A lesson from Thailand
Thailand has a long history of military intervention since it became a democracy in 1932.
The dramatic results from Thailand’s general election of July 3 have by now clearly indicating that regardless of the efforts of the elite, people will express their own opinions when it comes to casting the ballot. The sister of former Thai prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, Yingluck Shinawatra, who has been heading the Puea Thai party for just six weeks, clinched a majority in Thailand’s 500-seat parliament, with 265 seats compared to 159 for the ruling Democrat Party of Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva, who promptly conceded defeat.
The results are extremely significant. Thaksin, now in exile in Dubai, remains a key figure in the minds of the many people who voted for him. The majority among them are the poor of Thailand, who had originally brought the populist politician to power before he was ousted in a violent 2006 military coup, with Abhisit coming to power after the 2007 election from which Thaksin’s party was barred amidst allegations of corruption. Even now, while the military and the defeated Democrats continue to talk of a jail term for Thaksin, it seems likely he will return to the country under an amnesty declared by his party. His portraits, along with those of his sister, already adorn streets across Thailand.
It is clear then that the Puea Thai’s policies of offering computers for nearly one million school-children and introducing economic reform to benefit the underprivileged has greater influence among most Thais than the issue of corruption. Quite clearly, people are undisturbed by the charges against Thaksin. The elite, particularly the military, just as obviously does not care for his socialist-style politicking, and are alarmed by politicians who inspire public passions. The parallels with our own situation are easy to draw. Thailand has a long history of military intervention since it became a democracy in 1932. While people have made their priorities clear, the question now is whether these will be respected or more attempts made to manipulate matters through the use of propaganda and force.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 11th, 2011.
The results are extremely significant. Thaksin, now in exile in Dubai, remains a key figure in the minds of the many people who voted for him. The majority among them are the poor of Thailand, who had originally brought the populist politician to power before he was ousted in a violent 2006 military coup, with Abhisit coming to power after the 2007 election from which Thaksin’s party was barred amidst allegations of corruption. Even now, while the military and the defeated Democrats continue to talk of a jail term for Thaksin, it seems likely he will return to the country under an amnesty declared by his party. His portraits, along with those of his sister, already adorn streets across Thailand.
It is clear then that the Puea Thai’s policies of offering computers for nearly one million school-children and introducing economic reform to benefit the underprivileged has greater influence among most Thais than the issue of corruption. Quite clearly, people are undisturbed by the charges against Thaksin. The elite, particularly the military, just as obviously does not care for his socialist-style politicking, and are alarmed by politicians who inspire public passions. The parallels with our own situation are easy to draw. Thailand has a long history of military intervention since it became a democracy in 1932. While people have made their priorities clear, the question now is whether these will be respected or more attempts made to manipulate matters through the use of propaganda and force.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 11th, 2011.