Move on Preah Vihear is a step back

Cabinet agreed on Tuesday to maintain its objection to the World Heritage listing of Preah Vihear and to send Natural Resource and Environment Minister Suwit Khunkitti to Spain next week to ask the World Heritage Committee to review its decision last year.

The committee agreed to list Preah Vihear as a World Heritage site last July. But the decision by Cabinet this week, while unlikely to reverse the listing, will further delay Cambodia's plan to develop the site.

Military clashes at the border have previously prevented Cambodia from completing its plan.

After being listed, Phnom Penh is obligated to set up a seven-member International Coordinating Committee (ICC) to protect and develop the temple and its vicinity. The heritage body suggested Cambodia invite Thailand to be a member of the ICC.

But the Abhisit government is hesitant to join the ICC, as it does not want to go back on its previous stance, even though it is a nuisance for both coun-tries.

The Democrats backed protesters from the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) who used bruised nationalist ideology in claims of secret deals in regard to Preah Vihear temple to fight the previous Samak government.

They managed to force Noppadon Pattama to step down from the post of foreign minister and accused Samak's Cabinet of misconduct for backing Cambodia's proposal to list the Khmer sanctuary.

While the International Court of Justice ruled in 1962 that Preah Vihear belongs to Cambodia, Bangkok argues that areas adjacent to the tem-ple belong to Thailand. It fears that listing of the temple will affect its claim for sovereignty over that disputed territory.

Legally speaking, such concern sounds senseless since the UNESCO World Heritage Convention's article 11 says clearly that "the inclusion of a property (as a world heritage site) situated in a territory, sov-ereignty or jurisdiction over which is claimed by more than one State, shall in no way prejudice the rights of the parties to the dispute."

Support or opposition to Cambodia's bid to list Preah Vihear as a World Heritage site has nothing to do with land claimed by both sides.

Thailand's narrow-minded attitude benefits no-one. Thailand will get nothing from opposing Cambodia. And its plan to list Pha Mo I Daeng might be also opposed by Cambodia for the same reason.

A better option is to separate World Heritage listing from sovereignty concerns since the two things should not be linked. Thailand should cooperate with Cambodia to develop Preah Vihear, while reserving its right to negotiate the demarcation of boundaries in the area.