Abstract
Thailand’s domestic political crisis that began in the final year of the Thaksin Shinawatra administration (2001–06), culminating in the military coup of September 2006 and continuing into the current period of the Democrat-led government under the leadership of Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva, has also influenced the country’s foreign policy, especially its relations with the great powers. The crisis has provided a platform for these powers — in this case, the United States and China — to compete with each other in order to preserve their strategic ties with Thailand at a time when the kingdom has been experiencing political turbulence. It is however necessary to see the role of Washington and Beijing in Thailand’s protracted crisis in the wider context of competition for influence and supremacy in Southeast Asia. This chapter examines the different approaches of the United States and China in dealing with the Thai crisis. It asks: Which approach is more effective to win influence in Thailand? It investigates the way in which the competition between the two great powers has come to influence Thailand’s foreign affairs. In the final section, the chapter briefly discusses the standing of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in Thailand’s polarized politics and seeks to elucidate whether Thailand has been able to exploit its position in ASEAN to dilute the power of the United States and China over its domestic and foreign affairs
Country or Region: Thailand
Sovacool, Benjamin K
Abstract
Regulators within the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) have heavily promoted investment in natural gas infrastructure to meet burgeoning demand for energy. By 2030, some analysts expect Southeast Asia to become “the Persian Gulf of Gas” and responsible for one-quarter of the world’s gas production and use. Perhaps no single project is more emblematic of the region’s view of energy security and policy than the Trans-ASEAN natural gas pipeline (TAGP) system, a proposed network of natural gas pipelines to connect the gas reserves in the Gulf of Thailand, Indonesia, Myanmar and the Philippines to the rest of the region. Advocates of the TAGP expect it to promote economic development, earn foreign exchange, mitigate the risks of climate change, and enhance regional energy security. Drawing from field research and research interviews, however, this article takes a critical look at the region’s drive towards the TAGP and ASEAN’s approach to energy security as a whole. The article argues that plans for the TAGP rest on too simple a notion of energy security: secure access to fuel. This conception of energy security ignores important additional dimensions related to availability, affordability, efficiency and environmental and social stewardship. In contrast, the paper concludes that the TAGP is insufficient, expensive, inefficient, and environmentally and socially destructive.
Sumitra, Tatchai
Abstract
The main tasks of NPIPC were to prepare plans for the following: (1) laws, regulations and international protocols, (2) industrial and commercial infrastructures, (3) technology transfer and human resource development, (4) safety and environmental protection, (5) public information and public acceptance programs, (6) utilities planning. Six subcommittees were set up to look after the 6 main tasks and NPIPC coordinated the findings and proposals of the subcommittees.
Marshall, Alan
Abstract
It has been said Thailand needs more energy for its growing economy and that the world needs eco-friendly energy sources to stave off catastrophic global warming. So, to encourage this, we might ask ‘should Thailand develop nuclear energy?’ The answer is ‘no’. Nuclear energy is not going to push Thailand towards cost-effective, efficient and climate-friendly energy use. If nuclear energy is forced upon Thailand by the government, its people and its environment will not only be just as vulnerable to climate change but also be subjected to chronic radioactive pollution, whilst risking both a disastrous accident and the spread of nuclear and radiological weapons.
Malley, Michael S., and Tanya Ogilvie-White
Abstract
Indonesia, Thailand, and Vietnam recently announced that they are launching nuclear energy programs, and Malaysia and the Philippines soon may follow suit. As a result, by 2020, at least three states in Southeast Asia could possess latent nuclear capabilities—the option to pursue military applications of dual-use nuclear technology. Analysis of the nuclear programs, domestic proliferation pressures, and the external threat environment in Southeast Asia leads the authors to conclude that the nuclear intentions of states in that region are entirely peaceful and the probability of future nuclear breakout there is low. However, this finding does not justify complacency. In the long term, the benign outlook for regional security may change, and in the near term weak regulatory regimes present serious challenges to nuclear safety and create opportunities that non-state actors may exploit. To minimize these risks, the authors recommend creating a “proliferation firewall” around the region, which would combine strong global support for Southeast Asian nuclear energy programs with innovative regional multilateral nuclear arrangements.
Symon, Andrew
Abstract
The possibility of nuclear power in Southeast Asia to help meet huge growth in electricity demand has suddenly risen in government planning. Vietnam, Indonesia and Thailand have plans for nuclear power generation while Malaysia and the Philippines are studying the option. These plans and possibilities raise a gamut of economic, environmental and security issues and fears which policy makers are only beginning to grapple with. As in other parts of the world, both where there are established nuclear generation industries and where there are not, nuclear power is being turned to as a possible solution to meeting demand when the cost of traditional fossil fuels used for generation, coal and natural gas, are rising steeply, and in a way that mitigates against contribution by fossil fuel combustion to the greenhouse effect and predicted global warming. But how governments in Southeast Asia go about implementing nuclear power is still far from clear. Optimal development from economic, environmental and security points of view would argue for a cooperative approach via the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), possibly through an ASEAN nuclear power authority. So far, plans for nuclear power generation are fairly limited when considered against total projected power demand. But they may be the precursor to a much greater commitment to nuclear power if first plants are successfully developed. Managing the development of nuclear power will be a major test of ASEAN’s maturity and effectiveness.
Hamilton-Hart, Natasha
Summary
In Hard Interests, Soft Illusions, Natasha Hamilton-Hart explores the belief held by foreign policy elites in much of Southeast Asia—Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Thailand, Singapore, and Vietnam—that the United States is a relatively benign power. She argues that this belief is an important factor underpinning U.S. preeminence in the region, because beliefs inform specific foreign policy decisions and form the basis for broad orientations of alignment, opposition, or nonalignment. Such foundational beliefs, however, do not simply reflect objective facts and reasoning processes. Hamilton-Hart argues that they are driven by both interests—in this case the political and economic interests of ruling groups in Southeast Asia—and illusions.
Hamilton-Hart shows how the information landscape and standards of professional expertise within the foreign policy communities of Southeast Asia shape beliefs about the United States. These opinions frequently rest on deeply biased understandings of national history that dominate perceptions of the past and underlie strategic assessments of the present and future. Members of the foreign policy community rarely engage in probabilistic reasoning or effortful knowledge-testing strategies. This does not mean, she emphasizes, that the beliefs are insincere or merely instrumental rationalizations. Rather, cognitive and affective biases in the ways humans access and use information mean that interests influence beliefs; how they do so depends on available information, the social organization and practices of a professional sphere, and prevailing standards for generating knowledge.
National News Bureau of Thailand
This post by the National News Bureau of Thailand quotes the Thai National Shippers’ Council chief, Paiboon Polsuwanna, on his views toward the construction of nuclear plants to cope with energy demand. It also covers his views on nuclear safety issues following the Fukushima accident in Japan and Vietnam’s growing nuclear program.
Original Text
