After two decades of progress that brought an end to army-backed regimes in Indonesia and the Philippines, Thailand's return to military rule is a setback for democracy in Southeast Asia, observers say.
"Any sudden change of government in any ASEAN member government is no good for ASEAN as a whole," ASEAN Secretary-General Ong Keng Yong said.
"The secretary-general hopes the situation in Thailand will return to normal as soon as possible, because political stability in Thailand is very important to the stability of ASEAN," he said.
Analysts said the coup's impact would depend on how long the military holds onto power after ousting the billionaire businessman prime minister, Thaksin Shinawatra, in a bloodless putsch on Tuesday.
Mely Caballero-Anthony, a Southeast Asia specialist at the Singapore-based Institute of Defense and Strategic Studies, said the events in Thailand were a setback for the region.
"If you look at what's happening in ASEAN, one of the goals is to establish a more democratic Southeast Asia," she said.
"Anything that is considered as an unconstitutional takeover ... is a setback to democratization. That is bad news for Southeast Asia," she said.
But she also said there are indications the Thai military will pave the way for civilian rule sooner rather than later.
"In the next week or so, the situation could be more clear ... So it may not be as bad as people would think it is. This could be an interim setback," Caballero-Anthony said.
Indonesian Foreign Minister Hassan Wirayuda said Jakarta "hopes that the democratic principles -- important elements in the ASEAN community that have been agreed [upon] together -- will remain enforced."
The head of the Indonesian parliamentary commission dealing with foreign affairs, Theo Sambuaga, said the coup was "a step back in the life of Thailand as a democratic country."
He called on his government and those of ASEAN member states "not to endorse or recognize the coup d'etat."
Thailand's military chief General Sonthi Boonyaratglin said on Wednesday he would hand power to an appointed prime minister within two weeks, and that democracy would be restored in a year.
ASEAN groups Thailand with nine other countries ranging from Vietnam and Laos and junta-ruled Myanmar to democracies including the Philippines, Indonesia and Malaysia to Brunei, an absolute monarchy.
The group's former secretary-general, Rodolfo Severino, said the Thai coup "seems to be a step backward in the trend toward institutional processes" in the region.
"But we don't know what compelled [the military] to do it. It's hard to judge," he said.
"Each country has its own conditions and the Thais might feel that this is the only way to go," he said, adding that military rule "could be a short-lived kind of interregnum," he said.
Michael Backman, an Australian author and commentator on Southeast Asian politics and business, offered a different analysis.
"On the face of it, the coup looks bad for democracy," he said, noting allegations of vote-buying leveled against Thaksin.
But Backman said the coup "may be a corrective one rather than a corrosive one in terms of Thai democracy" because it was bloodless, with the army saying it does not intend to hold on to power and with coup leaders carefully linking themselves with the palace.
"If this is so, then the coup need not be bad for the image of Thailand or ASEAN. If the purpose of the coup is to install a true democrat, then perhaps Thailand will be enhanced by the experience," he said.
Backman said a key question is whether there will be an attempt to reverse the acquisition by Singapore's state-linked investment firm Temasek Holdings of a 49 percent stake in Shin Corp, the Thaksin family-controlled telecom giant.
The US$1.9-billion deal in January sparked massive street protests in Bangkok and helped spark the political crisis that culminated in the coup.
Dutch bank ABN Amro said it expected a period of uncertainty in Thailand. The "ultimate resolution could come from an election," it added.
Market rumor that central bank chief Pridiyathorn Devakula will be appointed as prime minister, after Sonthi steps aside, will probably boost investor confidence, ABN Amro said.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath