Cambodia will use force if Thailand attempts to repair Ta Moan Thom temple

By Khmerization
Source: RFA

Small yet elegant Ta Muen Thom sanctuary in Surin’s Phanom Dong Rak district. Both Thailand and Cambodia have claimed ownership over the 13th century temple, which is on the overlapping border. An ownership dispute caused the Thai Fine Arts Department to abandon the site in 2001. PHOTO: SANITSUDA EKACHAI

A senior Cambodian commander based at the border areas has threatened to use force if Thailand sends experts to repair Ta Moan Thom temple which is located on top of the Dangrek Mountains inside Cambodian territory in Oddar Meanchey province.

Gen. Chea Dara, Deputy Commander-in-Chief of Royal Cambodian Armed Forces in charge of Khmer-Thai border areas, said Thai nationals cannot enter Cambodian territory to repair Ta Moan Thom temple which is situated under Cambodian territorial integrity. “Thailand has no right to do repair works on any Cambodian temples. This action is called invasion and any invasion will be met with the use of swift and effective self-defence rights”, he said.

The warning from a Cambodian commander was issued after the Bangkok Post reported on Thursday 16th September that Thailand’s Fine Arts Department planned to do repair works on Ta Moan Thom temple.

Thailand Is Waiting For Appropriate Time To Talk With Cambodia – Suthep

August 05, 2010 15:47 PM
Source: BERNAMA

BANGKOK, Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban said that Thailand is now waiting for an ‘appropriate time’ to hold talks with itsneighbouring Cambodia over the Preah Vihear temple dispute, Thai News Agency said Thursday.

“The talks could be held later when both nations are more calm, and that is why Thailand did not reserve the right to begin talks,” he said when asked to comment on Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva’s statement on Wednesday.

Abhisit said he was ready to assign his deputy Suthep Thaugsuban to hold talks with Cambodia on the Preah Vihear dispute if the Khmer leadership gives a positive signal for negotiation.

Tension between Thailand and Cambodia rose after the Thai government’s delegation objected to Cambodia’s unilateral management plan of the ancient temple as the two neighbours could find no common ground to settle the disputed 4.6 sq km of land adjacent to the temple which was granted world heritage status in 2008.

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) through its World Heritage Commission (WHC) consequently last week postponed its discussion of the plan until next year when it meets in Bahrain.

On another issue, Suthep urged civil groups to refrain from rallying under a state of emergency.

Tulsie and Thanong on Preah Vihear

By Bangkok Pundit

Actually, on the substance of Tulsie’s opinion piece in The Nation on why Abhisit is acting tough now BP thinks Tulsie is basicallyright so do not have a dispute with that, but then there is this:

Defending its decision to support Cambodia’s registration efforts, the Samak government pointed to two basic legal points. The first was the World Court ruling in 1962 declaring that the temple was on Cambodian territory. The second was Article 61 of the World Court ruling, which states: “No application for revision may be made after a lapse of 10 years from the date of the judgement.” Article 61 featured prominently in Cambodia’s application document to Unesco, with “LAPSE OF TEN YEARS” written in capital letters).

The Democrat camp led by Abhisit at the time pointed out Article 60 of the court’s ruling. This article allows warring parties to reserve doubts and observations concerning rulings and, unlike Article 61, this one does not spell out any time frame. Which article carries stronger weight is debatable, but the battle line was clearly drawn. The Democrats were saying that any Thai move that could weaken Thailand’s “silent protest” against the World Court ruling had to be avoided.

BP: Ok, He has Article 61 correct, but lets look at Article 60 (it is actually Article 60 of the ICJ Statute and not the court ruling) states:

Article 60

The judgment is final and without appeal. In the event of dispute as to the meaning or scope of the judgment, the Court shall construe it upon the request of any party.

BP: What is in dispute about the scope of the decision? The key part of the Court decision (see this post for more):

“The Court however considers that Thailand in 1908-1909 did accept the Annex I map as representing the outcome of the work of delimitation, and hence recognized the line on that map as being the frontier line, the effect of which is to situate Preah Pihear in Cambodian territory“

“FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT,

by nine votes to three,

Finds that the temple of Preah Vihear is situated in territory under the sovereignty of Cambodia

BP: So Thailand will go back to the ICJ and ask, did you really mean it when you said that the temple is in Cambodian territory? There is nothing vague about this. See this post as for a critique by someone else at The Nation on trying to use Article 60. Actually, Thailand doesn’t dispute this at all per this document from from the MFA:

Thailand accepts that the Temple belongs to Cambodia as it honors the ICJ’s decision on the matter.

BP: Now, there is argument, which the ICJ didn’t address, about whether the land boundary between Thailand and Cambodia is, is this what the Democrat party argument is? The ICJ didn’t address this in details (although it did mention about Thailand accepting the Annex 1 map) so is there really an  argument for going back to the ICJ to determine the scope of the ICJ decision? Does Thailand really want to given that this would put more territory up for grabs?

Thanong in The Nation:

Thailand appears to be totally isolated on the issue. Most of the major powers are backing Cambodia on the management plan for the temple. This will allow interested parties a window of opportunity to take part in the development project for Preah Vihear, plus other business deals with Cambodia afterward.

Cambodia is trying every means to squeeze the territory from Thailand. The implication from this Unesco meeting is significant, for the claim over the land territory will have implications for maritime claims in the Gulf of Thailand, which are rich in oil and natural gas deposits.

…
If Cambodia insists on managing Preah Vihear, Thailand should respond in kind by closing the borders and stopping all trade with its neighbour. This would be the first warning. Thai soldiers on the border are on high alert. If the first warning goes unheeded, we should reserve the right, under our sovereignty, to drive out any nationals infringing upon our land.

BP: You see the Kasit/PAD line of thought in that first paragraph? Foreign countries are conspiring against Thailand it seems (Question? Because UNESCO delayed the decision until next year does it not logically follow that these countries are stalling for more oil and natural gas or that Thailand is giving them something in return?)

On the second paragraph, from Article 2 of the UNESCO Convention:

11. No act or activity undertaken on the basis of this Convention shall constitute grounds for claiming, contending or disputing any claim to national sovereignty or jurisdiction.

BP: This is the conflating of two issues (Preah Vihear and the maritime claims) by Thanong. Now, the issues are related in terms of Cambodian-Thai relations, but a ruling by UNESCO does not then legally mean anything in relation to the maritime claims.

On the third paragraph, will Abhisit comply?

Have Posted in Here