A Bangkok-based Western researcher requested a meeting with me on Tuesday afternoon in Bangkok to discuss the troubling Thai–Cambodian relations, asking me whether I see any hope for the normalisation of the two neighbouring ASEAN member states. Before attempting to answer, I learned that he had recently visited Phnom Penh to talk to experts and officials (probably asking similar questions that were posed to me), so I asked for his personal assessment of the other side of the border first.
Here are his answers, handwritten by this writer as the man gave his take. Please note that he is well aware that I am turning the tables around and explicitly told him that he would be quoted in my column today, although his identity and the organisation he works for will not be revealed.
Let’s call him John, which is not his real name.
John’s take on Cambodia:
“The fact of the war is much more present in people’s lives. [In Thailand] people just move on. [In Cambodia] it just weighs on people but not here [in Thailand].”
Please note that according to the Cambodian Ministry of Interior, as of mid-April 2026, over 34,000 Cambodian civilians remain displaced along the border with Thailand, despite the December 2025 ceasefire. In Thailand, virtually all displaced during the war have returned home.
John on Cambodian Senate President and de facto leader Hun Sen:
“Most people in Cambodia recognise that the war was a huge mistake, [and was conducted] out of emotions and not cold calculation. This was a mistake.
“They want to internationalise the issue,” John said, adding that an American public relations adviser working for Cambodia compares the conflict between Thailand and Cambodia to that of Israel and Palestine.
John then lamented his job, saying he will write a report on the conflict and recommendations. “It’s a thankless job. You’re gonna get shit from both sides.”
He then returned to criticising the Cambodian political leadership. “Cambodia acted in reckless and provocative ways. It’s really damaging to the Hun Sen regime, but it doesn’t sit well with the people there.”
I then interjected and told John that Thailand is currently playing hard to get, not wanting to quickly return to the Thailand–Cambodia Joint Boundary Commission (JBC) negotiating table. Also, Cambodian leaders cannot be seen as giving up the disputed lands and temples ‘lost’ to Thailand.
“What is it gonna take to get Thailand to restore normal diplomatic relations, e.g. reopen the border, resume trade and talk on the [disputed] boundaries?” John asks.
I told him that a big part has to do with domestic Thai politics where the conflict between Thailand and Cambodia has been used as a tool to maintain and bolster the popularity of the conservative royalist Bhumjaithai Party and Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul, as well as the Thai armed forces. Especially now that the economy is fragile—and that’s an understatement—Anutin needs a reason for ordinary Thais to feel good, and that is to replay Thailand’s ‘victory’ over Cambodia. Cambodia basically became Thailand’s bogeyman.
Also, Anutin may not be fully in control, I told John. To quickly compromise and reconcile with Cambodia could be seen as selling out the acquired ‘disputed lands and temples’ to Cambodia. After all, then-Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra eventually fell from power due to her perceived special relationship with her ‘uncle’, Hun Sen, which was revealed through the leaked audio recording last year.
John then reminded me that his boss wants to hear about the role of foreign states possibly mending ties between Thailand and Cambodia.
I told him only very few countries can assert any real influence or pressure. Japan failed when its embassy tried to call for the reopening of the border checkpoints in order to save its supply chains, but ended up being harshly criticised by Thai netizens who attacked the embassy’s Facebook page. It was so shocking that, last year, a senior correspondent from the Asahi Shimbun invited me to help explain why, as he believed Thailand and Japan maintained very good relations. I told the Japanese journalist that it was nothing personal against Japan but about ultranationalism blinding Thais from recognising what is best for Thailand.
It is clear that any nation with less influence on Thailand than Japan won’t make a difference.
This means it’s down to the United States, China, the EU and ASEAN.
The US is preoccupied with the cruel mess it has created (along with Israel) in Iran and the Middle East. China is giving it a try in an attempt to not only compete with the waning US influence in the ASEAN region, but to restore the region as China’s southern backyard. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi just finished his high-profile visits to Phnom Penh and Bangkok and met both PMs, but beyond the diplomatic politeness offered by Anutin about China’s bid to restore Thailand–Cambodia relations, the Thai PM basically made no commitment on that front.
Many Thais see Cambodia as a semi-satellite or client state of China, with its leaders’ continued tradition of seeking medical treatments and care there, and do not perceive China as impartial. China will try its best to reconcile the two nations, however, as it is in the best interests of the Middle Kingdom as well.
As for the European Union, they could try harder but they are preoccupied with what is happening in Ukraine, Iran and the US. France, a key member of the EU, meanwhile, is perceived as being sympathetic to Cambodia due to its colonial history.
Then there is the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in which both Thailand and Cambodia are members, but the current rotating chair, the Philippines, has made little progress on the issue.
John doesn’t believe that US President Donald Trump can do more than what he did last year in Kuala Lumpur when the ceasefire accord was signed, with the Malaysian PM and then ASEAN chair Anwar Ibrahim serving as the host.
“Trump had an impact last year. I don’t know if he could do it today.”
After the two-hour meeting ended, I wished John the best of luck in his work and left the café, my mind still preoccupied by the tragic reality of the situation between my country and Cambodia. I feel that those who stand for peace in both nations will have to work harder and be more imaginative in approaching the issue or more than a generation may be lost in both nations to this needless mutual animosity.
Many Thais may believe we have ‘won’. It is far from over. At best, this is a Pyrrhic victory—more accurately, a defeat for Thai–Cambodian relations and for ASEAN.
All those lands and temples currently under Thai control are ‘disputed’ and will remain so, and the sooner more Thais recognise this, the better it will be for us, for there is no happiness or genuine security in making your next-door neighbour your nemesis.
