Cambodia: Vang Sreyno (វ៉ាង ស្រីណូ)

You really knew well sexy singer and actress, Vang Sreyno, right? When she was on stage making TV watchers more interesting in her sexy clothes. Presently, she is not in public and singing at local Television channels over the weekend.

Malaysian: Did Najib lie to the nation?

Najib is wrong in making unilateral claims that Sabah belongs to Malaysia when historical legal documents and agreements may indicate otherwise. Vidal Yudin Weil, Free Malaysia Today According to the Manila Accord signed on July 31, 1963 and registered in the United Nations as document No. 8029, then Malayan deputy prime minister Abdul Razak Hussein (late father of the present Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak) met up with foreign minister Dr Subandrio of Indonesia, and vice-president Emmanuel Pelaez of the Philippines in Manila for five days from June 7 to 11, 1963, to discuss about the status of Sabah. Consequently, it was agreed in writing by former Malayan prime minister Tunku Abdul Rahman together with president Soekarno of Indonesia and president Diosdado Macapagal of the Philippines in paragraph 12 thereof: “The Philippines made it clear that its position on the inclusion of North Borneo in the Federation of Malaysia is subject to the final outcome of the Philippines’ claim to North Borneo. The ministers took note of the Philippines’ claim and the right of the Philippines to continue to pursue it in accordance with international law and the principle of the pacific settlement of disputes. They agreed that the inclusion of North Borneo in the Federation of Malaysia would not prejudice either the claim or any right thereunder. Moreover, in the context of their close association, the three countries agreed to exert their best endeavours to bring the claim to a just and expeditious solution by peaceful means, such as negotiation, conciliation, arbitration, or judicial settlement as well as other peaceful means of the parties’ own choice, in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations and the Bandung Declaration.” Subsequently on Aug 5, 1963 in a joint statement released to international media, the same also agreed in writing under paragraph 8 thereof: “In accordance with paragraph 12 of the Manila Accord, the three Heads of Government decided to request the British Government to agree to seek a just and expeditious solution to the dispute between the British Government and the Philippines Government concerning Sabah (North Borneo) by means of negotiation, conciliation and arbitration, judicial settlement, or other peaceful means of the parties’ own choice in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations. The three Heads of Government take cognizance of the position regarding the Philippines claim to Sabah (North Borneo) after the establishment of the Federation of Malaysia as provided under paragraph 12 of the Manila Accord, that is, that the inclusion of Sabah (North Borneo) in the Federation of Malaysia does not prejudice either the claim or any right thereunder.” It was undoubtedly stated from the above provisions of the Manila Accord and joint statement that: the inclusion of Sabah into the formation of Malaysia is subject to the Philippines claim; and the Philippines’ claim on Sabah must be settled in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) run by the United Nations. Therefore, until such time when the ICJ has decided, Malaysia does not have absolute ownership of Sabah.

Malaysian News: The Sulu Sultanate quarrel and wider implications

Could it become a regional flashpoint? asks Asia Sentinel If it weren’t for many so unnecessary deaths – and the apparent Malaysian need to act tough in advance of its pending national election – the confrontation in Sabah between Malaysian authorities and supporters of the pretender to the Sultanate of Sulu, Jamalul Kiram III, might have seemed comic. It was hardly comic this morning when Malaysia fighter jets and ground forces including seven army battalions responded with overwhelming force against the 200-odd men of the Royal Sulu Sultanate Army, routing them from a kampung on the eastern Sabah shore at Lahad Datu. It is questionable whether the force unleashed by the Royal Malaysian Army was necessary, or whether it was more a message to the Barisan Nasional’s voting public of government decisiveness and military prowess. So far, President Benigno S. Aquino in Manila has been quiescent about the Sulu sultan’s claims. But the sight of warplanes bombing a ragtag bunch of their countrymen is not going to sit well with the Filipino public. Beyond that, the situation is very much a reminder that what were thought permanent national boundaries established at the end of World War II and the 20 years of decolonization which followed may not be so, and that there remains the risk of a wider confrontation that has troublesome potential for the region. For instance the tragic events at Lahad Datu coincide with two other issues involving Sabah and its immediate Borneo neighbors, Sarawak and independent Brunei. One is the Chinese claim to waters stretching almost to the northern coast of Borneo and thus to waters within the Exclusive Economic Zones of Malaysia and Brunei. Malaysia has so far kept a low profile during the confrontations between China and Vietnam and the Philippines. But the Chinese claim to Malaysia-held islands and waters will not go away, however far Malaysia buries its head in the sand. Indeed, there are some in the East Malaysian states who feel that Kuala Lumpur’s low profile on an issue so important to them reflects an attitude that the two states are only important so long as they provide resources and votes for the Barisan Nasional, or national ruling coalition led by the United Malays National Organization, the country’s biggest ethnic political party.

Malay News:A 'smooth' transition, says Anwar

- Anwar Ibrahim has done it again. He has put the cart before the horse. In a recent interview with Bloomberg, this Pakatan leader told his interviewers that there would be a smooth transition of Malaysian Government after the general election. But shouldn't he first win the general election? Shouldn't his coalition win the majority seats in Parliament before seeking Royal permission to form the next government? Only after that can there by any transition. In other words, he may be ready for Putrajaya, but is Putrajaya ready for him? In 2008, he was ready for Putrajaya but Putrajaya wasn't quite ready for him. He had then predicted that he would take over the government on 16 September of that year by engineering a spate of defections. His failure to capture the Federal government was met with derision by people who had believed him. One of them wrote in a blog: Sorry, Mr. Opposition Leader, you lost your credibility after not keeping to your promise to form a new government in Putrajaya.after 169. That is the biggest b......t you gave us. You never had the numbers but you still raised our expectations. You lied and assumed Malaysians were stupid. You became the butt of jokes in the bars and warungs" So, in 2013, Anwar makes a 'logical leap'. (A logical leap is a moment where there is a significant--and contemptuous-- gap in the argument). He doesn't predict a victory but predicts a smooth transition. The other noteworthy predictions that Anwar made in the interview included the following: That he would be the Prime Minister That it will not be a 'Chinese government' That he will roll back 'privileges for the ethnic Malay and indigenous people'. And what did the foreign news agency say about what foreigners think about the general election? “An opposition win would be destabilizing for the market in the short term,” Alan Richardson, a Singapore-based fund manager who helps oversee about $110 billion for Samsung Asset Management Co., told Bloomberg. “We haven’t had a history of political transition in Malaysia and there will be uncertainty.”

Despite Exile, Sam Rainsy Named Opposition Choice for Prime Minister

Sam Rainsy remains in exile abroad, found guilty on a number of criminal charges that make him ineligible to run in the July election.

08 March 2013
Heng Reaksmey, VOA Khmer

PHNOM PENH - Officials for the new opposition say they will appoint Sam Rainsy as candidate for premier, despite his exile, if they are victorious in July’s election.

The Cambodia National Rescue Party, which held a meeting in Singapore this week, will make Kem Sokha, currently the head of the minority opposition, the National Assembly president, if it wins a majority in the parliamentary polls.

Sam Rainsy remains in exile abroad, found guilty on a number of criminal charges that make him ineligible to run in the July election.

That means he is also not legally eligible for the premier seat, political analyst Lao Mong Hay told VOA Khmer. “If his party wins the election, he still cannot be a candidate for prime minister, according to constitutional law,” he said.

Nevertheless, opposition officials believe a political settlement can be found to clear the way for Sam Rainsy’s return to politics, Kem Sokha, president of the Human Rights Party, told VOA Khmer.

US diplomats and other international and local observers say he should be allowed to contest the elections if they are to be considered free and fair.

Government spokesman Phay Siphan dismissed the opposition’s announcement as a political stunt, aimed at strengthening its negotiation for power sharing.

Prime Minister Hun Sen, meanwhile, has maintained there will be no political solution for Sam Rainsy, whose case remains a matter for the courts.

Cambodia:We are Women -- Hear us ROAR!

Celebrating being Women

 We should celebrate womanhood every day, but it's good to have an official reminder to do so today.
We are Women, hear us roar!

Theary with accomplished Khmer women of Phnom Penh at Bunleng's birthday party, including a former Secretary of State of the Foreign Ministry to a medical doctor with a degree from France (March 2013)

Recently at church, an amiable looking young man reminded everyone of the upcoming March 8, International Women's Day celebration for all the women there, "the day when the men gave rights to the women". 

Let me provide a gentle correction to this young man and everyone else, as it is not the first time I've heard a similar heresy, even among the women themselves. (Several years back I heard women teased each other that it is the one day they have the right to beat up the men.)

MARCH 8 is NOT the "day the men gave rights to the women."

Rather, March 8

is a day we set aside

to REMIND EVERYONE

(both men and women)

of the INALIENABLE

(not subject to sale or transfer; birth)

RIGHTS women have with the men

ALL THE TIME.

On this March 8, our hearts and prayers in particular go out to

the Khmer women who are suffering from:

domestic violence,

gang rape ("bauk"),

trafficking, and

violent land evictions.  (Go, Boeung Kak Women!)

Vietnamese test taboo on debating communist monopoly

Motorcycle-taxi driver is seen waiting for customers next to a row of communist propaganda posters in Hanoi, on March 5, 2013. When Vietnam's communist leaders asked for public comment on their plan to amend the country's constitution, they did not anticipate unleashing a fierce debate on the party's monopoly on power

Motorcyclists ride amongst red banners marking the 83th anniversary of the foundation of the Vietnamese Communist Party, in Hanoi, on February 3, 2013. When Vietnam's communist leaders asked for public comment on their plan to amend the country's constitution they did not anticipate unleashing an unprecedented debate on the party's monopoly on power

03/08/2013
By Cat Barton
AFP News

"If one day I have to go to prison, I'm certain it will be a Communist prison, because I'm dying to be free"

When Vietnam's communist leaders asked for public comment on their plan to amend the country's constitution they did not anticipate unleashing an unprecedented debate on the party's monopoly on power.

What was supposed to be a ritualistic consultation has morphed into a fierce open discussion on topics like human rights and land ownership on everywhere from state television to dissident blogs.

The furore started when 72 respected academics submitted a petition in January through the National Assembly as part of the consultation process, calling for multiparty democracy, respect for human rights, private land ownership and an apolitical army that served the people not the party.

They also called for the abolition of Article 4, the clause that protects the party's power, and for a clear separation of powers between the legislative, executive and judicial branches of government -- revolutionary demands in the one-party state that have spread like wildfire online.

"Vietnamese from all walks of life, including party members, are calling for them to remove Article 4 from the constitution. It is necessary for the people and for the party itself," prominent dissident Nguyen Thanh Giang, one of those who signed the petition, told AFP.

By guaranteeing the party's supremacy, Article 4 has "led to corruption and abuse of power," and allowed the unaccountable leadership to become "totally removed from reality and an obstacle to Vietnam's development," he added.

Nearly 6,000 people have signed the petition so far -- the public consultation period on the reforms ends on March 31 -- and it has even found support among a section of the Communist Party itself.

Deputy minister of justice Hoang The Lien even called for more controls on party power "to fight against the abuse of power and monopoly," during an online discussion organised by the government.

The leaders have not yet made any specific proposals themselves on what changes they would like to make to the constitution, which was first approved in 1946 and has been amended four times since -- most recently in 1992.

Founded in 1930, Vietnam's Communist Party led the country to independence from the French and then to victory over the Americans in a decades-long bloody war.

It has ruled unified Vietnam as a one-party state since 1975. The party tightly controls public debate and routinely imprisons dissidents who question the political system or call for change.

Some 25 years after the party initiated market reforms, Vietnam is mired in an economic slowdown, which experts and public opinion blames on mismanagement. This has caused an unprecedented erosion of trust in the party leadership.

In a bid to seem progressive and legitimate, Vietnam's rulers regularly -- albeit as a token -- ask for public input on policy issues. But with public dissatisfaction high, the constitutional reform bill has touched a raw nerve.

"Vietnam is in uncharted waters," said Jonathan London, an assistant professor in the Department of Asian and International Studies at City University of Hong Kong, adding the leadership "has to be rattled".

"The true significance of recent developments lies not in whether they result in any immediate reforms, which is unlikely, but whether and to what extent they have resulted in an altered political landscape," he said.

The party has already hit back, with top leaders issuing stern warnings about those who seek to use the consultation process to "sabotage the party".

Officials have warned that there is no plan to allow private ownership of land -- a very sensitive issue as land disputes currently account for more than 70 percent of complaints by citizens to local authorities.

And when journalist Nguyen Dac Kien came out on his blog to criticise leaders -- in particular the head of the party who said seeking reform was a sign of "moral deterioration" -- he was fired from his state-run newspaper.

"If one day I have to go to prison, I'm certain it will be a Communist prison, because I'm dying to be free," he wrote in a poem called "Freedom" which, like his original essay, has gone viral online.

With support for Kien and the petition growing rapidly online, it appears the dissenting voices will not be silenced.

"We're 37 years late with political reforms," said former top government official Nguyen Trung, in an open letter to the leaders of Hanoi, referring to when the communist party took control of unified Vietnam.