Hun Manet’s Cambodia: Where Repression Evolves

The narrative surrounding Hun Manet’s rise to power in Cambodia has undergone significant revisions since his ascension to the premiership in 2023. Initially, many observers believed that the carefully stage-managed transition would bring about a new era of liberal reform and potentially even open up the country’s political space after decades of authoritarian rule. However, as Hun Manet’s tenure has progressed, it has become increasingly clear that his governance model is merely an evolution of the repressive machinery built by his father, Hun Sen.

This refined authoritarian system relies on adaptability and a willingness to evolve in response to changing circumstances. Unlike the more overtly coercive methods employed by Hun Sen during his reign, Hun Manet’s approach combines patronage, elite control, digital surveillance, and strategic partnerships with foreign powers – particularly China. This shift has been accompanied by an apparent decrease in conspicuous violence, but the overall impact remains the same: a more resilient and institutionalized authoritarian state.

The treatment of civil society under Hun Manet’s leadership is a stark example of this evolution. The recent sentencing of five Mother Nature activists to lengthy prison terms on trumped-up charges exemplifies the regime’s reliance on legal repression to silence dissenting voices. These individuals were not merely punished for their environmental activism; they were targeted because their work threatened to expose corruption and human rights abuses linked directly to the ruling elite.

The persecution of Cambodia’s remaining opposition parties is another key aspect of this evolution. The Candlelight Party and the Nation Power Party have faced repeated attempts to silence them through the courts, effectively rendering meaningful electoral competition impossible. Independent journalists operating in a climate of constant pressure often find themselves targeted for investigating sensitive topics such as corruption, land seizures, or online fraud.

The tragic death of environmental journalist Chhoeung Chheng in 2024 serves as a stark reminder of the risks faced by those who dare to challenge the regime’s interests. The increasing dependence on China for economic and security cooperation has provided Cambodia’s ruling party with a critical lifeline, allowing them to withstand external pressure over democracy and human rights.

Western governments continue to pursue diplomatic engagement and offer incentives in an attempt to persuade Phnom Penh to rebalance its foreign policy and gradually open up political space. However, this expectation is rooted in a fundamental misunderstanding of Cambodia’s alignment with China. Rather than a mere foreign-policy preference, Beijing has become integral to the ruling party’s strategy for preserving power and shielding itself from Western pressure.

The depth of this alignment can be seen in both economic and security partnerships between Phnom Penh and Beijing. The Funan Techo Canal, backed by a $1.2bn financing agreement with Chinese partners, is emblematic of China’s expanding footprint in Cambodia. Chinese investors accounted for 54 percent of the country’s approved investment capital in 2025, while the Chinese-funded expansion and reopening of Ream Naval Base point to Beijing’s growing strategic presence on the Gulf of Thailand.

The implications of this alignment are far-reaching. Western policymakers must acknowledge that diplomatic engagement alone will not persuade Cambodia to change its stance on democracy and human rights. Instead, they should focus on addressing the root causes of Hun Manet’s authoritarian system by pressuring Phnom Penh to make meaningful reforms and engaging in a more nuanced dialogue with Beijing about its role in shaping Cambodia’s domestic policies.

Ultimately, the future of Hun Manet’s Cambodia remains shrouded in uncertainty. Will this evolution of the repressive machinery continue, or will it reach a critical point where external pressure becomes too great for the regime to withstand?