Prime Minister Hun Sen has acted to prevent Cambodia from becoming subservient to Washington, which makes his government a target for regime change.
In August 2017, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Cambodia closed the local office of the National Democratic Institute (NDI). NDI feigns puzzlement as to why the government took that action; so well-meaning are its aims of helping to impose U.S.-style democracy over the world in the interests of global capital that all reasonable people are assumed to stand aghast at such high-handedness.
Others more cynical might suggest that NDI is part of a multitudinous network of world-wide scope, combing state bureaucracies, academics, diplomats, politicians and notables from both capital and labor, united in the aim of extending U.S. hegemony across every part of the world.
NDI states that it is “surprised and saddened” by the ousting of NDI from Cambodia, after working there for 25 years. NDI claims that its programs are “non-partisan,’ and that it has worked with all parties, including the ruling Cambodian People’s Party, to enhancing “democratic processes.” The aim is precisely the same as that of hundreds of others, including U.S. Government-funded organizations such as the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). NDI states that its programs are supported by “the U.S. Agency for International Development,” as if any such U.S. state-backing is a cause for jubilation. It can only mean interference by the USA in the sovereignty and development of the targeted nation in the interests of U.S geopolitics and/or global business.
While there has been much commotion recently about the alleged “interference” by Russia in the U.S. presidential elections because Hillary Clinton, the chosen candidate of the dominant oligarchy, was defeated against all odds by a maverick businessman, albeit such allegations remaining unencumbered by evidence, U.S. interference in internal political processes across the world has for decades become increasingly blatant.
Such interference in undertaken behind the guise of “strengthening democracy,” which means instituting a regime that is pliable to U.S. and oligarchic interests.
Russia does not mark a nation for domination and proceed to set up an entire so-called “civil society” network to bring about “regime change.” That is a U.S. speciality, honed to an exact science. If a state will not succumb to U.S. blandishments of a more subtle type, such as “aid,” advisers, and loans, then the next phase is to instigate internal unrest, to the extent of backing riots and insurrection with bombs, as occurred in Libya and in Serbia.
Russia is well aware of the way she has long been targeted by oligarchic and geopolitical interests mainly from the USA, these interests having been in the process of succeeding under Boris Yeltsin. Russian sovereignty was reclaimed by Putin. Part of the process of maintaining that sovereignty has been Putin’s ouster of NGO’s in 2015, such organizations having come under Russian scrutiny since 2012. The last straw for Russia came when NGOs were found to been funding subversion and turmoil in the Ukraine.
The first to be expelled from Russia was NED. Then George Soros’ Open Society organizations. Others have since included the NDI and the International Republican Institute (the IRI, which is funded by NED, USAID, and the U.S. State Department).
NED’s stated aim is precisely the same as that of NDI and the hundreds of other inter-connected NGOs across the world: “The National Endowment for Democracy (NED) is a private, nonprofit foundation dedicated to the growth and strengthening of democratic institutions around the world.” NED states that it is a “unique organization.”
This is nonsense. Perhaps the extent of their activities and their funding are unique, but their tactics and aims are the same as NDI and many, many others; and, to reiterate, these organizations interconnect across the world.
What is NDI?
If an NGO funded and linked to the Russian state had such a purpose, there would be outrage, with allegations that she was “interfering in the politics of sovereign nations.” However, the U.S. globalists and their state-sponsored NGO network are justified under the guise of bringing democracy to the world, which also often happens to go hand-in-hand with “market-reform” to open national resources up to international oligarchs. Russia’s real “crime” was that the process started under Yeltsin was thwarted under Putin. Where the subversive tactics of NDI, NED, USAID, etc., do not work, a “color revolution” ensues, assisted if required by bombers, as in Serbia, Iraq, Libya and presently Syria.
It should be kept in mind that the “privatization” of Serbia’s economy was a primary war-demand of NATO. The secret annexe B of the Rambouillet accord required a free-market economy, and the privatization of all government-owned assets.
The chairman of the board of NDI is Madeleine Albright, secretary of state under Clinton, a leading zealot for the destruction of Serbian sovereignty by genocidal warfare. She is chair of Albright Capital Management LLC, “an investment advisory firm focused on emerging markets.” As one might expect she is on the board of directors of the globalist think tank, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). She is co-chair of the Albright Stonebridge Group, “a global strategy firm,” and chair of the advisory council for The Hague Institute for Global Justice. She was on the National Security Council under President Jimmy Carter, having been hired by leading globalist architect Zbigniew Brzezinski.
The “philosophy” of Albright Capital Management happens to coincide with the geopolitical interests of the USA and the imposition of privatization on what is called “emerging economies,” stating: “We believe companies that solve real social/economic problems improve human living conditions. As such, they are naturally aligned with host governments, minimizing a source of political risk frequently encountered by emerging market private investors.”
This statement of purpose seems a blatant admission that certain financial interests work in tandem with states (that is, the USA and NATO) to change the structure of a nation until it is open to predatory international capital. As might be discerned from the above statement, this is done with the pretext of “improving human living conditions;” encapsulated in the war-slogans of “democracy” and “human rights” when a reticent nation is targeted for “regime change.”
NDI’s sponsors include Amazon, Google Inc., Chevron, Soros’ ever-present Open Society Foundation, Coca-Cola, Visa Inc., NED, USAID, the U.S. State Department, et al.
With sponsorship from USAID, the State Department, and the state-funded NED, how can the actions of NDI be regarded as anything other than serving the interests of U.S. geopolitical strategy and generally concomitant investment interests?
NED in Cambodia
The National Endowment for Democracy is “partnered” with NDI.
The chairman of CIPE is Gregori Lebedev, who is also a senior adviser to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and senior adviser to the Robertson Foundation for Government, “a private family fund that supports talented men and women wishing to pursue governmental careers in national security and international affairs.” He has had a long career in government service including with Henry Kissinger.
The Robertson Foundation for Government has its origins in the Cold War. It taps the most talented students for government service. Conspicuous on the board of CIPE are a number of officers of the Heritage Foundation. Given that NED was founded by CIO-affiliated socialists and ex-Trotskyites, it is interesting how NED’s CIPE affiliate connects with a foundation whose purpose is to promote “Free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense.”
However, as paradoxical as it might seem, it has been common for socialists to be aligned with international capital and U.S. geopolitical interests. Enough is now known about the widespread conversions of Trotskyites and other Marxists to U.S. globalism from the Cold War era. Dr. Igor Panarin, senior Russian state adviser, observed of this phenomenon that, “Trotskyite ideas were victorious at the end of the 20th century in the USA, vividly manifested in the ideology of the liberal globalism of the contemporary American political elite.”
This describes the common ideology around which both the “left” and the “right” wings of American global hegemony converge: “liberal globalism.” This is the ideology to which every nation must be committed lest destruction follows.
NDI in Cambodia
NDI states in its program on Cambodia that is provided “technical assistance” to parties and civic organizations on electioneering. NDI states that since 1992 it has aided “democratic activists” in Cambodia, working through parties and civic groups. How is this not interfering in a nation’s political processes, including giving assistance to sundry opposition groups and individuals?
It is “interference in Cambodia’s political processes” that is precisely the reason the Government told NDI to leave. Like Russia, Cambodia’s foreign affairs ministry also stated that it was looking into expelling other U.S. state funded NGOs. Prime Minister Hun Sen accused the NGOs of attempting to overthrow the government.
Cambodia’s experience with U.S.-imposed politics is no better than that imposed on other states by NATO bombs, NGOs, “regime changes,” and “color revolutions,” throughout the world.
Hun Sens’ remark about the USA assisting the rise of the Khmer Rouge is accurate. The USA backed Pol Pot against Vietnam, recognized the Pol Pot regime, with Zbigniew Brzezinski, Madeleine Albright’s mentor, stating that while the USA could not be seen to be overtly supporting Pol Pot, China could, and he encouraged them to do so, using Thailand as a conduit to funnel arms. Veteran journalist Peter Jennings stated during the 1990 ABC TV production, “From the killing fields” that many arms were also being supplied directly by the USA to the Khmer Rouge. Strobe Talbott, a U.S. foreign policy analyst with the Brookings Institute, and a globalist who optimistically predicted the demise of the nation-state, explained:
The consequences of U.S. intervention in Kampuchea have made a mockery of American intentions before, and they could do so again. The emergence of Pol Pot’s ultra-Maoist Khmer Rouge was partly a result of misguided American policy 20 years ago. Richard Nixon’s secret bombing of Kampuchea in 1969 and the CIA’s support for a coup by a feckless military junta the following Spring contributed to the chaos in which the Khmer Rouge thrived. In 1975 Pol Pot seized power and unleashed a holocaust.
Four years and nearly 2 million deaths later, the Vietnamese invaded and installed their own regime in Phnom Penh. To much of the world, Hanoi’s aggression against a neighbor mattered more than Pol Pot’s atrocities against his own people. After all, Viet Nam was expanding not only its own influence but also that of its backer, the Soviet Union.
The Khmer Rouge, whom the arch-moralist Jimmy Carter called ‘the worst violators of human rights in the world,’ became an instrument to drive the Vietnamese out of Kampuchea.
‘I encouraged the Chinese to support Pol Pot,’ recalled Zbigniew Brzezinski, Carter’s National Security Adviser, in 1981. ‘Pol Pot was an abomination. We could never support him. But China could.’ The U.S., he added, ‘winked semipublicly’ as the Chinese funneled arms to the Khmer Rouge, using Thailand as a conduit.
Throughout the Reagan Administration, the Khmer Rouge have been part of a loose and unholy alliance of anti-Vietnamese guerrilla groups that the U.S. helped create. Pol Pot has lurked in the shadows of the Reagan Doctrine.
Why is Cambodia being targeted for “regime change”? When a “regime change” is decided, the process of demonizing the target is initiated, typically with accusations of “human rights” abuses” and lack of “democracy.” Pol Pot was acceptable but Hun Sen is not.
Currently there is controversy over Cambodia’s wartime debt to the USA, which is to say, not to the American government per se much less the American people, but to the banking interests that run the financial system.
During the Vietnam War the U.S. lent hundreds of millions of dollars to Cambodia to help refugees, at the time it was carpet-bombing the countryside. The debt has now reached half a billion dollars.
Hun Sen replies that it is the USA that owes a debt for the devastation that was caused. The New York Times reported on this issue that, “Between 1965 and 1973, as it fought what would prove to be a losing war in neighboring Vietnam, the United States dropped an estimated 500,000 tons of explosives on eastern Cambodia. The bombardment started covertly as part of an effort to cut off supply routes used by the Viet Cong.”
Interest and late fees have been added. Here might be the crux of the matter:
The State Department says the international financial system will fall apart if governments cannot be held responsible for their predecessors’ debts… Mr. Hun Sen, who has been in power since the 1980s, has long resented the United States for the bombing and for its support of the Khmer Rouge at the United Nations after a Vietnamese invasion ousted it in 1979, said Sebastian Strangio, the author of ‘Hun Sen’s Cambodia.’
Any one of these factors would be sufficient to place Hun Sen on Washington and Wall Street black lists.
The Council on Foreign Relations has taken up the cudgel with the perennial red-herring of Hun Sen being an “authoritarian.” Since when has an “authoritarian” government been objectionable to the USA, unless it is one of a patriotic disposition that will not kowtow U.S. interests? Can we soon expect an escalation of media criticism from CNN, New York Times, Washington Post, The Guardian, etc. against Hun Sen as the world’s latest number one violator of “human rights”? Will we see supposedly “spontaneous” demonstrations by well-organized, twittering and tweeting, NDI-indoctrinated youths embarking on another “color revolution” in the name of “democracy” and for the benefit of plutocracy?
 “Statement on decision of Cambodian government to shut down NDI’s office in Cambodia,” August 23, 2017, https://www.ndi.org/publications/statement-cambodian-government%E2%80%99s-decision-shut-down-ndis-office-cambodia
 “National Endowment for Democracy is first ‘undesirable’ banned in Russia,” The Guardian, July 28, 2015, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jul/28/national-endowment-for-democracy-banned-russia
 “Kosovo Government takes control of Trepca mine, Serbs protest, Reuters, October 8, 2016, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-kosovo-mines/kosovo-government-takes-control-of-trepca-mine-serbs-protest-idUSKCN12808T
 Rambouillet accord, Annexe B, Article I (1), and Article II (1).
 “There’s a special place in hell for Madeleine Albright,” Serbia Today, https://inserbia.info/today/2016/02/theres-a-special-place-in-hell-for-madeleine-albright/
 “Background on CIPE,” http://www.cipe.org/publications/detail/background-cipe
 Ivor Panarin, “From united Russia to Eurasian Rus,” Cyril and Methodius, January 12, 2006.
 Electoral Reform in Cambodia, NDI, August 2009, page 1, https://www.ndi.org/sites/default/files/Electoral_Reform_in_Cambodia_Program_Consultation_Report_APPENDIX.pdf
 “Cambodia calls US democracy ‘bloody and brutal’ as charity row escalates,” The Guardian, August 24, 2017, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/aug/24/cambodia-calls-us-democracy-bloody-and-brutal-as-charity-row-escalates
 James r. Flynn, Beyond Patriotism: From Truman to Obama (Exeter: Imprint Academic, 2011), “America and Pol Pot.”
 Strobe Talbott, “America Abroad,” Time, June 24, 2001, http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,160112,00.html
 Strobe Talbott, “America Abroad: Defanging the Beast”, Time, 6 February 1989. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,956883-1,00.html
 Julia Wallace, “Cambodia appeals to Trump to forgive War-Era Debt,” New York Times, April 2, 2017, https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/02/world/asia/cambodia-trump-debt.html?_r=0
 Joshua Kurlantzick, “Some reasons for new tensions over Cambodia’s debt,” Council on Foreign Relations, April 5, 2017, https://www.cfr.org/blog/some-reasons-new-tensions-over-cambodias-debt