PM Abhisit: Thailand Objects To Cambodian Plan For Preah Vihear Area Management

[webfact]

Abhisit: Thailand objects to Cambodian plan for Preah Vihear area management

BANGKOK: -- Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva on Sunday reiterated that Thailand would object the World Heritage Committee (WHC) when it meets later this month to discuss a management plan around Preah Vihear ancient temple, earlier granted the World Heritage status by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).

Mr Abhisit said during his weekly TV and radio address that his government would continue to object a management plan around the 11th century temple during the WHC meeting in Brazil between July 25 to August 3, for Thailand and its neighbour Cambodia still have to resolve their border demarcation problem.

Thailand continues to insist on using watershed mark as the border between the two countries, said Mr Abhisit, adding that Thai people should not worry that the country would lose some of its territory to Phnom Penh.

The Thai government’s stance on the Thai-Cambodian border remains unchanged, except that of the Preah Vihear temple as the International Court of Justice has already ruled that the temple belongs to Cambodia and the Thai government has to obey the order, he said.

The UNESCO has about two years ago listed the temple as the World Heritage site while the site was awarded to Phnom Penh by the International Court of Justice in 1962 in a decision rankling with most Thais.

Armed clashes of the two countries have occurred frequently after the listing of the temple as World Heritage site, while Cambodia maintains the demarcation of the disputed area, which it says has to be based on a map drawn in 1908.

Both Thailand and Cambodia have historically laid claim to the temple site, which sits on Cambodian soil but can only be easily accessed from Thailand.

Mr Abhisit said although clashes occurred from time to time but generally speaking both sides try to refrain from fighting.

Thailand has informed several countries that as long as border dispute continues to exist, it is inappropriate for Cambodia to handle the management plan around the Preah Vihear temple, he said.

The WHC will meet for its 34th annual session and Suwit Khunkitti, minister of Natural Resources and Environment, is expected to head the Thai delegation at the meeting.

Cambodia is scheduled to submit its management plan expected to involve the 4.6-square kilometre overlapping area near Preah Vihear Temple to UNESCO during the meeting.

Mr Suwit earlier notified the cabinet that he will ask the committee to postpone its consideration of the Cambodian management plan as there has not been a resolution of the territorial dispute between the two countries regarding the area. (MCOT online news)

-- TNA 2010-07-18

[jayjay0]

It's not like Thailand didn't have any problems at home. It really dosen't matter about what Thailand wants. Historicaly it has always been Cambodia. Now is not the time to be playing politics. Historicaly there was a map drawn in 1908 showing it as being part of Cambodia. The International Court of Justice in 1962 said it was Cambodia. If Abhisit can't achieve agreement when he is obviously on the wrong side what can he do at home. His stand reminds me of the red shirts. Feet firmly placed in mid air.

Yes it is easier to gain admittance to from Thailand. So what. Where I come from the U. S. has no land connection to Point Roberts in Washington state And to get there you must drive through part of British Columbia. Point being ease of admittance means nothing when it comes to ownership.

Edited July 18, 2010 by jayjay0

[crazygreg44]

A position to make the watershed the base of conjuring the borderline, in my opinion is the best way to resolver the dispute. The cliff - based site sheds its water downward to Thailand, the adjacent area sheds it to Cambodia. In my opinion, since you don t steal water from your neighbour, a new mapping of the watershed could resolve the dispute for once and ever.

The 1908 maps were drawn by the french and are an insult to the people. Same thing happened in Iraq/ Lebanon/Syria/Jordan etc border markations by the french. We all know that many of nowadays minority and border conflicts have their origin in those colonial-era drawn up maps.

I sincerely hope there will be a solution. I live 15 km from the site and would welcome it. I am short of being retired and I would love to meditate on the cliffs in the mornings, without being hassled neither by Thai troops nor Cambodian. I wish the UNO representatives have dug into the subject, get relevant information and understand both sides. If the border dispute fails , I would suggest a "heritage" site managemant plan, leaving border dispute aside and open the sanctuary for the public again. If you want UNO management, I will be your man, I am applying for the job as the caretaker of the heritage. I am 53 and I love living there. I hope somebody involved in the UNO reads this.

[buckhumyai]

I am curious how Thailand can claim any right to this temple at all when it was built hundreds of years before the first Siamese State of Sukhothai was founded in 1238. The first temple built by the Khmer people on the site dates back to the 9th Century. The land on which the temple lies, was for a brief period of modern history under Siamese rule. However the land was ceded to Cambodia, who were under French rule at the time, on 13th February 1904 by King Rama V. He agreed to the French demands and gave them the land they were asking for rather than risk being invaded. I have attached a map showing the exact areas he signed over to the French and the dates. You will note that it quite clearly marks Preah Vihear as being inside French Territory. Subsequent maps made after this also clearly show the Temple as belonging to the French. The International Court also ruled in 1962 that it does not belong to Thailand.

Case closed.

You will notice on the map that Thailand also controlled a fair portion of what is now Cambodia including Siem Reap on which Angkor Wat is situated, however they signed that over on 23rd March 1907 and I bet they are still counting how many tourist dollars they have lost because of it. Could you imagine if Angkor Wat was in Thailand? The number of tourists and money coming here would be staggering. They also signed over all of what is now modern day Laos That is probably why they are digging their heels in on Preah Vihear, when they have not a modicum of evidence to support their ownership.

[jayjay0]

I am curious how Thailand can claim any right to this temple at all when it was built hundreds of years before the first Siamese State of Sukhothai was founded in 1238. The first temple built by the Khmer people on the site dates back to the 9th Century. The land on which the temple lies, was for a brief period of modern history under Siamese rule. However the land was ceded to Cambodia, who were under French rule at the time, on 13th February 1904 by King Rama V. He agreed to the French demands and gave them the land they were asking for rather than risk being invaded. I have attached a map showing the exact areas he signed over to the French and the dates. You will note that it quite clearly marks Preah Vihear as being inside French Territory. Subsequent maps made after this also clearly show the Temple as belonging to the French. The International Court also ruled in 1962 that it does not belong to Thailand.

Case closed.

You will notice on the map that Thailand also controlled a fair portion of what is now Cambodia including Siem Reap on which Angkor Wat is situated, however they signed that over on 23rd March 1907 and I bet they are still counting how many tourist dollars they have lost because of it. Could you imagine if Angkor Wat was in Thailand? The number of tourists and money coming here would be staggering. They also signed over all of what is now modern day Laos That is probably why they are digging their heels in on Preah Vihear, when they have not a modicum of evidence to support their ownership.

Just a point of knowledge. Siem Reap Is Cambodian for Siam Defeated.

[jayjay0]

I am curious how Thailand can claim any right to this temple at all when it was built hundreds of years before the first Siamese State of Sukhothai was founded in 1238. The first temple built by the Khmer people on the site dates back to the 9th Century. The land on which the temple lies, was for a brief period of modern history under Siamese rule. However the land was ceded to Cambodia, who were under French rule at the time, on 13th February 1904 by King Rama V. He agreed to the French demands and gave them the land they were asking for rather than risk being invaded. I have attached a map showing the exact areas he signed over to the French and the dates. You will note that it quite clearly marks Preah Vihear as being inside French Territory. Subsequent maps made after this also clearly show the Temple as belonging to the French. The International Court also ruled in 1962 that it does not belong to Thailand.

Case closed.

You will notice on the map that Thailand also controlled a fair portion of what is now Cambodia including Siem Reap on which Angkor Wat is situated, however they signed that over on 23rd March 1907 and I bet they are still counting how many tourist dollars they have lost because of it. Could you imagine if Angkor Wat was in Thailand? The number of tourists and money coming here would be staggering. They also signed over all of what is now modern day Laos That is probably why they are digging their heels in on Preah Vihear, when they have not a modicum of evidence to support their ownership.

Thanks for the map. I notice that none of the areas ceded to France had not at one time been Cambodia. They were all lands Thailand took by force with no justification. All the French did was right a wrong. Also the French had nothing to do with the 1962 decision. Once again I say Abhisit get on with uniting Thailand save the castle's in the sky for the Thai TV posters. LOL

As I said Siem Reap is Cambodian for Siam Defeated.

[webfact]

New Politics Party Demands Govt Stance on Phreah Vihear Temple Dispute

The New Politics Party is demanding that the natural resources and environment minister publicly declare his stance regarding the Preah Vihear Temple issue.

Acting Secretary-General of the New Politics Party, Suriyasai Katasila has issued a demand to Natural Resources and Environment Minister Suwit Khunkitti to publicly announce the stance he will take when representing Thailand at the UNESCO World Heritage Conference on July 25 in Brazil.

Suriyasai also demanded Suwit to clarify the government's strategy for dealing with the Cambodian government's attempt to unilaterally register the disputed Preah Vihear Temple as a UNESCO World Heritage site.

Meanwhile, Samran Rodpetch, acting spokesperson for the party, has reiterated that the party opposes the unilateral registration proposed by the Cambodian government because, if it is approved by the World Heritage Committee, Thailand could lose up to 3,000 rai of land surrounding the disputed temple site.

Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said during his weekly television program this past weekend that the government will use the border dispute as a rationale in protesting the Cambodian government's attempt to have the temple listed and insisted that from the government's perspective, there is conflict of interest regarding the issue.

-- Tan Network 2010-07-19

[webfact]

Cambodia Demands Thailand to Make First Move in Reconciliation Offer

Cambodia has rejected Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva's call for reconciliation talks, demanding that the Thai government send its ambassador back to Phnom Penh first.

The Cambodian government has turned down a request made by Thailand's Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva, calling for bilateral talks to restore ties between the two countries.

Cambodian Foreign Ministry spokesman Koi Kuong said Cambodia will do nothing unless Thailand makes the first move.

He added that the Cambodian government considers the fact that Thailand has downgraded its diplomatic relations with Cambodia to the level of Charge' d'Affaires as insignificant.

However, Kuong stressed that if the Thai authorities send their ambassador back to Phnom Penh, the Cambodian government would do the same.

Last November, Thailand and Cambodia recalled their ambassadors over a political dispute regarding the appointment of ousted former Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra as Cambodia's economic adviser.

The recall marked the lowest point in recent diplomatic relations between the two countries.

Meanwhile, tensions seem to have eased a bit after Cambodia recently deported two red-shirt supporters wanted by Thai authorities for their involvement in the bomb attack near the Bhumjaithai Party headquarters, and its cancellation of the 'Day of Anger' campaign that has been planned by radical Cambodian activists to foster hatred against Thailand.

-- Tan Network 2010-07-19

[rfukata]

I am curious how Thailand can claim any right to this temple at all when it was built hundreds of years before the first Siamese State of Sukhothai was founded in 1238. The first temple built by the Khmer people on the site dates back to the 9th Century. The land on which the temple lies, was for a brief period of modern history under Siamese rule. However the land was ceded to Cambodia, who were under French rule at the time, on 13th February 1904 by King Rama V. He agreed to the French demands and gave them the land they were asking for rather than risk being invaded. I have attached a map showing the exact areas he signed over to the French and the dates. You will note that it quite clearly marks Preah Vihear as being inside French Territory. Subsequent maps made after this also clearly show the Temple as belonging to the French. The International Court also ruled in 1962 that it does not belong to Thailand.

Case closed.

You will notice on the map that Thailand also controlled a fair portion of what is now Cambodia including Siem Reap on which Angkor Wat is situated, however they signed that over on 23rd March 1907 and I bet they are still counting how many tourist dollars they have lost because of it. Could you imagine if Angkor Wat was in Thailand? The number of tourists and money coming here would be staggering. They also signed over all of what is now modern day Laos That is probably why they are digging their heels in on Preah Vihear, when they have not a modicum of evidence to support their ownership.

I have to agree with you on this. I always wondered why the Thai's claim this to be their sacred site, a Khmer temple?

even the local village dialect is of Khmer base origin and not Siamese. As you mentioned this may have a lot to do with the ownership of an ancient temple in which this will

yield a ton of tourist dollars for Thailand.

[Rucharee]

I am curious how Thailand can claim any right to this temple at all when it was built hundreds of years before the first Siamese State of Sukhothai was founded in 1238. The first temple built by the Khmer people on the site dates back to the 9th Century. The land on which the temple lies, was for a brief period of modern history under Siamese rule. However the land was ceded to Cambodia, who were under French rule at the time, on 13th February 1904 by King Rama V. He agreed to the French demands and gave them the land they were asking for rather than risk being invaded. I have attached a map showing the exact areas he signed over to the French and the dates. You will note that it quite clearly marks Preah Vihear as being inside French Territory. Subsequent maps made after this also clearly show the Temple as belonging to the French. The International Court also ruled in 1962 that it does not belong to Thailand.

Case closed.

You will notice on the map that Thailand also controlled a fair portion of what is now Cambodia including Siem Reap on which Angkor Wat is situated, however they signed that over on 23rd March 1907 and I bet they are still counting how many tourist dollars they have lost because of it. Could you imagine if Angkor Wat was in Thailand? The number of tourists and money coming here would be staggering. They also signed over all of what is now modern day Laos That is probably why they are digging their heels in on Preah Vihear, when they have not a modicum of evidence to support their ownership.

Thanks for the map. I notice that none of the areas ceded to France had not at one time been Cambodia. They were all lands Thailand took by force with no justification. All the French did was right a wrong. Also the French had nothing to do with the 1962 decision. Once again I say Abhisit get on with uniting Thailand save the castle's in the sky for the Thai TV posters. LOL

As I said Siem Reap is Cambodian for Siam Defeated.

Sorry, I think you have mistaken.

All the French did was wrong a right.

Just look at the artitechture. It is simplySiamese. You can see similar structure in downtown Lopburi & PiMai too.

[dumball]

'Rucharee' date='2010-07-19 19:40' timestamp='1279543228' post='3759413']

jayjay0' date='2010-07-19 10:38' timestamp='1279510690' post='3758360']'buckhumyai' date='2010-07-19 09:18' timestamp='1279502301' post='3758084']

I am curious how Thailand can claim any right to this temple at all when it was built hundreds of years before the first Siamese State of Sukhothai was founded in 1238. The first temple built by the Khmer people on the site dates back to the 9th Century. The land on which the temple lies, was for a brief period of modern history under Siamese rule. However the land was ceded to Cambodia, who were under French rule at the time, on 13th February 1904 by King Rama V. He agreed to the French demands and gave them the land they were asking for rather than risk being invaded. I have attached a map showing the exact areas he signed over to the French and the dates. You will note that it quite clearly marks Preah Vihear as being inside French Territory. Subsequent maps made after this also clearly show the Temple as belonging to the French. The International Court also ruled in 1962 that it does not belong to Thailand.

Case closed.

You will notice on the map that Thailand also controlled a fair portion of what is now Cambodia including Siem Reap on which Angkor Wat is situated, however they signed that over on 23rd March 1907 and I bet they are still counting how many tourist dollars they have lost because of it. Could you imagine if Angkor Wat was in Thailand? The number of tourists and money coming here would be staggering. They also signed over all of what is now modern day Laos That is probably why they are digging their heels in on Preah Vihear, when they have not a modicum of evidence to support their ownership.

Thanks for the map. I notice that none of the areas ceded to France had not at one time been Cambodia. They were all lands Thailand took by force with no justification. All the French did was right a wrong. Also the French had nothing to do with the 1962 decision. Once again I say Abhisit get on with uniting Thailand save the castle's in the sky for the Thai TV posters. LOL

As I said Siem Reap is Cambodian for Siam Defeated.

Sorry, I think you have mistaken.

All the French did was wrong a right.

Just look at the artitechture. It is simplySiamese. You can see similar structure in downtown Lopburi & PiMai too.

Are you willing to cede those two structures , Preah Vehear is not simply Siamese , the temple happens to be a 900 year old HINDU temple , there are many more across both Cambodia and Thailand .

[Rucharee]

Are you willing to cede those two structures , Preah Vehear is not simply Siamese , the temple happens to be a 900 year old HINDU temple , there are many more across both Cambodia and Thailand .

http://aes.iupui.edu/rwise/banknotes/thailand/ThailandP86-500Baht-%281975-88%29-donatedth_b.jpg

If it is not Siamese, why would such architecture be printed in Thai currency (see above link)?

For example, would be be funny if Chinese bank notes have Hadrian Wall rather that the Great Wall?

[Democrat]

Abhisit wont abide by the international court rulings. People from other countries who do not have vested interests. But he expects Thaksin to abide by the Thai courts rulings. The democrat party need to have an election for a new leader and PM. The democrats need someone with integrity and accountability who cares about their people and country, someone who abides by the laws and does not interfere in the due processes. Surely it cannot be that hard to find someone. How about a women OOPS would the Thai's with money accept that.

Edited July 19, 2010 by Democrat

[Rucharee]

Abhisit wont abide by the international court rulings. People from other countries who do not have vested interests. But he expects Thaksin to abide by the Thai courts rulings. The democrat party need to have an election for a new leader and PM. The democrats need someone with integrity and accountability who cares about their people and country, someone who abides by the laws and does not interfere in the due processes. Surely it cannot be that hard to find someone. How about a women OOPS would the Thai's with money accept that.

Amazing Thailand = Ironic Thailand.

[sabaijai]

There are around a thousand Khmer-built, Angkor-era temple sites throughout northeastern Thailand. The issue is not Preah Vihar itself or the land it occupies but the adjacent area still in dispute and not ruled on by the ICJ. The Thai government is posing no objections to the ICJ ruling.

[Rucharee]

There are around a thousand Khmer-built, Angkor-era temple sites throughout northeastern Thailand. The issue is not Preah Vihar itself or the land it occupies but the adjacent area still in dispute and not ruled on by the ICJ. The Thai government is posing no objections to the ICJ ruling.

Bingo. Northern East Thailand should be returned to Cambodia. You said it all.

[mizzi39]

There are around a thousand Khmer-built, Angkor-era temple sites throughout northeastern Thailand. The issue is not Preah Vihar itself or the land it occupies but the adjacent area still in dispute and not ruled on by the ICJ. The Thai government is posing no objections to the ICJ ruling.

Bingo. Northern East Thailand should be returned to Cambodia. You said it all.

I don't think that North East Thailand should be returned to Cambodia, but annexed and become a "free state" with its own government body, since it is exploited by so many and supported by so few. BTW Rucharee there is nothing "Thai" about Preah Vihear.

Edited July 20, 2010 by mizzi39

[Rucharee]

There are around a thousand Khmer-built, Angkor-era temple sites throughout northeastern Thailand. The issue is not Preah Vihar itself or the land it occupies but the adjacent area still in dispute and not ruled on by the ICJ. The Thai government is posing no objections to the ICJ ruling.

Bingo. Northern East Thailand should be returned to Cambodia. You said it all.

I don't think that North East Thailand should be returned to Cambodia, but annexed and become a "free state" with its own government body, since it is exploited by so many and supported by so few. BTW Rucharee there is nothing "Thai" about Preah Vihear.

Maybe your so call "free state" should be ruled by Thaksin?

[mizzi39]

There are around a thousand Khmer-built, Angkor-era temple sites throughout northeastern Thailand. The issue is not Preah Vihar itself or the land it occupies but the adjacent area still in dispute and not ruled on by the ICJ. The Thai government is posing no objections to the ICJ ruling.

Bingo. Northern East Thailand should be returned to Cambodia. You said it all.

I don't think that North East Thailand should be returned to Cambodia, but annexed and become a "free state" with its own government body, since it is exploited by so many and supported by so few. BTW Rucharee there is nothing "Thai" about Preah Vihear.

Maybe your so call "free state" should be ruled by Thaksin?

Well no sense arguing with a "born again yellow". It just goes to show your utter ignorance thinking that if one lives in the northeast they must automatically be a Thaksin supporter or a red. Many don't see colors FYI and just want peace (my wife, mother and father in law included), so get the sun out your eyes.

Edited July 20, 2010 by mizzi39

[Tod Daniels]

What I’d like to know is;

How did a thread on the P/M saying Thailand objected to the Cambodian management plan for the Preah Vihear temple ruins turn into a my cock is bigger than yours pissing match between the posters known as "Rucharee" and "mizzi39"? I don't care if you live in Nakhon Nowhere or whether you're 'born again' red, green, yellow, sky blue pink, or rainbow color . The mind truly wobbles how these posts can go so off topic so quickly.

BACK-ON-TOPIC

There are 4.6 square kilometers of basically totally useless economically unviable land in dispute and claimed by both countries. Granted that land just happens to also be the easiest way into the temple complex itself as goin' there from the Cambodian side is a tough row to hoe.

Now a sensible person might actually be lead to believe that thailand could capitalize on this 'easy access'. They could reap no small sum in fees charged to all and sundry who wanna see what is, in reality, much ado about nothing as far as ruined temples go . In fact, thailand was already doing just that, before they got pissy and closed access to the temple complex from the thai side . The road that accesses Preah Vihear runs thru a national park up there in Sisaket Province and cars were charged to drive on it.

Instead all thailand does is repeatedly whine about the injustice of it all after the ICJ decided WAY BACK in 1962, by a vote of 9 to 3 that the temple belonged to Cambodia. Sheesh, that's FORTY EIGHT YEARS AGO !!!

FWIW: a country can and often does appeal a decision by the ICJ and I believe they are given 10 years to do so. Sadly in that time (now LONG expired) thailand didn't submit a single piece of paper or a shred of evidence to counter the decision.

Now they're objecting to a management plan of land already deemed to be INSIDE Cambodia without ever seeing the draft of the paperwork outlining the planned management. <deleted> is that about?

Cambodia is not presenting the plan until the WHC meeting so thailand has abso-tively posi-lutely NO frickin' clue what's even in it. I guess they just disagree to be disagreeable about it.

Sour grapes really.

[tig28]

There are around a thousand Khmer-built, Angkor-era temple sites throughout northeastern Thailand. The issue is not Preah Vihar itself or the land it occupies but the adjacent area still in dispute and not ruled on by the ICJ. The Thai government is posing no objections to the ICJ ruling.

This is worth repeating !!!

Bold print is mine.