Thailand and Mass Politics

      Thailand and Mass Politics:Thailand’s Puea Thai Party won a solid parliamentary majority in yesterday’s election, and Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva graciously conceded defeat. Thais are left to wonder whether the new government will grant former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra amnesty for corruption and allow him to return home, and whether the military will step in to prevent that from happening.

For now, however, one outcome of the election is clear enough. The changes in Thai society that made the rise of Mr. Thaksin possible and that he furthered in his five years in office until he was ousted by the military in 2006 are continuing.

The incumbent Democrat Party and the challenger Puea Thai fought this contest primarily on the basis of party platforms and the personal appeal of the candidates. That may sound unremarkable, but Thai politics used to be the province of bland characters who campaigned on their ability to bring benefits to their local constituencies.

Patronage and bribery of voters continue to play a role in Thai politics today. But it is striking that in recent weeks, both sides mobilized their supporters based on their vision for the nation as a whole. Pro-Thaksin Thai Puea set the agenda for rural development and globalization, and the Democrats were forced to follow.

Both sides pledged more aid for the poor, including measures that may be enough to call populist. Their proposals to increase minimum wages and more government support for farmers differ only in details. Many promises of public spending have raised concerns that the new government may collapse in Thailand’s public finances.

A more positive sign was the way in which both parties competed to show that they enhance the competitiveness of Thailand. Both offer much-needed investment in infrastructure and education.

It is noteworthy that during the election campaign, Democrats dropped a reference to “sufficiency economy”. In the 1970s, King Bhumibol Adulyadej coined the term to keep the debt caused by excessive and over-consumption in rural areas. Since then it has evolved into a nationalist, and sometimes the autarkic philosophy. After the 2006 coup, the military junta revived the idea and the Democrats continue on the words to her after Prime Minister Abhisit took office in late 2008.

Most Thais understand what the romanticism of the past. Mr Thaksin called on villagers to start a local industry and production of industrial goods. Increasing rural incomes, and many farmers went abroad and understand that great opportunities await, if the government removes obstacles to growth.

Puea Thai benefit from a proven track record, Mr. Thaksin’s development. As the campaign wore on and the Democratic Party lost ground, Mr. Abhisit began to emphasize the links of their opponents, to pro-Thaksin “red shirt” movement, which occupied the center of Bangkok, last year. The episode ended in violence, with government troops killed at least 91 protesters and burning red shirts of the building.

Thai society remains highly polarized and these events Thaksin period in which former prime minister is sometimes used his power to silence critics. But after his fall, the military government, and then the Democrats could not continue more and more popular and successful Thaksin’s policies. They also could not strengthen the weak institutions of government that allowed violations of Mr. Thaksin. Instead they gave the Thais an impression that they would like to turn the clock back to an era when elite shared power among themselves, with little regard for voters.

As this election showed, Thailand irrevocably reached the stage where it will be governed by the mass parties. Creating a system of checks and balances to control the political competition has become the most urgent task. Some analysts, such as Thitinan Pongsudhirak write in these pages last week, urged both parties to reach an informal agreement on the establishment of norms of behavior. This is necessary in the short term, but the next government will need to begin the process of revising the constitution to create a reliable and independent institution that oversees the political process. Without such reforms, political uncertainty will continue to hinder the development of Thailand.