JIC Chief: Protecting National Interest Need Not Foster Hatred
Thailand's JIC chief says protecting national interests doesn't require fostering hatred toward neighbors, arguing that security measures must balance threats with impacts on border residents' livelihoods and people's wellbeing.
The director of the Thailand-Cambodia Information Center emphasized that national interest must come first and security must not abandon the people, asserting that protecting national interest does not require creating animosity.
On September 22, 2024, Lieutenant General Praphas Saonthed, director of the Thailand-Cambodia Information Center (JIC), addressed ongoing debate about patriotism and nationalism, and proposals to close or downgrade relations with neighboring countries. He stated that all state measures must demonstrate they can genuinely protect Thailand's and its people's interests, based on facts, law, threat assessment, and both short and long-term national interests.
Praphas explained that national interest extends beyond military security to include sovereignty, public safety, economy, border trade, and Thailand's standing and credibility in the international community.
He noted that border checkpoints are security tools. If data shows opening them creates risks to lives, military strength, or sovereignty, the state may implement measures ranging from increased inspections and time restrictions to closure. However, every measure must consider its purpose, effectiveness, who is affected, and how to adjust when circumstances change.
"The question should not be simply 'open or close,' but rather 'which measures best protect Thailand while creating the least unnecessary burden on the people," Praphas said.
He added that restricting or closing borders affects businesses, farmers, workers, and border residents—many of whom are not adversaries or responsible for problems. Border residents' lives depend on trade, travel, work, and community relationships. Border restrictions therefore affect not just trade figures but the real daily income and livelihoods of ordinary people.
Putting national interest first does not mean ignoring public hardship, as people's wellbeing is part of national interest, he explained. If security measures are necessary, the state should assess impacts and provide relief or remedies in parallel. People should not be forced to choose between safety and survival; the state's duty is to provide both as much as possible.
Regarding the concept that security must come before prosperity, Praphas noted that if there are threats to lives or sovereignty, security carries great weight. But strategically, security and economics should not be treated as mutually exclusive, since a strong economy is an element of national security.
On downgrading relations with neighboring countries, the state has multiple tools—diplomacy, military, trade, border mechanisms, and crisis communication channels—all requiring clear objectives and impact assessment. "We may distrust certain actions by another party, but we should not turn that distrust into hatred toward another country's people."
Praphas stressed that every measure should answer: What does Thailand gain? Are people safer? Is sovereignty and national interest protected? And can it be justified by law and to the international community? He reaffirmed principles for handling the Thailand-Cambodia situation: firm on sovereignty and public safety, while maintaining dialogue channels, using existing mechanisms, and acting on facts and law.
"Restraint is not weakness. Negotiation is not surrender. Protecting national interest need not create hatred. The principle is: put national interest first, use facts," he concluded.
