Amid the escalating tensions along the Thailand-Cambodia border that have captured global attention, the emergency meeting of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) has become a crucial stage where every statement carries immense weight. Behind the scenes stands ‘Team Thailand,’ led by Cherdchai Chaivaivid, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Thailand to the United Nations.
THE STANDARD had the opportunity to conduct an exclusive interview with Ambassador Cherdchai Chaivaivid, led by Nattha Komolvadhin, News Director of THE STANDARD, to uncover the behind-the-scenes efforts—from the first moment the news broke, the diplomatic strategies laid out, the crafting of a statement that conveyed both facts and the heartfelt sentiments of the Thai people, to the untold atmosphere inside the meeting room.
Interview Transcript (Q&A)
Nattha Komolvadhin (THE STANDARD): Looking back to the very first moment you learned that Cambodia had requested an emergency UNSC meeting, how did Team Thailand react and prepare to respond?
Cherdchai Chaivaivid: I saw Cambodia’s letter at around 3 A.M. in New York. What struck me was how Cambodia managed to submit a letter to the UNSC President so quickly—within just 2-3 hours after the clash (July 24).
On our side, I had already discussed with the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs since 1 A.M. that night, and I received a clear directive that we had to prepare an immediate letter of explanation. The fact is, we were not the aggressors; we were on the receiving end. The most important thing was to gather all the information comprehensively first.
That morning, I immediately arranged a meeting with the UNSC President to brief him on the situation before Thailand’s official letter arrived a few hours later. As a result, both our letter and Cambodia’s reached the UNSC at nearly the same time. This eventually led to a closed-door session (Private Meeting), which everyone agreed was the most appropriate format under these circumstances, to prevent the briefings from turning into a public debate.
Nattha Komolvadhin: Some critics in Thailand have noted that we were ‘slow’ or ‘reactive’ compared to Cambodia in submitting our letter to the UNSC. What is your view?
Cherdchai Chaivaivid: I don’t think the issue of being slow or fast is the real point. The fact is, we couldn’t draft a letter within 10 minutes of the incident because we lacked the necessary information and had to verify the legal aspects. We had no prior knowledge that Cambodia would attack us. But I believe that our letter was comprehensive, precise, to the point, and based on the truth in every word. That naturally takes time.
On that day (July 24), we sent three letters (while Cambodia sent two). Our first letter was addressed to the UNSC President, the second was circulated among diplomats, and the third—which Cambodia did not do—was sent directly to the UN Secretary-General to protest Cambodia’s use of anti-personnel mines. We acted faster than usual procedures on this, and this letter opened the door for me to meet the Secretary-General to explain the situation and present evidence of the harm inflicted on Thai civilians that very same day. This was our proactive approach.
Nattha Komolvadhin: Regarding the six-point statement you delivered at the meeting, how did you strategize the wording, especially terms like ‘Inhuman’ or ‘Indiscriminate’? Was there any lobbying of member states beforehand?
Cherdchai Chaivaivid: Drafting the statement was a team effort between New York and Bangkok. We wanted it to be tight, accurate, and based solely on facts. I divided it into three key sections:
- Opening message: We had to make it clear that “the Cambodian people are not enemies of Thailand.” We are like brothers and sisters. We have always supported them, from the civil war era to their entry into ASEAN. Neighbors may have conflicts, but violence is unacceptable and we cannot tolerate it.
- Facts: We presented the facts of what happened and clarified two key points: first, we did not start the aggression, and second, Cambodia fired rockets indiscriminately. I emphasized the term ‘Indiscriminate’ four times to highlight that such actions violate international principles, resulting in civilian deaths, injuries, and homelessness. This led to our strongest condemnation of Cambodia’s actions.
- Thailand’s actions and demands: We explained that our response adhered to proper principles, did not affect the Preah Vihear Temple, and called on Cambodia to stop hostile actions and return to sincere dialogue.
You will notice that our demands differed from Cambodia’s, which sought UNSC intervention, a ceasefire resolution, and referral to the International Court of Justice. Not a single member state supported Cambodia’s proposals; all supported bilateral mechanisms and ASEAN frameworks.
Nattha Komolvadhin: What was the atmosphere inside the meeting room, and what impact did speaking second have?
Cherdchai Chaivaivid: The meeting began with the UN Secretary-General’s team providing an overview briefing—60-70% of which was based on the information we had already provided. Then Cambodia, as the requesting party, spoke first. I think it was good that they spoke first because I could hear their points and adjust my statement in real time to counter them.
After I finished speaking, the President opened the floor to all 15 member states, and every country stressed resolving the issue through bilateral and ASEAN mechanisms. Speaking second allowed our message to remain fresh in the minds of the audience. Most importantly, we decided to show images of the damage inflicted on Thai civilians during the meeting.
Nattha Komolvadhin: Was showing those images part of your original plan? Were there any particularly emotional moments?
Cherdchai Chaivaivid: I enlarged the images of the damage and held them up for everyone to see. As I was about to speak about the civilian impact, I repeated the Cambodian ambassador’s own words—“Don’t look away.” I told the meeting the same: “Don’t look away.” from the images I was about to show, because they depict the reality of Cambodia’s actions. At that moment, the room fell completely silent, and all eyes were on us.
There was one point I decided to bring up spontaneously, which was not in the prepared statement: the story of a mother and her two children who died in a convenience store. That moment shook me deeply, and I almost couldn’t continue speaking. It was an intensely emotional silence in the room, and I believe that feeling reached everyone there. Afterward, more than half of the member states included civilian impact in their statements following ours.
Nattha Komolvadhin: Cambodia often uses the narrative of being a “small country bullied by a bigger neighbor” in diplomacy. How do we convey Thailand’s narrative? And would you call this meeting a diplomatic victory for Thailand?
Cherdchai Chaivaivid: I don’t think we tie ourselves to the narrative of small versus big. Thailand may not be perfect, but I firmly believe that ‘Thailand never harbors ill intentions toward anyone’ and ‘Thailand has one of the kindest hearts in the world.’ We help others because we want to see a better world. When I spoke at the meeting, I didn’t have to force myself because every word was true—it reflected the genuine character of Thailand. I spoke as a Thai citizen, expressing the feelings of our entire nation.
As for winning or losing, I believe war and violence create only losers, never winners. From the first gunshot, both Thailand and Cambodia have already suffered losses. I don’t measure Thailand’s success at the meeting by whether a resolution was adopted or whose side it favored. What matters most to me is that Thailand did its duty to the fullest, and we succeeded in ensuring that every member in the room listened intently and believed in our united efforts to defend our country.
Nattha Komolvadhin: What’s next after this?
Cherdchai Chaivaivid: As we speak, the UN Secretary-General has issued a statement expressing concern and condemning the violence against civilians, which reflects the information we presented. This shows that he understood the situation from our briefing. As for the next steps, that will depend on various factors.
Photo Credit: Cherdchai Chaivaivid
