Thailand Firmly Rejects Trump’s Claim of a New Ceasefire with Cambodia as Border Clashes Continue
Bangkok insists no truce has been agreed amid intense fighting, contradicting U.S. President’s announcement and highlighting ongoing conflict along the disputed frontier
Thailand has categorically denied United States President Donald Trump’s recent assertion that it had agreed to a renewed ceasefire with Cambodia, reaffirming that hostilities along the long-disputed border remain unresolved and active.
Trump posted that after speaking with Thai Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul and Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet, both nations had agreed to “cease all shooting” and revert to an existing peace accord.
Thai authorities swiftly clarified that no such agreement had been concluded and that the situation on the ground did not reflect a cessation of military operations.
Caretaker Prime Minister Anutin stated that Thailand would continue military actions “until we feel no more harm and threats to our land and people,” emphasising that there had been no formal truce with Phnom Penh.
The Thai Foreign Ministry similarly criticised Trump’s characterisation of events, saying his remarks did not accurately capture the current dynamics and underscored Thailand’s pride in its alliance with the United States while stressing that any genuine ceasefire required substantive negotiations and conditions.
Cambodia’s government has not validated the reported ceasefire, although it has publicly expressed support for proposals by Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim to halt hostilities, including an offer for observer missions supported by U.S. satellite monitoring.
Fighting along the border has persisted with airstrikes, artillery exchanges and rocket fire between Thai and Cambodian forces, causing casualties and displacing large numbers of civilians.
The clashes, which reignited in early December after the suspension of a previous peace arrangement signed in October under the auspices of regional mediation, have drawn international concern over both humanitarian impacts and the fragility of diplomatic efforts.
Thailand and Cambodia blame each other for breaches of prior agreements, and the Thai foreign minister stressed that a ceasefire could not be declared in the absence of an actual halt to hostilities.
As the dispute endures, divergent narratives from Bangkok, Phnom Penh and Washington highlight the challenges of translating diplomatic declarations into effective action on the ground.
Trump posted that after speaking with Thai Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul and Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet, both nations had agreed to “cease all shooting” and revert to an existing peace accord.
Thai authorities swiftly clarified that no such agreement had been concluded and that the situation on the ground did not reflect a cessation of military operations.
Caretaker Prime Minister Anutin stated that Thailand would continue military actions “until we feel no more harm and threats to our land and people,” emphasising that there had been no formal truce with Phnom Penh.
The Thai Foreign Ministry similarly criticised Trump’s characterisation of events, saying his remarks did not accurately capture the current dynamics and underscored Thailand’s pride in its alliance with the United States while stressing that any genuine ceasefire required substantive negotiations and conditions.
Cambodia’s government has not validated the reported ceasefire, although it has publicly expressed support for proposals by Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim to halt hostilities, including an offer for observer missions supported by U.S. satellite monitoring.
Fighting along the border has persisted with airstrikes, artillery exchanges and rocket fire between Thai and Cambodian forces, causing casualties and displacing large numbers of civilians.
The clashes, which reignited in early December after the suspension of a previous peace arrangement signed in October under the auspices of regional mediation, have drawn international concern over both humanitarian impacts and the fragility of diplomatic efforts.
Thailand and Cambodia blame each other for breaches of prior agreements, and the Thai foreign minister stressed that a ceasefire could not be declared in the absence of an actual halt to hostilities.
As the dispute endures, divergent narratives from Bangkok, Phnom Penh and Washington highlight the challenges of translating diplomatic declarations into effective action on the ground.
