Thai military is ‘far ahead of Nato armies’ in the use of quadcopters on the battlefield, say analysts.
The quadcopter hovers above a metal roof before releasing its bomb. Seconds later, the target explodes in a burst of smoke and fire.
Last week, drone warfare spread from the muddied trenches of eastern Ukraine to the sweltering Thailand-Cambodia borderlands. But while the footage circulating on social media may look similar, there was a key difference.
Ukraine’s use of cheap UAVs was, initially at least, an attempt to create some kind of parity with Russia’s vast superiority in men and material.
Rebel groups in Myanmar also took an early lead over the better-equipped junta in the race to develop drone technology by turning commercial devices into killing machines.
But the Thai-Cambodian border clashes saw a complete role reversal, with Thailand dominating on drones despite having a military that dwarfs that of its neighbour.
The shift from being a desperate, ad-hoc rebel technology to a mainstay of modern military might underlines the revolution that drones have been on the battlefield – and should, analysts say, act as a wake-up call for the West.
“Normally, the narrative with drones is that it empowers the weak actor,” Marcel Plichta, a former US defence department analyst and expert on drone warfare, told The Telegraph. “That’s Ukraine holding off Russia, or the rebels in Myanmar.
“So without any context, you would think that Cambodia would benefit from this drone revolution. But to date, the Cambodians haven’t really caught up to Thailand’s drone capabilities.”
Dr Rahman Yaacob, an expert on south-east Asian defence and security at the Lowy Institute think tank, said: “Ukraine and Myanmar are similar… in that they use drones for a multiplier effect against their opponent.
“I think Thailand has been watching and learning, and now they’ve used drones to target critical points in the Cambodian forces.
“The first target is the command posts, and the second is the ammunition depots. Once you hit these two positions, it causes chaos for command and country. And once the supply chain is disrupted, the enemy cannot operate freely or launch country attacks.”
Before Monday’s ceasefire brought a halt to five days of fighting, Cambodia did deploy some surveillance drones. However, Thailand attacked its neighbour with quadcopters, FPV (first-person view) drones and one-time kamikaze drones, all sent to dominate the skies alongside more traditional weaponry such as F-16s.
Most of these UAVs were likely to have been bought from US or Israeli arms companies, said Mr Plichta. But only last month, the Royal Thai Air Force successfully tested a new, locally developed kamikaze drone.
Phnom Penh spends about $1.3 billion on defence, and its air force has roughly 1,500 personnel, 20 transport planes, and 26 transport and multi-role helicopters. In contrast, Bangkok spends $5.73 billion and has 46,000 airmen, plus 112 combat-capable aircraft – including 28 F-16s and 11 Gripens.
Thailand’s strategy also undermined some arguments in the West that drones are ineffective in jungle terrain. The latest conflict – which has so far claimed 35 lives – was centred on a disputed, heavily forested border along the Dangrek mountains.
Mr Plichta said: “There was this assumption – mostly from the West, it’s not necessarily the view of Asian militaries – that drones wouldn’t be useful in this kind of conflict, because of the density of the terrain [and] foliage. But clearly, that’s not the case from the footage.”
The five-day clash may well trigger a surge of investment in drones across the rest of south-east Asia, added Dr Yaacob, and could result in countries rethinking their air-defence systems.
The Thai-Cambodian clash also reiterates just how quickly modern warfare is changing across the globe.
Robert Tollast, a researcher in the Land Warfare team at Rusi, said the Thai military appeared to be “far ahead of Nato armies in this field”.
“We’re seeing the second state-on-state conflict, after Ukraine, where commercial multirotor drones are being used,” he told The Telegraph. “The ramifications of this are stark for Nato and allies.”
© 2025, GDC. © GDC and www.globaldefensecorp.com. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to www.globaldefensecorp.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.
