In Thailand, everything turns on the number 20.
At the same moment the nation commemorates the 20th anniversary of the Asian financial crisis, Prime Minister General Prayuth Chan-o-cha is rolling out his 20-year vision for the economy where it all began.
Odd, perhaps, given that Prayuth wears a military uniform — he headed the junta that grabbed power in 2014. Thailand’s has a long, sordid history of internment military rule, 19 coups since the 1930s.
But if you’d told Thais in 1997 that 20 years on men with guns would be running the place, few would’ve thought it remotely possible.
The nation today is, in many ways, a direct result of the lack of progress made since July 2, 1997, the day Bangkok’s baht devaluation set Asia’s financial meltdown in motion.
Thais hate it when foreign observers mention their dubious patient-zero role.
Thais hate it when foreign observers mention their dubious patient-zero role.
If Indonesia, South Korea and even Malaysia had healthier financial systems, cleaner governments and greenlighted fewer unproductive investments, Thais retort, the contagion never would’ve infected their economies.
Fair point, perhaps. But 20 years on, Thailand is again Exhibit A -– this time for economists mulling the next lost-decade patient. It’s become a macabre parlor game, of sorts.
Who might next follow Japan down the deflationary rabbit-hole of chronic malaise, mushrooming bad loans and governments ill-equipped to escape?
Prayuth and his fellow generals are making it too easy for the pessimists.
Try as he may, Prayuth can’t spin a 3.3% growth rate that’s the weakest among the eight biggest Southeast Asian economies. The Philippines and Indonesia, for example, are operating above 6% and 5%, respectively.
The generals have moved too slowly to accelerate infrastructure projects, including a US$5.2 billion high-speed rail undertaking with China.
They’ve also been slow to build more advanced industries and cultivate innovation. Now, as Donald Trump’s White House threatens trade wars and protectionism spans the globe, Thailand is more exposed to external shocks now than before the junta grabbed power.
Concerns about political paralysis and weak global demand are fueling a prolonged period of soft private-sector investment. Exports, after all, fuel about 70% of Thai growth.
Because of that structure, looser Bank of Thailand policies are getting little traction. One answer is marshaling the roughly US$67 billion of infrastructure projects the military government has unveiled into action.
Another is putting aside the short-termism that’s pervaded Thailand these last three years.
The irony of Prayuth’s reign is the extent to which he’s emulated the policies of the man from whom he claimed to be saving Thailand.
The irony of Prayuth’s reign is the extent to which he’s emulated the policies of the man from whom he claimed to be saving Thailand.
Much of the political turmoil from 2006 to 2014 surrounded the mercurial Thaksin Shinawatra, prime minister from 2001 to 2006.
Even after he was ousted in a 2006 coup, Thaksin played a larger-than-life role in local politics –- from exile.
His supporters, mostly the rural poor, clashed incessantly with the urban elite.
In 2014, Prayuth grabbed power pledging to settle the dispute for good. Oddly, though, he embraced Thaksinomics and its emphasis on populist cash handouts to rural communities to win support.
This strategy adds more to the national debt than competitiveness. Better roads, bridges, ports and power grids would encourage the Toyota’s and Samsung’s of the world to build more factories in Thailand.
Less corruption would ensure that economic growth reaches more of Thailand’s 68 million people.
Nor do Prayuth’s handouts strengthen government institutions, enhance human capital or build a credible legal system. Perhaps Prayuth can cajole President Donald Trump to broker a US-Thailand trade deal at the White House next month.
So, yes, Thailand is stable and devising 20 year-national strategies. But before Prayuth can take Thailand forward, his government must make up for lost time on economic and political reforms.
If not, today’s drift, on top of last two decades of start-and-start repairs, will ensure a lost decade -– one a developing nation wracked by inequality can’t afford.
(William Pesek is a Tokyo-based journalist, former columnist for Barron’s and Bloomberg and author of “Japanization: What the World Can Learn from Japan’s Lost Decades.” Twitter: @williampesek)
Ah actually he took power because they corrupt politicians were bankripting the country and killing and using Nazi style intimidation against anti goverment protestors. BTW the best PM Thailand ever had were Generals such as Gen. Prem
80% of Thais support the current administration but, hey, what do Thais know compared to William Pesek?
I think you need to read a bit more about Thai history. Prem was never elected and he was saved by his Royal connections. Name one thing he achieved for the mass of people in Thailand. Absolutely nothing, and he is still acting like Svengali! He is one of the prime causes of the divisions in Thai society, and oh yes, the Thai Military had their asses kicked by the Lao army in his tenure. He might still be the leader of the Privy Council but I cannot see that lasting much longer under Rama X. Next you will be telling me Sarin Thanarat was as pure as driven snow – another totally corrupt Military figure, along with all the other corrupt Military figures. And who comanded the Army when it killed 90 odd Redshirts, and who killed all the students? These were not Politicians my friend, they were the Thai Military, who just happen to have killed more Thais since 1932 than enemy combatants. Chan-Ocha took power because the Military, the representatives of the Thai Elite feared that the Royal Succession might deal them a mortal blow. They actually believe they are ‘Good Men’! Unfortunately they are economically and politically incompetent. Anyone who believes oppression and suppression create an atmosphere for long term success is an idiot. I hope they have bank accounts outside Thailand because at some point in time in the future they will need them!
If you actually believe 80% of Thais support the Military Administration you are in an alternate reality. Most Thais detest them!
I agree with your argument, however, when Thailand was experiencing mega growth where did all the money go. It certainly didnottbenefit the poor and lift them out of poverty. In simple words the Thai Military Government uses ‘deception by omission’! Trying to emulate the policies of the man they are trying to airbrush out of Thai politics suggests he might have been right. The Yingluk Rice scheme was about redistribution of income rather than about rice. In other words trying to funnel some of the cash away from the greedy and corrupt elites to the deserving poor!
This guy Pesek seems to be a self-appointed know-it-all of every country in Asia, their economic ills and how the leaders should go about solving them. Maybe the leaders in all the Asian countries should get together and elect him to be their president/prime minister. Stop reading his diatribe. Don’t waste your time commenting on them.
Obi Ike Sorres Agree.
The Thai Mafia was around long before the US/Italian Mafia but I would agree with you that the US has a pretty appalling form of Democracy and has created many problems in the World. The American Way is definitely not the best way.The Thai way is even worse!
Hey stop saying things against my country unless you did some research. Phil poverty levels are dropping fast bcoz of correct economic policies. I can state official Phil, adb and wb stats if you want. If you hate the thai gobt, thats fine but dont malign our country. Stupid a-hole
64 percent in a referendum in which no critical comments on the referendum were not allowed and to the only alternative was prolonged military rules and no elections. That seems to me to be an awfully cynical definition of support.
The more than 6% growth of the Philippines cannot be attributed to any economic policy. As far as I know, no Filipino economist claimed anything for such positive growth. Perhaps the inflow of foreign money can be the cause during the Aquino administration. There were no strictures then. But we see outflows and inflows these days.
Hey … What planet do you live on ?????