Kasit does not put peace package on Cabinet agenda

By Piyanart Srivalo

The Nation

Instead of considering the Indonesia-brokered peace package, the Cabinet yesterday concentrated on the interpretation of the 1962 International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling on the Preah Vihear Temple, a government source said yesterday.

Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya did not put the peace package, which would bring Indonesian observers to the disputed border areas, on the agenda even though he promised last week that he would have the Cabinet consider the matter.

Instead, Kasit proposed that the Treaties and Legal Affairs department and the government's legal team look into the 1962 ruling.

Cambodia had earlier called on the ICJ to clarify its ruling so it can force Thai troops and security personnel out of the areas adjacent to the temple. In 1962, the court also ruled that since Preah Vihear was located on land that came under the sovereignty of Cambodia, Thailand must withdraw its troops and personnel from the vicinity of the temple. Phnom Penh is now calling on the court to clarify if Thailand has taken heed of the 1962 ruling.

Kasit told the Cabinet that the court might act on Cambodia's request later this year.

Meanwhile, Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva will meet the legal team next week to come up with new strategies and tactics to fight against Cambodia in court, a source said, adding the ICJ would seek testimonies on the case before the end of this month.

Thailand and Cambodia have been at loggerheads over Preah Vihear for a long while now. Clashes erupted in February and Indonesia, as chair of Asean, stepped in and offered to send a team of observers to assess the situation and monitor permanent ceasefire at the border area.

Jakarta proposed this new package last week when things came to a standstill after Thailand set conditions that were rejected by Cambodia. Phnom Penh has been insisting that Thailand withdraw its troops before it would allow observers to settle down in the disputed areas.

According to the peace package, a team of observers has to be dispatched and meetings of the Joint Boundary Commission (JBC) and General Border Committee (GBC) have to be set up. Thailand has said that it would only accept the team of observers when Cambodia sets a date for the JBC/GBC meeting.

The Cabinet will not consider the package until Defence Minister Prawit Wongsuwan sets a date for the meeting with his Cambodian counterpart Tea Banh, the source said.

Prawit and Tea Banh are in Jakarta until Saturday for a meeting with Asean defence ministers. The source said the Cabinet might consider the peace package next week once it gets a clear message from Prawit.

-- The Nation 2011-05-19

Thais are gamblers, win or lose, they do not like compromise. Compromise is seen as weakness to be exploited by your enemies. To lose means you reserve the right to try again.

Thais are gamblers, win or lose, they do not like compromise. Compromise is seen as weakness to be exploited by your enemies. To lose means you reserve the right to try again.

It appears to me that Thailand has had 38 years to "try again" but doesn't seem to have followed it through. Which does make me wonder why now? A cynical use of nationalistic fervour and an attempt to get the PAD supporters back on the democrat side, with elections on the way?

Thais are gamblers, win or lose, they do not like compromise. Compromise is seen as weakness to be exploited by your enemies. To lose means you reserve the right to try again.

Internationally yes, domestically within their own I beg to differ.

clearly, they don't want Jakarta's intervention......

Lose face...................

incapable of handlin' the conflict.

another clash will take place again repeatedly. (my thought)

if i were Abhisit, I'd sake him before breakfast.

Whatta useless! .... Da*mn Kasit

Thais are gamblers, win or lose, they do not like compromise. Compromise is seen as weakness to be exploited by your enemies. To lose means you reserve the right to try again.

It appears to me that Thailand has had 38 years to "try again" but doesn't seem to have followed it through. Which does make me wonder why now? A cynical use of nationalistic fervour and an attempt to get the PAD supporters back on the democrat side, with elections on the way?

The upcoming election is certainly a factor, but so too is the view of the army commanders. Deferring a decision until after the election might be the easiest option.