Khmer Song Generally
Please Read more Detail!
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Monday, October 20, 2008
The History of Love
The History of Love
The History of Love is a novel in the form of a homage to things lost, as well as to unsolved mysteries. The novel within the novel, also named The History of Love is the basis for all these questions.
Leo Gursky is an old locksmith who feels as though he is disappearing. He tries at all costs to draw attention to himself, but he still feels he has a void in his life. Eventually, he goes on a quest to find his long-lost son and the novel that he wrote as a young man, now published in Chile under the name of Zvi Litvinoff. Alma Singer is a teenage girl who is trying to keep her family together after the loss of her father. Named after the heroine of The History of Love, Alma tries to console her widowed mother (who has recently been requested to translate the novel from Spanish) as well as keep her younger brother Bird (who believes he is a lamed vovnik) from becoming a social pariah.
In The History of Love by Nicole Krauss, photography is sometimes presented as proof of existence. However, this idea is troubled when Leo cannot get any photo of himself to develop properly, whereas photos of his cousin taken at the same time develop normally (81-82). It is important to consider how Leo overcomes this difficulty in his own mind: “I took a photograph of him, and as we watched the paper in the developing pan his face appeared…It was me who’d taken the picture, and if it was proof of his existence, it was also proof of my own…Whenever I took it out of my wallet and looked at him, I knew I was really looking at me” (82).
Photography is also used as a substitute for human contact, as a way of knowing others, as in the case when Leo admits that he has studied all known photographs of his son and when wants to yell at the photograph of his dead son, pictured in a newspaper at Starbucks: Isaac! Here I am! Can you hear me? (77).
Photography is a way of knowing the world that we see. Note the distinction between knowing and seeing. This is best illustrated by the blind man who has been to Antarctica and who takes a photo of Charlotte Singer so that, when he recovers his sight, he can know what he has been seeing (39).
Photography is also the conceit of a perfect memory, and of the promise of memorializing change, as in when Leo wishes he could photograph Alma every day of her life, trying to capture her growth and change over time (90). (In fact a man tried to do this, photograph himself every day of his life, and produced a poignant record of it, right up until the moment he died of cancer: full collection here; overview account here).
Photography is also the illusion of clarity, as when Alma refers to vivid memory as a photograph. But faded memories are also photographs, just photographs of other photographs (192).
And yet... to use Leo’s favorite expression, in all of these examples of photography, the novel undermines the authority of photography. Photography is supposed to do those things. The characters want it to do those things, but photography fails. As an act of representation that is supposedly authoritative and complete, never lying, always transparent and self-evident, photography is peculiarly insufficient in this novel.
Please Read more Detail!
The History of Love is a novel in the form of a homage to things lost, as well as to unsolved mysteries. The novel within the novel, also named The History of Love is the basis for all these questions.
Leo Gursky is an old locksmith who feels as though he is disappearing. He tries at all costs to draw attention to himself, but he still feels he has a void in his life. Eventually, he goes on a quest to find his long-lost son and the novel that he wrote as a young man, now published in Chile under the name of Zvi Litvinoff. Alma Singer is a teenage girl who is trying to keep her family together after the loss of her father. Named after the heroine of The History of Love, Alma tries to console her widowed mother (who has recently been requested to translate the novel from Spanish) as well as keep her younger brother Bird (who believes he is a lamed vovnik) from becoming a social pariah.
In The History of Love by Nicole Krauss, photography is sometimes presented as proof of existence. However, this idea is troubled when Leo cannot get any photo of himself to develop properly, whereas photos of his cousin taken at the same time develop normally (81-82). It is important to consider how Leo overcomes this difficulty in his own mind: “I took a photograph of him, and as we watched the paper in the developing pan his face appeared…It was me who’d taken the picture, and if it was proof of his existence, it was also proof of my own…Whenever I took it out of my wallet and looked at him, I knew I was really looking at me” (82).
Photography is also used as a substitute for human contact, as a way of knowing others, as in the case when Leo admits that he has studied all known photographs of his son and when wants to yell at the photograph of his dead son, pictured in a newspaper at Starbucks: Isaac! Here I am! Can you hear me? (77).
Photography is a way of knowing the world that we see. Note the distinction between knowing and seeing. This is best illustrated by the blind man who has been to Antarctica and who takes a photo of Charlotte Singer so that, when he recovers his sight, he can know what he has been seeing (39).
Photography is also the conceit of a perfect memory, and of the promise of memorializing change, as in when Leo wishes he could photograph Alma every day of her life, trying to capture her growth and change over time (90). (In fact a man tried to do this, photograph himself every day of his life, and produced a poignant record of it, right up until the moment he died of cancer: full collection here; overview account here).
Photography is also the illusion of clarity, as when Alma refers to vivid memory as a photograph. But faded memories are also photographs, just photographs of other photographs (192).
And yet... to use Leo’s favorite expression, in all of these examples of photography, the novel undermines the authority of photography. Photography is supposed to do those things. The characters want it to do those things, but photography fails. As an act of representation that is supposedly authoritative and complete, never lying, always transparent and self-evident, photography is peculiarly insufficient in this novel.
Some Notes on the ‘Love’ in The History of Love by Nicole Krauss
The University of Texas Arlington First Year Reading Experience Program, known as the OneBook Program, has selected The History of Love by Nicole Krauss as the book for 2008-2009. As faculty co-chair of OneBook I’ve had a lot of fun assisting in the development of study guides and such materials to help students as they begin reading. (The online resources we’ve gathered are listed here.) In what follows, I present some thoughts on the meanings of love in The History of Love. I have already posted a short essay about the novel on the OneBook Blog titled “Some Thoughts on Photography in The History of Love”, as well as a video of Nicole Krauss, so I hope students at UT Arlington and other web surfers will find those resources useful as conversation starters. (UTA students are also welcome to join our OneBook Facebook page for more useful tips on The History of Love and to network with each other, faculty, librarians and staff who have read the book. Currently, there is an open thread on the facebook onebook group titled “English 1301 Students Ask Your Questions Here”. We’ll do our best to give answers or provide some food for thought at least.)
Some Notes on the ‘Love’ in The History of Love by Nicole Krauss
What does love got to do with it? In the section “Until the Writing Hand Hurts” (119-134) we learn of Leo’s reaction to his uncle’s death. “Suddenly I felt the need to beg God to spare me as long as possible…I was terrified that I or one of my parents were going to die…The fear of death haunted me for a year…I was left with a sadness that couldn’t be rubbed off” (125). But meeting Alma brought that all-permeating sadness to an end. Leo puts a wall around those thoughts of mortality as he loves Alma. “Only after my heart attack, when the stones of the wall that separated me from childhood began to crumble at last, did the fear of death return to me” (129).
It is the power of love that keeps the manuscript of The History of Love alive and brings it into print. In speaking for Leo, whom Zvi believes to be dead, Zvi brings a magical book into the orbit of people’s lives. The book results in the naming of Alma Singer and her subsequent quest to know her origins. The book memorializes Leo Gursky’s name as proof of his existence fades away. It connects Isaac to Charlotte. It becomes a pretext for Bird to do something loving for his sister. The linchpin of all of these possibilities is the fact that Alma’s name remains intact at the center of the book. Without that clue, all might have been forgotten and The History of Love would not have had the impact it had.
Is sentimental love successful in this novel? As in the case of photography, sentimental love is loaded with the promise of meaning and transcendence, but it is continually troubled because Leo loses Alma, Zvi is closed off from Rosa emotionally, Charlotte does not fall in love with another man in spite of Alma’s efforts, and Misha and Alma’s budding love in interrupted.
There are other kinds of love, however, that are successful: Leo’s love of Bruno and of writing; Alma’s love for her mother and absent father which provides her with an impetus to explore her origins and ‘connect’; Bird’s love for Goldstein, who mentors him and helps him come up with strategies for survival.
So what does the title mean? The History of Love is a book within a book, but it is also a phrase that calls up a progression in time, beginning in childhood and culminating in old age and death. The title may be read as referencing the pathways of memory and creation that are driven by one man’s love for one woman.
Please Read more Detail!
Saturday, October 18, 2008
The history of public administration
Public administration can be broadly described as the development, implementation and study of branches of government policy. Public administration is linked to pursuing the public good by enhancing civil society and social justice. Though public administration has historically referred to as government management, it increasingly encompasses non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that are not acting out of self-interest.
Contents
[hide]
* 1 The history of public administration
o 1.1 The pre-generation
o 1.2 The first generation
o 1.3 The second generation
o 1.4 The third generation
o 1.5 The fourth generation
o 1.6 The fifth generation
* 2 Rational choice models of bureaucracy
* 3 New public management (NPM) and its potential successors
* 4 Public administration as an academic discipline
* 5 Notable public administration/bureaucracy scholars
* 6 References
* 7 See also
o 7.1 Societies for public administration
* 8 External links
* 9 Suggested reading
[edit] The history of public administration
The evolution of the theory of Public Administration can be classified into six "generations": one pre-generation and five succeeding generations.
[edit] The pre-generation
The pre-generation includes thinkers such as Plato, Aristotle and Machiavelli. Until the birth of the national state, the emphasis lay principally on the problems of moral and political nature, and on the organization of the public administration. The operation of this administration was a less urgent problem. Machiavelli wrote the book The Prince, which offered a guideline for European rulers. The operation of the administration, and not only the organization, also profited from the attention it received in this book.
From the 16th century, the national state was the reigning model of the administrative organization in Western Europe. These states needed an organization for the implementation of law and order and for setting up a defensive structure. The need for expert civil servants, with knowledge about taxes, statistics, administration and the military organization grew.
In the 18th century the need for administrative expertise grew even further. Therefore King Frederick William I of Prussia established professorates in Cameralism, an economic and social school of thought within 18th century Prussia to reform society, at the universities of Frankfurt an der Oder and University of Halle. The most well known professor of Cameralism was Johann Heinrich Gottlob Justi.
[edit] The first generation
Lorenz von Stein, since 1855 professor in Vienna, is considered the founder of the science of public administration. In the time of Von Stein the science of public administration was considered to be a form of administrative law, but Von Stein thought that opinion was too restrictive.
His opinions were innovative in several respects:
* He considered the science of public administration a melting pot of several disciplines, like sociology, political sciences, administrative law and public finance. In the opinion of Von Stein the science of public administration was an integrating science.
* According to Von Stein the science of public administration was an interaction between theory and practice. He considered the public administration as leading practically, but the theory had to form the base.
* Von Stein thought that the science of public administration should strive to adopt a scientific method.
In the United States Woodrow Wilson was the first to consider the science of public administration. In an 1887 article entitled "The Study of Administration," Wilson wrote "it is the object of administrative study to discover, first, what government can properly and successfully do, and, secondly, how it can do these proper things with the utmost possible efficiency and at the least possible cost either of money or of energy."[1] Wilson was more influential to the science of public administration than Von Stein, primarily due to an article Wilson wrote in 1887 in which he argued in favor of four concepts:
* Separation between politics and public administration.
* Consideration of the government from a commercial perspective.
* Comparative analysis between political and private organizations and political schemes.
* Reaching effective management by training civil servants and assessing their quality.
The separation between politics and the public administration, which Wilson argued, has been the subject of fierce debates for a long time, and the different points of view on this subject differentiate periods in the science of public administration.
[edit] The second generation
The discussion about the separation between politics and the public administration as argued by Wilson continued to play an important role up to 1945.
Luther Gulick and Lyndall Urwick were the founders of the Science of Administration. They integrated the ideas of earlier theorists like Henri Fayol into a comprehensive theory of administration. Gulick and Urwick believed that the thoughts of Fayol offered a systematic treatment of management, which was unique at that time. They believed that this could be applied as well for the management of companies as for administrative sciences. They did not want to separate the two disciplines, but believed a single Science of Administration, which exceeds the borders between the private and the public sector, could exist. Later on the Science of Administration would focus primarily on governmental organizations. The reasoning of the Science of Administration was largely borrowed from the fourteen principles of organization of Fayol.
Gulick and Urwick were the ones who put forth the management process of planning, organizing, staffing, directing, coordinating, reporting, and budgeting (POSDCoRB).
[edit] The third generation
After 1945, the third generation arose which questioned the ideas of Wilson and the second generation.
Initially the distinction between politics and the public administration was strongly relativized by the third generation, but the discussion would continue. Because of the unsuccessful American intervention in Vietnam and the Watergate scandal politics became discredited and in the eighties there was again a plea in favor of bureaucracy, especially in the United States. The public administration had to detach itself from politics.
After Louis Brownlow from the University of Chicago chaired the Hoover Commission on the Reorganization of Government, he founded Public Administration Service on the University of Chicago campus (at 1313 E. 60th Street). From 193 until the late 1970s PAS provided consulting services to governments at all levels: cities counties, states, the federal government and many foreign countries.
[edit] The fourth generation
In the 1980s and early 1990s, the New Public Management model was proposed by David Osborne and Ted Gaebler [2] . This public administration model advocates the use of private sector innovation, resources, and organizational ideas to improve the public sector. This model was advocated by U.S. Vice President Al Gore in the 1990s and adopted by the Clinton Administration. It is now part of the bureaucratic system of government in the United States. Some criticisms of this model is that it emphasizes people as "customers" rather than "citizens" and that customers are placed as an end-product user of government rather than part of the policy making process. This model focuses on a person as a unit of the economy rather than democracy. The model is still widely accepted among all levels of government.
[edit] The fifth generation
In the late 1990s and early 21st century, Janet and Robert Denhardt proposed The New Public Service model [3]. This model of public administration focuses on people being treated as "citizens" rather than "customers". The citizen's primary role is to participate in government and be active throughout the process of implementing policy, instead of the end product of said policies. Whilst this remains feasible at the nation-state level to which the concept of 'citizen' is wedded, the emergence of 'transnational administration' with the growing number of international organizations and 'transnational executive networks' complicates the prospects for citizen engagement.[4]
One example of this is OpenForum.com.au, an Australian non-for-profit eDemocracy project which invites politicians, senior public servants, academics, business people and other key stakeholders to engage in high-level policy debate.
[edit] Rational choice models of bureaucracy
An influential new stream of rational choice analysis in public administration was inaugurated by William Niskanen, whose 1971 'budget-maximizing' model argued that rational bureaucrats will always and everywhere seek to increase their budgets, thereby contributing strongly to state growth. Niskanen went on to serve on the U.S. Council of Economic Advisors under President Reagan, and his model provides a strong underpinning for the worldwide move towards cutbacks of public spending and the introduction of privatization in the 1980s and 1990s. Niskanen's universalist approach was critiqued by a range of pluralist authors who argued that officials' motivations are more public interest-oriented.
The bureau-shaping model (put forward by Patrick Dunleavy) also argues against Niskanen that rational bureaucrats should only maximize the part of their budget that they spend on their own agency's operations or give to contractors or powerful interest groups (that are able to organize a flowback of benefits to senior officials). For instance, rational officials will get no benefit from paying out larger welfare checks to millions of poor people, since the bureaucrats' own utilities are not improved. Consequently we should expect bureaucracies to significantly maximize budgets in areas like police forces and defense, but not in areas like welfare state spending.
[edit] New public management (NPM) and its potential successors
Outside the U.S., critics argue that NPM has failed in the UK and other countries where it has been applied, so that it is now 'dead'. One claimed successor to NPM is digital era governance focusing on themes of reintegrating responsibilities into government, needs-based holism (doing things in joined-up ways) and digitalization (exploiting the transformational capabilities of modern IT and digital storage).
[edit] Public administration as an academic discipline
See also: Master of Public Administration
A Public Administrator can fill many voids. The academic field evolved in the United States from both academic political science and law as a separate study in the 1910s. In Europe, notably England and Germany (Max Weber), it started as a separate scholarly field in the 1890s, but it was first taught in Continental universities in the 1720s. The Federalist Papers several times referred to the importance of good administration, and scholars such as John A. Rohr see a long history behind the constitutional legitimacy of government bureaucracy.
There is minor tradition that holds that the more specific term public management refers to ordinary, routine or typical management concerns, but in the context of achieving public good. Others see public management as a new, economically driven perspective on the operation of government. This latter view is often termed "New Public Management" by its advocates and can be seen as a reform attempt aimed at reemphasizing the professional nature of the field versus its academic, moral or disciplinary characteristics. A few public administration theorists advocate a bright line differentiation of the professional field from related academic disciplines like political science and sociology. But, in general, it remains interdisciplinary in nature.
As a field, public administration can be compared to business administration, and the MPA viewed as similar to an MBA for those wishing to pursue governmental or non-profit careers. An MPA often entails substantial ethical and sociological aspects not usually found in business schools. There are derivative and related degrees that address public affairs, public policy, and the like. Differences often connote program emphases on policy analysis techniques or other topical focuses such as the study of international affairs as opposed to focuses on constitutional issues such as separation of powers, administrative law, problems of governance and power, and participatory democracy.
Public administration theory is the domain where discussions of the meaning and purpose of government, bureaucracy, budgets, governance, and public affairs take place in the field. In recent years, public administration theory has occasionally connoted a heavy orientation toward critical theory and postmodern philosophical notions of government, governance, and power, but many public administration scholars support a classic definition of the term which gives weight to constitutionality, service, bureaucratic forms of organization, and hierarchical government.
Please Read more Detail!
Contents
[hide]
* 1 The history of public administration
o 1.1 The pre-generation
o 1.2 The first generation
o 1.3 The second generation
o 1.4 The third generation
o 1.5 The fourth generation
o 1.6 The fifth generation
* 2 Rational choice models of bureaucracy
* 3 New public management (NPM) and its potential successors
* 4 Public administration as an academic discipline
* 5 Notable public administration/bureaucracy scholars
* 6 References
* 7 See also
o 7.1 Societies for public administration
* 8 External links
* 9 Suggested reading
[edit] The history of public administration
The evolution of the theory of Public Administration can be classified into six "generations": one pre-generation and five succeeding generations.
[edit] The pre-generation
The pre-generation includes thinkers such as Plato, Aristotle and Machiavelli. Until the birth of the national state, the emphasis lay principally on the problems of moral and political nature, and on the organization of the public administration. The operation of this administration was a less urgent problem. Machiavelli wrote the book The Prince, which offered a guideline for European rulers. The operation of the administration, and not only the organization, also profited from the attention it received in this book.
From the 16th century, the national state was the reigning model of the administrative organization in Western Europe. These states needed an organization for the implementation of law and order and for setting up a defensive structure. The need for expert civil servants, with knowledge about taxes, statistics, administration and the military organization grew.
In the 18th century the need for administrative expertise grew even further. Therefore King Frederick William I of Prussia established professorates in Cameralism, an economic and social school of thought within 18th century Prussia to reform society, at the universities of Frankfurt an der Oder and University of Halle. The most well known professor of Cameralism was Johann Heinrich Gottlob Justi.
[edit] The first generation
Lorenz von Stein, since 1855 professor in Vienna, is considered the founder of the science of public administration. In the time of Von Stein the science of public administration was considered to be a form of administrative law, but Von Stein thought that opinion was too restrictive.
His opinions were innovative in several respects:
* He considered the science of public administration a melting pot of several disciplines, like sociology, political sciences, administrative law and public finance. In the opinion of Von Stein the science of public administration was an integrating science.
* According to Von Stein the science of public administration was an interaction between theory and practice. He considered the public administration as leading practically, but the theory had to form the base.
* Von Stein thought that the science of public administration should strive to adopt a scientific method.
In the United States Woodrow Wilson was the first to consider the science of public administration. In an 1887 article entitled "The Study of Administration," Wilson wrote "it is the object of administrative study to discover, first, what government can properly and successfully do, and, secondly, how it can do these proper things with the utmost possible efficiency and at the least possible cost either of money or of energy."[1] Wilson was more influential to the science of public administration than Von Stein, primarily due to an article Wilson wrote in 1887 in which he argued in favor of four concepts:
* Separation between politics and public administration.
* Consideration of the government from a commercial perspective.
* Comparative analysis between political and private organizations and political schemes.
* Reaching effective management by training civil servants and assessing their quality.
The separation between politics and the public administration, which Wilson argued, has been the subject of fierce debates for a long time, and the different points of view on this subject differentiate periods in the science of public administration.
[edit] The second generation
The discussion about the separation between politics and the public administration as argued by Wilson continued to play an important role up to 1945.
Luther Gulick and Lyndall Urwick were the founders of the Science of Administration. They integrated the ideas of earlier theorists like Henri Fayol into a comprehensive theory of administration. Gulick and Urwick believed that the thoughts of Fayol offered a systematic treatment of management, which was unique at that time. They believed that this could be applied as well for the management of companies as for administrative sciences. They did not want to separate the two disciplines, but believed a single Science of Administration, which exceeds the borders between the private and the public sector, could exist. Later on the Science of Administration would focus primarily on governmental organizations. The reasoning of the Science of Administration was largely borrowed from the fourteen principles of organization of Fayol.
Gulick and Urwick were the ones who put forth the management process of planning, organizing, staffing, directing, coordinating, reporting, and budgeting (POSDCoRB).
[edit] The third generation
After 1945, the third generation arose which questioned the ideas of Wilson and the second generation.
Initially the distinction between politics and the public administration was strongly relativized by the third generation, but the discussion would continue. Because of the unsuccessful American intervention in Vietnam and the Watergate scandal politics became discredited and in the eighties there was again a plea in favor of bureaucracy, especially in the United States. The public administration had to detach itself from politics.
After Louis Brownlow from the University of Chicago chaired the Hoover Commission on the Reorganization of Government, he founded Public Administration Service on the University of Chicago campus (at 1313 E. 60th Street). From 193 until the late 1970s PAS provided consulting services to governments at all levels: cities counties, states, the federal government and many foreign countries.
[edit] The fourth generation
In the 1980s and early 1990s, the New Public Management model was proposed by David Osborne and Ted Gaebler [2] . This public administration model advocates the use of private sector innovation, resources, and organizational ideas to improve the public sector. This model was advocated by U.S. Vice President Al Gore in the 1990s and adopted by the Clinton Administration. It is now part of the bureaucratic system of government in the United States. Some criticisms of this model is that it emphasizes people as "customers" rather than "citizens" and that customers are placed as an end-product user of government rather than part of the policy making process. This model focuses on a person as a unit of the economy rather than democracy. The model is still widely accepted among all levels of government.
[edit] The fifth generation
In the late 1990s and early 21st century, Janet and Robert Denhardt proposed The New Public Service model [3]. This model of public administration focuses on people being treated as "citizens" rather than "customers". The citizen's primary role is to participate in government and be active throughout the process of implementing policy, instead of the end product of said policies. Whilst this remains feasible at the nation-state level to which the concept of 'citizen' is wedded, the emergence of 'transnational administration' with the growing number of international organizations and 'transnational executive networks' complicates the prospects for citizen engagement.[4]
One example of this is OpenForum.com.au, an Australian non-for-profit eDemocracy project which invites politicians, senior public servants, academics, business people and other key stakeholders to engage in high-level policy debate.
[edit] Rational choice models of bureaucracy
An influential new stream of rational choice analysis in public administration was inaugurated by William Niskanen, whose 1971 'budget-maximizing' model argued that rational bureaucrats will always and everywhere seek to increase their budgets, thereby contributing strongly to state growth. Niskanen went on to serve on the U.S. Council of Economic Advisors under President Reagan, and his model provides a strong underpinning for the worldwide move towards cutbacks of public spending and the introduction of privatization in the 1980s and 1990s. Niskanen's universalist approach was critiqued by a range of pluralist authors who argued that officials' motivations are more public interest-oriented.
The bureau-shaping model (put forward by Patrick Dunleavy) also argues against Niskanen that rational bureaucrats should only maximize the part of their budget that they spend on their own agency's operations or give to contractors or powerful interest groups (that are able to organize a flowback of benefits to senior officials). For instance, rational officials will get no benefit from paying out larger welfare checks to millions of poor people, since the bureaucrats' own utilities are not improved. Consequently we should expect bureaucracies to significantly maximize budgets in areas like police forces and defense, but not in areas like welfare state spending.
[edit] New public management (NPM) and its potential successors
Outside the U.S., critics argue that NPM has failed in the UK and other countries where it has been applied, so that it is now 'dead'. One claimed successor to NPM is digital era governance focusing on themes of reintegrating responsibilities into government, needs-based holism (doing things in joined-up ways) and digitalization (exploiting the transformational capabilities of modern IT and digital storage).
[edit] Public administration as an academic discipline
See also: Master of Public Administration
A Public Administrator can fill many voids. The academic field evolved in the United States from both academic political science and law as a separate study in the 1910s. In Europe, notably England and Germany (Max Weber), it started as a separate scholarly field in the 1890s, but it was first taught in Continental universities in the 1720s. The Federalist Papers several times referred to the importance of good administration, and scholars such as John A. Rohr see a long history behind the constitutional legitimacy of government bureaucracy.
There is minor tradition that holds that the more specific term public management refers to ordinary, routine or typical management concerns, but in the context of achieving public good. Others see public management as a new, economically driven perspective on the operation of government. This latter view is often termed "New Public Management" by its advocates and can be seen as a reform attempt aimed at reemphasizing the professional nature of the field versus its academic, moral or disciplinary characteristics. A few public administration theorists advocate a bright line differentiation of the professional field from related academic disciplines like political science and sociology. But, in general, it remains interdisciplinary in nature.
As a field, public administration can be compared to business administration, and the MPA viewed as similar to an MBA for those wishing to pursue governmental or non-profit careers. An MPA often entails substantial ethical and sociological aspects not usually found in business schools. There are derivative and related degrees that address public affairs, public policy, and the like. Differences often connote program emphases on policy analysis techniques or other topical focuses such as the study of international affairs as opposed to focuses on constitutional issues such as separation of powers, administrative law, problems of governance and power, and participatory democracy.
Public administration theory is the domain where discussions of the meaning and purpose of government, bureaucracy, budgets, governance, and public affairs take place in the field. In recent years, public administration theory has occasionally connoted a heavy orientation toward critical theory and postmodern philosophical notions of government, governance, and power, but many public administration scholars support a classic definition of the term which gives weight to constitutionality, service, bureaucratic forms of organization, and hierarchical government.
Please Read more Detail!
Communist Party of Kampuchea
Communist Party of Kampuchea
The Communist Party of Kampuchea was a communist party in Cambodia. Its followers were generally known as Khmer Rouge (Red Khmers).
other killer files
The party was founded in 1951, when the Indochinese Communist Party (ICP) was divided into separate Vietnamese, Laotian and Cambodian communist parties. The decision to form a separate Cambodian communist party had been taken at the ICP congress in February the same year. Different sources claim different dates for the exact founding and the first congress of the party. The party congress did not elect a full Central Committee, but instead appointed a 'Party Propagation and Formation Committee'.[1] At the time of its formation, the Cambodian party was called Khmer People's Revolutionary Party. The Indochinese Communist Party had been heavily dominated by Vietnamese, and the KPRP was actively supported by the Vietnamese party during its initial phase of existence. Due to the reliance on Vietnamese support in the joint struggle against French colonial rule, the history of the party would later be rewritten, stating 1960 as the year of foundation of the party.[2]
According to Democratic Kampuchea's version of party history, the Viet Minh's failure to negotiate a political role for the KPRP at the 1954 Geneva Conference represented a betrayal of the Cambodian movement, which still controlled large areas of the countryside and which commanded at least 5,000 armed men. Following the conference, about 1,000 members of the KPRP, including Son Ngoc Minh, made a "Long March" into North Vietnam, where they remained in exile. In late 1954, those who stayed in Cambodia founded a legal political party, the Krom Pracheachon, which participated in the 1955 and the 1958 National Assembly elections. In the September 1955 election, it won about 4% of the vote but did not secure a seat in the legislature. Members of the Pracheachon were subject to constant harassment and to arrests because the party remained outside Sihanouk's Sangkum. Government attacks prevented it from participating in the 1962 election and drove it underground. It is speculated that the decision of Pracheachon to file candidates for the election had not been approved by the WPK.[2] Sihanouk habitually labeled local leftists the Khmer Rouge, a term that later came to signify the party and the state headed by Pol Pot, Ieng Sary, Khieu Samphan, and their associates.
During the mid-1950s, two KPRP factions, the "urban committee" (headed by Tou Samouth), and the "rural committee" (headed by Sieu Heng), emerged. In very general terms, these groups espoused divergent revolutionary lines. The prevalent "urban" line, endorsed by North Vietnam, recognized that Sihanouk, by virtue of his success in winning independence from the French, was a genuine national leader whose neutralism and deep distrust of the United States made him a valuable asset in Hanoi's struggle to "liberate" South Vietnam. Champions of this line hoped that the prince could be persuaded to distance himself from the right wing and to adopt leftist policies. The other line, supported for the most part by rural cadres who were familiar with the harsh realities of the countryside, advocated an immediate struggle to overthrow the "feudalist" Sihanouk. In 1959 Sieu Heng defected to the government and provided the security forces with information that enabled them to destroy as much as 90 % of the party's rural apparatus. Although communist networks in Phnom Penh and in other towns under Tou Samouth's jurisdiction fared better, only a few hundred communists remained active in the country by 1960.
During the 1950s, Khmer students in Paris organized their own communist movement, which had little, if any, connection to the hard-pressed party in their homeland. From their ranks came the men and women who returned home and took command of the party apparatus during the 1960s, led an effective insurgency against Sihanouk and Lon Nol from 1968 until 1975, and established the regime of Democratic Kampuchea.
Pol Pot, who rose to the leadership of the communist movement in the 1960s, was born in 1928 (some sources say in 1925) in Kampong Thum Province, northeast of Phnom Penh. He attended a technical high school in the capital and then went to Paris in 1949 to study radio electronics (other sources say he attended a school for printers and typesetters and also studied civil engineering).
Another member of the Paris student group was Ieng Sary. He was a Chinese-Khmer born in 1930 in South Vietnam. He attended the elite Lycée Sisowath in Phnom Penh before beginning courses in commerce and politics at the Institut d'Etudes Politiques de Paris (more widely known as Sciences Po) in France. Khieu Samphan, considered "one of the most brilliant intellects of his generation," was born in 1931 and specialized in economics and politics during his time in Paris. In talent he was rivaled by Hou Yuon, born in 1930, who studied economics and law. Son Sen, born in 1930, studied education and literature; Hu Nim, born in 1932, studied law.
Most members of the Paris student group came from landowner or civil servant families. Three of the Paris group forged a bond that survived years of revolutionary struggle and intraparty strife, Pol Pot and Ieng Sary married Khieu Ponnary and Khieu Thirith (also known as Ieng Thirith), purportedly relatives of Khieu Samphan. These two well-educated women also played a central role in the regime of Democratic Kampuchea.
At some time between 1949 and 1951, Pol Pot and Ieng Sary joined the French Communist Party. In 1951 the two men went to East Berlin to participate in a youth festival. This experience is considered to have been a turning point in their ideological development. Meeting with Khmers who were fighting with the Viet Minh (and whom they subsequently judged to be too subservient to the Vietnamese), they became convinced that only a tightly disciplined party organization and a readiness for armed struggle could achieve revolution. They transformed the Khmer Students' Association (KSA), to which most of the 200 or so Khmer students in Paris belonged, into an organization for nationalist and leftist ideas. Inside the KSA and its successor organizations was a secret organization known as the Cercle Marxiste. The organization was composed of cells of three to six members with most members knowing nothing about the overall structure of the organization. In 1952 Pol Pot, Hou Yuon, Ieng Sary, and other leftists gained notoriety by sending an open letter to Sihanouk calling him the "strangler of infant democracy." A year later, the French authorities closed down the KSA. In 1956, however, Hou Yuon and Khieu Samphan helped to establish a new group, the Khmer Students' Union. Inside, the group was still run by the Cercle Marxiste.
The doctoral dissertations written by Hou Yuon and Khieu Samphan express basic themes that were later to become the cornerstones of the policy adopted by Democratic Kampuchea. The central role of the peasants in national development was espoused by Hou Yuon in his 1955 thesis, The Cambodian Peasants and Their Prospects for Modernization, which challenged the conventional view that urbanization and industrialization are necessary precursors of development. The major argument in Khieu Samphan's 1959 thesis, Cambodia's Economy and Industrial Development, was that the country had to become self-reliant and end its economic dependency on the developed world. In its general contours, Khieu's work reflected the influence of a branch of the "dependency theory" school, which blamed lack of development in the Third World on the economic domination of the industrialized nations.
After returning to Cambodia in 1953, Pol Pot threw himself into party work. At first he went to join with forces allied to the Viet Minh operating in the rural areas of Kampong Cham Province (Kompong Cham). After the end of the war, he moved to Phnom Penh under Tou Samouth's "urban committee" where he became an important point of contact between above-ground parties of the left and the underground secret communist movement. His comrades, Ieng Sary and Hou Yuon, became teachers at a new private high school, the Lycée Kambuboth, which Hou Yuon helped to establish. Khieu Samphan returned from Paris in 1959, taught as a member of the law faculty of the University of Phnom Penh, and started a left-wing, French-language publication, L'Observateur. The paper soon acquired a reputation in Phnom Penh's small academic circle. The following year, the government closed the paper, and Sihanouk's police publicly humiliated Khieu by beating, undressing and photographing him in public--as Shawcross notes, "not the sort of humiliation that men forgive or forget." Yet the experience did not prevent Khieu from advocating cooperation with Sihanouk in order to promote a united front against United States activities in South Vietnam. As mentioned, Khieu Samphan, Hou Yuon, and Hu Nim were forced to "work through the system" by joining the Sangkum and by accepting posts in the prince's government.
On September 28-September 30, 1960, twenty-one leaders of the KPRP held a secret congress in a vacant room of the Phnom Penh railroad station. It is estimated that 14 delegates represented the 'rural' faction and seven the 'urban' faction.[3] This pivotal event remains shrouded in mystery because its outcome has become an object of contention (and considerable historical rewriting) between pro-Vietnamese and anti-Vietnamese Khmer communist factions. At the meeting the party was renamed as the Workers Party of Kampuchea (WPK). The question of cooperation with, or resistance to, Sihanouk was thoroughly discussed. A new party structure was adopted. For the first time since, a permanent Central Committee was appointed with, Tou Samouth, who advocated a policy of cooperation, as the general secretary of the party. His ally, Nuon Chea (also known as Long Reth), became deputy general secretary; however, Pol Pot and Ieng Sary were named to the Central Committee to occupy the third and the fifth highest positions in the party hierarchy. Another committee member was veteran communist Keo Meas. In Democratic Kampuchea, this meeting would later be projected as the founding date of the party, consciously downplaying the history of the party prior to Pol Pot's ascent to leadership.[2]
On July 20, 1962, Tou Samouth was murdered by the Cambodian government. In February 1963, at the WPK's second congress, Pol Pot was chosen to succeed Tou Samouth as the party's general secretary. Tou's allies, Nuon Chea and Keo Meas, were removed from the Central Committee and replaced by Son Sen and Vorn Vet. From then on, Pol Pot and loyal comrades from his Paris student days controlled the party center, edging out older veterans whom they considered excessively pro-Vietnamese.
In July 1963, Pol Pot and most of the central committee left Phnom Penh to establish an insurgent base in Ratanakiri Province in the northeast. Pol Pot had shortly before been put on a list of thirty-four leftists who were summoned by Sihanouk to join the government and sign statements saying Sihanouk was the only possible leader for the country. Pol Pot and Chou Chet were the only people on the list who escaped. All the others agreed to cooperate with the government and were afterward under 24-hour watch by the police.
In the mid 1960s the U.S. State Department estimated the party membership to be approximately 100.[4]
The region Pol Pot and the others moved to was inhabited by tribal minorities, the Khmer Loeu, whose rough treatment (including resettlement and forced assimilation) at the hands of the central government made them willing recruits for a guerrilla struggle. In 1965, Pol Pot made a visit of several months to North Vietnam and China. He probably received some training in China, which must have enhanced his prestige when he returned to the WPK's liberated areas. Despite friendly relations between Sihanouk and the Chinese, the latter kept Pol Pot's visit a secret from Sihanouk. In September 1966, the party changed its name to the Communist Party of Kampuchea (CPK).[5] The change in the name of the party was a closely guarded secret. Lower ranking members of the party and even the Vietnamese were not told of it and neither was the membership until many years later. The party leadership endorsed armed struggle against the government, then led by Prince Norodom Sihanouk. In 1967, several small-scale attempts at insurgency were made by the CPK but they had little success.
In 1968, the Khmer Rouge launched a national insurgency across Cambodia. Though North Vietnam had not been informed of the decision, its forces provided shelter and weapons to the Khmer Rouge after the insurgency started. The guerrilla forces of the party were baptized as the Revolutionary Army of Kampuchea. Vietnamese support for the insurgency made it impossible for the Cambodian military to effectively counter it.
The political appeal of the Khmer Rouge was increased as a result of the situation created by the removal of Sihanouk as head of state in 1970. Premier Lon Nol, with the support of the National Assembly, deposed Sihanouk. Sihanouk, in exile in Beijing, made an alliance with the party and became the nominal head of a Khmer Rouge-dominated government-in-exile (known by its French acronym, GRUNK) backed by the People's Republic of China. Sihanouk's popular support in rural Cambodia allowed the Khmer Rouge to extend its power and influence to the point that by 1973 it exercised de facto control over the majority of Cambodian territory, although only a minority of its population.
Historians have also cited the U.S. intervention and bombing campaign, spanning from 1965-1973 as a significant factor leading the Cambodian peasantry to increasing support of the Khmer Rouge. Not only were the massive bombings of rural areas considered unjust by vast sections of the local population, the destruction of villages facilitated the collective agrarian reorganization of the peasantry by the CPK.[2]
When the U.S. Congress suspended military aid to the Lon Nol government in 1973, the Khmer Rouge made sweeping gains in the country. On April 17, 1975 the Khmer Rouge captured Phnom Penh.
Please Read more Detail!
The Communist Party of Kampuchea was a communist party in Cambodia. Its followers were generally known as Khmer Rouge (Red Khmers).
other killer files
The party was founded in 1951, when the Indochinese Communist Party (ICP) was divided into separate Vietnamese, Laotian and Cambodian communist parties. The decision to form a separate Cambodian communist party had been taken at the ICP congress in February the same year. Different sources claim different dates for the exact founding and the first congress of the party. The party congress did not elect a full Central Committee, but instead appointed a 'Party Propagation and Formation Committee'.[1] At the time of its formation, the Cambodian party was called Khmer People's Revolutionary Party. The Indochinese Communist Party had been heavily dominated by Vietnamese, and the KPRP was actively supported by the Vietnamese party during its initial phase of existence. Due to the reliance on Vietnamese support in the joint struggle against French colonial rule, the history of the party would later be rewritten, stating 1960 as the year of foundation of the party.[2]
According to Democratic Kampuchea's version of party history, the Viet Minh's failure to negotiate a political role for the KPRP at the 1954 Geneva Conference represented a betrayal of the Cambodian movement, which still controlled large areas of the countryside and which commanded at least 5,000 armed men. Following the conference, about 1,000 members of the KPRP, including Son Ngoc Minh, made a "Long March" into North Vietnam, where they remained in exile. In late 1954, those who stayed in Cambodia founded a legal political party, the Krom Pracheachon, which participated in the 1955 and the 1958 National Assembly elections. In the September 1955 election, it won about 4% of the vote but did not secure a seat in the legislature. Members of the Pracheachon were subject to constant harassment and to arrests because the party remained outside Sihanouk's Sangkum. Government attacks prevented it from participating in the 1962 election and drove it underground. It is speculated that the decision of Pracheachon to file candidates for the election had not been approved by the WPK.[2] Sihanouk habitually labeled local leftists the Khmer Rouge, a term that later came to signify the party and the state headed by Pol Pot, Ieng Sary, Khieu Samphan, and their associates.
During the mid-1950s, two KPRP factions, the "urban committee" (headed by Tou Samouth), and the "rural committee" (headed by Sieu Heng), emerged. In very general terms, these groups espoused divergent revolutionary lines. The prevalent "urban" line, endorsed by North Vietnam, recognized that Sihanouk, by virtue of his success in winning independence from the French, was a genuine national leader whose neutralism and deep distrust of the United States made him a valuable asset in Hanoi's struggle to "liberate" South Vietnam. Champions of this line hoped that the prince could be persuaded to distance himself from the right wing and to adopt leftist policies. The other line, supported for the most part by rural cadres who were familiar with the harsh realities of the countryside, advocated an immediate struggle to overthrow the "feudalist" Sihanouk. In 1959 Sieu Heng defected to the government and provided the security forces with information that enabled them to destroy as much as 90 % of the party's rural apparatus. Although communist networks in Phnom Penh and in other towns under Tou Samouth's jurisdiction fared better, only a few hundred communists remained active in the country by 1960.
During the 1950s, Khmer students in Paris organized their own communist movement, which had little, if any, connection to the hard-pressed party in their homeland. From their ranks came the men and women who returned home and took command of the party apparatus during the 1960s, led an effective insurgency against Sihanouk and Lon Nol from 1968 until 1975, and established the regime of Democratic Kampuchea.
Pol Pot, who rose to the leadership of the communist movement in the 1960s, was born in 1928 (some sources say in 1925) in Kampong Thum Province, northeast of Phnom Penh. He attended a technical high school in the capital and then went to Paris in 1949 to study radio electronics (other sources say he attended a school for printers and typesetters and also studied civil engineering).
Another member of the Paris student group was Ieng Sary. He was a Chinese-Khmer born in 1930 in South Vietnam. He attended the elite Lycée Sisowath in Phnom Penh before beginning courses in commerce and politics at the Institut d'Etudes Politiques de Paris (more widely known as Sciences Po) in France. Khieu Samphan, considered "one of the most brilliant intellects of his generation," was born in 1931 and specialized in economics and politics during his time in Paris. In talent he was rivaled by Hou Yuon, born in 1930, who studied economics and law. Son Sen, born in 1930, studied education and literature; Hu Nim, born in 1932, studied law.
Most members of the Paris student group came from landowner or civil servant families. Three of the Paris group forged a bond that survived years of revolutionary struggle and intraparty strife, Pol Pot and Ieng Sary married Khieu Ponnary and Khieu Thirith (also known as Ieng Thirith), purportedly relatives of Khieu Samphan. These two well-educated women also played a central role in the regime of Democratic Kampuchea.
At some time between 1949 and 1951, Pol Pot and Ieng Sary joined the French Communist Party. In 1951 the two men went to East Berlin to participate in a youth festival. This experience is considered to have been a turning point in their ideological development. Meeting with Khmers who were fighting with the Viet Minh (and whom they subsequently judged to be too subservient to the Vietnamese), they became convinced that only a tightly disciplined party organization and a readiness for armed struggle could achieve revolution. They transformed the Khmer Students' Association (KSA), to which most of the 200 or so Khmer students in Paris belonged, into an organization for nationalist and leftist ideas. Inside the KSA and its successor organizations was a secret organization known as the Cercle Marxiste. The organization was composed of cells of three to six members with most members knowing nothing about the overall structure of the organization. In 1952 Pol Pot, Hou Yuon, Ieng Sary, and other leftists gained notoriety by sending an open letter to Sihanouk calling him the "strangler of infant democracy." A year later, the French authorities closed down the KSA. In 1956, however, Hou Yuon and Khieu Samphan helped to establish a new group, the Khmer Students' Union. Inside, the group was still run by the Cercle Marxiste.
The doctoral dissertations written by Hou Yuon and Khieu Samphan express basic themes that were later to become the cornerstones of the policy adopted by Democratic Kampuchea. The central role of the peasants in national development was espoused by Hou Yuon in his 1955 thesis, The Cambodian Peasants and Their Prospects for Modernization, which challenged the conventional view that urbanization and industrialization are necessary precursors of development. The major argument in Khieu Samphan's 1959 thesis, Cambodia's Economy and Industrial Development, was that the country had to become self-reliant and end its economic dependency on the developed world. In its general contours, Khieu's work reflected the influence of a branch of the "dependency theory" school, which blamed lack of development in the Third World on the economic domination of the industrialized nations.
After returning to Cambodia in 1953, Pol Pot threw himself into party work. At first he went to join with forces allied to the Viet Minh operating in the rural areas of Kampong Cham Province (Kompong Cham). After the end of the war, he moved to Phnom Penh under Tou Samouth's "urban committee" where he became an important point of contact between above-ground parties of the left and the underground secret communist movement. His comrades, Ieng Sary and Hou Yuon, became teachers at a new private high school, the Lycée Kambuboth, which Hou Yuon helped to establish. Khieu Samphan returned from Paris in 1959, taught as a member of the law faculty of the University of Phnom Penh, and started a left-wing, French-language publication, L'Observateur. The paper soon acquired a reputation in Phnom Penh's small academic circle. The following year, the government closed the paper, and Sihanouk's police publicly humiliated Khieu by beating, undressing and photographing him in public--as Shawcross notes, "not the sort of humiliation that men forgive or forget." Yet the experience did not prevent Khieu from advocating cooperation with Sihanouk in order to promote a united front against United States activities in South Vietnam. As mentioned, Khieu Samphan, Hou Yuon, and Hu Nim were forced to "work through the system" by joining the Sangkum and by accepting posts in the prince's government.
On September 28-September 30, 1960, twenty-one leaders of the KPRP held a secret congress in a vacant room of the Phnom Penh railroad station. It is estimated that 14 delegates represented the 'rural' faction and seven the 'urban' faction.[3] This pivotal event remains shrouded in mystery because its outcome has become an object of contention (and considerable historical rewriting) between pro-Vietnamese and anti-Vietnamese Khmer communist factions. At the meeting the party was renamed as the Workers Party of Kampuchea (WPK). The question of cooperation with, or resistance to, Sihanouk was thoroughly discussed. A new party structure was adopted. For the first time since, a permanent Central Committee was appointed with, Tou Samouth, who advocated a policy of cooperation, as the general secretary of the party. His ally, Nuon Chea (also known as Long Reth), became deputy general secretary; however, Pol Pot and Ieng Sary were named to the Central Committee to occupy the third and the fifth highest positions in the party hierarchy. Another committee member was veteran communist Keo Meas. In Democratic Kampuchea, this meeting would later be projected as the founding date of the party, consciously downplaying the history of the party prior to Pol Pot's ascent to leadership.[2]
On July 20, 1962, Tou Samouth was murdered by the Cambodian government. In February 1963, at the WPK's second congress, Pol Pot was chosen to succeed Tou Samouth as the party's general secretary. Tou's allies, Nuon Chea and Keo Meas, were removed from the Central Committee and replaced by Son Sen and Vorn Vet. From then on, Pol Pot and loyal comrades from his Paris student days controlled the party center, edging out older veterans whom they considered excessively pro-Vietnamese.
In July 1963, Pol Pot and most of the central committee left Phnom Penh to establish an insurgent base in Ratanakiri Province in the northeast. Pol Pot had shortly before been put on a list of thirty-four leftists who were summoned by Sihanouk to join the government and sign statements saying Sihanouk was the only possible leader for the country. Pol Pot and Chou Chet were the only people on the list who escaped. All the others agreed to cooperate with the government and were afterward under 24-hour watch by the police.
In the mid 1960s the U.S. State Department estimated the party membership to be approximately 100.[4]
The region Pol Pot and the others moved to was inhabited by tribal minorities, the Khmer Loeu, whose rough treatment (including resettlement and forced assimilation) at the hands of the central government made them willing recruits for a guerrilla struggle. In 1965, Pol Pot made a visit of several months to North Vietnam and China. He probably received some training in China, which must have enhanced his prestige when he returned to the WPK's liberated areas. Despite friendly relations between Sihanouk and the Chinese, the latter kept Pol Pot's visit a secret from Sihanouk. In September 1966, the party changed its name to the Communist Party of Kampuchea (CPK).[5] The change in the name of the party was a closely guarded secret. Lower ranking members of the party and even the Vietnamese were not told of it and neither was the membership until many years later. The party leadership endorsed armed struggle against the government, then led by Prince Norodom Sihanouk. In 1967, several small-scale attempts at insurgency were made by the CPK but they had little success.
In 1968, the Khmer Rouge launched a national insurgency across Cambodia. Though North Vietnam had not been informed of the decision, its forces provided shelter and weapons to the Khmer Rouge after the insurgency started. The guerrilla forces of the party were baptized as the Revolutionary Army of Kampuchea. Vietnamese support for the insurgency made it impossible for the Cambodian military to effectively counter it.
The political appeal of the Khmer Rouge was increased as a result of the situation created by the removal of Sihanouk as head of state in 1970. Premier Lon Nol, with the support of the National Assembly, deposed Sihanouk. Sihanouk, in exile in Beijing, made an alliance with the party and became the nominal head of a Khmer Rouge-dominated government-in-exile (known by its French acronym, GRUNK) backed by the People's Republic of China. Sihanouk's popular support in rural Cambodia allowed the Khmer Rouge to extend its power and influence to the point that by 1973 it exercised de facto control over the majority of Cambodian territory, although only a minority of its population.
Historians have also cited the U.S. intervention and bombing campaign, spanning from 1965-1973 as a significant factor leading the Cambodian peasantry to increasing support of the Khmer Rouge. Not only were the massive bombings of rural areas considered unjust by vast sections of the local population, the destruction of villages facilitated the collective agrarian reorganization of the peasantry by the CPK.[2]
When the U.S. Congress suspended military aid to the Lon Nol government in 1973, the Khmer Rouge made sweeping gains in the country. On April 17, 1975 the Khmer Rouge captured Phnom Penh.
Please Read more Detail!
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Two Cambodians Killed in Border Clashes
At least two Cambodian soldiers were killed and one injured in brief fighting with Thai troops around Preah Vihear temple Wednesday, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said, warning that further violence could lead to "large scale" hostilities between the two countries.
A Thai soldier patrols near Preah Vihear temple in July.
Fighting took place at Viel Intry, or Eagle Field, a patch of land near Preah Vihear temple, as well as at the Keo Sikha Svara pagoda and Phnom Trap, the ministry said in a statement.
The Keo Sikha Svara pagoda has been at the heart of a months-long military standoff that followed the inscription at Cambodia's request of Preah Vihear temple on a Unesco list of World Heritage sites in July.
On Wednesday afternoon, "Thai troops launched heavy armed attacks on the Cambodian troops…in an apparent attempt to force the Cambodian troops out of their present positions inside Cambodian territory," the Foreign Ministry said.
The Cambodian government protested "repeated and very serious armed provocations by Thailand, which could lead to large scale armed hostilities between the two countries" and reserved the right to defend itself, the ministry said.
"In spite of this armed clash between the soldiers on both sides, Cambodia still considers it a clash between soldiers and not a deliberate intent of Thailand," Foreign Minister Hor Namhong told reporters late Wednesday.
No immediate response was available from the Thai government. Both sides said the other fired first, the Associated Press reported Wednesday.
At least six Thais were injured in the fighting, Lt. Col. Phuk Sary, an officer with military Division 12, said late Wednesday.
A Reuters photographer at Preah Vihear temple reported rocket fire from the Thai side Wednesday afternoon.
The foreign ministers for each country failed to reach an agreement on troop withdrawal or border demarcation Monday, following which Prime Minister Hun Sen announced Thai troops were encroaching on a "life-and-death battle zone" at Eagle Field and gave the Thai military one day to pull back.
Cambodian officials said Tuesday the Thai soldiers had withdrawn from Eagle Field, but Thai officials said they would keep soldiers nearby and were not withdrawing troops.
The Cambodian Foreign Ministry said Wednesday Thailand had "increased troops at the border locations with heavy weapons, including artillery and tanks."
Preah Vihear temple's July 7 inscription as a World Heritage site stirred nationalism on both sides and sparked massive protests in Bangkok.
Relations between the two countries are generally civil, but nationalism can boil over. In 2003, Cambodian rioters sacked the Thai Embassy in Phnom Penh and spent a night looting and burning Thai businesses, following untrue media reports that a Thai actress had claimed the famed temples of Angkor Wat should belong to Thailand.
On Wednesday night Cambodian police stood guard over the new Thai Embassy.
Please Read more Detail!
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Thais Leave Areas Near Temple: Officials
Cambodian officials said Tuesday more than 80 Thai troops left two areas near Preah Vihear temple, a day after Prime Minister Hun Sen issued an ultimatum for their withdrawal.
"After negotiations with two-star general Srey Douk, commander of Division 12, and the commander of Thai forces this morning near Preah Vihear temple, the Thai forces that entered Viel Entry on Monday right now have withdrawn from that area," according to Ministry of Foreign Affairs statement.
Viel Entry is a small field near Preah Vihear temple, which has been at the center of a contentious military standoff since July 15.
However, Thai Foreign Minister Sompong Amornviwat told reporters in Bangkok the troops were still in place near the area, Agence-France Presse reported.
"All 80 troops will remain in the disputed area because Thailand has overseen that area for 20 to 30 years," AFP quoted Sompong as saying. "Of those 80 troops, 20 of them are mine clearance workers and the rest offer protection for the mine clearance troops."
Thai troops remained in their positions along other points of the border in Oddar Meanchey and Preah Vihear provinces, Cambodian officials said.
Worried arket vendors in Bantheay Meanchey province who cross the border daily in Poipot to sell on the Thai side stayed in Cambodia Tuesday.
"They are afraid of a border conflict between the two countries, after they heard on the radio and TV the speech of Prime Minister Hun Sen, warning of large-scale conflict in the border dispute," Bantheay Meanchey Governor Oung Oun said.
Renewed tensions over the border come following failed talks between the countries' foreign ministers in Phnom Penh on Monday and a statement to reporters by Hun Sen that warned Thai troops to withdraw from two areas, Viel Entry and Pram Makara, on Phnom Troap, near the temple.
Phnom Troap was the site of a small skirmish that wounded one Thai and one Cambodian soldier earlier this month, and where two Thai soldiers were injured by landmines.
The Thai Foreign Ministry said on its Web site Tuesday their soldiers would defend themselves "if Cambodia does resort to the use of force."
"Thailand is surprised by the remarks by the Prime Minister of Cambodia issuing an ultimatum to Thailand to move its military personnel out of the area adjacent to the Temple of Phra Viharn (Preah Vihear) and threatening the use of force," the Thai Foreign Ministry said.
Please Read more Detail!
Monday, October 13, 2008
យុវជនខ្មែរនៅតំបន់ព្រំដែនស្ម័គ្រចិត្តធ្វើទ័ពប្រយុទ្ធនឹងទ័ពឈ្លានពានរបស់ថ
ដោយទឹកចិត្តស្នេហាមាតុភូមិរបស់ខ្លួន បុរសវ័យក្មេងចាស់មួយចំនួននៅតំបន់ត្រពាំងប្រាសាទនិងអន្លង់វែង បានស្ម័គ្រចិត្តចូលបម្រើកងទ័ពដើម្បីទៅការពារនៅតាមព្រំដែន។
Please Read more Detail!
ដោយទឹកចិត្តស្នេហាមាតុភូមិរបស់ខ្លួន បុរសវ័យក្មេងចាស់មួយចំនួននៅតំបន់ត្រពាំងប្រាសាទនិងអន្លង់វែង បានស្ម័គ្រចិត្តចូលបម្រើកងទ័ពដើម្បីទៅការពារនៅតាមព្រំដែន។
ទាហានខ្មែរជីកលេណដ្ឋាន នៅខ្សែត្រៀមក្បែរតំបន់ប្រាសាទព្រះវិហារ នាថ្ងៃទី៦ តុលា ២០០៨។
យុវជន ឡូត សុខឃាន អាយុ១៩ឆ្នាំ ជាសិស្សនៅស្រុកអន្លង់វែង សុខចិត្តបោះបង់ចោលការរៀនសូត្រដើម្បីចូលបម្រើកងទ័ពនៅក្នុងកងពលលេខ ៤៣ ហើយសព្វថ្ងៃកំពុងឈរជើងនៅលើភ្នំទ្រព្យ ជាតំបន់ដែលកងទ័ពថៃប៉ុងប៉ងដណ្ដើមយក។
យុវជន ឡូត សុខឃាន បានបញ្ជាក់ប្រាប់កាសែតភ្នំពេញប៉ុស្តិ៍ថា លោកចូលបម្រើទ័ពដោយស្ម័គ្រចិត្ត ពីព្រោះតែខឹងនឹងការឈ្លានពានរបស់ថៃ ដែលប៉ុនប៉ងយកប្រាង្គប្រាសាទខ្មែរ។
លោក ឈឹម សេរីរ័ត្ន អាយុ២៤ឆ្នាំ ជាកូនប្រុសរបស់អតីតមន្ត្រីកម្មាភិបាលខ្មែរក្រហម ជាយុវជនមួយរូបទៀតដែលបានឲ្យដឹងដែរថា រូបលោកត្រៀមខ្លួនជាស្រេចដើម្បីចូលបម្រើប្រទេសជាតិ ប្រសិនបើផ្នែកកងទ័ពត្រូវការរូបលោក។
ចំណែកលោកស្រី ជិន ទូច អាយុ៥៣ឆ្នាំ ជាអតីតបុគ្គលិកពេទ្យក្នុងជួរកងទ័ពខ្មែរក្រហម បានឲ្យដឹងថា លោកស្រីមានកូនប្រុស៣នាក់ ហើយពួកគេបានត្រៀមខ្លួនរួចជាស្រេចដើម្បីស្ម័គ្រចិត្តបម្រើកងទ័ព ការពារមាតុភូមិខ្មែរ។
ទាក់ទងនឹងការជ្រើសរើសកងទ័ព មន្ត្រីយោធាខ្មែរមួយរូបបានបង្ហើបឲ្យដឹងថា ផ្នែកកងទ័ពកំពុងកេណ្ឌទ័ពនៅតំបន់ត្រពាំងប្រាសាទ នៅអន្លង់វែង និងនៅតាមបណ្ដាខេត្តដទៃទៀត ប៉ុន្តែបើតាមលោក នួន នៅ មេបញ្ជាការរងយោធភូមិភាគទី៤ បានមានប្រសាសន៍ថា លោកមិនបានដឹងអំពីកម្មវិធីកេណ្ឌកងទ័ពនោះទេ៕Please Read more Detail!
មន្ត្រីថៃ៖ ថៃនឹងមិនដកទ័ពចេញពីតំបន់ជម្លោះព្រំដែនជាមួយខ្មែរឡើយ
នៅមិនប៉ុន្មានម៉ោងក្រោយពីចាកចេញពីប្រទេសកម្ពុជា រដ្ឋមន្រ្តីការបរទេសថៃ លោក ស៊ុមភុង អាម៉នវីវ៉ាត់ បានប្រតិកម្មចំពោះការព្រមានរបស់នាយករដ្ឋមន្រ្តីខ្មែរ លោក ហ៊ុន សែន ដោយថា ថៃនឹងមិនដកកងទ័ពចេញពីតំបន់ជម្លោះព្រំដែនតាមការទាមទាររបស់ភាគី កម្ពុជាឡើយ។
Please Read more Detail!
នៅមិនប៉ុន្មានម៉ោងក្រោយពីចាកចេញពីប្រទេសកម្ពុជា រដ្ឋមន្រ្តីការបរទេសថៃ លោក ស៊ុមភុង អាម៉នវីវ៉ាត់ បានប្រតិកម្មចំពោះការព្រមានរបស់នាយករដ្ឋមន្រ្តីខ្មែរ លោក ហ៊ុន សែន ដោយថា ថៃនឹងមិនដកកងទ័ពចេញពីតំបន់ជម្លោះព្រំដែនតាមការទាមទាររបស់ភាគី កម្ពុជាឡើយ។
ទាហានថៃអង្គុយនៅក្បែរប្រាសាទព្រះវិហារ ក្នុងខេត្តព្រះវិហារ នាថ្ងៃទី៤ តុលា ២០០៨។
យោងតាមអ្នកយកព័ត៌មានរបស់វិទ្យុអាស៊ីសេរីប្រចាំក្រុងបាងកកបាន រាយការណ៍មកថា រដ្ឋមន្រ្តីក្រសួងការបរទេសថៃ លោក ស៊ុមភុង អាម៉នវីវ៉ាត់ បានថ្លែងដូច្នេះនៅក្នុងក្រសួងការបរទេសថៃកាលពីយប់ថ្ងៃច័ន្ទ គឺនៅបន្ទាប់ពីលោកបានវិលត្រឡប់ពីជំនួបចរចាជាមួយសមភាគីកម្ពុជា លោក ហោ ណាំហុង វិញ ដោយលោកថ្លែងបញ្ជាក់អំពីមូលហេតុនៃការមិនដកកងទ័ពចេញពីតំបន់ ជម្លោះក្បែរប្រាសាទព្រះវិហារដូច្នេះថា ៖ "ការដកកងទ័ពគឺជាបញ្ហាសំខាន់ដែលត្រូវធ្វើ ប៉ុន្តែតើតំបន់នោះជាតំបន់អ្វី? ទាហានថៃបានឈរជើងនៅទីនោះអស់រយៈពេល២០ទៅ៣០ឆ្នាំមកហើយ។ ពួកគេដឹងថាទីនោះគឺជាទឹកដីរបស់គេ ហើយកម្ពុជាក៏អះអាងថាទឹកដីនោះជាទឹកដីរបស់ខ្លួនដែរ។ ហេតុនេះយើងត្រូវមានការជជែកគ្នាដោយគណៈកម្មាធិការព្រំដែនចម្រុះ អំពីបញ្ហាព្រំដែននេះ"។
ការថ្លែងបញ្ជាក់របស់រដ្ឋមន្រ្តីក្រសួងការបទេសថៃនេះធ្វើឡើង ប៉ុន្មានម៉ោងបន្ទាប់ពីការថ្លែងព្រមានរបស់លោកនាយករដ្ឋមន្រ្តី ហ៊ុន សែន ដោយទទូចដាច់ណាត់ថា កងទ័ពថៃត្រូវតែដកចេញពីទឹកដីកម្ពុជានៅតំបន់ព្រលានឥន្រ្ទីទីដែល កងទ័ពថៃត្រូវបានបញ្ជូនចូលមកជាបន្តបន្ទាប់ឲ្យបាននៅយប់ថ្ងៃ ច័ន្ទឬនៅថៃ្ងអង្គារនេះ។
ដោយឡែកប្រភពមន្រ្តីយោធាថៃដែលអមដំណើរលោក ស៊ុមភុង អាម៉នវីវ៉ាត់ ត្រឡប់ពីកិច្ចចរចាជាមួយសមភាគីកម្ពុជាវិញនោះបានត្រូវគេស្រង់ សម្ដីថា សភាពការណ៍តំបន់ព្រំដែនអាចវិវត្តន៍ទៅរកភាពអាក្រក់នៅយប់ថ្ងៃច័ន្ទ ហើយនាយករដ្ឋមន្រ្តីថៃ ឬលោក ស៊ុមភុង អាម៉នវីវ៉ាត់ ឬមេបញ្ជាការយោធាថៃអាចនឹងទូរស័ព្ទទៅកាន់លោកនាយករដ្ឋមន្រ្តី កម្ពុជាផ្ទាល់ដើម្បីបញ្ជៀសការប្រឈមមុខដាក់គ្នាតាមផ្លូវយោធា។
នៅស្របពេលជាមួយគ្នានោះដែររដ្ឋលេខាធិការក្រសួងការពារជាតិ កម្ពុជា លោកឧត្តមសេនីយ៍ នាង ផាត បានថ្លែងបា្រប់ទីភ្នាក់ងារព័ត៌មានរ៉យទ័រថា កងទ័ពកម្ពុជាបានត្រូវបញ្ជូនទៅកាន់តំបន់ជម្លោះព្រំដែនកម្ពុជាថៃ បន្ទាប់ពីកងទ័ពថៃប្រហែល៥០០នាក់បានព្យាយាមឆ្លងកាត់ព្រំដែនក្បែរ តំបន់ប្រាសាទព្រះវិហារ៕Please Read more Detail!
នាយករដ្ឋមន្ត្រីខ្មែរព្រមានថៃឲ្យដកទ័ពចេញពីតំបន់ព្រលានឥន្ទ្រីនៃទឹកដីខ្មែរ
លោកនាយករដ្ឋមន្ត្រី ហ៊ុន សែន នៅល្ងាចថ្ងៃច័ន្ទ ១៣ តុលានេះ បានព្រមានភាគីថៃឲ្យដកកងទ័ពចេញពីព្រលានឥន្ទ្រី ដែលស្ថិតនៅចម្ងាយប្រមាណ៣គីឡូម៉ែត្រភាគខាងលិចប្រាសាទព្រះវិហារ ដែលថៃបានព្យាយាមចូលមកក្នុងទឹកដីខ្មែរកាលពីព្រឹកមិញ ឲ្យបានអស់នៅយប់នេះ ឬក៏ថ្ងៃស្អែក។
Please Read more Detail!
លោកនាយករដ្ឋមន្ត្រី ហ៊ុន សែន នៅល្ងាចថ្ងៃច័ន្ទ ១៣ តុលានេះ បានព្រមានភាគីថៃឲ្យដកកងទ័ពចេញពីព្រលានឥន្ទ្រី ដែលស្ថិតនៅចម្ងាយប្រមាណ៣គីឡូម៉ែត្រភាគខាងលិចប្រាសាទព្រះវិហារ ដែលថៃបានព្យាយាមចូលមកក្នុងទឹកដីខ្មែរកាលពីព្រឹកមិញ ឲ្យបានអស់នៅយប់នេះ ឬក៏ថ្ងៃស្អែក។
លោកនាយករដ្ឋមន្ត្រីខ្មែរ ហ៊ុន សែន (រូបខាងឆ្វេង) ចាប់ដៃជាមួយរដ្ឋមន្ត្រីការបរទេសថៃ ស៊ុមភុង អាម៉នវីវ៉ាត់ (រូបខាងស្ដាំ) នៅឯទីស្ដីការក្រសួងការបរទេសកម្ពុជា ក្នុងក្រុងភ្នំពេញ នាថ្ងៃទី១៣ តុលា ២០០៨។
ការព្រមានរបស់លោកនាយករដ្ឋមន្ត្រី ហ៊ុន សែន បានធ្វើឡើង នៅក្នុងកិច្ចជំនួបជាមួយនឹងឧបនាយករដ្ឋមន្ត្រីនិងជារដ្ឋមន្ត្រី ក្រសួងការបរទេសថៃ លោក សុំពង់ អាម៉នវីវ៉ាត់ នៅឯក្រសួងការបរទេសកម្ពុជា ក្នុងរាជធានីភ្នំពេញ។
ទោះជាយ៉ាងណាក្តី លោកនាយករដ្ឋមន្ត្រី ហ៊ុន សែន បានមានប្រសាសន៍ថា វាមិនអាចទស្សន៍ទាយបានទេថា តើអាចនឹងមានការផ្ទុះអាវុធរវាងកងទ័ពនៃប្រទេសទាំងពីរ ឬយ៉ាងណាឡើយ បើសិនជាកងទ័ពថៃមិនព្រមដកចេញពីព្រលានឥន្ទ្រីនោះ។
លោកនាយករដ្ឋមន្ត្រី ហ៊ុន សែន ថ្លែងយ៉ាងដូច្នេះថា ៖ «បន្ទាន់ជាង គេ គឺកងទ័ព[ថៃ]ដែលចូលមកថ្ងៃនេះ ហើយមកទល់នឹងថ្ងៃនេះកំពុងតែបោះតង់នៅវាលឥន្ទ្រីនេះតែម្ដង គឺឲ្យគាត់ដកបន្ទាន់ បើដកយប់នេះមិនទាន់ គឺថ្ងៃស្អែកឲ្យដក ហើយបន្តទៅ គឺដោះស្រាយបញ្ហានៅវត្តកែវសិក្ខាគិរីស្វរៈ»។
គួរជម្រាបថា កាលពីព្រឹកមិញ កងទាហានថៃបានព្យាយាមឆ្លងចូលទឹកដីខ្មែរត្រង់ចំណុចព្រលានឥន្ទ្រី ក្នុងខេត្តព្រះវិហារ ទីកន្លែងដែលទាហានថៃពីរនាក់បានរងរបួសដាច់ជើង ដោយសារជាន់មីន។
លោកនាយករដ្ឋមន្ត្រី ហ៊ុន សែន បានមានប្រសាសន៍ថា ចំណុចព្រលានឥន្ទ្រីនោះជាចំណុចស្លាប់រស់ ហើយថា ការផ្ទុះអាវុធអាចនឹងកើតមានឡើងចេញពីចំណុចនោះ។
លោកនាយករដ្ឋមន្ត្រី ហ៊ុន សែន ក៏បានអំពាវនាវឲ្យកងទ័ពទាំងអស់មានការអត់ធ្មត់ កុំឲ្យមានការផ្ទុះអាវុធកើតឡើង។
Please Read more Detail!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)