Verghese Matthews has raised a very pertinent question in his article: "Will
King Father Sihanouk Stay on Political Sidelines?" (PP Post, 1 July 2005). It
is, however, rather disappointing that he chooses not to venture into answering it.
His article begs a number of interesting questions: Why did the prime minister -
dubbed as a master political player - agree in the first place to establish the Council
under King Father Sihanouk's chairmanship? Or did the master player not expect the
King Father to be the one to chair the Council when he approved the establishment
of the Council? Could the master player have been naïve enough to think that
others, especially the King Father, would accept such a perceived heavy burden of
responsibility without adequate authority?
What does the master player's so called deft move to enhance the Border Authority
and to put himself in charge mean? Does that indicate he now accepts a full responsibility
for the border issues he was so glad to give away to the King's Council only a few
weeks ago? Why the change of heart and mind?
Name withheld
