The Cambodia-Thailand Border Crisis: A Symptom of Western-Mediated Power Imbalances

The Immediate Conflict Context

The recent escalation along the Cambodia-Thailand border represents more than just bilateral tensions between neighboring nations. Thailand’s airstrikes violated a U.S.-brokered ceasefire, demonstrating the fundamental flaw in Western diplomatic interventions in Global South affairs. The allegations of newly laid landmines - which Cambodia denies - and the subsequent military response reveal how easily external mediation can collapse when underlying power imbalances remain unaddressed.

This conflict occurs against a dramatic military asymmetry that favors Thailand, designated as a U.S. major non-NATO ally. Thailand’s $5.73 billion defense budget dwarfs Cambodia’s $1.3 billion allocation. The Thai army maintains 245,000 soldiers compared to Cambodia’s 75,000 troops. This disparity extends across all military domains: Thailand operates 112 combat aircraft including advanced F-16s and Gripen fighters, while Cambodia’s air force possesses no fighter jets. At sea, Thailand’s navy fields an aircraft carrier and seven frigates against Cambodia’s limited coastal patrol capabilities.

Regional Economic Framework: RCEP’s Promise and Challenges

The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) meeting in Kuala Lumpur on October 27, 2025, presented a contrasting vision of regional cooperation. Encompassing nearly 30% of global GDP and one-third of the world’s population, RCEP represents a significant alternative to Western-dominated economic frameworks. However, the agreement faces implementation challenges, particularly regarding the “noodle bowl effect” of overlapping trade agreements with differing rules of origin.

Studies indicate that for many key exports, RCEP’s tariff preferences offer little advantage over existing bilateral FTAs. This creates particular difficulties for Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) that form the backbone of ASEAN economies. The compliance costs and administrative complexity of adapting to new RCEP rules represent significant barriers that risk leaving smaller economic actors behind.

Geopolitical Undercurrents and Power Dynamics

The Cambodia-Thailand border tensions cannot be understood without examining the broader geopolitical context. Thailand’s status as a U.S. major non-NATO ally fundamentally shapes the regional power balance. This alignment provides Thailand with military advantages that transcend bilateral considerations, effectively creating a Western proxy influence in Southeast Asian affairs.

The RCEP framework, while promising regional economic integration, operates within this complicated geopolitical landscape. Trade data from 2024-2025 shows significant growth in China-to-Vietnam goods flow, followed by exports to Western markets. This pattern suggests that current regional economic activity derives more from “China Plus One” strategies and supply chain diversification resulting from U.S.-China tensions than from RCEP-induced integration.

Development Disparities and Institutional Challenges

RCEP brings together nations with vastly different economic development levels, from high-income countries like Australia and Singapore to developing economies like Cambodia and Laos. This diversity creates inherent challenges in establishing equitable terms of engagement. Developed RCEP members often prioritize high-standard issues like intellectual property rights and e-commerce that benefit technology-rich economies, while developing members require support in technology transfer, industrial infrastructure, and agricultural protection.

The capacity gaps between RCEP members mirror the military asymmetry evident in the Cambodia-Thailand border situation. In both cases, existing structures tend to reinforce rather than reduce inequalities. Without conscious effort to address these disparities, agreements like RCEP risk becoming instruments that widen regional inequality rather than promoting shared prosperity.

The Path Forward: Reevaluating Regional Architecture

The current situation demands critical examination of how regional institutions address power imbalances. ASEAN’s principle of centrality faces challenges when external alliances like Thailand’s U.S. partnership create military asymmetries that undermine regional cohesion. Similarly, RCEP’s potential requires addressing implementation barriers that currently favor large corporations over MSMEs.

Effective solutions must prioritize several key areas. First, regional conflict resolution mechanisms need strengthening to reduce dependence on Western mediation that often carries inherent biases. Second, economic integration must actively work to bridge development gaps through targeted capacity-building measures. Third, regional institutions should develop mechanisms to counterbalance external power projections that distort local power dynamics.

The establishment of the RCEP Secretariat represents a potential step forward, but it requires a strong mandate focused on monitoring implementation and addressing non-tariff barriers. More importantly, regional mechanisms need to ensure that economic and security architectures serve all members equitably, rather than reinforcing existing power hierarchies.

Conclusion: Toward Authentic Regional Cooperation

The Cambodia-Thailand border tensions and RCEP’s implementation challenges both highlight the enduring influence of external powers in Southeast Asian affairs. True regional stability and prosperity require developing institutions that reflect local realities and priorities rather than accommodating external interests.

Developing nations in Southeast Asia deserve diplomatic and economic frameworks that prioritize their development needs and sovereignty concerns. The current crisis demonstrates the urgent need for regional mechanisms capable of addressing conflicts without external interference that often exacerbates power imbalances. Similarly, economic integration must deliver tangible benefits to all participants, particularly developing economies that have historically been marginalized in global economic arrangements.

As Southeast Asia navigates complex geopolitical currents, the principles of mutual respect, sovereign equality, and development-focused cooperation must guide regional architecture. Only through genuinely inclusive approaches can the region overcome the legacy of external intervention and build a future reflecting the aspirations of all its peoples.