Military Coups in Thailand: The Strategic Arguments to Justify a Democratic Setback.

• Main Author: Narayaem Lindman, Lipikar
• Format: Others
• Language: English
• Published: Uppsala universitet, Statsvetenskapliga institutionen 2017
• Subjects: Thailand; Military; Coup; Globalisation Studies; Globaliseringsstudier
• Online Access: http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-338860

One of the military establishments that have gained considerable power and autonomy, and it is out of reach of civilian control, is the Royal Thai Army (RTA). In Thailand, coups have become the norm for change of political leadership and government, and has evolved in a cyclical pattern – starting with a coup, followed by an election and a short period of open politics, before a crisis leading to another coup. The majority of Thai people support military interventions when the government is incapable of ruling, but at the same time appear to desire a democratic state and democratic institutions.  With frequent military intervention, democracy in Thailand is fragile. When compared to other cases of military coups in other parts of the world, military takeovers are often violent and not approved of by its own citizens. Therefore, the case of Thailand is unusual and relevant because the latest interventions (2006 and 2014) were considered bloodless, and the RTA succeeded in gaining power and legitimacy from the support of the people without accomplishing political takeovers through armed and violent means. The strategic arguments the RTA uses to gain justificiation can be related to the discourses of security, corruption and monarchy, and it is apparent that the military has been using the rhetorics of the discourses to legitimize their coups.