And Arroyo and Abhisit also have much in common personally: both are scions of powerful families, both are Western-educated economists (Arroyo studied at Georgetown University while Abhisit was educated at Oxford), they entered parliament in 1992 (Abhisit as a Bangkok MP and Arroyo as senator), and their rise to power was backed by peaceful street action. But because of their questionable election victories, both were also described by their rivals as undemocratic and illegitimate leaders and have been accused of abetting human rights violations by using the violent arm of the state to quell protests.
Arroyo’s shaky nine-year rule mirrored the unstable Abhisit government. Arroyo’s greatest accomplishment is the fact that she survived and finished her term despite the efforts of the opposition to undermine her presidency. She succeeded in appeasing the restive military and was able to neutralize the powerful Catholic Church. Meanwhile, Abhisit stood his ground even after Red Shirt protesters paralyzed Bangkok’s commercial and tourist centers for two months. The military remained loyal to Abhisit, while he also benefited from the fact that the influential King didn’t intervene to bring an end to the chaos in the streets.
But recent events have also highlighted a significant difference between the two, one that suggests that the Philippines has something to show its more prominent neighbor—the relatively peaceful resolution of political conflict between the country’s top rival parties.
Despite the flaws in their political system, Filipinos have turned to the ballot box to express their dissatisfaction, not to threats of violence. Abhisit today will witness the smooth transition of power in the Philippines, but the question now is whether it will inspire him to work out a similar transition in Thailand or identify with the outgoing Arroyo, who just shrugged off her unpopularity to stay in office as long as she could.
The right choice is clear. But is the Thai leadership ready to move past the destructive power of divisive politics and ensure it works to truly enhance democracy in society? The same, of course, goes for Aquino.
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
J
Mr. Chaiwal, actually Mrs. Arroyo has never won an election too. She grabbed power from President Estrada in a 2001 coup and cheated in the 2004 Elections. Her voice was caught on wiretapped recordings where she was instructing an elections official to ensure she wins by a slim margin over her popular opponent.
Chaiwal
Arroyo is very different from Abhisit …The Thai PM has never won an election, and is afraid to hold elections because it is widely assumed that the Democrat Party would lose. How can there be a transition to civilian rule without a real election?