By Pavin Chachavalpongpun
The Nation
Thailand has a new prime minister, Yingluck Shinawatra.
Her government is now in full operation. For now, Yingluck will need to deliver on her election promises, ranging from implementing an effective economic policy and mending the country's ties with Cambodia. There is, however, one top priority that Yingluck has not made her position clear on - removing the anti-Pheu Thai Army chief, General Prayuth Chan-ocha.
True, Yingluck desperately seeks to build a working relationship with the military. When her brother, former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, wanted to weaken the military by interfering in its internal affairs, he was toppled in a coup. But the situation has changed and Yingluck is now playing a different political game. Her overwhelming popular support in this post-coup period signifies the public discontent with the military's political intervention. Yingluck is therefore urged to invent a new culture under which elected civilians control the military.
Yingluck will certainly meet her match. General Prayuth is not just a typical royalist soldier. A self-proclaimed anti-Thaksin figure, he blatantly interferes in politics. Yingluck may find it almost impossible to work with a man who openly disapproves of her own brother, the Pheu Thai political platform and the red-shirt movement.
Thus, a question emerges: Should Yingluck sack Prayuth from his current post as the Army chief? There are five reasons for the new prime minister to do so.
First, General Prayuth is not politically neutral. As the Army chief, he must not take sides because to do so would further polarise Thai politics. In fact, he should be barred from making political statements. Prior to the election, General Prayuth frequently appeared on national television, urging Thais not to vote for the Pheu Thai Party. His action was inappropriate. He betrayed the professionalism of the Thai military.
On June 14, Prayuth said, "Voters should use their good judgement to choose the best candidates to run the country efficiently. If you allow the election [result] to be the same as before, you will not get anything new and you will not see any improvement from this election. Voters must not allow themselves to be blinded by the personalities involved and must not vote for politicians who violate morals or laws.
"Why vote for them? I want to ask you to vote for good people who are determined to work for the good of the country", General Prayuth stressed.
His TV appearance was seen by Pheu Thai as a move to stem the apparent rising popularity of Yingluck, its top party list candidate.
Second, General Prayuth continues to drag the monarchy into the political fray even when he earlier warned Thai politicians not to do so. He claimed that there was an anti-monarchist undertone in certain campaigns, especially by groups of Thais living overseas, and that security organisations have found evidence of "rampant" lese-majeste in some instances.
The lese-majeste law has been used as a weapon by different factions to undermine their opponents. The military has also exploited the lese-majeste law to defend its position in politics. General Prayuth's repeated reference to the draconian law will obstruct the government's renewed reconciliation effort.
Third, General Prayuth himself has become "too politicised". It is difficult to find any consistency in his actions and statements. As a soldier who dared to publicly identify his political enemies, he must stick to his words. While he previously discouraged Thais from voting for Pheu Thai, he rushed to congratulate Yingluck on her election success, less than 24 hours after the ballot boxes were closed.
On April 23, Prayuth said, "The only thing we want to ask is for all parties not to violate the monarchy or bring the monarchy into their conflicts."
As mentioned above, it was General Prayuth who pulled the monarchy into the political ring and kept making allegations against some Pheu Thai members for their supposed disloyalty to the much-revered institution.
Fourth, General Prayuth was one of the chief operators behind the brutal crackdowns in April and May last year. While he was the second man in the Army at the time, it was reported that he could have been behind the order to go ahead with the crackdowns. So far, no Army officers have been brought to justice for the alleged crimes they committed against unarmed demonstrators. A recent report by the BBC's Fergal Keane alleged that the military was indeed responsible for the killings of red-shirt protesters.
Clearly, the Army under the leadership of General Prayuth perceives the elimination of internal enemies as its top agenda. The healing process in Thai society will not be achieved if justice is not given to the victims of state violence. Such a perception of the Army could only worsen the already fragile situation.
Fifth, General Prayuth lacks a sense of diplomacy. He "declared war" against Cambodia and brought back an obsolete, security-centric foreign policy. His hostile attitude toward Cambodia, which is partly derived from the incessant politicisation of the (disputed) Preah Vihear Temple issue, spearheaded by the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD), will complicate the work of the current government in its attempt to renew ties with Cambodia for the sake of peace and prosperity for the people in the border area.
It is time for Madame Prime Minister to act like a true soldier - fire the one who has caused great damage to Thai interests.
Pavin Chachavalpongpun is a fellow at Singapore's Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. Follow Pavin at www.facebook.com/pavinchachavalpongpun.
The Nation
Fifth, General Prayuth lacks a sense of diplomacy. He "declared war" against Cambodia and brought back an obsolete, security-centric foreign policy. His hostile attitude toward Cambodia, which is partly derived from the incessant politicisation of the (disputed) Preah Vihear Temple issue, spearheaded by the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD), will complicate the work of the current government in its attempt to renew ties with Cambodia for the sake of peace and prosperity for the people in the border area.
Thailand has a new prime minister, Yingluck Shinawatra.
Her government is now in full operation. For now, Yingluck will need to deliver on her election promises, ranging from implementing an effective economic policy and mending the country's ties with Cambodia. There is, however, one top priority that Yingluck has not made her position clear on - removing the anti-Pheu Thai Army chief, General Prayuth Chan-ocha.
True, Yingluck desperately seeks to build a working relationship with the military. When her brother, former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, wanted to weaken the military by interfering in its internal affairs, he was toppled in a coup. But the situation has changed and Yingluck is now playing a different political game. Her overwhelming popular support in this post-coup period signifies the public discontent with the military's political intervention. Yingluck is therefore urged to invent a new culture under which elected civilians control the military.
Yingluck will certainly meet her match. General Prayuth is not just a typical royalist soldier. A self-proclaimed anti-Thaksin figure, he blatantly interferes in politics. Yingluck may find it almost impossible to work with a man who openly disapproves of her own brother, the Pheu Thai political platform and the red-shirt movement.
Thus, a question emerges: Should Yingluck sack Prayuth from his current post as the Army chief? There are five reasons for the new prime minister to do so.
First, General Prayuth is not politically neutral. As the Army chief, he must not take sides because to do so would further polarise Thai politics. In fact, he should be barred from making political statements. Prior to the election, General Prayuth frequently appeared on national television, urging Thais not to vote for the Pheu Thai Party. His action was inappropriate. He betrayed the professionalism of the Thai military.
On June 14, Prayuth said, "Voters should use their good judgement to choose the best candidates to run the country efficiently. If you allow the election [result] to be the same as before, you will not get anything new and you will not see any improvement from this election. Voters must not allow themselves to be blinded by the personalities involved and must not vote for politicians who violate morals or laws.
"Why vote for them? I want to ask you to vote for good people who are determined to work for the good of the country", General Prayuth stressed.
His TV appearance was seen by Pheu Thai as a move to stem the apparent rising popularity of Yingluck, its top party list candidate.
Second, General Prayuth continues to drag the monarchy into the political fray even when he earlier warned Thai politicians not to do so. He claimed that there was an anti-monarchist undertone in certain campaigns, especially by groups of Thais living overseas, and that security organisations have found evidence of "rampant" lese-majeste in some instances.
The lese-majeste law has been used as a weapon by different factions to undermine their opponents. The military has also exploited the lese-majeste law to defend its position in politics. General Prayuth's repeated reference to the draconian law will obstruct the government's renewed reconciliation effort.
Third, General Prayuth himself has become "too politicised". It is difficult to find any consistency in his actions and statements. As a soldier who dared to publicly identify his political enemies, he must stick to his words. While he previously discouraged Thais from voting for Pheu Thai, he rushed to congratulate Yingluck on her election success, less than 24 hours after the ballot boxes were closed.
On April 23, Prayuth said, "The only thing we want to ask is for all parties not to violate the monarchy or bring the monarchy into their conflicts."
As mentioned above, it was General Prayuth who pulled the monarchy into the political ring and kept making allegations against some Pheu Thai members for their supposed disloyalty to the much-revered institution.
Fourth, General Prayuth was one of the chief operators behind the brutal crackdowns in April and May last year. While he was the second man in the Army at the time, it was reported that he could have been behind the order to go ahead with the crackdowns. So far, no Army officers have been brought to justice for the alleged crimes they committed against unarmed demonstrators. A recent report by the BBC's Fergal Keane alleged that the military was indeed responsible for the killings of red-shirt protesters.
Clearly, the Army under the leadership of General Prayuth perceives the elimination of internal enemies as its top agenda. The healing process in Thai society will not be achieved if justice is not given to the victims of state violence. Such a perception of the Army could only worsen the already fragile situation.
Fifth, General Prayuth lacks a sense of diplomacy. He "declared war" against Cambodia and brought back an obsolete, security-centric foreign policy. His hostile attitude toward Cambodia, which is partly derived from the incessant politicisation of the (disputed) Preah Vihear Temple issue, spearheaded by the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD), will complicate the work of the current government in its attempt to renew ties with Cambodia for the sake of peace and prosperity for the people in the border area.
It is time for Madame Prime Minister to act like a true soldier - fire the one who has caused great damage to Thai interests.
Pavin Chachavalpongpun is a fellow at Singapore's Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. Follow Pavin at www.facebook.com/pavinchachavalpongpun.
1 comment:
This well written point by point of the event so accurately. Some wonder why PM Yingluck hesitant to keep Gen. Prayuth? There might be other reasons. We really don't know the truth why he is still holding to his position. Cambodia relationship will get worsen with Gen. Prayuth. I agree with the author completely.
Warrior Blood
Post a Comment