c

Intervention of H.E. Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva of the Kingdom of

Thailand responding on the Thailand-Cambodia Issue at the Plenary
Session of the 18th ASEAN Summit, 7th May 2011, Jakartac
c
c
c
c
c

Your Majesty,
Mr. Chairman,

Allow me to respond to the statement made by Prime Minister Hun Sen.

Thailand recognizes full well that any conflict between ASEAN Member States
can undermine ASEAN¶s community -building efforts.

I can therefore categorically state that Thailand has no intention

whatsover to engage in any conflict with neighbours and countries in
the region.

The border disputes between Thailand and Cambodia, like many other
disputes, are long-standing. In this case, the borders have been delimited by
various Treaties such as the Siamese-French Convention of 1904 and the
Siamese-French Treaty of 1907. There have also been subsequent
developments which have raised disagreements.

As mentioned by Prime Minister Hun Sen, there were maps that were
referred to and there was a ruling by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in
1962. The ICJ, however, made it clear that the mentioned map was not the
work of the Siamese-French Mixed Commission of Delimitation. The ICJ
delivered a judgment in 1962 and although Thaila nd did not agree with it, we
complied with the judgment since 1962. Military and police personnel were
withdrawn from the Temple and its vicinity since 1962. This was undertaken in
a transparent manner, recognized by the international community and
Cambodia. And there have been no problems for decades.

Both sides agreed on the 2000 Memorandum of Understanding between

Thailand and Cambodia on the Survey and Demarcation of Land Boundary (2000
MOU) which again was done in good faith. The 2000 MOU stated that no actions
should be undertaken to affect the demarcation work, and this included
movement of troops and people into disputed areas. The problem emerged when
Cambodia violated the 2000 MOU by sending troops and people into the area.

I therefore wish to set the record straight:

Thailand has no intention whatsoever to have conflicts.

I am therefore disappointed that Prime Minister Hun Sen has stated

otherwise regarding Thailand¶s intentions.
 Thailand has contributed to Cambodia¶s nation-building process with utmost
sincerity and with the wish to see it advance and achieve reconciliation. Even
today, we continue to provide development cooperation assistance to Cambodia
because we believe that Cambodia¶s prosperity is linked with our
prosperity. Even in times of dispute, we have continued to provide assistance,
trade and cooperate economically.

Thailand has de-coupled the border dispute from other issues.

But we cannot help but notice that there is a clear att empt by Cambodia to
internationalize the issue.

It is simply not true that the bilateral process is not working.

I am frustrated too, as may be Prime Minister Hun Sen, of the internal legal
requirements but the fact is that the Thai -Cambodian Joint Commission on
Demarcation for Land Boundary (JBC) continues to function. Legal issues have
been resolved. Thailand¶s Consitutional Court has ruled on the Agreed Minutes of
previous meetings of the JBC that they need not go to the Thai Parliament.

So we are ready to resume the JBC.

Before the clashes in February this year, my Foreign Minister was in

Cambodia. Immediately after the first shot was fired, Cambodia went to the
United Nations Security Council. However, bilateral mechanisms a re still
working. In April 2011, the JBC met in Bogor. I hope my ASEAN colleagues
recognize that the doors for bilateral meetings remain open. Invitations have
been issued to Cambodia regarding meetings of the JBC, the Regional Border
Committee (RBC) and the General Border Committee (GBC). We are waiting
for Cambodia to accept the invitations.

I accept that the issue could affect the credibility of ASEAN. We must
therefore make sure that any problem should be solved, locally, bilaterally and if
needed with the facilitation of the region.

Regarding the Terms of Reference (TOR) on the Indonesian Observers Team

(IOT), the Thai Cabinet has approved the text of TOR. But we have concerns. If
observers are to be sent, there must be good faith s hown by Cambodia to
respect the 2000 MOU. This involves the withdrawal of troops and other people
from these areas since the 2000 MOU states that there would be no movement
of troops and people into these areas.

Furthermore, the presence of troops at the Temple is a violation of the 1954

Hague Convention on the Protection of Cultural Properties in the Event of Armed
Conflict and the 1972 Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural
and Natural Heritage as well as the guidelines of the World Heritage Committee.
It is therefore a good idea for the GBC to discuss this before the IOT is sent.

On the recent border clashes in April ± these took place more than 100
kilometers away from the Phra Viharn Temple. Therefore, the area where th e
IOT is to be sent to is nowhere near the latest clashes. Subsequently and
immediately, Cambodia sent a letter to the ICJ.

I apologize for taking time to explain this issue. This matter can be
resolved bilaterally. We welcome ASEAN¶s facilitating role and appreciate
Indonesia¶s facilitation in this regard. There are some technical issues to be
addressed. If there is good faith, then our house can be set in order.

I welcome the offer of our host to hold a meeting with Cambodia and
Thailand ± I have no problems discussing this issue with Prime Minister Hun
Sen. This will allow for a good understanding of what really happened in the past
few months.

**********************
c

÷




 



 

May 1, 2011, 4:41 pm

On 29 April 2011, Mr. Thani Thongphakdi, Director -General of the Department of

Information and Foreign Ministry Spokesperson, together with Dr. Panitan
Wattanayagorn, Deputy Secretary -General to the Prime Minister and Acting
Government Spokesperson, and Colonel Sansern Kaewkamnerd, Royal Thai
Army Spokesman, gave a press briefing on the situation along the Thai -
Cambodian border and Cambodia¶s submission to the International Court of
Justice (ICJ). Gist as follows:

1. The Deputy Secretary-General said that the Thai Government was

disappointed with the clashes that reoccurred on 28 April 2011 after the Thai
Second Army Region Commander had held talks earlier in the day with the
Cambodian Fourth Army R egion Commander on ceasing hostilities. He also
expressed the Government¶s condolences to the families of those whose lives
were lost and those who were injured. The Thai Government calls upon the
Cambodian Government to adhere to the agreement to cease hostilities which
was reached by the local officers of both countries in order to bring back peace
to the area. The Thai Government is committed to the principle of peaceful
negotiations and affirms that it does not have a policy of attacking neighbouring
countries, and that Thailand will respond only to defend itself and protect its
people, which has been the position of successive Thai governments, in line with
the practice of international relations.

The Deputy Secretary-General further stated that Prime Minister Abhisit

Vejjajiva would attend the ASEAN Summit in Jakarta, Indonesia next week and
would use this opportunity to clarify the situation to the other ASEAN leaders.
The Prime Minister is also considering the possibility of having a bilateral
meeting with the Prime Minister of Cambodia on the sidelines of the Summit.
2. The Foreign Ministry Spokesperson said that on the morning of 29 April 2011,
the Cambodian side released a statement revealing that it had submitted a
request to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) for an interpretation of the
Court¶s 1962 ruling on the case concerning the Temple of Phra Viharn. The Thai
was informed earlier about this development and was now awaiting formal
notification. This move by Cambodia is not beyond expectation. Assessment of
Cambodia¶s actions from the beginning indicates it would move in this direction.
Furthermore, during the seventh meeting of the Joint Commission for Bilateral
Cooperation on 3-4 February 2011, Mr. Hor Namhong, Deputy Prime Min ister
and Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation of Cambodia had
informed the Thai Foreign Minister that if no further progress could be made by
the Joint Boundary Commission (JBC), the Cambodian side would submit its
request to the ICJ to interpret the aforementioned ruling of the Court.

This action by Cambodia reflects the fact that it has been harbouring an ulterior
motive. By initiating armed clashes along the Thai -Cambodian border since 22
April 2011, Cambodian had laid the groundw ork and created an environment
which it hoped would be conducive for it to go to the ICJ. On its part, Thailand
is ready and has been making the necessary preparations for quite some time
now, including establishing a working group and seeking the service s of foreign
legal advisers on this case. Thailand still believes bilateral negotiation remains
the best approach to resolve boundary problem between the two countries.
However, given the fact that the Cambodian side has sought an interpretation
from the ICJ, the Thai side is prepared to take appropriate action. This decision
by Cambodia also reflects its disregard and wish to bypass the role of ASEAN in
helping facilitate the bilateral process between Thailand and Cambodia.

3. Regarding the latest clashes, the Army Spokesperson said that clashes
reoccurred at 21.00 hrs. followed by sporadic clashes despite the fact that on 28
April 2011, Lieutenant -General Thawatchai Samutsakorn, Thailand¶s Second
Army Region Commander had held talks with Lieutenant -General Chea Mon,
Cambodia¶s Fourth Military Region Commander at Chong Jom whereupon it was
agreed that the results of their discussions, including a preliminary agreement to
cease hostilities, would be reported to their superiors. The clashes led to the
death of one soldier and seven soldiers being injured on the Thai side. The
Army Spokesperson opined that, looking positively, the clashes might have
resulted from miscommunication and there may have been issues of command
and control amongst the Cambodian troops since the Fourth Army Region
Commander who led the talks with Thailand¶s Second Army Region Commander
was not directly responsible for the area where the clashes took place. Be that
as it may, in the evening of 29 April 2011, talks between the com manders of
units stationed on the front line were arranged in Osamet District, Odor
Meanchey Province. Issues discussed included making sure that units under
their respective command exercise caution in the use of their weapons in order
to prevent misunderstandings that might lead to clashes. Furthermore,
information was exchanged so that local officers of both countries could
promptly coordinate with each other if incidents occur. All this shows Thailand¶s
sincerity in trying to end armed clashes throug h peaceful means. Thailand
would continue to monitor whether Cambodia would be able to turn the results
of the negotiations into concrete action.

4. In response media enquiries about steps taken by the Government when

clashes occurred, besides those taken by the military, the Deputy Secretary -
General to the Prime Minister stated that the Government is the one who
determines the approach to be taken by the military as prescribed by the
provisions of the Thai Constitution. This approach would remain uncha nged
even if there is a change of government ± that is, military force would be used in
self-defence to secure Thailand¶s sovereignty and protect the people.

The Foreign Ministry Spokesperson added that the foreign ministers of Thailand
and Cambodia had spoken on telephone on 23 April 2011 and agreed to meet
during the ASEAN Summit to be held on 7 -8 May 2011, and there is also a
possibility for a meeting between the Thai and Cambodian prime ministers.

In response to questions about the issues raised in Cambodia¶s submission to

the ICJ requesting an interpretation of the case concerning the Temple of Phra
Viharn, the Foreign Ministry Spokesperson said that this issue would become
clearer once the official notification is received, which should happen with in the
next 24 hours. Nonetheless, based on Cambodia¶s statement, it could be that
Cambodia would request the ICJ to make an interpretation on the ³vicinity´ of
the Temple. The Foreign Ministry Spokesperson further noted that the
submission of the request for such interpretation by the ICJ could be made
under Article 60 of the ICJ Statute. He underlined that since the ICJ has yet to
thoroughly consider all the evidence and facts before deciding how to proceed
with the matter, and given that the ICJ must also allow the disputing parties to
present their respective observations and evidence for the Court¶s consideration,
all of which would take time, it would be inappropriate to prejudge the outcome.

*************************

29 April 2011