Thailand marches ahead of
Myanmar By Brian McCartan
CHIANG MAI, Thailand - Thailand's new
cabinet was sworn in on Wednesday, marking the
final step in the switch from military rule to a
democratically elected government. In next door
Myanmar, the military rulers continue their hold
on power stifling any dissent and make plans to
continue their reign through a "democratic"
constitution.
Thailand's military took
power in a bloodless coup on September 19, 2006,
and established the Council for National Security
(CNS). Immediately after taking power the coup
leaders announced they would hand over power to a
civilian government within a year after drafting a
new constitution and holding
parliamentary elections.
The coup followed almost a year of
protests by people opposed to the government of
prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra. The desire to
see the removal of Thaksin made the coup initially
very popular with people in Bangkok going out in
an almost festive atmosphere to greet the soldiers
and tanks in the streets. This changed, however,
the longer the military stayed in power and its
appointed government became increasingly
unpopular. By late 2007, most Thais were ready for
the generals to go.
After 15 months of
military rule elections were held on December 23
in which over 70% of eligible voters took part.
Although there were some irregularities and the
People's Power Party (PPP) accused the military of
trying to hinder its efforts on the campaign
trail, they were felt by most people to be fair.
As expected, the PPP won the most seats, although
not enough of a majority to form a government
itself. The CNS quietly dissolved itself and after
an intense period of negotiations and
horse-trading the PPP was able to form a coalition
government. PPP head, Samak Sundaravej, was sworn
in as prime minister on January 29.
Before
the elections, however, the military made sure
that its place in Thai politics was assured.
General Anupong Paochinda, the head of the Thai
army, made repeated statements that the army has
retreated permanently from politics, but he also
appointed his trusted subordinates into positions
that could either ensure the success of a future
coup or block the possibility of another one
taking place.
Two other laws passed by the
military appointed National Legislative Assembly
have further strengthened the military's position.
A controversial internal security act passed just
two days before the elections gives sweeping new
powers to the military. The act empowers the
military to contain domestic dissent through such
methods as curbs on government officials and the
right to detain individuals deemed threats to
national security for up to six months without
trial.
Other law takes away the power of
the prime minister to influence the annual
reshuffle of senior officers. Under the new
regulation, the reshuffle list must be approved by
a seven-member committee including the defense
minister, the deputy defense minister, the defense
permanent secretary, the supreme commander and the
heads of the army, navy and air force.
Although the military remains in the
background and critics are skeptical about
Anupong's claims of future non-interference by the
military in politics, Thailand does now have a
democratically elected government. The military
kept its promise to restore a civilian government.
The same cannot be said for Myanmar which,
despite popular support for democracy and an
overwhelming desire to see the military removed
from power, still remains under military
dictatorship after 46 years.
The military
rulers of Myanmar have taken a different tack.
Since taking power in a 1962 coup, the military
has spent much of its time consolidating its power
over the country. Rather than hand over power to a
civilian elected government, the military has
styled itself as the only institution that can
hold the country together. In doing so it has
crushed or sidelined the political opposition.
Mass demonstrations calling for democracy were
violently put down in 1988 and 2007.
Initially stating that the military needed
to take power to preserve the country from the
threat of ethnic and communist insurgents, the
threat changed with the demise of the Burmese
Communist Party and the wave of ceasefires that
took place in the early 1990s. In recent years,
the regime has tried to invoke the threat of
outside invasion - usually understood to mean the
United States - although this has met with
skepticism by much of the population. However, the
views of the general population have never really
mattered much to the regime, what is important is
that they give themselves some reason to retain
power no matter how spurious.
Myanmar's
military rules currently claim to be moving ahead
on a "seven-step roadmap" to bring democracy to
the country. The regime claims that the country is
currently undergoing the third step which is the
drafting of a new constitution. While Thailand's
military rulers took less than a year to draft
their constitution, in Myanmar the process has
been going on for almost 18 years. The junta
claims the constitution will be finished this
year, but it remains unclear whether this will
actually happen.
Whatever constitution is
drafted it is widely believed by opposition
figures and Myanmar watchers that the military's
role in politics will be guaranteed. While
Thailand's coup makers made sure that they would
not be punished for their coup by including an
amnesty clause for themselves and their appointed
officials and enacting laws that would enable them
to legally step in again or influence the running
of the country, for the most part they have gone
back to barracks and stepped aside.
Myanmar's constitution is expected to give
much more to the military. Seats are to be
reserved in the new Parliament - enough to make it
almost impossible for parliamentary decisions to
be made without the support of military
representatives. The military is also expected to
hold onto the more powerful of the cabinet
portfolios as well as to reserve the right to take
over the government again should a civilian
government prove unequal to the task.
Even
with the constitutional provisions the military
rulers of Myanmar are not hedging their bets, they
have spent considerable effort in developing what
many feel will become their political party in the
Union Solidarity and Development Association
(USDA). Originally designed as a government
sponsored civil society organization, the USDA has
grown to pervade almost all aspects of life in
Myanmar. Government bureaucrats, teachers,
students and anyone hoping to curry favor with the
government are encouraged - and sometimes forced -
to become members.
The association has
organized mass rallies in various spots across the
country in support of the regime and to deride
opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi, her National
League for Democracy party and foreign
interference in the country. The USDA is also
widely believed to have been behind the violent
attack on Suu Kyi's motorcade in 2003 and involved
in the September 2007 crackdown on pro-democracy
demonstrators in Yangon and elsewhere.
Elections, when and if they happen, are
expected to be anything but free and fair. The
last elections in Myanmar in 1990 were actually
considered for the most part to have been fair -
and the regime's party suffered an overwhelming
defeat, something they are not likely to allow to
happen again. Elections are a part of the seven
step roadmap and will probably happen, but with
the already reserved seats in parliament for the
military and the influence of the USDA which will
probably field their own candidates, opposition
parties like the NLD will find it very difficult
to win.
Thailand's military, although
rumored to be behind at least one small political
party in the recent elections, for the most part
kept out of the electioneering. While the
Democracy Party was widely believed to be in
support of the coup and were certainly favored by
the coup makers, they are their own masters and
fought the campaign as such. Their loss in the
election was touted by the mainstream media as a
victory over the military rulers and a vindication
for Thaksin and his dismantled Thai Rak Thai
party.
What does matter is that the Thai
military did step aside, and not just for their
preferred party, but for the PPP party which they
identify with Thaksin, the man they overthrew 15
months before. To be sure, the military put in
place mechanisms which will allow them to have
influence over politics and to even make a
comeback if deemed necessary, but they are at
least willing to stand back and allow the
civilians to have their say first.
Thailand and Myanmar are very different in
the political pressures within each country.
Myanmar's ethnic politics, along with drug
trafficking and other illegal businesses that have
grown out of the almost 60-year insurgency make it
much more difficult to arrive at consensus.
However, it can also be argued that these
problems have been allowed to perpetuate and even
grow worse due the lack of democracy and the
adherence to democratic values of civil society.
Thailand, while its democratic institutions are
anything but perfect, at least has shown that they
do function and the people can choose their
government.
Brian McCartan is a
Thailand-based freelance journalist. He may be
contacted through brianpm@comcast.net.
(Copyright 2008 Asia Times Online Ltd. All
rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.)
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road,
Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
