With domestic politics behind the Thai-Cambodian conflict, Asean must tread carefully and neutrally
Feb 22, 2011
By Simon Tay
Today Online (Singapore)
Like two fighting students brought before the class monitor, Thailand and Cambodia may be cajoled to continue the tenuous ceasefire, shake hands and give the semblance of making up. But so long as domestic imperatives and ambitions dictate, no lasting peace is possible and ASEAN should not pretend otherwise.
Shelling and shots on the Thai-Cambodian border between Feb 4 and 7 have inflicted casualties and deaths among soldiers as well as civilians. Voices call for the Association of South-east Asian Nations (ASEAN) to intervene. At its ministerial meeting today, the regional group must be seen to do something or it will lose credibility as a security community.
Realism is needed, however. We need to see why violence has flared repeatedly since 2008, when Khmer ownership of the Preah Vihear temple has been recognised since 1962, and understand why Cambodia seeks intervention while Thailand prefers bilateral discussions. Only then can ASEAN know what best to do, rather than try to be a mini-United Nations Security Council.
The reality is that the Preah Vihear temple is the focal point and not the primary cause of bilateral tensions. Nor is it ancient animosity. This flare-up is fuelled by current domestic politics. This is especially true in Thailand, coloured by the Red and Yellow Shirts and other factions. In Cambodia, the Hun Sen government seeks a wider influence and is mobilising around the issue.
Thai politics first. Remember in 2008, the Thai Foreign Minister then, Mr Noppodon Pattama, was forced to resign after UNESCO listed the temple as a world heritage site. Yellow Shirts used the issue as a nationalistic rallying point for an early and significant step in pushing out the pro-Thaksin government.
The Democrat-led alliance that took over is now more than two years in office, and elections are widely expected by June. Demonstrations are increasingly prominent in Bangkok once again. The incumbent Democrats have a complex and evolving relationship with the Yellow Shirts.
Current Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya actively supported the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) and the Yellow Shirts movement. But as elections loom, the PAD seems to be shifting away from the Democrats.
In this increasingly charged atmosphere, seven Thais - Yellow Shirts and one Democrat MP and former vice-minister, Panich Vikitsreth - visited the area last December. When the Cambodian authorities arrested them for allegedly crossing the border, this rekindled the issue. Two Thais remain in Cambodian custody and when Foreign Minister Kasit visited them in prison on Feb 4, the military clashes flared again.
What motivates Cambodia is harder to read. Personal reasons play a part. Rumours circulate that Premier Hun Sen remains close to his ousted Thai counterpart Thaksin Shinawatra, who was appointed as Cambodian economic adviser. While Thaksin has since resigned, ties between Mr Hun Sen and the current Thai Premier, Mr Abhisit Vejajjiva, are reported to lack rapport.
There is also a patriotic gloss. Mr Hun Sen's party too played up Preah Vihear to increase electoral support. The Premier visited the temple dressed in full military fatigues and, at times, even claimed Thailand was preparing to invade.
The Hun Sen administration has been trying to garner international community support and legitimacy as the "victim". Accordingly, it has invited regional or international intervention and even suggested observers to monitor the ceasefire.
Cambodia has been subject to interventions by the United Nations and experienced ASEAN's 1997 decision to postpone its membership after heavy factional fighting. The government also faces on going criticisms about human rights, corruption and land grabs affecting the poor.
If Cambodia secures a diplomatic victory, this burnishes Mr Hun Sen's nationalistic credentials and strengthens his international standing. Conversely, if the Abhisit government "loses", it could weaken the Democrats considerably for the coming elections.
As the 19th century German military theorist Carl Clausewitz said: "War is politics by other means". This is a sad verdict on the dispute, especially when lives have been lost, but that does not make it any less true.
What, then, can ASEAN do?
The ASEAN Charter empowers the chairman to offer good offices, conciliation and mediation and the current chair, Indonesian Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa, has actively shuttled between the capitals. ASEAN must discuss the issue for its credibility and can help the process.
But realistically, results will be limited when the two sides have reasons of realpolitik to continue bickering. ASEAN cannot impose a solution. Care must be taken to maintain neutrality and avoid favouring one side's proposals - such as Cambodia's suggestion to have ASEAN monitor the ceasefire.
Non-intervention in the domestic affairs of the state remains a cardinal principle in the ASEAN Charter and there are clearly domestic factors at play. If ASEAN forgets this and over-reaches, this will be regretted later. The group can easily get bogged down in controversy and be distracted from necessary efforts in other important areas of cooperation.
Like two fighting students brought before the class monitor, Thailand and Cambodia may be cajoled to continue the tenuous ceasefire, shake hands and give the semblance of making up. But so long as domestic imperatives and ambitions dictate, no lasting peace is possible and ASEAN should not pretend otherwise.
Simon Tay is chairman of the Singapore Institute of International Affairs, a member of the ASEAN Institutes of Strategic and International Studies.
2 comments:
LOOK....WHO'S NEXT ?
this simon tay guy eventhough he is a chairman of some international study, he seems only know way less than half of Cambodia, her history in relation to thailand, Cambodian phsychi, on going foreign policy, etc. this guy is half baked at best. he has to try again some other time.
Post a Comment