Monks
Group
Buddha Dhamma Monk
Puthichak ITbusiness buddhism
buddha dharma monk 
BuddhaChak IT 
Cambodia4World 
Bokator Cambodia 
Monk Cambodia
Economic Buddhism 
Lbokator Khmer 
Housewife Khmer 
Kun Lbokator
Preap News 
Sampeah News 
Kampuchea Chef Monksbusiness buddhismEconomic Buddhism Buddha Chak IT The Khmer EmpireKing Jayavarman VIIWorld Peace Baray NewsBokator CambodiaKhmer LiteratureBokator WorldThe Great Khmer EmpireBuddhist EconomicsKhmer EmpireBuddha Dhamma MonkMonk CambodiaMonk WorldMonksPopular KhmerNorkor KhmerBusiness BuddhismBuddhist Economics Khmer HousewifeKhmer HomewifeKhmer FestivalKomsan News
Thol Un CambodiaChoul Chnam Thmey
Summary of the Thai Military’s Armed Aggression Against Cambodia’s Sovereignty and Territorial Integrity from 24 to 28 July 2025
Résumé des actes d’agression menés par l’armée thaïlandaise contre la souveraineté et l’intégrité territoriale du Cambodge du 24 au 28 juillet 2025
រដ្ឋាភិបាលថៃជោគជ័យក្នុងការលុប MOU-2001(44) តែបរាជ័យយ៉ាងអាម៉ាស់ ក្នុងការលុប MOU-2000(43)
បញ្ហាព្រំដែន និងកិច្ចព្រមព្រៀងទ្វេភាគីរវាងព្រះរាជាណាចក្រកម្ពុជា និងព្រះរាជាណាចក្រថៃ តែងតែស្ថិតក្រោមការតាមដានយ៉ាងដិតដល់ពីសាធារណជន និងសហគមន៍អន្តរជាតិ។ ក្នុងនោះ ការសម្រេចចិត្តរបស់ភាគីថៃលើការលុបចោលអនុស្សរណៈនៃការយោគយល់គ្នា (MOU) ទាំងពីរ បាននាំមកនូវផលវិបាកផ្លូវច្បាប់ និងការទូត ដែលខ្លួនឯងជាអ្នកបង្កើតឡើង ប៉ុន្តែបែរជាខ្វៃការទទួលខុសត្រូវ (Lack of Accountability)។
១. ការលុប MOU-2001(44)៖ ជោគជ័យបែបបង្កើតវិបត្តិ
កាលពីពេលថ្មីៗនេះ រដ្ឋាភិបាលថៃបានធ្វើការលុបចោលនូវអនុស្សរណៈយោគយល់ឆ្នាំ២០០១ ស្តីពីការកំណត់តំបន់ព្រំដែនសមុទ្រ (MOU-2001) ដោយឯកតោភាគី (Unilateral Termination) ប្រកបដោយជោគជ័យ។ សកម្មភាពនេះបានបង្កឱ្យមានបញ្ហាជាប់គាំង (Deadlock) ក្នុងយន្តការចរចាទ្វេភាគី (Bilateral Negotiation) ដោយទុកឱ្យកម្ពុជាគ្មានជម្រើសចរចា ក្រៅពីការបន្តនីតិវិធីជាសកល ដោយបង្ខំតាមរយៈអនុសញ្ញាអង្គការសហប្រជាជាតិស្តីពីច្បាប់សមុទ្រ (UNCLOS)។
ជាលទ្ធផល ថៃបានយកលេសដោយមិនចូលរួមកិច្ចប្រជុំគណៈកម្មការព្រំដែនទូទៅ (General Border Committee - GBC) ដើម្បីដោះស្រាយបញ្ហាព្រំដែនគោក (Land Boundary) ទៀតផង។ ដូច្នេះ ភាគីថៃជាអ្នកបង្កើតបញ្ហាដោយខ្លួនឯង ជួបបញ្ហាដោយខ្លួនឯង ប៉ុន្តែបែរជាមិនបង្ហាញការទទួលខុសត្រូវ (Accountability) នោះឡើយ។
២. ការបរាជ័យយ៉ាងអាម៉ាស់ក្នុងការលុប MOU-2000(43)៖ ជាប់គាំង និងគ្មានផ្លូវដើរ
ទោះបីជាថៃទទួលបានជោគជ័យលើការលុប MOU-2001 ក្តី តែចំពោះអនុស្សរណៈយោគយល់ឆ្នាំ២០០០ ស្តីពីការកំណត់តំបន់ព្រំដែនគោក (MOU-2000) ដែលរដ្ឋាភិបាលថៃធ្លាប់បានលើកឡើងថានឹងលុបចោលដោយឯកតោភាគីបន្តទៀតនោះ រហូតមកទល់ពេលនេះ ហាក់ដូចជាស្ថិតក្នុងសភាពជាប់គាំង។ ការជាប់គាំងនេះកើតចេញពីឧបសគ្គផ្នែកច្បាប់ និងនយោបាយសំខាន់ៗដូចខាងក្រោម៖
· កម្លាំងច្បាប់ផ្ទុយគ្នានៅក្នុងប្រព័ន្ធតុលាការថៃ (Domestic Legal Conflict)៖ តុលាការធម្មនុញ្ញថៃ (Thai Constitutional Court) ធ្លាប់បានសម្រេចថា កិច្ចព្រមព្រៀង MOU-2000 ជាសន្ធិសញ្ញាអន្តរជាតិមួយ ដែលទាមទារឱ្យមានការយល់ព្រមពីសភាមុននឹងលុបចោល។ ការធ្វើឯកតោភាគីត្រង់ៗដោយគណៈរដ្ឋមន្ត្រី (Cabinet) អាចនឹងត្រូវប្រឈមមុខនឹងបណ្តឹងទៅកាន់តុលាការយុត្តិធម៌អន្តរជាតិ (ICJ) ឬ សាលាក្តីអន្តរជាតិសម្រាប់ច្បាប់សមុទ្រ (ITLOS) ពីសំណាក់កម្ពុជា។
· គោលការណ៍ហាមឃាត់ការថយក្រោយ ឬ Estoppel៖ យោងតាមច្បាប់អន្តរជាតិស្តីពីការទទួលខុសត្រូវរបស់រដ្ឋ (State Responsibility) ប្រសិនបើថៃធ្វើសកម្មភាពណាមួយដែលប៉ះពាល់ដល់សិទ្ធិរបស់កម្ពុជា ខណៈកិច្ចព្រមព្រៀងនៅមានសុពលភាព ថៃអាចត្រូវអនុវត្តគោលការណ៍ Estoppel ពោលគឺមិនអាចបដិសេធកាតព្វកិច្ចដែលខ្លួនធ្លាប់បានឯកភាព និងអនុវត្តនោះទេ។
· នីតិវិធីជាសកលក្រោម UNCLOS៖ ការលុប MOU-2000 មិនអាចលុបបំបាត់របបដែនសមុទ្រ (Maritime Zone Regime) ដែលកម្ពុជាបានដាក់ពាក្យបណ្តឹងទៅកាន់អង្គការសហប្រជាជាតិ ស្តីពីការកំណត់ព្រំដែនខ្ពង់រាបទ្វីប (Extended Continental Shelf Submission) នោះឡើយ។ ការលុប MOU-2001 ទុកជាមេរៀនថា ថៃគ្រាន់តែដកខ្លួនចេញពីយន្តការចរចាទ្វេភាគី ប៉ុន្តែបែរជារុញកម្ពុជាឱ្យឈានទៅរកដំណោះស្រាយចំហពហុភាគី (Multilateral Adjudication) ដែលផ្តល់ផលអាក្រក់ដល់ថៃវិញ។
ដូច្នេះហើយ ការដែលថៃមិនអាចសម្រេចគោលដៅលុប MOU-2000 នេះ ត្រូវបានអ្នកជំនាញចាត់ទុកថាជា ការបរាជ័យយ៉ាងអាម៉ាស់ ក្នុងការប្រើប្រាស់នយោបាយក្នុងស្រុកដើម្បីបម្រើផលប្រយោជន៍ភូមិសាស្ត្រនយោបាយ (Geopolitics)។
៣. ទស្សនៈសហគមន៍អន្តរជាតិ៖ កេរ្តិ៍ឈ្មោះជារដ្ឋមិនស្មោះត្រង់ (Bad Faith Actor)
នៅក្នុងរង្វង់ការទូត និងសហគមន៍អន្តរជាតិ (International Community) ការសម្រេចចិត្តដោយឯកតោភាគី (Unilateralism) ប្រភេទនេះ ត្រូវបានគេមើលងាយ និងចាត់ទុកថៃជារដ្ឋដែលប្រើល្បិចកលនយោបាយ តែខ្វះភាពស្មោះត្រង់ (Bad Faith)។ ការដែលរដ្ឋមួយអាចហែកហួរ ឬលុបចោលកិច្ចព្រមព្រៀងទ្វេភាគី (Bilateral Agreements) តាមតែអំពើចិត្ត និងស្រេចតែនឹងចិត្ត (Arbitrary Cancellation) គឺជាការរំលោភលើគោលការណ៍អន្តរជាតិ "កិច្ចសន្យាត្រូវតែគោរព" (Pacta sunt servanda)។ ទង្វើនេះមិនត្រឹមតែធ្វើឱ្យបាត់បង់ទំនុកចិត្តពីសំណាក់ប្រទេសជិតខាងប៉ុណ្ណោះទេ ប៉ុន្តែថែមទាំងធ្វើឱ្យមុខមាត់របស់ថៃធ្លាក់ចុះនៅលើឆាកអន្តរជាតិក្នុងនាមជាដៃគូសហការដែលគ្មានភាពចាស់ទុំផ្នែកការទូត (Diplomatic Immaturity) ផងដែរ។
សរុបមក ការជោគជ័យក្នុងការលុប MOU-2001 (44) គឺជាជ័យជម្នះបែបនយោបាយក្នុងស្រុករយៈពេលខ្លី ដែលបានក្លាយជារបាំងបក្សបាក់ខ្លួនឯងវិញ ដោយបង្កើតភាពជាប់គាំង និងរុញកម្ពុជាទៅរកដំណោះស្រាយពហុភាគី។ ផ្ទុយទៅវិញ ការបរាជ័យក្នុងការលុប MOU-2000 (43) គឺជាការបរាជ័យផ្នែកយុទ្ធសាស្ត្រច្បាប់អន្តរជាតិ (International Legal Strategy) ដែលធ្វើឱ្យថៃត្រូវជាប់ដៃជើង ដោយខ្លួនឯង មិនអាចឈានទៅមុខ ឬថយក្រោយបាន ប្រកបដោយភាពអាម៉ាស់បំផុត និងបង្ហាញពីភាពទន់ខ្សោយ និងការខ្វះភាពស្មោះត្រង់ក្នុងកិច្ចការអន្តរជាតិរបស់រដ្ឋាភិបាលថៃ៕
#UNSC #ICC #UN #abcnews #thaigirl #thailand🇹🇭 #ScammerAlert #scammers #thailand #Peaceincambodia #JusticeForCambodia #Thailandopenfire #ថៃជាអ្នកផ្តើមសង្គ្រាម #ប្រទេសថៃបាញ់កម្ពុជាមុន #ThaiPolitics #OnlineScam #scammer #boycott #thailandtravel #thai
Barbed Wire Is Not a Border: Bangkok Must Honor the Demarcation It Agreed To
Noranarith Anandayath | Member of ECOSOCC
August 3rd, 2026
Drive along Road 58 toward Poipet today and the landscape tells its own story: rusted shipping containers stacked in makeshift walls, coil after coil of barbed wire cutting through rice paddies, and villages like Chouk Chey and Prey Chan sitting empty behind them. Nearly 900 families from Chouk Chey alone remain unable to return home. In some places the containers sit more than a kilometer past the boundary line both governments once recognized. This is not a border. It is a fact imposed by force while the world was told to wait for diplomacy.
Diplomacy, in fact, already produced an answer. Cambodia and Thailand agreed, through the ceasefire brokered after last year's fighting and the subsequent talks facilitated with international involvement, to resolve the disputed sections of the frontier through the established bilateral demarcation mechanism — the Joint Boundary Commission process both countries have relied on for decades to translate old treaties and colonial-era maps into an agreed line on the ground. That mechanism exists. Both sides signed on to it. What is missing is the will to use it with any urgency.
Instead, the months since the ceasefire have been spent consolidating rather than negotiating. Homes in Thai-controlled sections of Chouk Chey and Prey Chan have been bulldozed. Excavators have cleared land behind the container walls. Signs have gone up warning Cambodian citizens against entering territory that, by Phnom Penh's account and by the pre-conflict map, is Cambodian soil. Rights monitors have already flagged that razing homes in a still-contested zone sits uneasily with the basic protections owed to civilians under international humanitarian law, regardless of whose flag ends up flying there. Every week that passes without survey teams on the ground hardens a de facto line into something its architects will be far less willing to give up at the negotiating table.
Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul now governs with the kind of stable mandate his predecessors lacked — a decisive election win, a broad coalition, and a Parliament that reconfirmed him without real contest. That stability removes the excuses that plagued earlier Thai governments buffeted by no-confidence votes and coalition collapse. A government this secure has no reason to let a boundary dispute drift while facts are manufactured on the ground in the meantime. If Thailand's leadership genuinely accepts, as it has said, that "border lines cannot be determined through military force," then the barbed wire and the containers should not still be standing months after that principle was affirmed.
The responsibility does not stop with the Prime Minister's office. Thailand's Parliament, freshly seated after February's election, has both the standing and the obligation to press its own government on this. A demarcation process starved of political priority does not move itself. Lawmakers who represent border provinces, who sit on foreign affairs and defense committees, who claim to speak for Thai farmers and villagers displaced on their own side of the line, should be asking publicly why survey teams are not yet in the field and why a technical commission that has existed for decades cannot produce a timeline.
Cambodia bears its own share of the obligation to negotiate in good faith and to resist the nationalist theater that has, at times, made compromise harder on both sides of the border. But an agreement to demarcate is not self-executing, and right now the physical reality on the ground is being written unilaterally, one container at a time, faster than any commission is writing the legal one. Displaced families are not abstractions in this — they are sleeping in tents at Wat Kandoul, cutting each other's hair for lack of income, watching their children fall sick from crowded, unsanitary conditions that have no clear end date.
A ceasefire that freezes an occupation in place is not peace; it is simply a slower war. Bangkok and Phnom Penh both signed up to resolve this frontier through law and survey, not through fencing. Prime Minister Anutin's government and Thailand's Congress should convene the Joint Boundary Commission on a fixed, public timeline, halt further construction of barriers in disputed sections while that work proceeds, and let villagers on both sides go home while the lawyers and surveyors — not the excavators — decide where the line actually falls. #Cambodia #Thailand #thailandcambodianews #ASEAN #aseannews #UNHRC #UNSpecialRapporteur #ThomasAndrews #ECOSOCC
Thailand criticised for Undermining UN Special Rapporteur Instead of addressing Humanitarian Crisis
Thailand has been criticised for undermining the independence and credibility of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Cambodia after Bangkok challenged the UN expert’s findings on the humanitarian impact of the border conflict.
The criticism came after Thailand’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement challenging parts of UN Special Rapporteur Thomas Andrews’ end-of-mission report following his visit to Cambodia from July 20 to 31.
In his recent statement, Andrews urged Cambodia and Thailand to work together to ensure the safe and swift return of thousands of civilians displaced by the border conflict, saying international law guarantees their right to return home.
Responding to the statement, a senior Cambodian official said Cambodia was “seriously concerned” by Thailand’s attempt to undermine the independence and credibility of the UN Special Rapporteur.
“Independent mandate holders are appointed by the UN Human Rights Council to assess facts objectively and free from political interference. Governments may disagree with their findings, but they should do so through evidence, transparency and constructive engagement—not by attacking the credibility of independent UN mechanisms,” the official said.
The official said it was regrettable that Thailand had questioned the Special Rapporteur’s impartiality instead of addressing the humanitarian concerns raised during the mission, arguing that the humanitarian consequences stemmed from Thailand’s armed invasion of Cambodian territory.
“The humanitarian consequences highlighted in his statement stem from Thailand’s armed invasion into Cambodian territory, which forced 650,000 Cambodian civilians to flee their homes, destroyed civilian homes and essential infrastructure, and continues to prevent many displaced families from returning safely and with dignity,” the official said.
The official added that these humanitarian realities required accountability and meaningful action rather than denial or attempts to discredit independent UN institutions.
The official also welcomed Thailand’s stated commitment to peace and the implementation of the Joint Statement of December 27, 2025, but said those commitments should now be reflected in concrete actions.
“Those commitments must now be reflected through concrete actions: respecting Cambodia’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, refraining from unilateral actions that alter the status quo, enabling the safe, voluntary and dignified return of displaced Cambodian civilians, and resuming boundary demarcation through the Joint Boundary Commission in good faith,” the official said.
The official stressed that attempts to undermine independent UN mechanisms could not erase the humanitarian consequences of the conflict or substitute for accountability, adding that lasting peace depended on respect for international law, objective facts, the sincere implementation of bilateral commitments, and respect for Cambodia’s sovereignty and the fundamental rights of civilians affected by the conflict.
At a press conference on Friday, Andrews stressed that international law protects the rights of civilians displaced by armed conflict.
“It is a matter of international law that those displaced by armed conflict have the right to return to their homes,” he said.
Referring to the ceasefire agreement reached between Cambodia and Thailand on December, 27, 2025, Andrews said the accord stipulates that civilians must be allowed to return to their homes and livelihoods safely and without obstruction.
“It is imperative that Thailand and Cambodia work together to expedite the return of displaced civilians. They need, and they deserve, to go home,” he said.
