PM Hun Sen Shares Thai Expert's Analysis on Cambodia-Thailand Border Dispute

Prime Minister Hun Sen of Cambodia has shared an analytical article written by Thai international relations and security expert Surachart Bamrungsuk. The article, titled "An Old Story That Is Not Old: What the International Court of Justice Ruling Determined," focuses on the 1962 International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling concerning Preah Vihear Temple. Prime Minister Hun Sen stated that he shared an unofficial translation of this article to enhance understanding for the people of both Cambodia and Thailand. The article highlights that the 1962 ruling stipulated that "one of the most important objectives when two countries delineate their borders with each other is to achieve security, certainty, and clarity." It argues that this objective cannot be achieved if the delineated border line remains subject to constant debate or demands for alteration. The article points out that the core of the border dispute between Thailand and Cambodia lies in the Preah Vihear Temple issue. The two countries have previously brought cases concerning the temple before the International Court of Justice twice: in 1962 and again in 2013. While Thailand has accepted the outcomes of both rulings, the article warns that Thailand must strictly avoid creating conditions that would force a return to the ICJ for a third time. Specifically, the 1962 ruling contains crucial points directly relevant to resolving the current border disputes between Thailand and Cambodia. Although the issue may have become an "old story" for contemporary politicians due to the passage of time, the article argues that ignoring this ruling in the context of current border conflicts would not be conducive to deeper understanding. The article emphasizes that the 1962 ruling clearly indicates that treaties and accompanying maps serve as the decisive factors in demarcating the border between Siam/Thailand and its neighboring states, which are inheritors of colonial rights. Furthermore, this ruling has the potential to influence not only the current Thai-Cambodian border dispute but also future border disputes between other states. The ICJ stated that if a delineated border line can be challenged or demands for alteration can be made at any time simply by referencing inaccuracies in the original treaty, such protests would continue endlessly, and agreements would never be permanently reached. This would lead to a lack of reality and long-term stability in the border line, posing serious risks. The Court made it clear that the international community does not wish to see border disputes drag on indefinitely. Therefore, even if current state leaders believe the original documents have flaws, they cannot be used as an excuse to revoke them, especially if they were jointly ratified by representatives of both states in the past. Otherwise, the border line would be constantly changed, leading to perpetual territorial disputes in border areas. This crisis could escalate into an unavoidable war between neighboring states, the article warns. The article concludes that the purpose of the Court's ruling is to prevent border areas from falling into a state of war and to prevent the border line from becoming a condition that leads to endless conflict. Agreements on border lines are intended to reduce and eliminate all tensions and achieve territorial stability based on certainty and clarity. Source: Kampuchea Thmey Local