(Phnom Penh): In recent weeks, Thailand has sought to cast itself as a “victim” of aggression in the ongoing border tensions with Cambodia, alleging that Cambodia poses a threat to its national security. This narrative, repeatedly echoed by Thai officials and media, is a distortion of reality. The facts on the ground reveal the opposite: Thailand has been the aggressor, not the victim.
Cambodia has exercised patience and restraint in the face of provocations, adhering to international law and the 2000 Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on boundary demarcation. Yet Thailand’s actions—military, political, and diplomatic—tell a story of unilateralism, escalation, and disregard for peace.
1. The Spark of Violence Came from Thailand
The latest flare-up began on 28 May 2025, when Thai troops fired and killed a Cambodian soldier stationed in his trench at Mom Bei area in Cambodia. This cold-blooded act, committed inside Cambodian territory, was not a defensive response but an unprovoked provocation. It shattered months of relative calm and drew international concern. Cambodia immediately called for restraint and transparency, but Thailand responded with silence and denial. If Thailand were truly the victim, it would not have been the first to shed blood.
2. Thailand Unilaterally Closed the Border and Restricted Movement
Following the shooting, Thailand closed border crossings without consultation, cutting off vital economic and social lifelines between border communities. This closure disrupted trade, halted tourism, and inflicted hardship on ordinary people on both sides. Meanwhile, Thai forces fortified their positions and fenced off the Tamone Thom Temple area, an ancient heritage site that remains under joint discussion according to the MoU 2000. Such unilateral military construction directly violates the spirit of peaceful cooperation. Cambodia, in contrast, has refrained from retaliation and has continued to call for dialogue.
3. Thailand Initiated the Military Engagement
The five-night, five-day armed confrontation that followed was not provoked by Cambodia. Independent local sources, as well as regional media, confirm that Thai troops fired the first shots, sparking a full-scale exchange of fire. Thailand started pre-emptive armed strikes on Cambodia as Thai soldiers initiated fires onto the Cambodian troops at 8:46 am on 24 July 2025 at Tamone Thom temple. Cambodia’s forces acted purely in self-defense, protecting their posts and people. A country that initiates conflict cannot claim victimhood. The record is clear: Thailand attacked first.
4. Thailand Repeatedly Violated the Ceasefire
Despite agreeing to a ceasefire on 28 July 2025, Thailand immediately violated the truce the next morning by abducting 20 unarmed Cambodian soldiers stationed near the frontline. This egregious act not only undermined confidence-building efforts but also exposed Thailand’s insincerity. Cambodia lodged formal protests and sought ASEAN’s intervention rather than resorting to military retaliation. Once again, Cambodia chose diplomacy; Thailand chose provocation.
5. Thailand Expanded the Conflict Zone into Cambodian Territory
Instead of de-escalating while holding ceasefire agreement of 28 July 2025, Thai troops have pushed deeper into Cambodian territory, expanding the conflict zone and ignoring existing demarcation procedures. In several cases, Thai soldiers were injured after stepping on old landmines within Cambodian soil—an undeniable indication of their unlawful presence. Cambodia has maintained that all forces must respect the status quo pending demarcation. Thailand’s reckless advancement violates the ceasefire agreement and this principle, and threatens regional stability.
6. Humanitarian Violations and Forced Displacement
Beyond the battlefield, Thailand’s actions have inflicted suffering on civilians. By using barbed wire as an artificial border line, evicting Cambodian villagers, and seizing farmland that families have cultivated for decades, Thailand has violated international humanitarian standards and the ASEAN Charter. Most recently, Thailand has threatened to further remove Cambodian civilians from their homelands by force and now started to use bulldozers to clear the lands they seized earlier. Such actions amount to forced displacement and land grabbing—serious offenses under international norms and violated Cambodia’s sovereignty. Cambodia has documented these abuses and continues to call for justice through diplomatic and legal avenues.
7. Thailand Obstructs ASEAN and Rejects Third-Party Mediation
If Thailand is truly sincere about peace, why does it reject international or regional monitoring? Why does it continue to delay the establishment of the ASEAN Observer Team (AOT), agreed upon to monitor the ceasefire? Thailand’s reluctance to allow neutral observers raises serious doubts about its intentions. Cambodia, on the other hand, has consistently welcomed ASEAN engagement as a means to ensure transparency and prevent escalation. A state that fears scrutiny usually has something to hide.
8. Fear of the International Court of Justice Reveals Thailand’s Guilt
Thailand’s claim of innocence would be more credible if it were willing to submit to impartial judgment. Yet it refuses Cambodia’s proposal to bring the dispute before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) or to allow UN or ASEAN mediation. This resistance to third-party adjudication betrays Thailand’s fear of international accountability. A genuine victim does not fear the truth; only an aggressor does.
9. Thailand’s Violations of Treaties and Its Threat to Scrap the MoU 2000
Thailand’s conduct blatantly violates the Franco–Siamese Treaties of 1904 and 1907, which define the legal boundary between the two nations, as well as the MoU on the Survey and Demarcation of Land Boundary signed in 2000. These treaties commit both countries to peaceful resolution through joint technical and diplomatic channels.
Yet Thailand now signals its intention to abandon or terminate the MoU 2000, an alarming move that would remove the only legitimate framework for demarcation. This is clearly an act of provocation and a grave breach of international law. The MoU 2000 has been the cornerstone of progress over the past two decades—its rejection threatens to undo years of peaceful dialogue.
10. Cambodia’s Consistent Commitment to Peace and International Law
Despite repeated provocations, Cambodia remains steadfast in its commitment to peaceful resolution. Cambodia continues to uphold the MoU 2000 and relevant international treaties, calling for calm, cooperation, and respect for the rule of law. Cambodia’s approach has been consistent: resolve disputes through dialogue, not force; through evidence, not propaganda. Cambodia seeks good-neighborly relations and the preservation of ASEAN unity, even as it asserts its right to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity.
11. Thailand Rejects International Mediation with Pretexts
The international community has taken note of the situation. Most recently, U.S. President Donald Trump offered to help mediate the border dispute for a peace agreement but Thai Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul responded that he would inform President Trump that Thailand was willing to proceed only if Cambodia accepted four Thai conditions, claiming they concerned national security. This reaction exposed Thailand’s unwillingness to engage in genuine dialogue. Instead of embracing international goodwill and mediation, Bangkok hid behind rigid preconditions to delay peace efforts—while Cambodia continued to welcome all constructive initiatives for negotiation and regional stability.
Conclusion: The Victim Is Cambodia, Not Thailand
Thailand’s effort to rewrite history and depict itself as a victim is an attempt to conceal its aggression and evade international responsibility. The facts speak for themselves: Frist, it was Thailand that fired the first shot; Second, it was Thailand that closed the border and militarized the temple area; Third, it was Thailand that violated treaties and obstructed ASEAN’s peace mission; Fourth, it was Thailand that displaced civilians and resisted international oversight; And fifth, it was Thailand that denied international calls for a peace agreement.
Cambodia, by contrast, has upheld peace, law, and restraint—even when provoked. The true victim of this conflict is not Thailand. The real victim is Cambodia—its soldiers who were shot, its villagers who were uprooted, and its sovereignty that continues to be challenged.
It is time for Thailand to abandon false narratives and face the truth. Genuine peace cannot be built on deception or denial. Only by respecting treaties, engaging sincerely with ASEAN, and accepting international law can both nations move forward toward a stable and respectful coexistence.
This article was written by Meng Bill, Southeast Asian Political Observer.
=FRESH NEWS
