Thai Legal team did well, Chulalongkorn University academic says [Thailand was also confident of winning in 1962, but it lost]

By Pakorn Puengnetr
The Nation 
Sunday April 21, 2013

But prepare for a negative ruling, Puangthong warns 

Chulalongkorn University political scientist Puangthong Pawakarapan said Thai people should be jubilant about the seemingly well-executed legal fight over disputed land around Preah Vihear Temple in the International Court of Justice (ICJ), but should prepare for a possible negative ruling.

Puangthong said it was premature to expect victory because Cambodia was equally confident about its prospects. She warned that back in 1962, Thailand also expected to win but did not, so people should prepare themselves, especially when considering that all the judges were non-Thais.

The political scientist said that over the past week Cambodia insisted many times that it had protested repeatedly in regard to the placement of barbed wire outside Preah Vihear Temple since 1962. And they provided the ICJ with what claimed to be written proof - notes from the French Embassy in Phnom Penh to the French Foreign Ministry, for example, and reports that then ruler Prince Sihanouk had protested against Thailand's action.

However, she said the Thai media were not interested in reporting about the matter. And while Thailand insists that the court should not have jurisdiction to rule over the land surrounding Preah Vihear Temple, it was unclear how the court would view that matter.

In regard to the disputed maps, it was also unclear to what extent the ICJ might use them as evidence.

In regard to interpretation of the word "vicinity" around the temple, Puangthong said there seemed to be no definitive principle to support Thailand's argument that it only refers to the immediate vicinity of the temple which belongs to Cambodia.

"From all these factors, it can be concluded that it won't be easy to say that we will win. Actually, it will be tough," the political scientist concluded, adding that joint border control over the disputed land may be the best option for peace between the two nations.

"Certain political groups may distort the issue by claiming that the land must belong to Thailand only. If that's the case, it will be problematic. So the role of the media is very important in creating understanding," she said.

"There are many places in the world which do not belong to a particular nation and they handle them through joint border administration. This is better than war….

"We must wait and see how the government will react - whether they will follow a nationalist trend or forget it and do something which is more constructive."

Veerapat Pariyawong, an independent Harvard-educated lawyer told Nation TV, a sister media organisation of The Nation, that the original ruling would have far more influence on the outcome than the whole argument by both sides as to which map was more reliable and why.

He said it was too early to judge Thailand's performance at the ICJ regarding the disputed land and what the week-long court fight that ended on Friday may lead to.

Cambodian weaknesses, he said, were the country's shifting stance and its decision to make an oversimplified accusation against Thailand. "We tried to show to the court that Cambodia cannot be trusted," he said.

Veerapat warned, however, that the MoU signed between the two countries in 2000 was like a double-edged sword and may be beneficial to Cambodia. It was likely to be crucial in the court's decision on whether to accept the complaint made by Cambodia or not.

On Facebook, Army Col Nat Sri-in, deputy intelligence chief at Suranaree Army Unit, warned that a ruling by the ICJ favourable to Cambodia could lead to a 100-year war between the two nations.

Nat said the word "vicinity" did not imply the disputed land area but the mere immediate vicinity of Preah Vihear Temple which Thailand has already handed over to Cambodia decades ago. Nat blamed Cambodia for re-igniting the issue despite the MoU signed in 2000 to jointly demarcate the border.