Wednesday, August 26, 2009

Phay Siphan: The Preah Vihear issued with Thailand is merely a technical issue ... it is not a dispute between nations -sic!-

Phay Siphan: International resolution of the Preah Vihear dispute is the destruction of Hun Xen’s concluded 2000 MOU

Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Source: Everyday.com.kh
Translated from Khmer by Socheata for KI-Media

Phay Siphan, spokesman of the Council of Ministers, said that the resolution of the Preah Vihear temple dispute with Thailand through an international court is tantamount to the destruction of the 2000 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) [KI-Media note: the 2000 MOU was concluded between Hun Sen’s government and Thailand].
Phay Siphan told The Phnom Penh Post regarding the opposition wanting the government to bring this dispute issue to be resolved by an international court, that: “This is the freedom of the opposition. Up to now, we do not consider the Preah Vihear temple dispute as a dispute between nations. We consider the Preah Vihear temple dispute as a separate issue because we have prepared 70% of the map from Anlong Veng down to the Cham Yeam point already.”
He added: “Therefore, if we take this dispute to resolve outside [of the bilateral discussion with Thailand], this means that we are destroying the 2000 achievement. Therefore, the opposition party should revisit what was the gain from the 2000 MOU to the good cooperation between Cambodia and Thailand, in the sense of preserving peace, in the sense of the application of what we have agreed on since 1904 and 1907 and the map preparation in 1908. Do we want to sue each other to come up with a new map? In summary, the Preah Vihear issue is merely a technical issue, i.e. it is not a political affair.”
-----
KI-Media note: Phay Siphan seems to forget that the 2000 MOU did not stop Thailand from invading part of Cambodia. How many more Cambodian soldiers need to be killed for Phay Siphan to acknowledge this fact? As is, Thailand is also questioning the validity of all the treaties it concluded in 1904 and 1907.

No comments: