WI: No Khmer Rouge

GeographyDude

Gone Fishin'
The Vietnamese backed the Khmer Rouge too. It feels as if people do not remember the Cambodian civil war.
This sounds like something you know about.

Could you please give us a quick rundown, and perhaps a reference if you have one at your fingertips?
 

mial42

Gone Fishin'
The Holodomor certainly counts as real genocide. Ending Nazi genocide and ending Khmer Rouge genocide are both far preferable to not doing anything about it. Credit where credit is due. But If Hitler had came to power with support from the Soviets, such is the analogy with Khmer Rouge and Vietnam, then I think there’s all the less to celebrate.
It's not a question of celebration or moral culpability (For what it's worth, the Soviets, along with the British, French, and Americans, also played a role in the rise of the Nazis. But that's irrelevant to the thread). The claim is that Vietnam will invade and puppet Cambodia no matter who's in charge. I'd argue that's not necessarily true, considering OTL they only invaded when they had ample casus belli (genocide against Vietnamese Cambodians that spilled over in to attacking Vietnamese villages). Vietnam may want a sphere of influence over Indochina, but there's a difference between wanting something and going to war to get it, and a less blatantly provocative Cambodian government, or even a friendly-but-not-subordinate one (perhaps an alt-Khmer Rouge that doesn't jump way off the deep end and is basically just "normal" Communists) will not necessarily be invaded.
 

Lusitania

Donor
I have in one of my TL a Communist China that has a much bigger falling out with Soviet Union and no Mao in the 1960s. In that TL I had pro-Soviet Vietnam also having similar falling out with China which results in China backing pro-Chinese communist government in Cambodia and pro-China communist rebels take over in Laos.
 

Deleted member 90949

Because the Khmer Rouge at this point were not much different to other communist insurgents. You can't blame them for not knowing what they would do in the future.
While not anywhere as bad as the Khmer Rouge, the Vietnamese government wasn't very kind to ethnic minorities either. Note the displacement and persecution of the Montagnards as well as the expulsion of the ethnic Chinese after the Sino-Vietnamese war.

Pol Pot and Ho Chi Minh were not radically different in their beliefs, one was just far more ruthless in pursuing the goal of ethnic homogeneity.
 
It's not a question of celebration or moral culpability (For what it's worth, the Soviets, along with the British, French, and Americans, also played a role in the rise of the Nazis. But that's irrelevant to the thread). The claim is that Vietnam will invade and puppet Cambodia no matter who's in charge. I'd argue that's not necessarily true, considering OTL they only invaded when they had ample casus belli (genocide against Vietnamese Cambodians that spilled over in to attacking Vietnamese villages). Vietnam may want a sphere of influence over Indochina, but there's a difference between wanting something and going to war to get it, and a less blatantly provocative Cambodian government, or even a friendly-but-not-subordinate one (perhaps an alt-Khmer Rouge that doesn't jump way off the deep end and is basically just "normal" Communists) will not necessarily be invaded.

Cambodia and Vietnam were both rational actors. Cambodians fear Vietnamese domination just as the Vietnamese fear Chinese domination. Vietnam joined the Soviet bloc against China and for the same reason Cambodia had to form a coalition against Vietnam, and China was the natural ally of the Khmer Rogue. Had the Khmer Republic survived they would of course leverage American support instead.

As such Cambodia can choose to be subordinate to Vietnam or be anti-Vietnam. Given the disproportionate military advantage Vietnam had, a friendly-but-not-subordinate position is untenable IMO.

The Khmer Rogue takeover was the worse case scenario for Cambodia. The country would have been much better off had the Khmer Republic survived, but this would have led to certain invasion from Vietnam. What would happened then is a US backed insurgency to get back at Vietnam. Inevitably Vietnam would have to withdraw troops when the Cold War ends a little over a decade later. The damage to the country would be
immense but still a fraction of what the genocide caused.
 
The Khmer Rouge lose the war and never take control of Cambodia. How this happens doesn't matter (though you can add it if you want). Just what would Cambodia look like today? From what I saw, it was a modestly successful country and was on the rise before Pol Pot seized control. Would it be the South Korea of Southeast Asia or would it just be a modestly successful country?
I live in the region as a native and am somewhat more than familiar with the local history.

If there was no Khmer Rouge (maybe butterfly away?), then the replacement state would either be the Kingdom of Cambodia or the Khmer Republic (which was a defacto dictatorship). Regardless, the patterns of ruling won't be that different.

The biggest change would be the economy.

The Khmer Rouge wiped out 20% of the population but the 20% that was wiped out was the most educated and most skilled segment of the population. Teachers, academics, engineers, mechanics, technicians, doctors, professionals were all specifically targeted. People whom wore glasses were targeted and purged as wearing glasses was a sign of education.

Without the purge, Cambodia might possibly be a lot more economically developed; it won't be anyway near Thailand but still have significant manufacturing and industrial operations.
But I still feel that the Vietnamese would still have invaded anyway.
 

chankljp

Donor
"Cultural exports" could be interesting too... I've been to Vietnamese, Lao, and Thai restaurants, but never to a Cambodian restaurant....
As a result of the Khmer Rouge regime's brutal rule during the 1970s, with hundreds and thousands of people dying from execution and starvation, large part of traditional Cambodian cuisine was literally just... forgotten and lost forever, as chefs were killed, books with recipes were destroyed, and certain ingredients, such as the Kampot pepper, once the pride of the nation that was exported all over the world, was almost driven extinct because no one farmed it anymore during the famine. All you are left with are elderly people and tourist who visited the country before things went to hell wishfully reminiscing about food that they used to eat, but no one knows how to cook them anymore...

Without Khmer Rouge, I can certainly see Kampot pepper staying on and retain its position as a premium cooking ingredient on par with real vanilla beans from Madagascar.
 
Top