The Kingdom of Cambodia is a country in Southeast Asia. Decades of war and political instability in the country left it completely devastated and in great need of assistance to grow (Jezeera, 2008). From that point on, Cambodia has been one of the biggest beneficiaries of international aid in the world (Jezeera, 2008). The World Bank’s involvement in reducing poverty in Cambodia is mainly associated with the Land Allocation for Social and Economic Development (LASED) ("Project: Land Allocation for Social and Economic Development", 1991). The main goal of the project was to identify the uses of all land in the state and give it to “eligible, poor and formerly landless or land poor recipients through a transparent and well-targeted process” ("Project: Land Allocation for Social and Economic Development", 1991).
The LASED program has led to some positive results. The first round of the land distribution awarded 250 families with land titles ("Project: Land Allocation for Social and Economic Development", 1991). As many people within Cambodia depend on agriculture to survive, land allocation is an excellent way to liberate families and ensure sustainable growth. Critics however, are deeply concerned with the treatment of people protesting against land allocation and see the development of Cambodia as necessary but “chaotic” ("Project: Land Allocation for Social and Economic Development", 1991). The development of Cambodia is often seen as “chaotic” because the reallocation of land has led numerous people being displaced (Jezeera, 2008). …show more content…
A large majority of these people were already quite poor, dependent of their land for their livelihoods and had nowhere else to go. The large increases in crime, child prostitution and sexually transmitted diseases (Cambodia has the highest prevalence of HIV/AIDS in Asia) is often blamed on people being displaced (Jezeera, 2008). The World Bank certainly could have done more to ensure that these negative impacts were not so pervasive. They were completely aware of the politically instability that has affected Cambodia for decades and should have been more cautious before green lighting the government to evict citizens. In addition, if an eviction was truly necessary, it is the World Bank’s responsibility to ensure that anyone affected should have been adequately compensated for their troubles. The World Bank and the government of Cambodia have been criticized about the inhumane responses to protests against land reallocation (Evans, 2015). As mentioned in the paragraph above, many people have been negatively affected by the LASED program. Many of these people logically felt that it was necessary to voice their concerns by protesting. The Cambodian government has taken to violently breaking up peaceful protests and filing illegitimate charges against protesters in order to stop them from protesting ("At Your Own Risk - Reprisals against Critics of World Bank Group Projects", 2015). The World Bank has adamantly opposed to forced evictions of community members, which is a good thing (Evans, 2015). However, it also chose not to comment of the Cambodian government’s treatment of protesters (Evans, 2015). One would think that the large amounts of money being invested towards the program would give the World Bank authority to dictate how the government treats these issues to an extent. Considering this, turning a blind eye to such atrocities gives the impression that they do not really care about reduction of inequality (which is one
The LASED program has led to some positive results. The first round of the land distribution awarded 250 families with land titles ("Project: Land Allocation for Social and Economic Development", 1991). As many people within Cambodia depend on agriculture to survive, land allocation is an excellent way to liberate families and ensure sustainable growth. Critics however, are deeply concerned with the treatment of people protesting against land allocation and see the development of Cambodia as necessary but “chaotic” ("Project: Land Allocation for Social and Economic Development", 1991). The development of Cambodia is often seen as “chaotic” because the reallocation of land has led numerous people being displaced (Jezeera, 2008). …show more content…
A large majority of these people were already quite poor, dependent of their land for their livelihoods and had nowhere else to go. The large increases in crime, child prostitution and sexually transmitted diseases (Cambodia has the highest prevalence of HIV/AIDS in Asia) is often blamed on people being displaced (Jezeera, 2008). The World Bank certainly could have done more to ensure that these negative impacts were not so pervasive. They were completely aware of the politically instability that has affected Cambodia for decades and should have been more cautious before green lighting the government to evict citizens. In addition, if an eviction was truly necessary, it is the World Bank’s responsibility to ensure that anyone affected should have been adequately compensated for their troubles. The World Bank and the government of Cambodia have been criticized about the inhumane responses to protests against land reallocation (Evans, 2015). As mentioned in the paragraph above, many people have been negatively affected by the LASED program. Many of these people logically felt that it was necessary to voice their concerns by protesting. The Cambodian government has taken to violently breaking up peaceful protests and filing illegitimate charges against protesters in order to stop them from protesting ("At Your Own Risk - Reprisals against Critics of World Bank Group Projects", 2015). The World Bank has adamantly opposed to forced evictions of community members, which is a good thing (Evans, 2015). However, it also chose not to comment of the Cambodian government’s treatment of protesters (Evans, 2015). One would think that the large amounts of money being invested towards the program would give the World Bank authority to dictate how the government treats these issues to an extent. Considering this, turning a blind eye to such atrocities gives the impression that they do not really care about reduction of inequality (which is one