Warning on the wall for Pheu Thai

The Decline of Pheu Thai: A Political Giant in Peril

Once a dominant force in Thai politics, the Pheu Thai Party is now facing a critical juncture. With an upcoming election on the horizon, the party appears to be struggling with internal and external challenges that threaten its relevance and future.

A series of setbacks, including poor performances in recent by-elections and the high-profile resignation of a senior figure, have raised concerns about the party’s ability to remain a major political player. Analysts suggest that these issues point to a broader decline in voter confidence, weakened unity, and a shrinking support base outside traditional strongholds.

The party’s performance in the Si Sa Ket and Kanchanaburi by-elections has been particularly damaging. Both provinces were once considered favorable ground for Pheu Thai, but the results highlighted its inability to expand beyond its core regions. In Si Sa Ket, a province traditionally sympathetic to pro-Thaksin Shinawatra politics, Pheu Thai failed to regain lost ground despite fielding a locally recognized candidate. In Kanchanaburi, the defeat underscored the party’s continued struggle to broaden its appeal.

According to insiders, these losses are not isolated incidents but reflect deeper structural weaknesses. The party is seen as unable to connect with new generations of voters and losing influence at the local level. Local networks that once mobilized voters under previous banners like Thai Rak Thai and People Power Party have either weakened or shifted allegiance to regional parties and factions tied to the Bhumjaithai (BJT) Party.

The resignation of Mr. Sompong Amornwiwat, a respected veteran and former leader, has further compounded the party’s woes. His departure was attributed to frustration with internal management and leadership direction. Although there are rumors of his potential return following his son’s election as party leader, many analysts doubt this will reverse the party’s fortunes.

The party’s reliance on the Shinawatra family has also drawn criticism. While Thaksin Shinawatra remains a significant figure in Thai politics, his continued influence over Pheu Thai and the prominence of his daughter, Paetongtarn Shinawatra, have led to perceptions of the party as a dynastic enterprise rather than a modern political organization.

Political experts argue that Pheu Thai has failed to reinvent itself. Younger voters do not see Paetongtarn as representing change, and the party’s structure and decision-making remain rooted in the Shinawatra orbit. Meanwhile, rival parties like the BJT and the People’s Party (PP) are capitalizing on Pheu Thai’s stagnation.

The BJT, led by Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul, has successfully tapped into some of Pheu Thai’s strongholds and focuses on pragmatic governance and populist measures. The PP, on the other hand, continues to dominate among young and urban voters with its reformist agenda and social media-driven campaigning.

All these factors have left Pheu Thai with few strategic options. Senior political consultants warn that the party risks being squeezed out if it cannot redefine its narrative soon. Analysts also point to the party’s difficulty in articulating a clear, compelling policy vision. Its 2023 campaign slogan, promising a ‘landslide victory’ and economic revival, failed to resonate beyond its core supporters.

Pheu Thai’s working in a coalition government alongside the BJT after initially pledging not to ally with military-backed groups has further eroded its credibility. Many die-hard supporters feel betrayed, viewing the move as opportunistic and inconsistent with the party’s pro-democracy rhetoric.

If current trends persist, observers say Pheu Thai could end up losing nearly half its seats in the next election. Without a major strategy overhaul, the party risks losing both its identity and its relevance in a rapidly changing political landscape.

Political Grandstanding and the Road Ahead

Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul recently fired a political warning shot when he declared readiness to dissolve the House before the scheduled date of Jan 31. His message was clear: why let his government be attacked for free?

Mr. Anutin’s remark was intended to show confidence that the Bhumjaithai (BJT) Party is prepared for an early election, but observers suggest that the reality is different. The prime minister’s move is seen as a sign of frustration and possible lack of confidence ahead of a potential no-confidence debate that could be filed by Pheu Thai and possibly backed by the main opposition People’s Party (PP).

Pheu Thai is reportedly preparing to submit a no-confidence motion, with deputy leader Visuth Chainaroon confirming that internal discussions on the timing and scope of the debate are underway. The PP, meanwhile, has adopted a wait-and-see stance, stating it is ready to support the scrutiny of the government “in the public interest,” not for political maneuvering.

With the House dissolution set for Jan 31 under a political agreement, the BJT – the minority coalition leader – could find it difficult to regain public trust if its weaknesses are exposed just months before a general election.

Political analysts believe that all three major parties must appear ready for an early election even though none of them truly is. Stithorn Thananithichot, a political scientist from Chulalongkorn University, doubted that a House dissolution would take place before the Jan 31 date agreed between the BJT and PP.

He said the current political atmosphere is being stoked by all three parties – each pretending to be ready while in reality they all need more time to secure more support. Pheu Thai, the former ruling party, is unprepared and has yet to regain momentum since former prime minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra’s audio leak controversy, he said, noting that it would be difficult for the party to win 70 seats if the polls were held soon.

The PP does not want to trigger an early House dissolution because its main priority remains the charter amendment. A snap election, he said, would derail its campaign to draft a new constitution.

The BJT, meanwhile, shows no enthusiasm for an early election, because despite holding power, the party has struggled to deliver tangible achievements, especially in suppressing scam networks, he said.

Mr. Anutin is more likely to prefer remaining in office until the scheduled dissolution on Jan 31 to recapture the favorable momentum he enjoyed at the beginning of this coalition, when his cabinet of “outsiders” briefly impressed the public, said Mr. Stithorn.

‘He wants four months without hiccups. If he dissolves the House early to dodge a no-confidence debate, he will lose credibility … and possibly voters,’ he said.

The prime minister recently declared scammers “enemies of the state” and announced the formation of a Technology Crime Suppression Committee and the signing of agreements with 15 public and private agencies to enhance coordination.

However, Pheu Thai deputy leader Sutin Klungsang said that Mr. Anutin fears a no-confidence debate more than an early election because his government faces multiple issues.

These include the unresolved Khao Kradong land dispute, which involves the Chidchob family, which is powerful in the BJT, and growing suspicion that the government has been unwilling or unable to crack down on scam-centre networks.

Mr. Sutin noted that Mr. Anutin’s threat to dissolve the House early is not an empty one, and it is driven by fear of scrutiny.

‘If a debate takes place, he will not be able to give any convincing answers,’ said the Pheu Thai veteran.