Cabinet firm on Thailand's stance on Preah Vihear

D

Dave The Dude

Guest
Cabinet firm on Thailand's stance on Preah Vihear

  • Published: 28/07/2010 at 05:12 PM
  • Online news: Local News
Cabinet has instructed Natural Resources and Environment Minister Suwit Khunkitti to walk out of the meeting if the World Heritage Committee (WHC) discusses Cambodia's management plan for the Preah Vihear temple without taking Thailand's protest into consideration, Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said.

Mr Suwit is in Brasilia, Brazil's capital, to attend the WHC meeting, which is due to discuss Cambodia's management plan for the 1,000-year-old Hindu temple.
Mr Abhisit said the cabinet on Wednesday agreed that if the WHC went ahead with consideration of Cambodia's proposal, Mr Suwit should walk out and boycott the vote.
Mr Suwit should also review Thailand's WHC membership if it looked likely to endorse the management plan.
The prime minister stressed that even if the WHC endorses Cambodian management of the site, it would not have any effect on the dispute between Thailand and Cambodia.
Cambodia would not be able to use the WHC endorsement to manage the overlapping territory of 4.6 square kilometres which is still in dispute and has not been demarcated, Mr Abhisit said.
He said Thailand would try to solve this problem without the use of force, but the Thai army was ready to protect Thai sovereignty over its territory.
It might take as long as a year to withdraw WHC membership, because the matter would require approval from the House of Representatives.
But if Thailand withdrew from the WHC, the listing of Preah Vihear temple as a world heritage site would not be able to proceed, Mr Abhisit said.
Therefore, Thailand would persist in its attempt to delay the WHC's consideration of the Cambodian proposal and ask the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (Unesco) to adhere to its intention of promoting peace, not conflict, the prime minister said.
Deputy government spokesman Supachai Jaisamut said the cabinet resolution followed a fax from Mr Suwit on Wednesday morning asking that it confirm Thailand's stance.
Thailand has made clear that it will not cooperate with the WHC if it agrees to the management plan for the Preah Vihear temple, because it infringes on the disputed border area.
 
School kids,give my ball back or I'm not playing anymore......yes, laughable.
 
Dave The Dude said:
Mr Abhisit said. Thailand would try to solve this problem without the use of force, but the Thai army was ready to protect Thai sovereignty over its territory.
.
Click to expand...

Thats if you can drag these ''steely eyed dealers of death'' away from their primary role of cutting the nations lawns with scissors.

Or better still... trafficking ..... (rhymes with mugs)
 
lukey1979 said:
Thats if you can drag these ''steely eyed dealers of death'' away from their primary role of cutting the nations lawns with scissors.

Or better still... trafficking ..... (rhymes with mugs)
Click to expand...
Yeah it seems they tried that once lately and women and children whooped them.....:GrinNod1:
 
The Thais have absolutely no legitimate claim over this temple whatsoever.
In 1904 the land on which the temple is located, which was under Thai rule at the time, was ceded by Rama V to the French, who governed Cambodia . Rather than risk invasion he willingly signed over about 1/3 of Thailand. I have included a map of the land he signed away. It clearly marks Preah Vihear inside French territory, as do subsequent maps drawn in 1908.
The International Court verified these maps and ruled in 1962 that the temple lays on Cambodian land.
End of story.
PS You can see from the map that the Thais also signed away Angkor Wat. I think they have got the shits on about that and are still counting the billions of dollars of lost tourist income.
 

Attachments

  • Thai-ceded territory.jpg
    Thai-ceded territory.jpg
    35.8 KB · Views: 6
I don't think there is a dispute oover the Preah Vihear Temple ,that is on Cambodian land for sure but the dispute is over a piece of land to the north of the Temple .The line that was draw up in 1907 by the French -Siamese commission and the line claimed by Thailand in 1962 is what the problem is over ?

I think this explains it all.........
Editorials on Cambodia:: Preah Vihear: A Khmer Heritage - Cambodian Information Center
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That's a good website Alan, I will have a good read tomorrow. Its a bit too in depth for this time of night.
To the best of my knowledge they havent disputed any other borders only the one surrounding Preah Vihear? I suppose I am just questioning their motives behind it all. If the temple is definitely in Cambodia and was built by the Khmer people I can't help but think they are doing it purely to antagonise the Cambodians and perpetuate 1000 year old grudges.
 
The trouble with talking about 'Khmer heritage' is that it could equally well include Phimai and Phanomrung; it's not really an argument.

There is another disputed area, round Ta Meuan 'Antiquities', as the signposts call them. This is a group of three sites on the border Surin/Cambodia. This is rather an attractive site, as the relatively few people who have been there know, but hasn't the tourist appeal of Preah Vihear's spectacular view (the temple in Preah Vihear is a mess, partly due to the Khmer Rouge).

Incidentally, if Thailand is so nationalistic about Preah Vihear, why doesn't it use the Thai version of the name?
 
Thai army to reinforce Cambodian border if needed

by KINAN SUCHAOVANICH
sourceAP.standard.gif



updated 7/28/2010 11:02:26 AM ET BANGKOK — Thailand's army is prepared to defend its border with Cambodia if a territorial dispute heats up, the prime minister said Wednesday, as the two nations were set to tussle on the diplomatic front at a U.N. meeting in Brazil.
Deadly clashes have flared in the past over the Preah Vihear temple, which the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization named a World Heritage site in 2008, over Thailand's objections.
Two Thai soldiers were killed and 12 wounded in April 2009 after troops exchanged fire with assault rifles and rocket launchers along Cambodia's northern border near the temple, one of several clashes in recent years.
Cambodia will present a management plan in Brazil on the disputed territory at a UNESCO meeting this week.
The International Court of Justice in 1962 ruled the 10th-century border temple belongs to Cambodia, rejecting Thai claims. Cambodia's World Heritage bid reignited Thai resentment over the ruling, and there have been small armed clashes in the area during the past few years.
Thailand claims the management plan would infringe on a small area of undemarcated territory around the temple, of which both sides stake a claim. It has called on UNESCO to reject the plan, and said it will walk out of the meeting if it is accepted. It also said it would consider withdrawing from UNESCO's membership if Cambodia's plan is accepted.
Leaders of both countries have used the issue to stir up nationalist sentiment and shore up domestic political support.
Abhisit met Wednesday with Defense Minister Pravit Wongsuwan, who told him that, pending Cabinet approval, the army is ready to deploy more troops to the already heavily defended border if Cambodian forces intrude into Thai territory.
"The army is now ready to defend our sovereignty if breached," said Abhisit after his weekly Cabinet meeting. He said he was appealing to members of UNESCO's World Heritage Committee "to remember the very purpose this committee was set up for. It should be a purveyor of peace and culture, not of tension and conflicts."
A Thai delegation, led by Minister of Natural Resources and Environment Suwit Khunkitti, is in Brasilia to attend the UNESCO meeting.
"We must make it clear that Thailand cannot and will not accept the proposal," said Abhisit. "And if the committee will not listen to our objection, we will not take part in the voting process."
 
isanbirder said:
Incidentally, if Thailand is so nationalistic about Preah Vihear, why doesn't it use the Thai version of the name?
Click to expand...
I think it is more about not letting the Cambodians have control rather than the Thais being passionate about their heritage.
 
buckhumyai said:
I think it is more about not letting the Cambodians have control rather than the Thais being passionate about their heritage.
Click to expand...

Could well be.

Mind you, the cliff on which PV stands is such an obvious demarcation line that one wonders how any other was even contemplated (back in 1904 or whenever). But common sense doesn't come into it!
 
Errors stall Cambodian temple bid

Phnom Penh urged to review WHC listing

  • Published: 31/07/2010 at 12:00 AM
  • Newspaper section: News
Unesco's World Heritage Committee has postponed a decision on Cambodia's development plan for the Preah Vihear temple partly because it submitted a graphical illustration instead of a map, says a source in the Thai delegation.

Other reasons for the committee's postponement include evidence that Cambodia had deployed heavy weapons in the temple, that the country had failed to submit relevant documents on time, and that a memorandum of understanding between Thailand and Cambodia over the disputed territory in the area had not been settled.
The WHC decided to delay its decision on the management plan until next year's meeting in Bahrain because Thailand and Cambodia were unable to find common ground.
Brazil, the host of the meeting, had mediated between the two countries for an hour before the decision to postpone was made.
" The use of the graphical illustration, instead of a real map, has suggested a possible intent to conceal details about the areas surrounding the temple," the source said.
The Thai delegation capitalised on this by supplying a map that shows the construction of a road by Cambodia in the disputed overlapping 4.6 square kilometre zone.
Under a 2002 memorandum of understanding between Thailand and Cambodia, both sides agreed not to carry out any work in the area pending a survey to officially demarcate the common land boundary.
According to the source, the delegation has also submitted photos of a Cambodian installation of heavy artillery and troops in the temple.
"The Thai delegation had three minutes to talk to each of the WHC members. Our evidence made them feel that Cambodia's case was incomplete," said the source.
The source also called on Thai authorities not to get carried away with the delay and be prepared for the next WHC meeting.
"Cambodia has already set up a special body known as the Department of World Heritage, and we should also have a body that is responsible for this matter. It may be a long battle," said the source.
Part of the success of the Thai delegation led by Natural Resources and Environment Minister Suwit Khunkitti should be attributed to three military officers who accompanied them on the trip: Lt Gen Thawatchai Samutsakhon, chief of the 2nd army corps, Lt Gen Niphat Thonglek, commander of border affairs attached to the Supreme Command, and Maj Gen Noppadol Chotisiri, deputy chief of the Army Survey Department.
Mr Suwit said yesterday the WHC's postponement of its decision on the site was partly because Cambodia had failed to submit its documents six weeks before the meeting as required.
As a result, the Thai delegation pointed out to the committee that it did not have enough time to study the proposal which could affect the country's sovereignty, Mr Suwit said.
He said the WHC acknowledged the problem and wanted both countries to work out a solution before it considered a management plan.
Meanwhile, Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva yesterday pledged to direct necessary resources to examine Cambodia's management plan now that the WHC had postponed its decision on the matter.
He said concerned authorities would spend the next 12 months studying the proposal, so that Thailand is able to present an informed opinion to the WHC at its next meeting in Bahrain.
"Within a period of one year, we will look at Cambodia's document and come up with a comprehensive recommendation [to the WHC]. It will be different [next year]. We have a chance and we have to do our best," he said.
Mr Abhisit said the 2000 memorandum of understanding on the survey and land boundary demarcation Thailand signed with Cambodia was instrumental in the postponement.
According to Mr Abhisit, it was the memorandum that forced Cambodia into conceding that border demarcation had not yet been settled.
He said the issue should prompt Cambodia to review its decision to have the temple listed as a world heritage site and acknowledge the limitations that come with that designation.
Mr Abhisit said that before Cambodia's unilateral bid to register Preah Vihear temple as a world heritage site, both countries were able to use the site for economic benefit without incident.
As for the alleged encroachment into the disputed zone, he said the Foreign Ministry had already sent a message that Thailand expected Cambodia to respect the memorandum of understanding.
Mr Abhisit said authorities would look into reports about Cambodia's alleged encroachment.
Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban played down speculation about renewed tensions, saying the delay would allow both countries to work out border disputes.
He said that any disputes with Cambodia would be dealt with at the government level.
Defence Minister Prawit Wongsuwon yesterday said there was no need to dispatch more troops to the Thai-Cambodian border despite a report that two battalions and heavy artillery had been sent there.
 
Facing reality beats playing politics over Preah Vihear
By The Nation

Talks with Phnom Penh may be hard but it's the only way to resolve dispute

It was a close call as far as Thailand is concerned. On the other hand, the decision by the World Heritage Committee of Unesco to delay considering Cambodia's management plan for the Preah Vihear Temple to next year must have felt to Phnom Penh like a sucker punch. A diplomatic time bomb has been defused, but barely just, and the most important question is: What's next?

Blame took place in Brazil. Thailand was accused of trying to rock the boat and cling to something that no longer belongs to it. But to the Bangkok government, although the World Court ruled more than four decades and a half ago that the temple was on Cambodia's territory, things are not as simple as it looks. The management plan, the Thai delegation in Brazil insisted, would at least refuel territorial claims around the temple because the plan incorporated some information that Bangkok did not agree on.

Unesco must have been worried. This is not the first time a World Heritage site has become a source of neighbourly conflict. But given the on-and-off military tension at the Thai-Cambodian border and the stormy ties between the two countries, the international organisation must have felt it was best to postpone the Preah Vihear issue to next year.

But can everyone hope things will have calmed down by then? Nationalism aside, the issue has been complicated by the fact that Thailand's two main political parties have different stances on Preah Vihear. In fact, Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva has been forced to resort to uncharacteristically belligerent diplomacy because he used to take a very tough stand against his political rivals' perceived compromise toward Cambodia over the temple.

So whatever will happen next year in Bahrain when the World Heritage Committee meets again to consider the management plan will depend largely on who's in power in Thailand at the time. The Pheu Thai Party's stand, as shown by the Samak Sundaravej government, is that Thailand should lend full cooperation to Cambodia in its promotion and management of the site because the 1962 World Court ruling means any resistance will be futile. The Democrats, on the other hand, as demonstrated in Abhisit's scathing speech in Parliament in 2008, are against any move that will embolden Cambodia about its rights over the temple and claims over surrounding disputed areas.

Some academics have proposed handing over the whole matter to some sort of an independent commission so that domestic politics will have the least impact on where the country stands regarding the Preah Vihear Temple, its listing as a World Heritage site and its management plan. The proposal may be rejected outright, as the issue involves sensitive matters like bilateral ties, national sovereignty and so on. However, some things have to change because otherwise the Bahrain meeting will be a repeat of the Brasilia one.

Most importantly, both countries must talk more and play less politics. Thai officials claimed they had been kept in the dark over what information was in Phnom Penh's management plan submitted to Unesco until the Brasilia meeting was about to take place. Whether the claims are true or not, obviously there has not been a communications line between the two countries over this sensitive and potentially explosive issue, and this has to change.

Territorial disputes can last years, or even decades. They sometimes encompass generations. This, however, should never be used as an excuse for not trying enough to find a common solution, or for not talking to each other when we can. This is not an issue that can be solved through passing messages through a third or fourth party or lobbying. Of course, direct talks will be hard and possibly acrimonious, but if Thailand and Cambodia are sincere about ending the conflict, there's nothing else they can do but try.


-- The Nation 2010-08-01
 
Some history on that border temple


By Avudh Panananda
The Nation
Published on August 17, 2010


A vast number of Thai citizens may find that the Preah Vihear Temple controversy causes feelings of wounded pride, but dwelling on the past will only bring grief and misery to all parties concerned.


http://googleads.g.doubleclick.net/...est_Cultural_Heritage_Vietnam_Tour_11days.htm
Thailand must come to terms with its past and move forward instead of trying to right an "unrightable" wrong. Cambodia too must learn to overcome pettiness to be an understanding neighbour.




The International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled in 1962 that the temple was on Cambodian land. And Unesco's World Heritage Committee agreed to list the temple as a World Heritage site in 2008.

What is the urgency to stir up an international dispute over the site management plan for a temple that has survived the elements since the 11th century?

If the two neighbouring countries opt to quarrel on what they see as their rightful territory, then the verbal spat might soon escalate into a war, with regrettable and tragic consequences.

Regardless of what politicians say or do, Thais should heed the lesson of history before charting their next move on the temple.

To put the controversy in context, it is necessary to trace the issue back to the Franco-Siamese War in 1863, to a time when France was expanding into Indochina and Thailand had to cede territory in Laos and Cambodia. Two Franco-Siamese treaties in 1904 and 1907 formalised the hand-over of Thai territory in exchange for safeguarding Thai independence from the colonial power.

Based on provisions in the 1907 treaty, a mixed commission was formed to demarcate the border, relying on the watershed of the Dongrak mountain range. France, then the colonial power in the region, unilaterally deviated from the watershed principle to "carve out" the temple for its Cambodian protectorate.

Although Thailand attempted to rectify this injustice of boundary demarcation, its fighting with Vichy France in 1940-41 and the outcome of World War II failed to alter the colonial legacy.

The advent of the Vietnam War prompted the United States to produce a 1:50,000-scale map for battle purposes. It happened that this map, using proper cartographic technology, showed the temple's location as inside Thailand.

In the midst of the Cold War when France was forced to retreat from Indochina, Prasat Khao Phra Viharn, as the temple is known in Thai, was briefly returned to Thai sovereignty, as part of what is now Si Sa Ket's Kantharalak district.

But a spat between the Sarit Thanarat government and King Norodom Sihanouk of Cambodia led to an international dispute over the temple. The ICJ decision returned ownership of the temple back to Cambodia.

Even though the Sarit government conceded defeat in the International Court, it said its conditional acceptance of the ICJ verdict was a decision that had nothing to do with the national boundary and that the area surrounding the temple remained in Thai territory.

As a World Heritage site, the main temple structure is about 800 metres in length. But the problem arises from the temple's management plan, because it covers 4.6 square kilometres. The temple perimeter is unclear, but is estimated to link a series of sanctuaries stretching about 2 kilometres into Thailand.

Pending agreement on the boundary between Thailand and Cambodia based on map-making technology and not colonial legacy, the two neighbours have no irrefutable evidence to back up their respective claims on territory.

In lieu of sabre-rattling, the two ought to keep calm to pave the way for work on border demarcation. All the necessary mechanisms to settle the border dispute are already in place and just await a green light to go into operation.
It would be sheer folly to squabble over a temple built to uplift human spirits to the heavens.
 
The trouble is that, whatever the rights and wrongs of the matter, to place the boundary anywhere than along the cliff line is simply dotty. Anybody who goes there can see that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top