Cambodia, Thailand Agree to New Measures to Reinforce Border Ceasefire
Cambodia and Thailand have agreed to a 13-point plan to manage their ongoing border dispute, including an agreement to allow observers from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) to monitor the ceasefire that ended a fierce five-day border conflict last month.
The agreement came as the two nations' General Border Committee (GBC) concluded four days of talks in Kuala Lumpur aimed at thrashing out the terms of a ceasefire brokered by Malaysia on July 28.
According to a joint statement of the GBC, signed by Cambodian Defense Minister Tea Seiha and Thailand's acting Defense Minister Nattaphon Narkphanit, the two sides agree to a ceasefire involving all types of weapons, including attacks on civilians and civilian objects and military objectives of either side, in all cases and all areas.'
They have agreed to a freeze on border troop movements and patrols, not to reinforce their positions along the border, and 'not to undertake provocative actions that may escalate tensions.' Both sides agreed to maintain an open line of communication between the defense chiefs of both countries and the chief of the defense force level.
Most significantly, each country will set up its own interim observer team comprised of defense officials from ASEAN member states and coordinated by the current chair, Malaysia, pending the deployment of a formal ASEAN Observer Team from the Southeast Asian bloc.
The issue was discussed by Tea Seiha and Nattaphon Narkphanit during an earlier meeting with Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, who said in a Facebook post that the proposed ASEAN observers would help 'support monitoring efforts, humanitarian assistance and medical coordination at the border.' He added, 'Malaysia will continue to support this process in the belief that lasting peace is only possible through dialogue, mutual respect and genuine friendship.'
The advance of the ceasefire agreement is welcome, given the tensions that still exist between the countries following last month's conflict, which killed at least 43 people and displaced more than 300,000 on both sides of the border.
Despite agreeing to a ceasefire under Malaysian, Chinese, and (particularly) U.S. pressure on July 28, the two sides have continued to trade invective, each accusing the other of violating the ceasefire. Both sides have also trafficked in false or misleading news about the border conflict, which has eroded trust further.
One area of uncertainty concerns the 18 Cambodian soldiers who were captured by Thai forces in the hours after the ceasefire went into effect. Previously, Bangkok announced that it would hold them as prisoners of war until the formal cessation of hostilities. This was reiterated by the GBC agreement, which stated that 'captured soldiers shall be immediately released and repatriated after the cessation of active hostilities in accordance with Article 118 of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Rule 128 (A) of the Customary International Humanitarian Law.'
The statement said that the GBC will meet again within a month and said both sides would also 'agree to refrain from disseminating false information or fake news in order to de-escalate tensions, mitigate negative public sentiment, and foster an environment conducive to peaceful dialogue.'
Speaking to reporters after the agreement, Tea Seiha said that the steps laid out in the agreement 'are life-saving measures and lay groundwork for restoring confidence, trust, and normalcy between our two countries.' Natthaphon added that 'in order for our discussions today to result in concrete outcomes, both sides needed to show cooperation and sincerity.'
Despite these comments, it remains to be seen whether both sides are genuinely committed to restoring stability at the border and ending the spiral of mutual mistrust that has brought Thai-Cambodian relations to the lowest point since at least the 2008-2011 Preah Vihear crisis. Domestic political constituencies in both nations have benefited from (and arguably helped encourage) the conflict, and both governments, particularly Thailand's, will remain under pressure to take a hard line on border issues.
Edgard Kagan, the U.S. ambassador to Malaysia, who attended yesterday's meeting as an observer, told the press that the agreement was just one step towards lasting peace.
'We have to be honest and say that there is still a very high level of tension, there's a high level of distrust,' he said, as per the AFP news agency. 'We think that it is going to be important for both sides to show strong commitment at the highest levels, and that it is messaged clearly down to the soldiers and policemen who are on the border.'
Even then, a comprehensive resolution of the border dispute, which has its origins in disagreements over Franco-Siamese border treaties signed in 1904 and 1907, remains a remote prospect. Like most border disputes, the Cambodia-Thailand conflict is about much more than territory: it touches on deep questions of national identity for Thais and Cambodians and functions as an important currency of domestic political legitimation in both countries. In this context, any serious attempt to delimit the disputed parts of the border will leave both governments vulnerable to claims that they are failing to defend the national interest. This is something that neither government can countenance if it wants to retain any degree of domestic legitimacy.
In this case, about the best that can be expected in the immediate term is a return to the status quo ante.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Nikkei Asia
2 hours ago
- Nikkei Asia
Putin calls Xi, Modi and other leaders ahead of planned meeting with Trump
MOSCOW -- Russian President Vladimir Putin spoke to the leaders of China, India and three ex-Soviet states on Friday in a flurry of calls to brief them on his contacts with the United States about the war in Ukraine. Putin met U.S. President Donald Trump's envoy Steve Witkoff in Moscow on Wednesday, after which the Kremlin said a summit between Putin and Trump could take place as early as next week. No venue, date or agenda have been announced. Trump, pressing for an end to the 3-1/2-year war, had set a deadline that expires on Friday for Russia to agree to peace or face new sanctions on Moscow and countries that buy Russian exports. China and India are the biggest buyers of Russian oil. China's President Xi Jinping told Putin in a phone call that China is pleased to see Russia and the United States maintaining contact and improving ties to advance a political resolution of the Ukraine crisis, Chinese state broadcaster CCTV said. China is a major backer of Russia in its confrontation with the West, as well as Russia's biggest trading partner. Putin is due to visit China in September for events marking the 80th anniversary of the end of World War Two. The Kremlin said that Putin also discussed his talks with Witkoff with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Trump this week announced an additional 25% tariff on Indian goods to penalise New Delhi for its purchases of Russian oil. "Had a very good and detailed conversation with my friend President Putin. I thanked him for sharing the latest developments on Ukraine," Modi said in a post on X. On Thursday Putin spoke with South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, who expressed South Africa's "full support to peace initiatives that will end the war and contribute to a lasting peace between Russia and Ukraine." Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, President of the United Arab Emirates, met Putin in Moscow on Thursday and Putin said the UAE was a possible venue for the Russia-U.S. summit. Russia, China, India, South Africa and the UAE are all members of the BRICS group of countries which Moscow sees as a counterweight to U.S. political and economic dominance. Putin on Friday also discussed the outcome of Witkoff's visit in calls with his ally Alexander Lukashenko, president of Belarus, and with the leaders of Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan.
The Diplomat
6 hours ago
- The Diplomat
Damming the Climate for Rights in Tibet
It's not just the new mega-dam on the Yarlung Tsangpo River. For years, Tibetans who draw attention to environmental damage have faced detention and lengthy jail sentences. On July 8, Tsongon Tsering, 30, a Tibetan environmental defender, was released from the Ngaba County Detention Facility in Sichuan Province. Reportedly emaciated and in poor health, he had completed an eight-month sentence on baseless charges of 'inciting social unrest' and 'subverting the state.' What had actually prompted this detention? In October 2024, he posted a video documenting illegal sand and gravel mining that identified the company responsible for the environmental degradation. The video went viral, and Tsongon Tsering was arrested. His detention prompted a January 2025 intervention by United Nations human rights experts on the environment, free speech, and human rights defenders to Chinese authorities. The authorities responded, insisting Tsongon Tsering had been arrested for an unrelated scuffle – but also asserting that the company whose illegal mining he had helped expose had been fined. Although his formal sentence is over, Tsongon Tsering remains under close surveillance. Just days after Tsering Tsongon's 'non-release release,' on July 19 Chinese Premier Li Qiang traveled to Nyingtri, near the Tibet-India border, to oversee the groundbreaking for the Yarlung Tsangpo mega-dam. The Chinese government identified this and other dams as priority clean energy projects in the 2021-2025 Five Year Plan, and Chinese President Xi Jinping recently reiterated his view of renewable energy as central to addressing the climate crisis. When finished, the dam is expected to be the largest in the world, generating not just power but also an economic boost. At the opening ceremony, Li referred to the dam as 'the project of the century.' But he didn't mention what mattered most to local residents: the prospects of submerging two dozen Tibetan villages or the staggering risks to cultural heritage such as monasteries, not to mention wildlife and the environment. He had nothing to say about the project's lack of a publicly-available environmental impact assessment. He did not respond to retired geologist and environmentalist Fan Xiao, who in early 2024 described this dam as 'not feasible' given the 'geological and environmental risks.' Li's disinterest in the consequences of the dam for the local population is consistent with the Chinese government's general disdain for human rights. Ordinary citizens like Tsongon Tsering try to use their rights – guaranteed under international law and China's constitution – to free speech, a healthy environment, prior consent, and participation in political life to mitigate the damage to their communities. Representatives of the state literally, figuratively, and legally respond by bulldozing those concerns. Tibetans routinely grapple with Beijing's pervasive repression as authorities relentlessly try to control all aspects of their identity. Tibetan Buddhism is a key target: not content to wrongfully imprison untold numbers of monks and nuns on trumped-up charges for decades, or try to control faith through 'management' of religion, Beijing also seeks to control the selection of the next Dalai Lama. In a horrifying effort to break familial and linguistic ties, Tibetan children as young as four are now compelled to attend state-run boarding schools whose staff and curriculum teach almost entirely in Chinese and deny opportunities to learn Tibetan culture. For thousands of years, Tibetan herders and pastoralists have herded and survived on the plateau, adapting to its climatic demands. Authorities have now largely forced them to move to fixed settlements, ironically in the name of Beijing's campaign of 'ecological civilization.' Tsongon Tsering isn't alone in facing state persecution for exposing environmental damage. In June 2025, Sherab and Gonpo, senior monks at Yena monastery in a Tibetan area of Sichuan Province, were slapped with sentences of four and three years, respectively, for having publicly opposed the Gangtuo dam in 2024. In 2023, United Nations human rights experts pressed Beijing for information about nine Tibetan environmental activists detained for exposing illegal mining and protesting harms to sacred sites in Tibetan areas of Qinghai and Sichuan, and in what the Chinese government disingenuously calls the Tibetan Autonomous Region (TAR). The detentions took place between 2010 and 2019, leaving these people vulnerable to torture and ill-treatment for years. At times, these environmental protests directly implicate China's own vision of clean energy. In 2013 and 2016 Tibetans faced repression for protesting new mines tapping into vast supplies of lithium – an element essential to the production of electric vehicles. A pillar of addressing climate change is the concept of a 'just transition' to renewable energy and away from fossil fuels in which affected communities are consulted, have a say in decision-making, and share in any benefits. But those questioning projects like the Yarlung Tsangpo dam are treated as enemies or, worse, criminals. In a truly just transition, Tsongon Tsering's concerns would have been received and acted on consistent with international and Chinese law. Premier Li Qiang would be visiting Nyingtri to listen to – and pledge to take seriously – local concerns about new hydropower projects. Critics would be released from prison, and compensation would be paid. These cases show the inseparable relationship of human rights and climate change. If Beijing's claims to climate success rest on rampant human rights violations, it is a long way from a 'just transition.'
The Diplomat
6 hours ago
- The Diplomat
India, Philippines Strengthen Partnership Amid China Challenge, US Unpredictability
India and the Philippines have embarked on a new chapter in bilateral relations with special emphasis on bolstering security and economic ties. The decision to upgrade their relationship, which was announced during the visit of Philippines' President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr. to India on August 4-8, comes amid a sharp uptick in security challenges posed by China across Asia and Southeast Asia, particularly in the South China Sea, and growing disquiet over U.S. security commitment to its partners and allies in meeting the China challenge in Asia and the broader Indo-Pacific. Marcos' visit coincided with India and the Philippines marking 75 years of diplomatic relations. Bilateral ties have been largely problem-free but were not particularly close during the Cold War decades when the two countries were on opposite sides of the divide. Subsequently, even as India focused on forging stronger economic ties with the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN), of which the Philippines is a part, China emerged as the Philippines' main partner. It is only in recent years, in the context of an aggressive China in their neighborhood, that India and the Philippines have recognized an alignment of their security interests. Speaking at a media event in New Delhi, Prime Minister Narendra Modi pointed out that while modern diplomatic ties may be recent, India's civilizational connection with the Philippines goes back centuries. 'The Philippine version of the [ancient Hindu epic] Ramayana—'Maharadia Lawana' is living proof of our deep-rooted cultural bond,' Modi said. In addition to elevating their relationship to a strategic partnership, the two sides said they would boost their economic partnership by growing bilateral trade from the current $3 billion. To do this, Modi said the two countries would aim to quickly wrap up a review of the India-ASEAN Free Trade Agreement, first signed in 2009. Separately, India and the Philippines would work towards a bilateral Preferential Trade Agreement, Modi said. Direct flights will connect India and the Philippines to support business and tourism. Both sides have decided to ease visa rules to facilitate tourism. On security ties, Modi said the defense partnership was a 'symbol of the deep mutual trust between our two countries. As maritime nations, cooperation in the maritime domain is both natural and essential.' Modi also referred to the first-ever naval exercises between the two countries that concluded as Marcos arrived in New Delhi. The 'bilateral maritime cooperative activity' is said to have taken place near the Scarborough Shoal, a major flashpoint in the maritime dispute between China and the Philippines. India's interest in the South China Sea stems from the fact that almost 55 percent of its trade passes through the South China Sea and the Malacca Straits. Modi also welcomed the Philippines' decision to join the India-based International Fusion Centre, which tracks the movement of ships in the Indian Ocean region. India considers Manila an important part of its Indo-Pacific, Indian Ocean, and ASEAN strategies, Modi added. 'Both countries face a rising challenge from China in freedom of navigation and sea lanes of communication,' Anil Wadhwa, a former Indian foreign ministry official, told The Diplomat. Additionally, 'in the case of the Philippines, there is a dispute over islands in the South China Sea.' As for India, 'it faces tensions on the land border with China. Chinese presence in the Indian Ocean is growing and their use of Pakistan as a proxy state to challenge the Indian Navy's presence in the Indian Ocean' are of concern to India. 'That is why the Philippines and India are cooperating in maritime domain awareness, naval and coast guards exchanges, and joint exercises,' Wadhwa said. In his remarks, Marcos said he viewed his India visit as a 'reaffirmation' of the 'alliance and the partnership that we are strengthening.' He pointed out that what was once referred to as the Asia Pacific region is now being referred to as the Indo-Pacific region, 'a correct evolution of that understanding because of the global nature of politics, all of trade and economy.' Later, Marcos said that the bilateral relationship had entered a 'new epoch' with the launch of the strategic partnership between the two countries. The conversation with Modi was 'far reaching,' 'productive,' and 'forward looking,' Marcos said; one of the decisions was the 'levelling up' of security cooperation. The blueprint drawn up for the strategic partnership stated that both countries will intensify dialogue and engagement in the maritime domain, promote coordination between maritime authorities and law enforcement agencies, collaborate in the production of defense equipment, and encourage investments and joint initiatives in defense research and supply chain ecosystem. The blueprint also called for full respect and adherence to international law, particularly on the rights and obligations of States under the 1982 U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), and its dispute settlement mechanisms, and expressed concern over coercive and aggressive actions that impact regional peace. Analysts say the emphasis on security in the India-Philippines partnership is natural, given the Marcos government's emphasis on territorial defense in the wake of its tensions with China. 'While in the past, Philippines-India ties were largely limited to issues of low politics, today, Manila has incorporated India into its security calculations as a credible and trusted defense partner at a time when China has been increasing its provocations and unilateralism in the West Philippine Sea,' former Indian foreign ministry official Anil Trigunayat and Filipino scholar Don Mclain Gill pointed out in a joint article in Firstpost. The Philippines is the first country to which India exported the Russia-India co-produced Brahmos missiles. Adding another layer of uncertainty to matters in the region are doubts about the U.S. commitment to its Asian allies and partners, especially in the context of Trump insisting that Europe pay for its own defense. Trump's tariffs have also frayed ties with countries, casting doubts over cooperation in groups like Quad and AUKUS. 'Trump is bringing unpredictability to U.S. behavior in the future in safeguarding the interests of the littoral states in the South China Sea, the Pacific and the Indian Ocean,' diplomat Wadhwa said, adding that countries like the Philippines and Taiwan are unsure whether their interests vis-à-vis China will be sacrificed by the U.S. for what it sees as its own strategic interests.' Given the many imponderables in the current international scenario, it makes sense for countries with common interests to come together and forge bonds based on shared concerns. India and the Philippines have identified areas of convergence and are now building on those to weather the unpredictability of the times.
