Bangkok: The ongoing conflict between Thailand and Cambodia has escalated as Cambodia continues to violate ceasefire agreements, initially breached on July 24, 2015, leading to significant losses in Thai civilian and military lives, as well as damage to infrastructure. Despite two rounds of ceasefire negotiations, the situation remains tense with frequent gunfire and explosions from the Cambodian side.
According to Thai News Agency, the involvement of global superpowers, China and the United States, in the conflict resolution process adds complexity to the situation. Recent military cooperation between the United States and Cambodia, including the resumption of annual military exercises, poses a strategic challenge for Thailand, a longstanding ally of the United States. Associate Professor Dr. Dulyapak Preecharatch from Thammasat University describes the current situation as “Hybrid Warfare,” emphasizing the need for Thailand to remain vigilant.
Asst. Prof. Dulyapak highlights the evolving dynamics of China-US relations with Cambodia. While Cambodia’s past policy heavily favored China, Prime Minister Hun Manet has shifted towards balancing ties with the United States, influenced by his education at the US Military Academy. This shift in Cambodia’s foreign policy is causing discomfort for China, which is monitoring the situation closely.
In the eyes of China and the United States, Cambodia’s strategic maneuvers allow it to exert influence on the global stage despite its smaller size compared to Thailand. Thailand, on the other hand, remains a key player in the region, balancing its relationships with both superpowers. China’s investments through its “One Belt, One Road” initiative and the US’s Indo-Pacific strategy highlight the geopolitical importance of both Thailand and Cambodia.
Cambodia’s repeated ceasefire violations have damaged its credibility on the international stage. Despite coordination efforts by China and the United States, Cambodia’s pragmatic foreign policy, driven by a desire to reclaim territory from Thailand, continues to provoke tensions. This approach, coupled with propaganda efforts portraying Thailand as the aggressor, underscores Cambodia’s willingness to prioritize its national interests over international image.
The information warfare aspect of this conflict presents an additional challenge for Thailand. Cambodia’s frequent dissemination of information, often distorted, gives it an advantage. To counter this, Thailand must enhance its communication strategy, retaliating more frequently and effectively. Additionally, strengthening cultural and international law claims, alongside military tactics, is crucial for Thailand to gain ground in this hybrid warfare.
Dr. Dulyapak suggests that while Thailand’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has taken the right step by submitting evidence to the international community, the process is lengthy. To expedite matters, Thailand should match Cambodia’s pace in releasing information, thus improving its bargaining position.