Gopura V of the Preah Vihear Temple complex, standing near the UNESCO and World Heritage flags, was damaged during what Cambodia describes as Thailand’s ‘war of aggression’ in July and December 2025. Hong Raksmey
Last year’s border conflict, described by Cambodian officials as Thailand’s “war of aggression”, has caused three major crises in Cambodia — humanitarian, heritage and international law — while many of its impacts have yet to be fully addressed.
The assessment was made by Kong Puthikar, director-general of the National Authority for Preah Vihear (NAPV), during a September 9 roundtable discussion on the mine and unexploded ordnance (UXO) situation in Preah Vihear province.
He noted that the extensive visible damage to temples, homes and infrastructure represented only part of the conflict’s consequences, which has also affected people’s lives, heritage protection and confidence in the effectiveness of international law.
Humanitarian crisis
Puthikar identified the humanitarian crisis as the first major consequence, noting that some displaced residents remained unable to return to their homes. Some children had not resumed their education, while many families continue to face disruptions to healthcare, employment and livelihoods.
“Schoolchildren have been unable to attend classes, while residents have not had adequate access to public healthcare services. This is the humanitarian crisis caused by the war,” he said.
He noted that Thai troops have occupied some border areas and erected razor-wire barriers, preventing Cambodian residents from returning to their homes.
He stressed that the situation in Preah Vihear represented only one part of the broader impact along the Cambodia-Thailand border.
Speaking at the same event, Preah Vihear provincial governor Kim Rithy said approximately 97 per cent of displaced residents in the province had returned home, while the remaining 3 per cent were still unable to do so because their villages were located in areas classified by the authorities as red or yellow zones.
A Cambodian child in a temporary ‘waiting village’ in Preah Vihear province. Hong Raksmey
According to the governor, red zones refer to areas which the provincial administration says are occupied by Thai forces, while yellow zones are locations considered to pose high security risks.
Rithy said approximately 16,000 families, or 54,000 people, across Choam Ksan district were evacuated during the fighting.
A provincial assessment found that 765 civilian homes were struck during the fighting, including 135 which sustained severe damage, 39 with moderate damage and 591 with minor damage.
CMAC personnel display cluster munitions they removed from a civilian residence in Sra’em, Preah Vihear province. Hong Raksmey
Rithy said the data had been collected by local authorities, with photographs and GPS coordinates recorded for each affected home.
For residents unable to return to their original villages, the government has constructed 645 houses in Ta Keung Baitong village, along with roads, clean water supplies, electricity, schools, a health centre and administrative offices.
Despite the provision of new housing, the governor acknowledged that approximately half of the residents regularly left the village to seek work elsewhere because local income-generating opportunities remained limited.
Heritage crisis
Puthikar identified damage to cultural heritage and the disruption of conservation activities as the second crisis.
He said Preah Vihear temple sustained damage at 562 points, 142 during the July clashes and a further 420 during the fighting in December.
The damage affected architectural structures, carvings, stone pillars, gopuras, stairways and tourism infrastructure, he explained.
Puthikar noted that Keo Sikha Kiri Svara pagoda sustained severe damage, while a statue of Vishnu An Ses area was destroyed with machinery.
He also mentioned that the Tamone, Ta Krabei and Khnar temples in Oddar Meanchey province suffered extensive damage and are now occupied by Thai forces.
He said the occupation has prevented Cambodia, as the legal guardian of the heritage sites, from accessing them to conduct damage assessments, prevent further deterioration or carry out conservation work.
At Preah Vihear temple, Cambodian teams have been able to conduct some emergency stabilisation work, although the security of conservation officials remains threatened by the military situation near the temple, he added.
Repair and conservation projects undertaken by the NAPV and international partners, including from India, China and the US, have been suspended.
Journalists, accompanied by conservation officials, document damage to the ancient structures of Preah Vihear temple. Hong Raksmey
The authority is currently able to carry out only emergency measures, such as supporting unstable structures, sealing cracks and temporarily securing stone fragments to prevent further damage.
Crisis of international law
Puthikar described the third consequence as a crisis involving violations of international law, saying it raised questions about the effectiveness of international rules and mechanisms intended to protect sovereignty and cultural heritage.
He recalled the confrontations around Preah Vihear temple between 2008 and 2011, noting that the problem had continued despite the temple being protected by several international legal instruments and mechanisms.
These include the International Court of Justice’s 1962 judgment, its 2013 interpretation of that judgment, the 1904 and 1907 Franco-Siamese treaties, the 2000 memorandum of understanding on border demarcation and Preah Vihear temple’s status as a UNESCO World Heritage Site.
Puthikar questioned whether international law could be effectively enforced if the use of force, damage to heritage sites and restrictions preventing civilians from returning home were allowed to continue.
He said the third crisis extended beyond a bilateral dispute because it concerned confidence in the international legal system and the international community’s responsibility to protect the shared heritage of humanity.
The claims of attacks, occupation and damage presented at the roundtable were statements by Cambodian officials. No response from the Thai side to the specific allegations was included in the presentations.
