Sukhumbhand Versus Pongsapat

The Bangkok gubernatorial election was held last weekend and ended with a great fanfare. The incumbent governor, Sukhumbhand Paribatra, from the opposition Democrat Party, managed to hold on for another term despite implementing a number of failed policies during the past four years under his leadership.

Sukhumbhand won the election with a record-high number of votes, surpassing 1.25 million votes. According to the official result of 100% vote count on Sunday, 3 March, Sukhumbhand gained 1.25 million votes, defeated Pol Gen Pongsapat Pongcharoen who had 1.07 million votes. Pongsapat was nominated by the ruling Peua Thai Party, and reportedly specially handpicked by former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

After the votes were counted, Sukhumbhand expressed his gratitude to the people who helped him to get more than one million votes in the election. He pledged to work harder and be more committed to serve the Bangkokians.

Meanwhile, Prime Minister Yingluck Shinnawatra, together with Pol Gen Pongsapat, made an official announcement by conceded defeats and congratulated Sukhumbhand. Yingluck also promised that the government would work cooperatively with him as a newly elected Bangkok governor.

In his first term, Sukhumbhand was criticised for having failed to solve key problems facing Bangkok as well as to fulfil his ambitious projects. When devastating floods hit Bangkok in 2011, Sukhumbhand refused to work with the Yingluck government while claiming to protect Bangkok at all costs. But in so doing, other provinces had to suffer from trapped floodwaters because Bangkok blocked the waterways which disallowed excessive water to reach the sea.

Then, there were cases of the Bangkok Metropolitan installing fake surveillance cameras, sparking the issue of corruption since the budget was originally allocated for the purchase of real surveillance cameras. Sukhumbhand was also unable to answer the public about his plan to build a giant tunnel designed to let floodwaters get through Bangkok to avoid the capital being flooded. The giant tunnel was never constructed.

In another embarrassing case, Thailand was selected to host the 2012 FIFA Futsal World Cup, from 1-18 November 2012. Sukhumbhand promised to complete a new stadium for this global event, but again failed to deliver his promise. FIFA decided to move the venue to an older stadium in Bangkok—the decision that tarnished the reputation of the Bangkok governor.

With these criticisms, then why did Bangkokians still vote for Sukhumbhand?

Bangkok is known to be the centre power of the Thai traditional elites backed by members of the middle and upper middle class. They have adopted an anti-Thaksin attitude since Thaksin, while in power from 2001-2006, posed as a threat to their position of powers; thus they approved the military to stage a coup that overthrew his regime. Thaksin, meanwhile, has enjoyed popular support from poor residents of the far-flung north and northeast regions of Thailand.

Toward the end of the election campaign, the Democrat camp employed an old strategy to discredit the candidate of Peua Thai, by propagating certain discourses, such as, “Don’t elect those who burned our city”, referring to the case of arson attacks against the Central World building in downtown Bangkok in May 2010 allegedly committed by the Peua Thai supporters in the red shirt movement. Other discourses included, “Don’t allow Thaksin to take control over the royal capital”, and “Let’s stop the political domination of one family”, supposedly meaning the “Shinawatra family”.

Many Bangkokians, albeit being let down by Sukhumbhand’s performance, were compelled to still vote for him as a rejection for the Peua Thai candidate. But choosing Sukhumbhand not because of his quality, but rather because of a political ideology will certainly further complicate Thai political conflict which was first ignited in the aftermath of the 2006 coup.

First, the triumph of Sukhumbhand will deepen the already widened gap between the Thai traditional elites and the Thaksin faction. There is a great divide between the centre and the periphery, and between the rich in Bangkok and the poor in the remote provinces. The decision of Bangkok residents showed that they continue to detest Thaksin and his political legacies. It was also a slap in the face of the ruling government under Prime Minister Yingluck.

Second, the gubernatorial election reflected the severe politicisation of the current political issues and troubles which Thailand has been encountering. Instead of judging candidates from their policies, and in the case of Sukhumbhand—his past failures and achievements, voters in Bangkok were willing to sacrifice their vote to punish the Peua Thai, even when they recognised the lack of effectiveness on the part of the incumbent governor.

And when Bangkok residents complained about the poor in the outlying regions falling prey to vote buying, they themselves also fell in the trap of devious political ideology. Political divisiveness obscured the fact that Bangkok will have to bear with the same old incapable governor for the next four years.

Third, there could be one positive outcome deriving from the gubernatorial election—and that is, the adherence to electoral democracy. All sides of political divisions came to exercise their vote last Sunday. After Sukhumbhand won the poll, his supporters immediately appeared to be enamoured with the electoral politics. It is ironic because many of the Bangkok residents endorsed several coups that removed elected governments in the past. When their political interests were lost in the process of the election, they did not hesitate to belittle electoral democracy.

Finally, now with Sukhumbhand returning at the helm of the Bangkok affairs, it is expected that conflict between Bangkok and the government will continue. And with the Democrat Party regaining full confidence, the battle against the Yingluck regime will be ever more fierce and intense.

Pavin Chachavalpongpun is associate professor at Kyoto University’s Centre for Southeast Asian Studies.

Opinion

Pavin Chachavalpongpun

Search form