As blue-clad Palang Pracharath Party (PPRP) leader Gen Prawit Wongsuwon made his way to the party headquarters on August 29, flanked by party stalwarts, a palpable shift in the political landscape of Thailand was brewing. It came on the heels of a major fallout with the Pheu Thai-led coalition government, which had decided to exclude the PPRP from its new cabinet lineup.
This decision was not without drama. According to Pheu Thai’s secretary-general Sorawong Thienthong, party MPs felt that Gen Prawit didn’t give Pheu Thai the respect it deserved. The tipping point was his notable absence during two crucial prime ministerial votes — once last year for Srettha Thavisin and recently for Paetongtarn Shinawatra, Srettha’s successor after he was ousted by the Constitutional Court.
With the PPRP now ousted, the Pheu Thai Party extended an olive branch to its erstwhile foe, the Democrat Party, marking a significant end to their long-standing rivalry. This move relegated Gen Prawit and his 19 MPs to the opposition, setting the stage for what promises to be a contentious political showdown.
Deputy PPRP leader Chaiwut Thanakamanusorn signaled that the PPRP was ready to embrace its newfound role. “We’ll diligently do our job. As a matter of fact, we have always scrutinized government work. However, this time round, we won’t pull any punches,” he announced with a note of determination.
While predicting a relatively smooth passage of major policies due to the government’s strong majority, Chaiwut warned that controversial schemes like the casino-entertainment complex and the issue of economic reforms would inevitably stir trouble. Added to this, the shadowy influence of Thaksin Shinawatra, Paetongtarn’s father, loomed large, complicating the political dynamics further.
Pheu Thai’s strategy of absorbing MPs from other parties has also come under scrutiny. “The way [Pheu Thai] maneuvers in politics could lead to internal conflicts,” Chaiwut remarked. According to him, the party’s inability to adhere to the traditional political system might cause disputes, leading to political instability and making governance more challenging.
The coalition government, now comprising 141 MPs from Pheu Thai, 70 from Bhumjaithai, 36 from United Thai Nation, 25 from the Democrats, 10 from Charthaipattana, three from Chart Pattana, and 21 from Captain Thamanat Prompow’s faction within the PPRP, had significant numbers on its side. However, certain external factors and internal dynamics could pose potential threats.
Despite Chaiwut’s assurances, Pheu Thai reportedly isn’t losing sleep over Gen Prawit’s charm and influence. Instead, they are focused on politicians compliant with their agenda. Among those, Capt Thamanat, who has previously maintained cordial relations with Thaksin, stands out.
Even though Capt Thamanat expressed independence from Gen Prawit, he has shown support for the Pheu Thai-led coalition, indicating a rift within the PPRP. Prawit’s party claims the exclusion from the cabinet was unjust despite their original agreement when they supported Srettha. And so, the PPRP pinpoints Pheu Thai as the breach initiators.
However, Chaiwut debunked claims that Prawit’s absence during the prime ministerial votes was the reason for their ouster. “The PPRP has 40 MPs, and all except Gen Prawit turned up to support Mr. Srettha and Ms. Paetongtarn,” he clarified, hinting there were deeper intricacies at play.
Irrespective of these claims, Pheu Thai insiders advise caution. Gen Prawit, with his extensive political experience, is a force to reckon with. His influence over key public agencies and ability to craft political turbulence should not be underestimated.
Echoing these sentiments, a Pheu Thai source warned, “The government needs to tread carefully.” Gen Prawit’s strategic moves, bolstered by the 40 senators allegedly acting on his behest, have already stirred trouble for the government, such as the recent petition against Srettha’s appointment of ex-convict Pichit Chuenban as a PM’s Office minister.
The government has to avoid any legal pitfalls in its appointments to maintain stability. Pheu Thai knows that Thaksin’s frequent political interventions could become a potential liability amid brewing rivalries.
Stithorn Thananithichot, from King Prajadhipok’s Institute, highlighted that Gen Prawit does not pose an immediate threat but added that the government’s success depends on its ability to deliver results swiftly. “The government needs to deliver results by the first or second quarter of next year,” he insisted.
According to Stithorn, the government’s performance will be under close scrutiny, with approval ratings and economic improvements being decisive factors. While the coalition partners seem satisfied for now, failure to meet public expectations could see the current equilibrium falter.
Chalermchai Sri-on’s Democrats and Bhumjaithai, along with Capt Thamanat’s alignment, ensure a broad base of support. But should the government falter, especially with lofty expectations set by Thaksin’s national vision, it could be their Achilles heel.
The crux of the matter remains simple: if the Pheu Thai-led government can’t meet public expectations, all bets could be off. Failure to deliver on their ambitious promises may weaken their standing, paving the way for political instability that Gen Prawit and other opposition forces could exploit.
Prawit’s absence during crucial votes was clearly a snub, and the PPRP deserved to be ousted. Pheu Thai made the right decision.
That’s one way to look at it, but was it really fair to the PPRP members who showed up for the votes? Prawit’s actions don’t represent the whole party.
True, but leadership matters. If the leader can’t commit, it reflects poorly on the entire party.
Kiara has a point. The PPRP isn’t just Prawit. They have capable MPs who should be given a chance.
Let’s not forget the political maneuvering by Pheu Thai to secure their coalition. They aren’t saints either.
The real issue here is Thaksin’s shadowy influence. How long will Thailand tolerate this?
Exactly! Thaksin’s interference is a ticking time bomb. It’s only a matter of time before it backfires.
Shadowy influence or experienced advisor? Thaksin’s involvement might actually be beneficial. Depends on how you see it.
Beneficial? To whom? Certainly not to the democracy we’re striving for.
The coalition’s makeup is incredibly diverse. I doubt they can actually govern effectively without internal conflicts.
Agreed. It’s a recipe for chaos with so many factions involved. I predict a lot of infighting.
Diversity can also mean a broader perspective. If they manage it well, it could be their strength.
But have they shown any capability of managing it well so far? History suggests otherwise.
Chaiwut’s comment about not pulling punches this time is laughable. PPRP has always been aggressive in opposition, but what have they really achieved?
Their aggression isn’t always productive, but it does keep the government on its toes.
Prawit’s seasoned political experience is underestimated. He could make a significant comeback.
Experience or not, political landscapes change. Prawit might find it hard to regain ground with all the young, new blood in politics.
But that experience also means he knows how to navigate political turbulence better than most newcomers.
How crazy is it that the Democrats and Pheu Thai are working together? Just goes to show politics make strange bedfellows.
All this political drama is exhausting. What happened to focusing on actual governance and public service?
You’re right. All this infighting does nothing for the people who need real solutions.
The new coalition may have a strong majority, but if Thaksin keeps meddling, they’re doomed.
Meddling or guiding? It’s a thin line. They need to tread carefully.
Casino-entertainment complex? That’s just asking for trouble. The social consequences would be disastrous.
Agreed. It could lead to a rise in crime and addiction problems.
Pheu Thai’s absorption strategy might just backfire. Internal conflicts are bound to happen.
Absolutely. Trying to control so many different MPs with varying agendas is risky.
Stithorn’s point is crucial: delivering results by next year is essential. If they fail, they’re setting themselves up for failure.
All this political maneuvering shows how fragile our democracy still is. It’s worrisome.
When Thaksin’s vision aligns with public needs, governance thrives. But when it’s self-serving, we have problems.