The reality of our politics

Overall, the marriage of convenience between Oxford-educated Abhisit Vejjajiva and Isan's favourite son Newin Chidchop, was as mundane as any political choice: pragmatic, uninspiring and probably with so many strings attached I would not be surprised if PM-in-waiting Abhisit will breach another political divide and call up some former puppet premiers in the opposite camp for advice.

The hug was a little dramatic, I must admit. And the thousand-baht-apiece bunch of red roses imported from the Netherlands were slightly out of place and over the top.�

Why not? With a friend like Mr Newin - he gave a free hug in return for the expensive roses - who made it abundantly clear how much he's had to sacrifice to stand by Mr Abhisit and how he does not want the Democrat to take his "loss and pain" for granted, Mr Abhisit would not need an enemy. He would be too busy managing the expectations of his "friend".�

The hug, however, is symbolic of many things in Thai politics. It is the art of the possible in its crudest, rudest form. I am not saying this out of disdain. I am just calling it as it is, so that we realise the reality out there. Unless your party wins a decisive majority, it boils down to the numbers game. Never mind the ideological conviction or policy platform. It's the head-count that matters. Well, as parties are basically running on the same platform these days anyway, the forming of a coalition is made even easier.�

Thus, I am astonished to hear many people expressing their disbelief, disapproval, even disgust, at the sight of Mr Abhisit in the rather tight embrace of Mr Newin, who not too long ago was seen embracing another man, Thaksin Shinawatra, as or even more tightly.�

Mr Newin's first hug occurred two years ago at the foot of the stairs at Government House after the former PM announced his temporary break from politics. Indeed, Mr Newin's dramatic gesture at that time - to give his "boss" a public display of affection and loyalty even before Thaksin's own family members could - earned him the taunt of acting as if he were another son of the former prime minister.�

Anyway, the thing is, I am surprised that other people are still surprised by another alliance of expediency. We have seen it before. And I am sure we will continue to see it long into the future.�

That someone seen as being high and deep on the other side as Mr Newin could turn around and tango with a former enemy may be unexpected, but it is by no means a new or stunning act.�

Still, the widespread feeling of incredulity made me think that, maybe, the gap between our political reality and our wish for what it could be, partly constitutes the stalemate we have found ourselves in.�

Some of us dream of a politics that is completely free from vested interests. That is why they have written or supported a severe Constitution that defines a tight role for politicians to play and an equally tight room for them to play in. Some of us want our politicians to be squeaky clean and for voting to be an entirely free choice. That is why they came up with such a harsh punishment for vote buying, which they view as the origin of all that is wrong with Thai politics.�

Should the unexpected hug between the two unlikely allies tell us something about the state of our political affairs? Should it tell us about where we stand in democratic development and who we really are?�

The present Constitution was clearly written within a lofty framework, with the assumption of politics as it should have been. Instead of being a legal groundwork for government, the charter in its present form is more like a legal scheme to constrain the government and reform politicians.�

I am aware that charter amendment is a thorny issue, one that has unleashed heated debate and ugly clashes. I can't help feeling, however, that if we are to move forward and enhance our democratic system, we will have no better place to start but at this crucial document which should serve as the master design for our society.�

The "hug" may or may not bring Mr Abhisit what he wants. It should remind us, however, of the reality of our politics. And that is a good place to start - whenever we gather enough sense to start rewriting the charter.�