There Is No Such Thing As A Good Thai Military Coup

[webfact]

THAI TALK

There is no such thing as a good coup

By Suthichai Yoon

The Nation

Is the new Army chief, General Prayuth Em-Ocha, more inclined toward staging a coup than his predecessor, General Anupong Paochinda? That's the question a lot of people have wanted to pose to the new Army commander-in-chief, but it would have been too sensitive a query. Besides, who wants to be the rat to bell the cat?

But then, as it turned out, the "cat" was more or less ready to be belled anyway.

That's why, when a reporter posed the question about a statement by Jatuporn Promphan, a red-shirt leader, saying the yellow shirts had raised the issue of a Thai-Khmer memoranda of understanding on border demarcation with the clear intention to instigate the military to stage a coup, General Prayuth seized upon the opportunity to make clear his stand:

"Who wants to stage a coup at this time? We already have a democracy under the monarchy. Other countries may have democracy but they don't have the institution of the monarchy like the one we have."

Then, without prompting, the Army chief went on to justify the previous coup: "I don't really want to talk about the past, but the last time that [a coup] happened, it was to prevent a calamity. Once they did it, they went back to the normal, democratic track."

Of course, he was being cautious. General Prayuth is a much more outspoken general than his predecessor. He might be much more forthright on this issue in private. But he has already been criticised for "speaking out of turn" in the few public statements he has made since he took over the Army's top post on October 1.

General Prayuth has made it clear he won't tolerate attempts by any group to be involved in activities that could even be remotely considered lese majeste. He has made this mission his personal crusade, and some critics fear that he might cite certain actions he finds offensive in this regard to do what he says he won't do if he can help it.

If you read between the lines of what he has said all along, there is no guarantee that the last coup will really be the "last" attempt to tamper with the democratic rules to "re-set" the country's political system.

Interestingly enough, a few days later on November 12, "Big Jiew", General Chavalit Yongchaiyudh, chairman of the Pheu Thai Party, gave a speech to an in-house seminar in which he touched on this highly (un)popular subject:

"Two days ago, someone asked whether the military will stage another coup. I told them if they did [citing reasons given by the previous coup-leaders], then it's everyone for himself. I would be terribly upset, of course.

"If I had known this would be the trend, I should have done it myself. That's because if you knew how to stage a coup, then you can build democracy. End of story. But what they did was to tear up the constitution and draw up a new one. That's why Thailand has had so many [torn-up] charters."

In other words, General Chavalit isn't necessarily against a coup. The problem is that the military takeovers staged by others in the past were "bad coups". He is sure he could pull off a "good coup", whatever that means.

I hope he hasn't given General Prayuth any ideas about a "good coup".

Dear General: Let's get this clear, once and for all: There is no such thing as a good coup, no matter who stages it. Or how one phrases it.

-- The Nation 2010-11-18

[virtualtraveller]

General Prayuth has me worried when he speaks, he's outspoken, fine, but he doesn't come across as very smart. What worries me too is that a PT government might deliberately go on the offensive, goading the general into a coup, which might not be as smooth as the previous one, ultimately proving disastrous for the military, the general, and ultimately Thailand as a whole.

[Northman061]

"Then, without prompting, the Army chief went on to justify the previous coup: "I don't really want to talk about the past, but the last time that [a coup] happened, it was to prevent a calamity".........hmmm

I think you will find, the Millionaire Generals had simply had enough of a PM who was limiting their access to power and money. Once they decided to break their oaths of service, break the law, oust a democratically elected PM and Parliament and force their will onto the Thai people, they simply made sure the cash and the power were in their and their Elites friends pocket once more.

And using "lese majeste" to listen in on people phone calls, read texts and e mails whilst spending BILLIONS on checking peoples Facebook sites and web pages is simply a ruse to crush all forms of free speech and debate so as to maintain and strengthen their grip upon the Thai Nation.

[Thai at Heart]

Don't the courts deal with lese majeste?

[rreddin]

General Prayuth has me worried when he speaks, he's outspoken, fine, but he doesn't come across as very smart. What worries me too is that a PT government might deliberately go on the offensive, goading the general into a coup, which might not be as smooth as the previous one, ultimately proving disastrous for the military, the general, and ultimately Thailand as a whole.

"Who wants to stage a coup at this time?" from the OP. So, the last coup was justified and another one is not ruled out. I doubt the trigger will be a new PT government. The financial markets have a shrewd idea of what the catalyst might be. As reported, General Prayuth makes it sound like it is just a matter of when.

[SomTumTiger]

There will be no coup, and its not for any of the internal reasons. It's entirely external. The the coup in 1991 went largely underneath the world's radar - internet and news were not what they are now. I think, in many ways, the 2006 reaction to the coup stunned the Thai military. They were not prepared for the instant and strong global backlash, brought about by the global 24 hour news machine, and the instant news service that is today's reality. They certainly don't want that bad press again, and I think - finally we can close the book on the use of military coups to press the "reset" button in Thailand. Only time will tell.

[SomTumTiger]

General Prayuth has me worried when he speaks, he's outspoken, fine, but he doesn't come across as very smart. What worries me too is that a PT government might deliberately go on the offensive, goading the general into a coup, which might not be as smooth as the previous one, ultimately proving disastrous for the military, the general, and ultimately Thailand as a whole.

"Who wants to stage a coup at this time?" from the OP. So, the last coup was justified and another one is not ruled out. I doubt the trigger will be a new PT government. The financial markets have a shrewd idea of what the catalyst might be. As reported, General Prayuth makes it sound like it is just a matter of when.

Remember, he didn't say that, word for word, in English. What did he say in Thai? The Nation is notorious for not translating meaning accurately.

[Thai at Heart]

There will be no coup, and its not for any of the internal reasons. It's entirely external. The the coup in 1991 went largely underneath the world's radar - internet and news were not what they are now. I think, in many ways, the 2006 reaction to the coup stunned the Thai military. They were not prepared for the instant and strong global backlash, brought about by the global 24 hour news machine, and the instant news service that is today's reality. They certainly don't want that bad press again, and I think - finally we can close the book on the use of military coups to press the "reset" button in Thailand. Only time will tell.

I think you might be correct, but TIT...........

The pressure was so great they had to very quickly explain when they would step aside and have elections. And the rest as they say is history.

[bushwacker]

"If I had known this would be the trend, I should have done it myself. That's because if you knew how to stage a coup, then you can build democracy. End of story. But what they did was to tear up the constitution and draw up a new one. That's why Thailand has had so many [torn-up] charters."

HOW CAN STAGING A COUP BUILD DEMOCRACY? I am confused.

[jdinasia]

"Then, without prompting, the Army chief went on to justify the previous coup: "I don't really want to talk about the past, but the last time that [a coup] happened, it was to prevent a calamity".........hmmm

I think you will find, the Millionaire Generals had simply had enough of a PM who was limiting their access to power and money. Once they decided to break their oaths of service, break the law, oust a democratically elected PM and Parliament and force their will onto the Thai people, they simply made sure the cash and the power were in their and their Elites friends pocket once more.

And using "lese majeste" to listen in on people phone calls, read texts and e mails whilst spending BILLIONS on checking peoples Facebook sites and web pages is simply a ruse to crush all forms of free speech and debate so as to maintain and strengthen their grip upon the Thai Nation.

Sorry but your claims about the government that was replaced by the coup in 2006 are simply .... wrong.

There was no democratically elected PM or parliament at the time. Parliament had been dissolved and the PM extra-constitutional. (His failed elections left him in a caretaker position that he resigned publicly and then reclaimed ... the time allowed for a caretaker government to rule had expired.)

[Crushdepth]

If Thai politicians weren't so hopelessly corrupt there would be no need for the army to throw them out when things get out of hand.

The only fix is to improve governance in Thailand - when a politician breaks the law they lose their seat and go to jail. No deals, no amnesties and no rewriting the law to let them off the hook (honestly, how pathetic).

When enough politicians are rotting in jail the others will start to get the message and things will improve.

I know, I know, don't hold your breath.

[geovalin]

Every time I mention war between Thailand and Cambodia, some of the Thai Visa readers castigate me. Unfortunately, reading this article I feel, one more time, that the alternative to a coup is a war. The advantage is that a war would reunify the Thai population.

It's very easy for PAD and army to provoke / create the conditions and they'll do it if it prevents the advent of the democracy (which had never been really installed in Thailand).

Please remember, PAD and army mastermind the Thai life.

[jayboy]

"Then, without prompting, the Army chief went on to justify the previous coup: "I don't really want to talk about the past, but the last time that [a coup] happened, it was to prevent a calamity".........hmmm

I think you will find, the Millionaire Generals had simply had enough of a PM who was limiting their access to power and money. Once they decided to break their oaths of service, break the law, oust a democratically elected PM and Parliament and force their will onto the Thai people, they simply made sure the cash and the power were in their and their Elites friends pocket once more.

And using "lese majeste" to listen in on people phone calls, read texts and e mails whilst spending BILLIONS on checking peoples Facebook sites and web pages is simply a ruse to crush all forms of free speech and debate so as to maintain and strengthen their grip upon the Thai Nation.

Sorry but your claims about the government that was replaced by the coup in 2006 are simply .... wrong.

There was no democratically elected PM or parliament at the time. Parliament had been dissolved and the PM extra-constitutional. (His failed elections left him in a caretaker position that he resigned publicly and then reclaimed ... the time allowed for a caretaker government to rule had expired.)

The question is how does one interpret facts.Few serious commentators eg Chang noi accept your position that a democratically elected government was not overturned.If you want to justify the coup - and clearly you do - then by all means make that case.But don't rely on logic chopping and half truths.Turning to the Army chief's claim that the last coup was to prevent a calamity - this too has been disproven.The original case to this effect was made by Thanong in The Nation.Chang Noi (ie Pasuk/Baker) demolished his arguments one by one.

[jdinasia]

Yet again Jayboy ---

Parliament had been dissolved --- Fact

Thaksin had publicly resigned his caretaker PM position ---- Fact

Thaksin stepped back in and picked up his caretaker position when there was no constitutional allowance for him to do so ---- Fact

The time allowed in the previous constitution for a caretaker government to be in charge had expired --- fact

An election was held that could not seat a government. --- Fact

Note --- I did not claim it was a "good coup" in my post above. I merely corrected another poster's statements (something you didn't do with my post.) My personal opinion is that the 2006 coup was, in fact, the least damaging of all the option that were on the table at the time. NOW I have stated my opinion ---

[MikeyIdea]

"If I had known this would be the trend, I should have done it myself. That's because if you knew how to stage a coup, then you can build democracy. End of story. But what they did was to tear up the constitution and draw up a new one. That's why Thailand has had so many [torn-up] charters."

HOW CAN STAGING A COUP BUILD DEMOCRACY? I am confused.

Read up on the facts what happened here in Thailand and you won't be

[Thai at Heart]

"If I had known this would be the trend, I should have done it myself. That's because if you knew how to stage a coup, then you can build democracy. End of story. But what they did was to tear up the constitution and draw up a new one. That's why Thailand has had so many [torn-up] charters."

HOW CAN STAGING A COUP BUILD DEMOCRACY? I am confused.

Read up on the facts what happened here in Thailand and you won't be

Unfortunately the system in Thailand is still such that sometimes the whole system takes 5 political steps back to hopefully take 4 political steps forward, but hopefully step 5 and 6 will come in the next year or so.

Of course, they could ask people for a map so that the course is much clearer, but face prevents taking advice from others.

Edited November 18, 2010 by Thai at Heart

[jayboy]

Yet again Jayboy ---

Parliament had been dissolved --- Fact

Thaksin had publicly resigned his caretaker PM position ---- Fact

Thaksin stepped back in and picked up his caretaker position when there was no constitutional allowance for him to do so ---- Fact

The time allowed in the previous constitution for a caretaker government to be in charge had expired --- fact

An election was held that could not seat a government. --- Fact

Note --- I did not claim it was a "good coup" in my post above. I merely corrected another poster's statements (something you didn't do with my post.) My personal opinion is that the 2006 coup was, in fact, the least damaging of all the option that were on the table at the time. NOW I have stated my opinion ---

The statements you designate FACT don't really address my concerns outlined earlier.Facts have to be interpreted and their significance considered.

However your personal opinion "least damaging option" on the 2006 coup puts your FACTS in their appropriate subjective context.

[Northman061]

Wiki states ; A coup d'état (English: /ˌkuːdeɪˈtɑː/, French: [ku deta]; plural: coups d'état)—also known as a coup, putsch, and overthrow—is the sudden, illegal deposition of a government,^[1][2][3] usually by a small group of the existing state establishment—typically the military—to replace the deposed government with another body; either civil or military.

The coup, was and is an illegal act - FACT.

We can all agree that having a Military power in control over and running a Democratic State and people is wrong, in so many way, very wrong.

My concern with the OP is that even though the WORLD in general violently opposed and rejected this show of force, the Miliionaire Generals and Elites simply have not understood that this was wrong and is a violation of everything democratic.

Thailand has a new, English educated Thai PM who has been unable to control the grow of the Millionaire Generals and Business Elites. The fact these Generals have ANY part in the civil government and civil administration is wrong on all levels.

If these Millionaire Generals have "finished" with forcing their will through force of arms upon the people, then they should stick to their paid jobs as Servicemen and get out of the puplic view, off TV, off the Radio and out of the newspapers........oh, i forgot, they manage, own and run their own.

[jdinasia]

Yet again Jayboy ---

Parliament had been dissolved --- Fact

Thaksin had publicly resigned his caretaker PM position ---- Fact

Thaksin stepped back in and picked up his caretaker position when there was no constitutional allowance for him to do so ---- Fact

The time allowed in the previous constitution for a caretaker government to be in charge had expired --- fact

An election was held that could not seat a government. --- Fact

Note --- I did not claim it was a "good coup" in my post above. I merely corrected another poster's statements (something you didn't do with my post.) My personal opinion is that the 2006 coup was, in fact, the least damaging of all the option that were on the table at the time. NOW I have stated my opinion ---

The statements you designate FACT don't really address my concerns outlined earlier.Facts have to be interpreted and their significance considered.

However your personal opinion "least damaging option" on the 2006 coup puts your FACTS in their appropriate subjective context.

Please feel free to counter anything I suggest is a fact that you can prove is not a fact. Otherwise you are simply obfuscating.

[animatic]

"Then, without prompting, the Army chief went on to justify the previous coup: "I don't really want to talk about the past, but the last time that [a coup] happened, it was to prevent a calamity".........hmmm

I think you will find, the Millionaire Generals had simply had enough of a PM who was limiting their access to power and money. Once they decided to break their oaths of service, break the law, oust a democratically elected PM and Parliament and force their will onto the Thai people, they simply made sure the cash and the power were in their and their Elites friends pocket once more.

And using "lese majeste" to listen in on people phone calls, read texts and e mails whilst spending BILLIONS on checking peoples Facebook sites and web pages is simply a ruse to crush all forms of free speech and debate so as to maintain and strengthen their grip upon the Thai Nation.

There was no Parliament ousted, try to stick to facts.

Thaksin had disbanded it, before TRT screwed the pooch in the election.

Minsters were also abandoning their seats in the cabinet like rats from a sinking ship.

Thaksin had been to the palace and resigned,

his resignation was accepted,

but then decided a week later to just assume

the Care Taker PM job again, and no palace visit

or announcement in the royal gazette to make it legal.

Thaksin was an expired and resigned Care Taker PM past his mandated period of power, because he did not do his constitutional job of getting a proper election run. The coup prevented the calamity of his creating martial law based on ginned up risks and the army saw him starting his power play, they moved first. If there was to be a calamity of of the coup was a calamity itself, either way Thaksin put it all in motion.

I see JD beat me to it,

but truth bears repeating in the face of spurious propaganda.

Edited November 18, 2010 by animatic

[hammered]

There will be no coup, and its not for any of the internal reasons. It's entirely external. The the coup in 1991 went largely underneath the world's radar - internet and news were not what they are now. I think, in many ways, the 2006 reaction to the coup stunned the Thai military. They were not prepared for the instant and strong global backlash, brought about by the global 24 hour news machine, and the instant news service that is today's reality. They certainly don't want that bad press again, and I think - finally we can close the book on the use of military coups to press the "reset" button in Thailand. Only time will tell.

After 2006 the international criticism was incredibly mild. A few headlines that also showed flowers being given to troops. Some we dont support coup talk by a few friendly governments. A minor amount of military aid held back and nothing else. The western world in particular didnt give a toss about the coup beyond throwing a few platitudes around.

Of course that coup was against an elected government but one that had been undermined itself with its hideous human rights record and there were no deaths. A coup against the current government which hasnt killed thousands of its own people would be admittedly be harder to sell as would a coup against an incoming government after the next election. Of course if the country was in utter turmoil after say the disolution of yet another party and with more such cases to come would be a lot easier sell.

Then there is also the fact that this region is of strategic geo-poltical interest to say the least and no major government is going to put some set of ideals above the harsh reality of establishing or maintianing hegemony. If the army want a coup all they have to do is be united and have one, state they are going to return demcoracy when the corrupt are removed/when stability is restored and make sure the interests of certain powers are protected and not kill or jail too many people. By the way the US just got Bout. They owe Thailand one and in reality of the western democracies only what they say counts round here. Oh and China doesnt comment on internal events. Political reality.

Most people think there will be a coup at a certain time if stability is not certain and there will be no consideration for what is thought internationally at that time. As investors favour stability rather than type of government over everything else they have likely factored in such events.

Edited to add: I am not advocating a coup or supporting previous ones

Edited November 18, 2010 by hammered

[Buchholz]

If Thai politicians weren't so hopelessly corrupt there would be no need for the army to throw them out when things get out of hand.

The only fix is to improve governance in Thailand - when a politician breaks the law they lose their seat and go to jail. No deals, no amnesties and no rewriting the law to let them off the hook (honestly, how pathetic).

When enough politicians are rotting in jail the others will start to get the message and things will improve.

Agree wholeheartedly.

Start issuing out long prison sentences and see what happens to corruption levels.

[MikeyIdea]

There will be no coup, and its not for any of the internal reasons. It's entirely external. The the coup in 1991 went largely underneath the world's radar - internet and news were not what they are now. I think, in many ways, the 2006 reaction to the coup stunned the Thai military. They were not prepared for the instant and strong global backlash, brought about by the global 24 hour news machine, and the instant news service that is today's reality. They certainly don't want that bad press again, and I think - finally we can close the book on the use of military coups to press the "reset" button in Thailand. Only time will tell.

I spoke to my foggy old mother a couple of days after that coup and she wanted to know more because she didn't understand why the news back home didn't display the military coup as a bad thing really.

I remember a couple of funny SMS's that I sent to a friend that evening just before midnight.

Military coup?

Yepp

Well it can't get worse than it was under Thaksin

Why not, it can rain too

Because it had just started to rain hard in Samit Prakan

[animatic]

The only side in need of a coup at this time is Team Thaksin.

[jdinasia]

It really was amazing, that in the days of electronic media and instant news, that nobody in the West really objected to the 2006 coup. There was a bit of grumbling here and there, but for the most part it appeared that the West just took the coup in stride. The Americans, who are forbidden by law to sell weapons to a government that takes over a democratic form of government, made a point to say "our hands are tied."

Some people saw all of this as a bad thing (mainly in principle) and some people saw it as the removal of a would-be petty dictator.

[whybother]

"If I had known this would be the trend, I should have done it myself. That's because if you knew how to stage a coup, then you can build democracy. End of story. But what they did was to tear up the constitution and draw up a new one. That's why Thailand has had so many [torn-up] charters."

HOW CAN STAGING A COUP BUILD DEMOCRACY? I am confused.

A coup can build democracy if those in power are by-passing the democratic checks and balances.

[jdinasia]

If Thai politicians weren't so hopelessly corrupt there would be no need for the army to throw them out when things get out of hand.

The only fix is to improve governance in Thailand - when a politician breaks the law they lose their seat and go to jail. No deals, no amnesties and no rewriting the law to let them off the hook (honestly, how pathetic).

When enough politicians are rotting in jail the others will start to get the message and things will improve.

Agree wholeheartedly.

Start issuing out long prison sentences and see what happens to corruption levels.

I agree as well.

1) HARSH sentences for members of the government and government agencies that are caught in corruption.

2) Banning from holding public office or from serving in the police/army/government service people that have beenconvicted of any crime that carries the possibility of a prison term that exceeds one year --- and banning them forever.

edit to add a few links

Thaksin dissolves Parliament

http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/02/24/thailand.government/index.html

Thaksin steps down

http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/04/07/thailand.politics/

Edited November 18, 2010 by jdinasia

[MikeyIdea]

If Thai politicians weren't so hopelessly corrupt there would be no need for the army to throw them out when things get out of hand.

The only fix is to improve governance in Thailand - when a politician breaks the law they lose their seat and go to jail. No deals, no amnesties and no rewriting the law to let them off the hook (honestly, how pathetic).

When enough politicians are rotting in jail the others will start to get the message and things will improve.

Agree wholeheartedly.

Start issuing out long prison sentences and see what happens to corruption levels.

I agree as well.

1) HARSH sentences for members of the government and government agencies that are caught in corruption.

2) Banning from holding public office or from serving in the police/army/government service people that have beenconvicted of any crime that carries the possibility of a prison term that exceeds one year --- and banning them forever.

I agree as well but we must start from the top down. The top have no excuses while those at the bottom are living with a system built so that corruption is not only expected but also needed.

It is not possible to support a wife and kids on 4,000 bath per month, even if accommodation is free. Top down and harsh sentences

[ianbaggie]

Firstly - is a "COUP" any different to a "military coup"? isnt a revolution a coup? and when the military coup removes a corrupt thieving murdering tyrant who then finances an attemted "counter coup" isnt the military coup a good thing? Personally id say it was!! Id say Thailand needed to get rid of Khun Thaksin Shinawatra by ANY means - fair or foul!!

[ianbaggie]

If Thai politicians weren't so hopelessly corrupt there would be no need for the army to throw them out when things get out of hand.

The only fix is to improve governance in Thailand - when a politician breaks the law they lose their seat and go to jail. No deals, no amnesties and no rewriting the law to let them off the hook (honestly, how pathetic).

When enough politicians are rotting in jail the others will start to get the message and things will improve.

Agree wholeheartedly.

Start issuing out long prison sentences and see what happens to corruption levels.

Im GLAD someone mentioned the Police - to me Thailands BIGGEST corruption problem!!

I agree as well.

1) HARSH sentences for members of the government and government agencies that are caught in corruption.

2) Banning from holding public office or from serving in the police/army/government service people that have beenconvicted of any crime that carries the possibility of a prison term that exceeds one year --- and banning them forever.

I agree as well but we must start from the top down. The top have no excuses while those at the bottom are living with a system built so that corruption is not only expected but also needed.

It is not possible to support a wife and kids on 4,000 bath per month, even if accommodation is free. Top down and harsh sentences