Political Turmoil in Thailand: Thaksin, Protests, Elections, and the King

Abstract

In the concluding section of my preceding assessment of the political situation inThailand (see eastasia.at, Vol. 4, No. 2, December 2005), I anticipated six monthsof suspense. Factors assumed to contribute to this suspense were the decision ofthe Supreme Administrative Court on the privatization of the Electricity GeneratingAuthority of Thailand (EGAT); a disappointing cabinet reshuffle; the second Senateelection on 19 April 2006 producing a TRT-dominated Upper House; and ano-confidence debate against a number of ministers for alleged corruption. In reality,the course of political events unexpectedly accelerated. On 24 February 2006,Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra dissolved the House of Representatives andcalled for new elections to be held on 2 April.From the “Sondhi Phenomenon” to “Thaksin ook pai !”After Sondhi Limthongkul—the founder of the newspaper Manager, and since lateSeptember 2005 on a self-styled mission to rescue the Thai nation from theclutches of “Thaksinocracy” by calling for a royally-appointed government—on 13January 2006 led about 3,000 protestors from Lumpini Park to Government House,his star seemed on the wane. A few hundred of Sondhi’s followers had forced theirway into the compound. Many observers thought that this action went too far.Moreover, it was lamented that Sondhi could not present any new revelations aboutThaksin’s alleged myriad of serious wrongdoings. Reflecting on the possibility thatpolitically-oriented non-governmental organizations (NGOs) could join Sondhi inwhat appeared to be a personally motivated retaliation campaign against the primeminister, Thirayuth Boonmee, a leading social critic, said that “activists needed moreevidence of corruption to try to bring down the Thaksin government” (The Nation, 15Jan. 2006). The Nation (20 Jan. 2006) proclaimed that “Mob politics is not theanswer,” and spoke of the “self-styled Thaksin haters-cum-reformists” with their“less-than-transparent cause.” The editorial continued:It is not inconceivable that a genuine people’s movement for politicalreform can arise from Sondhi’s campaign. It is simply a matter ofrebalancing the mix: more rationality, less raw emotion, more publiceducation, less incitement.[i]Since Sondhi’s “crusade against Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra falters”(Bangkok Post, 22 Jan. 2006), a mass demonstration at Sanam Luang, announcedfor 4 February, was generally seen as a good way for Sondhi to achieve a “softlanding” (ibid.) of his campaign. He had announced that he would end that event bysubmitting a petition to the King and then withdraw from organizing any moreprotests. In short, Thaksin’s political life seemed well on its way to being relieved ofsome burden. Even this burden should not have been taken as seriously as manyobservers and political actors did, thus increasing political tension. After all, in ademocracy, one should not be too surprised that some people are unhappy withwhat the government does. Neither should the public demonstration of such dissentbe perceived as something unusual in an open political order.[ii] In any case, Political Turmoil in Thailand: Thaksin, Protests, Elections, and the King