|
By
Basil Fernando
The approaches
undertaken by several groups and individuals to understanding Cambodia vary
considerably. One is to treat it as a country that has been affected by war and
civil conflict and therefore has experienced considerable instability. This
approach will stress the need for peace, reconciliation and reconstruction.
Another approach treats Cambodia as a post-colonial society with similar
problems as other post-colonial societies in terms of defining its identity and
reconstructing its economic, social, and political institutions to meet current
needs. The third approach, which is suggested in this paper, is to treat
Cambodia as a post-revolutionary society with unique problems of reconstruction,
which relate to the nature and the content of the attempted revolution by the
Pol Pot regime.
On many issues, these
three approaches may overlap. However, the differences of the three approaches
would be mainly on the aspects of identifying problems affecting the nation and
developing solutions. The first approach stresses political factors such as
negotiations and understanding between parties, the need for greater material
assistance from the international community and the building of democratic
institutions. This approach is likely to focus on the reconstruction of
institutions and practices that existed prior to the post-Pol Pot period as soon
as possible. The second approach is likely to stress learning from the
experiences of other countries in Asia and Africa that have been struggling to
build their countries and shape their post-colonial identities. This approach
will stress recreating traditional approaches (pre-colonial customs etc.) in
rebuilding the institutions of the countries. The symposium organized by the
UNTAC’s Electoral Component, prior to the election in May 1993, proceed on
this approach. However, the nature of the revolution that was ruthlessly
attempted in Cambodia makes the application of experiences of other countries in
Asia and Africa relating to the transition from colonialism to independence and
the reliance on traditional approaches unrealistic.
The approach of
treating Cambodia as a post-revolutionary society stresses the following
factors: the ruthlessness of the Pol Pot revolution and its lasting impact on
Cambodian society (not merely the aspect of trauma and suffering that it caused
to individuals and families) and the subsequent influence of the Vietnamese
socialist revolutions particularly in the eighties. Due to the two factors
mentioned above, the following aspects have become prominently visible factors
in Cambodia, i.e. the loss of memory of the pre-revolutionary social
institutions and practices; a new memory of social habits, procedures and
practices (This new memory, however, has been theoretically displaced with the
acceptance of a market economy and liberal democracy as the foundations of
Cambodian social life after the elections by the signatories of the Paris
Agreements and the makers of the new Cambodian Constitution.) and a host of
other problems that result in giving a new content to the age-old traditions
which in Cambodia are centered around the Royalty, Buddhism, family and land.
The Shift From Humanitarian Assistance
to Social Reconstruction
In the eighties,
humanitarian assistance to Cambodia from the United Nations, Western countries
and international NGOs was given on the basis that the country and its people
had been hit by a great tragedy. This tragedy is described as the worst human
cataclysm of the twentieth century, with regard to the number of lives lost and
people displaced. Naturally, at that stage, the nature of the future of
Cambodian society was not a prime consideration. During the negotiation and the
signing of the Paris Agreements, the pre-occupations were to find basic areas of
agreement between the warring factions and to provide for an internationally
supervised election as a means of
establishing a legitimate government. While the immense problems that this
country may face might have become apparent at that time, at least in broad
terms, it seemed natural to leave these problems for the future government to
solve. The UNTAC’s presence in Cambodia and its attempt to assist Cambodia to
reconstruct some of its basic institutions by way of exercising direct control
in some “ministries” as allowed by the Paris Agreements supplied a wealth of
information about the society, which had been unknown to the Cambodian public as
well as the international community. Since the elections and the establishment
of the new government, it has been sharply felt that the reconstruction of the
post-Pol Pot Cambodia is not an easy task. This is not merely due to lack of
resources (material and human), but also due to the nature of society and social
institutions created during the Pol Pot revolution, followed by the introduction
of a socialist model of administration by the Vietnamese.
Why Cambodia
Is Not A Post-colonial Society
There
are many characteristics of post-colonial societies despite unique aspects of
each such society. The first characteristic is the existence of a large body of
laws that relate to various aspects of life, particularly the basic aspects of
life, such as basic criminal administration, civil administration, citizenship,
immigration, contract law etc. In addition to these, colonial powers usually
implant the attitude that societies need to be governed by laws. These laws may
sometimes be the recognized customs of the traditional way of life of the people
themselves.
However, in Cambodia
today there is no such body of identifiable laws in many areas, including those
areas most basic for maintaining orderly ways of life even to a minimum degree.
Furthermore, the attitude that society needs to be governed by law has also
become alien, as the day-to-day orders of the party leaders were “the law”
during the Pol Pot period. The Vietnamese approach was not much different,
though it was less harsh. The party apparatus administered the country by party
decisions which were sometimes disseminated by written decrees or verbal
communications passed from the central committee down to communes. During the
Vietnamese-guided State of Cambodia period a small body of law modeled after the
Vietnamese socialist law was passed by the National Assembly.
Colonial powers
usually build administrative structures in the countries they rule, which
provide a foundation for newly independent governments to begin their
administration. Newly independent states often modify these structures the way
they wish, but almost always begin with the old structures used during colonial
times.
In Cambodia the
situation is different. The Pol Pot revolution wiped out all existing
administrative structures in a manner that had not happened in any other country
within a period of four years. The structures which were built in certain areas
of the country (in other areas there are no structures at all) under the
Vietnamese guidance by the PDK or the SoC were socialist structures deeply
linked to party rule. These qualities are incompatible with a liberal democracy.
Thus, with a liberal democratic style government now in power, there is a vacuum
as far as administration is concerned.
Most colonial powers
introduced to their colonies a judiciary and encouraged its independence at
least in some areas of community life.
The Pol Pot revolution
completely destroyed the previous existing judiciary. Thereafter, under
Vietnamese guidance, a socialist-style judiciary was introduced. Essentially,
the socialist system of judiciary consisted of a court-house in each of
Cambodia’s provinces. The trial system was one of secret trials held by
prosecutors confirmed by a public performance called a “trial,” which
confirms the verdict arrived at earlier. In this area too there is a vacuum to
begin with as the socialist court system is incompatible with the legal systems
used in a liberal democratic system.
The colonial powers
usually leave behind a number of qualified persons to run the institutions of
the post-colonial period. In British colonies such as India, Sri Lanka,
Malaysia, etc. this consisted of a considerable section of society. When the
French left Cambodia, they left enough persons qualified for the day-to-day
running of the administration.
The Pol Pot revolution
concentrated on total elimination of the intelligentsia and achieved this in
such complete manner as has never happened in any other country within such a
short period of time. As a result, the people running the administration in 1992
knew only one type of administration, the one set up under the Vietnamese
guidance. This is rather an ironic outcome of the Khmer Rouge revolution, as it
had declared Vietnamese as their greatest enemy.
The Place of Tradition in Post-colonial
and Post-revolutionary Cambodia
The
traditional Cambodian society has three pillars: king, religion and family unit.
The French, as the colonial power in the country, compromised with these
institutions to the extent that they did not interfere with their interests as
being masters. When the French finally gave up the colony, these three
institutions still maintained their predominant positions in Khmer society.
Some political parties
in Cambodia did attempt to undermine the monarchy, and as a result the king
himself formed a political party in order to retain his power. Under the 1947
Constitution, the King retained a great deal of power, but had to compromise
with the democratic institutions.
Pol Pot’s revolution
did not succeed in wiping out the Royalty. In fact after the initial stage, the
king was allowed to live in the country under virtual house arrest. When the
revolution was in danger, the king gained even a greater degree of influence.
The blow to the Royalty did not come as a direct blow to the king, but by way of
destroying the social structures and institutions that supported the king.
During the early
period of the Vietnamese-backed Heng Samrin regime, the king joined the
resistance but later arrived at a compromise with the State of Cambodia.
Under the new
Constitution of Cambodia adopted in September 1993, the power of the king is
reduced to be the symbolic head of State, “The King shall reign but not
rule.” The role of the monarchy clearly demonstrates how dramatically
traditional life in Cambodia has changed. While the content of the former social
institution has been substantially changed, external aspects of tradition have
been restored. Such is the continuing impact of the “wiping out the past
policy” of the Pol Pot revolution.
As for the continuity
of Buddhism, the situation is similar. Cambodian Buddhism is rooted in the soil
and centered around the Sangha. The village temple is the social base of
Buddhism. Pol Pot’s revolution wiped out the Sangha from village life. The
physical extermination of monks and nuns was ruthless. Approximately 25,000
monks were summarily executed or died due to hardships. All monks were
defrocked.1 Repressions were
even more ruthless due to the Marxist view that religion would back the
counter-revolution. The aspect of physical extermination stopped during the next
period, but the Vietnamese socialists were also opposed to Buddhism in
principle. The new emergence of monks was slow, and Buddhism was pushed to the
periphery. The State of Cambodia made some compromises with the monks and
allowed some political patronage to monks living in the city.
The SoC also allowed many of the village Wats (Buddhist temples)
to be rebuilt. The villages, however, were run by communes, and within the
village power structure, the temple had no place. While Buddhism as the main
psychological, spiritual and moral force will retain its place in the minds of
Khmers, whether they live in Los Angeles, Paris or Cambodia, the temporal power
of the Sasana (Buddhist organisation) will not attain the same position
as that before Pol Pot times. The village life of the earlier times has indeed
been wiped out. Religions have the capacity to survive. However, the specific
social organization and influence does change under the pressure of massive
revolutions.
The great victim of
the Pol Pot revolution was the Khmer family. In this respect there are several
good studies.
The Effects of the Pol
Pot Years and Socialist Period that Followed on the Khmer Society at Large.
The Khmer society has
been radically uprooted from the past. All Asian societies go through a period
of transition to modern times. However, the pace of change from rural to modern
society varies from place to place. The chief reason for change in most places
is the urbanization process. Ironically, Cambodia’s social uprooting took
place in a counter-urbanization process, when the entire population of towns
were forcibly pushed to live in rural areas. The result of the total experience
is that the link with the past is perceived less as a way to sustain lives. The
appeal to return to the roots will not be a convincing solution to the massive
instability in the country. The social displacement is such that return to the
status quo will be perceived not only as impossible, but also as undesirable.
This creates an enormous pull for rapid modernization and for creating a dynamic
social administration system, as opposed to the slow rural system of the past.
On the other hand, the only known social experience
the people have is that of socialism. They face great difficulties in
understanding and conceptualizing liberal democratic ideas and institutions.
Parliament, courts and even centralized administration are alien concepts. Even
a police force devoted to crime investigation and maintaining law and order are
unfamiliar concepts. It was the party that was in charge of these matters.
Dealing with day-to-day crime was mostly the function of the commune. The
definition of crime itself was based on the socialist conception of property and
Marxist class concepts as far as individuals were concerned. Essentially, crimes
were defined according to the political strategies to fight back
counter-revolution. The definitions of offences are quite different to those in
countries following the British or the French models. Criminal or civil trials
with an independent judiciary that review evidence are completely alien
processes. What people have experienced are verdicts secretly arrived at and
publicized during a session called a “trial” by “judges” who are
expected to follow party orders. Though under the new Constitution many new
committees, commissions and ministries etc. may be appointed, the working
methods of these are likely to be on the basis of the socialist model until it
is abandoned consciously.
Posted on 2002-03-30
|