泰國有史以來最受人民歡迎的總理，被軍人們宣稱的支持民主的軍事政變所推翻，結束了幾個月來泰國日益分裂的局面。
軍事政變領導人宣稱會將權力還給人民（但最快要一年，因為要制定新憲法後才能再選舉）。泰國菁英指控前總理腐敗、破壞民主機制，既使他一直深受鄉村民眾的喜愛，而且獲得泰國有史以來最多的國會席次。
又一個亞洲國家以非民主的方式重新定義﹂民主」，以非憲政的方式來達到政治目的。
News Analysis: Thailand in a dangerous limbo
By Seth Mydans International Herald Tribune
Published: September 20, 2006
The generals billed it as a pro-democracy military coup, and although they had ousted one of the most popular prime ministers in Thailand’s history, most commentators here Wednesday tended to agree.
During Tuesday night, top military commanders deposed Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra in a nonviolent coup while he was in New York, concluding a debilitating political standoff that was increasingly dividing the country.
On Wednesday, the coup’s leader, General Sonthi Boonyaratglin, said that he had acted "to bring back normalcy and harmony" and that he intended to "return power to the Thai people as soon as possible."
That, in so many words, was the hope of Thailand’s elite, who had accused Thaksin of corruption and of destroying democratic institutions, even as he continued to enjoy the overwhelming support of rural voters, who had given him Thailand’s first outright majority in Parliament.
But whatever the hopes and intentions, Thailand is in a dangerous limbo as the generals work to consolidate control in a fragmented political field and Thaksin, now with his family in London, considers his next moves.
And one more Southeast Asian nation has reinterpreted democracy in undemocratic terms, either manipulating or sidestepping constitutional processes to achieve political ends.
"The crisis in the immediate term has been resolved," said Thitinan Pongsudhirak, director of the Institute of Security and International Studies at Chulalongkorn University.
"Thaksin is out of the picture for now," he said. "We can move forward with political reforms. But in the medium and longer term he is still around and his supporters are still around. We have been put back at Square 1. We’ve got to get out of this vicious cycle of constitution, election, corruption and coup."
It had seemed that Thailand had left behind its long era of repeated coups, slowly consolidating constitutional rule over the past 15 years. Sonthi himself said in March, "Military coups are a thing of the past."
Now both Thailand and the Philippines, the region’s two exemplars of democracy, have removed democratically elected leaders in coups that followed popular uprisings.
Other Southeast Asian nations are ruled with varying degrees of authoritarianism, while staying close to the rules of the democratic playbook.
In a turnaround, it is Indonesia that has the most thoroughgoing, though fragile, democracy, following 32 years of dictatorship under Suharto, who was ousted in 1998.
Each nation argues that its adaptations of democracy are necessary responses to local conditions. Singapore, for example, points to its precarious position as a tiny, mainly Chinese nation squeezed between two much larger Malay neighbors, and to the combustible mix of a multiethnic population.
Myanmar, the former Burma, says it must maintain its repressive military rule to keep ethnic tensions from bursting into civil war. But it is nevertheless going through the motions of democratic process, with plans to reopen a constitutional convention next month.
Vietnam and Laos are thoroughly communist nations, following what they call the democratic structures of regular parliamentary votes and five- year plans.
The Philippines, like Thailand, has argued that democratic processes had broken down when President Joseph Estrada was facing impeachment on corruption charges
and that only the military could clean house and set the country back on course. The military turned against Estrada, clearing the way for his successor, President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo.
Calling the coup Tuesday a hiccup, Kavi Chongkittavorn, a political commentator at The Nation newspaper, said, "It was a necessary evil, if you look at it. There were no other options to end this political cul-de-sac."
But he conceded: "It is a contradiction in terms to have a military coup that calls for political reform. That’s the dilemma."
The Asian Center for Human Rights, an independent monitoring group, raised the obvious objection in a statement Wednesday.
"If the latest coup d’état in Thailand is justified, similar military interventions in a situation of political flux such as in Mexico will also be justified," it said. "The coup d’état in Thailand is a threat to democracy all over the world."
On Wednesday, Sonthi offered both good news and bad news for those who seek a quick return to democratic rule.
He said he would choose an interim civilian prime minister within two weeks and then, "We step out." But he said that interim government would have the task of drawing up a new Constitution, putting it to a referendum, and then holding parliamentary elections, a process that would take more than a year.
Surin Pitsuwan, a former foreign minister of Thailand, said: "The foundation of the state has been shaken to its core during the last five to six years, so with or without a military coup it would have taken a long time to heal and to be re-established.
"But now that it is here, which is regrettable, we have to make the best out of the circumstances. That would mean trying to play a role in the drafting of the constitution and trying to make sure that the interim period will be as short as possible."
By that time, Thailand’s political scene will have changed in unpredictable ways, analysts said.
They said Thaksin himself was unlikely to return to Thailand in the near future, where he could face lawsuits, trial and even prison on various charges of corruption.
One effect of his five years of overwhelming dominance, though, is the absence of any obvious alternative. The main opposition party, the Democrat Party, has been notable in its inability to capitalize on Thaksin’s difficulties.
A main task of the interim government will be to heal the rifts that Thaksin has created, avoiding vendettas that could devolve into what Thitinan, of the Institute of Security and International Studies, called "an endless revenge and recrimination cycle."
There is also an urgent need to address a spreading separatist insurgency in the largely Muslim south of the country, where at
least 1,500 people have been killed since January 2004.
Experts attribute much of the growth in violence to Thaksin’s no-compromise, militarized policies.
Sonthi, himself a Muslim, has clashed with Thaksin over the handling of the conflict. He recently proposed negotiations with the separatists, and the change in government could lead to a more successful counterinsurgency.
At the same time, Thitinan said, new governments should embrace one of
Thaksin’s positive legacies, a focus on the needs of the poor, with programs like village development funds, debt forgiveness and low-cost health care.
These populist measures, however calculating and paternalistic, did address long-neglected needs of the majority of the population.
"He did have a positive legacy with the grass roots," Thitinan said. "The mistake will be to reject everything Thaksin did."
文章定位：
