By Professor Pen Ngoeun
Phnom Penh Post
Michael Hayes, in an article published on 17 February 2011 by The Phnom Penh Post under the title: “The view from Cambodia,” is not “a spin doctor for the government of Cambodia” as he mentioned about himself, but he is certainly a spin doctor for Thailand, when he suggested that: “As for the disputed 4.6 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.”
No, not everybody wins. Michael Hayes loves to see Thailand win and Cambodia lose. Instead, Michael Hayes should suggest that Thailand must respect international treaties, of which Thailand (or Siam) was, is and will be the party to the treaties.
Siam (now Thailand) signed the Franco-Siamese Treaty of 13 February 1904 setting up a Mixed Commission composed of French Commission and Siamese Commission to delimit the frontier line between Cambodia (that was part of French Indochina) and Siam. In the area of the Temple of Preah Vihear, a map of the Dangrek sector known as “The Dangrek Map” among a set of 11 maps published under this treaty recognised and accepted by Siam, is the insoluble evidence that an international frontier line, stable and final, existed almost a century ago and continues to exist between Cambodia and Thailand. Being former publisher and editor-in-chief of The Phnom Penh Post, and under this circumstance writing and publishing on Cambodian affairs where all eyes may yet see Michael Hayes as an expert in the matter, I found it to be a shocking disappointment, despite a certain number of things interesting, good and fair that are actually presented in the article.
The International Court of Justice’s Judgment of 15 June 1962 is the reaffirmation that there is an international frontier line, stable and final between Cambodia and Thailand as evidenced by the Dangrek map known to be ANNEX I to Memorial of Cambodia or ANNEX I map.
The Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of the Kingdom of Cambodia and the Government of the Kingdom of Thailand on the Survey and Demarcation of Land Boundary, actually known as MOU 2000, requires that the survey and demarcation shall be jointly conducted in accordance with:
* The Convention between France and Siam modifying the stipulations of the Treaty of the 3 October 1893, regarding Territorial Boundaries and other Agreements, signed at Paris, 13 February 1904;
* The Treaty between His Majesty the King of Siam and the President of the French Republic, signed at Bangkok, 23 March 1907, and the Protocol concerning the delimitation of boundaries and annexed to the Treaty of 23 March 1907;
* Maps which are the results of demarcation works of the Commissions of Delimitations of the Boundary between Indo-China and Siam set up under the Convention of 1904 and the Treaty of 1907 between France and Siam and other documents relating to the application of the above Convention and Treaty.
Based on the above international and legal documents, the “4.6 sq kms” exists only in the imagination and fabrication of Thailand, and the suggestion of Michael Hayes, as I quoted here above, is feeding quite well into the campaign of intoxication of the international public opinion conducted consistently and shamelessly by Thailand for the “joint management” of a Cambodian piece of property against Cambodian will. Naturally, Cambodia will develop the area of the Temple of Preah Vihear in conformity with UNESCO and the World Heritage standards. It is a slanderous suggestion aimed to spoil and to hurt the intelligence, kindness and good nature of the Cambodian people made by Michael Hayes, who thinks that “tax revenues” will blind the Cambodian leaders seeking to enrich themselves with Thailand investments. As the matter of fact, Michael Hayes’ article was picked up in its entirety by the Bangkok Post Online News on 20 February 2011 under the title: “The view from across the border”. Without getting into unfair accusations, it is fair to think that Michael Hayes has not yet cleansed himself of the grudges he had against Cambodia and the former Second Prime Minister, Samdech Techo Hun Sen.
The point I wish to make here is that Michael Hayes, or anyone else, or anyone of the stature of former President of Singapore Lee Kwan Yew or former President Jimmy Carter of the United States of America, as suggested by Pinn Siraprapasiri in “Thailand and Cambodia need a ‘Jimmy Carter’ mediator”, published in The Nation on 18 February 2011, to be successful his or her job would be to convince Thailand to respect and to abide by the treaties of which Thailand is the party to those treaties.
At Jakarta, on 22 February 2011, the business is very specific.
The members of the United Nations Social Security Council (UNSC) in a meeting on 14 February, following the plea of Samdech Akka Moha Sena Padei Techo Hun Sen, Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Cambodia, about the gravity of the conditions created by Thailnd’s war of aggression against Cambodia, took note that (i) a war broke out, (ii) there are losses of lives and properties, (iii) tens of thousands of people face insecurity and uncertainty every day, and these calamities must be stopped, “urge the parties to establish a permanent ceasefire and to implement it fully,” and recommended that “the idea is to work in synergy with the regional efforts – and right now regional efforts are in full force – and resolve the situation peacefully and through effective dialogue.” It is for those reasons that foreign ministers of ASEAN will meet on 22 February at Jakarta under the chairmanship of the Foreign Minister of Indonesia, Marty Natalegwa.
Will we have a permanent ceasefire? Why not? Will the ceasefire be implemented fully? Why not? I bet on ASEAN’s astuteness, despite the fact that Thailand has a reputation of “a difficult child”.
Confusion and misapprehension will benefit Thailand to the detriment of Cambodia. Clarity will bring justice and equity to Cambodia. I intended that Michael Hayes be clear about the Cambodian affairs in relation to Thailand’s war of aggression in the following sequences: (i) establishment of a permanent ceasefire under UNSC’s recommendation, (ii) full implementation of the ceasefire under the UNSC’s recommendation, (iii) demarcation of the land boundary under MOU 2000.
Professor Pen Ngoeun,
Senior adviser and member of the Academic Committee, Puthisastra University, Phnom Penh, Cambodia,
Former Dean and Professor of the Faculty of Business and Economics, Pannasastra University of Cambodia,
Former Assistant Controller at Phibro Inc, a subsidiary of Citigroup Inc, New York City, USA, until 2000.
Michael Hayes, in an article published on 17 February 2011 by The Phnom Penh Post under the title: “The view from Cambodia,” is not “a spin doctor for the government of Cambodia” as he mentioned about himself, but he is certainly a spin doctor for Thailand, when he suggested that: “As for the disputed 4.6 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.”
No, not everybody wins. Michael Hayes loves to see Thailand win and Cambodia lose. Instead, Michael Hayes should suggest that Thailand must respect international treaties, of which Thailand (or Siam) was, is and will be the party to the treaties.
Siam (now Thailand) signed the Franco-Siamese Treaty of 13 February 1904 setting up a Mixed Commission composed of French Commission and Siamese Commission to delimit the frontier line between Cambodia (that was part of French Indochina) and Siam. In the area of the Temple of Preah Vihear, a map of the Dangrek sector known as “The Dangrek Map” among a set of 11 maps published under this treaty recognised and accepted by Siam, is the insoluble evidence that an international frontier line, stable and final, existed almost a century ago and continues to exist between Cambodia and Thailand. Being former publisher and editor-in-chief of The Phnom Penh Post, and under this circumstance writing and publishing on Cambodian affairs where all eyes may yet see Michael Hayes as an expert in the matter, I found it to be a shocking disappointment, despite a certain number of things interesting, good and fair that are actually presented in the article.
The International Court of Justice’s Judgment of 15 June 1962 is the reaffirmation that there is an international frontier line, stable and final between Cambodia and Thailand as evidenced by the Dangrek map known to be ANNEX I to Memorial of Cambodia or ANNEX I map.
The Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of the Kingdom of Cambodia and the Government of the Kingdom of Thailand on the Survey and Demarcation of Land Boundary, actually known as MOU 2000, requires that the survey and demarcation shall be jointly conducted in accordance with:
* The Convention between France and Siam modifying the stipulations of the Treaty of the 3 October 1893, regarding Territorial Boundaries and other Agreements, signed at Paris, 13 February 1904;
* The Treaty between His Majesty the King of Siam and the President of the French Republic, signed at Bangkok, 23 March 1907, and the Protocol concerning the delimitation of boundaries and annexed to the Treaty of 23 March 1907;
* Maps which are the results of demarcation works of the Commissions of Delimitations of the Boundary between Indo-China and Siam set up under the Convention of 1904 and the Treaty of 1907 between France and Siam and other documents relating to the application of the above Convention and Treaty.
Based on the above international and legal documents, the “4.6 sq kms” exists only in the imagination and fabrication of Thailand, and the suggestion of Michael Hayes, as I quoted here above, is feeding quite well into the campaign of intoxication of the international public opinion conducted consistently and shamelessly by Thailand for the “joint management” of a Cambodian piece of property against Cambodian will. Naturally, Cambodia will develop the area of the Temple of Preah Vihear in conformity with UNESCO and the World Heritage standards. It is a slanderous suggestion aimed to spoil and to hurt the intelligence, kindness and good nature of the Cambodian people made by Michael Hayes, who thinks that “tax revenues” will blind the Cambodian leaders seeking to enrich themselves with Thailand investments. As the matter of fact, Michael Hayes’ article was picked up in its entirety by the Bangkok Post Online News on 20 February 2011 under the title: “The view from across the border”. Without getting into unfair accusations, it is fair to think that Michael Hayes has not yet cleansed himself of the grudges he had against Cambodia and the former Second Prime Minister, Samdech Techo Hun Sen.
The point I wish to make here is that Michael Hayes, or anyone else, or anyone of the stature of former President of Singapore Lee Kwan Yew or former President Jimmy Carter of the United States of America, as suggested by Pinn Siraprapasiri in “Thailand and Cambodia need a ‘Jimmy Carter’ mediator”, published in The Nation on 18 February 2011, to be successful his or her job would be to convince Thailand to respect and to abide by the treaties of which Thailand is the party to those treaties.
At Jakarta, on 22 February 2011, the business is very specific.
The members of the United Nations Social Security Council (UNSC) in a meeting on 14 February, following the plea of Samdech Akka Moha Sena Padei Techo Hun Sen, Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Cambodia, about the gravity of the conditions created by Thailnd’s war of aggression against Cambodia, took note that (i) a war broke out, (ii) there are losses of lives and properties, (iii) tens of thousands of people face insecurity and uncertainty every day, and these calamities must be stopped, “urge the parties to establish a permanent ceasefire and to implement it fully,” and recommended that “the idea is to work in synergy with the regional efforts – and right now regional efforts are in full force – and resolve the situation peacefully and through effective dialogue.” It is for those reasons that foreign ministers of ASEAN will meet on 22 February at Jakarta under the chairmanship of the Foreign Minister of Indonesia, Marty Natalegwa.
Will we have a permanent ceasefire? Why not? Will the ceasefire be implemented fully? Why not? I bet on ASEAN’s astuteness, despite the fact that Thailand has a reputation of “a difficult child”.
Confusion and misapprehension will benefit Thailand to the detriment of Cambodia. Clarity will bring justice and equity to Cambodia. I intended that Michael Hayes be clear about the Cambodian affairs in relation to Thailand’s war of aggression in the following sequences: (i) establishment of a permanent ceasefire under UNSC’s recommendation, (ii) full implementation of the ceasefire under the UNSC’s recommendation, (iii) demarcation of the land boundary under MOU 2000.
Professor Pen Ngoeun,
Senior adviser and member of the Academic Committee, Puthisastra University, Phnom Penh, Cambodia,
Former Dean and Professor of the Faculty of Business and Economics, Pannasastra University of Cambodia,
Former Assistant Controller at Phibro Inc, a subsidiary of Citigroup Inc, New York City, USA, until 2000.
6 comments:
Votre analyse est bien juste , pour l'intérêt de notre pays !
Mais les autres ne voient pas la même chose que nous .Il est là le problème .
Il faut qu'on prouve noir sur blanc que cette bande de terre de 4,6 km2 nous appartient , lors du tracé de la carte franco-siamois 1904-1908 .
Si c'est encore un travail mal fait par les français à l'époque , on ne peut pas gagner l'opinion international.
Les intellectuels khmers doivent demander à la France de nous donner un coup de main pour la publication de ce traité et la carte signée par les Siam et les Français.
Si on veut retourner à La Haye , il faut qu'on commence à préparer le terrain .
Merci à vous.
In his article, Michael Hayes is very sympathetic with Cambodia and the Cambodian people. But his suggestion of a "joint management" of the Preah Vihear surrounding area is out of the question because it is a Cambodian territory. Cambodia would never share its territory with Thailand the same as Thailand would never share its territory with Cambodia. The only way to decide which country owns the lands is to take the case to the international court, but Thailand refused because it knows it does not have a claim to the lands, meaning it will lose in the court case like in 1962.
I disagree that Michael Hayes suggestion amounts to a case of Thailand winning and Cambodia losing.
I also find this article while containing some factual references regarding MOU's and previous treaties, more of an attack on Michael Hayes than his idea.
His idea is a compromise i.e. both sides lose AND win. That is no -one country gets to claim the land as their own (the losing part) and that both sides get to use the land for the benefit of all via tourism and related income for both countries (the winning part). Oh and yeah, another winning point is that no more people get killed and displaced from their homes, instead they could get jobs in the proposed tourism industry, have money to send their kids to school, and food in their bellies.
How does that sound?
Regardless of his intension, the viewpoint that this Michael guy comes from really makes a difference in his argument. From the mere fact that he sounds to talk from the viewpoint held by the Thai in believing there was ever still a dispute over the supposed 4.6 km already has a bias written all over.
Hello Mr. PM Hun Sen and Khmer brothers and sisters. I’m one of Khmers krom, but I’m not living in Cambodia either in Kampuchea krom. Actually, I came to the United States for thirty years ago. I’m writing this letter to you PM Hun Sen because I have been admiring and supporting you from the bottom of my heart. Compared to a several previous generation, you are a good leader. However, I’m sure that you might-have-been remembered what happened before 1970 when the King of Sihanouk was a chairman at the time. I didn’t mean to make him feel bad about what he did, but I just can’t keep it in my heart forever. Sihanouk mess up the country because he fed alligator (HoChiMinh); he himself also knew what he did. In the last few decades, Cambodia had lost so much land just because of the Khmer Empire. Thai, Vietnamese communist, and Lao tried to take advantage of Khmers King kindness, and stool our land. Now is the 21st Century, the young generation will not repeat the mistake that the old generation had made in the past. My understanding is, Cambodia government can allow to all foreigners who desire to live in Cambodia; otherwise, they must follow the rule of the Cambodia Government just like Khmer citizens. Here are several example rules that they must be following: 1) they must learn the language, 2) they must be able to fill out of the legal documents, 3) they must joint army and serve just like Khmer citizens do, 4) if they attempt to act against the government then they will sentence to prison for life or death penalty, 4) all of the government documents must be Khmer and English languages only.
I had proved and seen in my own eyes that Yuon Hanoi and Thieu’s regime alleged that they wanted Khmers krom to die, so they were always put Khmers krom in front-line just like Thai did to Khmers Surin. I felt sad and sick in my stomach when I saw Khmers died in irrational way. This is not funny to Cambodian people at all. This is a serious matter that Khmers leader should pay a closer attention. Khmers young generation can do better but depend on a leader. My understanding is the Education department of Cambodia must create the flyers and small books; the comment will be written a brief explanation about the history of Cambodian people and original Geography. It can help Khmers Phnom Penh, Khmers Surin, and Khmers Krom understand more about history of people and geography. On the other hand, the Cambodia Government must drop the flyers all over the provinces where the Khmers Surin and Khmers krom when we needed. Therefore, Cambodia Government must show them respect, welcome, and promise that we were born in the same blood and language. God of Buddhism will bless and bring all Khmers together in one Nation and united. I believe that Khmers must defeat the enemies because Khmers are tall, strong, brave, confident, trustful, and well trained. God knows Khmers can do it. So please, think about it twice. We come together, we will build a better Cambodia and live a better life. As a result, if you agree or disagree of my opinions, please email me at newpageofhistory@yahoo.com thanks! We are Khmers, we were born in the same blood and language. One more thing that I want to remind Khmers brothers and sisters. Don’t listen and believe to Vietnamese communist old school propaganda, and Don’t feed alligator (Vietnamese communist, HCM). I’m sure that the United States and China know who is an “ALLIGATOR” --->(Ho)---->Ho flip-flop!
Hanoi tried to control Indochina, Vietnam, Lao, Cambodia, and Thailand as well. Hanoi planed to do same thing that it had done in Cambodia before 1970; it means Hanoi kept sending more Vietcong to Cambodia, Lao, and Thailand. However, I believe that one day in the future, China must wide-out of Hanoi, so Khmers can have Kampuchea krom back.
Suggestion: The US should stay out of South China Sea. In the eyes of Hanoi-Vietnamese communist, The French and The US were considered a loser. Hanoi-Vietnamese communist talk and nice to the US at this time because they afraid China invade the Vietnam, therefore, his brother Stalin-Soviet Union is longer exist on earth. Hello American, wake up!! and remember that Hanoi always plays game two hands at the same time. That's all I can tell you, and hope you will think about it twice.
Post a Comment