Calls for a boycott of Thai products and companies in Cambodia: Issues, benefits and risks of an economic and diplomatic rift

For several months, tensions have been running high between Cambodia and Thailand, two geopolitical neighbours marked as much by a disputed border as by economic interdependence. The armed conflict has reignited deep historical resentments and triggered a series of retaliatory measures between the two countries.

PTT, the Thai energy giant, is one of the most established brands in Cambodia. With around 186 petrol stations across the country, PTT has a strong presence in fuel distribution.

Among these, Cambodia has called for a massive boycott of Thai products and companies, an economic and symbolic strategy that raises questions about its motivations, advantages and potential dangers.

Context and relevance of the boycott

This campaign of economic ostracism comes amid a serious diplomatic crisis. The border dispute between Phnom Penh and Bangkok, inherited from the imperfect colonial agreements drawn up by France, escalated into a military confrontation in May 2025, leading to an immediate deterioration in relations. In response to strict measures imposed by Thailand at border crossings, penalising thousands of Cambodian cross-border workers, Phnom Penh decided to suspend imports of Thai fruit, vegetables, fuel and other products.

Calls for a broader boycott targeted consumer goods, including electronics and cosmetics, as well as Thai pop culture, going so far as to ban the broadcast of TV series and films from its neighbour.

This boycott is therefore a political move aimed at pressuring Thailand to review its coercive stance, while asserting Cambodia's national sovereignty and dignity at a time of heightened tensions. Symbolically, it also serves to strengthen patriotic sentiment and internal solidarity in a context marked by mass demonstrations in support of the government and rising nationalist rhetoric.

7-Eleven, operated by Thai company CP All (Cambodia) Co Ltd, is a major Thai brand in Cambodia. 7-Eleven stores are expanding in several cities, including Phnom Penh, Sihanoukville and Siem Reap, with a strategy that includes promoting products from small and medium-sized Cambodian businesses, which account for 50% of their stock

Potential benefits of the boycott

Economically, the boycott could encourage consumption of local products and alternative imports, thereby reducing dependence on Thai goods, which were previously ubiquitous on the Cambodian market. This could stimulate domestic industries, particularly agriculture, while promoting trade partnerships with other countries, both domestic and international.

Prime Minister Hun Manet's message that Cambodia is capable of meeting its energy and food needs from other sources highlights this desire for economic independence.

Politically, this move acts as a bargaining chip and diplomatic pressure to secure the full reopening of border crossings and the lifting of restrictions imposed by Bangkok. The boycott thus acts as a strategic defence tool without direct recourse to military confrontation and with a concrete impact on bilateral trade channels.

Risks and limitations of the strategy

However, the approach is not without its drawbacks. The interruption of cross-border trade is weakening the economies of both countries. For Cambodia, possible food price rises and disruption to essential supplies could affect local consumption and social stability. The country's historical dependence on fuel, 30% of which previously came from Thailand, exposes it to tensions in this strategic sector, despite government assurances.

For Thailand, the denial of access to an important market such as Cambodia represents a significant economic loss, particularly for tropical fruit farmers and exporters. On a cultural level, the boycott is accompanied by a loss of influence in a region closely linked by long-standing human and social exchanges. Furthermore, nationalist and economic escalation could undermine political stability in both countries, fuelling resentment and mistrust at a time when international calls for restraint are urging dialogue.

Finally, on a human level, the crisis has triggered a significant exodus of Cambodian workers employed in Thailand, further destabilising the regional socio-economic dynamic and exacerbating inter-community tensions.

Outlook

The boycott of Thai products in Cambodia is part of a complex and painful geopolitical crisis, in which territorial, identity, economic and diplomatic issues are intertwined. While it gives Phnom Penh leverage and a means of rallying public opinion to a patriotic cause, it is not without economic, social and political risks that could prolong and deepen the collateral damage of a conflict that is both border-related and multidimensional.

To overcome this impasse, the path of enhanced bilateral dialogue and ASEAN regional mediation seems to be the only viable option. Expanding economic cooperation and restoring trade while ensuring respect for sovereignty would help reconcile the interests of both nations and ease tensions for the future.

This crisis highlights the fragility of ties between close neighbours with deep historical and economic ties, and the crucial importance of prudent and constructive diplomacy for peace and development in this strategic region of Southeast Asia.