U.S. reaction on the coup in thailand

U.S. reaction on the coup in thailand

Thailand, situated in the south east asia, has always fascinated me. This country has always been a desired location of tourists. The whole stability of its economy is founded on tourism, yet such a fascinating and full of thrill country has seen 18 coups since the establishment of democracy takes me aback. It just surprizes me how unstable different governments have proved to be. There has been no prime minister elected twice for PM seat in the history of thailand except the recently ousted prime minister Thanksin. It leaves with the impression that probably Thanksin has accomplished its duties well and has worked for the people. Also Thanksin had made himself very popular in the country side. His policies were inclined in favour of poor and uneducated crowd of Thailand. He was selected twice and the 2nd win was a clear landslide. It seems really surprizing that at one side you have a landslide victory and at another you are overthrown by the coup and almost 80% of the public supports the coup! It was only the last year when Thaksin was elected again. The victory says most of the public supports you and the polls after coup says most of them opposes you !
What were these critical decisions Thaksin had moved ahead with, which caused him to be ousted ?? One of the biggest mistake Thaksin committed was to sell telecommunication industry in private hands. He was keen of handing over government assets in private hands and this probably caused the rise dissatisfaction and anger against him. He was charged many a times with involvement in corruptive activity. Although each time he was absolved by the court, yet the fumes against him were fogging and it was further agitated by the tax free sales of $2 billion of his company. People began to believe that he was corrupt. Moreover, He failed to control the insurgents in southern Thailand. The army forces were ordered to bring the situation under control but without any governing proper plan. The lives of Thai soldiers were not being considered. When the monarch put his views before the government warning it of possible danger, he did not even cared to give heed to the monarch. Monarch is consided revered among Thai people but this negligency to the views of the monarch led to nothing but undermined his goodwill. His attitude of authoritarianism and harsh-rough behaviour with subordinates made him disliked among his juniors and finally his office was captured by the millitary in the coup.
The coup was bloodless, there are no news of violence except few cases of protest. EVen when the coup leader General Sondhi has declared Martial law, in which public gatherings have been ordered to be prohibited and liable of proper action against it. Meetings of political parties have been declared illegal and the media has been barred from printing any news against the existing rulers which can promote violence and result into activities against junta. Even in such situation polls shows that approximately 80% of the thai public is in favour of coup and hope that the coup will be dawn of the flawless and c+orruption less democracy again in the Thailand. In such a condition when a majority of the people of the country are happy with the existing rulers, why does other nations assert it to be against peace. Why U.S. affirms that the coup is not going to produce any fruitful results.
Coup leaders in Thailand have shown no interest in power and seat and at the same time, have already promised to return power to publicly elected person within 2 weeks and vowed to revise its constitution within a year, that clearly shows that the country is going through reforms which are unlikely to be harmful. In such a situation , forceful imposition of ideas by one democracy on another government does not resemble with the ideology of peace. If U.S. really wants to value it on the scale of peace, then it should let the existing Thailand government work, the way it wants to. It should, at various steps , make sure that the majority of public is with the government policy, it could varify at various steps whether the government is keeping its promises to certain degree of satisfaction or not and finally it should varify whether the new constitution is in recocilation with the ideology of peace, prosperity and democracy or not. It is the time when Thai people are mending loopholes in their democracy, and they definitely have every right to do it. Why should any government prejudge and announce it to be non-democratic??????