logo
‘Like brothers' - the friendship between Thaksin Shinawatra and Hun Sen spanned three decades

‘Like brothers' - the friendship between Thaksin Shinawatra and Hun Sen spanned three decades

NZ Herald27-07-2025
Now, a rift has opened up between the two men, bewildering even Thaksin himself and shocking insiders.
And the fallout has been severe, with Thai and Cambodian troops exchanging fire in the deadliest clashes in over a decade. Analysts say they worry that the animosities could spiral out of control.
'I was surprised how two close friends for so many years ended up practically overnight in such an escalation,' said Kantathi Suphamongkhon, who was Thailand's foreign minister from 2005 to 2006 when Thaksin was premier.
'This is something that I never expected — how that friendship can break apart so spectacularly.'
Clashes at the border over four days have sent hundreds of thousands fleeing from their homes and bringing the death toll to at least 33 people.
In the hours after fighting began last week, Thaksin and Hun Sen lobbed insults at each other on social media.
Thaksin said many countries had offered to mediate but that he wanted to 'let the Thai military do their duty to teach Hun Sen a lesson about his cunning ways first'.
Hun Sen fired back at Thaksin on Facebook while referring to himself in the third person: 'Now, under the pretext of taking revenge on Hun Sen, he is resorting to war, the ultimate consequence of which will be the suffering of the people'.
Analysts say Hun Sen has sought to exploit the turmoil within the Thai Government to shore up his own legitimacy.
Even opposition figures in Cambodia have taken the Government's side, arguing that the disputed temples that lie along the border belong to the country.
A crisis can also help solidify the nationalist credentials of Hun Manet, the current Prime Minister and Hun Sen's son, who has implied that Cambodia's one-party rule is better than the domestic chaos in Thailand because there is 'no confusion or conflicting orders'.
The political standing of Thaksin, a billionaire tycoon, and his ruling Pheu Thai party have both weakened since he struck a deal with the royalist-military establishment in 2022 to end 15 years of exile, alienating some of his core supporters.
Despite that deal, in recent months, the Thai Government has appeared increasingly at odds with the country's powerful military.
And while he is still the most influential person in Thai politics, Thaksin's hold on power is tenuous — he is fighting a criminal royal defamation charge that could send him to prison for as long as 15 years.
For decades, Thaksin and Hun Sen worked to anchor their personal and political fortunes together.
In 2001, they signed a memorandum of understanding to pursue the extraction of oil and gas in the Gulf of Thailand. But that plan ultimately fizzled because of resistance from Thaksin's rivals.
Hun Sen and Thaksin remained close even after Thaksin was ousted in a 2006 coup.
Hun Sen appointed Thaksin as an economic adviser to the Cambodian government, and allowed him and his sister, Yingluck, who was also overthrown in a coup, to seek refuge in his home in Cambodia.
Hun Sen later said he named the bedrooms the 'Thaksin room' and the 'Yingluck room.'
In Thailand, though, this closeness with Hun Sen has often been regarded with suspicion by Thaksin's political opponents, particularly those in the military and conservative establishment.
Thaksin has never been able to shake off the view held by many that he is interested only in his personal gain.
'The aspirations and the dream of wealth of the two families have not been realised,' said Kasit Piromya, another former foreign minister of Thailand.
He said Hun Sen probably saw this as a failure on Thaksin's part.
'Hun Sen was in total control of his country, and he could carry out his end of the bargain. But Thaksin has been losing that lustre and control of the Thai society for the past 20 years.'
After Thaksin returned to Thailand in 2023, he increasingly positioned the country to be an economic competitor to Cambodia.
He floated the idea of an entertainment complex that would rival the casinos in Cambodia, a lucrative source of revenue for Hun Sen and his fellow tycoons.
Analysts say Hun Sen was probably feeling threatened by Thailand's warning to cut off electricity in the border area and its subsequent arrest warrants against tycoons operating casinos and online scam compounds in the area.
The relationship between the two historical rivals has long been fraught because of the dispute over the undefined 800km-long border as well as over claims to ancient temples.
In 2003, Cambodians rioted in the capital, Phnom Penh, after a Thai actor was reported to have said that Angkor Wat, the Cambodian temple, belonged to her country.
Much of the fighting has centred around the 11th-century Preah Vihear temple. The International Court of Justice awarded the temple to Cambodia in 1962, but Thailand has continued to claim the surrounding land.
According to Kantathi, Hun Sen in 2006 invited Thaksin to make a friendly visit to the Preah Vihear temple and land a helicopter near it.
Kantathi said he urged Thaksin not to go, warning that Cambodia could use the visit to strengthen its territorial claims to the areas claimed by both Cambodia and Thailand.
A visit by a Thai prince in the early 1930s, when Cambodia was a French colony, was later cited by Cambodia to bolster its argument at the International Court of Justice, he said. The Thai prince did not complain about the hoisting of the French flag during his visit, which the court said amounted to his tacit consent to French-Cambodian control.
Thaksin ultimately cancelled the trip.
The proposed trip has not been made public, but Jakrapob Penkair, a longtime associate of Thaksin, confirmed that Thaksin had told him about it.
Thaksin could not immediately be reached for comment. Hun Sen's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The dispute over the temple escalated significantly in 2008 when Cambodia listed Preah Vihear as a Unesco World Heritage Site, leading to deadly military encounters in 2008 and 2011.
This year, tensions rose again when Thai and Cambodian soldiers clashed briefly, killing a Cambodian soldier in late May.
Two weeks after that, Thaksin's daughter and the then prime minister of Thailand, Paetongtarn Shinawatra, tried to call Hun Sen to discuss the crisis.
She was unable to reach him, but Hun Sen later called Paetongtarn's personal number, according to Thaksin, who recounted his version of the events at a seminar in Bangkok.
Three days later, Hun Sen posted the audio recording of that call on Facebook. The Thai public heard Paetongtarn calling Hun Sen 'uncle' and telling him to ignore 'the opposite side', a reference to the Thai military.
It led to calls for her resignation and multiple complaints. One complaint filed by 36 senators at the Constitutional Court led to her suspension this month.
Thaksin said, 'I was wrong to trust someone like Hun Sen'.
Upon learning that 12,000 Cambodian troops had been mobilised to the border last month, he called the translator who had facilitated his daughter's call with Hun Sen and told him: 'You tell your boss — our children are prime ministers of both countries. Are we going to war now?'
The initial clashes may have been an indication of the dangerous direction the two countries are heading.
Thailand said Cambodia fired rockets into civilian areas and that it responded by sending F-16 fighter jets to bomb targets in Cambodia — a rare deployment of the jets for combat in the region.
Cambodian officials said Thai soldiers had opened fire on Cambodian troops first, at a temple.
This article originally appeared in The New York Times.
Written by: Sui-Lee Wee
©2025 THE NEW YORK TIMES
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Curriculum changes delayed after feedback from teachers
Curriculum changes delayed after feedback from teachers

1News

time2 hours ago

  • 1News

Curriculum changes delayed after feedback from teachers

The Government has delayed introducing the new senior secondary school curriculum after feedback from teachers. The change followed warnings the new curriculums were being rushed, and coincided with the Government's announcement this week that the NCEA qualification would be phased out from 2028. The Government had originally told schools they would have to teach the new English and maths curriculums for intermediate and secondary schools from the start of next year and new curriculums from other subjects from the start of 2027. But this week the Ministry of Education dropped that timeline and introduced a staggered start. The 2027 date would apply only for students up to Year 10. Those in Year 11 would be taught the new curriculums from 2028, Year 12 from 2029, and Year 13 from 2030. ADVERTISEMENT Teachers spoken to by RNZ welcomed the delay, but said work on a new qualification to replace NCEA should wait until after the curriculums were in place. The morning's headlines in 90 seconds, including privacy concerns over road user charges, possible changes to Wellington's waterfront, and one of the biggest sports memorabilia heists ever. (Source: 1News) Association of Teachers of English president Pip Tinning said she was happy the curriculum would be phased in. "It is really important to allow teachers time to get their heads around the changes and what's going to need to happen." Auckland Secondary Principals' Association president Claire Amos said teachers were feeling overwhelmed by all of the changes the Government was making. She said the Government should delay consultation on a new qualification to replace NCEA until work on the curriculums was complete. "We're expected to comment on whether we think an assessment framework change is the right change when we have no idea what it will be assessing." "It's really hard for us to be consulted on the way we might assess something that is invisible to us at the moment."

Rate hikes and reforms force councils into tough decisions
Rate hikes and reforms force councils into tough decisions

NZ Herald

time3 hours ago

  • NZ Herald

Rate hikes and reforms force councils into tough decisions

The sector faces unprecedented fiscal pressure – and ratepayers are running out of patience. This is not business as usual. Come October, newly elected mayors and councillors will inherit this perfect storm. But unlike their predecessors, they are running out of road – growth in debt is becoming unsustainable and the Government is taking an ever-closer interest in council performance. The next three years will demand brutal choices: which services to cut, which projects to abandon, and how to navigate the most sweeping government reforms in decades. Those who succeed will need more than management skills. They will need the political courage to tell their communities hard truths. The financial reckoning is stark. Department of Internal Affairs benchmarks published last week reveal dramatic disparities between councils in rates per household, debt per capita and capital spending. In many cases, debt is rising faster than revenues. Some councils face massive infrastructure deficits while pursuing new facilities. Others watch transport and water project costs blow out while basic maintenance gets deferred. Across the country, councils with grand ambitions are being mugged by grinding reality. Making matters worse, the 2025-28 council term coincides with multiple central government reforms that will reshape local government's foundations. First comes the Resource Management Act replacement. The new system will shift responsibilities from individual councils to regional entities and national standards. While potentially streamlining planning processes, the transition will demand new skills and complex co-ordination, along with significant upfront costs. Then there is water reform. The coalition's 'Local Water Done Well' leaves councils responsible for delivering viable water services alone or through shared entities. By September, every council must produce a Water Services Delivery Plan that satisfies the new water regulator and the Commerce Commission. Some councils are pursuing joint ventures with neighbours, hoping to achieve economies of scale. Others are establishing at-arm's-length, council-controlled organisations, seeing it as the best way to maintain local control while meeting new standards. Still others plan to soldier on in the status quo, somehow convinced they can manage the regulatory burden in-house. Each path has its challenges. The Local Government (System Improvements) Bill adds another layer of change. It scraps councils' broad 'wellbeings' mandate – the ability to promote spending on loosely-asserted social, economic, environmental and cultural benefits – in favour of the Prime Minister's 'doing the basics brilliantly'. The bill prioritises core services, introduces new financial performance measures, mandatory disclosure of contractor and consultant spending and standardised codes of conduct. Most controversially, it opens the door to rates capping, which the minister says is being developed 'at pace'. Capping rates is appealing to angry ratepayers, but international experience shows it can be a blunt instrument. Councils in capped jurisdictions often defer maintenance, cut core services or find creative workarounds that cost more. Ratepayer referendums on major non-core projects could prove more effective, giving communities direct say over expensive projects while preserving councils' ability to fund essentials. Newly elected mayors face tough choices on services and projects due to unsustainable debt growth. Photo / NZME Democratic decay compounds these challenges. Voter turnout at local elections barely reaches half that of national elections. Despite last-minute surges, some councils couldn't fill all seats. Several mayoralties attracted just one candidate. This reflects decades of centralisation that have hollowed out local government's relevance. Why would talented people seek office when councils control less and matter less? Why would voters care? The erosion shows in public discourse. Councillors face increasing criticism and abuse, much of it personal and vitriolic. Social media amplifies every rates increase, every pothole, every perceived failure. Yet councils desperately need capable people who can absorb regulatory complexity, scrutinise multi-million dollar infrastructure proposals, and communicate financial realities to their communities. Those elected in October face three immediate priorities. Cost growth must be controlled without gutting essential services, a delicate balance requiring financial acumen and political skill. Reforms will test their ability to shape change rather than resist. Most importantly, they must rebuild trust with communities exhausted by rate hikes and service failures. Ratepayers being mugged by reality should be watching closely. They should not accept more empty promises, excuses, delays or double-digit rate increases. Success in the next council term will require a different kind of leadership. The old model, where councils could muddle through and keep hiking rates, is dead. The new environment demands leaders who can make hard choices quickly, communicate them clearly, and stick to them despite the inevitable backlash. This means not making their own costly promises, being prepared to say no to others' dreams and schemes, and telling uncomfortable truths about what councils can and cannot afford. The question is whether enough of them have stepped forward – and, crucially, whether enough voters will notice and reward them.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store