The government's move to scrap the maritime deal with Cambodia is not a "hit where it hurts" decision as it is based on sketchy information over interests in the overlapping areas in the Gulf of Thailand.
Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen said in Phnom Penh upon arrival from Tokyo yesterday that termination of the deal was not good for both neighbours.
It's like you wrote with your hand but deleted it with your foot," he said. "Who can trust you if the new government does not honour treaties the previous government signed?"
Inner circles of the Thai government, which drove the diplomatic moves to retaliate against Hun Sen's decision to appoint former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra as his adviser, believe Thaksin and Hun Sen would benefit from the maritime pact.
The government's reason for deciding to end the memorandum of understanding (MoU) with Cambodia - on the areas of their overlapping maritime claims to the continental shelf - was that Thaksin had a
The former prime minister used to be the chief negotiator for Thailand but has turned himself to the other side, said Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva.
The government's argument is not based on solid logic. Being an adviser to another country is not simply equivalent to betraying the home country. In the modern world, many former leaders of countries could be appointed as advisers to other countries.
Singaporean Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew used to be an adviser to Vietnam while Singapore had many deals with the country. South Korea's President Lee Myung-bak has been an economic adviser to Hun Sen since 2000 during which time the two countries have had many economic negotiations.
The true reason for the government's decision is that Thaksin is the enemy of the ruling Democrat Party and many obligations he entered into in the past should not be carried out.
In practice, the five-article MoU signed on June 18, 2001 by then foreign minister Surakiart Sathirathai and Cambodian deputy prime minister Sok An agreed on two things - defining a joint development area in the sea, and delimiting the territorial sea.
The joint committee has made no progress in accordance with the agreement since then. With or without the MoU, disputes in the sea remain and the two sides have no proper solution.
The dispute in the sea has a long history since Cambodia announced its continental shelf in 1972 and Thailand in 1973, resulting in the creation of a 26,000-square-kilometre overlapping area in the Gulf of Thailand. They agreed over the past years that the area above Latitude 11 degrees North would be the area of delimitation, and the area below that line would be a joint development area to exploit hydrocarbon resources.
They believed there is abundant natural gas in the area. Thailand has granted concessions to petroleum companies since 1968, long before the announcement of a continental shelf, while Cambodia started to do the same in 1997.
However, no company can implement the concessions since they are in the disputed area, said Admiral Thanom Charoenlap, an adviser to the government. What the two countries have done over the past years is simply concession booking, said the admiral who has given advice on maritime boundaries to Thai governments for decades.
To Thailand's concern, Cambodia has granted more concessions to foreign petroleum companies in many areas including those in the overlapping areas, and Thaksin's hand might also be involved. Concession in the overlapping areas might not be enforced, but there are many sites in Cambodia's area that could be explored.
Nobody has accurate information on Thaksin's interest in the petroleum deal in Cambodia, inside or outside the overlapping areas. Most government officials have doubts about any. Chavanond Intarakomalyasut, secretary to the foreign minister, said on the day when the decision was made to revoke the MoU that his government was looking into whether Thaksin really had any stake in the deal.
Ditching the maritime MoU will not cause any effects in real terms, but it could further delay the joint development area projects between the two countries. Economically speaking, the delay means the two countries will miss opportunities to exploit the resources. Simply put, this country has more opportunities than Cambodia to lose.
Sunday, November 8, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

No comments:
Post a Comment