Illustration: Liu Rui/GT

On December 27, 2025, Cambodia and Thailand signed a joint statement on ceasefire at the third Special General Border Committee meeting. The ceasefire represents an equilibrium point where both nations have reached their immediate political goals and can no longer bear the mounting practical costs. 

However, the real challenge has never lain in the ceasefire itself, but in what follows. It was in anticipation of and response to this complex situation that, on December 28 and 29, 2025, Foreign Ministers and senior military officials of China, Cambodia and Thailand held a meeting by the Fuxian Lake, Southwest China's Yunnan Province, to jointly discuss next steps to consolidate the ceasefire outcomes, rebuild political mutual trust, improve Cambodia-Thailand bilateral relations, and safeguard regional stability

In the process of resolving this conflict, the international community has witnessed two distinctly different approaches to diplomatic mediation. On October 26, 2025, during the ASEAN Summit in Kuala Lumpur, US President Donald Trump leveraged the threat of tariffs to pressure Cambodia and Thailand into signing the Kuala Lumpur Peace Accord. This model, which failed to prevent a renewed military confrontation between Cambodia and Thailand in less than two months, is fundamentally a variant of power politics - achieving temporary silence through coercion but at the cost of long-term trust. It exposes a deep-seated contradiction in the US strategy toward Southeast Asia: a desire to assert hegemony without investing "patient capital" and an attempt to counterbalance China's influence while failing to understand the agency of regional states.

In stark contrast to the "transactional mediation" of the US, China has demonstrated an effective form of conciliation rooted in the "Asian Way." On December 18, Wang Yi, member of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee and foreign minister of China, held separate phone calls with Cambodian Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation Prak Sokhonn and Thai Foreign Minister Sihasak Phuangketkeow, emphasizing that the pressing task was to make a decisive move, cease fire as soon as possible, prevent further losses and rebuild mutual trust. 

China's mediation set no preconditions and did not forcibly link economic and trade relations with security issues, focusing instead on the conflict itself. The Fuxian meeting offered a pragmatic approach: rather than rushing to resolve century-old territorial disputes, it suggests an incremental path of "crisis management - functional cooperation - political mutual trust." Starting with concrete issues such as mine clearance cooperation (to reduce accidental triggers), and restoring mutual exchanges (to foster economic interdependence), the aim is to gradually cultivate habits of cooperation, which in turn can strengthen political trust. This logic resembles a course of holistic treatment in traditional Chinese medicine, rather than a surgical intervention in Western medicine - it may take effect more slowly, but it carries fewer side effects.

China's mediation strategy can be summarized in three key dimensions. 

First, a multi-track approach that keeps communication channels open. China has maintained a multidimensional network ranging from formal negotiations to informal conversations. Throughout this process, China has adhered to a fair and objective stance, acting not as an "arbitrator" or "judge," but as a "facilitator" and "bridge-builder." This approach represents a concrete practice of advancing the Global Security Initiative in the regional context.

Second, the expansion of the agenda to lower political sensitivity. Among the five outcomes of the Fuxian meeting, four extend beyond the military realm: resuming normal exchanges, rebuilding political mutual trust, improving Cambodia-Thailand bilateral relations and safeguarding regional stability. This "easier tasks first" roadmap avoids premature deadlock over core territorial issues and provides a practical platform for rebuilding trust.

Third, embedding efforts within existing mechanisms and respecting ASEAN centrality. The Fuxian meeting was not intended to create a new framework but was connected to existing structures such as the Cambodia-Thailand General Border Committee and the Lancang-Mekong Cooperation mechanism. This posture of "constructive participation" rather than "substitutive leadership" allows China to exert its unique influence, aligning with regional countries' expectations for diversified and balanced engagement.

A ceasefire can be achieved through political calculus, but lasting peace must be built day by day through the reconstruction of trust. The current ceasefire remains fragile, and underlying structural tensions, such as territorial demarcation and historical grievances, remain unresolved, leaving bilateral relations still volatile. Variables like shifts in Thailand's electoral landscape and resurgent nationalist sentiments in both countries could influence the situation going forward. Whether the series of consensus reached at the Fuxian meeting can be transformed into a long-term border management mechanism remains to be tested by time and political will. True peace demands not only silencing the guns but also disarming the hearts. Going forward, China will continue to play a constructive role in supporting regional countries in preserving this hard-won peace.

Yang Kexuan is a PhD student from Institute of Area Studies, Peking University. Zhai Kun is a professor at School of International Studies and deputy dean at Institute of Area Studies, Peking University. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn