The United Nations is apparently ‘deeply concerned’ about the latest dustup between Thailand and Cambodia along their well-defined border and the 1000-year-old temple at Preah Vihear. Well, it should be.
Veterans of the current dispute and the anti-Thai riots that tore Phnom Penh apart back in 2003 know only too well how fast a scenario like this border clash can escalate. Both sides are being economical with the casualty figures. It might be five dead, it could be as high as 50.
Some outside help would be welcome, and Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen has asked for intervention from the UN Security Council, where his country can probably count on support from old allies China and Russia, France—who helped draw the boundary—and the United States.
But to date, all he’s received is a statement from Secretary General Ban Ki-moon that had about as much clout as a damp squib: ‘The secretary general appeals to both sides to put in place an effective arrangement for cessation of hostilities and to exercise maximum restraints.’
Diplomats in Bangkok and Phnom Penh were no doubt shaking in their boots.The Thais were so bold as to say: ‘If there is a complaint, we are ready to explain.’
The United Nations has a long and illustrious history of appeasement that ends up solving little. Its efforts in Somalia, the Balkans and its inability to disarm the warring factions in Cambodia in the 1990s were among its less illustrious adventures. And its continued recognition of Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge as the legitimate leadership in then-Kampuchea for more than a decade after their great atrocities were committed still sticks in the gullet of many Cambodians.
The problem for UN appeasement is the border area is well defined by internationally accepted maps and easily checked with global positioning systems or GPS. The Thais don’t like this. But no matter how Thailand argues its side, the Cambodians have several international agreements that date back more than 100 years, a decision by the International Court of Justice, history and common sense on their side.
Bangkok is going to find it extremely difficult to find any country willing to back it, particularly given the substance attached to The Treaty of Washington, written in the aftermath World War II when Thailand sided with Japan and invaded and occupied large parts of Cambodia and Laos.
Under the treaty, Bangkok agreed to withdraw to the pre-war boundaries as part of a deal that basically absolved it of any war crimes committed while it was aligned with the Axis powers. It wasn’t until 1954 that Thailand disputed Cambodian sovereignty over Preah Vihear for the first time. That went to the international court, which six years later ruled against Thailand.
From the late 1970s to 1990s, the temple was a favourite haunt of the Khmer Rouge, another charming bunch of characters the government in Thailand had aligned itself with, following Vietnam’s invasion of Cambodia in 1979 that ended another well-documented madness.
Nobody in Thailand was remotely interested in challenging the already lost cause of the Hindu temple at Preah Vihear when the area was providing a handy a hideout for Pol Pot and his ultra-Maoists. However, problems at home and peace in Cambodia made an old chestnut out of Preah Vihear—a convenient excuse among extreme nationalists with a selective sense of history and a political agenda.
This was all the more so when UNESCO declared Preah Vihear a Cambodian World Heritage Site in July 2008.As a result, the latest bout of fighting has entered its fifth day and revealed one or two prejudices along the way, such as the few choice words from Thailand’s army spokesman Colonel Sansern Kaewkamnerd.
In blaming the Cambodians for starting the attack, Sansern maintained the Thai response was proportionate, the defence minister and prime minister are well aware of the situation and that: ‘We are afraid of rumours that we are bullying an inferior neighbour because we have superior capabilities.’
The UN’s damp squib offered Cambodia little, and it might be all the world body can afford Thailand.
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
Zato Ichi
Here is what I’ve read on the internet: Preah Vihear temple was constructed during the reigns of the Khmer kings in the early 9th century, and followed the decline and fall of the Khmer empire in the 13th–14th century, the Buddhist Tai kingdoms of Sukhothai, Lanna and Lan Chang were on the ascension, therefor the first Thai or Siamese state is traditionally considered to be the Buddhist kingdom of Sukhothai, which was founded in 1238 (300-400 years after the temple was built).
Please explain to me why the Thais are fighting for this temple that was not built by their kings?
Sokchea
Your question does shut the Thais up. TA
Sia Mean
@Zato, because there is Khmer Blood in the Thai populace. Claiming the same Ancient Khmer line is the only logical case Thailand has, but in doing so is like a doubled edged sword. Claiming ones ethnicity(Khmer) first, over ones nationality(Thai) is shuned upon and looked at as a threat to Thai soverignty.
Thailand was only recently formed in the late 1930’s, and there demographic makeup consist of the Khmers in the East, The Lao Issan of the North, the Malays stock of the South, the Shans of the north, Mons in the valleys, viet boat peoples of the coast, and Chinese in the cities. What ethnicities consist in Thailands national demographics is a dangerous question in Thailand.
The Thai agenda of phreah vihear is based on dilusion, and a confused historial identity.
Raymond
Zato Ichi,
Please go and read the history again. The Empire khmer who built those temples.
Siamese did not any temples.
Siamese kept fighting its neighbors and took their land.
Cambodian or Khmer had many wars with Siamese many times.
Siamese had war and took Malaysia land too. That’s why the south of Thai does not have peace until now.
Siamese had war with Laos in 1987-1988 on border.
Siamese had war with Burma too. One thing that Siamese has is the ally of U.S.A who provide Siamese a better weapon than its neighbors.
There are 3 of siameses are poor countries : Cambodia, Burma, Laos and only Malaysia is compatable to Siamese.
Just Imagine or compare Siamese (Thai) to Isreal.
bllong
Yes, that’s good question. For me, the reason is to gain political advantage for election. They don’t care about people’s life and sufferings, they don’t care about the temple, they are not afraid of the world because they know how to explain, yet without proof!!! I can give you some of Cambodia’s proof:
1. World court rulings dated years ago that The Preah Vihear temple is in Cambodia territory, and how about the 4.6 meter square surrounding? Please read the rulings to the end, thoroughly.
2. We lived in harmony with the previous Thai gov and the 2 people traded and did touristic business across the border happily until this new gov came out, this new gov that won election just because of cheating his people by accusing former Thai gov (and UNESCO) for supporting Cambodia to put Preah Vihear temple into world heritage.
3. Thai insists to solve the dispute bilaterally for so many times, and we have believed them until now, and now lots of casualities as consequences. Cambodia needs to pass the issue to the UN or ASEAN. Hopefully, either of the 2 bodies, will do their job rightfully. I, personnally, do not have much faith, because Cambodia do not have good standing internationally because of communism, pol pot, genocide, civil war, poor and corrupt society… yet we were not formally allied with Hitler.
4. One of the wing of the temple has been damaged by the Thai heavy gun and Cambodia complaints this to UNESCO.
Many more, but now I have to go to do my job, sorry.
MeeeNeee
We can say that this is for political gain in leading up to election. But it is also part of government leader thinking. Everyone is selfish and become blind and it is the case of Thai leaders.
bllong
Hi,
I’m back again with more proof:
5. The pagoda, Keo Siri Svarak, near the temple has been heavily damaged by the Thai heavy military weapon. This is what the Thai leaders, under pressure of the yellow shirts, ordered Cambodia “remove your flag flying above the pagoda and the pagoda itself, if not obey to do it, we will use force”. But, the pagoda was built in 1998 in the Cambodia territory for the Cambodian traders and has been used by The thai traders as well, to worship their God; and it is OK ever since.
6. The Thai says Cambodia uses French map, not recognized by the Thai now, the map that clearly shows the 4.6 Km square are in Cambodia territory. But the map was co-signed by their thai ancesters, I think long before the Thai now were born, so how can they say the map is not recognized by them.
7. The Cambodian arm force has captured a 22 year-old Thai soldier during the fighting. At the begining the Thai army did not acknowledged that he is its soldier until Cambodia showed them the proof and until the soldier cried. If you were him, what is your feeling? At the end, we released him to the hand of the Thai authority and we hope he will not be sent back to fight us again. We just want to live in peace with the neighbours.
8. Thai accused Cambodia to fire first and Cambodia accused Thai fire first. Who fire first then? Only God know. However, the bottomline is who want to start the war first. The 2 sides agreed not to cross the line, the buffer zone, and wait until the gov. solving the issue diplomatically. But, the Thai army crossed the line first to reach the pagoda to destroy it and to remove Cambodia flag flying over it.
9. Some says Cambodia threaten the Thai, that does not make sense to me. How can a poor country, poor military equipments, less people threatens a bigger country, more wealthy with modern military equipments?
This is all I can share with you.
Kom
I’m praying that those Thai ultra-nationalists would never ascend to power in Thailand. Otherwise, they would lead Thailand to repeat the path of 1930s, 1940s. Only this time, my Thailand may not be able to get off the hook like post-WWII.
From my point of view (I’m a Thai-American), Thailand does threaten Cambodia, and I’m sick + embarrassed of that.