PM’s political era different to Prem’s

ANALYSIS: Prayut faces no easy ride if he chooses to remain in power as an unelected prime minister after the next general election, writes Nattaya Chetchotiros

Acomplex political scenario will await Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha if he chooses to stay on as a post-election unelected prime minister and steer the government in the manner of Privy Council president and former prime minister Gen Prem Tinsulanonda.

While Gen Prayut has brushed aside calls for him to remain in power through the so-called “Prem Model”, there is no knowing whether Gen Prayut will eventually follow in the footsteps of Gen Prem, who led three administrations for eight years consecutively from March 1980 to August 1988.

He did not rule out the possibility that he might become the next prime minister again after an election, saying that “it is not a time to talk about the issue presently.”

Support for Gen Prayut from members of the National Legislative Assembly (NLA) and the National Reform Steering Assembly (NRSA) has grown since the draft charter and additional question were approved at the referendum on the draft charter. NRSA member Wanchai Sornsiri had suggested Gen Prayut look to the Prem Model to stay in power.

His supporters are saying that Gen Prayut should follow i n Gen Prem’s footsteps to stay at the helm, especially as the majority of people are less concerned about the process to select a leader than getting someone who can maintain peace and order.

But political observers say the circumstances of the two leaders are very different.

One difference is Gen Prem was invited by political parties that had won the election to take the position of prime minister.

Sujit Boonbongkarn, a Chulalongkorn University political scientist, told the Bangkok Post that even Gen Prayut himself cannot predict whether he will be an outsider prime minister, because he needs to wait for the post-election political landscape to take shape.

At this stage, it is not appropriate to discuss any plans to help the regime tighten its grip on power, Mr Sujit said.

Mr Sujit, who once served as an adviser to Gen Prem while he was prime minister, revealed that Gen Prem had no intention of becoming government leader.

But when the political need arose for an outsider prime minister to lead a coalition administration at the time, Gen Prem had to step up to the challenge, Mr Sujit said.

“But today, whoever floats such an idea will only face resistance. There is no need for Gen Prayut to do anything for now,” he added.

“If the MPs and senators can choose a prime minister from the political parties’ lists, Gen Prayut will only step back and oversee security [as the leader of the National Security Council for Peace and Oder] as stipulated by a provisional clause of the new charter. The new charter does not stipulate for the NCPO to become a government,’’ Mr Sujit said.

He also noted that the political strategy of Gen Prayut differs from Gen Prem’s, who was also a former army chief yet never ran in a general election before his premiership.

Gen Prem, who also concurrently served as defence minister, had a group of young military officers dubbed the “Young Turks” working as his strategists.

They i ncluded Maj Gen Manoonkrit Rupkhachorn and the late Col Prachak Sawangchit.

Chavalit Yongchaiyudh, who held the rank of major general at the time, also served as a close aide to the defence minister. Maj Gen Chavalit played a key powerbrokering role in negotiating with political parties and groups to maintain the government’s political stability.

Mr Sujit said that the political circumstances during Gen Prem’s tenure were less complex because there was less political conflict. Political parties were not as polarised as today and not so opposed to the idea of an outsider prime minister.

At the time, political parties were divided roughly into two categories — those in a coalition government, and those eager to join a coalition.

In light of this, a power-sharing system called “musical chairs” was adopted to share power with political parties. With this approach, Gen Prem was successful in dealing with coalition parties and steered three administrations over eight years.

Unlike Gen Prem, Gen Prayut has his hands full with several opponents, particularly Pheu Thai and the red-shirt United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship, not to mention several civil groups that are more diverse than in Gen Prem’s era.

As circumstances change, Gen Prayut has to strike a balance between maintaining security and stability and the rights and liberties of those groups, Mr Sujit said.

However, over the past two years of his administration, Gen Prayut’s popularity has continued to increase, as shown by some opinion surveys.

However, if Gen Prayut is to become an outsider prime minister under the new charter, he will still need the support of MPs after the election.

Even though the new charter opens the door for Gen Prayut to become an outsider premier with the support of at least 376 of members of the Lower and Upper houses, Gen Prayut still needs to come up with a more delicate approach to come to power than Gen Prem did in the past, Mr Sujit said.

Apart from juggling between retaining the government’s stability and respecting the public’s rights, Gen Prayut must also work with political parties to ensure an even power distribution, Mr Sujit said.

Following the 1979 general election, the Social Action Party came out top with most House seats, followed by the Chart Thai Party and the Democrat Party.

These parties urged Gen Prem to take the post of prime minister, even though he did not run in the election. He agreed to become premier and managed to run a stable coalition government.

After the 1983 general election, Gen Prem was invited to serve as prime minister for a second term after Chart Thai which won the most House seats, but its leader failed to win the support of other parties to become prime minister.

The 1986 election saw the Democrat Party emerge as the winner of the most House seats and Gen Prem was invited to lead a coalition government for a third time.

In the 1988 election, Chart Thai won again, but this time Gen Prem announced: “That’s enough”, and that he was willing to step down after eight years in power.

The chief subject of political speculation since the Aug 7 referendum is the political future of the prime minister, Gen Prayut Chan-o-cha. To be more precise, there has been constant conjecture about whether Gen Prayut has, or wants, a future in politics after the next election which many believe will take place in about 15 months. The prime minister once assured the nation that election would end his political career, but lately he has been much more coy.

In truth, one can’t blame Gen Prayut entirely for his recent statements. Politicians fearful for their own power have done their best to draw him into the gauntlet. The prime minister has said — and this is accurate — that it is far too early to speculate on his future fate. The politicians themselves have hardly been any more forthcoming about plans for next year and beyond.

Still, however, Gen Prayut owes the country more than, “It is too early to speculate.” For one thing, it clearly isn’t. Every newspaper reader and radio talk show listener knows it is the top subject of the day. Some claim there is a fear Gen Prayut’s supporters will try to grasp and manipulate the issue to make him an unelected prime minister. Others, certainly small in number, openly fear they won’t.

It is no accident why this uncertainty has crept into the premier’s known plans since the referendum. Voters approved everything he asked for and plumped for. Citizens who voted approved the draft constitution despite some undemocratic clauses. They also endorsed empowering a future, unelected Senate to play a part in picking the first post-election premier.

There seems little doubt that by effectively giving Gen Prayut the power to indirectly affect who will be the premier in 2018, voters have caused the prime minister to waver and wriggle on the issue. Academics and columnists have been equally quick to lay out an exact scenario where he would not only control the contest, but emerge the winner.

He, together with his brothers in the National Council for Peace and Order, has the power to name every senator in the 250-member body. Given the weakened status of parties under the new constitution, that Senate is likely to be the strongest single unit in the next parliament. With such bloc power, the Senate could vote down every nomination of an elected member of parliament as prime minister. With the selection of a premier stalemated, some are already predicting a clear road for the nomination, and the humble acquiescence of Gen Prayut to stay in Government House.

That is a scary proposition. It is firstly a direct repudiation of Gen Prayut’s own much-vaunted “roadmap”. That plan was to culminate in the return of the military to the barracks, where it has always belonged, and should stay.

The country has been here before. The year was 1992. The powerful coup leader was Gen Suchinda Kraprayoon. The promise was that the military would not step into the prime minister’s position. His lie exposed, popular revolt broke out. It is called Black May because of the large but officially undermined number of fellow Thais Gen Suchinda and his underlings killed before they finally surrendered.

This is why Gen Prayut should issue a forthright statement of his future plans. If he still intends to step down, he should let the nation know. He has the right to change his mind and seek to continue to lead the country. To avoid another sad ending, he should not try to use emergency rules to keep the nation in political crisis, and himself in power.