Thailand Shouldn't Walk Away From Maritime Dialogue With Cambodia

While the dispute is not resolved, the MOU keeps two connected questions on a peaceful track: how to explore joint development of petroleum resources in the overlapping claims area, and how to negotiate a maritime boundary where delimitation is required.

Its value is practical: it allows Cambodia and Thailand to continue talking with a view to reaching an agreement while safeguarding their legal positions. Removing this channel makes dialogue harder and increases the risk of escalation.

This is why Thailand's recent threat to withdraw from the MoU is significant. It would not resolve the maritime issue. It would make it more difficult to manage by undermining trust at a critical time and heightening the risk of misunderstanding.

This issue extends beyond Cambodia and Thailand. The waters between our countries are part of Southeast Asia's broader maritime environment. Developments here influence regional confidence, affecting fishing communities, energy companies and investors monitoring Southeast Asia's stability.

ASEAN has consistently advocated dialogue and peaceful dispute resolution. These principles are most important when they are most difficult to maintain. Cooperation is easy when relations are calm; the real test is during periods of domestic tension or unresolved claims.

Cambodia does not view the 2001 MoU as a concession by either side, nor as a threat to Thailand or Cambodia. It is a means for both countries to protect their interests while maintaining dialogue. Neighbors do not need full agreement to continue discussions.

Cambodia's position is clear. We will defend our sovereignty responsibly and peacefully. We believe maritime claims should be resolved through dialogue and respect for international law. Agreements intended to prevent escalation should be upheld, not abandoned.

Maritime and border disputes are complex and require time to resolve. This is why countries need established channels for dialogue. Abandoning them does not solve disputes; it makes resolution more difficult.