Contents Navigation

Thailand—Political Parties

About 5 pages (1,423 words)

List of political parties in Thailand Summary

Questions on this topic? Just ask!

Thailand—Political Parties

Political parties first emerged in Thailand with the end of the absolute monarchy in 1932, when the new ruling clique established the People's Party. Nevertheless, the history of Thai political parties is not a happy one. During the first four decades following 1932, political parties were banned completely for two lengthy periods: from 1933 to 1945, and from 1958 to 1968. When parties were able to function, the great majority were established by rival factions of the political elite; forming a party was typically the response of a defeated faction following a coup d'état. In other words, party politics was often a secondary form of politics; real power lay mainly in the hands of the military and the bureaucracy. Nor was party politics about mass politics. The People's Party has aptly been described as an "oligarchy," and few Thai parties have ever had substantial numbers of members.

Thai parties have been criticized for being unprincipled, lacking clear policies, being dominated by personalities, being undisciplined, being unstable, lacking real public support, clashing with government officials, being too numerous, being dominated by financiers, and misunderstanding their own roles. Many commentators have wanted to transform the existing parties into "real" parties, based on mass membership organizations with a more ideological basis. Legislation has been introduced in an attempt to accomplish this. The 1981 Political Parties Act, for example, set minimum numbers of members for political parties and required that parties contest a quarter of all parliamentary seats. Some political parties, such as the United Thai Peoples' Party (established by the Thanom Kittikachorn government in 1968) were established specifically as "mass" parties, designed to mobilize large memberships.

The Political Economy of Parties

In practice, such attempts have been doomed to failure. Most Thai parties are actually driven by financial rather than ideological considerations. A typical Thai party is composed of a number of factions, or cliques. Each clique is led by a boss figure, who assumes the role of patron. Often, these cliques correspond roughly to geographical areas, as politicians tend to work together in regional groupings. Faction bosses cultivate close relationships with business interests in particular regions or economic sectors. It is common for these faction leaders to work closely with local crime bosses, commonly known as chaopho (godfathers). Sometimes the politicians are themselves chaopho. Godfathers typically engage in such illegal business activities as logging, smuggling, drug dealing, gambling, and prostitution rings To operate these businesses with impunity, they require political protection; hence their willingness to fund politicians, cliques, and parties that will cooperate, passively or actively, with their businesses.

At the same time, political economy explanations of Thai political parties are not sufficient to account fully for their activities. Thai parties seek to present a respectable image to the media and to the voting public, especially the more sophisticated Bangkok electorate. While most major parties are managed by a secretary-general, who serves as principal fund raiser and trouble shooter, they often chose a well-educated and presentable individual to act as party leader. The party leader is the public face of the party, while the secretary-general controls the purse-strings. From 1988 to 2000, Thailand had four prime ministers who were also leaders of political parties: Chatichai Choonavan (Chart Thai), Chuan Leekpai (Democrat), Banharn Silp-archa (Chart Thai), and Chavalit Yongchaiyudh (New Aspiration). With the exception of Banharn, these men were all well-respected public figures: Chatichai was a former general and ambassador from an elite family; Chavalit was a former army commander and career military man; and Chuan was a well-educated, silver-tongued lawyer. Banharn, a provincial businessman of Chinese descent, had serious problems during his short term as prime minister. He was the former secretary-general of the Chart Thai Party, a brilliant behind-the-scenes fixer who did not gain broad public acceptance as a national leader. Thai political parties could not survive on the basis of fund raising and wheeling and dealing alone: they needed to present a serious and somewhat plausible face to the wider world. Chatichai, Chavalit, and especially Chuan were able to place an apparent distance between their own leadership, and the backstairs deal making that had put them into office.

Stasis and Change

Thai parties are constantly changing. In part, this reflects movements of politicians from one party to another, as faction leaders routinely switch parties in the run-up to elections. Yet it also reflects an eternal optimism among politicians, commentators, and the wider voting public that a new party can emerge and break the existing mold of Thai party politics. Recent examples of "new style" parties have included Palang Dharma (Moral Force), founded by Buddhist ascetic and former Bangkok governor Chamlong Srimuang in 1988; New Aspiration, set up by former army chief Chavalit Yongchaiyudh in 1990; and Thai Rak Thai (Thai loves Thai), created by telecommunications magnate Thaksin Shinawatra in 1999. New parties tend to promise higher levels of integrity, greater technocratic competence, and more substantive popular support than existing parties. They are typically led by a high-profile public figure, and initially recruit some prominent individuals to bolster the party's image. Over time, however, they demonstrate a tendency toward greater pragmatism, and gradually begin to embrace many of the features of other Thai parties that they initially disdained.

Thai governments are coalitions, generally bringing together as many as five or six parties. A typical coalition is built around one lead party, working with a couple of medium-sized parties and a couple of rather smaller partners. Because of factional defections, a large party at one election may shrink to nothing by the next. The Samakkhi Tham Party was the single largest party in the March 1992 election, but it did not contest the September 1992 election at all. Palang Dharma was the leading party in Bangkok in July 1995, winning sixteen seats; yet in November 1996, it gained only one. During the 1995 general election, Chart Thai and the Democrats were the two main rivals. By 1996, the rivals were the New Aspiration and the Democrats. And by 2000, the key contest was between Thai Rak Thai and the Democrats. These parties present slightly different images and appeal more strongly in different parts of the country. Chart Thai is a somewhat conservative, pro-business party, with its core support in central Thailand. New Aspiration uses populist rhetoric to appeal especially to government officials and farmers, especially in the Northeast. The Democrats (Thailand's oldest party, dating back to 1946) have a slightly more liberal platform and internationalist image, with their main support in Bangkok and the South. Thai Rak Thai combines a very modern image with the use of nationalist and pro-poor rhetoric.

The 1997 constitution, widely considered one of Thailand's most liberal, included provisions intended to strengthen the party system and measures designed to prevent politicians from switching parties. The effectiveness of these changes remains to be seen. However, the January 2001 general elections—the first to be held under the new rules—did see the Thai Rak Thai Party gain an unprecedently large electoral mandate. The campaign was characterized by a much greater emphasis on policy issues than had previously been the case. In the aftermath of the elections, there were signs that Thai Rak Thai might absorb some of its coalition partners, with the aim of establishing a one-party-dominant system.

Coalition politics can make for unlikely bedfellows. Because his Chart Thai Party had a poor image with the residents of Bangkok, Banharn Silpa-archa's 1995–1996 administration formed an alliance with the more respectable Palang Dharma. When clean-living Chuan Leekpai began his second spell as prime minister in 1997, his coalition was based on support from the Prachakorn Thai Party's "cobra" faction, led by Vattana Assavahame, a controversial figure accused of having strong connections with chaopho. Any coalition requires the collaboration of respectable figures and power brokers of questionable integrity. However, these collaborations are characterized by serious tensions, and consequently are unstable. Thailand's current lineup of political parties is certain to continue waxing and waning, provoking alternating moods of optimism and despair among both political analysts and ordinary voters.