Thai Parliamentary fiasco and Vox Populi

DIE HARD III
Herman Tiu Laurel
9/22/2006



Gloria, Joe de Venecia and the “Singaw ng Bayan” call for a parliamentary system are the biggest losers in the coup in Thailand. Their claims that parliamentary government would bring the country stability, rid it of political gridlock and pave the way to enhanced democracy. Ha, ha, ha, ha, these turds should be flushed down the toilet with their dirty, lying propositions meant only to cover up their stealing of the people’s vote twice before and now with finality for a third time if cha-cha passes.

No system of democratic government can provide stability if there are forces that refuse to accept the popular will when fails to suit their factional, parochial or financial interests. Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra has been consistently praised for his handling of the Thai economy emerging from the 1997 financial crisis (engineered by Western speculator George Soros) and hugely popular with the Thai population who benefited from his “universal access to healthcare, a 3-year debt moratorium for farmers, and 1 million THB development funds for all Thai villages”.

I have not seen any assessment of the Thai crisis that goes deeper than Thaksin’s alleged “corruption”, and they haven’t enumerated those cases. The only instance they cite is the sale of the Thaksin family’s telecom company to the Singaporean government interests controlled by senior adviser Lee Kwan Yew, but even Thaksin’s detractors admit there was no law violated in the purely private transaction involving no government money. This reminds me of the concocted corruption cases against President Estrada.

The General Sonthi Boonvartklin coup was an anti-democratic intervention meant to prevent a democratically elected political leader from sealing his mandate. Thaksin had handily won a recent election run to test his legitimacy but was questioned by civil society and opposition elements, and even the Thai Supreme Court was badly conflicted due to the crisis. Another election was called for October 15. But Tahksin was certain to win the new elections because of his popularity stemming from policies that cared for the popular welfare.

Anti-Thaksin forces had to act to prevent the election. Thus, this coup by the military with the blessings of the Thai King. The Thai monarchy is but a figurehead in this conflict as it often is in Thai history, riding out the internal conflicts by an intricate balancing act and always betting on powerful winning side – often where the barrel of the gun is and appeasement when forces ready to split the country runs high. What is at the root of the crisis then? To discern this we must review the history of the present crisis, and the root certainly isn’t corruption.

Corruption as an issue is the most convenient propaganda to use against a popular leader and for destabilization of a legitimate government, but a review of his past five years’ economics and governance does not confirm corruption to be a hallmark of Thaksin. He was tough against the illegal drugs trade ordering summary liquidation of pushers but which received high marks from the public. Most popular was his economic rural pump priming. Thaksin was on the road to consolidating his government in the manner of Lee Kwan Yew and Mohammad Mahathir.

The privatization of Thailand’s state-owned energy company came up, which the Thai Supreme Court thumbed down. A surge arose in anti-Thaksin protests led by media mogul (ala Lopez here) Sondhi Limtongkul (a partner of Wall Street’s Dow Jones company) and the civil society. Then Thaksin’s sale of his multi-billion dollar telecoms company to Singapore was taken up by the anti-Tahksin forces as the main issue. Behind the rising political conflict in Thailand is the issue of control of national wealth and economy through its lucrative state and public utility enterprises.

Thaksin did not favor the Thai elite and its foreign partners. The ultimate loser is the broad masses of Thais. It parallels the Filipino elite’s attacks on Estrada who had a landslide mandate (which non-explainer Manuel Quezon III tries to degrade); they hated President Estrada for refusing the radical rise of power and water rates, and sovereign guarantee to trans-nationals. In elite parochial and factional interests hands, Thailand’s economic good fortunes, like the Philippines, will decline. The Thai military moved to replace the popular mandate with might hoping to resolve a political impasse but it remains to be seen where this will lead.

The Philippines is often cited as the twin sister of Thailand, but unlike Thaksin Gloria has not acted to benefit only the foreign and elite interests in a society with even great divides than Thailand. Many complain that Thailand beat us to “it”, i.e. the coup. The truth is Thailand is only now experiencing the coup in 2001 against Erap’s elected government. The people’s will is the central issue, while the Thai elite and military averted Thaksin’s October 15 re-election, Gloria and her cabal thwarted the people’s will again in stealing FPJ’s 2004 victory.

While a country refuses to accept the absolute supremacy of Vox Populi, stability and growth will always be elusive. No parliamentary system can change that - in the Philippine or Thailand as in Budapest, Hungary which parliamentary and in turmoil. Let’s hope the Philippine military learns from these lessons and help restore Vox Populi. General Esperon, do you hear?

(Tune to 1098AM, M-W-F 6-7pm and T-Th 3-3pm)