Photos of the Preah Vihear site and drawings of the sanctuary which appear in Cambodia's nomination document for the listing of the ancient temple as the World Heritage site.The Bangkok Post
Monday July 21, 2008
Temple management committee could result in Thailand losing sovereignty over heritage site
MR Pridiyathorn
The government should mobilise state agencies to deal with the Preah Vihear issue, and appoint a national committee to steer the effort, MR Pridiyathorn Devakula suggests in an open letter to Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej.
The national committee, chaired by a deputy prime minister, needs to coordinate efforts from state agencies in explaining to the world community loopholes in the process leading to the decision by the World Heritage Committee to list Preah Vihear temple, he says in the letter.
The listing was based on debatable information on the temple's history.
The Cambodian government had distorted the fact that significant parts of the Preah Vihear temple site were in Thai territory, said MR Pridiyathorn, a former Bank of Thailand governor, and ex-finance minister.
A diplomatic campaign should be launched to tell the world community that Thailand was willing to cooperate with the Preah Vihear listing, but the listing must be properly carried out and meet all the criteria for World Heritage sites.
To carry out such a diplomatic campaign, agencies should work in the same direction and with the same strategy.
A national committee must be set up to direct agencies' efforts. Internationally recognised experts including historians, archaeologists and civil servants well-versed in the issue should be invited to work with the committee, he said.
The deputy prime minister appointed to chair the committee should be independent from political groups as the public could ask questions if the chairman has any conflict of interest on the issue.
"Mr Prime Minister, I write this letter to point out information that some might have overlooked.
"Many have tried to point a finger at those causing Thailand to make mistakes on this issue. But I'm afraid we might forget our real opponents abroad. They are also threatening opponents, who are not easy to deal with.
"So I've tried to find a way to deal with them and propose it for your consideration. I hope you won't overlook this important national issue."
The fact that the WHC had now listed Preah Vihear as a World Heritage site should not be a problem for Thailand as Cambodia's latest map of the temple proposed to the WHC did not include area in the disputed territory.
The listing, which Thailand opposed, had not affected this country's territory.
The government should, however, be wary of Item 14 in the WHC's Preah Vihear listing ruling. It says the WHC "requests the State Party of Cambodia, in collaboration with Unesco [the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation], convene an international coordinating committee for the safeguarding and development of the property no later than February 2009, inviting the participation of the Government of Thailand and not more than seven other appropriate international partners, to examine general policy matters relating to the safeguarding of the outstanding universal value of the property in conformity with international conservation standards".
The statement seemed harmless. However, the phrase "the safeguarding of the outstanding universal value of the property in conformity with international conservation standards" had wide ramifications.
It gave an international committee, comprising representatives from Cambodia, Thailand and seven other nations authority to manage the surrounding area of the ancient Preah Vihear temple, including adjacent architecture on Thai soil.
The international conservation standard required all parts of a World Heritage site and its surroundings to be conserved and restored to fit its heritage status.
The letter quotes former chairman of the National Committee for Protection of World Cultural and Natural Heritage, Adul Wichiencharoen, as saying Item 14 of the WHC's ruling created an opportunity for the international committee to supervise conservation areas at the ancient temple.
The statement in Item 14 was unprecedented as the WHC had not before opted to use an international panel in the protection or the creation of a conserved or development area of a World Heritage site, Mr Adul was quoted as saying.
The fact that the WHC allowed Cambodia to invite representatives from seven other nations to join the committee was a way to silence representatives from Thailand when any disagreement arose.
Whenever the Thai government disagreed with any idea proposed to the committee, Cambodia's partners from the seven countries could simply unite to oppose its stance.
Thailand would then have no chance to do anything on its own territory due to pressure from the majority on the international committee. It would be equivalent to losing the country's sovereignty over the disputed area, said Mr Adul.
He suggested the conserved and development area should be managed by a joint panel between Thailand and Cambodia only.
Archaeologist and anthropologist Srisakra Vallibhotama had suggested the government not cooperate with the WHC's plan to appoint the international committee to supervise Preah Vihear temple's protection, according to the letter.
Mr Srisakra said the government's participation on the committee would be tantamount to the country's acknowledgement of the temple's listing and eventually the country could lose 4.6 square kilometres of overlapping territory.
However, the government could not do what Mr Srisakra suggested, MR Pridiyathorn wrote, because Thailand has ratified the Unesco Convention concerning the protection of world cultural and natural heritage. The government was obliged to cooperate in the process to manage and protect heritage sites listed by the WHC.
If Thailand did not cooperate, Thailand might have to end its membership in Unesco's World Cultural and Natural Heritage programme.
If Thailand decided not to join the international committee for the management of Preah Vihear temple and failed to properly explain its decision to other countries, those who did not know the issue might think Thailand irrationally refused to cooperate because it could not co-host the listing of Preah Vihear temple.
Such a misunderstanding could damage the country's image in the world community.
The national committee was needed to make sure the world community understands Thailand's stance on Preah Vihear and the history of Preah Vihear temple correctly, he said.
Monday July 21, 2008
Temple management committee could result in Thailand losing sovereignty over heritage site
MR Pridiyathorn
The government should mobilise state agencies to deal with the Preah Vihear issue, and appoint a national committee to steer the effort, MR Pridiyathorn Devakula suggests in an open letter to Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej.
The national committee, chaired by a deputy prime minister, needs to coordinate efforts from state agencies in explaining to the world community loopholes in the process leading to the decision by the World Heritage Committee to list Preah Vihear temple, he says in the letter.
The listing was based on debatable information on the temple's history.
The Cambodian government had distorted the fact that significant parts of the Preah Vihear temple site were in Thai territory, said MR Pridiyathorn, a former Bank of Thailand governor, and ex-finance minister.
A diplomatic campaign should be launched to tell the world community that Thailand was willing to cooperate with the Preah Vihear listing, but the listing must be properly carried out and meet all the criteria for World Heritage sites.
To carry out such a diplomatic campaign, agencies should work in the same direction and with the same strategy.
A national committee must be set up to direct agencies' efforts. Internationally recognised experts including historians, archaeologists and civil servants well-versed in the issue should be invited to work with the committee, he said.
The deputy prime minister appointed to chair the committee should be independent from political groups as the public could ask questions if the chairman has any conflict of interest on the issue.
"Mr Prime Minister, I write this letter to point out information that some might have overlooked.
"Many have tried to point a finger at those causing Thailand to make mistakes on this issue. But I'm afraid we might forget our real opponents abroad. They are also threatening opponents, who are not easy to deal with.
"So I've tried to find a way to deal with them and propose it for your consideration. I hope you won't overlook this important national issue."
The fact that the WHC had now listed Preah Vihear as a World Heritage site should not be a problem for Thailand as Cambodia's latest map of the temple proposed to the WHC did not include area in the disputed territory.
The listing, which Thailand opposed, had not affected this country's territory.
The government should, however, be wary of Item 14 in the WHC's Preah Vihear listing ruling. It says the WHC "requests the State Party of Cambodia, in collaboration with Unesco [the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation], convene an international coordinating committee for the safeguarding and development of the property no later than February 2009, inviting the participation of the Government of Thailand and not more than seven other appropriate international partners, to examine general policy matters relating to the safeguarding of the outstanding universal value of the property in conformity with international conservation standards".
The statement seemed harmless. However, the phrase "the safeguarding of the outstanding universal value of the property in conformity with international conservation standards" had wide ramifications.
It gave an international committee, comprising representatives from Cambodia, Thailand and seven other nations authority to manage the surrounding area of the ancient Preah Vihear temple, including adjacent architecture on Thai soil.
The international conservation standard required all parts of a World Heritage site and its surroundings to be conserved and restored to fit its heritage status.
The letter quotes former chairman of the National Committee for Protection of World Cultural and Natural Heritage, Adul Wichiencharoen, as saying Item 14 of the WHC's ruling created an opportunity for the international committee to supervise conservation areas at the ancient temple.
The statement in Item 14 was unprecedented as the WHC had not before opted to use an international panel in the protection or the creation of a conserved or development area of a World Heritage site, Mr Adul was quoted as saying.
The fact that the WHC allowed Cambodia to invite representatives from seven other nations to join the committee was a way to silence representatives from Thailand when any disagreement arose.
Whenever the Thai government disagreed with any idea proposed to the committee, Cambodia's partners from the seven countries could simply unite to oppose its stance.
Thailand would then have no chance to do anything on its own territory due to pressure from the majority on the international committee. It would be equivalent to losing the country's sovereignty over the disputed area, said Mr Adul.
He suggested the conserved and development area should be managed by a joint panel between Thailand and Cambodia only.
Archaeologist and anthropologist Srisakra Vallibhotama had suggested the government not cooperate with the WHC's plan to appoint the international committee to supervise Preah Vihear temple's protection, according to the letter.
Mr Srisakra said the government's participation on the committee would be tantamount to the country's acknowledgement of the temple's listing and eventually the country could lose 4.6 square kilometres of overlapping territory.
However, the government could not do what Mr Srisakra suggested, MR Pridiyathorn wrote, because Thailand has ratified the Unesco Convention concerning the protection of world cultural and natural heritage. The government was obliged to cooperate in the process to manage and protect heritage sites listed by the WHC.
If Thailand did not cooperate, Thailand might have to end its membership in Unesco's World Cultural and Natural Heritage programme.
If Thailand decided not to join the international committee for the management of Preah Vihear temple and failed to properly explain its decision to other countries, those who did not know the issue might think Thailand irrationally refused to cooperate because it could not co-host the listing of Preah Vihear temple.
Such a misunderstanding could damage the country's image in the world community.
The national committee was needed to make sure the world community understands Thailand's stance on Preah Vihear and the history of Preah Vihear temple correctly, he said.
No comments:
Post a Comment