It's time to embrace 'world without borders'

A political struggle in Bangkok has once more triggered nationalistic fervour over whether Preah Vihear Temple is truly Cambodia's.

Many people are now trying to recall exactly what happened when the International Court of Justice ruled on the matter almost half a century ago.

Some historians and anthropologists warned disgruntled parties against being consumed by emotion and to avoid the pitfalls nationalistic tendencies often bring.

Historian Thanet Aphornsuvan wondered whether it was wise to return to border disputes, which had often sparked terrible wars in the old world.

More advanced countries prefer to embrace the notion of a world without borders, he said.

"Whenever the issue of Preah Vihear arises, it seems some people forget we are entering a new era where the world is viewed without borders," said Thanet, dean of Thammasat University's faculty of liberal arts.

"They appear willing to die for an area covering four square kilometres."

 Among his chief concerns is the danger of politicians whipping up nationalism, amid ignorance and poor information regarding the temple's history.

If the matter escalated, it may cut a deeper wound between the two countries, he warned.

The historian said he recently learned that the Unesco issue would not have any effect on Thai territory or sovereignty, should Preah Vihear Temple be put on Unesco's world heritage list.

Under article 11 of Unesco's Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, "the inclusion of a property situated in a territory, sovereignty or jurisdiction over which is claimed by more than one state shall in no way prejudice the rights of the parties to the dispute".

The dean said he agreed with the idea that world heritage sites belong to people of all races, irrespective of the territory they come from.

Historian Somrit Luechai shared the concern, especially what stands to be lost or gained by returning to a dispute that had wrecked both sides for generations.

"When talking about  [the border dispute], they only raised some issues of borders and national interest. But they seem to forget about the people who are born and live their lives there," he said.

Anthropologist Pichet Saiphan agreed. Preah Vihear today should no longer be chained by politics and nationalism, he said.

The key concern should be what benefits the Thai government and people would receive if the temple was listed a world heritage site.

"Who will gain the benefits? How about the locals there? Will any benefit go to them? We have to discuss that, not about land that is largely a meaningless issue today," said Pichet, who teaches at Thammasat University's faculty of sociology and anthropology.

Formulating the notion of lost territory was necessary to boost a nationalistic ideology, said historian Thongchai Winichakul, the author of "Siam Mapped: A History of the Geo-Body of a Nation".

Without that, "Thai nationalism could have crumbled," he said. A contrived memory "had to be fed repeatedly to people until we believe it is true", he said.

"If people want to fight for all disputable cases, there are probably hundreds of them to choose and to send soldiers to die for," he said.

Every country had lost territories in the past but nobody actually lost or gained anything, he noted.

But the idea of losing territory is powerful to stir nationalistic fervour, especially among politicians everywhere, he said.