Can Thailand's Red Shirts topple the government
Updated
Thailand's Red Shirts or the United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship may have received wide international media coverage of yesterday's dramatic gesture at government house. But though it might have been good political theatre, but the numbers at the protests have fallen considerably since the weekend. They may be no closer to toppling the government of Abhisit Vejjajiva.
Presenter: Sen Lam
Speakers: Dr Andrew Walker, Senior Fellow, College of Asia and the Pacific, Australian National University
- Listen:
- Windows Media
WALKER: Well, I think what they've achieved is they have demonstrated that they remain a powerful, political force in Thailand. They certainly did succeed in mobilising a large number of people on the streets of Bangkok. Perhaps not as many as some of the rhetoric of a million people, but certainly a very substantial crowd, with people coming in from quite remote areas in rural Thailand. So this is a sign that they remain a potent, political player in Thai politics.
LAM: Nonetheless though, as we heard in the previous report, their numbers seem to have fallen. Do you think it is losing steam a little bit?
WALKER: It's inevitable that numbers will drop off, people have jobs and farms to get back to, there's costs involved in protesting in Bangkok, and there's the very hot weather to deal with, so certainly I think the protest is losing steam. I think most of them probably never really seriously expected that they would be able to overthrow the government with this protest. The main aim was to demonstrate that they can mobilise large crowds still, on the streets of Bangkok.
LAM: Well do the Red Shirts really want Thaksin back or is that just the international media's reading of the situation?
WALKER: There's probably a mix of views amongst the Red Shirts. No doubt there are some hardline Thaksin loyalists amongst the Red Shirts and for the Red Shirt protests, he remains a powerful symbol, and a mobilising symbol for them. But there is also a broader sentiment amongst the Red Shirts, and perhaps even more broadly in Thai society that we need to return to a system where there is a national consensus of respect for electoral results. And I think their call for an election is basically about putting that issue on national centre stage.
LAM: Well, the Prime Minister, Abhisit Vejjajiva, earlier this week stared down the demonstrators by ignoring the deadline that they set, and indeed Prime Minister Abhisit has said that he will not consider calling elections until the situation has calmed down. Do you think that the government is seriously considering calling fresh elections?
WALKER: Well, I think Abhisit's talk of calm is self-serving. As one member of the Thai Parliament put it to me, Abhisit will not call an election until he's confident he will win it, and that means probably a long delay. I think Abhisit fears that if an election was called, the pro-Thaksin political forces would do very well and may well be able to form a new government. So I think he is going to stretch this out as long as he possibly can. There is an election due under constitutional provisions next year. We would expect that he would call an election then. But who knows, they may be able to pull something out of the bag to delay it even further.
LAM: And finally Andrew Walker, what's your reading of the mood in Thailand? I know that Bangkok does not really speak for the rest of the country .. but do you think that ties generally see the Abhisit Government as an illegitimate one, even though it was put in place by the parliament?
WALKER: There's a mix of views no doubt in Thailand on legitimacy of Abhisit's government. He came to power under extraordinary circumstances, as you say parliamentary, but following the occupation of Bangkok international airport and following the judicial dissolution of the-then governing party. Since then, in many respects he has done not a bad job. He has managed a global financial crisis, as governments have all over the world and in some of the basics of government administration, I think there is considerable respect for his government. But the bottom line is people recognise sooner or later there is going to have to be an election and the fundamental division remains - are people going to accept the result of what that election throws up?
