February 23, 2011
By Dr. A. Gaffar Peang-Meth
PACIFIC DAILY NEWS
Anyone knows, there are two sides to a coin, and at least two sides to any argument; so it takes two sides to make war or peace.
Last week I wrote about the Feb. 4-7 border gunfight between troops from Thailand and Cambodia, countries condemned by destiny to live side by side, sharing much history, similar culture and Buddhist beliefs, and both members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, yet generally unable to get along.
The shooting earlier this month between the two countries' heavily armed soldiers was not a surprise. It was not the first armed conflict on the border dispute around the Preah Vihear Temple, nor will it be the last. Each side blames the other for shooting first, as if one should be absolved of responsibility for the resulting death and destruction for shooting second.
Each knows it cannot win. Let no person dream of a Thai or a Cambodian "victory" through guns, only colossal losses. Cambodia called for a U.N. Security Council emergency meeting and a deployment of U.N. Peacekeepers. Thailand said no.
The 15-member Security Council didn't really care to entertain what the Bangkok Post's Voranai Vanijaka called the "tattletale little punks running to adults," but listened to both sides tell their stories on Feb. 14.
Security Council members expressed "grave concern" and told both sides to show "maximum restraint," to establish a permanent ceasefire and expressed support for "bilateral efforts and regional efforts" to negotiate an end to the conflict. ASEAN foreign ministers, guided by their charter principle of noninterference in domestic affairs of states, met in Jakarta yesterday.
Hardly a day after the New York meeting, border skirmishes flared up. Again, Bangkok and Phnom Penh traded blame.
Who owns temple?
The issue of ownership of the Temple of Preah Vihear in Khmer, Phra Viharn in Thai, has been settled since June 15, 1962, by the International Court of Justice's 9-to-3 ruling to give the temple to Cambodia.
But the World Court never ruled on the 4.6 square kilometres (1.8 square miles) of land around the temple, claimed by both Thailand and Cambodia.
A few events precipitated the recent gunfight. Never mind the Bangkok-Phnom Penh conflict over the United Nations' designation of the Preah Vihear Temple as a World Heritage Site of universal value in 2008 or the arrest in December 2010 of seven Thai (yellow shirt) nationalists who deliberately crossed the border into the disputed area.
First, there was a stone signboard in the disputed area: "Here is the place where Thai troops invaded Cambodian territory on 15 July 2008." Thai authorities protested. On Jan. 25, the Cambodian defense minister agreed to remove the sign.
Yet as the signboard was pulled down, a new stone tablet was erected and inscribed with the words, "Here is Cambodia."
A Thai military commander and 20 armed Thai soldiers met with Cambodian border troops to demand the removal of the stone tablet: "If you don't remove the tablet, I will erect a 'Here is Thailand' stone tablet."
The Cambodian stone tablet was removed.
But in the place of the signboard and the tablet was Cambodia's national flag flying over the Buddhist temple.
So tanks and armored personnel were involved on Feb. 4-7.
Both sides are digging in for the long haul.
Meanwhile, on Feb. 17, Europe's Angora Vox's article, "Vietnamese armored vehicles en route to Preah Vihear to help Cambodia," reported from its headquarters in Brussels that a company of Vietnamese armored vehicles crossed Cambodia, headed for Thailand's border.
Ploy and deception
Both Abhisit Vejjajiva, the Oxford-educated Thai prime minister, and Hun Sen, the pagoda boy made Cambodia's prime minister by Vietnam in 1985, have used nationalism as a ploy for personal political gain.
For Abhisit, the border dispute is a tool for political survival in his domestic political fight with the yellow-shirted "People's Alliance for Democracy" that seeks his government's demise. For Hun Sen, the border dispute with Cambodia's historical enemy in the West is a blessing to draw domestic attention away from discontent and concerns over Vietnam's encroachment in the East.
The use of nationalism as a ploy has worked wonders, more for Hun Sen.
For Abhisit, Thais are growing disillusioned because reason and logic tell them Abhisit is less than honest not to admit to the losing fight over Preah Vihear. The temple will not be recovered. He is seen as less than competent for embracing "bilateral negotiation" that has not worked, and for rejecting international intervention that may help solve a problem Bangkok cannot win.
For Hun Sen, nothing draws Cambodians together -- not only in the country but, ironically, many expatriates abroad, who should know better -- than Hun Sen's call to stop the "invasion of Cambodia" by the "swallowers of Khmer soil." Logically, if Thais in the disputed area are invaders, what would Cambodians be in the same disputed area?
Cambodians, in general, are left ignorant of what underlies the June 14, 2000, memorandum of understanding on the survey and demarcation of land boundary, or the June 18, 2000, joint communique that led to the making of Preah Vihear a World Heritage Site.
And so, here we are: In a crisis created by two. If both armies don't withdraw their trigger-happy troops, new rounds of armed conflict are waiting to happen.
A. Gaffar Peang-Meth, Ph.D., is retired from the University of Guam. Write him at peangmeth@yahoo.com.
By Dr. A. Gaffar Peang-Meth
PACIFIC DAILY NEWS
Anyone knows, there are two sides to a coin, and at least two sides to any argument; so it takes two sides to make war or peace.
Last week I wrote about the Feb. 4-7 border gunfight between troops from Thailand and Cambodia, countries condemned by destiny to live side by side, sharing much history, similar culture and Buddhist beliefs, and both members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, yet generally unable to get along.
The shooting earlier this month between the two countries' heavily armed soldiers was not a surprise. It was not the first armed conflict on the border dispute around the Preah Vihear Temple, nor will it be the last. Each side blames the other for shooting first, as if one should be absolved of responsibility for the resulting death and destruction for shooting second.
Each knows it cannot win. Let no person dream of a Thai or a Cambodian "victory" through guns, only colossal losses. Cambodia called for a U.N. Security Council emergency meeting and a deployment of U.N. Peacekeepers. Thailand said no.
The 15-member Security Council didn't really care to entertain what the Bangkok Post's Voranai Vanijaka called the "tattletale little punks running to adults," but listened to both sides tell their stories on Feb. 14.
Security Council members expressed "grave concern" and told both sides to show "maximum restraint," to establish a permanent ceasefire and expressed support for "bilateral efforts and regional efforts" to negotiate an end to the conflict. ASEAN foreign ministers, guided by their charter principle of noninterference in domestic affairs of states, met in Jakarta yesterday.
Hardly a day after the New York meeting, border skirmishes flared up. Again, Bangkok and Phnom Penh traded blame.
Who owns temple?
The issue of ownership of the Temple of Preah Vihear in Khmer, Phra Viharn in Thai, has been settled since June 15, 1962, by the International Court of Justice's 9-to-3 ruling to give the temple to Cambodia.
But the World Court never ruled on the 4.6 square kilometres (1.8 square miles) of land around the temple, claimed by both Thailand and Cambodia.
A few events precipitated the recent gunfight. Never mind the Bangkok-Phnom Penh conflict over the United Nations' designation of the Preah Vihear Temple as a World Heritage Site of universal value in 2008 or the arrest in December 2010 of seven Thai (yellow shirt) nationalists who deliberately crossed the border into the disputed area.
First, there was a stone signboard in the disputed area: "Here is the place where Thai troops invaded Cambodian territory on 15 July 2008." Thai authorities protested. On Jan. 25, the Cambodian defense minister agreed to remove the sign.
Yet as the signboard was pulled down, a new stone tablet was erected and inscribed with the words, "Here is Cambodia."
A Thai military commander and 20 armed Thai soldiers met with Cambodian border troops to demand the removal of the stone tablet: "If you don't remove the tablet, I will erect a 'Here is Thailand' stone tablet."
The Cambodian stone tablet was removed.
But in the place of the signboard and the tablet was Cambodia's national flag flying over the Buddhist temple.
So tanks and armored personnel were involved on Feb. 4-7.
Both sides are digging in for the long haul.
Meanwhile, on Feb. 17, Europe's Angora Vox's article, "Vietnamese armored vehicles en route to Preah Vihear to help Cambodia," reported from its headquarters in Brussels that a company of Vietnamese armored vehicles crossed Cambodia, headed for Thailand's border.
Ploy and deception
Both Abhisit Vejjajiva, the Oxford-educated Thai prime minister, and Hun Sen, the pagoda boy made Cambodia's prime minister by Vietnam in 1985, have used nationalism as a ploy for personal political gain.
For Abhisit, the border dispute is a tool for political survival in his domestic political fight with the yellow-shirted "People's Alliance for Democracy" that seeks his government's demise. For Hun Sen, the border dispute with Cambodia's historical enemy in the West is a blessing to draw domestic attention away from discontent and concerns over Vietnam's encroachment in the East.
The use of nationalism as a ploy has worked wonders, more for Hun Sen.
For Abhisit, Thais are growing disillusioned because reason and logic tell them Abhisit is less than honest not to admit to the losing fight over Preah Vihear. The temple will not be recovered. He is seen as less than competent for embracing "bilateral negotiation" that has not worked, and for rejecting international intervention that may help solve a problem Bangkok cannot win.
For Hun Sen, nothing draws Cambodians together -- not only in the country but, ironically, many expatriates abroad, who should know better -- than Hun Sen's call to stop the "invasion of Cambodia" by the "swallowers of Khmer soil." Logically, if Thais in the disputed area are invaders, what would Cambodians be in the same disputed area?
Cambodians, in general, are left ignorant of what underlies the June 14, 2000, memorandum of understanding on the survey and demarcation of land boundary, or the June 18, 2000, joint communique that led to the making of Preah Vihear a World Heritage Site.
And so, here we are: In a crisis created by two. If both armies don't withdraw their trigger-happy troops, new rounds of armed conflict are waiting to happen.
A. Gaffar Peang-Meth, Ph.D., is retired from the University of Guam. Write him at peangmeth@yahoo.com.
8 comments:
DR. Hun Sen has bought two nuclear bombs from old soviet union. These nuclear bombs secretly sell by Russia Mafia to Dr. Hun Sen last 3 weeks ago. It cost US$1 billions just two bombs. Dr. Hun Sen will only use these bombs to protect his power if Thai use aircrafts to invate him. So it doesn't matter how many tanks, aircrafts weapons thai military has. Two Nucleau bombs are more than enough for Dr. Hun Sen end the war with thai.
Why do Kos Trol, sea and lands proximately over 10 000 km2 have been lost to Vietnam by who treaty? Why don’t Cambodia goverment transparencies explain to Cambodia army at front line and the whole nation about this? Why don't they include this into education system? Why?
Cambodian armies are fighting at front line for 4.6 km2 and what's about over 10 000km2 of Cambodia to Vietnam. Nobody dare to talk about it! Why? Cambodian armies you are decide the fate of your nation, Cambodian army as well as Cambodian people must rethink about this again and again. Is it fair?
Kos Trol, Sea and lands over 10 000km2 have been lost to Vietnam by who treaty at 1979 to 1985 treaty! Treaty! Cambodian army at front line as well as all Cambodian people must rethink again about these issues. Are Cambodian army fighting to protect the Cambodia Nation or protect a very small group that own big lands, big properties or only protecting a small group rather in the real name of protecting Khmer nation?
Cambodian army at front line suffer under rain, wind, bullets, bombs, lack of foods, lack of nutrition, their families have no health care help, no securities after they die but a very small group eat well, sleep well, sleep in first class hotel with air conditioning with young girls message, have super health care from oversea medical treatment, they are billionaires, millionaires who sell out the country to be rich and make Cambodian people suffer everyday as Cambodian people know already.
Who signed the treaty 1979-1985 that result lost over 10 000 km2 of Cambodia??? Why don't they transparency inform all Cambodian and Cambodian army at front line about these issues? Why don't include Kos Trol (Kos Trol size is bigger than the whole Phom Phen and bigger than Singapoor with heap of great natural resources) in education system in Cambodia.
Look at Hun Sen families, relatives; friends are billionaires, millionaires where do they get the money from if we all just get out of war with empty hands? Hun Sen always say in his speech Cambodia just get up from war, just get up from Zero with empty hands and how come they are billionaires, millionaires but 90% innocent Cambodian people are so poor struggling with living every day.
Smart Khmer girl Ms. Rattana Keo,
Shut up!! The temple and the surrounding is Khmer land period!!! What kind of logic do you don't understand? Thai is the invader!!!
http://photos.world.yes.my/gallery/1295938871645
Please check why the Red Shirt protester in Thailand used Cambodian flag?
Dr P-Meth should read more about preah vihear case but this mane never said something good about Cambodian don't know what he want
how could call yourself DR? most of your written are from news that we read many time befor.basicly you are lack of understanding the root of the dispute of whose invade who?wich make your theory seem lower then a child that understand what cause the invasion.you said: if Thais in the disputed area are invaders, what would Cambodians be in the same disputed area? We are the defender of our motherland that won turn a bline eye like you MR DR TRATOR GAFFAR PEANG METH. Fuck you
I think he tries to balance his view in this article that is why he lost some points. He talked about MOU 2000 and Joint Communique of 18 June 2008.
As I understand well, the MOU 2000 was made to facilitate the border demarcation according to Maps produced by Franco-Siam treaties at the beginning 20th century. As for the portion of border around Preah Vihear temple, it has been examined during the international court of justice process haft a century ago, so it should not be clear. While Thailand produce another map, it is clearly violation of MOU 2000 and ICJ verdict in 1962.
Dr. Peang Meth should not mention about Joint Communiqué of 18 June 2008 at all. This communique had been canceled by Thailand before the Unesco meeting in Canada to awarded the world heritage status to Preah Vihear.
5:30 PM, Agreed. As an academic, I would have expected Dr. Peang-Meth to understand the 2000 MoU and the 18 June 2008 communique deeper and better. I am disappointed that he didn't. The MOU stipulated that both sides can't construct anything inside the so-called "disputed zone" from the date it was signed. However, Wat Keo Sikha Kirisvara pagoda was built and the Cambodian flag was flown over the pagoda in 1998, 2 years before the MOU was signed. Also, the MOU stated that the 1908 Franco-Siamese map will be used as a base for future demarcation works. The 1908 Franco-Siamese map puts the 4.6 sq.km squarely under the sovereignty of Cambodia. Talking about the joint communique of 18 June 2008, the communique and the attached sketch of map, not a real map but a sketch, was for the purpose of the zoning of the Preah Vihear temple for the purpose of Unesco inscription of the temple only. It is not, I stress it is not, a treaty or border map which has international legal weight at all. Besides, it was annulled by the Thai constitutional court a few months before Preah vihear temple was inscribed by Unesco.
about the 4.6sq.km. The Thai always claimed that the international court did not judge what country it falls under. However, one of the judgment stated something like this that "Thailand is under obligation to withdraw all troops, police, guards from the temple or the vicinity of the temple under the sovereignty of Cambodia". Here, the word "vicinity of the temple under the sovereignty of Cambodia" means that the court judged that the 4.6sq.km belong to Cambodia because of the word "vicinity" and under the sovereignty of Cambodia" say it all.
Post a Comment