A Change of Guard

សូមស្តាប់វិទ្យុសង្គ្រោះជាតិ Please read more Khmer news and listen to CNRP Radio at National Rescue Party. សូមស្តាប់វីទ្យុខ្មែរប៉ុស្តិ៍/Khmer Post Radio.
Follow Khmerization on Facebook/តាមដានខ្មែរូបនីយកម្មតាម Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/khmerization.khmerican

Tuesday, 31 July 2012

Cambodian Ambassador's letter to the editor of the Philippine Star

Hos Sereythonh

Communiqué only through full consensus 

By Hos Sereythonh, 
Ambassador, Kingdom of Cambodia to the Republic of the Philippines 
The Philippine Star
Updated July 30, 2012 

I wish to respond to an article written by Erlinda Basilio, Undersecretary, Department of Foreign Affairs of the Philippines, published in your newspaper, on 19 July 2012, under the title: What happened in Phnom Penh?” as follows:
The description and explanation of “What happened in Phnom Penh?” by Erlinda Basilio clearly represented the official position of the Philippines, and therefore just one view among the ASEAN Member-States. The format of this description and explanation is between fiction and fact, which Erlinda Basilio has tried to manipulate, distort and exaggerate in order to make her case. After having carefully reviewed what she has termed “fictions” and “facts” all readers may be convinced of her story telling. Below is what I would like to clarify between fictions and facts in order to ensure that all of your readers have a better understanding of what actually transpired in Phnom Penh during the 45th ASEAN Foreign Ministers’ Meeting (AMM) and other ASEAN-related meetings.
First, it is a fiction or inventing reality when stated that “. . . the failure of the Chair to gain a consensus” of all ASEAN Member-States. In fact, eight out of ten ASEAN Member-States agreed to all 132 points in the Joint Communiqué of the AMM, including the 3 paragraphs (14, 15, 17) related to the South China Sea, except paragraph 16 which is the bilateral disputes between the Philippines and China and Vietnam and China, despite the tireless efforts of the ASEAN Chair as well as those of other ASEAN Member-States. Both the Philippines and Vietnam continued to insist from July 9 until the last day of the meeting (July 13) to include their national bilateral disputes with China in the JC. By doing so, the two countries wanted to sabotage and hijack the JC as well as the AMM, and to make them fail before the eyes of the ASEAN Dialogue Partners and the International Community. It was truly an un-ASEAN spirit of unity and solidarity.
Second, the “souring of the mood” which led to the non-issuance of the JC could undoubtedly be attributed to the inflexible and non-negotiable position of the two countries, the Philippines and Vietnam. As a matter of fact, the Foreign Secretary of the Philippines stated at the meeting that on the bilateral dispute between the Philippines and China, it was non-negotiable, and therefore he insisted that it must be included in the JC, or there would be no JC at all. In other words, the two countries demanded that ASEAN collectively must yield to the national interests of the Philippines and Vietnam, even if it is at the expense of ASEAN.
Third, throughout the 45th AMM, the ASEAN Chair had tried very hard to encourage all ASEAN Member-States to stick to the position of principle, meaning that ASEAN should deal with the bilateral dispute in the South China Sea on the basis of the agreed principles, such as the DOC, the DOC Guidelines, the 1982 UNCLOS, universally recognized principles of international law, among others. At the same time, the ASEAN Chair wanted all ASEAN Member-States to look at the general position of ASEAN, without getting bogged down with specific national and bilateral issues, which could complicate ASEAN’s position and interest, especially in relations to all of its Dialogue Partners, including China. But the two countries of ASEAN rejected Cambodia’s (and ASEAN Chair’s) appeal to stick to the general principles because they were not happy with the position of Cambodia for not issuing an ASEAN statement since April of this year regarding the dispute in the Scarborough Shoal. But, in the end, the two countries agreed with the ASEAN Foreign Ministers’ “Six-Point Principles,” which are similar to what the ASEAN Chair had raised throughout the AMM.
Fourth, as the Chair of ASEAN, Cambodia has always been mindful of the need to secure full consensus of all ASEAN Member-States before ASEAN could issue any statement, especially on the sensitive issue of the South China Sea. In fact, since April of this year, Cambodia had been receiving pressures from the ASEAN claimant states and others to issue an ASEAN statement on the situation in the South China Sea. To ensure that ASEAN has full consensus, Cambodia, as the ASEAN Chair, wrote to all ASEAN Foreign Ministers to ask for responses in writing on this issue. But, after waiting for several weeks, it was clear that ASEAN had no consensus on this matter of Scarborough Shoal. Therefore, no one could blame Cambodia for not issuing the ASEAN statement, because to have done so Cambodia would had violated the ASEAN Charter on the consensus-based decision-making.
Fifth, once again, as the Chair of ASEAN, Cambodia had to be sensitive to the concerns of all ASEAN Member-States, not just those of a few countries. Cambodia, or another other ASEAN Member, could not proceed without having the full consensus of all ASEAN Members. To state that the view of the Philippines has the support of four other ASEAN Members on the issue of the South China Sea is to demonstrate the point that the Philippines did not have the full support of all ASEAN Members on its position.
Finally, to try to blame Cambodia, as the ASEAN Chair, for what essentially was the inflexible and non-negotiable positions of the two countries of ASEAN is a dirty politics and therefore it should have no place in ASEAN.


Anonymous said...

Why don't we as a country put this 45th Asian summit behind and move on? I told Madam Yuon Ay to stop picking an old wound, now another ambassador to Philippine picking an old wound again.Well,it will be bleeding.Accusations war of words had began....Mr seething should goes answer the question to Philippine's gov't.
stop picking this old wound let it health,it time to move on.....

Anonymous said...

and who are you Mr. 9:43AM?

Anonymous said...

The more Cambodian ambassadors everywhere reacts to every criticism, the more damages they've done to their countries. They should go back to School of Diplomacy in Switzerland, not Hun Sen School of Diplomacy.

Anonymous said...

Cambodia need to overhaul its diplomat personnel.

Rubysyed said...

Timeless country = Combodia

Sample Wedding Invitation Letter

Anonymous said...

You are fool - you should be out of ASEAN.

Anonymous said...

Stop lying. Liars go to Hell!

Anonymous said...

With all due respect sir hos of cambodia but you should get your facts straight. Were you even there during that meeting of the asean?
Your becoming much like your boss (china). Try to read the official journal of the meeting sir so that you may be enlightened of what really happened during the AMM. The whole world knows what happened. You bunch of liars.

Anonymous said...

When Cambodia-Thai conflict occurs where were those people?
They let Cambodia and Thailand do bilaterally talk. Now, They should taste it. I think Cambodia do his best protect Cambodian interest and ASEAN as a whole. Please stop blaming. If too much, Philliphine and Vietnam might loose more because no matter what, China keep moving on while you just sit and accuse of each other in ASEAN for nothing.
It is really a worthless talk with those unintelligent Vietnam and Philippine.

Anonymous said...

Stop picking on Ambassadors of the jungle,lets focus on China city on the water of Yiek cong &Manila coast (SCS) Lets fight against Chinese Yiek cong& phifipino,stop the mighty invaders if you think you're brave enough,don't forget to carry your own coffin with you,say good bye to your families before leave....Fishes loves Yiek cong meats.

Anonymous said...

The issue of Thai-Khmer is an internal problem to ASEAN. Any ASEAN members can help them if the Thai and Khmer wanted help. If they prefer non-interference, they can resolve it bilaterally. It is different than ASEAN vs. China.
When it is a matter of ASEAN vs. an outsider, ASEAN must unite and help each other. China is outside of ASEAN and it is the responsibility of ASEAN states to protect its members from the China. Cambodia were blinded by greed and betrayed its responsibility to uphold its club's interest.

Cyber Lawyer said...

I only have one question to this ambassador; WERE YOU THERE? if you are not there SHUT UP! you know NOTHING!