Although the coup was successful and without bloodshed and effectively ended a lengthy period of political turmoil, public debate on the legitimacy of the coup has been confusing.

The main flaw of the debate so far seems to be based on the assumption that the deposed Thaksin government was "legitimate", or at least "democratically elected", and thus the overthrow of the "democratically elected government" by violent means is illegal.

Lacking understanding of the basic principles of political science, some supporters of the coup even wrongfully confessed: "The coup is illegal, but it is good for Thailand."

I happen to think there is no need to be apologetic about the coup, nor should we spare any precious time engaging in empty talk on such a question.

To understand the real nature of the coup, we must take into consideration the words of wisdom of some of the great political philosophers of the past. One of the greatest philosophers in the East, Mencius (372-289 BC) quotes his mentor, Confucius (551-479 BC), on the "rectification of names" in "The Analects" as saying that the "son of heaven" (the king) exercised his authority with the support of the populace, in accordance with the name given: "Let the ruler be ruler, the subject subject ..." The truly moral king must rule the country in a "kingly way". If not, he would lose the "mandate of heaven" by being killed or deposed through rebellion.

Implicit in his teaching is the right of rebellion. As the winner, the rebel chief would automatically gain the "mandate of heaven", or the right to rule in place of the deposed king.

Eminent Western political philosophers who intelligently theorised the right of rebellion of the governed against the ruler include Aristotle (c 384-

322 BC), Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) and John Locke (1631-1704).

Aristotle's criticisms against the flaws of democracy included "the tyranny of the majority" that put the will of the majority above the law. He said such a ruler would be overthrown by revolt.

Hobbes and Locke traced the source of rebellion in length in theoretical terms. In short, once the multitude of men agree to leave the state of nature to form the "leviathan" (commonwealth), they agree to confer their power and strength upon one man or one assembly of men to exercise their authority on behalf of the civic body. The "social contract" is thereby effectuated. All members of the "leviathan", including the top ruler, must not violate the social contract. If the top ruler exercises his authority exceeding the power given to him by the social contract, he becomes a "tyrant".

The tyranny of the majority sometimes develops when the will of the majority is put above the law or the social contract. When this happens, the civic body ends, and a state of nature re-emerges. In this state of nature, there is only the "law of the jungle". Hence, there is no "right" or "wrong", but rather "might is right". All fighters in the state of war risk their own lives. The one who wins the battle gains the right to form a new "leviathan".

The Thaksin regime can be appropriately termed a "tyranny of the majority", because Thaksin and his cohorts systematically violated the Constitution and the law of the land. The regime theoretically turned Thailand into a state of nature. General Sonthi and his close associates exercised their natural right to seize political power by risking their own lives, in accordance with the "law of the jungle".

Viewed in this light, all coups are neither "legal" nor "illegal", because the people involved are in a state of nature. A coup that overthrows an illegal government, a tyrannical regime, elected or non-elected, is necessarily good, but a coup that seizes political power for the coup-makers' personal interest is undeniably evil.

I happen to believe the recent coup in Thailand has been good for Thailand, for it has set out to cure the country's numerous political ills permeating all social spectra. I do not hesitate to call it a coup de grace. Mechanisms set up for the interim regime deserve our cooperation and encouragement, so that they can work efficiently to clean up the mess left behind by the deposed regime and whole-heartedly devote their time and energy to engage in set reform programmes.

Khien Theeravit

Special to The Nation

Khien Theeravit is a professor emeritus of Political Science at Chulalongkorn University. For more details with references in the Thai version, please visit Thai World Affairs Centre website at www.thaiworld.org.