By Veera Prateepchaikul
Bangkok Post
The Surayud government did not sign a document officially pledging support for Cambodia's temple listing bid. In any case, there is no law which states that the Samak government must follow all decisions made by its predecessors.
-----------
Veera Prateepchaikul is Deputy Editor-in-Chief, Post Publishing Co Ltd.
My sympathies are with Surayud Chulanont, the privy councillor.
The retired general should have been left to live a quiet and peaceful life after spending almost two years as a lame duck prime minister in the military-installed government. Suddenly out of the blue, he is rudely dragged into today's hottest political controversy, the Preah Vihear temple issue, thanks to Foreign Minister Noppadon Pattama.
The embattled foreign minister told the Constitution Court on Friday that it was the Surayud government which committed itself to support Cambodia's bid to list the ancient ruins as a World Heritage site during a meeting of the World Heritage Committee held in Christchurch, New Zealand last year.
In other words, Mr Noppadon has blamed the Surayud administration for the blunder by the government of Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej for its signing of the joint communique with the Cambodian government pledging Thailand's "active support" for Cambodia's unilateral bid to inscribe the temple as a World Heritage site.
What a surprise! The Samak government has followed in the footsteps of the Surayud government which it has held in contempt for being a puppet of the military dictatorship.
Is the Surayud government now a convenient scapegoat? And will that mean Mr Noppadon and the Samak government will not be held accountable if Thailand is put at a disadvantage or its territorial sovereignty is in the future put at risk should Cambodia succeed in its listing effort?
But wait. Even if the Surayud government actually committed itself to supporting Cambodia's listing bid, the incumbent government cannot escape blame. There is no law which states that the Samak government must follow all decisions made by its predecessors.
And, in this particular case, the Surayud government did not sign a document officially pledging support for Cambodia's temple listing bid.
The Samak government is completely free and fully authorised to make its own decisions. After all, no one put a gun to the head of Mr Noppadon and forced him to sign the joint communique.
So if the government had the best interests of the country in mind, it should have made the right decision and not put itself in hot water.
Finger-pointing now will not improve the situation, but will only further cast the government in a bad light. What the government needs to do is to accept the mistake in stride and to try to rectify it to mitigate the negative consequences which could arise in the future.
Asking the World Heritage Committee to postpone consideration of the temple, as the government plans to do, is moving in the right direction, although the Cambodian side must be given a clear explanation of the government's sudden about-face.
As far as Cambodia is concerned, it is determined to go ahead with the application to list the Preah Vihear temple even without Thailand's support. Which should not be surprising. After all, the temple issue has been politicised by all parties in Cambodia, especially Prime Minister Hun Sen's party, in the runup to the July 27 election.
Given the national sensitivity over the temple issue both in Thailand and Cambodia, and the potential that dangerous nationalist sentiments can be fuelled by provocateurs for political gain, it would be wise and reasonable for the World Heritage Committee to put on hold Cambodia's bid to list the temple until the next meeting.
The temple issue has been politicised more than enough in this country to the extent that the good neighbourly relations between Thailand and Cambodia are now at stake.
Likewise, I hope that Cambodian politicians will not whip up anti-Thai sentiment after the July 27 election if the World Heritage Committee does not rule in its favour. For this will not help improve the strained relations either. It's time for cool heads from both sides of the border.
-----------
Veera Prateepchaikul is Deputy Editor-in-Chief, Post Publishing Co Ltd.
My sympathies are with Surayud Chulanont, the privy councillor.
The retired general should have been left to live a quiet and peaceful life after spending almost two years as a lame duck prime minister in the military-installed government. Suddenly out of the blue, he is rudely dragged into today's hottest political controversy, the Preah Vihear temple issue, thanks to Foreign Minister Noppadon Pattama.
The embattled foreign minister told the Constitution Court on Friday that it was the Surayud government which committed itself to support Cambodia's bid to list the ancient ruins as a World Heritage site during a meeting of the World Heritage Committee held in Christchurch, New Zealand last year.
In other words, Mr Noppadon has blamed the Surayud administration for the blunder by the government of Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej for its signing of the joint communique with the Cambodian government pledging Thailand's "active support" for Cambodia's unilateral bid to inscribe the temple as a World Heritage site.
What a surprise! The Samak government has followed in the footsteps of the Surayud government which it has held in contempt for being a puppet of the military dictatorship.
Is the Surayud government now a convenient scapegoat? And will that mean Mr Noppadon and the Samak government will not be held accountable if Thailand is put at a disadvantage or its territorial sovereignty is in the future put at risk should Cambodia succeed in its listing effort?
But wait. Even if the Surayud government actually committed itself to supporting Cambodia's listing bid, the incumbent government cannot escape blame. There is no law which states that the Samak government must follow all decisions made by its predecessors.
And, in this particular case, the Surayud government did not sign a document officially pledging support for Cambodia's temple listing bid.
The Samak government is completely free and fully authorised to make its own decisions. After all, no one put a gun to the head of Mr Noppadon and forced him to sign the joint communique.
So if the government had the best interests of the country in mind, it should have made the right decision and not put itself in hot water.
Finger-pointing now will not improve the situation, but will only further cast the government in a bad light. What the government needs to do is to accept the mistake in stride and to try to rectify it to mitigate the negative consequences which could arise in the future.
Asking the World Heritage Committee to postpone consideration of the temple, as the government plans to do, is moving in the right direction, although the Cambodian side must be given a clear explanation of the government's sudden about-face.
As far as Cambodia is concerned, it is determined to go ahead with the application to list the Preah Vihear temple even without Thailand's support. Which should not be surprising. After all, the temple issue has been politicised by all parties in Cambodia, especially Prime Minister Hun Sen's party, in the runup to the July 27 election.
Given the national sensitivity over the temple issue both in Thailand and Cambodia, and the potential that dangerous nationalist sentiments can be fuelled by provocateurs for political gain, it would be wise and reasonable for the World Heritage Committee to put on hold Cambodia's bid to list the temple until the next meeting.
The temple issue has been politicised more than enough in this country to the extent that the good neighbourly relations between Thailand and Cambodia are now at stake.
Likewise, I hope that Cambodian politicians will not whip up anti-Thai sentiment after the July 27 election if the World Heritage Committee does not rule in its favour. For this will not help improve the strained relations either. It's time for cool heads from both sides of the border.
8 comments:
From the last paragraph of this article " I hope that Cambodian politicians will not whip up anti-Thai sentiment after the July 27 election if the World Heritage Committee does not rule in its favour. For this will not help improve the strained relations either. It's time for cool heads from both sides of the border.
"
You Thai started to fuel the situation first on Preah Vihear issue. Don't blame us if there is somethings wrong with your embassy (you chose improper date to inaugurate) and bussiness. Only your site (Thailand) have politicise this temple for PAD's benefit not the both country.
Facts:
1) Preah Vihear Temple has been ours since centuries
2) It is your government's stupidity - teach your generation the right history
3) You have been trying to steal our properties right before the international's eyes.
Of course, Surayud supported the listing of Preah Vihear. Afterall, he is of Khmer descent! He spoke Khmer during his meeting with Hun Sen. Cheyo!
Recently, according to Bangkok Post, the Thai Foreign Minister Noppadon Pattama said the joint communiqué he signed with Cambodia on May 22 in Paris endorsing Cambodia's bid to have Preah Vihear Temple listed a World Heritage site has no legal binding unless it got approval from the Thai and Cambodian cabinets.
This claim is purely groundless and in contradiction with international law. First, the “Joint Communiqué” is governed by the 1969 Vienna Convention. The appellation or designation as a treaty, convention, declaration or communiqué is not a matter, according to the International Law Commission (ILM) and article 2(1)(a) of the 1969 Vienna Convention.
Second, it is true that during the discussion between Cambodia and Thailand on May 22, it was agreed that Thailand’s consent to the stipulation in the Joint Communiqué is subject to approval from their respective agreements. This clear statement of limitation of full powers of Mr. Noppadon was right. However, the fact that Mr. Noppadon signed the communiqué later on the 18th of June 2008 reveals that Mr. Noppadon did have consent from his government (between the period of 22 May and 18 June). It is weird to argue that Mr. Noppadon signed the communiqué without any approval of its cabinet between this period while he was in Bangkok, not to mention that modern international practice does not require a foreign minister to furnish evidence of their authority.
The Thailand government’s consent is clearly seen by many series of facts and discussions, including discussion between her Prime Minister and the Cambodian government during his visit to Phnom Penh on 03 and 04 March 2008, the joint press release on 06 May 2008, the tête-à-tête meeting between HE Sok An and Mr. Noppadon on the ribbon-cutting ceremony for national highway No. 48. The other petitions claimed by different organizations, including the Thai Senate does not therefore represent the Thai government’s view.
Since Thailand had agreed to support for the Cambodia’s inscription of the Preah Vihear temple on the World Heritage List, Thai government should act and implement its agreement in good faith. The proposition raised by Mr. Nappadon is in breach of its agreement and international law. Thailand as a good nation should not commit mistakes of its mistakes to show to the world this kind of behavior.
Regardless of the above reasons, the importance is that Cambodia may exercise its rights as a sovereign state to register the Preah Vihear temple which is located in its territory in the World Heritage List even without Thailand’s consent. The fact that the Government asked for the latter’s consent was just to show its good faith and conciliation manner with its neighbor. I do hope that UNESCO will decide in favor of Cambodia to let the temple be registered in the World Heritage List.
Monyrath
Half of 21 coutries of UNESCO member has supported us to liste the Preah Vihear in UNESCO. This is a good sound from UNESCO even though it is a informal sound but Khmer people at everywhere in the world hope strongly our Preah Vihear will be listed soon!!
Bravo, Cambodia!!
Down Thai!!
From Ramy, Chungnam University, South Korea.
What about the other half?
agree with unesco when they say that that was thailand's problem, not cambodia's. god bless cambodia.
cambodia upholds the icj verdict, always.
You are going in the wrong direction by playing with technicality. You will see no profit from it. The people in the area will continue to suffer from poverty. The best policy is the truth. And that is, to make profit from tourists for both sides, and you can't do it alone with temple that doesn't belong to you.
Post a Comment