It would be interesting to see how this Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) is mapped in relations to the Franco-Siamese boundary line of 1904/1907 and Thailand's unilateral map.
This DMZ is primarily one of the indications of provisional (temporary) measures by the Court to prevent further damages being done to the Temple as a result of military activities in the area pending its clarification of the 1962 verdict which will spell out the Court's stance on the boundary issue one way or another.
If Thai troops are not in the DMZ, there is no need for Cambodia to station military personnel within that zone either, except security personnel required to safeguard tourists and visitors to the Temple.
It is a positive sign for Cambodia that the Court unanimously rejected the request by Thailand that Cambodia's case be removed from the General List. This appears to indicate that the Court clearly believes it has a mandate to help resolve disputes between states and also an obligation under its relevant Statutes to clarify or reinterpret its 1962 ruling. Its decision is also final and not subject to further appeal.
This decision on provisional measures may fall somewhat short of what Cambodia seeks from the ICJ, but its effect is to pile more pressure on Thailand to face up to its responsibility before the international community whilst giving the Khmer temple of Preah Vihear the best possible chance to be spared from any more irreparable damage until the Court's next pronouncement (assuming that is, Thailand and Cambodia both comply with the indications made by the Court).
Had the Court instead indicated that Cambodia could station her military personnel within her 1907 boundary including having troops at the Temple ground or its immediate vicinity, the Thais would then be under no real pressure to refrain from firing or shelling in the direction of the Temple complex, inflicting further damages to the site under their pretext of due self-defence! Cambodia also has nothing to gain from engaging in military confrontations with Thailand provided Cambodian sovereignty remains free from Thai military or political occupation.
Note: the Temple site falls just inside the DMZ. This does not mean that the Court has acceded to Thailand's dispute claim over the area surrounding (or underneath!) the Temple because it had already ruled once that the Temple located on Cambodian sovereignty.
Of course, not being a legal specialist myself, it would be interesting to hear better informed opinions on this subject.
----------------------------------------------------
Anonymous said...
A strict complying with the ICJ decision today is what Cambodia needs. Thailand can no longer argue in it aggression, but letting Cambodia protect the site, doing restoration and developing it freely as tourist destination, since Thailand should not obstruct Cambodia’s free access to the Temple or prevent it from providing fresh supplies to its non-military personnel. As for the final decision on the demarcating boundary, we can wait for later ruling, maybe in the few months away from now. We should keep working or negotiating only in the framework of ASEAN as stated by the Court. On top of it, the prospect of peaceful solution is enhanced by the next Thai government in Bangkok, led by Yingluck Shinawatra of Puea Thai Party. Requiring both Thailand and Cambodia to withdraw troops from the provisional demilitarized zone near Preah Vihear Temple makes the pill easier for military and nationalist Thais to swallow. Yes, it makes the decision only a partial victory for Cambodia, but a wise decision to better protect the temple and allow the restoration to be done properly by experts and at the same time, the tourist enjoying their visits there. When ASEAN observers will be there, why Cambodia needs to give a pretext to the Thais to shoot on us by installing military personnel there? Long live the ICJ and long live Cambodia!
This DMZ is primarily one of the indications of provisional (temporary) measures by the Court to prevent further damages being done to the Temple as a result of military activities in the area pending its clarification of the 1962 verdict which will spell out the Court's stance on the boundary issue one way or another.
If Thai troops are not in the DMZ, there is no need for Cambodia to station military personnel within that zone either, except security personnel required to safeguard tourists and visitors to the Temple.
It is a positive sign for Cambodia that the Court unanimously rejected the request by Thailand that Cambodia's case be removed from the General List. This appears to indicate that the Court clearly believes it has a mandate to help resolve disputes between states and also an obligation under its relevant Statutes to clarify or reinterpret its 1962 ruling. Its decision is also final and not subject to further appeal.
This decision on provisional measures may fall somewhat short of what Cambodia seeks from the ICJ, but its effect is to pile more pressure on Thailand to face up to its responsibility before the international community whilst giving the Khmer temple of Preah Vihear the best possible chance to be spared from any more irreparable damage until the Court's next pronouncement (assuming that is, Thailand and Cambodia both comply with the indications made by the Court).
Had the Court instead indicated that Cambodia could station her military personnel within her 1907 boundary including having troops at the Temple ground or its immediate vicinity, the Thais would then be under no real pressure to refrain from firing or shelling in the direction of the Temple complex, inflicting further damages to the site under their pretext of due self-defence! Cambodia also has nothing to gain from engaging in military confrontations with Thailand provided Cambodian sovereignty remains free from Thai military or political occupation.
Note: the Temple site falls just inside the DMZ. This does not mean that the Court has acceded to Thailand's dispute claim over the area surrounding (or underneath!) the Temple because it had already ruled once that the Temple located on Cambodian sovereignty.
Of course, not being a legal specialist myself, it would be interesting to hear better informed opinions on this subject.
----------------------------------------------------
Anonymous said...
A strict complying with the ICJ decision today is what Cambodia needs. Thailand can no longer argue in it aggression, but letting Cambodia protect the site, doing restoration and developing it freely as tourist destination, since Thailand should not obstruct Cambodia’s free access to the Temple or prevent it from providing fresh supplies to its non-military personnel. As for the final decision on the demarcating boundary, we can wait for later ruling, maybe in the few months away from now. We should keep working or negotiating only in the framework of ASEAN as stated by the Court. On top of it, the prospect of peaceful solution is enhanced by the next Thai government in Bangkok, led by Yingluck Shinawatra of Puea Thai Party. Requiring both Thailand and Cambodia to withdraw troops from the provisional demilitarized zone near Preah Vihear Temple makes the pill easier for military and nationalist Thais to swallow. Yes, it makes the decision only a partial victory for Cambodia, but a wise decision to better protect the temple and allow the restoration to be done properly by experts and at the same time, the tourist enjoying their visits there. When ASEAN observers will be there, why Cambodia needs to give a pretext to the Thais to shoot on us by installing military personnel there? Long live the ICJ and long live Cambodia!
13 comments:
This is not victory for Cambodia. It is smoke screen to make you think it is victory but actuality it is not. ICJ created DMZ mean it recognizes the dispute area. ICJ both both countries to withdraw is like kicking Cambodia from its own home. PM Hun Sen never recognize that there is a dispute area or 4.6km but now ICJ ruling everybody must withdraw from the so called DMZ technically it is the dispute area. Who won? Not Khmer.
I believe neither Thai troops nor Cambodia troops are going to move out from this so call DMZ, and the court will not able to do anything about it and the court will lost it credential and the judiciary power. It’s a laughing-stock.
I think you should read the rule carefully. ICJ rule is just doing his first job. What They should do now is to avoid clash between Thailand and Cambodia. ICJ stated clearly that it does not do anything to redefine the ICJ's 1962 rule between Cambodia and Thailand yet. We should be patient to wait for the interpretation of the ICJ's rule. The Benefit for Cambodia now is that we can allow the ASEAN to manage the the zone so that we can repair the temple and as well as develop the area. ICJ does not delay the interpretation of the ICJ's rule. Don't have to waste the time to worry. What we worry now is to deal to withdraw the troop and does Thailand respect their words? What order Thailand doesn't want to follow or what Thailand ask us to do first or they do first?
I think ICJ rule in this time does not give any benefit to Thailand. Thai image is really bad in the world since They want rule their country by military like Burma. Most people know.
DMZ which mean victory to Khmer if not so unisco can't come to repair the Khmer temple but what a bout the murderous yellow Thai flood not the temple but to wat Khmer next to the temple who going to control that
Siam is very tricky people from the king to the poor
Thailand is not the land of smile but the land of secrets we're all khmer should known that
It does relation between the Thai politic and the border as those stupid Thai nationalist tries to dream that they can get the land back.
Hi 12:35:
"tricks" should substitute for "secrets"
thank by the way.
Reply to "ICJ decision: Is it a victory or a loss for Cambodia?"
ANSWER: HALF VICTORY BECAUSE WE CAN LET THE REPAIRER TO FIX OUR TEMPLE AND WE MIGHT WAIT UNTIL ICJ INTERPRET THE 1962 RULE. SECOND HALF IS THE INTERPRETATION OF ICJ'S RULE.
THIS VICTORY IS NOT TOO BAD.
Cambodia should rather wait until after the interpretation of the court were delivered first before she move the troops out of Preah Vihear.
It is a provisional measure, look it up if u don't know what it means. It is a temporary ruling while the court delivers it's interpretation of the icj decision. Thailand's request was to have the court throw out our interpretation request but the court went ahead. Do a simple math and u would be able to work out who is winning this case. The real deal is the court's reinterpretation that is to come.
Since when we needed ICJ ruling to do repairs? The development meeting in France already approved the development of Phrea Vihea. Watch in the next couple days, Thailand will want to talk how to pull the troop out because that is what they wanted to creat a dispute area and ICJ called it DMZ. Let hope I am wrong or I didnt read all the rulings. I usually read between the line especially the silent sign. Cambodia is happy to withdraw its troop from it territory? We will see how things unfold in the nearest future. I can almost bet my bottom dollar that the DMZ will turn into join development area.
Why we have to worry about pulling the troop? We just don't pull. That's all. What If we just create the busy schedule to pull the troop as the Thailand used to do and wait until the interpretation of ICJ's rule.
However, if we don't pull the troop. Thailand will blame us as we did and created an atmosphere in which they manipulate the world that we don't respect the rule either.
Now, I believe there is no need to talk about this rule. Everything is in the hands of the Judges. Just Wait for the Interpretation of ICJ's rule in 1962.
To let all you guy know and just don't waste the time to give any credit to HUN SEN.
The judges's scope is based on the evidences of 1962 rule. It is an interpretation. They will not rule again. Thailand cannot use any other evidences that have now or the past rejected evidences to claim and so does Cambodia.
Thailand is the one suppose to withrawal their fag troop out! Because Thailand invaded Cambodia...
Post a Comment