|
Showing 1 - 2 of
2 matches in All Departments
Thailand remains important by virtue of its location at the centre
of the Asia–Pacific region, an area playing a vital role in world
affairs. And yet, although Thailand has a comparatively large
population and has powerful military forces performing significant
roles in state and society, the country itself is seen as having
little military power; it is a minor player. Why is this? Using
strategic culture as an analytical framework, this book produces a
portrait of the Thai state as an accommodative actor. During the
period of Western imperial dominance in Asia, Thailand `bent in the
wind’ to preserve its independence by a limited trading of
territory and sovereignty. This accommodative policy continues to
the present day in different forms. A key feature is that military
organisational culture reinforces a state ideology of royalist
nationalism that in turn reinforces the national strategic culture.
Significant here is internal political acceptance of not just
militarydomination in civil–military relations but also of the
Thai military’s limitations in state-on-state combat. The author
finds such `underbalancing’ – not responding to threat, or
responding to it inadequately – elsewhere in Southeast Asia, too,
especially in Indonesia. Although ASEAN’s two largest economies,
and despite the challenges presented by a rising China, neither
country is acting to significantly build alliances or rapidly
strengthen their military forces. Pointing as well to other
Southeast Asian nations with weak civil control of their
militaries, including Myanmar, the Philippines and Cambodia, the
book sets out a case that the interplay of civil–military
relations and military organisational culture retards the
development of strong external defence postures.
Thailand remains important by virtue of its location at the centre
of the Asia–Pacific region, an area playing a vital role in world
affairs. And yet, although Thailand has a comparatively large
population and has powerful military forces performing significant
roles in state and society, the country itself is seen as having
little military power; it is a minor player. Why is this? Using
strategic culture as an analytical framework, this book produces a
portrait of the Thai state as an accommodative actor. During the
period of Western imperial dominance in Asia, Thailand `bent in the
wind’ to preserve its independence by a limited trading of
territory and sovereignty. This accommodative policy continues to
the present day in different forms. A key feature is that military
organisational culture reinforces a state ideology of royalist
nationalism that in turn reinforces the national strategic culture.
Significant here is internal political acceptance of not just
military domination in civil–military relations but also of the
Thai military’s limitations in state-on-state combat. The author
finds such `underbalancing’ – not responding to threat, or
responding to it inadequately – elsewhere in Southeast Asia, too,
especially in Indonesia. Although ASEAN’s two largest economies,
and despite the challenges presented by a rising China, neither
country is acting to significantly build alliances or rapidly
strengthen their military forces. Pointing as well to other
Southeast Asian nations with weak civil control of their
militaries, including Myanmar, the Philippines and Cambodia, the
book sets out a case that the interplay of civil–military
relations and military organisational culture retards the
development of strong external defence postures.
|
You may like...
Poor Things
Emma Stone, Mark Ruffalo, …
DVD
R449
R329
Discovery Miles 3 290
Ab Wheel
R209
R149
Discovery Miles 1 490
|