Cambodia accuses Thailand of escalating tensions with new land crossing restrictions
PHNOM PENH, Cambodia (AP) — Cambodia's government on Tuesday accused Thailand of escalating border tensions by imposing new restrictions that have blocked almost all land crossings, especially for tourists heading into Cambodia.
Relations between the neighbors have deteriorated following an armed confrontation on May 28 in which one Cambodian soldier was killed in a relatively small, contested territory along their border. While the two sides have agreed to de-escalate their dispute, they have continued to implement or threaten measures that have kept tensions high.
The Thai army on Monday imposed heightened restrictions at border checkpoints with Cambodia following an order from Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra to allow only students, medical patients and others with essential needs to enter or leave Thailand. That also makes it impossible for thousands of tourists to cross between the two countries.
Pen Bona, a spokesperson of the Cambodian government, said Tuesday that Cambodia has committed to resolve the conflict through diplomatic channels, but tensions have soared because of Thailand's actions.
'The Cambodian government has already stated that we will not initiate any border closure,' and that it will also lift restrictions if Thailand does so first, he said.
Cambodia has boycotted some Thai internet services, banned Thai fruits and vegetables, and blocked electricity and fuel supplies from Thailand in response to the border dispute. Prior to the boycott, Cambodia imported 30% of its gasoline and other fuel from Thailand.
Cambodia's Prime Minister Hun Manet on Monday visited troops at the border and a temporary shelter for thousands of civilians who were evacuated from the area. He said that while Cambodia doesn't want war, 'we cannot stand by and let us be abused.'
In addition to border restrictions, Paetongtarn also announced measures targeting online scam operations in Cambodia. They include blocking exports that could facilitate such activities in Cambodia and coordination with other countries and international agencies to crack down on cybercrime based in Southeast Asia.
Pen Bona said that while he recognized that Cambodia "is being exploited by online scammers,' many such operations are also based in Thailand.
'This is a very shameful thing that is happening in Thailand, but they are trying to divert the story from Thailand to Cambodia,' he said.
Thailand earlier this year implemented measures to crack down on online scam operations in neighboring Myanmar, severing electricity, internet and gas supplies to border towns where the syndicates were based.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
41 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Lawsuit challenges billions of dollars in Trump admin's funding cuts
The lawsuit filed in Boston is asking a judge to limit the Trump administration from relying on an obscure clause in the federal regulation to cut grants that don't align with its priorities AP Boston Attorneys general from more than 20 states and Washington, DC, filed a federal lawsuit Tuesday challenging billions of dollars in funding cuts made by the Trump administration that would fund everything from crime prevention to food security to scientific research. The lawsuit filed in Boston is asking a judge to limit the Trump administration from relying on an obscure clause in the federal regulation to cut grants that don't align with its priorities. Since January, the lawsuit argues that the administration has used that clause to cancel entire programmes and thousands of grants that had been previously awarded to states and grantees. Defendants' decision to invoke the Clause to terminate grants based on changed agency priorities is unlawful several times over, the plaintiffs argued. The rulemaking history of the Clause makes plain that the (Office of Management and Budget) intended for the Clause to permit terminations in only limited circumstances and provides no support for a broad power to terminate grants on a whim based on newly identified agency priorities. The lawsuit argues the Trump administration has used the clause for the basis of a slash-and-burn campaign to cut federal grants. Defendants have terminated thousands of grant awards made to Plaintiffs, pulling the rug out from under the States, and taking away critical federal funding on which States and their residents rely for essential programmes, the lawsuit added. The White House's Office of Management and Budget did not immediately respond to a request made Tuesday afternoon for comment. Rhode Island Attorney General Neronha said this lawsuit was just one of several the coalition of mostly Democratic states have filed over funding cuts. For the most part, they have largely succeeded in a string of legal victories to temporarily halt cuts. This one, though, may be the broadest challenge to those funding cuts. It's no secret that this President has gone to great lengths to intercept federal funding to the states, but what may be lesser known is how the Trump Administration is attempting to justify their unlawful actions, Neronha said in a statement. Nearly every lawsuit this coalition of Democratic attorneys general has filed against the Administration is related to its unlawful and flagrant attempts to rob Americans of basic programmes and services upon which they rely. Most often, this comes in the form of illegal federal funding cuts, which the Administration attempts to justify via a so-called agency priorities clause." Connecticut Attorney General William Tong said the lawsuit aimed to stop funding cuts he described as indiscriminate and illegal. There is no because I don't like you' or because I don't feel like it anymore' defunding clause in federal law that allows the President to bypass Congress on a whim," Tong said in a statement. Since his first minutes in office, Trump has unilaterally defunded our police, our schools, our healthcare, and more. He can't do that, and that's why over and over again we have blocked him in court and won back our funding. In Massachusetts, Attorney General Andrea Campbell said the US Department of Agriculture terminated a USD 11 million agreement with the state Department of Agricultural Resources connecting hundreds of farmers to hundreds of food distribution sites while the US Environmental Protection Agency terminated a USD 1 million grant to the state Department of Public Health to reduce asthma triggers in low-income communities. We cannot stand idly by while this President continues to launch unprecedented, unlawful attacks on Massachusetts' residents, institutions, and economy, Campbell said in a statement. The lawsuit argues that the OMB promulgated the use of the clause in question to justify the cuts. The clause in question, according to the lawsuit, refers to five words that say federal agents can terminate grants if the award "no longer effectuates the programme goals or agency priorities. The Trump Administration has claimed that five words in this Clause'no longer effectuates . . . agency priorities'provide federal agencies with virtually unfettered authority to withhold federal funding any time they no longer wish to support the programmes for which Congress has appropriated funding, the lawsuit said.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Trump administration authorizes $30 million for Israeli-backed group distributing food in Gaza
Trump administration authorizes $30 million for Israeli-backed group distributing food in Gaza (Image: AP) WASHINGTON: The Trump administration has authorized providing $30 million to a US- and Israeli-backed group that is distributing food in Gaza, a US official said Tuesday, an operation that has drawn criticism from other humanitarian organizations. The request is the first known US government funding for the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation's aid distribution efforts amid the Israel-Hamas war. The American-led group had applied for the money to the US Agency for International Development, which has been dismantled and will soon be absorbed into the State Department as part of the Trump administration's deep cuts of foreign aid. The application is part of a controversial development: private contracting firms led by former US intelligence officers and military veterans delivering aid to some of the world's deadliest conflict zones in operations organized with governments that are combatants in the conflicts. The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive diplomatic issue involving a controversial aid program, said the decision to directly fund GHF was made "to provide effective and accessible humanitarian aid to the people of Gaza." The announcement comes as violence and chaos have plagued areas near the new food distribution sites since opening last month. In a statement, GHF refuted AP's reporting about any killings near its sites. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Diese Testsieger-Wärmepumpe stellt den Heizungsmarkt auf den Kopf thermondo Undo The group says it has delivered some 44 million meals to Palestinians in need. Palestinian witnesses and health officials say Israeli forces have repeatedly opened fire on crowds heading toward desperately needed food, killing hundreds in recent weeks. The Israeli military says it has fired warning shots at people it said approached its forces in a suspicious manner. Witnesses said Israeli troops opened fire as crowds tried to reach a GHF site on Tuesday in southern Gaza. At least 19 were killed and 50 others wounded, according to Nasser hospital and Gaza's Health Ministry. The Israeli military did not immediately comment. Israel wants the GHF to replace a system coordinated by the United Nations and international aid groups. Along with the United States, it accuses Hamas of stealing aid, without offering evidence. The United Nations, its affiliated aid agencies and private humanitarian groups that work in Gaza have denied that there has been any significant theft of their supplies by Hamas. UN agencies, humanitarian groups and crisis experts have warned for months that many of Gaza's more than 2 million people are on the brink of famine. Israel recently eased a blockade on food and other humanitarian supplies to the territory, but the UN humanitarian aid office says deliveries into Gaza remain severely restricted, describing the current flow of food as a trickle into an area facing catastrophic levels of hunger. The Oxfam America aid organization condemned the Trump administration's funding decision Tuesday, calling the US and Israeli-supported aid operation "a multimillion-dollar distraction from the actual causes - and solutions - of Gaza's humanitarian crisis that also carries fatal risks for its intended beneficiaries." The Associated Press reported Saturday that the American-led group had asked the Trump administration for the initial funding so it can continue its aid operation, which has been criticized by the UN, humanitarian groups and others. They accuse the foundation of cooperating with Israel's objectives in the 21-month-old war against Hamas in a way that violates humanitarian principles. State Department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce told reporters earlier Tuesday that she had no information to provide on funding for the foundation.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
NYC mayor election results: How does ranked choice voting work?
New York City is using ranked choice voting in its Democratic mayoral primary election taking place Tuesday, June 24. The system allows voters to rank candidates in order of preference rather than pick just one. Supporters of Democratic mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani cheer as they watch results come in at his primary election party, Tuesday, June 24, 2025, in New York. (AP Photo/Heather Khalifa)(AP) Those who support ranked choice voting believe it builds consensus, promotes positive campaigning and allows voters to express a fuller range of opinions. Opponents, however, believe the system is too complicated and could lead to ballots being thrown out. In this system, the number of candidates a voter can rank depends on the specific rules in an area. In New York City, as many as five candidates can be ranked in one race. Voters, however, are not required to fill their ballots. A voter who supports only one candidate can just pick that one person. However, should that candidate not get the most votes, that voter will have no say in the later rounds of counting. The last-place candidate is eliminated after the votes are tabulated. Subsequently, ballots from voters who supported that candidate have the next choice counted. The counting continues if none of the candidates hit 50%, and eventually another last-place candidate is eliminated. The next-ranked choices on all those ballots in the next round are counted. This process continues until a candidate finally reaches majority support, and wins. How long it takes to count the votes depends on where the election is. For instance, in New York City, the Board of Elections will post unofficial results from the first round of votes on election night. Preliminary elimination rounds are then tabulated a week later, with officials posting an unofficial report, according to the elections board. With mail and affidavit ballots being processed, the results could change. It often takes longer to project winners in this system as election authorities need to ensure each ballot counted before they know in what order they would eliminate last-place finishers. Counting and processing mail-in ballots, provisional votes and others can take time.
