EDITORIAL
EDITORIAL Military opts for purge
- Published: 30/04/2009 at 12:00 AM
- Newspaper section: News
In what is seen as the final act, remnants of former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra's "loyalists" who managed to cling on to key positions in the armed forces have been "purged". Several senior officers who were former classmates of Thaksin at the Armed Forces Preparatory School have been abruptly transferred to inactive positions and replaced by men deemed more trustworthy.
The purge should not come as a complete surprise, given the tumultuous week of violent protest by the red shirts during the Songkran festival, when rumours of a possible coup by certain officers to topple the Abhisit government made the rounds.
Whether or not the rumour had any basis, or whether any of Thaksin's loyalists were involved, the latest reshuffle has eliminated any remaining influence the ex-premier may have had in the military.
On the other hand, the move has further consolidated the position of Army Commander-in-Chief General Anupong Paojinda and his protege, General Prayuth Chan-ocha.
As has always been the case with military reshuffles, the top brass saw no need to explain to the public or to the officers involved why they have been transferred, though "suitability" has occasionally been cited as a reason. In this case, it is understood that the fact these officers were former classmates of Thaksin, or that they were closely connected with him, was enough to warrant their transfers.
Even if these officers are not likely to protest against their transfers - in line with the tradition that good soldiers must follow orders from their superiors without question - the way military reshuffles, including this latest one, have been handled is anything but fair and transparent.
It goes against the performance-based merit system which should be the standard in determining whether an officer deserves to be promoted or demoted. Apparently, the military top brass based their judgement on the suspicion that Thaksin's former Class 10 mates were more loyal to him than to the military establishment and thus could not be trusted.
The number of Thaksin loyalists affected may represent only a fraction of the total number of officers being shuffled this time, but their questionable treatment will by no means be conducive to healing the wounds of the present political and social polarity nor pave the way for national reconciliation. These officers are likely to be left deeply embittered, demoralised and angry as their career path has suddenly come to an abrupt end.
Like the military, the civil service too has always been subject to meddling by politicians, to the extent that quite often the performance-based merit system is discarded in favour of nepotism and political expedience. This is clearly evident whenever there is a change of government. Officials from department heads down to provincial governors deemed too close to the previous regime or who were promoted by the previous regime are likely to be axed, unless they switch sides and vow allegiance to their new bosses.
The consequences of nepotism in government bureaucracy are reflected in the poor service rendered to the public and the poor performance of the organisations involved.
As head of the government, Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva should have an explanation regarding the latest military reshuffle, at least for the sake of fairness and national reconciliation, to show that the whole exercise has not simply been a settling of scores against Thaksin and his followers in the military hierarchy.
