Bhumjaithai Party’s Populist Strategy in Thai Politics
The Bhumjaithai Party, led by Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul, is making a clear statement about its approach to governance. With only four months in power, the party has opted for an aggressive populist strategy, aiming to leave a lasting impression on voters ahead of the next election.
This approach is not without precedent. In Thai politics, populism has long been a key tool for political survival. Governments have historically competed to deliver direct benefits to citizens through subsidies, welfare programs, and development initiatives. However, for the Bhumjaithai Party (BJT), the stakes are uniquely high.
The party entered government in a politically unstable environment, with limited support from other factions. This has made it crucial for BJT to establish itself as a party that delivers tangible results. By doing so, it hopes to build a reputation as the “people’s party” and lay the groundwork for future electoral success.
One of the primary reasons behind this strategy is the need to deflect criticism. The BJT has faced accusations of being opportunistic, engaging in dealmaking, and lacking a strong ideological foundation. By focusing on immediate benefits for voters, the party aims to shift attention away from these criticisms.
Recent policies, such as the Khon La Khrueng co-payment subsidy scheme, highlight this focus on short-term relief. These measures are designed to generate quick wins and create a visible impact, which is essential for a party with limited time in office.
However, the challenge lies in the brevity of the current term. The party’s tenure is constrained by the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the People’s Party, which allowed Mr. Anutin to become prime minister. With less than four months until the next general election, there is little time to implement and demonstrate the impact of long-term reforms.
As a result, BJT is prioritizing highly visible policies that can be quickly implemented and showcased. While structural reforms like overhauling land laws or tackling corruption are necessary, they require more time and face resistance from entrenched interests. For a party with limited time, these reforms are not feasible.
Historically, populist policies have been effective in securing voter loyalty. Thaksin Shinawatra’s governments in the early 2000s, and later the Pheu Thai Party, used similar strategies to gain support. While BJT cannot replicate these policies wholesale, it can draw from the same playbook by tying its name to impactful initiatives.
What sets BJT apart is its lack of an entrenched political machine compared to Pheu Thai. Its influence is primarily in the lower Northeast and parts of the South, where populist measures could shift loyalties. Expanding its base requires bold and highly publicized interventions to sway undecided voters.
Despite the potential benefits, populism carries risks. Critics argue that cash handouts and short-term subsidies may win votes but do not address deeper economic issues. Thailand’s economy remains sluggish, with rising debt levels and persistent inequality. Without meaningful reform, populism may offer only temporary solutions.
Moreover, BJT faces competition from other parties, such as Pheu Thai and the People’s Party, which are also offering their own versions of populist policies. This creates a contest of who can promise more, faster. For BJT to stand out, it must deliver unique and credible policies.
Trust is another critical factor. Populist promises must be backed by effective execution. If voters perceive that BJT’s policies are poorly implemented, the strategy could backfire, reinforcing accusations of being opportunistic rather than reliable.
Despite these challenges, the BJT’s strategy is seen as rational. The party cannot rely solely on elite dealmaking; it needs voter legitimacy. Populism provides a pathway to that legitimacy by ensuring people feel immediate benefits under its watch.
Whether this strategy succeeds depends on two factors: the party’s ability to outcompete rivals in promising and delivering populist measures, and its capacity to withstand fiscal and political scrutiny. In a crowded field of populist contenders, standing out is no easy task.
In the end, Bhumjaithai’s short-term populist push reflects both the opportunities and constraints of Thai politics today. The party knows that four months is too short to transform institutions but long enough to shape perceptions. It is betting that highly visible populist policies will overshadow criticism of opportunism and position it as a credible player at the next election.
If the strategy works, Bhumjaithai could emerge stronger, having turned a brief tenure into a springboard for long-term relevance. If it fails, the party risks being remembered not for delivering benefits but for overpromising and underdelivering in a fleeting moment of power.
Democrats’ Leadership Reboot
The Democrat Party recently held a meeting to elect a new leader and executive board, generating excitement among long-time supporters. Many expressed strong support for the return of former party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva.
The meeting followed the resignation of Chalermchai Sri-on as party leader on September 12. Mr. Chalermchai stepped down after four MPs defied a party resolution to abstain from the prime ministerial vote.
Mr. Abhisit himself resigned as the Democrat leader in 2019 to take responsibility for the party’s poor performance in that year’s general election. The party won 52 seats in both the constituency and party-list systems.
After stepping down as an MP to avoid voting for former Prime Minister Gen Prayut Chan-o-cha, Mr. Abhisit remained a party member. He later withdrew from the leadership race in December 2023, announcing his resignation from the party. His departure was followed by that of long-serving members, including Sathit Pitutecha, Sathit Wongnongtoey, and Orn-anong Kanchanachusak.
Mr. Abhisit’s return has re-energized many veteran Democrats, such as Korbsak Sabhavasu and Khunying Supatra Masdit, who have already announced their return to the party.
Khunying Supatra wrote on her Facebook that her decision was motivated by the belief that it was time to help bring the Democrat Party ‘back to the hearts of the people who once supported it’ and ‘return the party to its true owners – Thais who have long shared its ideals’.
Chaichana Dechdecho, acting deputy party leader, recently took a group of 20 provincial administrative organisation (PAO) members to apply for Democrat Party membership at a local meeting in Nakhon Si Thammarat’s Ron Phibun district.
Mr. Chaichana confirmed that he and the group supported Mr. Abhisit’s return to the party leadership, calling him ‘the right person’ to guide the party through renewal and help it regain public confidence.
Former deputy party leader Korn Chatikavanij also posted a picture with prominent figures, including economist Santitarn Sathirathai, business guru Karndee Leopairote, and former higher education, science and innovations minister Suvit Maesincee.
The social media post sparked talk that these individuals might support Mr. Abhisit, either as outsiders or as potential party members. The former prime minister also emerged as the favourite to lead the Democrat Party into the next election, according to a National Institute of Development Administration (Nida) poll.
About 32.9% of respondents favoured Mr. Abhisit’s return, highlighting his enduring recognition among voters, while Suvicha Pouaree, director of the Nida Poll centre, expressed belief that the Democrats could secure as much as 10% of the vote under Mr. Abhisit’s leadership.
However, political observers question whether Mr. Abhisit’s comeback can truly restore the party to its former glory, as Mr. Abhisit’s qualifications alone may not help attract votes, especially among young voters.
Olarn Thinbangtieo, a political scientist at Burapha University, said he does not expect Mr. Abhisit to cause a dramatic turnaround, and the best hope for the former Democrat leader is to revive the party’s support among middle-class voters in Bangkok who believe in the Democrats’ values.
‘Winning a significant number of seats now depends on constituency networks – the baan yai political families in the provinces,’ he said.
According to Mr. Olarn, the party’s baan yai, such as the Pitutecha family in Rayong, the Wongnongtoey family in Trang, and the Issarasenarak family in Nakhon Nayok, were admired for their integrity and close ties with local communities.
These political families do not project the image of wayward political godfathers or business tycoons, which stands in stark contrast to the party’s current image, said the academic.
Mr. Abhisit will have to manage the baan yai carefully so that they do not dominate the party and do not feel alienated or sidelined, he said.
‘Some of them won’t leave the party but will try to use Mr. Abhisit’s reputation to benefit themselves. He has an image of honesty and credibility that remains widely respected,’ said Mr. Olarn.
Given its long history as the country’s oldest political party, the analyst described the Democrats as ‘a party that never dies but never grows’, adding that this is the key challenge Mr. Abhisit must confront.
‘It is his burden to persuade veteran members to return while guiding the younger MPs from political families to follow in the footsteps of their predecessors,’ he said.
‘At the same time, he must nurture a new generation of candidates for both constituency and party-list systems to lay a firm and steady foundation for long-term growth.’
