Thai geopolitical balancing compromised
Thailand is demonstrably famous for its foreign policy balancing. From the era of imperialism and two World Wars through the Cold War, Thailand’s gifted geography and diplomatic finesse and skill shepherded the country’s sovereignty and independence through the thick and thin of geopolitical headwinds. Whatever happens out there, the Thais (and their Siamese forebears) had a way to diplomatically navigate and geopolitically balance their national interests to stay out of harm’s way.
But centuries of diplomatic ingenuity and geographic luck can be undermined by quick and careless acts of injudicious leadership. In a recent interview with Time magazine, Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha let it be known that “China is the number one partner of Thailand”. Gen Prayut prefaced his view by pointing out that “the friendship between Thailand and China has existed over thousands of years, and with the US for around 200 years”.
This statement may have provided music to many ears in Beijing but it is not in Thailand’s best interests. Even if China is indeed Thailand’s number one among the major powers, the prime minister should not have said it. Had he been in Beijing or elsewhere in private conversation with Chinese leaders, it could have been more understandable and forgiven. But Gen Prayut should not have volunteered this statement to an international magazine at Government House and cede top partnership in Thailand’s foreign relations to any one country.
Moreover, even if it is true that China is Thailand’s number one partner, it would not be that way forever. Today China could be Thailand’s top partner, but tomorrow it could be different. Committing to China the way Gen Prayut did was imprudent and inadvisable. Geopolitics is always fluid and ultimately unpredictable. Thailand’s proven success derives from pragmatism, varying between omnidirectional and committal approaches with shades in between depending on prevailing circumstances.
Thailand never chose sides unless it really had to. In the Cold War, it bit the bullet and went with the US-led alliance to thwart communist expansionism. In World War II, it joined both the Axis and Allied sides in a classic hedge that allowed the country to re-emerge relatively unscathed. Under European imperialism, it relied on geography and diplomacy to cede territory in exchange for continued independence.
Geopolitical headwinds are now blowing again. The US under President Donald Trump has been at loggerheads with China over trade and other contentious issues, particularly the Chinese construction and weaponisation of artificial islands in the South China Sea. Bilateral trade friction between the US and China is likely to get much worse in view of Mr Trump’s zero-sum approach and emphasis on reciprocity. And the Chinese are unlikely to budge without a face-off.
In short, the Trump administration has a point about China’s exploitation of the liberal international trade regime under the World Trade Organisation while protecting its internal market from foreign competition and keeping its body politic closed and authoritarian. But the US response to impose tariffs and protectionist measures of its own is misguided and dangerous to all concerned.
Viewed in this way, what Gen Prayut said about China being Thailand’s number one is damaging. Thailand should be waiting and seeing, constantly recalibrating and reaching out to all in public and private. In this round of geopolitical tensions, Thailand is a US treaty ally but also intimate friend of China with ever closer ties.
The idea is not to have to choose between the US and China. But Gen Prayut has done just that when nobody asked him to do so. This will raise alarm bells among Thailand’s other friends and partners, not least Japan, India, and the Republic of China (Taiwan). It is also likely to be noticed by Thailand’s fellow Asean members who have to grapple with China’s growing regional belligerence. Cambodia is the only country in this region that is explicitly “all-in” on China. It is not in Thailand’s national interest to follow in Cambodia’s footsteps.
Perhaps Gen Prayut meant that China is Thailand’s number one “economic” partner. This would make more sense but remains questionable. According to a cross section of internationally published trade data, China and the US are about even as destinations for Thai exports in terms of value, followed closely by the European Union and Japan. But China is the largest source of Thai imports, trailed by Japan, the EU and the US. Accordingly, Thailand registers its largest trade deficit of more than $15 billion with China but enjoys an $11-billion surplus with the US. On trade, China is Thailand’s top partner only relative terms. The other markets are individually crucial and collectively indispensable for Thailand.
Perhaps the implicit explanation behind Gen Prayut’s hasty judgement at the country’s expense is the nature of his government. As the Prayut government seized power to hold office over the past four years, China has been the only superpower friend that recognised and lent Thailand’s military regime a semblance of international legitimacy.
But on this score, the other major players are catching up. Japan has engaged with the Prayut government all along, whereas the EU normalised relations with Thailand last December, just two months after Mr Trump officially received Gen Prayut at the White House. Because the other major powers no longer alienate and isolate Thailand, there is no rationale for Gen Prayut to hand over forefront position to China. The prime minister and his cohorts may feel like they owe China but Thailand does not.
What Gen Prayut said about China being Thailand’s number one is damaging.