Politics Thai PM snubs World Court in border spat with Cambodia

[webfact]

FILE - In this photo released by the Thai Royal Thai Army, Cambodian Chief of Army Mao Sophan, left, meets with Thailand Chief of Army Gen. Pana Claewplodtook, right, at a border checkpoint in Surin province, Thailand, May 29, 2025. (Thai Royal Thai Army via AP, file)

 

Thailand's Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra has firmly declared the nation's refusal to bow to the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) amidst an ongoing border dispute with Cambodia.

 

Speaking on 5th June, she reiterated Thailand’s commitment to peaceful resolutions over the contested areas, which include three ancient temples. This decisive stance follows Cambodian PM Hun Manet's suggestion to elevate the row to the ICJ, excluding these from the upcoming Joint Border Committee talks.

 

Shinawatra took to social media after a spirited discussion on the border tensions with Foreign Minister Maris Sangiampongsa.

 

The dialogue comes hot on the heels of a clash in the Chong Bok area in Ubon Ratchathani on 28th May, highlighting the urgency of the situation. Defence boss Phumtham Wechayachai is boots on the ground, ensuring a comprehensive understanding of the stakes and options available to both neighbours.

 

Thailand stands its ground firmly, insisting on bilateral dialogue while refusing to entertain ICJ meddling. Since 1960, Bangkok has kept such international involvement at bay, underscoring a long-standing policy of handling disputes locally.

 

Former defence strategies and prime ministerial prowess anchor Thailand’s preference to keep the peace talks in-house, preserving the courteous camaraderie shared by their citizens.

 

At the heart of the contention are three historic sites – Prasat Ta Muen Thom, Prasat Ta Muen Tot, and Prasat Ta Khwai – alongside the Mombei area, located at the crux of a century-old cross-border saga. Both nations vie for cultural and territorial claims in a diplomatic dance steeped in complex history.

 

Ultimately, the Thai government emphasises maintaining “good neighbourliness” through agreed mechanisms rather than straying into unfamiliar legal waters.

 

Neighbourhood harmony remains the beating drum guiding Bangkok's approach, committed to a future forged by cooperative dialogue, firmly keeping foreign adjudicators at an arm’s length.

 

  Adapted by ASEAN Now from Thai Newsroom 2025-06-06

 

 

[Pouatchee]

 

 

Quote

Thai PM Puppet PM snubs World Court in border spat with Cambodia on order of her father.

 

There that's how it should read.

[JimHuaHin]

The court cannot be "bought", thus avoid.

[hotchilli]

10 hours ago, webfact said:

Since 1960, Bangkok has kept such international involvement at bay, underscoring a long-standing policy of handling disputes locally.

Times have changed, Thailand hasn't

[Thingamabob]

For once many people will agree with her. Best to ignore the ICJ.

[Kerryd]

The ICJ makes judgements based on POLITICS - not on "letter of the law" or actual facts.

Which is why they ruled against Thailand previously in the Phra Vihear issue - because they WANTED to give that temple to Cambodia despite it CLEARLY being in what should have been Thai territory.

Which stems back to the early 1900s when a FRENCH cartographer mapped out the border between Thailand and (French) Indo-China - France's colonies in SouthEast Asia (Laos, Vietnam and Cambodia at the time).

Whether the cartographer made a mistake, or didn't actually do the survey properly or deliberately excluded Phra Vihear from the Thai side of the border (ignoring the actual fall of the land and cutting that hill off for some reason) we will never know.

But we do know that, at the time, the temple didn't have any great significance, especially considering it's remote location.

It seems Thailand assumed the temple was on Thai territory in accordance with a 1904 treaty, but the map the French drew in 1907, for unexplained reasons, deviated slightly from the watershed it was supposed to follow, thus resulting in the temple being on the Cambodian side of the line.

But it stayed like that until 1954 when the French withdrew and Thailand occupied the temple to enforce their claim to it.

Cambodia went to the International Court of Justice and argued that because Thailand never objected to the error before, the temple should belong to Cambodia.

And despite the FACT the border was drawn in error - the ICJ agreed with Cambodia because it WANTED to give them that temple (to "help them" as they transitioned from being a French colony).
So the ruling was NOT based in fact or reality, but entirely on politics.

And in 2010 Cambodia filed a protest with Google Maps because Maps used the proper watershed line to delineate the border instead of the incorrect 1907 line.
(It is an issue still as Google Maps often show the border being completely different than what it is on the old maps.)

As late as 2013 the ICJ STILL considers the temple and adjacent lands to the East and West as being Cambodian, regardless of how the border should actually be.
Again, it seems they ruled that way because they were siding with "the little guy" and making their judgement based on politics instead of evidence and reality.
(The temple being "Cambodian" gives Cambodia more status as it gains another World Heritage Site and theoretically helps their economy - which is why the ICJ keeps ruling in Cambodia's favour instead of doing something rational like ordering the border to be redrawn properly to correct the error - because that would result in the temple firmly being in Thailand.)

And that is (likely) why Thailand is ignoring the ICJ because it knows they will NOT make judgements based on the law but based on whoever they want to grant favour to - or whoever is pulling their strings behind the scenes.
 

[Guderian]

Uncle Xi in Beijing pays no attention to the ICJ (and most other international bodies unless it suits him or he's bought them off, like the WHO), so why should his children? 

[Srikcir]

10 hours ago, webfact said:

the Thai government emphasises maintaining “good neighbourliness” through agreed mechanisms rather than straying into unfamiliar legal waters.

aka "any loss of sovereignty."

A Thai military mantra, to even give an inch it seems to danger to the nation. This is the same mantra to failing to achieve peace with the Malay Muslim insurrection after decades.

[peter zwart]

More bold, manly actions that will boost tourism. Keep it going guys.
 

[ujayujay]

Thailand has a problem: The Phra Vihear temple complex is located on Cambodian territory... It's clear that Thailand will lose before the ICJ. The fact that a prime minister wants to start a war over such peanuts is a testament to the boundless stupidity of the current government!

[wensiensheng]

1 hour ago, Kerryd said:

The ICJ makes judgements based on POLITICS - not on "letter of the law" or actual facts.

Which is why they ruled against Thailand previously in the Phra Vihear issue - because they WANTED to give that temple to Cambodia despite it CLEARLY being in what should have been Thai territory.

Which stems back to the early 1900s when a FRENCH cartographer mapped out the border between Thailand and (French) Indo-China - France's colonies in SouthEast Asia (Laos, Vietnam and Cambodia at the time).

Whether the cartographer made a mistake, or didn't actually do the survey properly or deliberately excluded Phra Vihear from the Thai side of the border (ignoring the actual fall of the land and cutting that hill off for some reason) we will never know.

But we do know that, at the time, the temple didn't have any great significance, especially considering it's remote location.

It seems Thailand assumed the temple was on Thai territory in accordance with a 1904 treaty, but the map the French drew in 1907, for unexplained reasons, deviated slightly from the watershed it was supposed to follow, thus resulting in the temple being on the Cambodian side of the line.

But it stayed like that until 1954 when the French withdrew and Thailand occupied the temple to enforce their claim to it.

Cambodia went to the International Court of Justice and argued that because Thailand never objected to the error before, the temple should belong to Cambodia.

And despite the FACT the border was drawn in error - the ICJ agreed with Cambodia because it WANTED to give them that temple (to "help them" as they transitioned from being a French colony).
So the ruling was NOT based in fact or reality, but entirely on politics.

And in 2010 Cambodia filed a protest with Google Maps because Maps used the proper watershed line to delineate the border instead of the incorrect 1907 line.
(It is an issue still as Google Maps often show the border being completely different than what it is on the old maps.)

As late as 2013 the ICJ STILL considers the temple and adjacent lands to the East and West as being Cambodian, regardless of how the border should actually be.
Again, it seems they ruled that way because they were siding with "the little guy" and making their judgement based on politics instead of evidence and reality.
(The temple being "Cambodian" gives Cambodia more status as it gains another World Heritage Site and theoretically helps their economy - which is why the ICJ keeps ruling in Cambodia's favour instead of doing something rational like ordering the border to be redrawn properly to correct the error - because that would result in the temple firmly being in Thailand.)

And that is (likely) why Thailand is ignoring the ICJ because it knows they will NOT make judgements based on the law but based on whoever they want to grant favour to - or whoever is pulling their strings behind the scenes.
 

I think you will find that the ICJ ruled for Cambodia because Thailand failed to file its claim in time. I will try to find links for the story which was widely reported.

[Espanol]

 

Have Thailand's borders with Cambodia been closed now?

[portisaacozzy]

1 hour ago, Kerryd said:

The ICJ makes judgements based on POLITICS - not on "letter of the law" or actual facts.

Which is why they ruled against Thailand previously in the Phra Vihear issue - because they WANTED to give that temple to Cambodia despite it CLEARLY being in what should have been Thai territory.

Which stems back to the early 1900s when a FRENCH cartographer mapped out the border between Thailand and (French) Indo-China - France's colonies in SouthEast Asia (Laos, Vietnam and Cambodia at the time).
thanks, that now makes sence
Whether the cartographer made a mistake, or didn't actually do the survey properly or deliberately excluded Phra Vihear from the Thai side of the border (ignoring the actual fall of the land and cutting that hill off for some reason) we will never know.

But we do know that, at the time, the temple didn't have any great significance, especially considering it's remote location.

It seems Thailand assumed the temple was on Thai territory in accordance with a 1904 treaty, but the map the French drew in 1907, for unexplained reasons, deviated slightly from the watershed it was supposed to follow, thus resulting in the temple being on the Cambodian side of the line.

But it stayed like that until 1954 when the French withdrew and Thailand occupied the temple to enforce their claim to it.

Cambodia went to the International Court of Justice and argued that because Thailand never objected to the error before, the temple should belong to Cambodia.

And despite the FACT the border was drawn in error - the ICJ agreed with Cambodia because it WANTED to give them that temple (to "help them" as they transitioned from being a French colony).
So the ruling was NOT based in fact or reality, but entirely on politics.

And in 2010 Cambodia filed a protest with Google Maps because Maps used the proper watershed line to delineate the border instead of the incorrect 1907 line.
(It is an issue still as Google Maps often show the border being completely different than what it is on the old maps.)

As late as 2013 the ICJ STILL considers the temple and adjacent lands to the East and West as being Cambodian, regardless of how the border should actually be.
Again, it seems they ruled that way because they were siding with "the little guy" and making their judgement based on politics instead of evidence and reality.
(The temple being "Cambodian" gives Cambodia more status as it gains another World Heritage Site and theoretically helps their economy - which is why the ICJ keeps ruling in Cambodia's favour instead of doing something rational like ordering the border to be redrawn properly to correct the error - because that would result in the temple firmly being in Thailand.)

And that is (likely) why Thailand is ignoring the ICJ because it knows they will NOT make judgements based on the law but based on whoever thethanksy want to grant favour to - or whoever is pulling their strings behind the scenes.
 

 

[bubblegum]

3 hours ago, Kerryd said:

The ICJ makes judgements based on POLITICS - not on "letter of the law" or actual facts.

Which is why they ruled against Thailand previously in the Phra Vihear issue - because they WANTED to give that temple to Cambodia despite it CLEARLY being in what should have been Thai territory.

Which stems back to the early 1900s when a FRENCH cartographer mapped out the border between Thailand and (French) Indo-China - France's colonies in SouthEast Asia (Laos, Vietnam and Cambodia at the time).

Whether the cartographer made a mistake, or didn't actually do the survey properly or deliberately excluded Phra Vihear from the Thai side of the border (ignoring the actual fall of the land and cutting that hill off for some reason) we will never know.

But we do know that, at the time, the temple didn't have any great significance, especially considering it's remote location.

It seems Thailand assumed the temple was on Thai territory in accordance with a 1904 treaty, but the map the French drew in 1907, for unexplained reasons, deviated slightly from the watershed it was supposed to follow, thus resulting in the temple being on the Cambodian side of the line.

But it stayed like that until 1954 when the French withdrew and Thailand occupied the temple to enforce their claim to it.

Cambodia went to the International Court of Justice and argued that because Thailand never objected to the error before, the temple should belong to Cambodia.

And despite the FACT the border was drawn in error - the ICJ agreed with Cambodia because it WANTED to give them that temple (to "help them" as they transitioned from being a French colony).
So the ruling was NOT based in fact or reality, but entirely on politics.

And in 2010 Cambodia filed a protest with Google Maps because Maps used the proper watershed line to delineate the border instead of the incorrect 1907 line.
(It is an issue still as Google Maps often show the border being completely different than what it is on the old maps.)

As late as 2013 the ICJ STILL considers the temple and adjacent lands to the East and West as being Cambodian, regardless of how the border should actually be.
Again, it seems they ruled that way because they were siding with "the little guy" and making their judgement based on politics instead of evidence and reality.
(The temple being "Cambodian" gives Cambodia more status as it gains another World Heritage Site and theoretically helps their economy - which is why the ICJ keeps ruling in Cambodia's favour instead of doing something rational like ordering the border to be redrawn properly to correct the error - because that would result in the temple firmly being in Thailand.)

And that is (likely) why Thailand is ignoring the ICJ because it knows they will NOT make judgements based on the law but based on whoever they want to grant favour to - or whoever is pulling their strings behind the scenes.
 

Actually the court made the decision based on facts. Read you own post. What is not a fact (only in your mind) is that the border was drawn wrong.

[bubblegum]

1 hour ago, Espanol said:

 

Have Thailand's borders with Cambodia been closed now?

No

[Donga]

The ICJ is becoming increasingly irrelevant, like the UN and WHO - dangerous, unelected administrators.

[ChipButty]

Lets have a good olé boarder war good for tourism, I reckon the Chinese will back the Cambodians. 

[Hunz Kittisak]

No worries Tony is best buddy with Cambodian strongman PM.

Issue will be resolved soon

[Luuk Chaai]

10 hours ago, ChipButty said:

Lets have a good olé boarder war good for tourism, I reckon the Chinese will back the Cambodians. 

 

you mean the shins !

[Chongalulu]

Putin has been called in as an impartial mediator based on his significant experience as an expert on border disputes. A fair and peaceful resolution is anticipated in short order..

[thesetat]

On 6/6/2025 at 3:25 AM, webfact said:

Thailand stands its ground firmly, insisting on bilateral dialogue while refusing to entertain ICJ meddling. Since 1960, Bangkok has kept such international involvement at bay, underscoring a long-standing policy of handling disputes locally.

So basically, Thailand wants to be a part of the ICJ but they do not want to adhere to any decision made by them if it goes against what their PM wants. Sounds like a dictatorship that needs to be straightened out. So much for being a democratic society if the leaders can not even follow the laws and rulings given by a higher court. 

[thesetat]

1 hour ago, Chongalulu said:

Putin has been called in as an impartial mediator based on his significant experience as an expert on border disputes. A fair and peaceful resolution is anticipated in short order..

What does this OP have to do with Putin? 

[Chongalulu]

7 hours ago, thesetat said:

8 hours ago, Chongalulu said:

Putin has been called in as an impartial mediator based on his significant experience as an expert on border disputes. A fair and peaceful resolution is anticipated in short order..

What does this OP have to do with Putin? 

Whoosh! There…over your head!