Comments

  1. “Gen. Sondhi, Gen. Prem & Gen. Surayud are all Muslim, from the South & north of the South.”

    Gen Sonthi is a Muslim, but the other two are not – Gen Surayud’s official, Thai language, profile indicates he is a Buddhist. Is Gen Surayud from the South? Nothing in his biography makes mention of this.

  2. Nicholas Wood says:

    More worrying is how unoriginal this whole thing really is.

    If Thailand is to avoid a “groundhod day” experience, things will probably have to get worse before they get better.

  3. Nicholas Wood says:

    I know very well that the news in the Nation/Post is very filtered and simplistic.

    However, one can regularly see changes in the mood of the country towards foreigners being preceeded by such ridiculous stories.

    I have seen it all before within Thailand, when things are not going well economically, socially, politically, the large finger is produced to point it at the farang/bogeyman under the stairs. Whilst being constantly reminded that I have no right to worry about how Thailand is run, I refuse therefore to believe that the farang is the fountain of “trouble” within the country.

    Thailand is a wonderful place, my wife is Thai and I have many Thai friends. However, this type of simplistic nonsense really does colour people’s opinions in Thailand, and I had to say my bit.

    I do not pretend what goes on inside a completely Thai/Chinese/Japanese/Frenc household in terms of social interaction, and obviously from her research neither does this stupid professor or reporter.

  4. Vichai N. says:

    Anon’s take about ‘Buddhist monks are above criticism from people like you or me’ doesn’t impress me. Many news had been written on transgressing monks – corruption, women and maybe drug trafficking. Many have been defrocked, but have any been judically tried or jailed?

    Frankly I am at a total loss about how well these Thai monks police themselves or whether they are accountable to anybody. All those land and properties donated to the monastery I suspect (suspicions only mind you) could just easily end up as the head monk’s personal property. But I could be wrong of course.

    Maybe these New Mandala academic researchers can clear up my suspicous minds or otherwise.

  5. Thai in Seattle says:

    Khun Patiwat is quite cleaver comparing the past generals who were truly dictators to present day’s generals who have softer touches. It’s interesting & quite informative but a few comparisons are off the mark.

    First, it’s ridiculous to compare one Sarit to three men, Surayuth+prem+sondhi. Gen. Sarit was a breed by himself, a ruthless man from the NE, an extremely ambitious man without sense of loyalty, a truly & most brutal dictator who were extremely capable of instilling fear to the entire population of the country. He ruled not with iron fist but with platinum (stronger than iron) hands. Not too many people could or would get close to him for he ruled with fear. His hands were tainted by blood. He was big, fat, ugly & an unequal womanizer who used his position of power & money to forcefully get or buy young beautiful women married or not to be his mistresses. He was rather loud with forceful tone & commanding voice. He was the marshal for all branches of arm-force and the police general. Democracy, freedom & rights for others were all alien, not in this world to him. Gen. Sarit was a Buddhist. At the age of 55, his life was consumed by those souls whom he had brutally killed during his time in power.

    Gen. Sondhi, Gen. Prem & Gen. Surayud are all Muslim, from the South & north of the South. All three men are soft speakers, became national leader by situation not ambition. These 3 general have better education whose moral principles are in the opposite end than Gen. Sarit. They are adored & widely respected by peers, subordinates & civilians. They’re all gentlemen, not known for womanizer. They earned their rank as general only. With the absence of abuse & good support of ordinary family, they have lived good life longer than Gen. Sarit. To Gen. Sarit’s standard, these 3 soldiers would be too sissy.

    Another not so good match up is the charm with ladies. As I described above, Gen. Sarit was not an attractive man. He used his power to get beautiful women whom he saw & wanted no matter what. His aides would also find young pretty women for him in order to build up favor. From what I heard growing up, he had several dozen mistresses at his pleasure but hardship for them & their parents. Gen. Surayud, Gen. Sondhi & even Gen. Prem are more handsome than Gen. Sarit. They have better personality. Gen. Surayud in particular is more charming. That’s why female report(s) and citizens were charmed by him after knowing him better. This is a comparison between sweet apple and sour plum.

    Khun Patiwat put in good effort, made the good attempt but one should view it as infotainment.

  6. fall says:

    Good comparison.
    The only question remain: Are we learning from our history?

  7. Thai in Seattle says:

    Sawasdee Khun Chalita,

    I commend your courage to admit that you’re the lady distributing the leaflets against the coup. Thank you for posting the 9 myths.

    Where were you & why didn’t you voice your strong opposition to Thaksin’s abusive management of Thailand in the past 5 years or so?

    Your writing indicates you’re an intelligent person besides very polite as you described. And I’m sorry you were hurt by the incident. As smart as you’re, you could have taken a thoughtful, honest approach by letting the organizer(s) know about your intention. Is it true that you called one of the organizing members & asked questions unrelated to the event itself (but on funding, about the organizers/leader & purposes)? If you did, is there a need to disguise yourself & your intention? You should have been upfront with them about what you would do when you called. Because you failed to take proper & friendly measure, the misunderstanding & undesirable consequence thus incurred. As we’ve seen, Thaksin’s supporters especially those thugs in Thailand have threatened & physically assaulted pro-democracy supporters of PAD and Khun Sondhi. My friend & other organizing members did not want that to happen here.

    When you said you had never ever aggressively handed out flyers, did you just seat at or stand by the table? I was quite sure I saw you two walked toward the arriving attendees & handed the flyers to them. I was approached too but I was told that you’re Thaksin’s supporter before having the chance to read it. So, I immediately threw it away.

    On your comment that there’s no room for different opinions any more, I have to strongly disagree with you. My friend, other people in the group & myself value different opinions & new approaches to problem. What we don’t like, and I’m sure most people too, is the unpleasant surprise. I can understand their view & concern when you & your male friend showed up before them, unexpectedly took over their spot before they could set up, handed out flyers with questionable contents & aims, created confusion to arriving attendees. After some attendees who were upset about the flyers informed them, what did you expect them to do? Try to put yourself in their shoes. Honesty, courtesy & good communication can go along way. I saw you two entered into the auditorium, sat down & listened to both speakers’ speech. When people (a dozen or so) asked Khun Sondi questions, I couldn’t recall either of you asking any question or making comment. WITH THIS FACT, HOW COULD YOU SAY THAT THERE’S NO ROOM FOR DIFFERENT OPINION? Having the event held publicly in the educational institution, the organizer was fully aware that there would be opposing views & unfriendly comments for the speakers. The speakers were also fully aware of the fact. That’s why they graciously invited you 2 to sit down, listen & evaluate the information that provided. And those who attended, there are Thai faculty members of PhD at UW & WSU, medical doctors, engineers, professionals, business owners, regular workers (in govt & private sector), home makers & students like yours. Most are not fooled by Thuskin & were there to lend supports to the speakers to continue their fight against corruption & for better democracy. Most felt the coup is the means to justify the end; getting rid of the irresponsible nat’l leader who doesn’t know the word “Accountability” & the most corrupted, abusive govt.

    On your assumption that Thailand is falling apart, you’re too pessimistic & wrong. Thaksin created a lot of mess & has left the country in limbo. However, we are lucky that Sondhi Limthongkul has the courage to stand up & lead the exposeтА▓ on Thaksin’s mismanagement & misconducts. Due to his & the PAD’s fight against the most corrupted govt in Thailand history, and due to the coup, those powerful but dishonest officials who robbed people’s democracy & raped national resources no longer have the free power to cause more damages to our homeland. The crises led to the severely lame & dysfunctional govt. The country, the people, the economy as well as our beloved King had been suffering for a year or so due to the conflict & impasse. To help save the patient’s life, the good doctor must take drastic steps to stop the hemorrhage first. After that, it’s to stabilize the patient, find the cause & remedy to cure the patient permanently, and then, restore the patient’s good health. Likewise, when things went badly wrong or problems persistently encountered threatening & impeding the smooth operation & success, smart people would say hold it, let’s stop & find out what went wrong, what are the causes and options for the solution! Because the nation’s democracy was hi-jacked by the ex-PM & his cronies through manipulation & sophisticated means, the crises went long enough. Because the check & balance system (which was already weak) was made totally ineffective by Thaksin’s govt, there was no other option available to break the stalemate. Based on previous occurrences, no one likes the coup. Gen Sondhi had been very patient & exercised the restrain. But with the impending & highly credible threat of bloodshed on 9/20, he took the risk & responsible leadership to stage the coup; thus stop the hemorrhage & prevent massive loss of lives. It would be extremely irresponsible to allow assault & killing to take place during the mass rally & counter demonstration. The coup is temporarily a step backward for Thailand’s democracy. But it would provide a foundation for the country to leap forward because of the lessons learned, because of the spreading seeds for better democracy, and because of increased activism started courageously by Sondhi Limthongkul & his PAD members. For these reasons, Thailand is not falling apart but is rebounding from a stronger, sounder & new foundation.

    By the way, you could have stood up to Khun Sondi with your arguments presented in the 9 myths about the coup. My comments or logics above can also be applied against some of your arguments too. I’d like to point by point countering your arguments but it’s too long already. Though you contend that you’re not Thaksin’s supporter, some of your arguments indicate that you’re.

  8. anon says:

    Vichai N notes that Luang Phor Khoon compared Thaksin to Sarit for his War on Drugs.
    This is somewhat misrepresentative. Before Sarit, opium was legal. Sarit criminalized and cracked down on opium. And to this day, Sarit is fondly remembered by some Thais for ridding Thailand of opium.

    Speed (Yaa Maa) has been around long before Thaksin – but it was used by truck drivers and the like. The authorities never really did anything about it. But increased supply from Burma and very cheap prices made addiction rates soar, and the public started realizing that this stuff was seriously bad. So when Thaksin put his foot down and started cracking down hard, practically everybody cheered him.

    Vichai N asks why nobody is investigating Luang Phor Khoon for instigating the war on drugs.
    Can’t do that. Buddhist monks are above criticism from people like you or me.

    Don’t forget, during the 70’s, Phra Phawornawornkhun said that 30,000 left-wing students needed to be killed to properly clense Thai Buddhism.

    And Kittiwutthi Bhikku said it wasn’t a sin to kill a communist – it was in fact the duty of all Buddhists. This was, in the middle of the war against communism. Kittiwutthi’s Chittipawan College is still around and is still very active in training monks.

  9. aiontay says:

    Khun Sam and the Irrawaddy in general do great work. I think the local KIO official wasn’t quite as truthful as he could be. The KIO itself has used forced labor from Kachin villagers. Back in 1996 Kachin villagers in the Northern Shan State were livid because the KIO made them work on a road on Christmas day. They could have understood it if it had been the non-Christian Burmese military that had ordered them to do it, but that the “Christian” KIO made them do it was beyond the pale. I wouldn’t be shocked to find a bit of KIO cooperation in the current project in the Kachin State.

  10. Vichai N. says:

    Thanks Patiwat for the historical analogy.

    While all along I thought Thaksin Shinawatra wanted to emulate/surpass Sarit. The revered monk Luang Pho Koon seemed to think so also when he praised Thaksin Shaniwatra for his extrajudicials:

    “”It’s good you were born to become powerful and help the nation. If you did not exist, yaba [methamphetamines] would never be got rid of for sure . . . . Since the time of Field Marshal Sarit Thanarat, now it’s you who has appeared as someone important to save the nation at the right moment . . . . Don’t bother putting drug traders in jail . . . . The sin from killing a ya ba trader is the same as from killing one mosquito. Nothing to be afraid of”
    (Matichon raiwan, 30 September 2003)

    I wonder if they judicially try a monk for instigating mass murder? That should be a crime, isn’t it? Instigating somebody to commit a crime?

  11. Austin says:

    Wow, that is golden analysis. Worthy of an article. I had never connected the old black and white pictures to that time period. Funny too because I was just staring at them yesterday at Vinmanmek.

  12. Thai in Seattle says:

    To Curios #30 – Please think again about getting the information from Taxi drivers particularly on politics.

    Do you think if there is any correlation at all between logics and education? What level of education most if not all cab drivers have in Thailand? Does their profession enable them to accurately provide the facts on politics & its complex ramification? How reliable are their statements?

  13. Thai in Seattle says:

    To commentator #20 – Curious

    Based on your comments & questions, I got a hunch you are a Thai more than Aussie, American or other Caucasian origin. Your knowledge of the political chaos in Thailand together with your visit to the Sameskybooks.org’s website also led me to believe so.

    I want to make it clear to you & other readers that I do not belong to any particular party. I am an independent, for more rights, greater freedom & fuller democracy. I am strongly against corruption & misconducts but for higher ethical standards & accountability. I am for peace & against violence.

    In your comment, you mentioned violence a few times relating to the coup. You clearly tried to paint the distorted picture. The whole world knew that it was a bloodless coup; not a single bullet was fired & no violence was involved at all. The world also saw pictures of people (Thais & foreigners of young & old of both sexes) taken with soldiers and tanks. And you implied that I lived in the cave for the past 5 yrs!

    Because I’ve been living in the States for more than 2 decades, I have tasted & participated in the world’s model for democracy. Because of the familiarity, I knew from the beginning that Thaksin was a crook, not a noble or honest man who would dedicate himself to serve loyally for the interest of the nation & people.

    The issues that majority of the commentators & I addressed here are centered on Mr. Sondhi Limthongkul’s anti-Thaksin’s role & his public speeches, the coup led by General Sondhi Boonyaratglin, and Thailand’s political events under ex-PM Thaksin’s administration. These 3 key players and their maneuvering acts that have the direct impacts on Thailand and neighboring countries are more captivating & of the cause for concern to me as a native Thai. They are the instigators, the doers, actors. Although in his Dec 5, 2005 statement, King Bhumibol reiterated that he is a human being & admitted that he made mistakes in his younger days, to us Thais, we know his mistake if any did not hurt Thai people & the country . You or anyone who has tried to link him to the coup got to be insane, has hidden agenda against our beloved King & has hostility against Thailand.

    As for the Crown Prince, he is not much different than Prince Charles; a lot of Thais are not proud of his behaviors. Unlike those fair & open-minded people, people with hidden agenda or ill will would distort the facts & tend to spread falsehoods to hurt others. The Crown Prince or royal family members may have invested in projects, programs, assets to earn income similar to the royal family of England or other nations. I don’t think there is anything wrong with that.

    Again, it is not the royal family but Thaksin who brought the country’s democracy down into the valley, who OKd the war-on-drug campaign that caused innocent lives, who OKd the kidnapping & killing of thousands of innocent civilians, who refused to pay even 1 Satang (100 Satangs equal 1 Baht) tax on capital gain tax for the sale of his $1.8 billion assets, who pushed hard for mega projects with questionable bidding process & non-specific details, who arbitrarily made deals with foreign govt in exchange for personal (his & his cabinet members) gains & business interests, who allowed his family members as well as cabinet members and other high ranking govt officials to enrich themselves (through insider-trading on privatization of national infrastructure & others) so much & so fast at the expenses of the people & nation. It was Thaksin & his cronies who silent the press, stymied freedom of expression/speech & instilled fear into govt workers not to talk about the politics or say anything bad against him. (My sister-in-law is in the management level for a department in the govt agency.) EVEN THAKSIN’S MAID & DRIVER OWNED HIS COMPANY’S STOCKS WORTH HUNDREDS MILLION OF BAHTS! Based on the requirement by Council for Democratic Reform, all Thaksin’s former cabinet members & their immediate family members must disclose their assets. It was very astonishing that many have assets valued more than double from the time before & at the end of their official duties. The assets ranged from hundreds of million to billions of Bahts. Their spouses or unmarried but live-in partner also have millions & hundred million Bahts. Even their children, many are still in grade schools, have millions & hundreds of million Bahts. Where did the money come from especially for the kids?

    On Sondhi’s lese majesty charges against Thaksin, the ex-PM’s deeds & words appear to be offensive against HM in the view of great number of people which include scholars. If Mr. Sondhi Limthongkul committed the lese majesty offense, why did Thaksin’s govt not directly file the charge against him? Why did the govt has to borrow the clowns’ names to file the charge against Sondhi? My response to your question about the law is that most laws are written with good intention to serve the majority of people, and for peace and order of the society and nation. But Thai police and authorities tend to abuse the laws & misuse them to hurt others & for personal gain. The problems lie on the enforcement more than the laws.

    As for the currently appointed PM and parliamentary law-makers, frankly they are better than those elected. These are respectable citizens, seasoned professionals with diverse experience and broad backgrounds. Together with their rather clean records (on corruption), they are more qualified than those crooked politicians without backbones elected in the last 2 elections. Thaksin often copied terms used in the US during his 5 yr as the PM. These terms or words include naming Thailand’s 1st official plane for PM as Air-force 1, changing the honorable governor title of provinces to CEO, calling his TRT party’s meeting room as War room, publicizing his travels to provinces as Road show & Reality show, etc. Despite being good at this & despite his PhD, he did not know nor practice the word “ACCOUNTIBILTY.” With his arrogant self, he does not say “I am sorry; I made the mistake.” This is one of his major mistakes.

    I hope the info & answers provided here will be enough to satisfy your curiosity. If there’s anything else I can help to enlighten you, please let me know.

  14. nganadeeleg says:

    I agree with Pundit that the McCargo piece is excellent.
    However, as abhorent as coups are, why not accept this bloodless coup as circuit breaker in a difficult situation.
    Obviously, it would have been better if Thaksin had resigned for the good of the country, but an act of good faith like that appears contrary to his nature.

    All these crocodile tears for democracy only play into the hands of Thaksin and his cronies.

    Only time will tell whether the junta will put in place the fundamentals to provide for a better ‘democracy’ in the future, than the style of ‘democracy’ that Thaksin offered.

    Another year of constitutional wrangling seems better than letting Thaksin continue to get away it, when, like McCargo says, he should have been gone in 2001.
    At least now there is some (slight) hope that things could get better.

  15. anarchist says:

    I live in Laos and have for eight years now and I think this isn’t as positive as it is being trumped up here.

    Here is a review of the book as I see it in its broad contemporary, bilingual context…

    The book, if it takes off is going to become the “official alternative” to the nationalist histories and what not of Lao. It is a conservative account that rivals Thailand’s royalist histories for elite hagiography and offers no insight into how the people of Lao might come to perceive histogriography itself and hence their “histories” on their own terms. It gives no sense of Lao life as the people would recognise it and so will see another generation come to accept/believe that history is about non-normal people (elite people)…a pity really, certainly not a big step towards any kind of emancipation that the preface hints at…

  16. Thorn says:

    Don’t forget, it’s 2006 Thai, not 1957 Thai…

    Context change:

    King’s nearly 80 years old, not 30 years old. He’s at the highest point of his reign? not the beginning!

    Thai people experienced through many coup, and uprising.

    Socio-economics condition changes vaguely….

    Sarit had become PM himself and became probably the most powerful man in the country, What is it about Sonthi then? Do you think he himself acutally organied the coup? Do you think he’s so powerful right now?

    It’d be just the smaill similarity, comparing Sarit and Sonthi…..if you look at these differents

    Well, one similar thing here can be, “King” play some “__” role, and quite similar role…

  17. anon says:

    Bangkok Pundit, I agree: the promise of a referendum for the 2007/2008/? Constitution is a positive sign. To my knowledge, it will be the first time that a Thai constitution will be ratified via popular referendum.

    However, the referendum does not ensure public participation in the constitutional process. Most of the drafters of the 1997 Constitution were elected via popular vote. The People’s Constitution was truly a product of the people.

    The 2007/2008/? Constitution will be a product of the junta. The junta is appointing 2000 cronies, who will select 200 among themselves as drafter candidates. Of those 200, the junta would select 100 loyalists. Those junta-selected 100 would select 25 of their members as drafters. The junta would directly select another 10 drafters. The inclusion of so many steps, all controlled directly by the junta (it’s like one of those vodka commercials where they brag about quintuple distillation), is clearly a mechanism for the junta to seek absolute control of the resulting constitution.

    That’s not democracy.

  18. nganadeeleg says:

    ‘Sarit Thanarat = Sonthi/Prem/Surayud’

    Did he have a split personalty?

  19. Johpa says:

    I can certainly see the similarities that Khun Patiwat sees between the current situation and the situation in1957, but I could also make a list of differences such as Phibulsongkram being a military dictator who was anti-Chinese and Thaksin being a business tycoon and very much a Sino-Thai.

    It is true that Phibulsongkram may be portrayed as having ruled at the expense of the palace. But the best we can argue is that perhaps Thaksin was beginning to, or trying to lean in that direction. I certainly give this view, as articulated in the Handly interview, credence.

    There is, in my mind, a significant difference between Phao Sriyanon’s death squads, which assassinated political rivals, and Thaksin’s War on Drugs, which assassinated low level drug dealers and local low-level rivalries. In-between, we have the death squads in the 1970s that assassinated local rural farm labor leaders up north and highlighted in the book Political Conflict in Thailand by Morrell and Chaianan.

    And there are the constants that, as constants, show little, such as support of US policy, or I could even argue the constant of making lese majeste charges for purely political purposes. Clearly any successful coup leadership group will want to use, and must use, the symbol of the palace for legitimacy.

    I confess I only know Sarit through books, yet I just don’t see much in similarity when it comes to personality between Sarit and the Sonthi/Prem/Surayud triumvirate. I just don’t see Prem and his clique as militarists in the vein of Sarit. I see the recent coup as being strictly anti-Thaksin, and not a coup for the military, less one individual, to attempt to take power in perpetuity. I should note that I cannot speak for His Majesty’s thoughts regarding his support for Sarit and now his support for this coup. I have some thoughts on the matter, but these are based upon the only conversation I have had with an individual who has known the Royal Family for decades, and those conversations are still confidential.

    Thailand of today is not the Thailand of 1957 which is the number one reason I feel that the comparison of the current coup leaders to Sarit to be, at minimum, a bit premature. Certainly Thailand is still controlled by a small elite, but the larger society has changed drastically. Not only is there a much larger and thriving middle class than in 1957, but the lives of many of the rural folk have been brought closer into the mainstream, the result of quantum improvements in universal education and in infrastructure.

    I may be wrong, but I just think it is still too early to compare the current situation with that of 1957, although the similarities shown by Patiwat should keep us all on guard and prevent us from becoming too complacent in our armchairs. I feel it is best to wait and see. If after a year we still have no elections and no return to the familiar, and somewhat deplorable, status quo (sans Thaksin and sans Sondhi as a PM) then I will gladly concede my point. And I apologize for the overstated view that the opposing viewpoint is na├пve as Khun Rebel man’s (Patiwat) thoughts are worthy of appreciation.

  20. patiwat says:

    During a talk in NY, Handley mentioned to the audience that unauthorized samizdat xeroxed versions of his book were available around Tha Phrachan (Thammasat University) for a few hundred baht. So he knows that this stuff is going on, and he doesn’t discourage it. Besides, the book is already into its 3rd printing in 3 months.