Most observers project that the constitution will pass as people vote to move forward from 11 months under a military junta and proceed with a promised election and a return to civilian rule.
Illustrating the current state of affairs, Thai voters are going to get a new constitution, presented by the ruling generals, whether they want one or not. If the charter being offered Sunday is rejected, according to the rules of the referendum, the generals will simply select another from among Thailand's 17 previous constitutions, amend it to their liking and declare it to be the law of the land. To many analysts, that would be a scenario for renewed anger and unrest.
Thailand has yet to emerge from a period of turmoil that began months before the former prime minister, Thaksin Shinawatra, was ousted in a coup last September. A struggle is under way both for personal power and over the nature of Thai government.
To ensure a yes vote, the country's military rulers have mobilized the armed forces to "rally support," in particularly in rural areas of the northeast where allegiance to Thaksin remains strong.
"Before referendum day, troops from special warfare and intelligence units will be dispatched to all communities in the region to block any last-ditch attempts by remnants of the old power clique to sink the draft charter," an unidentified military source told The Bangkok Post this week, without elaborating.
The regional commander in the northeast, Lieutenant General Jiradet Kocharat, assured the newspaper that turnout there "would be more than 70 percent due to the intensifying campaigns."
Anticipating the adoption of the constitution and an election as early as November or December, office-seekers are already maneuvering in what has become a fluid and unpredictable political arena.
Thaksin and his supporters remain a force in Thai politics, even though a court disbanded his party, Thai Rak Thai, in May, and a warrant for his arrest on a corruption charge was issued Wednesday. More charges are likely soon, and officials say they will seek to have him extradited from London, where he now lives, although that could prove to be a long and difficult process.
As new parties form and alliances shift, some analysts see the emergence of an electoral confrontation between supporters of Thaksin and supporters of the generals who ousted him.
But under the new constitution, the shifts in power will run deeper than the outcomes of political rivalries.
Much of the charter is structured as a reaction to Thaksin's aggressive accumulation of power during his five years in office. The new constitution weakens the executive and shifts dominance from voters and politicians back to the traditional power groups: the elites, the bureaucracy and the military.
Thailand would return to the weak, ineffective and short-lived coalition governments of the past, watched over by a potent military.
Half of the Senate as well as the independent commissions that form a check on central power would be appointed, opening the way to patronage and corruption. Constituencies for the lower house would be enlarged, distancing representatives from the voters.
The voices of civil society and non-government groups that had been empowered by the previous constitution, passed at the end of 1997, would lose force, analysts say.
The enhanced role of the military - including an amnesty for the coup members and a guarantee of new equipment - is a widespread concern among critics of the constitution.
There are also worries over a separate internal security law proposed by the junta giving the military broad independent powers that could override other constitutional provisions.
In addition, the junta leader, General Sonthi Boonyaratglin, has hinted that he might enter politics, putting the military squarely in the center of civilian government. Analysts said there would certainly be an angry backlash.
"The already volatile political situation will certainly worsen if Sonthi decides to throw his hat into the ring," wrote Thepchai Yong, an editor at The Nation daily newspaper, last week.
"Thaksin, meanwhile, will have a field day telling the world that he has been right all along in predicting that the military would try to hold onto power."
What the constitution presents to Thailand, according Pasuk Phongpaichit, an author of books on Thaksin and Thai economics, is a form of "managed democracy" that would weaken the role of the public.
Its elements are a democratic format insulated against mass takeover; military oversight of political activity at all levels; and a campaign for national unity focused on the monarchy, Pasuk, a professor of economics at Chulalogkorn University, said in a widely quoted paper last month.
These elements, which also characterized a coup in 1976, will be more difficult to implement in today's changed world, she said, noting that "Thailand's globalized economy is incompatible with military rule."
Pasuk warned that a combined backlash from two opposing camps - backers of Thaksin and pro-democracy campaigners - could be explosive.
Already, she added, Thailand has been tilting away from the open and liberal ideals that infused the 1997 constitution.
"The keywords of political debate of the 1990s were terms like civil society, rights and freedoms, participation, and reform," she said. "By contrast, the keywords of the 2000s have included authoritarianism, exclusion, coup, nominee, security, violence and reconciliation."
This trend away from liberal democracy is likely to continue for some time, said Jon Ungpakorn, a former senator who is part of the democracy movement here.
"It's a long road ahead," he said. "We are sort of twisting and turning, and we have a long way to go to reach a much more democratic society."
He added: "The main issue is patronage. The system of patronage is entrenched in Thai society. It allowed Thaksin to abuse his power. The coup makers used the patronage system."
But whichever way things go, he said, Thai politics "can change in a minute, like a storm."
The significant changes often come from outside the political process - whether through a coup or a bloody crackdown.
"If it reaches a crisis point where there are mass demonstrations and things get violent," he said, in what appeared to be an optimistic assessment, "there will be dramatic change"
From: International Herald Tribune (17aug.)
