ON THE Record
PIYAPORN WONGRUANG
Pongpol Adireksarn, the chairman of the National World Heritage Committee, talked to the Post after returning from Quebec where the Preah Vihear issue was discussed.
How did Thailand prepare for the meeting in Quebec? We had two teams. One was mine concentrating on matters regarding World Heritage. The other was led by the Foreign Ministry and focussed on matters regarding political issues, especially the boundary issue.
We agreed to merge our stance into two main points, which were the deferral and the joint nomination of the site. We insisted on the joint nomination because we felt that the site's integrity should be preserved. Since some parts of the temple's cultural landscape fall in Thai territory, it should be jointly nominated.
What did you do to get the World Heritage Committee (WHC) to consider Thailand's stance? We had an informal talk with Cambodia through a mediator on July 6. We were in separate rooms, and the WHC's representative came to us first. We told them we wanted to postpone the proposal. They said this could not be done since it was postponed once. And for the joint nomination, they said it was too late because Cambodia already put in a proposal [unilaterally]. So we told them then that only the temple could be listed. They went back and forth between us and the Cambodians for about three to four hours. It was quite rushed as they went back and forth.
Did we not expect that Cambodia's temple would be listed anyway? We realised that. But we tried to negotiate so we would have benefited, or at the most not been at a disadvantage. People said we surrendered. Surrendered what? Our statement says we objected.
Was there any voting in the meeting? No. The chairperson shared the draft decision in the meeting, and nobody objected. So, the chairperson hit the hammer. In some other cases, some members exchanged words, but not on this. They said it was the last matter and time was limited. There were 47 sites nominated. Previously, the Preah Vihear case was the fourth in order, but it was moved to 47th. They said they wanted us to settle a deal.
Do you think policies or mechanisms regarding a World Heritage site are adequate to help facilitate the issues concerning disputed boundaries?
The WHC does not get involved with boundaries. They are interested in only World Heritage matters. So parties have to discuss with one another. So far, there is the International Coordinating Committee to help in related policies. This will be a platform where we can fight further. I still see that as useful.
Prev
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Next
