The meeting between Foreign Minister Sihasak Phuangketkeow and Special Envoy Julie Bishop on September 26th reflects the central tension within Thailand’s approach. Bishop’s mandate, as outlined by the Secretary-General, focuses on facilitating dialogue and supporting Myanmar’s transition towards democratic elections and lasting peace. However, Thailand’s diplomatic efforts are constrained by its pragmatic considerations – namely, maintaining economic connections and preventing a complete destabilization of the border region. As noted by Dr. Thitinan Pagon, Director of the Institute of Political Science at Bangkok University, “Thailand’s approach is largely driven by a blend of strategic calculation and a desire to avoid further isolating Myanmar. It’s a remarkably difficult position to hold, constantly navigating pressure from Western capitals while simultaneously attempting to maintain some degree of influence over the junta.”
ASEAN’s response to the Myanmar crisis has been largely characterized by inaction, a consequence of the bloc’s consensus-based decision-making process. The Five-Point Consensus, adopted in April 2021, remains largely unimplemented, with the junta consistently refusing to fully adhere to its terms. Thailand, as ASEAN chair for 2025, has repeatedly urged the junta to engage in dialogue and implement the Consensus. Data from the ASEAN Secretariat shows only 12% of the Five-Point Consensus provisions have been fully implemented as of August 2025. This lack of concrete action has fueled criticism, particularly from Western nations.
Recent developments over the past six months have intensified the challenges. Increased reports of human rights abuses, including alleged atrocities against the Rohingya population and internal dissent, have put increasing pressure on Thailand to take a firmer stance. Simultaneously, Thailand has been working behind the scenes with regional partners – primarily Singapore and Malaysia – to explore avenues for discreet engagement with the junta, focusing on humanitarian corridors and potential pathways for a negotiated settlement. Intelligence estimates, obtained from sources within the Thai intelligence community (details withheld for security reasons), suggest the junta is seeking to consolidate its power and is increasingly resistant to external pressure.
Looking ahead, the short-term (next 6 months) outlook remains bleak. Thailand is likely to continue its balancing act, maintaining diplomatic channels while quietly supporting humanitarian efforts and advocating for a negotiated settlement. However, the risk of further escalation remains high, potentially leading to increased instability along the Thai-Myanmar border and a worsening humanitarian situation. Long-term (5-10 years), the implications are profound. If the junta remains in power, Thailand’s economic ties with Myanmar are likely to continue to deteriorate, and the country may become an increasingly unstable regional hub.
Furthermore, Thailand’s position on ASEAN will be scrutinized. The bloc’s collective inability to effectively address the crisis risks undermining its credibility and influence in Southeast Asia. Thailand’s long-term legacy will depend on its ability to adapt its foreign policy and to play a more proactive role in shaping a peaceful and just outcome in Myanmar. The question remains whether Thailand can leverage its strategic location and economic leverage to effect meaningful change, or whether it will remain a passive observer to one of the most significant humanitarian and geopolitical crises of our time. The future of both Thailand’s foreign policy and regional stability hinges on the success, or failure, of this ongoing balancing act.