Peer reviewed analysis from world leading experts

ASEAN and the Cambodia-Thailand Conflict

Reading Time: 4 mins

In Brief

The fighting and violence that have taken place in the Thai-Cambodia border area violate both the letter of solemn agreements among the members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and its spirit, the spirit which underlies the very concept of ASEAN.

As ASEAN members, Cambodia and Thailand are both signatories to the 1976 Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia (TAC), which commits them to reject the use or threat of force in the relations between states and to the peaceful settlement of inter-state disputes.

Share

  • A
  • A
  • A

Share

  • A
  • A
  • A

The overriding purpose in this regard is to avoid and prevent actions that result in the death or injury of human beings. Already, between ten and twenty persons are reported to have been killed and countless others injured or displaced in the border fighting between the two countries.

In addition to the provisions of TAC, certain facts have to be kept in mind to avoid the repetition of violence in the future.

The first is that the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 1962 ruled that the temple of Preah Vihear, near where the fighting has occurred, belonged to Cambodia. Both Cambodia and Thailand had agreed to submit their dispute to the ICJ and to abide by its decision. The current dispute is not about the temple itself but over a strip of land nearby, which the ICJ saw fit not to adjudicate but which joint Cambodia-Thailand border and boundary bodies are supposed to deal with.

Another fact to remember is that in 2008 UNESCO listed Preah Vihear as a World Heritage Site. It did so upon Cambodia’s proposal but with the support of Thailand. This cooperation between the two was manifested in an agreement signed in June 2007 by Noppadol Pattama, then foreign minister in the government of Samak Sundaravej, a successor to the deposed Thaksin Sinawatra deemed sympathetic to Thaksin. Anti-Thaksin politicians have charged that the agreement violated Thailand’s constitution.

These events were also inflamed by nationalistic public emotions. It would be responsible and indicative of the value that the leaderships in both countries place on human life if they were to dampen the emotional flames instead of fanning them.

As the weaker protagonist, Cambodia has sought to multilateralise and internationalise the matter, including asking for a meeting of the United Nations Security Council on it. However, Thailand has expressed its preference for bilateral negotiations. But there are venues for mediating this conflict other than the world body, among them regional countries and ASEAN itself.

In recognition of this, Susilo Bambang Yudhuyono, President of Indonesia, this year’s ASEAN chair, has sent his foreign minister, Marty Natalegawa, to Cambodia and Thailand on 7 and 8 February, respectively. The new ASEAN Charter allows the parties to a dispute ‘to request the Chairman of ASEAN or the Secretary-General of ASEAN . . . to provide good offices, conciliation or mediation’. Marty and the foreign ministers of Cambodia and Thailand were invited to the 14 February UNSC meeting, at which all three made statements.

At the end of that meeting, the Council President, Brazil, issued a statement calling on ‘the two sides to display maximum restraint and avoid any action that may aggravate the situation’ and ‘to establish a permanent ceasefire . . . and resolve the situation peacefully and through effective dialogue’. It went on: ‘The (Council) members . . . expressed support for ASEAN’s active efforts in this matter and encouraged the parties to continue to cooperate with the organization in this regard. They welcomed the . . . Meeting of [ASEAN foreign ministers] on 22 February.’

The Cambodia-Thailand conflict puts to a severe test both ASEAN and Indonesia. Indonesia was one of ASEAN’s founders, its largest member and its current chair. Indonesia was where the 1976 Treaty of Amity and Cooperation was signed and the Blueprint for an ASEAN Political and Security Community was adopted, in 2003. It is the leading proponent of the Political and Security Community, which calls for the prevention of disputes and conflicts from arising between member-states.

The 22 February ASEAN foreign ministers’ meeting was called, hosted and chaired by Indonesia as ASEAN’s chair. It resulted in clever compromises among Thailand’s call for bilateral negotiations, third-party intervention, and ASEAN’s role. While the statement released at the end of the meeting underscored bilateral talks, it also repeatedly referred to Indonesia, which the ministers called on to send ceasefire observers on both sides of the disputed territory, as ‘ASEAN’s chair’.

For the sake of their peoples and of the region, not to mention ASEAN’s credibility, the efforts at mediation by Indonesia as the ASEAN chair and a cessation of hostilities must be encouraged and succeed.

K. Kesavapany is the Director of the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.

One response to “ASEAN and the Cambodia-Thailand Conflict”

  1. This is a very skewed article as it does not mention the most important document of all!!
    Siam (now Thailand) signed the Franco-Siamese Treaty of 13 February 1904 setting up a Mixed Commission composed of French Commission and Siamese Commission to delimit the frontier line between Cambodia (that was part of French Indochina) and Siam. In the area of the Temple of Preah Vihear, a map of the Dangrek sector known as “The Dangrek Map” among a set of 11 maps published under this treaty recognised and accepted by Siam, is the insoluble evidence that an international frontier line, stable and final, existed almost a century ago and continues to exist between Cambodia and Thailand. The International Court of Justice’s Judgment of 15 June 1962 is the reaffirmation that there is an international frontier line, stable and final between Cambodia and Thailand as evidenced by the Dangrek map known to be ANNEX I to Memorial of Cambodia or ANNEX I map.
    The Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of the Kingdom of Cambodia and the Government of the Kingdom of Thailand on the Survey and Demarcation of Land Boundary, actually known as MOU 2000, requires that the survey and demarcation shall be jointly conducted in accordance with:
    * The Convention between France and Siam modifying the stipulations of the Treaty of the 3 October 1893, regarding Territorial Boundaries and other Agreements, signed at Paris, 13 February 1904;
    * The Treaty between His Majesty the King of Siam and the President of the French Republic, signed at Bangkok, 23 March 1907, and the Protocol concerning the delimitation of boundaries and annexed to the Treaty of 23 March 1907;
    * Maps which are the results of demarcation works of the Commissions of Delimitations of the Boundary between Indo-China and Siam set up under the Convention of 1904 and the Treaty of 1907 between France and Siam and other documents relating to the application of the above Convention and Treaty.
    Based on the above international and legal documents, the “4.6 sq kms” exists only in the imagination and fabrication of Thailand.

Support Quality Analysis

Donate
The East Asia Forum office is based in Australia and EAF acknowledges the First Peoples of this land — in Canberra the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people — and recognises their continuous connection to culture, community and Country.

Article printed from East Asia Forum (https://www.eastasiaforum.org)

Copyright ©2024 East Asia Forum. All rights reserved.