Thailand Politics and the Monarchy, Part 2

There will be a snap elections in Thailand on February 2 or less than 3 weeks from now. The Protesters can democratically and constitutionally remove the current administration if they succeed. But they want an unelected People's Council to assume power immediately with two years no election. Rule of law huh? Photo from BBC, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-25708092

The Democratic Party of Thailand does not seem to appreciate fully what rule of law and political liberalism really means. 

Assuming the protesters including the Democratic Party will succeed in forcing the current government to step down without elections, they will be inviting another round of protests and "step down unelected" demonstrations. Despise for the rule of law invites another round of such despise, directed unto itself.

Before, the changes in government administration were between or among different clicques within the monarchy. Meaning they were all friends of the monarchy even if they stab each other in the back, they did not threaten the monarchy and his family. When Thaksin came in 2001, it was different, the monarchy and his family was uncomfortable with him. He was too populist, and some economic interests of the family and friends of the monarchy were threatened by his presence.

(Photo right from CNN). They succeeded in ousting Thaksin in 2006, and in all 4 or 5 elections after that, the Thaksin camp always wins an election, including the last election in 2010 where Thaksiin's sister, Yingluck, became Prime Minister. That is why the protesters are scared of elections, they know that they are mainly Bangkok-based, far from the rural voters where Thaksin made an impression there. The protesters know that they will always lose, that is why they advocate to set up a non-elected "People's Council", they select among themselves. And if they succeed, they do not want election for the next 2 years. Very undemocratic, even dictatorial.

There have been lots of military coup in Thailand before, but they hardly shot each other, it's called "coup de talk". The generals talk and threaten each other to relinquish power, if the military opposition has enough force on its side, the ruling military will give way. But somehow whatever faction wins, they have the approval of the monarchy.

Wrong policy on the part of the Democrat Party (DP, headed by former PM Abhisit Vejjajiva) to boycott the elections. They are affiliated with the Council for Asian Liberals and Democrats (CALD), supposed to advocate the primacy of rule of law. But the DP chose the rule of men option. Despise of traffic rules, despise of the constitution, despise of elections, They and the other opposition groups just want to install un-elected People's Council in power for two years with zero elections. http://edition.cnn.com/.../thailand-protests/index.html...

Not that I am pro-Thaksin. I am just pro rule of law. People should follow what is stated in their existing constitution.

-----------

See also: 
Thailand politics and the anti-globalists, November 20, 2008 
Thai politics and the Monarchy, December 04, 2008 
Killings in Thailand and Military Crackdown, April 16, 2009 
Rule of Law 4: On Thailand Crackdown, April 18, 2009

EFN Asia 32: Day 2 of Conference 2013 in Bangkok

* This is my article yesterday at the EFN website. Karthik Chandra of the Foundation for Democratic Reforms and Lok Satta (People Power), India, helped in filling up some gaps in my original article. Thanks Karthik.
--------------

Day 2 of the Economic Freedom Network (EFN) Asia 2013 Conference started with a presentation by Fred McMahon of Fraser Institute in Canada, of the results of the Economic Freedom of the World (EFW) 2013 Report. Before presenting the numbers, he reiterated the definition of “economic freedom” as fundamental rights. Without these basic rights, no political or civil freedom can prosper.

The results of the latest EFW report showed once again, that more freedom means, more growth, less poverty. It also means less corruption, higher life satisfaction, life expectancy, more prosperity. For Asia, Economic freedom has been following global average or trend. The full EFW Report can be accessed at  http://www.freetheworld.com , http://fraserinstitute.org .

FNF Regional Director for SouthEast and East Asia, Rainer Adam discussed the work of FNF in Asia, then explained that they invited some Thai incumbent government officials, they all declined, so they invited the opposition, former Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejajiva. (Photo from left: Rainer, Abhisit, Fred.) 

Hon. Vejajiva said that Thailand’s high growth in past decades was due to dynamic private sector subject to competition. Government’s monetary policy helped without compromising inflationary pressure. The administration is buying Thai farmers’ rice at 50 percent higher than market rice. The farmers are richer but public finance suffered, also global rice prices rose.

He added that low wages, natural resources extraction can not sustain growth. Needed are more innovations to escape middle income trap. It is not how small or how big the government is, but to properly identify the sectors that government should come and support, and which sectors the government should get out. When markets are distorted, corruption goes up.

Economic freedom can be improved, Abhisit added, by identifying sectors where government can engage and solve inequality. Populist policies and authoritarian government feed each other, but .they can be tackled with democratic and good Governance. Thailand is successful In attracting various car producers and has no national car. An economy improves its competitiveness by gradual opening up.

Discussions in Panel 4 followed with 6 speakers from 6 countries, to talk about different experiences in dealing with middle income trap. Adinda Muchtar from the Indonesian Institute moderated the panel. Photo below, from left: Adinda (Indonesia), Wan saiful (Malaysia), Xingyuan (China), Set (Myanmar), Nguyen (Vietnam), Barun (India), and Hiroshi (Japan).

EFN Asia 12: Day 1 of Conference 2012

Day 1 yesterday of the 2012 Economic Freedom Network (EFN) Asia conference here at Crowne Plaza East Kowloon. It is sponsored by the Friedrich Naumann Foundation for Freedom (FNF) and co-sponsored by the Lion Rock Institute (LRI), Hong Kong’s first and only free market institute. 

There were 100+ participants, mostly international (Asia, US, Canada, Germany, Spain...). Many locals too, mostly friends of LRI.

Key speakers yesterday morning, from left: Wolf Zumpfort, Deputy Chairman, FNF Board of Directors, Germany;  Abhisit Vejjajiva, former Thai Prime Minister, Rainer Adam, Regional Director, FNF Southeast and East Asia, and Andrew Work, LRI co-founder. He took the place of  Bill Stacey, Chairman of LRI, who came late by a few minutes.

In his opening message, Bill reiterated the importance of free market, rule of law and property rights, in countering the mass appeal of populism which has long term negative impact on the economy. He said that the HK government is treading slowly on more welfarism.

Wolf cited HK's generally free market and globalized economy for its economic prosperity while Germany and many European economies are struggling with welfarism trap, massive unemployment, and the need to cut the expensive, huge debt generator welfare programs to help stabilize their economy.

Rainer reiterated a number of points made by Bill, and praised former Thai PM Abhisit for not bowing to heavy populism in Thailand during his term, that he cut certain subsidies and instill fiscal restraint and responsibility, only to be reversed by the succeeding populist administration in Thailand.

Abhisit discussed many points in his keynote speech. Among them:
* Populism has made the poor become even more dependent on the government.
* Populism breeds high opportunity for corruption, like the rice subsidy corruption.
* It can lead to more social conflict as a result of those continuing corruption.
* Decline of democracy as populism very often leads to authoritarianism and totalitarianism.
* Foreign intervention becomes inevitable later, like the heavily indebted welfarist economies who must be bailed out by other countries and the multilaterals.
* Decline in competitiveness and possible collapse of the economy as free market competition is often shelved.
* But free market has problem with social and economic distribution, thus the need for government to provide some safety nets to those highly vulnerable sectors and households.
* Politicians should be responsible, balance populism with proper education of the voters, avoid quick fixes and welfarism trap.

3. Keynote Address, former Thailand PM , “How Welfare Populism Destroys Prosperity”

The next round of speakers were Sec. Neric Acosta, the Presidential Adviser for Environmental Protection, Philippines, and Sec.Gen. of the Council of Asian Liberals and Democrats (CALD), and Bibek Debroy from India. Bibek was the sudden replacement of Parth Shah, President of the Center for Civil Society (CCS), India, who failed to come due to  problem with his flight from Delhi. Below is part of Neric's presentation.

Neric emphasized the importance of the rule of law, avoid populism despite its temptation to politicians. Bibek said that contrary to many people's belief, politicians in general are not myopic as they balance populist demand by the voters and managing public expenditures.