Thailand pushes for diplomacy after ex-Cambodia PM's 'extraordinary' attack
BANGKOK, June 27 (Reuters) - Thailand's foreign ministry said on Friday it was taken aback by an unprecedented public attack on the Thai premier and her family by Cambodia's influential former leader, but stressed the need for diplomacy to resolve an escalating bilateral dispute.
In a televised address that lasted more than three hours, veteran Cambodian politician Hun Sen rebuked Thai Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra for her handling of a festering border row between the neighbours.
Hun Sen, who led Cambodia for nearly four decades until stepping down in 2023, also took aim at Paetongtarn's father, divisive billionaire former premier Thaksin Shinawatra, until recently his close ally.
"It surprised us, and it's quite extraordinary in terms of diplomatic norms," foreign ministry spokesman Nikorndej Balankura told Reuters.
"Thailand has opened a lot of doors, and I insist that these doors remain open even after what happened this morning."
Hun Sen, who is now president of Cambodia's senate but still holds enormous clout, accused Paetongtarn of looking down at him and his son, Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet.
On Thaksin, who faces an impending court case over the legitimacy of a hospital stay that allowed him to skip prison time, Hun Sen said the former Thai leader faked his illness.
"Thaksin was not sick," he said. "He pretended to be sick."
Paetongtarn, 38, has come under enormous domestic pressure following the leak of the audio of June 15 phone call between her and Hun Sen, in which she appeared overtly deferential to him and also criticised a Thai military commander.
That call came after an escalation in tensions along a disputed border between the Southeast Asian nations, where a Cambodian soldier was killed in a brief exchange of gunfire with Thai forces in late May.
Despite Hun Sen's public vilification, Thailand is working to open a dialogue between both foreign ministers.
"We are looking at the earliest possible venue where both sides can talk," Nikorndej said. "Speaking for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, we are a strong advocate for peaceful resolution through dialogue."
At the root of the current tensions is a longstanding dispute over various undemarcated points along their 817 km (508 miles) land border.
Following the recent flare-up, which also led to reinforcement of troop on both sides of the border, Cambodia said it would seek resolution by the International Court of Justice.
Thailand does not recognise the ICJ's jurisdiction, but has gathered legal teams to study Cambodia's application and also talked with members of the United Nation Security Council to push its position, Nikorndej said, without naming those members.
"We're doing everything we can to try to convince Cambodia to come to bilateral talks," Nikorndej said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
9 hours ago
- The Independent
Longtime State Department spokesman, diplomat Richard Boucher, dies at 73
Richard Boucher, who served for more than a decade as the spokesman for the State Department and assistant secretary of state for public affairs, has died at age 73, according to friends and family. He died on Thursday in a hospital in northern Virginia after a battle with an aggressive form of cancer, according to two people close to his family. Boucher had been the face of U.S. foreign policy at the State Department podium across administrations throughout the 1990s and early 2000s, beginning in the George H.W. Bush presidency and continuing through Bill Clinton's and George W. Bush's terms in office. Boucher served as the spokesman for secretaries of state James Baker, Madeleine Albright, Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice. In a career that took him from the Peace Corps though Africa and Asia as well as in Washington, Boucher also served as U.S. Consul General Hong Kong during the 1997 handover of the territory from Britain to China, and later used the skills he learned there to help orchestrate an end to the U.S.-China spy plane crisis in early 2001. After leaving the spokesman's job, Boucher became assistant secretary of state for state for South and Central Asia and was then ambassador to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Retired veteran CBS journalist Charles Wolfson, who worked with Boucher for years, lauded him as an effective State Department spokesman but also a valued professional colleague and friend. 'He was a superb diplomat, an excellent spokesman and an even better human being,' Wolfson said.
The Guardian
13 hours ago
- The Guardian
‘There's a significant lack of knowledge': Iranian American legislator on countries' tangled history amid conflict
Arizona congresswoman Yassamin Ansari brings an unusually personal perspective to the US's fraught relationship with Iran. The daughter of two Iranian parents who fled their homeland – her father as a student in the 1970s who couldn't return after the 1979 revolution, her mother as a 17-year-old in 1981 escaping the new regime's restrictions on women – Ansari grew up immersed in the complexities of US-Iran relations. This deep familiarity with both Iranian domestic politics and the tangled history between Washington and Tehran has given the Democratic freshman a distinctive edge in debates over military strikes, sanctions and diplomatic engagement. As tensions teetered for 12 days, culminating in the direct US bombardment on Iranian nuclear facilities, Ansari finds herself navigating between hawkish calls for regime change and concerns about empowering Iran's authoritarian government. We spoke to Ansari about how her background influences her approach to one of foreign policy's most intractable issues. It's a topic I not only grew up learning about at home but also studied formally during my undergraduate years. I have a minor in Iranian studies, I speak the language [Farsi], and I wrote my college thesis on Iran's nuclear breakout capacity. So I've been working on and thinking about these issues for a long time. When it comes to US-Iran policy – especially during the Trump administration – I think there has been a significant lack of knowledge. And even within Congress, there's often limited information about the historical and political context – not just since 1979, but also what led up to that point and how we arrived at the current situation. I don't believe the strikes were the right move for several reasons. First and foremost, we wouldn't even be in this position if Trump hadn't unilaterally withdrawn from the JCPOA [in 2018]. That agreement would have prevented Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and created a framework for diplomacy. Even after the withdrawal, we were in the midst of negotiations. Based on briefings I've received from subject matter experts, those negotiations were progressing – until the US suddenly shifted the goalposts and demanded zero uranium enrichment, which had never been part of the deal. That effectively derailed talks. Beyond that, Trump never made the case to Congress or the American public. There was no presentation of intelligence justifying strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities. In a country with such a fraught history of military interventions in the Middle East – from the 1953 CIA-orchestrated coup in Iran to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan – that lack of transparency is especially dangerous. I'm not familiar with all the specifics of that proposal, but I see what you're getting at. And I do think Trump's actions have emboldened the Islamic Republic, a regime that is deeply unpopular with the majority of Iranians. Since the recent escalation, we've seen reports that hundreds of people have been arrested on espionage charges – charges often used by the regime to imprison political opponents. Iran's most notorious prison, Evin, is full of some of the country's brightest minds, including Nobel laureates. It's heartbreaking. Trump's actions have not only hurt US foreign policy interests and increased the risk of a wider war, but they've also given the regime cover to intensify its domestic repression. During the past two weeks, we've even seen the government black out the internet to prevent communication with the outside world. This is a regime focused entirely on its own survival – and it will do whatever it takes, including more arrests and crackdowns. We should be supporting Iranian civilians, not strengthening the regime or risking another war. Exactly. I think any sort of US-led military intervention or regime change would be a terrible mistake. I was genuinely terrified during the days Trump was making contradictory threats – one moment urging civilians in Tehran to evacuate, the next talking about regime change, and then suddenly calling for peace. That kind of unpredictability is dangerous. There are also groups like the MEK – a cult-like organization that was once designated a terrorist group by the US – that are trying to position themselves as the alternative. They've paid people like John Bolton and Rudy Giuliani to support them, but they could be even more repressive than the current regime. That said, there are ways the US could support the Iranian people – like helping provide secure internet access or advocating for the release of political prisoners. But instead we're seeing more crackdowns because the regime feels threatened and is reacting in the only way it knows: repression. Not directly, but many of us are still pushing for the War Powers Resolution to come to a vote so members of Congress can make their positions clear. It's important that we reassert Congress's constitutional authority over decisions of war and peace. Unfortunately, the Republican lead on the resolution, Representative Thomas Massie, recently said he no longer sees the need for [the resolution] due to the ceasefire. I strongly disagree. The resolution isn't just about this moment – it's about reaffirming that only Congress has the power to declare war, as the constitution lays out. Trump should never have taken unilateral military action. We've already seen the consequences. I know the Senate is moving forward with it, and it'll be important to see where key leaders stand. You're right, I'm definitely not the spokesperson for all Iranian Americans, but I can share some perspective. Nearly all Iranian Americans strongly oppose the regime. That's because most of our families came here after fleeing it, either during the revolution in 1979 or in the years since. But there's a wide range of views on what the solution should be. Some Iranian Americans, including a sizable portion who voted for Trump, believed he would help topple the regime. I remember when Trump posted 'Make Iran great again', a segment of the diaspora was genuinely excited. Many of those people support the son of the former Shah as a potential leader. Others – myself included – strongly oppose US-led regime change. The US has a bad track record in this region. The 1953 coup that overthrew Prime Minister Mosaddeq is still remembered bitterly by many Iranians. He was democratically elected and wanted to nationalize Iran's oil, but the US and UK didn't want that. So they overthrew him. Then came the Shah, then the revolution, and now this regime. So while we all oppose the current regime, there's disagreement about what comes next and how to get there. I think most Iranian Americans fear war and want a better future for Iranians – without more violence, repression or foreign intervention. My dad came to the US in the early 1970s on a student visa to attend the University of Oregon for his engineering degree. He planned to go back but once the revolution happened, it wasn't safe to return, so he stayed. My mom fled in 1981. Women's rights had already been severely restricted – forced hijab, schools being shut down. She happened to be a US citizen because her father had done a medical residency in the US in the 60s. So her parents sent her here alone at 17 to live with a family in Delaware. She talks about it a lot, about how she and her family opposed the revolution even though it was popular at the time. Coming here alone was traumatic. She went through deep depression for years before the rest of her family could join her. That experience shaped a lot of how I was raised. She always stressed not taking freedom and democracy for granted, and that's something I carry with me in my work today, especially when I see authoritarian threats here in the US.
The Guardian
18 hours ago
- The Guardian
Bangkok protesters demand prime minister's resignation over leaked phone call
Thousands of protesters have gathered in Bangkok to demand the resignation of Thailand's prime minister over a leaked phone call with a former Cambodian leader. Paetongtarn Shinawatra faces growing dissatisfaction over her handling of a recent border dispute with Cambodia involving an armed confrontation on 28 May. One Cambodian soldier was killed. The recorded phone call with the former Cambodian prime minister Hun Sen led to the protests on Saturday and has triggered a series of investigations in Thailand that could lead to Paetongtarn's removal. The call caused anger because of Paetongtarn's comments about an outspoken regional army commander and her perceived attempts to appease Hun Sen, the current Cambodian Senate president, to ease tensions at the border. There were about 6,000 protesters, according to Bangkok police. Despite a downpour, they held national flags and placards around the Victory Monument in central Bangkok as speakers took turns attacking the government. Protesters chanted slogans, sang and danced to nationalist songs. 'From a heart of a Thai person, we've never had a prime minister who's so weak,' said Tatchakorn Srisuwan, 47, a guide from Surat Thani province. 'We don't want to invade anyone, but we want to say that we are Thai and we want to protect Thailand's sovereignty.' There were many familiar faces from a conservative royalist group known as Yellow Shirts. They are opponents of Paetongtarn's father, the former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, who reportedly has a close relationship with Hun Sen and who was toppled in a military coup in 2006. Rallies organised by Yellow Shirts also helped oust the elected government of Thaksin's sister, Yingluck Shinawatra, in a 2014 coup. Hun Sen said on Saturday the border action by the Thai army was a serious violation of Cambodia's sovereignty and territorial integrity, despite the country's goodwill in attempting to resolve the border issue. 'This poor Cambodia has suffered from foreign invasion, war and genocide, been surrounded and isolated and insulted in the past, but now Cambodia has risen on an equal face with other countries,' Hun Sen told an audience of thousands at the 74th anniversary celebration of the founding of his ruling Cambodian People's Party in the capital, Phnom Penh. There is a long history of territorial disputes between the countries. A 1962 International Court of Justice ruling awarded Cambodia the disputed territory where the historic Preah Vihear temple stands and there were sporadic, though serious, clashes in 2011. The ruling from the UN court was reaffirmed in 2013, when Yingluck Shinawatra was prime minister. The scandal has broken Paetongtarn's fragile coalition government, losing her Pheu Thai party the support of its biggest partner, Bhumjaithai party. Its departure left the 10-party coalition with 255 seats, meaning it has a slender majority in the 500-seat house.
