In Cambodia, thirty years after the genocide, perpetrators and victims live together not in a state of collaboration as would be hoped, but one of tolerant cohabitation. Why? The reason is that there is no real incentive for them to work together. Cambodia is one of the most corrupt nations in the world, and collaboration is impossible without a functioning, rational framework that fosters integration, and not simply interaction.
The parts of the narrative are more important than the sum. Genocide is a shared trauma, and on the surface it appears to be so in Cambodia. Or at least that’s how Westerners talk about it. However, dig deeper and it is easier to see the grudges. Not surprising, since the country is less than 20 years out of a protracted civil war that followed one of the darkest human chapters in history, and the blanket pardon offered perpetrators continues to rub salt in painfully fresh wounds.
For example, we visited with a Buddhist monk one evening in rural Thpong District. After just a few minutes, we were unexpectedly joined by a man whom we were informed was a former Khmer Rouge soldier. Seeing him and the monk sit side by side, but not together, in the dark of a late evening on the steps of a rural pagoda, the crux of the problem became clear. Cambodians have compartmentalized their individual histories and stories of suffering. The ex-soldier was there to check us out and make his presence as a local official known. He answered questions, but I sensed no remorse in his story. He had rationalized his involvement with the Khmer Rouge, made easier by the impunity given him years ago. The monk’s long silence while the man spoke told me it was business as usual. This isn’t to place blame on anyone, or to assume that every Cambodian feels the same way. I haven’t walked one step in their shoes. It’s a natural defense mechanism to categorize and box emotional responses, especially over long periods of time, in order to forge ahead. Whether those feelings are processed and dealt with is the difference between collaboration and cohabitation.
Decades of convulsive attempts to rise above a violent past where guilt and shame play central roles have left Cambodians understandably weary and tired, and have left many development professionals scratching their heads. Apathy would be an easy way out of understanding the more complex issues in Cambodia, but it’s not altogether off the mark. Are Cambodians worried that forgiving one another will mean forgetting?
Finally, the remorseless relationship between the government and its people is a pot waiting to boil over, and typifies the divided state Cambodia finds itself in today. Despite many positive changes happening in Cambodia to rebuild through billions in aid and perhaps overly ambitious development goals for a country two steps into a marathon, long-term, peaceful, sustainable development cannot happen until integrative social reconciliation opportunities available to every Cambodian are equally prioritized with maintaining shiny, unrepresentative tourist waterfronts in Phnom Penh.
No comments:
Post a Comment