The latest edition of the London Review of Books — Europe’s most-popular intellectual periodical — makes uncomfortable reading for Thailand’s most capable politicians.
Suave villainy: Former prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva and Finance Minister Korn Chatikavanij should have fought at the polls, the ‘London Review of Books’ says.
What starts off as a flattering essay on the “brilliance, charm and intellect” of Democrat Party deputy Korn Chatikavanij and his “great friend and confrere Abhisit Vejjajiva” ends up being an elegant (and bare-knuckled) critique of the country’s oldest and most modern political party.
When the author, Richard Lloyd Parry, Asia editor of The Times, meets Mr Korn in February he says he is “the man who came closest to persuading me of the virtue of toppling a democratically elected government”.
“A tall self-deprecatingly dashing figure with high cheekbones and exquisite shirts. He is brilliant, charming and droll, and his presence works like air-conditioning on the perspiration and stench of Thai politics. Over the course of an hour with Korn, it resolves into the clarity of a well-turned op-ed, a tutorial with a bright young don, a conversation at a metropolitan dinner party.”
After the disaster of the failed amnesty bill late last year to bring Thaksin Shinawatra home, the Democrats had the choice of pushing for an elusive election win, a prize which has eluded the party since 1992. Lloyd Parry writes Mr Korn admitted as much to him February. “After we’d won the first round [when the Yingluck government dropped the amnesty bill], a lot of us thought that was the time to channel our efforts to winning an election,’ he said. ‘But we didn’t do that’.”
Instead, the reins of opposition were torn from their hands by Suthep Thaugsuban, who the London Review of Books describes as “the opposite of Abhisit in image and temperament: a pot-bellied man of the people, a sneering, relentless demagogue, fizzing with gleeful cunning”.
It’s bitter medicine for the Democrats to swallow, and the conclusion just as unpalatable.
While many people bear responsibility for Thailand’s divisions, prominent among them Thaksin, Lloyd Parry writes that “the suave villainy of the Democrat Party, and of men like Abhisit and Korn, is insufficiently recognised”.
“They understand how democratic opposition works, and how defeat, over time, strengthens losing parties, by purging them of what is unrealistic and superfluous, and forcing them into congruence with the aspirations of voters. Twice they have had the opportunity to reject military force and to insist on the primacy of elections; twice they have held the generals’ coats for them, and watched civil rights being trampled on, in the hope of gaining some respite from their own chronic unelectability. The Democrat Party’s leaders — young, attractive and cosmopolitan — could have positioned themselves as mediators between a corrupt, complacent old elite and a corrupt, arrogant new power.
“Instead, they chose their natural side in the class war, and achieved the feat of losing the moral high ground to a man such as Thaksin. Their responsibility, and their disgrace, are very great.”
But are there any lessons to be learned for the Democrats from the scathing essay? The author was educated at the UK’s prestigious Oxford University, as were Mr Korn and Mr Abhisit and another protest leader, Akanat Promphan, a fact Lloyd Parry likes to point out. He even starts the article by describing Mr Korn as “a former investment banker and English public schoolboy”.
Through the juxtaposition of the pantomime Machiavellian antics of Mr Suthep and Thaksin and the “suave villainy” of Mr Korn and Mr Abhisit, Lloyd Parry is making a modern argument for noblesse oblige. That is, that those who have the power, status, and in this case education, have a responsibility to perform their duties for others.
Another article that might give the Democrats pause for thought, and encouragement, is “The Seismic Shifts Behind the Coup in Thailand” by Australian researcher Grant Evans.
In a refreshing approach, Evans rejects cliched media depictions of the “rural poor versus the Bangkok elites”. He instead argues that rural areas have grown more financially secure, along with the country. The result? An aspirational class — the majority, in fact — disillusioned and alienated by political parties controlled by rich owners serving their own interests.
Tellingly, he describes the Democrat Party as the closest Thailand has to a modern political party, but one which has failed to reach out to the people of the North and Northeast.
He also argues it would be a major step forward for democracy if “the red shirts abandoned Pheu Thai and established a popular political party with a genuine political platform”.
“Duty” has been the byword of the generals who launched their coup on May 22 after the failures of the politicians. If they reform the country, root out corruption and return the nation to democracy without unfair constitutional changes to skew results, then we will have nothing to complain about come election time promised late next year.
As the country’s most modern and capable political party, there should be hope that the Democrats recalibrate their strategy and policies and make themselves relevant to rural voters. Ultimately, it’s their duty, and a matter of survival.
Max Kolbe is a the nom de plume of a Bangkok-based writer and editor.