Border strife spurs faith in Boonsin
Deputy Defence Minister Gen Nattaphon Narkphanit said he is open to the possibility; however, he said the issue must be weighed carefully to avoid damaging morale regarding career progression within army ranks.
For weeks on end, ahead of his retirement in September, Lt Gen Boonsin, widely known by his nickname "Big Kung", was seen supporting troops and reported to be laying down tactics and strategies for his subordinates.
Supporters of the extension of his term argue that his battlefield experience and familiarity with the situation are vital to ensuring stability, especially during this delicate period.
Speaking on Monday, Gen Nattaphon said Lt Gen Boonsin and his deputies had carried out their duties with full dedication and capability during the fighting, and that any decision would have to take into account the broader needs of the army.
Observers, including Assoc Prof Wanwichit Boonprong, a political scientist at Rangsit University, have warned against the creation of a "personality-based" rather than "system-based" military culture.
Assoc Prof Wanwichit said extending Lt Gen Boonsin's term would be seen as a break in military tradition and might create internal tensions.
An extension might be used to fuel internal disputes, undermine the army's cohesion, and politicise the command structure, said the academic.
Concerns about the competence of the next commander after Lt Gen Boonsin are unfounded, he said.
There are experienced officers with a deep familiarity with the area, although they might operate with different styles.
On the other hand, security analyst Panitan Wattanayagorn took a more conciliatory view, saying that a short-term extension, ideally no more than six months, could ensure continuity throughout upcoming Thai–Cambodian border negotiations and General Border Committee talks.
"In principle, you should not change horses midstream," he said.
"If no serious mistakes have been made, there is no compelling reason to replace a commander at such a critical juncture."
Mr Panitan suggested extending Lt Gen Boonsin's service for a limited period to see through key talks or appointing a successor immediately while retaining him as a special adviser with meaningful responsibilities.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bangkok Post
3 hours ago
- Bangkok Post
Neda halts all new projects in Cambodia
Following the deadly Thailand-Cambodia border skirmishes, the Neighbouring Countries Economic Development Cooperation Agency (Neda), a public organisation under the Finance Ministry, has halted all new aid investment projects in Cambodia. According to a source from Neda who requested anonymity, no ongoing financial aid projects in Cambodia are currently under construction. One new project that has investment plans will be postponed following the clashes, the source said. This latest investment project offered assistance to the Cambodian government to construct Road R67, and was in the contractor selection process prior to the postponement. This route connects Si Sa Ket province in Thailand with Siem Reap in Cambodia. Although the project has already been approved, Neda paused funding until the situation improves. Road R67 is considered a key route in Cambodia, with the project upgrading the road surface to asphalt concrete and reinforced concrete over a distance of 134 kilometres, from Siem Reap to Anlong Veng and Choam/Sa Ngam in Cambodia. The total project value is 983 million baht. Neda offered a low interest rate of 1.5% to the Cambodian government and a repayment period of 25 years, including a seven-year grace period. The construction period was set at 24 months. The loan conditions require the use of Thai contractors and at least 50% of the contract value must be spent on Thai goods and services. As for other new financial aid projects for Cambodia -- such as the Road R68 project that would connect Surin province with Siem Reap -- a feasibility study was completed. However, Neda will not approve the project at this time, the source said. "All new projects are on hold. Nothing will be added, except for existing contracts we are following through on," said a senior-ranking source at Neda, adding that given the sentiment, even if projects were approved no Thai contractor would dare enter Cambodia to carry them out. The source said over the past two years Neda has focused financial aid efforts in Cambodia on 3-4 projects, as Laos faces high levels of public debt, leaving it unprepared for further investment. Meanwhile, Myanmar continues to struggle with internal conflict. For projects to proceed in Myanmar, Neda must wait for an election recognised by Asean, said the source. The country may hold an election this year or next. The source said the previous conflict between Thailand and Cambodia in 2011 over the Preah Vihear Temple caused Neda to suspend aid to Cambodia for 5-6 years. Neda has provided low-interest loans totalling 2.92 billion baht to Cambodia, accounting for 12% of Neda's total aid to neighbouring countries.
Bangkok Post
4 hours ago
- Bangkok Post
Govt issues fake temple news alert
The government has warned against circulating false information online after a claim was made that the Fine Arts Department has authorised the demolition of ancient temples or historical sites near the Thai-Cambodian border for military purposes. Deputy government spokesman Anukool Pruksanusak said the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society has found that this false piece of information has gained public interest over the past week. The ministry also found a report saying a Cambodian spy, who possessed drones and electronic devices for targeting the Royal Thai Air Force's Wing 5 base, had been arrested in Chanthaburi province. This claim was also confirmed to be false. Mr Anukool emphasised that the Fine Arts Department has never supported or approved the destruction of any heritage site for military purposes or any other reason. "Historical sites are invaluable cultural heritage, not just for Thailand but for all of humanity," said the spokesman. "Even if restoration is technically possible, it can never truly replace the historical, artistic and spiritual value of the original structures." Mr Anukool stressed that any intentional destruction of such sites for whatever reason would be considered disrespectful to the nation and violate international conservation standards. "Allowing such historical sites to be demolished would affect the country's image and credibility on the global stage," he added.
Bangkok Post
5 hours ago
- Bangkok Post
Asean's balancing act gains momentum
In the middle of the Covid-19 crisis, a tentative idea was raised at the Chongqing virtual meeting between Asean-China foreign ministers in June 2021, for Asean Plus Two. The two referred to the US and China. The bloc's leaders were quite worried that US-China rivalry, especially during the pandemic, would result in catastrophic outcomes for the regional economy and its integration. Asean should therefore do its bit by hosting, facilitating dialogue and cooperation between the two superpowers to ensure peaceful coexistence. The idea did not fly. One reason was simply that the bigger powers did not need the bloc's handling. Both Washington and Beijing also have their bilateral channels. However, what has taken place in Kuala Lumpur over the week, when the Thai-Cambodian ceasefire was concluded, indicates that Asean has built up its convening power to have the US and China observe the Asean way of resolving intra-Asean challenges. Their presence is significant for many reasons. First, both the US and China want to see a stable and prosperous region, which is good for their respective economies. Second, both powers have different approaches towards regional issues. The US is more assertive in tackling such issues impacting its global strategy, while China has been cautious and prefers regional countries to solve their own problems, supporting regional efforts. In Kuala Lumpur, the current Asean chair can collaborate with the US and China to create an enduring environment conducive to easing tensions and promoting friendliness. In short, now that Asean has brought the two superpowers to the same table, more accomplishments could follow. Previously, US-China rivalry has often overshadowed Asean meetings. Yet this time, as an isolated event, their representatives stayed in the room and listened, taking in what the Asean leadership was proposing. Could the Kuala Lumpur meeting serve as a follow-up to the Chongqing idea? Under the "Asean Plus Two" format, proposed by Thailand, the chair was meant to facilitate the dialogue between the two superpowers. At the 47th Asean summit, with President Donald Trump in attendance, other leaders might want to engage him. Mr Trump's transactional approaches could be useful for the bloc. Indeed, if this idea is construed at the right time, it could reshape the way Southeast Asia manages external influence and do so on its own terms. Asean centrality is often mentioned in the joint communiques and official speeches. Now, Asean has the opportunity to lead and to act. Meanwhile, Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim is currently the man of the hour. He knows how to engage both superpowers and keep the bloc in charge. By inviting them to observe and supporting Asean initiatives, the chair was able to use their presence to ease tension and reduce anxieties. Most importantly, all parties kept face. Asean showed that the bloc does not have to choose sides to take the lead. In a more divided world, Asean must find new ways to engage both superpowers without losing its voice. As Professor Amitav Acharya of the American University writes in his latest book, The Once and Future World Order: Why Global Civilization Will Survive the Decline of the West, global power is no longer dominated by the West. The world is moving towards what he calls a "global multiplex" -- a system where power is shared and no single country sets the rules. This new order opens space for regions like Asean to take a more active role. But to do so, the bloc must be malleable. The Asean Plus Two model fits the current circumstances as it is another Asean-led format that brings in the US and China when needed, especially when the region confronts a crisis that needs external engagement, but with regional authority. Other Asean-led mechanisms remain useful, including the East Asia Summit, the Asean Regional Forum and ADMM, a platform for Asean and its eight dialogue partners: Australia, China, India, Japan, New Zealand, the Republic of Korea, Russia and the United States (collectively referred to as the "plus countries"). In essence, the Asean-plus formula will give Asean additional instruments to deal with crises in the unpredictable world. Some may argue that the ceasefire meeting was just a one-off. Asean has a limited role. Thailand and Cambodia will use their existing bilateral frameworks to resolve long-standing issues. But throughout Asean's history, many lasting formats or policies began informally. The East Asia Summit, for example, grew from earlier Asean Plus Three meetings to Plus Five. It could gain more members in the future. The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), which started out as the bloc's free trade agreement with key dialogue partners. What matters is political momentum and leadership. Unmistakably, the Asean chair has lots of leeway. If the ceasefire format is used again to deal with future disputes or crises, it could become a valuable diplomatic tool for the region. It also aligns with the "future-ready" call for Asean as a true game changer. The Philippines is the next Asean chair; this model offers a useful tool to engage the two superpowers. If Manila wants to reinforce Asean centrality, it should look closely at what Malaysia has just achieved. The Philippines' red herrings are the situation surrounding the South China Sea dispute. That said, the new Asean chair needs to be creative. Manila will also need to balance its longstanding ties with both China and the US. If done correctly, an Asean Plus Two format could help it manage this balancing act. In a global multiplex world, Asean must be proactive in shaping the regional environment. The plus two framework may not be an official policy yet, but it could be practical. The upcoming chair, the Philippines, can take the idea to the next level and make it part of the bloc's diplomatic future.
