Thailand Accuses Cambodia of Border Provocations, Civilian Attacks

Army Details Escalation, Denies Chemical Weapon Use

Thailand’s Army has detailed a series of escalating border provocations by Cambodia, culminating in attacks on civilian targets and a violation of a ceasefire agreement. The military asserts its actions have been strictly defensive and proportional under international law.

Cambodia Accused of Provocative Military and Civilian Actions

The Thai Army outlined a timeline of Cambodian military and civilian activities it claims have heightened tensions along the shared border. These incidents began with Cambodian tourists visiting Ta Muen Thom Castle on February 13, 2005, and the bundling of symbols of Thai-Cambodian cooperation with Laos on February 28, 2005.

Between March and April 2005, Cambodian soldiers reportedly modified border terrain to strengthen positions, improve routes, and expand into Thai territory near Kulet. Satellite imagery from Australian analysis indicated a significant increase in Cambodian personnel and weaponry along the border from April to May 2005.

Escalation to Skirmishes and Attacks on Civilians

A skirmish erupted on May 28, 2005, when Cambodian units opened fire. Thailand returned fire in defense of its territory, but diplomatic efforts to resolve the issue proved ineffective. By July 2005, Cambodian soldiers were reportedly involved in smuggling, intrusions, and even murder in Thai border areas.

During one such incident, Thai military patrols were injured by PMN-2 anti-personnel mines, an act the Army characterized as a deliberate violation of humanitarian principles and the Ottawa Convention. The Army also reported recovering unexploded ordnance in the area, made safe through international cooperation.

Cambodia also allegedly orchestrated provocative demonstrations, sending uniformed and plainclothes soldiers, as well as civilians from Phnom Penh, to the Ta Kwai Temple and other border areas. These activities, intended to provoke Thai tourists and soldiers, created a risk of clashes.

Thai Response Aligned with International Law

The Army clarified border control measures, stating that on July 24, 2005, Cambodian military at Ta Muen Thom Castle initiated firing with small arms, machine guns, and mortars. This led to a clash, after which Cambodia reportedly escalated with artillery and BM-21 rockets targeting Thai positions.

The Cambodian forces are accused of deliberately targeting civilian areas, including Phanom Dong Rak Hospital, a PTT gas station, and residences in villages like Kruat and Ban Kut Chiang. These indiscriminate attacks resulted in 36 civilian casualties, including 15 deaths, one of whom was an 8-year-old child, and forced over 150,000 people to evacuate. As of late 2023, the risk of landmines remains a global concern, with an estimated 110 million mines still active worldwide, primarily in conflict zones. (Source: Geneva Call, 2023)

“The Army responded under the principles of self-defense as provided in international law, particularly Article 51 of the United Nations Charter, which states that no provision in this Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs.”

—Thai Army Spokesperson, quoted from statement

Thai operations, the Army stated, were legitimate, necessary, and proportional, aimed at inhibiting threats, reducing civilian losses, and maintaining national sovereignty without territorial aggression.

Denial of Chemical Weapon Use and Misrepresentation of Events

The Army vehemently denied Cambodian accusations of using chemical weapons, asserting Thailand’s adherence to the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC). Such claims were labeled as “War Propaganda” intended to slander Thailand, with a reference to a 2022 incident involving a forest electricity agency in California.

Regarding the use of F-16 aircraft and heavy weaponry, the Army maintained these were proportional responses to Cambodian encroachments and targeted only military objectives. The Cambodian side, however, is accused of initiating hostilities from civilian areas, using communities as human shields, which constitutes a serious violation of international humanitarian law.

The Army also refuted claims of using MK-84 bombs in Cambodian civilian homes, describing them as distorted allegations using old images from the Vietnam War era. Cambodia’s assertion that a specific image depicted MK-84 bombs was rejected as unscientific and untrue.

Continued Violations and Call for Peaceful Resolution

Despite a ceasefire negotiated in Malaysia on July 28, 2005, Cambodia is reported to have violated the agreement in several areas, including Chong Bok, Sam Tae, Pha Mor E Daeng, and Ta Kwai Temple. Further violations occurred on July 30 and July 31, 2005, with increased troop presence and unmanned aerial vehicle activity near the Thai border.

Cambodia’s public statements accusing Thailand of invasion and violating UN rules were called distortions. Thailand reiterated its commitment to UN rules and the principle of refraining from the use of force in international disputes, as per Article 2(4) of the UN Charter.

The Army condemned Cambodia’s false accusations and urged them to cease such propaganda to avoid inciting hatred. Thailand called for cooperation in resolving the border situation peacefully through negotiation and straightforward collaboration.

Most recently, on July 30, 2005, Cambodia reportedly invited foreign military ambassadors to inspect a battle area but redirected the convoy to the dangerous Sadam Chong Horse area.

“The clash between Thai and Cambodia began with the Cambodian side shooting first, using long-range weapons to target civilians and cause unacceptable damage to life and property. Despite negotiations for a ceasefire, the Cambodian side has continued to violate the agreement.”

—Thai Army Spokesperson, concluding remarks

The Army concluded by emphasizing that Cambodia’s systematic dissemination of distorted information necessitates international community engagement for understanding and joint efforts towards peaceful negotiation and problem-solving.