UNSC vote is not a referendum on Thailand’s world standing

In the next few days, the mediashere in Thailand is likely to be awash with self-anointed international sages swinging at the current Thai government for having lost the bid for a non-permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council. Many of them clearly have their own political agenda, perhaps a concerted one. Some are without a hidden agenda, who may or may not have a clear picture of the rules and procedures of this huge and most complex international body. Some advocacy groups such as human rights activists would try to point out that the loss was caused by the political oppression of the military government. Some are just those with the chat-show mentality, hanging their favourite hobby on a seemingly important and weighty issue such as this one. 

There is no denying that the loss at the UN represented a loss in opportunity for Thailand to play a larger role in the international arena, but it is also important that things are put in perspective.

Thailand’s bid for a UNSC non-permanent seat was not started by the current government; it was launched in 2007, right before the government of prime minister Samak Sundaravej came to power via a general election. At that time, it received little or no attention from then foreign minister Noppadon Pattama who got embroiled very quickly in the Phra Viharn Temple controversy when he stirred up the Thailand-Cambodia territorial disputes by his unilateral action at UNESCO.

In the year 2008, after the departure of Nopadon, Thailand saw three foreign ministers within a few months. The fourth one was Kasit Biromya, who served as foreign minister between 2008 and 2011. During his tenure, the apparent sole attention of the Foreign Ministry was the extradition of former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra back to Thailand, and the revocation of his Thai passports.

When the Democrat-led government lost the election in 2011, the power pendulum swung back to the corner of Thaksin, and Surapong Tovichakchaikul was the foreign minister between 2011-14. During his tenure, he decided to do everything in his power to return the Thai passports, diplomatic and official, to Thaksin. The UNSC candidacy was not his preoccupation.

However, the Foreign Ministry steered by the competent permanent secretary, Sihasak Puengketkaew, started paying attention to Thailand’s UNSC bid again. Up until then, it was a non-issue. Nobody at the policy level cared. But during that time, Thailand was also heavily involved in resolving the border conflicts with Cambodia at the International Court of Justice (ICJ). So the UNSC campaign was not front and centre of the government’s agenda.

Then came the military coup on May 22, 2014 after months of street protests and armed violence that severely crippled the ability of the administration in power to govern. It was not until early 2015 that the government began to function again with continuity and consistency of policies.

So it is fair to say that Thailand’s active campaign efforts literally saw resurgence only in 2015 after being idle for eight years.

Meanwhile, Kazakhstan, which also launched its UN seat bid in 2007, at the same time as Thailand, has had the benefit of continuity of government. Nursultan Nazarbayev, who was first elected president to a five-year term in 1991 when the country became independent, remains the first and only president Kazakhstan has had until today. The current prime minister – Karim Massimov – held the same post between 2007-12. But he has been holding a cabinet portfolio in Astana since 2001.

It is fair to say that Thailand lost eight precious years of active campaigning at the UN due to our own difficult internal political situation.

The current Thai government and the Foreign Ministry knew full well the high hurdles in the UN bid to compensate for lost time and opportunities, but it had the sportsman’s spirit not to quit the race in the middle. With a much smaller budget, compared to that of the oil-rich Kazakhstan to spend on the campaign, the Thai Foreign Ministry attempted to do a double duty with the budget; it tried to carry out public diplomacy at every campaign stop. The strategy and the face-to-face contacts have improved Thailand’s relations with many nations around the world.

Externally, Kazakstan has the benefit of the support of the 57 member of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) – 56 of whom are UN members. That number constitutes one-fourth of the 193 UN votes. It also has the support of the five-member Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU or EEU), whose establishment was an initiative of the president of Kazakhstan. Its five members include Russia. Kazakhstan also received support from the nine-member Eastern Bloc, generally the Soviet Union and countries of the Warsaw Pact.

As for China, little is known to the public how close the ties are between Beijing and Astana. Prime Minister Massimov is a China expert who speaks fluent Chinese as he studied in Beijing and at a university in Hubei. China and Kazakhstan have become close strategic, political and economic partners. They have been working together to develop Kazakhstan’s energy resources. China is looking at Kazakhstan as the bridgehead in Central Asia to unroll its “Belt and Road” connectivity initiative across the Eurasian region. Equally important is the fact that it was Kazakhstan that came up with the initiative of setting up CICA (Conference on Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in Asia) and turned it into China’s initiative. CICA has been under the chairmanship of China and it has 26 members and 11 observers. CICA has proven to be an important vehicle of political projection of China’s power and influence in Asia.

Regarding the issue of human rights, those who care to check will find out that the issue has little or no relevance in the consideration for the Security Council seat. And on this issue, Thailand is not the worse of the two countries.

Lastly, contrary to the criticism that Thailand was shunned by Western countries due to the military government, countries such as Germany, the Netherlands, Italy and Australia, expressed their support for Thailand without any misgivings about the country’s military leadership.

It is said that success has a thousand fathers, and failure has none. Like in any race, there is winner and loser, but Thailand can take pride in having played fair and by the rules in this campaign. The most important aspect of a race is to take part.

And taking part was what Thailand did.