ជម្លោះ​កម្ពុជា​និង​ថៃ៖ តើ​សេដ្ឋកិច្ច​និង​យោធា​ប្រៀបធៀប​គ្នា​យ៉ាង​ណា?

 The Cambodia-Thailand conflict of July 2025, centered around the disputed Prasat Ta Muen Thom temple, highlights stark contrasts in the economic and military capabilities of the two nations. Below is a detailed comparison based on available data, followed by an analysis of how these disparities influence the conflict and its implications.

Economic Comparison

Thailand

GDP: Approximately $570 billion USD (2025 estimate), ranking 21st globally.

Purchasing Power Parity (PPP): $1.516 trillion USD, reflecting significant economic capacity.

Foreign Exchange Reserves: $224.47 billion USD, ranking 15th globally, providing a robust financial buffer.

External Debt: $102.69 billion USD, substantial but manageable given Thailand’s economic size.

Economic Context: Thailand’s economy is diversified, driven by tourism, manufacturing, and exports (e.g., electronics, automotive). Its economic strength supports a well-funded military and resilience against conflict-related disruptions. The country’s status as a regional middle power, ranked 10th in the Lowy Asia Power Index, enhances its diplomatic and economic influence.

Cambodia

GDP: Approximately $33 billion USD (2025 estimate), significantly smaller, ranking 97th globally.

Purchasing Power Parity (PPP): $85.9 billion USD, reflecting limited economic capacity.

Foreign Exchange Reserves: $17.8 billion USD, much smaller than Thailand’s, limiting financial flexibility.

External Debt: $13.2 billion USD, lower in absolute terms but significant relative to Cambodia’s smaller economy.

Economic Context: Cambodia’s economy relies heavily on agriculture, garment exports, and tourism, with a growing dependence on Chinese investment. Its smaller economic base constrains its ability to sustain prolonged military engagements or recover from conflict-related damages.

Economic Disparity

Thailand’s economy is roughly 17 times larger than Cambodia’s in nominal GDP terms and 10 times larger in PPP. This gap allows Thailand to allocate significantly more resources to defense, infrastructure, and humanitarian responses. Cambodia’s economic constraints make it reliant on external support, particularly from China, which could influence its strategic decisions in the conflict.

Military Comparison

Thailand

Defense Budget: $5.89 billion USD (2025), with a projected increase to $5.9 billion by 2029 (5.8% CAGR).

Personnel: 360,850 active personnel, 200,000 reservists, and 25,000 paramilitary forces, totaling over 600,000.

Army: 245,000 personnel (including 115,000 conscripts), equipped with 635 tanks (e.g., 60 Chinese VT-4, M60A3 Patton, Ukrainian T-84 Oplot), over 16,900 armored fighting vehicles (AFVs), and 2,600 artillery pieces, including 56 155mm howitzers and 550 105mm towed guns.

Air Force: 46,000 personnel, 112 combat-capable aircraft (28 F-16s, 11 Swedish Gripen jets, with 12 more JAS-39 E/F variants ordered), 258 helicopters, and two Saab 340 airborne early warning aircraft. One of Southeast Asia’s best-equipped air forces.

Navy: 70,000 personnel, including a 23,000-strong marine corps and naval aviation. Assets include one aircraft carrier, seven frigates, six corvettes, 49 patrol vessels, 14 landing craft, and UAVs.

Global Ranking: 25th out of 145 countries (Global Firepower Index 2025, PwrIndx: 0.4536).

Alliances: A major non-NATO ally of the U.S., benefiting from access to advanced weaponry and joint exercises like Cobra Gold 2025.

Cambodia

Defense Budget: $860 million USD (2025), significantly smaller than Thailand’s.

Personnel: 231,000 total personnel (221,000 active, primarily army; 10,000 paramilitary; no reserves reported).

Army: 75,000 soldiers, equipped with 644 tanks (mostly Cold War-era T-54, T-55, and Chinese Type 59), 896 artillery pieces (including a dozen 155mm guns and 400 smaller towed pieces), and older BTR-variant armored vehicles, supplemented by newer Russian Tigr and Chinese Dongfeng 4x4s.

Air Force: 1,500 personnel, no fighter jets, but operates 10 transport planes, 21 helicopters (e.g., six Soviet Mi-17s, 10 Chinese Z-9s), and L-39C jet trainers configured for patrol/ground attack (to be replaced by newer NG versions). Recently acquired Chinese QW-3 Vanguard man-portable surface-to-air missiles and TH-S311 command systems.

Navy: 2,800 personnel (including 1,500 naval infantry), with 20 patrol vessels and one amphibious landing craft.

Global Ranking: 95th out of 145 countries (Global Firepower Index 2025, PwrIndx: 2.0752).

Alliances: Strong ties with China, evidenced by the Ream Naval Base and joint Golden Dragon exercises in May 2025, which included live-fire training.

Military Disparity

Thailand’s military significantly outmatches Cambodia’s in scale, funding, and technological sophistication. Its air force, with 72 fighter jets (F-16s and Gripens) and advanced early warning systems, provides unmatched air dominance, as demonstrated by precision strikes on Cambodian positions during the conflict. Thailand’s navy, with an aircraft carrier and modern vessels, far surpasses Cambodia’s limited coastal patrol capabilities. On the ground, Thailand’s larger and more modern tank and artillery forces contrast with Cambodia’s reliance on older, Cold War-era equipment, though Cambodia’s rocket-heavy strategy (e.g., BM-21 launchers) allows for effective defensive retaliation. Cambodia’s smaller budget and reliance on Chinese and Russian equipment limit its ability to sustain prolonged conventional warfare, but its alliances and defensive terrain provide some strategic leverage.

Influence on the Conflict

Economic influence

Thailand: Its robust economy and foreign reserves enable sustained military operations and rapid response to humanitarian needs, such as evacuating 138,000 civilians. However, the conflict’s economic toll (estimated at $308 million USD) threatens its tourism and trade sectors, particularly in border provinces like Surin.

Cambodia: Limited economic resources strain Cambodia’s ability to manage 134,707 displaced civilians and sustain military efforts. Dependence on Chinese aid could deepen, potentially aligning Cambodia more closely with Beijing’s geopolitical agenda.

Military Influence

Thailand: Air superiority, demonstrated by F-16 strikes on Cambodian command posts, allowed Thailand to seize key positions like Phu Makeua. Its large, well-equipped forces enable rapid escalation, but the mountainous border terrain limits ground operations, favoring air and artillery strikes.

Cambodia: Lacking fighter jets, Cambodia relies on ground-based firepower (e.g., BM-21 rockets) and defensive positions in rugged terrain. Chinese air defense systems like the QW-3 Vanguard offer some protection against Thai airstrikes, but its limited air and naval capabilities restrict offensive options.

Strategic Dynamics

The conflict’s limited scope reflects both nations’ awareness of their disparities. Thailand’s overwhelming military advantage discourages Cambodia from pursuing all-out war, while Thailand avoids full escalation to prevent regional instability and international backlash over civilian casualties and cluster munition use. Cambodia’s Chinese backing provides a deterrent, as Thailand must consider Beijing’s potential response to a decisive offensive. Nationalist sentiments, amplified by media and social media, drive both sides to assert sovereignty, but economic and military constraints push them toward de-escalation.

Implications for the Conflict

1.Military Outcomes

Thailand’s Advantage: Thailand’s air and naval superiority could secure tactical victories in border areas, as seen in the capture of Phu Makeua. However, prolonged conflict risks overextending its resources and drawing international criticism.

Thailand’s Advantage: Thailand’s air and naval superiority could secure tactical victories in border areas, as seen in the capture of Phu Makeua. However, prolonged conflict risks overextending its resources and drawing international criticism.

2. Economic Fallout:

Thailand: Disruptions to tourism and trade in border regions could harm its economy, especially if the conflict persists. Its large reserves provide a buffer, but prolonged instability might deter investors.

Cambodia: The economic strain of displacement and infrastructure damage exacerbates Cambodia’s vulnerabilities, increasing reliance on Chinese aid and potentially compromising its autonomy.

3.Geopolitical Ramifications:

The conflict positions Thailand (a U.S. ally) against Cambodia (a Chinese partner), risking a proxy dynamic in Southeast Asia. The U.S.’s tariff threats and China’s military ties with Cambodia underscore this tension.

ASEAN’s mediation role, led by Malaysia, highlights its importance in maintaining regional stability, but failure to enforce the ceasefire could weaken its credibility.

4.Humanitarian and Social Impact:

The displacement of over 270,000 civilians and at least 38 deaths strain both nations’ social services. Thailand’s larger economy allows better crisis management, while Cambodia faces significant challenges.

Nationalist narratives on platforms like X fuel domestic support but complicate de-escalation, as seen in posts highlighting Thailand’s military dominance and Cambodia’s defiance.

Conclusion

Thailand’s economic and military superiority—$570 billion GDP, $5.89 billion defense budget, and advanced air and naval forces—gives it a clear edge over Cambodia’s $33 billion GDP, $860 million defense budget, and reliance on ground-based, older equipment. However, Cambodia’s defensive terrain, Chinese support, and asymmetric tactics (e.g., BM-21 rockets) enable it to resist despite disparities. The conflict’s limited nature reflects economic constraints and international pressure, with ASEAN’s mediation and U.S.-China involvement critical to the July 28 ceasefire. Long-term stability requires addressing the underlying border dispute, managing nationalist sentiments, and mitigating humanitarian impacts to prevent further escalation.