• 
• 

Published on March 1, 2008

Now that Thaksin has returned after 17 months in exile following the coup, and is treated by his supporters and followers like a hero, he is ready to rock the Thai political landscape once again. As both camps are being re-energised by divisive politics, understanding how both the PAD and DAAD operate may help understand the shaky political landscape that is Thailand.

The mirror image, or similarities between the two movements are quite numerous and worrisome. Here are the worrying characteristics:

  1) Both groups depended on charismatic leaders.

Thaksin was greeted by at least 5,000 supporters and followers at the airport. Many waved little light blue flags, holding red roses high up, wearing T-shirts with the message on the back saying "Our prime minister". Some of the DAAD leaders and members were there. People sang and chanted, saying they love and missed Thaksin, and some even cried. It was as if Thaksin was a rock star or spiritual guru, much more than their economic and political saviour. It was Thaksin mania and he was mobbed at other places where he went, including the court and the posh hotel where he is staying.

Those against Thaksin may complain about his populist policies of easy loans and cheap medical care, but Thaksin himself has become the embodiment of populism politics.

During the height of the PAD rallies, they had yellow flags and yellow T-shirts and claimed that they were fighting against Thaksin to defend the monarchy.

 2) They both have a multi-dimensional media as their propaganda mouthpiece.

Read Sonthi's daily newspaper called Phoo Jad Karn (Manager Daily) and check the newly established pro-Thaksin Prachatouch newspaper, and one will have either a black or white representation of Thaksin.

Prachatouch's editorial piece on Thursday, the day Thaksin arrived, was a warm welcome. "We believe you will fight all allegations by the 'goons who robbed democracy' and the majority of the people will support you. Welcome back to the motherland."

The next day, Friday, February 29, Phoo Jad Karn accused Thaksin of lying about his statement that he will quit politics. It added on the front page that bad omens, including "crying crows and a falling squirrel" ominously greeted Thaksin at the court on Friday.

While there's nothing wrong with supporting whichever political group one likes, this writer cannot help but wonder if these newspapers had to screen their staff by testing before recruitment if they were pro- or anti-Thaksin first before giving any applicant a job at the editorial office.

  3) Both rely on the discourse of "good" versus "bad" people.

Thaksin is good or Thaksin is bad, depending on which group you ask. And because he's bad, the PAD will accept the military, which is "less bad", staging a coup. Some of the senior PAD members even joined the junta-appointed parliament over the past year.

Because Thaksin is good, the proxy People Power Party-led government can remove any senior bureaucrats - which is taking place at speed, as this article is being written. The police chief, director-general of the Department of Special Investigations and the director-general of the Public Relations Department are the latest casualties. The DAAD seems to have no problem with it.

  4) Both lack transparency.

Does anyone recall how the PAD came about, deciding that they would controversially raise yellow flags as the focus of their anti-Thaksin protest and call for royal assistance in helping solve the political crisis in early 2006?

Nothing was made known to the public about how the decision-making process took place, and it was unparticipatory. The leaders simply handed down their ruling and the followers were expected to, uh, follow.

The DAAD meetings now share this secretive and non-participatory nature.

And both claim to be fighting for democracy.

  5) Both will turn a blind eyesto "necessary evil".

  The PAD, besides being accused by the DAAD of inviting the generals to stage a coup, did nothing to oppose the military junta. Note that the PAD wasn't active during the 15 months of military rule, although it was supposed to stand for democracy and its name contained the word "democracy". Now with Thaksin back, it's alive again.

Many feel that the PAD regarded the military junta as a "necessary evil", if not an outright benefit, with some joining the junta-appointed National Legislative Assembly (NLA).

 The same could be said of those who eventually formed the DAAD. They had no qualms about Thaksin's alleged abuse of power and were only active after the coup which ousted Thaksin.

When the junta took power, many heads in the bureaucracy rolled. The PAD had no problem with that. Now with the pro-Thaksin PPP government in power, the same sacrificial transfers of top bureaucrats are taking place. And the DAAD doesn't seem too bothered.

  6) They both stand for democracy?

  The PAD claims it's fighting against parliamentary dictatorship under Thaksin, and what they regard as the Thaksin regime. The DAAD meanwhile, claims it is against military dictatorship.

  But what about other forms of dictatorship?

  In the end, one can't help but wonder if any of them are sincere about fighting for democracy. Or perhaps democracy for some is dictatorship for others.  

Pravit Rojanaphruk

The Nation