ASEAN in Thailand’s Foreign Policy under the Military Government (2014-2019): Continuity and Change

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Government of the Russian Federation

Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education

NATIONAL RESEARCH UNIVERSITY «HIGHER SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS»

Faculty of World Economy and World Politics

Educational program

International relations: European and Asian studies

MA dissertation

Theme:

ASEAN in Thailand's Foreign Policy under the Military Government (2014-2019): Continuity and Change

thailand's foreign policy

Student of group № МЕА-181

Siriwut Watsapon

Advisor :

Evgeny Kanaev

Reviewer:

Vassily B. Kashin

Мoscow 2020

Table of contents

Introduction

CHAPTER 1: The theoretical framework of the study

1.1 Neoliberalism as the conceptual foundation

1.2 Neoliberalism in the study case and its limitations

CHAPTER 2: ASEAN as a Direction of Thailand's Foreign Policy:

Priorities and Practice.

2.1 The Conceptual Foundation

2.2 The Historical Retrospective: ASEAN in Thailand's Policy before 2014

2.3 The US and China Factors

CHAPTER 3:Thailand's Military Government: New Nuances

3.1 The Conceptual Changes

3.2 Thailand's ASEAN Chairmanship in 2019: Topics and Decisions

3.3 The BRI Factors in Thailand's ASEAN Policy

Conclusion

Bibliography

1

Introduction

After the Cold War, Thailand as one of leading countries in Southeast Asia has collaborated with other countries to create cooperation, peace and implemented policies that turn the battlefield into a trade field by creating economic relations with all parties, such as China, Japan, and the United States. Thailand often implements a neutral policy in world politics to avoid conflict with other countries.

The foreign policy direction of Thailand that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs continuous adheres and carries out foreign affairs in every era, including: (1) Adhering to the rector of the state and state security, including building a correct understanding about Thailand and building confidence to many countries. (2) Maintaining good relations and promoting bilateral and multilateral relations with neighbours and other countries. (3) Promoting the unity and strength of ASEAN, including the preparation and participation in Thailand's innovation in ASEAN and the role and cooperation between ASEAN and many countries. (4) Promoting collaboration with countries that have political cooperation and member countries to support the development of politics and political security in Thailand. (5) Strengthening creative and responsible roles in the international community, such as transnational solutions for regional and global security. (6) Conducting diplomacy for consular services, protection and security of Thai people abroad.

Nevertheless, Thailand's foreign policy had been interrupted when political crisis within the country occurred, there were frequent protests and riots in the capital that affect the stability, order and the image of the country. On 22 May 2014, when the political crisis came to a dead end, the Royal Thai Armed Forces, led by General Prayut Chan-o-cha, Commander of the Royal Thai Army (RTA), seized power from Yinkluck Shinnawatra, prime minister of democratic government, and set up his military government. The military established a junta called the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) to govern the nation. Military also declared martial law and took control of media broadcastings to secure the power from political rivals.

Because of this action, many Western countries start to impose sanctions against the junta, calling for the restoration of democracy and respect for human rights, which made diplomatic relations between Thailand and the West have deteriorated because Thailand considers condemnation of Western countries as an intervention in the internal affairs of state. Thailand's new government want to be accepted internationally by other states. Therefore, they seek for non-western partners such as China and strengthen cooperation in both security and economy and continues its policy focusing on ASEAN cooperation.

Therefore, this work aims to analyze Thailand's foreign policy under the Military Government during 2014-2019 to explain its policy strategy and priority, especially policy in ASEAN and how Thailand as the US ally pivot to strengthen cooperation with China.

The object matter of the study is the ASEAN in Thailand's Foreign Policy and the subject is their continuity and change in their policies from democratic government to military government.

The aim of the study is to gain a deeper understanding of Thailand's foreign policy in ASEAN and determine its place and role in the ASEAN especially Thailand under the military government from 2014-2019.

To achieve this aim, the research has the following three objectives:

1. To gain a better understanding of Thailand's Foreign policy in ASEAN before 2014 and the current time.

2. To analyze Thailand foreign policy under the military government and how it changed and continued from previous governments.

3. To understand China and US factors in Thailand's foreign policy in ASEAN

The chronological framework of the study covers the period of Thailand's foreign policy from the 19^th Century until present briefly, this work will focus mainly after Thailand's military coup in 2014 to 2019 when Thailand became a chairman of ASEAN and host the 35th ASEAN Summit and Related Summits.

The hypothesis of the study is that Thailand as a small country, need to do everything to ensure its security and balance its relations with major powers. Thailand's foreign policy is always flexible and pragmatic and know how to escape from threats. Thailand uses ASEAN in developing its economy and creating cooperations between countries both in the region and outside, Thailand considers itself as a centre of Southeast Asia Mainland and wants its country to become the centre of transportation, economy and various sphere.

The theoretical basis of this study uses the perspective of neoliberalism in the context of international relations, to explain how the state of anarchy in international relations, has shaped Thailand's Foreign policy in need to join international institutions. The study uses the works of neoliberals J. Nye and R. Keohane in explaining international institution and its functions.

Sources of research many sources have been used during the research of this study. The primary sources for the research can be organized as follows:

1. Official document resources include documents and website from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in the Kingdom of Thailand; Association of Southeast Asian Nations; ASEAN Learning Center; ASEAN Regional Forum; Ayeyawady - Chao Phraya - Mekong Economic Cooperation Strategy: ACMECS; The Asian Development Bank; U.S. Embassy & Consulate in Thailand; Department of Trade Negotiation; Ministry of Commerce, Department of Trade Negotiations; Ministry of Tourism and Sports, Department of Tourism; Office of the National Economics and Social Development Council; ASEAN-Thailand Secretariat.

2. News Material. Bangkok Post; The Nation; Post today; Reuters; Time; France24; the diplomat; the101world; Thai PBS World; NationThailand; Info Quest; Thailand Business News

3. Academic resources. Global Politics and Strategy; American Political Science Association; Routledge; Lynne Rienner Publishers; E-IR.info; International Institutions and State Strategies in Europe; Verso; Thammasat University; www.worldscientific.com; The Australian National University; University of Hawai'i Press; Asian Survey; Asian Journal of Political Science; FOCUSED AND QUICK (FAQ); Int' l Business Publications; CRS Report; Openbook; Veridian E-Journal, Silpakorn University;

Academic novelty of the research. The research of this study has created a comprehensive study of Thailand's foreign policy especially in ASEAN. It briefly covered the history of Thailand since the 19^th century until present and shows how external factors has shaped the Thai government in order to determine national interest and shows how Thailand in each period uses ASEAN in driving the integration in the region.

Practical implication. For countries that need cooperate with ASEAN, this research can be used to understand the nature of Thailand's foreign policy, Thailand as a small country, needs to do every way to achieve its national interest in the world politics. This work can also be used in academic courses about international relations in ASEAN as well.



CHAPTER 1: The theoretical framework of the study

1.1 Neoliberalism as the conceptual foundation

Neo-Liberalism is a combination of concepts between dependent liberalism and institutional liberalism, as well as the application of rational choice theory and game theory to apply and create a conceptual framework as well. The most important thing in neo-liberalism theory is the importance of international institutions, with the work of the neoliberal theory being born and starting from the work “Power and Interdependence” by Keohane and Nye, challenging realism theory by creating concepts based on realism assumptions. The Neo-liberal theory believes that although the world is an anarchist state, cooperation is possible and acknowledges that cooperation may be difficult to succeed, but it can happen with the growth of international institutions and the international regime. Robert O. Keohane and Joseph S. Nye, Power and interdependence // Global Politics and Strategy Volume 15, 1973 - Issue 4, p. 158-165.

The principles of neo-liberal theory or institutional liberalism were expanded and complemented by Keohane's work “After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy”(1984), which is considered as a “pin” of establishing the position of the neoliberal theory. This work is considered Keohane's attempt to synthesize neo-realism or structural realism and interdependence theory, therefore, this concept has other names, called Modified Structural Realism or neoliberal institutionalism Robert O. Keohane , Stuctural Realism and Beyond // In: A. D. Finifter, ed. Political Science:The State of the Discipline II. Washington D .C. : American Political Science Association 1993, pp. 506-508., with emphasis on the importance of “international institutions” that have developed the framework continuously since the work “Power and Interdependence” that presents the international organization model of regime change, including continuous works in the 1980s. In this work, Keohane questioned how the international system would develop into a stable component of cooperation in spite of the decline of American power relative to Japan and Europe since 1945. Martin Griffiths, Steven C. Roach and M. Scott Solomon, FIFTY KEY THINKERS IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS // Routledge: New York, 2009,p. 109. The theory of cooperation is based on the functional utility of regimes, which maintain long-term interests and rational interests of the state in the perpetuating cooperation despite shifts in the underlying balance of power. He argues that such regime be set up primarily to deal with the failure of the political market. These regimes will reduce the cost of international interaction by determining the extent of interaction, whether allowed or not, or by combining the interaction through the linkage, allowing the state to collect various agreements and by reducing uncertainty. In summary, the maintenance of institutional cooperation between the states does not depend on the permanent state of the superpowers that are necessary to set regimes in place. Keohane also introduced the functional concepts of institutional cooperation by examining issues such as oil and financial trading. He found that the deterioration of power in the United States was only part of explaining the weakness of the regime. Even before the 1970s, although the United States dominated power, the advanced industrialized Countries have continued to try to integrate the policy with the world political economy and not return to implement beggarthy-neighbor policy as in the 1930s, and international trade has not been sacrificed in favour of rigid blocs in Europe, the Americas and Asia.

Keohane accepted many hypotheses of neo-realism theory, such as the state being an important indicator in the international system of anarchy, but with different perspectives:

First, in the anarchist point of view, although neo-realism and liberalism also believe that there is no exact state hierarchy in the most powerless condition, but neo-realism sees anarchy as all-encompassing, unchanging condition, it is a condition in which humans are dominated by their inability to control policies and guarantee survival, causing fear and driving to power, which is considered the fundamental analysis of realism. In contrast, the neo-liberalism sees anarchy as a vacuum, which is gradually filled by human-made processes and institutions, and by gradually studying the different historical developments. That is why neo-realism theorists focus on the study of military warfare, international trade competition as a confirmation of the unchanging quality of anarchy. While the neo-liberal theory emphasizes that there is no need to make the anarchist state in relation to the occurrence of war, neo-liberalism believes that even if cooperation is difficult in an international anarchist state, it will be easier if “institutions” are the mediators of state cooperation and believe that inter-state cooperation can occur if states adjust their behaviour according to the satisfaction of others.

Second, the liberal theory emphasizes that there are two historical developments in the 20th century that the neo-realism cannot explain world politics Jennifer Sterling-Folker, Making Sense of International Relations Theory// Lynne Rienner Publishers: Boulder 2013, p. 117-118., which is the historical development that is increasingly dependent on various issues as a result of technological and industrial advancements as well as the inaccuracy of realism theory with contemporary international relations in the period of hegemonic stability established by the United States after World War II.

Finally, the neo-realism believes in relative gain, while the neo-liberalism believes in absolute gain. Feina Cai, Absolute and Relative Gains in the Real World // http://www.e-ir.info/2011/04/28/absolute-and-relative-gains-in-the-real-world/ (Date of accesses: 1 March 2020) In other words, neo-realism believes that relative gain is more important than absolute gain by focusing on the interests of comparable advantageous states and not wanting other states to gain more benefits, as can be seen in the relationship between the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War or the issues of Relations between China and the United States today, in which this view is in contrast to the view of neoliberalism that offers absolute gain, with the view that all states, despite receiving unequal interests, but at least all states get interests.



Table: compares the differences between relative and absolute gain

Relative gain	Absolute gain
+ One state gets more benefits at the loss of one state (zero-sum game).	+ States get mutual benefits regardless of how much they receive benefits.
+ One state will increase its power only if it has the advantage over other states.	+ States will increase their power regardless of whether their actions will affect the power of other states.

Keohane sees regime theory having too many limitations to explain his study of conditions under what would make international cooperation successful. Therefore, he expanded the framework of the “institution.” by defining international institutions as “persistent and connected sets of rules (formal and informal) that prescribe behavioural roles, constrain activity, and shape expectations”. Robert O. Keohane, International Institutions: Two Approaches// International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 32, No. 4 (Dec., 1988), p.383. While Christian Reus-Smit explains that international institutions is “a group of rules, regulations and principles that will define the ways of international relations to control each other's behaviour”. Christian Reus-Smit, The Moral Purpose of the State: Cultural, Social Identity,and Institutional Rationality in International Relations// Princeton, NJ: PrincetonUniversity Press, 1999, 12-13 Therefore, the form of an international institution appears to have one of the following forms:

1. Formal intergovernmental or nongovernmental organizations: such as the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).

2. International regimes, which means rules that are institutionalized and agreed by the government of the states on specific issues such as the establishment of an international monetary system or the Bretton Wood system in 1944, the Law of the Sea regime in 1970, including several control agreements between the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War.

3. Conventions, which is an unofficial institutional pattern (like a norm and a long tradition).

Keohane addressed the three important roles of international institutions, which are: first, the opportunity to exchange information and opportunities to negotiate, second, to increase the government's ability to see if other states have complied with common agreements, and third, to help to strengthen expectations regarding international agreements.

From this concept, it can be seen that Keohane created the theory in the context of the Cold War. After the Cold War ended, Keohane and Hoffmann studied how international institutions affected state strategies in Europe, both of them have summarized that the international institution has 6 important functions, which are: Robert O. Keohane and Stanley Hoffmann, After the Cold War: International Institutions and State Strategies in Europe, 1989-1991 // Harvard University Press, 1993, pp. 395-407.

(1) Institutions are resources that have the potential of ambitious government exploitation, so we should expect to see them as a place for the exercise of influence.

(2) If there are conflicts of interest when states seek influence in international institutions, these will constrain bargaining strategies in a way that agreements are facilitated.

(3) International institutions can work as instruments to balance against or replace other institutions.

(4) International institutions will stimulate the government politically in order to signal governments' intentions, provide information and create more predictable policies.

(5) International institutions play a role of helping specify obligation, which directs government actions by proposing templates for policy options.

(6) International institutions can influence not only the interests of the state but also the fundamental preference.

The world in the 21st century has conditions that make cooperation to be easier than cooperation in the past, there are 2 types of the institution, which are formal institutions that are formal, multilateral organizations with clear buildings, concrete organization arrangements, staff and resources for operationsas, can be seen from the United Nations (UN), the World Trade Organization (WTO),the International Monetary Fund (IMF), with various states joining these organizations with the objective of sharing benefits.

Second, informal institutions or the International Regimes, which are abstract forms consisting of clear and unclear principles, mutual norms, rules, and decision-making processes in international relations, the concept of an international regime also has been developed to describe and analyze an overview of collaborative efforts, as well as assumptions and behaviors on international issues.

In short, neoliberalism seeks to present the concept of global governance or cooperation between states and states through institutions between countries, both in abstract and concrete ways.

1.2 Neoliberalism in the study case and its limitations

As Thailand finds itself to be located in the centre of Southeast Asia's mainland and has an important part in international relations, Thailand always seek to cooperate to gain more interests from international institutions such as ASEAN. However, Thailand in the 19th and early 20th, under the condition of anarchy, it was hard for Thailand and any other states to cooperate because of the risks from European empires, in this time Thailand did everything to survive from threats by compromising with every country and balancing its relations with majors powers. Therefore, the objectives of Thailand's foreign policy in this period was to maintain national independence, maintain territorial integrity, maintain national security, which realism applies better in this case.

However, after World War II, Thailand started attempt to implement policies that require more international cooperation, which is considered to be initiated in accordance with the neo-liberal theory, which relies on international organizations to protect national interests. Thailand as a small country saw that after the world war II, there are more and more non-state actors in international activities such as international organizations and transnational corporations, together with the anarchy in the international system in which each country is independent, unrelated, and unequal conditions of power, riches and resources cause countries to compete for survival in each country. Therefore, it is necessary to rely on cooperations and other countries to achieve their objectives.

Thailand joined the United Nations in order to guarantee the safety of the country and maintain peace in the world. At the same time, Neo-liberal ideology also permeated and implemented throughout powerful financial institutions such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). David Harvey, Space of Global Capitalism// London: Verso, 2006: p. 7-68. Neo-liberalism is trying to establish power in the global trade and economic arena, undeniably, the positive impact of this is the global society developed very fast, wealthy and complex as if the whole world would become “The world of consumerism.”. However, there are also negative impacts that occur and explode in different ways, whether it is hardship, class differences, or the gap between the poor and the rich countries. Thailand needs to open itself to the world of capitalism by joining international and financial institutions that mention above. Moreover, Thailand also saw that it is necessary to create its own international institution together with other countries in the region, which resulted in the establishment of ASEAN in nowadays. ЗКС№µм »С­­ТбЎйЗ (Wasan Panyagaew), аКГХ№ФВБгЛБи, КС§¤Бд·ВВШ¤ЛЕС§ГС°ЄТµФ бЕРЎТГѕСІ№ТГРґСєАЩБФАТ¤г№аўµЕШиБ№йТвў§ (Neoliberalism, postmodern Thai society and regional development in the Mekong River Basin) // https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/43670740/wasan_neoliberalism_and_thai_nation_state_final.pdf (Date of accesses: 1 March 2020)

Thailand uses ASEAN to build cooperation in the areas of economy, society, culture, education, agriculture, industry, promotion of peace and stability in the region as well as to play an important role in strengthening international trust in the region, reducing paranoia and helping to create an enabling environment for economic development. ASEAN becomes a place for the exercise of influence for Thailand in playing a leading role in the region, Thailand was a joint leader with Indonesia and traditional ASEAN member countries to solve the Cambodian problem, including successful cooperation in solving Indo-Chinese refugee problems. The Thai Prime Ministers, Chatichai Choonhavan came to power in 1988, he started a new policy of “turning battlefields into trade fields” with neighbouring countries, which helps develop an economy in the region, and Anand Panyarachun also played an important role in driving the ASEAN economic progress by initiating the establishment of the ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA) in 1992. As a result, a trade expansion in the region is increasing in both finished goods and raw materials.

Thailand, together with other member states also use the ASEAN forum to negotiate with countries outside of ASEAN in building more cooperation in various areas such as building infrastructure projects in the region, it shows that international institution is needed to increase the bargaining power among small states.

From neo-liberalism point of views, ASEAN Member States have developed institutions in the form of an international regime in both economy and trade such as the ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA) since 1992, and security, such as the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) since 1994. In terms of economy, this set of rules is in the form of two agreements, namely the Framework Agreement on the Extension of ASEAN Economic Cooperation and the agreement on the Common Effective Preferential Tariff (CEPT) for the ASEAN Free Trade Area. The developed set of rules allows member states to learn and develop methods of implementing an agreement, which in this case is a progressive liberalization that has clear set goals, both binding and voluntary, with the belief that economic cooperation will bring peace and prosperity in the region. At the same time, ASEAN expanded the rest of the region into membership in all 10 Southeast Asian states, as well as developing mechanisms for ASEAN to take on a broader stage from the region such as ARF, ASEAN + 1, ASEAN + 3, and the East Asia Summit (EAS) to draw other states into a cooperative system governed by a set of ASEAN rules, allowing ASEAN to integrate large enough on a wide stage, which is essential to the existence of ASEAN in the globalization, both political - security and economic dimensions. Н№ШКГім ЄСВНСЎЙГаЗЄ (Anusorn Chai-aksorn Vej), НТа«ХВ№ЎСєЎГРєЗ№ЎТГКГйТ§К¶ТєС№: ЁТЎ “»ЇФ­­ТЎГШ§а·ѕП 1967” ¶Ц§ “Ў®єСµГНТа«ХВ№ 2008” (ASEAN and the institutional process: from the "Bangkok Declaration 1967" to the "ASEAN Charter 2008") // Bangkok: Thammasat University, 2013, p.160.

Chapter 2: ASEAN as a Direction of Thailand's Foreign Policy: Priorities and Practice.

2.1 The Conceptual Foundation of Thailand's Foreign Policy

For many scholars, they described Thailand's foreign policy as “Bamboo Swirling in the Wind” or “bamboo diplomacy” because Thailand always values flexibility and pragmatism in its foreign policy. Their foreign policy is always solidly rooted, but flexible enough to bend whichever way the wind blows in order to survive. Throughout history, Thailand is able to mitigate many major security threats by compromising with external powers and switching support from one power to balance another power when it is suited for Thailand's interests. The principle of flexibility enables Thailand to achieve two goals which are: First, Thailand can avoid conflict with a major power; and second, Thailand can maintain the country's sovereignty and security. PONGPHISOOT BUSBARAT, "Bamboo Swirling in the Wind": Thailand's Foreign Policy Imbalance between China and the United States, Contemporary Southeast Asia Vol. 38, No. 2 (August 2016), pp. 233-257

During the colonial period, Thailand at that time was still a country named Siam, and it is the only country in the region that can maintain its independence. By implementing a flexible foreign policy and compromising, Siam could survive the threats from superpowers by developing and modernizing the country, using diplomacy to solve the conflict and dispute with France and Britain than using the radical approach. Siam adopted the political system and values from the West, the King of Siam wanted his people to study in Europe and bring knowledge to develop the country. All these decisions made Siam at that time became the most developing states in Southeast Asia while other countries were still under the control of colonial empires.

During World War I, Thailand joined the allies after the king clearly knew which side would win in this war. The participation of Siam aimed its country to be accepted by Western countries. It also allowed Siam to use excuses to call for amendments to treaties that Siam had disadvantaged with Western countries. It was an important step in restoring sovereignty and freedom of trade and commerce with Western nations like Britain and France, and it aimed to open the way to the abolition of various unfair treaties, especially Bowring Treaty B.J. TERWIEL, THE BOWRING TREATY: IMPERIALISM AND THE INDIGENOUS PERSPECTIVE, THE AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, http://www.siamese-heritage.org/jsspdf/1991/JSS_079_2f_Terwiel_BowringTreaty.pdf (Date of accesses: 7 March 2020) that had existed since the middle of the 19th century, which allowed Western nations to trade freely and there were only three percents of export and import tax ceiling, including setting up a British consulate in Siam and granting extraterritorial rights. After the war, Siam had become a part of the international community as a founding member of the League of Nations in 1919 and successfully terminated treaties with Germany and Austria-Hungary, followed by treaties with the United States in 1920 and with England in 1924 and France in 1925.

In World War 2, Thailand was forced to join the alliance with Japan in order to avoid confrontation as Japan spread its powers throughout the Asia Pacific. At that time, even though the government of Thailand joined the fight against the Allie powers, on the other hand, there were people linked to the Thai government secretly helping the Allied countries named Free Thai Movement. After Japan surrendered, the Free Thai Movement took control of the government of Field Marshal P. Pibulsongkram and immediately issued a declaration stating that Phibun's 1942 declaration of war was unconstitutional and legally void. They opened the way for Seni Pramoj, who had influenced in Thailand - the United States relations because he was a Minister in Thailand's embassy that refused Thailand's government order to declare war with the US. Seni Pramoj became Prime Minister to continue negotiations with the Allies about the status of the country after the war. Daniel Fineman, A Special Relationship: The United States and Military Government in Thailand, 1947-1958, University of Hawai'i Press, 1997,p. 31

https://books.google.co.th/books?id=ALp3JfHefG8C&pg=PA31&lpg=PA31&dq=Seni+Pramoj+influence+with+united+states&source=bl&ots=VHsU_yqaoU&sig=ACfU3U0luX5tHC1FmwnZ3HtfC0I96xaT1w&hl=th&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjt-Zed99joAhXKT30KHeGbAF8Q6AEwB3oECAsQNw#v=onepage&q=Seni%20Pramoj%20influence%20with%20united%20states&f=false The United States, who had decided not to declare war on Thailand since the beginning because Thailand was considered occupied by Japan, helped Thailand not to pay a large sum of war reparations from other allies demanded.

During the Cold War, Thailand recognized communism as a threat to its ideologies, values, traditions and ways of life, especially a threat to its three fundamental institutions: the Nation, the Religion, and the Monarch. Thailand joined the United States in the fight against communism in Korea and Vietnam as well as being a strategic ally of the United States in Southeast Asia. Moreover, Thailand cooperated with other countries, such as Indonesia, The Philippines, Malaysia, and Singapore in establishing the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in 1967. This association aimed to bring political and economic cooperation to the region, excluding security and military affairs from its agenda.

The situation of the world had changed when the two major communist camps between the People's Republic of China and the Soviet Union had been violently conflicting. A superpower country like the United States had changed its foreign policy and turned to be friendly with the Chinese government, causing Thailand to have to adjust the policy and turn to friendship with the Chinese government as well.

It can be seen that from the past until the end of World War 2, the implementation of Thailand's foreign policy reflects the policy adjustment to be in line with the changing environment and with important markers to maintain security and the survival of the country. While in the Cold War era, Thailand, as a small country in Southeast Asia, could not escape the situation as mentioned earlier. It was coupled with Thai politics under the authoritarian regime that made national leaders, military leaders and the military became an important player in defining national interests and threats of the country. They could not let the civilian government that was weak to run the country under these conditions. The policy formulation to maintain stability at that time was mainly in the hands of the prime minister and the military, with leader deciding to be close allies to major powers in order to guarantee Thailand's security, this means that the foreign policy of Thailand must inevitably be consistent with the policy of the major powers. Therefore, Thailand's foreign policy tended to be in the same direction as the United States. However, when the US decided to reduce its role in Southeast Asia, it was a significant turning point for the formulation and implementation of foreign policy. Thailand decided to balance the relations between superpower states such as China to ensure its security and protect itself from the Vietnamese threat. The Thai government had changed the direction of major foreign policy by reviving and strengthening relations with China, beginning with the abolition of the Prohibition of Trade with China since 1958 and established formal relations in 1975. Thailand also signalled support for Chinese membership of the UN as well as confirming its position against the “two-China policy”. Kim, Shee Poon, "The Politics of Thailand's Trade Relations with the People's Republic of China,"// Asian Survey 21, no. 3 1981, p. 315.

In the late Cold War, when the tension between the superpowers with different political ideologies began to decline. Security was no longer the only issue in Thailand as a national interest, causing foreign policymakers to pay more attention to economic benefits, especially trade and investment. Thailand needed resources from neighbouring countries which had subsequently become a factor in the formulation and implementation of foreign policy in Thailand. The relationship between Thailand and countries with different political ideologies started to develop considerably, especially the change of Thailand's comprehensive national interests to became peacefully with neighbouring countries even if they have different political ideologies.

When the new government under General Chatichai Choonhavan came to power in 1988, he started a new policy of “turning battlefields into trade fields” significantly eased hostilities in Southeast Asia. It became the conceptual foundation of Thailand's Foreign Policy in ASEAN countries until today. Due to the political instability of neighbouring countries, especially Cambodia, which has internal political problems as well as other countries in the Indochina Peninsula, which had been affected by the ongoing cold war, causing the atmosphere in the region to be unfavourable for investment. The economic transactions of foreign investors were not easy, and it also affected Thailand as a country in the same region which made Thailand to seek a compromise. The so-called “Change the battlefield into a trade field” means sending diplomatic signals to conflicting countries, to make them ignoring domestic security and turning to economic cooperation for mutual benefits for the region.

Examples of such policies include negotiations between the four Cambodian parties to end the fighting, it started by inviting Hun Sen's side to negotiate peace with King Norodom Sihanouk at Ban Phitsanulok in which General Chatichai witnessed the signing of the joint record between Hun Zen and King Norodom Sihanouk for the first time. In addition, Thailand had helped to promote close coordination with major powers such as China, the United States of America, and Japan to participate in the peace-building process in Indochina. As a result, all parties turned to negotiations and developed into a peace agreement in Paris in April 1991, leading to cooperation in peacebuilding in Cambodia successfully. This policy had a positive impact on the economy and has turned every country in Indochina into an area that attracts investors, helping to contribute to regional peace.

According to Thailand's foreign policy statement under Prime Minister Chatichai Choonhavan:

The government will carry out an independent foreign policy based mainly on national interests in order to maintain independence, national sovereignty and territorial integrity, as well as protect and strengthen the security of the state and national interests. Promoting economic growth of the country and the coordination between government agencies and private sector to make the implementation of policies become more effective and unity. In addition, the government will cooperate with other countries and international organizations that benefit the security of the state and national development by implementing the following key policies:

1. Respect and preserve the rights according to the agreements made with foreign countries by abiding by the principles of equality, principles of practice and fairness, and respect and promote the observance of the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

2. Promote peace and coexistence among all nations based on the principles of respect for independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity, equality, justice, non-intervention in each other's internal affairs, and peaceful resolution of international conflicts.

3. Improve economic and political relations, especially the expansion of trade markets as well as strengthen good understanding and good relations with neighbouring countries to live in peace and harmony in a manner that responds to mutual interests. The government will try and promote solutions to regional and international issues through political and diplomatic methods.

4. Strengthen closer cooperation in politics, economy, society and the unity of the member countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), as well as support measures to make Southeast Asia become the region of peace, freedom and neutrality to achieve true political and economic peace in Southeast Asia.

5. Operate and develop relations with the major powers in a balanced manner and in line with national interests that will enhance security and economic prosperity of the country and lead to cooperation and solutions to achieve peace, stability and advancement in the Asia Pacific region.

6. Promote relations with developing and developed countries both in bilateral and multilateral levels in order to have economic and technical cooperation to expand the market of the agricultural and industrial product and tourism. Moreover, the Thai government will promote the expanding the source of funds for raw materials, technology, academic and for human resource development that necessary for national development which will promote economic growth and upgrade the quality of life of the people.

7. Conduct information operation to make foreigners and general Thai people to have an understanding of Thailand's foreign policy and actions with foreign countries. At the same time, the government will carry out public relations about Thailand and disseminate Thai culture abroad in order to be known and have a good understanding of Thailand and the Thai people.

8. Protect and look after the welfare, rights and interests of the Thai people, and protect the interests of the Thai nation as a whole to be treated fairly from other countries. Secretariat of the Cabinet ,Government policy statement of Major General Chatichai Choonhavan, http://www.soc.go.th/pol_45.htm, (Date of access 1 March, 2020)

From friendly policy toward neighbouring countries, it became the main of Thailand's foreign policy up to date. Thailand sees itself as the centre of the mainland of Southeast Asia and also sees itself as a leading role in ASEAN by maintaining various cooperations in the region.

2.2 The Historical Retrospective: ASEAN in Thailand's Policy before 2014

Over the past 40 years, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations or ASEAN has developed steadily, and Thailand has played an important role in driving progress for ASEAN cooperation for a long time. When ASEAN was founded in 1967, the environment in Southeast Asia was intense. As a result of the Cold War, there was a contradiction between the ideology of internationalism that supports liberal democratic ideals and countries that adhere to socialist ideology. At the same time, there were conflicts between countries in the region such as conflicts between Malaysia and the Philippines in citing ownership over Sabah and Sarawak as well as the separation of Singapore from Malaysia, causing many countries to become aware of the need for cooperation between countries in the region. Mr. Thanat Khoman, the foreign minister of Thailand at that time had played an important role in negotiating and mediating conflicts between countries. He invited the foreign ministers of the 4 Southeast Asian countries, namely Malaysia, Indonesia Philippines and Singapore, to discuss at Laemthan, Chonburi province, which led to the signing of the Bangkok Declaration. On 8 August 1967, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations was founded, which Thailand is considered as the founding country and the “birthplace” of ASEAN. ASEAN,The Founding of ASEAN // https://asean.org/asean/about-asean/history/ (Date of access 1 March, 2020)

ASEAN had gradually expanded its membership, with Brunei becoming the 6th country in 1984, and after by the remaining 4 Southeast Asian countries namely Vietnam, Laos, Burma and Cambodia. Thailand has played an important role in connecting the countries that are located on the continent and all the island countries in the Southeast Asian region in a unified manner, with Thailand as a Center. Kavi Chongkittavorn, 20 years of mixing Asean old and new // https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/opinion/1677152/20-years-of-mixing-asean-old-and-new (Date of access 1 March, 2020)

The first four decades of ASEAN that Thailand had pioneered, it plays a role in creating new ideas and participating in a wide range of activities, promoting regional cooperation until ASEAN continues to grow, progress, unite and prosperity.

Thailand initiated the establishment of ASEAN in 1967 marked the beginning of political stability, not only among the member states but also as a form of cooperation for security in Southeast Asia as a whole. After the announcement of the Bangkok Declaration of ASEAN, the initial agreed-upon work was: ASEAN Learning Center, Thailand and ASEAN Community // http://asean.dla.go.th/public/article.do?lv2Index=100&lang=en&random=1492837946898 (Date of access 1 March, 2020)

1. There shall be a committee to consider certain proposals regarding cooperation in areas such as tourism, sea transportation and fishery and ways to expand trade in the region.

2. Announcement of the 7 objectives of ASEAN:

(1) To accelerate economic growth, social progress and cultural development in the region to strengthen the foundation for a prosperous and peaceful nations.

(2) To promote peace and stability in the region by respecting justice and the rule of law in carrying out international relations and the UN Charters.

(3) To promote pragmatic cooperation in the economic, social, culture, academics, science and administration.

(4) To provide mutual assistance in the form of facilitating training and research in education, vocational, academic, and administrative.

(5) To cooperate for the benefit of agriculture and industry.

(6) To promote education in the region.

(7) To Maintain close and beneficial cooperation with regional international organizations with similar objectives.

In the first 40 years of ASEAN, Thailand has played a leading role in ASEAN's political stability by adhering to work for these seven key objectives continuously, resulting in ASEAN achieving of many agreements on peace and political stability in the region such as: Kusuma Snitwongse, Thailand and ASEAN: Thirty years on // Asian Journal of Political Science, Volume 5, 1997 - Issue 1, p. 87-101.

- Kuala Lumpur Declaration (the Zone of Peace, Freedom and Neutrality Declaration), Kuala Lumpur, 27 November 1971.

- The Declaration of ASEAN Concord (Bali Concord I), Bali, 24 February 1976.

- Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia, Bali, 24 February 1976.

- Treaty on the Southeast Asia Nuclear Weapon-Free Zone, Bangkok, 15 December 1995.

- ASEAN Vision 2020, Kuala Lumpur, 15 December 1997.

- Declaration of ASEAN Concord II (Bali Concord II), Bali, 7 October 2003.

- Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea, Phnom Penh, 4 November 2002.

- Charter of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN Charter), Singapore, 20 November 2007.

- ASEAN Regional Forum - ARF, 1994.

The role of Thailand in ASEAN in politics and security extends beyond to the entire Asian region and the coastal countries of the Pacific with a new dialogue called ASEAN Regional forum. With initiatives from Thailand, other countries that are not ASEAN members but are in a connected region that have the benefits that should be discussed, are invited to join the forum. In the first meeting, Thailand hosted and chaired the meeting in Bangkok on 25 July 1994. Thailand then chaired the meeting again at the 7th ARF meeting on 27 July 2000. ARF members as of 2011, there are 10 ASEAN member countries with the EU and 16 other countries in Asia and the Pacific as follows:

(1) Australia (2) Bangladesh (3) Brunei Darussalam (4) Cambodia (5) Canada (6) China (7) European Union (8) India (9) Indonesia (10) Japan (11) Democratic Peoples' Republic of Korea (12) Republic of Korea (13) Laos (14) Malaysia (15) Myanmar (16) Mongolia (17) New Zealand (18) Pakistan (19) Papua New Guinea (20) Philippines (21) Russian Federation (22) Singapore (23) Sri Lanka (24) Thailand (25) Timor Leste (26) United States (27) Vietnam

Therefore, the ASEAN Regional Forum has 53 countries involved through the ASEAN cooperation framework on political and security cooperation in the Asia-Pacific region. Thailand, along with the ARF members, has created a new norm for preventive diplomacy, there are collaborating meetings in the government, ministers and senior officials, and both the ARF work in 3 phases. ASEAN Regional Forum, http://aseanregionalforum.asean.org/about-arf/ (Date of access 1 March, 2020)

Step 1: Promoting trust-building measures.

Step 2: Developing preventative diplomacy.

Step 3. Developing mechanisms for conflict resolution.

Thailand works as the backbone of various ARF activities, including the prevention of terrorism, especially after the events of September 11, 2001 (9/11). In addition, there are more activities such as peacekeeping in the region, disaster relief in the Asia-Pacific disaster, persuading North Korea to attend a meeting with the ARF for peace in East Asia, including group activities before and after the ARF meeting on the Inter-sessional Group on Confidence-Building Measures (ISG-CBM).

From the initiatives in the first year of ASEAN, the work of creating economic cooperation in the ASEAN region has developed systematically. With clear goals, Thailand has consistently played a leading role in the economy of ASEAN. The most important work that the Thai government under Prime Minister Anand Panyarachunhas (1991-1992) presented and pushed until it succeeded and is at the heart of driving ASEAN as a community is the establishment of ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA). Pongphisoot Busbarat, Thailand's Foreign Policy: The Struggle for Regional Leadership in Southeast Asia // Globalization, Development and Security in Asia, 2014,p. 136. The ASEAN Free Trade Agreement is a trade agreement for products manufactured within all ASEAN member countries, created in 1992, with the objective of increasing ASEAN's competitiveness as an important production base to enter the world market through trade liberalization by reducing tariffs and eliminating non-tax trade barriers, such as limiting import quotas and adjusting customs structure to facilitate free trade, this agreement covers all kinds of goods except products that affect stability, morality, life and art. However, member states must grant customs benefits on a reciprocal basis, this means that in order to enjoy the benefits of tax cuts of other countries for a particular product, that member state must declare a tax on the same product as well. AFTA was an important turning point in ASEAN that aimed to lay out a comprehensive programme of regional tariff reduction and ultimately hoped to establish a common market in Southeast Asia. This AFTA made the amount of trade between ASEAN member countries increases and the cost of manufacturing industrial products reduced as well as attracted more foreign investment in the region.

Over 24 years from 1990-2014, under many Thailand's Prime Ministers played an important role in developing the region to have more integrity. The Thai government under Chuan Leekpai (1992-1995) focused on promoting sub-regional economic cooperation, in particular, it aimed to coordinate the development of transportation links between China, Laos, Myanmar and Thailand, known as the North-South Economic Corridor. The North-South corridor placed Thailand as a centre of emerging economic of the Greater Mekong Sub-region. Thailand played a significant role in negotiating interests amongst participating countries. Thailand was committed to research, survey, design, technical and financial assistance in road network projects, including mobilizing support from external donors such as ADB, Australia, and Japan. This project was incorporated into the Greater Mekong Subregion (GMS) project supported by the Asian Development Bank (ADB), which also include Cambodia and Vietnam. ibid, p.138

...