“Blessed are the peacemakers” (Matthew 5:9) is a phrase that echoes from antiquity into the present day. Diplomats and world leaders who embody the spirit of this verse, regardless of their faith, distinguish themselves from the warlords and tyrants of history. One of the clearest marks of such leaders is how they conduct themselves in situations where old grievances run deep—resolving conflicts between nations or peoples that have simmered for decades.

Southeast Asia is no stranger to violence. The long-term effects of the Vietnam War still linger, as does a long history of imperialism from foreign powers. The recent border clash between Cambodia and Thailand in 2025 can be traced, in part, to the French colony of Indochina in the 19th century, which created unstable borders across the region. These unresolved tensions were compounded during the Cold War and further exacerbated by refugee crises and drug trafficking. Confrontation seemed inevitable.

It is nothing short of a miracle, then, that a full-scale war between Cambodia and Thailand was averted in late July 2025. This victory for peace was the result of efforts from several nations, particularly members of the ASEAN organization such as Malaysia. For reference, ASEAN is a joint security and trade partnership of several Southeast Asian countries.

Looking outside Asia, one key player stands out in the final ceasefire agreement: the United States. Actions taken by U.S. President Donald Trump provide one of the clearest examples of a truly non-interventionist America. By using economic incentives rather than threats of military force, Trump set himself apart from his most recent predecessors in the White House.

For comparison, Ronald Reagan popularized the phrase “Peace Through Strength,” the idea that a show of force—without engaging in combat—could deter enemies from fighting at all. Trump has often affirmed his belief in this doctrine as well. However, his actions during the Southeast Asia negotiations revealed another truth: a strong economy can be just as effective a tool for securing peace.

While tariffs have generally sparked negative reactions worldwide, a case can be made for their careful, calculated use to achieve specific foreign policy goals.

ASEAN has voiced opposition to U.S. trade tariffs. Despite this, the organization refused to retaliate with tariffs of its own. Preserving strong trade relations with the United States remains ASEAN’s top economic priority. This gave Trump an opening. He realized that the mere threat of tariffs could prove highly effective, especially once fighting broke out between Thailand and Cambodia.

Initially, Thailand rejected an American offer to mediate the conflict. Yet just one day later, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and President Trump engaged in direct communication with leaders of both nations—a major step forward in the negotiation process. What changed the Thai government’s mind so quickly? It seems Trump’s declaration that tariff negotiations would be paused until “fighting STOPS” convinced Thailand to come to the table.

This was a remarkable moment in American foreign policy. Just as Ronald Reagan helped bring an end to the Cold War without firing a shot, Donald Trump spared Southeast Asia from another devastating war. The achievement did not go unnoticed. In early August 2025, Cambodia announced it would nominate Trump for a Nobel Peace Prize, crediting him directly for the success of the peace talks.

What does this mean for the future? It shows that the United States does not always need to escalate conflicts by deploying troops (as in Vietnam, Iraq, and Bosnia), nor must it rely solely on sanctions to apply pressure on hostile nations (as with Cuba, North Korea, and Russia). Tariffs have now been added to the list of proven tools to end conflicts.

That said, tariffs should not be applied recklessly. They are most effective against nations heavily dependent on trade with the United States, and they only work if Americans are willing to bear the domestic costs. For example, many Americans may not support higher tariffs on China given the U.S.’s heavier reliance on Chinese products and resources. That could change under extreme circumstances, however—particularly if Taiwan or Japan faced a direct military threat from China.

With the ceasefire between Thailand and Cambodia, Donald Trump and Marco Rubio prevented unnecessary bloodshed by leveraging America’s economic strength. But this tool must be used with care. In the right hands, it can save lives; in the wrong hands, or applied in the wrong situation, it could backfire disastrously.

Foreign policy analysts would be wise to study this episode closely as America continues to redefine its role as a world leader.

Logan Blakeslee is a fellow at the American Journey Experience’s Freedom Rising Fellowship Program.