Episode #254: A Diplomatic Deadlock
“At least we should make an attempt in our efforts to help solve the issues, because the situation has changed. Three years have passed [and the military] is not as strong as before! So it is more likely that they would like to negotiate.”
Our guest is Kitti Prasirtsuk, a professor of international relations at the Faculty of Political Science from Thammasat University in Bangkok, Thailand. His expertise lies in international relations within the Indo-Pacific region, and ASEAN issues, including its alliance with America and relationship with Thailand.
Kitti begins by reviewing ASEAN's tepid attempt to resolve the crisis through the Five-Point Consensus, and how its ability to enforce its own resolutions and mediate effectively has been hindered by both an absence of a cohesive strategy, and a lack of unity among its member states. Echoing the words of former AHA Executive Director Adelina Kamal, he finds that ASEAN’s attempt at intervention and even humanitarian assistance has been largely ineffective.
Kitti explains Thailand's reluctance to constructively influence the Myanmar military as primarily driven by economic interests. This hesitation is compounded by the uncomfortable reality that Thailand's own previous Prime Minister rose to power through a military coup. For these reasons, he feels they prefer a cautious approach which safeguards their investments while maintaining good military-to-military relations.
Here Kitti reflects on the profound loss of Dr. Surin Pitsuwan, a former Thai diplomat whose recent passing has left a significant void in the region's diplomatic efforts. Dr. Pitsuwan was seen as a beacon of hope for resolving complex conflicts in the region, and Kitti believes that his leadership and experience would have been instrumental in mediating between the conflicting parties in Myanmar, leveraging his credibility and influence to foster dialogue and cooperation. “We do not have that kind of caliber of a person in our Thai political community [now]," he adds sadly.
Last year, Thailand's Foreign Minister Don Pramudwinai, after claiming he had secretly met with Aung San Suu Kyi in prison on a recent visit to Myanmar, initiated a meeting in Pattaya, inviting Myanmar's military junta and other factions to discuss the crisis. This move was seen as controversial because it was conducted without prior consultation with ASEAN, leading to frustration among member states. The meeting was also criticized for potentially legitimizing the military junta and for its inability to make substantial progress due to the Thai government's interim status at the time. Kitti notes how the Pattaya meeting echoed Thailand’s attempts to mediate the Cambodian conflict in the 1980s, but this similar approach failed to achieve meaningful resolution for Myanmar's current conflict. “[Don Pramudwinai] is a businessman, and he’s very fast moving,” he says. “I think he would like to do that again, but he did not make good progress in the Myanmar crisis.”
Still, Kitti believes that a democratic victory in Myanmar would also bring significant, positive changes for Thailand. “Many people in Thailand would be heartened [if] they managed to win out over the tyranny of that dictatorial regime,” he says. Kitti believes that most Thais would be concerned about the potential spillover of instability across the border. However, he adds, “It doesn't mean that we prefer stability at all cost,” adding that a democratic Myanmar could well lead to stronger regional cooperation and stability, benefiting ASEAN as a whole.
Kitti next addresses the controversial humanitarian corridor for food and medical aid that was opened on the Thai border. Critics argued that working with the Myanmar Red Cross Society, which is closely connected to the military, might not ensure that aid reached those most in need, particularly in areas controlled by ethnic minority groups. The corridor's effectiveness was further hindered when Thailand’s Foreign Minister and his advisor, instrumental in organizing the initiative, resigned. The new foreign ministry team is now evaluating how to best reopen the corridor and improve aid distribution.
In light of these challenges, Kitti suggests a pivot towards collaborating more directly with NGOs to ensure that aid reaches the intended recipients. This approach, advocated by Shade in a recent podcast episode, would bypass the Myanmar military's control and provide a more direct and efficient means of delivering humanitarian assistance. However, he acknowledges that this strategy might well provoke the military and require delicate, diplomatic negotiations.
Previous podcast guests have asserted that the military has already shown that it should have no future in the country’s development. As Matthew Arnold previously declared on this platform, “What is perfectly clear in terms of what people want, is a different country that is not burdened by a genocidal military.” However, while Kitti understands the widespread skepticism and mistrust of the military—a reputation it has earned through its history of oppression and broken agreements—he believes that any realistic resolution to the conflict cannot completely exclude it. “In reality we cannot ignore the military junta because they still hold some grip or power in the central area,” he says. “These [warring factions] need to somehow reconcile for the sake of the people.” He suggests that maybe it's too idealistic to hope for change, yet at the same time, that the situation is too unbearable not to try. Kitti does emphasize that any engagement with the military must be backed by stringent accountability measures and oversight, to ensure transparency and genuine commitment by all sides to any agreements reached.
This connects to the significant role that Kitti thinks China could play in the Myanmar crisis, due to its considerable influence over the military junta as well as some opposition groups. Kitti explains that China's primary interest lies in maintaining stability, which they achieve by leveraging their relationships with both the military government and opposition forces. This strategy is aimed at eradicating illegal businesses along their border, but it also illustrates the reality that their influence will be pivotal in any negotiation efforts. “The pressure from China to the military government is very important. I have a hope in China as a decisive factor, even more than the United States and India,” he says.
Kitti believes the one thing the international community absolutely cannot do is to simply stand by, and that the world must try to find a solution. He directs this admonition towards the world’s major powers in particular. “I just think that Thailand, ASEAN, and the major powers should discuss together how to engage with Myanmar as a whole. Unless we have a hope, we have nothing, and we let the people suffer. It’s not good.”