Archive for the ‘Politopical’ Category
Mahathir confident of ruling coalition’s victory in May general election
Mahathir Mohammed longest serving Malay PM
KUALA LUMPUR, April 11 (Xinhua) — Mahathir Mohamad, Malaysia’s longest serving prime minister, has expressed confidence that the ruling coalition will retain power in the upcoming general election to be held in May.
Speaking at a talk show aired on a local channel late Wednesday, Mahathir said he is sure that the ruling coalition, National Front, will win Malaysia’s 13th general election, which is widely deemed as the least predictable since the country’s independence in 1957.
However, he was cautious on National Front’s chance to retake the two-thirds majority in parliament that it lost in the previous election in 2008.
“The chance is 50-50, but the National Front will definitely perform better than in 2008,” he said.
The 87-year-old has been campaigning vigorously across the country for the National Front and its dominant component party, the United Malays National Organization (UMNO).
He has also engaged with the opposition in war of words, urging some senior opposition leaders to retire “as he did.”
Mahathir stepped down in 2003 after 22 years of premiership. Mahathir is likely to win hearts of many of voters of the Malay majority for the ruling coalition with his charisma, but he may also alienate some non-Malay voters with his pro-Malay comments.
Lim Kit Siang, a senior opposition figure, has urged Mahathir to stop “race-baiting and inciting communal sentiments.”
Mahathir’s active campaigning in the run-up to the general election this year serves as a sharp contraction to the election in 2008, when he was opposing his successor and then Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.
Mahathir quit UMNO later the year, only rejoined after Abdullah stepped down a year later.
The opposition alliance is now headed by Anwar Ibrahim, Mahathir’s former deputy. Anwar fell out with Mahathir in 1998 and was thrown into jail for corruption and sodomy charges.
Thai Govt warns against defying ICJ ruling
Surapong denies giving up Preah Vihear fight
Foreign Minister Surapong Tovichakchaikul has come under criticism for his ‘no-win’ remark involving the border dispute with Cambodia.
Bangkokpost 5-01-2013
Thais should be wary of the consequences if they want to defy the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling on the Preah Vihear temple, the Foreign Ministry warned Friday.
Army commander Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha: “We are neighbours, we must live together peacefully. Nobody wants fighting.”
Chan-Ocha: We’ll fight to defend our sovereignty,if invaded
Cambodia has asked the ICJ to clarify its 1962 ruling on the dispute surrounding the border temple.
The court ruled the temple belonged to Cambodia, but some territory around it has been contested by both countries since.
PAD’s ‘patriots’: Government traitors
The ministry’s warning comes after public criticism of remarks by Foreign Minister Surapong Tovichakchaikul in which he suggested the court case was a “no-win” situation for Thailand.
He said late last month he was pursuing the case with a heavy heart.
“If we lose the case, we lose it [territory]. Even if we don’t lose the case, it goes back to square one. That is, the temple belongs to Cambodia and the area surrounding it remains as it is,” Mr Surapong said.
The minister denied media accusations he had a vested interest in seeing the dispute go Cambodia’s way, or was unenthusiastic about fighting the case.
Cambodia will present an oral statement to the judges on April 15 and Thailand on April 19. The court is likely to give its ruling in October.
“My government and I want peace and stability and we never let our guard down,” Mr Surapong said.
“If the people would like to fight, we will certainly do so. But bear in mind that we are neighbours, situated side by side, and can’t just be cut apart,” he said.
The foreign minister on Friday chaired a meeting of the committee representing Thailand in the case, comprising the defence minister, army chief, attorney-general, the Royal Thai Survey Department, the Council of State.
“We have been arguing all along the ICJ should not tamper with old verdicts. But from now on, we are preparing the public to accept whatever the verdict will be,” Mr Surapong said.
He said the public should understand the consequences if Thailand chooses not to comply with the ICJ, particularly the likely trade and economic impacts.
He was concerned that anti-government, nationalistic forces were exploiting and politicising the ICJ issue.
Defence Minister ACM Sukumpol Suwanatat said the temple issue was sensitive and the government should take a united stand to avoid confusing the public.
Personally, he said, he was confident the ICJ’s ruling in October would be the same as its earlier one.
He said the media and the public should not be pessimistic. “We should lend moral support to each other. The government is prepared.”
He agreed Thailand must comply with the ICJ ruling.
Army chief Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha said that as a military officer who is duty-bound to defend the country’s sovereignty, he is ready to fight if the country’s territory is invaded.
“But as we are neighbours, we must live together peacefully. Nobody wants fighting,” he said.
Virachai Palasai, ambassador to the Netherlands, said an oral hearing was complementary to the written statement that both nations have presented to the Hague. The Hindu temple, not the surrounding territory, would be the object of the verdict since the court had been asked to re-interpret its old verdict.
“We should not take it as losing or winning,” said Mr Virachai, who said his legal team, comprising himself, head of the Treaties and Legal Affairs Department, three foreign lawyers and two foreign assistants, has received full support from the Yingluck government.
“We have been working with technical and legal experts and no one has interfered in our work,” he said.
He was appointed under the previous government.
Four scenarios could emerge from the ruling, Mr Virachai said. The court might declare it has no jurisdiction, or decide in favour of Thailand or Cambodia, or in favour of both sides, he said.
“As members of the the United Nations, both countries have to comply with the decision, however it comes out,” he said. “If not, the UN Security Council might be asked to make either side abide by the ruling,” the Hague-based ambassador said.
Tearful Obama Credits Staff for History-Books Campaign…Powerful nation leader was in grateful tears
President Obama: “I’m Really Proud of All of You.”
The morning after he won re-election, an emotional President Barack Obama credited his youthful staff of several hundred with running a campaign that will “go on in the annals of history.”
“What you guys have accomplished will go on in the annals of history and they will read about it and they’ll marvel about it,” said Obama told his team Wednesday morning inside the Chicago campaign headquarters, tears streaming down his face.
“The most important thing you need to know is that your journey’s just beginning. You’re just starting. And whatever good we do over the next four years will pale in comparison to whatever you guys end up accomplishing in the years and years to come,” he said.
The moment, captured by the Obama campaign’s cameras and posted online, offers a rare glimpse at the president unplugged and emotional. During the first four years of his presidency, Obama has never been seen publicly crying.
He first came to Chicago, he told the campaign staff, “knowing that somehow I wanted to make sure that my life attached itself to helping kids get a great education or helping people living in poverty to get decent jobs and be able to work and have dignity. And to make sure that people didn’t have to go to the emergency room to get health care.”
“The work that I did in those communities changed me much more than I changed those communities because it taught me the hopes and aspirations and the grit and resilience of ordinary people,” he said, as senior strategist David Axelrod and campaign manager Jim Messina looked on. “And it taught me the fact that under the surface differences, we all have common hopes and we all have common dreams. And it taught me something about how I handle disappointment and what it meant to work hard on a common endeavor, and I grew up.”
“So when I come here and I look at all of you, what comes to mind is, it’s not that you guys remind me of myself, it’s the fact that you are so much better than I was in so many ways. You’re smarter, you’re so better organized, you’re more effective,” he said.
Obama said he expected many of those who helped to re-elect him will assume new roles in progressive politics, calling that prospect a “source of my strength and inspiration.”
Senior campaign officials said Thursday that the Obama campaign infrastructure – the field offices and network of hundreds of thousands of volunteers – would undergo a period of transition in the coming weeks to determine how to remain sustainable and influential.
“We have remarkable staff, and the campaign that Jim [Messina] put together, you know, is the best in history,” said senior Obama adviser David Plouffe. “But the reason those people got involved was because they believed in Barack Obama. It was the relationship between them and our candidate.”
Russia’s leaders criticized at Stalin commemorations…similarly to Cambodia’s Sihanouk
Relatives of Josef Stalin’s victims say Russian President Vladimir Putin and other Russian leaders should have attended the annual tribute honoring the millions who died during Stalin’s rule.
30 October 2012
(Reuters) MOSCOW – Relatives of Josef Stalin’s victims commemorated the Soviet dictator’s repression on Tuesday and many condemned Russia’s leaders for not taking part.
Millions of people were executed or sent to prison camps under Stalin’s rule, but while thousands paid tribute to the dead at annual ceremonies on Monday and Tuesday, President Vladimir Putin stayed away.
Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev condemned Stalin in a blog, saying: “Josef Stalin and other leaders of the Soviet state at the time deserve the harshest assessment. It must remain in the annals of our history so that it never happens again. Because war with one’s own people is a very serious crime.”
But Medvedev, too, did not attend any ceremony, revealing the problems Russia has coming to terms with Stalin’s three-decade rule until his death in 1953 when the Soviet Union was the only global superpower to rival the United States.
“Our government does not like this kind of memory and that is why it keeps silent,” said Anna Volkova, a 31-year-old teacher attending a ceremony on Monday outside the Lyubanka building in Moscow that once housed Stalin’s security police, the KGB.
“It’s uncomfortable to live with such history.”
Memorial, a rights group that has archived Stalin’s repressions, has proposed that all political leaders mark the day, which has been held each year for two decades.
Yelena Sus, 24, whose grandfather was executed in 1938 and whose mother was born in a prison for political criminals, called for a gesture to acknowledge the crimes.
“Our country’s leaders have not yet apologized for this nightmare,” she said, while waiting her turn to read out her grandfather’s name, a candle in her hand.
“In our country we keep saying ‘Nazis tortured people’ – but we were no better.”
Putin, Russia’s paramount leader since 2000, has condemned the crimes of the Stalin era and described the Soviet system as totalitarian.
He took part in a 70th anniversary commemoration of a 1940 massacre by Soviet troops of 22,000 Polish officers and intellectuals at Katyn forest in what was then the western Soviet Union.
But Putin has also praised Stalin’s role in the defeat of Nazi Germany in World War Two. Other Russians still laud him for the country’s rapid industrialization.
POSITIVE VIEW
More than a third of Russians either do not believe the political repressions happened or are not sure, according to a poll by the FOM research group, and only 43 percent hold Stalin personally responsible.
Nearly half of Russians regard Stalin’s historical role as positive, according to another poll. Only 22 percent said his role was very negative – a third of the number 25 years ago.
Leonid Gudkov, head of the Levada Center which conducted that poll, says melodramatic movies and books in recent years have trivialized the Stalin era. He also criticized history education.
A high-school textbook, compiled with the help of a historian from Putin’s United Russia party, says repressions were a common occurrence under Stalin but also says that a lack of democratization after 1945 was a consequence of threats from the West during the Cold War.
Some Russians at the ceremonies said Russia continued to have a climate of political repression, citing the jailing of the Pussy Riot punk band over an anti-Putin protest in a church, and growing pressure on the opposition.
“If I were taking part in a public meeting today as a high-ranking official, I would be afraid to talk to people, who would ask me …. what about the current political repressions?” said Valentin Gefter, a member of the Kremlin’s council on human rights.
Some Russians demand more openness about the past and more freedom in the future.
“The authorities must explain the fate of every person who went missing,” said Viktor, an 82-year-old whose father disappeared in 1937. “We are intimidated – we were born trembling and we tremble now.”
Khmer Language Use on Media Discussed…XO in action
Ong Kanharith must be really drunk to confuse in such matter as so important than his father language,tien viet
AKP Phnom Penh, October 26, 2012 –
The Ministry of Information in collaboration with the National Council for Khmer Language (NCKL) organized here on Oct. 25 a workshop on Khmer Language Use for Media.
The opening ceremony of the one-day workshop was presided over by Information Minister H.E. Khieu Kanharith and NCKL Chairman H.E. Prum Mol, while the closing ceremony by Deputy Prime Minister and Minister in charge of the Office of the Council of Ministers H.E. Sok An at the Royal University of Phnom Penh (RUPP), Campus II.
The purpose of the workshop was to advise journalists and TV and radio anchors to use and write Khmer language properly because they have great impacts on the public on the way Khmer language is spoken and written, said H.E. Prum Mol.
Therefore, proper controlling and use are required because language use on media is very crucial in deed for Khmer preservation, he underlined.
For his part, H.E. Khieu Kanharith said the Khmer language use on media is a very significant task, so NCKL has tried to do research and sought to find unified agreement for the common and correct wording.
H.E. Khieu Kanharith also requested NCKL to compile and publish as much as possible available documents already edited and agreed for the research of journalists, as well as TV and radio anchors and students to be aware of the proper use of Khmer language.
H.E. Khieu Kanharith further asked the TV and radio anchors to work together to form an association so as to easily communicate and exchange experience.
Death toll tops 100 in Myanmar ethnic strife
Burma civil war among ethnics
SITTWE, Myanmar (AP) — The death toll from recent ethnic violence in Myanmar’s western state of Rakhine has surpassed 100, an official said Friday, as the government warned that the strife risks harming the country’s reputation as it seeks to install democratic rule.
Rakhine state spokesman Win Myaing said 112 people had been killed in six townships in clashes that began Sunday between members of the Buddhist Rakhine and the Muslim Rohingya communities. He said 72 people were reported injured, including 10 children.
The government announced earlier that almost 2,000 homes had been burned down in the conflict.
In June, ethnic violence in the state left at least 90 people dead and destroyed more than 3,000 homes. About 75,000 have been living in refugee camps ever since.
A resident of another township, Ramree, said there also was violence there Friday morning.
“There were some clashes between the two sides in Ramree this morning,” Kyaw Win, 30, said by phone.
“Residents are very fearful of imminent attacks by the Muslim community because security presence is very little. We don’t feel safe. We want the Bengalis to be moved away from the Rakhine community,” Kyaw Win said. Rakhine prefer to use the term Bengali for Rohingya, whom they contend are not a distinct ethnic group.
Kyaw Win said that a few houses had been burned down but that no casualties were reported.
The mob violence has seen entire villages torched and has drawn calls worldwide for government intervention.
“As the international community is closely watching Myanmar’s democratic transition, such unrest could tarnish the image of the country,” said a statement from the office of President Thein Sein published Friday in the state-run Myanma Ahlin newspaper.
Thein Sein took office as an elected president last year, and has instituted economic and political liberalization after almost half a century of repressive military rule.
“The army, police and authorities in cooperation with local people will try to restore peace and stability and will take legal action against any individual or organization that is trying to instigate the unrest,” the statement warned.
The long-brewing conflict is rooted in a dispute over the Muslim residents’ origin. Although many Rohingya have lived in Myanmar for generations, they are widely denigrated as intruders who came from neighboring Bangladesh to steal scarce land.
The U.N. estimates their population in Myanmar at 800,000. But the government does not count them as one of the country’s 135 ethnic groups, and so — like neighboring Bangladesh — denies them citizenship. Human rights groups say racism also plays a role: Many Rohingya, who speak a Bengali dialect and resemble Muslim Bangladeshis, have darker skin and are heavily discriminated against.
A statement issued late Thursday by the office of U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon described the latest violence as “deeply troubling.” Ban called on Myanmar authorities “to take urgent and effective action to bring under control all cases of lawlessness.”
“The vigilante attacks, targeted threats and extremist rhetoric must be stopped,” Ban said. “If this is not done, the fabric of social order could be irreparably damaged and the reform and opening up process being currently pursued by the government is likely to be jeopardized.”
In Washington, State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said the U.S. was deeply concerned about the reports and urged restraint.
In a hospital in Sittwe, the state capital not yet hit by the latest round of violence, an Associated Press photographer talked to four wounded people brought in from the affected areas. Aung Moe Khaing, 25, was wounded in an arm and a leg, saying he was shot Tuesday when soldiers dispersed the crowd.
Phyu Thein Maung, 39, from Yathetaung township, said he was shot in the buttocks.
“Muslims provoked us from inside their village and challenged us from their community, guarded by soldiers,” he said. “People were very angry as they shot iron spikes at us with catapults and made abusive gestures. I was hit by a gunshot when soldiers dispersed the crowd.”
There have been concerns in the past that soldiers were failing to protect the Rohingya community, but accounts this time from Rakhine villagers suggest that Myanmar’s military may have been defending the Rohingya.
The crisis has proven a major challenge to Thein Sein’s government and to opposition leader and Nobel Peace laureate Aung San Suu Kyi, who has been criticized by some outsiders as failing to speak out strongly against what they see as repression of the Rohingya.
The U.N. warned Thursday that the crisis had sent a new wave of refugees to seek shelter in camps already overcrowded with 75,000 people from the June violence.
Bangladesh has put its border guards on alert, fearing a new influx of Rohingya refugees.
On Thursday, Bangladesh border guards turned away 45 Rohingya trying to enter into Bangladesh by boats, said Lt. Col. Khalequzzaman, a border commander. Local police chief Selim Mohammad Jahangir said Friday that at least another 3,000 Rohingya Muslims had been spotted on about 40 boats on the Naaf River off Bangladesh’s Tekhnaf coast.
He said the boats may try to enter Bangladesh, but “we have instructions not to let them come here.”
Bangladesh says it’s too poor to accept more refugees and feed them. Bangladesh is hosting about 30,000 Rohingya who fled Myanmar to escape government atrocities in 1991.
___
Associated Press writer Farid Hossain in Dhaka, Bangladesh, contributed to this report.
Asian-Americans could impact presidential race
Joe Watkins, who was an aide to President George H.W. Bush, says there is one common denominator: “Asian-Americans like everyone else just want to be considered Americans, and when candidates reach out to them as such, as American voters, I think they’re thrilled by that.” (sic! Politicians do not take Asians seriously)
By NBC’s Richard Lui
There are plenty of different voter groups for campaigns to court during this presidential election and, this year, Asian-Americans and Pacific Islanders could impact the outcome in a significant way. In what has been a tight race, a relatively minor investment in these voters could pay large dividends for President Barack Obama and Republican nominee Mitt Romney.
There are three characteristics to consider about this slice of the electorate:
Swing State Population Levels
First, Asian-Americans and Pacific Islanders have reached tipping-point population levels in battleground states.
For example, in Florida, Asian-Americans (single and mixed race) are 3 percent of the population, according to the Asian American Center for Advancing Justice — small, but Obama won the state by just 2.5 percentage points in 2008. In Nevada, Asian-Americans are 9 percent of the population; Obama won by 12.4 percentage points. And in Virginia, where they are 7 percent; Obama won by 6.3 percentage points.
Another way to look at it is to total the popular margin of victory Obama had in 2008 in the nine NBC News battleground states. That’s almost 1.6 million votes. The Asian-American population in those states in 2010 was 2.3 million. After removing children under the age 18, or about 25 percent of the population, the number of Asian-Americans in those states is greater than Obama’s 2008 margin of victory in these crucial states.
Though 100 percent turnout and voting unanimity is highly unlikely, Virginia and North Carolina epitomize the opportunity. Until Virginia swung blue in 2008, Republican candidates hadn’t lost the state since Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964. In North Carolina, up until 2008, Democrats had won only one in the previous 10 elections; Obama eked out a win by only 14,000 votes. In cases like these, smaller voting blocks, like Asian-Americans tilt the outcome
Undecided votersA second characteristic to consider: Asian-Americans and Pacific Islanders this year are over four times more likely to be undecided than the average voter, according to the National Asian American Survey. Jon Stewart from “The Daily Show” joked, after all the press and debate to date, you’d have to basically live in a cave not to have been able to make a choice by now. So is it that Asian-Americans are four times more aloof when it comes to politics? Though they do register to vote at a lower rate than average, 2012 is different.
Video: Obama surrogate answers town hall questions from Asian-American voters
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/msnbc/48742074? (search for Obama)
Sixty-two percent of them voted for Obama four years ago. But this year, the economy continues to be the biggest issue in the campaign and Asian Americans who own businesses are considering their options.
Democrat Haresh Bhungalia is undecided. “You have one candidate who wants to raise taxes, which I think is appropriate – I think that that’s necessary in order for us to get back on track. And then we’ve got one candidate talking about cutting government spending. I think that you have to do both,” Bhungalia said.
Immigration reform is the other top issue Bhungalia cares about. It’s been delayed. Like him, three out of four Asian-American adults were born in a foreign country and are watching the debate on immigration.
The outreach to voters like Bhungalia has not matched the potential payoff. A recent study by APIAVote in association with Lake Research Partners found 23 percent of Asian-Americans had been contacted by the Democratic Party, and 17 percent by the Republican Party, in the last two years. Some community leaders believe both Obama and Romney could do more. Mee Moua of the Asian American Center for Advancing Justice in Washington, D.C. says Asian-Americans need to be considered.
“As we head toward election day, candidates and political parties will step up their voter engagement efforts,” said Moua. “Those who want to succeed will recognize the importance of the Asian-American voter. Those who ignore us, do so at their own peril.”
At APIAVote’s Presidential Town Hall in Fairfax, Va., in July, neither candidate showed up, sending videos and surrogates instead. The Romney campaign had bumper stickers in several different Asian languages, and both Obama and Romney have Asian-American outreach information on their campaign websites.
Donation RatesA third consideration:
Asian-Americans and Pacific Islanders are not afraid to use their economic muscle. (Despite being half to a third the size, the group’s combined consumer and business spending power of almost $1.2 trillion equals African-Americans and just trails Latinos.) They equaled whites for the highest rate of donation to political campaigns in the last election: 13 percent. This was higher than African-Americans (8 percent) and Latino-Americans (5 percent). As the economy faltered, Asian-Americans so far this cycle have donated at 11 percent.
These characteristics might be attractive to candidates, but there are challenges. This group is complex: representing 49 different countries of origin and more than 100 languages. And the community leaders don’t always coordinate well given their varied backgrounds and histories.
Video: Romney surrogate answers town hall questions from Asian-American voters
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/msnbc/48742074? (search for Romney)
Joe Watkins, who was an aide to President George H.W. Bush, says there is one common denominator: “Asian-Americans like everyone else just want to be considered Americans, and when candidates reach out to them as such as American voters, I think they’re thrilled by that.”
After the landmark 2008 election, enthusiasm has ebbed. Voter ID and registration law battles across the country have cast concerns. And in places like Florida, early registration levels are less than half what they were four years ago. With such serious questions about turnout, Asian-American and Pacific Islanders could be 2012’s ultimate swing vote.
OPINION:The Impulsive Mrs. Mua Sochua Can Be Perceived to Be Rude To the US President
Cambodian politicians who wish to communicate and to deal with the US government must understand the US politics and the US Foreign policies to a certain degree.
First, sending a “personal” letter to the US President just five weeks before the “always tough presidential election” in the US is wrong timing. The Cambodian parliamentary election is ten months away, on July 28 2013. What’s a rush to cause the Cambodian?
Opposition politician to disturb the US President who is on the last leg of his campaign for re-election. It is a totally abominable miscalculation when Mrs. Mua Sochu intended to use the Cambodian-American citizens to put pressure on President Obama who needs all the votes he can get from all American registered voters.
Second, Mrs. Mua Sochu didn’t make her homework properly. She should know that the majority of Cambodian- Americans in the US are registered and hard core republican voters.
Why? Because one of the Democratic Party’s policies is to create jobs and make the people living “on welfare” going to work and earn the living. Many first-generation of Cambodian- Americans do not like that. For many valid reasons, they wanted to stay on welfare. This is absolutely not the case of the second-generation Cambodian-Americans. However the Republican Party uses the welfare-program to attack the democrats, saying that it is a “democrat program” to make the people lazy and do not want to go to work. That is just a small “corner” of the US politics.
Third, what Mrs. Mua Sochu has done was to rouse Cambodian-Americans to utilize the “power” of the vote to pressure President Obama, on the basis of the report of Mr. Surya Sabedi who, despite his praise of the National Election Committee (NEC) and the Provincial Election Committee (PEC) for good jobs done during the June 2012 Commune Election (ref. paragraph 44 of his report presented in July, as also referred to by Mrs. Mua Sochu) and surprisingly following some kind of obscure logic, he ended up asking for reforms of NEC and PEC. In this matter, Mr. Surya Subedi is no different than a bad boy who wanted to destroy a good working toy and Mrs. Mua Sochua appreciates bad boy behavior.
Fourth, needless to speak on behalf of the US, but speculating on the reactions of the US falls within “the freedom of speech,” the American way, when talking about Mrs. Mua Sochu’s letter: “We call on you to cancel this trip unless you receive binding assurances of electoral reform in line with the U.N. recommendations,” the tone and the expression are a little bit rude and arrogant and will not be well received. Another point to be made is that the American people would not appreciate their government taking action that is being viewed as the initiative of the U.N.
Fifth, the relevancy of the “UN” in Cambodia, 20 years after UNTAC administration of Cambodia for a very limited time has been put into question by many. Why the U.N. is still treating Cambodia as a child? At least U.N. should speak with the International Republican Institute (IRI) and get current information about the political trends in Cambodia, as the IRI has conducted survey every year. There are still many ways that the U.N. could be helpful to Cambodia.
Prof. Pen Ngoeun
Advisor, University of Puthisastra, Phnom Penh, Cambodia
pngoeun@puthisastra.edu.kh
28 September 2012
President Obama, Four more years?…wealthy Bush broke US bank, Poor Obama pinches penny
Economist, 1 September 2012
A president who has had a patchy first term now needs to make a convincing case for a second one.
In Denver four years ago, an inspiring presidential candidate announced that he would change America. Barack Obama promised to put aside partisan differences, restore hope to those without jobs, begin the process of saving the planet from global warming, and make America proud again.
Next week Mr Obama will address his fellow Democrats at their convention in Charlotte, North Carolina, with little of this hopeful agenda completed. Three million more Americans are out of work than four years ago, and the national debt is $5 trillion bigger. Partisan gridlock is worse than ever: health-care reform, a genuinely impressive achievement, has become a prime source of rancour. Businessfolk are split over whether he dislikes capitalism or is merely indifferent to it. His global-warming efforts have evaporated. America’s standing in the Muslim world is no higher than it was under George W. Bush, Iran remains dangerous, Russia and China are still prickly despite the promised resets, and the prison in Guantánamo remains open.
So far, so underwhelming
The defence of Mr Obama’s record comes down to one phrase: it could all have been a lot worse. He inherited an economy in free fall thanks to the banking crash and the fiscal profligacy that occurred under his predecessor; his stimulus measures and his saving of Detroit carmakers helped avert a second Depression; overall, he deserves decent if patchy grades on the economy (see article). Confronted by obstructionist Republicans in Congress, he did well to get anything through at all. Abroad he has sensibly recalibrated American foreign policy. And there have been individual triumphs, such as the killing of Osama bin Laden.
But this does not amount to a compelling case for re-election, in the view of either this paper or the American people. More than 60% of voters believe their country to be on the wrong track. Mr Obama’s approval ratings are well under 50%; almost two-thirds of voters are unimpressed (however harshly) by how he has handled the economy. Worn down by the difficulties of office, the great reformer has become a cautious man, surrounded by an insular group of advisers. The candidate who promised bold solutions to the country’s gravest problems turned into the president who failed even to back his own commission’s plans for cutting the deficit.
Were he facing a more charismatic candidate than Mitt Romney or a less extremist bunch than the Republicans, Mr Obama would already be staring at defeat. The fact that the president has had to “go negative” so early and so relentlessly shows how badly he needs the election to be about Mr Romney’s weaknesses rather than his own achievements. A man who four years ago epitomised hope will arrive in Charlotte with a campaign that thus far has been about invoking fear.
Mr Obama must offer more than this, for three reasons. First, a negative campaign may well fail. The Republicans are a rum bunch with a wooden leader; but Mr Romney’s record as an executive and governor is impressive, and his running-mate, Paul Ryan, is a fount of bold ideas. Mr Obama’s strategy of blaming everything on Republican obstructionism will strike many voters as demeaning.
Second, even if negative campaigning works, a re-elected Mr Obama will need the strength that comes from a convincing agenda. Otherwise the Republicans, who will control the House and possibly the Senate too, will make mincemeat of him. And, third, it is not just Mr Obama who needs a plan. America does too. Its finances and its government require a drastic overhaul. Surely this charismatic, thoughtful man has more ideas about what must be done than he has so far let on?
A tempting option will be to galvanise his party base, with talk of more health reform and threats of higher taxes on business and the rich. Rather than redesigning government, he could suck up to the public-sector unions by promising that jobs will not be cut. Rather than cutting entitlement programmes, he could reassure the elderly that America can actually afford them.
Such an approach would fit the pattern of too much of his presidency, and his campaign so far; but it would do America a disservice, and it might not help Mr Obama either. His victory in 2008 relied on reaching beyond the groups that traditionally vote Democratic and bringing in young voters and wealthier whites. Many of them are centrists who are suspicious of Mr Romney, but since they have to foot the bill for government profligacy, they will not vote for a president who promises more of the same.
Reach for the radical centre
Appealing to the centre is not easy for Mr Obama. His allies on the left are powerful and, in a country so polarised, the middle ground can be a dangerous place. But there are plenty of things that many on both sides of the political aisle could agree on, including tax and immigration reform, investment in schools and aid to businesses that are creating jobs. Crucially, Mr Obama could explain how he intends to cut the still-soaring debt without pretending that taxing only the rich will help in any meaningful way.
Mr Obama has a strong belief in social justice. It drove his health-care reform. But he needs to distinguish between a creditable desire to help the weak and a dangerous preference for the public over the private sector. The jobs that poor Americans need will be created by companies. Smothering firms in red tape is not the way to help them; Mr Obama should vow to stop adding to it, and to start cutting some of it away. The party faithful in Charlotte might not like centrist ideas much. But they would appeal to the voters Mr Obama needs to win over and, should he be re-elected, they will strengthen him in his dealings with the Republicans in Congress.
Incumbents tend to win presidential elections, but second-term presidents tend to be disappointing. Mr Obama’s first-term record suggests that, if re-elected, he could be the lamest of ducks. That’s why he needs a good answer to the big question: just what would you do with another four years?
Op-ed: Mobilize Youths
By Kham Logue, 29 August 2012
‘The Group good supersedes the Individual good’, is an old adage but it still works timelessly like an old charm. The idealists, and especially the youths are fond of it.
In Cambodia politic, often youths were ignored but Hun Sen politicized them in greater good in volunteerism for the benefits of the society after his border demarcation address.
On 9 August 2012 Hun Sen’s made a grand entrance and grand standing in his 5 hour border demarcation and swapping land with Yuon clarification address before the National Assembly. That had risen both in positive and negative feedbacks. The opposition seemed to think Hun Sen was unable to escape his treacherous acts.
Other hands his officials honored him with extraordinaire title. Before the youths eyes, Hun Sen made a historical event that none of the past regime leaders had achieved. This comparable to how one sees the half empty or half full glass example. At the same time, it appeared Hun Sen won approval on TKO over the opposition political jabs.
Because of the land grab and anarchy under his watch, people were upset and ready to take matter to streets in large scales. Almost coincidently his border demarcation clarification address turned out to be a golden opportunity for him to appeal for help from thousands of secondary schools student.
Donning in military garbs climbing on military organized trucks after the send off ceremonies, the youths went off to survey land and help CPP run government to grant ownership and titles to the rural folks.
Politically this is big deal to kids who have never been recognized officially as the national heroic volunteers. Hun Sen made them felt important and as the problems solvers. They esteem in their newly vested power because the government needed them. Each feels self-worth in such a dramatized skit. So when Hun Sen call upon them to volunteer in public services, they responded in thousands.
This mobilization is supposed to whitewash the K-5 tragedy in grand positive scale because at time the rich KPRP cadres can afford to pay stipends and supplied food to the so called conscripted volunteers. To top that the Government owned media and broadcasting systems blasting such propaganda to the countryside listeners,
“Our leader Hun Sen cares and sends helps to secure your land title and ownership for you, the poor land owner.”
Other hand, the youths failed the calls from the opposition in vilifying Hun Sen treacherous acts.
This may be a fluke in projecting political perception. But really the opposition needed youths more than anything else in time. Although all know youths do not have money, but they do have time, effort and energy.
In grass root politics, not so much about money, but energy, effort and time are vitally important in political campaign.
Take President Obama campaign success in 2008 for example. Because he is effective in communicating his agendas with the youths, millions rallied to his support in making small pledges in cash but spent countless days and hours to bring message to the communities and voters door steps. That was the youths who helped making him the first elected minority to be the President in US 226 year history.
For the opposition, youth is the missing piece of the puzzle that needed prompt attention in fixing it.
Prior to his collusion with Hanoi in 1984 to eliminate the olds, Hun Sen was the designated head of Yuon spearheaded Youth Movement. Connivingly he used his ploy ’submit to resist, divide to conquer’ to grab power all the way to the top. All of his adversaries, the Sihanoukians and Khmer Rouge proletarians were spun off to pieces in merely lesser than 10 years after 1993 election.
For the last two decades, Hun Sen continued to neutralize critics, press and opponents within his party rank. Not only that he keenly played off the oppositions within his party against one another but kept them at bay before each CPP congress assembly.
Although Chea Sim is the party Chair but it is Hun Sen who has control of power switches. He pulls strings on rivals. Subsequently sooner than later all rivals turned to be his accomplices and do-boys for life.
In the other political end, the opposing parties prematurely celebrated the Conjoined heads party birth. Before receiving the official certificate, the Conjoined heads party is exhilarated to celebrate and opportune the vacation tour in abroad to solicit donation.
The conjoined heads party should be more cautious with the loudly thunder in case the rain did not occur. In this we fear for it as when the going gets tough, the tough may get sluggish. It’s déjà vu.
In all for a change, we wish the conjoined heads party well and hope it does walk the one walk and talk the one talk from a big town hall to a small village kitchen, from a person to a group and from a house to a community to clarify the why, what, who, whom, where, when and how on its objectives, so voters can share view and vote for.
We all know the old can’t outdo the young but let us not be complacent and lost head in big dream before bed time. To mobilize youth and old alike altogether to step up the games that had never been played in Cambodia political arena before is the opposition’s key to rule.
In this way and is the only way to make Hun Sen a fool out of his prophetic insult; “Opposition storm is only in the bottle,” unbecoming true.
contact author: khmerlogue@gmail.com
