Cambodian Government Lambast Us Internet Giant Google

[Zebo]

Since when is google the be all and end all of international boarders? Seriously, this is pathetic.

Why is this in my inbox along with Ads for dating, property, skype, hsbc bank, weather, insurance, travel companies?

The current sort of email I'm getting from thaivisa is classed as SPAM in most countries.

Shame on you Thaivisa for filling my inbox with total crap day after day.

[Tywais]

Shame on you Thaivisa for filling my inbox with total crap day after day.

You do realize that e-mails from Thaivisa are opt-in don't you? Which means you can opt-out if you look at the bottom of the e-mails.

[gemini81]

this should be about the least of Cambodia's concerns. Easily said for anyone who has travelled there. Ironic timing with China's complaints................

[gemini81]

this should be about the least of Cambodia's concerns. Easily said for anyone who has travelled there. Ironic timing with China's complaints................

[jackr]

As if Larry and Serge would give a shit. How much more are those two guys pulling in than the GDP of Cambodia.

[Grey11]

Mildly amusing.

Hun Sen is a former Khmer Rouge murderer & should be brought before the World Court charged with crimes against humanity. Hun Sen is the kind of ally the convicted criminal Thaksin associates with. There will be nothing but trouble with the Cambodian Government as long as these two criminals are together.

[stevemck]

Who cares about the "line", I want to know how to 'Lambaste Google"!! They have pissed me off too many times, and I never could figure out how to "lambaste them"(whatever that means?).

[gbswales]

such a fuss about a pile of old stones that belong to the long dead past.......if only every nation could forget its past and concenrate their effort on building a better future for people the world would be a better place. Peoples' obsession with the past, tradition and culture is an utterly pointless exercise since it is clear that they LEARN NOTHING from it!

[Briggsy]

Mildly amusing.

Hun Sen is a former Khmer Rouge murderer & should be brought before the World Court charged with crimes against humanity. Hun Sen is the kind of ally the convicted criminal Thaksin associates with. There will be nothing but trouble with the Cambodian Government as long as these two criminals are together.

Hun Sen is former Khmer Rouge - correct.

He bailed in 1976 and fled to Vietnam. This was one year after they came to power. He served in the Khmer Rouge's Eastern Region. This was the region that later rebelled against Pol Pot and was thoroughly purged along with many Eastern villagers. The Eastern Region is recognised as having fed the villagers and been the kindest to the population throughout the first and second years of "Democratic Kampuchea". Commanders were purged and replaced by sadists from other regions.

Hun Sen's own war record has been investigated by the UN and there was no evidence linking him to Khmer Rouge atrocities. These findings are not surprising since he left so early in the regime and the atrocities didn't really get into to their stride till later on.

He certainly ain't a saint though. And a saint could never hold Cambodia together.

[thaigold]

Of interest here might be the Victory Monument in Bangkok, and the date of its dedication. Many people, at that time "knew" Japan would secure its Co-Prosperity sphere, a dream dashed along with the concurrent real estate transfers. Isn't history fun?

[meelousee]

The problem is that the Temple is on Thai Soil, and Thailand did not answer the call from the UN when it was proposed as a world heritage site.

They waited too long to voice concern, I think they had like 10 years? I forget never mind though, Cambodia mounted to what amounts to as a land grab or encroaching on sovereign territory. No matter what many may say the road was built by Thailand the structures that were erected for tourist were built by Thailand destroyed by Cambodia and reconstructed. The Cambodians knew what would and has proceeded afterward as they perpetrated it from the beginning of these problems.

say what you will but I was a young soldier with the 5th special forces that protected that place fought for it ,and it was only that which I can say. This belongs to Thailand... period

[TPI]

Why should Google respond? Surely, if the International Courts have not ruled on the border, "cutting it in half" is the fairest thing. Maybe Thailand should ask for "land rent money" from Cambodia, for half of the Temple......

Unbelievable! International Courts have not ruled but you have decided it is fair "cutting in half". What do we need International Courts for? We have your infinite wisdom. What is your opinion on the latest bank robberies? Please tell us what is fair! We're all waiting for the oracle to speak.

Pretty bitter James, perhaps the cambodian govt. needs to look to how mature, civilized coutries conduct negotiations

[ScubaBuddha]

To be fair, Google should have an option to list an area as "in dispute." I am not sure if what I did is of the area in dispute, but I'm thinking something like this:

Google has bowed to pressures before. Tibet is shown as part of China, and Kashmir as part of Pakastan.

[geriatrickid]

I don't suppose it's any coincidence that the Chinese are Cambodia's greatest benefactor and they're currently locking horns with Google?

Rubbish. Nice of you to join TV to share this piece of political wisdom.

[geriatrickid]

The problem with distortions is that if they are repeated often enough, the gullible accept them as fact;

Hun Sen is a former Khmer Rouge murderer & should be brought before the World Court charged with crimes against humanity. Hun Sen is the kind of ally the convicted criminal Thaksin associates with. There will be nothing but trouble with the Cambodian Government as long as these two criminals are together.

Hun Sen was 17 when he was forced into military service for the Khmer Rouge in 1970, the start of the major conflict. The Cambodian political machine likes to say Hun Sen enlisted because it makes him look like a patriot. The truth is that he was pressed into service. If you know the history of the Cambodian war, you will understand that both the Khmer Rouge and the Cambodian government at the time were using child soldiers as young as 13, so there was really no way out of serving.

On April 16, 1975 Hun Sen was seriously injured, losing his left eye. This left him out of action for over a year as he recovered. The war was over on April 17, 1975, making Hun Sen at the ripe old age of 22 a washed up one eyed ex-soldier. He was hardly a mover and shaker in the Khmer regime. He was like every other kid that ended up in the Khmer Rouge: Do as ordered or die. He escaped from Cambodia in 1977. He went to the only country that was willing to take on the Khmer Rouge and stop the genocide: Vietnam. It certainly wasn't going to be Thailand which was doing a robust trade with the Khmer and doing what it could to keep desperate civilians fleeing the brutal Khmer Rouge regime. Many people died horrible gruesome deaths because the Thai government didn't allow the UN and international agencies to shelter the refugeees. I put it to you that the people that should face the world court are the Thai officials that faciliated and profited from the genocide in Cambodia. It took Vietnam to sacrifice its soldiers and limited resources to stop the madness. Thailand did nothing. Yes, Hun Sen was ruthless in his political march, but that is due to his understanding that he was fighting the Khmer Rouge that had murdered and tortured millions of people. The Khmer Rouge wasn't a liberation movement anymore, but had instead become psychotic orgy of social cannibalism.

If you had undergone the experiences of Hun Sen and had seen the horrors of war as he had, you might appreciate his position. How can he have any love for the Thai elite, when it was the Thai elite that profited from the death of his people?

This is a man that lived through war, and I don't think he wants to revisit such horrors again. To accuse him of looking for a war with Thailand as some in TV are doing speaks to the ignorance. Anyone that has been in a war zone, doesn't want to go through it again, nor push it on others. Hun Sen is a product of a genocide that Thailand could have acted to prevent. To a certain degree, Thailand helped shape Hun Sen's present views.

Edited February 6, 2010 by geriatrickid

[Meridian007]

Okay, to begin with, this didn't really become an issue until it became a World Heritage Site on July 7, 2008. Before that, it was just a part of the border that Thailand wanted because the original line of demarcation was supposed to follow the 1904 treaty which stated that it would be based on the watershed line. A watershed line is where rain will fall on either side of a mountain range, and at that time (1904) this was considered the usual way to create a line of demarcation within a mountain range.

Any of you who have been to Preah Vihear know that it is on the edge of a cliff that looks out over Cambodia. If rain falls, it falls over the cliff doesn't it? The cliff edge would be the logical edge for the line of the border. This was Thailand's assertion before 1962, but because the maps that were created by the French, (who owned Cambodia as a colony in 1904), did not follow the letter of the treaty, there was a dispute as to whether the map or the letter of the treaty was to be followed. Since Thailand didn't have the legal backing that Cambodia did in the early `60s, (France decided to back Cambodia as its former colony in this dispute, and sent a bevy of French and American lawyers to assist Cambodia), they weren't able to prove that the letter of the treaty should be followed, and so the International Court of Justice, (in its early days, before it figured out ways to keep large states such as France from imposing their power over smaller states such as Thailand), made the decision on page 34 of their judgment (page 64 in this pdf):

For these reasons, The Court, by nine votes to three, finds that the Temple of Preah Vihear is situated in territory under the sovereignty of Cambodia

As is seen from this link to the ICJ website.

From this, Thailand accepted the judgment until 2008, when it suddenly became a lucrative tourist site, and then the conflict began. This is why they didn't contest it within the 10 year window from 1962 to 1972, as it wasn't seen as a major issue for a country that was involved in its own domestic problems.

Since then, Cambodia has decided that the ICJ's decision means that all of the land that was demarcated in the original French map of 1904, (sorry, I don't have the map at hand, maybe you can find it if you Google, it is quite amazing), is Cambodian territory, which goes much further back into Thailand than the accepted border for the past 40 years. From this, it not only becomes an issue of the temple, but the whole border, including the underwater oilfields to the east of Koh Chang.

Thaksin signed a memorandum of understanding with Cambodia while he was in power, which allowed him some rights to drill there in return for uncontested Cambodian rights to the temple. The new government, (and pressure from outside groups - PAD), has decided that the temple might be more important, so along with the Thaksin-in-Cambodia issue, they have gone back on this agreement.

I think Thailand lost their chance in 1962, but through no fault of their own. That ICJ case is a good example of a large, developed country such as France, (who wrote the ICJ laws, no less), using their power over a smaller, developing country like Thailand who didn't have the fore-knowledge or ability to defend themselves properly in the (then brand new) International Court of Justice.

You can decide if you think it is fair...

Edited February 6, 2010 by Meridian007

[geriatrickid]

I think Thailand lost their chance in 1962, but through no fault of their own. That ICJ case is a good example of a large, developed country such as France, (who wrote the ICJ laws, no less), using their power over a smaller, developing country like Thailand who didn't have the fore-knowledge or ability to defend themselves properly in the (then brand new) International Court of Justice.

You can decide if you think it is fair...

Right, blame it on the mean old bad colonial power. Sorry, but your argument is not supported by the facts.

Thailand was an independent nation fully capable of asserting its rights. The Thais retained qualified potent foreign counsel too. Did you even look at who was on the legal team? The Thais had a more robust legal team. It was bigger and included English, American, Belgian and French legal heavyweights. The Thais brought in all sorts of experts to offer evidence and none of it passed muster.

Here's the list of the legal team. I invite people to read the list and see for themselves. http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/45/12793.pdf

The judgement is here. I ask people to read it before commenting. It's clear that the Thais lost on the merits of the case and not through political chicanery.

http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/45/12821.pdf

[eggomaniac]

Leave it to me to find the humor. If Cambodia, or anyone else thinks Google Earth did this on purpose, they should just do a check of how innacurate the border lines of Google Earth are all over the World!!!

North Korea and China, as well as Iran and Iraq could quite easily go to war if pitchy patchy Google Earth is to be the deciding factor in border disputes.

If someone likes reading FINE PRINT, I will bet money that Google Earth has a Disclaimer that the border lines that appear are not necessarily accurate and definitely NOT official!!!

------------

Germane to the area in question, the UNNOFICIAL line on Google Earth seems to, mostly, follow the latest proposal, the high altitude line that seperates the water sheds.

IF, if the French knew what they were doing when they drew the line, they were allies of the Thais, they followed the cliff edge, instead of the Internationally recognized high altitude line, to FAVOR the Thais.

PERHAPS, perhaps they did not want attention drawn to their gerrymandering so they dog legged the temple into Cambodia, thinking to keep a vast territory in exchange for a small pile of old buildings.

Thailand recently HAD a great conclusion, they got to keep all that land and it was agreed to by the World, Thailand and Cambodia. Some unintelligent Yellow supporters demanding an over throw of this agreement and now Thailand is set to lose the whole upper stretches when the World Court rules appropriately.

-------

Google Earth will have nothing whatsoever do with it!

[eggomaniac]

A watershed line is where rain will fall on either side of a mountain range, and at that time (1904) this was considered the usual way to create a line of demarcation within a mountain range.

Any of you who have been to Preah Vihear know that it is on the edge of a cliff that looks out over Cambodia. If rain falls, it falls over the cliff doesn't it? The cliff edge would be the logical edge for the line of the border.

You have a lot of information I was not aware and hope to take the time to read up on it.

However, are you saying the watershed line is the cliff? It is actually the hilltops some kilometers inland. While Google Earth is not 100% accurate, you can use it to get a rough idea where the high altitude line runs between the 2 countries.

I learned about this aspect of the issue from a Thai lingusitics professor, who told me he learned it from a chagrined General. The General was angry the 2008 ruling was overturned as now the inland border will come into play, instead of the cliff edge. When the International court is 'forced' to look at it, because stupid politicians started screaming about patriotism, they will have no choice but to line up with other World decisions. The ones who wanted to 'save' an acre for Thailand will be the cause of the loss of hundreds of rai. OR maybe it was Thaksin's money that them to over turn the decision so he could win favor in Cambodia.

I was told that Cambodia is also lining up a claim on Ko Chang.

This, Internationally, would be recognized as Cambodian territory, as well. The only chance for Thailand to save it are the private land owners claims, but they are squandering that option by replacing the Thai owners with National Park and military usage.

Just look at the skinny little line of Thai territory that runs along the NW beach of Cambodia and try to explain how that is NOT Cambodian.

I actually have a 'premonition', Thaksin will enter and base himself on Ko Chang; it's just a 'hunch'. I was contemplating what moves I would make in his shoes.

[IMA_FARANG]

Quote:

Much of the border between the two countries has yet to be demarcated.

Not to quibble, but the actual border location as defined by international agreements is known within a meter or two and has been for over 20 years now.

Around 1980 I met a team of five Americans who worked for the U.S. goverment mapping agency. They were in Bangkok to do a mapping of the exact location of the Thai Cambodian border using satellite mapping. They were working for the U.S. government and were doing the mapping at the request of the Thai government, who wanted the information for the Thai military. The team was able to determine the actual border, as specified in the international agreement within a 2 meter range.

The problem is that niether the Thai government or the Cambodian government accepts the international agreement as interpreted in the disputed areas.

So it's not that both governments don't know exactly where the border is, it's that they don't accept the international interpretation of the border agreement.

[mca]

I realize Thais have a different view on this dispute...BUT, amazing how both sides neglected the ancient site until the UN declared it as a UNISCO sight I must mention (correct me if I am wrong) that a couple years ago the UN threatened to pull funds out of the historic UNESCO Ayuthaya sight because the Thai government was not taking care of the historical ruins ... So if Thailand cannot take care of their UNISCO Ayuthaya site, how can they take care of Phanom Rung?

<deleted> has Phanom Rung got to do with it?

totster

I was gonna say even Stevie Wonder couldn't dispute that was in Thailand!

[seri thai]

I think Thailand lost their chance in 1962, but through no fault of their own. That ICJ case is a good example of a large, developed country such as France, (who wrote the ICJ laws, no less), using their power over a smaller, developing country like Thailand who didn't have the fore-knowledge or ability to defend themselves properly in the (then brand new) International Court of Justice.

You can decide if you think it is fair...

Right, blame it on the mean old bad colonial power. Sorry, but your argument is not supported by the facts.

Thailand was an independent nation fully capable of asserting its rights. The Thais retained qualified potent foreign counsel too. Did you even look at who was on the legal team? The Thais had a more robust legal team. It was bigger and included English, American, Belgian and French legal heavyweights. The Thais brought in all sorts of experts to offer evidence and none of it passed muster.

Here's the list of the legal team. I invite people to read the list and see for themselves. http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/45/12793.pdf

The judgement is here. I ask people to read it before commenting. It's clear that the Thais lost on the merits of the case and not through political chicanery.

http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/45/12821.pdf

Lots of issues have come up since Noppadoms announcement of a compromise during the Thaksin government. This is all being bandied around for political reasons. There is however a nefarious sociological issue in that certain elite Thai groups see themselves as the true inheritors of the Angkor empire, its religious structure (and its boundaries) and modern cambodians as recent Cham interlopers.

Additionally the appointed boundaries imposed by international bodies since 1907 (and accepted by Thailand) roughly follow the route of the present road wich would give Cambodia a big foothold atop the Dang Rak range and lose Thailand strategic advantage/temple access and face.

The announcement of a compromise by Noppadom was a gift to the "yellow" establishment as it also demonstrated Thakins venality in giving away a key part of the establishments ethos in return for cash. That he was wiling to do this was a slap in the face that could not be accepted. His continuing alignment with Cambodians irritates further. I point this out as a foreign observer with no axe to grind. This is part of a continuing battle between elites. This is part of what is perceived by the establishment as Thaksins fin de siecle, multi-faceted strategy of destabilisation and fragmentation of fragile thai "unity"

[Ponbkk]

such as France from imposing their power over smaller states such as Thailand), made the decision on page 34 of their judgment (page 64 in this pdf):

You can decide if you think it is fair...

Thanks for those references in your post. They have made some interesting reading. I will list what I think are my conclusions from them and the rest of the discussion. They have changed my opinion of the matter as one from which was with what seems to be popular opinion against Thailand, to one where I am generally in support of the contention that the border delineated in 1904 is not fair to Thailand.

So I first conclude that the "border" shown on the recent maps is (still) the "1904 border" projected onto the Google Earth ellipsoid as accurately as possible given the source of the information (not known) and generally reflects that Cambodia was given control of the temple and immediately surrounding area. If you had detailed maps to compare with, I think you might find that border as projected is slightly inaccurate, maybe a little south and east of where that border technically should be shown (according to the 1904 ruling).

The "ball" was in French hands in 1904 and they basically decided to draw the boundary in this ISOLATED case in favor of Cambodia (their own colony) with what appears to be no justification.

The major objection of Thailand is that border is not drawn in regards to the norm of being the "fall" line, or rainfall dividing line. Clearly the Google Earth 3d view shows this to be true (NOT drawn in accordance) to those understanding basic geometry. The "fall line" is generally the ridge along which all rainfall that falls on one side goes one-way and on the other side the other. There is a great North American divide separating Atlantic and Pacific drainage. A divide touches the peak of Mount Everest. The McMahon Line runs along the crest of the eastern Himalayas demarcating much of the boundary between India and Tibet. It's demarcation can be quite straightforward, the principle is basically that borders decided in this manner insure that the countries involved remain in the control of their own watershed. It slightly breaks down where there are intermontane basins that drain inward only. Split them?

Thailand claims the rainfall line should have been drawn along the southern edge of the cliff giving Thailand full sovereignty of the Temple. Without having the topographic maps to prove it I contend this Thai claim has validity but goes too far. The fall line exists. It touches a peak in the area. That peak is probably in the center of the temple. Aren't most temple's built on the mountain top? Thus the actual fall line, that which should have been delineated in 1904, divides the temple.

Thailand's objection was in response to Cambodia's assertions to the world court in 1962. The world court ruled on Thailand basically "suck eggs" you already agreed in 1904 and in favor of Cambodia.

So what can Thailand do? I don't know. The border was drawn unfairly. The whole issue is mired in other border issues, both with Cambodia and applies elsewhere. It could only be solved as a "local" issue. Thaksin tried to use the situation he thought no one cared about to establish a precedent that he, as Prime Minister, could enact agreements with other foreign countries in his own power and without the consent of parliament (and in his own interest?) and that is at issue in the Thai constitutional debate.

I can only see this as possibly resolved as a local issue, un-intertwined with outside issues, for local interests on both sides of the border. Split the baby (regardless of where technically that line should be). A box around a "no border within" jointly controlled zone where tourists can go in and out? Both sides have to give. And in result a source of income for the locals, preservation of the temple can be acted on. A Thai village in the north and a Cambodia village in the south of the zone?. Tourists shouldn't be able too cross the border fully. Local souvenirs sold by local people. Local restaurants. NO retail markets or duty frees!

Is it "worth a visit" (when the shooting stops)? :-)

JMHO

[toptuan]

To be fair, Google should have an option to list an area as "in dispute." I am not sure if what I did is of the area in dispute, but I'm thinking something like this:

Google has bowed to pressures before. Tibet is shown as part of China, and Kashmir as part of Pakastan.

No, that's NOT the area in dispute. Pretty map, though. The area in dispute does not touch the ruins of the primary temple which runs from the brow of the escarpment northward about 1km to the bottom of the steps of the first level of ruins. The disputed area is actually a scrubland further north--a barren area of what looks like burnt rock and scrub brush. Hardly anything to fight over--unless you have an axe to grind, that is.

[geriatrickid]

Ok, so now that the basis of the ICJ judgement is quite evident and cannot be contested using the applicable law or the empty argument that the legal teams were stacked in favour of Cambodia (they were actually stacked in favour of Thailand), the argument goes back to "but it wasn't fair" canard.

Well guess what? Many of the world's international boundaries are not fair. In North America, wide swathes of territory were unfairly sliced out of Canada by the British and given to the USA. but you don't see the USA and Canada feuding and threatening war do you? Why the heck is France still in possession of St Pierre & Miquelon, 2 islands off of Newfoundland? The national boundaries between many European countries today are not reflective of the actual history or local cultures. One need only look at the historical size of old Poland or the Austro-Hungarian Empire to understand that. Large chunks of territory that were German are now in other countries today. The last German that tried to "right" perceived wrongs invaded Czechoslovakia, Poland and Prussia on the excuse that the border wasn't fair. We all know how that ended. There isn't one African country with a border that reflects the cultural realities of that Continent. South America has the same issue.

The world's consensus is that the borders, no matter how unfairly drawn a century ago must stand. Thailand stands alone on this issue and will not receive significant support from the international community. To do so would open the Pandora's box of border disputes. There is a similar dispute ongoing between Peru and Chile over maritime boundaries. Quite a different mature approach to the case than that seen here with Thailand & Cambodia.

Thailand can complain all it wants but it this is a dispute that it cannot win unless it overthrows the Cambodian government and negotiates a new border treaty. Aint going to happen is it? This is a dispute created to distract the population from more serious issues. Find a common enemy and use it to unite a fragmented population. Pathetic.

[Grey11]

I don't suppose it's any coincidence that the Chinese are Cambodia's greatest benefactor and they're currently locking horns with Google?

Rubbish. Nice of you to join TV to share this piece of political wisdom.

I agree with you misterjag. And, you have the right to your opinion whether someone likes it or not. There is absolutely nothing in Southeast Asia that Communist China does not have a hand in either from the outside - the Government or Chinese inhabitants of ALL Southeast Asian countries. You can bet Cambodia is joining with Communist China to come after google.

[Grey11]

such as France from imposing their power over smaller states such as Thailand), made the decision on page 34 of their judgment (page 64 in this pdf):

You can decide if you think it is fair...

Thanks for those references in your post. They have made some interesting reading. I will list what I think are my conclusions from them and the rest of the discussion. They have changed my opinion of the matter as one from which was with what seems to be popular opinion against Thailand, to one where I am generally in support of the contention that the border delineated in 1904 is not fair to Thailand.

So I first conclude that the "border" shown on the recent maps is (still) the "1904 border" projected onto the Google Earth ellipsoid as accurately as possible given the source of the information (not known) and generally reflects that Cambodia was given control of the temple and immediately surrounding area. If you had detailed maps to compare with, I think you might find that border as projected is slightly inaccurate, maybe a little south and east of where that border technically should be shown (according to the 1904 ruling).

The "ball" was in French hands in 1904 and they basically decided to draw the boundary in this ISOLATED case in favor of Cambodia (their own colony) with what appears to be no justification.

The major objection of Thailand is that border is not drawn in regards to the norm of being the "fall" line, or rainfall dividing line. Clearly the Google Earth 3d view shows this to be true (NOT drawn in accordance) to those understanding basic geometry. The "fall line" is generally the ridge along which all rainfall that falls on one side goes one-way and on the other side the other. There is a great North American divide separating Atlantic and Pacific drainage. A divide touches the peak of Mount Everest. The McMahon Line runs along the crest of the eastern Himalayas demarcating much of the boundary between India and Tibet. It's demarcation can be quite straightforward, the principle is basically that borders decided in this manner insure that the countries involved remain in the control of their own watershed. It slightly breaks down where there are intermontane basins that drain inward only. Split them?

Thailand claims the rainfall line should have been drawn along the southern edge of the cliff giving Thailand full sovereignty of the Temple. Without having the topographic maps to prove it I contend this Thai claim has validity but goes too far. The fall line exists. It touches a peak in the area. That peak is probably in the center of the temple. Aren't most temple's built on the mountain top? Thus the actual fall line, that which should have been delineated in 1904, divides the temple.

Thailand's objection was in response to Cambodia's assertions to the world court in 1962. The world court ruled on Thailand basically "suck eggs" you already agreed in 1904 and in favor of Cambodia.

So what can Thailand do? I don't know. The border was drawn unfairly. The whole issue is mired in other border issues, both with Cambodia and applies elsewhere. It could only be solved as a "local" issue. Thaksin tried to use the situation he thought no one cared about to establish a precedent that he, as Prime Minister, could enact agreements with other foreign countries in his own power and without the consent of parliament (and in his own interest?) and that is at issue in the Thai constitutional debate.

I can only see this as possibly resolved as a local issue, un-intertwined with outside issues, for local interests on both sides of the border. Split the baby (regardless of where technically that line should be). A box around a "no border within" jointly controlled zone where tourists can go in and out? Both sides have to give. And in result a source of income for the locals, preservation of the temple can be acted on. A Thai village in the north and a Cambodia village in the south of the zone?. Tourists shouldn't be able too cross the border fully. Local souvenirs sold by local people. Local restaurants. NO retail markets or duty frees!

Is it "worth a visit" (when the shooting stops)? :-)

JMHO

EXCELLENT!

[Roachiebkk]

The problem with distortions is that if they are repeated often enough, the gullible accept them as fact;

Hun Sen is a former Khmer Rouge murderer & should be brought before the World Court charged with crimes against humanity. Hun Sen is the kind of ally the convicted criminal Thaksin associates with. There will be nothing but trouble with the Cambodian Government as long as these two criminals are together.

Hun Sen was 17 when he was forced into military service for the Khmer Rouge in 1970, the start of the major conflict. The Cambodian political machine likes to say Hun Sen enlisted because it makes him look like a patriot. The truth is that he was pressed into service. If you know the history of the Cambodian war, you will understand that both the Khmer Rouge and the Cambodian government at the time were using child soldiers as young as 13, so there was really no way out of serving.

On April 16, 1975 Hun Sen was seriously injured, losing his left eye. This left him out of action for over a year as he recovered. The war was over on April 17, 1975, making Hun Sen at the ripe old age of 22 a washed up one eyed ex-soldier. He was hardly a mover and shaker in the Khmer regime. He was like every other kid that ended up in the Khmer Rouge: Do as ordered or die. He escaped from Cambodia in 1977. He went to the only country that was willing to take on the Khmer Rouge and stop the genocide: Vietnam. It certainly wasn't going to be Thailand which was doing a robust trade with the Khmer and doing what it could to keep desperate civilians fleeing the brutal Khmer Rouge regime. Many people died horrible gruesome deaths because the Thai government didn't allow the UN and international agencies to shelter the refugeees. I put it to you that the people that should face the world court are the Thai officials that faciliated and profited from the genocide in Cambodia. It took Vietnam to sacrifice its soldiers and limited resources to stop the madness. Thailand did nothing. Yes, Hun Sen was ruthless in his political march, but that is due to his understanding that he was fighting the Khmer Rouge that had murdered and tortured millions of people. The Khmer Rouge wasn't a liberation movement anymore, but had instead become psychotic orgy of social cannibalism.

If you had undergone the experiences of Hun Sen and had seen the horrors of war as he had, you might appreciate his position. How can he have any love for the Thai elite, when it was the Thai elite that profited from the death of his people?

This is a man that lived through war, and I don't think he wants to revisit such horrors again. To accuse him of looking for a war with Thailand as some in TV are doing speaks to the ignorance. Anyone that has been in a war zone, doesn't want to go through it again, nor push it on others. Hun Sen is a product of a genocide that Thailand could have acted to prevent. To a certain degree, Thailand helped shape Hun Sen's present views.

Very good statement of facts. he is no angel but he certainly wasn't one of the players in the genocide. These days he is busy taking backhanders from NGO's and ex-NGO staff who are now systematically raping the country. As long as the 'poor Khmer people' need support from these greedy money hungry NGOs they'll never be empowered or own their own country. Hun Sen has been selling off his country to the highest bidder for years.

[george]

Update:

Cambodia Calls Google Maps “Misleading” Over Thailand Border Dispute

Cambodia blasts Google map of disputed Thai border from Reuters reports Cambodia is the latest country upset with Google over how they draw the border on Google Maps. Cambodia’s prime minister, Hun Sen, wrote a letter saying Google was “radically misleading,” “professionally irresponsible” and “devoid of truth and reality.”

Cambodia and Thailand have military on the disputed border for over three years now. So this letter was clearly a political move by Cambodia. But Cambodia and Thailand are not the only countries to have such disputes and call in Google Maps as proof or lack-there-of.

In fact, did you know, Google will change borders when you go to localized versions of Google Maps? For example, compare Google India Maps http://maps.google.co.in/maps?f=q&sour....173584&z=7 to Google Maps http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source....173584&z=7 and you will see the border lines are different.

-- serachengineland.com 2010-02-08

[MAJIC]

Perhaps Google maps are providing the wisdom of Solomon and cutting the baby in half to resolve the issue.

Seems fair to me: Hasip Hasip