This blog is about Bangkok’s upcoming gubernatorial election on October 5. Why is the election important? Not just because Bangkok is crawling with rats and cockroaches which are “20 times the population of Bangkok” according to one of the independent candidates running for office, but also because it will be a test case for the kind of politics that Bangkokians want to see happen against a backdrop of national political turmoil.

 Government House, the seat of government, is still under siege by protestors who see themselves as custodians of a moral force bent on introducing sound leadership (read: anything but Thaksin et al) even at the expense of subverting the will of the people at large. Well, if the urbanites and Bangkok elite in particular, think they know what is best for the country, who will they pick for governor? 

 There are 16 contenders vying for the post that has a limited mandate but depending on the leadership qualities of the governor, it can be decisive. Case in point: Chamlong Srimuang, a former military officer turned politician and currently one of the leaders of the PAD behind the protestors at Government House, and who was governor between 1985 and 1992. Among the 16 include a massage parlor baron (Chuwit Kamolvisit) and another candidate known for her cabaret tactics (businesswoman Leena Jangjanya), but the leading nominees are favorite Apirak Kosayothin, Democrat Party incumbent; the People Power Party’s Prapas Chongsa-nguan; and independent Kriengsak Charoenwongsak, a former Democrat Party lawmaker.

 I will use this space to discuss professor Kriengsak only because I have had the chance to meet with him at the Foreign Correspondents’ Club (FCC) where he gave a talk. The other two contenders bailed out at the last minute. They placed electioneering over meeting with the foreign press. So I asked professor Kriengsak who was seated next to me why he had not done the same. “If you live up to your integrity, people will remember you,” he said pleased with himself that he kept his FCC appointment, and eager to hear feedback from foreign reporters.

 The 53-year-old, a Harvard-Oxford academic/economist, told me he’s an admirer of Singapore’s Lee Kuan Yew. You can hear the LKY-speak in some of the things he utters: A leader has to have a “measurable vision and find strategies to get there.” He wants to introduce more parks in Bangkok with 50 different kinds of flowers beautifying the 50 districts; rank hawkers according to hygiene and cleanliness standards the way the Environment Ministry does in Singapore; and get Bangkok so wired that people need not add to the traffic congestion by working from home and using their high speed wireless technology that incidentally, will also be a hit with the young. Above all, he believes he stands for “constructive politics” that presumably is a shade more respectable than the rotting party politics in Bangkok. But what exactly does this “constructive politics” entail? Professor Kriengsak did not say.

 One can surmise from his talk that constructive politics means “setting an example”; “communicating”; and having “clear, thought-through suggestions” on how to make Bangkok a livable city of 10 million. He already thinks the 20 ministries are largely his; teachers and intellectuals are helping him spearhead an Obama-like ground up political phenomenon that will shake up Bangkok since professor Kriengsak lacks the party machinery and funding to clean up politics as he sees it. If he’s making an impact, it is not showing because one poll reveals Bangkokians are still seemingly oblivious to the nearing election. Professor Kriengsak also says one of the first things he plans to do to implement his policies if elected is to have a “heart-to-heart talk with civil servants, maybe at the National Stadium.”

 A foreign reporter quickly dismissed him as a dreamer during the question-and-answer session while another reporter from the English language Bangkok daily ‘The Nation’ wondered if he seemed too aloof to the average voter as a Harvard-Oxford scholar. Professor Kriengsak did not think so, returning to what he reckons matters more to the silent majority: That he is the right kind of person at the right time in Thai politics. “If I don’t succeed,” he opined during his address, “I wonder how many will (in breaking the politics of old).” Indeed, as one attendee present noted to me at the end of the evening, professor Kriengsak is sincere. But is sincerity enough to win the election?

 We will find out. The Bangkok gubernatorial election is going to be a significant power tussle that could shed light on where the parties stand with the urban electorate and elite this late in the democratic game since the 2006 Thaksin crisis; the degree of voter fatigue with the political shenanigans of those with vested interests; and whether democracy itself is coming undone in Thailand. If so, Bangkok could well be overrun by rats and cockroaches, and it should not surprise anyone if a military coup rears its ugly head again. Moving forward, the key question will not be if Thailand is really ready for democracy but how to make the one-man-one-vote political system work for the well being of the urban-rural communities as well as the larger, nobler interests of the nation.

Ms Haseenah Koyakutty

September 26, 2008