Thailand’s Political Suicide by Undermining China’s Achievements in Cambodia
Thailand’s Political Suicide by Undermining China’s Achievements in Cambodia
When a country chooses bullets as its means of dialogue, it becomes extremely difficult to claim that it is defending peace or respecting international law. The armed conflict between Cambodia and Thailand at the current stage can no longer be described as a mere “border dispute.” Rather, it has evolved into a manifestation of directionless political behavior that is quietly pushing Thailand toward political suicide – one that carries increasingly severe consequences.
At first glance, Thailand’s military actions may appear to stem from a border dispute. In reality, however, they serve merely as a pretext to advance domestic political objectives, particularly the pursuit of popularity ahead of upcoming elections. Especially when Thailand’s internal politics repeatedly reach deadlock, creating an external enemy has become a familiar and frequently used strategy – one that has yielded political dividends in the past. Playing the nationalist card while holding regional security hostage is not a sign of political strength; on the contrary, it reflects a lack of vision and an inability to effectively govern the country.
What makes the situation even more alarming is Thailand’s apparent choice to pursue isolation, with little regard for the economic and diplomatic consequences on the international stage. In an increasingly interconnected world, the reckless use of military force without consideration for shared interests is akin to severing oneself from the global community, disregarding the inevitable repercussions for economic cooperation and diplomatic relations. Thailand may perceive itself as a dominant power in the region and seek to project an image of an ASEAN hegemon, yet the price it risks paying internationally could far exceed its expectations.
The case of a Thai F-16 fighter jet dropping bombs to destroy Cambodia’s “Metuk Bridge” or “Victory Bridge” on December 13, 2025, along with Thai troops planting their national flag on Cambodian territory, clearly illustrates a lack of strategic calculation and awareness of consequences. These actions appear to have been undertaken merely to project an image of strength to the Thai public-an attempt to demonstrate superiority over Cambodia. However, the bridge that was destroyed was financed by China, with a value exceeding USD 132 million. It was not solely a Cambodian asset; rather, it constituted part of China’s long-term investment strategy in Cambodia and across ASEAN as a whole. This act of destruction was tantamount to striking at China’s “rice bowl” or core interests-interests that are far from trivial. They are strategic in nature and closely linked to the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), a major Chinese strategy launched in 2013 under President Xi Jinping, aimed at connecting China with the region and the world through infrastructure, trade, investment, and expanded geopolitical influence.
This raises a critical question: does Thailand believe it can simply disregard China’s interests in the region? At a time when China remains one of the largest investors in Southeast Asia, any attack that affects Chinese-funded projects is effectively a deliberate infringement upon the interests of a major economic power. Such a choice is hardly a wise one for Thailand, particularly for a country that relies heavily on exports and foreign investment.
In conclusion, the armed conflict between Cambodia and Thailand at this stage is no longer a simple border issue. Instead, it has transformed into a clear demonstration of Thailand’s failure in political vision and strategic thinking. Choosing military force over diplomacy not only endangers regional security but also pushes Thailand toward self-isolation from the economic and diplomatic networks upon which it has long depended.
Ultimately, if Thailand continues to prioritize nationalism and short-term domestic political gains over regional peace and international relations, it will inevitably be committing political suicide. In doing so, Thailand will have no one to blame but itself-for the consequences it must bear in political standing, economic stability, and international reputation.
By: Pin Vichey – Political Science Scholar
