Because of general ignorance and political manipulation, especially by foreigners with the foreign "experts" on Cambodia being the worst offenders, the term "Yuon" has become so controversial that the Khmers and the Khmer language have become the victims. The term has been criticized by foreign experts as "contemptible" "derogatory" and as having a "savage connotation". The word has been used by certain political factions as a tool to discredit or demonize their political rivals for their own political gain.

In his letter to editor of Washington Times, 13/9/02, Dr. David Roberts defamatorily called the opposition leader, Mr. Sam Rainsy, a racist for using the term "yuon" when referred to Vietnamese. Roberts was harshly critical of Mr Rainsy and wrote: "Mr. Rainsy is not a democrat. He is a disappointed authoritarian in the Cambodian tradition. He refers to his Vietnamese neighbors as 'yuon,' meaning savage."

Mr. Yasushi Akashi, the Head of UNTAC, was hypnotized by the foreign "experts" on Cambodia to the degree of, reportedly, speechlessness, when a Khmer journalist used "yuon" to refer to Vietnamese when asking him questions. Akashi's foreign advisors even discussed criminalizing the use of term. Although the use of the term was not criminalized, "insults" and "racial incitement" (which are undefined which led to broad discretion or political abuses) were made criminal offences in the UNTAC criminal Code 1992. The drafters of the Code had a misplaced focus. They apparently were so obsessed with ensuring use of the word "Yuon" could be actionable that they failed to criminalize the offence of assault. As a result, assault is not punishable under the Code unless it results in permanent injury lasting
six months. This has provided the police with an implicit license for torturing accused people - unless an accused person suffers permanent injury it is difficult to complain about police treatment during questioning. The Code further fails to include basic criminal defenses such as insanity and self defence. But, congratulations, if someone utters the word "youn" they can be charged with "insult" under Code.

Samdech Hun Sen's letter to US Senators John McCain and John Kerry of 3/10/1998, capitalized on the senators' ignorance of the term "Youn" in Hun Sen's campaign against Mr. Rainsy. Hun Sen stated, "Mr. Sam Rainsy.referred me as a "Yuon" puppet. In case Your Excellencies are not familiar with the term "Yuon", "Yuon" is highly derogative and racist term used to denigrate those of Vietnamese ancestry". Hun Sen is known for his ties to the Vietnamese. What Sam Rainsy said was nothing new. Hun Sen chose to attack his use of the term "youn" rather than answer the charge that he was too close to the Vietnamese.

The term began to be politicized in late 1970s, especially during the Khmer Rouge-Vietnam war. In an attempt to demonize KR, the Vietnamese propagandists propagated that "Yuon is the pejorative term for the Vietnamese": see Hanoi's propaganda against KR: Kampuchea Dossier (KD), April 1978, Pt I, p 35. On the following page, they added "Annamites" in French, or Annam in Khmer, "is another pejorative term meaning Vietnamese" p36. The term "Annam", or "Annamese" in English being pejorative is more than ridiculous considering the fact that Annam was the name of a country. While few Khmer know this Vietnamese self-adopted definition, anything is possible in propaganda war.

Dr. Robert's definition of "youn" as "savages" appears to have been drawn from the KR's definition of the term found in the KR Black Papers (1978) p.9. The definition is, incorrect and baseless and was included by the KR and the Vietnamese for the purpose of their respective propaganda. The adoption of this definition by Dr Roberts and others flies in the face of more than a thousand of years of evidence to the contrary.

Let me set the record straight. The term is neither new nor contemptible or derogatory. In fact, the Khmers have been using the term for more than a thousand years and it has become a piece of Khmer tradition and language. As far as the surviving recorded evidence shows, the word "yuon" appears in Khmer inscriptions dating back to the reign of King Suryavarman I (1002-1050), a immediate predecessor to the Angkor Wat temple builder Suryavarman II: see Inscription K105 or Coedes, Inscriptions du Cambodge, K. Hall, Maritime Trade and State Development in Early Southeast Asia (1985) etc. "Yuon" was used in the context of trade and commence to refer to the Vietnamese people and in no way was a term of contempt.

As a matter of fact, "yuon" was well known and used by early European travellers and officials; for instance by the British linguist Lieut-Col James Low in his "On the Ancient Connection Between Kenah and Siam", Journal Indian Arch. Vol v. (1851) p513, by a famous French naturalist Henri Mouhot in his "Notes on Cambodia, Lao Country," Journal Royal Geog. Soc. London, Vol. 32 (1862),p.157; by a Thai King Mongkut (1851-68) in his official correspondence, Pharatchahatthalekha prahatsomdet phrachomklaochauyuhau (114-116), etc. "Yuon" was still in use by some French writers after the independence of Indochina states, for instance, by a French Sgt. Resen Riesen, Jungle Mission (1957). In Khmer writings, the term "youn" was not used as a racist slur nor to indicate contempt, but to refer to what
since WWII have been known as Vietnamese people. None of Khmer language dictionaries define "youn" as "savage" or indicate that it is a pejorative term. "Yuon" has been used in old and new Khmer poetry and songs for hundreds of years compared to the term "Vietnamese" which has been used about 50 years ago.

Additionally, the Khmer dish named "samlor mchu yuon" means Vietnamese sour soup. In fact, it would be odd to call that particular dish "samlor mchu Vietnam" because it is not the traditional name, even the Vietnamese-Cambodians refer to it using the word "youn".

It is true that most Vietnamese do not know the term "yuon" and only the Khmer colloquially use it to refer to them, but this surprises no Khmer because equally most of the Vietnamese do not know that almost the whole of south Vietnam (from Don Nai to Hatien provinces) rightly belong(ed) to Cambodia and the Vietnamese ancestors (and themselves) have colonized that part of Khmer lands for the last 3 centuries. "Yuon" had been used long before the beginning of this brutal Vietnamese colonization process starting in late 15th century. Knowledge by the Vietnamese, therefore, is not a test of the meaning or offensiveness of the term.

Some "experts" have argued that if the Vietnamese are offended with the use of term, the Khmer should follow their wish. Well, a lot of Khmer traditions
and words may offend the Vietnamese but this should not force the Khmer to give up their traditional and cultural habits, and there are many Khmer terms which Vietnamese had adopted in their language. Political "correctness", or forced accommodation rather, is not new to the Khmer. Back in the 19th century, the Khmer were forced to learn and speak Vietnamese rather than the Khmer language and to behave and to dress the way the Vietnamese under the policy of Vietnamization by Emperor Minh Mang or his dynasty. Phnom Penh was changed to Tran Tay; a Phnom Penh fort was changed to "Annam"; and all Khmer districts were changed to Vietnamese names; Khmer traditional royal coronation, in case Queen Ang Mei; and titles were changed to adopt the Vietnamese way. When the Khmer resisted, they were punished and, in some cases, executed. The resistance has continued.

The question is should the Khmer give up this piece of their traditional language or culture, thus stop resisting? Why should we?. It is time for dispassionate discussion of the term rather than inflammatory comments by foreigners and by Mr Hun Sen. Perhaps the foreign "experts" should see that in a sense they have been manipulated by Mr Hun Sen, and the Vietnamese rather than lecturing the Cambodians about hate language. The tone of foreigners, particularly in their criticism of Sam Rainsy, smacks of paternalism. As if we do not know what words in our own language mean. Believe me, Khmers know which words in their own language are "bad" or pejorative and we do not need foreigners to teach us or show us the way.

For Vietnamese to accept another term, "yuon", and learn that the term is not pejorative and not contemptible is perhaps easier and cheaper than forcing the Khmer to give it up, a task which could include destroying the 1000 year-old inscription (or at least obscuring the "offensive" word in that inscription) as well as destroying all Khmer dictionaries.

Bora Touch
Sydney