Amb. Pou Sothirak, Distinguished Senior Advisor to CCRS, recently gave an interview to a Thai digital media, The 101 World, regarding MOU2001:
On this issue, The 101 World also had the opportunity to interview Pou Sothirak, Senior Advisor to the Cambodia Center for Regional Studies, during his participation in the Track 1.5 ASEAN Community Building Forum organized by the Foreign Policy Community of Indonesia (FPCI) in Cebu today (May 7, 2026), parallel to the ASEAN Summit. Sothirak commented that Thailand’s tearing up of MOU44 and the possibility of both countries entering UNCLOS compulsory conciliation might not be a good path.
“I think the fact that this matter is entering a legal process again is not a good sign,” Sothirak said, adding that this path could lead to several consequences for both sides.
“In terms of diplomatic strategy, the cancellation of this MOU will cause deeper mistrust between the two sides because the 2001 MOU (MOU44) was the only bilateral framework in force between the two governments, expressing the desire to develop the joint area alongside joint boundary demarcation within the Overlapping Claims Area (OCA). Therefore, without this bilateral relationship, I think diplomatic relations between the two countries will worsen,” Sothirak said.
“It should not be seen as a good way because it will increase tension and promote mistrust, and it will pull Cambodia and Thailand further apart during this very important time,” Sothirak elaborated.
Beyond diplomatic impacts, Sothirak pointed out that “Economic costs also occur, especially in terms of energy security. In a time when both countries are struggling and need to find ways to reduce energy security risks, the longer it takes before we can drill for resources under the overlapping area, the more both sides have to bear increasing energy insecurity. It also affects other downstream businesses, such as petrochemicals and others, that lose opportunities because of this.”
Sothirak suggested that a better way might be to have a new version of a bilateral agreement with similar intent to the original MOU44 but improved.
“I hope that under the leadership and chairmanship of the Philippines, Cambodia and Thailand can agree and find a good solution that helps bridge gaps, reduce misunderstandings, and find a way that both sides can agree on regarding the utilization of resources in the overlapping area. If eventually the two countries can develop a new agreement that is similar and has the same intent as MOU44, we can have hope that friendly relations will occur and resource sharing will happen,” Sothirak said.
Although Sothirak has expectations for the Philippines’ role, he believes it would be best if Thailand and Cambodia could negotiate and mediate between the two nations themselves.
“If Thailand and Cambodia can mediate themselves without a third party, including ASEAN, acting as a mediator, it would show the world that both neighboring countries have enough maturity to resolve conflicts and disagreements between them, which ultimately would not cause regional instability,” Sothirak said.
The full article of The 101 World on this issue in Thai is accessible in this link: https://www.the101.world/thailand-cambodia-philippines-tripartite-meeting/?fbclid=IwY2xjawR1955leHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETFjRm1pVHpMNENNang2dDNqc3J0YwZhcHBfaWQQMjIyMDM5MTc4ODIwMDg5MgABHrVmSJ24AP_MNgviqn3zxTi05hLIJ4khQw_PCkmwnAOS1tejMhGZgT4E6qpI_aem_gesnspErFN-UWMXJG7xGmQ
The English translated version of this article is available in this link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yzRR9O8ItAaX8e0F5AU_dsotRyaqXEv6/view?fbclid=IwY2xjawR198RleHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETFjRm1pVHpMNENNang2dDNqc3J0YwZhcHBfaWQQMjIyMDM5MTc4ODIwMDg5MgABHmShA5dUW3UzQjpBEB9vldXLtoNCOphFHkrr2heh_fUQQeEXCKpaHDZJ7spI_aem_lv1KglNeknMyNlFUOCcWqg