A Coup And A King

The calmness with which Thais responded to this week’s military coup must not lull the generals into complacency. Cleaning up the mess they accused Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra of creating would require a degree of determination and dexterity few juntas in history have been able to muster.
To be sure, Thaksin was one of Thailand’s most popular and successful politicians. He emerged when the country really needed a strong-willed leader in the aftermath of the 1997-98 East Asian financial crisis. Thaksin presided over the resurgence of what has certainly become one of Asia’s most formidable economies.
Although he continued to command the loyalty of rural Thais, Thaksin’s style alienated his political opponents and urban voters. Sustained protests in Bangkok and other cities against the premier’s alleged financial irregularities involving his billion dollar family fortune compelled Thaksin to hold early elections. An opposition boycott and technical hitches subverted the vote. Under sustained pressure from the streets earlier this year, Thaksin had made a clear pledge to quit power. However, he remained firmly in the saddle.
Amid the polarization, King Bhumibol Adulyadej appealed for restraint and reason. Although Thais had experienced 17 coups since the 1930s, the prospect of another one was hardly on many people’s minds.
Gen. Sonthi Boonyaratkalin, the army chief, insists his takeover enjoys the blessings of the widely revered monarch. Bhumibol’s silence over the crisis suggests that may be the case. But for how long?
Gen. Sonthi has pledged to hand over power to a civilian administration as soon as possible. But, then, no military ruler has insisted he was in for the long haul. Once an interim government is in place and fresh elections are held in a year under a new constitution, the army will have to return to the barracks. The legitimacy as well as the viability of the process would ultimately depend on the degree of cooperation Thai political parties extend to the military leaders.