Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T22:58:30.307Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

After the Fall: Prospects for Political and Institutional Reform in Post‐Crisis Thailand and the Philippines

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2014

Paul Hutchcroft
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Since the late-1980s, efforts to consolidate democracy in Thailand and the Philippines have been accompanied by marked contrasts both in levels of developmental success and degrees of subsequent economic decline. In Thailand, extraordinary rates of growth in the decade prior to 1997 were followed by dramatic contraction; in the Philippines, the more modest and short-lived gains of the mid-1990s have been followed by economic standstill but not cataclysmic crash. Despite the major differences in the political economic foundations and economic performance of these two economies, Thailand and the Philippines currently face many common challenges of supplementing earlier neoliberal economic reform with the more daunting tasks of political and institutional reform. In particular, this brief and synoptic analysis will argue, both confront the need to enhance the quality of their democracies and the capacity of key bureaucratic agencies.

Type
Articles
Information
Government and Opposition , Volume 34 , Issue 4 , October 1999 , pp. 473 - 497
Copyright
Copyright © Government and Opposition Ltd 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Weber, Max, Economy and Society, Berkeley and Los A ngeles, University of California Press, 1978, p. 1041 Google Scholar; Hutchcroft, Paul D., Booty Capitalism: The Politics of Banking in the Philippines, Ithaca, Cornell University Press, 1998, pp. 18–22 Google Scholar, 45–64 (matrix at p. 20); Riggs, Fred W., Thailand: The Modernization of a Bureaucratic Polity, Honolulu, East-West Center Press, 1966, pp. 250–1Google Scholar. The term ‘bureaucratic’ capitalism is meant to correspond with Riggs’s widely used term, ‘bureaucratic polity’, but neither category has any resemblance to Weber’s notions of how modern bureaucracy or modern capitalism should operate.

2 McVey, Ruth, “The Materialization of the Southeast Asian Entrepreneur’, in McVey (ed.), Southeast Asian Capitalists, Ithaca, Cornell Southeast Asia Program, 1992, pp. 22–4, 26 Google Scholar.

3 Laothamatas, Anek, ‘From Clientelism to Partnership: Business-Government Relations in Thailand’, in Maclntyre, Andrew (ed.), Business and Government in Industrialising Asia, Sydney, Allen & Unwin, 1994, pp. 199–200 Google Scholar; Doner, Richard F. and Ramsay, Ansil, ‘Competitive Clientelism and Economic Governance: The Case of Thailand’, in Maxfield, Sylvia and Ross Schneider, Ben (eds), Business and the State in Developing Countries, Ithaca, Cornell University Press, 1997, p. 248.Google Scholar

4 Anderson, Ben, ‘Withdrawal Symptoms: Social and Cultural Aspects of the October 6 Coup’, Bulletin of Concerned Asian Scholars, 9: 3 (1997), pp. 13–30.Google Scholar

5 Phongpaichit, Pasuk and Baker, Chris, Thailand: Economy and Politics, Kuala Lumpur, Oxford University Press, 1995, p. 342 Google Scholar; Doner, Richard F. and Laothamatas, Anek, ‘Thailand: Economic and Political Gradualism’, in Haggard, Stephan and Webb, Steven B. (eds), Voting for Reform: Democracy, Political Liberalization, and Economic Adjustment, New York, Oxford University Press, 1994, pp. 42–9Google Scholar, 411, 443.

6 Pasuk and Baker, Thailand, p. 342–44 (quotation at p. 342); Laothamatas, Anek, ‘A Tale of Two Democracies: Conflicting Perceptions of Elections and Democracy in Thailand’, in Taylor, R. H. (ed.), The Politics of Elections in Southeast Asia, New York, Cambridge University Press, 1996, pp. 211–12Google Scholar; Anderson, Benedict, ‘Murder and Progress in Modern Siam’, in Spectre of Comparisons: Nationalism, Southeast Asia, and the World, London, Verso, 1998, pp. 182–4Google Scholar; Laothamatas, ‘Clientelism to Partnership’, p. 204.

7 Pasuk and Baker, Thailand, quotation at p. 345; Anderson, ‘Murder and Progress’, pp. 180–1, 188 (quotation at p. 188).

8 Pasuk and Baker, Thailand, p. 337; Anderson, ‘Murder and Progress’, p. 184; Ockey, James, ‘Political Parties, Factions, and Corruption in Thailand’, Modern Asian Studies, 28: 2 (1990), pp. 251–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

9 Pasuk and Baker, Thailand, pp. 345–61, quotation at p. 349; Doner and Ramsay, ‘Competitive Clientelism’, pp. 268, 276; Laothamatas, ‘Two Democracies’, pp. 217–18.

10 Laothamatas, ‘Two Democracies’, p. 221; Ammar Siamwalla, ‘Why Are We in this Mess?’, Bangkok Post, 12 November 1997, pp. 6–7.

11 See e.g.: Ockey, ‘Political Parties’; Anderson, ‘Murder and Progress’; Pasuk and Baker, Thailand; and Sidel, John T., ‘Siam and Its Twin? Democratization and Bossism in Contemporary Thailand and the Philippines’, IDS Bulletin, 27: 2 (1996), pp. 56–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

12 See Doner, Richard F. and Ramsay, Ansil, ‘Thailand: From Economic Miracle to Economic Crisis’, in Jackson, Karl D. (ed.), Asian Contagion: The Causes and Consequences of a Financial Crisis, Boulder, Colo., Westview, 1999, pp. 171–207 Google Scholar; and Ammar, ‘Why Are We In This Mess?’

13 World Bank, The Philippines: An Opening for Sustained Growth, Report No. 11061-PH, Washington, DC, World Bank, 1993, i, 1; De Dios, Emmanuel S., ‘A Political Economy of Philippine Policy-making’, in Langford, John W. and Lorne Brownsey, K. (eds), Economic Policy-Making in the Asia-Pacific Region, Halifax, Nova Scotia, The Institute for Research on Public Policy, 1990, pp. 109–47Google Scholar; Hutchcroft, Paul D., ‘Oligarchs and Cronies in the Philippine State: The Politics of Patrimonial Plunder’, World Politics, 32: 3 (1991), pp. 414–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Manila Chronicle, 2 June 1990.

14 For more comprehensive analysis of the motivations behind the economic reform effort, as well as the centrality of a military perspective, see Hutchcroft, Booty Capitalism, pp. 242–6. On the content of the reforms and the ‘advantages of lower elevation’, see Hutchcroft, Paul D., ‘Neither Dynamo Nor Domino: Reforms and Crises in the Philippine Political Economy,’ in Pempel, T. J. (ed.), The Politics of the Asian Economic Crisis, Ithaca, Cornell University Press Google Scholar, 1999.

15 Joel Rocamora, ‘The Political Requirements of Economic Reform’, Issues and Letters, 4 (October 1995), pp. 1–4; Hutchcroft, Paul D., ‘Sustaining Economic and Political Reform: The Challenges Ahead’, in Timberman, David G. (ed.), The Philippines: New Directions in Domestic Policy and Foreign Relations, New York, The Asia Society, 1998, pp. 38–9Google Scholar.

16 Jose T. Almonte, ‘Building State Capacity for Reform’, a speech to the Philippine Economic Society, Metro Manila, 9 February 1996.

17 Lipton, Michael, ‘Market, Redistributive and Proto-Reform: Can Liberalization Help the Poor?’, Asian Development Review, 13: 1 (1995), pp. 1–35 Google Scholar, at 1–3.

18 In other contexts, the term ‘political reform’ may be used to denote the promotion of political stability or the installation and consolidation of democratic institutions.

19 Polanyi, Karl, The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time, Boston, Mass., Beacon Press, 1944, p. 139 Google Scholar; Weber, op. cit., pp. 224, 1095.

20 On various problems still to be addressed in economic reform efforts, see de Dios, Emmanuel S., ‘Philippine Economic Growth: Can It Last?’, in Timberman (ed.), pp. 49–84; Hutchcroft, ‘Neither Dynamo Nor Domino’; and Doner and Ramsay, ‘Thailand’. Gini indices for Thailand and the Philippines are, respectively, 46.2 (1992 data) and 42.9 (1994 data). World Bank, World Development Indicators 1999, http://www.worldbank.org/data/wdi/pdfs/tab2–8.pdf Google Scholar.

21 Bungongkarn, Suchit, ‘Economic Crisis, Political Reform and Democratic Consolidation in Thailand’, unpublished manuscript, 1999 Google Scholar; Maisrikrod, Surin, Thailand’s Two General Elections in 1992: Democracy Sustained, Singapore, Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 1992, pp. 35–6Google Scholar.

22 Clark D. Neher, ‘Thailand’s Politics as Usual’, Current History (December 1995), p. 426; Suchit, ‘Economic Crisis’, Far Eastern Economic Review (hereafter FEER), 18 September 1997, p. 15; FEER, 20 November 1997, p. 28; and FEER, 4 September 1997, p. 15. For analysis of major social forces in contemporary Thailand, see Phongpaichit, Pasuk and Baker, Chris, ‘Power in Transition: Thailand in the 1990s’, in Hewison, Kevin (ed.), Political Change in Thailand, London, Routledge, 1997, pp. 21–31 Google Scholar.

23 Suchit, ‘Economic Crisis’; similar analysis is found in FEER, 18 September 1997, p. 15.

24 FEER, 15 April 1998, pp. 26, 28; Doner and Ramsay, ‘Thailand’, pp. 196–8; FEER, 12 November 1998, p. 24.

25 FEER, 21 May 1998, pp. 62–3 and 3 June 1999, pp. 44–5; Doner and Ramsay, ‘Thailand’; Suchit, ‘Economic Crisis’.

26 On the limitations of Ramos’s ‘social reform agenda’, see Solita Collas-Monsod, ‘The War Against Poverty: A Status Report’, in Timberman (ed.), p. 98; and Edmund Martinez, ‘Fidel Ramos’s Unfinished Business’, Politik, 2 (February 1996), pp. 39–40. Thanks to the crisis, average Philippine incomes are now back to levels prevailing in 1982. Emmanuel S. de Dios, ‘Crisis Without Consequence, Recovery Without Reform’, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 25–26 August 1999.

27 Both Thai and Philippine parties are notably lacking in cohesion, but as David Würfel points out, parliamentary government ‘forces parties to negotiate with each other to form cabinets’ and thus may encourage more party organization in Thailand than in the Philippines. Würfel, , ‘Convergence and Divergence’, Philippine Journal of Political Science, 20: 43 (1999), p. 34.Google Scholar

28 Joel Rocamora, ‘Dodging the Authoritarian Temptation’, Politik, (November 1995), p. 42; New York Times, 19 September 1997.

29 Fernando T. Aldaba, ‘Erapeconomics: The Feasibility of a Pro-Market and Pro-Poor Strategy’, Politik, pp. 14–17. Quite incredibly, Estrada’s National Anti-Poverty Commission has decided to target its efforts toward the poorest 100 families in each province, and thus assist only 7,800 families out of the 4.5 million poor families in the country. Philippine Daily Inquirer, 14 July 1999.

30 As Wurfel exclaims (and de Dios concurs), ‘old-style politics have not only survived a crisis, but have reappeared with new vigor’. Wurfel, ‘Convergence and Divergence’, p. 29; de Dios, ‘Crisis Without Consequence’. See also FEER, 12 August 1999, pp. 38–40; Asian Wall Street Journal, 24 September 1998.

31 Philippine Daily Inquirer, 21 August 1999; New York Times, 21 August 1999. The rally also protested about cronyism and press harassment.

32 Joel Rocamora, ‘Cha Cha is Not a Two Step Dance’, Institute for Popular Democracy, 16 August 1999. Analysis of various specific types of political reform are beyond the scope of this article, but Rocamora favours parliamentary government and a strong component of proportional representation. An excellent argument in favour of the latter is found in Montinda, Gabriella R., ‘Parties and Accountability in the Philippines’, Journal of Democracy, 10: 1 (01 1999), pp. 126–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

33 The author would like to thank Bruce Cumings, Don Emmerson, Edna Labra Hutchcroft, Bill Liddle, Manuel Montes, john Sidel and anonymous readers for offering valuable comments on, and assistance with, this article. All errors, of course, are his own.