9th February, 2009
By Khmerization
The sensitive issues of Khmer-Thai border relations have generated heated, and sometimes, controversial debates among those who felt passionately about these issues. For the Cambodian side, the Preah Vihear issues have been settled once and for all under the 1904-1907 Franco-Siam Treaty and the 1962 verdict of the International Court of Justice (ICJ). For the Thai side, who never wanted to let go of the Preah Vihear temple, the issues have never been settled.
Some foreign observers seem to buy into the Thai theory that the 1904-1907 treat and the ICJ verdict have left many unanswered issues and unsolved territorial disputes. Mr. Norbert Klein is one such believer. After reading my translated article titled “Thai troops crossed into Cambodia at Phnom Trop”, Mr. Klein had left a very diplomatic comments in my blog. But his rationale seem to be at odds with the Khmer views, but in line with the Thai view. He seem to buy into the Thai theory that the areas surrounding the Preah Vihear temple belong to Thailand under the 2008 Joint Communique. I hereby wish to publish his comments in its entirety. Here it is:
“There are again confrontations at the border - west of Preah Vihear. This is dangerous, deplorable, it has to be defused, avoided in future.
But I continue to be surprised, time and again, that the Joint Communique of 18 June 2008, including the map produced by the Cambodian side, and the declaration of the Cambodian side is never referenced in such Cambodian reports.
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/pdf/jointcommunique.pdf
In some mail exchanges before, I have been accused to disregard documents of 1904/1907/1962/2000 - this is not what I said; I just point to the fact that there is a document signed later, by a Deputy Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Cambodia, saying that the 18.6.2008 map "supersedes" the former maps "at this stage."
- And the Thai troops, mentioned in the present posting, are in "territories at the foot of Phnom Trop Mountain west of the Preah Vihear temple" - where the Cambodian side said, at that time, that "a buffer zone on the northern and western areas of the Temple" is not part of the Cambodian claims when applying for World Heritage listing.
I am not a legal expert, I am not "taking sides" - I just share my observation that there is never an official clarification how the 18.6.2008 Cambodian map and declarations relate to the ongoing conflict, and how the Cambodian side in the present and future border discussions intends to handle the Cambodian statements in the Joint Declaration.
Just to say "forget it" is not appropriate for a document signed by a Deputy Prime Minister. Norbert Klein”
I am of the opinion that the Joint Communique Mr. Klein mentioned is just a communique signed for the purpose of listing the temple only, it is not a border treaty document for the purpose of border demarcations. Therefore the document cannot be used in regard to border issues, but the listing of the temple only. As far as international law is concerned, the 1904-1907's Franco-Siam Treaty is still in force.
Furthermore, both the Thai (present Thai administration) and the Cambodian sides have reiterated on numerous occasions that both the 1904-1907 treaty and the 2000’s MOU will be used to resolve the Khmer-Thai border disputes. Mr. Klein has also mentioned the 1962 ICJ's verdict. The Thai side seem to interpret that the ICJ has not judged on the ownership of the lands surrounding the Preah Vihear temple. If one reads and analyses of one of the ICJ’s verdict thoroughly one would understand that the lands surrounding the Preah Vihear temple have been judged. Here is one of the ICJ’s verdict:
“Thailand is 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”. The verdict stated clearly that Thailand is under an obligation to withdraw troops from “the Temple, or its vicinity on Cambodian territory.”
Maps from the 1904 treaty put the temple and the areas, or the temple’s “vicinity”, claimed by Thailand inside Cambodia. So, the 1962 ICJ verdict was clear. The areas or the temple’s “vicinity” currently claimed by Thailand have been judged to belong to Cambodia. My understanding seem to be in line with Mr. Chan Veasna’s view who had a few exchanges with Mr. Klein through the Phnom Penh Post recently. Here I wish to re-publish his last exchange with Mr. Klein below:
"Letter to the editor
Phnom Penh Post
6th December, 2008
newsroom@phnompenhpost.com
Dear Sir, Nobert Klein’s letter (Cambodia must use its own maps too, 25 Nov.) has totally missed the points of my previous letter (Thailand must use Cambodian maps, 14 Nov.). While Mr. Klein might be correct in his views, his letter certainly has confused your readers of the points I was trying to make in my letter. While I was talking about the maps of the 1904-1907 Khmer-Thai Border Treaty, Mr Klein was talking about the maps of the 2008 Joint Communique or the agreement to list the Preah Vihear temple. T
here is no comparison between these two agreements because one is a border treaty and the other is an agreement to list the temple on the world heritage list. While Mr. Klein was correct to spell out the details of the 2008 Joint Communique, he is incorrect in drawing its connections to the issue of the border demarcations between Thailand and Cambodia. The distinction between these two agreements must be made:
1) The maps of the 2008 Joint Communique are for the purpose of inscribing the Preah Vihear temple on the world heritage list, not for the purpose of border demarcations as has been the point of my letter.
2) The maps attached to the 2008 Joint Communique will only supersede other maps concerning the zonage/zoning of the Preah Vihear temple boundary, not superseding the maps concerning the demarcations of territorial borders between Thailand and Cambodia.
The 2008 Joint Communique, of which Mr. Klein was talking about, spelled out that the border demarcations will only be carried out pending the results of the Joint Commission for Land Boundary which in turn, according to previous agreements, will use the Memorandum of Understanding signed in 2000 which both Thailand and Cambodia recognised to use the 1904-1907 Treaty as a base for their border resolution.
The 2008 Joint Communique stated that “the inscription of the Preah Vihear temple on the World Heritage List shall be without prejudice to the rights of the Kingdom of Cambodia and the Kingdom of Thailand on the demarcations work of the Joint Commission of Land Boundary of the two countries.”
With the provisions in the 2000 Memorandum of Understanding, signed between Cambodia and Thailand, recognising the 1904-1907 Treaty, there is no doubt that the maps of the 1904-1907 treaty must be used by the Joint Commission of Land Boundary for the border settlements, not the Preah Vihear zoning maps that Mr Klein was talking about. Yours sincerely, signed Chan Veasna Cabramatta, NSW, Australia"
I would like to end this post by reiterating that the 2008 Joint Communique raised by Mr. Klein was only a communique for the purpose of listing of the Temple only. The map, or as the Cambodian side called it, a drawing, attached with this communique is a zoning/zonage map for the inscription of the temple, and not a treaty map. As such, it cannot be used for the resolution or demarcation of the borders. By this definition the 1904 treaty maps, which put all the lands claimed by Thailand inside Cambodia, are till in force. Therefore, the lands surrounding Preah Vihear temple currently occupied by Thailand since 15th July 2008 belong to Cambodia.
By Khmerization
The sensitive issues of Khmer-Thai border relations have generated heated, and sometimes, controversial debates among those who felt passionately about these issues. For the Cambodian side, the Preah Vihear issues have been settled once and for all under the 1904-1907 Franco-Siam Treaty and the 1962 verdict of the International Court of Justice (ICJ). For the Thai side, who never wanted to let go of the Preah Vihear temple, the issues have never been settled.
Some foreign observers seem to buy into the Thai theory that the 1904-1907 treat and the ICJ verdict have left many unanswered issues and unsolved territorial disputes. Mr. Norbert Klein is one such believer. After reading my translated article titled “Thai troops crossed into Cambodia at Phnom Trop”, Mr. Klein had left a very diplomatic comments in my blog. But his rationale seem to be at odds with the Khmer views, but in line with the Thai view. He seem to buy into the Thai theory that the areas surrounding the Preah Vihear temple belong to Thailand under the 2008 Joint Communique. I hereby wish to publish his comments in its entirety. Here it is:
“There are again confrontations at the border - west of Preah Vihear. This is dangerous, deplorable, it has to be defused, avoided in future.
But I continue to be surprised, time and again, that the Joint Communique of 18 June 2008, including the map produced by the Cambodian side, and the declaration of the Cambodian side is never referenced in such Cambodian reports.
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/pdf/jointcommunique.pdf
In some mail exchanges before, I have been accused to disregard documents of 1904/1907/1962/2000 - this is not what I said; I just point to the fact that there is a document signed later, by a Deputy Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Cambodia, saying that the 18.6.2008 map "supersedes" the former maps "at this stage."
- And the Thai troops, mentioned in the present posting, are in "territories at the foot of Phnom Trop Mountain west of the Preah Vihear temple" - where the Cambodian side said, at that time, that "a buffer zone on the northern and western areas of the Temple" is not part of the Cambodian claims when applying for World Heritage listing.
I am not a legal expert, I am not "taking sides" - I just share my observation that there is never an official clarification how the 18.6.2008 Cambodian map and declarations relate to the ongoing conflict, and how the Cambodian side in the present and future border discussions intends to handle the Cambodian statements in the Joint Declaration.
Just to say "forget it" is not appropriate for a document signed by a Deputy Prime Minister. Norbert Klein”
I am of the opinion that the Joint Communique Mr. Klein mentioned is just a communique signed for the purpose of listing the temple only, it is not a border treaty document for the purpose of border demarcations. Therefore the document cannot be used in regard to border issues, but the listing of the temple only. As far as international law is concerned, the 1904-1907's Franco-Siam Treaty is still in force.
Furthermore, both the Thai (present Thai administration) and the Cambodian sides have reiterated on numerous occasions that both the 1904-1907 treaty and the 2000’s MOU will be used to resolve the Khmer-Thai border disputes. Mr. Klein has also mentioned the 1962 ICJ's verdict. The Thai side seem to interpret that the ICJ has not judged on the ownership of the lands surrounding the Preah Vihear temple. If one reads and analyses of one of the ICJ’s verdict thoroughly one would understand that the lands surrounding the Preah Vihear temple have been judged. Here is one of the ICJ’s verdict:
“Thailand is 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”. The verdict stated clearly that Thailand is under an obligation to withdraw troops from “the Temple, or its vicinity on Cambodian territory.”
Maps from the 1904 treaty put the temple and the areas, or the temple’s “vicinity”, claimed by Thailand inside Cambodia. So, the 1962 ICJ verdict was clear. The areas or the temple’s “vicinity” currently claimed by Thailand have been judged to belong to Cambodia. My understanding seem to be in line with Mr. Chan Veasna’s view who had a few exchanges with Mr. Klein through the Phnom Penh Post recently. Here I wish to re-publish his last exchange with Mr. Klein below:
"Letter to the editor
Phnom Penh Post
6th December, 2008
newsroom@phnompenhpost.com
Dear Sir, Nobert Klein’s letter (Cambodia must use its own maps too, 25 Nov.) has totally missed the points of my previous letter (Thailand must use Cambodian maps, 14 Nov.). While Mr. Klein might be correct in his views, his letter certainly has confused your readers of the points I was trying to make in my letter. While I was talking about the maps of the 1904-1907 Khmer-Thai Border Treaty, Mr Klein was talking about the maps of the 2008 Joint Communique or the agreement to list the Preah Vihear temple. T
here is no comparison between these two agreements because one is a border treaty and the other is an agreement to list the temple on the world heritage list. While Mr. Klein was correct to spell out the details of the 2008 Joint Communique, he is incorrect in drawing its connections to the issue of the border demarcations between Thailand and Cambodia. The distinction between these two agreements must be made:
1) The maps of the 2008 Joint Communique are for the purpose of inscribing the Preah Vihear temple on the world heritage list, not for the purpose of border demarcations as has been the point of my letter.
2) The maps attached to the 2008 Joint Communique will only supersede other maps concerning the zonage/zoning of the Preah Vihear temple boundary, not superseding the maps concerning the demarcations of territorial borders between Thailand and Cambodia.
The 2008 Joint Communique, of which Mr. Klein was talking about, spelled out that the border demarcations will only be carried out pending the results of the Joint Commission for Land Boundary which in turn, according to previous agreements, will use the Memorandum of Understanding signed in 2000 which both Thailand and Cambodia recognised to use the 1904-1907 Treaty as a base for their border resolution.
The 2008 Joint Communique stated that “the inscription of the Preah Vihear temple on the World Heritage List shall be without prejudice to the rights of the Kingdom of Cambodia and the Kingdom of Thailand on the demarcations work of the Joint Commission of Land Boundary of the two countries.”
With the provisions in the 2000 Memorandum of Understanding, signed between Cambodia and Thailand, recognising the 1904-1907 Treaty, there is no doubt that the maps of the 1904-1907 treaty must be used by the Joint Commission of Land Boundary for the border settlements, not the Preah Vihear zoning maps that Mr Klein was talking about. Yours sincerely, signed Chan Veasna Cabramatta, NSW, Australia"
I would like to end this post by reiterating that the 2008 Joint Communique raised by Mr. Klein was only a communique for the purpose of listing of the Temple only. The map, or as the Cambodian side called it, a drawing, attached with this communique is a zoning/zonage map for the inscription of the temple, and not a treaty map. As such, it cannot be used for the resolution or demarcation of the borders. By this definition the 1904 treaty maps, which put all the lands claimed by Thailand inside Cambodia, are till in force. Therefore, the lands surrounding Preah Vihear temple currently occupied by Thailand since 15th July 2008 belong to Cambodia.
18 comments:
The surrounding land is part of Cambodia where the Temple situates. When Cambodia applied for World Heritage listing, there is no need to include every square inches of land to the listing because the map from 1904-1907 already have been documented and both sides went to World Court and the court awarded the Temple with the land around the area to Cambodia.
Why all at a sudden some foreigners play stupid about the territory? They should not take into account that it’s belong to Thailand. They should research and examine the history of both sides before they believe what was said to them.
I suggest that Mr. Klein needs to hear from Cambodian side and check into the fact that the territory is belong to Cambodia and no more playing dumb when convincing by Thai side.
How much more does Norbert Klein want to put a spin on the Khmer Phrea Vihear conflict? Please don't play Cambodian expert if you don't what hell is at the heart of the fucken problem!
There are only two solutions to Siem-Cambodian conflict! If the Siem leaders still insisted on using their unilateral map which is not recognize by international community and it will lead to war to end the conflict! If the Siem leaders accept international map and that is the end of the conflict and they need to withdraw their fucken troop from Cambodian territory!
Siem naked aggression will not be rewarded!
I believe that by trying to stress too much importance on the 2008 Joint Communique, Norbert Klein has given an impression that the surrounding lands, which are not included in the listing of Preah Vihear, belong to Thailand. The Joint Communique, which has been pointed by a few debaters before, is not a border treaty. The Thai govt. has reneged on this agreement and the Thai constitutional court has also annulled it. So it cannot be used as a document to negotiate the border issues.
its $ my friends, its not a matter of maps, but intention to get into trouble. if thai win, they get all, if they don't, they still get some; now they are making cake without flour with us...Think Again!
The temple and all lands on the mountain belong to Khmer on the mountain. Everyone else should stay out, no ifs, no buts, or nothing.
And Not gorillar, neither champanzee 8:07 AM, too.
How many kind of Khmer did you have, Gorillar 8:07?
Khmer on the mountain, Khmer in the temple, Khmer in the jungle, Khmer near border, Khmer in Preah Vihear Province, blah...blah...blah
How about Khmer live near the bottom of the mountain? Are they still Khmer or what?
In Cambodian slogan reads out that: "Make a clear reading before winking on conclusion" means that "read 100 times before believing 1 times". Don't just flip through and say I'm clear. The way Mr. Klein acts will harm others. If you are a teacher and the source of information you obtained is not perfectly quotted, your students will be brainwashed from white to black. Shut the fuck of mouth up if not truly aware. Keep watching is better. Sometimes being shut up is clearer!!!
Preah Vihear NOT Preah Viharn the temple are belong to Cambodian people and Cambodia period.
No khmer on the mountains nor under mountain quit claiming that shit it none senses,on the mountain only monkey are living there if you are one of those monkey get down and suck my pure Cambodian banana is full of juice it's free for Thai's monkey .
This is ridiculous making some thing out of nothing greedy Thai monkey!
9:14 AM, go back to sleep and just keep on waiting okay?
Funny comment, 9:46AM. Keep going,dud!
Mr Nober Klein is probably addicted to sucking thai gay dicks, thus has to take their side. What a lame foreigner who barked when told by the thais.
Dear Mr. Klein,
Are you soo stupid?. Please read the article 4 of the 16.08.2008 Joint Communique " ... its sunrounding areas to be submitted to the World Heritage Centre by 1st February 2010...". By this way what do you means "its surounding areas" in plural noun?. All 4 directions or only 2? If you mean by 2 directions, please go back to start studying from kindergarten level.
I find that the decisive yet controversial issue here is whether the Joint Communique supersedes the 1904-1907 Treaty (the "Treaty") or vise versa.
To determine the above, it is required to compare the legal hierarchy of the two instruments.
First of all, Khmerization and Mr. Veasna Chan are right, with perfect supportive quotations, that the Joint Communique was made for the only purpose of listing the Preah Vihear Temple within the UNESCO world heritage list, and not any other purpose whatsoever.
Secondly, the Joint Communique is at the highest rank only a governmental memorandum, not even an agreement; whereas the Treaty is an international contract duly recognized by the world at large.
Thirdly, the Treaty was duly ratified and thus regarded as a respectful law with full competency; whereas the Joint Communique is merely a record of mutual understanding between the two governments for the sole purpose of the temple listing.
Best regards,
Raja
Everything on the mountain will always belong to Khmer on the mountain.
You can bickering all you want, and it will not change any fact.
who is this person, mr. norbert klein? does he know khmer history? is he an expert at solving the khmer problem? is he a long time student of khmer history? why is he siding with the siem in regards to cambodia's preah vihear?
Because Siem history to 10 times more accurate than Khmer twisted history.
1:58 AM and 4:58 AM, come here and kiss my Khmer's arse!
Post a Comment