We are just three days away from marking one month since tensions between Cambodia and Thailand heat up, sparked by a deadly incident in which a Cambodian soldier was killed on Cambodian soil, allegedly in a sneak attack by Thai forces. Since then, the standoff has escalated into a multi-layered conflict involving border closures, economic retaliation, and public accusations.
Using game theory as our lens, let's read 3 insights
Thailand's Strategic Reframing: From Conflict to Crimefighting:
Recently, Thai Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra launched a campaign framing Cambodia as a global cybercrime hub. In response, Thailand announced dramatic measures:
• Cutting cross-border access
• Disconnecting internet
• Halting oil, electricity, etc
Game theory would call this classic reframe, Thailand is rewriting the story so escalation looks like responsibility. By shifting the narrative from "abusing international law" to "fighting cybercrime". At this point, Thailand aims to reframe the conflict from confrontation over sovereignty, international law, and border control to a security campaign against cybercrime. Additionally, Thailand also wants to divert international attention and drawing criticism from controversial moves, including ignoring ICJ rulings, international law, and existing MOUs. Their end goal is rebrand itself as a responsible global actor rather than a regional aggressor.
But while the messaging may aim at international audiences, it hasn't landed cleanly at home. Many Thais responded not with pride, but with confusion.
Thailand Fights Cambodia to Win at Home: Thailand Fights Cambodia to Win at Home:
Despite appearances of unity, recent leaks and growing dissent reveal internal fractures between the Thai military and civilian government. While both sides appear aligned publicly, there’s mounting evidence they’re not on the same page.
This brings the nested strategic game, also known as the two-level game. In this model, foreign policy isn’t just shaped by external dynamics, it’s also driven by domestic political battles. But the main issue is that the Thai military also holds the wheel of foreign affairs, which usually government goes right but military goes left. Thai Military use their power and this conflict to:
• Undermine the civilian government’s credibility
• Project itself as the true defender of national sovereignty and fight for the nations interest
• Boost its institutional relevance and public support
Commitment Strategy: Cambodia Locks In Its Position:
Amid Thailand’s internal chaos, Cambodia has been surprisingly strategic and fast-moving. Even before any formal embargo or disconnection came from Thailand, Cambodia preemptively cut oil imports, electricity and internet. In other words, even just a joke or a proposal that hints at manipulating Cambodia, Cambodia respond back with actions.
This is a commitment strategy, where a player takes action in response to a threat, real or hypothetical, in order to signal resolve and eliminate the opponent’s leverage.
By acting first, Cambodia:
1. Removed Thailand’s leverage before it could be used
2. Raised its political credibility, both domestically and internationally
3. Flipped the narrative, from being seen as a vulnerable underdog to asserting itself as a real strategic player in the region.
Author: DeNotorious