SURIN, THAILAND – Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul pledged that Thailand would build a border wall with Cambodia if his party won the upcoming election.
Election pledge after fresh border clashes
During a visit to the contested frontier area in Surin province, Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul announced that the wall project would go ahead only if his party secured victory. Skirmishes had taken place as recently as Saturday around the Ta Kwai temple and Hill 350.
“The plan to build a wall along the Thai-Cambodian border will remain in place if we win the election.”
said Anutin, adding that security forces would be reinforced.
Defence budget to fund multi-billion project
According to Anutin, financing for the large-scale construction would come mainly from the defence budget. He described the barrier as a measure for national security. The estimated cost was about seven million baht per kilometre (around 175,000 euros) for the wall alone, with additional spending required for a control road behind it.
Step-by-step construction in uncontested zones
The Thai armed forces had drawn up a phased plan for the border barrier. Initial segments were to be built in uncontroversial areas where there was no active boundary dispute. The district of Pong Nam Ron in Chanthaburi province was viewed as the likely starting point, with more sensitive stretches to follow later.
Royal initiative and security rationale
The project originated from an initiative by Her Royal Highness Princess Chulabhorn. In October, the army had pledged to push ahead with construction of a “Thai-Cambodian border wall.” The stated aim was to improve the safety of soldiers and civilians in frontier regions, with the latest exchanges of fire cited as evidence of urgency.
Foreign policy signal ahead of February 8 vote
With this announcement, Anutin sent a clear foreign and security policy message in the election campaign. The Bhumjaithai Party positioned itself as a guarantor of strength and protection of national borders. Whether the massive project would ever be realised now depended solely on the outcome of the February 8 election, a decision that could shape relations with neighbouring Cambodia for years.
Wall as protection or political symbol?
Supporters and critics alike viewed a border wall as a tool of control, deterrence and state power. At the same time, it remained expensive, symbolically charged and politically contentious. The debate raised the question of whether concrete could truly deliver security, or merely replace diplomacy with a visible show of force.