On December 22, 2025, Thai military engineers demolished a nine-meter-tall statue of Lord Vishnu near the Thailand-Cambodia border in the Chong An Ma area of Ubon Ratchathani province. Thailand asserts this action was an assertion of sovereignty over disputed territory, claiming the statue was erected by Cambodian forces in 2013 in violation of a joint-border agreement prohibiting permanent structures in disputed zones. Cambodia condemns the act as destructive to ancient temples and statues revered by both Buddhist and Hindu followers, viewing it as a violation of their sovereignty and cultural heritage.
Thai officials maintain the demolition was not religiously motivated but purely territorial, emphasizing that both nations share historical ties to Hinduism and Buddhism is the predominant religion in both. Reports indicate other non-Hindu structures associated with Cambodian units have also been destroyed in the broader conflict, suggesting a focus on military and territorial control.
A History of Disputed Borders and Rulings
The incident is a flashpoint in a long-standing border dispute between Thailand and Cambodia, originating from colonial-era mapping and the Franco-Siamese treaties of 1904 and 1907. Key issues include discrepancies between the 1904 treaty’s watershed line and a subsequent French map in 1907, which controversially placed the Preah Vihear temple on the Cambodian side.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled in 1962 that Preah Vihear belonged to Cambodia, a decision reaffirmed in 2013. However, ambiguity remains regarding the precise status of surrounding territories, including the 4.6 square kilometers around Preah Vihear, fueling nationalist sentiments and recurrent clashes.
Cultural Heritage Under Fire: Temples as Casualties
Cultural heritage sites, including ancient Hindu temples, have repeatedly been casualties of this conflict. The 11th-century Preah Vihear Temple, a UNESCO World Heritage site, has suffered severe structural damage from bombing and airstrikes, with reports from 2008-2011 and 2025 detailing damage to gopuras, the central cella, and other architectural elements. Cambodian authorities have presented evidence of Thai F-16 fighter jets, MK-82 bombs, 155mm shells, and cluster munitions causing fractures and collapses. Ta Krabey temple was also reported to have been attacked and devastated by the Thai military in December 2025. UNESCO has expressed deep concern, urging both nations to protect these sites and reminding them of their obligations under international law, including the 1954 Hague Convention and the 1972 World Heritage Convention.
Distinguishing Motivations: Bamiyan Buddhas vs. Vishnu Statue
The destruction of the Vishnu statue has drawn comparisons to the Taliban’s demolition of the Bamiyan Buddhas in 2001. However, a critical distinction lies in their motivations. The Taliban’s actions were driven by an extremist ideological interpretation of Islam, aiming to destroy pre-Islamic artifacts deemed “idolatrous.” In contrast, Thailand’s actions are officially attributed to a geopolitical territorial dispute, with the stated goal of asserting sovereignty and removing structures erected by Cambodian forces in claimed areas. While the outcomes are tragic, the underlying drivers are presented as fundamentally different: ideological cleansing versus a consequence of a border dispute.
International Reactions and the Call for Diplomacy
International reactions have included significant anger and shock from Hindu communities online, particularly in India, with calls for intervention. India’s Ministry of External Affairs has voiced concern over damage to Preah Vihear and urged dialogue. The ongoing conflict underscores the need for diplomatic resolution, with both nations obligated under international law to protect cultural heritage. UNESCO continues to advocate for adherence to conventions and peaceful resolution, emphasizing that shared heritage should be a bridge, not a battleground. The events highlight how geopolitical disputes can inflict irreparable harm on human history and culture, with a nuanced understanding pointing to sovereignty claims as the root cause, demanding diplomatic rather than purely moralistic condemnation.
About the Author
