SARINNA AREETHAMSIRIKUL
Bangkok Post
The unruly state of Thailand's politics has worsened since the Constitution Court last month disqualified the unpopular Samak Sundaravej from carrying on his job as prime minister. Shackled by his confrontational disposition, the short-lived administration of Mr Samak did little to help the weakening economy and failed to restore Thailand's credibility on the international stage.
His successor Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat is not faring any better; and being the brother-in-law of Thaksin Shinawatra isn't helping matters. Soft-spoken and seemingly conciliatory in nature, Mr Somchai started off promising reconciliation with the anti-government People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD). But as the events of Oct 7 have clearly demonstrated, he is little interested in walking a fine line. The government-condoned police crackdown on protesters and the resulting violence that unfolded in front of Parliament - in the wake of which his deputy resigned in a show of responsibility - has made it evident that no satisfactory method of defusing the current confrontation is forthcoming. In fact, the future of Mr Somchai's government is now in doubt.
This prolonged instability of Thai politics has caused what is known as a "double-negative" impact. Since the 2006 coup, political development in Thailand has been frozen and the governments have been nearly paralysed. Frequent changes of government do more harm than good because it postpones the time that otherwise would be spent on unravelling economic, social and security problems on the home front. As a consequence, the implementation of economic and social policies is interrupted, or even discontinued. Particularly at this moment, the ongoing political turmoil harmfully shifts attention away from the global financial crisis and the alarming signals of Thailand's economic downturn.
In the regional and international arenas, Thailand has forfeited its chance to initiate or continue negotiations with other countries on serious talks in economic and security cooperation. Under such a scenario no significant agreements can be concluded. In fact, the country clearly lacks direction.
At the same time, foreign countries have dithered on investing in any serious negotiation or cooperation with Thailand.
Last month at the annual meeting of the UN General Assembly in New York, newly-appointed Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Sompong Amornvivat skipped his speech and cancelled 20 bilateral talks with Thailand's country partners. Mr Sompong told reporters that since "the government has not yet announced its policy to Parliament, I should not say anything about policy commitments to the international community". He added: "I regard the meetings on the sidelines of the UN as a routine matter, not a policy commitment."
That Thailand is in limbo vis-a-vis the international community is a very serious state of affairs.
In the same vein, Thailand's leadership in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations is diminishing. In retrospect, during the good old day of the 1990s, Thailand had a prominent role in pushing for the establishment of the Asean Free Trade Agreement (Afta) and as a representative in the Asean troika that monitored Cambodia's 1998 elections.
Most importantly, the Democrat party-led government of Chuan Leekpai put democracy and human rights issues at the forefront of Asean affairs, and was strongly supported by the Philippines. The regional role of Thailand in Southeast Asian affairs was significant and substantial.
At that time, Surin Pitsuwan was foreign minister in the Chuan government and a strong supporter of the principle of "constructive engagement" in Asean and the development of democracy in Southeast Asia. Today Mr Surin is Asean secretary-general, a position which carries the significant task of moving Asean forward to its goal of institutionalisation as a cohesive regional community. However, the political commotion at home leaves him in a quandary.
Among Asean members, Thailand in the 1990s was hailed as a pro-democracy nation, but may now be seen as an obstacle in promoting this principle due to the situation at home (e.g. the 2006 military coup and resulting interim government did little to lend credibility to Thailand's position of claiming to promote democracy).
Under the breakthrough Asean Charter, the regional community will be formalised and become a legally binding entity for the first time, promoting democracy and protection of human rights. The question now is whether some Asean members, Burma in particular, will in fact implement these values. As well, the teetering position at home allows other member countries to cast doubts on Thailand's commitment to these values.
Thailand ratified the Asean Charter just weeks before Mr Samak's government was forced to disband. The Philippines ratified it last week. While Indonesia has yet to ratify the charter, it is interesting to note that Indonesian lawmakers are very active in making sure that this charter will work. They have been asking Asean to iron out the "nuts-and-bolts" issues, by for example adding the dispute settlement issue to the charter.
And although she failed to achieve her demand, Philippine President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo had called for the release of Burma's Aung San Suu Kyi as a condition for ratifying the charter.
In Thailand, we have no clue as to whether Parliament had questioned or seriously discussed the details of this charter before ratifying it.
The coup of September 2006 has been followed by nearly two years of economic and political decay - seen as "the lost years of Thailand" in the eyes of regional and international communities. It is a matter of absolute urgency that Thailand get back on track and restore its international credibility, as well as stave off an economic recession.
Sarinna Areethamsirikul is a PhD candidate in Development Studies, University of Wisconsin-Madison, United States.
His successor Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat is not faring any better; and being the brother-in-law of Thaksin Shinawatra isn't helping matters. Soft-spoken and seemingly conciliatory in nature, Mr Somchai started off promising reconciliation with the anti-government People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD). But as the events of Oct 7 have clearly demonstrated, he is little interested in walking a fine line. The government-condoned police crackdown on protesters and the resulting violence that unfolded in front of Parliament - in the wake of which his deputy resigned in a show of responsibility - has made it evident that no satisfactory method of defusing the current confrontation is forthcoming. In fact, the future of Mr Somchai's government is now in doubt.
This prolonged instability of Thai politics has caused what is known as a "double-negative" impact. Since the 2006 coup, political development in Thailand has been frozen and the governments have been nearly paralysed. Frequent changes of government do more harm than good because it postpones the time that otherwise would be spent on unravelling economic, social and security problems on the home front. As a consequence, the implementation of economic and social policies is interrupted, or even discontinued. Particularly at this moment, the ongoing political turmoil harmfully shifts attention away from the global financial crisis and the alarming signals of Thailand's economic downturn.
In the regional and international arenas, Thailand has forfeited its chance to initiate or continue negotiations with other countries on serious talks in economic and security cooperation. Under such a scenario no significant agreements can be concluded. In fact, the country clearly lacks direction.
At the same time, foreign countries have dithered on investing in any serious negotiation or cooperation with Thailand.
Last month at the annual meeting of the UN General Assembly in New York, newly-appointed Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Sompong Amornvivat skipped his speech and cancelled 20 bilateral talks with Thailand's country partners. Mr Sompong told reporters that since "the government has not yet announced its policy to Parliament, I should not say anything about policy commitments to the international community". He added: "I regard the meetings on the sidelines of the UN as a routine matter, not a policy commitment."
That Thailand is in limbo vis-a-vis the international community is a very serious state of affairs.
In the same vein, Thailand's leadership in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations is diminishing. In retrospect, during the good old day of the 1990s, Thailand had a prominent role in pushing for the establishment of the Asean Free Trade Agreement (Afta) and as a representative in the Asean troika that monitored Cambodia's 1998 elections.
Most importantly, the Democrat party-led government of Chuan Leekpai put democracy and human rights issues at the forefront of Asean affairs, and was strongly supported by the Philippines. The regional role of Thailand in Southeast Asian affairs was significant and substantial.
At that time, Surin Pitsuwan was foreign minister in the Chuan government and a strong supporter of the principle of "constructive engagement" in Asean and the development of democracy in Southeast Asia. Today Mr Surin is Asean secretary-general, a position which carries the significant task of moving Asean forward to its goal of institutionalisation as a cohesive regional community. However, the political commotion at home leaves him in a quandary.
Among Asean members, Thailand in the 1990s was hailed as a pro-democracy nation, but may now be seen as an obstacle in promoting this principle due to the situation at home (e.g. the 2006 military coup and resulting interim government did little to lend credibility to Thailand's position of claiming to promote democracy).
Under the breakthrough Asean Charter, the regional community will be formalised and become a legally binding entity for the first time, promoting democracy and protection of human rights. The question now is whether some Asean members, Burma in particular, will in fact implement these values. As well, the teetering position at home allows other member countries to cast doubts on Thailand's commitment to these values.
Thailand ratified the Asean Charter just weeks before Mr Samak's government was forced to disband. The Philippines ratified it last week. While Indonesia has yet to ratify the charter, it is interesting to note that Indonesian lawmakers are very active in making sure that this charter will work. They have been asking Asean to iron out the "nuts-and-bolts" issues, by for example adding the dispute settlement issue to the charter.
And although she failed to achieve her demand, Philippine President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo had called for the release of Burma's Aung San Suu Kyi as a condition for ratifying the charter.
In Thailand, we have no clue as to whether Parliament had questioned or seriously discussed the details of this charter before ratifying it.
The coup of September 2006 has been followed by nearly two years of economic and political decay - seen as "the lost years of Thailand" in the eyes of regional and international communities. It is a matter of absolute urgency that Thailand get back on track and restore its international credibility, as well as stave off an economic recession.
Sarinna Areethamsirikul is a PhD candidate in Development Studies, University of Wisconsin-Madison, United States.
No comments:
Post a Comment