Thailand’s Internal Power Struggles Fuel War with Cambodia
 |
| Anti-government protesters rally to demand the removal of Thailand's Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra June 28 |
July 28, 2025
From diplomatic embarrassment to the brink of war, Thailand has demonstrated a troubling contempt for international norms and regional stability. Its reaction to the May 28 border clash is less about national security than political survival. With a fractured government losing its grip and a military emboldened by surging nationalism, war offers a convenient distraction—and, for some in power, a strategic opportunity.
Why would Thailand risk open conflict now, amid such domestic volatility? The answer lies in a pattern of deliberate actions that suggest escalation by design—not accident.
On June 15, Cambodia turned to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) after bilateral talks through the Joint Boundary Commission repeatedly collapsed. Thailand immediately rejected the ICJ’s jurisdiction, insisting on direct negotiations—an approach that sidesteps third-party oversight and echoes past failures to assert its territorial claims on legal grounds.
Then came the ceasefire farce. On July 24, Thailand initially agreed to a truce proposed by the ASEAN Chair and Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim. Just one hour later*, Bangkok abruptly backed out, claiming it needed “more time.” The timing was suspect—and so was the explanation.
* Prime Minister Hun Manet clarified that Thailand agreed to a ceasefire with Cambodia, started at midnight on July 24, following a proposal by Malaysian Prime Minister and ASEAN rotating chair Anwar Ibrahim. However, just one hour after the phone conversation with the ASEAN chair, Thailand retracted its position. Manet issued the clarification to avoid any misinterpretation of the facts, particularly from the Thai government and media. In a Facebook post on the evening of July 25, he explained that he had spoken by phone with Anwar regarding the ongoing clashes between Cambodian and Thai forces along the border. During the conversation, Anwar expressed concern about the fighting and shared his desire for an immediate ceasefire to pave the way for a resolution between the two parties. “I clearly affirmed to His Excellency Anwar Ibrahim that Cambodia agreed with his proposal for a ceasefire, as Cambodia did not initiate this conflict,” said Manet.
The conversation between Manet and Anwar followed discussions between the ASEAN chair and Thai acting Prime Minister Phumtham Wechayachai. During that call, Thailand agreed to Anwar Ibrahim’s ceasefire proposal, setting on midnight on July 24, as the time for both sides’ forces to cease hostilities. “Regrettably, just over an hour later, the Thai side informed the ASEAN chair that they had reversed their stance from agreeing to the ceasefire at midnight to disagreeing and opting to wait. His Excellency Anwar Ibrahim is fully aware of this matter,” explained Manet. “Therefore, the key to ending the armed conflict between Thailand and Cambodia at this time lies in Thailand’s genuine willingness to accept a ceasefire, which is the first step toward finding a further resolution between the two parties,” he continued.
Shortly afterward, former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra posted a statement on social media that raised eyebrows and tempers:
“Many countries are concerned about the fighting situation between Thailand and Cambodia and have offered to help mediate. So I thanked everyone, but I asked for some time—because I have to let the Thai military teach him a lesson for his cunningness.” **
The reference to “him” was widely interpreted as a personal jab at Cambodia’s leadership. Coming from Thaksin—whose influence still shapes Thailand’s political landscape—and given the close ties between Acting Prime Minister Phumtham Wechayachai and the Shinawatra family***, the suggestion was unmistakable: this may not be a war of states, but of vendettas. Critics within Thailand are already asking whether this is a conflict between rival dynasties, not sovereign nations. If so, it is ordinary citizens and soldiers who will pay the price.
** Senate president Hun Sen responded strongly to Thaksin's comments. He expressed no surprise at the aggressive rhetoric, citing Thaksin's controversial history, including his alleged betrayal of the Thai monarchy and his involvement in the deaths of hundreds of Thai Muslims in southern Thailand in 2004.
“What is worse is that he was involved in the killing of hundreds of Thai Muslims in the southern provinces in 2004,” Hun Sen said. He also noted that Thaksin’s actions were not only a personal vendetta against him, but would lead to the suffering of innocent civilians, as the people of Thailand and Cambodia would bear the brunt of any military escalation. “Under the pretext of taking revenge on me, he is resorting to war, the ultimate consequence of which will be the suffering of the people,” he added.
*** In the 1990s Phumtham was employed by the Thaksin-founded telecom giant Shin Corp, before entering politics full-time in 2001. He served as deputy secretary-general of the Thai Rak Thai (Thais Love Thais) party, founded by Thaksin, and was appointed deputy transport minister in 2005. After Thaksin was ousted in a coup, the party was dissolved and Phumtham was slapped with a five-year ban from politics. But the movement remained a potent force, with Thaksin's sister and brother-in-law both having stints as prime minister. Paetongtarn was appointed in August, with the backing of the family's Pheu Thai party.
Thailand’s behavior has revealed the stark gap between its stated desire for peace and its actions on the ground. On July 23, Bangkok expelled Cambodian diplomats, downgraded relations, and urged Thai nationals to flee Cambodia—a dramatic move typically reserved for imminent conflict. The next day, Thai forces launched a coordinated strike, including F-16 fighter jets. Calling this a defensive act stretches plausibility. These were not panicked maneuvers; they were precision operations—prepared in advance and executed with chilling efficiency.
The insistence on bilateralism, far from being a sign of diplomatic good faith, has become a shield against accountability. Inside Thailand, the government is under siege—politically and literally. Martial law was declared in the border provinces on July 25, handing sweeping powers to the military. By July 26, even as U.S. President Donald Trump called for peace talks and offered to mediate, Thailand escalated its offensive. Cambodia welcomed negotiations; Thailand continued bombing
This disconnect speaks volumes. Civilian leaders say one thing. The military does another.
In truth, this war serves two purposes: for the Shinawatra-aligned government, it’s payback for past diplomatic defeats; for the military, it’s a chance to consolidate power behind a nationalist banner. What unites them is not strategy—but self-interest. And what suffers, once again, is peace.
Pach Pagnavorn
Published in Cambodianess Media
July 28
Romdoul Chetra
July 27
Thailand is bombing Cambodian soil while manipulating the global narrative—a coordinated campaign of military aggression and disinformation aimed at undermining Cambodia’s sovereignty. These are not isolated incidents or misunderstandings. This is a strategy: invade with force, then lie with confidence.
While Thailand plays victim to the world, claiming Cambodia initiated the conflict, facts on the ground tell a different story. On the morning of July 24, it was Thai forces who opened fire—yet Thai diplomats rushed to the United Nations with false reports that Cambodia had crossed the border first. This wasn’t a communication error. It was a deliberate deception.
The pattern continued. In the early hours of July 27, Thailand launched another wave of unprovoked attacks, firing artillery into Cambodian territory around 2 a.m. and sending F-16 fighter jets to strike from the skies. Instead of owning up to this act of aggression, Thai media accused Cambodia of deploying BM-21 and PHL-03 rockets on Thai soil—an allegation that Cambodia firmly denied.
Thailand’s campaign of distortion didn’t stop there. After one of its own shells reportedly landed in Laos, Thailand deflected blame, falsely claiming Cambodia was at fault. Cambodia, in turn, has rejected this accusation and awaits the Laotian government’s findings with transparency and respect for international processes.
Thailand has mastered the art of playing the peacemaker while escalating conflict behind closed doors. It tells the world—and leaders like Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, who chairs ASEAN, and U.S. President Donald Trump—that it seeks ceasefire and calm. Yet its actions betray those words: ongoing artillery attacks, mass troop mobilizations, and expansion of military presence to border areas that were never part of the original dispute.
According to Ministry of National Defense spokesperson Lieutenant-General Maly Socheata, Thai shelling has devastated Cambodian infrastructure: homes, clinics, schools, pagodas—all struck, all destroyed. Civilians living along the border have been terrorized. The trauma is real, and it is ongoing.
What’s worse, Thailand’s military has twice damaged the sacred Preah Vihear Temple—recognized globally as a UNESCO World Heritage Site—through indiscriminate bombing on July 24 and 27. Cambodia’s Ministry of Culture and Fine Arts has rightfully condemned these acts as deliberate and unacceptable violations of cultural heritage.
To deflect from its own destruction, Thailand accuses Cambodia of destroying Ta Moan Thom Temple—one of four temples caught in the current flashpoints. But this claim, too, is absurd. Ta Moan Thom is a Khmer temple—part of our shared cultural inheritance. Cambodia has no reason, no interest, and no logic to destroy its own history.
Even as Cambodia calls for peace, Thailand escalates. Their military is currently striking nearly a dozen locations across Oddar Meanchey, Banteay Meanchey, and Preah Vihear provinces, while deploying troops to the borders of Battambang and Koh Kong—regions never previously involved in the conflict.
Faced with this barrage of fire and lies, Cambodia has been forced to respond—through military defense on land and air, and through relentless efforts to counter Thailand’s misinformation online and in diplomatic arenas. We are defending not just our land, but the truth.
Cambodia remains committed to peace. We seek resolution through diplomacy, international law, and dialogue. But let it be clear: we do not invade; we do not provoke. We defend—our people, our sovereignty, and our dignity.
Romdoul Chetra
Based on Cambodianess media opinion articles section
