« | Home | »

Washington Keeps Quiet

Tags: |

The anti-government protests in Bangkok, which have drawn at least 100,000 red-shirted protestors from across rural Thailand, have attracted a lot of attention from the global media. This is in large part down to the gore: demonstrators have been donating litres of their blood to be poured on government buildings. The United States government, however, Thailand’s longtime foreign patron and ally, has said almost nothing about the red demonstrations. During a brief visit to the country shortly before the current protests, Assistant Secretary of State Kurt Campbell issued a bland statement:

We are urging restraint, and we want very much for issues that are passionate, and important political matters, to be dealt with in an appropriate way through the electoral process and through other democratic institutions.

American silence makes good sense. Four years ago, Washington was less hands-off – and paid for it. In 2006, protestors dressed in yellow and drawn mostly from the Bangkok elites gathered in the same streets where the red shirts now mass, pushing to oust Thaksin Shinawatra, the then prime minister. They got their wish: in September 2006, a military coup toppled Thaksin, who fled into exile, and many yellow shirts welcomed the army troops with flowers and smiles.

The US miscalculated badly. Washington issued a pro forma denunciation of the coup, but tacitly condoned the military takeover by its actions. The US did not suspend planned joint military exercises with the Thai armed forces, and privately sent signals to the army that the US would work closely with the military-appointed prime minister.

In private, many senior American officials argued that the US should tolerate the coup, because Thaksin, though elected, had autocratic tendencies, and because Thailand had weathered some 17 coups in the past, and the US historically had stood behind the traditional elites – the army, monarchy and Bangkok businesspeople.

That was a mistake. In the past, the US could back Thai elites because the majority of the population had no voice. Now, with the rural poor mobilised, the elites America has always worked with can’t keep the situation under control: if an election were called today, a proxy party for Thaksin would almost certainly win. Travelling through northern Thailand, Thaksin’s home base, last month, I found near-unanimous support for the red shirts, and polite but bitter disdain for the US, which perceived as always favouring Bangkok’s rulers.

To make matters worse, Bangkok’s elites have shown they can no longer even manage the country effectively. Shortly after the coup, the military-installed government so bungled its handling of the economy that investors fled the stock market in droves. In recent months, the current government, which has also not actually won an election, has been embarrassed by revelations that it paid a British company $21 million for useless bomb-detection equipment to use in Thailand’s war-torn southern provinces. No wonder Washington is keeping quiet.

Comment on this post

Log in or register to post a comment.

  • Recent Posts

    RSS – posts

  • Contributors

  • Recent Comments

    • name on Who is the enemy?: Simply stating it is correct doesn't make it so, I just wish you would apply the same epistemic vigilance to "Muslim crimes" as you do to their Hebrew...
    • Glen Newey on Unwinnable War: The legal issue admits of far less clarity than the simple terms in which you – I imagine quite sincerely – frame them. For the benefit of readers...
    • Geoff Roberts on The New Normal: The causes go back a long way into the colonial past, but the more immediate causes stem from the activities of the US forces in the name of freedom a...
    • sol_adelman on The New Normal: There's also the fact that the French state denied the mass drownings of '61 even happened for forty-odd years. No episode in post-war W European hist...
    • funky gibbon on At Wembley: If England get France in the quarter finals of Euro 16 I expect that a good deal of the fraternity will go out the window

    RSS – comments

  • Contact

  • Blog Archive

  • From the LRB Archive

    Edward Said: The Iraq War
    17 April 2003

    ‘This is the most reckless war in modern times. It is all about imperial arrogance unschooled in worldliness, unfettered either by competence or experience, undeterred by history or human complexity, unrepentant in its violence and the cruelty of its technology.’

    David Runciman:
    The Politics of Good Intentions
    8 May 2003

    ‘One of the things that unites all critics of Blair’s war in Iraq, whether from the Left or the Right, is that they are sick of the sound of Blair trumpeting the purity of his purpose, when what matters is the consequences of his actions.’

    Simon Wren-Lewis: The Austerity Con
    19 February 2015

    ‘How did a policy that makes so little sense to economists come to be seen by so many people as inevitable?’

    Hugh Roberts: The Hijackers
    16 July 2015

    ‘American intelligence saw Islamic State coming and was not only relaxed about the prospect but, it appears, positively interested in it.’

Advertisement Advertisement