The Prince and Preah
Vihear<http://ki-media.blogspot.com/2009/10/prince-and-preah-vihear.html>

<http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_8up7h6T0Kzc/StAaPDjp7CI/AAAAAAAAOKw/g2aCxVw...>Prince
Damrong visiting Preah Vihear temple (2nd from right)

October 7, 2009
SUBHATRA BHUMIPRABHAS
SPECIAL TO THE NATION

Nationalism has clouded our view of the temple's ownership, argues one
academic. But history has the simple answer

On 30 January 1929, Prince Damrong Rajanupab arrived at Preah Vihear as head
of an official expedition from the Siamese court of King Prajadhipok (Rama
VII). There to welcome him was the French commissioner for the Cambodian
province along with the archaeologist Henri Parmentier, who was to act as
guide for the expedition's trip up Panom Dongrek mountain to see its famed
centuries-old Hindu temple.

The prince and the commissioner exchanged speeches of friendship at a
cheerful reception attended by the entourage of high-ranking Siamese
noblemen, before listening to a lecture on Preah Vihear Temple given by the
French archaeologist. Fluttering above this happy scene was the flag of
France.

"This is recorded history - a history that must not be forgotten by Thai
students," said historian Charnvit Kasetsiri, at a talk titled "The
Contested Temple" given recently at the Foreign Correspondents' Club of
Thailand.

"Prince Damrong accepted that Preah Vihear belonged to French Indochina,"
noted Charnvit, as he showed photographs of the prince and French
commissioner posing together beneath the French flag. But the history that
most Thai students are taught focuses on the loss of territory, he added,
citing a Thai textbook for Grade 6 students.

"It asks us to remember the loss of territories beginning with Penang and
ending with Preah Vihear Temple. But by ignoring Prince Damrong's visit in
1929, it effectively tells us to forget about the truth.

"This is history infected with nationalism."

Charnvit went on to show how the "infection" reaches beyond schoolbooks and
into tourism - a brochure welcoming tourists to Chiang Mai and Chiang Rai
talks about the "Losses of Territories and Survival of Siam", while Samut
Prakan's Muang Boran [Ancient City] contains a replica of Preah Vihear.

Nationalism and tourism go together, he concluded.

The current case of Preah Vihear reflects the kind of "selective history"
that stirs nationalistic feeling and leads to war-mongering threats to take
back "lost territory", he said.

Following Prince Damrong's visit, Preah Vihear was left in peace for over a
decade. Then, in 1940 the government of Field Marshal Plaek Pibulsongkram
added the Hindu temple to its list of Thai archaeological sites.

Though the addition was announced in the pages of the Royal Gazette, there
is no evidence that Cambodia's French rulers noticed it. In 1954, the year
after Cambodia won independence, Pibul sent Thai troops to occupy the area
around the Preah Vihear site. But Thai history tends to ignore this event,
preferring to focus on the claim made by King Sihanouk at the International
Court of Justice in 1959, which in 1962 awarded the temple to Cambodia.

Charnvit, now 67, recalled how nationalism was working on him the day he
heard of the "loss of territory" brought by the court's judgement.

"It was a shock because all the news, all the PR from the military
government, told us we were winning for sure," he said.

"We believed that Preah Vihear belonged to us. I was a 21-year-old student.
I was so angry. I marched with about a hundred Thammasat University students
up Rajdamnoen Avenue. I had a photo of King Sihanouk, which I tore apart,
threw down on the street and trampled."

Finally, Field Marshal Sarit Thanarat, leader of the military government at
the time, made an appearance on television to say the government had no
choice but to accept the ruling of the court.

Now, after almost half a century, the version of history that tells of the
"loss" of Preah Vihear has been brought up to stir nationalism in Thailand
once again, with nationalists saying they refuse to accept the International
Court's 1962 judgement.

Bad history creates false perceptions and false perceptions lead to conflict
between neighbours, the historian said.

"Our history texts must be revised and corrected to reflect the truth. Only
that way will we be able to live together peacefully in this age of
regionalism and globalisation."