What Went Wrong with the Thai Democracy?

The coup on 22 May 2014 in Thailand has, for the present, caused a break in the political divide and impasse, a problem that the previous elected government was unable to solve. Many were worried that the deeply entrenched political polarization which had existed for almost a decade would lead to bloodshed if it was allowed to continue. So many questions were asked on what went wrong with the presumed Thai democracy. Why did the coup happen? What would be the future of democracy in Thailand? How can it be consolidated? These questions reflect that Thailand is facing a serious problem of democratic consolidation.

Many scholars on democratization agree that the road to a stable democracy is not always smooth. They agree that democratic consolidation in many countries is not an easy task, and Thailand is no exception.

Democratic consolidation depends on a variety of factors which vary from one country to another. Nonetheless, one of the major causes for the instability of a democratic regime is related to political legitimacy. Any political regime which does not secure legitimacy will find it hard to survive since its legitimacy depends on its acceptance by its citizens as expressed through major political forces. There is no need at this stage to debate in detail here how to develop and fortify a democratic regime’s legitimacy. However, it is accepted that the essential requirement for strengthening such legitimacy is the regime’s effectiveness in meeting the needs of its people and the implementation of democratic values, practices and procedures.

Political Polarization and the Crisis of Political Legitimacy

In the case of Thailand during the past decade, we have witnessed a deeply entrenched political polarization which had never reached such extreme levels in the past. This divisiveness, initially caused by a conflict between the pro-and anti-Thaksin groups, later developed into a crisis of political legitimacy. The anti-Thaksin group was formed around 2001 by a mass media tycoon, Sonthi Limthongkul, and later joined by some prominent political elites, notably Chamlong Srimuang, former Governor of Bangkok. In the beginning, the group was composed of thousands from the urban middle class and some upper-middle class who believed that Thaksin was leading the country towards one party rule. He was accused of trying to amass his family’s fortunes through “policy corruption”. For example, when he was the Prime Minister, the Parliament, presumably under his influence, passed a law enabling him to sell his family’s telecom company, Shin Corp, to Temasek of Singapore and be tax exempt for the profits made. In addition, some of his populist policies, especially the provision of village funds (one million baht (US$31,000) per village) and medical care (thirty baht per one hospital visit), were criticized by a number of scholars. They argued that such policies would, in the long run, affect the national economy detrimentally. However, what the anti-Thaksin groups were most concerned about was the fact that Thaksin seemed to allow the left-wing elements in his party to freely criticize the monarchy even though most of the criticisms were unfounded. The anti-government protest rapidly received more popular support both in urban and rural areas. This gradually led to an erosion of the political legitimacy of Thaksin’s government.

On the Thaksin side, the then Prime Minister and his political colleagues established a political movement, commonly known as the “Red Shirts” movement to counter the “Yellow Shirts” (People’s Alliance for Democracy, PAD) and to strengthen Thaksin’s legitimacy. The movement mobilized rural villagers mostly from the north and the northeast to rally in Bangkok to demonstrate the strength of their support. The movement also wanted to show how popular the government’s populist policies were especially in rural provinces and towns in the north and the northeast. The political figures playing an important role in establishing the power bases of Thaksin in these two parts of the country were left-leaning party members, some of them being former student activists who fled into the jungle after the coup in 1976 to join the Communist Party of Thailand (CPT...