Trashed

The trash was piling up Tuesday night at Government House. Protesters who seized the building 192 days ago had left a few hours before, having succeeded in bringing down the elected government of Prime Minster Somchai Wongsawat. At Bangkok's Suvarnabhumi airport, which opened today after being shut down for the past week, thousands of yellow-clad protestors lingered—apparently wanting to savor the taste of victory overnight. Much of Bangkok's attention was shifting to plans to mark the 81st birthday of King Bhumibol Adulyadej on Friday.

The apparent settlement of the conflict between the government and the protesters—members of the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD)—was viewed as a good omen for the revered monarch's celebrations. It may not be a good omen for Thailand's democracy, however. PAD, despite its name, is an essentially royalist party from the elite, urban portion of the country. And the settlement promises only a temporary end to the simmering conflict.

Today Thailand's Constitutional Court dissolved the three key political parties in the ruling coalition, finding that they committed fraud in December 2007 elections. The judgment brought down the government. The protestors, seeing the ruling as an outright victory, exploded in euphoria. When Somchai stepped down, PAD leaders ended their occupation of Suvarnabhumi airport, a two-year-old, $3 billion regional hub, and quit Government House.

The Constitutional Court jurists banned more than 50 members of Somchai's People's Power Party, as well as the Chart Thai and Machima Thipathai parties, from politics for five years. "Dishonest political parties undermine Thailand's democratic system," said court president Chat Calavorn. Deputy Prime Minister Chaowarat Chandeerakul is expected to become caretaker prime minister until Parliament selects a replacement for Somchai, which it must do within 30 days. All the moves, however, fail to resolve the issue most responsible for Thailand's long-running political crisis: the question of former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

Thaksin, a billionaire businessman overthrown in a bloodless coup in 2006, remains an incendiary figure; the source of a paralysis Thailand cannot shake. The court's ruling may be less a neat deus ex machina than another plot twist leading to further turmoil. For one thing, supporters of Somchai vow that they will not go away quietly. They want to press charges against PAD leaders, arguing that their takeover of the airports and Government House were illegal and have seriously damaged the country. "The law is the law. Someone who breaks the law must be held to account for it," said one speaker at a pro-government rally in front of city hall. For another, the PAD has made clear it will not accept as prime minister any politician it considers linked to Thaksin. It calls such people Thaksin "proxies." After first helping to force Somchai's predecessor, Samak Sundaravej, from office in September and now effectively hounding the government from office, the group is unlikely to be in a mood to compromise.

The PAD is determined to erase any Thaksin elements from power and also has a bold goal of reshaping Thailand's political landscape by creating a "new" politics. Notwithstanding its name, the group's objectives would not strike many as especially democratic. Founded largely by middle- and upper-class people from Bangkok and other southern parts of the country, the PAD is unabashedly royalist. And its zeal goes well beyond the almost universal reverence for King Bhumibol. Thaksin's populist economic policies and efforts to decentralize power from Bangkok were anathema to the alliance. It apparently has little use for the bedrock democratic notion of one man, one vote. Shrugging off the fact that Thaksin was elected in a landslide and that his successors also were democratically chosen, PAD leaders have called for constitutional amendments requiring that some members of Parliament be royally appointed. Some analysts say the PAD is far more about oligarchy than democracy, and some even quip that it would not be averse to restoring an absolute monarchy.