The Nation/Asia News Network
THAILAND - Perhaps Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva has finally realised that he jumped on the wrong bandwagon over the controversial Preah Vihear Temple because his yellow shirts have turned against him and his government, accusing them of losing Thai territory.
The nationalist People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) alleges that the government had already recognised Cambodia's right over the temple, and victory over the delay in the consideration of Phnom Penh's management plan means nothing.
It's strange but true that the PAD, which is supposed to back this government, is echoing Cambodian Deputy Prime Minister Sok An's claim that Natural Resource and Environment Minister Suwit Khunkitti had accepted and signed the World Heritage Committee's decision 34 COM 7B.66.
One of five points in the decision cited that the committee "welcomed" steps taken by the state party (Cambodia) toward the establishment of an international coordinating committee (ICC) for the sustainable conservation of Preah Vihear.
Establishing the ICC is good, because the temple has been given World Heritage status since 2008. It is a basic requirement to have such a body run a heritage property.
However, much to PAD's delight, Thailand declined Cambodia's invitation to sit on the ICC. Establishing the ICC is equivalent to implementing the management plan, and the "welcome" as well as Suwit's acceptance justifies its implementation.
Common sense tells you that being invited to participate in the management of a World Heritage property should be an honour for Thailand. However, this government thought that joining the committee would be equivalent to accepting and recognising Cambodia's sovereignty over the temple and surrounding areas.
According to an International Court of Justice ruling in 1962, theHindu Khmer temple of Preah Vihear is situated in territory that is under the sovereignty of Cambodia.
When Abhisit was opposition leader, he and his alliance PAD used a very strange argument - the court ruling was only on the ruins of the temple, not the area, which comes under the sovereignty of Thailand. In other words, Thailand accepted that the temple belonged to Cambodia, but not the land the temple is sitting on.
If Thailand recognised any activities - be they by Cambodia or the World Heritage Committee - in the area under question, it could be seen as recognising Cambodia's sovereignty, they said.
In reality though, the 250,000 square metres that the temple is sitting on was relinquished by a 1962 Cabinet decision to Cambodia. Like it or not, that land has already been given away.
The area that should be under dispute is the 4.6 square kilometres to the west and the north of the temple, as both sides claim it is theirs. In its management plan for Preah Vihear, Cambodia does not include the disputed area in the buffer zone. So, there's not much point in Thailand opposing the plan.
Yet, the PAD has been going beyond expectations - declaring that Cambodia dared to claim the temple's surrounding area because Phnom Penh used and Thailand recognised the French-Siamese joint boundary committee's 1:200,000-scale map. According to the PAD, the best thing would be for Thailand to reject this map.
Unfortunately though, it was a Democrat-led government under Chuan Leekpai that signed the memorandum of understanding for boundary demarcation in 2000. The pact recognised the map and Siam-Franco treaties as historical documents for boundary demarcation.
The PAD is mounting pressure on the government, while Abhisit is in a difficult position of having to steer away from his own rhetoric. He cannot fiercely oppose the PAD, because his Democrat Party and the PAD's New Politics Party share the same political bas.
The only option would be to blame Cambodia, but that's not easy either because border security and lives of people could end up being at stake.
The nationalist People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) alleges that the government had already recognised Cambodia's right over the temple, and victory over the delay in the consideration of Phnom Penh's management plan means nothing.
It's strange but true that the PAD, which is supposed to back this government, is echoing Cambodian Deputy Prime Minister Sok An's claim that Natural Resource and Environment Minister Suwit Khunkitti had accepted and signed the World Heritage Committee's decision 34 COM 7B.66.
One of five points in the decision cited that the committee "welcomed" steps taken by the state party (Cambodia) toward the establishment of an international coordinating committee (ICC) for the sustainable conservation of Preah Vihear.
Establishing the ICC is good, because the temple has been given World Heritage status since 2008. It is a basic requirement to have such a body run a heritage property.
However, much to PAD's delight, Thailand declined Cambodia's invitation to sit on the ICC. Establishing the ICC is equivalent to implementing the management plan, and the "welcome" as well as Suwit's acceptance justifies its implementation.
Common sense tells you that being invited to participate in the management of a World Heritage property should be an honour for Thailand. However, this government thought that joining the committee would be equivalent to accepting and recognising Cambodia's sovereignty over the temple and surrounding areas.
According to an International Court of Justice ruling in 1962, the
When Abhisit was opposition leader, he and his alliance PAD used a very strange argument - the court ruling was only on the ruins of the temple, not the area, which comes under the sovereignty of Thailand. In other words, Thailand accepted that the temple belonged to Cambodia, but not the land the temple is sitting on.
If Thailand recognised any activities - be they by Cambodia or the World Heritage Committee - in the area under question, it could be seen as recognising Cambodia's sovereignty, they said.
In reality though, the 250,000 square metres that the temple is sitting on was relinquished by a 1962 Cabinet decision to Cambodia. Like it or not, that land has already been given away.
The area that should be under dispute is the 4.6 square kilometres to the west and the north of the temple, as both sides claim it is theirs. In its management plan for Preah Vihear, Cambodia does not include the disputed area in the buffer zone. So, there's not much point in Thailand opposing the plan.
Yet, the PAD has been going beyond expectations - declaring that Cambodia dared to claim the temple's surrounding area because Phnom Penh used and Thailand recognised the French-Siamese joint boundary committee's 1:200,000-scale map. According to the PAD, the best thing would be for Thailand to reject this map.
Unfortunately though, it was a Democrat-led government under Chuan Leekpai that signed the memorandum of understanding for boundary demarcation in 2000. The pact recognised the map and Siam-Franco treaties as historical documents for boundary demarcation.
The PAD is mounting pressure on the government, while Abhisit is in a difficult position of having to steer away from his own rhetoric. He cannot fiercely oppose the PAD, because his Democrat Party and the PAD's New Politics Party share the same political bas.
The only option would be to blame Cambodia, but that's not easy either because border security and lives of people could end up being at stake.
11 comments:
Yay! Vejja Jiva - you will be cooked. I do not know whether or not Thais consider our great Kings Suryavarman II and Jayavarman VII as Thai Kings? If not, why they claim the temple to be theirs?
Preah Vihear is a Cambodian property.
Thailand prosecutes Cambodia to obtain Preah Vihear.
Cambodia has nothing to win here.
Cambodia lost Preah Vihear or lost nothing.
The case should be already ended.
Cambodian governement is able to delay the court decision.
What a dump !
Sok An is too incompetent to manage the question, remove him from there.
Thailand only has themselves to blame... Because the use PV for politics and there is no grounding to begin with and they know that... That's why the world must not be fooled to thinking Thailand's doing for the world peace. Clearly, they are taking advantage from their smaller and poorer neighbor or neighbors.
Shameless Siamese writer of the article who said "In reality though, the 250,000 square metres that the temple is sitting on was relinquished by a 1962 Cabinet decision to Cambodia. Like it or not, that land has already been given away". Hey, Siamese Thief, can you take your ancestors from the grave and asked them where was there origin? Did they use to be robbers in southern China?
I'm not interested in where the Tai's ancestor comes from.
But here's my thought about the management of the "dispute" area.
Condition for management:
the Khmer-Thais, the Thai-Kuis, and the Tha-Mon, which are the locals and original inhabitants consisting of our ancient Khmer fabric society, will gain the large benefit of the development of their ancestral heritage.
not interested in doing business deal just so Thailand can come stake a claim and make profit for their own country and government while our families, and members of the Khmer descendants who should bear the grace of this development are left behind, discouraged from learning their own language and culture and proudly proclaiming their identity.
To me, if I am a Khmer royalty and Khmer official, this is foremost important and any dealing of "reconciliation" management of the temple will have to explicitly list those groups in Thai society as the main beneficiaries from the project on the Thai side of the border. This has to be put down on paper before it is sign.
And there has to be accountable transparency where Cambodia can check Thailand on it's condition.
Otherwise, Thailand, have neither cultural rights, nor historical rights to the properties of the Khmer people.
Your reconciliation, Mr. Abishit, should start with funding more Khmer indigenous language education and increasing capacity and school like Mr. Cheymonkol's project, except on larger scale.
Let us see that first then we can think about whether the bigger condition of Preah Vihear and the benefits to former subjects of the Khmer empire can be met by Thailand.
The tais were SLAVES, therefore cannot claim common heritage with their MASTERS, the Angkorian Khmers. That's HISTORY.
from what i've read and understand so far, it seemed like pad thai people are running thailand and the world? maybe? it seemed like thai gov't is catering to pad view more than doing the right thing by law, whether it thai law or international law and so forth. now, pad's arguments have a lot of flaws to it, thus it is hard for a khmer person like me or even my country cambodia to accept. the pad's argument is so biased lending only in thai interest by disregarding the law, cambodia's view and so forth. and thai gov't still allowing pad to rule thailand? i think cambodia and the world need to scruntinize the meaning or philosophy of thai's pad group (i think it stands for people's against dictatorship or something like that). now one way to find a solve to all of this is to study and examine the way of this pad group and their political phiolosophy to see if they are biased or racist against khmer. if they are, then they are not suitable in the thai gov't because then thailand and cambodia will never have peace and good neighborly cooperation because pad is in my view is too extreme or radical and cannot handle the truth or the law. if thailand and the world or even cambodia to cater only to the pad group, then everything in cambodia and everything in the world would all be thailand. thai everything, really! so, now we need to see and understand what is pad group in thailand? are they good for the region, let alone thailand and its neighbors or are they just some kind of scapegoat group for something else hidden secret in thailand? we have to wonder and study and examine and scrutinize them. maybe someone knowledge about this political group can give or educate the broard audience here or anywhere.
pad's view is so bias. how could thailand gov't let this group of people interfere with their law or the international law? i think if thailand were to take over by pad group, thailand would have no friends at all in the world!
10:50,
even slaves contribute to the building and up keeping of these monuments. From construction down, they were either all slaves or combination of voluntarily subjects who thought they were doing good merits for their king.
Tai has no sizable community or probably had not even migrated down during at the time of Preah Vihear. Nevertheless, over 1.5 million people today in Thailand are Khmers and so many other are also Kui and Mon. These group who were originally subjects of the Preah Vihear King's kingdom, and still living along these border should have the shared benefit in some way or fashion.
now, is pad group thai experts? thai/khmer problem calls for experts' work to solve it; if pad is not experts, they should be out of the picture of thai gov't, law, etc... otherwise, they are interfering with the process needlessly, not good if thailand and cambodia want to solve this problem peacefully and bilaterally, etc...
Anonymous said...We won Preah Vihear by international judges 9 to 3.How come Thai government still complaining about it?.The Preah Vihear is belong to Khmer.Thai must obey the international laws.These are not Khmer or Thai laws.Thai was lost Preah Vihear since 1962.Thai must stop barking or crying like a tiny baby.
Post a Comment