"When the decent people stay out of politics, they shouldn't be surprised when politics become indecent" (Friedrich Naumann)

My VA and I have had this discussion a couple of times already, and we've only been working together a few weeks. How do good, honest, hard-working people get into government? Or, more accurately, why? Why is it that local government authorities are so undervalued that they don't get paid enough to dedicate themselves to the public? In Cambodia, people like my VA have considered public service, but he can't afford to work honestly as a public servant (that means, not taking 'extras' and working other jobs instead of serving the pubic) and adequately support his family. This work attracts those who can afford not to work, those who are looking for the power, prestige, connections, and the extra money that may come on the side, as well as those few altruistic types that are truly looking to represent the public.

Dar Commune Office, Chetr Borei District

So, how does this affect me? Working with people who are, yes, dedicated to their work, but not really an advocate for those less fortunate, it can be difficult to convince them to let go and support the voices from below, as much as I try. I've heard a lot about the villagers being 'uneducated' 'dirty' and 'children'. The commonly held view and the perpetuated hierarchy in Cambodia emphasizes the parental role of the government. In my research conducted on land governance, the villagers were rejecting this paradigm, asking "how can they be our parent if they don't help us or listen to us?" The local authorities said
"we are the grass that the elephants walk upon"; in other words, the local representatives accept that there is nothing that they can do about the plans being executed at the national level with disregard for the local communities.

CPP campaigners blocked the road to PP

Legitimizing governance is about the (lack of) accountability of local authorities. Nonetheless, this cannot happen without curtailing the overarching control that the national hierarchy demands. Despite its call for democratization and decentralization, the national government in Cambodia is unwilling to let go and let the people represent themselves. As seen with the (unofficial) outcome of the national elections, people throughout Cambodia are looking for change. But the ruling party's control over the National Election Committee (NEC) and the delayed outcome of the result is straining the relationship. When will it reach a breaking point?

Voters waiting in Phnom Penh (from The Cambodia Daily)

The youth (who, when they support the opposition, have been characterized as gangsters by the ruling party) have said that they are not afraid of change or conflict. In fact, things must change. It is the older generation that lived through the Khmer Rouge era who want to avoid conflict at all costs, and the ruling party is playing on the survivors' fears to keep the youth in line. Demographically, this is a challenge as the restless youth are increasing year after year. Change will come. But we (I) must remember that these government officials, local and national level, are people and capacity building is about changing relationships and building trust in communities. Persons in government must work to earn the peoples' trust. In post-conflict countries, such as Cambodia, trust was broken between neighbours and within families; trust was life or death.

It is no small feat to unwind the complex relationships in communities. Trusting the youth and fostering their leadership is the way forward. My hope is that someday my VA, who wants to be a community leader for the 'right' reasons, will be able to work in the public service with pride.