PREAH VIHEAR TEMPLE: THAIS CONTINUE TO SUPPORT

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 BANGKOK 001486 SENSITIVE SIPDIS PARIS PLEASE PASS TO USMISSION UNESCO E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: UNESCO PREL SCUL PBTS TH CB SUBJECT: PREAH VIHEAR TEMPLE: THAIS CONTINUE TO SUPPORT INSCRIPTION REF: A. PHNOM PENH 392 ¶B. BANGKOK 871 BANGKOK 00001486 001.2 OF 002 ¶1. (SBU) Summary: Thai Foreign Minister Noppadon Pattama intended to discuss the disposition of the Preah Vihear temple during a May 14 trip to Cambodia. According to a Thai MFA official, Noppadon hoped to discuss with the RGC in general terms a possible joint statement on the management of the temple complex. The Thai MFA aims to finalize the joint statement text in the coming weeks. The Thai MFA said the Thai media and politicians were trying to sensationalize the issue by incorrectly portraying the RTG as prepared to make concessions relating to Preah Vihear to obtain other benefits from Cambodia. End Summary. ¶2. (U) The RTG continued to support the UNESCO World Heritage Commission's inscription of the Preah Vihear temple; however, it still held reservations about the resolution of the disputed area surrounding the complex, a working level contact at the MFA told us May 14. Thai Foreign Minister Noppadon Pattama traveled to Cambodia today (May 14) to attend a ceremony opening new roads in Cambodia that Thailand had helped to finance. He also planned to use the trip to have a side meeting with Cambodian Deputy Prime Minister Sok An as a follow up to the May 6 discussions between the RTG and RGC regarding the Preah Vihear temple issue. With this in mind, several officials from the Departments of East Asian and Legal Affairs accompanied Noppadon to Cambodia. ¶3. (SBU) Noppadon intended to reiterate to Sok An Thailand's backing of the temple's inscription. He would deliver the message that the Thais are not interested in overturning the 1962 ICJ decision, which declared that the temple complex belonged to the Cambodians. Rather, the RTG was keen to resolve the ongoing dispute of what the Thais identify as "overlapping territorial claims." (Ref B) Our contact acknowledged that the Cambodians believed the ICJ decision resolved any boundary dispute. The RGC and RTG relied on two different maps to support their distinct claims, however, and the RTG does not consider all boundary disputes resolved. ¶4. (SBU) The FM also planned to discuss in general terms the proposed contents of the RTG's version of a joint statement on Preah Vihear and encourage the RGC to finalize the joint 
statement before the July session of the World Heritage Committee. This joint statement, our contact explained, was a document that both countries agreed to redraft during the May 6 discussions. It would lay out the expectations of each country for the future and management of the temple complex, thus forming the basis for continued negotiations. Thailand understood that the Cambodian position emphasized inscription and the development of conservation plans for the temple complex. The Thais supported this position, but wanted to expand on it to include the issues of boundary demarcation as well as specific management instructions. ¶5. (U) Thailand's focus on management issues stemmed from ongoing practices at the temple complex that are of concern to the RTG. For example, the Thais claimed that several hundred Cambodians have lived in the disputed territory since 2001, when the RGC moved them to that area. "We have not outright objected to their living there (in the disputed area) as we do not want to make an issue out of it at this point," stated our contact. At the same time, the Thais contended that this community did not properly dispose of its waste water, which was freely flowing in to clearly demarcated Thai territory. If the Cambodians refused any consideration of joint RGC-RTG management of the disputed area, then Thailand would insist that the joint statement include guarantees that situations such as the above-mentioned would be addressed according to specific, agreed upon directives. (Note: On a visit to the temple, PolOff observed a large number of Cambodians clearly living in or around the complex, operating market stalls. End note.) ¶6. (U) The MFA expected to meet the Cambodians again in two to three weeks to attempt to finalize the joint statements. To date, the MFA's Legal Affairs Department had prepared a draft for the FM, but Noppadon had yet to approve it. ¶7. (U) Recent Thai media coverage of the issue raised the matter of disputed coastal waters between Thailand and Cambodia, and linked it with the Preah Vihear temple dispute. In response, the opposition party in parliament publicly criticized the RTG for considering the concession of Thai territory associated with Preah Vihear in exchange for access to natural gas rights along the coast. However, our MFA BANGKOK 00001486 002.2 OF 002 contact described the news reports and opposition party's statement as sensationalistic. Negotiations on both issues operated in parallel, she clarified, and the MFA Legal Affairs Department had already cautioned against linking the two issues for fear it would further complicate the ongoing negotiations. Thailand's objective was to resolve both disputes, she stated, and the Preah Vihear temple inscription could move forward without definitive resolution of the ongoing border disputes. JOHN