Monthly Archives: February 2016

The art of doubletalking

27 Saturday Feb 2016

Posted by in History

≈ 1 Comment

My dear Kacvey,

It looks like at this season Méak Bochéa, some people went to pagoda to receive some “srôuch teuk”, and right away some of their blasphemous sins would have been absolved. The men then emerged and they thought they have found some revelations that, when displayed to public, would shake and shuffle the feathers of stone garudas.

Thanks to the Phnom Penh Post, you have the chance to gauge how the big nabob evaluated the performance of his ministers. Please do not forget to thank Mech Dara, Lay Samean, Pech Sotheary and Igor Kossov for their reporting.

http://www.phnompenhpost.com/national/pm-gives-ministers-f-lashes-out-illegal-logging-task-force

Kacvey, has any of your students ever curiously asked why this doctor honoris causa has all of a sudden adopted this scholastic grading methodology for his ministers? If that happened, you would terribly be in a tough bind to find a rational answer for it. Since rationality has never been the foundation of this administration, some answers could then be found by the obvious which is right in front of your eyes:

  • Like iron or steel, the power that sits and doesn’t move after 37 years gets oxidized. Le pouvoir qui ne bouge se rouille, mon cher!
  • Like liqueur/alcohol, corruption, cronyism and nepotism have drowned the power in the barrel of arrogance, autocracy and despicableness.
  • Like drugs, 37-years of heavy consumption has made the power addicted and hallucinated.
  • Like gambling, after 37 years of playing and betting against itself all the times, the power has become madly insane (or insanely mad!) of its self-superiority or invincibility.

Thus, the confirmation of Isaac Newton’s law on gravity: “What goes up must come down.” The 4 above axioms, in the context of Khmer politics, when put together would produce a situation that would indicate that everything has already reached its maximum or the top of the inverted parabola. Nothing can go further or higher. Thus begins the descending process.

Kacvey, you may then ask what this has to do with the evaluation of the ministers with grades “F” on the report card?

The above 4 axioms are the cause of the evaluation in as much as:

  • The autocracy runs out of new ideas and principles to convince the electorate that what it has been doing is for their good welfare. In other words, the electorate does not believe anymore in the daily boasting of the deeds of the ruling authority.
  • The autocracy, although it is not afraid of the opposition(s), starts to be afraid of or to doubt itself as like in Snow White tale, when the Magic Mirror told the Evil Queen – [who every day asked the same question “Magic mirror in my hand, who is the fairest in the land?”; the mirror always replied: “My Queen, you are the fairest in the land”] – that “My Queen, you are the fairest here so true. But Snow White is a thousand times more beautiful.”
  • The threat of civil strife and refusal by the army or police to recognize the result of the elections that would bring a different party or a coalition of parties to the leadership of the country would no longer have recognizable soundbites that would create a psyche of fear among the electorate.
  • The autocracy, having made a mockery of democracy, rule of law and social justice that victimized the population across the board, has now tried to use social media as a theatrical mask to fool and to delude the public. Creating confusion in the mind of the people is part of a psychological warfare.

Because of the above, the public blaming of ministers is a ruse to double talk in so far as it is easier to put the blame on somebody else. Why blaming oneself when one can blame other(s)? He who sits on top of all powers is unaccountable to no one!

But, Kacvey, please,

  • Who appointed those ministers?
  • To whom those ministers have reported to, 37 years so far?
  • Where does the buck stop?
  • If ministers are rated, who rates the rater?
  • Does the rater have credentials and recognized qualification to be a rater or an evaluator?
  • If some ministers are rated “F”, who then would be rated “A” or “B” etc..? Ah! Ha!
  • If individual ministers are rated, what is the scientific criteria used?
  • Or is it “because I say so”?
  • If individual ministers are rated, how is the government itself as a whole is rated? [Kacvey, Remember the many international organizations that rated Cambodia on various issues! Uh! Ooh!]

Doublespeak is an art of distortion, disguise and deception that has always been perfected by irresponsible people who think that they can always get away with anything they do or say. But a government is like a family where these words from Thomas Draxe, a British theological and classical author, still resonate the Khmer political truth: “Like father, like son; like mother, like daughter.”

People have long memory, have they not?

The NEC or the Non-Exhilarating Comedy

24 Wednesday Feb 2016

Posted by in Governance, Institution, Issue, Politics

≈ Comments Off on The NEC or the Non-Exhilarating Comedy

My dear Kacvey,

Did you apply for one of the 362 positions as a thespian in the Non-Exhilarating Comedy troupe? If you did, you would now become the official civil servant comedian! And whatever you do on stage, people will haughtily laugh in your face!

Well, Kacvey, it seems that in the Non-Exhilarating Comedy organization, there is a big confusion or ignorance about the notion of independence which is defined as the freedom from outside control or support. So, instead, the head of the troupe defines independence according to his own ignorance and uneducated knowledge and makes the 362 thespians to believe that, as they now are integrated into the civil servant corps of functionaries, they could still be independent like they used to be until 2013. A nonsensical and absurd mind makes nonsensical and absurd statement. To paraphrase Chilon, he must have had let his tongue over running his thought, if thought there is.

So, the July 2014 deal between the ruling and the opposition for a reformed NEC is ending up in a non-exhilarating comedy where the plot turns out to be the same old stuff: the opposition, despite its claim on the contrary, gets cheated in plain daylight again and again.

Kacvey, you must have heard the head of the army and the head of the police army who are members of the ruling circle clamoring the independence of the army and the police in the event that the ruling party will not return to power? Their independence is in the dependence of the party, not the constitution or the laws of the country.

What comes around goes around. 2017 and/or 2018 will be 2013 “repeat.” And so has it been decided by the head of the Non-Exhilarating Comedy troupe under the watchful eyes of the “independent” supreme autocrat. The rest is duck soup.

=====

Update:
– 7 February 2017
RFA: លោក រ៉ុង ឈុន ប្រកាសលាឈប់ពី គ.ជ.ប ប្រសិនបើបក្សប្រឆាំងត្រូវរំលាយ
– 9 February 2017, The Phnom Penh Post: Revision to Law on Political Parties could trigger NEC resignation

Chilon, one of the Seven Sages

24 Wednesday Feb 2016

Posted by in Culture, History, Social, Stories

≈ Comments Off on Chilon, one of the Seven Sages

My dear Kacvey,

Diogenes Laertius wrote that Chilon was a Lacedaemonian born circa 560 B.C.

Chilon was an ephor who wrote poem in elegiac meter some 200 lines in length.

When he was asked wherein lies the difference between the educated and the uneducated, Chilon answered: “In good hope.” What is hard? “To keep a secret, to employ leisure well, to be able to bear an injury.”

These are some of Chilon’s precepts:

  • To control the tongue, especially at banquet.
  • Not to abuse our neighbours, for if you do, things will be said about you which you will regret.
  • Do not use threats to anyone.
  • Be more ready to visit friends in adversity than in prosperity.
  • Do not make an extravagant marriage.
  • Prefer a loss to a dishonest gain: the one brings pain at the moment, the other for all the time.
  • Do not laugh at another’s misfortune.
  • When strong, be merciful, if you would have the respect , not the fear, of your neighbours.
  • Learn to be a wise master in your own home.
  • Let not your tongue outrun your thought.
  • Control anger.
  • Do not aim at impossibilities.
  • Let no one see you in a hurry.
  • Obey the laws.
  • Be restful.

Chilon was already an old man when Aesop was flourishing, and a tale was told that when Chilon inquired of Aesop what Zeus was doing and he received this answer: “He is humbling the proud and exalting the humble.”

Chilon was known as a man of few words and his death took place in Pisa, just after he had congratulated his son on an Olympic victory in boxing.

His famous apothegm is: “Give a pledge, and suffer for it.”

Solon, one of the Seven Sages

22 Monday Feb 2016

Posted by in Culture, History, Social, Stories

≈ Comments Off on Solon, one of the Seven Sages

My dear Kacvey,

Diogenes Laertius told that Solon, the legalist, was born in Salamis, circa 594 B.C.

In the war between Athens with Megara over the claim to Salamis, he wrote this famous poem: “Then let us fight for Salamis and fair fame, Win the beloved isle, and purge our shame.”

When his kinsman, Pisistratus, became a tyrant, he sailed to Egypt, to Cyprus and then proceeded to the court of Croesus who, in magnificent array, sat on his throne and asked Solon if he had ever seen anything more beautiful. “Yes,” he replied, “cocks and pheasants and peacocks; for they shine in nature’s colors, which are ten thousand times more beautiful.”

Solon enacted some laws, one of which is the precursor of the “law of talion” (lex talionis) by which the penalty for depriving a one-eyed man of his single eye should be the loss of the offender’s two eyes.

Solon used to say that those who had influence with tyrants were like the pebbles employed in calculations; for as each of the pebbles represented now a large and now a small number, so the tyrants would treat each one of those about them at one time as great and famous, at another as of no account.

Solon’s most notable sayings:

  • Speech is the mirror of action.
  • Wealth breed satiety, satiety outrage.
  • Put more trust in nobility of character than in an oath.
  • Never tell a lie.
  • Pursue worthy aims.
  • Do not be rash to make friends and, when once they are made, do not drop them.
  • Learn to obey, before you command.
  • In giving advice seek to help, not to please, your friend.
  • Be led by reason.
  • Shun evil company.
  • Honour the gods, reverence parents.

Solon most famous apothegm: “Nothing too much” – ne quid nimis.

Kacvey, you certainly remember Thales’s most famous apothegm: “Know thyself“. This is how the two apothegms “Know thyself” and “Nothing too much” work together.

Duane H. Berquist explained: “If the Seven Sages put Know thyself before Nothing too much, it would seem to be because one must know oneself before one can know how much is too much. If one did not know oneself, one could not know how much is too much for oneself.

“The exhortation Nothing too much can be applied first to the exhortation Know Thyself. Some have thought that the end of human knowledge was for man to know himself. We find this especially among many modern thinkers. To pursue knowledge of oneself as the end of man’s knowledge, and therefore as wisdom, is to seek to know oneself too much. The only knowledge of self that is wisdom is God’s knowledge of himself. Man is not wise if he is ignorant of himself, but knowing himself does not make him to be wise.

“The Seven Sages did not urge us to love ourselves. For it is more natural to love oneself than to know oneself. We do not need to be urged to love ourself. But those who do not know themselves may not truly love themselves. Those who think themselves to be more a body than a soul or emotion more than reason, may not truly love themselves. They choose what appears to be good for the body or to satisfy the emotions rather than what perfects the soul or reason.

“Moreover, if the common defect in knowing oneself is to know oneself too little (hence, we must be urged to know ourselves), the common defect in loving oneself is to love oneself too much.

“Thus, for the defect in knowing ourselves, we are urged to know ourselves. And for the common defect in loving ourself, we are urged Nothing too much. But for the defect of not truly loving ourselves, we are urged to know ourselves as well.

“Why do the Seven Sages urge more Nothing too much than Nothing too little? Since there is the same knowledge of opposites and thus the brevity of wisdom can be satisfied taking just one of these two, why emphasize Nothing too much?

“Perhaps more harm is done by too much than by too little. Although driving too slowly can cause accidents, more accidents are caused by driving too fast. More harm is done by drinking too much alcohol than too little.

“Perhaps we are also inclined more to go towards too much than towards too little. This is clearly seen in the pleasures of eating and drinking and reproducing. But is not the same true as regards anger? And do men love money too much or too little? Men do not seem to be in need of being urged not to love money too little.

“And if pride is the queen and root of all the vices, and pride or haughtiness is an excessive love of one’s own excellence, Nothing too much is an exhortation that we are much more in need of than Nothing too little.”

Cultured dialog with “Future Forum”

19 Friday Feb 2016

Posted by in Culture, Institution, Issue, Politics

≈ Comments Off on Cultured dialog with “Future Forum”

My dear Kacvey,

Hope by now you and your students have fully been aware of and gone through the “Domestic Politics Briefing Note” issued by the think tank “Future Forum.”

In order to assist the classroom discussions that might arise from the issues raised in the Briefing Note, you may inject some of the ideas that are in the below letter that was in response to the Note.

Enjoy the discussions!

“Dear Mr. Chairman of Future Forum

First and foremost we wish to thank you for your introducing us into the work of Future Forum and we are delighted that you had individually sent us a copy of your 2 February 2016 “Future Forum Domestic Politics Briefing Note.”

For you as the Chairman of Future Forum to have visited our blog, there is no greater honor that our Circle has been given. Again, we thank you for your time and your diligence, and we preciously keep your paper in our archives for future reference.

We hope that Khmer diaspora, either sympathetic to the two main political parties or otherwise, when reacting to your Briefing Note, would shed their cliché reasoning and start to seriously reflect on the ideas and perspectives that you have outlined therein.

For us, we are thrilled to now see that there are “other Cambodians” who not only do not stop to learn and to think freely and independently, but also do not let anybody else think for them.

Leon Blum, once, said: “The free man is he who does not fear to go to the end of his thought.”

As we fully respect your view and analysis, we believe that Cambodia still has a lot of room for its children to think and to work towards a future which will not be the shadow of its past. Future Forum and us are like two cars riding on a highway of ideas and conviction, and of undetermined distance towards a destination called “Cambodia” – [Future Forum, an 18-wheeler carrying a big load of indispensable necessities and foodstuffs; us, a mini-van with a small load of other necessary commodities] – where its citizens are hungry and thirsty of real democracy and exposure to intellectual novelty. We hope, one day, the citizens of Cambodia would, in their vision, see Future Forum arriving and make use of the amount of commodities that you have brought along for their consumption.

As Future Forum is right there in Cambodia seeing and feeling the true reality as it happens, your privileged position could well stand out as you have been almost daily quoted in the Khmer and English languages newspapers in Phnom Penh. We, on our part, have learned a great deal from your wisdom.

Our Circle appreciates the substantive depth of the Briefing Note and wishes – if we may – to bring to your attention six (6) points that we also have come to ponder upon:

  1. Footnote 24 on page 3. On 18 November 2014, we posted a piece in our blog: “A lady and two men”
  2. “… made a deal …” and Footnote 56, on page 6. Two dealers, and their agents, made a secret deal and all hell broke loose when the “deal” was not gentlemanly honored by either of the two or quite possibly by both of them. When “leaders” become “dealers” – letters “d” and ”l” trade places – they convert the country into a gambling den. Then, where is their courage, dignity and honor to disclose the true details of the “deal” to the citizens that they loudly claim they serve? For example, how does the removal of the first vice-president of the National Assembly square with that “deal”?
  3. “Cambodians will most likely bite their tongues and opt for peace”, last line on page 8. If Cambodians continue to bite their tongues, how much longer will they have to struggle to suffer the pain from that ceaseless biting? Would the insane, irrational and continuous fighting between the two main protagonists or antagonists, if you will, parties and individuals all included, really compromise social peace nationwide?
  4. “…working hard to make progress in terms of implementing some real reforms”, on page 10. Does the apple that does not fall far from the tree qualify itself as reformist? In other words, can the apple that grows out of that tree become an orange when it falls? Since when archaic Khmer leaders know about “reforming” themselves?
  5. “… democratic youth movement, inexorably gathering strength, that sooner or later will demand … change”, on page 18. In the total absence of public political discussion and debate in the Khmer institutional and educational culture, it would be a gigabyte phenomenon that would lead, in a very near future, to a new era of democracy for Cambodia, if the mind and intellect of the “youth movement” would meet Future Forum in the cyberspace! We were all young and full of ideals once in our life. “Youth of Cambodia”, be not what the “parties” want you to be, be what “You” want the parties to be. “Youth of Cambodia”, you like to do selfies, why not also doing the “selfie” of your aspiration, the freedom of your mind and intellect and your honesty! “Youth of Cambodia”, build the future of Cambodia, and “You” will also build yours!
  6. “Yet there are many reasons to be optimistic”, on page 20. How could this state of mind sustain itself in the assumption that in the present state of affairs of and in Cambodia “if … leaders fail to respond, and continue to favor the old, negative politics …” and “if the old guard on both sides refuse to enable and support this natural progression…”?

We look forward to being on your mailing list for future Briefing Notes on foreign policy, governance and institution, and rules of law and legislation.

With profound respect and best regards.”

=====

Update: An article penned by Julia Wallace in the Asia Pacific Section of The New York Times can provide additional thoughts to the above. Thanks Julia! Thanks NYT!

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/18/world/asia/cambodia-hun-sen-sam-rainsy.html?_r=

 

Thales, one of the Seven Sages

14 Sunday Feb 2016

Posted by in Culture, History, Social, Stories

≈ Comments Off on Thales, one of the Seven Sages

My dear Kacvey,

According to Diogenes Laertius, Thales was born circa 585 B.C., and considered by Plato as one of the Seven Sages in the Ionian school of philosophy. He was a Phoenician by birth. After his expulsion from Phoenicia, he settled in Miletus and later was known as Thales the Milesian.

Here are current apothegms assigned to Thales:

He held there was no difference between life and death. “Why then do you not die?” said one. “Because” said he, ” there is no difference.”

To the question which is older, day or night, he replied: “Night is the older by one day.”

Some one asked him whether a man could hide an evil deed from the gods: “No,” he replied, “nor yet an evil thought.”

Being asked what is difficult, he replied, “To know oneself.” “What is easy?” “To give advice to another.” “What is most pleasant?” “Success.” “What is divine?” “That which has neither beginning nor end.”

To the question what was the strangest thing he had ever seen, his answer was, ” An aged tyrant.”

“How shall we lead the best and most righteous life?” “By refraining from doing what we blame in others.”

To Thales belongs the proverb “Know thyself.”

A Fictional Culture of Dialog in Rancho Mirage

08 Monday Feb 2016

Posted by in History, Social, Stories

≈ Comments Off on A Fictional Culture of Dialog in Rancho Mirage

My dear Kacvey,

Before the opening of the Asean-US summit, an Aseanian leader aka Dau Chéch, protectively surrounded, would pensively stroll in the Sunnylands gardens.

Armed with his new self-discovery in FB, he would meet a group of other Aseanian expats who noisily would demonstrate against Aseanian autocrats. Playing the type of a cool-guy-for-photo-ops chatting with the tri-cycle pushers or the gardeners at The Monument of Independence, or even pretending to water the plants and flowers, he could not stand any longer hearing many adjectives that he never before heard in his natural ears launched against him; with a curiosity without precedent, he would feel like desiring to empty his chest.

He would then have decided to sit down on a public bench and chatted with an Aseanian reporter. And the fictional conversation would go as follows:

Aseanian Reporter (AR): It’s very daring of you, Sir, to sit and talk like this thousand miles away from the usual Koh Pich lectern!

Dau Chéch (DC): I’m an old man in new clothes, if you know what I mean!

AR: Sir, since your time is very limited, and the guys in dark glasses are watching us intently, would you mind address 2 topics?

DC: OK. Fire ahead! 1st topic.

AR: Thank you, Sir. How are your pulse and heart beat as you’re about to be presidentially treated for 2 days at the “Camp David of the West” at the American taxpayers expenses like a small number of famous world leaders before?

DC: My palace in Takhmau is many times better, but I must say I start to have some butterflies in my belly.

AR: Why so, Sir? Because of the 1st time and officially in the heartland of contemporary democracy?

DC: I’ve always thought mine is the best…. Well, it’s still the best for me.

AR: Sir, this is the 1st topic. Do you feel affected by the noise of the protest, the words on the banners?

DC: You see, these people have no respect for me: the prime minister, the leader.

AR: Sir, aren’t you then giving too much importance to the protests rather than to the substance of the summit or the draft on the “Sunnylands Declaration” for example?

DC: The substance has already been taken care off prior to the summit, and by the way, the TV will mostly show the protests rather than the formal summit. And it is these TV images that damage my standing with my people.

AR: In the US, Sir, freedom and democracy come with freedom of expression by the people.

DC: Calling me a tyrant is not exercising freedom of expression. It’s disrespect; it’s dishonoring my country.

AR: But Sir, the protests against the politics of the leaders have always been the golden hallmarks of democracy and freedom in the US as well as in Western democracies, even since Athenian time: for example, in the US and worldwide, demonstrations against Nixon and Johnson during the Vietnam War when you were a young KR, against Bush during the period leading to the Iraq War, etc …

DC: I have nothing to say about the Americans against Americans on their own lands.

AR: But, Sir, these folks are Americans on their lands. Why are you against them?

DC: Yes, they are American but many of them also hold dual nationality. They interfere with my politics in my country with their non-American nationality upon which I must exercise control.

AR: Aren’t you contradicting yourself, Sir?

DC: When it comes to my politics and my governance, they are part of my challenge.

AR: So, you believe that you have the absolute rights to rule them the same way you rule the people in your country.

DC: Because I think I rule them, therefore I oppose their protesting against me.

AR: Sir, the bien-fondé and relevance of the protests against Nixon, Johnson or Bush turned out to be right at the end: as a result, Phnom Penh and Saigon in 1975, no WMD in Iraq …

DC: If I had to make decision on those wars, I would not have done the way they did.

AR: But Sir, as a young KR guerrilla, you were part of the “protest” when you went against the imperialism, against the Lon Nol regime and then you fully joined the “opposition” which was the KR at the time?

DC: I was against Lon Nol then does not mean that I now like the protest against myself. I am now on the other side of the fence. Time has changed, don’t you know that?

AR: Historically, Sir, you did the “protest” twice, not in the streets like these folks, but in the “war jungle”: the 1st time against Lon Nol as a KR before 1975, and the 2nd time against the KR after 1977, both time with gun in your hand.

DC: I protested and I acted. The protest was my motivation to act. I don’t now look back at what I did; I’m moving ahead and past history.

AR: History has made you what you are now, why being ungracious to it?

DC: You don’t talk about sickness anymore when you have fully recovered.

AR: So, what you protested against turned out to be greatly in your favor. You reap what you sowed against the wind.

DC: I know that, and I invested in it. You invest right, you get top dividends.

AR: So, Sir, why then are you so against the present protests? Are you afraid that they are right?

DC: The protest makes me look bad; it makes me look like I lose control. You see, the thing is that President Obama and the 9 Asean leaders, they all accept me as their peer. And then why these protest and demonstration in the street against me? My honor is in jeopardy.

AR: May be because President Obama and the 9 Asean leaders are not the citizen of your country. If they were, who knows?!

DC: What are you driving at?

AR: The State Department’s position on “SCS issues” when your chaired the 2012 Asean, for example.

DC: On that issue, I got pounded left and right, East and West. Ah, these world affairs!

AR: Speaking about “honor”, why do you now care so much about “honor” whereas when the KR of yours emptied Phnom Penh in April 1975 and when foreign troops arrived in Phnom Penh in January 1979 with you, nobody or you spoke about “honor”?

DC: Are you a historian or a psychologist?

AR: Neither, Sir. Just like to ask questions to get answers.

DC: Let’s move ahead. 2nd topic, please.

AR: Sir, in your FB account, you seem to have more than 1 million “like”. Do you truly believe that there are more than 1 million of real people who like you?

DC: Portable device and FB are “me and my people”: we are connected!

AR: Are you implying that for the last 40 years, you and your people have never been connected?

DC: You see, with FB, I don’t need to go out and meet them in person in their villages anymore. They read what I write, and they see my face. They see me, and I don’t need to see them. Does a movie star need to meet the people who watch the film in the movie house? No. You act well on the movie set, and you’re a star! The flat screen works wonder for me.

AR: Sir, do you trust the sincerity of every “like”?

DC: I did not force them to “like”; they “like” on their own free will, don’t they?

AR: In Chinese tradition, there is this thing called “gold or silver paper money” that people symbolically burn for wealth and fortune to be sent to the next life.

DC: I see what you infer to, but hey! that’s life in 2016! I have to live my youth that I did not have!

AR: Sir, it looks like you now use your FB to run your government. You make a decision and you broadcast it on FB. If so, why having ministers and ministries?

DC: You see, I’m really gung-ho with FB and in the next governmental reshuffling I might create a new portfolio for social media that could be attached to my premiership.

AR: If you spent so much time on your FB, when do you have time to do the real work for the country?

DC: You already said that I use my FB to run my government. That is my new style, and everybody else in my country has to catch it on up with me.

AR: Sir, when the Asean-US summit starts, will you broadcast your own speech, your discussion with the 10 leaders in FB?

DC: Of course, I will put all the photos and selfies in my page as soon as I have a minute of break.

AR: Why only photos, Sir?

DC: So my fans can see me in my international glory and aura! More “like” to record and to surpass the forced-to-exile “minority leader.” It’s like an enchantment, a magic spell!

AR: How about your speech, your talking, your oral intervention, your ideas, your arguments on behalf of the country?

DC: Generally, in those settings, I don’t speak much, I don’t talk much. I listen a lot. For the camera, I smile a lot.

AR: How would you interact with those leaders who do not speak your language?

DC: I greet them with fewest words; I shake their hands; I talk through my interpreter.

AR: So, your interpreter is the only person who officially hears you talking?

DC: There is no need for other people to hear what I say, because what I say at the meeting is not for public consumption. It is for me alone and my power. No “share”. Period.

AR: Sir, why wouldn’t you like to let your people hear your voice in an international platform which is different from the monotonous setting of Koh Pich lectern and in the working language of the meeting?

DC: Decision in political life is like a power switch: “on” or “off”. This matter is on “off”.

AR: But Sir, when you sign the “Sunnylands Principles” with President Obama and other Asean leaders, it is a solemn and high political act. And the document will not be in your native language, won’t it.

DC: Oh, I will just sign my name where the protocol officer tells me to do. I will smile!

AR: Your people used to see and hear, for example, the late Prince Sihanouk speaking French at the podium of the United Nations General Assembly or with General De Gaulle, and English with Mrs. Jacqueline Kennedy!

DC: It’s different strokes for different folks.

AR: Sir, hope this time your wardrobe master do a better job than the last time in Bangkok.

DC: What happened in Bangkok?

AR: Your wrinkled suit, Sir.

DC: Next time, I’ll make a State visit through FB.

AR: Wish you good luck for the golf outing with President Obama on the beautiful course on the estate!

DC: Why good luck?

AR: In the US, golf is a gentleman game, and the rules of the game are gentlemanly respected.

DC: A selfie of me with President Obama on the golf course will crash the FB server!

AR: Thank you for your time and answers. Hope to see you again in Sochi in May.

DC: Ah, in Russia, there won’t be any protest against me!

=====

Update on Saturday 13 February 2016:This from The Phnom Penh Post must be noted.

http://www.phnompenhpost.com/national/us-wary-over-intimidation

Update on Tuesday 16 February 2016: Joint Statement of the U.S.-ASEAN Special Leaders’ Summit: Sunnylands Declaration. Kacvey, please pay attention to Paragraph No. 4.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2016/02/16/joint-statement-us-asean-special-leaders-summit-sunnylands-declaration

A quote from Genghis Khan

05 Friday Feb 2016

Posted by in History

≈ Comments Off on A quote from Genghis Khan

My dear Kacvey,

Here is a quick and short retrospective on the history of the Mongols (蒙古)and their relationship with the Chinese Jin Dynasty (金王朝).

After defeating all the tribes and the Tartars in the Central Asian plateau North of China, Timujin (铁木真) achieved the unification of the Mongol people. In the spring of 1206, he was hailed and enthroned by the Chiefs of the Mongol tribes as “Great Khan” (大汗) and is known to the world history as “Genghis Khan” (成吉思汗). Once in power, Genghis Khan established a military and administrative system and a Mongolian writing system that contributed to the building of his “khanate” into a strong empire.

In the meantime, the Jin Empire continued to treat the Mongols as vassals and demanding tribute from Genghis Khan. Genghis Khan wowed to change this humiliating state of affairs.

At the end of 1208, Emperor Zhangzong (章宗) of the Jin Dynasty died, and he was succeeded by the Crown Prince Wanyan Yongji (完颜永济). Later, Wanyan Yongji sent an emissary to Mongolia bearing an edict. When the emissary bade Genghis Khan to receive the edict on his knees, Genghis Khan asked him who the new Emperor was. When he was told that Wanyan Yongji had just ascended the throne, Genghis Khan spat scornfully and said: “I thought the master of Central Plains must be of celestial caliber. I’m surprised a mediocre, incompetent man like him could qualify to the throne.” (我原来以为中原主人是天上人做的，像这种庸碌无能的人也配做皇帝?)

With that, he mounted his horse and rode off, leaving the Jin emissary behind. 70 years later, Genghis Khan’s grandson, Kubilai Khan (忽必烈汗) arrived in Khanbaliq (today’s Beijing) and established the Yuan Dynasty (元朝) which lasted until 1368.

 

Constantine’s three sons

01 Monday Feb 2016

Posted by in History, Social

≈ Comments Off on Constantine’s three sons

My dear Kacvey,

There has been a lot of “aspirations” to be a future prime minister of Cambodia floating around in the media, social or otherwise, in the City of Tonlé Buon Mouk, in interview in Australia, even at John Hopkins University.

To have aspiration is what a woman/man is all about for what she/he will be doing for the rest of her/his days, because a woman/man without aspiration is but a rock.

But a rational and sane woman/man with real aspiration does not walk around and tell whom who does want to hear what her/his aspiration is; modesty and discretion in character are partners of aspiration; the other partners are education, hard-working, diligence, ethics, perseverance and putting oneself into the service of the society. To be a so-called “dauphin” of an unprincipled and autocratic ruler does qualify oneself to the aspiration, but does not qualify oneself to the certainty that that would be fulfilled. The era of power by heritage is archaic and has no place in a democratic society where citizens are free, independent, sovereign and law-abiding. Woman/man is born equal in opportunity.

Kacvey, that being said, the story of Constantine’s 3 children would be to alert the memory of your friends and your students who have no aspiration at all to become prime minister of Cambodia, but to observe the course of events that would carry the “dauphins” to that self-created vanity.

Oh, before it begins, this is not about the Franco-American actor Eddie Constantine in his role as Lemmy Caution.

In a nutshell, Constantine (272-337), the Roman Emperor from 306 to 337, had 3 male children: Constantine II (316-340), Constantius II (317-361) and Constans (323-350). He moved the empire capital from Rome to a new capital that he named after himself, Constantinople (today’s Istanbul, Turkey). After his death in 337, in order to accommodate his 3 sons to the throne, the empire was divided into 2, with Constantinople as the Eastern Capital, and Rome the Western Capital. Constantius II reigned in the Eastern Capital, and Constantine II and Constans reigned in the Western Capital. But Constantius II was an ambitious and cruel man whose “aspiration” was to rule the empire as a sole emperor. So, he manipulated in such a way to have Constantine II killed in 340 and Constans in 350. Not only he had his 2 brothers killed, but also other relatives who he suspected might also have ambition to the throne, such as his uncle and his cousins. In 351, he proclaimed himself sole emperor of the Roman Empire. He died 10 years later while the Romans were in war with the Persians. He was succeeded by Julian, the surviving son of his uncle that he had killed before.

When the “father” is gone, fratricidal wars in the name of battle for power and supremacy are everywhere in the history of mankind, from antiquity to present days, in the East as well as in the West. And it is not going to stop tomorrow.

So, Kacvey, the KR ruled Cambodia brutally and mercilessly from 1975 to 1978, and it is the process that has still been carried out on the continuum by the ex-KR, but just under a different “outfit”. Khmer, Beware of the “dauphins”!