Thai Troops Enter Disputed Territory On Thai-cambodian Border

[Nampeung]

Ha ha ha Good on you Kat!!! I'm enjoying it too actually as you two are actually managing to be quite nice to each other while disagreeing

I would have thought that regardless of where the entrance is, the temple was 'awarded' to Cambodia so it is Cambodian (as indeed it is)

I pray for peace

[ThaiAdventure]

a quadruple Gemini with Virgo in mars.

Is that similar to a double hernia with Cancer in Uranus?

[Chaimai]

Ooooh !

The posts are too long and there appears to be too many egos at stake.

As the other thread reports - the 'temple' was built by Cambodians and. simplistically, the 1962 Hague ruling confirms it belongs to them.

Time to move on - chai mai ?

[canuckamuck]

a quadruple Gemini with Virgo in mars.

Is that similar to a double hernia with Cancer in Uranus?

You should frame that one T.A.

[Plus]

I think I missed the whole point of Kat's arguments - are you saying that the main intended entrance is/was from Cambodian side?

At this point we should separate the questions of soverignty and border markings from what the site is and what it should include.

It appears Cambodians recognize only the temple and cliff-side approach, Thais insist that ponds and stairs are also part of the site.

At this point it appears that Unesco sided with Cambodians, and so I think Thais have a legitimate case of not recognising the listing or the cropped and crippled site.

How the border dispute and management rights should be settled once the whole site is recognised by World Heritage Commitee is a different question altogether, for now they should focus on basics first - the boundaries of the ancient site, not the modern borders.

[jimbob]

http://andybrouwer.blogspot.com/2007/06/un...ar-listing.html

Interesting quote from the abovementioned website:

Whilst I'm on the subject, I'm currently reading a book called Climbing Back Up by Kim Chou Oeng, which contains his personal experiences during the Khmer Rouge years as well as a shocking description of a decision by the Thai authorities in 1979, to forcibly repatriate around 45,000 Cambodians. They were forced by Thai soldiers to climb down the steep slopes of the Dangrek mountainside at Preah Vihear through unmarked minefields as well as being shot at by both Thai and Khmer Rouge soldiers. Thousands died.

Is it any wonder Cambodian's are so sensitive about Thailand's recent activities at Preah Vihear.

William Shawcross also provides a detailed account of the atrocities that took place there.

Nampeung and Chaimai echo my sentiments that the temple is Khmer and has been declared part of modern day Cambodia by the ICJ.

[kat]

a quadruple Gemini with Virgo in mars.

Is that similar to a double hernia with Cancer in Uranus?

Ha Ha

I think I missed the whole point of Kat's arguments - are you saying that the main intended entrance is/was from Cambodian side?

At this point we should separate the questions of soverignty and border markings from what the site is and what it should include.

It appears Cambodians recognize only the temple and cliff-side approach, Thais insist that ponds and stairs are also part of the site.

At this point it appears that Unesco sided with Cambodians, and so I think Thais have a legitimate case of not recognising the listing or the cropped and crippled site.

How the border dispute and management rights should be settled once the whole site is recognised by World Heritage Commitee is a different question altogether, for now they should focus on basics first - the boundaries of the ancient site, not the modern borders.

No, I'm not.

[egg6447]

right the two experts in the last few postings. a archeological question. in my visits to most of the Khmer sites i flagged up with resident archeoligists what all the holes were for in the blocks of stone. the experts seem to think they are/were for lifting the blocks. this is unacceptable to me as one, man hours to drill the holes would be ridiculous , and two, the blocks arn,t that heavy to warrant the man hours. any ideas . oh kat man hours also = woman hours. lol. the pc police have got me. lol

[Plus]

I think I missed the whole point of Kat's arguments - are you saying that the main intended entrance is/was from Cambodian side?

No, I'm not.

Duh, and here's half the page of display of academic prowess. I guess our very learned Sabaijai missed it, too, not that his presentaion was totally in vain.

[funfun]

right the two experts in the last few postings. a archeological question. in my visits to most of the Khmer sites i flagged up with resident archeoligists what all the holes were for in the blocks of stone. the experts seem to think they are/were for lifting the blocks. this is unacceptable to me as one, man hours to drill the holes would be ridiculous , and two, the blocks arn,t that heavy to warrant the man hours. any ideas . oh kat man hours also = woman hours. lol. the pc police have got me. lol

ere, egg, thats an easy one, even i can get that, its to let the water out if someone leaves a tap on!

did they have drills 900 years ago anyway

[samran]

A related topic: I was thinking about all this the other day and how historical divving up of land has created some pretty cool little enclaves all over the world. Geographically, they really should belong to the country surrounding them, but for some reason they simply don't.

There are a bunch of enclaves all across the world. There is a piece of spainish territory surrounded by france. I beleive both the Netherlands and Belgium have pieces of each others territory within their larger national boundries. Parts of Germany and Italy in Switzerland.

Even the US and Canada have enclaves, Roberts Point one of the more famous, which is basically in the outer suburbs of Vancouver, but becuse it lies below the 49th parallel, is part of the US.

http://jscms.jrn.columbia.edu/cns/2007-04-...americanenclave

I just hope Thailand and Camodia reach that point where they don't really care about this issue. Seems a long way off though.

[jasreeve17]

A related topic: I was thinking about all this the other day and how historical divving up of land has created some pretty cool little enclaves all over the world. Geographically, they really should belong to the country surrounding them, but for some reason they simply don't.

There are a bunch of enclaves all across the world. There is a piece of spainish territory surrounded by france. I beleive both the Netherlands and Belgium have pieces of each others territory within their larger national boundries. Parts of Germany and Italy in Switzerland.

Even the US and Canada have enclaves, Roberts Point one of the more famous, which is basically in the outer suburbs of Vancouver, but becuse it lies below the 49th parallel, is part of the US.

http://jscms.jrn.columbia.edu/cns/2007-04-...americanenclave

I just hope Thailand and Camodia reach that point where they don't really care about this issue. Seems a long way off though.

They won't easily reach agreement; the Thais are in it for the money and 'Thai pride' - the heart of most problems here. Though to be fair to them, it is a very complex issue where they do have some reasonable considerations.

The instability of Thai politics doesn't help. If MrT was still in power ( or any unchallenged political force) then a simple bribe from the Cambodians to him would sort it out. In fact, the bribe has probably already been paid, but they want more...

[samran]

They won't easily reach agreement; the Thais are in it for the money and 'Thai pride' - the heart of most problems here. Though to be fair to them, it is a very complex issue where they do have some reasonable considerations.

The instability of Thai politics doesn't help. If MrT was still in power ( or any unchallenged political force) then a simple bribe from the Cambodians to him would sort it out. In fact, the bribe has probably already been paid, but they want more...

Mr T already paid his bribes to the Cambo's (Thanksinouhkville anyone?) and the Samak government was providing the finishing touches to the deal with the joint hand holding on the world heritiage listing. Money and a bit of cowtowing.

The PAD and the military have seen fit of rain on the party, knowing that (short of war of course) what is Thailands loss in this is in reality simplly a loss for Thaksin in and the PPP. And short of war, I say good on them....

[Plus]

Thais are in it for the money and 'Thai pride'

Why do you think so? I wouldn't pay much attention to current protesters, though it's difficult to say who "Thais" are at the moment. If it's the original negotiating team - they had a very valid objection, not connected to either money or pride.

[Old Man River]

The article today in the BP by THITINAN PONGSUDHIRAK pretty much sums up my view on this mess.

http://www.bangkokpost.com/250708_News/25Jul2008_news26.php

[Nampeung]

Well said Jimbob #366

[sabaijai]

Again, you are using what seems to be your favored tactics of choice in argument: constructing a strawman of an opposition to attack an argument that was not made, at least not by me (in terms of approach vs. ritual; I was merely arguing that the ascension as a normative concept is not far-fetched, which is absolutely true), and secondly, to distract with minutiae that is not directly relevant, or necessarily more substantive than the point it is attempting to discount.

So, on the first point, it was not my point.

On the second point:

I appreciate your reminder of the differences between "Brahman" and "Brahminist", but it was not one that I needed, as I understand the differences, the common points of confusion, and I did not misuse it, as I showed in my reference link. BTW, either term could be true in my prior example anyway, which is why this is another diversionary tactic.

But, to stay on point, my original reference was intentional and correct, to show the overlap and influences between both early Hinduism and Buddhism, and the shared roots including early converts of Brahminist priests, cultures, and parallel empires, shared normative customs, temples, and influences.

Still waiting for a single example of what you're talking about.

Re Brahmin vs Brahman, again your citation was about Brahmin caste, not Brahman religion, and your original use of 'Brahmin' was obviously in reference the Brahman religion not the Brahmin caste (and see your misuse again, above, marked in red). It was not intended as a diversion, except perhaps by you, 'Brahmin' having nothing whatsoever to do with Angkor architecture. These common malapropisms are a pet peeve of mine, but I forgive you and thanks for the attention

[sabaijai]

a quadruple Gemini with Virgo in mars.

Is that similar to a double hernia with Cancer in Uranus?

Ha Ha

I think I missed the whole point of Kat's arguments - are you saying that the main intended entrance is/was from Cambodian side?

It appears Cambodians recognize only the temple and cliff-side approach, Thais insist that ponds and stairs are also part of the site.

No, I'm not.

Kat, if you werent supporting A Traveller's orignal, brief assertion that the Khmers chose a more difficult approach (ie, the cliff) because it was spiritually meritorious, etc, then we've been arguing about nothing. But the posts suggest otherwise.

A Traveller post #292

Sabaijai post #311

A Traveller post #316

Kat post #319

If you agree the entry approach is as it appears, then the argument is over. Hope no one is disappointed In that case, I'm not clear why you disagreed in the first place unless it was just for the thrill ... the quadruple Gemini explains all

[kat]

I think I missed the whole point of Kat's arguments - are you saying that the main intended entrance is/was from Cambodian side?

No, I'm not.

Duh, and here's half the page of display of academic prowess. I guess our very learned Sabaijai missed it, too, not that his presentaion was totally in vain.

Uhm, I thought I was having a discussion and responding to some good points and some unfounded points, just like everyone else who has something to say on this thread, whether people find value in or it not, including yourself.

Again, you are using what seems to be your favored tactics of choice in argument: constructing a strawman of an opposition to attack an argument that was not made, at least not by me (in terms of approach vs. ritual; I was merely arguing that the ascension as a normative concept is not far-fetched, which is absolutely true), and secondly, to distract with minutiae that is not directly relevant, or necessarily more substantive than the point it is attempting to discount.

So, on the first point, it was not my point.

On the second point:

I appreciate your reminder of the differences between "Brahman" and "Brahminist", but it was not one that I needed, as I understand the differences, the common points of confusion, and I did not misuse it, as I showed in my reference link. BTW, either term could be true in my prior example anyway, which is why this is another diversionary tactic.

But, to stay on point, my original reference was intentional and correct, to show the overlap and influences between both early Hinduism and Buddhism, and the shared roots including early converts of Brahminist priests, cultures, and parallel empires, shared normative customs, temples, and influences.

Still waiting for a single example of what you're talking about.

Re Brahmin vs Brahman, again your citation was about Brahmin caste, not Brahman religion, and your original use of 'Brahmin' was obviously in reference the Brahman religion not the Brahmin caste (and see your misuse again, above, marked in red). It was not intended as a diversion, except perhaps by you, 'Brahmin' having nothing whatsoever to do with Angkor architecture. These common malapropisms are a pet peeve of mine, but I forgive you and thanks for the attention

SJ, the original quote was correct, as I was referring to Brahmin priests of the Brahmin caste, so you went off on a nit-picking tangent about an unnecessary point that wasn't even there. I appreciate your display of the less common usage and meaning of "Brahman" and "Brahmin", but it was totally unnecessary, especially since I was talking about the influence and intermingling of Hindu and Buddhist culture, religion and spiritual beliefs, and the impacts that this had on the temples and normative beliefs. Very clear and valid, but yet dismissed by you and then diverted to this nit-picky display of yours, from which I defended myself, and I then get blamed for. If you are going to argue and present yourself as a learned person, then argue honestly, or don't do so at all. As for the sideline critics with their one-sided judgments: what else is new?

a quadruple Gemini with Virgo in mars.

Is that similar to a double hernia with Cancer in Uranus?

Ha Ha

I think I missed the whole point of Kat's arguments - are you saying that the main intended entrance is/was from Cambodian side?

It appears Cambodians recognize only the temple and cliff-side approach, Thais insist that ponds and stairs are also part of the site.

No, I'm not.

Kat, if you werent supporting A Traveller's orignal, brief assertion that the Khmers chose a more difficult approach (ie, the cliff) because it was spiritually meritorious, etc, then we've been arguing about nothing. But the posts suggest otherwise.

A Traveller post #292

Sabaijai post #311

A Traveller post #316

Kat post #319

If you agree the entry approach is as it appears, then the argument is over. Hope no one is disappointed In that case, I'm not clear why you disagreed in the first place unless it was just for the thrill ... the quadruple Gemini explains all

Yes, but you missed the Virgo mars, didn't you? Even more significant in this case.

In terms of my own assertion, I really don't think that the approach argument has much merit on either side. It simply is not part of the deciding factors for me, the ICJ, or the historical significance of the temple.

In support of A Traveller, I was merely responding to your glib dismissal and your pat assumption that your argument was somehow more substantive than his own. It's not; it's conjecture based on the same set of available information and inferences as everyone else.

Have a nice day.

[thaigene2]

Well Kat

At least your posts aren't being deleted and "Warnings Raised.." Oh no..

There can be little doubt among regular posters/residents here that this is the PAD and their R+alist supporters flayling away at the PPP/TRT.

Who cares..only those with a "vested" reason to care.

[sabaijai]

Yes, but you missed the Virgo mars, didn't you? Even more significant in this case.

In terms of my own assertion, I really don't think that the approach argument has much merit on either side. It simply is not part of the deciding factors for me, the ICJ, or the historical significance of the temple.

In support of A Traveller, I was merely responding to your glib dismissal and your pat assumption that your argument was somehow more substantive than his own. It's not; it's conjecture based on the same set of available information and inferences as everyone else.

Have a nice day.

more the Gemini, unable to hold one position consistently Virgo myself ....

[sabaijai]

There can be little doubt among regular posters/residents here that this is the PAD and their R+alist supporters flayling away at the PPP/TRT.

Only on the Thai side, and only among those directly involved in the PAD/PPP battle. Listen to Thai talk radio shows right now and you'll hear hundreds of Thais voicing opinions on KPV unrelated to either side of the PAD/PPP imbroglio.

There are assorted angles on the Cambodian side as well. Anyone who has followed the story from the beginning knows that the Cambodians started the issue rolling, and in the Cambodian press (as well as some quarters of the Thai press, most recently a Matichon editorial) many are suggesting that Hun Sen sought World Heritage status to bolster his party's chances in Cambodia's parliamentary election tomorrow.

A sample observation from the Phnom Penh Post:

Preah Vihear card in play following UNESCO listing

Written by Kay Kimsong and Thet Sambath

Phnom Penh Post, Friday, 11 July 2008

Since Monday’s decision by UNESCO to list Preah Vihear temple as a Cambodian World Heritage Site, the Kingdom’s nationalist rapture has subsided just enough to allow for more pragmatic thoughts of the pay-off.

Senior Cambodian People’s Party lawmaker Cheam Yeap said July 10 that he expected the listing of the 11th-century Hindu temple, which had long been hotly disputed by Thailand, to result in a major boon for the ruling party in the July 27 general election.

“I am at Prey Veng near the Vietnam border right now. We told the voters of the success of Samdech Prime Minister Hun Sen,” he told the Post.

Yeap said Hun Sen deserved credit for the world body’s decision because he had sent a letter to UNESCO requesting the designation six years ago.

“There is no doubt that Samdech Hun Sen is a CPP leader,” he boasted.

Khmer-language newspapers this week featured numerous advertisements placed by CPP officials, congratulating Hun Sen, Deputy Prime Minister Sok An and CPP President Chea Sim on the world body’s decision.

continued at http://www.phnompenhpost.com/index.php/200...CO-listing.html

Then there's the whole issue of the alleged 'trade' of KPV that Noppadon arranged in exchange for Thaksin's new empire in southern Cambodia, an issue of concern to loyal PPP members as well as PAD and a host of independents who disapprove of corruption on such a scale.

It's true there are many vested interests, but it's hardly as simple as PAD vs PPP, and in fact the battle for KPV started before the PAD or the PPP even existed. I'd say it's one of the more complex diplomatic controversies to crop up in SE Asia in years.

[thaigene2]

Yes, you're right it's not that simple. I'm just pointing out that the PAD/R+yalists are using this conflict as another tool to attack a democratically elected govt. As crappy as that govt may be..it was elected by the PEOPLE of Thailand. Don't like it? In any other country we would wait for a chance to change things (George Bush ring a bell?). But no, here in LOS it seems, we're all to bow and scape and return Thailand to feudalism as it seems many - including many very hi-so - would truly love to do, and preferrably by the all-so-compliant-military as a first choice. These people need to be challenged - and I am glad to see the brave people out there who are doing just that - despite those who would level charges of disloyalty at them. I'm glad to see the Americans at least have made it clear they won't bow down to help in the brain washing this time - and will take a stand if necessary - to say "No" to elitism (The irony of that is not lost on me either, of course - believe me!).

[Nampeung]

You know this is seriously becoming sooooooooooo boring that it's not worth reading any more

[Plus]

Thaigene, this is about a conflict on Thai -Cambodian border.

Your attempt to divert the subject to Thais rising up against their elites smacks of good old trolling, especially with George Bush thrown in.

However valid or important you think it is - take it somewhere else, there are plenty of PAD discussions here, you don't need to insert it in every thread.

[younghusband]

Thaigene, this is about a conflict on Thai -Cambodian border.

Your attempt to divert the subject to Thais rising up against their elites smacks of good old trolling, especially with George Bush thrown in.

However valid or important you think it is - take it somewhere else, there are plenty of PAD discussions here, you don't need to insert it in every thread.

But you cannot possibly deny that PAD has played a leading role in whipping up nationalist hysteria over the Preah Vihear issue, in my view dishonestly, irresponsibly and possibly dangerously.You may not like it but history can't just be rewritten to suit the PAD agenda.

[Plus]

The problem has been out of PAD's hands for a nearly a months no, and it has become much bigger than Pad itself.

If you want to talk about PAD's role in this crisis, fine, but it certailny has nothing to do with "elitism" Thaigene is after.

If not for PAD, btw, Thai public would have still been kept in the dark. And I doubt PAD digged it up itself in the first place - it most certainly came from Foreign Ministry officials who had no other channels of communicating their concerns to the public.

PAD has exploited it, true, but don't shoot the messenger.

[sabaijai]

July 25, 2008

Thai-Cambodia crisis underscores Asean's failings

ASEAN'S failure to come to grips with the brewing Thai-Cambodia border conflict at ministerial talks here has underlined the organisation's inability to take action during a crisis, observers say.

Some 4,000 Thai and Cambodian soldiers are facing off over a small patch of land near the 11th-century Preah Vihear temple, in one of the most dangerous flare-ups of regional tensions in decades.

The dispute erupted just before foreign ministers of the 10-member Association of South-east Asian Nations convened for annual talks ahead of Asia's top security meeting, the Asean Regional Forum, which embraces their 17 partners including China, the United States and Russia.

Asean held crisis talks on the issue, and extracted an assurance that the neighbours would 'exert utmost efforts' to find a peaceful solution.

But Cambodia's request for the bloc to form a 'contact group' to act as an impartial broker was shot down by Thailand which opposes any intervention.

Asean's long-cherished convention of making decisions by consensus and not interfering in members' internal affairs made it impossible to move forward, and instead Cambodia has asked the United Nations Security Council to act.

'The thing is, Asean is not built to intervene in these kinds of disputes except to urge restraint,' said a former secretary-general of the group, Mr Rodolfo Severino.

'Asean has no armed force, it has no powers of coercion. So it's just the moral weight of the association that's being brought to bear,' he said.

Asean took a dim view of Cambodia's decision to go over its head and appeal to the UN, which some saw as an unwelcome internationalisation of the conflict.

'There is a view that this may be a little premature,' Singapore Foreign Minister George Yeo said on Thursday at the close of the Asean Regional Forum, whose members called for 'restraint, a speedy resolution and to maintain the status quo'.

Mr Tim Huxley from the International Institute for Strategic Studies in Singapore said the mild response showed Asean was 'still underdeveloped as a security grouping'.

'For many years Asean has talked about doing more in the security sphere,' he said. 'If it's going to maintain its relevance it's going to have to try a bit harder.'

'The issue has now gone to the UN Security Council and I think it's an illustration of how far South-east Asian countries still have to go in developing a security community.'

The same shortcomings have vexed Asean's attempts to rein in member state Myanmar, which has earned widespread condemnation for its human rights abuses and refusal to shift towards democracy.

Myanmar came to this week's talks in the bad books for extending opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi's house arrest for another year, and refusing to quickly open its doors to a foreign-led relief effort after a catastrophic cyclone in May.

But it escaped with effectively a slap on the wrist. Ministers said after an informal dinner on Sunday that they were 'deeply disappointed' with the action against Ms Aung San Suu Kyi, but in the formal communique the words were omitted.

Mr Huxley said the bloc has set itself lofty standards, including a goal to establish a political and security community by 2015.

But in a grouping that includes authoritarian states, democracies and semi-democracies, a military dictatorship, and an absolute monarchy, that kind of cohesiveness will be difficult to achieve.

Asean Secretary-General Surin Pitsuwan, himself a former Thai foreign minister, defended the bloc's failure to achieve a breakthrough in the crisis with Cambodia.

'I think the entry point has to be very carefully chosen,' he said.

On this issue, intervention would have to wait until 'both sides are more ready and emotions calm down a little bit', he said. -- AFP

[samran]

Yes, you're right it's not that simple. I'm just pointing out that the PAD/R+yalists are using this conflict as another tool to attack a democratically elected govt. As crappy as that govt may be..it was elected by the PEOPLE of Thailand. Don't like it? In any other country we would wait for a chance to change things (George Bush ring a bell?). But no, here in LOS it seems, we're all to bow and scape and return Thailand to feudalism as it seems many - including many very hi-so - would truly love to do, and preferrably by the all-so-compliant-military as a first choice. These people need to be challenged - and I am glad to see the brave people out there who are doing just that - despite those who would level charges of disloyalty at them. I'm glad to see the Americans at least have made it clear they won't bow down to help in the brain washing this time - and will take a stand if necessary - to say "No" to elitism (The irony of that is not lost on me either, of course - believe me!).

so what you are essentially saying is that I have no right of protest? If a government is elected then I have to shut my mouth for 5 years until the next election rolls about? As you said, this is a crap government, and people should know enough for next time.

BTW - you'll hardly find me supporting the entire agenda, but they are the only people in Thailand bothering at the moment....and I don't think they should be stopped just becuase people equate a PAD protest as inevitably prelude to a coup. At the end of the day, the two aren't related.

[hammered]

Yes, you're right it's not that simple. I'm just pointing out that the PAD/R+yalists are using this conflict as another tool to attack a democratically elected govt. As crappy as that govt may be..it was elected by the PEOPLE of Thailand. Don't like it? In any other country we would wait for a chance to change things (George Bush ring a bell?). But no, here in LOS it seems, we're all to bow and scape and return Thailand to feudalism as it seems many - including many very hi-so - would truly love to do, and preferrably by the all-so-compliant-military as a first choice. These people need to be challenged - and I am glad to see the brave people out there who are doing just that - despite those who would level charges of disloyalty at them. I'm glad to see the Americans at least have made it clear they won't bow down to help in the brain washing this time - and will take a stand if necessary - to say "No" to elitism (The irony of that is not lost on me either, of course - believe me!).

Many countires including Thailand have a lot of options open to people and parties between elections. Elections are only a snapshot of popularity at a point in time and democratic systems recognize that checks and balances are necessary. Under Thai law no-confidence, impeachment, public demonstration, appeals to courts are all just part of the valid options open to those who see government wrong doing. A system where you had elections every 4 or 5 years and then no oversight of government would actually not be democratic by any true measure. Democracy as it stands today is about a lot more than just elections.

By the way considering the mantra of free trade, globalisation and entertainment that emenates from the great corporations of the world it is far more likely the US would support the current Thai government because it has shown a willingness to open the Thai economy up to more foreign competition and more to the point has shown a willingness to do the bidding of big pharma in Thailand. The US has no problem in propping up regimes far worse than any coup led government in Thailand has ever been providing the dictators are willing to put US interests at the top of the pile.