Pad Rally To Demand Govt Rid Disputed Territory Near Temple Of Cambodians

[Plus]

This actually comes back to a policy of the Surayudh government, which PPP has continued.

Thailand had reversed this policy late in 2007, and neither Surayud nor Nittaya were closely involved.

The clue is right there, in the agreement from Surayudh's days:

“The State Party of Cambodia and the State Party of Thailand are in full agreement that the Sacred Site of the Temple of Preah Vihear has Outstanding Universal Value and must be inscribed on the World Heritage List as soon as possible.."

Later Cambodians, among other things, insisted that only temple itself, which is on their territory has "Outstanding Universal Value", and whatever happens to be on the Thai side of the current border is not worth preserving.

Thais protested and tried to thwart the bid (and would have probably succeeded).

Then Noppadon took charge, overrode previous Thai objections and agreed with Cambodians to list the TEMPLE of Preah Vihear only, no more "SITE of the the Temple of Preah Vihear".

[jayboy]

This actually comes back to a policy of the Surayudh government, which PPP has continued.

Thailand had reversed this policy late in 2007, and neither Surayud nor Nittaya were closely involved.

The clue is right there, in the agreement from Surayudh's days:

“The State Party of Cambodia and the State Party of Thailand are in full agreement that the Sacred Site of the Temple of Preah Vihear has Outstanding Universal Value and must be inscribed on the World Heritage List as soon as possible.."

Later Cambodians, among other things, insisted that only temple itself, which is on their territory has "Outstanding Universal Value", and whatever happens to be on the Thai side of the current border is not worth preserving.

Thais protested and tried to thwart the bid (and would have probably succeeded).

Then Noppadon took charge, overrode previous Thai objections and agreed with Cambodians to list the TEMPLE of Preah Vihear only, no more "SITE of the the Temple of Preah Vihear".

For heavens sake can't you see how ridiculous all this is.It's a minor matter which could easily be sorted out in ten minutes by ministers with good will on both sides.What on earth has prompted your fixation with this silly little squabble anyway?

[dumball]

What can the problem be with a few homeless families squating on a piece of 'No mans land' trying to eke out a living ? No country has domain over it at this time so who has any legal right to evict them ? It is somewhere in the middle of practically nowhere and it appears that all those whom call them selves locals are quite content to leave things the way they are , having no disputes with each other . Tempest in a teacup by some who feel they have more rights than even their government to call the shots , some of whom are not even citizens of the bordering countries , they should keep their nose in the backyard of wheresoever they happen to reside IMHO !!!!!

[Plus]

Minor matter?

Cambodians sliced and diced the site to suit their current political and economical needs and declared that Khmers who lived on Thai side of the current border were not the ones who build it and worshiped there and their heritage worth nothing, and the grand staircase was a later addition built by those usurpers.

Historically it's a blasphemy, and it shows total disregard for the site itself, and that was when Thais refused to participate in this sham of "preserving culture".

And they also don't have ministers with good will - there once was a little news item in Bangkok Post that was later removed. It showed a photo of Tej Bunnag having lunch with Cambodian FM, and in the story their FM was reported as bragging that Tej is a lightweight and is no match to his experience and that Cambodia will prevail.

To be honest, I don't know much about Hun Sen, but I certainly haven't read a single good thing about him, and I wouldn't give him a benefit of doubt in any matter, let alone in trying to get back at Thailand for centuries of injustice.

Good will? Seriously? His goons burned a Thai embassy not very long ago. I don't expect any good will from him. Do you?

[justanothercybertosser]

Minor matter?

Yes - a minor matter completely blown out of proportions over 4.6 square km.

And yes, Hun Sen uses it for his own brand of nationalism the same way the Thais do it. Only that he has all the cards in his hand, and Thailand hasn't. The few cards Thailand held were lost last year by allowing the PAD to protest in the area, and will stay lost. Thailand if it follows the demands of Cambodia will set itself only up to burn its fingers the same way they did in Rom Klao.

Anyhow - one stupidity doesn't justify another. Fait accompli - Thailand won't get the temple, and Cambodia will not leave the part of the "disputed territory" they presently hold without a war. Thailand may one day decide to bring the matter to an international court again, and most likely will lose again.

Edited September 28, 2009 by justanothercybertosser

[sabaijai]

Actually the ruling applied to the temple only, using the Annex 1 map as evidence. It was not a ruling on the Annex 1 map itself.

Actually, you are somewhat right.

The ruling on the validity of the border as outlined in the Annex I map was following:

Referring finally to the Submissions presented at the end of the

oral proceedings, the Court, for the reasons indicated at the beginning

of the present Judgment, finds that Cambodia's first and

second Submissions, calling for pronouncements on the legal status

of the Annex 1 map and on the frontier line in the disputed region,

can be entertained only to the extent that they give expression to

grounds, and not as claims to be dealt with in the operative provisions

of the Judgment.

But the ICJ did not rule on that. Their conclusion applies only to the temple, not 'somewhat'

Thailand's claim to the 4.6-km disputed territory is no more nationalistic than Cambodia's claim to the temple based on a map that was in violation of treaties and agreements between France and Siam, including the agreement to draw the map following the watershed.

Regardless The ICJ only applies to the temple and there are many areas along the border here (also with Laos and Myanmar) that are in fact still disputed.

This BBC article makes the same point:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7507425.stm

The particular patch, 4.6 sqkm is considered particularly strategic, which is why both sides want it. In fact anyone who has seen this area will realise how absurd it is that Cambodians would climb a cliff to settle here. In that context it seems more like a clear provocation.

The historical precedents and legal aspects of the border dispute has been well thrashed out in an early thread:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Thai-Troops-...&hl=rulings

[Plus]

Yes - a minor matter

Apparently Thais have more respect for their history than you.

For a team that has been negotiating the listing for several months Cambodian position was unacceptable, and don't tell me they were driven only by greed and opportunism to make a few bucks (for the villagers).

Imagine tourists reading two completely different versions of the temple history - Thai and Cambodian one, at complete odds with each other.

Yes, a minor matter indeed.

[Plus]

Another testament to "minor matter" and "Cambodian goodwill"

PHNOM PENH - CAMBODIAN Prime Minister Hun Sen ordered his troops on Monday to shoot any trespassers in a simmering border dispute with Thailand and angrily blasted the neighbouring nation's territorial claims.

...

'If they enter again, they will be shot,' MR Hun Sen told officials who applauded as he publicly ordered troops along the border to fire against civilian or military 'invader enemies' who illegally enter Cambodia.

'Troops, police and all armed forces must adhere to the order... for invaders, shields are not used but bullets are used,' Hun Sen said in the speech at the opening ceremony for Cambodia's new Ministry of Tourism building.

Hun Sen also lambasted Thailand's claim to the disputed 4.6 square kilometres of land around Preah Vihear, saying he may raise it at an Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) meeting next month.

'This is a unilateral claim with the ambition of occupying Cambodian territory... If the Thai prime minister put the (unilaterally-drawn) map in front of me, I would tear it,' Mr Hun Sen told the audience.

http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNew...ory_435525.html

[webfact]

PREAH VIHEAR CONTROVERSY

Four square km land belongs to Cambodia : Hun Sen

Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen on Monday said with strong words that Cambodia and Thailand do not have overlapping land of 4.6 square km near 11th century Khmer Preah Vihear temple.

"That area is Cambodian soil," Hun Sen said at a opening ceremony of the new Tourism Ministry building in Phnom Penh downtown.

"Thailand is using their own map which was drawn unilaterally to take land from Cambodia such as 4.6 km square near Preah Vihear Temple," Xinhua quoted Hun Sen as saying.

Hun Sen had said that Thai "yellow T-shirt" protesters rallied at the area near Preah Vihear temple to demand Cambodian troops and villagers to move out from the land of 4.6 square km near the temple. "They are extremists and have ambitions," he said.

State-run Xinhua said Hun Sen warned that he has told his military commander that if the Thai "yellow T-shirt" protesters forced their way into the area, Cambodian troops could use force.

He said he has ordered his troops to shoot anyone found illegally crossing a disputed border with Thailand.

His remarks came a little over a week after Thai protesters rallied at the site near the Preah Vihear temple, where seven soldiers were killed when tensions flared last year.

"If they enter again, they will be shot," Hun Sen told officials.

"Troops, police and all armed forces must adhere to the order ... for invaders, shields are not used but bullets are used," the said in the speech at the opening ceremony for Cambodia's new Ministry of Tourism building.

The Prime Minister also rejected the declaration by Thai leaders that the road Cambodia built to Preah Vihear temple is joint sharing for using. "This road was built on Cambodian soil and it did not have joint share with Thai side. I am so sorry for your comment," he said, adding "you have confused the matter of this street."

However, Hun Sen stressed that even though "we will not avoid to use force, our stance is still to deal with the issues with peaceful way, Cambodia does not need war."

Cambodian and Thai troops have confronted each other since July 15, 2008 at the areas near Khmer Preah Vihear temple after Cambodia registered the temple as the World Heritage Site in July 7, 2008.

-- The Nation 2009/09/29

[mca]

^ That'll calm things down.

[justanothercybertosser]

Actually the ruling applied to the temple only, using the Annex 1 map as evidence. It was not a ruling on the Annex 1 map itself.

Actually, you are somewhat right.

The ruling on the validity of the border as outlined in the Annex I map was following:

Referring finally to the Submissions presented at the end of the

oral proceedings, the Court, for the reasons indicated at the beginning

of the present Judgment, finds that Cambodia's first and

second Submissions, calling for pronouncements on the legal status

of the Annex 1 map and on the frontier line in the disputed region,

can be entertained only to the extent that they give expression to

grounds, and not as claims to be dealt with in the operative provisions

of the Judgment.

But the ICJ did not rule on that. Their conclusion applies only to the temple, not 'somewhat'

Thailand's claim to the 4.6-km disputed territory is no more nationalistic than Cambodia's claim to the temple based on a map that was in violation of treaties and agreements between France and Siam, including the agreement to draw the map following the watershed.

Regardless The ICJ only applies to the temple and there are many areas along the border here (also with Laos and Myanmar) that are in fact still disputed.

This BBC article makes the same point:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7507425.stm

The particular patch, 4.6 sqkm is considered particularly strategic, which is why both sides want it. In fact anyone who has seen this area will realise how absurd it is that Cambodians would climb a cliff to settle here. In that context it seems more like a clear provocation.

The historical precedents and legal aspects of the border dispute has been well thrashed out in an early thread:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Thai-Troops-...&hl=rulings

The ICJ also gave expression to grounds, which should not be dismissed.

The Annex I Map was not, according to ICJ, in violation of treaties and agreements. Furthermore, this map has been accepted by Prince Damrong (he was no dopey), and has been used widely in Thailand.

As to its strategic position, sorry, but i do not see the strategic value for Thailand of the disputed land without the temple on top of the hill. And Thailand is in clear possession of neighboring hills. And that temple has been ruled for Cambodia.

As to the absurdity of borders drawn, this would not be the only one. If you look at many European maps, you can see that many borders there are drawn in similar ways. You have, for example, valleys in the alps belonging to particular countries, but are only accessible through the neighboring country. Nothing new about strange borders there as well. Not all of the world has to be particioned in straight lines.

And yes, of course, i do not deny that Cambodia applies an equally nasty brand of nationalism to the area. Yet Thailand refuses to bring the case to an international court again, knowing that it has very little chance to win their case. Reasons are the same that have led to the first judgment in '62.

Nationalism stands here against nationalism. The PAD has exploited Thailand's particular brand of "lost territory" nationalism for their own internal political struggles, and roused the rabble that has been imprinted with this ideology from school age on. Until the PAD has protested their last year, villagers on both sides of the borders live very well with the situation, the bickering over the area have been in the diplomatic arena, and no damage was done. This has changed.

And international opinion has moved very much against Thailand in this issue, as Thailand has behaved, and is seen, as the immature agressor coming down to the same level of the tinpot dictator Hun Sen, bullying one of the poorest countries on the world over a non-issue. It is also not forgotten that Kasit was, before he became FM, on that same protest stage demanding the return of Preah Vihear to Thailand.

Well done, Thailand...

[animatic]

"Troops, police and all armed forces must adhere to the order ...

for invaders, shields are not used but bullets are used,"

the said in the speech at the opening ceremony for Cambodia's new Ministry of Tourism building.

Well that is certainly a fine turn of phrase to promote tourism....

Calm is not the issue, local appearance of sovereignty is.

Edited September 29, 2009 by animatic

[Plus]

Nationalism stands here against nationalism.

There are deeper disagreements here. Nationalism is just a temporary symptom, an overreaction.

[Yoshitaka]

"They are extremists and have ambitions," Hun Sen said.

At least Hun Sen got the yellow part right.

While the Thais were with the Japanese, The Japanese gave half of current day Cambodia to Thailand. That included the prized Angkor Wat.

Do you think history will repeat itself?

[webfact]

Thailand's Anti-Corruption Commission to rule on Preah Vihear charge Tuesday

BANGKOK, Sept 22 (TNA) - Thailand's National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) is scheduled to rule on Tuesday on the previous government's resolution which supported Cambodia's listing of the ancient Preah Vihear temple as a World Heritage site.

The NACC decided last November to press charges against 44 persons including 28 Cabinet members in the Samak Sundaravej administration and state officials in connection with the signing of a joint communique with Cambodia without seeking parliamentary approval as required by the Constitution.

The joint communique was signed by Thailand’s then foreign minister Noppadon Pattama and Cambodian Deputy Prime Minister Sok An on June 18, 2008.

The NACC decided last Tuesday to postpone the ruling to today.

NACC Commissioner Klanarong Chantik said last week that the NACC would consider the case on two separate issues: impeachment and criminal prosecution following the Constitutional Court's ruling that the joint communique was unconstitutional.

He said the anti-graft commission would tackle whether each of the 44 was intentionally involved in malfeasance that caused damage to the country.

The commission, he explained last week, finished investigating 12 persons, but the other 32 would be further scrutinised with the results to be disclosed on September 29.

Of the 28 accused ministers, four are members of the Abhisit government. They include Deputy Prime Minister Sanan Kachornprasart, Deputy Finance Minister Pradit Pattaraprasit, Information and Communication Technology Minister Ranongrak Suwanchawee and Natural Resources and Environment Minister Suvit Khunkitti.

The accused were charged with negligence of duty and violating Article 190 of the 2007 Constitution which imposes that any treaty affecting Thailand's society, economy and integrity of its borders must be approved by Parliament. (TNA)

-- TNA 2009/09/29

[EffectiveAnger]

"They are extremists and have ambitions," Hun Sen said.

At least Hun Sen got the yellow part right.

While the Thais were with the Japanese, The Japanese gave half of current day Cambodia to Thailand. That included the prized Angkor Wat.

Do you think history will repeat itself?

What on earth are you talking about!?

In 1863, King Norodom, who had been installed by Thailand,^[16] sought the protection of France from the Thai and Vietnamese, after tensions grew between them. In 1867, the Thai king signed a treaty with France, renouncing suzerainty over Cambodia in exchange for the control of Battambang and Siem Reap provinces which officially became part of Thailand. The provinces were ceded back to Cambodia by a border treaty between France and Thailand in 1906.

Cambodia continued as a protectorate of France from 1863 to 1953, administered as part of the colony of French Indochina, though occupied by the Japanese empire from 1941 to 1945

Please read the facts.

[brahmburgers]

With rather important offshore demarcation to come I guess we can expect gunboat diplomacy ala the Spratleys. It will soon be time for Thailand and Cambodia to purchase a few more corvettes.

Yes, but Thailand has an aircraft carrier. Oh wait, they don't have functioning planes and adept enough pilots to use the flattop. Oh well, PAD can stand on it and wave flags and yell through megaphones. Just hope they don't all stand on the same side at the same time, it might tip over.

Seriously though, I generally have been behind PAD's protests over the past several years. However, I differ with them over the current temple protest. The temple appears to be Cambodia's. Lick your wounds and go on to a more righteous crusade, like saving what little is left of Thailand's natural environment from further destruction.

[Plus]

Read the thread, Brahmburgers, the protest is not about the temple, it's about surrounding area that has been encroached on by Cambodians, and now Hun Sen threatens to shoot any Thai who goes there.

I repeat again - it's not about the temple itself.

[justanothercybertosser]

Read the thread, Brahmburgers, the protest is not about the temple, it's about surrounding area that has been encroached on by Cambodians, and now Hun Sen threatens to shoot any Thai who goes there.

I repeat again - it's not about the temple itself.

The PAD seems to switch positions over the temple as is convenient for them. Last year it was over the whole temple (Prachatai has the translation of a key speech by Sondhi Lim over the issue, asking the military to go to war against Cambodia), this year they "only" protest over the disputed areas.

Underlying this is the "lost territory" ideology...

[justanothercybertosser]

With rather important offshore demarcation to come I guess we can expect gunboat diplomacy ala the Spratleys. It will soon be time for Thailand and Cambodia to purchase a few more corvettes.

Yes, but Thailand has an aircraft carrier. Oh wait, they don't have functioning planes and adept enough pilots to use the flattop. Oh well, PAD can stand on it and wave flags and yell through megaphones. Just hope they don't all stand on the same side at the same time, it might tip over.

Seriously though, I generally have been behind PAD's protests over the past several years. However, I differ with them over the current temple protest. The temple appears to be Cambodia's. Lick your wounds and go on to a more righteous crusade, like saving what little is left of Thailand's natural environment from further destruction.

Congratulations for reaching this remarkable insight.

The basic problem of the PAD always was that they were never a more democratic protest movement against Thaksin (such of which i would have supported wholeheartedly), but militantly nationalistic movement from the far right. If you would have listened to the speeches from their stages in Thai - it would have been obvious.

[Samuian]

..and who is (supposedly) residing on Ko Kong right now - out for a little stir?

what about those rumors that "influential people" came forward with big money to develop this region

on the cambodian side?

I think there is much more about this story then what surfaces... think!

Edited September 29, 2009 by Samuian

[Plus]

The PAD seems to switch positions over the temple as is convenient for them. Last year it was over the whole temple (Prachatai has the translation of a key speech by Sondhi Lim over the issue, asking the military to go to war against Cambodia), this year they "only" protest over the disputed areas.

Maybe you can sit tight and wait it out until the drop the issue altogether.

On the other hand they'd give you a wider range of issues to attack them for. If this year their demands are reasonable, you can always attack them for the last year, or for right wing fascism or whatever.

It seems you can't have a rational argument over PAD - you always take a directly opposite position regardless of logic, history, or common sense. Right now you appear to support that maniac Hun Sen approach to the issue just because he is on anti-PAD side just as you are.

Ok, thanks, you clarified what the diametrically opposing opinion to PAD is, can we now move on to discuss the issue without prejudice? PAD is just one interest group in this issue. There are governments, historians, there's ICJ, Unesco, govt current opposition, Noppadon and his defense, local villagers, soldiers, and nationalism, each comes with their own interests, perspective, and history.

Can you transcend your anti-PAD singlemindedness?

[justanothercybertosser]

..and who is (supposedly) residing on Ko Kong right now - out for a little stir?

what about those rumors that "influential people" came forward with big money to develop this region

on the cambodian side?

I think there is much more about this story then what surfaces... think!

Yes, lets get our tin foil hats out and put them on, the black helicopters are coming.

[Plus]

Just because there's no hard proof of connection between Thaksin's business interests in Cambodia and his stance on the temple issue, doesn't mean that there isn't one.

It's not just a rumor that he promised them lots of development for that island just when Noppadon was reversing Thai strategy.

[justanothercybertosser]

The PAD seems to switch positions over the temple as is convenient for them. Last year it was over the whole temple (Prachatai has the translation of a key speech by Sondhi Lim over the issue, asking the military to go to war against Cambodia), this year they "only" protest over the disputed areas.

Maybe you can sit tight and wait it out until the drop the issue altogether.

On the other hand they'd give you a wider range of issues to attack them for. If this year their demands are reasonable, you can always attack them for the last year, or for right wing fascism or whatever.

It seems you can't have a rational argument over PAD - you always take a directly opposite position regardless of logic, history, or common sense. Right now you appear to support that maniac Hun Sen approach to the issue just because he is on anti-PAD side just as you are.

Ok, thanks, you clarified what the diametrically opposing opinion to PAD is, can we now move on to discuss the issue without prejudice? PAD is just one interest group in this issue. There are governments, historians, there's ICJ, Unesco, govt current opposition, Noppadon and his defense, local villagers, soldiers, and nationalism, each comes with their own interests, perspective, and history.

Can you transcend your anti-PAD singlemindedness?

It seems that you have still difficulties reading fellow posters posts.

No, i do not side with Hun Sen. He is a tin pot dictator using nationalism to rouse the rabble, and so does you beloved PAD. And unfortunately the present Thai FM has been tainted by the same. Which is on record.

No, standing up on a hill, demanding the Thai military to forcefully evict the Cambodian villagers out of the disputed land is not a reasonable demand. It is completely insane, following a history of insanity.

And yes, i wait for the day the PAD will drop this issue (and several other similarly insane issues). I fear though i will grow old waiting...

[justanothercybertosser]

Just because there's no hard proof of connection between Thaksin's business interests in Cambodia and his stance on the temple issue, doesn't mean that there isn't one.

It's not just a rumor that he promised them lots of development for that island just when Noppadon was reversing Thai strategy.

It is not just Thaksin's business interests that have been damaged, but the business interests of the whole of Thailand.

Vietnam is the laughing third. They get away with land encroachments and increased business, while Thailand bickers over laughable 4.6 square kms.

[Plus]

demanding the Thai military to forcefully evict the Cambodian villagers out of the disputed land is not a reasonable demand

You can't let them stay either, because doing nothing would only give Hun Sen and excuse to really occupy the area. They have enough homeless Cambodians for that purpose.

And PAD was correct last year - the listing has lead to Thailand de facto losing its claims over the disputed territories, as it has provided Hun Sen to make bolder moves.

Actually, a tough response from Thailand would be - ok, we'll start shooting anyone who shows up in that area, too, and let the squatters clear out themselves. Thailand can even pay for the relocation.

It should be made into a no go zone before both countries agree on mutual and cooperative use. Nothing will improve until Hun Sen changes his attitude. If Thai can manage to convince him diplomatically, fine, but I won't hold my breath waiting.

[justanothercybertosser]

Actually, a tough response from Thailand would be - ok, we'll start shooting anyone who shows up in that area, too, and let the squatters clear out themselves. Thailand can even pay for the relocation.

And that is exactly the reason why the local villagers and anybody in the area wants the PAD not getting anywhere close to the temple - insane rabble rousers from the outside that provoke a war while they have to live with the mess created by people of the opinions that you have just expressed here.

[hammered]

When Noppadol signed where was the quid pro quo? That is what this is about. Thailand signed and got nothing back. Diplomacy doesnt work that way unless the negotiators are utterly useless or you have lost a war badly. So what about the quid pro quo unless you regard Noppadol and hastily changed negotiators (why was that done) as utterly incompetent who got their back scratched? That is why this looks so suspicious.

Another point is that in Asian diplomacy you need to look strong. You dont give anything unless you get something back. Thailand didnt and looked weak and for the taking.

The PAD might be lunatic nationalists who predictably overreacted but Noppadol without the little something in return started the whole thing. If Thailand had gained something in return like movement on other disputed areas it would have made sense and been more readily accepted in Thailand. Thailand didnt have to sign the joint agreement unless they had what they wanted

Now we have a poisoned atmosphere and bigger disputes to come. This is not really about a temple or 4.6 disputed km but about what is going to happen over disputed coastal areas that contain resources. Thailand cannot back down on anything as it has already lost face by sigbning with nothing in return. Hun SDen is emboldened by being able to easily get something out of what looks like a weakened Thailand. Realpolitik diplomacy at work.

This whole thing has been a disaster.

[Plus]

Cambodia can't treat this land as its own. One way or another, PAD or not, but they have to be convinced that unilaterally taking ownership is not going to work.

The settlement is against the diplomatic accord they signed with Thailand in 2000, so if anyone wants diplomacy to work - they have to find the way for Cambodia to follow their own promises.

But then again, I don't hold much hope for Hun Sen becoming reasonable in the near future.