One of my favorite parts about
traveling is the perspective shift that often blooms from learning more about
the world we live in. One of the areas in which I can see some new growth is
the concept of silence and speaking up.
 |
Image 1: Yao in front of a bed with
ankle restraints, with an image on the wall of a brutally murdered prisoner on
this very bed.
 |
Image 2: Autopsied skulls of
prisoners killed at the killing fields in Phnom Penh
|
About a week ago, we visited S21,
one of the most secretive and brutal retaining centers of the Khmer Rouge. It
was definitely a very heavy experience, that gave me lots of food for thought.
The general state of affairs right before the Khmer Rouge took over was one of
chaos and fear; the US was secretly bombing the region to try and hurt
Vietnamese forces (early 1970's), so when the Khmer Rouge came in and took
over, the people welcomed them. Thus began the period of the Khmer Rouge, a
brutal time where it is estimated 2 million Khmer were killed by execution or
displacement/starvation. The reason I mention so many details is other
countries’ (especially US) response to these horrible events.
Their response? Silence. Because
Vietnam took over Cambodia in the years after the Khmer Rouge, the UN did not
recognize that government as the leaders, but instead, until the mid-90's, the
UN representative of Cambodia was a Khmer Rouge official. And only now, in the
last few years, are the top Khmer Rouge officials being tried by law. The US
can't claim that they didn't want to interfere in another country's affairs,
when the US's interference helped bring the Khmer Rouge so many supporters in
the first place. Not to mention the many civilian deaths caused by the bombing.
Then, about 10 years after Vietnam
had come and taken Cambodia, the UN came in and helped remove the Vietnamese
rule as well as help set the country back on its feet (including clearing 80%
of the estimated 6 million mines placed by the Khmer Rouge). So overall, this
interference of the UN was a positive action, but the interference by the US
was an overall negative action. I understand that there are so many factors
that complicate the issue, but how does a country or something know when it's
appropriate to interfere, or 'help'? On the same line of thought, when is it
appropriate for an individual to provide assistance? There is so much potential
for unintended consequences.
I am here in Cambodia because I do
not want to be silent and I wanted to speak up and do something. Taber was speaking
up when he started Wetlands Work! We are here because we want to give the Khmer
people support - not to fix their problems, because that is not possible, but
to add strength to help the Khmer push in the right direction. Obviously, I do
not think that I have this issue of foreign aid all figured out - I'm sure
experts in this area have had many discussions in this area - but I think just
opening up this conversation can move things in the right direction. Simply
having an awareness that actions can have unintended consequences, can help to
brainstorm ways of avoiding some consequences.
Comments
Post a Comment