Thailand’s Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Sihasak Phuangketkeow has warned that the rules-based international order is weakening, arguing that countries must rebuild multilateral cooperation rather than rely on unilateral action.
In an interview in Bangkok, Sihasak described Thailand as a “geopolitically safe zone” and outlined how the country is balancing relations with the United States and China, while seeking stability through ASEAN diplomacy. His comments offer wider insight into current international affairs and the pressures facing countries caught between competing major powers.
Thailand’s message on the changing international order
Sihasak said the international system is facing a period of serious strain. In his view, the response should be a renewed commitment to multilateralism, because no country can address major global challenges alone.
That message comes as strategic competition between Washington and Beijing increasingly shapes diplomacy, trade, investment and security across Asia. Thailand has longstanding relationships with both powers, creating a need for careful diplomacy rather than a straightforward alignment with either side.
The foreign minister said Thailand asks its partners not to force it to choose between them. However, he also stressed that avoiding formal alignment does not necessarily mean adopting neutrality, particularly when neutrality may not serve a country’s interests.
Why Thailand is balancing the United States and China
Thailand’s approach reflects the country’s economic and security interests. China has become an important investor, including through growing electric-vehicle investment, while the United States remains significant to regional security arrangements.
Maintaining working relations with both countries allows Thailand to protect its room for manoeuvre. It also reflects the wider position of many countries in Southeast Asia, which seek economic opportunities from China while retaining strong security and diplomatic links with the United States.
- China is an important source of investment in Thailand, including in electric-vehicle manufacturing.
- The United States continues to play a major role in regional security.
- Thailand wants to avoid being pressured into choosing one strategic partner over the other.
- Bangkok sees peace and stability as central to its long-term national interests.
ASEAN’s role in regional stability
The minister also highlighted the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, or ASEAN, as a key platform for managing tensions and supporting regional stability. ASEAN brings together countries with different political systems, security priorities and relationships with the major powers.
For Thailand, the organisation provides a diplomatic framework through which regional governments can maintain dialogue and reduce the risk of confrontation. Its importance extends beyond economics, covering political cooperation, security, connectivity and crisis management.
Sihasak said Thailand was prepared to rebuild relations with Cambodia. He also supported a gradual return to regional discussions involving Myanmar, signalling a preference for dialogue and incremental engagement rather than abrupt diplomatic moves.
Thailand’s regional priorities
The foreign minister’s comments point to three broad priorities for Thai diplomacy:
- Preserving strategic flexibility: Thailand wants productive ties with both the United States and China without being compelled to take sides.
- Supporting ASEAN-led engagement: Bangkok sees regional diplomacy as essential to maintaining stability across Southeast Asia.
- Rebuilding neighbouring relationships: Thailand is open to restoring ties with Cambodia and supports a gradual approach to talks on Myanmar.
Why the remarks matter beyond Southeast Asia
The interview reflects a broader debate about the future of international cooperation. Countries across different regions are facing pressure to align with competing powers, while also dealing with challenges that require collective responses, including conflict, economic uncertainty, supply-chain disruption and climate risks.
Thailand’s position illustrates why middle powers often resist binary choices. Economic links, security partnerships and regional diplomacy do not always point in the same direction. Governments may therefore seek flexible relationships that allow them to cooperate with different partners on different issues.
The remarks are also relevant to European foreign policy. The European Union has traditionally presented multilateralism, international law and rules-based cooperation as central principles of its external relations. Developments in Asia affect European interests in trade, investment, supply chains, maritime security and relations with both China and the United States.
What happens next for Thailand’s diplomacy?
Thailand’s immediate focus is likely to remain on preserving stability, strengthening ASEAN engagement and maintaining balanced relations with its major partners. The approach described by Sihasak does not remove the tensions created by US-China competition, but it seeks to prevent those tensions from limiting Thailand’s diplomatic choices.
Any progress with Cambodia or Myanmar will depend on further regional engagement and the willingness of the countries involved to participate in talks. The minister’s emphasis on gradual diplomacy suggests that Bangkok favours sustained dialogue over sudden or confrontational policy changes.
Conclusion
Thailand’s foreign minister has used the language of multilateralism to describe a central challenge in today’s international affairs: how countries can protect their interests while the wider rules-based order comes under pressure. By maintaining relations with both Washington and Beijing and placing ASEAN at the centre of its regional strategy, Thailand is seeking flexibility, stability and diplomatic space in an increasingly competitive world.