Phnom Penh (Cambodia). 15/02/2009: Bruno Carette, documentary maker, at genocide museum Tuol Sleng.
©John Vink/ Magnum
With grave and solemn expressions on their faces, former Khmer Rouge leaders are gathered in Pailin on July 3rd 2003 for the funeral of Khieu Ponnary, the first wife of Pol Pot. They are all present: Nuon Chea, Ieng Sary and his wife, and Khieu Samphan, who will all be arrested four years later to answer for the crimes committed under the Democratic Kampuchea regime. These images open the film “Khmers rouges amers” (Bitter Khmer Rouge), directed by Bruno Carette and Sien Meta, who have decided to investigate on the side of the Khmer Rouge as they had another look at this dark period in the history of Cambodia. Their camera has filmed those who made the Khmer Rouge regime, from the simple peasant-soldier to the great leaders. The interviews were edited and completed with archive footage, with the chief concern to place the events back in their historical context. The result is a dense and comprehensive documentary intended for anyone interested in trying to understand what can be understood on these tragic years. The premiere of “Khmers rouges amers” is scheduled on Saturday February 21st in Phnom Penh, at the Bophana Audiovisual Resource Centre, who will make a Khmer version of the document – in spite of its historical value, it has yet to find a distributor. Interview with director Bruno Carette, who has been tracking the Khmer Rouge regime since 1993.
Ka-set: “Khmers rouges amers” gives the floor to former Khmer Rouge, from the simple soldier to the leaders of Democratic Kampuchea, who present their perspective on this dark period of the history of Cambodia. Why did you choose that angle?
Bruno Carette: This film actually comes in complement of a first one I had done before, “Kampuchea, chroniques rouge-amer” (Kampuchea, Red Bitter Chronicles), a historical documentary that is a little academic, which was broadcast in 2000 on television channel France 5 and for which I had collected many victims testimonies. That movie had been well-received by the public and I had thought – as I was living in Cambodia – that it would be interesting to repeat the same work, but from the point of view of the Khmer Rouge and with the same concern to place the events back in their historical context.
K7: Hence the presence of the words “rouge” (red) and “amer” (bitter) in the title, as an echo to the first documentary?
BC: Yes, it was to make it clear that this was the second part of an investigation. At the same time, the Khmer Rouge Meta and I were able to meet are not very proud of what happened. We could even perceive a hint of bitterness in their words, in particular for Khieu Samphan [the former president of Democratic Kampuchea].
I am aware that placing the Khmer Rouge tragedy back in its historical context is one of the defence arguments used by Khieu Samphan, but I think that approach is legitimate, although, in my opinion, it does not justify the death of a quarter of the population [1.7 million Cambodians]. I did not take everything he told me at face value, but that was our agreement. For him, it is indeed impossible to explain the tragedy without any historical perspective.
K7: Was it easy to establish contact with former Khmer Rouge?
BC: Not really. I have been running after the Khmer Rouge since 1993! That is when I came to Cambodia for the first time, for a documentary aimed at taking stock of the United Nations Transitional Authority in Cambodia [UNTAC, 1991-1993] as they withdrew from the Kingdom. The Khmer Rouge then had a delegation in the capital, behind the Royal Palace, since they had signed the Paris Peace Accords in 1991 with the United Nations. Every morning, I used to go and knock on their door, during the whole time I stayed in Phnom Penh. My requests remained unsuccessful. Every time I came back to Cambodia, I tried to get in touch with them. In vain. We can say that things started to get better after Khieu Samphan published his book [Recent History of Cambodia and My Successive Positions, 2004] and became interested in meeting journalists to promote it. As for those who were ordinary Khmer Rouge, mostly peasant farmers, I was able to approach them because I spoke a little Khmer and I was accompanied by a Cambodian, Meta, who knows the history well and was instrumental in gaining their trust.
K7: Did you feel that they needed to justify themselves?
BC: No. Unlike the leaders, not really. But they were rather surprised by our approach, that a foreigner could be interested in them without necessarily demonising them.
K7: In the documentary, you ask Khieu Samphan if he will offer apologies in a court, and he replies that forgiveness means nothing under the law. But does it have a meaning in the Cambodian culture?
BC: Before asking Khieu Samphan this question, I told him, 'You have muttered a request for forgiveness in your book.' Reading some sections, you can feel his bitterness. At the same time, I think he remains convinced that if the Khmer Rouge policy had been rightly implemented, the gap between the cities and the countryside – which has never been as important as today – would have disappeared. It is true that forgiveness is not a Buddhist concept and Buddhism is deeply ingrained in Cambodian society. It is a Western concept. Has Duch asked forgiveness because he converted to Christianity?
K7: All those you have interviewed have shied away from any responsibility they may have. On the one hand, former ordinary Khmer Rouge shift the blame onto those who used to be their leaders, who they accuse of having deceived them. On the other, former leaders point to the Vietnamese neighbour whose alleged expansionism represented a danger and to Khmer Rouge low-level cadres who are accused of abusing their power. Does nobody want to take their responsibility?
BC: Isn't it a little how a Khmer family works? You only have to look at what is happening in Cambodian politics today. Is that really characteristic of the Khmer Rouge? Khieu Samphan does consider, in hindsight, that they proceeded too quickly and gave too much power to the chiefs, those of cooperatives in particular. How can you know in a society where orders were only given orally? Faced with the failure of their policy, the Khmer Rouge could either question it or claim it was the result of the policy of traitors. They chose the second explanation. Has anyone ever dared to dispute their own policy? As well, there was the fear of the central power and of reprisals... You can also wonder if there was a real willingness to see things. Wasn't there a belief that it was the price to pay to achieve their ends? That – as an ordinary mechanic in Pailin said with simplicity – it was finally the same as when the Angkor temples were built at the cost of the death of many people? That is why I tried to keep a balance between the interviews of leaders, subordinate cadres, ordinary people and individuals like Laurence Picq, a Frenchwoman married to a Cambodian who lived under the Khmer Rouge regime and shared their ideology.
K7: What is left of the Khmer Rouge past in the Northwest of Cambodia, where the Khmer Rouge rebels took up position after the fall of their regime in 1979?
BC: Not much in what was yet one of the richest regions of the country, thanks to its gems and timber in particular. Forests have been logged, the frontier is exploited by Thai companies, the soil is exhausted from mining... The population is living in absolute poverty. The result is the opposite of what the Khmer Rouge had announced, that is making Cambodia a country where peasant farmers could take their destinies into their own hands and no longer be exploited by the upper classes. In addition, the region is not spared by bad weather. However, since national reconciliation, there is the feeling that former Khmer Rouge leaders have made a complete U-turn. They have built casinos, brothels... and are now the ones exploiting the population.
K7: How have former Khmer Rouge reacted to the internationalised tribunal established in Phnom Penh to try the former leaders and those most responsible for the crimes of their regime?
BC: Until the leaders were arrested [the tribunal has indicted five of them, including Khieu Samphan, Nuon Chea, the ideologist of Democratic Kampuchea, and Ieng Sary, former chief of Khmer Rouge diplomacy], the word among peasant farmers, Khmer Rouge in Pailin and Anlong Veng, was to remain loyal to the leaders. A little like in the Cambodian tradition, when you respect the eldest, the leader. So, until their arrest, they were not interested at all in seeing the tribunal work, but in justifying the action of their leaders, who had, according to them, acted for the good of the people. Their stance has changed a little since then. Is it out of fear of the authorities or fear that the tribunal looks at other subordinate chiefs? Maybe. There is a scene in the movie I find interesting. It shows the credulity of Cambodian peasant farmers living in former Khmer Rouge areas. Sam Rainsy, the opposition leader, always wanted a tribunal. For the 2003 legislative elections, he had appointed as the head of his list in Pailin the niece of Ta Mok, Pol Pot's military chief. What surprised me was to see Ta Mok's niece tell her supporters that when Sam Rainsy came to present her as the ideal candidate in Pailin, it was to support the brave Khmer Rouge patriots who had defended the nation, and that if he was fighting for a trial, it was to bring justice for the Khmer Rouge! Was this credulity or propaganda? I am not sure.
K7: You have never believed that an internationalised tribunal would be set up in Cambodia to try the former Khmer Rouge leaders. But it has been established and the first trial should open at the court in the near future. Do you still have reserves about it?
BC: I do not have any reserves – those must come from Cambodians because justice must be given to them. However, I do feel some scepticism. First, I recall that there was a tribunal in 1979 in Phnom Penh, which was a parody of justice established by Vietnam and held a summary and poor trial. From the point of view of Cambodians in power today, a Khmer Rouge trial did take place, an insufficient one, but it did happen. Then, the United Nations arrived in Cambodia and said they were going to restore peace. They signed the Paris Peace Accords with the Khmer Rouge and others. From 1979 to 1989, Vietnam occupied the country and had established a puppet regime. It was the middle of the Cold War, Vietnam was a USSR ally and it was impossible to support such a regime. As a result, the United Nations allowed the Khmer Rouge to keep the vacant seat of the Cambodian delegation in New York until 1991. That is a bit too much... As soon as the Peace Paris Accords sponsored by the United Nations were signed, people said: We are going to try the Khmer Rouge! This of course hastened the impossibility of national reconciliation. When the Khmer Rouge realised that, they boycotted the elections and resumed military guerilla. Again, the United Nations has a great responsibility for this failed peace. They managed to organise the first free elections in Cambodia in 1993 and return Norodom Sihanouk to the throne, but as soon as it happened, they left, saying that had been the most successful United Nations mission! A mission that still cost three billion dollars with the deployment of 22,000 civilians and military in the country, who completed only half the work but left feeling satisfied! Even though the Khmer Rouge rebels had not been disarmed. It was necessary to wait for Pol Pot's death, after the surrender of the Pailin stronghold, for the civil war to end, and that is not the achievement of the United Nations!
Later, when national reconciliation was sealed by prime Minister Hun Sen, the United Nations said again: We are going to try the Khmer Rouge now that they have been defeated! Hun Sen warned them by explaining that he extinguished the fire and that if they came back and reignited it, then, this time, they would have to put it out. In light of the context and the financial needs, I do think that the government has bargained for the tribunal. But given the past failures of the United Nations in Cambodia, I consider the way they have pressured the Cambodian government to try the former Khmer Rouge is not without a certain cynicism. It is also true that the Cambodian government includes in its ranks former Khmer Rouge members and I do not believe that the authorities are keen to see the past of these high officials be uncovered. On the contrary, I have the feeling that they are going to somehow rewrite history. But maybe they have a certain right to do so, because truth is they were the ones to restore peace.
K7: Several organisations are concerned by the graft allegations that have marred the Khmer Rouge tribunal. What do you think about it?
BC: I have noted that the United Nations have carried out an investigation on the allegations and still have not made their report public. Why? In the end, there is the impression that everyone has started something that no one really wanted, with on the one hand, the United Nations who is concerned with rehabilitating their half-failed UNTAC action, and on the other, a Cambodian government that has restored peace but does not want to bring to light the past of some of its members...
Also, by limiting itself to the 1975-1979 period, the Khmer Rouge tribunal will not allow to place events back in their historical context, which I have tried to present in my movie, and it will not allow a full understanding of these events. We will see what the tribunal offers, but I do fear a striking simplification. Are they going to talk about the United States bombing? Of the support of China? Will that be possible? If the trial is biased and everyone tries to take advantage of it, then Cambodian people will again be held hostage.
K7: There is however a real expectation from Cambodians, who are hoping, through the tribunal, to understand what happened...
BC: If the tribunal provides elements of understanding and enables the victims to get closure over the death of their relatives, those will be very good things. But will the trial of Duch, the former director of S-21 prison, make it possible to explain the thousands and thousands of deaths in the countryside, the deportations, the starvation, the diseases and so on?
K7: So, you do not believe that the four others indicted by the Khmer Rouge tribunal will be tried?
BC: Unfortunately, I don't. I do not think they will be tried, at least not while Norodom Sihanouk is still alive. Some could die in detention for example, and maybe one of them will even get released...?
K7: Through these meetings with former Khmer Rouge, has your opinion of them changed?
BC: Not really. Like everybody, I had started with the idea that the Khmer Rouge were monstrous criminals, who had plundered their country and made the population suffer. Which is true. However, I do not want to sound outrageous, but I do not believe that crimes of this scope were premeditated. I think that at the start, the Khmer Rouge were rather motivated by progressive intentions, that were inspired by communist ideology – true – but that they thought they were working for the good of the people. The “enemies” were eliminated coldly, the Cold War context precipitated things and it all led to the absurdity of the Khmer Rouge system and the Cambodian tragedy, one of the worst catastrophes of mankind. The Khmer Rouge got it totally wrong.
But I am a journalist, not a prosecutor or a lawyer. I am satisfied with the opportunity I had to talk with Khmer Rouge, to show another side of history. Many among those we met were nothing like bloodthirsty criminals, but rather, they seemed like people who got carried away in a history that was beyond them. I could see that they had also suffered a lot, in particular the ordinary Khmer Rouge who were forcibly recruited in the countryside and ended up on the frontline. In the film, you can see it: almost all of them miss either a leg or an arm. This comforted me in the idea that this country had suffered in its flesh everywhere.
"Khmers rouges amers" will be shown on Saturday February 21st at 4pm at the Bophana Audiovisual Resource Centre , No 64 Street 200 (Okhnia Men), in Phnom Penh.
“Khmers rouges amers” on the Internet
Short extracts of testimonies collected by Bruno Carette and Sien Meta during their long investigation on the Khmer Rouge can be found on the website: www.khmersrouges.blogspot.com . In particular, you can hear Nuon Chea, also known as Brother Number Two, and Khieu Samphan, former president of Democratic Kampuchea. The documentary was finished in 2007 and was selected at the International Current Affairs and Social Documentary Film Festival (FIGRA) in 2007. The directors are currently looking for a distributor.
Also on Ka-set:
 - Khmer Rouge tribunal's credibility in question on eve of first trial (16-02-2009)
- Khmer Rouge Trial: "We always expect too much from justice", says historian Annette Wieviorka (23-12-2008)
|
By Doris
By John Vink
By Doris