Israel issues Thailand, Cambodia travel warning amid violent clashes
The ministry emphasized 'the northeastern provinces of Thailand and the northwestern provinces of Cambodia' in particular as places to avoid.
Thailand is a popular destination for Israelis, with hundreds of thousands of citizens estimated to travel there annually.
7 The Israeli Foreign Ministry issued a statement, recommending that Israeli nationals 'avoid entering or staying in the border area' between Thailand and Cambodia in light of the cross-border fighting.
via REUTERS
Clashes broke out on Thursday morning near the Khmer Hindu temple Ta Muen Thom, after five Thai soldiers were wounded by mines the previous day, the Guardian reported.
Bangkok, in response, shuttered its northeastern borders with Cambodia and expelled the Cambodian ambassador from the country.
Thailand's Health Minister Somsak Thepsuthin said that 11 civilians and one soldier had been killed by Cambodian artillery shelling since the start of the fighting, according to Reuters.
The minister added that 24 civilians and seven military personnel had been wounded.
7 Thailand's Health Minister Somsak Thepsuthin said that 11 civilians and one soldier had been killed by Cambodian artillery shelling since the start of the fighting, according to Reuters.
Courtesy of Facebook user Chatchak Ratsamikaeo/AFP via Getty Images
7 Cambodian soldiers reload the BM-21 multiple rocket launcher in Preah Vihear province on July 24, 2025, according to reports.
AFP via Getty Images
'The Thai Army condemns Cambodia for using weapons to attack civilians in Thailand. Thailand is ready to protect sovereignty and our people from inhumane action,' the country's military said in a statement cited by Reuters.
Cambodian troops had opened fire near the temple, and deployed a surveillance drone before sending in troops with heavy weapons, including rocket launchers, the Thai military said, per the Guardian.
Cambodia denied those claims, with its Defense Ministry saying that 'Cambodian forces acted strictly within the bounds of self-defence, responding to an unprovoked incursion by Thai troops that violated our territorial integrity,' the report added.
7 Thai people who fled clashes between Thai and Cambodian soldiers take shelter in Surin province, northeastern Thailand, Thursday, July 24, 2025.
AP
7 Thai people who fled clashes between Thai and Cambodian soldiers take shelter in Surin province, northeastern Thailand, Thursday, July 24, 2025.
AP
A two-country territorial dispute has put a damper on their relations for years, but diplomatic ties took a nosedive in May after a Cambodian soldier was killed during a confrontation in one of the areas under dispute, according to the Associated Press.
The contesting claims derive largely from a 1907 map drawn under French colonial rule.
7 Clashes broke out on Thursday morning near the Khmer Hindu temple Ta Muen Thom, after five Thai soldiers were wounded by mines the previous day, according to reports.
AFP via Getty Images
7 Firefighters work to extinguish fire at a convenience store at a gas station, amid the clashes between Thailand and Cambodia.
via REUTERS
Phnom Penh has been using the map as a reference to claim territory, while Bangkok has argued the map is inaccurate.
Later on Thursday, Thailand said that F-16 fighter jets had attacked 'military targets' in Cambodia, AP reported.
The Royal Thai Army stated that the fighting has expanded to six different points along the border.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
23 minutes ago
- New York Post
Mark Levine will reinvest in Israel Bonds as next NYC comptroller — reversing Brad Lander divestment
The leading candidate for Big Apple comptroller says he will reinvest millions of dollars of city pension funds into Israeli bonds — after current Comptroller Brad Lander divested from them. When Lander took office in 2022, the pension funds of city government workers and retirees that he oversees had $39.9 million of assets in Israeli bonds. When the bonds matured, Lander did not reinvest in them, in effect divesting the pension funds from bonds that New York City had invested in since the 1970s. Advertisement Brad Lander did not reinvest in Israeli bonds, despite it being a standard practice by the city since the 1970s Adam Gray for New York Post A campaign rep for Levine — Manhattan's borough president and the Democratic nominee for comptroller and thus likely next comptroller — said his boss will invest in Israel government bonds again if elected. 'We have a globally diversified portfolio, and that should include investments in Israel and Israel Bonds, which have paid solid dividends for 75 years,' Levine had said during the June comptroller primary-race debate with rival and Brooklyn Councilman, Justin Brannan. Advertisement 'We are now the only pension fund in America without that investment,' Levine said at the time. 'I think prudent management for global diversity should include investment in those assets.' Lander was criticized during his mayoral campaign for divesting from Israeli bonds. Foes have noted that he and Israel-bashing socialist buddy Zohran Mamdani cross-endorsed each other in the city's Democratic primary in June — a move that is credited with helping propel the far-left Mamdani well in front of the pack to clinch the party's nomination. Lander recently spelled out his divestment decision in a response letter to First Deputy Mayor Randy Mastro, who had ripped the divesting. Advertisement Lander had accused prior comptrollers of investing pension funds from unionized workers in Israeli bonds for political reasons, not for prudent returns. The Big Apple first invested $30 million in State of Israel Bonds in 1974 under former city Comptroller Harrison Goldin through its pension funds for educators. 'We are now the only pension fund in America without that investment,' Mark Levine (pictured) said during June's debate. 'I think prudent management for global diversity should include investment in those assets.' Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty Images 'The decision to invest only in Israel bonds, when the funds held no other country's bonds, and to invest assets intended for short-term cash management in longer-term bond instruments, was a political decision, not a fiduciary one,' Lander said in his July 13 letter. Advertisement 'The City's pension fund holdings of Israel bonds amounted to $39,947,160 at the time I took office in January 2022. In January 2023, those bonds matured, and our office was faced with the choice of whether or not to purchase new ones. We consulted our guidelines and made the prudent decision to follow them, and therefore not to continue investing in the sovereign debt of just one country.' Lander, who is Jewish and a self-described Zionist, added, 'To summarize: We treat investments in Israel as we treat investments in any other country. No better, and no worse. 'The [Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions] Movement asks investors to treat Israel worse than other countries; I oppose this effort. You appear to be asking that the City's pension funds treat Israel better than all other countries. That would also be politically motivated, and inconsistent with fiduciary duty.' He then accused Mayor Eric Adams of using the city's divestment of Israeli bonds as a 'cynical ploy' in his desperate re-election campaign. But Lander's predecessor as comptroller, Scott Stringer, said Lander was out of line for claiming that Israeli bonds are not a worthy investment. 'Brad got busted for BDS'ing the pension system. He got caught, and now he has to own up to it,' Stringer told The Post. Stringer said he was infuriated with Lander for claiming Stringer and other prior comptrollers invested in Israeli bonds for political, not sound financial, reasons. Advertisement He said Israeli bonds had always been a sound investment and told Lander to 'f–k off. 'If you get busted, you can't be trusted,' Stringer said. Israeli bonds are considered a solid investment, accumulating about 5% returns on average a year, records show. The New York state pension system, run by state Comptroller Tom DiNapoli, has more than $360 million invested in the Jewish state.
Boston Globe
23 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
MIT has stayed out of Trump's fight against elite colleges. Recent incidents could draw it back in.
All the elements are here for another high-profile confrontation — and it couldn't be happening at a more inopportune time. Advertisement 'There's no question that people in Washington are looking at MIT,' said Kenneth L. Marcus, chairman of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, which Kornbluth, who is Jewish, is yet again facing challenges to her leadership that also test the limits of free speech on campus, only this time President Trump is back in office. 'My central responsibility is to make sure that the work of the people of MIT continues, work that's central to America's health, wealth, and national security,' said Kornbluth, who has met with Washington officials, including Education Secretary Linda McMahon. MIT isn't immune to the whims and will of the White House, which is currently investigating the school's involvement with a higher education nonprofit as part of a widespread Advertisement But it has a unique vulnerability with its extensive relationship with the US Department of Defense: The school's That relationship also makes MIT uniquely valuable to the US government. And back in Cambridge, Kornbluth must navigate a delicate course managing an unwieldy range of constituencies. There are professors whose labs rely on defense funding, and protesters who claim MIT's contributions to technology are being misused by one of the US's allies, Israel. Even the pro-Palestinian movement on campus contains multitudes, including students who've lost family members in Gaza and Jewish allies who say the university is abetting mass violence in the Middle East. The rising activism has come along with a change in rhetoric that some see as increasingly extreme. Over the July Fourth weekend, vandals spray-painted 'Death to the IDF,' on the entrance to MIT's An outside group, Direct Action Movement for Palestinian Liberation, appeared to take credit for the tagging, and circulated a video accusing MIT professor Daniela Rus, who heads the Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory inside the Stata Center, of being complicit in genocide. Kornbluth has repeatedly defended Rus, who did robotics research Advertisement But because serving in the nation's military is mandatory for Israeli citizens, the IDF graffiti also essentially targeted 'all of us' on campus, said Or Hen, an associate professor of physics from Jerusalem who estimates around 3 percent of faculty at MIT are from Israel. 'We have people on campus who fought in Gaza last year. We have people in reserve duty. So when they talk about death to soldiers ... we all did army service.' Rifts are resurfacing on campus, but positioning them as being between ethnic or religious groups is a 'false conflict,' said Jeremy Fleishhacker, a graduate student in plasma physics and member of The real divide is between school administrators and those pressuring them to cut 'problematic research connections' with Israel, Fleishhacker said and pointed to a An MIT spokesperson said the UN report contains 'mischaracterizations' that 'appear to be drawn from campus advocacy groups,' and noted that between fiscal years 2015 and 2024, MIT received less than $4 million in grants for individual research projects through the Israeli Ministry of Defense. Moreover, such research involves work that is 'open and publishable,' and not limited to a particular country, she added. FILE - MIT students and faculty protested outside campus in September 2024. Erin Clark/Globe Staff Kornbluth said in a Stata Center vandalism and will 'press for criminal charges.' That followed her Advertisement 'Of course it is legitimate to criticize the actions of any government,' Hen said he appreciates Kornbluth's 'extremely high' level of communication. But Mila Halgren, a postdoc in brain and cognitive sciences and member of the MIT Coalition for Palestine, says administrators are overly concerned with public messaging. In May, MIT 'They think that repression and punishment of students is going to quell people talking about Israeli military ties,' Halgren said. Others suggest MIT administrators don't seem concerned enough. Talia Khan, a PhD student in mechanical engineering and founder of the MIT Israel Alliance, said the Trump administration is making an example of Harvard for a reason, but school officials are failing to see that what's happening just 'down the road' can also happen to MIT. Now, with its lawsuit, the Brandeis Center is trying to pick up where the 2023 congressional hearings left off. 'MIT is significant because [Kornbluth] is the only university president from the congressional hearings who has apparently survived so far,' said Marcus. 'This case shows that antisemitism doesn't stop at the science quad.' The lead plaintiffs in the Brandeis Center's Advertisement The lawsuit claims MIT failed to address a 'hostile anti-Semitic environment on campus' after Hamas attacked Israel Oct. 7, 2023. It also named a tenured MIT professor of linguistics, Michel DeGraff, as a defendant. In fall 2024, DeGraff taught a seminar on language and power using his native Haiti as well as Palestine and Israel. Around that time, he posted on Instagram about a 'Zionist 'mind infection,'' which the lawsuit claims he linked to Jewish organizations such as Hillel. DeGraff said the accusation conflates anti-Zionism with antisemitism. When Sussman A university spokesperson said MIT 'rejects antisemitism' and will defend itself in court. In an email, DeGraff said the lawsuit's allegations 'are riddled with reality-bending lies, distortions, and mirror accusations,' which he sees as 'part of a larger settler-colonial Zionist campaign of obfuscation and intimidation that presents a major threat to academic freedom and freedom of expression, especially in the context of the plausibility of Israel's genocide of Palestinians in Gaza.' MIT had fended off a similar lawsuit related to the Gaza campus protests that was Advertisement The question this time around isn't just whether MIT can clear that bar again; for some, it's also whether clearing the bar is enough. 'Even if it turns out that MIT operated within the law,' said Ernest Fraenkel, Grover M. Hermann Professor in the Department of Biological Engineering, 'that doesn't mean it lived up to the standards that MIT would like to hold itself to.' Brooke Hauser can be reached at
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
There Are No More Reasons for U.S. Presence in Middle East
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu left Washington without a ceasefire deal for Gaza. Like U.S. efforts to broker an Iran nuclear agreement and end Houthi attacks in the Red Sea, the war in Gaza is yet another example of the United States being over-engaged and overconfident about a favorable outcome in the Middle East. Diplomacy is a good thing; so is encouraging stability across the Middle East. But instead of obsessing about fixing the region's problems, Washington needs to focus on vital U.S. interests, of which there are few in the Middle East. That means drawing down the majority of the 40,000 to 50,000 U.S. troops spread across 30 bases in the region. Throughout the 1980s, the United States had only two permanent bases in the Middle East. Aside from some short-lived ground operations, it largely stayed offshore with an occasional rotation of naval assets to protect the free flow of oil to global markets. Two vital interests—oil and terrorism—eventually brought U.S. forces on shore. Iraq's 1990 invasion of Kuwait raised the danger of a single hegemonic power controlling global oil supplies. After deploying 540,000 troops to push Iraq out of Kuwait in the First Gulf War, Washington adopted a strategy of dual containment to prevent either Iraq or Iran from dominating the region. Around 25,000 U.S. troops were stationed permanently at new bases in the Persian Gulf throughout the 1990s. The September 11 terrorist attacks, related wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the 2014 rise of ISIS brought the next surge of troops. New U.S. bases emerged in Syria, Iraq, Jordan, and elsewhere. Troop levels soared at times to above 200,000. The big question now is: why are U.S. troops still in the Middle East? U.S. vital interests in the region are gone, but the forces stay. It makes no sense. Since 2019, the United States has been a net exporter of oil, meaning it's no longer dependent on the Middle East for its energy needs. Moreover, there are no regional hegemons on the horizon. Iraq is now a U.S. strategic partner. With the near-decimation of its regional proxies, a fragile economy, and battered missile defenses, Iran is weaker now than it has been at any point since the 1978–79 revolution. It has no capacity to make a bid—even with a nuclear weapon—for regional hegemony. The recent U.S. strikes against Iran prove challenges can be handled from offshore: bombers flew from Missouri, not from U.S. bases in the Middle East, to hit Iran's nuclear facilities. US soldiers inspect the site of reported Turkish shelling days earlier on an oil extraction facility on the outskirts of Rumaylan, in Syria's Kurdish-controlled northeastern Hasakeh province on October 28, 2024. US soldiers inspect the site of reported Turkish shelling days earlier on an oil extraction facility on the outskirts of Rumaylan, in Syria's Kurdish-controlled northeastern Hasakeh province on October 28, 2024. Delil SOULEIMAN / AFP/Getty Images Washington has an interest in maintaining open sea lanes in the region to ensure stable global oil prices. But it can handle that objective with something akin to the 1980s force posture, not the bloated ground presence we have now. U.S. access to a handful of strategically located naval bases in the Persian Gulf should do the trick. The terrorism threat is also mostly gone and capable of being handled by local actors. The ISIS caliphate was defeated in 2019 and al-Qaeda is extremely weak. Developments in post-Assad Syria have opened new avenues for regional states to work together in managing what remains of ISIS. The most influential ISIS and al-Qaeda affiliates aren't located in the Middle East and are almost exclusively local insurgencies incapable of posing a threat to the United States. In short, the issues—oil and terrorism—that have traditionally anchored the U.S. military presence in the Middle East for decades no longer offer good reasons to keep troops in the region today. Some might say we need to stay to protect Israeli sovereignty, counter China, or act as an insurance policy of some sort. None of these reasons hold up. Even after the events of October 7, 2023, Israel is more secure today than at any point since its founding due to the collapse of the Assad regime in Syria and the decimation of Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran. As a slew of new research shows, China has no plans or means to seize leadership in the Middle East. And staying "just in case" makes for an expensive insurance policy and gives unfriendly actors targets to fire at—U.S. forces in the region have been attacked hundreds of times in the last two years, including most recently by Iran. Sticking around "just in case" could also do more harm than good to regional stability. The reduction of U.S. forces in Syria helped unify the post-Assad Syrian state. Likewise, a 2019 U.S. decision to not retaliate after an Iranian attack on Saudi oil facilities contributed to Riyadh winding down its war in Yemen and normalizing relations with Iran. Who knows? Stepping back might even help bring a sustainable peace to Gaza someday. So let's get going. The sooner the U.S. draws down troops, the better. Will Walldorf is a Professor at Wake Forest University and Senior Fellow at Defense Priorities. He is currently writing a book titled America's Forever Wars: Why So Long, Why End Now, What Comes Next. The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.
