UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon 'Deeply Concerned' On Thailand-Cambodia Spat

[webfact]

UN boss 'deeply concerned' on Thailand-Cambodia spat

UNITED NATIONS, February 7, 2011 (AFP) - UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said Sunday he is "deeply concerned" about cross-border fighting between Cambodia and Thailand and called for "maximum restraint" on both sides.

Clashes over disputed territory have claimed at least five lives while displacing thousands of villagers, and on Sunday resulted in damage to an 11th century temple, according to Cambodia, despite a ceasefire announced Saturday.

"The secretary-general is deeply concerned by reports of repeated armed clashes," Ban's office said in a statement.

"The secretary-general appeals to both sides to put in place an effective arrangement for cessation of hostilities and to exercise maximum restraint," the statement said.

The ancient Preah Vihear temple, which is surrounded by disputed territory, was damaged Sunday by Thai artillery fire, according to Cambodia, which said one wing of the building had "collapsed" as a result.

Relations between the neighbors have been strained since Preah Vihear was granted UN World Heritage status in July 2008.

Thailand and Cambodia accuse the other of starting the ongoing clashes.

The UN statement said Ban also called on the countries to find a solution "through established mechanisms and arrangements and a spirit of dialogue and good neighbourly relations."

Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen urged the UN Security Council to hold an urgent meeting "so as to stop Thailand's aggression" which has "gravely threatened peace and stability in the region".

But Thai government spokesman Panitan Wattanayagorn rejected the accusation that his country was the aggressor, saying: "Thailand has clear policy that we will not invade any country."

Ban's statement did not address the request for an urgent meeting of the Security Council, but ended: "The United Nations remains at their disposal to assist in these peaceful efforts."

The World Court ruled in 1962 that Preah Vihear itself belonged to Cambodia, although its main entrance lies in Thailand and the 4.6-square-kilometre (1.8-square-mile) area around the temple is claimed by both sides.

-- (c) Copyright AFP 2011-02-07

[SomTumTiger]

Thailand has nothing to gain from this fighting, while Cambodia had a great deal to gain. I have a good idea who fired first (and who has been targeting schools)

[Payboy]

A "wise" man once said "the UN is not my father".

[geovalin]

Thailand has nothing to gain from this fighting, while Cambodia had a great deal to gain. I have a good idea who fired first (and who has been targeting schools)

Cambodia WANTS peace because peace - money. Also Cambodia is very happy with the French border. Thailand NEEDS a war for internal political issues (we know that very clearly) and to gain some territories.

[timekeeper]

A "wise" man once said "the UN is not my father".

in relation to the person who said that , i expect you are using the term 'wise' in the loosest possible term or with sarcasm

personally i wish it was a comment that could be attributed to a deceased person..........

[timekeeper]

Thailand has nothing to gain from this fighting, while Cambodia had a great deal to gain. I have a good idea who fired first (and who has been targeting schools)

Cambodia WANTS peace because peace - money. Also Cambodia is very happy with the French border. Thailand NEEDS a war for internal political issues (we know that very clearly) and to gain some territories.

could be some truth in that

look what the Falklands did for Maggie Thatcher and the UK..........

[creck]

Not quiet on the Temple front.

It is true that ‘the maps’ show the PV temple and its surroundings as being in Cambodia. However, the maps do not have any legal status. The treaty signed by Siam and France in 1904 did not include any map or even sketch of that part of the frontier. When the commission given the power to define the Border wound up, (18 January 1907) both the French and the Siamese expressed their satisfaction that the border was defined. In that part it was defined in the words of the treaty ‘The watershed of the Dangrek Mountains’ Note; the map still had not been drawn, the survey was still underway at that time. Only later did the maps get appended physically to the treaty. They were not examined or approved by either side. The instruction to the French survey corps was to survey (Only survey) the area. They were not given any power to define or move the frontier in any way.

The power given to the French Survey Map of 1908 by the international Court of Justice rests on the silence of Siam after receiving the map sheets from France. One quarter of the Judges did not agree. It was a majority decision. Reading the Dissenting Opinion of Judge Sir Percy Spender I feel strongly that he is correct and that the silence of Siam should not have been taken as agreement.

Even in the 1930’s Siam was still in awe of France’s superior military power and very aware that she was present in the region. Siam was not sure of the intention of France, it was felt that it would not be wise to give any ‘excuse’ to France for action which would, without doubt, be detrimental to Siam. This explains the silence in 1937 when a Thai survey of the region determined that the map was wrong. (Although it was not then understood why).

France was technically superior in survey techniques in 1908 and that is why she carried out the survey. Neither France nor Siam believed that the maps had any power. This is evidenced by the way an error in the map at the Kell pass was corrected by the survey officers marking the boundary. The line there is not in accordance with the map and has not been since 1908. The amended line on the ground was accepted by Siam and France without any accord being needed. It is now accepted by Thailand and Cambodia. It was only after many years that the myth became established that the map defined the border. When Cambodia made her application to the International court, she mistakenly assumed that the map was the definition. Only during the proceedings was this assumption knocked down.

I think that the International Court of Justice should bear the responsibility for the present fracas and deaths at PV temple region. The Court should not have applied current strict legal rules to countries in an era that was so very different from today. The watershed was wrongly mapped in 1908 and this was ‘just’ a technical error. The map had no power to move the boundary. Anyone standing on the edge of the cliff at the temple site cannot fail to see that ‘down there’ in the blue haze of distance is the plane of Cambodia and the temple is to the north of the watershed and in Thailand.

If any solution can be found, I guess it has to be in a kind of neutral status for the temple and its environs with equal 'tourist profit' opportunities for both sides.

[whybother]

<snipped>

:jap:

[DP25]

So is this policy of non-aggression sort of like their policy against political corruption, or enforcing child prostitution laws and such? Just asking!

[SerpentSea]

Thailand has nothing to gain from this fighting, while Cambodia had a great deal to gain. I have a good idea who fired first (and who has been targeting schools)

Cambodia WANTS peace because peace - money. Also Cambodia is very happy with the French border. Thailand NEEDS a war for internal political issues (we know that very clearly) and to gain some territories.

I think that is obvious. Meanwhile everyone bitching about the yellows now, but they are not in charge. Just look how the current government acts in this issue and if you want you can even compared it with a previous one.

[asiawatcher]

"... The ancient Preah Vihear temple, which is surrounded by disputed territory, was damaged Sunday by Thai artillery fire, according to Cambodia, which said one wing of the building had "collapsed" as a result."

Well if they keep shelling their will be nothing left to fight about now will there - what &lt;deleted&gt; idiots!