Govt takes punches as it tries to get off the ropes

Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej was right to point out on Sunday that he was not a punch-bag. But strangely he has been doing more to stoke up anti-government sentiment rather than pacifying his opponents.

The country is facing great trouble during a time of soaring oil prices. Political quarrels and tantrums will simply worsen the already bad situation. As things stand now, fractious politics will likely persist. The sharp polarisation of society will not end soon unless Samak does some rethinking in order to mend fences.

Even though no political pundit expects the government to last its full term, Samak owes it to himself and the country to leave behind a legacy of leadership rather than an exit in the face of overwhelming contempt. For starters, the prime minister can show that he is a bigger man by allowing the proposed censure debate to take place.

Last week he fumbled in his political game of trying to outwit the opposition Democrat Party. By quashing the proposal for a general debate on the government's performance without a casting vote, he now has to face the censure motion with a casting vote of no confidence.

With his command of a huge majority in the House, he will definitely survive the opposition's grilling but not without a serious pummelling.

If he continues to play games by stalling the censure debate, he risks a worsening of the simmering discontent which could bring about his downfall. To face the censure now would be like lancing a boil, which would allow him a new beginning without a nagging pain to contend with.

He sees his four short months in office as too short a time to have accomplished anything. By the same argument, he blames the Democrats and critics outside Parliament for rushing to try to nail him on corruption allegations when he has not yet had the chance to implement any projects that could show tangible results.

While he complains about the hasty moves to judge him, he forgets to reflect on why he himself has managed to attract such a heap of scorn in such a short space of time.

When the government came into power, critics were doubtful about its ability to run the country, given that many viewed it as a proxy administration. Based on precedents, it is normal for any new government to face such scepticism.

After less than a month in office, Samak himself lit the political fireworks with his push to amend the Constitution. In hindsight, the controversy over the proposed amendments was the turning point for the opposition movement to grow both inside and outside Parliament.

The People's Alliance for Democracy has resumed its anti-government activities. The Senate, a non-partisan body, is becoming critical of the government. And the Democrats have been thrust into the limelight as a counter-balancing voice.

Instead of nipping the problem in the bud, the government has opted to exchange barbs with its opponents, thus inflaming the sense of animosity. By last month, street protests had resumed once again, causing the country to plunge into uncertainty and divisiveness just like in 2006, the pre-coup period.

What started off as a debate whether to rewrite the charter (ostensibly to protect ousted prime minister Thaksin) has degenerated into free fall. Rival camps appear relentless in wanting to bring about the destruction of each other regardless of the consequences.

To draw on a boxing analogy, the government has inadvertently fought its way into a corner. The PAD, the Senate, the Democrats and a large number of political commentators are pounding it with solid punches. There is no way for Samak to wriggle his way out of the corner unscathed. He has to make a trade-off between taking blows while getting out of the corner and staying trapped there by his vicious opponents.

The PAD is undermining the government's credibility to lead. The Senate is slated to grill Samak and his Cabinet on June 23. The government will have to face the budget debate, which is a de facto censure, on June 25.

Samak conceded that he expects his government to emerge bruised from the grilling. Since this is inevitable, it might be wise to take an extra beating in the form of censure by the Democrats in order to get it over and done with. To skirt around the censure debate is like keeping the lid on a boiling kettle.

Should Samak want to keep his job for at least a year - as he implicitly said about a fortune-teller proven wrong in predicting he would last only three months - he should realise that he ought to make peace with his opponents.

With pacified opponents, he will be freed to tackle his real challenge - the infighting among factions of the People Power Party. He should know well that the downfall of a Thai prime minister is often attributed to the erosion of support from his allies.