Listen to the audio version of this article (generated by AI).
Thai election results on Sunday’s poll showed conservative Anutin Charnvirakul’s Bhumjaithai Party claiming victory, with analysts saying that the border remains an arena of “manage friction” with periodic nationalist rhetoric under the caretaker government.
The Election Commission on February 9 announced unofficial results with Bhumjaithai Party in the lead with 94% of the vote, winning more than 190 seats, the People’s Party securing over 110 seats, and Pheu Thai Party over 50 seats, according Thai media Khaosod.
More than 50 parties contested in Sunday’s polls, but only three — the People’s Party, Bhumjaithai, and Pheu Thai — gained comparatively large votes.
According to Asia-Pacific geopolitical analyst Seng Vanly in terms of the ongoing border tensions, the election outcome likely means a period of “cold peace” characterized by occasional diplomatic posturing and a slower pace of negotiations as the Joint Boundary Commission.
“The border may remain a focal point of managed friction, where the Thai government maintains a degree of pressure to satisfy domestic hardliners without necessarily intending to sever the deep economic ties that bind the two nations.”
Thailand’s foreign policy toward Cambodia may shift toward a more transactional approach, where cooperation in areas like trade or labor is decoupled from, or used as leverage against the resolution of territorial disputes, Vanly said.
Sophal Ear, a professor at Arizona State University, said that the election result means that “tensions may continue to flare rhetorically” if Thai domestic pressure mounts.
“Cambodia should expect some tough language but also opportunities for quiet diplomacy. The border situation will likely remain manageable but still vulnerable to political exploitation,” Sophal said.
He said that Cambodia should emphasize steady communication, technical cooperation, crisis prevention, and keeping military-to-military channels open based on already agreed-upon legal frameworks to reduce misunderstanding.
Sophal opined that Anutin’s Bhumjaithai Party performed strongly because it positioned itself as a pragmatic party focused on economic recovery, regional development, and stability — border issues have long been used by Thai politicians to appeal nationalist sentiment.
During the election campaign, Bhumjaithai Party announced a four-pillar policy strategy, focusing on the economy, security, society, and natural disaster management.
In terms of security and safety, the party pledged to build a “security wall” to protect Thais from modern threats, strictly curb illegal imports, and recruit 100,000 new personnel with a monthly salary of 12,000 baht (approximately $385). Two days before the polls, Anutin also promised to unilaterally abolish the 2001 maritime agreement (MOU 44) with Cambodia.
Pavin Chachavalpongpun, a Thai professor of politics and international relations at Kyoto University, told CamboJA News that the party’s victory signals the consolidation of a conservative order between military and palace rule through a civilian populist front, as provincial voters favored stability amid patronage politics and border tensions over People’s Party’s reforms.
Anutin’s win was driven in part by nationalist rhetoric and a “rally-around-the-flag” effect linked to border clashes, warning that the dispute was likely to persist or flare up again rather than be quickly resolved.
“Because the conflict served as an effective electoral tool to sideline progressives, there is little domestic incentive for the new government to make the concessions necessary for a final settlement,” he said.
“We are likely to see a pattern of ‘armed diplomacy’ where periodic skirmishes are used to reinforce nationalist credentials, making any ceasefire fragile and dependent on the political needs of the Bangkok establishment.”
However, Pavin said that if a more diverse coalition government had been formed—particularly one involving the People’s Party—the chances of a resolution might have initially seemed higher but would have likely faced intense institutional sabotage.
“A reformist-led coalition would have prioritized de-escalation and international mediation to focus on domestic policy; however, the Thai military and conservative elite would likely have viewed such ‘softness’ as a betrayal of national sovereignty,” he said.
However, he said while another coalition might have sought a settlement, Thailand’s political red lines mean any leader without full military backing—unlike Anutin—would struggle to resolve the dispute without risking domestic backlash or even a coup.
Developing border situation
Speaking at a press briefing, Cambodian government spokesperson Pen Bona said that protests will continue to be lodged over alleged Thai violations on February 8 through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The protests concern the alleged illegal act of Thai forces in blocking roads by placing containers and constructing access roads in parts of Oddar Meanchey and Pursat provinces.
He added that the areas where the Thai containers are placed are within Cambodian territory defined by the 1904 and 1907 French–Siamese treaty.
Veal Veng District Governor Theang Leng confirmed that the Thai military has deployed another 40 shipping containers in the area near the Thmor Da Special Economic Zone widely reported to host online scam operations and which Thailand heavily bombed in December.
“The containers have been set up in front of the existing concertina wire, with 47 containers,” he said. “Thai forces remain present on Cambodian territory.”
Bona declined to comment on whether relations between the neighboring countries would improve following the victory of the Bhumjaithai Party.
