បទសម្ភាសន៍ ឯកឧត្តមបណ្ឌិតសភាចារ្យ សុខ អាន ឧបនាយករដ្ឋមន្ត្រី អំពីលទ្ធផលនៃ កិច្ចប្រជុំលើកទី៣៥ របស់គណៈកម្មាធិការ បេតិកភណ្ឌ ពិភពលោក
ទីក្រុងបារីស ប្រទេសបារាំង ថ្ងៃទី២៦ ខែមិថុនា ឆ្នាំ២០១១
Council of Ministers
លោក សោម ឆាយ៉ា
សំណួរ៖ ដោយសារថាព្រឹត្តិការណ៍កន្លងមកនេះនៅទូរទស្សន៍ថៃ គ្រប់ប៉ុស្តិ៍ទាំងអស់ ហើយក៏នៅ Website អន្តរជាតិបានចុះផ្សាយស្តីអំពីការដើរចេញរបស់ភាគីថៃពីបេតិកភណ្ឌពិភពលោក ហេតុការណ៍នេះកើតឡើងដូចម្តេចដែរ សូមឯកឧត្តមជួយជម្រាបជូនប្រិយមិត្តទូរទស្សនិកជន បងប្អូនជនរួមជាតិយើងបន្តិចឯកឧត្តមបាទ ?
ឯកឧត្តមបណ្ឌិត សុខ អាន
ចម្លើយ៖ សូមអរគុណ លោក ឆាយ៉ា ដែលបានផ្តល់លទ្ធភាពឲ្យខ្ញុំបានជម្រាបជូនបងប្អូនជនរួមជាតិ ទាក់ទិននឹងរឿងដ៏សំខាន់នេះ ហើយយើងចាត់ទុកជាជោគជ័យមួយយ៉ាងល្អប្រសើរសម្រាប់បេសកកម្មរបស់យើងនេះ។ ហើយជាការលើកកិត្យានុភាពរបស់ព្រះរាជាណាចក្រកម្ពុជាយើងនៅលើឆាកអន្តរជាតិ។ ចំណុចសំខាន់គឺថា ខ្ញុំសូមលើកសេចក្តីផ្តើមខ្លីមួយសិន ចាប់ពីថ្ងៃទី ១៩ ដល់ថ្ងៃទី ២៩ តែឥឡូវយើងមិនទាន់ចប់សព្វគ្រប់ទេ គឺគណៈកម្មាធិការបេតិកភណ្ឌពិភពលោកតែងតែមានការរៀបចំប្រចាំឆ្នាំ ដែលយើងហៅថាការប្រជុំប្រចាំឆ្នាំរបស់ខ្លួនជារៀងរាល់ឆ្នាំ ដើម្បីពិនិត្យនូវស្ថានភាពនៃការអភិរក្ស ការថែរក្សាប្រាសាទ ការថែរក្សាបេតិកភណ្ឌពិភពលោក ដែលបានចុះនៅក្នុងបញ្ជីបេតិកភណ្ឌពិភពលោក។ អញ្ចឹងកាលណាបេតិកភណ្ឌមួយបានចុះក្នុងបញ្ជីបេតិកភណ្ឌពិភពលោកហើយ គណៈកម្មាធិការបេតិកភណ្ឌពិភពលោកមានភារៈកិច្ចស្វែងយល់ និងតាមដាន ហើយចលនាឲ្យមានកិច្ចសហប្រតិបត្តិការអន្តរជាតិ កិច្ចសហប្រតិបត្តិការពិភពលោក ការពារប្រភពនៃធនធានទាំងឡាយ ដើម្បីធ្វើការអភិរក្សឲ្យបានល្អសម្រាប់មនុស្សជាតិទាំងមូល តទៅដល់យុវជនជំនាន់ក្រោយៗទៀត។ នេះជាការងារធំមួយរបស់គណៈកម្មាធិការបេតិកភណ្ឌពិភពលោក ដូចជាប្រាសាទព្រះវិហារអញ្ចឹង ប្រាសាទព្រះវិហាររបស់យើងគឺសម្បត្តិបេតិកភណ្ឌពិភពលោកមួយហើយ ដែលបានចុះនៅក្នុងបញ្ជីបេតិកភណ្ឌពិភពលោក កាលពីឆ្នាំ២០០៨ នៅទីក្រុងកេប៊ិចមក។ អញ្ចឹងជារៀងរាល់ពេលប្រជុំគឺគណៈកម្មាធិការបេតិកភណ្ឌពិភពលោក គឺមានភារៈកិច្ចតាមដាន និងពិនិត្យមើលថាតើស្ថានភាពរបស់ប្រាសាទព្រះវិហារហើយយ៉ាងណា ហើយមានការអភិរក្ស ការថែរក្សា ត្រឹមត្រូវហើយឬនៅ ដើម្បីពិនិត្យទាក់ទាញការចាប់អារម្មណ៍ ធ្វើយ៉ាងម៉េចសហប្រតិបត្តិការអន្តរជាតិទូលំទូលាយ ជួយអភិរក្ស ជួយជួសជុល ជួយកសាងអភិវឌ្ឍន៍ ដូចគេបានធ្វើរួចហើយ ដែលមានជោគជ័យយ៉ាងធំ នៅប្រាសាទអង្គររបស់យើង បានចុះឈ្មោះជាបេតិកភណ្ឌពិភពលោក តាំងពីឆ្នាំ១៩៩៦ មក។ នេះជាដំណើរការធម្មតា ដែលបេតិកភណ្ឌជាតិមួយបានក្លាយជាបេតិកភណ្ឌពិភពលោក មានន័យថាបានក្លាយជាបេតិកភណ្ឌរបស់មនុស្សជាតិទាំងមូល។ ដូច្នេះឆ្នាំនេះគឺនៅក្នុងរបៀបវារៈអង្គប្រជុំ ប្រទេសកម្ពុជាគេលើកឡើងនិយាយអំពីប្រាសាទព្រះវិហាររបស់យើង ស្ថានភាពនៃការអភិរក្សយ៉ាងម៉េច ហើយការថែរក្សាយ៉ាងម៉េច នេះជាចំណុចដែលជៀសមិនផុត ដែលថៃមិនចង់បាន។ ខ្ញុំចង់ជម្រាបផងដែរថា នៅក្នុងអង្គប្រជុំម៉េចបានជាឈានទៅដល់ ថៃដកខ្លួនចេញពីអនុសញ្ញា ទាត់ចោលអនុសញ្ញា ហើយដើរចេញពីអង្គប្រជុំ ដែលជាព្រឹត្តិការណ៍មួយមិនដែលមានទេនៅលើឆាកអន្តរជាតិនៅក្នុងការប្រជុំក្នុងពិភពលោកធំៗ។ មូលហេតុអី? មូលហេតុទី១ ចំណុចមួយធំដែលថៃចង់បាន គឺបិទបាំងឧក្រិដ្ឋកម្មរបស់ខ្លូន ដែលបានធ្វើមកលើប្រាសាទព្រះវិហារ ថៃបិទបាំងនៅលើគ្រប់វេទិការទាំងអស់ ហើយយើងកាន់តែយល់មូលហេតុអ្វីបានជាថៃនិយាយាពីការប្រជុំទ្វេភាគី ការប្រជុំទ្វេភាគី ពីព្រោះថៃចង់បិទបាំងការពិត បិទបាំងឧក្រិដ្ឋកម្មដែលខ្លួនបានធ្វើចំពោះប្រាសាទ ចំពោះបេតិកភណ្ឌពិភពលោក ចំពោះសាសនានៅវត្តកែវសិក្ខាគីរីស្វារៈរបស់យើងនេះ កុំឲ្យនរណាដឹង ។ ទី២គឺចង់ទប់ស្កាត់កុំឲ្យមានអ្នកជំនាញការអន្តរជាតិ កុំឲ្យគណៈកម្មការបេតិកភណ្ឌពិភពលោកបញ្ជូនអ្នកជំនាញការ ដែលអ្នកជំនាញការកម្រិតពិភពលោក ទៅមើលប្រាសាទព្រះវិហារ យើងតាំងពីមុនមកថៃគំរាមកំហែងថា កុំឲ្យមក តែមកប្រយ័ត្នបញ្ហាធ្ងន់ធ្ងរ គេចង់និយាយប្រាប់ថា បើអ្នកឯងមកខ្ញុំបាញ់ អញ្ចឹងហើយមិនមែនប្រឆាំងតែទ័ពទេ ប្រឆាំងទៅដល់អ្នកវប្បធម៌ ប្រឆាំងទៅដល់អ្នកបេតិកភណ្ឌទៅទៀត។ អញ្ចឹងខ្លួនប្រព្រឹត្តិឧក្រិដ្ឋកម្មហើយខ្លាចគេមកឃើញ គេស្រែក អញ្ចឹងខំទប់ទៅ មិនទប់តែអ្នកសង្កេតការណ៍ឥណ្ឌូនេស៊ីទេ ទប់ដល់អ្នកជំនាញការវប្បធម៌ បេតិកភណ្ឌថែមទៀត។ ចង់បានអីមួយទៀត ថៃគេថាក្រោយពីបានវាយឈ្លានពានលើកម្ពុជាយើងហើយ អញ្ចឹងថៃបានបាញ់មកលើប្រាសាទព្រះវិហារ ដែលជាសម្បត្តិបេតិកភណ្ឌពិភពលោក ថៃបានបាញ់មកលើវត្តកែវសិក្ខាគីរីស្វារៈ ដែលជាឧក្រិដ្ឋកម្មប្រឆាំងវប្បធម៌ ដែលជាឧក្រិដ្ឋកម្មប្រឆាំងសាសនាហើយ ថៃបានធ្វើការឈ្លានពានដោយយោធា ខ្លួនបានប្រព្រឹត្តឧក្រិដ្ឋកម្មប្រឆាំងសាសនា ប្រព្រឹត្តឧក្រិដ្ឋកម្មប្រឆាំងវប្បធម៌ ហើយខ្លួនទប់ស្កាត់មិនឲ្យអ្នកជំនាញការបរទេស អ្នកជំនាញការរបស់គណៈកម្មាធិការបេតិកភណ្ឌពិភពលោក ទៅប្រាសាទព្រះវិហារទៀត ហើយចង់បំផ្លាញផែនការគ្រប់គ្រងប្រាសាទព្រះវិហាររបស់កម្ពុជាយើងទៀត។ អញ្ចឹងយើងបានខិតខំណាស់ទម្រាំធ្វើផែនការគ្រប់គ្រងនេះបាន សុទ្ធតែអ្នកជំនាញការធំមកធ្វើ ហើយអ្នកជំនាញការជាន់ខ្ពស់របស់យើងសហការ យើងបានផលិតផែនការគ្រប់គ្រងទាំងមូល ដែលកាលនៅប្រទេសកេនយ៉ា ខាងមជ្ឈមណ្ឌលបេតិកភណ្ឌពិភពលោក គេវាយតម្លៃថាល្អណាស់ គឺជាមូលដ្ឋានយ៉ាងល្អសម្រាប់អាជ្ញាធរព្រះវិហារយកមកពង្រីកឲ្យទៅជា គោលនយោបាយរបស់ខ្លួនសម្រាប់អភិរក្សប្រាសាទផង និងសម្រាប់អភិវឌ្ឍន៍ឲ្យមានចីរភាពផង។ អញ្ចឹងចង់បំផ្លាញផែនការគ្រប់គ្រងហ្នឹង អញ្ចឹងខ្លួនចង់ហ្នឹងវាចង់ហួសហេតុពេក ដូចខ្ញុំជម្រាបមិញអញ្ចឹង ទី១ បិទបាំងឧក្រិដ្ឋកម្មរបស់ខ្លួនកុំឲ្យអ្នកណានិយាយដល់ កុំឲ្យអ្នកណាគេឃើញ ទី២ ទប់ស្កាត់អ្នកជំនាញការ ការងារវប្បធម៌ ការងារបេតិកភណ្ឌ ទី៣ ខ្លូនចង់បំផ្លាញផែនការគ្រប់គ្រងរបស់កម្ពុជាយើងដែលយូណេស្កូគេទទួលស្គាល់ហើយ ខាងមជ្ឈមណ្ឌលបេតិកភណ្ឌពិភពលោកគេបានទទួលស្គាល់ គេវាយតម្លៃថាល្អហើយ រួចថៃនៅតែចចេសថា អត់ទទួលទេ ដល់គេសួរថា អត់ទទួលរឿងអី ពន្យល់មិនកើត ថាផែនការចូលដីថៃ ការពិតអត់មានចូលអីសោះ។ អញ្ចឹងថៃចង់បានទៀតចង់បានរឿងធំ៣ ប៉ុន្តែថៃអត់មានទឡ្ហីករណ៍បច្ចេកទេសឲ្យគេជឿបានទេ ថៃប្រើអី ទី១ ថៃប្រើការភូតភរ ថាប្រាសាទព្រះវិហារអត់មានខូចអីផង មានខូចខាតបន្តិចបន្តួចមកពីខ្មែរវាយគ្នាឯងតើ មកពីខ្មែរប្រយុទ្ធជាមួយខ្មែរក្រហមតាំងពីសម័យមុន។ គាត់ចោទយើងទៀត គាត់ចោទថាកម្ពុជាទៅចោទប្រកាន់គាត់ខុស មានការខូចខាតតិចតួចហ្នឹងខ្មែរវាយគ្នាតាំងពីជាមួយហ្វ៊ុនស៊ីនប៊ិច ជាមួយខ្មែរក្រហមខូចខាត ហើយបើថាថៃធ្វើខូច អញ្ចឹងមធ្យោបាយគាត់គឺប្រើបា្រស់ការភូតភរ ប្រើប្រាស់ការបោកប្រាស់មតិសាធារណៈ។ ខ្ញុំតែងបាននិយាយប្រាប់គណៈប្រតិភូដ៏ទៃថាអាហ្នឹងដូចយកដៃទៅបាំងព្រះអាទិត្យអញ្ចឹងវាមិនជិតទេ អញ្ចឹងមូលហេតុចង់បានទាំងបីហ្នឹង អត់បានទាំងអស់ គ្មានអ្នកណាគាំទ្រទាំងអស់ រួចទៅខឹងពេកប្រកាសមិនដឹងធ្វើម៉េច ប្រកាសទាត់ចោលអនុសញ្ញា ហើយដើរចេញ។
លោក សោម ឆាយ៉ា
សំណួរ៖ កន្លែងហ្នឹងសូមឯកឧត្តមជួយពន្យល់ប្រិយមិត្តយើងបន្តិចថា តើវាមានប៉ះពាល់អ្វីខ្លះទៅនឹងនីតិវិធីរបស់អង្គការយូណេស្កូ ពីអនុសញ្ញាឆ្នាំ១៩៧២ ស្តីពីការលាលែង ឬក៏ដើរចេញរបៀបថៃនេះឯកឧត្តម?
ឯកឧត្តមបណ្ឌិត សុខ អាន
ចម្លើយ៖ នេះជាសំណួរល្អណាស់ ដូច្នេះខ្ញុំចង់បញ្ចាក់ឲ្យច្បាស់ថា អ្នកដែលនិយាយថា ដោយសារខ្លួនបានដកពីអនុសញ្ញា១៩៧២ ហ្នឹងហើយ សេចក្តីសម្រេចរបស់គណៈកម្មាធិការកាលពីថ្ងៃម្សិលមិញហ្នឹង វាអត់មានឥទ្ធិពលមកលើថៃទេ គឺមិនមែនដូច្នោះទេ នេះជាការនិយាយខុសឆ្គងហើយ គឺអ្នកនិយាយគឺមិនបានយល់អំពីនីតិវិធីបែបបទច្បាស់លាស់ដែលមាននៅក្នុងអនុសញ្ញាឆ្នាំ១៩៧២ ទេ ។ ខ្ញុំសូមបញ្ជាក់ជាថ្មីម្តងទៀត បើចង់ឲ្យការលាលែងមានប្រសិទ្ធភាព និងមានឥទ្ធិពលច្បាប់ ត្រូវសរសេរជាលាយលក្ខណ៍អក្សរមកស្នើប្រធានគណៈកម្មាធិការ ឬ អគ្គនាយកអង្គការយូណេស្កូ អំពីការសុំលាលែង ដល់ពេលបានការឯកភាពហើយ ១២ខែក្រោយនោះទើបការលាលែងនេះចូលជាធរមាននេះជាការពិត។
លោក សោម ឆាយ៉ា
ឯកឧត្តម ខ្ញុំចង់ដឹងពីជំហររបស់ខាងយូណេស្កូ ដោយសារថាថៃគេដឹងថាមានការគាំទ្រតិចសម្រាប់ពួកគេ ហើយកម្ពុជាយើងមានការគាំទ្រច្រើនពីសមាជិកចំនួន២០ប្រទេស ដកកម្ពុជាយើងចេញ ១៩ប្រទេសបើដកថៃទៀត ក្នុងនោះប្រការដែលធ្វើឲ្យថៃអាម៉ាស់របៀបហ្នឹងមកពីមូលហេតុអ្វីដែរឯកឧត្តម?
ឯកឧត្តមបណ្ឌិត សុខ អាន
ចម្លើយ៖ ខ្ញុំសូមបញ្ជាក់ម្តងទៀតមិញជាគោលចំណុចធំ នៃការតស៊ូគ្នានោះគឺមាន ៣ ចំណុច។
ចំណុចទី១ គឺថាថៃចង់លាក់លៀមការពិត ចង់លាក់លៀមអំពីឧក្រិដ្ឋកម្មរបស់ខ្លួន ដែលបានបំផ្លាញវត្តកែវសិក្ខាគីរីស្វារៈរបស់យើង និងបំផ្លាញប្រាសាទរបស់យើង អញ្ចឹងខ្លួនចង់លាក់បាំង។ ចំណែកកម្ពុជាយើងចង់ជម្រាបជូនគណៈកម្មាធិការបេតិកភណ្ឌពិភពលោកដែលមានដល់ទៅ ១៨៦ ប្រទេសដែលចូលរួមប្រជុំគឺមនុស្សច្រើនណាស់ មានទាំងអង្គការ ២៦ អង្គការ ហើយគេចង់ថ្កោលទោសថៃ ថាប្រាសាទយើងខូច ហើយការខូចខាតនេះគឺដោយសារថៃបាញ់កាំភ្លើងធំចំនួន ៤១៤ គ្រាប់ប្រឆាំងប្រាសាទរបស់យើង។
អញ្ចឹងនេះជាចំណុចទី១ គឺជាចំណុចដែលត្រូវធ្វើការតស៊ូគ្នា។ចំណុចទី២ គឺបញ្ហាថៃចង់សរសេរសេចក្តីសម្រេចហ្នឹងយ៉ាងម៉េចទប់ស្កាត់មិនឲ្យគណៈកម្មាធិការបេតិកភ័ណ្ឌពិភពលោកបញ្ជូនអ្នកជំនាញការទៅដល់ប្រាសាទ។ឯយើង យើងចង់សរសេរយ៉ាងម៉េចដើម្បីឲ្យមានចំណុចបញ្ជាក់ថាគណៈកម្មាធិការបេតិកភ័ណ្ឌពិភពលោកមានភារៈកិច្ចត្រូវបញ្ជូនក្រុមជំនាញទៅដល់ប្រាសាទភ្លាម។ អញ្ចឹងនេះជាចំណុចតស៊ូគ្នា។ចំណុចទី៣ នេះជាចំណុចសំខាន់ណាស់ នៅប្រេស៊ីលគេបានសម្រេចហើយថា ផែនការគ្រប់គ្រងប្រាសាទព្រះវិហាររបស់យើងគឺបានសរសេរបញ្ជាក់ថា គឺត្រូវចូលជាធរមាន និងបញ្ចប់ការប្រឆាំងរបស់ថៃនៅពេលហ្នឹងហើយ ហើយខាងផ្នែកគណៈកម្មការគេទទួលស្គាល់ ឯថៃគាត់ទាមទារថាអត់ទេ គឺគាត់ចង់បំផ្លាញផែនការគ្រប់គ្រងប្រាសាទព្រះវិហារសម្រាប់ឆ្នាំនេះ គឺត្រូវលើក ហើយត្រូវសរសេរឲ្យច្បាស់ដាក់ថានឹងត្រូវពិនិត្យនៅឆ្នាំ២០១២ សម្រាប់ការប្រជុំលើកទី៣៦ឯណោះទេ។អញ្ចឹងលោក ឆាយ៉ា ឃើញហើយថាអ្វីដែលយើងតទល់គ្នាក្រោយពីយើងបានធ្វើការតស៊ូយ៉ាងតានតឹង ពីព្រោះយើងបានចាប់ផ្តើមតាំងពីខែមុនមកម្លេះ គឺនៅពេលដែលលោកជំទាវអគ្គនាយកបានអញ្ជើញកម្ពុជា និងថៃមកនោះ ដែលយើងបានប្រជុំ៣ថ្ងៃគឺថ្ងៃទី២៥-២៦-២៧ ខែមុននេះ។តាមរយៈការប្រជុំគ្នានោះគឺយើងបានយកពង្រៀងសេចក្តីថ្លែងការណ៍នោះមកជជែកគ្នាហើយ ហើយទាស់គ្នារឿងចំណុចធំ៣ ហើយពេលនោះលោកជំទាវអគ្គនាយកបានខិតខំឲ្យពិភាក្សាដើម្បីធ្វើម៉េចឲ្យបានខិតជិតគ្នា ពីព្រោះថាជំហររបស់ យូណេស្កូ ជំហររបស់គណៈកម្មការបេតិកភ័ណ្ឌពិភពលោក គឺមិនមែនជាកន្លែងដែលគេត្រូវថ្កោលទោស មិនមែនជាកន្លែងដែលគេត្រូវទិតៀន ឬជាកន្លែងដែលត្រូវជេរគ្នាទេ តែជាកន្លែងដែលគេធ្វើយ៉ាងម៉េចឲ្យប្រទេសនីមួយៗធ្វើសហប្រតិបត្តិការគ្នាល្អ។អញ្ចឹងគេខំឲ្យយើងហ្នឹងខិតខំរកនូវពាក្យដែលដូចគ្នា។អញ្ចឹងតាំងពីរយៈពេលពីថ្ងៃទី១៩មក គឺការចរចារនេះលោកជំទាវ គឺលោកមានការដូររូបភាព ម្តងនេះលោកអត់ប្រជុំដូចមុនទេ គឺលោកសុំចាត់តាំងអ្នកពូកែម្នាក់ដែលជាអគ្គនាយកនៅស្ថាប័នមួយឈ្មោះ អ៊ីក្រម ( ICROM ) គឺជាស្ថាប័នជំនាញខាងបុរាណវិទ្យា ដែលមានទីតាំងនៅទីក្រុង រ៉ូម ។គឺលោកជំទាវអគ្គនាយកបានអញ្ជើញ លោកអគ្គនាយកអ៊ីក្រម ថាឥឡូវខ្ញុំចាត់តាំងលោកជាតំណាងខ្ញុំ ក្នុងការជួបជាមួយកម្ពុជាម្តង ជួបជាមួយថៃម្តង។ក្នុងមួយថ្ងៃលោកអាចជួបជាមួយថៃពីរទៅបីដង ជួបជាមួយកម្ពុជាពីរទៅបីដង ធ្វើយ៉ាងម៉េចដើម្បីឲ្យឯកភាពគ្នាលើសេចក្តីសម្រេចបាន។ហើយលោកអគ្គនាយកលោកខិតខំសម្បើមណាស់ គឺលោកតំណាងរបស់លោកជំទាវអគ្គនាយកនោះ ហើយលោកតែងតែថ្ងូរថាជាមួយមិត្តថៃពិបាកពេកតែម្តង និយាយអ្វីក៏គាត់ជំទាស់ៗ អញ្ចឹងធ្វើម៉េចទើបត្រូវគ្នាបាន?។ចំណែកខាងកម្ពុជាបានបង្ហាញនូវភាពទន់ភ្លន់ អញ្ចឹងយើងអាចនិយាយបានថាគេគាំទ្រយើង គេមានសមានចិត្តលើយើង ដោយសារគេឃើញទី១ យើងជាអ្នករងគ្រោះ ទី២ យើងអត់ប្រកាន់ជំហរមួយ គឺយើងគោរពគោលការណ៍របស់គណៈកម្មាធិការបេតិកភ័ណ្ឌពិភពលោក គោរពគោលការណ៍របស់យូណេស្កូ និងបង្ហាញនូវភាពទន់ភ្លន់រស់រវើកថាយើងបានទទួលសំណូមពរគេហើយ និងរៀបចំសរសេរថ្មីទៀតដើម្បីឲ្យស្របតាមសំណូមពរគេផង ស្របតាមផលប្រយោជន៍របស់យើងផង។អញ្ចឹងគេឃើញថាកម្ពុជាគឺទន់ភ្លន់រហូត លើកសំណើថ្មីរហូត។ចំណែកថៃគឺក្នុងរយៈពេល៤ថ្ងៃនេះគឺគាត់អត់មានសរសេរអ្វីថ្មី គឺគាត់សរសេរតែដដែលៗ ទាមទារតែចំណុចគូសដដែលៗឲ្យបាន និងអត់មាននិយាយអំពីរឿងប្រាសាទអ្វីទេ គឺគាត់គេចដោយថាកុំនិយាយរឿងប្រាសាទ និយាយតែពីរឿងដែលគាត់ចង់បានសិន។គេមើលទៅខ្លឹមសាររបស់ថៃគឺហាក់បីដូចជាមិនមែននិយាយអំពីរឿងសេចក្តីសម្រេចដែលនិយាយអំពីរឿងប្រាសាទ គឺអត់និយាយពីការថែររក្សាប្រាសាទសោះ ដូច្នេះគេពិបាកក្នុងការគាំទ្រគាត់។អញ្ចឹងហើយគាត់ឃើញថា ចំណុចទាំងបីរបស់គាត់គឺអត់បានទាំងបី រីឯកម្ពុជាដូចបានទាំងបី ដល់អញ្ចឹងគាត់អត់សប្បាយចិត្តទេ រហូតដល់ចុងក្រោយគាត់យកជំហរមួយគឺគាត់ប្រើប្រាស់ ការភូតភរកុហក ប្រើប្រាស់ការគម្រាមកំហែងជាមូលដ្ឋាន ហើយប្រើប្រាស់នយោបាយមកគៀបសង្កត់វប្បធម៌ មកគៀបសង្កត់បេតិកភ័ណ្ឌ ដូច្នេះគណៈកម្មការគេទទួលមិនបានទេ។ដល់ចុងក្រោយគាត់លើកឡើងថា គណៈកម្មាធិការបេតិកភ័ណ្ឌព្រមឬមិនព្រមតាមថៃ បើមិនព្រមថៃដើរចេញ( Yes or No ) បើ No ថៃដើរចេញហើយ។ការធ្វើរបៀបនេះគេទទួលមិនបានទេពីព្រោះប្រទេសថៃមិនអាចមានទម្ងន់រហូតដល់ធ្វើអញ្ចឹងកើតទេ។ គាត់ថាអ្វី ថាតែគាត់ទៅ ហើយគាត់បានធ្វើសម្ភាសន៍ទូរទស្សន៍នៅក្នុងកន្លែងទីស្នាក់ការ ដែលមានមនុស្សរបស់គាត់រហូតដល់ទៅ ៥២ នាក់ឯណោះ និងមានកាមេរ៉ាថតរហូតដល់៧ ហើយពេលដែលខ្ញុំជួបភ្ញៀវគាត់ថតខ្ញុំម្ខាងដល់ទៅ៣កាមេរ៉ា។នេះជាការដែលគេសម្លុតធ្វើឲ្យយើងបាក់អារម្មណ៍ ស្លុតអារម្មណ៍ ប៉ុន្តែនៅពេលដែលប្រើរបៀបនេះមកលើគេវាបែរទៅជាគ្មានប្រសិទ្ធិភាព វាបែរជាធ្វើឲ្យគេខឹង គេមិនចូលចិត្តទៅវិញ។នេះជាមូលហេតុទាំងអស់ដែលថៃប្រើ ដូចជាការគំរាមកំហែងថា អ្នកឯងព្រមឬមិនព្រម បើមិនព្រមខ្ញុំដើរចេញជាដើម និងកុហកថាប្រាសាទអត់មានខូចខាតអ្វីទេ ការខូចបន្តិចបន្តួចនោះគឺមកពីខ្មែរគាត់វៃគ្នាគាត់ទេ ហេតុអ្វីក៏មកចោទថៃថាគេខូច។ ការចោទបែបនេះ គឺត្រូវបានកម្ពុជាត្រៀមរួចអស់ហើយ យើងបានធ្វើ DVD ច្បាស់លាស់ យើងបានសម្ភាសន៍អានុព័ន្ធយោធាពីប្រទេសចំនួន១៣ សំខាន់ៗ ដែលគេបានអញ្ជើញទៅមើលការខូចខាតរបស់ប្រាសាទ និងបានសម្ភាសន៍អំពីរឿងប្រាសាទដែលបានខូច។នៅពេលចុងក្រោយនេះខាង ស៊ីម៉ាក់ ( CMAC ) យើងបានរៀបចំឲ្យអ្នកការទូត ន័រវែ អ្នកការទូត អូទ្រីស ទៅពិនិត្យមើល ហើយគេបានចេញសេចក្តីថ្លែងការណ៍ ថ្កោលទោសថៃដែលបានប្រើប្រាស់គ្រាប់បែកចង្កោម ( Clusters Bombs ) ដោយគេបានចូលទៅមើលដោយផ្ទាល់ទៀតផង។ដូច្នេះគេឃើញគ្រាប់បែក គេឃើញអ្វីៗអស់ហើយ ។ចុងក្រោយគេបញ្ចាំងម្តងទៀត។អញ្ចឹងគេមើលឃើញថាខាងថៃខុស ។អញ្ចឹង DVD របស់យើងវាមានសព្វគ្រប់ រូបថតយើងមានសព្វគ្រប់ ដោយយើងបានបោះពុម្ពជាសៀវភៅនូវរូបដែលថៃបានបាញ់កំទេចវត្ថុបុរាណយើង និងការបាញ់កំទេចផ្សារយើង ខូចវត្តយើង ដោយយើងបានចែកអ្នកដែលចូលរួមស្ទើរតែគ្រប់គ្នា។យើងបានចែកគ្រប់គណៈប្រតិភូ នូវ DVD សៀវភៅ និងរូបថតនៃការខូចខាតគ្រប់ទាំងអស់។អញ្ចឹងដល់ថៃគេថា ខ្ញុំអត់ឃើញប្រាសាទព្រះវិហារខូចផងបែបនេះ វាជាការហួសហេតុ។មូលហេតុទាំងអស់នេះហើយដែលធ្វើឲ្យថៃអាម៉ាស់ ហើយចុងក្រោយគឺមានការភ្លាំងភ្លាត់មួយទៀត ទៅប្រកាសថ្កោលទោស ទិតៀនអនុសញ្ញាឆ្នាំ១៩៧២ ហើយប្រកាសដើរចេញ។ការប្រកាសដើរចេញនេះអាចមានផលវិបាក ទាំងខាងនយោបាយ ទាំងខាងវប្បធម៌ ទាំងខាងទេសចរណ៍ និងអ្វីៗទៀតច្រើនណាស់នៅពេលខាងមុខ។
លោក សោម ឆាយ៉ា
សំណួរ៖ ពីពេលនេះតទៅ តើអង្គការយូណេស្កូ និងគណៈកម្មាធិការបេតិកភ័ណ្ឌពិភពលោក នឹងធ្វើអ្វីទៀតជាមួយនិងការងារផែនការអភិរក្ស ក៏ដូចជាអភិវឌ្ឍនៅតំបន់ប្រាសាទព្រះវិហាររបស់យើង ឯកឧត្តម?
ឯកឧត្តមបណ្ឌិត សុខ អាន
ចម្លើយ៖ នេះគឺជាសំណួរដ៏ល្អមួយទៀត។ ក្រោយពីប្រទេសថៃបានដើរចេញ គណៈកម្មាធិការបេតិកភ័ណ្ឌពិភពលោក គេបានបន្តធ្វើការប្រជុំធម្មតា ហើយគេបានសម្រេចពិនិត្យទៅលើសេចក្តីសម្រេចនោះ មួយចំណុចម្តងៗ ដែលគេបានគ្រោងនោះគឺមាន៧ចំណុច ដោយគេពិនិត្យចំណុចទី១ ចំណុចទី២ ចំណុចទី៣ ហើយគេអនុមត្តិម្តងមួយៗ រហូតដល់ចំណុចទី៦ គឺក្នុងគម្រោងដើមរបស់យូណេស្កូដាក់ឲ្យគណៈកម្មាធិការបេតិកភ័ណ្ឌនោះគេដាក់ថា កម្ពុជាស្នើ ថៃស្នើ។ តើថៃស្នើអ្វី? គឺស្នើកុំឲ្យពិនិត្យផែនការគ្រប់គ្រងប្រាសាទ។ត្រង់ចំណុចនេះថៃគេថាមិនមានការឯកភាពគ្នា អញ្ចឹង គឺត្រូវដកចំណុចហ្នឹងចោលតែម្តងទៅ។ដូច្នេះសំណើរបស់ថៃនេះគឺគេដកចោលបាត់ទៅហើយ។ អញ្ចឹងគេបានសម្រេចទៅលើសេចក្តីសម្រេចមួយដែលមាន៦ចំណុច ដែលកាលពីមុនមាន៧ចំណុច។ដូច្នេះគេដកចំណុចទី៦ចេញ បានន័យថាដកសំណើរបស់ថៃដែលស្នើឲ្យពន្យារផែនការគ្រប់គ្រងប្រាសាទព្រះវិហារទៅឆ្នាំក្រោយនោះ។អញ្ចឹង៦ចំណុចនោះគេបានអនុមត្តិហើយ ។
នៅក្នុង៦ចំណុចនោះតើមានអ្វីខ្លះ? ទី១គឺគណៈកម្មការនឹងបញ្ជូនក្រុមអ្នកជំនាញដើម្បីទៅពិនិត្យស្ថានភាព នៃការអភិរក្សប្រាសាទ និងការជួសជុលប្រាសាទក្នុងពេលឆាប់ៗ។នេះជាចំណុចសំខាន់ណាស់ គឺជាចំណុចដែលយើងចង់បាន ហើយដែលមតិគណៈកម្មការក៏គេយល់ឃើញថាត្រូវធ្វើអញ្ចឹងដូចយើងដែរ ពីព្រោះនេះជាភារៈកិច្ច ជាតួនាទីរបស់គណៈកម្មការ។ចំណុចសំខាន់មួយទៀតគឺគេបានដកសំណើថៃចោល អំពីសំណើពន្យារផែនការគ្រប់គ្រងប្រាសាទនោះ។ គេក៏បានទទួលស្គាល់នៅចំណុចទីមួយថាជាចំណុចសំខាន់ណាស់គឺគណៈកម្មការបានរំលឹកឡើងវិញពីឯកសារផ្សេងៗ ដែលគណៈកម្មការបានអនុមត្តិពាក់ព័ន្ធនឹងប្រាសាទព្រះវិហារ។ ក្នុងនោះក៏មានសេចក្តីសម្រេចឆ្នាំ២០១០ កន្លងមក នៅប្រេស៊ីលីយ៉ា មានន័យថាផែនការគ្រប់គ្រងប្រាសាទរបស់យើងគឺគេទទួលស្គាល់ហើយ គឺអត់មានបញ្ហាអ្វីតទៅទៀតទេ។ អញ្ចឹង រឿងធំៗទាំងអស់នេះគឺយើងត្រឡប់ទៅស្រុកវិញដោយមានសេចក្តីសម្រេចមួយដែលមានលក្ខណៈយ៉ាងសត្យានុមតិ ផ្អែកលើគោលការណ៍ទាំងស្រុងនៃអនុសញ្ញា ផ្អែកលើគោលការណ៍ទាំងស្រុងនៃគណៈកម្មាធិការ ព្រោះគណៈកម្មាធិការនៅក្នុងអង្គប្រជុំពេញអង្គមិនងាយអនុមត្តិអ្វីដែលខុសពីគោលការណ៍នោះទេ។ ដូច្នេះគណៈកម្មាធិការបានអនុមត្តិអស់ហើយដែលក្នុងនោះមាន៦ចំណុច ហើយមានចំណុចសំខាន់ពីរដូចខ្ញុំបានជម្រាបលោក ឆាយ៉ា អញ្ចឹង។សួរថាតើគណៈកម្មការគេនឹងធ្វើអ្វីទៀត? បើតាមខ្លឹមសារនៃសេចក្តីសម្រេចនេះ គឺគេបានបញ្ចូលសេចក្តីសម្រេចលើកទី៣៤មកជាការរំលឹកឡើងវិញច្បាស់ហើយ ដែលក្នុងនោះមានផែនការគ្រប់គ្រងប្រាសាទ និងទី២ គេបានបញ្ជាក់ហើយថាគេទទួលស្គាល់ និងមានការចាំបាច់ណាស់ក្នុងការពិនិត្យស្ថានភាពនៃការអភិរក្ស និងការស្តារ និងជួសជុលប្រាសាទព្រះវិហាររបស់យើង។
លោក សោម ឆាយ៉ា
អរគុណចំពោះឯកឧត្តមដែលបានផ្តល់នូវកិច្ចសម្ភាសន៍នេះ ហើយសង្ឃឹមថានៅពេលដែលឯកឧត្តមអញ្ជើញមកវិញនឹងផ្តល់នូវកិច្ចសម្ភាសន៍បន្ថែម ស្តីអំពីសមិទ្ធផល ក៏ដូចជាលទ្ធផលនៃកិច្ចប្រជុំលើកទី៣៥របស់គណៈកម្មាធិការបេតិកភ័ណ្ឌពិភពលោកនៅឯទីក្រុបារីស៕
29 June, 2011
27 June, 2011
Thais Withdraw from Paris Meet
Thais Withdraw from Paris Meet
The Phnom Penh Post, 27 June 2011
http://www.phnompenhpost.com/index.php/2011062750018/National-news/thais-withdraw-from-paris-meet.html
Photo by: Heng Chivoan
A Cambodian soldier and a group of civilian visitors at the 11th-century Preah Vihear temple during a lull in fighting with Thailand in February.
The WHC decided to put the matter on the agenda. I have no choice, we have to withdraw
Thailand has withdrawn from a meeting of UNESCO’s World Heritage Committee after the body said it would consider Cambodia’s management plan for the Preah Vihear temple, a Thai government minister said on Saturday night.
Natural Resources and Environment Minister Sukwit Khunkitti, who headed the Thai delegation, said Thailand had been left with “no choice” but to withdraw after the committee ignored their pleas.
“The World Heritage Centre decided to put the matter on the agenda. I have no choice, we have to withdraw,” he said via Twitter.
“The decision is to prevent the other side from using this issue to claim our territory,” he added.
In an earlier tweet, Sukwit Khunkitti said it was useless to be in a society without rules – an apparent reference to the WHC – and threatened to withdraw if the committee did not accept Thailand’s proposal to delay Cambodia’s temple management plan, the Bangkok Post reported yesterday.
“I’ve issued an ultimatum_if they reject our proposal, we have to be apart,” he wrote.
Meanwhile, Cambodian Deputy Prime Minister Sok An claimed in a statement from Paris that the WHC had “acknowledged” that the temple had been damaged by Thai soldiers during border clashes in February that left at least 10 dead on both sides as well as surface-level scars on the Hindu temple.
“The committee acknowledged as the temple was damaged from shelling by Thai soldiers and it is needed as immediately to dispatch technical team for the restoration and preservation of the temple,” he wrote from the 10-day summit in Paris. Sok An said 22 Cambodian delegates had lobbied representatives of the 19 WHC member states throughout the summit. “As result, the Thais completely failed in an attempt to postpone Cambodia’s management plan for Preah Vihear temple,” he wrote.
Thai government spokesman Panitan Wattanayagorn and Foreign Ministry spokesman Thani Thongphakdi could not be reached for comment.
Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites
The Phnom Penh Post, 27 June 2011
http://www.phnompenhpost.com/index.php/2011062750018/National-news/thais-withdraw-from-paris-meet.html
Photo by: Heng Chivoan
A Cambodian soldier and a group of civilian visitors at the 11th-century Preah Vihear temple during a lull in fighting with Thailand in February.
The WHC decided to put the matter on the agenda. I have no choice, we have to withdraw
Thailand has withdrawn from a meeting of UNESCO’s World Heritage Committee after the body said it would consider Cambodia’s management plan for the Preah Vihear temple, a Thai government minister said on Saturday night.
Natural Resources and Environment Minister Sukwit Khunkitti, who headed the Thai delegation, said Thailand had been left with “no choice” but to withdraw after the committee ignored their pleas.
“The World Heritage Centre decided to put the matter on the agenda. I have no choice, we have to withdraw,” he said via Twitter.
“The decision is to prevent the other side from using this issue to claim our territory,” he added.
In an earlier tweet, Sukwit Khunkitti said it was useless to be in a society without rules – an apparent reference to the WHC – and threatened to withdraw if the committee did not accept Thailand’s proposal to delay Cambodia’s temple management plan, the Bangkok Post reported yesterday.
“I’ve issued an ultimatum_if they reject our proposal, we have to be apart,” he wrote.
Meanwhile, Cambodian Deputy Prime Minister Sok An claimed in a statement from Paris that the WHC had “acknowledged” that the temple had been damaged by Thai soldiers during border clashes in February that left at least 10 dead on both sides as well as surface-level scars on the Hindu temple.
“The committee acknowledged as the temple was damaged from shelling by Thai soldiers and it is needed as immediately to dispatch technical team for the restoration and preservation of the temple,” he wrote from the 10-day summit in Paris. Sok An said 22 Cambodian delegates had lobbied representatives of the 19 WHC member states throughout the summit. “As result, the Thais completely failed in an attempt to postpone Cambodia’s management plan for Preah Vihear temple,” he wrote.
Thai government spokesman Panitan Wattanayagorn and Foreign Ministry spokesman Thani Thongphakdi could not be reached for comment.
Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites
Temple to remain time bomb
Temple to remain time bomb
By PONGPHON SARNSAMAK,
SAMASCHA HUNSARA
THE NATION
June 27, 2011
Thailand will withdraw from Heritage Convention, but experts query move
Thailand's defiant decision to pull out of the World Heritage Convention late on Saturday in protest over Cambodia's management plan for Preah Vihear Temple could be another ticking bomb for the new government.
"The next step to withdraw from the World Heritage Committee will be the responsibility of the next government," Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva told a press conference at Suvarnabhumi Airport.
He had called Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya to meet for 10 minutes at the airport's VIP room before the press conference.
"From now Unesco can consult with Thailand over the next process and Thailand will insist that any activity to recover the disputed areas must be approved by Thailand. We do always ask Cambodia to withdraw troops from the Preah Vihear Temple as it would violate the convention and the intention of the committee," he said.
Noppadon Patama, a legal adviser to ex-premier Thaksin Shinawatra and former foreign minister, derided the decision to withdraw from the World Heritage Convention, saying it would cause trouble for the country.
"There is another way to protect our sovereign rights that is better than resignation from the convention," he said in a comment called "What has Suwit done in Paris?" on his Facebook page.
Natural Resources and Environment Minister Suwit Khunkitti, head of the Thai delegation negotiating with the World Heritage Committee in Paris, announced at 11.55pm on Saturday that his delegation had informed the World Heritage Committee that Thailand had withdrawn its membership to the convention. He said the Thai delegation had to make the move after the committee ignored Thailand's concern that consideration of the management plan would complicate the Thai-Cambodian border dispute.
"So, I think that we should not take a risk. If we take a risk, the vote of the committee may affect us and affect our sovereignty. I talked to the delegation and we agreed to withdraw as a member of the World Heritage Convention," Suwit said.
However, academics have called into doubt the legality of the caretaker government's decision, saying the Constitution does not allow a caretaker government to make any legally binding decision until the next government is appointed.
"It is still a question whether the caretaker government has the authority to make any legally binding decision after the House dissolution," said Panas Tassaneeyanont, a legal expert and former senator.
"The withdrawal from the World Heritage Convention will not take effect as the caretaker government does not have the authority to legally bind the next government," he said. "The new government will later cancel the previous government's decision."
According to Article 35 of the World Heritage Convention, such a move must be notified by a signatory in writing, sent to the director-general of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (Unesco).
The withdrawal would take effect 12 months after receipt of such a notice. It would not affect the financial obligations of the state until the date on which the withdrawal takes effect.
Abhisit insisted that Suwit's decision had followed the Cabinet resolution.
Akkharaphong Khamkhun, a lecturer at Thammasat University's Pridi Banomyong International College, said Suwit's announcement was hollow because it was done by the caretaker government.
Adul Wichiencharoen, a former member of the National World Heritage Committee, said he supported Suwit's response, as Thailand was in danger of losing territory if the committee accepted the Cambodian plan.
Panthep Pourpongpan, spokesman for the People's Alliance for Democracy, which has been camping out at Government House to protest against the listing of Preah Vihear Temple, said the announcement was a victory for the country.
By PONGPHON SARNSAMAK,
SAMASCHA HUNSARA
THE NATION
June 27, 2011
Thailand will withdraw from Heritage Convention, but experts query move
Thailand's defiant decision to pull out of the World Heritage Convention late on Saturday in protest over Cambodia's management plan for Preah Vihear Temple could be another ticking bomb for the new government.
"The next step to withdraw from the World Heritage Committee will be the responsibility of the next government," Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva told a press conference at Suvarnabhumi Airport.
He had called Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya to meet for 10 minutes at the airport's VIP room before the press conference.
"From now Unesco can consult with Thailand over the next process and Thailand will insist that any activity to recover the disputed areas must be approved by Thailand. We do always ask Cambodia to withdraw troops from the Preah Vihear Temple as it would violate the convention and the intention of the committee," he said.
Noppadon Patama, a legal adviser to ex-premier Thaksin Shinawatra and former foreign minister, derided the decision to withdraw from the World Heritage Convention, saying it would cause trouble for the country.
"There is another way to protect our sovereign rights that is better than resignation from the convention," he said in a comment called "What has Suwit done in Paris?" on his Facebook page.
Natural Resources and Environment Minister Suwit Khunkitti, head of the Thai delegation negotiating with the World Heritage Committee in Paris, announced at 11.55pm on Saturday that his delegation had informed the World Heritage Committee that Thailand had withdrawn its membership to the convention. He said the Thai delegation had to make the move after the committee ignored Thailand's concern that consideration of the management plan would complicate the Thai-Cambodian border dispute.
"So, I think that we should not take a risk. If we take a risk, the vote of the committee may affect us and affect our sovereignty. I talked to the delegation and we agreed to withdraw as a member of the World Heritage Convention," Suwit said.
However, academics have called into doubt the legality of the caretaker government's decision, saying the Constitution does not allow a caretaker government to make any legally binding decision until the next government is appointed.
"It is still a question whether the caretaker government has the authority to make any legally binding decision after the House dissolution," said Panas Tassaneeyanont, a legal expert and former senator.
"The withdrawal from the World Heritage Convention will not take effect as the caretaker government does not have the authority to legally bind the next government," he said. "The new government will later cancel the previous government's decision."
According to Article 35 of the World Heritage Convention, such a move must be notified by a signatory in writing, sent to the director-general of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (Unesco).
The withdrawal would take effect 12 months after receipt of such a notice. It would not affect the financial obligations of the state until the date on which the withdrawal takes effect.
Abhisit insisted that Suwit's decision had followed the Cabinet resolution.
Akkharaphong Khamkhun, a lecturer at Thammasat University's Pridi Banomyong International College, said Suwit's announcement was hollow because it was done by the caretaker government.
Adul Wichiencharoen, a former member of the National World Heritage Committee, said he supported Suwit's response, as Thailand was in danger of losing territory if the committee accepted the Cambodian plan.
Panthep Pourpongpan, spokesman for the People's Alliance for Democracy, which has been camping out at Government House to protest against the listing of Preah Vihear Temple, said the announcement was a victory for the country.
UNESCO Director-General regrets the announcement of Thailand's intention to denounce the 1972 World Heritage Convention
UNESCO Director-General regrets the announcement of Thailand's intention to denounce the 1972 World Heritage Convention
UNESCO
Sunday, June 26, 2011
The Director-General of UNESCO Irina Bokova has expressed her deep regret following the declaration of the Thai Minister Suwit Khunkitti during the 35th session of the World Heritage Committee being held at UNESCO Headquarters in Paris from 19 to 29 June 2011, on the intention of Thailand to denounce the 1972 World Heritage Convention.
Irina Bokova reiterated that "The World Heritage Convention of 1972 is not only the foremost international instrument for the preservation and protection of the world’s cultural and natural properties which have Outstanding Universal Value, but also widely recognized as an important and indispensable tool to develop and encourage international cooperation and dialogue”.
Contrary to widely circulated media reports, the World Heritage Committee did not discuss the Management Plan of the Temple of Preah Vihear nor did it request for any reports to be submitted on its state of conservation.
Moreover, it needs to be clarified that UNESCO’s World Heritage Centre never pushed for a discussion of the Management Plan by the Committee.
The decision of the World Heritage Committee on the Temple of Preah Vihear World Heritage site in Cambodia only reaffirms the need to ensure the protection and conservation of the property from any damage. It further encourages the two countries to use the 1972 Convention as a tool to support conservation, sustainable development and dialogue.
The World Heritage Committee decision was adopted unanimously after Thailand staged a walkout. The request of Thailand to adjourn the debate was not supported by any other member of the World Heritage Committee.
While cognizant of the values and importance of the Temple of Preah Vihear, the Director-General has on many occasions called on Cambodia and Thailand to ensure its protection and sustainable development. She has emphasized that heritage should serve not for conflict but as a tool for dialogue and reconciliation. Earlier in February 2011, she had sent her special envoy Mr. Koichiro Matsuura, to the two countries, following clashes near the temple. Mrs. Bokova also facilitated consultations between the two Parties in May 2011 in Paris, with the aim of bringing closer their respective positions.
Intense negotiations were also held with the delegations of the two countries over the past five days on the sidelines of the 35th session of the World Heritage Committee, but no agreement could be reached.
The Director-General expressed the hope that Thailand will carefully consider its future course of action in respect of this important Convention and will continue to be an active participant in the international cooperation for the protection of the world’s outstanding heritage.
UNESCO
Sunday, June 26, 2011
The Director-General of UNESCO Irina Bokova has expressed her deep regret following the declaration of the Thai Minister Suwit Khunkitti during the 35th session of the World Heritage Committee being held at UNESCO Headquarters in Paris from 19 to 29 June 2011, on the intention of Thailand to denounce the 1972 World Heritage Convention.
Irina Bokova reiterated that "The World Heritage Convention of 1972 is not only the foremost international instrument for the preservation and protection of the world’s cultural and natural properties which have Outstanding Universal Value, but also widely recognized as an important and indispensable tool to develop and encourage international cooperation and dialogue”.
Contrary to widely circulated media reports, the World Heritage Committee did not discuss the Management Plan of the Temple of Preah Vihear nor did it request for any reports to be submitted on its state of conservation.
Moreover, it needs to be clarified that UNESCO’s World Heritage Centre never pushed for a discussion of the Management Plan by the Committee.
The decision of the World Heritage Committee on the Temple of Preah Vihear World Heritage site in Cambodia only reaffirms the need to ensure the protection and conservation of the property from any damage. It further encourages the two countries to use the 1972 Convention as a tool to support conservation, sustainable development and dialogue.
The World Heritage Committee decision was adopted unanimously after Thailand staged a walkout. The request of Thailand to adjourn the debate was not supported by any other member of the World Heritage Committee.
While cognizant of the values and importance of the Temple of Preah Vihear, the Director-General has on many occasions called on Cambodia and Thailand to ensure its protection and sustainable development. She has emphasized that heritage should serve not for conflict but as a tool for dialogue and reconciliation. Earlier in February 2011, she had sent her special envoy Mr. Koichiro Matsuura, to the two countries, following clashes near the temple. Mrs. Bokova also facilitated consultations between the two Parties in May 2011 in Paris, with the aim of bringing closer their respective positions.
Intense negotiations were also held with the delegations of the two countries over the past five days on the sidelines of the 35th session of the World Heritage Committee, but no agreement could be reached.
The Director-General expressed the hope that Thailand will carefully consider its future course of action in respect of this important Convention and will continue to be an active participant in the international cooperation for the protection of the world’s outstanding heritage.
UNESCO regrets Thai decision to denounce World Heritage Convention
UNESCO regrets Thai decision to denounce World Heritage Convention
UN News Centre
26 June 2011
26 June 2011 – The head of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) today voiced deep regret after Thailand announced it would denounce the global convention aimed at preserving humankind's most outstanding shared cultural and natural heritage.
A Thai Government minister said yesterday in Paris, where the UNESCO World Heritage Committee is currently meeting, that his country did not support the convention, the latest step in a row involving the Preah Vihear Temple, a World Heritage List site that was damaged during border clashes earlier this year between Thailand and Cambodia.
UNESCO Director-General Irina Bokova said in a press statement issued today that “the World Heritage Convention of 1972 is not only the foremost international instrument for the preservation and protection of the world's cultural and natural properties which have outstanding universal value, but also widely recognized as an important and indispensable tool to develop and encourage international cooperation and dialogue.”
Ms. Bokova said she hoped that Thailand would “carefully consider its future course of action” regarding the convention and “continue to be an active participant” in the discussion of world heritage issues.
In its press statement UNESCO noted that, contrary to some media reports, the World Heritage Committee did not discuss the management plan for the Preah Vihear Temple or request that reports be submitted on its state of conservation.
Instead the committee reaffirmed the need to ensure the protection and conservation of the temple site from any damage and further encouraged Thailand and Cambodia to use the convention as a tool to support conservation, sustainable development and dialogue.
UNESCO said the committee made the decision unanimously after Thailand staged a walkout, despite “intense negotiations” with both Thailand and Cambodia over the past five days on the sidelines of the committee meeting.
Earlier this year the former UNESCO director-general Koïchiro Matsuura was dispatched as a special envoy to try to resolve the dispute between the South-East Asian neighbours, and the agency also facilitated consultations between the two countries last month in Paris.
Meanwhile, the committee yesterday inscribed five new sites to the World Heritage List, taking the total of new additions during the current session – which ends on 29 June – to 13.
The committee added the Coffee Cultural Landscape of Colombia, the Archaeological Sites of the Island of Meroe in Sudan, Jordan's Wadi Rum Protected Area, the Longobards in Italy and the Fagus Factory in Alfeld, Germany.
UN News Centre
26 June 2011
26 June 2011 – The head of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) today voiced deep regret after Thailand announced it would denounce the global convention aimed at preserving humankind's most outstanding shared cultural and natural heritage.
A Thai Government minister said yesterday in Paris, where the UNESCO World Heritage Committee is currently meeting, that his country did not support the convention, the latest step in a row involving the Preah Vihear Temple, a World Heritage List site that was damaged during border clashes earlier this year between Thailand and Cambodia.
UNESCO Director-General Irina Bokova said in a press statement issued today that “the World Heritage Convention of 1972 is not only the foremost international instrument for the preservation and protection of the world's cultural and natural properties which have outstanding universal value, but also widely recognized as an important and indispensable tool to develop and encourage international cooperation and dialogue.”
Ms. Bokova said she hoped that Thailand would “carefully consider its future course of action” regarding the convention and “continue to be an active participant” in the discussion of world heritage issues.
In its press statement UNESCO noted that, contrary to some media reports, the World Heritage Committee did not discuss the management plan for the Preah Vihear Temple or request that reports be submitted on its state of conservation.
Instead the committee reaffirmed the need to ensure the protection and conservation of the temple site from any damage and further encouraged Thailand and Cambodia to use the convention as a tool to support conservation, sustainable development and dialogue.
UNESCO said the committee made the decision unanimously after Thailand staged a walkout, despite “intense negotiations” with both Thailand and Cambodia over the past five days on the sidelines of the committee meeting.
Earlier this year the former UNESCO director-general Koïchiro Matsuura was dispatched as a special envoy to try to resolve the dispute between the South-East Asian neighbours, and the agency also facilitated consultations between the two countries last month in Paris.
Meanwhile, the committee yesterday inscribed five new sites to the World Heritage List, taking the total of new additions during the current session – which ends on 29 June – to 13.
The committee added the Coffee Cultural Landscape of Colombia, the Archaeological Sites of the Island of Meroe in Sudan, Jordan's Wadi Rum Protected Area, the Longobards in Italy and the Fagus Factory in Alfeld, Germany.
26 June, 2011
Thailand- Leaving World Heritage Convention
27 June 2011
World Heritage Sites for Cambodia and Thailand
The World Heritage List reveals that Cambodia has two properties inscribed as the world heritage sites namely Angkor and Temple of Preah Vihear while Thailand has five cultural and natural ones. In total, the World Heritage List includes 919 properties forming part of the cultural and natural heritage which the World Heritage Committee considers as having outstanding universal value. The properties include 709 cultural, 183 natural, and 27 mix properties in 152 State Parties (UNESCO, 2011). List of sites inscribed as the World Heritage Sites of the two countries include as follows:
- Historic City of Ayutthaya
- Historic Town of Sukhothai and Associated Historic Towns
- Thungyai-Huai Kha Khaeng Wildlife Sanctuaries
- Ban Chiang Archaeological Site
- Dong Phayayen-Khao Yai Forest Complex
If Thailand decided to leave the World Heritage Committee for withdraws itself as a member of the World Heritage Convention, Thailand would definitely think twice how to deal with their existing inscribed sites. Cambodia became as the State Party to the Convention on November 28, 1991 while Thailand accepted the Convention four years earlier on September 17, 1987. Both countries have submitted sites for their inscriptions as mentioned above and still more sites are on tentative list for both countries.
Properties submitted on the Tentative List-Cambodia
- Groupe de Sambor Prei Kuk (1992)
- Le site de Koh Ker (1992)
- Site des Kulen (1992)
- Site d'Angkor Borei et Phnom Da (1992)
- Site d'Oudong (1992)
- Ensemble de Beng Mealea (1992)
- Ensemble du Prah Khan de Kompong Svay (1992)
- Ensemble de Banteay Chmar (1992)
- Ensemble de Banteay Prei Nokor (1992)
Properties submitted on the Tentative List-Thailand
- Phimai, its Cultural Route and the Associated Temples of Phanomroong and Muangtam (2004)
- Phuphrabat Historical Park (2004)
- Kaeng Krachan Forest Complex (KKFC) (2011)
When Thailand decided to leave this world body, will Thailand still want to process all these properties listed as tentative? Even, Thailand said so, it will take twelve months to be in effect of the State Party’s denunciation of the Convention. Maybe, the next Thai Government after the election change their mind.
Duties of State Parties to the Convention
The World Heritage Convention links together in a single document the concepts of nature conservation and the preservation of cultural properties. The duties outlined in the Convention include the duties of State Parties in identifying potential sites and their role in protecting and preserving them. Due to the outrage of recent border conflict, one would know for sure that Cambodia is a small country and dares not invade any bigger neighbor since it has small number of armed forces and ammunitions in comparing to Thailand. Cambodia is determined to exercise its self-defense and protect its sovereignty. The issue of overlapping did not take place until the pre, during and post inscription of Preah Vihear temple. This is because of the use of map that has not been internationally recognized. The ICJ judgment stated states clearly on the ownership of the temple and listed obligations to be fulfilled by Thailand to remove its troops from the vicinity of the temple based on the Annex 1 map.
The Convention stipulates the obligation of States Parties to report regularly to the World Heritage Committee on the state of conservation of their World Heritage properties. These reports are crucial to the work of the Committee as they enable it to assess the conditions of the sites, decide on specific programme needs and resolve recurrent problems (UNESCO, 2011)
The Benefits of Joint the Convention:
- Integrating to the international community of appreciation and concern for universally significant properties
- Joining hands to protect and cherish the world’s natural and cultural heritage;
- Expressing shared commitment to preserving our legacy for future generations;
- Having access to the World Heritage Fund with US$4 million available to assist State Parties in identifying, preserving and promoting World Heritage Sites;
- Sites inscribed on the World Heritage List benefit from the elaboration and implementation of a comprehensive management plan that sets out adequate preservation measures and monitoring mechanisms;
- Bringing an increase in public awareness of the site and of its outstanding values; and
- Increasing the tourist activities at the site;
Denunciation of the Convention
Article 35 of the Convention states that the state party may denounce the Convention in writing and notify the Director-General of UNESCO. The denunciation shall take effect twelve months after the receipt of the instrument of denunciation and it shall not affect the financial obligations of the denouncing State until the date on which the withdrawal takes effect.
If it is officially accepted the withdrawal of Thailand from the WHC as of 26 June 2011, the denunciation will take effect 26 June 2012 as stipulated in Article 36 of the Convention. Will Thailand change their mind? This will be based on the next elected Government. Thailand has been with the WHC for 24 years and Thailand benefited a lot from the historical and world heritage sites in terms of number of tourists visited.
Thailand withdraws from UN World Heritage Convention in protest
Source: M&G, 26 June 2011
URL:http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/asiapacific/news/article_1647637.php/Thailand-withdraws-from-UN-World-Heritage-Convention-in-protest
Bangkok - Thailand has withdrawn from the United Nations World Heritage Convention to protest a decision to consider a management plan for a disputed ancient temple, reports said Sunday.
A committee on Saturday agreed to consider Cambodia's plan for the Preah Vihear temple despite Thai objections. Thailand claims that an adjacent 4.6-square-kilometre plot of land is still part of a border demarcation dispute.
'I talked to the delegation and we agreed to withdraw as a member of the World Heritage Convention,' said Suwit Khunkitti, head of the delegation negotiating with the World Heritage Committee of the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, The Nation online news service reported.
But a senior Thai government source in Bangkok said the resignation was not effective immediately.
'There is a process that has to be gone through and it takes time,' a Thai foreign ministry official said. 'Most likely it will need to be decided by the incoming government,' said the official, who asked to remain anonymous.
Thailand is gearing up for a general election on July 3.
UNESCO's World Heritage Committee was discussing new sites in Paris last week and management plans for existing ones.
Cambodia pressed it to proceed with its management plan for the 11th-century Hindu temple, which was named a Heritage site in 2008 over Thai objections.
Since the listing of Preah Vihear, Thai and Cambodian troops have clashed on several occasions along the border, most recently in April when 16 people died.
The temple ruins on a cliff that defines the Thai-Cambodian border has been a bone of contention between the two countries for six decades.
In 1962, the International Court of Justice ruled that the temple was on Cambodia soil, but it stopped short of ruling on where the border lies in the disputed area.
While Thailand has accepted the 1962 ruling, it claims a 4.6-square-kilometre area adjacent to the temple, which is also claimed by Cambodia.
URL:http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/asiapacific/news/article_1647637.php/Thailand-withdraws-from-UN-World-Heritage-Convention-in-protest
Bangkok - Thailand has withdrawn from the United Nations World Heritage Convention to protest a decision to consider a management plan for a disputed ancient temple, reports said Sunday.
A committee on Saturday agreed to consider Cambodia's plan for the Preah Vihear temple despite Thai objections. Thailand claims that an adjacent 4.6-square-kilometre plot of land is still part of a border demarcation dispute.
'I talked to the delegation and we agreed to withdraw as a member of the World Heritage Convention,' said Suwit Khunkitti, head of the delegation negotiating with the World Heritage Committee of the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, The Nation online news service reported.
But a senior Thai government source in Bangkok said the resignation was not effective immediately.
'There is a process that has to be gone through and it takes time,' a Thai foreign ministry official said. 'Most likely it will need to be decided by the incoming government,' said the official, who asked to remain anonymous.
Thailand is gearing up for a general election on July 3.
UNESCO's World Heritage Committee was discussing new sites in Paris last week and management plans for existing ones.
Cambodia pressed it to proceed with its management plan for the 11th-century Hindu temple, which was named a Heritage site in 2008 over Thai objections.
Since the listing of Preah Vihear, Thai and Cambodian troops have clashed on several occasions along the border, most recently in April when 16 people died.
The temple ruins on a cliff that defines the Thai-Cambodian border has been a bone of contention between the two countries for six decades.
In 1962, the International Court of Justice ruled that the temple was on Cambodia soil, but it stopped short of ruling on where the border lies in the disputed area.
While Thailand has accepted the 1962 ruling, it claims a 4.6-square-kilometre area adjacent to the temple, which is also claimed by Cambodia.
Thailand pulls out of World Heritage Convention
MCOT, 26 June 2011
PARIS, June 26 - Thailand announced its departure from the World Heritage Convention with immediate effect on Saturday, after the World Heritage Committee failed to heed its request seeking postponement of the Cambodia's unilaterally-proposed Preah Vihear Temple management plan, as Thailand fears that it may threaten national sovereignty.
Thailand's Natural Resources and Environment Minister Suwit Khunkitti, leading the Thai delegation at the 35th session of the WHC meeting in Paris, earlier notified Mr Mounir Bouchenaki, director-general of International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property, who represents the director-general of United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), that Thailand would leave the World Heritage Convention and would also withdraw from the 21-member World Heritage Committee as the body continues to ignore any negative consequences which may arise from the consideration of the temple management plan which he said overlooks sensitive issues which could adversely affect Thailand's sovereignty and territory.
Mr Suwit also said the World Heritage Centre, instead of revising the wording of the draft, decided to put it on the agenda of the WHC meeting in Paris, despite Thailand's request to have the plan deferred, pending border demarcation with Cambodia.
Thailand is opposed to the terms of "urgent repair and restoration" but preferred using the wording "protection and conservation" in the draft. The head of the Thai delegation also said the pullout means that any WHC resolution will not be binding to Thailand.
The withdrawal has resulted in the Director General of the Fine Arts Department, Mrs Somsuda Leyavanija, one of 21 members of the WHC, to leave her post.
Mr Suwit earlier posted a message on his Twitter account late Saturday night saying, "Thailand has no choice but to withdraw as the meeting has resolved to put the issue on agenda."
Thailand wanted the meeting to defer consideration of the Cambodian management plan until the International Court of Justice (ICJ) rules on its complaint, and not until Thailand and Cambodia finish demarcation of their common border.
Ties between the neighbours have been strained since Preah Vihear temple was granted UN World Heritage status in July 2008.
In April, Cambodia asked the court to clarify its 1962 ruling on the ancient Hindu temple on its disputed border with Thailand following recent deadly armed clashes between the two neighbouring countries.
The world court, based in The Hague, ruled in 1962 that the temple belonged to Cambodia, but both Phnom Penh and Bangkok claim ownership of 4.6-square-kilometre (1.8-square-mile) of the surrounding area. (MCOT online news)
Mr. Basket Knife and Other Khmer Folktales (Unesco collection of representative works: Khmer series)
PARIS, June 26 - Thailand announced its departure from the World Heritage Convention with immediate effect on Saturday, after the World Heritage Committee failed to heed its request seeking postponement of the Cambodia's unilaterally-proposed Preah Vihear Temple management plan, as Thailand fears that it may threaten national sovereignty.
Thailand's Natural Resources and Environment Minister Suwit Khunkitti, leading the Thai delegation at the 35th session of the WHC meeting in Paris, earlier notified Mr Mounir Bouchenaki, director-general of International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property, who represents the director-general of United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), that Thailand would leave the World Heritage Convention and would also withdraw from the 21-member World Heritage Committee as the body continues to ignore any negative consequences which may arise from the consideration of the temple management plan which he said overlooks sensitive issues which could adversely affect Thailand's sovereignty and territory.
Mr Suwit also said the World Heritage Centre, instead of revising the wording of the draft, decided to put it on the agenda of the WHC meeting in Paris, despite Thailand's request to have the plan deferred, pending border demarcation with Cambodia.
Thailand is opposed to the terms of "urgent repair and restoration" but preferred using the wording "protection and conservation" in the draft. The head of the Thai delegation also said the pullout means that any WHC resolution will not be binding to Thailand.
The withdrawal has resulted in the Director General of the Fine Arts Department, Mrs Somsuda Leyavanija, one of 21 members of the WHC, to leave her post.
Mr Suwit earlier posted a message on his Twitter account late Saturday night saying, "Thailand has no choice but to withdraw as the meeting has resolved to put the issue on agenda."
Thailand wanted the meeting to defer consideration of the Cambodian management plan until the International Court of Justice (ICJ) rules on its complaint, and not until Thailand and Cambodia finish demarcation of their common border.
Ties between the neighbours have been strained since Preah Vihear temple was granted UN World Heritage status in July 2008.
In April, Cambodia asked the court to clarify its 1962 ruling on the ancient Hindu temple on its disputed border with Thailand following recent deadly armed clashes between the two neighbouring countries.
The world court, based in The Hague, ruled in 1962 that the temple belonged to Cambodia, but both Phnom Penh and Bangkok claim ownership of 4.6-square-kilometre (1.8-square-mile) of the surrounding area. (MCOT online news)
Mr. Basket Knife and Other Khmer Folktales (Unesco collection of representative works: Khmer series)
Thailand leaves World Heritage Convention
Thailand has withdrawn from the World Heritage Convention to protest against the World Heritage Committee's decision to consider Cambodia's management plan of Preah Vihear Temple.
Suwit Khunkitti, head of the Thai delegation negotiating with the World Heritage Committee in Paris, announced at 11:55 pm Saturday, that his delegation had informed the World Heritage Committee that Thailand resigned as a member country to the convention.
Suwit, the natural resources and environment minister, said the Thai delegation had to make the move after the committee ignored Thailand's concern that the consideration of the management plan would complicate Thai-Cambodian border dispute.
"They ignored it and they did not care about our sovereignty and territory," Suwit said.
"They cared only about the conservation of the temple. Actually, we told them that if Cambodia withdraws its troops from the temple, the conservation can go ahead. The troop withdrawal will allow the conservation to be done. No one will interfere with it. No damages will be done if no one fires from the site."
Suwit said the Thai delegation had tried to no avail to explain the need to defer the meeting on the management plan to a later date.
"So, I think that we should not take a risk. If we take a risk, the vote of the committee may affect us and affect our sovereignty. I talked to the delegation and we agreed to withdraw as a member of the World Heritage convention," Suwit said.
Following the withdrawal, the World Heritage Committee could no longer force Thailand to compile to its decision, Suwit added.
He said he believed the committee would not consider the management plan after Thailand's withdrawal but if it still goes ahead with the consideration, its decision would have no effect on Bangkok.
Cambodia wants to press ahead with the World Heritage Committee's meeting on the management of 4.6-square-km space around the ancient Hindu temple.
The World Court ruled in 1962 that the temple situated on the Thai-Cambodian border, belongs to Cambodia, but stopped short of making a ruling on the ownership of land surrounding the ancient temple.
Noppadon blasts Suwit for "failure"
Bangkok Post, 26 June 2011
Noppadon Pattama, a lawyer for former prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva, on Sunday strongly criticised National Resources and Environment Minister Suwit Khunkitti for withdrawing Thailand from the World Heritage Convention.
Mr Noppadon, a former foreign minister of the Thaksin administration, said Mr Suwit, as expected, failed to convince other members of the World Heritage Convention to postpone consideration of Cambodia's proposed management plan for the Preah Vihear temple.
"You failed because you have few friends in the world forum," he wrote in his personal Facebook page.
Mr Noppadon said the withdrawal from the World Heritage Convention would cause considerable damage to Thailand, which would no longer be able to list its ancient ruins and national parks as world heritage sites.
He said Thailand could take other actions to protect its territoral sovereignty than resigning from the World Heritage Convention.
25 June, 2011
On The Borderline
On the Borderline
Source: Aljazeera, 25 June 2011
An ancient temple on the border between Thailand and Cambodia is at the heart of a deadly territorial dispute.
An ancient temple on the border between Thailand and Cambodia is at the heart of a deadly territorial dispute, creating some of the fiercest fighting in southeast Asia for years.
Twenty-seven people have been killed since February in clashes along the border, while many more have been injured and tens of thousands of villagers have been forced to flee.
Both governments claim ownership of the 4.6 square kilometres of land surrounding the temple. But some say nationalism and domestic politics are the real driving forces behind the conflict.
On this edition of 101 East, we go to both sides of the borderline to look at the fight for Preah Vihear.
Who suffers the most from the conflict?
By Ou Virak, the president of the Cambodian Centre for Human Rights
The hostilities over Preah Vihear and other border temples have become a rallying point for nationalist sentiment in both Cambodia and Thailand. While uncertainty remains as to the cause of the recent clashes, nationalist forces in both countries have used the issue to score political points.
The extents to which both governments have gone to paint the other as the cause of these tensions have been to the detriment of civilians on either side of the border who have borne, and who continue to bear, the brunt of this cynical and politicised conflict.
The clashes, which were previously confined to the area surrounding Preah Vihear temple, spread in pockets in April and May this year along a 150 kilometre stretch of the shared border. Given the fragility of the peace between the two countries, hundreds of thousands of civilians on either side of this stretch of the border now live in constant fear of displacement resulting from any resumption of hostilities.
As the geographical scope of the clashes increased, so too did their intensity and the resulting humanitarian fallout. While a clash at Preah Vihear in April 2009 resulted in the temporary relocation of 1,660 civilians on the Cambodian side of the border, it is reported that as many as 85,000 civilians on either side of the border were displaced as a result of the most recent series of clashes.
Of even greater concern are the nefarious tactics and weapons that have been used. When hostilities broke out in February this year, Cambodia shelled a residential area 10 kilometres inside Thai territory killing one civilian and damaging seven homes and a school. In response to this attack, Thailand fired shells 27 kilometers into Cambodian territory and resorted to the use of cluster munitions – justified, according to Thai sources, on the basis of Cambodia's resort to indiscriminate shelling.
The widening geographical scope of the conflict is such that its consequences are being felt by an ever greater number of civilians. The use of indiscriminate tactics places these people in the firing line. While civilians have returned to their homes, they live in constant fear of a resumption of hostilities. It is only when the Cambodian and Thai governments put their people before politics and resolve this issue peacefully and conclusively that any semblance of normalcy can return to civilian life at the border.
Source: Aljazeera, 25 June 2011
An ancient temple on the border between Thailand and Cambodia is at the heart of a deadly territorial dispute.
An ancient temple on the border between Thailand and Cambodia is at the heart of a deadly territorial dispute, creating some of the fiercest fighting in southeast Asia for years.
Twenty-seven people have been killed since February in clashes along the border, while many more have been injured and tens of thousands of villagers have been forced to flee.
Both governments claim ownership of the 4.6 square kilometres of land surrounding the temple. But some say nationalism and domestic politics are the real driving forces behind the conflict.
On this edition of 101 East, we go to both sides of the borderline to look at the fight for Preah Vihear.
Who suffers the most from the conflict?
By Ou Virak, the president of the Cambodian Centre for Human Rights
The hostilities over Preah Vihear and other border temples have become a rallying point for nationalist sentiment in both Cambodia and Thailand. While uncertainty remains as to the cause of the recent clashes, nationalist forces in both countries have used the issue to score political points.
The extents to which both governments have gone to paint the other as the cause of these tensions have been to the detriment of civilians on either side of the border who have borne, and who continue to bear, the brunt of this cynical and politicised conflict.
The clashes, which were previously confined to the area surrounding Preah Vihear temple, spread in pockets in April and May this year along a 150 kilometre stretch of the shared border. Given the fragility of the peace between the two countries, hundreds of thousands of civilians on either side of this stretch of the border now live in constant fear of displacement resulting from any resumption of hostilities.
As the geographical scope of the clashes increased, so too did their intensity and the resulting humanitarian fallout. While a clash at Preah Vihear in April 2009 resulted in the temporary relocation of 1,660 civilians on the Cambodian side of the border, it is reported that as many as 85,000 civilians on either side of the border were displaced as a result of the most recent series of clashes.
Of even greater concern are the nefarious tactics and weapons that have been used. When hostilities broke out in February this year, Cambodia shelled a residential area 10 kilometres inside Thai territory killing one civilian and damaging seven homes and a school. In response to this attack, Thailand fired shells 27 kilometers into Cambodian territory and resorted to the use of cluster munitions – justified, according to Thai sources, on the basis of Cambodia's resort to indiscriminate shelling.
The widening geographical scope of the conflict is such that its consequences are being felt by an ever greater number of civilians. The use of indiscriminate tactics places these people in the firing line. While civilians have returned to their homes, they live in constant fear of a resumption of hostilities. It is only when the Cambodian and Thai governments put their people before politics and resolve this issue peacefully and conclusively that any semblance of normalcy can return to civilian life at the border.
Preah Vihear : l'envers du décors
Preah Vihear : l'envers du décors
Gavroche, 24.6.11
http://www.gavroche-thailande.com/actualites/societe/1650-preah-vihear-l-envers-du-decors
La multiplication des affrontements militaires meurtriers autour du temple frontalier n'est pas seulement le résultat d'une historique dispute territoriale. Elle illustre aussi la collison des ambitions opposées de Bangkok et Phnom Penh, matinées de contentieux affairistes.
Publiés le 24 avril dans la presse siamoise, les clichés montrant d’un coté l’envoi de renforts thaïlandais dans les districts frontaliers de Surin, et de l’autre les batteries cambodgiennes de missiles Katyousha font réfléchir.
S’agit-il, entre deux pays voisins membres de la même organisation régionale – l’Asean – d'une situation normale ? Est-ce juste la preuve que, de part et d'autre, le nationalisme débridé des généraux l’emporte sur les diplomates et les juristes ? Négatif.
Ce qui se passe depuis des mois à cette frontière khmérothaïlandaise est la preuve que la crise engendrée par la dispute territoriale autour du temple de Preah Vihear n’est plus une succession « d’incidents » ou de rodomontades galonnées, mais bel et bien une bataille rangée entre Bangkok et Phnom Penh autour d'une conception erronée et fétide de la souveraineté, attisée sans doute par des contentieux affairistes locaux.
Tout, en effet, remonte à la surface à la faveur des meurtriers duels d'artillerie : l’antagonisme historique, les clichés populistes, les frustrations politiques et l’opposition irréductible d'une partie des élites au pouvoir. Il n’est plus rare, désormais, d’entendre des responsables thaïlandais parler du « Khmer rouge Hun Sen », qualifié au passage « de paysan assassin ». Une accusation pour le moins cynique de la part d’une administration thaïe qui apporta si longtemps son soutien aux fidèles de Pol Pot... La symétrie, coté Cambodgien, voit proliférer à Phnom Penh les accusations contre les « exploiteurs » et les « maquereaux » siamois accusés, pêle-mêle, de faire suer le burnous aux clandestins khmers et d’attirer leurs femmes dans les filets de la prostitution. Les clichés outranciers, sur fond de gesticulations kaki, deviennent des lieux communs.
Le temple de Preah Vihear et la délimitation controversée de la Cour internationale de justice ne sont finalement plus le sujet. L’Unesco a d’ailleurs fait des propositions. Son ancien directeur général, Koïchiro Matsuura, spécialement chargé de cette affaire par sa successeure, la bulgare Irina Bokova, pourrait fort bien assurer une médiation avantageuse pour les deux pays. « La sauvegarde culturelle et l’exploitation historique conjointe de ce site par les autorités thaïe et cambodgienne seraient un formidable symbole », nous confiait récemment cette dernière.
L’agence culturelle de l’ONU serait prête à faire beaucoup plus si l’opportunité lui était donnée. Son label « Patrimoine mondial » pourrait par exemple être attribué à une fondation binationale, dirigé par une présidence tournante et un comité scientifique paritaire. Folie ? « Des solutions existent, nous a plusieurs fois répété Irina Bokova. Cela aurait, en plus, une formidable valeur d'exemple ».
Impossible, malheureusement, de concilier une telle approche avec la surenchère actuelle, sur fond de « souveraineté » bafouée. Car c’est bien de cela qu’il s’agit : souveraineté d'un État thaïlandais qui se prétend moderne mais reste obsédé par les concessions territoriales d’antan contre souveraineté d’un État cambodgien prédateur pour qui seuls valent les rapports de force.
La bataille s’incarne en plus pile dans les hommes
Abhisit Vejjajiva, technocrate occidentalisé pétri d’arrogance aristocratique contre Hun Sen, despote affairiste habitué à négocier des compromis l’arme au pied. Idem pour les forces en présence : une armée thaïe pressée de défendre le peuple du nord-est déshérité dont elle a, à Bangkok, traqué, arrêté et parfois liquidé les porte-paroles en « chemises rouges », face à une armée khmère peu économe de ses soldats et habituée à tirer avant de négocier.
Moralité : l’antagonisme frontalier, avec ce qu’il réveille de ressentiments enfouis et de revendications mal assumées, sert les intérêts des deux gouvernements qui s’accommodent fort bien des souffrances infligées aux populations locales. Rien de tel, dans une Thaïlande politiquement et géographiquement divisée, qu’une opération musclée de police aux frontières pour démontrer aux paysans de l’Isan, entre Buriram, Surin et Ubon Ratchathani, que l’administration de Bangkok veille sur eux. Rien de tel, dans un Cambodge géré par un Premier ministre accusé de se comporter comme un parrain mafieux, qu’une bonne occasion pour celui-ci de réaffirmer sa force. Le reste, du coté des districts frontaliers de Surin où casinos et marché noir prolifèrent, rime sans doute avec rivalités sonnantes et trébuchantes. Entre la Thaïlande et le Cambodge, la guerre pour Preah Vihear reflète l’envers du décor.
Richard Werly
Gavroche, 24.6.11
http://www.gavroche-thailande.com/actualites/societe/1650-preah-vihear-l-envers-du-decors
La multiplication des affrontements militaires meurtriers autour du temple frontalier n'est pas seulement le résultat d'une historique dispute territoriale. Elle illustre aussi la collison des ambitions opposées de Bangkok et Phnom Penh, matinées de contentieux affairistes.
Publiés le 24 avril dans la presse siamoise, les clichés montrant d’un coté l’envoi de renforts thaïlandais dans les districts frontaliers de Surin, et de l’autre les batteries cambodgiennes de missiles Katyousha font réfléchir.
S’agit-il, entre deux pays voisins membres de la même organisation régionale – l’Asean – d'une situation normale ? Est-ce juste la preuve que, de part et d'autre, le nationalisme débridé des généraux l’emporte sur les diplomates et les juristes ? Négatif.
Ce qui se passe depuis des mois à cette frontière khmérothaïlandaise est la preuve que la crise engendrée par la dispute territoriale autour du temple de Preah Vihear n’est plus une succession « d’incidents » ou de rodomontades galonnées, mais bel et bien une bataille rangée entre Bangkok et Phnom Penh autour d'une conception erronée et fétide de la souveraineté, attisée sans doute par des contentieux affairistes locaux.
Tout, en effet, remonte à la surface à la faveur des meurtriers duels d'artillerie : l’antagonisme historique, les clichés populistes, les frustrations politiques et l’opposition irréductible d'une partie des élites au pouvoir. Il n’est plus rare, désormais, d’entendre des responsables thaïlandais parler du « Khmer rouge Hun Sen », qualifié au passage « de paysan assassin ». Une accusation pour le moins cynique de la part d’une administration thaïe qui apporta si longtemps son soutien aux fidèles de Pol Pot... La symétrie, coté Cambodgien, voit proliférer à Phnom Penh les accusations contre les « exploiteurs » et les « maquereaux » siamois accusés, pêle-mêle, de faire suer le burnous aux clandestins khmers et d’attirer leurs femmes dans les filets de la prostitution. Les clichés outranciers, sur fond de gesticulations kaki, deviennent des lieux communs.
Le temple de Preah Vihear et la délimitation controversée de la Cour internationale de justice ne sont finalement plus le sujet. L’Unesco a d’ailleurs fait des propositions. Son ancien directeur général, Koïchiro Matsuura, spécialement chargé de cette affaire par sa successeure, la bulgare Irina Bokova, pourrait fort bien assurer une médiation avantageuse pour les deux pays. « La sauvegarde culturelle et l’exploitation historique conjointe de ce site par les autorités thaïe et cambodgienne seraient un formidable symbole », nous confiait récemment cette dernière.
L’agence culturelle de l’ONU serait prête à faire beaucoup plus si l’opportunité lui était donnée. Son label « Patrimoine mondial » pourrait par exemple être attribué à une fondation binationale, dirigé par une présidence tournante et un comité scientifique paritaire. Folie ? « Des solutions existent, nous a plusieurs fois répété Irina Bokova. Cela aurait, en plus, une formidable valeur d'exemple ».
Impossible, malheureusement, de concilier une telle approche avec la surenchère actuelle, sur fond de « souveraineté » bafouée. Car c’est bien de cela qu’il s’agit : souveraineté d'un État thaïlandais qui se prétend moderne mais reste obsédé par les concessions territoriales d’antan contre souveraineté d’un État cambodgien prédateur pour qui seuls valent les rapports de force.
La bataille s’incarne en plus pile dans les hommes
Abhisit Vejjajiva, technocrate occidentalisé pétri d’arrogance aristocratique contre Hun Sen, despote affairiste habitué à négocier des compromis l’arme au pied. Idem pour les forces en présence : une armée thaïe pressée de défendre le peuple du nord-est déshérité dont elle a, à Bangkok, traqué, arrêté et parfois liquidé les porte-paroles en « chemises rouges », face à une armée khmère peu économe de ses soldats et habituée à tirer avant de négocier.
Moralité : l’antagonisme frontalier, avec ce qu’il réveille de ressentiments enfouis et de revendications mal assumées, sert les intérêts des deux gouvernements qui s’accommodent fort bien des souffrances infligées aux populations locales. Rien de tel, dans une Thaïlande politiquement et géographiquement divisée, qu’une opération musclée de police aux frontières pour démontrer aux paysans de l’Isan, entre Buriram, Surin et Ubon Ratchathani, que l’administration de Bangkok veille sur eux. Rien de tel, dans un Cambodge géré par un Premier ministre accusé de se comporter comme un parrain mafieux, qu’une bonne occasion pour celui-ci de réaffirmer sa force. Le reste, du coté des districts frontaliers de Surin où casinos et marché noir prolifèrent, rime sans doute avec rivalités sonnantes et trébuchantes. Entre la Thaïlande et le Cambodge, la guerre pour Preah Vihear reflète l’envers du décor.
Richard Werly
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)