Having recently taunted opponents demanding his ouster or House dissolution that they had to wait until their “next life”, the embattled leader would be surprised to know that the current political debates no longer revolve around his future, but a post-Thaksin Thailand.

He could still choose to dissolve the House of Representatives, then lead an caretaker government and hope for a new election mandate. But what was once a “wishful” scenario of his opponents and rivals has, apparently, become his own best option. Buoyed by the continued arrivals of new allies, the anti-Thaksin coalition now doesn’t want to give him a sniff of a chance at coming back. They want him to go – now and for good – or else.

Thaksin’s omnipresence has evaporated. This was underlined on Tuesday when a group of high school students who should have been playing ragnarok at home organised a press conference to declare war on this “Satan”. Whether or not someone is behind the kids, Thaksin’s problem is that nobody cares. Such is the dismal state of his besieged legitimacy.

Whispered rumours had it that he might call it a day before Sunday, when one of the biggest political rallies in modern history is expected. It was said that the prime minister has come under heavy pressure from left, right and centre, directly and implicitly, to exit politics now so he can maintain some grace. He can hold out and wait to see how the joint House-Senate special session transpires, but this option comes with the risk of being knocked out in the assembly hall, and even greater fuel for public resentment.

A House dissolution today or in the near future may ease some pressure. But the coalition won’t stop and the intertwined crises of Thailand and Thaksin will come back if he manages to stage a comeback. The House dissolution won’t resolve two key issues  – the controversial Shin Corp takeover and the new clamouring for political reform. His opponents don’t want him to seek a new mandate because they know he is more than capable of getting re-elected, but then everything would be back to square one. In other words, the coalition does not want him to go to the grassroots and use their support to justify alleged policy corruption, further ruin of checks and balances and a decline of political morals.

Yet Thaksin’s resignation does not guarantee a peaceful transition, especially if Thailand’s new leadership is perceived as a vehicle for the Shinawatras. Whoever replaces him would probably have to oversee a highly acrimonious constitutional-amendment process. The new prime minister would also have to deal with lingering questions concerning the Temasek deal, a very unenviable job especially if the new leader comes from the ruling Thai Rak Thai Party.

An ideal scenario would be for Thaksin to bow out and give way to a respectable figure – like Chaturon Chaisaeng – from his own party. The new leader would then have to facilitate a special constitutional amendment process, probably starting with a set of drafters, not from the Parliament but accepted by the public, and ending with parliamentary deliberation. The process should be precise and directed at just a few key clauses. When that is done, a new election could be called under the new rules.

But even this wishful scenario cannot address the question of what should be done in regard to what the Shinawatras “have taken away” from Thailand. Should Singapore’s Temasek Holdings still be allowed to control Thailand’s telecom assets? What about the alleged tax evasion? The alleged insider trading? And so on. The family’s enormous fortunes have become a major stumbling block in efforts to find a peaceful solution to the political crisis dividing the country.

But there are those who think the present pain and impasse are the best testimony that Thailand’s priority is to get back what it lost when trying to accommodate Thaksin in 2001. According to this school, nothing else should matter. So much has been said about who should replace him, about the lack of challengers, and, about economic continuity. But the current crisis may be the nation’s straightforward cry for reform. This was the cost of his ascent to power, so his much-demanded departure must bring it back, or everything will come to nothing again.

Tulsathit Taptim

The Nation