Thailand-Cambodia border clashes live: Bangkok accuses Phnom Penh of targeting civilian areas as death toll rises to 16
Date: 2025-07-25T05:08:55.000Z
Title: Opening summary
Content: Hello and welcome to our live coverage of the clashes along the border of Thailand and Cambodia.
The escalation of military exchanges between Thailand and Cambodia could move towards war, acting Thai prime minister Phumtham Wechayachai told reporters on Friday, as the death toll in the conflict rose to 16.
At present the clashes have involved heavy weapons, he said. Thailand and Cambodia exchanged heavy artillery fire again on Friday morning as their worst fighting in more than a decade stretched for a second day.
Thai authorities said 15 people had so far been killed, including 14 civilians, while a Cambodian official said one civilian had been killed although the Cambodian government has yet to give any official update on casualties.
Thailand's military meanwhile accused Cambodia of using of long-range weapons to 'target civilian areas' and of committing 'barbaric acts' that 'have senselessly claimed the lives and inflicted injuries upon numerous innocent civilians'.
Phnom Penh's landmine authority accused Thailand of using cluster munitions calling it a 'serious violation of humanitarian norms'.
We'll bring you more on that soonest. In other developments:
The UN security council will hold an emergency meeting on Friday over the deadly border clashes between Cambodia and Thailand, diplomatic sources told AFP. The meeting, requested by Cambodian prime minister Hun Manet, would be held behind closed doors at 3pm (1900 GMT), the sources said.
Britain's foreign ministry advised against all but essential travel to parts of Cambodia and Thailand, both popular destinations for foreign tourists, after the fighting.
Fighting was focused on six locations, the Thai army said on Thursday. Six Thai air force jets were deployed, hitting two 'Cambodian military targets on the ground', according to Thai military deputy spokesperson Ritcha Suksuwanon.
Cambodia has not yet commented on casualties on its side. Defence ministry spokeswoman Maly Socheata refused to answer when asked about the issue at a news conference.
Both sides blame the other for starting the fighting, which erupted near two temples on the border after weeks of tensions. On Wednesday, Thailand had expelled the Cambodian ambassador and recalled its own envoy after five members of a Thai military patrol were wounded by a landmine.
Cambodia downgraded ties to 'the lowest level' on Thursday, pulling out all but one of its diplomats and expelling their Thai equivalents from Phnom Penh.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
3 hours ago
- Reuters
Taiwan government says US tariff rate temporary, will negotiate lower one
TAIPEI, Aug 1 (Reuters) - Taiwan's president and his cabinet said on Friday 20% U.S. tariffs will be "temporary" and the government will continue to advocate for reasonable tariff rates as they complete the final stage of negotiations. "Once a final agreement is reached, the tariff rate is expected to be reduced further," according to a Facebook post from Lai Ching-te, reiterated in a cabinet statement. The comments follow U.S. President Donald Trump's executive order on Thursday imposing tariffs ranging from 10% to 41% on U.S. imports from dozens of trading partners and foreign locations. Taiwan's presidential office will hold a press briefing at 11:30 a.m. (0330 GMT) on the tariffs. Taiwan has been seeking to strengthen its trade ties with major partners, particularly the U.S., Taiwan's second-largest trading partner after China, amid growing geopolitical and economic challenges. Taiwan had the sixth-largest trade deficit with the U.S. last year, exporting $73.92 billion more to the U.S. than it took in, according to data from the U.S. and Taiwan governments. The outcome of the discussions could play a key role in shaping the island's future trade strategy and its position in the global supply chain, and is crucial to Taiwan's export-driven economy.
BBC News
4 hours ago
- BBC News
Trump and Africa: Is it legal for US to deport foreign criminals to the continent?
The US administration has turned to the African continent as another destination to deport migrants who it says are convicted dozens have been flown to countries in Central and South America, 12 men from countries including Mexico, Myanmar and Yemen were last month sent to Eswatini and South Sudan. One South Sudanese was also flown back African countries are also reportedly being courted by the US to accept people, whose home countries will not take them back, according to the US Donald Trump's mass deportation pledge drew support during his campaign last year. But UN rights experts and human rights groups are alarmed by what has happened and argue that these removals to a nation that is not the migrant's place of origin – known as third countries - could violate international law. Is third-country deportation legal in international law? Third-country deportations can be legal - but only under certain conditions."The whole concept of third-country removal has to be seen in light of the broader concept of asylum," says Prof Ray Brescia, from the Albany Law School in the US."There is a principle in international law - non-refoulement - which means you are not supposed to return someone to their home country if it's unsafe for them, so a third country could provide a safe option," he principle not only applies to the migrant's home country but also to any third country they might be sent that country is unsafe, deportation may violate international law - as when the UK's Supreme Court blocked the British government's plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda in process is also has 'enough problems' and can't take deportees from US, minister says'We can't do without these people': Trump's migrant crackdown has businesses worriedMigrants must have the chance to challenge deportation if the destination is dangerous, based on evidence from credible sources like UN reports or US State Department findings. Courts are expected to assess this risk carefully."The courts should examine what kind of legal status migrants will have, if they'll be detained, and what kind of housing is provided," says Dr Alice Edwards, the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or many migrants struggle to access legal support in time."It takes significant effort and access to a lawyer who can act quickly," says Prof Brescia."That legal route may not be available to everyone." Do the Eswatini and South Sudan deportations violate international law? "They certainly do in two respects," says Prof David Super, from Georgetown University Law Center."There's no evidence the US is giving people a chance to challenge their deportation, and they're not permitted to send people to countries where they might face oppression."South Sudan and Eswatini have serious questions about their human rights records," he tells the the migrants were first bound for South Sudan in May, a legal challenge was filed in a US district court after the flight had already taken judge ruled that the attempts to deport the men had violated his order that migrants must be allowed to challenge their removal to third plane was rerouted to Djibouti, on the East African coast, where the men were reportedly held in a shipping container on a US military base while the case was case was referred to the Supreme Court which allowed the deportations to proceed but did not specify whether South Sudan was deemed a safe place for the migrants."What we've seen in similar cases is that people are often denied legal help when they need it, and proceedings begin far too late," says Dr Edwards."In this case, they were already en route to a US military base and that's deeply problematic."She adds that the courts must remain apolitical, especially when basic rights are at declares state of disaster amid US tariff uncertaintyUS cuts visa validity for most Nigerian applicantsTrump's tariffs could be death knell for US-Africa trade pactProf Brescia warns that the Supreme Court's decision could set a dangerous precedent."There's real concern it will encourage the administration to move even faster, before individuals can access the courts at all," he says. Are Eswatini and South Sudan safe? In addition to being denied due process, migrants are being sent to potentially unsafe countries - violating international US State Department currently advises against all travel to South Sudan, citing threats including crime, armed conflict and kidnapping. Earlier this year, the country, one of the poorest in the world, was said to be on the brink of a return to civil war."There are very real concerns about law and order in South Sudan - about violence, instability, and ongoing conflict," says Dr deported to South Sudan are reportedly being held in a detention facility in the capital, Juba, known for poor conditions, according to political activist, Agel Rich Machar. The government has not confirmed their location or how long they will spend in detention. In Eswatini, a small landlocked kingdom in southern Africa, officials say the migrants are in a correctional facility and will be repatriated with support from the International Organization of Migration (IOM).The US State Department has said Eswatini's prisons face problems of overcrowding, poor ventilation, and deficiencies in dietary nutrition and health services."We don't foresee they will stay long enough to be integrated into society," Eswatini government spokesperson Thabile Mdluli told the BBC, without giving any indication of how long they would stay in the country, or whether they would serve the rest of their sentences US government says those who have been deported to Eswatini committed "barbaric" crimes including child rape, murder and sexual assault.A backlash is growing in country's largest opposition party, the People's United Democratic Movement (Pudemo) says that the agreement between the two countries was "human trafficking disguised as a deportation deal".Pro-democracy activist Lucky Lukhele says the country must not become "a dumping ground for criminals". Even if international law has been violated, Prof Super says the US is unlikely to face consequences as it does not recognise many international courts."This appears to be about deterrence, sending a message that if you come to the US you'll be treated very, very harshly," he of legality, third-country deportations often place vulnerable individuals in unfamiliar environments with little support or legal status, says Dr Edwards."It's a deeply flawed idea."She stresses that the human rights community is not trying to block each and every deportation - only where people face human rights violations. What's in it for the host countries? The details of the deportation deals remain largely Mdluli tells the BBC that Eswatini's reasons for accepting the deportees "remains classified information for now".However, both the Eswatini and South Sudan governments cited their strong ties with the US as a key Brescia suggests some countries may fear US retaliation if they refuse, such as stricter visa rules or higher April, the US said it would revoke all visas issued to South Sudanese nationals after it would not accept a deported is not clear if that has changed, now that it has accepted deportees from the activist Machar says South Sudan has also agreed to this deal as it wants the US to lift sanctions on Vice-President Benjamin Bol Mel. The US government issued sanctions against Bol Mel in 2021 due to alleged corruption and renewed them this other countries, like Nigeria, are pushing back."We have enough problems of our own," Nigerian Foreign Minister Yusuf Tuggar said in July, rejecting a request to take in Venezuelan Edwards notes that such deals often come with incentives."In past arrangements of third-country deportations, large sums of money, as well as military and security cooperation, were part of the package," she March, reports said the Trump administration would pay El Salvador $6m (£4.5m) to accept Venezuelan deportees. You may also be interested in: US cuts visa validity for applicants from four African countriesSix things Trump should know about Liberia after he praised leader's 'good English'Why Trump invited five African leaders to the White House Go to for more news from the African us on Twitter @BBCAfrica, on Facebook at BBC Africa or on Instagram at bbcafrica
Daily Mail
5 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Keir Starmer refuses to commit to Palestine statehood deal that returns all Hamas hostages - as Lords say his pledge may break international law
The UK will recognise Palestine as a state next month even if Hamas fails to release its remaining Israeli hostages, Sir Keir Starmer suggested yesterday. Amid a growing backlash over the Prime Minister's pledge – plus warnings that he could be breaking international law – he refused to back calls to make a hostage deal a main condition of recognition. Earlier this week Sir Keir announced the UK will recognise a Palestinian state before the UN general assembly in New York next month unless Israel meets a raft of conditions, including agreeing to a ceasefire in Gaza. The decision was condemned by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who said it rewarded 'Hamas's monstrous terrorism' – the group is still believed to be holding up to 50 hostages, many of whom were abducted during the attack on October 7, 2023, although only 20 are believed to still be alive. Sir Keir was asked yesterday whether he would still recognise a Palestinian state in September – a hugely diplomatic and symbolic move – even if Hamas refuses to release more hostages. Instead of a simple 'yes' or 'no', he replied: 'Those hostages need to be released immediately – they have been held for a very long time in intolerable conditions. 'So that absolutely needs to happen. And the situation on the ground in Gaza needs to change – there is a humanitarian catastrophe. And that's why I have said unless that changes materially – and obviously we will assess that as we get to September – then we will recognise Palestine.' The PM insisted he 'particularly' listens to freed hostages, after he was accused of 'moral failure' over his move by Emily Damari, a British-Israeli woman who had been held captive by Hamas . The PM told ITV he was 'absolutely clear that we must have the remaining hostages released – that's been our position throughout and I absolutely understand the unimaginable horror that Emily went through'. It came as some of the UK's most eminent lawyers wrote to the Attorney General, Lord Hermer, to warn that Sir Keir's pledge of recognition could undermine his commitment to upholding the law. Some 38 members of the House of Lords – among them seven KCs – said recognising Palestine may not meet the criteria for statehood under the Montevideo Convention, a treaty signed in 1933. In their letter, the peers said Palestine 'does not meet the international law criteria for recognition of a state, namely, defined territory, a permanent population, an effective government and the capacity to enter into relations with other states'. There is no certainty over the borders of Palestine, they said, and no single government. The peers added: 'You have said that a selective, 'pick and mix' approach to international law will lead to its disintegration, and that the criteria set out in international law should not be manipulated for reasons of political expedience. 'Accordingly, we expect you to demonstrate this commitment by explaining to the public and to the Government that recognition of Palestine would be contrary to the principles governing recognition of states in international law.' Business minister Gareth Thomas described the decision on Palestine as a 'political judgment' and that ministers 'believe it is' compliant with international law.
