Latest news with #Angkorian
The Diplomat
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Diplomat
The Social Media Battle Between Thailand and Cambodia
Civil wars, insurgencies, religious and ideological movements, and social and political tensions exist in all 11 nations of Southeast Asia and among the many communities they contain. However, since the end of the Cold War, the region has largely avoided one particular type of conflict: interstate war. It is unsurprising then, that when airstrikes and artillery barrages erupted along the disputed border between Thailand and Cambodia in late July, it made global headlines. The scale and intensity of the fighting was markedly different from that of the skirmishes that took place during the last border dispute from 2008-2011. While many factors have been observed as the roots of the war, what has been less explored and analyzed is the pre-existing tensions that exist between each state's ordinary citizens, especially following the border skirmish in May, who have rallied to their respective governments as the dispute has intensified, particularly on social media. From TikTok to X, Thai and Cambodian netizens have been waging a different kind of war, one based on insults, nationalistic hyperbole, and historical and cultural nostalgia. This has created echo chambers where an imagined sense of one's perceived innocence and superiority over the other justifies hatred and war. At a time of fragile peace, this sort of collective mentality remains a constant threat to the safety and security of thousands on both sides of the border. A History of Territorial Disputes The recent conflict between Thailand and Cambodia is a manifestation of the complicated relationship between the two countries. In 2008, a dispute over Preah Vihear temple, an 11th Century Angkorian temple situated on the border between the two countries, resulted in a standoff between Thailand and Cambodia that escalated into military conflict. A French colonial map of the area placed the temple on the Cambodian side of the border, but Thailand believed that this deviated from the terms of border treaties signed between French Indochina and the Kingdom of Siam in 1904 and 1907, and claimed it had never officially accepted the map. Although the International Court of Justice ruled in Cambodia's favor in 1962, giving it ownership over Preah Vihear, disputes over this and other surrounding parcels of land. The most recent incidents erupted from a minor skirmish at the border, resulting in the death of a Cambodian soldier on May 28; both countries blame the other for initiating the clash. Tensions escalated further on July 23, when Thai soldiers triggered a landmine, injuring five, following a similar incident a week earlier. Accusations once again flared, and Thailand recalled its ambassador from Phnom Penh. Early the next morning, fighting broke out at Ta Moan Thom, another temple along the border, which was followed by four more days of large-scale exchanges of firepower and air strikes, which ultimately killed at least 43 people, including civilians, and displaced more than 300,000. On July 28, both countries agreed to 'an immediate and unconditional ceasefire.' However, about eight hours after the newly implemented ceasefire, 20 Cambodian soldiers were detained by Thai forces for crossing the border, only two of which have since been returned. Nationalism and Social Media Before the Five-Day War Social media has long acted as a battleground in the everyday lives of Thais and Cambodians, nationalist sentiments bashing one another being a common sight. A quick search on any social media platform showcases many examples of defamation and nationalist pride that have garnered much attention and hatred even before tensions poured into a war. Well before the war, Cambodian netizens had accused Thailand of the cultural theft of music, ancient temples, and food, as well as rewriting or faking history to erase 'Khmer glory' from the Thai education system. This has led some to refer to it as 'Copyland.' Comments from various social media platforms have labelled Thailand as a 'bully,' claiming that Cambodians living in Thailand are treated without respect, abused without protection in the workforce, and that their children are denied rights. Alongside the bashing of Thailand, a recent upsurge of a TikTok trend of users dressed in Cambodian uniforms dancing to the song 'Weapons,' by Cambodian Artists La Cima Cartel, All3rgy, and Hasha had obvious undertones of nationalism that propelled many Cambodians to rally around their government following the initial clash in May. Conversely, hostile discourse by Thais is not uncommon. 'Scambodia,' 'CampuChina,' 'Xi Jinping's playground,' and 'mini China,' are all derogatory nicknames that Thai social media users have given to Cambodia in the comment sections of various social media sites before the events of July 24. This phenomenon has created a foundation of mistrust on platforms that are less visible to outsiders yet extremely influential in an age of digital technology, creating the conditions for an explosion of online animosity after the conflict broke out. Continuing Tensions #Save Thailand, #ThailandOpenedFire, 'Angkor Wat will belong to Thailand,' 'Cambodia Attacking Hospital.' These are just a few of the many recent comments under a TikTok video of two Western travel-vloggers who shared their experiences having visited Cambodia weeks before the war began. There is no doubt that the preexisting adversity between the two states before the outbreak of the conflict blew into a massive social media battleground still active a week after the ceasefire. Many themes that dominated the social media tug-of-war before 24 July — moral superiority, cultural history, good governance, respectable royalty — became sharper and more pronounced afterwards. Recent social media posts include comparisons of royal family members, a favorite target of Cambodian users being Thailand's Prince Dipangkorn Rasmijoti who has been frequently contrasted against Cambodia's Princess Norodom Jenna, usually subjected to shameful emojis and captions. Thai netizens are no better, posting edits of their air force's military gains during the clashes or the country's supposed help toward Cambodian refugees in 1979. Even against the backdrop of a nominal ceasefire, the generalization and abuse of issues as trivial and mundane as the two prime ministers' English accents during the ceasefire agreement have become weapons disrupting an atmosphere of stability on the internet. AI tools have been used extensively to serve up the same propaganda and slander, for instance, to reimagine a false, glorified conclusion to the conflict. In addition to amplifying the existing social media animosity, the outbreak of war has also led both sides to accuse each other of firing the first shot. This has been followed by a flood of tit-for-tat requests for justice and accountability, veiled in self-righteousness. On X, Cambodian op-eds from their national newspapers and captioned images still condemning the Thai military for 'a calculated act of intimidation against a peaceful neighbour' have been posted as recently as August 4, while pro-Thai posts have similarly pictured Cambodia as a false victim of a war it started. Nationalist social media posts continue to be uploaded ambitiously. Videos of both sides accusing each other of breaking the ceasefire have also surfaced well into the first week of August. The constant animosity on social media between politicians from both countries, including big names such as Thaksin Shinawatra and Hun Sen, only increased tensions, rallying nationalistic crowds, rallying nationalistic crowds, both to agree and add insults, under every post. A Mentality of Conflict Persists While social media banter and its influence on nationalistic and jingoistic rhetoric is not new, its effects have created a collective opposition to lasting peace between Thailand and Cambodia. As part of a reply on a TikTok video posted a few days ago — 'just protect and fight back' — connotes, the desire for conflict has not been quelled. While there have been calls for peace and stability in the region, such optimism is usually overshadowed by unresolved grievances and a confused need for netizens to fulfill their own definitions of justice, created in an echo chamber of like-minded people. Social media users on both sides continue to justify the violence as a necessary reaction to aggression from each other, rather than calling for the two nations to transcend their dispute in the interests of reconciliation and cooperation. On the ground, as the ceasefire remains fragile, both militaries are on high alert, and distrust between the two governments runs deep. 'It can erupt at any time,' one Thai politician commented, on the possibility of renewed conflict. Online, the social media war shows no signs of slowing down. It is important to recognize that one of the contributors to a lack of widespread opposition to the war from both sides has been the fact that social media had already laid the groundwork of distrust and antagonism. If cool-headed leaders on both sides are unable to rise above the online noise, the continuing tug-of-war on social media may pull the two nations into yet another series of border clashes.
The Diplomat
29-07-2025
- Politics
- The Diplomat
Thailand, Cambodia Dispute Status of Border Ceasefire
Uncertainty surrounds the status of a ceasefire agreed by Thailand and Cambodia yesterday, with the two nations seemingly at odds as to whether their agreement was still in effect. Yesterday, Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet and Thailand's acting Prime Minister Phumtham Wechayachai agreed to an 'immediate and unconditional' ceasefire after more than two hours of talks hosted by Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim in Malaysia. The agreement came into effect at midnight last night. However, just as world leaders were expressing their relief at the cessation of hostilities, the Thai army alleged this morning that Cambodia had launched attacks in multiple areas after the ceasefire was supposed to take effect, and that Thai soldiers had responded with defensive actions. 'Such actions represent a deliberate violation of the ceasefire and a serious breach of trust,' Maj. Gen. Vithai Laithomya said in a statement quoted by the Associated Press. Cambodia's government said there had been 'no armed conflict on all front lines' and that the ceasefire continued to hold. A Thai government spokesperson later said that it was gathering evidence of the Cambodian violations and would submit them in due course to Malaysia, the United States, and China, the nations that attended yesterday's meeting in Putrajaya. As the AP reported from the Thai side of the border, 'it was unclear if fighting was continuing but signs of calm returned in places. Some families displaced by the fighting began returning to their homes.' The ceasefire agreement was intended to end five days of intense fighting, which began on the morning of July 24, when fighting broke out between Cambodian and Thai soldiers close to Ta Moan Thom, an Angkorian temple close to the border between Thailand's Surin province and Cambodia's Oddar Meanchey province. Clashes then erupted along other parts of the border, involving heavy weaponry, including rockets, artillery, and in the case of the Royal Thai Air Force, F-16 fighter jets. As of yesterday, the fighting had killed at least 34 people and displaced more than 270,000, as per Nikkei Asia. In a press conference yesterday announcing the agreement, Anwar said that in order to stabilize the situation, military commanders from both sides had agreed to meet at 7 a.m. today and that there will be a meeting of the bilateral General Border Committee Cambodia on August 4. Anwar said that Malaysia, as the current chair of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), 'stands ready to coordinate an observer team to verify and ensure its implementation.' The two governments also appeared to diverge on the question of whether the scheduled meeting of military commanders would take place as scheduled today. Cambodia's Defense Ministry spokesperson said that military leaders held meetings at 7 a.m. and 10 a.m. this morning, while Thai media reports suggested that the meetings were pushed back to 10 a.m. and then 'postponed indefinitely,' which one report put down to the unavailability of two Cambodian generals. Both things obviously can't be true, and by the time this article is published, the situation will likely have become clear, for better or worse. But even if the ceasefire holds, the uncertainty points to the dearth of trust and poor lines of communications between the two sides – something that poses serious challenges to the stabilization of the border region. It also suggests that a conclusive resolution of the long-running border dispute, which has its origins in disagreements over Franco-Siamese border treaties signed in 1904 and 1907, remains an extremely remote prospect. As I noted in a lengthy article yesterday, the dispute touches on deep questions of national identity that have infused contested tracts of border territory with an almost sacred status. In this context, the loss of territory, however insignificant in strategic or economic terms, is something that neither government can countenance if it wants to retain a shred of domestic legitimacy. Any final resolution of the dispute would require both Thai and Cambodian leaders to restore the mutual trust that has been all but destroyed by the conflict. It would then require them to muster the political will to initiate border demarcation efforts and the political capital to make compromises on core nationalist demands. In the absence of any of these conditions, the two governments may well find that there is more political utility in an unsettled border than in a conclusively demarcated one.
The Diplomat
08-07-2025
- Politics
- The Diplomat
A Small State's Limited Playbook: Cambodia Exploits Thailand's Weakness
The recent leaking of a phone conversation between the Thai Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra and former Cambodian leader Hun Sen marked an unexpected twist in the escalating border dispute between the two countries. Hun Sen's subsequent prediction that there would be a new Thai prime minister in 3 months and that he knows who it would be further exacerbated bilateral tensions. Days later, the Constitutional Court suspended Paetongtarn Shinawatra from office amidst a pending court case seeking her dismissal. A small state managed to inflict extraordinary repercussions on the domestic situation of its larger neighbor with a phone call. Thai Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra reasoned that Hun Sen leaked the recording in order to 'boost his popularity without regard for the impact on bilateral ties.' A poll by the National Institute of Development Administration found that most Thais hold a similar perspective. This assessment is reminiscent of regional media discussions about the role of domestic politics during the 2008-2011 conflict over the Preah Vihear temple, an eleventh-century Angkorian ruin perched on the two nations' disputed border. However, this latest development is best understood as a product of the asymmetry of power between Cambodia and its larger neighbors, and the lessons that the Cambodian government – and Hun Sen – learned from the Preah Vihear conflict. There are important differences between the 2008-2011 conflict and the current stand-off. First, the domestic political situation in Cambodia is much more stable today than in 2008. While domestic political competition was at its height during the Preah Vihear conflict, which ignited just prior to the 2008 national election, Cambodia has had no proper opposition party since the dissolution of the Cambodia National Rescue Party in 2017. The ruling Cambodian People's Party has also since undergone a gradual leadership transition to a younger generation, which culminated in Hun Sen handing the prime ministership to his son Hun Manet in 2023. As a result, the government's recent actions should not be reduced to domestic political factors. Second, Cambodia and Thailand have forged a much closer economic relationship over the last decade. Bilateral trade amounted to just $1 billion in 2006; this rose to $4.29 billion in 2024, and the two nations have set an ambitious bilateral trade target of $15 billion by 2027. Similarly, in 2006, there were an estimated 180,000 Cambodian workers in Thailand. In 2024, this had risen to 1.2 million, according to Cambodian government estimates. Remittances from the 1.38 million Cambodian migrants working abroad amounted to $2.95 billion last year. What then explains Cambodia's – or Hun Sen's – willingness to jeopardize such a pivotal economic relationship? While the border issues faded from regional and international attention after 2011, the border has remained a top national security concern for the Cambodian government. Notably, the 2013 judgment of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on the Preah Vihear temple area, which granted the temple and its surrounding promontory to Cambodia, was never formally implemented. Former Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra denied accepting the court's decision and insisted on parliamentary approval of the ICJ judgment, which has not been passed to date. In an indication of the fragile situation at the border, Thai officials did not publicly discuss the possibility of reopening the border checkpoint at the Preah Vihear temple until last year. Negotiations over their overlapping claims area in the Gulf of Thailand resumed in January 2023, but this only reignited the dormant dispute over the island of Koh Kood in the Gulf of Thailand. Cambodia's willingness to jeopardize its economic relationship with Thailand over the border dispute needs to be viewed in the context of the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022. The invasion highlighted the vulnerability of small states with larger neighbors and their apparent dependence on international law for survival. Cambodia co-sponsored the United Nations General Assembly resolution condemning Russia's annexation of four Ukrainian regions in 2022. Explaining Cambodia's decision, Hun Sen stated, 'If our neighbors did that to us, would we get angry? We must stand for the principle of law.' On June 15, the Cambodian government submitted an official letter to the ICJ asking it to resolve disputes over four areas of the border with Thailand. However, Thailand has rejected any ICJ involvement, saying that it would prefer to resolve the disputes bilaterally. Accordingly, the Cambodian government cannot solely rely on international law to manage the current dispute. A small state such as Cambodia has limited options for responding to a national security crisis. Even though the country has been increasing its annual military spending, the Thai military retains an overall advantage in relation to the Royal Cambodian Armed Forces. A small state with limited material capabilities thus might resort to an unconventional strategy, such as leaking a phone recording, to influence the trajectory of an escalating dispute. There was precedent for this strategy: leaking phone recordings has long been a mainstay of Hun Sen's approach to Cambodian domestic politics. To make sense of this strategy in the realm of foreign policy, it is important to consider an important lesson that the Cambodian leadership learned about its relationship with Thailand in the wake of Preah Vihear. This lesson concerned the risk that Thai domestic politics were highly sensitive to anything concerning the Cambodian border and could negatively impact Cambodia's security and economy. Up until the outbreak of the conflict in 2008, the Cambodian government was preoccupied with integrating into the global and regional economy and recovering from decades of conflict. After the Khmer Rouge surrendered at their last stronghold in the Preah Vihear area, the government turned its attention to preserving its cultural heritage in the 2000s. It submitted a letter to UNESCO proposing the temple as a World Heritage Site in January 2006. Pre-occupied with internal affairs, the Cambodian leadership might not have anticipated the extent to which Thai domestic politics would react negatively to UNESCO's decision to list the Preah Vihear temple as a World Heritage Site in July 2008. It also might not have anticipated that the inscription would touch off a border conflict, especially after joining Thailand in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations in 1999. The Preah Vihear conflict demonstrated the considerable constraint that domestic politics imposed on the actions of the Thai government in its relations with Cambodia, particularly regarding the border. From this perspective, leaking the phone conversation could be a means of exploiting a key Thai weakness: the country's fractious domestic politics. It remains to be seen if this strategy will pay off or backfire for the small state, but it at least has shifted the focus of the discussion onto Thai domestic politics for now. Similarly, Cambodia's submission of an official letter to the ICJ shifts the attention to the Thai side, and whether it plans to adhere to international law. Whether or not all of this works out remains to be seen, but it's a sign that, confronted with limited resources, a small state might choose to deploy unconventional strategies.
Otago Daily Times
30-05-2025
- General
- Otago Daily Times
History's marching papers
The oldest known fragment of paper, over 2000 years old, shows part of a map. It is just 5cm wide and comes from a Chinese grave. As digital communication takes over, so letters are now few and far between. This is going to create an unfortunate void for future historians, for so much is to be found in personal letters and diaries. Take, for example, the Roman fort of Vindolanda, just south of Hadrian's Wall in northern England. In 1973, a student excavator digging in swampy layers extracted what he thought were wood shavings. Prising two of these apart, he recognised writing. Under infrared, this archive of wafer thin wooden letters has revealed what life was like for those garrisoning the wall — there was an invitation to a party, and a request for more beer. Then consider earliest messages from the civilization of Sumer, pressed into clay tablets, or the papyrus records, made from the pith of the plant of the same name, that date back to 2560BC and which describe the construction of the Great Pyramid of Giza. In Europe, records were kept on parchment, that is curated animal skins. The best vellum comes from foetal calfskin. Angkorian temples included libraries for royal archives, but they stand empty because records were kept on palm leaves that have not survived the tropical climate. In China, early texts were written on strips of bamboo that were strung together with silk. So, consider what you are holding: a newspaper. Even in the digital age, paper remains central to our lives in so many ways. Tradition has it that paper was invented by a Chinese eunuch Cai Lun, who submitted his discovery to the Han emperor in 109AD. Early Chinese paper was made from the bark of the mulberry tree or sandalwood. However, archaeology has rejected this story, for the earliest fragment of paper found in a Chinese grave and bearing a map, has been dated to the first century BC. Paper documents soon became the norm in China, but how did expertise in paper making spread further? There is an intriguing story that it reached the Middle East and further west following the Battle of the Talas River in 751AD. Located on the border of Kazakhstan and Kyrgystan, the forces of the Abbasid Caliphate defeated the Tang Dynasty army, and in doing so, captured some Chinese paper makers. Be that as it may, paper was soon replacing papyrus in Baghdad and the inexorable spread of paper made its way west. The Magna Carta was written on parchment in 1309, the oldest paper document from England. However, the Treaty of Waitangi is written on a long sheet of paper.
Listly
21-04-2025
- Listly
Exploring Siem Reap's Cultural Tapestry: 5 Unique Experiences Beyond Angkor Wat
If you want to gain a deeper understanding of the Angkorian civilization before or after visiting the temples, the Angkor National Museum, located in proximity to the best hotels in Siem Reap, is the perfect place to do so. This modern museum houses a vast collection of artifacts, sculptures, and historical exhibits that narrate the story of the Khmer Empire. The museum's galleries are well-organized, covering topics like religious beliefs, daily life, and architectural achievements of the Angkorian period. One of the highlights is the Gallery of 1,000 Buddhas, which displays an impressive collection of Buddha statues. Visiting the Angkor National Museum enhances your appreciation of the ancient temples and the rich history of Cambodia.
