ASEAN and the Cambodia-Thailand row

Thu, 11/19/2009
Huala Adolf , Bandung
Opinion
The Jakarta Post

The row between Cambodia and Thailand has been worsening recently. The decision of the Cambodia government to appoint former Thai leader Thaksin Shinawatra as its personal and economic advisor appears to be a clear case of interfering in Thai internal affairs.

The situation between the two countries is rather sensitive. Besides this row, the border dispute between the two countries is still fragile, while the long dispute over Preah Vihear Temple is still in limbo.

ASEAN has, for some time, been paying closer attention to the relationship between these countries. The recent call from ASEAN to both countries to end the row over the appointment of Thaksin has been met with reluctance from both countries. Given the scope of the dispute, this row is a test case for ASEAN.

ASEAN was set up to handle tension, disputes and conflicts in the region. Any conflict that emerges between or among members is solved by way of musyawarah mufakat, or negotiation and mutually agreed settlements, the terms recognized by all ASEAN leaders.

This step involves respecting the integrity and independence of each member country and strongly upholding the principle of non interference.

Over time, the way disputes have been resolved has gradually improved. This improvement, however, still reflects the spirit of musyawarah mufakat.

The present row is not only sensitive, but also somewhat political. The situation is heavily colored and is also exacerbated by other disputes, in particular the ongoing border dispute.

Since the row is political, it is therefore necessary to see whether the dispute settlement mecha-nism available under ASEAN is appropriate.

The use of legal mechanism, through negotiation or diplomacy, is therefore the best possible solution.

The regional conflicts taking place in most parts of the world have been successfully resolved by negotiation between concerned parties. The Latin American crisis in 2008 is an important example of the successful settlement of regional disputes.

The dispute between Columbia and Ecuador was negotiated in a summit hosted by the Dominican Republic.

What ASEAN could do to resolve the current dispute could be to not only call on the parties to end the conflict, but provide a concrete resolution, such as providing support or facilitating a meeting or summit between the two parties.

ASEAN's efforts, of course, will not succeed without the good faith of the parties and their genuine intention to end the crisis. Thailand on the other should refrain from using force or the threat of using force. On the other hand, Cambodia should take into account the sensitivity of the "Thaksin Shinawatra" issue in the eyes of the Thai people.

The writer is the lecturer in international law at the University of Padjadjaran's School of Law in Bandung.A

A 'world without borders' ... as long as it servesThailand's benefits?

PREAH VIHEAR TEMPLE: It's time to embrace 'world without borders'

June 23, 2008
By Subhatra Bhumiprabhas
The Nation (Thailand)

Historians warn row with Cambodia could trigger dangerous nationalism

A political struggle in Bangkok has once more triggered nationalistic fervour over whether Preah Vihear Temple is truly Cambodia's.

Many people are now trying to recall exactly what happened when the International Court of Justice ruled on the matter almost half a century ago.

Some historians and anthropologists warned disgruntled parties against being consumed by emotion and to avoid the pitfalls nationalistic tendencies often bring.

Historian Thanet Aphornsuvan wondered whether it was wise to return to border disputes, which had often sparked terrible wars in the old world.

More advanced countries prefer to embrace the notion of a world without borders, he said.

"Whenever the issue of Preah Vihear arises, it seems some people forget we are entering a new era where the world is viewed without borders," said Thanet, dean of Thammasat University's faculty of liberal arts.

"They appear willing to die for an area covering four square kilometres."

Among his chief concerns is the danger of politicians whipping up nationalism, amid ignorance and poor information regarding the temple's history.

If the matter escalated, it may cut a deeper wound between the two countries, he warned.

The historian said he recently learned that the Unesco issue would not have any effect on Thai territory or sovereignty, should Preah Vihear Temple be put on Unesco's world heritage list.

Under article 11 of Unesco's Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, "the inclusion of a property situated in a territory, sovereignty or jurisdiction over which is claimed by more than one state shall in no way prejudice the rights of the parties to the dispute".

The dean said he agreed with the idea that world heritage sites belong to people of all races, irrespective of the territory they come from.

Historian Somrit Luechai shared the concern, especially what stands to be lost or gained by returning to a dispute that had wrecked both sides for generations.

"When talking about [the border dispute], they only raised some issues of borders and national interest. But they seem to forget about the people who are born and live their lives there," he said.

Anthropologist Pichet Saiphan agreed. Preah Vihear today should no longer be chained by politics and nationalism, he said.

The key concern should be what benefits the Thai government and people would receive if the temple was listed a world heritage site.

"Who will gain the benefits? How about the locals there? Will any benefit go to them? We have to discuss that, not about land that is largely a meaningless issue today," said Pichet, who teaches at Thammasat University's faculty of sociology and anthropology.

Formulating the notion of lost territory was necessary to boost a nationalistic ideology, said historian Thongchai Winichakul, the author of "Siam Mapped: A History of the Geo-Body of a Nation".

Without that, "Thai nationalism could have crumbled," he said. A contrived memory "had to be fed repeatedly to people until we believe it is true", he said.

"If people want to fight for all disputable cases, there are probably hundreds of them to choose and to send soldiers to die for," he said.

Every country had lost territories in the past but nobody actually lost or gained anything, he noted.

But the idea of losing territory is powerful to stir nationalistic fervour, especially among politicians everywhere, he said.

Chevron given 10-year extension off Thailand's coast [-Cambodia and Thailand have oil disputing claims going back to 1972]

Monday, October 29, 2007
East Bay Business Times

Chevron Corp. has received a 10-year extension for natural gas production in the Gulf of Thailand.

San Ramon-based Chevron (NYSE: CVX) has interests ranging from 60 percent to 80 percent on former Unocal leases in the center of the gulf bounded by Thailand on the north and west and Cambodia and Vietnam on the east. The leases from the Thai government expired in 2012 and have now been extended to 2022.

Chevron, which bought El Segundo-based Unocal in 2005, hopes to eventually boost natural gas production from these leases to 1 billion cubic feet per day.

David O'Reilly, Chevron's chairman and CEO, traveled to Bangkok for a ceremony surrounding the deal.

Chevron shares the leases with Mitsui Oil Exploration Co. and PTT Exploration and Production Public Co. Along with its venture partners, Chevron, which has about 180 platforms in the gulf, has paid about $3.5 billion in royalties to Thailand since 1981.

These leases -- for blocks 10, 11, 12 and 13 in areas named Erawan, Satun, Funan, Banpot, Plamuk, Yala, Pla Daeng and Platong -- are along a rough north-south line to the west of another area where Cambodia and Thailand have disputing claims going back to 1972.