SEPTEMBER is a busy month in New York City. Every year, world leaders, senior diplomats and high-level officials come to the city to address the General Assembly of the United Nations. Paralleling the UN event, students at Columbia University welcome the leaders to campus for the World Leader's Forum. Amongst many, Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva came to share his vision on "Post Crisis Thailand: Building a New Democratic Society". The session was moderated by Joseph Stiglitz, university professor and Nobel prize winner in economics.
In his address, the prime minister encapsulated the trajectory of Thai democracy and envisioned a post-crisis Thailand. A decade back, Thailand was a beacon of democracy in Asia, with robust economic growth. A decade on, Thailand has become a country of conflict, chaos and at times violence. Despite the downturn, the prime minister urged everyone to think big and beyond the current stagnation. According to the PM, the new democracy will be based on "the rule of law, responsibility and reconciliation". It will promote political inclusion, rather than exclusion. While political participation needs to respond to the opinion of the majority, it will also serve the marginalised. In short, the new democracy will "put people first".
The prime minister's optimistic address was inspiring. However, it was more of an idealistic aspiration rather than plausible reality, at least in the near term. Firstly, the address was disconnected to the reality. Currently, demonstrations of different colours still continue to disrupt national stability, and internal political interests continue to impede the government's capacity to perform. While the PM said "We need to know where to go in order to know how to get there", the question remains: How do we move on from here? What kinds of tools or strategies are necessary to move Thailand out of the current political impasse toward an aspiring new democracy? It was unfortunate that the prime minister's speech did not go far enough to address these critical questions.
Secondly, he did not illustrate how to ascertain that politicians will be responsible and accountable for their actions and wrongdoings. As accountability and responsibility are at the crux of new democracy, the prime minister argued that politicians or public figures should resign whenever there is any question of wrongdoing in order to set a higher political standard and ease social tension. Given that the Democrat-led administration depends on a large coalition and multiple interests to sustain itself in power, political benefits speak louder than political morals. Therefore, it is easier to talk the talk rather than walk the walk. The prime minister can gain greater public trust and support for his words by setting the precedents. He must ensure that his Cabinet is held accountable and responsible for its actions or any questionable wrongdoing.
Thirdly, the prime minister needs to focus more on policy "substance" rather than rhetoric. He argued that the role of education is essential for the new democracy. According to the PM, a fruitful and healthy democracy requires more active political participation than simply casting votes. The electorate needs to become "more sophisticated" and well informed in order to engage in public discussion and policy debates.
To prepare Thai citizens to become "more sophisticated", the quality of education rather than quantity is what matters. As things stand, the fifteen years of compulsory education focus on the quantity aspect. The current education policy does not address difficult issues such as how to prepare students to be critical thinkers and responsible citizens.
The Prime Minister referred to cash-handouts in the current economic stimulus package as another successful policy to nurture Thailand towards prosperity and sustainability. The PM argued this policy has a dual purpose: To serve the less fortunate and to strengthen the domestic economy to be less reliant on export income at time of global and national recession. How can the prime minister ascertain that this policy will not create a vicious cycle of political and socio-economic dependency? As the opposition, the Democratic Party was convincing and consistent in its attacks on the then Thai Rak Thai Party. The Democratic opposition condemned cash-handouts as a short-sighted populist policy to serve political aggrandisement and reproduce dependency. It is time for this administration to put on its opposition hat and be more careful about what it offers.
The Prime Minister's charisma has succeeded in inspiring a new generation to re-imagine a post-crisis Thailand and envision the prospect of a new democracy. His optimism is much needed in the current political deadlock, with people distrusting the government and politicians.
To move forward, the country needs more than big ideas and grand visions. Thailand needs bold action plans to end the ongoing demonstrations and to achieve political reconciliation. More importantly, Thailand needs a systematic development policy that favours quality over quantity and prioritises long-term sustainability over short-term political interest. Of course, there is no quick fix to heal deep-seated wounds amongst all Thais, nor is there a magic solution to foster a sophisticated electorate and nurture sustainable development. A healthier, more educated and more democratic society requires substantial political courage, financial commitment and devoted brain power on all sides.
It is just like the prime minister said: "This is going to be difficult, but it is not impossible."
Ratana Lao is a PhD student at Columbia University, New York City.