Cambodia and India Relations

 

I. Introduction

India – Cambodia relations have existed since the 1st century AD when Hindu and Buddhist religious and cultural influences spread out of India to various parts of Southeast Asia. Cambodia today is predominantly Buddhist, but it is remained a strong influence of Hindu rituals, idolatry and mythology. The pervading influence of Hinduism, Buddhism, and Indian architecture are found in the historical sites such as Angkor Wat, Angkor Thom, Bayon, Ta Phrom and other religious place in Cambodia.

India – Cambodia bilateral relations are warm and cordial. During 1954-1958, India was a chairman of the International Control Commission (ICC), which played a very important role in solving the issues in Indo-China. During this period, Nehru brought Prince Sihanouk to meet Chou En-lai at Bandong in the Asian – African Conference. The Chinese premier promised nonintervention in Southeast Asia and began friendship with Cambodia, which has lasted more than a decade. Moreover, the ICC’s intervention successfully helped Cambodia to get the USA military aid agreement in May 1955. India’s representation in Cambodia was mere or less limited to normal diplomatic personnel. In 1955-1958, Cambodia’s international position approximated that of India. Although Cambodia used the term “neutral” to against India’s preference to call “nonaligned”, both countries were anti colonial and denounced military alliances with either bloc, especially SEATO. India and Cambodia accepted the economic aid from the West world as well as from communist countries.

When Khmer Rouge regime collapsed in 1979, India recognized the new government of Cambodia led by Heng Samrin administration, and India opened its Embassy in Phnom Penh in 1981 when many countries in the world shunned Cambodia. In this period Cambodia was internationally isolated because the ASEAN nations were concerned that communist blocs will be widespread and threatened the regional security, for Cambodian government was the pro Vietnamese government, which was supported by the Soviet Union. This factor along with India’s association with the Paris Peace Agreement and their finalization in 1991 is appreciated by the Cambodian leadership. India also committed military personnel for the conduct of the United Nations Transitional Authority in Cambodia (UNTAC) sponsored elections in 1993. India was one of the contributors to UN demining operations in Cambodia. Moreover, India responded to an appeal by Cambodian to undertake the conservation of the famous Angkor Wat temple from 1986 to 1993 at a cost of US$ 4 million.

Historical Sketch

According to legend Cambodia has its long history back to the 1st century of Christian era. Funan was the first Indianized kingdom of Cambodia. According to Chinese records, Kaundinya who a Brahmin travelling from India conquered the Cambodian queen in a war and married her. He then introduced Indian culture to the local people. Funan lasted for around five centuries during which Indian culture was introduced to the local inhabitants. This was the centuries-long phenomena known as Indianizaton, whereby elements of Indian culture were absorbed or chosen by the Cambodian people (David Chandler 2008). However, most Cambodian and European historians did not regard this process as “ Colonization” as many nationalist Indian historians did. Funan was the earliest known state of Cambodia among the “ Indianized” states in Mainland (Suvannabhumi) adn Island (Suvannadwipas) Southeast Asia founded during the first or second century A.D. Funan is a Chinese form of an old Khmer word bnam (modern Khmer phnom), meaning mountain. Located in the strategic land, Funan used to be serving as the main ports (the known sea port is Oc-Eo located now in Thoai Son, South Vietnam) for maritime trades with China, India, Persian and Europe, with its city at Vyadhapura (Ba Phnom in Cambodian province of Prey Veng) extended to Kampuchea Krom or Lower Cambodia (South Vietnam), Cambodia, central Thailand, northern Malaya, and southern Burma.

Whatever political structure Funan possessed, recent studies conclude that it evolved from indigenous social and cultural forms, that it was a ritual center before it became “Indianized,” that Indian influence commenced with Funan’s conquest of trade centers on Kra isthmus, and that Funan’s leaders adopted Indian cultural and political forms during the 5th century A.D. in order to maximize agrarian income in compensation for lost commercial revenue (G. Carter Bentley 1986).

For a long time of peaceful co-existence with Indian culture, Cambodians developed themselves into a great civilization. Angkor Wat temple is one of many remaining manifestations showing the cultural development during ninth to fifteenth centuries A.D. Therefore, Cambodian cultural identity is the offspring of Indian influence.

Another similar version of the legends is written in Cambodian annals (popular among Cambodians), which talks about the origin of the Kingdom in the following words:

Adityavamsa, king of Indraprastha (Delhi), being displeased with one of his sons, Preah Thong, drove him out of kingdom. The prince arrived in the country of Kok Thlok (the Khmer name of Kambuja meaning the land of Thlok tree) where ruled a Cham prince who was soon dispossessed of his throne by the newcomer. One evening, caught unawares of teh tide on the seashore, he was obliged to spend the night there. A Nagi of marvelous beauty came to play on the beach. The prince fell in love with and was married to her. The Naga-raja, father of the Nagi, expanded the kingdom of his son-in-law by drinking off the water which covered the country, built for him a capital and change the name of th ecountry into Kambuja (B.R. Chatterji 1946: 3-4).

As far as the early history of Cambodia is concerned, though the above-mentioned legends are merely mythical stories which cannot be regarded as the authentic proof of history, but they are of great value in the absence or lack of any precise document or record. In the myth, Cambodians see themselves as the offspring of the marriage between culture and nature. Preah Thong who was accepted by his father-in-law is his great success and the Naga-raja drank the water to enlarge the kingdom for him. This idea would have been familiar to Cambodians and that remained practicing in a large extend in the modern Cambodia. A prospective bridegroom often has to gain his in-laws approval by living with them before his marriage. While living with the groom’s family members, the bridegroom will have to act and behave properly up to the satisfaction of her family, so that he will be accepted to marry her or otherwise he will be rejected. And in the traditional wedding ceremony the story of Preah Thong is reconstructed again and again, beginning with a symbolic “snake skin” given the groom by his bride, to commemorate Preah Thong’s visit to the underworld (Rudiger Gaudes 1993).

On the other hand, the myth tells us that the local people (i.e. The dragons) respected the Brahman and his honour, so they agreed to change the kingdom from Kok Thlok or Nokor Kok Thlok( which is more often in the mind of Cambodian people in general) to an Indain name Kambuja (which first appears in the Cambodian inscription in the ninth century A.D.). However, it is from these mythical stories that many Cambodian kings had often referred to while taling about the origin of the kingdom and their ancestors back from very beginning.

By the end of the fifth century Funan was at the height of its power. The chief vassal state of Funan was Chenla, to the north on the Mekong. In the middle of the sixth century, Chenla gained control over Funan, first making it a vassal, then annexing it. Thus, history of Funan was ended here with its power handed over to Chenla, the next kingdom.

II. Cambodia and India Relations (1954 – 1958)

It is hardly to find the leader in a small country in modern era has played prominent role on the world political issue as what Prince Norodom Sihanouk did in Cambodia. Because of the peculiar state of circumstances, coincidental; however, Sihanouk has often had to make decisions between two unappealing changes. His crucial activities in the country have made him become the top of the

situation for most of the time, his extraordinary ability neutralism, he has been accused of being bias to the East or simply implementing the opportunistic neutralism. Although Cambodia was concerned about the historical foes on either side, Vietnam and Thailand, Cambodia has entertained not without justification, fears and apprehensions of aggressive intentions with her neighbors after gaining independence in 1953 – 1954 from France. Moreover, Sihanouk has to settle many internal and external issues. His problems were increased and he was suspected and has been intended to overthrow from his throne.

Sihanouk has hardly decided whether to lean to the West or the East, and his international relations have been significantly governed by the other countries to the issues in Cambodia. In such situation, Sihanouk had to weigh the conflicting positions of Cambodia’s holding at the Geneva Conference of 1954 not to join a military alliance against practical requirement of a more concrete defense base for his country. One choice is between alignment and security, and another is non-alignment, independence, and coexistence based on pure good will. Cambodia has to depend on China in order to improve local business community of oversee in Cambodia, and the necessity of U.S aid for economic betterment is very crucial; however, the communist pressures against to the West.

After the immediate attainment of the Cambodia’s independence, from 1954 to 1958, the choice is not much different between India and China as two great Asian neighbors as between the Indian and American and the American approaches to the question of peace keeping in Southeast Asia. During the mid 1954 and early 1955, Cambodia’s international attitude was controlled by considerations of securing an effective protection against possible conquest from the Vietminh or an overaggressive advance by China. Actually, Cambodia included in the treaty area of SEATO Protocol; hence, it was eligible for protection by the SEATO powers against communist aggression. However, the United States Secretary of State, Dulles, subsequently, pronounced that his country did not favor “earmarking forces for particular areas of the Far East but

 ………..Developing the deterrent of mobile Striking power plus strategically placed reserves.” This statement had weakened the political and military impact of SEATO, and it had disappointed some of its members, who had expected a military command under NATO, and it had frustrated the defense hopes of “protocol countries” like Cambodia.

Dulles reiterated his stand, at the first SEATO meeting in Bangkok form February 23 to 25, 1955, that the USA would not commit her forces specifically to the treaty area. He visited Phnom Penh and discussed a weak military aid agreement after the meeting. Without getting the strong military aid from the USA, Cambodia veered toward a policy of nonalignment in world affairs. The Alternatives

came when Sihanouk visited India, where he met Prime Minister Nehru in March 18, 1955, and he declared that

…………………..the best guarantee for peace in the world and for friendship between countries is to adhere to the principles of the recognition of each other’s sovereignty, the independence and integrity, of nonaggression, of equality and mutual respect and non-interference in the domestic affairs of each other or of other countries and on the promotion of conditions for peaceful coexistence.

Nehru’s policy of peaceful coexistence as the right recourse to containment of international communism was endorsed by Sihanouk. He left his efforts to look for American military protection against his communist foes; Nehru had clearly appreciated Dulles in wining Cambodian leader to the nonaligned camp.

India’s role in the International Control Commission (ICC) in Cambodia form 1956 through 1958 showed her inclination to help reduce tensions on Cambodia’s frontiers. However, severe limitations were remained. The ICC was not capable to intervene in Kampuchean-Siamese disputes, and its role in regard to Cambodian-Vietnamese conflict was challenged by one of its own members- Cambodia.

After the mid of 1958, the Cambodian rejection to participate in the inquiry of border violations by South Vietnam reduced the ICC to a paralyzed spectator of the devastated peace in the region. It was the worst period for the ICC in all three countries of former Indochina.

Cordial relations between Cambodia and India have been throughout the period from 1955 to 1958, whereas her relations with China were formal. The foreign policy of neutrality of Cambodia was still uncertain until almost the end of 1959, when her relations with China grew gradually, friendly and she leaned progressively thereafter on her powerful communist neighbor support.

It is considerable that after 1956, Chinese influence was gradually proving in Cambodia, partly at India’s expense. During that time India and China were very close, and India was complacent as to Chinese designs in Southeast Asia. In reality, Nehru’s diplomatic desires were directed toward bringing China and Cambodia closer. At Bandung, Nehru and Chou claimed that their common interest in Cambodian neutrality and both were satisfied with Sihanouk’s declaration on neutrality as the guideline for Cambodia foreign policy.

Nehru had openly expressed concern about the growing bipolarization of power in the world and had seriously criticized the formation of SEATO. He indicated the former Indochina states should remain unaligned and thereby “form part of the area of peace.” He warned that SEATO would stimulate actions which would decline the Geneva agreements by renewing old fears and feelings of insecurity. If Nehru had taken advantage of his visit to Cambodia to extol the merits of a policy of nonalignment, it would not be surprising in the light of his convictions.

It is important to stress that the initial statement of Cambodian Government of neutrality implied no more than a decision to abstain from alignment with the West. The neutrality which she committed herself to was passive, and the king did not seek to counterbalance Western influence in Cambodia with that of the communist bloc at that time.

In 1954, Nehru visited Indochina, and the political relations with Laos, Cambodia became very close. Moreover, Nehru's visit to Phnom Penh in October, 1954 offered Cambodia technical assistance as much as Cambodia needed. He helped construct one street in Phnom Penh, the Capital City of Cambodia, named Nehru's Street, which Cambodian people bear in mind till now. In 1955, India gave five thousand tons of rice to enable Cambodia to help solve domestic shortages.

India also paid some attention to cultural exchanges with Cambodia. An official cultural delegation of dancers and musicians, led by India’s foremost stage actor Prithriraj Kapoor, went all the countries of Southeast Asia in 1956. Numerous delegations are from the Buddhist countries visited India in 1956 to celebrate the 2,500 th anniversary of birth of Lord Buddha. In 1957 the Indian Council of Cultural Relations, sponsored the visit of Manmohan Ghosh to Cambodia, where he taught for three years at the Buddhistic University. One Cambodian student was awarded a scholarship to study in India for higher education in 1958. There were fifteen Cambodian educators came to visit India for four weeks “to observe and study community development through education.”

Despite lack of indispensible attention to Cambodia in Indian policy and its inability to help Cambodia in the latter’s disputes with its neighbors, India influence was still more significant than was China’s in Cambodia until 1959. Cambodia was closer to India than China by following the neutral foreign policy. India’s assistance and friendship on certain issues were taken for granted, and Sihanouk kept on acknowledging Nehru’s superior leadership among the nonaligned nations as well as in overall world affairs.

III. India’s Role in Cambodia after Khmer Rouge Regime (Pol Pot Regime)

Pol Pot, who came into power in Cambodia from 1975 to 1979, was overthrown by the Vietnamese troops in the 7th of January, 1979. The new government of Cambodia was installed by Vietnamese army under the leadership of Heng Samrin, whose government was a pro-Vietnam. The

Vietnamese army’s role in Cambodian affairs was shown with grave misgivings by the ASEAN countries, and they feared that this might be the beginning of a new policy of invasion by the Hanoi government. The issue of Kampuchea not only remained the matter of regional concerning the countries of Southeast Asia alone, but also had its international dimension. This issue became a situation which was unable to escape from the intertwining with the Sino-Soviet dispute and international power politics. The Pol Pot government of Cambodia was a Bejing backer, and Vietnam, which supported Heng Samrin, had a cordial relationship with the Soviet Union. Therefore, the Cambodian political issue became a boiling issue of international politics.

What the attitude of India towards this problem? There were two aspects of the Indian government towards this problem because two governments of India, one under the Janata party, and another under Indira Congress, followed two different policies towards the Cambodian issues.

1. Indian Foreign Policy towards Cambodia under Janata Party

When the problem between Cambodia and Vietnam did happen, the Soviet Union and Vietnam were in alliance, and Cambodia was in cordial relation with China. India under Mrs Gandhi was in close associated with Moscow and Hanoi, but there was the change of regime in India when the Cambodian issue took place. In March 1977, the Janata Party had come to power by winning the Congress of Indira Gandhi in the election, and the foreign policy of the Janata Government was not identical with the foreign policy of Mrs Indira’s Government.

When Janata Party came to power, there was a broaden consideration among the people about the possibility of major changes in India’s external ties. In particular, there speculations that the Prime Minister, Moraji Desai, and president Carter, could work to restore Indo-American relations because most of Janata leaders had a known hostility towards Russia and failed to have closeness with USA and the Western countries.

Soon after coming to power, Moraji Desai, the Prime Minister of India, explained Indian foreign policy by stating:

“Foreign Policy should not be based on the fear that its pursuit might annoy others……….. An honest straight forward and principled approach was always the best way of securing national interest.”

The most sensitive and crucial event, taking place in the Janata phase was the conquest of Vietnam in Cambodia and the simultaneous Chinese aggression on Vietnam. These two simultaneous events put India and Southeast Asia foreign policy to a very tough condition as a serious dilemma.

Some members of the India parliament condemned Vietnam’s aggression in Kampuchea, and some recognized the government of Heng Samrin, pro-Vietnam. Nonetheless, the Janata government did not show any kind of initiative to recognize Heng Samrin government. In January 1979, Moraji Desai stated in the press conference that the new government of Phnom Penh would be recognized upon the receipt of formal communication or if it sought recognition by India.

The policy of the Janata government towards Cambodian issue clarified precisely that the nature of its non-aligned foreign policy. Although it was more emphatic in its condemnation of the former than of the later, it was considerable both of Chinese invasion of Vietnam and of the presence of the Vietnam army in Cambodia. As a result, Indian government under Janata leadership did not recognize Pol Pot, nor did it recognize Heng Samrin, but it recognized the right. It tied to improve relations with the USA, but did not accept its demands, contradicting to India’s sovereign rights and interests. Janata government tried to judge every problem separately on its merits with reference to India’s advantages.

2. Indian Foreign Policy towards Cambodia under Indira Gandhi Government

Soon after coming to power, Indira Gandhi government announced to recognize the Heng Samrin government of Cambodia on 7 July 1980. “ Cambodia, if it is to develop its economy, restore its internal infrastructure and reestablish its status as sovereign, independent, nonaligned nation, it has to depend on the possible aids from the international community.” It was the objectives that Indian foreign minister immediately proposed to establish diplomatic relations with the People’s Republic of Kampuchea Government, ruled by President Heng Samrin.

While announcing the recognition of Kampuchea, the External Affairs Minister of India, P.V. Narasimha Rao recalled India’s past relations with Kampuchea and said: “The temples of Angkor Vat are a valid testimony of the interaction between the cultures of our two countries. Indeed, no other country in the Indo-China Peninsula is linked to India as Kampuchea. It is a cherished relationship. The gentle people of that highly cultured country have unfortunately suffered very greatly for no fault of their own. Our hearts have gone out in sympathy to the people of Kampuchea, and India has done whatever it could to alleviate their suffering. We shall continue to do so.” In the summit conference, the Second Commonwealth Heads Regional (Asia-Pacific Region) meeting, held in New Delhi, may leaders criticized India’s policy, recognizing the new government of Cambodia; however, Indira Gandhi had a blessed attempt to defend India’s policy in the second day of this conference, and told all the leaders of Governments that her policy towards Kampuchea was based on well established norms. She expected that India’s policy towards Cambodia would be appreciated by other countries course of time, they may criticize at present. To defend India’s recognition of the Heng Samrin government of Kampuchea, Indira Gandhi said in the conference: “Vietnam’s intervention in Kampuchea cannot be isolated from the context of the barbarous dictatorship of Pol Pot and the external interest in sustaining it. We are receptive to the opinions of our friends in the ASEAN countries. We have no reason to be defensive about our own recognition of the reality in Kampuchea. We have taken our decision consciously and after due consideration of all aspects of the question. Nations should try to face facts. I remember that when we recognized the People’s Republic of China, it was said we were isolated and we were similarly criticized.

“We urge those countries of Southeast Asia, who are engaged in conflict to reach a negotiated settlement in their common interest. ASEAN’s commendable experiment in regional cooperation needs the ambience of trust that only a larger accommodation with Vietnam, Laos and Kampuchea can provide. The path of peace is to relax the tensions which are polarizing and dividing Asia.”

Under the Pol Pot Government, India ruled by Indira Gandhi found it depressed to what had happened, and it did not think Pol Pot could be recognized. It was very wrong for any power to support him or his forces from outside; moreover, the journalists from western and other nations had found greater support for Heng Samrin.

India policy towards Cambodia precisely indicated that India was in attempt of the ultimate withdrawal of Vietnamese troops from Cambodia, but India did not hold the government of Cambodia alone responsible for it. The atrocities of the Khmer Rouge Regime and “the external interest in sustaining it” were largely responsible for the establishment of the Heng Samrin government with the support of Vietnam, in India’s view. In addition, India claimed that the conditions for the withdrawal of Vietnamese troops from Cambodia should create an atmosphere of peace and friendly conversation, not by using armed forces. India tried to compromise the policy of Kampuchea with the policy of continued friendship with ASEAN countries by urging the negotiation with Vietnam giving up the present policy of confrontation largely under instigation of outside powers. India’s recognition of the new government of Cambodia was based on three important factors, first was that an ‘overwhelming majority of political opinion in India’ was in its favour, second was that the Heng Samrin government was a reality in Kampuchea and it was the defacto government in the country, and the last one was that in between the Pol Pot government and the Heng Samrin government, New Delhi preferred the latter from the moral and humanitarian point of view.

IV. Cambodia and India Defense Cooperation

The cooperative and fruitful exist between Indian Army and the Royal Armed Forces of Cambodia have started since the participation of Indian troops in United Nations Transitional Authority in Cambodia in 1992 to 1993. An agreement on defense cooperation was signed when Prime Minister Hun Sen visited to India in December 2007. It has started from the basic framework to widen bilateral defense ties through training, material help, organization of seminars, and exchange of visits.

Training has been the core sector for bilateral defense cooperation. India has been conducting the training capsules in Cambodia since 2007 for batches of Royal Cambodian Armed Forces to be deployed to UN peacekeeping duties in Sudan, Chad, the Central African Republic and Lebanon. Indian teams visit to Cambodia for this training every year, and the training takes three weeks in every one year. On the 26 of August to the 13 of September, 2011, the fifth annual three-week training was held.

The visit to Cambodia has regularly been paid goodwill by the Indian Naval Ships came to Sihanoukville on the mission of goodwill, and a 26 member defense delegation from Indian Armed Forces visited Cambodia from October 31 to the 6 of November, 2010 as part of goodwill visit and training.

Indian Naval Ships Arrival came to visit Sihanoukville from July 12 to July 16, 2011. The Ship hosted a reception on board for dignitaries from Cambodian Government and Royal Cambodian Armed Forces, diplomatic corps and the Indian Community on the 12 of July, 2011.

Cambodia and India cooperated in a number of multilateral and regional fora. Cambodia has consistently supported India’s candidature in the UN and other international organizations. PM Hun Sen formally declared his country’s open support in favour of India for permanent membership of the UN Security Council at the South Summit Conference in Havana in April 2000. Cambodia has time and again reiterated this support at various international fora and during bilateral interactions. In the context of our ‘Look East’ policy and the ASEAN, Cambodia is an important interlocutor and a good partner. There have been regular high level meetings between the Prime Ministers of both countries. Premiers of the two countries held a bilateral interaction on 18 November, 2011 at Bali on the sidelines of ASEAN and EAS Summits. Dr. Manmohan Singh accompanied by his wife Smt. Gursharan Kaur led a high level delegation to Cambodia on 18 to 20 November 2012 to participated in the 10th ASEAN-India Summit and the 7th EAST Asia Summit held in Phnom Penh. Cambodia PM Hun Sen travelled to New Delhi to attend the ASEAN-India Commemorative Summit in December 2012.

V. Conclusion

Throughout the study of Cambodia's relations with India from the early of attainment of independence onward, it shows that India played a very important role in solving the Cambodian issues. Being a chairman in the International Control Commission (ICC) from 1956 through 1958 clarified that its inclination to reduce tensions on borders' disputes; however, the severe limitations were remained. Cambodia's relations with India during 1955 to 1958 continued to be most cordial whereas the relations with China were remained simple. Moreover, it is noticed that after 1956 Chinese influence was gradually increasing in Cambodia. Furthermore, India under Nehru's leadership brought Prince Sihanouk to meet Chou En-Lai in Bandung's conference and from that time Cambodia and China started close relationship with each other.

In addition, Cambodia under Prince Sihanouk's government had declared officially that Cambodia would accept the neutral policy when he came to visit to New Delhi and had a meeting with Nehru in order to get the advice from Nehru in the foreign policy. This meeting brought about the acknowledgement of Nehru's crucial leadership policy to be conducted in Cambodian foreign policy among the non aligned countries and in over the world affairs.

More importantly, after the collapse of Pol Pot regime, Cambodia was internally isolated when Heng Samrin came into power. Many countries in Southeast Asia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Burma and Thailand, did not recognize the new government ruled by Heng Samrin because this government was installed by Vietnamese troops. They feared that Vietnam would have the policy of the communist expansion, for Vietnam was a backing of Soviet Union.

However, India in this period were under the leadership of two government's policies, Janata Party, and Indira Gandhi, Congress Party. Cambodia was not recognized by India when it was under the leadership of Janata Party because Janata party as well as other countries had the policy towards Kampuchea of nonrecognition. The Heng Samrin government was considered as unlawful.

Soon after Indira Gandhi came to power in India, the foreign policy towards Cambodia started changing. In 1981, when most of countries in the world did not recognize the Heng Samrin government, India announced officially to recognize the new government of Cambodia and opened the embassy in Phnom Penh, the capital city of Cambodia. By recognition from India, the world began to change the policy towards Cambodia gradually, and Cambodia relation with the world consequently improved.

And apart from the political assistance, India also rolled crucially in the defense cooperation as well as the economic development in Cambodia. In the last few years, the enhancement of defense cooperation between India and Cambodia have reached the agreement. Moreover, India have trained the Cambodian Naval Army, and India have signed an Agreement on Combating International Terrorism, Organized Crimes ect.

In short, the relationship between India and Cambodia have been very cordial, and India exactly played very significant role in Cambodia in terms of solving the disputes between the neighboring countries, recognition Cambodia's Government after the collapse of Khmer Rouge, which assisted Cambodia to be fully lawful, and Cambodia also has been given the training in the defense cooperation by India.

References:

 Sar Desai, D.R.Berkeley. (1968), Indian Foreign Policy in Cambodia, Laos, and Vietnam. University of California Press.

 Smith, Roger M. (1965), Cambodia's Foreign Policy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

 Chakraborti, Tridib. India and Kampuchea. Calcutta, India: Minerva Associates Publicatoins, 1985.

 Audric, J. (1972), Angkor and the Khmer Empire, London: Robert Hale.

 Reddi, V.M. “Cambodian Neutralism,” International studies, II (October.,1960),

190 – 205)

 Ayoob, Mohammed. (1990), India and Southeast Asia: A study of Indian Perceptions and Policies, London: Routledge.

 http://www.indembassyphnompenh.org/bilateral-relations/political.html

 http://www.indembassyphnompenh.org/bilateral-relations/defence-cooperation.htm

About the author: 

Thoeun Vongdy has been currently working in Japan International Cooperation Agency in Social Development & Governance Sections. He also serves as a lecturer in various universities in the Discipline of International Relations, Educational Psychology, Global Studies, etc. He also used to work for the foreign mission including Embassy of India in Cambodia. He obtained Master Degree of Politics, Specialization in International Relations from Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU), India. He has been pursuing Ph.D. of International Relations at University of Cambodia (UC). His interest papers in world politics, India-Cambodia, China-Cambodia as well security issues in world affairs.