…what ensured the success of the coup was the middle classes’ uneasiness with democracy. The middle class, while supportive of democracy as an ideal, was not at ease with the system in reality. Its fierce onslaught on the flaws of the system was taken by the military as a veiled request for a takeover of the government. Very few in the ranks of the middle class realized that they had in effect formed a pro-coup alliance with the military.
No, it’s not about Thailand’s 2006 coup but the coup of 1991. The quote comes from Anek Laothamatas’ 1996 “A tale of two democracies”
in The Politics of Elections in Southeast Asia edited by R. H. Taylor. Those who think that a sense of rural-urban divide is a product of Thaksin’s populist manipulation would do well to read the article in full. You don’t have to agree with everything in Anek’s portrayal of voting behaviour to appreciate that he is pointing to a fundamentally important dynamic in Thai political life.
16 responses so far ↓
1 nganadeeleg // Dec 1, 2006 at 2:05 pm
It’s not that the urban-rural divide is a product of Thaksin’s populist manipulation, but rather that Thaksin used that divide to further his own selfish money & power grab.
Can you see the difference?
2 patiwat // Dec 1, 2006 at 6:41 pm
But isn’t the junta agravating the divide by limiting the representation of the provinces? They might be doing it with good intentions, rather than their own greed, but their still making the situation worse, IMO.
3 Jon Fernquest // Dec 1, 2006 at 7:05 pm
More detailed demographics would be a good research project. I looked around them during the political turmoil this year and couldn’t find them. Surely, they must exist privately. Thaksin was said to have used market research techniques. Besides the obvious geography factor, what other factors were associated with beign pro- or anti-TRT? Like why taxi drivers?
4 nganadeeleg // Dec 1, 2006 at 7:14 pm
It’s early days yet – they appear to have good intentions, but are getting pulled is several directions trying to please everyone (including foreign academics with their ‘democracy’ mantra).
For instance, take the situation in the south.
They change tack and try to be reasonable in their dealings in the region -> which leads the extremists to get worried that they will lose the hearts & minds of the general population so they step up the attacks –> then all the anti junta commentators jump and say look the situation in the south is worse.
Resolving the southern situation will take a long time, and can only be achieved if the authorities act fairly in their dealings for a sustained period (perpetually) until eventually the moderates in the population will weed out the extremists themselves.
Theres no quick fix, and I am not advocating acting soft on terrorists – they need to be tough, but fair (consistently).
5 patiwat // Dec 2, 2006 at 12:36 am
Jon, I’ve commented on why Thaksin was so popular with taxi drivers on Bangkok Pundit here and here. Bangkok Pundit himself has some thoughts on the issue here.
6 Vichai N. // Dec 3, 2006 at 12:29 am
Isn’t it ironic? It should have been the midddle-class, those sensible fearless defenders of Thai Democracy (the villagers are much too far from the center of power and would have been much too intimidated) who should have poured out in the streets when those tanks of General Sonthi rolled in the streets of Bangkok. Those middle-class did pour out, but not to protest, but to hang garlands and take photos among the tanks.
That should tell us something about how these sensible Bangkok middle-class view the danger of Thaksin Shinawatra to their democratic ideals, and, how relieved they were that General Sonthi intervened to restore sanity to a deteriorating national situation.
The rural-urban divide was only being provoked by this one man Thaksin Shinawatra, and THAT is what cause the unease among the whole Thai citizenry, urban and rurrals alike.
It is under very unusual circumstance that the middle-class would welcome martial rule, even if that will last only 12 months or so. But Thaksin Shinawatra was very unusual aberration that the middle-class recognized should be promptly be rid of by WHATEVER means.
7 Suvimol // Dec 4, 2006 at 3:09 am
The pro-Thaksins kept trying to denigrate the Thai ‘elites’ because they kicked Thaksin out and approved the coup.
But Vichai’s point is probably more relevant: the Thai middle class just cannot take Thaksin’s disrespect of the Thai constitution and the King any more and just went out in the streets to protest his ouster, then went out to the streets again to welcome the tanks that ushered the junta in. I consider myself middle-class and had it been any other coup but General Sonthi’s (intervention to stop Thaksin), I would have thrown stones, instead of flowers, at the tanks.
Once Thaksin lost the trust of the middle-class he was history. It was never about Thaksin vs. the elites. It was just decent Thais who won’t stand for Thaksin’s nonsense any longer.
8 polo // Dec 4, 2006 at 5:48 am
In 1991 the palace-military alliance sparked and fed the sentiment against Chatichai and his “buffet cabinet”, effectively telling the urbanites that these “country bumpkins” were wrecking the state. (see handly’s book on what the king said about chatichai, but apparently never anything against Suchinda and that skinny guy witht he two wives and the big wine glass.) The city people believed this, which effectively was preparation for the coup. What happened last year and this year? Constant palace-military support for the idea that Thaksin was destroying the nation and the middle class’s gravy train.
So have urban Thais really been played against rural Thais, rather than there being a fear with genuine roots?
9 Vichai N. // Dec 4, 2006 at 12:28 pm
Polo your source of truth is Handly and Walker and you will bury your head in the sand while you cry for Thaksin? Amazing polo? You were the same guy who said Thaksin was equally amazing shooting defenseless suspects then reading their rights after they were dead on the ground.
What could be that middle class’ gravy train you alluded at? Or were you lamenting in fact for Thaksin’s/TRT’s gravy train that just got derailed by General Sonthi?
10 polo // Dec 5, 2006 at 5:04 am
Vichai: you tell me, just when did the urban middle class get upset about Thaksin’s murder campaign? They were silent about it until 2006. So was the palace. So was the military. So were you.
11 Vichai N. // Dec 5, 2006 at 12:15 pm
Polo this is about personal convictions: you wholeheartedly approve of Thaksin’s extrajudicial murders but I vigorously oppose it. During 2003 when the killings started I was suspicious but I was not sure. I believe the urban middle class, the palace, the military and the rurals even would just about be in the same suspicious-but-not-sure opinion on the matter.
But today you and I are no longer suspicious. Both of us are damn sure Thaksin carried out those horriic extrajudicial executions of drug suspects, in clear violation not only of the rule of law, but ialso n clear violation off human rights and our sense of decency. It was totally repugrant to extrajudicially murder thousands of defenseless villagers during Y2003 anti-drugs campaign. I find it even more repugrant that Polo you can applaud those murders.
12 polo // Dec 5, 2006 at 1:36 pm
Vichai: one of the rhetorical tricks of extremist fascist demagogues like Hitler, Mao, Rush Limbaugh and George W. Bush, and apparently your self, is that when someone doesn’t in the last 10 seconds condemn rape or theft or murder, the demagogue immediately says “So you support rape and theft and murder”. If someone doesn’t in the last 10 seconds say “I love my country” your type immeduately says, “So, you hate your country.”
Kind of silly, but it worked for a few years for George Bush. and the others. Just doesn’t work anymore. I’m surprised to run into it here. I suppose its best to ignore you from here on out.
13 Naphat // Dec 5, 2006 at 6:00 pm
Khun Vichai – I find it surprising that you were only ’suspicious’ (back then) that something was fishy regarding the war on drugs. Both Thaksin and then Interior Minister Wan Noor spoke publicly on the shoot to kill policy and in fact publicized their tough crackdown to the nation. Complaints from international human rights groups from that far back (as well as the government’s rebuttal) were given pretty prominent coverage in the press.
The fact was that most people were aware and the majority (sadly) supported this war on drugs. Polo is right – no one got upset back then at Thaksin.
14 Vichai N. // Dec 5, 2006 at 11:09 pm
The extrajudicial rampage of Thaksin Shinawatra goes right at the core of what convictions a person carry. It was murder people, it was mass murder of the innocents. There was no demagoguery, there are no tricks. Everybody in this forum understand what extrajudicial murder is . . and it was carried out against thousands of innocents during Thaksin’s anti ya ba campaign.
Whether it was popular or not is beside the point. Thaksin Shinawatra deliberately carried out a crime against humanity with that horrific anti-drugs extrajudicial murderous rampage.
Now I ask the direct question to all the people in this forum: Was it wrong? Was it repugrant? Was it a crime?
Polo and Naphat would want you to believe it was all over, the Thai people approved, it was the popular thing to do. Maybe they should now listen to the families of the victims as they slowly come out to pour their grief and anguish at their loss.
I am surprised Polo and Naphat are angry at me. They should be condemning Thaksin Shinawatra instead of humble Vichai N. for those extrajudicial murders of thousands. Hey I have not killed anyone!
15 jeru // Dec 6, 2006 at 2:10 am
I still do not understand what Naphat’s
(December 5th, 2006 at 6:00 pm) point was.
Naphat probably can say the same thing for Hitler or Pinochet – - when the murders were going on their citizens at that time appear to have generally approved.
But monstrous crimes like extrajudicial killings of defenseless villagers-suspects, or, executions of Southern Muslim prisoners just won’t go away and these crimes will continue to haunt the Nation until justice is served – - justice is served to Thaksin.
16 Naphat // Dec 6, 2006 at 3:58 am
Khun Vichai – I think you have the wrong idea. Neither myself nor Polo nor I think anyone in this forum condones these extrajudicial killings. It was repugnant and it was a crime.
What I wanted to point out is that, unlike the problems Thaksin has with corruption, at no point did he make what he was trying to do with the war on drugs any secret. He promoted this war and used it to win votes. Most, not all, of the Bangkok middle class supported the policy back then (see here – 84.2%!). The King praised it in his 2003 speech, as Patiwat pointed out in his comments here. I’m not trying to “make… believe” anything, I think these are facts on how people felt back then.
Of course, if something is popular that doesn’t mean it’s right and just. What bothers me is the sense of hypocrisy I feel – the same middle class people who supported the war back then are now calling for Thaksin’s scalp for human rights violations and justifying the coup on grounds of Thaksin’s abuse of human rights. Where was the opposition to these crime back then, when it would have really mattered to the victims?
I’m a bit pessimistic that the Surayud government will be able to sort all this out. The new press release from the AHRC make a point we can perhaps discuss:
“This [state officers flouting the rule of law] is as much a characteristic of the present government of Thailand as it was of the former. It is also as much a characteristic of the army as it is of the police. The current regime took power illegally, but can rely upon its orders being carried out, just as the former government gave illegal orders with the same assurance.”
Leave a Comment
Please note: New Mandala encourages vigorous debate. However, for the moment we will only be publishing high-quality comments that make original contributions to discussion. There will, of course, still be space for pithy, humorous, eccentric and cheeky input. Short and sweet will usually trump long and involved. Repetitive ranting, unimaginative point-scoring and idle abuse will not be entertained. Comments which carry a real name are also more likely to be approved. Thank you for your ongoing interest and contributions.