In just twelve days, ASEAN foreign ministers will gather in Kuala Lumpur for their annual ministerial meeting (AMM).
But two of its member states—Thailand and Cambodia—are deeply entrenched in a tense border standoff, now inflamed by political drama.
Troops have been mobilized and are dangerously positioned against one another.
Worse, nationalist rhetoric is reaching a fever pitch. With Cambodian Senate President Hun Sen’s public tell-all targeting the Thaksin family, the risk of a misstep grows by the hour.
It’s unfortunate that these two leaders and their “frenemy” have reached a "do or die" moment.
This explosive personal dimension—linking a border dispute to Thailand's internal politics and beyond—has made the situation dangerously unpredictable.
If left unchecked, the quarrel could overshadow the AMM and tarnish the image of the ASEAN family. Worse still, both countries risk “losing face” in front of their regional peers.
To prevent catastrophic escalation, both countries must act now—before the AMM begins—by engaging in quiet diplomacy through senior officials.
Clear, concrete steps must be taken to calm the situation and give diplomacy a real chance, rather than resorting to megaphone mudslinging.
The first and most urgent step is to sit down and talk, face to face—but not in front of cameras or formal ASEAN sessions.
A quiet bilateral meeting—perhaps in Kuala Lumpur, the AMM venue—would allow both sides to open a backchannel for de-escalation.
This is critical, as public communication has broken down and become a tool of political brinkmanship, inflamed by uninformed hate speech.
Thailand should propose that senior foreign ministry officials—not prime ministers—meet discreetly in Malaysia, a neutral and respected player in ASEAN diplomacy.
This meeting would be a trust-building exercise that could lay the groundwork for win-win strategies: no troop reinforcements, no inflammatory rhetoric, and no unilateral actions in disputed areas.
Then, both sides could discuss ground rules for reopening common borders to benefit both Thais and Cambodians.
Such a meeting would prevent border incidents from escalating further, safeguard national security interests, and create a buffer against political fallout at home.
Thailand must remain calm, allowing tensions to ease without making it appear that Cambodia has yielded to external pressure.
A brief joint statement affirming commitment to peace and existing bilateral mechanisms would send a powerful signal to ASEAN that both countries are serious about resolving the issue and adhering to the ASEAN Way.
Even amid personal political tensions, both must show they can manage their differences.
At the very least, a cooling-off period can be achieved. Restraint is vital to prevent exploitation by warmongers.
Thailand and Cambodia don’t need to invent a new framework to manage this dispute—they already have one: the 2000 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), which established the Joint Boundary Commission (JBC).
This technical body was designed to handle joint mapping, land demarcation, and peaceful dispute resolution.
However, it has been dormant for over a decade.
The two countries should also privately brief Malaysia, as ASEAN Chair, on their plan to address the issue bilaterally.
This ensures ASEAN is not caught off guard, while keeping the issue off the official AMM agenda. No ASEAN member wants the annual meeting overshadowed by a Thailand-Cambodia spat—especially one rooted in sensitive domestic politics.
ASEAN’s role should be to quietly support bilateral mechanisms, not to mediate. By keeping the process internal and discreet, both nations can save face, maintain control over the outcome, and demonstrate commitment to ASEAN's spirit of dialogue and consensus.
Meanwhile, local authorities should create opportunities for Thai and Cambodian communities to hold joint peace-building activities—such as shared religious events between monks—to prevent bad actors from stoking conflict through religion on social media.
Students and artists could also host joint performances to ease tension. These efforts build social trust and goodwill—a win-win for both communities.
After all, both countries remain committed to peace and share a rich cultural heritage. It’s time to prioritize national interests over family politics.
Time is running out. Bangkok and Phnom Penh must transform a hostile narrative into one of shared identity—and a shared future.
