Why are Thailand and Cambodia at odds?

BarcelonaThailand and Cambodia They have accused each other of attacking each other this weekend on the border they share. The clashes, in which at least three Thai soldiers and nine Cambodian civilians died, appear to be derailing the peace agreement signed by both countries in October, at the initiative of US President Donald Trump. Some 400,000 people living in the border area have been evacuated due to the danger of the fighting, which has occurred in six of the seven provinces that border this 800-kilometer border, and which shows no signs of stopping.

What are they accusing each other of?

Both countries accuse each other of starting the fighting and carrying out several acts of provocation. Cambodia maintains that Thailand has launched airstrikes since Monday in northeastern Cambodia using artillery, rocket launchers, and drones against Cambodian forces and civilian areas. The country's Ministry of Defense says nine civilians were killed and more than 20 wounded as a result of Bangkok's "brutal and illegal actions." Thailand, in turn, accuses Phnom Penh of firing rockets at civilian areas and deploying snipers along the border. The result, according to Thailand, was three soldiers killed and 29 people wounded.

Where did the dispute originate?

The conflict is not recent. In fact, it dates back more than a century, to 1907, when the borders between Siam (present-day Thailand) and French-occupied Cambodia were drawn. When Paris withdrew from the territory in the 1950s, Thai troops occupied part of the border area. And although an international court recognized Cambodia's sovereignty over the Preah Vihear temple in the occupied zone, the discord was inevitable: Bangkok considers the surrounding area its own, and so does Phnom Penh. The dispute intensified in 2008 when Cambodia attempted to have the temple listed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site, sparking massive protests in Thailand and a renewed outbreak of clashes, resulting in around 30 deaths. But tensions definitively escalated in May 2025 when a Cambodian soldier was killed in a clash shortly after a Thai soldier lost a leg after stepping on a landmine on the border. The incident sparked a wave of fighting in the summer which resulted in fifty deaths.

Can it climb?

Despite calls for restraint from the UN Secretary-General, the European Union, and Donald Trump himself, the leaders involved in the conflict are pointing toward an escalation, at least in the short term: the Thai Foreign Minister has said that military action will continue until they feel that "sovereignty and territorial integrity are not being violated"; and the country's Prime Minister, Anutin Charnvirakul, responded "I don't remember anymore" when asked about the peace agreement signed in October. The rhetoric seems equally heated on the Cambodian side, where the country's former president and current Senate President, Hun Sen, wrote on Facebook: "Our armed forces must counterattack at all points where the enemy attacks."

What happens to the peace agreement?

At the end of July, representatives from both countries met in Malaysia and agreed to declare an "immediate and unconditional" ceasefire. But it wasn't until the end of October that they sealed the peace agreement in a ceremony presided over by Donald Trump, whom Cambodia had previously nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. Trump secured the signing of the agreement by threatening the two states that, if they refused, he would not allow any trade. For this reason, several experts were already pointing to signs that the ceasefire would not last long, among other reasons because it was not based on a genuine process of understanding. What does each side want?

Experts suggest that the Thai military has no reason to de-escalate the conflict because it wants to further bolster nationalist rhetoric ahead of the March parliamentary elections. "By continuing to reinforce nationalism, the armed forces hope their actions will increase support for pro-military parties in March and prevent the progressive People's Party from winning an outright majority," Joshua Kurlantzick and Annabel Richter point out in an article in the think tank Council on Foreign Relations, December.

The same is true for Cambodia. In the opinion of these two researchers specializing in Southeast Asia, Cambodia fears appearing too weak to a population that blames Bangkok for violating the ceasefire. Furthermore, after decades of isolation imposed by the White House, Cambodia hopes to improve ties with the United States and believes it can establish the narrative that Thailand is obstructing the peace that Trump so desperately desires.

But, ultimately, neither state would win in a war: "Both countries and their respective political leaderships stand to lose in a prolonged crisis," concludes Matt Wheeler, a regional analyst at the International Crisis Group, who cites cross-border trade, which has escalated, and the enormous flow of migrant workers from which both Southeast Asian countries benefit.