Cambodia Must Remove Flag: PM Abhisit

[webfact]

P Penh must remove flag: PM

By THE NATION

Abhisit talks tough after PAD raises issue during protest outside his office

Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said yesterday that Cambodia had no right to rise its national flag over the disputed border area adjacent to the Preah Vihear Temple.

"If there is such flag, it needs to be taken down," Abhisit told reporters, but noted that he did not know where exactly this flag has been raised.

Abhisit made the comment after the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) raised the issue while protesting outside the Prime Minister's Office.

Cambodia agreed earlier to removed two stone tablets at Wat Keo Sekha Kirisvara, which indicated that the area belonged to Cambodia and had been invaded by Thai troops in 2008

Abhisit said Cambodia did not have the right to declare sovereignty in the area, because Thailand was also claiming the land.

The two countries have been at loggerheads over areas adjacent to Preah Vihaer for long time, though the boundary in the temple's vicinity has not yet been demarcated.

Preah Vihear, as ruled by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 1962, is situated in a territory under the sovereignty of Cambodia, but Thailand is arguing that it owns the 4.6 square kilometres area surrounding the temple, and the land the stone ruins are standing on.

Cambodia, meanwhile, claims that the 1:200000-scale map made by France showed that the Preah Vihear and its vicinity were on the Cambodian side. The ICJ used this map for its ruling.

The PAD is mounting pressure on Abhisit's government, demanding that it scrap the memorandum of understanding (MoU) on land-boundary demarcation signed with Cambodia since 2000 and use force to evict the Cambodian community living in the area.

The group first got angry when Phnom Penh managed to get a World Heritage Site inscription for the temple in 2008. The group, along with Abhisit as opposition leader, accused the then-government of Samak Sundaravej of supporting Cambodia's application for the status.

When Abhisit took office with PAD's blessings in late 2008, he maintained his position to oppose Cambodia over inscription. He stood strong against Preah Vihear's management plan proposed by Phnom Penh on grounds that the conflict over the temple's surrounding area had not yet been settled.

Abhisit told reporters yesterday that the ongoing conflict with Cambodia would be a good excuse for him to continue blocking the Preah Vihear management plan.

However, his plans to settle the boundary disputes are different from those of the PAD. He believes that the joint-boundary mechanism set up in accordance with the 2000 MoU could work to end the problem. The PAD said the MoU, which was signed under the Democrat-led government with Chuan Leekpai at the reins, would never work because it recognised the French map that indicated the area belonged to Cambodia.

-- The Nation 2011-01-28

[Sydebolle]

Well, am I getting this right or wrong? According to the UNESCO, the ICC ruling back in the early sixties and the acceptance of the French mapping some 100 years ago there should be ....... no disputed area left

[SouthernMan3]

Yea, get that flag out of Thailand !

[brahmburgers]

Canada and the US share administration and maintenance of a large tract of land straddling their borders: Glacier National Park. Other countries cooperate on other border-straddling properties. Could Thailand and Cambodia cooperate on Preah Vihar? My grandoise self says 'yes.' My practical self says 'no.' .....no more than SE Asian countries implement a common currency, or freedom of movement between countries for SE Asians. They are still decades away from even formally discussing such issues.

[Robby nz]

See from a report today that the yellows dont really know what they want.

Shortly before 6pm and not long after the male speaker onstage promised that the PAD is not calling for war, his female colleague read a PAD leadership statement of the day, urging the Thai government to repeal the MoU unilaterally and "use military might to pressure [Cambodia] into drafting a new MoU".

So we dont want war but want military might used.... and the difference is?

[khaowong1]

The difference is, is , is ... I'm right and your wrong, so there.

[Crash999]

Well, am I getting this right or wrong? According to the UNESCO, the ICC ruling back in the early sixties and the acceptance of the French mapping some 100 years ago there should be ....... no disputed area left

It's not quite so simple. That territory traded hands for hundreds of years following the collapse of the Khmer Empire, for example here's a map from the 17th century showing that area under the control of Siam. As French (and other) colonial influence in the region grew the border between Cambodia and Thailand was in dispute. Finally an international group was set up to decide exactly where the border would be, and both France and Thailand agreed as a conclusion that the border would follow the watershed (the line of cliffs). This meant that the temple would be within Thailand as it sits within the Thai portion of the watershed, on top of the cliffs.

However, 3 years later France produced a few maps showing the watershed as the border with the exception of the temple. Cambodia (and eventually the UN commission ruling) argued that because Thailand didn't object to receiving this updated map it meant that the temple is within Cambodia's territory- there was no reply/response at all from Thailand. And there was at least one visit to the temple by Thai diplomats who were greeted there by French diplomats. Basically, Cambodia's argument is that Thailand didn't say anything (to the UN) for many years after receiving those maps so the territory should belong to Cambodia. Thailand's argument is that the maps didn't follow the original agreement, and those who received the maps weren't authorized to make an official response on behalf of Thailand.

My opinion is that either Thailand overlooked the inclusion of the territory in Cambodia (I'd love to see a copy of those 1907 maps), or more likely that there was some unusual agreement going on between the French and Thai governments. The fact that as soon as French troops left the temple it was occupied by Thai troops shows that the temple was on the minds of the Thai government, and not ignored. Why the Thai government didn't raise objections earlier is anyone's guess, as by now most or all of those involved in any discussion with the French government over the temple have probably passed away.

Edited January 28, 2011 by Crash999

[aperturebkk]

My wife is from the small town (Sao Thong Chai) that borders this so called thai site. When i asked her and her family is this Thailand or Khmer land - they all replied, it's khmer and always has been. It's recent world heritage listing has simply made it appealing to some bkk thai's. As it is so close to the actual border Thailand thinks it has enough ground to claim this site. Ask any Khmer about who this belongs to and i am afraid Thailand should be worried. 90% of maps throughout the world show this as Cambodian territory. This is a popular tourist site that can benefit locals on both sides of the mountain. Thailand needs to accept the facts, move on and let the local towns in that area prosper without the threat of border skirmishes.

"The Preah Vihear Temple is a Khmer Hindu temple situated atop a 525-meter cliff in the Dângrêk Mountains. The temple complex runs 800m along a north-south axis. It was built mainly during the 11th and 12th centuries during the reigns of the kings Suryavarman I (and Suryavarman II).

Ownership of the temple by Cambodia has been under dispute from neighbouring Thailand. In 1962 the International Court of Justice in the Hague ruled that it belonged to Cambodia. "

[Payboy]

Tablet, Flag - what's next - Hun Sens soiled underpants?

I think the Khmers are just taking the piss on Abhisit.

[Insight]

P Penh must remove flag: PM

"If there is such flag, it needs to be taken down," Abhisit told reporters, but noted that he did not know where exactly this flag has been raised.

The Nation. The website has a Flash animation as a welcome page.

Which is an advertisement.

Which they make sure every user who visits the site should suffer.

"Pitiful" doesn't even begin to describe it.

[kuffki]

See from a report today that the yellows dont really know what they want.

Shortly before 6pm and not long after the male speaker onstage promised that the PAD is not calling for war, his female colleague read a PAD leadership statement of the day, urging the Thai government to repeal the MoU unilaterally and "use military might to pressure [Cambodia] into drafting a new MoU".

So we dont want war but want military might used.... and the difference is?

None, i am only little confused what military might she was referring to?

And has she considered that Cambodia may also have that same might, but with the difference as Cambodia has nothing to lose, i mean Its not even a 10th of a developed country as Thailand, so who would suffer more if the war was to begin?

[Crash999]

When i asked her and her family is this Thailand or Khmer land - they all replied, it's khmer and always has been.

...

Ask any Khmer about who this belongs to and i am afraid Thailand should be worried.

Just because something is Khmer doesn't make it Cambodian just as not all Khmer people hold Cambodian passports.

There are many other historical maps showing the temple complex as part of Siam- here's one from a couple of decades prior to the map in question that shows even Angkor as part of Siam. This map too was drawn up by the French.

The current border was drawn up by an international commission, as mentioned before. Included in the commission was France (Cambodia) and Thailand and both agreed to define the border by the watershed. Why a later map was drawn up with the temple as part of French Indochina (Cambodia) and the real reason why the Thai government didn't immediately protest to the UN is something we'll probably never know.

[johncat1]

Come now children stop your silly tantrums after all you are supposed to be LEADERS of your respective countries.

Simple solution fly BOTH flags side by side as a sign of goodwill

BUT of course Thais cannot be seen to lose face can they ?

[mccw]

My wife is from the small town (Sao Thong Chai) that borders this so called thai site. When i asked her and her family is this Thailand or Khmer land - they all replied, it's khmer and always has been. It's recent world heritage listing has simply made it appealing to some bkk thai's. As it is so close to the actual border Thailand thinks it has enough ground to claim this site. Ask any Khmer about who this belongs to and i am afraid Thailand should be worried. 90% of maps throughout the world show this as Cambodian territory. This is a popular tourist site that can benefit locals on both sides of the mountain. Thailand needs to accept the facts, move on and let the local towns in that area prosper without the threat of border skirmishes.

"The Preah Vihear Temple is a Khmer Hindu temple situated atop a 525-meter cliff in the Dângrêk Mountains. The temple complex runs 800m along a north-south axis. It was built mainly during the 11th and 12th centuries during the reigns of the kings Suryavarman I (and Suryavarman II).

Ownership of the temple by Cambodia has been under dispute from neighbouring Thailand. In 1962 the International Court of Justice in the Hague ruled that it belonged to Cambodia. "

There are many khmre empire era temples in east thailand and southern loas. Should all of those lands be given back to what is now cambodia? ofcourse not! no more than all the lands of cambodia, loas and burma should be given back to the more recent dominant asian empire of Siam ie Thailand.

International bodies arn't too good at drawing lines on maps; such drawings are the reasons behind most of the conflicts across the former colonial empires. the only people who can sort this out are those directley affected.

The best way to deal with the problem would be to set it up as a joint venture tourist location and border crossing point; share the profits 50-50; could make it a stop on the way to ankor wat. Maybe throw in a couple of casinos to really make it a go-er for the vested interests on both sides.

[retell]

Well, am I getting this right or wrong? According to the UNESCO, the ICC ruling back in the early sixties and the acceptance of the French mapping some 100 years ago there should be ....... no disputed area left

It's not quite so simple. That territory traded hands for hundreds of years following the collapse of the Khmer Empire, for example here's a map from the 17th century showing that area under the control of Siam. As French (and other) colonial influence in the region grew the border between Cambodia and Thailand was in dispute. Finally an international group was set up to decide exactly where the border would be, and both France and Thailand agreed as a conclusion that the border would follow the watershed (the line of cliffs). This meant that the temple would be within Thailand as it sits within the Thai portion of the watershed, on top of the cliffs.

However, 3 years later France produced a few maps showing the watershed as the border with the exception of the temple. Cambodia (and eventually the UN commission ruling) argued that because Thailand didn't object to receiving this updated map it meant that the temple is within Cambodia's territory- there was no reply/response at all from Thailand. And there was at least one visit to the temple by Thai diplomats who were greeted there by French diplomats. Basically, Cambodia's argument is that Thailand didn't say anything (to the UN) for many years after receiving those maps so the territory should belong to Cambodia. Thailand's argument is that the maps didn't follow the original agreement, and those who received the maps weren't authorized to make an official response on behalf of Thailand.

My opinion is that either Thailand overlooked the inclusion of the territory in Cambodia (I'd love to see a copy of those 1907 maps), or more likely that there was some unusual agreement going on between the French and Thai governments. The fact that as soon as French troops left the temple it was occupied by Thai troops shows that the temple was on the minds of the Thai government, and not ignored. Why the Thai government didn't raise objections earlier is anyone's guess, as by now most or all of those involved in any discussion with the French government over the temple have probably passed away.

could it be the made the reply in thai what could be diffecult to read for french?

[mccw]

Tablet, Flag - what's next - Hun Sens soiled underpants?

I think the Khmers are just taking the piss on Abhisit.

Hun Sen - Thaksins old mate (no real mate obviously; only business) . Stirring up a bit of trouble and hassle for dems before the upcoming ellection, and the PAD fools are falling for the bait hook line and sinker, really stupid, at least Kasit got some marbles. COOL is the word for how this gov has gone about everything from reds protesting to provokations from cambods to squables with coalitions, jai yen yen, dee mak mak

I wonder if the reason joint projects with china for hi speed rail, they switch plans to link from thailand through loas up to china, more difficult way through many mountians! instead of though cambodia and up through vietnam like the origonal plan. Maybe punish / not trust because of the on going ballshit. Cambodia loose more by this shortsighted policy i think.

[jayjay0]

Canada and the US share administration and maintenance of a large tract of land straddling their borders: Glacier National Park. Other countries cooperate on other border-straddling properties. Could Thailand and Cambodia cooperate on Preah Vihar? My grandoise self says 'yes.' My practical self says 'no.' .....no more than SE Asian countries implement a common currency, or freedom of movement between countries for SE Asians. They are still decades away from even formally discussing such issues.

Actually a few years ago they were talking about a visa good for Thailand and Cambodia with plans to make it good for five different countries. I guess that is on hold.

As far as Glacier Park goes they may work together but they both end there property at the 49th parallel.There is no dispute what so ever about who owns what. You need to go through the customs check point to get into the other country. Same as any other border crossing.

[bangkokrick]

Think you might find it here Mark.

[bangkokrick]

This could also be of interest.

[warfie]

Aren't there more important things to be worried about and spending time on?

[notime]

Aren't there more important things to be worried about and spending time on?

Yes, exactly. And since the disputed area is about 1,000,000th part of the land territory of Thailand and Cambodia is a much poorer country how about Thailand give that area to Cambodia in a gesture of true Buddhist compassion? Both countries could only gain from cross-border cooperation in that area and general closer relationship. But is "giving away a piece of Thai soil", even if that is only a disputed piece, conceivable at all to the psyche of Thai public? And is there any politician here who would dare to show true Leadership?

[Buchholz]

Come now children stop your silly tantrums after all you are supposed to be LEADERS of your respective countries.

Simple solution fly BOTH flags side by side as a sign of goodwill

BUT of course Thais cannot be seen to lose face can they ?

An even better solution is NO flags... of which the regional Cambodian Army commanders agree with...

Cambodian military commanders General Chea Dara and Major-General Srey Doek agree with Thailand's demand that the flag raised at Wat Keo Sekha Kirisvara be taken down

The Nation - January 29, 2011

As this is the third provocation that they have subsequently backed down from (2 signs and 1 flag), perhaps it's the Cambodians that are losing face over this agreeably childish display.

.

Edited January 28, 2011 by Buchholz

[diehard60]

Yea, get that flag out of Thailand !

Well I guess the yellow shirts are right again to use deadly force and the red shirsts are wrong again!!!!! Who says the flag is in thailand anyway? A yellow Shirt??????????????????? They dont ever lie now do they?

[diehard60]

See from a report today that the yellows dont really know what they want.

Shortly before 6pm and not long after the male speaker onstage promised that the PAD is not calling for war, his female colleague read a PAD leadership statement of the day, urging the Thai government to repeal the MoU unilaterally and "use military might to pressure [Cambodia] into drafting a new MoU".

So we dont want war but want military might used.... and the difference is?

Typical Yellow shirt thinking. :jap:

[Buchholz]

Yea, get that flag out of Thailand !

Well I guess the yellow shirts are right again to use deadly force and the red shirsts are wrong again!!!!! Who says the flag is in thailand anyway? A yellow Shirt??????????????????? They dont ever lie now do they?

It's in a disputed land and inappropriate to be flagged by anyone, of which apparently the Cambodian generals agree with the yellow shirts in that it should be removed.

still, yours is a pretty good rant.

[SouthernMan3]

Yea, get that flag out of Thailand !

Well I guess the yellow shirts are right again to use deadly force and the red shirsts are wrong again!!!!!

Now you are getting the idea !

[Buchholz]

Yea, get that flag out of Thailand !

Well I guess the yellow shirts are right again to use deadly force and the red shirsts are wrong again!!!!! Who says the flag is in thailand anyway? A yellow Shirt??????????????????? They dont ever lie now do they?

It's in a disputed land and inappropriate to be flagged by anyone, of which apparently the Cambodian generals agree with the yellow shirts in that it should be removed.

still, yours is a pretty good rant.

Interesting Cambodia is apparently ignoring their own generals

Cambodian Flag still not brought down on the disputed soil

BANGKOK, 30 January 2011 (NNT)-Deputy Prime Minister for Security Suthep Tuegsuban said he is ready to talk to the Yellow Shirts hoping it would ease the situation surrounding the territorial issue between Thailand and Cambodia.

The Cambodian flag erected in the disputed area has sparked anger on the Thai side. To solve the problem, Mr. Suthep has coordinated with the 2nd Army Region Commander to talk with the Cambodia side about the removal of the flag.

However, he further added that he would like to inform Somdech Hun Sen, the Cambodian Prime Minister, that the Thai government is not involved in the Yellow Shirt rally in anyway.

Concerning road closures due to the rally, Mr Suthep said the government is expected to take a few more days to put a plan into action, hoping the Yellow Shirt would also comply with the government’s request not to cause any further traffic gridlocks.

-- NNT 2011-01-30

Edited January 30, 2011 by Buchholz

[animatic]

name='Sydebolle' timestamp='1296179195' post='4180257'

Well, am I getting this right or wrong? According to the UNESCO, the ICC ruling back in the early sixties and the acceptance of the French mapping some 100 years ago there should be ....... no disputed area left

It's not quite so simple. That territory traded hands for hundreds of years following the collapse of the Khmer Empire, for example here's a map from the 17th century showing that area under the control of Siam. As French (and other) colonial influence in the region grew the border between Cambodia and Thailand was in dispute. Finally an international group was set up to decide exactly where the border would be, and both France and Thailand agreed as a conclusion that the border would follow the watershed (the line of cliffs). This meant that the temple would be within Thailand as it sits within the Thai portion of the watershed, on top of the cliffs.

However, 3 years later France produced a few maps showing the watershed as the border with the exception of the temple. Cambodia (and eventually the UN commission ruling) argued that because Thailand didn't object to receiving this updated map it meant that the temple is within Cambodia's territory- there was no reply/response at all from Thailand. And there was at least one visit to the temple by Thai diplomats who were greeted there by French diplomats. Basically, Cambodia's argument is that Thailand didn't say anything (to the UN) for many years after receiving those maps so the territory should belong to Cambodia. Thailand's argument is that the maps didn't follow the original agreement, and those who received the maps weren't authorized to make an official response on behalf of Thailand.

My opinion is that either Thailand overlooked the inclusion of the territory in Cambodia (I'd love to see a copy of those 1907 maps), or more likely that there was some unusual agreement going on between the French and Thai governments. The fact that as soon as French troops left the temple it was occupied by Thai troops shows that the temple was on the minds of the Thai government, and not ignored. Why the Thai government didn't raise objections earlier is anyone's guess, as by now most or all of those involved in any discussion with the French government over the temple have probably passed away.

could it be the made the reply in thai what could be diffecult to read for french?

A whole nation with French governed neighbors, right next door

and NO ONE can be found that speaks fluent french to translate... yeah right.

Ignoring that the word for foreigner is farang,

and french franag sei which equals française.

[Cnxforever]

Canada and the US share administration and maintenance of a large tract of land straddling their borders: Glacier National Park. Other countries cooperate on other border-straddling properties. Could Thailand and Cambodia cooperate on Preah Vihar? My grandoise self says 'yes.' My practical self says 'no.' .....no more than SE Asian countries implement a common currency, or freedom of movement between countries for SE Asians. They are still decades away from even formally discussing such issues.

I agree with you ASEAN is a loose association of opportunistic nations - who all want to gain economically but none of them wants to give anything. They are all 2faced and don't trust each other - some of the corruptest governments in the world are united here - that's the only thing they have in common - greed - and their leadership all pray to one god - MONEY!

What the PM now suddenly - under pressure from the extreme right nationalists - describes as "disputed area" is just ridiculous! First it's a sign- then a flag - Whats next ??? - Start a war over the laundry of a Cambodian soldier who hangs his military trousers out to dry in the "disputed" area ??

Instead of disseminating stupid rhetoric the PM and all Thais should start to do some soul searching and face the brutal truth - besides all the fake niceties politicians exchange during ASEAN meetings - none of their neighbors either likes or trusts them!

It is Thailand who has to change - and not everybody around them! Sad thing is it will not happen there are just to many primitive forces at work here who are 50 years behind our time!

And make no mistake the people who have a big mouth here now are not the ones who will sent their sons and daughters to die if an armed conflict should start - they will sent the poor to die to defend their luxury lifestyles!

Approx. a thousand soldiers died in the Baan Rom Klao area in 1986/87 because of a similar land "dispute" - most of them Thai only to see Gen. Chavalit and his Laotian counterpart Gen. Sisawat kissing and hugging each other a month later in Bangkok wondering what the fuss was all about - insulting the memory of those who died!! And why did they have to give their lives?

Because a few narrow minded , stupid politicians and Generals where not able to talk to each other in a civilized way and find a peaceful solution. The war at the end actually solved nothing!

If Thailand does not adapt and tries become a contributing and respected member of ASEAN and the international community - soon the only country for them left to associate with will be Burma!

[lovelomsak]

Well, am I getting this right or wrong? According to the UNESCO, the ICC ruling back in the early sixties and the acceptance of the French mapping some 100 years ago there should be ....... no disputed area left

+1