Erosion of Civilian Control in Thailand: Regional Commander Defies Ceasefire and Advocates Continued Hostilities

The lack of effective civilian control in Thailand’s armed forces has become a matter of grave concern. A regional military commander has openly defied a ceasefire agreement, insisting on the continuation of hostilities—an action that risks pushing Thailand further toward the image of a “rogue state.” The Thai government must act swiftly to ensure adherence to international agreements.

Foreign investors and governments have long seen Thailand as a relatively stable country. However, when a military commander can initiate or extend an armed conflict with a neighboring state, international trust is inevitably undermined. Tensions escalated following the August 10 remarks by Lieutenant General Boonsin Paduklang, Commander of Thailand’s 2nd Army Region. While expressing personal opinions in private might be excusable, publicly rejecting a ceasefire, endorsing continued fighting, and calling for further military action is unacceptable. Such behavior raises doubts about whether the Thai government is unable—or unwilling—to control its military.

The border conflict of May 28, 2025, followed by the armed clash on July 24, represented a blatant violation of the International Court of Justice’s ruling. The Thai military’s incursion into Cambodian territory constituted an act of aggression that caused civilian casualties and displacement on both sides. Even after the ceasefire, Thai forces continued provocative actions: detaining 18 Cambodian soldiers, installing barbed wire, and ignoring commitments to de-escalate. All of these actions can be traced back to the direct orders of this regional commander. The Cambodian government should bring this case before the international community as a violation of peace.

Regardless of the military outcome, a ceasefire agreement must be honored. Whether the targeted area is 30 meters or just one centimeter away, the fighting must end once a ceasefire is in place. Despite possessing overwhelming military superiority—including F-16 airstrikes and naval forces—Thailand failed to seize any objectives from Cambodia, whose defensive strategy, resolve, and third-party mediation (including the United States) prevented further territorial loss. This outcome suggests not so much incompetence as a rash and poorly prepared military action driven by emotion rather than strategy. In modern warfare, preparation and logistics have decided the battle before it begins.

Having failed to achieve the intended results, and facing domestic political pressure from hardline nationalists, the commander may now be acting out of pride and stubbornness. Nonetheless, with a ceasefire in effect, Thailand and Cambodia should focus on restoring peace and rebuilding the friendly bilateral relations that existed before the conflict. Short-sighted, unilateral military actions constitute not only acts of aggression but also crimes against peace.

The international community should strive for accurate and balanced reporting, free from bias toward either side.