[House Hearing, 115 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
CAMBODIA'S DESCENT: POLICIES TO SUPPORT DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON ASIA AND THE PACIFIC
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
DECEMBER 12, 2017
__________
Serial No. 115-97
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/
or
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
27-812 PDF WASHINGTON : 2018
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
EDWARD R. ROYCE, California, Chairman
CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida BRAD SHERMAN, California
DANA ROHRABACHER, California GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York
STEVE CHABOT, Ohio ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
JOE WILSON, South Carolina GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia
MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida
TED POE, Texas KAREN BASS, California
DARRELL E. ISSA, California WILLIAM R. KEATING, Massachusetts
TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania DAVID N. CICILLINE, Rhode Island
MO BROOKS, Alabama AMI BERA, California
PAUL COOK, California LOIS FRANKEL, Florida
SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii
RON DeSANTIS, Florida JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas
MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois
TED S. YOHO, Florida BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania
ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois DINA TITUS, Nevada
LEE M. ZELDIN, New York NORMA J. TORRES, California
DANIEL M. DONOVAN, Jr., New York BRADLEY SCOTT SCHNEIDER, Illinois
F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, Jr., THOMAS R. SUOZZI, New York
Wisconsin ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York
ANN WAGNER, Missouri TED LIEU, California
BRIAN J. MAST, Florida
FRANCIS ROONEY, Florida
BRIAN K. FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania
THOMAS A. GARRETT, Jr., Virginia
JOHN R. CURTIS, UtahAs of
12:44 pm 11/29/17 deg.
Amy Porter, Chief of Staff Thomas Sheehy, Staff Director
Jason Steinbaum, Democratic Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific
TED S. YOHO, Florida, Chairman
DANA ROHRABACHER, California BRAD SHERMAN, California
STEVE CHABOT, Ohio AMI BERA, California
TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania DINA TITUS, Nevada
MO BROOKS, Alabama GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia
SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida
ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii
ANN WAGNER, Missouri
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
WITNESSES
Ms. Olivia Enos, policy analyst, Asian Studies Center, Davis
Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy, The
Heritage Foundation............................................ 12
Ms. Monovithya Kem, deputy director-general of public affairs,
Cambodia National Rescue Party (daughter of Kem Sohka,
president, Cambodia National Rescue Party)..................... 24
Mr. Kenneth Wollack, president, National Democratic Institute.... 32
LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING
The Honorable Ted S. Yoho, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Florida, and chairman, Subcommittee on Asia and the
Pacific: Prepared statement.................................... 4
Ms. Olivia Enos: Prepared statement.............................. 15
Ms. Monovithya Kem: Prepared statement........................... 26
Mr. Kenneth Wollack: Prepared statement.......................... 35
APPENDIX
Hearing notice................................................... 60
Hearing minutes.................................................. 61
CAMBODIA'S DESCENT: POLICIES TO SUPPORT DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS
----------
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 12, 2017
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific,
Committee on Foreign Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:00 p.m., in
room 2255, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Ted Yoho
(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Mr. Yoho. The subcommittee will come to order.
Members present will be permitted to submit written
statements to be included in the official hearing record.
Without objection, the hearing record will remain open for 5
calendar days to allow statements, questions, and extraneous
material for the record subject to length, limitations, and the
rules.
Well, good afternoon, everybody. And I can tell by the
amount of participation in this room, this is a very important
topic. And I want to thank you, the ranking member, my
colleagues, and the panel for joining us today to discuss the
events in Cambodia. We are holding this hearing at a
consequential moment for Cambodia with serious implications for
over 6 million of its citizens and for Southeast Asia and for
democracy and human rights in the region.
Cambodia is set to hold general elections in July 2018,
which were predicted to be particularly significant for the
country's progress toward genuine democracy. Recent elections,
including the 2013 general elections and recent local
elections, saw unprecedented gains for the Cambodia National
Rescue Party, a consolidated opposition movement.
Many observers believe that in 2018, the CNRP would win an
unprecedented parliamentary majority. Unfortunately, Cambodia's
authoritarian leader had other plans. Hun Sen, the sitting
prime minister, has been in power for more than 30 years, and
has no intentions of relinquishing power. In face of
strengthening support for the opposition, it seems Hun Sen has
decided that he can no longer dominate the polls, even in a
rigged election system. He will retain power through force.
Over the last years, his brutal consolidation of powers
played out on numerous fronts. Hun Sen has chilled support for
the opposition by threatening to deploy the miliary if
elections do not go his way, and has used his control of the
government to dismantle threats to his grip on power.
Two years ago, two CNRP lawmakers were savagely dragged
from their cars and beaten by Hun Sen's bodyguards. While the
perpetrators served token sentences, they were promoted to
colonel barely 2 weeks after being released. Such is the reward
for crushing the opposition.
In early September, authorities arrested Kem Sokha, the
leader of the CNRP, and charged him with treason, allegedly for
participating in an American plot to undermine Hun Sen's
regime.
Only last month, Cambodia Supreme Court dissolved the CNRP,
again citing the party's involvement in an alleged U.S.-backed
plot. The chief judge, who is an ally of Hun Sen, relied on
legal authorities that were created by the regime's controlled
Parliament this year to give the ruling party sweeping powers
over competing parties. We are seeing this around the globe.
One only needs to look at Venezuela, the same thing is
happening there.
To dismantle Cambodia's only credible opposition came amid
a slew of other actions to eliminate dissenting--dissent among
civil society. In August, the regime shut down the Office of
the National Democratic Institute, a preeminent NGO that is
active in promoting democracies around the world. Other NGOs
have been investigated and subject to increased scrutiny.
In recent months, the regime has forced the closure of
independent media outlets that challenged its control over
information, including Radio Free Asia, the Voice of America,
and other publications and radio stations.
Hun Sen's corrupt, oppressive regime perpetuates a culture
of human rights abuses and restrictions of political freedoms.
As Human Rights Watch finds, his rule has relied on security
force violence and politically motivated persecution. Security
forces commit killings and torture with impunity. The
politically powerful have carried out forced evictions and
illegal land grabs for decades. And again, we are seeing this
in other parts of the world run by other governments.
Government officials and judges are mirrored in corruption.
Hun Sen's relentless consolidation of power this year means
that these widespread abuses will continue. It goes without
saying that this is an intolerable situation for the people of
Cambodia.
The White House deserves recognition for taking decisive
actions on these issues. In November, the press secretary
issued a strong statement on the regime's action to undermine
democracy. And this month, the State Department began
implementing visa restrictions for officials involved in these
actions, but more must be done.
The human rights and democracy in Cambodia have broad
implications for the region and the world. Cambodia is a member
of ASEAN, the premier international forum in Southeast Asia,
with nine other nations, and accounts for 633 million people,
and $2.5 trillion in trade. Every one of its 10 members must
agree in order for the bloc to act, so any nation operating
outside the bounds of humanity and decency will have an outsize
effect on the entire group. This is such an important issue,
not just for the Cambodian people, but for that whole region
and, really, for the world.
Hun Sen and his cronies are also clients of China. Chinese
aid increases Hun Sen's resilience to international pressure,
perpetuates corruption within Cambodia, and gives China undue
influence within ASEAN. China's support of Hun Sen's regime
shows that its policy's priorities are dramatically out of step
with global humanitarian norm, despite China's rapidly growing
global profile.
It has been a difficult year for the cause of human rights
and democracy in Cambodia, and the year ahead may even be
harder. So in today's hearing, we will try to determine how
Congress can best contribute to this cause.
I thank the panel for helping to guide us in this important
work. And, without objection, the witnesses' written statements
will be entered into the hearing record.
And I now turn to the ranking member, Mr. Sherman, for any
remarks he may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Yoho follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
----------
Mr. Sherman. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Yoho. Do you want my gavel?
Mr. Sherman. No, no, you keep your wedding ring.
The mission of this subcommittee is so important that even
another subcommittee is having hearings on Asia, namely, the
North Korea hearings being held by the Africa and Human Rights
Subcommittee.
Looking at this from a global standpoint, American
resources are finite. We have a limited amount of foreign aid.
We have a limited amount of preferential access that we can
give to the United States' market, particularly with textiles.
And if the Cambodian Government is unworthy of this, then
perhaps we need to allocate it to poorer countries that are
moving toward democracy.
In the past two decades, the United States has invested
hundreds of millions of dollars in Cambodia to help it on the
road of recovery and to rebuild after the costly civil war. The
international community has joined us in efforts to rebuild the
country and move toward democracy.
In addition to what we list as the expenses, that special
access to American markets takes jobs away from Americans,
takes jobs away from those in AGOA, takes jobs away from those
in South Asia. Somebody is going to be making those garments,
and that is an additional advantage we give to Cambodia.
Organizations such as the NDI, represented here, the
International Republican Institute, and Radio Free Asia, have
engaged with local Cambodian partners in building a capacity
for civil society. Despite this, Cambodia has been ruled
continuously by Prime Minister Hun Sen and the Cambodia
People's Party. Now, they were willing to share power in a
coalition for some years. Prospects for democracy, though, have
suffered setbacks in the last 2 years because the government
has adopted policies aimed at eliminating the opposition.
In 2015, the Cambodian Parliament passed the Law on
Associations of Nongovernmental Organizations, LANGO, to revoke
the registration of certain nongovernmental organizations. In
August, Cambodia ordered the closure of the National Democratic
Institute on the theory that it had violated LANGO. We have the
president of that organization here, and you are to be
commended for being effective, and that is why your
organization was expelled.
The Cambodian Government has also ordered radio stations to
stop broadcasting. Radio Free Asia and Voice of America, these
are vital sources of credible independent information for the
people of Cambodia.
Kem Sokha, the leader of the opposition, Cambodian National
Rescue Party, was arrested just a few months ago on September
3, and charged with treason and with conspiring with the United
States Government to overthrow the Government of Cambodia. We
have with us Kem Sokha's daughter, Ms. Kem, who will be a
witness at these hearings. And the dedication of your family to
the people of Cambodia is exemplified by your father's
sacrifice.
The CNRP's previous leader, Sam Rainsy, remains in exile.
In November, Cambodia's Supreme Court ordered the Cambodian
National Rescue Party to be dissolved. And I will point out
that the charges against Ms. Kem's father are also charges
against the Government and people of the United States claiming
that we are trying to, quote, deg. ``overthrow the
government.''
The United States and our international partners must act
quickly to stop this backsliding away from democracy. Toward
that end, I have co-sponsored legislation with Congressman
Lowenthal, the co-chair of the Cambodian Caucus, together with
Mr. Chabot and others who are here.
Our bill supports the decision announced by the Secretary
of State on December 6 to restrict entry to the United States
for individuals involved in undermining democracy in Cambodia.
And it urges the executive branch to consider placing all
senior Cambodian Government officials implicated in the
crackdown on democracy on the list of specially designated
nationals so they are subject to travel restrictions and
freezes.
We don't want to hurt the Cambodian people. We don't want
to disrupt our investment in Cambodian society, but we do need
to reevaluate our foreign aid and our special access. And we
need to turn to our European friends and remind them that they
too could be providing special access to poor people in Africa
or South Asia, or they could be working with a government in
Cambodia that is increasingly authoritarian.
We strongly urge Cambodia's government to reinstate the
political opposition, release Kem Sokha, allow civil society
and media to resume their constitutionally protected
activities, allow NDI back into Cambodia, and release former
Radio Free Asia journalists who have been arrested on dubious
charges.
If the Cambodian Government does not take these steps and
does not bring Cambodia on the path to genuine democracy, it is
hard to see how the United States and our international
partners could accept the legitimacy of next year's elections,
or continue the economic aid and concessionary trade that so
many other people in countries that are moving to democracy
have asked to be directed in their direction.
I yield back.
Mr. Yoho. Thank you for your comments.
And we have the honor and the great pleasure of having the
chairman of the full committee, Mr. Ed Royce, to join us. So
thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Royce. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thanks for holding
this hearing today on an issue that really needs worldwide
attention and needs it now. And let me say, you know, the
demise of democracy in Cambodia, the ongoing human rights
nightmare in Cambodia, the violations that the Hun Sen regime
is committing against basic human rights and the rule of law,
this is the reason for this hearing. This is why we are so
discouraged, but our hearts go out to the people of Cambodia
with all they have been through, and especially since the
elections back in 2013.
We have seen such gross attacks on those Cambodians that
peacefully oppose this growing authoritarian trend by the
government. Hun Sen's regime, frankly, has become thuggish. It
continues to crack down on the political opposition, arresting
and beating those who speak out and oppose in any way they
rule.
Freedom House, you know, does an analysis every year, and
it consistently rates Cambodia now as not free, but that is
putting it very mildly. Two years ago, opposition lawmaker and
American citizen, Nhay Chamroeun, was severely and brutally
attacked by plainclothes bodyguards. Most of the world saw the
photographs in the paper about what happened. They repeatedly
kicked and stomped him. He was hospitalized for months.
Several months later, Kem Ley, a popular Cambodian
political commentator, was murdered in broad daylight. And why
was he murdered? Because he had written. He had spoken out
about some of these abuses.
And over the last few months, Hun Sen has dispatched any
notion that democracy in Cambodia is going to continue to be
maintained under their rule. They have dissolved the CNRP. They
arrested its leader, Kem Sokha, who faces very spurious
charges, obviously, by the government. And despite deep flaws
in 2013, for those of us that were watching those elections,
there were big gains made by the opposition in those elections.
And since that time, we have seen a complete dismemberment of
the political system in Cambodia. Make no mistake, the
government is now run by an authoritarian thug. That is the
unfortunate fact.
The Trump administration has responded with some positive
steps: Last week's announcement of the visa ban on those
undermining democracy. That is welcomed. But by no means should
this be the last stop.
And I look forward to hearing from our witnesses on what
additional measures we should take to support Cambodia's
democracy. That is what we are calling--we are a democracy
here, we are calling on other republics around the world, other
democratic institutions. Now is the time to come forward.
And again, I want to thank the chairman for holding this
very important hearing, Mr. Yoho, on a subject that demands,
frankly, our attention, and doesn't get enough of our
attention. So thank you again for doing this.
Mr. Yoho. Thank you for joining us, Chairman Royce. It is
an honor to have you here. And we are also blessed to have Alan
Lowenthal, not a member of this committee, but from California,
but is very passionate.
And if I hear no objection, I will let him have 5 minutes.
Hearing none, Mr. Lowenthal, you have 5 minutes, and I look
forward to your comments. And thank you for being here.
Mr. Lowenthal. Well, thank you, Mr. Chair. You know, I am
very pleased that you called this timely hearing on Cambodia's
dissent from democracy. And I also want to comment on Chairman
Royce.
You have been a steadfast proponent and champion for
democracy, and you have been part of--you have been calling for
reforms and changes in Cambodia for many years, and so I want
to thank you too.
You know, as we have already heard, the situation in
Cambodia is dire. I am just going to go over a few things, and
I think it is really important to say them again, because it is
really important for the United States Congress and all those
that are watching to understand the importance that we play on
the situation in Cambodia today and why we are holding this
hearing.
We are witnessing the death of democracy. You know,
Cambodian democracy really began in 1991 with the Paris Accord,
which called for democracy, which called for ongoing free and
fair elections, which have not occurred. And now we are
witnessing this death of democracy, not by a single action, but
in 1,000 recent cuts and 1,000 attempts by the Hun Sen regime.
He has increased, as we pointed out, the intimidation
against the opposition, CNRP. He has used political maneuvers
to oust the former CNRP president, Sam Rainsy. He has arrested
the current CNRP president, Kem Sokha, as we all know, and
charged him with treason. And removed the rest of the CNRP from
their posts in the Cambodian Parliament.
He began a crackdown on nongovernment organizations, the
NGOs, and the independent media, all of this in anticipation of
the election, to eliminate all public comment and opposition to
the elections next year. And as has been pointed out, the
National Democratic Institute, Radio Free Asia, and others were
forced to cease operations.
Individuals related to the these groups were also arrested,
such as two RFA reporters, who are now facing between 7 and 15
years in prison for charges of espionage. The arrest of Kem
Sokha by the Hun Sen regime, who has sent--when he sent armed
forces to raid Kem Sokha's house and arrest him without a
warrant and led him away in handcuffs. And as we know, the
fictitious case against Kem Sokha, the Canadian Government has
implicated the United States as a co-conspirator. I think that
is really important for us to understand, that we have been
identified as a co-conspirator in Kem Sokha's alleged crime of
treason to topple the Cambodian Government.
He is now being held in a maximum security prison near the
border of Vietnam. And also what is very troubling is that
China, in a very unusual step, weighed in publicly to support
the arrest of the Kem Sokha. The Cambodian Supreme Court then
ruled to dissolve the CNRP, and the Hun Sen controlled
Parliament passed a rule, a law to redistribute the seats held
by the CNRP to minority parties. Fifty-five seats were
reassigned from the CNRP to these other parties. More than
5,000 commune councilor positions won by the CNRP in the June
local elections were redistributed to other minor political
parties or these people were forced to defect if they wanted to
stay on to the Hun--become part of the Hun Sen party. This
essentially ended all political opposition to Hun Sen.
Following these moves, it is to the White House's credit,
that it announced that it would no longer support the 2018
election in Cambodia, calling it illegitimate. I think it is
really critically important that we are seeing the lack of
legitimacy on the part.
As co-chair of the Congressional Caucus on Cambodia, along
with my other co-chair, Congressman Chabot, we have introduced
a resolution, which is a companion resolution to the U.S.
Senate passed McCain-Durbin resolution, which really cites the
problems that are going on in Cambodia.
I think I would just like to close and say also, I am
really here to understand what are the next steps that we must
do. We must support the efforts of our State Department. We
must continue to educate. We must make sure that Kem Sokha is
released. We must make sure that the CNRP is able to be become
a viable political party once more. But I think we also must,
as Chairman Royce has said, we must look at ways to reach out
to the world, to our EU partners, our partners in Japan, who
are the big trading partners of Cambodia, and speak with one
voice that the world will not allow Cambodia to dissent from
democracy.
So I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, again, for holding
this hearing. It is critically important. You know, we spend
time talking about crises in North Korea, in the Middle East;
we are in danger, without looking at it as a specific crisis
but an ongoing issue, of losing Southeastern Asia, and
especially losing the one country that was moving toward
democracy, which will now be lost. And so I am so pleased with
you for holding this hearing, Mr. Chair. And I yield back.
Mr. Yoho. Well, I appreciate your comments and your input.
We will now go to opening statements from members, Mr.
Rohrbacher from California.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank
you for holding this hearing.
I have been deeply involved with this issue with
Congressman Lowenthal and Congressman Royce. We have spent a
lot of time and effort trying to do what is right over the
years, and I don't think we have accomplished what we wanted
to.
Mr. Lowenthal. It has gone in the wrong direction.
Mr. Rohrbacher. It has actually gone in the wrong
direction, like you say. I remember when Cambodia did have
hope. I remember that after--we realized that the plight of the
Cambodian people is something that was set in course because of
America's foolish war in Vietnam. This is nothing more than an
aftermath of that war. And it was a mistake for us to get into
Vietnam, and the people of Cambodia are continuing to pay the
price.
The fact is that we know that Hun Sen was actually ferried
into Cambodia on the back of Vietnamese tanks during an
upheaval in trying to get rid of Pol Pot, and this type of
turmoil has been a horror story for this wonderful group of
people in Cambodia who deserve much more than what they have
had to experience.
Let me just say that American's greatest mistake, I think,
was in 1993. I was there for that election, and the people
actually voted against Hun Sen. And it was very clear that Hun
Sen had lost the election. And our Ambassador at the time
decided, oh, my goodness, they are threatening violence if we
don't permit their--if we don't acquiesce to the demand that
there be a sharing of power, and Hun Sen would be part of the
sharing of power.
That decision, that one decision, has condemned the people
of Cambodia to oppression and corruption never--we never
imagined. The fact is, Hun Sen, yeah, he was power-sharing and
he brutally, slowly but surely, eliminated all the rest of the
people who were sharing power and eliminated the democratic
process.
Today, what we need, and I am going to suggest this, I
would like to hear about our witnesses, we should--we have a
thing called the Magnitsky Act. Now, I happened to have voted--
I think I voted for the Act, but I was against the name
Magnitsky, because I didn't think that that had been proven in
that case. However, the principle of the Magnitsky Act is
exactly the right thing, and that is, let's find out the
specific tyrants and criminals that are plaguing innocent
people, like the people of Cambodia, and hold them specifically
responsible. And try to find out where they bank--put their
money, where is their bank accounts, and actually find ways of
putting the law against them. I would like to have your opinion
on how we might do that in Cambodia.
And, finally, let me just say this: If nothing else, today,
we are telling the people of Cambodia, we are on your side. We
are telling Hun Sen and his gang of criminals that now keep him
in power, we are not on your side. We are on the side of the
people of Cambodia and the side of a free and democratic
Cambodia, and it is time for Hun Sen to go.
Mr. Yoho. Thank you for your comments.
We will next go to Mr. Chabot from Ohio.
Mr. Chabot. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I happen--as Alan mentioned, I am co-chair of the
Congressional Cambodian Caucus, and we have been working on
this for quite some time. I want to thank him for his
involvement there, Chairman Royce, and many others. And as Mr.
Lowenthal mentioned, there is a resolution that we are
submitting today, which essentially reaffirms the United
States' commitment to democracy, human rights, and the rule of
law in Cambodia.
That being said, although there were some bright spots
awhile back with respect to Cambodia, I have to say that, under
Hun Sen, we are about as far from a democracy as you can get.
Shutting down independent press, suppressing opposition and
civil society, threatening civil war if your party doesn't win,
jailing your political opponent, and then dissolving their
party so there is essentially no opposition, that is not a
democracy. And so they are jeopardizing their relationship with
the United States and the West. But they think, oh, that is
okay because we have China on our side. And it is not
surprising, because that is one of the other countries on this
globe which has just about as much democracy as Cambodia does
right now, which is zero.
And so if they want the human rights and the democracy of
the PRC, that is what they are--that is what they are getting.
And the Cambodian people deserve so much better than that,
particularly when you consider the trauma that this nation has
been through, where approximately a quarter of the population
was wiped out under the Khmer Rouge.
And so, in any event, it is a terrible shame and travesty
what is occurring in Cambodia right now, because it could be so
much better. But this leader will not let the people of
Cambodia decide who is going to control the country and who is
going to rule the country and who--he wants it for himself. And
it is just a shame.
But, people of Cambodia, know that you have a lot of
friends here in this country and all around the globe that are
pulling for you and what is best for you. And so we hope that
this hearing will draw some attention to that.
That being said, I also am the co-chair of the
Congressional Turkish Caucus, and we had a meeting that started
at 2 o'clock that I have to run to, but I will be back if we
get finished there.
And, Alan, thank you for your hard work in this area.
I yield back.
Mr. Yoho. Thank you for your comments.
Does any other members have opening statements? Mr. Brooks?
Mr. Brooks. No, sir. I am just waiting for the witnesses.
Mr. Yoho. All righty. And we are going to do that right
now.
Ms. Oliva Enos, policy analyst at the Asian Studies Center
at The Heritage Foundation. Thank you for being here. Ms. Mona
Kem, daughter of the person that is in jail, your father--I
can't imagine how hard this is for you to be here--deputy
director-general of public affairs to the Cambodia National
Rescue Party, and daughter of Kem Sokha, president of the
Cambodia National Rescue Party. And Mr. Kenneth Wollack,
president of the National Democratic Institute.
If you guys would--you have your timer up there. The green
light is the beginning, it is 5 minutes. We will gently let you
know when time comes up, and keep your remarks there. And then
we look forward to getting your information so that we can help
draft resolutions and direct policies for our government to,
hopefully, bring this situation in Cambodia to an end.
So, with that, Ms. Enos, go ahead.
STATEMENT OF MS. OLIVIA ENOS, POLICY ANALYST, ASIAN STUDIES
CENTER, DAVIS INSTITUTE FOR NATIONAL SECURITY AND FOREIGN
POLICY, THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION
Ms. Enos. Chairman Yoho, Ranking Member Sherman, and
members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to
testify before you this afternoon.
My name is Olivia Enos. I am a policy analyst in the Asian
Studies Center at The Heritage Foundation. The views I express
in this testimony are my own and should not be construed as
representing any official position of The Heritage Foundation.
Cambodia's democracy is in peril. On September 2, Kem
Sokha, president of the opposition Cambodia National Rescue
Party, CNRP, was taken from his home, arrested, and
indefinitely imprisoned on trumped up charges of treason. Kem
Sokha's arrest triggered a downward spiral. Just a month later,
on October 6, the Cambodian Interior Ministry filed a lawsuit
to dissolve the opposition party. The CNRP was officialty
dissolved by the Cambodian Supreme Court on November 16.
In just 3 months' time, Hun Sen, the leader of the ruling
Cambodian People's Party, CPP, has eviscerated the CNRP,
effectively crippling the only viable opposition to Hun Sen's
32-year reign, ahead of 2018 elections.
Since Kem Sokha's arrest, at least 100 CNRP
parliamentarians and political leaders fled Cambodia. And the
crackdown on civil society is severe. Shortly after Kem Sokha's
arrest, Hun Sen proclaimed that he will rule for another 10
years.
The CPP's anemic electoral victory in 2013 was too slim for
Hun Sen. In 2013, the opposition garnered 55 of the 123 seats
in the assembly, leaving the ruling party with only 68 seats.
Clearly, Hun Sen does not want to risk a potential opposition
victory in 2018, which is why he has shut down the opposition
long before it could become a viable threat to his three
decades' long grip on power. Since the opposition was
dissolved, the White House has stated that,
quote, deg. ``on current course, next year's elections will not
be legitimate, free, nor fair.''
The U.S. Government response has gotten increasingly
stronger. After releasing several statements, the Department of
State took concrete action by pulling U.S. support for upcoming
2018 elections, and just last week, by restricting travel for
individuals involved in undermining democracy in Cambodia.
Congress has taken similarly positive steps to hold the
Cambodian Government to account. A bipartisan resolution
introduced by Senators McCain, Durbin, and Rubio passed the
Senate on November 17, and affirmed U.S. commitment to a
democratic Cambodia, reiterated the value of the Paris Peace
Agreements, and condemned the crackdown on civil society. The
resolution also called for Treasury to consider placing all
senior Cambodian officials implicated in the abuses on the
Specially Designated Nationals list. Cambodia is at a
crossroads, and the U.S. Government, in conjunction with the
international community, should take action to hold Cambodian
officials accountable.
In 1993, after the defeat of the Khmer Rouge, the U.S. and
18 other international signatories to the Paris Peace Agreement
agreed to ensure the right to self-determination of the
Cambodian people through free and fair elections. In this
regard, signatories have a continuing moral obligation to
assist Cambodia when the political process falters.
In my written submission, I offer several potential policy
solutions to the current crises in Cambodia. Right now I will
offer three.
First, the U.S. should consider sanctioning all individuals
involved in undermining democracy in Cambodia under relevant
Treasury Department authorities. Raising the financial risk to
engaging in such behavior has the potential to deter future
actions that erode democracy. Potential mechanisms could
include invoking the Global Magnitsky Act, which allows
individuals to be targeted on human rights and corruption
grounds, or by placing individuals on this Specially Designated
Nationals list, as was recommended by Senate Resolution 279.
Second, the U.S. Government should consider forming a
Cambodia contact group comprised of key signatories to the
Paris Peace Agreement. These signatories could include the
U.S., Japan, Indonesia, Australia, the U.K., and France. Japan,
in particular, has a critical role to play, but has thus far
not done much in response to recent events in Cambodia. Given
the severe deterioration in democracy there, the group should
reassemble to provide accountability and develop plans to get
Cambodia back on the path of political reform.
Third, and finally, the U.S. should continue to publicly
and privately press for the release of Kem Sokha. The U.S.,
along with other partners, such as the European Union, should
draw attention to threats to democracy in Cambodia. Calling for
Kem Sokha's release is the surest way to do that. In
particular, statements from high ranking officials, such as the
Secretary of State or the Deputy Secretary of State, may deter
Hun Sen from further degenerating democracy in Cambodia.
Thank you for your time and attention. I am now open for
questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Enos follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
----------
Mr. Yoho. Thank you for your comments there.
And now we will go to Ms. Kem.
And, you know, I know this has got to be a hard thing, you
know, talking about this in front of this committee with your
father, Kem Sokha, incarcerated right now. So I would love to
hear from you, and thank you for being here.
STATEMENT OF MS. MONOVITHYA KEM, DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL OF
PUBLIC AFFAIRS, CAMBODIA NATIONAL RESCUE PARTY (DAUGHTER OF KEM
SOHKA, PRESIDENT, CAMBODIA NATIONAL RESCUE PARTY)
Ms. Kem. Chairman Yoho, Ranking Member Sherman, and members
of the subcommittee, thank you so much for this opportunity to
testify today on the fragile state of Cambodia's democracy and
the important role that the U.S. can play to protect the
political rights of the Cambodian people in the lead up of our
national election, which is scheduled for July 2018.
Twenty-six years after the signing of the Paris Peace
Accord, Cambodia is once again facing a historic crossroads,
which two options present. One, restoring democracy or
dissenting into downright dictatorship.
The fundamental elements of the Paris Peace Accords have
been violated by the ruling elites, and some of those
violations--recent violation include, number one, the November
16 dissolution of the main opposition party, the CNRP, and the
theft and redistribution of our seats, 55 seats in the national
assembly to unelected smaller parties.
Number two, the unconstitutional and midnight arrest of the
opposition leader, Kem Sokha, my father, without warrant, by
heavily armed police raided into his house after midnight. That
violated his parliamentary immunity. That echoed the terrifying
tactics and divisive rhetoric of Cambodia's darkest past, the
Khmer Rouge.
And, number three, the banning of 118 CNRP leaders from
participating in politics, and the removal of about 5,000 of
our commune councillors who were just elected earlier this year
in June.
And, number four, the crackdown on independent media and
civil society. Most brutally, the broad daylight assassination
of the political analyst, Dr. Kem Ley.
Democracy and freedom are American values that echo
universal ideals. I believe your country bedrock values
resonate well with the Cambodian people's desire for change
that is felt by all Cambodians of all walks of life. And it is
not only the moral responsibility of the U.S. to protect
democracy and human rights in Cambodia, I believe it is also in
the U.S. interest.
The U.S. benefits by staying engaged in Asia to uphold the
international rule-based order that underpins the global
commerce and international security. So it is both in your
interest and in protecting your values. The U.S. has already
sent a clear signal, I believe, to the Cambodian Government in
holding them responsible for the regression.
I want to thank both Houses of Congress. I want to thank
the White House, the State Department, especially for the
banning of--the visa ban that was placed last week, and also
the continuous call for the release of Kem Sokha, without
condition, and of other political prisoners, for free and fair
election in 2018.
But it is important now that the U.S. place and force a
deadline. It is very important to place a deadline with the
Cambodian Government. If the Cambodian Government does not
reverse course on time, as soon as possible, I believe further
action needs to be taken by the U.S. And that include, number
one, placing individual targeted sanctions on Cambodian
Government officials that have been identified as undermining
democracy through the global Magnitsky Act, or on the SDN list,
as recommended by the Senate.
Number two, suspending any and all assistance that go
directly to central Cambodian Government, including security-
related assistance, as proposed by the Senate, State, and
Appropriation Operation bill.
Number three, continue to provide democracy assistance to
civil society, especially the NGOs that work on election-
related matters.
Number four, reviewing Cambodia's eligibility for the
generalized system of preferences, and sending a notice of that
review as soon as possible to the Cambodian Government so that
they have incentive to backtrack.
Number five, coordinating with like-minded countries and
entities, such as Japan, the EU, Australia, and South Korea, to
use their leverages in calling for the Cambodian Government to
reverse course.
And, finally, number six, convening key signatories of the
Paris Peace Accord to organize a synchronized global response
to the Cambodian Government, because they have been attacking
all the elements of the Paris Peace Accord.
The current oppression, I believe, if continued to--if
allowed to continue, will generate political instability,
because oppressed dissent tends to boil over, and then
eventually that will lead to economic instability as well.
So I urge you to remain resolute in your call for the
release of Kem Sokha and other political prisoners, for free
and fair election in 2018 in Cambodia. And I believe Cambodia
is worth your attention and action, because this crossroad
actually presents an unprecedented opportunity that the country
has not seen for decades. Big changes can happen, and we are an
inch away from it.
Democracy is very much possible and it can happen very
soon, and the U.S. can play a big role in helping Cambodia,
telling an inspiring story to the world, that democracy can
persist. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Kem follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
----------
Mr. Yoho. Well, we appreciate it and you coming here
testifying. That gets that message out to the world, and we
will help you with that.
Mr. Wollack, from--the president of the National Democratic
Institute. Go ahead.
STATEMENT OF MR. KENNETH WOLLACK, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL
DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTE
Mr. Wollack. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Sherman, thank
you for this opportunity to testify before the subcommittee on
developments in Cambodia.
I am honored to appear here with Mona Kem. She and her
imprisoned father are courageous champions for democracy in
Cambodia.
And let me summarize my written testimony with these
comments.
As has already been said here, the recent action by the
Cambodian Government and the ruling CPP to dissolve the
opposition CNRP, effectively transformed the country into a
one-party state. The arrest of Kem Sokha, the leader of the
CNRP, on spurious charges, the banning of over 100 opposition
leaders from political activities, the arrests of political
activists, and the crackdown of independent news media and
civil society, have isolated the country and put its further
development in serious doubt.
These and previous actions by the Cambodian Government are
a clear violation of the spirit and letter of the 1991 Paris
Peace Agreement, which ended the nation's 12-year civil war.
That agreement, which Mona referred to, was signed by 19
governments, including the United States and China, and
required Cambodia to respect human rights and called for
Cambodia to follow a system of liberal democracy on the basis
of pluralism. And I would recommend strongly a rereading of the
provisions of that important document.
When the 1991 Paris Peace Agreement was signed, Cambodia
was emerging from decades of war, the genocidal Khmer Rouge
regime, and the Vietnamese occupation. The country was
economically devastated, and the institutions of governance
weak or nonexistent. In some areas, much progress has been
made, largely due to the hard work by thousands of Cambodians
and international donors.
The U.S. has played a major role in the country's
development, funding projects in the fields of agriculture,
education, and public health, and strengthening the electoral
system, rule of law, political parties, and civil society.
NDI has focused its efforts in Cambodia on developing
governance and building a more democratic political party
system. Since 1992, NDI has sponsored hundreds of community-
level multiparty dialogs, offering villagers the opportunity to
engage in local governance, sponsored election campaign
debates, and assisted citizen organizations to monitor the
elections. We have also carried out programs, and I emphasize
here, with both the ruling and opposition parties alike, to
participate in elections, monitor polling, develop greater
opportunities for women and youth, and build more democratic
party structures.
Since the transitional period began in 1991, the ruling CPP
has dominated the political landscape, maintaining control of
the police, the military, civil bureaucracy, and virtually all
of local government. However, the Peace Accord spawned a large
number of civil society groups, which were able to operate, at
times, with a surprising amount of freedom. Political parties
too have had some space in which to operate. Although the
government used civil defamation suits, the party registration
law, and the filing of criminal charges to keep the opposition
off balance.
At the same time, Cambodia's political history since the
Paris Peace Accords can be characterized as a period marked by
three distinct coups. The first coup occurred when the results
of the 1993 elections, conducted by the United Nations
Transitional Authority in Cambodia, UNTAC, were in effect
overturned by the CPP, as Mr. Rohrbacher pointed out.
The second occurred in 1997 when Hun Sen brutally and
violently overthrew his coalition partner, FUNCINPEC, and
forced the opposition into exile.
The third coup, of course, occurred this year when the
government disbanded the CNRP, the only opposition party that
could effectively challenge them. The opposition strength was
clearly growing, as has been noted here. In the 2013 national
elections, the CNRP made a strong showing, increasing their
seats in Parliament by nearly 50 percent, while the CPP saw
their representation decline by 25 percent.
In the elections' aftermath, the CPP-led government became
increasingly repressive, stepping up actions against civil
society and the political opposition. Its motivation was
obvious. The CPP's own internal polling, leaked to the press,
showed the ruling party facing stiff opposition in the upcoming
local and national election. And I would suggest rereading some
of the questions in that poll that are included in my written
statements. They actually foreshadow the exact actions taken by
the CPP.
Commune council elections were held last June, resulting in
a strong showing for the CNRP, which won 44 percent of the
total votes cast. On August 23, NDI received a notice from the
government ordering it to close its office and withdraw its
international staff from the country within 7 days. The Voice
of America, the Radio Free Asia, were also shuttered, as were
dozens of local broadcast stations which carried VOA and RFA
programming. The Cambodia Daily, the Independent English
Language newspaper that had been operating since 1963 was
forced to close.
The government's actions are clearly designed to maintain,
at any price, the ruling party in power. They also place
Cambodia more firmly in China's orbit. While the Cambodian
Government was widely condemned by the international community
for its recent repressive measures, China was quick to offer
support, ignoring the provisions of the Paris Peace Agreement
to which it is a signatory.
I want to recognize the actions taken by the U.S.
Government in terminating assistance to Cambodia's election
commission, and imposing visa restrictions on those Cambodian
officials responsible for undermining democracy. These actions
are important because they demonstrate that concrete measures
will be taken unless certain conditions are met.
Let me just summarize by recommending possible other
actions that could be taken. Number one, the withdrawal of all
but humanitarian aid to the Government of Cambodia.
Two, continued support of nongovernmental organizations
within Cambodia.
Three, altering the terms of trade with Cambodia, the
U.S.'s largest export market for Cambodian goods, receiving 25
percent of Cambodian exports. The EU is the next largest. This
provides leverage for inducing positive change.
Four, increase international pressure and dialog. Following
the 1997 coup, an informal diplomatic network known as the
Friends of Cambodia Group, helped Hun Sen and the political
opposition come to an agreement on conditions under which the
exiles would return to Cambodia to participate in national
elections the following year. The U.N. withheld recognition of
the government at that time, and similar moves might help pave
the way for new negotiations.
And, finally, supporting the return of exiled political
leaders. The CNRP remains a legitimate political force within
Cambodia. However, over 100 opposition leaders and elected
officials are in exile. As in 1997, continued support should be
provided to the exiled opposition to help them convene and to
communicate with their supporters and the international
community. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Wollack follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
----------
Mr. Yoho. Thank you for your testimony, all of you. I
appreciate it.
Everybody has brought up the elections of 2013 and the
elections last summer, this past summer, that resoundingly
showed the will of the people, you know, is what we saw with
the numbers that are favored and the growing popularity and the
growth of the CNRP. I think this speaks loudly. But what we are
seeing is, we are seeing the world divide diametrically opposed
philosophies with Western ideologies.
The universal principles--and, Ms. Kem, you brought up what
we believe here in America, but I think if we all look at
people around the world, and I have had the opportunity to
speak to people all over, there is innate beliefs that we all
have: Liberty, freedom, self-will, self-determination. Those
are universal beliefs that, I believe--my beliefs are that
everybody has those in the world.
Where we start dividing this or start bringing--preventing
this is when you have authoritarian governments. And, you know,
we look at the beliefs that we have here that government is by
the people, to serve the people, versus the authoritarian type
that we are seeing, especially with the rise of China after the
19th Congress, where Xi Jinping said the era of China has come
and it is time to take the center stage of the world. And I
just I read an article where they said the purpose of the
citizens, their sole purpose is to serve the government.
You know, in our forum, we have the government is there to
serve the many. Whereas, theirs--their people are to serve the
government of a few. And we know those regimes don't last
longterm.
And, you know, saying that, I look at the amount of aid we
have given Cambodia. My figures show from 1993 to 2016, aid to
Cambodia was $1.7 billion in aggregate aid. One-point-seven
billion dollars. A lot of this goes in the name of good
governance, building democracies. And it is something that we
can't wish upon another country, but we know it works pretty
darn well here. It has for the last 226 in our constitutional
republic. And it is something that we know, again, that the
innate feeling of people everywhere want what we have, and so
we have invested in this.
What I would like to know from you is, what programs have
you seen work the best? And we will start with you, Ms. Kem.
Your feelings with the investment that we have made--the
American people have made. What is your opinion on where we
should keep going or should we just pull back and pull back
everything?
Ms. Kem. Thank you, Chairman, for the question. I think
what is most helpful so far in Cambodia is a democracy program
that involves direct citizen participation. I can give one
example of the Cambodian Center for Human Rights, which was
funded, and I believe still funded, partly by USAID in some
form. So any program that works directly and encouraging
people, empowering people to understand their rights, to stand
up for their freedom.
And, also, I would say, number two, because of the timing
of the election, any program that works with NGOs, that works
on election-related matters, whether it is investigation or
monitoring of election.
Mr. Yoho. Is that possible now that he has cracked down on
everything, you know, and gotten rid of the opposition party?
Is that possible to do that in that country?
Ms. Kem. There are still a few effective organizations. For
example, COMFREL, they work on elections, and I believe that
their job is extremely important, as important as the presence
of the opposition. They are an election watchdog and their work
has been significant. For example, in 2013, without their
documentation, we would not have known all the----
Mr. Yoho. And their job may be easier in the next election,
right, because there is no other party other than the one he is
going to allow run.
Ms. Kem. In the case that there will be election, we want
to be prepared that these watchdogs are equipped with the right
knowledge and right tools to do their job.
Mr. Yoho. All right. Given the actions of Hun Sen and the
regime has taken against the CNRP, what is the opposition's
current plan of action?
Ms. Kem. We have two things, really. We have the Cambodian
people inside a country, but as of right now, there is very
little they can do because of physical threats, really. So
another channel for us would be through the international
community. And I believe in the Cambodian context, the donor
community has more of an obligation than any other country
because of the Paris Peace Accord binding.
So for us, we will continue to advocate for the
reinstatement of our party. And, again, timing is of essence.
If there is no solution soon--soon, we are talking about the
end of this year, or the latest I would say at the end of next
month--then any possibility of free and fair election is
impossible. Then we would have to rethink, so what is next. And
I think the international community and the Cambodian people
together will pave a way for us to go back and restore
democracy.
Mr. Yoho. Okay. Thank you.
I am going to turn to the ranking member and let him ask
his questions. Thank you.
Mr. Sherman. Ms. Kem, how would you describe the current
status of your father, Kem Sokha, the head of the CNRP? We know
he was arrested on this ridiculous charge of treason. And how
can the United States and the international community work to
ensure that he is treated justly and released?
Ms. Kem. So far, I believe that they deny any visit access
from outside. The only people that can visit him is my mother
and his lawyers. He is kept in solitary confinement, and he has
no access to the outside world, except through my mother. And I
believe what the U.S. can do is continue--the U.S. and its
allies, meaning the EU, Japan, and the other countries, is
continue to press for at least a visit to see how he is doing.
And also to communicate already to the Cambodian Government
about any repercussions should they mistreat him. I think that
is very important to preempt.
Mr. Sherman. Has he been denied medical attention or
pharmaceuticals?
Ms. Kem. So far, I believe a group of doctors has seen him
once.
Mr. Sherman. Mr. Wollack outlined a number of steps that we
would consider. I think it is now time for us to step up to the
business community in the United States and hopefully get
European governments to do the same, and Japan's governments to
do the same, to put in American law that says, if we decide to
forego this special access to U.S. markets, that any company
buying garments from Cambodia can immediately void its
contract. So we can put that in as a matter of law, that is
deemed by law to apply to any contract, and we can demand that
no U.S. company can sign a contract in the future that doesn't
specify that, so that there is no doubt that it applies. That
would have the effect of putting every garment manufacturer in
Cambodia on notice that their contracts are hanging by a
thread.
Ms. Enos, how dependent is Cambodia upon its ability to
export garments to Europe, Japan, and the United States?
Ms. Enos. Well, I would say that one of my concerns with
pursuing this type of strategy would be that it has the
potential to harm the Cambodian people more than to----
Mr. Sherman. Keep in mind, it dramatically helps the people
of Africa, dramatically helps the people of South Asia. We are
only going to buy a certain number of shirts. I know your focus
is on helping the people of Cambodia, but what we give to
Cambodian manufacturers undermines democracy in Cambodia and
takes jobs away from sub-Saharan Africa.
Again, Mr. Wollack, do you have an answer on just how
dependent the Cambodian Government is?
Mr. Wollack. They are very, very dependent. My only
recommendation would be on these issues of sanctions. As we----
Mr. Sherman. And notice, I wasn't saying sanctions. I was
saying let us have contractual provisions so that if in the
future we have sanctions, we don't have American companies in
violation of contracts. Go ahead.
Mr. Wollack. My only recommendation would be, as we did in
South Africa, as we do in Venezuela, in Cuba and other places,
is to consult with local democrats, those in Phnom Penh and
those outside the country.
Mr. Sherman. Including one sitting next to you, yes.
Mr. Wollack. Exactly. To hear their views and----
Mr. Sherman. I mean, the next step is to be legally
prepared to move forward. That sends a message and hopefully
will result in the changes, because we propose steps we can
take against individuals. Well, I am not sure they want to go
to Disneyland, and even if they do they can go to Shanghai.
We talked about cutting off foreign aid. I am not sure that
that will get the attention. Their focus is on maintaining
power. So we have to at least prepare the ground for something
that goes beyond that. Now, NDI has been kicked out. Is RII
still operating in Cambodia?
Mr. Wollack. Well, RII did not have international staff in
Cambodia to----
Mr. Sherman. Are they moving in to fill in for you?
Mr. Wollack. Well, I doubt whether that will be the case
because they have been under--they are under attack.
Mr. Sherman. So it is not like they are just going to go
after the D. They are willing to go after the organization
affiliated with the President's party as well.
Mr. Wollack. Yes. They have been attacked rather
vociferously over the last few months as well.
Mr. Sherman. I yield back.
Mr. Yoho. Thank you. We will next go to Mr. Rohrabacher
from California.
Mr. Rohrabacher. I think that, well, number one, we are
sending a message by this, as I mentioned in my first 5
minutes, and it is important that that message is very clear.
Hun Sen has got to go. The United States is on the side of the
Cambodian people who want a more democratic and honest
government, and that is that. That is the number one message.
So, number two, about this hearing, maybe we can get down
to some brass tacks on something that we can do. And let me
just say, after my long period of time that I have been friends
of the Cambodian community here and the Cambodian people, one
message I would like to send to them is America just can't do
it for you. This is not going to be a gift.
Every time I talk to my Cambodian friends, they are saying,
well, when are the Marines going to come and get rid of Hun Sen
so we can then take over the government and have free
elections? It ain't going to happen. So we have got to find--
that is number two message: Don't wait for the American
military might to displace Hun Sen.
So what is the third step? So what do we do with Hun Sen?
What do we do? What is the exact pattern? Ms. Kem, you gave
some very good suggestions there. I am going to get into a
little detail on it now. Maybe we should have, Mr. Chairman, a
list of individuals in the Cambodian Government and
corporations, both individuals and corporations that are from
other countries, who are there profiting from the corruption of
the Hun Sen regime. And there should be some kind of economic
sanctions on them. It is like the Magnitsky Act, so to speak.
Now, right now there is a lot of--for example, there are
big problems I know of in Cambodia where people's property is
being stolen, and it is being handed over to cronies of Mr. Hun
Sen, both national and international cronies, I might add.
So, thus, we need a list from you. We need the Cambodian
community to provide us a list of specific corporations and
individuals, and then we can work on legislation that will
require our State Department to investigate these particular
individuals, and basically will be able to tell us, does this
person deserve specific sanctions? Like when I say this is sort
of the Magnitsky Act, but I think it goes beyond that, because
this is just simply a situation where we also are talking about
economic crimes as well as political crimes and as well as just
regular criminal activity by people murdering their opposition.
So if you can give us, let's say out of this hearing that
we get a commitment to get some names of people that we then
can ask for and legally require our State Department to do an
analysis of what the particular person has done and to verify
that it will be justified for sanctions against the individual.
So that is one thing I would hope would come out of this today.
And, again, let me just say that it is not just the United
States that isn't going to do it for you. It is not Japan that
is going to do it for you. We also need to see some signs of
some resistance among the Cambodian people to their government.
It is not their government. If it was their government, we
wouldn't want resistance to it. It is a clique that is holding
power by force and corruption, and they are not your
government. They are gangsters, and we need to recognize that.
And gangsters understand two things: Brute force and a deal.
Now I am going to ask you one last thing about the deal. I
want your opinion on this. Maybe the only way--I remember about
20 years ago, I sat across from Hun Sen at a table. And I told
him, I said, you know, we are all getting a little older here
and we want to have time to enjoy our lives. I will make you a
deal. I will retire from Congress if you will retire from being
the President of Cambodia. He didn't take----
Mr. Yoho. You are still here.
Mr. Rohrabacher. He didn't take me up and I am here too, so
there we go. But maybe we could, again, maybe some people
should approach Hun Sen and just give him the deal. And I would
like your opinion on this.
Should we offer Hun Sen a deal, this happens with all
tyrants, by the way, that says, get out of town and you can
keep your ill-gotten gains. We are not going to bother you, but
get out of there, and as compared to if we don't, we say, no,
the only way you are going to get out of there is if we kill
you or if we capture you and put you in a cage. That guy is
never going to go voluntarily.
So what do you think about offering Hun Sen a deal, get out
of there, let the people have democracy, and you will be free
from being prosecuted?
I would just like a short answer from each of you, please.
Ms. Enos. Sure. I think the critical role of the U.S.
Government is to restore freedom to the Cambodian people. And
so I think strengthening democratic institutions is probably
the best way to do that. And I think that holding accountable
individuals, including Hun Sen and other individuals within the
Cambodian Government, is the best way to do that.
I don't know that we need to offer him a specific deal. I
think we just need to put pressure on key nodes and facets of
democracy in Cambodia.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Okay. So you would oppose the idea of just
offering him a deal?
Ms. Enos. Yes.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Get out of town--get out of town and let
us get on with our freedom.
What about you, Ms. Kem?
Ms. Kem. First of all, I agree with the list of individuals
and corporations that are undermining democracy in Cambodia,
and we will happily provide you with that list.
In terms of a deal, I think right now he is not ready for a
deal. You need to corner him first, and then he will propose a
deal himself.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Okay. Well, what if he proposes the deal?
Let me get out of town with my money.
Ms. Kem. His current state of mind is not about receiving a
deal yet. It is about crushing the rest of the opposition that
is left.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Sure. The secret is is we want to get him
to the point where he is either going to ask for a deal or we
can get rid of him ourselves. But--so you are sort of hedging a
little bit here.
Ms. Kem. No, I don't think I am hedging.
Mr. Rohrabacher. You said yet, we don't want to offer him a
deal yet.
Ms. Kem. When he is ready to make a deal, he will offer the
deal. Right now I think what it is important, to put pressure
on him. I agree with Olivia. And I think maybe I am more
optimistic than some of you. I believe that individual targeted
sanctions alone will likely be enough. You may not have to pull
the nuclear option of removing Cambodia's trade privileges. I
really strongly believe that.
So let's just start with the individual financial
sanctions. That will put tremendous pressure. And I must say
even the visa ban alone, it impacts him a lot. It is not just
about Disneyland.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Okay. All right.
Ms. Kem. It is much more than that. It makes their life
difficult. And if you move on to financial sanctions, I think
that alone will have enough impact for them to reconsider.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Usually people like Hun--well, gangsters,
I will just say usually gangster regimes understand a deal when
there is a gun at their head, but that is another issue.
What about it? Should we offer him a deal or not?
Mr. Wollack. I would say, it may not only be the Prime
Minister. There is more than just an individual. And I am a big
believer in institutions and processes, and I like to believe
that these types of deals would be entered into by
democratically elected governments, that they have the right
and the authority and the legitimacy----
Mr. Rohrabacher. Oh, sure.
Mr. Wollack [continuing]. To deal with those that their
nondemocratic predecessors.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Well, whatever deal would have to--
whatever deal would be offered, if there is a deal--I am not,
by the way, advocating that necessarily. I just was interested
in your opinion. But it has to be something that could be then
accepted by the democratically elected government.
Mr. Wollack. And I think broader negotiations are
necessary, because I think it is beyond just one individual. I
think you have the military. You have the deep state. You have
other aspects of the political system that would have to be
part of a negotiated settlement.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Thank you.
Mr. Yoho. Maybe we can get him a signed copy of the art of
the deal.
Mr. Lowenthal.
Mr. Lowenthal. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I would just like
to say I have a deal for you too.
I think I really like the direction that we are going in.
We are trying to figure out what can we do now, and I think
that is critically important. And we are seeing that there is
no easy silver bullet to do it.
We have talked about increasing what the State Department
sanctions are by looking at increasing sanctions on
individuals, on businesses that engage in these behaviors. I
think that is very appropriate to look at.
I would like to raise some other things that I have heard
so far this morning to really talk about where we can go. One
is, how do we do it to reconstitute the Paris Agreement? There
were all the signatures. There were 15. We were one of the
signatures. All of the people that we are talking about also
signed the Paris Agreement that they would ensure free and fair
elections.
What do we do now--what do we do now to make sure--and is
there a path to do it? I would like to hear from you.
That is my first question. Is that an option, and how do we
do that? Anybody want to choose to answer it? Ms. Enos.
Ms. Enos. I think that already there are Ambassadors from
several of the signatories of the Paris Peace Agreement that do
meet together to sort of convene. I think we should sort of
raise the profile of this and perhaps have foreign ministry-
level officials come together and talk about what are the long-
term as well as the short-term steps to ensuring that Cambodia
gets back on track.
Mr. Lowenthal. Do you see us as a Congress writing to our
State Department and asking them to reconvene or to raise this
issue with the foreign ministers possibly, our U.N. Ambassador
also raising? Because I am trying to figure out how do we get
there? And so that is very good.
So we need some mechanism to reach these foreign ministers
of the countries that have already signed their signatures to
see what they think how we can work together and to entreat. So
that is one.
Mr. Wollack. An alternative too is the Friends of Cambodia
group that was brought together following the 1997 coup.
Mr. Lowenthal. Okay.
Mr. Wollack. That group supported the negotiations that
ultimately led for the then-UCD opposition to return to
Cambodia. And I think even before that, however, what is
necessary, the opposition right now, the leadership of the
opposition, aside from being in jail, are scattered in
Australia, Thailand, the United States. International support
has to be extended to them so they can communicate to the
international community. This is a coalition. This is not a
single party. And they have to communicate with their
supporters in the country. They have to communicate with the
international community.
Right now, the government is the only body that is
communicating in multilateral settings. And they have to begin
discussing and convening to discuss how they would return to
Cambodia, under what conditions. And the international
community, Friends of Cambodia, can help that happen as well.
Ms. Kem. I am largely exploring myself the path to revive
the spirit of the Paris Peace Accord, and I believe it may fall
under the jurisdiction of the U.N. Security Council. So I am
trying to meet with the missions at the U.N. who have
membership, permanent membership in the National Security
Council. And I think they have the authority or more, I would
say more obligation about reviving the Paris Peace Accords. So
I think that is one way to look at it.
And I agree with Olivia about at least you can convene
minister, foreign minister-level of the key signatories. It
doesn't have to be all the countries. And right now, even on
ambassadorial level, it is not that coordinated yet. So I think
that is the message that each government or the U.S.
Government, I believe maybe the French Government as well can
begin, can start to look into.
Mr. Lowenthal. Following that, talking about this
international consortium, whether it was through the Paris--and
I think it was you, Mr. Wollack, talked about trade. Now, we
are talking about individual sanctions from the United States,
but I think also you mentioned that the vast majority of
Cambodians' exports go to either the United States, the EU, or
to Japan. How can we use that as leverage, that kind of trade
that goes, in terms of trade agreements or other things? Maybe
you can explain or anyone else. The leverage that we have is
that we are buying all their goods. It is not just from the bad
folks. We are buying all the Cambodian goods, EU, United States
and Japan. How do we use that? Do you have some ideas?
Mr. Wollack. Well, I am not a trade expert, but what I
would recommend, there are a lot of options of how to tie trade
in. The international financial institutions, by the way, put a
number of loans on hold to Cambodia because of land expulsions.
They then extended it a little later and they came under
criticism.
So the international financial institutions have a role to
play here too when it comes to investment opportunities in the
country. But I think on the trade issues, there are a variety
of options, but I think this is an issue that requires
consultation with the Cambodians first before we get into how
to do it, to determine what they feel comfortable with so it
doesn't harm the Cambodian people.
And different democratic forces in different countries take
different positions on this issue, but I think they should be
sort of the driving force in the types of recommendations that
they would make to the international community on the issues of
trade.
Ms. Kem. I think you can first start by the reviewing
process. Reviewing, identifying the violation, and then do a
recommendation and communicate that very clearly and strongly
to the Cambodian Government. And, again, I am optimistic and I
think that alone will be enough.
And I wouldn't call that a bluff or a threat either. It is
just preparing ground. If you really need to pull it, if the
actions by the Cambodian Government really violate those terms
and conditions of the trade, then you may have to pull--to
cancel the trade.
But I think reviewing, it is very important to start the
reviewing process. And I urge the same thing with the EU as
well. Both the EU and the U.S. can start reviewing the trade
privileges and the violation that the Cambodian Government is
conducting.
Ms. Enos. I think it is critical that we be as targeted as
possible in what we are reviewing and what we are thinking of
doing, in terms of action toward Cambodia. One of the concerns
that I have with doing a broader trade review, which I agree
with Mona would be good to review it.
But to actually revoke all those trade preferences is that
it is not clear that it is a direct response to threats to
democracy and human rights. When you target specific
individuals, when you review democracy assistance, you are
considering things that are directly relevant to the challenges
at hand. And I think that sends a much clearer message that
U.S. policy will respond in kind to the ways that there are
violations that are occurring.
Mr. Lowenthal. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Do I have any time
left or----
Mr. Yoho. Yes, go ahead.
Mr. Lowenthal. Thank you.
The one other question is, you know, I have also talked
about, you know, we do provide a significant--I think the
chairman mentioned the amount of aid that we have given in
terms of foreign aid over.
But it seems to me, in my understanding--I would like to
hear from the panel--that U.S. foreign aid primarily has gone
to NGOs and to organizations trying to bring about change in
Cambodia rather than directly to the government. And that if we
look at restricting foreign aid, it may not impact the
government as much as those people that are already seeking
democracy.
So I would like to know do you see that as, you know,
something that we should be very much aware of if we move in
that direction also? And I would like to hear your comments on
that.
Ms. Enos. I think it is critical that if we are going to do
a review of our democracy programming that we make sure that we
keep in place programs that encourage development of civil
society and encourage the development of democratic
institutions.
I think it is true that a lot of the aid does go toward
NGOs. And this brings me to one point that I think is critical.
Even though the U.S. has withdrawn support for the 2018
elections, I think it is still critical that some of these
election-monitoring NGOs be allowed, possibly even encouraged,
to operate, just without U.S. assistance, because I think we
need to be able to get a pulse on to what extent democratic
institutions in Cambodia have regressed, and also to sort of
get a pulse on what is the public opinion in Cambodia toward
Hun Sen, toward the CPP. And I think if you don't have
election-monitoring organizations from the U.S. or from other
Western governments there, you will lose that critical insight.
But even still, I think that is still reason to review our
democracy programming in Cambodia and make sure that it is
achieving the outcomes that we want and that it is bolstering
the right institutions, not being diverted, because aid is
always fungible. So watch that.
Mr. Lowenthal. Thank you.
Ms. Kem. I would say that do not underestimate your
leverages. If you look at, was it last month when the U.S.
announced it was pulling support for demining for the National
Commission, CMAC--I can't think of the full name now--and
giving that money instead to NGO who also work on demining,
that alone got the Cambodian Government panicking. And that is
only I believe $2 million a year. You would think that is a
very small number of money in the U.S. context. But I believe
that the aid that goes directly--I am talking about the one
that goes directly to Central Cambodian Government, if you cut
that, it will have an impact.
Sure, they will supplement that either from China or from
other sources, but that would still hurt them and hurt the
Cambodian Government itself, and would have to reconsider--I
think they will have to reconsider their action.
And I agree with Olivia also that the U.S. should still
continue to monitor the electoral environment in the case that
the election go forward and regardless what kind of election we
would have in 2018. So I think an election monitoring program
is still very important, because you want to document what is
going on, to have an opinion on it, regardless of the
circumstances.
Mr. Wollack. I would just add that monitoring the election
process by citizen monitoring groups does not necessarily
legitimize the process; rather, it legitimizes themselves. And
so the worst thing is to withdraw assistance so they are under
extraordinary pressure by the government. It would be even
worse if the international community suddenly withdrew support
for these groups.
There are many other areas in assistance that we have
provided Cambodia over the years. We funded projects in the
field, as Mona said, in demining, but also agriculture,
education, and public health. We have helped develop a labor
framework and a $100 million travel industry. We supported
Cambodia's cultural heritage. So there is a myriad of programs,
I think important programs over the years that have had some
important impact, and those I think can certainly be reviewed.
Mr. Lowenthal. Thank you. And just as I yield back, I would
just like to say, in addition to the statements that you have
done at the beginning, you have provided us with a number of
specific recommendations. It would be very helpful if you could
provide those to the committee or to members of the committee,
because really, that is where the next step is.
And we are trying to figure out what is the next step, and
you have a wealth of information that you have provided us. And
I would like it as concretely as possible to provide to the
committee. Thank you.
Mr. Yoho. Thank you. I appreciate your extra input. We
allowed people to go over extra because we are down to a few
people, but it is more engaging this way and we are getting
more information out.
We are going to go back to Mr. Rohrabacher. He has some
comments.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Just a couple thoughts. And if we have a
list of names of people that should be investigated and to see
if they are engaged in human rights abuses, but also in total
corruption and harmful corruption to their society, those names
should be provided to the chairman of this subcommittee. He has
a staff, and we have just talked about it and the staff will
look at that and make sure that we follow through with
legislation, talking to the State Department. Then you have the
staff here would be able to follow through and make sure we get
something done there.
Second of all, about general sanctions versus specific
sanctions. I am sorry that when you have a dictatorship, do you
think that Hun Sen would give a damn about whether or not some
people were being hurt down in his country by a sanction? Do
you think he does? No. Why should he? In fact, his gang is
buffeted. They are not going to get--they are not going to not
have an extra bowl of rice because of sanctions. They have
already got their money and they have got--and whatever income
is going on. They are the ones who are ripping off the profit
of the whole country rather than having it become part of the
ownership of the people.
And number two, of course, if there were any sanctions that
did--general sanctions, another monstrous gangster regime
called Beijing will step in and take care of, oh, well, we will
come in and do this. And I am sorry, all the really good
industries that you were talking about that were--you know, I
am sure that it is Hun Sen's buddies that have got the permits
to operate those particular businesses. That is the way it
works.
And, again, you have got to hold people accountable. I do
think the people of Cambodia will reach a breaking point where
they will have to at some point say, we are going to be engaged
in something that will force Hun Sen out and we can't just rely
on other people, whether they are Japanese-Americans or ASEAN
friends or whatever.
The people of Cambodia either are going to stand up to Hun
Sen and kick his butt out of there or he is going to continue
in power. We can, put even, what I am suggesting by holding
specific people accountable for their crimes, I don't think
that will result in Hun Sen running off unless, of course, a
deal is made, which, of course, we thought about that too.
Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you to the witnesses as well.
Mr. Yoho. Well thank you for both of your input. Thank you.
Let me ask real briefly, how effective is Radio Free Asia,
Voice of America, or other transmissions into Cambodia, in your
opinion, Ms. Enos?
Ms. Enos. Radio Free Asia and Voice of America are critical
to ensuring that democracy continues to flourish in Cambodia.
They provide an alternative news source, and they help to
encourage the sort of domestic news sources that are already
there.
So I think it is really a shame that Radio Free Asia has
had to withdraw its service, and my understanding is that VOA
has also had to reduce what it can provide as well.
Mr. Yoho. I would assume that most people in Cambodia know
that CNRP has been kicked out, right? In all of the regions,
everybody is aware of that?
I would think they would be highly inflamed about that and
irritated. That is a program that we think is very effective.
Anybody have a differing opinion?
Mr. Wollack. Particularly in the heartland of the country
too, these outlets are extremely important.
Mr. Yoho. Okay. And like I said in the beginning, what we
see over and over again is the same thing playing, you know,
the good versus evil. And I think it was 2\1/2\ years ago I was
at--I think you were there. It was a meeting with a lot of our
active and retired generals. And they said that the world was
going through a tectonic shift in superpowers or world powers
that we haven't seen prior to World War II.
And I think we are seeing this played out. I think China is
in another phase. I don't want to say it is phase two or phase
three of their grand scheme. And I see them putting pressure on
countries around the world, in this instance in Cambodia.
Wherever there is a democracy, they see that as a threat and
they have a hand in that. And if you see a democracy stumbling,
falling, you can look at--China is in the background.
How much influence, in your opinion, has China invoked on
the current breakdown of the free elections of democracy and
the disbanding of the CNRP? If you guys don't mind, we will
just go through.
Mr. Wollack, you can start. You look like you are ready.
Mr. Wollack. Well, no. I just say that China has given a
good deal of support. It has also--the Cambodian Government has
reciprocated, particularly in ASEAN forums, where they blocked
any effort to reach consensus on the South China Sea.
It was interesting that China and Cambodia announced that
they were going to set up a joint think tank to study color
revolutions, because this is the narrative that somehow the
West was trying to instigate a color revolution and domestic
groups were as well.
And I think if this think tank did accurate research, they
would find out one very fundamental point, that the movements
that rose up in places like the Philippines in 1986, in
Kyrgyzstan, and Serbia, and Ukraine, and Georgia were the
result of one thing, and that was a stolen election. Movements
rose up, starting with the People Power Revolution in the
Philippines, because authoritarian regimes stole an election.
It had nothing to do with outside intervention.
And so I think it serves Cambodian interests and stability
in the country, and in terms of China its view of stability in
the region, to have an election that is seen by the people of
Cambodia to reflect their will.
Mr. Yoho. Ms. Kem.
Ms. Kem. I don't think that China can replace the role of,
for example, the EU or the U.S. has on Cambodia's economy.
China is not the one that is buying our products. And over 70
percent of Cambodian exports depend on U.S. and EU market. And
I am sure you have seen in other closed society around the
world in the region, they can't survive on China's support
alone.
And then number two, do you, meaning the free world, the
U.S. or the EU, do you sit back and allow China to go forward
with the aggression or you fight for your space, because it is
in your interest as well, as I made my remark earlier, to stay
connected in the region.
I think Cambodia could be an easy case and a good
opportunity for the U.S. to take leadership in the region and
to show that democracy can win. And it is very, very possible.
I believe elsewhere in the region, it may be more difficult. In
Cambodia, you just have to lift your finger. And, again, I am
more optimistic than some of you. I believe that there is a lot
of hope, and I think that it can be done very soon as well.
Mr. Yoho. Ms. Enos.
Ms. Enos. I think China has consistently proven a bad actor
in Cambodia, and that is evidenced by the latest statement by
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, which affirmed Cambodia's
decision to dissolve the opposition party.
Not only that, but, as Mr. Wollack referenced, in ASEAN,
they had sort of a tit-for-tat agreement where Cambodia was, I
mean it looks like basically paid off in order to disavow the
South China Sea resolution that ASEAN had made. And I think it
is to the tune of $237 million in direct aid, $90 million in
forgiven debt, and $15 million in other forms of assistance
that they decided to give to Cambodia.
So I think China has proven to be a consistently bad actor
and sort of acts with sort of impunity and with total disregard
to what is going on in Cambodia. But I would echo Mona's
sentiments that I think, apart from U.S. leadership--and this
includes with forming the Paris Peace Agreement--you are not
going to see substantive action being taken, because I think
the U.S. needs to call upon EU partners, needs to call upon
Japan and other signatories that have demonstrated an interest
in seeing Cambodia get back on the track toward reform.
Mr. Yoho. No, I think you are absolutely right. And, you
know, China is pushing that, because they want control of that
region. And we see them with the power of, you know, of the
ASEAN nations. Just one nation can shut down the rest of them.
And this is something we are looking at, you know, talking to
the ASEAN nations and seeing if we need to kind of see what we
can do to put pressure on an individual nation that is doing
this, because that was about $368 million that you said that
gave them.
Again, this comes down to--and I wanted to talk to you
about--you were talking about the United States has to keep
pushing and giving them and helping with democracies and that.
I kind of take a different angle on that. I can't give you
democracy. I can help you get it, but you have to have the want
and the desire.
It is like my mom wanted me to play the piano. For 7 years,
my mom sewed and did all this extra stuff so I could learn to
play the piano. There was a missing factor: I didn't have the
want at that time.
And so I know with the Cambodian people voting where they
were winning these elections and the momentum was with them, to
be robbed from that, you know, we have the Cambodian people
that are pushing for this. Then you have the Cambodian
Government that doesn't want it.
Because what I have seen, you know, countries that are
authoritarian, they are afraid of empowering their people. The
most valuable resource any country has is their people. It is
not their gold, their jade, or any of that other stuff, it is
their people. And when you empower their people, they will do
well.
Ms. Kem, you brought up that the EU, the United States,
Canada, Japan, account for roughly 70--I have got 78 percent of
Cambodia's exports. That is a big hand that we can influence
better decisions, and that is what our goal is.
And I wish you the best of luck with your father, with the
work you guys are doing. I can't tell you how much we
appreciate your testimonies. This meeting has gone a little bit
long. But everybody has stayed here and this shows you the
importance.
Allen, do you have a followup? Any more comments? Dana?
But, again, I can't tell you how much I appreciate it. And
it is like I said when I came up to the table. We take the
information you give us, we look at different areas where we
can give recommendations to the administration, the State
Department, or a resolution coming out from the House saying,
we stand with these ideals and that we will stand with the
support of the Cambodian people.
And then we will also send the information to the Cambodian
Government that you either choose to do business with the
United States of America following these principles that we
have all signed onto, or you do business with somebody else.
And I think it is time we start playing that hand, because we
see the hand that China is forcing, and it is not in the favor
of democracies.
All right. So, with that, this meeting is concluded. I
appreciate everybody's participation and have a great day.
[Whereupon, at 3:38 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
Material Submitted for the Record
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]