Motorists navigate floodwaters about 70cm deep for a second day on Monday, due to the overflowing Chao Phraya River, on the inbound side of Nakhon In Road in Bang Kruai district of Nonthaburi. Photo by Pattarapong Chatpattarasill
Many large dams and reservoirs across Thailand are currently close to or exceeding their full water storage capacities due to continuous rainfall, the Royal Irrigation Department (RID) announced on Monday.
There are among 23 dams and reservoirs nationwide where water storage has reached between 81% and more than 100% capacity, prompting the department to regulate discharges to maintain safety and manage downstreamflow.
According to the Meteorological Department, rainfall across northern Thailand has decreased, although some thunderstorms are still expected. Residents are advised to remain on alert, while farmers are urged to take precautions against possible damage to their crops.
Meanwhile, Typhoon Fung-wong, which struck the Philippines on Sunday, was expected to move towards the upper South China Sea and the Taiwan Strait over the next two days and not affect Thailand.
In response to rising water levels, the Chao Phraya Dam in Chai Nat province on Monday increased its discharge rate to 2,900 cubic metres per second, resulting in a noticeable rise in downstream water levels.
Sukru Yusuf Onganer, a 22-year-old German, drives his motorcycle past another vehicle on a road on Koh Phangan in Surat Thani on Sunday. (Photo: Koh Phangan Tourist Police)
A German man arrested for reckless driving on Koh Phangan has been found to be on a criminal wanted list in his home country, police said.
Police said on Monday that Sukru Yusuf Onganer, 22, was arrested at a motorcycle wash shop on Sunday for riding a bike without a licence plate and causing a public disturbance with excessive noise.
The arrest followed complaints from residents about his dangerous driving, prompting officers to track down the motorbike, which was later found being cleaned at the shop.
Police records revealed that Mr Onganer is wanted by German authorities on extortion charges, though details of the case and the date he entered Thailand remain unclear.
He has been charged with reckless driving at Koh Phangan police station.
Police have contacted German authorities about his extradition.
Sukru Yusuf Onganer, a 22-year-old German, drives his motorcycle past another vehicle on a road on Koh Phangan in Surat Thani on Sunday. (Photo: Koh Phangan Tourist Police)
A German man arrested for reckless driving on Koh Phangan has been found to be on a criminal wanted list in his home country, police said.
Police said on Monday that Sukru Yusuf Onganer, 22, was arrested at a motorcycle wash shop on Sunday for riding a bike without a licence plate and causing a public disturbance with excessive noise.
The arrest followed complaints from residents about his dangerous driving, prompting officers to track down the motorbike, which was later found being cleaned at the shop.
Police records revealed that Mr Onganer is wanted by German authorities on extortion charges, though details of the case and the date he entered Thailand remain unclear.
He has been charged with reckless driving at Koh Phangan police station.
Police have contacted German authorities about his extradition.
MANILA, Philippines — Severe floods have recently been blamed on clogged drains and substandard flood control projects run by allegedly corrupt officials. But with storms dumping more rain in a short amount of time, Filipinos are beginning to question what’s happening on the mountains and in rivers.
When the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) launched an investigation into Monterrazas de Cebu — a luxury development on a mountainside in Guadalupe, Cebu City — the public response was quick to ask: who approved it in the first place?
While no evidence has directly linked the Monterrazas project to the floods that hit Cebu during Typhoon Tino, officials and experts say it raises valid questions about whether hillside developments comply with environmental and flood-mitigation rules.
Gaps in oversight
The DENR said the controversy uncovers deeper issues in land-use planning — a gap that Usec. Carlos David described as particularly critical for local governments.
“When we place structures on the natural environment, there are consequences. … There are advantages, but you also generate disadvantages,” David told One News PH’s “The Big Story.”
Climate Change Commissioner Albert Dela Cruz said building structures on natural slopes often involves cutting trees and covering soil with concrete, which prevents water from being absorbed and sends it down to low-lying communities.
“We should not have a concrete road (on these slopes), concrete jungle, because the water absorptive capacity of our land will lessen,” he said in a mix of English and Filipino on “The Big Story.”
David had a similar point, stressing that building structures on areas where water is naturally absorbed or flows through does not make the water disappear. Water from rain or from rivers, he said, would simply go to low-lying communities where there may be no dikes.
“Every time you constrict, divert, block or alter the natural course of a waterway — a river, for example — you are probably protecting the adjacent communities from flooding, but you’re simply translocating the problem elsewhere,” he said.
“That is where the disaster will occur — that is precisely what we are seeing in Cebu,” he added, noting that lapses in laws and policies governing floods and natural waterways have likely contributed to the problem of leaving communities more exposed.
What makes the problem even more complex, David said, is that extreme weather events such as Typhoon Tino leave some areas naturally prone to flooding. The decision of whether to invest in dikes or relocate communities falls to the government, especially local authorities.
DPWH coordination overdue
David said the DENR bears part of the responsibility for worsening floods due to weak coordination with the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) and years of poor reforestation.
“It’s like we’ll have to learn our lesson first before working together because in the past, there’s really no coordination,” David said.
Asked if such coordination was new, David said that, based on what he knows, it is only under the new leadership that the DPWH has begun working closely with the DENR.
Since September, the DPWH has been led by Secretary Vince Dizon, who has been cracking down on allegedly corrupt officials in connection with the flood control scandal.
David said that while Monterrazas is the project currently in focus, it is not the only development under review. “All other types of development” are also being examined for their environmental risks, he added.
Strong storms and deep floods are a recurring reality for Filipinos, with the poorest and most marginalized communities bearing the greatest risks. Decades of logging, mining, and unsafe development have left many areas exposed. As urban planner Jun Palafox puts it, “corruption kills,” and good governance is the key to protecting vulnerable communities.
A land plot advertised for sale in Soi Suan Phak in Bangkok’s Taling Chan district. (Photo: Chanat Katanyu)
The land price index in Greater Bangkok rose in the third quarter of 2025 despite a sluggish economy, driven by strong demand for industrial and logistics property in eastern areas.
According to the Real Estate Information Center (REIC), the Bang Phli–Bang Bo–Bang Sao Thong area in Samut Prakan led the growth, with a 44% increase year-on-year in the land price index.
This zone continued to expand as a major industrial and logistics hub, supported by ongoing infrastructure development, proximity to the airport, and convenient connections to both inner Bangkok and the Eastern Economic Corridor (EEC).
Nearby areas such as Bang Poo and Bearing also recorded the largest increases among locations along mass transit routes in Greater Bangkok.
Two Green Line extensions, Samut Prakan–Bang Pu and Bearing–Samut Prakan, recorded land price indices of 338.6 and 333.7 points, respectively, rising 26.1% year-on-year.
REIC reported that the overall index for vacant land in Greater Bangkok in the third quarter of 2025 stood at 447.2 points, up 7.7% from the previous quarter and 14.3% year-on-year, marking the first double-digit increase in 10 quarters since early 2023.
The Bang Kruai–Bang Yai–Bang Bua Thong–Sai Noi area in Nonthaburi ranked second with a 26.4% annual rise.
Muang Samut Prakan–Phra Pradaeng–Phra Samut Chedi followed with 26.1%, while Muang Nonthaburi–Pak Kret rose by 22.8%, and Lat Phrao–Bang Kapi–Wang Thonglang–Bueng Kum–Saphan Sung–Khan Na Yao grew by 21.4%.
REIC said the surge in land values across these top areas reflects urban expansion into the metropolitan outskirts, particularly Samut Prakan, where a new city plan took effect on Aug 22, 2025.
The revised plan eases land-use restrictions and reclassifies zoning to allow denser residential and commercial development, significantly enhancing the province’s development potential and land value.
Meanwhile, suburban areas in Bangkok and its vicinity, where land prices remain far lower than in the city’s inner zones, continue to attract low-rise housing suited to local purchasing power.
This sustained demand for affordable housing land has resulted in faster price growth in the outer zones than in central Bangkok.
For vacant land along mass transit routes, REIC found that in the third quarter of 2025, the five routes with the highest year-on-year growth were mainly those with existing or upcoming train operations.
Following the two Green Line extensions in Samut Prakan was the Pink Line between Khae Rai and Min Buri, which saw land prices rise 20.7% year-on-year. This area, which includes Bueng Kum, Muang Nonthaburi and Lak Si, for example, recorded the sharpest increases.
The Purple Line from Bang Yai to Tao Poon ranked third with 19.6% growth, followed by the Brown Line (Khae Rai–Lam Sali) and the Yellow Line (Lat Phrao–Samrong), each with 19.2% growth.
In joint fifth place was the MRT Blue Line and the Dark Red Line (Bang Sue–Hua Lamphong), both up 18.5% year-on-year.
People rally for climate justice ahead of the COP30 climate summit in Brazil on July 23. (Photo: Reuters)
I am a policy analyst. My job is to provide expert information to decision makers and the public to help improve public policy. This job, always hard, has become harder.
Seven decades of global economic growth and relative peace have provided great wealth, liberation and enhanced well-being but have also overrun the Earth’s environmental boundaries, created vast inequalities and spawned disruptive new technologies. Transformational change, for good or bad, is now inevitable.
This creates a paradox for expert policy advice: We need experts more than ever. Unaided intuition will fail us as society leaps into the greater unknown. At the same time, transformational change makes communication among experts, decision makers and the public harder. Experts will be caught by surprise by novel shifts, just like everyone else, and consequential policy decisions will often pose questions they can’t easily answer.
Let me offer an illustrative example. About 15 years ago, I participated in a meeting of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The meeting I attended brought together scientific experts from many different countries and academic disciplines to grapple with the coming surge of more extreme weather events. The meeting’s location near Brisbane, Australia, was poignant. Just weeks before, the city had flooded. Several years of unprecedented extreme drought had suddenly given way to days of unprecedented extreme rain.
Extreme events often have the most consequential impacts, so these were what most interested experts like me, who study prevention of and response to climate disasters. But experts who study the physical climate were reluctant to opine on extreme events, which in the past were rare and thus difficult to predict into the future with confidence. The physical climate experts were more comfortable focusing on future changes in averages — increases in average temperature, increases in the intensity of the average storm — for which much more data is available. This was a frustration for me and other experts interested in the best ways to respond to climate risk. From our point of view, the physical climate experts know more about these outlier events than anyone else. While their information is imperfect, it’s better than what we have from any other source.
At the core of this dilemma, ubiquitous when experts seek to inform policy, is a focus on predict-then-act analyses. Predict-then-act policy analysis asks experts to generate a prediction of the future on which all the parties to a decision can agree, such as the likely intensity of future storms. These consensus predictions then inform debate on the pros and cons of alternative decisions one could make. Such analysis is a major channel through which experts communicate and collaborate with decision makers and the public.
Predict-then-act works well when experts seek to inform small changes in systems that behave in expected ways — for instance, how many people will lose medical care if premiums increase a few percentage points. But when we face and seek large changes in complex systems, like Earth’s climate or a society undergoing transformational change, prediction-based analysis can disrupt conversations among experts, policymakers and the public. Policies based on predictions can fail when experts are surprised by novel conditions. Insisting on consensus around expert predictions can promote gridlock as parties to a decision attack the predictions, which are in fact likely to be wrong, rather than search together for robust, evidence-based policies. Finally, uncertainty makes people uncomfortable.
Decision Making under Deep Uncertainty (DMDU) is a rigorous participatory approach to giving expert policy advice that aims to resolve these tensions by focusing on informing good decisions rather than making good predictions. DMDU embraces the idea that experts have vital information but are not all-knowing. DMDU rests on two pillars: collaborative co-design by experts and stakeholders, and analysis that focuses not on prediction but on using multiple models to understand the world, learning and robust solutions.
In 2015, the small town of Sitka, Alaska, suffered a fatal landslide during an intense storm, leaving the community suddenly anxious about its safety during the region’s frequent rainy days. Experts suggested a landslide warning system, but it soon became apparent that landslide science was insufficient to support reliable predictions of when the town should evacuate. The community thus used DMDU to co-design a novel landslide warning system aligned with both the science and community values. Sitka’s online risk dashboard now provides hourly and three-day forecasts of landslide risk. Rather than attempting to direct residents to evacuate on command, the system reduces anxiety by giving people the information they need to make the best possible decisions about whether they should stay or go, even in the face of scientific uncertainty.
DMDU has helped the IPCC to resolve the type of tension that surfaced in the previous meeting on climate extremes. Scientists now clearly distinguish between those processes they understand well and those they understand only poorly. For instance, several factors contribute to rising sea levels in a warming climate. Well-understood processes include how much water expands when it warms. Poorly understood processes include how fast the miles-thick ice sheets covering Greenland and Antarctica will slide into the sea. The poorly understood factors are most important for the worst cases. Thus, the IPCC now offers probabilities for the former (the likelihood that sea level rise will reach one metre by century’s end) but signposts for the latter (the possibility that sea levels can rise close to 2 metres, but if and only if specific future events occur). This information helps decision-makers and disaster prevention experts develop adaptive contingency plans.
Embracing co-design and deep uncertainty can help repair today’s broken conversations among experts and those who might benefit from acting on their information. Practising DMDU encourages humility and relevance, enabling experts to acknowledge a non-dominant role in policy discussions, while giving useful information, without overconfidence.
By encouraging thoughtful action, rather than paralysis or willful ignorance in the face of deep uncertainty, DMDU empowers — aligning actions with science, however imperfect, and with community values. By balancing dynamism and learning with democratic guidance and accountability, DMDU can help make good use of expertise as the world transforms. Zócalo Public Square
With the UN Climate Conference (COP30) in Belém, Brazil, kicking off, it is clear that the world’s widely shared commitment to a just energy transition is falling by the wayside. In the year since governments signed on to the agreement at COP29 to scale up climate finance — with a goal of mobilising $1.3 trillion (42 trillion baht) annually by 2035 — wealthy countries have been retreating from their pledges. Worse, these signs of bad faith are coming just as the costs of climate adaptation and decarbonisation in developing countries are mounting.
This is not an issue that can be deferred. The shift to a green economy is already reproducing the same asymmetries that have long defined global trade. Instead of fostering inclusive development, climate policy is increasingly being shaped by protectionist measures and IP regimes that entrench technological monopolies in the Global North. For example, the European Union’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) may be billed as a safeguard against carbon leakage, but it also illustrates how climate policy can be used to justify protectionist trade measures. Meanwhile, China’s recent complaint against India for its electric-vehicle and battery subsidies shows how green industrial policies are increasingly becoming grounds for trade disputes. Together, these developments signal a growing tension between climate goals and World Trade Organization rules.
At the heart of this issue lies a stark imbalance: larger powers like China, the US, and the EU are producing high-value green technologies, while most developing countries are stuck exporting low-value green commodities — primarily critical minerals. This mirrors the colonial-era division of labour, whereby the Global South supplied raw materials, and the North supplied innovation, monopolised production, and reaped the largest profits.
Data from the World Intellectual Property Organization underscore the depth of this divide. Green patents are overwhelmingly concentrated in a handful of countries, such as China, the US, Japan, and Germany. Between 2000 and 2024, the top 10 economies accounted for nearly 90% of international patent filings in solar and wind technologies. Brazil, despite ranking sixth globally in installed wind capacity, contributed only 0.4% of global wind patents. For solar, its share was a mere 0.19%.
This technological concentration is not accidental. It is the result of a global IP regime that privileges monopoly profits over public goods. Efforts to foster more global coordination, including through the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) agreement, have failed to address the fundamental problem. Without access to affordable technologies, the Global South cannot fully participate in the climate transition.
Climate finance is not sufficient to break this cycle. Instead, technology transfers and reforms to the global IP regime must be at the centre of climate negotiations.
Fortunately, there is a precedent for the necessary changes. Back in the 2000s, Brazil played a pivotal role in categorising access to Hiv/Aids medicines as a public good, rather than as a commodity. This shift was driven by a combination of legal, political, and civil-society actions that challenged the global pharmaceutical patent regime and put public health first.
As economist Joseph Stiglitz has argued, such mechanisms are essential to correct market failures and ensure equitable access to innovation. That is why the International Court of Justice, in its recent advisory opinion on climate change, underscored the obligation of all states to cooperate — beyond the provision of finance — on the development and diffusion of green technologies, including by sharing knowledge and engaging in technology transfers.
The Technology Implementation Program (TIP) that was agreed at COP28 offers a means to foster such cooperation. Under Brazil’s leadership at COP30, TIP can become a platform for strengthening national innovation systems, enabling countries to adapt technologies to local contexts and build capacity for climate solutions. The idea is to use a mix of public and private money to support trial projects, and then to scale those that prove effective.
Utility poles are seen along a rural road in Cambodia. (Photo: Reuters)
According to our latest projection, electricity demand in Asean will reach around 173 million tonnes of oil equivalent (Mtoe), or about 2,000 terawatt-hour (TWh), in 2050 — roughly 1.6 times higher than the 2023 level.
Meeting this challenge is not only about building more power plants, but also about building stronger links between countries. Cross-border electricity trade has already proven its value, helping neighbouring countries share resources, balance supply and demand, and strengthen collective energy security. For example, Cambodia imports around a quarter of its electricity needs, or about 1,030MW, from the Lao PDR, Vietnam, and Thailand, due to its limited domestic generation.
However, energy interconnection within the Southeast Asian region is still primarily conducted bilaterally, for instance, the Lao PDR–Myanmar and Sarawak–Brunei Darussalam interconnections.
Bilateral interconnections pose practical obstacles, as disruptions could lead to a decline in energy availability in some regions. Among these, force majeure events such as natural disasters constitute one of the most immediate and unavoidable threats towards grid infrastructure.
Interstate conflict, although not as unpredictable as natural hazards, can also have far-reaching effects on energy security, once triggered.
Thailand and Cambodia, for example, are interconnected through Thailand’s Wattana Nakhon–Aranyaprathet–Poi Pet Industrial Estate 115-kV overhead transmission line, with a maximum transmission capacity of 250MW. This interconnection has helped Cambodia meet its domestic energy demand, with a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) and a Power Transmission Agreement (PTA) that were signed in the early 2000s. Yet, this cooperation has recently come under strain due to the conflict between the countries. In June, Cambodia halted electricity supply from Thailand at three locations, which prompted Thailand to terminate the PPA.
Additionally, the Electricity Authority of Cambodia (EAC) has instructed two electricity companies to immediately stop issuing invoices in Thai baht, which could affect the baht’s exchange rate if the conflict goes on longer.
What’s more concerning is the vulnerability of grid infrastructure itself. Thailand and Cambodia have built a network of interconnection for limited cross-border electricity trading and load balancing that are at risk of being damaged due to the armed conflict. Although these infrastructures are not massive in scale, they are crucial for regional energy resilience, particularly during periods of peak demand or dry seasons. Thailand’s Provincial Electricity Authority (PEA), for instance, has reported damage to its power distribution facilities along the border, causing multiple outages in some areas.
Beyond that, supply and revenue decline may not only affect investment but also trust between Asean members. In the case of Cambodia and Thailand, it once again serves as a warning signal to the region. If one bilateral dispute can disrupt such a critical lifeline, what does it mean for Asean’s vision of deeper energy integration? This is where the Asean Power Grid (APG) becomes not just a blueprint for cleaner energy but a foundation to build regional energy resilience and cooperation.
Drawing from lessons learned in other regions, wherein energy interconnection has contributed to energy resilience in times of conflict. In the Russia–Ukraine armed conflict, the European Union’s shared grid has helped Ukraine meet its energy demands after it was cut off from Russia’s power grid.
It is clear that Asean needs a proper framework or mechanism to ensure energy security amid political disputes and in the event of future conflicts.
The Asean Agreement on Disaster Management and Emergency Response (AADMER) offers a cooperative framework to protect social, economic, and environmental assets. By recognising energy infrastructure as a vital lifeline, AADMER can serve as a platform to carry out joint risk assessments, develop early warning systems, and launch coordinated responses. However, it remains important to clarify whether AADMER’s scope extends to all forms of force majeure or is limited strictly to natural disasters. Unlike wars, which are politically driven and in principle avoidable, natural disasters are unforeseeable events which lie beyond human control, a distinction that carries implications for how resilience measures are institutionalised in Asean’s disaster preparedness architecture.
Bilateral arrangements alone are insufficient when cross-border infrastructure vulnerabilities and supply stability are at stake. Strengthening existing legal framework provisions on dispute settlement would therefore be more relevant to building a robust Asean-level Dispute Settlement Mechanism (DSM), while ensuring that collective mechanisms respect the sovereignty of member states.
A robust dispute settlement mechanism would build trust in Asean’s frameworks, encouraging countries to rely on regional solutions over ad hoc bilateral negotiations. Lessons from the EU–Ukraine energy integration show that interconnection, paired with strong institutions, can help maintain energy supply during armed conflict.
Beyond protecting infrastructure, such mechanisms are essential for cross-border electricity trading. Ensuring continuity of trade and energy flows underlines the market’s credibility, investability, and long-term sustainability. With adjustments to ensure the mechanism is in line with local laws, we can also integrate the APG within AADMER to strengthen the dispute settlement mechanism. Only then can Asean transform its blueprint for energy integration into a resilient, secure, and pioneering regional system.
This file photo, dated Nov 18, 2022, shows Chinese President Xi Jinping, left, His Majesty King Maha Vajiralongkorn Phra Vajiraklaochaoyuhua, Her Royal Highness Princess Sirivannavari Nariratana Rajakanya, First Lady of China Peng Liyuan and Her Majesty Queen Suthida Bajrasudhabimalalakshana at the Chakri Maha Prasat Throne Hall inside the Grand Palace in Bangkok. (Photo: Royal Household Bureau)
The long-awaited trip to China by His Majesty King Maha Vajiralongkorn Phra Vajiraklaochaoyuhua and Her Majesty Queen Suthida Bajrasudhabimalalakshana is now official, with the state visit scheduled from Thursday to Monday. The historic visit will be the first by a reigning Thai monarch. Both countries, which established diplomatic ties in 1975, are also commemorating the golden jubilee of their friendship.
The trip has been in the making since Chinese President Xi Jinping invited the King. The two met when Xi participated in the Apec leaders’ meeting hosted by Bangkok in November 2022.
The five-day visit comes amid the fast-shifting geopolitical landscape in the region and beyond. It is also an opportunity to redefine what the next 50 years of Thai-Chinese relations would look like. After all, China has become one of the world’s most powerful countries, meaning that Thailand must navigate a more complex world.
For the past decades, the phrase zhong–tai yi jia qin, which means China and Thailand are one family, has been the motto of the relationship. It reflects a special warmth rooted in history, culture and kinship, nurtured by economic and political pragmatism. Given the current global environment, good old sentiment alone is no longer enough. China is a growing global power. Beijing now also has economic and technological influences affecting the nature of its engagement with Thailand and the rest of Southeast Asia.
To sustain a healthy friendship into the next five decades, the relationship must become transformative and anchored in strategy, mutual respect and interest, and a deeper understanding of China’s power dynamics.
China’s rise is unstoppable. Recently, at the 80th United Nations General Assembly, Beijing declared that it would no longer take up trade benefits as a developing country under the World Trade Organization (WTO). In effect, this means that China considers itself a developed country. This is a structural change and the new reality of China, which Thailand has to embrace.
Beijing is no longer a developing power seeking friends. Rather, it is a global actor shaping the rules of trade, technology, and security. Its regional influence is extensive, ranging from the Belt and Road Initiative to cross-border digital infrastructure and green technology. From Thailand’s vantage point, this presents both unprecedented opportunities and important challenges.
Historically, Thai diplomacy has been all about balancing relationships with major powers. During the Cold War, Bangkok was a key US ally while managing pragmatic ties with China. This balancing act preserved national autonomy and benefited the country’s security and economy. But the present US-China rivalry has become more volatile and has intertwined regional politics in all dimensions. It is unavoidable that Thailand must now craft a strategy without swaying towards either camp.
The royal visit to China will thus carry hefty strategic weight. Doubtless, it will reaffirm their historical friendship and adaptive ability to new realities. The next 50 years of Thai–Chinese cooperation must be built around concrete, forward-looking agendas that respond to shared futures and challenges where national security and economic transformation intersect.
At the top of the agenda today are transnational crime and cybersecurity cooperation. The proliferation of online scams, digital fraud networks, and cross-border criminal syndicates operating along the Thai–Myanmar, Thai–Cambodian and Thai–Lao borders have become a major security concern. Many of these criminal groups adeptly use technology and cross-border platforms and existing loopholes, often targeting Thai, Chinese and other global citizens.
It is imperative that the two governments strengthen and institutionalise cooperation between their law enforcement agencies, intelligence networks, and cybersecurity regulators. Both countries have been cooperating on these operations over the past years. Given the present mammoth scale of transnational cybercrime, deeper cooperation and mutual trust are pivotal to setting up mechanisms for data-sharing and frameworks for digital surveillance. These are new areas of security cooperation that will increasingly define Thai-Chinese relations in the new era.
Furthermore, the digital economy and green transition offer fertile ground for collaboration. As both nations invest in next-generation industries, Thailand can leverage China’s technological edge in artificial intelligence, e-commerce, and digital finance.
At the same time, such cooperation must enhance national capacity rather than dependency. Likewise, the electric vehicle (EV) industry, which has already expanded rapidly in Thailand with Chinese investment, should be guided by long-term sustainability goals, local content development, and environmental safeguards.
Both sides could also jointly explore green financing, battery recycling technology, and carbon-reduction mechanisms that align with Asean’s broader sustainability agenda.
Finally, the evolving strategic environment demands that Thailand engage China with open eyes and pragmatic restraint. China’s growing core interests in the South China Sea, Mekong Basin, and global governance institutions indicate that its regional influence continues to expand.
Under the Anutin government, Thai foreign policy is in high gear, especially in its engagement with Beijing. Thailand has also increased its engagement with friends and allies, especially China and the US. To keep ties with Beijing and Washington in balance and beneficial to Thailand, Bangkok needs diplomatic finesse to adapt to meet the future digital and geopolitical challenges.
Furthermore, Thai policymakers must invest in China-related literacy. They must better grasp how Beijing shapes its interests, exerts influence, and negotiates results. Most importantly, they must understand how China has been fighting to preserve its national interest and global narratives.
Future Thai leaders must speak the language of friendship as well as think in terms of strategic interdependence. Comprehending China’s decision-making process is a must. It will help the country to appreciate the Middle Kingdom’s economic statecraft and long-term policies to preserve equilibrium and avoid missteps.
As China rapidly becomes the world’s most powerful country, Thailand’s approach must have strategic clarity.
While nostalgia remains pivotal, the next phase of Thai–Chinese relations should be defined by cooperation in areas that safeguard national interests and address global challenges, especially those related to cyber threats and transnational crime, clean energy and digital innovation.
The current 50th anniversary of diplomatic ties is therefore the beginning of the second golden jubilee — an opportunity to renew their friendship with vision and pragmatism. Together, they can elevate their strategic partnership toward a shared future and shared prosperity, grounded in a clear understanding of the evolving global power dynamics.
Fears of an epic flood similar to the catastrophic inundation of 2011 have returned to haunt the public once again.
The reaction is understandable. People are shocked to learn that 23 major dams and reservoirs across the country — except the South — are filled to the brim with water and, as such, might not be able to take in much more.
The revelation has also eroded public trust in the government. Back in August, the Office of the National Water Resources (ONWR) said 15 of these dams would be about 80% full by the end of the rainy season, so it advised relevant government agencies to release water to ensure the dams had enough space to store the excess.
On Sunday, the ONWR said the nation’s dams and reservoirs still had sufficient capacity to accommodate the influx of water from recent storms.
But the situation on the ground paints a totally different picture. The Bhumibol Dam, for instance, is 98.84% full, while the Sirikit Dam is about 97.57% full. The Nong Pla Lai Dam, meanwhile, is no longer able to accommodate much more water, with water levels reaching 103.94% of its total capacity.
In response, the government has ordered officials to increase the discharge rates at the Chao Phraya and Bhumibol dams to free up space for more water. As a result, many areas which lie downstream of these major dams, like Chai Nat and Uthai Thani, are now dealing with widespread flooding.
It is important to remember that many residents living in flood-catchment areas in Ayutthaya and Angthong have had to deal with constant flooding for almost four months now. The release of water from upstream reservoirs will certainly make life worse for them.
While the likelihood of this year’s floods matching the severity of the inundation in 2011 remains small — the volume of flood water is only about 35% of the volume reported in 2011 — the fact of the matter remains that even after a decade and a half, Thailand’s flood management has not improved much.
Various governments have tried to resolve the problem over the years with different approaches, for instance, by forming new agencies such as the ONWR, increasing investments in infrastructure, and implementing a new, early warning system.
But climate change is making rainfall patterns harder to predict. When coupled with land changes which have seen many flood catchment areas turned into commercial developments, the task of managing floods will only get harder as time progresses.
Furthermore, while the ONWR was formed five years ago to improve coordination, the reality is that government agencies are still working independently from one another, making flood management difficult.
Government and state bodies need to change their water management plans. Instead of focusing on rescue, relief and compensation, the ONWR must work closely with relevant agencies such as the Royal Irrigation Department to prevent and mitigate flooding.
Flood warnings must be issued earlier, so those living in high-risk areas have plenty of time to prepare and evacuate. Furthermore, the government must explain to the public why it can’t drain the water from reservoirs. Ultimately, flood management must be fair to all. The government can’t continue using some communities as flood buffer zones.
Without better coordination, flood management will never improve.
