[Asia Report] The Thaksin Family's Political Fall and the Enduring Power of Thailand's Military

After the Thailand-Cambodia Border Clash
The Leaked Call Between Paetongtarn and "Uncle" Hun Sen
Transnational Ties Among ASEAN Elite Families
Strong Military Backlash and the Restoration of Political Leadership

From an external perspective, ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) politics may appear chaotic and incoherent. However, upon closer examination, there are certain underlying rules. The recent leak of a phone call between Paetongtarn Shinawatra (38) and former Prime Minister Hun Sen, which shook both Thailand and Cambodia, is a prime example.

Above all, the core of ASEAN politics lies in the existence of elite political families and the transnational, close-knit networks among political elites in each country. These groups function as power blocs that stand above national institutions, and in times of crisis, they exchange information and coordinate the political situation in ways that transcend national boundaries. The forces that check and control these elites are none other than the military and intelligence agencies.

A Phone Call That Shook ASEAN

On June 15, the phone call between Prime Minister Paetongtarn and former Prime Minister Hun Sen took place just after the border clash between Thailand and Cambodia at the end of May. She addressed Hun Sen as "uncle" and asked him to restrain the military from taking a hardline response. While such a term of address may be natural in Southeast Asian cultures, the fact that a sitting prime minister discussed sensitive security matters in a private and close relationship with a former foreign prime minister quickly escalated into a political issue. The conservative camp labeled this as "collusion with foreign powers," and the Constitutional Court suspended her from the prime ministership in early July. This led to a sharp drop in the stock index, resulting in economic shock as well.

In fact, Hun Sen and Paetongtarn's father, Thaksin, have had a long-standing friendship. After Thaksin was ousted in a coup, he stayed in Cambodia, which further deepened their political ties. This incident was not merely a diplomatic blunder; rather, it revealed the reality of the unofficial power networks among Southeast Asian elites that transcend national borders.

The lines connecting Suharto in Indonesia, the Marcos-Duterte alliance in the Philippines, and the Shinawatra-Hun Sen connection in Thailand and Cambodia all demonstrate that these figures function less as national leaders and more as the "top 1% power class of Southeast Asia." Such close ties result in the dilution of sovereignty and the weakening of democratic oversight. Through this incident, it became clear once again that ASEAN politics operates not as "relations between states," but as "relations between elites."

Who Leaked the Call?

The central question in this incident is the motive and process behind the leak. On June 18, Hun Sen stated that he himself had recorded the call and uploaded it to Facebook. He explained that this was to "prevent misunderstandings," but the fact that he had already distributed the recording to more than 80 high-ranking Cambodian officials before making it public strongly suggests the possibility of intentional dissemination.

In particular, Paetongtarn's reference to her own country's military commander as the "opposing side's military commander" provoked a strong backlash from the military. As soon as the conversation was made public, the military and conservative parties acted swiftly, with 36 senators filing a petition with the Constitutional Court. The speed of this response was unusually fast. This strongly suggests that Thai intelligence agencies (such as the NIA) may have detected the contents of the call in advance, or at the very least, strategically utilized it after the fact. Some analysts suggest that it may have been the Thai military, not Hun Sen, that encouraged the disclosure of the call, or that they implicitly conveyed diplomatic pressure to Hun Sen. This is because there is no clear explanation for why Hun Sen would take an action that could harm his long-standing political allies, the Shinawatra family.

There may also have been political interests at play for Hun Sen personally. With his son Hun Manet serving as prime minister, some interpret this as a strategic move to demonstrate his influence in the ASEAN region. In other words, this disclosure may not have been a simple diplomatic mistake, but rather a kind of "power signal" aimed at both domestic and international audiences.

The Structural Clash Between the Thai Military and the Shinawatra Family

The central feature of Thai politics over the past 20 years is that the Thaksin family has consistently won elections, but has repeatedly been thwarted by the conservative elite network centered on the military, judiciary, and monarchy. The coups in 2006 and 2014, as well as repeated institutional checks such as party dissolutions and disqualifications of politicians, have shown a persistent disconnect between "democratic legitimacy" and "elite legitimacy" in Thailand. The Thaksin family enjoys support from the masses, but remains an outsider to the elite system.

The Shinawatra family maintains popular legitimacy based on strong support in the northern and northeastern regions, but has never seized real power rooted in the military, bureaucracy, or judicial system. As a result, their electoral victories are always unstable and vulnerable to removal by the establishment at any time. This phone call incident once again demonstrated that fragile structure.

Some interpret that the military and intelligence agencies are employing a "waiting strategy" rather than overt repression. Through surveillance, image tarnishing, and judicial pressure, they wait for the Shinawatra family to collapse on its own. Especially with the next generation after Paetongtarn deemed even more vulnerable, they are reportedly waiting for the next general election or internal divisions as an opportunity.

Public opinion among conservatives within Thai society also partially supports the military's stance, and the divided attitudes of the public further strengthen the military's strategy. The military regards the Thaksin system as a threat to the regime and maintains the position that the survival of the national elite system takes precedence, even if it conflicts with public sentiment.

The Political Downfall of the Thaksin Family Once Again

Prime Minister Paetongtarn used her conversation with "uncle" Hun Sen as a tool to maintain her administration by quickly resolving the border dispute. However, this became a decisive pretext for shaking the Shinawatra family. Her suspension was not merely a legal procedure, but a reflection of the structural contradictions inherent in Thai politics.

Prime Minister Paetongtarn once again provided an opportunity for the military to regain political leadership, and the Shinawatra family once again found themselves halted before the wall of the establishment. ASEAN politics continues to sway between "democracy and elitism." This incident was not a simple diplomatic mishap, but a political fault line exposing a deep rift. And, as always, the Thai military is at the center of it.

Jung Hojae, Secretary General of the Asia Vision Forum