The Nation/Asia News Network
It was a close call as far as Thailand is concerned. On the other hand, the decision by the World Heritage Committee of Unesco to delay considering Cambodia's management plan for the Preah Vihear Temple to next year must have felt to Phnom Penh like a sucker punch. A diplomatic time bomb has been defused, but barely just, and the most important question is: What's next?
Blame took place in Brazil. Thailand was accused of trying to rock the boat and cling to something that no longer belongs to it. But to the Bangkok government, although the World Court ruled more than four decades and a half ago that the temple was on Cambodia's territory, things are not as simple as it looks. The management plan, the Thai delegation in Brazil insisted, would at least refuel territorial claims around the temple because the plan incorporated some information that Bangkok did not agree on.
Unesco must have been worried. This is not the first time a World Heritage site has become a source of neighbourly conflict. But given the on-and-off military tension at the Thai-Cambodian border and the stormy ties between the two countries, the international organisation must have felt it was best to postpone the Preah Vihear issue to next year.
But can everyone hope things will have calmed down by then? Nationalism aside, the issue has been complicated by the fact that Thailand's two main political parties have different stances on Preah Vihear. In fact, Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva has been forced to resort to uncharacteristically belligerent diplomacy because he used to take a very tough stand against his political rivals' perceived compromise toward Cambodia over the temple.
So whatever will happen next year in Bahrain when the World Heritage Committee meets again to consider the management plan will depend largely on who's in power in Thailand at the time. The Pheu Thai Party's stand, as shown by the Samak Sundaravej government, is that Thailand should lend full cooperation to Cambodia in its promotion and management of the site because the 1962 World Court ruling means any resistance will be futile. The Democrats, on the other hand, as demonstrated in Abhisit's scathing speech in Parliament in 2008, are against any move that will embolden Cambodia about its rights over the temple and claims over surrounding disputed areas.
Some academics have proposed handing over the whole matter to some sort of an independent commission so that domestic politics will have the least impact on where the country stands regarding the Preah Vihear Temple, its listing as a World Heritage site and its management plan. The proposal may be rejected outright, as the issue involves sensitive matters like bilateral ties, national sovereignty and so on. However, some things have to change because otherwise the Bahrain meeting will be a repeat of the Brasilia one.
Most importantly, both countries must talk more and play less politics. Thai officials claimed they had been kept in the dark over what information was in Phnom Penh's management plan submitted to Unesco until the Brasilia meeting was about to take place. Whether the claims are true or not, obviously there has not been a communications line between the two countries over this sensitive and potentially explosive issue, and this has to change.
Territorial disputes can last years, or even decades. They sometimes encompass generations. This, however, should never be used as an excuse for not trying enough to find a common solution, or for not talking to each other when we can. This is not an issue that can be solved through passing messages through a third or fourth party or lobbying. Of course, direct talks will be hard and possibly acrimonious, but if Thailand and Cambodia are sincere about ending the conflict, there's nothing else they can do but try.
Blame took place in Brazil. Thailand was accused of trying to rock the boat and cling to something that no longer belongs to it. But to the Bangkok government, although the World Court ruled more than four decades and a half ago that the temple was on Cambodia's territory, things are not as simple as it looks. The management plan, the Thai delegation in Brazil insisted, would at least refuel territorial claims around the temple because the plan incorporated some information that Bangkok did not agree on.
Unesco must have been worried. This is not the first time a World Heritage site has become a source of neighbourly conflict. But given the on-and-off military tension at the Thai-Cambodian border and the stormy ties between the two countries, the international organisation must have felt it was best to postpone the Preah Vihear issue to next year.
But can everyone hope things will have calmed down by then? Nationalism aside, the issue has been complicated by the fact that Thailand's two main political parties have different stances on Preah Vihear. In fact, Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva has been forced to resort to uncharacteristically belligerent diplomacy because he used to take a very tough stand against his political rivals' perceived compromise toward Cambodia over the temple.
So whatever will happen next year in Bahrain when the World Heritage Committee meets again to consider the management plan will depend largely on who's in power in Thailand at the time. The Pheu Thai Party's stand, as shown by the Samak Sundaravej government, is that Thailand should lend full cooperation to Cambodia in its promotion and management of the site because the 1962 World Court ruling means any resistance will be futile. The Democrats, on the other hand, as demonstrated in Abhisit's scathing speech in Parliament in 2008, are against any move that will embolden Cambodia about its rights over the temple and claims over surrounding disputed areas.
Some academics have proposed handing over the whole matter to some sort of an independent commission so that domestic politics will have the least impact on where the country stands regarding the Preah Vihear Temple, its listing as a World Heritage site and its management plan. The proposal may be rejected outright, as the issue involves sensitive matters like bilateral ties, national sovereignty and so on. However, some things have to change because otherwise the Bahrain meeting will be a repeat of the Brasilia one.
Most importantly, both countries must talk more and play less politics. Thai officials claimed they had been kept in the dark over what information was in Phnom Penh's management plan submitted to Unesco until the Brasilia meeting was about to take place. Whether the claims are true or not, obviously there has not been a communications line between the two countries over this sensitive and potentially explosive issue, and this has to change.
Territorial disputes can last years, or even decades. They sometimes encompass generations. This, however, should never be used as an excuse for not trying enough to find a common solution, or for not talking to each other when we can. This is not an issue that can be solved through passing messages through a third or fourth party or lobbying. Of course, direct talks will be hard and possibly acrimonious, but if Thailand and Cambodia are sincere about ending the conflict, there's nothing else they can do but try.
13 comments:
The Temple and the surrounding land are located on the Cambodian side of the border and was final according to ICJ of 1962.
All international press should not be mislead by the Thais that this is a Hindu Temple. It has always been and will be a Khmer Temple of Hindu influence.
the question is how is siem's ahbullshit going to demarcate the boundary lines with cambodia when siem pad thugs use illegal map by themselves? that's the real issue. maybe siem pad thus is a real hypocrite and hiding something from cambodia and the world by thinking we are stupid not to know their real motive, etc... shame on siem pad thugs for still living in the dark ages era and for being pure ignorant and illiterate, etc...! unesco and the UN body should ask siem to see what map they are using to demarcate the so called demarcation ahbullshit is using rhetorics to claim illegally from cambodia. and watershed my ass. the thing about using watershed to demarcate the borderline, there was all spelled out and there was an exception to the rule because where cambodia's preah vihear temple's world heritage site is located, it is an exception to the rule which siem pad thugs are having hard time or brain defects to understand, really! preah vihear temple is located there, that's why they spelled out the exception to the rule because without the preah vihear monument being located there, then the whole watershed as demarcation is alright. well, the areas surrounded preah vihear, this watershed rule doesn't apply, ok, siem! every law and theory in the world has an exception to the rule clause spelled out, ok. in the case of the 1907 international treaty, the exception to the rule of using the watershed to mark boundary is ruled out around the vicinityof preah vihear because of its significant located chosen by the great khmer god-kings to build it there on the cliff top way before there was such thing as thailand or siem country, ok! i suggest siem pad thugs check your date of independence again and it says 1292 or 1296, that way after preah vihear was built by the khmer great god-kings, ok! the date of siem independence looks like around the time after the greak khmer god-kings jayavarman VII's death which indicated by khmer history the beginning of the decline of the the great khmer civilization. that's why siem became free from khmer slavery and thus became independence. anyway...
khmer king jayavarman the 7th was the real last great god-kings to build any huge size temple monuments during the angkor civilization, meaning no kings after him build anymore great temple. siem definitely once was khmer slaves before they gained granted or gained independence from the khmer empire or khmer power after the death of king jayavarman the 7th ever since, you know!
My advise to PM Hun Sen is that prepare the Cambodian arm forces for war.....and do not accept, talk with the Thais about the 4.6sqKM there is no such thing. Let them start the war and we'll show them how horrible war is......do not blink.....they don't have the guts let them risk war with us poor Cambodian and we'll show them the bitterness of war.....
Hey Siem Bangcock Post and The Nation papers:
Stop your illegal ambition and fantasy about Khmer Preah Vihear Temple! It will always be a Khmer Temple through enternity!
One day, Khmer will regain all Khmer land that you Siem stole from us.
And one day, Preah Ko Preah Kaew will be returned to their home in Wat Preah Kaew Morakot in Phnom Penh once again!
There is nothing that Khmer need to negotiate with the Siem thieves...it's a waste of time trailing their silly tactics...these Siem thugs and thieves can only be taken seriously with BULLETS!!!
2:37pm,
No doubt slaves wered used to build Preah Vihear, and Angkor Wat.
It is not far fetch that some of those slaves could have been Siam.
One thing though, Cambodians cannot live in the glory of Jayavarman's of past centuries.
We have to look forward to the future, how to move forward in the 21st century.
The past Khmer Empire, Preah Vihear, and Angkor Wat must not continue to define who Khmer is. Otherwise, our passion for nationalism will drive us to blindness. This is what contribute to the psyche of Pot Pot.
2:45pm
Bravo...two thumbs UP!!!
Cheyo Prateh Kampuchea!
Cheyo Prateh Kampuchea!!
Cheyo Prateh Kampuchea!!!
Barachey Ah Chor Siem...
of course, we should look to the future while looking back to the past for learning purpose. nobody can relive the past because it is in different era of time, etc.... but it's good to understand the past, though. that's what history is written for us to study and learn the events in history, but not necessarily to imitate or repeat history! pol pot was stupid to the point of extreme or radical. when somebody in the position of influence or position of leader is extreme or radical, it is never good for humanity, i think. yes, then it becomes blindness!
There is no such thing as 4.6km dispute.this land for only road that cambodian can drive up to the temple,The thai used to said let the cambodian have the temple we take the 4.6km land so they can not drive up there let them use robe (voir) to claim up there.
3:21pm,
I'm not saying we forgeting our history. Khmer people should know our history.
We don't let our history and accomplishment define us.
Right now if you ask people about Cambodia, I can almost guarantee the answer is Pol Pot, Killing Field, Angkor Wat would come up. These things come up in their mind and frame their opinion about Cambodians.
I'm Cambodian, but I don't want to be defined by those things. I am an individual person.
Since Hun Sen was a Khmer Rouge commander, now a Khmer Rouge leader and had many of his political opponents and journalists assassinated, I wonder if he have any plan to assassinate the Thai Prime Minister (Ahbullshit Vejjajiva)?
Ahbulshit go stopping bomb blast in your emergency nation once for all and all for once.
Post a Comment