Khmer Times, Opinion, 23 January 2023 (Link)
In his memoir, Lee Kuan Yew remarked that Cambodia’s “present leaders,” meaning Hun Sen, “are the product of bitter, relentless struggles in which opponents were either eliminated or neutralized. They are utterly merciless and ruthless, without humane feelings.”
This is the general view of foreign observers over Cambodian leaders. But was it a correct view about Cambodia and Cambodian leaders?
Back then, Singapore was not alone in despising Cambodian leaders whom they treated as Vietnam’s puppet. Many countries put sanction on Cambodia and the remaining few million Cambodian survivors. Many countries provided legitimacy and weapons to, and conducted trade with the Khmer Rouge. The anti-Vietnam and anti-communism sentiment had justified those countries’ being as Khmer Rouge sympathizers.
For now, we have the benefit of re-evaluating history in hindsight.
For now, we could understand that being a Khmer Rouge sympathizer was a mistake against the surviving Cambodian people.
This was the past mistake of foreign observers, and they should learn from that mistake by trying to understand what Cambodian leaders think. They have to remove their own stubborn and rigid ideological and geopolitical frames if they want to understand better about Cambodian leaders.
Was Hun Sen really Vietnam’s puppet? Was Hun Sen a communist dictator?
By reviewing Prime Minister Hun Sen’s five-hour testimony in the National Assembly on the border issues between Cambodia and Vietnam on 9 August 2012, and his 64-page written statement dated 8 September 2015, one would have wondered why would Vietnam spend more than 40 years to negotiate border issues with its puppet?
If one can read Prime Minister Hun Sen’s book entitled, “10 Years of Cambodia’s March: 1979-1989”, one can re-evaluate what was the situation and challenges that Cambodian leaders were facing, and evaluate their leadership’s approaches and perspectives.
From the book, one can observe that Hun Sen is not an ideologue. He is a pragmatist that cares the most for the nation’s survival and people’s livelihood. He adopted market economy and partial privatization well before Vietnam did. He initiated peace negotiation with the then-Prince Norodom Sihanouk despite internal opposition within his party. He invited the United Nations to broker Cambodian peace and to station in Cambodia despite the fear of losing sovereignty and foreign domination. He was not a dictator as he was trying to mobilize consensus and support from within his party since the beginning. His approach is still the same. He never made a decision in silo, with a complete lack of information or consultation.
All of these historical decisions defined the quality and capability of Cambodian leaders, and those surrounding them.