Click on map to read. The line that says "border claim by Cambodia" is a line agreed by Thailand and Cambodia in the 1907 Treaty. The line that says "border claim by Thailand" is a line unilaterally-drawn by Thailand after the 1962 world court verdict.Published: 30/07/2010
Bangkok Post
What is the point of having stone ruins recognised and developed as a World Heritage site when these ancient stones may yet have to stand as sad and solitary witness to a war? Had circumstances been simpler, there would never have been any dispute over what the answer should be.
First, the 9th century stone temple of Preah Vihear, or Khao Phra Viharn in Thai, deserves to be protected for its architectural integrity and cultural value. Any status or recognition given to the site so that it can earn the attention and financial assistance it needs and deserves, should always be welcome. There is no question that this Hindu temple should be preserved and promoted as a destination for travellers from around the world. Second, war is a needless, destructive affair for any country, let alone neighbouring nations.
But of course, the circumstances surrounding the cliff-top, hundreds-of-years-old stone temple are anything but simple. For decades Thailand and Cambodia wrangled over where one country's border began and where the other's ended and in whose territory the temple stood, until the matter was brought before the International Court of Justice, which ruled in 1962 that the temple itself belonged to Cambodia.
The ruling was of little help, however, when it came to the border dispute - both Thailand and Cambodia claim an overlapping area of about 4.6sqkm - since the World Court refrained from deciding under whose sovereignty the area around the temple was. The ICJ verdict offered no respite to the feelings of people on both sides of the border: some continued to interact with one another and ply their trade; others were fed extremely nationalistic views of the territorial dispute that they lost all perspective of what the issue really was about.
Now, the presentation of a management plan for Preah Vihear by the Cambodian government to the World Heritage Committee, to fulfill the inscription of the Hindu temple as a World Heritage site which was approved in Quebec, Canada in 2008, has opened up old wounds and ignited fresh debate about what Thailand can and should do, if the WHC accepts Cambodia's management plan which, according to news reports, includes one square kilometre of the buffer zone that is still under dispute.
Emotions are running high on both the Thai and Cambodian side. Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva has instructed the Thai delegation to protest against Cambodia's management plan, even to the point of Thailand resigning its membership of the WHC if the body agrees to let the plan go through. Meanwhile, Cambodia's Foreign Minister Hor Namhong has had some sharp words for the Thai protest.
As government spokesman Panitan Wattanayagorn noted, the issues surrounding Preah Vihear are not simple, nor are they easy to resolve, despite what people may wish or want. Territorial disputes can and do arouse strong emotion, which easily gets out of hand, resulting in fatal clashes, as have been seen in the past.
The best way out of the present untenable situation would be for the WHC, Thailand and Cambodia to separate the need for Preah Vihear to be developed so that it is fit to be qualified as a World Heritage site; and the need for Thailand and Cambodia to demarcate their disputed border. Bundling the issues together - which seems to be what the management plan for Preah Vihear is about - and forcing the disputing parties to accept the package can only worsen the disagreement and fuel resentment.
First, the 9th century stone temple of Preah Vihear, or Khao Phra Viharn in Thai, deserves to be protected for its architectural integrity and cultural value. Any status or recognition given to the site so that it can earn the attention and financial assistance it needs and deserves, should always be welcome. There is no question that this Hindu temple should be preserved and promoted as a destination for travellers from around the world. Second, war is a needless, destructive affair for any country, let alone neighbouring nations.
But of course, the circumstances surrounding the cliff-top, hundreds-of-years-old stone temple are anything but simple. For decades Thailand and Cambodia wrangled over where one country's border began and where the other's ended and in whose territory the temple stood, until the matter was brought before the International Court of Justice, which ruled in 1962 that the temple itself belonged to Cambodia.
The ruling was of little help, however, when it came to the border dispute - both Thailand and Cambodia claim an overlapping area of about 4.6sqkm - since the World Court refrained from deciding under whose sovereignty the area around the temple was. The ICJ verdict offered no respite to the feelings of people on both sides of the border: some continued to interact with one another and ply their trade; others were fed extremely nationalistic views of the territorial dispute that they lost all perspective of what the issue really was about.
Now, the presentation of a management plan for Preah Vihear by the Cambodian government to the World Heritage Committee, to fulfill the inscription of the Hindu temple as a World Heritage site which was approved in Quebec, Canada in 2008, has opened up old wounds and ignited fresh debate about what Thailand can and should do, if the WHC accepts Cambodia's management plan which, according to news reports, includes one square kilometre of the buffer zone that is still under dispute.
Emotions are running high on both the Thai and Cambodian side. Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva has instructed the Thai delegation to protest against Cambodia's management plan, even to the point of Thailand resigning its membership of the WHC if the body agrees to let the plan go through. Meanwhile, Cambodia's Foreign Minister Hor Namhong has had some sharp words for the Thai protest.
As government spokesman Panitan Wattanayagorn noted, the issues surrounding Preah Vihear are not simple, nor are they easy to resolve, despite what people may wish or want. Territorial disputes can and do arouse strong emotion, which easily gets out of hand, resulting in fatal clashes, as have been seen in the past.
The best way out of the present untenable situation would be for the WHC, Thailand and Cambodia to separate the need for Preah Vihear to be developed so that it is fit to be qualified as a World Heritage site; and the need for Thailand and Cambodia to demarcate their disputed border. Bundling the issues together - which seems to be what the management plan for Preah Vihear is about - and forcing the disputing parties to accept the package can only worsen the disagreement and fuel resentment.
No comments:
Post a Comment