Gerald W. Fry is Visiting Professor at the International Institute for Asian Studies of Leiden University in the Netherlands. He is also Professor at the University of Minnesota. Professor Fry has been doing research on Thailand over the past five decades and has spent around a total of ten years working there with diverse organizations such as the Peace Corps, the Ford Foundation, and the Asian Development Bank.
The consensus on the street was that the only way for Thailand to rid itself of Dr. Thaksin was through a military coup. In a system dominated by money politics, there was no way that he could be defeated in the election that would have taken place in
November 2006. In terms of restoring Thailand’s most democratic system ever as reflected in the progressive 1997 Constitution, the coup took one step backward in the hopes of taking two steps forward.
In the evening of September 19, 2006, the tanks surrounding the Government House were the only visual evidence of the coup. It was peaceful coup and not a single shot was fired.
It is important to note that both the King and Prem Tinasulanond, head of the Privy Council and senior statesman (former Prime Minister, 1980-1988), were unhappy with Thaksin’s performance as prime minister. The Thai King, though above partisan politics, nevertheless may use his power of granting or withholding legitimacy when he sees the country in crisis (as in 1973, 1976, 1981, and 1992). The instance in 1981, when there was a coup attempt against then Prime Minister Prem, involved the King moving physically to Korat where Prem had fled to send a signal that the King was withholding legitimacy from the coup group. The King did not object to the coup against Thaksin or withhold legitimacy from the coup group, because he saw Thailand spinning into political chaos; there was no parliament, both major political parties were on the verge of being abolished, and there was potential for violent clashes between the highly polarized Thaksin and anti-Thaksin camps.
After the coup, there were pictures of smiling soldiers being given flowers by people in Bangkok. In Bangkok, where Dr. Thaksin’s popularity had declined considerably, many welcomed the coup.
Two groups in Thailand, however, were strongly opposed to the coup. First were those who were upset that democratic processes had been violated by the coup, and have since registered a number of protests. Even if they did not like Dr. Thaksin, they wanted to see him removed through a democratic electoral process. One recent articulation of this feeling occurred in book of essays in Thai on the coup, published by the magazine, Fa Dieo Kan in February 2007. A major theme of the book was that the coup reflected an elite minority dominating Thai politics.
The second group upset with the coup consisted of those in the countryside, especially in the north and northeast (representing roughly 54 percent of the electorate), who had benefited directly from Thaksin’s populist policies. In fact, a major legacy of the Thaksin government is that in the future, Thai political parties will need to be much more attentive to the needs of the rural poor.
The Future of Thai Democracy and Dr. Thaksin
Soon after taking power, the coup group put in place an interim constitution, appointed a prime minister and cabinet, and a National Legislative Assembly of 242 members. The cabinet, though gerontocratic (the prime minister and his cabinet have been labeled “Old Ginger”), includes several highly respected individuals, such as the new Minister of Education, Dr. Wichit Srisa-an, known for his integrity and commitment to innovation. Despite being an interim minister, Dr. Wichit has moved decisively to reform the admissions system for public schools to increase equity.
The coup was, therefore, understandably followed by high expectations for the new government. The government led by Anand Panyarachun installed after the last successful coup in 1991 was one of the most effective in Thai history. By contrast the performance of this government has been disappointing, particularly in its handling of the economy and, aside from Dr. Wichit’s school reform, noticeable lack of decisiveness – a sharp contrast with Dr. Thaksin. In the most recent political poll taken March 2, 2007, the approval rating of the new government had dropped to 34.8 percent from a high of 90 percent in early October of last year. This drop was magnified by the government’s handling of a series of eight bomb attacks in Bangkok on New Year’s Eve 2006 that killed three individuals and wounded others. Such political terrorism in Bangkok is unprecedented. The government too quickly blamed Dr. Thaksin and his supporters without evidence, which contributed to a decline in its own popularity.
In an attempt to strengthen the interim government, the King approved a cabinet reshuffle on March 7, 2007. Three new cabinet ministers were appointed, the most significant being the choice of Dr. Chalongphob Sussangkarn as the new Minister of Finance. Widely respected, he is a former economist at the World Bank and former president of Thailand’s major economic policy think thank, the Thailand Development Research Institute.
New elections are scheduled for later this year in December. One complication is that on May 30, the Constitutional Court will decide whether to abolish the Thai Rak Thai and/or the Democratic Party, based on allegations of illegal actions during the annulled April 2006 election. With the weakening and possible abolition of Dr. Thaksin’s Thai Rak Thai Party, the Democrat Party (if it survives) could possibly win the election, leaving Apisit Vejjajiva as the new Prime Minister. Apisit could be considered the “JFK of Thailand.” He is young, handsome, articulate, cosmopolitan, and like, Dr. Thaksin, highly educated. He is in stark contrast to the “Old Ginger” image of the current interim government. Another possible next prime minister is Dr. Somkid Jatusripitak, who, with a doctorate from Northwestern, was one of the most respected members of the Thaksin cabinet. He was asked to serve the new interim government to handle international economic matters, but quickly resigned after protests about his appointment.
Hopefully, the new government formed after the 2007 elections will return Thailand to the democratic path and not undermine the new constitution, which seriously needs to address the complex issue of the dominance of money politics. The new constitution is now being drafted and will be subject to the first national referendum in Thai history this coming summer. There is hope that it will build on the progressive nature of the 1997 constitution. The Democrat Party, though considered weak in decision-making, has consistently committed to democratic processes and provided prime ministers with personal integrity.
