Reform ‘key’ to unlocking Thailand’s potential

Democrat leader warns against ‘fragmented policymaking’, writes Nattaya Chetchotiros

Over the course of 80 years, Thailand has weathered political upheaval, economic booms and crises, military interventions, constitutional resets and rapid shifts in the global order. Yet despite periods of promise, former prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva believes the country has repeatedly fallen short of fulfilling its potential.

Speaking in an exclusive interview to mark the Bangkok Post’s 80th anniversary, the Democrat Party leader said Thailand’s greatest challenge has not been a lack of resources or opportunity, but an inability to undertake the structural reforms necessary to move the country forward.

“Thailand still has considerable potential,” he said. “But without systemic reform, the country risks remaining stuck where it is.”

Caught between populism and bureaucracy

For decades, Thailand has alternated between governments driven by short-term populist policies and administrations shaped by post-coup conservatism and bureaucratic inertia, according to Mr Abhisit. The result, he said, has been fragmented policymaking rather than sustained transformation.

Thailand, once viewed as one of Asia’s rising economies, has struggled to match the progress of countries that began from similar levels of development.

At the heart of the problem lies what economists describe as the middle-income trap — a stage at which countries can no longer rely on cheap labour and resource-driven growth but fail to transition to innovation-led economies.

To escape it, Mr Abhisit argued, Thailand must fundamentally rethink how it creates value.

“Economic growth can no longer depend mainly on resources,” he said. “Thailand must create value through knowledge, creativity and technology.”

Yet successive governments have failed to push through the difficult reforms required to make that transition. Some prioritised populist policies aimed at electoral gains, while others focused on preserving stability and the status quo. In many cases, vested interests and political patronage diluted momentum for change.

The consequence, he said, is a country trapped in recurring cycles rather than long-term progress.

Three reforms for the next decade

Looking ahead, Mr Abhisit identified three priorities he believes Thailand must address over the next decade if it hopes to compete in a rapidly changing global economy.

First: overhaul outdated laws and regulations

Rigid bureaucracy and obsolete regulations remain among the biggest barriers to entrepreneurship and economic dynamism, he said. Efforts to streamline licensing, reduce red tape and improve the ease of doing business have been discussed for years but have delivered only limited progress.

Thailand requires a dedicated, systematic effort to modernise its regulatory framework, particularly for emerging industries and new business models.

Second: invest seriously in skills

Mr Abhisit said Thailand continues to face a mismatch between labour capabilities and the needs of modern industries. Reform, he argued, must extend beyond schools and universities to include lifelong workforce development, reskilling and career transitions.

As industries evolve, workers must be equipped to adapt to new technologies and changing economic demands.

Third: confront corruption and conflicts of interest

Longstanding concerns over corruption and the close relationship between political power and economic interests continue to undermine public trust and weaken reform efforts, he said.

Without stronger governance and greater transparency, Thailand’s ambitions for competitiveness and inclusive growth will remain constrained.

Over the next two decades, Mr Abhisit envisions a Thailand that has achieved high-income status while building institutions capable of adapting to change.

His ideal future is one marked not only by economic prosperity, but by efficient, transparent governance free from entrenched conflicts of interest.

Turning points and stalled progress

Reflecting on Thailand’s trajectory over the past three decades, Mr Abhisit identified a series of pivotal moments that reshaped the country’s political and economic direction.

Mr Abhisit entered politics in 1992, the year of the Black May uprising — a watershed moment that many believed would permanently steer Thailand away from military intervention.

Optimism deepened with the promulgation of the 1997 constitution, often viewed as a milestone in democratic development.

Yet within only a few years, Mr Abhisit said, political actors found ways to undermine the spirit of constitutional reform. Polarisation intensified, eventually contributing to the military coups of 2006 and 2014.

The post-2014 political landscape marked a significant departure from earlier coup periods, he noted. Unlike previous interventions, the military-backed administration remained in power for an extended period and retained influence even after elections, with the Senate playing a decisive role in selecting prime ministers.

Three decades after the democratic optimism of the early 1990s, Thailand remains preoccupied with constitutional disputes and unresolved questions over political legitimacy.

“Politically, we have not progressed very far,” he said.

Economically, Thailand has followed a similarly uneven path.

Rapid expansion before the 1997 Asian financial crisis proved unsustainable, while subsequent shocks — including the global financial crisis and the Covid-19 pandemic — repeatedly weakened growth momentum.

Each recovery has been slower than the last.

Over the past decade, Thailand’s economic growth has lagged behind regional peers, underperformed its own historical trajectory and fallen short of its potential, Mr Abhisit said.

Political uncertainty and economic stagnation have become deeply interconnected, gradually eroding national competitiveness.

Yet despite those setbacks, he believes Thailand retains important strengths — from its enduring appeal as a tourism destination to emerging opportunities in electric vehicles, advanced electronics and data centres.

The concern, he warned, is complacency.

Thailand may continue to benefit from past advantages for some time, but without decisive reform, it risks steadily losing ground to faster-moving competitors.

A more active global role

As geopolitical tensions intensify between the United States and China, Mr Abhisit said Thailand’s longstanding relationships with both powers offer strategic advantages — but balancing them will become increasingly difficult.

Competition between Washington and Beijing, particularly in technology and trade, is steadily narrowing the space for countries seeking to remain neutral.

Rather than passive diplomacy, he argued, Thailand should pursue what he described as a more proactive form of neutrality.

Central to that approach is stronger regional cooperation through Asean, enabling Southeast Asian nations to engage constructively with both powers while maintaining strategic autonomy.

He also sees room for broader middle-power cooperation involving partners such as the European Union, Japan, India, Australia, Canada and countries in the Middle East to help reduce global polarisation.

“The problem with many leaders in Thailand and Asean is that they focus too much on domestic issues,” he said. “Foreign policy and Asean should be strategic tools because today’s challenges extend beyond national borders.”

Myanmar, he suggested, offers a practical example of where Thailand could play a larger diplomatic role by acting as a mediator while engaging both China and the US through regional mechanisms.

Neutrality, he said, should not mean passivity.

Thailand should seek opportunities to shape outcomes rather than merely avoid tensions.

Leadership that understands change

If Thailand is to reclaim momentum, Mr Abhisit believes leadership will ultimately determine success or failure.

He points to widening inequality, weak competition and increasingly close relationships between major business interests and political power as structural problems that have reduced incentives for reform.

To govern effectively in a rapidly changing world, leaders must possess three qualities: an understanding of change, a clear vision for the country’s direction and integrity free from vested interests.

Only then, he argued, can Thailand position itself more confidently on the global stage.

His message for the country’s future is clear: Thailand still has the foundations for success, but potential alone will not be enough.

Without the political will to modernise institutions and address structural weaknesses, the country risks standing still while others move ahead.