Hypocrisy: US Destroys Syria While Propping Up Cambodian Dictator

US funds terrorists to overthrow Syrian
government based on “humanitarian concerns,” while US President Obama to
lend legitimacy to “dictator-for-life” Hun Sen of Cambodia with
upcoming visit.

Tony Cartalucci


November 10, 2012 

The US President shaking hands with Cambodian dictator Hun Sen in 2010.

The United States and its allies have maintained that their commitment
to supporting militants operating inside of Syria is based on
“humanitarian concerns” and in helping “oust a dictator.” The US has
recently handpicked the Syrian opposition, and has pledged funds and
logistical support to help arm militants who have, since 2007, been
identified as sectarian extremists affiliated with Al Qaeda, not secular
“pro-democracy” “freedom fighters.”

This was first exposed by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh in his 2007 New Yorker report titled, “The Redirection: Is the Administration’s new policy benefiting our enemies in the war on terrorism?

In the report it specifically stated:

“To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush
Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in
the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has coöperated with
Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations
that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is
backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations
aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has
been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant
vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.”
The Redirection, Seymour Hersh (2007) 

Hersh’s report would continue by stating: 

“the Saudi government, with Washington’s approval, would provide funds
and logistical aid to weaken the government of President Bashir Assad,
of Syria. The Israelis believe that putting such pressure on the Assad
government will make it more conciliatory and open to negotiations.” –The Redirection, Seymour Hersh (2007)

The link between extremist groups and Saudi funding was also mentioned
in the report, and reflects evidence regarding the origin and backers of
similar extremists who flooded Iraq during the US occupation, sowing
sectarian strife and killing Western troops alike:

“…[Saudi Arabia’s] Bandar and other
Saudis have assured the White House that “they will keep a very close
eye on the religious fundamentalists. Their message to us was ‘We’ve
created this movement, and we can control it.’ It’s not that we don’t
want the Salafis to throw bombs; it’s who they throw them at—Hezbollah, Moqtada al-Sadr, Iran, and at the Syrians, if they continue to work with Hezbollah and Iran.” –The Redirection, Seymour Hersh (2007)

The US attempts to bury this reality and instead highlight its alleged
humanitarian agenda with publicized donations to refugee camps created
by the very violence they have created and fully plan to perpetuate.  The US has just recently claimed it has pumped another 34 million USD for “humanitarian aid” according to Sky News.

US Claims to Fight Dictatorship, Yet Coddles a Menagerie of Mass Murdering Despots. 

Yet despite this window dressing, the fact that the US is supporting
sectarian terrorists is not the full extent of Western hypocrisy. It was covered recently
that deposed dictator and accused mass-murderer Thaksin Shinawatra of
Thailand was allowed to travel to the United States and engage in
political activity. Shinawatra had overseen a “War on Drugs” that saw
nearly 3,000 people extra-judicially executed over the course of 90
days, most of whom were later found to have had nothing to do with
illicit drugs – Human Rights Watch (HRW) would confirm this in their
2008 report titled, “Thailand’s ‘war on drugs’,” a follow up to the much more extensive 2004 report, “Not Enough Graves.”   . 

Now the US prepares for yet another display of overt hypocrisy as US
President Barack Obama prepares to meet with the Prime Minister of
Cambodia, Hun Sen. Accused mass murderer and formerly a member of the
genocidal Khmer Rouge, Hun Sen has since sat in power for well over
two-decades. While running under the illusion of “people’s power,” he
has since 2008 sold over half of his nation off to foreign investors,
right out from under the Cambodian people.

In a 2008 article by the Guardian titled, “Country for Sale,”
it was reported that, “almost half of Cambodia has been sold to foreign
speculators in the past 18 months – and hundreds of thousands who fled
the Khmer Rouge are homeless once more.” The report would go on to

Hun Sen and his ruling Cambodian People’s Party (CPP) have, in effect,
put the country up for sale. Crucially, they permit investors to form
100% foreign-owned companies in Cambodia that can buy land and real
estate outright – or at least on 99-year plus 99-year leases. No other
country in the world countenances such a deal. Even in Thailand and
Vietnam, where similar land speculation and profiteering are under way,
foreigners can be only minority shareholders.

It would continue:

By March this year [2008], virtually all Cambodia’s
accessible and sandy coast was in private hands, either Cambodian or
foreign. Those who lived or worked there were turfed out – some jailed,
others beaten, virtually all denied meaningful compensation. 

The article would also state: 

It was abundantly clear to observers, including the World Bank and
Amnesty International, that by making these private deals, Hun Sen was
denying prosperity to most of his people, causing the country’s social
fabric to unwind like thread from a bobbin. Today, more than 150,000
people are threatened with eviction. Forty-five per cent of the
country’s entire landmass has been sold off – from the land ringing
Angkor Wat to the colonial buildings of Phnom Penh to the south-western
islands. Professor Yash Ghai, the UN human rights emissary to Cambodia,
warned, “One does not need expertise in human rights to recognise that
many policies of the government have… deprived people of their
economic resources and means of livelihood, and denied them their
dignity.” He added, “I believe that the deliberate rejection of the
concept of a state governed by the rule of law has been central to the
ruling party’s hold on power.” 

It would seem as if Cambodia’s Hun Sen should easily find himself
amongst the West’s “Axis of Evil,” the subject of crippling sanctions,
and at the very least, uninvited to visit the US, or lent legitimacy by
being allowed to host US representatives. 

Since the 2008 Guardian article, the situation has only deteriorated for
the Cambodian people. The Guardian again reported in September 2012 in
their article, “Conflict over land in Cambodia is taking a dangerous turn,” that:

In the first nine months of the year, we have seen the killing of Cambodia‘s leading environmental activist, a journalist and a 14-year-old girl whose community faced eviction. We’ve also seen the conviction of 13 land activists for legitimate protests; a judicial move against one of the country’s most respected human rights activists; the harassment of politically active monks; and the arrest of an independent radio station owner on charges of secessionism. And these are just the most outlandish and publicised incidents.

The article would continue: 

Cambodia is in the grip of a land-grabbing crisis that has seen more than 2m hectares
(5m acres) of land transferred mostly from subsistence farmers to
agribusiness. And as good land becomes scarce, the battle for it is
becoming increasingly intense. An estimated 400,000 people have been affected by land disputes since 2003.

It would also state that: 

For the average Cambodian, the only avenues that offer the prospect of
success are public protest and individual action. The government is well
aware of the desperation, and this fact helps explain the recent spate
of arrests, killings and harassment. The authorities are increasingly
using violence to keep a lid on things. If evictees don’t go peacefully,
private firms are willing and able to tap the resources of the state to
forcefully capture land.

Yet despite Hun Sen’s government brutalizing its own people with
harassment, violence, and murder, displacing hundreds of thousands of
civilians, and stealing the land right out from under the nation’s poor,
it was recently announced that US President Barack Obama would be visiting Cambodia to meet with Prime Minister Hun Sen.
There has been no protest or formal condemnation by the US regarding
Hun Sen and his systematic campaign of theft and violence waged against
the Cambodian people, nor has there been any protests of political
ramifications imposed by the emerging supranational block ASEAN who is
in fact holding their annual meeting in Phnom Penh, Cambodia this

Image: While the West funds and arms verified Al Qaeda
militants invading Syria for alleged “humanitarian concerns,” tacit
approval is granted to governments like that of Hun Sen of Cambodia to
brutalize his own population in sweeping land grabs that have left
hundreds of thousands of Cambodian people without homes or a livelihood.
The difference? Syria refuses to capitulate to Wall Street and London’s
“international order,” Cambodia is eagerly selling off its sovereignty
to it.


The reason for silent complicity is because the land Hun Sen steals goes directly to foreign corporations,
including those in both neighboring Southeast Asian nations, as well as
the United States, United Kingdom, and Europe. Similar atrocities have
been tacitly approved by the West in Uganda, where a similar mass
murderer, dictator-for-life Yoweri Museveni has been given a blank check to seize land on behalf of foreign corporations using his US-armed and trained military to carry out land-grabbing operations.

Clearly the West’s commitment for “human rights,” “democracy,” and
“freedom” is a selectively enforced set of values, just as driven by
self-serving corporate-financier interests as tacit, or even active
support for land grabbing, mass murder, and pillaging across the

The taint such hypocrisy brings to the so-called “international
community,” leaves permanently disfigured any concept of “international
rule-of-law,” and resigns entirely the legitimacy of Western governments
and silent global institutions from presuming authority to meddle
elsewhere while profitable exceptions are quietly made in nations like