THE EVOLUTION OF THAI DEMOCRACY : AN ANALYSIS

Abstract

The term Democracy is a transliteration of the Greek demokratia, which means government by the people. The term has spawned a multitude of definitions and has come to mean different things to different persons. But what is certain is that it has become the catchword of the twentieth century and is used to legitimise liberal and totalitarian regimes alike. Americans prided their system as democratic in the same way that the Khmer Rouge named Cambodia Democratic Kampuchea in 1975. The term has become all-pervasive since World War Two when the process of decolonisation threw up new states which chose to embrace the democratic system. Among them were states like Burma, Malaysia, Singapore, the Philippines, Indonesia, India, Pakistan etc. Several have since discarded the system and opted for a more totalitarian form of government. But all have found it impossible to apply it wholesale in its original western form to the local context. In every case, the regimes in power have seen it fit, indeed necessary, to improvise and make adjustments to suit the local environment. But even before the explosion of "democratic" states in the post-war years, there had been regimes which were anxious to adopt the democratic system in the name of political development. Thailand's was a case in point. Its record since the "democratic revolution" of 1932 was a lesson to all that form does not necessarily mean substance. In fact, the title of this study suggests that democracy, be it the values, institutions or mechanisms, is an evolutionary process that cannot take root overnight. The process is also dependent on the political culture of the country. In some societies, the traditional political culture appears to have provided a ready basis for democratic evolution, while in others the tendencies have been more consistent with authoritarian ways. This study traces the evolution of democracy in a developing country bearing in mind the problems posed by its political culture, the necessity for adjustments in institutional forms and the need to accomodate factors peculiar to that country. There are two reasons for choosing Thailand as the subject of study. Firstly, Thailand stands apart from most countries in Asia in that it has never been colonised. It did not inherit the democratic system from a western colonial master but rather "imported" the system after a coup had terminated the era of absolute monarchy. This distinctiveness warrants our special attention. Secondly, Thailand adopted ''democracy" more than a decade before many states did in the 1940s and the 1950s. It would be interesting to see if the "additional" years had been beneficial in helping her to develop the democratic system. The focus of this study is the evolution of Thai democracy with special emphasis on the 1980s when the situation appeared to indicate some progress in the country's state of democracy. From 1932 to 1973, except for brief interludes, democracy had existed only in name and the country was to all intents and purposes ruled by a cabal of senior Army officers. With the downfall of the military regime in 1973 however, the face of Thai politics changed drastically. Although the Army was able to re-assert control in 1976, it could not turn the clock back to the days of one-man rule. The open politics of 1973-76 had a momentous impact on the military, making them realise that they would have to share power with the emerging forces of extra-bureaucrats in a newly-devised political setup. The 1980s symbolise the co-operation of the military and the extra-bureaucrats in a unique political system which the Thais called a "semi-democracy". The aim of this study is to examine how this system works and what lies ahead of Thailand's democratic evolution. Chapter One provides the backdrop to the study by discussing the various elements of Western democracy so as to arrive at a working definition of the concept. The political culture of the country will also be discussed to put the study of Thai democracy in perspective. Chapter Two traces the evolution of democracy from 1932 to the end of the 1970s. The vicissitudes of democratic growth during this period will be examined, as will the economic and social developments that had brought forth the momentous changes of the 1970s. Chapter Three focuses on the significant incidents of the 1980s which had led many to term the period "the decade of democratic acceleration" in Thai history. We shall determine if these incidents were indicative of structural and permanent changes in the Thai polity. A comprehensive examination of the three variables of the monarchy, the extra-bureaucrats and the military forms the core of Chapter Four. The study of Thai democratic evolution in the 1980s is then taken a step further with an analysis of the Prem era to see how democracy is developed via the shifting alignments of these three variables. This chapter concludes with an examination into the possibility of institutionalising Prem's survival tactics. Chapter Five discusses the evolution of Thai democracy in the post-Prem era. The ideas of General Chaovalit and their impact on democratic development will be examined as the general is considered the rising star of the political firmament. There will also be a discussion on the Chaovalit-led effort to institutionalise the Army's role in politics ae well as its chances of success. Chapter Six concludes this study by examining the possible directions the evolution will take in the future. It will also strive to give some ideas on how semi- or half democracy can progress towards the long-term goal of a full-fledged democracy.