The rough and tumble of the troubled Thai election and the painful formation of the next government in Bangkok may well impact Thai-Myanmar relations and the conditions and status of Myanmar nationals, both migrant workers and political exiles, in Thailand.

Mizzima sat down with Sirada Khemanitthathai, Lecturer at the School of International Affairs, Faculty of Political Science and Public Administration at Chiang Mai University, an expert on Thai-Myanmar affairs, to try to peer through the fog to ascertain the state of Thai-Myanmar relations as Thailand tries to follow the democratic path.

Mizzima: Both Thailand and Myanmar are in the midst of political change. How do you view Thailand-Myanmar relations at the moment?

If we compare or if we look at the last eight to nine years, you can see how strong the ties are between the Thai government and the Burmese government. So, whether through the military-to-military track, or government-to-government, even during the National League for Democracy (NLD) government, they have already had normalized diplomatic relations with Thailand. And then, after the Myanmar coup it is so obvious how the Thai government and Thai military really helped legitimize and practically support Myanmar’s State Administration Council (SAC). So, during the current uncertainty of the Thai political situation, we still don't know what's going on.

Even the Thai politicians do not know what is going to happen. Anything could happen. So, at least, according to the election result, we still have some opportunities for change in the future regarding Thailand-Myanmar relations, at least the status quo will not be maintained we hope.

We can see how the Thai caretaker government and the Thai Ministry of Foreign Affairs were represented by the Minister and his advisor, went to visit Myanmar junta leader Min Aung Hlaing and the SAC and that maybe demonstrates something to the regime in Myanmar, as they are also sensitive about Thai politics. They saw some vulnerability in the Thai-Myanmar relations at the top level.

So, this is an historic time to see if there are any changes in Thailand-Myanmar relations but I would say even if the progressive parties in Thailand can lead the government, Thai foreign policy officially will never, never change in terms of official foreign policy. It's really hard because it is heavily embedded in the Thai bureaucratic system. Not only the Ministry of Foreign Affairs but also other ministries or politicians need to have relations of various kinds with Myanmar. They also need to maintain the bureaucratic ties with the authorities in Myanmar and for them it is the SAC. Even the migrant workers or migrant worker issues or any other transnational issues, they have to link with the SAC authorities when it comes to the bureaucracy.

Realistically speaking is really hard to see significant changes even if progressive parties lead the new government. The government might be led by the Pheu Thai Party. If the Pheu Thai Party leads the government then when it comes to Thailand-Myanmar relations then they may focus more on economic advantages rather than other issues.

Mizzima: It looks like Pheu Thai Party, not the Move Forward Party, will lead the new Thai government, possibly a coalition including conservatives. How do you view this and how it might affect Thailand-Myanmar affairs?

If that is the case, then I can say Thai politics will be really chaotic. And people wouldn't want to accept that. The other factor is foreign policy is not a prioritized issue for Thailand. And for Thai people, they don’t care. I will say that the majority of Thai people don't care about foreign policy. So, it's the last thing that we Thai people and Thai society would focus on. And then if Thai politics cannot be stabilized, then foreign policy will be further marginalised.

It's the last priority for Thai society and politics. And then if Thai politics becomes really chaotic and not normalized, not following the democratic principles or suffering from a lack of legitimacy, then, of course, Myanmar issues and foreign affairs issues will not be really focused on by the government. I think we need to hope for the stability of Thai politics so that the Thai government can help our neighbouring countries as well.

Mizzima: Related to these issues, how do you view ASEAN’s stance on the Myanmar crisis in the wake of the ASEAN foreign ministers ’meeting last week? ASEAN has not been able to achieve much, right?

Right. This is what we we've seen and the Burmese people were hopeful for ASEAN to take action and for something to come out of the Five-point Consensus. But Burmese people and Burmese civil society organizations or the communities see nothing, right? It’s not effective. They seek something more effective, inclusive, to include all political stakeholders in Myanmar, including the NUG, EAOs, EROs and civil society. We hope that something will come out if Jakarta Indonesia is the ASEAN chair as they have been the most vocal about the Myanmar issue. But time is passing. We are already in July, and nothing really happened and there have been no changes to the Myanmar crisis. And for me, I'm really worried because the next chair of ASEAN is Laos. This is not good for the future.

Mizzima: There seems to be a split between Thailand's approach to the Myanmar crisis, and other ASEAN members. How do you view that?

Yes, as we can see the Thai caretaker government, the Prayuth government and the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Khun Don, I think because of the strong ties between the two armies and also, they're also the intention of Mr. Don himself to really want to maintain the conventional diplomacy between Thailand and Myanmar. They have a very, very top-down perspective about the diplomatic relations with Myanmar. They just see the SAC and the Tatmadaw as the main political actors.

I can see how the Thai caretaker government wants to show the international community they have the capacity to convince the SAC in one way, in any way. So, they had to have some influence to have some kind of like, “okay, we have issues with the SAC, because we want to end the violence and want to build a bridge between Myanmar and the world.” And then they try to portray that only the Thai government can do that and we will utilize that. Their perspective is we utilize strong ties and relations with the military regime to make things better. But then that kind of outcome, that hasn't happened at all, right?

So, I think like the current split between Thailand’s hardline stance on Myanmar crisis and other members of ASEAN is because of the top-down perspective on diplomacy with Myanmar, and they also have to restore their role as leader of the region. And then they want to show that and demonstrate their capacity and strong ties with the Tatmadaw and that only Thailand can be an agent of change. This is what they want to do, and especially before the end of the term of the caretaker government, they want to make something happen. But then this hasn’t happened.

Mizzima: And following on from that, as you say, the Thai Foreign Minister Don went to meet with Aung San Suu Kyi. What was he trying to do with that meeting?

Yes. This follows on from what I've just said. It's just what he and his team want to show that he and Thailand have this capacity to negotiate with different stakeholders, they can access Aung San Suu Kyi, which others cannot do. So, they want to show they have the capacity to convince the SAC to allow them to meet Suu Kyi. Then I think this is a political symbol in that they can show that they have that capacity, but we don't know yet right? We cannot see any outcome from this meeting with Suu Kyi. Nothing changed at all.

But I can say the Thai caretaker government aim for ending the violence, but because they only see the stakeholders, political stakeholders in Myanmar through a very, very narrow perspective, they only see the SAC versus the NLD or the SAC versus Aung San Suu Kyi, which is not true in terms of Myanmar politics. It's not like that. It's just not a dichotomy between these two. They just want to follow this path.

Mizzima: So, changing the topic, you know over the last three or more years, Myanmar migrant workers in Thailand have faced quite a few challenges. They faced problems in terms of COVID-19 lockdowns and the closing of Thai borders. How do you view the challenges for Myanmar migrant workers in Thailand at the moment?

Yes, there are a lot of challenges. So, it was from the COVID-19 period and then the coup and that made everything worse for Myanmar migrant workers. So, now migrant workers aim for more accessible registration and then getting a document from Thailand. Many people want to have jobs in Thailand and then even for the refugees, they want to find a safe place for their lives. So, those who are coming to Thailand without documents need to be in Thailand in less troublesome circumstances. So, they need documentation within the Thai registration system, so the challenge for them is the documentation and then the registration. Now that seems to be really complicated and pricey, and the Thai authorities are demanding so many documents.

So, I think it's challenging for Myanmar migrant workers in that sense. Then the other thing is some Myanmar citizens have been involved in political activities in Myanmar and then flee to Thailand. They choose to flee and become migrant workers. But there is a problem here. Thailand may ask for documents guaranteed by the Myanmar authorities. In that sense, those who have some political sensitivity, they may not be able to access that kind of document issued by the Myanmar authorities.

The Thai government wants the Myanmar authorities to guarantee the nationality and the documents for migrant workers, but those who are political cannot access the system. So, this is another challenge that we had after the Myanmar coup. And then there are the daily life challenges that they face from local authorities and policemen. Some of them, even if they have documents, still have to face discrimination and are forced to pay daily or monthly bribe payments. So, this is what they are still facing every day.

Mizzima: Obviously the Thai economy is starting to pick up after the COVID-19 restrictions were removed. Are Thai businesses looking for Myanmar migrants?

I will say Thai businesses and Thai entrepreneurs really need Myanmar migrant workers in terms of economic contribution. I think Thai society and the Thai general public realise how important Burmese migrant workers and also other workers from neighbouring countries are. Migrant workers contribute to the Thai economy. I think the Thai general public understands and realises well about the contribution of low-skilled migrant workers. So, I would say the Thai economy needs low-skilled workers. There is high demand for factory and agricultural workers. I heard from many, many Thai entrepreneurs that they even ask for the refugees in the camp to be employed.

Even during COVID-19, the Ministry of Labour in Thailand did a survey asking the businesses in Thailand how many migrant workers they need. I think it was around 2021. Two years ago, the number of labour demanded was around 700,000 during COVID-19. That is the official number. The unofficial number should or must be higher than that. That demonstrates how much Thailand really needs labour from neighbouring countries.

Mizzima: On a different subject, over the decades refugees escaped from Burma and were given refuge in camps along the border. And also more recently, since the Myanmar coup, there's been fighting on the border. Burmese refugees have come across the border, but the Thai government has tried to push them back. How do you view the refugee situation for Burmese refugees in Thailand?

For the refugees, we can distinguish around three types of refugees from Myanmar. So, existing refugees are in refugee camps, which the Thai Government calls temporary shelter. So, this is the first category. The second would be the transient refugees, refugees who fled from the war from conflict to take refuge on the Thai side of the border. The Thai authorities could see across the border, that there is fighting and the people need to flee. And then the third one, is political refugees or political exiles.

So, Thailand has implemented different approaches to these three groups. For the camp refugees in Thailand, during the NLD government, Thailand tried to repatriate them back to Myanmar, but the programme was unsuccessful. So, I think now they are trying to find a way to ask for cooperation from Western countries and resettle some of them. At the same time, there are many advocacy groups and even some government officers who are trying to close the refugee camps. They want to let these refugees integrate into Thai society and the economy, maybe as migrants, or under another status.

But this kind of solution is still in the campaigning stage, and there is advocacy for it. So, we hope that the new government will consider to solve this problem as well.

For the second type of refugees or refugees who flee from war, those who flee come across the border, and Thailand might follow a very minimum standard of care. They need to accept these refugees. They still have to stay restricted in the areas along the border and some of them have to have to live in the jungle on the Thai side.

At least we can see some flexibility, more than in the past, before 2021. Currently, local authorities allow external humanitarian assistance to help refugees fleeing from war on the border. So, I think at the operational level, they seem to understand what's going on and then they have more sympathy. But at the national level, we still don't see any national policy that would help the refugees who flee from war. So, we were looking towards that kind of policy as well.

And for the third, the third type is political exiles, the most difficult and most controversial for Thailand. For Thailand, I think they will not really have a national policy to deal with this group explicitly. So, we hope that they might nowadays just “blur” it. They just blur it. Then the Thai authorities know what's going on and that these people are fleeing from the coup and the political crisis.

But, they have no policy to accept political refugees into society at all. So, it's hard and very political. So, hopefully the new government will consider a solution to integrate them.

And then the Thai authorities, the ministries, really care about the state-to-state diplomacy and in state-to-state, that means the military regime. So, they would claim about the non-interference principle, they would claim about border proximity things and interdependence with Myanmar and something like that. But then I can see how the Thai caretaker government takes sides with the SAC.

Practically legitimizing them is another form of interference. If they claim non-interference, if they have relations with the SAC, that would be another kind of interference as well. And then for the “good neighbour” narrative that the Thai Government tries to follow. So, I would ask them, what is your policy as a neighbour and when we look at the concept of neighbours that should also involve people. Myanmar people are suffering from the atrocities that are happening. If so, what is your policy as a neighbour?

Mizzima: Is there anything else you would like to add?

This is what I said, the “good neighbour” narrative. I think being a good neighbour is to help and assist our neighbours who are the Myanmar people and who really suffer from the political crisis and atrocities. I just hope that any government, whichever party will become the government, they should see this perspective. There are those on the conservative side, I think we, the advocacy groups, we need to work a lot towards this end, seeking humanitarian ends for the people. The most important thing is to protect people first because the political crisis in Myanmar will not end soon. It will not be over in a few years. So, the first priority is the lives of the people, and Thailand is a host country for all kinds of displaced people from Myanmar, migrants and refugees, and other refugees. Thailand should be a “good neighbour” who really helps protecting lives. This is the fundamental principle for the civilized world.