Border Thai and Cambodian Troops Clash Near Ta Muen Thom Temple

[ezflip]

Just got home from Prasat and I can still hear the shelling going on.

 

You would think that if the area is unsafe for civilians, military road blocks would be set up to stop people going into the conflict zone and general evacuation orders would be issued through the local PA system that every village has. 

 

Then again, I am basing this with my own past experience from a country where rules are more direct and not a counrty that may not be standard...

[CHdiver]

4 hours ago, Burma Bill said:

A spokesman for the Ministry of National Defense has confirmed that in the fighting on July 25, 2025, the Thai army launched attacks on 7 locations using heavy weapons and cluster munitions, which are prohibited by international law.

That's what Cambodia says. Probably to distract from shelling Petrol Station and Hospital. 

 

As you are biased heavy towards Cambodia, you are just a shill for the Cambo Government. You have no credibility at all.

[Liquorice]

1 hour ago, ezflip said:

Just got home from Prasat and I can still hear the shelling going on.

Probably Thai artillery, rather than Cambodian missiles landing.

[ezflip]

1 minute ago, Liquorice said:

Probably Thai artillery, rather than Cambodian missiles landing.

Correct. The difference is distinct. Up until an hour ago I could also hear the distant rumble as well. 

 

Past tense since it's raining heavily now in Phanom Dong Rak. 

[Liquorice]

5 hours ago, JensenZ said:

The Khmer Empire was a powerful Southeast Asian civilisation centred in present-day Cambodia. While it controlled a vast territory that included parts of modern-day Thailand, Laos, and Vietnam, it was fundamentally a Cambodian empire, with its heartland and capital, Angkor, located within Cambodia. The Khmer people, who are the direct ancestors of modern Cambodians, were the empire's rulers and builders

Go back in history.

Prior to the establishment of the Kingdom of Sukhothai, the area was influenced by the Khmer empire, and various Mon and Khmer kingdoms existed. The Sukhothai kingdom was established in 1238 by a Thai chieftain who declared independence from the Khmer empire. Later, the Ayutthaya kingdom emerged, and the name Siam became more widely used internationally. 
Before it was known as Siam, Thailand was called Mueang Thai by its own people. The name Siam was used internationally from the Ayutthaya Era until 1939, when it was officially changed to Thailand, and then briefly again in 1946. 

 

Speak to Thai elders than know the history of how Thailand gave up land they considered as part of Siam, to Lao and Cambodia.
By agreement, the English drew up land borders for Lao, the French for Cambodia.

What the French verbally stated as borders and what was later discovered by Thailand on hand drawn maps are the areas that have been in dispute for almost 100 years.
 

[Myran]

Perhaps it's already been covered, but the Australian satellite analyst Nathan Ruser has evaluated satellite imagery from around the disputed border from the last six months or so, and it seems pretty clear that Cambodia is the aggressor.

 

[Shado1]

13 hours ago, proton said:

 

USA had hundreds, the Vietnamese 0

The USA had politicians the Vietnamese had their their will.

[Burma Bill]

9 hours ago, CHdiver said:

That's what Cambodia says. Probably to distract from shelling Petrol Station and Hospital. 

 

As you are biased heavy towards Cambodia, you are just a shill for the Cambo Government. You have no credibility at all.

  

Yes, I am biased towards Cambodia. I have lived in retirement in Siem Reap for almost 6 years. The Khmer people have been very kind, courteous  and helpful towards me, never a bad word!.  As regards a shill, being a UK Citizen, I had to look this up and discovered it is North American expression for an accomplice of a swindler! I can assure you I have no connections with the Cambodian Government. I have much credibility in Cambodia. Thailand, where I lived for 20 years, is of no interest to me these days. Sadly, it is not the  country I knew years ago. I now support Cambodia. 

 

No further comment from me.

Mods edit - Image removed as inappropriate.

 

[Cameroni]

21 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Both good historical summaries of the original 'agreements / disagreements' and why lines on a map are contested....

 

However, the issue has become politically nuanced....

 

Along the Thailand-Cambodia border, especially in places like Poipet and Koh Kong, a lot more is going on than meets the eye. These areas have become hubs for call centres, online scam operations, and casinos, many of them operating in legal grey zones. Cambodia has profited heavily from these industries, often turning a blind eye to the criminal networks behind them. From Thailand’s perspective, these operations - many targeting Thai citizens - have created real tension, fuelling distrust and feeding into wider border security issues.

 

But, the border dispute isn’t just about where the line is drawn on a map - it’s also deeply tied to potential oil and gas riches in the Overlapping Claims Area (OCA) in the Gulf of Thailand. Both countries have long claimed this stretch of sea, which is believed to hold vast untapped reserves. The OCA became more than a territorial issue - it’s about who gets to control and profit from the energy beneath it. This adds weight to the broader border tensions, fuelling nationalist rhetoric on both sides and complicating any efforts at peaceful resolution. The promise of oil has turned what might otherwise be a manageable land or maritime boundary dispute into a high-stakes geopolitical contest.

 

Layered on top of that are the politics of personality - particularly the turbulent relationship between Thaksin Shinawatra and Hun Sen. At one point, they were tightly aligned; Hun Sen even welcomed Thaksin as an adviser and offered him refuge during his exile. But that closeness later soured.

 

Speculation suggests that Thaksin may have offered Cambodia a greater share of the OCA’s oil revenues, possibly in a bid to secure political or personal favours. When negotiations stalled and political winds shifted, Hun Sen retaliated with a very public display - posting photos of Thaksin and his sister Yingluck staying in luxury at a Cambodian villa. It was a clear signal: personal alliances have their limits, and Cambodia wasn't going to play second fiddle.

 

This falling-out made things worse. With tensions rising, both countries found it harder to come to any meaningful agreement over the OCA. Hun Sen seemed increasingly determined to assert Cambodia’s sovereignty and avoid appearing manipulated by a former Thai prime minister with his own agenda. Meanwhile, Thailand remained deeply divided at home, with Thaksin’s actions abroad only adding fuel to the fire. The dispute over the OCA, once a technical matter of maritime law, had become tangled in scandal, ego, and the promise of oil money - turning an already fragile border into a flashpoint of regional power games.

 

 

In summary, the Thailand-Cambodia border dispute may appear to centre on map lines and ancient temples, but beneath the surface it’s driven by casino empires, tolerance of cross-border crime, backroom deals over oil in the Overlapping Claims Area, and a once-chummy political relationship between Thaksin and Hun Sen that has since turned bitter - fuelled by power, profit, and personal betrayal - Ego's are costing lives.

 

Some good points, however, the disputed territory is at the heart of this issue for more than one reason, and actually informs the political background in various ways:

 

1)  The disputed territory has always been used by Cambodia to stir up nationalist sentiment when Cambodian leaders considered this expedient, as Hun Sen does now to shore up the position of his son in Cambodia. He is using the nationalist sentiment which the territorial issues arouses in Cambodians, who feel this territory is theirs by right. This happened in the late 60s, in 2003, and in 2011 too.

 

2)  The Thai side too feels aggrieved by the error made by the French colonial authority when they awarded a temple to the Camobdian side, which clearly should have belonged to the Thai side looking at the map. Not just that but it goes deeper, because after WWII the French ousted the Thais from Cambodian territories the Thais had annexed hoping to profit from the war. The French then ousted them and this stil rankles to this day in Thai educated circles.

 

3) The Cambodians fear that they are wedged between two larger powers, Vietnam and Thailand, and that Thailand will continue to lay claim to lands, which they believe is theirs by right. This is why Cambodia escalated to the ICJ, and this is why, in part, they now also want to force the issue, because they are concerned of never ending conflict with Thailand, who will keep raising this issue of disputed territory.

 

So whilst there are indeed political issues of current times that influence the situation, the historical underlying border issues are also seen as vital national interests by both leaderships and are of great importance. The more regrettable we once more  have to thank incompetent, greedy, and exploitative former colonial powers from Europe for creating conflict with their incompetence, in this case France, who messed up the border issue by erroneously awarding a temple to Cambodia. And the ICJ was not much better, as it clarified the temple situation, but not the ownership of the surrounding land.

 

Obviously both parties precipated the situation, the Cambodians are accusing the Thais of moving border markers, which I can well believe happened and is happening now, and undoubtedly the Cambodians provoked the current situation with patrols, patriotic songs and foregoing the established bi lateral commission to solve the border issue and instead appealing to ICJ, UN etc., as well as possibly laying mines.

 

It's a clear case of both parties feeling they were screwed, and certain territories are theirs by right. It's not just about Hun Sen wanting to shore up his son and falling out with the Shinawatras.

[ezflip]

Phanom Dong Rak

Day 3

Can hear the jets and cannons again. A distinctive blast not far from the farm.

[Liquorice]

19 minutes ago, ezflip said:

Several sharp detonations nearby. 

Are these Cambodian missiles landing or Thai artillery firing?

[richard_smith237]

3 hours ago, Cameroni said:

 

Some good points, however, the disputed territory is at the heart of this issue for more than one reason, and actually informs the political background in various ways:

 

1)  The disputed territory has always been used by Cambodia to stir up nationalist sentiment when Cambodian leaders considered this expedient, as Hun Sen does now to shore up the position of his son in Cambodia. He is using the nationalist sentiment which the territorial issues arouses in Cambodians, who feel this territory is theirs by right. This happened in the late 60s, in 2003, and in 2011 too.

 

2)  The Thai side too feels aggrieved by the error made by the French colonial authority when they awarded a temple to the Camobdian side, which clearly should have belonged to the Thai side looking at the map. Not just that but it goes deeper, because after WWII the French ousted the Thais from Cambodian territories the Thais had annexed hoping to profit from the war. The French then ousted them and this stil rankles to this day in Thai educated circles.

 

3) The Cambodians fear that they are wedged between two larger powers, Vietnam and Thailand, and that Thailand will continue to lay claim to lands, which they believe is theirs by right. This is why Cambodia escalated to the ICJ, and this is why, in part, they now also want to force the issue, because they are concerned of never ending conflict with Thailand, who will keep raising this issue of disputed territory.

 

So whilst there are indeed political issues of current times that influence the situation, the historical underlying border issues are also seen as vital national interests by both leaderships and are of great importance. The more regrettable we once more  have to thank incompetent, greedy, and exploitative former colonial powers from Europe for creating conflict with their incompetence, in this case France, who messed up the border issue by erroneously awarding a temple to Cambodia. And the ICJ was not much better, as it clarified the temple situation, but not the ownership of the surrounding land.

 

Obviously both parties precipated the situation, the Cambodians are accusing the Thais of moving border markers, which I can well believe happened and is happening now, and undoubtedly the Cambodians provoked the current situation with patrols, patriotic songs and foregoing the established bi lateral commission to solve the border issue and instead appealing to ICJ, UN etc., as well as possibly laying mines.

 

It's a clear case of both parties feeling they were screwed, and certain territories are theirs by right. It's not just about Hun Sen wanting to shore up his son and falling out with the Shinawatras.

 

Agreed - more good points and info... +1

[ezflip]

29 minutes ago, Liquorice said:

Are these Cambodian missiles landing or Thai artillery firing?

Incoming. Missiles don't land, unless they're a dud. If you experience that, you're pants will change color quickly. Speaking from past experiences. 

[ezflip]

Left home with the wife to an agreed rendez-vous place where the rest of the family is taking refuge. As we were driving, we crossed a long line of APC with some stationed at nearby schools. 

[mstevens]

On 7/25/2025 at 12:53 PM, Aussie999 said:

Simple, the world, except for Thailand, accepts the ruling by the ICJ, 1960....so, why is Thailand stirring up trouble now....is there a no so hidden agenda...unstable government, impose martial law....yep, another coup. It all seems to suit the military 

 

Because many countries do NOT accept the jurisdiction of the ICJ, the United States being one such country.

[Aussie999]

2 hours ago, mstevens said:

 

Because many countries do NOT accept the jurisdiction of the ICJ, the United States being one such country.

This is about Thailand... 

[Liquorice]

10 minutes ago, Aussie999 said:

This is about Thailand... 

Thailand does not accept the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice (ICJ). While Thailand is a member of the United Nations and thus a party to the ICJ Statute, it has not made a declaration accepting the Court's compulsory jurisdiction. This means that the ICJ can only hear a case involving Thailand if both parties consent to its jurisdiction. 

Thailand's position on the ICJ's compulsory jurisdiction is consistent with that of many other countries. While Thailand has participated in cases before the ICJ, such as the 1962 ruling regarding Preah Vihear Temple, it has done so based on specific agreements or consent to jurisdiction for those particular cases, not due to a general acceptance of the ICJ's compulsory jurisdiction. 

In the context of the ongoing border dispute with Cambodia, Thailand has consistently maintained that such issues should be resolved through existing bilateral mechanisms, like the Joint Border Committee, rather than through the ICJ. Thailand has also stated that it has not been approached by Cambodia to discuss the possibility of using the ICJ to settle their differences. 

Therefore, while Thailand acknowledges the ICJ's role in settling international disputes, it does not recognize its compulsory jurisdiction and prefers to resolve disputes through other means. 

[Aussie999]

1 minute ago, Liquorice said:

Thailand does not accept the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice (ICJ). While Thailand is a member of the United Nations and thus a party to the ICJ Statute, it has not made a declaration accepting the Court's compulsory jurisdiction. This means that the ICJ can only hear a case involving Thailand if both parties consent to its jurisdiction. 

Thailand's position on the ICJ's compulsory jurisdiction is consistent with that of many other countries. While Thailand has participated in cases before the ICJ, such as the 1962 ruling regarding Preah Vihear Temple, it has done so based on specific agreements or consent to jurisdiction for those particular cases, not due to a general acceptance of the ICJ's compulsory jurisdiction. 

In the context of the ongoing border dispute with Cambodia, Thailand has consistently maintained that such issues should be resolved through existing bilateral mechanisms, like the Joint Border Committee, rather than through the ICJ. Thailand has also stated that it has not been approached by Cambodia to discuss the possibility of using the ICJ to settle their differences. 

Therefore, while Thailand acknowledges the ICJ's role in settling international disputes, it does not recognize its compulsory jurisdiction and prefers to resolve disputes through other means. 

Fact, Cambodia, on numerous occasions has approached Thailand to attend ICJ... Thailand refused..because it does not agree with its decision, it matters not if Thailand has withdrawn from the ICJ...ICJ can still make judgements...this could lead to sanctions on Thailand, and individuals... Freezing their assets, limiting their international travelling, even issuing warrants...charging with war crimes.

[Georgealbert]

UPDATE
This map shows where clashes between Thai and Cambodian forces are occurring on the afternoon of 26 July

 

Picture courtesy of Khaosod.

[Liquorice]

1 hour ago, Aussie999 said:

Fact, Cambodia, on numerous occasions has approached Thailand to attend ICJ... Thailand refused..because it does not agree with its decision, it matters not if Thailand has withdrawn from the ICJ...ICJ can still make judgements...this could lead to sanctions on Thailand, and individuals... Freezing their assets, limiting their international travelling, even issuing warrants...charging with war crimes.

The ICJ resolves disputes between states. While all UN member states are automatically parties to the ICJ's statute, they don't automatically accept the court's compulsory jurisdiction. 

Countries can choose to accept the ICJ's compulsory jurisdiction by making a declaration to that effect. 

However, many countries, including some major powers, have not made such a declaration and therefore do not automatically fall under the ICJ's jurisdiction. 

The U.S. withdrew its acceptance of the ICJ's compulsory jurisdiction in 1986. 

China, Russia, and India are also not party to the Rome Statute, which governs the International Criminal Court, and do not recognize the court's jurisdiction. 

Thailand has not accepted the ICJ's compulsory jurisdiction since 1960, a position it shares with many other UN member states. 

[Lacessit]

Apparently this spat started when Hun Sen leaked a private telephone conversation with Paetongtarn Shinawatra, leading to her suspension, with the military stepping in.

 

There's nothing new about politicians starting wars to stir up domestic support. Thatcher did it with the Falklands war. Bush did it with Iraq.

 

IMO they would be far less keen on the concept if they had to stand in the front lines themselves.

[Aussie999]

3 hours ago, Liquorice said:

The ICJ resolves disputes between states. While all UN member states are automatically parties to the ICJ's statute, they don't automatically accept the court's compulsory jurisdiction. 

Countries can choose to accept the ICJ's compulsory jurisdiction by making a declaration to that effect. 

However, many countries, including some major powers, have not made such a declaration and therefore do not automatically fall under the ICJ's jurisdiction. 

The U.S. withdrew its acceptance of the ICJ's compulsory jurisdiction in 1986. 

China, Russia, and India are also not party to the Rome Statute, which governs the International Criminal Court, and do not recognize the court's jurisdiction. 

Thailand has not accepted the ICJ's compulsory jurisdiction since 1960, a position it shares with many other UN member states. 

What's your point... Thailand withdrew after having a dummy spit, because the ICJ sided with Cambodia...all Thailand needs to do is go to the ICJ and put their case.