| |
The seeds of Thai-Cambodian
tension
By Alan Boyd
SYDNEY -
Strident nationalism and decades of cultural baggage are
weighing down relations between Mekong neighbors
Cambodia and Thailand, which almost went to war last
week over a reported insult by a Bangkok soap-opera
star.
While Suwanna Konying denies that she
called for the return of the Angkor Wat temple complex
to Thailand, her reported comments triggered violent
attacks on Thai property in Phnom Penh and a hurried
exodus of diplomatic staff.
The consensus among
regional analysts is that Suwanna was probably the
unwitting victim of political scheming by elements of
the ruling Hun Sen government ahead of July's Cambodian
elections.
Nevertheless, the affair offered a
revealing glimpse of the perilous state of relations
between Thailand and Cambodia, which is aptly defined by
the iconic presence of Angkor Wat. "Setting aside the
obvious political connotations, it is difficult to avoid
the conclusion that Angkor Wat has been a symbol of all
that is wrong with the Thai-Cambodian relationship, of
differences rather than shared heritage," said a
European diplomat.
The magnificent city of
temples in western Siem Reap province have been under
alternate Thai and Cambodian control. Cambodian colonial
master France and a succession of Thai rulers traded
Siem Reap for territorial gains during the early part of
the 20th century, usually with an implied threat of
force from the French.
A series of accords was
drawn up in 1900-04 to delimit the vague boundaries
between Thailand, Cambodia and Laos, but protocols were
still being issued three decades later in response to
shifting commercial interests.
Among the most
crucial was a 1907 delimitation protocol under which
Thailand, then known as Siam, ceded the territories of
Battambang, Siem Reap and Sisophon to Cambodia in
exchange for Dan Sai and Krat.
France sought to
consolidate these pacts into a single binding treaty in
1937, only to lose control altogether in 1941, as
Japanese forces overran most of Southeast Asia and the
Indian subcontinent.
Ever ready to compromise,
Bangkok negotiated a peace convention with Tokyo in May
1941 that handed vast tracts of Cambodian and Laotian
territory to Thai jurisdiction in return for transit
rights for Japanese troops, which needed an unrestricted
route between India and Burma. But the returning French
struck back with the postwar Washington Accord in 1946,
which annulled the Tokyo Peace Convention and mostly
restored the 1907 boundaries.
This satisfied
neither the Thais nor the oppressed Cambodians. When
French forces eventually withdrew from Indochina in 1954
after their defeat at the hands of the Vietnamese,
tensions quickly boiled over. In 1958 Thailand and
Cambodia fought an inconclusive but bitter war over
simmering resentments that mostly centered on Siem Reap
and another temple at Preah Vihear, farther to the
north.
Mediators stepped in, and both countries
agreed to accept an arbitration ruling in 1962 by the
International Court of Justice (ICJ). Cambodia won, and
was granted sovereignty over Preah Vihear.
Angkor Wat was never a factor in this ruling, as
it was governed by the 1907 protocol. However, it
remained a deep thorn in a relationship that was
fractured by national pride and perceived cultural
slights.
Popular opinion in Thailand has never
accepted the court ruling, while Thai diplomats have
sought ever since to have the French legacy purged and
borders restored to their pre-1900 status.
Cambodia - ironically - has had to draw on the
colonial era to justify its territorial gains, which
include Angkor Wat.
"Since the judgment ... no
disputes over precise alignment have been raised by
either state," the US State Department reported at the
onset of the Vietnam War in 1966. "Cambodia, however, in
recent times has demanded that Thailand accept, at an
international conference, the validity of the treaties
with France delimiting the border and of the ICJ
decision of 1962."
The importance of the western
borders came sharply into focus as conflict broke out in
Indochina. By the early 1970s, Thai troops were
simultaneously struggling to contain a communist
insurgency from Laos and the overspill from Cambodia's
civil war.
Khmer Rouge guerrillas launched an
offensive across the northwestern border after claiming
vast tracts of former Cambodian territory. They were
repulsed, but returned in 1979 to seek refuge from
Vietnamese-backed forces in Phnom Penh.
"We then
had the extraordinary spectacle of this isolated
frontier becoming a Cold War sideshow for Soviet
expansionism, Southeast Asian security cooperation,
Chinese xenophobia - you name it. And of course the
nationalists had a field day on both sides of the
border," said another diplomat.
When the dust
cleared it was Hun Sen's Vietnamese-installed regime
that had won the day, with the help of a rigged election
result. Thailand had backed the losers, and had few
friends in Phnom Penh.
Even its non-communist
allies were suspicious of Bangkok's motives, which
appeared to be rooted in narrow commercial and
territorial interests rather than a genuine desire to
help a neighbor devastated by two decades of war.
By 1993, two years after fighting ended, Thai
firms were being accused of raping Cambodian forests,
while the government spoke of establishing a new era of
cultural influence over Indochina.
When Phnom
Penh began showing more favor to companies from other
Asian states, most notably Malaysia and Singapore, an
abortive coup attempt was staged in Cambodia, reportedly
with Thai support.
Border talks have mostly been
deadlocked, apart from a joint exploration agreement for
offshore oil that in effect sets aside sovereignty
issues until the resources have been exhausted.
Thai business is never likely to gain the
foothold it wants in Cambodia until there is a change of
government. But the cultural offensive has been
all-pervasive and will have a more lasting
impact.
Television stars such as Suwanna have
become the most effective ambassadors in Indochina,
feeding a daily dose of consumerism that reaches even
the most remote and impoverished rural communities. As
Thais parade their affluence across the cinema screens
and in the new crop of Khmer-language glossy magazines,
historic resentments have found a new outlet among the
poorer Cambodians.
"They are jealous, sure. The
Cambodians view the Thais like some sort of latter-day
carpetbaggers who are out for what they can get and damn
the consequences," said the European diplomat.
"But the root cause is these historic
differences, which really should have been sorted out by
now for the sake of a better bilateral relationship and
also for the sake of a region that can ill-afford petty
rivalries that really don't benefit anyone in the longer
haul."
(©2003 Asia Times Online Co, Ltd. All
rights reserved. Please contact content@atimes.com
for information on our sales and syndication policies.)
|
| |
|
|
 |
|
