The Political Rols of the Red Cross in Social Welfare Activities in Yasothon Province

Abstract

This article examines the Red Cross as a humanitarian organization formally committed to neutrality while maintaining close relationships with the state, civil society, and social networks. Such relationships generate political roles that operate both directly and indirectly. The study applies the frameworks of state–society relations, soft power, political legitimacy, and humanitarian diplomacy to explain how the Red Cross influences social problem management, resource mobilization, and public policy. A qualitative research approach is employed through the review and synthesis of historical documents, laws, policy documents, and contemporary research, combined with interpretive content analysis. The findings reveal three major dimensions of the Red Cross’s political role. First, it functions as a symbolic mechanism that can reinforce state legitimacy and public confidence through humanitarian relief, disaster response, and assistance to vulnerable groups. Second, it serves as an institutional intermediary connecting government agencies, businesses, religious organizations, communities, and citizens. This intermediary role facilitates the mobilization of funding, knowledge, volunteers, and other resources while expanding opportunities for public participation in collective affairs. Third, the Red Cross contributes to humanitarian and social-policy agenda setting, particularly in disaster-response standards, public health, protection of vulnerable populations, and volunteer development, thereby influencing the long-term direction of social policy. Nevertheless, close relations between the Red Cross and the state create a structural tension between humanitarian neutrality and political embeddedness. Major challenges include the potential use of humanitarian activities as political symbolism, functional overlap with state agencies, and concerns regarding transparency and accountability. The article therefore proposes strengthening institutional governance, systematic information disclosure, digital monitoring and evaluation systems, and mechanisms for incorporating beneficiaries’ voices. These measures are essential to preserving organizational credibility, autonomy, accountability, and humanitarian legitimacy within contemporary democratic society.