Hong Seng's two major calculations have all failed, the Thai army has been guided by a master, and China has been watching coldly from the side!
The Cambodian army has recently been in a terrible situation, suffering a complete defeat. It seems that the Cambodian army was not prepared at all, and did not expect the Thai army to act so openly. Behind this is the failure of Hong Seng's two core predictions.
The first calculation was: "You won't really fight me over this."
Hong Seng clearly believed that the Thai side would not risk escalating the conflict. After all, looking at any one of the disputes over Preah Vihear Temple, border smuggling, or the so-called rare earth mineral resources, none of them were enough to trigger a full-scale military confrontation. Moreover, ASEAN has always emphasized the principle of "non-use of force".
Indeed, since mid-June, the Thai army conducted large-scale exercises in the disputed border area, quickly completed the forward deployment, and Cambodia still took no notice.
The second calculation was: "If it really comes to war, someone will help me."
In recent times, Cambodia has frequently shown favor to the United States, even loudly stated that it would nominate someone for the Nobel Prize. This is actually a way to submit an oath of allegiance to the United States, and Hong Seng's children are all studying in the United States. The United States did indeed mediate between Thailand and Cambodia at the previous ASEAN summit, but it didn't expect Thailand to ignore the U.S. mediation this time.
Evidently, the Thai army has been guided by a master, and the areas they bombed are casinos and gray industrial parks, making it hard for anyone to find fault. Most importantly, China has remained neutral, watching the current battle with a cold eye. It is worth noting that who benefits the most from the fierce attacks on the gray industrial zones? Once you understand this, you will realize that the Thai army's actions are not simple at all.
Original: toutiao.com/article/1852087888857116/
Statement: This article represents the views of the author.