Thailand, Cambodia start ceasefire talks amid Trump trade threat
Thailand's acting Prime Minister Phumtham Wechayachai and Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet are holding discussions Monday in Putrajaya, Malaysia's administrative capital. Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim is facilitating the dialogue in his role as the chair of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, with Washington and Beijing dispatching envoys.
Anwar's office said that the talks had begun shortly after the scheduled 3pm start time.
The talks mark the first formal dialogue since fresh clashes erupted on July 24, with at least 35 people killed and more than 150,000 civilians displaced on both sides of their 800-kilometre (500-mile) border. Tensions escalated rapidly over the weekend as heavy artillery fire and aerial strikes were reported, and both sides accused each other of targeting civilian areas.
US President Donald Trump had said before the discussions that the Thai and Cambodian leaders had agreed to 'quickly work out a ceasefire'. After separate calls with Mr Phumtham and Hun Manet on Saturday, Trump had threatened that Washington would not do a trade deal with either as long as the fighting continued.
Before departing for the talks, Mr Phumtham questioned Cambodia's sincerity in halting fighting as clashes continued into early Monday. The discussions were set to focus on ending the hostilities and maintaining Thailand's sovereignty, he told reporters.
Thailand has insisted that any ceasefire must include troop withdrawals, an end to lethal force and an agreement to resolve conflict through bilateral mechanisms. Cambodia, by contrast, says it supports an unconditional end to hostilities.
The current conflict traces its roots to long-standing disputes stemming from colonial-era maps and treaties that defined the two countries' boundaries. Relations had remained relatively stable since a 2011 clash that left dozens dead, but renewed tensions have triggered fears of escalated fighting.
Trump threatened to block trade deals with both countries unless the violence stopped. 'We're not going to make a trade deal unless you settle the war,' Trump said Sunday, adding that both leaders expressed willingness to negotiate after speaking with him directly.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said US officials are on the ground in Malaysia 'to assist these peace efforts.' China, the top trading partner for both Southeast Asian nations and a major backer of Phnom Penh, is due to participate in the talks, the Cambodian leader said.
'Both President Trump and I remain engaged with our respective counterparts for each country and are monitoring the situation very closely,' Rubio said in a statement. 'We want this conflict to end as soon as possible.'
With Trump's Aug 1 tariff deadline looming, trade-reliant Thailand wants to avoid antagonising the US president, especially as its officials have been holding talks to lower the steep 36% planned levy on its exports. Trump has claimed credit for helping halt border clashes earlier this year between India and Pakistan by leveraging trade measures. It's an assertion India has consistently denied but Pakistan has embraced.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bangkok Post
3 hours ago
- Bangkok Post
Trump vows substantial India tariff hike over Russian oil buying
US President Donald Trump said he would be 'substantially raising' the tariff on Indian exports to the United States over the Asian nation's purchases of Russian oil, a move New Delhi slammed as unjustified in an escalating fight between the two major economies. 'India is not only buying massive amounts of Russian Oil, they are then, for much of the Oil purchased, selling it on the Open Market for big profits,' Trump wrote on social media on Monday. 'They don't care how many people in Ukraine are being killed by the Russian War Machine. Because of this, I will be substantially raising the Tariff paid by India to the USA.' Trump didn't say by how much he would increase the levy. Last week, he announced a 25% rate on Indian exports — one of the highest of any major economy — and vowed more duties if India continued to buy oil from Russia. The US president's warning comes ahead of an Aug 8 deadline for Russia to reach a truce with Ukraine, with the administration threatening so-called secondary sanctions on countries that purchase Russian energy. Ukraine's allies view those purchases as helping to prop up Russian leader Vladimir Putin's economy and undercutting pressure on Moscow to end a war that is now in its fourth year. India has been a top Trump target in the campaign to end the war. Prime Minister Narendra Modi — who previously enjoyed warm relations with Trump — has been defiant, urging Indians to buy local goods and signalling that his country will continue to buy Russian oil. In a social media post later on Monday, India's Ministry of External Affairs hit out at the European Union and the US for continuing to buy energy and other materials from Russia when 'such trade is not even a national compulsion.' It noted that India began buying oil from Russia because traditional supplies were diverted to Europe after the start of the war, and the US 'encouraged such imports.' 'The targeting of India is unjustified and unreasonable,' the ministry said. 'Like any major economy, India will take all necessary measures to safeguard its national interests and economic security.' India has morphed into a major buyer of Moscow's crude since the 2022 invasion of Ukraine, spurred on by discounts. On average, the country has been buying Russian crude at a rate of about 1.7 million barrels a day so far this year, according to tanker tracking data compiled by Bloomberg. India exported about 1.4 million barrels a day of refined fuels in the first half of this year, according to Kpler data compiled by Bloomberg. Diesel or gasoil cargoes made up approximately 40% of total fuel exports, while gasoline and blending components comprised about 30% of the shipments. Still, it's hard to quantify how much of India's oil exports derive specifically from Russian crude because refiners generally consume an array of barrels and then sell an even wider range of fuels. The EU recently launched a package of sanctions that will ban the purchase of fuel made from Russian crude, but traders are still waiting for the body to detail how the measures would work in practice. At least four tankers discharged millions of barrels of Russian crude at Indian refineries at the weekend, a sign the closely scrutinised deliveries are continuing as normal. Any disruption to Indian purchases of Russian oil could force it to look elsewhere for supplies. Last week, the country's largest processor bought several million barrels of crude from the US and United Arab Emirates in sudden large purchases that were set to be delivered relatively quickly, people familiar with the matter said. Under the president's deadline for Putin to halt the fighting in Ukraine, secondary sanctions targeting buyers of Russian oil could be imposed Friday. 'Secondary sanctions and tariffs against those that are paying for this war — like China, India and Brazil — by buying the oil that Russia is producing, is an obvious next step to try and bring this war to an end,' Matt Whitaker, the US ambassador to NATO, told Bloomberg Television. 'This is really going to hit them where it counts, and that is in their main revenue source, which is the sale of oil to these countries.' Trade talks Trump's escalating tariffs stunned India after months of negotiations. The president has intensified his rhetoric against India, assailing its levies and other barriers to US goods. He's also hit out at the nation's energy purchases from Russia and participation in the Brics group of developing economies, in particular over the bloc's consideration of alternatives to the US dollar. The Indian government has indicated it intends to continue talks with the US in hopes of securing lower tariffs. India is considering ramping up natural gas purchases from the US and increasing imports of communication equipment and gold. Officials see those moves as helping to narrow India's trade surplus with the US, a key concern for Trump. The US had a trade deficit with India of about $43 billion last year, the 11th largest, according to figures from the International Monetary Fund. But there are numerous sticking points, with Modi reluctant to open up sensitive sectors like agriculture and dairy to the US. Relations between Modi and Trump have deteriorated in the president's second term. After clashes earlier this year between India and Pakistan, Trump threatened to block access to US markets if the countries did not halt the fighting. Trump has claimed his actions brought peace, a view that has rankled Modi's government. Pressure on Russia India has been caught in the middle of Trump's enhanced focus on ending Russia's war in Ukraine. The president vowed to quickly end Russia's invasion but those efforts have been stymied by Putin, who has responded with only maximalist demands for Ukrainian territory and refused face-to-face discussions with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy. Trump has grown increasingly frustrated with Putin, leading to his latest threats to impose economic penalties on Moscow. He has floated tougher sanctions in the past only to delay action in hopes of preserving negotiations. Trump told reporters Sunday that special envoy Steve Witkoff would go to Russia this week — on Wednesday or Thursday — for further discussions. Tensions between Washington and Moscow intensified last week when Trump said he had moved two nuclear submarines in response to 'highly provocative statements' from former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev.
Bangkok Post
7 hours ago
- Bangkok Post
A Faustian bargain for the Global South
US President Donald Trump's tariff policies have unleashed global economic turmoil and a wave of protectionist measures. While many of his frequently changing tariffs may prove short-lived, their use as geopolitical weapons is poised to reshape international trade for years to come. But the current fixation on Mr Trump's tariffs diverts attention from the larger goal: the US is leveraging its economic power to push for market liberalisation and preferential access for American firms, often at the expense of lower-income countries' development prospects. Today's US-China standoff is a prime example. America's hostile posture toward China has never been just about trade. Rather, it reflects a strategic ambition to preserve US technological dominance. That effort has since become part of a broader campaign to restrict access to advanced technologies across the developing world. The primary tool for achieving this goal has been the imposition of increasingly restrictive intellectual-property (IP) rules that aim to privatise knowledge through patents, copyrights, and industrial designs. This helps explain why the trade agreement with Indonesia includes several provisions designed to limit the country's ability to move up the value chain into knowledge-intensive industries. Tellingly, Indonesia will eliminate 99% of its tariffs on American industrial, food, and agricultural imports, while Indonesian exports to the US will face an average tariff rate of 19%. The immediate impact will be felt most acutely by Indonesian farmers, who must now compete against subsidised US agricultural products. But the longer-term risks lie in the dismantling of non-tariff barriers, which could severely constrain Indonesia's ability to diversify its economy and curtail its access to critical technologies. According to the joint statement announcing the deal, American firms will receive sweeping privileges. Indonesia will remove all content requirements for US-made goods and accept American vehicle-safety and emissions standards, which are far more lenient than its own. It must also recognise Food and Drug Administration approvals for medical devices and pharmaceuticals, exempt US food and agricultural imports from local licensing regimes, and accept US certifications for meat, dairy, and poultry products. Indonesia has also agreed to eliminate tariffs on intangible goods and support a global moratorium on digital customs duties -- issues that remain highly contested within the World Trade Organization. Even more troublesome are the IP provisions: the deal compels Indonesia to resolve key disputes over traditional knowledge, genetic resources, and compulsory licenses. The US is not alone in pursuing this agenda. While Indonesia's concessions are baffling, India's recent trade deal with the UK raises even more questions. Despite being years in the making, the deal has little commercial significance, as bilateral trade accounts for less than 2.5% of either country's exports. Media coverage of the UK-India deal has focused on tariff reductions: 92% of UK exports to India will receive full or partial tariff relief, while up to 99% of Indian exports to the UK will be tariff-free. Optimistic forecasts suggest the agreement could double export volumes in certain sectors: textiles, clothing, and jewellery for India; alcoholic beverages and automobiles for the UK. But as with the US-Indonesia deal, the most consequential element of this agreement is its IP provisions, which tilt the regulatory balance in favour of Western patent holders. For example, the deal promotes the use of "voluntary licences" over compulsory ones, potentially discouraging future price reductions. Another clause endorses the harmonisation of patent standards, opening the door to "evergreening" -- the extension of patents through minor tweaks to existing drugs. It is deeply disturbing that the Indian government has accepted these terms, which jeopardise not only the future of its pharmaceutical industry but also the global supply of affordable drugs. India's willingness to make such concessions to a weakened former colonial power -- one that is no longer a major trading partner -- makes the potential outcome of its trade talks with the European Union and the US all the more alarming. To ensure India's economic future, Prime Minister Narendra Modi must stop cracking down on domestic dissent and start defending India's interests on the global stage. ©2025 Project Syndicate Jayati Ghosh, Professor of Economics at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, is a member of the Club of Rome's Transformational Economics Commission and Co-Chair of the Independent Commission for the Reform of International Corporate Taxation.
Bangkok Post
8 hours ago
- Bangkok Post
PM 'has no plan' to quit before ruling
Prommin Lertsuridej, secretary-general to suspended prime minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra, rejected reports which suggest the premier would resign before the Constitutional Court issues a ruling on the leaked recording of her conversation with Cambodian Senate President Hun Sen. Several media reports claimed Ms Paetongtarn is planning to quit as premier before the court hands down the ruling to avoid a guilty verdict in the case. If she steps down early, the case would be aborted, saving her from a political ban that comes with an unfavourable ruling. Responding to questions from the press about the rumour, Dr Prommin said on Monday there was no truth to such reports. "I can confirm that she has no intention to resign at this time," he said. "We are proceeding in strict accordance with the law, and we stand by the legitimacy of our actions." Dr Prommin said Ms Paetongtarn was confident about her prospects, as she had no other intentions but to guide the country away from the security crisis unfolding along the border. He said as the nation's leader, Ms Paetongtarn consulted thoroughly with security agencies, including the military and the National Security Council, before implementing any measures. She made informal calls to individuals outside official channels to help defuse tensions and prevent violent confrontations with Cambodia, Dr Prommin said. "I believe her intention was to act responsibly as the country's leader. Despite being suspended from official duties by the Constitutional Court, she respects the court's authority and awaits its ruling. "She hopes the decision will reflect her commitment and determination to guide Thailand towards peace as swiftly as possible," Dr Prommin said. When asked whether the explanation submitted to the court, if viewed strictly in legal terms, could potentially constitute an ethical breach, Dr Prommin said the facts of the case, surrounding circumstances, and relevant legal provisions had all been carefully considered. He said the written statement had clearly addressed the ethical allegations and cited pertinent legal statutes.
