ASEAN's role as mediator in Thai-Cambodian conflict, says Thai independent scholar

According to Kritsada Boonruang, while ASEAN’s function as a conflict resolution platform cannot be avoided, it is unlikely to lead to tangible outcomes.

“The ASEAN meeting in Malaysia is a ‘diplomatic necessity’—something both parties cannot sidestep. It’s another attempt to prevent the United States, China, or other states and blocs from stepping in to mediate,” he said.

Kritsada noted that various actors, including the US, China, Singapore, and France, are actively seeking ways to de-escalate tensions. However, he pointed out that the situation will not cool down unless Cambodian Senate President Hun Sen is forced or pressured to step back from the spotlight.

“Hun Sen remains the central figure in this conflict,” he said, adding that Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet and Thailand’s former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra are merely supporting characters.

The crossroads for Hun Sen

Hun Sen may intensify the conflict to consolidate power within a trusted inner circle and eliminate those suspected of being political rivals waiting for an opportunity to replace him, Kritsada said.

Alternatively, he could flee the country in the event of a power seizure in Cambodia.

Kritsada believes Hun Sen has limited options, particularly due to financial evidence abroad that could implicate him. At the same time, no foreign power—including China, which is striving to maintain good relations within ASEAN—has shown clear willingness to offer him protection.

Thailand’s political fragility a key variable

According to Kritsada, Western intelligence agencies are closely monitoring the internal challenges Thailand is facing—especially the disunity within the ruling political factions. This internal turbulence may, in the coming weeks, lead to a shake-up in Thailand’s top political leadership and affect major political parties.

“If the situation in Thailand deteriorates further, it could lead to a change in government or a temporary shift in power,” he warned, adding that some legacy power groups and large business interests have been preparing for such a shift, although they currently lack sufficient legitimacy.

Kritsada also warned of a dangerous intersection: escalating security threats from ongoing conflict and the looming economic downturn triggered by the US tariff deadline on August 1.

Dissolution or coup?

Kritsada said Thailand could face just two options in August or September: dissolving parliament or a military coup. This could take the form of the Prime Minister stepping down, with a new interim premier dissolving the House.

“Much will depend on political manoeuvring and which side gains stronger public support,” he said.

Western analysts, he added, have noted that:

• If suspended Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra resigns, it could help her avoid prosecution and preserve her future political prospects.
• Dissolving parliament could benefit the People’s Party more than others, but would face procedural hurdles and opposition—similar to events two years ago.
• A coup would serve the interests of powerful business groups and protect conservative figures currently facing legal cases, including issues related to the Senate.

Timing is critical

Kritsada emphasised that the timing of any political shift—whether in Thailand or Cambodia—will be highly sensitive.

“If there’s a sudden political change in Thailand before Hun Sen steps down, it could buy him time and extend Cambodia’s authoritarian grip for a while longer,” he said.

However, he added that the latest Western intelligence reports contain indications that Hun Sen and his inner circle are already preparing for a transition of power.