What is the point of a public agency whose mission is to drive the "20-year national strategy" -- an abstract legacy from the Prayut Chan-o-cha era that was never practically implemented?
Simply put, none. That is why the proposal to dissolve it warrants our serious attention.
Veera Dhirapatranon, a prominent news analyst and adviser to the parliamentary 2027 budget committee, recently sparked controversy by proposing the dissolution of several state agencies over their unclear or redundant mandates.
Chief among those on his radar is the Strategic Transformation Office (STO), which was established by the coup leader's order in 2018, supposedly to drive national reform, strategy and reconciliation.
At the time, Gen Prayut was convinced that if he could envisage Thailand two decades into the future and lay out a roadmap towards that goal, he would provide a solid foundation for the nation's growth. By enshrining this strategy in the 2017 constitution, he hoped his vision would steer Thailand towards "security, prosperity and sustainability", transforming it into a fully developed country guided by the Sufficiency Economy philosophy.
The gaps are hard to ignore. Gen Prayut's "national strategy" was designed to span from 2018 to 2037. But no one -- least of all the military leadership of that time -- could foresee the political, economic, social and technological shifts on the horizon.
Back in 2018, for instance, artificial intelligence (AI) was still transitioning from an experimental technology, held back by technical bottlenecks, high financial costs and widespread doubts about its scalability.
Fast forward eight years, and AI and related technologies have become undisputed engines driving global development. Yet because the strategy's creators lacked foresight, the 20-year plan contains no roadmap for this technological revolution. With no specific blueprint to follow, what exactly is the STO supposed to be driving?
The document itself reads less like a strategic roadmap and more like a high-minded wish list. Divided into six broad pillars -- national security, competitiveness, human resources development, social opportunities and equality, environmental quality, and public service efficiency -- it ignores Thailand's concrete realities in favour of empty rhetoric.
The strategy calls for vague, arguably out-of-touch ideals like "safety, sovereignty and order at all levels", urges the country to "enhance value for the future", and envisions citizens who are simultaneously moral, disciplined, fluent in English and a third language, yet dedicated to preserving local dialects.
Without a clear mandate, it is no surprise that the STO has become irrelevant. Though technically chaired by Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul, half of its board seats remain vacant. In practice, much of its workload consists of routine tasks such as hosting training courses or handing out honorary awards.
Although the STO's allocation in the draft 2027 budget bill is relatively modest -- 66.5 million baht is hardly enough to boost the government's campaign to streamline the oversized bureaucracy -- it is still superfluous for an office with little to show for itself.
As Mr Veera pointed out, the agency's staff has steadily expanded to more than 100 personnel over the years, but it's now a relic of a bygone political era. If the government is truly serious about reform, dissolving it should not be controversial -- it would be a good start.
