On a hot, tense day in Si Saket province, a Dutch man and his Thai wife stepped forward to tell a personal story that brought the abstract headlines down to human scale: they had fled cross-border violence, narrowly escaped attacks, and wanted the world — starting with the Netherlands’ ambassador — to know what they had seen and felt firsthand.
From the front line to the ambassador’s ear
The couple, who moved to Si Saket two years ago, met with the Dutch ambassador during an international delegation’s tour of border areas affected by recent clashes. The visit was led by Thailand’s Foreign Affairs Minister Maris Sangiamphongsa together with Royal Thai Army Spokesperson Winthai Suwaree, and included ambassadors and representatives from 33 countries and international organisations. The goal: show clear, on-the-ground evidence of damage and, crucially, alleged anti-personnel mines that Thai officials say were planted by the Cambodian military.
Standing before the envoy, the Dutch national — unnamed in media reports — and his wife, Phitsamai Angkana, described how the conflict has reshaped daily life for people in the border provinces. They recounted narrow escapes and the constant anxiety that comes with living where mortar fire, shelling and the threat of hidden explosives can change a routine day into a life-or-death scramble.
“We want the ambassador to know the truth from people who lived it,” Phitsamai told reporters. “We want the world to understand that we did not start this violence.” The couple emphasised their belief — echoed by Thai authorities — that Cambodia initiated the clashes and violated international rules governing the use of anti-personnel mines.
Showing is sometimes more persuasive than telling
Thailand’s delegation led visitors through fields, villages and cleared areas in Si Saket and nearby locations that officials say were impacted by anti-personnel mines. The aim was both legal and narrative: to build a factual record that could be shown to the international community and to underscore Thailand’s public position in the conflict. Bangkok has been pressing the case that Cambodia breached the Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention (the Ottawa Convention) by allegedly planting mines across border zones.
For the visiting diplomats, the tour was intended to move beyond maps and ministry statements — to let scars on the land and testimonies from residents do the talking. Photographs shared on official Facebook channels captured officials inspecting cratered fields and talking with residents, while the couple’s account added a powerful human voice to the evidence presented.
Photo via Facebook/ กระทรวงการต่างประเทศ Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Kingdom of Thailand
A brief meeting, a lasting impression
Media reports say the encounter with the Dutch ambassador was short — the envoy reportedly smiled and waved but offered no extended public comment at the time. Channel 7 noted the meeting’s brevity, but the couple’s testimony remains important: it places a European national’s lived experience at the centre of a conflict often described in geopolitical terms.
That human angle is vital in disputes where facts, accusations and international law intersect. When someone who moved to the region by choice finds themselves fleeing their home, it complicates narratives and underscores how civilians are often the primary victims.
Ceasefires, mines and ongoing risks
Officials say that no major or violent clashes have erupted since the signing of the third ceasefire agreement — a hopeful sign — but dangers persist. On August 12, a soldier in Surin province stepped on a landmine and lost a leg, a stark reminder that explosive remnants of conflict remain deadly even when shooting stops. Thailand is urging Cambodia to clear all remaining landmines in accordance with the Ottawa Convention, but as of the latest reports there is no formal agreement on demining operations.
Clearing mines is painstaking, expensive and sometimes dangerous work, but advocates stress it’s non-negotiable for restoring safety to border communities. Until a coordinated demining effort is in place, farmers, children and soldiers will remain at risk — and more personal stories like that of the Dutch-Thai couple are likely to emerge.
What comes next?
The international delegation’s tour was designed to generate a shared understanding among foreign missions and international organisations — a step toward building pressure for a diplomatic solution and adherence to international law. Whether that pressure will translate into concrete action, like a joint demining plan or stricter accountability measures, is still unclear.
For now the message from the border is painfully simple: ordinary people are living in the shadow of mines and mortar fire, and they want their stories heard. The Dutch man and Phitsamai travelled from their home to tell one such story — a reminder that behind news bulletins and government statements are families trying to live, work and raise children in places that increasingly feel less like home and more like a contested front line.
Photo via Facebook/ มาเด้อกินข้าว Channel 7
We went to the ambassador because people need to hear the truth, not just press releases. Living with the constant fear of mines changed our lives overnight. I hope seeing diplomats in the fields pushes for real demining.
As the Dutch husband who was there, I can confirm their fear felt real and immediate; it wasn’t staged. Ambassadors can smile in public, but the people on the ground left shaken. We want action, not just photographs.
The delegation’s goal was to build a factual record and draw global attention to violations of the Ottawa Convention. We invited international partners to witness the evidence themselves. Legal pressure and coordinated demining are now urgent priorities.
Thank you for coming, Minister, but words have to turn into agreements on clearing mines. Farmers can’t go back to their fields until it’s safe. Please keep the pressure on Cambodia and the international community.
As a Dutch diplomat observing from afar, I felt uncomfortable with the short public encounter. Diplomacy often requires silence in public, but survivors deserve more engagement. We must balance evidence collection with humanitarian follow-up.
Why is the ambassador smiling then? That looks like indifference to me. If it’s real, act like it.
Photographs of cratered fields are dramatic, but who will verify the origin of mines? I’m skeptical until independent investigators inspect the sites. Accusations between countries escalate quickly without transparent proof.
Skepticism is healthy, Larry, but independent experts have been invited. Diplomats must ensure access and transparency while supporting victims and demining efforts. Political pressure is sometimes the only tool to start that work.
Legally, if antipersonnel mines were placed across borders deliberately, that’s a serious breach of international humanitarian law. Documentation from credible observers should be compiled for potential proceedings. However, demining is a humanitarian necessity regardless of fault.
So are we talking war crimes or muddy border skirmishes? The legal route sounds long and slow, while people are getting hurt now. Prioritize clearing mines immediately.
Clearing costs money and time; who pays for it, Dr. Chen? If Cambodia refuses, what then? Anger is understandable but solutions need funding and political will.
Both paths are necessary: immediate humanitarian demining funded by international donors and longer-term legal accountability. Funding mechanisms exist but require donor coordination and security guarantees.
I till land near borders and it’s terrifying to think mines might be hidden in my fields. Governments talk, people pay with limbs and lives. Somebody should pay for demining and wake up to the farmers’ reality.
As a local, I know the cost of waiting; children play where mines might be under dirt. I’d rather international teams come in tomorrow. Blame aside, clear the danger first.
I don’t get why countries can’t work together on this. Mines aren’t political when kids are at risk, right? Why make it complicated?
Tom, it’s complicated because of sovereignty, blame, and resources. But you’re right—we need joint action and fast, not endless finger-pointing.
If international teams come without clear agreements, security might get worse. We need a plan that protects deminers and villagers at the same time.
I appreciated that the embassy at least listened, but there was no public commitment from the ambassador. A wave and a smile felt hollow when people told us about lost limbs. I hope Dutch foreign policy will pressure for demining and support for victims.
As a humanitarian worker, I saw similar token encounters elsewhere; they rarely lead to real funding. Donor fatigue and geopolitics get in the way. We need NGOs and states to coordinate urgently.
Nadia, agreed — NGOs can act faster but need diplomatic cover for safety and funding. Without diplomatic leverage, access for demining teams might be blocked.
Why can’t there be a neutral third party to clear mines and verify who did what? The accusations just make it worse for civilians. Somebody smart should create a neutral demining treaty for border zones.
A neutral treaty sounds ideal, but states rarely cede control at borders. Historical mistrust fuels refusal to let outsiders in. Still, regional organizations could mediate if pressured.
We need pressure then. Pressure from other countries and the public. Let people’s stories like Phitsamai’s be the spark for that pressure.
The article highlights the power of personal testimony layered onto geopolitical disputes. Oral histories often sway international opinion more than maps. Yet we must guard against using refugees’ trauma as political props.
That’s a fair academic point, Li Wei, but when someone’s life is ruined by a mine, I don’t think they care if they’re a ‘prop’ or not. They just want the danger gone and compensation.
Absolutely, Benito; victims need aid and justice. My warning is only that advocates should avoid instrumentalizing individuals for narrow political gains while promising unrealistic outcomes.
Sure, but sometimes politics is the only lever to get money to clear mines. Better imperfect politics than no action at all.
I am scared the fields I knew as a child are now danger zones, and no one tells us when it’s safe. Adults keep saying treaties, but my friends can’t play. It’s unfair.
Your fear is exactly why we went to the ambassador, ต้น; children should be able to play without risking their lives. Keep speaking up and telling adults this is urgent and personal.
I will tell my teacher and neighbors. Maybe if grown-ups see our fear, they will do something faster.
I worry this will become another geopolitical talking point and then die down. Donor agendas shift and attention moves elsewhere. We need binding regional funds for demining that aren’t subject to media cycles.
K., creating a standing regional fund is politically tough but worth exploring. It would need contributions and governance that both sides trust, which is the real barrier.
Trust is precisely the problem, Marieke, but perhaps transparent oversight with neutral trustees could work. Otherwise civilians remain at risk forever.
Transparent oversight and inclusion of local voices could increase legitimacy, yes. The next step is getting governments to agree to the concept in writing.
I’ve coordinated emergency responses; mines complicate aid because access is dangerous. We can provide psychosocial support and immediate medical help, but we can’t clear entire landscapes alone. International cooperation is mandatory.
Until someone with real power enforces a plan, statements are empty. Sanctions? Incentives? Threats of legal action? Something concrete has to happen. Civilians deserve safety, not diplomacy theater.
There is also a frustration locally that investigations feel one-sided. If Cambodia denies it, you’ll get a stalemate. Locals want independent teams now, not endless diplomatic blame games.
International law takes time and resources; meanwhile, the only real measure is demining teams on the ground with cross-border agreement. I remain skeptical of swift solutions but hopeful that pressure can move things.
Why isn’t ASEAN stepping in with a neutral clearing mission? Regional bodies should resolve regional problems. If they won’t, outside actors should fund and protect humanitarian demining.
Sounds like people are waiting for a miracle. Keep showing diplomats the reality and maybe one day they’ll stop waving and start working. Public shaming sometimes pushes action, sadly.
I want to add that compensation mechanisms for victims should be considered alongside demining, otherwise survivors are left with lifelong costs. Legal routes can help fund reparations if proven responsible.
Thailand remains committed to clarifying facts and protecting citizens. We call for Cambodia’s cooperation in demining and invite international observers to verify findings. Our priority is civilian safety.
One more thought: independent forensic teams and satellite imagery could help assign responsibility with less political noise. Transparency helps everyone, even accused states, by providing verifiable truth.