About Us
Our Research Products
Thailand
Cluster Munition Ban Policy
The Kingdom of Thailand has not acceded to the Convention on Cluster Munitions.
In June 2011, Thailand informed the convention’s first intersessional meetings that it hopes to accede to the convention in “the near future.”[1] In a March 2011 letter to the CMC, Thai Ambassador Sihasak Phuangketkeow said that the government “places high importance” on the convention and noted that Thai authorities would continue to “seriously consider the possibility of acceding” to it.[2] On 14 February 2011, Thailand’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Kasit Piromya informed the UN Security Council that, “We are seriously considering joining the Convention on Cluster Munitions.”[3]
These statements came after Thailand used cluster munitions in early February 2011 during its border conflict with Cambodia (see Use section below). Thailand has stated that it “fully understands the concerns raised” by States Parties over its use of cluster munitions and has promised to “remain committed to engaging with the international community on this issue.”[4] Thailand said it had “concern for safety of civilians” and “no intention to exacerbate the situation” on the border, but noted that, “important lessons have been learnt from this episode and we therefore see the need to close this chapter and move forward.”
Thailand has accepted a proposal from Norway to organize an interagency seminar on cluster munitions and has expressed its hope that “the seminar will help pave the way for Thailand to better prepare for our accession to the Convention in the near future.”[5]
Prior to 2011, Thailand had expressed concern about how it would meet the convention’s obligations if it were to join. In November 2010, Thailand said that it was “seriously considering” joining the convention, but described implementation as “challenging” and said it would accede “only when we are fully ready to join.”[6] In February 2010, a Ministry of Foreign Affairs official told the Monitor that an interagency review was looking at implementation considerations, including stockpile destruction obligations.[7]
Thailand participated in most of the diplomatic conferences of the Oslo Process that created the convention, but attended the formal negotiations in May 2008 as an observer and did not sign the convention when it was opened for signature in Oslo in December 2008.[8]
Since 2008, Thailand has continued to show a strong interest in the convention. It attended the First Meeting of States Parties to the Convention on Cluster Munitions in Vientiane, Lao PDR in November 2010 as an observer and made statements on its position on joining the convention as well as on international cooperation and assistance. Thailand also participated the convention’s first intersessional meetings in Geneva in June 2011, where it provided a statement expressing its intent to join the convention.
Thailand is a State Party to the Mine Ban Treaty.
Thailand is not a party to the Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW). It participated as an observer in CCW deliberations on cluster munitions in 2010 and 2011, but did not make its views known on the chair’s draft text.
Civil society groups have undertaken several activities in support of the Convention on Cluster Munitions and Thailand’s accession.[9]
Production, transfer, and stockpiling
Thailand is not believed to have ever produced or exported cluster munitions.
Thailand possesses a stockpile of cluster munitions, but the composition and status is not known. The United States (US) supplied Thailand with 500 Rockeye and 200 CBU-71 air-dropped cluster bombs at some point between 1970 and 1995.[10] Thailand also possesses French-made 155 mm NR 269 ERFB extended-range artillery projectiles each containing 56 M42/M46[11] type dual purpose improved conventional munition (DPICM) submunitions.[12] Based on the types of submunitions identified in Cambodia after artillery strikes, Thailand also possesses a cluster munition that delivers M85 self-destructing DPICM submunitions.
Thailand has said that it does not intend to acquire more stocks of cluster munitions.[13] Norwegian People’s Aid (NPA) has been providing the government with advice and information on efficient solutions for the destruction of Thailand’s stockpile of cluster munitions.[14]
Use
In recent years, Thailand and Cambodia’s military forces have engaged in several brief skirmishes over disputed parts of the border near Preah Vihear temple, resulting in claims and counter-claims of new antipersonnel mine use.[15] On 9 February 2011, the Cambodian Mine Action Centre (CMAC), a government entity, claimed that Thai military forces had fired cluster munitions during fighting on the border, which had started on 4 February. CMAC said it had identified “evidence of heavy artilleries such as 105MM, 130MM and 155MM used by Thai military, and CMAC experts have verified and confirmed that these artilleries contained Cluster Munitions including M35, M42 and M46 types.”[16]
The Thai army denied the claim of cluster munition use.[17] On 10 February, the Cluster Munition Coalition issued a public statement noting the use allegations and requesting that both countries “clarify if their armed forces have used cluster munitions in the recent border conflict.”[18] On 15 February, Thailand’s diplomatic mission in Geneva provided the CMC with a one-page statement denying cluster munition use.[19] On 16 February 2011, the CMC sent a formal letter to Thailand requesting an investigation into whether Thai forces used cluster munitions.[20] In a 28 March 2011 response, Ambassador Sihasak Phuangketkeow expressed Thailand’s support for the convention, but did not state if Thailand had taken any measures to investigate the allegations of cluster munition use.[21]
In February and April 2011, CMC members conducted separate missions to cluster munition contaminated areas in Cambodia including in Svay Chrum Village, Sen Chey Village, and around the Preah Vihear temple hill, and witnessed unexploded M42/M46 and M85 type DPICM submunitions as well as fragmentation damage caused by cluster munitions.[22] The Cambodia programme of NPA was shown an unexploded NR269 projectile by the CMAC office in Sraaem.[23]
On 6 April 2011, the CMC issued a press statement announcing that, based on the on-site investigations, it had established that cluster munitions were used by Thailand on Cambodian territory during the February 2011 border conflict. The statement also acknowledged Thailand’s allegation of heavy use of rocket fire by Cambodian forces against civilian targets in Santisuk, Khun Han district of Thailand. The CMC statement noted that during a 5 April meeting with the CMC, Thai Ambassador Sihasak Phuangketkeow had confirmed Thai use of 155mm DPICM and said that Thailand used the weapons in accordance with the principles of “necessity, proportionality and in compliance with the military code of conduct.”[24] The CMC urged Thailand to provide detailed information on the cluster munition strikes and urged both Cambodia and Thailand to take urgent action to denounce cluster munitions and join the Convention on Cluster Munitions.[25]
On 8 April, Thailand’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement that said the CMC had “misinterpreted” Ambassador Sihasak’s statement, and noted, “The Permanent Representative had informed the CMC that Thailand had used ‘Dual Purpose Improved Conventional Munitions’ (DPICM), not ‘cluster munitions’ as erroneously reported by CMC.”[26]
The CMC views the DPICM as a “classic example of a cluster munition” that clearly and unequivocally falls under the definition of a cluster munition contained in the Convention on Cluster Munitions. It has noted that dozens of states stockpile the DPICM and has cited the large numbers of civilian casualties caused by the use in Iraq (2003), Lebanon (2006), and Georgia (2008) of DPICM cluster munitions with M85 DPICM submunitions (including with self-destruct mechanisms which are banned under the convention).[27]
Thailand’s use of cluster munitions elicited a strong international response. During April 2011, Austria, Lao PDR, Norway, and the United Kingdom (UK) all condemned Thailand’s use of cluster munitions.[28] On 21 April 2011, Norway, together with Austria, New Zealand, and Switzerland, issued a joint demarche to the Thai Ministry of Foreign Affairs expressing their concern over the cluster munition use and urging Thailand to accede to the convention.[29]
Cluster munition remnants
Survey by the Thai Civilian Deminers Association (TDA) in 2010 identified contamination by US Mk-118 submunitions dating back to the Vietnam War and covering an estimated 315,000m2 in Fakta district of northern Uttaradit province.[30] They were apparently dumped by US aircraft returning to bases in Thailand after sorties over Vietnam and Lao PDR.[31] The contamination is located in a remote area of forest and mountains and no casualties have been reported.[32] TDA said the contamination limits villagers’ access to forest products, grazing for livestock, farming, and recreation.[33]
Clearance of cluster munition contaminated areas
No clearance of cluster munition remnants was reported in 2010. TMAC’s HMAU 4 started clearing cluster munitions in 2011 and, as of April, had cleared 56,816m2 in the Pooh Nong Sam Yai area of Uttaradit province.[34]
[1] Statement of Thailand, Convention on Cluster Munitions Intersessional Meeting, Session on Universalization, Geneva, 27 June 2011. Notes by the CMC.
[2] Letter to Sylvie Brigot, ICBL-CMC Executive Director from Amb. Sihasak Phuangketkeow, Permanent Mission of Thailand to the UN in Geneva, 28 March 2011. REF: 52101/229.
[3] Statement of Kasit Piromya, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Kingdom of Thailand, UN Security Council, New York, 14 February 2011, thailand.prd.go.th.
[4] Statement of Thailand, Convention on Cluster Munitions Intersessional Meeting, Session on Universalization, Geneva, 27 June 2011. Notes by the CMC.
[5] Ibid. The workshop was due to be held in Bangkok on 18–19 August 2011.
[6] Statement of Thailand, First Meeting of States Parties, Convention on Cluster Munitions, Vientiane, 9 November 2010. Notes by the CMC.
[7] Interview with Cherdkiat Atthakor, Director, Peace Security and Disarmament Division, Department of International Organizations, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Bangkok, 24 February 2010.
[8] For details on Thailand’s policy and practice regarding cluster munitions through early 2009, see Human Rights Watch and Landmine Action, Banning Cluster Munitions: Government Policy and Practice (Ottawa: Mines Action Canada, May 2009), pp. 245–246.
[9] For example, several activities took place in Bangkok to celebrate the convention’s 1 August 2010 entry into force and promote its universalization. The ICRC organized a national workshop on the convention on 29–30 July 2010. On 30 July, the CMC held a press conference on the convention that included a cluster munition survivor and representatives from the government of Lao PDR, the UN, and the ICRC. Campaigners organized a drumming event at Baan Xavier Church in Bangkok. CMC, “Entry into force of the Convention on Cluster Munitions Report: 1 August 2010,” November 2010, p. 28.
[10] US Defense Security Assistance Agency, Department of Defense, “Cluster Bomb Exports under FMS, FY1970–FY1995,” obtained by Human Rights Watch in a Freedom of Information Act request, 28 November 1995.
[11] This specific type of submunition is also called a “grenade.” A certain amount of contradictory information exists publicly about the specific type of DPICM submunition contained in the NR269 projectile. France lists it as an “M42 type” in its initial Article 7 report in January 2011. Other international ammunition reference publications list the type as M46. There is little outward visual difference between the two types: the M46 DPICM is heavier/thicker and has a smooth interior surface. A portion of the interior of the M42 DPICM body is scored for greater fragmentation.
[12] NPA, “Impact Assessment Report: Preah Vihear Province, Cambodia,” Undated, but circulated 3 April 2011. Both Canadian and South African companies were involved in the development of this weapon. “155 mm ERFB cargo projectiles,” Janes, articles.janes.com.
[13] Interview with Cherdkiat Atthakor, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Bangkok, 24 February 2010; and Statement of Thailand, Convention on Cluster Munitions Signing Conference, Oslo, 4 December 2008. Notes by Landmine Action.
[14] Email from Lee Moroney, Programme Manager, NPA, 17 August 2010.
[15] See ICBL, Landmine Monitor Report 2009: Toward a Mine-Free World (Ottawa: Mines Action Canada, October 2009), pp. 243–244 and pp. 719–710; and ICBL, Landmine Monitor 2010 (Ottawa: Mines Action Canada, October 2010), www.the-monitor.org.
[16] CMAC press release, “CMAC Mine Risk Education (MRE) teams to raise awareness of mines, ERW and Cluster Munitions for the communities in Preah Vihear,” 10 February 2011, www.cmac.gov.kh.
[17] On 10 February, Thai army spokesperson Sansern Kaewkamnerd denied Thai use of cluster munitions at Preah Vihear and accused the Cambodian army of using cluster munitions against Thailand. See “Sansern: No cluster munitions used,” Bangkok Post, 10 February 2011. A spokesman for the Thai Army's Suranaree Task Force, Col. Chinnakaj Rattanajitti, also denied Thai use of cluster munitions use and stated that, “No such weapon is used. It is not part of military operations.” See: “Task force denies Thai troops used cluster bombs,” Bangkok Post, 11 February 2011, www.bangkokpost.com. Another Thai army spokesperson, Colonel Veerachon Sukondhadhpatipak, said Thai troops had only deployed conventional artillery and noted, “This is just a normal one, not something against international law or standards.” See “Border still in crosshairs,” Phnom Penh Post, 7 February 2011.
[18] CMC press release, “CMC concerned about reports of cluster munition use on Cambodia-Thailand border,” 10 February 2011, www.stopclustermunitions.org.
[19] According to the statement, “Thailand did not employ any form of cluster munitions throughout the operation to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity during the recent border clashes with Cambodia on 4–7 February. Thailand is fully aware of the indiscriminate effects and vast humanitarian repercussions of cluster munitions. Thailand, therefore, reaffirms its commitment to refrain from using such weapons to settle border disputes. … Regarding photos of weapons published in various media, the Royal Thai Army is unable to identify those weapons since they have never been in the possession of the Royal Thai Army.” See “Clarification on the Allegation of the Use of Cluster Munitions and Chemical Weapons,” document provided by Thailand’s Permanent Mission to the UN in Geneva to the CMC, 15 February 2011.
[20] Letter from Sylvie Brigot, ICBL-CMC Executive Director, to Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva, 16 February 2011.
[21] Letter from Amb. Sihasak Phuangketkeow, Permanent Representative of Thailand to the UN in Geneva, to Sylvie Brigot, ICBL-CMC, 28 March 2011, REF: 52101/229.
[22] The missions were conducted by Cambodia Campaign to Ban Landmines and Cluster Bombs (on 9 February and 12 February), NPA (1–2 April).
[23] NPA, “Impact Assessment Report: Preah Vihear Province, Cambodia,” Undated, but circulated 3 April 2011, p. 2.
[24] CMC Press release, “CMC condemns Thai use of cluster munitions in Cambodia,” 5 April 2011, www.stopclustermunitions.org.
[25] Ibid.
[26] Thailand government public relations department statement, “Thailand Refutes CMC’s Claim on Its Use of Cluster Bombs,” 4 April 2011, thailand.prd.go.th. Thailand’s Minister of Defense, General Prawit Wongsuwon, denied any use of cluster munitions by Thai forces and said that the Thai Army “strictly complied with international laws banning their use.” See “Cluster bomb claim denied,” Bangkok Post, 8 April 2011, www.bangkokpost.com.
[27] “Anti-munitions group takes aim at Thailand’s cluster bomb denial,” Bangkok Post, 9 April 2011, www.bangkokpost.com.
[28] Austrian Foreign Ministry press release, “Foreign Minister Spindelegger condemns deployment of cluster munitions,” 18 April 2011, www.bmeia.gv.at; statement by Dr. Thongloun Sisoulith, Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of Lao PDR, 7 April 2011, www.stopclustermunitions.org; and Royal Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs Press release, “Norway condemns use of cluster munitions,” 7 April 2011, www.stopclustermunitions.org. A spokeswoman for the UK’s Foreign and Commonwealth Office told IPS: “That cluster munitions may have been used is of serious concern to the UK. We condemn in the strongest terms the use of cluster munitions, which cause unacceptable harm to the civilian population.” See Irwin Loy, “Cluster bombs cloud prospects for peace,” IPS, 19 April 2011, www.ipsnews.net.
[29] Letter from Hon. Georgina te Heuheu, Minister for Disarmament and Arms Control, to Aotearoa New Zealand Cluster Munition Coalition, 23 May 2011, www.stopclusterbombs.org.nz
[30] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Lt. Gen. Attanop Sirisak, Director General, TMAC, 20 May 2011.
[31] Email from Amornchai Sirisai, Advisor, TDA, 23 March 2011.
[32] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Lt. Gen. Attanop Sirisak, TMAC, 20 May 2011.
[33] Ibid.
[34] Ibid.
Send us your feedback on this profile
Send the Monitor your feedback by filling out this form. Responses will be channeled to editors, but will not be available online. Click if you would like to send an attachment. If you are using webmail, send attachments to .