One month has passed. Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul now has three more months to go.
Will he make history or be condemned?
After all, Thai historians and critics have never been kind to politicians. For Mr Anutin, the remaining months will be akin to walking through a political minefield. One wrong step could set off an explosion that derails his reform agenda.
One cabinet minister, Vorapak Tanyawong, a deputy finance minister, has already resigned, and it would not be surprising if more cabinet members follow. That said, Mr Anutin also needs to perform his Houdini act to avoid a guillotine that awaits in the form of a no-confidence vote or hush-hush house dissolution.
Mr Anutin must now focus on two fronts: improving people’s standard of living and ensuring that Thailand’s diplomacy protects its sovereignty while raising the country’s international standing.
From the start, his approach has been pragmatic. Reviving the co-payment scheme, Khon La Khrueng Plus, has shown he values results over ego. He was courageous in restarting the Prayut administration’s policy to inject fresh cash into households and small businesses. He quickly earned praise. Still, he needs something more tangible.
At the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (Apec) business leaders’ meeting in Gyeongju, Mr Anutin outlined three strategic pillars to boost the country’s competitiveness — connectivity, future industries and sustainable growth. He paired these with a “Quick Win” policy, aimed at achieving visible progress in key sectors such as electric vehicles, biotechnology, semiconductors and digital innovation.
“True growth must begin with the people,” he said, “because economic growth is meaningless unless everyone benefits.”
Well said. But the taste of a pudding is in the eating.
At the regional level, his message resonated with international partners who still see Thailand as a bridge between the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean), South Asia, and East Asia. The government’s Quick Win policies must bring lasting reforms, especially in the digital economy, not short-term results.
Fortunately, his foreign policy scores high marks thanks to Foreign Minister Sihasak Phuangketkeow and his Saranrom team. After he returned from Gyeongju, he was so pleased that he told the press Thailand is now on the diplomatic radar, while claiming the country will attract more investment and create more jobs.
So far, it has helped rebuild the country’s diplomatic credibility abroad. His performance during the Asean summits and the Thai-Cambodian engagements shows some competence. He was at ease with the leaders attending the Kuala Lumpur summits and the Apec leaders’ meeting, including US President Donald Trump.
On the sidelines of Apec, he made a good impression on Chinese President Xi Jinping, who commended Bangkok’s “effective measures to combat online gambling and telecom fraud” and urged both nations to “intensify efforts against cross-border crime”.
Lest we forget, the same message was delivered to former prime minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra when she met the Chinese leader in early February. Back then, Mr Xi warned her about the negative impacts of a pro-casino policy, but Ms Paetongtarn had no clue of the significance of his early concerns.
This time, Mr Anutin quickly affirmed that his government would continue strict action against online scams, a stance that has won quiet respect across the region.
Mr Anutin has already proposed hosting an international conference on cybercrime. As a precursor, it would be wise for him to order an investigation of dubious financial transactions flowing through Thailand. Money laundering and shadow banking help enable scam centres in neighbouring countries.
Transparency in financial flows will strengthen investor confidence and increase Thailand’s weight when the proposed conference comes about.
Meanwhile, as the anti-scam campaign heats up, questions have emerged at home. The sudden resignation of the cabinet minister, Mr Vorapat, following allegations of financial links to a scam network, has raised doubts about the government’s internal integrity. Was this an isolated case or the tip of an iceberg?
Public trust in Mr Anutin’s reform drive depends on how he handles such cases. If there are others in his cabinet or circle with questionable records, as the media have alleged, they must be removed. Indeed, as the Anutin government has promised to clean up cross-border scams, the prime minister must do the same within his own ranks.
Mr Anutin’s candour on the Thai-Cambodian border dispute must also be noted. His comment that both countries face encroachment problems was courageous — a statement grounded in realism rather than populism. After the remarks, he has been under severe attacks from ultra-nationalist groups and demagogues.
To be fair, he simply wants to defuse tensions and increase mutual trust through diplomacy and dialogue, not denial.
In peacetime, his comments on the border demarcation issue would earn respect. But the current Thai public mood is inundated with emotion and pessimism. Social media influencers, driven by outrage and algorithms, spin every misstep and ignore nuance.
These attacks did not augur well for the favourable atmosphere that followed the signing of the joint declaration of Thailand and Cambodia on Oct 26.
Toxic media have added fuel to the fire, making reconciliation more difficult across the border. Clickbait media must stop.
The prime minister also has to resist this spiral of doomsday fears and remain calm against maniacal voices. He must explain hard truths clearly and rationally. If Thailand continues to let online anger and xenophobia dictate its politics, no future government will have any chance to solve real problems.
The remaining three months will test Mr Anutin’s resolve.
Thailand will need to prepare to host major international meetings — the Mekong-Lancang Cooperation (MLC) and the IMF annual meeting, which is expected to be held in October next year.
These conferences are a pivotal prerequisite to strengthening cooperation against transnational crime, corruption, and economic disparity.
Mr Anutin’s time in power is numbered, but he still can leave a lasting mark that could propel voters to bring him back. Otherwise, it would be a big waste of political capital.