Second Army chief term extension debate and its impact on military system

Extending a military officer’s service is not illegal and has legal precedent, such as under the Government Pension Act. However, the key issue lies in whether public opinion will accept it.

Historical precedents

In the past, extensions have stirred political tensions. Field Marshal Thanom Kittikachorn extended his own term as chief of defence forces after staging a coup against himself on November 17, 1971, staying on past the age of 60 to retain supreme control of the armed forces. 

Field Marshal Praphas Charusathien, Thanom’s close ally and relative by marriage, extended his own term as army chief in 1972. Both moves contributed to the uprising on October 14, 1973.

Later, Gen Prem Tinsulanonda, after becoming prime minister while concurrently serving as army chief, enjoyed broad political support and extended his term by one year, from 1980 to 1981. 

Gen Arthit Kamlang-ek, who served as both army chief and chief of defence forces, also had his term extended as a key backer of Prem. However, after a policy dispute with the government over devaluing the baht, Arthit was removed as army chief in 1986, ending his hopes for a second extension.

After the Prem era, several powerful military figures were considered for extensions, including Gen Chavalit Yongchaiyudh, who served as both army chief and chief of defence forces, and Gen Apirat Kongsompong as army chief. However, public sentiment was unfavourable, and Apirat eventually declined the idea himself.

Post-Prem dynamics

Since the end of the Prem era, the military’s political influence has declined as elected politicians alternated in power. Although briefly interrupted by the 1991 coup by the National Peace Keeping Council, the political shift eventually reduced the military’s dominance.

Today, extending the service of a senior officer can be seen as blocking promotion opportunities for the next generation. Mandatory retirement ensures regular leadership turnover and allows capable new officers to rise. In a society that increasingly values democracy, keeping a military leader in place for too long risks controversy.

Rising public opposition to coups and military interference means any extension will draw scrutiny. Some leaders have opted to retire on schedule and enter politics openly instead, as in the cases of Gen Chavalit Yongchaiyudh and Gen Prayut Chan-o-cha.

Expert view

Thai independent scholar Krisada Boonrueng noted that extending the service of a commander or senior official could be justified only in the most urgent, unavoidable national crisis. Doing so merely to reward a “hero” figure risks damaging the system, disrupting the chain of promotions, and undermining morale.

He cautioned that keeping one “hero” in place for an extra year can alter the career paths of many future leaders. Popular sentiment is fleeting, and yielding to it can lead to regret when priorities change. 

Overemphasis on personalities rather than procedures can demoralise those who follow the rules, and the extended officer may not even welcome the role.

Legal considerations under the Defence Ministry Act must also be addressed, including whether such an extension is permissible and whether those involved could face legal consequences.

Extending Lt Gen Boonsin’s term could affect the morale of the armed forces, especially as there are likely already candidates preparing and hoping to succeed him. Doing so could also send a signal that no other officer possesses his combination of operational, public engagement, and Cambodia-related expertise.

Political and border factors

Recently, there were rumours of his removal due to political pressure or Cambodian protests after a Cambodian soldier was killed in the May 28 border clash. 

Economic interests along the border have also reportedly lobbied for his transfer. His rapid shift from being a target of criticism to a popular figure should be viewed cautiously, as professional soldiers value consistency over volatile public sentiment.

Historically, wartime “heroes” have gone on to serve in various roles in the public, private, and political spheres, using their experience and prestige.

Notably, the military’s image is currently positive among the public during a politically fragile period in which an early election remains possible, and the conservative bloc is lacking a unifying leader.

If the public continues to prioritise sovereignty, security, and nationalism, retired or retiring officers may find opportunities to serve the nation in roles equally significant as a one-year term extension.

Potential successors for Second Army chief

• Maj Gen Weerayut Raksin, deputy commander of the Second Army Region and deputy director of Internal Security Operations Command Region 2 
• Maj Gen Norathip Poinok, deputy commander of the Second Army Region 
• Maj Gen Nat Sri-in, deputy commander of the Second Army Region