In an effort to take back control, Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat has now declared a state of emergency at the two airports. Everyone is talking about a reluctant coalition of the police, the navy and the air force coming together to disperse the protesters. It is hard to see how that can be done without a very firm hand. The last time the police tried to quell a protest in Bangkok scores were injured by exploding tear gas canisters. The protesters at the airports have declared their intention to resist. The army has, for its own reasons, decided to stay out of the immediate fray.
This showdown at Bangkok’s airports has, however, motivated the Thai army chief, General Anupong Paochinda, to call on the government to dissolve parliament and hold fresh elections. He has also said that the protesters—who have not just shut down the airports but have also caused disruption and violence in other parts of Bangkok—should do their bit by calling off their provocations. This advice has been ignored by both sides.
It will take more than platitudes from General Anupong to end the current conflict.
Crudely, on one side are those, like the government and its millions of supporters, who see electoral democracy as the supreme vehicle for expressing the peoples’ will. Their embrace of a rough-and-tumble, cut-and-thrust form of politics is certainly motivated by a degree of pragmatism. These are the same people who have been on the side of repeated electoral victories born out of professionally orchestrated campaigns of a style unprecedented in Thai history. Notwithstanding their self-interest in supporting democratic processes, this side has shown a willingness to drive debates about issues that matter to the tens of millions of ordinary Thais who make ordinary livings in the provinces. Those who support this perspective, who often present themselves in red shirts, describe electoral politics as a way of distributing power and resources to the masses. They are uncompromisingly populist in approach.
On the other side are those whose wariness of corrupt, “immoral” politicians has encouraged them to undermine democratically-elected governments. In 2006 this side helped spark the September military coup. Today, the protesters at the airports speak of a vague “New Politics” where the voting franchise is restricted and/or the majority of parliament is appointed. They detest the current government and all the “darkness” it purportedly represents. Government efforts to change the constitution, and to “whitewash” the crimes of the government deposed in the military coup, are key motivations for their rebellion. Importantly, their side has, over the past few years, been increasingly associated with some members of the Thai royal family. It is that association, signaled by the royal yellow shirts that they wear, that is integral to any thorough analysis of Thailand’s current showdown.
What General Anupong’s call for fresh elections hides is the reality that in any vote the current government, even if it is disbanded and forced to again re-brand, would likely triumph over its opponents. Consistently since 2001, the campaigning machine built by deposed former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, and now at the disposal of Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat, has shown a capacity to win at the ballot box. The opposition Democrats would not need a big swing to be in a position to form government but, so far, they have demonstrated little inclination to pursue a vigorous grass roots electoral campaign. There is no reason to expect that the next election, whenever that might be, will derail the current government’s popular mandate.
But, right now, electoral dominance may not be enough to guarantee that Somchai stays in charge. Murmurs that a coup is imminent have increased as the brinksmanship of the protesters ratchets up day-by-day.
It is all coming to a head at a bad time.
As the global economy suffers continuing setbacks, and as many industrialised countries lurch into recession, Thailand is fracturing in a spectacular fashion. In a year when investors are exercising increasing caution, and when things are getting tighter across the board, the current crisis is inopportune. Disrupting the lucrative tourist industry at the beginning of the “high season” will also hit millions of ordinary Thais who rely on it for their survival.
And all of the international attention has only drawn more interest to the often unspoken role of the royal family in Thai politics.
Unless something dramatic happens in the meantime the immediate watch point is the king’s speech next week. Each year he uses the occasion of his birthday, 5 December, to address the nation. In most years it is watched closely and dissected by local and international observers. The alignment of the People’s Alliance for Democracy with members of the royal family will make it hard for the king to ignore some awkward issues this time around. Throughout the turbulence of 2008 he has remained very quiet, even as a group publicly identified with his “defence” has sought to precipitate the collapse of the government.
Exactly what he says in his birthday speech, if he indeed makes one, will be crucial. A siege at his kingdom’s main international airport is not, one must assume, the birthday present the king had hoped for.
–
Nicholas Farrelly works in the ANU’s Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies. He is the co-founder of New Mandala, a blog on mainland Southeast Asian affairs. On Thai political issues, he has a co-written op-ed in today’s The Age.