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