Day: March 30, 2022

RFA’s Vietnamese Service interviewed Natalya Zhinkyna, interim representative of the Ukraine Embassy in Hanoi about her country’s struggle under the Russian invasion and her work in the capital of Vietnam, a traditional ally of Russia, a number of whose people have turned out to support Ukraine. In a wide-ranging interview, she thanked the Vietnamese public for participating in recent charity events that raised more than $100,000 for humanitarian relief. The interview has been edited for length and clarity.

RFA: What is the reaction of the Vietnamese public that you have noticed  since the war broke out?

Zhinkyna: Since the 24th of February, when the war started, every day we receive words of sympathy and support from the Vietnamese public, people write messages come to the embassy there with flowers and donations to help Ukraine, who had to leave their homes to protect their lives, ran our cities have been bombed by Russian army. We have organized charity events for Vietnamese public at our embassy in the beginning of March to raise money in order to address the humanitarian needs in Ukraine. And more charity events are coming soon.

And the Vietnamese people are praying together with us for the innocent Ukrainians who lost their lives in the fierce Russian attacks on peaceful cities of Ukraine.

This money is aimed at humanitarian relief for Ukraine and what is also important here that many Vietnamese opinion leaders took their mission in the informational front and help Ukraine to combat Russia’s propaganda here in Vietnam. Help to refute fakes and disinformation and expand the reasons, the costs, and the consequences of Russia’s brutal aggression for the global rules-based order, as well for the region of Southeast Asia, including for Vietnam.

RFA: Can you tell us, can you give us some examples of how the Vietnamese individually and collectively shown their support toward Ukrainian people that have moved the most?

Zhinkyna: When I see people coming to the embassy to just give us a hug. And I see the tears in their eyes and I hear the kind words from Vietnamese people who even didn’t have an opportunity to visit Ukraine or to know about Ukraine before. This is very touching. This is very moving. And as I mentioned, people have just flowers left at the embassy’s doors. I know this comes from Vietnamese people. This is very touching. And the donations that we receive, it doesn’t matter how much money people bring, but sometimes we will receive a big amounts from like private people like 1,000 or 2,000 dollars. I understand that this is a big donation for Vietnam, this person, and it is made from the bottom of their hearts in order to support and to help. And this is very precious. And are those messages that we receive? I personally receive thousands of messages and I’m very sorry. I cannot respond to all the all of the people who write to me, but it really inspires me or for the everyday work and it inspires my colleagues.

RFA: Did it come as a surprise from you, the level of support from the Vietnamese public?

Zhinkyna: This war itself, it was very much unexpected. We did understand that there is a big threat coming from Russia, but until the very beginning, we didn’t expect it to happen and then we didn’t expect the amount of support coming from the Vietnamese public. But I do understand. I do know that those are Vietnamese people who understand exactly what Ukrainians in Ukraine feel around that and how the rockets are flying over their heads because Vietnamese people, they still have their memories of the wars. Even me and my colleagues here, when we are staying in a peaceful Hanoi and we are very much worried about our relatives in Ukraine, we still do not understand that feeling of being afraid, of being scared or that your life will end just abruptly, or what is worse, your kid’s life could end. And I know that Vietnamese people do understand that. So I cannot say that this was not expected by us to receive support from the Vietnamese public. It came naturally, and we are grateful for that.

RFA: You mentioned that it seems there has been a propaganda effort in Vietnamese language social media, basically propagating pro-Russia rhetoric. And you may be aware that there has been some conflicts-clashes between the pro and against sides since the war started. So are you aware of this ongoing war of information in Vietnamese social media and how do you feel about it?

Zhinkyna:  Of course I’m aware of that. Just yesterday, I saw a reader taking my picture and totally distorting the words that I say, so I can see how the Russian propaganda machine works here and how much money Russia puts into those efforts, into spreading disinformation and to spreading fake news into transferring their own narratives here. This is to some extent a good point. Let them spend their money on propaganda, but not on new rockets and tanks. But of course, it makes our work here difficult.

This is just an information war…and we are very much grateful for all those members of the Vietnamese public who help us to refute those fakes, to help us spread the truth because their every word of truth about this war and condemnation of the aggressor helps to stop Russia from advancing further into Ukrainian land.

Members of Cambodia’s Candlelight Party marked the anniversary of a deadly grenade attack on an opposition rally Wednesday with demands for justice in the case that remains unsolved despite a 25-year “investigation” by authorities.

Around 200 party officials and family members gathered at a stupa in the capital Phnom Penh where they held a Buddhist ceremony dedicated to the 16 victims of the March 30, 1997, attack on the rally led by Sam Rainsy, the acting president of the dissolved Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP) who now lives in exile to avoid what are widely viewed as politically motivated charges and convictions.

In an interview with RFA’s Khmer Service, former CNRP Sen. Ly Neary, the 79-year-old mother of one of those who died in the attack, expressed her frustration over the failure of authorities to bring her son’s killers to justice.

“It’s been 25 years, and authorities have yet to conclude their investigation,” she said. “I don’t have any hope for a resolution.”

Nonetheless, Ly Neary urged the government to keep the case open and hold those responsible to account.

She said her son, a doctor, had been proud to take part in the rally at Phnom Penh’s Wat Botum Park, where protesters gathered across from the National Assembly to denounce the judiciary’s corruption and lack of independence.

While Sam Rainsy is thought to have been the target of the attack, the assailants missed him, killing his bodyguard, as well as some protesters and bystanders. The blasts blew the limbs off nearby street vendors and left more than 150 people injured.

According to eyewitness accounts, the people who threw the grenades ran toward Prime Minister Hun Sen’s riot-gear clad bodyguards, who allowed them to escape.

An FBI report declassified in 2009 indicated that Cambodian police possessed prior knowledge of the attack and that there was the possibility that the attackers colluded with Hun Sen’s bodyguard unit.

Despite the toll of death and dismemberment, no one has been arrested for the attack, leaving victims and family members still searching for justice.

‘Investigation’ continues

Government spokesman Phay Siphan told RFA that the case remains open and urged family members to submit any new evidence they find to authorities for further investigation.

He criticized the Candlelight Party for exploiting Wednesday’s ceremony “to draw attention for political benefit.”

“The court continues to accept complaints and information from the public and organizations to find those responsible for the grenade attack,” he said.

RFA was unable to reach National Police Spokesman Chhay Kim Khoeun for comment on the status of the investigation on Wednesday.

Hing Bun Heang, the commander of Hun Sen’s Bodyguard Unit, denied involvement in the grenade attack in an interview with RFA and dared anyone to present evidence to the contrary.

“I already clarified this [with the FBI]. I wasn’t involved. I don’t know anything,” he said.

“Show me a photo of me throwing the grenade,” he added, threatening to “use a machine gun against anyone who accuses me.”

Hing Bun Heang was sanctioned by the U.S. government in June 2018 over his unit’s alleged role in the grenade attack, as well as several other assaults on unarmed Cambodians.

Kata Orn, spokesman for the government’s Cambodia Human Rights Committee, told RFA that officials have been working with the FBI to apprehend the suspects in the case.

He also dismissed a French judge’s order last month that Hing Bun Heang and another security aide for Hun Sen named Huy Piseth be tried for organizing the attack.

“Cambodia has a constitution to protect Cambodians,” he said, adding that the French court would never be able to enforce its verdict against the two generals outside of its jurisdiction.

In an interview with RFA last month, Brad Adams, Asia director of New York-based Human Rights Watch, said a conviction in the French court could lead to enhanced sanctions against the two individuals and an Interpol Red Notice, or a so-called European arrest warrant, in their names.

‘No light’ of accountability

Former Sen. Ly Neary said that while she welcomes the French court order, authorities in Cambodia should be responsible for pursuing the case. She questioned why the onus is on the families of the victims to pursue justice for their loved ones.

“I am a regular citizen. How can I ‘find evidence?’ Only the authorities have the legal right to do so — regular citizens can’t do it,” she said.

Candlelight Party Vice President Thach Setha called Phay Siphan’s comments “disrespectful” to the victims and their family members.

“[The government] can’t find the suspects, so instead they accused us of exploiting the event,” he said.

Ny Sokha, president of the Cambodian rights group Adhoc, told RFA that if the government really had any interest in seeking justice for the victims, the French court warrant would be “a good start.”

“The government doesn’t have the will to seek justice [for the victim] because it has already been 25 years,” he said.

“There is no light [to hold the perpetrators accountable]. This is yet another example of [official] impunity.”

Translated by Samean Yun. Written in English by Joshua Lipes.

A new law enacted this month in Myanmar brings the country’s police force under the full control of the military, with expanded powers put in place to help quell resistance to junta rule, according to sources in the country.

Issued on March 25, the 18-chapter Myanmar Police Law gives Snr. Gen. Min Aung Hlaing, commander-in-chief of the country’s military, authority to appoint or remove the head of the police force, sources say.

Myanmar’s police force will now have to comply with all orders issued by the leaders of the coup that overthrew the democratically elected civilian government of Myanmar on Feb. 1, 2021, a police officer working in opposition to the junta told RFA.

“The new police law means that the police force is now totally under the control of the commander-in-chief,” the officer said, speaking on condition of anonymity for security reasons. “Everything, starting from the appointment of a police chief to his retirement, can now be done only after obtaining consent from the military chief.

“This could even mean the police will have to take part in military operations,” the officer, a member of Myanmar’s Civil Disobedience Movement (CDM) set up to resist junta rule, added.

Chapter 2 of the new law says that the police force, in addition to ensuring social stability and the rule of law, must now also participate in matters related to security and the national defense.

Kyee Myint, an attorney in Myanmar, said the country’s police force “has now been turned into an army.

“The country’s security should be taken care of by the army, and the police force should be responsible for the rule of law. But the police can’t say anymore that they work only to enforce the law,” Kyee Myint said. “The authority of the police force to uphold the rule of law will now be severely affected because of this law.”

Police officers acting under the new law are now empowered to enter homes and public buildings without a warrant, said high court lawyer Khin Maung Myint. Before, police entering a home would have a warrant and be accompanied by at least two village or ward administrators and their deputies, he added.

“But now, these requirements have been suspended. From a legal point of view, I don’t think this is a good law,” he said.

Also speaking to RFA, political analyst Ye Tun said that provisions of the law allowing for warrantless detention or arrest may be aimed at reducing attacks by resistance groups against security forces and junta supporters.

“Overall, the law appears to have been enacted for public safety, and it will empower police to be more effective in preventing the smuggling of ammunition and explosives,” he said. “But at the same time, I think it is going to make ordinary people more uneasy in their daily lives.

“If and when the situation later improves, I think the next parliament will be able to repeal the stricter provisions of the law,” he added.

Another provision of the law allows the arrest of any person for playing drums or banging pots and pans at times not permitted by the police, with observers calling the move a bid to restrict public protests like many seen last year. Violators face one to three months in prison or a fine of from 10,000 kyats (U.S. $5.62) to 50,000 kyats (U.S. $28.12), or both.

Myanmar security forces have killed a total of 1,722 civilians and arrested another 9,991 during mostly peaceful protests since the Feb. 1, 2021 military coup that overthrew civilian rule in the country, according to the Bangkok-based Assistance Association for Political Prisoners-Burma.

Reported by RFA’s Myanmar Service. Translated by Khin Maung Nyane. Written in English by Richard Finney.

The Solomon Islands prime minister has told lawmakers that a controversial security agreement with China is “ready for signing” without revealing the details, saying only that his government had not been pressured to let China build a naval base in the country.

Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare made the remarks to Parliament late Tuesday, according to multiple news reports. Neighboring powers have expressed concern over the pact that China has defended as normal cooperation with Pacific island nation.

“We are not pressured in any way by our new friends and there is no intention whatsoever to ask China to build a military base in the Solomon Islands,” Sogavare was quoted as saying.

A draft agreement leaked online last week would allow Beijing to set up bases and deploy troops in the Solomon Islands, which lies about 1,700 kilometers (1,050 miles) from the northeastern coast of Australia. The document provoked fears in the region’s traditional powers, Australia and New Zealand, with the New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern saying that her country sees the pact as “gravely concerning.”

It is unclear whether the leaked draft differs from the final agreement.

Sogavare told Parliament that in order to achieve the nation’s security needs, “it is clear that we need to diversify the country’s relationship with other countries” but existing security arrangements with Australia would remain.

His policy of “diversification” was evident last November when Sogavare asked Australia, and after that China, to send police forces to help him quell violent riots that rocked the capital, Honiara.

Alexander Vuving, a professor with the Hawaii-based Daniel K. Inouye Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies, said Sogavare’s strategy is not unusual for leaders of small Pacific island states who are “willing to play the major powers off against each other, thus bloating their states’ values to the major powers.”

A Chinese Foreign Ministry’s spokesman said on Tuesday that “normal law enforcement and security cooperation between China and Solomon Islands … is consistent with international law and customary international practice.”

“We hope relevant countries will earnestly respect Solomon Islands’ sovereignty and its independent decisions instead of deciding what others should and should not do in a condescending manner,” spokesman Wang Wenbin said.

China’s growing presence in the Pacific

Beijing doesn’t hide its ambition to set up military bases in the region. Some Chinese analysts, such as Qi Huaigao, an associate professor at Fudan University, suggested that in order to compete with the United States in the Western Pacific, China needs to have bases in Solomon Islands, Samoa and Vanuatu for commercial and military supply purposes.

In 2018, media reports about China’s plan to build a base in Vanuatu prompted a stern warning from the then Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull.

David Capie, director of the Centre for Strategic Studies at the Victoria University of Wellington in New Zealand, told RFA earlier this week that China “wants to be able to operate its rapidly growing navy out in the wider Pacific, complicating U.S. plans in the event of a future conflict.”

“A base in the Pacific would let People’s Liberation Army Navy vessels operate far away from their home ports for longer and in the future might also be used for intelligence gathering and surveillance,” he said.

It would greatly boost China’s capabilities in intelligence-collecting which is alleged to have often been done by marine research vessels.

Data provided by the ship-tracking website MarineTraffic show that China’s spacecraft-tracking ship Yuanwang-5 is currently operating in the Western Pacific, not far from the Solomon Islands.

Yuanwang-class ships are “multi-purpose signals and technical intelligence gathering platforms,” said Paul Buchanan, director of the Auckland, New Zealand-based 36th Parallel Assessments risk consultancy.

The Yuanwang-5’s presence is normal but “it would not be surprising if it makes a port visit to Honiara as part of the deployment in order to register the seriousness of China’s intent in the region,” Buchanan said.

Two U.K. Supreme Court judges resigned from Hong Kong’s Court of Final Appeal (CFA) on Wednesday, citing a recent crackdown on dissent under a draconian national security law imposed on the city by Beijing.

Non-permanent CFA judges Lord Reed and Lord Hodge had sat on the court “for many years” under an agreement governing the 1997 handover of Hong Kong to Chinese rule, Reed said in a statement.

“I have been closely monitoring and assessing developments in Hong Kong, in discussion with the government,” Reed wrote. “However, since the introduction of the Hong Kong national security law in 2020, this position has become increasingly finely balanced.”

“The judges of the Supreme Court cannot continue to sit in Hong Kong without appearing to endorse an administration which has departed from values of political freedom, and freedom of expression, to which the Justices of the Supreme Court are deeply committed,” the statement said.

U.K. foreign secretary Liz Truss said the government supported the decision.

“The Foreign Secretary supports the withdrawal of serving UK judges from the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal, following discussions with the Deputy Prime Minister and Lord Chancellor and the President of the Supreme Court,” said in a brief statement, which was signed by Truss and deputy prime minister Dominic Raab.

Ruling Conservative Party rights activist Benedict Rogers, who heads the U.K.-based rights group Hong Kong Watch, said the move was the correct one.

“Today’s news reflects the sad reality that the national security law has torn apart the human rights and constitutional safeguards which made Hong Kong meaningfully autonomous,” Rogers said.

“The British judges’ ongoing presence was providing a veneer of legitimacy for a fundamentally compromised system, and the British government is right to have taken steps to recall them,” he said.

The Law Society of Hong Kong, which represents solicitors in the city, called on the judges to reverse their decision.

“Unfair and unfounded accusations … against the judicial system of Hong Kong have no place in the discussion about rule of law,” president C.M. Chan said in a letter to news editors.

“I sincerely appeal to the U.K. judges to reverse course.”

Hong Kong Chief Justice Andrew Cheung noted the resignations “with regret.”

Documentary on attacks

The resignations came as internet service providers in Hong Kong appeared to have blocked a 30-minute documentary by Vice News on YouTube detailing the involvement of triad criminal gangs in bloody attacks on passengers at the Yuen Long MTR station on July 21, 2019, amid a mass protest movement sparked by plans to allow the extradition of alleged criminal suspects to face trial in mainland China.

The documentary explored in depth the attacks by men wielding sticks and wearing white clothing.

“For many, the violence was shocking and symbolized the death of Hong Kong’s democracy,” the platform said in its introduction to the video on YouTube.

“It is tragic how a Hong Kong citizen like me had to use a VPN in order to watch this,” YouTube user Dayton Ling commented under the video.

“It saddens me that Hong Kong has gone from a first class financial centre to a third world police state.”

Several other users commented that the journalist interviewed for the film is currently behind bars, awaiting trial under the national security law.

Hong Kong’s national security police recently wrote to Benedict Rogers ordering him to take down the group’s website, which was highly critical of the ruling Chinese Communist Party (CCP)’s rights record in Hong Kong.

The U.K., along with Australia, Canada, Germany, New Zealand and the United States have suspended their extradition agreements with Hong Kong.

However, extradition agreements remain active between Hong Kong and the Czech Republic, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Portugal, Singapore, South Africa, South Korea and Sri Lanka, putting anyone traveling to those countries at potential risk of arrest if they are targeted by the law.

The national security law ushered in a citywide crackdown on public dissent and criticism of the authorities that has seen several senior journalists, pro-democracy media magnate Jimmy Lai and 47 former lawmakers and democracy activists charged with offenses from “collusion with a foreign power” to “subversion.”

Translated and edited by Luisetta Mudie.