Kites in the highlands: articulating Bunong Indigeneity in Cambodia, Vietnam, and abroad

Abstract

Bunong people from both sides of the Cambodia–Vietnam border are increasingly self-identifying as Indigenous peoples and claiming collective human rights as Indigenous peoples at international platforms, such as the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues. As of now the Bunong from Vietnam articulate Indigeneity from a diasporic distance, having fled the country as political refugees. The aim of this article is to compare and contrast the networks of Bunong Indigeneity that now seek cross-border and transnational connections, and examine the blockages and openings that appear as a result. The border between Vietnam and Cambodia separates Bunong communities and families spatially, politically, and culturally. Cambodia recognizes Indigenous peoples, while Vietnam does not. Through primary research with Bunong activists, combined with secondary sources, this article adopts a comparative cross-border approach to the Bunong articulation of Indigeneity, and asks where this movement may be headed.

Keywords:

• indigenous peoples
• Bunong
• transnational
• Cambodia
• Vietnam

Acknowledgements

I would like to acknowledge and thank the members of the Bunong Indigenous Community Association, especially Glan Bubong, Pheap Sochea, Mpreo Bubong, for providing critical feedback and dialogue regarding this article. Thanks also to Ian Baird for organizing the March 2015 workshop at the University of Wisconsin-Madison on the concept of Indigenous people in Asia, which provided further insights upon which the article draws. Frédéric Bourdier also provided critical feedback on the article in its draft stage. Thanks as well to the anonymous reviewer. Any errors or shortcomings in the article are solely my responsibility.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1. From a 2015 interview with Mpreo Bubong. In Keating, “unpublished fieldnotes.”

2. The spellings of the name ‘Bunong’ vary. In Vietnam, they are more commonly referred to as Mnong, and in Cambodia as Phnong. The Bunong I have worked with reject both Mnong and Phnong as inaccurate on many levels, and prefer to be referred to as Bunong.

3. Scott, Art of Not Being Governed; and Clastres, Society Against the State.

4. Higham, The Civilization of Angkor.

5. Blood, “A Reconstruction of Proto-Mnong.”

6. Maxwell, “Fire regimes.”

7. The term ‘Indigenous’ is capitalized here to indicate its usage as a proper noun, which correlates with how it is understood within international human rights law. The term ‘peoples’ is categorically different from the term ‘people’ in international law. The ‘s’ in peoples denotes a collective existence.

8. For an example of Akha ‘mobile Indigeneity’ in mainland Southeast Asia, cf. Morton et al., “Decolonizing Methods.”

9. Lewis et al., Ethnologue.

10. This was proposed by Bunong participants in a workshop held in Madison at the University of Wisconsin, with whom I collaborated in making a presentation. In workshop discussions prior to our presentation, an interesting moment erupted when my Bunong colleagues suggested a much larger group of languages be considered ‘Bunong’, including Lao. This was greeted with protest from other participants. The Bunong participants subsequently scaled back their classification, yet their classification remains more inclusive than that of most linguists. The moment exemplified the inchoate and contested nature of Bunong Indigeneity.

11. Lewis et al., Ethnologue.

12. Kirsch, Feasting and Social Oscillation.

13. Keating, “unpublished fieldnotes”; Chandler, Cambodia; and Higham, The Civilization of Angkor.

14. Ian Baird, personal communication, 2015.

15. Tambiah, “Galactic Polities” and Keating, “Kuy Alterities.”

16. Hickey, Sons of the Mountain; and Chandler, A History of Cambodia; for a specifically Bunong focus on change during the colonial period, cf. Guerin, “De Casques Blanc.”

17. Zayas, “Promotion of a Democratic and Equitable International Order.”

18. Keating, “Kuy Alterities”; and Milne, “Under the Leopard’s Skin.”

19. C.f. RGC, Land Law. The actual name for Indigenous peoples that is used in the Land Law is chun cheat daoem pheak tech, which literally means /people, original, minority/. Semantically, this name does not entirely correspond to the international legal sense of ‘Indigneous Peoples’, mainly because it perpetuates a minoritarian framework. Until very recently, the Bunong were the clear majority of the people in the province of Mondulkiri,

20. Michaud, “Handling Mountain Minorities.”

21. Arguably this article repeats this pattern, but does so with self-conscious acknowledgements, as well as with the free, prior and informed consent of the Bunong communities the author works with.

22. Bourdier, “When the Margins Turn.”

23. Vater, The Bunong.

24. Thanh et al., Economic, Cultural and Social Life.

25. Important exceptions include Pearson, Missions and Conversions; and Salemink, Ethnography of Central Highlanders.

26. Salemink, Ethnography of Central Highlanders; and Hickey, Sons of the Mountain.

27. According to Bunong interlocutors, the name ‘Bajaraka’ combines the first two letters of the names of the four main groups it purportedly represented: Bahnar, Jarai, Rade (spelled Ede in this article), and Kaho.

28. Hickey, Free in the Forest.

29. Keating, “unpublished fieldnotes.”

30. Michaud, “Handling Mountain Minorities.”

31. On coffee, c.f. Doutriaux et al, “Competing for Coffee.” Bauxite mining is very recent in Dak Nong. The first aluminum factory reportedly started in September 2014, Source: http://tggroup.vn/index.php/en/internal-news/419-electrolysis-aluminum-factory-in-dak-nong-promoting-bauxite-industry (accessed 12 March 2015). Human rights violations of Central Highlanders have been documented by Human Rights Watch for many years.

32. Condominas, L’Exotique est Quotidien; Condominas, We Have Eaten the Forest.

33. Hickey, Shattered World.

34. Baird, “The Construction of Indigenous Peoples.”

35. Chandler, Cambodia.

36. Ledgerwood and Un, “Global Concepts and Local Meaning.”

37. Keating, “Kuy Alterities.”

38. Keating, “Cambodia.”

39. Bourdier, Indigenous Peoples.

40. Keating, “unpublished fieldnotes.”

41. Hickey, Free in the Forest.

42. Salemink, Ethnography of Central Highlanders; and Hickey, Sons of the Mountain.

43. Keating, “unpublished fieldnotes.” The breaking of Bunong silence in 2015 is discussed at greater length in Keating, “Traversing the Scales.”

44. Ibid.

45. Ibid.

46. Ibid. For a full examination of the ambivalent relations between Vietnam veterans and the diasporic Montagnards (albeit limited to Jarai and Ede people), cf. Pearson, Missions and Conversions.

47. Khy, “Indigenous Group” and “Ethnic Minorities.”

48. Yasunari, “The Role of Large Scale Vegetation.”

49. Khy, “Ethnic Minorities in Mondolkiri.”

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Neal B. Keating

Neal B. Keating, PhD, is an associate professor of cultural anthropology and coordinator of museum studies/public history at The College at Brockport, State University of New York, Brockport, NY, USA. His research interests include human rights practices and movements, Indigeneity and neoliberalism, transnational networks, and the Anthropocene.