'Bad History' Not Helping Attitudes On Both Sides; Thailand, Cambodia

[webfact]

BURNING ISSUE

'Bad history' not helping attitudes on both sides

By Pravit Rojanaphruk

Kantharalak, Si Sa Ket

Prejudice against Cambodians is bubbling as border clashes continue sporadically and villagers flee back and forth.

While some national media are quick to cast Cambodians as people not to be trusted, locals in Si Sa Ket have a more complex view of their neighbours. This doesn't stop some national papers espousing archetypal bias towards Cambodians, though such popular misconceptions may backfire and hinder mending ties between the people of the two nations well into the future.

"Elderly people in the areas along the border who for long have been trading with their neighbour often remind their children and grandchildren that they have never trusted Cambodians because [Cambodians] are not predictable. 'They may be friends in the morning but by the evening become enemies'," wrote a columnist last Tuesday.

While some locals say they do not trust Cambodians and will demand cash upfront when trading with them, others say such stereotyping is simply wrong. "There's no absolutely good Thai or absolutely evil Cambodian and vice versa," Niphon Polsaet-rerk, a school teacher in Kantharalak, said yesterday.

What's more, some villagers are married to Cambodians and surely none would have done so if all Thais believe Cambodians are not to be trusted.

But history textbooks and popular beliefs among Thais and Cambodians perpetuate prejudice and distrust. A scholar like Thibadi Buakamsri, of Kasetsart University, explained in a chapter of the Thai-language book "Nationalism in Thai Textbooks" how Thai history books made Thai students regard Cambodians with prejudice and distrust. A heavy reliance on historical accounts written by Siam's elite meant Thai history books gave Cambodians short shrift, he said.

"Cambodia [in the past] is just a small protectorate that often seeks to exploit moments of Ayutthaya's weakness by taking away some people [as captives] and declaring independence."

Contemporary writing in newspaper columns, feature stories and other popular media is very much moulded by this narrow-minded perspective in school textbooks, he said.

Sarnti Pakdeekham, a Cambodian studies expert at Srinakharinwirot University, also wrote that Cambodian textbooks more often than not remind their readers that Thais are ruthless foreign aggressors.

Sarnti, writing in his Thai-language book published in 2009 entitled "Khmers debate about Siam", said that while Cambodians' attitude towards Thais (and Siamese of the past) was rather complex, it might best compared to the negative attitude Thais hold toward the Burmese, who twice attacked and burnt down Ayutthaya.

"The way Thai history portrayed Burma as the historical 'bad guys' is not that different from the way Cambodian history writes about 'Thailand'," Sarnti wrote on pages 3-4 of his book.

Given that Thai-Cambodian relations are based on deeply rooted beliefs, historical wounds and nationalism, the ongoing conflict should be treated most carefully in order not to exacerbate the situation further. The conflict also should serve as a wake-up call for people in the two societies to think about how they can best overcome past wounds and present prejudice and distrust. This will be no easy task, but the other option of going to war and hating each other even more should certainly be less desirable.

The challenge for both Thais and Cambodians is to learn not to become a prisoner of their past while also questioning the prison that current nationalist thinking lock us in.

-- The Nation 2011-02-14

[TheyCallmeScooter]

Boy he can write, this Pravit fellow...when he sets his mind to it.

The challenge for both Thais and Cambodians is to learn not to become a prisoner of their past while also questioning the prison that current nationalist thinking lock us in.

This is the challenge for us all. Well said, Pravit.

[Xangsamhua]

History is an area in which a little knowledge can be dangerous - especially, as the author points out, when it is written and served up to the people by the powers that be and those who serve them.

One danger to the Thai side of the current conflict is that opening it up to its history may present past Thai and Siamese leadership in rather a bad light. Of course, steps will be taken to suppress unedifying material, but they may not be successful. I don't know if there are skeletons in the Cambodians' closet as well in regard to the border, temple and refugee issues. If there are, we can be sure that Hun Sen and his cronies will keep the closet door shut as tight as possible.

Having said that history (i.e. recording and writing about past events) can be misleading, I would also say that probing a bit further into history is a very worthwhile exercise. Most people who genuinely seek to know about the past learn some valuable lessons and are often surprised to discover that things were not quite the way their governments say they were.

[Xangsamhua]

Apologies. Double post.

Edited February 14, 2011 by Xangsamhua

[Thai at Heart]

And there is never a truer statement than, "You can't fool all of the people all of the time".

Lies like this get need a very large mechanism and system to perpetuate. Of course, one way to break them down is press freedom and the internet. Oh, I forgot where we were living. However, as more Thai people take the blue pill so to say, this nationalism will disappear. Might however, lead to a complete deflation of the national ego.

[hammered]

Same the world over. Traditional enemies in border spat and the majority of the people in the respective country naturally fall in behind their own side. Reason goes nowhere in situations like these which are emotive.

[lungmi]

They fight for old maps.

Every land surveyor can tell you that it would be better to call a future teller for a correct map.

In Mae Hong Song and Tak Province the first correct maps appeared in the 1992-94 years, thanks to the ESA with Ariane.

In Tha Song Yang Thailand/Burma lose every year their "sovereignty" over some land, because the river follows the raining saison.

Actually there is a border dispute with Burma in Mae Sot, because Thailand makes a small dam as protection against lost of land.

With the dam Burma will lose some sqare meters.

[WhySoSerious]

Another good article by Pravit Rojanaphruk.

It is not unlikely that the further away from the Cambodian border you get, the more unfounded bias and prejudice you will find.

Where I resided until recently, close to Cambodia, Thais and Cambodians live side by side in relative harmony.

The Cambodians are not always treated as equals however, but when it comes down to it, what foreigner in Thailand truly is?

Then again, I would say that goes for foreigners in most countries...

Edited February 14, 2011 by WhySoSerious

[Xangsamhua]

Another good article by Pravit Rojanaphruk.

It is not unlikely that the further away from the Cambodian border you get, the more unfounded bias and prejudice you will find.

Where I resided until recently, close to Cambodia, Thais and Cambodians live side by side in relative harmony.

The Cambodians are not always treated as equals however, but when it comes down to it, what foreigner in Thailand truly is?

Then again, I would say that goes for foreigners in most countries...

I suspect the Cambodians have not forgotten this (Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, Oct 2006 p. 462):

.... 'the Dangrek genocide' – that took place at the Preah Vihear border crossing on 8 June 1979 after tens of

thousands of Cambodians had crossed into Thailand seeking asylum. On this day, Thai

soldiers began deporting 45,000 of these refugees, who were forced at gunpoint down

the heavily mined and booby-trapped mountain below Preah Vihear. Many of the

Cambodians were killed or injured during their descent down the ravine; some were

even robbed or shot by Thai soldiers.... those Cambodians who were

allowed to remain on Thai soil in camps were sometimes abused by their Thai guards and

administrators, who wielded enormous power over them and, ironically, often profited

from local trade and the international aid pouring into the camps. Thai soldiers and

businessmen also benefited from trade with various Cambodian 'resistance groups',

including the Khmer Rouge, who sometimes operated from Thai soil and were receiving

international support to battle the PRK regime.

http://andromeda.rut...hai%20Other.pdf

It's not the neighbours and the villagers that are the problem. The problem has been with those whose status and authority desensitizes them to the point that they see people as objects or little more than farm animals. Let's hope we don't see things like the Dangrek genocide again.

[lungmi]

Another good article by Pravit Rojanaphruk.

It is not unlikely that the further away from the Cambodian border you get, the more unfounded bias and prejudice you will find.

Where I resided until recently, close to Cambodia, Thais and Cambodians live side by side in relative harmony.

The Cambodians are not always treated as equals however, but when it comes down to it, what foreigner in Thailand truly is?

Then again, I would say that goes for foreigners in most countries...

I suspect the Cambodians have not forgotten this (Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, Oct 2006 p. 462):

.... 'the Dangrek genocide' – that took place at the Preah Vihear border crossing on 8 June 1979 after tens of

thousands of Cambodians had crossed into Thailand seeking asylum. On this day, Thai

soldiers began deporting 45,000 of these refugees, who were forced at gunpoint down

the heavily mined and booby-trapped mountain below Preah Vihear. Many of the

Cambodians were killed or injured during their descent down the ravine; some were

even robbed or shot by Thai soldiers.... those Cambodians who were

allowed to remain on Thai soil in camps were sometimes abused by their Thai guards and

administrators, who wielded enormous power over them and, ironically, often profited

from local trade and the international aid pouring into the camps. Thai soldiers and

businessmen also benefited from trade with various Cambodian 'resistance groups',

including the Khmer Rouge, who sometimes operated from Thai soil and were receiving

international support to battle the PRK regime.

http://andromeda.rut...hai%20Other.pdf

It's not the neighbours and the villagers that are the problem. The problem has been with those whose status and authority desensitizes them to the point that they see people as objects or little more than farm animals. Let's hope we don't see things like the Dangrek genocide again.

Thank you for the information.

[WhySoSerious]

Another good article by Pravit Rojanaphruk.

It is not unlikely that the further away from the Cambodian border you get, the more unfounded bias and prejudice you will find.

Where I resided until recently, close to Cambodia, Thais and Cambodians live side by side in relative harmony.

The Cambodians are not always treated as equals however, but when it comes down to it, what foreigner in Thailand truly is?

Then again, I would say that goes for foreigners in most countries...

I suspect the Cambodians have not forgotten this (Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, Oct 2006 p. 462):

.... 'the Dangrek genocide' – that took place at the Preah Vihear border crossing on 8 June 1979 after tens of

thousands of Cambodians had crossed into Thailand seeking asylum. On this day, Thai

soldiers began deporting 45,000 of these refugees, who were forced at gunpoint down

the heavily mined and booby-trapped mountain below Preah Vihear. Many of the

Cambodians were killed or injured during their descent down the ravine; some were

even robbed or shot by Thai soldiers.... those Cambodians who were

allowed to remain on Thai soil in camps were sometimes abused by their Thai guards and

administrators, who wielded enormous power over them and, ironically, often profited

from local trade and the international aid pouring into the camps. Thai soldiers and

businessmen also benefited from trade with various Cambodian 'resistance groups',

including the Khmer Rouge, who sometimes operated from Thai soil and were receiving

international support to battle the PRK regime.

http://andromeda.rut...hai%20Other.pdf

It's not the neighbours and the villagers that are the problem. The problem has been with those whose status and authority desensitizes them to the point that they see people as objects or little more than farm animals. Let's hope we don't see things like the Dangrek genocide again.

Yes, this is indeed a dark chapter in the more recent history between the two countries, and not a very well publisized one.

There is a very real risk now that nationalist sentiment will make people blind once again, allowing history to repeat itself.

Let's hope not.

[stepenwolf1958]

Another good article by Pravit Rojanaphruk.

It is not unlikely that the further away from the Cambodian border you get, the more unfounded bias and prejudice you will find.

Where I resided until recently, close to Cambodia, Thais and Cambodians live side by side in relative harmony.

The Cambodians are not always treated as equals however, but when it comes down to it, what foreigner in Thailand truly is?

Then again, I would say that goes for foreigners in most countries...

I suspect the Cambodians have not forgotten this (Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, Oct 2006 p. 462):

.... 'the Dangrek genocide' – that took place at the Preah Vihear border crossing on 8 June 1979 after tens of

thousands of Cambodians had crossed into Thailand seeking asylum. On this day, Thai

soldiers began deporting 45,000 of these refugees, who were forced at gunpoint down

the heavily mined and booby-trapped mountain below Preah Vihear. Many of the

Cambodians were killed or injured during their descent down the ravine; some were

even robbed or shot by Thai soldiers.... those Cambodians who were

allowed to remain on Thai soil in camps were sometimes abused by their Thai guards and

administrators, who wielded enormous power over them and, ironically, often profited

from local trade and the international aid pouring into the camps. Thai soldiers and

businessmen also benefited from trade with various Cambodian 'resistance groups',

including the Khmer Rouge, who sometimes operated from Thai soil and were receiving

international support to battle the PRK regime.

http://andromeda.rut...hai%20Other.pdf

It's not the neighbours and the villagers that are the problem. The problem has been with those whose status and authority desensitizes them to the point that they see people as objects or little more than farm animals. Let's hope we don't see things like the Dangrek genocide again.

Knowing for habit of many Thais(officials or how they like to call themselves government officers) to look down on all neighbours, i have to admit i didn't know for this. Thanks for this post. I am shocked as well.

[TheyCallmeScooter]

The Cambodians are not always treated as equals however, but when it comes down to it, what foreigner in Thailand truly is?

Then again, I would say that goes for foreigners in most countries...

Is there a country where citizens of that country treat each others as equals?

Please point me in the general direction of such a fantastical land.

[WhySoSerious]

The Cambodians are not always treated as equals however, but when it comes down to it, what foreigner in Thailand truly is?

Then again, I would say that goes for foreigners in most countries...

Is there a country where citizens of that country treat each others as equals?

Please point me in the general direction of such a fantastical land.

You are missing the point.

[Siripon]

A friend of mine who works for a certain Thai bank was sent to Cambodia some years ago to open a branch. The project failed when the agents who were lent the money to further lend to borrowers in various provinces, defaulted or disappeared. My friend concluded Cambodians could not be trusted. This was in contrast to Laos where a branch was opened with no serious problems.

On another note, a neighbour in Ban Pai is married to a Thai from Buriram. One day I noticed two dogs locked in a fierce fight on their property. I recommended throwing water on the dogs but the husband refused.The neighbour said,'He's Khmer,they're bloodthirsty and cruel'.

In my experience that is quite a common perception of Khmers in Thailand,and of course it was only 35 years ago that the Khmer Rouge killed a quarter of their own population.

[jayboy]

A friend of mine who works for a certain Thai bank was sent to Cambodia some years ago to open a branch. The project failed when the agents who were lent the money to further lend to borrowers in various provinces, defaulted or disappeared. My friend concluded Cambodians could not be trusted. This was in contrast to Laos where a branch was opened with no serious problems.

On another note, a neighbour in Ban Pai is married to a Thai from Buriram. One day I noticed two dogs locked in a fierce fight on their property. I recommended throwing water on the dogs but the husband refused.The neighbour said,'He's Khmer,they're bloodthirsty and cruel'.

In my experience that is quite a common perception of Khmers in Thailand,and of course it was only 35 years ago that the Khmer Rouge killed a quarter of their own population.

I think what you describe would be confirmed by most knowledgeable people.The trouble with the Cambodians is that they are heirs to a genuinely great civilisation, a country which lost its way and became instead a small marginal player.I think one can observe in Cambodia a characteristic also seen in human beings, namely the lack of achievement manifesting itself in bitterness and aggression.None of this given Cambodia's history is particularly surprising.What does stick in the gullet however is Thailand, with all its comparative advantages descending to the same puerile level, even when headed by a sophisticate like Abhisit.Of course we know the PAD leadership and the wacky reactionary end of the military are vomit inducing but even so it's sad that wiser heads have not intervened to dissuade these cretins from demeaning the country they profess to love.

[Steely Dan]

A friend of mine who works for a certain Thai bank was sent to Cambodia some years ago to open a branch. The project failed when the agents who were lent the money to further lend to borrowers in various provinces, defaulted or disappeared. My friend concluded Cambodians could not be trusted. This was in contrast to Laos where a branch was opened with no serious problems.

On another note, a neighbour in Ban Pai is married to a Thai from Buriram. One day I noticed two dogs locked in a fierce fight on their property. I recommended throwing water on the dogs but the husband refused.The neighbour said,'He's Khmer,they're bloodthirsty and cruel'.

In my experience that is quite a common perception of Khmers in Thailand,and of course it was only 35 years ago that the Khmer Rouge killed a quarter of their own population.

I think what you describe would be confirmed by most knowledgeable people.The trouble with the Cambodians is that they are heirs to a genuinely great civilisation, a country which lost its way and became instead a small marginal player.I think one can observe in Cambodia a characteristic also seen in human beings, namely the lack of achievement manifesting itself in bitterness and aggression.None of this given Cambodia's history is particularly surprising.What does stick in the gullet however is Thailand, with all its comparative advantages descending to the same puerile level, even when headed by a sophisticate like Abhisit.Of course we know the PAD leadership and the wacky reactionary end of the military are vomit inducing but even so it's sad that wiser heads have not intervened to dissuade these cretins from demeaning the country they profess to love.

And how many centuries ago were the Khmers a great civilisation? Well lets say 1000 judging from the age of the disputed temple. The trouble is that nationalists of all Countries have a chip on their shoulders which obliterates any logic. Perhaps the Khmers do have a chip on their shoulders but let it not be forgotten that Thailand had to horse trade great tracts of territory itself in order to prevent being colonised, and prior to that they were sporadically ruled by the Burmese so Thais too could be argued to have chips on their shoulders. As the title of the thread alludes to, it is not helpful to categorise the Cambodians as somehow inferior to Thais, such thoughts through the eyes of nationalists makes losing territory to them seem even more unbearable and it is easier to look for scapegoats than realise that Thais in years past made decisions which resulted in the current situation. Perhaps had Thailand played hardball with the French Thailand too could have been a French colony, but instead they came to an arrangement which was probably seen as preferable, though I must admit I wouldn't mind a decent choice of wine being available at reasonable prices as has always been the case in Cambodia and Laos.

[calbears]

The view from Cambodia

Phnom Penh Post

Thursday, 17 February 2011 15:01 Michael Hayes

[/url] Michael Hayes

When I was publisher and editor-in-chief of The Phnom Penh Post I was sued once by then-Second Prime Minister Hun Sen, accused of spreading disinformation and trying to create political instability. Over the years, several Cambodian government officials even accused me and my newspaper of attempting to “destroy the nation”.

At the very least I’ve never been called a spin doctor for the Cambodian government. But on the issue of the current border dispute between Cambodia and Thailand surrounding Wat Preah Vihear, I’m as angry as all Cambodians are at what we perceive as a Thai-initiated conflict of grossly unjust proportions.

We are not alone. Since this issue flared up two years ago, I have not met one Asian or Western diplomat, one foreign aid worker or one expatriate businessman in Phnom Penh who disagrees. Even a few Thai friends have sheepishly expressed support for the Cambodian side on this spat.

The nagging question that perplexes us all is why Thailand is trying to export its domestic political problems and dump them on poor Cambodia? The sentiment here is that if the red shirts and the yellow shirts want to fight it out, do so somewhere in Thailand, but don’t use Cambodia as a scapegoat.

The view from Cambodia is simple: the issue of sovereignty over the temple was decided back in 1962 when the case was submitted to the International Court of Justice in The Hague.

If Thailand didn’t want to abide by the court’s ruling then why did it agree to submit the case in the first place? And why are they groaning now and firing artillery shells at the temple almost 50 years later?

Moreover, when Thailand says: Well, we controlled the temple in the 1800s and before, the Khmers have a simpler reply: Yeah, but WE BUILT IT! We started construction in the early 9th century, modified and improved it for 250 years and then continued to pray there and celebrate our Gods for another three centuries until you guys stole it after you sacked and looted our capital at Angkor Wat three times between 1352 and 1431. Thank you very much. End of story.

Cambodia has no interest whatsoever in another protracted violent conflict with anybody. The Kingdom is still trying to recover from 30 years of civil war, Pol Pot madness and the ensuing guerilla conflict in the ’80s and ’90s that in total cost the lives of more than 2.5 million Cambodians and left the country in ruins. Every dollar spent on the military conflict there is a dollar lost for building desperately needed roads, schools and hospitals.

The Thai accusation that Cambodia has had some secret plot to steal Thai land along the border is also seen as ludicrous.

Everybody knows that since 1970 Cambodia has been too consumed with domestic strife to take even one metre of land from any of its neighbours. In fact, foreign aid officials who worked on the Thai border in the ’80s will readily admit that border creep worked in reverse. It was Thai farmers living in peace – and I’m not accusing the Thai government of some orchestrated campaign here – who took the opportunity to plant a few extra hectares in disputed border areas while internally Cambodia was in complete disarray.

If there is one thing that is clear, it is that the entire border needs to be systematically surveyed and demarcated, step by step, once and for all.

As for the disputed 4.5 square kilometres just north of the temple, why not consider this: Turn the area into the Cambodian-Thai International Friendship Park and set it up as a jointly managed enterprise by both countries’ Ministries of Tourism. Invite in hawkers, entrepreneurs, whatever, from both sides of the border to set up businesses to cater to the millions of tourists who will want to visit the site in the coming decades and beyond. Tax revenues could be shared by both nations equally. Everybody wins.

It could also be a model for other border disputes around the globe.

If the Thais want a protracted, bloody fight on their hands over the temple, they’ve got one. In the 20 years I’ve been in Cambodia the Preah Vihear issue is without question the only one I’ve seen that has united the entire nation. Cambodian TV stations have been running fundraisers off and on with donations large and small pouring in from all quarters for two years. Even the normally truculent Sam Rainsy Party and others in the opposition are fully on board.

It’s clear from a visit to the temple last week that the Cambodian military has dug in for the long haul. New heavy tanks, armoured personnel carriers and ammunition “donated by friendly countries” are evident all over the base of the escarpment. Battle-scarred veterans, no doubt from all of Cambodia’s four previously warring factions and including ex-Khmer Rouge who controlled the temple from 1975 to 1998, are now all operating under one flag.

And yes, of course there are Cambodian soldiers with weapons bunkered around the temple. If they weren’t there the Thai military could literally walk in and take control of it in five minutes. What government in Phnom Penh could allow that?

If this dispute goes real hot, relations between Cambodia and Thailand will be ruined for years, hundreds on both sides will die needlessly and the economic costs to the two countries will be astronomical.

Cooler heads need to prevail, but rest assured the Cambodians will never, no matter what the price, give up control of Wat Preah Vihear.

Why should they? It’s theirs.

[Siripon]

The view from Cambodia

Phnom Penh Post

Thursday, 17 February 2011 15:01 Michael Hayes

[/url] Michael Hayes

When I was publisher and editor-in-chief of The Phnom Penh Post I was sued once by then-Second Prime Minister Hun Sen, accused of spreading disinformation and trying to create political instability. Over the years, several Cambodian government officials even accused me and my newspaper of attempting to “destroy the nation”.

At the very least I’ve never been called a spin doctor for the Cambodian government. But on the issue of the current border dispute between Cambodia and Thailand surrounding Wat Preah Vihear, I’m as angry as all Cambodians are at what we perceive as a Thai-initiated conflict of grossly unjust proportions.

We are not alone. Since this issue flared up two years ago, I have not met one Asian or Western diplomat, one foreign aid worker or one expatriate businessman in Phnom Penh who disagrees. Even a few Thai friends have sheepishly expressed support for the Cambodian side on this spat.

The nagging question that perplexes us all is why Thailand is trying to export its domestic political problems and dump them on poor Cambodia? The sentiment here is that if the red shirts and the yellow shirts want to fight it out, do so somewhere in Thailand, but don’t use Cambodia as a scapegoat.

The view from Cambodia is simple: the issue of sovereignty over the temple was decided back in 1962 when the case was submitted to the International Court of Justice in The Hague.

If Thailand didn’t want to abide by the court’s ruling then why did it agree to submit the case in the first place? And why are they groaning now and firing artillery shells at the temple almost 50 years later?

Moreover, when Thailand says: Well, we controlled the temple in the 1800s and before, the Khmers have a simpler reply: Yeah, but WE BUILT IT! We started construction in the early 9th century, modified and improved it for 250 years and then continued to pray there and celebrate our Gods for another three centuries until you guys stole it after you sacked and looted our capital at Angkor Wat three times between 1352 and 1431. Thank you very much. End of story.

Cambodia has no interest whatsoever in another protracted violent conflict with anybody. The Kingdom is still trying to recover from 30 years of civil war, Pol Pot madness and the ensuing guerilla conflict in the ’80s and ’90s that in total cost the lives of more than 2.5 million Cambodians and left the country in ruins. Every dollar spent on the military conflict there is a dollar lost for building desperately needed roads, schools and hospitals.

The Thai accusation that Cambodia has had some secret plot to steal Thai land along the border is also seen as ludicrous.

Everybody knows that since 1970 Cambodia has been too consumed with domestic strife to take even one metre of land from any of its neighbours. In fact, foreign aid officials who worked on the Thai border in the ’80s will readily admit that border creep worked in reverse. It was Thai farmers living in peace – and I’m not accusing the Thai government of some orchestrated campaign here – who took the opportunity to plant a few extra hectares in disputed border areas while internally Cambodia was in complete disarray.

If there is one thing that is clear, it is that the entire border needs to be systematically surveyed and demarcated, step by step, once and for all.

As for the disputed 4.5 square kilometres just north of the temple, why not consider this: Turn the area into the Cambodian-Thai International Friendship Park and set it up as a jointly managed enterprise by both countries’ Ministries of Tourism. Invite in hawkers, entrepreneurs, whatever, from both sides of the border to set up businesses to cater to the millions of tourists who will want to visit the site in the coming decades and beyond. Tax revenues could be shared by both nations equally. Everybody wins.

It could also be a model for other border disputes around the globe.

If the Thais want a protracted, bloody fight on their hands over the temple, they’ve got one. In the 20 years I’ve been in Cambodia the Preah Vihear issue is without question the only one I’ve seen that has united the entire nation. Cambodian TV stations have been running fundraisers off and on with donations large and small pouring in from all quarters for two years. Even the normally truculent Sam Rainsy Party and others in the opposition are fully on board.

It’s clear from a visit to the temple last week that the Cambodian military has dug in for the long haul. New heavy tanks, armoured personnel carriers and ammunition “donated by friendly countries” are evident all over the base of the escarpment. Battle-scarred veterans, no doubt from all of Cambodia’s four previously warring factions and including ex-Khmer Rouge who controlled the temple from 1975 to 1998, are now all operating under one flag.

And yes, of course there are Cambodian soldiers with weapons bunkered around the temple. If they weren’t there the Thai military could literally walk in and take control of it in five minutes. What government in Phnom Penh could allow that?

If this dispute goes real hot, relations between Cambodia and Thailand will be ruined for years, hundreds on both sides will die needlessly and the economic costs to the two countries will be astronomical.

Cooler heads need to prevail, but rest assured the Cambodians will never, no matter what the price, give up control of Wat Preah Vihear.

Why should they? It’s theirs.

Thailand have previously offered to jointly run the disputed area but this was rejected by Hun Sen,as Apisit said, Cambodia should sit down with Thailand and work out the border lines first.

Of course Hun Sen knows focusing on Preah Vihear will unite the Cambodians, it's a perfect way to divert disquiet and frustration amongst Cambodian army officers at the rapid promotion of his son and his giving away of territory to the Vietnamese on the eastern border.

[calbears]

Thailand have previously offered to jointly run the disputed area but this was rejected by Hun Sen,as Apisit said, Cambodia should sit down with Thailand and work out the border lines first.

Of course Hun Sen knows focusing on Preah Vihear will unite the Cambodians, it's a perfect way to divert disquiet and frustration amongst Cambodian army officers at the rapid promotion of his son and his giving away of territory to the Vietnamese on the eastern border.

True. The joint venture on the disputed area has been discussed before. The Thaksin administration could have reached a deal with the Cambodian government, I'm not sure. However, if there were a deal, it would have been annulled by the current government with the help of PAD catylist. Right now, it seems like Thailand doesn't want to agree on anything. Their only option is bilateral negotiation, which has never worked after a couple years of the same gridlock. The fact that Abhisit keeps refusing any offers from Cambodia and other third party entities shows that Thailand, not Cambodia, is the one with much to hide and afraid to get unmasked.

[TheyCallmeScooter]

The Cambodians are not always treated as equals however, but when it comes down to it, what foreigner in Thailand truly is?

Then again, I would say that goes for foreigners in most countries...

Is there a country where citizens of that country treat each others as equals?

Please point me in the general direction of such a fantastical land.

You are missing the point.

Perhaps. Might I bother you with a request that you make it?

Political games are won by harnessing the emotions of simple people, usually around something like a flag or something which ostensibly represents "national honour". The Cambodians aren't "united as one", who buys this idiotic tripe?

Poverty in Cambodia is rife due to years of terrorism and civil war and corruption within the government. Forced evictions also have had an impact on the numbers of families living on the streets. While Cambodia is on a path to greater economic development, poverty is still widespread with 40 percent of the population living under the poverty line according to various UN agencies.

<b><br style="margin-top: 0px; "></b>

Read more: http://blogs.sacbee.com/photos/2010/02/poverty-in-cambodia.html#ixzz1ELs9vfka

Unfortunately, the people most likely to buy it are those who cannot afford to buy food. They're living on less than a $1 / day.

But of course, they are the target market for nationalistic drivel.

United as one? Don't make me laugh. National pride? Don't make me angry. Why would you have pride in your nation if half of your population is starving.

There is no theme of unity in humanity. Not in relationships, not in family units, not in villages, not in cities, not in countries - no no no. The theme of humanity is one of exploitation of others. And who better to exploit than those closest to you, especially when they're all you can exploit.

This is pure political idiocy being played out by wealthy slime balls who proactively work to ensure the sustained poverty of those around them, because it suits them for exploitative purposes. And then, when it suits them, they string up the emotions of their victims and run them like puppets - tragic, idiotic puppets. Who think they should fight and kill the other starving puppets over...what? National pride? Who buys this tripe!

The media plays along. Everyone bright and wealthy and shameless plays along. And the poor saps can't be faulted for getting sucked in, regardless of how ludicrous their whipped up emotions of national pride are (what with their hunger pain and agonies of poverty endured by cyclical generations of exploited victims of that country they're so proud of).

I don't believe I've missed the point at all.

Do you think perhaps you might have?

[TheyCallmeScooter]

Michael Hayes[/color]']

Cooler heads need to prevail, but rest assured the Cambodians will never, no matter what the price, give up control of Wat Preah Vihear.

Why should they? It's theirs.

If any man says he hates war more than I do, he better have a knife, that's all I have to say.

People like this are the problem.

Why should they....CARE? They're starving!

-------------

Mr Hayes and Hun Sen will tell them that they should ignore their hunger and care enough about a country which cares nothing for them; care enough about the interests of those who exploit them...to kill their fellow (starving) man in support of those interests.

After all, Mr Hayes has so clearly elucidated his adversarial position - albeit somewhat unconvincingly - to Hun Sen, and this shows to the people who shouldn't possibly care less that they should care! If even long-term adversaries like him and his old sparring partner Hun Sen are coming together on this one - then it's clearly a time to rally around, Cambodians!

But then, what kind of adversaries are you - exactly? If the extent of your gladiatorial battle was an attempt at litigation? Hmm, if all my enemies were so vicious...I'd be living in bliss. I smell a rat - because you've been publishing all along. One would think Hun Sen's power would dispatch you rather flippantly if you were truly an adversary, no? Could you - gasp! - not actually be a rogue newspaper man standing up to the power of Cambodia's leader...but really just be a good old foil...a prop, in a play, written to dupe suckers?

Nah, that can't possibly make sense. Better call for cool heads whilst you sharpen your sabre viciously.

Edited February 19, 2011 by TheyCallmeScooter