Is Thailand Already A Failed State?

[miatai]

The US will never win in the Afganistan when you have a people whose army, police and government are corrupt.

Just look at the history of the area.

The only way to control these countries is to occupy them, govern them and re-educate them.

If you cannot do that and can not win -get out.

The problem is that the US would suffer humiliation.

Afghanistan is approaching failed state status.

Furthermore, the war in Afghanistan definitely cannot be won. This is clear now. Even the highly conservative George Will has finally concluded that:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...9083102912.html

I wish the Canadians hadn't accepted the very large role they played and continue to play in this tragic conflict.

"The only way to control these countries is to occupy them, govern them and re-educate them."

True, but this will not and should not happen.

"The problem is that the US would suffer humiliation."

At this point in time I believe further humiliation could be minimized. The role of the U.S. and allies in the war should now be redefined to be a passive support effort only to the Karzai government, with drones, ATACs intelligence, etc. Direct combat engagement should be rapidly handed over entirely to the Afghans themselves and if they aren't ready by now that's just too bad. Too many American, Canadian, British and other lives have been tragically sacrificed in this lost cause. We must be on the fast track to end further casualties.

You gotta know when to hold 'em, and when to fold 'em. Time to fold up this sorry hand of cards.

Let's face it -- Bin Laden won.

IMHO

..being the oldest grand-daughter of the brititsh empire, does canada have much of a choice not to be over-committed in afghanistan??????

[KevinBloodyWilson]

The only abnormality in the current political state of affairs is the poisonous actions and rhetoric coming from Thaksin, but that will be dealt with in time. Meanwhile, the country goes on, lives are improving. Law and order hasn't broken down, and any attempts to try and break them down were well dealt with by the governing authorities. Your biggest complaint is that you personally are being fecked up by the Thais attempts to deal with the current divisions in the country, yet you have the audacity to complain about a lack of adult discussion, and try to drag the country down to a level it clearly isn't at.

Well, we disagree.

Personally I don't think universal law and order are in place.

Personally I don't think Thailand has universal suffrage.

Personally I don't think Thailand is an honest or trustworthy place, either in government, bureaucracy, or judiciary, and the evidence for that is overwhelming and beyond question.

Personally I don't think the Thai education system is socially serviceable or useful.

Personally I don't think the standard of living in rural areas has kept up with the standard of living among the elites at all (in other words the gap between the haves and the have-nots has grown wider throughout the past 60 years). rather, it would be true to say that the standard of living of a select few Thais has improved very satisfactorily (for them).

Personally I do think that Thailand is on the verge of becoming a failed state, for all of the above reasons, and I am very far from being alone in this, in fact one prominent person spoke recently about the country 'falling in to ruin' as I recall. The Thais who are ruining Thailand are ruining it for all people who live here, Thais and ex-pats alike, this is the context of my previous comment. Thankfully, it is only a minority of Thais who are determined to maintain their present privileged positions who are doing the ruining, and (so far as I can see) are making a violent overthrow pretty much inevitable, but these are the ones with influence at the moment.

To think that any of the above is not true is (I believe) to fail to see what is blindingly obvious. But that is only my opinion.

[jackspratt]

Given that Mr Wilson has chosen to use definitions taken from a wiki article on failed states in his OP, perhaps we could use the same article to provide his answer.

List of Countries by "Failed States" Index 2009 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Failed_states

Somalia 1

Zimbabwe 2

Sudan 3

Chad 4

Dem. Rep. of the Congo 5

Iraq 6

Afghanistan 7

Central African Republic 8

Guinea 9

Pakistan 10

Ivory Coast 11

Haiti 12

Burma 13

Kenya 14

Nigeria 15

Ethiopia 16

North Korea 17

Bangladesh 18

Yemen 19

East Timor 20

Uganda 21

Sri Lanka 22

Niger 23

Burundi 24

Nepal 25

Cameroon 26

Guinea-Bissau 27

Malawi 28

Lebanon 29

Republic of Congo 30

Uzbekistan 31

Sierra Leone 32

Georgia 33

Liberia 34

Burkina Faso 35

Eritrea 36

Tajikistan 37

Iran 38

Thailand comes in at #79 on this list, behind (ie less failed than) countries such as China (57), Israel (58), Indonesia (62) and Russia (71).

As Mr Wilson could not but have noticed this list when he copied and pasted his definitions into the OP, I can only wonder at his motives in doing so

[Oberkommando]

Well, we disagree.

Personally I don't think universal law and order are in place.

Personally I don't think Thailand has universal suffrage.

Personally I don't think Thailand is an honest or trustworthy place, either in government, bureaucracy, or judiciary, and the evidence for that is overwhelming and beyond question.

Personally I don't think the Thai education system is socially serviceable or useful.

Personally I don't think the standard of living in rural areas has kept up with the standard of living among the elites at all (in other words the gap between the haves and the have-nots has grown wider throughout the past 60 years). rather, it would be true to say that the standard of living of a select few Thais has improved very satisfactorily (for them).

Personally I do think that Thailand is on the verge of becoming a failed state, for all of the above reasons, and I am very far from being alone in this, in fact one prominent person spoke recently about the country 'falling in to ruin' as I recall. The Thais who are ruining Thailand are ruining it for all people who live here, Thais and ex-pats alike, this is the context of my previous comment. Thankfully, it is only a minority of Thais who are determined to maintain their present privileged positions who are doing the ruining, and (so far as I can see) are making a violent overthrow pretty much inevitable, but these are the ones with influence at the moment.

To think that any of the above is not true is (I believe) to fail to see what is blindingly obvious. But that is only my opinion.

Good post.

[Lopburi99]

I can really relate to Thailand personally. I also once had a lot of potential ...

Potential and five bucks will get you a latte at Starbucks.

Thing fall apart ...

The center cannot hold

Isn't that the truth. I had actually realized much of my potential by having an income in excess of $25,000 per month for 15 years. Now my income is less than that per year. Something about GM purchasing EDS, the 1991 U.S. recession, a Filipina wife taking me to the cleaners, a Thai wife taking me to the cleaners, and my work-ending disability coming at the worst possible time. Am I one of the expats who failed in his home country? I guess so. Sure feels that way. So much for potential. Yes, things fall apart. Shit happens.

The next latte is on me JT.

Edited September 21, 2009 by Lopburi99

[KevinBloodyWilson]

Given that Mr Wilson has chosen to use definitions taken from a wiki article on failed states in his OP, perhaps we could use the same article to provide his answer.

<snippety>

Thailand comes in at #79 on this list, behind (ie less failed than) countries such as China (57), Israel (58), Indonesia (62) and Russia (71).

Don't worry a few more years of this lot and they'll reach number 1. It seems like it's what they're trying to do.

As Mr Wilson could not but have noticed this list when he copied and pasted his definitions into the OP, I can only wonder at his motives in doing so

It's a conspiracy of course, I am in the pay of Thaksin... obviously.

Paranoia good. Obsessiveness good. Thaksin bad. All Thais are honest - except Thaksin.

:D

By the way... you can call me Kevin. Kev if you like.

[Mosha]

Thailand is a Wild West Banana Republic and long may it remain so.

Surely you mean Som Tam republic?

[Crushdepth]

Oh stop your whining, Thailand is not even close to being a failed state (eg. North Korea, Zimbabwe, Afghanistan). Do you really think Thailand fits in that kind of company?

[hammered]

I just don't see the facts for "failed state" at all. I also don't buy at all "nothing has changed in 20 years". The facts don't back that up.

Fair enough, but the criteria for 'failed state' status were given, and you have addressed different criteria, some quite subjectively.

Then you compare Thailand with other Asian economies and note that it doesn't stack up so you compare it with Africa instead.

Nothing wrong with an opinion, but the stats you quote don't always support your covering comment. Thailand's corruption rating for example is among the worst in the world, not ' slightly above average' as you state. Haven't had time yet to have a look at the other links you posted - but thanks for posting them, I have an open mind so I will follow through in that spirit.

Thanks for the opinion, you went to the trouble of getting supporting numbers so it wasn't the usual polyanna stuff. And you didn't get abusive either, which puts you several steps ahead of the game compared with some of the others who just can't seem to grasp what adult discussion is about...

Thanks.

For Curruption Thailand is #59 out of 159 countries. So 58 are better and 99 are worse. Here's how Thailand ranks with Asia.

# 5 Singapore: 9.4

# 15 Hong Kong: 8.3

# 32 Taiwan: 5.9

# 39 Malaysia: 5.1

# 40 Korea, South: 5

# 59 Thailand: 3.8

# 77 Laos: 3.3

# 78 China: 3.2

# 107 Vietnam: 2.6

# 118 Philippines: 2.5

# 131 Cambodia: 2.3

# 138 Indonesia: 2.2

# 156 Burma: 1.8

I think the Thailand to Africa or Middle East is important because overall Asia, despite what we in the west might see as democratic challenges, has done a far better job of growing their economies and bettering the life of their people than Africa or Middle East. So it's a perspective. A better apples to apples is Asia to Eastern Europe and perhaps S.America.

I don't have the time to do it but some wonky guy could take that list into Excel and give a regional average for some of these numbers.

Aid as a percentage of GDP might be an interesting indicator of failed state. Who's on welfare? Thailand is #106 of 129 - so 105 countries, including Indonesia and Philippines get more aid as a percentage.

Let's look at the original questions:

1. [A country in which the] central government so weak or ineffective that it has little practical control over much of its territory; non-provision of public services; widespread corruption and criminality; refugees and involuntary movement of populations; and sharp economic decline

• The Thai government has complete control over it's territory. There is that little border temple thing with Cambodia and the troubles in the south (which are part of a pandemic problem)
  
• Corruption is a problem - but as I indicate above Thailand is about the norm
  
• There is the issue of stateless people here - that' for sure is a nagging problem, but not at a mass scale
  
• The economy has contracted here and the estimates I see for 2009 are 0 to -3% growth, largely driving by drops in exports (down 20%) due to the world economy. This is not as good as other SEA countries but in line with a lot of others
  

2. ... a state that has been rendered ineffective (i.e., has nominal military/police control over its territory only in the sense of having no armed opposition groups directly challenging state authority; in short, the "no news is good news" approach) and is not able to enforce its laws uniformly because of high crime rates, extreme political corruption, an extensive informal market, impenetrable bureaucracy, judicial ineffectiveness, military interference in politics, cultural situations in which traditional leaders wield more power than the state over a certain area but do not compete with the state, or a number of other factors.

• 
  Thailand has a strong central government - there are no tribal leaders with more power over the central government like say Pakistan. The judiciary is a bit hard to fathom at times but they do seem to enforcing laws on Red and Yellow alike. They did rule against a very powerful ex-PM. If you take a cynical view of things this might have a ring of truth but if you look at this critically in relation to real failed states Tailand isn't close to being out of control.
  

3. A state could be said to "succeed" if it maintains, in the words of Max Weber, a monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force within its borders. When this is broken (e.g., through the dominant presence of warlords, paramilitary groups, or terrorism), the very existence of the state becomes dubious, and the state becomes a failed state.

Not even close. The Thai government, red or yellow or military

• has a clear "monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force within its borders". The protests and unrest we have seen are IMHO very healthy - people should be out in the stre
  

ets when they feel aggrieved and overall the governments have done OK - a coup notwithstanding.

Come on people. Have a cup of coffee and look at the facts. This is an emerging country with all the problems you'd expect. In some ways Thailand is doing very well, and others not so well but the report card is anything from a failed state as defined by those 3 definitions.

An excellent post.

[KevinBloodyWilson]

Oh stop your whining, Thailand is not even close to being a failed state (eg. North Korea, Zimbabwe, Afghanistan). Do you really think Thailand fits in that kind of company?

Opinion noted. Absence of rational argument noted.

It is what it is because I say it is what it is and if it wasn't what it is it would be because I said it wasn't what it is so there! (Johnny - aged 10)

[Valjean]

Here's some more data to chew on. Just came in the recent American Chamber of Commerce T-AB magazine "How Thailand's IT Sector Stacks Up" - all copyrights noted for them. It's based on several different global surveys and like a lot of other data shows Thailand doing well in some respects and not so well in others.

I'm in IT and this ring true to me. The talent pool of IT and developers is not as strong in quantity or quality as the market would like. There is some work I do off-shore in the US for high prices that I'd love to be doing here.

Enjoy

How_Thailand_s_IT_Sector_Stacks_up.pdf

[Valjean]

Well, we disagree.

Personally I don't think universal law and order are in place.

Personally I don't think Thailand has universal suffrage.

Personally I don't think Thailand is an honest or trustworthy place, either in government, bureaucracy, or judiciary, and the evidence for that is overwhelming and beyond question.

Personally I don't think the Thai education system is socially serviceable or useful.

Personally I don't think the standard of living in rural areas has kept up with the standard of living among the elites at all (in other words the gap between the haves and the have-nots has grown wider throughout the past 60 years). rather, it would be true to say that the standard of living of a select few Thais has improved very satisfactorily (for them).

Personally I do think that Thailand is on the verge of becoming a failed state, for all of the above reasons, and I am very far from being alone in this, in fact one prominent person spoke recently about the country 'falling in to ruin' as I recall. The Thais who are ruining Thailand are ruining it for all people who live here, Thais and ex-pats alike, this is the context of my previous comment. Thankfully, it is only a minority of Thais who are determined to maintain their present privileged positions who are doing the ruining, and (so far as I can see) are making a violent overthrow pretty much inevitable, but these are the ones with influence at the moment.

To think that any of the above is not true is (I believe) to fail to see what is blindingly obvious. But that is only my opinion.

Good post.

It's not that these things aren't true to a greater or lesser extent (if you accept the subjective nature of the comments) in Thailand - it's that that 3 out of 4 of them probably apply to 80% of the countries on the planet. The world's actually a pretty chaotic place and I'm amazed it's all working as well as it is. It's just a warped view to judge the bottom 80% from a top 20% perspective.

and in many ways I could apply 3 to the US;

Highest incarceration rates in the world (I think I right about "highest" but none the less VERY high) along with capital punishment, including of crimes committed by children. Meanwhile some of the highest crime and murder rates in the developed, if not entire world. It's a justice system that let's rich people go free and poor black teenagers go in for life. And executes black people our of proportion to their population of the convicted. (perhaps this starts to call into question #2 which I wasn't going to challenge).

We elected George W when Al Gore got more votes. :-)

Compared to our peers, and more importantly China and India, the US education is a chronic under-performer - especially in math and science. We are excellent at somethings but key IT talent is either imported or the work exported these days on a growing scale.

This isn't to bash the US - just to point out that in different ways most countries struggle with these issues. You need to keep context and perspective.

[Chunkton]

Failed State in relationship to what? How do we actually measure that in the modern world? I would put these things as yard sticks:

1) quality of life for the majority (covers a lot of things that are hard to measure)

2) sustainable economy (meaning provides for presents needs without impairing needs of future generations)

3) rule of law established

4) democracy (true democracy)

Short answer: Yes.

Yes good points, so the US is also a failed state then, or will be shortly.

[Lopburi99]

We elected George W when Al Gore got more votes. :-)

Yawnnnnn

[henryalleman]

According to Wiki, there are several definitions of the expression 'Failed State'. Some of those are:

1. [A country in which the] central government so weak or ineffective that it has little practical control over much of its territory; non-provision of public services; widespread corruption and criminality; refugees and involuntary movement of populations; and sharp economic decline

2. ... a state that has been rendered ineffective (i.e., has nominal military/police control over its territory only in the sense of having no armed opposition groups directly challenging state authority; in short, the "no news is good news" approach) and is not able to enforce its laws uniformly because of high crime rates, extreme political corruption, an extensive informal market, impenetrable bureaucracy, judicial ineffectiveness, military interference in politics, cultural situations in which traditional leaders wield more power than the state over a certain area but do not compete with the state, or a number of other factors.

3. A state could be said to "succeed" if it maintains, in the words of Max Weber, a monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force within its borders. When this is broken (e.g., through the dominant presence of warlords, paramilitary groups, or terrorism), the very existence of the state becomes dubious, and the state becomes a failed state.

By any and all of these definitions, there seems to be a case for saying that Thailand is already a failed state.

Opinions?

Are you sure that you are taking about Thailand and not the USA?

[KevinBloodyWilson]

According to Wiki, there are several definitions of the expression 'Failed State'. Some of those are:

1. [A country in which the] central government so weak or ineffective that it has little practical control over much of its territory; non-provision of public services; widespread corruption and criminality; refugees and involuntary movement of populations; and sharp economic decline

2. ... a state that has been rendered ineffective (i.e., has nominal military/police control over its territory only in the sense of having no armed opposition groups directly challenging state authority; in short, the "no news is good news" approach) and is not able to enforce its laws uniformly because of high crime rates, extreme political corruption, an extensive informal market, impenetrable bureaucracy, judicial ineffectiveness, military interference in politics, cultural situations in which traditional leaders wield more power than the state over a certain area but do not compete with the state, or a number of other factors.

3. A state could be said to "succeed" if it maintains, in the words of Max Weber, a monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force within its borders. When this is broken (e.g., through the dominant presence of warlords, paramilitary groups, or terrorism), the very existence of the state becomes dubious, and the state becomes a failed state.

By any and all of these definitions, there seems to be a case for saying that Thailand is already a failed state.

Opinions?

Are you sure that you are taking about Thailand and not the USA?

Quite sure.

Gave up on the USA years ago - when they re-elected Ronnie Raygun and I realised it wasn't an accident.

[Xangsamhua]

Failed State in relationship to what? How do we actually measure that in the modern world? I would put these things as yard sticks:

1) quality of life for the majority (covers a lot of things that are hard to measure)

2) sustainable economy (meaning provides for presents needs without impairing needs of future generations)

3) rule of law established

4) democracy (true democracy)

Short answer: Yes.

Yes good points, so the US is also a failed state then, or will be shortly.

Perhaps all states are in a process of decline and will eventually fail. Like groups, they form, storm, norm and perform, then they adjourn and mourn, after which they transform.

The Thai state is very young - only since 1932, when Pridi and Phibun led a coup against absolute monarchy. A stable democratic form of government couldn't be maintained and military dictatorship became the norm until after 1973, when a series of elected governments came and went, with coups d'etat punctuating the period up to the early 90s. Performance has been patchy since then and Thaksin's was seen as the most energetic government. However, his norm (Thailand Inc and Shincorp hegemony) conflicted with that of the power elite (and many other people, especially in Bangkok and the South), so that government was "adjourned" by the 2006 coup. There is considerable mourning among the beneficiaries of the Thaksin regime, but much hostility to him and his government by others. New groups (PAD, UDD, Friends of Newin) have formed and would like to storm, but are not able to agree on norms; hence, Thailand is unable to perform in the way a stable group or state should.

The divisions seem irreconcilable, but the state has not reached "failed" status, simply an inability to function in keeping with its resources and potential. If it continues to be unable to norm and perform, a new group will form that will bring things together. Perhaps led by another Sarit - a saviour from Isaan, who will combine the backing of the army and the rural poor, but who will co-opt Chinese money, the Thai elite and the organizational sweep of the Democrat Party.

(The cases against Thaksin will be dropped on account of ill health and he will be allowed to return to Thailand to spend his last days, even if there are rather a lot of them. The new government will be sufficiently dictatorial and potentially brutal that PAD, UDD and others will heed the warnings and adopt a low profile.)

Even if Thailand stumbles it won't fail. Despite the obvious weaknesses in its schools and universities it has enough sufficiently well educated people to innovate, maintain and develop a productive society. There is enough money in Chinese hands and Thais know they have to fix their problems themselves. No benevolent outsider is going to ride in and they can't continue to rely on wise and paternal father-figures. They have nowhere to go. Everywhere outside Thailand is strange to Thais. There are no other Thai-speaking nations. Even the Lao, who are closest, don't want them. Before long there will be a catalyst and a catharsis. We'll hold on to our hats for a while, then a new process of political and civic forming, norming, etc. will be worked out.

Sorry for the rant. It just turned out that way.

[Valjean]

Failed State in relationship to what? How do we actually measure that in the modern world? I would put these things as yard sticks:

1) quality of life for the majority (covers a lot of things that are hard to measure)

2) sustainable economy (meaning provides for presents needs without impairing needs of future generations)

3) rule of law established

4) democracy (true democracy)

Short answer: Yes.

Yes good points, so the US is also a failed state then, or will be shortly.

Perhaps all states are in a process of decline and will eventually fail. Like groups, they form, storm, norm and perform, then they adjourn and mourn, after which they transform.

The Thai state is very young - only since 1932, when Pridi and Phibun led a coup against absolute monarchy. A stable democratic form of government couldn't be maintained and military dictatorship became the norm until after 1973, when a series of elected governments came and went, with coups d'etat punctuating the period up to the early 90s. Performance has been patchy since then and Thaksin's was seen as the most energetic government. However, his norm (Thailand Inc and Shincorp hegemony) conflicted with that of the power elite (and many other people, especially in Bangkok and the South), so that government was "adjourned" by the 2006 coup. There is considerable mourning among the beneficiaries of the Thaksin regime, but much hostility to him and his government by others. New groups (PAD, UDD, Friends of Newin) have formed and would like to storm, but are not able to agree on norms; hence, Thailand is unable to perform in the way a stable group or state should.

The divisions seem irreconcilable, but the state has not reached "failed" status, simply an inability to function in keeping with its resources and potential. If it continues to be unable to norm and perform, a new group will form that will bring things together. Perhaps led by another Sarit - a saviour from Isaan, who will combine the backing of the army and the rural poor, but who will co-opt Chinese money, the Thai elite and the organizational sweep of the Democrat Party.

(The cases against Thaksin will be dropped on account of ill health and he will be allowed to return to Thailand to spend his last days, even if there are rather a lot of them. The new government will be sufficiently dictatorial and potentially brutal that PAD, UDD and others will heed the warnings and adopt a low profile.)

Even if Thailand stumbles it won't fail. Despite the obvious weaknesses in its schools and universities it has enough sufficiently well educated people to innovate, maintain and develop a productive society. There is enough money in Chinese hands and Thais know they have to fix their problems themselves. No benevolent outsider is going to ride in and they can't continue to rely on wise and paternal father-figures. They have nowhere to go. Everywhere outside Thailand is strange to Thais. There are no other Thai-speaking nations. Even the Lao, who are closest, don't want them. Before long there will be a catalyst and a catharsis. We'll hold on to our hats for a while, then a new process of political and civic forming, norming, etc. will be worked out.

Sorry for the rant. It just turned out that way.

Great post. I hadn't ever thought of the form, storm, norm and perform progression (which I've seen with teams over and over) but it is very applicable. It's hard for any team or organization, much less a country, to see the light in the form and storm stage. I'd agree also, and one reason I think both the red and yellow protest are good, is that Thai's need so get out and fight for what they believe in and make it happen themselves - not looking for another to do it. It's a messy process but it will be a better society that has leaned how to disagree, how to fight and how to take the long view when you lose to live to fight another day - and how to win with humility. Let's home the norming stage comes soon.

Thanks again for a thoughtful post.

[Lopburi99]

Gave up on the USA years ago - when they re-elected Ronnie Raygun and I realised it wasn't an accident.

Oh Kev! Say it isn't so! And I was just starting to think I was in love....

Why'd you have to pass gas under the sheets?

[KevinBloodyWilson]

Failed State in relationship to what? How do we actually measure that in the modern world? I would put these things as yard sticks:

1) quality of life for the majority (covers a lot of things that are hard to measure)

2) sustainable economy (meaning provides for presents needs without impairing needs of future generations)

3) rule of law established

4) democracy (true democracy)

Short answer: Yes.

Yes good points, so the US is also a failed state then, or will be shortly.

Perhaps all states are in a process of decline and will eventually fail. Like groups, they form, storm, norm and perform, then they adjourn and mourn, after which they transform.

The Thai state is very young - only since 1932, when Pridi and Phibun led a coup against absolute monarchy. A stable democratic form of government couldn't be maintained and military dictatorship became the norm until after 1973, when a series of elected governments came and went, with coups d'etat punctuating the period up to the early 90s. Performance has been patchy since then and Thaksin's was seen as the most energetic government. However, his norm (Thailand Inc and Shincorp hegemony) conflicted with that of the power elite (and many other people, especially in Bangkok and the South), so that government was "adjourned" by the 2006 coup. There is considerable mourning among the beneficiaries of the Thaksin regime, but much hostility to him and his government by others. New groups (PAD, UDD, Friends of Newin) have formed and would like to storm, but are not able to agree on norms; hence, Thailand is unable to perform in the way a stable group or state should.

The divisions seem irreconcilable, but the state has not reached "failed" status, simply an inability to function in keeping with its resources and potential. If it continues to be unable to norm and perform, a new group will form that will bring things together. Perhaps led by another Sarit - a saviour from Isaan, who will combine the backing of the army and the rural poor, but who will co-opt Chinese money, the Thai elite and the organizational sweep of the Democrat Party.

(The cases against Thaksin will be dropped on account of ill health and he will be allowed to return to Thailand to spend his last days, even if there are rather a lot of them. The new government will be sufficiently dictatorial and potentially brutal that PAD, UDD and others will heed the warnings and adopt a low profile.)

Even if Thailand stumbles it won't fail. Despite the obvious weaknesses in its schools and universities it has enough sufficiently well educated people to innovate, maintain and develop a productive society. There is enough money in Chinese hands and Thais know they have to fix their problems themselves. No benevolent outsider is going to ride in and they can't continue to rely on wise and paternal father-figures. They have nowhere to go. Everywhere outside Thailand is strange to Thais. There are no other Thai-speaking nations. Even the Lao, who are closest, don't want them. Before long there will be a catalyst and a catharsis. We'll hold on to our hats for a while, then a new process of political and civic forming, norming, etc. will be worked out.

Sorry for the rant. It just turned out that way.

Seemed like a good post to me, but there are other scenarios, including the Chinese one.

You said it in a round-about kind of a way, but I will say it directly - again Thais have no friends, and that is going to hurt them one day. USA is relocating away from Thailand, China is already here and agitating the hel_l out of things. Thailand will wakeup one day to realise that they have no friends, and worse, that they have pissed off too many people with long memories.

[siamamerican]

I just don't see the facts for "failed state" at all. I also don't buy at all "nothing has changed in 20 years". The facts don't back that up.

Fair enough, but the criteria for 'failed state' status were given, and you have addressed different criteria, some quite subjectively.

Then you compare Thailand with other Asian economies and note that it doesn't stack up so you compare it with Africa instead.

Nothing wrong with an opinion, but the stats you quote don't always support your covering comment. Thailand's corruption rating for example is among the worst in the world, not ' slightly above average' as you state. Haven't had time yet to have a look at the other links you posted - but thanks for posting them, I have an open mind so I will follow through in that spirit.

Thanks for the opinion, you went to the trouble of getting supporting numbers so it wasn't the usual polyanna stuff. And you didn't get abusive either, which puts you several steps ahead of the game compared with some of the others who just can't seem to grasp what adult discussion is about...

Your previous psot was well thought out. Nice to see TV has some rational thinkers. I might be missing something but isn't the definition of a failed state somewhat subjective? You want congrete facts to validate a subjective definition.

[jackspratt]

It's a conspiracy of course, I am in the pay of Thaksin... obviously.

Paranoia good. Obsessiveness good. Thaksin bad. All Thais are honest - except Thaksin.

:D

By the way... you can call me Kevin. Kev if you like.

No, no, Mr Wilson - you try to overcomplicate things. When I read your OP, I didn't think conspiracy - I immediately thought just another Thailand bash.

And given that the data taken from the same source as your initial OP shows that Thailand is not a failed state, the whole thread is a non sequitur.

Perhaps the mods should therefore close it

[Heng]

Probably more relevant to ask if you have a failed life in Thailand and in general or not.

It's a reasonable question given the number of no-hopers we all know flee here from Europe and America.

As for myself, I count moving here as one of my better decisions, and I have made some pretty bad ones over time. I am more free here than I ever was in the UK, I have a much better lifestyle and I have been more professionally successful for a number of reasons. I also consider my personal growth as having been much more significant in Thailand than it ever was in UK - again for a number of reasons.

Am I a loser? Possibly, depending on the benchmark you set. I am successful professionally, comfortable financially and emotionally happier in the onsetting autumn of life than I have ever been. I do not smoke, I do not drink, I have no need of bargirls. Depends on the benchmark.

Am I a loser for not agreeing that Thailand is some kind of Polyanna heaven? Perhaps.

Yeah, I didn't say it was an unreasonable question. Nor did I mean to suggest you were a loser.

Generally speaking though those who are extremely negative about any locale IME usually have personal issues loosely related to those they frequently complain about.

On topic IMO some common issues that need to be more ubiquitous before Thailand gets 'failed state' type status is a LOT more public debt, top 10 or even at least top 20 external debt, rampant unemployment, and of course the world standard: food shortages and lots of people starving which are not your inlaws who keep borrowing money from you each week to go to Tesco Lotus.

I think the "problem with Thai corruption" we hear about on a lot public forums can be summed up as "I know people aren't starving because of corruption, but I despise the fact that there is a minority whose bellies are fuller than the majority whose bellies typically are also full."

[Maigo6]

and of course the world standard: food shortages and lots of people starving which are not your inlaws who keep borrowing money from you each week to go to Tesco Lotus.

[cmdream]

The US will never win in the Afganistan when you have a people whose army, police and government are corrupt.

Just look at the history of the area.

The only way to control these countries is to occupy them, govern them and re-educate them.

If you cannot do that and can not win -get out.

The problem is that the US would suffer humiliation.

Afghanistan is approaching failed state status.

Furthermore, the war in Afghanistan definitely cannot be won. This is clear now. Even the highly conservative George Will has finally concluded that:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...9083102912.html

I wish the Canadians hadn't accepted the very large role they played and continue to play in this tragic conflict.

"The only way to control these countries is to occupy them, govern them and re-educate them."

True, but this will not and should not happen.

"The problem is that the US would suffer humiliation."

At this point in time I believe further humiliation could be minimized. The role of the U.S. and allies in the war should now be redefined to be a passive support effort only to the Karzai government, with drones, ATACs intelligence, etc. Direct combat engagement should be rapidly handed over entirely to the Afghans themselves and if they aren't ready by now that's just too bad. Too many American, Canadian, British and other lives have been tragically sacrificed in this lost cause. We must be on the fast track to end further casualties.

You gotta know when to hold 'em, and when to fold 'em. Time to fold up this sorry hand of cards.

Let's face it -- Bin Laden won.

IMHO

Agreed, as an American I say the US should pull out of Afghanistan, South Korea, The Philippines, Japan, The Med Sea, NATO, The UN and let you all deal with Bin Laden on your own. We can use our troops on home ground. Any attack again on America will be delt with from the sky ! No more boots on the ground. Europe, the Mid East and Russia and China are all yours now. Chokdee.

[LooseCannon]

According to Wiki, there are several definitions of the expression 'Failed State'. Some of those are:

.......

By any and all of these definitions, there seems to be a case for saying that Thailand is already a failed state.

Opinions?

"By any and all of these definitions, there seems to be a case for saying that Thailand is already a failed state".

....and you make absolutely no attempt to provide any supporting argument or facts.

Your first reply is a 2 liner...

"Is that a rebuttal? Why is it not a failed state? What characteristics of a failed state does Thailand not yet show?

Jest the fax ma'am, jest the fax. "

....a rebuttal of what? You have given nothing, why should anybody else go to trouble of constructing a counter argument to your original statement when you have not bothered to put the effort in. Where are your 'fax'? At this stage all you deserve is what you are getting - Yes/No & smart arse comments.

Next we get this little gem..."And they are &lt;deleted&gt; it up for me" It's all about me?

Busy building your supporting argument?

Moving on, your next little treat consists of this "....stop reducing a reasonable debate to ad-hominem comments" & this "If this is all you have then trust me, you need more".

Reasonable debate? There is no reasonable debate.... you have provided nothing....zero. How about your supporting argument or do you consider that unnecessary?

"...you need more". Never a truer word written.

Your next post is probably best forgotten - try reading what was written instead of concentrating on comments that don't 'sting'.

As we laboriously plod forward in our quest for constructive argument we arrive at post#50

This really requires no comment but it did make me laugh & I thank you for that.

You ask "Can your opinion be supported by facts?" - How about your opinion supported by the facts? then there will be points to argue . Hardly persuasive.

Next up, our friend Valjean presents some interesting facts,some rational argument & a bit thoughtful opinion. Your reply dismisses it out of hand - did you actually go to the 'NationMaster' website?

Valjeans post#58 more than adequately demolishes any notion that Thailand is a failed state.

Interestingly you seem to ignore this post. Plenty of opportunity to construct counter-argument here. Where is it?

Starting to pick up a bit speed now, we at last reach post#62.

Are all these points here to bolster your original statement?

You provide us with this.."Personally I don't think the Thai education system is socially serviceable or useful".

When Valjean provides links (post#53) to websites providing information on literacy & education in Thailand, you dismiss them as being irrelevant by stating ".....and you have addressed different criteria". Have the criteria changed?

To your credit you do preface each of your statements with the word 'personally' but there is still no supporting argument.

To take just one your points "Personally I don't think universal law and order are in place" - how have you reached this conclusion? Surely there are facts & figures, reports from international organizations etc that show 'law & order' is at a 'failed state' level in Thailand. Come on throw us something!

Interestingly, now you say Thailand is "on the verge of becoming a failed state", so does this mean that there is no case "...for saying that Thailand is already a failed state?"

"To think that any of the above is not true is (I believe) to fail to see what is blindingly obvious. But that is only my opinion". - you started this discussion & presented your opinion with no supporting argument yet seem to demand that any contrary opinion to your own be supported by facts. If you want a constructive argument you need to make an effort.

In your defence, none of the posters that agree with you have made any attempt to argue constructively. Maybe you should demand 'fax' from all the 'yes'men.

I tend to agree with jackspratt - just another Thailand bashing exercise. Probably thought you could have a bit of fun bagging the Thais. Trouble is, a number of posters present valid & well constructed arguments to debunk your rather ridiculous original statement and .... what? Nothing.

Thailand has many problems & things that are wrong but the notion that it is a 'failed state' is just patently absurd.

[Lopburi99]

Wake up Kev. Get a cup of coffee You've got some nastygrams awaiting you.

Edited September 22, 2009 by Lopburi99

[Naam]

Agreed, as an American I say the US should pull out of Afghanistan, South Korea, The Philippines, Japan, The Med Sea, NATO, The UN and let you all deal with Bin Laden on your own. We can use our troops on home ground. Any attack again on America will be delt with from the sky ! No more boots on the ground. Europe, the Mid East and Russia and China are all yours now. Chokdee.

an excellent idea. good riddance!

[caf]

The Newin verdict proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that Thailand is not a failed state

[livinthailandos]

I'm just going to toss in the winner and say for the majority here

THAILAND IS NOT A FAILED STATE