Apsara diplomacy: Cambodia's new diplomatic path in international relations

Abstract

This article introduces "Apsara Diplomacy," a new diplomatic approach that does not follow Western models as an alternative for implementing foreign policy and strengthening international relations in Cambodia’s own way. This diplomatic framework is primarily influenced by Cambodia’s Hindu and Buddhist cultural heritage, which is deeply rooted in the pre-monarchy era. Apsara, the celestial maidens or dancers whose more than two thousand statues and carvings are found on the walls of Angkor Wat, embody seven qualities: gentleness, resilience, beauty, intelligence, charm, approachability, and friendship.

Cambodia's foreign policy or international relations, which we call diplomacy, has been practiced for a long time by the logic of the Khmer civilization since ancient times, with roots stretching back at least two thousand years ago. Unfortunately, Cambodia has not been able to preserve its historical evidence well due to factors such as war, the deterioration of temple stones over time, and successive invasions. However, we can at least rely on the well-preserved evidence of historical relations in the Chinese historical cave, Mogao Cave in Dunhuang, which shows that in the 3rd century AD, when Chinese missionaries Kang Tai (康泰) and Zhu Ying (朱應) of the Eastern Wu Kingdom of the Three Dynasties traveled by ship to the Kingdom of Funan, they made one of the first diplomatic meetings recorded in history between China and Cambodia.

Existing Western models of international relations (IR), such as Realism, Nye’s liberalism, constructivism, and soft power can explain Cambodian diplomatic traditions, but they are not enough. Drawing on research at the Mogao Caves, four case studies, and the Cambodian Senate as an institutional mirror, this article develops a theoretical framework it calls “Silk and Stone,” a diplomacy that is both soft and unbreakable at the same time. The article situates “Apsara Diplomacy” within Acharya’s Global IR project and establishes a dialogue with China’s Tianxia (under one sky) tradition, arguing that it provides a nationally grounded strategic framework for Cambodia and a model that can be followed by smaller states in the Indo-Pacific and the Global South.

Keywords: Apsara diplomacy; Non-Western IR theory; Cambodian foreign policy; Funan Kingdom; Kang Tai; Chou Ying; Cultural diplomacy; Global IR; Small state diplomacy; China- Cambodia relations

I.  Introduction

International Relations is the study of relationships between one state and another that have global relevance, but the basic governing framework of the field is almost entirely derived from Western history, scholars, intellectuals, and ideologies. In international relations, we need to understand the theories of Realism, Liberalism, and Constructivism in the introduction to international relations. The core ideas of the above theories, as well as the core principles in international relations, focus solely on the independence and sovereignty of states and the fact that each state builds relationships with other states in pursuit of its own interests. These normative frameworks forced each state to follow what was called customary law or customary international law, which was explained as

being all for the sake of a certain world order—a world order that the Western powers built after the Treaty of Westphalia. How is such a world order, or such an international custom, relevant or appropriate for small states in Southeast Asia or in Africa? Their power, traditions, diplomacy, and methods of communication since ancient times have no relevance to the above treaty at all. Why must a small state like Cambodia, with diplomatic traditions dating back some two thousand years, change its form, or at least parts of it, to conform to the world order that Western scholars have created? This is a question that most modern international relations experts leave unanswered.

The problem raised here is that the Western-style framework of international relations, or the current context in which it is practiced, cannot fully explain the lack of participation. In a positive way, or at least through a historical extract from the relations between states that is positive, even if not entirely satisfactory, it can be accepted that the world should be more open to alternative diplomatic frameworks or paths. This provides opportunities for small countries like Cambodia to create a framework for international relations that is appropriate to their thousands of years of civilization, without being oppressed or pressured by large states or the international laws of large states. This article will present an international relations framework called Apsara Diplomacy: An approach based on ancient Khmer culture and state-to-state relations, the fundamental principles of which are embodied in the iconography of the Apsara, a celestial dancer carved on the walls of Angkor Wat. An Apsara does not use power to control or force tourists to come to her to take pictures with her, but she attracts. She does not command, but she invites. She does not use power, she does not invade, and she can stand strong through hundreds of wars and hundreds of years with a smile on her face.

The above description is more than a comparison. It is a description of the philosophy of governance of the ancient Khmer Empire that researchers can observe at every stage of Khmer civilization. Clearly, from the approach to solving problems based on Cambodia's Apsara-style international relations principles, consider the Preah Vihear conflict: the most effective international tool of Cambodia was not using force or international legal mechanisms to protect the temple from invasion, but including it as a UNESCO World Heritage Site. Another example is the campaign to reclaim the antiquities stolen from the Koh Ker temple site: what has moved major Western museums to agree to return the priceless relics to Cambodia is not the power of Cambodia's claim to ownership, but rather the weight of morality or the narrative of spiritual stories from the wounded civilization of Cambodia. In addition to the diplomatic mechanisms of the government, the Cambodian Parliament Friendship Group also practices parliamentary diplomacy in accordance with its traditional diplomatic principles.

This article will highlight three key factors for ease of follow-up. In theory, it will introduce Apsara diplomacy as a framework for international relations that is not influenced by the West and is based on Cambodian civilization, which seems to be consistent with Acharya's (2014a) statement that international relations theory is derived entirely from the experience and practice of the state itself. In the main body, this article will provide the first documented diplomatic background of Cambodian cultural diplomacy through four case studies. The compilation of the fundamental principles of Cambodian international relations can outline a framework for foreign policy for small states, both small states in the Indo-Pacific region and small states in the South-South region.

They will be able to adapt it to suit themselves when in the midst of great power competition and when there is no option to prevent it using hard-power. As the saying goes, “A single flower cannot represent spring, but a whole garden can.” A small country like Cambodia will not make a difference to global affairs today on its own, but all small states together can help maintain peace and bring prosperity to the world for everyone in a sustainable manner.

II.  Historical Foundations: The First China-Cambodia Diplomatic Mission

The Mogao Caves (莫高窟) in Dunhuang City, Gansu Province, are a magnificent historical preservation site. A painting in this cave commemorates the 3rd-century diplomatic mission of the envoys Kang Tai (康泰) and Zhu Ying (朱應) from the Eastern Wu Kingdom, who traveled by boat to the Kingdom of Nokor Phnom (Funan), the first great civilization of Cambodia. This evidence shows that Cambodia-China diplomatic relations have deep, long-standing civilizational roots.

According to historical records, around 245-250 AD (during the Three Kingdoms Period), Emperor Sun Quan of Eastern Wu sent Kang Tai and Zhou Ying as official envoys to the Kingdom of Phnom Penh (Funan). At that time, the Kingdom of Nokor Phnom was described as an empire with a very powerful, brave, and strong army and navy, and this empire was located in the delta region along the lower Mekong River. Because of the history of this mission, it is recognized that the Phnom Kingdom was the birthplace of the first major state formation in Cambodia's history. It is a pity that Cambodia has no surviving evidence, or has not yet found any, of these historical diplomatic relations between the ancient Khmer Empire and China, India, and even the West throughout each era. The diplomatic mission of these two Chinese envoys was not a unilateral action by China, but a reciprocal diplomatic gesture after previous diplomats from Funan had also arrived in the Kingdom of Wu and were welcomed at the Wu Palace between 225-230 AD and again in 243 AD. In terms of modern international relations theory, these exchanges of envoys represent mutual recognition between two sovereign states, Cambodia and China. Mr. Kang Tai's account of his mission to the Kingdom of Phnom can be found in the book Wushi waiguo zhuan (吳時外國傳, Records of Foreign States in the Wu Dynasty), which is the earliest surviving Chinese document mentioning Cambodian civilization. The original text no longer exists in a complete form, with only excerpts preserved in books like the Shuijing zhu and in later dynasties. Mr. Kang Tai described the Funan civilization with admiration, stating that the civilization of this mountain kingdom was very great, its politics and state administration were well organized, and its material and literary sophistication was similar to the Indian tradition, which had a great influence on the intellectual world of mainland Southeast Asia at that time.

What is also noteworthy is that his description did not mention methods of conquest, coercion, or the introduction of Chinese cultural or political forms into the Mountain Kingdom. The relationship between the Kingdom of Wu and the Mountain Kingdom, as described by Mr. Kang Tai, was not one of intelligence gathering for invasion, but rather a relationship of mutual learning, in which one major state was genuinely curious about the other and recognized the civilization and progress of the other state. The Kingdom of the Mountains attracted the attention of the Chinese dynasty not through military force, conquest, or threat—because China at that time was thousands of miles away from Nokor Phnom—but Nokor Phnom attracted relations from foreign states because of its political, cultural, and trading fame, which were its cultural achievements. This diplomatic exchange was done based on mutual benefits (exchange of tribute), not hierarchy or military power. This is Cambodia's first historical Apsara embassy. Historically, when Kang Tai arrived in Phnom Penh, he came as a scholar-diplomat, recording what he saw with intellectual honesty. When he left Phnom Penh, he did not bring back royal letters, tribute obligations, or threats of military force, but he brought with him a text that he compiled based on his observations of life, statecraft, influence, and the prosperity of the Phnom Penh civilization, which has kept Phnom Penh alive in the imagination of Chinese history for a long time.

III. International Relations Theory and the Gap of Other States

As is mentioned above, the core principles of Western IR theory are transversal, comprising three main theories:

• Realism: It is assumed that the state is a private entity, which makes sense in an anarchic international system where power and security are the ultimate values.
• Liberalism: The discussion is as follows: Global trends and state actors alike need to be interdependent on economics and democratic norms, which can reduce Hobbesian realism and create stable cooperation instead.
• Constructivism: Understanding international politics means it must be governed by a structure of shared ideas, norms, traditions, identities, and values, rather than relying solely on material factors.

Each of these frameworks has its own value for analysis in each specific context, but they also bring with them implicit assumptions that states are forced to accept, which in some situations are not appropriate for the Cambodian diplomatic experience, or sometimes mean explanations of Cambodian identity and diplomatic methods are not valued or recognized. Realism expects small states to follow the dominant regional power or, if possible, to maintain a balance against that power. Cambodia does not follow these two options on a regular basis. What some scholars call strategic hedging can be understood more clearly through reflection in this article, called: Civilizational Neutrality—non-alignment based on principles that are rooted in identity rather than on strategic calculations that change over time.

The state-based optimism of liberalism captures some aspects of Cambodia's multilateral engagement, but it cannot explain why Cambodia's most effective diplomatic tool is not a law, but a strong root from the Khmer civilizational heritage.

Constructivism theory is most similar to Cambodia's diplomatic approach. According to Wendt's (1999) observation, "Anarchy is what the state makes of it," which opens up some conceptual space for a normative framework for the small state, but this theoretical study remains tied to terminology taken from the West about "norms" and "identities" that tend to disregard specific evidence of Khmer civilizational ideas or higher civilizations from ancient times.

Joseph Nye’s (2004) Soft Power philosophy is perhaps the most frequently applied Western framework to cultural diplomacy in Southeast Asia. Soft power, as Nye defines it, is “the ability to get what you want through attraction rather than coercion or payment.” This view has a part that aligns with what Cambodia did. But soft power theory views culture as merely a tool of international relations—a tool deployed strategically to serve national interests. Contrary to what has been mentioned above, Apsara diplomacy is different. This diplomatic path is a way of survival in a complex, dangerous, and elusive world, not just a tool for influencing other states. The differences in Apsara diplomacy are important to analyze and use strategically.

Gaps or inadequacies in Western IR frameworks for other non-Western countries can be applied equitably, not just as a new complaint. Acharya and Buzan (2010) argue at length that the structural biases of international society have systematically silenced the IR traditions of Asia, Africa, the Middle East, and Latin America. Some global IR projects that these countries protest and advocate for are not just adding case studies to existing frameworks, but calling for a truly new theoretical architecture built on an intellectual foundation that is not Western politics, with participation from all regions and inclusiveness.

• IV.  Conceptual Foundations: Apsara as a Diplomatic Comparison
• 4.1 Apsaras in Hinduism and Buddhism

In Hinduism and Buddhism, which are deeply rooted in Khmer civilization, the Apsara dances, heals, inspires, guides, and resolves conflicts. Currently, on the walls of Angkor Wat, there are nearly two thousand different Apsara sculptures. No two Apsara statues are exactly alike. Each one has its own unique characteristics and tells its own story. What makes an Apsara become the most suitable diplomatic character is a combination of qualities according to the story she represents.

This meaning, value, and culture are carved into the stone of Angkor Wat. It is worth noting that the temple and Apsara figures have survived centuries of invasions by various empires, burning, abandonment, colonization, civil war, the Khmer Rouge genocide, and many other instabilities. Yet, the Apsara character still stands strong as a living symbol of Cambodian national identity. The Royal Dance of Cambodia, a UNESCO-recognized intangible cultural heritage, is a clear testament that the Cambodian people have preserved and continue to perform the Apsara tradition forever.

4.2  Silk and Stone: Conceptual Architecture

To easily understand and remember the characteristics of Apsara diplomacy, one should consider the comparison of "silk and stone," which can illustrate the principles of Apsara diplomacy. Silk and stone are at the core of Khmer civilization, where each material represents how to complement each other in Cambodian diplomacy.

• Silk: Represents liveliness, gentleness, flexibility, and coolness, which in diplomacy refers to the warmth of hospitality and welcoming other states and other people, helping to reduce barriers or caution to dialogue and open-mindedness. Approachability, intelligence, and emotional maturity allow Cambodia to be a non-judgmental, neutral, and trustworthy interlocutor. Silk is flexible, adaptable to changing circumstances, and not easily broken.
• Stone: Representing the immovable foundations of civilization: the cultural heritage of the Angkor Wat temple park area demonstrates a strong foundation of religious beliefs, starting with Hinduism and continuing to Buddhism, which has become the state religion of Cambodia and is practiced by over 90% of the Cambodian population. Khmer civilization has survived for two thousand years and continues into this generation of Cambodians through all enemy invasions, colonialism, world wars, internal wars, and genocide, not only through military victories, but also through spiritual, cultural, and mental struggle, patience, and belief in their strong identity, which must be preserved and protected. The special characteristic of stone is its endurance, which lasts longer than any invasion. When Kang Tai encountered the mountain kingdom, it was the weight of the actual Funan civilization. Cambodia is the only country on earth which has a temple on its flag, which already implies this. When Cambodia commemorates the Angkor culture of the Khmer Empire in today's diplomatic context, Cambodia is deploying its soft power, which is the legitimacy of Cambodia's Khmer civilization, requiring no legal documents or diplomatic designations that can be easily denied. Silk and stone together describe a diplomacy that is both gentle and unbreakable at the same time.

V.  The Apsara Diplomacy Framework: Seven Pillars

Apsara diplomacy is based on seven pillars. Each pillar is taken from the traditional qualities attributed to Apsara characters in ancient Khmer literature, art, and religious sources, each of which can be translated into principles of statecraft. Please present these seven qualities in a format matching cultural origins and diplomatic practices:

• Softness: Choosing dialogue over pressure at all levels and in all situations. Cambodian people will choose to smile to solve problems and prefer to resolve issues peacefully rather than using force or threatening methods. This is also the method by which Cambodia has demonstrated its soft power to the In the border dispute, the Cambodian people and the Cambodian government spoke with one voice, demanding peace and asking for a peaceful resolution of the problem.
• Resilience: Maintaining a strong position without holding grudges. With a civilizational identity that has survived colonialism, genocide, invasion, and competition between great powers, Cambodia continues to speak with its own voice and in its own way, without changing. Cambodia continues to use the French language and strengthens its friendship with France, its former colonial power, and Cambodia does not bow to European and American countries that impose economic sanctions on a regime that has just emerged from.
• Beauty: World heritage sites like Angkor Wat are truly irreplaceable when experienced. The beauty of the Apsaras and the stories behind each carved stone serve as a major diplomatic resource—a resource that draws attention to itself without Cambodia having to make an effort to impress.
• Intelligence: Since the Funan period and later the Chenla period, most ancient Khmer empires have navigated and balanced between major powers such as the Chinese, Indian, Javanese, and Dvaravati dynasties, as well as among their powerful neighbors in modern times. The accumulated experience gained from navigating these major powers informs specific diplomatic judgments that cannot be learned from textbooks alone.
• Attractiveness: The difference between a truly open culture and a culture of manipulation that seeks to expand and attract through strategic means will yield different Tourists and partners can feel the genuine invitation and welcome of Cambodia.

• Approachability: Making it easy to talk and Cambodian hospitality is not a formal protocol; it is a habit and mindset of the Cambodian people, who are friendly, hospitable, and helpful, and can transform the atmosphere in which difficult conversations occur into a relaxed one.
• Friendship: The driving force of Cambodia’s foreign policy is “strengthening old friendships and creating new ones.” Cambodia sees the world as a brotherhood, a partner in a common project, rather than a competitor in a zero-sum game. Cambodia’s relationships are an investment in a shared future, not a defense against current threats.

These seven pillars do not operate independently of each other. They form an integrated philosophy of statecraft, in which each quality is dependent on all the others. Tenderness without resilience is doomed to failure or disappointment. Resilience without tenderness risks becoming narrow-minded and isolated from others. Charm without intelligence risks becoming a victim of the enemy. Together, they describe a diplomatic posture that maximizes the capacity for sustained engagement while minimizing the vulnerability that comes with material weakness.

One point worth emphasizing: these pillars are drawn from the real Cambodia. They are descriptions based on careful observation and in-depth research of what Cambodian diplomacy has actually done. The theoretical contribution lies in naming, systematizing, and making it possible to analyze what already exists in practice.

VI.  Apsara Diplomacy in Action: Four Case Studies

• 6.1 The Preah Vihear Cultural Pivot

The story of Preah Vihear Temple is one of the cases that provides the most lessons on international relations. In the history of modern Cambodian diplomacy, it is a case study that the current framework of international relations struggles to explain well. The dispute between Cambodia and Thailand over sovereignty led to two International Court of Justice (ICJ) rulings—the original 1962 ruling that decided the Preah Vihear temple was within Cambodia’s sovereign territory, and the 2013 interpretation that made it clear that the land rights surrounding the temple also belonged to Cambodia. But the ruling and international law could not completely protect the temple or protect Cambodian territory from attempts by Thailand, a neighboring country with seven times greater military and economic power. What matters is not just the legal outcome, but the strategy which Cambodia chose to deploy alongside its legal strategy: namely, its inclusion as a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 2008. Cambodia decided to register Preah Vihear Temple as a World Heritage Site, despite objections from Thailand. This inclusion did not resolve the territorial dispute, which remains a problem to be resolved under international law, but it fundamentally changed the competitive landscape for a small country like Cambodia. The conflict that Thailand wanted to characterize as a territorial dispute along the border was transformed into a shared mission and a shared obligation in which Thailand and other countries must join to protect the heritage, which is the property of humanity and a sacred place of Khmer civilization. This is strategy, beauty, and intelligence in diplomatic activities. The success of this UNESCO World Heritage Site designation is not due to Cambodia's strong military strength, but rather due to the undeniable legitimacy of its civilization, showing that legal documents alone are not enough.

6.2  Bon Om Touk and the Diplomacy of Hospitality

The Royal Boat Festival, Floating Festival, and Full Moon Festival (Ok Ambok) is an annual event that is celebrated with great solemnity in November every year in Cambodia. The three-day royal ceremony attracts millions of participants from across the country and the region. Cambodia's practice of inviting foreign dignitaries, ambassadors, and inter-parliamentary delegations to attend has created a space for engagement that formal diplomacy cannot replicate. The shared experience of the celebration, the warmth of Cambodian hospitality, and the sight of the boat race in front of the Royal Palace are not just cultural performances. This royal festival is a diplomatic tool that has an impact and real results by operating according to Principle 6, creating an approachable nature to reduce the psychological barriers between Cambodia and its dialogue partners. As Cull (2009) noted: "The most enduring public diplomacy is built on real cultural change rather than protocol- based messaging." The Water Festival is an example of this: it is a diplomatic gesture through the demonstration of a true, living civilization, not a manufactured strategy.

6.3  Repatriation of the Ancestors: The Koh Ker Statues

Among the most notable recent examples of Apsara diplomacy is Cambodia's successful campaign to reclaim Angkor-era sculptures stolen from major Western museums, particularly the Metropolitan Museum of Art (The Met) in New York City. Important sculptures, such as the 10th- century sandstone warrior sculptures from the Koh Ker temple area, had their return challenged despite Cambodia being the heritage owner. Rather than relying primarily on legal means, Cambodia utilized its own diplomatic flexibility. In this case, Cambodia's approach was storytelling. Cambodian officials, scholars, and cultural advocates prepared scenarios for reclaiming heritage assets in terms of cultural conscience obligations. They told stories about the needs of the characters, the Koh Ker sculptures, to return to their homeland. They spoke about the deep wounds in Khmer civilization caused by the absence of statues representing the legacy of their ancestors, and about the high moral responsibility that an institution holds regarding what they and the world know is the common heritage of humanity. The narration of this story showed that there is more persuasion through gentleness than conquest by law, not because the law is weak, but because cultural arrangements mobilize a kind of moral authority. The legal process alone could not produce such satisfactory results.

6.4  The Angkorian Consensus: Cambodia as Bridge-Builder

Cambodia's leadership in multilateral contexts, whether in ASEAN, the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU), or bilateral contexts, has consistently demonstrated what is called the Angkorian Consensus: a position of principled neutrality as stated in the constitution and active participation in mediation and peaceful dispute resolution. By increasing ASEAN friends and dialogue partners, Cambodia has done all of this well. Obviously, whether it is the Myanmar issue, supporting Timor-Leste's accession to ASEAN, or even issues such as the development of a code of conduct for the South China Sea, Cambodia has never supported any one party against any other party.

Cambodia's foreign policy stance is not one of ignorance or inaction, but is based on the recognition that the greatest credit, influence, or power of a small state in a multipolar world is its credibility as an honest interlocutor. Maintaining fruitful relationships by being able to serve multiple powers at the same time without becoming subordinate to any one party is a unique characteristic that ASEAN countries have always practiced. Cambodia's capability to maintain close ties with China while maintaining meaningful engagement with the United States, the European Union, Japan, and its ASEAN partners is not unprincipled risk-taking; it is a deliberate implementation of the Fourth Principle (Intelligence is the Wisdom of Building Bridges) and the Seventh Principle (Friendship is a Partnership for the Common Progress of Humanity, Rather than Joining a Geopolitical Alliance) of Apsara Diplomacy. At this point, it is worth recalling that historical roots run very deep for the Khmer people; the Kingdom of Phnom Penh (Funan) maintained relations simultaneously with both the great powers of the Chinese and Indian civilizations, and to this day, Cambodia continues the tradition of building and maintaining those relations without placing itself under the sway of any one great power.

VII.  The Institutional Vehicle: Parliamentary Diplomacy

A theoretical framework, no matter how persuasive, still needs support from institutional leaders to become a foreign policy that can be implemented. In the case of Cambodia, the Senate of the Kingdom of Cambodia has become an important mechanism in the field of foreign affairs, especially under the high leadership of Samdech Akka Moha Sena Padei Techo Hun Sen, President of the Senate of the Kingdom of Cambodia, who has announced two priorities for the 5th Senate, namely parliamentary diplomacy and accountability to the electorate. The parliamentary diplomacy mechanism is carried out through different channels as follows:

• High-level direct participation: The Senate President and the Senate Vice President receive and meet foreign dignitaries in a context that combines state power with a friendly, collegial approach that executive diplomacy rarely achieves. Parliamentary diplomacy operates at a slightly different level, often referred to as Track Two Diplomacy or public diplomacy. Such diplomacy is freer, more open, less pressured, less constrained by formal protocol, and more conducive to building relationships that can fully implement Apsara 
• Committee on Foreign Affairs, International Cooperation, Information and Media: Provides institutional support for Cambodia's international engagement—monitoring legal developments in partner countries, preparing briefings for Senate leadership, and contributing to shaping the House's foreign policy stance.
• 
  
• Bilateral friendship groups: In the Senate, parliamentary friendship groups with parliaments of partner countries across Asia, Europe, and the Americas are a deep-rooted mechanism for parliamentary These groups directly implement the 7th principle of Apsara Diplomacy (Friendship) in an institutional form: they create networks of parliamentary friends and have ongoing person-to-person engagement that lasts longer than the traditional diplomatic cycle, which is limited to the government's mandate.
• Technical Cooperation Infrastructure of the General Secretariat: Allows Cambodia to share its legal and parliamentary expertise with partner institutions—a form of capacity- building diplomacy that creates goodwill and positions Cambodia as a contributor to regional governance development, rather than simply a recipient of external assistance.

• VIII.  Apsara Diplomacy in Global Perspective
• 8.1 Dialogue with Tianxia and the Chinese Community of Shared Future

Among non-Western international relations theories in recent decades, there is the traditional theory of international relations known as Chinese Tianxia, most prominently interpreted by the philosopher Zhao Tingyang (2005). Tianxia (天下), which means "under one sky," is built on the assumption that world order should not be organized solely around the concept of sovereignty and competition for national interests according to the theory of the Westphalian-style state, but rather around the management of a shared, civilized space in which state-to-state relations are organized around mutual obligations rather than competition for power. President Xi Jinping's (2017) idea of a "community with a shared future for mankind" represents a modern adaptation of this tradition to China's global engagement.

Apsara diplomacy also has important similarities with this Chinese tradition of diplomacy. Both theories of international relations reject the logic where "profit and loss equal each other" or a Zero- Sum Game. Both theories prioritize relationship harmony beyond strategic benefits, laying the foundation of the international order on the values of civilization rather than material interests. Recall once again that the mission of Chinese scholars more than 1,700 years ago was a gesture of this traditional Tianxia. The advancement of Chinese civilization from its world towards a distant kingdom by water was driven by curiosity and recognition rather than aggression, conquest, and control. The response of the Funan Empire was a diplomatic gesture of the Khmer, confident in the attractiveness of its civilization and confident enough in its own depth to dare to accept strangers without concern.

But the two frameworks (Tianxia and Apsara) are not entirely the same, and the differences are important to bring up for discussion here. The Tianxia theory, both in ancient and modern forms, tends toward universalism—a desire to describe and organize the whole world order. In contrast, Apsara diplomacy is intentionally specific, self-contained, and self-governing, starting from the experience of a small state, grounding itself in the cultural heritage of the Khmer people, and not demanding that anything be emulated or universally applied unless requested. That is, Cambodia is open and happy to share the seven principles of its Apsara diplomacy, but believes other small states should draw from their own civilizational resources and create a framework similar to Cambodia’s for their own countries. This is not a sign that Cambodia is unambitious, but rather reflects an epistemological choice. The global IR that Acharya (2014a) is trying to advocate for is not the search for a new universal theory to replace the Western-style globalist international framework, but rather a plurality of theoretical perspectives on international relations.

8.2  Southeast Asian Civilizational Parallels

Apsara diplomacy does not stand alone in the Southeast Asian cultural landscape. Comparable civilizational characters appear in the indigenous traditions of Cambodia's neighboring countries:

• Myanmar: Nat (a guardian figure who embodies the protection of the community).
• Thailand: Angel (Devata) (Heavenly deities with functions similar to Apsaras).
• Indonesia: Mother Goddess Dewi Sri (Goddess of Rice, symbol of community life and well-being).
• Philippines: Diwata (nature spirits associated with the beauty and harmony of the environment).

Each of these actors, in principle, can serve as the foundation for an indigenous IR framework. If Apsara diplomacy successfully names and creates a Cambodian-style diplomatic logic system, this context will become a diplomatic model that scholars and practitioners from other Southeast Asian countries can use to create their own diplomatic tradition theories. The result in the future is that the world will no longer have IR theories from the West alone, but rather a collection of theories from many other civilizations with different contexts, namely: a set of pluralistic, regionally based alternatives to the framework that governs international relations.

8.3  Small State Diplomacy in the Indo-Pacific Region

Keohane's (1969) seminal work, "Lilliputians' Dilemmas," captured the core challenge that small states face in an anarchic international system: they lack the material resources to play international politics with great powers on an equal footing. The standard formula is for small states to form alliances, follow the big powers, and participate in multilateral institutions. This is a strategy of compromise, not problem-solving. Apsara diplomacy proposes something more transformative: a reassessment of the value of international influence. If attraction, not coercion, is the primary tool of diplomacy, then Cambodia can certainly participate effectively. Surveys consistently show that small and medium-sized states in the region resist being forced into alliances with major powers, such as the United States or China. Apsara diplomacy provides a theoretical vocabulary for opposing such forced choices.

IX.  Conclusion

This article introduces Apsara diplomacy as a theoretical framework for Khmer-style international relations for further understanding and application in the field of international relations. Built on the seven virtues of the Apsara and organized around the architectural concept of “silk and stone,” this framework captures the characteristics of Cambodia’s traditional diplomatic practices over the past two thousand years.

The theoretical contribution to the field of global international relations is to demonstrate that cultural resources, traditions, and customs in communication from the ancient times of the Khmer Empire can be used to construct a theory of international relations in the modern era. It can be truly applied, not just as a nice description, but as a theoretical tool that can be used throughout different contexts, with evidence and case studies that can be cited for comparison. This article describes what Cambodia has done and provides further guidance on what should continue to be done, along with an opening for other small states in the Global South to look at their own civilizational traditions to preserve and implement them as their own strategies.

International relations, at its best, is a form of wisdom. It is, in fact, how human communities can live together and cooperate. The Apsara Diplomatic Framework clearly states that this wisdom does not have to come only from Western universities and think tanks. It can come from the walls of Angkor Wat, from royal dances, from seasonal celebrations of the Tonle Sap River, and from the travel notes of Chinese envoys who returned with nothing but admiration.

Future research should test these principles or match them with larger datasets of Cambodian foreign policy and diplomacy, including state diplomacy, parliamentary diplomacy, public diplomacy, and people-to-people diplomacy. Research should continue to develop comparative analyses of Southeast Asian civilizational models and examine the conditions under which the core principles of Apsara diplomacy can be adapted for use by other small states under the pressure of great power competition in the twenty-first century. The theoretical work that has begun here is just the beginning.

References

• Acharya, A. (2014a). Global international relations (IR) and regional worlds: A new agenda for international studies. International Studies Quarterly, 58(4), 647–659.
• Acharya, A. (2014b). The end of American world order. Polity Press.
• Acharya, A., & Buzan, B. (Eds.). (2010). Non-Western international relations theory: Perspectives on and beyond Asia. Routledge.
• Acharya, A., & Buzan, B. (2019). The making of global international relations: Origins and evolution of IR at its centenary. Cambridge University Press.
• Callahan, W. A. (2008). Chinese visions of world order: Post-hegemonic or a new hegemony? International Studies Review, 10(4), 749–761.
• Chandler, D. (2008). A history of Cambodia (4th ed.). Westview Press.
• Cull, N. J. (2009). Public diplomacy: Lessons from the past. Figueroa Press.
• Hall, D. G. E. (1981). A history of South-East Asia (4th ed.). Macmillan.
• Hall, K. R. (2011). A history of early Southeast Asia: Maritime trade and societal development, 100–1500. Rowman & Littlefield.
• International Court of Justice. (1962). Case concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear (Cambodia v. Thailand) (Judgment of 15 June 1962). ICJ Reports 1962.
• International Court of Justice. (2013). Request for interpretation of the judgment of 15 June 1962 in the case concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear. ICJ Reports 2013.
• Inter-Parliamentary Union. (2019). Guidelines for parliamentary diplomacy. IPU.
• Kang, T. [康泰]. (3rd century CE). Wushi waiguo zhuan [吳時外國傳, Accounts of foreign states in Wu times]. Excerpts preserved in the Shuijing zhu and subsequent dynastic histories.
• Keohane, R. O. (1969). Lilliputians' dilemmas: Small states in international politics. International Organization, 23(2), 291–310.
• Khath, B. (2023). Soft power in India's Act East Policy: A Cambodian perspective. India Quarterly, 79(2), 230–248.
• Ling, L. H. M. (2014). The Dao of world politics: Towards a post-Westphalian, worldist international relations. Routledge.
• Nye, J. S., Jr. (2004). Soft power: The means to success in world politics. Public Affairs.
• Srey, M. (2023). Soft power as smart diplomacy for Cambodia. AVI Perspective, (Issue 2023-02). Asian Vision Institute.
• Tarling, N. (Ed.). (1999). The Cambridge history of Southeast Asia (Vol. 1). Cambridge University Press.
• UNESCO. (1987). Mogao Caves (World Heritage List No. 440). UNESCO.
• UNESCO. (2008). Preah Vihear Temple: World Heritage nomination file. UNESCO World Heritage Center.
•Vickery, M. (2003–2004). Funan reviewed: Deconstructing the ancients. Bulletin de l'École Française d'Extrême-Orient, 90–91, 101–143.
• Wade, G., & Sun, L. (Eds.). (2010). Southeast Asia in the fifteenth century: The China factor. NUS Press.
• Wendt, A. (1999). Social theory of international politics. Cambridge University Press.
• Xi, J. (2017, October 18). Secure a decisive victory in building a moderately prosperous society in all respects [Report to the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China].
• Zhao, T. (2005). Tianxia: A philosophy for the world institution [天下:一個世界體系的想像]. Shanghai Century Publishing.
• Zhu, Y. [朱應]. (3rd century CE). Funan Yiwu zhi [扶南異物志]. Excerpts preserved in later dynastic compilations.

(The author Sok Leakhena is the Vice-Chief of the Cabinet of the Second Vice-President and Director of the International Affairs Research Department at the Senate of Cambodia.)