Thailand and Cambodia Clash on Maritime Claims at Hague

BANGKOK – Thailand and Cambodia have taken their decades-old dispute over maritime borders and offshore energy resources to the international stage. The two Southeast Asian neighbors faced off before an international conciliation commission in Singapore, marking a new chapter in a complex diplomatic conflict. The dispute centers on overlapping claims in the Gulf of Thailand, an area believed to hold rich deposits of natural gas.

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) framework governs the current talks. However, both nations have laid out sharply contrasting positions on how to proceed.

Key Takeaways:

The core issue: Thailand and Cambodia have overlapping claims in the Gulf of Thailand, an area rich in oil and gas.
Contrasting approaches: Cambodia wants a definitive border or a resource-sharing deal, while Thailand insists the maritime boundary must be settled before any resource discussion.
The UNCLOS process: The dispute has entered compulsory conciliation under UNCLOS, though the panel’s recommendations are non-binding.

A Dispute Over Boundaries and Energy

The current conciliation process was initiated by Cambodia after a long-standing bilateral framework collapsed. In May, Thailand unilaterally withdrew from a 2001 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), known as MoU 44, designed to manage the overlapping claims. The MOU covered a vast, 27,000-square-kilometer area of the Gulf of Thailand.

Cambodia argues that Thailand’s withdrawal left it with no choice but to seek international mediation. Cambodian Foreign Minister Prak Sokhonn told the commission that his country hopes for a “fair and lasting resolution” to open the door for offshore energy development. Cambodia is seeking either a final maritime boundary or an interim agreement to jointly develop and share the resources.

Thailand sees things differently. Thai Foreign Minister Sihasak Phuangketkeow argued that the 2001 MOU was a failure, producing no concrete progress in 25 years. Thailand insists that a formal maritime boundary must be established before any talks about sharing oil and gas.

The Blame Game and Legal Arguments

The opening statements in Singapore highlighted the deep mistrust between the two countries. Thailand accused Cambodia of playing the victim to gain international sympathy. Sihasak pointed to recent border clashes, which Thailand says injured its soldiers and killed civilians, as evidence that Cambodia’s actions contradict its claims of peaceful intent.

Thailand also firmly rejected Cambodia’s legal arguments. Cambodia relies on a 1972 continental shelf claim, which Thailand dismisses as having no legal basis. Furthermore, Thailand stressed that the UNCLOS proceedings apply only to the sea. They do not cover land disputes or sovereignty over islands like Koh Kood.

Cambodia has pointed to a successful UNCLOS conciliation between Timor-Leste and Australia as a model. That process led to a 2018 treaty that established maritime boundaries and a system for sharing gas revenue.

However, the circumstances in the Gulf of Thailand are different. While the conciliation panel can facilitate negotiations, its recommendations are not legally binding. It will likely take a year for the five-member panel to issue its findings. Until then, the valuable offshore resources remain untapped, locked beneath a sea of diplomatic disagreement.