Military coups just aren’t what they used to be!

In the good old days the military simply had to secure key sites like the radio, television broadcasters, airports, other transport hubs and newspaper offices. Once the sites were under control, then detain the ‘disputed’ head of government along with her key associates. Finally, put some helmeted soldiers decked out in combat gear on the streets of major cities, preferably with some tanks nearby for the ‘wow’ factor. The civil service and judiciary naturally fell into line by taking new oaths of loyalty or were simply fired from their roles. 

(Source: Pexels.com)

All of the above happened in darkness and in typically the space of a few hours between midnight and dawn. Depending on the size of the country a few thousand loyal soldiers were all that was required for a successful coup. If a more detailed playbook were required then ‘Coup D’Etat: a Practical Handbook’ by Edward Luttwak would serve the purpose.

No more. That was the last century. Like many similar handbooks, Luttwak’s book is obsolete. Things are different in the new millennium.

The first sign that something was amiss came in July 2016 with the failed coup attempt in Turkey.

Yes, Turkey. A country where the military is revered and coups are (were) a normal fact of life. Despite these two factors, the coup was neither able to dethrone President Erdogan nor install a military council to run affairs of state.

Today the world is witnessing the ongoing efforts by Myanmar’s military to unseat the civilian government of Aung San Suu Kyi. At the time of writing, it seems unclear if efforts by Min Aung Hlaing, the military commander leading the coup attempt, will succeed. The coup is certainly not ‘done and dusted’ the way it would have been in the past.

What has changed in the last two decades to make successful, naked military coups a rarity?

News Monopoly

Remember the days everyone read newspapers in the morning at breakfast? Then families gathered together in the evening to watch the news on national television. And only the news that was fit to print was printed. 

International newspapers often arrived a few days late and circulation was easy to control. There were no international television broadcasters. Even radio broadcasts by international politically motivated broadcasters such as Voice of America or Radio Free Europe had limited success in shaping opinions in target countries.

In other word, national governments’ had a monopoly on information. Even print publications of the ‘free’ press could be coerced by into reporting with a particular slant or just simply not reporting certain events. A low ranking officer posted at the office of the major newsprint companies and the national radio / television broadcasters was sufficient to manage news flow.

(Source: Pexels.com)

Along came social media and broke the information monopoly paradigm. Not only has information become virtually impossible to control but the proliferation of disinformation, often politically motivated, has also become routine. Moreover, international news broadcasters are regularly watched in living room televisions all around the world.

Consequently, managing negative news – or any news for that matter - associated with a military coup is impossible. No state maintains a monopoly on news anymore. This less controlled movement of information and the immediacy of many social media platforms also allow ordinary citizens to mobilize protest movements in a manner not possible in the past.

Global Superpower Rivalries

The Cold War between the US and its Soviet rival spawned many doctrines. All were expedient for their time but among the most relevant (and loved) doctrine for coup makers was the Kirkpatrick Doctrine. The doctrine was postulated by the former US Ambassador to the United Nations Jeane Kirkpatrick in a 1979 essay.

In her essay, Kirkpatrick made a distinction between Totalitarian and Authoritarian regimes. While totalitarian regimes try and control all aspects of a society and its citizens – including thought, authoritarian regimes try and control only certain behaviours. Additionally, authoritarian regimes are more amenable to gradual reform thus making them easier to move towards democratic norms. 

In essence, the doctrine was Cold War influenced intellectual justification for supporting authoritarian dictatorships from Argentina to the Philippines - as long as these rulers supported free enterprise (read permitted US businesses to operate freely) and sided with the US in its battle against Soviet inspired communism.

In practice, the Kirkpatrick Doctrine gave a blank check to coup makers to overthrow leftist regimes. Once in control, these same coup makers could expect continued support from the Free World until the ‘threat’ from communism was defeated. Support for such right wing authoritarian regimes was only withdrawn if / when the optics of maintaining domestic control became untenable.

Corporate Dollars and the Rise of Social Media

In a bygone era, large multinational corporations often acted as catalysts for coups. Whether it was a left leaning government that needed ‘course correction’ or a privileged monopolistic position in a market was under threat by government policy changes, corporations were in the thick of things – typically on the side of the coup instigators.

Note the origins of the term, Banana Republic, which stemmed from the installation of a military government via a coup in Honduras in the early 1900s. The coup was championed and funded by an American businessman and founder of a fruit company with significant economic interests in the Honduran fruit industry.

Things did not change because multinationals miraculously grew a conscience and stopped supporting dictatorial rulers. That was a slow process and relied largely on consumer pressure. It reached critical mass in the 1980s as campus activists pressured companies doing business in apartheid South Africa to divest their holdings.

Activists held that by doing business with a racist regime in apartheid South Africa, large corporations like Bank of America and General Motors, were helping to prop up the system. Initially, this led to the establishment of the Sullivan Principles, a voluntary code of business ethics devised by a Baptist Minister, for companies involved in South Africa. However, ultimately it forced businesses to rethink their presence in apartheid South Africa.

Over the last several decades, the trend of social activism has entered the mainstream with concepts like ESG – environmental, social and governance, becoming an essential part of the framework used to review and analyze corporations. With the rise of citizen journalism and social media it is virtually impossible for companies to cover up unethical practices, including openly supporting regime change in foreign countries. On the contrary, companies have found it almost essential to implement positive and transparent ESG policies to cater to rising social awareness among contemporary consumers.

(Source:Pexels.com)

The New Normal

The generals in Myanmar are finding out the hard way that coups are an anachronism of the last century. To be sure, the Thai military successfully executed a coup in 2014 under General Prayut likely because the coup was quickly legitimized by a much revered monarch, the late King Bhumibol. The late King’s actions must be considered as a major factor in the success of the 2014 coup. Arguably, Thailand is the exception that proves the rule.  

A new balance in civil-military relations has been precipitated by changing social conditions. While there is no clear rule for ‘new’ civil – military relationships the experience of Turkey, Thailand and Pakistan are illustrative.

In Turkey, the once all powerful Turkish military has had to swallow humble pie. From being able to change a government by issuing a memo, Coup by Memorandum, the Turkish military now plays a less powerful role under a powerful president. In Thailand, the military has so far resisted meaningful change. Though it is hard to predict how events will unfold in the coming years. In Pakistan, the military’s dominance remains a key part of the state power equation. Partly this is due to the military’s relationship with the current Prime Minister Imran Khan and partly because the military establishment has been careful in playing its hand. The possibility of the Pakistani military establishment overplaying its cards a la Myanmar must loom large with senior Pakistani generals.

As for Myanmar, only time will tell how the situation will play out. Even if the generals do survive intact until the next promised elections it is clear the military junta’s operational freedoms have already been circumscribed by domestic protests.

__________________

Imran is a Singapore based Tour Guide with a special interest in arts and history. Imran has lived and worked in several countries during his past career as an international banker. He enjoys traveling, especially by train, as a way to feed his curiosity about the world and nurture his interest in photography. He is available on Instagram (@imranahmedsg); twitter (@grandmoofti) and can be contacted at imran.ahmed.sg@gmail.com.

Of riots, immigrants and Singapore’s Global Migrant Festival

Since the refugee crisis hit Europe issues pertaining to migration and population flows have moved up the global agenda. Back home in Singapore, the Little India Riot in 2013 was a shocker (riots in Singapore!) but also a wake-up call about the countries large but often unnoticed pool of low skilled labor.

One side effect of the renewed focus is the establishment of the Global Migrant Festival which takes place in Singapore in December 2018. As part of his research for an article on the festival for a Hong Kong English daily I received some questions from a journalist on the subject of migrants, immigration, etc.

A selection of the questions and my answers are reproduced below.

Syrian refugees at the main train station in Budapest, Hungary (source: Wikipedia)

Q. What do you think are circumstances that led to this festival? How do you see it as something different towards other cultural festival?

A. I don’t know the details of the festival other than the information listed on their website but understand it is geared towards an otherwise culturally neglected demographic of Singapore’s society, i.e. low income foreign workers. In many ways, this is a ‘local’ Singapore festival which hopefully over time will come to encompass the aspirations and talents of an often forgotten segment of immigrant communities. In coming years, as the festival becomes established, festival Organizers will have to walk a fine line between commercialization and maintaining the ‘grassroots’ spirit / intent of the founders.

Q. What problems are they trying to remedy or at least articulate/engage with?

A. Humanizing a demographic of society which is often seen but almost never heard. Without this community many cities, including Singapore, would grind to a standstill. Additionally, I am sure there are lots of hidden talents among festival participants so bringing these talents out will be a service to not only the individuals but also the entire arts community.

Q. Singapore had a setback with the Little India race riots in 2013. How do you think things have changed (or not) since then? 

A. The wording of your question is interesting. Not everyone will refer to the 2013 Little India riots as a race riot. The riot was a seminal moment for Singapore in that it highlighted to broader Singaporean society the need to focus on a minimum quality of life for *all* residents of Singapore, not only Singaporeans and top end foreign talent. Much has been achieved since then because of this focus on the lower paid foreign workers by the government as well as a burgeoning NGO sector. Arguably, this festival itself is a by-product of the 2013 Little India riots.

Q. What do you think can be done to encourage more discussion and community engagement with migrant/immigration issues? Is there anything particularly that requires a shift in debate?

A. It’s a sad testament to the modern world but it took large waves of uncontrolled refugee migration to the developed Europe, especially from Iraq and Syria, for the international community to realize immigration issues are real and must be studied for greater understanding. Poorer countries have faced refugee crises for many decades since in the post-war period, most notably three million plus Afghani refugees in Pakistan during the first Afghan war and many parts of Africa. 

‘Humanizing’ migrant workers and introducing them as real people with hopes, wants, fears, etc. through literature and the arts is a great starting point. Given that foreigners – of all skill levels – comprise approximately 30 percent of our population including sections on such migrant communities in academic courses / syllabi at various levels of learning in our educational institutions should be considered.

I hope we will see more high quality literature and visual arts emerge on the experiences of migrant populations as a result of this increased focus. This festival is a step in the right direction.

Q. How can awareness of these issues help drive change and inclusion in the following sectors? Education, art and culture, employment

A. As I mentioned earlier, including sections on the role of migrant workers in keeping Singapore running smoothly may be included in school syllabi. Additionally, the government may allocate more funding to academic efforts to understand the challenges faced by new citizens and / or migrant workers. Increased funding will lead to more and better research and, hence, greater understanding.

A broad debate on making Mandarin a compulsory subject in school for all Singaporeans until, say, P6 should be initiated. In a majority Chinese society where Mandarin is the lingua franca of the bulk of the population, not speaking Mandarin acts as a glass ceiling as well as a hidden barrier for integration.

Q. Some of the key social issues include concerns of immigrants taking up white-collar jobs, driving property prices up and occupying places in schools and hospitals. How do you think these concerns can be better addressed by the government and individuals?

A. This is a broad policy debate and pertains to Singapore’s historic economic growth model pursued over the last few decades, i.e. grow the population to sustain economic growth. We have gone from approximately three million residents in 2000 to 5.6 million today. That’s a big jump and brings with it not only economic growth but a multitude of ancillary social issues – intended and unintended.

Growth is not an end in itself. A blind focus on generating economic growth misses the point. Economic growth is a means to a fairer, more just and happier society.

As Singapore has achieved levels of affluence comparable to the likes of Switzerland and Austria, Singaporeans must now shift their focus to other aspects of social maturation. These are difficult questions relating to distribution of wealth, taxation structures, provision and subsidies of medical services and so on.

The question of immigration is part of a larger rethink which Singaporeans must undertake about the future priorities of our society.

Q. Cultural identity is always ridiculed or dismissed as being diluted in Singapore. What can be done to discourage this mindset and see more proactiveness from Singaporeans to articulate or develop this 'identity'?

A. National identity is not static. Nor is at an end point a society must achieve. National identity is dynamic. Like any vibrant society, Singapore’s identity is also constantly evolving over time.

Openness to new ideas is necessary for society to thrive, especially in today’s fast paced world. Foreigners – whether immigrants or transient – are a historic part of Singapore’s population landscape and contribute significantly to our melting pot of ideas.

I don’t accept the idea that Singapore’s identity is diluted by immigration or migrant workers. On the contrary, over the course of time, Singapore’s identity is strengthened by new and diverse population groups.

Take Hainanese chicken rice and roti prata, two quintessential markers of modern Singaporean identity. These dishes did not develop in a cultural vacuum. They developed through the interaction of various different immigrant populations on this Little Red Dot.

______________

Note: Imran is a former banker and has lived and worked in several countries during his international banking career. He enjoys traveling, especially by train, as a way to feed his curiosity about the world and nurture his interest in photography. He is a licensed freelance tour guide in Singapore. He is available on twitter (@grandmoofti); Instagram (@imranahmedsg) and can be contacted at imran.ahmed.sg@gmail.com

Singapore: police powers and the Little India riot

I am a 'Law and Order' man. Generally, Singapore's tough laws are fine with me. Want to hang convicted drug traffickers? Be my guest. Wish to cane criminals convicted of vandalism? Carry on. If anything, I find the punishments for certain crimes, e.g. drink driving, too lenient. Nonetheless, I cannot get myself to support the proposal to enhance police powers in Singapore's new 'Special Zone,' i.e. Little India.

The proposal will permit the police to strip search individuals to look for alcohol. Additionally, police officers ranking Sergeant and above may raid any establishment within the Special Zone without a warrant, in case of suspicion that an offence is taking place. Individuals may also be banned from entering the Special Zone for up to 30 days if their presence is deemed detrimental to maintaining order.

Certainly, Singapore's police must have adequate authority to ensure there is no repeat of December 2013's Little India riot. Hence, having a more stringent alcohol licensing regime makes eminent sense. Particularly, as seems likely, alcohol was a contributing factor to the Little India violence.

However, don't the police already have enough powers to control 'miscreants' all over the island? Of course they do. Act in a 'suspicious' manner and see if the police present you with a warrant before carting you off to the nearest police station! Better still, walk around with a can of spray paint near an MRT subway train depot and see how long it takes for the police to 'interview' you? This is not just about a car entering Singapore illegally from Malaysia but preempting a serious act of vandalism!

Surely, Singapore's first riot in decades requires a drastic response from the authorities but I cannot see more policing taking Singapore to a better place. Already, some analysts suggest unskilled and semi-skilled foreign labor (as opposed to foreign talent) felt persecuted and intimidated by police measures in place prior to the December 2013 riot.

The answer lies in taking a more balanced approach. For example, by providing greater recreational facilities and outlets for Singapore's hordes of semi-skilled workers, while at the same time ensuring wrong doers are dealt with harshly (under existing laws). Needless to say, unless Singapore stops functioning, the thousands of foreign laborers on our island are not going anywhere. (Do we have any locals prepared to act as sanitation workers?)  

Giving the police a freer hand to stop, question, strip search and detain individuals – foreign or local – creates a dangerous precedent which can only lead Singapore down a slippery slope ... particularly when it will inevitably result in racial profiling of persons belonging to non-majority races (Caucasians exempted?). How long before individuals from minority backgrounds (like me) are asked to justify their presence in 'Special Zones' around Singapore?

Singapore is ahead of its time in many aspects of urban organization. I hope Orwellian style '1984' policing does not become one of these areas.

__________________

Imran is a licensed Singapore Tour Guide. Please contact Imran if you wish to arrange personalized tours of Singapore, including walking tours of historic districts such as Little India, Chinatown and Kampong Glam. Imran can be reached at imran@deodaradvisors.com or +65 9786 7210.