As world leaders prepare to gather in Kuala Lumpur for the annual ASEAN summit this Sunday, all eyes are on the much-anticipated “Kuala Lumpur accord”—a peace deal aimed at ending the simmering conflict between Thailand and Cambodia. For Donald Trump, who is set to attend the summit for the first time since 2017, the stakes are personal as well as political. According to Politico, Trump’s attendance is driven less by a newfound appreciation for multilateral diplomacy and more by a desire to claim credit for brokering yet another peace deal, adding to a list of international conflicts he claims to have “ended.”
The roots of this latest crisis stretch back to May 2025, when tensions erupted along the Cambodia–Thailand border, particularly in the village of Ban Prey Chan. Cambodian homes now sit within Thai-marked territory, and the fallout has been deeply personal for many: some residents have been forced to leave their homes, while others have lost their jobs. The dispute has left locals calling for peace, even as ASEAN observers—tasked with monitoring the ceasefire—remain concerned about the potential for renewed regional instability.
The United States, under Trump’s leadership, played a pivotal role in brokering a ceasefire between the two neighbors in July 2025, leveraging trade relations to bring both sides to the table. Trump has since included the Thailand–Cambodia conflict among a collection of wars he claims to have resolved, alongside such high-profile disputes as Israel and Hamas, Pakistan and India, and Armenia and Azerbaijan. While some of these claims are genuine achievements, others, as TIME notes, are overstatements. The Cambodia–Thailand ceasefire, in particular, remains fragile, with outbreaks of violence and unresolved tensions still a reality on the ground.
For Trump, the ASEAN summit is an opportunity to showcase his peacemaking credentials—credentials he has campaigned on, even seeking the Nobel Peace Prize. Earlier this month, the prize went instead to Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado, but Trump’s efforts have not gone unnoticed. Several world leaders, including Cambodia’s, have nominated him for next year’s prize, a move that some analysts see as “flattery diplomacy.”
Yet, as Mark S. Cogan, an associate professor of peace and conflict studies at Kansai Gaidai University in Osaka, told TIME, the success of the Kuala Lumpur accord will hinge on what happens after the photo-ops and handshakes. “It requires sustained political pressure,” Cogan explained. “Will the United States take its eye off the ball? Will it continue to take interest in what’s going on in Thailand and Cambodia once Trump oversees this accord? Or will he get distracted by something else?”
Cogan is not alone in his skepticism. Pavin Chachavalpongpun, a professor at the Center for Southeast Asian Studies at Kyoto University, described Trump’s involvement as largely transactional. “The sustained external pressure necessary for enforcement will probably disappear once the signing ceremony is over,” Pavin said. This sentiment is echoed by many who have watched previous peace deals falter once international attention waned.
On the ground, the situation remains tense. ASEAN observers have been closely monitoring ceasefire violations, worried about the potential for another outbreak of violence. In Ban Prey Chan, the border dispute has upended daily life. Cambodian homes now lie within territory marked by Thailand, forcing some residents to leave and others to lose their livelihoods. Local calls for peace have grown louder, but the uncertainty remains palpable. "We just want to live in peace," one resident told local reporters, reflecting a sentiment shared by many on both sides of the border.
Malaysia’s Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, who holds the rotating ASEAN chair for 2025, acknowledged on Thursday that the details of the agreement are still being “ironed out.” This uncertainty underscores just how delicate the negotiations remain, even as the world’s attention turns to Kuala Lumpur. According to TIME, Cambodia has shown enthusiasm for the deal, with a spokesperson for the ruling party stating on October 15, “we are ready at any time” to sign. Thailand’s new government, however, has been more circumspect.
Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul, who took office after the previous government was ousted over its handling of the conflict, made Thailand’s position clear on October 19: “We will not let our country be taken advantage of by neighbouring countries or any other nation. We have the duty to protect the national interest to the best of our ability.” This wariness reflects a broader concern that Trump’s involvement could tilt the deal in Cambodia’s favor, a concern that has left Thai officials both welcoming of stability and wary of being steamrolled in the process.
For Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet, the pact is about more than just ending the violence. In a statement on October 19, Hun Manet wrote that the agreement aims to “set conditions and codes of conduct to create a favorable environment to end the conflict and restore relations between the two countries.” But he was quick to clarify that neither the July ceasefire nor the forthcoming accord means that “either party agrees to give up its legal right to control territory under its sovereignty.”
This distinction is critical. As Pavin Chachavalpongpun observed, the deal “likely [will] succeed as a short-to-medium-term stabilization measure” but remains “inherently fragile as a source of lasting peace.” The underlying border dispute—rooted in historical maps and contested claims—remains unresolved. “The deal’s longevity is doubtful,” Pavin noted, “because it fails to resolve the underlying border dispute over territory and historical maps; it merely postpones that conflict.”
Experts agree that for the accord to have any real staying power, it will require robust third-party monitoring and ongoing international engagement. “Enforcing compliance,” Cogan argued, “is something that Washington theoretically has the ability and credibility to provide.” But whether the United States, and Trump in particular, will maintain the necessary pressure is far from certain.
As the summit approaches, the people of Ban Prey Chan and the wider region wait anxiously. For them, the stakes are not about international prestige or Nobel Prizes—they are about the basic desire for safety, stability, and the right to remain in their homes. Their calls for peace, echoed by ASEAN observers and local leaders alike, serve as a reminder that the real test of the Kuala Lumpur accord will come not in the signing, but in the months and years that follow.
Whatever the outcome in Kuala Lumpur this weekend, one thing is clear: the path to lasting peace between Cambodia and Thailand remains fraught with challenges, and the world will be watching to see whether this latest accord can truly hold.
