The fragility of democracy in Thailand and the return of the Shinawatra family to power
The fragility of democracy in Thailand and the return of the Shinawatra family to power
WRITTEN BY ANIELLO IANNONE
3 October 2024
The Constitutional Court of Thailand recently dissolved the Move Forward Party (MFP) — a progressive party that had won the majority of votes in the latest national elections — accused of being a threat to the monarchy. This decision, though not unprecedented in Thai politics, underscores the precarious nature of democracy in Thailand, which remains heavily influenced by entrenched political oligarchies and the military.
Military coups and legal interventions have continually disrupted the political legacy of the Shinawatra family. Thaksin Shinawatra's populist policies and widespread support led to a deep polarisation in Thai society, resulting in his ousting in 2006 and the subsequent military coup that overthrew his sister Yingluck in 2014. These events set the stage for a political environment where democratic representation is continually subverted.
The Thai political system, described as a "Thai-style democracy", repeatedly delegitimises election winners through constitutional manoeuvres. The fate of the MFP mirrors that of its predecessor, the Future Forward Party (FFP), which was similarly dissolved by the Constitutional Court two years ago. A series of events have unfolded since the 2014 coup led by General Prayuth Chan-ocha: internal divisions within the military junta, the end of the military regime, the 2019 elections, the rise and subsequent fall of the FFP, the MFP's electoral campaign in 2023, and the Shinawatra family’s return to power with Paetongtarn Shinawatra as the new prime minister.
The Shinawatras and Thai politics
Thaksin Shinawatra’s emergence as Thailand's prime minister in 2001 heralded a new era in Thai politics. Thaksin secured victory in the election with his party, Thai Rak Thai (TRT), amid the socio-economic turmoil precipitated by the 1997-98 Asian financial crisis. Thaksin garnered support from the country’s business community and the rural segment of society, disillusioned by the previous government's handling of the crisis.
The persistent influence of the military and entrenched oligarchies continues to subvert the will of the electorate, creating a hybrid political system where democratic processes are overshadowed by authoritarian interventions.
Thaksin's government has often been characterised as autocratic due to its centralisation of power and suppression of dissent. Thailand has witnessed a delicate and tumultuous power struggle between civilian and military factions since 1932. Thaksin's triumph was a significant shift in this power dynamic, creating a stark division between the privileged bureaucratic class and the impoverished working class. This division later manifested in sporadic and violent clashes between pro-monarchy (and military) factions and Thaksin's supporters, primarily composed of the lower and economically disadvantaged classes.
TRT’s success in securing consecutive election victories with a significant majority allowed it to form a government without a coalition. However, this dominant position in parliament raised concerns about a potential shift towards authoritarianism — a concern that grew during Thaksin's second term, which saw intensified centralisation of power.
The military coup of 2006, which ousted Thaksin Shinawatra, marked the beginning of a period of political instability in Thailand, characterised by deepening divisions between rural and urban populations, frequent changes in government, mass protests, and continued military and judicial interference in politics. During these years, military and conservative forces worked to dismantle the Shinawatra family’s political influence. However, the entrenched support for Thaksin and his policies persisted, particularly among rural voters.
Yingluck Shinawatra’s rise to power in 2011 briefly revived the Shinawatra family’s political influence. However, her tenure was similarly marred by another military coup in 2014. This period highlighted the recurring tension between the democratically elected government and the powerful military, as well as the challenges of sustaining democracy in a deeply polarised society. Following the 2014 coup, Thailand remained under military rule from 2014 to 2019.
The political situation in Thailand
Thai politics has been unstable since the early 2000s, starting with Thaksin's ascent to power in 2001. Despite his broad support, particularly from rural and impoverished regions dissatisfied with the previous government's handling of the 1998 financial crisis. Thaksin, a prominent telecommunications businessman, won two elections before being ousted by a military coup led by General Sonthi Boonyaratglin in 2006. This event marked the emergence of two factions: the "Red Shirts" (pro-Thaksin) and the "Yellow Shirts" (pro-monarchy and conservative). Thaksin's sister Yingluck won the election in 2011 but was removed from power by the 2014 coup led by Prayuth Chan-ocha, who then established the National Council for Peace and Order.
The military's desire to maintain control over Thai politics is reflected in the 2017 constitution, which grants it the power to appoint all 250 members of the Thai Senate, ensuring its influence over legislative and executive decisions. By controlling key levers of power, such as the judiciary and the electoral process, the military seeks to prevent the rise of political movements that challenge its dominance or advocate for substantial democratic reforms. This has resulted in a system where elections exist, but real power remains concentrated in the hands of military-backed elites, reinforcing a hybrid regime that limits genuine democratic representation. The 2017 constitution was widely criticised by the FFP and democratic activists as "unpopular", in stark contrast to the 1997 “people constitution”.
Indeed, the electoral process in Thailand faces challenges. The outcomes of these elections are often overshadowed by the influence of the military. While elections are held, the political landscape is heavily distorted by the military’s ability to intervene and influence political processes and outcomes. This is due to the military’s control over aspects of governance, such as the appointment of senators and its role in political interventions. Additionally, the monarchy holds a significant symbolic and political role. Its influence often intersects with political affairs, particularly in reinforcing the status quo and stabilising conservative forces. This places Thailand in a system that can be described as a hybrid regime, where democratic processes are present but significantly compromised by non-democratic forces.
A problem for democracy?
The 2019 election saw the surprising success of the FFP, led by Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit. As a newly established party with a progressive agenda that directly challenged the military-backed government and the entrenched political elites.
This young and progressive party, distinct from the "Red Shirt" and "Yellow Shirt" ideologies, emerged as the third-largest party. The FFP's success was attributed to its appeal to young Thais disillusioned with the military regime and the traditional ideological divisions. However, the FFP was dissolved the following year due to a constitutional amendment, and from its ashes emerged the Move Forward Party (MFP), led by the charismatic Pita Limjaroenrat. The MFP won the 2023 elections with a progressive platform, but Pita was not appointed prime minister. Instead, Srettha Thavisin of the Pheu Thai Party, a political heir with a background similar to Thaksin, formed an alliance that excluded the MFP and garnered support from conservative senators.
The 2023 elections highlighted two fundamental issues: the widening gap between the population and the establishment, and the deepening crisis of representation. This situation is exacerbated by a political system that undermines electoral outcomes through military influence and constitutional manipulation. The United Thai Nation Party, representing Prayuth and the military forces, garnered less than 15 per cent of the vote, securing 36 seats; while the MFP secured the highest percentage at 37.99 per cent with 151 seats, followed by the Pheu Thai Party with 28.84 per cent and 141 seats. This reflects a strong desire for significant change among the electorate, as evidenced by the support for the MFP. However, the dissolution of the MFP underscores the hybrid nature of Thailand's regime, which does not favour progressive parties or opposition groups challenging the status quo.
Determining the way forward
Thailand finds itself at a crossroads with the return to power of the Shinawatra family, an event that reflects the deep divisions running through Thai society. The recent dissolution of the Move Forward Party (MFP), which had garnered widespread popular support, highlights the ongoing struggle between progressive forces and the entrenched military-oligarchic alliance. Paetongtarn’s role as prime minister not only symbolises the resilience of the Shinawatra political legacy but also represents a potential flashpoint between democratic aspirations and authoritarian tendencies. These tensions are manifested along several fault lines: the rural-urban divide, where Thaksin’s populist policies have consolidated support among rural voters, in contrast to the urban conservative elite backed by the military; the ideological clash between pro-democracy reformists and defenders of the conservative monarchy; the generational divide, with younger voters calling for democratic reforms regional disparities, with economic inequalities between the wealthier urban areas and marginalised rural regions continuing to fuel long-standing social discontent.
Indeed, the return of the Shinawatra family to power, alongside the dissolution of the Move Forward Party, underscores the inherent fragility of democracy in Thailand. The persistent influence of the military and entrenched oligarchies continues to subvert the will of the electorate, creating a hybrid political system where democratic processes are overshadowed by authoritarian interventions. The generational, ideological, and socio-economic cleavages shaping contemporary Thai politics reflect growing discontent with the status quo. Progressive movements like the MFP and its predecessor, the FFP, have garnered significant popular support. However, as demonstrated by the fate of both parties, electoral victories alone are insufficient to challenge the entrenched military-backed political establishment. Thailand’s political trajectory remains uncertain, as it navigates the tension between the resilience of traditional power structures and the rising demands for democratic reform from a new generation of voters. The critical question remains whether Thailand can reconcile these competing forces and progress towards a more inclusive and representative political system.
DISCLAIMER: All views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily represent that of the 9DASHLINE.com platform.
Author biography
Aniello Iannone is a lecturer in Political Analysis of Southeast Asia and Conflict Resolution (with a focus on the Southeast Asia Area) at the Department of Political Science and Government at Diponegoro University. He is also Junior Fellow at the research centre Geopolitica.info. His research concentrates on Indonesian politics, comparative politics within Southeast Asia, and ASEAN's role as a regional actor. Image credit: Wikimedia Commons/Prachatai.