The fighting that erupted on July 28th and again since December 7th, 2025, has left an indelible scar on the people of both Thailand and Cambodia. Beyond the tactical military movements and political rhetoric lies a raw, shared naked reality: the loss of innocent civilian lives, hundred thousands of displaced people, infrastructure destroyed, the profound physical and emotional suffering of two nations that share not only a border, but a deep cultural and historical heritage. While the impulse to defend the sovereignty of the modern nation-state through military means seems inevitable, the current stalemate—rooted in a battle over rigid preconditions unilaterally imposed by Thai military/government—threatens to turn a temporary crisis into a generational tragedy.
To move forward, the focus must shift. The path towards peace does not lie in the perfection of this unilateral demand, but in the moral courageous construction of alternative narratives that prioritize collective prosperity over national pride.
The Trap of Unilateral Preconditions
In the wake of lives lost, infrastructure destroyed, and physical and emotional suffering, both Thailand and Cambodia have expressed a formal willingness to talk. However, this “willingness” is currently hamstrung by Thailand’s unilaterally imposed preconditions. In any diplomatic arena, setting “non-negotiable” terms before the dialogue even begins is often a recipe for deadlock. It treats the negotiation as a zero-sum game—a win for one must be a loss for the Others. We emphasize the Others (with capital O and s), because it is not only Cambodia, but the whole world.
When preconditions are set unilaterally, they act as a wall rather than a bridge. They demand a concession of dignity before a word is even spoken. To break this cycle, both nations must acknowledge that working towards stability cannot be imposed; it must be designed reciprocally and even constellationally, to ensure that there is a third party to witness. The shared suffering experienced since July must serve as the equalizer, humbling both parties to recognize that the cost of continued war far outweighs the cost of compromise.
The Power of Alternative Narratives
What is urgently needed is a departure from the “Narrative of National Pride and Political Legitimacy” toward a “Narrative of Potentiality” as envisioned by ASEAN community in its three pillars: Political-Security (peace and just region), Economy (integrated, prosperous, connected) and Socio-Culture (enhanced quality of life, inclusive, sustainable). This future-oriented approach focuses on what can be built, rather than just what has been broken.
- From Sovereignty to Synergy: Instead of viewing the border as a line of friction, a new narrative can reframe it as a zone of joint opportunity and collaboration, a temporary or permanent “Shared Sovereignty” in the unsolved territory, (but leave this issue to Joint Boundary Commission (JBC) and General Border Committee (GBC).
- Healing the Social Fabric: The emotional suffering of people along the border on both sides is a powerful, untapped catalyst for peace. A shared narrative of “regional resilient and quality of life” can emphasize that the security of a Cambodian farmer is inextricably linked to the prosperity of a Thai merchant and entrepreneurs.
- Human Prosperity as Sagga: When the narrative in negotiation rooms shifts from “Whose side of the border does this land lie on” to “how do we feed our children and the next generation,” the air in the room changes. Prioritizing human and social prosperity guides leaders to frame concessions not as a retreat, but as a strategic investment in the well-being of their respective citizens for generations to come.
Cooperation as a Strategic Choice
Choosing cooperation over conflict and war is not an act of weakness or a loss of face; it is an act of high-level statesmanship and moral courage. The foundations for prosperity that were destroyed so far can be rebuilt more strongly if they are rebuilt together, a joined force that respect original Buddha teaching, dependent origination (Paticca-samuppada).
- Shared Security: Modern threats—climate change, pandemics, and economic instability—do not respect national borders. By ending the war, both nations can redirect military attention and financial commitments toward these shared existential challenges.
- Shared Future: In an interconnected and interdependent world, a localized conflict devalues both currencies and drives away foreign investors and international tourists. A joint commitment to a “Peace Zone” could turn a site of tragedy into a symbol of recovery.
The Path Forward: The negotiation process must begin by setting aside the “checklist of demands” and replacing it with shared destiny. If both nations can envision a future where their borders are conduits for trade and culture rather than trenches for soldiers, the preconditions that seem insurmountable today will naturally lose their weight.
The common suffering of 2025 has provided a painful reminder of our shared humanity. It is now time for the leaders and people of Thailand and Cambodia to use that shared pain as the foundation for a shared peace and prosperity.
Professor UN Leang, Dean of Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities, RUPP
