Transcript of the above video: 

As the title of this video suggests, we are discussing the situation involving Thailand and Cambodia and their attempt it seems, albeit somewhat stalled at least at this point attempt, to create some kind of joint oil drilling operation in the Gulf of Thailand here and let's just say it's hit some complications. It's politically charged now; there's a lot of blowback if you will from folks on this whole issue of this joint oil drilling enterprise. I'm not going to get into the high weeds of the history of the Treaties and things but with regard to UNCLOS, that's UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, I felt that it was worth pointing this out if for no other reason than UNCLOS is a major issue. Law of the Sea stuff pertaining to the UN and how they deal with Maritime Law and how they deal with Maritime boundaries and things is rather interesting and from the standpoint of somebody who comes from sort of a Western legal tradition, I find it interesting to kind of study how these things are viewed sort of in a Southeast Asian context. 

I thought of making this video after reading a recent article from the Bangkok Post, that is bangkokpost.com, the article is titled: Deputy PM makes case for Cambodia deal. I urge those who are watching this video, go check out that article in detail. Long story short, again this is politically charged, it's highly nuanced, the legalities of this are in some ways sort of picayune and then in other ways they're very, very, they have a lot of substance because this has to do with whose oil is where, and where the actual boundaries are. There's a lot of discussion about whether or not Cambodia is going to take a piece of an island that's clearly under Thai sovereignty; I don't think that's likely to happen. But that said, I can understand the concern, and quite frankly I as a Thai am concerned as well. I don't want to see Thailand’s sovereignty impinged or impugned in any way, so yeah it is of concern, but again I think that some things got conflated, most notably oil rights. But that said I'm not any type of an expert with respect to this and there are many other people with a far deeper grasp of all of these sort of competing and conflicting legalities associated with this issue. 

That said, one thing struck out, sort of popped its head out to me in this article and it had to do with UNCLOS. Let me dig in. Quoting directly: "Dr. Warong” - and that is Dechgitvigrom, and again I urge those who are watching this video, read the article to figure out who he is and get all the context. That said, quoting directly: "Dr. Warong, however, pointed out the Government must firmly request that Cambodia ratify the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) before both sides proceed with any further talks." Quoting further: "Without ratifying the UN Convention on Law of the Sea or UNCLOS, Cambodia could later exploit the fact that it isn't a signatory as an excuse to present an obstacle in future negotiations on the disputed Maritime boundary demarcation."

And just for some further context regarding Thailand's own UNCLOS membership, again that is UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, quoting directly from fulcrum.sg, UNCLOS and Thailand: Security, Prosperity and Sustainability. Quoting directly: "At the 1958 UNCLOS 1" so UN Convention on Law of the Sea first convention, "in Geneva, Major-General Prince Naradhip Bongsprabandh, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Thailand was appointed Chair of the Conference. UNCLOS was adopted in 1982 but Thailand delayed ratification of UNCLOS for nearly three more decades until the Kingdom ratified the Convention in 2011." So, to be clear, Thailand has ratified the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea; Cambodia has not. To my mind, that's a good point to bring up. If Cambodia is not signed on to that and Thailand is there are a million ways Thailand can be hamstrung, can have their hands tied behind their back from a legal standpoint, because they're bound by UNCLOS and Cambodia isn't.

So my personal opinion is it seems under the circumstances, leave aside, again I urge those who are watching this read the article there's a lot going on; a ton of different legal arguments of being thrown back and forth, but one that really stuck out to me was this UNCLOS one. And candidly, it seems logical to me that if there is going to be a final deal struck, honestly Cambodia needs to join UNCLOS if for no other reason than Thailand is in it and it just makes the whole thing more fair for lack of a better term, because again if Thailand is in UNCLOS, and Cambodia isn't probably isn't, there's all kinds of ways that can lead to problems for all involved down the road.