1 the Paris Plan and Its Failure 2 Towards a New Explanation of The
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Notes 1 The Paris Plan and Its Failure 1. Douglas Pike, ‘The Cambodian Peace Process: Summer of 1989’, Asian Survey, XXIX, no. 9 (September 1989), 842, 847. 2. See: Cambodia: An Australian Peace Proposal. Working Papers Prepared for the Informal Meeting on Cambodia, Jakarta, 26–28 February 1990. (Canberra: Department of Foreign Affairs, Australia, 1990.) The Australian Plan was reproduced in: Amitav Acharya, Pierre Lizée, and Sorpong Peou, eds., Cambodia – The 1989 Paris Peace Conference. Background Analysis and Documents (Millwood, New York: Kraus International Publications, 1991). Subsequent references will be to that text. 3. The peace agreement was in fact a series of accords comprising: the Final Act of the Paris Conference on Cambodia, an Agreement on a Comprehensive Settlement of the Cambodia Conflict, an Agreement Concerning the Sovereignty, Independence, Territorial Integrity and Inviolability, Neutrality and National Unity of Cambodia, and a Declaration on the Rehabilitation and Reconstruction of Cambodia. 4. Ibid. 5. Ibid. 6. Ibid. 7. Ibid. 8. See: United Nations Peacekeeping Operations. Information Notes (New York: United Nations Department of Public Information, 1992) (CDPI/1306, September 1992), and Frederick Z. Brown, ‘Cambodia in 1992. Peace at Peril,’ Asian Survey, XXXIII, no. 1 ( January 1993), 83–90. 9. See: Stephen R. Ratner, ‘The Cambodian Settlement Agreements,’ American Journal of International Law, 87, no. 1 ( January 1993), 12–18. 10. A.K.P. Mochtan, ed., Cambodia. Toward Peace and Reconstruction ( Jakarta: Centre for Strategic and International Studies, 1993), iii. 2 Towards a New Explanation of the Collapse of the Paris Plan 1. Stephen Gill, ‘Epistemology, Ontology and the ‘Italian School,’ in Gramsci, Historical Materialism and International Relations, Stephen Gill, ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), (Cambridge Studies in International Relations no. 26), 21. This volume probably presents the most pertinent of these writings. Of particular interest is: Robert W. Cox, ‘Gramsci, Hegemony and International Relations: An Essay in Method.’ This essay was originally published in Millennium, 12, no. 2 (1983), 162–75. 2. Robert W. Cox, ‘Gramsci, Hegemony and International Relations: An Essay in Method,’ 56–7. 3. Stephen Gill, ‘Epistemology, Ontology and the ‘Italian School,’ 28. 4. Robert W. Cox, ‘Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory,’ in Neorealism and its Critics, Robert O. Keohane, ed. (New York: Columbia University Press, 1986), 208. This text was originally published in: Millennium, 10, no. 2 (Summer 1981), 126–55. 176 Notes 177 5. Cox, ‘Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory,’ 218. 6. Ibid., 218–19. 7. Anthony Giddens, The Nation-State and Violence. Volume Two of A Contemporary Critique of Historical Materialism (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1987). 8. Giddens, The Nation-State and Violence, 1. 9. Other authors have attempted the same type of study, but their work has lacked the brilliance and the detail of Giddens’ writings. See, for instance, Michael Mann, States, War and Capitalism. Studies in Political Sociology (Oxford and New York: Basil Blackwell, 1988) and Martin Shaw, ‘War and the Nation-State in Social Theory,’ in Social Theory of Modern Societies. Anthony Giddens and his Critics, 129–46, David Held and John B. Thompson, eds (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1989). 10. Giddens, The Nation-State and Violence, 65. 11. Ibid, 87. 12. Ibid, 94. 13. Bob Jessop, ‘Book Review: A. Giddens’ The Nation-State and Violence,’ Capital and Class, no. 29 (Summer 1986), 217. 14. For instance, in Robert Jervis, ‘Cooperation Under the Security Dilemma,’ World Politics, 30, no. 2, 167–214, and Helga Haftendorn, ‘The Security Puzzle: Theory-Building and Discipline-Building in International Security,’ International Studies Quarterly, 35, no. 1 (March 1991), 3–18. 15. Martin Shaw, ‘War and the Nation-State in Social Theory,’ 138. 16. Giddens, The Nation-State and Violence, 14. 17. Ibid, 140. 18. Ibid, 135. 19. Ibid, 249. 20. Other authors have underscored the relation between the expansion of cap- italism and the centralization of the means of violence in the structures cre- ated by the emergence of the nation-state. See, for instance: Charles Tilly, ‘War Making and State Making as Organized Crime,’ in Bringing the State Back In, Peter Evans, Dietrich Rueschemeyer, Theda Skocpol, eds. (Cambridge University Press, 1985), and Charles Tilly, Coercion, Capital, and European States, A.D. 990–1990 (Oxford: Blackwell, 1990). The originality of Giddens’ work lies in its ability to demonstrate that the elaboration of cer- tain mechanisms of control of violence were part of the emergence of capi- talism itself since capitalist practices entail the evacuation of violence from economic exchanges. In this sense, his analysis provides a deeper under- standing of the role of violence in shaping the capitalist aspect of the mod- ern order in Western societies. 21. Sheldon Wolin, ‘Violence and the Western Political Tradition,’ American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, XXXIII (1963), 20. 22. Giddens, The Nation-State and Violence, 4. 23. Ibid, 308. 24. Anthony Giddens, ‘A Reply to my Critics,’ in Social Theory of Modern Societies. Anthony Giddens and his Critics, 267. 25. Anthony Giddens, The Nation-State and Violence, 160. 178 Notes 26. Thom Workman, The Social Origins of the Iran-Iraq War (Boulder and London: Lynne Rienner, 1993), 14. 27. See, for instance: Ruth H. Howes and Michael R. Stevenson, eds., Women and the Use of Military Force (Boulder and London: Lynne Rienner, 1993). 28. Bradley S. Klein, ‘The Textual Strategies of the Military: Or Have You Read Any Good Defense Manuals Lately?’ in International/Intertextual Relations. Postmodern Readings of World Politics, James Der Derian and Michael J. Shapiro, eds. (Lexington: Lexington Books, 1989). 29. Sheldon S. Wolin, ‘Violence and the Western Political Tradition.’ 30. Abdulgaffar Peang-Meth, ‘Understanding the Khmer: Sociological-Cultural Observations,’ Asian Survey, XXXI, no. 5 (May 1991), 445. 31. Niels Mulder, Inside Southeast Asia (Bangkok: Duang Kamol, 1992), 97. 32. Ibid, 118. 33. S.J. Tambiah, World Conqueror and World Renouncer (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976). 34. Donald G. McCloud, System and Process in Southeast Asia (Boulder: Westview Press, 1986), 72. 35. See: Than H. Vuong, ‘Les colonisations du Viêt-nam et le colonialisme viet- namien,’ Etudes internationales, XVIII, no. 3 (September 1987), 545–71. 36. Alain Forest, Le Cambodge et la colonisaiton française. Historie d’une colonisa- tion sans heurts (Paris: L’Harmattan, 1980). 37. ‘… c’est justement parce que l’une des fonctions du Cambodge dans le contexte colonial indochinois est de rapporter de l’argent par le biais de l’impôt sans prob- lème que l’oeuvre coloniale fut limitée.’ Alain Forest, Le Cambodge et la colonisa- tion française. Histoire d’une colonisation sans heurts (Paris: L’Harmattan, 1980), 252. 38. Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities. Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism (revised edn) (London: Verso Books, 1991). 39. Ibid, 175. 40. Anthony Giddens, The Nation-State and Violence, 272. 41. Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities, xiv. 42. ‘Ce n’est pas la notion de race qui fonde la spécificité cambodgienne, mais la notion de tradition.’ Alain Forest, Le Cambodge et la colonisation française, 464. 43. ‘Ces dernières [les autorités françaises] occupent tout le terrain de l’initiative et de l’action publique, n’exigeant des Cambodgiens, à quelque niveau qu’ils soient, qu’approbation, obéissance et soumission, et cantonnant les autorités dans le domaine du traditionnel et, plus précisément, du religieux … il en résulte une perte complète du sens des responsabilités et la non-émergence d’un certain sens de l’Etat chez un fonctionnariat qui échappe désormais à toute sanction de la part des administrés; ce qui signifie, dans le concret, la continu- ation, plus discrète cependant, des practique concussionnaires et arbitraires.’ Alain Forest, Le Cambodge et la colonisation française, 489. Though this does not explain the weakness of the French administrative apparatus and its consequences, it is possible to note that the reliance on Vietnamese administrators in Cambodia throughout the colonial period also played a role in preventing the emergence of a bureaucratic class in Cambodia. 44. Nayan Chanda, The Political Economy of Cambodia (New York: The East Asian Institute, Columbia University, 1990), 7. Notes 179 45. Nayan Chanda, The Political Economy of Cambodia, 13. Chanda is comment- ing on the Chinese community’s behavior in the early 1980s, but the remark also applies to deeper trends. 46. Alain Forest, Le Cambodge et la colonisation française, 51. 47. David P. Chandler, A History of Cambodia (2nd edn) (Boulder: Westview Press, 1992), 12. 48. Ibid, 58. The emphasis is in the original text. 49. On these concepts, see: Abdulgafar Peange-Meth, ‘Understanding the Khmer.’ For two brilliant analyses of the relation between factionalism and the nature of Cambodian politics, see: Marie Alexandrine Martin, ‘La paysannerie khmère et le processus démocratique,’ in Les Cambodgients face à eux-mêmes?, Christian Lechervy and Richard Petris, eds. (Paris: Fondation pour le progrès de l’homme, 1992); François Ponchaud, ‘Elections et société khmère,’ in the same volume. For an interesting contrast on the notion of factionalism, see Pye’s study of