SMH : Lesser of two evils

Lesser of two evils

Military coups are usually universally deplored, but Thai-style politics are always a little different. Connie Levett reports.

September 23, 2006

THE buzz at the Bangkok Stock Exchange on Tuesday afternoon was all about speculation of an impending coup. But it was not the arrival of tanks from the north that worried the traders; it was the hypothetical questions.

Hypothetically, how would Thailand's baht currency respond to a change of government? Hypothetically, how would foreign investors react if Thaksin Shinawatra was deposed?

Behind the scenes, the coup plotters were testing the financial waters ahead of their "good coup" to relieve Thailand of what many see as the cancer of Thaksin's political manipulation.

The months of quiet coup speculation meant the reason for even the very pointed questions was not obvious until the tanks rolled onto the streets. It gave the generals a much-needed camouflage in the final hours.

The coup went off seamlessly but the four days since the army chief, General Sonthi Boonyaratglin, snatched power have highlighted a disconnect between Western governments' view of military intervention and Thailand's warm welcome of the circuit-breaking event.

Thailand is no stranger to coups. It has had 17, or 18, no one can agree, since constitutional monarchy and parliamentary democracy were introduced - in a bloodless coup - in 1932.

Jon Ungpakorn, a former senator and civil society activist, cannot remember how many coups he has lived through - "too many to count". Most vivid for him was when his father, Dr Puey Ungpakorn, then rector of Bangkok's Thammasat University, was accused of being a communist in 1973 after a large student uprising centred on the university. "People were hanged by right-wing vigilantes in Saman Luang [Royal Field], near the university, many intellectuals fled to the jungle and my father was allowed to leave the country," he says.

The 59-year-old made a distinction between this week's coup and previous ones. "There was no previous coup that any democratic-minded person could support. The irony is a lot of people who support democracy have supported this coup.

"I don't support it but I am relieved Thaksin is overthrown. I am optimistic about present coup leaders but wonder who is behind them."

He said in effect Thaksin had staged the first coup by subverting the constitution in order to destroy the checks and balances during his five years in power. He did that by using his money and the traditional patronage system, Ungpakorn says.

On Tuesday night Thaksin, in New York, tried one last time to grab the reins of power. As the coup makers' plans became apparent, he called a state of emergency, naming the Supreme Commander of the Army, General Ruangroj Mahasaranon, as the person to take control until his return. But as Thaksin tried to send his state of emergency message out to the nation, only one Thai television channel carried it and within minutes it was yanked from the air.

Soon after came an announcement on Thai television by a military spokesman, General Prapas Satunkanak, that the army was taking over because "there is no way to end the conflicts. The revolution body thus needs to seize power. We have no intention to rule but to return the power to the people as soon as possible, to preserve peace and honour the king, who is the most revered to all Thais."

Thai coup connoisseurs immediately spotted the general as the same man who announced an early 1980s coup.

Back in New York, Thaksin had made a critical miscalculation. He assumed, through Ruangroj, he would have control of the military in Bangkok and a voice to the international community at the United Nations General Assembly. Also, with him overseas, the generals would not move because they could not take him into custody. Thaksin quickly discovered his presence was not required in Bangkok and loyalty was a fickle thing.

"General Ruangroj had no part in the coup preparations but he very soon threw in his lot with Sonthi, cutting the legs from under Thaksin as he tried to establish an alternative power base," says Robert Karniol, a long-time correspondent for Jane's Defence Weekly in Bangkok.

"At midnight on Tuesday, the king called in the three military leaders, Sonthi, Ruangroj and the navy chief [Sathiraphan Keyanont]. No one knows what was discussed."

The significance of the meeting lay not in a statement released but the fact it took place. Analysts say King Bhumibol Adulyadej could have reacted very differently: he could have condemned it; he could have ignored it. The meeting was taken as tacit approval by the palace for what was unfolding. The nonstop broadcast on all networks of patriotic songs with montages of the king was briefly interrupted to show the generals arriving at the palace.

The criticism from the international community has focused on a rejection of any type of military intervention as a solution, that there is no such thing as a good coup.

Australia's Prime Minister, John Howard, condemned the coup. "[Military coups] are a throwback to a past that I had hoped Asia had emerged from, and it's a great disappointment," he said.

The Foreign Minister, Alexander Downer, in New York for the UN meeting, said: "We stress the importance of democratic elections taking place as soon as possible."

But Karniol says Australia's statement was made for a domestic audience. "The real reflection of government views lie in their actions. The statements out of Canberra are painting by numbers; this is what we are supposed to say if there is a military coup," Karniol says.

KRAISAK CHOONHAVAN, a former senator and leading contender for foreign minister under the new interim government, has a strong record of fighting for democracy and human rights in Thailand.

"This is the first coup where I didn't have to watch my back," he says. In 1991 Kraisak's father, General Chatichai Choonhavan, then prime minister, was overthrown in a military coup.

"All day Wednesday I gave interviews to Western media: [it was] what about democracy, the elected government? So I would begin telling about four years of human rights violations, abuse of power, and uncaring of parliamentary process [under Thaksin]. I was amazed the lengthy explanation fell on deaf ears," Kraisak says.

"Most Western media only equate Thaksin with election and the military as bad. [Australia] says this is unacceptable; I would say [the] Government's support for the invasion of Iraq is unacceptable."

Kasit Piromya was Thaksin's former confidant and ambassador to Washington until he quit last year, deciding he must oppose the Thaksin regime. "We got into a situation where we were facing one-party rule. He was turning this country into an illiberal democracy and then most choices are not acceptable. I think this was a reluctant coup," Kasit says.

Reluctant coup makers or not, they must now deliver on their promises to return the country to an interim civilian administration within two weeks and to an elected democracy in a year.

"It's a bit like Baghdad," said a Western diplomat after the generals briefed ambassadors on Wednesday. "It's like the Americans: they got to Baghdad faster than they expected but didn't have much idea what to do when they got there. There was good coup planning and execution but it seems now they are making it up as they go along."

IN THE short term, the army's control is assured. It has detained key politicians loyal to Thaksin, imposed martial law, curbed media criticism, and introduced a ban on political parties meeting. The problem for Sonthi is if he wants to keep faith on his good coup intentions, those restrictions must be quickly eased.

"Basically there are good coups and bad coups. Military intervention is occasionally required. Unfortunately the circumstances are not always ideal," Karniol says. "A move back to a democratic process is necessary for a coup to be seen as good. Perhaps rather than a good coup you should call it the lesser of two evils."

While the initial reactions were positive, the sight of guns in television studios, tanks on the streets and soldiers guarding major intersections throughout the city is unsettling. Thais are waking up to the fact that they are now living on trust that their military saviours will deliver.

The biggest task for the coup group, says Kraisak, is to set up a government and work out a draft of a new constitution - the country's 18th.

"The future will be very difficult," he says. "Already people are a bit dazed; they didn't expect Thaksin to go so fast."

Is it a good coup? "It's a military coup to overthrow an undemocratic democratically elected regime," Ungpakorn says. "I don't think we can know [if it's good] for a year."