Thailand’s surreal politics

S P SETH

In the last few months, Thailand has been going through a slow moving political thriller with the audience waiting how it ends. It all started with the passing of a law in the country’s legislature in October, effectively granting amnesty for the former prime minister, Thaksin Shinawatra, without having to serve a two-year jail sentence for corruption. He is a rich man, allegedly having made money through corrupt business practices, and is currently living in exile. He is said to be the real power behind his sister, Yingluck Shinawatra, Thailand’s first woman Prime Minister, who is believed to be his political proxy. It is alleged by the protesters and the opposition Democrat Party, leading the protests, that the Shinawatra siblings, current and former prime ministers, are seeking to destroy Thailand’s stability and harmony by playing populist politics of buying rural voters through state subsidies. And in this way, they are destroying the country’s long governing and largely Bangkok-based elite institutions. And if allowed to perpetuate their rule, admittedly based on popular vote, they could even compromise the country’s venerated monarchy.

The rural voters, for instance, receive support price for their rice crops. They have also been provided healthcare and loans for people to start up small businesses. This has created a certain sense of prosperity and confidence in the countryside. And it has given them a sense of power in terms of making and breaking governments by popular ballot. The opposition Democrat Party is not happy with the Shinawatra family subverting the established order in Thailand.

The protests are led by Suthep Thaugsuban, a former deputy prime minister in a military backed government, who wants the government to resign or be made to resign. And he and his supporters have been seeking to do this by bringing its functioning to a standstill through road blocks and barricades, and by occupying government buildings. The entire government machinery is virtually come to a halt and the law and order is, more or less, suspended, except haltingly, because the state institutions of all descriptions are not allowed to use force against protesters. The Yingluck government was hesitant to use force any way for fear of giving the army an excuse to stage a coup, which the opposition would very much like to happen to bring down the government. The political situation in Thailand is surreal. There is an institutional shut down with no body being the wiser who is running or not running the show.

The anti-government protesters of the Democrat Party, joined by all sorts of non-descript elements and shadowy figures, and led by Suthep Thaugsuban -- who is wanted for treason but protected by mysterious forces--- are not fighting for democracy. Indeed, they believe that it is the perverted and populist democracy of the Shinawatra brand that led Yingluck to a landslide election victory in 2011 (as it did for his brother, Thaksin Shinawatra, at an earlier time), which is at the root of Thailand’s problems. Therefore, they want to dispense with democracy based on people power.

Their solution is to bring power back to the Bangkok-based elites through a nominated People’s Democratic Reform Committee. The committee would amend laws to fight corruption and institute other reforms while an appointed prime minister (their own nominee) would help administer the country for up to two years. Which would mean burying people’s rule for two years at least, and rule by diktat of self-appointed busybodies.

The problem, though, is that Prime Minister Yingluck wouldn’t resign. Instead, she sought to resolve the crisis by ordering new elections, with the opposition boycotting the polls. At one time, the country’s election commission was against holding scheduled elections in February because of the conditions in the country. The elections, however, went ahead in most constituencies, and where these were interrupted the polls will take place next month. The results will not be known until after the election process is completed everywhere. Prime Minister Yingluck, who is now in a caretaker role, is quite confident that she will win and once again be returned as the country’s legitimate leader.

But this might not work out as smoothly. Apart from something or the other going wrong with the election process or results, considering that there are such entrenched interests against her return to power, there are parallel moves to remove Yingluck, like it was done with her brother, by disqualifying her from the country’s politics. As it happens, she is being investigated for corruption and incompetence in the rice subsidy scheme for the country’s farmers. At the same time, there is reportedly an investigation against her by the election commission. Any one of the two, or both, investigations might find her guilty, sending her, like her brother, into political purgatory of foreign exile.

It would, therefore, seem that the Bangkok-based elite groups and institutions are slowly working to get rid of her. The problem, though, is that the ruling Pheu Thai party might be able to unleash strong popular protests, as it did in 2010, against plans to get rid of their leader. The government supporters, called Red Shirts, have so far been relatively quiet on advice from their leaders lest any violence, resulting from their protests, might give the army an excuse to declare martial law. The army so far has been sitting on the sidelines, seemingly tolerant of the opposition protests, advising the government against using force against peaceful protesters. Prime Minister Yingluck, now in a caretaker role is, unable to govern in any meaningful way. She even doesn’t have a regular office, being hounded out by the protesters.

As things stand, the government and the opposition have no common ground and are distrustful of each other. The opposition believes that if the Shinawatra dynasty were allowed to entrench their power, they would turn Thailand into an elected dictatorship by changing or manipulating the country’s constitution and institutions. For instance, the country’s venerated king is now 86 years old and in poor health. And if the ailing king dies when Yingluck or brother Thaksin is in power, they might try to manipulate the institution of monarchy, which is the symbol of country’s unity, to further consolidate their power. 

When Thaksin Shinawatra was the prime minister, he did show signs of authoritarianism in his dealings with the press, and other institutions as well as helping his family’s business interests. In other words, there is some basis for the old elites of the country to be distrustful of the Shinawatra family. But that is no reason to dump democracy. It should energize them and the opposition Democrat Party to win over the people to their side.  

Note: This article was first published in the Daily Times.

Contact: sushilpseth@yahoo.com.au