The Cavalier Daily
Serving the University Community Since 1890

Implications of the Thai coup

EARLIER THIS WEEK, the worldwent into a frenzy as tanks rolled into Bangkok. Thailand, one of Southeast Asia's fastest growing economies and a staunch U.S. ally, experienced a much misunderstood coup by military officials against the government of Thaksin Shinawatra. The Washington Post dismissed it as a "leap backward" for democracy, the Australian government called it "unjustified." These shallow views ignore the political and cultural situations in Thailand and the positive effects of the coup that are more complex than a superficial study suggests.

Most observers tend to label the coup as an example of "undemocratic means" of government transition, which overlooks two critical facts. First, democracy in Thailand has its own unique flavor. A military coup, implicitly supported by the Thai king, may be considered immoral in the West, but it is inherently moral in Thailand. The king, Bhumibol Adulyadej, is the ultimate moral authority in Thailand because of Thai culture's ancient, almost-godlike reverence for its monarchs. To many in Thailand, Thaksin committed the ultimate sin of defying the king's authority in a number of instances, such as implicating officials close to the king in coup attempts and greeting guests who attended the king's 60th anniversary in July before the king did. Thaksin therefore deserved this moral usurpation of this power.

Second, the coup was a desperate measure taken to resolve a stymied political process in Thailand. This began as early as February this year when Thais took to the street to protest Thaksin's decision to sell his family's share of a telecommunications firm Shin Corp to Singapore -- prompting allegations of tax evasion. Thaksin announced snap elections, which he later won -- only to have this declared invalid by the constitutional court due to a massive boycott of opposition parties. Thaksin was also sure to win another round of elections by way of his secure rural base, while continuing his assaults on democracy through restricting press freedom, massacring thousands by extrajudicial means in the government's war on drugs and cracking down on anti-Burmese dissidents within Thailand. With the judiciary recommending a cyclic return to corrupt elections and the parliament dissolved, this was the only avenue toward long term democratic change.

In addition, the Thai coup brings many positive outcomes for Thailand and the United States. The removal of Thaksin will pave the way for the resolution of the bloody Islamic insurgency in South Thailand -- the greatest national security threat. Thaksin's iron-fisted campaign in the south has killed over 1,000 people in a year while he has rejected repeated offers by more experienced military personnel. Most prominent of these proponents is the current coup leader himself, Sondhi Boonyaratlalin, a Muslim who is well-versed with the situation. Lukman B. Lima, one of the separatist leaders in the South, told the Associated Press that Sondhi was the "only one who knows the real problems of the South" and hinted that reconciliation may be possible under his command. The coup could do a lot to resolve the crisis in the South

Further, the military appears willing to erase Thaksin's culture of corruption and suppression of democracy. They have organized a committee to track graft and corruption among Thaksin's allies, vowed to appoint a civilian leader within two weeks and hold elections within a year. Even if they do not follow this timetable, analysts have predicted that the very Thais who supported the coup in Bangkok may well turn against the military leaders and start another democratic upheaval.

As for U.S.-Thai relations, according to Paul Chambers, lecturer at Oklahoma University, relations have tended to be closer when Thailand has been under military regimes rather than civilian rulers who sought to balance relations with the US with other powers like China. Thaksin's business interests and domestic public opinion also seemed to be preventing Thailand from fully supporting U.S. foreign policies -- and these have both been neutralized by the military takeover. Thaksin's business dealings in Myanmar and China influenced his orientation toward these countries, while Muslim political opposition within Thaksin's government had initially impaired Thai support for the U.S. war on terror. The military, comprising of more pro-U.S. individuals, may well increase prospects for U.S. military relations with Thailand and its war on terrorism in Southeast Asia.

As for human rights, the United States has always been willing to be silent on these violations if Thailand is willing to follow US policies. Now, it has the even greater opportunity to blame human rights violations solely on the military while continuing to finance the Thai military on the sidelines. It might also benefit in that the Thai military consists of hardliners against Myanmar, which might harden Thai policy which has traditionally moved toward engagement instead of the U.S. policy of isolation.

Prashanth Parameswaran's column appears Mondays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at pparameswaran@cavalierdaily.com.

Local Savings

Comments

Latest Video

Latest Podcast

Ahead of Lighting of the Lawn, Riley McNeill and Chelsea Huffman, co-chairs of the Lighting of the Lawn Committee and fourth-year College students, and Peter Mildrew, the president of the Hullabahoos and third-year Commerce student, discuss the festive tradition which brings the community together year after year. From planning the event to preparing performances, McNeil, Huffman and Mildrew elucidate how the light show has historically helped the community heal in the midst of hardship.