A Coup Ordained? Thailand’s Prospects for Stability

Martial law has brought calm but not peace to Thailand’s febrile politics. The military regime’s stifling of dissent precludes a frank dialogue on the kingdom’s future and could lead to greater turmoil than that which brought about the May 2014 coup.

A nine-year cycle of popular protests followed by military and judicial interventions to oust elected governments has left the country deeply polarised. The 22 May military coup brought an end to sometimes violent street protests but not to political uncertainty: equipped with absolute power, the ruling National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) quashes dissent and remains vague about the timeline for a return to electoral democracy. The International Crisis Group’s latest report, A Coup Ordained? Thailand’s Prospects for Stability, examines the conflict’s underlying causes and warns that, by curbing the power of elected representatives in favour of appointed officials, the coup makers risk yet another round of violent conflict.

The report’s major findings and recommendations are:

• The 22 May coup demonstrated the failure of the 2006 coup and subsequent governments to address the factors underpinning Thailand’s protracted conflict. More than ever, the society is riven across regional, ethnic and quasi-ideological lines, by deep income inequality and by a difficult relationship between Bangkok and its peripheries.


• At the heart of the turmoil is not only a political struggle but disagreement over what constitutes legitimate authority, with some regarding the popular ballot as paramount and others regarding majoritarianism as another form of tyranny, requiring strong checks and balances by the establishment. In the background, a looming royal succession – prohibited by law from being discussed – adds to the uncertainty.


• To achieve its stated goal of establishing a durable democracy, the NCPO must encourage the development of a national dialogue, provide for meaningful political participation of all and reach out particularly to those in the North and North East who believe they have been serially disenfranchised by the Bangkok establishment. Failure to do so risks an eventual clash between the army and protesters, such as those that resulted from the 1991 and 2006 coups.

“The military’s apparent prescription, the deliberate weakening of elected leaders in favour of unelected institutions, is more likely to bring conflict than cohesion”, says Matthew Wheeler, South East Asia Analyst. “It will deepen divisions while doing further damage to the institutions best suited to safeguard the rights of political minorities, root out corruption and resolve social conflict”.

“Thai society is both deeply divided and – now – accustomed to having a political voice”, says Jonathan Prentice, Chief Policy Officer and Acting Asia Program Director. “Stability will remain elusive unless Thailand forges a political path in which all Thais respect the majority vote and see their own concerns acknowledged”.