Royal Families

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      What King Charles’s Cancer Diagnosis Means for Princes William and Harry

      by

      How life may change for the Prince of Wales and his younger brother, Harry, who flew from Los Angeles to visit their father.Less than two weeks after King Charles III was admitted to a London hospital to be treated for an enlarged prostate, Buckingham Palace disclosed that tests had revealed “a form of cancer.” As Charles has been “advised by doctors to postpone public-facing duties,” many expected other members of the royal family to step up to the plate. So what does the news mean for Charles’s two sons, William and Harry?Will any of the king’s ‘public-facing duties’ fall to Prince William?Any of the small handful of working senior royals could theoretically be called upon to attend events in King Charles’s place and take on other duties while he receives treatment. Queen Camilla, Princess Anne and Sophie, the Duchess of Edinburgh, are expected to absorb some of them.But a great many of Charles’s duties are expected to fall to his son William, the Prince of Wales, who is the heir to the throne. The prince had only recently decided that he would be taking some time off from his public duties while his wife, Catherine, was hospitalized for a “planned abdominal surgery.” (To allow for her recovery, Catherine would not be undertaking any public activities until after Easter, the royal family said at the time.)“With the Princess of Wales undergoing abdominal surgery and being out of the public eye, I think the spotlight will surely fall to Prince William,” said Elizabeth Holmes, a journalist who has written widely about the royals. Camilla had also been keeping a full schedule recently, Ms. Holmes added, saying that last week the queen consort had had “public engagements every day, which is a lot.”Much of the last month for Prince William has been spent attending to his wife, Catherine, who is recovering from an abdominal surgery.Chris JacksonHow will Prince William’s day-to-day role change during this time?William’s life had already been turned upside-down by his wife’s hospitalization, but in the weeks ahead, he is likely be asked to add events and ceremonies from his father’s schedule to his own.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      King Charles’s Cancer Diagnosis May Reshape How U.K. Monarchy Works

      by

      Britain’s king has been a highly visible royal, making hundreds of public appearances. As he steps back from view, who will fill the gap?Queen Elizabeth II liked to say that she needed to be seen to be believed. Now it falls to her son King Charles III to test that principle, after a cancer diagnosis that will force him out of the public eye for the foreseeable future.For a family that has cultivated its public image through thousands of appearances a year — ribbon-cuttings, ship launchings, gala benefits, investiture ceremonies, and so on — the sidelining of Charles may finally force the royals to rethink how they project themselves in a social-media age.The king’s illness is the latest blow to the British royal family, which has seen its ranks depleted by death (Elizabeth and her husband, Prince Philip), scandal (Prince Andrew), self-exile (Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan), and other health woes (Catherine, the wife of Prince William).Charles, who is 75, took part in 425 royal engagements in 2023, his first full year on the throne, according to a count by The Daily Telegraph. That made him the second hardest-working royal after his younger sister, Princess Anne, who did 457. Both were busier than in the previous year, when Elizabeth, though in the twilight of her life, still appeared in public sporadically.While Anne, 73, shows little sign of slowing down and William plans to return to public duties while his wife convalesces at home from abdominal surgery, even a temporary absence of the king from the public stage would put heavy pressure on the family’s skeleton crew of working royals.Princess Anne, left, during royal duties on Tuesday, giving an honor to Nicholas Spence, an operatic tenor.Yui Mok/Press Association, via Associated PressWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 100 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      King Charles Released From Hospital After Prostate Procedure

      by

      Charles was released on Monday hours after Catherine, Princess of Wales, left the same hospital following abdominal surgery.King Charles III was released from a London hospital on Monday after undergoing a procedure to treat an enlarged prostate, Buckingham Palace officials said.Charles was seen waving as he exited The London Clinic, a private hospital, hours after his daughter-in-law Catherine, Princess of Wales, left the same hospital following an abdominal operation she had earlier this month.In a statement on Monday, the palace said Charles, 75, had “rescheduled forthcoming public engagements to allow for a period of private recuperation.” The king was admitted to the hospital Friday morning for what Buckingham Palace described as “scheduled treatment.” Benign prostate enlargement is common in men over 50 and can be found in up to 90 percent of men over 70. Treatment can include medication and changes to diet and lifestyle, as well as surgical procedures in more severe cases to remove excess tissue from the prostate gland.Medical experts said that the most common treatment was a transurethral resection of the prostate, in which a surgeon scrapes out the inside of the prostate gland, giving the urethra more space.Buckingham Palace did not specify which procedure Charles underwent.Queen Camilla was with Charles when he was admitted last week, and she was photographed arriving at and leaving the hospital multiple times over the weekend.January has brought troubling health news for the British royal family. Not only did announcements of Charles and Catherine’s procedures catch supporters and the public off guard, so did news that Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York and ex-wife of the king’s younger brother, Prince Andrew, had been diagnosed with melanoma, a serious type of skin cancer.It was Ms. Ferguson’s second cancer diagnosis within a year. Last summer she spoke publicly about her decision to undergo a mastectomy and reconstructive surgery after a breast cancer diagnosis. More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Thailand’s Old Guard Keeps Its Grip After Voters Seek Change

      by

      The country went months without naming a new prime minister, only for Parliament to elect Srettha Thavisin, a candidate who many frustrated voters say represents the establishment.The election was supposed to be about change. Three months ago, Thai voters propelled the progressive Move Forward Party to a surprise victory. “A new day for the people has arrived,” said Pita Limjaroenrat, the party leader, as he paraded through the streets of Bangkok.On Tuesday, Thailand named a new prime minister, but it was not Mr. Pita. A coalition government was formed in Parliament, made up almost entirely of parties linked to the generals who led the last military coup. Move Forward is in the opposition.Now, many Thais are asking why the future they had voted for is looking so much like the past.“If you go around and talk to middle-class Thais at the moment, they’re saying, ‘What the hell did we have this election for, if this is the result that we get?’” said Christopher Baker, a historian of Thailand.Thailand, Mr. Baker said, is giving up a chance to “reverse the fact that it’s been going backward, in almost every sense, for the last 15 years.”Supporters of the Move Forward Party during a protest in Bangkok last month. No political party had ever been so explicit about changing the status quo in Thailand.Sakchai Lalit/Associated PressAs the second-largest economy in Southeast Asia and an ally of the United States, Thailand was once a powerful player in the region. More recently it has suffered from prolonged economic stagnation brought about by nine years of military rule under Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-ocha, the general who seized power in a coup in 2014. Mr. Prayuth has steered Thailand away from democracy and toward authoritarian rule — he cracked down on pro-democracy protests and oversaw the rewriting of a Constitution that gave the military more power.His term fueled rising public anger and frustration, culminating in mass protests in 2020. For the first time, disaffected young Thais questioned publicly the relevance of the country’s powerful monarchy, a topic previously considered taboo. They asked why Thailand needed a royal defamation law, one of the world’s strictest, that carries a maximum sentence of up to 15 years in prison.Move Forward capitalized on this anti-royalist, anti-military sentiment, which became the bedrock of the party’s progressive platform. It announced more than 300 policy proposals, including shrinking the military budget and breaking up big business. No political party had ever been so explicit about changing the status quo.“No one would have thought that the party whose policy is to reform the monarchy and the military could win” the election, said Aim Sinpeng, a senior lecturer in politics at the University of Sydney, in Australia. “I don’t think you can take that significance away, ever. It’s completely changed Thailand.”A portrait of Thailand’s king, in Bangkok. Young Thais have questioned publicly the relevance of the powerful monarchy, a topic previously considered taboo.Adam Dean for The New York TimesMove Forward’s election victory jolted the political elite, which quickly set the wheels in motion to block the party’s ascent. In the days after the election, the complaints against Mr. Pita piled up. The Constitutional Court suspended him from Parliament, pending a review of a case involving his shares in a now-defunct media company. The military-appointed Senate blocked him from becoming the prime minister during an initial vote. After that, the Constitutional Court said he could not be renominated for the position.When it became clear that the establishment was not going to allow Move Forward to form a government, Pheu Thai, the populist party founded by the former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, stepped in.Pheu Thai had been Move Forward’s partner in the initial coalition. It said it had to part ways with Move Forward and attempt to form its own coalition after it became clear that other conservative parties were not willing to work with Move Forward.Pheu Thai does not share Move Forward’s liberal agenda, though it has promoted itself as a pro-democracy party. Mr. Thaksin had battled the conservative establishment for decades. But as a billionaire businessman, he is essentially a member of the old guard. Since 2001, the political parties he founded have consistently won the most votes in every election — except for this year.For 15 years, Mr. Thaksin had lived in self-imposed exile to avoid a lengthy jail term on corruption and abuse of power charges, with one goal: to return home to Thailand.Democracy demonstrations in Bangkok in 2020.Adam Dean for The New York TimesOn Tuesday, he did that, just hours before Pheu Thai’s candidate, Srettha Thavisin, secured enough votes in Parliament to become the next prime minister.For many in Thailand, Mr. Thaksin’s timing only confirmed their suspicions that a quid pro quo arrangement had been made between Pheu Thai and the conservative establishment to have his prison sentence reduced in exchange for keeping the military and royalists in power.“Srettha was a product of this deal with the Thai establishment,” said Ruchapong Chamjirachaikul, a politics specialist at iLaw, a civil society organization. “The people don’t feel excited about having Srettha as prime minister.”To obtain enough support for Mr. Srettha, Pheu Thai relied on the military’s support, despite vowing repeatedly in the past to remove the generals from politics. Mr. Srettha, a real estate tycoon, says the party had no choice because of “basic math”: to secure the premiership, he needed 374 votes from both houses of Parliament, including the military-appointed Senate.“It’s not deceiving the people, but I have to say it bluntly that we have to accept reality,” Mr. Srettha, 61, said in a speech to Pheu Thai party members on Monday.Move Forward lawmakers voted against Mr. Srettha; they had announced earlier this month that they would do so because Pheu Thai was essentially extending military rule in Thailand. “There will never be a day that this crossbred government can make a difference in society,” Mr. Pita, 42, wrote on Facebook after Mr. Srettha was voted in on Tuesday.The question now is whether Mr. Srettha has the support to hold together an 11-party coalition government that is united in its determination to stop Move Forward but in agreement on little else. Analysts warn that such an unwieldy coalition could lead to more instability.Pheu Thai’s candidate, Srettha Thavisin, had to rely on the military’s support to secure enough votes to become prime minister.Lauren Decicca/Getty Images“It’s very much a government that’s held together by a common enemy, but that doesn’t make them automatically friends,” said Ken Mathis Lohatepanont, an independent political analyst who writes about Thai politics.Thailand’s neighbors and partners are watching developments with apprehension, fearing that political instability in one of the world’s most popular tourist destinations could derail economic cooperation.History warns that this is possible: For the past 70 years, Thai politics have been defined by a cycle of protests and coups — the country has had 13 successful coups in its modern history, and several more attempted ones. Except for Mr. Thaksin’s first term from 2001-2005 and Mr. Prayuth’s term, no government in Thailand has lasted its full term in the past two decades.Countries like the United States, which was quick to condemn Cambodia for a recent election that was deemed not to be free or fair, have been largely silent on the protracted election process in Thailand.Sunai Phasuk, a senior researcher on Thailand for Human Rights Watch, said the rights organization had been pressing the United States, the European Union and Australia to take a stronger stance but has been told these governments prefer a “wait and see” approach.Mr. Sunai added that the United States was probably being cautious about alienating Thailand to avoid driving it closer to China.Last month, the State Department said that it was “closely watching” developments in Thailand and that it was concerned about the recent legal cases against Mr. Pita, a graduate of Harvard and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Move Forward.One complaint before the Constitutional Court centers on the party’s effort to amend the royal defamation law, calling it tantamount to “attempting to overthrow the democratic system with His Majesty the King as the Head of State.”A ruling against the party could lead to its dissolution.The Election Commission is also investigating Mr. Pita to see if he was aware that he could not run for office because he owned shares in a now-defunct media company. If found guilty, he could be imprisoned for up to 10 years.Muktita Suhartono More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Thailand’s Royal Establishment Is Denying the Will of the People Again

      by

      For a brief time this summer, it seemed like Thailand might finally be on the cusp of truly representative government.In elections in May, a pro-reform party won the largest share of votes, riding a wave of public discontent over nine years of military rule and the outsize prerogatives enjoyed by the Thai royal family. Thailand’s monarchy is one of the wealthiest and longest-reigning in the world. Backed by the military and the judiciary, it is the linchpin of a conservative establishment that has fought off challenges to its dominance for decades, often with royally-endorsed military coups that overthrew democratically elected governments. This state of affairs has mired Thailand in a cycle of recurring political violence and frustrated the democratic yearnings of a new generation.So, like many of my compatriots who also grew up in this authoritarian climate, I celebrated the win by the progressive Move Forward Party, which openly seeks to curb royal power, and the second-place finish of Pheu Thai, a longtime opposition party. Voters issued a resounding call for change.Now those hopes are being crushed.More than two months after the elections, Thailand still does not have its new government, as the conservative establishment maneuvers to deny the will of the people once again by frustrating Move Forward’s efforts to form a coalition.We’ve been here before. But this time it feels even more ominous for the future of Thai democracy. A royalist establishment that has in the past relied on the blunt force of the military has added political sophistication to its arsenal. Working through the parliamentary system, this old guard has maneuvered to block Move Forward and co-opt Pheu Thai in return for allowing the party’s 74-year-old spiritual leader Thaksin Shinawatra, a popular former prime minister, to return from exile.The Thai monarchy has always been an aggressive contender for political power.In 1932, Thailand ended centuries of absolute royal rule in favor of a constitutional monarchy. But the ensuing 70-year reign of late King Bhumibol Adulyadej, who died in 2016, undid much of that. After taking the throne in 1946 the king forged ties with the military and together they engineered a neo-royalist system which, although far from an absolute monarchy, placed the palace at the political apex and exalted King Bhumibol as a godlike figure. Elected governments were subservient or tossed out. The neo-royalists were never interested in investing in electoral politics to guarantee their power, relying instead on shortcuts like military coups and strict lèse-majestélaws that forbid criticism of the monarchy and are an important tool for protecting its privileges.Supporters of Move Forward Party’s leader and its prime minister candidate, Pita Limjaroenrat, during a protest in Bangkok.Rungroj Yongrit/EPA, via ShutterstockBut over the past decade, with the towering figure of King Bhumibol gone and the palace occupied by his less-revered son, King Maha Vajiralongkorn Bodindradebayavarangkun, the neo-royalists have realized the need for novel strategies. After its latest coup in 2014, the military moved to preserve conservative dominance and contracept future challenges with new changes, including stuffing the Senate with appointees to offset the democratically elected House of Representatives.These tactics are hardly new in the political life of Southeast Asia. Autocratic governments in the region have become more sophisticated in manipulating electoral systems to secure power. Myanmar’s military junta has for years retained 25 percent of the seats in Parliament, which enables it to block constitutional changes that could weaken its authority. After decades of neutralizing dissent, the Cambodian strongman Hun Sen has more recently turned to using stage-managed elections to give his regime a thin veneer of legitimacy. (He intends to hand power over to his son.)The Thai neo-royalists are adopting the same strategies.Parliamentary means have been used to deny Move Forward its right to form a government. The party’s leader, Pita Limjaroenrat, failed to secure enough votes in Parliament to become prime minister and is also under investigation for failing to disclose shares held in a media company, which could disqualify him from office. Move Forward represented too much change to Thailand’s stifling political culture and simply could not be allowed to take power.Other forces that bode ill for reform are also in motion. The conservative pushback has prompted the pro-democracy Pheu Thai party to break from a proposed coalition with Move Forward and into talks with conservatives on forming a government.This is a momentous shift for Thai politics. Pheu Thai is the successor to a party founded by Mr. Thaksin, a populist business tycoon who served as prime minister from 2001 to 2006. Mr. Thaksin won over voters by advocating to improve livelihoods in poor and marginalized regions of the country. But when his popularity threatened to eclipse that of King Bhumibol, he was ousted in a coup and fled the country, saying he could not get a fair trial in Thailand on a series of corruption charges; he was later sentenced to a total of 12 years in prison. The struggle for influence — marked by two coups and a series of violent street demonstrations — between the conservative establishment and Mr. Thaksin’s supporters and relatives has dominated Thai politics for more than two decades.Now there are indications that Mr. Thaksin and Pheu Thai are falling in line with the royalists. Mr. Thaksin has long expressed a desire to come home and reunite with his family. In the run up to the elections in May, he pleaded publicly for “permission” to return home and came out against reforms proposed by Move Forward to curb royal influence.Last week, Mr. Thaksin’s daughter announced that he would return to Thailand on Aug. 10 after 15 years in exile. Royalists who had previously cursed Mr. Thaksin as public enemy No. 1 are now cheering his return, hoping to thwart what they see as the greater threat: the Move Forward Party and the generational change that it represents.Mr. Thaksin gets to come home; the royal establishment dodges a potent challenge. The only ones who won’t get what they want are the Thai voters.Pavin Chachavalpongpun @PavinKyoto is associate professor at Kyoto University’s Center for Southeast Asian Studies. He is the editor of the forthcoming “Rama X: The Thai Monarchy under King Vajiralongkorn.”The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

    • 88 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      The Royals May Be on to Something

      by

      LONDON — With the thrill of coronation still in the air outside Buckingham Palace, it’s tempting for a Yankee to mock the British for the shop windows full of coronation plates and King Charles III coffee mugs. And how can we not roll our eyes when a slice of cake from the 2005 wedding between the new king and queen now sells for $1,600?Yet I won’t indulge in mockery for two reasons. First, many of the tourists buying the souvenirs have undeniable American accents.Second, I would never admit this in public — but I’ve come to think that maybe there are advantages to having a royal family.Britain is, like America, so polarized that any political leader is loathed by a sizable chunk of the population, sowing conflict and risking violence. But with the monarchy, the U.K. is guaranteed a nonpolitical head of state who amounts to a unifying force.“It helps to have someone who is above politics and can bring people together,” said Chris Patten, a longtime political leader who is now formally Lord Patten of Barnes.A May poll found that 62 percent of people in Great Britain favored remaining a monarchy, compared to 28 percent who preferred a republic. Young people were somewhat less enthusiastic about royalty than older people, but that has been true for decades: As they age, Britons appear to become more pro-monarchy.A monarch is not the only option for a nonpolitical head of state. Germany, Israel and other countries have non-royal largely ceremonial heads of state who can stand for harmony above the fray. President Isaac Herzog of Israel tried to do that this year to promote compromise, preserve democratic norms and calm the mass protests in Israel; he warned that the conflict could even lead to civil war.But even the nonpolitical presidents like Herzog are often former politicians and don’t seem to have the healing power of monarchs. King Charles declined to be interviewed (when I requested time with him, I think his staff giggled). But I’ve occasionally interacted with other members of his family and with royalty in other countries — and it’s funny how even we Americans go weak-kneed over even a measly duchess or, say, a Tongan king.When Japan gave up fighting in 1945 to end World War II, many in the Tokyo government bitterly opposed the decision. It was perhaps only Emperor Hirohito as the revered leader of Japan who could convince the army to stand down, even if his speech announcing surrender was royally elliptical: “The war situation has developed not necessarily to Japan’s advantage.”One study of 137 countries over more than a century found that monarchies perform better economically than republics over the long run. The authors concluded that this was in part because monarchs provided a national symbol of unity, reducing internal conflict and threats to property rights.Kings can be expensive, of course, and it can seem ridiculous to provide public housing in the form of palaces to one family, while countless others are homeless. But in Britain, the royal family may pay for itself with tourism income, and constitutes a useful tool of foreign policy: Every foreign leader wants tea with the sovereign, so when prime ministers ruffle foreign feathers the royals can smooth them.The royal family is “an integral part of our soft power strategy,” noted Arminka Helic, now the Baroness Helic, a foreign policy expert. Helic grew up in the former Yugoslavia and came to Britain only at the age of 24, but she says she still sees the royals as “the family to which we are all related no matter where we come from.”I’m not advocating for royalty in America, even if we may be more perilously divided than at any time in a century. George III soured us forever on kings. Which raises the question: What happens when a bad (or mad) king comes along?Britain dodged a bullet when King Edward VIII abdicated in 1936, for he was a racist who was soft on Nazism, especially because he lived a long life, dying only in 1972. The United Kingdom hit the jackpot with Queen Elizabeth II and seems to have relatively reliable heirs in the form of King Charles and Prince William.Thailand is less fortunate. When the last, much revered Thai king died in 2016, he was succeeded not by the king’s widely admired daughter but by his scandal-plagued son — who has spent a great deal of time in Germany with his paramours and once promoted his poodle, Foo Foo, to the rank of “air chief marshal.”Bad kings are difficult to recover from. They’re one reason the number of monarchies has fallen from 160 in 1900 to fewer than 30 now.But today’s constitutional monarchies like Britain, Japan, Sweden and the Netherlands may benefit by turning to an apolitical family that, in exchange for palaces, will supply a nation with gossip, tourism and a bit of harmony.So don’t tell a soul, but as I stand outside Buckingham Palace, I think: “God save the king!”The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com. More

    • 100 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Opposition Forms New Coalition in Thailand After Election

      by

      Thais voted overwhelmingly for change on Sunday, but the military-appointed Senate could still block the opposition’s nomination for prime minister.The two opposition parties that won the largest share of the vote in Thailand’s general election over the weekend said on Monday that they had agreed to form a coalition government. It remained unclear, however, whether the ruling junta would hand over power easily.The results of the election were a stinging rebuke to the country’s military leaders, who have governed Thailand since seizing power in a coup in 2014. Although Thailand is a nation where coups are not uncommon, it had never been under military rule for so long.Many voters, disillusioned with the never-ending cycle of putsches and protests, used the election on Sunday to demonstrate overwhelmingly that they wanted change.“People have been through enough of a lost decade,” Pita Limjaroenrat, the leader of the progressive Move Forward Party, told reporters on Monday. “Today is a new day.”The Move Forward Party — which has called for an overhaul of the military and amending a strict law that criminalizes criticism of the Thai monarchy — secured 151 seats out of the 500-member House of Representatives. The result defied opinion polls, which had predicted a strong victory for Pheu Thai, the country’s largest opposition party, founded by former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra.Pheu Thai won 141 seats, which, like Move Forward, was short of a clear majority. The two parties announced during separate news conferences on Monday that they had agreed to work together to form a government.Mr. Pita has led the effort to build the coalition. He said that five parties, including Pheu Thai, had already joined him, boosting the opposition’s control over Parliament to 309 out of 500 seats. “It’s safe to assume that we have secured a majority in forming a government,” Mr. Pita said on Monday.Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-ocha, the general who seized power in the 2014 coup, said on Sunday that he “has respect for the democratic process and the election results.” His party, United Thai Nation, won only 36 seats.Prayut Chan-ocha, Thailand’s current prime minister and the United Thai Nation Party’s candidate, said he “has respect for the democratic process and the election results.”Lillian Suwanrumpha/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesMr. Pita’s quick work in assembling a coalition lowered some uncertainty around what many Thais have described as the most consequential election of their lifetimes. But it was still unclear if he would be allowed to lead the country as prime minister.The military-appointed Senate, which has the power to select the prime minister through a joint vote in parliament, may still block Mr. Pita from the position.Many analysts questioned whether the Senate would tolerate any election results that threaten the status quo. Move Forward has targeted institutions and policies once considered sacrosanct in Thai society, including abolishing mandatory military conscription and reducing the punishments for the law that protects the monarchy from criticism.With Pheu Thai in government, it could effectively place the party’s founder and one of the military’s top rivals, Mr. Thaksin, back at the center of the country’s politics. The king must also endorse the appointment of prime minister.At a news conference, Mr. Pita said he was not concerned about opposition from the Senate. “With the consensus that came out of the election, it would be quite a hefty price to pay for someone who’s thinking of abolishing the election results or forming a minority government,” he said. “And I don’t think the people of Thailand would allow that to happen.”But if history is any indicator, the military, which has dominated Thai politics for decades, is unlikely to relinquish power quickly. In addition to engineering a dozen coups within a century, Thai generals rewrote the Constitution in 2017 to stack the Senate with allies and ensure that the military would have the power to determine the country’s prime minister.Paetongtarn Shinawatra and Srettha Thavisin, Pheu Thai Party candidates for prime minister, after a news conference on Monday. Their party opted to form a coalition with the Move Forward Party.Lauren Decicca/Getty ImagesGregory Raymond, a lecturer researching Southeast Asian politics at the Coral Bell School of Asia Pacific Affairs, said there was still a possibility that the two military proxy parties — United Thai Nation and Palang Pracharath — could cobble together enough seats to mount their own claim to government. “That is still, in my mind, the last scenario. It would be highly undemocratic but can’t be ruled out at this point,” Mr. Raymond said.Analysts warned that the Senate choosing to block Mr. Pita’s appointment would likely galvanize protests in Thailand, plunging the country into more political turmoil.“I think the reaction will be much more dangerous than four years ago,” said Purawich Watanasukh, a research fellow at King Prajadhipok’s Institute in Thailand, referring to the nation’s previous election. “Right now, many people have Pita as their new prime minister in their minds. If Pita cannot be prime minister and Move Forward cannot form the government, it will break the people’s hearts. And it will be very, very bad.”In 2020, the country’s Constitutional Court disbanded the Future Forward Party, the previous iteration of the Move Forward Party, after the election. Tens of thousand of Thais took to the streets of Bangkok to protest the decision.What started out as a protest for democratic reforms quickly grew into a pro-democracy movement calling for checks on the Thai monarchy, a subject that was once considered taboo.The country’s conservatives are likely to step up their campaigns to block the rise of Move Forward in the coming days. Last week, a conservative candidate petitioned the Election Commission and the National Anti-Corruption Commission to investigate Mr. Pita for failing to disclose that he owned shares of a now-defunct media company that he had inherited from his father. By law, no candidates running for Member of Parliament are allowed to hold shares in a media firm.Mr. Pita brushed off the petition, saying he had already reported the shares to the authorities.But Move Forward will need to manage many competing interests to keep the coalition intact. It was the only large party that pushed to amend a law criminalizing criticism of the monarchy, arguing that the law had been weaponized by royalists to persecute protesters who participated in pro-democracy demonstrations.Anti-government protesters clashing with riot police in Bangkok in 2020.Adam Dean for The New York TimesOn Sunday night, Mr. Pita said he was still going to press ahead with amending the royal protection law.Paetongtarn Shinawatra, the youngest daughter of Mr. Thaksin and a Pheu Thai candidate for prime minister, said on Monday that she was “ready to discuss” the issue of young people being charged with violating the law, known as Article 112. But she added that her party would not vote to get rid of the law altogether.“We will have to tell Move Forward Party that we do not support the abolishment of Article 112,” she said.Pirada Anuwech More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      A Crucial Question in Thailand’s Election: Can You Criticize the King?

      by

      Liberal voters have intensified their scrutiny of the Thai monarchy in recent years. Conservatives have responded with a campaign to defend the institution at all costs.When Thais go to the polls on Sunday, they will be voting in a closely fought election that is seen, in part, as a referendum on whether it is illegal to criticize the Thai monarchy.Thailand has one of the world’s strictest laws against defaming or insulting the king and other members of the royal family. Once considered taboo, the topic of the monarchy was brought to the forefront after tens of thousands of protesters took to the streets and called for checks on the institution’s power in 2020.The protests represented two sides of an impassioned struggle to determine the role of the crown in modern Thailand. The election could determine whether the Southeast Asian nation of 72 million will revive its once-vibrant democracy or slide further toward authoritarian rule, with royalists firmly in power.On one side of the debate are conservative political parties whose standard-bearer is Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-ocha, the general who has governed Thailand for nine years after seizing power in a coup. He and his supporters argue that amending the law could lead to abolishing the monarchy altogether, and have vowed to defend the royal family.On the other side is the progressive Move Forward Party, which is polling in second place and argues that the law needs to be amended because it is being used as a political weapon. Several young people who participated in the 2020 protests are now running as candidates with the Move Forward Party.Anti-government protesters flashing a three-fingered salute, a sign of resistance, at a demonstration in Bangkok in 2020.Adam Dean for The New York Times“Perhaps one of the deepest fault lines in Thai society is about the monarchy,” said Sunai Phasuk, a senior researcher on Thailand for Human Rights Watch.Paetongtarn Shinawatra, the youngest daughter of the ousted former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra and the front-runner for prime minister, is treading carefully. Her father, a populist billionaire, is one of the most divisive political figures in Thailand. He lives in self-exile after being ousted in a coup in 2006 and can only return to Thailand with the king’s permission.Royalists have consistently accused Mr. Thaksin of wanting to overthrow the monarchy, a charge that he denies. Ms. Paetongtarn has said her party, Pheu Thai, would not abolish the law protecting the monarchy from criticism, but that the issue of reform must be openly discussed in Parliament.King Maha Vajiralongkorn greeting his supporters in Bangkok during a ceremony in remembrance of his father, King Bhumibol Adulyadej.Adam Dean for The New York TimesOpinion polls show that the party of Mr. Prayuth, United Thai Nation, is trailing in third place behind Pheu Thai, which has topped the polls. In recent weeks, there has also been a surge in support for the Move Forward Party, which is polling a close No. 2.Move Forward is the largest party pushing to amend the law, irking conservatives who have accused it of undermining the monarchy. The party wants to cut the jail terms of violators of the law and designate the Bureau of the Royal Household as the only agency allowed to file lawsuits. (Any Thai citizen is able to file complaints under the current version of the law.)Conservative politicians have threatened to disband Move Forward. The party’s previous iteration, the Future Forward Party, was dissolved in 2020 by the Constitutional Court. In a sign of how sensitive the topic of reform has become, Move Forward has attempted to moderate its position, saying reform would not take precedence in its campaign.For decades, the monarchy and the military have had a symbiotic relationship, with the army frequently reminding the public that it is the true guardian of the Thai crown. Thais are taught from a young age that they have to love the king and that any criticism of the monarchy is strictly forbidden.But today, many Thais no longer stand at attention when the royal anthem is played in public spaces such as movie theaters. Royalist Marketplace, a Facebook group set up to satirize the monarchy, had more than 1 million members before Facebook blocked access to it in 2020, citing a Thai government request.The law criminalizing criticism of the monarchy carries a minimum sentence of three years if violated — the only law in Thailand that imposes a minimum jail term — and a maximum sentence of up to 15 years. After the 2020 protests, the authorities charged at least 223 people, including 17 minors, for violating the law, known as Article 112.In the area around the Grand Palace in Bangkok, posters of the king and queen are ubiquitous.Adam Dean for The New York TimesTantawan “Tawan” Tuatulanon, a 21-year-old law student, was accused of violating the rule in 2022 after she and her friends conducted a poll asking whether the royal motorcade was an inconvenience to Bangkok residents.In recent weeks, she has been pressing political parties on whether they would amend the law — which she is in favor of abolishing — after the election. On Wednesday, Ms. Tantawan was arrested after she called for the release of a 15-year-old charged with violating the rule.“I feel we don’t need any law that specially protects anybody or any family,” said Ms. Tantawan, who mounted a hunger strike earlier this year in protest against the government. “He is a person like us, not a god or a demigod.”King Maha Vajiralongkorn Bodindradebayavarangkun, who ascended the throne in 2016, is not as beloved as his father, King Bhumibol Adulyadej, who reigned for 70 years. While King Bhumibol was revered in Thailand, his son used to spend most of his time in Germany, though he has been seen more often in public since the 2020 protests.In the wake of the protests, Mr. Prayuth instructed all government officials to “use every single law” to prosecute anyone who criticized the monarchy. Royalists stepped up their campaign against people they accused of insulting the crown, filing more complaints and attacking anti-monarchy activists.In 2021, Warong Dechgitvigrom, a former doctor, founded Thailand’s first far-right party, Thai Pakdee, in response to what he called the “Three Fingers Mob,” referring to the three-finger salute adopted by young Thais as a symbol of resistance during the 2020 protests.A supporter holds up a poster of King Bhumibol Adulyadej during a rally for Thai Pakdee, a right-wing party that is centered on defending the monarchy against criticism.Jorge Silva/ReutersHe now says the current law protecting the monarchy does not go far enough, as it is limited to shielding four key members of the royal family. Former Thai kings, princes, princesses and the word “monarchy” itself should also be protected, he said.Although Mr. Warong’s views are considered extreme, he says he has collected about 6,000 to 7,000 signatures for his proposal, and that he is confident he can gather the 10,000 signatures needed for the House of Representatives to consider passing the bill.Mr. Warong says people need to understand that the Thai monarchy is unique. He recalled France’s former monarchy as one characterized by the oppression of its people. “But ours is like father and children,” he said. “We have good feelings together, there are no bad feelings.”Those views are at odds with how many young people feel about the king. During the 2020 demonstrations, protesters questioned the wealth of the royal family, which is one of the richest in the world.Protesters in 2020 at a pro-democracy rally in front of the Siam Commercial Bank, demanding that the king return royal assets to the people and reform the monarchy.Adam Dean for The New York TimesKasit Piromya, a former foreign minister, said it would be challenging for Mr. Warong and his party to lead a successful campaign backing the constitutional monarchy because many young people “don’t see what is in it for them.”“If you cannot speak this in the open, then it gives more room and ammunition to the students, to the Thaksin supporters to say, ‘We are more democratic,’” Mr. Kasit said, referring to calls to reform the monarchy.Arnond Sakworawich, an assistant professor of statistics at the National Institute of Development Administration, said that preserving Article 112 was necessary because the king and the royal family do not defend themselves against criticism.“It’s a different culture, because in Thailand, people believe that the king is their parent, and parents never hurt their children,” said Mr. Arnond, who is known for his royalist views. “So there must be some people to protect the king.”In their zeal to defend the monarchy, many royalists may ultimately end up hurting the institution more than they protect it.Siripan Nogsuan Sawasdee, the head of the department of government at Chulalongkorn University, said it was “very precarious and risky” for parties such as Thai Pakdee to use the monarchy as a campaigning platform.“Even though the monarchy is above politics, it’s now drawn into the divide,” she said. “It will polarize the voters and parties into two camps, inevitably.”Young protesters flash the three-fingered, anti-government salute at a pro-democracy rally at Democracy Monument in Bangkok.Adam Dean for The New York TimesRyn Jirenuwat More