The International Court of Justice (ICJ) got a rare second chance this week to revisit one of its past major rulings. Judges reviewed their 1962 verdict on the Preah Vihear temple, and for the second time, their answer settled one question while failing to clarify one of the single most irritating disagreements between Cambodia and Thailand.
Once again, when the dust dies down, the governments and people of Thailand and Cambodia will have to confront not just what the ICJ wrote on Monday. The court took 37 pages and 17,500 words to write a judgment that most media outlets in both countries could distil into a short headline.
The main point was that Cambodia can claim legal ownership of both the temple and the grounds immediately surrounding it. In fact, the judgment of the ICJ in 2013 was that this fact was already implicit in the 1962 ruling.
Of course it wasn't, since the two countries have bickered and fought mortal battles over that point. But now it seems clear: The Preah Vihear temple and the spectacular promontory on which it sits, jutting over Cambodian plains below, are legally owned by the Phnom Penh government.
By agreeing to put the case in the hands of the ICJ, also known as the World Court, Thailand is now legally and morally obligated to cede this point. The government cannot brook public protests about it. Any type of action aimed at Cambodia or Cambodians _ protests included _ must be opposed. Cambodia is not responsible for the court's decision; like Thailand, it simply appeared before the courts.
In any case, the government, its highly professional Foreign Ministry and legal team are correct. This decision by the ICJ has turned out, somewhat surprisingly, as an opportunity to move forward, with the temple and with relations with our neighbor to the east.
"Win-win" may seem a little strong to some after the court handed over territory to Cambodia. But any other description is only going to make matters worse. The western saying "when all you have is lemons, make lemonade" resonates here. There were bitter moments indeed on Monday as the verdict was read. But it opened the way to putting this long-standing disagreement in the past.
The first task is to sideline the ultra-nationalists. The ICJ is a non-political body. The media, in particular, should expose those who try to further politicize the issue. Local people at the border, in Si Sa Ket and in Cambodia, want to move ahead. Both countries need to look carefully at the educational systems that combine national pride with cross-border hatred to produce such non-productive and backward opinions.
By accident or design, the ICJ judges addressed their own shortcomings in this second verdict on Preah Vihear. It is up to the two countries to set upon a peaceful course of action.
Both must demilitarize the zone. The ICJ ordered Thai troops out, so there is no reason to replace them with armed Cambodians.
Secure in its new role as sole owner of temple and grounds, Cambodia should begin to take seriously the court's other order. That is that "Cambodia and Thailand must cooperate to protect the site".
The geography at the temple site realistically calls for joint maintenance and development. Preah Vihear is a wondrous historical site, not a political object. It is time for both countries to collaborate to preserve, protect and defend it.