|
NOT YET TIME: The conditions to justify intervention by the army - a threat to the monarchy or national security, or violence on the streets - do not exist. The government occasionally gives in to anti-government protesters to avoid giving the army a reason to step in. -- PHOTO: REUTERS
|
|
|
BANGKOK - ONCE again, the long shadow of the military looms over Thailand, with rumours in Bangkok every other day of the army readying itself to seize power again.
The conditions to justify such intervention - a threat to the monarchy or to national security, or uncontrolled bloodshed on the streets - do not exist at the moment. But many analysts feel the army will not hesitate to step in if any of those factors should arise.
One of the most significant definitions of the role of the military in Thailand was twice made by Privy Council president Prem Tinsulanonda, a former armed forces chief and premier before the September2006 coup d'etat which ousted then Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra.
General Prem likened the military to a racehorse and the government to the jockey. The government, he emphasised, did not own the horse.
The message, said Thai scholar and author Chris Baker, was that 'the military is not accountable. Elected governments come once in a while and go'.
'There has been no real reform in the internal culture of the military (which) still tells itself it is answering to a higher morality.'
The leverage of the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD), which is campaigning to bring down the People Power Party-led government, is multiplied by the potential of army intervention. By themselves, the alliance - a mix of individual activists, a former general who fought on the side of democracy in 1992 and a media baron, none of whom has ever been elected - have little real clout.
The PAD, as in early 2006, when it campaigned to oust Thaksin, is adept at pushing to the brink, and then pulling back.
The government also plays the game, occasionally giving in to the PAD in a complex game aimed at avoiding a head-on clash and violence on the streets.
Analysts say it is in the interests of the PAD, which wants to bring down a government that it sees as a puppet of Thaksin, to provoke a bloody confrontation, because that would lay the ground for the army to step in.
After ruling Thailand in one form or another for decades, the military was pushed out of politics between 1988 and 1992 - though it hung on to its radio and TV stations, which even today actively project the army's role as a developer of the country and guardian of the monarchy.
Some two years after the 1997 financial crisis, the Democrat Party administration of then Premier Chuan Leekpai drew up reforms aimed at downsizing and streamlining the military - which were accepted.
But they were essentially scrapped when Thaksin took power in 2001 and appointed former armed forces chief Chavalit Yongchaiyudh as defence minister.
The attempt to 'socialise' the military eventually failed, Mr Baker said at a panel discussion on the role of the military at the Foreign Correspondents Club of Thailand on Wednesday evening.
Chulalongkorn University professor Panitan Wattanayagorn, who has advised a series of governments on military reform and security issues, sees the return of the military in 2006 as a resurgence and consolidation of its domestic role.
Speaking at the same panel discussion, he noted: 'Seventy-five years ago, it was the young liberal colonels who brought democracy to Thailand.
'Later coups were still by the young colonels, aimed at improving the system.'
But recent interventions have been by the top generals. No liberals have emerged from the military, he said.
'Incorporating the military into Thailand's new democratic structure is a problem.'
Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej appears to have forged an accommodation of sorts with army chief Anupong Paochinda.
An analyst who asked not to be named told The Straits Times: 'Prime Minister Samak knows his survival does not depend on support from the People Power Party, but on the army.'
General Anupong, though a classmate of Thaksin's, served in the Queen's Guard. When his boss, General Sonthi Boonyarataglin, who has since retired, called on him in 2006 to seize power, he moved to oust Thaksin.
Ironically the controversial Mr Samak may hold the key to stability, noted Prof Panitan.
If Mr Samak - a committed royalist but disliked by many in the Bangkok elite and in Thaksin's old Thai Rak Thai party - were to step down or be ousted, there is nobody quite like him who could navigate the pressure.
Mr Samak, a veteran political fighter, is walking a thin line between opposing forces - keeping both the army and the PAD at bay, and fending off pressure from Thaksin loyalists.
nirmal@sph.com.sg
|
