Recent Thai actions along the border around Cambodia’s Banteay Meanchey and Pursat provinces have prompted controversy. Information from multiple sides indicated that Thai troops had placed military containers, raised Thai flags and erected barbed-wire fences inside Cambodia. These were described not as temporary defensive measures but as physical deployments with a clear element of control, allegedly seeking to create a fait accompli through a military presence.
The analysis argued that these actions could not reasonably be explained as self-defence. It stated that international law prohibited states from unilaterally changing the status quo in disputed or undemarcated areas, and that sovereignty could not be established through flags, fences or military facilities but should rest on treaties, maps and mutually accepted demarcation mechanisms. It considered the Thai actions contrary to international-law principles and previous ceasefire understandings and commitments against unilateral action.
More seriously, the actions were considered to undermine trust within ASEAN. The analysis said ASEAN’s Treaty of Amity and Cooperation required members to refrain from force and settle disputes peacefully, and unilateral border militarisation was clearly contrary to those principles. In contrast, Cambodia had exercised restraint, taken no equivalent military action and continued calling for legal settlement through the Joint Boundary Commission (JBC). Analysts said border issues could only be resolved through law and negotiations, and Thailand should remove the facilities, stop unilateral action and return unconditionally to the boundary-negotiation mechanism.
Compiled report by this station