"I thought that killing was bad, but shooting Cambodians over land is okay, right?": Thai shameful propaganda for Thai children

KI-Media Note: How could The Bangkok Post print something that is filled with racism like this?

Impressions of a 9-year-old at the border (sic!)

12/02/2011
Arglit Boonyai
Bangkok Post

Hello, my name is Buk Kum. I am 9 years old and live in Kantharalak district of Si Sa Ket province.

Sorry, my Thai is not very good but I still like to call myself a Thai person, even though sometimes people from Bangkok laugh at my accent. I don't mind. I think Thailand is a nice place.

Living in this part of Thailand is very scary right now. There are lots of soldiers and guns and I can't even go to school because a bomb landed on it and now it is all blown up and stuff. I don't even have any new clothes to wear because some bombs fell near my house. It happened so quickly that I couldn't even get fresh clothes.

Now I have to stay in a tent with my mum, dad and two sisters.

I think all the fighting is very confusing. I don't really understand why this has to happen. I hear all the puyai talking about the situation. They say that we must be patriotic and fight for ownership of a temple called Phra Viharn. I just want to go back to school and play with my friends.

I heard mummy talking about the yellow-shirt people. She said that they are bad because they like to cause trouble. She said they are the ones who stirred up the Cambodians and made them attack us.

They want to be the owners of Phra Viharn Temple or something, but mummy said because they started the fighting, no one can go there now. It doesn't matter who the temple belongs to; at least if there is no fighting everyone can visit it.

I don't agree with mummy, though. I think the yellow-shirt people are nice. They want Thailand to be strong and not give in to the Cambodians. The Cambodians are weaker than us so they should do what we say. I thought that killing was bad, but shooting Cambodians over land is okay, right? Well, that's what I think. But mummy said that I was foolish for thinking that.

Bangkok Post reporters cannot read English? They misquoted KI-Media!!!

KI-Media Note: The Bangkok Post reported the following news. It attributed to KI-Media of reporting that Hor Namhong accused Thailand of instigating each of the four clashes. In fact KI-Media only reported that Hor Namhong "discussed about the situation of the attack by Thai troops on 4 occasions". The original post by KI-Media is available here, and the original article in Khmer from Kampuchea Thmey which KI-Media translated from is available here.

Hor Namhong claims Thais fired first

8/02/2011

Bangkok Post

The Cambodian foreign minister has told the Asean chairman, Indonesian foreign minister Marty Natalegawa, that the Thai military began firing first in the four clashes on the border over the last few days.

Cambodia’s KI Media website reported that Hor Namhong, the Cambodian foreign minister, had discussed the conflict with Mr Natalegawa in Phnom Penh on Monday.

The website says that during the meeting Hor Namhong accused Thailand of instigating each of the four clashes, begining on Feb 4.

The Cambodian foreign minister said after the meeting that he told Mr Natalegawa that five Cambodian soldiers were killed and 45 others were injured, according to the website. People in disputed areas had been evacuated.

Mr Natalegawa said he wanted both countries to end their violent dispute.

He urged them to put down their weapons and return to the negotiating table because both countries are members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean).

Vietnam, another Asean member, has also called on Phnom Penh and Bangkok to end their border conflict around Preah Vihear temple through peaceful negotiations based on international law and the United Nations charter.

Cambodia's betrayal of the Ottawa Convention ... or Thailand's poor attempt to hide its invasion of Cambodia?

Betrayal at the border

Saturday October 25, 2008
Bangkok Post
EDITORIAL

When Thailand and Cambodia signed and later ratified the 1997 Ottawa Convention outlawing anti-personnel landmines, both countries joined 154 others in promising to destroy any stockpiles and do everything in their power to rid themselves of the deadly devices within a set deadline. Implicit in this was an understanding that none of the signatories would acquire or lay landmines ever again.

Both countries were believed to be honouring their commitments until, on Oct 6, something went horribly wrong. Two Thai paramilitary rangers from the Suranaree task force stepped on mines and their legs were blown off, while on a routine patrol deep inside Thai territory to the north of Phu Ma Khua in an area adjacent to the Preah Vihear temple in Si Sa Ket province. The explosion was so powerful that parts of the wounded soldiers were blown up to 5-6 metres into the air.

The Thai Mines Action Centre and other non-governmental organisations identified the culprits as Russian-made PMN2-type landmines which were retrieved and appeared to be new as no rust was found on them. They were also in an area marked as landmine-free and used regularly by villagers to get to their farms as well as by soldiers on patrol. These landmine-free areas were separated from those yet to be cleared by a barbed wire fence and both of the wounded soldiers were outside that fence.

Quite rightly, anger has flared on the diplomatic front. The Foreign Ministry noted that the new mines appeared to have been laid after a brief clash in the area on Oct 3 and called on Cambodian authorities to investigate whether any individual had violated legislation banning the use of anti-personnel landmines. It recalled that the Phnom Penh government had submitted a report to the United Nations secretary-general in 2002 noting that 240 PMN2-type landmines from a total of 3,405 were transferred from its Interior Ministry to the Cambodian Mine Action Centre for development and training. It asked the Cambodian government to verify where the remaining mines were and expressed disappointment and alarm as the mine blasts indicated a violation of the 1997 Ottawa Convention as well as a threat to international peace.

Not so, said Cambodian officials in Phnom Penh. The Hun Sen government denied it had recently planted landmines along the border and said any there "are the remnants of almost three decades of war."

Now a question mark and suspicion cloud the air. If, as Cambodia claims, the two mines in question were not new, why were they not detected in previous sweeps and clearing operations? And if the mine ban treaty is being flouted, what a dreadful omen this would be for mine-clearing operations in the future and joint demarcation of the border. We already have enough trouble with mines strewn along the Burma-Thai border and elephants, their mahouts and villagers being blown up with disturbing regularity. But Burma isn't a signatory of the Ottawa Convention; Cambodia is.

Any weakening of the Mine Ban Treaty increases the threat to the half a million Thais living in 27 provinces along the Cambodian, Lao and Burmese borders who are exposed on a daily basis to death, dismemberment or disability from uncleared mines. Aid agencies say from 30 to 100 people are maimed or killed in these mine-contaminated areas every year.

It would be a terrible betrayal of trust for anyone to lay more of these barbaric devices on our soil after pledging not to. Anti-personnel mines have no place in the civilised world.

When the thieves accused the owners of not being sincere, it can only be Siamese TWISTED logic

Cambodia needs to show it is sincere

Sunday October 19, 2008
THANIDA TANSUBHAPOL
Bangkok Post

The clash between the Thai military and Cambodian troops along the border on Oct 15 has raised questions about Phnom Penh's sincerity in settling the border dispute through diplomacy.

The road to peace has been ruined despite several rounds of multi-level meetings between the two countries.

The two nations have promised many times in the past few months to exercise restraint. But Phnom Penh has failed to keep its promise.

Every time a clash happens, the Foreign Ministry has summoned the Cambodian ambassador or the charge d'affaires to protest against the Cambodian action, and they always promise to resolve things through negotiations. But a short time later, another clash occurs.

The fighting last Wednesday was quite serious - seven Thai soldiers were injured and two Cambodian soldiers killed.

After the Foreign Ministry went through its usual pattern of protesting through diplomatic channels, Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen said on Friday that the conflict would not end in war, that both sides would exercise restraint along the border and the problems would be tackled through bilateral talks. But what does that mean?

Phnom Penh's past record in keeping its word has not been good. And because of this Thailand has started to have doubts about its neighbour's sincerity. Asean members Indonesia and Malaysia have even offered to act as mediators.

The Cambodian government needs to show it is genuine about settling problems through bilateral talks.

Bringing bilateral problems to the international community or to the International Court of Justice, as earlier suggested by Mr Hun Sen, will not help ease tensions and instead will only heat up the conflict.

Cambodia became angry in July after the government opposed its request to take the border issue to the multilateral level through Asean members and the 15 members of the United Nations Security Council.

The Cambodians thought the government feared losing the case if it went to the International Court of Justice, which is what happened 50 years ago when Thailand lost the Preah Vihear temple to Cambodia in the same court.

In fact, Thailand has never feared taking a case to court. Thanks to many countries like the United States, China and Russia, as well as UN secretary-general Ban Ki-moon, Thailand has stuck to its position and not played Cambodia's game.

The Phnom Penh government should know that the world has changed and no third country wants to get involved or support another country in a war against its neighbour, especially if nothing would be gained by that third country.

A key point in the conflicts between Thailand and Cambodia has been the demarcation of the disputed 4.6-square-kilometre overlapping area. The issue is unlikely to be settled unless border demarcation is finished.

Examples from other countries with similar border problems can be used as a model.

Until the problems are resolved, both countries must abide by their commitment and exercise restraint. This will surely take time, but a victory from the process will likely last longer than one derived from war.