EDITORIAL
PM has returned Army to politics

Thaksin has managed to destroy a military-political balance that has taken over three decades to achieve
Whether or not the recently announced Army reshuffle that purged middle-ranking officers said to have strong ties with embattled caretaker Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra out of key positions in Bangkok was warranted, it is a pity that the situation had to come to this. The military and political spheres of Thai society had been doing their best to stay away from one another since the turbulence of the early 1990s. Even after Thaksin came along and started interfering with the affairs of the armed forces, most top commanders continued to behave admirably. The reshuffle has political motives written all over it. Wild speculation has been swirling in recent weeks concerning coup and counter-coup plots, as caretaker Prime Minister Thaksin has appeared determined to fight to the bitter end to maintain his political power against his formidable opponents. All of a sudden, the might of the military has become vital to a political leader's survival, and this bodes ill for Thailand's democracy, which is struggling to shake off the corruption-prone, authoritarian Thaksin administration through constitutional means. The "Class 10" members - as Thaksin's classmates from the Pre-Cadet Academy's Class 10 are often called - were in command positions in many units stationed in and around the capital. Their connection with him has invariably put them in the political spotlight. Military leaders, led by Army Commander-in-Chief Sonthi Boonyaratglin, had publicly warned junior officers that there were lines they should not cross. Sonthi told the Class 10 members in no uncertain terms that if any element in the armed forces was plotting something malicious, Thai society would never accept it. That the prospect of a coup - which has until recently been unthinkable, not so much because it was a taboo subject but rather because of a public consensus on it being an impractical means to gain or retain political power - is now being openly discussed only reflects the fragile state of politics in this country. The last time a successful coup was staged was in February 1991 when a group of military officers led by supreme commander General Sunthorn Kongsompong and Suchinda Kraprayoon, then the commander-in-chief of the Army, seized power from the Chatichai government. They cited widespread government corruption as justification and initiated an investigation into the "unexplained wealth" of politicians at the time. But the real motives of the coup leaders were much less noble than their purported mission to rid politics of corruption. They turned out to be no less self-serving or corrupt than the civilian political leader they toppled. Any coup or use of military force to achieve a political objective - by whomever for whatever purpose - must be rejected by all citizens who love democracy regardless of their ideological inclinations or political affiliations. Since the last coup, in 1991, which is generally believed to be Thailand's last, all democratically elected governments knew enough to leave the armed forces well alone. In the meantime, a new generations of military officers has developed a high level of professionalism while steering clear of politics. But such positive developments have been reversed since Thaksin came to power in 2001. Thaksin, a former police lieutenant-colonel, has a sinister design for the national police force and the military. The merit system has been corrupted and undermined through the showering of personal favours in exchange for personal allegiance. Nepotism in the armed forces is back with a vengeance. We can only hope the royal decree that earmarks October 15 as the D-day for restoring our democracy to its full strength will cast away the threats that have loomed frighteningly over the past few weeks. They were threats ironically posed by someone who has been proclaiming himself, domestically and internationally, to be a defender of democracy and who has portrayed himself as a victim of those using undemocratic political means to achieve their ends.
|