|
Santhiya M
15 June 2025 |
In the news
On 28 May, a Cambodian soldier was killed in a border clash between the Royal Cambodian Armed Forces and the Royal Thai Army. Cambodia's army claimed that they were attacked during a routine patrol along the disputed border in Preah Vihear province. Thailand's army claimed that Cambodia's army fired the first shot.
On 29 May, Cambodia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs sent a letter to Thailand's embassy in Phnom Penh, calling for an "immediate and thorough investigation into the violent incident." On the same day, the army commanders of both countries discussed preventing further clashes.
On 1 June, Cambodia's Prime Minister Hun Manet announced that the dispute over the areas would be taken to the International Court of Justice (ICJ).
On 2 June, the joint session of Cambodia’s parliament supported the decision to take the dispute to the ICJ. Cambodia’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Prak Sokhonn, stated: “Given the complexity, historical nature and sensitivity of these disputes, it is increasingly evident that bilateral dialogue alone may no longer suffice to bring about a comprehensive and lasting solution.”
On the same day, Thailand's Minister of Foreign Affairs, Maris Sangiampongsa, stated that Cambodia has the right to file the case in the ICJ but insisted on bilateral talks under existing mechanisms. The Thai government stated that the country does not recognise the ICJ’s jurisdiction.
On 4 June, Thailand announced that Cambodia had agreed to a Joint Boundary Committee (JBC) on 14 June to resolve the border issue.
Issues at large
First, the recurring clashes along the border. The heart of the dispute has been the claims over the Preah Vihear Hindu temple, along the Thai-Cambodian border. In 2008, tensions escalated when Cambodia attempted to list Preah Vihear as a UNESCO World Heritage Site. Between 2008 and 2011, Cambodia and Thailand clashed six times in Preah Vihear. The 2011 border clashes killed several soldiers and civilians, and displaced thousands of residents.
Second, a background to the disputed claims over the Preah Vihear temple. The temple, dedicated to the Hindu God Shiva, dates back to the ninth century, built during the Khmer Empire by King Suryavarman I. It has old Khmer and Sanskrit inscriptions. Bangkok and Phnom Penh claim historical ownership over the temple. Under French Indochina, the Franco-Siamese Treaty of 1904 with the Siamese Kingdom demarcated this region along the watershed line. In 1907, the Mixed Delimitation Commission’s map indicated that the temple was on the Cambodian side. ICJ’s verdict in 1962 reaffirmed the same. In 2008, Preah Vihear became a UNESCO World Heritage site, which displeased Thailand.
Third, the ICJ intervention. In 1962, the ICJ ruled that the disputed area of the Preah Vihear temple belongs to Cambodia, under the Franco-Siamese Treaty of 1904 and the 1907 map. Thailand contested this verdict by claiming not to have recognised the 1907 map. However, the Court found that Thailand had recognised the map and delivered the verdict in favour of Cambodia. Subsequently, the Court called on Thailand to withdraw the military forces stationed there since 1954. Cambodia sought clarification on the ruling following the 2011 hostilities. In 2013, the ICJ reaffirmed that the territory of Preah Vihear is under Cambodia’s sovereignty.
In perspective
First, a recurring issue is over lack of clear demarcation. The 1962 ICJ ruling did not result in a revamped map with clear demarcation of the borders. The issue was prolonged because Thailand suggests bilateral mechanisms like the JBC, while Cambodia seeks international involvement. Cambodia has garnered internal support in taking the case once again to the ICJ. The past judgments favoured Cambodia.
Second, the ASEAN question. In 2011, the UNSC referred the issue to ASEAN under Indonesia's Chairmanship. Both countries agreed to receive a group of Indonesian observers to oversee a ceasefire and demilitarisation of the area. However, Thailand subsequently withdrew, claiming that the move would undermine its sovereignty. ASEAN’s efforts failed, and the ceasefire was left verbal and unsigned. ASEAN has not issued any substantial statement on the current tensions.
About the author
Santhiya M is an undergraduate student at Madras Christian College, Chennai.
