The monks marching toward the gate of Preah Vihear temple.
Reaksmei Kampuchea newspaper
18th December, 2008
Translated from Khmer by Khmerization
Because the gate to Preah Vihear temple has been closed for a few months which has caused disruptions to the livelihood of traders in Sisaket, the Thai foreign Ministry has organised a meeting to push for the quick re-opening of the Preah Vihear temple.
According to the reports by the Thai media on the 17th of December, the meeting took place in Sisaket province on the 16th of December. The meeting’s participants include Thai officials, Sisaket traders, experts as well as many Sisaket residents have expressed their concerns about the impacts on the livelihood of the local residents after the gate to Preah Vihear temple was closed after the Thai invasion of Preah Vihear areas on the 15th of July, 2008.
According to the above source, the Thai Foreign Ministry officials urged the Sisaket residents to push the new government for a quick re-opening of the Preah Vihear gate.
In the past, the Sisaket traders and tourist operators have urged the Thai government to help push for the quick re-opening of the Preah Vihear gate. They said that since the closure of the gate, their livelihood has been greatly impacted. Sisaket governor has also pushed for the re-opening of the Preah Vihear gate.
The same source said that the chairman of the Sisaket Development Coordination Committee has urged the Thai government to continue to maintain Thai troops in the Preah Vihear areas until the border disputes between Cambodia and Thailand have been resolved. Officials from Sisaket province said that Thailand must maintain Thai troops their until they are able to evict the Khmer people from the staircase of the Preah Vihear temple as they have demanded.
The officials from the Thai foreign Ministry said that they will convey the messages of the Sisaket people to the meeting of the Foreign Ministry and compile a report to submit to the new prime minister and the cabinet to make the decision.
On the same day, there were about 44 Buddhist monks holding a Dharmayietra march to the gate of the Preah Vihear temple. Among the 44 Buddhist monks, there were 8 foreign monks who have been canvassed to join the march.
Sisaket authority said that the Thai monks as well as the foreign monks have presented the image of the Buddha to the Thai troops based around the Preah Vihear areas.
After the Dharmayietra, those monks will travel to Bangkok to urge the Thai government to resolve the Preah Vihear issues.
18th December, 2008
Translated from Khmer by Khmerization
Because the gate to Preah Vihear temple has been closed for a few months which has caused disruptions to the livelihood of traders in Sisaket, the Thai foreign Ministry has organised a meeting to push for the quick re-opening of the Preah Vihear temple.
According to the reports by the Thai media on the 17th of December, the meeting took place in Sisaket province on the 16th of December. The meeting’s participants include Thai officials, Sisaket traders, experts as well as many Sisaket residents have expressed their concerns about the impacts on the livelihood of the local residents after the gate to Preah Vihear temple was closed after the Thai invasion of Preah Vihear areas on the 15th of July, 2008.
According to the above source, the Thai Foreign Ministry officials urged the Sisaket residents to push the new government for a quick re-opening of the Preah Vihear gate.
In the past, the Sisaket traders and tourist operators have urged the Thai government to help push for the quick re-opening of the Preah Vihear gate. They said that since the closure of the gate, their livelihood has been greatly impacted. Sisaket governor has also pushed for the re-opening of the Preah Vihear gate.
The same source said that the chairman of the Sisaket Development Coordination Committee has urged the Thai government to continue to maintain Thai troops in the Preah Vihear areas until the border disputes between Cambodia and Thailand have been resolved. Officials from Sisaket province said that Thailand must maintain Thai troops their until they are able to evict the Khmer people from the staircase of the Preah Vihear temple as they have demanded.
The officials from the Thai foreign Ministry said that they will convey the messages of the Sisaket people to the meeting of the Foreign Ministry and compile a report to submit to the new prime minister and the cabinet to make the decision.
On the same day, there were about 44 Buddhist monks holding a Dharmayietra march to the gate of the Preah Vihear temple. Among the 44 Buddhist monks, there were 8 foreign monks who have been canvassed to join the march.
Sisaket authority said that the Thai monks as well as the foreign monks have presented the image of the Buddha to the Thai troops based around the Preah Vihear areas.
After the Dharmayietra, those monks will travel to Bangkok to urge the Thai government to resolve the Preah Vihear issues.
18 comments:
here they come again...war wil be starting soon.
The new foreign minister is a hardcore PAD supporter. Maybe the war over PV is not over yet. Hun Sen, please beef-up defense spending now.
Thai people, you don't DEMAND anything from Cambodia, whether to open or not to open the gate of PV is none of your business.
The new Thai foreign minister is a hardcore PAD member and the new Thai PM is also a somewhat hardcore PAD supporter. So Cambodia will have a hard time resolving the P. Vihear/border disputes peacefully. I also believe that to open or not to open P.Vihear is Cambodia's business. It is none of Thai business. If they want Cambodia to open P.Vihear they must withdraw their troops from there.
Preah Vihear is Khmer business.
Thai can march ,nake or jump the cliff if they like.
Gate close until old borderline accepted and recognized fully by Abishiit government and King Lek number 9.
If the government choose international mediation, we can avoid the war and increase our chance of winning (though everything is ours). A small nation without a good governance is being threatened.
Preah Vihear is belonging to who? If it is Khmer property, how can those stupid Thai Sisaket Development Coordination Committee wants to keep their troops at Khmer temple? It means they want to start the war again. The same things the Thai stupid monks who dare to come to Khmer temple and demand it to open. If the home owner doesn't want to open the door for the thief, why should we open the door for you. Hun Sen needs to take this issue with UN that Thai is invading Cambodia, but Ah Kwak do nonething and let Ah Siem occupies our land. Could Ah Hun Sen send his troops to Sisaket or Borirum or Surin to occupy Thai land. If I'm the leader, I'll do that. If you can invade my country, so do I.
Khmer leaders are just a bunch of shit or crook who can't stand up for themself. Ah smart Hanoi gives their prostitutes to Khmer leaders to gain khmer land where Ah Siem can give dollars to Ah Hun Sen people to get Khmer land too because Khmer leaders are stupid.
Hun Sen has no any interests on Cambodian people business. At this time, Hun Sen is thinking how much he can get money from thousand million dollar donation in 2009.
Why he wast his time for Cambodian people business?
Khmer on the mountain should throw all monkeys back to Cambodia over the cliff for attempting to rob Phra Viharn.
If you are the Khmer in Thailand, poster above, which we really doubt. Then you don't deserve to call yourself Khmer you traitor. Khmer from Vietnam say you're a fucked up. Brainwashed beyond your ancestor's pride to help!
PV is to remain closed until Thai get out of Khmer land.
demand all they want, until they all die or something, if it in violation of cambodian territory and international boundary, then there is no way cambodia will allow it! god bless cambodia.
Ah monkey in Cambodia must unconditionally surrender Phra Viharn back to Khmer on the mountain, or else!
hey 3:34 come suck my Dick...fuckhead! 'ma dood kooy gu si'!
Farang mueang Thongthani
12:45am&3:34am is the same person and you are a disgrace to the khmer race. cambodia is ashamed to have a khmer traitor like you. you are not a thai as you would like us to believe. you are a khmer traitor pretending to be thai/ a khmer serving foreign interests. shame on you and shame on your family. your ancestors would be crying in their graves knowing that you are serving foreign interests, become a khmer traitor and that you have disgraced them,you traitor!
Summary of the Summary of the Judgment of 15 June 1962
CASE CONCERNING THE TEMPLE OF PREAH VIHEAR
(MERITS)
Judgment of 15 June 1962
Proceedings in the case concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear, between Cambodia and Thailand, were instituted on 6 October 1959 by an Application of the Government of Cambodia; the Government of Thailand having raised two preliminary objections, the Court, by its Judgment of 26 May 1961, found that it had jurisdiction.
In its Judgment on the merits the Court, by nine votes to three, found that the Temple of Preah Vihear was situated in territory under the sovereignty of Cambodia and, in consequence, that Thailand was under an obligation to withdraw any military or police forces, or other guards or keepers, stationed by her at the Temple, or in its vicinity on Cambodian territory.
By seven votes to five, the Court found that Thailand was under an obligation to restore to Cambodia any sculptures, stelae, fragments of monuments, sandstone model and ancient pottery which might, since the date of the occupation of the Temple by Thailand in 1954, have been removed from the Temple or the Temple area by the Thai authorities.
Judge Tanaka and Judge Morelli appended to the Judgment a Joint Declaration. Vice-President Alfaro and Judge Sir Gerald Fitzmaurice appended Separate Opinions; Judges Moreno Quintana, Wellington Koo and Sir Percy Spender appended Dissenting Opinions.
*
* *
In its Judgment, the Court found that the subject of the dispute was sovereignty over the region of the Temple of Preah Vihear. This ancient sanctuary, partially in ruins, stood on a promontory of the Dangrek range of mountains which constituted the boundary between Cambodia and Thailand. The dispute had its fons et origo in the boundary settlements made in the period 1904-1908 between France, then conducting the foreign relations of Indo-China, and Siam. The application of the Treaty of 13 February 1904 was, in particular, involved. That Treaty established the general character of the frontier the exact boundary of which was to be delimited by a Franco-Siamese Mixed Commission
In the eastern sector of the Dangrek range, in which Preah Vihear was situated, the frontier was to follow the watershed line. For the purpose of delimiting that frontier, it was agreed, at a meeting held on 2 December 1906, that the Mixed Commission should travel along the Dangrek range carrying out all the necessary reconnaissance, and that a survey officer of the French section of the Commission should survey the whole of the eastern part of the range. It had not been contested that the Presidents of the French and Siamese sections duly made this journey, in the course of which they visited the Temple of Preah Vihear. In January-February 1907, the President of the French section had reported to his Government that the frontier-line had been definitely established. It therefore seemed clear that a frontier had been surveyed and fixed, although there was no record of any decision and no reference to the Dangrek region in any minutes of the meetings of the Commission after 2 December 1906. Moreover, at the time when the Commission might have met for the purpose of winding up its work, attention was directed towards the conclusion of a further Franco-Siamese boundary treaty, the Treaty of 23 March 1907.
The final stage of the delimitation was the preparation of maps. The Siamese Government, which did not dispose of adequate technical means, had requested that French officers should map the frontier region. These maps were completed in the autumn of 1907 by a team of French officers, some of whom had been members of the Mixed Commission, and they were communicated to the Siamese Government in 1908. Amongst them was a map of the Dangrek range showing Preah Vihear on the Cambodian side. It was on that map (filed as Annex I to its Memorial) that Cambodia had principally relied in support of her claim to sovereignty over the Temple. Thailand, on the other hand, had contended that the map, not being the work of the Mixed Commission, had no binding character; that the frontier indicated on it was not the true watershed line and that the true watershed line would place the Temple in Thailand, that the map had never been accepted by Thailand or, alternatively, that if Thailand had accepted it she had done so only because of a mistaken belief that the frontier indicated corresponded with the watershed line.
The Annex I map was never formally approved by the Mixed Commission, which had ceased to function some months before its production. While there could be no reasonable doubt that it was based on the work of the surveying officers in the Dangrek sector, the Court nevertheless concluded that, in its inception, it had no binding character. It was clear from the record, however, that the maps were communicated to the Siamese Government as purporting to represent the outcome of the work of delimitation; since there was no reaction on the part of the Siamese authorities, either then or for many years, they must be held to have acquiesced. The maps were moreover communicated to the Siamese members of the Mixed Commission, who said nothing. to the Siamese Minister of the Interior, Prince Damrong, who thanked the French Minister in Bangkok for them, and to the Siamese provincial governors, some of whom knew of Preah Vihear. If the Siamese authorities accepted the Annex I map without investigation, they could not now plead any error vitiating the reality of their consent.
The Siamese Government and later the Thai Government had raised no query about the Annex I map prior to its negotiations with Cambodia in Bangkok in 1958. But in 1934-1935 a survey had established a divergence between the map line and the true line of the watershed, and other maps had been produced showing the Temple as being in Thailand: Thailand had nevertheless continued also to use and indeed to publish maps showing Preah Vihear as lying in Cambodia. Moreover, in the course of the negotiations for the 1925 and 1937 Franco-Siamese Treaties, which confirmed the existing frontiers, and in 1947 in Washington before the Franco-Siamese Conciliation Commission, it would have been natural for Thailand to raise the matter: she did not do so. The natural inference was that she had accepted the frontier at Preah Vihear as it was drawn on the map, irrespective of its correspondence with the watershed line. Thailand had stated that having been, at all material times, in possession of Preah Vihear, she had had no need to raise the matter; she had indeed instanced the acts of her administrative authorities on the ground as evidence that she had never accepted the Annex I line at Preah Vihear. But the Court found it difficult to regard such local acts as negativing the consistent attitude of the central authorities. Moreover, when in 1930 Prince Damrong, on a visit to the Temple, was officially received there by the French Resident for the adjoining Cambodian province, Siam failed to react.
From these facts, the court concluded that Thailand had accepted the Annex I map. Even if there were any doubt in this connection, Thailand was not precluded from asserting that she had not accepted it since France and Cambodia had relied upon her acceptance and she had for fifty years enjoyed such benefits as the Treaty of 1904 has conferred on her. Furthermore, the acceptance of the Annex I map caused it to enter the treaty settlement; the Parties had at that time adopted an interpretation of that settlement which caused the map line to prevail over the provisions of the Treaty and, as there was no reason to think that the Parties had attached any special importance to the line of the watershed as such, as compared with the overriding importance of a final regulation of their own frontiers, the Court considered that the interpretation to be given now would be the same.
The Court therefore felt bound to pronounce in favour of the frontier indicated on the Annex I map in the disputed area and it became unnecessary to consider whether the line as mapped did in fact correspond to the true watershed line.
For these reasons, the Court upheld the submissions of Cambodia concerning sovereignty over Preah Vihear.
IF YOU WANNA SEE FOR YOURSELF VISIT THIS SITE..........http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?sum=284&code=ct&p1=3&p2=3&case=45&k=46&p3=5
The dude that always come in here and say shit about Khmer, he's really thai because he keeps on saying phra viharn so obviously he's not khmer. Khmer people would refer as preah vihear not what he calls it. That dude know that his race, thai-scums, are the shit of the earth but he won't admit that just like his ancestors never can admit that either. Just pay him not mind and let him talk all the shit he wants cuz he is shit.
Because of Preah Vihea, Thai nearby lives a better life of selling food and others supplies to foreingers. Now, they are crying to reopen Preah Vihea gate. To Khmer please balance out what is to Khmer benifit not to Thai, thus, I say let not open the gate to that warning Thai that Preah Vihea belong to Khmer not Thai. If Khmer not reopen the gate, that means Khmer close it. who dare to open it beside Khmer.
Khmer Long Beach
Evicting the Cambodians from the staircases of the Preah Vihea temple? Sounds familiar.
I seem to recall that in the early 1980s hundreds of thousands of Cambodian survivors of the KR regime were forced off the cliff of the same Dangrek range by the Thai army having previously sought the relative safety of the border areas from the Vietnamese-KR cross fires in Cambodia. Many of these unfortunate people lost their lives and limbs as they trekked precariously across heavily mined terrain.
The need to divert scant resources and revenue from defence to social development projects is understandable in a country that has been devastated by war for over three decades. Yet the Preah Vihea issue serves the Cambodian nation as another timely reminder as well as an urgent warning of what may affect national security and sovereignty where military infrastructure and national defence remain weak and inadequate.
Time and time throughout history, the lack of foresight and complacency on the part of Khmer rulers have contributed to the downfall and demise of a once mighty and respected sovereign. It would be irresponsibility of a grand scale were the current Cambodian leadership not wise up to the challenge posed by Cambodia’s neighbours and continue to take diplomatic reassurances from third parties including its Bangkok counterpart. I understand that the US (an ally of Thailand) recently blocked Cambodia’s bid to have the PV crisis arbitrated at the UN. That the Thais risked full-scale conflict with their neighbours for whatever motives and did so in blatant contravention of international judicial judgement and ruling show their contempt for the rule of law and the confidence they have in their own wealth as well as their ability to back their demand with force vis a vis a weaker neighbour.
The recent clashes at Preah Vihea also demonstrate the mettle of ordinary Cambodian soldiers who were lightly armed, but fought with pride and valour against a foe that were massively better armed and equipped. Nevertheless, they possessed one advantage over their opponents in their combat readiness and experience. However, I suspect the same opponents will attempt again with another subtle tactic to penetrate their line of defence and exert more pressure on Phnom Penh in future diplomatic gatherings.
I hope that the Cambodian government’s growing body of council of ‘Advisors’ will at least act to justify their seat and salaries.
In war time, a nation must prepare for peace. In peace time, a people must prepare for war.
Post a Comment