Republic of the Philippines

Dumaguete City

Silliman University

THAILAND: State and Government

In partial fulfillment of PolSci 23: South East Asian Government

Mrs. Editha Enumerabellon

Professor

By:

Estrella, Josef Adon

Lajot, Jeben Nicholas

Luayon, Luigi

Nalug, Nelyn

Ragay, Christdell
 THAILAND

Topic Outline

I. Classical Thailand

A. Impact of Traditional State System

B. Hinduism and Buddhism in Thailand

C. Sakdi-na System and Its Impact

D. The coup d’etat of 1932

II. Political Actors

A. The Military

B. The Military Cliques of Thailand

C. The Relationship between Military Cliques and the Political Parties

D. The relationship of Prime Ministers and Military Cliques

III. Government

A. Legislative Branch

B. Executive Branch

C. Judicial Branch

D. Democracy in Thailand
I. Classical Thailand

A. Impact of Traditional State System

The traditional state government of Thailand had a significant impact on the politics and

political attitudes of the people of Thailand. Together with Hinduism and Buddhism, the political

practices of the traditional period exerted influences on the present government of Thailand.1

Before the arrival of Western powers in Thailand, it was ruled by kings. Foremost of the

classical Thai kingdoms was the powerful Buddhist kingdom in the Menam River basin of

Thailand in the 6th century B.C. known as Dvaravati.2 For a time, this became the hub of

Buddhist civilization, but was later conquered by the Khmers who brought in Brahmanism in 11

B.C. Dvaravati thus became an Indianized state and Thais adopted Brahmanism.

One important aspect of Thai traditional rule was the Sakdi-na system. 3 With the expansion

of the Thai kingdom, the King had to adopt this system to have officials who could administer

the people in the local areas. Sakdi-na assigned positions to king’s appointees who received no

salaries but were expected to earn livelihood from assigned landholdings. The greater the land,

the greater the value and position of the appointee and the more people were assigned under him.

Those who were lower in position had to submit and obey those in higher positions. One

advantage of Sakdi-na was that officials were responsible for the welfare of their subjects.

B. Hinduism and Buddhism in Thailand

1
Southeast Asian Government and Politics, Pol Sci 23 Module, p. 30
2
Morell, David and Chai-anan Samudavanija, Political Conflict in Thailand: Reform, Reaction Revolution.
Oelgeschlager, Gunn and Hain, Publishers, Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts, p. 8
3
Girling, John L.S. Thailand: Society and Politics, Cornell University Press, pp. 25-26
 Buddhist paternalistic kings like those of Aythaya from 1350 to 1767 were seen as autocratic

God-kings following traditions in Brahmanism.. Kings were obeyed as lords of life with absolute

power over everything and every citizen.4

However, while Brahmanism influenced the rulers of Thailand, the people themselves

practiced Buddhism. This combination of Brahmanism and Buddhism in Thailand resulted in a

modified Devaraja. Thus, the king was looked upon as divine but also as the embodiment of the

law, and so based on Buddhist principles, he must also be measured against the law.5

The Thai people in traditional and modern Thailand were influenced by two different

politico-religious structures. On the one hand was Hinduism with its hierarchy that emphasized

respect for authority, and Buddhism on the other which focused on an egalitarian social

philosophy. Buddhism greatly reinforced traditional patterns and authoritarian rule. The Thai

people became passive because of the basic values of the Buddhist state that taught sangha –

peace of mind, selflessness, renouncing worldly things and nirvana.6

Buddhism also influenced the Thai masses in such a way that they did not form interest

groups, trade unions and networks. This was because Buddhism discourages people from

political participation which is considered worldly. Thai masses thus traditionally showed no

political interests. Political conflicts were limited to the royal court with issues focused on

succession.7

C. Sakdi-na System and its Impact

4
Neher, Clark D. “Thailand”, in Dianne K. Mauzy, ed. Politics in the Assean States, p. 14
5
Morell, pp. 9-10
6
South East Asian Government and Politics, p. 33
7
Morell, p. 12
 One important aspect of Thai traditional rule was the Sakdi-na system. 8 With the expansion

of the Thai kingdom, the King had to adopt this system to have officials who could administer

the people in the local areas. Sakdi-na assigned positions to king’s appointees who received no

salaries but were expected to earn livelihood from assigned landholdings. The greater the land,

the greater the value and position of the appointee and the more people were assigned under him.

Those who were lower in position had to submit and obey those in higher positions. One

advantage of Sakdi-na was that officials were responsible for the welfare of their subjects.

Discontented subjects could however transfer to other patrons if they became discontented.

However, the patron was free to exploit all his subjects although the people in turn were like

clients who looked at the patrons for rewards. Community problems were passed directly to the

patrons. The Sakdi-na system, although no longer practiced in present Thailand had perpetuated

and given rise to the patron-client relationships in military cliques. The military gained power in

after the 1932 coup which limited the King’s powers. As in traditional Thailand, people continue

to depend on patron-client relationships for rewards. This relationship acts as the way through

which people’s demands are passed on to the core clique.

D. The coup d’ etat of 1932

1932 was a crucial year in 20th century Thai history. The Siamese Revolution or the

Siamese coup d’ etat was imminent and it took place in June 24, 1932. The system of

government in Siam was changed from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional monarchy,

8
Girling, John L.S. Thailand: Society and Politics, Cornell University Press, pp. 25-26
through a bloodless and peaceful coup d’ etat. The Khana Ratsadon, (People’s Party) led by a

small group of military and civilians started the revolution. It ended 150 years of absolutism

under the Chakri Dynasty and almost 700 years of absolute rule of kings over Thai history. It

was a product of global historical change as well as domestic social and political changes. It also

resulted in the people of Siam being granted their first constitution.9

At dawn on June 24, 1932, a small group of Bangkok intellectuals launched a revolution

– seizing control of the army and imprisoning royal officials. By noon, they’d persuaded King

Prajadhipok to surrender his autocratic power – thus ending almost 700 years of absolute rule of

Kings, and bringing Thailand, then Siam, into the era of democracy.10

In 1932, Siam was a country in crisis.11 The global Great Depression had brought the only

South Eastern Asian nation never to be colonized to the brink of bankruptcy as rice prices fell by

more than 60%. The country was also undergoing a dramatic social change as the budding urban

middle classes of Bangkok became increasingly frustrated with their lack of opportunities under

an ineffective, corrupt and archaic government.

Against this backdrop of discontent, in February 1927, a group of seven Siamese students

met at a hotel in Paris and founded what would become the Khana Ratsadon, or the People’s

Party. For five days they thrashed out a new vision for Siam, based on Western notions of

democracy. But they realised that the Siamese masses – mainly illiterate peasants – were not yet

ready for democracy, let alone revolution. The taking of power, they reasoned, would be possible

only by a military-led coup d’état.

9
Craig Reynolds, Thai Revolution pp. 479
10
Craig Reynolds, Thai Revolution pp 480
11
Kukrit Pramoj. Four Reigns pp 25
 On the fateful day of 24th June, military units of the People’s Party secured all of

Bangkok’s strategic locations. Standing on the podium of the city’s royal pavilion, one of the

Promoters read out their revolutionary manifesto – accusing the king of embezzling funds,

nepotism and governing without principle. The speech was broadcast over the radio while

supporters of the movement blanketed the capital with flyers and pamphlets. The People’s Party

then invited the king to retain his position under a constitution. King Prajadhipok – fearing for

his life – agreed.12

II. POLITICAL ACTORS

A. The Military

The military establishment enjoy greater prestige than any of the political actors enjoy.

Nicolas Tarling points out,

They were no longer primarily armed constabularies they were also nation-builders

associated with development. Distinguishing it from the professionalism of conventional western

12
Girling, John L.S Thailand: Society and Politics, pp. 30-31
armies, their augmented role was sometimes captured in, if not rationalized by, the term ‘new

professionalism.’13

B. The Military cliques of Thailand

Thailand was ruled by kings who were military leaders who had to contend not only with

external enemies but also enemies from within. Thailand’s history is replete with Coup d’ etats,

the favourite instrument used by a prince to topple down a rival prince from power. Political

conflicts in Thailand were confined in the king’s court and the usual issue of succession, the

people on the other hand, did not care about what transpires politically in the king’s court. 14

People were generally passive.

The military had to content with its powerful neighbours chiefly, the Khmers and the

Burmese. In order to withstand and advances of its neighbours, in 1448, the king sought to

improve the proficiency of his army. Later, the king also hired the services of the Portuguese to

teach the Thai army of the use of fire arms and musketry. In other words, the king

professionalized the military and this led to the development of professional military class

composed mainly of members of the royal family.

The Thai kings had the willingness to learn from the experiences of their neighbours as well

as those of the west. In the 1930’s for example, a number of young military officers were sent to

study in Europe exposing them to the liberal ideals pervading in the west. They soon were

invited by some elements of the Thai intellectuals who believed that kingship is anachronistic

and is no longer in tune with the tide of modern times. These young military officers became

13
Nicholas Tarling, Southeast Asia: A Modern History, Oxford University Press, 2005, p. 290
14
Morell, pp. 12-13.
very important elements in the coup d’ etat that was launched in 1932 which resulted to changing

the character of the monarchy of Thailand from absolute t constitutional. This means that the

king no longer holds absolute power rather the power that he exercises is limited by the

constitution. Although the king as the keeper of Buddhism is highly revered by the people, he

abstains from politics “due to the pejorative connotations of the term n Thai culture. The king

should not be touched by the vulgarity of political situation, a vulgarity historically apparent in

elections, in the behaviour of elected politicians, and in recurrent military interventions.” 15 It is

understood that he is above politics.

Military cliques are strong political forces for membership extends to the society in general.

Each military clique maintains support from among the members of governmental bureaucracy,

business and ordinary people. Support cuts across class lines and run from the upper classes of

society down to the grassroots.

The military cliques replaced the traditional patron client that was bounded by the sakdi na

system. During the traditional period, the king’s officials were the sources of patronage,

presently, it is the military. The people depend heavily on the clique for the satisfaction of their

demands.

The military cliques will stay in Thai politics for a long time. As sociologist Charles Levine

pointed out in the late 1970’s “the military establishment is now such an integral part of Thai

society that it is difficult to imagine life without it.” This is also true in the bureaucracy. More

importantly, each clique seeks to satisfy demands of its supporters. 16 Lastly, another factor that

must be considered is the position of the palace as regards the military. Morell observed, “ the

15
Morell, p. 64.
16
Morell, pp. 58-64
palace has depended increasingly on the military as the guardian of national security and the

continuity of the throne itself. Military leaders adeptly turned any opposition to the regime into

opposition to the regime into opposition to the royal institutions.17

C. The relationship Between the Military Cliques the Political Parties

Thailand, just like the democratic countries in the region has political parties, which in the

surface are the carriers of the peoples’ demands from the government. These political parties

are active in elections and they constitute the government. However, one phenomenon is not

openly seen. This is the control exerted by a military clique over a political party. Behind each

political party is a military clique which determines the fate of the party during elections. After

each election, the dominant party or a coalition of political parties constitutes the government.

The status quo holds as long as the military clique baking it enjoys the dominance among all the

other cliques. However, a change occurs in government when power configuration among the

cliques changes. The government will collapse. The prime 18minister resigns and he is changed

by another coming from the part which enjoys the backing of the stronger military clique. In an

event that a dominant party which has control of patronage and is not so dependent with the

clique persists in controlling government despite the call of the latter that it withdraws the prime

minister from power, a coup d’ etat is launched to remove the prime minister from power. This

happened to Prime Minister Shinawatra.

D. Relationship of the Prime Minister and the Military Cliques

History says that most of the Prime Ministers in Thailand were controlled by the military

17
Morell, p. 64.
18
cliques. The first Prime Minister of Siam was Phraya Manopakorn Nititada, a judge. The title of

the office was changed from "Prime Minister of Siam" to "Prime Minister of Thailand" in 1945

and then permanently with the renaming of Siam to Thailand in 1949. For most of its existence

the office has been occupied by Army leaders; sixteen out of twenty-nine, including the

incumbent General Prayut Chan-o-cha. Military dominance began with the country's second

Prime Minister, Phot Phahonyothin, who ousted his civilian predecessor in a coup in 1933. The

longest serving Prime Minister was Field Marshal Plaek Pibulsonggram at 14 years, 11 months

and 18 days. The shortest was Tawee Boonyaket at just 18 days. Nine were removed by coups

d'état, three were disqualified by court order, and eleven resigned from office. The youngest ever

to occupy office was M.R. Seni Pramoj at 40 years old. Thailand received its first female prime

minister, Yingluck Shinawatra, in 2011. Every prime minister since Manopakorn Nititada has

been Buddhist.19

III. GOVERNMENT OF THAILAND

The Government of Thailand, or formally the Royal Thai Government (RTG) is

the unitary government of the Kingdom of Thailand. The country emerged as a modern nation

state after the foundation of the Chakri Dynasty and the city of Bangkok in 1782. The Revolution

of 1932 brought an end to absolute monarchy and replaced it with a constitutional monarchy.20

From then on the country was ruled by a succession of military leaders installed after

19
Kittisak Prokati (2006). Thai Legal Reform under European Influence (pdf) (in Thai). Bangkok: Winyuchon.
20
Damrong Rajanubhab. (1927). Thai Government in Ancient Times.. (in Thai). Bangkok: Fine Arts Department.
coups d’etat, the most recent in May 2014, and a few democratic intervals. The 2007

Constitution (drafted by a military-appointed council, but approved by a referendum) was

annulled by the 2014 coup-makers who run the country as a military dictatorship. Thailand has

so far had seventeen Constitutions. Throughout, the basic structure of government has remained

the same. The government of Thailand is composed of three branches: the executive, the

legislative, and the judiciary. The system of government is modeled after the Westminster

system. All branches of government are concentrated in Bangkok, the capital city of Thailand.21

Since May 2014 Thailand has been ruled by a military junta, the National Council for Peace and

Order, which has partially repealed the 2007 constitution, declared martial law and nationwide

curfew, banned political gatherings, arrested and detained politicians and anti-coup activists,

imposed internet censorship and taken control of the media.22

A. Legislative Branch

The legislative branch (also called the Parliament of Thailand) of the Thai government

was first established in the "temporary" constitution of 1932 after the adoption of Thailand's first

constitution, which transformed Thailand from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional

monarchy. The National Assembly of Thailand is a bicameral legislature and is composed of two

houses: the Senate and the House of Representatives. The legislative branch took its current form

in 2007. Prior to the assumption of power by the military junta in 2014, the National Assembly

21
Noranit Setabutr (2007). Constitutions and Thai Politics (pdf) (in Thai). Bangkok: Thammasat University Press
22
Manit Jumpa (2007). A Comment on Reform of Thai Constitution in 2007 (pdf) (in Thai). Bangkok:
Chulalongkorn University Press.
of the Kingdom of Thailand combined has 650 members, 576 of which were elected

(500 MPs and 76 Senators). Others include 74 non-elected (74 Senators through party selection).

The majority of elections in Thailand follow the first-past-the-post system which is used in the

elections for the 375 members of the House of Representatives and 76 members of the Senate.

The remaining 125 members of the House are elected by party list proportional representation.23

The upper house of the legislative branch was first established in 1946. However, for

most of its history the Senate has been the stronghold of the military and the elite. The current

Senate has 150 members. Seventy-six members are elected, one per province from the

75 provinces of Thailand and one from the Bangkok Metropolitan Area. The other 74 are

selected by the Senate Selection Commission, made up of both elected and appointed officials.

The chamber is strictly a non-partisan, and members may not be a member of a partisan

organization, the House of Representatives, the judiciary, or the cabinet for five years. The

Senate has little legislative power, but retains considerable powers of scrutiny and appointment

as the Senate is vested with the power to advise on the appointment of members of the judiciary

and independent government agencies. The Senate sits for a set six year non-renewable term.

The Senate cannot be dissolved. The Senate is presided over by a president of the Senate,

who is also the Vice-President of the National Assembly. He is assisted by two vice-presidents of

the Senate. The last election to the Senate was in 2008.24

The lower house of the legislative branch has been in existence in some form since 1932.

The House of Representatives is the primary legislative house of the government of Thailand.

The House includes 500 members. Three hundred seventy-five of the MPs are elected directly

23
Vanijaka, Voranai (2013-08-22). "Welcome to Thakland". Bangkok Post. Retrieved July 4, 2016.
24
 Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand 2007. Chapter 6: The National Assembly, Part 3: The Senate
from single-seat constituencies around the country. The other 125 members are selected using

"proportional representation" through party-lists. There are eight electoral areas from which the

proportionally representative votes are taken and 375 constituencies. This system is called the

"mixed member majoritarian" in which a voter has two votes, one for the constituency MP, and

the other for a party in the voter's electoral area.

The house is a partisan chamber with seven political parties. The house is the primary

legislative chamber and the more powerful of the two houses. The house has the power to

remove both the prime minister and cabinet ministers through a vote of no confidence. The house

sits for a term of four years; however a dissolution of the house can happen anytime before the

expiration of the term. The house is led by the Speaker of the House of Representatives, who is

also the President of the National Assembly. He is assisted by two deputy speakers.

The leader of the largest party or largest coalition party will most likely become prime

minister, while the leader of the largest party with no members holding any ministerial positions

will become the leader of the opposition. The leader of the opposition is a powerful position with

considerable influence. The leader is assisted by a shadow cabinet. The last general election for

the house was in 2007.

After the 2007 election the People's Power party (PPP) won the most seats with

the Democrats and Chart Thai party trailing behind. However, after the 2008 political crisis and

the ruling of the constitutional court on 2 December 2008, in which the PPP plus the Chart Thai

and Neutral Democratic Parties (coalition partners), the prime minister and several party

executives were banned from politics for five years, the composition of the house changed. The

successor of the PPP still retained most seats; however the remainder of the coalition partners
defected and joined a Democrat-led government which was inaugurated on 17 December 2008,

leaving the For Thais Party (successor of the PPP) and the Pracharaj Party in opposition.25

The Senate and the House of Representatives were abolished after May 22, 2014 coup by

the "National Council for Peace and Order" (NCPO). Currently, according to the interim

Constitution of Thailand imposed by NCPO, there is no Senate.26

B. Executive Branch

Since 1932 the head of government of Thailand has been the Prime Minister of Thailand,

usually the leader of the largest party or the largest coalition party in the lower house of

parliament. The prime minister is, in accordance with the constitution, selected, first by an

election in the lower house, and then officially appointed by the King.

The prime minister, as head of the executive branch, is also the leader of the Cabinet of

Thailand. The prime minister therefore retains the prerogative to appoint or remove any minister

he or she so chooses. As the most visible member of the government, the prime minister

represents the country abroad and is the main spokesperson for the government at home. The

prime minister's official residence is Baan Phitsanulok, a mansion in the Dusit district of

Bangkok.27

The prime minister is appointed by a vote in the Thai House of Representatives by a

simple majority, and is then sworn-in by the King of Thailand. The house's selection is usually

25
Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand 2007. Chapter 6: The National Assembly, Part 2: House of
Representatives
26
Vanijaka, Voranai (2013-08-22). "Welcome to Thakland". Bangkok Post. Retrieved July 4, 2016.
27
Damrong Rajanubhab. (1927). Thai Government in Ancient Times.. (in Thai). Bangkok: Fine Arts Department.
based on the fact that either the prime minister is the leader of the largest political party in the

lower house or the leader of the largest coalition of parties. In accordance with the constitution,

the prime minister can only be appointed twice and is therefore limited to a maximum of two

consecutive terms. The post of Prime Minister is currently held by General Prayut Chan-o-cha,

since the coup d'état on May 22, 2014.28

The Cabinet of Thailand or, formally, the Council of Ministers of Thailand is a body

composed of thirty-five of the most senior members of the government of the Kingdom of

Thailand. The cabinet is the primary organ of the executive branch of the Thai government.

Members of the cabinet are nominated by the prime minister and formally appointed by the King

of Thailand. Most members are governmental department heads with the title of "minister of

state". The cabinet is chaired by the prime minister of Thailand. The cabinet is often collectively

called "the government" or "the Royal Thai Government."29

As the primary government institution in the executive branch, the cabinet is ultimately

responsible for the administration and management of various government agencies and

departments. It is also the primary institution for the formulation of policies with regards to all

areas of politics and governing. Legislatively, the cabinet is one of the institutions allowed to

submit bills to the National Assembly for consideration. The cabinet is also allowed to call a

joint sitting of the National Assembly to consider important bills or even join a joint sitting of the

Assembly. The cabinet is also allowed to call a national referendum.30

The cabinet is governed by the rule of collective responsibility, in which the members of

28
Thailand: Government. Global Edge. Taken from www.msu.edu.
29
Noranit Setabutr (2007). Constitutions and Thai Politics (pdf) (in Thai). Bangkok: Thammasat University Press.
30
Noranit Setabutr (2007). Constitutions and Thai Politics (pdf) (in Thai). Bangkok: Thammasat University Press.
the cabinet must support all policies despite personal or private disagreement. As a result, if the

government fails or if the policy of the government fails, then the entire cabinet must take

responsibility; and resign in its entirety. The cabinet's term is wedded to that of the Prime

Minister. The Leader of the Opposition is allowed to create his own cabinet or the Shadow

Cabinet of Thailand.31

C. Judicial Branch

The Judiciary Branch of Thailand is composed of three distinct systems: the Court of

Justice system, the Administrative Court system and the Constitutional Court.

The Courts of Justice of Thailand is the largest of the court system and makes up the

majority of courts in the kingdom. The courts as mandated in the constitution are composed of

three tiers: the Court of First Instance, the Court of Appeals, and the Supreme Court of Justice of

Thailand. Research judges assist the sitting judges. Judges must take an examination and two

different examinations are given: one exam is for judges trained in Thailand and a different

examination is given for judges who graduate from foreign law schools. All judges are formally

appointed by the king.32

31
Noranit Setabutr (2007). Constitutions and Thai Politics (pdf) (in Thai). Bangkok: Thammasat University Press.
32
 "Human rights group slams Thailand's judicial system". M&C. 26 March 2007. Archived from the original on 14
July 2007.
 The administrative court system is made up of two tiers: The Administrative Courts of

First Instance and the Supreme Administrative Court. The court system was first created in 1997.

The court's main jurisdiction is to settle litigation between the state or an organ of state

(government ministries, departments and independent agencies) and private citizens.33

First set up in 1997, the Constitutional Court of Thailand was created solely as a high

court to settle matters pertaining to the constitution. The court has since accumulated huge

amounts of power and influence, generating many controversies on the way. This became

especially clear during the 2006 and 2008 political crisis, settling political deadlocks and social

unrest.34

D. Democracy in Thailand

From absolute monarchy to democracy. The Thailand adopted the latter after their previous

system was toppled down by a coup. As they both allowed a multi-party system, their brands of

democracy were threatened by coup. For approximately 64 years, the kingdom of Thailand is

beset by coup after coup. Until such a decade after, the country’s democratically elected leader,

Thaksin Shinawatra, was toppled down by a successful coup d’etat in year 2006. Siam is

currently under the administration of a military junta with a promise to transfer power to the

civilian authority through elections.35

Thailand, right now, looks less like an example of overcoming adversity and more like a

case of how majority rule government can come up short. It has returned after a few military

33
Kittisak Prokati (2006). Thai Legal Reform under European Influence (pdf) (in Thai). Bangkok: Winyuchon.
34
Manit Jumpa (2007). A Comment on Reform of Thai Constitution in 2007 (pdf) (in Thai). Bangkok:
Chulalongkorn University Press.
35
Southeast Asian Government and Politics, Pol Sci 23 Module, p. 76
upset to a sort of delicate tyranny: the military assumes a tremendous part in deciding legislative

issues; the Thai middle class has turned out to be progressively antidemocratic and security

powers have “threats, online filtering, arrests, and killings to intimidate opponents of a

government sanctioned by the armed forces and Thailand’s monarchy. Freedom House just lately

ranked Thailand as just "partly free," and the nation has sunk close to the base of every single

creating country in rankings of press flexibility. Thailand's disappointments give wake up calls to

reformers in the Middle Easterner world.

Thai reformers erroneously trusted that Thailand had passed a point of confinement,

allowing them to shut down their NGOs, their media watchdogs, and their straightforwardness

screens. In the wake of the Asian financial crisis, countless middle class Thais unexpectedly got

themselves unemployed, making it harder to contribute vitality volunteering at nonprofit or

leading night discussion sessions about new political social events.

Along these lines, rather than picking the democratic way, Thailand's middle class propelled

road dissents in 2006 intended to overthrowing a democratic government. The protestors urged

an arrival to more established types of Thai "democracy," in which a little theocracy basically

controlled governmental issues through unelected positions in parliament, the administration, and

the armed force. They got what they needed: the military dispatched an overthrow in September

2006, and Thaksin fled into outcast. This procedure has been rehashed lately in nations from the

Philippines to Honduras, where working classes have utilized correspondingly questionable

intends to push out chose leaders they saw as too much populist. The Thai coup, sadly, just set

off an total meltdown. Thaksin may have harmed the nation's frail democratic government,

however the military destroyed it. It weakened the reformist constitution and set the phase for

now's Thai government, which unleashed huge power against demonstrators.

 To avoid the misfortune of the Kingdom of Siam, Middle Eastern reformers ought to make a

few basic strides. For one, they should understand that, even after they topple a dictator, they

can't forsake the diligent work of changes; it is in these beginning of democratization that the

requirement for free government watchdogs, new press outlets, or aggressive unions is generally

basic. Also, they should oppose the tendency to personalize reform—to lay down their faith to

their elected leader. When people trust too much in one potential reformer, his or her failings get

to be amplified, frequently prompting dissatisfaction with majority rule government itself.36

References:

Kurlantzick, Joshua. "Thailand: A Democratic Failure And Its Lessons For The Middle East". Council on Foreign
36

Relations. N.p., 2016. Web. 10 July 2016.