Also!

Today is the 34th anniversary of the Khmer Rouge takeover of Cambodia on April 17th, 1975. Only they knew the carnage they were about to inflict on Cambodia. Terribly sad. I was actually reminded by a moto driver about this anniversary, and he was born in 1975, a lucky baby that made it through alive.

Musings From My Trip to Vietnam

I just got back from Vietnam a few days ago, and I really love Vietnam for multiple reasons. Not to disparage Cambodia whatsoever, but I prefer Vietnam. Although Cambodian people are kinder, gentler, and less aggressive than their Vietnamese counterparts, Vietnam as a country is more modern, advanced, organized, and habitable than Cambodia (or Kampuchea as it is know in this part of the world). Additionally, Vietnam is overall cheaper, its landscape is diverse and beautiful, and it is easier to get around. Aaaaaaaa one of the few Communist places that outshines its neighbor.

So I went from Saigon to the amazing island of Phu Quoc (WOW!) and back to Phnom Penh.

First stop was Saigon or Ho Chi Minh City as it has been called since 1976. Saigon is a bustling city that has all the modern conveniences. I have not seen the entire city, so I cannot speak of its overall character, but South Vietnamese are a bit more lad back than their Northern compatriots, and its shows in Saigon. Little more geared towards fun, drinking, eating, and overall enjoyment than Hanoi. The city has a bit of its French architecture still around here and there, but the city is fairly rebuilt and new. So, it is a bit less aesthetically pleasing as Hanoi for example. I spent 2 days in Saigon, and one of the days I took a trip to the Cu Chi tunnels. For those not old enough to know or those who are otherwise unaware, the Cu Chi tunnels were an extremely large and elaborate system of tunnels that the Viet Cong (who I was told were not North Vietnamese, but South Vietnamese who sympathized with their Northern communist) built around Saigon to help them fight a guerrilla style war against the American forces. These tunnels were one of the main reasons that American forces left Vietnam altogether. Hospitals, kitchens, movie theatres, and small factories were just some of the things built underground to evade the superior American army. From these tunnels, they were able to infiltrate behind enemy lines (even inside American bases) to conduct surprise attacks, create booby traps to escape pursuit, and retreat to safer areas (even as far as Cambodia, which is tens of miles and miles away!). American tried to force them out by shooting water down these tunnels, sending soldiers in to kill Viet Cong, bombing the area with napalm and B-52s, and even training dogs to root them out. The Vietnamese were extremely resilient, and they used very creative method to combat American tactics, such as wearing friendly American clothes to fool the dogs, using faux tunnels to throw off their location, or creating additional tunnels to divert water. The site of the Cu Chi tunnels was, unfortunately, a bit kitchy, touristy, and not well setup (however, I really don't think this was avoidable, but just a reality), but the story behind them was extremely interesting, and a good trip, kitchiness and all

After this day long trip, I went to the Vietnam War Remnants Museum. Most of this museum is, predictably, about actions committed by American and Allied forces against the Vietnamese civilian population. Most of this was portrayed through extremely graphic and extensive photographic displays that covered everything from French military involvement in the 1940s-50s to the last days of America's time in Vietnam in the 1970s. There was a small, but impressive collection of American war machines on display that were captured by Vietnamese forces, and a section of the Museum recreating South Vietnamese-American prisons called "Tiger Cages" that housed North Vietnamese prisoners. (sadly, these Tiger Cages were eerily similar to the Khmer Rouge's S-21 in many ways). But, for the most part, there was picture after picture after picture of the war. These pictures covered the undertaking and results of seek and destroy missions, napalm attacks, Agent Orange bombs, Herbicide misuse, B-52 bombings, and other things of this nature.

Ok, let me give my two cents politically, if you will. I do not claim to be a Vietnam war expert having not lived through it. Yet, I think I know more than the average person about this war and geopolitical matters in effect at that time. My take on the war is mixed overall. After going through this Museum, my first reaction was (and still is) embarrassment that my country did these inexplicable and inexcusable things to the Vietnamese people (and Cambodian and Laotian people as well). I think my country has so much to be proud of, and so much to offer the world, so it pains me all the more to see this on our track record. While the exact extent of American misconduct is up for debate and I certainly do not know the truth, it is beyond contention that somethings done by American servicemen and their superiors amounted to international crimes. On the other hand, aside from one sizable section of the Museum which showed color drawings by Vietnamese and American children about the present day and future positive friendship between Vietnam and America, this Museum put the worst foot forward on America's actions in Vietnam and did not discuss at all the equally reprehensible actions of the North Vietnamese during the war. The museum did not differentiate between the travesties of war (which are not criminal, but just what happens in war) versus the deliberate targeting of civilians (which is criminal). They kind of lumped it all together, which is disingenuous. Also, I kept thinking about what was going on in the mind of a typical American solider during the Vietnam war (putting aside the few soldiers who were absolute murders to the core). The enemy is fighting a guerrilla war against your army. The enemy deliberately melds into the civilian population, making it so hard to distinguish friend from foe...putting you on edge that someone is going to pop out and kill you at any moment. Now, when some innocent civilian, adult or child, pops up and surprises you, and you shoot out of reaction, what happens in your mind? You cannot believe what just happened, that it happened accidentally or not what you intended....causing you to snap! You either (more or less) disengage mentally and go into a cocoon, or you lose it and start killing indiscriminately. I partially fault the American government for not preparing soldiers for this reality, and finding ways to prevent it (at least in part). Lastly, portions of South Vietnam really did not want to be Communist or under Communist rule, and America had a right and a choice to defend people that wanted our support, financially and militarily, to escape Communism.

Yet, I also thought about self-determination, especially in the context of the Cu Chi Tunnels. If Vietnamese people were willing to live underground for months at time, in the jungle,and fight a superior American army that threw almost every type of weapon of war imaginable at them and mercilessly, the Vietnamese earned the right to live as they see fit. All in all, I see why the USA entered Vietnam: to stem the tide of totalitarian communism (arguable if this perception was real or not) and many are supported by the fact that Communism did not establish roots in Southeast Asia. Nevertheless, Americans committed crimes in so doing, the American public was misled and/or lied to by their government on the extent of the war, and the entire scope and duration of the war was unacceptable in many ways. Whether cliche or not, no side was blameless in this war. It was an unfortunate time (to put it very very lightly) in American and Vietnamese history.

Now to something way more uplifting: Phu Quoc. This island is actually very close to the Cambodian coast (large island right off the southern coast, used to be a part of Cambodia, and is settled in the Eastern portion of the Gulf of Thailand). I arrived by plane from Saigon, as this was the easiest and most direct route there from Cambodia or Vietnam for that matter. Without reservation, this island had some of the best beaches I have ever seen or heard about. The sunsets were amazing, the accommodations around the island were extremely quaint and charming, and the food was downright terrific. There is no town worth visiting, but the rest of the island made up for it. The island is slowly being developed, but the lack of crowds and the multiple areas that are untouched show that Phu Quoc is years away from turning into just another Thai beach island (not to mention a Communist government not known for marketing itself well).

My entire Phu Quoc experience had an undertone of sadness, because it was certainly a place for couples and a place that Tami would love to visit. This made me think of her and us constantly, which I already do, but more intensely :( Anyway, first half day was spent on the main beach aptly called Long Beach. Had a great squid lunch, and a good pasta dinner. The next day, for 15$, I was able to go on a day long tour of Phu Quoc's many beaches and smaller islands off of Phu Quoc, snorkel and swim at uninhabited beaches with great corral, and get a terrific lunch cooked on the boat with freshly caught squid and fish! At this point, I would like to mention that I have been on two boat tours in Vietnam in my life: this one and one a year and a half ago in Halong Bay. On both tours, I shared the boat tour with individuals not only from Denver, but lived amazingly close to me. The first was a young woman who lived about a mile from me in downtown Denver, and this Phu Quoc tour had an older woman who was also working in Phnom Penh presently, grew up in Capitol Hill mere minutes from my childhood home, went to Kent Denver as well, and also lived on Ios, Greece (where Tami and I lived right after college)! Ok, that is weird, really weird. Anyway, after the tour, the small group from the boat tour met up for dinner, and we had a great night talking and drinking at a little French bistro right off the beach (wow, my French is better when I am drunk).

Well now, I am back to the grind, although not really a grind, because I love working at the tribunal in almost everything I do there. Again, I encourage people to follow the trial on http://www.cambodiatribunal.org/ and http://www.eccc.gov.kh/. There is some very interesting stuff happening in Duch trial, and even more interesting issues coming up in the case against the five other defendants. If there is anything that I post about or do in Cambodia that followers of this blog would like to explain, or things you want me to discuss, please do not hesitate to leave a comment. Best, Kip!

Farewell to a friend and Chomsky is an idiot

Farewell to Ben



First, a farewell to a friend, Robert "Ben" Fleming. Ben just left the tribunal last week after working at the ECCC for 2 1/2 years. For all tense and purposes, Ben and I were predisposed not to like each other, let alone converse at any level. He worked in a different office (the Office of Co-Investigative Judges) that sometimes is at odds with my office. Not only is he a Texan (a huge flaw in any true Coloradoans' mind), but a proud Texan (kind of like having egg on your face and bragging about it). He and I did not see eye to eye on most everything, from international criminal issues to the best NFL franchise (guess which one I defended?). Yet, Ben and I typically had a good time together, laughed about all sorts of things, had a respect for each other (albeit, he would say his respect for me was just a facade) and enjoyed making fun of each other (it was pretty easy for me, given his background at all). I don't profess to be one of Ben's best friends or even one of his good friends here in Cambodia, for we did not hang out religiously or anything. Yet, I respect what he did for this tribunal. He was at the ECCC from the very beginning, and played a considerable role in forming it, legally speaking. Ben's work products have and will continue to shape this tribunal's legacy. He was a smart guy with an obvious intellect. He was nice to just about everyone, and spoke honestly and direct. Ben took an interest in helping me out in my career even when he had no reason or obligation to. He also started work here out of a sincere interest to help Cambodians. His family back home took in some Cambodian refugees around the time of the Khmer Rouge, and they created a bond with this family. Ben keeps in touch with them, in the US and abroad, and he always wanted to do something for the Cambodian people. This tribunal was one of the ways he did that. Ben told me a crazy story before he left. When he first came to Cambodia to work at the ECCC, he hung out at this random bar and met this guy. They struck up a relationship. Some considerable time later, the two found out that the Cambodian guy was directly related to the Cambodian refugee family that Ben's family took in in Houston! Small world huh? Anyway, thanks Ben for your contribution to the ECCC. Stay in touch, and best of luck on your next adventure.



Chomsky is an idiot.



Ok, while I hope all readers read this next section, I warn you, it is about international politics, international criminal law, and Norm Chomsky! Some may consider this a bit dry (sarcasm laid on thick right....here). Anywho, Chomsky was interviewed by the Phnom Penh Post, and before reading the rest of this paragraph, take a gander at this article. http://www.phnompenhpost.com/index.php/National-news/Tribunal-ignoring-US-role-says-Chomsky.html
Now, political philosophers and academics have a right to speak their mind, a right to stir the proverbial pot, and a right to push the limits, even on some facts. Yet, there is also an obligation to be generally accurate and be true to the overall topic you are discussing. However, Norm Chomsky has apparently forgotten that last part. While Chomsky and I may share similar political leanings and view of the world order, this interview that the Phnom Penh Post published is so factually inaccurate and legally fanciful that it was hard not to scream out in shear anger or laugh uncontrollably while reading this. Maybe this explains why it was published in the Phnom Penh Post of all papers.



In his assessment of the ECCC, his basic argument is that this tribunal, like all others in history, are all about one or more powerful countries (often the case with Chomsky, the US is the powerful country) leveraging its power to prosecute selectively...meaning only former enemies, citizens of weaker nations, and politically beneficial targets. Continuing, Chomsky sees that the US and its leaders are either equally or more criminally responsible than those that these tribunals prosecute. Or the US is partly to blame for whatever criminal acts others committed and are now being tried for. To be fair, Chomsky is right to assert that the US, through its leaders and officials, is not blame free. Plenty of legitimate arguments exists that US officials should have been prosecuted for acts committed in the many wars and engagements that my beloved country has participated in, starting with events in World War II.

Despite this, Chomsky is still a freaking idiot. First, in trying to make his argument, he commits a "farce" of trying to state accurately what international criminal law is. First, bombs cannot have genocidal intent Norm. Only people can. Bombs do not discriminate, especially carpet bombing. Sure, if you drop a bomb on a town because it is a town that has a certain protected group (e.g. Muslims, Vietnamese, or Hutus), that could be genocide. But he is talking about random, blanket bombing. His example of stated US policy in bombing Cambodia to prove the genocidal intent of the US ("use anything that flies against anything that moves") actually proves that the US did not act with genocidal intent! The US would have to bomb to kill a certain group, not just "anything that moves"! He also says the Nuremberg tribunal was all ex post facto law or law created after the commission of the act (making the act criminal after the fact) that was unjustly applied against the Nazis. So Norm, have you seen the international legislature lately? Oh yea, there isn't one. Therefore, international criminal laws are created through unanimously created and not obligatory treaties, but also (and primarily I might add) through custom (i.e. customary international law that are binding on nations regardless of consent). The laws that the Nazis violated were either laws in treaties they signed and ratified, or international customs that they violated (i.e. crimes against humanity). Sure, prior to Nuremberg, no entity announced these laws publicly, but they still existed among the customs of nations, the rules of war, and the rights of humans. These is just a taste of the legally inaccuracies that litter this interview, and Norm should be ashamed that he passed this along as fact.

Yet, what is the most frustrating is his unrealistic political view of the field of international justice. Chomsky believes that international justice (i.e. international tribunals and international criminal law) should only occur if it is perfect, in that the world is politically able to prosecute anybody, anywhere, from any country. Plus, he argues that international criminal law can only be if it is flawless and indisputable. How is this view not only not realistic, but achievable, Norm? Of first importance, don't victims of these conflicts deserve some measure of justice? It is all or nothing Norm? Well, I believe some level of justice, imperfections and all, is better than no justice (but I don't even accept his proposition that these tribunals are unjust when in fact they are far more just than not). Just because we cannot prosecute all those that might be culpable than we cannot prosecute anyone. Let impunity live? The bigger point, however, is that a perfectly acceptable international criminal enforcement mechanism cannot spawn overnight. Heck, a functional, fair, and just DOMESTIC criminal system cannot spawn overnight either, which is, unfortunately, very evident the world over. It takes time, experience, and trial and error to get it right. For example, the US criminal justice system is one of the most respected in the world, but it took hundreds of years to get to where it is. In the very beginning, it was flawed, unjust, and a shadow of its present self. And still, it too is problematic and far from perfect. With that being said, how can you ridicule international tribunals and the field of international criminal law, Norm, when the field has only be around, in earnest, since 1992 (the formation of the Yugoslav tribunal)? In this context, not only has this field of law advanced quickly, effectively, and admirably, but it should also be noted that this field has been created and manned by individuals from very different legal cultures, legal customs, legal traditions, and legal beliefs. Mixing and matching these differences into a patchwork that all nations can agree to, and more importantly, can justly try those accused on committing international crimes is a very difficult feat, yet this is exactly (more or less) where the field of international justice is. Of course, the field is far far far from perfect, and it has many decades of development ahead of it. However, this field has done some remarkable stuff when put in context. Arguing that the field can only exist if it drags US presidents into a courtroom in The Hague is (albeit legally desirable when applicable) politically absurd and counterproductive in numerous ways. This field cannot get to a place of advanced, blind justice at the snap of a finger, Norm, or without decades of development.