Burma Underground :: Coup Update

My previous post on the Thai coup was somewhat hastily written before picking my mom up at the airport, and I haven't had much chance to make the follow-up that I'd hoped. My apologies for another hastily written update. An AP article in the Oregonian today reported that coup leader Sondhi Boonyaratkalin has announced that he will not call another election for at least a year. Presumably this year will be used to re-writed the constitution. The irony of postponing elections in order to draft a democratic constitution under military rule seems to be lost on them.

So much about how this situation will play out in relation to both Thailand and Burma is still up in the air. Thaksin was pretty cozy with the SPDC generals, something many in the Thai government and the military did not approve of. This new 'interim' military government in Bangkok may be less supportive, but will it even be an issue they can be bothered to address? Protests against Thailand and Thaksin's agreement to build dams on the Salween river were scheduled for the 19th, but have also now been postponed - besides the confusion of protesting an ousted leader, there are now genuine safety concerns for any protests staged in Bangkok and Chiang Mai.

The more I think about this coup, the more I don't like it. As much as I didn't like Thaksin, military rule has no place in the modern democratic state Thailand seems to be struggling to become.

In the course of looking for info the other day, I came across a blog I'd seen before but hadn't read much of - New Mandala. Its relatively new, and I just discovered yesterday that one of their bloggers was a professor of mine when I was at the ANU. (Hi Andrew!). They've been keeping up with this issue better than I have, and have a good perspective on it, both having done research in rural Thailand. My experiences in Thailand have obviously been with living as an expat/tourist and working with Burmese exiles. I'm not fond of Thaksin at all, and have had doubts about the legitimacy of the most recent elections - but - elections and politics in rural Thailand is not my area of expertise. Andrew has some great posts at New Mandala exploring the role that the rural/urban divide has played in the recent political kerfuffles, and points out the way in which the pro-democracy Bangkokians often dismiss the validity of rural votes. He posted this rather telling quote from a NY Times article I don't have time to access:

"The group of military officers that overthrew Thailand’s government sought to consolidate its control today, banning public gatherings, threatening to shut down or block telecommunications and urging “farmers and laborers” — many of whom are strong supporters of the ousted government — to stay out of politics."

This kind of attitude doesn't bode well for anyone.

You can start reading here for some good background on the current political situation in Thailand.

Tuesday's post also pre-empted me posting about September 18th, which happens to be the anniversary of the day the current regime seized power in Burma in 1988. There have been many differences between military rule in Thailand and Burma, but at least one common parallel can be drawn, and that is the attitude that deems it acceptable for the military to get involved and intervene in political issues. Thailand doesn't have to look very far to see how far off-track a tolerance for a political military can take a nation.

So, go read the New Mandala for some great updates on the Thailand situation, and I'll work on blogging more about how this relates to Burma.

More Linkage: Mixed Reaction to Thai Coup in Burma

Posted to:

Main Page

Thailand

Comments

Comment posting not enabled for this article

Re: Coup Update

by Anonymous on Sat 23 Sep 2006 09:11 AM PDT | Permanent Link

I agree that a year is a long time for anything but democratratic reconstruction to take place, but we can pray that the general will be true to his word on reform. This could be very positive, Thialand is one of the Burmese junta's largest supporters, while at the same time, in the past, condemning the lack of reform.

If the general is true to his word that HAS to be bad news for the SPDC. Currently Burma is on the table at the UNSC but that is easily being over shadowed by the Bush is the Devil commentary from Chavez and the appearance of the Iranian hot shot how by now is confusing the hell out of everyone as to just what his objectives are. He is very Western in that sense.

I just hope that we elections come in Thialand they well be fully recognized by the international watch dogs as legit, this would have to put further pressure for action on Burma, as opposed to pressure to put pressure on Burma which amounts to nothing.

When will the journalist get us some inside info into the generals character?

Richard J T

Re: Coup Update

by Anonymous on Tue 03 Oct 2006 05:17 PM PDT | Permanent Link

hey, it's richard

so much for hopes for a thoughtful coup, it seems while the general have fallen out of the headlines they have gotten down to business, (http://www.asiantribune.com/index.php?q=node/2285) - this link is a basic cover of the situation on the ground, this link shows the (http://business.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,9074-2387705,00.html) generals taking over commercial interest and this link says (http://www.irna.ir/en/news/view/menu-234/0610030568191646.htm) a warming up with Iran is taking place. I feel stupid that I thought something good could come out of this. As the first link mentions, the appearancne of being prodemocracy was to secure investors, it seems now they are forcing investment security. I don't think taking aim against atrosities in Burma will be on their agenda.

Re: Re: Coup Update

by The Editor on Thu 05 Oct 2006 01:31 PM PDT | Profile | Permanent Link

Thanks for the links, Richard. It's interesting that the article by John Roberts claims the coup was motivated primarily be fears of social unrest, and not opposition to Thaksin's economic policies. And yet, they've wasted no time in pushing the idea of economic self-sufficiency, have they? Thaksin won support based on his populist policies, but won disfavor with his mega-projects and focus on international investment. He seemed to cater to the extremes - populist policies for the poor, fast-paced development for the rich. I heard many lower-middle but upwardly mobile Thais complain that Thaksin was moving too fast, and that it was hard to keep up - but nonetheless, they appreciated the direction he was taking. Perhaps they just wanted more assurance that they could be taken along for the ride and not left behind. It will be interesting to see how this self-sufficiency model will go. It seems to me that its a little reactionary, and at risk of allowing fear to dictate economic policy rather than it's stated focus of well-being over income.

The Tesco Lotus thing is case in point - they accuse them of driving locals out of business, and yet, I don't recall their prices ever being cheaper than local markets. I only shopped there for clothes because they offered western sizes, or other products we just didn't know where to find elsewhere. It seemed to us the only people who shopped at those stores regularly were pretty well-off financially, and it was as much a status thing as economics.

Syndicate this category