It has become increasingly clear that Thailand’s domestic politics is fractured, and no single actor appears to have firm control over the wheel. What we are witnessing is not a coordinated state with a unified foreign policy, but a two-level game, one where two rival centers of power in Thailand pursue diverging strategies with unequal tools.
Unfortunately, Cambodia has been pulled into this internal Thai drama, not by choice, but by proximity.
So, What’s Really Going On in Thailand?
The trigger came on May 28, 2025, when Thai troops sneaked attack Cambodia. What followed resembled a sequential strategic game, but not between two countries. Instead, the main players were within Thailand itself:
1. The Military Moves First
Thailand’s military, led by Lt Gen Boonsin Padklang of the Second Army Region, unilaterally escalated tensions, claiming Cambodian incursions, closing border checkpoints, and adopting a tough nationalist stance. This move followed the classic “rally-round-the-flag” strategy: use external threats to boost internal legitimacy and media attention.
2. The Government Reacts
The civilian government under Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra was left scrambling, trying to contain diplomatic fallout, manage public backlash, and preserve cross-border trade.
• At Level I, the Thai government has sought negotiations with Cambodia to cool tensions, avoid economic damage, and maintain border stability.
• At Level II, the same government faces intense domestic pressure. It must compete with the military’s nationalist image, regain political credibility after missteps, and show it is defending the “national interest.”
=> Military Strategy: Win the Home Game
While the government tried to appear diplomatic, the military doubled down on domestic signaling:
• Lt Gen Boonsin called on the Prime Minister to pursue a “moral policy” and protect Thailand’s sovereignty, subtly undermining government legitimacy.
• He reinforced his image as a protector of national pride, giving interviews and making bold public statements.
• The military's payoff? Greater visibility, relevance, and nationalist credibility, all gained without holding elected power.
=> Civilian Catch-Up: Playing Level I for Domestic Survival:
Facing backlash from both Cambodian leaders and Thai protesters, the government adapted. It began asserting its own form of coercion: restricting exports to Cambodia by Citing cybercrime as justification. While these moves had diplomatic costs, they were aimed at signaling strength to domestic voters, not just solving the border crisis. Furthermore, Paetongtarn even made symbolic gestures, apologizing to the general after a leaked call and wearing a yellow shirt, a military-favored color, during a visit.
Final Analysis: One Border, Two Powers
Thailand’s conflict with Cambodia is not just a bilateral issue, it’s a domestic power struggle projected outward. The border has become a political stage for competing Thai actors:
• One seeks legitimacy through negotiation and diplomacy
• The other through nationalist escalation and military posturing
Author: DeNotorious