They may be worlds apart, but those pacing the lush green paddy fields of Cambodia and some in Washington's corridors of power share a common concern -- the southeast Asian nation's elections next month.
Scarred by decades of war and bloody turmoil, including the genocide of the Khmer Rouge, elections mean only one thing for many of deeply impoverished Cambodia's 13 million people: the possible return of strife, maybe even fighting.
A landmark UN-backed election in 1993 and the last general election five years later were both marred by violence, bitter disputes over the result and grave political crises.
"I am unsure what will happen," said Kim Peing, a teacher, at a recent political rally by Prime Minister Hun Sen and his ruling Cambodian People's Party (CPP). "Now it is calm, but you never know what could happen. People are scared."
Meanwhile, for those in US foreign policy circles with a keen eye on the rebuilding of "failed states", the worry is that billions of dollars in international aid over the last decade have not created the liberal democracy they would wish.
Mitch McConnell, chairman of the senate's powerful Foreign Affairs Appropriations Committee and a staunch Republican, has even equated Hun Sen, a former Khmer Rouge guerrilla, to the junta in Myanmar.
Although McConnell has toned down calls for "regime change" in Myanmar and Cambodia -- a stance that appalled many diplomats in Phnom Penh -- Secretary of State Colin Powell is due to follow up on what he has described as the Cambodian "situation" at a security summit in Phnom Penh on June 18.
Climate of fear
Cambodia's undisputed leader from 1998 onwards, Hun Sen has brought the war-ravaged country its first five straight years of peace for nearly 40 years, although critics accuse him of ruling with an iron fist.
With his main rival for the last 10 years, the royalist party of Prince Norodom Ranariddh, divided and demoralized, Hun Sen's victory on July 27 is not in doubt, but despite this, Cambodia's 10-year-old democracy might appear fairly healthy.
There is a vocal opposition, 23 parties are registered for the polls and the bright blue campaign signs of the three main parties adorn roadsides across the land.
But the flame of political freedom is not burning quite as brightly as many in Washington might wish.
Normally happy to talk to journalists about anything under the sun, most ordinary people -- at least in Kompong Cham, Cambodia's most populous and politically fractious province -- clam up the moment politics is mentioned.
"I dared to put up the party sign, but I don't dare talk about the elections," said Bunna, 43, an activist for the opposition Sam Rainsy Party, who would only give her first name.
In the countryside, shootings and violence -- sometimes political, sometimes criminal -- are common and few want to risk upsetting powerful grassroots officials, most of them part of Hun Sen's CPP machine.
The killings this year of a senior monk, a top royalist party aide and a prominent judge have sharpened the climate of fear, even though the government has blamed the shootings on crime, not politics.
Whatever the reasons, it is all grist to the mill of the anti-Hun Sen lobby on Capitol Hill.
"Murders of political activists, widespread intimidation and selective application of justice create a climate of impunity which curtails the ability of citizens to express their views freely," the International Republican Institute, a US Republican party-funded pro-democracy body, said recently.
Government spokesman Khieu Kanharith rejected the criticism, saying authorities and the National Election Commission were investigating every instance of alleged political intimidation or violence.
Don't forget
the khmer rouge
As the currency, the riel, wobbles against the dollar and businesses temporarily scale back investment, the election campaign is shaping up to be dirtier than, if not as bloody as, previous years.
In the midst of it all, there is little space for serious debate about policies or building a better society.
"Cambodians continue to have very limited notions about what a democracy offers them and how it should function," a study by the US-funded Asia Foundation concluded. "Voters still view their vote primarily as currency for political patronage."
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
On the eve of the 80th anniversary of Victory in Europe (VE) Day, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) made a statement that provoked unprecedented repudiations among the European diplomats in Taipei. Chu said during a KMT Central Standing Committee meeting that what President William Lai (賴清德) has been doing to the opposition is equivalent to what Adolf Hitler did in Nazi Germany, referencing ongoing investigations into the KMT’s alleged forgery of signatures used in recall petitions against Democratic Progressive Party legislators. In response, the German Institute Taipei posted a statement to express its “deep disappointment and concern”