TMCnet News
Thailand politics: Impasse as protests continue(EIU Viewswire Via Thomson Dialog NewsEdge)COUNTRY BRIEFING FROM THE ECONOMIST INTELLIGENCE UNIT The political situation in Thailand remains extremely uncertain. Mass protests calling for the resignation of the prime minister, Thaksin Shinawatra, have continued in Bangkok. But Thaksin has refused to step down and appears determined to see off the threat to his premiership. Meanwhile, the snap general election set to take place on April 2nd is in danger of becoming a farce unless the opposition parties change their minds over boycotting the poll. All of the above factors are creating an impasse that daily threatens political stability. Something, in other words, has to give. It is possible that an end to the impasse could come from one of the protagonists themselves--from Thaksin himself, the People's Alliance for Democracy (a loose coalition of anti-Thaksin forces), or the former parliamentary opposition. However, the uncompromising rhetoric of both the pro- and anti-Thaksin camps to date suggests this is unlikely without some external factor forcing a change in either one or the other side's position. One such factor is the possibility of intervention by the king, Bhumibol Adulyadej. Anti-Thaksin figures have already sought to petition the monarch to appoint an interim prime minister in place of Thaksin, and the king is so revered in Thailand that it is almost inconceivable that anyone would oppose his ruling were he to make one. Whether or not the monarch will step in to end the political crisis is another matter altogether, though. It seems unlikely he would do so unless the demonstrations turned violent, and even then he might be more reluctant to get involved given the fact that the current crisis concerns a civilian government (unlike in 1992, when the king intervened after a violent crackdown by the military-backed government on pro-democracy demonstrators). Assuming that the king does not step in and that neither Thaksin nor his opponents change their positions, the factor most likely to prevent the impasse from continuing--and thus a potential destabilising influence in itself--is the approach of the April 2nd general election. An election has to be held within 60 days of Thaksin's dissolution of parliament (which took place on February 24th), so even if the polls were delayed they would still have to take place by late April. If the opposition goes ahead with its boycott of the polls, it will rob the elections of much of their legitimacy. This would be a setback for the prime minister, who is eager to prove that the majority of Thais outside the capital still support him. Yet despite the calculations of Thaksin's opponents, the farcical spectacle of an election contested only by Thaksin's Thai Rak Thai (TRT) party--a one-horse race, in other words--may not prove disastrous for the prime minister if turnout is still strong. The TRT won 377 out of 500 seats in the last election, and although it would be unlikely to win as many this time, the party could still conceivably claim a popular mandate if voter turnout were high, particularly in rural areas where support for Thaksin remains strong. If turnout were low, however, it would be more difficult for Thaksin to remain in power while legitimately claiming a democratic mandate. But boycotting the April election creates as many potential difficulties for opposition groups like the Democrat Party as it does for Thaksin. To many voters, refusing to take part in the election could appear unsporting and contrary to the spirit of democracy. (One could argue, after all, that the election is the Democrats' chance to show that the people have turned against Thaksin.) Not only this, but boycotting the polls also risks giving the impression, probably correct, that the Democrats fear losing heavily to the TRT in an open contest. The current situation is ultimately to the benefit of neither Thaksin nor his opponents. That the stand-off has continued therefore suggests each side is trying to manoeuvre the other into backing down first. If instability causes the election to be delayed, for example, this could encourage Thaksin's own party members to defect and run against him. (Indeed, one of the reasons Thaksin called a snap poll is likely to have been to take advantage of a rule stipulating that politicians cannot contest an election if they have changed party fewer than 90 days beforehand.) If the election goes ahead on April 2nd, of course, the 90-day rule will still apply and TRT lawmakers will be far less likely to switch sides for fear of losing their seats. Thaksin, meanwhile, may be looking for some means of forcing the Democrats (either morally or legally) to take part in the election, in a way that would both discredit them and increase the chance that a post-election TRT-led government would have sufficient legitimacy to rule. SOURCE: ViewsWire Asia |