研究テーマ
Thai Politics, Foreign Policy and International Relations, Comparative Politics, Politics of Myanmar and Indochinese States, Nationalism, National Security, Asian International Relations, ASEAN Integration, Policy Studies, Public and Social Policy. Currently, I am working on two projects: one is on the political developments in Thailand in post-Bhumibol period by comparing the reign of King Bhumibol (Rama IX) with Rama X, and the other on the political reforms of Myanmar.
研究概要
TOPIC 1:
In the first project, I will be looking at the role of monarchy in politics, investigating the current reign of King Bumibol Adulyadej in order to project the future of the monarchy under the next king. King Bhumibol's flourishing reign had been magical. Royal courtiers, institutions with vested interests in the monarchy and conventional educators embarked on constructing the “neo-royalism”, even when its content remained essentially traditional.The embodiment of the “neo-royalism” rests on three important characteristics; “being sacred, popular and democratic But methods, approaches and conceptualisations behind the process of image generation can be at times paradoxical and muddy. King Bhumibol was sacralised and transformed into Dhammaraja, or god-king,encapsulated within protective walls of lèse-majesté law that forbids insults and defamations against him. Yet, he was a popular Dhammaraja who was down-to-earth and people-centric. Similarly, Bhumibol's portrayal of a democratic king was consistently painted despite the fact that his periodic political interventions had exposed his disdain of democratic governments.The three characteristics serve not only as a measurement for the success of the King, but also as a useful instrument to forecast the future of Thai monarchy after Bhumibol passes from the scene.sacred and popular effectively enhanced the divine power of Bhumibol, therefore levelling up both his charisma, or barami, and his moral authority.It is this moral authority that had in turn augmented his political weights,occasionally exploited to destabilise threatening civilian regimes,Ironically in the name of protecting democracy and maintaining stability.But the formula for a successful reign based on the three characteristics seems to have lately fallen apart at the seams, as Thailand is approaching the end of the Bhumibol era. Palace propaganda based on exceeding glorifications of Bhumibol through national education and mainstream printed and visual media has molded the persona of the King into one rigid embodiment; anything less than this will not be accepted.This poses a great challenge for the next monarch, Crown Prince Vajiralongkorn, the sole heir apparent , who will undoubtedly be unable to follow in the footsteps of his charismatic father.The likely failure to match up the charisma and divinity to the level Bhumibol had long enjoyed represents a key obstacle for Vajiralongkorn. They are non-transferable traits and personal properties.But a greater obstacle lies in the fact that Vajiralongkorn will not be able to fully command politics due to the lack of moral authority as much as the lack of support from the inner circles of the palace.
This study deals with the concept of “neo-royalism”, in a specific context of the twilight of the Bhumibol period, to explicate the current political position of the royal institution.The primary objective is to employ such concept to assess the position of the king-in-waiting and eventually to project the future of the monarchy.The main argument is that the concept of “neo-royalism”, based on the unsurpassed qualities of Bhumibol, relentlessly promoted by royalists, is a dangerous entrapment for the next king , and indeed, for the monarchical institution and its entire network.More, the undemocratic nature of the royal power has increasingly become incompatible with, or even antithetical to, the changing political environment in Thailand.This situation produces a dilemma for the next king.Vajiralongkorn could either insist on consolidating his political power despite his obvious deficits in the three characteristics--and thus an expected failure as well as a possible bold rejection from the public and even among some conservative royalists--or to undergo major reforms of the monarchy , placing it strictly within the border of the constitution in order to save his throne.The recent political initiative of Vajiralongkorn during the political crisis of 2013-2014 seemed to suggest that he might have favoured the reforms, given his limited political capital and capabilities. placing it strictly within the border of the constitution in order to save his throne.The recent political initiative of Vajiralongkorn during the political crisis of 2013-2014 seemed to suggest that he might have favoured the reforms,given his limited political capital and capabilities.placing it strictly within the border of the constitution in order to save his throne.The recent political initiative of Vajiralongkorn during the political crisis of 2013-2014 seemed to suggest that he might have favoured the reforms, given his limited political capital and capabilities.
TOPIC 2:
The Relationship between Thailand and the United States: Thailand is the United States’ oldest ally in Asia. The two countries signed the Treaty of Amity and Commerce in 1836 which served as a foundation for strong bilateral ties. It is evident that the United States’ amicable relations with Siamese kings assisted greatly in strengthening the power of the throne. Bilateral relations were progressively solidified particularly during the Cold War when the two nations cooperated in their attempt to combat the threat of communism, even when Washington openly supported a series of despotic regimes in Thailand against democratic forces. King Bhumibol Adulyadej, Thailand's most powerful and revered monarch, was reinvented into an all-time US protagonist. As Bhumibol strove to maintain his royal political hegemony, the US was ready to lend its support to Bhumibol’s “network monarchy” of which Washington became a kind of member ex officio. Washington invested massively in Bhumibol throughout the Cold War. But when the Cold War was over and the Thai political landscape changed drastically, the United Stated was rooted to the old network of the ailing king.
This study examines the ties between the United States and the authoritative institution of Thailand – the monarchy. The speaker discusses how the United States has willingly become a part of Thailand’s domestic political struggles which pitted the dominant monarchy against democratic institutions. Perceiving the monarchy as the highest institution, Washington put all of its egg in that one basket as a way to defend its interests of power in the kingdom. Hence, when new political alternatives emerged on the Thai political scene, the United States remained reluctant to engage with them for fear that it could joepardise its intimate relations with the monarchy. Additionally, with the rise of China, a question must be asked: What must the United States do to maintain its influence over this old ally in Southeast Asia?