Lessons from the Current Strife in Thailand 212.0

I hope my friend Pun-Arj Chairatana is well. With a PhD in Economics from Sussex, he is proud to be a Red Shirt. And as of this writing, they are shooting Red Shirt protesters in Bangkok.

I first met Pun-Arj at the 2009 Asialics in Hongkong. I last met him on April 17 in Taipei at the 2010 Asialics, his right arm bandaged from some incident in a Bangkok street.

The one thing he said that surprised me is that, “Today, Thaksin Chinnawat is just one character in the Red Shirts’ struggle. This long time demonstration is really more about getting a better deal for the rural poor than the one the yellow-shirted, urban-based elite is sharing with them.”

Note: Other Learning from …[other countries] posts: Taiwan, Singapore and Hongkong, Denmark, Israel and New Zealand.

Conditions behind Red Shirts’ demonstration. Thailand has more people than the Philippines in the rural area where farm productivity, in general, is higher than the Philippines. Still, relatively within Thailand, the city-based dwellers with the factories did better than the rural dwellers.

Former Prime Minister Thaksin, who comes from the rural north, recognized the disparity and implemented policies to correct them like universal health care. After he was deposed, rural dwellers want more (universal health care remains in place as it is highly popular.

By showing discontent, they are asking for mechanisms for a more just sharing of the fruits of national development.

State of political debate. Back then, almost one month ago when I was looking forward to an election in the Philippines were all candidates are personalities from the national elite, I told him that I envy the Thai.

As Thailand has moved ahead of the Philippines in the economic front, it seems they are likewise ahead in the political debate, a debate on a more just geographic distribution of wealth that most countries must pass to attain a more developed status.

For the Philippines, paradoxically, the apparent success of the automated voting may have further moved this necessary debate about a more just wealth allocation, a social contract, to a later date.

With the election, dynasties have increased their hold in domestic politics.

A political system that is predicated more on connections than on merit does not bode well for the country especially with respect to the effective allocation of capital resources and the sharing of the fruits of development.

The delay in engaging the debate, to me, seems to set us up a bigger fall when the next economic bust will inevitably come.

Note: Pun-arj first told me about a popular fruit in Bangkok, the watermelon, that has the military camouflage green on its rind but is actually red inside. With the death of Commander Red and the 3pm deadline today for the demonstrators to disperse, I hope the united Thai military does not consummate a civil war. More than that, I wish my friend stays well and the Thai people re-engage in political debate rather than armed confrontation.

The Philippines and Thailand. Both countries were roughly at par in 1975 at the end of the Vietnam war.

Since then, Thailand has parted ways from the Philippines.

We had our lost decade in the 1980-1990s, double-timed in exporting our workers, and in hollowing out our industry. We survive as an apparently progressive society from the remittances of the OFWs, almost 10% of our population who contribute almost 20% of GDP.

Exporting OFWs is a weak economic strategy – previously a band aid during the first oil shock – that helps keep the present national elite in place but does not provide the means to lift the country to a higher developed status.

During that same period, Thailand grew above 9% per year, created a boom in industry, and strengthened local value adding activities in other areas like agriculture and tourism.

At the bottom line, from rough parity, Thailand raised GDP per capita (in purchasing power parity) above US$8,000 or more than the Philippines US$3,300 today.

While it is easier to blame the difference in leadership, it is more realistic to blame ourselves for the leaders we select – and the consequent policies they rationally implement).

My expected conclusion for Thailand. Some blood has been spilled, but the clarity between the debate issues and the protagonists – rather than between political personalities from the same national elite feuding about shrinking spoils in the Philippines – tells me that Thailand will come out stronger when this is finished.

Their version of People Power – exhibited in Asian and Buddhist fatalism – seem destined for a permanent change after this bullheaded exchange. I hope that more responsible and patriotic Thai leaders will work to heal the deep divisions exposed.

In truth, Thailand is also a land of smiles hiding these divisions. I do hope the healing happens soon.

My hope for the Philippines. Just last week, we also had our new version of People Power exhibited in the voters patient lining up to participate in the automated elections, the field election officers using their individual initiative to create order despite the odds, and the BEI teachers adapting despite the March 4 orders basically getting them charge of election day polling center management.

My sense is that the powers that be will misread the Filipino people’s fortitude as support for the situation as it is – where there are likewise deep divisions that need to be bridged.

I cross my fingers that those other Filipino leaders of goodwill can initiate the necessary changes that create for a more just distribution of the benefits of progress.

Then we would have learned the lesson of the current strife in Thailand.