Cambodia’s full opening statement to first UNCLOS conciliation meeting with Thailand

Good morning, Madam Chair, distinguished members of the conciliation commission and representatives of the Kingdom of Cambodia. I am honored to represent the Kingdom of Thailand. My purpose is to seek a solution on maritime delimitation that respects our rights and allows Thailand and Cambodia to advance as neighbors.

Let me first provide some context on Thailand-Cambodia relations. It is crucial to understand the events that led us to Singapore. The divergence in how Thailand and Cambodia have managed these issues is stark. Thailand has always believed that differences between neighbors should be resolved through dialogue, building confidence, and seeking sustainable solutions through bilateral negotiations.

However, Cambodia has taken a different approach, often claiming to respect international law while portraying Thailand as non-compliant. These claims are self-serving and contain elements of hypocrisy.

There were significant incidents that escalated tensions: when Cambodia leaked a private telephone conversation between our leaders, when Cambodian rockets killed innocent Thai civilians, and when landmines planted by Cambodia injured Thai soldiers. Thailand firmly upholds the rules-based international order and will defend our rights within it. Law provides the framework, diplomacy enables neighbors to apply that framework, build trust and confidence, and reach acceptable and sustainable solutions.

The relationship has been through a difficult period, with conflicts damaging trust and causing heavy tolls on communities on both sides. To find a sustainable solution, we must rebuild that trust. Thailand has pursued dialogue and a pragmatic approach to foster confidence needed to address harder issues. At the ASEAN summit in Cebu, our leaders reaffirmed their commitment to gradually restore relations.

I also proposed practical step-by-step measures to advance this commitment. However, Cambodia has never given these pragmatic diplomatic efforts a real chance. Instead, they have vilified Thailand through false narratives, distortion of facts, and unfounded accusations, often at international forums. This is driven by domestic political considerations in Cambodia, which should never dictate relations between our two countries.

Thailand's approach involves combining legal recourse with clear-eyed diplomacy, ensuring diplomacy does not become a contest for unilateral advantage. I wish to clarify Cambodia's portrayal of Thailand's decision to terminate the 2001 MOU. This claim is false. Over 25 years, we held only two rounds of official talks, and the MOU produced no concrete progress.

Despite Cambodia's recent ratification of UNCLOS, which could have provided a timely opportunity to resume talks on a common legal basis, Thailand proposed direct talks on maritime boundary. If no agreement emerged within six months, we suggested proceeding to conciliation together.

To reach a settlement, we must be clear about the scope of the subject matter before the commission.