It took four months following elections in March, but Thailand finally has a government in place. After five years of autocratic rule by the generals who overthrew an elected government in 2014, the new government has promised to lead Thailand to an orderly, democratic future. Thai history, however, indicates the road ahead will not be smooth.
Already Prime Minister Gen. Prayut Chan-o-cha, reappointed after ruling as an autocrat for five years, has hinted at another coup, struggled to cobble together a shaky coalition, and stormed out of Parliament in a rage.
Coalition Challenges
The key problem for Gen. Prayut is that he depends on a shaky coalition of 20 parties to cling to a narrow majority in Parliament. It took weeks of negotiations to get 251 of the 500 MPs to join the coalition. Keeping them in line will be even more difficult.
The 20 coalition partners have a jumble of policy and personal objectives that range from legalizing marijuana to lowering personal income tax to providing stipends to the poor. Even the prime minister’s own Palang Pracharath party will be difficult to manage. Less than two years old, the party has little ideological coherence. Members range from conservative retired military officers to former members of the populist party that Prayut ousted.
Some cabinet members have unsavory reputations and previous legal problems. Thitinan Pongsudhirak, a professor of political science at Chulalongkorn University, described the coalition as “dominated by patronage politics and paybacks.”
“The unsavory few who have had a shady and criminalized past are surprising because they will be a lightning rod on the Prayuth government’s credibility,” he told the Associated Press. “It suggests that Prayuth has paid a high price for luring old-style politicians and influential figures into his party and Cabinet.”
One of his coalition partners, the Democrat Party, actually campaigned on a pledge by its leader to oppose Prayut’s return to power. When, after the election, the party reversed course and voted to join the coalition, party leader and former Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva resigned in protest. It will not be an easy task for Prayut to command loyalty or even minimal cooperation from some of the Democrat MPs in Parliament.
The factional problems became obvious in the difficult negotiations to form the government. Vicious competition for potentially lucrative ministerial posts attracted so much negative attention that Prayut issued a statement apologizing for “conflict within the party.”
Prime Minister Prayut presents the new government’s policy statement in Parliament
He warned the squabbling politicians not to force him to resort to “the old method that no one wants to see happen” – another military coup.
The opposition’s strength in Parliament – 248 MPs – will make it difficult for Prayut’s government to pass essential legislation or withstand no confidence motions. Since one opposition party was disqualified during the campaign, the number of opposition MPs may not reflect the full extent of popular support possible in the next elections. The leading opposition party, the Pheu Thai Party (PTP) has fervent backing in Thailand’s rural areas of the north and northeast. Another, the Future Forward Party (FFP), won a surprising number of seats on a wave of enthusiasm from young voters.
The new government’s performance in delivering its policy statement in Parliament this week was not reassuring. Opposition MPs attacked the statement as a “bundle of wishlists” lacking practicality and implementation. Prachachart Party leader Wan Muhamad Noor Matha ripped into Prayut for leading the coup.
“How can a coup maker uphold democracy?” he asked. “You tore the constitution to pieces. That’s definitely treason.”
Prayut came under attack for increasing military spending, turning a blind eye to corruption and writing the new constitution for his personal political benefit.
Sereepisut Temiyavet, the former national police chief and leader of a small opposition party accused Prayut of “cheating” his way into power
“If I were him, I wouldn’t be this shameless and still hold on to power,” Sereepisut taunted Prayut.
The prime minister reacted angrily to the attack, slammed down his documents and stormed out of Parliament.
Sereepisut Temiyavet (l) was ordered to leave Parliament for his attacks on the prime minister.
This initial performance added to doubts that Prayut has the temperament and political skills to maneuver through the political trials ahead.
Lessons of History
As I noted in earlier blogs, the situation in 2019 is not unprecedented. Coup leaders have tried to maintain their power through elected governments several times before – in 1957, 1969 and 1992. None succeeded.
The current situation, of course, has important differences, but it is especially like that in 1969.
Elections in 1969 were an attempt by Gen. Thanom Kittikachorn and the army to legitimize their power seized in a coup. As in 2019, the military party failed to win a majority. Thanom’s party won 75 of the 219 seats (34%), forcing it into an unstable coalition. By comparison, Prayut’s Palang Pracharath party won only 116 of 500 seats (23%).
Thanom’s ability to manage the government suffered when, after elections, he was unable to use the dictatorial powers he had enjoyed for the previous five years. Similarly, Prayut has now lost the power under section 44 of the interim constitution to rule by decree – a power he too wielded for five years.
Both Thanom and Prayut face a restive rural sector. In 1969 a Communist insurgency was growing and a Malay Muslim insurgency was active in the southern border provinces. The military fought these insurgencies with a sometimes vicious suppression campaign and propaganda that vilified all opposition to the government.
Fortunately, Prayut does not face such an armed Communist insurgency, but unrest in the far south continues. The rural poor, however, remain a threat to renew large scale protests that led to serious violence in Bangkok in 2010. General Apirat Kongsompong – the current Commander in Chief of the Royal Thai Army recently stirred resentment by using a slur from the 1970s against opponents of the Prayut government. Prayut and the army will have to take care to avoid worsening dangerous political divisions in Thai society – divisions he promised to heal when he seized power in 2014.
The Thanom government faced serious foreign policy challenges as it’s main international supporter, the US government, began to distance itself from Southeast Asia and withdraw from the conflict in Vietnam under President Nixon. It was clear Thanom needed to develop better relations with the Communist regimes in Vietnam and China, but he failed to do so. Prayut’s foreign policy challenge is far less severe, but he too needs to adjust to fading US interest in the region and the fast-growing influence of China.
Money Politics
Thanom’s most immediate problems however, came in managing the government – passing a budget, allocating funds and appointing senior officials – amid a slowing economy. He was repeatedly frustrated by experienced politicians in his own coalition who maneuvered for political and financial gain. When he submitted a budget for 1970, the Parliamentary Budget Scrutiny Committee refused to approve it because expenditures were too high. At the same time, members of Thanom’s party were demanding two million baht each for projects in their constituencies.
Prayut also faces a slowing economy. According to the Asian Development Bank, economic growth will dip from 4.1 percent in 2018 to 3.9 percent this year and 3.7 percent in 2020. A drought threatens agriculture and slowing growth in China threatens exports.
Like Thanom, Prayut may be torn between the need for careful economic management and the demands of greedy members of their own coalitions. The negotiations to form the Prayut government showed that some coalition partners insisted on cabinet portfolios that offer opportunities for financial return. Prayut has claimed that his government was effective in suppressing corruption, but one of his closest associates was found to have accepted “loans” of luxury watches, yet he was appointed to Prayut’s new cabinet.
Keeping the Army Happy
Like Thanom, Prayut must not only placate his coalition partners, but also his supporters in the military. Thanom had support from the US government for improved military equipment, but Prayut must rely on limited tax income. In his five years in power, Prayut increased defense spending by 18.6%. In the first session of Parliament he came come under attack for past and planned arms purchases.
Will the economy and the Parliament allow him to continue increasing the military budget when Thailand faces limited tax income and no obvious military threat?
Prayut appears to have recognized the problem of assuring military support by taking the defense ministry portfolio himself. But that places him in the line of fire for other military grievances. Thanom sought to maintain his power over the army by repeatedly postponing his retirement date and promoting only his allies. His efforts to hold onto his army position ultimately worked against him when the army refused to obey orders to suppress anti-government demonstrations.
Some analysts suggest that Prayut’s influence over army factions has steaduily diminished with the retirement of his closest allies. The last two army commanders came from factions outside Prayut’s immediate circle of supporters. A key challenge will come next year when Gen. Apirat retires as army commander. Who will replace him? Who will decide on the other key promotions in the army? The recent death of former army commander and prime minister, Prem Tinsulanonda, has removed an influential voice in coordinating army promotions and moderating internal military conflicts.
Army Commander Apirat Kongsompong (l) and Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha (r)
Another problem that plagued Thanom has also sprung up against Prayut – revision of the constitution. Not only the opposition, but even some of Prayut’s coalition parties have insisted that the current constitution, drafted and promulgated under Prayut, must be revised to make it less authoritarian.
Only two years after his election as prime minister, Thanom, frustrated by all these difficulties, simply abolished Parliament, re-appointed himself prime minister and resumed ruling by decree. It didn’t last. The Thanom government collapsed in 1973 after widespread protests.
Prime Minister Prayut will need great political skills and some luck to avoid a similar fate.