Losing the narrative

Bangkok Post

20 hours ago

Since the border clashes between Thailand and Cambodia began and up until the recently brokered ceasefire, Thailand has struggled to present its position to the world.
However, the joint press briefing by the Thai military and Foreign Ministry during a visit by military attachés to the conflict zone on Friday marked one of the most coherent and assertive efforts to communicate the facts on the ground.
One of the key lessons from this conflict is the critical importance of proactive diplomacy and strategic communication with the international community.
This responsibility lies squarely with the government, national leadership and the Foreign Ministry. Yet Cambodia has consistently outpaced Thailand in projecting its narrative, winning sympathy abroad, even as facts on the ground indicate otherwise.
Evidence clearly shows that civilian areas, including schools, hospitals and entire communities, have been damaged by indiscriminate military attacks by Cambodian forces, and Thailand did not open fire on civilians nor historic sites.
Even after a ceasefire was agreed, Cambodia violated the terms with continued shelling. Still, Thailand has failed to tell the world about the glaring violation of the Geneva Convention Additional Protocol I (1977) and customary international humanitarian law.
Comments by Sean O'Neill, nominee for US ambassador to Thailand, underscored the perception gap Thailand faces internationally.
During his Senate confirmation hearing, Mr O'Neill criticised the border conflict as harmful and counterproductive, saying it neither benefits Thais nor strengthens the US-Thailand alliance, but instead results in unnecessary loss and hardship.
That message did not reflect an understanding of Thailand's defensive position or the complexities of the situation. Similarly, statements from China have not helped improve Thailand's standing in the eyes of the global community.
The underlying problem is Thailand's passive diplomatic posture and weak communication campaign. The government has spent each day fending off Cambodian accusations, many of which are distorted or false, without clearly asserting Thailand's own narrative.
As Cambodian strongman Hun Sen eloquently pushes his narratives on the global stage, Thailand's leadership is out of sight, and Thai netizens and social media influencers fill the gap.
Domestically, the government faces a crisis of confidence. A recent leak of an audio clip featuring Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra and Hun Sen has deepened public mistrust. A poll by Rangsit University shows that over 60% of Thais have no confidence in the prime minister's ability to manage the Thai-Cambodian conflict, while only 1% expressed strong confidence.
Similarly, a survey by the Institute of Future Studies for Development found 85.5% of respondents had little or no trust in the government. In contrast, a poll by the Asia Vision Institute in Phnom Penh found that 93.6% of Cambodians were satisfied with their government's handling of the situation.
The Friday briefing to foreign military attachés was direct, well-documented and addressed Cambodia's allegations point by point. Unfortunately, it came late.
No matter how justified Thailand's actions may be, if the world remains unaware, Thailand will continue to lose ground in international diplomacy. A new era of proactive, strategic diplomacy must begin now.
Since the outbreak of border clashes between Thailand and Cambodia, up until the recently brokered ceasefire, Thailand has struggled to effectively present its position to the world. However, the joint press briefing by the Thai military and Foreign Ministry during a visit by military attachés to the conflict zone on Friday marked one of the most coherent and assertive efforts to communicate the facts on the ground.
One of the key lessons from this border conflict is the critical importance of proactive diplomacy and strategic communication with the international community. This responsibility lies squarely with the government, national leadership, and the Foreign Ministry. Yet, Cambodia has consistently outpaced Thailand in projecting its narrative, winning sympathy abroad, even as facts on the ground indicate otherwise.
Evidence clearly shows that c ivilian areas, including schools, hospitals, and entire communities, have suffered indiscriminate attacks by Cambodian forces and Thailand did not open fires. Even after a ceasefire was agreed, Cambodia reportedly violated the terms with continued shelling. Still, Thailand has failed to turn these facts into international awareness and support.
Comments by Sean O'Neill, the nominee for U.S. ambassador to Thailand, underscored the perception gap Thailand faces internationally. During his Senate confirmation hearing, O'Neill criticised the border conflict as harmful and counterproductive, saying it neither benefits the Thai people nor strengthens the US-Thailand alliance, but instead results in unnecessary loss and hardship.
That message did not reflect an understanding of Thailand's defensive position or the complexities of the situation. Similarly, statements from China have not helped improve Thailand's standing in the eyes of the global community.
The underlying problem is Thailand's passive diplomatic posture. The government has spent each day fending off Cambodian accusations, many of which are distorted or false, without clearly asserting Thailand's own narrative. The leadership has remained largely absent from global discourse. In the resulting vacuum, Thai netizens and social media influencers have stepped in to share the truth with the world.
Domestically, the government faces a crisis of confidence. A recent leak of an audio clip featuring Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra and former Cambodian leader Hun Sen has deepened public mistrust. A poll conducted by Rangsit University shows that over 60% of Thais have no confidence in the prime minister's ability to manage the Thai-Cambodian conflict, while only 1% expressed strong confidence.
Similarly, a survey by the Institute of Future Studies for Development found that 85.59% of respondents had little or no trust in the current government. In contrast, a poll by the Asia Vision Institute in Phnom Penh found that 93.6% of Cambodians were satisfied with their government's handling of the situation.
The Friday briefing to foreign military attachés was a rare moment when Thailand presented its side with clarity and conviction. It was direct, well-documented, and addressed Cambodia's allegations point by point. Unfortunately, it came late. The global narrative had already taken shape, influenced by early and sustained Cambodian messaging.
Thailand must learn from this experience. In a world where communication moves at the speed of social media and perception often overrides fact, even the truth needs a strategy. No matter how justified Thailand's actions may be, if the world remains unaware, Thailand will continue to lose ground in international diplomacy, especially in conflicts with smaller, seemingly less powerful nations like Cambodia.
A new era of proactive, strategic diplomacy must begin now.