EVEN by his own standards, Cambodia's Prince Norodom Sihanouk is behaving highly erratically.
On Saturday, he threw into doubt all planning for the new form of government in Cambodia, plans backed by his son, Prince Norodom Ranariddh. The plans, due to be ratified on September 15, envisaged a return to a monarchy (with Prince Sihanouk as a constitutional ruler). But Prince Sihanouk decided he was opposed to the restoration of the monarchy, said he was severing ties with the United Nations Transitional Authority in Cambodia (UNTAC) and declared he would be in hospital in Beijing, not in Phnom Penh,on September 15.
Yesterday, however, he said he would restore relations with the UN and hinted that he might be persuaded to accept the throne. His aloofness had been watered down to a desire not to be involved in the final voting on the constitution.
The plan to restore the monarchy, with the 70-year-old Prince Sihanouk on the throne, can be explained in part by Prince Ranariddh's self-interest. If the royal line were re-established, he would succeed his father. It can also be explained by the need for a ravaged nation to have a powerful unifying symbol.
But Cambodia's leaders have a problem in Prince Sihanouk. He is changeable and unreliable. The only thing that is predictable about him is his unpredictability. It would be very worrying if he were to exercise power, for it would add an extra dimension of uncertainty to a perilously uncertain existence.
A constitutional monarchy may well be an acceptable form of government in Cambodia. But the nation would be better off if the new constitution guaranteed that the role of the monarchy was symbolic and ceremonial.
