• 
• 

Published on September 17, 2007

With 25 coups in 75 years of democracy, an average of one every three years, Thai politics is no stranger to military intervention. But of all those putsches, the latest power seizure last September was declared the biggest failure by any criteria, according to

historians and political scientists.

On the eve of the junta's coup anniversary on Wednesday, leading historian Nithi Eoseewongse said the military takeover one year ago robbed Thai people of a crucial opportunity to gain confidence, for the first time, in their political power to maintain a system of checks and balances on their leaders.

"By the end of Thaksin's rule, the public was getting a taste for its ability to actually begin demanding accountability from its leadership," Nithi observed.

"Politicians who supported Thaksin began to wobble thanks to the growing anti-Thaksin movement. But this was all short-circuited by a select few who wanted to exploit the situation to block Thai society from passing through this new democratic threshold. "I don't think there's been any other coup that did more damage to Thai society than this one. Had the generals not stepped in, Thai society would have had a great opportunity to take Thaksin down by itself."

Nithi was a keynote speaker at yesterday's public forum on "Constitutions and Coups in Modern Siamese/Thai Politics: A Centennial Review 1912-2007" organised by the Foundation for the Promotion of Social Sciences and Humanities Textbooks Project to mark the 96th anniversary of Siam's first coup in 1912; the 75th anniversary of the 1932 Revolution; the 50th anniversary of the coup by Field Marshal Sarit Thanarat, the 15th anniversary of the May 1992 bloodshed and the first anniversary of the September 19 coup.

Chulalongkorn University historian Chalong Soontravanich agreed the September 19 coup was the "worst failure" of all the coups in Thai modern history, contrasting it with the "most successful" putsch by Field Marshal Sarit in 1954.

"By calling the coup by Sarit the most successful, I don't say if it's good or bad. But [I'm] judging from Sarit's ability to fulfil his promises to restore social order, defend Thailand from outer threats of the Cold War [and] bring about economic prosperity that no other leaders have ever achieved.

"By contrast, this latest coup failed on almost every front. Most importantly, the generals failed to correct wrong fundamentals in Thai society, especially measures to prevent corruption related to mega-projects Thaksin was notorious for."

Going through a checklist of the generals' stated goals when they rolled the tanks on to Bangkok streets last September, Chulalongkorn University political scientist Thitinan Pongsudhirak gave the junta the thumbs-down for its failure to mend social rifts, bring Thaksin to justice for corruption, liberate bureaucracy from political controls and investigate Thaksin's alleged lese majeste attempts.

The rift is still deep-rooted, investigations into corruption have reached a ceiling, the junta has taken control of the bureaucracy and no steps are being taken about lese majeste charges, Thitinan said.

"The generals were able to kick Thaksin out, but are incapable of getting rid of the Thai Rak Thai phenomenon as highlighted by the recent constitution referendum. The costs of the attempt to uproot Thaksin are too high for Thai society. The judicial system lost its balance when it dissolved the Thai Rak Thai Party and barred its 111 executives from politics for the next five years.

"I disliked Thaksin from the beginning and wanted him ousted. But … now as I reassess the costs we have had to pay to get rid of him, I say it's not worth it."

While some might argue that the country is to have its democracy restored with the new constitution and an upcoming election, Thitinan said the question was not if Thailand would have a democracy, but rather whose democracy would it be?

"I say we will have a 'custodial democracy' in which the junta may closely watch from outside but be ready to step in once it sways away from the direction it desires," said Thitinan, director of the Institute of Securities and International Studies.

"With the new constitution, the Senate, the judicial institutes and independent bodies are under its control."

Nantiya Tangwisutijit

The Nation