Thursday, August 20, 2009

Thailand to protest Cambodian patrol in disputed area



Writer: WASSANA NANUAM
Published: 20/08/2009

The Defence Ministry plans a strongly-worded protest over a Cambodian patrol entering a disputed maritime area near Koh Kut in Trat province, a source says.

The protest will be lodged through the Foreign Ministry.

Two Cambodian warships were seen patrolling in the disputed area last week.

The patrol was in breach of an agreement on disputed and overlapping areas which requires the two countries to inform the other of any plans for a patrol and for the patrol to be a joint operation.

The source said the Cambodian patrol was probably in response to the Thai navy's move to set up a new base on Koh Kut to reinforce its patrol missions following a report that Cambodia had allowed a French oil company to carry out surveys in the disputed area.

Meanwhile, the navy has apologised to Cambodia after a patrol plane strayed into Cambodian airspace.

The Phnom Penh Post yesterday cited Cambodian general Bun Seng as saying the commander of the Chanthaburi-Trat airbase had written that the incident was due to bad weather affecting the aircraft's navigation system."We accepted the letter of apology by the Thai military but we have warned Thailand's airbase that we will not take responsibility for a second repeated airspace violation," Gen Bun Seng said.

Navy spokesman Prachachart Srisawat said it was not unusual for planes from Thailand and Cambodia to accidentally cross over into each other's territory.


Relatives killed “for nothing,” survivors doomed to living with ghosts


Kambol (Phnom Penh, Cambodia). 18/08/2009: Duch listening to Antonia Tioulong, 56 years old and civil party in the name of her sister executed at S-21
©John Vink/ Magnum


Ka-set
http://cambodia.ka-set.info/

By Stéphanie Gée
20-08-2009

Relatives of victims whose lives ended brutally in S-21’s hell evoked with courage, before the Chamber and the accused, a beloved face gone forever, a broken family bliss, an unspeakable distress and the anguish sprung from the ignorance about the fate of those persecuted and imagining the most inhumane torture they must have endured. They stressed the powerlessness in the face of these individual tragedies that unfolded without them. Mrs Antonya Tioulong, sister of opposition party leader Sam Rainsy’s wife, shared on Tuesday August 18th a testimony filled with restraint that struck the right chord. By late afternoon, farmer Neth Phaly paid an impassioned tribute to his brother, “smashed” at S-21, and whose only remains consisted in a portrait he presented to the court, firmly holding it in his hands, to bring the latter’s soul back to his side while he testified in his memory.

Finding the disappeared relatives at any cost
Antonya Tioulong, chief of the documentation service at the French weekly L’Express, came as her family’s spokesperson – first, the two daughters of her older sister Raingsy who was assassinated, but also her mother, “who found the courage to come and stand in the same room as the accused,” and her five other sisters. She also presented herself as a voice for Raingsy, “no longer here to speak,” to defend her and to “say who she really was and how much her family desperately misses her.”

Raingsy was the second of seven daughters and worked as representative for a German laboratory and radio presenter. Her husband, Lim Kimary, was a senior executive at the Cambodian Commercial Bank. In March 1970, Lon Nol’s Republic decreed that the Tioulong family was banished due to the bonds of loyalty between its patriarch and Norodom Sihanouk, Antonya recounted in a trembling voice. Tioulong Raingsy and her husband took no notice and they were the only ones in the family who decided to stay in the country, as they clung to their jobs fearing a “downgrading” in France, where their relatives took refuge. In 1973, as civil war intensified and the Descartes high school attended by their children closed its doors, the couple sent the latter to Paris, in the care of their grandparents. As the situation deteriorated, it was planned for them to reunite with the rest of the family in the summer of 1975. That did not happen.

Kambol (Phnom Penh, Cambodia). 18/08/2009: Photograph of Tioulong Raingsy shown on a screen in the ECCC press room
©John Vink/ Magnum

On April 17th 1975, the Khmer Rouge took Phnom Penh. In Paris, the Tioulong were not alarmed, as the newspaper headlines sported a “pink victory in South-East Asia.” Then started a long silence, a wait, that became increasingly worrying. The mother launched investigations, she was ready for anything: she requested assistance from international organisations based in Thailand, she paid “crooks to go and look for [her daughter] in the country.” She lost fortunes, duped by unscrupulous people who claimed they had seen Raingsy. All in the family sought to protect the couple’s three children entrusted to their care. In 1979, Vietnamese boat-people flocked everywhere in Europe and their fate moved public opinion, unlike that of Cambodian refugees despite their rapidly increasing number.

A hunger strike for Cambodian refugees
“Using my rights as a citizen, together with two other Cambodians, I carried out a hunger strike for some twelve days at the Buddhist pagoda of the Vincennes Forest to draw the attention of French authorities to the necessity to welcome many more Cambodian refugees than the quota initially set by the French government,” Antonya reported. “I don’t have the arrogance to claim that my action influenced then Prime Minister Raymond Barre. But a few weeks later, the quota for Khmer refugees noticeably increased. I believed I had led that action as a citizen calling to my fellow citizens, but I understood later that I had done it for my sister and I wanted her to be among the refugees. It was my way to help her the way I could. I did not know she had already disappeared. I have thought about her constantly for all those years. Her thought has never left me.”

A devastated family
The civil party, in her fifties and living in France for the last 40 years, could not envisage the worst and thus imagined that her brother-in-law, an accomplished athlete, would succeed in organising their escape from the country. “It was very naïve from me.” The Tiouleng responded to the call for help from cousins who survived the Khmer Rouge and managed to get out of the country. These relatives gave them a terrifying account of what they experienced and bluntly told them that Raingsy and her husband had died at S-21. They did not hide that Raingsy was subject to “particularly rough torture.” The announcement was a “devastating shock” and the family was plunged in grief. The father – who, mandated by Norodom Sihanouk to whom he consistently proved “unfailingly loyal,” had signed the Geneva Convention on Indochina in 1965 – ended up sitting at the negotiation table with the Khmer Rouge, including Khieu Samphan. He showed nothing of his grief, overcome forever by a feeling of guilt.

Antonya evoked her nieces and nephew, who grew up “as best they could,” without their parents by their side. Raingsy’s two daughters were “so devastated they did not have the strength to come and testify before the Chamber,” although they also joined as civil parties, while the son died prematurely in 1999. Still today, the memory of the couple was kept alive. “We talk about them in present tense.”

Probably dead for being too honest
Antonya eventually learned at least partly what happened to her sister. After Phnom Penh’s fall, Raingsy was very soon assigned to “the hardest work in the fields.” As she often spoke French, she drew suspicions. She and relatives of hers were subjected to an interrogation that demanded the truth from them. And she told the truth: her name was Tioulong Raingsy, daughter of Nhiek Tioulong, former commander of the armed forces, whose return as well as that of Norodom Sihanouk she was waiting for. When she said those words, she felt the Khmer Rouge tensing up. But it was too late. It was a sadly ironic twist as Raingsy had never put forward her aristocratic ancestry and never used her maiden name, as she preferred a simple life, her sister said. The only time when she declined her real identity, it cost her life.

When Antonya set foot again in Cambodia in 1994, her steps quickly led her to S-21, where she discovered a photograph of her sister, displayed on the wall. “As soon as I entered that room, it was as if I had immediately caught her eye.” She also recovered her biography, which established she died in April 1976 and bore the mention: “beaten to death.”

“Why so many inhumane methods?”
In the confession unearthed from the archives, it was written that Raingsy “led a CIA network,” that she was “in charge of spying,” etc, while she was a French-speaker and never had any links with Americans. Faced with such coarse inventions mixed with reality – “it was machiavellic, […] it was a refinement to decree until the end that the victims were guilty” – and the idea that her sister endured long months of torture, Antonya exclaimed: “She must have survived her wounds too long. We are revolted and wonder why such cruelty? Why so many inhumane methods? How could what happened under the Nazis have recurred in an even worse way because here, it was Khmer who killed Khmer, with no reason! They caused suffering day after day and they were not content with simply killing their fellow countrymen with a bullet in the head. They delighted in and enjoyed making them suffer. My sister and brother-in-law endured that and that thought is unbearable!”

Guilt and powerlessness
A distressed Antonya explained that what continued to torment this family was that “the whole time they were still alive, they must have wondered why their family did not help them. […] They must have wondered why the French, who were so present until then, who were our closest friends, did not manage to come and chase the Khmer Rouge away. It was a terrible feeling of guilt and powerlessness. I can only imagine the psychological distress of my sister and the incomprehension of my brother-in-law. It is unbearable for their children and I believe it shows through their disquiet and illness still now. My sister was killed for nothing.”

The need for justice
Antonya had been waited for a trial for a long time. She filed a complaint in France, after 1999, for “sequestration followed by torture and war crimes against Duch, Khieu Samphan, Chea Sim, Nuon Chea and Ieng Sary.” Two years later, her complaint was dismissed on the grounds that the victim was not French. She argued that the victim was born under French protectorate, but to no avail. She then turned her hopes – and legal naiveté – to The Hague tribunal. Of course, nothing came out of it. The family was able to hope again only when the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia were created. It was relief. Doubly so, she noted, because the tribunal allowed for the participation of civil parties and Cambodia would show the example.

“My family or myself will never forgive Duch”
“We have to teach future generations and Khmer young people, who are not enough informed, that this type of absolutely intolerable crimes cannot stay unpunished. It is not enough to say “I apologise” to be absolved. There must be a ruling […] that measures up to the crimes perpetrated by the accused.” After showing one of the last pictures taken from her smiling sister, she talked indirectly to Duch: “I do not believe in his apologies. I do not believe in his remorse. My family or myself will never forgive him. I know he doesn’t care. I know that in February, when he made his apologies officially, he said “I present my apologies to the tribunal. Now, the court can do whatever it likes with them.’ […] I simply want to say that, in light of the horror he inflicted upon my sister and brother-in-law, I will never forgive him. If he does feel one centimetre of remorse, I wish him that this remorse become as tall as all the physical and mental suffering he inflicted upon his 17,000 victims. That is the punishment he would deserve. I think the accused is quite lucky: he is appearing in a fair international trial. His victims were not as lucky. […] The accused sleeps every night on a mattress, he has adequate clothes and food, and he lives reasonably well. He will probably spend the rest of his life in decent conditions. These victims went through agonies. So, never, ever, ever, will I forgive him.”

Duch sings the same song
When Antonya interroged Duch about the fate of her sister and brother-in-law, the accused remained evasive. Tioulong Raingsy arrived at S-21 when he was still only the deputy director, he said. He believed she had died “of illness” and as for her husband, he did not know… Why were they eliminated? “Any person sent to S-21 was eventually eliminated,” Duch repeated on a curt and mechanical note. When he finally spoke to share his observations, he eagerly expressed his respect to Raingsy’s mother. “It is an honour.” As for each of these testimonies, he repeated that he considered the statement to be “a historical document” that would be useful for future researchers studying the impact of the Khmer Rouge on the families.

Growing without a father or any hope for his return
Hao Sophea, a 33-year-old farmer, did not know her father, a Khmer Rouge cadre who returned from Hanoi. The S-21 killing machine got him just before she was born. Her mother raised her in the memory and respect of this adored man, whose return she waited for until 1996, when all her hopes vanished. She learned through the Documentation Centre of Cambodia (DC-Cam) that he died at S-21 and she went into depression. If the daughter was at the stand today, it was because the mother refused to be faced with the accused, Hao Sophea explained. Her father’s absence meant a daily struggle, “financially, physically, emotionally,” tempered by the mother’s certainty that everything would improve upon the father’s return. To her despair, the young woman had to end her studies, for lack of money. She had wanted to become a Khmer literature teacher.

On April 17th 1975, the Khmer Rouge took Phnom Penh. In Paris, the Tioulong were not alarmed, as the newspaper headlines sported a “pink victory in South-East Asia.” Then started a long silence, a wait, that became increasingly worrying. The mother launched investigations, she was ready for anything: she requested assistance from international organisations based in Thailand, she paid “crooks to go and look for [her daughter] in the country.” She lost fortunes, duped by unscrupulous people who claimed they had seen Raingsy. All in the family sought to protect the couple’s three children entrusted to their care. In 1979, Vietnamese boat-people flocked everywhere in Europe and their fate moved public opinion, unlike that of Cambodian refugees despite their rapidly increasing number.

Kambol (Phnom Penh, Cambodia). 18/08/2009: Antonia Tioulong during her testimony on Day 60 in Duch’s trial
©John Vink/ Magnum


After learning that her husband was executed at S-21 – where he was sent after passing through the Boeung Trabek camp –, the mother travelled to Phnom Penh in January 2007, with Tuol Sleng museum as her sole destination. “She was in a state of shock. Her eyes were filled with tears,” her daughter recounted. When she arrived near the pile of former prisoners’ clothes, she wanted to search it to find the last clothes worn by her late husband. The guards prevented her from doing so. After that visit, the daughter decided to join as a civil party. After that visit, the same dream started haunting her: she saw this father whose living face she never knew escape from S-21.

Duch again recognised his responsibilities and concluded his observations by saying he referred to the Chamber as to whether Hao Sophea was the daughter of the one she called her father, who bore a different name.

A testimony in the memory of a brother-in-law
Mrs So Song, 55 years old, came to testify in the name of her older sister, whose husband allegedly died at S-21 and was like a father to her after the separation of her parents. Her sister, ill for a year, was unable to take such step and it was therefore legitimate for So Song to do it instead, her lawyer justified. A debate then started on her family relationship with the victim, proved by only one certificate by the older sister’s commune chief. The defence remained to be convinced. The civil party, guided by her lawyer’s questions, evoked the grief caused by the loss and the economic struggles encountered as the family was deprived of support. So Song only had one photograph of her brother-in-law, found at S-21, to affirm he was detained there. Duch would only accept the picture as evidence if it was corroborated by other documents.

“Let my brother know that justice is being given"
Neth Phaly, a 52-year-old farmer, was there for his older brother, Neth Bunthy, imprisoned and killed at S-21. The last time he saw him was in 1978, at the April 17th hospital where he treated his wounds. At the fall of the regime, he started looking for him and searched districts for ten months. He found no trace of him, but was convinced he was still alive. He lost all hope only in June 2004, when DC-Cam provided him with a copy of his brother’s biography found at S-21. He fell into depression. He knew that in that cursed place, detainees died after great suffering. “How could someone as loyal as him, him who had devoted his life to the revolution, have been executed at S-21? My father never got over it and died a few years later. […] I myself participated to the military activities but in the end, we were betrayed. My brother met with death and there is nothing left except sadness and grief.”

Kambol (Phnom Penh, Cambodia). 18/08/2009: 52-year-old Neth Phaly testifying in memory of his brother Neth Bunthy
© Stéphanie Gée


Neth Phaly appeared dull when he spoke, and yet, anger was consuming him inside, he said. He finished his testimony with magnificent words, while holding a portrait he showed to the Chamber: “I would like to show a picture of my brother. A little as if he is sitting next to me and I hope he is now with me and he knows that the accused is being judged. I believe my brother would find peace again if he knew that justice is being given here by this court. So, I make the wish for the soul of my brother who died at S-21 to know that justice is being given. […] He was taken to S-21 where he was blindfolded and he was blindfolded again when he was taken for execution. Today, we are revealing the faces of those who committed these atrocities. I invoke my brother’s soul to be present here with me. May homage be paid to him with this picture. We will never find his body. There is only this picture left, which represents the ashes and body of my brother.”

(translated from French by Ji-Sook Lee)



Cambodia's Hun Sen looks safe despite some unease


Trouble is mounting for Cambodia's long-serving prime minister, Hun Sen, with rising unemployment and an economic slowdown on top of growing criticism from diplomats, rights activists and political rivals.

But analysts see little threat to his power or the long-term investment outlook in a country that has made great strides after decades of poverty, brutalilty and instability.

"Things are far from perfect in Cambodia, but democracy is a slow process and we have to see the bigger picture," said Pou Sothirak, a senior research fellow at Singapore's Institute of South East Asian Studies (ISEAS).

"Hun Sen's priority has been the economy, social order and the avoidance of conflict, and the current situation is a significant improvement from the past."

Hun Sen's government has come under fire recently, accused of corruption, abuse of power, and undermining the judiciary, raising concerns about future stability and its sincerity about carrying out long-awaited reforms.

Tens of thousands of people have been driven out of their homes in a slew of land seizures, while critics have blasted Hun Sen for filing lawsuits they say are merely attempts to intimidate journalists, activists and political opponents.

However, Hun Sen gets plenty of plaudits as well, and some analysts say the firm hand of the undisputed strongman is exactly what Cambodia and its economy needs.

"It's easy to criticise Hun Sen as a single-party ruler, authoritarian and totalitarian, but he's a pragmatist -- he does what he needs to do," said Ian Bryson, a regional analyst for Control Risks.

"There's no reason to forecast any instability in the near future. Cambodia's pretty rock solid. Hun Sen is healthy and he really is quite well-regarded."

Given the steady turnaround in Cambodia's fortunes since Hun Sen came to power 25 years ago, the popularity of the Khmer Rouge defector and former farmer and monk, comes as no surprise.

RECOVERY COURSE

Six years after Vietnamese invaders ended the Khmer Rouge's 1975-79 "killing fields" reign of terror, Hun Sen became premier and cultivated a reputation as a moderate, investor-friendly democrat, which helped put Cambodia on the road to recovery.

Until the global economic crisis struck, Cambodia had seen four straight years of double-digit growth fuelled by Hun Sen's pro-business policies, which created new jobs and infrastructure and raised living standards among the rural poor, many of whom live on less than $1 a day.

With backing from the poor, his Cambodian People's Party (CPP) scored 73 percent of the vote in 2008 elections, which observers said had only minor irregularities, to win its first outright majority after years of bickering coalition governments.

"I see no party that can challenge the CPP. They've improved the livelihoods of the poor and boosted their hopes and expectations for the future," said a Cambodian political science lecturer, who asked not to be named.

"The criticism Hun Sen has received does not reflect the overall situation. I can see the ruling party will continue to hold power ... and foreigners will continue to invest here."

Analysts say complaints about graft, cronyism, lawsuits and forced evictions from donors, rights groups, diplomats and financial institutions have irked Hun Sen, but will have little impact on his popularity.

The biggest challenge for the CPP, they say, is to revive the economy and ensure jobs are created to minimise the threat of social problems or civil disorder that could undermine its grip on power.

Foreign direct investment has slowed since the global financial crisis took its toll. Economic growth slowed to 5.5 percent in 2008 and the economy is forecast to shrink by 0.5 percent this year, according to the International Monetary Fund.

With a slump in demand from key markets like the United States, at least 130 garment factories have closed since late last year, prompting an estimated 50,000-60,000 lay-offs in an industry that brought in $3.8 billion in 2007.

But analysts say workers have accepted this is not the fault of government mismanagment, and that it looks unlikely to pose a threat to Cambodia's stability.

Neither, they say, will long-running diplomatic disputes with traditional foe Thailand over border demarcations, near the 11th-century Preah Vihear temple and in the Gulf of Thailand, where oil and gas deposits have been found.

Both sides have beefed up their military presence in the areas and seven soldiers died in skirmishes over the past year. But too much is at stake for both countries, and that is preventing the disputes from escalating significantly.

"It's been a bumpy ride for Cambodia, but stability is, and will remain, very much intact," added Pou Sothirak of ISEAS. "And for that reason, I expect foreign investors will return when the global economic situation improves." (Writing and additional reporting by Martin Petty; Editing by Alan Raybould and Bill Tarrant)