For Pita Limjaroenrat, Thailand’s liberal icon and “almost prime minister,” the experience of being banned from politics following his decisive 2023 general election win has only strengthened the calling to fight for democracy in his country.

Thailand’s distinctive power structure – an entrenched alliance among the monarchy, the military, and economic monopolies – has repeatedly undermined and dismantled democratic forces’ attempts to challenge the dominance of unelected institutions. “This is a systematic issue that if I don't stand up for, then it's going to happen to my daughter's generation and my granddaughter's generation,” Pita says.

Joining APARC Director Kiyoteru Tsutsui on the latest episode of the APARC Briefing video series, Pita reflects on his journey, shares lessons in leadership and resilience, and discusses the forward-looking vision that continues to define his commitment to contribute to the conversation on Thailand’s future.

The APARC Briefing interview followed a fireside chat with Pita, Thailand at a Crossroads, hosted by APARC’s Southeast Asia Program, where he examined Thai politics and Southeast Asian regional dynamics.

Sign up for APARC newsletters to receive expert analysis and insights from our scholars and guests >

The People’s Mandate

In May 2023, Pita led the Move Forward Party (MFP) to win the most seats in Thailand’s general election on a platform of progressive reform. He was poised to lead the country, but a court injunction and parliamentary maneuvering halted his path to the prime ministership. In August 2024, the Thai Constitutional Court disbanded the MFP and banned Pita from politics for ten years. He may still face a lifetime ban. Rather than retreating, however, Pita has reframed his political setback as a summons to a larger mission.

To compartmentalize, find purpose in adversity, and manage anxiety, Pita proactively maps out worst-case scenarios, he revealed. “Once I have that down on paper, I stop worrying,” he said. Having anticipated the possibility of being blocked from power, the event, when it happened, was not a personal shock but the activation of a pre-analyzed outcome. This mindset allows him to see his ban from office as a reversible obstacle in a long-term struggle, citing the comebacks of leaders like Brazil’s President Lula da Silva. 

Politics is a ball that could turn either way, Pita believes. “If there's enough mandate, if there's enough calling from the people that they want me to govern and they want me to run again, whatever legal procedure that is done to me can be reversed. A pathway to power is always there as long as you still have that fire in you and people give you the mandate,” he argues.

Image

The Art of the Middle Way

Pita’s leadership philosophy is rooted in a life spent bridging divides. Describing himself as a “jack of all trades,” he recalled how, as a child, he moved easily between being a bookworm and taking on leadership roles in school and basketball. He traces this identity back to his upbringing, which included a middle-class childhood in Bangkok, formative years at an all-boys school in rural New Zealand, and an education and professional experiences in both the public and private sectors, with degrees earned from Harvard’s Kennedy School and MIT’s Sloan School of Management.

“That became who I am,” he stated, outlining his unique proposition to Thai voters. “Someone who understands international markets and rural areas. Someone who's middle class, who understands people who are well off and people who are struggling [...] Someone who understands both the private side and public side because he prepared himself that way.”

This dual expertise, he argued, is crucial for effective governance. He noted the fundamental difference in objectives between the two sectors. “The goal of public service is service. The goal of the private sector is profitability,” he said. “Just because you're a successful businessman doesn't make you a successful politician.”

He recounted how his political calling was ignited in the wake of the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, when, as a management consultant, he worked on a tourism recovery strategy for Thailand. The intellectual challenge of balancing complex public needs, like national energy security, sparked a passion that private-sector work couldn't match.

From Campaign to Campus

Now a Senior Democracy Fellow at Harvard Kennedy School, Pita channels his experiences into mentoring a new generation of leaders. He teaches a class on running for public office in developing countries, hosts workshops, and holds “private office hours” for students committed to entering public service, helping them craft their first campaign strategies. It is a way of “turning reality into a textbook” for others.

He also remains a keen observer of global affairs, characterizing the current U.S.-China relationship as a “managed rivalry” or “competitive coexistence,” where deep distrust is checked by the understanding that a full-fledged decoupling would be “economic suicide” for both sides. He sees Southeast Asia as a central and crucial bloc of “swing states” that must leverage its position to determine its own future without being forced to choose sides in the competition between the world’s two greatest powers.

When asked for his message to young people, Pita’s advice is a blend of passion and pragmatism. “Always follow your heart, but take your brain with you,” he urged. For those with aspirations to tackle the world’s crises and pressing social challenges, he stressed the importance of pairing that fire with a concrete plan.

“It's up to you whether you find your North Star, improve your skills to have a plan to get there,” he concluded.

Pita clearly articulates what he wants: a more just and democratic Thailand. Even from outside the halls of political power, he is methodically working on his plan to get there. “I can wait for my time, and I will come back stronger, more vigorous, more capable, and more relevant.”

In May 2023, Thai pro-democracy reformer and lawmaker Pita Limjaroenrat led Thailand’s Move Forward Party to a stunning victory in the general election on a platform of progressive change. The party won a clear mandate from over 14 million voters, but conservative powers and military-appointed senators blocked Pita’s path to the prime ministership. Fifteen months later, Thailand’s Constitutional Court dissolved the Move Forward Party – the same fate its predecessor, the Future Forward Party, met in 2020. The court also barred Pita from politics for a decade.

It is a story he recounts in his political memoir, The Almost Prime Minister, and one he discussed at a February 2025 fireside chat hosted by APARC’s Southeast Asia Program. In his current role as a Senior Democracy Fellow back at his alma mater, the Harvard Kennedy School, Pita continues to champion transparent and equitable governance, coaches a new generation of political leaders, and strategizes a democratic path forward for Thailand. 

On May 29, 2026, Pita returned to Stanford for a follow-up discussion with APARC Director Kiyoteru Tsutsui, who also serves as co-director of the Southeast Asia Program. Pita examined political developments in Thailand since the contentious 2023 election, the tensions between Thailand and Cambodia, the crisis in Myanmar, ASEAN’s role in the region, and how Thailand and other middle powers should hedge their bets amid the U.S.-China competition and a fragmenting world order. 

Get APARC event invites and guest speakers’ insights delivered to your inbox >

Anatomy of a Defeat

Pita’s opening remarks focused on the outcome of Thailand’s recent general election, in which the People’s Party – the successor to the dissolved Move Forward Party – suffered a decisive defeat. Entering the February 8, 2026, election, the People’s Party had hoped to convert widespread calls for democratic reform into power. Instead, the conservative Bhumjaithai Party secured a clear victory and then joined forces with the third-place populist Pheu Thai Party to form a coalition government.

Pita, who had campaigned for the People’s Party ahead of the election – a political activity he remains eligible to undertake despite being barred from seeking office – offered a candid assessment of the party’s loss.

Lower voter turnout was a key determinant of the February 8 election results, he argued: at 65 percent, it was sharply down from 76 percent in the 2023 general election that he won. Many voters came to believe that the costs of participating in the political process outweighed the potential benefits, Pita said.

That is the calculus of autocrats when they manipulate elections, he argued. Recognizing that electoral participation is the linchpin of a representative democracy's legitimacy and power, and that voter turnout of upward of 70 percent would all but guarantee a People Party victory, "they want to make sure that the cost of going to an election is higher than the benefit."

Pita pointed to his experience as evidence. Despite winning the 2023 election, Thai supporters now see him, three years later, living in Boston rather than governing from Bangkok. The message to voters, he said, is clear: If you keep voting and nothing changes, then why bother?

Pita calls this "voter fatigue by design" – a tactic used by autocrats to make politics seem “dramatized, boring, or irrelevant.”

He labels this Thai establishment's effort to convince voters that political participation is futile as “constituency.” It is one element in a “five C’s framework” that explains the People’s Party’s recent election defeat, he says.

A second factor, which he names “competitive collusion,” was evident in the decision by conservative candidates to coordinate their efforts – whether by merging campaigns or stepping aside – to avoid splitting the vote and present a unified front against the reformist People’s Party.

Third, conflict – by which Pita refers to the recent flare-up of tensions between Thailand and Cambodia – rallied nationalistic sentiment, lending greater legitimacy to the military and thus benefiting the conservative parties associated with it.

The fourth element, according to Pita, is Thailand’s Constitution, under which the Election Commission – the country’s sole election management body – is effectively appointed by the King on the recommendation of the Senate. “So I felt the [February 2026] election was not fair,” Pita said. “There was no linkage to the people, and there were no checks and balances.”

Finally, Pita pointed to the People Party's own missteps, which he categorizes as “candidacy.” He described a “Brahmin left versus merchant right” dynamic, arguing that the party became overly focused on technocratic, urban-centered policies and lost touch with the rural grassroots base that had been crucial to the Move Forward Party’s 2023 electoral success.

Regional Flashpoints: Cambodia and Myanmar

On the Thailand-Cambodia border dispute, Pita called for a renewed commitment to diplomacy, arguing that lasting peace can only be achieved through dialogue. He pointed to the Joint Boundary Commission, the bilateral body the two countries established in 1997 to oversee the demarcation of their border, as the most viable mechanism for resolving the dispute.

“If we return to the table and try to negotiate that out, I think that could be a path toward durable peace between Thailand and Cambodia.”

Turning to Myanmar, Pita stressed the need for Thailand and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) to take a more active role in addressing the civil war that has devastated the country since the military coup of February 2021. The conflict’s spillover effects, he noted, extend well beyond Myanmar’s borders, fueling cyber scam operations, human trafficking, and illicit financial activity that directly affect Thailand.

“If the ASEAN core, especially Thailand, with its geographic proximity, doesn't do anything, it's going to keep going in a dangerous drift like that.” 

Pita noted, however, that the crisis in Myanmar has grown more complex in recent years. Beyond the struggle among ethnic armed groups and between the military and pro-democracy forces, it now encompasses resource politics as part of a broader competition over rare earths and China’s expanding strategic interests linked to trade corridors and energy infrastructure.

As China’s involvement in the region deepens through its trade routes and gas pipeline interests, the conflict in Myanmar has become much harder to resolve, he said.

As a way forward, Pita proposed a minilateral coalition comprising key ASEAN states, along with India, China, and possibly Japan and South Korea. The goal, he said, would be to work with Myanmar’s opposition forces to “turn resistance into governance” and lay the groundwork for a viable political transition toward a post-conflict Myanmar.

The Middle Power Moment and U.S.-China Rivalry

Zooming out to the global stage, Pita spoke of his interest in the prospects of a "middle power moment" taking shape, citing Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s recent diplomatic tour of the Indo-Pacific region to urge middle power nations, including India, Australia, and Japan, to unite in response to the U.S.-China great power rivalry and the transformation of U.S. foreign policy under the Trump administration.

“Thailand is still the second-largest country in ASEAN,” Pita said. “So we have agency and autonomy. Whether we use it or not, that is something that remains to be seen.”

“You realize that if you rely on the Americans for security and the Chinese for the economy, you are going to be forced to choose sides. And once you choose sides, that's the end of everything that you have.” He argued that, if nations are to avoid being forced to choose sides, they must redefine neutrality as an active capability rather than a passive position.

Here, too, he suggested, flexible, issue-based minilaterals could be beneficial. “So I think we'll see a rise of multilaterals on various issues, whether it's AI governance, semiconductors, maritime management, cybersecurity, or critical minerals.”

From Player to Coach

Forced to the sidelines of Thai politics, Pita has embraced a new role. "My calling now is to groom next-gen leaders. I used to be a player, and I did a good job. And then they stopped me. They forced me to sit down. So I decided to become a coach instead.” At Harvard Kennedy School, he now co-teaches a class on running for public office in developing countries, turning his recent, raw experiences into a textbook for the next generation.

Despite the setbacks, Pita’s message remains one of resilience and determination. When asked if he could still win, he was unequivocal. "I think I can," he stated. “I think about it every single night, to return to the arena and become a player. But I can wait. I could strategize, I could accumulate small victories until I'm strong, vigorous, and capable. And when I return, I will change Thailand for good.”.

In His Own Words: Pita's Column in Matichon Weekly

Pita contributes a regular column to the Thai-language news magazine Matichon Weekly (มติชนสุดสัปดาห์), providing analysis on topics ranging from global economic shifts and international politics to urban development and his experiences engaging with leaders in politics, technology, business, and social activism. In his column of June 12, 2026, he reflects on his May 29 visit to Stanford and APARC.

Below is an English version of the column, generated by Google Translate. It has been mildly edited for accuracy and style.

Palo Alto Annual Event

I'm back at Stanford University and Palo Alto again, after visiting last year. I was so impressed that I've decided I'd like to visit every year if I can, not just because of the good weather and pleasant atmosphere, but because this place is a hub of knowledge, conversation, and unique perspectives on the world that are hard to find elsewhere.

I spent three days as a guest of APARC, or the Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center, Stanford University's Asia-Pacific research center, which is part of the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI), one of the world's most influential institutions in international relations and public policy, as well as the Hoover Institution, a public policy institute that brings together thinkers, historians, economists, and former policymakers from around the globe.

These three institutions set Stanford apart from typical universities, creating a space where the academic and policy worlds converge tangibly. The people you pass each day might be Larry Diamond, who has studied democratic transitions and declines for decades; Francis Fukuyama, author of The End of History and the Last Man; Gi-Wook Shin, an expert on East Asia; or Kiyoteru Tsutsui, who studies human rights issues. On the other side of the university is a collection of former top U.S. policymakers, from Condoleezza Rice to Michael McFaul, making conversations here both academic and practical. Importantly, the questions I'm asked at Stanford are always more difficult than anywhere else.

Many conversations this year have revolved around the same question: Is the world entering an era where geopolitics and technology are increasingly intertwined? While in the past, technology companies competed to create superior products, today they face geopolitical questions similar to those governments do. From restrictions on chip exports and access to rare earth minerals to energy security and the restructuring of international supply chains, the names Nvidia, TSMC, and ASML are frequently mentioned alongside those of major powers, as the ability to design, manufacture, and control advanced technology has become an integral part of state power.

In the world of AI, the question has changed significantly this year. At Stanford and Silicon Valley, I hear less talk about frontier models than I expected, but more and more talk about inference, compute, and energy. The excitement isn't about how well the next model will perform, but about who can get these models out of the lab and into real-world economic applications first.

On the other hand, competition is shifting from the digital world to the physical world. Waymo's self-driving cars are becoming commonplace on San Francisco streets, while Amazon's Zoox is beginning to enter the fray as a major player. The development of humanoid robots is also being discussed more seriously than ever before. Many believe that the next decade will be the time when AI begins to develop its own "arms and legs," no longer confined to computer screens.

As technology has advanced to this point, the conversation has once again turned to geopolitics. This includes issues such as controls on the export of advanced chips, competition to attract leading researchers, access to energy for hyperscale data centers, and concerns about the concentration of computing power in the hands of a few companies and countries. If in the 20th century, oil was the strategic resource of superpowers, many are beginning to see that in the 21st century, computing may be heading towards a similar status. The world is therefore not just witnessing a technological competition, but a new restructuring of power through technology.

Another thing I always try to do whenever I come to Stanford and Silicon Valley is to meet Thai students, researchers, entrepreneurs, and Thais working in the technology industry. Because, if you look closely, Thais are already a part of the global competitiveness we talk about.

Over the past two years, since being disqualified from politics, I have dedicated part of my time to traveling, meeting, and systematically building a database of Thai talent abroad. This includes scientists, engineers, economists, artificial intelligence researchers, and executives in global technology companies. This trip was no exception. I had the opportunity to meet Thais working at Google, Meta, Apple, Salesforce, Nvidia, OpenAI, and many other leading technology companies. Some work in semiconductors, some develop AI models, and some manage products with hundreds of millions of users worldwide. Many may not be well-known in Thailand, but they are part of the workforce driving the world's future economy today.

Every time I speak with this group of Thais, I leave feeling hopeful. Hopeful to see that Thais can stand at the forefront of industries that are shaping the future of the world, on par with anyone else. And hopeful that their knowledge, experience, and networks can connect and create even more value for Thailand in the future. I can only hope that one day I will have the opportunity to work with them for the future of our nation.

Growing up on a Philippine military base, Gaea Morales’ interest in global politics is rooted in questions of what drives successful local peacebuilding and security. Spending summers between Manila and Davao in her youth, she was first exposed to the ways socioeconomic insecurity, especially as a result of disaster-driven resource scarcity, can foment conflict and institutional distrust. At the same time, her exposure to community-led disaster relief efforts highlighted the importance of building rapport and community engagement in effective public service delivery.  

When she first came to the U.S. to pursue a degree in diplomacy, she had hoped to develop expertise in environmental governance and join the foreign service to advance climate security and cooperation. Amid growing state-led backlash against global environmental institutions, however, she started to question the linkages between international and domestic politics and the limits of a state-centric international order in responding to transboundary threats. Inspired by mentors across academia and the public sector working to sustain international commitments at the most local level, she pursued a doctorate anchored on the question of how cities translate global norms within local institutions, especially in climate-vulnerable contexts like her home region of Southeast Asia.

As APARC’s 2025-26 Shorenstein Postdoctoral Fellow on Contemporary Asia, Gaea spent the last academic year developing her dissertation into a book project that illuminates the factors that incentivize and enable local governments to participate in global governance, and more specifically, to implement climate action initiatives even in the absence of central government support. Looking ahead, she is working to dedicate her career to blurring the lines between traditional conceptions of global and local politics while bridging research and policy in the realm of climate resilience and sustainable development.

We spoke with Gaea about her work and fellowship experience at APARC. This interview has been edited lightly for clarity.
 

Get APARC fellowship announcements and scholars' insights delivered to your inbox >

Could you describe your research briefly?

Broadly, my research centers on the question of what happens between negotiating international agreements and the local delivery of services, or between “thinking globally” and “acting locally.” The climate crisis challenges the status quo of global governance practices: while most of our approaches focus on national mitigation and adaptation commitments, the burdens of the crisis are unevenly distributed across and within countries. I join a growing community of scholars and practitioners who are responding to this empirical reality by studying local and regional governments as global actors in their own right. More narrowly, my book project investigates why and how some of the world’s most climate-vulnerable cities innovate in response to climate challenges, while also operating within their respective sociolegal and financial responsibilities and constraints.

My other projects also lie at the intersection of global and local environmental governance, including studying cross-sectoral local (i.e., public-academic) partnerships in sustainable policy development, local policy implications of the institutionalization of environmental rights in international law and courts, rural-urban inequalities in foreign disaster aid distribution, and the local adoption of anticipatory action frameworks.

What sparked your passion for your academic topic?

My passion for environmental issues is deeply rooted in my own experiences and those of my community. Born and raised in the Philippines, I witnessed firsthand how extreme weather and natural disasters can not only drive conflict, but also shape the way people live their everyday lives: from anticipating school and work suspensions during the monsoon season, price hikes on produce due to droughts, and even nationwide donation drives and fundraisers. Media narratives often highlight Filipino “resilience” amid calamity. Yet such discourse raises questions about who bears responsibility for disaster response and prevention when failing public infrastructure exacerbates climate risks and disproportionately burdens some communities over others.

Early in my academic journey as a student of international relations, I was inspired by the potential of landmark negotiations, such as the Sustainable Development Goals (2015) and the Paris Agreement (2016), to develop environmental standards by which to hold our political leaders accountable. But, ultimately, I was inspired by my mentors in both the academic and policy worlds, from Manila to Los Angeles, who have instilled in me the belief that all global politics is local and that civic engagement with and especially across local governments can catalyze policy, progressive action, and innovation from the bottom up.

What message do you hope people will take from your research?

A key message of my research is that, although national governments commit to international agreements, local context and local champions determine which projects get implemented and how. The knowledge, capacity, and political will of local leaders are shaped not just by central government mandates or their supporters, but also by a desire to build a reputation within a network of cities, international organizations, and other global actors. As cities across the globe face increasingly similar climate challenges, they can exchange lessons learned and use their credibility to access technical and financial support to then act on these lessons.

On that note, I also want to shed light on the complexity of climate and environmental governance and make a case for stronger multi-level governance standards that integrate international, national, and local perspectives right from the negotiating and planning phases through project implementation.

You conducted field research in three major Southeast Asian capitals: Bangkok, Jakarta, and Metro Manila. What similarities and differences did you find across these cities’ responses to climate vulnerabilities and in their climate politics?

Although Jakarta, Metro Manila, and Bangkok possess unique characteristics and, by extension, have varying environmental priorities, they share many of the same challenges one would expect of rapidly urbanizing coastal capitals in an era of climate change. Governments across all cities had climate change, disaster response and recovery, and/or environmental issues more broadly as a priority issue area. For example, it was unsurprising to learn that Jakarta – the world’s fastest-sinking megacity – was focused on innovating flood management, including digital flood-monitoring systems and mangrove restoration along the northern coast of the capital.

Given the twin challenges of pollution and mobility in the Philippines’ capital region, cities in Metro Manila, such as Quezon City, have focused on developing local infrastructure for air-quality monitoring and electrification of public transit.

Finally, Bangkok is also facing the threats of extreme heat and subsidence, and it is investing heavily in tree-planting initiatives and the accessibility of parks and green spaces for stormwater retention and cooling.

All local governments, to varying degrees, cited limited resources to develop the plans and projects that central governments required to meet their respective country’s international commitments. To meet this governance gap, all cities actively incorporated lessons learned either directly from other cities through bilateral or multilateral forums or directly through partnerships with city network organizations and development agencies that provided both technical and financial support.

How has the postdoctoral fellowship at APARC supported your research and your experience at Stanford?

My time at APARC was incredibly enriching, thanks in large part to its remarkable diversity spanning nationalities, professional backgrounds, areas of expertise, and epistemological approaches. I’m humbled to have been a part of this interdisciplinary and supportive community. As an early-career researcher, I’m especially grateful to have had the chance to engage with leading scholars whose legacies continue to shape (Southeast) Asian studies.

Finally, I’m grateful for having the opportunity to participate in APARC’s annual Trans-Pacific Sustainability Dialogue (TPSD), held in Manila in November 2025. This event allowed me to share my research findings with local stakeholders (several of whom I first met while conducting fieldwork as a graduate student) and learn directly from policy experts and scholars with overlapping questions and interests.

What future research areas are you exploring? And what’s on the horizon for you professionally?

There is still so much ground to cover related to global environmental governance, and I’m excited to keep pursuing this topic in both my research and pedagogy. I’ll continue work on my book project as well as ongoing work on urban-rural inequalities in climate resilience, environmental rights, and anticipatory action initiatives in the Philippines, and I look forward to teaching courses on global environmental politics. I’m also eager to explore future projects on the global ecosystem of climate financing mechanisms, including the evolution of the fund for responding to loss and damage (FRLD), the intersection of corruption and climate risks, and ways to mitigate climate-driven internal displacement through a gender equity lens.

This coming Fall 2026, I will be starting as the Helen Houlahan Rigali Assistant Professor of Political Science at Loyola University Chicago. It’s a privilege to be able to continue my research (at another global city, no less) and join such a vibrant community of scholars at Loyola. 

What advice would you give to prospective APARC postdoctoral scholars?

One of the most influential pieces of advice I’ve received, especially while I was on the academic job market, is: Don’t reject yourself for an opportunity. Believe and bet on yourself. I’m so incredibly grateful for my time at Stanford, and I wouldn’t have had this opportunity (and many others leading up to it) if I had let self-doubt keep me from applying in the first place. If you believe in yourself and the value of your contributions, your work will speak for itself.

And once you’re here, don’t forget to explore within and beyond Encina Hall whenever you get the chance. Stanford – and the broader Bay Area - has so much to offer, from seminars showcasing cutting-edge research in progress, hands-on pedagogical and data science training workshops, to global forums addressing a wide range of contemporary issues.