My Political Stance: Strategy of Disruption

including critique of Candlelight Party

(L) វេទិកាអ្នកស្តាប់ វិទ្យុអាស៊ីសេរី៖ តើ គណបក្សភ្លើទៀន ចូលរួមការបោះឆ្នោត ជាការបង្រ្គប់កិច្ច ឬយ៉ាងណា?

RFA Listeners' Forum: Is Candlelight's participation in the 2022 election process conferring legitimacy to the Hun Sen regime?

(R) RFA interview: Why Theary Seng does not support the Candlelight Party

Cambodians should BOYCOTT the election PROCESS—not only voting day—(boycott politics as usual) in 2022 and 2023 because to engage in politics as usual in these 2022 and 2023 elections is to CONFER LEGITIMACY to this unconstitutional Hun Sen regime AND PROLONG its survival—along with conferring legitimacy to all the dangerous unconstitutional laws it has enacted since 2017 without any opposition input. Plus, the regime will learn new updated information about the resistance as it exists now, not in 2017, to suppress or co-opt it, or in the case of the July 2013 elections, the creation of a new province, Tbaung Khmum, by splitting up Kampong Cham, on 31 Dec. 2013.

Some in civil society fear the regime will dissolve the Candlelight Party once the regime has won the elections. It won’t; it’d be an unnecessary hassle: Candlelight is only a remote-control party, a shadow of its former self, the SRP, and only a fraction of the CNRP. The regime needs Candlelight to exist as a prop of multiparty democracy and legitimacy in prolonging this regime’s rule and stability. Instead, the regime will go after individual leaders, ex. Thach Setha’s treason/incitement hearing has been put on hold as he is now needed to confer legitimacy to this regime. And the regime will continue its infiltration of Candlelight to co-opt it from within; already an estimated 30% of the candidates in the provinces are CPP-affiliates. As with the laughable 2018 "elections", if people do go to vote (out of fear of reprisal), they will cast a "protest vote", that is a vote AGAINST Hun Sen (rather than a vote FOR someone; thus, my dog Delilah can beat Hun Sen IF free and fair, an insurmountable "if" in light of the current reality).

Strategy of Disruption:

Washington Post:

Elections are a hallmark of democracy. So why do dictatorships around the world also hold them? While autocratic elections are often characterized as “sham elections,” with the official vote winner clear beforehand, elections in fact have systematic and substantial effects on the durability of dictatorships.

In a recent article in World Politics, we examine 389 elections in 259 dictatorships. We found that elections can actually prolong dictatorships in the longer term…

But autocrats also gain something from holding elections. There is a long-standing debate among political scientists on whether elections are, on balance, stabilizing or destabilizing for dictatorships. We argue that they are both, but with a key nuance: Elections confer long-term benefits. The regime can co-opt members of the opposition, for instance, or learn more about the strength of the opposition. Elections also help dictators build a strong organizational apparatus and signal their strength to intimidate potential opponents….

We analyzed 259 autocratic regimes

Drawing on data from 259 autocratic regimes across the world, from 1946 to 2008, we test these concepts, by analyzing the dynamic relationship between autocratic elections and the risk of regime breakdown, using different statistical models….

Why would dictators want to hold elections?

There’s also some evidence, although not as clear-cut, that holding elections makes for more stable dictatorships in the long term. We think this is an important underlying reason that autocrats like Marcos take the gamble of holding elections, despite the risks to the regime around Election Day. Here’s how these long-term benefits played out in Mexico’s autocratic regimes from 1929 to 2000. The party in power, the Institutional Revolutionary Party, or PRI, for decades managed to conduct elections without seeing major threats to its grip on power.

In fact, studies by political scientists argue that the PRI used these elections as a device to prolong its rule. The party used elections to selectively co-opt supporters — but deter opponents by displaying organizational strength and broad public appeal. These stabilizing effects continued long past election day.

(L) The Cambodia Daily: Why I do not support the Candlelight Party; (R) RFA: អ្នកជំនាញ​ច្បាប់​ ​និង​កិច្ចការ​អន្តរជាតិ​កញ្ញា​ ​សេង​ ​ធារី​ ​នៅតែ​ប្រកាន់​ជំហរ​ដាច់ខាត​ ​ថា​ដើម្បី​ទាមទារ​ឲ្យ​គណបក្ស​សង្គ្រោះ​ជាតិ​រស់​ឡើងវិញ​បាន​ ​គឺ​ទាល់តែ​អ្នកនយោបាយ​បក្ស​ប្រឆាំង​ ​និង​ប្រជាពលរដ្ឋ​ដែល​ស្រលាញ់​ប្រជាធិបតេយ្យ​ ​ប្រើប្រាស់​សិទ្ធិ​តវ៉ា​ ​និង​ធ្វើ​ពហិការ​ការបោះឆ្នោត​ខាងមុខនេះ​ ​ព្រោះ​ការចូលរួម​ការបោះឆ្នោត​នោះ​ ​គឺជា​ការចូលរួម​ផ្តល់​ភាព​ស្រប​ច្បាប់​ដល់​រដ្ឋាភិបាល​លោក​ ​ហ៊ុន​ ​សែន​ ​ដែល​ធ្វើបាប​គណបក្ស​​សង្គ្រោះ​ជាតិ​តែប៉ុណ្ណោះ​៖ «គណបក្ស​សង្គ្រោះ​ជាតិ​នៅ​រស់រវើក​ ​ពីព្រោះ​ប្រជាពលរដ្ឋ​អត់​ទាន់​ទទួលស្គាល់​ថា​របប​ផ្ដាច់ការ​អាច​រម្លាយ​បាន​។​ ​មិន​អាច​រម្លាយ​បាន​ ​ពីព្រោះ​មិន​ស្រប​រដ្ឋធម្មនុញ្ញ​។​ ​ឆ្នាំ​២០២២​ ​នេះ​ ​២០២៣​ ​ធ្វើ​ពហិការ​នីតិវិធី​នយោបាយ​បោះឆ្នោត​ ​កុំ​ចុះឈ្មោះ​ ​កុំ​ធ្វើ​ឃោសនា​ ​កុំ​លើកស្លា​ក​ ​ហ្នឹងហើយ​ដែល​អាច​ធ្វើឲ្យសង្គ្រោះជាតិ​ជា​គណបក្ស​រស់​ឡើងវិញ​»។

RFA: Legal and International Affairs expert Theary Seng continues to strongly believe that in order to have CNRP alive again requires that the opposition figures and the democrats exercise their right to demand and boycott the upcoming elections because to participate in such elections is only to confer legitimacy the Hun Sen government that has been oppressing the CNRP: "CNRP is still alive because the people have never accepted the regime's dissolution. It cannot be dissolved because it was unconstitutional. This 2022 and next year 2023, boycott the election process; don't register, don't campaign, don't raise party signs; only then can the CNRP as a party be made alive again."

ខ្ញុំ ពន្យល់បន្ថែម អំពី យុទ្ធសាស្រ្ត នៃការរំខាន ដោយផ្តោតលើ ប្រទេស មីយ៉ាន់ម៉ា (ភូមា), ហើយ ហេតុអ្វី បានជា លោកសេរី ឈរជាមួយ អ្នកប្រជាធិបតេយ្យ ភូមា ក្នុងការបដិសេធ មិនទទួលយក ភាពស្របច្បាប់ នៃរបប ហុនតា។ តើ​ យើង ​អាច​ទាញ​យក​ មេរៀន​អ្វី​ ពី​យុទ្ធសាស្ត្រ​ភូមា?

I explain further the Strategy of Disruption by focusing on Myanmar, and why the Free World stand alongside the Burmese democrats in refusing to accept the legitimacy of the Junta regime. As point of comparison to the Cambodian situation: what lessons can we draw from the Burmese strategy?

អានសៀវភៅ ដ៏សំខាន់នេះ ជាភាសាខ្មែរ «ពី របបផ្តាច់ការ ទៅ លទ្ធិប្រជាធិបតេយ្យ» | "From Dictatorship to Democracy" in Khmer

More...

The Regime's War against Khmer Women

(R) recently detained York Neang in my treason hearing

Former political prisoner So Metta

Former political prisoner Lim San

1. In recent days: 4 women connected to my activism or members of the Friday Women have been either: threatened with a death threat (Sat Pha), detained (York Neang), gravely wounded by attempted murders via head-on motorbike collision (this RFA coverage of Lim San and a few days ago youth environmentalist So Metta).

2. And the continuing violence against NagaWorld employees on strike, 90% women.

3. Mr. Seam Pluk, refusing to flee after threatened with arrest and court charges because of his support for me and other women (NagaWorld, Friday Women), was arrested on April 27; upon arrival in prison, they shaved his head to mock him for his support of me.

- Theary, 28 April 2022

One of the destructive results of the prolonged CNRP artificial “unity” is the toxic ecosystem it created and accelerated into a “fun” game among the in-group in destroying individuals (“character assassination”) who dared to disagree with them or to question the authority. I’ve been approached by mature committed adults to the cause of freedom and democracy with personal stories of psychological torture and isolation, many reduced to days of tears. The appearance is one of all smiles; behind the scenes are cliques of blind loyalists and people who want to stay near the center of power or are climbing the power ladder who are ready to destroy characters at the slightest hint from the top. Then, there is a group of individuals who are paid attack dogs, trolls. Yes, this is the overseas “democratic” CNRP, now metastasized into different manifestations, most recently the Candlelight Party. - Theary, Facebook, 6 Feb. 2022

The Guardian: "Its army of bots, trolls and useful idiots has stoked culture wars, amplified conspiracy theories, spread fake news and latched on to any glimmering of doubt and division."

On a different scale altogether, what the CNRP has been doing under the cover of “unity” and “democracy”. Over the years, I have been the target of misinformation, disinformation, defamation in particular as I was/am seen as a competitor to the old guards of democracy. But even with this knowledge, I continued to support Sam Rainsy and CNRP, standing at the fore, at the frontline, from civil society that landed me the charges of treason and incitement for support of Sam Rainsy's return on 9 Nov. 2019. The disinformation, misinformation, defamation have multiplied 1,000 fold since my popular Apsara appearance. Any person who disagrees or questions a questionable activity is black-tagged a "Hun Sen sell-out"; this is the wildfire that was spread against me in the prison among political prisoners, that I am now a "Hun Sen sell-out"; the situation has changed since I learned of this as my responses to the interrogation/questioning at trial put that lie to rest. - Theary, Facebook, 5 March 2022

Cambodian Opposition Figures Take Distinct Resistance Paths

A pair of activists offer differing visions of reform and disruption while sharing a goal to change the Kingdom’s political future

SEA Globe | 4 March 2022

Exiled opposition leader Mu Sochua is steadfast that the spirit of the Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP) is still alive.

Even as its former leaders remain scattered around the globe, await trial for trumped-up charges or try to drum up support for new parties with few resources, “it’s very clear – very clear – that the CNRP remains the main opposition,” Sochua said during a recent video call. “We have not disappeared.”

Other activists disagree. Theary Seng, another of the roughly 130 dissidents facing mass trial who has emerged as a cause célèbre in recent months for attending her trial hearings in apsara clothes or shackles, has called for Cambodians to ditch traditional politics.

“Political campaigning in this time period is a dead end,” Seng said. If no leading opposition party could win when it was stronger and operating in a freer environment, “why would it win now?” The question of what’s next for Cambodia’s fractured opposition, along with the value of participation in elections widely panned as illegitimate, has gained fresh urgency as commune elections loom this spring and Prime Minister Hun Sen readies his son, Hun Manet, to succeed him in 2023.

The backdrop for resistance is bleak. While the trial of former CNRP President Kem Sokha drags on sporadically due to the Covid-19 pandemic, other longtime leaders, like Sochua and her Paris-based contemporary Sam Rainsy, a CNRP co-founder, are stuck issuing public statements, writing op-eds and lobbying from abroad.

Although various smaller opposition parties have emerged, they hold no seats in the National Assembly and in many cases lack the name recognition that defined the CNRP.

These factors have created a leadership vacuum, experts say, with competing but perhaps complementary paths for opposition leaders who wish to do away with a regime that has ruled Cambodia for more than 35 years.

“Nobody lives forever,” said Sophal Ear, the associate dean of Arizona State University’s Thunderbird School of Global Management who specialises in Cambodian politics. “We’ve gotta think about what happens afterward, and that’s where we are.”

Five years into exile, Sochua, 67, spends her days in the American state of Rhode Island. She wakes early to drink a ginger and turmeric concoction before beginning video meetings, phone calls and email exchanges with dissidents and legislators around the world.

Her primary focus is lobbying for international sanctions against Cambodian government authoritarianism, such as the Cambodia Democracy Act and the Cambodia Democracy and Human Rights Act under consideration by the U.S. Congress. She also has taken up knitting.

“I call this a sweater for democracy,” she said, pulling a mess of baby-blue yarn from her bag. “It’s never perfect because I’m in the middle of a meeting, a very heated meeting, and I miss a stitch. But I don’t go back.” She laughed. “My poor children and grandchildren, they always have an imperfect sweater.”

Since her latest failed attempt to return to Cambodia last year, Sochua has faced the reality of trying to stay plugged into her home country from thousands of miles away. In late February, exiled CNRP leaders held a retreat in Florida to discuss strengthening their diplomatic ties and skills.

It’s a stark contrast from a decade ago, when she traversed the provinces to campaign and wielded immense popularity as a women’s rights defender trading public barbs and lawsuits with Hun Sen. CNRP took its highest number of seats in years in a highly contested 2013 election that prompted thousands to protest the ruling Cambodian People’s Party (CPP) for months.

“I don’t think there will be a time you can bring, again, the mobilisation we had in 2014 when we (the CNRP) were there, the hundreds of thousands of people,” Sochua said.

Sochua named the most promising of the newly formed opposition groups the Candlelight Party, citing its breadth of campaigning. The party’s Acting President Thach Setha recently told Radio Free Asia (RFA) nearly 90% of CNRP members joined and the party had reestablished headquarters in every province.

Other notable resistance groups include the newer Cambodia Reform Party, led by former CNRP principals Ou Chanrath and Pol Ham, and the League For Democracy Party, which reached third in the 2018 general election. Six of the parties told RFA they planned to form a bloc before next year’s national election but currently lacked the resources.

Sochua said she doesn’t know who has the charisma to take the reins as a unified opposition leader. Out of fear of endangering them, she avoids contacting the ‘Friday Women’ or ‘Friday Wives,’ who are known for weekly marches calling for the release of detained relatives, and other domestic dissidents.

“That’s why it’s so key for Sam Rainsy to return and why they won’t allow it,” she said. “That’s why it’s so key for Mr. Kem Sokha to be free.”

The duo have been locked in public conflict as Sokha distances himself from the CNRP and new opposition groups, prompting some analysts to pronounce the breakup of the party.

Sochua brushed the possibility aside in favour of encouraging voters. If Cambodians are repeatedly reminded of freedom and democracy, she said, they will know their rights and change when elections arrive: “That’s when they can put that in action.”

“They’re not going to get the 43% that CNRP had,” she said, “but if they get 20% of the communes or the councillors at the commune level? It’s 20% versus zero.”

Sochua’s advice falls flat with Seng, an increasingly recognised and theatrical critic of Hun Sen’s regime who takes a more revolutionary view of opposition strategy.

The Georgetown University-educated lawyer survived the Khmer Rouge killing fields as a child and was raised in the U.S. before returning to Cambodia in the 1990s, earning a public platform as a civil society leader and outspoken witness in the Khmer Rouge Tribunal.

She has used recent court appearances in her trial for treason to highlight the “political theatre” she said is inherent to the prosecution’s case.

Seng’s Facebook activity was brought into the trial in recent days, according to a 1 March VOD report, with prosecutors targeting nine posts including messages supporting Rainsy and her use of the term “illegitimate government.” Seng said one post may have been a restatement of Rainsy’s messages rather than her own words. Yet she remained steadfast when the trial judge asked whether it was right to suggest toppling the government. “If it was not right, I would not have advocated for it till now,” Seng said.

Through symbolic outfits during her court appearances and outspoken, anti-government invectives rarely uttered within the Kingdom, Seng hopes to position herself as an invigorating resistance leader.

“I see the future as women, I see the future as young,” she said. “I look around and who else is that bridge? You can’t run an opposition political party via remote control from Paris.”

Seng lives with her two dogs in a rural part of Cambodia’s Kandal Province. The walls are lined with posters of incarcerated CNRP representatives and slain activists such as political analyst Kem Ley and union leader Chea Vichea.

Despite invitations from leaders to join CNRP, Seng said she has declined offers to become part of any political organisation, frustrated with “a culture of always being in line.”

Yet she denies having ambitions to start her own party. The 51-year-old wants Cambodians to eschew traditional politics and build a nonviolent, civil disobedience movement, particularly during the country’s high-profile 2022 ASEAN chairmanship.

Expressions of outrage against the government would draw international attention to the need for fair, open elections, she said. Citizens could boycott elections and stop working. Women could shave their heads, a Cambodian sign of mourning adopted by the Friday Women protesters. “The regime understands that it doesn’t even need to really dig deep and pretend to make it viable to make it believable,” Seng said. “But as long as they can get the public… to play their game – and up to this point, the public has been playing the game – then they accept the procedure.” Some civil society leaders and international activists find Seng’s approach refreshing but have stopped short of condoning an election boycott. Brad Adams, executive director of Human Rights Watch’s Asia Division, said he wouldn’t tell Cambodians to sit out elections, although the outcome “is already known.”

“I would not personally want to give legitimacy to something that is completely illegitimate,” he said.

Cambodian Centre for Human Rights Executive Director Chak Sopheap said her organisation does not determine whether citizens should engage in civil disobedience and emphasised that voting is a cornerstone of democracy.

“However, to enable citizens to effectively and meaningfully participate in elections, the government must ensure that the elections held are free – meaning that they must take place without intimidation, corruption, or threats to citizens and with respect for their political freedoms – and fair – meaning that all the candidates must be treated equally and that the processes leading up to the vote and the count of ballots cast by the voters must be transparent,” she explained. Opposition leaders have identified the NagaWorld casino strike in Phnom Penh, which has been ongoing since December, as a symbol of democratic uprising. But union leaders and protesters are adamant the demonstrations are exclusively focused on workers’ rights.

Patrick Lee of worker organising group Central emphasised “we have to be very strict that no, we are not politically engaged,” but said he understood why activists have framed the casino protest as a broader resistance movement.

“It’s not something that we’re encouraging or actively looking for,” Lee said. “But if you’re a smart political party at the moment leading into these commune elections and the national election in 2023, you’d latch on to something like this.”

Sochua did not embrace Seng’s boycott proposal. “Voters want to vote,” she said.

Ear, the Arizona professor who has known Seng and Sochua for years, said a twin approach of traditional international diplomacy and civic disobedience could be complementary against the regime.

There is a deep fear of speaking out, instilled by the legacy of the Khmer Rouge and citizen crackdowns by Hun Sen’s government for behaviour as banal as Facebook posts, Ear said. But “those who don’t know history can dare to do things that are outside the lines,” he said. “That’s the triumph of hope over experience,” Ear said. “It’s daring to dream, something that’s increasingly difficult to do in Cambodia.”