FRIDAY, March 29, 2024
nationthailand

The great test in balancing ties with China and the US

The great test in balancing ties with China and the US

Question for the next government: Is Thailand merely leaning on Beijing, or are domestic sentiments pushing it that way?

In terms of geography and culture and geopolitics too, Bangkok is indisputably closer in proximity to Beijing than Washington. What is debated is why the last is so. Admirers of the United States say Washington’s frequent criticisms of Thailand’s faltering commitment to democracy have forced Bangkok into the arms of its alternative friend to the north. Detractors of the US say Washington has pushed too hard and crossed a line never to be breached again.
There’s a crucial distinction between “leaning towards” China and “being pushed towards” China. The first suggests Bangkok is willingly cultivating political, economic and cultural bonds with Beijing – and that America can do little about that. “Being pushed” implies that Washington’s own behaviour or perhaps domestic sentiments are to blame. 
Either way, the irony is obvious. In the 1970s the Communist Party of Thailand, with clear enough links to Mao Zedong’s ruling revolutionaries, forcibly if inadvertently pushed Thailand closer to the US. These were the days when Thai student activists despised America for its aggressive interventions in Indochina and elsewhere in the world and for its capitalism-driven hypocrisy with regard to democracy. The dictatorial Thai government of the day sought Washington’s help in countering the militant domestic threat posed by armed leftist students driven from Bangkok into the forests.
Many of those same insurrectionists gradually came to adopt a far more conservative ideology under the reformist regime of Thaksin Shinawatra, by which they can now regard America’s shortcomings as at least preferable to China’s abject silence over the authoritarian rule of Prayut Chan-o-cha. The Thai establishment, meanwhile, has also shifted position, warming to Beijing’s style of maintaining an absolute grip on society and eschewing America’s incessant diplomatic meddling. The former rebels who once looked up to China are now enchanted with the US. Only when the politicians they prefer are in power do issues such as US military involvement in Thailand become heavily politicised.
All of this has the risk of becoming lethally complicated with both factions in our political divide taking turns running the country. The foreign-affairs policies of Beijing and Washington are markedly different while this pendulum swing is occurring. China in recent years, ever pragmatic, has opted to sit back and watch, engaging with Thailand only on economic matters, such as with its Belt and Road Initiative. America, ostensibly principled in constitutional ideals, is eager to place bets on one-half of the Thai populace, to the point of being seen as actively helping the pro-Shinawatra faction.
Whether the US approach is sound or whether it is simply – if unwittingly – pushing Thailand closer to China draws different answers from different people. The US State Department takes its cues from academics who share ingrained concepts of freedom and democracy without question, while assigning secondary importance to matters of culture, uniqueness and public opinion that run contrary to its own. China’s seeming acceptance of Thai politics-as-is creates an impression among the public here that it’s more understanding.  
Prayut always seems comfortable meeting Xi Jinping, and a vast number of Thais support him in his accommodation of Beijing. China is winning this game of influence largely on the back of Thailand’s domestic political affiliations, which is unfortunate. 
Diplomacy should primarily be based on genuine, mutually respectful cordiality. Our allegiance to one superpower or the other should be based entirely on sincerity that is beyond doubt, not on seeming sincerity. 

RELATED
nationthailand