Thailand marches ahead of Myanmar
- From: Chim <ChimS1@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 15:10:16 -0800 (PST)
Feb 8, 2008
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@xxxxxxxxxxxx
.
- Prev by Date: Business solutions for small and medium size companies in Cambodia
- Next by Date: Video of cambodian celebration in Cleveland, Ohio
- Previous by thread: Business solutions for small and medium size companies in Cambodia
- Next by thread: Video of cambodian celebration in Cleveland, Ohio
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
