After the May 1992 crisis

16 May 1997

Two weeks after the May Crisis in 1992, a group of leading businessmen, technocrats and academics met for a closed-door discussion. All are still prominent figures today - in the financial industry, the Constitution Drafting Assembly, the central bank, the universities, and important industries. As we move towards the debate on the constitution, it is worth recalling how we felt at the last great turning point. Just five years ago.

F1 [then and now, one of the leaders of the finance industry]: Businessmen have lost hope about the parliament. We don’t believe MPs can make rational decisions. The economy has developed very quickly. But politics have moved too slowly. Politics at the village level have not developed at all.

I feel I reject the present system. I don’t think any of the party leaders are suitable to be a PM. None of them know enough about running the economy. We have big problems over infrastructure. The world is being divided into economic blocks. Businessmen want a PM and government who understand the world economy. None of the existing party leaders qualify, including Chuan.

H1 [a top hotel executive]: Our industry was so badly affected. In that week [of May 17-21] all the hotel guests left. The only people remaining were the air crews. We lost so much money. We need to revive the industry, and we need to do something about our politics.

C1 [head of a major construction firm]: I’m unhappy about all these "money politicians" who are in parliament only for personal gain. I’m unhappy about the military controlling the government. I’m unhappy about Suchinda. I’m unhappy that a few generals can grab all the power.

The declaration by the three institutions [a joint statement issued on 1 June 1992 by the Bankers Association, Federation of Thai Industries, and Chamber of Commerce, supporting a return to democracy] is just the beginning. From now on the business sector will play a bigger role in politics. They have to do more.

F1: The positive side of the event is that business people now pay attention to politics. From now on, business will determine the pattern of Thailand’s future.

In fact, coup governments are better for business. They pass legislation which helps business. They get things done. But it’s too dangerous. I sat in the senate recently. We passed more than 300 bills. But I kept thinking: who is going to benefit from all this legislation. The people? The bureaucrats? The military officers? It was frightening to see that this kind of government can pass so many bills so quickly without any participation.

To have real democracy we must start from the grassroots - from the village, district, province. We must have elections at all levels so that rural people learn not to elect these awful MPs. I would like non-elected persons to be eligible to be PM, like Anand Panyarachun.

P1 [leading political scientist, now prominent in the CDA]: We can have ministers who are not elected. But the PM must be an elected MP. We have too many laws which give too much power to our PM. The military created all these laws - anti-communist act, emergency degree, act to control unrest, and so on. We will never be able to change these unless we have a PM who comes from election. The military will always want to have a PM who won’t change the rules against them.

T1 [a leader of the textile industry]: We just want to get back to normal as quickly as possible. We want a stable government. That alone will be good for business. I don’t mind a non-elected PM. But that matter is now closed. Let’s pass the constitutional reforms and get things moving.

R1 [a member of one of the retailing family empires]: The business people are beginning to feel that to lean on the military too much is not a good thing,

B1 [a banker, now in a leading finance company]: The May event was a blessing in disguise. Let me talk about the positive side. I used to prefer a non-elected PM. Many business people did. In the past, non-elected PMs were more effective, more pro-business. But this Suchinda episode has changed my mind. There is too big a risk of getting an unsuitable person. Business people have not paid enough attention to the selection process. It’s the same with senators. We know the system of selection is not transparent, but we accepted it in the past because we benefited. Now we have to change the rules of the game.

A1 [a top aviation executive]: The Thai bureaucracy has collapsed. How do we get rid of the three tyrants [Suchinda Kraprayoon, Kaset Rojananil, Chainarong Noonpakdee]? I say: let them just disappear naturally. Give them time. But the Bank of Thailand should make sure they cannot withdraw a lot of money. They should not be allowed to gain from corruption, gift cheques.

BT1 [then and now a prominent official in the Bank of Thailand]: Maybe we can collect donations to get them to leave. I would like to contribute. Maybe we should tax big-value gift cheques with a withholding tax.

A1 [then an economics lecturer, now in a top telecommunications firm]: The middle class joined the demonstrations. Now the middle class sees that democracy is good for the economy in the long term. They feel they have some bargaining power. They could make their protest flet by withdrawing their money from the Thai Military Bank, refusing to buy from companies which support the army.

F1: Many people are getting excited about the power of the "middle class". But who are they? I reckon there are about 800,000 people. That’s the number of bank accounts with deposits of over 200,000 baht. With so few people with any money power, I don’t see how democracy can work.

L1 [a bank executive]: We must dissolve the parliament. Don’t worry about having to spend tax money on the elections. Look how much of our tax money the army spent. Elections will be a good education for the people. Let’s have as many elections as we need. We must get more young blood into parliament. About 40 new young MPs got in last time, but they haven’t had a chance to do much yet. We must prevent the same old parties which supported the military [Chat Thai, Social Action, Muan Chon, Prachakorn Thai] from forming a government.

A2 [an economics lecturer]: In the past the business sector has had a free ride. It has let the academics, NGOs and students do all the work of promoting democracy. Up to now, whenever our democracy ran into a problem, business gave its support to the military. But it has not worked this time. Now business is going to suffer because of this political crisis. The economy will be bad for a time.

We are not going to cure everything by getting rid of the three tyrants. The problems go much deeper than that. It is time for the business sector to push on all fronts - over decentralisation, the privatisation of TV and radio, the reform of the army.

Academics and students have only one weapon: their brains. But business people have money.