“I’m sure you read about how outraged some of the family’s of victims of the May 19 crackdown were last week when the current PT-led government sought a waiver from further legal action from people who accept compensation.”
One that is clearly written in an attempt to admonish PT for continuing to wield LM as a method of maintaining the status quo.”
And then state
“What is of more interest, to me anyway, is how your analyses of events in Thailand have become increasingly partisan. These days they seem to be more concerned with painting PT in a favourable light.”
Which is it?
Am I admonishing PT or painting PT in a favourable light?
I don’t mind being criticised but can I please request it is consistent from one paragraph to the next?
I am deeply concerned that we’re heading back to the “Thaksin and all his works are evil” bullshit that the PAD/ASTV are so fond of.
I’ve nerve liked Thaksin. Whether it was suing Suchinda for 430 million baht, disappearing Somchai, or the massacre at Tak Bai … I just don’t like the guy at all. I realize that a part of his cynical operation brought about 30 baht medicine for the Thai people and that they are very appreciative. I still don’t like him.
Already Manager is quoting lines from “progressives” and “leftists” who have shifted against the Reds and gone back to the “Thaksin is evil” meme that only those of equal “evil” will ever dare counter.
I realize the reactionaries are trying to capitalize on the split between democrats and Thaksin supporters, but I see no reason to stop being a democrat on that account.
It’s not all that unlike the situation in the USA where you have two parties without a dime’s worth of difference between them trying their damnedest to convince people there is difference between them.
It’s all a wretched waste of time. The real work of putting things right requires casting aside both Thaksin and the the more traditional royalist elite.
Thaksin killed nearly as many at Tak Bai as Abhisit did at Kok Wua and Ratchaprasong. He killed many, many more in his fake war on drugs. Much as Obama has killed many, many more in his fake war on terror than whomever it was who did the job on 9/11.
You cannot have change without changing. Thaksin … Abhisit … not a baht’s worth of difference.
And the Royal Thai Army is the de facto beneficiary of all of this just as the Pentagon is in the USA.
After the election last July there was political capital enough to have run the bastard military out of power. Thaksin pissed it all away. To hell with him and the Pua Thai. Too much blood sweat and tears have been wasted upon them already.
The task ahead is not easy but it will remain impossible as long as people delude themselves with visions of Thaksin … or Obama … being a part of the solution.
Unfortunately, your pessimistic view seems to be the most realistic option. Even if you look at Nitirat, the same disturbing “go-it-alone” approach: instead of forming an alliance, they are paranoid not to be associated with anyone (not only with Thaksin/ the red shirts). The result of this struggle then was a given.
BTW, in the light of the Ombudsman disturbing assessment than “no law could overrule the Constitutional Court”, I find it harder and harder to tolerate this nonchalent approach towards the Law. I am not even talking about judicialization of politics- in those cases it is clear that the law is bend to get the political result needed by those in the shadows. More annoying is the tendency to drag every decision by any side to the Courts, but even that is a mere consequence of the overall legitimacy crisis and the conservative resistance to representative democracy (“Parliamentary Dictatorship”). What I am referring to is the use of legal argumentation in a way that insults even a Law school undergraduate….
At the time of my visit and interview I was given “unique” access at Laksi. I’m not sure if others have sought to speak to the prisoners at Laksi but they can approach Karom in the same way I did should they wish. If you believe that this is part of some kind of strange conspiracy or agenda I’d say you’ve got an over-active imagination.
Sorry but Kraisak Choonavan is not a credible impartial source. As I said before just quoting a rumour you heard at the FCCT is not evidence.
You’ve been misinformed – accepting the compensation for May 2010 hasn’t voided the victims right for other forms of legal redress. It has included a waiver, I believe, that they can’t make further compensation claims from the government. Which would be usual in most circumstances.
Your criticism of Panlop is spot on – people like him need to properly investigated and held to account. As does Abhisit, Thaksin, Prayuth, Prem, Suthep, the USA’s involvement in supporting Thai Military etc etc etc.
I said special not secret. Quite different. I only asked as you said your access was unique, which it appears it was not.
Kraisak Choonavan spoke at a panel at the FCCT shortly after the Tak Bai massacre and made clear and explicit allegations about Thaksin’s involvement. These were then reported in the press.
You may also want to refer to Panlop Pinmanee’s involvement in Tak Bai, Krue Sai and I think the Rohinga. He’s one of those nasty, shadowy military men, ran anti-communist death squads and moved over to support Thaksin after the coup.
On the issue of human rights you’ll note that Somchai Neelapaihit’s wife Achana has always found it very strange how Thaksin had explicit knowledge about her husband’s disappearance and murder (which Thaksin conveyed to her directly). Why and how would a PM know such things was extremely disturbing. She has made these comments public ally a number of times, including at the event to mark the 5th anniversary of her husband’s murder at an event held in conjunction with the International Commision of Jurists.
One of the great things the ICJ managed to bring off with victims of political violence in the south was to ensure their right to take legal action against the government wasn’t voided by accepting compensation. I’m sure you read about how outraged some of the family’s of victims of the May 19 crackdown were last week when the current PT-led government sought a waiver from further legal action from people who accept compensation.
Your comments on the clauses the compensation payments are subject are spot on.
I should also add, on another point, an amnesty is only recognised by domestic Thai law. It won’t be recognised internationally or by, for example, the ICC. In fact an amnesty actually strengthens the hand for ICC involvement as it shows that Thailand is unable to investigate itself.
I believe ‘Cartoon Checks’ is apt. Yes they are NOT ‘Reconciliation Checks’ because even those receiving the checks were openly displaying embarrassment, hesitancy, resentment (at being bribed/coerced) and later on guilt then anger.
‘Cartoon Checks’ is apt. The Yingluck regime had NOT given any serious consideration to the victims . . . highlighting the ‘big million amounts’ to be dispensed (like a lottery win as SteveCM commented), the ‘generosity’ of Thaksin/Yingluck/PeauThai (hey people, the Thai taxpayers have NOT been consulted but their tax money dispensed in a b/s manner) and the implied threat shut-up-or-no-check.
Cartoon Checks is aprt. Where are very important from-the-heart speeches from Yingluck and her minister-designate that should underscore their mourning for the deaths, the blood shed, bones crushed and lives shattered by the May2010 tragedy? The moment for sober reflection and mourning on the occasion to compensate the victims and their families was missing . . . and its place, Yingluck chose to be absent and ask her minor minister to dispense the repugnant utterly crass Cartoon Checks.
Red Shirts are you going to continue to take this abuse, this insult and the continuing charade/deception of Thaksin and Yingluck?
But Spooner could explain this ‘fairly complex and nuanced’ Thaksin-Red-Shirts relationship, I am sure.
While Gaga’s visit to Thailand met with less controversy than in other Southeast Asian nations, there were a few very small protests. Pictures circulating around facebook show groups of two or three holding signs with messages like “р╕Бр╕▓р╕Бр╣Йр╕▓р╣Ар╕Ыр╣Зр╕Щр╕Чр╕╣р╕Хр╣Бр╕лр╣Ир╕Зр╕Лр╕▓р╕Хр╕▓р╕Щ” (Gaga is the ambassador of Satan). I am not at all clear, however, on the relationship between Satan and the Illuminati.
My “secret”connections? I asked Karom Ponpornklang, the renowned Red Shirt lawyer who represents Surachai, Somyot etc. Why dont you approach him and ask? Laksi prison is not the kind of off-limits secret army base that Abhisit sent the Red Shirts to in May 2010. To my knowledge anyone can visit.
Thaksin certainly has a responsibilty for Tak Bai but the military are the continuous factor from Sarit to May 2010, not Thaksin. For Sunai to be eulogising about them is a disgrace. It is the first I have read a claim he directly ordered the army to kill people there. Can you publish the evidence? Rumours you heard at the FCCT dont count.
More partisan? Damn. I obviously wasnt trying hard enough before. 😉
Jim, you raise some fair points, but I think you miss the point that PT as with every other political party in Thailand are concerned with increasing their own power and the best way of doing that is through the preservation of the status quo. Article 112, the Computer Crimes Act etc are all powerful weapons that they all want to have on hand. It’s a fallacy to imagine that even if PT reformed 112 they would usher in a new, pro-democratic culture in Thailand.
In terms of a united front? It’s hard to see anything will change in Thailand without a progressive, far-reaching counter-corruption campaign. Democracy cannot function without rule of law. Thailand’s democracy will not develop much until rich powerful people start getting lengthy prison sentences.
A successful campaign would win the support of the vast majority of Thai all of whom have ot deal with corruption and graft from police, school teachers, civil servants, etc etc. Unfortunatley any government that launched such a campaign would probably be ousted by the army. But in reality no political party in Thailand will do anything about corruption because they all benefit from it.
I think we need to stand aside a moment and detached from whatever baggage we have carried over from Thaksin’s time. Clearly, PTP are in a most vulnerable position as this piece indicates. Most of the underground and more politicised red shirts, including Aj.Surachai, do not blame PTP, and realise the dilemma they are in. The criticisms against HRW and para-statal NGOs in the last six years are fully justified. And of course we would all like to see justice and the military murderers get their comeuppance in court, but it aint that easy. We need to realise the limitations in which PTP (or any “democratically” elected party) are able to work, sometimes it is better to try and win tactically at multiple levels and then, when the opposition is least expecting it, deliver the coup de gr├вce (and an opening for the organised masses and its intellectual leadership to strike at the heart). All this talk of blaming is tedious…Instead, I’d rather like to see a discussion on how to present a united front against such extraordinary odds!
One that is clearly written in an attempt to admonish PT for continuing to wield LM as a method of maintaining the status quo.
It’s interesting the way in which you attack Sunai, directly commenting on Tak Bai but fail to mention that the incident took place during Thaksin’s administration (in fact Thaksin was alleged to have been directly involved in giving orders to the mitilary on the ground that day).
On you Facebook page you recently posted this: “The debate is now turning again. “Thaksin is evil, if you don’t agree with this 100% you too are evil.” Yawn.” But this is exactly that tactic you employ against other people, in fact anyone who comments on Thailand without mentioning the May 19 crackdown or for failing to call Abhisit a “butcher”.
You wrote above: “I won’t be getting into some silly pissing contest about how much I am more committed to challenging LM than the next person.” This is funny. You’ve spent most of the past couple of years doing exactly that.
What is of more interest, to me anyway, is how your analyses of events in Thailand have become increasingly partisan. These days they seem to be more concerned with painting PT in a favourable light than in supporting the red shirts, which is your self-proclaimed position.
Are yous serving another agenda these days? Did you have any special connections which you worked to get your “unique” access to the political prison which as Giles pointed out isn’t taking people on LM charges and is as such as spurious inclusion in your piece?
(c49): “Thursday the huge crass cartoon-size reconciliation checks begun.”
They’re actually compensation cheques – but I, too, found the photo-op presentation of a placard-sized cheque really incongruous. What has become the norm for donor-self-promoting charity events as well as lottery/pools scheme marketing exercises seems (to me) wholly inappropriate to paying out compensation for death, injury etc. Compounding the woeful impression of “you’re so lucky to be getting this”, one picture I saw actually included a placard-sized lottery ticket presented with the cheque….. http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/294923/lawsuit-furore-mars-compo-ceremony
Again, they’re compensation cheques….. However, the “but shut up” assertion deserves attention. There has been a lot of critical comment about a clause included in the compensation acceptance agreement preventing the recipient from pursuing a lawsuit. As I understand it, this clause relates only to not proceeding with a lawsuit for (further) government compensation – i.e. it doesn’t block a lawsuit at least against individuals (e.g. the then office-holders) to establish responsibility for wrongful death, injury etc. Nor does it interfere with – let alone block – ongoing calls for “…a full inquiry-investigation, judicial/parliamentary scrutiny, the works so that justice for the victims will be served, and the malevolent elements identified and prosecuted.”
“The connection between these workaday issues and ‘the fight for democracy’ seems somehow lost on them .”
Regardless of your own regard for “the Lady” , which by the way is a term no one really uses to refer her in Burma except in the circle the
“West” gets to see and talk to and is hardly representative of 60 million mostly illiterates after intentional de-education- , seasoned politicians would easily see like that red flag of NLD, that she has been very amateurish with total lack of either direction or true strategy or, worse, conviction.
While a dogmatic conviction has been the undoing of many a true revolutionaries, it is the life of them. As Roland Watson once noted, without principles, NLD is nothing.
Currently NLD strategy seems to be placating the military on any and all issues and help them realise their ill-conceived plans for commercialization of Burma with the help of dubious advisors of various origin with total disregard for who gets hurt on the way.
It seem to have lost on all as well that the desperate wish to get integrated into the “Global trade” is ironic as it is perhaps the very time not get oneself associated with that evil outfit at all.
Current global financial situation is the real life description of “carnage to the left, carnage to the right, and into the valley of death, now rides in Burma gallantly.”
Important as this financial situation and long term development issues, the sheer lack of clear stand on Kachin problem is also indicative of either weakness, lack of conviction or, at worst, agreement with the killing, torturing military as the action of this hordes of usual standard military thuggery is amply documented and is more than adequate to put the whole army to to criminal court if there is real justice and protectors of justice in the world. Fortunate for them there isn’t.
It is now more than likely that people will take their own action, not out of malice with intent for destruction but of desperation and starvation.
Shame as it could have been done in orderly and well contained manner.
Thanks very much for paying attention to a less “heavy” topic such as Lady Gaga. She really is a bizarre case of boundary-crossing popular culture. I wonder where we can locate her in Southeast Asian youth culture. Do her performances in SEAn countries, and the varied reactions of adversaries, mean anything, and if so what? Superficial middle-class modernity, consumerism, liberalism?
I have raised the issue you describe several times – why aren’t the “progressives” and “liberals” seeking to a) leverage power b) become active in a genuine political process c) organise themselves effectively rather than as a random series of individual acts.
You’re absolutely 100% right that the present moment presents an opportunity to “move on” but that far too many are being quickly reduced back into the “red” v “yellow” dichotomy. Nitirat offered some hope regarding LM but where are similar voices on wider issues such a civilian control of the army, social justice, democratisation etc etc?
In my view this leaves the Red Shirts as still the only act in town. They are not “Thaksin”, they are not neo-fascist PAD, they are not elite PR like the Dems and they are pretty open and accessible.
They choose to be aligned with Thaksin and the middle class liberals, leftists and others who claim to be progressives who look down on them will be alienated from the Red Shirts long before the Red Shirts are alienated from Thaksin.
People are ignorant of this person who is a victim of manipulation at best and mind control at worst. Regrettably people are gullible and about corporate media endorsement when alternative media knows full well the modus operandi for celebrity.
bunny: “His [Thaksin’s] return and the re-invention of power balance can help the ammarts.”
There is probably lurking here a principle regarding the perpetuation and renewal of the Thai state in which seeming opposites get incorporated into the system eventually allowing the system to progress and move on which Burma never seemed able to do at least until now (like the immune system of the mammalian body or similar mechanisms supporting organic growth in long-lived trees (like the Bodhi tree)). Whether it is the socialist monk whose photo now graces the desks of government officials or the radical ideas of gun-toting jungle dwelling revolutionary Jit Phumisak that are now taught in courses with his image and life being enshrined in the minds of others, or coup-leading generals who ultimately failed, were exiled and finally returned to their home and finally enshrined in a gigantic funeral urn in the family compound where they eaked out their last corporeal days, Thai history seems to repeat the idea of “let bygones be bygones” or “live and let live” or “lets get on with the show” , can even see the red-shirts getting official approval, endorsement and eventual incorporation into the system 🙂
“Wasana, Royal Thai Army Gossip columnist for the Royal Thai Army Times (aka the Bangkok Post) had an article admitting elements of the army were responsible for the attack on the army at Dok Wua, which then was used as the excuse for the massacre that unfolded. That’s a message from the Royal Thai Army command. Purge Time in the Royal Thai Army?”
Granted that Wassana clearly enjoys privileged access to higher echelons within the RTA, but surely she would have to be a recognised mouthpiece for the RTA to justify that use of the term “admitting”? I’m not aware of an article of hers making the assertion, but it was referenced in a review of her new book as follows:
“She offers an interesting insight into the shooting of soldiers at Kok Wua intersection on Ratchadamnoen Avenue in April last year by mysterious men dressed in black and armed with heavy weapons. The ambush, she says, was the result of a personal vendetta by an unspecified force of militants against Burapha Payak.
A senior army officer and several other promising members of this faction were killed in the incident and this so outraged their colleagues, Wassana says, that it led to the use of live ammunition, a few weeks later, when troops were sent in to disperse the red-shirt encampment in central Bangkok.”
Plainly, the review is only a second-hand summary of the full original Thai-language book reference. If anyone has access to that original and can use it to show something that clearly rates as “admitting” then I’m sure many of us would be very interested to see it. Equally, while the speculation has been around for some time, I also readily grant that someone in Wassana’s position even proposing it lends major weight to its credibility.
Finally, in terms of “Purge Time”….. hasn’t Prayuth been actively doing that ever since he replaced Anupong – at least by further sidelining those he deems “not one of us”?
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Human rights and lese majeste
c25
“I’m sure you read about how outraged some of the family’s of victims of the May 19 crackdown were last week when the current PT-led government sought a waiver from further legal action from people who accept compensation.”
See second half of my comment at http://www.newmandala.org/2012/05/22/why-the-compromise-game/#comment-1075780
Human rights and lese majeste
Greg
Also slightly confused.
You state, at the opening of your first comment
“A very interesting piece, Andrew.
One that is clearly written in an attempt to admonish PT for continuing to wield LM as a method of maintaining the status quo.”
And then state
“What is of more interest, to me anyway, is how your analyses of events in Thailand have become increasingly partisan. These days they seem to be more concerned with painting PT in a favourable light.”
Which is it?
Am I admonishing PT or painting PT in a favourable light?
I don’t mind being criticised but can I please request it is consistent from one paragraph to the next?
Thanks.
Human rights and lese majeste
I’ve nerve liked Thaksin. Whether it was suing Suchinda for 430 million baht, disappearing Somchai, or the massacre at Tak Bai … I just don’t like the guy at all. I realize that a part of his cynical operation brought about 30 baht medicine for the Thai people and that they are very appreciative. I still don’t like him.
I realize the reactionaries are trying to capitalize on the split between democrats and Thaksin supporters, but I see no reason to stop being a democrat on that account.
It’s not all that unlike the situation in the USA where you have two parties without a dime’s worth of difference between them trying their damnedest to convince people there is difference between them.
It’s all a wretched waste of time. The real work of putting things right requires casting aside both Thaksin and the the more traditional royalist elite.
Thaksin killed nearly as many at Tak Bai as Abhisit did at Kok Wua and Ratchaprasong. He killed many, many more in his fake war on drugs. Much as Obama has killed many, many more in his fake war on terror than whomever it was who did the job on 9/11.
You cannot have change without changing. Thaksin … Abhisit … not a baht’s worth of difference.
And the Royal Thai Army is the de facto beneficiary of all of this just as the Pentagon is in the USA.
After the election last July there was political capital enough to have run the bastard military out of power. Thaksin pissed it all away. To hell with him and the Pua Thai. Too much blood sweat and tears have been wasted upon them already.
The task ahead is not easy but it will remain impossible as long as people delude themselves with visions of Thaksin … or Obama … being a part of the solution.
Why the compromise game?
@Andrew Spooner
#69
Unfortunately, your pessimistic view seems to be the most realistic option. Even if you look at Nitirat, the same disturbing “go-it-alone” approach: instead of forming an alliance, they are paranoid not to be associated with anyone (not only with Thaksin/ the red shirts). The result of this struggle then was a given.
BTW, in the light of the Ombudsman disturbing assessment than “no law could overrule the Constitutional Court”, I find it harder and harder to tolerate this nonchalent approach towards the Law. I am not even talking about judicialization of politics- in those cases it is clear that the law is bend to get the political result needed by those in the shadows. More annoying is the tendency to drag every decision by any side to the Courts, but even that is a mere consequence of the overall legitimacy crisis and the conservative resistance to representative democracy (“Parliamentary Dictatorship”). What I am referring to is the use of legal argumentation in a way that insults even a Law school undergraduate….
Human rights and lese majeste
Greg
At the time of my visit and interview I was given “unique” access at Laksi. I’m not sure if others have sought to speak to the prisoners at Laksi but they can approach Karom in the same way I did should they wish. If you believe that this is part of some kind of strange conspiracy or agenda I’d say you’ve got an over-active imagination.
Sorry but Kraisak Choonavan is not a credible impartial source. As I said before just quoting a rumour you heard at the FCCT is not evidence.
You’ve been misinformed – accepting the compensation for May 2010 hasn’t voided the victims right for other forms of legal redress. It has included a waiver, I believe, that they can’t make further compensation claims from the government. Which would be usual in most circumstances.
Your criticism of Panlop is spot on – people like him need to properly investigated and held to account. As does Abhisit, Thaksin, Prayuth, Prem, Suthep, the USA’s involvement in supporting Thai Military etc etc etc.
Human rights and lese majeste
I said special not secret. Quite different. I only asked as you said your access was unique, which it appears it was not.
Kraisak Choonavan spoke at a panel at the FCCT shortly after the Tak Bai massacre and made clear and explicit allegations about Thaksin’s involvement. These were then reported in the press.
You may also want to refer to Panlop Pinmanee’s involvement in Tak Bai, Krue Sai and I think the Rohinga. He’s one of those nasty, shadowy military men, ran anti-communist death squads and moved over to support Thaksin after the coup.
On the issue of human rights you’ll note that Somchai Neelapaihit’s wife Achana has always found it very strange how Thaksin had explicit knowledge about her husband’s disappearance and murder (which Thaksin conveyed to her directly). Why and how would a PM know such things was extremely disturbing. She has made these comments public ally a number of times, including at the event to mark the 5th anniversary of her husband’s murder at an event held in conjunction with the International Commision of Jurists.
One of the great things the ICJ managed to bring off with victims of political violence in the south was to ensure their right to take legal action against the government wasn’t voided by accepting compensation. I’m sure you read about how outraged some of the family’s of victims of the May 19 crackdown were last week when the current PT-led government sought a waiver from further legal action from people who accept compensation.
Why the compromise game?
SteveCM
Your comments on the clauses the compensation payments are subject are spot on.
I should also add, on another point, an amnesty is only recognised by domestic Thai law. It won’t be recognised internationally or by, for example, the ICC. In fact an amnesty actually strengthens the hand for ICC involvement as it shows that Thailand is unable to investigate itself.
Why the compromise game?
I believe ‘Cartoon Checks’ is apt. Yes they are NOT ‘Reconciliation Checks’ because even those receiving the checks were openly displaying embarrassment, hesitancy, resentment (at being bribed/coerced) and later on guilt then anger.
‘Cartoon Checks’ is apt. The Yingluck regime had NOT given any serious consideration to the victims . . . highlighting the ‘big million amounts’ to be dispensed (like a lottery win as SteveCM commented), the ‘generosity’ of Thaksin/Yingluck/PeauThai (hey people, the Thai taxpayers have NOT been consulted but their tax money dispensed in a b/s manner) and the implied threat shut-up-or-no-check.
Cartoon Checks is aprt. Where are very important from-the-heart speeches from Yingluck and her minister-designate that should underscore their mourning for the deaths, the blood shed, bones crushed and lives shattered by the May2010 tragedy? The moment for sober reflection and mourning on the occasion to compensate the victims and their families was missing . . . and its place, Yingluck chose to be absent and ask her minor minister to dispense the repugnant utterly crass Cartoon Checks.
Red Shirts are you going to continue to take this abuse, this insult and the continuing charade/deception of Thaksin and Yingluck?
But Spooner could explain this ‘fairly complex and nuanced’ Thaksin-Red-Shirts relationship, I am sure.
Lady Gaga in Bangkok
While Gaga’s visit to Thailand met with less controversy than in other Southeast Asian nations, there were a few very small protests. Pictures circulating around facebook show groups of two or three holding signs with messages like “р╕Бр╕▓р╕Бр╣Йр╕▓р╣Ар╕Ыр╣Зр╕Щр╕Чр╕╣р╕Хр╣Бр╕лр╣Ир╕Зр╕Лр╕▓р╕Хр╕▓р╕Щ” (Gaga is the ambassador of Satan). I am not at all clear, however, on the relationship between Satan and the Illuminati.
Human rights and lese majeste
Greg
My “secret”connections? I asked Karom Ponpornklang, the renowned Red Shirt lawyer who represents Surachai, Somyot etc. Why dont you approach him and ask? Laksi prison is not the kind of off-limits secret army base that Abhisit sent the Red Shirts to in May 2010. To my knowledge anyone can visit.
Thaksin certainly has a responsibilty for Tak Bai but the military are the continuous factor from Sarit to May 2010, not Thaksin. For Sunai to be eulogising about them is a disgrace. It is the first I have read a claim he directly ordered the army to kill people there. Can you publish the evidence? Rumours you heard at the FCCT dont count.
More partisan? Damn. I obviously wasnt trying hard enough before. 😉
Human rights and lese majeste
Jim, you raise some fair points, but I think you miss the point that PT as with every other political party in Thailand are concerned with increasing their own power and the best way of doing that is through the preservation of the status quo. Article 112, the Computer Crimes Act etc are all powerful weapons that they all want to have on hand. It’s a fallacy to imagine that even if PT reformed 112 they would usher in a new, pro-democratic culture in Thailand.
In terms of a united front? It’s hard to see anything will change in Thailand without a progressive, far-reaching counter-corruption campaign. Democracy cannot function without rule of law. Thailand’s democracy will not develop much until rich powerful people start getting lengthy prison sentences.
A successful campaign would win the support of the vast majority of Thai all of whom have ot deal with corruption and graft from police, school teachers, civil servants, etc etc. Unfortunatley any government that launched such a campaign would probably be ousted by the army. But in reality no political party in Thailand will do anything about corruption because they all benefit from it.
Human rights and lese majeste
I think we need to stand aside a moment and detached from whatever baggage we have carried over from Thaksin’s time. Clearly, PTP are in a most vulnerable position as this piece indicates. Most of the underground and more politicised red shirts, including Aj.Surachai, do not blame PTP, and realise the dilemma they are in. The criticisms against HRW and para-statal NGOs in the last six years are fully justified. And of course we would all like to see justice and the military murderers get their comeuppance in court, but it aint that easy. We need to realise the limitations in which PTP (or any “democratically” elected party) are able to work, sometimes it is better to try and win tactically at multiple levels and then, when the opposition is least expecting it, deliver the coup de gr├вce (and an opening for the organised masses and its intellectual leadership to strike at the heart). All this talk of blaming is tedious…Instead, I’d rather like to see a discussion on how to present a united front against such extraordinary odds!
Human rights and lese majeste
A very interesting piece, Andrew.
One that is clearly written in an attempt to admonish PT for continuing to wield LM as a method of maintaining the status quo.
It’s interesting the way in which you attack Sunai, directly commenting on Tak Bai but fail to mention that the incident took place during Thaksin’s administration (in fact Thaksin was alleged to have been directly involved in giving orders to the mitilary on the ground that day).
On you Facebook page you recently posted this: “The debate is now turning again. “Thaksin is evil, if you don’t agree with this 100% you too are evil.” Yawn.” But this is exactly that tactic you employ against other people, in fact anyone who comments on Thailand without mentioning the May 19 crackdown or for failing to call Abhisit a “butcher”.
You wrote above: “I won’t be getting into some silly pissing contest about how much I am more committed to challenging LM than the next person.” This is funny. You’ve spent most of the past couple of years doing exactly that.
What is of more interest, to me anyway, is how your analyses of events in Thailand have become increasingly partisan. These days they seem to be more concerned with painting PT in a favourable light than in supporting the red shirts, which is your self-proclaimed position.
Are yous serving another agenda these days? Did you have any special connections which you worked to get your “unique” access to the political prison which as Giles pointed out isn’t taking people on LM charges and is as such as spurious inclusion in your piece?
Why the compromise game?
(c49): “Thursday the huge crass cartoon-size reconciliation checks begun.”
They’re actually compensation cheques – but I, too, found the photo-op presentation of a placard-sized cheque really incongruous. What has become the norm for donor-self-promoting charity events as well as lottery/pools scheme marketing exercises seems (to me) wholly inappropriate to paying out compensation for death, injury etc. Compounding the woeful impression of “you’re so lucky to be getting this”, one picture I saw actually included a placard-sized lottery ticket presented with the cheque….. http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/294923/lawsuit-furore-mars-compo-ceremony
(c57): “…the ongoing ‘reconciliation cheques (but shut up)’ process…”
Again, they’re compensation cheques….. However, the “but shut up” assertion deserves attention. There has been a lot of critical comment about a clause included in the compensation acceptance agreement preventing the recipient from pursuing a lawsuit. As I understand it, this clause relates only to not proceeding with a lawsuit for (further) government compensation – i.e. it doesn’t block a lawsuit at least against individuals (e.g. the then office-holders) to establish responsibility for wrongful death, injury etc. Nor does it interfere with – let alone block – ongoing calls for “…a full inquiry-investigation, judicial/parliamentary scrutiny, the works so that justice for the victims will be served, and the malevolent elements identified and prosecuted.”
Does anyone actually know different?
Counting on the National League for Democracy
“The connection between these workaday issues and ‘the fight for democracy’ seems somehow lost on them .”
Regardless of your own regard for “the Lady” , which by the way is a term no one really uses to refer her in Burma except in the circle the
“West” gets to see and talk to and is hardly representative of 60 million mostly illiterates after intentional de-education- , seasoned politicians would easily see like that red flag of NLD, that she has been very amateurish with total lack of either direction or true strategy or, worse, conviction.
While a dogmatic conviction has been the undoing of many a true revolutionaries, it is the life of them. As Roland Watson once noted, without principles, NLD is nothing.
Currently NLD strategy seems to be placating the military on any and all issues and help them realise their ill-conceived plans for commercialization of Burma with the help of dubious advisors of various origin with total disregard for who gets hurt on the way.
It seem to have lost on all as well that the desperate wish to get integrated into the “Global trade” is ironic as it is perhaps the very time not get oneself associated with that evil outfit at all.
Current global financial situation is the real life description of “carnage to the left, carnage to the right, and into the valley of death, now rides in Burma gallantly.”
Important as this financial situation and long term development issues, the sheer lack of clear stand on Kachin problem is also indicative of either weakness, lack of conviction or, at worst, agreement with the killing, torturing military as the action of this hordes of usual standard military thuggery is amply documented and is more than adequate to put the whole army to to criminal court if there is real justice and protectors of justice in the world. Fortunate for them there isn’t.
It is now more than likely that people will take their own action, not out of malice with intent for destruction but of desperation and starvation.
Shame as it could have been done in orderly and well contained manner.
Lady Gaga in Bangkok
Thanks very much for paying attention to a less “heavy” topic such as Lady Gaga. She really is a bizarre case of boundary-crossing popular culture. I wonder where we can locate her in Southeast Asian youth culture. Do her performances in SEAn countries, and the varied reactions of adversaries, mean anything, and if so what? Superficial middle-class modernity, consumerism, liberalism?
Why the compromise game?
Marek Cziobel
I have raised the issue you describe several times – why aren’t the “progressives” and “liberals” seeking to a) leverage power b) become active in a genuine political process c) organise themselves effectively rather than as a random series of individual acts.
You’re absolutely 100% right that the present moment presents an opportunity to “move on” but that far too many are being quickly reduced back into the “red” v “yellow” dichotomy. Nitirat offered some hope regarding LM but where are similar voices on wider issues such a civilian control of the army, social justice, democratisation etc etc?
In my view this leaves the Red Shirts as still the only act in town. They are not “Thaksin”, they are not neo-fascist PAD, they are not elite PR like the Dems and they are pretty open and accessible.
They choose to be aligned with Thaksin and the middle class liberals, leftists and others who claim to be progressives who look down on them will be alienated from the Red Shirts long before the Red Shirts are alienated from Thaksin.
Lady Gaga in Bangkok
People are ignorant of this person who is a victim of manipulation at best and mind control at worst. Regrettably people are gullible and about corporate media endorsement when alternative media knows full well the modus operandi for celebrity.
http://vigilantcitizen.com/musicbusiness/lady-gaga-the-illuminati-puppet/
Why the compromise game?
bunny: “His [Thaksin’s] return and the re-invention of power balance can help the ammarts.”
There is probably lurking here a principle regarding the perpetuation and renewal of the Thai state in which seeming opposites get incorporated into the system eventually allowing the system to progress and move on which Burma never seemed able to do at least until now (like the immune system of the mammalian body or similar mechanisms supporting organic growth in long-lived trees (like the Bodhi tree)). Whether it is the socialist monk whose photo now graces the desks of government officials or the radical ideas of gun-toting jungle dwelling revolutionary Jit Phumisak that are now taught in courses with his image and life being enshrined in the minds of others, or coup-leading generals who ultimately failed, were exiled and finally returned to their home and finally enshrined in a gigantic funeral urn in the family compound where they eaked out their last corporeal days, Thai history seems to repeat the idea of “let bygones be bygones” or “live and let live” or “lets get on with the show” , can even see the red-shirts getting official approval, endorsement and eventual incorporation into the system 🙂
Human rights and lese majeste
jfl (c16):
“Wasana, Royal Thai Army Gossip columnist for the Royal Thai Army Times (aka the Bangkok Post) had an article admitting elements of the army were responsible for the attack on the army at Dok Wua, which then was used as the excuse for the massacre that unfolded. That’s a message from the Royal Thai Army command. Purge Time in the Royal Thai Army?”
Granted that Wassana clearly enjoys privileged access to higher echelons within the RTA, but surely she would have to be a recognised mouthpiece for the RTA to justify that use of the term “admitting”? I’m not aware of an article of hers making the assertion, but it was referenced in a review of her new book as follows:
“She offers an interesting insight into the shooting of soldiers at Kok Wua intersection on Ratchadamnoen Avenue in April last year by mysterious men dressed in black and armed with heavy weapons. The ambush, she says, was the result of a personal vendetta by an unspecified force of militants against Burapha Payak.
A senior army officer and several other promising members of this faction were killed in the incident and this so outraged their colleagues, Wassana says, that it led to the use of live ammunition, a few weeks later, when troops were sent in to disperse the red-shirt encampment in central Bangkok.”
http://www.bangkokpost.com/arts-and-culture/book/294362/factions-and-short-fuses
Plainly, the review is only a second-hand summary of the full original Thai-language book reference. If anyone has access to that original and can use it to show something that clearly rates as “admitting” then I’m sure many of us would be very interested to see it. Equally, while the speculation has been around for some time, I also readily grant that someone in Wassana’s position even proposing it lends major weight to its credibility.
Finally, in terms of “Purge Time”….. hasn’t Prayuth been actively doing that ever since he replaced Anupong – at least by further sidelining those he deems “not one of us”?