World Heritage Committee Walkout: More Loss Than Gain; Thai Opinion

[webfact]

ANALYSIS

Walkout: More loss than gain

By Supalak Ganjanakhundee

The Nation

Suwit says move against World Heritage Committee was to protect Thailand's sovereignty; exit won't affect ICJ ruling, but status of 3 new sites now in doubt

Thailand is likely to lose, rather than gain, from its decision to withdraw from the 1972 World Heritage Convention simply to express its disagreement with the World Heritage inscription of Cambodia's Preah Vihear Temple.

Natural Resources and Environment Minister Suwit Khunkitti, who returned from Paris yesterday after withdrawing from the 35th session of World Heritage Committee, defended his decision by saying it was made to protect Thailand's sovereignty over the territory adjacent to Preah Vihear.

"It's too risky for us to accept the Preah Vihear management plan, which asks Unesco and the committee to dispatch experts for reparation and restoration of the temple of Preah Vihear," he said.

"It's good for us to denounce the convention, as Cambodia will not be able to use the World Heritage Committee's decision as evidence to back up its arguments in the world court."

The decision seems to reflect Thailand's worries over the consequences of Cambodia's request to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) that it clarify its 1962 ruling in the Preah Vihear case.

Bangkok is concerned that any Thai acknowledgement of World Heritage activities related to Preah Vihear would be equivalent to acceptance of Phnom Penh's sovereignty over the temple and its vicinity.

The international court ruled in 1962 that Preah Vihear was in territory under the sovereignty of Cambodia, but Thailand argued that the temple's surrounding area, and even the piece of land where the sandstone temple sits, belonged to Thailand.

However, legal experts are doubtful whether Thailand's withdrawal has any legal implications for the ICJ's judgement. Decisions of the World Heritage Committee are not linked to the processes of the ICJ, a Foreign Ministry official said.

Furthermore, the World Heritage Convention says "the inclusion of a property situated in a territory, sovereignty or jurisdiction which is claimed by more than one state shall in no way prejudice the rights of the parties to the dispute".

Whether or not Thailand accepted the inscription and the management plan for Preah Vihear, that decision has no legal implications for Thailand's rights, if any, over the territory in question.

On the contrary, its denunciation of the World Heritage Convention will lead to the lost opportunity to list three Thai properties as World Heritage sites.

Thailand, which has accepted the convention since 1987, has five World Heritage sites and three more are on the tentative list. They are Phimai, Cultural Route and Associated Temples of Phanom Rung and Muang Tam (2004), Phu Phrabat Historical Park (2004) and Kaeng Krachan Forest Complex (2011). Suwit said the withdrawal would not affect the five sites already listed, but he didn't mind if Thailand lost its chance to propose new sites.

"I choose national sovereignty over the Preah Vihear area, rather than the chance to list the other sites," he said. "We don't need the inscription because most of those sites are already well known among tourists."

He added that Thailand never received financial assistance from a World Heritage inscription.

While money might not be a concern for Thailand, international credibility is important for the country.

Irina Bokova, director-general of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation, expressed her deep regret after Suwit's declaration of Thailand's intention to denounce the 1972 World Heritage Convention.

"The decision of the World Heritage Committee on the Temple of Preah Vihear World Heritage site in Cambodia only reaffirms the need to ensure the protection and conservation of the property from any damage," she said in a statement.

Perhaps, she said, the Thai delegation circulated false information during last week's meeting blaming the World Heritage Committee and Unesco, when Unesco's World Heritage Centre had never pushed for a discussion of the management plan.

"Contrary to widely circulated media reports, the World Heritage Committee did not discuss the management plan of the Temple of Preah Vihear, nor did it request any reports to be submitted on its state of conservation," she said.

In the World Heritage Committee meeting at the weekend, Suwit slammed the committee and Unesco. He announced Thailand's intention to denounce the 1972 convention and walked out.

Cambodian Deputy Prime Minister Sok An, who led his country's delegation to the meeting, said that by making such an intemperate statement and acting in such an ill-mannered fashion, by walking away from an ongoing session, the Thai delegation showed real contempt for Unesco, the World Heritage Committee and all the 186 states that were parties to the convention in 1972.

"These actions by the Thai delegation also reflect on the image of the current caretaker government in Bangkok and on the ruling party," he said.

Bokova urged Thailand to consider carefully its future course of action in respect of the important convention and to continue to be an active participant in international cooperation for the protection of the world's outstanding heritage sites.

In technical terms, Suwit's decision has not yet become effective. Thailand needs to submit its denunciation in writing to Unesco's director-general and the action will take effect 12 months after official notice has been received.

In a letter to Bokova on June 25, Suwit said Thailand was willing to denounce the 1972 convention in accordance with Article 35 of the convention.

"The instrument of denunciation will be forwarded to you [the director-general] in due course," he said in the letter, a copy of which has been seen by The Nation.

-- The Nation 2011-06-28

[vont]

WHO THE HECK MADE THESE FOLLOWING STATEMENTS....

WHO THE HECK HAVE THIS/THESE PERSONS, GROUPS AND/OR ENTITIES BEEN WORKING FOR....

1--Thailand is likely to lose, rather than gain, from its decision to withdraw from the 1972 World Heritage Convention simply to express its disagreement with the World Heritage inscription of Cambodia's Preah Vihear Temple....

2--Whether or not Thailand accepted the inscription and the management plan for Preah Vihear, that decision has no legal implications for Thailand's rights, if any, over the territory in question....

On the contrary, its denunciation of the World Heritage Convention will lead to the lost opportunity to list three Thai properties as World Heritage sites....

3--While money might not be a concern for Thailand, international credibility is important for the country....

RESPONSE TO:

1--Thailand's withdrawal protects, conserves and preserves Thai Sovereignty.... so name what Thailand has to lose in terms of specificity, pls do enlighten us who are interested in the welfare and well being of Thailand. What would Thailand ever gain.... if she loses her sovereignty, more particularly her land where UNESCO itself used to accommodate those cambodian refugees in the 70.... (Am referring specifically to the current very ungrateful and moronic Cambodian govt and it might also NOW include those current members who seem to forget who own those parcels in the 70).

2--What on earth are you implying? Do you imagine yourself talking to a bunch of first graders, so easily fooled and covered over? Such an irresponsible statement. Was the statement coming out of the mouth of my friend Suthichi....?

If it has no legal implication.... why do Cambodians together with her bed fellows are still pushing it.... trying to own something that even in the 70 was surely not theirs.... do these entities have no shame.... even in 2011....? Even before 1970, those parcels of land belong to Thai Sovereignty.... leave Thailand alone....

3--You are talking about intenational credibility....? Where on earth are you, yours and your own countries.... going to hide your shameless faces; trying to claim something that clearly belongs to Thailand and the Thai people.... WHAT CREDIBILITY DO YOU AND YOURS, PERSONALLY AND AS NATIONS.... have remained.... after trying to steal parcels of land that does not belong to you.

Worse yet, when HuSan can not do it by himself nor with his family members, he ran to his colonized father--the French et al, enlisting their assistance, trying again.... this time, their efforts are even grander than before.... hiding behind international committee and such.... trying to depend on a committee decision to annex Thailand Sovereignty.... such a shameless bunch....

Fortunately for Thailand, the majority of the Thai are still loyal to the throne and Thailand Sovereignty.... even though many Thai official representatives have already sold their souls to the devilish Cambodian HuSan and the French govt representatives and other committee members et al....

My dear pal from 1950, Suthichai.... speaks up please.... are you still loyal to Thailand and the Throne....?

ALL THESE SUBVERSIVE STATEMENTS ARE COMING OUT IN PRINT IN YOUR FLAGSHIP NEWSPAER.... What on earth is going on, please?

[geovalin]

WHO THE HECK MADE THESE FOLLOWING STATEMENTS....

WHO THE HECK HAVE THIS/THESE PERSONS, GROUPS AND/OR ENTITIES BEEN WORKING FOR....

1--Thailand is likely to lose, rather than gain, from its decision to withdraw from the 1972 World Heritage Convention simply to express its disagreement with the World Heritage inscription of Cambodia's Preah Vihear Temple....

2--Whether or not Thailand accepted the inscription and the management plan for Preah Vihear, that decision has no legal implications for Thailand's rights, if any, over the territory in question....

On the contrary, its denunciation of the World Heritage Convention will lead to the lost opportunity to list three Thai properties as World Heritage sites....

3--While money might not be a concern for Thailand, international credibility is important for the country....

RESPONSE TO:

1--Thailand's withdrawal protects, conserves and preserves Thai Sovereignty.... so name what Thailand has to lose in terms of specificity, pls do enlighten us who are interested in the welfare and well being of Thailand. What would Thailand ever gain.... if she loses her sovereignty, more particularly her land where UNESCO itself used to accommodate those cambodian refugees in the 70.... (Am referring specifically to the current very ungrateful and moronic Cambodian govt and it might also NOW include those current members who seem to forget who own those parcels in the 70).

2--What on earth are you implying? Do you imagine yourself talking to a bunch of first graders, so easily fooled and covered over? Such an irresponsible statement. Was the statement coming out of the mouth of my friend Suthichi....?

If it has no legal implication.... why do Cambodians together with her bed fellows are still pushing it.... trying to own something that even in the 70 was surely not theirs.... do these entities have no shame.... even in 2011....? Even before 1970, those parcels of land belong to Thai Sovereignty.... leave Thailand alone....

3--You are talking about intenational credibility....? Where on earth are you, yours and your own countries.... going to hide your shameless faces; trying to claim something that clearly belongs to Thailand and the Thai people.... WHAT CREDIBILITY DO YOU AND YOURS, PERSONALLY AND AS NATIONS.... have remained.... after trying to steal parcels of land that does not belong to you.

Worse yet, when HuSan can not do it by himself nor with his family members, he ran to his colonized father--the French et al, enlisting their assistance, trying again.... this time, their efforts are even grander than before.... hiding behind international committee and such.... trying to depend on a committee decision to annex Thailand Sovereignty.... such a shameless bunch....

Fortunately for Thailand, the majority of the Thai are still loyal to the throne and Thailand Sovereignty.... even though many Thai official representatives have already sold their souls to the devilish Cambodian HuSan and the French govt representatives and other committee members et al....

My dear pal from 1950, Suthichai.... speaks up please.... are you still loyal to Thailand and the Throne....?

ALL THESE SUBVERSIVE STATEMENTS ARE COMING OUT IN PRINT IN YOUR FLAGSHIP NEWSPAER.... What on earth is going on, please?

J'ai l'impression que vous êtes une personne sympathique, agréable, à l'esprit ouvert et très chaleureuse. Je brule de vous connaitre.

Je vous aime.

:-)

[webfact]

Link to Bangkok post and quoted text removed

be reminded

31) Members are not allowed to quote news articles or material from Bangkokpost.com or Phuketwan inside topics on Thaivisa.com. Posts from members containing quotes will be deleted from the forum. Members posting links referring back to the sites is also not allowed and will be deleted.

[animatic]

WHO THE HECK MADE THESE FOLLOWING STATEMENTS....

WHO THE HECK HAVE THIS/THESE PERSONS, GROUPS AND/OR ENTITIES BEEN WORKING FOR....

1--Thailand is likely to lose, rather than gain, from its decision to withdraw from the 1972 World Heritage Convention simply to express its disagreement with the World Heritage inscription of Cambodia's Preah Vihear Temple....

2--Whether or not Thailand accepted the inscription and the management plan for Preah Vihear, that decision has no legal implications for Thailand's rights, if any, over the territory in question....

On the contrary, its denunciation of the World Heritage Convention will lead to the lost opportunity to list three Thai properties as World Heritage sites....

3--While money might not be a concern for Thailand, international credibility is important for the country....

RESPONSE TO:

1--Thailand's withdrawal protects, conserves and preserves Thai Sovereignty.... so name what Thailand has to lose in terms of specificity, pls do enlighten us who are interested in the welfare and well being of Thailand. What would Thailand ever gain.... if she loses her sovereignty, more particularly her land where UNESCO itself used to accommodate those cambodian refugees in the 70.... (Am referring specifically to the current very ungrateful and moronic Cambodian govt and it might also NOW include those current members who seem to forget who own those parcels in the 70).

2--What on earth are you implying? Do you imagine yourself talking to a bunch of first graders, so easily fooled and covered over? Such an irresponsible statement. Was the statement coming out of the mouth of my friend Suthichi....?

If it has no legal implication.... why do Cambodians together with her bed fellows are still pushing it.... trying to own something that even in the 70 was surely not theirs.... do these entities have no shame.... even in 2011....? Even before 1970, those parcels of land belong to Thai Sovereignty.... leave Thailand alone....

3--You are talking about intenational credibility....? Where on earth are you, yours and your own countries.... going to hide your shameless faces; trying to claim something that clearly belongs to Thailand and the Thai people.... WHAT CREDIBILITY DO YOU AND YOURS, PERSONALLY AND AS NATIONS.... have remained.... after trying to steal parcels of land that does not belong to you.

Worse yet, when HuSan can not do it by himself nor with his family members, he ran to his colonized father--the French et al, enlisting their assistance, trying again.... this time, their efforts are even grander than before.... hiding behind international committee and such.... trying to depend on a committee decision to annex Thailand Sovereignty.... such a shameless bunch....

Fortunately for Thailand, the majority of the Thai are still loyal to the throne and Thailand Sovereignty.... even though many Thai official representatives have already sold their souls to the devilish Cambodian HuSan and the French govt representatives and other committee members et al....

My dear pal from 1950, Suthichai.... speaks up please.... are you still loyal to Thailand and the Throne....?

ALL THESE SUBVERSIVE STATEMENTS ARE COMING OUT IN PRINT IN YOUR FLAGSHIP NEWSPAER.... What on earth is going on, please?

J'ai l'impression que vous êtes une personne sympathique, agréable, à l'esprit ouvert et très chaleureuse. Je brule de vous connaitre.

Je vous aime.

:-)

You can not write in anything but English here,

and a little Thai. I translate to so it is not erased.

"I have the impression that you are a sympathetic agreable person

of open and warm spirit. I am burning to know you.

I love you."

I have no clue what this statement has to do with the subject at hand?

Nor why 100 years of treaty and multiple Thai governments acceptance of precedent suddenly is up ended to 'give the temple back to Thailand'. This fight, as Thailand repeatedly says, is about SOME of the land AROUND the temple, essentially the easiest access to the temple. Someone in Thailand clearly wanted to charge tolls and profit off this access route. With Cambodia trying to put in cable cars and bypass the Thai saide, oops no money.

Before Hun Sen or ANYONE arguing this was born,

this was known to be Cambodian.

It is absurd for Thailand to lose the benefits for it's other heritage sites because they are fighting about the land around another. This isn't even truly about the actual site itself which Thailand HAS acknowledged IS Cambodian .hough some Thais are being confused about that too. Nationalism is running amok and burying facts in wishful thinking or simply propaganda.

In this case Thailand has clearly cut off its nose to spite it's face, and save face, but uglier and uglier. Why can they not see how much face they are losing in this grand Quixotic effort to... save face?

Edited June 28, 2011 by animatic

[webfact]

posts containing other languages than English will be deleted

This time I've made an exception

/Admin

[geovalin]

posts containing other languages than English will be deleted

This time I've made an exception

/Admin

Thank you.

It was just a joke. Irony.

By the way, I agree with you animatic.

[REM]

This will make Thailand a laughing stock of the international community, and by by credibility!!! Thailand has to be careful, they don't realize what it is to adapt to other people. The rampant nationalism doesn't spread outside the borders, no one else cares. Thailand demands all of this stuff, but does nothing in return. They haven't figured out how to make corruption work on the international level yet, so they get mad and walk out like infants!!!!

[vont]

J'ai l'impression que vous êtes une personne sympathique, agréable, à l'esprit ouvert et très chaleureuse. Je brule de vous connaitre.

Je vous aime.

:-)

----------------

You can not write in anything but English here,

and a little Thai. I translate to so it is not erased.

----------------

"I have the impression that you are a sympathetic agreable person

of open and warm spirit. I am burning to know you.

I love you."

----------------

....Nor why 100 years of treaty and multiple Thai governments acceptance of precedent suddenly is up ended to 'give the temple back to Thailand'. This fight, as Thailand repeatedly says, is about SOME of the land AROUND the temple, essentially the easiest access to the temple. Someone in Thailand clearly wanted to charge tolls and profit off this access route. With Cambodia trying to put in cable cars and bypass the Thai saide, oops no money.

Before Hun Sen or ANYONE arguing this was born,

this was known to be Cambodian.

It is absurd for Thailand to lose the benefits for it's other heritage sites because they are fighting about the land around another. This isn't even truly about the actual site itself which Thailand HAS acknowledged IS Cambodian .hough some Thais are being confused about that too. Nationalism is running amok and burying facts in wishful thinking or simply propaganda.

In this case Thailand has clearly cut off its nose to spite it's face, and save face, but uglier and uglier. Why can they not see how much face they are losing in this grand Quixotic effort to... save face?

----------------

vont redirects....

....In this case Thailand has clearly cut off its nose to spite it's face, and save face, but uglier and uglier....

your statement reminds me of what former prez johnson declared on national tv.... we will win the war.... our nation will win this war regardless.... just last night we released 10,000 pounds of napalm to teach them not to mess around with our troops.... they must surrender within 30 days.... or else we....

animatic i have to disagreed with you this time on this subject.... of losing face....

the noses that were cutoff some nights ago, were surely not the thai.... they were the oversized noses of the french and the french backed collective bodies of govt including HuSan's....

tell me if i am wrong.... that this collective shameless committee is NOT trying to annex parcels of land rightfully belongs to thailand sovereignty....

what happens in the interlude....between 1980 and 2011.... did the thai surrender any of their sovereignty to any other nations on or off the record....? i doubt it.....

furthermore, the UNESCO own archives and pictures clearly and undeniably showed both in writing and in graphics presentations then.... that the cambodian refugees then were encamping on thai sovereignty and enjoying thai hospitality.... which today.... several thai traitors and thai govt representatives including such dignified countries as french, u.s. and other euro rep in collaboration with the shameless and now noseless (to use your expression) cambodians.... are all chiming in calling those clearly and unequivocally thai sovereignty as.... a disputed and undemarcated parcels....

animatic, do you really want to count yourself as one of those shameless and prideless groups of individual or entity.....? not me.... not in a million year....

and animatic.... do examine those bleeding noses.... they were clearly too big to fit any thai.... LOL

Edited June 28, 2011 by vont

[gregb]

In this case Thailand has clearly cut off its nose to spite it's face, and save face, but uglier and uglier. Why can they not see how much face they are losing in this grand Quixotic effort to... save face?

I might be more inclined to agree with you animatic if you could actually explain what value being a member of the WHC actually brings to Thailand. Perhaps Jingthing could make a poll. How many members here actually even knew where the world heritage sites were in Thailand? Did anyone come to Thailand and specifically seek out World Heritage Sites on their itinerary? Would the fact that a temple was not endorsed by the WHC cause anyone to rethink their plans to visit?

Thailand has to pay dues every year for the privilege of belonging to the WHC. From the evidence available, they have only ever received financial assistance in return of around $30,000 USD...less than a million baht. Somehow, I suspect the expenses of belonging to the WHC are substantially more than that.

I guess I just don't see a problem in withdrawing. Seems like a good tactical decision to sacrifice membership in a useless committee that brought essentially no benefit to the country. I would not be opposed to rethinking my position if there was sufficient evidence the other direction, but it just seems to me like a waste of money to belong to a group that doesn't even bother to exercise more discretion when they continue to try and list a temple that has already caused deaths and damage to the area they are supposed to want to preserve.

I don't see why this was a bad decision on Thailand's part, and nobody has offered any evidence to show that it is. All I see are emotional responses about how it looks. Well, however it looks to the outside, it appears to me to be a decision made in the best interests of the country.

Is there any actual evidence to the contrary?

[Steely Dan]

Leaving the WHC does strike me as throwing one's rattle out of the pram. The WHC is nothing to do with ICJ rulings and it is the ICJ which is the important entity to consider, not the WHC. I guess it makes good print for ultra-nationalists to imagine Thailand is sticking it's finger up to outside meddling, but they should save their efforts for where they may actually make a difference.

Bilateral has sadly become unilateral.

[LomSak27]

this dramatic geo political move is going to last any longer than next sunday?

No matter who wins the election, chances are a quiet-ness will blanket the Nations scribes and Thailand will be back in the fold, quietly without editorial comment, almost like they never left. And this whole little squabble will be replaced by a new little squabble to occupy are time.

keeyep Keeyep

[MengWan]

For me, I fail to understand how and why the WHC can do anything without the consensus of its members !

Will the WHC bomb Thailand because it was not OK with HunSen's plan ?

[welbymd]

Doesn't amount to a hill of beans. If a normal, common person can't visit the site due to soldiers running around and camped all over the place, its as if the place doesn't exist.

Most of the regional newspapers and magazines all say "it's bad for Thailand"., but give little clear indication of what would be good and what is going to be lost. The saga continues.

[rubl]

Unesco urges Thailand to reconsider withdrawal

By The Nation

Unesco is urging the Thai government to reconsider its decision to leave the World Heritage Convention, saying the committee has not yet discussed Cambodia's proposed management plan of the Preah Vihear Temple as earlier reported.

Director General Irina Bokova said in a letter dated June 27 addressed to Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva that there was no push from her side for the discussion of the management plan.

"I hope sincerely that the Kingdom of Thailand will carefully consider its future course of action in respect of this important convention and will continue to be an active participant in the international cooperation for the protection of the world's outstanding heritage," she said.

The letter was sent after the chief Thai negotiator, Suwit Khunkitti, walked out of a World Heritage meeting in Paris and announced Thailand's withdrawal from the World Heritage Convention during a Unesco meeting in Paris last Saturday in protest at the committee's intention to discuss Cambodia's management plan.

Bokova said it was most unfortunate this had happened in relation to the examination of the issue concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear World Heritage site by the World Heritage Committee.

"I cannot but express disappointment at such an announcement of the possible withdrawal of the Kingdom of Thailand from the World Heritage Convention, in light of your country's longstanding commitment to and active support of the latter."

Bokova denied news reports that after the walkout, the committee discussed the management plan.

What the committee decided after the walkout was only reaffirmation of the need to ensure the protection and conservation of Preah Vihear temple from any damage, read the letter.

It further encouraged the two countries to use the 1972 World Heritage Convention as a tool to support conservation, sustainable development and dialogue.

She added that Thailand's bid to postpone the debate on the management plan was not supported by another member of the committee.

-- The Nation 2011-06-28

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2011/06/28/national/Unesco-urges-Thailand-to-reconsider-withdrawal-30158883.html

[themockrat]

Sadly, the "Thai Opinion" doesn't matter to this government.

[phuketrichard]

I await the outcome on July 3rd to see how this plays out

[rubl]

Sadly, the "Thai Opinion" doesn't matter to this government.

Thai opinions matter to the (caretaker) government. As in most democracies there is not one 'the opinion', there are lots of them. Needs investigation which opinions are founded on reasonable principles or facts.Just like you see here on this TV forum, dear mock rat