Political compromise is difficult in Cambodia’s emerging democracy, even though no one doubts it is necessary for political stability and economic development for many reasons, including the recent increase in political polarization, and the ruling party’s repression of its opponents and critics.
However, there is no incentive for political compromise due to the political culture of revenge and China’s backing of the ruling Cambodian People’s Party (CPP) against the Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP).
The deep-seated fear of political revenge is encapsulated in an oft-quoted Khmer saying: “When the water rises, the fish eats the ant, but when the water recedes, the ant eats the fish.”
CPP elites’ fear of political revenge constitutes their uncompromising mindset, characterized by their win-at-all-cost strategies and dark chapters of Cambodia’s political history that teach leaders to distrust their opponents. This mindset is conducive to campaigning, but not to governing, because losing power is not an option in zero-sum politics.
Chinese leaders deny that Beijing has anything to do with the CPP’s crackdown on its opponents because it does not interfere in Cambodia’s domestic politics, but anyone can draw a direct line connecting China’s all-out support for the CPP with the recent uptick of political repression in Cambodia.
China’s “rolling back of Western influence in Cambodia” has hardened the CPP’s uncompromising stand and significantly minimized both the economic and political cost of repression against its opponents.
It is foreseeable that the ruling party’s increased repression would justify more devious and vicious resistance by the opposition, feeding mutual fear of harsher revenge. The culture of dialogue and political moderation has largely retreated to the primacy of political extremism in Cambodia.
If the ruling elites view the Chinese one-party state model as the best cure for political ills in Cambodia, then they are certainly remiss of what the future will bring. Political instability will only worsen as cyberspace, a place where no one is really in charge, has increasingly become the prime domain for political contestation.
Since the 2013 election, online social media have replaced mainstream media as the primary vehicle for political campaigning. In the very near future, cyberspace will enable an individual or an entity to improvise more penetrating and cheaper means of influencing politics across national boundaries.
As more young Cambodians spend more of their lives in cyberspace, an already divided and weak Cambodia will be more vulnerable to destabilizing forces inside and outside the nation.
Fast-forward to the future, the greatest danger to Cambodia’s national interest will be the culture of political revenge because the national disunity it creates will drag Cambodia into more violence, deeper poverty and greater despair.
When it is all over, the nation will be far behind its neighbors, including Vietnam and Myanmar, in terms of economic development.
However, there is an alternative, but it is an uphill road to a brighter future for all Cambodians — that is, a harmonious society, a win-win political culture and a resilient economy that would enable the nation to compete and thrive in a fast-changing world.
Unfortunately, fear is gravity in Cambodian politics, always driving politicians to take the easier path to total victory over their opponents, whom they suspect are out to get them.
Kosal Path is assistant professor of political science at the City University of New York’s Brooklyn College.
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry