Buchholz Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 PM: Thai troops exercise right of self-defence to protect sovereignty BANGKOK, Feb 5 -- Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva expressed condolences to families of villagers and a soldier who died during Thai-Cambodian border clashes and affirmed that Thai soldiers had exercised the right of self-defence to protect sovereignty following Cambodian troops opening fire on a Thai military base at Phu Ma Khua area of Si Sa Ket on Friday. Mr Abhisit held a press conference after a meeting with several ministers and top security officials including Defence Minister Gen Prawit Wongsuwan, Foreign Affairs Minister Kasit Piromya, Army chief Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha and Natural Resources and Environment Minister Suwit Khunkitti at Government House to assess the situation. He said the army had carried out its duty to protect the country’s territory in the border clashes between Thai and Cambodia troops near Phu Ma Khua area of Si Sa Ket on Friday through Saturday morning. The premier urged the public to have confidence that the government and army would never invade its neighbour and called on Thai people to support the armed forces in protecting the country’s sovereignty. He said the Ministry of Foreign Affairs would issue a statement providing correct information about the military clash at the Thai-Cambodian border for the international community, foreign diplomats, the United Nations Security Council and the World Heritage Committee of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). A letter has already been sent to the UN Security Council clarifying incidents related to deadly border clashes between Thailand and Cambodia. Mr Abhisit said the World Heritage Committee would be informed that the area at Preah Vihear Temple was very sensitive and should suspend its listing as a World Heritage Site. Meanwhile UNESCO issued a statement saying that its Director-General Irina Bokova expressed her deep concern at the sudden escalation of tensions between Cambodia and Thailand on the issue of the Temple of Preah Vihear being inscribed on the World Heritage List. Reports indicate that troops on both sides have exchanged fire resulting in loss of life and also some damage to the temple. Bokova expressed her distress at this sudden turn of events and called upon both sides to exercise restraint for the sake of the preservation of the Temple of Preah Vihear and to open direct channels of communication at the highest levels to defuse the tension. In a related development, Thai Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya invited foreign ambassadors to be briefed on the latest clashes between Thai and Cambodian troops Saturday afternoon. The meeting was attended by ambassadors of eight member countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), except from Cambodia, the ambassadors from the five member countries of the UN Security Council and ambassadors from those countries who are involved with the World Heritage Committee. The Thai foreign ministry informed them the details about the skirmishes which occurred along the Thai-Cambodian border and the meeting of the Joint Commission (JC) on bilateral cooperation between Thailand and Cambodian which was held on Friday only a few hours before the clashes broke out. "The Thai foreign minister told them that Thailand had retaliated against Cambodian troops as needed for self-defence with maximum restraint. We do not want the situation to intensify and affect the overall relations of both kingdoms. We are willing to use all negotiation frameworks to create better understanding to solve the problem at the earliest," stated Foreign Ministry spokesman Thani Thongpakdi. Mr Thani added the Indonesian Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa, as ASEAN chair, is scheduled to visit Thailand Feb 8 to hear a briefing on the situation from the Thai side and would also visit Phnom Penh regarding the matter. -- TNA 2011-01-05 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buchholz Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 PM seeks Preah Vihear registration suspension BANGKOK, 5 February 2011 (NNT) – Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva is targeting to seek a suspension on the registration of the Preah Vihear Temple as the world heritage site in the wake of the recent fatal border clashes between Thai and Cambodian troops. Speaking after meeting with security and foreign affairs officials, Prime Minister Abhisit expressed his condolences on behalf of the Thai government for the losses in the border clashes. He confirmed that the Thai troops have been trying their best to protect the national sovereignty. The Prime Minister then proposed that the Preah Vihear Temple registration be suspended. He said that the Thai Ministry of Foreign Affairs will send letters to the United Nations Security Council, the World Heritage Committee and foreign ambassadors to explain the incident. Upon his concerns with villagers along the border, Prime Minister Abhisit said he has tasked Interior Minister Chavarat Charnvirakul with ordering governors in provinces along the border, especially Si Sa Ket province to take care of residents and support operation of the military. According to the recent report from local public health office, 17 people have been injured from the border clashes so far, including 14 army officers and three civilians. -- NNT 2011-01-05 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buchholz Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 (edited) A Thai man is seen at a crater allegedly caused by a shell in Si Sa Ket province near the 11th-century Preah Vihear temple at the border between Thailand and Cambodia February 5, 2011. Deadly fighting broke out between Thai and Cambodian soldiers on Friday and Saturday. REUTERS http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/slideshow/photo//110205/ids_photos_india_wl/ra3423634917.jpg/#photoViewer=/110205/ids_photos_india_wl/ra3423634917.jpg Edited September 18, 2011 by metisdead Copyrighted Reuters photo removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkawish Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 Buchholz.... Thx for the video.... much appreciated. Just hope that many other Farang would appreciate the clip too, even though it is in Thai. Thx again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buchholz Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 (edited) In this photo released by China's Xinhua News Agency, Thailand's 2nd Region Army Commander Lt. Gen. Tawatchai Samutsakhon, left, and Cambodia's 4th Region Army Commander Maj. Gen. Chea Mon, right, hold talks at Chorm Sra Ngam border checkpoint in Anlong Veng district, Undor Meanchey Province, Cambodia, on Saturday, Feb. 5, 2011. AP http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/slideshow/photo//110205/ids_photos_india_wl/ra3423634917.jpg/#photoViewer=/110205/481/urn_publicid_ap_org_ba8ec409647942da8954a5cccb1dc5d8 Edited September 18, 2011 by metisdead Copyrighted AP photo removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Democrat Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 What next? The government won't be able to handle it, Its different fighting with another country as opposed to slaughtering your own civilians, the army will come out and say the government don't know how to handle it, and then fast forward to the coup that we all know is coming based on the reds coming back into power at the next election, and a desire by the elite to stop that at all costs. Where did you get that crystal ball? add Mara releasing all heck >>> it's documented in the last paragraphs. here >>> http://www.nationmul...y-30147875.html He is a very confused poster. The elite's trying to stop the red shirts. What a laugh does he not know that the elites are where the red shirts get there money did he really think that it was gathered up in collections from the poor people they are supposed to represent.:jap: Jay0JayO HoHoHo yes good laugh but you are more wrong than right. I have seen with my own eyes poor people give to the cause, and give to religions etc etc. when they have nothing themselves. Really astounding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkawish Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 If you are a conformist, a corporate structured executive, a CEO or an accountant.... probably my style of expression would upset you the most.... because it just does not fall into line nor conform to many societal standards and expectations..... Succinctly I choose to write this way and can not be bothered with many proper punctuations any more.... in my remaining life span.... Why bother to write at all if you can not be bothered to make it understandable? Whatever people in general do not understand, they are always prepared to dislike; the incomprehensible is always the obnoxious.- L. E. Landon Being a global mod.... you ought to know better.... whether or not a written message is understood by the majority of the readers or not.... Just to comfort you and needle your wandering erring attitude a little.... There are even several former Cambodian as well as Vietnamese refugees who have now successfully and fluently resettled in different continents, who also come across my posts and responses.... and they understood my message and intent.... and were kind enough to respond.... However, if you and some others who ought to know and understand The King's English better by virtue of being Farang; could not read, nor understand, nor comprehend the intended meanings in my pose and response.... I would then humbly consider it as your loss, my friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TAWP Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 (edited) Why bother to write at all if you can not be bothered to make it understandable? Whatever people in general do not understand, they are always prepared to dislike; the incomprehensible is always the obnoxious.- L. E. Landon Being a global mod.... you ought to know better.... whether or not a written message is understood by the majority of the readers or not.... Wait, what? UG never has been [and never will be ] a moderator on this forum. Edit: And my 8k'th post wasted on this. Edited February 5, 2011 by TAWP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animatic Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 (edited) There are many competing factions of Elites, with many interconnecting ties, and many interconnecting rivalries. To see them as one large entity is not to see the bigger picture. Asian culture also values stability, particularly from the older generations. And there is a bigger picture still. There is not a class war in Thailand, but 65 million, daily, kow tow, class wars, fought with ever bow , wei and face making business deal. As you rise up the ranks the battles have greater collateral damage, and the need of stability grows all the greater, as long as control and increased face is maintained. The so called elites are those that have long played the game best, and those trying to knock them off the hill are the newcomers almost doing it as well, often with fewer scruples. The mind set here is not one of us against them, keep the poor down, but one of each and every other man wants to one up every one else he meets, and makes alliances of convenience to do so. It will take much more than a proletariat take over of the reins of power to stop this centuries old pattern of thought. They will just be trading one elite for a less experienced, and less well trained to govern, one for a generation or more. That that historically has been very bad for the common man. Edited February 5, 2011 by animatic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calbears Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 Your writing style is rather annoying. How about a complete paragraph with a topic sentence? Perhaps you better grab your gun and go fight for Thailand. Don't let those Thai soldiers get all the glory SomTumTiger.... you are quite right, my style of writing is truly individualistic.... it is intended for that specific purpose.... solely.... and intentionally as well.... you see for over 30+ yrs, your truly have had been delivering written doc, very well polished and politically correct, to some power to be and power that be.... now that I am an independent with no 'boss' to answer to, except to my wife, kids and talking birds.... a position that many wish to be in.... I could pour out my heart without having to weight.... WHAT WOULD BE SOME OF THE MORE SERIOUS POSSIBLE OUTCOMES.... if a comma or semi colon or quotation mark is missing or left out unintentionally here and there.... L O L If you are a conformist, a corporate structured executive, a CEO or an accountant.... probably my style of expression would upset you the most.... because it just does not fall into line nor conform to many societal standards and expectations..... Succinctly I choose to write this way and can not be bothered with many proper punctuations any more.... in my remaining life span.... :jap: In regard to grabbing my bazooka and go to fight for Thailand.... just for your private info.... I am in Thailand now.... and have been here on and off.... ever since 1980.... when the UN and other respectable nations all recognize that the UN dug well.... as well as the parcels of land where the Camb refugee camp ground were situated.... belong to Thailand sovereignty exclusively.... just how the new generations.... ever dare to claim.... otherwise.... is really beyond my imagination.... a majority of Cambodian refugees who have now very affluently resettled in US, Australia and European countries, would scratch their heads and wondered just.... what is happening in Southeast Asia.... particularly in Thailand and Cambodia in reference to the dispute of border lands which in 1980 were never any question-- that they belong to Thailand.... :jap: which also could be confirmed by many UN as well as International Red Cross documentations.... :jap: Mkawish, with all due respect, sir, you are not in a position to tell people how the Cambodian refugees think of the current situation between Cambodia and Thailand right now. Like I mentioned earlier, many Khmer refugees who stationed in Thailand before leaving for third countries rather had bitter experience from ill treatments by Thai soldiers and many Thais with the exception of a few good ones. Not to be offensive to you, sir, I want to add that the sentiments of those refugees who now have settled in third countries are not much different from those currently living in Cambodia regarding this conflict. Most Cambodians believe that their neighboring countries always want to encroach to steal their lands. This is not because of false propaganda or fake history lessons. If you take a little time to read the following Wiki article, you'll understand how a Khmer person with his or her love to the country feels like: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_ages_of_Cambodia I also do not see any relationship between the lands in Thailand where refugee camps were built on and the one in dispute. The Cambodians are not trying to take the lands that the camps were on. They just want the land that the French and the Thai King at that time agreed upon and signed in 1904. The huge population of Khmer living the northeastern part of Thailand is in itself a proof of who used to own the area for the longest time in the earlier part of the history of this region. Khmer people get tired of always getting the shorter end of the stick when it comes to engaging in any conflicts with their neighbors. They feel like now is the time. Let's get a fair deal out of it. They don't want to get bullied once more. That's why they rather have another party to decide whether this piece of land belongs to Thailand or Cambodia. Whereas the Thai side is chickened out, they have no courage to face the truth, they're afraid that history is not on their side and cannot fathom any possibility of losing this 4.6 square km to Cambodia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 <snipped ... see above for full quote> They just want the land that the French and the Thai King at that time agreed upon and signed in 1904. From what I see (ie IMO), that is the crux of the issue. From what I understand, the French and the Thais agreed to use the watershed as the border. For some reason, the border moved off the watershed around the temple. But apparently the Thias accepted the maps used to demarcate the border, particularly the 1907 map which had the temple (and surrounding areas) in Cambodia. What I expect happened (therefore, only my opinion) is that the Thais didn't realise that the 1907 map moved off the agreed watershed border line. The Thais, working of the original agreement, would have assumed that the temple fell into Thai territory. It was only later that the Thais realised that the maps were "wrong", hence their dispute of the real ownership of the area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rushdentillidie Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 Can anybody confirm what this is really all about? The amount of the land or a ruined temple is not worth fighting for!! From different sources are reading between the lines, there seem to be a hidden agenda which relates to drilling rights in the gulf old Thailand (reason NATO and the US are in Afghanistan). Please forgive my lack on local geographical knowledge but it seems this land distribute would not have any bearing on maritime boards or am i wrong. This is what i believe is the real motive, because i cant believe that anybody is so stupid to go to war other losing face. If it did come to war then i think it would be a stalemate, The Thai army would be able to hold the land but at a much higher cost. Like most people say Cambodia has the experience and will to fight. They are more than capable of giving the Thais a bloody nose, but neither the manpower or weapons to take and hold land for a long period. Any thoughts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 Can anybody confirm what this is really all about? The amount of the land or a ruined temple is not worth fighting for!! From different sources are reading between the lines, there seem to be a hidden agenda which relates to drilling rights in the gulf old Thailand (reason NATO and the US are in Afghanistan). Please forgive my lack on local geographical knowledge but it seems this land distribute would not have any bearing on maritime boards or am i wrong. This is what i believe is the real motive, because i cant believe that anybody is so stupid to go to war other losing face. If it did come to war then i think it would be a stalemate, The Thai army would be able to hold the land but at a much higher cost. Like most people say Cambodia has the experience and will to fight. They are more than capable of giving the Thais a bloody nose, but neither the manpower or weapons to take and hold land for a long period. Any thoughts I would doubt that anyone can "confirm" it for you, but I haven't seen any circumstantial evidence of it having anything to do with the gulf. Some people seem to think that one country giving up land around the temple will give them more area around the gulf, but I don't think they are related. Regardless of what happens around the temple, neither country will want to give up any claimed territory in the gulf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rushdentillidie Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 Can anybody confirm what this is really all about? The amount of the land or a ruined temple is not worth fighting for!! From different sources are reading between the lines, there seem to be a hidden agenda which relates to drilling rights in the gulf old Thailand (reason NATO and the US are in Afghanistan). Please forgive my lack on local geographical knowledge but it seems this land distribute would not have any bearing on maritime boards or am i wrong. This is what i believe is the real motive, because i cant believe that anybody is so stupid to go to war other losing face. If it did come to war then i think it would be a stalemate, The Thai army would be able to hold the land but at a much higher cost. Like most people say Cambodia has the experience and will to fight. They are more than capable of giving the Thais a bloody nose, but neither the manpower or weapons to take and hold land for a long period. Any thoughts I would doubt that anyone can "confirm" it for you, but I haven't seen any circumstantial evidence of it having anything to do with the gulf. Some people seem to think that one country giving up land around the temple will give them more area around the gulf, but I don't think they are related. Regardless of what happens around the temple, neither country will want to give up any claimed territory in the gulf. I am sure that the evidence is hard to prove, and location of the temple is far from the gulf, but i have found the following link http://www.navy.mi.th/judge/Files/Thailand%20Cambodia.pdf that gives some more background. All i am trying to say is i think this boarder issue has a much boarder agenda. I just cant see the point of fighting for a temple a 5km of land, the whole situation is been blown out of proportion. People refer to the Falklands islands, it is the same reason that we want to war with Argentina. Because we believe that they are sizeable oil and gas deposits in the area, which are only now been explored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 I am sure that the evidence is hard to prove, and location of the temple is far from the gulf, but i have found the following link http://www.navy.mi.t...%20Cambodia.pdf that gives some more background. All i am trying to say is i think this boarder issue has a much boarder agenda. I just cant see the point of fighting for a temple a 5km of land, the whole situation is been blown out of proportion. People refer to the Falklands islands, it is the same reason that we want to war with Argentina. Because we believe that they are sizeable oil and gas deposits in the area, which are only now been explored. Actually, Map 5 in your link is the key issue. (IMO). I have been looking for the French map's reference to the gulf for a while (obviously not hard enough). If the Thais accept the 1907 map in regards to the temple, then they would probably need to accept it for the gulf as well. The area around the temple was supposed to be decided (according to my information) by the watershed. But the gulf boundaries wouldn't apply in that case. The move off the watershed wouldn't be noticed on the maps initially for the temple, but the direction of the gulf demarcation (directly across the gulf) should have been clear. It will be interesting how the Thais talk their way out of that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MengWan Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 But apparently the Thias accepted the maps used to demarcate the border, particularly the 1907 map which had the temple (and surrounding areas) in Cambodia. Hi, (If it is possible to keep calm here !) To my knowledge, the map was made by the French, and Siamese did not even have a copy of this map ... (it is NOT in the National Archives of Thailand). I would be happy to have other info on this matter ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 But apparently the Thias accepted the maps used to demarcate the border, particularly the 1907 map which had the temple (and surrounding areas) in Cambodia. Hi, (If it is possible to keep calm here !) To my knowledge, the map was made by the French, and Siamese did not even have a copy of this map ... (it is NOT in the National Archives of Thailand). I would be happy to have other info on this matter ... OK. What did they sign off on then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MengWan Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 Most Cambodians believe that their neighboring countries always want to encroach to steal their lands. This is not because of false propaganda or fake history lessons. If you take a little time to read the following Wiki article, you'll understand how a Khmer person with his or her love to the country feels like: http://en.wikipedia....ges_of_Cambodia Hi, To me, this goes to the (real) heart of the matter ! History is NEVER "objective", it is always told and explained taking side ... And this story goes back to more than 400 years ago !!! (I could not find my ancesters of 400 years ago, many many countries "of today" did not exist at that time) Even the mindset is wrong, the relations between Siam and Khmer were NOT relations between "countries of today" but "suzerain/vassal" relations ... There was no extermination attempts, even the vassal King was kept in place until he maintained fidelity to his suzerain ! There were no boatloads of siamese immigrants armed with guns to "ethnically cleanse" those regions, no machine-guns used to shoot fleeing women and children and the local nobility (government of sort) was not hanged in public ... There was a period where young italians were taught that they were the children of the Roman Empire, that they had some right over the land conquered by their ancestors and their teacher was a man named Mussolini ! When there is a border dispute, there is no point in talking about 400 years ago and saying that the Thais are wrong because they did not filed a complaint in the few years following the Treaties that were forced on them (at least, it is inconsistent !) It is sad to see conflicts of this kind, and pouring oil on the fire is even worse ... Supporting (ex ?) Khmer-Rouge dictators is impossible for me, apparently not for everyone ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MengWan Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 But apparently the Thias accepted the maps used to demarcate the border, particularly the 1907 map which had the temple (and surrounding areas) in Cambodia. Hi, (If it is possible to keep calm here !) To my knowledge, the map was made by the French, and Siamese did not even have a copy of this map ... (it is NOT in the National Archives of Thailand). I would be happy to have other info on this matter ... OK. What did they sign off on then? They signed a Treaty which mentioned "watershed line" as border ... Is there any proof of otherwise ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metisdead Posted February 6, 2011 Share Posted February 6, 2011 Some off topic posts not making any sense were removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buchholz Posted February 6, 2011 Share Posted February 6, 2011 Can anybody confirm what this is really all about? The amount of the land or a ruined temple is not worth fighting for!! From different sources are reading between the lines, there seem to be a hidden agenda which relates to drilling rights in the gulf old Thailand (reason NATO and the US are in Afghanistan). Please forgive my lack on local geographical knowledge but it seems this land distribute would not have any bearing on maritime boards or am i wrong. This is what i believe is the real motive, because i cant believe that anybody is so stupid to go to war other losing face. If it did come to war then i think it would be a stalemate, The Thai army would be able to hold the land but at a much higher cost. Like most people say Cambodia has the experience and will to fight. They are more than capable of giving the Thais a bloody nose, but neither the manpower or weapons to take and hold land for a long period. Any thoughts I would doubt that anyone can "confirm" it for you, but I haven't seen any circumstantial evidence of it having anything to do with the gulf. Some people seem to think that one country giving up land around the temple will give them more area around the gulf, but I don't think they are related. Regardless of what happens around the temple, neither country will want to give up any claimed territory in the gulf. I am sure that the evidence is hard to prove, and location of the temple is far from the gulf, but i have found the following link http://www.navy.mi.th/judge/Files/Thailand%20Cambodia.pdf that gives some more background. All i am trying to say is i think this boarder issue has a much boarder agenda. I just cant see the point of fighting for a temple a 5km of land, the whole situation is been blown out of proportion. People refer to the Falklands islands, it is the same reason that we want to war with Argentina. Because we believe that they are sizeable oil and gas deposits in the area, which are only now been explored. Thanks for that link. It shows some of the absurdity of thinking when maritime borders can be written so cock-eyed. When does Cambodia lay claim to the southern half of Thailand's Koh Kut, as it falls within their supposed maritime border??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayboy Posted February 6, 2011 Share Posted February 6, 2011 It shows some of the absurdity of thinking when maritime borders can be written so cock-eyed. The absurdity of thinking is not about some paranoid concern about Cambodia's territorial or maritime ambitions at the expense of Thailand, but rather the deranged quasi fascist nationalism of PAD extremists and their bizarre foreign acolytes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phutoie2 Posted February 6, 2011 Share Posted February 6, 2011 5 mins ago, two RTAF F-I6'soverflying the house, unusual activity for Sunday, Tak Li Airbase not too far from us, most flying is weekdays!. Perhaps on the way to give someone a slap! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LomSak27 Posted February 6, 2011 Share Posted February 6, 2011 A PR gimmick which originated in the struggl;es against fromer PM Thaksin has now taken on a life of its own. Wow! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just1Voice Posted February 6, 2011 Share Posted February 6, 2011 But apparently the Thias accepted the maps used to demarcate the border, particularly the 1907 map which had the temple (and surrounding areas) in Cambodia. Hi, (If it is possible to keep calm here !) To my knowledge, the map was made by the French, and Siamese did not even have a copy of this map ... (it is NOT in the National Archives of Thailand). I would be happy to have other info on this matter ... If you read the ICJ decision, you'll find that Siam had MANY copies of the map. Due to the fact that they did not have the capability at the time of making copies, they asked the French to do so, and were provided with, if I remember right, about 50 copies of each border demarcation map. These maps were then distributed throughout Siam by the government to all government offices, and even schools. Also as pointed out a number of times in the ICJ ruling, Thailand had ample opportunities over a 50 year period to "object" to the map, or question it, but never once did so until the issue of the temple being registered as a W.H.O. site by Cambodia came up. Now Abhist is claiming he wants to stop the registration of the temple with the W.H.O. Sorry, but he's a little late for that one, as it's already been registered! The only thing holding back the finalization of implementation is the documentation by Cambodia as to the management plan for the temple. Thailand can, and will, object to THAT, but the actual registration is a "done deal" and there's nothing he can do about that. In my opinion, Thailand is fighting a losing cause. The ICJ made a definite ruling on the temple AND where the border demarcation is. People seem to forget, or are unaware of the fact that when 2 or more countries agree to allow the ICJ to resolve an issue, they are ALSO agreeing to abide by the decision. However, if the decision goes against them, they then have a 7 year period in which to file an appeal. Thailand clearly lost the case, with the ICJ clearly stating why. The question is: If Thailand still believed they were in the right, WHY didn't they file an appeal in the time period they had? Because they knew they would lose again, and the 2nd "loss of face" would be too much for their pride? And is that the same reason why they have declined, more than once, Cambodia's offer to again let the issue be settled by International arbitrators, and even ASEAN, of which Thailand is a member? IMHO, the answer is YES. They would rather lose lives and lose face, even though they know that it's a battle they really can't win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notime Posted February 6, 2011 Share Posted February 6, 2011 I don't understand why so many people here are flogging a dead horse. Isn't it sufficiently clear the situation could have been amicably resolved million times over if both governments were more interested in peace and cooperation rather than slapping each other and hoping for some political gain? 4 square km of scrub .. my Goud .. if Thailand really cannot afford to look compassionate enough to donate it to poorer Cambodia I'm sure they would be able to swap it for 4 sq km of scrub somewhere else. This is called "small border adjustment" and could easily make everybody happy and making money from the tourists coming to see this Wonder of Temple. Or even coming to see <deleted> was all that fighting about. But instead they actually fire heavy artillery at each other and destroy poor people's property. CRIMINALS! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animatic Posted February 6, 2011 Share Posted February 6, 2011 I don't understand why so many people here are flogging a dead horse. Isn't it sufficiently clear the situation could have been amicably resolved million times over if both governments were more interested in peace and cooperation rather than slapping each other and hoping for some political gain? 4 square km of scrub .. my Goud .. if Thailand really cannot afford to look compassionate enough to donate it to poorer Cambodia I'm sure they would be able to swap it for 4 sq km of scrub somewhere else. This is called "small border adjustment" and could easily make everybody happy and making money from the tourists coming to see this Wonder of Temple. Or even coming to see <deleted> was all that fighting about. But instead they actually fire heavy artillery at each other and destroy poor people's property. CRIMINALS! It's likely not about what is obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted February 6, 2011 Share Posted February 6, 2011 If you read the ICJ decision, you'll find that Siam had MANY copies of the map. Due to the fact that they did not have the capability at the time of making copies, they asked the French to do so, and were provided with, if I remember right, about 50 copies of each border demarcation map. These maps were then distributed throughout Siam by the government to all government offices, and even schools. Also as pointed out a number of times in the ICJ ruling, Thailand had ample opportunities over a 50 year period to "object" to the map, or question it, but never once did so until the issue of the temple being registered as a W.H.O. site by Cambodia came up. Now Abhist is claiming he wants to stop the registration of the temple with the W.H.O. Sorry, but he's a little late for that one, as it's already been registered! The only thing holding back the finalization of implementation is the documentation by Cambodia as to the management plan for the temple. Thailand can, and will, object to THAT, but the actual registration is a "done deal" and there's nothing he can do about that. In my opinion, Thailand is fighting a losing cause. The ICJ made a definite ruling on the temple AND where the border demarcation is. People seem to forget, or are unaware of the fact that when 2 or more countries agree to allow the ICJ to resolve an issue, they are ALSO agreeing to abide by the decision. However, if the decision goes against them, they then have a 7 year period in which to file an appeal. Thailand clearly lost the case, with the ICJ clearly stating why. The question is: If Thailand still believed they were in the right, WHY didn't they file an appeal in the time period they had? Because they knew they would lose again, and the 2nd "loss of face" would be too much for their pride? And is that the same reason why they have declined, more than once, Cambodia's offer to again let the issue be settled by International arbitrators, and even ASEAN, of which Thailand is a member? IMHO, the answer is YES. They would rather lose lives and lose face, even though they know that it's a battle they really can't win. Thailand objected to the maps in the 1960's which is why it went to the ICJ in the first place. The WHO decision was in 2008. But this fight isn't over the temple, which is the only thing the ICJ ruled on. This fight is over the land near the temple. For various reasons, the border in this area has never been properly demarcated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buchholz Posted February 6, 2011 Share Posted February 6, 2011 The ICJ made a definite ruling on the temple AND where the border demarcation is. In addition to the other international media reporting similarly that were already posted, here's another international media source that apparently has gotten it wrong... The border between Thailand and Cambodia has never been completely demarcated and the issue of ancient temple has been an age-old dispute. Although the International Court of Justice in 1962 awarded the temple itself to Cambodia, the row over land plot of 4.6 square kilometers surrounding the temple have never been solved. http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90777/90851/7280381.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buchholz Posted February 6, 2011 Share Posted February 6, 2011 Now Abhist is claiming he wants to stop the registration of the temple with the W.H.O. The WHO decision was in 2008. Purely for accuracy sake of everyone, WHO is the World Health Organization and has nothing to do with World Heritage sites. UNESCO is the cognizant entity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now