Yemeni IS Group Claims Sana’a Mosques Blasts

Suicide bombers attacked two mosques in Yemen's capital, Sana'a, Friday, killing at least 137 people and wounding about 350.

At least four bombers carried out the attacks during midday prayers at the Badr and al-Hashoosh mosques, which are linked to the Houthi rebels who control the capital.

Officials say the bombers blew themselves up both inside and outside the mosques, looking to kill those trying to escape. Witnesses say blood, body parts, and charred victims were everywhere.

The Yemeni branch of Islamic State is claiming responsibility. It put out an online statement calling the bombings "just the tip of the iceberg."

The extremists also say they were behind this week's massacre at the national museum in Tunisia, killing 23.

White House spokesman Josh Earnest would not confirm the claims, saying there was no clear evidence yet tying the group to the attacks.  But he said "It does appear that these kinds of claims are often made for a perception that it benefits their propaganda efforts.''

Whether or not Islamic State was actually behind the attacks, one U.S. official told VOA Friday Islamic State seems to be "quite liberal" in taking responsibility for such attacks.

The official also urged caution in linking the Yemen and Tunis attacks.

“Given the rapid succession of the attacks, one should have a strong hypothesis that there’s coordination,” said Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies."

Analysts also say Islamic State thrives on propaganda and publicity.

Map of Sanaa, Yemen, showing the location of Badr Mosque

The United States condemned the attacks in Yemen.

The U.S. State Department called upon all actors within the country to halt unilateral and offensive military actions and stressed the way forward for Yemen must be through a political solution.

People help an injured man at the scene of a suicide bombing inside a mosque in Sana'a, March 20, 2015.

U.N. Security General Ban Ki-moon, who also condemned the blasts, called on all sides in the ongoing fighting in Yemen to "immediately cease all hostile actions and exercise maximum restraint."

Separately, the U.N. Security Council condemned Thursday's attacks on the international airport in Yemen's main southern city, Aden, and an airstrike Thursday on the presidential palace in Aden.

Security forces loyal to former leader Ali Abdullah Saleh, the longtime leader who was ousted in a 2011 popular uprising, attacked the airport and battled militia loyal to President Abd-Rabbu Mansour Hadi.

The fighting forced the airport's closure. The two sides also clashed in other parts of the city.

Four pro-Saleh fighters and two militiamen were killed in the clashes.

Later, an unidentified warplane launched a missile at the presidential palace. Hadi was not harmed in the attack.

Hadi last month escaped house arrest by Houthi rebels allied with Saleh and fled to Aden in a bid to re-establish his authority in the politically fractured nation.

The United Nations, Arab Gulf nations and several western countries, including the United States, have all issued statements supporting Hadi.

Meanwhile, the international medical humanitarian organization Doctors Without Borders (MSF) has reporting that it has received at its hospital in Aden 63 wounded victims of recent clashes there.

Most patients treated in MSF’s emergency surgical unit were suffering from gunshot wounds, with 12 requiring urgent surgery, the group said in a statement issued Friday.

“We may receive more patients and it is all the more crucial that all parties to the conflict facilitate unhindered access of patients and ambulances to health structures, including to MSF's emergency unit,” said Dounia Dekhili, manager of MSF's programs in Yemen.

Some information in this report was provided by VOA's Jeff Seldin, AP, AFP and Reuters.

http://www.voanews.com/content/sanaa-yemen-mosques-suicide-blasts/2688142.html

One Year Later, Crimea Adjusts to New Realities News Europe

SEVASTOPOL, CRIMEA—

A year after Russia 

annexed Ukraine’s Crimea peninsula, its people are adjusting to new citizenship, new political conditions, and new economic realities.

Russian navy and special forces blockaded and stormed Crimea's Ukrainian bases a year ago, giving the troops inside a choice: join us or leave.

With a powerless government in Kyiv, most of his fellow servicemen chose Russia's military, said former Ukrainian officer Alexander, who does not want to use his last name because of the sensitivity of switching sides, but voices no regrets as he considers Russia his motherland.

“The most difficult thing was that my father is left in Ukraine. I knew that I would not be permitted to go there,” Alexander said. But his father can still visit Crimea, and it helps that as a Russian military officer, Alexander makes more money now than he did wearing a Ukrainian uniform.

Thirty-three-year-old Andrei refused to give up his Ukrainian citizenship.

But he lives with his younger brother, another former Ukrainian military officer who chose the Russian side to provide for his two children.

“It affected our relationship,” Andrei said. “It became more tense in some moments. Sometimes we have some things left unsaid; sometimes we just keep silent. And, I’m personally annoyed by some things, especially when he wears his Russian uniform.”

Climate of fear

Members of Crimea's Tatar minority community have been the most outspoken opponents of Russia's moves to annex Ukraine's Black Sea peninsula, and now they are afraid. A year later, Tatars say there is a climate of fear because activists and their relatives have been intimidated, abducted, and even killed

Rifat Ametov buried his brother Reshat the same day Russia signed the law to annex Crimea.

Reshat, a Tatar critic of Russia's moves on Crimea, was abducted, tortured, and murdered. No one has been held responsible and authorities, Ametov said, have stopped investigating.

“We have video materials. And, some clues where those people [the killers] came from. Nevertheless, they say these people are unknown, that they cannot find them. How can you trust such authorities?” asked Ametov.

Abdureshit Dzhepparov said his son Islyam was a good athlete and student but, unlike himself, was no activist and had no interest in politics.

The 19-year-old was abducted in September. Along with his 23-year-old cousin, he was shoved into a car by men in black uniforms, according to witnesses. Neither has been seen since, and no one has been arrested for their kidnapping.

Dzhepparov thinks Russia's security services were involved.  The reason -- he said -- is his work as a former deputy in the Crimean Tatar Mejlis, a representative body that addressed the community's concerns.  

He believes the kidnapping “was prepared for a long time. They prepared it thoroughly. It was not the work of two or three men."

Since Russia took over Crimea, authorities have banned some Tatar leaders and pressured the Mejlis out of its offices, making it hard to operate, said activist Zair Smedlya.

“Over the past year, we saw murders, kidnappings of activists, searching of madrassas and mosques, even the houses of the activists, and illegal arrests and detentions.  All this is being done to Crimean Tatars, like the rest of the population, to instill fear,” said Smedlya.

Russian and Crimean authorities have denied any official abuses and maintain that life under Russian rule is better for Crimean Tatars.

Conducting business

The change of sovereignty hurt the economy, in part because of international sanctions imposed on Russia because of the annexation and Moscow’s role in the separatist conflict in eastern Ukraine.

Western sanctions have left Crimea a cash-only economy. Automatic teller machines don’t work, credit cards aren’t accepted, the banking system is limited. There are restrictions on foreign tour groups and investment.

Crimea has long been a popular vacation destination for both Ukrainians and Russians. But since last year, fewer Ukrainians visit. Tourist numbers have dropped by half.

Tour owner Alexander Yurchenko raised prices to maintain his income but complains of strict border controls and bureaucracy.

“Like the Chinese say to their enemies, ‘we wish you live in times of change.’ Any changes when a person is already 45, 50, or 60 years old and he’s been doing the same thing for the last 15 years, when he’s got everything organized, especially the tax-paying and all the problems connected with this issue -- then everything changes again -- that brings a lot of negative reactions,” Yurchenko said.

On the other hand, Russia's declining economy means fewer Russians can afford to travel abroad, so more visit Crimea.

This year, occupancy rates have recovered, said Anastasia Fedoseeva, the managing director of the Yard Hotel.

“The main problem was finding new partners and contacts because the old tour operators [in Ukraine] cannot work with us anymore. Also, we had problems with this bank system while it was being adjusted,” she said.

But, she said, “I think in the coming season we will not have any problems like that.”

Other companies are adapting, too.

Oleg Krinitsyn is searching for Russian suppliers for his cheese shops, since shipments from mainland Ukraine now take weeks instead of just a few days.

“We’re not planning to develop our business further any time soon because we don’t know how things will shape up or which way the political winds will blow,” Krinitsyn said. “But, in any case, everything should be in order someday. And, only after we’ll make conclusions whether to stay here and develop further or close the business and leave [Crimea].”

Nervous anticipation 

Many people in Crimea are watching to see what will come next.

Andrei, who kept his Ukrainian citizenship, said his family and his employer urge him to switch to a Russian passport so he is completely legal and has access to social services.

Although he thinks Russia isn’t likely to give up the peninsula any time soon, Andrei doesn’t plan to switch passports, and he doesn’t plan to leave Crimea, as long as he can keep his job.

“I’m following the news, and I can see what’s happening in Kyiv. They have enough to deal with without Crimea right now. In any case, the hope exists and I have friends I stay in touch with who also have great hopes that Crimea will return back” to Ukraine, he said.

Credit : www.voanews.com

Michelle Obama Arrives in Cambodia

PHNOM PENH—

U.S. First Lady Michelle Obama arrived in Siem Reap province, Cambodia Friday, the next stop after her visit to Japan on her Asia tour to promote education for girls.

Cambodia is one of 11 countries to be targeted in the first year of Obama's "Let Girls Learn'' initiative, launched last summer through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID).

The initiative aims to reduce the number of girls - 62 million worldwide - who do not attend school.

Michelle Obama arrived at Siem Reap International Airport. She was greeted by Cambodia first lady Bun Ranny Hun Sen, Education Minister Hang Chuon Naron, and the U.S ambassador. (Photo: Neou Vannarin for VOA)

Obama was greeted on Friday by Cambodia's first lady Bun Rany Hun Sen, who is set to join her and Peace Corps Director Carrie Hessler-Radelet to meet with high school students participating in community-led programs supporting education for girls.

Training event, roundtable 

Obama is then due to deliver remarks to Peace Corps volunteers participating in a girls' education training event and host a roundtable with local community leaders and civil society members, who are implementing projects to support girls' education in Cambodia.

Kim Dara heads the Cambodia office of World Education, a non-profit that works with the Ministry of Education to improve access to schooling.

Dara explained that girls in Cambodia face specific challenges. While most villages have primary schools close by, for example, secondary schools are often farther away. That can make travel to and from school dangerous for girls. Another important issue is the lack of latrines and washing facilities in many rural schools.

\
Credir by ; http://www.voacambodia.com

The Source Of The Siem Reap River

The Siem Reap River is one of there important rivers that flow from north to south through the region of Angkor. The Siem Reap River lies east of the Pouk River and west of the Rolous River1. The Siem Reap River, as we know it today from Bampenh Reach to the south (see map), is the result of a human intervention which worked to change and continuously improve land management during five hundred years of Angkorian rule.

The Siem Reap River rises from small streams that flow from various hills located to the north of the plains of Angkor. These waters come together in single before flowing onto the plains. Among these streams, I will only discuss two important ones below: O Thom, or Big Stream, and the O Kbal Spean, or Stream Above the Bridge.

1. O Thom

The O Thom has its source on Phnom Kulen Kulen located about 40 kilometers to the northeast of Angkor. Phnom Kulen is a high plateau, 25 kilometers in length (from northwest to southeast), and 15 kilometersin width (from southwest to northeast). This plateau stands 300 to 450 meters higher than the surrounding plains. The eastern end of the Kulen plateau has a large "Chup" (a marshy water source) which gives birth to two important waterways: O Thma Dap (Stream of cutting stone) to the southeast which flows into Teuk Lech River in Srok Suknikun, and O Thom which flows to the northeast into the Siem Reap River (see map). The Chup is located about one kilometer northeast of Anlong Thom village2. In addition to the source, the O Thom  is fed by many other small streams and rivulers from the plateau of Phnom Kulen. Amongst these small sources, the most important are: O Thnal Mtek O Thnal Dach, and O Ta Penh.

The O Thom meanders away from the Chup on the plateau of Kulen, winding down the slopes fo about 15 kilometers to the waterfalls found at the area of the Preah Ang Thom site. From the Anlong Pkay site, located above the waterfalls a few hundred meters, reliefs have been sculpted along the bed of the O Thom. These reliefs represent the god Vishnu reclining on the ocean in meditation, various gods, and many sculpted lingas. Very close to the waterfalls there is a temple which today is called the "Watefall Temple" but in earlier times was called the "rhinoceros stable"3. The temple is surrounded by laterite wall, which cuts the O Thom in half. Just above the waterfall is pool that serves almost like a reservoir or water rank, there are also relief carvings of gods in the water just above the waterfall. Just after the waterfall, a huge stone cuts the stream. This stone is also carved with many lingas. The villagers call this site "Kbal teuk muj" (head of the waterfalls), they call the linga "Kong" (gong). About 15 kilometers further down from the waterfalls, O Thom reaches the base of Phnom Hap (Hap hill) in te east . Finally, the O Thom flows to the west into Srung Russei (the Bamboo river), and then together the two run south forming the Siem Reap River.

2. O Kbal Spean

O Kbal Spean has its source on Phnom Kbal Spean (Kbal Spean hill) and Phnom Krol (Krol hill). These two hills are separated from Phnom Kulen to the west by a valley called "Kandol Sar" (the white rat valley)4 , which today is known as the passageway for the road to Sre Noy and Anlong Veng to the north. Kbal Spean is located in commune Khun Ream, Srok Banteay Srei, about 200 meters above sea level. It flows down from the northwest to the southeast, eventually flowing into the Stung Russei not far from the base of the hills. Several hundred meters to the north, two more important streams feed Stung Russei: O Chreap to the west and O Andaeng to the east.

About 2,000 meters from the road leading into the hills, we arrive at a waterfall about 5-6 meters high. Above the waterfall, there are many lingas, the symbol of the god Shiva's supreme essence, carved into the riverbed. The riverbanks, along with basins carved deep into the riverbed, are sculpted with a variety of scenes, symbols and inscriptions: the god Vishnu reclines on a serpent in the ocean in meditation, from his navel grows a lotus flower bearing the god Brahma5. The sculptures stretch along the streambed for a distance of 200 meters. These are also many "Poeung" (Stone shelters) located along the stream, some of which also have sculptures, inscriptions and stone pedstals.

Kbal Spean has been a sacred site for more than a millennium. Most of Kbal Spean's archaeological vestiges date to the 11th and 13th centuries. One inscription tells us that: "In the year 976 saka (1054 AD)  a minister of Kng Suryavarman I, had the site decorated with a thousand lingas (sahasrainga). In 980 saka (1059 AD) King Udayadivarman II, officially consecrated the engraved stream, the stream of a thousand lingas, and erected a large golden linga on the site".

Flowing past and over the reliefs of O Thom and O Kbal Spean, the water is sanctified before entering the Siem Reap and Pouk rivers, which continue south onto the plain and through the temple complexes of Angkor. Thus the water is seen as the source of prosperity.

The Siem Reap River can be compared to the compared to the Ganges River in India. The Gangas begins on the mountain of Himalaya. In Hinduism, the Ganges is believed to have its source in the heavens. The Ganges flows down to earth in the form of rain, then infiltrates the ground and flows out again as the source to all streams and rivers. The northern hills of Angkor, as well as the mountain of Himalaya, receive the monsoon rains of the same rainy season. These mountains are reservoirs of water and the source of all streams and rivers. Local peoples used and manged the water from the river for everyday use.

Cambodia doesn't have an equivalent to the Ganges River. So the ancient Khmer modified the existing rivers and consecrated them to form a kind of Ganges. The Khmer carved lingas and representations of various gods deep into the bed of O Thom and O Kbal Spean. These two streams give birth to Siem Reap River. The water flowing past and over these lingas in like the rain falling on chigon of Shiva. Thus the Siem Reap River is transformed into the Gangas.

1. For more on the hydrological system during the Angkor period see B.P Groslier, "La cite hydraulique Angkorienne: exploitation ou sur exploitation du sol?", BEFEO, vol LXVI, Paris, 1979, pp. 161-202.
2. This village is located in commune of Khnang Phnom , Srok Svay Loeu, Siem Reap Province.
3. This Temple was given the number 279 in the inventory conducted by Jean Boulber. See "Le Phnom Kulen et sa region", EFEO, Paris 1979. The temple was built at the same time as the Bayon temple.
4. Villaget call it "Khnar Rongveas".
5. See jean Boulber and Bruno Dagens, "Les sites archeologiques de la region du Bhnam Gulen (Phnom Kulen)" in Arts Asiatiques, vol. XXVLL. 1973, Paris, as well as Jean Boulber, "Kbal Spean , The Stream of a Thousand Lingas"in Nokor Khmer, #2, January-March 1970, Sangkum Reatr Nuym Editionsm, Phnom Penh.

The Cotroversy Over The Reign Of King Suryavarman I

 What did king Suryavarman I originate from?

There are many arguments about the origin of the King Suryavarman I. The first historians who studied Suryavarman, Coedes and .P. Briggs, thought that he was a foreign conqueror from the Malay peninsula. This is because he was given the title 'Kamtvan' which G. Coedes linked to the word 'Tuan' which means 'leader or master' in Maly language. In addition, the king had the posthumous name 'Nirvanapada'. G. Coedes believed that this posthumous name must have being connected to the Buddhism in Malaya1 (Srivijaya).

A Thai chronicle written in Pali language described a war between forces from the Malay peninsula and other places in the middle section of Siam called Lvo and the southern part called Nakhon Sri Dharmmaraja. In the Pali language, this later name is called Sri Dhammangera, which G, Coedes indicated was Ligor that was controlled by King Kambojaraja. Again, G. Coedes thought Kambojaraja was the King Suryavaraman I, who conquered from th esouth to the middle of Siam then to Cambodia.

Inscriptions Wat Thipdei (K. 125) and K. 834 proved that Suryavarman I was of the maternal line of King Indravarman. The inscriptions also praised Suravarman I , as a 'Moon of the Ocean of Milk' , and considered that he belonged to the family of the mother of IndravarmanII. Under the reign of King Harsavarman III (the son of Suryavarman I) there is another 11th century inscription, K. 136 which was sponsored by an important family called Saptadevakula (the 'seven gods family'). The inscription says that this family gad served since the grand parents of Rudravarman. The inscription also say that Suryavarman I, was born in to that family, rather than the royal family. Inscription K.125 (found at Sabor-Kratie) proves Suryavarman I was born in a family that had ancestors who were high-ranking officials in Jayavarman II's period.

The period Suryavarman I and local wars

Suryavarman I became the king after winning a war with Jayaviravarman (we don't know the origin of the King Jayaviravarman). Perhaps both kings were not of the royal family and they fought each other to become the king at the end of Udayadiyavarman I's period(?). We can not clearly understand the background of Jayaviravarman. It is known that he was a king at Angkor before or contemporary with, Suryavarman I , because there are inscriptions which are listed K.153, K.89, K.161 from Kampong Thom and Kampong Cham provinces. They prove that there is a name Jayaviravarman around 1003-1006 (?) (the same time as Suryavarman I). George Coedes believed that Jayaviravarman may have come from a great family at Angkor, as an inscription at Prasat Kravan (built in the 10th century during Jayavarman IV's period) says that there officials who were responible for the construction of this temple. One of them was named Kamsten Jayavaviraman who was perhaps an ancestor of King Jayaviravarman (?).

Why was there war?

If we read about the war from the period of Indravarman to Yasovarman, inscriptions say that many temples were built by the king himself in this period. Starting from the period of the sponsored by the king but rather belonged to the high-ranking officials. We see there was competition between the high-rankings officials. Philippe Stern, A French historian who was a specialist in art and architecture, said there was a regular pattern in the development of constructions during the reigns of the Angkor kings.

In the period of four kings Indravarman, Yasovarman, Rajendravarman and Jayavarman VII, he discovered that there were three similar paterns in their construction works. Between the period of Rajendravarman and Jayavarman VII are, firstly, public works such as building the Baray and roads, secondly, ancestral monuments such as Preah Ko, Lolei, Mebon and Preah Khan, and thirdly, state temples with a royal with royal Siva-linga (Bakong, Bakheng, Pre Rup, Bayon). In fact, the same thing can be seen in the Koh Ker of Jayavarman Iv, but as he was considered a usurper, Stern did not pay attention to him. He also says that after Rajendravarman's period we have not seen this pattern again except in Jayavarman VII's period as most of the buildings belonged to officials (Takeo, Banteay Srei Temple, and etc.)

Generally inscriptos are about people who were not related to the king, and these inscriptions were written in Khmer languge. In Jayavarman VII's peroid, we see this pattern of construction again, but the king's inscriptions are written in Sanskrit language. The war in Suryavarman I's period as stared by high-ranking official families who had the same status and owned land. When we compare the inscriptions, they reveal information about the families that had the same status and who always competed with each other. Starting from Indravarman's period, we know that high officials bore a tittle of Purohita, Guru, Hotar & ect.  The family that wrote the inscription known as Sdok Kakthom (K.235, dated 1052AD) says that in Jayavarman II's period, their ancestor name Sivakaivalya was Purohita of Jayavarman II. But another inscription K.989 dated 1008AD written before that of Sdok Kakthom proves that their ancestor named Vrah Manadatta was also Purohita of Jayavarman II.

Both families were the local chiefs of northwest Cambodia (perhaps they were in competition).

The writer of th Kakthom inscription claims that they were the Varna of Aninditapura who came from Satagrama district and their status was Purohita. Two other inscriptions, K.259 dated 1066AD reveal the family named Madhusudhana and K.534 dated 893AD reveal the family named Kesavabhatha. They claimed that were some exaggeration in order to control their ancestor's land.

There are two more inscriptions K.253 dated 912AD and K.382 dated 1047AD, which claim that the family of Sikhasiva and the family Sikhasanti were Hoter. Inscription K.842 dated family of Sivacarya was Hotar and Guru. Inscription K.91, which was found at Choeung Prei dated before Suryavarman I's period reveals evidence of competition and argument between an official's family in Jayavarman II's period at Jalingesvara in the Haripura region. Another family named Hyenpavitra in inscription K.278 dated 1007AD reveals that they were high-ranking officials at Jalingesvara in Haripura region. Inscription K.276 dated 1078AD reveals an official, whose name was Yogisvarapantita was Hotar, and this official built Takeo temple.

Be the inscriptions above, it is revealed that for about 200 years, great families from before or during, Jayavarman II's period there was a war. The families that supported King Suryavarman I, appeared in inscriptions, but other families who did not, were not mentioned.

There are three inscriptions that speak about the families who supported King Suryavarman I in the central region:  

          - K.354 (Khna temple) at Mlu Prei region daed 1060AD (Suryavarman I son's period) proves the status of a family called Vyajanadhara (the 'person who carries an umbrella') and the person who was close to the king called Adhipavyajadhana.

         - K.289 (Preah Ngok) describes land in the region from Phom Bok to Phnom Kulen which belonged to a high official from Jayavarman II's period to Suryavarman I's period. this inscription also reveals the action of soldiers whose status was called Camcarina (General) and their regions were to the northeast of Angkor.

             - K.125 (Ta Kin near Sambor-Kratie) is close to the Suryavarman I's period dated 1003AD. It reveals the chronological kings and we see the word "Ka.tvan" (Suryavarman I) This inscription proves the word "Vap" (the official who worked in the central state) wo asked King Suryavarman I to reclaim his postion in a place which he controlled. Before it was create by Kamsten, one of four Kamsten who were Rajakula of Paramesvara , and the four Kamsten in Jayavarman II's period. More clearly, one of the four Kamsten names, "Kamsten bhaavanukrsna" in K.124 belonged to there queens at Samborpura (803AD) which spoke of "Vrah punya bhagavaa kamraten an Utakrsna". This inscription relates to King Jayavarman II. This reveals that Suryavarman I, came from an official's famaly in the court of Jayavarman II.

Achievements of Suryavarman I in his period

Some schools think that Suryavarman I was Buddhist according to his posthumous name Nirvanapada, but most of this buildings were dedicated to Hinduism such as Phnom Chiso, Preah Vihear, Wat Baset, Preah Khan (Kampong Svay), & etc. He built a giant reservoir to the west of Phnom Bakheng called the Western Baray (Baray Tukthla). Coedes thought that his son Udayadituavarman II built this Baray. This is much evidence that he exended his authority to central Thailand by attacking to the west, and after this attack, the country of Lvo (Lopburi) was defeated).

Especially, an inscription at Lopburi states King Suryavarman I, received an oath from the Mratan who came from Lvo (which was not far north of the capital Ayuthya). There is much evidence of the extent of his authority which proves that many important persons in the northeastern, central and southern Thailand, were Khmer. these people had lived in these regions for a long time before Suryavarman I's reign. Up to the period of Suryavarman I perhaps there was peace and new relationships between the Khmer at Angkor and the Khmer in central Siam were developed after periods of no contact. We believe Suryavarman I died in 1049AD, as inscription K.229, found in Sisophon, is dated to the start of the period of Udayadityavarman II.

Conclusions

This study reveals that Suryavarman I, didn't come from abroad. His decent was from a royal family of the Angkor period. Coedes suggestion and other documents both differ from Dr. Michael Vickery's accounts, as Coedes suggests Suryavarman I, came from the northwest of Cambodia (southern Thailand). Dr. Micael Vickery, on the other hand, claims that the king came from the eastern region of Cambodia in Sambor-Kratie and started to conquer from the east towards the capital Angkor, then continued to Lopburi (Siam).

These points are opposite from G. Coedes who said Suryavarman I started to seize power from southern to central Siam and across to Angkor. The war in this period was started by competition between high-ranking officials who claimed they came from great ancestors (after the period of Jayavarman II) in order to control their land. The success of Suryavarman I, was to utilize the power of these great families that had begun to grow prior to his reign. In his period these was a war, and at the end of it, Suryavarman I, was the victor. 

Angkor Thom Findings For The Future

Angkor Thom covers an area of 9 square kilometers. If we compare its area to that of the region of Angkor as a whole, we can see that Angkor Thom makes up really only a very small part of the region. But if we consdider the quantity of buildings and structures found within Angkor Thom. we can see how densely inhabited and significant the area is. This is not strange really since the Kings of Angkor built their courts at Angkor Thom over a long period of time.

The 9 square kilometer area of Angkor Thom is surrounded by a moat which is the result of the last large renovations to the site at the end of the 12th century. If we only consider the historical (and not the pre-historical) period, the city of Angkor Thom was already at least four hundred years old by then. This meas that Jayavarman VII implemented his new symbolic plan fo the capital by trying to take into account existing older structures. The removal of older structures in order to fit them to new circumstances, was an ongoing process. Even in earlier times, this was so, and changes made could even include alterations in the natural layout of site. For example, we have recently come to understand that, up to a time which is not yet clearly determined, the O klot flowed across the eastern side of Angkor Thom (at that time there was not yet a wall surrounding the city) and perhaps even passed close to the base of Phnom Bakheng. The Phimeanakas which we had thought was the first temple built on the grounds of the old Palace was really built on the site of a previous wooden structure built during an even earlier time. This is a new finding based on recent excavations. In addition, we can surmise that there were villages and constructions dating from the prehistorical period as well, since we have evidence that the nearby Prasat Baksei Chamkrong (beginning of the 10th century) was built on a prehistoric site dating from the Bronze Age.

If we only consider the infrastructure established by Jayavarman VII, still our knowlede is very incomplete. We know that "Run Tradev"(figure 2), in the southwest corner of the wall around the city, was once used as a drain for water to be expelled to the outside, since today this channel still functions for the same purpose. But what function did an identical channel at the northeast corner of the wall, which today is almost completely blocked, originally have? Was it a channel for bringing water into the city for use? If so, how was the water made to run into the city? Did they use the Beung Thom as a place for allowing water to stand until it was clear before allowing it to run into the surrounding moat? And what about the Trapeang Don Mea, what was its junction? Were there water passages dug in the earth to allow water to flow under the five main roads of Angdor Thom as we have come to believe? All these questions indicate only one small part of the knowledge and understanding which we must still come to in order to comprehend urban planning during and after the rule of Jayavarman VII.

In short, that which we see today is only a partial skeleton or remains of a city which evolved over a long period of time. It's history is still full of conjectures. For example, we imagine that the city first began to develop when Yasovarman established his capital with its center at Phnom Bakheng. Because researchers found an inscription of King Yasovarman in the are of Tep Pranam, They have assumed that the King established a Buddhist ashram there. But this supposition is not at all certain since the inscribed tablet, found at the site, could have been brought from another area even during a later time period. There seems to be a consensus that after the city of Angkor was abandoned during the 14th century, jungle came to cover the entire site of Angkor with the exception of only  a few place which wee periodically  inhabited. This often passed down belief ought to be examined in more detail than has been previously given to it since at the end of the 16th century, for example, when a group of "foreigners" (at that time, Spanish and Portuguese travelers) arrived at Angkor Thom, they did not describe the city as engulfed by jungle at all. Instead, the local inhabitants pointed our to them the site of the old Royal Palace as well as various other sites in the area. In the 19th century, it was the same also note that it was not a small group of people who could have changed the second terrace of the Baphuon into the form of the Buddha entering nirvana.

Nowadays, more and more things are being found in the jungles of Angkor Thom including the foundations of temples which we surmise were mostly built during a later period when Angkor had ceased to be the capital. One fact that we know for sure is that the region of Cambodia as a whole launched into its greatest decline during the 18th century, and it was perhaps in this context that Angkor Thom underwent serious decline as well, We can see by these points that research on the Middle Period needs to be seriously expanded and emphasized.

Myanmar cross-border bombing kills 4, draws protest from China

Myanmar soldiers patrol in Laukkai, the main city in the Kokang region of northern Myanmar Shan state, on February 16, 2015.

 AFP

China flew fighter jets near its border with Myanmar and lodged diplomatic protests after bombs dropped by the Southeast Asian country's warplanes killed four farmers on China's side of the frontier.

The attack on a sugarcane field in the border city of Lincang in Yunnan province drew a sharp warning from a senior Chinese military leader that further incidents would be met by "firm and decisive action" by China, Beijing's state-run Xinhua news agency.

Fan Changlong, vice chairman of the Central Military Commission told Min Aung Hlaing, commander-in-chief of the Myanmar Defense Services that Myanmar must seriously investigate the incident, severely punish the perpetrators, and apologize to and compensate the families of the victims, the agency said.

Friday's bombing, the second case this week of spillover from the Myanmar military's fight with ethnic rebels, also injured nine people and prompted China's Air Force to launch fighter jet sorties along the China-Myanmar border areas to "track, monitor, warn and chase away" Myanmar warplanes, Xinhua quoted Fan as saying.

A diplomatic protest was also lodged by Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Liu Zhenmin to  Myanmar ambassador Thit Linn Ohn in Beijing on Friday, while on Saturday, Chinese ambassador to Myanmar Yang Houlan made "urgent and solemn representations" to Myanmar's government and military, the agency said.

Earlier this week, Beijing had called on the Myanmar government to investigate an incident in which four bombs exploded in villages on China's side of the border on March 8, casing damage to some houses.

Fighting began on Feb. 9 in Laukkai between Myanmar government troops and Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army (MNDAA) rebel forces.

The MNDAA under ethnic Chinese commander Peng Jiasheng is trying to retake the Kokang self-administered zone, which it had controlled until 2009, forcing an estimated 100,000 refugees away from the conflict zone and across the border into China.

Reported by RFA's Mandarin and English Services, with wire reports.

Credit:   http://www.rfa.org/english/news/myanmar/myanmar-kokang-china-03142015140332.html