Preah Vihear aerial view.August 3, 2010
By Supalak Ganjanakhundee
The Nation
The boundary dispute with Cambodia and controversy over Preah Vihear Temple have become mixed up and widely politicised as political groups inflame the issues and accuse each other of losing Thai territory.
Some of the most vociferous of those charges and issues are:
* Nationalist groups under the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) umbrella have accused the government of possibly losing territory to Cambodia due to a document signed in 2000 by the Democrat-led administration headed by Chuan Leekpai.
* Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva has shifted the blame to former foreign minister Noppadon Pattama for giving Cambodia the chance to list the Preah Vihear as a world heritage site.
* Natural Resource and Environment Minister Suwit Khunkitti called a press briefing on his return from the World Heritage meeting in Brazil to claim credit for convincing the committee to delay consideration of Cambodia's management plan for Preah Vihear.
* Unlike Abhisit, Suwit thanked PAD leader Chamlong Srimuang for a protest staged in front of Unesco's regional office in Bangkok last week, in support of his efforts to block the Cambodian temple plan. Suwit implied that his mission was defending Thai sovereignty over the Preah Vihear.
* Meanwhile, Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya called another press conference yesterday to defend the 2000 Memorandum of Understanding on boundary demarcation, while his yellow-shirt alliance group turned their guns on the government for demanding its abolition.
The issues of borders and World Heritage listing of Preah Vihear were linked as the PAD tried to say that listing was equivalent to the loss of Thai sovereignty over areas where the temple was situated.
Based on the Siam-Franco treaties signed in 1904 and 1907, as well as an annex map made by the Siam-French joint boundary commission, the International Court of Justice ruled in 1962 that Preah Vihear Temple was situated on land under Cambodian sovereignty.
The Thai government has basically argued that the court ruled only on the temple complex, and left questions about the boundary between the two countries unclear.
The PAD is concerned that the 2000 MOU recognised the Siam-Franco treaties and the French map as basic documents for boundary demarcation. And, as a result, Thailand may lose many parts of its claim to land by the temple, in accordance with the map, it said.
PAD member Veera Somkwamkid submitted a demand to the government yesterday to revoke the 2000 MOU.
Foreign Minister Kasit said the MOU could not be terminated, as it was the sole legal instrument and framework for boundary negotiation with Cambodia.
"The MOU is not a matter of territory loss. It could not change the boundary line which was already demarcated more than a century ago," Kasit said.
In fact the border between Thailand and Cambodia was demarcated during French colonial time. The MOU merely provided facilities for the two countries' boundary committee to jointly survey the border and find boundary pillars which were partly damaged, he said.
With the MOU, negotiation on boundary demarcation would be conducted in accordance with customary international law, Kasit said.
The MOU also prohibited the two countries from making any changes before the joint boundary committee completed its work, he said.
Former foreign minister Noppadon called yet another press conference to challenge Prime Minister Abhisit's claim that territory was lost when Noppadon supported Phnom Penh over World Heritage listing for the historic temple.
A joint communique he signed with Cambodia's deputy Prime Minister Sok An in 2008 to support the Preah Vihear proposal sought to protect Thai sovereignty. It made clear Cambodia would not take the disputed area of 4.6 square kilometres as a buffer zone for the temple, he said.
"Let's see the truth. Prime Minister Abhisit always uses doublespeak. The Thai government since the Chuan administration has recognised Cambodia's right over Preah Vihear and areas relinquished by Thailand to the temple when it declared the area of Phra Viharn national park in 1998," he said. "The 2008 joint communique, which was later revoked, changed nothing."
Some of the most vociferous of those charges and issues are:
* Nationalist groups under the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) umbrella have accused the government of possibly losing territory to Cambodia due to a document signed in 2000 by the Democrat-led administration headed by Chuan Leekpai.
* Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva has shifted the blame to former foreign minister Noppadon Pattama for giving Cambodia the chance to list the Preah Vihear as a world heritage site.
* Natural Resource and Environment Minister Suwit Khunkitti called a press briefing on his return from the World Heritage meeting in Brazil to claim credit for convincing the committee to delay consideration of Cambodia's management plan for Preah Vihear.
* Unlike Abhisit, Suwit thanked PAD leader Chamlong Srimuang for a protest staged in front of Unesco's regional office in Bangkok last week, in support of his efforts to block the Cambodian temple plan. Suwit implied that his mission was defending Thai sovereignty over the Preah Vihear.
* Meanwhile, Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya called another press conference yesterday to defend the 2000 Memorandum of Understanding on boundary demarcation, while his yellow-shirt alliance group turned their guns on the government for demanding its abolition.
The issues of borders and World Heritage listing of Preah Vihear were linked as the PAD tried to say that listing was equivalent to the loss of Thai sovereignty over areas where the temple was situated.
Based on the Siam-Franco treaties signed in 1904 and 1907, as well as an annex map made by the Siam-French joint boundary commission, the International Court of Justice ruled in 1962 that Preah Vihear Temple was situated on land under Cambodian sovereignty.
The Thai government has basically argued that the court ruled only on the temple complex, and left questions about the boundary between the two countries unclear.
The PAD is concerned that the 2000 MOU recognised the Siam-Franco treaties and the French map as basic documents for boundary demarcation. And, as a result, Thailand may lose many parts of its claim to land by the temple, in accordance with the map, it said.
PAD member Veera Somkwamkid submitted a demand to the government yesterday to revoke the 2000 MOU.
Foreign Minister Kasit said the MOU could not be terminated, as it was the sole legal instrument and framework for boundary negotiation with Cambodia.
"The MOU is not a matter of territory loss. It could not change the boundary line which was already demarcated more than a century ago," Kasit said.
In fact the border between Thailand and Cambodia was demarcated during French colonial time. The MOU merely provided facilities for the two countries' boundary committee to jointly survey the border and find boundary pillars which were partly damaged, he said.
With the MOU, negotiation on boundary demarcation would be conducted in accordance with customary international law, Kasit said.
The MOU also prohibited the two countries from making any changes before the joint boundary committee completed its work, he said.
Former foreign minister Noppadon called yet another press conference to challenge Prime Minister Abhisit's claim that territory was lost when Noppadon supported Phnom Penh over World Heritage listing for the historic temple.
A joint communique he signed with Cambodia's deputy Prime Minister Sok An in 2008 to support the Preah Vihear proposal sought to protect Thai sovereignty. It made clear Cambodia would not take the disputed area of 4.6 square kilometres as a buffer zone for the temple, he said.
"Let's see the truth. Prime Minister Abhisit always uses doublespeak. The Thai government since the Chuan administration has recognised Cambodia's right over Preah Vihear and areas relinquished by Thailand to the temple when it declared the area of Phra Viharn national park in 1998," he said. "The 2008 joint communique, which was later revoked, changed nothing."
2 comments:
Thailand will try to increase more tensions in the area. Thailand will threaten Cambodia as frequently as possible to turn what they called disputed area to become real disputed area. What I worry is that Thailand archived to declare the area as disputed area (while previously was not), They seem to move to the next step. Cambodian government must do something to prevent further claims by Thailand. Now, if Thailand invade and control majority of the areas by forcing us (our soldiers) out. We will be forced to talk to Thailand about the disputed area and it might, in the end, ends up with split the area into pieces, which I don't want to imagine.
Now, I feel I don't trust the UN. Maybe in the next generation, Thailand will claim Siam Reap and other areas as disputed area.
See even Their previous King's decision was already did and the UN is present, Thailand put them under their buttock.
I don't know that to be Allie with the US is really cool.
This can turn this childish country to be more aggressive in the region.
The US should look at his allies. I really don't want the US to be a famous tool of other country to invade others.
In fact, none of the US/UK's allies do as the same as Thailand did.
Even though Cambodia is the corruption country to the sight of the US and the world, but Cambodia never invade others.
Cambodians were suffered enough and used to be an experiment of the main powers to test Their dominant in south east Asian, leaving at least 1.5 millions died.
That's more than enough for you guys (the US, China, or who are involved in all issues in Cambodia) as the civilized countries to put your pettiness over this poor country.
In my sight, the US, the Mainland (china), my previous king, Vietnamese, and Russia are involved, even indirect or direct, were the factors of Cambodian's genocide.
If Thailand can do as they wish, so why can China not do to Taiwan? or North Korea cannot do to south Korea?
(I am 18 years old, lolz)
the thai never want the temple to be listed as a unesco because the thai never cares if it crumble to the ground cus the thai did not built it. well you know how we khmer feel about loosing preah vihear......i wish we go to war if the surounding were not gave it back!!!!!!!!!!!!!this will show the world that we want some of our land back. SOME OR NOTHING=WAR!!!!! POL POT STYLE MY FRIENDS!!!!THEN THE UN WILL STAY AWAY ONCE MORE!!!!!THIS TIME POL POT HARDCORE TO THE INVADERS!!!!ALL OR NOTHING!!!CHAY YO PREAH VIHEAR KHMERS!!!!
Post a Comment