Way forward for Thai-Cambodia trust building
Commentary by ISP’s Kavi Chongkittavorn
However, this interim period has also highlighted the urgency for concerned stakeholders on both sides of the border to jump-start trust-building measures and activities. Indeed, there is no more time to waste, because if the current conflict continues, it could have devastating repercussions for their relationship in generations to come. Worse, it could transform the common border inaccessible for local communities as it would inevitably become a battle zone riddled with landmines.
When Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul and his counterpart Hun Manet met on the sidelines of the Cebu Summit in May, hosted by President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., they reaffirmed their commitment to restraint and emphasized the need to address their differences. However, they have yet to find common ground or make progress on these issues. Despite positive comments lately and peer pressures, both sides still have yet to meet formally as trust deficits remain high.
As the UNCLOS conciliation process proceeds, it is a must to find practical measures to increase mutual trust, especially on the ground, due to the consequential nature of the conflict. Some border checkpoints, especially the demarcated segments, with time restrictions should be opened to local traders and communities. So far, they have been the biggest casualties in the fighting. Broader joint humanitarian assistance under the supervision of the UN agencies and friends could ease their dire situation.
That said, it is an open secret along the porous border that the smuggling of goods and human trafficking continue to take place unabated along the so-called natural (non-demarcated) channels. To ensure both sides have some control over the flow of goods and emergency entries — such as individuals requiring medical care or life threatening cases — it is important that both governments reconsider their positions.
Since the conflict began, the long standingThai-Cambodian supply chain has been completely halted, and this has severely disrupted the production lines of Thailand-based companies, such as those manufacturing electronic, auto and machinery parts. If it is possible, now is the time for the two countries to work out common measures so that these supply lines can be reconnected in an incremental manner depending on priorities during the conciliation process.
Although there are no official statistics on the damage caused by the conflict, several figures have been quoted by officials, scholars, banking reports and the media, which are staggering given their high cost. For instance, the Krungthai Bank estimated monthly loss of exports at 11.41 billion baht of14.0 billion baht in two-way border trade. It also estimated that border trade represented about 48% of total Thailand-Cambodia trade.
Furthermore, the Bangkok-based think-tank, the Institute for Strategic Policy puts the losses even higher at about 24 billion baht monthly, including direct losses of 16.26 billion baht and another 7.8 billion baht indirectly, caused by supply chain disruptions and reduced investment.
In addition, Thai-branded businesses in Cambodia have also suffered greatly. Gas stations and retail shops, including convenience stores, coffee shops and other SMEs, have seen a dramatic scaling down. Indeed, well-known Thai 24-hour convenience stores have already halved their one hundred plus outlets around the country and further cuts are expected if the border remains tense.
However, the saddest part has been the laying off thousands of local young workers who were employed and some of them trained to assume higher management positions. In contrast, a recent visit to Vientiane, where similar Thai-brand convenience stores are booming, clearly showed how successfully these have served as a training ground for young Laotians to become future entrepreneurs.
Last June, as tensions heightened, Phnom Penh came out with a six-point response that included the suspension of imports of Thai goods, a halt to using Thai products and finding alternative products and markets for Cambodian agricultural products. These responses are still in place and have now become a new norm. Some forms of rectification are needed.
While both sides are still adhering to the December 27 agreement, informal channels, known as track two, include private sectors, academia, civil society organizations and media can help to create a conducive atmosphere for improving ties and enabling their leaders to meet each other halfway. Afterall, the UNCLOS conciliation process would serve as insurance that the border remains calm and the conflict de-escalates.
Truth be told, Thailand and Cambodia face a similar dilemma. More ways than one, both sides are being held hostage by polarized domestic conditions. At this juncture, neither side can easily yield or even have second thoughts. Public sentiment is still unfriendly, and social media, which has played a toxic role in fanning xenophobia, must stop pumping out disinformation and call for further dialogues.
At the moment, social media is setting the political and diplomatic agendas of the day, especially on the side that has more media space and openness. Contributors to the media on all platforms must use common sense and ensure that proper public understanding of the situation — without nationalistic hyperbole — is disseminated. Otherwise, leaders could easily be swayed as fragile domestic conditions do not allow for alternative rhetoric. They fear public backlash.
In broader terms, the conflict has already disrupted regional cooperation. The Lancang Mekong Cooperation summit, which was to be hosted by Thailand and co-chair by China, was postponed twice last year due to border tensions. China has now agreed to host the summit later this year.
It is hoped that Anutin and Hun Manet will use the upcoming Mekong platform to break the current stalemate. If they cannot wait, the upcoming ASEAN summit in early November is another option. Otherwise, not only will bilateral ties and cooperation be further dampened, but sub-regional cooperation and beyond involving the third partners will also take its toll.
Kavi Chongkittavorn is a member of the Board of the Institute for Strategic Policy (ispadvisory.com). This article first appeared in the Bangkok Post.
Subscribe Today
Subscribe to our mailing list to
get the new updates!
