Fighting continues at Thai-Cambodian border despite Trump's appeal
Bangkok
Despite US President Donald Trump's calls for a ceasefire between Thailand and Cambodia, fighting continued on Sunday morning in the border region between the two countries.
The Foreign Ministry in Bangkok quoted a military spokesman as saying that Cambodia had opened fire in the morning and hit civilian homes.
According to the Thai newspaper Khaosod, the attack took place in the Phanom Dong Rak district in the north-eastern border province of Surin.
Cambodia, however, accused Thailand of opening fire early in the morning.
The Cambodian newspaper Phnom Penh Post cited a spokeswoman for the Defence Ministry saying 'Thai forces resumed shelling' in the border area in the early hours of Sunday.
'In all combat zones... Thai forces have used artillery, drones and aircraft to launch heavy shells, bombs and cluster munitions on Cambodian soil,' spokeswoman Mali Socheata was quoted as saying in a Sunday press briefing.
According to the Cambodian ministry, two well-known Hindu temples have also been targeted.
Since Thursday, the South-East Asian neighbouring states have accused each other of triggering an escalation in a border conflict that has been simmering for decades.
After phone calls with the two countries' leaders on Saturday, Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform that they 'have agreed to immediately meet and quickly work out a Ceasefire and, ultimately, PEACE.' In a separate post, Trump said that 'we happen to be, by coincidence, currently dealing on Trade with both Countries, but do not want to make any Deal, with either Country, if they are fighting - And I have told them so.' Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet said in a statement that his country had agreed to Trump's proposal for an immediate and unconditional ceasefire. He thanked the US president for his initiative and mediation.
Thailand's interim Prime Minister Phumtham Wechayachai said his government agreed 'in principle' with a ceasefire. However, he said the Cambodian side must first show serious intentions to make peace.
The central issue of the conflict between the neighbours is the location of the border, which was drawn in colonial times and is interpreted differently by the two countries.
According to government figures, more than 130,000 people have fled Thailand, while the Cambodian Defence Ministry put the number of displaced people in Cambodia at 80,000. More than 500 schools in the border area are closed due to the fighting.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Jazeera
an hour ago
- Al Jazeera
US appeals court hears arguments about legality of Trump tariffs
Oral arguments over United States President Donald Trump's power to impose tariffs have kicked off before a US appeals court after a lower court ruled he had exceeded his authority by imposing sweeping new levies on imported goods. The appeals court judges on Thursday sharply questioned whether what Trump calls his 'reciprocal' tariffs, announced in April, were justified by the president's claim of emergency powers. A panel of all the court's active judges – eight appointed by Democratic presidents and three appointed by Republican presidents – is hearing arguments in two cases brought by five small US businesses and 12 Democratic-led US states. The judges on the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, DC, pressed government lawyer Brett Shumate to explain how the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a 1977 law historically used for sanctioning enemies or freezing their assets, gave Trump the power to impose tariffs. Trump is the first president to use IEEPA to impose tariffs. The judges frequently interrupted Shumate, peppering him with a flurry of challenges to his arguments. 'IEEPA doesn't even say tariffs, doesn't even mention them,' one of the judges said. Shumate said the law allows for 'extraordinary' authority in an emergency, including the ability to stop imports completely. He said IEEPA authorises tariffs because it allows a president to 'regulate' imports in a crisis. The states and businesses challenging the tariffs argued they are not permissible under IEEPA and the US Constitution grants Congress, and not the president, authority over tariffs and other taxes. Neal Katyal, a lawyer for the businesses, said the government's argument that the word 'regulate' includes the power to tax would be a vast expansion of presidential power. Tariffs are starting to build into a significant revenue source for the federal government as customs duties in June quadrupled to about $27bn, a record, and through June have topped $100bn for the current fiscal year, which ends on September 30. That income could be crucial to offset lost revenue from extended tax cuts in a Trump-supported bill that passed and became law this month. 'Tariffs are making America GREAT & RICH Again,' Trump wrote in a social media post on Thursday. 'To all of my great lawyers who have fought so hard to save our Country, good luck in America's big case today.' But economists said the duties threaten to raise prices for US consumers and reduce corporate profits. Trump's on-again, off-again tariff threats have roiled financial markets and disrupted US companies' ability to manage supply chains, production, staffing and prices. Dan Rayfield, the attorney general of Oregon, one of the states challenging the levies, said the tariffs are a 'regressive tax' that is making household items more expensive. Since Trump began imposing his wave of tariffs, companies ranging from carmaker Stellantis to American Airlines, temporarily suspended financial guidance for investors, which has since started again but has been revised down. Companies across multiple industries, including Procter and Gamble, the world's largest consumer goods brand, announced this week that it would need to raise prices on a quarter of its goods. The president has made tariffs a central instrument of his foreign policy, wielding them aggressively in his second term as leverage in trade negotiations and to push back against what he has called unfair practices. Pressure outside trade Trump has said the April tariffs, which he placed on most countries, are a response to persistent US trade imbalances and declining US manufacturing power. However, in recent weeks, he's used them to increase pressure on nontrade issues. He hit Brazil with 50 percent tariffs over the prosecution of former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, a key Trump ally who is on trial for an alleged coup attempt after he lost the 2022 presidential election. Trump also threatened Canada over its move to recognise a Palestinian state, saying a trade deal will now be 'very hard'. He said tariffs against China, Canada and Mexico were appropriate because those countries were not doing enough to stop fentanyl from crossing US borders. The countries have denied that claim. On May 28, a three-judge panel of the US Court of International Trade sided with the Democratic states and small businesses that are challenging Trump. It said IEEPA, a law intended to address 'unusual and extraordinary' threats during national emergencies, did not authorise tariffs related to longstanding trade deficits. The appeals court has allowed the tariffs to remain in place while it considers the administration's appeal. The timing of the court's decision is uncertain, and the losing side will likely appeal quickly to the US Supreme Court. The case will have no impact on tariffs levied under more traditional legal authorities, such as duties on steel and aluminium. The president recently announced trade deals that set tariff rates on goods from the European Union and Japan after smaller trade agreements with Britain, Indonesia and Vietnam. Trump's Department of Justice has argued that limiting the president's tariff authority could undermine ongoing trade negotiations while other Trump officials have said negotiations have continued with little change after the initial setback in court. Trump has set a deadline of Friday for higher tariffs on countries that don't negotiate new trade deals. There are at least seven other lawsuits challenging Trump's invocation of IEEPA, including cases brought by other small businesses and California.
Al Jazeera
an hour ago
- Al Jazeera
Pam Bondi: Who is Trump's attorney general handling the Epstein files?
United States Attorney General Pam Bondi has emerged as one of the most embattled top officials in the administration of United States President Donald Trump, amid fallout over her handling of disclosures related to the sex trafficking case of billionaire financier Jeffrey Epstein. Trump has so far stood by Bondi, who has been instrumental in his reshaping of the Department of Justice, but the president has continued to voice frustration that public fixation on the scandal – and criticism from both within his base and among his opponents – has refused to die down. Democrats have adopted the issue as their latest political cudgel, while Republicans in Congress have promised to continue their own probe when they return from summer recess, with plans to hear testimony from Bondi, as well as subpoena the case files and testimony from Epstein confidant Ghislaine Maxwell. Two lawmakers are even pushing a bill that would compel Bondi to release the documents in question, a move Republican Thomas Massie has said is aimed at 'justice for the victims and transparency for Americans'. So who is Bondi and how did the 59-year-old attorney general come to be one of Trump's most loyal cabinet members? What did Bondi do before becoming attorney general? Bondi spent 18 years as a public prosecutor in Hillsborough County, Florida before breaking into statewide office. The lengthy career gave her more direct prosecutorial experience than any preceding US attorney general, according to the Heritage Foundation, the conservative group that has had an outsized role in shaping the policy of Trump's second term. Speaking last year to the Tampa Bay Times, former colleagues recounted Bondi's reputation for jury-turning charisma that saw her quickly rise through the ranks of felony prosecutions. But it was regular media appearances as a legal analyst on national news networks that helped her to build public recognition, which was credited with her victory in Florida's open attorney general race in 2010. Bondi, who took office in 2011, was also buoyed by the endorsement of former Alaska governor and vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin. As attorney general, Bondi led crusades against so-called 'pill mills', clinics that loosely prescribe pain medications, while leading some Republican pet causes, including a multi-state effort to overturn former President Barack Obama's signature Affordable Care Act. She also led efforts to uphold Florida's ban on same sex marriage, before its nationwide legalisation by Supreme Court order in 2015, as well as the ability for same sex couples to adopt. During that period, Bondi sought to establish herself as a champion against sex trafficking and child sex abuse, launching the state's council on human trafficking and an investigation into past abuse by Catholic priests. As Florida's top cop, she also had her first brush with Epstein, with critics accusing her of remaining willfully silent on a controversial non-prosecution agreement Epstein and his co-conspirators had struck with her predecessor. They have said Bondi could have intervened as victims launched lawsuits challenging the deal, which saw Epstein plead guilty to soliciting a minor for prostitution but serve only months in prison. 'But Bondi kept her distance from the state's most prominent sex-trafficking case, even as Epstein's victims pleaded with the courts to invalidate provisions of his non-prosecution agreement and filed lawsuits alleging he abused them when he was on work release from jail,' wrote Mary Ellen Klas, a Bloomberg opinion writer and former Miami Herald Bureau Chief. 'Her inaction helped to perpetuate what victims describe as a government cover-up that, along with Epstein's death, has robbed those victims of their chance to get answers and hold their abusers to account,' she wrote. How did Bondi enter Trump's orbit? Bondi's connections with Trump drew scrutiny even before he entered office, after it was revealed in 2016 that authorities had launched an ethics probe related to the soon-to-be president. At question was whether Bondi had solicited contributions from Trump in 2013, as her office was weighing joining a lawsuit against Trump University. Her office denied any wrongdoing, and the investigation was later dropped. Despite those early contacts, Bondi was not an early adherent to Trump's presidential ambitions or his nascent 'Make America Great Again' movement. Instead, she initially supported former Florida Governor Jeb Bush in the 2016 Republican primary. When Jeb dropped out of the race, she threw her lot in with Trump. From there, things accelerated quickly. While still Florida's attorney general, Bondi served on Trump's first White House transition team. She left her post in Florida in 2019 and soon joined the Ballard Lobbyist group, representing the interests of Amazon, General Motors, and Uber, among others. From there, she joined the White House legal team, defending the president during his first impeachment trial in the US Senate, in which Trump was accused of conditioning weapons to Ukraine in exchange for dirt on then political opponent Biden. After Trump's election loss, Bondi was among those spearheading unfounded claims that the vote was marred by widespread fraud. She helped coordinate former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani's infamous news conference at the Four Seasons Landscaping in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, where she flatly and falsely claimed that Trump had 'won Pennsylvania'. She went on to chair the America First Policy Institute (AFPI), a pro-Trump think tank that oversaw 'a series of concerning lawsuits in recent years, particularly in the voting rights and elections arena', as described by the Brennan Center for Justice. Publicly, she also floated prosecuting career federal law enforcement officials who investigated Trump. In criticising her appointment, Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee in January said that Bondi had 'the ultimate qualification' to be Trump's attorney general: 'loyalty'. Bondi's tenure at the Justice Department That loyalty has generated much consternation since Bondi took office, with opponents accusing her of shaping the country's top law enforcement agency in Trump's likeness. That has included hundreds of layoffs at the department, including investigators and prosecutors in the two federal criminal cases lodged against Trump before his November election victory last year. She has also launched a task force to probe those investigations, while publicly decrying what she has framed as a conspiracy against Trump amid the career staff, saying the staff of the FBI and Justice Department were rife with employees 'who despise Donald Trump, despise us', as she told Fox News. More recently, she launched a strike force to investigate how the intelligence community, under former President Obama, handled information related to Russian influence in the 2016 presidential election, in what some have seen as an attempt to distract from the Epstein imbroglio. She has also announced a misconduct complaint against federal Judge James Boasberg, escalating a standoff over judges who have ruled against Trump's early actions, most notably his use of the Alien Enemies Act to swiftly deport alleged Venezuelan gang members with little requirement for proof. But it was Bondi's embrace of theories pushed by Trump's staunchest supporters that has landed her in the current predicament. In February, she brazenly told Fox News that she had Epstein's long-sought 'client list' – thought to contain the names of the powerful figures the billionaire blackmailed via his sex scheme – 'sitting on my desk right now'. Months later, the White House would say Bondi was referring to the entirety of Epstein's case files, and not specifically the list long sought by MAGA's most influential voices. That came shortly after the Justice Department in July released a memo, stating flatly: 'This systematic review revealed no incriminating 'client list''.
Al Jazeera
an hour ago
- Al Jazeera
New poll finds Americans perceive less racial discrimination in US
Only 40 percent of people in the United States believe that Black and Hispanic people face 'quite a bit' or 'a great deal' of discrimination, according to a new poll highlighting a reversal in previously held perceptions. An Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll released on Thursday also found that 30 percent of those surveyed felt the same way about Asian people, and only 10 percent believed that white people were discriminated against. 'The number of people saying Asian people and Black people are experiencing a substantial amount of discrimination has dropped since an AP-NORC poll conducted in April 2021,' according to a statement on the NORC website. The poll comes as US President Donald Trump continues to attack initiatives that promote diversity at universities and the workplace, and to pressure institutions not aligned with his political agenda in the name of combatting left-wing ideas. In the spring of 2021, amid massive protests against racial injustice following the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, Minnesota, 60 percent of people polled believed that Black people face 'a great deal' or 'quite a bit' of discrimination in the US. That figure has now dropped to less than 50 percent. About 74 percent of Black people say their communities continue to face substantial discrimination, while just 39 percent of white respondents said that Black people face serious discrimination. People in the US have also become more sceptical about corporate efforts to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion, often referred to as DEI. Many large companies have started to roll back such efforts. Between 33 percent and 41 percent said that DEI made no difference at all, and a quarter said it was likely to increase discrimination against minorities. 'Anytime they're in a space that they're not expected to be, like seeing a Black girl in an engineering course … they are seen as only getting there because of those factors,' Claudine Brider, a 48-year-old Black Democrat in Compton, California, told the Associated Press. 'It's all negated by someone saying, 'You're only here to meet a quota.'' But the Trump administration has gone far beyond criticisms of DEI efforts, wielding a wide definition of the term to exert pressure on institutions and organisations that he sees as hostile to his political agenda. The president has threatened, for example, to withhold federal disaster aid from states that do not align with his efforts to roll back anti-discrimination measures and open probes into companies with DEI policies, which he has framed as racist against white people. A majority of those polled also believe that undocumented immigrants face discrimination, as the Trump administration pursues a programme of mass deportations that have caused fear in immigrant communities across the country. 'Most people, 58 percent, think immigrants without legal status also face discrimination — the highest amount of any identity group,' AP-NORC states. 'Four in 10 say immigrants living legally in the United States also face this level of discrimination.' The poll also found that more than half of the public believes Muslims face substantial discrimination, and about one-third said the same for Jewish people.
