Montagnard Children near Tuan Giao. Northwest Vietnam |
Montagnards: Victims and Microcosm of Vietnam’s Expansion and Imperialism
Op-Ed by MP
THE major donor countries -
particularly, the US, Japan, Australia and other EU countries should not
ignore the plight of refugees known as ‘Montagnards’, currently, the
subject of repatriation to Vietnam by the Phnom Penh government . On
humanitarian grounds, at least, this group, drawn from one of Vietnam’s
politically persecuted ethnic minorities should be allowed to remain in
Cambodia or to claim asylum in any other third countries of their own
choosing, in accordance with international conventions on refugees. No
human being would consider the prospect of living in exile, away from
their native habitat as an easy choice to make, especially if your state
and government put a premium upon your head or discriminate against you
as a people and an entity, such as the Khmer Krom people or the
Montagnards. The Vietnamese regime had angered their Chinese counterpart
in the 1970s and 1980s by discriminating against ethnic Chinese
residents in Vietnam - a practice they extended to Cambodia through
their client regime of the PRK - prompting waves of exodus of the 'boat
people' of Chinese descend out of Vietnam, particularly, from former
South Vietnam, and this had been one of the factors behind Beijing's
determination to 'teach Hanoi a lesson' in 1979.
For all its tireless propaganda
effort, the Vietnamese state has yet to respect the rights and integrity
of indigenous populations living within their ever expanding
territories. In the wake of the overthrow of the Pol Pot regime, the
centuries-long repressed people of Kampuchea Krom had a chance to
escape this repression by simply crossing over the western border into
Cambodia. Economic poverty was a major contributing factor for this
movement, but the Khmer Krom people have had their farms and livelihoods
imperceptibly but ineluctably seized from their ownership or control
from the moment Vietnamese authorities extended their official
administrative presence across this region of former Cambodian
territories, clearing the way for ethnic Vietnamese farmers to assume
permanent control over the villages and farmlands; a historical trend
that has been perpetuated and replicated to this day to the grief and
misery of the Montagnards and - since the early 1990s or perhaps earlier
- the Khmer farmers along the eastern frontiers.
In relations to the claim made
in apology for Vietnam's criminal and genocidal policy and practices
directed at indigenous populations regarding communist Vietnam
‘allowing’ Buddhist clergy in Kampuchea Krom to come over to Cambodia to
'revive' Khmer Buddhism, it should not be forgotten that the Khmer Krom
clergy (itself very much a victim of the same discriminatory trend) has
not been exempted from political and cultural discrimination by the
Vietnamese state over the same historical period under Vietnamese
suzerainty. Therefore, the clergy's principal motivation for coming to
settle in Cambodia - still within the influence of that same suzerainty –
is, in truth, no different from the social causes motivating or
coercing many of the lay people of Khmer descend of the Mekong Delta to
migrate upstream of the Mekong to the less densely populated land of
their Khmer cousins.
Further, the Buddhist clergy - not unlike all other secular social institutions - has been heavily infiltrated by Communist agents. Beside subjecting the clergy to the dictatorial influence of Hanoi aligned Communists - in - saffron robes like Tep Vong (aptly labelled 'Hochi-Monks' by some), all monks had been required to undergo political indoctrination sessions during the PRK era. The violent suppressing of protesting Khmer Krom monks in Cambodia itself at the hands of the current regime does nothing to support the claim that these monks' actual religious freedom is or has been promoted or respected by the Hanoi regime and its client state in Cambodia today.
Further, the Buddhist clergy - not unlike all other secular social institutions - has been heavily infiltrated by Communist agents. Beside subjecting the clergy to the dictatorial influence of Hanoi aligned Communists - in - saffron robes like Tep Vong (aptly labelled 'Hochi-Monks' by some), all monks had been required to undergo political indoctrination sessions during the PRK era. The violent suppressing of protesting Khmer Krom monks in Cambodia itself at the hands of the current regime does nothing to support the claim that these monks' actual religious freedom is or has been promoted or respected by the Hanoi regime and its client state in Cambodia today.
The question as to whether these
Montagnards are genuine refugees or ought to be repatriated to their place of
origins is an issue that rights groups and UNHCR along with other
responsible bodies outside the state should be allowed to determine
first and foremost, free of undue political interference from the states
concerned. The relevant UN Charter on refugees and displaced persons -
if one is to go by this - would enable one to view such persons in
similar vein to the way prisoners of war (for example) are viewed and
defined, with all the binding implications as to rights and
responsibilities in respect of their well-being and legal entities upon
relevant authorities.
Why is it so hard for the
Cambodian regime to accommodate a handful of Montagnards seeking
sanctuary from persecution when the border between Cambodia and Vietnam
has been open to one-way traffic in favour of illegal Vietnamese
settlers in their hundreds of thousands, if not, perhaps, millions since
1979? Whereas Cambodian authorities are prepared to allocate hectares
of arable land to Vietnamese fishermen and their families to settle in -
not to mention the thousands of square kilometres of mineral, timber -
rich swathes of land 'leased' to Vietnamese 'companies' - is it too much
to ask that the Montagnards be allowed temporary shelter until such a
time when their safe return to their home land can be assured? Or will
that day ever come at all given Vietnam's relentless pursuit of its
manifest destiny? If China's aggression and enslavement of Vietnam had
once provided the reason for the latter's need for expansion and organic
cohesion in both demography and territory terms, when will this
need/compulsion be finally satisfied so that other peoples and nations
can look forward to a time of peace and stability free from Vietnam's
reactive syndrome, or her inbuilt- rapacity and siege mentality?
Or is this sense of insecurity
vis-a-vis China simply a pretext for Vietnam to steamroll over smaller, vulnerable nations and peoples?
No comments:
Post a Comment