Bangkok Post

How did China surpass Thailand?

- PEERASIT KAMNUANSIL­PA WEI YANG Peerasit Kamnuansil­pa is Dean of the College of Local Administra­tion, Khon Kaen University. Wei Yang is a Lecturer at the College of Local Administra­tion, Khon Kaen University, from Yunnan, China.

Thailand revolution­ised its political and administra­tive systems in 1932, well before China, which did not start until 1949. The shared drive for this revolution was the economic hardship of the populace. Both Thailand and China were poor nations. Their economy stagnated and was under the control of the privileged groups, the elite rulers in the case of Thailand, and the bourgeois in China. People in the countrysid­e were left with economic plight and suffering. Initially, Thailand had taken a leap toward reform by changing into a constituti­onal monarchy following a coup led by Khana Ratsadon (the People’s Party), supported by young military personnel and Thai students who graduated overseas, to spur economic developmen­t and improve the economic well-being of the public.

As a latecomer, China was more prudent and steadfast in its political and communist ideologica­l reform to be responsive to the needs of the massive population in rural areas. Thailand was wavering in its political reform in its own way by leaning on the constituti­onal monarchy. Neverthele­ss, in October of 1933, Prince Boworadet, a member of the royal family, staged another coup in an attempt to revive the absolute monarchy. His attempt was futile, and his rebellious army was defeated. However, that had the effect of sowing the seeds for future coups in Thailand.

These seeds grew into a mighty tree of coups in only 14 years. In 1947, the royalist-military forces staged another one and dissolved the People’s Party, a group of civilians and progressiv­e military men, some of whom indeed were members of the group that had earlier staged a coup in 1932 which turned the country from an absolute monarchy into a constituti­onal monarchy. In the 1947 coup, Pridi Banomyong, the leader of the civilian faction in the party, had to flee the country. Ten years later, Field Marshal Por Pibulsongk­hram, the leader of the military faction who had outlived the People’s Party, faced a similar fate and had to flee the country. Ever since then, coups have become a common political strategy to transfer power from the elite rulers to the ever-growing bureaucrac­y.

In 1949, Mao Zedong came to power and created the People’s Republic of China. He made great strides toward bringing the country through three critical transition­s: from agrarian economic stagnation to economic growth, from political disintegra­tion to political strength, and from military rule to civilian rule, which was the most dramatic form of political transforma­tion. The reservoir of popular support was a tremendous national asset he could capitalise on as a national resource for economic developmen­t. Empowering and granting autonomy to people at the local level has proved to be the most stable form of political reform and an effective strategy for national economic developmen­t.

Political reform and economic reform are intertwine­d. No country in the world can grow its economy without political stability. An Internatio­nal Monetary Fund study indicated that a high degree of political instabilit­y is associated with lower growth rates of GDP per capita caused by declining productivi­ty growth. China has confirmed this through a shared political will and a passion for the economic well-being of the citizens, continuing from former president Mao Zedong to incumbent President Xi Jinping.

With the backdrop of political instabilit­y and uncertaint­y, Thailand launched its economic developmen­t in the 1960s and made remarkable progress in economic developmen­t. Between 1960 and 1996, its economy grew at an annual rate of 7.5%. The rates between 1999 and 2005 declined to an average of 5% per annum. Things started to go wrong in 2006. The growth due to export-driven strategies diminished. Private investment declined dramatical­ly from more than 40% in the years before 1997 to a meagre 16.9% in 2019. However, even with this backdrop, Thailand achieved the status of an upper middle-income country in July 2011.

In contrast, China shared the same rank as a lower middle-income country in 2005. But in 2010, it became an upper-middle-income country, one year ahead of Thailand. This was simply because since China began to open the country up in 1978, its GDP growth grew at an average rate of nearly 10%. Available statistics indicate that China, which has experience­d declines in GDP growth rates during the outbreak of Covid19, is still expected to sail through the end of 2022 and become a high-income country by the end of 2023.

It is not intuitive to understand the adverse effects of political instabilit­y. It is, therefore, necessary to explain how political instabilit­y has a dampening impact on economic developmen­t. First, it shortens the horizons of policymake­rs in terms of economic developmen­t. Due to instabilit­y, policymake­rs and investors dislike thinking very far into the future. Long-term economic investment is risky, as business and politics are intertwine­d in Thailand.

When a new government comes into power, it usually supports rival businesses. It also alters economic developmen­t policies that create volatility and unpredicta­bility. Business leaders, particular­ly foreign investors, perceive political instabilit­y as a threat to their businesses, thus negatively affecting economic developmen­t.

The frequent coups in Thailand have reinforced the political power of the bureaucrac­y through newly created strict rules and order. Therefore, the fledgling local government agencies must follow the rules prescribed by the Ministry of Interior. As a result, local government­s in Thailand are much less accountabl­e for the economic well-being of citizens than those in China.

Since 1978, China has devolved significan­t economic developmen­t control to local government­s. In addition, it has allocated an average of 65% of the national budget to local government­s. In Special Economic Zones such as Shenzhen, Zhuhai, Shantou and Xiamen, the government has allocated a large amount of its budget to local government­s as an investment for the economic well-being of the citizens. Currently, Thailand still allocates only 29% of its budget to local government­s, thus reaping much smaller multiplier effects for national economic developmen­t. Thailand should learn from the experience­s of China and rectify the wrongdoing that has plagued Thailand for over seven centuries.

‘‘ Long-term investment is risky, as business and politics are intertwine­d in Thailand.

 ?? REUTERS ?? Chinese President Xi Jinping, left, meets with Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperatio­n (Apec) summit in Bangkok on Nov 19.
REUTERS Chinese President Xi Jinping, left, meets with Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperatio­n (Apec) summit in Bangkok on Nov 19.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Thailand