Sent to Khmerization by anonymous reader
Watch video of Sihanouk visiting Preah Vihear temple in 1962.
On one of those days in June 1962, a 15-year-old boy, enthralled by the Prince’s court victory, stood in the crowd listening to a speech in which His majesty the king Norodom Sihanouk exalted the use of diplomacy over military force. “I remember [His majesty the king Norodom Sihanouk] said,‘Fighting is not good; fighting is for defense only,’” 63-year-old Moeung Sonn, president of the National Association of Tourism Enterprises, recalled recently.
Having shaved his head in celebration of the International Court of Justice’s ruling in favor of Cambodia’s claim to ownership of Preah Vihear temple, then-Prince Norodom Sihanouk declared that a seven day vigil would be held outside the Royal Palace in Phnom Penh.
Thailand once again find themselves in dispute with Cambodia regarding the land surrounding Preah Vihear temple,“We should do like his majesty the king did,” said Moeung Sonn, who is also a founder of the Khmer Civilization Foundation, explaining that the retired King rejected military force even after bilateral talks with Thailand failed in the late 1950s.
As soon as he became prime minister,His majesty the king Norodom Sihanouk sent several letters to the Thai government, which received no response. The Cambodian Commentary, a government publication, wrote at the time that the premier “never lost an opportunity of expressing his intense desire—which is shared by the whole Khmer people—to see relations between Cambodia and Thailand firmly established upon a basis of firm and mutual trust.” But his attempts to resolve the temple dispute failed because of political instability in Thailand, says Julio Jeldres, the retired King’s official biographer, and negotiations over Preah Vihear in Bangkok in August 1958 ended in failure.
In October 1959,His majesty the king Norodom Sihanouk approached the ICJ, Jeldres explained in a recent e-mail.His majesty the king Norodom Sihanouk was also instrumental in choosing Dean Acheson, who was highly respected in international circles for expertise in resolving international disputes, as lead counsel for the Cambodian legal team. His majesty the king Norodom Sihanouk never appeared in the courtroom.
Thailand’s legal team had its own heavyweights, including Frank Soskice, England’s former attorney general, but it was Acheson who ultimately succeeded.
Thailand argued that the border at Preah Vihear was so obviously the 575-meter-high cliff on which it is perched that the French-Siam Commission found it unnecessary to say otherwise, Acheson replied, “What a truly extraordinary theory and explanation this is!” He added, “The authors of the
Treaty chose well in selecting the watershed rather than the often non-existent cliff edge. And in doing so, as the Court is well aware, they followed the example of the vast majority of treaties which have drawn frontiers between two countries separated by a mountain range.” Despite this ongoing debate in
the international court, during this time, the heads of the two states again severed ties.
Reports at the time say the Thai Interior Minister gave up eating Cambodian fish. TIME Magazine noted in 1961 how the heated conflict had led to both sides hurling insults at each other. On June 15, 1962, the same year bombs began falling on Cambodia as the US targeted Vietnamese Communists along the border, the International Court of Justice voted 9 to 3 that Preah Vihear temple lay inside Cambodian territory.“In a gloomy, rainy atmosphere,” the Bangkok World reported, “Thailand yesterday at noon surrendered its sovereignty over Khao Phra Viharn Temple.”
Protest demonstrations rang in the streets of Bangkok. Thailand soon alleged that Acheson, still a US presidential adviser, had misused his position by arguing on behalf of Cambodia, but the ICJ declared this a moot point.
Thai Army said it would refuse the temple’s handover, but Thai King Bhumibol Adulyadej, who is still King of Thailand today, stated that the international court’s decision would be obeyed. Thailand backed down, but rather than merely lower the Thai flag flying over the temple, Thai soldiers removed the entire flagpole. That very pole today stands across the shallow valley from Preah Vihear temple, according to the book “Prasat Phra Viharn, Truth That Thais Need to Know,” erected on the other side of the watershed at the Thai border police camp.
In January 1963 that his majesty the king Norodom Sihanouk visited Preah Vihear temple for an official flag-raising ceremony. Even until that time, Thai gunfire continued to drive away Cambodian troops.
In a colorful ceremony attended by close to 1,000 people, The New York Times recounted, the athletic Prince bounded up the cliff in less than an hour, paused to sip lemonade, then made offerings to Buddhist monks. In the ceremony, he made a gesture of conciliation, announcing that Thais would be able to visit the temple without visas and that Thailand was free to keep antiquities that it had taken away from the site.
Before the World Heritage Committee granted Cambodia’s request to inscribe the temple as a Unesco World Heritage Site in July 2008, to the objection of the Thai government, the retired King responded to rehashed claims that the temple belonged to Thailand. Those who claim Thai ownership of the Preah Vihear temple, the retired King wrote in a letter, “are absolutely wrong and are demonstrating meanness” and causing “undeserved worries” to Cambodia. “The mountain and Preah Vihear temple are 100 percent Cambodian and belong 100 percent to Cambodia,” he wrote.
(thanks L.C)
Watch video of Sihanouk visiting Preah Vihear temple in 1962.
On one of those days in June 1962, a 15-year-old boy, enthralled by the Prince’s court victory, stood in the crowd listening to a speech in which His majesty the king Norodom Sihanouk exalted the use of diplomacy over military force. “I remember [His majesty the king Norodom Sihanouk] said,‘Fighting is not good; fighting is for defense only,’” 63-year-old Moeung Sonn, president of the National Association of Tourism Enterprises, recalled recently.
Having shaved his head in celebration of the International Court of Justice’s ruling in favor of Cambodia’s claim to ownership of Preah Vihear temple, then-Prince Norodom Sihanouk declared that a seven day vigil would be held outside the Royal Palace in Phnom Penh.
Thailand once again find themselves in dispute with Cambodia regarding the land surrounding Preah Vihear temple,“We should do like his majesty the king did,” said Moeung Sonn, who is also a founder of the Khmer Civilization Foundation, explaining that the retired King rejected military force even after bilateral talks with Thailand failed in the late 1950s.
As soon as he became prime minister,His majesty the king Norodom Sihanouk sent several letters to the Thai government, which received no response. The Cambodian Commentary, a government publication, wrote at the time that the premier “never lost an opportunity of expressing his intense desire—which is shared by the whole Khmer people—to see relations between Cambodia and Thailand firmly established upon a basis of firm and mutual trust.” But his attempts to resolve the temple dispute failed because of political instability in Thailand, says Julio Jeldres, the retired King’s official biographer, and negotiations over Preah Vihear in Bangkok in August 1958 ended in failure.
In October 1959,His majesty the king Norodom Sihanouk approached the ICJ, Jeldres explained in a recent e-mail.His majesty the king Norodom Sihanouk was also instrumental in choosing Dean Acheson, who was highly respected in international circles for expertise in resolving international disputes, as lead counsel for the Cambodian legal team. His majesty the king Norodom Sihanouk never appeared in the courtroom.
Thailand’s legal team had its own heavyweights, including Frank Soskice, England’s former attorney general, but it was Acheson who ultimately succeeded.
Thailand argued that the border at Preah Vihear was so obviously the 575-meter-high cliff on which it is perched that the French-Siam Commission found it unnecessary to say otherwise, Acheson replied, “What a truly extraordinary theory and explanation this is!” He added, “The authors of the
Treaty chose well in selecting the watershed rather than the often non-existent cliff edge. And in doing so, as the Court is well aware, they followed the example of the vast majority of treaties which have drawn frontiers between two countries separated by a mountain range.” Despite this ongoing debate in
the international court, during this time, the heads of the two states again severed ties.
Reports at the time say the Thai Interior Minister gave up eating Cambodian fish. TIME Magazine noted in 1961 how the heated conflict had led to both sides hurling insults at each other. On June 15, 1962, the same year bombs began falling on Cambodia as the US targeted Vietnamese Communists along the border, the International Court of Justice voted 9 to 3 that Preah Vihear temple lay inside Cambodian territory.“In a gloomy, rainy atmosphere,” the Bangkok World reported, “Thailand yesterday at noon surrendered its sovereignty over Khao Phra Viharn Temple.”
Protest demonstrations rang in the streets of Bangkok. Thailand soon alleged that Acheson, still a US presidential adviser, had misused his position by arguing on behalf of Cambodia, but the ICJ declared this a moot point.
Thai Army said it would refuse the temple’s handover, but Thai King Bhumibol Adulyadej, who is still King of Thailand today, stated that the international court’s decision would be obeyed. Thailand backed down, but rather than merely lower the Thai flag flying over the temple, Thai soldiers removed the entire flagpole. That very pole today stands across the shallow valley from Preah Vihear temple, according to the book “Prasat Phra Viharn, Truth That Thais Need to Know,” erected on the other side of the watershed at the Thai border police camp.
In January 1963 that his majesty the king Norodom Sihanouk visited Preah Vihear temple for an official flag-raising ceremony. Even until that time, Thai gunfire continued to drive away Cambodian troops.
In a colorful ceremony attended by close to 1,000 people, The New York Times recounted, the athletic Prince bounded up the cliff in less than an hour, paused to sip lemonade, then made offerings to Buddhist monks. In the ceremony, he made a gesture of conciliation, announcing that Thais would be able to visit the temple without visas and that Thailand was free to keep antiquities that it had taken away from the site.
Before the World Heritage Committee granted Cambodia’s request to inscribe the temple as a Unesco World Heritage Site in July 2008, to the objection of the Thai government, the retired King responded to rehashed claims that the temple belonged to Thailand. Those who claim Thai ownership of the Preah Vihear temple, the retired King wrote in a letter, “are absolutely wrong and are demonstrating meanness” and causing “undeserved worries” to Cambodia. “The mountain and Preah Vihear temple are 100 percent Cambodian and belong 100 percent to Cambodia,” he wrote.
(thanks L.C)
3 comments:
His majesty the king proposed two solutions to Thailand
At that time, in a gesture to keep the friendship between the two countries, His majesty the king proposed two solutions to Thailand: a) the joint administration of the Khmer sanctuary; and b) that the matter be referred to the International Court of Justice (ICJ).
As Thailand did not reply to the proposal his majesty the king Norodom Sihanouk decided to bring the matter to the International Court of Justice for adjudication.
Commenting on Cambodia’s decision to take the case to the ICJ, the leading Bangkok newspaper Siam Rath editorialized as follows: “If Cambodia has taken this matter to the ICJ, we cannot prevent her from doing so. It is her right to do it. She is in her right because the ICJ is an organ of the United Nations having the mission of peacefully settling differences between its members.… As for the Thai government, faced with this correct attitude on the part of the Cambodian government, it should accept it in a friendly spirit and with the honesty worthy of a member of the United Nations.”
On June 15th 1962, the judgment of the ICJ was announced. By nine votes in favor and three against, it held that Preah Vihear was under the sovereignty of Cambodia. The ICJ urged Thailand to immediately withdraw any military, police and any other guards or keepers from the site.
Thailand was disappointed by the ICJ’s judgment. It withdrew its Ambassador from France and its delegations from the SEATO Council and the Geneva Conference on Laos, in protest to what it felt was the “uncooperative behavior of some of its SEATO allies”, members also of the ICJ, and which had voted for Cambodia.
The Thai Foreign Minister at the time, Mr Thanat Khoman, rejected the ICJ ruling on behalf of the Thai government and wrote to U Thant, the UN Secretary General, expressing his government’s reservations but providing no new legal argument which would back up the Thai government’s reservations.
(thanks L.C)
reference
Official Biographer of HM the King Father
Samdech Preah Upayuvareach Norodom Sihanouk of Cambodia;
Research Fellow, Monash University’s Asia Institute
His majesty the king proposed two solutions to Thailand
At that time, in a gesture to keep the friendship between the two countries, His majesty the king proposed two solutions to Thailand: a) the joint administration of the Khmer sanctuary; and b) that the matter be referred to the International Court of Justice (ICJ).
As Thailand did not reply to the proposal his majesty the king Norodom Sihanouk decided to bring the matter to the International Court of Justice for adjudication.
Commenting on Cambodia’s decision to take the case to the ICJ, the leading Bangkok newspaper Siam Rath editorialized as follows: “If Cambodia has taken this matter to the ICJ, we cannot prevent her from doing so. It is her right to do it. She is in her right because the ICJ is an organ of the United Nations having the mission of peacefully settling differences between its members.… As for the Thai government, faced with this correct attitude on the part of the Cambodian government, it should accept it in a friendly spirit and with the honesty worthy of a member of the United Nations.”
1
2
On June 15th 1962, the judgment of the ICJ was announced. By nine votes in favor and three against, it held that Preah Vihear was under the sovereignty of Cambodia. The ICJ urged Thailand to immediately withdraw any military, police and any other guards or keepers from the site.
Thailand was disappointed by the ICJ’s judgment. It withdrew its Ambassador from France and its delegations from the SEATO Council and the Geneva Conference on Laos, in protest to what it felt was the “uncooperative behavior of some of its SEATO allies”, members also of the ICJ, and which had voted for Cambodia.
The Thai Foreign Minister at the time, Mr Thanat Khoman, rejected the ICJ ruling on behalf of the Thai government and wrote to U Thant, the UN Secretary General, expressing his government’s reservations but providing no new legal argument which would back up the Thai government’s reservations.
(thanks L.C)
reference
Official Biographer of HM the King Father
Samdech Preah Upayuvareach Norodom Sihanouk of Cambodia;
Research Fellow, Monash University’s Asia Institute
Post a Comment