Right Web

Tracking militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy

When Democracy Promotion Turns Partisan

A not-so-fine line exists between foreign support to foster democratization and the direct funding of a single political party. The first type of...

A not-so-fine line exists between foreign support to foster democratization and the direct funding of a single political party. The first type of democracy promotion helps create a level playing field for governing and opposition parties alike; the second undermines democracy by interfering in the process from afar. In Cambodia, the International Republican Institute (IRI) has crossed far over this line in its support of the Sam Rainsy Party (SRP).

Cambodia has three major political parties. In addition to the opposition Sam Rainsy Party, the other leading political parties are the post-communist Cambodian People’s Party (CPP), led by Hun Sen, and the royalist Funcinpec party under Prince Ranariddh. These latter two have uneasily shared power for the past decade. Meanwhile, the nationalistic SRP, named after its leader, has risen in the polls. The most recent elections, in July 2003, saw the CPP win a majority of seats in the National Assembly but less than the two-thirds required by Cambodia’s constitution to form a government. Funcinpec narrowly outpolled the SRP for second place.

On the whole, U.S. policy supported the electoral process in a neutral fashion. The U.S. Embassy in Phnom Penh funded long-term election observers in many Cambodian provinces. Several other U.S. government-funded agencies, including the Asia Foundation and the National Democratic Institute (NDI), sponsored nonpartisan debates, distributed voter guides, and funded domestic election monitors. IRI, by contrast, channeled its funding and technical assistance to the SRP, which it refers to as “the democratic opposition.” Rainsy has repeatedly been guest of honor at IRI events in Washington, such as an April 2003 banquet co-hosted by the Heritage Foundation.

In October 2002, IRI channeled a $450,000 grant from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) to start the Cambodian Center for Human Rights (CCHR), a nongovernmental organization led by a former Funcinpec senator, Kem Sokha. Cambodia already has a number of respected, neutral human rights organizations, but CCHR operates in “partnership” with IRI and provides reporting of rights abuses that are of particular political utility. When CCHR allegations of pre-election violence differed from that of other organizations, for instance, IRI routinely quoted CCHR’s reports. Conveniently, the CCHR expatriate adviser is married to the IRI country director.

IRI’s support for Sam Rainsy is accompanied by its visceral hatred of Prime Minister Hun Sen. This animosity dates back to a 1997 grenade attack on an SRP rally in which 13 Cambodians were killed and an IRI operative, Ron Abney, was injured. Cambodia’s lackadaisical and corrupt judicial system never arrested any suspects, but IRI and Abney say they are “confident” that Hun Sen was himself responsible. IRI statements repeatedly call for further investigation of the attack while leaving no doubt about whom they believe is to blame.

IRI’s vendetta is supported by key Republican leaders in the U.S. Congress, most vehemently by Mitch McConnell (R-KY), who is majority whip and chair of the Senate’s Foreign Operations Subcommittee. McConnell’s chief of staff, Paul Grove, is a former IRI representative in Cambodia and Asia director at IRI in Washington. In one in an extraordinary series of op-ed articles published in 2002 and early 2003, McConnell and Grove wrote, “It is in America’s interests that the opposition win … it is time for the State Department to take sides.” This was followed by calls for “regime change” and attempts to link the “paranoid evil dictator” Hun Sen to the war on terrorism.

In an Asian Wall Street Journal op-ed ( May 20, 2003), McConnell argued directly that “technical and material assistance should be provided to opposition political parties,” of which there is only one of any serious stature. In a May 22, 2003 letter to Senator McConnell, the Sam Rainsy Party-USA stated: “We understand that the political clout your office can bring to bear on the ruling party in times of crisis is paramount to our success. For the partnership forged between SRP and your office, it will play a pivotal role in safeguarding the livelihood of our party.”

On June 26, Sen. McConnell and two colleagues introduced the “Cambodia Democracy and Accountability Act” (S. 1365), which provides for resuming full foreign assistance to Cambodia, provided that elections are “free and fair”–and “that Prime Minister Hun Sen is no longer in power.” In effect, McConnell proposed using $21.5 million of U.S. government aid to reward, if not to buy, a certain election result. The bill was relegated to committee and never acted on. However, the 2004 Consolidated Appropriations Act, (H.R. 2673), contains “up to $4,000,000 … for activities to support democracy [in Cambodia], including assistance for democratic political parties.”

In a July 2003 interview with the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, IRI’s Asia director, Daniel Calingaert said, “We’ve provided some additional assistance to the Sam Rainsy Party because they are at a disadvantage in that they are not in the ruling coalition and don’t have the access to state resources that the other parties have.” Calingaert refused, however, to reveal the exact amount of IRI support for the SRP. On election day in July 2003, SRP activists in rural villages proudly displayed IRI notebooks and T-shirts, leaving no doubt about their funding source.

The IRI election observer delegation was led by Christine Todd Whitman, who had recently stepped down as chief of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). At a post-election press conference, Whitman and IRI’s president, George Fulsom, expressed caution about broad generalizations about the outcome and denied that IRI had partisan favorites. Whitman later admitted that the results were “relatively free of irregularities” with “more open expression of political opinion and lively campaigns.” Nevertheless, they concluded that the elections “did not meet international standards”–a statement that IRI has since used as justification for its partisan political operations in Cambodia and for its condemnations of the Hun Sen government.

Most observers expected that a multiparty coalition similar to the previous one would be formed soon after the election. However, IRI advisers urged both the Sam Rainsy and Funcinpec parties to reject the election results while at the same time calling for Hun Sen’s resignation. The SRP and Funcinpec formed an “Alliance of Democrats” dedicated to removing Hun Sen. On September 10, Sam Rainsy and Prince Norodom Sirivudh (representing Funcinpec) visited Washington and met with Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Mitch McConnell. During the visit, Senator McConnell told the two party chiefs that they could count on “America’s support in ensuring new leadership comes to Cambodia.” Furthermore, McConnell said, “The demand of the Alliance [of Democrats] that Prime Minister Hun Sen step aside is reasonable and realistic,” all the while ignoring the fact that Hun Sen’s party won the election.

Several weeks later, IRI issued its final election assessment, citing “pre-election intimidation and an inequitable political playing field in Cambodia’s failure to meet international standards.” The IRI blamed the entire post-election impasse on the CPP for not acceding to the demand that Hun Sen be removed as prime minister.

IRI’s carefully worded statement assured Sam Rainsy of continued support in blocking the formation of a new government. When an agreement with the Hun Sen government seemed near in November, Rainsy and the Alliance backed out. IRI was reportedly included in Alliance strategy meetings about how to proceed. In late February 2004, IRI hosted Rainsy’s wife, Tioulong Saumura (identified only as “a leading SRP member”), at a luncheon in Washington and arranged for her to meet with senators and the State Department.

In spite of these efforts, the CPP and Funcinpec appear to have reached an understanding in early March to form a new “two-and-a-half party” coalition including several SRP members and with Hun Sen continuing as prime minister. It is reasonable to conclude that without IRI prodding and “technical and material support,” the eight-month political deadlock in Cambodia could have been resolved much sooner. Finally, as the Bush administration increasingly stresses the U.S. commitment to foster a “global democratic revolution,” it is worth considering how the U.S. public would react if a foreign government funded an opposition political party in the United States.

Andrew Wells-Dang is the Indochina representative of the Fund for Reconciliation and Development, an independent nonprofit organization supporting normal political, economic, and cultural relations between the U.S. and Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam, and Cuba. He served as an official observer during the 1998 and 2003 Cambodian elections.

 

For More Information Cambodian Center for Human Rights (IRI-funded):
http://www.cchr-cambodia.org/

Fund for Reconciliation & Development reports on 2003 Cambodian election:
http://www.ffrd.org/indochina/camelection03/index.html

IRI country analysis on Cambodia, pre-election and post-election reports:
http://www.iri.org/countries.asp?id=8392062734

IRI testimony on Cambodia to Congress (June 2003):
http://wwwc.house.gov/international_relations/108/cal0610.htm

Interview with IRI Asia Director Daniel Calingaert:
http://www.abc.net.au/correspondents/content/2003/s910824.htm

In These Times article on IRI in Cambodia (April 2003):
http://www.inthesetimes.com/comments.php?id=141_0_2_0_C

 

 

Citations

Andrew Wells-Dang, "When Democracy Promotion Turns Partisan," IRC Right Web (Somerville, MA: Interhemispheric Resource Center, April 5, 2004).

Share RightWeb

Featured Profiles

Update was slow, but still no lag in the editor window, and footnotes are intact.     This has been updated – Bernard Lewis, who passed away in May 2018, was a renowned British-American historian of Islam and the Middle East. A former British intelligence officer, Foreign Office staffer, and Princeton University professor, Lewis was…


Bernard Lewis was a renowned historian of Islam and the Middle East who stirred controversy with his often chauvinistic attitude towards the Muslim world and his associations with high-profile neoconservatives and foreign policy hawks.


John Bolton, the controversial former U.S. ambassador to the UN and dyed-in the-wool foreign policy hawk, is President Trump’s National Security Adviser McMaster, reflecting a sharp move to the hawkish extreme by the administration.


Michael Joyce, who passed away in 2006, was once described by neoconservative guru Irving Kristol as the “godfather of modern philanthropy.”


Mike Pompeo, the Trump administration’s second secretary of state, is a long time foreign policy hawk and has led the public charge for an aggressive policy toward Iran.


Max Boot, neoconservative military historian at the Council on Foreign Relations, on Trump and Russia: “At every turn Trump is undercutting the ‘get tough on Russia’ message because he just can’t help himself, he just loves Putin too much.”


Michael Flynn is a former Trump administration National Security Advisor who was forced to step down only weeks on the job because of his controversial contacts with Russian officials before Trump took office.


For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

Trump is not the problem. Think of him instead as a summons to address the real problem, which in a nation ostensibly of, by, and for the people is the collective responsibility of the people themselves. For Americans to shirk that responsibility further will almost surely pave the way for more Trumps — or someone worse — to come.


The United Nations has once again turn into a battleground between the United States and Iran, which are experiencing one of the darkest moments in their bilateral relations.


In many ways, Donald Trump’s bellicosity, his militarism, his hectoring cant about American exceptionalism and national greatness, his bullying of allies—all of it makes him not an opponent of neoconservatism but its apotheosis. Trump is a logical culmination of the Bush era as consolidated by Obama.


For the past few decades the vast majority of private security companies like Blackwater and DynCorp operating internationally have come from a relatively small number of countries: the United States, Great Britain and other European countries, and Russia. But that seeming monopoly is opening up to new players, like DeWe Group, China Security and Protection Group, and Huaxin Zhongan Group. What they all have in common is that they are from China.


The Trump administration’s massive sales of tanks, helicopters, and fighter aircraft are indeed a grim wonder of the modern world and never receive the attention they truly deserve. However, a potentially deadlier aspect of the U.S. weapons trade receives even less attention than the sale of big-ticket items: the export of firearms, ammunition, and related equipment.


Soon after a Saudi-led coalition strike on a bus killed 40 children on August 9, a CENTCOM spokesperson stated to Vox, “We may never know if the munition [used] was one that the U.S. sold to them.”


The West has dominated the post-war narrative with its doctrine of liberal values, arguing that not only were they right in themselves but that economic success itself depended on their application. Two developments have challenged those claims. The first was the West’s own betrayal of its principles: on too many occasions the self interest of the powerful, and disdain for the victims of collateral damage, has showed through. The second dates from more recently: the growth of Chinese capitalism owes nothing to a democratic system of government, let alone liberal values.


RightWeb
share