Talk:Hun Sen

Headline text

Hello, can anyone tell me how I can e mail the office of Prime Minister Samdech Hun Sen ? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 2004 203.144.75.14 (talk • contribs) 09:05, 15 December.

It does not matter because the whole gov't is corrupt anyways I believe, so any attempts will be ignored. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.163.136.195 (talk • contribs) 21:05, 13 January 2006.

hun sen a puppet

What sources can be given that say he is a puppet of Hanoi? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.163.136.195 (talk • contribs) 20:59, 13 January 2006.

Every history of Cambodia not written by Vietnam. He was put in power by the Vietnamese army and he was kept in power by the Vietnamese until they finally left the country. He isn't really a puppet anymore, he is just a standard second-rate political strongman controlling a rotten government. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.12.116.137 (talk • contribs) 05:41, 20 April 2006.

Religion

Does anyone know if Hun Sen has any religious affiliation? Being an ex-communist, one might assume not. But being the leader of a deeply Buddhist state, one might assume so. Any knowledge on the subject is welcome. Picaroon9288 19:15, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Post 1993 political career section

I have removed this section from the body of the article because it is written in very poor English and is full of uncited facts, POV and Original Research. The only reason I did not totally delete is that there seems to be some useful material that could be salvaged by fact-checking, citing sources and removing POV. I don't have the time but maybe somebody else can clean this up and incorporate it back into the article.--WilliamThweatt 15:57, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Political Life post-1993 election

The 1993 election sponsored by the UN saw Hun Sen came second, after FUNCINPEC Party. Despite this result, Hun Sen refused to hand over power, and demanded power-sharing with the winning party. He threatened to start civil war should he failed to gripe on to power. Finally, due to some political wrangling within the FUNCINPEC Party itself and the facts that the bulk to the Cambodian military is under Hun Sen control, the Prime ministership was shared between the two men: Ranarriddh as first PM, Hun Sen as second. It was the first ever such power sharing arrangement anywhere in the world, and few believed the alliance would hold. During that time til 1997, the alliance continually showed signs of crack and disagreement, and the government achieved little if anything. Both parties focuses on building a strong military of its own, and in 1997, a war broke out in the centre of the city. The war is a coup by Hun Sen to depose his first PM.

The section above is substantially true, though the language is POV heavy. Hun Sen actually threatened to succeed the eastern provinces of Cambodia if CPP were not part of the new government. I'll hunt for some good sources. Paxse 14:51, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

From then on, Hun Sen went on to become a great tactitian, oppressor, democrat, entrepreneur, military leader, economic leader, chess master, spiritual leader, and above all else, the strongman of Cambodia. No one - no one - can touch him. His political fortune rises and rises. He is feared and loved everywhere. He is feard because at times, he is very evil - he constantly issued death threats, he stated that he would choose war over anything should he loses power, and he is known to be mad. He is loved because he is decisive and the best leader Cambodia could have among the current politicians.

Nothing to salvage here. Paxse 14:51, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

In 2003, Hun Sen won the election for the 3rd term of the government, termed by internation observers as free and fair. Yet, the oppositions: the Sam Rainsy Party, and the FUNCINPEC Party disputed the result, alleging intimidation and vote buying. The next couple of months after the election, a huge demonstration organized by the Opposition took place in front of the National Assembly in Phnom Penh to protest the result of the election. At first, Hun Sen's attitude towards the demonstration was peaceful and even boasted that he would let them demonstrate as much as they wish, because he was still the PM and as long as the new government was not formed, he remained PM indefinitely. This attitude took a swift turn when his motorcade was attacked in Siem Reap, and he barely escaped death in that attack. He offered $100,000 and forgave anyone who confessed the act. (There was no record that anyone came out to confess despite this huge sum of money). He returned to Phnom Penh, and immediately ordered the demonstration, which was by then into its second month, to be dispersed or he will use force to disperse them. 2 days later, police, miliary and fire-fighter truck arrived at the scene and forcefully remove demonstrators. Several were killed, a large numbers were injured, and several were arrested, and some died in custody due to internal bleeding from torture. Phnom Penh became locked down, and curfew were imposed. Pro-opposition monks were dethrobe, and some were beaten. Gun shots were heard here and there and the city is completely chaotic.

The first few lines are correct but the curfew, defrocking, chaos etc are exaggerated. Paxse 14:51, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

The above section is incorrect: The writer is referring to 1998, not 2003. What happened in 2003 was entirely different.74.166.249.148 (talk) 04:35, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Some months later, miraculuously, Ranariddh broke his opposition to the election result and decided to join the new government. The newly formed coalition took shape shortly after, with Hun Sen retaining his PM post, and Ranarridh acquiring the Speaker of the National Assembly post. This stunted the Sam Rainsy party, and left it the sole opposition party in the new government. The SRP accused Ranarridh of accepting $30 million bribes and a private jet for him joining the government.

This was the story at the time and may be correct - naturally no evidence is available.Paxse 14:51, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

In 2006, Hun Sen and Ranariddh broke out, and Hun Sen said publicly that it is hard for him to work with Ranariddh. On 18 Oct, Ranariddh was deposed as FUNCINPEC leader, and he was replaced by Keo Puth Reasmey, a hardly known Cambodia Ambassador to Germany.

This is correct. I will try to find some sources and add the useful parts of the above back to the article. William, I heartily agree with your concerns. However, I would have preferred to work on the section in situ - rather than cutting and pasting it into the talk page and then trying to put it back. Paxse 14:51, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Family name

What is his family name? Hung or Sen? Or Hung Sen? Or he got no surname? Wasabian 11:05, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

• The family name comes first in Cambodia - so his kids are Hun Toe, Hun Mana, Hun Malis etc. Sen is what his Mum called him when he was a little boy :) Paxse 18:43, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
  
• As in most of the Far East, the family name comes first ... which is the same order that names appear in telephone and other directories in the West. Where mixed traditions exist (as in Hong Kong); the family name may be first if they follow the Chinese style or last if they adopt Western style. In this case, they usually use the Western order (family name last) if they adopt a Western given name (such as "Tommy Wong") or the Eastern style if using their Chinese name (say, "Wong Cheung-kwok"). However, this can be confusing if they give both given names such as "Wong Cheung-kwok (Tommy)." In such cases, it is common to capitalize or underline the family name to avoid confusion such as: "WONG Cheung-kwok (Tommy)." Enquire 2007-11-05

Vandalism?

The recent edits by 124.121.137.21 seem to have replaced the article with text about someone else. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.32.218.187 (talk) 07:06, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

A certain user Symo.kh seems keen on white washing Hun Sen´s violent passed and his recent questionable acts as a 'prime minister'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.237.230.118 (talk) 02:51, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Lesbian daugther

It sems, that the news are mashed up and cripplet the real background. It look like it is not because she is a lesbian. The the apell for tolerance made then no sense. It's because she make other troubles. (Finance or Bombs or both)

• http://www.theage.com.au/news/World/Cambodian-PM-cuts-ties-with-gay-daughter/2007/10/30/1193618882924.html
• http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-5900.html
• http://uk.reuters.com/article/lifestyleMolt/idUKBKK11415620071031

--Fg68at de:Disk 01:26, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Illegal with voting rights?

It looks like an oximoron...--Againme (talk) 19:49, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Article: Birth 1951 - next thing - leader 1979

Born April 4, 1951 Appointed as foreign minister 1979 Maybe something happened in between - something to do with belonging to the Khymer Rouge? 124.169.231.34 (talk) 14:38, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Agreed something needs to be done about his early life and involvement in the Khmer Rouge -- Gramscis cousin (talk) 17:07, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

This article appears to be a whitewash of a thoroughly evil man. It's widely believed here (in southern Thailand) that his involvement with the Khmer Rouge continued right up to the point it became evident the movement's days were numbered. He abruptly "escaped" to Vietnam in 1979 and began the process of buying his way into the leadership role he enjoys now. I should be very interested in other points of view on this take. (kentfx 05:57, 29 November 2009 (UTC)) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kentfx (talk • contribs)

This is all uncited

Where are the citings for this article. How can it make comments like this:

" He was a former Khmer Rouge who escaped to Vietnam before 1979 in order to call for the Vietnamese to overthrow the Khmer Rouge government. Since the restoration of multi-party democracy in 1993, the CPP has been in a coalition with the royalist Funcinpec party."

He called for nothing. The vietnamese invasion was the result of the Khmer Rouge attempting to regain land in South Vietnam. I'd also question the use of the term 'democracy' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.99.177.207 (talk) 01:38, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

It's democracy, Jim, but not as we know it.

To be fair to Hun Sen, the country is a lot freer than many others in Southeast Asia. There are regular elections and the results are not actually a foregone conclusion; the press is pretty free, in fact it's often pretty libelous; and roads and schools and clinics do get built. All this is to Hun Sen's credit. On the other hand, it's not exactly Sweden out there. The elections are the occasion for massive bribery and coercion, especially in the rural areas (less so in the cities), the elite are deeply corrupt and don't give a damn about the poor (if those roads and schools get built it's in order to bribe the village elites who control local vote-blocs), and the lives of journalists can be abruptly terminated (though a jail term is more usual). It's a mixed picture, and simply calling HS a dictator doesn't begin to give the flavour of the complexities involved. The interesting part will start when he leaves the scene and others, probably less politically adept, take over. PiCo (talk) 08:43, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

NPOV

The article is too biased towards negative aspects of the Cambodian government. Editors should stick to writing about the individual, the stuff about the administration should be moved/merged into the article on the government. — Nearly Headless Nick {C} 06:58, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

@Nearly Headless Nick, thanks for the advice and correcting my edit. Upon reflection, I agree it is not best suited on the individuals page. What page do you think would be suitable for a piece on government corruption? Government_of_cambodia? 4JackInTheBox (talk) 09:43, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

I think a neutrally worded article on Corruption in Cambodia should do fine. But remember, allegations are simply allegations, Wikipedia has no place for speculation, we must give due consideration to WP:V, WP:RS, WP:WEIGHT and WP:NOR/WP:SYN. — Nearly Headless Nick {C} 09:48, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

A couple of points to ponder. 1)If a person/government IS corrupt, writing about it is not bias. 2)For all intents and purposes, Hun Sen IS the Cambodian government; if not for his position as the Strongman in charge of Cambodia, he would be non-notable. Thus, the "writing about the individual" is not nearly as relevant as the "stuff about the administration". (See for an example Richard Nixon where the vast majority of the article is about his politics and administration.) The well-documented and wide-spread corruption relating to Hun Sen and his grip on power as well as his close ties to Viet Nam are inseparable from any article about him. Now having said that, I agree that we must give due consideration to WP:V, WP:RS, WP:WEIGHT and WP:NOR/WP:SYN. I guess what I'm trying to say is that any article written about the Cambodian government or Hun Sen might seem "biased towards the negative" but that's just because that is the reality of the topic. To not write about it or to have a "sanitized" article just about his personal life would be biased in the other direction. Just some things to think about.--William Thweatt ^Talk | ^Contribs 00:10, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Agree with you in principle about the policies. However, to make claims such as "he is corrupt" should be backed by multiple reliable sources. The more exceptional the claim, the more exceptional the sources should be. The sources should also mention who made the allegation (most allegations would not qualify, unless they pass the muster at WP:DUE and WP:BLP). Something like "Hun Sen is the Cambodian government" will not go through unless it's a widely held view published in independent, reliable, mainstream and scholarly sources. Remember, Verifiability, not the truth. — Nearly Headless Nick {C} 00:15, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

I found extracts from many newspapers in which Hun Sen acknowledged and responded to the bribery allegations (and subsequent investigation by US government) (HERE) but denied that corruption had taken place. However he admitted to signing the original deal with BHP (HERE). Hence why I thought his page may be appropriate. Statements such as "Hun Sen is the Cambodian government" are not relevant in highlighting a newsworthy investigation. 4JackInTheBox (talk) 11:36, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

One of the sources you have quoted is a blog post and cannot be considered a reliable source. Please see Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. The other source claims that the US authorities were probing payments. Hun Sen said it was meant for a social fund. That is a fact. But we have to be careful whist representing multiple sources in an article so as to ensure that none of what is stated is original synthesis. Thanks. — Nearly Headless Nick {C} 11:49, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

About the claim of corrupt: If you would name then Hun Sen corrupt with "exceptional" source, then the implications will be that dozens of politicians (including in the US) can then "enjoy" to read the word "corrupt" in respective articles about them. 49.145.85.9 (talk) 10:47, 3 June 2012 (UTC)