December 17, 2009
By Supalak Ganjanakhundee
The Nation
From a government point of view, conflict is not all bad - as long as the two governments limit their disagreements and avoid consequences that could backfire. But for either country, any kind of conflict will never bring a good result.
Normalisation of bilateral relations between Thailand and Cambodia remains an uphill task at this moment as both sides continue to enjoy - for domestic consumption - political benefits from the dispute.
The Thai government has set conditions for normalisation of relations - Cambodia must respect the Thai judiciary; stop interference in Thailand's internal affairs; and remove fugitive former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra from the position of adviser to the Cambodian government.
Cambodia, on the other hand, says it wants Thailand to return its ambassador to Phnom Penh, otherwise relations can never get back on track.
The Thai government reply is it would not return its ambassador to resume duty as long as Thaksin remained an adviser to Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen, and continued to avoid extradition to face punishment following his conviction in Thailand for corruption.
Thaksin has been at the core of the bad relations between the two countries since Hun Sen gave him the economic adviser's post in October. But even before this, feelings had been bad due to the conflict over the Hindu temple of Preah Vihear.
The two governments intentionally put the Thaksin issue into the context of bilateral relations because they wanted to use the issue to boost popularity at home and cover their respective administrative failures.
The Democrat-led government badly needed the Thaksin issue to justify its reason for being in power. Conflict with Cambodia over Thaksin has helped improve the popularity of Abhisit Vejjajiva's administration.
Thaksin is a perfect decoy to divert attention from the administration's failure to revive the economy.
The government could easily shift the blame to Thaksin and his red-shirted group for any economic failure. Political stability is indeed a key factor for economic recovery.
On the foreign policy front, Thailand has a good excuse to delay a resolution on the conflict with Cambodia over Preah Vihear. The issue is complicated and many government supporters, notably the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD), don't want the country to end the dispute over the temple.
They believe - wrongly- that if Thailand delays settlement on Preah Vihear until February next year, the World Heritage Committee would remove the temple from its listing.
Prime Minister Abhisit might know that perception is wrong but as long as it keeps the PAD away from putting pressure on the government, it's fine.
The opposition too can benefit from the Thai-Cambodian conflict as it uses the case of Thai engineer Sivarak Chutipong to move a censure motion against Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya.
They blame Kasit for instructing Thai diplomat Kamrob Palawatwichai to get Thaksin's flight information from Sivarak, who was later pardoned from a seven-year jail term on the spying charge.
Cambodia also wanted the Thaksin issue to fuel its conflict with Thailand to boost support for the government. Angered by the Preah Vihear case, many Cambodian people wanted Prime Minister Hun Sen to take a tough stance against Abhisit's government.
Thaksin is a powerful weapon for Hun Sen to wield against the current Thai government as the issue could cause the Thai prime minister and his foreign minister to lose direction in handling the situation.
Thaksin is also useful for Cambodia in real terms as Hun Sen can utilise his connections with international investors to bring capital into the Cambodian economy. Thaksin himself has planned to invest in the country's tourism and energy sectors.
From a government point of view, conflict is not all bad - as long as the two governments limit their disagreements and avoid consequences that could backfire. But for either country, any kind of conflict will never bring a good result.
0 comments:
Post a Comment