 |
| Preah Vihear Temple belong to Khmer not Siamese |
The military skirmishes between Thailand and
Cambodia that have claimed more than two dozen lives, caused scores of
injuries, and displaced tens of thousands of people since February are
primarily attributable to domestic politics in both countries.
Rooted
in ancient enmities and the legacy of the colonial era, the fighting is
damaging the entire region. So virulent is the dispute that even a
short-term settlement will require third-party mediation. A secure peace
will depend mainly on how the endgame to Thailand’s domestic political
crisis plays out in the coming months – and on Cambodia’s willingness to
stay out of this process.
At
issue in the conflict is 4.6 square kilometres that adjoin a
millennium-old Hindu temple known as “Preah Vihear” to Cambodians and
“Phra Viharn” to Thais. Cambodia insists that the disputed land has been
under its territorial sovereignty since a landmark case decided by the
International Court of Justice in 1962. In its 9-to-3 verdict, the ICJ
ruled that Cambodia’s map, drawn up by French surveyors in 1904-1907,
put the temple area in Cambodia, and that Thailand (known as Siam until
1939) had not objected previously.
During
the hearings, Cambodia asked the ICJ to rule on the adjoining land, but
the judges confined their decision only to the temple, as Cambodia
originally requested.
Until
recently, the overlapping claims on the 4.6 square kilometres were not a
serious issue. Villagers and merchants from both sides conducted a
brisk business and border trade unfettered by the authorities. Bilateral
tensions flared when Thai politics heated up after the September 2006
military coup that overthrew the democratically elected prime minister,
Thaksin Shinawatra, on charges of corruption and disloyalty to the
monarchy.
In
2008, after the self-exiled Thaksin’s proxy force, the People’s Power
Party, took power following an election victory, the Thai government
signed a joint communiqué agreeing to Cambodia’s listing of Preah Vihear
Temple as a UNESCO World Heritage site. The communiqué became a
lightning rod for Thaksin’s opponents at home, spearheaded by the
People’s Alliance for Democracy. The spate of armed clashes along the
border this year stems from PAD provocations. Although some of its
members entered the cabinet under Abhisit, PAD leaders felt betrayed and
abandoned by Abhisit and some of his powerful backers. The PAD’s
yellow-clad supporters returned to the streets, this time under the
banner of ultra-nationalism over Preah Vihear and a domestic
anti-corruption campaign. The PAD has openly called for a military coup
to clean up Thai politics.
A
major tipping point may have been the red-shirt leaders’ allusion to
the conspicuous royal silence in response to the army’s violent
suppression, which heightened the army’s fear of a clear and present
danger to the monarchy.
If
ASEAN is not allowed a mediating role, the Thai-Cambodian spat may wind
its way back to the United Nations Security Council, which earlier
delegated the issue to ASEAN amidst heavy lobbying by Cambodia and
Thailand. Cambodia wants to multilateralise the border conflict as much
as Thailand tries to limit it to bilateral negotiations.
Though
the Thai-Cambodian border battles have involved tanks and heavy
artillery, they are unlikely to degenerate into open, large-scale
warfare. The ASEAN framework acts as a safety net and mutual commercial
interests should ultimately prevail. But sporadic shooting and verbal
antagonism between the two sides will continue, as Thailand’s
powers-that-be close ranks in a right-wing turn towards the symbols and
institutions of royalism, entangling Hun Sen, who should have stayed on
the sidelines, in the endgame unfolding in Bangkok.
Thitinan
Pongsudhirak is Professor and Director of Chulalongkorn University’s
Institute of Security and International Studies in Bangkok. He is also a
visiting professor at Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced
International Studies in Washington, DC
Khaleej Times Online
0 comments
Post a Comment