VZCZCXRO2769
PP RUEHCHI RUEHDT RUEHHM RUEHNH
DE RUEHPF #0558/01 1911202
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 091202Z JUL 08
FM AMEMBASSY PHNOM PENH
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
INFO RUCNASE/ASEAN MEMBER COLLECTIVE PRIORITY

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 PHNOM PENH 000558 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR EAP/MLS AND DRL 
USAID FOR ASIA BUREAU 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PGOV PHUM PREL KDEM KWMN CB
SUBJECT: CAMBODIA ELECTIONS: LEAD PARTIES GO HEAD-TO-HEAD 
DURING SECOND FEMALE CANDIDATE DEBATE 
 
REF: A. PHNOM PENH 554 
     ¶B. PHNOM PENH 522 
     ¶C. PHNOM PENH 403 
 
¶1.  (SBU) Summary: A ruling Cambodian People's Party (CPP) 
candidate and lead opposition party Sam Rainsy Party (SRP) 
candidate faced off for the first time this pre-election 
season during a video-recorded political debate of female 
candidates on July 9.  The debate was part of a 22-debate 
series in advance of the July 27 elections, and was the 
second of two female candidate debates (Ref A).  Norodom 
Ranariddh Party (NRP) and League for Democracy Party (LDP) 
candidates also participated in the July 9 debate.  As the 
moderator pointed out, the National Democratic Institute 
(NDI) used a debate format that could ensure a fair and 
impartial setting for dialogue.  Listening to and watching 
the candidate dialogues, one might not have known that two of 
the relatively tame candidates belong to the two lead, rival 
parties in hotly contested Phnom Penh.  The audience had 
segregated itself into CPP and SRP ballcap and t-shirt 
donning factions with NRP and LDP supporter pockets in 
corners of the room.  However, the debate succeeded in 
providing a non-threatening, organized forum for the four 
candidates to provide information on their party's platforms 
and plans.  The debate is scheduled to be televised on July 
10 and July 11.  End Summary. 
 
CPP and SRP Candidates Face Off 
------------------------------- 
 
¶2.  (SBU) Four female political party candidates from the 
CPP, SRP, NRP and LDP participated in a second debate on July 
¶9.  This was the first time during this pre-election season 
that candidates from the CPP and SRP have come to the same 
venue to discuss the issues.  The Phnom Penh candidates were 
civil to one another, to the point that it was difficult to 
discern that two of the debaters are members of the leading 
rival parties in a hotly contested district, judging from 
their demeanor and their mostly tame statements during the 
debate.  The CPP was represented by Krouch Soman, and the SRP 
by Lysrey Vina. 
 
Debaters Stick To Party Platforms 
--------------------------------- 
 
¶3.  (SBU) There were few surprises in the debate content and 
debaters stuck mostly to their party platforms.  For the CPP 
candidate, that meant a focus on the CPP's governing track 
record and achievements such as building roads, schools, and 
other infrastructure, and increasing economic development. 
The SRP candidate repeated the SRP platform to pass the 
anti-corruption law, and to tackle inflation, unemployment 
and poverty issues.  The NRP candidate stated the party's 
commitment to the monarchy, and repeatedly pointed out the 
monarchy's role in bringing peace to Cambodia through the 
signing of the Paris peace agreement.  The LDP candidate 
focused on the party's proposal to give power to the 
Cambodian people, stressing that citizens should exercise 
their rights and freedoms to participate in government. 
 
A Scant Few Nail-Biters 
----------------------- 
 
¶4.  (SBU) A tense interaction arose during the portion of the 
debate when party members are allowed to ask a question of 
one other, pre-determined party candidate.  The CPP debater 
was designated, by a lottery draw before the debate, to ask 
the SRP candidate one question, and asked:  "The SRP held 24 
seats in the National Assembly during this last mandate; what 
has the SRP done to help the Cambodian people besides 
inciting them to demonstrate?"  Before the SRP candidate 
could reply, the moderator stopped the debate momentarily and 
requested that the candidates review the rules and 
guidelines, and stated that candidates are not to make 
statements that would directly criticize individuals or 
parties.  However, upon review of the rules and guidelines 
for the debate, it was not apparent which rule was broken -- 
they generally restrict debaters from making personal insults 
or attacks towards other candidates or parties.  The SRP 
member did not appear particularly phased, and responded that 
the SRP seeks to pass and then enforce an anti-corruption 
law; after passage, the SRP would use increased government 
revenues from tax collection to pay for civil servant 
salaries and building roads. 
 
¶5.  (SBU) Preah Vihear came up during the July 9 debate, as 
it had during the July 8 debate.  This time, the SRP 
candidate lauded the inscription of Preah Vihear as a UNESCO 
 
PHNOM PENH 00000558  002 OF 002 
 
 
World Heritage Site, but asked listeners "not to forget" that 
the land surrounding the temple was not designated as part of 
the site, and that the issue of the land surrounding the 
temple has not been solved.  She stated that Cambodia might 
give up a little bit of its land one day, then a little bit 
more the next day.  She also stated that land is lost through 
economic land concessions.  There were guffaws from the 
audience at the comments. 
 
Noisy Audience 
-------------- 
 
¶6.  (SBU) The moderator interrupted the debates a second time 
after the SRP debater pointed out that the audience was 
unruly during statements of the LDP candidate.  The moderator 
asked that there be order among audience members.  Emboff 
observed that the crowd was mostly quiet during the CPP 
candidate's statements, but that laughing and talking among 
some audience members during the statements of the other 
three candidates made it difficult to hear the debate at 
times.  The noise seemed to be coming from the CPP-wear clad 
portion of the crowd. 
 
Comment 
------- 
 
¶7.  (SBU) As we tick off debate number two of twenty-two, we 
can say that the debates are going as they were intended:  in 
a fair, neutral fashion in a generally positive atmosphere. 
The noise level of the crowd during the second debate could 
have been controlled by the NDI-chosen moderator who mostly 
seemed unconcerned with the immature laughter and chatter, 
and was obviously not the fault of the debaters themselves. 
Emboff sat near two CPP supporters and overheard one ask the 
other whether he would be able to ask a question during the 
debate.  The other CPP supporter told him no, that the 
questions had been decided in advance, and all that he had to 
do was cheer.  While he may have been there just to cheer on 
his party candidate, the debate succeeded in giving him a 
chance to hear the platforms of a number of candidates to 
which he might not have been exposed before. 
MUSSOMELI