Thailand's army, the silent political actor

[Mentors]

BANGKOK: While a populist street movement paints Bangkok red, the army has been quietly acting its own role and will be pivotal to determining how the crisis plays out, analysts say.

 

Experts differ on who will win the political battle pitting Oxford-educated Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva against the “Red Shirts†loyal to his ousted billionaire predecessor, Thaksin Shinawatra.

 

But they agree that some of the real power play is taking place behind closed doors.

 

The army, responsible for no fewer than 18 coups or attempted coups since 1932, overthrew Thaksin in September 2006 and appointed a general to head an interim government, which created a new constitution during its year in power.

 

Thaksin’s allies took office in 2007 elections, but were hounded by a series of lawsuits and a vocal protest movement. They were toppled by court rulings in 2008 that saw Abhisit come to power through a parliamentary vote.

 

The coup still looms large over the political stage, said Thongchai Winichakul, a Thai analyst at the University of Wisconsin-Madison in the United States.

[color:red]“The 2006 coup has let the genie out of the bottle,†said Thongchai, arguing that the country’s establishment had asked the army to step in and restore order. “Of course they didn’t turn down the invitation to power.†[/color]

 

The Red Shirts have argued that former prime minister Prem Tinsulanonda, who is now the chief adviser to Thailand’s revered King Bhumibol Adulyadej, masterminded the putsch.

The 82-year-old monarch has been a stabilising force during six politically turbulent decades on the throne, but he has kept out of the current crisis.

 

[color:red]Observers now say Abhisit and his fragile coalition government survive only with the support of the army and its chief, General Anupong Paojinda.

The current army leadership “and (Abhisit’s) Democrats are both adamantly anti-Thaksinâ€Â, said Paul Chambers, a Thailand expert at Germany’s Heidelberg University.[/color]

“The former currently dominates the armed forces, the latter the ruling coalition. It is thus in their mutual interests to remain together.â€Â

 

The military was widely seen as being behind Abhisit’s sudden decision on Sunday to agree to televised talks with the Red Shirts, after previously refusing all negotiation until they left the streets.

And many believe the army must have agreed to Abhisit’s offer  rejected by the Red Shirts  to call elections a year early, at the end of 2010.

 

[color:red]If the polls were held even earlier it might upset a transition of power in the army, with Anupong due to retire in October.

He is pushing his number two, General Prayuth Chan-ocha, to succeed him but  despite the army’s clout  the appointment must be signed off by the government.

So it would have been “extremely unusual†if an election date was discussed for before the October 1 military reshuffle, said Chris Baker, a Bangkok-based Thailand expert and biographer of Thaksin. [/color]

 

In recent months, Thai media have pored over signs of splits within army ranks and ruminated over persistent rumours of a fresh coup being plotted in the background.

 

But Chambers said the military was likely to keep up the pressure in private rather than stage another coup, allowing the country to maintain a

“veneer of electoral democracyâ€Â.

 

“It is more convenient to allow an elected prime minister to face potential public scorn while the armed forces reap the rewards of enhanced prerogatives behind the scenes,†he said.

 

Analyst Thongchai believes it is now up to Thai society to reject the army’s pre-eminent role in politics. Otherwise the military genies look likely to remain.

 

[color:red]Only when “society no longer seeks a quick but false fix of political problems, but lets the democratic process and rule of law run its course, will they return to the bottleâ€Â, he said. --[/color] AFP

 

http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/articles/20100401154931/Article/index_html

 

 

[Flashermac]

<< Observers now say Abhisit and his fragile coalition government survive only with the support of the army and its chief, General Anupong Paojinda. >>

 

And just what "observers" is that? A Farang in Heidelberg?

 

<< Only when “society no longer seeks a quick but false fix of political problems, but lets the democratic process and rule of law run its course, will they return to the bottleâ€Â, he said. >>

 

"Democracy" such as the election Thaksin called with just 30 days notice so that no one would be able to leave his party for another one? The election that was boycotted by most parties and in which Takky's people tried to bribe small parties to run against him in the south to try to get around the % rules?

 

Of course, when Takky appointed his brother the head of the Army and his cousin head of the police, that was democratic.

 

To my surprise, I got a taxi driver today who told me he was sick of the whole mess and wished the red shirts would go home. "It won't make any difference who is in power," he said.

 

 

 

 

 

[SpiceMan]

To my surprise, I got a taxi driver today who told me he was sick of the whole mess and wished the red shirts would go home. "It won't make any difference who is in power," he said.

 

The politics of despair will never improve the lives of anyone.