Reading the article below, I am perplexed and appalled to hear that the Thai are suggesting that Cambodia shares its cake (Preah Vihear) equally with Thailand by asking for a joint management. It would be interesting to hear a Thai proposal of a joint management of the former Khmer temples of Phimai and Phnom Rung which are now under Thai control. It is regrettable that the Thai never wanted to let go of Preah Vihear which had been illegally occupied by Thailand from 1940-1962 when the International Court of Justice adjudicated to give the ownership of the temple to Cambodia. By agreeing to list only the temple Cambodia had already been short-changed. Under the 1908 treaty and again under the ICJ's decision in 1962, all the surrounding areas were Cambodian territories. After this latest agreement between Sok An and Noppadon Pattama Cambodia has certainly lost some parts of its lands in the areas. Sad!
(Khmerization)
by Nophakhun Limsamarnphunnop
Bangkok Post
Cambodia should consider Joint inscription of Preah Vihear site
Unesco's World Heritage Committee is due to meet next week in Canada to consider Cambodia's proposal for inscription of the ancient Preah Vihear temple on the World Heritage list.
I believe that Unesco will not approve the Cambodian bid at this stage, despite the Thai Cabinet's recent endorsement of a joint communique between the two countries on this matter.
According to this joint communique - signed by Thai Foreign Minister Noppadon Pattama and Cambodian Deputy Premier Sok An on June 18 - both countries agreed to five major points that were based on the results of a bilateral meeting on May 22.
First, Thailand explicitly supports the inscription, based on a map prepared by Cambodia, at the upcoming 32nd session of the World Heritage Committee in Canada.
Second, Cambodia accepts the inscription without - at this stage - buffer zones on the northern and western areas of Preah Vihear temple.
Third, the map presented by Cambodia shall supersede the other maps and graphic references.
Fourth, pending the work of the Joint Commission for Land Boundary concerning western and northern areas of the temple, the two countries agree to prepare jointly the management plan of these areas for consideration by Unesco in 2010.
Fifth, the inscription of Preah Vihear shall be without prejudice to the rights of Thailand and Cambodia on demarcation works of the two countries.
All these points were debated fiercely in the Thai Parliament on June 22 and June 23, with opposition MPs accusing the government of conceding sovereignty to Cambodia.
In my opinion, Thailand's national interest was compromised at least as far as the negotiations over the temple were concerned.
As indicated by former foreign minister Nit Pibulsongkarm, the country's interest would be best protected if the foreign ministry insisted on a joint nomination together with Cambodia for Preah Vihear's inscription as a World Heritage site.
Second, Thailand should make it clear to Cambodia that it would oppose any unilateral attempt for Prear Vihear's inscription.
In the spirit of the founding of Unesco, it is highly unlikely that the UN body will go ahead with the inscription of the site should there be any opposition from a neighbouring country.
In the case of Preah Vihear, built around 1,100BC, Thailand's national interest would be compromised because the endorsement of Cambodia's single-country nomination would serve as a basis that bars any future attempt by Thailand to contest its sovereignty over the temple, which is situated just next to its border.
More importantly, the issue of the surrounding areas, currently in Thailand's territory, would be complicated and the integrity of Preah Vihear complex would be compromised, given that a number of elements of the temple such as a giant reservoir and the Naga staircase are situated in Thai territory.
Again, it would be best for both countries to jointly nominate the temple as the World Heritage site so as to avoid these territorial and management issues.
It would also be considered reasonable if the temple and its peripheral areas are turned into a joint-development area co-owned by Cambodia and Thailand.
Any monetary or other benefits derived from this joint effort could then be shared between the two nations in a fashion similar to the Joint Development Area between Thailand and Malaysia, covering oil and gas resources in the countries' territorial waters.
(Khmerization)
by Nophakhun Limsamarnphunnop
Bangkok Post
Cambodia should consider Joint inscription of Preah Vihear site
Unesco's World Heritage Committee is due to meet next week in Canada to consider Cambodia's proposal for inscription of the ancient Preah Vihear temple on the World Heritage list.
I believe that Unesco will not approve the Cambodian bid at this stage, despite the Thai Cabinet's recent endorsement of a joint communique between the two countries on this matter.
According to this joint communique - signed by Thai Foreign Minister Noppadon Pattama and Cambodian Deputy Premier Sok An on June 18 - both countries agreed to five major points that were based on the results of a bilateral meeting on May 22.
First, Thailand explicitly supports the inscription, based on a map prepared by Cambodia, at the upcoming 32nd session of the World Heritage Committee in Canada.
Second, Cambodia accepts the inscription without - at this stage - buffer zones on the northern and western areas of Preah Vihear temple.
Third, the map presented by Cambodia shall supersede the other maps and graphic references.
Fourth, pending the work of the Joint Commission for Land Boundary concerning western and northern areas of the temple, the two countries agree to prepare jointly the management plan of these areas for consideration by Unesco in 2010.
Fifth, the inscription of Preah Vihear shall be without prejudice to the rights of Thailand and Cambodia on demarcation works of the two countries.
All these points were debated fiercely in the Thai Parliament on June 22 and June 23, with opposition MPs accusing the government of conceding sovereignty to Cambodia.
In my opinion, Thailand's national interest was compromised at least as far as the negotiations over the temple were concerned.
As indicated by former foreign minister Nit Pibulsongkarm, the country's interest would be best protected if the foreign ministry insisted on a joint nomination together with Cambodia for Preah Vihear's inscription as a World Heritage site.
Second, Thailand should make it clear to Cambodia that it would oppose any unilateral attempt for Prear Vihear's inscription.
In the spirit of the founding of Unesco, it is highly unlikely that the UN body will go ahead with the inscription of the site should there be any opposition from a neighbouring country.
In the case of Preah Vihear, built around 1,100BC, Thailand's national interest would be compromised because the endorsement of Cambodia's single-country nomination would serve as a basis that bars any future attempt by Thailand to contest its sovereignty over the temple, which is situated just next to its border.
More importantly, the issue of the surrounding areas, currently in Thailand's territory, would be complicated and the integrity of Preah Vihear complex would be compromised, given that a number of elements of the temple such as a giant reservoir and the Naga staircase are situated in Thai territory.
Again, it would be best for both countries to jointly nominate the temple as the World Heritage site so as to avoid these territorial and management issues.
It would also be considered reasonable if the temple and its peripheral areas are turned into a joint-development area co-owned by Cambodia and Thailand.
Any monetary or other benefits derived from this joint effort could then be shared between the two nations in a fashion similar to the Joint Development Area between Thailand and Malaysia, covering oil and gas resources in the countries' territorial waters.
No comments:
Post a Comment