Thai PM Abhisit Demands Cambodians Leave Disputed Border Area

[SamritT]

The World court merely said the temple belongs to Cambodia. However the land is in Thailand, claim by PAD based on some water line. So if Cambodia put a temple in Thailand without permission, it is call forced invasion. Or is it not?

If someone make a mistake and build a house on your land, can you confiscate it (the house)? Or must you give your land to the house builder?

Edited August 11, 2010 by SamritT

[Oberkommando]

Simple facts are Thailand nor Siam nor even any of the ancient kingdoms of Sukhothai or Ayutthada existed when this temple was constructed.

Thailand has stolen the land the temple was on and encroached into Cambodia many times in the last century. Remember they have previously used military force to occupy the temple. The International Court of Justice intervened last time and forced the Thai military to withdraw, awarding the temple to Cambodia.

The site is also the scene of a horrific massacre committed by the Thai army against thousands Khmers fleeing the Khmer Rouge and Vietnamese. Remembered well by Cambodians but you won't find that in Thai history books. Haing S. Ngor refers to it in his book, A Cambodian Odyssey. The Thai army drove thousands of Cambodians over the cliff and threw rocks down upon them. 40,000 Khmer refugees were forcibly expelled by Thailand at Preah Vihear, some 3000 died there and several thousand are still missing.

[Oberkommando]

The World court merely said the temple belongs to Cambodia. However the land is in Thailand,

The land is not in Thailand according to the agreed upon map which was demarcated by a Siam-French committee.

The truth is the PAD have been using this as leverage against the current government and it has now spiralled out of control. There was no issue until the PAD interfered as Thailand had agreed with Cambodia to accept the UNESCO World Heritage ruling in exchange for the disputed land around the temple to be recognised as Thai. This wasn't enough for the PAD as they want both the land and the temple.

This is what happens when you pander to mob rule and encourage fascist and nationalist rhetoric from marginalised figures to become mainstream.

[ianf]

I see the Red Shirt sympathisers are out in force already,

Usual underlying message:any excuse to bring Abhisits Government down.

Shame they will be disappointed, once again!

I was also amazed at the speed with which the Thaksinites swooped on this thread. Well He doesn't pay them to sit around doing nothing, I guess.

(More's the pity- we could all do with a break from the relentless spin).

I was once severely reprimanded for even daring to suggest that some posters MAY be paid to post by the red god!

Edited August 11, 2010 by ianf

[DickFarang]

Poor Abhisit,

He looked clever and capable. The truth is that he is just one more puppet in the hands of PAD and army.

Thailand should really have an external look on the situation and see how its international image deteriorates everyday, not good for businnes, investments, tourism.... Time to wake up

Its a really sad fact of life, its not the land, or the Temple that these two sides are fighting over, it is purely the money than can be made from tourism in the area. The other sad fact is that most of the money that would, could, should be made from a historical attraction like this will likely make its way into some private pocket, very likely from both sides.

Areas like this are important both to Thailand, Cambodia, Asia, Buddhism, and the worlds population in general. It would be too sensible for both countries to put down their guns, and shake hands, while working together to provide tourism jobs for people on both sides of the border, while using the money raised to preserve the area for all time. They do it in India, with many of their historical treasures, they do it here in Thailand too. Why is it that because of its proximity it will be a catalyst for war.

Personally, I will never go there, ever, so at the moment there is one, possibly many more that will forever boycott such an area.

When I visited Ayutthaya four years ago, it was neglected and dirty.

There were hardly any tourists and this was before the military coup and before the seizure of the airports.

Why should visitors to Thailand travel to temple ruins in the middle of nowhere if they even do not go to Ayutthaya, which is at a stone's throw from Bangkok ?

We all know the answer: Most tourists do not come to Thailand for the temples and the ruins.

[SamritT]

"Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva on Tuesday demanded Cambodian citizens leave a disputed border area that has been the focus of deadly clashes in recent years." Is the Thai PM demand in Thai language or Cambodian?

[Oberkommando]

"Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva on Tuesday demanded Cambodian citizens leave a disputed border area that has been the focus of deadly clashes in recent years." Is the Thai PM demand in Thai language or Cambodian?

Many Cambodians understand Thai and I am sure they have competent translators as they are far better English and French speakers than Thais.

Your language is descended from Khmer after all. As is your culture, your religion, your martial arts, your... sorry, going off topic a tad.

[DickFarang]

The World court merely said the temple belongs to Cambodia. However the land is in Thailand, claim by PAD based on some water line. So if Cambodia put a temple in Thailand without permission, it is call forced invasion. Or is it not?

If someone make a mistake and build a house on your land, can you confiscate it (the house)? Or must you give your land to the house builder?

IMHO the temple ruins are a little bit older than the current border line.

[moetownblues]

The World court merely said the temple belongs to Cambodia. However the land is in Thailand, claim by PAD based on some water line. So if Cambodia put a temple in Thailand without permission, it is call forced invasion. Or is it not?

If someone make a mistake and build a house on your land, can you confiscate it (the house)? Or must you give your land to the house builder?

It is believed that construction on the temple, built in several stages starting with the Shiva sanctuary at the top and moving down the mountain side in four levels, began some time in the 9th century, well before Cambodia's spectacular Angkor Wat complex was built.

At its height of power in the 12th to 13th centuries, the Khmer Empire encompassed much of modern-day Thailand.

'It included everything right up to Lopburi and all of what is now Bangkok,' said Sulak Sivaraksa, a well-known Thai historian and social critic.

The Thai empire didn't really become a regional force until the 15th century, with the rise of Ayutthaya.

Thai invasions of Cambodia, then in its decline, led to the adoption of many Khmer cultural traditions by the Thais, including the Hindu concept of god-kings and court rituals, and an ongoing fondness for Brahman-inspired black magic, especially among Thai politicians

[TCW]

Does anyone think the two countries will go to war over this? As I understood it, in 1962 the International Court of Justice awarded the temple area to Cambodia. Is the whole area now in dispute again or just a small piece of land inside the temple area?

Thank you.

[DickFarang]

Poor Abhisit,

He looked clever and capable. The truth is that he is just one more puppet in the hands of PAD and army.

Thailand should really have an external look on the situation and see how its international image deteriorates everyday, not good for businnes, investments, tourism.... Time to wake up

It's been awhile since I blocked someone's comments and I've forgotten how. Will someone post the steps to block a certain person's posts?

Why should you “block a certain person's posts” ?

Never heard of freedom of speech ?

[DickFarang]

The World court merely said the temple belongs to Cambodia. However the land is in Thailand, claim by PAD based on some water line. So if Cambodia put a temple in Thailand without permission, it is call forced invasion. Or is it not?

If someone make a mistake and build a house on your land, can you confiscate it (the house)? Or must you give your land to the house builder?

It is believed that construction on the temple, built in several stages starting with the Shiva sanctuary at the top and moving down the mountain side in four levels, began some time in the 9th century, well before Cambodia's spectacular Angkor Wat complex was built.

At its height of power in the 12th to 13th centuries, the Khmer Empire encompassed much of modern-day Thailand.

'It included everything right up to Lopburi and all of what is now Bangkok,' said Sulak Sivaraksa, a well-known Thai historian and social critic.

The Thai empire didn't really become a regional force until the 15th century, with the rise of Ayutthaya.

Thai invasions of Cambodia, then in its decline, led to the adoption of many Khmer cultural traditions by the Thais, including the Hindu concept of god-kings and court rituals, and an ongoing fondness for Brahman-inspired black magic, especially among Thai politicians

In historical context, I think, you should say Khmer Empire and Siamese Kingdom.

[Deeral]

Only fools want war. K. Abhisit is aware he's got a few of them in powerfull positions and he needs to maneuver carefully to avoid a war and bloodshed. To use this Preah Vihear issue as method to distract from other internal problems is old-fashioned, used many times in many countries. Thailand is fortunate in a PM who has a bit more education and knowledge of the outside world than most others here. And yes, IMHO!

" Thailand is fortunate in a PM who has a bit more education and knowledge of the outside world than most others here."

This is a huge jump of credibility.

pol pot, Idid Amin and many many of the WORST dictators were educated in the West - far from making good democratic leaders thy returned to their country to wreak havoc on their own people.You also might want to look at who Abhisit hung out with in the UK - you'd see they were quite possibly not the "good influence" type either.

[Siripon]

"Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva on Tuesday demanded Cambodian citizens leave a disputed border area that has been the focus of deadly clashes in recent years." Is the Thai PM demand in Thai language or Cambodian?

Many Cambodians understand Thai and I am sure they have competent translators as they are far better English and French speakers than Thais.

Your language is descended from Khmer after all. As is your culture, your religion, your martial arts, your... sorry, going off topic a tad.

Khmer language influenced Thai to some extent, ie tamruat=truat ตำรวจ =ตรวจ but a much bigger influence came from India with Pali and Sanskrit.

Regarding present day language skills, the Khmers have a big disadvantage as all intellectuals were killed by their fellow Khmers, the Khmer Rouge, and few can match the eloquence and articulate English of Khun Aphisit.

[Thai at Heart]

Only fools want war. K. Abhisit is aware he's got a few of them in powerfull positions and he needs to maneuver carefully to avoid a war and bloodshed. To use this Preah Vihear issue as method to distract from other internal problems is old-fashioned, used many times in many countries. Thailand is fortunate in a PM who has a bit more education and knowledge of the outside world than most others here. And yes, IMHO!

" Thailand is fortunate in a PM who has a bit more education and knowledge of the outside world than most others here."

This is a huge jump of credibility.

pol pot, Idid Amin and many many of the WORST dictators were educated in the West - far from making good democratic leaders thy returned to their country to wreak havoc on their own people.You also might want to look at who Abhisit hung out with in the UK - you'd see they were quite possibly not the "good influence" type either.

If he was treated like the Thai kids that I went to school with, I doubt he enjoyed British boarding school very much at all.

[march]

From PM's letter received at the UN:

For this reason, the MOU serves as a framework for negotiations between Thailand and Cambodia in relation to the land boundary. Thailand therefore expects strict adherence to the MOU. The current problem arises from Cambodia's encroachment of Thailand's territory in violation of international law, and in particular Article 5 of the MOU which states that:

"To facilitate the effective survey along the entire stretch of the common land boundary, authorities of either Government and their agents shall not carry out any work resulting in changes of environment of the frontier zone,

except that which is carried out by the Joint Technical Sub-Commission in the interest of the survey and demarcation."

==========================================

Full letter in PDF format here:

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/admin/specials/sound/file/36374.pdf

[march]

UN Receives Thailand's Petition on Issues with Cambodia

TAN Network

UPDATE : 11 August 2010

The United Nations received clarification letters submitted by the Thai government last night in response to Cambodia's claim over Thailand's threat of force.

Deputy Director General of the Foreign Ministry's Department of Information, Thani Thongpakdee, said the government sent letters of clarification to the presidents of the United Nations General Assembly and the United Nations Security Council last night, regarding Cambodia's allegations that Thailand has threatened to use force in settling the border dispute.

The details of the letter are as following:

1. The Thai prime minister's statement as it appeared in Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen's letter that he submitted to the UN earlier, is misrepresented.

2. Thailand gives importance to maintaining friendly relationships with its neighboring countries.

3.Thailand intends to solve border disputes with Cambodia, based on the MoU signed in 2000.

4. Thailand has always strictly adhered to the UN Charter and has acted in compliance with the 1962 ruling of the International Court of Justice regarding the ownership of the Preah Vihear Temple.

5.Thailand believes a friendly relationship is a cornerstone to the resolution of bilateral conflicts.

Meanwhile, the Secretary for the Foreign Minister, Chawanont Intharakomalsut, said the government does not expect a response from the UN, other than giving explanations and demonstrating the facts.

He added that the letter details how the conflicts between Thailand and Cambodia took place from the beginning.

Regarding Cambodia's encroachment on the disputed land, Chawanont revealed that the ministry will seek a diplomatic discussion with its Cambodian counterpart to express that Cambodia's reluctance to settle the conflicts could delay the listing of the Preah Vihear Temple as a World Heritage site.

Recently, Hun Sen called for the UN's intervention in solving the bilateral border disputes, claiming that the door for negotiation between Thailand and Cambodia has long been closed, and the matter has come to a dead end.

http://www.thailandoutlook.tv/tan/ViewData.aspx?DataID=1033369

[Thai at Heart]

Here is the 2000 Memorandum of Understanding

My link

Seems to only make mention of treaties in 1893 and maps from 1904 and 1907.

[Deeral]

erratum - Amin was in the colonial army not educated in UK

[DickFarang]

"Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva on Tuesday demanded Cambodian citizens leave a disputed border area that has been the focus of deadly clashes in recent years." Is the Thai PM demand in Thai language or Cambodian?

Many Cambodians understand Thai and I am sure they have competent translators as they are far better English and French speakers than Thais.

Your language is descended from Khmer after all. As is your culture, your religion, your martial arts, your... sorry, going off topic a tad.

Khmer language influenced Thai to some extent, ie tamruat=truat ตำรวจ =ตรวจ but a much bigger influence came from India with Pali and Sanskrit.

Regarding present day language skills, the Khmers have a big disadvantage as all intellectuals were killed by their fellow Khmers, the Khmer Rouge, and few can match the eloquence and articulate English of Khun Aphisit.

English language skills are OK, but there are more important things in life.

[DickFarang]

"Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva on Tuesday demanded Cambodian citizens leave a disputed border area that has been the focus of deadly clashes in recent years." Is the Thai PM demand in Thai language or Cambodian?

Let us hope that the Thai Embassy in Phnom Penh was smart enough to hire some people with a good command of the Khmer language.

[hammered]

"Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva on Tuesday demanded Cambodian citizens leave a disputed border area that has been the focus of deadly clashes in recent years." Is the Thai PM demand in Thai language or Cambodian?

Many Cambodians understand Thai and I am sure they have competent translators as they are far better English and French speakers than Thais.

Your language is descended from Khmer after all. As is your culture, your religion, your martial arts, your... sorry, going off topic a tad.

Khmer language influenced Thai to some extent, ie tamruat=truat ตำรวจ =ตรวจ but a much bigger influence came from India with Pali and Sanskrit.

Regarding present day language skills, the Khmers have a big disadvantage as all intellectuals were killed by their fellow Khmers, the Khmer Rouge, and few can match the eloquence and articulate English of Khun Aphisit.

Oh no we arent allowed to have facts brought to us about where Thai langauge influences came from;)

We have to listen to the Hun Sen appreciation and Khmers are superior to Thais posters all based on nothing but personal bias and ignoring a few facts. Quite entertaining though. Dont take them so seriously or let their misiniformed opinions wind you up though

[tig28]

Does anyone think the two countries will go to war over this? As I understood it, in 1962 the International Court of Justice awarded the temple area to Cambodia. Is the whole area now in dispute again or just a small piece of land inside the temple area?

Thank you.

Hi TCW

One would hope that sanity shall prevail and we shall be spared a repeat of the bloodshed of July 2008 . Some feel that internal Thai politics are playing a significant role in inflaming the matter.

Somewhat conflicting reports tend to muddy the waters -- but it seems that the Thai Government has little choice but to accept the ruling of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) at The Hague. It seems they have done so. In June 1962, the court ruled that indeed Cambodia held sovereignty over the Temple and naturally the land on which it stood.

The current dispute concerns surrounding land that was not considered in the ICJ ruling of 1962. This is not the land immediate to the temple referred to in the 1962 ICJ ruling. This is land which includes the only reasonable access to the temple and is undeniably within Thai borders. .

Cambodia has built a road up the 500m. vertical escarpment from the plains of Cambodia below to the temple ...... but this is unlikely to provide a reasonable public entrance to the temple. It seems to be more of a political statement than a public access.

Certain forces within Thailand seem to wish to repudiate the ICJ ruling. International pressure would seem to make this very unlikely.

The attached picture shall give you an idea of the view from adjacent to the Temple (Thailand ??) -- down 500M+ into Cambodia. (left click to enlarge)

[cmsally]

Perhaps a more pressing concern is to where those maps are putting the disputed territory in the Gulf of Siam (which is thought to have more than a few drops of gas/oil).

Does anyone have links to the relevant maps for this area?

Any agreement on the temple is going to set a precedent for the disputed territory at sea.

[whybother]

In 1904-1907, the French and Siamese decided on a line along the "watershed line of the mountain range". That puts the temple on Thai soil.

Some of the maps produced at that time moved off the watershed line around the area of the temple - including, apparently, some official maps - putting the temple on Cambodian soil. There was no discussion as to why the border moved off the watershed line at this area, so IMO, the Thais did not realise this at the time.

The Cambodians used these maps in their arguments to the World Court. The Thais used the principle of their agreement with the French of the watershed line.

The Cambodians won the decision in the world court because a majority (9 to 3) of judges ruled that, basically, the Thais had accepted the maps, so the maps should be used. The decision was NOT because of the Khmer heritage of the site.

It's easy now to see that the maps don't follow the mountain range watershed line (which was the generally agreed line at the time of the original demarcation) with all the satellites and technology, but in 1907 and even 1962 that wouldn't have been so easy.

As far as I understand, in 1904-1907, the temple was never drawn in Thai territory. It can argued back then that the Thai government overlooked this issue, which was either intentional or not. The land around it turned into a squabble after 1962 because Thailand occupied the temple and was compelled to give it back.

Nice little map.

But as I said, the **understanding** was that the border was the "watershed line of the mountain range".

Some of the maps (such as yours) veered of the watershed line ONLY at the temple. But there was no other discussion of whether the temple would be on Thai or Cambodian soil.

The watershed line puts the temple on Thai soil. SOME of the maps, including SOME of the official maps go away from the watershed line, putting the temple on Cambodian soil.

The fact that the Thais failed to pick up on this at that time is their problem now.

The 1962 decision was based on the "official" maps, although not everyone agreed. Some thought it should have been based on the understanding of using the watershed line, especially since nothing else mentioned anything about moving off the watershed line except SOME maps.

[Thai at Heart]

Perhaps a more pressing concern is to where those maps are putting the disputed territory in the Gulf of Siam (which is thought to have more than a few drops of gas/oil).

Does anyone have links to the relevant maps for this area?

Any agreement on the temple is going to set a precedent for the disputed territory at sea.

It appears to me that the precedent was largely set in 1900 approx. I am sure Russia would like to get Alaska back now for the oil and gas, but unfortunately that bit of business was concluded long ago.

[DickFarang]

Does anyone think the two countries will go to war over this? As I understood it, in 1962 the International Court of Justice awarded the temple area to Cambodia. Is the whole area now in dispute again or just a small piece of land inside the temple area?

Thank you.

Hi TCW

One would hope that sanity shall prevail and we shall be spared a repeat of the bloodshed of July 2008 . Some feel that internal Thai politics are playing a significant role in inflaming the matter.

Somewhat conflicting reports tend to muddy the waters -- but it seems that the Thai Government has little choice but to accept the ruling of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) at The Hague. It seems they have done so. In June 1962, the court ruled that indeed Cambodia held sovereignty over the Temple and naturally the land on which it stood.

The current dispute concerns surrounding land that was not considered in the ICJ ruling of 1962. This is not the land immediate to the temple referred to in the 1962 ICJ ruling. This is land which includes the only reasonable access to the temple and is undeniably within Thai borders. .

Cambodia has built a road up the 500m. vertical escarpment from the plains of Cambodia below to the temple ...... but this is unlikely to provide a reasonable public entrance to the temple. It seems to be more of a political statement than a public access.

Certain forces within Thailand seem to wish to repudiate the ICJ ruling. International pressure would seem to make this very unlikely.

The attached picture shall give you an idea of the view from adjacent to the Temple (Thailand ??) -- down 500M+ into Cambodia. (left click to enlarge)

You can even reach Machu Picchu (in Peru) by road.

[whybother]

Simple facts are Thailand nor Siam nor even any of the ancient kingdoms of Sukhothai or Ayutthada existed when this temple was constructed.

Thailand has stolen the land the temple was on and encroached into Cambodia many times in the last century. Remember they have previously used military force to occupy the temple. The International Court of Justice intervened last time and forced the Thai military to withdraw, awarding the temple to Cambodia.

<snip>

Cambodia didn't exist even when the French-Siam treaty was agreed, did it?

Edited August 11, 2010 by whybother

[DickFarang]

Perhaps a more pressing concern is to where those maps are putting the disputed territory in the Gulf of Siam (which is thought to have more than a few drops of gas/oil).

Does anyone have links to the relevant maps for this area?

Any agreement on the temple is going to set a precedent for the disputed territory at sea.

It appears to me that the precedent was largely set in 1900 approx. I am sure Russia would like to get Alaska back now for the oil and gas, but unfortunately that bit of business was concluded long ago.

And Napoleon Bonaparte sold Louisiana also long ago.

[Deeral]

Russia and the Sates agreed a clear cut deal on Alaska.

THe Thai borders and those of Cambodia were set up by the Brits and the French to serve THEIR purposes not Thailand's or Cambodia's so it's hardly surprising that the edges of these countries are always contested (don't forget the South of Thailand too) - it is a shame however that these issues are used by governments for their own advantage not for the benefit of those who live there.