N※N

Political poker: People's Party keeps Thailand guessing on next PM

  //politics-government.news-articles.net/content/ .. -s-party-keeps-thailand-guessing-on-next-pm.html
  Published in Politics and Government on Tuesday, September 2nd 2025 at 0:22 GMT by The Thaiger
          ^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

Political Poker: The People’s Party Keeps Thailand Guessing on Its Next Prime Minister

The 2023 Thai general election ended in a fragmented parliament and an uneasy coalition that has left the country’s future leadership a matter of careful, high‑stakes negotiation. At the centre of this political poker game sits the newly formed People’s Party (PPP), a coalition‑of‑small‑parties outfit that has become the most powerful king‑maker in the National Assembly. Though it controls only a handful of seats, the PPP’s strategic positioning and its leaders’ deft playing of the political cards keep the country guessing about who will become the next prime minister.

A Quick Look at the Numbers

The election produced a hung parliament. The Palang Pracharat Party (PPP‑P), the Democrat Party, the Thai Nation Party, the Thai Liberal Party, and the PPP together hold the 51 seats needed for a majority in the 500‑member House of Representatives. However, each of the six coalition parties holds only 6‑9% of the vote share, meaning no single party can claim the mandate to form a government on its own.

The People’s Party, which officially announced its formation in September 2022, ran as a coalition of seven small parties that had failed to reach the 2% electoral threshold on their own. In the end, the PPP secured 42 seats, representing 8.4% of the vote. While that is far from a dominant block, it is more than enough to tip the balance in any post‑election bargaining table.

The “Political Poker” of PM Selection

In Thailand, the process of selecting a prime minister is uniquely complex. Once the election is over, the National Assembly (House + Senate) convenes in a joint session to nominate a candidate. The nomination must be a person who has already served as a member of parliament, and the candidate must have the confidence of at least 50% of the joint assembly – that is, 126 out of 250 votes. The selected candidate is then sent to the King for final approval. The King’s role is largely ceremonial, but he can refuse to sanction a candidate, in which case the entire process starts over.

This multi‑layered, multi‑step process is why the PPP’s leaders have described their maneuvering as a game of political poker. The PPP’s leader, Sukrit Ratanakorn (the party’s public face), has publicly stated that the party will support “the candidate who can unify the nation and secure the confidence of the monarch and the army.” Yet, in practice, Sukrit has kept his word to the letter, refusing to commit to any single candidate and instead offering conditional support that shifts with the shifting political landscape.

A Kingmaker With a High‑Stakes Strategy

The PPP’s strategy hinges on its ability to act as a gatekeeper. By threatening to withhold its votes, the PPP can force larger parties to make concessions. In the early days of the coalition talks, the PPP demanded a prime minister who was “experienced, trustworthy, and not aligned too closely with the military.” This demand was initially rejected by the Palang Pracharat Party, which had a strong military backing. But the PPP also offered a coalition of its 42 seats to the Democrat Party in exchange for a vice‑prime minister role, a move that the Democrats accepted, thereby creating a fragile three‑party coalition.

The PPP’s moves also play on the Monarch’s preference for a stable, pro‑constitutional government. The King’s approval is not given lightly, and the PPP’s public assurances that it will support “the best candidate for the nation” have been interpreted by political analysts as a sign that the party is aligning itself with the monarchy’s interests. This has made the PPP a respected, if not entirely predictable, player in the political arena.

Recent Developments and the Road Ahead

In the weeks following the elections, the PPP has shifted its position several times. The party’s public statements have fluctuated between backing a “pro‑reform” candidate and a “neutral” one. According to a recent article on thethaiger.com, the PPP has been playing “long‑range chess” with both the Palang Pracharat and the Democrat parties, holding its ground while waiting for the right moment to strike.

The article also highlighted the PPP’s involvement in a recent parliamentary vote where a motion of no confidence against the current caretaker government was narrowly defeated. The PPP’s vote was decisive, and the party’s leader publicly called it “a clear message that the PPP stands for democracy and stability.”

At the same time, the PPP has faced criticism from opposition groups that accuse it of playing a “game of chance” with the nation’s future. A prominent critic, Somsak Suthipon, a senior political scientist, warned that the PPP’s “double‑talk” could destabilise the already fragile political environment.

What Does This Mean for Thailand?

If the PPP’s political poker continues to pay off, Thailand could see a prime minister who is a compromise candidate – perhaps someone with a background in the private sector but who has also maintained a neutral stance on the military’s role in politics. Such a figure could appease the monarchy, satisfy the military, and maintain the coalition’s fragile majority.

However, the PPP’s strategy also carries risks. The party’s willingness to switch sides could erode public trust, especially if the electorate views the PPP as merely a “seat‑seeker” rather than a principled party. Additionally, the looming threat of a constitutional court intervention – if the coalition fails to secure a prime minister within the constitutional timeframe – could force a fresh election, risking another cycle of political stalemate.

Final Thoughts

The People’s Party’s involvement in Thailand’s post‑election politics demonstrates how even a relatively small party can wield outsized influence when the balance of power is so precariously thin. Their strategic play – keeping the nation guessing about the next prime minister – underscores the complex, often opaque nature of Thai politics. As the next prime minister is eventually chosen, the PPP will undoubtedly be scrutinised for its role, and the nation will watch closely to see whether its political poker pays off for the betterment of Thailand or simply adds another layer of uncertainty to an already complex political landscape.