Hilariously, on the nation article.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/breakingnews/ICJ-says-Thailand-did-accept-Annex-I-map-30219282.html

The nation is running a mood indicator of how you feel about knowing that Thailand might have lost 4sq km of land

How does this story make you feel?

• Amused

  37%

  

• Happy

  27%

  

• Mai Pen Rai

  18%

  

• Sad

  9%

  

• Angry

  2%

  

• Shocked

  1%

  

• Surprised

  1%

  

• Like

  1%

  

The other paper has a completely contradictory statement in the "breaking news" section.

From the other paper, it seems that not the whole 4.6kms is Cambodian. That's the way I read it anyway.

From the ICJ's own press release:

"the Temple of Preah Vihear is situated in territory under the sovereignty of Cambodia" must be taken as referring, ....., to the whole of the territory of the promontory of Preah Vihear.:"

(see harrry's link in earlier post)

I don't see Thai TV being that anxious to incite further discord in the midst of an already raging protest. 'News' can wait - for now, look to the West for news about the east.

I am in Phnom Penh and last night my son in Khon Kaen said that Thai TV was saying war would start tomorrow. Not sure what channel he saw that on. As before this is only to distract from the problems in Bangkok... and money of course. I note that after several decades the Thai's only kicked up a fuss when the Cambodians finished the new road from Siem Reap. Up until then most tourists went in via the Thai side. Clearly no foreigner is going to travel something like 8 hours from Bangkok when they can do it from Siem Reap in less than 2. Why they can't both split the tiny area (less than 9 football pitches) or make it a free trade area is beyond me.

i wonder if cambodia can file for damages, the lines were clearly drawn yet thailand greed was responsible for the death of many

ICJ got it right... now it's time to follow the umpires decision.

The other paper has a completely contradictory statement in the "breaking news" section.

From the other paper, it seems that not the whole 4.6kms is Cambodian. That's the way I read it anyway.

Exactly, meanwhile Surapong has had a brain fade and told everyone in Thailand that the verdict comes next year.

"Nothing to see here, move along please"

LAST Month he said it was going to be next year.

Still not mentioned on Thai tv :-D

Sent from my i-mobile IQ 5.3 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

HUH; every station had the ruling on it at 4 pm and than commentary

I predict that an amicable settlement to the dispute will be made between the leaders of both Countries. They will set up a joint family owned Company to run this World Heritage Site for mutual financial benefit, problem solved.

The other paper has a completely contradictory statement in the "breaking news" section.

From the other paper, it seems that not the whole 4.6kms is Cambodian. That's the way I read it anyway.

Exactly, meanwhile Surapong has had a brain fade and told everyone in Thailand that the verdict comes next year.

"Nothing to see here, move along please"

LAST Month he said it was going to be next year.

Well someone bumped it up. I notice, that the comments were made 2013-10-11, which would be rather opportune if you were trying to run deliberate interference and confusion around the dates for this story. Someone should close that story, because it is just causing confusion

The Thai victory spin has begun.

Press release from the ICJ website: http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/151/17714.pdf

The Court considers that the territorial scope of the three operative paragraphs is the same: the finding in the first paragraph that “the Temple of Preah Vihear is situated in territory under the sovereignty of Cambodia” must be taken as referring, like the second and third paragraphs, to the whole of the territory of the promontory of Preah Vihear.

The Court finally notes that, in the present proceedings, Thailand has accepted that it has a general and continuing legal obligation to respect the integrity of Cambodian territory, which applies to any disputed territory found by the Court to be under Cambodian sovereignty.

Therefore, the Court does not need to examine the nature, continuing or instantaneous, of the obligation to withdraw contained in the second operative paragraph.

I don't see Thai TV being that anxious to incite further discord in the midst of an already raging protest. 'News' can wait - for now, look to the West for news about the east.

I am in Phnom Penh and last night my son in Khon Kaen said that Thai TV was saying war would start tomorrow. Not sure what channel he saw that on. As before this is only to distract from the problems in Bangkok... and money of course. I note that after several decades the Thai's only kicked up a fuss when the Cambodians finished the new road from Siem Reap. Up until then most tourists went in via the Thai side. Clearly no foreigner is going to travel something like 8 hours from Bangkok when they can do it from Siem Reap in less than 2. Why they can't both split the tiny area (less than 9 football pitches) or make it a free trade area is beyond me.

having driven it on the Cambodia side, would say closer to 3 1/2 hours not counting taking a motorbike to the top Its a matter of face,

Now google can change the color of the border from red to yellow like all other borders.

ICJ got it right... now it's time to follow the umpires decision.

The only thing that makes it right is that the ICJ decided it.

I think the 1962 decision was wrong myself, but the ICJ decided otherwise.

I don't see Thai TV being that anxious to incite further discord in the midst of an already raging protest. 'News' can wait - for now, look to the West for news about the east.

No you can probably rely on blue lightning tv or whatever they call themselves to do that

Still not mentioned on Thai tv :-D

Sent from my i-mobile IQ 5.3 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

It has been on most Thai TV stations. Channel 3 has English language translation if you select English on your remote control.

The other paper has a completely contradictory statement in the "breaking news" section.

From the other paper, it seems that not the whole 4.6kms is Cambodian. That's the way I read it anyway.

Exactly, meanwhile Surapong has had a brain fade and told everyone in Thailand that the verdict comes next year.

"Nothing to see here, move along please"

Surapong must be correct, he's Thai and a government minister so all the international news outlets I can find are wrong but that's not surprising.

Just how long does he think he can keep this BS going ?

I'm not sure but I hear Thailand got most. Cambodia got a small part just to the east of the temple.

Press release from the ICJ website: http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/151/17714.pdf

The Court considers that the territorial scope of the three operative paragraphs is the same: the finding in the first paragraph that “the Temple of Preah Vihear is situated in territory under the sovereignty of Cambodia” must be taken as referring, like the second and third paragraphs, to the whole of the territory of the promontory of Preah Vihear.

The Court finally notes that, in the present proceedings, Thailand has accepted that it has a general and continuing legal obligation to respect the integrity of Cambodian territory, which applies to any disputed territory found by the Court to be under Cambodian sovereignty.

Therefore, the Court does not need to examine the nature, continuing or instantaneous, of the obligation to withdraw contained in the second operative paragraph.

Cue searches from Thailand to define the word "promontory" to hit the million in the next 10 minutes.

The other paper has a completely contradictory statement in the "breaking news" section.

From the other paper, it seems that not the whole 4.6kms is Cambodian. That's the way I read it anyway.

This is my understanding also. The court rules d that the "promontory" belongs to Cambodia. I think the "disputed" 4.6 km includes some that is not on the promontory. What I am hearing is that 1-2 km of the 4.6 is affected by the ruling only.

On the other hand..................

The whole decision is based on a french Colonial Map of 1902.

Knowing the French (and British) colonial doings in Asia, Africa and he Middle East one can not escape getting the idea the French did a bummer for Thailand.

Moreover, looking at the map, one can not escape the second idea the border line as drawn on that French map indicates something fishy going on.

ICJ got it right... now it's time to follow the umpires decision.

The only thing that makes it right is that the ICJ decided it.

I think the 1962 decision was wrong myself, but the ICJ decided otherwise.

From a topographic point of view, the whole Temple and area is indeed on Thai side... The thing is that Thailand pretty much signed a contract (with France at the time) that said otherwise; and later repeatedly referred to it for about 50 years as a reference for the border definition.

They didn't read the fine print and signed the contract anyway... too bad for them but that's not a valid reason for breaking such a contract.

They should have cut their losses in 1962 and not revived the wound for petty internal political reasons.

The other paper has a completely contradictory statement in the "breaking news" section.

From the other paper, it seems that not the whole 4.6kms is Cambodian. That's the way I read it anyway.

This is my understanding also. The court rules d that the "promontory" belongs to Cambodia. I think the "disputed" 4.6 km includes some that is not on the promontory. What I am hearing is that 1-2 km of the 4.6 is affected by the ruling only.

1.2 or 4.6 doesn't really matter, Thailand has "lost" land big big loss of face

The other paper has a completely contradictory statement in the "breaking news" section.

From the other paper, it seems that not the whole 4.6kms is Cambodian. That's the way I read it anyway.

This is my understanding also. The court rules d that the "promontory" belongs to Cambodia. I think the "disputed" 4.6 km includes some that is not on the promontory. What I am hearing is that 1-2 km of the 4.6 is affected by the ruling only.

If that is the case, that is a very very elegant solution. That is what the other paper states, in that there is a hill inside the disputed bit, which will not be given to Cambodia.

The other paper has a completely contradictory statement in the "breaking news" section.

From the other paper, it seems that not the whole 4.6kms is Cambodian. That's the way I read it anyway.

This is my understanding also. The court rules d that the "promontory" belongs to Cambodia. I think the "disputed" 4.6 km includes some that is not on the promontory. What I am hearing is that 1-2 km of the 4.6 is affected by the ruling only.

1.2 or 4.6 doesn't really matter, Thailand has "lost" land big big loss of face

Actually it's not so clear cut. Not all of the disputed territory has been awarded to Cambodia as I understand it; from the 'other' news source

However, the court rejected Cambodia's claim that it was also awarded a nearby hill, called Phnum Trap or Phu Makheu in Thailand, by the 1962 ICJ ruling that was being interpreted in Monday's judgment.

Pheu Makheu is in the disputed 4.6 square kilometre area.

Not a complete victory, the international press saw it as Thailand disputing the ownership of the promontory but actually Thailand disputed the 4.6kms of land, and some of it has now been included in Cambodia's territory.

A lose-lose really, since the Nationalists will interpret this as 'losing some land' and take advantage of it against the Shinawatra govt.

The Cambodian govt still won't manage to open it since Thailand controls the hill adjacent, though they've been ordered to pull back troops.

We were there three times and Thais as well as Cambodians made decent money every day.First the fee to drive through the national park, then the fee to get on the temple territory. \

Then all the street vendors, etc...

I'd think that no foreigners will go there again, if they need to purchase a visa for Cambodia with all the hassle.

The foriegn ministry of Thailand will be giving a live press conference at 18.40. Where they will be explaining in detail the courts findings.

This is a travesty of justice.

This is not the way of doing things.

So will we now see, as suggested by Estrada, a joint Thai-Cambodian initiative that jointly operates the site to mutual benefit as should have happened originally. No guesses as to where the profits will go.

Next on the agenda will then be the disputed sea area and the oil revenues, but probably not until Mr De Facto is here to dip his snout!