The Prince and Preah Vihear

Prince Damrong visiting Preah Vihear temple (2nd from right)

October 7, 2009
SUBHATRA BHUMIPRABHAS
SPECIAL TO THE NATION

Nationalism has clouded our view of the temple's ownership, argues one academic. But history has the simple answer

On 30 January 1929, Prince Damrong Rajanupab arrived at Preah Vihear as head of an official expedition from the Siamese court of King Prajadhipok (Rama VII). There to welcome him was the French commissioner for the Cambodian province along with the archaeologist Henri Parmentier, who was to act as guide for the expedition's trip up Panom Dongrek mountain to see its famed centuries-old Hindu temple.

The prince and the commissioner exchanged speeches of friendship at a cheerful reception attended by the entourage of high-ranking Siamese noblemen, before listening to a lecture on Preah Vihear Temple given by the French archaeologist. Fluttering above this happy scene was the flag of France.

"This is recorded history - a history that must not be forgotten by Thai students," said historian Charnvit Kasetsiri, at a talk titled "The Contested Temple" given recently at the Foreign Correspondents' Club of Thailand.

"Prince Damrong accepted that Preah Vihear belonged to French Indochina," noted Charnvit, as he showed photographs of the prince and French commissioner posing together beneath the French flag. But the history that most Thai students are taught focuses on the loss of territory, he added, citing a Thai textbook for Grade 6 students.

"It asks us to remember the loss of territories beginning with Penang and ending with Preah Vihear Temple. But by ignoring Prince Damrong's visit in 1929, it effectively tells us to forget about the truth.

"This is history infected with nationalism."

Charnvit went on to show how the "infection" reaches beyond schoolbooks and into tourism - a brochure welcoming tourists to Chiang Mai and Chiang Rai talks about the "Losses of Territories and Survival of Siam", while Samut Prakan's Muang Boran [Ancient City] contains a replica of Preah Vihear.

Nationalism and tourism go together, he concluded.

The current case of Preah Vihear reflects the kind of "selective history" that stirs nationalistic feeling and leads to war-mongering threats to take back "lost territory", he said.

Following Prince Damrong's visit, Preah Vihear was left in peace for over a decade. Then, in 1940 the government of Field Marshal Plaek Pibulsongkram added the Hindu temple to its list of Thai archaeological sites.

Though the addition was announced in the pages of the Royal Gazette, there is no evidence that Cambodia's French rulers noticed it. In 1954, the year after Cambodia won independence, Pibul sent Thai troops to occupy the area around the Preah Vihear site. But Thai history tends to ignore this event, preferring to focus on the claim made by King Sihanouk at the International Court of Justice in 1959, which in 1962 awarded the temple to Cambodia.

Charnvit, now 67, recalled how nationalism was working on him the day he heard of the "loss of territory" brought by the court's judgement.

"It was a shock because all the news, all the PR from the military government, told us we were winning for sure," he said.

"We believed that Preah Vihear belonged to us. I was a 21-year-old student. I was so angry. I marched with about a hundred Thammasat University students up Rajdamnoen Avenue. I had a photo of King Sihanouk, which I tore apart, threw down on the street and trampled."

Finally, Field Marshal Sarit Thanarat, leader of the military government at the time, made an appearance on television to say the government had no choice but to accept the ruling of the court.

Now, after almost half a century, the version of history that tells of the "loss" of Preah Vihear has been brought up to stir nationalism in Thailand once again, with nationalists saying they refuse to accept the International Court's 1962 judgement.

Bad history creates false perceptions and false perceptions lead to conflict between neighbours, the historian said.

"Our history texts must be revised and corrected to reflect the truth. Only that way will we be able to live together peacefully in this age of regionalism and globalisation."

Cambodian scholars ask Thai "Yellow Shirts" to respect international laws

(Photo: DAP)

PHNOM PENH, Sept. 21 (Xinhua) -- Cambodian historians and scholars have appealed to the Thai "Yellow Shirts" protesters to stop demanding the land of 4.6 square kilometers near the 11th-century Khmer Preah Vihear temple, the website of DAP News said on Monday.

"Those Thai protesters have confused the history and their demands are incorrect," IV Chan, a deputy chairman and historian of the Royal Academy of Cambodia (RAC) was quoted by DAP Cambodia news as saying.

"We also requested those Thai protesters to respect international border treaty between Siam ( Thailand) and French colony (representative of Cambodia) in 1904-1907 and the verdict of international court which claimed in 1962 that Preah Vihear temple belongs to Cambodia."

"There is no overlapping area at the area and both countries have boundary line for over 100 years," he said.

Additionally, Kim Saron, a senior member of history and culture affairs department of RAC said that Cambodia and Thailand have already established the committee of Khmer-Thai culture and they have met each other for several times to write important documents of the two countries.

"Those Thai extremists have to know about their history and culture, and should also know the cultures and histories of neighboring countries like Cambodia," Kim added.

A group of Thai protesters from People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD), also called "Yellow Shirts," held a rally near Preah Vihear Temple at the weekend to protest the mishandling of Thai governments over the disputed border area with Cambodia, and planned to move into the are that is claimed by Thailand to hold the protest rally at the areas.

Cambodian and Thai armed forces have tightened security at border near the temple to prevent any rally protests.

The two neighboring countries share a nearly 800-kilometer-longcommon border and they have never fully demarcated their land border.

The UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) approved Cambodia's bid to list Preah Vihear Temple as the World Heritage Site, in July 2008. Since then, the temple and its adjacent area have become the sites of border conflict between Cambodia and Thailand.

The temple ghost returns

Wednesday July 02, 2008
By Anchalee Kongrut
Bangkok Post

Preah Vihear, the 900-year-old temple currently in the spotlight, has always been like a restless ghost. At a proper given moment and background, it finds a way to come back and haunt the Thai people.

On June 15, 1962 the whole country mourned when the International Court of Justice ruled that the ancient Khmer-style temple was situated in Cambodian territory.

This year, the ghost of Preah Vihear has returned with a vengeance.

The eerie episode started on June 18, when Foreign Minister Noppadon Pattama signed a joint communique with the Cambodian government, endorsing the latter in unilaterally nominating the Preah Vihear Temple for inscription as a World Heritage Site.

The World Heritage label is a high-profile global status which will bring fame and real advantages including tourists and money, and financial grants from the United Nations' World Heritage Fund.

The sentiment is similar to the fervent patriotism in 1962, when each Thai citizen was asked to chip in at least one baht to help fund Thailand's attempt to defend the temple at the International Court of Justice in the Hague.

Last week in Si Sa Ket province, local protesters threatened to evict Cambodians living in the problematic overlapping area along the border. Cambodia has closed access to the temple since last week.

Like a good Hollywood remake, the ghost of Preah Vihear has had some new features for the 2008 version. This time, centre stage is devoted to which country will secure the World Heritage Status for Preah Vihear temple.

The World Heritage Committee (WHC) is an independent body under the Unesco umbrella. It is holding its annual meeting from today till July 10 in Quebec, Canada, during which it approves or defers World Heritage nominations.

It is almost certain that Cambodia will resubmit its nomination for Preah Vihear. Since 1992, the country has tried to inscribe the temple as a World Heritage site.

Cambodia's past attempts were vetoed by Thailand, which feared a unilateral nomination would include the 4.6 square kilometres of overlapping land still under dispute.

The WHC's last meeting in New Zealand deferred Cambodia's nomination and advised that the country get consent from Thailand.

Cambodia managed to secure the endorsement when Thai Foreign Minister Noppadon Pattama signed the joint communique on June 18, 2008. According to the joint communique, Thailand supports the inscription of Preah Vihear as a World Heritage Site as proposed by Cambodia. And Cambodia, in showing reciprocal goodwill and conciliation, will nominate only the temple structure, without the buffer zone on the northern and western areas of the temple.

But the Cambodian move has since faced obstacles. Last week, 43 Thai senators and 300 members of the Thai elite establishment signed a petition asking the WHC to defer Cambodia's nomination of Preah Vihear and sought time for Thailand to file a joint-nomination. The campaign has picked up momentum, with another 25,000 Thais having signed the petition.

The protesters say Cambodia's unilateral nomination would undermine the integrity of the ancient Hindu site. The temple was not a stand-alone architecture, but a complex in which related structures i.e stupas, barai (man-made lake) are interrelated and constitute a meaning within the ancient Hindu belief.

Inscribing only the temple while ignoring the related structures that make it whole - which are located in Thailand's territory - would undermine the integrity of the site, said Senator M R Priyanandana Rangsit. She insisted the WHC should defer the listing and give Thailand time to prepare the necessary document for joint nomination.

The WHC has a long history of inscribing entire sites, such as Angkor, the whole ancient cities of Ayutthaya and Sukhothai or even the Jesuit mission of the Guaranis which is a transboundary property between Brazil and Argentina. But integrity is not a must. Richard Engelhardt, an adviser at Unesco's Asia-Pacific office, said the WHC sometimes gave weight to only architectural value. For instance, only the Taj Mahal building was listed as a World Heritage site while the garden in the same compound was omitted.

In case of transboundary property, the WHC does allow State party members to file a joint nomination.

So far, the WHC has inscribed 851 properties with universal values, including 660 cultural sites and 166 natural sites - 25 of them are transboundary properties.

The WHC has two avenues for countries with shared property to secure the World Heritage status. First, countries can file for a joint nomination and help manage the site together under the same rules laid down by Unesco. For disagreeing countries, the WHC allows each individual member to lodge a separate nomination. Each country would separately manage the site.

But the question is whether Thailand and Cambodia can or should resume cordial relations and file for joint nomination.

Cultural experts in Thailand have criticised the data which Cambodia has submitted to WHC as being one-sided and distorted from the facts, thereby undermining the value of the related structures that lie in Thai territory.

The International Council on Monuments and Sites (Icomos) in Thailand sent a petition to Unesco to reconsider the information from Cambodia, according to Vasu Poshyanondana, archaeologist and assistant secretary-general at Icomos-Thailand office.

Icomos is an advisory agency which gives recommendations to Unesco on conservation techniques and provides technical assistance to the WHC on the granting of World Heritage status to State party's nominations.

However, the final decision rests with the WHC. This year, neither Thailand nor Cambodia sits on the committee.

The WHC has spent the past 30 months reading the information proposed by Cambodia, according to Mr Engelhardt. The Thai senators' question about the integrity of the whole site is a challenging one for the WHC. At the end, the WHC will relay the question back to, and check on the position of, the Thai government.

It remains to be seen what the Thai government will do, since the Administrative Court has granted an injunction while checking if Minister Noppadon had the authority to sign the joint communique endorsing Cambodia's unilateral inscription of the temple.

Sompen Kutranon, a Thai businesswoman who has lived in Phnom Penh for 18 years, said local people were not paying much interest to this issue. They understand that the Preah Vihear issue has been politicised by anti-government protesters.

The Cambodian government only needs Preah Vihear as a new tourist attraction. Ms Sompen - who helped staff at the Thai embassy during the riot against Thais in 2003 - said she did not expect another riot against Thais.

"The Cambodian government will not allow any riot because the economy in Phnom Penh is very good. It will not allow any turmoil that could scare investors away," she said.

She added that people in Cambodia, herself included, could not understand why Thais had to protest against Cambodia's attempt to enlist its own property as a World Heritage site.

"Local Cambodians are very clear. The temple belongs to Cambodia and it is their right to get it listed. People here do not care about the overlapping land and surrounding areas. They have been waiting for the temple to become a heritage of the world," she said.

"If they find that Unesco has deferred its decision again, they may get angry, very angry," Ms Sompen said.

In 1907 Siam requested France to draw up a border demarcation map, one century later, Thailand renege on its agreement

Get priorities right

THAI RATH noted that a chorus of opinion has criticised the government as being more concerned with solving its own political problems than with stemming the rising cost of living faced by the Thai people

Saturday June 21, 2008
KAMOL HENGKIETISAK
Bangkok Post

As had been expected, the government's performance for the past 4 months has received a thumbs down by eminent economists, especially the Commerce Ministry, which Prof Ammar Siamwalla, TDRI chairman, cited as having no policy on rice as the government flip-flopped constantly. One day it said it would help paddy farmers, the next day it said it would help consumers. One day it said it would sell blue-flag cheap packed rice, another day it said it would stop selling cheap rice, noted a Thai Rath editorial.

Former commerce minister M.R. Pridiyathorn Devakula also criticised the ministry for interfering in the rice market and distorting the pricing mechanism, making the situation worse.

The TDRI chairman said the Samak Sundaravej government had no plan to solve the country's economic problems. However, Dr Ammar praised the Samak administration for not distorting the oil supply mechanism by using the oil fund to subsidise diesel, as was the case during the administration of former prime minister Thaksin Shinawattra.

The Thai Rath writer noted that Prof Ammar's evaluation of the Samak administration was in accord with opinions expressed by the media and the general public that criticised the government as being more concerned with solving its own political problems than with stemming the rising cost of living faced by the Thai people. This attitude was not unlike the Burmese junta, who insisted that Burmese citizens must vote in the referendum to accept the draft constitution even when millions of them were going hungry due to the devastation of Cyclone Nargis early last month.

According to a Ramkhamhaeng poll released on May 25, 2008, about 92.6% of the sampled population wanted the government to urgently tackle economic problems, while a tiny number, just 4.5%, believed that amending the constitution should be the government's priority. Sadly, the government did not pay heed to the poll results, said Thai Rath.

The writer then cited an Abac poll which found 87.8% of sampled people were dissatisfied with politicians' performance, 61.5% expressed concern that amending the constitution would lead to violence, and 38.6% recommended the government reshuffle the cabinet. The problem was, the leading candidate that people wanted ousted was none other than Samak Sundaravej, followed closely by Interior Minister Chalerm Yubamrung.

Thai Rath concluded by saying that since this reshuffle was obviously not going to happen, the alternative is for the government to prioritise its policies, especially on economics, which should be coordinated toward a definite goal, and not carried out haphazardly by various ministries as is the case now.

BMTA bus leasing controversy

Even though Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej declared that the government had done everything transparently during its 4 months in office, the opposition still insisted on filing a censure motion against certain cabinet ministers, especially Transport Minister Santi Promphat and Deputy Transport Minister Songsak Thongsri, for proposing that the Bangkok Mass Transit Authority (BMTA) lease 6,000 NGV buses from a private firm at a cost of 110 billion baht, to replace old diesel buses, noted a Thai Rath writer.

Some believe that the reported leasing cost is about one million baht per bus over the real cost and that politicians are pocketing the difference.

In fact, the prospect of leasing NGV buses from China once surfaced during the Surayud Chulanont government and generated some news, but the project was shelved. The writer noted that he had written an article cautioning the government at the time that the made-in-China buses would be of lower quality than the Euro II buses now in use by the BMTA.

Now that the leasing plan has come up again, he wanted to insist the bus specifications conform to international standards and the contract opened for general bidding in a transparent manner. It would not do if the government let the BMTA conclude the deal secretly with only one supplier.

In principle, the writer agreed that the government should act to solve the accumulated debt problems shouldered by the BMTA - 69 billion baht and ballooning toward 100 billion baht. Just paying the interest to service the debt is beyond the capability of the BMTA.

The writer noted that one of the main reasons the BMTA continues to amass ever bigger losses each year is that most buses run on diesel, which rises in cost practically every week. The fuel cost represents nearly 60% of the collected fares. But even if the government allowed periodic fare increases, said Thai Rath, the BMTA would still face losses as it is bloated with bureaucracy. At present, there are five staff for every bus, much higher than the ratio for private bus operators.

The plan to reduce personnel is to borrow 3.5 billion baht from the Finance Ministry to pay compensation for dismissed personnel. The BMTA would then return the principal to the ministry at the rate of about 500 million baht a year.

The selling of 3,100 diesel buses was expected to earn one billion baht, to be used as capital to lease 6,000 NGV buses, which will reduce fuel cost by 60%. As mentioned, the opposition Democrats are charging that the leasing fee is excessive. The condition that the government is most unlikely to agree with is for the Finance Ministry to take over the 69 billion baht in accumulated losses from the BMTA, concluded Thai Rath.

Preah Vihear revisited

Recently the Samak Sundaravej administration agreed with the Cambodian government in its application to Unesco to declare Preah Vihear as a World Heritage Site. The most contentious point is whether or not a part of the Preah Vihear site is located on Thai soil, noted a Matichon writer.

The reason the Cambodian government needed the Thai government's approval before submitting the application is that this is still very much disputed by some, as it has yet to be settled permanently by clear-cut demarcation line. If the Cambodian government submitted the application without consent from Thailand in July next month during the Unesco meeting in Canada, it is unlikely it would be successful.

The Preah Vihear issue became big news when Lt Gen Pitsanu Pujjakarn, former Defence Ministry spokesman, expressed publicly that the Defence Council was worried that Cambodia would encroach on Thai territory if Preah Vihear was declared a World Heritage Site, because both countries still claim parts of a buffer zone around the area.

Looking back, Preah Vihear is the last territory that Thailand ceded to a foreign country. From 1904 to 1908, France, as Cambodia's protector, concluded a few treaties with Siam. The treaty signed on 13 July 1904 stated that disputed territory shall use a mountain range as the demarcation criteria and that a joint border committee would be appointed to survey the disputed areas.

In 1907 Siam requested France to draw up a border demarcation map. France agreed and submitted one to Siam. The map included Preah Vihear on the Cambodian side. This map was later used by an independent Cambodia to claim sovereignty over the Preah Vihear temple when Cambodia took Thailand to the World Court at the Hague, Netherlands for an arbitration settlement in the early 1960s.

Thailand argued that the French map was not drawn by a joint border committee, and thus could not bind Thailand, and also said the map did not use the mountain range as demarcation criteria.

However the Thai border committee did not express opposition to the map in a timely manner during the committee meeting in Bangkok in 1909, and Thailand's own map by the Mapping Department also indicated clearly that Preah Vihear was in Cambodia's territory. During the reconciliation talk in Washington DC in 1947, Thailand did not raise any objections to the map.

For this reason, the World Court decided that the French map was legitimate and awarded Preah Vihear to Cambodia on June 15, 1962.

Now some wonder if history may be repeating itself with a renewed boundary dispute. When the Samak administration agreed to the Cambodian-drawn map outlining the Preah Vihear area for the Unesco World Heritage Site, some were questioning whether the site encroached on a 4.6 sq.km. area claimed by both countries. The Matichon writer wanted to remind Mr Samak to be careful before signing the agreement, and not allow Cambodia to claim any Thai territory under the pretext of being the protector of a World Heritage Site.

Thailand's Democrat party urged Thai gov't not to support Preah Vihear's listing as a World Heritage Site - When will the Thai stop their hegemony?

Preah Vihear was built by Khmer people
and it belongs to Khmer people!

Wat a controversy!

Monday, 09 June 2008
By Post Reporters Bangkok Post

The Democrat party has urged the government not to rush to support Cambodia's attempt to register Preah Vihear temple as a new World Heritage Site.

Democrat deputy leader Alongkorn Ponlaboot said on Sunday that the government should think carefully before backing the Cambodian effort.

He was speaking after Phnom Penh redrew the boundaries of the ancient temple site to convince the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation (Unesco) that it now deserved to be put on the World Heritage list. The old map, which was opposed by Thailand, included overlapping areas.

Mr Alongkorn said that by supporting Cambodia on the issue, Thailand would automatically lose its right to reclaim sovereignty over Preah Vihear in the future.

On June 15, 1962, the International Court of Justice ruled the ancient temple belonged to Cambodia. Mr Alongkorn said the ruling was unfair and not based on law.

The Treaty of Versailles stipulated later that the demarcation of the disputed areas was questionable, and that was why Thailand wrote to the United Nations secretary-general on July 3, 1962, saying it reserves the right to reclaim the ancient temple in the future, he said.

"The present government has no right to either sell or reclaim Thai sovereignty in this case. Next week, I hope, the National Security Council (NSC) and cabinet will review the issue. Otherwise, it would be a shame and tantamount to betraying the nation and selling Thai sovereignty to another country," Mr Alongkorn said.

He suspects vested interests are behind the move to support Cambodia on the listing.

Mr Alongkorn suggested the government oppose the listing and ask Unesco's World Heritage Committee to drop the issue from the agenda of its July 2-10 meeting in Quebec.

The new Cambodian map will be discussed at the NSC's weekly meeting today. If the NSC approves the map, cabinet is likely to endorse the map tomorrow.