(Phnom Penh): The highly publicized trip by Thai Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul to China—accompanying the Thai King on a royal state visit—was initially framed as a powerful geopolitical maneuver. The message Anutin hoped to project was clear: Thailand could find a “second strategic pillar” in China to counter rising pressure from the United States over the Thai-Cambodian border conflict.

Yet the moment the Thai aircraft landed in Beijing, both the King and Anutin heard only one unified message from China’s top leadership: peace, restraint, and no conflict with Cambodia.
What was expected to impress China and intimidate Cambodia ultimately turned into a diplomatic miscalculation—one that revealed Thailand’s growing isolation.

Anutin’s China-Dependent Strategy Contained Fundamental Flaws
Anutin’s attempt to rely on China to balance the United States and pressure Cambodia was weak at its core. China did not support Thailand’s escalation along the Cambodian border. On the contrary, Beijing emphasized stability, dialogue, and mutual restraint.
As a result, Thailand gained nothing—no political support, no strategic leverage over Cambodia, and no relief from American pressure.
Cambodia, meanwhile, benefitted automatically from Thailand’s missteps. The crisis that Anutin attempted to manufacture became a self-inflicted political setback for Thailand.

China Will Not Allow Thailand to Harm Cambodia
Although Thailand attempted to use the border dispute as a means of applying pressure on Cambodia, Beijing’s message was firm and unmistakable:
No conflict. No weapons. Dialogue only.
China remains Cambodia’s closest “ironclad friend”:
• the country with the deepest historical ties to the Khmer nation,
• a long-term strategic partner,
• a major supporter of Cambodia’s military capacity,
• the principal source of large-scale BRI infrastructure projects, and
• a dominant economic partner.
Thailand cannot expect China to support any move that undermines Cambodia or threatens regional stability.

A Failed Attempt at “Balancing the U.S. and China”
Before leaving for China, Anutin adopted a confrontational tone toward the United States, declaring:
“If the United States doesn’t buy Thai products, we will find other markets.”
He believed that criticizing Washington would make Beijing more supportive.
But China did not reward this rhetoric.
China has no interest in replacing the United States or being drawn into Thailand’s internal political battlefield. Beijing prioritizes regional stability and does not want Thailand to ignite a crisis with Cambodia—or provoke a larger confrontation with Washington.
The real outcome?
Anutin failed on both fronts:
• No improved position with Washington
• No special support from Beijing
According to China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the five-day visit from November 13–17 produced nothing more than general reaffirmations of future cooperation in areas such as railway connectivity, agricultural exports, AI, digital economy, and aerospace.
Reuters reported that no significant agreements or treaties were signed.

China Heard Thailand—But Stood Firmly With Cambodia’s Peace and Stability
During the meetings between the Thai King, Anutin, and President Xi Jinping, China reiterated:
• avoid conflict
• respect negotiation
• maintain border peace
• preserve bilateral dialogue
• do not violate ceasefire commitments
These were unmistakably messages in support of peace with Cambodia—not encouragement for Thailand to use Chinese influence as leverage.
Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lin Jian added:
“China sincerely hopes both Thailand and Cambodia will exercise restraint, work in the same direction, conduct friendly consultations, and find an acceptable solution as soon as possible to prevent any further escalation.”

Cambodia Emerges as the Indirect Winner
The contradictions within Thailand’s foreign-policy approach can be traced directly to Anutin’s miscalculated diplomacy. His actions not only intensified U.S. pressure on Thailand but also demonstrated that China would not support Thailand’s aggression against Cambodia.
Meanwhile, ASEAN reaffirmed its backing for the Kuala Lumpur Peace Agreement—further strengthening Cambodia’s legal and diplomatic standing.
In contrast, Thailand appears more isolated on the international stage than ever before.

Conclusion
Anutin’s strategy of “appeasing China” has exposed deep inconsistencies within Thailand’s foreign policy.
Attempting to use China to pressure Cambodia while simultaneously provoking the United States was a serious strategic misjudgment.
China—a major power that prioritizes regional stability and long-term influence—has no interest in allowing Thailand to disrupt peace or undermine China’s closest strategic partner, Cambodia.
The conclusion is clear: Thailand gained nothing from this state visit, while Cambodia emerged diplomatically, politically, and strategically stronger.