Where the Democrats fit in the battle of wits

It’s too soon to say who will be left standing after August 7, charter referendum day, but the key characters have clearly defined their own roles. The military government and the Pheu Thai Party are plainly the two main warring families, the Lannisters and the Starks – which leaves Thailand’s oldest political party on the fringe. Which may suit the Democrats just fine.
This is neither a compliment nor an insult.
According to Lord Tywin, a top powerbroker in the series, those who think strength, holiness or popularity make a good and long-lasting ruler are seriously mistaken. You have to be wise, and that’s all it takes, he says.
The Democrats have been grumpy about the draft charter, but that’s a far cry from vowing to put their lives on the line to oppose it. There are things that they don’t like about the document, but other things they agree with. The Democrats’ ambivalence comes from a mixture of the need to fight for “democratic principles”, the knowledge that the proposed charter could maim their biggest rivals, and a brilliant clause that gives the opposition bloc considerable power to block future constitutional amendments.
Latest reports claim an unspoken deal has been forged with the Pheu Thai Party, in which the Democrats would “look the other way” while the latter mounts an all-out attack on the draft. A truce has been achieved and bitter foes have become temporary allies, so to speak. But have they really?
It would be a shaky truce at best. There are probably a couple of reasons why the draft’s death would be good for the Democrats, but if they really have to choose between a bad charter and the old, formidable enemy, what’s their best option? To quote Lord Tywin again, “A house with great wealth and fertile lands asks for your protection against another with a strong navy that could one day oppose you. How do you know which choice is wise and which isn’t?”
That’s exactly the Democrats’ situation. One house is wealthy with fertile overseas connections, while the other boasts undisputed military might. Which choice is wisest? When the answer is not 100 per cent clear-cut, it’s perhaps best to keep a low profile.
The Democrats have experience here. In 1992, after the May bloodbath, the military and a popular movement led by Chamlong Srimuang battled it out until both were left more or less flat on the floor.
The Democrat Party, largely unscathed, prevailed in the aftermath of that war.
Things are a bit different this time, with the current crisis initially involving a Democrat-Pheu Thai internecine showdown, before the military pushed the oldest party aside to create an intriguingly familiar situation.
The Democrats are better equipped to play a waiting game. The party has a better transitional structure than Pheu Thai, and there are good alternatives to Abhisit Vejjajiva as party leader. To “democracy lovers”, the Democrats are the lesser evil when compared with the military. It was this “middle-ground” image that helped sweep the party to power in 1992.
Less than three weeks to go and every key player is appealing to the masses. Truth is, this is anything but an ideological battle. To answer the question of whether the draft charter will pass or not, one mustn’t get distracted by the supposed idealism involved, such as how a directly elected Senate is better than an appointed one. To get the most accurate answer, one needs to know who stands to lose or gain what under the different scenarios.
Ordinary folks won’t lose anything, since they don’t have anything to lose anyway. Their votes will matter on August 7, of course, but more to the political stakeholders than to themselves. What Thais will lose or gain from the draft constitution is largely abstract, because this is a game of wits in which the words “rights”, “freedom” and “democracy” are rhetoric that can be bent, distorted or beaten like a drum to mask vested interests.
To differing extents, the military, Pheu Thai and the Democrats are all guilty of this, though the latter appear the most cautious in wielding words as weapons. It’s open to debate whether that’s because they know better, or because they have decided they must play it cool under the circumstances.