Hun Sen seeks to 'internationalise' spat

GMT +07:00

Send suggestions

News » Local News

Hun Sen seeks to 'internationalise' spat

  • Published: 18/11/2009 at 12:00 AM
  • Newspaper section: News

Thailand's domestic turmoil has been further complicated by the political tempest that blew through Bangkok from Phnom Penh last week. For the first time, the protracted Thai political crisis is no longer wholly domestic but has direct foreign bearings from next door.

In a flurry of seemingly orchestrated offensive manoeuvres, Cambodia's Prime Minister Hun Sen has put the government of Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva on the back foot. Mr Hun Sen has achieved several objectives, whereas Mr Abhisit's government has yet to define what it wants out of the retaliatory spiral that has brought contemporary Thai-Cambodian relations to its nadir.

To be sure, Mr Hun Sen's deliberate provocation was designed and timed to rock the Abhisit government. It began with the Cambodian leader's invitation to. and warm reception of, Gen Chavalit Yongchaiyudh's visit to Phnom Penh in mid-October. At that time, Mr Hun Sen expressed sympathy for convicted and exiled Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, hinting the latter could find refuge in Cambodia.

At the Asean Summit in Cha-am a week later, Mr Hun Sen's second move was to follow through with statements to the media indicating that Thaksin should be made an adviser to the Cambodian government.

The Cambodian strongman then returned to Phnom Penh to officially appoint Thaksin as government adviser on the economy.

The fourth move was to invite Mr Thaksin to give a talk last week. All of these moves took place just prior to the Apec leaders' meeting and the inaugural Asean-US summit, which Mr Abhisit was to preside over as Asean chair.

The Abhisit government was behind Mr Hun Sen's curve balls throughout. It should have sent clearer and louder signals that avoided unnecessary ridicule, insult, condescension and sarcasm.

Instead, Mr Abhisit's press conference in Cha-am warned Mr Hun Sen not to be used as a pawn by Thaksin. If the Cambodian ambassador failed to show up when summoned by the Thai government, clear signals should have been sounded as well.

By the time Mr Hun Sen appointed Thaksin, the Abhisit government went ballistic when it should have been measured and nuanced. It could have recalled the Thai ambassador for consultations before sending him back to Phnom Penh.

The intensity and rapidity of Bangkok's level of responses, including the revocation of a memorandum of understanding on overlapping claims in the Gulf of Thailand and suspension of aid and soft loans, made the Abhisit government appear flustered and blustered.

Moreover, it reflected the Abhisit government's misguided estimation of Thailand's leverage over Cambodia and betrays its own shortcomings, which were discussed in detail in Mr Hun Sen's long interview last week.

Indeed, Mr Hun Sen has not been nice but he may have had his reasons for not being nice to Mr Abhisit's government. And there appears little the Thai leader can do about it.

Unlike bygone years, new geopolitical realities now mean Bangkok is merely one among many in the pecking order of importance to Cambodia. China, Vietnam, Russia, Japan, and even South Korea have been instrumental players in Cambodia's economic development. The Thai government needs to accept Cambodia's status as an up-and-coming emerging economy after decades of war, conflict and tragedy, with more than its fair share of natural resources that beckons partners near and far, and relative political stability alongside democratic legitimacy to boot.

On the other hand, Mr Hun Sen has been pent up on a number of old scores, as his interview revealed. The Cambodian leader was miffed, of course, when Mr Abhisit appointed a foreign minister who publicly called him a gangster on a nationalist stage where Mr Hun Sen was a ping-pong ball. Mr Abhisit's misjudgement on his foreign minister choice, owing to his own miscalculation and/or pressure from his backers, doomed Thai-Cambodian relations from the outset.

Moreover, Mr Hun Sen viewed the Abhisit government's reneging on Cambodia's registration of Preah Vihear Temple as a World Heritage Site as back-stabbing following Mr Abhisit's personal assurance that it could be discussed. The Abhisit government did little to rein in right-wing groups from demonstrating at Preah Vihear areas, some even demanding the return of the temple which belongs to Cambodia by international law.

The bilateral atmosphere was further poisoned by the Abhisit government's allowing Sam Rainsy, an opposition leader in Cambodian politics, to use a forum in Bangkok to attack Mr Hun Sen.

With the expulsion of a Thai diplomat and the arrest of a Thai engineer on spying charges, Mr Hun Sen has not flinched in the face of Thai retaliation. While he is settling old scores, Mr Hun Sen's persistence of harassment and taking sides in Thailand's deep-seated polarisation by allowing Thaksin to use Cambodia as a staging ground, would suggest that Phnom Penh is intent on carrying out this bilateral spat to its logical conclusion in regionalising and internationalising the Thai-Cambodian conflict.

Mr Hun Sen would have an edge not in bilateral dealings but in regional and international considerations, especially if the Abhisit government ratchets up retaliation and ends up with overreaction.

Mr Abhisit must now own up to his misjudgements.

A cabinet reshuffle is imperative. He should treat Mr Hun Sen with respect and appeal for Cambodia to stay out of Thai affairs like other countries, such as the United Kingdom and China, have done.

Most important, Mr Abhisit must come up with an overarching policy objective in order to locate and shape the political and diplomatic tools to achieve it. That objective should be to persuade Mr Hun Sen to not let Thaksin use Cambodian soil as his launch pad to battle his opponents.

  • Thitinan Pongsudhirak is Director of the Institute of Security and International Studies, Faculty of Political Science, Chulalongkorn University.

About the author

columnist
Writer: Thitinan Pongsudhirak
Position: Director of the Institute of Security and Internat

Share your thoughts

For more candid, lengthy, conversational and open discussion between one another, use our Forum

Report objectionable comments click here. Include: discussion #, commenter name, comment date / time as it looks on the page. Example: discussion 15: 09/01/2009 at 10:00 AM.

  • Peter

    Discussion 36 : 24/11/2009 at 12:44 PM36

    Well balanced, perceptive analysis of the shortcomings of Abhisit's Cambodia policy. The only point I disagree with is the final paragraph. Why does it matter where Thaksin conducts his activities? The overarching policy objective should be regional economic development.

  • huh?

    Discussion 35 : 23/11/2009 at 05:57 AM35

    To Discussion 25
    I completely agree with you and many others in saying that the article is bias, towards thailand. As a thai myself, I'm appaled by both Cambodia and Thailand, considering that the Preah Vehear Temple does belong to Cambodia according to international law, however it does not give Hun Sen the right to cause this kind of "spat" since you cant deny that it was an offensive move.

    Though however I cant quite understand by what you mean that Thai society is "blindfolded". Thai society is more divided over the entire issue.

  • Downunder

    Discussion 34 : 19/11/2009 at 09:54 AM34

    Say in the next election PT is able to form government. PT and Thaksin has to 'repay' Hun Sen for the 'favors'- and here, I suspect something quite concrete has already been agreed otherwise Hun Sen wouldn't have played his part so wholeheartedly.
    In essence, Thaksin has already laid the seeds of PT's downfall and history will only repeat itself again. The pattern and narrative is going in cycles that begun with Thaksin's sell of Shincorp to Singapore (and literally overnight losing the support from urban voters).
    Maybe AjarnThitinan in his next article can let us know what Thaksin/PT has offered Hun Sen.

  • Mnkutbory

    Discussion 33 : 19/11/2009 at 06:08 AM33

    Without Preah Vihear Temple, there's no Abhisit government.

  • a Khmer in Phnom Penh

    Discussion 32 : 18/11/2009 at 07:56 PM32

    @ dboston - discussion #27

    "...The whole conflict between the two countries should have been avoided if Mr. Hun Sen used his judgement wisely..."

    i suppose you did not imply that abhisit and his govt and the PAD have made wise judgment all the way here.

    why problem started only when hun sen appointed thaksin as his personal economic adviser?
    did you forget what happen when thailand refuse or rather oppose to the listing of preah vihear as an internation cultural site? when PAD extremist caused problems at the border and military deployment by thailand which led to armed conflicts and loss of lives? when abhisit and PAD, not to mention those uncivilized words used by some PAD leaders against hun sen as a PM of a neighboring country, used cambodia as a diversion strategy from internal problems?

    every one seems to forget that thailand allowed a cambodian opposition leader criticized Phnom Penh from Bangkok, which infuriated Phnom Penh govt and in particular hun sen. it is also to be noticed that hun sen had restrained himself for so long from supporting thaksin this so publicly since the coup.

    the whole problem should be read from the whole contextual perspectives. cambodia or dubai or nicaragua, there is no big difference but just thailand and abhisit simply felt that it is far easier to "play and intimidate" a kid next door. well, it turned out to be the opposite. sadly.

  • a Khmer in Phnom Penh

    Discussion 31 : 18/11/2009 at 07:55 PM31

    @ dboston - discussion #27

    "...The whole conflict between the two countries should have been avoided if Mr. Hun Sen used his judgement wisely..."

    i suppose you did not imply that abhisit and his govt and the PAD have made wise judgment all the way here.

    why problem started only when hun sen appointed thaksin as his personal economic adviser?
    did you forget what happen when thailand refuse or rather oppose to the listing of preah vihear as an internation cultural site? when PAD extremist caused problems at the border and military deployment by thailand which led to armed conflicts and loss of lives? when abhisit and PAD, not to mention those uncivilized words used by some PAD leaders against hun sen as a PM of a neighboring country, used cambodia as a diversion strategy from internal problems?

    every one seems to forget that thailand allowed a cambodian opposition leader criticized Phnom Penh from Bangkok, which infuriated Phnom Penh govt and in particular hun sen. it is also to be noticed that hun sen had restrained himself for so long from supporting thaksin this so publicly since the coup.

    the whole problem should be read from the whole contextual perspectives. cambodia or dubai or nicaragua, there is no big difference but just thailand and abhisit simply felt that it is far easier to "play and intimidate" a kid next door. well, it turned out to be the opposite. sadly.

  • stima

    Discussion 30 : 18/11/2009 at 07:02 PM30

    For those who thing that Hun Sen is stupid or immature, you are completely wrong.

    First by going against thailand, CPP nearly kill opposition party in Cambodia, right now, no-one is going to talk about illigal eviction, corruption...etc they're only talking about thailand aggression against Cambodia.

    See..
    Hun Sen use the same tactics as Abhisit and his goverment by going against the outsider, so the domestic problem tension could be reduced. They just play the same game, the only different is that Hun Sen have an upper-hand since he need not to worry about his position as Abhisit do.

  • Frank

    Discussion 29 : 18/11/2009 at 04:56 PM29

    The author writes "Most important, Mr Abhisit must come up with an overarching policy objective in order to locate and shape the political and diplomatic tools to achieve it. That objective should be to persuade Mr Hun Sen to not let Thaksin use Cambodian soil as his launch pad to battle his opponents."

    Did the writer even read the kind of comment Hun Sen was giving to the Thai government while Thaksin was there? He sounded like an immature teenager bashing a classmate.

    Hun Sen was obviously not willing to let play the normal diplomatic tools. Nobody could even see the arrested Thai Engineer back then. Note that since Thaksin is out of Cambodia, the balls of Hun Sen seems to have deflated and his condescending attitude as shunned as well!

    Hun Sen makes me think of an immature kid who was just in a power trip while his budy Thaksin was there.

  • Lalida

    Discussion 28 : 18/11/2009 at 04:07 PM28

    Hi Dboston,

    Nice post you've got there, just wondering if you have post anything with the same theory of timing when Samaka and Somchia was in office or was during that time everyone was enjoying peace...:)

  • dboston

    Discussion 27 : 18/11/2009 at 01:33 PM27

    Thailand's Abhisit has been Thailand Prime Minister for about a year; give him time to achieve some objectives. If the country were a little more peaceful, he would have captured the moment, I bet. Mr. Hun Sen, on the contrary, has been in the power for long time so his record is more solid. How each one of them got into the office - let's talk about that next time.

    The whole conflict between the two countries should have been avoided if Mr. Hun Sen used his judgement wisely. He should be aware of the consequences when he decided to give his land as a safe harbour for his beloved friend, who has been the most-wanted guy at his neighboring country. For whatever reasons - I do not know, but the Cambodian strongman's intuition has been onece again proven wrong. There are many ways Mr. Hun Sen can show his loyalty to his friend. It has to take a lot of brain cells to find one when you are the head of the country, however. It is contemptuous to put the nation and possibly its citizens to this ordeal ( this message is for both of them ).

    Mr. Pongsudhirak article outlines a good debate. But it also reflects a jump-a-gun bias on certain issues by him.

Reply

    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
  • As a courtesy to our readers, please use proper punctuation and correct spelling.

back to top