This week marks the first anniversary of the Thai-Cambodian border conflict, which erupted after a BM-21 rocket attack killed 11 Thai civilians, including a nine-year-old child, in Kantharalak district of Si Sa Ket. Although the two countries have observed a ceasefire since late December, the path to lasting peace remains long and difficult.
Understandably, the anniversary revives grief and anger among those who lost loved ones, as well as the wider public, over the events of July 24 last year. Yet such emotions should not obscure the fact that the conflict began in a handful of small overlapping border areas and could have been contained had all parties on both sides acted with restraint and reason instead of allowing ultranationalism to drive events out of control.
A case in point is the intensifying dispute over ownership of Ta Muen Thom, despite the fact that the ancient temple stands in an overlapping claim area.
As tensions escalated, communities along the border were left voiceless while military leaders ignored repeated warnings from experts and academics that the dispute should be handled with restraint and proportionate measures. Instead, the state ceded the narrative to the media and hyper-nationalist figures.
Thailand's superior military capability has enabled it to occupy contested areas. However, if such actions are not consistent with international law, they could ultimately prove counterproductive. Cambodia, a small nation long scarred by war, has repeatedly accused Thailand of aggression at international forums. Regardless of the merits of those claims, they have tarnished Thailand's international image.
Whatever the competing arguments, both countries stand to lose far more than they can gain.
In recent months, many Thais have opposed reopening the border, citing concerns over online scam operations and casinos. Such fears, however, are misplaced. Illegal activities can be curbed if authorities are willing to enforce the law effectively.
More broadly, Thailand no longer enjoys the trade surplus of more than 100 billion baht that it once had with its neighbour. Recently, the Chanthaburi Border Trade and Tourism Association called for a review of border closures in the eastern province, noting that the area faces few security concerns and no serious territorial disputes. Businesses in Chanthaburi and Trat, many of which depend on cross-border labour, are suffering under the blanket closure policy. Their concerns deserve careful consideration.
There is, however, some encouraging news. Last week, the cabinet appointed new members to the Joint Border Committee (JBC), reviving one of the key bilateral mechanisms for resolving disputes. The JBC, together with the General Border Committee (GBC), should be allowed to carry out its work without political interference, using modern satellite mapping technology to support accurate and mutually acceptable boundary decisions.
Thais should pay greater attention to the voices of those who live and work along the border. They also need to recognise the economic costs and lost opportunities that will continue to mount if hostilities persist.
The Anutin Charnvirakul government, particularly the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, should recognise that it cannot rely indefinitely on ultranationalist sentiment. Instead, it must devote its full efforts to resolving this unnecessary conflict before it exacts an even greater toll on the country.
