Refugee Camps: A Cambodian Perspective
August 6, 2025
So Farina, Author of the Hijab of Cambodia: Memories of Cham Muslim Women after the Khmer Rouge
Deputy Director of Documentation Center of Cambodia/the Queen Mother Library
Photo Sources: Documentation Center of Cambodia Archives
Dear Spokesperson of the Defense Ministry of Thailand,
My name is So Farina. I am a second-generation Cambodian born after the collapse of the Khmer Rouge and currently serve as a senior researcher at the Documentation Center of Cambodia and the Queen Mother Library. I am writing in response to your message quoted in The Nation Thailand, titled “From Survivors… to Those Who Turned Their Guns Back When Cambodians Forgot Everything Thailand Once Gave”, published on August 4, 2025.
First of all, I assure you that we, the Cambodian people, have not forgotten what happened during and after the Khmer Rouge regime. We remember the experiences endured during the genocide and in the refugee camps along the Cambodian-Thai border, before Cambodian refugees were either resettled in third countries or deported to Dangrek Mountain, where many faced death. The Cambodian people remain deeply grateful to those who provided humanitarian assistance during that time. However, I respectfully urge you to also listen to Cambodian perspectives, as well as the accounts of international eyewitnesses and media coverage regarding the situation in the refugee camps along the border at that time. Second, I affirm that both Cambodian civilians and non-civilians desire to live in peace, having lived through the Vietnam War and the Khmer Rouge genocide. The younger generation remains mindful of the testimonies of Khmer Rouge survivors. However, we will defend ourselves and our country at all costs if it is at risk or suffers from aggression.
According to the Refugee Convention, in 1979, only Cambodia and the Philippines had acceded to the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol. Many ASEAN countries, including Thailand, lacked the legal and institutional frameworks necessary to address the treatment of refugees in Southeast Asia. In the absence of specific legal mechanisms to manage refugee movements, it became difficult to distinguish between economic migrants and individuals in need of international protection. Thailand, as a state, did not initially accept Cambodian refugees. When it later did, it failed to fully comply with the obligations set forth in the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol.
Are you aware of what happened on Dangrek Mountain in 1979 and 1980, and do you accept the facts?
The Dangrek Mountain incident, also referred to as the Dangrek Genocide or the Preah Vihear pushback, was a tragic border event along the Dangrek Mountain Range on the Thai-Cambodian border. It resulted in the deaths of many Cambodian refugees who were denied asylum by Thailand in 1979. The violent response by Thai authorities left a lasting impact on the memories of those who survived. While some refugees were eventually resettled in third countries, many others were forcibly deported to this area and died in large numbers.
In the 1980s, Mr. Youk Chhang, a Khmer Rouge survivor and Director of the Documentation Center of Cambodia (DC-Cam)/Queen Mother Library, entered the Khao I Dang refugee camp along with other men who had also entered the camp “illegally,” as they had not registered with or paid Thai military officials at the border. They hid in a well beneath an empty house whenever Thai soldiers patrolled the area and survived with the support of church organizations. Mr. Chhang recalled, “There were weeks without food.” Nevertheless, the “illegals” were accepted into schools and training programs, both of which he took full advantage of. He acknowledged that while some Thai individuals were kind and cared for the refugees, the Thai state itself did not fulfill its responsibilities. He has since encouraged others to share their experiences, stating that the evidentiary information is ubiquitous.
Mr. Chhang’s time in limbo at Khao-I-Dang lasted longer than the Khmer Rouge regime itself. In 1985, he finally obtained legal immigrant status from the United States and was transferred to a camp in the Philippines for orientation and training. In February 2025, he and his friends returned to visit the sites in 2018 and 2025. Mr. Chhang has always expressed deep gratitude to the Philippines for taking excellent care of him and other refugees.
While Mr. Youk Chhang was able to pass through the camp and continue his journey to the United States, Dr. Quach MengLy, Founder of Quach Mengly Education, was not so fortunate. In his book, “Dangrek Mountain…unforgettable,” he recalled his painful experience of staying at Nong Chan Camp for seven days, after which his entire family, along with other refugees, were robbed and then forced by Thai soldiers to board a bus to another location. Initially, he was hopeful he would be relocated to another camp, but instead, they were taken to Dangrek Mountain, a site used as a shield in the conflict against the People’s Republic of Kampuchea (PRK) and Vietnamese troops. He estimated that approximately 40,000 refugees were abandoned on the mountain and forced to navigate a mine-infested mountain range by following waterfalls on their own. “We had to choose between bullets or mines or tiger and crocodile. But we were not the first group to arrive. Actually, Cham Muslims were sent here before us and most of them were dead of landmine explosion a few days before our arrival.” he said. It took him 22 days to trek from Dangrek Mountain to his hometown, Battambang province.
Joel Brinkley, a Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter for The New York Times, documented eyewitness accounts from missionaries in December 1979, describing what they called “a massacre” of Cambodian refugees. Thai officials had refused to accept any more refugees. The 850 men, women, and children obediently began trudging down the hill, only to look back and see M16 rifle barrels pointed at them. At the time, no one was aware of the danger that lay ahead. The mines blew up hundreds of them; others turned around to run back up the hill, but the Thai soldiers opened fire. Mrs. Rasmussen quoted in the article recalled, “Missionaries who have seen all sorts of horrible things, all over the world, they cry when the talk about that day.”
Frightened by Thai soldiers, landmines, and darkness, many refugees—both young and old—cried out for help. Their haunting voices grew louder across the mountain, while many more perished from mine explosions, starvation, and disease. Consequently, the mountain later became known as “Phnom Khmaoch,” or “Ghost Mountain.”
Dr. Phuangthong Rungswasdisap, a Cambodian Genocide Program research fellow at Yale University, noted that Thailand often emphasized refugees as an economic burden. However, they rarely acknowledged the economic benefits Thailand gained from their presence. She explained that the border district of Aranyaprathet experienced a thriving black market and a property boom. “Many local farmers abandoned their rice fields to engage in illegal cross-border trading with Cambodians. The influx of foreign aid workers to the town also caused a rapid increase in housing demand and local employment. Thailand’s national economy benefited significantly from the substantial budgets international aid agencies spent on relief efforts. Between 1979 and 1982 alone, refugee relief operations expended US$350 million in Thailand. Subsequently, the United Nations Border Relief Operation (UNBRO) allocated 90 percent of its US$36 million annual budget within Thailand. The UN also provided assistance to 80,000 Thai border villagers affected by the refugee situation ,” she stated.
Looking back, on behalf of the Cambodian people, I extend my sincere gratitude to the United States of America and the United Nations Border Relief Operation (UNBRO) for providing humanitarian assistance and for pressuring Thailand to accept Cambodian refugees. The U.S. accepted 140,000 Cambodian refugees in 1980. Thanks go to the UNHCR for facilitating refugee protection; to the Philippines for accepting and caring for Cambodian refugees with great kindness; to Malaysia for accepting Cham Muslim refugees; to Vietnam for assisting Cambodian forces in overthrowing the Khmer Rouge; and to other countries and organizations that helped Cambodia and the people at that time.
The Khmer Rouge regime left behind five million surviving eyewitnesses from whom we continue to learn. This year, we commemorated the 50th anniversary of the Khmer Rouge’s control over Cambodia and have begun the process of healing our wounds.
Defending Our Country and Sovereignty
You are claiming credit when we are in a hostile. Please listen to the other side and what the world has written about the camps and the recent armed conflict. As Cambodian citizens, we have a moral obligation to protect our country. As Cambodian soldiers, we have a duty to defend our sovereignty and territorial integrity. On May 28, 2025, Thai soldiers killed one of our Cambodian soldiers, yet Cambodia was blamed for initiating the conflict. Please remember that human life holds equal value regardless of socio-economic status, age, or nationality. Imagine if the soldier killed on May 28 had been Thai, how would you have reacted? Despite the ceasefire, 18 Cambodian soldiers remain in your custody. These soldiers are the sons of Khmer Rouge survivors. Their families and the entire nation are calling for their immediate release so they may return home.
To sum up, we remain committed to truth and justice. When truth is not revealed and justice has yet to be served, we continue to search and seek for it. Similarly, Cambodia invited you to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to address the conflict over disputed areas in pursuit of truth and justice, but you refused. Instead, you chose to escalate the situation into violent conflict. The Cambodian people never imagined that a good neighbor like you would intend to hinder our progress toward a better life. Unfortunately, your intentions failed to undermine our sincerity, resulting in greater strength and unity among us.