The map of Cambodia's and Thailand's overlapping claims area.Published: 18th November, 2011
By Michael Doyle
Bangkok Post
The Southeast Asian oil and gas community is all abuzz about the overlapping claims dispute between Thailand and Cambodia.
The overlapping claims area (OCA) extends more than 27,000 square kilometres in the Gulf of Thailand and originates from a dispute concerning the rightful border between the countries.
The reason for the intense regional interest in the OCA is that many oil and gas experts believe the area within the OCA is the most attractive undeveloped oil and gas exploration area in all of Asia.
OCA history: The dispute between Thailand and Cambodia over the OCA dates back to 1907 and is based upon differing interpretations of a treaty and maritime law put forth by the two countries. A memorandum of understanding setting forth an agreed mutual framework for a settlement of the dispute was signed by both sides in 2001, only to be cancelled by Thailand in 2009 for political reasons.
In an effort to shore up their respective legal claims to the OCA, both countries have already awarded their own individual conditional exploration and production licences to various oil and gas companies to develop the areas within the OCA. However, these companies are all required to wait to commence exploration until after the dispute between the two countries has been resolved.
Thailand divides the OCA into blocks 5-14 and has awarded conditional licences for these blocks to Chevron, British Gas, Mitsui, Idemitsu and PTT Exploration and Production.
Cambodia divides the OCA into areas 1-4 and has awarded conditional licences for these areas to Idemitsu, ConocoPhillips and Total.
There has been little or no progress in recent years in finding a compromise to this dispute, but since Thailand's new government was installed earlier this year, there seems to have been a renewed political will to find a settlement on both the Thailand and Cambodian sides, which has given rise to optimism.
Agreed negotiation framework: The following seems to be the agreed-upon framework for settlement negotiations:
For Thailand's blocks 5 and 6 within the OCA (referred to by Cambodia as area 1), the two countries have agreed to draw a median line at a place to be agreed upon to be the new border between the two countries.
After the location of this median line is agreed upon, the conditional licensees on both sides should then be free to explore and develop the areas on their side of the boundary line.
Note that many believe blocks 5 and 6 to be less promising for oil and gas than the rest of the OCA. However, fishing rights make this section very important and complicate negotiations.
For Thailand's blocks 7-13 (referred to by the Cambodian government as areas 2-4), the two countries have agreed in principal to create a joint operating zone similar to the joint development zone Thailand has previously negotiated with Malaysia.
The expectation is that once a settlement is reached, each sides' conditional licences will be required for joint development of their respective blocks/areas, along with the conditional licensee named by the other side.
This negotiation is further complicated by the fact that both sides have agreed all of the above related issues concerning the OCA must be resolved by the countries at the same time.
Negotiating positions: Thailand's current negotiating position seems to be that blocks 7-13 (the most promising for oil and gas) should be divided into thirds with:
- the western third to be held 80% by Thailand and 20% by Cambodia;
- the middle third to be held by the two countries on a 50:50 basis; and
- the eastern third to be held 20% by Thailand and 80% by Cambodia.
Cambodia's position for the same areas/blocks seems to be that Thailand's and Cambodia's interests for all of the areas/blocks should be divided equally.
So there is still a lot of work to do in the negotiations, and significant obstacles remain, but there is strong optimism that a deal may be concluded within the next two years.
Michael Doyle is a US lawyer and partner with the Bangkok-based law firm Seri Manop & Doyle and an adviser to oil and gas companies. He may be contacted at michael@serimanop.com
The Southeast Asian oil and gas community is all abuzz about the overlapping claims dispute between Thailand and Cambodia.
The overlapping claims area (OCA) extends more than 27,000 square kilometres in the Gulf of Thailand and originates from a dispute concerning the rightful border between the countries.
The reason for the intense regional interest in the OCA is that many oil and gas experts believe the area within the OCA is the most attractive undeveloped oil and gas exploration area in all of Asia.
OCA history: The dispute between Thailand and Cambodia over the OCA dates back to 1907 and is based upon differing interpretations of a treaty and maritime law put forth by the two countries. A memorandum of understanding setting forth an agreed mutual framework for a settlement of the dispute was signed by both sides in 2001, only to be cancelled by Thailand in 2009 for political reasons.
In an effort to shore up their respective legal claims to the OCA, both countries have already awarded their own individual conditional exploration and production licences to various oil and gas companies to develop the areas within the OCA. However, these companies are all required to wait to commence exploration until after the dispute between the two countries has been resolved.
Thailand divides the OCA into blocks 5-14 and has awarded conditional licences for these blocks to Chevron, British Gas, Mitsui, Idemitsu and PTT Exploration and Production.
Cambodia divides the OCA into areas 1-4 and has awarded conditional licences for these areas to Idemitsu, ConocoPhillips and Total.
There has been little or no progress in recent years in finding a compromise to this dispute, but since Thailand's new government was installed earlier this year, there seems to have been a renewed political will to find a settlement on both the Thailand and Cambodian sides, which has given rise to optimism.
Agreed negotiation framework: The following seems to be the agreed-upon framework for settlement negotiations:
For Thailand's blocks 5 and 6 within the OCA (referred to by Cambodia as area 1), the two countries have agreed to draw a median line at a place to be agreed upon to be the new border between the two countries.
After the location of this median line is agreed upon, the conditional licensees on both sides should then be free to explore and develop the areas on their side of the boundary line.
Note that many believe blocks 5 and 6 to be less promising for oil and gas than the rest of the OCA. However, fishing rights make this section very important and complicate negotiations.
For Thailand's blocks 7-13 (referred to by the Cambodian government as areas 2-4), the two countries have agreed in principal to create a joint operating zone similar to the joint development zone Thailand has previously negotiated with Malaysia.
The expectation is that once a settlement is reached, each sides' conditional licences will be required for joint development of their respective blocks/areas, along with the conditional licensee named by the other side.
This negotiation is further complicated by the fact that both sides have agreed all of the above related issues concerning the OCA must be resolved by the countries at the same time.
Negotiating positions: Thailand's current negotiating position seems to be that blocks 7-13 (the most promising for oil and gas) should be divided into thirds with:
- the western third to be held 80% by Thailand and 20% by Cambodia;
- the middle third to be held by the two countries on a 50:50 basis; and
- the eastern third to be held 20% by Thailand and 80% by Cambodia.
Cambodia's position for the same areas/blocks seems to be that Thailand's and Cambodia's interests for all of the areas/blocks should be divided equally.
So there is still a lot of work to do in the negotiations, and significant obstacles remain, but there is strong optimism that a deal may be concluded within the next two years.
Michael Doyle is a US lawyer and partner with the Bangkok-based law firm Seri Manop & Doyle and an adviser to oil and gas companies. He may be contacted at michael@serimanop.com
4 comments:
Phu Quoc belongs to Cambodia, thanks Bangkok Post!
Look at the map Koh Tral is belong to Cambodian how come it belong to Vietcong? Also the whole South Vietcong is belong to Cambodian too.
Before the Yuon Mongolian invaded China and South East Asia, presently Thailand,Cambodia,Lao and South Vietnam was Known as Chenla by the Chinese or Kambujdesa by the Indian. The Kings of Chenla were bestowed by the Chinese Emperors as the Highest Outpost Chinese Generals. According to Chinese Emperors, Chenla was an Autonomous territory of China and governed by Khmers Kings with the blessing and approval from Chinese Court.
Khmers run into many problems for many centuries but the Chineses could not help because they themselves were defeated by the Mongolians then by European and Japanese etc...
Finally China is now back in big business!! Cambodia and China should once again reunited.
Chenla(land and water) was invaded by Java or Chwea (modern day Bali, Indonesia) and took hostage of the king and his son, Prince Jayavarman 2. The prince was educated in the Javanese court. After he escaped, he built himself a kingdom situated around Siemreap, Cambodia. This kingdom is known as Khmer and later became an empire that ruled most the lands that are now modern day Thailand, some parts of eastern Burma, Laos, and South Vietnam. What is left of the empire is modern Cambodia. Khmer or Cambodian(western term) are the descents of Funan and Chanla. Khmer are the orginal inhabitant of the land.
Post a Comment