Shi Jingtang and the Khitans

28 Saturday Nov 2015

≈ Comments Off on Shi Jingtang and the Khitans

My dear Kacvey,

As you have been invited quite often by a number of your friends to their house for various functions or ceremonies with a strong cachet of Chinese culture and rituals, here is a story from the period of “Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms” 五代十国 (907-960 AD) that you may use to animate the friendly discussions among friends. This part of Chinese history is extracted from the book “Tales from Five Thousand Years of Chinese History” 上下五千年.

During his reign, Emperor Mingzong of Later Tang 后唐明宗 had two great generals: one was his son Li Congke 李从珂 , the other was his son-in-law Shi Jingtang 石敬瑭, the Military Commissioner of Hedong 河东. Both were valiant, skilled fighters, but neither of them was ready to concede ground to the other. In 934 AD, Li Congke acceded to the throne (also known as the last emperor of the Later Tang Dynasty 唐末帝) and the feud between the two families came out into the open.

Li Congke sent tens of thousands of troops against the city of Jinyang 晋阳城 where Shi Jingtang stationed. As Shi Jingtang’s resistance faltered and Jinyang was in imminent danger of falling, his adviser Sang Weihan 桑维翰 had the idea of appealing to the Khitans 契丹 for help. At that time Yelu Deguang 耶律德关 had succeeded his father Yelu Abaoji 耶律阿保机 who had died, as leader of the Khitan Kingdom. Sang Weihan drafted a letter on Shi Jingtang’s behalf, appealing to Yelu Deguang for help and expressing Shi’s readiness to be adopted as a son by the leader of the Khitans. Shi Jingtang further promised that after the Tang army was repelled, he would cede sixteen prefectures north of the Yanmen pass 雁门关 to the Khitans. These prefectures included Youzhou 幽州 and Yunzhou 云州, in the north of modern-day Shanxi 山西 and Hebei 河北.

However, his plan to subordinate himself to the Khitans did not sit well with his generals. His lieutenant Liu Zhiyuan 刘知远 said, “One could argue in favor of appealing to the Khitan chief for help and swearing loyalty to him, but being adopted as a son is a bit too much. Additionally, it is reasonable to promise them gold, silver and jewelry, but you shouldn’t cede territory to him.”

Intent on preserving his own power to the expense of his country, Shi Jingtang turned a deaf ear to Liu Zhuyuan’s argument. He promptly sent Sang Weihan to offer Yelu Deguang these concessions, selling out his country in the process.

Yelu Deguang has always aspired to expand southward, so he was overjoyed at the incredibly favorable concessions offered by Shi Jingtang. He immediately sent 50,000 of his best cavalrymen to relieve the siege of Jinyang. With Shi Jingtang’s troops sallying out of the city wall in coordinated attack, they hemmed in from two sides and routed the Tang forces.

When Yelu Deguang himself later arrived in Jinyang, Shi Jingtang came out of the city gate to greet him, obsequiously calling Yelu Deguang “Father”, despite being ten years older than Yelu Deguang. He humbly asked how the Khitan troops could have ever beaten the Tang army in so short a time, allowing the highly flattered Yelu Deguang to give a glowing account of the prowess of his army. Shi Jingtang appeared duly impressed and expressed his admiration for the Khitans, pleasing Yelu Deguang with his compliments.

After a period of observation, Yelu Deguang finally concluded that Shi Jingtang had indeed cast in his lot with him. He said to Shi, “I haven’t traveled three thousand li to rescue you in vain. I believe you have the bearing and aura to be ruler of the Central Plains. I’ll make you Emperor.”

In false modesty, Shi Jingtang at first declined this offer, but at the urging of his close associates soon accepted it with pleasure. Shortly afterwards, the leader of the Khitans formally proclaimed Shi Jingtang Emperor. Upon his accession Shi Jingtang immediately ceded the sixteen prefectures to the Khitans, as promised.

With the support of the Khitans, Shi Jingtang marched south to attack Luoyang 洛阳. Having suffered repeated defeats at the hand of the Khitans, Li Congke, the last emperor of the Late Tang Dynasty, had lost his will to fight. He spent his days waiting for the end to come, drinking and sobbing. As Shi Jingtang’s troops approached Luoyang, the last Emperor torched his palace, and threw his entire family and then himself into the flames in a collective suicide.

After Shi Jingtang captured Luoyang and overthrew the Later Tang Dynasty, he formally became the emperor of China’s Central Plains. He named his new dynasty, Jin, and established his capital at Bian 汴, giving himself the title of Emperor Gaozu of the Later Jin. In gratitude to Yelu Deguang, the leader of the Khitans, Shi Jingtang wrote a memorial to the Khitan leader, calling him “Father Emperor” 父皇帝 and himself “Son Emperor” 儿皇帝. In addition to an annual tribute to the Khitan court of 300,000 bolts of silk fabrics, on festive occasions Shi Jingtang regularly sent envoys bearing gifts to the Khitan king, his mother, members of the aristocracy and top officials. Whenever any of the Khitan bigwigs was less than satisfied, they would immediately send Shi Jingtang messengers to take him to task, and Shi would unfailingly give abject and reverent apologies. Envoys of the Jin would frequently suffer indignities and insults from the insolent Khitan officials who received them. These humiliating experiences would be recounted back in the capital Bian. The entire Jin court felt the pain of humiliation, except Shi Jingtang, who remained unconcerned and unaffected.

After seven years of being propped up by the Khitans as the “Son Emperor”, Shi Jingtang fell ill and died. His nephew Shi Choggui 石重贵 succeeded him as Emperor Chudi of Later Jin 晋出帝. When Emperor Chudi presented memorials to the king of the Khitans, he called himself “Grandson” 孙儿, but gave no indication that he was their subject. For that reason, Yelu Deguang became offended and sent troops against the Later Jin 后晋.

The troops and people of Later Jin united in their struggle against the invaders, twice repelling the Khitans as they invaded the Central Plains. However, with the help of traitors in the Jin court, the Khitan troops were finally able to march into Bianjing 汴京. They took Emperor Chudi prisoner, and transported him to the Khitan Kingdom. This marked the end of the Later Jin Dynasty.

In 947 AD, Yelu Deguang entered Bianjing and proclaimed himself Emperor of Da Liao 大辽皇帝. That same year, the Khitans had changed their dynasty name to Liao 辽.

An imaginary press conference

23 Monday Nov 2015

Posted by KhmerPAC in Stories

≈ 1 Comment

My dear Kacvey,

Wow, the world is moving dangerously and fast during the last 10 days: terrorist attacks in Paris, world conference in Turkey, Apec summit in Manila and Asean summit in Kuala Lumpur. Amid all of that, the name of Cambodia is ever present at those events, even in French: “Le Petit Cambodge.”

For now, let just focus on Apec and Asean.

Kacvey, have you heard anything about Cambodia at the Apec meeting in Manila, and/or the Asean summit meetings in Malaysia? Have you heard what Cambodia had said or proposed at those meetings? Have you been told what was Cambodia doing in those meetings besides sitting at the conference tables with the headsets on or appearing on photo ops? Was there any Cambodian press corps attending those meetings and independently reporting to their readership back home or elsewhere?

In the absence of real and exciting news about Cambodia at those official meetings, let fancy ourselves with an imaginary press conference given by Cambodia at one of the venues where those meetings took place and in front of the international press.

International Press: Thank you, Sir, for making yourself available to the international press which will ask you few questions, all related to or about Cambodia.

Cambodia: Good! My Cambodia is my domain. Fire it.

IP: Unlike many countries who use international forum to promote their politics, we have not heard anything from you, Sir. Why?

C: Talk is cheap. I let my ministers or interpreter talk. If you have specific questions, ask them.

IP: Among the Apec and Asean leaders who are here, all of them have changed from one time to another. You are the only one who appears on every photo since Cambodia joined Asean in 1999 and also since Cambodia has been invited to participate in Apec as a non-member-economies. Why is so?

C: Because those people like to change, it’s their business, their freedom. I don’t like change. As I told you before, I can teach those people a few tricks on how to govern without change.

IP: You must be the only one who has amassed the most “shirts” offered at those occasions.

C: I intend to break the Guinness Records Book on that.

IP: But, Sir, the people of those countries make the change democratically and no disaster falls upon them after the change: Bush/Obama, Hu/Xi, Sarkozy/Hollande, Harper/Trudeau … just to name a few.

C: You seem to confuse power and power. Change of power every 4, 5, 6, 7 or 8 years is cheap and banal. Temporary power is not my definition of power.

IP: Sir, what is then your definition of power?

C: Power defines its strength by its permanency. Permanent power is real power. When I met Hollande at the Elysées in October, he greeted me and saw me off at the porch of the palace. It struck me as I visualized Sarkozy leaving the same palace when Hollande won and took the leadership of France. A minute before Sarkozy was president, 3 minutes later he went to his private residence as an ex-president. Same for Bush and Obama. Bush is back to his ranch in Texas, Obama is president. It will also happen to Obama in January 2017.

IP: But, Sir, Bush or Sarkozy had real power during their terms?

C: They did, but now they don’t. Remember, yesterday’s power is no longer important.

IP: But others come up and replace them and the beat goes on for their country, doesn’t it?

C: That is the difference between them and me: I had power, I still do, I also will. And I shall. Continuity also defines power.

IP: Sir, do you have accountability?

C: Accountability is for others to me.

IP: Could you please define the length of your “permanency” or the duration of your “continuity.”

C: The length of my life and my progeny.

IP: Does it imply dynastic power in your “after life”, like the Tang, the Ming or the Qing dynasties in Chinese history?

C: My vision is my own, and also what I consider the “vision of greatness.”

IP: So, Sir, have you ever been afraid of losing power like Sarkozy or Bush?

C: I sure am, and that’s the reason why I am making my power continuous and permanent. The night is the source of my fear; it makes me fear the morrow that may take the power away from me.

IP: Can you, Sir, describe your fear?

C: Easy! I cannot fathom seeing another person sitting on what I have built since I joined the KR. I cannot dream of having to sit on the opposite side of the desk from where I am sitting now, or to sit behind the podium like a statue or worst to sit in a court box/bench as an accused. I will not put myself into such a disgrace. Besides, if I don’t have power, I do not know what else could I do as I never had any skill, academic or otherwise. War against Khmer is my forte, my trade mark.

IP: Sir, how do you keep up with your fear of losing power day after day?

C: Keeping power is like reinforcing a wall of bricks. Every day you fortify the foundation and the wall structure with more steel tube, more cement, more mortar and more bricks, so that the wall will resist any political tsunami. You must also employ the workers that are dedicated to you, body and soul. So long you stay behind the accrued fortified wall of power, you can easily shoot at any target outside the wall without being seen. That what I learnt from the guerrillas time.

IP: You still use the guerrillas tactics and strategies, don’t you?

C: Any good lesson is always worth to be learned and put into effect. If I did not join the guerrillas and the KR, I wouldn’t be here today to talk to you like this.

IP: Sir, do you have a recipe for staying on par with your defined power?

C: No wine maker or great chef will ever disclose their recipe to customers. Don’t even try, my friend!

IP: So, are you also a wine maker and a chef?

C: As a chef, I designed the dishes that will be prepared by the kitchen helpers. Then I select the wine that would go with the dishes.

IP: And you enjoy the dishes and the wine!

C: No, no and no. You do not seem to follow the flow of my thinking.

IP: I don’t get it!

C: You see, I do not eat those dishes and drink those wines. They are all for J and G. By the way, just “tréy ngiét” would do fine for me!

IP: Who or what are J and G?

C: They are like my left and right arms: Justice and Gaol. You see, I every day feed them both with these delicious dishes and wines; the dishes and wines are so pleasant and enjoyable to their palate that they become addicted to; J and G are so fat and addicted that they cannot go anywhere else but me. Once you have J and G in your armpits, the rest is like peeling a banana.

IP: But, Sir, J and G cannot go and arrest people who are not in your good book like that!

C: You are such a novice in Khmer politics. Once I finish giving signal, J will mobilize his authority and let other do the dirty jobs. And then G will take over. Since J runs the kangaroo court, people have to think twice before daring me.

IP: Sir, do you happen to have, from time to time, some kind of guilty conscience?

C: Ah, Western psychology! Real leaders don’t. Power excludes guilt. But 5 hours of good sleep per night is a rare commodity.

IP: Claire Denis said: “I am the eldest child; it’s lonely at the top.” Now Sir, do you often feel lonely sitting in that cathedra of power?

C: To feel lonely is not having power is all about, and loneliness does not surround me. I am only lonely when I strategize, like playing chess.

IP: You must be a happy man with your power.

C: I am happy when I bully, frustrate and confuse my enemies, my opponents. When they are unhappy, in my heart I laugh.

IP: Thank you for your time with us. Would you be willing to give another press conference in the City of Tonlé Buon Mouk in the near future?

C: In that City, I don’t allow anybody to ask me questions, nor I allow my power to be questioned.

IP: Then in Paris, at COP21-UN Climate Change Conference between 30 November and 11 December?

C: No, I had my share of Paris. Besides, in those summit settings, nobody cares or talks about me. I rather stay put in the City of Tonlé Buon Mouk, give hell to those who dare contesting my authority or keep them outside of my Cambodia!

IP: Thank you, Sir.

Change and Impermanence – Part I

21 Saturday Nov 2015

Posted by KhmerPAC in Culture, Issue, Politics

≈ Comments Off on Change and Impermanence – Part I

My dear Kacvey,

Christmas 2015 has not even arrived yet, and the water of the Mekong River at the level of the City of Tonlé Buon Mouk is already boiling with grim perspectives towards the elections in 2017 and 2018! Oh, how efficient Cambodian politicians know how to prepare themselves ahead of time for these battles among themselves. Si vis pacem fac bellum!

Pending such occurrences, the future electoral battles would be centered around the fundamental concept of and disposition for “change” and “impermanence.” Why so? you may ask.

The answer is simple: if the current ruling party does not win, there will be “change”; the semblance of “permanence of power” that the same ruling party has endeavored to achieve will drift to a state of “impermanence.” Change signifies impermanence.

It is to resist to this concept of “change” that the ruling party is doing everything in its autocratic power to perpetuate its grip on the legislative, executive and justice of the country at any cost to the social, political and institutional structures of the Khmer society.

Kacvey, you are going to be taken to a long journey on the discussion on “change” and “impermanence” that Cambodia would or would not face in the future, all parameters and caveats that have been known in all previous letters being “unchanged!”

Let begin, shall we!

In ancient China, more than 2,000 years before the common era and in the central plains around the Yangtze River, it was known that a book called Zhouyi 周易 (The Book of Changes) was written to reveal the way things change between heavens and earth based on observations on changing phenomena in the sky and on the earth over thousands of years, and that everything is forever changing. Zhouyi is the book about the philosophy of change.

Wen Haiming, a professor of philosophy at the Renmin University in Beijing, summarizes as follows:

“Zhouyi philosophy maintains that everything in the world has both yin and yang. The movement of yin 阴 and yang 阳 forms the dao 道. The yin and yang are the basic symbol of the Zhouyi, and can be illustrated by the yin-yang fishes in the Taiji 太极 Diagram. The yin and yang mutually contain one another, and transform to be the other. The ancients tried to tell us that all things and events contain both yin and yang, which are forever transforming.”

“Zhouyi is also a book that assists people in realizing their own time and position; the time and space people live in are changing, as are their propensities and social status. People cannot transcend the time and space they are situated in, and they need to pay attention to them when acting.”

“The Zhouyi takes human beings to be part of a natural process. Human beings have been correlative to natural changes since the dawn of time.”

To be continued in next “Change and Impermanence – Part II”

War of Words – Part II

15 Sunday Nov 2015

Posted by KhmerPAC in Culture, Issue, Politics, Social

≈ Comments Off on War of Words – Part II

My dear Kacvey,

Hope you recall the “War of Words – Part I” of 20 March 2015. Well, a new one has broken out while the memory of the holidays during the 62nd Anniversary of Independence of Cambodia have barely faded away.

But this time, there is a slight change in:

the dramatis personae: the ruling star against the leading opposition star, and
the prop/stage: social media is the interface.

You and all of your friends have already seen all sort of accusations, counter-accusations, justifications, threats, court summons, police mobilization, apologies, schemes/plans, airports alerts, and reactions/condemnations on the internet that it would be better to leave those things where they are and continue to develop along the course of time. The two stars are two headstrong protagonists that seem to know what they want for themselves as well as from/against each other.

Kacvey, you must also be tired of the proverbial metaphor “when 2 bulls fight …” that was used in the “War of Words – Part I” and in the “Disunited Unity”; nonetheless, the repetition serves as an emphatic reminder that you and your friends should unequivocally resist to be “the grass to get hurt.” Settling of personal scores is not a state business, as you may very well remember the duel Burr-Hamilton on 11 July 1804 in Weehawken.

Putting that aside, there is something very unsettling and troubling in the way of using social media as a means of communications on national politics and affairs. Indeed, an account in a social media allows the owner to express freely his/her positive/negative perception like a monologue. If, however, two persons at very high positions in the national and political hierarchy resorted to social media as a “disguised” means of communications, it is clear as summer daylight that not only they are in fact “disconnected and disconnecting” from each other in real life of politics, but also the face-to-face interaction, conversation or dialog (cultured or otherwise) between themselves is totally broken down. Has the institutional relationship between the legislative and executive collapsed or shattered and nobody cares about it anymore? Has the standard in Khmer politics in the City of Tonlé Buon Mouk fallen this low and become worst than juvenile irresponsibility? Where is the respect towards those upon whom they pretend to lead or govern?

Oh, Kacvey, one more thing: decorum. Message through social media can carry a long way when the discourse contain these elements: honor, good manners and politeness.

Jonathan Swift, once, said: “Good manners is the art of making those people easy with whom we converse. Whoever makes the fewest people uneasy is the best bred in the room.”

To be continued in “War of Words – Part III”

Catching the shadow

11 Wednesday Nov 2015

Posted by KhmerPAC in Event, Issue, Politics

≈ Comments Off on Catching the shadow

My dear Kacvey,

Thank you for your feedback from your class discussing the elections in Myanmar.

Hope that the students were not too carried away by the landslide victory of the NLD to a point of drawing an illusory hope for Cambodia. Myanmar is Myanmar: (1) without a similar history of genocide between 1975 and 1978 like in Cambodia, (2) the military junta has no history of being similar to the genocidal KR, or the ex-KRs running Cambodia since then, and (3) the NLD has a philosophy, a principle, an ideal, a belief for the interests of the country; its leaders stick with their believers and supporters in hard times of repression and dictatorship.

An apple is not an orange, and vice versa.

The group of 123 is abuzz and busy talking and discussing about Myanmar in the City of Tonlé Buon Mouk, and even from Tokyo. Everybody seems to appropriate the shadow of the outcome of the elections in Myanmar to justify their unearned merit. Attempting to catch the shadow with which to erect a hope for Cambodia in 2017 or 2018 is a sign of narrow-mindedness to the extreme, as well as the shallowness of their principle and public conduct.

Kacvey, it would be very interesting to watch what the big nabob would do when he meets the head of the Myanmar military junta at the Apec meeting in Manila on next 18-19 November.

Aung San Suu Kyi who has given her life to something bigger than herself, once, said about herself: “If I were the blushing kind, I would blush to be called a hero.”

The Train of Democracy

09 Monday Nov 2015

Posted by KhmerPAC in Event, Issue, Politics

≈ Comments Off on The Train of Democracy

My dear Kacvey,

While Cambodia is pondering on its Independence, the train of democracy has arrived in Myanmar carrying the full load of power of the ballots by its millions of independent and free citizens.

It has been indeed a very long and extremely difficult journey with military and dictatorial roadblocks on the way, but no matter how powerful an autocracy/dictatorship is, there always is a more powerful force to uproot it: it is called the power of the free and independent people. It is only the question of time, determination and sacrifice.

Plato once said: “Dictatorship naturally arises out of democracy.”

Kacvey, the citizens of Myanmar have today reversed that thinking: Out of dictatorship arises democracy. It’s Myanmar now; where would that train head to next?

Hope you would discuss openly the elections in Myanmar with your poli sci students.

On the 62nd Anniversary of Independence of Cambodia

09 Monday Nov 2015

Posted by KhmerPAC in History, Social

≈ 2 Comments

My dear Kacvey,

Let start off with “Happy 62nd Independence Anniversary, Cambodia!”

Independent Cambodia is 62 years old today. If it is about a woman/man, she/he gets a year older on her/his birthday. Conventional wisdom is that as a woman/man is getting older, she/he would get better, smarter, more experienced and wiser. But François de La Rochefoucauld qualified that conventional wisdom with: “As one grows older, one becomes wiser and more foolish.” Are we or aren’t we?

But for Cambodia, can it be said that she is getting older? Does a country have age?

At her 61st Independence Anniversary, 6 questions were raised in the letter “Independent Cambodia” of 8 November 2014. Please refresh your memory before proceeding further. Then, go on.

Well, it is sad to state that those 6 questions still remain as questions that, unfortunately, ordinary Khmer citizens have been tirelessly and against all obstacles and hurdles set up by the autocratic regime trying to find answers or to redress; moreover, it is purely downcast and deplorable that the current state of Cambodia is in need of a new medical team to assess her institutional, political and social health, as well as a big dose of medicine to restore her vigor, equilibrium and sanity.

If so, does the country make woman/man, or do women/men make the country?

Kacvey, if you scan the health history record of Cambodia from 1953 to today, it shows that she has been seriously battered and subject to violent abuse or cruel maltreatment:

coup d’état in 1970,
KR in 1975,
a foreign medical intervention at the end of 1978 and beginning of 1979,
a prolonged internal bleeding between 1979 and 1991,
a huge international medical intervention from 1991 to 1993,
giving difficult birth to a bicephalous government from 1993 to 1997,
the 2 heads savagely bit each other in July 1997, and
from then onward until today, a new disease called corrupted autocracy.

With such a record, has Cambodia enjoyed the sweetness of the fruit of the 1953 Independence?

Under the KR régime, Cambodia lost not only its national identity but also more than 1 million daughters and sons; Cambodia again lost its national identity under the foreign military intervention in 1978-79, and international intervention in 1991-93. The history of this dark period teaches Cambodians that Cambodians, using various world ideologies, made wars against fellow Cambodians; Cambodians defeated or killed other Cambodians. As independent Khmer, Cambodians fought among themselves to be superior to themselves; they feel so good fighting each other; they take pride for having overpowered and defeated their sisters and brothers; they bleed themselves to the last drop of blood; and still they did not know how to stop the fighting among themselves, to the killing of themselves. At a certain point in time, they proclaim themselves the victors over the vanquished who are no other than themselves. But they forget that the victory they claim over their Khmer brothers and sisters was not their achievement alone, but rather the alienation of their own independence to foreign military forces or international authority that they seek to end the bloody dispute. History keeps on repeating itself every single day, and is being ignored every single day as well.

With such an attitude and disposition, has Cambodia been proud of its independence? or is it the confirmation of what Diogenes of Sinope once said: “Men strive in digging and kicking to outdo another, but no one strives to become a good man and true.”

Yes, the French colonialists had gone forever, but a new and contemporary form of colonization has settled in in lieu of the French: it is called non-foreign, domestic or local colonization.

Since 1979, a group of Cambodians, under different appellations: Ex-KRs, communists, sipipists, and a blend of opportunists, poseurs and leftovers from other dead or half-dead political formations, have dominated Cambodia political scene in every aspect of life of the country: legislative, executive, justice, military, police and economy. Together, they have a firm belief that Cambodia is their own private property, for today and tomorrow. They take the lands and sell them to the highest bidders; they raze the forests and sell the timbers to foreigners; they exploit the national historical heritage as if it is their own private enterprise; they manipulate the existing laws and/or create new laws to suit themselves to perpetuate their domination; they place the military to the servitude of their party, threaten to ignite future civil wars and to weigh down on the civilians; they use the police to cover and protect their interests and properties; they use their security apparatus to intimidate or to put down any voice that does not go along with their propaganda; their justice system is worst than a kangaroo court; nepotism and corruption are the essence of their stewardship. This form of political domination is the contemporary form of colonialism with a local color.

When domestic colonialism shines, the country loses its independence. A country cannot be independent by itself, and the independence of a country without the independence of its people from exploitation, oppression, injustice, inequality and the fundamental liberty attached to the basic rights of the citizens is a travesty and a caricature of true independence.

Kacvey, do independent Cambodians have:

the liberty to speak their mind and to criticize what is not right?
the independence of their thought?
the power to choose, to replace and to change? and
the freedom to use the power of the ballots?

One year is allotted to you to find the answers.

Our parents gave us the most precious gift in life: our independence, the independence to learn and to think. Let not waste it and do not let it be re-colonized.

Independence of a country is not an end by itself, nor just the annual commemorative military parade; it is the independence of the people, their happiness and the mutual trust and respect between the independent and sovereign citizens and their leaders.

	SwaPrey on The Weak and Desperate St…
	Cheatkhmer Ros on On the bank of Sésane Riv…
	Kim Ea on The Character of a Nation
	Leang UN on Khmer Diaspora Novelists
	Pou Sovachana on “CAMBODIA VOTES”

Khmer Politics Alternatives Circle

~ Thinking outside the box about Cambodia

Monthly Archives: November 2015

Shi Jingtang and the Khitans

An imaginary press conference

Change and Impermanence – Part I

Catching the shadow

The Train of Democracy