Uncover the causes and consequences of the Thailand-Cambodia border conflict, from historical claims to fragile ceasefires and civilian displacement.
{{ vm.tagsGroup }}
14 Jan 2026
5 Min Read
Afrina Arfa (Alumni Columnist)
Uncover the causes and consequences of the Thailand-Cambodia border conflict, from historical claims to fragile ceasefires and civilian displacement.
When Thailand and Cambodia announced a ceasefire in late December last year, it appeared to mark a pause in a decades-old dispute. Tensions along their 800-kilometre shared border eased, diplomatic channels reopened, and prisoners of war were exchanged. The December 27 truce brought an end to the most intense phase of fighting that month, concluding nearly three weeks of clashes that left at least 100 people dead and displaced hundreds of thousands on both sides of the border.
Just ten days after the truce was brokered, however, Thailand accused Cambodia of violating the agreement following an incident on January 6 in which cross-border mortar fire wounded a Thai soldier. Cambodia attributed the incident to an operational error, stating that two of its own soldiers were also injured. In response, the Thai military warned its Cambodian counterpart to exercise caution, signalling that further incidents could invite retaliation.
As the ceasefire’s fragility became apparent, developments along the border drew close attention from neighbouring countries and global powers, several of which had been involved in brokering the truce. On January 9, the United States announced US$45 million in support for truce-related efforts. Yet, despite these diplomatic interventions, concerns remain over whether it can withstand a backdrop of unresolved territorial disputes that have shaped relations between the two neighbours for decades.
In the mid-19th century, France established its colonial presence in mainland Southeast Asia, bringing Cambodia under French control in 1863. France subsequently consolidated its influence across the region and compelled Thailand (then Siam) to cede territory under the 1907 Franco-Siamese Treaty. This treaty, which defined much of the modern borders between Thailand, Cambodia, and Laos, returned territories such as Battambang, Siem Reap, and the Preah Vihear Temple to Cambodia—a decision that remains politically sensitive in Thailand to this day.
Disputes over the Preah Vihear Temple intensified after World War II. During the war, Thailand temporarily reclaimed the temple while allied with Japan, but returned it to French control in 1946. Following Cambodia’s independence in 1953, Thailand again claimed the site, prompting Cambodia to bring the case before the International Court of Justice (ICJ). In 1962, the ICJ ruled that the temple belonged to Cambodia but left the status of the surrounding land indeterminate, creating lingering legal ambiguity.
This ambiguity resurfaced in 2008, when Cambodia registered the temple as a UNESCO World Heritage Site. The move reignited tensions, sparking a series of border clashes over the next three years that left at least 20 people dead and displaced thousands. While subsequent ICJ clarifications reaffirmed that the temple and its immediate vicinity belong to Cambodia, the contested history of the surrounding land has allowed the dispute between the two countries to persist.
The second half of 2025 saw multiple clashes erupt over competing claims to the disputed territories. On May 28, a confrontation near the temple left a Cambodian soldier dead, with both countries blaming the other for initiating the incident. In the following months, tensions intensified through political and economic retaliation: Cambodia banned Thai goods, while Thailand closed border crossings and restricted electricity and internet links to Cambodia.
Fighting expanded in July, spreading to at least 12 locations along the border. Thailand reported that more than 138,000 people were evacuated from affected areas, while Cambodia reported evacuating over 20,000. As clashes escalated, officials and media on both sides accused the other of instigating the violence.
Throughout the conflict, experts and the public alike have often looked to the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) for guidance and intervention. Yet the bloc has historically refrained from intervening in the domestic affairs of its members due to its principle of non-interference, complicating efforts to reach a resolution. Nevertheless, an immediate, unconditional ceasefire was announced on July 28, mediated by Malaysia in its capacity as ASEAN chair.
Although the ceasefire temporarily halted large-scale fighting, it did not address the underlying causes of the conflict. The truce proved fragile, with both sides continuing to trade accusations and hostilities resuming in December.
The renewed fighting directly affected civilians along the border, resulting in both casualties and mass displacement across several north-western and western provinces. Cambodia reported 18 civilian fatalities and 79 injuries, with over 490,000 people displaced, while Thailand reported 16 civilian fatalities and six injuries, with more than 500,000 displaced. As of December 17, Thai authorities announced efforts to repatriate around 6,000 Thai citizens from Cambodian territory, including the city of Poipet.
The effects were particularly acute for Cambodian migrant workers, who constitute the second-largest foreign labour group in Thailand after Myanmar. In the aftermath of the December clashes, an estimated 900,000 Cambodian nationals returned home from Thailand—a scale and speed of movement that authorities described as unprecedented. Many returnees faced the dual burden of lost livelihoods and outstanding microfinance debts incurred prior to migration, placing significant strain on Cambodia’s economy and social support systems.
The capacity to manage the consequences of the conflict remains uneven between the two countries. Thailand’s larger and more diversified economy has allowed it to absorb displacement and some economic impacts more effectively, while Cambodia faces greater constraints. Border closures and trade disruptions have slowed the country’s economic recovery and stalled remittances from migrant workers, adding pressure to an already strained economy.
The sharp flare-up of the Thailand-Cambodia border conflict last year was not the result of an isolated crisis, but the culmination of decades of unresolved historical claims over contested borders. While multiple interventions, diplomatic efforts, and ceasefires have temporarily halted hostilities, the persistence of clashes underscores the fragility of peace along this sensitive frontier.
Whether the current truce will hold depends not only on military restraint but also on the ability of both governments to tackle the deeper structural and political drivers of the conflict, while ASEAN and external actors move beyond short-term crisis management towards long-term solutions. Enhanced border monitoring, joint demarcation, and initiatives to restore cross-border economic and social ties are critical, yet lasting stability will ultimately hinge on the political will and practical frameworks needed to transform precarious pauses into enduring peace.
Afrina Arfa is a Bachelor of Finance and Economics (Honours) alumna of Taylor's University. She spends her time indulging in economic news, hoping to inspire others to think beyond the constraints of society.
