CAMBODIAN SPRING ONE STEP CLOSER TO BECOMING A REALITY

The latest rumour in Phnom Penh, as the city sleeps,  is that there will be a coup today, Wednesday; that the army has been mobilized and by the end of the day that it will be in control of Cambodia. 

The last two days, since Sunday's election, have been filled with rumours, spreading like wild fire on Facebook then passed on as fact by word of mouth. All of the rumours, so far, have turned out to be false. Perhaps the imminent coup one is also. 

One rumour that seems to be true, however, is that leader of the opposition Sam Rainsy’s the Cambodian National Rescue Party has won more votes and more seats in the National Assembly (63 out of 123) in the election, despite the many ‘irregularities’ that saw more than one million Cambodians robbed of their right to vote as a result of their names disappearing from the voting lists.

If Sam Rainsy has won the election it will be an amazing turnaround in fortunes for a man who was, just two weeks ago in exile in France. He could not return to Cambodia without risking an eleven year jail sentence handed down by the notoriously  corrupt Cambodian judiciary,  beholden as it is to ‘strongman’ Prime Minister Hun Sen. The nonsensical charges against Rainsy were, as is so often the case when Hun Sen's CPP wishes to silence a critic, politically motivated.

In mid July, however, Rainsy received a Royal Pardon from Cambodia's King and was able to return to the country on 19^th July and start campaigning for an election in which he would be unable to stand for a seat in the National Assembly and in which he would not even be able to vote.

Rainsy’s chances of becoming Prime Minister, of his party winning the popular vote 

were close to zero, as Rainsy freely acknowledged, but when he started to attend rallies and the crowds grew from tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands, it became clear that millions of Cambodians were investing their hopes and dreams in him to bring true democracy to a country that, after the ravages of the Khmer Rouge years, has been subjected to 28 years of human rights abuses, land grabbing, deforestation of the last remaining rain forests at the hands of the kleptocracy that runs the country – the family and friends of Prime Minister Hun Sen.

People who had, for the past close to three decades, been afraid to express their feelings about ‘strongman’ Hun Sen, justifiably fearing retribution if they did, now felt safe to do so openly. And Cambodia’s youth, a new Facebook generation, until recently politically disengaged, were able to use social media to find out what was actually going on in their country (the state run media being the only options open to them until a few years ago), to share information and, on election day, to bear witness with their mobile phone cameras to the various forms of fraud being perpetrated at polling stations all around the country. These have been posted online so that all Cambodians with access to a mobile phone can see and hear for themselves what actually happened as opposed to what the Ministry of Information tells them happened - the same Ministry that is now declaring that the elections were free and fair and that there is no evidence of the more than one million voters that the CNRP claims to have disappeared from the voting lists.

In the final days leading up to the election Cambodian air was filled with hope and the refrain that became the catchcry for Rainsy’s Cambodian National Rescue Party – ‘change, change, change.’ And change Cambodia has this past 48 hours. Hun Sen’s Cambodian People’s Party seems to be in shock. Far from the landslide that Hun Sen predicted (he has always won in the past with landslides) he had no choice, the day after the election and with considerable loss of face, to admit that his party had lost at least 22 seats of the 90 it had in the last National Assembly.

How could Hun Sen’s CPP lose so many seats when the party had put so much effort into denying voters for the opposition the right to vote, in creating so many ghost voters, in issuing many duplicate registrations such that when people turned up to vote someone had already voted in the place? It is because the people of Cambodia have had enough of Hun Sen and his corrupt cronies and want him gone. All those whose task it was to guarantee that he win another landslide had not counted on just how effective the will of a people can be when they want true democracy and not the sham version of it represented by the CPP and propped up year after year by an international donor community (including Australia) prepared to pay half Cambodia's bills whilst not insisting that Hun Sen get serious about transforming Cambodia from a kleptocracy into a democracy.

If there is a coup today, it is unclear if it will be the army defending Hun Sen’s right to remain in power as a dictator or will the army’s aim be to remove Hun Sen from power by force if he will not accept the election results and concede defeat? Hun Sen has 10,000 personal bodyguards who are, all Cambodians have been led to believe, fiercely loyal to him but, at the time of writing, a new rumour has it that the leader of this 10,000 strong bodyguard corps has resigned tonight. Will the other 9,999 bodyguards remain loyal to Hun Sen if the rest of the Cambodian people want him gone? 

Coup or no coup it is going to be an interesting day in Cambodia.  

CAMBODIAN SPRING?

The National Elections in Cambodia tomorrow will be a major turning point in the country’s history regardless of who wins  - the Cambodian People’s Party, in power for 28 years under Prime Minister Hun Sen, or the Cambodian National Rescue Party (CNRP), led by president, Sam Rainsy.

That the president of the major opposition party, only recently returned from exile to escape an 11 year jail sentence,  is not allowed to stand for parliament provides a clue as to how free and fair the election will be.

Rainsy’s CNRP, promising free healthcare, education and pensioner rights, an increase in factory and civil servant wages, to bring to an end forced evictions and illegal land grabs, to lower the prices for rice, electricity and petrol, is very popular with voters all around the country.  If the size of the pre-election rallies and the enthusiasm of the crowds attending them is any indication, Sam Rainsy’s CNRP would almost certainly win the election. However, the 1.2 million voters who registered in the lead-up to the election who cannot find their names on voting lists (the majority of them supporters of the CNRP) will not be able to vote, representing a huge setback for the CNRP.  This is just one of many ‘irregularities’ (a euphemism much in use by donor countries afraid to call a spade a spade!) in the electoral process (controlled in its entirety by Hun Sen’s CPP) that will almost certainly rob the CNRP of the victory that should rightfully be Rainsy’s.

Despite its huge nation-wide popularity the CNRP will not, short of a miracle, wrest power from ‘strongman’ (another diplomatic euphemism!) Prime Minister Hun Sen in tomorrow’s elections. It is certainly on the cards, however, in the wake of the defeat of Rainsy’s CNRP, that the young people of Cambodia -a switched on Facebook generation - will take to the streets, make their presence felt and demand change – the word, in Khmer, that plays a very similar role in this Cambodian election to the ‘It’s Time’ slogan that helped win Whitlam the Australian federal election in 1972. Last night, as I walked and rode through Phnom Penh on a motor bike, it was this one chanted word, this mantra – ‘change’ -  that was literally on everyone’s lips, echoing through the streets on a warm and humid Friday night as enthusiastic young CNRP called out to each other and dreamt of a better future.

Hun Sen’s CPP gained its legitimacy from the overthrow of the Khmer Rouge regime – a fact that the party keeps reminding the populace to this day. However, Cambodia’s young, who had no experience of the Khmer Rouge and who do not feel under any obligation to politicians like Hun Sen (in their 60s and 70s now) for having ‘saved’ them from communism, do not fear the intimidation that pervaded previous elections. Perhaps it is because they know, from the Arab Spring, that impossible dreams may not be impossible after all. These young Cambodians want much more than mere peace. They want jobs and they want to enjoy the benefits of development in Cambodia that at present enriches only the families of the kleptocracy that runs the country.

There is a feeling of excitement in the air today – the hundreds of thousands of young CNRP who have taken to the streets  these past few weeks convinced, by dint of their sheer numbers that Hun Sen must surely lose the election; that the country is on the brink of a major change. When Hun Sen does not lose the election (and it is almost certain that he will not since  he controls the entire electoral and appeals processes) and their hopes are dashed, what will these young idealists do? How will they respond?

In the unlikely event that Rainsy’s CNRP does win, it is hard to imagine that Hun Sen will give up power - after 28 years of enjoying it and enriching himself, his family and his cronies with it - without a fight. What sort of fight remains to be seen. Perhaps a clue is to be found in the fact that Hun Sen has, on several occasions this past few months, issued thinly veiled threats that if the CPP loses, Cambodia could be pitched into a civil war. Hun Sen has not made it clear just who would be fighting whom – unless it is Hun Sen’s 10,000 strong personal bodyguard and the army, both fiercely loyal to him, against all those who did not vote for him. That the Prime Minster of a supposed democracy, propped up with funds from donor countries such as Australia and the US, needs 10,000 personal bodyguards speaks volumes of the regime he leads or, throwing political correctness to the winds, the dictatorship he presides over. Interestingly, young Cambodians armed with mobile phones and sharing information on Facebook, now feel free to call Hun Sen a dictator and to accuse him and his political cronies of corruption. They no longer fear him. If the loss of fear of their leaders on the part of the populace is one of the things that dictators most dread, Hun Sen must be a worried man. He will almost certainly win the election but forces have been unleashed by the events leading up to this election over which he has no control. Recent history suggests that his says are numbered.

It may be, if Hun Sen does lose the election, that he decides to cling to power in the same way that the Generals clung to it in Burma after the 1990 elections won by Aung San Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy. If so, how will the international donor community react? Will it (and this includes Australia) continue to provide aid to Cambodia or will the spigot be turned off until the will of the people is adhered to?

The election itself is but the beginning of the story though – regardless of who wins. It is what happens in the week following the election that will be most interesting. Just as Hun Sen will not accept losing government, nor will Cambodia’s youth accept having their hopes and dreams dashed by their corrupt and now very wealthy leaders. The stage is set for a confrontation of some kind and it is to be hoped that Hun Sen tells his 10,000 bodyguards, armed with state of the art weaponry, to act with restraint when these young Cambodians take to the street next week in protest, as they surely will.

As Sam Rainsy says, the election result will not be the end of anything but the beginning of what is shaping up to be the country’s own Khmer-style ‘Cambodia Spring.’ What form this will take and how long it will take is the question everyone in Cambodia is asking and that no-one has the answer to.

Orphanage tourism provides a feelgood moment but a lifetime of regret Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/orphanage-tourism-provides-a-feelgood-moment-but-a-lifetime-of-regret-20130721-2qcgm.html#ixzz2ZnF8zVv8

This article is well worth reading not just in relation to sham orphanages but in relation to genuine orphanages that rely on the good will of sponsors and donors:

The comments following the article are also well worth reading.

It is unwise to make generalisations but it is advisable that anyone wishing to donate to an orphanage ask of the Non Government Organization that runs the orphanage:

Do any of the children in the orphanage have a living parent or other members of an extended family who could take care of them?

If the answer is ‘yes’, ask why the children can’t live with that parent or other members of the extended family with the assistance of the NGO. This is a much cheaper and more culturally appropriate option.

If a person with none other than the best of intentions wishes to sponsor a orphan or any other child presented to the world as 'at risk', the same question applies. If there is at least one parent alive or an extended family willing and able to take care of the child, why is the NGO not helping re-integrate the child with his or her family?

It may be that it is inappropriate for one reason or another for the child to be living with either a parent or family (very rare) but if this reason is presented to the potential donor or sponsor, they should ask what the reason is and have it presented to them in writing so that there is no misunderstanding further down the track. No genuine sponsor want to discover, years down the track that he or she has been sponsoring an 'orphan' or a 'victim' who is neither an orphan or a victim and whose parents have been trying for many years to have they child (or, in Chanti's case, two children) returned to them.