Q&A: Patrick Heuveline on the Khmer Rouge’s long-term impact on Cambodia

April 17 marks the 50th anniversary of the day the Khmer Rouge took over Cambodia's capital, Phnom Penh. From 1975 until 1979, between 1.2 million and 2.8 million Cambodian people - between 13% and 30% of the nation's population at the time - were killed or died from starvation, preventable disease or childbirth, and thousands fled for refugee camps.

Sociology professor Patrick Heuveline develops models centered on population dynamics to represent phenomena that are intertwined with demographic processes. He has applied this kind of modeling on the death toll of the Khmer Rouge regime as well as the HIV/AIDS epidemic in Eastern Africa. He also studies family change in Cambodia since the oppressive Khmer Rouge period as part of broader research into how childhood family structures affect child well-being and the transition to adulthood.

Heuveline completed a 16-month residency in Cambodia, which was called Kampuchea from 1976 to 1989, as part of a United Nations peacekeeping mission. "I had never been to Cambodia but had heard about the Khmer Rouge and the refugees," he said. "I thought it would be interesting to work for the U.N. in the field rather than at (headquarters)."

We spoke with Heuveline, who is affiliated with the California Population Research Center at UCLA and UCLA's International Institute, ahead of April 17, which Los Angeles County has declared Cambodian Genocide Remembrance Day.

What was the Khmer Rouge?

The Khmer Rouge was the Communist Party of Kampuchea, or CPK. Then-head of state Norodom Sihanouk coined the term when referring to his opponents in French as les Khmers (Cambodians) rouges (Reds, that is, communists).

The CPK came to power on April 17, 1975, and established Democratic Kampuchea, or DK, often referred to as the Pol Pot regime after its leader.

What enabled the Khmer Rouge to come to power?

It is unlikely that the Khmer Rouge would have come to power without the Vietnam War. In 1970, President Sihanouk was ousted in a coup led by one of his army generals, Lon Nol, who favored the U.S. and the U.S.-supported South Vietnamese regime, whereas Sihanouk had tried to maintain Cambodia's neutrality. With much popular support in Cambodia but without an army, Sihanouk tried to return to power by forming an opposition front with the Khmer Rouge - his former opponents. The bombing of Eastern Cambodia by U.S. B-52s, corruption in the Lon Nol government and Sihanouk's tactical alliance all contributed to increased popular support for the Khmer Rouge, until then a relatively weak opposition party.

While in the opposition, the Khmer Rouge received support from the Vietnamese communists fighting the U.S. and the South Vietnamese militaries during the Vietnam War. Once in power, however, the Khmer Rouge adopted a strongly nationalistic rhetoric, especially against Vietnam, Cambodia's historical foe. The treatment of Vietnamese in Cambodia as well as incursions into Vietnamese territory contributed to Vietnam's decision to topple DK.

How was the United States involved with Cambodia during this time, or what was U.S. policy toward the regime?

The U.S. wasn't involved with Cambodia during DK. The U.S. didn't recognize DK's successor, the People's Republic of Kampuchea, or PRK, de facto allowing for the Khmer Rouge to remain the legitimate rulers of Cambodia and to retain their seat at the United Nations.

What did your peacekeeping mission entail?

The U.N. mission was given transitional authority in Cambodia to organize multi-party elections following a 1991 peace agreement to end the ongoing armed conflict and provide the country with an internationally recognized government. Resulting from a foreign intervention, the PRK was never fully recognized internationally and continued to face armed opposition from the Khmer Rouge from their strongholds in the Northeast of Cambodia near the Thai border.

What is the legacy of the Khmer Rouge regime?

The DK collapsed on January 7, 1979, when the Khmer Rouge fled from Phnom Penh in front of the advancing Vietnamese army.

About 2 million people, or more than 20% of the population living in Cambodia on January 17, 1975, or born in DK between 1975-79 are estimated to have died in DK due to Khmer Rouge policies, including executions, displacement, forced labor and food rationing.

Those who survived the "3 years, 8 months and 20 days" of the DK (April 17, 1975, to January 7, 1979) suffered many long-term consequences, from experiences of loss and traumatic stress, the elimination of education and health care personnel and infrastructure or forced marriages.

How can this history inform our understanding of current events?

First, this history illustrates the tragic consequences of putting ideology ahead of realities, disregarding expertise and suppressing dissent. Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge leaders thought they could return Cambodia to its past grandeur of the Angkor Empire by implementing an agricultural revolution that would make Cambodia self-sufficient again. Their production goals were probably unrealistic to start with but to achieve them, moreover, they relied mostly on uneducated cadres, because they perceived the former elites - members of the previous governments or anyone with a formal education - as "enemies of the people" to be eliminated or worked to death in labor camps. Meanwhile, fears of retribution for dissent or criticism within the Khmer Rouge ranks prevented any "reality check" to reach the DK rulers.

Second, this history illustrates the possible fate of a small nation when superpowers fight to assert their influence in the region. As mentioned earlier, it is hard to imagine the Khmer Rouge coming to power in the absence of the Vietnam War, but also without critical military and additional support from China.

Is there any other question that would be of interest to a broad audience?

As a family sociologist, I'm particularly interested in what happened to families during the DK. Before the DK, Cambodian society placed strong emphasis on familial relationships and respecting one's parents or even anyone older. To transform Cambodia into a one-class society, the Khmer Rouge thought they needed to end any form of familial loyalty. This involved separating children from their parents, sending them into youth work brigades and telling them they only owe allegiance to the government, not to their parents.

Historians have observed that to create a new society, the Khmer Rouge aimed to destroy the three pillars of Cambodian society at the time - private ownership, religion and the family - and that it was the attack on the family that most undermined support for their policies. Memoirs of survivors suggest that they suffered tremendously yet kept going after losing most of their possessions and being prevented from practicing their religion, but for many their lives became completely meaningless once they felt detached from their family.

Tags: research | history | faculty news | Asia