September 4, 2024: It’s not every day that a brand-new government is greeted with overwhelming It-can’t-last-long content on the mainstream and social media, so the Paetongtarn administration’s immediate yet ultimate goal is to prove that speculation wrong.
Obviously, few believe Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra, whose Cabinet has been formalized and is good to go, will be able to. Her path from now on is strewn with landmines _ likely, possible and unexpected. Adding to that, it may not be a conscious, careful navigation of that path. Many liken her government to a heavily-drunken man trying to dance across a slippery and darkened floor without spilling the beer in his hand.
Conservative extremists say her chance of survival is like that of a little snowball in fiery hell.
The People’s Party (formerly Move Forward) used to have her back, but not anymore. Current “friends” are not trustworthy. Her father Thaksin is getting increasingly hyperactive politically with each passing day. Her aunt Yingluck is itching to come home. The Constitutional Court will be flooded with removal and party dissolution petitions. Digital Wallet remains largely unsettled. Serious flooding is taking place here and there. Global turmoil is intensifying and getting closer to home.
The past few days could be just a prelude that scared a little bit. The real nightmare is about to begin.
September 3, 2024: The Democrats were the last man standing against Digital Wallet, but that is coming to a whimpering end because the party is joining the Pheu Thai-led government.
Let’s take away the People’s Party which is fighting against the policy. We all know why they are doing so and why they were not doing so before last year’s general election.
In fact, the People’s Party’s criticism of Digital Wallet ranked only slightly below the conservative parties’ silence regarding a plan they were so opposed to when Pheu Thai mooted it as an election campaign platform.
The Democrats had looked more consistent than the above-mentioned. They lambasted the policy before and immediately after last year’s election. And only recently in Parliament, the party attacked the government’s budget planning which they suggested was being messed up by Digital Wallet.
That apparently-noble stand will cease to exist, though, and their speech writers must be working overtime to tell the public why.
One possible explanation is that “adjustments” which have been made lately or are being made are acceptable.
This leaves Pheu Thai as the only steadfast party when it comes to Digital Wallet. In the public eyes at least, mind you, because gossips and speculation do not totally dismiss the possibility of the policy being altered beyond recognition due to legal and political problems.
The rumours have it that if Digital Wallet is to come in a form that displeases those expecting it, Pheu Thai will make it look like others’ fault.
September 2, 2024: Nobody has officially looked into Ratchaburi voters’ profiles, so it is not clear if generational tendencies played a role in the province’s PAO (Provincial Administrative Organisation) election over the weekend.
Young people are traditionally not that interested in elections that are “too local.” This may explain why Move Forward (currently the People’s Party) won the biggest number of popular votes in Ratchaburi in the general election last year but its support for a PAO candidate in the same province has significantly fallen short.
If this generational analysis is true, the general election winner can take comfort from the possibility that it could be more of the same in the next national election, when young voters are expected to return in full force and perhaps backed by even younger ones.
The PAO election, however, has provided a great food for thought. Every nation’s citizenry is a mix, and, for its own good, every political party must realise it.
September 1, 2024: Who knows about your strengths and weaknesses better than your enemy? According to Abhisit Vejjajiva, the ruling Pheu Thai Party probably has great selling points but the problem is it keeps promoting the bad ones.
As someone whose limousine was ambushed by pro-Pheu Thai mobsters while being prime minister, who faced prolonged pro-Pheu Thai protests that shut down main Bangkok streets, again while being the government head, and who rose to the top executive post thanks to questionable political activities of the Shinawatras, Former prime minister and former Democrat leader Abhisit has the right to publicly analyse his former arch-enemy.
And he admitted that Pheu Thai could have been a decent political party but for its undying and overreaching attempt to establish a political clan no matter how much it may cost the country.
“I have said this many times,” Abhisit stated. “I admit that Pheu Thai has been (positively) successful in certain areas. To me, it’s a pity that they never tried to make the party progress based on that.
“They have never been able to overcome (the word) family.”
Abhisit was right. Trying to keep a clan in power can easily go against what should have been. To start with, not every family member can be politically capable. Then there is the tendency to abuse power, to be corrupt, or to cut nasty deals in order to maintain, or enhance, or rebuild, the status quo.
It goes without saying that Abhisit is commenting on the current state of affairs in Pheu Thai, which is betting on young Paetongtarn Shinawatra; turning a blind eye on her father Thaksin who is putting everybody at risks by being politically assertive; and forging jaw-dropping deals left and right to make sure the family survive in politics.
August 31, 2024: A small Democrat Party joining the Pheu Thai government may be not right, but true infamy took place decades ago.
In other words, a bigger Democrat Party went with the wrong flow in the past. By refusing to join the Pheu Thai Party when it was clear that an overwhelming majority of Thais regarded the two camps as Thailand’s best options, the Democrats actually chose to betray the genuine concept of democracy.
To be fair, Pheu Thai has been the same. By declining to work with the Democrats in the past when it was clear that an undeniable majority of Thai voters considered them their best and second-best choices to run the country, Pheu Thai disregarded what was best for Thailand.
No law says the biggest and second-biggest parties in a multiple party system can’t work together. The badly-wrong idea came from politicians who were motivated by egos or/and vested interests. They managed to make the public believe that if better-qualified people “on the other side” wanted to serve in the government and were available, they would have to wait because, no matter how good they were, their party was a few seats shy in Parliament.
It’s a disgrace disguised as “beauty of democracy”.
What was wrong with, say, having a Democrat education minister in a Pheu Thai government because the oldest party appeared good at education? Similarly, what was wrong with having a Pheu Thai public health minister in a Democrat government because the 30-baht-can-treat-all-ailment policy seemed like a magnificent healthcare?
What happened after last year’s general election was hard, but it was acceptable because the defence of the 112 article managed to garner the “majority” in Parliament, in the process making the election winner Move Forward sit in the opposition. The power struggle after last year’s election concerned fundamental differences, making partnership between the “first” choice and “second” choice untenable.
It was different in the past. There were no fundamental conflicts that could prevent Democrats and Pheu Thai from working together. They just, driven by their own self-interests, fooled the populace into believing that it was okay to put up with a few bad ministers because the country would get democracy in exchange.
The wrong concept led to cutthroat politics and fueled divide, because a loss by a few parliamentary seats or a few thousand votes meant the “loser” would have to wait four more years, during which the “winner” would do everything necessary to edge out the opponent again next time.
Former Democrat veterans like Chuan Leekpai or Abhisit Vejjajiva are lambasting the decision of the Democrat Party to seek a Cabinet cake in the Paetongtarn administration. Past deeds should be equally, if not more, bemoaned.
August 30, 2024: Again, some politicians are threatening to “expose secrets”. When can they ever realise that such a threat makes them look as bad as the ones whose secrets they plan to expose?
The logic is so simple. Exposing a secret now means helping to cover it up then. The bigger the secret, the worse it makes the cover-up look.
There are two types of whistleblowers: Those who act out of good conscience and those who do it because they are disappointed, or angry, or want an upper hand in a bargain.
Are they aware that who is what is not at all hard to tell?
August 29, 2024: If a prime minister naming an alleged lawbreaker to the Cabinet is wrong, what does that say about a convicted lawbreaker naming a prime minister? The question was asked by a senior politician who, while seemingly bitter, did have a point.
Sereepisuth Temeeyaves, leader of Thai Liberal Party, was, of course, talking about the appointment of Pichit Chuenban that doomed Srettha Thavisin and how Paetongtarn Shinawatra replaced him as the prime minister.
Sereepisuth has been ideologically slippery over the past few years, but he is hitting where it hurts on this one. The not-so-secret meeting of coalition government leaders at Thaksin Shinawatra’s residence raises a lot of questions, and ones don’t need to be political pundits to know that Paetongtarn’s political ascendancy would not have been possible without her father’s approval.
“Out of the blue, people who said they understood the national problems well accused Srettha of making a lawbreaker sit in the Cabinet,” Sereepisuth said. “But what followed is a convict nominating the prime minister. How can I live with that?”
He claimed that was why the Thai Liberal Party could not be in the Paetongtarn coalition. The real reason, though, could be something else.
August 28, 2024: The most popular phrase when politicians do the unthinkable _ most possibly an outrageous U-turn _ is that they do so because they want the nation to get out of the mud and move forward.
Never mind the fact that it is them who got the country into the mud in the first place.
The use of “We are doing this so that the country can move on” is most frequent during formation of a new government, when alliance and ideology often fade and are overshadowed by vested interests.
In politics, hypocrisy is realer than ideology and partnership. It’s hypocrisy that gets things going. They even have feel-good names for hypocrisy. They call it
“sacrifice” or “prioritisation.”
They will always say “it pains us” to do an unpleasant thing but it is for the greater good. We know better, don’t we?
August 27, 2024: “Coloured” mobs come and go, be it red, yellow or orange, and they are learning to live with one another, but a scary Thaksin Shinawatra is here to stay, says a leading conservative academic and political analyst.
Kaewsan Atibhodi’s statement reflects how the Pheu Thai Party is perceived in the eyes of the conservatives. Empathy is mixing with lingering fears, the latter feeling having a lot to do with Thaksin who has been increasingly hyperactive politically.
Let Kaewsan’s remarks speak for themselves: “We need unity and shall let bygones be bygones. Saying this does not mean I’m having amnesia. I remember everything, but what we must do is be able to live with the present for the sake of our future.
“(Yellow activists) are like the Bangrajan villagers who rose up to fight their invading enemies. When the war was over, everyone went back to rice fields and farm work. I think (red shirt activists) are the same. Today’s problem is not about yellow shirt and red shirt fighting.
“Thaksin is the problem. I mean his attempt to wield power and show who the real boss is. This is a big problem. His thinking and his political way known as the Thaksin system will lead to another round of big turmoil.
“(The Thaksin system) involves building a power base through money and using power to create media propaganda. This is along with using (state) money to buy popular support. All this leads to election victories and corruption will be needed to keep power.
“Party branches popped up like seven eleven stores before the Thai Rak Thai Party’s historic election landslide. Once the New Aspiration Party came under its wing, it was the end of the story. (Those not kowtowing) only existed as mom-and-pop stores.
“… What he should have been doing is quietly take care of the grandchildren and once in a while give advice to his daughter from a great distance. He should have given his daughter and the party a free hand. Nobody will complain if he does that. I will be the first to shut up.
“But (what’s happening is) we are seeing more and more of the same. Signs are everywhere. It’s therefore normal for me to ring the alarm bell.”
August 26, 2024: Over the past century, world domination has been very much defined by who landed on the moon first, who had the most sophisticated and largest military, whose movies were more popular globally and whose ideologies were more penetrative.
To a lesser degree, who won the most Olympics medals.
Who produced a talk-of-the-town videogame was relatively not significant. But not any more. At a time when young generations’ political roles are very important, when cultural pride can be embedded in game stories with stunning graphics, when social media, streaming and players are globalised and feed off one another, a game’s popularity is a big cause for concern.
It, therefore, has come as no surprise that Black Myth: Wukong is being subtly attacked. Ambiguous instructions from game publishers for players to avoid discussing feminism are being overblown by the western media, seemingly out of hope that a global blockbuster success, which looks like the biggest and fastest so far, will be checked.
One most recent headline by a well-known western media network claimed Black Myth: Wukong tried to “police” players. “Sexism” is also creeping into the conversation.
While attacks are understandable, so are fears that caused the criticism. Black Myth: Wukong is taking the Internet by storm, and the gaming industry’s sale and participation records are falling one by one.
Black Myth: Wukong is a single-player action game based on the character of Sun Wukong, or the Monkey King, a key character in Journey to the West who has supernatural powers and has to fight enemies who come in the forms of monsters, demons and even angels.
The game allows players to learn one of the greats of Chinese literature that features Chinese mythology as well as Confucianism, Taoist and Buddhist beliefs.
YouTube has been flooded with western young players lavishing praises on graphics that look amazing throughout, on par with the best Hollywood Avengers series and belying the fact that the game makers had never been known for making a mega hit game before. LINE and Tiktok have drawn massive attention to the game even from those who would never play it.
The graphic excellence which has been the hallmark of Hollywood or other Western movies apparently has been confirmed to have lost exclusivity. If China can produce such a realistic and beautiful graphic videogame, the sky is the limit for the country's film industry.
And as we know, nothing promotes or discredits cultures and ideologies like movies that access global audiences.
There have been red flags before, but Black myth: Wukong is a big one that underlines so many things. The jaw-dropping battle scenes in the game may be less fierce than in real life.//Photo: AFP
August 25, 2024: Maybe the reason why Srettha Thavisin lost the premiership is opening some door for the dissolution of the Pheu Thai Party.
The Constitutional Court has ruled that, seriously, the Cabinet appointment of Pichit Chuenban lacked political ethics and integrity. Srettha was removed as prime minister for that, in effect making the entire Cabinet vanish.
Problem is Cabinet nominations usually come from parties, which most of the time endorse them through executive board decisions.
Why and how was Pichit chosen? Did Srettha handpick him, or was it “unethically” recommended to him by whoever controlled Pheu Thai?
The Election Commission has been asked to find out. Srettha’s past comments on the Pichit affair may also come back to haunt Pheu Thai. The defence argument that he could not possibly have known the backgrounds of every Cabinet nominee may boomerang on the party.
In addition, public records on Srettha feeling unsure about Pichit’s constitutional qualities will resurface and make Pheu Thai squirm.
Along with the questions surrounding Pichit’s nomination, the EC has been officially informed in great detail Pheu Thai’s relationship with Thaksin Shinawatra, and key developments since his return from exile last year including events leading to Paetongtarn Shinawatra’s appointment as the new prime minister.
The EC has been asked to seek the Constitutional Court’s ruling on Pheu Thai’s future. Alpine is urgent, of course, but maybe Pheu Thai should worry about it later.
August 24, 2024: Thailand allowing a dinner talk-show featuring someone who is constitutionally banned from playing politics is an infamy, according to former red-shirted leader Jatuporn Prompan.
That it is Jatuporn who cries foul over the event organised by Nation TV is an absurdity itself, but let’s forget that for a while.
Jatuporn has predicted in his regular Facebook Live that Thaksin’s public speeches and statements on politics and economy will only accelerate the “surefire” downfall of the new prime minister, who is the former prime minister’s daughter.
“The government should make it clear once and for all by giving him a total, legalized amnesty,” Jatuporn said sarcastically.
He said Thailand had better end its anti-corruption fight for good if someone accused of corruption was given blatant prominence like that. He added that Thailand is getting deeper and deeper into the mud.
On the new prime minister, Paetongtarn Shinawatra, Jatuporn repeated his belief that the Alpine Golf Course scandal and Thaksin’s “illness” that allowed the man to stay out of jail after his return from exile would cut her political career short very quickly.
He said the media should ask Thaksin how many glasses of wine he had had since his return, as liquor is deemed a no-no for all people with serious health conditions.
Last but not least, Jatuporn said Thaksin ruling out a future coup is hugely ironic.
“If there is to be another coup, everyone knows who will be the trigger,” Jatuporn said.
August 23, 2024: A key message Thaksin Shinawatra gave the conservatives during a much-reported event is that they shouldn’t worry about him.
But in the same breath he must have worried them.
While insisting that he owed a debt of gratitude to the Thai monarchy and that Pheu Thai could have worked with now-dissolved Move Forward but for the latter’s Article 112 stand, Thaksin said the fate of the Srettha government should have been the sole responsibility of Parliament.
It looks like a palpable contradiction. The Constitutional Court, the conservatives believe, is highly necessary in its current form and rules, but Thaksin suggested during the Nation TV dinner event that something regarding the institution needs to change.
“Governments were born in Parliament, so they should go when Parliament tells them to,” Thaksin said.
He ruled out a military coup against his daughter. “I’m 100 per cent certain that the coup cycle has completely disappeared,” he said.
According to Thaksin, Pheu Thai will always give priority to its current allies when forming a government. He also said that while the People Party, the reincarnation of Move Forward, is focused on ideological matters, Pheu Thai’s firm attention is on the economy.
He insisted that advice given to Paetongtarn as a father or as a concerned Thai citizen is doable and it’s in his nature to put his ideas on the table.
August 22, 2024: Late Samak Sundaravej lost his premiership over a tiny sum of “illegal money” and Srettha Thavisin has been removed by the Constitutional Court that seemed to give ethical responsibility as much importance as legal correctness.
This means Digital Wallet, whose controversies cover both legal and ethical questions, will need to be considerably altered for not just Thailand’s sake, but also Paetongtarn Shinawatra’s.
Monetary and budgetary discipline concerning the project will have to be increased drastically, while from now on the Thai public will hear the words “vulnerable group” more and more because they have to do with the ethical matter.
“Integrity” is apparently why Srettha was shockingly ousted, and a blanket digital cash giveaway that could put Thailand’s financial status in jeopardy, that would benefit people who are not so needy, and that may not include a lot of struggling sellers while big corporations may be smiling is a big risk.
While Digital Wallet may be able to wriggle through legal loopholes, the matter of “integrity” will open the door for its opponents.
If Digital Wallet continues in its current form, a complaint will almost certainly be filed with the Constitutional Court. As for the possible outcome if that happens, anyone can have a good look at the Srettha ruling.
August 21, 2024: In the next few hours, Paetongtarn Shinawatra will need to finalise her first Cabinet line-up that could break the hearts of two men and make the third one happy.
Prawit Wongsuwan, Thammanat Prompao and Jurin Laksanawisit are still waiting to learn their fates as this article is being written (2 pm, August 21).
It is likely that more men will have to mend their broken hearts, among them Chuan Leekpai, the former prime minister and former Democrat leader who has repeatedly said he was personally opposed to the Democrats joining the government. He was among those who do not want to join but has insisted that it would be up to the new leaders.
Prawit and Thammanat are in the same party, but barely just and a breakup looks increasingly imminent. Democrats who want to join the government including their current leadership hierarchy must be praying that the two men’s trouble would multiply, leading to Pheu Thai needing additional (or replacement) support.
Thai politics has hatched one irony after another, but Palang Pracharath, or even some of its members, ending up with the “Orange” camp in the opposition could be up there with the best of them.
August 20, 2021: The reported decision to drop Thammanat Prompao from the first Paetongtarn Cabinet was apparently influenced by political fight rather than made in good conscience. It does not suggest that one of the most powerful scourges in “democracy politics” would not prevail again this time.
Thai prime ministers exclude controversial figures from the government line-ups for fears the nominees could bring about legal troubles, not because of suspected incapability to serve in related positions.
Paetongtarn Shinawatra’s father Thaksin in fact named several education ministers to pacify factions, in other words to pre-empt political rebellion, and his decisions were never dictated by the fact that education was one of the most important national pillars.
Unqualified politicians in Cabinet lists represent that unhealthy yet unavoidable part of Thai politics and political systems in many other places. Democracy is supposed to put the right man on the right job but it has morphed into the exact opposite.
Even Prayut Chan-o-cha, for all his “reform” pledges, was unable to shake off the ugly drag of “democratic” politics. His Cabinet line-up in the wake of the 2019 election included names that had “expediency” written all over it, not “public interests.”
Srettha Thavisin, who had Thammanat as his agriculture minister, was another “victim” of strange “democracy” that allows leaders to be held hostage by factions who may not have public benefits at hearts, that degrades the concept of “national government” (the bringing together of qualified persons regardless of their ideological leanings) as “dictatorial”, that makes the media pay more attention to factional dissatisfaction than to what the public stand to lose when the Cabinet is unveiled.
The jury is still very much out on Paetongtarn, who is attempting to form her first Cabinet. A lot of analysts are focusing on ages, gender, backgrounds and experiences, but what will truly measure her leadership is the ability _ or lack thereof _ to throw away the bad traditions.
She may not survive politically. But if she is to be doomed, at least she can choose how.
She can choose to be doomed heroically, or she can choose to be gone while going with the flow, keeping intact a vicious loop that prevents constructive cooperation and promotes as well as feeds on putting the wrong man on the wrong job.
August 19, 2024: According to former Red Shirt warrior Jatuporn Prompan, who is sounding more and more conservative, Thailand’s newest and youngest prime minister will be ousted from Government House by early next year.
He gave a list of “old wounds” that can resurface to compromise Paetongtarn Shinawatra’s legal and constitutional legitimacy. Among them is curious ownerships of the previous Alpine Golf Course, which had led to a big political scandal that blew up in many Pheu Thai faces.
Some conservative analysts or activists have said the same thing. They think Alpine can undermine Paetongtarn, with official complaints seeking to remove her certain to be launched.
“Oong-ing (the new prime minister) must check the records to see if she had anything to do with Alpine,” Jatuporn said. “If she did, it could be a similar case that ended the political path of (ex-Palang Pracharath politician) Pareena Kraikupt.”
He also mentioned education matters that raised ethical questions, “nominee purchases” of Thai properties by foreigners, and election campaign policies that seemed to benefit foreigners at the expense of Thai sovereignty.
“The country is not a toy, (in other words) an experimental playground for risky policies like Digital Wallet or increased foreign stakes in condominiums,” Jatuporn said.
He added in his Facebook Live that opponents of Pheu Thai must be drooling while sharpening their knives.
August 18, 2024: The Constitutional Court essentially ruled that Srettha Thavisin lost his legitimacy as prime minister because of a Cabinet appointment, but what actually tested his integrity as a leader more was the Pheu Thai Party’s flagship policy.
Newly-appointed Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra is facing the same ultimate test. She has hinted that the “Digital Wallet” scheme may need to be reviewed, but her statement was still ambiguous to the point of making certain mainstream media outlets believe that there would be no significant changes to the controversial programme.
So much debate has focused on whether Digital Wallet would really help the poor effectively and boost the Thai economic rather than ruin it in the long run. If she wants to continue it essentially in its current form, she must be able to defend it scientifically and rationally.
She must not invoke the key Srettha argument that claimed “conspiracy” and virtually offered no valuable explanation to back up the plan.
Srettha’s integrity also dimmed because of his handling of the Thaksin issue. For obvious reasons, the Thaksin affair will complicate Paetongtarn’s political status more than it did to Srettha’s. Thaksin is a former convict who is now the father of Thailand’s prime minister and still faces legal charges.
Paetongtarn’s path will be strewn with legal and constitutional landmines. How the justice system will function in the current circumstances remains to be seen and will be a telltale sign as to the country’s direction.
August 17, 2024: You have to lead a superpower nation to be able to be rudely playful with a reporter and get away with it.
This is not to downplay what Palang Pracharath leader Prawit Wongsuwan did the other day. (According to some LINE comments, he might have put an end to any prime ministerial aspiration with that little “patting”.)
This is to say that a politician’s aggressiveness toward members of the press is perceived differently from place to place. What is considered rude also seems to increase in seriousness in reverse proportion to the sophistication of politics.
For example, in one of President Joe Biden’s hot mic moments, he was overheard murmuring while being inquired about inflation: “What a stupid son of a @#$%&”
Imagine Prawit was overheard saying something like that when a reporter asked him about the House of Representatives vote to elect Paetongtarn Shinawatra as the new prime minister.
Peter Doocy is a senior White House correspondent, mind you. What happened in the studio of Fox News? They laughed at it. They found it hilarious. Most pro- and anti-Biden news networks gave it a rest after two days.
Again, this is not in Prawit’s defence. This is to bring back a record that the leader of the free world could call a member of a major element of democracy “stupid” and all everyone did was laugh.
August 16, 2024: If someone had predicted early last year that Move Forward would sweep the May 2023 election but would not be in the government and would finally be dissolved, that Pheu Thai would form an administration with the main conservative parties, that a Pheu Thai prime minister would be removed by the Constitutional Court, only to be replaced by another Pheu Thai prime minister, that the cannabis deregulation policy that the conservatives were so proud of would be reversed at their own “approval”, that the Digital Wallet policy that the conservatives decried would sleepwalk through Parliament, again at their approval, that predictor would be sent to a mental institution.
That’s how crazy the past 16 months has been. Bad news is it can get crazier, at the expense of development policies that will be written, rewritten, revoked and reintroduced for fun.
Nobody can really celebrate. The “conservatives” and “liberals” are both swallowing bitter pills. Pheu Thai will have to keep looking over its shoulder. Backstabbing will be the most vital part of the Thai political game. Alliance will be based on vested interest, not trust or desire to give Thais utmost benefits.
August 15, 2024: The last thing people thought on hearing Wednesday’s Constitutional Court verdict against Srettha Thavisin was that Parliament would vote less than two days later to elect the new prime minister.
But here we are, just hours before the House of Representatives is scheduled to make it seem like Wednesday was another normal day in Thai politics.
This is the idea. A lot of people concerned would not want things to drag on for various reasons. Big businesses do not want great uncertainties. Politicians in power do not want mathematical formulas to emerge that could encourage the previously hopeless or entice potential rebels into upping bargains.
The swift schedule means much remains in Pheu Thai’s control as there is not enough time for the likes of Anutin Charnvirakul or Prawit Wongsuwan to conjure up a competing scenario. As for the newly-dissolved party, they did not stand a chance in the first place due to the complications of last week’s ruling and the mistake of failing to name substitute prime ministerial candidates. (This candidacy naming issue would give everyone a valuable lesson, not just the “Orange” camp.)
Also, we are seeing the importance of being able to control House schedules. (In addition to the ballooning irony of government leaders’ cars entering and leaving the house of you-know-who.)
August 14, 2024: Today’s Constitutional Court ruling on the prime minister’s case can ensure escalation of Thailand’s political turmoil, which has been kept from exploding by a fragile and absurd political equilibrium where partnership exists not on ability and willingness to work together, but on developments caused and dictated by utmost extremism and self-interest.
Things were always heading toward a dead end either way. The equilibrium is so sensitive that the most minuscule change can cause a turbulent upheaval, let alone a gigantic development like the dissolution of the Move Forward Party or the prime minister’s removal.
The court verdict ousting Srettha would only hasten the inevitability, a free-for-all political fight that cannot guarantee the winner but can ascertain one thing _ whoever emerges “triumphant” will not be able to bring peace and will have to continue looking over his or her shoulder.
As everyone knows, Pheu Thai’s relationship with the conservatives depends on how the latter group perceives Move Forward or its reincarnation. It is never based on public interest. Pheu Thai and what remains of Move Forward, meanwhile, have crucially-conflicting interests as well.
Horse-trading will take place at full throttle. Who is needing whom more and who is holding whom hostage are slippery questions invoking slippery answers.
The already-big mess can get even messier over the next few days.
