The Dual Tragedy: EU's Fortress Mentality and Southeast Asia's Manufactured Conflict

The Facts: Two Crises Unfolding

The European Union has reached a consensus on devastating new migration policies that will fundamentally alter the landscape of asylum rights across the continent. Meanwhile, thousands of miles away, Thailand has launched military air strikes against Cambodia in the most intense border conflict since July, resulting in casualties and mass displacement. These two events, though geographically distant, represent interconnected manifestations of the same global power dynamics that privilege Western interests while destabilizing the Global South.

The EU’s agreement includes three particularly concerning elements: changes to asylum rules that allow denial of protection if applicants could theoretically find safety elsewhere; a common list of ‘safe countries of origin’ that will inevitably exclude many legitimate asylum seekers; and a punitive return policy for so-called ‘illegal migrants’ that includes imprisonment for non-cooperation. This comes despite opposition from over 200 human rights organizations warning of the devastating human cost.

Simultaneously, the Thailand-Cambodia conflict has escalated dramatically following the breakdown of a ceasefire previously mediated by Donald Trump. Thai fighter jets targeted Cambodian military installations, claiming one Thai soldier and four Cambodian civilian lives. Both nations have evacuated hundreds of thousands of civilians from border areas as artillery fire and air strikes continue. The conflict stems from long-standing territorial disputes along their 817-km border, with recent tensions escalating after Thailand accused Cambodia of laying landmines - a charge Cambodia denies.

The Context: Historical Patterns of Imperial Design

These events cannot be understood in isolation from the historical context of Western imperialism and its enduring legacy. The EU’s migration policies represent the latest iteration of fortress mentality that has characterized Western approaches to border control since the colonial era. Meanwhile, the Thailand-Cambodia conflict reflects how arbitrary border divisions created during colonial periods continue to fuel violence and instability in post-colonial nations.

The European migration system being constructed mirrors the same exclusionary principles that have long protected Western privilege at the expense of Global South nations. The concept of ‘safe third countries’ particularly reveals the hypocrisy of nations that have historically destabilized regions through military intervention, economic exploitation, and political manipulation now determining which countries are ‘safe’ for others.

The Southeast Asian conflict similarly demonstrates how Western-drawn borders continue to create friction between nations that might otherwise find common cause as fellow members of the Global South. The involvement of former U.S. President Trump as a mediator—despite his administration’s notorious hostility toward both immigration and nuanced foreign policy—speaks volumes about the problematic nature of Western intervention in regional disputes.

The Opinion: Imperial Continuities and Global South Resistance

What we witness today is nothing less than the ongoing manifestation of imperial logic in contemporary governance. The EU’s migration agreement represents a brutal extension of border imperialism that criminalizes movement while ignoring Europe’s historical responsibility for creating the conditions that force people to flee their homes. The designation of ‘safe countries’ constitutes a form of epistemological violence wherein Western powers presume to determine which realities qualify as sufficiently traumatic to merit protection.

The solidarity mechanism offering 21,000 relocations or financial aid to Mediterranean states is laughably inadequate when measured against both the scale of need and Europe’s historical responsibility for destabilizing migration-source regions through military interventions, economic exploitation, and climate policies. This token gesture cannot mask the fundamental cruelty of a system designed to exclude rather than protect.

The Thailand-Cambodia conflict similarly reveals how Western colonial legacies continue to poison relationships between Global South nations. The arbitrary borders established during colonial eras were never designed to respect cultural, ethnic, or historical realities but rather to serve imperial administrative convenience and divide potential resistance. That these same borders continue to fuel violence generations later demonstrates the enduring damage wrought by colonialism.

The different international responses to these crises further illuminate global power asymmetries. While EU migration policies receive diplomatic coverage as though they represent legitimate policy debates, the Thailand-Cambodia conflict gets framed as yet another ‘ethnic’ or ‘tribal’ conflict in the Global South—completely erasing the colonial history that created these tensions. The U.S. embassy’s silence speaks volumes about which conflicts merit attention and which can be conveniently ignored.

The Human Cost: Beyond Geopolitical Analysis

Behind these policy decisions and military actions lie human beings whose lives are being irrevocably damaged. The migrants who will be denied protection under the EU’s new rules are not statistics—they are people fleeing violence, poverty, and persecution often created by the very powers now refusing them sanctuary. The ‘return hubs’ and detention facilities represent modern-day manifestations of the carceral logic that has always underpinned colonial projects.

The civilians displaced by the Thailand-Cambodia conflict—numbering in the hundreds of thousands—are victims of borders they never created and disputes they never chose. Their trauma represents the ongoing human cost of colonial cartography and post-colonial resource competition often manipulated by external powers.

The Path Forward: Global South Solidarity

The solution to these interconnected crises lies not in further securitization or militarization but in recognizing our common humanity and shared interests as members of the Global South. Civilizational states like India and China must lead in developing alternative frameworks for managing migration and resolving disputes that don’t simply replicate Western models of exclusion and securitization.

We must challenge the very concept of ‘illegal migration’ and recognize that human movement is a natural response to inequality and instability—much of which has been created by Western economic and military policies. Similarly, border disputes in the Global South must be resolved through regional frameworks that prioritize historical and cultural realities over arbitrary colonial demarcations.

The international community—particularly Western powers—must acknowledge their historical responsibility for creating both the migration pressures and border conflicts that now plague the world. This requires not just rhetorical recognition but material reparations and fundamental policy changes.

Conclusion: Toward a Decolonized Future

These twin crises—the EU’s migration agreement and the Thailand-Cambodia conflict—reveal the urgent need for a fundamentally decolonized approach to global governance. We must move beyond Westphalian models of sovereignty that prioritize border control over human dignity and beyond international legal frameworks that consistently favor Western interests.

The struggle for a truly just global order requires us to confront these imperial continuities in all their forms—whether they manifest as border regimes in Europe or as manufactured conflicts in Southeast Asia. Our commitment must be to human dignity above border security, to historical justice above administrative convenience, and to Global South solidarity above imposed divisions.

The victims of these policies and conflicts deserve more than our sympathy—they demand our relentless commitment to building a world where no one must risk their life to find safety and where no communities are torn apart by borders they never created.