skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Thailand seeks lead role in investment
Source: Bangkok Post
Thailand hopes to regain its leadership in foreign investment in Cambodia over the next five years now that the two countries have resumed diplomatic ties after months of strained relations.
Thai investment in Cambodia has fallen dramatically over the past seven years.
The relationship between the two soured notably in 2003 when the Thai embassy and some Thai businesses were heavily damaged by rioters in Phnom Penh. They had been reacting to fabricated reports quoting a Thai actress as saying that Angkor Wat belonged to Thailand.
Relations subsequently improved but became strained again last year as the two countries feuded over the Preah Vihear temple, leading to their ambassadors being recalled. Both envoys last month returned to their jobs, and Premier Abhisit Vejjajiva and Prime Minister Hun Sen are expected to hold talks later this month.
Thailand's investments based on approvals by the Cambodia Investment Board totalled only five projects worth US$15.5 million last year. The country ranked sixth in project numbers and third in project value, behind China ( $42.3 million) and Vietnam ($24.7 million).
Over the past 16 years, Thai investments in Cambodia totalled 81 projects worth $362.35 million. Most were in hotels, agro-industry, wood processing, food processing, telecoms, medical services, electricity, mining, garments and shoes.
Deputy Commerce Minister Alongkorn Ponlaboot said Thailand had potential to resume its leadership in foreign investment in Cambodia, if it can capitalise on the potential of National Road No. 5 as the land transport gateway to Vietnam and China.
The 407-kilometre highway connects Phnom Penh with Aranyaprathet in the Thai border province of Sa Kaeo. From Phnom Penh the road links to the Moc Bai-Bavet border crossing with Vietnam.
Mr Alongkorn and a group of Thai businesspeople recently travelled the road through Cambodia to Vietnam to explore the potential.
He said the Thai government planned to set up a special economic zone in Ban Pa Rai in Aranyaprathet to promote ties with Cambodia. It would offer comprehensive import-export services, distribution centres, customer services and an industrial estate covering about 1,000 rai.
The zone would be linked with Cambodia's Poipet O'Neang Special Economic Zone which occupies 2,000 rai opposite Ban Pa Rai.
Mr Alongkorn said the zone would be proposed to economic ministers and the cabinet in the new two weeks.
The special economic zone would be the second with a neighbouring country after the one that straddles Mae Sot district in Tak and Myawaddy in Burma. A special economic zone gives entrepreneurs more investment flexibility through such things as relaxed labour rules.
Thailand is currently the fifth largest trading partner of Cambodia behind the United States, Vietnam, China and Hong Kong. Bilateral trade between the two countries totalled $492.8 million last year, $477.2 million of which came from Thai exports.
By Marwaan Macan-Markar
BANGKOK - Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen is savoring another victory. His latest triumph: a string of verdicts against an opposition lawmaker that apparently guarantee him the liberty to insult women and get away with it.
His target, however, refuses to be silenced even after her latest showdown with the premier, who celebrated 25 years as the Southeast Asian country's leader this year. Nor has she changed her views about the Supreme Court, which upheld a lower court's decision against the outspoken parliamentarian in a bizarre case that has also put the country's judiciary on trial.
The superior court's verdict on June 3, including a fine of 16.5 million riel (US$4,000), was the third judicial ruling against the 54-year-old Mu Sochua. In August last year, the Phnom Penh Municipal Court found the former minister of women's affairs guilty of having insulted Hun Sen. In October 2009, she lost again following an attempt with the Court of Appeal.
"I will not pay the fine. They can confiscate my property. They can even take me to jail," a defiant Mu Sochua said in a telephone interview from the Cambodian capital. "I think it is a serious mistake for the ruling party to push this case at a time when the country needs reform of the judiciary."
"The judges were under trial from the beginning," she observed of the case that began early last year, when she first filed a defamation case against Hun Sen. It followed a speech he had delivered in the Khmer language, where he referred to her as "cheung klang" ("strong legs"), a demeaning term for women in the country.
But the powerful leader of the Cambodian People's Party (CPP) turned the tables on the parliamentarian from the opposition Sam Rainsy Party (SRP). The ruling party stripped Mu Sochua of her parliamentary immunity to help Hun Sen file a counter defamation charge against her. Adding insult to injury, a court dismissed the original defamation case Mu Sochua filed against the premier.
Hun Sen's latest judicial triumph has broader implications in a country struggling to get back on its feet after a 1991 peace deal brought an end to decades of civil war. The timing of the superior court's verdict, in fact, has triggered questions about the role Western donors have in aiding Cambodia's reconstruction.
On June 3, while Hun Sen was celebrating the silencing of one of the country's foremost champions of democracy, free speech and human rights, international donors pledged US$1.1 billion in aid for this year, up from last year's $950 million.
The largest aid package in Cambodia's history came at the end of a two-day donor conference in Phnom Penh, lifting the pressure on the Hun Sen administration to push ahead with five areas of reform. Three areas spelled out in 2004 by donors included changes to fight corruption and increase accountability, legal and judicial reform, protection of human rights and public administration reform.
That little had changed over the years was highlighted by a coalition of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) on the eve of this month's donor meeting. "Serious actions, such as court convictions of corruption cases, remain selective or are limited within certain political considerations," stated the NGO Forum on Cambodia.
The financial windfall for the Cambodian regime, despite a record of defamation lawsuits against opposition parliamentarians, intimidation of the media, a growing list of corruption scandals in the natural resources sector and stripping the environment for private profit, has disheartened civil society groups.
"All the talk by donors about strengthening democracy and human rights in Cambodia is just words; it is not meaningful," said Hang Chhaya, executive director of the Khmer Institute of Democracy, which seeks to champion democratic values in the Southeast Asian state. "The Mu Sochua verdict was a slap on the face of freedom of speech."
There is a growing belief that Hun Sen's ability to get away with bullying his opponents while being propped up by the donor community has more to do with China's spreading influence in Cambodia. Beijing's US$1.2 billion package in aid and soft loans to Cambodia in December last year confirmed the battle for influence being waged in a country where one-third lives in absolute poverty.
China gave Cambodia the funds shortly after Phnom Penh deported 20 Uyghur refugees from Xinjiang, a province in northwest China. Both the United Nations and the United States criticized the expulsion, saying it violated international refugee law. The Uyghurs belong to a Turkic-speaking Muslim minority in China.
"The donors have taken into account China's economic role in Cambodia," said Ou Virak, head of the Phnom-Penh based Cambodia Center for Human Rights. "There is a lot of self interest at play."
Some analysts admit that Cambodia's international donors, who include Japan, Australia, the US and the World Bank, fear that if they walk away China will consolidate its control, leaving Western donors with little influence. Such an act would be deeply embarrassing for the donors for another reason.
"Cambodia has become the poster child of post-conflict reconstruction since the 1991 Paris Peace Accords," said Shalmali Guttal, senior researcher for Focus on the Global South, a Bangkok-based regional think tank. "Donors couldn't abandon it now for that would mean admitting failure."
"The Mu Sochua case reveals the lengths they are prepared to go," noted Guttal. "The donors are willing to stamp on their own benchmarks for reform in order to be in the game in Cambodia."
Members of the Cambodian military take part in a parade on the outskirts of Phnom Penh on Oct. 13, 2009
Chor Sokunthea / Reuters
A land dispute in March between a sugar-plantation developer and a small community in the province of Kampong Speu motivated military police stationed nearby to spring into action, ostensibly in order to prevent an eruption of violence. It didn't take long, though, for the villagers to view the supposed peacekeepers as intimidators.
In this photo taken on Thursday, April 22, 2010, Yoko Ishiyama, left, of Japan, weeps during a Buddhist ceremony at a paddy field of Kandoul, in Kampong Speu province, about 70 kilometers (43 miles) south of Phnom Penh, Cambodia. Ishiyama's husband Koki, a former correspondent for the Japanese Kyodo News service, was reportedly missing during the Cambodian conflict. Two dozen aging colleagues on Thursday trekked to this village to mourn and remember dozens of reporters, photographers and cameramen who died covering the five-year war that ended in 1975 with the takeover by the brutal Khmer Rouge. (AP Photo/Heng Sinith)
KANDOUL, Cambodia — The bodies were dumped in a shallow grave amid the untilled earth of rice paddies: five journalists who had been ambushed by Khmer Rouge and Viet Cong guerrillas on May 31, 1970.
Om Pao, then 12, remembers the stench of decay for days after. He helped his father heap more earth on top of the remains to keep the smell down, the pigs out and the bodies from floating away.
In all, nine journalists — American, Indian, Japanese, French and Cambodian — were attacked that day near this dusty village south of the capital, Phnom Penh. All are believed to have been killed. It was one of the deadliest incidents for reporters in the wars in Vietnam and Cambodia, in a year that remains one of the deadliest anywhere for journalists.
This week, 40 years later, two dozen aging colleagues trekked to Kandoul to mourn and remember. They honored the dozens of reporters, photographers and cameramen who died covering the five-year war, which ended in 1975 with the takeover by the brutal Khmer Rouge.
"It's not only sadness for our colleagues, but also for our Cambodian friends," said Elizabeth Becker, who covered the war for The Washington Post, "but the biggest sadness is that it's taken so long for this country to recover."
Impoverished Cambodia, already roiled by the fighting in neighboring Vietnam, plunged into open war in March 1970 when Gen. Lon Nol overthrew Prince Norodom Sihanouk and seized power in a CIA-backed coup.
Two months later, as Lon Nol's forces battled Khmer Rouge insurgents and their Vietnamese allies, a six-man crew from CBS News was ambushed on the morning of May 31 as the team drove south of Phnom Penh, looking for a battle. Three men from NBC News, rushing after their competitors, were also captured.
According to former CBS cameraman Kurt Volkert, who compiled a detailed reconstruction based on witness accounts, four of the CBS employees were killed instantly. The five others are believed to have been taken to Kandoul in the days after and executed. They had their hands bound and possibly were clubbed to death.
In 1992, Volkert helped a U.S. military forensics team locate the grave just outside Kandoul. Four bodies were recovered and identified as the three NBC employees and one from CBS. The fifth body was never found.
In all, more than three dozen foreign and Cambodian journalists were killed or listed as missing during the 1970-75 war. As many as 26 were killed in the war's first year, according to tallies compiled by former Associated Press correspondents.
Earlier this year, amateur searchers digging northeast of Phnom Penh unearthed what they believe to be the remains of war photographer Sean Flynn — son of Hollywood star Errol Flynn. Sean Flynn went missing nearly two months before the U.S. television crews were ambushed.
After the Khmer Rouge took over in April 1975, dozens of other Cambodian journalists — mainly freelancers for foreign media — were executed or simply disappeared.
On Thursday, reporters, photographers and cameramen who covered Cambodia's upheaval joined throngs of curious villagers, huddling from the scorching heat under an orange and yellow tent in the middle of a rice paddy.
The smell of burning incense and the chants of Buddhist monks mixed with the sound of passing ox carts. Several visitors wept as the names of the dead reporters were read aloud. Children, naked and barefoot, begged for handouts, sipped coconut juice being sold by a vendor and splashed in the nearby puddle where the four bodies had been exhumed in 1992.
"We remember those who have died seeking both truth and reality in Cambodia," said Chhang Song, the minister of information in the Lon Nol government who worked closely with many of the reporters and helped organize the reunion.
Om Pao, whose father's paddy was just yards away from the grave in 1970, said: "To hold a Buddhist ceremony like today is good for dead people, to show the gratitude to the dead and to offer their souls a chance to rest in peace."
Former AP correspondent Carl Robinson said covering Cambodia's turmoil was much more dangerous than Vietnam. Journalists were more often on their own, without the protection of the U.S. military. And, he added, he was troubled by the U.S. role in Cambodia.
"It was nightmarish to cover it all," he said. "It's too hard to look back upon. The whole thing had been a disaster. I left feeling guilty and bitter, as a reporter, as an American, it was just shameful and the Cambodians suffered."
For Jeff Williams, a former correspondent for AP and CBS, the trip was a chance to remember the collegiality of the foreign press corps at the time.
"I don't believe in closure. Maybe it's just me, but nothing ever closes," he said. "You just move ahead."
BHP Billiton chief executive Marius Kloppers has effectively pre-empted the findings of two investigations into its Cambodian bribery scandal by saying he expects only modest fallout for the company.
Rather than wait for the findings of an investigation by the US Securities and Exchange Commission and an internal report being conducted with the help of a US law company, Mr Kloppers jumped the gun in an interview this week with the Financial Times, said by BHP to have been planned months ago.
BHP Billiton chief executive Marius Kloppers has effectively pre-empted the findings of two investigations into its Cambodian bribery scandal by saying he expects only modest fallout for the company.
Rather than wait for the findings of an investigation by the US Securities and Exchange Commission and an internal report being conducted with the help of a US law company, Mr Kloppers jumped the gun in an interview this week with the Financial Times, said by BHP to have been planned months ago.
"We think the potential issue we've got in the total scale of the company is very modest," Mr Kloppers is reported to have said.
The report quoted the chief executive as saying the potential wrongdoing needed to be put in context, which he said was why BHP limited its disclosure of the SEC probe and its own investigations to the bottom of its March-quarter exploration report, released on Wednesday.
"If there was any view that this was something that would have had a material impact on the company - and I'm not talking about financial-only terms, I am talking about overall reputational damage, all of the things that we weigh when we look at a disclosable event - you can clearly see we thought of this in one way," he said.
But Mr Kloppers also seemed to want an each-way bet.
"I don't want to detract from the seriousness of these issues at all because there is absolutely nothing more important in life than our reputation, as events at Toyota and Citibank show. So even if there was 50¢ that had changed hands to a government official, it would have been an unbelievably big deal."
BHP has so far refused to disclose where the bribery scandal took place, but nor has it bothered to deny widespread reports that it involved a $US1 million payment by the company to the Cambodian government in 2006 to secure bauxite leases.
There has also been speculation that there could be lingering issues for BHP from an aborted nickel project in the Philippines, with a Catholic Church aid agency saying in 2008 that the company needed to be more careful in picking its local joint-venture partners.
The Catholic Agency for Overseas Development alleged that BHP's Filipino partner in a nickel joint venture had offered bribes to community leaders to buy support for the project and silence opposition to the mining.
CAFOD said that while there was no evidence that BHP was involved, the company had a responsibility to ensure that partners and contractors it had chosen to work with did not partake in bribery or corruption.
The Phnom Penh PostFORTY workers who were dismissed from their jobs at NagaWorld Hotel and Casino earlier this month appealed to Prime Minister Hun Sen on Wednesday for intervention, and said they also plan to file a complaint with the Ministry of Labour.
The workers’ union, the Cambodia Tourism and Service Workers Federation (CTSWF), said in a statement that NagaWorld had violated labour laws by dismissing the workers without advance notice and providing them with inadequate compensation.
“Tourism Federation leaders and members would like to appeal to Prime Minister Hun Sen … to intervene, and would like all relevant ministries to re-inspect the implementation of labour law and other regulations at NagaWorld to help bring justice to our workforce,” the statement read.
CTSWF Vice President Sok Narith said the dismissed workers planned to file a complaint with the Ministry of Labour through his organisation on
Friday. Of the 40 workers who were dismissed on April 12 and April 13, Sok Narith said, only a handful received compensation. NagaWorld management has attempted to intimidate workers still at the company who have expressed interest in positions as union leaders, he added.
NagaWorld declined to comment on Wednesday.
Sok Narith was one of 14 workers dismissed by NagaWorld in February 2009. NagaWorld subsequently filed suit against the dismissed workers for defamation and incitement, though the case was thrown out by Phnom Penh Municipal Court in October. Ten of those workers have since dropped their complaints, and negotiations are pending for the other four.
Thailand’s fledgling democracy is now all but dead; bloodied and battered on the streets of Bangkok. How did this happen?
In 2005 we were in a northern Thai village undertaking field research on local economic and political issues. Our research coincided with the national election held in February that year. Thaksin Shinawatra’s now disbanded “Thais Love Thais” party, backed up by a formidable campaign machine, stormed to victory with strong support in the rural north and northeast. It was Thailand’s most comprehensive election victory ever.
In the country’s rural heartlands Thaksin’s policies of universal health care, infrastructure investment, local economic stimulus, and agricultural debt relief were wildly popular. Even the murders that punctuated his bloody “war on drugs” were applauded by many rural Thais who were fed up with the nightmare of narcotic abuse. To succeed at the ballot box, Thaksin learned to speak the language of rural Thailand in a cadence that alternated between populism and brutality.
In the northern village where we were working, Thaksin’s policies were not embraced uncritically. Vigorous debate about the positive and negative impacts of government action on local livelihoods was an everyday aspect of electoral culture. Many commentators say that rural people don’t care about government corruption. Of course they do, but they have their own ways of weighing up the contentious trade-off between private gain and public benefit.
In 2005, these debates informed a vigorous local tussle between the sitting “Thais Love Thais” candidate and a popular opposition figure who had served the area well in previous governments. This was a very real contest.
On election day the village hall was set-up to meet the strict requirements of Thailand’s electoral laws. Officials, conscripted from the ranks of local school teachers and village leaders, managed the hundreds of voters who came to exercise their franchise. The turnout was more than 80 per cent. Scrutineers nominated by the main candidates amiably watched over proceedings.
At the end of the day, once the lines of voters had fulfilled their obligations, the ballot boxes were sealed with string and wax and then transported, under police guard and with a sizeable escort, to the electorate’s vote-counting centre in the grounds of a provincial high school.
The ballot boxes from far-flung villagers were assembled for the count. Groups from each village waited patiently to empty their ballot box into the huge tub from which the votes were retrieved. College students were enlisted to count the votes and write the growing tallies on results boards.
For those, like us, for whom elections involve a night in front of the television, this was an extraordinarily open and participatory event. It was held, quite literally, in the public gaze. By the end of the night it was clear that Thaksin’s man had won, despite a strong showing from his opponent in many villages.
Thailand’s voters have been through this process twice since then. In 2006 Thaksin called a snap election in response to street protests in Bangkok. The opposition, lead by the current prime minister, Abhisit Vejjajiva, boycotted the election, knowing they had no chance of victory. Thaksin attracted over 60 per cent of the valid votes cast. He was eventually overthrown in the coup of September 2006 and another election was held in December 2007.
Thaksin was in exile, but his political allies won again, falling just short of an absolute majority. But the anti-Thaksin forces could not accept this result either and they managed to manoeuvre Abhisit Vejjaiva into power on the back of the yellow shirt occupation of Bangkok’s international airport and the dissolution of the pro-Thaksin governing party.
The detailed history of the tactics of the red shirts, since they began their current round of protests in Bangkok on March 12 will be written in the coming months and years.
There have been mistakes, miscalculations and some unedifying displays of thuggery and provocation. But the underlying motivation of the protesters is clear: they are fed up with having election results overturned.
They have gone peacefully to the ballot box three times since 2005 and each time elite forces associated with the palace, the military, the judiciary and Abhisit’s Democrat Party, have disregarded their decision. The red shirts have been told that their votes don’t count, that they are uneducated country bumpkins, and that they sell their votes to the highest bidder.
It is unsurprising that many of them were suspicious about Abhisit’s offer to hold yet another election on November 14. There were even more suspicious about the willingness of the forces that back Abhisit to respect its result. The elite’s disregard for electoral processes has opened the door for violent elements on both sides of the political spectrum.
So where to now?
Many in Thailand, including some of the villagers in the north, may be hoping that Thailand’s long-reigning king, Bhumibol Adulyadej, will intervene and talk some royal sense into the combatants as he famously did in May 1992 after more than 40 protesters had been killed on the streets of Bangkok.
But, in 2010, this is unlikely to happen again.
Quite apart from the king’s extremely fragile health, the palace has made it clear since the 2006 coup that it sides with anti-Thaksin forces. When the anti-Thaksin yellow shirts occupied Bangkok’s international airport in November and December 2008, they did so under an explicit royal banner with all of the protections that such palace endorsement implies. By contrast, the prospect of royal intervention to save the red shirts from the wrath of the military is now remote.
In fact, some are starting to wonder out loud if Thailand’s monarchy is now, in fact, part of the problem rather than part of the solution.
Decades of national faith invested in an unelected monarch as the ultimate source of authority and salvation in times of crisis has stunted the development of robust democratic institutions. Thailand has put too many eggs into the royal basket and now lacks the institutional wherewithal to constructively resolve political divisions.
There is considerable truth to the old joke that Thailand is the world’s longest lasting fledgling democracy, and that truth owes much to the fact that the symbolic power of the monarch has overshadowed opportunities for elected politicians to manage national affairs.
When the shooting and burning in Bangkok finally subsides Thailand is going to have to rebuild faith in its basic democratic institutions. Cultivating a more respectful attitude to the political choices of its many rural inhabitants would be a good place to start.
Andrew Walker and Nicholas Farrelly are Southeast Asia specialists in the ANU’s College of Asia and the Pacific. They are the co-founders of New Mandala, a blog on mainland Southeast Asian politics and societies.
