Cambodia begins painful look back with Khmer Rouge trials

[Coventina]

Source: International Herald-Tribune

PHNOM PENH: The first trial of a senior Khmer Rouge cadre opened Tuesday, 30 years after the end of the brutal Communist regime that took the lives of as much as one-fourth of Cambodia's population.

The first defendant is Kaing Guek Eav, 66, better known as Duch, the commandant of the Tuol Sleng prison and torture house, which sent at least 14,000 people to their deaths in a killing field.

(snip)

Duch confessed to journalists before his arrest nine years ago that he had committed atrocities but said he had been acting under orders and would himself have been killed if he had disobeyed. Known for his brutality, he is charged with crimes against humanity and war crimes, and with murder and torture in his prison, known as S-21.

Four senior Khmer Rouge officials who were in a position to give those orders are also in custody, but court officials say their trials may not start until next year.





Read more: http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/02/17/asia/cambo.php

---

It has begun. At last....

[panader0]

1. If Cambodia has the courage to do this

even if it long overdue, then they set an example for what the US must do re: bushco.

[AlphaCentauri]

3. that's true n/t

[crickets]

4. Good point. -nt

[karynnj]

2. Here's a nice John Kerry editorial on this from last year and an excellent

really detailed Prosense thread that explained how this came about including the major role Kerry played in it. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=6142669&mesg_id=6147245

[damntexdem]

5. Let it be remembered who stopped the killing fields.

Now, who did stop the Khymer Rouge? Was it an U.S. intervention -- no, that's what got them started, when Nixon invaded Cambodia. What it the UN?

No, it was the Vietnamese -- COMMUNIST Vietnam. Sure, they had their own reasons, to shut down the unruly nutcases next door. But they were the ones who did it.

[Coventina]

6. Yes, that's a fact the US is a little uncomfortable with

so you don't hear a lot about that in this country.

[DrCory]

7. Don't Fall for the Propaganda

Vietnamese motives were far from admirable: Territorial disputes, ethnic hatred, border incursions, fear of Chinese influence expansion, and expansion of their own influence. The Vietnamese couldn't have cared less what the Khmer did to each other so long as it didn't bother them. You may also wish to research the conduct of Vietnamese troops during the Kampuchean campaign, might make you rethink your praise.

[ronnie624]

8. I thought I might disseminate some more "propaganda".

I wouldn't want the 'real' facts to become widely known.

With the regime enjoying tacit economic, political and military support from China, it looked as if the horror would end only when there was no one left alive to blame. By 1977, even as Cambodia descended into chaos, some of Pol Pot's troops along the border with Vietnam had been sporadically murdering, looting, and raping Vietnamese villagers. Then, on Christmas Day 1978, Pol Pot's vast and grisly social experiment came to an abrupt end. The People's Army of Vietnam, in response to growing attacks by Khmer Rouge Eastern Zone cadre, entered Cambodia. The Khmer Rouge was by this stage in such disarray that the People's Army, despite being unprepared for such an operation, pushed Pol Pot's "army of genocide" to Thailand on Cambodia's western border, and deposed the brutal dictator.

With assistance from Vietnam, Pen Sovann and Heng Samrin became heads of Cambodia's defacto government until Hun Sen took over in 1985. At 35, he was the youngest prime minister in the world and was supported politically and economically by Hanoi. Vietnamese civil administrators quickly withdrew, but elements of the army remained to help defend the population from Pol Pot's forces. The People's Revolutionary Party of Kampuchea (PRPK- later the CPP) inherited a country in ruin; the nation lacked the most basic infrastructure-money, health care and transportation networks had all but ceased to exist; most of the country's human resources, doctors, teachers, engineers had been slaughtered or died of malnutrition and overwork in the agrarian "experiment" gone grotesquely wrong.

But over the next decade, rather than provide desperately needed aid, the West and China, led by Washington, withheld assistance and instead pumped aid, money, and arms, often through Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) conduits, to the Khmer Rouge and its newfound "allies" in the refugee camps in Thailand. Also withheld was formal recognition and a UN seat, without which Cambodia could not get the development aid so crucial to the mammoth task of rebuilding from the ruins of Year Zero. To this date, it retains the ignominious distinction of being the only country in the world to have been denied development aid by the UN. Instead, the world body surrendered to superpower realpolitic while thousands more Cambodians died in floods and famine

<http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Terrorism/US_Cambodia.html>


What actually happened in Cambodia during the '70s contradicts the myths created by this propaganda onslaught:

* Pol Pot's horrific rule was preceded by devastating US aggression. In 1969, the US launched an unprovoked bombing of Cambodia (with whom the US was not at war) which lasted until 1975.

* The Cambodian resistance took the ultra-violent direction that it did in 1975 only because of the destruction and dislocation created by the US war. The Pol Pot holocaust, far from being a justification for the US holocaust, was the direct result.

* Cambodia was liberated from the horrors of Pol Pot, not by intervention from the western “democracies”, but by intervention from Communist Vietnam and a force of Cambodian Communists.

* Following the overthrow of Pol Pot, the US and other western powers and China rearmed the Khmer Rouge and installed them in camps along the Thai-Cambodian border. They also encouraged the alliance which was formed between the Khmer Rouge and Ranariddh's FUNCINPEC.

<http://www.greenleft.org.au/1997/285/16298>

[Coventina]

9. Thanks.

No one has to believe that the Vietnamese were angels in order to believe that they did the right thing in overthrowing Pol Pot.

What the United States did was shameful.

[ronnie624]

11. Not angels, for sure.

Only a small country trying to rebuild after a devastating war by an aggressor from halfway around the world, and defend itself from attacks by a neighboring country.

After what we've seen during the last eight years, you would think that more people would start to question the elite commentary found in the U.S. media establishment.

Here is another interesting piece on this topic:

Another part of the U.S. and allied design was to force Vietnam to withdraw from Cambodia and to replace the government it had brought into power with one either closely aligned with the West or impotent. The United States succeeded in getting the UN and its allies to put enough pressure on the Cambodian government and Vietnam to force them to accept an election process that would replace the existing government. One problem with this solution was that the Cambodian government that was to be replaced was doing a credible job, despite the horrendous conditions that it inherited and the refusal of the "international community" to give any substantial aid to the badly damaged and slowly recovering country. According to a UN report of 1990: "Considering the devastation inherited from war and internal strife, the centrally directed system of economic management...has attained unquestionable successes, especially marked in restoring productive capacity to a level of normalcy and accelerating the pace of economic growth to a respectable per capita magnitude from the ruinously low level of the late 1970s."

Vickery claims that this new government also "made creditable progress in developing social services, health care, education, agriculture, and vaccination programs for children and animals." It also performed relatively well on women's rights and civil liberties, given the immediate background and in comparison with its Cambodian predecessors and nearby neighbors (like Thailand).

A second problem for Western interventionism was that Vietnam gradually withdrew its military forces from Cambodia and had them all out by 1989, in keeping with Vietnam's promises and contrary to Western assurances that Vietnam intended a permanent stay. This suggested that the Cambodian government no longer needed the Vietnamese military presence to govern and in another political context it might have raised questions about the need for foreign intervention to assure "independence." But all of this was irrelevant to the United States, which refused to accept a government friendly toward and influenced by the Vietnamese. That government had to be ousted, no matter what the consequences, and the experiences of post-ouster Guatemala (1954 onward) and post-ouster Nicaragua (1990 onward) indicated that the consequences could be painful and even disastrous to the indigenous population.

<http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9863>

[DemoTex]

13. "Pol Pot's" given name was Saloth Sar.

"Pol Pot" was a nom-de-guerre. He was born Saloth Sar, to a well-educated (perhaps relatively rich) family to the west of Phenom Phen. "Pol Pot," the pseudonym, means "Brother Number One". All from a great essay in Granta a few years back:

"Dancing in Cambodia" by Amitav Ghosh

Cambodia has a long tradition of classical dance. Amitav Ghosh meets one of its greatest exponents, a national treasure who happens to be Pol Pot's sister-in-law.

Granta 44, pages 125-169

[DrCory]

12. Conveniently Fails...

To mention Vietnam's role in the development of the Khmer Rouge and it's seizure of power. Fails to mention the arms and supplies it provided to the Khmer Rouge following Lon Nol's coup. Fails to mention the ideological roots of Khmer Rouge atrocities which are independent of U.S. involvement. To blame the U.S. entirely for the rise of the Khmer Rouge is indeed propaganda as that line of thought ignores a host of factors equally important.

[ronnie624]

14. You should not add to such failures

by neglecting to post some information about those aspects of this topic. You would be missing an opportunity to educate others. I, for one, would appreciate such information.

[DrCory]

15. Nice Dodge...

The information regarding Vietnam's role in the rise of the Khmer Rouge is just as easily located as the drivel you dredged up. Considering the sources you rely upon, I doubt you honestly would appreciate a discussion which is not based on the "blame the United States for everything" line of thought.

[ronnie624]

16. So, the sources are what you have a problem with,

not necessarily the accuracy of the information. I understand the emotional imperative of Americans to recoil automatically, without thought, from holding their own government accountable for its crimes, but perhaps you can find solace in the knowledge that the United States was not alone in its support of Pol Pot and his Khmer Rouge.

Here is another one, although it is unlikely that it has been approved by the centers of hegemonic political power either. But in the end, it is the facts that are important.

China, the United States, and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), all supported Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge in various ways. The Great Powers opposed attempts to bring the Khmer Rouge to justice. No country in the world could be found to file a case against them in the World Court. The Khmer Rouge held on to the Cambodian seat in the United Nations, representing their victims for another fifteen years even though they were openly accountable for their crimes. Rather, international aid poured into their coffers, abetting their war to retake power.

Governments were not alone at fault. In the 1980s, respectable non-government international legal bodies rejected numerous invitations to send delegations of jurists to Cambodia to investigate the crimes of the Khmer Rouge and possibly initiate official legal action. The American Bar Association, LawAsia, and the International Commission of Jurists all refused.

Only the Australian branch of the International Commission of Jurists showed interest, in the late 1980s. Powerful U.S. media outlets also campaigned to derail the attempt to document Khmer Rouge crimes.

But, at Cambodia's request in 1997, the U.N. set up a Group of Experts to investigate, headed by former Australian Governor-General Sir Ninian Stephen. Its report recommends an international tribunal to try Khmer Rouge leaders for genocide, other crimes against humanity, and war crimes. Negotiations are now underway with the Cambodian government, which has recently captured or accepted the surrender of the surviving Khmer Rouge leadership.

Why did it take so long? From 1979 to 1994, there was tremendous international opposition to any legal action against the Khmer Rouge. Only since 1994 has there been an important shift

<http://www.historyplace.com/pointsofview/kiernan.htm>

[DrCory]

17. Another Tired Tactic...

Suggesting a reactionary response to the "blame America for all" line when one dares to find culpability elsewhere. Care to point out where in any of my posts that I claim U.S. strategy in SE Asia was not at least partly to blame?

Now, do you deny the (North) Vietnamese had ANY responsibility whatsoever for the rise of the Khmer Rouge?

[ronnie624]

18. Poor confused Americans,

always looking for culpability elsewhere, even as their own government commits some of the most heinous crimes in the history of civilization.

It was not Vietnam that toppled the U.S. government (twice within one year), in order to thwart democratic elections and install a government here of its own preference. It was not Vietnam that invaded and destroyed the U.S. infrastructure, laying waste to civil society throughout the entire region for years to come. It is unlikely the Khmer Rouge would have existed outside of a small band of kooky fanatics, scratching around in the jungles of Cambodia, if it had not been for U.S. policies of war and mayhem in Indochina; a fact that all objective historians agree with.

You and I are citizens of the United States, not Vietnam. We should take responsibility for the actions of our government, and leave Vietnam to its own citizens.

[DrCory]

20. You Didn't Answer The Question

Why is that? Does the answer not fit tidily with your world view?

[ronnie624]

21. The consensus among practically every historian on earth

is that the secret bombings of Cambodia by the U.S. military is the catalyst for Pol Pot's rise to power. The attacks are considered responsible for the deaths of some 600,000 people and spreading panic and chaos throughout the population, thereby radicalizing Cambodians and driving them to support the Khmer Rouge. If you have information that disputes this, you should post it.

[bemildred]

10. Painful for whom?

If I was related to the victims, I would be pleased by any attempt at accountability, and as an outside observer, I am still pleased by any attempt at accountability.

[ronnie624]

19. More information for anyone interested:

UN Advanced Mission in Cambodia - Background:

<http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/dpko/co_mission/unamicbackgr.html>

Peoples Pledge Union Information
Genocide - Cambodia

<http://www.ppu.org.uk/genocide/g_cambodia1.html>