Why are Thailand and Cambodia engaged in a border conflict?
At least 11 Thai civilians, including an eight-year-old boy, and a Thai soldier, were killed in the violence. It is not yet clear if there are Cambodian casualties.
Both Thailand and Cambodia accused each other of opening fire first.
The dispute between Thailand and Cambodia dates back more than a century, to when France, which occupied Cambodia until 1953, first mapped the land border.
The dispute over the border, which stretches across more than 817 km (508 miles), has repeatedly erupted over the years, fanned by nationalist sentiment.
The most recent episode began in May, when troops briefly exchanged fire at a contested area, killing a Cambodian soldier. This led to a series of tit-for-tat actions by both governments: Thailand imposed border restrictions with Cambodia, while Cambodia banned imports of fruit and vegetables, broadcasts of Thai films, and cut internet bandwidth from Thailand, among other measures.
Tensions escalated further on Wednesday when five Thai military personnel were injured by landmines while on patrol. Thai officials, who have alleged the landmines were freshly laid, closed their northeastern border crossings with Cambodia, withdrew their ambassador and expelled the Cambodian ambassador in protest. Cambodia also said it was downgrading diplomatic relations with Thailand to their lowest level and recalling all Cambodian staff from its embassy in Bangkok. It has denied laying new landmines.
Cambodia is effectively a one-party state. It was ruled by the authoritarian leader Hun Sen for almost four decades, before he handed power to his son, Hun Manet, in 2023. Hun Sen is now the president of the senate and remains hugely powerful in the country. He may be attempting to shore up his son's position by fanning nationalism, says Matt Wheeler, a senior analyst at International Crisis Group, who adds that Hun Manet, 'governs in his father's shadow and lacks an independent power base'.
Others note that the dispute may provide a welcome distraction from economic problems. Both Cambodia and Thailand are facing the prospect of 36% US tariff from 1 August.
Thailand is gripped by a period of political instability, with its prime minister, Paetongtarn Shinawatra, suspended from office and her party accused of failing to act quickly over the border dispute.
Paetongtarn, the daughter of the influential former leader Thaksin Shinawatra, faced strong criticism over her handling of the border crisis after a recording of her discussing the problem with Hun Sen was leaked. She could be heard calling Hun Sen 'uncle' and saying that if there were anything he wanted, she would 'take care of it'.
Paetongtarn also made disparaging remarks about a senior Thai military commander – undermining an institution that is very powerful in Thailand, and which has frequently intervened in politics.
The call recording was especially damaging to Paetongtarn because Hun Sen is known to have been an old friend of her family – and critics accused her of putting personal connections before her country's interests.
Her party, Pheu Thai, is 'in a very fragile situation right now', said Tita Sanglee, an associate fellow at the ISEAS–Yusof Ishak Institute. 'They don't have much option but to go along with what the military wants.' she said. The government may feel that taking a stronger stance could win back public support.
Cambodia earlier asked the international court of justice (ICJ) to resolve the border dispute. However, this is unlikely to lead to a resolution as Thailand does not accept the court's jurisdiction.
Anwar Ibrahim, the prime minister of Malaysia, which now chairs the regional bloc Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean), called on both Thailand and Cambodia to 'stand down'.
However, it is improbable, said Sanglee, that Asean, known for its non-interference policy, would be capable of trying to mediate the dispute – or willing to try.
'China is the only viable external mediator because it has direct leverage over Cambodia and also Thailand,' she added.
However, while China has strong economic ties with both countries, it is considered to be more closely aligned with Cambodia. This may create unease among officials in Bangkok. Neighbouring countries, which are already concerned about China's dominance in the region, may also feel uncomfortable about Beijing playing such a role, added Sanglee.
Thailand's caretaker prime minister, Phumtham Wechayachai, said fighting must stop before there can be negotiations. There had been no declaration of war and conflict was not spreading into more provinces, he said on Thursday.
Hun Manet has requested the UN security council convene an 'urgent meeting' to discuss the crisis, accusing Thailand of 'unprovoked military aggression'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
28 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Putin has cemented Russia's status as a great power. Europe should be terrified
Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin met as equals on American soil this week, not because Mr Trump is in thrall to Putin but because his advances into Ukraine have been unstoppable despite over three years of Western effort. Ukrainian forces have fought hard and with tremendous courage, skill and sacrifice. They prevented the intended Russian blitzkrieg at the beginning of the war and have pushed Russia back in places. They even conducted audacious assaults into Russian territory and inflicted unexpected damage on Moscow's forces including in the Black Sea and as far away as eastern Siberia. But Putin still believes he can absorb whatever blows Kyiv throws at him and win even more territory as his forces push hard and continue to make progress in the Donbas. This region, rich in mineral wealth, is Russia's main military focus. Pushing against well-prepared Ukrainian defences here has proven costly in men and munitions and has made slow progress. Putin would prefer not to continue fighting for it if he can get it by other means and he told Mr Trump at Anchorage that the war could end if Ukraine withdraws from the 30 per cent of Donetsk that his forces have not yet conquered. Volodymyr Zelensky will be reluctant to agree to that and has said that voluntarily ceding any Ukrainian territory would require constitutional change. He will have to balance that with his judgment on whether Ukrainian forces will be able to hold on to it if the war continues, and what the price of that might be. That assessment will have to include the extent to which the West, eyeing the potential for peace, will continue to enable his defensive efforts and how effective Ukraine can be on its own. On top of that, Mr Zelensky will be mindful that at this stage in this extremely costly war, polling suggests that the majority of the population want to see its end, with significant proportions reluctantly willing to give up land. What is Putin offering in return? Virtually nothing. Russia has taken small areas of territory in the north-east, around Kharkiv and Sumy, and has said he will be willing to withdraw from there in exchange for Donetsk. He has also agreed to freeze the front lines in the south, in the Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions, of which Russia currently holds around three quarters of the total. A ceasefire prior to Putin's 'deal' is of no interest to him and it seems any such thing, which had been a Western priority, was not seriously entertained in Anchorage. Despite serious military flaws that became only too evident since the start of the war, Russia has shown that its forces are no paper tiger. The much-vaunted Western hardware, technical sophistication and military doctrines are not enough to beat it. Indeed Russia has learnt the lessons of modern warfare, adapting its forces and strategies to deal with drones and other battlefield innovations in a way that the West has not. Russia is maintaining astonishing levels of arms production and has been supplementing its own output with supplies from Iran, North Korea and China. In this form of attritional warfare the West has been unable or unwilling to keep up. Putin has reoriented his economy away from Europe especially towards the Brics nations. Although Russian finances are in difficulties, the West has not yet been willing to administer the level of shock that might lead to anything approaching collapse. Instead, dependent on Russian energy, European countries have continued to play their part in fuelling the war machine. Western sanctions have been severe but insufficient, and the additional sanctions President Trump threatened, as well as secondary tariffs, seem to have evaporated since Putin agreed to the Alaska summit. The net result of all this is that it seems the war will continue to grind on unless President Zelensky accedes to Putin's maximalist demands which, as the summit showed, have not changed since the day he launched his special military operation. Meanwhile, the Europeans have reduced themselves to spectators to Ukraine's fate – and their own. European leaders don't even seem to recognise that the cause of this entire situation, and whatever develops from it, largely falls at their own doorstep. Putin claims that a reason for invading Ukraine was Nato aggression towards the east. Yet it was the opposite. He noted that there was no price to be paid for his 2014 invasion of Crimea, notwithstanding Western guarantees that Ukraine would not be threatened by its agreement to give up its nuclear arsenal. Putin read the situation exactly right: it was Nato that was the paper tiger. Mr Trump has been discussing security guarantees with the Europeans as part of a final settlement. That would not include membership of Nato, which in any case would not be acceptable to Putin were he to agree any peace deal. It is unlikely to be any internationally binding treaty but rather a Nato 'article 5' type arrangement whereby participating states would agree to come to Ukraine's defence if it were to be attacked. That would amount to no more than political promises along the lines of previous guarantees given to Kyiv which were not subsequently honoured. Geography alone dictates that European countries should, theoretically, have greater investment in Ukraine's future than the US, and it is they who ought to be looking to bear the burden of security guarantees rather than always looking across the Atlantic. We keep hearing about the 'coalition of the willing', with European forces led by Britain and France to send in forces to guarantee a ceasefire or perhaps a peace agreement. Yet always this is accompanied by the caveat of a US backstop if it is to work. We also hear from European leaders how, if Putin gets his way in Ukraine, it will encourage him to further aggression. Well, it now looks likely that he may well get his way, or at least much of it. So rather than lamenting a dire situation that their own negligence has helped bring about, these European leaders need to get serious about defence – and fast. That means more than just promises to increase defence spending to repair their destitute armed services sometime in the future. It means hardening political thinking away from decades of flabby compromise, appeasement and accommodation and bringing about societal change so that when the Russian bear comes back for more there will be sufficient patriots ready and willing to get into the trenches rather than the hope that Uncle Sam will come to their rescue.
The Independent
9 hours ago
- The Independent
Black paint and blank screens: China forces censorship of Hong Kong and Uyghur artworks in Thailand
An art exhibition in Thailand has emerged at the centre of international concerns over China 's censorship after some was the artworks by Tibetan, Uyghur and Hong Kong artists were removed or altered following Beijing 's alleged pressure campaign. The exhibition at the Bangkok Art and Culture Centre (BACC) by Burmese artist Sai opened on 26 July, featuring artwork by exiled artists from China, Russia and Iran. Titled Constellation of Complicity: Visualising the Global Machinery of Authoritarian Solidarity, the show aimed to expose the collaborative repression tactics of authoritarian governments, including artworks from Tibetan, Uyghur and Hong Kong artists. However, just three days later, Chinese embassy staff, accompanied by Bangkok city officials, visited the BACC and demanded the removal of elements critical of Beijing's policies. The Independent has reached out to BACC for a comment. The co-curator, Sai, a Burmese national who goes by one name, fled Thailand for the UK with his wife on 29 July, fearing deportation to Myanmar where he believed he would be punished by the military-run junta for his activism. After the Chinese official and Thai police's intervention, the exhibition was forced to remove Tibetan and Uyghur flags, a novel about a Tibetan family in exile, and a film by Tibetan artist Tenzin Mingyur Paldron addressing the Dalai Lama. References to 'Tibet,' 'Hong Kong,' and 'Uyghur' were obscured with black paint while television screens meant to display Paldron's films were switched off, and artists' names were redacted. Sai told Reuters China's response showed it was "engaging in systematic political manipulation far beyond its borders", such as in his own country, where Beijing backs the ruling military. He said if the Chinese government's claims about ethnic minorities were true there would have been no need to send officials "into galleries in Thailand, no need to black out artists' names, and no need to threaten institutions into compliance." "Censorship is never the weapon of those confident in the strength of their ideas,' he said, describing the censorship as 'tragically ironic' in another interview. The Chinese foreign ministry said the exhibition of distorted Chinese policies and "undermined China's core interests and political dignity". It neither confirmed nor denied that the Chinese embassy was behind the removal and alteration. "The fact that the relevant country took timely measures precisely shows that the promotion of the fallacies of 'Tibetan independence', 'East Turkestan Islamic Movement' and 'Hong Kong independence' has no market internationally and is unpopular," it added. Thailand's police denied information that officers were looking for Sai in a response to the BBC. The Human Rights Foundation labeled it 'intimidation', reflecting a coordinated effort to suppress artistic expression. 'HRF strongly condemns an order issued by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to remove artworks by artists from Tibet, the Uyghur Region, and Hong Kong,' it said. 'This instance of intimidation reflects the CCP's broader pattern of suppressing artistic expression overseas, which is facilitated by the cooperation of authoritarian governments, such as Thailand, who are continuing to acquiesce to the CCP's demands.' Yalkun Uluyol, a China researcher at Human Rights Watc,h said 'Beijing should stop its repression against critics abroad. Others should resist such transnational repression to protect rights.' Campaign for Uyghurs called it yet another example of 'Beijing exporting censorship abroad, silencing art and activism that expose its human rights abuses'. 'Authoritarian repression doesn't stop at China's borders, it targets truth wherever it's told.' The exhibition remains open at the BACC but in its censored form, with an expected end date in October 2025. Visitor numbers have surged due to online buzz about the controversy, turning the censorship into unintended publicity for the exhibition. The controversy has renewed debate over China's sophisticated systems of censorship, aimed at controlling information, silencing dissent, and shaping public opinion both domestically and abroad. The ruling Communist Party employs a vast digital firewall, strict publishing controls, and pressure campaigns to stifle content it deems politically sensitive or damaging to its image. In 2010, when imprisoned dissident Liu Xiaobo won the Nobel Peace Prize, Chinese media blacked out coverage, and online searches for his name were restricted. His death in custody in 2017 was also heavily censored. coronavirus outbreak and posts questioning the government's handling of the pandemic were deleted en masse.
BBC News
20 hours ago
- BBC News
How a Bangkok art show was censored after China anger
Three weeks ago, Burmese artist Sai was in Bangkok, celebrating the opening of an art exhibition he had curated with his wife at one of Thailand's top the couple has fled to the UK where they plan to seek asylum, their exhibition about authoritarian repression censored after angering the Chinese couple alleges Thai police are looking for them, though a police spokesman has denied knowledge of rights advocates have condemned the situation as an example of transnational exiled artists from countries such as China, Russia and Iran, Sai says his exhibition, which opened on 26 July at the Bangkok Arts and Cultural Centre, saw repeated visits by Chinese embassy representatives, accompanied by Bangkok city officials, shortly after it show, titled Constellation of Complicity: Visualising the Global Machine of Authoritarian Solidarity, aims to show how authoritarian regimes collaborate in repression, according to one official claims that the Chinese officials lodged complaints about works by Tibetan, Uyghur and Hong Kong artists, and initially demanded that the show be completely shut down. But, he said, the arts centre managed to negotiate a compromise that allowed the exhibition to continue after sensitive artworks and elements of art installations were removed.A BBC journalist who visited the exhibition in Bangkok this week saw several artists' names covered up with black paint in the descriptions of artworks.A description of the artists' homelands was also partially covered with black paint to conceal references to Tibet, Hong Kong and Xinjiang. Most of the censored artworks were by the Tibetan artist Tenzin Mingyur Paldron. Television screens that were supposed to show several films by the artist - one was about the Dalai Lama - had been switched and Uyghur flags had also been removed, as well as a novel about a Tibetan family in exile and a postcard about China, Israel and Xinjiang.A gallery staff member told the BBC that the exhibition had attracted many visitors in recent days after news of the censorship went viral arts centre's management did not respond to the BBC's questions. But the BBC understands there was an email where the centre said they were "warned that the exhibition may risk creating diplomatic tensions between Thailand and China".The email also stated they made the adjustments "due to pressure from the Chinese embassy" transmitted through the Thai foreign affairs ministry and the Bangkok city government, which is the centre's main supporter.A Chinese embassy statement in response to BBC queries accused the exhibition of openly promoting Tibetan, Uyghur and Hong Kong independence. It added that Thailand's "timely measures" showed that such a "false notion" has "no market internationally and is unpopular".It also said the show "disregards facts... distorts China's policies on Tibet, Xinjiang, and Hong Kong, and harms China's core interests and political dignity"."China opposes any attempt by anyone to use the pretext of cultural and artistic exchanges to engage in political manipulation and interfere in China's internal affairs."The statement did not address allegations that its officials had pressured Thai authorities and the arts centre. The show's curators and exhibiting artists deny China's Mingyur Paldron said his films "conveyed stories from the heart and sent a message of global solidarity", adding that the censorship was part of a Chinese "campaign of erasure and suppression" of Tibetans around the world."Although I do support the people's will, there is no signage nor advocacy of independence [in the artwork]," said Clara Cheung, one of the artists whose names were blacked out. The Hong Kong artist's installation about China's surveillance in the UK was not of independence from China, "we promote freedom of expression, self-determination, and self-identification... basic human rights", Sai told the BBC."Our exhibition gives space for artists who resist authoritarianism. These are voices often silenced in their own country. The fact that the Chinese Communist Party tries to shut it down proves the very point they are making." 'We realised we had to leave' Sai and his wife decided to leave Thailand as they were worried of being deported back to Myanmar, also known as Burma, where Sai believes he will be persecuted for his activism against the days after the exhibition's opening, the couple was heading to their home in Bangkok when they realised that Thai police were looking for BBC understands the couple received texts from gallery staff alerting them to the police's visit to the exhibition, and that officers had asked for the couple's contact that moment, Sai said, "we realised we had to leave the country". The couple immediately purchased the earliest flight to the UK they could find. "We only had a few minutes to pack our belongings. My wife was shaking, she couldn't pack anything," he said. Just hours after they received the call, they left the national police spokesman Achayon Kraithong told the BBC that he had not received any information that police officers were looking for the artist, and said the accusation was too broad to prove. "Without specific information, we cannot comment on it. If there was enough evidence, we would be able to say if it actually happened or not," he couple had fled their homeland in 2021 following the military father is Lin Htut, the former chief minister of Myanmar's biggest state, Shan, and a member of Aung San Suu Kyi's ousted National League for Democracy. He was arrested and subsequently jailed on corruption charges. Sai's mother was put under house arrest for several months, and is now still living under heavy has long maintained the charges are false and insists that his father is a political prisoner. He has been vigorously campaigning for his release while criticising the couple had eventually settled in Thailand and decided to put on their art show in Bangkok because of the large Burmese community there, and also because "Thailand plays a critical role to promote peace and stability for Myanmar... it's a secure place", said he no longer feels this way. "When a foreign power can dictate what art can be shown, it undermines cultural sovereignty," he said."Because of our activism, the targeting by authoritarian regimes against us has multiplied... my wife and I have no choice but to seek asylum in the UK." Lord Alton of Liverpool, chair of the UK Parliament's Joint Committee on Human Rights, told the BBC that Sai's case "illustrates the extensive reach of China's campaign of transnational repression", and that he would support Sai's bid for asylum."To pressure an art exhibition to censor exhibits in a cultural centre in another country is an outrageous violation of freedom of expression and should be widely exposed and condemned. The additional fears that this caused for Sai, leading him to flee Thailand for his security, are deeply concerning," he Human Rights Foundation has called the incident "intimidation" that "reflects a coordinated effort to suppress artistic expression", while prominent Thailand-based activist Phil Robertson said it was "outrageous and unacceptable" that Bangkok city officials allowed Chinese BBC has asked Thailand's prime minister's office for a response to these of China's transnational repression - broadly defined as a government harassing or surveilling individuals in other territories - have risen in recent years. It has raised questions of whether host countries are aware of such actions, or even relationship between Thailand and China has also been closely 2015 Swedish citizen Gui Minhai, one of the founders of a Hong Kong bookshop that sold and published titles critical of Beijing, mysteriously vanished while holidaying in Thailand. He later reappeared in mainland China in police custody. Officials said he had gone to China voluntarily, but rights groups maintain he was abducted by Chinese this year, at least 40 Uyghurs were deported from Thailand to China despite serious concerns expressed by the United Nations, the US and the UK. Beijing said the repatriation was conducted in accordance with Chinese, Thai and international law. That case had occurred while Sai was still planning his show at the Bangkok Arts and Cultural Centre. Despite concerns, he said, the centre decided to go ahead with the exhibition Sai is contemplating his next steps while in the UK. He and his wife plan to showcase the uncensored art show in other countries once the exhibition ends its run in Bangkok in believes the censorship has ironically boosted the profile of their art show, with "now many people in the world interested in seeing the exhibition" and discussing it online."We didn't start this movement, the CCP started it. We just laid the foundation [with the exhibition]... the rest has been nurtured organically, and endorsed, by CCP censorship like fertiliser."Additional reporting by Thanyarat Doksone.
