Thairath Online
Thairath Online

Thanaphon Apologizes to Phumtham and Plans to Withdraw Lawsuit

Politic15 May 2026 12:59 GMT+7

Share

Thanaphon Apologizes to Phumtham and Plans to Withdraw Lawsuit

Associate Professor Thanaphon met with Phumtham to apologize for his harsh criticism of how the Thai-Cambodian border issue was handled when Phumtham served as Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Defense, and they cleared the air with plans to withdraw the lawsuit.


On 15 May 2026, Mr. Phumtham Vechayachai, advisor and executive member of the Pheu Thai Party, posted on Facebook that Associate Professor Dr. Thanaphon Sriyakul had contacted him to apologize for previously giving quite severe criticism of him regarding the Thai-Cambodian conflict when he held the positions of Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Defense.


For me, expressing differing opinions and political criticism is a sensitive matter, especially concerning security and international relations, which involve military secrets, the safety of personnel, and risks to border communities.


While serving in the government at that time, policy communication required clear responsibility, avoiding casual interviews. Therefore, providing details on certain issues had to be carefully considered due to potential consequences.


Back then, the dissatisfaction escalated to the use of strong language, prompting me to resort to the judicial process. However, when Dr. Thanaphon reached out to meet and apologized for misunderstandings based on incorrect information, I thanked him for engaging in a mature dialogue and acknowledging that perspectives can change when fully informed.


For me, what matters more than winning an argument is working together to protect the country's interests and help the nation progress. This responsibility yields better outcomes for all parties than harboring conflicts. Hence, I have decided to withdraw the lawsuit against Dr. Thanaphon based on this understanding and reasoning.


I hope this case serves as a reminder to political critics that differing opinions are not wrong but must be based on accurate and thorough information. Constructive criticism should be the goal, rather than hostile rhetoric aimed at destroying others to win.