Editor’s Note:

Below is a translation provided by the Bangkok Post of Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen’s remarks on Nov 8th regarding the Thaksin Affair.

What is going on in Thai-Cambodian relations is essentially a problem between me and Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva. I would urge people who wish to comment on this issue to do their research. When I started to work in the political arena, the Thai PM was still a child running around.

On Closing the Borders

The Thai side has been quoted in the press saying that it would pressure Cambodia by sealing off the border. I say, close it if you want to. Cambodia will follow suit.

If Thailand orders the border shut, don’t stop at blocking the flow of people. Because Cambodia would close it too, and we will block economic activities as well. We will forbid all Thai goods from coming into the Cambodia market.

Even one pig would not be able to cross.  Cambodia can import every Thai product from other countries. Let me cite as an example the statistics on Thai-Cambodian trade in 2008. Thailand’s export to Cambodia was worth about US$2 billion while Cambodia’s export to Thailand was only US$90 million.
Still, I agree with the Thai PM’s statement that [foreign relations] measures to be issued won’t affect people in the two countries because I myself do not wish to do so [shut the border] either. It is not in line with the idea of cooperation under the Asean framework.

Although I do not want to have to resort to such a measure, the Thai leader is threatening me so much. Therefore, I am giving an order to all relevant Cambodian officials to be prepared for it [closing the border and banning Thai products].

On Thaksin’s Appointment as Economic Advisor

As for the revocation of the MoU, it is Mr Abhisit who has put the common interest of both countries under harm.

Regarding the statement issued by the Thai Foreign Ministry on Nov 5, in which Mr Abhisit claimed he could not stay put when Thailand was humiliated, I will tell you what do the Thai people really think.

The Red Shirts support the appointment [of Thaksin as adviser]. The Yellow Shirts are angry and have expressed their opposition and protest. There is also another group which is indifferent and stays silent. These people know that the Hun Sen government is a good one, that we made them feel comfortable _ with money to spend _ when Thaksin was prime minister. The harder PM Abhisit pushes us, the stronger the reaction will be.

PM Abhisit warned me not to become a pawn in Thaksin’s game. We are nobody’s tool. I also wonder who is being used by whom. Abhisit let himself be used by Thaksin. When Thaksin made an opening, Abhisit jumped out and retaliated without thinking, without considering the national interest.

[He] said from Tokyo about the MoU cancellation. Thai people should consider the issue for themselves: the assets belong to the state but it is the personal matter that caused the cooperation to stop. Can Thai people accept that? Can someone like this serve as the Asean leader?

In 2012, Asean will cooperate in many areas. Member states will open the borders so that people can travel freely. We will adopt the same currency.

But Thailand is evidently attacking Cambodia. It sent troops to occupy Cambodian land.

Where was Thailand during the Angkor era? They claimed that Cambodia trespassed into Thai territory, but how could we? Study your history and see who the aggressor is.

Red Shirts’ Permission

On the issue of the appointment of former Thai PM as adviser, I would like to declare, loud and clear, to the Thai people so they realise that as far as this problem is concerned, it is PM Abhisit who has meddled with Cambodia.

Think about it carefully and determine who is at fault here, Hun Sen or Abhisit? There is no way I will retreat.

Cambodia has appointed many foreigners as advisers, both Korean and Australian nationals. What does the Thai PM have to fear if Thaksin resides in Cambodia?

Thaksin has been around the world and he [Abhisit] has done nothing about it. He has just been to Sri Lanka and nothing was done about that. Only after Thaksin said he would come to Cambodia that our country has been targeted.

I already explained this at the meeting in Hua Hin on Oct 23. I have tried to be patient and remain silent. But the Thai PM and Thailand have kept on criticising me.

Thaksin is not our tool. I want to employ Thakin’s experience, to ask him for help on Cambodia’s economic affairs. I would like to take this opportunity to ask for permission from the Red Shirt brothers and Puea Thai Party to allow me to bring Than Thaksin to Cambodia to help with our economy.

Asean

Asean Secretary-General Surin Pitsuwan issued a statement urging for a solution to the problem. I agree with him. But it seems the Asean Sec Gen’s proposal is not in line with the Thai government’s stance.  The truth is, Cambodia is always ready for a dialogue, whether it is a bilateral or multilateral one. But the Thai government rejected it.

Than Surin has to understand, though, that Asean should consider these problems comprehensively and solve them all in one go. These include the Thaksin problem, the Sept 19 coup, the intrusion into Cambodia’s territory, the appointment of Thaksin as Cambodia’s adviser. Cambodia is prepared to engage either at a bilateral or multilateral level.

I actually wanted to raise this issue at the Hua Hin summit but I restrained the urge. Think of it as my consideration towards Thailand and Mr Abhisit.

To solve this issue, we must tackle it from the origin. Since this has to do with Thaksin, we have to start at the Sept 19, 2006 coup.

If Abhisit is so sure of himself, then he should call an election. What are you afraid of? Is it that you are afraid you will no longer be the PM? Are you afraid that Puea Thai party will win the election?

I am Prime Minister of Cambodia who has received two-thirds of the vote in the Cambodian parliament. How many does Than Abhisit have? You’ve stolen somebody else’s chair to seat yourself in. You claim other people’s property as your own. How can we respect that?

On Rumours Thaksin has been in Cambodia previously

As for the rumour that Thaksin has been in Cambodia many times, I deny it. It is evident that your intelligence is flawed. It reflects the weakness in your information gathering ability.

International Law

Referring to the accusation that Cambodia does not respect the Thai court, I don’t see any value in the Thai justice system worthy of respect.

In the past, Khieu Samphan or Noun Chea [of the Khmer Rouge] were allowed to live [given refuge] in Thailand before they were arrested upon entering Cambodia. Thailand had signed a pact not to support the Khmer Rouge.

Thailand did more than violate international law. It had signed a peace pact. And it violated many things. Thai people should consider this. If Thailand does not respect international law, how can you expect us to respect Thai law?

Abhisit is so buried in problems himself he may not survive. He has problems with all the neighbouring countries _ Laos, Cambodia, Malaysia and Burma. He also has problems in the South of Thailand, problems about the Yellow Shirts, Red Shirts, Blue Shirts, White Shirts, and Puea Thai. The Yellow Shirts aren’t in harmony themselves. What does Thailand have that Cambodia has to respect?

Thaksin’s appointment has nothing to do with Thailand. I told Abhisit when I met him that Thaksin is my friend. Friends do not betray friends. Friends cannot feed friends to the tiger.

So, if you want to tear up anything, do so. If you want to shut down anything, do so. It’s probably not convenient to keep things open anyway.

We will probably have to withdraw the 911 [special force] unit within this week. A small force should be enough.

photo: Hun Sen at press conference Nov 8th at Phnom Penh Airport (AP)

Prime Minister Hun Sen is playing a dangerous diplomatic game with Thailand by provocatively appointing fugitive ex-Thai PM Thaksin Shinawatra as his economic advisor that triggered an angry and a retaliatory chain reaction from the Thai government. Political pundits from both countries are concerned that a diplomatic war of words, shuttling between Bangkok and Phnom Penh, will unavoidably spark armed clashes and cause irreversible damages to years of good relations.

But who is interfering in whose affairs?

Thailand is angrily claiming that Mr. Hun Sen’s appointment of Mr. Thaksin as his government economic advisor against the will of the Thai government, was an interference of Thai internal affairs and the Thai justice system in a deliberate provocation attempt aimed at the destabilization of the Thai government and to tarnish the image of the Thai justice system which convicted Mr. Thaksin of fraud.

The Cambodia government, however, responded that Cambodia is a sovereign nation and has every right to appoint anyone as its advisor as it sees fit, and claimed that the Thai objection over its appointment of Mr. Thaksin is an interference of its internal affairs.

Politically and diplomatically speaking, both sides had interfered to some degree in each other’s internal affairs. By appointing Mr. Thaksin, who is a fugitive after being convicted of fraud, as his economic advisor, Mr. Hun Sen had set out to interfere with the judicial and internal affairs of Thailand in order to set an old score over Preah Vihear issue. On the other hand, by objecting to appointment of Mr. Thaksin by Cambodia, which is a sovereign nation, Thailand is also interfering in the internal affairs and the sovereignty of Cambodia.

But what will Cambodia gain by provoking a diplomatic war with Thailand?

Prime Minister Hun Sen’s troublesome and provocative action has served no purpose in the promotion of peace and good neighbourly co-existence between the two people who shared a very similar historical cultural identity. Beside incurring the ire and the wrath of the Thai government, the appointment of Mr. Thaksin, had set out a chain of retaliatory reactions that only harm Cambodia’s interests and that of the Cambodian people.

Mr. Hun Sen had tactically devised his strategy of appointing Mr. Thaksin to irk the Thai government. First, Mr. Hun Sen wants to get back at Mr. Abhisit over Preah Vihear and the maritime border issues. And secondly, he had set out to destabilise Mr. Abhisit government in order to facilitate and to pave the way for the return of Thaksin, whom Mr. Hun Sen called “eternal friend”, to power as he cannot work with the Abhisit government. Mr. Hun Sen’s appointment of Mr. Thaksin was also a deliberate attempt to divert public attention away from Mr. Sam Rainsy’s accusations of border violations by Vietnam on the eastern borders. By creating a diversion from the larger and more serious territorial violations by his other “eternal friend” – Vietnam – Mr. Hun Sen hoped to garner supports by pitting one Thai against another by appointing Mr. Thaksin.

Mr. Hun Sen is wrong to think that he can use the “divide and conquer” rule against the Abhisit government in order to help his eternal Thai friend. His action would only alienate the Thai people from Mr. Thaksin and would serve to cement the rule of Mr. Abhisit as the Thai people will unite behind him because they consider Mr. Thaksin to be a traitor serving the interests of a foreign nation that is presently at odds with their own country. In fact, this theory has been proven correct in recent poll surveys conducted in Thailand which seen Mr. Abhisit’s popularity soared by threefold.

Thaksin, rightly or wrongly is a convicted fraudster, and being unable to set foot on Khmer and Thai soil, will not be able to serve his full capacity as a Cambodian government advisor to promote trades and investments between the two countries. And, unlike Mr. Lee Myung-bak, the current president of South Korea who was once appointed Mr. Hun Sen’s economic advisor, Mr. Thaksin, and again being unable to set foot on Khmer and Thai soil, will not be able to entice billions of dollars of trades and investments to Cambodia.

Furthermore, by triggering a diplomatic spat with Thailand, Mr. Hun Sen must be aware that it is Cambodia who will suffer more than Thailand. Cambodia has received some financial aid and loans from Thailand and many migrant Cambodian workers and students are currently working and studying in Thailand. On top of this, thousands of seasonal Cambodian labourers have been crossing the borders to work in Thailand everyday. Thai government has announced the suspension of aid to Cambodia and threatened to close the borders which will impact greatly on the livelihood of the Cambodian seasonal migrant workers.

The Thai losses
Many Thai academics and former diplomats viewed the recall of Thai ambassador to Cambodia as an over-reaction that had incurred the retaliatory reaction from the Cambodian government to the detriments of Thai national interests. Notwithstanding the loss of Cambodia’s interests, Thailand retaliatory actions of annulling the land border and maritime border agreements had not been at the interests of Thailand either. By annulling the agreements, Thailand has given Cambodia ammunitions to bring the case to the UN and the International Court of Justice, if Cambodia chooses to do so. And if Thailand had carried out its threats of border closures, Thailand will sure lose more economic benefits than Cambodia. Thai businesses had invested heavily in Cambodia. The two-way trades between Cambodia and Thailand, mostly through border checkpoints, amounted to over $2 billion dollars annually. Thai exports to Cambodia accounted to 80% of the two-way trades. By closing the borders, Thailand’s trades and businesses in Cambodia will be at the losing end.

Cambodia’s villain status
Mr. Hun Sen’s action had also damaged Cambodia’s status as a victim of the current Khmer-Thai border dispute. The world now sees Cambodia as being the villain and not the victim any more because they see Mr. Hun Sen’s action as a deliberate attempt to demonise, destabilise and to interfere in the internal affairs of Thailand.

Mr. Hun Sen’s action is wrong in trying to set an old score in this way. If Mr. Hun Sen wants to act tough against Thailand over Preah Vihear and the maritime border issues, he should have acted tough since the beginning by bringing the matter to the UN or International Court. To irk Thailand in this way will not achieve anything, but only create further problems that is perilous to Cambodia’s national interests.

Mr Hun Sen must also be mindful that a policy of supporting an individual leader against a foreign state has not been beneficial to Cambodia’s national interests, as has been shown in the past, because individual leaders come and go, but the state remain intact. He must have known that Sihanouk’s policy of a personality cult politics has brought irreparable damages to Cambodia’s national interests in the 1950s and 1960s. Sihanouk was a very good friend of Mao Tse-tung and Chou Enlai of China, Nehru of India, Pham Van Dong of Vietnam, Sukarno of Indonesia, Tito of Yugoslavia, Kim Il Sung of North Korea etc, etc. When these leaders died, Cambodia and Sihanouk lost their patrons and therefore the benefits.

By supporting Thaksin against the legitimate Thai government, even though it came to power through a constitutional coup d’etat, Mr. Hun Sen had angered the majority of the Thai people and had caused Mr. Thaksin to alienate many of his supporters because they consider his acceptance of the appointment by a foreign government as unpatriotic.

Mr. Hun Sen’s appointment of Mr. Thaksin is wrong. In the long term, his political gamesmanship is dangerous and will not benefit anyone, not even himself, as Thailand will retaliate and set out to find ways to destabilise his rule and eventually bring down his government one day as Thailand had done in the past by using the Issarak Movement and the Khmer Serei Movement against Sihanouk in the 1940s and 1950s.

Instead of creating rifts in the region, Mr. Hun Sen should be working towards creating a favourable condition to reaching a border resolution and regional peace, not working toward creating more troubles and instability in the region. Thanks to the maturity of the military leaders on the ground, unlike their political mentors, the border situations remain calm due to their restraint. As Thai prominent historian Charnvit Kasetsiri puts it “The only positive factor was that the military on both sides had so far stayed clear of the political gamesmanship”. And one would have hoped that the situation will remain that way until the political waters had calmed down.

Editor’s Note: Syndicated with permission from the blogger’s website found at http://khmerization.blogspot.com/