What's next in Thai politics?

After decades of absolute monarchy rule... After decades of bureaucratic polity and military dictatorship... After people uprising and loss of lives in 1973, 1976 and 1992... After semi-democracy under General Prem and years of unstable and ineffective coalition governments... After the Asian financial crisis and Thaksin's rise and fall... After coups after coups, constitutions after constitutions... After the PAD's besiege of the Government House and the use of mild force against the protesters...

After all these and many other events...

The question is, what's next?

Noone knows the answer for sure, but what is clear is that after all these years, the Thai society still lacks the maturity and the wisdom to settle political difference peacefully and reasonably.

"New politics" has probably been discussed in depth earlier in the Nation Weblog, but my take on that is that the change in the form of politics won't help fix our problems.

We may have selected MPs from different professions using some magical formula, but the underlying problems in the society won't simply disappear. They will still be there and will cause troubles, no matter what form of parliamentary system we come up with.

Corruption will be as prevalent in any kind of new politics as today's. Favoritism and cronyism will still be the rule of the game in the most part of the government and bureaucracy, even in business.

It's not the constitution that is the real problem in Thailand, nor it is election rules or parliamentary design. The time has come to realize that the root of all these problems lies in the very social and economic structure of the country.

The Thai social structure, although it has been changing, is still largely based on personal relationships. Meritocracy is not the main rule of the game. In the society like this where know-who is much more valued than know-how, it is natural that favoritism, nepotism, cronyism and corruption are norms rather than exceptions.

The Thai economic structure is also unbalanced. The rural-urban economic divide and income inequality are serious problems that undermine political development. Much has been said about this, and I shall not repeat them here.

The ultimate, top-priority challenge for Thailand, I would contend, is an economic one. Continued economic growth of at least 5-7% a year is an important objective that has to be met. Economic development also needs to be spread to other regions outside Bangkok.

To achieve this, policies to enhance competitiveness need to be implemented. Education, from primary to tertiary levels, requires substantial improvements. Trade barriers need to be brought down through multilateral, regional and bilateral trade agreements. Investments in key infrastructure need to be done. Energy security needs to be taken seriously, with concrete long-term energy policies implemented.

I still believe political development is certainly important for Thailand, but any real substantial progress on that front can only be made possible with continued increase in economic well-being. Thailand has indeed come a long way in terms of economic development, and this has allowed progress on the political front to take place. Indeed, it was the country's rapid economic development in the 1960s-70s that had created the middle class - less tied to the old patron-client social structure - who subsequently fought against military dictatorships and demanded a more participatory politics.

It is also the increase in standards of living that allows people to participate more in politics and to care about good governance (after all, you have to pay more taxes and so you care about how your tax money is being used!) and anti-corruption efforts. In other words, caring about corruption and good governance is a "luxury" good. Without the increase in economic well-being and the subsequent increase in demand for good governance in the wider mass, anti-corruption institutions or courts will never eradicate corruption. Plus, rising standards of living also tend to render strong personal relationships less relevant to success in life.

Future progress in politics, therefore, requires continued progress in economic development.

One might argue that if there were to be one political reform that would really help Thailand, it would be the process of decentralization. Thailand, albeit how homogenous it looks on surface, is a diverse place. Serious and substantial decentralization efforts that transfer power from the national government to provincial and local communities, one could argue, have the potential to drive different regions forward and reduce the rural-urban divide.

While I think decentralization should be carried out more seriously, I am doubtful of its actual impact. Given the social structure that prevails in Thailand today, decentralization could end up transferring power and money from national politicians to local elites, who are as corrupt and ineffective as the national ones. We could see corruption being decentralized as well (like in the case of Indonesia). However, I still think decentralization is worth trying and should be implemented carefully and, if done appropriately, could facilitate economic growth in regions outside Bangkok.

Still, the most important challenge facing Thailand today is how to sustain reasonably high economic growth in the years to come. It is a necessary condition for any substantial progress in the political front to take place. Unfortunately, it is the political development today (both the government and its oponents) that is undermining economic growth, thereby undermining political progress in the future.

It is time to stop fighting and get going with the real business.