The scene of Hun Sen giving immediate interview to the media corps right upon his arrival as the last man to arrive in the evening at the 15th Asian Summit venue in Cha-Am last Friday was something Thai people who are REAL Thais in their hearts should keep in mind forever.

He has bluffed Thailand by saying that he will give the ex-premier, who is now a fugitive convict for a crime of corruption living a billionaire life in Dubai and other places, permission to reside in Phnom Penh and appoint the guy as his adviser. It’s a slap in the face of Thai PM Abhisit Vejjajiva and a kind of political ploy against Thailand as if this country means nothing to him. Diplomatically, as a leader of a neighbouring country attending an Asean Summit, it can be viewed as a challenge as well as an insult and ungrateful attitude. Cambodia is a country, to which Thailand has given economic assistance in many forms including donations made by Thailand’s royal family.

Hun Sen has trodden Thailand’s honour like graves in a barrel. He looks at this country as if having nothing deserving his respect at all by saying that the guy is his eternal friend and Cambodia is an independent country and the fugitive convict has been unfairly treated by Thailand’s judicial system. He said so clearly that the guy is not a criminal but a political victim. His comment for the media corps was purely an interference of Thailand's internal affairs. He compared the guy with the famed Burmese Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi as tough fighter for democracy. It’s the best Joke we ever heard from the mouth of Hun Sen.

Hun Sen might have thought his comparison between Suu Kyi and TS was to praise his “eternal friend” to the same status with the world’s recognized champion of democracy. But, in fact, it’s an insult to Burmese people and the famed Nobel Laureate for peace. Some Thai newspapers interpreted the comparison as seeing a dirty strayed dog with leprosy-like skin disease in the same light as with an angelic grande dame of democracy. A pretty accurate interpretation, isn’t it?

I found an article on Suu Kyi in the Famous People website and inserted part of it here below.

Suu Kyi in Politics
In 1988, Suu Kyi returned to Myanmar to nurse her ailing mother and plunged into the nationwide uprising for the establishment of democracy. It all happened following the resignation of General Ne Win on July 23, 1988. Suu Kyi, in an open letter to the military government asked to establish a rule of the people in Myanmar. On 8 August, 1988, people, raising pro-democracy slogans assembled at the prominent places of the capital. The event led to a mass slaughter carried out by the ruling junta against the uprising throughout country. The military regime killed over 10,000 demonstrators, including students, women, and children – in a span of months.

Thailand's statesmanship in international relations has always defied outsiders' predictions. Thai people have taken great pride in two facts: firstly, that Thailand is the only country in Southeast Asia never colonized or even dominated by other countries and secondly, that Thailand, once dubbed "the next domino to fall" in the 1960's and 1970's has emerged in the 1980's stronger and more prosperous than ever. The ability of the country to get out of harms' way can be attributed in large part to the flexible, dynamic, and pragmatic characteristics of its foreign policy, which has as being the model of a successful "small- nation diplomacy."

There exist at least two fundamental elements in the Thai foreign policy i.e. the preservation of national sovereignty and independence and the promotion of national well-being. In the process of decision making, Thai leaders have taken into account the country's resources and constraints as against evolving international circumstances. In order to understand the present Thai foreign policy, it seems appropriate to trace its evolution chronologically from the colonial era [19th century] to the present time.

1970's CHANGING REALITIES

The advent of the 1970's marked drastic changes in regional and global political configurations which brought about new challenges for Thailand's policy makers. On the international front, world politics was transformed from bipolarization toward multi-polarization with the return of China to the world arena and with Japan and Western Europe gradually resuming their political and economic roles.

On the regional place, the U.S. withdrawal from Vietnam and the Nixon Doctrine created a vacuum of power as well as a sense of uncertainty and anxiety over U.S. defense commitments on mainland Southeast Asia. The communization of the three Indochinese states and the prediction of other falling dominoes represented a lurking danger to the security of free nations in the region, and to Thailand in particular.

To keep pace with the changing international environment, Thai foreign policy has undergone at least three basic developments, which have had long lasting effects today. First, it adopted an Omni-directional policy trend by seeking diplomatic, commercial, and cultural relations with all nations, regardless of their political ideology and economic system. Notably, in 1975 Bangkok and Beijing began full diplomatic recognition and exchanged ambassadors. Full diplomatic relations with the new state of Kampuchea were also established in that year, while relations with Vietnam were normalized in 1976.

Concurrently, Thailand has shown more interest in the developing world. In 1975, it began to develop its own aid program, called the Thai Aid Program [TAP]. Stemming from the "Third Country Training Program" [TCTP] in which Thailand offered technical training to developing countries under the sponsorship of outside donors, this program has provided training in various fields, particularly in agriculture, medicine, and public health, to at least 24 countries around the world.

Second, regionalism has come to play a more significant role in Thai foreign policy. At the first summit in Bali in 1976, ASEAN codified in contractual from the principle of pacific settlement of disputes among ASEAN members. Subsequently, the spirit of the Bali Summit further solidified political and economic cooperation among ASEAN states to the extent that ASEAN today can be called "a diplomatic revolution" in Southeast Asia. since then, ASEAN has expanded its joint activities to conjure new horizons, encompassing the fields of trade, tourism, industry, energy, science and technology, finance and banking, transportation, cultural and social development. Recent initiatives include import reduction among member countries and industrial complementation. These activities intertwine ASEAN'S interests and have given further impetus to development of the region.

Furthermore, ASEAN also expanded its cooperative relations with other developed countries. By 1976, ASEAN established cooperative links with Australia, Japan, Canada, New Zealand, and the agencies of the UN through the UNDP and ESCAP, followed by the United States in 1977, The links with the European Community and Canada were formalized through the signing of Cooperation Agreements in 1980 and 1981 respectively. The ASEAN foreign ministers meet annually with the foreign ministers of these dialogue partners and the Commissioner and the President of the EC Council of Ministers to discuss various international and regional issues of common interest and concern.

Third, Thailand has sought to promote even more its non-aligned foreign policy. With regard to its relations with major powers, it has sought to forge an "equidistant" policy, that is, a more equal relationship based on more balanced interests with all of them. The declaration of the concept of Southeast Asia as a Zone of Peace, Freedom, and Neutrality by ASEAN in 1973 is but one example of this. Flexible responses to the evolving international events are among other things that enable Thailand not only to be the domino that did not fall but also to be more stable, with a firmer foothold in the international community.

By the close of the decade, Thailand faced another serious challenge. The Vietnamese invasion of Kampuchea in 1978 and its occupation thereafter, followed by an armed confrontation between Vietnam and China, shattered the hope of regional peaceful coexistence. The Soviet involvement with Vietnam and its subsequent escalation of military presence in the Pacific further complicated the security equation of the region. The Kampuchean problem therefore presented a genuine potential for developing into a confrontation of major powers. In this regard, Thailand inadvertently became the front-line state in this conflict.

Aung San Suu Kyi has been put behind bars and into house arrest during the past 20 years but that convict guy escaped from Thailand since he asked for permission from the court to attend the Beijing Olympics in October last year by claiming that he was invited by China to be there to receive HRH Princess Sirindhorn. It turned out to be a big lie in his plot to jump bail and escaping from Thailand’s justice system, a foxy and cunning grand coup in bail jumping and avoiding of imprisonment the Thai courts have ever experienced. In the history of Thailand’s judicial system, perhaps, it’s a classic case of mistaken judgment of a faux-naïf, as a liable person, worthy of making it a case study in the jurisprudential studies.

This arrogant and ill-mannered Cambodian prime minister refers to the guy as his eternal friend, for whom he openly welcome into his care and protection. Two months ago he challenged the Thai army by saying that Cambodian soldiers are combat-smarter with fighting experiences to engage Thai soldiers with only one third of the Thai troops or a Cambodian soldier is enough to fight three Thai soldiers anytime. Amazingly, the Thai defence minister and army big brass kept their mouths shut becoming very cool cucumbers.

Deputy PM Suthep Thuegsuban, who is responsible for national security matters also downplayed the Cambodian verbal attacks on Thailand and did not have any idea of retorting back in strong terms. How long this country would continue to be like an underdog of arrogant ex-Khmer Rouge Cambodian prime minister?

According to the press reports, PM Abhisit acted in a mild-manner with soft words as he said that he had told Hun Sen to carefully think of his actions in favour of that fugitive convict as a political victim.

Hun Sen’s breach of good relationship between Thailand and Cambodia is a serious matter in terms of international relations. Thailand is now at a dilemma between diplomatic tit-for-tat and calm diplomatic maneuvering tactics.

Should Thailand execute its diplomatic démarche of some kind to show the world that Thailand’s is not a country without national pride and honour or stay calm for the sake of Asean unity?

Cambodia used to be a vassal state or a tributary of Ayutthaya Kingdom in the old days more than 400 years ago. The news of Cambodian rebellion led by King Chetta or Phya Lovek, (พญาละแวก) who ruled Lovek, the new principal city in Cambodia at the time (about half way between Tonle Sap and Phnom Penh), reached Ayutthaya when King Naresuan the Great took over as the ruler from his father King Mahathammaraja.

King Naresuan himself led Ayutthayan armies to Cambodia. His commanders captured all main cities of Champasak, Banteymas and Siemriep. King Naresuan captured Battambang. The Siamese armies went to the meeting point at City of Lovek to subjugate Phya Lovek, the chief ruler of Cambodia. Being captured alive, Phya Lovek was decapitated as a traitor by King Naresuan himself who took Phya Lovek’s blood to pour on his feet. This was, in the old time, a symbolic gesture to warn other vassal states of the consequence of breaking the Oath of allegiance with Ayutthaya and a ritual of majesty.

That’s a piece of history more than 400 years ago. Cambodia is now a country in modern time, an independent country. It’s is also a member of Asean, a regional community for economic development. But the act in undiplomatic by Hun Sen, reminds me of the history between old-days Siam and Cambodia.

I think Thailand cannot stay indifferent to Hun Sen disrespect of Thailand and his breach of the code of close international relationship among friendly countries. Doing nothing may lead to more rocky relationship between Thailand and Cambodia as well as more transgressing of Thai constitution and laws of the land by TS, the fugitive convict. Abhisit government has already lost a lot of credit for its inability to capture only one guy whose where-about is known to all his followers.

A demarche can be exercised in protest of Hun Sen’s undiplomatic remarks at Cha-Am. It can come in the form of strong memorandum of protest as a first step and progress to reducing the level of international relations from ambassadorial level to legation level by recalling Thai ambassador from Phnom Penh, leaving only a minister or a charge d'affaires to carry out the embassy work. If the transgression of good diplomatic tradition do not stop, dilution of international relations can be exercised further by withdrawal of diplomatic protection to consular service.

This strong démarche means there is no political relations at national level with any hostile state. Consular service is not considered as an agency for diplomatic representation at national level. There are two regimes applicable to international relations as international law recognises two kinds of protection all countries can exercise on behalf of their nationals: consular assistance and diplomatic protection.

Anyway, there are two sides on the diplomatic coin. One is for take a tough stand, another is to be cool and use bilateral dialogue to solve the problem. It’s worthy of giving them some thoughts.