Opinon: Thailand: The cost of policy and leadership or the lack of it (Part 2)
Opinon: Thailand: The cost of policy and leadership or the lack of it (Part 2)
Khmer Times | Thailand’s reckless policies toward its neighbors and the lack of clear leadership have severely strained its own international standing and its relations with its neighbors. This two-part series examine the consequences on previously good neighborly relations caused by Thailand’s domestic political complications, most notably the lack of clear policies and leadership.
Thailand’s Irresponsible Policies and Political Vacuum
Let’s go back in time to before the killing of an unarmed and unprovoked Cambodian soldier on May 28, 2025.
People wondered why this happened, and why at a time when relations between the two countries were excellent?
Most governments derive their popularity from policies that make citizens richer and happier. The government constantly strives to ease the burden on the population while creating more opportunities for growth.
In Thailand, the population is experiencing a political vacuum and a lack of leadership. Why? The answer is simple.
People can simply ask what are the recent policies that Thai government has unleashed to benefit Thai people and Thai economy? People do not have a clue. Another critical question is whom Thai people believe to hold the core power at the moment? Again, no one could provide an answer.
Although some Thais do not believe the Thai government and military have attempted to divert the domestic political vacuum into border conflicts, Thailand is currently facing border violence and security issues with Myanmar, Malaysia, and Cambodia. Why is Thailand straining its relations with all its neighbors at once? Again, nobody has a clear-cut answer. This is extremely regrettable.
As countries in the region struggle to overcome economic and trade challenges caused by superpower rivalry, unilateralism and increased attacks against the rule-based international order and multilateralism, each government is striving to maintain its friends and market access to navigate this period of extreme uncertainty.
For example, on January 7, Malaysia and Singapore joined forces to create the largest cross-border special economic zone ever established in the region. The two countries signed an agreement to establish an SEZ in the southern Malaysian state of Johor to support investment and liberalize the movement of goods and people between the two countries. On June 16, 2025, Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto was telling the world that his country is “copying with pride” the good policies that have been implemented by Singapore. On June 30, 2025, Indonesia announced a major deregulation initiative to ease import restrictions on 10 strategic commodity groups.
In this moment of extreme uncertainties, countries would try to team up, not break up. Countries are redoubling efforts to promote bilateral and multilateral trade to ensure economic security based on a solid network of interdependence with various partners. This is the most regrettable situation that could occur between Cambodia and Thailand within ASEAN, at a time when ASEAN’s external confidence is reaching its peak.
Thai leadership, or rather, its absence, is leading the country down a path that runs counter to international trend. Thailand is pursuing a policy of threats by reducing ties and interdependence, to the detriment of both parties. In this critical period, sellers would suffer more than buyers, as the latter have more options, aside from rare raw materials and technologies, and what Thailand supplies to Cambodia can be easily replaced by other suppliers.
The lack of policy and leadership has come at a huge cost to Thailand. Thailand deserves a strong government as soon as possible, not to fight Cambodia, but to rebuild ties with all its neighbors, restore its international prestige as a guarantor of a rule-based international order, and ultimately restore national confidence so that local and international businesses can thrive. Domestically, countries need peace, stability, predictability, and trust.
Internationally, countries need a rule-based order, multilateralism, friendship and cooperation. Countries should compete to strengthen these elements, not destroy them.
The author is a Phnom Penh-based geopolitical and security analyst. The views and opinions expressed here are the author’s own.
