Borders do matter in Thai-Cambodia dispute

Thu, 05/26/2011
I Made Andi Arsana, Yogyakarta
The Jakarta Post

A casual conversation with a friend reminded me of one important view about borders. He jokingly said “in a modern world like this, I thought borders are no longer an issue.” I have been learning about border issues for a couple of years now and managed to learn one important thing: Borders do matter and they even still dictate nations in the world. In this context, my friend’s statement, to an extent, surprises me.

However, I also understand that he must not be alone. There might be millions of people, if not more, who do not realize that the world is changing when it comes to international borders.

One might agree that the most attention-grabbing border dispute in Asia recently is between Thailand and Cambodia. The two countries dispute sovereignty over a piece of land in their border area close to three temples: Preah Vihear, Ta Moan and Ta Krabey.

The latest incident took place early this month, claiming the lives of several people and forcefully displacing many more. The recent report by The Jakarta Post (May 19, 2011) revealed that the “repeated skirmishes have claimed at least 23 lives on both sides since early this year”.

Indonesia, in its capacity as the current chair of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has proactively offered mediation to help Thailand and Cambodia achieve a solution. Meetings held on April 7-8 in Bogor were a positive sign of ASEAN’s involvement, even though the result did not seem to be satisfactory.

Thailand tends to believe that the solution must be achieved bilaterally, while Cambodia welcomes third party intervention. In addition, it is worth noting that ASEAN has a policy of non-interference in each other’s domestic affairs, which, to an extent, also limits ASEAN’s role in finding solutions. Meanwhile, internal issues in Thailand and Cambodia also, to an extent, add fuel to the tension.

It is tempting to say that the solution for the Thai-Cambodia border dispute has to be very quick, for it is urgent. That might be the reason why people expected too much out of the recent 18th ASEAN Summit in Jakarta. Some opined that the summit was a failure because it achieved no significant results concerning the border dispute between Thailand and Cambodia.

Interestingly, border issues seemed to overshadow other important agendas of the summit, as if the border dispute was the only important issue to deal with. This once again indicates how important border issues are for nations in the world. Borders do matter.

Settling borders is by no means an easy task to accomplish. It involves technical and legal expertise for the use of political solutions. Borrowing the view of Stephen Jones (1945), creating boundaries involves four important steps, which are not necessarily sequential: Allocation, delimitation, demarcation and administration. Allocation deals with territory where parties agree on a broad division of territory.

In the delimitation step, parties involve political, legal and technical experts to decide on a precise alignment of boundaries and illustrate them on maps. Demarcation is required on the ground. The points and lines agreed in the delimitation stage are then defined on the ground where they are physically marked with pillars, posts and fences. The last step is administration, involving activities to maintain the boundaries, including comprehensive development for people residing around border areas.

In the case of Thailand and Cambodia, it seems that the allocation step has been agreed. However, precise division of land area around the temples (delimitation and demarcation) apparently needs more work. It is worth noting that the dispute is not about the ownership of the temples, as it has been decided by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 1962.

Cambodia is attempting to use the 1962 ICJ decision to strengthen its position in the current dispute. On April 28, 2011, Cambodia filed an application to the ICJ requesting interpretation of the 1962 judgment. In response, the ICJ has scheduled a public hearing on May 30-31, 2011, where both parties will be given opportunities to express their views through oral observations.

The role of technical expertise reminds us of a phenomenal border settlement in America around 250 years ago. Charles Masson (an astronomer) and Jeremiah Dixon (a surveyor) are acclaimed for their work to settle the borders among four British Colonies in America: Pennsylvania, Maryland, Delaware and West Virginia.

To acknowledge their role, the line is called Masson-Dixon line. While their technical expertise certainly helped them settle the borders, political will demonstrated by relevant parties undoubtedly made the settlement possible. Having learned from this border-making history, it seems that Thailand and Cambodia also need to demonstrate positive political will to solve border issues between them.

Good intentions from Indonesia/ASEAN and other third parties, when allowed, can only be effective with positive political will. As a surveyor, I don’t question the important role of technical expertise, but I also acknowledge that technical people cannot do much in the absence of political will.

The world is currently watching what happens between Thailand and Cambodia. While acknowledging that external parties cannot do much without the willingness of the parties in question to solve an issue, it is fair to say that the world has put hope and expectation on Indonesia’s leadership in ASEAN.

Finding a solution for the Thailand-Cambodia border dispute is essential for paving the way toward an ASEAN community in 2015. If there is anything we want the world to talk about when it refers to ASEAN, it is certainly not the issue of border disputes.

The writer is a lecturer at the Department of Geodetic Engineering, Gadjah Mada University. His research interests are in technical/geodetic and legal aspects of boundary delimitation and demarcation. The opinions expressed are his own.