A Change of Guard

សូមស្តាប់វិទ្យុសង្គ្រោះជាតិ Please read more Khmer news and listen to CNRP Radio at National Rescue Party. សូមស្តាប់វីទ្យុខ្មែរប៉ុស្តិ៍/Khmer Post Radio.
Follow Khmerization on Facebook/តាមដានខ្មែរូបនីយកម្មតាម Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/khmerization.khmerican

Monday 18 November 2013

Good news: no war between Thailand and Cambodia; Bad news: it could happen anytime

By Kavi Chongkittavorn

BANGKOK (The Nation/ANN) -- A week has elapsed after the International Court of Justice (ICJ) announced its verdict.

The good news is there is no war between Thailand and Cambodia. But the bad news is it could happen anytime. 

Meanwhile the only consolidation news comes from the paragraph 99 of the ICJ decision that both sides oblige to implement the ruling in "good faith" and avoid imposing a "unilateral" solution. That much was clear.

However, given historical enmity and nationalist extremism between them, their future ties are fraught with myriad of uncertainties that can directly impact on the overall efforts to fulfill the verdict.

First and foremost, their bilateral relations must be cordial and firm enough before any real negotiation could start. Even if this process gets started in the near future, it could be easily dragged on forever. Unless, both sides have stable governments and sufficient incentives to move forward and complete the implementation within a mutually agreed time-frame.

The ICJ ruled that Cambodia had sovereignty over the whole promontory of Preah Vihear or Pra Viharn in Thai. As such, the judgment also rejected the unilateral line drawn by the Thai Council of Minister in July 1962 to limit the temple's vicinity. The court also rejected Cambodia's use of the so-called Annex 1 map to define the limits of the promontory. The court admitted that it would be difficult to give a precise location of such area on the ground. Therefore, it is incumbent for both countries to work out a resolution regarding their border line. It would take the combined wisdoms of both nations and cultures at all levels to overcome this formidable task.

On the Thai part, the withdrawal of the Thai troops from the "promontory" would be the main focus. Before the decision can be implemented, officials from both sides have to sit down and work out the exact location — the bone of contention for the past 51 years. Before the ICJ decision, both countries pledged clearly that they would accept the ICJ ruling to further strengthen their bilateral ties. But there were no details.

However, without hours after the announcement, there were subtle changes in positions. Before the judgment day, Foreign Minister Surapong Tohvijakchaikul and his Cambodian counterpart Ho Nam Hong agreed they would abstain from any comment on the ICJ ruling to avoid stirring up public sentiments. However, the Cambodian government's spokesman, Khieu Kantharith, was first to declare victory over the ruling, drawing an immediate response from Thailand. With growing domestic pressure inside the country, the Thai senior officials, both civilians and uniformed, began to shift their positions whether to accept the outcome. Certain Thai quarters even came out with a strong rejection. 

As days passed, domestic exigency in Cambodia and Thailand have forced their respective governments to come forth with their interpretations. For Cambodia, the Preah Vihear case does not carry explosive outcomes as its western neighbor. Prime Minister Hun Sen's comment after the ruling was viewed positively in Bangkok. Given his present political standing inside his country, he would not be able to capitalize on the ICJ ruling as much as he hopes for. If the Cambodian People's Party won the July election with a bigger margin and without charges of rigged-voting, his political aura would dramatically increase. After all, he brought the case to the ICJ in 2011 and challenged the Thais.

It is imperative that Thailand implements the decision to show the country's genuine adherence to international rule of law and good neighborliness. It does not matter how long the negotiating process would take as long as Thailand pursues this pacifist path. Some international law experts and diplomats have already commented that this would be time-consuming process and nearly an impossible task.

The stake is extremely high for the Yingluck government. In the past two years, the government put out frequent public relations campaigns to advertise Thailand as a democracy and a reliable member of the international community. Malaysia, Indonesia and Singapore dutifully complied with the ICJ decisions to settle their overlapping claims of territorial sovereignty. From an ASEAN point of view, it is a good precedence.

Any delay or avoidance of implementation of the ICJ ruling would reflect badly on Thailand and stability in the region. It would also undermine Bangkok's bid for a non-permanent seat at the UN Security Council in 2016. Bangkok must learn from Phnom Penh, which failed to win the council's seat last October. One contributing factor was due to the country's dismal records of adhering to international rule of law.

For the time being, the status quo of contested but peaceful border must be maintained as both countries have serious domestic challenges at hand to settle. Hun Sen has not yet reconciled with the opposition party and his nemesis, Sam Rainsy, which has boycotted the National Assembly. In Thailand, the future of Yingluck government is also uncertain. Negotiation over border demarcation between countries, especially with an arch enemy, can only proceed with confident ruling governments in place!

- See more at: http://www.thecambodiaherald.com/opinion/detail/3?token=NDJlNDBjMDRkODVkYTRkZDMyYjA3ZjU2MzAzYzA2#sthash.4VWlQVUz.dpuf

No comments: