Ladies and Gentlemen, I would like to begin by remarks by thanking the Sejong Institute and the Government of Korea for hosting this meeting of the world’s democracies. One hundred and forty invited and observer nations have been brought here together not by regional proximity, military alliance, or wealth. These nations have been brought together as a Community of Democracies, because of shared ideals, making this perhaps the most relevant of the many international forums.

I would also like to thank the ten convening nations of this meeting for the invitation to speak to you about role of democratic nations in supporting democracy’s march around the world. I am honored that you would invite me because sadly, Cambodia is not one of 140 nations eligible to send official delegates to this conference. Cambodia was rightfully denied a place at this conference as either a participant or an observer, and albeit it tragic, this decision was the correct one, and sends a strong message.

Cambodia is not a democracy. Standing below all 140 countries invited as participants and observers to this conference on the league table of democracy, Cambodia’s government keeps company with such regimes as Burma, Iraq, and Kyrgyzstan. I hope that I can not only speak for the long-suffering people of my country, but that I can speak for the people of countries like Belarus, Libya, and Laos who’s governments also failed to earn a seat at this table.

Cambodia’s absence from the list of the world’s democracies should be shocking to most observers if international affairs. Cambodia was the beneficiary of a US$2 billion United Nations peacekeeping mission and administration from 1991-1993 following the signing of the Paris Peace Accords ending Vietnamese occupation. In the decade that followed the UN withdrawal, Cambodia has received billions more in international assistance to rebuild the country and support the development of a stable democracy.

In spite of this generosity, Cambodia has failed as a sovereign democratic nation. In 1993, the winners of the UN-organized elections were never given the reigns of power. Instead of insisting upon a transfer of power, the nations of the world stood by while the ruling communists maintained effective control after a decisive electoral loss. The ensuing communist-royalist coalition finally collapsed in 1997, when Cambodian strongman Hun Sen cemented his de facto power with a violent coup d’etat. In 1998, Hun Sen’s former communists murdered opposition activists, including several from my own party, and manipulated the second round of parliamentary elections which the success-starved International Community went on to endorse as free and fair. In 2002 local elections, this sham was repeated with the international community offering its full support.

Many in the international community have been quick to point to progress in Cambodia. There is no longer a bloody civil war, the Khmer Rouge is no longer a threat, and Cambodia has been admitted to ASEAN. The world can agree that Hun Sen is better than Pol Pot, and that Cambodia is more democratic than Burma. But these meager accomplishments are not cause for pride or celebration. Cambodia must now be measured against its democratic neighbors in Thailand and the Philippines, and its leaders must be compared to nation builders, not genocidal killers. The time has come for Cambodia to be held to international standards.

These lessons from Cambodia have yet to be learned, but the must be understood and applied internationally if we earnestly seek a democratic and secure world. The former Soviet republics of Central Asia once held great promise with a wealth of natural resources and skilled workers. During the early- and mid- 1990s, this promise faded as Central Asian leaders led their countries backsliding into authoritarianism, with the familiar tools of executive power grabs, press crackdowns and assassination of democratic leaders.

Now these regimes enjoy international assistance and legitimacy as a result of their willingness to line up against terrorism. While their strategic significance cannot be underestimated, gratitude for their assistance should not lead to an abandonment of their people or the brave individuals struggling for democracy. In the age of international terrorism, short-term expediency may seem to dictate that unsavory regimes are preferable to messy democratic ones. This is a shortsighted view, and one that shifts the burden of world stability onto starving and voiceless populations longing for freedom and economic development.

Where communist ideologies once prevailed, dictators now rely on environmental destruction and criminal activity, including money laundering and trafficking in humans, gems, arms and narcotics for the needed cash to keep their personal armies equipped and to purchase electoral legitimacy. Cambodia has become the premier transit point for drugs, trafficked women and children, and laundered money in Southeast Asia. Like other lawless lands, Cambodia may soon become a haven for international terrorists in search of passports, bank accounts and training camps. This situation can only be averted through the development of democratic and lawful governments.

Continued international support for such criminal regimes in the shape of generous aid packages, military assistance and multilateral loans, only strengthens the ability of such regimes to carry out criminal and terror-related activities. While Central Asian leaders may be preferable to Joseph Stalin or Mullah Omar, they are not democrats and they are destroying the lives of their people. Their relationships with the democracies of the world must not reward undemocratic ways.

One lesson that is often forgotten is that democracy requires more than elections. I would bet that a majority of you in this room can give me a pretty good idea of what a vote costs in your country in the international currencies of cash, threats, or election commission appointments. While Cambodia has such ingenious tricks as forcing citizens to swear party loyalty oaths before saffron-robed monks, each country has its own unique methods of coercing voters. I recently learned that fraud technique by which a voter enters the polling station with a marked ballot and exits with a blank one not only exists in Cambodia, but is known the world over. I believe in the Balkans it is known as the “Bulgarian Train.” I don’t mean to make light of these serious issues, but my point is that the world often forgets that it takes more than ballot boxes and foreign observers to make a country a democracy, or an election free and fair for that matter.

Not only have the iron-fisted rulers of so-called democracies become cleverer in the ways that they can manipulate elections and opinion in their own countries. They have also become skilled in manipulating an all too-willing international community into accepting the democratic picture that they project. From Saddam Hussein’s stage managed referendum on his presidency in Iraq -- a smashing success in the international press -- to cryptic reports of progress in the Burmese military junta’s negotiations with Aung San Suu Kyi which have brought forth millions in Japanese aid, the world has been a willing partner in believing that which to the most undemocratic of regimes put before them.

The way that the world community judges democratization in oppressive regimes must change to reflect a clear set of democratic principles. Do not judge these countries against recent misdeeds of their rulers, or against colonial or genocidal atrocities of the past. Judge them by a single international standard that is inclusive of democratic elections, civil liberties, freedoms of press and speech, and acceptance of the rule of law. Without such clarity, the meaning of democracy is devalued.

It is wrong for a nation to lock up its political opponents as occurs around Asia in places like Cambodia, Burma, Vietnam, Laos, and even Malaysia and Singapore. It is wrong for governments to control the media to maintain political power, as occurs in one third of the nations of the world (according to Freedom House). It is wrong for ruling parties and governments to murder and intimidate opposition activists as elections approach, as happens in my country in countless others. Fewer murders and fewer prisoners from one year, or one election, to the next is not an appropriate measure of democratic progress. Everyday, governments make choices to be democratic and pluralistic, or not to be. The world community of democracies should reward or sanction them accordingly.

When confronted with these grim realities, diplomats often retreat to the familiar refrain that democratization must go “step-by-step”. This phrase is somehow comforting to hear. It implies that nations like Cambodia have made steps since the time of Pol Pot or their own familiar dictators, and that progress is ongoing. The truth is, however, that by accepting the “step-by-step” explanation, the world accepts state sponsored intimidation, violence and electoral manipulation...so long as it is always a little less than the last time.

Now, as this important meeting concludes, democratic nations must take action using the most important lever that they control: bilateral and multilateral assistance. In the past, international assistance has had virtually no meaningful strings attached – now is the time for conditionality based on international standards of democracy and governance.

In Monterrey, Mexico a call was sounded for international assistance to be linked to good governance policies. Donor governments must demand the simple choices from recipient governments that meet international standards of justice, democracy and good governance as a condition of international assistance.

The governments that have not been invited to this conference must answer for themselves whether they wish to take the serious decisions to become democracies and join this prestigious club. Most have already answered negatively.

More importantly, the nations that are a part of this World Community of Democracies must ask what is required of them in diplomacy, assistance and sanction in order to help the people of nations like Cambodia out of misery, and to hold their regimes to account. On behalf of Cambodians and the other hundreds of millions of people who are not represented at this meeting, I thank you for your attention and your action.