On 6 October 2009, the latest attempt to create a “real” political party in Thailand took a further step with the first general meeting of the New Politics Party (NPP), the formal political arm of the People’s Alliance for Democracy (PAD), at the Thunderdome in Mueang Thong Thani. The main purpose of this assembly of around 1,900 party members was to elect Sondhi Limthongkul party leader, and to determine the party’s executive board.
The soi leading to the venue was lined with billboards (picture 1) showing what the NPP wanted to stand for: “Dare to change – honesty, sacrifice, courageous, able to work.”
Picture 1
The founding of the NPP included a switch from the previous yellow to green. Picture 2 shows the stall where party members could update their outfits.
Picture 2
The PAD’s satellite TV ASTV has always been in need of funds. Donations were welcome at the stall shown in picture 3.
Picture 3
Voting for the first party chairperson was a major organizational task, and done in a way similar to elections in Thailand. First, party members could check their membership number on alphabetically ordered lists (picture 4).
Picture 4
As can be seen from the following detail (picture 5), Sondhi Limthongul’s membership number is 00005555.
Picture 5
In front of the meeting venue, tents had been erected with rows of tables carrying computers and printers, used by the staff to register arriving members and provide them with their identification cards (pictures 6 to 8). At the end of the procedure, they received the conference documents (picture 9), collected in a booklet entitled, “Agenda of the first general assembly of the members of the New Politics Party” (picture 10).
Picture 6
Picture 7
Picture 8
Picture 9
Picture 10
According to this booklet, as of 30 September 2009, the NPP had 8,922 members, 57 percent of who were women. The regional distribution was as follows: Bangkok 19%, central Thailand 37%, North 16%, South 17%, and Northeast 11%. Most of the members seemed to be shopkeepers since 48% gave their occupation as “thurakit suan tua.” Active and retired civil servants made up 16%, farmers 14%, employees 7%, employees of state enterprises 5%, and students 1%. The remaining 9% provided no information.
The number of party members still seems to be small. However, the party’s action plan envisages reaching 500,000 members and establishing 40 branches within the year 2010. At the end of 2011, every province should have one branch, and there should be 200 district as well as 1,000 tambon centers, serving one million party members. One year later, there should be 600 district centers and 4,000 tambon centers with five million members. Thaksin Shinawatra does not seem to be convinced that this will work. In an interview with the Economist (online, 15 October 2009), he said, “I don’t think there are too many hard-core yellow shirts, if not being supported by Democrats and by military, and the reason they were supported by military is because the so-called elite instructed them.”
The NPP plans many activities to train leaders, change agents, and party functionaries. Obviously, this is an ambitious plan. It will also not come cheap. The budget for 2010 is set at 117.9 million baht, while fund raising activities are supposed to generate 214 million baht, 120 million of which should come from membership fees.
Picture 11 shows one of the 12 polling stations. The NPP seemed to have borrowed the equipment from the provincial elections commission of Nonthaburi province (see the ECT emblem on the voting booth). Before counting started, the officials were lined up on the right-hand side of the main stage (picture 12). Voting for Sondhi Limthongkul is under way (picture 13). The result at this counting board (picture 14) was clear: Sondhi: 131 votes, 4 abstentions, and 4 invalid ballots. This outcome was not terribly surprising, because (as shown in picture 15) Sondhi was the sole candidate on the ballot paper. The overall result was 1,741 to 61 to 73 (picture 16).
Picture 11
Picture 12
Picture 13
Picture 14
Picture 15
Picture 16
One wonders why the NPP insisted on this elaborate election procedure when it was clear who had to be elected party leader. When Sondhi went on stage (picture 17) after the “vote” people in the hall greeted him with an enthusiastic ovation. His suggestions for those party board members who he had the right to propose (others had to be elected afterwards) were approved in the most convincing form (picture 18). Picture 19 shows Sondhi on stage with “his” board members. Not surprisingly, the front page of Sondhi’s ASTV Phuchatkan newspaper of 7 October celebrated his new formal leadership position (picture 20).
Picture 17
Picture 18
Picture 19
Picture 20
Dr. Michael H. Nelson is a visiting scholar at the faculty of political science, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand. He can be reached at mhnelson_kpi@hotmail.com.
15 responses so far ↓
1 Susie Wong // Oct 19, 2009 at 12:42 pm
The green color reminds me of the HAMAS. The party’s symbol looks alike the NAZI’s symbol.
2 Jim Taylor // Oct 19, 2009 at 3:24 pm
A “real” political party? so other popularly elected parties are or wre not “real”? Scholarship requires penetrating behind the rhetoric Michael.
3 Nick Nostitz // Oct 19, 2009 at 3:51 pm
“Jim Taylor”:
“Real”, i guess, in the sense of a party that is based on some sort of political ideology (even though it may be rather confuse in the details) – of which there is very little to see in any of the established parties. Even TRT, which was the first party that campaigned on a strong policy platform, was a conglomerate of many different vested interests, incorporating leftist ideologies, rightist ideologies, and pure economical aims, including old provincial power networks. PTP now, after two rounds of bans, is left with at best second rate politicians, in which dinosaurs like Chavalit, who fit no real political conviction other than shady elite conflicts and military networks, are able to play their games.
The Democrats, comparable to a strongly conservative party, have very little of what in more developed democracies could be seen as political ideological background.
4 Michael H. Nelson // Oct 19, 2009 at 4:07 pm
Jim:
Scholarship in this context requires careful reading (e.g., of quotation marks and their meaning) and some understanding of the comparative (both contemporary and historical) literature on political party development. Cheap polemic and point-scoring don’t help.
5 WLH // Oct 19, 2009 at 4:52 pm
It’s a “real” political party meaning they can finally get a “real” sense of their own lack of popularity when it’s put to a “real” vote. I for one look forward to NPP spinning their election losses, instead of having to watch them spout delusions on TV about representing some phantom majority of “real” Thais.
“Real” can hardly refer to a platform in Thailand. All parties here are just business consortiums. Thaksin managed the first monopoly, and the coup was the Thai version of anti-trust legislation.
6 Jim Taylor // Oct 19, 2009 at 7:23 pm
Michael: “cheap polemics and point scoring” is what I consider Sondhi Lim & his cronies to be about epsceially given his record of generating so much fiction over the past four years…
[Nick] “real” politics is precisely about representation and reaching some kind of consensus; I cannot see any indication in the confused rantings of Sondhi Lim to indicate anything close to an “ideology”?
7 Ralph Kramden // Oct 19, 2009 at 11:45 pm
McCargo, some years ago in the edited collection Political Change in Thailand had some comments on the search for a real political party in Thailand.
8 Les Abbey // Oct 20, 2009 at 12:49 pm
Off topic, but it will be interesting to see which group backs the SRT workers first. Will it be yellow or red? Or do they all want a bit of the SRT land bank?
9 Michael H. Nelson // Oct 20, 2009 at 3:24 pm
WLH:
Re “All parties here are just business consortiums.” I think that this is too simplistic an approach. Anyway, here is a nice quote on the matter by expert Sondhi Limthongul:
“Nowadays, political parties are limited companies. They depend on who holds the majority shares. The Democrat party is perhaps better, because it has a more varied set of shareholders. Still, however varied it is, there are major shareholders. The People’s Power party has only one single main shareholder, who thus directly is the owner. This group of people [the shareholders; faction bosses] gives money to the phuak [cliques] of electocrats to stand [in elections]. This is not politics. It is investing in the business of democracy. That is, [we are dealing here with] the establishment of political party companies in order to take over Thailand.” (Nation Weekend, July 11, 2008)
10 Nick Nostitz // Oct 20, 2009 at 3:37 pm
“Les Abbey”
SRT union is already allied with PAD. Somsak Kosaisuk, one of the PAD core leaders is a former SRT union leader, and still involved. Half a year ago i photographed him during a union event being celebrated on the stage.
11 Aladdin // Oct 20, 2009 at 5:29 pm
Sondhi’s membership number says it all.
What can the PAD / NPP achieve without the support of “members of a revered institution”?
- zilcho.
Even if they joined hands again that would guarantee the destruction of them both – if their doom is not already inevitable.
12 Nobody // Oct 21, 2009 at 4:18 pm
They have identified Rayong as a potential stronghold. It will beinteresting to see how they paly the environmentalist card down there. Previosuly Democrats did well there on this issue but now in government they are compromised on it. The NPP in the short term may concentrate on issues like this.
No doubt they will also try to hit the party list as they will likely have a lot of votes but spread thin across the constituencies. They are national in a way that not even Banharn’s private party are. However dont expect them to win many seats at all. They arent PTP or Dems.
The pressure group side of NPP also exists. They can wreck any Democrat strategy to win just by standing in every central, eastern and lower northern constituency and split the potential anti-PTP vote. If Dems dont do what NPP like at least much of the time then the Dems are going to find that the odds on their victory next time are suddenly very very long and they already are pretty bad odds imho.
Agree with Nick on the real being about ideology
13 Chris Beale // Oct 22, 2009 at 12:52 am
Nick – first congratulations for your brave and brilliant coverage.
You are completely correct about this union co-option into PAD fascism – like Mussolini did with Italian trade unions.
The way I see it is this :
1) Anupong – against considerable odds, has kept the military united, somewhat at least.
Did he shoot Sondhi ? Will he shoot Chamlong !!?
2) This makes another coup extremely likely – as many commenators are saying :
probably the only way for some sort of exit out of the crisis.
Anupong seems to have maintained the loyality of both Isaarn footsoldiers and Thai officers : the real cleavage which could break Thailand apart.
3) in this situation, the official line is that the monarchy is but a supreme symbolm, non-political : it is the military which saves the Nation !
Very ironical if the military – which started the current crisis, with 2006 coup, ends the crisis with another coup.
But typically Thai !
14 Nick Nostitz // Oct 22, 2009 at 2:13 pm
“Chris Beale”:
Thank you very much.
But i am afraid the honor has to go to Michael Nelson – he did the article, not me.
15 Chris Beale // Nov 10, 2009 at 4:44 am
Severeal events could be the trigger which tears Thailand apart.
One of these is the election of a government in any way allied to PAD.
PAD’s formula of disenfranchising 50% of the population is a sure-fire recipe for all-out civil war. There is no way the 50% who stand to lose their vote, will accept that without a major fight. Furthermore, we can already see where the PAD is taking Thailand with the fact of the assassination attempt on Sondhi.
If you think that was bad – just see what happens if he gets within an inch of being in government.
Leave a Comment
Please note: New Mandala encourages vigorous debate. However, for the moment we will only be publishing high-quality comments that make original contributions to discussion. There will, of course, still be space for pithy, humorous, eccentric and cheeky input. Short and sweet will usually trump long and involved. Repetitive ranting, unimaginative point-scoring and idle abuse will not be entertained. Comments which carry a real name are also more likely to be approved. Thank you for your ongoing interest and contributions.