Abhisit's View Is An Obstacle To Final Border Settlement

[webfact]

COMMENT

Abhisit's view is an obstacle to final border settlement

By Puangthong Pawakapan

Special to The Nation

When talking about nationalist fervour in Thailand and Cambodia, Cambodian leader Hun Sen and the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) get most of the blame for fanning the fire.

But what is missing from most analysis is that Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva's position on the Preah Vihear Temple and its surrounding area is also bordering on nationalism. This time it takes three to tango.

During his tenure as opposition leader, Abhisit unreservedly embraced the PAD's position on the temple. He claimed that its listing as a World Heritage site would result in Thailand negating the right to reclaim the 4.6 square kilometre disputed area surrounding the temple. Cambodia wanted to secure the disputed area as a buffer zone, a requirement for the World Heritage site.

When Abhisit became prime minister, he continued the effort to delist the temple from the World Heritage list and opposed Cambodia's attempt to develop the area into a proper World Heritage site. He promised the PAD in August 2010 that his government would never agree with Cambodia to jointly develop the overlapping claimed area. Such has become his government's policy.

When the yellow shirts rallied in front of the Unesco office in Bangkok on August 1, 2010, to oppose Cambodia's management plan for the temple, Abhisit thanked them for showing concern for the country.

Since the Unesco World Heritage Committee (WHC) accepted the inscription of the temple on its World Heritage list in July 2008, Abhisit continued to send envoys to oppose the listing and management plan at the WHC meetings in 2009 and 2010. It has vowed to do so again when the next meeting is convened in June this year in Bahrain. Such a position is a major obstacle to solving the territorial dispute in a peaceful manner, not to mention to restoring diplomatic relations to a normal level. There are a number of issues that Abhisit should come to terms with:

1. In 1962, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled 9:3 that "The Temple of Preah Vihear is situated in territory under the sovereignty of Cambodia." The judgement is final and without appeal. No application for revision may be made after a lapse of ten years from the date of the judgement. Cambodia therefore has the right to inscribe the temple as a World Heritage site.

Concerning the overlapping claimed area, Abhisit should study the final map attached to the temple nomination file. In fact, as a result of negotiations with the governments of Surayud Chulanont and Samak Sundaravej, Cambodia agreed to reduce the claim to cover only the temple. Cambodia sent the revised map for Thailand to examine before the submission to the WHC meeting in July 2008 was made. Experts from the Foreign Ministry, the Royal Survey Department and the National Security Council were involved and agreed that no part of the overlapping claimed area was taken for the temple's buffer zone.

It should be noted that the final map excluded a buffer zone on the northern and western areas of the temple, over which Thailand and Cambodia claim sovereignty. Only the buffer zones of the eastern and southern areas are maintained. The eastern boundary follows the fence erected in 1962 by the Thai government of Sarit Thanarit after the ICJ verdict. The southern buffer zone is in lowland Cambodia.

2. The only way to solve the dispute in a peaceful and bilateral manner is to have a joint development agreement with both sides maintaining sovereignty claims.

The dispute is based on the fact that the two countries adopt different legal documents. Thailand claims the boundary must follow the watershed line as indicated in the 1904 Franco-Siamese Treaty. But Cambodia asserts that the boundary is the one marked in the 1907 French map. Besides, Cambodia sees the 1962 ICJ opinion as in favour of Cambodia. The ICJ stated that Thailand in 1908-1909 accepted the map "as representing the outcome of the work of delimitation, and hence recognised the line on the map as being the frontier line, the effect of which is to situate Preah Vihear in Cambodian territory…. Both Parties, by their conduct, recognised the line and thereby in effect agreed to regard it as being the frontier line." However, Thailand believes it can still stick to the watershed line.

For years, these conflicting positions created an impasse, while much progress has been made on other parts of Thai-Cambodian border. In fact, before the yellow shirts manipulated the issue to topple the pro-Thaksin government of Samak in 2008, Thailand and Cambodia had reached an agreement to jointly manage the disputed area. But fiery nationalism put an end to this progressive idea. The nationalist current in Cambodia also swept away the idea of cooperation from the Cambodian government's mind.

3. It is a fallacy that the only access to the temple is from Thailand, and that without cooperation from Thailand, Cambodia cannot develop the temple as a proper World Heritage site. In fact there are two roads connecting the eastern and western parts of the temple with lowland Cambodia. These roads were abandoned during the civil war but are now developed with good tourist facilities and support from the WHC. When all facilities are completed, Thailand will not be able to enjoy the tourism benefits it once had.

Abhisit often reiterates that Thailand wants to solve the dispute with Cambodia in a peaceful manner within the existing bilateral mechanism. Thailand does not want a third party to get involved. But his refusal to consider joint development of the area simply shuts the door on a peaceful exit from the current hostility.

Indeed, Abhisit is in a better position than the Samak government. The treason accusation, employed by the PAD, worked against Samak and his foreign minister Noppadon Pattama. But it failed to work against the Democrats to the same effect. But what Abhisit needs is courage to clarify to his middle-class supporters the real situation regarding the issue. He cannot let the issue be exploited by ultra-nationalists for their own political agenda.

The conflict will not work in favour of Thailand, either domestically or internationally. The attempt to delist the World Heritage site will exacerbate Thailand's image as a bully, and its dream of becoming a regional leader will become impossible. It is time Thailand came to terms with the legal defeat of 1962 and move on.

Puangthong Pawakapan is a professor at the Department of International Relations, Chulalongkorn University.

-- The Nation 2011-02-15

[geovalin]

What an excellent paper!

If you have to send only one Thai article to your friends to explain the situation, choose this one. The only missing point is to show how Abisith torpedoed the excellent work of the JCB.

Cheers to Chula professors.

Very strange that The Nation publishes that it's against its usually nationalist stances.

[SomTumTiger]

Smart man - Of course, he doesn't have to get elected by Thai People, to Thailand public office.

[crazygreg44]

Best statement I have ever read , concerning the complication warping the case. To call 1962 a fact and that from thereon no more alterations should have been made, is by far the smartest comment ever made in favour of both sides. If they could agree on this, the problem would be solved.

I was on the cliffs opposing the temple in the second week of November, and saw the road being shaped from the Cambodia lowlands upward to the temple area. Cambodia could manage the temple vicinity by itself. I saw relaxed Thai military , and everybody in very peaceful mood. They even announced to us that a week later the access would be continually opened wider and we could be able walk through to the temple by the end of November.

It seems that Yellow Shirt hot heads have but destroyed the peace talks and shattered all positive hopes. Shame on them. The civilized parts of the world should openly tell them who they are.

[geovalin]

It seems that Yellow Shirt hot heads have but destroyed the peace talks and shattered all positive hopes. Shame on them. The civilized parts of the world should openly tell them who they are.

Right!

But now we have to guess why this 1 or 2% of the population (in every country, you have crazy people like that but they finish silent or in jail) MAKE Thai life. A PAD's wish is an order. Why? Who is behind?

[Steely Dan]

It's almost tragi-comic to see the PAD try to distinguish their position as being right wing of Abhisit, where Abhisit has been about as asertive as a leader could be in arguing Thailand's case. I do think in order to marginalise the PAD Abhisit has been shunted too far to the right for his own good, particularly with regard to asking Unesco to de-list the temple due to contested ownership. This is not Unesco's remit as clearly demonstrated by the Potala Palace in (ahem) Tibet autonomous ( ) region being listed in spite of China invading and annexing a hitherto independant state.

I hope Abhisit can take fresh look at the situation, though this may now be difficult due to that national blindspot - 'face' - even if an Oxford eductation makes rising above it possible I don't know whether Thai public oppinion can quickly gain such maturity in the face of a historical enemy.

[stepenwolf1958]

What an excellent paper!

If you have to send only one Thai article to your friends to explain the situation, choose this one. The only missing point is to show how Abisith torpedoed the excellent work of the JCB.

Cheers to Chula professors.

Very strange that The Nation publishes that it's against its usually nationalist stances.

No need to show this to any of Thais that i know. They are very well informed about Democrats and in my town majority is against them, including PM. My town has label as a stronghold of dems in the beginning. Now is changed and i have no idea what poll showed them they have advantage anywhere except in Bangkok. What kind of majority they will gain there in election-that is the question but for sure, in small towns they have no advantage at all. Quite opposite.

No need to show this article to Thais. They are silent but far from to be stupid.

[whybother]

What an excellent paper!

If you have to send only one Thai article to your friends to explain the situation, choose this one. The only missing point is to show how Abisith torpedoed the excellent work of the JCB.

Cheers to Chula professors.

Very strange that The Nation publishes that it's against its usually nationalist stances.

No need to show this to any of Thais that i know. They are very well informed about Democrats and in my town majority is against them, including PM. My town has label as a stronghold of dems in the beginning. Now is changed and i have no idea what poll showed them they have advantage anywhere except in Bangkok. What kind of majority they will gain there in election-that is the question but for sure, in small towns they have no advantage at all. Quite opposite.

No need to show this article to Thais. They are silent but far from to be stupid.

And people were saying that Abhisit was doing this just to get votes. Just goes to show, doesn't it.

[yellow1red1]

It seems that Yellow Shirt hot heads have but destroyed the peace talks and shattered all positive hopes. Shame on them. The civilized parts of the world should openly tell them who they are.

Right!

But now we have to guess why this 1 or 2% of the population (in every country, you have crazy people like that but they finish silent or in jail) MAKE Thai life. A PAD's wish is an order. Why? Who is behind?

not allowed to say.

[yellow1red1]

Thailand claims the boundary must follow the watershed line" However, Thailand believes it can still stick to the watershed line.

irony is, the watershed is NOT the cliff, it's the foothills that run parallel, north and west from the cliff.

Thailand, be careful what you ask for!

[whybother]

Thailand claims the boundary must follow the watershed line" However, Thailand believes it can still stick to the watershed line.

irony is, the watershed is NOT the cliff, it's the foothills that run parallel, north and west from the cliff.

Thailand, be careful what you ask for!

The watershed is between the cliffs and the temple. If the border was the watershed, the temple would be in Thailand.

[jayboy]

And people were saying that Abhisit was doing this just to get votes. Just goes to show, doesn't it.

Were they saying that? I doubt whether this issue will have much impact electorally one way or the other.The Thai people are not as stupid as some of the PAD fascists and army reactionaries apparently believe. Most people I speak to think Abhisit's ambivalence on this issue is the result of his dependence (one can argue about the degree) on the forces that led him by hand to power, ie military coup,rigged constitition,army interference, judicialisation of politics, buying off minority parties, hysterical state financed propaganda etc etc.

And there are still people burbling on about watersheds, as though that was relevant in anything other than a minor technical sense.All adds to the gaiety of nations.

[mkawish]

What an excellent paper!

If you have to send only one Thai article to your friends to explain the situation, choose this one. The only missing point is to show how Abisith torpedoed the excellent work of the JCB.

Cheers to Chula professors.

Very strange that The Nation publishes that it's against its usually nationalist stances.

In case you overlooked....

the French redrawn map.... has not been acknowledged by the committee which by the time the map was finished in print in its final form....

the authorized committee had already been dissolved....

leaving the submitted map.... unrecognized and unauthorized in its final present form....

Regardless of how France (your mother land, oui?) or other country or Camb HuSen himself so badly wish it to be legit....

it remains to date.... unsigned, unrecognized and unenforceable.... imho..... :jap: