Razor-Wire at the Border: Thailand’s Design, Cambodia’s Protest

Approximately 9.8 kilometers of razor-wire fencing and tire barricades now cut across the Thai–Cambodian frontier, the most visible symbol of a ceasefire under strain. Since early August 2025, Thai forces have reinforced sectors in Sa Kaeo, Surin, and Si Sa Ket provinces with these barriers. Bangkok frames them as temporary safety measures against unexploded ordnance (UXO). Phnom Penh calls them a violation of the August 7 Extraordinary General Border Committee (GBC) ceasefire agreement. The truth lies in how each side interprets law, risk, and political pressure (Nation Thailand, 13 Aug 2025).

What Bangkok Says

Thai commanders point to the battlefield legacy of July’s clashes. In Surin province, Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) teams documented a sharp rise in UXO hazards, with 824 impact sites identified along the border (PRD Thailand, 13 Aug 2025). In this environment, the Second Army Region argues, crossings cannot reopen until the ground is cleared and verified safe.

The Internal Security Act (2008) empowers the Internal Security Operations Command (ISOC) to restrict movement in declared security zones. On August 13, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs emphasized that the barriers are “temporary reinforcement measures” that “do not prejudice demarcation talks” (MFA Thailand, 13 Aug 2025). The military adds a second rationale: razor-wire allows “rapid tactical deployment” in case of renewed clashes — a rationale that stretches beyond humanitarian safety.

Notably, the installations accelerated after August 4, when Thai forces first laid wire in An Ses — three days before the GBC ceasefire was signed — suggesting pre-planned fortification rather than purely reactive safety measures (Nation Thailand, 13 Aug 2025).

What Phnom Penh Sees

Cambodian officials present a different picture. On August 13, the Defense Ministry released photographs and statements alleging Thai troops entered Choak Chey village (13.759°N, 102.744°E, Banteay Meanchey) and the An Ses area (13.783°N, 104.967°E, Preah Vihear) to lay razor-wire and tires (Phnom Penh Post, 13 Aug 2025). The Banteay Meanchey provincial administration declared the installations a “unilateral action” inconsistent with the Regional Border Committee (RBC) framework, which requires consultation. Phnom Penh has demanded removal of barriers at multiple locations, including the Ta Moan Thom temple zone (Phnom Penh Post, 13 Aug 2025).

These protests are not only legal but political. Domestically, Hun Manet’s government faces criticism from opposition figures such as Kem Sokha and the Candlelight Party for being too soft on Thailand (Cambodia Daily, 12 Aug 2025). Hardline responses at the border help blunt those attacks, raising the political cost of compromise in Phnom Penh.

The Legal Grey Zone

The legal core of the dispute is procedural. The August 7 GBC communiqué, signed by both nations’ defense ministers, prohibited new troop movements and required both sides to “maintain current status” (ThaiPBS, 8 Aug 2025). Past GBC minutes (November 2024) reaffirmed the principle of “prior notification and mutual consultation for any border activities likely to cause misunderstanding” (Nation Thailand, 23 Nov 2024). Thailand argues that informing Cambodia after installation suffices; Cambodia insists consultation must come first.

Some Thai legal scholars argue Cambodia selectively invokes consultation requirements — Phnom Penh installed its own fortifications near Samrong in late July without RBC notification (Bangkok Post, 10 Aug 2025). However, this does not resolve whether Thailand’s current barriers violate the August 7 ceasefire terms, which reset obligations for both parties.

With GBC-mandated observer teams still not deployed, there is no neutral verification. Each side’s narrative remains self-reinforcing. As former Indonesian Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa observed during the 2011 Preah Vihear crisis: “Border barriers reflect internal politics more than external threats” (ISEAS, 2020).

Stakes on the Ground

The economic stakes are significant. The Bank of Thailand estimated monthly trade losses of 10 billion baht during full closures (Pattaya News, 12 Aug 2025). Export losses could reach 162 billion baht in the second half of 2025 (Nation Thailand, 13 Aug 2025). Meanwhile, displacement has soared: over 138,000 people evacuated in Thailand and more than 300,000 displaced overall along the frontier (Al Jazeera, 5 Aug 2025; Britannica, 2025). These barriers block long-used paths to markets, farms, and family ties, deepening local hardship.

Yet commerce has never outweighed security in Thailand’s border doctrine. In April 2011, four days of fighting near Preah Vihear killed 11 people and forced the reassignment of regional commanders (Reuters, 12 Apr 2011). That memory endures. Today’s generals have little incentive to approve reopening orders that could expose them to similar career-ending risk.

This marks the fourth major cycle of barrier installation since 2008, following deployments in 2008, 2011, and 2019 — each eventually removed through RBC negotiation (ISEAS Working Paper 2020-14). The cycle is familiar: fortify, protest, negotiate, dismantle.

Regional Reverberations

The dispute extends beyond bilateral tensions. ASEAN’s credibility as a conflict-prevention mechanism faces scrutiny, particularly as Myanmar’s crisis strains the bloc’s consensus principle (East Asia Forum, Aug 2025). China watches closely — any Thai-Cambodian escalation could provide Beijing opportunities to position itself as regional stabilizer. Singapore and Indonesia, as ASEAN’s informal leaders, have urged both parties to accept third-party observers (Jakarta Post, 14 Aug 2025). The longer razor-wire remains without neutral verification, the more ASEAN’s relevance in managing member-state disputes comes into question. Early ASEAN-led mediation — especially by Jakarta — could break the impasse.

What to Watch

 1. Observer Deployment – GBC-mandated international observers have yet to arrive; their reports could validate or challenge Cambodia’s claims.

 2. RBC Meetings – Cambodia is expected to push for emergency sessions to register its protests.

 3. UXO Clearance Rates – Thailand Mine Action Center (TMAC) bulletins are the key technical constraint; rising clearance numbers could enable phased openings.

 4. Commanders’ Rhetoric – Watch Second Army and Burapha Command statements; a shift from “not ready” to “ready if…” often signals reopening within days.

 5. Public Mood in Thailand – A July NIDA poll found over 75% of respondents express high confidence in the armed forces on border issues, versus lower confidence in civilian ministries (Bangkok Post, 30 Jul 2025).

 6. Legal Challenges – Either side could invoke the International Court of Justice’s 1962 Preah Vihear ruling or its 2013 interpretation, which emphasized Thailand’s obligation to withdraw from disputed zones (ICJ, 1962/2013).

Bottom Line

The razor-wire now cutting through Sa Kaeo and Surin is more than an obstacle. To Thailand, it represents a law-bound, conditions-based reopening policy under ISOC authority. To Cambodia, it is a sovereignty breach that violates the spirit, if not the letter, of the ceasefire. Until neutral observers arrive, the dispute will remain unresolved.

Historical RBC patterns suggest partial reopening at select commercial crossings in the coming months (ISEAS, 2020). Full normalization is unlikely before the November ASEAN Summit in Malaysia. The formula for resolution exists in the 2000 MOU on Border Cooperation: joint verification, graduated reopening, and face-saving exits for both militaries (ThaiPBS, 10 Aug 2025). What’s missing isn’t a mechanism; it’s the political will to use it. Indonesia and Singapore should lead ASEAN efforts to deploy observers and mediate, ensuring the ceasefire holds.

The gates will not reopen until Thai generals, not diplomats, judge the ground safe. In Thailand’s system, that is not dysfunction. It is design.

Methodology: This analysis synthesizes 47 primary sources, including Thai Defense Ministry communiqués, MFA briefings, Nation Thailand, ThaiPBS, Al Jazeera, Cambodian provincial statements, and verified photographic documentation from August 4–16, 2025. All Thai and Khmer materials were cross-checked with independent translations.

Disclosure: I am Arnaud Darc,  Chairman & CEO of Thalias Hospitality Group and Co-Chair of the Government–Private Sector Forum (Working Group D). This article is based on open-source documentation and independent analysis.

#News

Razor-Wire at the Border: Thailand’s Design, Cambodia’s Protest

0 comment

Like comment

Write a comment......

Opinion: Thailand’s misperception of Cambodia

Decades of accusatory anti-government media acting as judges and investigative prosecutors have cemented the narrative of Cambodia as a backward country under a dictatorship, where people lack education and are denied the freedom of expression.

For those who have never been to Cambodia, they cannot let go of such prejudices, shaped by long-term narratives, against Cambodia. But for Cambodian people who live in Cambodia, they have grown tired of reading externally-framed and extremely negative media day-in day-out that has damaged the country’s reputation until today. This has created a persistent misperception of Cambodia among foreigners, including Thais.

1. The thought that “Cambodia is under a dictatorship and its people cannot speak or think differently from the Government”

There is an entrenched misperception among Thais who have never been to Cambodia that Cambodia is under a dictatorship and that the people are blindfolded by the centrally controlled media.

In fact, Cambodians have a wide range of media to choose from. In a country where social media is so prevalent, it is difficult – impossible – to suppress diverse opinions into one single opinion. The only way to do this is to completely shut down social media, and Cambodia has never done that.

With a growing number of people benefiting from better education, greater exposure abroad, and a youth who considers mastering new technologies “cool,” the new generation of Cambodians is a cautious reader. They don’t believe easily. They may not be as expressive or loquacious as political activists expect, but they are silent and critical observers. They understand what is good and what is bad for Cambodia.

They broke their silence when national territorial integrity was at stake, when the peace that Cambodia had enjoyed uninterruptedly for 26 years was at stake.

The recent peace rally in Phnom Penh and the enthusiasm of Cambodians from all walks of life to donate to frontline soldiers and war evacuees do not seem to suggest government-imposed action. They volunteered to do so. They did so wholeheartedly. Tens of thousands of rally supporters were predominantly from the younger generation, and they mobilized not to continue the war, but to end it.

Cambodia’s unity is consistent, from the highest level, His Majesty the King, to the grassroots people and civilian movements. This unity is based on the desire for Peace.

There is no blockage of access to media like what Thailand is doing. For instance, the Bangkok Post and the Nation have blocked access for Cambodian readers.

Cambodian newspapers like the Khmer Times and the Phnom Penh Post also received massive attacks from Thai netizens but they nevertheless chose to open their outlets for Thai readers so that the latter can balance their reading vis-à-vis the narratives created by the Thai government and military.

2. The thought that “Thailand helped Cambodia in the past and now Cambodians shoot at them”

It is an indisputable fact that Thailand assisted in Cambodia’s peacebuilding in the 1980s and 1990s.

At the special lecture at the ASEAN Secretariat on 5 May 2025, Samdech Techo Hun Sen expressed his gratitude toward ASEAN, including Thailand, for their indispensable contribution to Cambodia’s peace process.

“At this point, I acknowledge that Cambodia owes a great deal to ASEAN. We must never forget that ASEAN played a significant role in Cambodia’s peacebuilding process, although Cambodia was not a member of ASEAN at that time. Consider how vital was the role of Thailand in hosting Cambodian refugees and facilitating the return of nearly 400,000 displaced individuals? Why was His Excellency Chavalit Yongchaiyudh willing to facilitate negotiations between Cambodian different factions both in Thailand and even in Japan? Why was Indonesia willing to provide a negotiation platform for Cambodia? And why was His Excellency Ali Alatas willing to step in and act as a mediator in a conflict far from his own country and without a direct impact on its national security? These actions reflect a shared sense of regional responsibility – an institutional spirit that transcends national interests and borders. It exemplifies the use of soft power, the power of negotiation without resorting to gunfire, and relying instead on multilateralism with engagement from multiple stakeholders.”

Contribution to peace process and refugee repatriation were noble acts by Thai government and people.

But showing gratitude does not mean that Cambodia should cede its land and temples to Thailand.

There is no other word to describe Thailand’s actions than invasion: when Thailand attacked the Preah Vihear temple, which the International Court of Justice determined belonged to Cambodia in two separate rulings in 1962 and 2013; when Thailand extended the battlefield from Preah Vihear and Oddar Meanchey provinces to Pursat province; when Thailand used F-16 and Gripen fighter jets to drop massive bombs like the MK-84 and penetrate deep into Cambodian territory; when Thailand continues to use its unilateral map to claim territory and justify its military actions.

Thailand accused Cambodia of attacking civilians, but bullets cannot distinguish between civilians and military personnel, or between different age groups. Despite having more modern weapons and guidance systems, Thailand has attacked pagodas, schools, hospitals, etc., which are by no means military targets.

3. Troubling signals from Thai media and thinkers

The author has been concerned about the complete absence of calls for peace from the community of Thai media and thinkers. The Cambodian media published opinions daily related to the appeal for peace. Some Cambodians are not writers, but they expressed their worries and concerns for the well-being of the country and its people, and they wrote to advocate for peace.

On the contrary, while it is necessary for the Thai media to justify the country’s actions, it is worrying that Thai journalists and thinkers have not called for peace.

While the Cambodian people have shown enthusiasm for the ceasefire, the possible restoration of peace, and the normalization of borders, the same enthusiasm is not found among the Thai media and thinkers.

Media and thinkers are considered as opinion leaders.

Expressing voices for peace is a noble conduct for humanity, not to serve any political agenda or purposes. It is worrying that Thai media and thinkers are not promoting a peace agenda and that the freedom of expression that Thailand often boasts as superior to Cambodia is not serving the goals of democracy, peace and peaceful resolution of conflicts.

The only conclusion we can draw is that the Thai people and media seem dissatisfied with the peace with Cambodia. But this is not a conclusion we want to draw. We want Thai media and thinkers to prove the opposite.

The author Chan Kunthiny is a Phnom Penh-based geopolitical and security analyst. The views and opinions expressed here are the author’s own.

 

#News

Opinion: Thailand’s misperception of Cambodia

0 comment

Like comment

Write a comment......

#News

The world should start hearing our voices

0 comment

Like comment

Write a comment......

 

I'm a daughter of Cambodia. I grew up in Sihanoukville. I have no political ambition, nor do I want anything more than what I need in life. I like to share my thoughts because I want to help.

I must speak out if I see danger. Based on my analysis of the recent conflict between Thailand and Cambodia, I see an imminent threat in the coming years: Thailand will invade and occupy 6 of Cambodia's provinces by 2075. The invasion is not a distant possibility, but a looming danger that we must address now. Thailand will want Koh Kong, Pursat, Battambang, Banteay Meanchey, Oddar Meanchey, and Siem Reap back. Thailand wants all the territories that it ceded to France in 1893. Thailand is no longer a passive nation. It's becoming more assertive and aggressive in its territorial claims. One can tell which direction a country is heading based on the rhetoric coming from its leaders and citizens, and the rhetoric is alarming. Thailand has imprinted the toxic seed of ambition in the minds of the new generation. The seed will bear fruit in the next several decades.

Thailand has consolidated its power under the monarchy, and there's no turning back. Thailand revoked the monarchy's power in the early 1900s, but 100 years later, it has partially restored the monarchy's power. The civilian power is just a pony show for international observers.

The first stage of war is an information campaign within the country to gain public support. The second stage is to test the international response. What just happened was just the second stage. Unfortunately for Thailand, they never thought Donald Trump would intervene. With the threat of higher tariffs and the collapse of Thailand's economy, Thai territorial ambition came to a screeching halt.

However, Donald Trump won't be here forever for Cambodia. The United States has a term limit. He's only here for three more years. Thailand has time on its side. In the future, Thailand may no longer rely on the US market.

As the world advances, so does military technology. Thailand's use of drones to bomb Cambodia was just a taste of what's to come. By 2050, Thailand's military will be far more advanced than Cambodia's. We're talking about swarm drones, stealth fighter jets, humanoid soldiers, and naval drones. Cambodia would be outgunned and outmatched. It's like bringing a gun to a knife fight. By 2100, seizing half of Cambodia would be a cakewalk, and not even Vietnam would dare to face off with Thailand.

It's time for Cambodia to turn a new page. Cambodia's foreign policy needs to be updated. It's time to bring in the big guns. It's time to bring in the cowboys from the United States of America. Cambodia needs to amend the constitution and invite the United States to build and operate a military base west of Siem Reap, Cambodia. This base would be under Cambodian sovereignty, with the US military providing support and protection. What better way to stop Thailand than to have the world's number one military at its doorstep? Besides, aren't they allies? America's military base in Cambodia would stop Thailand's ambitions for good.

The United States would protect Cambodia's sovereign territory for hundreds of years to come. No neighbor would dare try to invade Cambodia again. How do we know this? Over 50 countries have US military bases, and they are all safe. Nobody invades them. Saudi Arabia is a monarchy, but it has a US military base. The Philippines' former and current presidents are father and son, but it has a US military base. Qatar and the United Arab Emirates are all kingdoms, but they have a US military base.

The US does not want anybody's territory anymore - not by force. Just look at World War 2, the US returned all the countries to their owner. The US is an ocean away from Cambodia. They would be doing us a favor, not the other way around. If the US wanted other people's territory, it would not have given back the Philippines after Spain lost the war. The US's actions in the past demonstrate its commitment to respecting the sovereignty of other nations, and we can trust that it will do the same for Cambodia.

What are the benefits of having a US military base in Cambodia besides protection? There are significant economic opportunities that come with hosting a US military base. Investors would feel more confident in their investment. The government would be more stable. Tourism would likely increase. The US military would spend money locally, injecting billions into our economy every year. The military base is not just about protection, but about a brighter economic future for Cambodia.

In 1860, King Ang Doung and King Norodom requested the French as a counterbalance to the influence of neighboring states. It's time for Cambodia to do the same, but this time it's the world's number one superpower, the United States of America. Currently, Cambodia risks losing half of its western territories, if not all its territories, if it does not adapt to the changing geopolitical landscape. Unfortunately, even in modern times, nations still invade each other, as we see with the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

I ask all citizens to share this with their friends, so that our government can consider this course of action. Your support and voice are crucial in this decision. Let's stand together for the future of our beloved Cambodia.

#News

I am a daughter of Cambodia. I grew up in Sihanoukville. I have no political ambition

0 comment

Like comment

Write a comment......