logo
Thailand and Cambodia cannot afford this war – but neither is prepared to give an inch

Thailand and Cambodia cannot afford this war – but neither is prepared to give an inch

Telegrapha day ago
The tank screeches as it rolls into the ad-hoc military base before four battle-weary soldiers jump out to re-inspect the hefty vehicle.
Around them, the thud of artillery fire reverberates, a near-constant reminder that the forested front line is just three miles south.
This is not the image that comes to mind when most people think of Thailand.
But since Thursday, when simmering tensions over a long-disputed border with Cambodia ignited into open conflict, these troops have been at the forefront of clashes that have claimed 33 lives, including children.
Lt Nitipon, who gave only his first name, told The Telegraph in Sisaket province on Saturday: 'You can hear two sounds right now – one is from artillery fire, the second is from the rocket launcher. It's coming from both sides… all I can tell you is that we are protecting our sovereignty.'
The Thai soldier added that while his unit had no intention of ceding ground, they had not escaped their battles unscathed.
'This is the duty for me as a soldier, and I'm very proud to do my duty… but of course I don't want the war to go on because it only brings losses,' Lt Nitipon said. 'People in our unit have been injured and are in treatment right now at the field hospital.'
On Saturday, Thailand and Cambodia traded fresh accusations and heavy artillery fire as the conflict between the south-east Asian neighbours entered a third day, with few signs of imminent de-escalation on the ground.
In Sisaket – where even the normally ubiquitous 7-11 convenience shops had closed their doors in eerily quiet border towns – military trucks tore down the deserted roads leading to the front line.
Throughout the afternoon, The Telegraph heard the frequent boom of artillery.
Clashes also spread further west to coastal regions on Saturday, where Thailand's navy joined the fight, despite continued international calls to cease violence, including an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council on Friday.
Donald Trump, the US president, wrote on social media on Saturday, referring to tariff negotiations: '[We] do not want to make any Deal, with either Country, if they are fighting – And I have told them so!'
But while both sides have talked of peace, Thailand prefers bilateral talks and Cambodia favours international arbitration.
Each has also claimed that the other has undermined armistice efforts by continuing to attack civilians, and criticised the use of assets including F-16 jets and rocket launchers.
Tita Sanglee, a Bangkok-based associate fellow at the ISEAS–Yusof Ishak Institute think tank, said: 'I think the Thai military is [trying] to weaken Cambodia's military capabilities before negotiating.
'But my sense is that the fighting will be contained along the border, but will be quite intense.
The two sides are at odds over how to resolve disputes, but it's not in their interest to escalate this geographically, partly because of tourism and economic interests.'
Bitter spats between the two rivals are not new, with much of the animosity dating back to differing interpretations of a colonial-era map, leading to disputed ownership of ancient temples.
But the latest violence is now bloodier than the previous major outbreak, between 2008 and 2011.
On Saturday, Cambodia's defence ministry said at least 15 people have been killed so far, while Thailand has put the death toll at 20. In all, 21 civilians have lost their lives across both countries, including an eight-year-old.
Thongdee Nimit, 67, said perched on a red plastic chair in the evacuation centre where she's been since Thursday: 'This is the heaviest fighting that I remember.
'The warning came and not even three minutes later – boom, boom, boom.
'It was so scary, and all the soldiers were coming saying 'get out', 'get out'. It wasn't like this at all last time.'
Ms Nimit is among thousands of evacuees sheltering in a covered concrete schoolyard, where they are sleeping and eating on mats with little refuge from the humid weather.
In all, officials estimate that more than 138,000 people have now been forced to flee their homes in Thailand, plus a further 35,000 in Cambodia.
Yinh Ya, an NGO executive who fled Cambodia's Oddar Meanchey province after witnessing heavy shooting, said: 'We left the home and just evacuated the people out, we left out animals and our assets.'
'We're worried because they [Thailand] have used drones and jets to attack the military along the border already,' he told The Telegraph by phone, laying blame squarely at Bangkok's door.
'Even though there has been tension for months, everyone here was shocked by how fast it all happened. There is a lot of fear.'
Animosity between the two nations re-emerged in May, after a Cambodian soldier was killed in a skirmish on the disputed 508-mile border.
But relations truly imploded after two groups of Thai soldiers were injured by landmines on Wednesday.
Thailand claims the ordnance was newly laid, but Cambodia says they are leftovers from a final stint of fighting during the murderous Khmer Rouge regime.
Still, soon after the incident, both sides downgraded relations, expelled their neighbour's ambassador and recalled embassy staff.
Then on Thursday, heightened tensions ignited into deadly clashes – both sides blame the other for starting the violence.
Yet the embers of war are also being fanned by strongmen politicians in Bangkok and Phnom Penh.
Escalating tensions have mirrored a rapid decline in relations between Hun Sen and Thaksin Shinawatra, two former prime ministers whose children now hold the role.
Or at least, Thaksin's daughter Paetongtarn did – until Hun Sen leaked an audio of a call last month where she kow-towed to the Cambodian leader and criticised her own military, a major red line in Thailand. She has since been suspended, and Thailand plunged into a political crisis.
Analysts attempting to explain Hun Sen' s motives for unravelling a once-close friendship – the two men had called each other 'godbrothers' – say it may be linked to a crackdown by the Thai government on scam centres in Cambodia, or because of Thaksin's push to legalise casinos in Thailand, which would threaten business across the border.
But through the fighting, he has succeeded at bringing the country together against a common enemy, said Mu Sochua, the head of the opposition Khmer Movement for Democracy.
She told The Telegraph: 'His tactic is working… it's like a big wave of outrage,'
'There's nothing to stop this nationalistic sentiment at this moment.'
A similar outpouring has been seen in Thailand, where local media have also reported attacks on migrant workers.
In Bangkok, one motorbike taxi was seen with a sign on his back on Saturday saying he would 'not accept orders from Khmer/Cambodian people'.
Yet, despite his attempts, Thaksin may not be able to capitalise in the same way as Hun Sen, a largely authoritarian figure who has significantly more power domestically.
Peter Mumford, the head of the Eurasia group's south-east Asia office, said: 'The military skirmish puts further political pressure on… Paetongtarn and likely emboldens their conservative opponents.'
'If the security or domestic political situation worsens, speculation about a military coup will grow – though we are not there yet.'
Yet in Sisaket on Saturday, few were thinking about national politics.
Instead, weary residents too anxious to sleep amid artillery fire just wanted life to return to normal – though they, like the soldiers, felt Cambodia was at fault.
Pawana Apaisila, a resident, said: 'I cannot sleep at night because I'm just thinking about what's happening and our home.
'None of this is worth it. But then, if we cave to them [Cambodia], I think they will keep wanting more. I am a Thai citizen, I feel we cannot keep losing our land to them.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Britain is ready to fight if conflict breaks out over Taiwan, says Defence Secretary John Healey
Britain is ready to fight if conflict breaks out over Taiwan, says Defence Secretary John Healey

Daily Mail​

time2 hours ago

  • Daily Mail​

Britain is ready to fight if conflict breaks out over Taiwan, says Defence Secretary John Healey

Defence Secretary John Healey has said Britain is ready to fight if conflict breaks out over Taiwan. The island nation has long been at loggerheads with China, strongly rejecting Beijing 's claim to sovereignty over it after the countries separated in the late forties. China's president Xi Jinping has previously said he would not rule out using force in the 'reunification of the motherland'. And now Mr Healey, when asked what the UK is doing to help countries like Taiwan prepare for potential Chinese escalation, has said Britain would fight in the Pacific. He was speaking on a visit to the HMS Prince of Wales, docked in the Australian city of Darwin, with the country's deputy prime minister and defence minister Richard Marles. He told The Telegraph, during the carrier group's nine-month Pacific deployment: 'If we have to fight, as we have done in the past, Australia and the UK are nations that will fight together. 'We exercise together and by exercising together and being more ready to fight, we deter better together.' These are some of the strongest words ever issued by the British government on the topic of potential engagement in any conflict in the region. The island nation has long been at loggerheads with China, strongly rejecting Beijing's claim to sovereignty over it after the countries separated in the late forties. Pictured: From second left, Mr Healey, Australian deputy prime minister and minister for defence Richard Marles, British foreign secretary David Lammy and Australian foreign minster Penny Wong on the visit to the HMS Prince of Wales aircraft carrier today But the minister emphasised he was talking in 'general terms' - and the UK would prefer any disputes there were resolved 'peacefully' and 'diplomatically'. 'We secure peace through strength, and our strength comes from our allies', he added. Experts have previously warned an invasion of Taiwan could cause a large-scale conflict, pulling in nations from across the world. It is because the country manufactures most advanced computer chips. Mr Healey said 'threats' in the Indo-Pacific region are on the rise. It follows the Chinese military taking control of contentious reefs - and was accused of intimidating its neighbours there. The Defence Secretary's remarks also come as the HMS Prince of Wales carrier group sails with advanced F-35 fighter jets from Singapore to northern Australia for the first time in nearly 40 years. The fleet will continue on to Japan, likely coming close to Taiwan. The Defence Secretary's remarks also come as the HMS Prince of Wales carrier group (pictured on the visit today) sails with advanced F-35 fighter jets from Singapore to northern Australia for the first time in nearly 40 years Deploying the strike carrier group, which is the UK's largest of its kind, in the Pacific for nine-months shows Britain is aware of increasing threats in the region. Sending it to Darwin in particular indicates close ties between the UK and Australia - key to any potential conflict in the Indo-Pacific. Indeed, Mr Healey noted such a partnership was especially important currently, as threats in the region increase. The defence secretary emphasised the UK's interest in international rules, stability and security, as well as both freedom of the seas and navigation in the area. British officials have previously not commented on whether the UK would intervene in any conflict in the region. This is in line with the United States' stance, which has been dubbed 'strategic ambiguity' - and most other nations follow it too. Two Royal Navy patrol vessels are stationed permanently in the region. The UK government recognised, in its National Security Strategy published earlier this year: 'There is a particular risk of escalation around Taiwan.' Former defence secretary Gavin Williamson (pictured in 2019) said the UK is probably becoming more candid on its stance on the matter as threats in the Indo-Pacific increase. Former defence secretary Gavin Williamson said the UK is probably becoming more candid on its stance on the matter as threats in the Indo-Pacific increase. 'I think there's a realisation that by being completely silent it doesn't make it more or less likely', he explained. Deterrence, he added, involves making clear the consequences that will come if others act dangerously or maliciously. Mr Williamson, who led the MoD from 2017 to 2019, added it is important someone as prominent as the British defence secretary is clear actions have consequences. Former US president Joe Biden has previously broken strategic ambiguity on several occasions, saying the US would support Taiwan against China. His successor Donald Trump has not done this - but Pentagon officials are said to be preparing for conflict. His government has said it will review its membership of the AUKUS security agreement, between the US, Australia and the UK. It comes as part of Mr Trump's 'America first' approach. Australian prime minister Anthony Albanese has also not spoken out whether the nation would join the US and other allies to fight China in any conflict in the region. He refused to comment on the matter last week. The UK and Australia have made a renewed commitment to each other in recent times. The two nations signed the Geelong Treaty this weekend - a 50-year agreement cementing their commitment to the AUKUS pact. It also commits them to building a new fleet of nuclear-powered submarines. The HMS Prince of Wales anchoring in Darwin marks the first time a British carrier strike group has docked in Australia. It is also the first time a non-US carrier has taken part in Australia's annual military drills, the so-called Talisman Sabre. The event this year was the largest it has ever been. While the UK is turning more of its attention to the Indo-Pacific, Mr Healey (pictured on the visit today) confirmed there would be no change to its level of engagement with Taiwan Foreign secretary David Lammy also boarded the HMS Prince of Wales, on the same day as and just before his colleague Mr Healey. He has previously said Britain plans to undertake more freedom of navigation operations in the Taiwan Strait. Last month, a Royal Navy patrol ship, the HMS Spey, moved through the strait - which was praised by Taiwan but frowned upon by China. Britain does not comment on the future movements of its vessels. But it is thought the HMS Prince of Wales will soon also travel through the strait on its way to South Korea and Japan. While the UK is turning more of its attention to the Indo-Pacific, Mr Healey confirmed there would be no change to its level of engagement with Taiwan. Mr Williamson said Britain would likely only alter this stance if China got increasingly aggressive.

Thai monks refuse to evacuate as shells and F-16s fly overhead
Thai monks refuse to evacuate as shells and F-16s fly overhead

Telegraph

time2 hours ago

  • Telegraph

Thai monks refuse to evacuate as shells and F-16s fly overhead

In a now deserted town less than 20 miles from the front line of the fighting between Thailand and Cambodia, monks at a usually peaceful temple have endured another bad night's sleep. The boom of artillery erupted throughout the night, with one shell estimated to have landed less than three miles from the temple on Sunday morning. 'Last night it was quite heavy and today at around 8am we heard some loud thuds,' Phra Mahasanong Khantitharo, the abbot, told The Telegraph on Sunday. 'The metal sheet roof and the windows were rattling very strongly this morning.' The south-east Asian neighbours have been fighting since a row over their shared border escalated on Thursday, leading to an exchange of fire and deaths on both sides. Despite the obvious risks to their lives, the monks at this temple and others in the border areas where fighting is raging have refused to budge, saying they owe it to the communities they serve to stay put. 'If I leave, the people who rely on us will lose their spirit. I'm scared too, but I'll just stay here for now, when I can,' Phra Phut Analayo told the Associated Press from a small, cylindrical shelter at a temple just six miles from the border. Thailand and Cambodia are both Buddhist countries and share many traditions and customs as a result. Relations between the two countries are normally peaceful, but the fighting has ignited a wave of nationalist fervour which the monks do not share. 'Cambodians are our neighbours, we should not be fighting,' Phra Mahasanong said. 'I have to say that karma will be the judge of this.' On Sunday, Thailand reported the death of a soldier, bringing its total fatalities to 22, mostly civilians. Cambodia said 13 of its people had been killed, though it was unclear if that included Lt Gen Duong Samnieng, whose death in combat was announced on Sunday. Meanwhile, more than 139,000 people in Thailand have evacuated to safe locations, and more than 79,000 people have fled from three Cambodian provinces. Many border villages are mostly deserted, with many schools and hospitals shut. The international community has called for peace and despite fighting continuing around two ancient, disputed temples in the Dangrek mountains, there were signs on Sunday that the two countries were finally yielding to pressure. A Thai government official said talks between Phumtham Wechayachai, the acting prime minister, and Hun Manet, the Cambodian premier, will begin at 3pm on Monday. They will be hosted by Malaysia, which currently chairs Asean, a regional bloc of south-east Asian countries. Both sides have previously talked of peace, with Cambodia, which has a far weaker military, already proposing a ceasefire. But Thailand has until now maintained that it prefers bilateral talks – perhaps because international arbitration has previously favoured their rival in the territorial dispute – while each side has repeatedly claimed that the other has undermined armistice efforts by continuing to attack civilians. The move towards talks comes after Donald Trump threatened to withdraw the US from critical tariff negotiations unless the two countries stopped fighting. As it stands, Thailand and Cambodia will be hit by a 36 per cent tax on imports from next month – a major economic hit which the countries are trying hard to avoid. The US president on social media: 'Both Parties are looking for an immediate Ceasefire and Peace. They are also looking to get back to the 'Trading Table' with the United States, which we think is inappropriate to do until such time as the fighting STOPS.' Yet whether this will be enough to stop the clashes – which have seen tanks, ground troops, rocket launchers, and F-16 jets deployed – remains to be seen. Dr Paul Chambers, a visiting fellow at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies in Singapore, said the long 'history of antagonism between the two countries' should not be underestimated. He added: 'I do not think that the US efforts to achieve conflict resolution will be successful because Washington has lost a great deal of influence in south-east Asia since the end of the Cold War.' The violence has also fuelled by mounting animosity between two political dynasties once considered close. While control in Cambodia is highly centralised under authoritarian premier Hun Manet, in Thailand the government is weak after a political crisis triggered by a leaked phone call with the Cambodian leader's father, Hun Sen, led to the suspension of Paetongtarn Shinawatra, the prime minister. 'The Thai negotiating team is operating under heavy domestic suspicion,' Ken Lohatepanont, a Thai politics expert at the University of Michigan, wrote in a blog post. 'I am not sure what [they] can achieve that will blunt public criticism in the face of such suspicion, [and] the fact that several Thai civilians and troops have died over the course of the past few days has raised public anger at Cambodia to a fever pitch,' he said. In Sisaket on Sunday, this anger was on full display in deserted villages in the danger zone. Like the monks, some men have seen it as their duty to stay behind despite the risks – a health centre was hit just 10 miles away on Saturday. They told The Telegraph they were there to protect property from looters and 'potential Cambodian spies'. Outside one house destroyed by shelling on Thursday, chickens wandered over mangled metal, and the smell of fuel from charred embers still persisted. Thongsuay Saikaew, the village chief, who lives next door, was lucky his house survived unscathed. 'It's not right to hit civilian places like this, it's rotten,' said the 58-year old. His neighbours who lost their home, he said, were speechless when they saw it had been destroyed. 'This was [a shop too], it was like their livelihood as well as their home. And now it's all gone… I think the Cambodians have to be blamed.' On the other side of the border, Cambodians affected by the fighting told The Telegraph the opposite – that Thailand was the aggressor and at fault. But despite his nationalist rhetoric, Mr Thongsuay is also keen for the fighting to stop. It's not just about safety; every day the clashes continue are a hit to his business, selling cattle. 'It will become very difficult if I can't earn an income soon,' he said. 'Our own government has to find a solution to this situation.'

Global moral consensus is just wishful thinking
Global moral consensus is just wishful thinking

The Guardian

time3 hours ago

  • The Guardian

Global moral consensus is just wishful thinking

In his opinion piece (From Gaza to Ukraine, peace always seems just out of reach – and the reason isn't only political, 20 July), Simon Tisdall says 'ending major conflicts, and easing the suffering of millions, is a moral imperative that demands a determined collective response from all concerned. That way lies peace. That way lies salvation'. If that is really the case then all hope is lost. There already is a 'determined collective response' from all concerned, which is a pledge to fight to the bitter end, whatever the cost to their victims in lives or suffering. For Vladimir Putin and Benjamin Netanyahu, freedom from moral constraints, incorporating manifestly immoral behaviour and open contempt for international law, is an existential necessity. To expect either of them to abandon the territorial ambitions on which they have staked their political futures lies somewhere between naivety and sheer wishful thinking. Given that, all talk of 'moral imperatives', without enforceable international law when their noble aspirations are breached, is no more than impotent bleating from the sidelines. The treaty to establish the international criminal court in 1998 failed to sign up China, India or the Gulf states. Indeed the map of those countries that have ratified the ICC looks suspiciously like the former Commonwealth, with the addition of South America. More significant are those countries who signed up to the treaty, but which have refused to ratify it, for various stated reasons, but ineluctably because their current politicians need immunity from its rulings – the former superpowers US and Russia, and Israel. None of their leaders could survive in office if they were made internationally accountable to enforceable laws with a clear moral basis. Sadly but paradoxically, the only people with the political and military clout to bring the war criminals to justice in the name of morality turn out to be the ones perpetuating the war crimes. Alex WatsonStroud, Gloucestershire Simon Tisdall rightly argues that peace remains elusive not just due to geopolitics, but a collapse in global moral consensus. Yet we must ask: has that consensus ever truly been global – or has it been curated through western lenses? Britain recently announced an inquiry into violent policing at Orgreave in 1984 and the subsequent collapsed prosecution of 95 miners, but still refuses to apologise for Jallianwala Bagh, where hundreds of unarmed Indians were massacred under imperial command in 1919. Where is the moral clarity? Tisdall speaks of the 'rules-based international order'. But when Donald Trump bombed Iranian nuclear sites – installations once fostered by Eisenhower's Atoms for Peace programme – where were the rules? Would the same be done to Pakistan or China? The west routinely turns a blind eye when its allies commit horrors. Yes, Russians ignore Ukraine. But did the UK not join the US in Iraq, a war based on phantom weapons of mass destruction? Have we ever truly atoned for the destruction of Falluja, or the millions displaced in Afghanistan? I agree that peace demands moral revitalisation. But that renewal must begin at home: in Washington, London, Paris. A world that arms first and negotiates never cannot preach morality. Diplomacy has been replaced by drone strikes, and summits by air raids. The UN has become a mute witness, bypassed by the very powers that once built it. Until we stop dividing the world into 'worthy victims' and 'collateral damage', there will be no peace. There is no lesser life. And there is no moral order unless it applies to all. Let truth precede justice. And only then will peace KalyanasundaramChennai, India Have an opinion on anything you've read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store