(Photo by Takeaway via Wikimedia Commons/CC BY-SA 3.0 DEED)
Listen to this article:
Bangladesh, Myanmar, and Thailand have recently experienced pushback from authoritarian leaders in their respective governments. The countries follow a recent trend in much of Southeast Asia, in which autocratic leaders and military officials are damaging democracies to hold power for themselves by not recognizing democratic elections, appointing family members to positions of power, etc.
As such, many young people in these countries face high unemployment or other harsh conditions that cause discontent towards the ruling regimes. This generational divide intensified in recent years, though each country has significant historical reasons for the persistence of autocratic leadership.
Youth Independence Movements in Bangladesh
Bangladesh’s successful fight for independence from Pakistan in 1971 has been a unifying national story. In honour of those who died in the conflict, the government created a policy to reserve a percentage of state jobs for family members of independence fighters. This policy was popular amongst members of the Awami League party and supported by Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina. However, this policy is facing criticism from the large Bangladeshi youth population who struggle to access the top jobs available, mainly reserved for veterans’ families.
The issue played a key role in the most recent election, where the main opposing party of the BNP (Bangladesh National Party) protested the vote due to a lack of confidence in election security. With few opposition seats in the legislature, it meant that there was not any legislative opposition to the actions of the government towards the protestors. As such, no political party movement opposed the government during the protest; instead, it opposed the governing party’s actions. The majority of what caused the ousting of Prime Minister Hasina was youth movements protesting against the decision to restore a policy reserving jobs and the violence that was conducted by the police directed towards protestors.
Myanmar’s Shift from Democracy to Military Rule
Myanmar, located between Bangladesh and Thailand, had its democratically elected government ousted by the military in 2021. The democratic government came to power in 2015 after the elections ended complete military control of the country. As such, this was the first civilian-led government since independence from the British.
In addition, militias, typically civilians, centered around anti-military junta rule of the country or ethnic groups attacked by the junta. Many young people in the country moved into militias outside of the main military areas to fight the junta or to escape persecution. Many of them were motivated by the want to restore democracy following demonstrations against the coup, which were violently repressed by the military. The conflict has caused a lot of casualties and violence throughout the country. The rebel militias have made significant gains against the military junta. In the country, the different militias control many regions already and are of varying sizes, but the military still controls cities and larger bases.
Under the military junta, the country committed many war crimes against civilians, primarily a genocide assault on the Rohingya population by the junta. Between these two occurrences, the country has many groups wanting to end the military junta’s complete control of the country’s government.
Monarchy and Military Influence in Thailand
Thailand has a history of sporadic elections since 1947 when the first military coup reinstalled the King of Thailand as head of state after an anti-monarchy revolution to have a civilian government. Since then, Thailand has had the most successful coups in the world, dividing the country between the military and monarchy and those opposed to them.
The most significant issue is the use of a law that makes any criticism of the monarchy illegal. The law restricts freedoms in the country and opposition to the country’s autocratic elements. This law and the desire to continue influencing the government benefit the monarchy and military.
Most recently, the election results of 2023 were rejected by election officials when the Move Forward Party—who won the popular vote—was denied the right to form a government. A party more connected to the military and the monarchy assembled a cabinet for the government instead. It remains undetermined if there will be strong support for the Pheu Thai party that was allowed to form the cabinet to govern due to the existing political interference by the military and monarchy.
Pushback and Protest
Bangladesh’s civilian protests against the decision to reverse the job quota showed a different aim than Thailand’s: people were protesting for access to jobs rather than legal rights. The protestors – initially composed of students – grew as the protests escalated into confrontations with the police. The protestors demanded to withdraw the quota, resign the prime minister, and improve government accountability.
Now that the prime minister has fled, a provisional government – which includes student protestors – has taken over the country. The groups resisting non-democratic governments have followed their path in each country, but all three countries have shown citizens willing to fight for democratic rights and economic well-being.
Myanmar has had the longest-occurring current conflict in the region, with much of the country out of military control. Soon, the country will face a conclusion involving rebuilding a country split between many groups. Coming to agreements will require many to come to terms to avoid the post-conflict conflict becoming a conflict itself. Many young people have been involved since protests after the coup and with the former elected leader still alive. One can hope that the military will cede control and a stable situation can arise, similar to how Bangladesh has a caretaker government and promises of elections in the future.
Despite the massive support—especially among young voters—that Thailand’s Move Forward party received in the recent elections, large-scale protests have not increased compared to Bangladesh or Myanmar. Like Myanmar, the election results showed displeasure with the current military-aligned parties. Thailand is more economically stable than Myanmar, meaning that more civilians are likely to stay home and oppose confrontation for the risk of losing their livelihood. In August of 2024, the Supreme Court of Thailand banned the Move Forward party and its leaders from running in future elections. Members of the party are reforming the party under a new name as a workaround for members not banned from sitting in the legislature.
In The Hopes of a Better Life
In these three countries, there’s been a significant push against autocratic leaders by protestors and militias to ensure the success and creation of democratic processes. These countries all have young populations of people, and many of them lack enough jobs. As many autocratic leaders have had some corruption or favouritism towards certain groups, many see these autocratic governments not functioning to provide for their citizens. These countries show how governments will try to hold power in the face of protest, whether through political maneuvering or direct violence.
What can differ is the reaction of protestors and other actors in the country. With Bangladesh’s protests rapidly changing the political landscape and in Thailand and Myanmar, the situation could persist for much longer due to more resistant forces allied to the autocratic leaders in those countries. While the future for the countries is not entirely clear, it is clear all three have leadership, especially among young people aiming for a better life in their country.
Edited by Gustavo Villela
