News •
Political tensions remained high, however, and, beginning in mid-2008, the yellow shirts began staging mass protests against the Samak government, charging that he was merely a stand-in for the ousted Thaksin. In September the prime minister and his entire cabinet were removed from office by order of a special Constitutional Court, and the parliament elected Somchai Wongsawat, brother-in-law of Thaksin, as prime minister. In October Thaksin, who by then was living in exile, was convicted in absentia on charges of corruption.
Meanwhile, the PAD mobilized thousands of yellow-shirt demonstrators against the selection of Somchai in large-scale protests that became increasingly violent. The country’s two major airports in Bangkok were swamped, forcing temporary closure of both facilities. In response to the unrest, the army called for new elections and the dissolution of the parliament. The prime minister rejected the request, and on December 2 he, like his predecessor, was removed from office by the Constitutional Court, and his party was dissolved. Within two weeks, Abhisit Vejjajiva, leader of the opposition Democrat Party, was chosen by a special parliamentary vote to become the new prime minister—the fifth in a period of just over two years.
In early 2009 the supporters of Thaksin—popularly called the “red shirts” for the colour of their uniforms and mainly rural-based and from northern and northeastern Thailand but also including urban-dwelling democracy activists—formed a populist movement called the United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship (UDD). The UDD organized protests against this latest change of government, which in April forced the cancellation of an Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) summit meeting outside Bangkok. Security forces were able to disperse the protesters, but antigovernment mass demonstrations by the red shirts erupted again later in the year and in early 2010.
The 2010 action, which began in mid-March, drew tens of thousands of red-shirted protesters to Bangkok. There the demonstrators barricaded themselves in the heart of the city’s commercial district, demanding that the Abhisit government resign and new parliamentary elections be held. The situation remained calm until mid-April, when government forces unsuccessfully attempted to oust the red shirts from their encampment. More than 20 died and hundreds were injured during the encounter. An attempt at a negotiated settlement with the red shirts failed in early May, and the Thai military soon began an operation to force out the protesters. This action culminated on May 19, when troops took the protesters’ camp by force and arrested the red-shirt leaders. In all, several dozen people were killed and hundreds more were wounded during that action.
About a year later, however, the red shirts scored a major victory. In July 2011 the Pheu Thai Party (PTP; “For Thais Party”), a pro-Thaksin party headed by Thaksin’s younger sister, Yingluck Shinawatra, won the majority of parliamentary seats in the country’s general elections. Until then, Yingluck, a newcomer to politics, had been involved in the family’s business ventures. The PTP quickly formed a coalition with several smaller parties to create an even larger majority in parliament, and in early August Yingluck became the country’s first female prime minister.
The political tensions continued after she took office, but her immediate concern was massive flooding caused by exceptionally heavy monsoon rains, which had inundated large portions of Thailand and left hundreds of people dead and shut down a large portion of the country’s economically vital foreign-owned manufacturing operations. Most of those companies were back in business by mid-2012, reviving Thailand’s economy, which had been severely hurt by the flooding. Politically, Yingluck was plagued by the spectre of Thaksin throughout her term in office. Although she continued to be popular among her large rural constituency, she was constantly portrayed by the opposition as her exiled older brother’s proxy.
Matters came to a head in 2013, when her government attempted to pass a bill that would have granted amnesty to those involved in the political turmoil between 2006 and 2010—which, it was believed, would include her brother. The bill not only failed in the legislature, but it led to massive antigovernment protests late in the year. Yingluck responded by dissolving the legislature and scheduling early elections for February 2014, which, it was widely believed, the ruling party would win; she remained in office as caretaker prime minister. Opposition protesters managed to disrupt the polling process, however, and the courts ruled that the election was invalid.
The government announced in late April 2014 that legislative elections would be rescheduled for July. In early May the country’s Constitutional Court ruled that Yingluck had illegally removed a government official early in her administration, and she was ordered to leave office. Several members of her cabinet were also dismissed by the court, and Niwattumrong Boonsongpaisan, one of the remaining members, was named acting prime minister. On May 20, however, Gen. Prayuth Chan-ocha, the head of Thailand’s army, declared martial law, citing concerns about the continuing antagonism between the pro-government and antigovernment factions. Two days later the Thai military staged a bloodless coup. The constitution was suspended (except for provisions pertaining to the monarchy), the government was dismissed, and Prayuth was named to head a committee of military leaders—the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO)—that was to rule the country. Other measures taken by the military included imposing an overnight curfew, detaining red-shirt and yellow-shirt leaders, and limiting public gatherings to five or fewer people.
In July the NCPO instituted, with the king’s endorsement, an interim constitution. By the beginning of August a new legislature was in office, its members appointed by the council, and on August 25 that body selected Prayuth to be the country’s interim prime minister. Meanwhile, in early May, shortly after she had been dismissed from office, Yingluck was indicted on corruption charges stemming from a rice-subsidy program instituted by her government.
In January 2015 the interim legislature voted to impeach Yingluck for her involvement in the subsidy scheme—which meant that she was barred from seeking public office for the next five years—and in March she was ordered to stand trial in May. On April 1 Prayuth, responding to domestic and external pressure, announced that martial law was to be lifted. In its place, a provision in the interim constitution was to be invoked that would give considerable authority to the executive. Later that month a draft constitution was completed, but it was rejected in September by a government-appointed panel. The junta selected a new constitutional committee in October, and another draft was unveiled in March 2016. The proposed constitution vested enormous power in the military, with the junta directly appointing the entire 250-seat senate and reserving the right to indirectly select the premier. When the proposed constitution was put to a referendum in August 2016, some 61 percent of voters backed it, and the junta promised that a general election would be held in 2017. On October 13, 2016, King Bhumibol died, triggering a period of nationwide mourning as well as intense speculation about the future of the monarchy. Bhumibol’s designated heir, Crown Prince Vajiralongkorn, was deeply unpopular among the Thai public, as Thailand’s strict lèse-majesté laws (statutes that prohibited the real or perceived defamation of the monarchy) had done little to conceal the prince’s often controversial behaviour.
The Editors of Encyclopaedia BritannicaEconomic and foreign-policy developments
Thailand had one of the world’s fastest growing economies from the 1960s to the late ’90s. By the 1990s Thailand was considered to be part of a second wave of newly industrializing countries, or NICs, that included such countries in the region as Malaysia and Indonesia and that were following fast on the heels of such first-wave NICs as South Korea and Singapore. Unlike Japan and some of the first-wave NICs, where governments aggressively channeled capital into industrial sectors with high growth potential, Thailand relied on an independent central bank and other government financial agencies to create the proper conditions for economic growth and left it to the private sector to make specific business decisions. This growth substantially improved the standard of living in Thailand, especially among urban dwellers. In July 1997, however, a crisis in Thailand’s financial markets forced the government to institute a drastic devaluation of the Thai currency, the baht, which triggered a wider crisis that soon swept across most of East and Southeast Asia. The crisis was especially severe in Thailand, where many financial institutions collapsed or were taken over; without new sources of capital, construction and new economic ventures slowed to a near halt. These events compelled the Thai government, with the backing of the International Monetary Fund, to institute a series of economic reforms, especially in the financial sector, after which the economy slowly began to recover.
Several factors led to Thailand’s financial collapse. Among these were the wholesale financial liberalization of the early 1990s; the declining competitiveness of Thailand relative to China, Vietnam, and other Asian countries; the aggressiveness of Thai businesses in obtaining short-term loans from foreign sources to fund long-term obligations; the eagerness of international lenders to make these loans; the growing influence from the mid-1990s of political leaders over the previously independent Bank of Thailand and other governmental economic agencies; the lax regulation of financial markets and the Securities Exchange of Thailand by the Bank of Thailand and other government bodies; and the slowness of the authorities to act once the problems were recognized. Foremost among those responsible for the crisis were the many finance companies that made short-term loans to fund long-term property investments. These finance companies were the first financial institutions to collapse. In the aftermath of the crisis, major banks and financial institutions went bankrupt, were combined with other firms, or were purchased by foreign buyers.
Even before the onset of the economic crisis, there was already ample evidence that the country’s rapid economic growth—while having brought a definite rise in the standard of living of most Thai—was also creating many social problems. Notable among the undesirable consequences were increased environmental pollution and degradation, a widening gap between rich and poor, the growth of slums and overcrowding in the cities, and urban traffic congestion. Added to these problems was the emergence of an HIV/AIDS epidemic in Thailand, which became the most serious in Asia. Increasingly, many of the NGOs and business leaders, even the king himself, have questioned the single-minded pursuit of new investments in industry and services, proposing instead that the country seek sustainable development that respects traditional ideas of community.
In contrast to the ideal of sustainable development, the government of Thaksin Shinawatra strongly emphasized free-market economics, and its policies succeeded in stimulating significant new growth in the economy. The Thaksin government used increasing revenues to undertake a number of large-scale infrastructure projects, the most visible of which was the Suvarnabhumi international airport. However, these projects also brought accusations of corruption and shoddy workmanship—notably the discovery of structural flaws at the new airport shortly after it opened—and questions were raised about how beneficial such projects were to the country’s economy.
From the 1950s through the ’70s, Thailand’s foreign policy was based on anticommunism and a special relationship with the United States. The withdrawal of American forces from Vietnam and the establishment of communist regimes in Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos spurred Thailand to reassess its foreign policy, and since the 1980s the emphasis has been more on promoting economic relations than on security. The relationship with the United States has been downgraded, and closer ties have been forged with Japan and China. Following the end of the Cold War and the disintegration of the Soviet Union, Thailand began to encourage regional trade relationships, even with its former enemies—Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia.
Thailand was a charter member of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), and with its support Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, and Myanmar were all admitted to the organization between 1995 and 1998. Although ASEAN had not evolved into a free-trade bloc, by the early 21st century Thailand had become increasingly oriented toward other Asian countries with which its economic relations had been strengthening, most notably China.
Although economic concerns have been the underlying basis for Thailand’s foreign policy since the 1980s, security concerns have not disappeared. The country has continued to grapple with refugees on its western border with Myanmar. At the same time, conflicts in southern Thailand have contributed to the government’s willingness to work with the United States and others in efforts to control terrorists who have been identified as Islamic radicals.
Charles F. Keyes E. Jane KeyesIn 2008 Thailand became embroiled in a military confrontation with Cambodia over the status of the Temple of Preah Vihear, situated on their mutual border. Both sides claimed jurisdiction over the temple, which had been designated a UNESCO World Heritage site that year, and dispatched troops to the area. The impasse continued for several years, and tensions mounted over border incursions and other incidents. Attempts to mediate the disagreement failed, but, after skirmishes broke out there in 2011, Cambodia appealed to the International Court of Justice at The Hague to confirm a 1962 ruling made by that body in favour of Cambodia. The court initially called for all troops to be withdrawn from the area (which was done in 2012), and in 2013 it ruled that Cambodia should control the temple site.
The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica