While leaders come and go, they leave behind a legacy that can be mixed, varying from glory to ignominy. Only a few leave nothing much to remember. As for Thailand's 30th prime minister, Srettha Thavisin, it was cursory at best. Overall, it's a good case study on how pomposity and self-adulation affect leadership.
Mr Srettha, a real-estate billionaire who turned politician by chance, was thrust into the spotlight when he was appointed prime minister last September. This was right after the bicameral parliament did not endorse Pita Limjaroenrat, then the leader of the now-defunct Move Forward Party (MFP), which won the 2023 general election with flying colours.
Before entering politics, Mr Srettha was known to never be shy in speaking his mind, often with hyperbole. He seemed to know what he wanted to do. Unlike prime ministers who were career politicians or had a bureaucratic or academic background, he proudly billed himself as "the salesman" (he also featured on the front cover of Time magazine with that moniker) and backed it up with his actions by spending 52 days globetrotting to launch "roadshows" where he rubbed shoulders with big-time CEOs.
In the annals of modern Thai history, no political leaders have inflated Thailand's image and capacity as much as Mr Srettha. The land bridge, the digital wallet, legal casinos, real estate ownership, and the Ignite Thailand programme were among his numerous megaprojects. Yet, his aggressive sales pitches were at odds with his bragging about Thailand's soft power. The way he addressed the issues was naïve and lacked subtlety, which is indeed a stratagem for any country and company to "sell" soft power. South Korea, which has been quite successful with its soft power, has never sold and talked about its hidden power as Mr Srettha did.
Mr Srettha's rise to power was unexpected. He joined the Pheu Thai Party just months before the 2023 election and was handpicked by political heavyweights Thaksin and Yingluck Shinawatra. He had no constituency or voter base -- he was a close friend of the Shinawatra family. That may explain why he was at a loss during his provincial visits. Local supporters, particularly their representatives, through their campaigners, often complained that Mr Srettha paid only cursory attention to their organised voters and focused on his schedule and agendas. It has been an open secret that Mr Srettha was isolated from his political party and politicians from the start. He was on his own and did what he deemed fit. This precipitated his political career's harrowing demise.
Mr Srettha's initial public reception was good. When he took office, the public saw him as a fresh alternative to his conservative predecessor, the junta general -- Prayut Chan-o-cha. With his dapper, charismatic demeanour signified by well-tailored suits and signature red socks, he was poised to ignite Thailand's potential after nearly a decade under a military-linked government. But there were problems. He did not show concern about the public or have a solid understanding of political leadership and international affairs.
During his first 100 days, Mr Srettha's confidence was brimming, and he ran the government like a boss. Indeed, staffers at the Government House were perplexed by his suave but disconnected personality. After months of tense and combative engagement with them and the local media, mainly at the Government House and other functions, he incrementally adjusted his behaviour and personal style, including his dress style, especially the colours of his socks. At one point, his sock colours were debated among Thai politicians. His aides even boasted that their boss had more colourful socks than Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who also has a thing for colourful socks.
Journalists covering the government's beat shared a similar sentiment about Mr Srettha's apparent detachment. Unlike his predecessor, Gen Prayut, who was blunt and never shied away from having verbal altercations with media and opponents, Mr Srettha often answered all questions in lengthy purple prose but often muted and resorted to agree-to-disagree tactic when the subject or argument was too controversial. His penchant for agreeing to disagree made his personality lack dimension, and the Talking to Srettha TV programme that began in mid-June did not do much to improve his political image.
What was worse -- indeed, his Achilles' heel -- was that his comments on foreign relations revealed his lack of understanding of Thailand's geopolitical landscape.
The most intriguing part of Srettha's tenure was his understanding and reaction to global issues, as it failed to consider the complexity of situations. For example, during the hostage crisis following the Hamas Oct 7 terror attacks on southern Israel, he should have been far more forceful in seeking to protect the Thai hostages and push for their release from the very beginning. With the largest number of Thai people ever held hostage abroad, this should have been declared a national crisis and treated as such.
Last week, Mr Srettha's tenure was abruptly cut short by a ruling from the Constitutional Court. The verdict was a response to a petition by 40 senators accusing him and his cabinet of ethical violations, specifically citing Section 170(14) and (5) of the Thai constitution. Despite his confidence in the legal backing from his team of lawyers, he was caught off guard by the court's decision. Sad but true, his removal, just eight days shy of his one year in office, was a blip in Thai politics.
Within a few days after, the country got a new prime minister.
In his parting remarks, Mr Srettha acknowledged the court's decision but failed to reflect on his leadership journey or the lessons learned. It should be noted that he did not express gratitude to those who supported him or acknowledge the trust placed in him. Instead, he maintained that he had done nothing wrong, a statement that resonated more as a deflection than a genuine reflection on his time in office. Within hours after his removal, all his social media platforms showed a photo featuring his signature red socks and his favourite dog.
Mr Srettha's brief tenure raises debates, questions, and comparisons about figureheads -- or, to use Thai popular parlance, phu name hun cherd, which means proxy leadership. As Thailand moves forward in uncharted waters, the country needs knowledgeable, wise, and mature leaders who can make informed, thoughtful decisions that consider the well-being of the nation, not vested interest groups, let alone prominent families.