29 November 2008 - Dangerous Democracy

Dangerous Democracy
Saturday 29 November 2008

Aside from events in India, the international press has been covering the ongoing political and social unrest in Thailand.

The unrest has been going on for months. On the surface it is a dispute regarding the alledged manipulation of the current government by the deposed former Prime Minister - Thaksin.

He was a wealthy business man who became immensely wealthy after taking office - a common benefit of holding political office in many countries throughout the world. What was unique about Thaksin was that he shared some of his good fortune, or rather government revenues - he's not that generous, with the poor people of Thailand. Under Thaksin loan programs were developed for poor Thais. Duang's father received such a loan. A basic healthcare program was provided for poor Thais. With these government programs Thaksin became very popular in Isaan.

Thaksin gave some hope and addressed some of the concerns as well as needs of the disaffected rural poor i.e. Isaan. This gave a recognizable face to the class stratification of Thai society. Thaksin most likely utilized his popularity with the rural poor to enhance his political and personal fortunes. This upset the status quo and added a new dynamic to the social fabric in Thailand. There are always powerful and influential forces that resist change.

He was overthrown in a military coup two years ago due to charges of corruption and the ensuing civil unrest associated with his opponents and supporters - a situation very similar to today.

The following is a article from MSNBC which gives a fairly good synopsis of the current state of affairs in Thailand.

THAILAND'S POLITICAL MAZE – A BEGINNERS GUIDE(From: .. --> m -->http://worldblog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/ ... 89630.aspx.. --> m -->)Posted: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 1:07 PMFiled Under: Bangkok, Thailand By Ian Williams, NBC News correspondentBangkok's massive multi-million dollar airport terminal tonight resembles a night market. It's teaming with yellow-clad protesters and lined with make-shift stalls selling badges, t-shirts, stickers and jewelry, as well as food and drink. Outside, the passenger drop-off zone is a sea of yellow protesters rattling their plastic "clappers" as they listen to fiery speeches from the top of truck. The approach road to the terminal is lined with cars that reflect the largely middle-class character of the protesters – the SUV is the vehicle of choice. There are several security checks along the way, where guards wielding metal rods and golf clubs stop and search approaching cars. It feels like the anti-government protesters are settling in for the long-haul. All flights remain suspended, and the estimated 3,000 passengers – most of them tourists – stranded last night when the airport closed have been moved to city-center hotels.But who exactly are these protesters clad in yellow – the color associated with Thailand's king – who risk crippling Thailand's lucrative tourist industry? And what do they want?Who are the protesters? They go by the name of the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) and are a loose coalition of Thailand's old elite – businessmen, academics and royalists, drawing support largely from Bangkok's middle class. They have a degree of backing from conservative elements in the army and the royal palace – one reason why the government has been reluctant to move aggressively against them.They are well-funded and well-organized, and have an ugly militia, armed with iron bars, sling shots, even guns. These "security guards" have frequently resorted to violence – yesterday they opened fire on government supporters on a city highway.They claim to be fighting corruption and defending the king, and their professed aim is to topple the government which was democratically elected a year ago. Their strategy is to create as much disruption as possible in order to force the hand of the military, which is reluctant to get involved. The last coup, in 2006, caused a lot of damage to the military's reputation, and ultimately achieved very little.Seizing the airport is perhaps the most effective disruption they've caused in months of protest, and comes at a time when they seemed to be running out of steam and losing support. What do they want? The PAD's leaders want the government replaced by "new politics," effectively doing away with the current democratic system and limiting the electoral power of poorer voters, who they regard as ill-educated. Instead, they want 70 percent of parliament to be appointed by worthy people – such as themselves. The government would be headed by a powerful king, whose portrait is everywhere at PAD rallies.One newspaper column this week described their ideology as "a cultish and violent conservatism," combined with a "mangled version of democracy."Their target, the government of Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat, is hardly a virtuous beast, but it was democratically elected, and enjoys massive support from Thailand's rural poor. If there was an election tomorrow, it would almost certainly be re-elected, which is why the PAD wants to change the system.Somchai is the brother-in-law of Thaksin Shinawatra, the former prime minister, who was disposed in the 2006 coup. He has been accused of widespread corruption and abuse of power, but his administration redrew Thailand's political landscape, empowering the rural poor, and adopting populist polices, including low cost village loans, and a basic health system. These reforms came as shock in a system which has for years been, essentially, a competition within the Thai elite – the poor north-east serving as a repository of cheap labor for Bangkok's bars and building sites.Thaksin's populism also threatened a traditional system of patronage and hierarchy, at the pinnacle which sits the royalist elite, who are the PAD's strongest supporters.The current government is packed with Thaksin cronies, and the former prime minister, now in self-imposed exile, is accused of calling the government's shots from abroad. He has drawn massive crowds to live stadium phone-ins and remains very popular in the poor north and north-east of Thailand.The government strategy this week has been, essentially, to "play dead," and not risk violence by confronting the PAD (which is what many of the protest leaders would like), allowing them to roam Bangkok at will. The police offered little resistance when they seized the airport.For months the PAD has occupied Thailand's Government House, forcing the government to shift cabinet meetings to Bangkok's old airport. In most countries they would have been tossed out weeks ago, but there is another factor at play Thailand – one that is rarely spoken about openly: the future of the monarchy.What about the king? King Bhumibol Adulyadej, the world's longest-reigning monarch, will be 81 next week. He is revered by the Thai people. Although he has few formal powers, he wields enormous moral influence. He has frequently intervened at times of crisis, but diplomats fear his advanced years and deteriorating health will limit his ability to calm this crisis.The king's annual birthday address next week will be carefully watched. His wife, Queen Sirikit, has explicitly backed the PAD. She even attended the funeral of a PAD supporter killed in clashes with the police last month. Her backing has given the protesters a powerful "roof" in its anti-government campaign.The queen's concern is for the continuation of a strong monarchy after her husband's passing, which will create an enormous vacuum. The heir to the throne, Crown Prince Vajiralongkorn will not command the reverence enjoyed by his father. He is very unpopular and unacceptable to many Thais, who prefer his sister Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn, though she has never married and has no immediate heir.None of this is openly discussed by the Thai media, which is shackled by strict lèse-majesté laws which make it a crime to offend the monarchy, but the future of the Chakri Dynasty goes to the heart of the current power struggle.One seasoned journalist summed it up nicely: "Covering this crisis is like trying to explain the unexplainable, without mentioning the unmentionable."

With the seizure of the two Bangkok airports by PAD, the tourism industry has been severely affected. Two of my friends from Great Britain were scheduled to fly into Bangkok tomorrow on their way to tour Laos. Duang and I had made arrangements to meet them in Vientaine. Last night they sent an email informing us that they had to cancel their trip. The British government has advised British to avoid Thailand. Because of the government warning, they would not be covered by their insurance. They were forced to cancel their trip.

Tourism to Thailand, in part due to the world economic problems, has been reduced by 50% already. The continued unrest and seizure of the airports will only worsen a bad situation.

It is important to remember that the current government was democratically elected in open and free elections after the military coup. The people were given a choice and voted for the wrong people. Damn democracy - so unpredictable!

I have lived in Thailand during Thaksin's tenure, during the military rule, and now under the current elected government. I unable to tell the difference between any of them.

During the coup there was some negative propaganda put out by the US government. This caused some concern by my family for my situation. At the time I replied ... "The stores are open and selling everything. The beer bars are open. The go-go dancers are still dancing. The working girls are still working. The lady boys are still doing whatever it is that they do." The point that I was making was that life was proceeding just as it had before the coup. The names and titles of the leaders had changed but the people were carrying on with their normal life.

A similar debacle happened in Algeria in the mid 1990s. The plan was to have two elections. When the Islamic fundamentalist party unexpectedly won the first round, the army decided that it was an unacceptable situation. They took control of the government and cancelled the second round of elections. The fundamentalists took up arms and the country was plunged into a bloody civil war. I lived in Algeria in 1995 to 1996 and was exposed to some of the conditions.

The Algerian people were trapped between the warring parties. Thousands of innocent people were slaughtered by the rebels and thousands of innocent people were slaughtered by the government. The country was subjected to despair, paranoia, and emotional upheaval. All this because the people were given democracy and chose incorrectly. The situation, if not for being so sad and tragic, appealed to my cynical sense of humor. Ungrateful people - you give them democracy and they go and vote for the wrong people!

A similar situation exists in Thailand today. Thaksin's political party was banned. New parties were created and ran in the election after the military coup. PAD wants the current government replaced because it is allegedly a front for Thaksin. This is the government that won the election. Once again the people have exercised their democratic rights but voted for the "wrong" people.

I do not support either side of the current situation in Thailand.

I did not support either side during my stay in Algeria.

In both countries I was and I am a guest. I do not know what is best for the people given their unique cultures and history. It is for them to decide.

However, I do support the democratic process. The results of free, fair, and open elections should always be respected - even if we do not agree with them. If the people have made a "mistake", they should endure the consequences of their error, and be allowed the opportunity to correct the situation within the framework of their constitutions.

I lived in Malaysia in 1999 and 2000 for awhile. Just before I left, the Muslim fundamentalists won the general election in a bordering province. This was very upsetting but the people had spoken. The results of the election were respected by the Malaysian government. After a couple of years, the fundamentalists demonstrated that they were not more adept at governing the people and providing for their needs than other parties. The people realized their mistake and voted them out in the next elections.

Like the Who sang in their song Won't Get Fooled Again - "Meet the new boss same as the old boss"

So it is in politics. The names change but the results are the same. The struggle is between the parties over who will have the power and reap the benefits of power. Seldom does it make much of a difference to the masses.

The masses only get the minimum required to allow the politicians to get or remain in power.

Given such, the principle of the people's will should be respected - at least it provides some order for the common good.