On 2 February 2026, Thailand’s military intelligence chief led a highly publicized tour to the Thai–Cambodian border, bringing foreign military attachés from nearly twenty embassies together with officers of the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Thai authorities presented the visit as an “open house” briefing, alleging that compounds across the border—including areas near O’Smach—were connected to large-scale scam operations targeting victims worldwide.
Transnational fraud is a serious regional challenge. Criminal networks operating across borders cause real harm, and regional cooperation is necessary. The existence of crime is not in dispute.
But the issue is not whether scams exist.The issue is whether criminal allegations can be used as a pretext to justify military coercion, territorial intrusion, and the normalization of occupation against a neighboring sovereign state.
Under international law, suspected crime does not suspend sovereignty. It does not expand jurisdiction. And it does not permit the use of force.
Not Thai Ground
Thailand’s military intelligence chief did not simply host a border tour. He led foreign military attachés and U.S. FBI officers onto land near O’Smach that Cambodia maintains is Cambodian sovereign territory.
Thailand framed this as a security briefing. But foreign officials should recognize a more basic truth before any discussion of crime begins: The ground beneath their feet was not neutral. It was Cambodian land.
Foreign personnel present were not standing on “Thai ground.” They were physically present on territory that Cambodia regards as unlawfully occupied.
No border spectacle, no enforcement narrative, and no criminal allegation can change the fundamental rule of international order: territory belongs to the sovereign state, and sovereignty cannot be overridden by accusation.
Those invited to observe should therefore understand what international law requires them to see: You are standing on Cambodian territory.
Foreign Witnesses
Foreign military attachés and U.S. FBI officers who toured O’Smach should recognize clearly that they were not standing on neutral ground, nor on territory Thailand may lawfully claim as its own. They were present on land that Cambodia maintains is Cambodian sovereign territory—seized and still held under Thai military control. Their visit must not be absorbed into a staged “anti-scam” narrative that seeks to reframe occupation as law enforcement and aggression as cooperation.
For Cambodia, this is not a matter of policing. It is a grave violation of territorial integrity and a forcible intrusion into a neighboring state’s land. No criminal allegation, however grave, can justify military encroachment across an international border. And no diplomatic spectacle can conceal the fundamental truth Cambodia has long asserted: sovereignty has been breached, and invasion cannot be normalized, excused, or legitimized through performance. O’Smach is Cambodian territory. And sovereignty cannot be occupied.
Crime as Pretext
If Thailand’s objective were genuinely law enforcement, lawful mechanisms already exist. Mutual legal assistance, extradition treaties, joint investigations, and civilian judicial cooperation are the recognized frameworks for addressing transnational crime. These processes respect sovereignty. Military tours do not.
Criminal jurisdiction is territorial. Enforcement inside another state requires consent and lawful process. Allegations of scams do not give any country—under Cambodian law, Thai law, or international law—the right to enforce domestic criminal claims inside Cambodia without authorization. Crime prevention cannot be transformed into territorial intrusion. Invasion cannot be rebranded as policing.
Jurisdiction Ends at the Border
The use of military presence, coercive pressure, or armed activity inside Cambodian territory cannot be justified through the language of “anti-scam enforcement.”
Airstrikes, bombardment, intimidation, and occupation are not tools of criminal justice. They are acts of warfare and grave violations of sovereignty. The staging of a tour with foreign personnel does not alter that reality. A military occupation does not become lawful because it is marketed as enforcement.
Heavy force confirms what the briefing attempted to obscure: this was never simply about crime. It was power projection.
Occupation by Another Name
The delegation was led by Thailand’s military intelligence leadership and included foreign embassy military attachés alongside officers of the U.S. FBI. This was not neutral observation; it was strategic signaling.
Criminal justice is pursued through courts, prosecutors, and lawful cooperation—not through military briefings staged on contested land.
When foreign personnel participate in such visits, they risk becoming more than observers. They risk serving—intentionally or not—as witnesses in a political spectacle designed to normalize coercion and occupation.
Foreign governments and institutions should therefore proceed with caution. Presence alone does not equal endorsement, but silence is often read as acceptance.
Occupation does not become lawful because outsiders are invited to walk through it. Sovereignty cannot be transformed into theater.
The Charter Prohibits This
International law is unequivocal: Criminal allegations do not grant the right to use force.No doctrine permits invasion or occupation on the basis of suspected crime.
The UN Charter prohibits the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity of any state.
The lawful response to transnational crime is cooperation through civilian institutions—not militarization, coercion, or territorial intrusion. Force is not justice. Aggression is not enforcement.
The Reality Beneath the Tour
Thailand may attempt to frame its actions through the language of scams and security. But sovereignty cannot be staged away.
If foreign officials are brought to O’Smach, they should not only listen to briefings about fraud. They should also recognize the legal truth that cannot be erased by spectacle:
The land beneath their feet is Cambodian territory. No tour, no narrative, and no criminal allegation can legitimize occupation. Sovereignty is not a theater prop. The O’Smach land is Cambodian territory, and sovereignty cannot be occupied.
Note: This Op-Ed was written by Long Panhavuth, a lawyer at PAN & Associates Law Firm.
