Ceasefire takes effect between Thailand and Cambodia after five-day border battle
Trump in a post on Truth Social on Monday congratulated all parties and said he had spoken to the leaders of Thailand and Cambodia and instructed his trade team to restart negotiations.
'By ending this war, we have saved thousands of lives. I have ended many wars in six months. I am proud to be the president of peace,' Trump said.
The two countries have wrangled for decades over border territory and have been on a conflict footing since the killing of a Cambodian soldier in a skirmish late in May, which led to a troop build-up on both sides and a full-blown diplomatic crisis that brought Thailand's fragile coalition government to the brink of collapse.
They accused each other of starting the fighting last week that within hours escalated from small arms fire to heavy artillery and rockets and Thailand's unexpected scrambling of an F-16 fighter jet to carry out air strikes.
Thai acting Prime Minister Phumtham Wechayacha praised Trump for pushing the peace effort and said trade negotiations would start from a good place.
'I thanked him from my heart for what we received from him and helped our country move beyond the crisis,' he told reporters on his return from Malaysia after speaking to Trump.
'After today the situation should de-escalate.'
Simmering tensions boiled over last week after Thailand recalled its ambassador to Phnom Penh and expelled Cambodia's envoy in response to a second Thai soldier losing a limb to a landmine that Bangkok alleged Cambodian troops had laid.
Cambodia has strongly denied the charge and Thai accusations that it fired at civilian targets including schools and hospitals. It accused Thailand of 'unprovoked and premeditated military aggression'.
US secretary of state Marco Rubio said he and Trump expected all sides to 'fully honour their commitments to end the conflict'.
Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet said his Thai counterpart had played a positive role and he deeply appreciated Trump's 'decisive mediation' and China's constructive participation.
In social media posts, Hun Manet said he had returned to Cambodia 'with brilliant results' and had spoken to Trump, who expressed a desire for lasting peace.
The fighting has scarred border communities on the two sides.
In Thailand's Sisaket province, a house was reduced to splintered wood and twisted beams after it was struck by artillery fire from Cambodia. The roof had caved in, windows hung by the frame and power lines drooped over the structure.
Amid the din of occasional artillery fire, homes and shops remained shut and a four-lane road was deserted except for a few cars and military vehicles.
Dozens of displaced residents lined up quietly for their evening meal at an evacuation centre about 40km away from the front lines.
Fifty-four-year-old Nong Ngarmsri wanted to go back to her village.
'I want to go to my children who stayed back,' she said.
'I want them to cease firing so I can go home.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The South African
16 minutes ago
- The South African
Trump alleges illegal campaign payments to Beyoncé and Oprah
On 27 July 2025, Donald Trump publicly accused Beyoncé Knowles-Carter, Oprah Winfrey, and Reverend Al Sharpton of receiving illegal payments in exchange for endorsing former Vice President Kamala Harris's presidential campaign. Trump alleged on his Truth Social platform that the Harris campaign paid Beyoncé $11 million (R200.2 million), Oprah $3 million (R54.6 million), and Sharpton $600,000 (R10.92 million). However, no verified documentation currently supports these claims. The US Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings directly contradict the figures Trump cited, showing significantly lower and legally justifiable amounts for campaign-related services. According to FEC records, Beyoncé's company, Parkwood Entertainment, received $165,000 (R3.01 million) for a fundraising concert. The payment covered event production and not a personal endorsement. Oprah Winfrey's Harpo Productions produced a nationally televised town hall featuring Kamala Harris and received $1 million (R18.25 million) for the event. Campaign filings and New York Post reporting confirmed this figure. Meanwhile, the Harris campaign donated $500 000 (R9.12 million) to the National Action Network, founded by Reverend Al Sharpton. The Harris campaign publicly disclosed the donation but did not specify its exact purpose in official filings. No evidence links the payment to any endorsement. and PolitiFact state that such payments are legal if they reflect fair market value and are properly reported. Legal experts also confirm that no verified evidence supports Donald Trump's claim that these celebrities were paid to endorse Harris. Tina Knowles publicly stated that Beyoncé did not receive payment to support Kamala Harris. She stated on Instagram that her daughter covered all personal costs. Oprah Winfrey also responded to the allegations. She confirmed she received no personal payment from the campaign. Instead, Harpo Productions handled event staffing and production under a formal contract. Meanwhile, Reverend Al Sharpton's team addressed the controversy. They denied that he took payment for endorsement. They also explained that campaign funds supported community outreach and event logistics. Legal experts also confirmed the transactions were lawful. The payments were disclosed and reflected fair market value. Legal analysts have raised doubts about Donald Trump's recent calls for criminal charges against Democrats and celebrities who supported Kamala Harris. US campaign finance law permits payments to individuals or entities if campaigns properly disclose them, ensure they reflect fair market value for legitimate services, and avoid using them for personal benefit unrelated to campaign activity. However, legality may still depend on the payment's intent and context, as determined by the Federal Election Commission or the Department of Justice. According to FEC filings and public records, the Harris campaign paid Beyoncé's Parkwood Entertainment and Oprah's Harpo Productions for event production, not endorsements. However, no verified legal expert has confirmed that Trump's accusations meet the threshold for criminal prosecution. Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 11. Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X and Bluesky for the latest news.
Mail & Guardian
3 hours ago
- Mail & Guardian
Reciprocity or retaliation? The semantics of US trade power
Trump's trade tantrums reflect the US president's transactional politics. Photo: File It's hard to decide what's more surreal — that the US is threatening 50% tariffs on Brazilian imports in the name of 'reciprocity' or that global markets, once jittery at the mere whisper of Trumpian trade tantrums, are now brushing off these ultimatums with a shrug and record-breaking rallies. In a letter campaign launched on 7 July, the US administration warned dozens of nations that, unless bilateral trade deals were reached by 1 August, punitive tariffs would be unilaterally imposed. Brazil, the current chair of Brics and a nation with a sizable trade deficit vis-à-vis the US, was told in no uncertain terms that its exports would be slapped with 50% tariffs. The premise is both stark and familiar: comply or pay. But this time, something has shifted. Unlike the uproar that followed the first wave of tariff threats in April — when emergency summits and legal challenges rippled across the globe — the second wave has been met with a remarkable degree of composure. The world isn't retreating. It's recalibrating. Take Brazil, for example. President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, just days after hosting the 17th Brics Summit in Rio de Janeiro, responded with restraint. 'We don't want an emperor,' he quipped, declining to engage in crisis theatrics. It was a sharp, yet composed, rejoinder to an ultimatum that would once have triggered panic. This moment marks more than defiance, it signals a strategic turning point. The Rio Declaration, adopted unanimously by Brics nations and invited partner countries, issued the bloc's clearest rebuke yet of US trade practices. 'We are seriously concerned about the rise of unilateral tariffs and non-tariff measures, which distort trade and violate WTO [World Trade Organisation] rules,' the declaration read. More than rhetoric, it outlined a coordinated vision — strengthen local currency trade, expand the role of multilateral development institutions and build resilient frameworks beyond the reach of US coercion. The contrast couldn't be clearer. While Washington leans on tariffs as a blunt tool of pressure, the Global South is coalescing around a more deliberate, cooperative trade vision. It's worth interrogating the logic behind these US threats. The idea that trade imbalances are inherently unjust and must be 'corrected' through punitive measures is a populist oversimplification. Economies specialise, consumers choose and deficits emerge naturally. Punishing countries for selling what Americans want to buy is not reciprocity – it's retaliation. Moreover, Washington's coercive strategy stands on shaky legal ground. The US Court of International Trade ruled in May 2025 that the administration's use of emergency tariff powers was incompatible with trade law. Yet, legality seems increasingly irrelevant in the face of a foreign policy that views the WTO not as a rules-based arbiter, but as an inconvenience. And still, the global economy hums. The Dow and Nasdaq have posted historical highs. Inflation remains subdued. Emerging markets, far from fleeing, are holding their ground. It's tempting to believe the tariffs are toothless. But that would be premature. Beneath the surface, a quieter reordering is underway. Countries are no longer scrambling to appease Washington. They're building buffers. From the Association of Southeast Asian Nations's supply chain diversification to the African Continental Free Trade Area's intra-regional push, nations are insulating themselves — not just economically, but diplomatically. The Brics bloc is central to this shift. No longer just a symbolic grouping, it has taken tangible steps toward a multipolar economic architecture. New initiatives unveiled in Rio — such as the Brics Pay platform, the Multilateral Guarantee Mechanism and ethical AI cooperation — are not mere declarations of intent. They are building blocks of a system that does not rely on Western-dominated institutions for validation. China's role in this transformation is pivotal. As the world's second-largest economy and a founding Brics member, China has consistently championed win-win cooperation over confrontation. Its advocacy for local currency-based payment systems, climate financing for the Global South and expanded youth and trade exchanges underscore a strategic, long-term vision. One not built on coercion, but on connectivity. India, too, proposed a forward-looking four-point agenda for the 2026 Brics Summit it will host: demand-driven development financing, climate adaptation support, ethical AI regulation and a framework for South–South food security. Together, these form a quiet, yet deliberate, counter-narrative to the transactional diplomacy of tariffs and threats. It's important to note that this isn't anti-Americanism. It's post-Americanism. Countries are not trying to isolate the US, they are trying to insulate themselves from its volatility. And the backlash is not limited to Brics. The EU, long seen as a compliant economic partner of the US, is beginning to show signs of fatigue. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has floated anti-coercion instruments aimed at retaliating against US overreach in public tenders and service sectors. Canada is considering reciprocal tariffs on US steel and agriculture. Even smaller nations like Malaysia are defending domestic policy space while exploring countermeasures. This isn't surrender. It's maturity. The world is learning that the US, for all its economic might, cannot permanently bend the global system to its will — at least not without consequences. Of course, the asymmetry of power remains. A 50% tariff from Washington still packs a punch. But its effectiveness as a shock tool is eroding. Countries are beginning to treat American threats not as destiny, but as one variable among many. If anything, the US approach might hasten what it fears most: a decentralised, multipolar trade regime. By using tariffs to enforce compliance, Washington is nudging others towards de-dollarisation, alternative payment networks and regional trade accords. Already, energy deals between Russia and China are settled in yuan and rubles. India pays for oil in dirhams. Brics's expansion to include Argentina, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates — and talks with Saudi Arabia as a strategic partner — further signals a pivot toward greater autonomy from Western leverage. As the 1 August deadline nears, some nations could still pursue tactical deals with Washington. India is reportedly close to a metals agreement. Pakistan is finalising a tariff adjustment deal. But the broader picture is one of divergence, not capitulation. The Rio Declaration summed it up best: 'Only when more and more economies issue a unanimous voice of condemnation and more and more actions form a counter-force can bullying be stopped.' The world is not panicking. It is prepared. And in that preparation lies not just the defiance of the present, but the blueprint of the future — a future where trade is negotiated, not dictated; where cooperation triumphs over coercion and where no nation, however powerful, can hold the global economy hostage to its whims. Dr Imran Khalid is a freelance columnist on international affairs based in Karachi, Pakistan.
The South African
4 hours ago
- The South African
Newspaper headlines from around the world - Tuesday, 29 July 2025
Here are the stories that made headlines on the front pages of newspapers worldwide on Tuesday, 29 July 2025. The New York Times front page reported that the EU has chosen stability as global crises loom large. The Washington Post reported that Trump blends politics and business. The Jerusalem Post's front page reported that the IDF will expand its operation in Gaza if talks with Hamas stall. China Daily's front page reported that Xi urged all-out flood relief efforts. The Daily Mail's front page reported that Trump advised Starmer on how to see off Farage. The Guardian's front page reported that Trump urged Israel to allow food aid into Gaza to tackle 'real starvation'. If you wish to stay up-to-date – for FREE – on the latest international and South African news, then bookmark The South African website for all that plus the latest in the world of finance, sport, lifestyle – and more. Did we mention it was 100% free to read …?
