Thailand’s monarch for 70 years -- often referred to as the “god-king” by the Thai people -- King Bhumibol Adulyadej recently died after prolonged illness.
At the news of the King’s death, thousands flocked the streets crying hysterically, many were carrying his portrait. Newspapers faded to black and white
Television channels, including the satellite channels, fell silent and were replaced by black and white broadcasts from the royal palace.
Bhumibol is remembered as a respected patriarch, a guardian of the poor and dispossessed, and a unifying figure -- the one who could intervene in times of national crisis and steer the Thai nation out of troubled waters. The truth is, however, more complicated.
The man
One of the longest ruling monarchs in world history, the late king began his reign in 1946 following a family tragedy -- the sudden and violent death of his elder brother, then King Ananda Mahidol, whose death remains unexplained to this day. Prior to 1946, King Bhumibol was far from the limelight and hardly a public figure. Born in the US and educated in Switzerland, Bhumibol lived outside Thailand for most of his formative years. When not studying, he kept himself busy with jazz, fast cars, and European high-society.
Few could see the highly Westernised young man becoming a mythical ruler and a symbol of the nation. And from that rather unremarkable and inauspicious beginning, Bhumibol’s stature as the Thai king only grew with passage of time. He was travelling to every nook and corner, including the remotest and most poverty-stricken rural areas, arguing for social and economic development, and championing the poor.
Probably his greatest moment came in 1992, following the massacre of unarmed protesters by the military in the Bangkok streets. Bhumibol called the protest leader and the prime minister to his palace. As they knelt before him, he commanded that they settle their differences peacefully, and both parties accepted. Thai people were captivated by their king’s ability to rescue the nation in its time of crisis.
The myth
Much of what the Thai nation and rest of the world came to know about the late king were in fact myths, which were seen through with meticulous preparation and careful execution. Such myths were part of a broader class project for sustaining political domination by the royalist Thai political elite -- the old palace loyalists, the military, big land-owners, established business houses, and the judiciary.
Surrounded by loyal establishment figures, Bhumibol was manoeuvred into the public consciousness as a compassionate king, the embodiment of traditional Thai values and virtues. He was cast as the champion of the country’s poor and dispossessed. He was the strongest voice for social and economic development. All the while, strict lèse majesté law was exercised, that punished any criticism or negative discussion about the king or royal family with imprisonment.
During the Cold War, while communism made inroads into a number of neighbouring countries, Thailand too was rocked by a communist insurgency. The country became an important pivot in the US-led alliance’s fight against communism in Southeast Asia.
In reality, King Bhumibol was never a consistent supporter of democracy or human rights. In service of the anti-communist ruling elite, Bhumibol sponsored right-wing paramilitaries, terrorising leftist youths and students, culminating in the 1976 Tammhasat massacre.
Later, under Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, Bhumibol publicly backed the “war on drugs,” in which over 2,500 people lost their lives through extra-judicial killings. In 2006, a military junta overthrew Thaksin, and promptly gained the king’s endorsement. By the time of the latest military coup in 2014, Bhumibol was allegedly too sick to appear in public. Still he was “wheeled out” to legitimise the destruction of democracy yet again.
Fresh elections envisaged in the new constitution will now be unlikely to take place until the one-year mourning period is over
The legacy
Thailand became one of the “Asian Miracle” economies in the 1980s, and appeared as a stable democracy in the 1990s. As the king in a constitutional monarchy, Bhumibol had a limited role in such developments. Yet, he was credited for them as a pillar of stability and a national guardian. Then came the financial crisis of 1997, in which Thailand was one of the worst hit economies. Although the country could find its way out of the crisis, the economy overall could never recover to its pre-crisis level.
Every crisis is an opportunity, the saying goes. So, the Asian financial crisis and its aftermath led to the rise of a new political axis -- the business tycoon-turned-politician Thaksin Shinawatra and his Thai Rak Thai political party. A former police officer, Thaksin became the richest businessman of Thailand.
Then he joined politics and went on to become the first democratically elected prime minister of Thailand to serve a full term, and was re-elected in 2005 by an overwhelming majority.
So, the royalist civil-military elite felt threatened by Thaksin’s rise. His economic, social, and health policies which helped reduce poverty by half in just four years dwarfed the benevolence of the king. Thaksin’s unprecedented electoral power endangered Bhumibol’s traditional royal authority, and started to unravel the established political order.
Capitalising on a major corruption allegation against Thaksin, the Thai military overthrew the popular democratic government in September 2006. Thaksin had to live in exile mostly ever since. He was sentenced in absentia, banned from politics, and his assets were confiscated.
Bhumibol made no attempt to distance himself from the military coup. For the first time, the Thai public had a clear view that the palace was a player in partisan politics, and had contributed to the overthrow of a popularly elected government.
In the post-coup election of December 2007, a new Thaksin-aligned government was elected, effectively undoing the work of the coup-plotters. The royalist political elite, thriving on Bhumibol’s personality cult, could not accept the election result. What followed was the yellow-shirt movement -- a series of increasingly belligerent street protests to bring down another elected government.
Soon a counter-protest movement supporting Thaksin also emerged. Despite the damage to Thailand’s economy and international reputation due to the yellow-shirt movement, the security forces refused to move against them.
Eventually the pro-Thaksin government fell amid violent protests, and a pro-royal administration led by Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva took its place.
That pro-royal government eventually fell at the following parliamentary election, replaced by an administration led by Thaksin’s sister Yingluck Shinawtra. Her opponents in royalist and militarist circles were soon bent on undermining her democratic mandate. Yingluck’s prime ministership, like that of her brother before, ended in May 2014 with yet another military coup. The current government in Bangkok, headed by General Prayuth Chanocha, took over.
The new constitution of Thailand recently introduced by the military regime was half-heartedly endorsed in the referendum in August. But fresh elections envisaged in the new constitution will now be unlikely to take place until the one-year mourning period is over.
At King Bhumibol’s death, Thailand has been a more divided country than ever before. The country’s politics overall has become a revolving door of democratic governments and military interventions. Legal machinations are also on the rise -- politicised lawsuits and judicial coups -- to overturn electoral outcomes which led to the pro-Thaksin government in power, as well as increasing resort to lèse majesté prosecutions.
Kazi Nurmohammad Hossainul Haque is PhD Fellow at the Asia Research Centre, Murdoch University.