Governing Thailand

Martial law declared again in a country that has had 11 military coups since the end of the strict monarchy in the 1930s. I've visited the country for work many times and love it as well as most of the people I have worked with there. However, I've never understood the country's lack of capacity to govern itself. Frankly, I fear the whole country could go tits up after the king dies.

At any rate, what are your opinions. What will it take for this country to effectively govern itself?

Do they have nukes or oil? If not, I'm told not to care.

InTenSity wrote:Do they have nukes or oil? If not, I'm told not to care.

In my experience, they have a lot of shopping malls and tourist locales.

Saw a stat during my last visit that Bangkok has 1 million current or former sex workers - in a city of 8 million people, so I guess they have lots of hookers as well. Who knew?

Zapp Brannigan wrote:Martial law declared again in a country that has had 11 military coups since the end of the strict monarchy in the 1930s.  I've visited the country for work many times and love it as well as most of the people I have worked with there.  However, I've never understood the country's lack of capacity to govern itself.  Frankly, I fear the whole country could go tits up after the king dies.

At any rate, what are your opinions.  What will it take for this country to effectively govern itself?

The urban/rural divide seems pretty significant in Thailand. The most recent protesters seemed to be urban and upper middle class (at least from what I gathered), and frightened that Yingluck Thaksin would bring her brother back to the country. Of course her brother was quite popular among rural Thais, but not so much among upper class urbanites or royalists. For me not much can happen until rural and urban Thais can agree on what they want and need from government.

Turtleneck wrote:

The urban/rural divide seems pretty significant in Thailand. The most recent protesters seemed to be urban and upper middle class (at least from what I gathered), and frightened that Yingluck Thaksin would bring her brother back to the country. Of course her brother was quite popular among rural Thais, but not so much among upper class urbanites or royalists. For me not much can happen until rural and urban Thais can agree on what they want and need from government.

Good point - there is a big gulf between the urban and rural populations. Thaksin's party has heavy support among the rural poor.

I do find it somewhat remarkable that the military repeatedly intervenes but tends to return power to the elected officials pretty quickly. Strange dynamic.

Bump for the 12th coup since the 1930s.

Not sure I see how this is resolved in the near term. The general population keeps voting Thaksin's party into power and it's clear the military just isn't having it.

At this point, Thailand's military is more of an armed bureaucracy than it is a genuine military establishment. The military spends a lot of time intervening in politics. To the point that it is now the norm. However, I do not think the military wants to give power back to a civilian authority. In the early 90s, the military seized power and tried to install a general as the new PM. There were protests and the monarchy intervened as a means of forcing a resolution. Elections happened and democracy began to grow. Personally, I think the military would love to stay in charge but pro-longed military rule is one thing that would likely unify the country.

Flash forward to 2001, and Thaksin wins with a "mass politics" strategy that draws rural Thais into the political process. From there everything goes downhill and politics becomes a fight between middle and upper class elites in Bangkok and poor rural Thais. You're right that the military has backed the wealthier urban Thais against Thaksin's party. Why? I'm not sure. Maybe it has something to do with the military's loyalty to the monarchy. I do not want to say the monarchy stands against rural Thais, but it is certainly no fan of Thaksin. For the most part it would be natural for the monarchy to support a smaller and elite driven democracy, which is consistent with what the protesters in Bangkok want. However, this comes at the expense of the majority, as Thaksin won in 2001, 2005, and pro-Thansin parties won in 2007 and 2011. All in all, good times

Hot Thailand women!   

Umm - where?

Edit: meant to quote Jethro

I received a note from a Thai colleague who works in academia. She indicated that they were relieved that the military stepped in as it was apparent that the two sides weren't going to compromise. She said the unrest between the red shirt and yellow shirt factions had escalated quite a bit in the last few weeks so something needed to be done.

This does fit with the general narrative that the "elites" favor intervention while the less affluent members of Thai society favor the elected government.