BURNING ISSUE

Democrats wrong from the start on Preah Vihear

By Supalak Ganjanakhundee

The Nation

It seems no political parties, other than Suwit Khunkitti's Social Action Party, want to follow Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva's call last week for clear positions on the conflict with Cambodia over the Hindu temple of Preah Vihear. They don't want to take the political risk of losing the battle.

Abhisit and his Democrat Party have taken a clear - but wrong - stance on the issue from the beginning.

Indeed, the party has been mistaken on the issue since it was in opposition. In 2008, it tagged along with the nationalist People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) to exploit crude nationalism over Preah Vihear and attack the governments of Samak Sundaravej and Somchai Wongsawat.

After Samak's government supported Cambodia in listing the temple as a World Heritage Site, the Democrats and the PAD accused Samak and his foreign minister Noppadon Pattama of losing Thai territory and the chance to reclaim Preah Vihear.

Abhisit made the accusation based on a misinterpretation of the International Court of Justice (ICJ)'s 1962 ruling on the Preah Vihear case. The court ruled the temple "was situated in territory under the sovereignty of Cambodia".

Abhisit - as he argued in Parliament during a censure motion against Noppadon in June 2008 - said the ICJ ruled only on the ruined sandstone temple, while the territory on which it stood belonged to Thailand. Thus, for Abhisit, any Cambodian activities in the area were violations of Thai sovereignty.

Abhisit's interpretation contradicted Thailand's own consistent stance since 1962, when a Thai Cabinet decision unilaterally set the boundary at Preah Vihear to comply with the ICJ ruling.

In fact, during the military-backed government under General Surayud Chulanont and later under the elected governments of Samak and Somchai, Thailand used the Cabinet-drawn line in dealing with Cambodia's proposal to list the temple.

Thailand's legal team also used it in making their argument in the recent ICJ trial, after Cambodia asked the court to clarify the 1962 judgement and to instigate provisional measures to have Thai troops withdraw from the disputed area.

Cambodia has agreed, at least for now, to use that line as the Preah Vihear boundary in its proposal for the temple's listing and management. The land that is disputed is not included in the management plan, but that did not stop Abhisit from blocking Phnom Penh's plan to run the temple as a World Heritage Site. The premier accused Cambodia of taking Thai territory as a buffer zone around Preah Vihear and asked the World Heritage Committee to suspend its management plan.

Abhisit will send Suwit, his minister of natural resources and the environment, to derail Cambodia's plans at the World Heritage Committee meeting in Paris next week.

The move cornered Cambodia and offered Phnom Penh no option but to bring the case back to the ICJ for a clarification of the scope and meaning of the 1962 judgement. The court is currently considering Cambodia's request for a ban on Thai military activities at the disputed area.

The decisions of both organisations are likely to be delivered around the same time, perhaps shortly after the Thai election.

Abhisit called for other parties to make their stances clear in order to relieve the political pressure mounting on him. In case Thailand loses the court battle, Abhisit needs someone in the same boat- as well as someone with a different stance to shift the blame to.

-- The Nation 2011-06-16

Of course they are quite clearly wrong. The temple obviously belongs to Cambodia. Once upon a time ago Thailand thought Angkor Wat was theirs in a place called Siem Reap.

Another BIG mistake of the Democrats mmmm....

It is more like the national mindset of blind nationalism.

I blame 5 generations of the school system.

I believe Abhisit knows better, but that doesn't mean he can swim up stream against decades of brainwashing on a national level. Sure it kept the country together, but it also breeds in bad decisions based on arrogant nationalism.

Of course they are quite clearly wrong. The temple obviously belongs to Cambodia. Once upon a time ago Thailand thought Angkor Wat was theirs in a place called Siem Reap.

Did you read that in "History for Idiots"? Once upon a time Angkor Wat was in Thai territory because they had militarily pushed the borders back, earlier still the border was much closer to Sukhothai. Angkor Wat was NOT in a place called Siem Reap until it was recaptured by the Cambodians - pretty obviously as it means Siam Defeated in khmer.

Of course they are quite clearly wrong. The temple obviously belongs to Cambodia. Once upon a time ago Thailand thought Angkor Wat was theirs in a place called Siem Reap.

Did you read that in "History for Idiots"? Once upon a time Angkor Wat was in Thai territory because they had militarily pushed the borders back, earlier still the border was much closer to Sukhothai. Angkor Wat was NOT in a place called Siem Reap until it was recaptured by the Cambodians - pretty obviously as it means Siam Defeated in khmer.

And 'Siam' hasn't been around for a LOOOOONG time now.

A bit like England trying to re-write the Canada USA border by force now, because they can't get an access road to that side of Niagara Falls. Of course forgetting Canada actually exists.

A very famous German man once said..........

Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country

...Once upon a time Angkor Wat was in Thai territory because they had militarily pushed the borders back, earlier still the border was much closer to Sukhothai. Angkor Wat was NOT in a place called Siem Reap until it was recaptured by the Cambodians - pretty obviously as it means Siam Defeated in khmer.

Actually it was the French that took Angor Wat as part of the treaty of 1907.

TH

Indeed, the party has been mistaken on the issue since it was in opposition. In 2008, it tagged along with the nationalist People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) to exploit crude nationalism over Preah Vihear and attack the governments of Samak Sundaravej and Somchai Wongsawat.

After Samak's government supported Cambodia in listing the temple as a World Heritage Site, the Democrats and the PAD accused Samak and his foreign minister Noppadon Pattama of losing Thai territory and the chance to reclaim Preah Vihear.

Indeed, totally wrong. Lucky us, soon we get rid of them and the "good people" (Prayuth Chan-ocha) are coming back.

Indeed, the party has been mistaken on the issue since it was in opposition. In 2008, it tagged along with the nationalist People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) to exploit crude nationalism over Preah Vihear and attack the governments of Samak Sundaravej and Somchai Wongsawat.

After Samak's government supported Cambodia in listing the temple as a World Heritage Site, the Democrats and the PAD accused Samak and his foreign minister Noppadon Pattama of losing Thai territory and the chance to reclaim Preah Vihear.

Indeed, totally wrong. Lucky us, soon we get rid of them and the "good people" (Prayuth Chan-ocha) are coming back.

That is where I think this whole mess will end. The most successful green party in political history will prevail again.

...Once upon a time Angkor Wat was in Thai territory because they had militarily pushed the borders back, earlier still the border was much closer to Sukhothai. Angkor Wat was NOT in a place called Siem Reap until it was recaptured by the Cambodians - pretty obviously as it means Siam Defeated in khmer.

Actually it was the French that took Angor Wat as part of the treaty of 1907.

TH

True ! And the French administrator at the time used to complain about the Cambodian King (Queen at the time I believe) : We gave them back Angkor Wat and they still don't like us

I am just curious where are all the tvmembers who in other threads concerning this were so adament the Democrats and PAD were right. But The Nation publishs a story about the error and they all go silent. Maybe they just havenot had time to read it yet and prepare their rebuttal to the article.

I am just curious where are all the tvmembers who in other threads concerning this were so adament the Democrats and PAD were right. But The Nation publishs a story about the error and they all go silent. Maybe they just havenot had time to read it yet and prepare their rebuttal to the article.

Interesting, considering the PAD and the Democrats do not agree on this issue - it's the first and foremost reason they are pushing for a "no vote".

I think that the Cambodian government, the Cambodian army, the Thai government, the Thai army and the various nationalist groups from Thailand and Cambodia are wrong, myself.

I am just curious where are all the tvmembers who in other threads concerning this were so adament the Democrats and PAD were right. But The Nation publishs a story about the error and they all go silent. Maybe they just havenot had time to read it yet and prepare their rebuttal to the article.

Interesting, considering the PAD and the Democrats do not agree on this issue - it's the first and foremost reason they are pushing for a "no vote".

I think that the Cambodian government, the Cambodian army, the Thai government, the Thai army and the various nationalist groups from Thailand and Cambodia are wrong, myself.

Well were the 3 guys spying in Thailand or Cambodia. Or were they spying in thailand They were arrested for spying in Thailand/Cambodia now The General that escaped, escaped from where. No wonder Abhisit is confused. Everyone here is as well.

Of course they are quite clearly wrong. The temple obviously belongs to Cambodia. Once upon a time ago Thailand thought Angkor Wat was theirs in a place called Siem Reap.

The temple cannot obviously belong to Cambodia. There is nothing to even suggest that. Topographically and by the treaty of 1907, it is in Thailand. Only an errored map and a legal technicality place it in Cambodia.

duplicate post<br>

A very famous German man once said..........

Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country

Obviously, George W Bush Read that book.

CS

Of course they are quite clearly wrong. The temple obviously belongs to Cambodia. Once upon a time ago Thailand thought Angkor Wat was theirs in a place called Siem Reap.

Did you read that in "History for Idiots"? Once upon a time Angkor Wat was in Thai territory because they had militarily pushed the borders back, earlier still the border was much closer to Sukhothai. Angkor Wat was NOT in a place called Siem Reap until it was recaptured by the Cambodians - pretty obviously as it means Siam Defeated in khmer.

You are a piece of work.

...Once upon a time Angkor Wat was in Thai territory because they had militarily pushed the borders back, earlier still the border was much closer to Sukhothai. Angkor Wat was NOT in a place called Siem Reap until it was recaptured by the Cambodians - pretty obviously as it means Siam Defeated in khmer.

Actually it was the French that took Angor Wat as part of the treaty of 1907.

TH

And who did they give it to?

Sad it has taken the Nation this long to make a statement like this and people have died because of it, my god.

Removed a post that claimed others were paid to post. If you have any actual evidence please forward it to support. If it's just a lame debating tactic, further references like that may find you without posting rights.