What is the Emerald Triangle that may lead to a war between two neighbors and bring down a prime minister
A quiet border turns into a tense military flashpoint—how one dispute could spark a war and shake political power in Thailand. This rising crisis in Southeast Asia is far from over, and every move now carries massive consequences.
Synopsis The Emerald Triangle dispute is quickly turning into a serious crisis between Thailand and Cambodia. What started as a small trench-digging issue has now become a tense military standoff, risking war and political fallout. With troops on both sides, rising border clashes, and growing calls to take the issue to the International Court of Justice, the Emerald Triangle could shake the stability of Southeast Asia. Thailand's Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin is under mounting pressure, and any wrong move could cost him his position. This developing story holds major geopolitical weight—and it's not over yet. The Emerald Triangle dispute: Could this border clash bring war and topple a prime minister? Tensions are rising fast around the Emerald Triangle, a remote but highly sensitive area where Thailand, Cambodia, and Laos meet. It may look like a quiet border zone on the map, but recent clashes and military moves have made it a flashpoint that's now threatening to spark a regional conflict—and possibly bring down Thailand's Prime Minister.
ADVERTISEMENT The Emerald Triangle came into global headlines when Cambodian and Thai troops exchanged fire near the disputed border in late May 2025. Since then, both countries have fortified positions, villagers have been caught in fear, and political pressure is mounting. At the heart of the issue: a long-standing disagreement over where exactly the border lies in this mountainous zone. But now, it's not just a cartography issue—it's a test of leadership, diplomacy, and peace in Southeast Asia. The Emerald Triangle border dispute isn't new. Thailand and Cambodia have had overlapping claims in this forested, rugged area for years. But things turned dangerous on May 28, when both sides confirmed that troops had exchanged gunfire, leading to injuries and panic among border communities.
According to Thailand's military, Cambodian soldiers had started digging trenches in the disputed zone. Cambodia later said this was to protect its border post. In response, Thailand deployed reinforcements, closed local checkpoints, and put residents on alert. Some families began digging bunkers, fearing the worst. By early June, Cambodia agreed to stop the trench digging and restore the land, but not before the conflict stirred up political debate at home and across the region. Former Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen, now President of the Senate, claimed the land was rightfully Cambodian, based on internationally recognized maps. He also urged both countries to take the issue to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to settle it legally.The phone call, reportedly shared by Hun Sen with 80 politicians before being leaked, featured Paetongtarn speaking candidly about a sensitive border dispute. She addressed Hun Sen — a long-time friend of her family — as 'uncle' and criticized a Thai army officer involved in managing the flare-up at the Thai-Cambodian border.
ADVERTISEMENT 'He just wanted to look cool and said things that are not useful,' she said of the Thai military commander, sparking a backlash over perceived disrespect to the powerful Thai military.While Paetongtarn later defended her comments as a 'negotiation technique,' critics say the call showed weakness in leadership and compromised Thailand's stance on a long-standing territorial dispute.
ADVERTISEMENT
On Wednesday, the Bhumjaithai Party, Thailand's second-largest political party and a key member of the ruling coalition, officially withdrew support for Paetongtarn's government. With its departure, the Peu Thai-led coalition now holds a razor-thin majority in parliament.Two more coalition parties are scheduled to meet later today to decide their stance — meaning a complete collapse of the ruling alliance is a real possibility.
ADVERTISEMENT Paetongtarn apologized on Thursday, stating, 'I would like to apologise for the leaked audio… which has caused public resentment,' but the damage might already be done.The Emerald Triangle conflict has become a serious test for Thailand's Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin, who is already under pressure from coalition struggles and growing economic challenges. With the military on alert and the public nervous, any misstep could cost him his job—or worse, risk dragging the country into a deeper conflict.
ADVERTISEMENT Srettha's government is still new and doesn't have full control over the military, which has a history of acting independently. The Thai armed forces are monitoring the border closely and may push for more aggressive moves if tensions flare up again. If the military loses faith in Srettha's handling of national security, it could spark calls for a change in leadership.
Political analysts in Bangkok have warned that the Emerald Triangle issue could become a "trigger event"—something that starts as a local skirmish but ends up breaking apart the government. And in Thailand's history, military pressure has often led to either reshuffling the Cabinet or full-blown coups. There's still hope that diplomacy will win. On June 12, both Cambodia and Thailand agreed to de-escalate after a high-level meeting. Cambodia promised to fill the trenches, and both countries said they'd avoid further moves in disputed areas. But the story isn't over. Hun Sen continues to press the ICJ route, saying only the international court can fairly settle the boundary issue. Thailand, on the other hand, hasn't yet confirmed if it will agree to ICJ arbitration. Both sides claim to have official documents and maps backing their claims, and neither wants to back down publicly.
That means the peace is fragile. While both governments may want to avoid war, border tensions can escalate quickly, especially if local commanders or military units act on their own. That's why experts are calling for immediate talks, a ceasefire agreement, and third-party observers—possibly from ASEAN or the UN.
The leak added fuel to a simmering border row between the two nations. In May, a deadly clash at a contested border zone led to the death of a Cambodian soldier. Since then, tensions have escalated. In response to Thai restrictions, Cambodia banned the import of Thai fruits and vegetables, halted Thai dramas on TV and in cinemas, and reduced Thai internet and power usage. Meanwhile, Thailand also imposed tighter border controls and entry restrictions on Cambodian citizens. In a diplomatic letter, Thailand's foreign ministry called the leak 'deeply disappointing,' adding it 'will severely affect ongoing efforts… to resolve the problem in good faith.' The Thailand-Cambodia border dispute stretches back more than a century, linked to a 1907 map drawn under French colonial rule. Cambodia has cited that map to support its territorial claims, while Thailand rejects it as inaccurate. Disputed areas include sites like Mom Bei (Chong Bok) — where the May clash happened — and three ancient temples, including the Preah Vihear Temple, which was awarded to Cambodia in a 1962 ruling by the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Thailand accepted that ruling, but disputes about land surrounding the temple have continued to spark violence. Most recently, Cambodia submitted a new case to the ICJ over four disputed border points. Thailand, however, does not accept the court's jurisdiction and prefers bilateral negotiations. The pressure on Paetongtarn, the youngest and only the second female prime minister in Thailand's history, is growing. She took office in August 2024 after her predecessor Srettha Thavisin was removed by the Constitutional Court for violating appointment rules. Opposition leaders and even some of her own coalition members have called for her to step down. Paetongtarn, daughter of exiled and now-returned former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, also faces scrutiny over her family's close ties with the Cambodian Hun political dynasty. Hun Sen, Cambodia's former leader, has said he will no longer engage in private phone calls with Paetongtarn. He also admitted sharing the leaked audio and later posted the full 17-minute conversation on his official Facebook page. The fallout from the leaked call could shift regional dynamics. Cambodia has asked the ICJ to intervene, while Thailand remains firm in preferring bilateral talks. Both countries have shortened visa stays for each other's citizens, and economic retaliation continues on both sides. Tensions remain high, with mass rallies in Phnom Penh on Wednesday drawing tens of thousands of Cambodians in support of their government's firm stance. Hun Manet, Cambodia's new Prime Minister and son of Hun Sen, addressed the crowds, saying, 'When the country faces a threat… we will stand up in united spirit.' With national pride and political futures at stake in both nations, observers say the situation could deteriorate further unless cooler heads prevail.
Q1: Why is Thai PM Paetongtarn Shinawatra under pressure to resign? Because of a leaked phone call with Hun Sen that upset the public and political allies.
Q2: What triggered the latest Thailand-Cambodia border tensions? A fatal border clash in May and fallout from the leaked call escalated the dispute.
(You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel)
(Catch all the US News, UK News, Canada News, International Breaking News Events, and Latest News Updates on The Economic Times.)
Download The Economic Times News App to get Daily International News Updates.
NEXT STORY
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Israel-Iran War: Can Trump bomb Iran without asking? Capitol Hill says no, invokes War Powers Act
President Donald Trump is keeping his cards close. When asked whether the United States would join Israel's escalating military confrontation with Iran, he simply said, 'I may do it. I may not.' That was on June 18, just days after Israel launched strikes on Iranian territory. Since then, speculation has grown over whether Trump might authorise a U.S. military operation—without getting the green light from Congress . According to Department of State spokeswoman Tammy Bruce, 'He is the singular guiding hand about what will be occurring from this point forward.' But many lawmakers disagree. And they're rushing to reassert control. Congress says, "Not without us" The U.S. Constitution is clear: only Congress has the power to declare war. Live Events 'This is not our war,' said Republican Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky. 'Even if it were, Congress must decide such matters according to our Constitution.' Massie has introduced a resolution under the 1973 War Powers Act to stop any unauthorised U.S. strikes on Iran. He's joined by Democrat Ro Khanna of California, who posted on X, 'Are you with the neocons who led us into Iraq or do you stand with the American people?' Over in the Senate, Democrat Tim Kaine has introduced a similar resolution. 'This resolution will ensure that if we decide to place our nation's men and women in uniform into harm's way, we will have a debate and vote on it in Congress,' he said. The War Powers Act: What it actually does Passed in 1973 after the Vietnam War and President Nixon's secret bombing of Cambodia, the War Powers Act was designed to limit the president's ability to launch military action unilaterally. It says, The president must notify Congress within 48 hours of launching military action. Military deployment without congressional approval is limited to 60–90 days. Congress must be consulted 'in every possible instance' before troops are committed abroad. The law was passed over Nixon's veto—but almost every president since has found ways to work around it. Why it's back in the spotlight As Israeli airstrikes continue and Trump hints at joining in, lawmakers worry that the U.S. could be dragged into another prolonged Middle East war. That's exactly what the War Powers Act was supposed to prevent. Bernie Sanders, the independent senator from Vermont, has proposed the No War Against Iran Act , which would prohibit the use of federal funds for any attack on Iran without a formal declaration of war or congressional authorisation. 'The recent escalation of hostilities between Israel and Iran could quickly pull the United States into another endless conflict,' Senator Kaine warned. Can the President Act without Congress? Technically, the president is commander-in-chief of the military. Under Article II of the Constitution, Trump can respond to 'sudden attacks' or threats. But the power to start a war—that belongs to Congress. Still, history tells a different story. Since World War II, U.S. presidents have authorised military operations in Korea, Vietnam, the Gulf, Libya, Somalia, and more—without formal declarations of war. They've relied instead on broad laws like the 2001 and 2002 Authorisations for Use of Military Force (AUMFs), passed after the 9/11 attacks and before the 2003 Iraq invasion. Trump used the 2002 AUMF to justify the assassination of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani in 2020. So does the War Powers Act have any real power? It's complicated. Congress can vote to end military action, but the president can veto that decision. Overriding a veto requires a two-thirds majority in both the House and Senate—a rare feat in a divided Washington. In 2019, Congress tried to end U.S. support for the Saudi-led war in Yemen. Trump vetoed it. Then again in 2020, after the Soleimani strike, Congress passed a bill to limit Trump's powers to launch war on Iran. Trump vetoed that too. The War Powers Act has been criticised for being more symbolic than effective. Even President Joe Biden once led a Senate subcommittee that concluded the law was falling short of its original purpose. Opinions split, even within parties Not all Democrats back Kaine's resolution. Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania has said he would vote against it. He believes Trump should retain the option to preemptively strike Iran's nuclear infrastructure. On the Republican side, some are more cautious. Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky said: 'No president can bomb another country without the permission of Congress.' He added, 'It's always been my belief that you don't go to war without the approval of Congress and bombing other countries is obviously war.' But others support Trump's freedom to act. Senator Ted Cruz of Texas said, 'A single bombing run, historically, has not been understood to require congressional authorisation.' Sustained warfare, he agreed, would require Congress to act. Senator Lindsey Graham took it a step further. 'If diplomacy is not successful,' he said, 'I would urge President Trump to go all in… If that means flying with Israel, fly with Israel.' The House and Senate are currently on recess, but both will be forced to vote on the new resolutions once they return. The outcome will test the strength of Congress's war-making authority. Meanwhile, Trump has made it clear he's watching the conflict closely. After cutting short a G7 trip in Canada, he returned to Washington and declared, 'We now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran.' He added, 'We know exactly where the so-called 'Supreme Leader' is hiding... We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now.' At its heart, this isn't just a legal or political issue. It's about whether the people, through their elected representatives, get to decide when America goes to war. For decades, war decisions have been drifting away from Congress and towards the Oval Office . This moment could shift that balance—or cement it. With Iran's nuclear programme in the crosshairs, and Israel already striking, the next move could redraw the map of the Middle East—and reshape America's role in it. And if history is any guide, the decision could be made by one man, not 535 lawmakers.
Mint
2 hours ago
- Mint
Banks Face €5 Billion French Dividend Tax Bill, Senator Says
(Bloomberg) -- Banks in France are facing a combined tax bill of as much as €5 billion ($5.8 billion) over contentious trades allegedly designed to escape levies on dividend payments, according to a lawmaker who dubbed the process a 'fraud.' Senator Jean-François Husson made the announcement on Thursday after a review of confidential documents from French tax officials — suggesting that the liability for banks has doubled since authorities released estimates in 2023. Husson told reporters that the papers provided certain indications that 'the tax fraud is still ongoing.' France's finance ministry declined to comment on the amount. Over the past few years, the banking industry in France has clashed with lawmakers, tax officials and prosecutors over a dividend arbitrage strategy known as Cum-Cum, which authorities have said is responsible for billions of euros in lost revenue to the exchequer. Cum-Cum trades typically entail shifting French stock during dividend season to an entity exempt from withholding tax, such as a local bank, and then splitting the saved money between the involved parties. Earlier on Thursday, Husson accused the government of creating a 'loophole' that waters down new dividend tax rules enacted earlier this year and ratcheted up pressure to close the revenue gap. The new legislation had widened the existing tax code to include more equity trades and to prevent foreign owners of French stock and local banks from carrying out transactions aimed at avoiding withholding taxes on dividend payments. But Husson — the lawmaker who spearheaded the changes — said the government's approach is creating exceptions where the rules aren't applicable. In a statement sent earlier in the day by the Senate, Husson said he was seeking to understand why the government published in April an interpretation of the law 'that substantially strips the effectiveness of anti-fraud measures voted by parliament.' After a visit to the finance ministry, Husson blamed France's banking lobby. The French Banking Federation said in a statement that it isn't aware of the tax bill estimates discussed by the senator, adding such assessments are being contested and no court has ruled on it to date. The French finance ministry said it makes its determinations 'in complete independence,' and denied introducing any loophole in the latest law. It said it had reiterated to Husson 'the government's uncompromising fight against tax fraud.' In 2023, financial prosecutors carried out coordinated evidence-gathering raids at the premises of BNP Paribas SA and its Exane SA unit, Societe Generale SA, HSBC Holdings Plc and Natixis SA as part of their Cum-Cum investigation. None of them has been accused of wrongdoing. Later, the industry lobby challenged existing tax rules in court, with lawmakers eventually voting for changes. Amid uncertainty over the application of new laws, several big banks in Paris, from Bank of America Corp. to Goldman Sachs Group Inc., have curbed some related trading activities that involved French equity derivatives. (Updates with comment from French finance ministry in 10th paragraph) More stories like this are available on
India Today
4 hours ago
- India Today
Opinion: Former Bangladesh spy chief's China visit: What it means for Dhaka and Delhi
The former Bangladesh military intelligence chief's recent 12-day visit to China has raised alarm bells in New Delhi. Major-General (retired) Rezzakul Haider Chowdhury, who departed for China on June 6, returned to Dhaka on June 18. According to a Bangladeshi intelligence report this week, "His recent travel to China and return may warrant observation due to his past affiliations and the strategic sensitivity of the cases he was implicated in.' Sources also said that a senior national security official from the Yunus government is currently in China, having arrived there during Chowdhury's visit. advertisementRezzakul Haider Chowdhury, who has served as director-general of both the Directorate General of Forces Intelligence and the National Security Intelligence, was jailed during the Awami League regime for his alleged involvement in the smuggling of a huge consignment of weapons meant for rebel groups in Northeast India and Bangladesh through the Chittagong port in April 2004. He was also sentenced to death for the attempted assassination of then-opposition leader and later prime minister, Sheikh Hasina, in 2004, within three months of the Chittagong arms seizure. Several Awami League leaders and activists were killed in the grenade attack on a party rally in Dhaka, but Hasina miraculously escaped. An ISI asset? Chowdhury is seen in New Delhi as a 'high-grade asset' of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence, who reportedly has close links to Chinese intelligence as well. Both countries have backed rebel groups in Northeast India since the 1950s. advertisementUnited Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA) military wing chief Paresh Baruah was also convicted in the Chittagong arms haul case after Bangladesh police seized 10 truckloads of weapons, including 4,930 firearms (mostly assault rifles), 27,020 grenades, 840 rocket launchers, 2,000 grenade launching tubes, 300 rockets, 6392 magazines, and 11,40,520 bullets, when the consignment was being offloaded from two ships at a jetty in Bangladesh's port city of huge consignment of weapons, mostly manufactured by the Chinese ordnance behemoth Norinco Group, was loaded onto ships in the port of Beihai in China's Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region in March 2004. More weapons of US- and Israeli-make were added to the consignment and transferred to two Bangladeshi vessels in the Thai port of Ranong and brought to Chittagong, where it was seized on the night of April 1, 2004. The weapons were meant for ULFA and other rebel groups in Northeast India, as well as Islamist terror groups like the Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen Bangladesh. Chittagong arms haul case linkAfter the ouster of the Awami League government in August last year, the interim government headed by Muhammad Yunus released those convicted of trying to smuggle in the largest illegal arms consignment. On January 16 this year, the Bangladesh High Court acquitted six people convicted in the Chittagong arms haul case, including Chowdhury and former state minister for home affairs, Lutfur Zaman Babar. The state did not challenge these acquittals. The high court also reduced the sentences of five others, including that of ULFA leader Paresh and Chowdhury were both very close to Bangladesh Nationalist Party acting chairperson Tarique Rahman, whose mother, Begum Khaleda Zia, was prime minister at the time of the massive arms seizure in Chittagong. Yunus recently met Tarique Rahman in London and expressed his satisfaction about the meeting regarding the future roadmap for those acquitted were the late Matiur Rahman Nizami, former industries minister and Jamaat-e-Islami leader, Mohsin Uddin Talukder, the former managing director of the state-run Chittagong Urea Fertiliser Limited, KM Enamul Haque, its former general manager, and Nurul Amin, former additional secretary in the industries individuals were initially sentenced in the arms smuggling case. The court abated the appeals of Brigadier General (retd.) Abdur Rahim, the former director general of National Security Intelligence, labour supplier Deen Muhammad, and Haji Sobhan, a trawler owner, because all of them are now dead. The sentences of five others were also reduced. advertisementBaruah's sentence reducedParesh Baruah's life imprisonment sentence was reduced to 14 years. The ULFA leader is reportedly holed up in a clandestine location on the China-Myanmar border. Additionally, the sentences of four other accused have been reduced to 10 years each. These are Akbar Hossain Khan, a former NSI field officer, Major (retd.) Liaquat Hossain, the former deputy director of the NSI, Wing Commander (retd.) Sahab Uddin Ahmed, and former NSI director Hafizur intelligence officials said in 2004 that the Chittagong police were not informed about the attempt to bring in such a huge quantity of weapons by rogue elements in the Bangladeshi 'deep state', who were backing Northeast Indian rebel groups and Islamist radicals in Bangladesh. So, when they were informed about the unloading of the weapons consignment by their sources at the Chittagong docks, they rushed in to effect the seizure. But the cases were cold-stored and only made headway after the Awami League came to power in 2009. In January 2014, the Chittagong Metropolitan Sessions Judge's Court and Special Tribunal-1 sentenced 14 individuals to death, including Babar, Nizami, and Baruah, in the attempted assassination case. In a separate case under the Arms Act, they also received life sentences for their involvement in the smuggling case. advertisementConcerns for India Indian security circles seem worried over these acquittals, and also the release of scores of known Islamist terror leaders like Jashimuddin Rahmani, the chief of the Ansarullah Bangla Team. "These elements are close to Pakistan's ISI and could well be now used to foment trouble in India's eastern states. After Operation Sindoor, the ISI and Pakistan Army could use their Bangladesh assets to strike with maximum deniability,' said a senior Indian intelligence official on condition of anonymity. "Islamabad would be less than bothered and may actually welcome the possible worsening of India-Bangladesh relations.'India has also not taken kindly to Yunus' recent reference to India's Northeast as a landlocked region dependent on sea access on Bangladesh, a situation that the Nobel laureate said presented a great opportunity for the Chinese economy. His comments were made during a visit to China. Yunus again suggested drawing Northeast India into a regional grouping involving Nepal, Bhutan, and Bangladesh, which drew a sharp riposte from Indian Foreign Minister S Jaishankar.(Writer is a former BBC and Reuters correspondent and author who has worked in Bangladesh as a senior editor with Expressed in this opinion piece are those of the Author)
