Thai's Incursion Into Cambodia Soil

The current standoff between my Cambodia and the neigbour to the west, Thailand at our Khmer Preah Vihear temple is in no way at peace any time sooner. The Thais were mad because we erected 3 flags: UNESCO flag, World Heritage flag and Cambodian flag on top of our Preah Vihear temple. They said that we did things without consulted them first. I think this is totally absurd. The areas are clearly Cambodia soil. The Thais have to get over with it and adhere to rule of international laws and treaties that were made between our two countries.

With all the tensions between our troops and the Thai intruders, we must be vigilant as ever. Just yesterday in Khmer soil near Phnom Trob, which is about 3km from Preah Vihear Temple, a Thai soldier stepped on the landmine and was killed instantly. The Thais have no reason to come down from Phnom Dongrek into our Cambodia. The area Phnom Trob, that these Thai invaders patrolling are Cambodia soil because only in our Khmer soil that is littered with landmines when they were laid during the civil war from 1970 to the mid 1990's.



I read the news there will be a joint de-mining effort to de-mine the areas before the border is demarcated. This really bothers me a lot. I just want to shout: IT'S CAMBODIA SOIL !! CAMBODIA WILL DO THE DE-MINING ALONE. If we let the Thai de-mining with us on our land, they will lay claim to our land after the landmines are cleared. Let me repeat only Cambodia soil -- Cambodia side of the border has the landmines.

The border demarcation is TOTALLY SEPARATE from the de-mining task. It should go first before the de-mining take place. It's simple. After we know the border, if the landmines are on the Thai side, the Thai can de-mining on their side. They can do anything they please on their side. If the mines are on Cambodia side, Cambodia alone will de-mining on our side. But again, I guarantee only the side of Cambodia soil would have the landmines. To demarcate the border, Thailand and us must stick the the agreement of the maps in 1904-1907 treaties. I couldn't have said any better than our Khmer compatriot, Chan Veasna where wrote his editorial to Phnom Penh Post that "If the 1904, 1907 maps are not used, it would be a betrayal of the treaties and a tragedy, as it will set a precedent that triggers future violations of subsequent [border] treaties".

On the other hand, Thailand are continually to live in the state of denial in their confused generations. Each of their school children is teached from falsified history and indotrinated to hate Khmer (Cambodian)at early age. What gain has they profitted from this kind of mentality is yet I still don't know.

Western scholars widely published Thai culture and tradition were derived from Khmer. I think this is very true. Many Thais are continuing to deny the facts. When I come to think of it, all Thai achitectural structures were modeled after Khmer's Angkor Wat -- this include the Royal Palace in Bangkok. Thai writing are modified from Khmer. Thai "Ratcha Sap" "Rea-chea Sap" royal language is typically Khmer language. Furthermore, there's a history book written by a Thai historian implicating that the Thai royal(king) may have been a descendant of Khmer commoner from the present day province of Takeo, Cambodia. I have to read more to confirm this fact.



Taken this into account, Thai King Mongkut (reigned 1851-1868) have ordered our Angkor Wat to be disassembled stone by stone and moved to Bangkok. When the task was so massive and impossible to do it. He ordered the smaller temple Prasat Ta Prohm to be disasembled instead.

I can see here, the descendant of the Thai King was a renegade from Khmer that's why he was so obsessed of everything Khmer's that he wanted to reestablish his identity by wanted to move Angkor Wat to Bangkok. Wanted to move Angkor Wat to Bangkok ? This truly was insane. I know the Thais cannot accept their king is a descendant of Khmer commoner from Takeo province. So my advice to them is to be open minded. That's all I can say.


Please continue to read below research on how Thai and Khmer languages derived from. The materials were published by the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) in America.

Vanak.
Phnom Penh


http://www.lmp.ucla.edu/Profile.aspx?LangID=80&menu=004
[Thai] HISTORY
The Thai, who originated in China, migrated into the Indochina peninsula before the current era. Initially dominated by the Mon and then later, beginning in the tenth century, by the Khmer,

the Thai gained their own independence in the mid-thirteenth century. Shortly thereafter, the first script--known as the Sukhotai and distinct from that used by the Khmer--was developed for Thai.

The script now in use is a more or less modified variant of this and other intervening scripts used during the reign of other monarchs.

ORTHOGRAPHY
Thai uses a script that is basically alphabetic in nature with some elements of a syllabic system. In origin it derives from an Indic script which was adapted first by the Khmer and then the Thai.

There is a fairly good approximation between the scriptand pronunciation.

LINGUISTIC SKETCH
Thai has borrowed heavily from Mon and Khmer.


http://www.lmp.ucla.edu/Profile.aspx?LangID=75&menu=004
[Khmer]HISTORY
The history of the language is distinguished into several periods: Old Khmer (the seventh to eighth century), Angkor period (the ninth to fifteenth century), Middle Khmer (the sixteenth to eighteenth century), and Modern Khmer. The language is attested from the earliest periods by numerous inscriptions, and then during the Middle Khmer period by extensive writings on palm leaf manuscripts, including the Khmer version of the Ramayana, a well-known Hindu epic about Rama.

During the Angkor period, Khmer influenced the surrounding languages, especially the unrelated languages of Lao and Thai, and they borrowed heavily from Khmer.

REFERENCES
Campbell, G. L. 1991. Compendium of the World's Languages, Vol. 1 -2. London and New York: Routledge.

Diffloth, G. 1992. "Khmer." In W. Bright, ed. International Encyclopedia of Linguistics, Vol. 2:271-275. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Grimes, B. F., ed. 1992. Ethnologue, Languages of the World. Dallas, TX: Summer Institute of Linguistics.

Linguistic Society of America. 1992. Directory of Programs in Linguistics in the United States and Canada. Washington, DC: Linguistic Society of America.

Ruhlen, M. 1987. A Guide to the World's Languages, Vol. 1: Classification. London: Edward Arnold.

Smyth, D. A. 1994. "Cambodia: Language Situation." In R. E. Asher, ed. The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, Vol. 2:440. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

_____. 1994. "Cambodian." In R. E. Asher, ed. The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, Vol. 2:440-441. Oxford: Pergamon Press