Free Breaking News

Cambodian Cultural Wealth Ripped Away From Thailand By UN

Monday, January 12, 2009 - Editor: Tiep Seiha

Demands for restitution of  ‘cultural property’ have become increasingly common in recent decades. The campaign of the Greek government for the return of the Elgin (or Parthenon) Marbles is well known, but there are many other examples.

Fight For Return of Wealth In Other Lands

The Ethiopians demand the return of the Askum Obelisk, which was taken to Italy by Mussolini’s troops. Turkey fought a court battle with the New York Metropolitan Museum of Art for the return of the Lydian treasures which were pilfered from Turkish territory in the 1960s. Indians complain about religious statues and other things of value taken from temples during the British occupation of their country. Australian Aborigines, Native Americans and Canadians are demanding the return of bones and other cultural relics held by museums in Britain and the United States.

Cultural property is owned by the historic society

In international disputes about cultural property it is almost always states which claim right of possession over artifacts, monuments, and relics. The basis for their claims is that these things are found in, or were taken from, their territory. Cultural property, so conceived, is a resource that states have a right to control.

From a moral point of view this conception of cultural property is unsatisfactory. It gives the claims of states unjustified precedence over the claims of other collectivists. If a state forces an indigenous community to surrender artifacts to a national museum then surely this counts as a case of unjust dispossession. It favors collectivists that are territorial over those that are not. Why shouldn’t a non-territorial organization, like a religious group, be able to claim cultural property? Most important, the idea that that cultural property is a national resource fails to consider how claims to cultural artifacts might differ from claims to things whose value is merely economic.

Cambodia Victorious Over Thailand in UN

Recently in the news Cambodia consider it a victory in a diplomatic standoff with Thailand after the U.N. cultural agency agreed to consider its plan for managing a temple that is on land claimed by both countries. Deputy Prime Minister Sok An said that Cambodia had achieved its goal when UNESCO’s World Heritage Commission agreed on Thursday to consider its plan for the Preah Vihear temple on the border with Thailand.

The Preah Vihear Temple or Prasat Preah Vihear or Temple of Phra Viharn is a Khmer temple situated atop a 525-metre (1,722 ft) cliff in the Dângrêk Mountains, in the Kantharalak district (amphoe) in Sisaket province of eastern Thailand and on the border of Preah Vihear province of northern Cambodia.

Territorial Property or Property of Human Society?

True Cambodia might own the said temple complex and it has ties to their culture but by extension it belongs to the human race. It is part of the heritage of the human civilization. It is a testament to our genius, brilliance and inherent capabilities. It is not important who gets to keep, manage or preserve it so long as such is kept as part of the priceless heritage of the entirety of mankind.

August 28, 2010 - Posted by shawndavidcox | Travel | Cambodia, Cultural property, Dângrêk Mountains, Deputy Prime Minister Sok An, Preah Vihear Temple