【Text by Guancha.cn Columnist Wen Shaosheng】

A 4-hour long press conference, harshly accusing Thai Prime Minister and daughter of former Prime Minister Thaksin, Paetongtarn, and her family of "treason and betrayal of allies," further breaking away from the Thaksin family.

On June 27, Hun Sen, chairman of Cambodia's ruling party and former prime minister, once again launched a political bombshell, openly stating that he predicted the Thai prime minister would change within three months.

The incident dates back to the so-called "tape scandal" two weeks ago. On June 18, a 17-minute phone recording was leaked, which recorded a private conversation between Hun Sen and Thai Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra.

This was not only a crude violation of diplomatic etiquette but also had severe consequences: the Thai political arena fell into turmoil, Paetongtarn's ruling coalition faced disintegration, and Cambodian media quickly portrayed themselves as the "victim."

It must be acknowledged that this was a carefully planned power maneuver, an effective "cognitive warfare." The timing, process, and consequences of the incident demonstrated Hun Sen's habitual "Mekong Machiavellianism"—using trust, dialogue, and even privacy itself as tools to attack opponents, reshape narratives, and consolidate power. It reflected Hun Sen's consistent realist creed under his 40-year rule: using the preservation and enhancement of personal power as the ultimate goal, regardless of sacrificing friendship, rules, and regional order.

On June 27, Hun Sen held a press conference at the Cambodian-Thailand border. Screenshot from video

A Carefully Chosen Moment of Betrayal

To outsiders, this leaked call undoubtedly constituted a betrayal of Paetongtarn. In the recording, the Thai prime minister referred to Hun Sen as "uncle," speaking in a friendly, trusting, and slightly vulnerable tone. She apologized for cutting off electricity supply to Cambodia and expressed willingness to "take care of everything." But it was precisely this intimacy and humility that gave the conversation high political value in Hun Sen's eyes.

Hun Sen claimed that leaking the call was to avoid "misunderstandings and distortions," but all Southeast Asian political observers knew well: this was not an accident, but a premeditated political strike. The release of the recording did not receive approval from Cambodia's current prime minister, Hun Sen's son Hun Manet, nor was it previously informed to ASEAN, but rather was publicly released unexpectedly, filling Cambodian media overnight as evidence of "Thai internal chaos and innocent Cambodia."

This is exactly Hun Sen's political style: weaponizing private communications, inciting domestic disputes among neighbors, and then raising the banner of morality.

Although having stepped down from the position of prime minister, Hun Sen still tightly controls actual power in Cambodia. This leak was first a high-profile patriotic operation, aiming to stir up nationalistic sentiment across the country, diverting public dissatisfaction with economic downturn, fraud zones, human trafficking, and corruption.

At the same time, the incident also helped to build momentum for "Prince" Hun Manet. After the recording was released, Hun Sen and Hun Manet immediately organized large-scale patriotic rallies, where the media loudly proclaimed "Cambodia will never retreat," creating a wave of patriotism nationwide. Previously, Hun Manet was seen as lacking personal charm, but now, he appeared prominently in military uniform at the patriotic rally, shaping himself as a strongman figure of "national defender."

Obviously, this was not just an external struggle, but a political movement to "renew" the family regime.

Strategically Weakening the Thai Government

Another clear purpose of Hun Sen's move was to weaken the legitimacy and stability of the Thai government. Before the call was leaked, the Paetongtarn government was facing multiple crises, including military interference, unstable alliances, and divided public opinion. The mention in the recording of "the army not following government orders" directly ignited the political powder keg in Thailand.

After the call was released, protests erupted throughout Thailand, with the "Pheu Thai Party" exiting the ruling coalition. The military, conservative factions, and royalist groups all launched attacks. Some media even speculated that Thailand might experience another military coup.

Hun Sen could have fully anticipated these consequences. By creating a political crisis in Thailand, he severely damaged the legitimacy and diplomatic capacity of the Paetongtarn government, thereby weakening Thailand's negotiation position and gaining more leverage for Cambodia, while also laying the groundwork for submitting the dispute to the International Court of Justice.

Before the call was leaked, Cambodia was in a passive position in international public opinion. Thai media generally accused Cambodia of "overstepping boundaries," while the Thai government also closed several border checkpoints, exerting economic and diplomatic pressure. Through this move, Hun Sen successfully reversed the public opinion: he portrayed Cambodia as "rational, law-abiding, and passive," while showcasing the division, weakness, and incompetence of the Thai government. Subsequently, Cambodia promptly filed a lawsuit with the International Court of Justice, requesting a ruling on the disputed territories. The Cambodian government stated that this should be the main means of resolving the dispute, while Bangkok strongly opposed international arbitration, insisting on bilateral negotiations to resolve the border dispute.

From the perspective of parliamentary seats, those Thai hardliners who wanted Bangkok to take a stronger stance against Cambodia did not have enough seats to form a government alone. The Pheu Thai-led coalition (if no one left) might continue to exist, but it would become a "limping duck," unable to control the parliament and widely suspected of disloyalty to the military, meaning that Bangkok would have no real authority in any future bilateral negotiations with Cambodia over the border dispute.

The Thai government might also collapse, leading to the formation of a new ruling coalition (unlikely) or holding new elections (more likely). Either way, Bangkok would be preoccupied with domestic politics and unable to focus on border tensions.

"Cambodia is not the vassal of anyone"

Hun Sen's move was also adjusting Cambodia's posture between major powers. On one hand, the relationship between Cambodia and China has been long-term and close, with Hun Sen being regarded as China's most steadfast ally in the Mekong River basin. However, as criticism of "pro-China" policies has intensified, Hun Sen has used the opportunity to "fall out" with Thailand to demonstrate Cambodia's "diplomatic independence," reducing accusations of excessive reliance on China.

In other words, Hun Sen's strategy is also to "cool down" Sino-Cambodian relations, avoiding being labeled as a "puppet" by the international community.

On the other hand, after the leak, Hun Sen immediately turned to the International Court of Justice, bringing the border dispute to international law. This action also aligns with Western countries' emphasis on "rule of order," helping to bring Cambodia closer to the EU and the United States.

Hun Sen is trying to shape Cambodia's "flexible diplomacy": maintaining room for maneuver between China and the US, without becoming the vassal of either.

This "diplomatic independence" is also directed domestically. For a long time, Hun Sen has had a close relationship with the Shinawatra family of Thailand. Hun Sen called Thaksin "a lifelong friend," once sheltered him after a coup, and even granted him an advisory title. This personal friendship once became an important channel for informal diplomacy between Cambodia and Thailand.

But in 2025, this relationship has become "harmful rather than beneficial."

Nationalists within Cambodia have long criticized Hun Sen's "softness" toward Thailand, especially regarding the handling of the disputed islands like Koh Tang. (There are allegations that Hun Sen and Thaksin hoped to revive an old agreement from decades ago, which would allow Thailand to control Koh Tang, but if oil and gas were found around the island, Cambodia would gain some benefits.) This "backstab" against Paetongtarn is tantamount to Hun Sen actively "cutting ties" with the Shinawatra family, clarifying his foreign policy stance.

He declared to the nation and neighboring ASEAN countries: Cambodia's sovereignty is not bound by personal relationships, and its foreign policy is not influenced by personal feelings.

However, this approach has inevitably severely harmed bilateral relations between Cambodia and Thailand and torn apart the core "non-interference principle" of ASEAN. For years, ASEAN member states have adhered to the "non-interference" principle, emphasizing private dialogue and closed-door negotiations. Even if they disagreed, they never publicly confronted each other. The unspoken understanding of "you don't say, I don't say" has long served as a cover for ASEAN to ease internal friction and unify external positions. But Hun Sen's move is an open challenge to this mechanism.

Now, ASEAN leaders have to consider a question: can private exchanges with the Cambodian leader be transformed into a political weapon at any moment?

Malaysia's Prime Minister Anwar, the current chair of ASEAN for the year, was caught off guard. The original focus on "dialogue, unity, and consensus" was suddenly lost. Indonesia, Singapore, Vietnam, and other countries have also developed doubts about maintaining private friendships with Cambodia. This not only exacerbates the trust crisis in ASEAN but may also affect the coordination ability of the entire region on major issues such as the South China Sea, transnational crime, and humanitarian disasters.

In March 2024, Hun Sen (second from left) visited Thailand to visit Thaksin (third from left), who had just received a conditional release, with Paetongtarn (first from left) present. Hun Sen's Facebook account

High-Level Tactics, Uncertain Costs

The 800-kilometer border between Cambodia and Thailand mostly originated from colonial treaties signed between Siam and French Indochina in 1904 and 1907, which remain undetermined to this day. This has sown the seeds for later disputes, most notably the armed conflict around Preah Vihear Temple between 2008 and 2011.

In 2013, the International Court of Justice ruled that Preah Vihear belonged to Cambodia, but the Thai military and nationalist forces have consistently refused to accept it. Today's disputed sites such as Tamuan, like Preah Vihear, are ancient sites from the Angkor period, carrying bilateral historical memories and territorial claims. Additionally, the issue of the Koh Tang Island, although not officially raised by the two countries, has already been heated on social media, becoming another powder keg for the confrontation between the two nations.

There is no denying that Hun Sen's move has yielded significant short-term results. He stabilized the domestic nationalist sentiment, weakened the regional opponent, and successfully shifted the international narrative. This is a method repeatedly verified in Hun Sen's 40-year political career—cold, clever, and extremely destructive.

But the risks are equally great: if Thailand sees the emergence of a tough government in the future, or even a military coup, the relations between Cambodia and Thailand may become more confrontational, border conflicts may escalate, and bilateral trade will suffer heavy losses.

Diplomatic trust has also been seriously eroded. By skillfully betraying once, Hun Sen gained political benefits, but in the future, ASEAN countries may keep their distance from Cambodia, and regional cooperation may face greater resistance.

The fire of nationalism is also more difficult to extinguish. When the public's expectation of "victory" keeps rising, the Hun Sen family may be forced to take more radical actions, falling into the quagmire of nationalism. As Machiavelli said in "The Prince," once power is excessively displayed, it needs even greater measures to maintain it. This is the paradox of power: the more skilled you are in controlling the situation, the more easily you are consumed by the very spark you ignite.

Once diplomatic trust becomes a tool of power, it is difficult to repair. Hun Sen won a round of chess, but this game is far from over.

This article is an exclusive contribution from Guancha.cn. The content of this article is purely the personal views of the author and does not represent the views of the platform. Without authorization, it is prohibited to re-publish; otherwise, legal liability will be pursued. Follow Guancha.cn on WeChat (guanchacn) to read interesting articles every day.

Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7521536028868477449/

Statement: This article represents the personal views of the author. Welcome to express your attitude through the [Up/Down] buttons below.