What to do? Prof Dr Aurel Croissant, Director, Institute of Political Science, Ruprecht-Karls-University, Heidelberg shared a platform with Dr Chambers at the recent ISIS public forum in Bangkok on Civil-Military Relations.
To my mind he gave a forensic world wide overview of military -civil relations and what should be done to optimise the balance between the two.
His paper was entitled “Civilian Control over the Military and Democracy. Conceptual and Theoretical Perspectives.” He can be contacted via email: [email protected]
Shwe and Swe are not normally interchangeable unless someone with a lisp is saying it. I hope it’s not a case of mistaken identity, for factual accuracy and fairness, though I’m far from being a fan of the junta.
Writer: BangkokPost.com
Published: 24/09/2009 at 03:12 PM
Defence Minister Prawit Wongsuwon on Thursday ordered all military units and their commanders to keep a close watch for websites running reports with lese majeste content, defence spokesman Col Thanathip Sawangsaeng said.
Pol Gen Prawit issued the order at today’s meeting of the Defence Council.
All military units and their commanders who come across such websites were to coordinate with the Information and Communication Technology Ministry to take legal action against them, the spokesman said.
Units under the Internal Security Operations Command have also been tasked with monitoring community radio stations for lese majeste content.
One thing I don’t quite understand. You say that the military failed to secure Government House when PAD moved in or to protect the PM at the time. But isn’t that the function of the police force and not the military? I was under the impression that the military and police force are rivals.
Good article with some interesting points. I wonder about the comment on rumours of Prem’s involvement in the coup? Maybe that is necessary in Thailand and for academics who feel a little threatened if they are too forthright. Prem’s direct role is undeniable. Immediately after the coup, there were several statements in the Thai press, including by Kavi and Wassana. Before the coup, count how many PAD demonstrations there were after the king’s April speech. I think the count is 1, and that was small. Prem put his uniform on and went out actively campaigning for the military to get rid of Thaksin. PAD could rest. Pretty blatant and not a rumour. Prem’s web site even proudly displays these moves.
Some of the comments are need some commentary themselves: WLH manages to come up with the “misled, uninformed, and confused” line yet again. It is either meaningless and could be applied anywhere in the world or it is a sign of pompousness. Observer over-generalises. Observer probably means the commentary in English-language newspapers and blogs perhaps, where one might expect opinionated material. However, there is quite a deal of informed commentary in academic journals and in Thai. Useful on the military is Ukrist’s piece in JCA, not noted above.
Totally agree with Observer (#2); could not have phrased it better.
Thailand’s polarization over fake choices is not so deep as to be hopeless. Maybe 15-25% of the population have a death-grip on their perceptions, but the majority are just misled, uninformed, and confused.
This article should be required reading for those people.
Intriguing. Location ‘M’ from the north of Burma? Myitkyina? Monywa? Mandalay? Meiktila? Myingyan? So many ‘M’s make your prediction a safe bet. I’m pretty sure it will involve the military, monks and multiethnic unity.
The Depayin massacre and the Yettaw incident both resulted in a hardening of the official US position. Nonetheless you underestimate the power of the US business lobby at your peril. It is after all the driving force of American history; the rest is little more than window-dressing for a means to an end.
Witness how Obama, like Clinton before him, faces an uphill struggle with his health reforms against the powerful insurance and health industries, indicative of the substantial gap between rhetoric and practice.
Elsewhere too, witness the rapid demise of New Labour’s ‘ethical foreign policy’ in Britain. Witness India’s turn-around in her attitude towards Burma from a moral stance to that of unashamed self-interest.
To paraphrase Palmerston, “Nations have no permanent friends and no permanent enemies. Only permanent interests.”
Prem has been influential enough to impose his will on the government, the military, and the Thai people for finally fulfilling his personal wish to establish a third infantery division in the Northeast (pricetag: around 50 billion baht).
This is an excellent article and a valuable contribution to understanding and solving Thai political problems.
The vast majority of commentary in Thailand is either opinion-based analysis or propaganda-based opinion. This factually and even-handed review moves us far forward in terms of understanding what has transpired and how it is likely to play out.
Additionally, the detailed role of the military is virtually a blank slate, almost untouched by even the most stalwart commentators such as Thitinan, Baker/Pasuk, and Crispin. Sure they do mention the issue, but never really take it head on.
I believe that the recent economist story on the military and their insightful chart on military spending, hit the nail on the head. This article is one of the few to push the discussion down to the level of detail.
If Thais debated the role of the military with 10% of the vigor that they discuss Thaksin, we would have a much better understanding of how this country is run.
I strongly oppose lese majeste laws and do think that the role of the palace should be open to greater scrutiny. But I have long wondered why the military, who doesn’t have such protection, appears to be completed ignored by critical reporters.
I read your full paper on this and found it very informative. In your footnotes, I see you got to interview Jakrapob–that’s a pretty good score–I’d like to get his take on some points of history–but probably won’t ever get the chance, a pity. Anyways, keep up the nice work!
Didn’t realize there could be such long conspiracy theory behind these rather mundane period illustrations. Look authentic, but downmarket to me. Nothing unusual is being portrayed here. Collectible value perhaps, sort of evocative of scenes from Anek Navikamul’s ‘when grandpa and grandma were kids’ series. Susie should go read this book at the earliest opportunity.
Susie: I asked for facts related to your claim: “William Gedney, an American who studied Thai language wrote in one of his articles that he had produced many fake old pictures on Thailand. He said he learned the techniques when he served the CIA as a Thai translator. This technique was later transferred to others.” So to be precise, which article? And where does he say he transferred these techniques to others?
It is now established that Terang Bulan was a song written by a French originating in the Seychelles. In all honesty this is a marginal issue considering more pressing problems.
However, if there are deep-rooted hatred towards Malaysia, then it is definitely reasons for concern.
I had always thought that Singapore was cannon fodder for ordinary Indonesians for allowing Indonesia crony capitalist to recycle ill-gotten gains and to live-it up. But never had any Indonesians demonstrated hatred towards Singapore like what they are doing now to Malaysia.
On another front, during the crisis when Indonesians of Chinese heritage were slaughtered, it reflected an anger that blamed these people for the misery of poor Indonesians.
If it is the logic of Konfrontasi, would it mean that some Indonesians consider Malaysia part of Indonesia?
Whilst not directly relevant to the original point of debate, I would like to ask: what studies have been done that put some numbers against dependence on gathered (wild) produce in Laos? I am vaguely aware of one by Oxfam in southern Laos which, I think, suggested that if the items gathered were marketed they would generate a cash income of somewhere around $500 per household per year. I am much more familiar with a second (because I did it myself) – and also with its weaknesses, and therefore wish to find out if others have been conducted. This second study arose out of data collected in association with the Sepon mine where some families (a small number -weakness #1 : because of the small, if growing, number of buyers, the prices reported may be subject to significant change if the market grows) who had cash were now buying items they had previously collected (suggesting not only that gathered items were ‘wanted’ but also that these families had concluded that it was in their best interests to buy them with cash earned through wage employment). Interestingly whilst in the immediate mine area large numbers of households had likewise determined that were better off earning a wage and buying rice rather than growing rice and not having a wage, most households, providing they had the available labour, were continuing to collect wild products. But from those who were buying it was possible to calculate that collected items represented a cash value of over $US700 per household per year. Even with all the weaknesses in arriving at that figure, it is a substantial one relative to known cash incomes. In villages in the District at a distance from the Sepon mine where wage jobs are limited that $700 is close to being equal to (or in excess of) the household’s total cash income from wages; even in villages near the mine where the majority of adults have work with the mine it still represents as much as the equivalent of one-quarter or one-third of the average household’s cash income.
More directly in line with the Jennifer/Andrew debate: isn’t it possible to argue not that those who depend on gathered produce are better nourished, but rather that it is their lack of income that pushes them into such a dependence? I was under the strong impression that it was the poorest (i.e. those with least cash income) who depended most on gathered produce. And isn’t the consequence of this that when mega-projects (or even smaller ones) come along, a key factor is ensuring that if the project does indeed undermine people’s capacity to gather wild produce, then the project should have the responsibility for doing its utmost to ensure that it not only has benefits for local people but that these are as equally spread as possible?
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Thailand’s military: perpetually political, forever factionalized, again ascendant
What to do? Prof Dr Aurel Croissant, Director, Institute of Political Science, Ruprecht-Karls-University, Heidelberg shared a platform with Dr Chambers at the recent ISIS public forum in Bangkok on Civil-Military Relations.
To my mind he gave a forensic world wide overview of military -civil relations and what should be done to optimise the balance between the two.
His paper was entitled “Civilian Control over the Military and Democracy. Conceptual and Theoretical Perspectives.” He can be contacted via email: [email protected]
Burma’s man at the UN
Shwe and Swe are not normally interchangeable unless someone with a lisp is saying it. I hope it’s not a case of mistaken identity, for factual accuracy and fairness, though I’m far from being a fan of the junta.
Even more Thai ephemera
Really Fascinating. Thank you
Thailand’s military: perpetually political, forever factionalized, again ascendant
Military to censor websites
Writer: BangkokPost.com
Published: 24/09/2009 at 03:12 PM
Defence Minister Prawit Wongsuwon on Thursday ordered all military units and their commanders to keep a close watch for websites running reports with lese majeste content, defence spokesman Col Thanathip Sawangsaeng said.
Pol Gen Prawit issued the order at today’s meeting of the Defence Council.
All military units and their commanders who come across such websites were to coordinate with the Information and Communication Technology Ministry to take legal action against them, the spokesman said.
Units under the Internal Security Operations Command have also been tasked with monitoring community radio stations for lese majeste content.
(http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/155223/military-to-keep-websites-under-watch/page-2/ )
Thailand’s military: perpetually political, forever factionalized, again ascendant
One thing I don’t quite understand. You say that the military failed to secure Government House when PAD moved in or to protect the PM at the time. But isn’t that the function of the police force and not the military? I was under the impression that the military and police force are rivals.
Thailand’s military: perpetually political, forever factionalized, again ascendant
Thank you very much, Paul – this is one of the most important studies in the recent years on Thailand.
Thailand’s military: perpetually political, forever factionalized, again ascendant
Good article with some interesting points. I wonder about the comment on rumours of Prem’s involvement in the coup? Maybe that is necessary in Thailand and for academics who feel a little threatened if they are too forthright. Prem’s direct role is undeniable. Immediately after the coup, there were several statements in the Thai press, including by Kavi and Wassana. Before the coup, count how many PAD demonstrations there were after the king’s April speech. I think the count is 1, and that was small. Prem put his uniform on and went out actively campaigning for the military to get rid of Thaksin. PAD could rest. Pretty blatant and not a rumour. Prem’s web site even proudly displays these moves.
Some of the comments are need some commentary themselves: WLH manages to come up with the “misled, uninformed, and confused” line yet again. It is either meaningless and could be applied anywhere in the world or it is a sign of pompousness. Observer over-generalises. Observer probably means the commentary in English-language newspapers and blogs perhaps, where one might expect opinionated material. However, there is quite a deal of informed commentary in academic journals and in Thai. Useful on the military is Ukrist’s piece in JCA, not noted above.
Thailand’s military: perpetually political, forever factionalized, again ascendant
Totally agree with Observer (#2); could not have phrased it better.
Thailand’s polarization over fake choices is not so deep as to be hopeless. Maybe 15-25% of the population have a death-grip on their perceptions, but the majority are just misled, uninformed, and confused.
This article should be required reading for those people.
Job at The Myanmar Times
ZodiacGuille,
Intriguing. Location ‘M’ from the north of Burma? Myitkyina? Monywa? Mandalay? Meiktila? Myingyan? So many ‘M’s make your prediction a safe bet. I’m pretty sure it will involve the military, monks and multiethnic unity.
A Sino-Burmese border dance
The Depayin massacre and the Yettaw incident both resulted in a hardening of the official US position. Nonetheless you underestimate the power of the US business lobby at your peril. It is after all the driving force of American history; the rest is little more than window-dressing for a means to an end.
Witness how Obama, like Clinton before him, faces an uphill struggle with his health reforms against the powerful insurance and health industries, indicative of the substantial gap between rhetoric and practice.
Elsewhere too, witness the rapid demise of New Labour’s ‘ethical foreign policy’ in Britain. Witness India’s turn-around in her attitude towards Burma from a moral stance to that of unashamed self-interest.
To paraphrase Palmerston, “Nations have no permanent friends and no permanent enemies. Only permanent interests.”
Thailand’s military: perpetually political, forever factionalized, again ascendant
Prem has been influential enough to impose his will on the government, the military, and the Thai people for finally fulfilling his personal wish to establish a third infantery division in the Northeast (pricetag: around 50 billion baht).
Thailand’s military: perpetually political, forever factionalized, again ascendant
This is an excellent article and a valuable contribution to understanding and solving Thai political problems.
The vast majority of commentary in Thailand is either opinion-based analysis or propaganda-based opinion. This factually and even-handed review moves us far forward in terms of understanding what has transpired and how it is likely to play out.
Additionally, the detailed role of the military is virtually a blank slate, almost untouched by even the most stalwart commentators such as Thitinan, Baker/Pasuk, and Crispin. Sure they do mention the issue, but never really take it head on.
I believe that the recent economist story on the military and their insightful chart on military spending, hit the nail on the head. This article is one of the few to push the discussion down to the level of detail.
If Thais debated the role of the military with 10% of the vigor that they discuss Thaksin, we would have a much better understanding of how this country is run.
I strongly oppose lese majeste laws and do think that the role of the palace should be open to greater scrutiny. But I have long wondered why the military, who doesn’t have such protection, appears to be completed ignored by critical reporters.
A Sino-Burmese border dance
The United States has changed its policy towards Burma, announcing it will engage diplomatically with the military run nation.
http://www.radioaustralianews.net.au/stories/200909/2695228.htm?desktop
Thailand’s military: perpetually political, forever factionalized, again ascendant
Thanks,
I read your full paper on this and found it very informative. In your footnotes, I see you got to interview Jakrapob–that’s a pretty good score–I’d like to get his take on some points of history–but probably won’t ever get the chance, a pity. Anyways, keep up the nice work!
Cheers!
Even more Thai ephemera
We can all stop worrying about Susie’s great concern for history.
‘Real Face’ is of course not Gedney’s work. In neither the book nor Craig Reynolds’ Intro is there anything about Gedney manufacturing documents.
Even more Thai ephemera
Didn’t realize there could be such long conspiracy theory behind these rather mundane period illustrations. Look authentic, but downmarket to me. Nothing unusual is being portrayed here. Collectible value perhaps, sort of evocative of scenes from Anek Navikamul’s ‘when grandpa and grandma were kids’ series. Susie should go read this book at the earliest opportunity.
Even more Thai ephemera
Susie: I asked for facts related to your claim: “William Gedney, an American who studied Thai language wrote in one of his articles that he had produced many fake old pictures on Thailand. He said he learned the techniques when he served the CIA as a Thai translator. This technique was later transferred to others.” So to be precise, which article? And where does he say he transferred these techniques to others?
ASEAN fragility and Indonesia-Malaysia tensions
Hi Jeff,
It is now established that Terang Bulan was a song written by a French originating in the Seychelles. In all honesty this is a marginal issue considering more pressing problems.
However, if there are deep-rooted hatred towards Malaysia, then it is definitely reasons for concern.
I had always thought that Singapore was cannon fodder for ordinary Indonesians for allowing Indonesia crony capitalist to recycle ill-gotten gains and to live-it up. But never had any Indonesians demonstrated hatred towards Singapore like what they are doing now to Malaysia.
On another front, during the crisis when Indonesians of Chinese heritage were slaughtered, it reflected an anger that blamed these people for the misery of poor Indonesians.
If it is the logic of Konfrontasi, would it mean that some Indonesians consider Malaysia part of Indonesia?
Job at The Myanmar Times
To ZodiacGuille,
Than Shwe’s dob is: 2 February 1933. – Aquarian
Aung San Suu Kyi’s dob is: 19 June 1945 – Gemini
Letter B stands for Burma
Letter M stands for Myanmar
Mega projects and Lao transitions
Whilst not directly relevant to the original point of debate, I would like to ask: what studies have been done that put some numbers against dependence on gathered (wild) produce in Laos? I am vaguely aware of one by Oxfam in southern Laos which, I think, suggested that if the items gathered were marketed they would generate a cash income of somewhere around $500 per household per year. I am much more familiar with a second (because I did it myself) – and also with its weaknesses, and therefore wish to find out if others have been conducted. This second study arose out of data collected in association with the Sepon mine where some families (a small number -weakness #1 : because of the small, if growing, number of buyers, the prices reported may be subject to significant change if the market grows) who had cash were now buying items they had previously collected (suggesting not only that gathered items were ‘wanted’ but also that these families had concluded that it was in their best interests to buy them with cash earned through wage employment). Interestingly whilst in the immediate mine area large numbers of households had likewise determined that were better off earning a wage and buying rice rather than growing rice and not having a wage, most households, providing they had the available labour, were continuing to collect wild products. But from those who were buying it was possible to calculate that collected items represented a cash value of over $US700 per household per year. Even with all the weaknesses in arriving at that figure, it is a substantial one relative to known cash incomes. In villages in the District at a distance from the Sepon mine where wage jobs are limited that $700 is close to being equal to (or in excess of) the household’s total cash income from wages; even in villages near the mine where the majority of adults have work with the mine it still represents as much as the equivalent of one-quarter or one-third of the average household’s cash income.
More directly in line with the Jennifer/Andrew debate: isn’t it possible to argue not that those who depend on gathered produce are better nourished, but rather that it is their lack of income that pushes them into such a dependence? I was under the strong impression that it was the poorest (i.e. those with least cash income) who depended most on gathered produce. And isn’t the consequence of this that when mega-projects (or even smaller ones) come along, a key factor is ensuring that if the project does indeed undermine people’s capacity to gather wild produce, then the project should have the responsibility for doing its utmost to ensure that it not only has benefits for local people but that these are as equally spread as possible?