dailykhmerpost

Government Turns to Sonando to Criticize Opposition

2013-05-16T18:53:00.003-07:00

Government Turns to Sonando to Criticize Opposition

By Colin Meyn and Eang Mengleng - May 15, 2013

In July, Mam Sonando, the outspoken political critic and owner of the independent Beehive radio station, was arrested and sentenced to 20 years in prison for allegedly having encouraged an armed uprising against the government in rural Kratie province.

–News Analysis

Less than 10 months later and just two months after he was released from Prey Sar prison in Phnom Penh, Mr. Sonando’s political commentaries are now being rebroadcast by state-controlled radio stations and disseminated by the government to media outlets as a means to undermine the political opposition ahead of July’s national election.

So why has the government’s recent enemy No. 1, become its ally?

In the past week, two audio segments aired by Bayon radio, which is owned by Prime Minister Hun Sen’s daughter Hun Mana, have contained commentaries made by Mr. Sonando in the run-up to the 2008 national election.

In those segments taken from old broadcasts on his Beehive radio, Mr. Sonando’s criticisms of the opposition SRP and Human Rights Party—which have since merged to become the Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP)—are spliced between recordings of the party’s respective leaders, Sam Rainsy and Kem Sokha, also taking swipes at each other during the 2008 national election campaign.

“The opposition’s policy is to disrupt democracy,” Mr. Sonando says in one dated commentary now being rebroadcast by pro-government media outlets.

“If they cannot eat rice, they want to break the pot,” he continued, using a colloquialism to describe the opposition’s tactic of attacking the country’s democratic institutions if it sees that it cannot win the election.

Although Mr. Sonando was sentenced in October to 20 years in jail for crimes related to an alleged insurrection—a case that human rights groups say was trumped up by the government—it appears the same government is now using Mr. Sonando for its own political ends.

While Mr. Sonando could never be accused of being a supporter of Prime Minister Hun Sen, he also has little time for the current leaders or tactics of the country’s political opposition.

Speaking by phone from Paris, where he said he is raising funds to help Cambodia’s poor, Mr. Sonando said Tuesday that he remains frustrated by the opposition party.

“For four mandates, the opposition party has not been successful in pushing the government to implement the rule of law. The opposition has to protest until the government changes what it has done to break the law or violate people’s rights,” said Mr. Sonando, adding that simply speaking out in the media or on the floor of the National Assembly was not enough to compel the CPP to change its ways.

“Opposition leaders must not be afraid of being jailed or beaten,” Mr. Sonando added.

Since 2009, Mr. Rainsy, who is president of the CNRP, has been in self-imposed exile to avoid an 11-year jail sentence for crimes including incitement and disinformation, which he claims are politically motivated.

Mr. Sonando also said that he was disappointed that threats by the CNRP to boycott the national election on the grounds of a lack of reform inside the National Election Committee (NEC) never materialized.

“The opposition party demanded that the government reform the NEC and told the public that if the NEC doesn’t change they would not join the election, but now they have joined the NEC. So now they support the elections,” he said.

Independent political analyst Chea Vannath said the government is likely distributing the recording featuring Mr. Sonando in order to influence the political convictions of the rural Cambodians he is already popular with.

“I think that Mam Sonando has his own constituency—people who listen to him. So by [broadcasting his critiques of the opposition], what they [the government] are trying to do is use different people who have influence in the society against each other,” she said.

Regarding the seeming contradiction of promoting the views of a man who was convicted of leading an insurrection against the government less than a year earlier, Ms. Vannath said that for the CPP-controlled government “the ends justify the means.”

“The target is not to promote Mam Sonando, the target is to counterbalance the influence of the opposition party,” she said.

Ek Tha, spokesman for the Council of Minister’s Press and Quick Reaction Unit, which has been distributing the audio segments of Mr. Sonando, declined to comment Tuesday, as did Council of Ministers spokesman Phay Siphan.

Satya Rak, the Bayon radio presenter who has produced and broadcast three audio recordings portraying opposition infighting over the past two weeks, said that he chose to include the commentary of Mr. Sonando because it encapsulates what he said is the struggle for power within the opposition.

“I put in Mr. Sonando’s comments in the audio segment because I think what Sonando said about the character and behavior of Sam Rainsy and Kem Sokha is true,” he said. “Mr. Sonando had said that the opposition party could not be strong when they fight within their party,” he added.

In March, following international and national outcry, the Court of Appeal overturned Mr. Sonando’s conviction on insurrection and incitement charges, cut his 20 years sentence to just five years and then promptly suspended that sentence too, ordering his immediate release.

Mr. Sonando was also imprisoned for three months in October, 2005, after he was arrested for defaming Mr. Hun Sen by airing interviews highly critical of the government’s border agreement with Vietnam, in which an interviewee accused the government of selling swaths of the country to Vietnam.

“Mam Sonando has been quite popular since he was put in jail, so any political party would gain a lot of advantage by having him on their side, or by having him criticize another political party,” said Moeun Chhean Nariddh, the director of the Cambodian Institute for Media Studies. “He has reached out to grassroots level people…. He has become in a sense the voice of the voiceless many.”

Cambodia Opposition Party Awaits Election Registration Approval

2013-05-16T18:52:00.001-07:00

Cambodia Opposition Party Awaits Election Registration Approval

2013-05-13

Print Share Comment Email

Sam Rainsy (R) addresses a roundtable in Washington, May 8, 2013.

RFA

Cambodia’s electoral body is scrutinizing a bid by the main opposition Cambodia National Rescue Party to contest the July general election, saying approval has been given to five of eight parties to field candidates in the polls.

The Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP), headed by exiled leader Sam Rainsy, submitted its registration to the National Election Committee (NEC) on Friday without his name listed as a candidate, officials said.

NEC Secretary-General Tep Nytha told RFA’s Khmer Service Monday that the CNRP’s registration papers are being examined.

The NEC, which organizes and manages all elections in the country, said in a statement on its website that it had “rectified a few errors in the CNRP’s registration" but did not provide details.

The election body has required the CNRP to provide more information on the registration within five days, according to Cambodia’s key ally China’s state news agency Xinhua.

CNRP officials said they had left Sam Rainsy off of the list of candidates because the NEC had barred him from running and deleted his name from voter lists on the basis of his prison convictions.

But Sam Rainsy—who is living in self-imposed exile to avoid prison for a string of convictions that critics contend are politically motivated—will be nominated as prime minister if the party wins the election, they said.

They did not explain how he could take up the post if he is not on the ballot.

Eight parties in the race

Among the five political parties that won approval to run in the July 28 polls are Prime Minister Hun Sen’s ruling Cambodian People’s Party (CPP) and the royalist Funcinpec Party.

The CPP and Funcinpec, which submitted their candidate lists earlier this month, received approval alongside three smaller parties. Another two lesser known parties are awaiting approval alongside the CNRP.

Sam Rainsy, 63, who has been living in self-imposed exile in France since 2009, faces a total of 11 years in prison if he returns to Cambodia.

Since the NEC said in November he could not stand in the elections because of the prison convictions, Sam Rainsy has called Hun Sen a “coward” for barring him from the polls and argued that the elections will not be “free and fair” if he is not allowed to run.

Hun Sen, 61, has ruled the country for 28 years and vowed last week to stay in power until he’s 74.

Exiled Sam Rainsy Says Talks Under Way with CPP for Return

2013-05-16T18:49:00.001-07:00

Exiled Sam Rainsy Says Talks Under Way with CPP for Return

2013-05-10

Print Share Comment Email

Sam Rainsy (R) speaks with RFA's Khmer Service in Washington, May 9, 2013.

RFA

Cambodia’s exiled opposition leader Sam Rainsy says his party is in negotiations with Prime Minister Hun Sen’s ruling party for his return to contest upcoming national elections, expressing optimism that a “political solution” would be reached.

“There are ongoing negotiations because this is not only a Cambodian issue—the world is watching,” the president of the opposition National Rescue Party (NRP) told RFA’s Khmer Service in Washington.

“[The world] wants our country to become a true democracy holding fair elections,” he said, without elaborating on when the talks with the Cambodian People’s Party (CPP) began or the basis for his optimism.

Sam Rainsy said he “believe[s] there will be a political solution” that will allow him to return to Cambodia.

“This is not the first time for me. There have been … other times [I was persecuted],” he said, “But in the end there have always been political solutions.”

Sam Rainsy, who has been living in self-imposed exile in France since 2009, is barred by the Cambodian authorities from contesting the July 28 elections due to convictions that he says were politically motivated and for which he faces a total of 11 years in prison.

“Without my participation as an opposition leader who can defeat the ruling party, the election is meaningless and worthless,” he said.

“The government understands this issue and they have heard the demands of the international community.”

The United States is among countries that have criticized the Cambodian authorities for disallowing Sam Rainsy from running in the elections based on his criminal convictions, saying this calls into question the vote’s legitimacy.

Sam Rainsy said he is “100 percent confident” that he will be invited back to Cambodia to participate in the polls, adding that his presence is critical for a “free and fair election.”

“If there is a free and fair election it must include Sam Rainsy,” he said.

“But if it is a sham there is no need for me.”

Sam Rainsy told Agence France-Presse on Thursday that Washington should impose sanctions against Hun Sen if the elections are unfair, citing Burma’s recent change from a military regime to a growing democracy as a result of foreign pressure.

Call to postpone polls

Sam Rainsy said that in order for Cambodia to have a free and fair election, the polls must be postponed by at least three months, indicating that the delay would enable electoral reforms to be implemented.

The opposition leader earlier this week told a roundtable in Washington that polls should be postponed due to what he said are inconsistencies in voter registration and the barring of the opposition from observing the ballot process.

Hun Sen recently reaffirmed that the government would not delay the election or audit voting lists under any circumstances.

According to law, he said, national elections must take place every five years in the fourth week of July.

Sam Rainsy said recent attacks by Hun Sen against his party—including a call on the Cambodian media to air recordings of Sam Rainsy and deputy NRP chief Kem Sokha expressing their political differences in public—indicate that the CPP is concerned about the popularity of the opposition.

The two opposition leaders had aired their differences long before they decided to jointly form the NRP.

Hun Sen also suggested earlier this week that the NRP’s delay in submitting a list of candidates for the polls to the National Election Committee (NEC), which organizes and manages all elections in the country, was related to a split within the party.

“These claims are nonsense. What is important is that the party's leaders and its millions of supporters are united to rescue the country from disaster,” he said.

As vote nears, Cambodia opposition urges sanction threat

2013-05-16T18:46:00.002-07:00

Cambodia's opposition leader is calling on the United States to impose sanctions against strongman Hun Sen if upcoming elections are unfair, saying that Myanmar showed how foreign pressure can work.

Cambodia holds elections on July 28, but Hun Sen has led the country since 1985 and his main challenger, Sam Rainsy, is barred from running due to a string of convictions that the opposition says are politically motivated.

Rainsy, who lives in exile in France to avoid prison, said on a visit to Washington that he was urging the United States and European powers to seek targeted sanctions against Hun Sen to delegitimize him if the vote is rigged.

"There must be a clear warning to the Hun Sen regime that there will not be business as usual following fake elections," Rainsy told AFP in an interview Thursday, saying he was giving the same message to US policymakers.

"If Hun Sen pretends to win in a boxing match in which he boxes alone, his victory would be meaningless," Rainsy said.

Rainsy said that the main retaliation should be a visa ban on top officials and that he opposed sanctions that would hurt ordinary Cambodians.

"Hun Sen craves legitimacy, he craves being able to travel (along with) his family and cronies," he said. "The very process of being banned would make Hun Sen think twice."

Rainsy said Cambodia has become the "new pariah of Southeast Asia" at a time when Myanmar, also known as Burma, is pursing democratic reforms after decades under military rule and being rewarded with an end to most Western sanctions.

"Burma has shown democratic progress and Cambodia is going the opposite way. So the sanctions that have been applied to Burma should be put on Cambodia if no democratic reform and election reform are implemented," he said.

Rainsy, who recently visited Myanmar to meet opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi, said that Cambodia would be even more responsive to pressure due to Phnom Penh's heavily reliance on international assistance.

Myanmar was isolated for decades and many experts believe it undertook reforms in part to reduce its heavy reliance on China -- which also has a close relationship with Cambodia.

Hun Sen recently said he will step down as prime minister when he turns 74 -- after previously saying he would serve until 90. The idiosyncratic leader is 60 but officially lists his age as 62 which he said was the result of a typing error.

Hun Sen has warned that Cambodia risks a return to war if the opposition wins due to Rainsy's vow to prosecute members of his government for alleged roles in the genocidal Khmer Rouge regime.

The United States has criticized the exclusion of Rainsy from the election and said it is urging Cambodia to take steps for a free vote.

"The exclusion of one of the leading opposition leaders calls into question the legitimacy of the democratic process in Cambodia," a State Department official said.

Rainsy, who said he met in Washington with officials at the White House, State Department and Congress, called on the United States not to send observers to the election for fear of legitimizing a "farce."

The opposition leader also called for reforms of the National Election Committee which he accuses of doing the bidding of Hun Sen.

The French-educated Rainsy has lived in exile since 2009. He faces 11 years in jail if he returns over charges that included publishing a "false map" that showed Vietnam controlling Cambodian territory.

Cambodian Opposition Rejects Claims of Internal Strife

2013-05-16T18:43:00.001-07:00

Cambodian Opposition Rejects Claims of Internal Strife

2013-05-09

Print Share Comment Email

Kem Sokha (C) greets supporters during a demonstration at Freedom Park in Phnom Penh, April 24, 2013.

AFP

Cambodia’s opposition National Rescue Party (NRP) has dismissed suggestions by Prime Minister Hun Sen that its delay in submitting a list of candidates for upcoming national elections underscores a split within the party.

Kem Sokha, the NRP’s deputy president, said the party was holding back the candidates’ list in anticipation of election reforms urgently needed to ensure that the July 28 polls are free and fair.

He said Hun Sen’s aides may have given the prime minister inaccurate information for him to make assumptions about a rift within the NRP.

Contrary to Hun Sen’s claims, he said, there is no internal dissent within his group and that it is “well-prepared” with the list of candidates.

“Someone cheated [Hun Sen] because this is a false report,” Kem Sokha told RFA’s Khmer Service, mocking the prime minister for accepting “incorrect information from his informants.”

“We don't have any internal conflict,” he said.

The NRP is led by exiled chief Sam Rainsy, who has been barred by the Cambodian authorities from contesting the elections due to past convictions which he says were politically motivated.

Kem Sokha may have to lead the NRP against Hun Sen’s ruling Cambodian People’s Party (CPP) in the elections if Sam Rainsy fails in his campaign to return to contest the polls.

Kem Sokha said the party had “reshuffled some candidates to make sure they are ready to compete with CPP officials,” without elaborating.

He said the NRP was prepared to submit its candidate list even by this weekend to the National Election Committee (NEC), which organizes and manages all elections in the country, if it agrees to adopt and implement poll reforms proposed by various groups.

The NRP had been holding off also with the hope that the NEC would accept calls from Cambodia’s opposition for more transparency and to allow Sam Rainsy to participate in the election, he said.

The demands echo recommendations to Prime Minister Hun Sen made earlier this year by U.N. Special Rapporteur for Human Rights in Cambodia Surya Subedi, who has been accused by the government of siding with the country’s political opposition and civil society.

The NEC maintains that it has acted in accordance with electoral laws and will not take any recommendations into consideration.

Earlier this week in Washington, Sam Rainsy asked Cambodian authorities to postpone the national elections, citing inconsistencies in voter registration and barring of the opposition from observing the ballot process.

Sam Rainsy has been living in self-imposed exile in France since 2009, facing a total of 11 years in prison over a string of convictions that critics contend are politically motivated.

Claims of division

Hun Sen earlier this week suggested that the NRP had been slow in submitting its candidate list due to an internal conflict.

He said its persistent calls for election reforms were a ploy to cover up its internal divisions.

“They said they haven’t submitted their candidate list because they’re waiting for the NEC to reform,” Hun Sen said.

“Please don't lie. [The NRP] simply can't agree on candidate lists,” he said, adding that the party was having “problems” with candidates in “certain provinces.”

Hun Sen reaffirmed that the government would not delay the election or audit voting lists under any circumstances.

According to law, he said, national elections must take place every five years in the fourth week of July.

As of Thursday, five political parties had registered with the NEC to compete in the polls. The NEC has recognized and approved three of them, including the CPP.

Local rights groups have charged that the NEC is biased toward the CPP, and election watchdogs say voters are intimidated into supporting the ruling party through restrictions on freedom of expression, rights abuses, and land disputes.

Last week, the Committee for Free and Fair Elections in Cambodia (COMFREL) and several human rights groups demanded that the NEC post a list of voters for upcoming crucial elections in all villages and involve key political parties in the supervision of the polling process.

They expressed concern over the lack of transparency in preparations for the polls along with what they felt was weak management in the selection of ground election supervisors and the "poor quality" of the voters list.

International Community Must Help Cambodian Democracy, Opposition Leader Says

2013-05-16T18:41:00.002-07:00

Sam Rainsy told the group that democracy in Cambodia has been “derailed,” and the international community must help put it back on track.

Sok Khemara, VOA Khmer

10 May 2013

WASHINGTON DC - Opposition leader Sam Rainsy joined a panel of experts in Washington on Wednesday to discuss further promotion of democracy in Cambodia.

The talk, joined by about 100 participants at the Wilson Center, a think tank in the capital, was aimed at finding ways to create free and fair elections in Cambodia in national polls July 28.

Sam Rainsy told the group that democracy in Cambodia has been “derailed,” and the international community must help put it back on track.

“If the whole world continues to turn a blind eye and does not react, I think the credibility of the whole world, the international community, would come down to zero, [hurting] the possibility to find political solutions for other countries,” he said.

Sam Rainsy said US Congress can play a role, by putting more pressure on the Cambodian government to reform its election process.

“The prospect of a strong reaction from the US will contribute to push Mr. Hun Sen to accept the international demands now and not after the election,” he said.

Sam Rainsy on Tuesday met with Congressman Ed Royce, a Republican from California, who is chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

But George Gorman, a political analyst at Cascade Asia, said Wednesday that the international community can’t do much if it only makes empty threats.

“There hasn’t been any constructive steps taken by the international community to actually enforce these threats that they levy on the Cambodian government,” he said.

Shihoko Goto, Asia Program Associate at Wilson Center and an organizer of the event, said Cambodia today “does not allow meaningful dialogues.” And so the center had invited Sam Rainsy to talk.

Cambodia, she said, “is a desert when it comes to free speech, and we wanted to provide a platform for him to be with us and show his opinions, because those opportunities are not available for him in his home country.”

CPP Releases a Second Recording of Opposition Sparring

2013-05-16T18:38:00.000-07:00

CPP Releases a Second Recording of Opposition Sparring

By Eang Mengleng and Colin Meyn - May 9, 2013

In a further attempt to discredit the opposition, the government on Wednesday released a second audio clip of the leaders of the recently formed Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP) insulting one another back when they headed rival opposition parties.

The 22-minute recording, originally broadcast on Bayon Radio—which is owned by Prime Minister Hun Sen’s daughter Hun Mana—splices together sound bites from current CNRP president Sam Rainsy and vice president Kem Sokha taken from between 2008 and 2012 when Mr. Rainsy headed the SRP and Mr. Sokha the Human Rights Party (HRP).

The audio clip, which was disseminated by the Council of Ministers, is the second of another 10 audio clips that will be disseminated painting the CNRP as divided in the run-up to July’s national elections, said Satya Rak, a Bayon Radio host.

Wednesday’s clip plays sound bites of Mr. Rainsy speaking about the HRP while on the campaign trail for the SRP in 2008.

“It is not a real opposition party because it is connected to the Cambodian People’s Party,” Mr. Rainsy said of the HRP. “It exists only to break democracy and the real opposition.”

The clip also has Mr. Sokha speaking to an audience of HRP supporters before the 2008 election saying that Mr. Rainsy is guilty of many of the same failures as Mr. Hun Sen.

“Every opposition politician is not working for the nation. He [Mr. Rainsy] cannot correct his own actions even though he wants to correct others. He is not the prime minister, but as the president of his party, he is also old and has been in the same position for a long time,” Mr. Sokha said.

The recording is also interspersed with outdated commentary from independent radio station owner Mam Sonando, who has previously been critical of the fighting between opposition parties.

In the recording, Mr. Sonando—who was released earlier this year after being jailed for having allegedly led an insurrection in Kratie province—raises the possibility that both opposition leaders might be pretending to care about Cambodia for their own benefit.

“I am critical of the leadership of Mr. Sokha and Mr. Rainsy. Are they working to cheat the public or help the people or simply help their own group?” he says on the recording.

Mr. Rak, the Bayon Radio host, said by phone Wednesday that he was not airing the recordings for the benefit of the CPP, but rather because he wants to expose the lack of sincerity between Mr. Rainsy and Mr. Sokha.

“This recording doesn’t belong to the CPP, it is mine. I want to show the behavior of the opposition party and characteristics of these two men,” he said.

Chhean Nariddh Moeun, director of the Cambodia Institute for Media Studies, said that the fact that Bayon Radio would take it upon itself to criticize the opposition was unsurprising.

“Everybody knows that almost all of the media is either controlled or influenced by government, so the release of these audio tapes is not a surprise. The government always tries to manipulate the media for political gains,” he said.

Opposition Leader Warns Against Destructive Foreign Investment

2013-05-16T18:34:00.003-07:00

Hun Xen'sbuffoonery: Schizophrenic Hun Xen asked the US to search and arrest group of men wanting to topple the Cambodian regime

2013-05-16T18:28:00.002-07:00

Hun Xen'sbuffoonery: Schizophrenic Hun Xen asked the US to search and arrest group of men wanting to topple the Cambodian regime 16 May 2013 By Rithy Cambodia Express News Translated from Khmer by Heng Soy Phnom Penh – Strongman Hun Xen announced that, based on a request made by his regime, the US government is searching to arrest a group of opportunists who are conducting actions to topple the Cambodian regime and the monarchy. He also pointed out that a group of opportunists is hiding within the opposition party as well. During an inauguration of a Buddhist institute named after himself in Preah Sdech district, Prey Veng province, in the morning of 16 May 2013, Hun Xen indicated that these US-based extremists have their own flag also. Hun Xen confirmed that his regime asked the US to search and arrest these opportunists, just like what his regime did to Chhun Yasidh – the leader of the US-based Cambodian Freedom Fighter group – in 2000. Hun Xen claimed that the US sentenced Chhun Yasidh to life in prison and the latter even hanged himself in a suicide. [KI-Media Note: Now Hun Xen is resorting to lies also! Chhun Yasidh is still alive]. Hun Xen claimed that there are 2 other movements: (1) The Tiger Liberation Movement which has its own flag and seeks refuge among the opposition party to conduct its actions; (2) The US-based Mohachak movement which has its own flag, a large of number of this group’s members finds themselves in the opposition party. Hun Xen claimed that, not only they want to change Hun Xen and the CPP, but they even want to change the monarchy as well.

HM [29-04-2013] Daily News

2013-04-29T04:54:00.001-07:00

Accident News [29-Apr-2013] - C HM

2013-04-29T04:51:00.001-07:00

Accident News [29-Apr-2013] - B HM

2013-04-29T04:49:00.001-07:00

Accident News [29-Apr-2013] - A HM

2013-04-29T04:46:00.001-07:00

Preah Vihear and the Thai military failures

2013-04-29T04:19:00.003-07:00

Re: Thai Democrats to stop Cambodia to develop area around Preah Vihear

Khmer Territories were laying far beyond the Dangrek Mountain chains

By KPCS
The idea of using the watershed was to oversimplifying the task of demarcating the border line. Deep down in theirs heart, French surveyors knew that the actual Khmer Territories were laying far beyond the Dangrek Mountain chains to the North many times over. That was the reason why those Frenchmen made the exception in their drawing when they rediscovered the Temple of Preah Vihear.
Their consciences simply did not allow them to ignore the historical facts that the Temple site belongs to the Khmers. They probably felt ashamed too for using the watershed notion to accommodate their laziness when they looked at the Temple, they suddenly realized that hundreds of years have passed, there were diligent Khmer ancestors had erected the magnificent Place,the Preah Vihear Temple, which were thousand times harder to accomplish than their task at hand.
I can assure you that if Sdok Kok Thom Temple were situated closer to the Dangrek Mountain ranges, the French would have done the same at that time, they would have ignored the watershed line and gave Sdok Kok Thom Temple to Khmers as well; Siamese wouldn't dare utter a word to complain !!!
Looking back through history, Thais should realized that they were lucky to have a country Thailand to call it Home. If it was not for what Seni Pramoj had done in the USA, the mighty British would have dismantled the Siamese Colony right after the WWII ended. The opposition led by Abhisit was to be blamed for causing all the trouble in 2008.

Now, Humankind are simply brothers and sisters from the common ancestors, even though we erred by fighting each other for thousands of years. It is about time for Humankind to act responsibly worthy to the weight of brain each carries.
By the way, who was the guy saying that if ICJ award the land to Cambodia then the 100 year war will start between the countries ? Oh poor Thai general !!! Do you want to be king privy councilor to the Thai king?!
We Khmers have not mentioned about the cluster bombs you dumb ass fired on the temple yet, shame on you!!!.

26 April 2013 2:39 am
--------------------------------------------------
The Thai military does not have superiority over Cambodian military

Anonymous said...
Siam (Thailand) kept on blindly blaming the World Heritage Committee (WHC) for listing Prasat Preah Vihear on world heritage site. They also blamed inscription as the source of tensions between Siamese & Khmers. IT'S NOT WHC's FAULTS, IT'S SIAM WHO CREATED TENSIONS IN THE FIRST PLACE. THEY WERE TRYING TO START A WAR WITH CAMBODIA. They think with their military superiority they can force Khmers into giving territories like the Youn (Vietnamese) had done in the 80's.

Here are the flaws of Siam's plans:
1. Siam had large budgets for military spending to acquire modern weapons. After all the money they spent, their forces are not dominating it's neighbors. With exception of their air force and navy. Their ground forces performed poorly against Laotian troops in the late 80's (1988 in Ban Romklao village). Now since 2008 up to 2011 they attacked Khmer forces several times and several positions and still didn't control any until today. War in SE Asia's terrains do not favor heavy mechanize divisions or Naval powers and limited air attack. Laotian & Khmer are far more COURAGEOUS and EXPERIENCED than Siamese. It was just that Laotians & Khmers are poor and can't afford fancy weapons. WHAT'S THE GOOD OF MODERN WEAPONS WHEN THE PERSON HOLDING THEM ARE COWARDS.

2. Siam military and elites are as corrupted as any military leaders and elites Indo-China countries. Most of their billion dollars budget go to top military leaders. Their ground forces are still using a mixer of American, French, Israeli, Chinese & Russian weapons. Most of their ground forces' weapons are Chinese & Russian-made like the Khmers are using, so you see they DO NOT HAVE MILITARY SUPERIORITY over us as far as ground forces are concerned. Siam are COWARDS for centuries. They were able to take Khmer's territories BECAUSE OTHER KHMERS BETRAYED THEIR KINGS.

3. SIAMESE population CAN'T handle high casualties and sufferings that comes with a war with Laotian or Khmers. Cambodia might not be able to hold the lines for long BUT we can make Siam pay a very high price for stepping on our land. Khmers are far more experienced in small pitch battles. Khmers forces will avoide of large pitch battles because of Siam is stronger in strengths. Khmers will make Siam have to fight small pitch battles, that's when we will rule supreme.

4. Siam ARE NOT courageous, nor will they be highly motivated, they are not experienced, not tough like the Vietnamese who fought the American , Chinese, and Khmer Rough forces. So you see why Siam will not accomplish like Youn were able to do to our country. Siam think they are because of their fancy weapons BUT in reality on the ground are different.

26 April 2013 5:20 am

Temple troubles: Thailand and Cambodia at the ICJ

2013-04-29T04:17:00.003-07:00

A lack of clarity in a 1962 ruling by the International Court of Justice has led to decades of dispute and wrangling over the ancient site. The question now is whether or not the court will agree to issue a reinterpretation of its 50-year-old decision

Published: 28 Apr 2013
Writer: John D Ciorciari
Bangkok Post

Lawyers for Thailand and Cambodia have completed their oral arguments as the International Court of Justice (ICJ) considers Cambodia's request to reinterpret its 1962 judgement on the dispute surrounding Preah Vihear.

The dispute's re-emergence in 2007 is owed largely to nationalist political forces, particularly the yellow shirt movement in Thailand. Nevertheless, the feud is founded on a legitimate legal disagreement, which the parties are now litigating precisely where they should - before the ICJ. A closer look at the legal issues suggests a path to resolution of a largely unproductive conflict.
The current controversy focuses on the border in the area around the temple. The 1962 judgement awarded the temple complex to Cambodia and required Thailand to withdraw security forces at the temple or ''in its vicinity on Cambodian territory''.
The ICJ reasoned that Thailand had accepted as binding a 1907 map of the frontier prepared by French cartographers, which placed the temple on Cambodian soil. However, the ICJ did not define the vicinity of the temple or discuss the legal status of the 1907 map in its operative part, which sets forth the ICJ's conclusions.
Thai lawyers argued that the ICJ's 1962 conclusions pertained only to the temple and the immediate surrounding area. They contended that Thailand obeyed the judgement by pulling its security forces just outside the temple grounds and that Cambodia had accepted that state of affairs. Thus, they asserted, there is no debate to justify an ICJ reinterpretation.
Cambodian lawyers countered that a dispute does exist and that the judgement gave the 1907 map line binding effect, because the ICJ's 1962 conclusions were inseparable from its reasoning. Thus, they claimed, both the temple and the 4.6 square kilometre strip directly to its west belong to Cambodia.
As it considers the pleadings, the ICJ faces two basic legal questions. Does a dispute exist between Thailand and Cambodia that justifies a reinterpretation of the 1962 judgement? And if the court does reinterpret the judgement, should it find that all or part of the 1907 map is binding?
Cambodia should prevail on the first question. The court found in 2011 that a dispute appeared to exist between the parties, and nothing in the recent oral proceedings should lead the judges to decide otherwise.
Under relevant jurisprudence, there is no statute of limitations on an ICJ reinterpretation, and a dispute need not be made formal to exist. A dispute must simply pertain to the operative part of the judgement or reasons that are deemed to be ''inseparable from the judgement''.
PASSING JUDGEMENT: The United Nations’ highest court on April 15 presides over the Preah Vihear temple dispute between Cambodia and Thailand.
The parties' submissions to the ICJ since 2011 demonstrate, at a minimum, that they interpret differently the operative clauses' references to ''Cambodian territory'' and the ''vicinity'' of the temple. Moreover, Cambodia's counsel presented numerous pieces of evidence to show that the interpretive dispute is hardly new; throughout the 1960s, Prince Norodom Sihanouk and others indicated their disapproval of Thailand's stationing of personnel and erection of a barbed-wire fence in the disputed 4.6 sq km strip.
BORDER CONFLICT: Thailand and Cambodia both claim ownership of a strip of land around Preah Vihear. PHOTO: BANGKOK POST ARCHIVE
The more difficult question is whether - or to what extent - the court's reasoning should be read into the binding conclusions of the 1962 judgement. As Thailand's lawyers have emphasised, the court expressly declined Cambodia's request for a ruling on the legal status of the 1907 map in the operative part of the judgement.
Thailand argues, not unreasonably, that this omission demonstrates that the court saw the status of the border and fate of the temple as separable legal questions and that Cambodia simply seeks a ruling the court denied it in 1962. This argument is nevertheless problematic.
As Cambodia's counsel argued in The Hague, one cannot give effect to references to Cambodian ''territory'' in the operative clause without knowing where that territory is. To decide sovereignty over the ''disputed area'' - which the court defined as ''the region of the temple of Preah Vihear'' - the court declared that the ''real'' and ''essential'' question in the case was ''whether the Parties did adopt the [1907] map, and the line indicated on it, as representing the outcome of the work of delimitation of the frontier in the region of Preah Vihear, thereby conferring on it a binding character''.
After a lengthy analysis, the court found ''in favour of the line as mapped [in the 1907 map] in the disputed area''. That placed the temple on Cambodian soil and, according to Cambodia's lawyers, makes this part of the court's reasoning inseparable from its conclusion. Cambodia's argument that the judgement renders the entire border line drawn on the 1907 map also encounters problems. Although the term ''Cambodian territory'' requires some reference to the court's reasoning with respect to the border, the court clearly did not purport to deal with the entire Thai-Cambodian frontier, but merely a particular disputed area.
This, taken alongside the court's refusal to issue a pronouncement on the status of the 1907 map in its operative clause, weakens the case for reading the entire map into the court's conclusions.
The real crux of the dispute is whether the 4.6 sq km area west of the temple can be considered part of ''its vicinity on Cambodian territory''. The Thai legal team has argued that Dean Acheson, counsel for Cambodia in the original case, characterised the area in dispute as ''very small''. However, Mr Acheson's Thai counterparts objected to references to the ''region'' or ''neighbourhood'' of the temple as potentially too expansive.
The 1962 judgement offers regrettably little guidance. Its lack of clarity has contributed to instability and makes its reinterpretation necessary and appropriate.
The court could have ordered only that Thailand withdraw troops ''at the temple''. Its addition of a reference to the temple's ''vicinity'' shows that its conclusions were intended to pertain to some area beyond the perimeter of the temple buildings.
Even if that area extended a few hundred metres to the west, as the Thai map suggests, the question would arise: Was that part of the temple's vicinity Thai, or was it Cambodian?
The Thai reading of the judgement suggests that the answer would depend on agreement of the parties. However, since agreement between the parties was lacking, the provision would have effectively no force in the western vicinity of the temple - an area where the court knew that some Thai personnel were located.
Although the court declined to pronounce on the border in the disputed area in its operative part, that part can only be understood through reference to the court's finding that the parties had accepted the 1907 map.
Under this reasoning, areas in the temple's ''vicinity'' on Cambodia's side of the 1907 map line fall into Cambodian ''territory''. The most sensible way to define the relevant vicinity would be to confine the scope of the judgement to the smallest contiguous territory under dispute to the immediate west of the temple - namely the 4.6 sq km strip. With that important limitation, the court should find for Cambodia.
The messiness of these legal questions reflects the ambiguity of the original judgement, which regrettably left enough room for continuing interpretive disagreement and discord between the two countries. Whichever side prevails in court, both governments would do well to respect the judgement.
For Cambodia, an international legal ruling clearly provides the fairest forum in which to resolve a conflict with its larger, more powerful neighbour.
For the government of Yingluck Shinawatra, a hard fought legal encounter provides insulation against domestic nationalist demands for action, even if the ruling is unfavourable. Indeed, both sides have been ably and zealously represented in court.
An ICJ decision on the issue offers both a useful watershed - a chance to shift away from contentious politics of the recent past, which help rally some constituents behind the flag but do little for the longer-term interests of their populations.
John Ciorciari is an assistant professor at the Gerald R Ford School, University of Michigan, and senior legal adviser to the Documentation Centre of Cambodia.

Attracting More Foreign Investment in Cambodia

2013-04-29T04:15:00.003-07:00

William e
By William E. Todd, U.S. Ambassador to the Kingdom of Cambodia

I’d like to begin my column this week by thanking the many Cambodians who have sent me their condolences regarding the horrific bombings last week in Boston, Massachusetts. As a person with deep family roots in the Boston area, the tragedy hit home for me, and like you, my heart goes out to all who lost a loved one, and I wish those injured a speedy recovery. As President Obama said, we owe a tremendous debt to law enforcement professionals for swiftly apprehending those believed to be responsible for this senseless act. Through it all, Boston, just like the rest of the United States, remains resilient and committed to the values that define our republic.

For this week’s column, I would like to answer a question that touches on the U.S.-Cambodia trade relationship. I received a question from Sereyvath who asked, “Why doesn’t the United States lower import duties on Cambodian textiles?”

Textiles are Cambodia’s primary export, so I understand the interest in expanding this sector. The United States purchases over 40 percent of Cambodia’s textile exports, which constitute about 20 percent of the country’s gross domestic product (GDP). Approximately 150,000 Cambodian jobs depend on these exports to the United States. In addition to the economic benefits of its exports, Cambodia can stand to diversify its economy by creating an environment for more higher-paying, skilled-labor positions. This type of job creation in developing countries usually requires foreign investment. According to some reports, U.S. companies have over $5 trillion in cash sitting idle, waiting to be invested. If Cambodia could attract just a fraction of those reserves as foreign direct investment, its economic prospects would improve dramatically.

How can Cambodia compete with other developing countries for U.S. foreign direct investment? The key to increasing investment is creating a more attractive business environment. Cambodia has made progress in many areas, such as publishing government fees online, but as a small country in a highly competitive region, Cambodia can offer a better investment environment than its neighbors. It reminds me of the strategy by Avis Car Rental, the second-largest U.S. car rental company. When asked how his company could compete with its much larger competitor, Avis’s president said, “We try harder.”

The United States is already trying to help broaden our economic relationship. I have traveled to Bangkok and Singapore, where I met with a number of American business people to discuss potential export and trade opportunities in Cambodia. On May 1, I will host a “webinar,” with the participation of the American Chamber of Commerce, which will reach a wide audience of U.S. businesses to discuss the benefits and challenges of doing business in Cambodia. I will point out that, in addition to the incentives for doing business in Cambodia, the country’s large number of working-age youth and substantial natural resources are attractive to a range of investors. While many countries in Southeast Asia are experiencing maturing markets, Cambodia has room for additional growth. Cambodia has a lot to offer U.S. businesses looking to get in on the ground floor of an emerging market.

Our goal is to encourage additional U.S. investment that would create higher-wage jobs. This would have the added benefit of reducing Cambodians’ vulnerability to labor trafficking. When people are able to earn a living wage in their home country, they do not need the help of unscrupulous brokers to immigrate illegally. I recently met a group of impressive young people in Siem Reap who are our partners in youth outreach, and nearly every one of them indicated they knew someone who had been recruited to work illegally outside of Cambodia. One of the best ways to combat labor trafficking is to provide decent, higher-paying jobs at home through foreign investment. I believe that we can all work together to “try harder” in Cambodia to attract more foreign investment. As I once heard, “Good things may come to those who wait…but only the things left over by those who hustle.”

Thank you for continuing to follow my “Ask the Ambassador” column. I greatly value receiving your thoughtful comments and questions, which are an important way for me to learn more about the issues facing Cambodia. I hope to continue to hear from you at AskAMBToddPP@state.gov, and please follow my blog at http://blogs.usembassy.gov/todd.

William E Todd is U.S. Ambassador to the Kingdom of Cambodia

(ថ្ងៃទី 28 មេសា 2013,) | ដោយ: លោក William E. Todd ឯកអគ្គរដ្ឋទូតសហរដ្ឋអាមេរិកប្រចាំព្រះរាជាណាចក្រកម្ពុជា

ភ្នំពេញ: ខ្ញុំសូមចាប់ផ្តើមខ្ទង់សារព័ត៌មានរបស់ខ្ញុំ នៅសប្តាហ៍នេះ ដោយអរគុណប្រជាជនកម្ពុជាជាច្រើនដែលបានផ្ញើសមានទុក្ខរបស់គេមក ខ្ញុំ ទាក់ទងនឹងការបំផ្ទុះគ្រាប់បែកដ៏គួរអោយខ្លាច នៅក្រុង Boston នៃរដ្ឋ Massachusetts។ ក្នុងនាមជាមនុស្សម្នាក់ ដែលមានខ្សែស្រឡាយគ្រួសារ នៅតំបន់ Boston សោកនាដកម្មនេះពិតជានាំអោយខ្ញុំមានការរន្ទត់ចិត្ត ហើយដូចលោកអ្នកដែរ ខ្ញុំអាណិតដល់អ្នកដែលបានបាត់បង់មនុស្សជាទីស្រឡាញ់របស់ខ្លួន ហើយសូមជូនពរអោយអ្នករងរបួសឆាប់ជាសះស្បើយ។

ដូចលោក ប្រធានាធិបតី Obama បានមានប្រសាសន៍ថា យើងសូមសំដែងអំណរគុណជ្រាលជ្រៅដល់សមត្ថកិច្ច ដែលបានចាប់ខ្លួនជន ដែលត្រូវបានជឿថា ទទួលខុសត្រូវចំពោះអំពើដ៏ឆ្កួតលីលានេះ បានយ៉ាងឆាប់រហ័ស។ ឆ្លងតាមរយៈព្រឹត្តិការណ៍ទាំងអស់នេះ ដូចនៅកន្លែងឯទៀតនៃប្រទេសអាមេរិកដែរ ទីក្រុង Boston នៅតែមានស្មារតីរឹងប៉ឹង ហើយនៅតែប្រកាន់ជាប់នូវគុណតំលៃ នៃប្រជាជាតិរបស់យើង។

សំរាប់ខ្ទង់សារព័ត៌មាន ក្នុងសប្តាហ៍នេះ ខ្ញុំសូមឆ្លើយសំណួរមួយទាក់ទងនឹងទំនាក់ទំនងពាណិជ្ជកម្មរវាងប្រទេស កម្ពុជា និងសហរដ្ឋអាមេរិក។ ខ្ញុំបានទទួលសំណួរមួយពីឈ្មោះ សេរីវុឌ្ឍ ដែលបានសួរថា “ហេតុអ្វីក៏សហរដ្ឋអាមេរិកបន្ទាបពន្ធនាំចូលលើទំនិញវាយនភណ្ឌ កម្ពុជា?”។

វាយនភណ្ឌគឹជាទំនិញនាំចេញសំខាន់ទី១ របស់ប្រទេសកម្ពុជា ដូច្នេះខ្ញុំយល់បានពីការចាប់អារម្មណ៍លើការពង្រីកវិស័យនេះ។

សហរដ្ឋអាមេរិកទិញជាង ៤០% នៃទំនិញវាយនភណ្ឌនាំចេញ (GDP)របស់ប្រទេសកម្ពុជា ដែលត្រូវជាប្រហែល ២០% នៃផលិតផលសរុបក្នុងស្រុករបស់ប្រទេសកម្ពុជា។ សព្វ ថ្ងៃនេះ ការងារចំនួនប្រហែល ១៥០ ០០០ នៅកម្ពុជាពឹងផ្អែកលើការនាំចេញសំលៀកបំពាក់ទៅកាន់ សហរដ្ឋអាមេរិក។ ជាបន្ថែមលើការចំណេញផ្នែកសេដ្ឋកិច្ចពីការនាំចេញរបស់ខ្លួន ប្រទេសកម្ពុជាអាច ពង្រីកភាពចំរុះក្នុងសេដ្ឋកិច្ចរបស់ខ្លួន ដោយបង្កើតអោយមានបរិយាកាសមួយសំរាប់ការងារដែលត្រូវការ ជំនាញ ហើយផ្តល់ប្រាក់ខែខ្ពស់។ ការបង្កើតការងារប្រភេទនេះនៅក្នុងប្រទេសកំពុងអភិវឌ្ឍ ជាធម្មតា ទាមទារការវិនិយោគបរទេស។

យោងតាមរបាយការណ៍ខ្លះ ក្រុមហ៊ុនអាមេរិកមានប្រាក់ចំនួនជាង ៥ លានលានដុល្លាអាមេរិក ដែលនៅទំនេរនិងរង់ចាំការយកទៅវិនិយោគ។ បើសិនជាប្រទេសកម្ពុជាអាច ទាក់ទាញបានតែមួយចំណែកដ៏តូចនៃប្រាក់នេះសំរាប់ការវិនិយោគបរទេស ដោយផ្ទាល់ នោះអនាគតនៃ សេដ្ឋកិច្ចកម្ពុជានឹងមានការកែលំអយ៉ាងឆាប់រហ័ស។

តើប្រទេស កម្ពុជាអាចប្រកួតប្រជែងយ៉ាងដូចម្តេចជាមួយប្រទេសកំពុងអភិវឌ្ឍ ផ្សេងទៀត ដើម្បីអោយមានការវិនិយោគបរទេសដោយផ្ទាល់របស់អាមេរិក? គន្លឹះក្នុងការបង្កើនការវិនិយោគគឺការបង្កើតអោយមានបរិយាកាសប្រកប មុខជំនួញដែលមានលក្ខណៈទាក់ទាញច្រើន។

ប្រទេសកម្ពុជាសំរេចបាន ភាពជឿនលឿននៅក្នុងវិស័យជាច្រើន ដូចជាការដាក់បង្ហាញតំលៃសេវារបស់រដ្ឋនៅតាមអ៊ិនធ័រណែត តែ ក្នុងនាមជាប្រទេសតូចមួយនៅក្នុងតំបន់ដែលមានការប្រកួតប្រជែងខ្លាំង ប្រទេសកម្ពុជាអាចផ្តល់បរិយាកាសវិនិយោគប្រកបដោយការទាក់ទាញច្រើនជាង ប្រទេសជិតខាងខ្លួន។

វារំលឹកអោយខ្ញុំចាំពីយុទ្ធសាស្ត្រ មួយរបស់ក្រុមហ៊ុនជួលរថយន្តធំជាងគេទី ២ នៅសហរដ្ឋអាមេរិក គឺក្រុមហ៊ុន Avis Car Rental ។ នៅពេលត្រូវបានសួរថា តើក្រុមហ៊ុនធ្វើយ៉ាងដូចម្តេចដើម្បីអាចប្រកួតប្រជែងជាមួយនឹង ក្រុមហ៊ុនធំជាងខ្លួន ប្រធានក្រុមហ៊ុន Avis បាននិយាយថា “យើងប្រឹងអោយបានច្រើនថែមទៀត”។

សហរដ្ឋអាមេរិកកំពុងតែ ខិតខំជួយពង្រីកទំនាក់ទំនងសេដ្ឋកិច្ចរបស់យើង។ ខ្ញុំបានធ្វើដំណើរទៅទីក្រុងបាងកក និងប្រទេសសឹង្ហបូរី ដែលនៅទីនោះ ខ្ញុំបានជួបជាមួយពាណិជ្ជករអាមេរិកមួយចំនួន ដើម្បីពិភាក្សាពីលទ្ធភាពនៃការនាំចេញ និងឱកាសធ្វើពាណិជ្ជកម្មនៅកម្ពុជា។ នៅថ្ងៃទី ១ ខែឧសភា ខ្ញុំនឹងរៀបចំ “សិក្ខាសាលាតាមអ៊ិនធ័រណែត” ដោយមានការចូលរួមរបស់សភាពាណិជ្ជកម្មអាមេរិក ដែលនឹងធ្វើអោយដឹងច្រើនដល់អ្នកជំនួញអាមេរិក ដើម្បីពិភាក្សាពីផលចំណេញ និងបញ្ហាប្រឈមក្នុងការធ្វើជំនួញនៅប្រទេសកម្ពុជា។ ខ្ញុំនឹងបញ្ជាក់អោយគេដឹងថា ក្រៅពីការលើកទឹកចិត្តដល់ការធ្វើជំនួញនៅកម្ពុជា ប្រទេសកម្ពុជាមានយុវជនក្នុងអាយុធ្វើការ និងធនធានធម្មជាតិច្រើន ដែលជាការទាក់ទាញដល់អ្នកវិនិយោគជាច្រើន។

ក្នុងពេលដែល ប្រទេសជាច្រើននៅអាស៊ីអាគ្នេយ៍មានទីផ្សាជោរជន់ហើយនោះ ប្រទេសកម្ពុជាអាចមានកំណើនបានច្រើនថែមទៀត។ ប្រទេសកម្ពុជាអាចផ្តល់ច្រើនដល់ក្រុមហ៊ុនអាមេរិក ដែលកំពុងសំលឹងរកការចាប់ផ្តើមការរកស៊ីនៅក្នុងទីផ្សាថ្មីមួយ។

គោលដៅរបស់យើងគឺលើកទឹកចិត្តអោយមានការវិនិយោគបន្ថែមទៀតរបស់អាមេរិក ដែលនឹងជួយបង្កើតអោយមានការងារដែលផ្តល់ប្រាក់ខែខ្ពស់។

ការ នេះនឹងជួយបន្ថែមទៀតក្នុងការកាត់បន្ថយភាពងាយរងគ្រោះរបស់ប្រជាជន កម្ពុជា ដោយសារការជួញដូរកំលាំងពលកម្ម។ នៅពេលគេមានប្រាក់ខែដែលអាចអោយគេរស់បានសមរម្យនៅក្នុងប្រទេសរបស់ គេ គេមិនត្រូវការពឹងពាក់មេខ្យល់ទុច្ចរិតដែលនាំគេទៅក្រៅប្រទេសដោយ ខុសច្បាប់ឡើយ។ ថ្មីៗនេះ ខ្ញុំបានជួបជាមួយក្រុមយុវជនមួយក្រុមគួរអោយចាប់អារម្មណ៍នៅ ខេត្តសៀមរាប ដែលជាដៃគូរបស់យើងក្នុងសកម្មភាពជាមួយយុវជន ហើយពួកគេស្ទើរតែគ្រប់គ្នាបានស្គាល់មនុស្សដែលត្រូវបានគេជ្រើសរើស អោយទៅធ្វើការដោយខុសច្បាប់នៅក្រៅប្រទេសកម្ពុជា។

វិធីមួយ ក្នុងចំណោមវិធីល្អបំផុតក្នុងការប្រយុទ្ធប្រឆាំងនឹងការជួញដូរកំលាំង ពលកម្មគឺការផ្តល់ការងារសមរម្យដែលផ្តល់ប្រាក់ខែខ្ពស់ នៅក្នុងប្រទេសកំណើត តាមរយៈការវិនិយោគបរទេស។ ខ្ញុំជឿថា យើងទាំងអស់គ្នាអាច “ប្រឹងអោយបានច្រើនថែមទៀត” នៅប្រទេសកម្ពុជា ដើម្បីទាក់ទាញវិនិយោគដោយផ្ទាល់របស់បរទេសអោយបានច្រើន។ ដូចដែលខ្ញុំបានលឺកន្លងមកថា “អ្វីដែលល្អអាចបានដល់អ្នកដែលរង់ចាំតែគ្រាន់តែជាអ្វីដែល បន្សល់ដោយអ្នកដែលញាប់ដៃញាប់ជើងតែប៉ុណ្ណោះ”។

សូមអរគុណដែល បានបន្តតាមដានខ្ទង់សារព័ត៌មាន “សួរឯកអគ្គរដ្ឋទូត” របស់ខ្ញុំ។ ខ្ញុំរីករាយនឹងទទួលមតិ និងសំណួរល្អៗ ដែលជាវិធីល្អបំផុតសំរាប់អោយខ្ញុំយល់ដឹងច្រើនថែមទៀតអំពីបញ្ហា ដែលប្រឈមនឹងប្រទេសកម្ពុជា ។ ខ្ញុំសង្ឃឹមថានឹងបានបន្តលឺពីលោកអ្នក តាមអ៊ីម៉េល AskAMBToddPP@state.gov ហើយសូមតាមដាន blog របស់ខ្ញុំដែលមានអាសយដ្ឋាន http://blogs.usembassy.gov/todd/៕

No Rich Child Left Behind

2013-04-29T04:11:00.000-07:00

No Rich Child Left Behind

My research suggests that one part of the explanation for this is rising income inequality. As you may have heard, the incomes of the rich have grown faster over the last 30 years than the incomes of the middle class and the poor. Money helps families provide cognitively stimulating experiences for their young children because it provides more stable home environments, more time for parents to read to their children, access to higher-quality child care and preschool and — in places like New York City, where 4-year-old children take tests to determine entry into gifted and talented programs — access to preschool test preparation tutors or the time to serve as tutors themselves.

No Rich Child Left Behind
By SEAN F. REARDON
The New York Times
April 27, 2013

High-income families are increasingly focusing their resources — their money, time and knowledge of what it takes to be successful in school — on their children’s cognitive development and educational success. They are doing this because educational success is much more important than it used to be, even for the rich.

Here’s a fact that may not surprise you: the children of the rich perform better in school, on average, than children from middle-class or poor families. Students growing up in richer families have better grades and higher standardized test scores, on average, than poorer students; they also have higher rates of participation in extracurricular activities and school leadership positions, higher graduation rates and higher rates of college enrollment and completion.

Whether you think it deeply unjust, lamentable but inevitable, or obvious and unproblematic, this is hardly news. It is true in most societies and has been true in the United States for at least as long as we have thought to ask the question and had sufficient data to verify the answer.

The more we do to ensure that all children have similar cognitively stimulating early childhood experiences, the less we will have to worry about failing schools. This in turn will enable us to let our schools focus on teaching the skills — how to solve complex problems, how to think critically and how to collaborate — essential to a growing economy and a lively democracy.

What is news is that in the United States over the last few decades these differences in educational success between high- and lower-income students have grown substantially.

One way to see this is to look at the scores of rich and poor students on standardized math and reading tests over the last 50 years. When I did this using information from a dozen large national studies conducted between 1960 and 2010, I found that the rich-poor gap in test scores is about 40 percent larger now than it was 30 years ago.

To make this trend concrete, consider two children, one from a family with income of $165,000 and one from a family with income of $15,000. These incomes are at the 90th and 10th percentiles of the income distribution nationally, meaning that 10 percent of children today grow up in families with incomes below $15,000 and 10 percent grow up in families with incomes above $165,000.

In the 1980s, on an 800-point SAT-type test scale, the average difference in test scores between two such children would have been about 90 points; today it is 125 points. This is almost twice as large as the 70-point test score gap between white and black children. Family income is now a better predictor of children’s success in school than race.

The same pattern is evident in other, more tangible, measures of educational success, like college completion. In a study similar to mine, Martha J. Bailey and Susan M. Dynarski, economists at the University of Michigan, found that the proportion of students from upper-income families who earn a bachelor’s degree has increased by 18 percentage points over a 20-year period, while the completion rate of poor students has grown by only 4 points.

In a more recent study, my graduate students and I found that 15 percent of high-income students from the high school class of 2004 enrolled in a highly selective college or university, while fewer than 5 percent of middle-income and 2 percent of low-income students did.

These widening disparities are not confined to academic outcomes: new research by the Harvard political scientist Robert D. Putnam and his colleagues shows that the rich-poor gaps in student participation in sports, extracurricular activities, volunteer work and church attendance have grown sharply as well.

In San Francisco this week, more than 14,000 educators and education scholars have gathered for the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. The theme this year is familiar: Can schools provide children a way out of poverty?

We are still talking about this despite decades of clucking about the crisis in American education and wave after wave of school reform.Whatever we’ve been doing in our schools, it hasn’t reduced educational inequality between children from upper- and lower-income families.

Part of knowing what we should do about this is understanding how and why these educational disparities are growing. For the past few years, alongside other scholars, I have been digging into historical data to understand just that. The results of this research don’t always match received wisdom or playground folklore.

The most potent development over the past three decades is that the test scores of children from high-income families have increased very rapidly. Before 1980, affluent students had little advantage over middle-class students in academic performance; most of the socioeconomic disparity in academics was between the middle class and the poor. But the rich now outperform the middle class by as much as the middle class outperform the poor. Just as the incomes of the affluent have grown much more rapidly than those of the middle class over the last few decades, so, too, have most of the gains in educational success accrued to the children of the rich.

Before we can figure out what’s happening here, let’s dispel a few myths.

The income gap in academic achievement is not growing because the test scores of poor students are dropping or because our schools are in decline. In fact, average test scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress, the so-called Nation’s Report Card, have been rising — substantially in math and very slowly in reading — since the 1970s. The average 9-year-old today has math skills equal to those her parents had at age 11, a two-year improvement in a single generation. The gains are not as large in reading and they are not as large for older students, but there is no evidence that average test scores have declined over the last three decades for any age or economic group.

The widening income disparity in academic achievement is not a result of widening racial gaps in achievement, either. The achievement gaps between blacks and whites, and Hispanic and non-Hispanic whites have been narrowing slowly over the last two decades, trends that actually keep the yawning gap between higher- and lower-income students from getting even wider. If we look at the test scores of white students only, we find the same growing gap between high- and low-income children as we see in the population as a whole.

It may seem counterintuitive, but schools don’t seem to produce much of the disparity in test scores between high- and low-income students. We know this because children from rich and poor families score very differently on school readiness tests when they enter kindergarten, and this gap grows by less than 10 percent between kindergarten and high school. There is some evidence that achievement gaps between high- and low-income students actually narrow during the nine-month school year, but they widen again in the summer months.

That isn’t to say that there aren’t important differences in quality between schools serving low- and high-income students — there certainly are — but they appear to do less to reinforce the trends than conventional wisdom would have us believe.

If not the usual suspects, what’s going on? It boils down to this: The academic gap is widening because rich students are increasingly entering kindergarten much better prepared to succeed in school than middle-class students. This difference in preparation persists through elementary and high school.

My research suggests that one part of the explanation for this is rising income inequality. As you may have heard, the incomes of the rich have grown faster over the last 30 years than the incomes of the middle class and the poor. Money helps families provide cognitively stimulating experiences for their young children because it provides more stable home environments, more time for parents to read to their children, access to higher-quality child care and preschool and — in places like New York City, where 4-year-old children take tests to determine entry into gifted and talented programs — access to preschool test preparation tutors or the time to serve as tutors themselves.

But rising income inequality explains, at best, half of the increase in the rich-poor academic achievement gap. It’s not just that the rich have more money than they used to, it’s that they are using it differently. This is where things get really interesting.

High-income families are increasingly focusing their resources — their money, time and knowledge of what it takes to be successful in school — on their children’s cognitive development and educational success. They are doing this because educational success is much more important than it used to be, even for the rich.

With a college degree insufficient to ensure a high-income job, or even a job as a barista, parents are now investing more time and money in their children’s cognitive development from the earliest ages. It may seem self-evident that parents with more resources are able to invest more — more of both money and of what Mr. Putnam calls “‘Goodnight Moon’ time” — in their children’s development. But even though middle-class and poor families are also increasing the time and money they invest in their children, they are not doing so as quickly or as deeply as the rich.

The economists Richard J. Murnane and Greg J. Duncan report that from 1972 to 2006 high-income families increased the amount they spent on enrichment activities for their children by 150 percent, while the spending of low-income families grew by 57 percent over the same time period. Likewise, the amount of time parents spend with their children has grown twice as fast since 1975 among college-educated parents as it has among less-educated parents. The economists Garey Ramey and Valerie A. Ramey of the University of California, San Diego, call this escalation of early childhood investment “the rug rat race,” a phrase that nicely captures the growing perception that early childhood experiences are central to winning a lifelong educational and economic competition.

It’s not clear what we should do about all this. Partly that’s because much of our public conversation about education is focused on the wrong culprits: we blame failing schools and the behavior of the poor for trends that are really the result of deepening income inequality and the behavior of the rich.

We’re also slow to understand what’s happening, I think, because the nature of the problem — a growing educational gap between the rich and the middle class — is unfamiliar. After all, for much of the last 50 years our national conversation about educational inequality has focused almost exclusively on strategies for reducing inequalities between the educational successes of the poor and the middle class, and it has relied on programs aimed at the poor, like Head Start and Title I.

We’ve barely given a thought to what the rich were doing. With the exception of our continuing discussion about whether the rising costs of higher education are pricing the middle class out of college, we don’t have much practice talking about what economists call “upper-tail inequality” in education, much less success at reducing it.

Meanwhile, not only are the children of the rich doing better in school than even the children of the middle class, but the changing economy means that school success is increasingly necessary to future economic success, a worrisome mutual reinforcement of trends that is making our society more socially and economically immobile.

We need to start talking about this. Strangely, the rapid growth in the rich-poor educational gap provides a ray of hope: if the relationship between family income and educational success can change this rapidly, then it is not an immutable, inevitable pattern. What changed once can change again. Policy choices matter more than we have recently been taught to think.

So how can we move toward a society in which educational success is not so strongly linked to family background? Maybe we should take a lesson from the rich and invest much more heavily as a society in our children’s educational opportunities from the day they are born. Investments in early-childhood education pay very high societal dividends. That means investing in developing high-quality child care and preschool that is available to poor and middle-class children. It also means recruiting and training a cadre of skilled preschool teachers and child care providers. These are not new ideas, but we have to stop talking about how expensive and difficult they are to implement and just get on with it.

But we need to do much more than expand and improve preschool and child care. There is a lot of discussion these days about investing in teachers and “improving teacher quality,” but improving the quality of our parenting and of our children’s earliest environments may be even more important. Let’s invest in parents so they can better invest in their children.

This means finding ways of helping parents become better teachers themselves. This might include strategies to support working families so that they can read to their children more often. It also means expanding programs like the Nurse-Family Partnership that have proved to be effective at helping single parents educate their children; but we also need to pay for research to develop new resources for single parents.

It might also mean greater business and government support for maternity and paternity leave and day care so that the middle class and the poor can get some of the educational benefits that the early academic intervention of the rich provides their children. Fundamentally, it means rethinking our still-persistent notion that educational problems should be solved by schools alone.

The more we do to ensure that all children have similar cognitively stimulating early childhood experiences, the less we will have to worry about failing schools. This in turn will enable us to let our schools focus on teaching the skills — how to solve complex problems, how to think critically and how to collaborate — essential to a growing economy and a lively democracy.

Mr. Sam Rainsy with Cambodian Community of San Jose, Bay Area - Sunday, April 28, 2013

2013-04-29T04:09:00.002-07:00

Court Summons Adhoc’s Chan Soveth for Incitement, Disinformation

2013-04-29T04:06:00.001-07:00

Chan Soveth (Photo: CEN)
April 29, 2013
By Khy Sovuthy
The Cambodia Daily

Well-known human rights worker Chan Soveth is in the firing line again, a court official in Pursat province confirmed on Friday.

Mr. Soveth, who last year was accused by the government of helping a member of a so-called anti-government movement in Kratie province evade arrest, is now being investigated for his alleged role in the so-called “incitement” of villagers involved in a land dispute, and for spreading so-called “disinformation.”

Pursat provincial court Prosecutor Tan Seihak Dechak said the allegations have been leveled by a commune chief against Mr. Soveth, who is chief of monitoring for prominent local human rights group Adhoc, and “his accomplices,” who are not defined by name in the complaint.

Mr. Seihak Dechak also said that earlier reports naming Adhoc’s Pursat provincial coordinator Phuong Sothea as the suspect in the case were incorrect.

“The commune chief filed against Chan Soveth and his accomplices. It is not the name Phuong Sothea,” the prosecutor said. “We will continue to investigate more details about this, and we will summon both parties for questioning.”

Mr. Soveth, who had the charges of “aiding a perpetrator” in the Kratie province case dropped against him by the Phnom Penh Municipal Court in February, said on Friday that he had not yet received formal notice that he is being investigated again.

“I don’t incite people against the government. I just explain about [peoples’] rights and the law,” he said.

“If I just help people as a human rights workers, is it wrong? If so, then all NGOs that help protect peoples’ rights are wrong too,” he said.

Prom Ngon, commune chief of Thma Da commune in Veal Veng district, and complainant against Mr. Soveth, could not be reached for comment.

The complaint is believed to stem from a land dispute between families in Tham Da commune and a company owned by well-known businessman Try Pheap.

Adhoc staff held workshops with the villagers to inform them of their rights under the land law. About 20 of the families subsequently traveled to Phnom Penh to submit a petition to Mr. Hun Sen’s Cabinet seeking help in their dispute with Mr. Pheap.

Um Savin, a representative of MDS Import Export company, which is owned by Mr. Pheap, said his company was not involved in any way with the lawsuit filed by Mr. Ngon, the commune chief, against Mr. Soveth and “his accomplices.”

“Our company is not involved in this case,” he said.

National Election Body Says It Refuses to Revise Voter List [-The National Election Cheating scared of Hun Xen losign the election?]

2013-04-29T04:04:00.000-07:00

National Election Body Says It Refuses to Revise Voter List [-The National Election Cheating scared of Hun Xen losign the election?] Cartoon by Sacrava April 29, 2013 By Eang Mengleng and Colin Meyn The Cambodia Daily The government’s election body has said it has no intention of revising the country’s voter list, a request that was delivered in a petition to government representatives at an opposition rally held last week by the Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP). In response to the CNRP’s request that the National Election Commission (NEC) delay July’s national elections in order to hold a new registration period for eligible voters and revise the official voter list, the NEC said in a statement on Friday that it has no plans to open the voter list to further scrutiny.

បទល្មើសព្រៃឈើកើនក្រោយឃាតកម្ម លោក ឈុត វុទ្ធី RFA Khmer

2013-04-28T19:01:00.002-07:00

Noppadon 'ready for Preah Vihear communique case'

2013-04-27T16:09:00.000-07:00

Published: 28 Apr 2013 at 00.00
Newspaper section: News

Former foreign minister Noppadon Pattama plans to highlight the "ambiguity" of Section 190 when he defends himself against a negligence charge over his role in signing the "Preah Vihear communique" without parliamentary approval in 2008.

GOING INTO BATTLE: Former foreign minister Noppadon Pattama

Mr Noppadon said Section 190 of the 2007 charter is flawed and has twice been the subject of amendments.

The section was amended during the Abhisit administration and it is now being revised by parliament, he said.

"I will tell the Supreme Court how flawed Section 190 is," said Mr Noppadon, who is also the legal adviser of ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

The Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Holders of Political Positions on Friday accepted for consideration the negligence charge filed against Mr Noppadon by the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC).

The commission has accused him of negligence of duty after he signed the communique with Cambodian Deputy Prime Minister Sok An.

Mr Noppadon is expected to appear in court on July 5.

Mr Noppadon said he has been preparing to fight the charge since the document was signed five years ago.

The charter court had earlier ruled that the joint communique, which backs Phnom Penh's request for the listing of Preah Vihear as a Unesco world heritage site, needed parliamentary approval.

Mr Noppadon said the communique does not have the status of a treaty and Cambodia does not treat it as one.

"I was following the suggestion of the chief of the Department of Treaties and Legal Affairs that the communique is not a treaty," he said.

At a press conference yesterday, Mr Noppadon showed the first map that Cambodia submitted to Unesco in 2007 when it sought the listing of Preah Vihear and the surrounding area as a world heritage site, and the layout of the Preah Vihear temple without the surrounding area.

Mr Noppadon said Cambodia had submitted the map with the surrounding area in 2007 before he was foreign minister. His team had negotiated with Cambodia which finally decided to seek the listing of the ancient temple only.

"In short, the Foreign Ministry sees the joint communique as beneficial," he said.

He rebutted Democrat MP Chavanond Intarakomalyasut's assertion that the 2008 communique put Thailand at a disadvantage over territory claims.

Mr Noppadon also said Cambodia has never used the joint communique in the legal dispute at the International Court of Justice because it does not bolster its position.

Dispute over Preah Vihear Temple is taken up, threatening to revive Thai nationalistic fervor

2013-04-27T16:06:00.001-07:00

by Pavin Chachavalpongpun

Special To The Japan Times

KYOTO – From April 15-19, the hearing at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) regarding the Thai-Cambodian dispute over the Preah Vihear Temple took place in the Netherlands. Cambodia made its opening argument on April 15 followed by Thailand two days later. Each side then made additional arguments. The court retired after the April 19 session, and is expected to give its verdict by October.

Cambodia has petitioned the ICJ to interpret its 1962 ruling, and decide whether it includes territory surrounding the temple. The ICJ awarded the temple itself to Cambodia, but did not dictate ownership of the area around the temple itself which is claimed by both countries.

Although the ruling was reached in 1962, the conflict over Preah Vihear has continued to be politicized, specifically in the context of Thailand’s domestic politics. To undermine the Thaksin-backed regime of Samak Sundaravej in 2008, the royalist “yellow shirts” exploited the Preah Vihear issue to achieve their purpose.

Back then, Prime Minister Samak offered his support for Cambodia’s bid to have Preah Vihear listed as a UNESCO World Heritage site. His enemies accused him of exchanging the overlapping area within the temple vicinity for Thaksin’s personal interests — an allegation that has been proven groundless.

When Abhisit Vejjajiva became prime minister in late 2008, relations between Thailand and Cambodia gravely deteriorated. This was because Abhisit once lent his support to the royalist yellow shirts in attacking Cambodia. The intense relations led to a series of armed clashes along the common border. These have become ones of the most severe armed clashes in the two countries’ recent memories. That was when Cambodia decided to send the verdict back to the ICJ for reinterpretation.

But in the past year, Thai relations with Cambodia have noticeably improved. Thailand’s election of July 2011 significantly changed the country’s political landscape. The Yingluck Shinawatra premiership was immediately celebrated in Phnom Penh. Her much-publicized visit to Phnom Penh on Sept. 15, 2011, symbolized a thaw in the Thai-Cambodian relationship. Thaksin Shinawatra followed up with his own visit to Cambodia in September 2011, helping to pave the way for a better relationship.

In the middle of 2012, Hun Sen and Yingluck decided to go ahead with Indonesia’s peacemaking initiative and agreed to withdraw their country’s troops from the disputed area.

Obviously a ceasefire was achieved, at least for now, because of the change in Thailand’s domestic politics, with Yingluck trying to negotiate with the Thai army for the reopening of dialogue between Thailand and Cambodia. It appears that leaders of both countries have been able to tamp down nationalistic emotions instead of fanning them as seen during 2008-2011.

It is therefore crucial to see whether the reinterpretation of the 1962 verdict of the ICJ will shift the positions of both countries again. If the ICJ rules in favor of Cambodia, as in 1962, this could resurrect nationalistic fervor in Thailand and may ignite armed clashes. The Thai military may benefit from the situation but the Association of Southeast Asian Nations will be put to the test for certain.

Already, some remnants of the yellow-shirt movement, under the name “People’s Alliance for Democracy” (PAD), staged a rally against Cambodia near a border town in Si Sa Ket. But their presence faced protests organized by local residents in the area who have become fed up with the politicization of the case. They wanted the return of peace and stability on the border.

One resident of Si Sa Ket said, “It is very easy for people in Bangkok to create the situation in Thai-Cambodian relations, but we are the ones who have to bear the consequences.”

It remains to be seen what would be the response from the Yingluck government, the military, the royalist yellow shirts or even the public at large if the ICJ’s reinterpretation puts Thailand in a disadvantageous position.

It is likely that the Thai military would grasp this opportunity to increase its leverage against the government. After all, the military is not willing to withdraw itself from politics. The 2006 coup was staged partly because of the military’s wish to maintain its foothold in politics.

A new possible war with Cambodia could also benefit the military, as this would assign the latter a significant role, particularly in defending Thailand’s national security. Not only would this allow a firmer political role for the army, but it would legitimize its call for a sizable budget due to the imminent threat on the Thai-Cambodian border.

The yellow shirts may also want to blow the unfavorable outcome of the ICJ’s reinterpretation out of proportion to undermine the Yingluck government.

Since they cannot compete with the Thaksin faction through electoral politics, they have been endorsing extra-constitutional means in their attempt to remove the current government from power. And the ICJ’s new ruling could be used for that purpose.

It all comes down to the Yingluck government and how she handles the situation. Since she and Prime Minister Hun Sen have been friendly toward each other, her government would be in a better position to ensure the absence of hostility toward the other even with a new ruling that doesn’t benefit Thailand.

A greater obstacle for Yingluck will be how to manage her relations with the military and the nationalist yellow shirts. Playing into their political game could jeopardize her power. Ignoring them could also intensify a sense of nationalism stirred up by them, too.

Thailand and Cambodia submit maps on Preah Vihear case

2013-04-27T16:01:00.002-07:00

Bangkok (The Nation/ANN) - Thailand and Cambodia yesterday submitted to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) maps and graphics to demonstrate the area surrounding Preah Vihear Temple, in response to a question raised last week by Judge Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf, after the hearing on the temple's "vicinity".

Cambodian officials had said they defined the temple area in accordance with a line indicated on the French Annex I map of 1:200,000 scale, but declined to say how large it is.

"If we want to know about the vicinity of the temple [Preah Vihear] it is clearly defined by the Annex I map," Cambodia's Foreign Minister Hor Namhong told reporters after the court hearing last week.

Thailand's Cabinet on Tuesday approved a map proposed by the Foreign Ministry to demonstrate to the court the area around Preah Vihear. The map has not been made public, but military officers and officials at the ministry said that the area delineated corresponded with the 1962 Thai cabinet resolution on the issue.

Thailand and Cambodia have been at loggerheads over the location of the Hindu temple of Preah Vihear and its territory for decades. The ICJ ruled in 1962 that the temple was situated on territory under the sovereignty of Cambodia. Under the ruling, Thailand was obliged to withdraw its troops from the temple and the "vicinity".

However, the ruling provided no details on the territory that comprised the vicinity surrounding the temple. The Thai cabinet therefore decided that 0.28 square kilometres of territory made up the vicinity of the historic site. Thailand then informed the ICJ that it believed the 0.28 square kilometres was the area from which it should withdraw its troops.

Over the years, Thailand has further argued that the total area in dispute is no larger than 0.35 square kilometres, but Cambodia claims all areas below the boundary line in the Annex I map - including the disputed area of 4.6 square kms - belong to the temple.

Thailand's legal team, headed by Virachai Plasai, will submit the requested documents by next Friday to the ICJ, according to Foreign Ministry deputy permanent secretary Nuttavudh Photisaro.

He said the documents as well as Thailand's accompanying remarks would not be made public at this time, in order to avoid impacting the case.

In a related development, the Supreme Court's division for political office holders yesterday accepted a petition by the national anti-graft body against former foreign minister Noppadon Pattama over a joint communique in support of Cambodia's effort to list Preah Vihear Temple as a World Heritage site in 2008.

The National Anti-Corruption Commission accused Noppadon of misconduct in accordance with Article 175 of the Penal Code for his role in signing the joint communique.

The joint communique, as cited by the Constitutional Court years earlier, is deemed a treaty with a foreign country requiring parliamentary approval before it can be signed.

Noppadon said yesterday that he had not violated Article 190 of the Constitution, as the article does not make clear what kind of documents signed with a foreign country require parliamentary approval.

Thailand: The paradox of nationalism

2013-04-27T15:58:00.000-07:00

Thailand: The paradox of nationalism
Khmerization's note: The following editorial was written by Davan Long, a Khmer living in Canada, and was published by the Thai Nation newspaper.

Bangkok, 26th April 2013 (The Nation/ANN) -- This past week, Cambodia and Thailand experienced another tense moment in their roller-coaster relationship as both presented their case on the Preah Vihear Temple dispute at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague.

The first time the two countries took the issue to the ICJ was in 1962, and the court ruled in favor of Cambodia by nine votes to three. Following that ruling, there were several diplomatic and sporadic military clashes. The latest military stand-off occurred from 2008-2011, following Cambodia's successful move to have Preah Vihear listed as a UNESCO World Heritage site.

As the military stand-off culminated and war became imminent, Cambodia felt compelled to bring the dispute back to the ICJ, requesting the court to interpret its 1962 ruling.

Judging from a series of events taking place since the 1962 verdict, some analysts remain cautious about the prospect that the protracted dispute will be put completely to rest by the pending verdict of the court. Indeed, some Thai ultra-nationalist groups have already made clear their intention to ignore the court ruling, expected before the year end, if it is not in favor of Thailand.

Few doubt the intention and ability of these groups to ignite new tension domestically, and externally with Cambodia, if they are not satisfied with the decision. The question is how far they will go at the risk of further damaging the image and interests of their own country. Oddly enough, it is the very same image and interests they proudly claim to champion that they are hurting.

Nationalism is a well-oiled machine in Thailand, as it is in Cambodia. It is important to point out a key difference between the two. In Cambodia, the so-called nationalist view and interpretation of history with neighboring countries are practically based on numerous independent studies and documents published by credible Western scholars and researchers. Thai nationalist sentiment, on the other hand, is predominantly influenced by history books written by Thai historians, under various forms and degrees of de facto censorship.

Some Thai scholars have called for a comprehensive reform in the teaching of Thai history, especially the history of Thailand's relations with neighbors. In a recent article, "Biased Views of Neighboring Nations Must Change" in The Nation (April 20), professors Thamrongsak Petchlertana and Akkhaphong Khamkhun were candid. "The teaching … should be reformed to eradicate Thais' superiority complex and condescending attitude, mistrust and even hatred towards its closest neighbors."

Cambodia is cautiously hopeful that this view will gain wide mainstream support, and that Thailand will be resilient enough to withstand fake nationalism and be able to persuade relevant Thai nationalist groups to close their epic but pointless chapter of Preah Vihear for good.

dailykhmerpost ​​​​​​

Government Turns to Sonando to Criticize Opposition

Cambodia Opposition Party Awaits Election Registration Approval

Exiled Sam Rainsy Says Talks Under Way with CPP for Return

As vote nears, Cambodia opposition urges sanction threat

Cambodian Opposition Rejects Claims of Internal Strife

International Community Must Help Cambodian Democracy, Opposition Leader Says

CPP Releases a Second Recording of Opposition Sparring

Opposition Leader Warns Against Destructive Foreign Investment

Hun Xen'sbuffoonery: Schizophrenic Hun Xen asked the US to search and arrest group of men wanting to topple the Cambodian regime

HM [29-04-2013] Daily News

Accident News [29-Apr-2013] - C HM

Accident News [29-Apr-2013] - B HM

Accident News [29-Apr-2013] - A HM

Preah Vihear and the Thai military failures

Temple troubles: Thailand and Cambodia at the ICJ

Attracting More Foreign Investment in Cambodia

No Rich Child Left Behind

Mr. Sam Rainsy with Cambodian Community of San Jose, Bay Area - Sunday, April 28, 2013

Court Summons Adhoc’s Chan Soveth for Incitement, Disinformation

National Election Body Says It Refuses to Revise Voter List [-The National Election Cheating scared of Hun Xen losign the election?]

បទល្មើស​ព្រៃឈើ​កើន​ក្រោយ​ឃាតកម្ម លោក ឈុត វុទ្ធី RFA Khmer

Noppadon 'ready for Preah Vihear communique case'

Dispute over Preah Vihear Temple is taken up, threatening to revive Thai nationalistic fervor

Thailand and Cambodia submit maps on Preah Vihear case

Thailand: The paradox of nationalism

dailykhmerpost

បទល្មើសព្រៃឈើកើនក្រោយឃាតកម្ម លោក ឈុត វុទ្ធី RFA Khmer