In Asia: Weekly Insight and Features from Asia

Earlier this week Thailand’s Supreme Court found former Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra guilty on charges of abuse of power.  Although one protester occupying Government House proclaimed “we won!” upon hearing the Supreme Court’s ruling, the fact is the country’s political paralysis remains.  Tensions are indeed mounting.  Last week Thai army chief, General Anupong Paochinda, spoke on national television saying Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat (who coincidentally is Thaksin’s brother-in-law) should resign.  The thousands of protestors occupying Government House under the banner of the People’s Alliance for Democracy are saying they will settle for nothing less.  Prime Minister Somchai has ignored these demands saying he is too busy doing his job.

This comes at a time when Thailand is facing the threat of a border war with Cambodia over a disputed area around the 11th century Prear Vihar temple. Fighting earlier this month left soldiers on both sides injured, and three Cambodians dead. Both Thailand and Cambodia have spurned using the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) to settle the border dispute.  ASEAN was established in 1967 with the ostensible purpose of preventing conflict among member states.  Unfortunately, such a response by both nations only serves to reinforce the view by many experts and scholars that ASEAN is an ineffectual regional organization.

In July, Thailand commenced its year-long turn as Chair of ASEAN.  In mid-September the Thai parliament passed legislation that will enable the Thai government to undertake the necessary legal follow-up to the ASEAN Charter.  This legislation is currently awaiting the signature of King Bhumipol Adulyadej and its promulgation in the Royal Gazette before Thailand’s ratification of the Charter is complete.  But will Thailand’s domestic problems compromise its ability to lead the organization?  Ratification of the Charter makes ASEAN a more rules-based organization that is supposed to strengthen its adherence to human rights and democracy.  If these rules are to be taken seriously by Thailand and other ASEAN members, this means Thailand as Chair will come under increasing scrutiny on how it leads ASEAN in other matters, such as in encouraging Burma (also known as Myanmar) to embark on issues of political reform and human rights.  Despite being a signatory to the Charter, Burma’s leaders are not giving ASEAN, or the rest of the international community, the impression it is prepared to do this.  If ASEAN fails to make headway with Burma, Thailand as Chair could be blamed for failing to maintain ASEAN’s momentum in trying to foster meaningful change in that country.  If this were to happen, Burma could become a bigger source of tension in U.S.-Thai relations in either a McCain or Obama administration.

The poisonous political atmosphere in Thailand shows little sign of improving.  No compromise appears in sight.  The possible resignation of Prime Minister Somchai would only superficially change the political landscape.  The political deadlock has had severe repercussions for Thailand’s tourist industry, which is the country’s largest foreign exchange earner and represents 6 percent of the country’s GDP.  Unfortunately a tourist was injured in an explosion aimed at hurting protesters last week.  Although Thailand is largely safe for foreigners, it is the country’s political turbulence and the uncertainty it brings that makes one question how safe the country’s future is for Thais.

John Brandon is The Asia Foundation’s Director for International Relations programs. He can be reached at jbrandon@asiafound-dc.org.