Figure 4 - uploaded by Siegfried O. Wolf
Content may be subject to copyright.
Maps of Thai-Cambodian border near Khao Preah Vihear, showing the 4.6 square kilometers of disputed territory. The first was presented by Thailand's Foreign Ministry 56
Source publication
Frontier friction has been a recurring phenomenon in much of the world, including in South and Southeast Asia. Yet the social construction of antagonistic border perceptions offers lessons about how not to frame a country's views of its neighbors. Though boundary disputes in South Asia are currently much more muted than in the past, this investigat...
Citations
... Previously sporadic clashes turned into more intense and frequent exchanges of fire including artillery and allegedly even the use of poison gas by the Thai side (Ahuja, 2011; "Thai-Cambodian Conflict: Temple Trouble," 2011). The intensification of the violence seriously disrupted tourism to the Temple and also caused the displacement of hundreds of villagers on both sides of the border (Chambers & Wolf, 2010). At this point Cambodia started seeking the good offices of a third party to mediate the dispute ("Thai-Cambodian Conflict: Temple Trouble," 2011). ...
... Bilateral talks have not resulted in any sustainable agreements and while Thailand has accepted the good offices of Indonesian peacekeepers in the disputed area, it has prevented them from entering the area due to technicalities such as the right to inspect the Thai held area ("Thai-Cambodian Conflict: Temple Trouble," 2011). With elections rapidly approaching in Thailand and a growing polarization between nationalist and populist forces; the dispute over the less than four square miles of land surrounding the temple is becoming a very sensitive and possibly explosive issue (Chambers & Wolf, 2010; "Thai-Cambodian Conflict: Temple Trouble," 2011). The dispute is now an issue of sovereignty, historical antagonism between the two countries, and political opportunism ("Thai-Cambodian Conflict: Temple Trouble," 2011). ...
The present paper explores the relationship between Prospect Theory and International Conflict by concentrating on key concepts such as the endowment effect, reference dependence, and framing. Prospect Theory is shown to have considerable explanatory power in the case of the historical dispute between Thailand and Cambodia over their shared border. The apparent lack of strategic importance of the Temple in dispute, the absence of natural resources in the contested area, and the relative intensity of the conflict cannot be properly explained by rational-choice theories. Finally, the paper concludes that Prospect Theory shows greater explanatory traction than rational-choice theories in explaining the intensity and persistence of the conflict over the contested areas, in particular the land surrounding Preah Vihear Temple.
... Previously sporadic clashes turned into more intense and frequent exchanges of fire including artillery and allegedly even the use of poison gas by the Thai side (Ahuja, 2011; "Thai-Cambodian Conflict: Temple Trouble," 2011). The intensification of the violence seriously disrupted tourism to the Temple and also caused the displacement of hundreds of villagers on both sides of the border (Chambers & Wolf, 2010). At this point Cambodia started seeking the good offices of a third party to mediate the dispute ("Thai-Cambodian Conflict: Temple Trouble," 2011). ...
... Bilateral talks have not resulted in any sustainable agreements and while Thailand has accepted the good offices of Indonesian peacekeepers in the disputed area, it has prevented them from entering the area due to technicalities such as the right to inspect the Thai held area ("Thai-Cambodian Conflict: Temple Trouble," 2011). With elections rapidly approaching in Thailand and a growing polarization between nationalist and populist forces; the dispute over the less than four square miles of land surrounding the temple is becoming a very sensitive and possibly explosive issue (Chambers & Wolf, 2010; "Thai-Cambodian Conflict: Temple Trouble," 2011). The dispute is now an issue of sovereignty, historical antagonism between the two countries, and political opportunism ("Thai-Cambodian Conflict: Temple Trouble," 2011). ...
The present paper explores the relationship between Prospect Theory and International Conflict by concentrating on key concepts such as the endowment effect, reference dependence, and framing. Prospect Theory is shown to have considerable explanatory power in the case of the historical dispute between Thailand and Cambodia over their shared border. The apparent lack of strategic importance of the Temple in dispute, the absence of natural resources in the contested area, and the relative intensity of the conflict cannot be properly explained by rational-choice theories. Finally, the paper concludes that Prospect Theory shows greater explanatory traction than rational-choice theories in explaining the intensity and persistence of the conflict over the contested areas, in particular the land surrounding Preah Vihear Temple.
That Thai-Cambodian relations are stable and peaceful after Thailand’s most recent military coup in 2014 is counterintuitive and inconsistent with recent trends and dynamics. When governments loyal to Thaksin Shinawatra took power over the past decade, bilateral relations were cordial and constructive. Conversely, when anti-Thaksin governments were in office, Thai-Cambodian relations became unstable and adversarial. But this has not been the case after the military regime under General Prayut Chan-ocha seized power and overthrew the Thaksin-aligned government of Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra. The dominant strand of scholarly explanations attributes the volatile bilateral relationship to Thai historical forces interacting with domestic politics, underpinned by a ‘national humiliation’ discourse dating to French imperialism. But such an informed understanding is unable to pinpoint the timing and extent of the bilateral conflict when it flared up. Synthesising overlapping streams of literature and drawing on select interviews, this article sets out to demonstrate that the post-coup Thai government’s commitment and resolve to prevail at all costs ahead of the royal succession and the incumbent Cambodian government’s weakened political legitimacy at home have combined to situate and normalise bilateral relations on a new plateau.
When it comes to discussing about East Asian countries relations, we all know that China-Japan-Korea relations (sometimes simplified into CJK relations) are one of the most complicated and sensitive relations in history and was often brought up for discussion and debate. In Southeast Asia, coincidently, this similar situation of international relations exists, nonetheless, it might have been unaware in the international stages. Thailand-Cambodia relations has considerable characteristics similarly to those of China and Japan, although it is not as sensitive as the latter, it is also worth a discussion about similarities and differences. This comparison might, in the future, contribute to each country in the way that it points out the solution to the strained relations. Thailand and Cambodia can learn from China and Japan, as well as vice versa. Research Question Comparative between Sino-Japanese relations and Thai-Cambodian relations. This literature is intended to point out the similarities and differences of such state of international relations, historical events, anti-national sentiment, territorial dispute and viewing another country as inferior.
This dissertation aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of Cambodia-Thailand
diplomatic relations over the past six decades, specifically from 1950 to 2014. In
addition to empirical discussion, it seeks to explain why Cambodian-Thai
relationships have fluctuated and what primary factors caused the shifts during the
period discussed. In doing so, it employs the “social conflict” analysis, which views
states not as unitary actors, but within which is comprised of different societal forces
competing with one another and pursues foreign policies in accordance with their own
ideology, interest, and strategy. As such, it is postulated that Cambodia-Thailand
diplomatic relations should not be seen simply as relations between two unitary states
cooperating with or securitizing against one another, but rather as a matrix of
intertwining relationships between various social and political groups in both states
harboring competing ideologies and/or interests to advance their power positions at
home.
Two inter-related arguments are therefore put forward in this research. Firstly,
Cambodian-Thai relations are likely to be cooperative when both governments in
power are civilian-democratically elected regimes and share similar ideologies,
mutual economic interests, as well as security outlooks. Conversely, relations between
them tend to deteriorate when these factors are not reciprocal. This is particularly true
when one government has more in common with the dissidents of the government of
the other side. Secondly, though antagonistic nationalism does exist between
Cambodia and Thailand, it is not a determinant of the two nations’ foreign relations.
This research argues that nationalism and historical animosity are invoked only if at
least the government on one side needs to bolster its own legitimacy at home, and the
government on the other side does not share a similar ideology or strategic interests
with its own – the second aspect being the more important factor here.
