Opinion: The cost of Thailand’s lack of policy and leadership (Part 1)

Opinion: The cost of Thailand’s lack of policy and leadership (Part 1)

Former allies Senate President Hun Sen and former Thai Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinwatra have fallen out since a border skirmish between the armies of Thailand and Cambodia on May 28. Senate

Khmer Times | Thailand’s reckless policies toward its neighbours and lack of clear leadership have severely strained its international standing and relations with the countries with which it shares a border.

This two-part series examines the consequences for previously good neighbourly relations caused by Thailand’s domestic political complications, most notably the lack of clear policies and leadership.

Cambodia has no interest in meddling in Thailand’s internal affairs
This article does not seek to express interest in Thailand’s domestic affairs and sovereign decision to choose its leader.

Previously, when Cambodia was accused of meddling, it was rather puzzling. Such a narrative seems to suggest that Cambodia is so powerful and influential that it can change the Thai prime minister at will, but this is not the case.

It is fully within Thailand’s purview to choose and topple its prime minister. The Thai constitutional court did not decide to remove the Tha prime minister on the instructions of Samdech Techo Hun Sen. Rather, it was because of the former Thai prime minister’s incapability to govern the country.

Cambodia knows best what foreign interference means. One only needs to grab a Cambodian history book to find out that its history is filled with foreign invasions, occupations and interferences.

Foreign invasions and occupations do not constitute ownership rights.

All civilised nations should teach history that differentiates between the past glory of imperialism, militarism, and expansionism and the current rules-based international order, in which territorial sovereignty is decided on the basis of international law, not force.

Given its unfortunate history, Cambodia is more inclined to adopt a defensive rather than an offensive mentality. It does not seek to revive the past glory of the Khmer Empire, which dates back to long before the creation of Siam. Such a historical debate and attempt to revive former glory, aimed at revising existing borders would create chaos and prevent every nation from living in peace.

Cambodia does not need to be lectured about domestic interference because Cambodia has been living with it, even until today.

No country in all of Southeast Asia has had its domestic politics as over-internationalised as Cambodia.

When foreign diplomats arrive daily to discuss and give instructions on how to run your government, that is called domestic interference.

When Cambodians who have dual nationalities, never set foot in Cambodia, and never paid taxes to the Cambodian government but to foreign tax coffers feel they have an inherent right to have a say in Cambodian politics and pass laws that restrict Cambodia’s right to self-determination, that is called internal interference.

In Cambodian history books, it is not difficult to identify instances where Cambodia was not even allowed to decide its own destiny. There have been countless such occasions.

It is true that Thailand’s domestic politics is not a matter that should concern Cambodia, but when Thailand’s domestic complications have degenerated into dangerous ultra-nationalism and militarism that aim to harm Cambodia’s sovereignty, security, and a formerly excellent bilateral friendship, Cambodia has every right to be concerned.

Cambodia’s peace is supported by peaceful borders created based on friendship, cultural linkages, trade, political trust, and a lasting and stable border based on international law.

Cambodia has had no choice but to refer its disputes with Thailand over the Mom Bei area and the temples of Ta Moan Thom, Ta Moan Tauch, and Ta Krabei to the International Court of Justice as bilateral mechanisms to resolve the border disputes have been exhausted. These four areas are considered the most dangerous flashpoints along the more than 800-kilometere bilateral border with Thailand. Ten years without progress demonstrate a blatant lack of commitment to the peaceful resolution of the disputes.

Except for the four areas mentioned above, Cambodia still relies on bilateral mechanisms to resolve border issues with Thailand, but the latter should demonstrate sincerity, consistency, and a clear line of command to ensure that negotiations can be conducted on the basis of international law and practices.

It is painful to see that the bilateral negotiations with Thailand have gone nowhere for more than 10 years due to Thailand’s domestic political complications, while Cambodia has completed almost 90% of boundary demarcation and marker-planting work with Laos and Vietnam.

For now, Cambodia has no confidence in bilateral mechanisms because Thailand has not shown the commitment to peace that Vietnam and Laos have. And with the Thai leadership vacuum, Cambodia fears that any agreement reached today will be forgotten the next.

The Thai government and the Thai military do not speak the same language.

Thailand’s two-faced approach has undermined trust and the negotiation process.

Thailand’s political confusion must be managed by the Thai people, not misused to provoke border conflicts with its neighbours. The fact that the Thai constitutional court unanimously agreed to consider the petition against the Thai prime minister constitutes an official declaration acknowledging the country’s internal confusion.

Thailand should stop exporting its internal confusion to its neighbours. Cambodia has its own domestic problems and development to address.

All of Cambodia’s actions were acts of self-defence and a reaction to Thailand’s unilateral and irresponsible policies born out of a lack of clear leadership.

The author is a Phnom Penh based geopolitical commentator. The views expressed here are the author’s own.