Hate coups? Then Don't spoil politicians

There is absolutely no such thing as a “perfect relationship” between soldiers and politicians. Thailand is among the “Exhibit A’s” for obvious reasons. The countless coups and controversial appointments made by politicians in power to the Armed Forces demonstrate a vicious circle of mistrust and attempts by both sides to control each other. No law, no Constitution, no executive order can prevent interference, explicit or otherwise.

Thailand saw a glimpse of hope during the big flood disaster a few years ago, when soldiers and politicians worked closely together in rescue and relief efforts. Unfortunately, that was an exception, not the rule. When a natural emergency fades and “politicians” returns, it’s business as usual. Soldiers are not “in the barracks” and the reason why depends on one’s political leaning.

Make no mistake, Thailand is not the only “cursed” nation. In Indonesia, the military dominated that country’s politics for so long. Myanmar, which has just held its “freest” election in decades, has a Constitution that favours a strong military presence in politics and is not easy to change parliamentarily. Past or present generals are controlling politics in Indochina. And it’s believed that even in the most democratic societies, military interference exists, albeit subtly and not in the “conventional” form.

To say that politically ambitious soldiers should drop their uniforms and run in elections is pointless. In Thailand, military people do that all the time, only to allow the politically ambitious ones unwilling to drop their uniforms and run in elections to come out of the shadows and assert themselves.

The best solution is getting rid of the reasons or “pretexts” for a coup. Prescribing strong punishment for coup-makers won’t work, obviously, because a successful coup can cancel out any legal means intended to penalise the perpetrators. Social boycotts won’t stop coups either. An anti-military popular uprising in 1992 was hailed as a concerted social effort to teach coup-makers a lesson. No coup would ever happen again, it was said at the time. As it turned out, the next coup overthrew one of the most popular civilian governments in history.

Attacking “coup apologists” also misses the point, a desperate act at best. Coup-makers will rule no matter what. With some support, their jobs may be a bit easier. Without support, they will just clamp down harder. In other words, coup-makers don’t care if they are loved or criticised, and to make that a justification why coups are bad won’t help. The bottom line is coups can happen no matter how the act is condemned or criticised. Some things may “deter” a coup, but if it has to happen, it will.

To break the vicious circle, therefore, it’s not up to the generals. It’s up to the politicians. The former don’t need to prove themselves, but the latter do. If we keep attacking coup-makers, we are spoiling the politicians, encouraging them to do what invites the soldiers to come out of their barracks in the first place. Some may say that if we keep attacking the politicians, we may also encourage the soldiers, too. But if our politicians give the soldiers fewer and fewer reasons or pretexts for staging a coup, wouldn’t that be nice?

This is not a chicken and egg situation. Clean, honest politics will give birth to a coup-free society. Coups may or may not make politicians behave, but if politicians behave, democracy will thrive. It’s as simple as that.