Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T01:11:51.838Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Institutional Design and Its Constraints: Explaining ASEAN's Role in the Temple of Preah Vihear Dispute

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 May 2014

Hao Duy PHAN
Hao Duy PHAN*
Affiliation:
Centre for International Law, National University of Singapore, [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper focuses on the role of ASEAN in maintaining peace and security in Southeast Asia. It uses the Temple of Preah Vihear dispute as a case-study to examine both ASEAN's successes and limitations in dealing with a crisis that threatened regional peace. The paper first examines ASEAN's initial response to the conflict and highlights a period of inaction that followed. It then traces ASEAN's renewed efforts to manage the conflict and assesses ASEAN's potential to resolve the dispute. The paper concludes that ASEAN did a remarkable job in facilitating negotiations and was instrumental in preventing the conflict from further escalation. It argues, however, that ASEAN's role remains limited: in particular, problems of institutional design reduce its effectiveness in managing conflicts and settling disputes. The paper concludes by making several suggestions to increase the effectiveness of the organization in maintaining regional peace and security.

Type
SYMPOSIUM: THE TEMPLE OF PREAH VIHEAR
Information
Asian Journal of International Law , Volume 5 , Issue 1 , January 2015 , pp. 7 - 15
Copyright
Copyright © Asian Journal of International Law 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Hao Duy Phan (S.J.D.) Senior Research Fellow, Centre for International Law, National University of Singapore.

References

1. On the role of international institutions, see KEOHANE, Robert and MARTIN, Lisa, “The Promise of Institutionalist Theory” (1995) 20 International Security 39CrossRefGoogle Scholar; MEARSHEIMER, John, “The False Promise of International Institutions” (1994−95) 19 International Security 5CrossRefGoogle Scholar; FINNEMORE, Martha and SIKKINK, Kathryn, “Taking Stock: The Constructivist Research Program in International Relations and Comparative Politics” (2001) 4 Annual Review of Political Science 391CrossRefGoogle Scholar; HAWKINS, Darren, “Explaining Costly International Institutions: Persuasion and Enforceable Human Rights Norms” (2004) 48 International Studies Quarterly 779CrossRefGoogle Scholar; MITCHELL, Sara McLaughlin and HENSEL, Paul, “International Institutions and Compliance with Agreements” (2007) 51 American Journal of Political Science 721CrossRefGoogle Scholar; SIMMONS, Beth, “Treaty Compliance and Violation” (2010) 13 Annual Review of Political Science 273CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2. UN Secretary Council, “Statement of Thailand Minister of Foreign Affairs at the 32nd Session of the World Heritage Committee” (21 July 2008)Google Scholar, online: Security Council Report 〈http://www.securitycouncilreport.org/atf/cf/%7B65BFCF9B-6D27-4E9C-8CD3-CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/Cam S 2008 474.pdf〉.

3. See International Crisis Group, “Waging Peace: ASEAN and the Thai-Cambodian Border Conflict” (6 December 2011)Google Scholar, online: International Crisis Group 〈http://www.crisisgroup.org/~/media/Files/asia/south-east-asia/thailand/215%20Waging%20Peace%20--%20ASEAN%20and%20the%20Thai-Cambodian%20Border%20Conflict〉.

4. ASEAN Declaration (Bangkok Declaration), 8 August 1967.

5. Embassy of Cambodia to Australia and New Zealand, “Letter of Cambodian Deputy Minister to ASEAN Chair” (21 July 2008)Google Scholar, online: Embassy of Cambodia 〈http://www.embassyofcambodia.org.nz/july2008/july2008-6.htm〉.

6. “ASEAN Foreign Ministers Confront Thai-Cambodia Crisis” Associated Foreign Press (22 July 2008), online: AFP 〈http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hS9VPRcnDZLhTV3A5B_uoMReL4lQ〉.

7. “Thailand rejects ASEAN role in Border Row, Cambodia appeals to U.N.” Kyodo News International (22 July 2008), online: Kyodo 〈http://www.thefreelibrary.com/LEAD%3A+Thailand+rejects+ASEAN+role+in+border+row,+Cambodia+appeals+to...-a0182078803〉.

8. Association of Southeast Asian Nations “Statement by Minister for Foreign Affairs George Yeo Singapore” (22 July 2008)Google Scholar, online: ASEAN 〈http://www.asean.org/asean/external-relations/east-asia-summit-eas/item/statement-by-minister-for-foreign-affairs-george-yeo-singapore-22-july-2008〉.

9. International Crisis Group, supra note 3 at 14Google Scholar.

10. “Hor Namhong Petitions ASEAN” The Phnom Penh Post (12 April 2010), online: The Phnom Penh Post 〈http://www.phnompenhpost.com/national/hor-namhong-petitions-asean〉.

11. Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Kingdom of Cambodia, “H.E Hor Namhong's Letter to Vietnamese Foreign Minister and ASEAN Chair” (2010), online: Ministry of Foreign Affairs 〈http://www.mfaic.gov.kh/Products/2603-he-hor-namhongs-letter-to-vietnamese-foreign-minister-and-asean-chair.aspx〉.

12. International Crisis Group, supra note 3 at 15Google Scholar.

13. Protocol to the ASEAN Charter on Dispute Settlement Mechanism, 20 November 1996, preamble, online: ASEAN 〈www.ASEAN.org〉.

14. “Indonesia Replaces Brunei as ASEAN 2011 Chair” Inquirer (14 April 2010), online: Inquirer 〈http://globalnation.inquirer.net/news/breakingnews/view/20100414-264222/Indonesia-replaces-Brunei-as-Asean-2011-chair〉.

15. “Hun Sen Makes Plea to UN” Phnom Penh Post (7 February 2011), online: The Phnom Penh Post 〈http://www.phnompenhpost.com/national/hun-sen-makes-plea-un〉.

16. See ibid.

17. Association of Southeast Asian Nations, “Statement by H.E. Dr. R.M. Marty M. Natalegawa, Indonesian Foreign Minister, Chair of ASEAN, Before the UNSC” (14 February 2011)Google Scholar, online: ASEAN 〈http://www.asean.org/news/item/statement-by-he-dr-rm-marty-m-natalegawa-indonesian-foreign-minister-chair-of-asean-before-the-unsc〉.

18. UN Secretary Council, “Security Council Press Statement on Cambodia-Thailand Border Situation, SC/10174” (14 February 2011)Google Scholar, online: United Nations 〈http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs//2011/sc10174.doc.htm〉.

19. Association of Southeast Asian Nations, “Statement by the ASEAN Chairman Following the Informal Meeting of the Foreign Ministers of ASEAN” (22 February 2011)Google Scholar, online: ASEAN 〈http://www.asean.org/news/asean-statement-communiques/item/statement-by-the-chairman-of-asean-following-the-informal-meeting-of-the-foreign-ministers-of-asean-jakarta-22-february-2011〉.

20. Not all ASEAN Member States agreed with Indonesia's decision. Singaporean Foreign Minister George Yeo remarked to a diplomat that the organization should not be the regional referee, but rather should stay on the sidelines of the conflict and avoid the risk of failure. International Crisis Group, supra note 3 at 24.

21. Request for Interpretation of the Judgment of 15 June 1962 in the Case Concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear (Cambodia v. Thailand), Request for the Indication of Provisional Measures, Order of 18 July 2011, [2011] I.C.J. Rep. 537, online: International Court of Justice 〈http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/151/16564.pdf〉.

22. Association of Southeast Asian Nations, “Chair's Statement of the 19th ASEAN Summit” (17 November 2011)Google Scholar, online: ASEAN 〈http://www.asean.org/archive/documents/19th%20summit/CS.pdf〉.

23. Rules of Procedure of the High Council of the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia, 23 July 2001, Rule 3, online: ASEAN 〈www.ASEAN.org〉.

24. Ibid., Rule 8.

25. This is conditional upon the entry into force of the 2010 Protocol. In accordance with art. 19, the 2010 Protocol needs to be ratified by all ASEAN Member States to enter into force. As of January 2014, Vietnam has ratified the 2010 Protocol.

26. Supra note 13, art. 8(1).

27. Ibid., art. 8(4).

28. Ibid., art. 9(4).

29. Request for Interpretation of the Judgment of 15 June 1962 in the Case Concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear (Cambodia v. Thailand), Judgment of 11 November 2013, [2013] I.C.J. para. 108.

30. “Thailand to Oppose Temple Plan” Bangkok Post (15 November 2013), online: Bangkok Post 〈http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/379884/thailand-to-oppose-temple-plan〉.

31. Supra note 13, preamble.