This is the Stalinist trend picked up by young Salot Sar - Pol Pot - and other aspiring Cambodian students while they were under the influence of the French Communist Party and through their Marxist Circle discussions on how to deal with ideological and political opponents or dissent generally: purge all enemies from within and without posing any threat to the Party!
^^^
Story by The Associated Press
Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet greets lawmakers as he arrives at the session on amending the law on nationality at the National Assembly in Phnom Penh Cambodia, on August 25, 2025. Heng Sinith/AP Phnom Penh, Cambodia AP —
Cambodian lawmakers on Monday approved a bill giving the government power to revoke the citizenship of anyone found guilty of conspiring with foreign nations to harm the national interest.
The amendment to the Nationality Law, which was approved by all 120 members of the National Assembly who were present, is viewed by critics as a way to suppress internal dissent and control political opponents of Prime Minister Hun Manet and the ruling Cambodian People’s Party.
Ahead of the vote on Sunday, 50 Cambodian non-governmental organizations issued a statement saying they were deeply worried by the bill’s “vaguely written” contents allowing the the government to strip Cambodians of their citizenship. They claim it “will have a disastrously chilling effect on the freedom of speech of all Cambodian citizens.”
“With this new amendment to the Nationality Law, all Cambodians risk losing our identities over our activism. If we are stripped of citizenship, we will lose the foundation for every right we have in our home country,” the statement said.
Before becoming law, the bill must be approved by Cambodia’s Senate and head of state, King Norodom Sihamoni, which are normally pro forma actions. Although Cambodia is formally an electoral democracy, Hun Manet’s Cambodian People’s Party holds 120 of the 125 seats in the National Assembly and controls all the levers of government.
More
than half of the respondents to an opinion, poll conducted by the
National Institute of National Administration (NIDA), agree that
Cambodia is a neighboring country with which Thailand should not be
associated, while 64.73% believe that super powers are interfering with
the border dispute between Thailand and Cambodia in pursuit of their
vested interests.
NIDA Poll conducted interviews with 1,310 people on August 18th and 19th to seek their opinions on the border conflict between the neighbouring countries.
The
poll shows that 44.96% of the respondents feel that the dispute is
abnormal and is a matter of concern. 29.15% feel the dispute is normal,
but that the reasons behind it are suspicious. 23.74% feel the situation
is not quite normal and 2.14% feel the situation is normal and there is
nothing to be worried about.
54.12% of the respondents
say that Cambodia is a neighbouring country with which Thailand should
not be associated. 29.39% say Cambodia is a Thai neighbour with which it
can be associated, but cannot trust. 14.20% believe Cambodia is an
enemy of Thailand. 1.91% say Thailand and Cambodia remain good
neighbours.
Regarding super power interference in the
Thai-Cambodian border conflict, 17.10% of the respondents say Thailand
should reject their interference. 64.73% believe the interference by
super powers is for their vested interests. 8.85% say that they believe
such involvement is intended to restore peace and 6.11% do not believe
super powers really want to interfere.
Foreign Minister Maris Sangiampongsa visited Sweden to witness the Gripen E/F jet deal and affirmed Thailand’s peaceful, lawful approach to Cambodia.
Maris paid an official visit to Sweden on Sunday (August 24) at the invitation of Maria Malmer Stenergard, Sweden’s Minister of Foreign Affairs.
The Thai foreign minister attended the signing ceremony for the Royal Thai Air Force’s purchase of Gripen E/F fighter jets from Saab and held discussions on defence industry cooperation.
Maris said Sweden was a country that valued human rights, and he took the opportunity to explain that Thailand was addressing its border conflict with Cambodia through dialogue, avoiding the use of force.
The 72-year old’s border
conflict theatrics and peace prize pandering aim to deflect scrutiny
from a regime that can now add child sextortion to its list of malign
economic interests.
By Jacob Sims
August 21, 2025
Diplomat
Former
Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen coordinates the country’s response to
the ongoing border dispute with Thailand, in a photo posted to his
Facebook page on August 4, 2025.
Credit: Facebook/Samdech Hun Sen Sen of Cambodia
Cambodia’s long-time leader Hun Sen may have entered his supposed retirement back in 2023,
but he remains the region’s unrivaled master of grand political theater
and cunning sleight of hand. This has rarely been more apparent than in
the unfolding of the Cambodia-Thailand border conflict in recent
months.
Back in June, he took a step that effectively reset the optics of the
entire dispute. Cambodia’s opposition, which has hammered Hun Sen over
the years for being too close to neighboring foreign powers, was forced
to fall in line after he released audio of his call with Thai Prime
Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra, directly interfering in Thai domestic
affairs and putting the nail in the coffin
of her floundering premiership. What began as a liability – accusations
of softness toward Thailand – was reframed into a show of nationalist
dominance, leaving the opposition without leverage. The message to the
Cambodian people was unmistakable: whatever your grievances, only Hun
Sen and the Cambodian People’s Party (CPP) can defend the nation.
Later in the month, Thailand attempted to re-center the conversation on Hun Sen’s strong links to organized crime actors, seizing money, property, and luxury cars from CPP Senator Kok An,
a scam-invested oligarch and key business partner of the strongman. By
this point however, Hun Sen had already seized control of the narrative,
and proceeded to goad Thailand into direct military confrontation via an array of escalating provocations along the border.
A fragile ceasefire between Thailand and Cambodia has held even as they trade fresh accusations every day
Jonathan Head
South East Asia correspondent in Bangkok
Published
The guns along the forested Thai-Cambodian border have been silent for three weeks now.
But
a fierce war of words is still being waged by both countries, as they
seek to win international sympathy and shore up public support at home.
And a commonly-held view in Thailand is that they are losing.
"The
perception is that Cambodia has appeared more agile, more assertive and
more media savvy," said Clare Patchimanon, speaking on the Thai Public
Broadcasting Service podcast Media Pulse. "Thailand has always been one
step behind."
The
century-old border dispute dramatically escalated with a Cambodian
rocket barrage into Thailand on the morning of 24 July, followed by Thai
air strikes.
Since
then an army of Cambodian social media warriors, backed by
state-controlled English language media channels, have unleashed a flood
of allegations and inflammatory reports, many of which turned out to be
false.
They
reported that a Thai F16 fighter jet had been shot down, posting images
of a plane on fire falling from the sky - it turned out to be from
Ukraine. Another unfounded allegation, that Thailand had dropped poison
gas, was accompanied by an image of a water bomber dropping pink fire
retardant. This was really from a wildfire in California.
Most foreigners and outsiders unacquainted with the history
of Cambodia and her more powerful neighbours will not fail to notice the
glaring injustice or an unjust deal forced upon a small weak nation by just taking
a cursory glance at the present-day map!
It’s not entirely misplaced that the Khmers have throughout
their history viewed their neighbours both to the East and West as ‘thieves’
for what they have committed against their nation, not only with reference to
their once vast territory plundered or ‘stolen’ but also the atrocities, human
enslavement as well as the theft of sacred ancient artefacts that form part of
their national dignity and identity. Indeed, the great looting is still taking
place today and has been happening since 1979 when one of these two familiar
historical foes – Annam-Vietnam – resumed its egregious foothold and suzerainty
over Cambodia. However, this fact and reality have tended to be overshadowed or
superseded by what Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge had committed against the
country.
Fundamentally, this situation facing the people of Cambodia
is a repetition of the dilemma that had also confronted the Khmer king when
colonial France’s intervention was allegedly courted or reluctantly accepted as
lesser of the three evils vying for ownership over Cambodia. Indeed, most historians
agree that – for good or ill – colonial France had a crucial, timely role in
salvaging what was left of Cambodia from the jaws of Siam and Annam while the
boundary maps that French surveyors conducted and the resulting treaties agreed
to among the relevant parties help Cambodia to retain and contest what remains
of her territory even as these maps and treaties themselves are continuing
sources of tension and conflict or bones of contention, essentially, because
they stand in the way of the lingering ambitions of the two neighbouring powers.
Besides, France is no longer there to act as referee and leverage?!
^^^
“In such a situation,” the prominent Thai historian says, “maps cannot help because they are part of the problem.”
By Sebastian Strangio
August 19, 2025
Diplomat
Detail
from a map of the Kingdom of Siam (Thailand) and its dependencies,
published in 1900, based on government surveys conducted under the
direction of the British surveyor James McCarthy.
Credit: Wikimedia Commons/University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Libraries
When
Cambodia and Thailand fought a fierce, five-day border conflict late
last month, many observers of international affairs were puzzled as to
its causes. To a large extent this was because the conflict involved
much more than the tracts of remote border territory claimed by both
sides. Indeed, the dispute has touched on deeply-rooted questions of
national identity in both nations.
In Thailand, the conflict has prompted a resurgence of nationalist
anxiety about territorial loss, linked to the colonial-era treaties that
created the country’s modern borders. In his classic 1994 book “Siam Mapped: The History of the Geo-Body of a Nation,”
the historian Thongchai Winichakul, a former Thai student activist,
documented the process by which Thailand’s “geobody” was created and
sacralized, creating anxieties that have since become closely connected
with the country’s domestic political struggles.
Thongchai, a professor of history at the University of
Wisconsin-Madison, spoke with The Diplomat’s Southeast Asia Editor
Sebastian Strangio about the reaction to the current conflict in
Thailand, the history of Thai irredentism, and how the two nations might
resolve the current crisis.
To start with, how have the Thai public and Thai
opinion-makers responded to the current conflict with Cambodia? Has
anything surprised you about the reactions you have observed in
Thailand?
Nationalistic anger, hatred, calls for aggressive “retaliation.” The
high degree of nationalism, which has not been seen in decades, higher
than the Preah Vihear dispute in 2008-2011, is surprising. The public
ignorance is also somewhat surprising because I thought that people had
learned from the previous dispute. Obviously, I was wrong.
VannDa, left, as brand ambassador of Coca-Cola
Cambodia, and Cambodian Senate President Hun Sen.
Coca-Cola is reported to have
cancelled its brand-ambassador contract with Cambodian rap star VannDa
over social media comments he made about the Thai–Cambodian border
conflict.
The posts are thought
to have violated contractual terms by creating a negative image and
fuelling tensions. One widely cited remark included the phrase “Thailand
fired first”.
The issue was highlighted by the Facebook page The Wild Chronicles Group, which noted that Coca-Cola Cambodia had deleted images of VannDa from its official page and terminated his endorsement deal.
The move sparked outrage online in
Cambodia, where netizens flooded Coca-Cola Cambodia’s page with angry
comments and calls for a boycott of the company’s products.
On Monday, Cambodian Senate
President Hun Sen posted a message on Facebook urging citizens to calm
down and think carefully. He said Coca-Cola was a US brand providing
jobs for Cambodians. If a boycott forced the company to pull out of
Cambodia, the country itself would ultimately suffer.
Hun Sen also addressed VannDa
directly, expressing hope the rapper would understand and show
resilience for the greater good, describing him as a symbol of the
spirit of sacrifice for the nation.
Coca-Cola has not publically confirmed it has severed links with the Cambodian rapper.
Rooted
in centuries of history, the border conflict between the two countries
is set to flare up again unless underlying causes are addressed.
The
recent ceasefire and ongoing talks between Thailand and Cambodia are
fragile bandages over a long-festering wound. It was brokered by
Malaysia – and closely observed by China and the US, along with other
Southeast Asian countries – after weeks of escalating military clashes, a
politically explosive phone call, and open hostilities that threatened
to turn a simmering border dispute into a regional conflagration. The
current calm is welcome, but may prove temporary. Without reckoning with
deeper historical, domestic political and geopolitical dynamics driving
this conflict, it is only a question of when, not if, we will see
another round of confrontation.
A Deep Historical Divide
The
roots of today’s dispute go back to the days of the Khmer Empire, which
dominated much of mainland Southeast Asia from the 9th to 13th
centuries, including large parts of present-day Thailand. As the Khmer
Empire declined, the rise of Siam (precursor to modern Thailand) brought
a reversal of fortunes. Over the ensuing centuries, much of the
territory now contested, including key temples and other sites sacred to
many on both sides, fell under Siamese control.
This
back-and-forth dynamic continued until France, having established itself
as the colonial power in Cambodia in the late 19th century, sought to
formalise borders in Indochina. The 1907 Franco-Siamese Treaty
redrew the map, jeopardising Thai control over several religious and
culturally significant sites, including the famous Preah Vihear Temple.
Thailand (then still Siam) signed the treaty, but resentment and
controversy lingered.
The Thais are under pressure to agree to the ceasefire
agreement, so their constant provocations and encroachments that undermine this
agreement are their effective means of sabotaging it while blaming Cambodia for
lying or not honouring the same agreement - as usual!
Observers
say while Asean’s intervention may help cease hostilities for now,
sustained engagement is needed to resolve tensions long term
Sam Beltran
scmp
The deployment of Asean
observers along the Cambodia-Thailand border can help ensure peace, but
deep mistrust between both sides may limit the regional bloc’s role as
gatekeeper amid a shaky truce.
Cambodia and Thailand
have agreed to allow observers from the Association of Southeast Asian
Nations (Asean) to be stationed on either side of the divide and help
monitor a tenuous ceasefire after a deadly five-day border conflict last
month.
The August 7 agreement
was forged under a General Border Committee established between both
countries. Security chiefs, including Cambodian Defence Minister Tea
Seiha and Thailand’s acting defence minister Nattaphon Narkphanit,
agreed to a 13-point plan after four days of truce talks led by Asean
chair Malaysia in Kuala Lumpur.
The
countries hashed out the terms of their ceasefire, including a joint
pledge to continue a freeze on border troop movements and civilian
attacks, as well as the use of all types of weapons. The conflict has
claimed the lives of at least 43 people and displaced more than 300,000
on either side.
Abdul
Rahman Yaacob, a research fellow at the Lowy Institute’s Southeast Asia
programme, told This Week in Asia that Asean faced a tall hurdle in
keeping the peace “because of the deep mistrust between Cambodia and
Thailand, and the fact they have different preferences when it comes to
how best to resolve the border disputes”.
