Imperfect truce: Thailand and Cambodia must relearn habits of cooperation

New Straits Times

4 days ago

THE ceasefire brokered in Kuala Lumpur on July 28, 2025, by Asean Chair, Malaysia's Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim was intended to halt the rapid escalation of a five-day conflict that claimed over 40 lives and displaced more than 300,000 civilians.
Yet, within hours of implementation, accusations surfaced. Thailand claimed that Cambodian troops had violated the terms of the truce. Cambodia, in turn, denied any wrongdoing and insisted on full compliance.
This mutual distrust underscores a reality often overlooked in the aftermath of ceasefires: peace is not made by paper alone. A ceasefire is merely a suspension of hostilities.
Without a shared commitment to transparency, accountability, and restraint, such agreements remain brittle and ultimately ineffective.
In the case of Thailand and Cambodia, the habits of military cooperation and political coordination appear to have withered, replaced instead by unilateralism and suspicion.
Thailand holds the upper hand in conventional terms. Its military is better equipped, more mobile, and strategically coordinated.
Cambodia, led by the new Prime Minister Hun Manet but still heavily influenced by his father, Hun Sen, has responded with nationalist fervour and rhetorical defiance.
Both approaches risk deepening the impasse.
Political actors on both sides seem more focused on managing domestic legitimacy than genuinely building bilateral trust. That posturing only widens the gap between their forces in the field and the peace so urgently needed by civilians caught in the crossfire.
This dispute is more than a mere contest over ancient maps and sacred sites.
It is now a regional concern with significant international consequences. President of the United States Donald Trump has warned that if the ceasefire fails, his administration will implement punitive tariffs — 49 per cent on Cambodian exports and 36 per cent on Thai goods. These threats are not idle.
For a region still recovering from pandemic-era disruptions and global inflation, such tariffs would be economically devastating.
China, for its part, has called quietly but firmly for dialogue. Its interests in mainland Southeast Asia — particularly through the Lancang-Mekong Cooperation mechanism and key Belt and Road infrastructure — depend on a stable and predictable neighbourhood.
Prolonged conflict not only risks damaging Chinese investments but also weakens Asean's overall cohesion, making the region more vulnerable to great power manipulation.
The General Border Committee meeting scheduled for August 4 2025 in Cambodia presents an opportunity to reset the trajectory.
But it must go beyond symbolism. Concrete steps are needed. These include setting up joint verification teams, activating real-time communication lines between military commands, and establishing demilitarised zones in the most volatile areas.
There must also be an agreement to jointly manage humanitarian relief and reconstruction for the tens of thousands displaced.
Asean, long derided for its "non-interference" doctrine, has shown glimpses of maturity. Malaysia, as Chair, moved swiftly to convene both sides.
Laos and the Philippines, the previous and future Chairs respectively, have been engaged in quiet diplomacy. Singapore and Indonesia have lent support to confidence-building.
But Asean's effectiveness now depends on sustained follow-through. It must consider the deployment of neutral observers and take bolder steps to institutionalise early-warning and de-escalation mechanisms.
Thailand and Cambodia must remember that military victories, even if achievable, do not resolve territorial or political disputes.
A genuine settlement requires mutual recognition of sovereignty, shared responsibility for border governance, and acknowledgment of past grievances without weaponising them.
The alternative is a return to tit-for-tat clashes, each deadlier than the last, with each side blaming the other while their people suffer the consequences.
This is not a conflict that demands external arbitration, it is a dispute Asean is well-equipped to handle if its member states summon the will.
The past 50 years have proven that Southeast Asia can contain its tensions through dialogue, consensus, and community-building. That legacy is now being tested, not by superpowers, but by two of its own.
The ceasefire agreement signed in Kuala Lumpur must not become another footnote in a long list of failed truces. So far it isn't.
It must serve as the foundation for a new habit of cooperation — one where Thailand and Cambodia can jointly manage their border, de-escalate tensions, and prioritise the lives and dignity of their people over nationalist grandstanding.