Thai army wary of intervening after post-coup chaos

[webfact]

Thai army wary of intervening after post-coup chaos
by Kelly MACNAMARA

BANGKOK, December 3, 2013 (AFP) - Thailand's opposition protesters have appealed to the army to help topple the government, but chastened by the turmoil they unleashed with a 2006 coup the powerful generals are reluctant to seize power again, observers say.

The kingdom has been convulsed with periodic unrest since the ouster of Thaksin Shinawatra, the billionaire tycoon whose political rise alarmed the nation's elites who saw him as corrupt and a threat to the monarchy.

The army held power for a year after the 2006 takeover, but Thaksin's allies soon secured one of a series of thumping election victories that have frustrated their opponents, who now call for democracy to be replaced with an unelected "people's council".

Anti-government protesters vowing to rid the country of Thaksin's polarising influence have this week stormed the offices of his sister, Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra, and other symbols of state power, in unrest which has claimed several lives.

As the clashes threatened to get out of hand, the military sent hundreds of unarmed soldiers to support the police and facilitated a meeting between Yingluck and protest leader Suthep Thaugsuban on Sunday.

But apart from those measures the generals have so far avoided any public return to the political fray and army chief General Prayut Chan-O-Cha said Tuesday the military would "let this problem be solved by politics".

A senior military source with knowledge of the Sunday meeting told AFP that the heads of the army, navy and airforce refused to throw their support behind the premier.

"None of the three commanders took the government side," said the official, on condition of anonymity. "They said if the government used force, they would stand next to the people."

Thitinan Pongsudhirak from Bangkok's Chulalongkorn University said the generals, who seen themselves as defenders of the monarchy, may feel impelled to exert order ahead of Thursday's solemn celebrations for the 86th birthday of King Bhumibol Adulyadej.

"Until very recently the army has stayed out of it and has been above the fray but now I think they are being increasingly dragged into the conflict to break the deadlock. And that's what the protest leaders want," he told AFP.

But he said the army was aware that intervention "may just lead to more turmoil down the road."

Thailand has seen 18 actual or attempted coups since it became a constitutional monarchy in 1932. But observers say the army knows that another putsch risks further inflaming tensions.

"The coup of 2006 was a failure. Thaksin's political forces are arguably stronger now than they would have been if that coup never took place," said Andrew Walker, a professor at Australian National University.

Response to a coup would be 'vigorous, violent'

The current unrest is the worst political violence since 2010, when more than 90 people were killed during pro-Thaksin "Red Shirt" rallies that ended in a brutal army crackdown with soldiers firing live rounds as they stormed protest camps.

Walker said the Red Shirts had proved they could again mass large numbers of supporters with their rally last weekend at a suburban sports stadium in Bangkok, which attracted tens of thousands of people.

"Their response to a coup would be vigorous, numerous and, in all likelihood, violent. The army won't risk it," he said.

The latest demonstrations have echoes of 2008, when the ultra-royalist "Yellow Shirts" stormed government headquarters trying to oust an elected Thaksin-allied government. Two premiers close to Thaksin were subsequently removed by judicial rulings.

Yingluck, who swept to power in elections held a year after the Red Shirts rallies which paralysed parts of Bangkok, had seemed to have earned at least grudging acceptance by the army.

But Paul Chambers, an academic at Chiang Mai University, said a reshuffle in October had strengthened the royalist contingent in the top military ranks.

"I think the army -- which has an anti-Thaksin leadership -- is doing the same thing it did back in 2008... That is, do nothing to help," he said.

The recent political turmoil comes as the country braces for the eventual end of ailing King Bhumibol's more than six-decade reign, and as the nation struggles with dramatic social change in which Thaksin acted as a catalyst.
Yingluck has insisted police would use a light touch and on Tuesday security forces offered no resistance to the protesters who had marched on the city police headquarters and government offices.

After fending them off with rubber bullets and tear gas in the days before, authorities removed barriers and razor wire and invited the whistle-blowing protesters inside, in a sudden mood of detente.


-- (c) Copyright AFP 2013-12-03

[dcsw53]

An "unelected people's council". Now that is democracy !!

Most politicians ( Putin excepted ) lose popularity after they are elected it is generally the way of the world. But love it or hate it the government were democratically elected and the only change should be the same! wait for the next election and make the change if this is the common mandate. All the protesters are wanting is anarchy, what happens when someone does not like the next lot ?

Meanwhile lots of people in freezing cold countries are thumbing through holiday brochures deciding where to go next year. Many international companies are about to announce where their new factory is about to be built. Could be the Monarchy of the Unelected People's Council ( formally known as Thailand ) is not top of the list. We are all Thais goes the cry, start acting like it.

[chainarong]

To have a coup would certainly be the living end of a struggling democracy such as Thailand's, the repercussions from the last coup from the rest of the western world, would serve as a reminder not to go down this path , even though it still maybe the last resort, to restore law and order, the top brass has changed but egging on from a few retired generals might sway things, only time will tell.

[uty6543]

So its not checkmate its stale mate. With neither side will to comprise any further I can see this all starting again in the next or 2

[millwall_fan]

The government has never been able to rely on the army, and that has always been part of the problem in Thailand. The army does not serve the civil power but has 'policies' and 'strategies' of its own making. It is a state within a state. but Prayuth is no fool and knows the army may not be able to rely on its own troops, most of whom come from the Isaan and North. Suthep's puppeteers have been trying to engineer a coup since day 1. A coup would be disastrous for the ordinary Thai people.

[JoeLing]

What's that, some of the army not standing behind the government?

In a democracy, the army is not ask if they like the government's policy or not.
They are there to protect a country, a governments sovereignty and security
and should be a tool of the elected government and not the other way round.

Although it seams to me, here in Thailand, not the police nor the army are
listening very much to their employer, the government. Any government.
And those governments in power aren't listening very much to their employers,
the people either.

And the people? First of all the would need to have uncensored education
and information in order to make any kind of decision but as long a handful
of people are in control of any kind of media or education, there will not be
much of a democratic future for Thailand.

[Local Drunk]

There isn't enough liquor in Thailand for Thaksin and myself... one of us has to go.

[Local Drunk]

To have a coup would certainly be the living end of a struggling democracy such as Thailand's, the repercussions from the last coup from the rest of the western world, would serve as a reminder not to go down this path , even though it still maybe the last resort, to restore law and order, the top brass has changed but egging on from a few retired generals might sway things, only time will tell.

There are no unweaned democratic fledglings falling from the nest of Thai politics.... It's a brutal game here and the raptor that eats all is called self interest.

[Curt1591]

"None of the three commanders took the government side," said the official, on condition of anonymity. "They said if the government used force, they would stand next to the people."

What happened in 2010?

[rogerdee123]

The government has never been able to rely on the army, and that has always been part of the problem in Thailand. The army does not serve the civil power but has 'policies' and 'strategies' of its own making. It is a state within a state. but Prayuth is no fool and knows the army may not be able to rely on its own troops, most of whom come from the Isaan and North. Suthep's puppeteers have been trying to engineer a coup since day 1. A coup would be disastrous for the ordinary Thai people.

Although I agree that the Army has always been part of the problem in Thailand ..... I think Prem's Govt was able to rely on the army .. although there was a short period of the "young turks" whose ambition got ahead of their brains .... and I think during his Govt things were fairly stable and significant development happened. Maybe I'm wrong but I think Arthit's Govt also could rely on the Army but I don't recall his Govt doing much of consequence.

[Old Man River]

In a democracy, the army is not ask if they like the government's policy or not.

They are there to protect a country, a governments sovereignty and security

It is obvious that the Army agrees with you. They only got involved in an attempt to get the parties together. They said crowd control was the Police's responsibility.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

[marcusd]

What's that, some of the army not standing behind the government?

In a democracy, the army is not ask if they like the government's policy or not.

They are there to protect a country, a governments sovereignty and security

and should be a tool of the elected government and not the other way round.

Although it seams to me, here in Thailand, not the police nor the army are

listening very much to their employer, the government. Any government.

And those governments in power aren't listening very much to their employers,

the people either.

And the people? First of all the would need to have uncensored education

and information in order to make any kind of decision but as long a handful

of people are in control of any kind of media or education, there will not be

much of a democratic future for Thailand.

I would like to quote you : In a democracy, the army is not ask if they like the government's policy or not.

They are there to protect a country, a governments sovereignty and security

and should be a tool of the elected government and not the other way round

The ARMY of ANY Nation with an interest in the GOOD of its people will stand behind the Government to PROTECT THE PEOPLE not ammass force against the people.

Now in this situation, the Army may have to intervene to STOP the people attacking the people and that would be an instrance where an army is used to quell oposing forces damaging the country.

If the Government here used the army to repell protesters or these crowds, then the government would be using the forces illegally and imorally to crush their own people to instill their will - hello Nazi germany in the 1930's.

The army here is trying to stop both sides destroying each other.

NONE on either side, of theses politicians here, care about their porple ONLY THEIR OWN GAIN and POWER BASES.

[JoeLing]

In a democracy, the army is not ask if they like the government's policy or not.

They are there to protect a country, a governments sovereignty and security

It is obvious that the Army agrees with you. They only got involved in an attempt to get the parties together. They said crowd control was the Police's responsibility.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

Ohh fully agree with you on that one.

Of course "Crowd Control" and upholding the law is the police's duty.

Last but not least, protect their own compound ;-)

But as last defence to protect an elected government, the Generals

should not hesitate and take orders from their "Supreme Commander"

which should be THE Government (Not a general or single person. e.g USA).

Edited December 3, 2013 by JoeLing

[Ragzilb]

The rules are simple. NEVER BRING IN THE ARMY. at bunch of 18-25 year old kids with guns and a General who have no clue or actually power over city problems. It is a it would be like trowing a A-bombs to stop Neighbour fights.

[Thai at Heart]

The government has never been able to rely on the army, and that has always been part of the problem in Thailand. The army does not serve the civil power but has 'policies' and 'strategies' of its own making. It is a state within a state. but Prayuth is no fool and knows the army may not be able to rely on its own troops, most of whom come from the Isaan and North. Suthep's puppeteers have been trying to engineer a coup since day 1. A coup would be disastrous for the ordinary Thai people.

Although I agree that the Army has always been part of the problem in Thailand ..... I think Prem's Govt was able to rely on the army .. although there was a short period of the "young turks" whose ambition got ahead of their brains .... and I think during his Govt things were fairly stable and significant development happened. Maybe I'm wrong but I think Arthit's Govt also could rely on the Army but I don't recall his Govt doing much of consequence.

Prem is the army. He is a career maker or breaker.. What he wants, he gets. He is the arbiter in nearly all serious decisions.

[rogerdee123]

Yes I know ... that's why I think the statement .... "The Govt has never been able to rely on the army" is incorrect. Although he didn't have the same degree of power when he was PM ... but he almost did.

[noitom]

So the Thai army "doesn't like" the sitting elected government of its nation, therefore their strategy is to "do nothing to help." This is a great strategy for a country. It means that no government is secure by the army and if the Thai army doesn't like any duly elected government, then it will do nothing to secure that government against protests and anarchy. This would be the classic definition of a Thai military dictatorship.

[anon210]

Actually, the Thai army has not been neutral at all. And that much is clear of several small signs that were sent out: army evacuating the besieged students; army medics assisting rioters affected by tear gas; army general calling the police to stop using tear gas.

All of these actions are clear actions of rebellion against a legitimately elected government.

The army is clearly behind the rioters, but so far is weary of acting itself to throw down the government. So, what they have been doing, is trying to cut little by little every little branch of support there was for the government.

The government itself is playing pretty well for now the game of reconciliation and national hypocrisy that the army is trying to play against it.

The failure of Suthep to garnish sufficient support for his general strike proposal is also a sign that the majority of the population would not stand for a further coup. Let us hope that the generals do not lose this of sight in their upcoming manipulations.

[millwall_fan]

The government has never been able to rely on the army, and that has always been part of the problem in Thailand. The army does not serve the civil power but has 'policies' and 'strategies' of its own making. It is a state within a state. but Prayuth is no fool and knows the army may not be able to rely on its own troops, most of whom come from the Isaan and North. Suthep's puppeteers have been trying to engineer a coup since day 1. A coup would be disastrous for the ordinary Thai people.

Although I agree that the Army has always been part of the problem in Thailand ..... I think Prem's Govt was able to rely on the army .. although there was a short period of the "young turks" whose ambition got ahead of their brains .... and I think during his Govt things were fairly stable and significant development happened. Maybe I'm wrong but I think Arthit's Govt also could rely on the Army but I don't recall his Govt doing much of consequence.

Prem was an ex army officer which makes him totally different to Thaskin who was ex police. Therefore I am happy to accept your qualification to my statement!

[Zodaka]

"None of the three commanders took the government side," said the official, on condition of anonymity. "They said if the government used force, they would stand next to the people."

What happened in 2010?

perherps they don't consider red shirts people. I've heard many Bangkokians accuse them of not being Thai too.