Countries at the Crossroads 2006

Country Reports  |  Overview Essay  |  Acknowledgments  |  Expert Advisory Committee  |  Survey Methodology  |  Introduction to Country Reports  |  Tables and Charts  |  Recommendations Progress Report

Print-Friendly Version

Country Report - Cambodia

Previous | Introduction | Accountability and Public Voice | Civil Liberties | Rule of Law | Anticorruption and Transparency | Author | Notes | Next

Introduction

After decades of civil conflict, Cambodia has made significant progress in restoring peace and political stability, reducing social tensions, and building the institutions of democratic governance. Major obstacles remain, however, to the establishment of a pluralist democratic society in which those goals may be realized fully. The UN intervention of 1992-93 and more than a decade of international development assistance have brought Cambodia the institutional rudiments of a democracy built on respect for human rights and the rule of law, but the state appears both unwilling and unable to guarantee either. Very few elements of a modern chain of public accountability are in place, resulting in poor governance and extensive corruption. Governmental dysfunction has obstructed the development process, with the greatest cost borne by the poor and vulnerable. Despite large injections of foreign aid, basic social indicators have seen scant improvement over the last decade. Ranked 130th of 177 countries in the UN's human development index¹,  Cambodia trails its neighbors in literacy, life expectancy, and infant mortality rates.

Cambodia thus sits at a fragile juncture in its transition from a hierarchical political system that prioritizes stability and control to a more liberal democratic society. Some 80 percent of the population are engaged in the subsistence rural economy, and to a large extent Cambodian social and political structures remain driven by traditional hierarchical patron-client relationships. Such ties rely on inequalities of wealth, status, and power and personalized interactions between the powerful and weak, in contrast to the impersonal guarantees of physical and economic security, such as the rule of law, that underpin liberal democracies. This lends itself to authoritarian forms of power politics antithetical to the principles of deliberative democratic interaction.

Against the legacy of the Khmer Rouge period, this poses a difficult reform environment even for the most committed government. Developing a decentralized, open democracy based on formal rules of law and a diversified market economy would alter the rule-and-incentive system under which the entire country operates. Powerful vested interests threatened by this objective have inevitably sought to obstruct reformists.

The 11-month political deadlock that followed the July 27, 2003, National Assembly elections highlighted the fundamental lack of legitimacy of the democratic process in Cambodian realpolitik. The prime minister, Hun Sen, consolidated his political and economic patronage system in response to an ambitious reform program proposed by the Alliance of Democrats (a coalition of FUNCINPEC and Sam Rainsy Party [SRP] opponents backed by former king Norodom Sihanouk, elements of the Cambodian People's Party [CPP], and prodemocracy urban civil society groups), which aimed to moderate Hun Sen's grip on power and level the political playing field².  Whether Hun Sen will take advantage of this consolidated power base to stall reform remains an open question.

Previous | Introduction | Accountability and Public Voice | Civil Liberties | Rule of Law | Anticorruption and Transparency | Author | Notes | Next