Bangkok is gearing up to elect the city’s next Governor. With the election looming on Sunday, 28th June, candidates are racing against external pressures and the capital’s own deeply rooted challenges to become the person in charge. Thailand held a nationwide election in February, but the upcoming one is equally significant, and the stakes are high as the city prepares to enter a new era.

Whilst the Bangkok Governor election may be a localized event, the capital houses 18 million residents, of whom 5.5 million are registered voters. The capital reflects how Thailand is represented and how it presents itself against a global backdrop. As the country continues to measure itself against fast-moving regional peers and a rapidly shifting world with increased competition, the speed at which Bangkok progresses and changes with the world around it is key in measuring the country’s ability to thrive on the world stage.

The consensus here is that the next Governor should shape Bangkok into a truly global city by 2030, but whether this is achievable within the country’s structural constraints remains to be seen.

Charting Chadchart’s Path

Former Governor and current independent frontrunner Chachart Sittipunt has dedicated a significant portion of his prior term to tackling “capillary policies” and leveraging the Traffy Fondue platform to record over 1.3 million public complaints on topics ranging from pavements to waste collection.

Under Chadchart’s directive, Bangkok began to see challenges chipped away at, from tackling flooding through science-led approaches to independently managing PM2.5.

Voter-friendly initiatives, such as championing a greener Bangkok and eliminating waste, also exist against the backdrop of structural limitations and the bureaucratic setup of the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA). It is also this very challenge that led to the epic saga of BMA’s 4 billion baht debt to BTS, an obligation inherited from previous administrations under a pre-signed operating contract extending through 2042.

What this issue highlights isn’t merely the billions of baht that could have been used to build hospitals, schools, or bus networks; it underscores Bangkok’s complex governance structure and how it places limitations on whoever is in charge.

A Role With Bureaucratic Constraints

The BMA Act of 1985 established the Governor as an elected executive with powers over matters such as transport, urban planning, and waste management. However, there are significant limitations, such as power-sharing. The BMA currently shares power with over 30 national agencies, meaning that the Governor can rarely sign an executive order. There are also the matters of fiscal dependency and legislative subordination.

Whilst any Governor can dream up a future-forward city, the real challenge is going beyond day-to-day management. Bangkok’s wide-ranging structural issues, from traffic congestion to overhead cables, are the product of the law’s limitations.

Meanwhile, as candidates focus on building the city of the future, it’s worth noting that the laws that govern it are over 40 years old. One of the biggest challenges is operating within the restrictions of the past.

Candidates United on Tackling Corruption

Often touted as a critical battleground for political parties, the Bangkok Governor election is a race of contradictions, as it doesn’t necessarily prioritize party over candidates. The capital holds symbolic and structural significance and can serve as a litmus test of what a population demands and seeks.

This year’s race features Chadchart against the Democrat Party’s Anucha Burapachaisri and the People’s Party’s Chaiwat Sathawornwichit. At a recent debate hosted by THE STANDARD, all three candidates laid out plans to tackle corruption and increase transparency across construction permits, procurement, and budgetary processes, a telling convergence, given that anti-corruption sentiment has long been among the most reliable drivers of Bangkok voter behavior. The national government also declared corruption a priority agenda item earlier this year, underscoring its structural drag on Thailand’s competitiveness.

Candidate debates for the Bangkok governor tend to revolve around the daily issues of city life, from drainage systems to footpath conditions and air quality. This year, the theme of eradicating corruption across the entire value chain reflects how it has become a priority on the agenda. Corruption and transparency are no longer confined to national politics but have embedded themselves in the day-to-day management of the city.

Paving Priorities: Bangkok in 2030

The stakes for a new and improved Bangkok have never been higher, particularly against the backdrop of Thailand’s renewed regional ambitions. In a race against itself to pursue meaningful reform and create new growth engines to fuel economic growth, Thailand is at a crossroads. The country has its sights set on becoming ASEAN’s hub for chip manufacturing, whilst also committing to reforming its energy landscape and tackling longstanding challenges such as household debt. Thailand’s GDP growth forecast for 2026 sits at just 1.6%, the lowest among major ASEAN economies.

The country’s ambitions and success will depend heavily on Bangkok functioning like a world-class city. Investors, businesses, and agencies look to the capital as an indicator, and as Thailand seeks to reposition itself as a digital hub and ASEAN economic anchor, pivoting away from low-cost manufacturing toward higher-value industries, the city will need to do more than just function well.

The governor elected on June 28th will be in office until 2030, the year that has emerged globally as a benchmark for urban reform, climate resilience, and economic repositioning. Ho Chi Minh unveiled its double-digit growth plan for 2030, aiming to join the ranks of Global Top 50 Smart Cities by integrating AI and a digital operating system to manage things from traffic to flood control. Meanwhile, Singapore revealed its Green Plan 2030, setting concrete sustainability targets and expanding urban greenery.

Bangkok has ambition. In this campaign, Chadchart is also pushing for the city to become a productive economic growth engine through key touchpoints such as improving mobility and expanding access to education through digital classrooms. The key is balancing future blueprints with tackling daily realities and navigating bureaucratic processes.

Looking to the Future

Thailand is at risk of being stranded between idealistic ambitions and the structural realities that make them difficult to execute. Bangkok sits at the heart of this, and the next four years are critical in determining whether the country will remain a competitive player on the regional scale. If 2030 is being used as a global benchmark for reform, then the incoming Governor will be tasked with a balancing act: delivering on daily fixes while simultaneously pushing for a city of the future.

The post The Race to 2030: Bangkok’s Governor Election and the Future of Thailand appeared first on THE STANDARD.

This week, Thailand is vowing to push ahead with its advanced technological ambitions, underscoring the recognition that the country risks falling behind if it fails to accelerate the adoption of deep tech.

Government Vows to Push Ahead with AI Passport

The government has been knee-deep in defending its 1.6 billion baht AI Passport scheme, a project that aims to provide five million Thais, only 10% of the working population, with a year’s access to Pro and Premium-tier AI tools. This week, Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul has said the project will proceed and that Thailand needs to remain competitive by catching up with AI advancements. The PM vows that the project will operate with transparency and in accordance with regulations, and says that the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society (DE) is responsible for the rollout.

PM shares ‘Made in Thailand’ chip vision for 2050

Separately, Prime Minister Anutin has also unveiled an ambitious vision for a ‘Made in Thailand’ semiconductor hub by 2050, aiming to produce homegrown chips to capture rising global demand.

The PM has signed an order to establish the National Semiconductor and Advanced Electronics Policy Committee to accelerate the government’s ambitions.

The scheme currently targets investment worth 2.5 trillion baht, and the upskilling of over 230,000 highly skilled workers in the field.

Pimjai Lee-issaranukul, Chair of the Federation of Thai Industries (FTI), says that promoting the home-grown semiconductor industry is key to sustaining Thailand’s competitiveness and to retaining investment demand for the country’s manufacturing industry.

The post Global Edition – Thailand News Brief 17 June 2026 appeared first on THE STANDARD.

Thailand is trying to fast-track its way into the AI era with a 1.6 billion baht price tag. 

The TH-AI Passport, or AI Pass, run by the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society, draws roughly 1.6–1.62 billion baht from the Digital Economy Promotion Fund to provide five million Thais, only 10% of the working population, with a year’s access to Pro and Premium-tier AI tools. The scheme promises access to over 30 models from 14 providers, recognizable names such as ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, bundled alongside over 130 online learning courses.

The scheme seems logical on paper, as Thailand cannot afford to merely watch the AI revolution happen from the sidelines. For a country stuck in a middle-income trap, with a workforce of 40 million, an aging population, and chronically low productivity, leveraging AI could be a significant tool to uplift Thailand’s economic potential.

With that said, buying an expensive AI pass does not automatically pave the way for Thailand to become an AI economy.

From Access to Absorption

The controversy surrounding the TH-AI Pass isn’t necessarily about access, but about whether the state is deploying public money to build real, durable capabilities with a clear blueprint to upskill the population, or simply spending over a billion baht to purchase a one-year license to foreign technology without any clear technology or knowledge transfer. The key distinction between access and absorption is that the latter is the ability to convert the tools into tangible skills, courses with a real deployment plan for productivity gains.  

Thailand often succeeds in access but struggles to meaningfully convert opportunities into long-term economic growth. The country is able to import technology, draw investment, and launch grand digital schemes, but often struggles to convert such inputs into domestic capability.

The AI Pass, therefore, serves as a mirror held up to reflect Thailand’s structural challenges, one that goes deeper than just tech giveaways.  

A Big Project Demands a Bigger Question

Vocal criticism of the AI Pass doesn’t translate to criticism of AI itself. The reality is quite the opposite: there is a broad consensus that Thailand needs to accelerate its AI adoption and skill-set development. The criticism concerns the suitability of the scheme itself.

There are five legitimate concerns.

First, the all-too-familiar issue of procurement transparency. The public terms of reference (TOR) drew scrutiny for their feasibility, specifically whether registration can be successfully opened within 30 days with a 90-day delivery target. 

Second, the scheme’s value for money. A quick calculation against the five-million-person target puts the cost at approximately 320 baht per person. The real question is whether this spending will actually translate into building long-term skills and improving public-sector efficiency on paper.

Third is the quality of AI on offer. There are valid concerns from field professionals that the ‘Pro-tier’ access specified in the project may fall short of commercial Pro subscriptions and may not differentiate much from existing free versions.

Fourth is the purpose of it all. What will Thailand have to show for this once the year is up and the country has already spent over a billion baht on acquiring an AI pass? If, ultimately, all Thailand has to show for it is a stack of expired user accounts, then it’s just another costly expenditure with far-reaching consequences.

Finally, the sensitive touchpoint of data security.  In today’s world, data itself is an economic asset. If the government is unable to assure its citizens that their data won’t be shared or stored securely, enthusiasm and sign-ups for the scheme could fall short.

Thailand’s Position in the AI Race

The AI Pass shouldn’t be viewed as a singular scheme but rather as part of a broader backdrop of Southeast Asia’s AI landscape. The region is fast becoming a new battleground for AI, cloud, data centers, semiconductors, and digital infrastructure. 

This raises the question of where Thailand stands in the AI race, and whether we’re able to compete at the regional level.

When placed alongside peers, Thailand’s weaknesses become more revealing. Singapore leans on its world-class governance, strong regulation, and talent. Meanwhile, Malaysia is carving out its own niche in the data center and semiconductor space. Vietnam is Thailand’s most direct competitor as a manufacturing base, but with a younger workforce and highly competitive costs, while Indonesia has the benefits of its vast population and rapid adoption of digital technologies.

Thailand actually has a deeply rooted manufacturing base compared to many of its peers, and a solid infrastructure with expertise in tourism. Thailand’s industries, from automotive manufacturing to healthcare and electronics, are all sectors with real potential for AI integration. However, the country struggles to translate potential into real capability; therefore, the conversation is often limited to what-ifs and calls for further reform.

Against Singapore, Thailand’s weaknesses are policy precision and regulatory efficiency. Against Vietnam, it’s the pace of upgrading the labor force; and against the world at large, Thailand’s disadvantage is its inability to convert access to technology into a meaningful engine for growth.

Lessons From FDI

The TH-AI Pass shares striking resemblances to Thailand’s long-running challenges with foreign direct investment (FDI). Thailand’s economy expanded 2.8% in Q1, largely driven by a 10% surge in private investment in machinery, capital goods, and factory construction. Simultaneously, BOI investment applications hit 1 trillion baht, with much of that capital concentrated across digital sectors. 

The extent of capital shows that the country isn’t lacking in numbers, but we are at risk of becoming a high-value production base without any technology transfer. These businesses may build factories in Thailand, but we do not get to absorb the technology, the knowledge, or the R&D. 

The real risk is that Thais gain temporary access without building lasting skills, data, or local AI ecosystems. 

Mapping Thailand’s Priorities

Thailand should continue to pursue its AI ambitions, but with a more critical approach. Beyond costly procurements, the government has to showcase its commitment to upskilling the workforce, rather than making it just a conference buzzword. 

AI literacy must become a widespread skill, evident across classrooms, training centers, and offices. Targeting groups and measuring outcomes must also be efficient; spending public money at this scale demands an outcome-based design. The government should focus on specific groups, from teachers to SMEs, in order to efficiently deploy resources, curriculum, and a trackable KPI. Following on from this, the success of an AI scheme should not be measured in sign-ups, but by economic value and productivity gains.

Beyond this, another critical element is public trust, because in this economy, trust is essentially infrastructure. The government has a responsibility to earn public trust in this regard. 

Lastly, any national-level AI policy must be linked with the FDI policy, with BOI incentives tied to outcomes, such as leveraging local suppliers, upskilling Thai workers, and knowledge transfer 

Beyond the AI Pass

Whilst we shouldn’t downplay the fact that the pass may be an initial entry point for Thais to experiment with AI, it’s important to differentiate between access and the capture of real opportunity through absorption.

Countries that leapfrog ahead in the AI era are those that use the technology to redesign local economies and to innovate across industries through technology adoption and workforce transformation.

Thailand needs to think beyond the five million sign-ups and consider what happens after committing 1.6 billion to a handful of AI platforms. Will the country ultimately build a more efficient economy and transition out of the middle-income gap? Will students be able to compete regionally, and will middle-aged workers be able to provide value in today’s landscape?

Access is merely a starting point. The ability to convert the technology into a real asset is Thailand’s real test for the ages.

The post The AI Pass: Gateway to the Future, or a Test of Thailand’s Competitiveness? appeared first on THE STANDARD.

Her Royal Highness Princess Bajrakitiyabha Narendiradebyavati has passed away at the age of 47, the Royal Household Bureau announced on Friday morning. His Majesty the King has commanded royal funeral rites with the highest honors, and HRH will lie in state at the Grand Palace.

HRH Princess Bajrakitiyabha had been hospitalized since Dec 15, 2022, following a collapse due to a heart-related condition.

HRH Princess Bajrakitiyabh led a meaningful and illustrious career and achieved a doctorate from Cornell Law School. Her Royal Highness worked as a public prosecutor before dedicating much of her public life to justice reform, most notably through the Kamlangjai (“Inspire”) Project, supporting the rehabilitation of incarcerated women and mothers. Her advocacy helped shape the UN’s 2010 Bangkok Rules on the treatment of women prisoners, and she also served as a Goodwill Ambassador for UN Women and UNODC. Among the most prominent was Her Royal Highness’ role as Thailand’s ambassador to Austria, where she simultaneously served as the nation’s representative to the United Nations.

HRH Princess Bajrakitiyabh dedicated her life to justice and reform, with the utmost compassion.

THE STANDARD Global Edition is produced in collaboration with Bitesize Bangkok.

The post Remembering HRH Princess Bajrakitiyabha, A Royal Voice for Justice and Reform appeared first on THE STANDARD.

Talks of Artificial Intelligence have been at the heart of parliamentary debates in Thailand this past week, bookended by the heated debate over the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society’s (DES) controversial 1.6 billion baht ‘TH-AI Passport’ project and its implications.

The country has arrived at a critical inflection point. The world is not patient when it comes to rapid AI adoption and skills acceleration. There are viable figures to support this: Out of Thailand’s total workforce of 40 million, approximately 8.7 million workers (21.8% of the total) are estimated to be affected by Generative AI.

The timing of current debates is significant. In the same quarter that Thailand recorded billions of dollars in AI-related investment applications, its largest BOI figure in recent memory, the government’s flagship program is under scrutiny.

Amid a race to reskill a nation saddled with an economic slowdown, high household debt, and a rapidly aging population with a low birthrate, governance also needs to keep pace. The gap between intention and governance lies in everything that matters about where Thailand actually stands amid the creation of a new global AI order.

Thailand as a Data Center Hub: Infrastructure is Arriving

According to the Thailand Board of Investment (BOI), Q1 2026 investment data was led by the Digital and Electronics sectors, riding the AI wave. Digital initiatives amounted to 873,741 million baht (US$27.3 billion) across 48 projects spanning data centers and cloud services. Names include TikTok and Skyline Data Center & Cloud Services.

Thailand is positioning itself as a Data Center hub, drawing billions of dollars worth of investment from global companies. Amazon has committed $5 billion over fifteen years, TikTok $8.8 billion over five, and Microsoft $1 billion over two, a cascade of big-tech capital arriving in Thailand at different speeds.

BOI incentives for data centers typically include corporate tax exemptions, import duty relief on equipment, and facilitation of foreign ownership and land use. What the country should see more of are criterias such as technology transfer requirements and long-term R&D commitments.

The investment landscape is shifting away from the asset-light era, such as software companies, towards HALO (Heavy Asset, Low Obsolescence), a fledgling physical infrastructure that AI itself cannot replace.

Billions of dollars in investment capital are positive for Thailand, and the country gains physical infrastructure on its soil that serves its own population. However, hosting infrastructure is not the same as owning or leveraging the value these centers will create. Thailand will need to ensure that its workforce governance keeps pace with its regional ambitions.

The government’s argument is that data centers attract a thriving ecosystem, from cloud-dependent startups to regional tech hubs, but this success requires many other conditions: a talent pipeline, a supportive regulatory environment, and startup capital, all of which remain a work in progress.

The Hidden Cost of Data Centers: A Call For Reform

The stability of the electrical system is the most critical factor for data centers, as they rely on a continuous power supply. Thailand’s electricity demand for data centers is forecast to reach 6 TWh by 2030, representing 2.5% of total power consumption.

The billions of dollars in demand are well and good, but Thailand needs to be realistic about energy delivery. Data center development has been heavily concentrated in the EEC across Chonburi, Rayong, and Chachoengsao, but the energy infrastructure serving that corridor was designed for conventional industrial loads, making it challenging to accommodate the power demands of hyperscale campuses that run 24/7.

The data center boom is actually forcing an energy reform that Thailand already needs to consider. These investments are creating a real political incentive to accelerate the use of renewable energy and Small Modular Reactors (SMRs), which are ideal for power generation in demanding facilities.

Thailand has the geographical advantages and a relatively stable grid to build on. But a thriving AI ecosystem runs on vast physical infrastructure, and that infrastructure still needs to be built.

Without this transition, Thailand’s AI target will remain as lofty ambitions. Without the grid, the policy framework, and the technology transfer to match, Thailand risks becoming a high-value landlord collecting rent on infrastructure it doesn’t control.

Thailand Is Betting Big on AI, But The Work Force Needs to Catch Up

Findings from the National Economic and Social Development Council (NESDC) show that Generative AI is affecting more than 8.7 million Thai workers, with 6.5 million expected to see their roles augmented rather than replaced, as AI is expected to handle the systematic parts of their jobs.

Beyond this, the labor market faces a further disruption on the horizon with the emergence of Physical AI, the merging of AI with automation, poised to reshape employment across manufacturing, logistics, and services in the next wave.

These forecasts should serve as a critical incentive for the state to upskill and reskill the Thai workforce. Beyond being buzzwords, the two terms offer a meaningful way for workers to coexist with technology during the next wave of disruption.

The government is taking notice, but not urgently enough. The National AI Action Plan (2022–2027) under the ‘MHESI for AI’ policy sets a target of producing 30,000 AI-skilled workers within three years, spanning researchers and developers, applied engineers, and general professional users. However, Thailand’s real challenge isn’t the blueprint on paper but the execution gap between policy ambition and the pace of technological change. Upskilling needs to happen fast enough to transition workers from operators to AI managers, and the scale needs to be more ambitious than targeting fewer than 1% of the total affected workforce.

The 1.6 Billion Baht Question

The state also needs to adapt quickly to AI, with bureaucratic bottlenecks and paper-intensive processes a significant obstacle to conducting business in Thailand. The Office of the Civil Service Commission (OCSC) has approved a framework of seven digital skills for government personnel, aimed at preparing public sector workers for the AI era and to deploy AI for repetitive administrative tasks to boost productivity.

The intention is there, but state-centric initiatives need a clear roadmap and trackable KPI.

The government’s flagship AI push is currently not without controversy. Under the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society (MDES), the 1.6 billion baht Thailand AI Passport project aims to give citizens access to AI tools and platforms, but it is now under reconsideration following intense scrutiny over transparency concerns and allegations that its TOR was structured to benefit specific business groups.

IMC Institute director Dr. Thanachart Numnonda told THE STANDARD WEALTH that much of what the TOR specifies is already available for free, and risks being obsolete before it launches. The 1.6 billion baht would be better spent on training people to use existing tools and on sector-specific AI implementation.

There are regional examples to draw from. Singapore rolled out a national initiative in which citizens who enroll in selected SkillsFuture AI training courses receive 6 months of free access to premium AI tools in order to boost national workforce capabilities. The nation also launched a multi-year partnership with OpenAI to expand deployment and build local talent, but Thailand is unable to pursue this due to legal constraints.

Through a wider lens, the TH-AI Passport controversy is more about bureaucracy and procurement than boosting capability. The government has framed AI as a national priority, but the issue at hand becomes merely another government contract, once again missing the opportunity for meaningful change.

Whilst parliamentary debate drags on and the budget is on pause, Thailand risks falling behind and missing the window altogether.

The Reality at Stake

Thailand has arrived at this crossroads before. Foreign capital arrives, a global technology shift creates a window, and the policy response gets consumed by familiar processes, procurement disputes, and the slow bureaucratic drag that delays it all.

There is significant demand from global players such as Microsoft, TikTok, and Amazon, and a BOI pipeline that highlights billions being poured into the economy. Thailand’s strategic assets, from the country’s geographical position to grid stability, have value.

Behind the infrastructure demand lies various contradictions. The country needs to follow through on energy deliverables to meet demand, and a workforce of millions needs to be meaningfully trained and upskilled, or risk becoming obsolete amid a challenging technological shift that waits for no one.

With the workforce transition program addressing less than 1% of the working population, and the government’s most visible AI initiative under scrutiny for corruption, Thailand needs to devise a clear roadmap to stay on track with its ambitions.

THE STANDARD Global Edition is produced in collaboration with Bitesize Bangkok.

The post Mapping Thailand’s AI Ambition: From Infrastructure to Policy appeared first on THE STANDARD.

As the French capital prepares its transition to summer, warm light reflects off the cream stone of the Musée des Arts Décoratifs, the renowned art museum on the same grounds as the Louvre Palace. Guests from the blended worlds of politics and diplomatic service, arts and fashion, ascended towards the broad stone staircase into the main hall to mark the occasion. The words La Mode en Majesté hang elegantly above.  

Lighting within the exhibition rooms is calibrated to shine on each royal garment, Thai silk, and craft with precision. Each special garment is presented not as a mere item of clothing, but as living historical document through artisan expertise. 

As Her Royal Highness Princess Sirivannavari Nariratana Rajakanya presided over the opening of La Mode en Majesté: Royal Thai Dress: From Tradition to Modernity exhibition, what unfolded was not merely the inauguration of a Thai fashion showcase abroad, but a significant foray of the Royal Thai Dress into one of the world’s most culturally influential stages. 

Across town at the Palais de l’Élysée, the President’s official residence, President Emmanuel Macron engaged in conversation with Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul in an entirely different discourse. Within the confines of the room, matters related to the Thailand–EU free trade agreement and forward-looking investments were discussed at length.   

On the surface, the conversations appear entirely separate, but a closer inspection tells a different story. Both events showcase Thailand’s efforts to redefine its relationship with France through cultural expressions, diplomatic ties, and economic incentives. 

An Exhibition That Transcends Beyond Fashion 

Whilst La Mode en Majesté may appear to be an exhibition celebrating the beauty of the Thai dress to mark the 170th anniversary of Thai-French diplomatic relations, the true significance lies in the venue. Musée des Arts Décoratifs (MAD) is no ordinary museum, but one of France’s most influential institutions in the fields of applied arts, design, and fashion, making a showcase here a significant cultural endorsement. 

In an exclusive royal interview, Her Royal Highness Princess Sirivannavari disclosed that the project took more than a year to prepare. It began with the 170th anniversary of Thai-French relations as its occasion and with the intention of presenting Thai culture in a form accessible to French audiences. 

At the heart of the exhibition are the garments of Her Majesty Queen Sirikit, the Queen Mother, with a nod to Her Majesty’s collaboration with distinguished French designer  Pierre Balmain and Maison Lesage, the legendary Parisian embroidery house. There’s a significant nod to the collaborative history between the two countries. 

One of the most significant milestones was receiving royal permission to display the Queen Mother’s garments outside of Thailand for the first time.

“We had to seek royal permission from Father, which was very nerve-wracking, because this was the first time the Queen Mother’s garments would be exhibited outside of Thailand.”

The exhibition brings together nearly 200 objects: eight styles of traditional Thai royal dress, garments by Balmain and Lesage, silk brocade, mudmee silk, jewelry, historical photographs, and works by contemporary Thai designers.

Queen Sirikit’s Art of ‘Fashionable Diplomacy’

A walk through the illustrious historical accounts of the 60s provides context for the exhibition. It was during that period that Her Majesty Queen Sirikit accompanied King Rama IX on state visits to Europe and the United States. The world was grappling with the Cold War, and Thailand was not well understood through a Western lens. The image depicted an exotic, distant Southeast Asian nation rather than a modern country with its own culture and capabilities.

The task at hand was to present Thailand as a contemporary nation, whilst giving nod to its heritage. Fashion emerged as a clear strategy, more specifically, a collaboration with Pierre Balmain. Collaborating with the legendary French haute couture designer was not just about choosing beautiful gowns, but the start of a new diplomatic language for Thailand on the world stage. 

Western silhouettes gave Thailand’s image a contemporary edge, while Thai fabrics and silks preserved the country’s identity. Through fashion, Queen Sirikit sent a signal that Thailand was not just a small Southeast Asian nation but one with a heritage and the capacity to engage equally with the modern world.

From Versailles to Paris: An Intricate Relationship

Upon entering the exhibition, visitors will encounter a historical film stretching back 340 years to the era when a Siamese diplomatic mission under King Narai the Great traveled to the court of Louis XIV at the Palace of Versailles. 

Nearly two centuries later, King Rama IV would sign a Treaty of Friendship, Commerce, and Navigation with France in 1856, opening a new chapter of exchange between the two nations.

The relationship between the two countries is a complex one

In 1686, a Siamese royal embassy led by Ok-phra Wisut Sunthon (Kosa Pan) traveled to the court at Versailles, an event recorded as one of the most vivid diplomatic episodes in European history. 

The relationship was never just about cultural admiration, but woven with strategic interests. Whilst Siam sought to balance European powers against one another, France sought to expand its influence to Southeast Asia. The period ended in political turbulence towards the end of King Narai’s reign.

By the 19th century, France returned as an expanding imperial power in Indochina. Siam became a buffer state between British and French ambitions. The crisis of 1893 left lingering wounds as French gunboats entered the mouth of the Chao Phraya River, and Siam ceded territories on the left bank of the Mekong.

From the Siamese embassy that once traveled to Versailles to the royal Thai garments that made their way to Paris, it illustrates a middle-sized nation that is thoughtfully navigating its place in an ever-evolving global landscape. 

Meanwhile, On The Other Side.

As a rich cultural dialogue unfolded on one side of the French capital, on the other, Thailand and France were speaking another language entirely, one of economics, technology, and geopolitics.

The dialogue between the Thai Prime Minister and the French President signaled that the relationship would not be confined to culture alone but could expand into high-technology industries such as smart grid systems, alternative energy, and AI infrastructure.

France also pledged its support for the Thailand-EU Free Trade Agreement negotiations, which could become a turning point for Thailand’s economy amid a broader restructuring of multinational companies’ supply chains as they seek new investment bases in Asia. 

This vision was clarified following the meetings Thailand’s Economic Team held with senior executives from five leading French companies: Airbus, EssilorLuxottica, Imerys, Thales, and IN Groupe. This illustrates Thailand’s proactive efforts to reposition itself as an advanced manufacturing base and as a strategic partner to Europe in ASEAN.

France is already among Thailand’s significant economic partners, ranking as Thailand’s fourth-largest trading partner within the EU, with bilateral trade valued at approximately 160 billion baht in 2025. Over the past five years, French companies have submitted nearly 100 investment promotion applications in Thailand, with a combined value exceeding 29 billion baht. 

France is also Thailand’s fifth-largest long-haul tourism market. This is where culture and economics converge.

Looking Ahead: The Next 170 Years

 
As sunlight eclipsed the Musée des Arts Décoratifs, visitors were already forming a queue outside. Whilst this is business as usual for a capital filled with museums and historical landmarks, it carries significant weight for Thailand.

The week in Paris underscored how Thailand leveraged all its resources and instruments, from heritage and culture to diplomacy, to redefine the country’s position on the competitive world stage. From Kosa Pan to Queen Sirikit, now to Her Royal Highness Sirivannavari, and from fashion to Artificial Intelligence, the Thai-French relationship is being rewritten in a new geopolitical context.

“The hope for this exhibition is that the world will not just appreciate its cultural beauty, but as intellectual capital and craftsmanship that can be built upon toward a sustainable economy,” says Sappasit Foongfaungchaveng, an independent advisor to the exhibition. 

Amid turbulent times when supply chains are being redirected, geopolitical influence is reshaping global trade, and competition for investment is fiercer, friendly diplomatic relations can only be a starting point. The real question is how Thailand will convert this momentum into tangible investments, thereby establishing long-term competitiveness.

THE STANDARD Global Edition is produced in collaboration with Bitesize Bangkok.

The post Thailand’s Paris Moment: Fashion, Diplomacy, and the Politics of Cultural Prestige appeared first on THE STANDARD.

Corruption at a Cost: Thailand’s Governance Problem

Amid goals to reposition itself within an increasingly complex and competitive world order, Thailand is on a challenging path to attract a new wave of investments across emerging verticals, free itself from the middle-income trap that has long caged its population, and finally pave the way towards OECD membership.

Thailand’s limitations may not be its geographical location or its private-sector capabilities. The country’s biggest constraint is the quality of its governance and laws.

The country has seen an abundance of headlines this past week, from a private-sector report on corruption’s impact on businesses to the government’s newly established anti-corruption committee to a private meeting between business leaders and Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul, and the government’s OECD ambitions. Look closely, and a pattern emerges; they’re part of the same narrative.

Thailand is finding itself increasingly under pressure to enforce rules and regulations. Corruption is not merely a moral failing of the state but a structural flaw that undermines economic growth and credibility, hindering Thailand’s ability to compete globally.

Corruption: Thailand’s Hidden Tax

A recent survey by Thailand’s Joint Standing Committee on Commerce, Industry and Banking (JSCCIB) paints a troubling picture. Among 401 surveyed business executives and representatives, 89.1% cited corruption as a moderate to serious obstacle to doing business, while unofficial payments in government-related contracts were estimated at around 11-15% of contract value.

This data point quantifies corruption and points to a systemic problem that goes beyond hushed scandals or random misconduct; there’s a structural cost on economic growth.

It’s a familiar story in Thailand. Entrepreneurs pay to expedite lengthy processes, business owners pay to secure contracts, and so forth. This has created an ecosystem in which access to bureaucracy overrides innovation and competition.

In today’s hyper-competitive landscape, countries seeking to attract capital to fuel future-forward ambitions in data centers, semiconductors, and clean energy cannot rely on tax incentives alone. Variables such as governance and state transparency are key to building international credibility, which is central to Thailand’s current ambitions to join the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

Thailand’s OECD Ambitions

Thailand has its sights set on prestigious OECD membership, an organization that serves as a policy forum for economic growth and sets the global standard for economic, trade, and government transparency. Thailand submitted its initial memorandum last year, thereby launching a technical review involving 25 expert committees, with hopes of joining by 2028. The OECD’s multi-year accession process requires a thorough review of the rule of law, human rights, corruption, and public-sector transparency.

For Thailand, the OECD serves as a benchmark on the world stage and the means to uplift its economic standing. The mission to join is akin to a diplomatic checklist, a trophy that the current government can claim as its success. On a larger scale, Thailand’s quest to join highlights its regional ambitions amid rising competition, its aim to remain relevant in the new geopolitical order, and, ultimately, a need for credibility to attract foreign investment. The OECD will assess Thailand’s anti-corruption enforcement, particularly bribery, public-sector transparency, procurement, and law enforcement.

It’s standing across international indices shows the challenge. The World Justice Project reports that Thailand’s Rule of Law Index 2025 is ranked 77th out of 143 countries, highlighting that corruption is not separate from the rule of law. Academics and the private sector warn that structural corruption is nearly impossible to eradicate, hindering the country’s admission to the organization.

The underlying irony here is that the political system pursuing membership is also the system that must be reformed to achieve it.

Meaningful enforcement of anti-corruption practices is, therefore, a prerequisite for thriving in the new world order.

A Committee Sends The Right Signal, But Is It Enough?

An Anti-Corruption Coordination Committee has been established to demonstrate Thailand’s commitment to reform. It sends a positive signal, particularly by fusing the public, private, and civil sectors to close bureaucratic loopholes and promote data transparency.

The looming question remains whether a committee will meaningfully change the state’s structure, given how deeply rooted corruption is. If not enforced, a committee will become just another attempt to window-dress the issue at hand.

Thailand does not lack oversight bodies, laws, or anti-corruption strategies. What it lacks are tangible outcomes that businesses and citizens see in reality.

CEOs and Accessibility

The ‘Business Speaks, Government Listens’ forum on May 15th carries a positive signal, as the government will benefit from hearing on-ground stories from businesses. However, there is a risk to this relationship. Problem-solving becomes contingent on access, and whoever has a seat can push their agendas into policy behind closed doors.

Continuing this will create even wider gaps and reinforce Thailand’s access-based economy.

Public Confidence Over Public Funds

The government’s 400 billion baht borrowing decree under an emergency clause may be framed as a political necessity amid deepening global shocks and a weakened domestic outlook, but public trust should be taken into account.

For a country already under scrutiny for transparency, large-scale public spending must meet a higher standard of accountability. The government should exercise fiscal discipline to enhance credibility, not attract scrutiny about vague deployment and unmeasured outcomes.

The state must be able to accept public scrutiny and demonstrate its commitment to transparency and disclosure, especially as the funds are not intended as a short-term stimulus but rather for relief and long-term energy reform.

Thailand’s Future Depends on Rule Enforcement

Thailand certainly does not lack global ambition. The country wishes to be an investment hub, attract new growth engines, and lift itself out of the middle-income trap whilst building credibility with the OECD.

Unfortunately, ambition alone cannot propel Thailand towards growth if governance fails.

In an era of supply-chain reorganization under immense geopolitical pressure, investors are seeking economies with clear governance and rule of law, and states that uphold transparency without hidden cost structures.

Thailand has acknowledged the challenge at hand. Businesses have spoken out, and international indices provide evidence in the data. The OECD committee itself will serve as a continuous framework for assessment.

The remaining question is whether Thailand can finally turn around and take meaningful action to enforce accountability. The country can only thrive on the state’s commitment to governance and enforcing the rules of law.

The post Corruption is testing Thailand’s OECD ambitions. appeared first on THE STANDARD.

In a world where global superpowers such as the United States and China are negotiating on matters of national interest, Thailand finds itself having to defend its own credibility and transparency while paving its way to create strategic value. As geopolitical uncertainties take center stage, countries such as Thailand must defend their credibility for a place in the new world order.

The meeting between President Trump and President Xi Jinping in Beijing goes beyond diplomatic and trade discussions, serving as a signal to Thailand. In an environment where trade, technology, and security are packaged together, neutrality and diplomatic goodwill are no longer enough to sustain a position.

Thailand may not have to choose sides between the two powers, but it will have to prove its credibility across the entire value chain.

From Trump to Xi: Sandwiched Between Superpowers

President Trump’s visit to China at President Xi Jinping’s invitation is geopolitical dealmaking at its best. Tariffs and trade aren’t the only issues on the table; the narrative also includes technology, AI chips, Asia’s stability, and implications for Taiwan. Discussions, therefore, transcend trade balances and center on the new world order.

The President has his agenda. There is a need to demonstrate to his voter base that engaging with China has tangible economic returns. Meanwhile, China needs to signal that it remains a vital market in which US corporations cannot bypass.

Thailand needs to pay attention. Discussions between the global powers can alter the course of the tariff structures, investment flows, and supply chain configurations. Countries without clear positioning, which face questions over governance risk being left out of the new global economy altogether.

When CEOs Enter The Negotiating Table

President Trump’s accompanying delegation to Beijing consisted of tech CEOs, a decision telling in itself. Over ten American business leaders from aviation, technology, finance, and strategic industries accompanied the President.

This sends a clear message. CEOs are no longer bystanders in geopolitics; they sit at the table. Private companies across areas such as AI and semiconductors are now direct actors in negotiations between key states. Businesses can now shape and influence geopolitics.

This carries implications for Thailand. If the state and private sectors of global powers are now acting in the same interests, then countries seeking to attract capital must have transparent systems to leverage such opportunities. Thailand must be able to generate value in return; there is no free lunch.

The New World Order: Globalization As We Know It Is Gone

The global discourse surrounding the “Decoupling” between the US and China took certain realities for granted. Truth is, the reality is much more complex.

The US wants to reduce its dependency on Chinese technology, namely, semiconductors and national security assets. China, in turn, aims to reduce its vulnerability to American export controls. Yet, both superpowers retain significant economic incentives to maintain the relationship, namely across consumer markets, investment flows, and financial services.

Therefore, globalization, as we understood it, is over. However, decoupling isn’t happening either. The term that best describes current economic realities is transactional rivalry.

Certain domains will remain contested amid increased competition, especially in advanced technology, security, and data. In other matters, the global powers will need to find common ground and balance shared interests; this will shift and change.

For Thailand, navigating this complexity won’t be easy, as the deals struck between the US and China can simultaneously create opportunities and pressure. It is no longer enough to thrive on neutrality, without demonstrating worth and capability at the table.

Thailand’s Test: Navigating Pressure From All Angles

Thailand is facing a critical challenge across multiple fronts, from trade to supply chains. As an export-reliant economy dependent on foreign direct investment, Thailand sits at the intersection of supply chains connecting the United States, China, Japan, Europe, and ASEAN. Historically, this was a strategic advantage. Now, it also makes Thailand vulnerable to exposure.

Trade data shows that Thailand is on Washington’s radar. In 2025, bilateral goods trade between Thailand and the United States reached $110.8 billion, with the US goods trade deficit with Thailand standing at $71.9 billion. This also means Washington is scrutinizing the country for trade imbalances. The United States is Thailand’s largest export market, accounting for approximately 18.3% of total Thai exports in 2024. The consequences of a faltering relationship would have long-lasting implications beyond a single export sector.

Thailand cannot risk being seen as merely a low-cost production base or a means to avoid tariffs. The country needs to meet the requirements of a productive, trusted partner in the new world order.

The Government is Sending Signals, but is it Enough?

The government is signaling awareness of the new world order, from its discussions with the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR), to creating more ease in doing business for certain foreign-owned entities.

The Cabinet has approved in principle an amendment to the rules under the Foreign Business Act. However, oversight remains with relevant governing bodies such as the NBTC and the Bank of Thailand.

Removing bureaucratic steps is necessary for Thailand to compete with its regional peers for high-quality business. However, lowering the barrier of entry alone is not the solution. The question remains whether Thailand’s regulatory framework is robust enough to ensure fair and transparent competition, and whether the state can navigate politics such as nominee arrangements and monopolistic agreements.

Investment in the first quarter of 2026 reached 260 billion baht, up 18%. Thailand has pockets of opportunities, with the potential to capture new growth engines. However, opportunity does not equate to results.

Timely licenses and enforced regulations are crucial to investor confidence, and this is what Thailand needs to deliver on.

The Credibility Gap: Corruption As a Cost

Thailand’s biggest weakness is the inability to turn opportunities into tangible outcomes. A survey by the Joint Standing Committee on Commerce, Industry and Banking found that 89.1% of respondents identified corruption as an obstacle to doing business.

Corruption directly erodes Thailand’s competitiveness and indirectly raises the cost of conducting business here, whilst also impacting markets and investor confidence. The picture is consistent with Thailand’s standing in the 2025 Corruption Perceptions Index, where the country scored 33 out of 100.

There is not enough incentive or subsidy that can overshadow this reality.

When Neutrality isn’t Enough

Amid a fast-changing world order and complex geopolitical ties, Thailand needs to commit to becoming the nation it aspires to be. The country does not need to pick between Washington and Beijing, but it needs to lay the groundwork for productivity and contribute meaningfully to the supply chain.

Beyond being an affordable production base, Thailand needs to be a reliable destination for countries to conduct business, rather than relying on quick wins and shortcuts.

The real risk is that Thailand remains constrained by domestic limitations, such as corruption and its own bureaucracy, in capturing wins in today’s new world order. Neutrality may not be enough to maintain Thailand’s relevance, especially with the absence of credibility.

Thailand needs to prove it can navigate the challenging waters of contemporary geopolitics and rise to the demands of a new world order through a series of meaningful reforms.

The post Thailand’s Credibility Test Amid Global Superpower Negotiations appeared first on THE STANDARD.

Landbridge, Thailand’s US$31 billion logistics megaproject, has been revived by the current government, amid the Strait of Hormuz closure and geopolitical conflict. These external shocks have handed the government a timely pretext to make a strong case for revival.

Thailand has spent more than a century dreaming of a shortcut across its Southern Peninsula. The Landbridge, linking the Gulf of Thailand at Chumphon to the Andaman Sea at Ranong, is the most ambitious expression. An 89-kilometer overland corridor made up of motorways, double-track railways, and energy pipelines designed to move cargo between the Indian and Pacific Oceans.

The vision is to attract large-scale foreign investment across ports, industrial estates, and energy infrastructure, and turn the South into a logistics hub on par with the Eastern Economic Corridor.

The canal concept has evolved in name and rationale with each administration, but the ambition has never translated into anything beyond lofty goals due to factors such as high cost and politics itself.

As the world continues to reel from the Strait of Hormuz closure and associated conflict, the strategic rationale behind Landbridge may be understandable, but the commercial viability is harder to justify.

For Thailand, Landbridge isn’t merely an infrastructure proposal, but a question of national positioning. Will the country be able to leverage its geographical position without mistaking ambition for a strategic value proposition?

Geo-Political Crisis to Opportunity? The 90 Day Challenge

The Landbridge project has returned to the Cabinet agenda. The government’s rationale is that the world itself has shifted, even if the megaproject itself has not. Under Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul, Minister of Finance and Deputy Prime Minister Ekniti Nitithanprapas has been appointed to chair a study committee to conduct a feasibility study within 90 days. The mandate is to assess the project against four realities: economic, environmental, social, and geopolitical.

Recent global uncertainties have made chokepoint anxiety the new vocabulary of modern trade. Governments and businesses are seeking to diversify their supply chains, and Thailand wants to seize this opportunity.

There is a trap within the opportunity. A more politically volatile world may lend credence to its argument, but it does not automatically strengthen the megaproject’s commercial viability.

The 90-day review must be a stress test, not a formality to justify ambitions. The central question is whether the Landbridge works in ordinary times, when shipping lines choose routes on cost and reliability, not geopolitical anxiety. Thailand risks building on a shortcut and belief that future crises will eventually validate it.

The Strait of Malacca and Regional Competitiveness

This is the underlying argument against it all. The Strait of Malacca, a waterway between the Malay Peninsula and Indonesia’s Sumatra Island, connects the Indian Ocean and the Pacific Ocean, and remains one of the world’s most important shipping lanes.

Malacca is a vital route connecting commerce among East Asia, the Middle East, and Europe. China’s dependence on it has long been labeled the Malacca Dilemma, but traffic through the strait has continued to grow. Therefore, Landbridge is unlikely to emerge as a replacement. At best, it could be an option, a contingency route with the appeal of a convenient fire exit.

There are regional comparisons. Singapore has invested decades in building an entire maritime services economy. Thailand would be challenging a leading incumbent with a multi-decade head start.

Malaysia’s ECRL is worth watching. The 665-kilometer railway linking Port Klang to Kota Bharu, a similar overland shortcut across the peninsula, is over 80% complete, with Chinese investment, and is already receiving trains. The project is ready to deliver, whilst Thailand continues its debates.

Thailand must weigh the political dynamics between global superpowers. The infrastructure may sit at the intersection of Chinese and American interests. How will the country navigate this balancing act?

Lessons From Panama

In the age of containerized shipping, Landbridge routes rarely replaced sea shipping continuously at scale. The closest comparison is the Panama Canal Railway, which runs alongside one of the world’s most vital inter-ocean waterways. Its capacity stands approximately 900,000 TEU annually, whilst the canal it runs beside moves multiples of that.

Thailand’s Landbridge sets its sights considerably higher. Project documents cite a long-term port capacity of up to 20 million TEU per port, for a combined total of 40 million TEU. Even its own assumptions concede that volumes will fall significantly short of that in the early years.

The core challenge of Landbridge is the double-handling. Cargo must be unloaded from one vessel, moved overland, and loaded onto another. When berthing time, rail scheduling, vessel coordination, and the delays of a two-port system are accounted for, the four-day time saving may not be worthwhile.

Contradictions Within the State

The most revealing case against Landbridge comes from within, as institutions cannot agree on whether it makes sense.

The Office of Transport and Traffic Policy and Planning, under the Ministry of Transport, previously reported an Economic Internal Rate of Return of 17.43%, projects 280,000 jobs, and estimates a four-day reduction in shipping time on certain routes. In contrast, prior research by the National Economic and Social Development Council (NESDC) reached the opposite conclusion: a negative NPV.

The Thailand Development Research Institute (TDRI) has also warned that megaprojects tend to fail due to excessive optimism and political pressure.

Another reality is that global trade may not thrive at the same levels seen decades prior; Thailand may be prepping for a former version of trade.

This raises the critical question of whether megaprojects in Thailand are vetted with factual evidence or simply greenlit on a whim.

Strategic Autonomy Or Strategic Capture

Every powerful nation reads this differently. For China, any credible alternative to Malacca carries strategic weight. For India, it could complement the country’s own eastward connectivity ambitions. For powers such as the US and Europe, a diversified logistics network in Southeast Asia aligns with their agenda of supply-chain resilience.

For Thailand, the singular prize is strategic autonomy. The risk? Strategic capture.

If a megaproject relies too heavily on a single investor, particularly one with its own national agenda, global powers will not view it as a neutral commercial corridor, thereby weakening Thailand’s position.

In a game of strategic diplomacy, Landbridge must remain Thailand’s project, not merely Thailand’s territory used to serve others’ ambitions.

The minimum conditions are a diversified investor base, transparent governance, and credible state guarantees that no single country can influence agendas.

The Existing Ecosystem: Assessing The Environmental Impact

For environmentalists, the key concern is the current ecosystem in which Landbridge will be constructed. The corridor runs through areas where fishing, tourism, forestry, and coastal ecosystems are already in place.

An assessment by Chulalongkorn University cites that the project risks encroaching on national forest reserves, the Khuan Mae Yai Mon wildlife sanctuary, and internationally protected wetlands at the mouth of the Kapeung Canal.

A strategic environmental assessment should thoroughly evaluate the project’s cumulative impact across the entire Southern Peninsula, including the industrial footprint that typically accompanies development of this scale.

For communities in Chumphorn and Ranong, it’s more than data points; it’s their livelihoods.

It’s important to assess whether Landbridge will uplift local communities or, rather, fulfill the interests of large capital.

The Looming Question

The key question is not whether Thailand can build Landbridge, but how the country can position itself in the new world order and upskill its own strategic infrastructure to shape the flow of global trade.

The concern is whether such ambitions are grounded in realities that can contend with geopolitical intricacies, market dynamics, and regional competitiveness.

Beneath it all lies an ambitious question. Landbridge is being debated as either the opportunity of a century or a national-scale risk. Thailand must thoroughly assess the megaproject’s value through a global lens, not lofty political ambitions.

THE STANDARD Global Edition is produced in collaboration with Bitesize Bangkok.

The post Landbridge: Thailand’s Gamble to Reroute Global Trade appeared first on THE STANDARD.

Durian has become the most talked-about fruit in Thailand this past week, sparking conversations in the media and on social platforms.

It began with a Live Video selling 100 Baht durian at the center, an initiative of Commerce Minister and Deputy Prime Minister Suphajee Suthumpun. At first glance, the discourse seems to revolve around the state, influencers, and durian farmers.

Step back, and this conflict is about something larger than price. It’s about the extent to which Thailand commands pricing authority over its export commodities and how much power it wields to negotiate on equal terms with relevant markets.

The Durian Context: Livestream as a mirror to our challenges

To understand the extent of this conflict, it’s important to factor in durian’s significance to Thailand’s export sector. 75% of Thailand’s durian supply is exported abroad, primarily to China. This means the fruit is one of Thailand’s most significant agricultural export commodities. In 2025, Thailand exported fresh durian to global markets worth 125,737 million baht, up 15.71% year-on-year. In January 2026 alone, fresh durian exports were valued at 10,316 million baht, up 67% from the same period in 2025. The Ministry of Commerce’s now-viral campaign began with an announcement to livestream the sale of 1 million durians at 100 baht per fruit. The Ministry stated that this year’s durian output is expected to reach 2 million tonnes, with Live Commerce introduced as a necessary marketing tool to support widespread distribution and prevent future oversupply.

The complexities of the campaign centered on how price signals were communicated and endorsed by the government in a sensitive market. The campaign, built and hyped around a low price point, sent immediate ripples through the market. Feedback from durian growers and operators, reported by BBC Thai, points to the core issue of ‘price signaling’ and ‘market credibility’. There are intricacies to export-grade durian that go beyond what’s shown on mobile screens.

The Live controversy is more than a viral dispute; it reveals a structural dilemma Thailand will continue to encounter in the new global trade order: how to grow without surrendering control over prices, standards, and terms.

Exports Are Growing, But At What Cost?

Step back from the durian controversy, and the broader export landscape reveals some contradictions. Whilst Thailand may be selling more to its trade partners, it isn’t fully capturing the opportunity.

A scan of Thailand’s March 2026 export figures appears strong. Exports grew 18.7% to US$35.16 billion, whilst Q1 exports expanded by 17.6% to US$96.17 billion. Industrial goods have fueled most of the export surge; notable sectors include electronics, electrical appliances, and verticals tied to AI infrastructure, data centers, and the global tech supply chain. Notably, mobile phones and related components saw a staggering 166.6% increase.

Now, this is where the figures reveal a more complex narrative. In the same period, imports expanded by 32.4% in Q1 alone, leaving Thailand with a trade deficit of almost US$9.47 billion in just three months of the year.

Thailand’s exports are showing positive trends; electronics and tech components are growing, but most of that growth is driven by assembly and processing, not design, product ownership, or home-grown innovation. Thailand imports the raw components of proprietary technology and advanced parts from elsewhere, assembles them, and exports the product.

Thailand is capturing the middle of the lucrative value chain, the labor and processing, but is missing out on the real value, as the intellectual property is owned elsewhere. It goes back to Thailand’s structural challenge, because whilst the country is still relevant in the new global supply chain, much of the growth in electronics is tied to multinational corporations and not Thai-grown companies.

Durian and electronics may be industries apart, but the challenges reflect the same fundamental question.

Section 301: Establishing Thailand’s Negotiation Power

Commerce Minister Suphajee’s upcoming trip to Washington, DC, from 13-14 May is an opportunity to establish Thailand’s role in the new global order.

The United States is seeking a new legal basis to replace existing tariff measures, set to expire on July 24. Separately, it is also planning to deploy Section 301 and other national security laws to reimpose more targeted tariffs.

This is the new operating reality of global trade. Countries seeking continued access to the United States market must now work within a playbook that is being actively rewritten. The question is how much leverage Thailand can realistically deploy to defend its prices and preserve the autonomy it will need to compete on its own terms.

Thailand will be tasked with providing concrete data to refute allegations of low capacity utilization rates and to demonstrate that this is the result of a market-driven decline in production, rather than state subsidies driving private-sector overinvestment.

The real challenge here is not to cave to demands that may encroach on Thailand’s sovereignty and strategic alliances. If Thailand accepts restrictions on who it can trade with or what agreements it can pursue, it trades a short-term relief for a long-term strategic constraint, one that will be harder to maneuver out of.

Thailand’s best-case scenario is maintaining the tariff ceiling at 19% and ensuring that the country is not penalized at a higher rate than ASEAN peers, thereby preserving its competitive edge and potentially enabling Thailand to capture market share once dominated by China.

Strategic Positioning: Establishing a Place Between the US and China

To successfully navigate the diplomatic chessboard, Thailand cannot afford to focus solely on the United States, because China remains a crucial partner to the country’s economy.

China is a key export destination for durian, a supplier of key components, and a major source of investment, whilst simultaneously competing with Thai businesses across key sectors such as manufacturing.

Thailand is therefore tasked with a delicate balancing act, actively leveraging its relationships with both Washington and Beijing to strengthen its position. Managing bilateral tension while pursuing Thailand’s own economic interests will require active and continuous diplomatic engagement.

The ASEAN dimension adds a layer of complexity; Thailand is also competing with regional neighbors, and whilst the 19% tariff rate is shared among peers, competitive strength is not. Vietnam offers unmatched manufacturing scale, and Indonesia holds a structural advantage in critical minerals. Thailand cannot rely on diplomatic goodwill alone.

To maintain a seat at the table, Thailand must comply with global standards through regulatory predictability, an origin-verification system, and a demonstrated ability and track record of moving up the value chain. It must work to demonstrate its competitive edge, or risk becoming a nonessential trade partner in the new global order.

Key Takeaway: Thailand Cannot Afford to Grow on Others’ Terms

Thailand has proven it can meet volumetric goals; export growth, trade partners, and headline expansions. Economic sovereignty, however, is the challenge. It needs to consistently maintain pricing power, capture value, and build credibility across the entire supply chain.

The new global trade order does not reward countries with the highest export figures; it rewards countries that provide real value through reliable production bases, delivering high-quality, traceable products, and are capable of upskilling themselves through the value chain.

Thailand’s real choice is not about which global superpower to favor. It is about whether the country can compete on its own terms or continue to participate in a game where someone else makes up the rules.

The post The Durian Dilemma: Can Thailand Escape the US-China Squeeze? appeared first on THE STANDARD.

Moody’s upgrade for Thailand is a signal, not a growth verdict

Welcome to The Standard Global Edition, an English-language newsletter making sense of Thailand at a pivotal moment. As the country navigates geopolitical uncertainty and external shocks alongside its own deeply rooted challenges, we’re here to explain what’s really at stake behind the headlines.

Behind The Rating: Stable, Not Strong

On Tuesday, Moody’s upgraded Thailand’s outlook from negative to stable. Whilst analysts may file this away as welcome news, a closer look between the lines indicates that it reflects fiscal resilience and macro stability rather than economic growth momentum.

Simply put, the rating confirms we have not deteriorated, but it’s not a complete vote of confidence on Thailand’s growth trajectory.

Moody’s report does not address Thailand’s growth story, but merely notes reduced risk factors and the return of a strong government coalition. Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul has secured the strongest grip on power seen in Thai politics in the past decade. A strong government will lead to policy continuation, the return of investors, and a stable fiscal position. All these are positive indicators, but the reality is that the modern world demands much more from an economy.

The market doesn’t necessarily reward stability and good enough; rather, it rewards those who thrive on new growth engines and proven resilience.

This is a point Thailand has yet to reach.

A Decade of Decline

Follow Thailand’s trajectory over the past decade, and a clear pattern persists. There is a slow and steady structural decline, and whilst the 1997 financial crisis is now a distant memory, the gradual erosion of growth and competitiveness is also significant. All of a sudden, Thailand has been labelled as the ‘Sick Man of Asia’ by global outlets.

Whilst the country remained in cruise control, regional peers doubled down on infrastructure investment, poured resources into upskilling, and drafted new regulations to drive innovation. As a result of complacency, Thailand has fallen behind its neighbors.

Limited investment, productivity, and static infrastructure mean that Thailand has struggled to keep up with the demands of a highly competitive and rapidly changing world order. As modern economies integrate emerging technologies such as Artificial Intelligence, navigate new energy sources, and adapt to new supply chain realities, countries that are unable to adapt and thrive in the new world order will be left behind.

Thailand at a crossroads

In the past, Thailand’s policy debates have often revolved around toolkits, from raising the Debt Ceiling to the current topic surrounding the Emergency Borrowing Decree, but not enough weight has been given to why and what for. The issue is not simply whether the government should or should not borrow, as the current global context demands fiscal support, but rather how it will be used.

Whilst quick wins such as the government’s populist Kon La Krueng Plus co-payment policy may boost short-term consumer spending, it will have a limited impact on Thailand’s competitiveness.

The question brings us back to Thailand’s fundamentals and the need for structural reform. Borrowing for short-term stimulus packages with flattering quick-win metrics will only go so far.

Borrowing for meaningful transformation will produce long-term gains. Utilizing resources to upskill professionals and regain competitiveness, investing in renewables, and supercharging new growth engines are all worthwhile investments.

Meanwhile, Thailand’s MTFF (Medium-Term Fiscal Framework) is sending a clear signal that Thailand needs to increase government revenue. Although politically challenging, continuous investment will not happen without an increase in state income.

The Government’s New Playbook is a Balancing Act

Finance Minister Dr. Ekniti Nitithanprapas is tasked with balancing short-term gains with laying a solid foundation for economic growth. His ‘4T’ policy framework (Target, Transition, Transform, Together) is an encouraging sign of the Ministry’s commitment to long-term reform. Each pillar carries tangible policy commitments: attracting FDI into high-value sectors such as wellness, promoting new industries such as digital and renewables, investing in smart grids, and advancing the Direct PPA initiative, which would allow businesses to procure renewable energy independently.

The government is doubling down on green initiatives, with an upcoming pilot ‘old car for new car’ trade-in policy that incentivizes owners to swap aging vehicles for hybrids and EVs, advancing the energy transition and tackling the stubborn PM2.5 problem. If executed well, it could meaningfully accelerate EV adoption in Thailand. This policy isn’t just about swapping cars; it will serve as an early, tangible litmus test of whether the government is serious about ‘Walking The Talk’.

In an exclusive interview with The Standard, Dr. Ekniti outlined the government’s fiscal strategy and plans for capital deployment, which consist of both targeted relief measures and structural investment, drawing a disciplined line between short-term assistance and laying the grounds for long-term infrastructure building.

As Thailand continues to deal with the fallout of geopolitical conflict and its impact on energy prices, an emergency borrowing decree with a THB500 billion debt ceiling is being mulled. Separately, the Ministry has identified up to THB100 billion in the non-critical FY2026 budget that can be redirected to provide relief, meaning the government won’t be overstretched.

Following the rollout of the FY2027 budget, the government plans to allocate two sets of funds, with up to THB200 billion for short-term relief. Another THB200 billion will be allocated to structural transformation, focusing on solar infrastructure, EV charging networks, and fleet modernization.

Placing energy reform at the center of investments highlights how the government has recognized just how exposed Thailand’s energy dependency really is. This is an encouraging signal towards reform.

Building on that, State-owned enterprises are being considered to anchor investment in critical infrastructure, such as smart grids, as Thailand looks to accelerate its energy transition without burdening public finances. Infrastructure funds are being considered, a fiscally responsible move that could also attract private capital.

Thailand’s fiscal position is being pulled in several directions at once. Supporting fragile groups, funding long-term infrastructure, managing debt ceiling constraints, and moving ahead with structural reform are equally important. The 2026 GDP forecast from relevant agencies has been revised downward to 1.6%, highlighting just how necessary deliberate allocation is for our economy.

The Structural Struggle

Thailand’s need for Structural Reform sits at the heart of it all. Whether the country is equipped to move forward and compete in the new world order depends almost entirely on political will.

Meaningful change is not about stimulus measures or borrowing decrees; it’s rewriting the rules that have kept systems and the status quo firmly in place for decades. Such rules have given way to bureaucratic hurdles and complex regulations, creating loopholes for corruption and monopolies.

If Thailand does not pursue structural reform, the country will remain constrained by the same limitations.

Moody’s is not concerned with Thailand’s debt level, but places a spotlight on our country’s growth potential. Thailand may not be in crisis, but a change in rating is not indicative of recovery. The real question is not simply about GDP expansion, but whether we will have enough political will to dismantle the structures and rules that have long suppressed our competitiveness.

THE STANDARD Global Edition is produced in collaboration with Bitesize Bangkok.

The post Thailand at a Crossroads: Still the Sick Man of Asia? appeared first on THE STANDARD.