Thai Military’s Mistreatments of Khmer Civilians

Op-Ed by School of Vice

Folks, I realise this is an emotive issue, but I think it would be wrong to condemn the victims (especially, those already dead who can't speak for themselves) for whatever they had done on foreign soil, and by implications, justifying the barbaric acts of the Thai military.

We don't always know all the factors or reasons that led these civilians to engage in activities of this nature. They could even have strayed there by accident due to lack of proper border markings along this part of the border. Maybe they were digging for crickets, wild potatoes or mushroom picking even, who knows?

None of these possibilities, however, are sufficient grounds for armed troops to open fire indiscriminately at a crowd of unarmed civilians, causing instant fatalities and serious physical injuries to these people. Whether you are Khmer or Thai, try imagine yourself in those victims' place when, without warning or dialogue, you found yourself a helpless target of several machine guns firing at you at the same time.

People of any nations, with just a slight interest in history, will easily learn of Cambodia's historical role as provider of sanctuary and refuge to thousands and maybe millions of displaced migrants or refugees forced to flee their native homelands for one reason or another down the centuries including Thais, Viets, Chinese, Laotians, and recently Montagnards or Hill Tribes of Vietnam. This is why you still have Lao-speaking Khmers in the village of Kset ('Ksat' in Khmer, or of Royal descend) in Svay Rieng, plus numerous Laotian villages across the north-eastern provinces of Cambodia today.

One may argue that these migrants had not come to Cambodia specifically to cut down trees, but they had used up more of the host nation's natural resources than just felling a few trees to make ends meet. If the Khmer Kings or their royal authorities had not been moved by compassion or the plight of the Siamese ancestors, the latter would have grave difficulties migrating southward and away from the turmoil caused by civil unrest or the great Mongol threat and the Thais as a race would still be a subjugated minority in southern China today. I realise this being an old fact, but fact it is nevertheless.

There are two related issues being raised here: A) How much of an effort has Cambodian government been making to protect its own subjects from risking their lives in this situation, both in terms of economic and educational policies geared towards alleviating the crisis in question?; and B) how much influence can Cambodia or Asean exert on the Thai government, forcing it to abide by international norms on its re-known ill treatment of civilians trespassing its territory?

One important misperception that needs to be corrected here is the notion that Khmer people have destroyed their own forests and are now looking to Thailand to do the same?

Well, ordinary people in Cambodia who have illegally cut down trees in their country may have contributed to the destruction of national forest stock or primary forests, but their overall contribution is perhaps insignificant when compared to legally organised activities in this regard by corporate commercial interests and the State itself which approves (or has approved) of these activities. There are many independent studies and reports on this subject.

Traditionally, Khmer people selectively cut down trees for timber to build houses, pagodas, boats etc.; collected dead tree branches for fuel and so on. These practices had gone on for centuries without significantly affecting the environment or the overall forest stock. They also applied the same sustainable approaches to other natural resources like fisheries and land use (for cultivation purposes). The vast majority of Khmers would also struggle to meet the cost of a chain-saw or that of a heavy tractor or truck with which to facilitate the logistics and transportation of fell logs on a large scale, let alone competing with timber companies on the processing and marketing fronts.

One may recall Khmer refugees or survivors in their hundreds or thousands who sought refuge along the Khmer-Thai border in 1979 only to be taken by the busloads to one of the peaks of the Dangrek mountain range and forced by the Thai military to march down the steep cliff and onto a mined field below. What national security threat did these innocents pose to Thai society then? How many trees did they chop down?

Not long ago some Thai nationals walked leisurely across the border into Cambodia armed with a video camera as though they were touring one of the country's ancient ruins. It took a while before a lone Cambodian border policeman turned up on a rusty motorbike (who was probably unarmed!), halted their progress and eventually transferred them to Phnom Penh. Two of these Thais are still being detained in a Cambodian prison for charges relating to - among other things - (as far as I know) spying or espionage. If this main charge turns out to be justified, then their crime is far more serious or harmful to another country's national security or welfare than the alleged illegal tree-cutting activities of those Cambodian civilians. Yet none of these Thais have received the kind of barbaric treatment that their military had meted out to Khmer civilians over the years.

NB: Author wishes to apologise for the necessary length of this note.