BBS Logo
 
  HOME     ABOUT US     CHAT     BBS     LOVE NOTES     PHOTO ALBUM     SONGS     ANGKOR WAT     LINKS  
Post Response | Return to Index | Read Prev Msg | Read Next Msg

POLITICS FORUM

1.Soviet+Vietnamese=Double Murderous Communists

Posted By: SLK <mailto:taprohm30@hotmail.com?subject=1.Soviet+Vietnamese=Double Murderous Communists> (cache.net2000.com.au)
Date: Thursday, 7 August 2003, at 4:39 p.m.

Soviet+Vietnamese= double Murderous-dictatorial Communists

20 years ago, when I first arrived in Australia, I could neither speak nor write English. But I’ve been trying to learn English very hard so that I could write something that I saw strangely was happening in Cambodia from 1975 to 1979 to tell the world not to misunderstand about the destruction of Cambodia a man-made disaster will be recognized as one of the great crimes of the 20th century, which was created by the “Mysterious Anonymous Higher Organization/Angkar Leu/Cap Tren of Hanoi,” whose wish is to incorporate Cambodia, Khmer Krom and Laos into their “Vietnamization” or “Indochinese Federation. It was not an act of God! It was the brutallest act of Hanoi leaders who are the worst violators of human rights on earth.

The past and present Hanoian Leaders had been [and] are trying every means to eliminate the Khmer race by using the secret words of “Angkar Leu/Cap Tren” during the Terror Regime of Angkar Leu/Cap Tren from 1973-79. Hanoi had used only their secret paramount-Pol Pot and Ieng Sary-on the international levels. But in the country, they had secretly used a “Young Mysterious Soldiers of Angkar Leu/Cap Tren” to brutally kill too far many Khmer innocent people.

And recently, interviewed with RFA, was monitored by SBS in Sydney at 9pm, 30 July, 2003, Chhang Yuk clearly told us that the Vietnamese shipped arms to Khmer Rouge in 1976. He’s got documents signed by Vietnamese.

Vietnamese leaders always try to cover up whatever they have done against Khmers from the past up until today. But they can’t conceal anything from the outside world and the Cambodians because they could not kill all Khmers in one day. They tried to kill Khmers in many brutal ways:

1-Killed all Lon Nol’s soldiers in 1975;

2-Collected all Vietnamese citizens living in Cambodia who were happily, freely and safely escorted by Bo Doi to Srok Yuon in 1975, and there are so many Europeans and other foreigners who still misunderstand that all Vietnamese who were living in Cambodia before 1975 were all murdered by the Khmer Rouge. For example, an recent interview with a Canadian former Ambassador to Cambodia by RFA. That Canadian Ambassador who didn’t see any Vietnamese boat people going home/South Vietnam all day and night who were safely, freely and happily escorted by Vietnamese Bo Dois who were dressed up as Khmer Rouge soldiers. That Canadian ambassador was perhaps enjoying himself with his family in Canada while Vietnamese boat people going home in 1975. He talks a lot of bullshit! He knows nothing about Vietnamese boat people going home in 1975. If he didn’t see any Vietnamese boat people going home in 1975 along both Mekong and Bassac Rivers; how dare he talks a lot of bullshit just like that?

3-All Khmer men who were led away to break the rocks and to pick corns never returned home to see their wives and children between 1975 and 1976;

4-All Khmers who were brutally starved to their death, and murdered in the name of Angkar Leu/Cap Tren by the “Young Mysterious Soldiers” freely and happily;

5-Murdered all Khmer Krom people and all Cambodians by accusing them of being Vietnamese agents in the first year of 1976, and 1977-79…etc;

6-All Khmers who were told in the name of Angkar Leu/Cap Tren to dig their own graves before Vietnamese invaders came to occupy Cambodia between 1978 and 1979. When I was told like this, I ran away for my life by leaving my mother and brothers in Phum 12 of Pursat province. But luckily, I met them again somewhere in Battambang province. Why did I run away for my life just like that by leaving my mother and brothers behind the village 12? Because in those days, no one could help no one, but themselves! I thought if I survived, I could procreate children. I ran away for my life with many Khmer victims, but one man whose name was “Don” who clearly knew about the geography of Pursat and Battambang provinces. His wife was a real Vietnamese who was safely protected by Mee Phum 12, Um Choeum. Don led us to the jungle toward Battambang province at night. Along the way of the rice fields, we heard noise from the distance. We got to the edge of the forest in the morning, and what we saw was horror that there were many uncountable decomposed corpses everywhere who were brutally murdered in the name of Angka Leu/Cap Tren. More strangely, we saw an unbelievable story about an old man who was still alive under a tree was covered in blanket, but he could not talk. I saw on his face, which was terribly bitten by mosquitoes. I also saw a group of “Young Mysterious Soldiers” appeared from the jungles. One of those “Young Mysterious Soldiers”, who used to be living in our village 13.

Two of our men carried an old man to a village where he died peacefully. And we all were led by the “Young Mysterious Soldiers” to another village. We all were so frightened to meet these soldiers. We all arrived in a village in the jungle. At night, those “Young Mysterious Soldiers” called all of us to the meeting. In that meeting, a leader of “Young Mysterious Soldiers” lied to us that they are the soldiers of In Tam. In morning, we didn’t know how come Vietnamese soldiers knew so fast where we were? When Vietnamese soldiers came to that village, those “Young Mysterious Soldiers” who immediately disappeared into the bush nearby.

7-Many Khmer Rouge whose families were also brutally murdered in the name of Angkar Leu/Cap Tren by other Khmer Rouge who were pro-Hanoi. I saw a Khmer Rouge cadre who was living next door to my hut was disappeared to nowhere who was a real Khmer. My Vietnamese mother who safely protected by her head of group “Mee Kang” whose husband was a real Khmer Rouge soldier who was killed by other group of Khmer Rouge. I also saw a group of old Cambodian women who were led away to be butchered in the name of Angkar Leu/Cap Tren, but other group of Khmer Rouge stopped the killings. That lady who survived through this tragedy is living in Phnom Penh today with her children. And many more poison tricks Hanoi leaders used to kill Khmer Krom people in the same ways…etc.

Let me reiterate that the Vietnamese were behind the Khmer resistance effort from March 18, 1970 on, an important factor in the eventual victory over the U.S. and Lon Nol. The historic truth is that Kampuchea was liberated with Vietnamese help, and not that Saigon and South Vietnam were liberated with Khmer Rouge help. In fact, between 1970 and 1975 the Khmer Rouge did everything in their power to trip up their Yuon comrades! (PP.71-72, “War & Hope, 1980, with William Shawcross, Prince Norodom Sihanouk)

P.145: but this possibility is entirely in the realm of hypothesis; if I know the Vietnamese, they are not especially inclined to humble themselves before their attackers.

P.146: their long-coveted Indochinese federation is made up of a famished Vietnam, a poor, weak, and extremely fragile Laos, and a miserable, desperate, vanishing Kampuchea.

In every book, when we all Khmers are holding it in our hands, which make us all a big terrible headache to see all kinds of the tortures, tragedies, endless sufferings and genocides…,which were created by the Khmer’s two Number-One Enemies-Siamese and Vietnamese as King Norodom Sihanouk clearly stated in his book “ War & Hope, 1980, with William Shawcross):
P.xiv: Cambodia’s history is unfortunately replete with plots and counterplots, conquests and occupations, secret conspiracies. Wedged between the Annamites and the Siamese, the ancient Khmer Empire commanded their respect. It stretched from the Point of Camau, the extreme southern tip of Indochina, to near the site of Bangkok. Little by little the Empire disintegrated. On August 11, 1863, the French Admiral Lagrandiere forced King Norodom to sign a protectorate treaty. On July 17, 1884, the Kingdom further capitulated in order to survive: the Governor of Cochin China, Charles Thomson, arrived in Phnom Penh, threatened the Khmer sovereign with deportation, and forced him to sign a protectorate treaty under which he relinquished judicial, financial, military, and diplomatic powers…etc.

The Khmer Rouge and the Vietnamese Communists:
A history of their relations as told in the Soviet archives

That's why William Shawcross wrote his book "The Destruction of Cambodia" in 1986, that "Nixon (US President) evidently believed in 1973 (and still in 1978) that the Khmer Rouge were controlled by Hanoi and were amenable to Moscow."

Russia perhaps was cursed by many Cambodian spirits who were brutally killed by Russians and Vietnamese who are the worst double-murderous-dictatorial communists. That’s why Chechen rebels who are taking a terrible revengeful suicide bomb that have killed too many Russians so far so good. The Soviet communists brutally butchered about ten million of their own people.

The worst- brutal-dictatorial regime of Stalin’s communists

1953: Soviet leader 'on brink of death'

Rumours are circulating in Moscow that Joseph Stalin, the long-time leader of the Soviet Union, is near death.

The first official news of Mr Stalin's illness came in a statement on Wednesday.

It said the Soviet leader, who came to power in 1928, had suffered a cerebral haemorrhage on Wednesday night.

An update issued earlier today mentioned "sharp disturbances of the heart functions".

There is speculation that the 73-year-old, born Iosif Vissarionovich Dzhugashvili, in the Soviet republic of Georgia, is now in the final stages of an illness he has been suffering some time.

Soviet newspapers today are clearly preparing their readers for the worst.

Their front pages carry the bulletins on Mr Stalin's health as well as sombre leading articles.

On the inside pages, feature articles praise the Soviet leader both as a man and politician.
Purges

World leaders have expressed concern for Mr Stalin's health.

A statement issued by the British Prime Minister Winston Churchill said his private secretary, John Colville, had yesterday called on the Soviet ambassador.

Mr Colville had passed on the prime minister's regret at the news of Mr Stalin's ill-health and asked to be kept informed of his progress, the statement said.

US President Truman also expressed sympathy for Mr Stalin.

"I am sorry just as I would be if such a thing happened to any other acquaintance of mine," Mr Truman said.

If Mr Stalin's death is confirmed, he will be most remembered for instigating political purges in which tens of thousands were killed.

He was also behind the introduction of farming collectives which led to a famine and the death of up to 10 million people.

His death is expected to provoke a power struggle within the ruling Politburo.

1956: Khrushchev lashes out at Stalin
VIDEO : Delegates arrive and attend the 20th Party Congress to listen to Khrushchev's speech (in Russian)

The President of the Soviet Union, Nikita Khrushchev, has denounced Joseph Stalin as a brutal despot. In a sensational speech to the 20th Congress of the Communist Party President, Khrushchev painted a graphic picture of a regime of "suspicion, fear, and terror" built up under the former dictator who died three years ago.

He said he wanted to break the "Stalin cult" that has held Soviet citizens in its thrall for 30 years.
President Khrushchev described the purges during the period of 1936-38. He implied that one of Stalin's most trusted aides Kirov had been assassinated in 1934 at the leader's behest.

Purges

Stalin then initiated a series of trials of members of the politburo and had some executed for Kirov's murder, including Zinoviev, Kamenev and Rykov. Stalin meted out humiliation and persecution to those officers and members of the Politburo who fell from favour, said Mr Khrushchev. He revealed that in 1937 and 1938, 98 out of the 139 members of the Central Committee were shot on Stalin's orders.

The president also criticised Stalin's foreign policy during World War II. As an ally of Adolf Hitler, Stalin refused to believe Germany would invade Russia - despite warnings from Winston Churchill and Sir Stafford Cripps, the British Ambassador in Moscow, amongst others.

When the attack was launched, Stalin ordered the Red Army not to retaliate saying the raid was merely "indiscipline" on the part of some of Hitler's units. 'Odious book' Mr Khrushchev also condemned Stalin's autobiography as an "odious book" in which Stalin refers to himself as "the workers' genius-leader" and a "shy and modest person". He also accused Stalin of violent nationalism and anti-Semitism. He revealed that in his last will and testament Lenin advised against the retention of Stalin as general secretary of the Communist Party. He said the information he had just divulged should only be made known to the public by degrees. "You understand, comrades, that we could not spread this information to the people at once," he said. "It could be done either suddenly or gradually, and I think it would be more correct to do it gradually."

In Context

Khrushchev's "secret speech" was not made public until 18 March 1956 and then only in Belgrade and Washington. It had a dramatic effect in Eastern Europe where "de-Stalinisation" raised expectations of change, especially in Poland and Hungary.

The text of the speech was not published in Russia until 1988, some 32 years later. Lenin's last will and testament was published in The New York Times in 1926, though it was not made public in the Soviet Union until Khrushchev's announcement. Party agitators (official propagandists) were sent to Georgia to disseminate revelations about Stalin, where opposition to the new information was anticipated. In the wake of the denouncement, Khrushchev's pictures were torn down in Georgia, Stalin's home state. Riots occurred for several days in Tbilisi as Georgians reacted angrily to the denunciation of their hero.

1967: Stalin's daughter defects to the West

VIDEO : Svetlana Alliluyeva: "I am very happy to be here"

The daughter of the Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin has requested political asylum at the United States Embassy in India.

The American Mutual Radio network broke the news but the American State Department has so far refused to comment.

Since her father's death in 1953, little has been heard of 42-year-old Svetlana Alliluyeva - who prefers to be known by her mother's maiden name.

She has been living in a flat in Moscow near the British Embassy working as a researcher and translator.

Mother's suicide

Svetlana is the only daughter of Joseph Stalin by his second wife Nadezhda Alliluyeva who committed suicide in 1932 when Svetlana was nine years old.

When she was just 18, Svetlana, married a Jewish fellow student at Moscow University against her father's wishes. She had a son by him but the marriage was dissolved and her ex-husband sent to his death in a Siberian labour camp.

Her second husband was a close ally of Stalin, Andrei Zhdanov - this marriage was also dissolved.

In 1964 she married Brajesh Singh, an Indian communist.

He died last November and Svetlana came to India on 20 December last year to bury his ashes.

She is believed to be planning to go to Geneva, Switzerland, after the Indian authorities refused her permission to stay in the country for fear of marring relations with the Soviet Union.

She leaves behind a grown-up son and daughter in Moscow.
In Context

Svetlana Alliluyeva was allowed to stay in Switzerland for three months.

She went to the United States in April 1967.

On arrival at New York, she held a press conference and astonished the world by denouncing her father's regime - much to the irritation of the Soviet leader of the time, Alexei Kosygin, who said she was a "sick person".

Later that year, she published her memoirs, Twenty Letters to a Friend, and another autobiography in 1969 called Only One Year.

Svetlana became a US citizen and changed her name to Lana Peters when she married American architect, William Peters in 1970. But they separated after their daughter, Olga, was born.
She returned to the Soviet Union in 1984 and settled in Tbilisi, Georgia - her father's homeland.

In 1986 she left the USSR for the second time to live in the US and then during the 1990s settled in England.
Hanoi ‘a hand in Pol Pot atrocities’

From Peter Day in Washington

One of only three Western reporters allowed into Kampuchea under the Genocidal Pol Pot regime has returned there to shatter the myth of Vietnamese non-involvement in the Khmer Rouge despot’s crimes.

In a devastating series of reports, Washington Post reporter Elizabeth Becker writes that the Vietnamese puppet regime of Heng Samrin is rewriting history to absolve itself of the past.

But the recent past, which she uncovers and describes leaves no doubt of the present rulers in atrocities already condemned the world over.

Her front-page story this week also leaves in shreds the Heng Samrin regime’s moral claims for world recognition.

“The need to continue justifying Vietnam’s occupation of Kampuchea,” she writes, “has created a volume of propaganda that on the surface appears to be series of meaningless lies.

Its effect, however, has been to obliterate the role of the communist party-and Vietnam-in contributing to the massacres of Pol Pot.”

Her on-the-spot documentation of the Vietnamese and Heng Samrin regime’s past collaboration with Pol Pot could hardly have come at a worse moment for the military occupiers of Kampuchea.

It has been published at a time when Vietnam, backed the Soviet Union, is waging a concerted international campaign for formal recognition of Heng Samrin’s rule.

But Miss Becker, one of a handful of Westerners to be allowed to look at existing Kampuchean records of Pol Pot’s time (before 1979), explodes the Vietnamese claim to legitimacy.

Quoting frequently from official records, she writes that the Heng Samrin regime has not brought to trial those who perpetrated the killing of perhaps a third of the population.

“The reason is simple,” she says. “Many of the men now running the Government for the Vietnamese are the same bureaucrats…who ran the government for Pol Pot. Most importantly, they are ruling the country in the name of the same communist party Pol Pot led for over 16 years.”

She describes a vast, continuing propaganda campaign encouraging the Kampuchean people to remember the more hideous crimes. State dance troupes, for example, perform dramas portraying Pol Pot’s soldiers starving people, beating them to death, smashing babies’ heads and raping women.

But all these atrocities are described as the mistakes and excesses of only two men: Pol Pot himself and his lieutenant, Ieng Sary.

Her explanation of this is damning: “The smallest admission of complicity would open the door to the obvious incrimination of some one-third o the country’s leaders, beginning with the head-of-state, Heng Samrin.

As well as Heng Samrin himself, the present Foreign Minister, Mr Hun Sen, and the Minister of Justice, Mr Ouk Boun Chheoun-whom she interviewed-scores of other senior figures now in Phnom Penh “were all Khmer Rouge fighters who held significant positions on the Pol Pot government”.

She was shown the archives above the same torture-chamber museum at Tuol Sleng that is shown all visitors to Kampuchea-who come away, she observes, convinced of the “the diabolical madness of Pol Pot”.

But having obtained permission to copy archive documents, she reports that instead of supporting the regime’s claim that Pol Pot was acting on his own with the Chinese, they show the opposite. (The Australian March 4, 1983. Subjugation of Cambodia, Simon Ross. 1983)

UN accused of covering up Soviet atrocities

From Peter Samuel

In Washington:

United Nations officials have been accused of a huge cover-up of Vietnamese and Soviet “yellow rain atrocities” and of denying medical aid to their victims.

Among the atrocities allegedly committed by the Vietnamese and the Soviet Union in Kampuchea are Nazi-style chemical warfare experiments on healthy children.

These sensational charges are made in an article by Lucio Lami, a leading foreign correspondent of II Giornale Nuovo, Milan, published in the latest issue of Commentary, a leading New York magazine.

Lami says doctors working under UN control near the Kampuchea border “refuse to help victims of (Vietnamese) gas attacks”. They explain their refusal to treat victims of yellow rain, in their own words, “because to accept them in the hospitals would create a political problem”.

United Nations officials have acknowledged that inside Kampuchea the Vietnamese and the Soviet Union are engaged in grisly Nazi-style chemical and biological warfare experimentation on children aged between two and 10 years, but have destroyed evidence of this, Lami said.

In April 1982, the article says, evidence was given to UN officials of children being killed in Soviet-Vietnamese chemical warfare experiments in Phnom Penh.

Adelia Bernard, an official of the Catholic Office of Emergency Relief, travelled secretly to Phnom Penh’s Soviet Hospital to investigate stories about the experiments.
Corpse

She found someone there who told her there were about 100 children being used in the hospital as human guinea pigs of chemical and biological warfare experiments.

Others were kept in laboratory camps built on islands in the Mekong River, which flows through the Kampuchean capital.

“The children were kept in special homes, and during the experiments were placed in transparent plastic spheres equipped with two valves, one for oxygen, the other for the gas that was being tested,” Lami says.

Adelia Bernard demanded of her Kampuchean informant some proof of such experimentation. Her informant went away and returned with the corpse of a three-year-old child inside a plastic sphere with two valves as described.

Bernard put the plastic container and corpse in a sack, carried it back to Bangkok and deposited in on the desk of a UN official, Mr Mark Brown.

Lami reports: “Brown looked at it with a bored expression and said, ‘We know all about this; believe me, you need not have gone to so much effort’. The body was disposed of. No ‘case’ was opened. (The Australian October 10, 1983. Subjugation of Cambodia, Simon Ross.)

Vietnamese blamed everything on Pol Pot

When Vietnamese families were brutally fighting among themselves by also blaming on Pol Pot.
When Vietnamese families set a whole village on fire by also blaming on Pol Pot.

When Vietnamese families could not shit/piss by also blaming on Pol Pot.
When Vietnamese families raped a Khmer girl by also blaming on Pol Pot.
When Vietnamese families fell sick by also blaming on Pol Pot.
When Vietnamese families were struck by lightning by also blaming on Pol Pot.
When Vietnamese families killed Cambodians by also blaming on Pol Pot.
When Vietnamese poisoned in food/water by also blaming on Pol Pot and American CIA (1980-1983). And it was happening again in Cambodia between 1997 and 1998; my uncle and aunt sell food at Khmer-Yuon border who could not sleep properly because they were so fearful that Vietnamese agents tried to put poison in food and water that they sell. Vietnamese agents secretly employed their citizens living in Cambodia to do these dirty jobs for them. The Cambodian people who are living at Khmer-Yuon border always kept their eyes on Vietnamese every step they walked because they were so fearful that they could be poisoned to death by Vietnamese agents. They closed their water-jar/tank extremely tight.
When Vietnamese fishermen could not fish in the river by also blaming on Pol Pot.
Vietnamese blamed on Pol Pot everything they-Yuons did against Khmers.

For example, one day in 1990, I went to Cambodia via Thailand and Laos by Russian airline. In those days, the sanction was still imposed on the Phnom Penh and Hanoian Governments. I was visiting my widow mother in a village along the bank of Mekong River in Srok Kiensvay, Khet Kandal (I’d not like to mention the name of my village for my family’s safety because the Vietnamese agents everywhere in Cambodia today). Every villager one night was in panic by Vietnamese fishermen who terribly scared the villagers by lying to them that Pol Potists are coming to the village.

My mother, aunts and uncles and other villagers sadly told me that you couldn’t go back to Australia because Pol Potists are coming to the village. “Come on, run for our lives!”

But I wasn’t afraid of Pol Potists by asking my mother and villagers and pointing my finger, “Who are in the east?”

My mother and villagers promptly replied to me “Vietnamese are in the East!”

I fiercely snapped back at them “That’s right. Vietnamese are in the East. But Pol Potists are in the West (Thailand).” they all looked so stunning/stupefying.

And I told them that the world already knows Pol Potists. We are afraid of Vietnamese who dressed up as Pol Potists who could kill us without mercy! And they all looked so stupid after that. If we-villagers left now, Vietnamese fishermen would come up to our village by stealing everything we have. And then we would have nothing left.

In the morning, villagers clearly told me that the Vietnamese fishermen are very bad by lying to us that Pol Potists are coming to our village. Vietnamese fishermen, who were mercilessly being chased away by Khmer soldiers on other side of River, tried to fish in the Mekong and parked their boat along the bank. But Khmer soldiers didn’t allow them to do so. From 1979-90, Vietnamese fishermen were Khmer soldiers’ bosses. Both Khmer soldiers and civilians were so terribly afraid of Vietnamese fishermen, civilians and soldiers…etc.

One more example, one of Cambodian boat people, who was asked by the Australian immigration officer between 1988 and 1990, “Why did you run away from Cambodia by boat to Australia?”

That man stupidly replied to an officer, “I’m afraid of Pol Potists.”
That officer clearly told him that, “No more Pol Pot now. In other words, there are only Vietnamese and Phnom Penh soldiers controlling Cambodia.”

Cambodian boat people who were transferred to other camps-far away from the city by waiting to be shipped back to Cambodia by stupidly answering that they are afraid of Pol Potists. In fact, Pol Potists aren’t in control of Cambodia in those days. If those Cambodian boat people answered that they were afraid of conscription, oppression and human right violation by Phnom Penh and Hanoian communists. They would be accepted happily to stay in Australia straightaway. I watched 6.30 News on TV appeared nearly on every channel in those days.

Yuon boat people never answered that they were afraid of Pol Potists, but who always clearly told the world that they didn’t want Vietnamese communists. There was no a single of Pol Potists living in Vietnam since 1975, but why did Vietnamese always try to run away from Vietnam?

What kind of communist was Pol Pot? What kind of revolutionist was Pol Pot? Did Pol Pot care about his families and his own life? Was there any members of Pol Pot’s families were brutally murdered and starved to death, too, from 1975-79?

Pol Pot, Ieng Sary and Khieu Samphan who purely sacrificed their lives for protecting their country from being wiped out on the World Map like Kampuchea Krom and Champa. They also know Cambodians can procreate more children to rebuild their country once again after the war. But they know very well that once Cambodia is wiped out on the World Map, it’s simply hard to regain the lost lands from our hereditary enemies. And they the Three Ghosts would also rather their names strongly to be condemned by their own people and the people around the world than their country being wiped out on the World Map.

Khmer proverb: When Nokor has war, needs only a hero to do his job (Hean si hean song. Do not need chicken/coward/rubbish mouths); when Nokor has peace, need only educated men to rebuild their country with their knowledge/specialist/professional.

Norodom Sihanouk knew very well that there were too many Vietnamese secret agents were secretly hiding since 1945/46 in his shoes/slippers, underpants/trousers, T-Shirts, coats/jackets, hair/head, ears and nose, under his armpits and everywhere in Cambodia. That’s why he sent the Three Ghosts to learn something from their teacher-Vietnamese. And he also clearly told General Lon Nol to stage 17th March 1970 coup de tat against Vietcong/Vietminh living everywhere in the Cambodian jungles. And then he went to join with Vietcong/Vietminh again after the coup. Why? To have dragged them out of the Kampuchean jungles to the open space as we are clearly seeing today that Vietnamese agents everywhere in Cambodia. That’s why Prince Norodom Sihanouk joined with Vietcong/Vietminh! As Khmer old saying goes; Trap (Chong) never forgets the heron that always forgets the trap/Chong. Hanoian Leaders are deeply troubled when all Khmer Rouge leaders are handed over to UN because they have been waiting patiently for nearly the rest of their lives for a right time to come up. And then they will surely confess everything that Vietnamese leaders have done against Khmers from the past up until today.

Quoted from Talk about Kampuchea Krom Current Events:
Dmitry Mosyakov
To this day, the real history of relations between the Khmer communists and their Vietnamese colleagues is enclosed in a veil of secrecy. Despite extensive research on this theme in Russia and abroad, there are still no reliable answers to many key questions. The history of relations between Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge is construed in Vietnam in a way, which sometimes has nothing to do with the story told in the West.

Statements of some Khmer Rouge leaders like Khieu Samphan or Ieng Sary, who have recently defected to the governmental camp in Phnom Penh and say what people want to hear, are not to be trusted either. All this supports the assumption that analysis of relations between Hanoi and the Khmer Rouge is not only a historical problem. There is still a political component, which encumbers its objective study.

The author endeavours to tackle this problem and to present to the reader an objective and impartial picture of what was happening. *The research is based on a study of the former USSR’s archival materials (diaries of Soviet ambassadors in Vietnam, records of conversations with ranking members of the Vietnamese government, analytical notes, political letters of the Soviet embassy in the SRV, and other documents) deposited in the Russian State Archive of Modern History (RSAMH).

Along with other sources, such as the French colonial archives and interviews with Vietnamese and Cambodian participants (see Ben Kiernan, How Pol Pot Came to Power: A History of Communism in Kampuchea, 1930-1975, London, Verso, 1985), this work allows us to give objective and reasonably complete answers to the question at issue.

Relations between Khmer and Vietnamese communists have passed through some major periods of development. In the first period, which can be determined to span from 1930 to 1954, a small Khmer section of the Indochina Communist Party (ICP), was under full ideological and organisational control of the Vietnamese communists.

During the years of struggle for liberation from the governance of France (1946-1954), the strength of this section grew continuously due to ICP recruitment of the most radical participants in the anti-colonial struggle. The Khmer People’s Revolutionary Party (KPRP) was founded in June 1951 on this basis. The leaders of this party, Son Ngoc Minh, Sieu Heng, and Tou Samut, acted hand in hand in the anti-colonial war with the Vietnamese and were truly valid allies and strict executors of all the plans drafted by the ICP.

The 1954 Geneva Agreements on Indochina drastically changed relations between Khmer and Vietnamese communists. The Vietnamese withdrew their forces from Cambodia in accordance with the Agreements, but as distinct from Laos (where the so-called free zone in the region of Sam Neua was controlled by the communists), Hanoi could not ensure the same conditions for their Khmer allies. The Vietnamese, under pressure from the Sihanouk regime and its Western allies, did not even let the Khmer communists participate in the Geneva negotiations, and by the end of 1954 had withdrawn their combat forces from the regions of Cambodia which were under their control. Hereupon Khmer Royal Forces entered all zones that had been under KPRP authority, which forced the party underground. The consolation offered by Hanoi - granting two thousand of their allies the possibility of taking cover in the territory of North Vietnam (Nayan Chanda, Brother Enemy, N.Y., 1986, p. 59) - was obviously disproportionate to their contribution to a joint struggle. Therefore among the Khmer communists remaining in Cambodia the story gained currency that Hanoi had simply betrayed them, used them as hostages for the sake of reaching the agreement with the then leader of Cambodia, Norodom Sihanouk.

The evaluation of the Vietnamese operations of those days as an unrighteous betrayal of the Cambodian revolution; (W. Shawcross, Sideshow: Kissinger, Nixon and the Destruction of Cambodia, N.Y., 1987, p. 23 was later more than once reproduced in official documents of the Khmer Rouge. Pol Pot himself claimed it many times.

Interestingly, Hanoi’s decision was remembered in Phnom Penh even in the eighties, when such a high-ranking official in the Phnom Penh hierarchy as the executive secretary of the pro-Vietnam United Front for National Salvation of Kampuchea, Chan Ven, was of the opinion that in 1953, the Vietnamese had acted incorrectly by leaving us alone to face with the ruling regime (conversation with Chan Ven, Phnom Penh, July 15, 1984).

The events in Indochina in 1954 marked the beginning of a new period in relations between the Khmer and Vietnamese communists. The close partnership of 1949-1953 promptly came to naught, and the KPRP, which had lost a considerable number of its members, went underground and fell out of the field of vision of Hanoi for many years. The North Vietnamese leaders who were preparing for a renewal of armed struggle in the South, found in Sihanouk, with his anti-imperialist and anti-American rhetoric, a far more important ally than the KPRP. Moreover, Sihanouk had real power. Hanoi placed its bets on the alliance with Sihanouk, who was not only critical of the United States but also granted North Vietnam the possibility to use his territory for creating rear bases on the so-called Ho Chi Minh Trail and even to deliver ammunition and arms for the fighting in the South through the Cambodian port of Sihanoukville. (However, the Khmers retained approximately 10 % of all deliveries - see Nayan Chanda, Brother Enemy, N.Y., 1986, pp. 61, 420).

The Vietnamese did their best to strengthen this regime, and went out of their way to scrap any plans of the local communists to fight Sihanouk. Hanoi believed that the armed struggle with the government of Sihanouk slackened it and opened a path to the intrigues of American imperialism against Kampuchea" (On the History of the Vietnamese-Kampuchean Conflict, Hanoi, 1979, p. 9). The Vietnamese even tried not to allow Khmer communists to leave Hanoi for Cambodia to carry out illegal work in their home country, and tried to have them keep different official positions in Vietnam (RSAMH, Fund 5, inventory 50, file 721: Document of the USSR embassy in the DRV, April 1, 1965, p. 142).

As to the communists, operating on the territory of Cambodia, their underground organization had broken up into rather isolated fractions under heavy pressure from the authorities, and its illegal leaders wandered through the country from one secret address to another at the end of their tether. Authentic documents of this epoch were not saved. However, according to the evidence of such an informed person as Tep Khen - a former ambassador of Heng Samrin's regime in Phnom Penh, all documentation of the party fitted into a schoolbag, which general secretary Tou Samut and his two bodyguards carried while travelling through the country. (Conversation with Tep Khen, Moscow, March 10, 1985).

The treachery of Sieu Heng - the second most important person in the KPRP - dealt a heavy blow against the underground organization. This party leader, who had been in charge of KPRP work among peasants for several years, secretly cooperated with the special services of the ruling regime and during the period from 1955 to1959 gave away practically all communist activities in the country to the authorities.

The prevailing obvious chaos inside the party and the absence of serious control from the Vietnamese party presented Saloth Sar (later he took the revolutionary pseudonym Pol Pot) who arrived home from France, and his radical friends who had studied with him there, with huge possibilities for elevation to the highest positions in a semi-destroyed, isolated organization.

The treachery of Sieu Heng did not affect them seriously, because they belonged to an urban wing of the party, headed by Tou Samut. The career growth of Pol Pot was vigorous: in 1953 he was secretary of a regional party cell, while in 1959 he made it to the post of the secretary of Phnom Penh city committee of CPRP. (Conversation with Chan Ven, Phnom Penh, July 15, 1984).

When in 1962, the Sihanouk secret police laid its hands on and killed Tou Samut at a secret hide-out in Phnom Penh (four years before - in 1958 - another prominent leader of the KPRP, editor of the party newspaper Nop Bophan had been shot and killed), Pol Pot and his friends got the unique chance to actually head the party or, more precisely, what was left of it. As early as 1960, Pol Pot had managed to assure that his evaluation of the situation in the country and his views on the tactics and strategy of political struggle were accepted as a basis for drafting a new program of the KPRP. It declared as the main cause of the party the realization of a national-democratic revolution, that is to say the struggle for the overthrow of the regime existing in the country, a policy that went counter to the interests of Hanoi.

The congress approved a new Charter and formed a new Central Committee, where Pol Pot assumed the responsibilities of deputy chairman of the party. The prevalence of new personnel was consolidated at the next Party congress, which took place in January 1963. It was also held underground at a secret address and according to veteran communists there were not more than 20 persons at it (conversation with Chan Ven, Phnom Penh, July 14, 1984). During this meeting a new Central Committee, wherein young radicals held one third of all 12 posts, was elected. Pol Pot himself took up the post of the general secretary, and Ieng Sari became a member of the permanent bureau (To Kuyen, The CPRP as avant-garde of the Kampuchean people, Cong Shang, 1983, 11-12. Cited from the Russian translation, "Questions of the history of the CPSU," N10, 1984, p. 6. Unexpectedly for the Vietnamese, Pol Pot then renamed the party: from the People’s Revolutionary Party to the Communist Party of Kampuchea or CPK (conversation with Tep Khen, Moscow, March 10, 1985). Much later, explaining the reason for changing the name, Pol Pot claimed that "The Communist Party of Indochina and consequently its successor the KPRP was in due course created by the Vietnamese to occupy Cambodian and Lao lands" (Provotesat songkhep nei pak protiatyun padevoat Kampuchea & A Brief history of the KPRP & The vanguard of the working class and all the people of Kampuchea, & Phnom Penh, 1984, p. 7).

Vietnamese for a long time calmly watched the changes in Khmer communist underground, practically not interfering into its business, unaware of the fact that with their involuntary help an evil, dictatorial bunch led by Pol Pot and Ieng Sari was emerging. In January 1978, the first deputy chief of the external relations department of the Communist Party of Vietnam’s Central Committee, Nguyen Thanh Le, told the Soviet ambassador: "There were contradictions between Pol Pot and Ieng Sari before, so in 1963-1964 Ieng Sari left Pol Pot in the underground and went to Phnom Penh. Then Pol Pot persuaded Vietnamese friends to help him to return Ieng Sari" (RSAMH, Fund 5, inventory 75, file 1061, record of the Soviet ambassadors conversation with the Vietnamese communist party Central Committees first deputy chief of the external relations department, Nguyen Thanh Le, January 14, 1978, p. 6). It is hard to tell if this information provided by Nguyen Thanh Le recalls actual events. Pol Pot always was an "alien" for the Hanoi leaders and it is difficult to imagine that for the sake of repairing his relationship with Ieng Sari, who was no less "alien" to Hanoi, Pol Pot needed Vietnamese assistance. Most likely, high-ranking Vietnamese officials tried to persuade their Soviet allies that Vietnam had the Khmer communist leaders under firm control.

This neglect of the Khmer communists began to change in the mid-sixties, when Hanoi realized that Sihanouk’s support of North-Vietnamese policy was becoming more and more frail. The positions of opponents of friendship with Hanoi on behalf of the powerful authoritative generals Lon Nol and Sirik Matak became stronger in Phnom Penh. Under such conditions, the Vietnamese again recalled their natural allies, the Khmer communists. However there they had to confront a lot of unexpected problems. The main one was that due to obvious oversight there were people in the highest posts of the Khmer Communist Party little-known to the Vietnamese, and inevitably suspect because they were educated in France, instead of in Hanoi. Besides, the majority of them had not participated in the anti-colonial war and were not checked for allegiance to the elder brother. But the most important reason was that they quite openly criticised North Vietnamese policy towards the Cambodian ruling regime.

Pol Pot, unlike his predecessors in the highest party post, rigidly defended the line that Khmer communists should act independently, fulfilling their own purposes and interests first of all, and should carry out independent, special policy on basic matters of revolutionary struggle, theory and tactics. (Provotesat songkhep nei pak protiatyun padevoat Kampuchea, p. 6). And Hanoi should take into consideration that the young radicals had managed to win certain popularity and support in party circles by their activity and independence. The point of view of the new general secretary that the political struggle won’t bring any results was regarded with understanding (Provotesat songkhep nei pak protiatyun padevoat Kampuchea, p. 7). That’s why the foreground task of the Khmer communists should be the one of capturing power in Cambodia; interests of Vietnamese brothers should not dominate in the determination of CPK policy. Also important was that for the first time since the Geneva agreements, the Khmer communists, despite instructions to support the anti-imperialist policy of Sihanouk received by Pol Pot during his secret stay in Hanoi in the summer of 1965, were prepared to move to real actions. (Chanda, Brother Enemy, N.Y., 1986, p. 62).
To be continued to Part 2.
Leng-SK

Password:
Post Response | Return to Index | Read Prev Msg | Read Next Msg

POLITICS FORUM is maintained by Webmaster at #CAMBODIA WEB.