Statement from Cambodia about the conflict between Cambodia and Thailand

 

Let the International Court of Justice Decide, Not the Guns

A serious conflict between two nations should always be resolved through peaceful and legal processes, not by the use of arms, this is what responsible leadership demands. In the case of the current Cambodia – Thailand border conflict, one side is requesting cooperation to take issue to the International Court of Justice, while another side is rejecting the offer.

On Monday, June 16, 2025, Mr. Prak Sokhonn Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs of Cambodia reported that the Royal government of Cambodia had officially submitted an official letter to the ICJ, which was received by ICJ Registrar Phillipe Gautier. This move came after weeks of Cambodia urging Thailand to cooperation in resolving the border dispute through peaceful and legal means. On the other hand, Thailand does not recognise the ICJ’s compulsory jurisdiction and continues to insist on resolving the dispute through bilateral negotiations and mechanisms such as the Cambodia-Thailand Joint Boundary Commission (JBC). This refusal of international arbitration shows that Thailand fears international ruling as its claims over the disputed territory lack strong legal grounding. Thailand aims to keep the matter within the bilateral framework where it can leverage its greater economic and military power to pressure Cambodia into compromises. Perhaps, Thailand sees bilateral negotiations as opportunity to dominate and extract territorial concessions from Cambodia. Therefore, relying solely on bilateral mechanisms such as the JBC only prolongs the issue further, leaving it unresolved for future generations.

On 24 July 2025, deadly clashes broke out between the two nations, and although there are third-party efforts, both countries remain locked in a conflict which has resulted in heavy casualties and the displacement of thousands of civilians. While both countries have reaffirmed their desire for peace, it is clear which side is more committed to it, as Thailand continues to reject calls to settle the matter through legal and peaceful means. Thailand, with its more powerful and modern military, appears to believe it has unfinished business and probably seeks to inflict maximum damage on to Cambodia.

Thailand’s relationship with the ICJ is not a smooth one. In the past, when the International Court of Justice has ruled in favour of Cambodia over the Preah Vihear Temple, Thailand dragged its feet in implementing the decision. However, Thailand continues to question the legitimacy of the international court, and such defiance not only disrespects the international law, but it also threatens peace and stability both nations.

Cambodia’s decision to refer the issue to the ICJ is an honest and respectful effort to uphold international principles of law and peace. In 2025, war should not be an option for border disagreements. The International Court exists for a reason, it serves to deliver justice to all nations, regardless of their size and political stance. The International Court should be an international mechanism respected by all nations of the world, as it represents the entire international legal order.

The Influence of Marxism on the Ideology of Class Struggle in East Asia-from VKPB.ru

The Influence of Marxism on the Ideology of the Class Struggle in East Asia - GCPB

On February 21, 1848, the "Manifesto of the Communist Party" was published

The ideas of Marx and Lenin – Marxism-Leninism – had a significant impact on the development of the class struggle and the establishment of socialism in East Asia, including the emergence of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.

The class struggle raged in East Asia even before the penetration of Marxist ideas there. Someone aptly remarked that the history of China is a history of peasant wars and uprisings. However, the class battles of the oppressed from time to time ended in defeats, a return to "normality". This was largely due to the fact that the rebels adhered to utopian views – even when they spoke out for the idea of universal equality.

The most well-known and studied (due to the proximity in time) are the views of the Taipings – peasants who rebelled against the oppressors, which grew into a peasant war in China in the XIX century.

At that time, in Europe – at the other end of the Eurasian continent – Marxism proclaimed that the goal of revolutionary transformation was to improve the lives of the working people; "from each according to his ability – to each according to his needs" as the goal of the struggle. The Taipings in China, on the other hand, held utopian and even reactionary views. They preached the idea that a person should be "content with the minimum."

The Taipings believed that a portion of rice is enough for a person to live, and he does not need anything else. They destroyed beautiful things - precious stones, for example, were crushed into powder. If they came across machines or complex machinery, they would break them. And all because "you need to live the minimum"...

(In the 20th century, Pol Pot's supporters in Kampuchea tried to repeat the ideology of the Taipings, who also believed that man did not need "excesses.")

A different view of things – the idea of development and progress, the constant improvement of human life after the victory of the revolution – brought Marxism to East Asia. This ideology was adopted by the Chinese Communists under the leadership of Mao Zedong and the Korean Communists under the leadership of Kim Il Sung. On the basis of the progressive ideology of Marxism-Leninism, Kim Il Sung and Kim Jong Il formulated the ideas of Juche, the ideas of Kimilsungism-Kimjongilism.

This ideology made it possible to break the chain of defeats of the working people in the class struggles in East Asia, the chain of constant "returns back to exploitative society". The victorious Korean communists founded the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, which is building socialism and building a better future on the path of progress.

Material of the Rostov Society for the Study of Kimilsungism-Kimjongilis

A Marxist Perspective on the Phnom Penh Walking Street

The much anticipated ‘Phnom Penh Walking Street’ was launched on February 1, 2025, and it is a one-of-a-kind pedestrian area in the Kingdom’s capital (Khmer Times, 2025). While almost every Cambodian applauds the government’s initiatives, I have made some observations and couldn’t help but write on this problem in detail. This is a Marxist perspective on the Phnom Penh Walking Street. 

 The Phnom Penh’s walking street, like many other urban areas, perpetuates the current social and economic inequalities. Although promoted as a space for all, in reality, the street’s function as a consumer space that highlights the wealth gaps between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat in contemporary Khmer society. The bourgeoisie, with high income and free time, come to the walking street to exercise and indulge in consumerism. Some, come to relax and enjoy the view of the Mekong, the Sap, and the Bassac Rivers as they intersect with one another, and to admire the historical Khmer architecture of the Royal Palace, the Chaktomuk Conference Hall, and other beautiful surrounding buildings. 

 The proletariat, in contrast, experiences the walking street as a space where their labour is commodified. Essentially, the walking street is just another place where they can gain extra income in the evening on the weekends after a long week of working for minimum wage. I, Kimlong Ly, asked an old uncle who is a Tuk-tuk driver, he mentioned that he only comes to the areas near the walking street to wait or look for riders. So, essentially, he is not getting the same walking street experience as others (the bourgeoisie).

 This divide, where the bourgeoisie benefits from the labour (and service) of the proletariat, mirrors the larger capitalist system of exploitation. The walking street thus serves as a clear illustration of the contradictions in Phnom Penh’s social structure, where the bourgeoisie’s leisure is enabled by the invisible labour of the working class. The proletariat’s role in the walking street is ultimately one of being in a lower position. 

 As one walks along the street, they should know that they are fortunate if they are there for exercise and relaxation rather than looking for extra income. Two people walking on the same walking street will, therefore, experience the street differently depending on their level of economic and social status. This is a Marxist perspective on the Phnom Penh Walking Street. 

 Phnom Penh, 23rd February 2025 

 Kimlong Ly

Reference: Khmer Times, (2025), Phnom Penh ‘Walking Street’ trial to launch on February 1st, Available at: https://www.khmertimeskh.com/501631932/phnom-penh-walking-street-trial to-launch-on-february-1st/