Who remembers that Thailand, was once marketed as the “Land of a Thousand Smiles”?
Instead of uniting the country, Sunday’s election — where voters cast ballots in 333 of the country’s 375 constituencies. — failed to defuse an increasingly violent stalemate.
On one side is Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra’s government. She’s clobbered as of fronting for her brother, Thaksin, ousted in 2006. In the other corner is former Deputy Prime Minister, Suthep Thaugsuban. His People’s Democratic Reform Committee demands an unelected council to effect “reforms”.
Thaksin is corrupt. And from abroad, he foments unrest. His desire to supplant the monarchy, through manipulation “feeds a visceral hate for Thaksin among well-educated, worldly Thais”.
This impasse should interest Filipinos, Inquirer’s Randy David wrote. Twice, we were in the same fix. Edsa 1 and 2 challenged the right of incumbents — Ferdinand Marcos, then Joseph Estrada — to continue wielding powers of government. That recast “the meaning of legitimacy …that it does not rest solely, or primarily, on winning an election”.
David foresees “dysfunctional return” of the Thai military.
This postpones the problem of political legitimacy. What Thai politicians seek is a way of justifying political power “appropriate to a modern and more complex society”.
Set David’s analysis in economic and historical context. We worked in Thailand, as a political exile turned United Nations officer, for 17 years. Thailand and the Philippines had, in the 1970s, almost identical demographic and economic profiles. Both were dubbed the “Asean Twins”.
Thailand adopted a population policy. We waffled.
Today, there are 69.5 million Thais and . 98.7 million Filipinos, The difference is about seven Singapores. A bogged-down demographic transition carries a stiff human cost. Consider the “Under-Age 5 Death Rates”. Here, 29 out of every 1,000 kids die. It is 11 for Thailand.
Sunday “there were no winners, only losers” wrote Elliot Brennan of Sweden’s Institute for Security and Development Policy. GDP growth, in 2014 may dwindle from over 5 to less than 2 percent in Southeast Asia’s second biggest economy.
Thaksin supporters, in the northern city of Chiang Mai, chant about setting up “a temporary capital along the porous border. Thai-Myanmar trafficking routes through which they’ve funneled opium and methamphetamine for decades. Next door Myanmar’s still fragile transition to democracy could be savaged, Yangon has conveyed concerns.
A coup would be the country’s 19th since 1932. Some fret about the threat of civil war. That’d ignite unrest in Muslim separatists in Southern Thailand — rock ASEAN to its roots. Dismounting from the whirlwind will only become harder later on.
Bhumibol belongs to the Chakri Dynasty which started to rule Siam in 1782. And what jars about today’s clashes is the almost complete absence of a king who, for 67 years, wielded a moral influence greater than constitutions..
The king marked his 86th birthday last Dec. 5. As always, a respectful truce marked the occasion. But there was no masking his frailty as he struggled through a short speech. With Queen Sirikit, 81, he lives in a seaside palace to the south. Both suffer debilitating ailments.
But the brawl between Red and Yellow shirts, brings up a rarely discussed issue where lèse-majesté laws are stiff. Did he fail to prepare a future for Thailand as a mature democracy after he passes? asks Paul Handley in “The Royal Meddler”.
The absolute throne was overthrown when Bhumibol was five. “He built a traditional, deified Buddhist kingship, at first guided by die-hard princes of the Ancien régime, and later, when he found his own stride, in concert with the military.”
Now, his team is crumbling. Prime Minister Prem Tinsulanonda, 93, is ailing. His grip on the military has slackened. The Buddhist supreme patriarch just died at 100. Both were Bhumibol’s key supporters.
Few Thais knew another king. “Bhumibol has been the one constant in their lives so this looming end portends a frightening shift in their cosmos.” The sole male in the Chakri line is Crown Prince Vajiralongkorn, 61.
He has a track record of trouble, domestically and internationally. These were hushed up by the palace. His three successive wives and many other girlfriends raise queries over whether he is suitable for the throne.
In an unprecedented interview in the early ’80s, Queen Sirkit said: “My son likes his weekends.” The top people around King Bhumibol dislike and distrust the crown prince, a Wikileaked US embassy cable says, adding, “But they have no solution to the danger he poses.”
Thailand lacks what constitutional monarchies like Denmark or Britain have: rules for succession that ensure against “tragic capriciousness of royal succession.”
When Bhumibol passes, as all mortals must, what will likely fall into Vajiralongkorn’s lap is the structure of a throne closely tied to the military, with institutionalized disdain for the parliamentary democracy mapped out in Thai constitutions since 1932.
“Drastic change will be forced on the next generation,” Paul Handley wrote in “The King Never Smiles”, published in 2006 by Yale University, the book is banned in Bangkok. Handley wrote: “Ultimately, members of the royal family will have to make use of one of monarchy’s unspoken prerogatives: ability and the right to to remake itself. That is the key to it’s survival.”
Disclaimer: The comments uploaded on this site do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of management and owner of Cebudailynews. We reserve the right to exclude comments that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial standards.
