Thailand marches ahead of Myanmar

By Brian McCartan
CHIANG MAI, Thailand

Thailand's new cabinet was sworn in on Wednesday, marking the final step in the switch from military rule to a democratically elected government. In next door Myanmar, the military rulers continue their hold on power stifling any dissent and make plans to continue their reign through a "democratic" constitution.

Thailand's military took power in a bloodless coup on September 19, 2006, and established the Council for National Security (CNS). Immediately after taking power the coup leaders announced they would hand over power to a civilian government within a year after drafting a new constitution and holding

parliamentary elections.

The coup followed almost a year of protests by people opposed to the government of prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra. The desire to see the removal of Thaksin made the coup initially very popular with people in Bangkok going out in an almost festive atmosphere to greet the soldiers and tanks in the streets. This changed, however, the longer the military stayed in power and its appointed government became increasingly unpopular. By late 2007, most Thais were ready for the generals to go.

After 15 months of military rule elections were held on December 23 in which over 70% of eligible voters took part. Although there were some irregularities and the People's Power Party (PPP) accused the military of trying to hinder its efforts on the campaign trail, they were felt by most people to be fair. As expected, the PPP won the most seats, although not enough of a majority to form a government itself. The CNS quietly dissolved itself and after an intense period of negotiations and horse-trading the PPP was able to form a coalition government. PPP head, Samak Sundaravej, was sworn in as prime minister on January 29.

Before the elections, however, the military made sure that its place in Thai politics was assured. General Anupong Paochinda, the head of the Thai army, made repeated statements that the army has retreated permanently from politics, but he also appointed his trusted subordinates into positions that could either ensure the success of a future coup or block the possibility of another one taking place.

Two other laws passed by the military appointed National Legislative Assembly have further strengthened the military's position. A controversial internal security act passed just two days before the elections gives sweeping new powers to the military. The act empowers the military to contain domestic dissent through such methods as curbs on government officials and the right to detain individuals deemed threats to national security for up to six months without trial.

Other law takes away the power of the prime minister to influence the annual reshuffle of senior officers. Under the new regulation, the reshuffle list must be approved by a seven-member committee including the defense minister, the deputy defense minister, the defense permanent secretary, the supreme commander and the heads of the army, navy and air force.

Although the military remains in the background and critics are skeptical about Anupong's claims of future non-interference by the military in politics, Thailand does now have a democratically elected government. The military kept its promise to restore a civilian government.

The same cannot be said for Myanmar which, despite popular support for democracy and an overwhelming desire to see the military removed from power, still remains under military dictatorship after 46 years.

The military rulers of Myanmar have taken a different tack. Since taking power in a 1962 coup, the military has spent much of its time consolidating its power over the country. Rather than hand over power to a civilian elected government, the military has styled itself as the only institution that can hold the country together. In doing so it has crushed or sidelined the political opposition. Mass demonstrations calling for democracy were violently put down in 1988 and 2007.

Initially stating that the military needed to take power to preserve the country from the threat of ethnic and communist insurgents, the threat changed with the demise of the Burmese Communist Party and the wave of ceasefires that took place in the early 1990s. In recent years, the regime has tried to invoke the threat of outside invasion - usually understood to mean the United States - although this has met with skepticism by much of the population. However, the views of the general population have never really mattered much to the regime, what is important is that they give themselves some reason to retain power no matter how spurious.

Myanmar's military rules currently claim to be moving ahead on a "seven-step roadmap" to bring democracy to the country. The regime claims that the country is currently undergoing the third step which is the drafting of a new constitution. While Thailand's military rulers took less than a year to draft their constitution, in Myanmar the process has been going on for almost 18 years. The junta claims the constitution will be finished this year, but it remains unclear whether this will actually happen.

Whatever constitution is drafted it is widely believed by opposition figures and Myanmar watchers that the military's role in politics will be guaranteed. While Thailand's coup makers made sure that they would not be punished for their coup by including an amnesty clause for themselves and their appointed officials and enacting laws that would enable them to legally step in again or influence the running of the country, for the most part they have gone back to barracks and stepped aside.

Myanmar's constitution is expected to give much more to the military. Seats are to be reserved in the new Parliament - enough to make it almost impossible for parliamentary decisions to be made without the support of military representatives. The military is also expected to hold onto the more powerful of the cabinet portfolios as well as to reserve the right to take over the government again should a civilian government prove unequal to the task.

Even with the constitutional provisions the military rulers of Myanmar are not hedging their bets, they have spent considerable effort in developing what many feel will become their political party in the Union Solidarity and Development Association (USDA). Originally designed as a government sponsored civil society organization, the USDA has grown to pervade almost all aspects of life in Myanmar. Government bureaucrats, teachers, students and anyone hoping to curry favor with the government are encouraged - and sometimes forced - to become members.

The association has organized mass rallies in various spots across the country in support of the regime and to deride opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi, her National League for Democracy party and foreign interference in the country. The USDA is also widely believed to have been behind the violent attack on Suu Kyi's motorcade in 2003 and involved in the September 2007 crackdown on pro-democracy demonstrators in Yangon and elsewhere.

Elections, when and if they happen, are expected to be anything but free and fair. The last elections in Myanmar in 1990 were actually considered for the most part to have been fair - and the regime's party suffered an overwhelming defeat, something they are not likely to allow to happen again. Elections are a part of the seven step roadmap and will probably happen, but with the already reserved seats in parliament for the military and the influence of the USDA which will probably field their own candidates, opposition parties like the NLD will find it very difficult to win.

Thailand's military, although rumored to be behind at least one small political party in the recent elections, for the most part kept out of the electioneering. While the Democracy Party was widely believed to be in support of the coup and were certainly favored by the coup makers, they are their own masters and fought the campaign as such. Their loss in the election was touted by the mainstream media as a victory over the military rulers and a vindication for Thaksin and his dismantled Thai Rak Thai party.

What does matter is that the Thai military did step aside, and not just for their preferred party, but for the PPP party which they identify with Thaksin, the man they overthrew 15 months before. To be sure, the military put in place mechanisms which will allow them to have influence over politics and to even make a comeback if deemed necessary, but they are at least willing to stand back and allow the civilians to have their say first.

Thailand and Myanmar are very different in the political pressures within each country. Myanmar's ethnic politics, along with drug trafficking and other illegal businesses that have grown out of the almost 60-year insurgency make it much more difficult to arrive at consensus.

However, it can also be argued that these problems have been allowed to perpetuate and even grow worse due the lack of democracy and the adherence to democratic values of civil society. Thailand, while its democratic institutions are anything but perfect, at least has shown that they do function and the people can choose their government.

Brian McCartan is a Thailand-based freelance journalist. He may be contacted through brianpm@comcast.net.