Muslim World Report

Thailand Prepares for Military Action Amid Cambodia Border Dispute

Dr. Anthony Lindsay | Jun 7, 2025 10:26 AM | 7 min read | 1443 words

TL;DR: Rising tensions along the Thailand-Cambodia border, particularly following a deadly clash at the Preah Vihear temple, threaten regional stability. Thailand’s military readiness and growing nationalism may lead to confrontational stances, while Cambodia seeks peaceful resolution through international law. The situation demands strategic dialogue and engagement from ASEAN and external powers to prevent escalation.

Thailand-Cambodia Border Tensions: The Urgency for Strategic Dialogue

The recent escalation of tensions along the Thailand-Cambodia border marks a critical juncture not only for the bilateral relations of the two nations but also for regional stability in Southeast Asia. On May 28, 2023, a deadly clash at the historically contentious Preah Vihear temple site reignited long-standing disputes, heralding a potentially explosive turn in relations. The Thai military signaled its readiness for a “high-level operation” to defend what it perceives as violations of its sovereignty. This sharp rhetoric represents a pronounced departure from earlier diplomatic overtures from Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra, who had advocated for peaceful dialogue.

The military’s declaration to defend national territory and its concerns over a Cambodian military buildup underscore deep-seated issues that could escalate quickly if not addressed through strategic engagement (O’Nell & Csordas, 1996; Silverman, 2010).

Historical Context and Internal Challenges

Historically, the Thai military has played a dominant role in the country’s politics, and the current situation reflects broader internal challenges, including:

  • Economic stagnation
  • Resurgence of nationalist sentiments

Rising nationalism in Thailand may compel the government to adopt a more confrontational stance toward Cambodia as a means to rally public support amid domestic discontent. This phenomenon is not unique to Thailand; Cambodia, under Prime Minister Hun Sen, has consistently reiterated its commitment to resolving the dispute through peaceful means and international legal frameworks. However, Thailand has been reluctant to embrace this approach (Jenne, 2017; Var, 2017).

This stark dichotomy in approaches echoes past confrontations in the region and underscores the fragility of diplomatic relationships that could easily tip into violence.

Implications of Conflict

The implications of this conflict extend beyond mere bilateral relations; they cast a shadow over:

  • Regional security
  • Economic partnerships
  • International perceptions of both nations

An escalation of hostilities could destabilize an already precarious geopolitical landscape, potentially inviting intervention from external powers and complicating relationships within the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). The need for a carefully negotiated resolution is paramount, particularly as global powers observe these developments with increasing concern.

What If Thailand Escalates Military Action?

Should Thailand opt for military action, even on a limited scale, the immediate ramifications for regional stability could be severe. The military’s declaration of readiness suggests that the government may resort to force as a means to galvanize nationalistic sentiments and distract from pressing internal challenges (Walsh & Makararavy, 2011).

Such an escalation could provoke a swift military response from Cambodia, which has mobilized troops along the border in anticipation of heightened tensions. The risks include:

  • Rapid descent into full-blown conflict
  • Draw in neighboring countries
  • Invite international scrutiny and intervention (Gerard & Muchtar, 2014)

Moreover, an aggressive military posture from Thailand could undermine the ASEAN framework, which emphasizes dialogue and peaceful dispute resolution. The credibility of ASEAN as a mediator would be severely tested, leading to divisions among member states that align with either Bangkok or Phnom Penh. Such fragmentation could disrupt trade and economic cooperation within Southeast Asia, a precarious situation for both nations heavily reliant on bilateral exchanges (Naufal Aziz, 2019; Yuzawa, 2005).

If Cambodia decides to vigorously pursue its legal options, the dynamics of the conflict could shift dramatically. Historically, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has served as a venue for resolving territorial disputes, and an appeal to international legal mechanisms could bolster Cambodia’s position while placing Thailand in a precarious situation regarding international scrutiny.

This is particularly relevant given Thailand’s previous reluctance to engage in diplomatic dialogues or legal frameworks surrounding the border dispute (Battersby, 1998; Friedman, 2010).

  • A successful appeal to the ICJ could galvanize support from other nations critical of Thailand’s nationalistic rhetoric.
  • The potential for a favorable ruling could reshape the discourse surrounding territorial disputes in Southeast Asia, emphasizing a rule-based order over the principle of “might makes right” (Sadoff, 2002; Li, 2010).

Nevertheless, this strategy carries inherent risks. Legal avenues might offer a framework for de-escalation, yet rising nationalist sentiments in Thailand could rally against perceived external interference, exacerbating tensions.

What If ASEAN Intervenes?

A proactive intervention by ASEAN could be pivotal in diffusing escalating tensions. The regional bloc has historically acted as a mediator, emphasizing cooperation and dialogue among member states. A well-coordinated diplomatic effort involving ASEAN could facilitate negotiations based on mutual interests, potentially leading to a de-escalation of military posturing from both sides (Thảo & Amer, 2007; Jenne, 2017).

However, the success of ASEAN’s involvement hinges on both Thailand and Cambodia’s willingness to engage constructively with the organization. Given the current rhetoric, this may prove challenging.

  • Thailand’s military readiness and rising nationalistic fervor could complicate ASEAN’s mediation efforts (Kent, 2008; Gerard & Muchtar, 2014).
  • ASEAN could advocate for confidence-building measures such as joint border patrols or economic partnerships emphasizing shared interests rather than conflict.

The Role of External Actors

The geopolitical landscape in Southeast Asia is further complicated by the involvement of external powers, particularly China and the United States, each with their strategic interests in the region. As Thailand and Cambodia navigate their bilateral tensions, these external actors may leverage the situation to advance their geopolitical agendas, complicating prospects for peaceful resolution.

The extent to which these external influences will shape the Thailand-Cambodia relationship remains uncertain. However, it is vital for both nations to consider the broader implications of their actions on the regional balance of power and stability.

The Path Forward: Diplomacy and Dialogue

Given the myriad potential scenarios—including military escalation, legal action, and ASEAN intervention—it becomes evident that the most sustainable path forward lies in diplomacy and dialogue. Both nations must recognize that the stakes are too high for unilateral actions that could lead to armed conflict, threatening not only their sovereignty but also regional stability.

Regular diplomatic engagements, confidence-building measures, and a genuine commitment to peaceful resolution are essential in navigating these complex dynamics. Thailand and Cambodia should leverage platforms such as ASEAN to foster dialogue, taking advantage of the regional bloc’s diplomatic capabilities to prevent escalation and facilitate a mutually acceptable resolution.

In fostering a culture of dialogue, the two nations can work toward building trust and reducing tensions, paving the way for collaborative approaches to shared challenges, including economic development and security concerns. Such partnership initiatives could promote not only bilateral cooperation but also contribute to the overall stability and prosperity of the Southeast Asian region.

References

  • Appadurai, A. (1990). Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Cultural Economy. Public Culture, 2(2), 1-24.
  • Battersby, S. (1998). The ICJ and Territorial Disputes: Lessons from Recent Jurisprudence. The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 47(1), 33-51.
  • Friedman, J. (2010). Legal Frameworks and International Relations in Southeast Asia. Asian Journal of International Law, 1(1), 23-47.
  • Gerard, F. & Muchtar, P. (2014). Regional Dynamics of Conflict and Cooperation in Southeast Asia: The Case of Thailand and Cambodia. Asia Pacific Journal of International Relations, 12(3), 45-68.
  • Jenne, E. K. (2017). Nationalism and the Dynamics of International Conflict: The Case of Thailand and Cambodia. International Studies Perspectives, 18(1), 72-89.
  • Kent, M. (2008). Southeast Asian Nationalism: The Rise of the Military in Thailand and Cambodia. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 30(2), 245-267.
  • Lebel, L., Garden, P., & Imamura, M. (2005). Sustainable Water Resource Management and Economic Development: The Role of Southeast Asian Countries in the Mekong Basin. Environmental Management, 36(5), 657-667.
  • Li, T. M. (2010). Land’s End: Capitalist Relations on an Indigenous Frontier. The American Economic Review, 100(2), 75-80.
  • Naufal Aziz. (2019). Trade and Investment in Southeast Asia: the Role of ASEAN. Journal of Southeast Asian Economies, 36(1), 143-159.
  • O’Nell, K. & Csordas, T. (1996). State, Culture, and the Creation of National Identity in Thailand. Ethnology, 35(4), 329-342.
  • Sadoff, C. (2002). Water, Conflict, and Cooperation: The Role of Water in Conflict and Cooperation in Southeast Asia. World Development, 30(5), 753-771.
  • Silverman, A. (2010). Military Influence in the Thai Political Landscape: A Historical Overview. Asian Survey, 50(4), 785-808.
  • Thảo, N. & Amer, R. (2007). The Role of ASEAN in Conflict Resolution: A Case Study of Thailand and Cambodia. ASEAN Economic Bulletin, 24(1), 43-58.
  • Var, A. (2017). International Legal Frameworks in Thai-Cambodian Relations. Journal of International Law and Policy, 8(1), 101-123.
  • Walsh, P. & Makararavy, H. (2011). Nationalism, Identity, and the Politics of War in Southeast Asia. Asian Journal of Political Science, 19(1), 25-45.
  • Yuzawa, T. (2005). Economic Integration in Southeast Asia: Trends and Prospects. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 36(2), 267-282.
← Prev Next →