Since dissolving Parliament on February 24, he has tried, with varying degrees of success, to drum up some political legitimacy in an effort to win over the electorate. In fact, he has done remarkably well in this high-wire act. The political suspense is intense. Still, this will also pass.

Last week's car-bomb scare showed that the current political struggle is nowhere near exhausting its capacity for drama. Things have now reached Shakespearean proportions. It was obvious to many people that the bomb fiasco was staged to demonstrate the monstrosity of the power of this caretaker government, ie Thaksin's own, and the extent of his control and viciousness. The event has rattled the public and further polarised the two sides of the showdown. On the one hand, the people want justice and on the other, they also yearn for normalcy, peace and stability. On top of that, they fear more violence. After all, the stunt has not only tarnished the country's image as a peaceful place - something the government has been reiterating and hoping for - but also helped raise the spectre of a full-scale conflict in the capital. As in past political episodes, the caretaker prime minister will definitely continue to rely on half-baked manipulations to increase his political leverage and to ensure his safe exit if all the manoeuvring fails.

Thaksin plays on the schism within the body politic, further complicating the already complex relations between the regional and socio-economic groups. Obviously, he wants to buy more time to ascertain that all potential entrapments have been effectively dealt with. He knows that his massive wealth is coming under increasingly close scrutiny, which could end up stripping him of his power. The ongoing deliberations over the Shin Corp-Temasek deal is a case in point.

In the coming days, more suspects with links to the alleged assassination plot could be arrested, and more evidence of their alleged crimes would be uncovered. The surreal situation will continue as Thaksin grapples with his future.

Before the October 15 election - though it looks highly unlikely right now that the vote will take place as scheduled - the beleaguered caretaker prime minister still has some time to manipulate and go for broke. The judicial reviews that have been going on since the end of April will only further pressure Thaksin, despite  them proceeding at snail's pace. For instance, the pending court verdict in the perjury case between Thaksin and his former American business associate, William Monson, is scheduled to be read on October 16. This could be the Achilles' heel that could finish off Thaksin's political ambition completely. Expect some surprises.

Looking back over the past 40 years, the departure of various autocratic leaders from developing countries, particularly those in Latin America and Africa, yield some important lessons. Most of these leaders received blanket amnesties, not only for themselves, but also for their families and in some cases for their preferred collaborators. Despite repeated calls for the confiscation of their wealth, few have suffered any financial consequences for their misrule. Only a broad amnesty would persuade these former dictators to step down.

The most dramatic recent example of transitional justice was the execution of former Romanian President Nicolae Ceausescu and his wife in December 1989. A military tribunal was quickly set up and a verdict passed. It was a necessary step to make a clean break from the past. But it did damage the country's reputation as it was moving towards democracy and the rule of law.

Viewed through the lens of such incidents, it is not surprising that Thaksin has dragged the country up to the political precipice. He seems to be creating the conditions that would allow him to leave with blanket amnesty, free of any legal entrapment.

What is interesting is that Thaksin has been internationalising his political trauma. With his money and global commercial and public relations networks, he has done a fine job of convincing people that he has abided by the rule of law, that he was elected by voters and has a mandate to rule. Street protests and civil disobedience have been portrayed as thuggery. Outsiders watching from faraway places have readily accepted this narrative.

That helps explain why Thaksin continues to spin news and go about his daily routine as if nothing has been happening, even in the face of pending court cases and corruption scandals. He realises that fooling all of the people all the time is impossible. For him, fooling some of the people some of the time is good enough.

With his extraordinary wealth, having a positive image overseas is a key prerequisite to be able to live in exile and invest money. Indeed, he could be the first political leader from a developing country to use his clout to secure visas and other investment opportunities before stepping down.

Whether in personal letters to world leaders or interviews with Western media, Thaksin chooses his words carefully. He tends to stay silent on how he corrupted the nation, stirred up violence in the South and much more.

Kavi Chongkittavorn