A Three-Way Choice and the Premonition of "Twists" ― Understanding Thailand's General Election and the Risk of Destabilization

A Three-Way Choice and the Premonition of "Twists" ― Understanding Thailand's General Election and the Risk of Destabilization

1. The Reason for the "Three-Way Battle": Focus on "Combinations" Over Winning or Losing

The recent Thai general election is difficult to describe as a simple ruling party versus opposition scenario. Broadly speaking, it can be divided into three camps:

  • The conservative camp prioritizing security and order

  • The progressive camp advocating for institutional and structural reforms

  • The populist camp focusing on livelihood support and mobilization power
    In this three-way battle, it is reported thatit is hard to see any camp "winning outright" on its own.


In this situation, what voters are choosing at the polls is less about a "winner" and more aboutthe shape of the next coalition. Regardless of how much a party's votes or seats increase, the nature of the government will change depending on the choice of coalition partners and conditions. In other words, from the moment the ballot box closes, what begins is not just policy debates but a political chemical reaction of **"who to partner with" and "how much to concede."**


And when this "combination politics" becomes tangled, Thailand has experienced in the past an amplification of street fervor, judicial decisions, and institutional barriers, ultimately leading to prolonged political vacuums. The same atmosphere lingers this time, which is the true nature of the "risk of destabilization."


2. The Changed Atmosphere Due to Border Disputes: Nationalism as Both a Tailwind and a Residue

The fact that this election did not proceed as a "normal term completion" but on a short timeline is symbolic. Reports suggest thattensions at the Thai-Cambodian borderhave raised the political temperature, strengthening rhetoric that emphasizes security, national defense, and national interests.


The rise of nationalism can easily consolidate the ruling and conservative sides in the short term. However, in the long term, it deepens social division and distrust simultaneously.
The atmosphere of "Now is a national crisis, unite" creates a soil where opposing opinions can easily be treated as "unpatriotic." The moment politics is simplified into "friend or foe," coalition politics, which relies on compromise, becomes suddenly difficult.


3. The Dilemma Facing Reformists: "Winning" Is Not Enough

While the progressive camp (reformists) is reported to have momentum in opinion polls, there is a history of failing to form a government even after achieving results in past elections. This is the biggest drama this time.


For voters, the question "Is it meaningless if we can't achieve it even if we win?" coexists with the hope of "wanting to nurture the seeds of change" in the same vote.


Here, the reformists face a double bind where the more they maintain the purity of their ideals, the fewer "partners" they can work with, and the more they lean towards a pragmatic approach, the more their support base sees them as "softened." It is a phase where not only policy assertions but also the blueprint for governance (who to prioritize and what to advance) is questioned.


4. Another Vote: The Significance of the Constitutional Amendment Referendum

In this election, thereferendum on whether to amend the constitution, which will influence the political framework, is also a focal point. Thailand has a history of frequent constitutional amendments, with voices criticizing the current framework as "still influenced by the military" clashing with those arguing "rapid changes are dangerous for stability."


The important point is that the constitutional debate does not exist in isolation but tends to becomea bargaining chip in coalition negotiations.
"I will agree to the coalition, but the constitutional debate stops here."
"If you want to advance the constitutional amendment, accept this policy."

Such conditional struggles may slow down political processes even if the direction is indicated by a national referendum. For reformists, the dynamics of "moving institutional change" are tested more than the election outcome.


5. Reactions on Social Media: Expectations and Resignation Progress Simultaneously

The atmosphere on social media surrounding this election is not one of simple enthusiasm. Broadly speaking, the following groups can be observed:


(A) Expectation for Reform: "This Time, Things Will Change"
Among young people and urban areas, there is strong expectation for reforms in institutions like politics, judiciary, police, and military, as well as for equal opportunities and anti-corruption measures. Fragments of gatherings and speeches are shared, and words like "fair society" and "freedom and opportunity" become rallying cries for support. The color "orange" is symbolically mentioned in support.


(B) Resignation Towards the System: "Even If We Win, We'll Be Stopped"
On the other hand, a cold realism flows through social media. The memory of "not being able to govern even as the largest force" in the past is repeatedly referenced in comment sections.

"Winning votes and governing are separate matters."
"In the end, without a 'partner,' you're stuck."
Such views act as a brake on enthusiasm.


(C) Concerns About Livelihood and Economy: "Before Reform, It's the Wallet"
While reform is important, dissatisfaction with the economy, prices, and employment is more pressing. On social media, topics that are more connected to the "feel of life," such as wages, agricultural support, regional economy, tourism, and security, spread more easily. The presence of the populist camp is demonstrated here.


(D) Caution Against Division: "If There's Conflict, Chaos Will Return"
There is considerable anxiety about tensions over borders and the resurgence of street politics. Despite differing political party support, posts advocating "accept the results" and "avoid violence" serve as "preventive measures," reflecting the learning effect from past chaos on society.


It is important to emphasize that social media is a mirror reflecting a part of society, and loud opinions can appear more significant than they are. Nonetheless, the atmosphere ofexpectations and resignation circulating simultaneouslywell represents the nature of this election—more focused on "coalition and institutional barriers" than the "birth of a winner."


6. The Real Test Begins "The Day After the Election": Three Conditions to Avoid Destabilization

Whether Thai politics can avoid destabilization after the election day depends on at least the following three points.

  1. Whether the coalition combinations are quickly solidified
    If negotiations drag on, the "no waiting" aspects of national management, such as markets, investment, tourism, and border responses, will stall.

  2. Whether the path for constitutional and institutional reforms is transparent
    Even with a national referendum and pledges, if the process is opaque, distrust can easily be amplified. Accountability reduces the political cost.

  3. Whether supporters of the losing side are not isolated
    If "the winning side takes all," backlash intensifies. Providing a "way back" for the losers ultimately creates stability.


The Thai election is not only a place where citizens choose their future but also a test of how politics handles social division. The three-way race produces winners, losers, and a large "middle." The processing of results that makes the middle class feel "I want to participate next time too" becomes the greatest stabilizing factor.


Source URL

Related Articles