Asnata: Prime Minister Sihasak Wangsuk hopes the chairman of the Thai-Cambodian maritime dispute mediation committee will be neutral. He expects the appointment process to take 30 days before negotiations can begin, emphasizing that the goal is to find a mutually acceptable solution.
According to Thai News Agency, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Sihasak Phuangketkaew revealed the progress in selecting the chairperson of the Compulsory Conciliation Commission under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). He stated that he had met with Thailand's nominated mediator, who explained the selection process, including whether the chosen candidate is acceptable to Thailand. While the law doesn't explicitly require the chairperson to be approved by both parties, there will be a notification of who is deemed suitable. Ideally, both sides would agree that the chosen individual is impartial. This process will take 30 days to complete, after which the working framework will be established, and Thailand will be invited for discussions and presentations, possibly once a month or every two months.
Regarding the question of why MOU 44 was canceled, Mr. Sihasak stated that it was to allow for negotiations under a new context. Both Thailand and Cambodia are now parties to UNCLOS, and a mandatory compromise is no longer necessary, as voluntary compromise remains the basis. This was the intention behind canceling MOU 44. He added that if the MOU remained in effect, negotiations would be unsuccessful. While many criticize MOU 44 for being based on Cambodia's claims, particularly the demarcation of Koh Kood, he acknowledged the initial difficulties in pushing forward negotiations under MOU 44 due to disagreement. However, he emphasized that their intention was to restart negotiations from scratch, but Cambodia was playing its cards right. He concluded that if negotiations on maritime issues could be successful, they might even be able to begin discussions on land matters, which Cambodia seems more interested in, given the numerous problems stemming from the war.
Regarding whether this could lead to the cancellation of MOU 43, Mr. Sihasak said that, without involving politics, this MOU is beneficial because it has already addressed many aspects of the boundary demarcation. The issue of the 1:200,000 scale map, which Thailand rejects because it resulted in the loss of the Preah Vihear temple, is significant. However, MOU 43 mentions other documents that can be used as supporting evidence, not just the 1:200,000 map, as it requires consideration of the treaty's content and the watershed issue. Therefore, he believes MOU 43 is still viable. He added that in current international relations, listening to public opinion is crucial, similar to UNCLOS, where Thailand has nothing to hide because this issue is as important as MOU 43. He stressed that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs must adhere to principles based on national interests and laws. However, if Thailand does not accept the mandatory process, it cannot appoint a mediator for Thailand and will not accept international rules during negotiations. Who will trust the agreements Thailand has signed? He reiterated that Thailand is part of a global community with established rules, and as a party to UNCLOS, Thailand must abide by them. Thailand will fight through the legal process to the best of its ability, which he believes is the best approach.
When asked further about the worst-case scenario for Thailand under UNCLOS, Mr. Sihasak said that we shouldn't look that far ahead, but rather consider how things will turn out under international law. Many people still believe that the border line claimed by Cambodia under international law is unlikely to be valid. However, there could be several scenarios, and in all of them, we can protect our sovereignty and then negotiate to find a win-win situation for both sides. If the approach is favorable and acceptable to Cambodia, then we win. But if not, we will talk to Cambodia to find a mutually acceptable solution.