How–and Why– The New York Times Didn’t Interview Pol Pot
By Nate Thayer
January 23, 2014
After I interviewed Pol Pot in July and October 1997, my excellent
magazine, the Far Eastern Economic Review–the sister publication of the
Wall Street Journal and both owned by Dow Jones–nominated me and the
story for a Pulitzer Prize.
It was a long shot as the Pulitzer is eligible only to correspondents
for American media organizations, and the Review was incorporated in
Hong Kong. However the story did run the same day on the front page of
the Wall Street Journal, so the WSJ asked me to write a bried outline of
how the story came about for the Foreign Editor, John Bussey, to
formally draft a letter to the Pulitzer committee. Here is one such
exchange of letters I wrote to my editor, the extraordinarily talented
in his own right Nayan Chanda of the Far Easter Economic Review:
From: Nate Thayer at REVIEW 11/13/97 10:25 PM
To: Nayan Chande at REVIEW
Subject: RE: Pulitzer Nomination by Bussy/WSJ
To: Nayan Chande at REVIEW
Subject: RE: Pulitzer Nomination by Bussy/WSJ
Dear Nayan:
First of all, I think it would be to our advantage to promote the freelance aspect, rather than to try to weave around the fact that the Review was central to this whole getting to Pol Pot project being successful.
It has been a long time since a freelancer won a Pulitzer, and, as we
all know, the politics of these awards sometimes overwhelm the
meritocracy of it all, and freelancers–particularly foreign
correspondents–take the brunt of risks and often go the extra mile.
The overwhelming number of foreign correspondents killed and wounded each year are freelancers, according to statistics compiled by Reporters Sans Frontiers and the Committee to Protect Journalists. It might be to our benefit to highlight this as an opportunity to recognize freelancers, and the net effect, of course, is that the Review, the Journal and Dow Jones will ultimately revceive the credit it deserves if we are a successful. It is not irrelevant that the Khmer Rouge executed many foreign journalists in their day.
Another macro theme to be addressed is the question of why I was the
one “allowed” in by the Khmer Rouge or “invited” in by the Khmer Rouge,
the implication being that I cut a deal with the, am a “fellow
traveler”, agreed to “conditions”, or paid them off. All of these are
accusations that have been floating around and many of them I have been
asked directly. The answer, of course, is that none of them are
accurate.
I was not “invited” in by them or “selected” by them. I contacted them as I had done scores and scores of times over the last decade and carefully tried to convince them to let me in to interview Pol Pot. It took six weeks for the “trial” and more than four months of non-stop, 7 days a week cajoling, finagling, secret meetings, messages passed back and forth, contacts activated on my behalf etc. until they finally relented–a far cry from being “invited” and all its implications.
On the question of why I was the only journalist is simple–as far as I
know, and I think I know clearly–I am the only Western journalist who
has managed to open a direct channel with contacts, and it took many
years of work on several continents to develop the contacts to the point
where I now have the code names of the entire leadership, their secret
mail drops, a channel through Europe that is actually a Chinese trained
coded radio operator who sends coded messages directly to the jungle,
and the mobile telephones of the top leaders that I call directly in the
jungle, as well as intermediaries that hand deliver requests and
communications.
The reason why the New York Times didn’t get in–which there is all
kinds of suspicions being promulgated that I shut them out–is simple:
The New York Times or anyone working for them never had any contact
whatsoever with the Khmer Rouge.
Even though they traveled around the world to my hotel in the Thai
border town of Surin on the eve of the Pol Pot interview, they, in fact
were never going anywhere farther than the hotel lobby, little less into
the Cambodian jungle.
This is a fact I know because when Elizabeth Becker and her cameraman
and fixer arrived at the hotel in high heels and a dozen pieces of
designer luggage the evening before I went into the Cambodian jungle,
and informed me that they were going with me into Cambodia to meet Pol
Pot, I made a couple calls.
I excused myself from my whiskey and notebooks in the hotel coffee
shop, went upstairs and simply called up on my mobile phone the chief of
staff of the Khmer Rouge army and inquired whether there were other
journalists scheduled to come into Khmer Rouge territory the next
morning to interview Pol Pot with me.. He said no there was not, that no
one had contacted him, and they had never heard of Elizabeth Becker
(These are peasant military commanders who don’t read the New York
Times.) He further assured me–being the man in control of all the guns
and check points accessing their control zones, that he would
immediately put out an directive that no one else would be allowed
access to their zones the next day except for me and my team. Given the
fact that this man controls all the guns at their checkpoints, I was
quite confident that Ms. Becker would not be accessing Khmer Rouge
control zones.
I then called another friend of mine, the commander of the Royal Thai
Army regional sector controlling the Thai border with Cambodia–who
controlled all the heavily guarded checkpoints on the Thai side which
controlled access out of Thailand into the no mans land between the Thai
border and the Khmer Rouge zones. He, also, said that no one was
granted permission to exit Thailand to access the Khmer Rouge zones save
for me and my team. He further said he would immediately put out a
directive to strictly forbid any other journalists or foreigners to exit
Thailand the next day through his checkpoints.
So I slept quite confidently that night knowing that Ms. Becker and
team would be enjoying the rest of their stay in Thailand, mostly in the
hotel lobby in Surin.
However, since an academic I had confided in during researching and
preparation that I was scheduled to have this interview with Pol Pot had
then called the NYT and said if they paid his way that he thought he
could get the NYT in to interview Pol Pot, there was never any question
that my competition was attempting to piggyback on four months and upon
numerous years of meticulous and very difficult full time work on my
part, and I was Goddamned if I was going to be beat on this story by a
Washington based NYT “reporter” in high heels, a short skirt, enough
luggage to require a bellhop and a luggage cart, who flew in from
Washington with letters from senior U.S. officials’ who were her friends
requesting she be given assistance in her “reporting” efforts.
It is in fact a classic difference in the way Washington
correspondents and those in the field operate. Elizabeth Becker got a
call in D.C. and, in exchange for the NYT paying money to a “fixer”
based at a University in London, flew across the world, after calling
(U.S. State Department officials) Strobe Talbot and Stanley Roth,
arrived in Bangkok and called the U.S. Ambassador and asked for their
intervention on her behalf with the Thai military to secure permission
from the Thai’s to accompany me into the Cambodian jungle. The U.S.
embassy staff were outraged at the combination of hubris and arrogance
of being essentially ordered around to do the impossible and ludicrous. A
more preposterous scenario could not be concocted. They arrived at the
border hotel with a truckload of luggage and smug demeanor as if the
plan they had hatched was actually not comical, but rather a done deal.
In a place like Cambodia, and to interview Pol Pot of all people, the intervention of high level contacts from foreign governments (particularly those representing a government the Khmer Rouge considered the enemy with which they were at war with), does not work.
On the other hand, if you have slept in the jungle with the field
commanders and his troops, and for a decade talked about what a drag
malaria is, compare medicines, share your food over jungle campfires
eating rice and bugs, and commiserate together on how you haven’t been
;laid for weeks because your girlfriend is living back at a rear base
guerrilla headquarters or in (my case) my house in Thailand, and how the
food sucks and you are tired of getting shot at and not getting paid
shit, when it comes time to raise the bamboo pole by the guys with
AK-47′s at the jungle checkpoint, the chances are considerably greater
you will be allowed access. It doesn’t matter whether you have a letter
from the Pope, the the guy with the AK-47 has been told not to let you
in, then you are not going anywhere, which is what happened with the New
York Times.
When I arrived back at the hotel the next day from the jungle after
interviewing Pol Pot, Ms. Becker was scurrying around frantic still in
the hotel lobby, and inquired of me whether I knew why no one would
allow her out the hotel. I packed and left for Bangkok with the
interviews of the Khmer Rouge leaders on videotape next to me in our
Pajero.
The bottom line is the story didn’t take a few days, it took many
years and there was a plan to try to interview Pol Pot and I had been
carefully working every angle and was poised to jump at any opportunity
and be ready for any scenario. I was rejected many times. But it finally
worked, because we were ready to grab the opportunity and we had put
the time and resources into it when it looked like it might or maybe
even had a slim chance of, working. It easily could have failed at the
last minute and had many times before. This time it didn’t. So that is
part of the reason we were able to access the inner sanctums of the
Khmer Rouge and interview Pol Pot.
No comments:
Post a Comment