1. Introduction and purpose

In July 2025, the historic border dispute between Thailand and Cambodia escalated into armed conflict around the Preah Vihear temple, causing civilian casualties, the closure of border crossings and diplomatic tensions throughout Southeast Asia.

For those working in the travel security sector, understanding the dynamics of this escalation is crucial to prevent disruptions, protect personnel and safeguard regional supply chains.

This article aims to provide an analysis based on verified OSINT sources, to facilitate dialogue and highlight Kriptia’s capabilities in data collection, monitoring and analysis for Travel Security, Situational Awareness & Early Warnings.

In order to provide an in-depth analysis of the topic, the analysis follows an approach aimed at answering key questions such as who, what, where, how, when and why.

The conflict has reignited with 11 civilian casualties and one military casualty, following over a century of tension between Thai and Cambodian forces. The increasingly heated clashes took place around the 4.6 km2disputed territory surrounding the ancient temple of Preah Vihear, now in Cambodian territory. 24 July 2025 was the day of renewed and dangerous escalation, the legacy of tensions over the temple, which had been simmering since 2008, an important turning point in events when the site was designated a UNESCO World Heritage Site, but leaving unresolved the bitter dispute over territorial ownership. The clash quickly escalated, involving surveillance drones and air forces, resulting in heavy artillery fire and tense diplomatic reactions between the two sides.

Figure 1) Preah Vihear Temple [1]

2. The protagonists involved

Cambodia is a constitutional monarchy led by Prime Minister Hun Manet and has had its capital in Phnom Penh since 1865. The country, heir to the post-Khmer Rouge regime leader Hun Sen, maintains an authoritarian system, with strong Chinese influence on the economy and infrastructure.

Thailand, also a constitutional monarchy, is led by a civil-military coalition headed by Paetongtarn Shinawatra, daughter of former Prime Minister Thaksin, and has had its capital in Bangkok since 1782. Thailand is more aligned with the political and economic axis of the United States, while mediating Beijing’s growing penetration into Thai economic interests.

Militarily, between the two contending countries, Thailand is better armed and more modern in this respect, especially in terms of air dominance, while Cambodia, with more obsolete weaponry, can however count on an informal network of military aid.

The clashes and tensions between the two protagonists grew increasingly violent, and already at this stage, identifying patterns in the conflict can be crucial: in clashes of various kinds involving two nations with relatively long histories, social, political and religious reasons often come into play. In particular, the territorial issue a n d the management of the political axis were a source of tension from the 1990s onwards, due to the common distinction within the axis itself, on which the two countries had opposing views. Thailand proved to be a solid eastern ally for the United States over the decades, while Cambodia, after the Khmer Rouge dictatorship a n d the influence of Vietnam’s pro-communist policy, slowly moved towards democracy in the 1990s, albeit maintaining a structure of authoritarian power.

Figure 2) Map showing the border areas involved and the sites at the centre of the escalation [2]

3. Historical and geopolitical roots: the background to the crisis

The conflict between Cambodia and Thailand that erupted in 2025 is one of the most significant flashpoints in Southeast Asia, with deep historical and geopolitical roots. Far beyond a simple territorial dispute, the crisis has called into question regional stability, influencing internal political dynamics, strategic alliances and the role of ASEAN, which was initially paralysed.

The focal point of the dispute is the Preah Vihear temple, a site of enormous symbolic and spiritual value for Cambodia, linked to the legacy of the Khmer dynasty. The dispute has its roots in the colonial period: the Franco-Siamese treaty of 1904, followed by the French map of 1907, formally assigned the temple to Cambodia, then a French protectorate. However, topographical ambiguities and divergent maps immediately gave rise to disputes over the sovereignty of the adjacent territories.

In 1962, the International Court of Justice awarded the temple to Cambodia, but without ruling on the surrounding territories. Since then, Thailand has continued to claim the area, with moments of acute tension in 2001, 2008, 2009 and 2011, culminating in armed clashes. The inclusion of the site on the UNESCO list at Cambodia’s request further reignited the conflict.

The re-emergence of the conflict in 2025 comes amid a tense international context in which historical rivalries, colonial memory and identity factors are intertwined with contemporary geopolitical interests.

Figure 3) Chronology of relations between Thailand and Cambodia

4. Escalation 2025: recent events

More or less latent tensions flared up again on 24 July 2025 along the border between the two countries, not far from another ancient temple, the Khmer- Hindu Prasat Ta Muen Thom, causing the death of at least 11 civilians in the Sisaket region. The predictable consequence was, in the first instance, the cessation and downgrading of diplomatic relations with Bangkok, which had previously closed the land border crossings, in line with a regime of warlike tension.

Between February and May 2025, a series of significant incidents began, from the ban imposed on Cambodian tourists singing the national anthem at a disputed site at the end of February, to a fatal incident on 28 May, during which a Cambodian soldier died in an altercation with Thai troops. Then, on 23 July, a Thai soldier was seriously injured by a landmine explosion while on patrol, providing the casus belli for the events of 24 July.

Starting on 24 July, the conflict intensified on several fronts, with mutual artillery fire, rocket launches, air raids, border closures and the mobilisation of ground divisions in both countries. On 26 July, the escalation became more acute with the Thai launch of Operation Trat Phikhat Phairi 1. Meanwhile, this latest phase of the July conflict has so far caused between 38 and 43 civilian and military casualties, displaced more than 300,000 people in Thailand a n d Cambodia, caused economic damage estimated at over $300 million, and resulted in the destruction of health and military infrastructure. The critical situation, supported by the words of the Thai Ministry of Health, is further reflected in the evacuation of approximately 1,500 Cambodian families from the area surrounding Oddar Meanchey.

Figure 4) Chronology of the crisis

28 2

A ceasefire is brokered through diplomatic intervention by the United States of America and

other ASEAN states.

5. Conclusions and implications

The recent crisis between Thailand and Cambodia has highlighted the limitations of regional conflict management mechanisms in Southeast Asia. ASEAN diplomacy, initially blocked by the principle of non-interference, has been reactivated thanks to international pressure. The United States, in coordination with Japan and Australia, facilitated a technical ceasefire focused on the withdrawal of artillery, the definition of border lines and the creation of humanitarian corridors. China, despite its proximity to Cambodia, maintained a cautious stance, avoiding further escalation.

At the geopolitical level, the crisis highlights the need for an external stabilising actor and underscores China’s strategic ambiguity in the region. The conflict, which can be defined as asymmetrical due to the military and political disparities between the contenders, recalls dynamics already seen in other global contexts, such as in the Sahel, Ethiopia and Nigeria.

A key lesson is the role of colonial divisions, often arbitrary, in the genesis of such conflicts. Understanding the political and cultural history of territories is crucial to analysing the root causes and long-term implications.

The case of Thailand and Cambodia shows how even local disputes can quickly take on international strategic significance.

Sources:

• https://www.limesonline.com/limesplus/fra-cambogia-e-thailandia-non-e-una-guerra-di-religione- 14656703/?callback=in&code=OWYWYWU2ZTMTM2EXZC0ZMZDIL TLKZMMTZTNIM2EYNJNHMZQ3&state=7e66a6624cd64b94891ef1e4b7e01a0
  d
• https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/IT/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52011IP0072&from=SK
• https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-7-2011- 0072_IT.pdf?redirect
• https://www.limesonline.com/rubriche/il-mondo-oggi/thailandia- cambogia-guerra-ucraina-russia-usa-israele-palestina-cisgiordania- 19712987/
• https://www.limesonline.com/limesplus/fra-cambogia-e-thailandia-non- e-una-guerra-di-religione-14656703/
• https://www.ispionline.it/it/pubblicazione/thailandia-cambogia-venti-di- guerra-214809•
• https://scenarieconomici.it/tensione-thailandia-cambogia-confine- conteso-2025/

Images:

[1]“Preah Vihear Temple.”
Foto di William Brehm, 27 agosto 2010.
Licenza: Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC BY 2.0).
Fonte: Wikimedia Commons – Preah Vihear Temple.

[2] “ECHO Cambodia BaseMap A4 Landscape.”
Autore: ERCC – Emergency Response Coordination Centre, European Commission, 12 agosto 2013.
Licenza: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
Fonte: Wikimedia Commons – ECHO Cambodia BaseMap A4 Landscape.