While getting a little off-topic, I support what Alan Potin says re Thai tourists. Since my bookshop is next to Dao Vieng restaurant, most night there are buses of Thais stopping there for dinner before return across the bridge. Some come in to buy ‘The King Never Smiles’ in English. Most have covered the sites mentioned and most are critical of the price of everything in Laos — usually Thai products imported. Principal disappointment for Thais visiting Vientiane is the Morning Market. Quite why so many expect to find bargains in gold and silver I have no idea. I have not heard any complaints re use of Lao or non-use of Thai and doubt that the fact that most signs are in Lao and English bothers many — they are used to seeing signs in Thai and English and use of Lao is to many a ‘quaint’ factor, giving one of the few indications they are not upcountry in Thailand. Official signs are not in Thai. Some are in Vietnamese and an increasing number in Chinese. The Ministry of Information and Culture does have a Committee to defend Lao against Thai language (so that’s okay then!), but I do not think any visiting Thai feels the need or wants everything to be spelled out in Thai rather than Lao — it’s already enough that Lao authomatically switch to verbal Thai as soon as a Thai open his/her mouth. And the fact that there are Thais here 40 years who do not switch to Lao, even if talking to their Thai-Lao children, is if anything evidence that Thai is a family of languages that can be mutually understood — with patience and time. And all Lao in Vientiane speak and understand Central Thai — but almost all continue to use their own regional brand of Lao. Thus the situation in VTE is what it was in Isaan and Chiang Mai 40 years ago. No doubt in another 40 years all signs will be in Thai (or Chinese!) but no need to hurry that transition.
Ref: Olli Tappe’s speculation on Isaan and Lao peoples’ reactions to the proposed Chao Anouvong statue…
Interestingly, something like a hundred thousand (!) day-tripping Thai tourists are bussed, annually, across the bridge into Vientiane for a wham bam thank you ma’am package tour of That Luang; Talath Sao; and the Ho Phrakeo (where, after paying homage to the Buddha and finding no serious interpretive materials in any language to distract them from buying made-in-Thailand clay votive tablets and other junk souvenirs from the museum shop). Yet nearly none amongst them find their way across the street to Vat Sisaket, which was originally a royal monastery erected within the former palace compound by Chao Anou in 1815-1818; and which remains in relatively pristine condition: unlike the Ho Phrakeo, a modern replica in reinforced concrete built under the French from 1939-1944. The story is that their tour guides discourage even the briefest Sisaket visit, explaining that Chao Anou was a “bad man”.
(A possible explanation of why there’s zero interpretive materials at HPK can be found at the slender Sethathirath.com website.)
The extensive interpretive panels at Vat Sisaket are in Lao, French, and English. But not in Thai, which was a very sensitive issue at the time when they were being installed nearly a decade ago: Isaan people can usually speak Lao, as well as Thai, but the respective written languages have diverged –especially after 1975– and it’s not so easy for most of them to read Lao. Apart from the question of who exactly was going to vett the Thai version, in the Lao PDR there is the greatest institutional reluctance to post any official signage in Thai : the language of their foremost source of Direct Foreign Investment
(Indeed, one of the principal Sisaket museum panels was removed from public view over the politically problematical usage in the trilingual text of the word “exile”: referring to the involuntarily dislocation of nearly the entire population of the Lao Lane Xang capitol across to what is now Isaan and points south.)
Thanks for all that, Arno — you must have been up later even than me!
Of course my comments were provocative, because I was asking questions that a.) almost certainly couldn’t be answered, and b.) if they could be answered would indicate I hadn’t asked the right question in the first place.
What upset me almost more than the violence in the streets of Bangkok last April and May were the absurd platitudes and inanities uttered by the likes of Rachel Harvey, Alastair Leithead and Dan Rivers for the various media businesses who pay them on both sides of the Atlantic.
The goggles of goodness on your eyes and the CNN Masterpiece-Theatre-News-Byte mealy in your mouth. With servants like that, is it any wonder the world is controlled by a handful cynics?
Who shot the journalists is complicated by the fact that almost all the key players on both sides had very good reasons to do so, just as almost everybody had some very good reasons to eliminate Seh Daeng.
Or to hood the surveillance cameras.
Or to shoot the young nurse at Wat Pathum Wanaram.
(Or do whatever with Viktor Bout!)
~
The one thing for certain is that whatever happened at Rajaprasong was more about back-room power than justice for the farmer –the struggle for equality was staged outside under banners in English while the leaders stage-managed the real event in the language of their own private interests in a shipping container behind it.
REALPOLITIK the play is called, co-authored by everyone with a finger in the pie.
“Normally, a well-functioning democracy has ways to remove these (bad) people from power…”
In the Philippines, Thailand and maybe Indonesia, the bad people (and their sons and daughters) gets repeatedly elected and just impossible to weed out from power . . .
Well-functioning democracy remains a dream . . . and flawed democracy will have to do until the next coup.
“Whilst it may be that these supporters represent the tip of a substantial less-visible Red iceberg, it may simply be that support for the Reds is not as substantive as it once was.”
With Thaksin’s substantially shrunk ATM-potency, “it may simply be that ATM-like-cash-handout support for the Reds is not as substantive as it once was.”
But this is NOT to refute Nganadeeleg’s faith that there were a scattering of Reds ” who paid to attend, rather than being paid to attend” . . .
I think many would like to know the exact disagreements between Veera and the other first generation leaders and what convinced him not to return to the protest before its fatal ending.
The police was actually there. But playing what role ? This is a difficult one to answer.
At 4 pm, i decided i had to leave Wat Pathum Wanaram, as the shooting and explosions were becoming more intense.
The only way out was through the Royal Police HQ. Plenty of journalists and demonstrators were already inside the HQ. But when we arrived – a group of five reporters – the gate was locked and a policeman told us that he did not have the key.
So we jumped the gate.
Once inside, it was an amazing scene. Hundreds of Reds demonstrators, people clad in black clothes were inside, mixing with police officers.
I am not someone who generally speaking like the police, but this time, for the first time in 20 years in Thailand, i felt some gratefulness towards the police.
They were effectively protecting us from the soldiers, especially the special forces on the BTS tracks.
The “Apaitan area” was NOT Wat Pathum Wanaram, but the Police HQ. And some people died because they believed they would be protected in the Temple. The killing of the young voluntary medic and the five others in front of the temple and in the front part of the temple is the most serious single incident of the 19th of May.
The government knows this. And that is why very few detailed reports were published in the Thai press, with exception of the Bangkok Post, Khao Sot, Matichon and Thai Rath. And of course, no TV ever played the clearest footage of the killing in the temple, especially the murder of the young female medic. The death of this young medic is a bomb for a government which used the “Chula’s hospital brutal invasion by the Red Germs” – as Thongchai Winichakul has written – to create hatred among the Bangkok middle class against the demonstrators.
The powerful symbol of the weeping nurse….
The young medic did not weep, she rushed to attend the wounded in the front part of the temple and was shot.
Second point.
It is interesting that Christopher mentioned about the lack of interest of the Red leaders for an election.
It is difficult to answer this question, but we have to notice that the side who broke the negociations is the government side, not the red side. A compromise was in view when Abhisit asked Sukhumband to withdraw. And then the military operation began immediately with the shooting of Seh Daeng.
But remembering Jaran Ditapichai press conference at the beginning of March, before the start of the demonstration on the 12th of April, i was struck by Jaran’s straightforwardness.
He said : we will bring one million people in the streets of Bangkok and the government will have either to accept our demands or suppress it.
It was in a way a blackmail operation : the use of street power to force a diktat on the government. A pure strategy of provocation by exposing a large number of people to a brutal repression.
But at the beginning of June, i think that some of the Red leaders were quite happy about the prospect of an election in mid november. It was obviously the case of Veera Musikapong, Kokeaw Pikulthong and Jaran Ditapichai. But the hardliners : Jatuporn and Dr Weng were not interested. I would like to know the exact position at that time of Nathawut Saikua, who seems to be the most charismatic Red leaders.
I just spent the evening with Max in Chiang Mai — the sad occasion of the death of a close mutual friend.
I have read the article carefully and all of the 95 comments.
Some striking omissions. No one mentions anywhere that the police were nowhere in sight during the whole period. A number observe how extraordinary it was that only 91 died in such a lengthy and explosive situation in the streets of such a huge city, but nobody observed how much more extraordinary this was in the context of the total absence of a police force!
Why the police force was NOT there is a topic in itself, and if one could answer that question clearly all the pieces of the puzzle might fall into place.
Some commentators hinted that the conflict was not really color coded at all, but few went so far as to suggest that the opposing parties in the conflict were about evenly represented on BOTH SIDES. Plenty of the soldiers were “tomatoes,” green on the outside but red within – and of course there were plenty of highly trained military personnel who were sniping from the Red side, goodness knows to what end — and some were in Black and some were in Green!
In other words, those two journalists were caught in a cross-fire that no reporter could ever have covered ‘correctly’, as the protagonists were hidden on both sides, and constantly changing their colors like chameleons. Because the objective was something quite other.
Think through this one: nobody is even sure whose side Seh Daeng was actually on, what’s more who had the more urgent motive to silence him!
Finally, it’s important to observe that only two outcomes could have handed victory to the Red Shirts, and an immediate election was certainly not one of them. The Red Shirt leaders were very aware of this, which explains why they dithered. An election would have been much too slow, much too uncertain, and functionally irrelevant to the true goal. Because the Red Shirt masterminds weren’t interested in a Parliamentary solution at all but in a fundamental resetting of Thailand’ historical clock.
(Cambodia?)
The result which could have brought victory was simply a Coup on the one hand or a Civil War on the other – both of which would have set Thailand back to Year One!
So how does a respectable Government prevent a Coup in such a situation, what’s more an Army??? And who doesn’t want a Civil War, think about that? Who doesn’t want the country to go up in smoke, hospitals closed down, schools gutted, husbands castrated and wives raped all the way up and down the line?
Yes, who stops a Civil War in general, and for what reason? Who does that?
Answer that question, and then get back to the question of who shot Fabio.
Whilst it may be that these supporters represent the tip of a substantial less-visible Red iceberg, it may simply be that support for the Reds is not as substantive as it once was.
Or it may simply be that the farmers are busy with the growing season once again. Wait till next year.
Having clocked up a few years of living in Chiang Mai rather than just reading about it, I’m bound to say that I view the oft-touted image of it as a “Red stronghold” wildly overblown. Yes, there are the gatherings of the faithful at the Warorot Hotel and very, very occasionally a few pick-ups and motorbikes carrying red-clad supporters on the roads – though not for some time now. At the height of the May events, they blocked a downtown bridge and a main road outside a mall – and some hotheads set fire to a building. The city is home to CM51 – unfortunately a fairly unsavoury bunch who have made a bad name for themselves with homophobic opposition to an AIDS-prevention march as being somehow “not Lanna” and may well be connected to the death of a yellow-shirt figure’s father. There was also enough strength of feeling to mount a very vocal protest when Korn came to speak at CMU. But, well, that’s it…..
The notion that it is “held” by Reds is frankly laughable. I have no doubt that there are still some Thaksin-grateful placemen in a few positions of power/influence – but the effects of that aren’t obvious. As for the proposed new base at Mae Rim – one should be aware that just about all of the land on the west side and much on the east side of the Mae Rim road leading out of Chiang Mai is government-owned and already packed with army installations of one kind or another….. including Special Forces and Artillery regiments. Of course, a further division (if it happens) adds to that – but don’t imagine that there’s exactly a shortage of military resources in the area now.
c29 Audiophile or – as per c30 – whoever you may be this week…..
“The press report you refer to is an attempt to clean up his mess after the fact on a subsequent occasion and after the negative reaction (which clearly was an annoyance to him). The press was actually kind and gave him the benefit of the doubt based on his startling weak english skills (often wondered about the degrees myself).”
“clean up his mess….. on a subsequent occasion”? The press report I quoted actually appeared the day after the speech was given (which was on Constitution Day) – perhaps the “negative reaction” was unusually quick in coming on this occasion?
Interpret the words how you like – but better from a basis of what was said rather than just The Nation’s take on it. That Thaksin’s ropey English was “smoothed” in the report is as unsurprising as it is irrelevant. It strikes me that the sentiments expressed could have come from many at the top of the Thai hierarchy…..
Tarrin: Over 4,000 at the Pattaya concert according to police (more according to other reports)
100 baht entrance fee too, so they paid to attend, rather than being paid to attend as is so often claimed.
Hi Audiophile/Devil in the details/truth/sad truth/ etc etc. We accept that some posters want to change their posting name occasionally. But with 10, or more, I think you’re getting a bit carried away with it.
I think its very hard to gauge what the populace from the North is thinking about their political preference right now. Don’t forget that we are only 3 months away from the May massacre, I’m surprised that 500 people even gather for political movement after all that, some people said we might not see political gathering for a good 6 months. Furthermore, a 21 years old red guard from Chieng Mai has been gunned down by a man wearing a military issued uniform according to some witness, he died a few days later, under that threatening circumstance no one want to speak too load I’m sure if it. However, if the author checked the red concert at Pataya you might be surprise that there are over thousand people joining the event.
Heard it with my own ears in person – in public through a microphone – and in English.
The press report you refer to is an attempt to clean up his mess after the fact on a subsequent occasion and after the negative reaction (which clearly was an annoyance to him). The press was actually kind and gave him the benefit of the doubt based on his startling weak english skills (often wondered about the degrees myself).
Yes, this is old news certainly but do not lose the main point while arguing about the quote.
At that time people had high hopes for T; primarily self deluding themselves into think that a billionaire would not need to carry on the endemic and crippling corruption in Thai. Thus, they chose not to see the clear attitudes evident between the lines – i.e. even dictatorship is fine if it “gives people a good lifestyle, happiness and national progress.” (as defined by me – the man in charge)
Whether at the time of saying it T was naive, arrogant, lost in some narcissist thrall, shooting from the hip, monomaniacal, or just not as intelligent as people gave him credit for is probably irrelevant in retrospect.
History has shown non participatory, dictatorial administrations to be an unsustainable attitude at best, and at worst the cornerstone of disastrous regimes.
In any case his, and the cronies who surrounded him, general disdain for the rule of law and subsequent actions for self enrichment negate any claims to having an understanding, much less commitment, to participatory democracy at any time in his life, other than using it as a beauty contest to elect a new all powerful one man show.
Interesting read – but seems like just chasing the tail.
Puzzling comments of “crowd up to 500” but according to “red guards” there were 100 plainsclothes officers. hard to visualize.
“Just as Thaksin did in the wake of the social unrest inspired by the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis, the incumbent government is seeking to create a new kind of social compact with the poor and working classes in order to produce a manageable level of social stability”
Good – government delivering something to address peoples needs. The only difference then is Thaksin? Must question why would it must be him to make the action politically legitimate.
“growing Thaksin-fatigue” Apparently peoples real life issues are being distracted from?
“memories of Thaksin’s largesse – the new roads, the street lights and the like – now reach back on ten years. Whilst they may still elicit a certain affinity for the man, ongoing loyalty requires ongoing acts of patronage.”
Sounds like politics as usual – Thaksin largesses was no different that any other Thai politician hoodwinking the populace into think their own money given back to them with a 50-75% haircut came from the man himself – rather than being recognized as his source of income and power. So for the northerners (and I guess Thai in general), corruption is fine as long as it is the local guy and the local elite (i.e. construction companies) and local people benefit from the trickle down more than others.
“ongoing loyalty requires ongoing acts of patronage.” speaks for itself about the general level of political development – and lack of democratic fundamentals or principles anywhere to be found. Good luck to the Reds using T as inspiration for these yet to be experienced principles in thai.
“increasing anger leveled against the Reds over the downturn in the local economy. ” At some point the people generally do figure out how things work.
“Local politics reflects this fluidity and lack of political commitment” Nice summary. Only need to add that in this environment the most successful are more likely to be the morally bankrupt and corrupt. In contrast, having principles generally can hinder the “fluidity” needed to pander, rather than communicate, educate, inspire, and lead.
“Yes its there are armed element in the protestors but how do you know which side they are on?” (Tarrin #26)
Those armed elements freely mixing with the Red camp during the protests and especially during the repeated violent eruptions of bombings and shootings whose targets are police, military, government institutions (and were NEVER EVER directed at the Red camp), would surely leave no doubts which side they are on.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
National celebrations and historiography in Laos
While getting a little off-topic, I support what Alan Potin says re Thai tourists. Since my bookshop is next to Dao Vieng restaurant, most night there are buses of Thais stopping there for dinner before return across the bridge. Some come in to buy ‘The King Never Smiles’ in English. Most have covered the sites mentioned and most are critical of the price of everything in Laos — usually Thai products imported. Principal disappointment for Thais visiting Vientiane is the Morning Market. Quite why so many expect to find bargains in gold and silver I have no idea. I have not heard any complaints re use of Lao or non-use of Thai and doubt that the fact that most signs are in Lao and English bothers many — they are used to seeing signs in Thai and English and use of Lao is to many a ‘quaint’ factor, giving one of the few indications they are not upcountry in Thailand. Official signs are not in Thai. Some are in Vietnamese and an increasing number in Chinese. The Ministry of Information and Culture does have a Committee to defend Lao against Thai language (so that’s okay then!), but I do not think any visiting Thai feels the need or wants everything to be spelled out in Thai rather than Lao — it’s already enough that Lao authomatically switch to verbal Thai as soon as a Thai open his/her mouth. And the fact that there are Thais here 40 years who do not switch to Lao, even if talking to their Thai-Lao children, is if anything evidence that Thai is a family of languages that can be mutually understood — with patience and time. And all Lao in Vientiane speak and understand Central Thai — but almost all continue to use their own regional brand of Lao. Thus the situation in VTE is what it was in Isaan and Chiang Mai 40 years ago. No doubt in another 40 years all signs will be in Thai (or Chinese!) but no need to hurry that transition.
National celebrations and historiography in Laos
Ref: Olli Tappe’s speculation on Isaan and Lao peoples’ reactions to the proposed Chao Anouvong statue…
Interestingly, something like a hundred thousand (!) day-tripping Thai tourists are bussed, annually, across the bridge into Vientiane for a wham bam thank you ma’am package tour of That Luang; Talath Sao; and the Ho Phrakeo (where, after paying homage to the Buddha and finding no serious interpretive materials in any language to distract them from buying made-in-Thailand clay votive tablets and other junk souvenirs from the museum shop). Yet nearly none amongst them find their way across the street to Vat Sisaket, which was originally a royal monastery erected within the former palace compound by Chao Anou in 1815-1818; and which remains in relatively pristine condition: unlike the Ho Phrakeo, a modern replica in reinforced concrete built under the French from 1939-1944. The story is that their tour guides discourage even the briefest Sisaket visit, explaining that Chao Anou was a “bad man”.
(A possible explanation of why there’s zero interpretive materials at HPK can be found at the slender Sethathirath.com website.)
The extensive interpretive panels at Vat Sisaket are in Lao, French, and English. But not in Thai, which was a very sensitive issue at the time when they were being installed nearly a decade ago: Isaan people can usually speak Lao, as well as Thai, but the respective written languages have diverged –especially after 1975– and it’s not so easy for most of them to read Lao. Apart from the question of who exactly was going to vett the Thai version, in the Lao PDR there is the greatest institutional reluctance to post any official signage in Thai : the language of their foremost source of Direct Foreign Investment
(Indeed, one of the principal Sisaket museum panels was removed from public view over the politically problematical usage in the trilingual text of the word “exile”: referring to the involuntarily dislocation of nearly the entire population of the Lao Lane Xang capitol across to what is now Isaan and points south.)
Who killed Italian photographer Fabio Polenghi?
Thanks for all that, Arno — you must have been up later even than me!
Of course my comments were provocative, because I was asking questions that a.) almost certainly couldn’t be answered, and b.) if they could be answered would indicate I hadn’t asked the right question in the first place.
What upset me almost more than the violence in the streets of Bangkok last April and May were the absurd platitudes and inanities uttered by the likes of Rachel Harvey, Alastair Leithead and Dan Rivers for the various media businesses who pay them on both sides of the Atlantic.
The goggles of goodness on your eyes and the CNN Masterpiece-Theatre-News-Byte mealy in your mouth. With servants like that, is it any wonder the world is controlled by a handful cynics?
Who shot the journalists is complicated by the fact that almost all the key players on both sides had very good reasons to do so, just as almost everybody had some very good reasons to eliminate Seh Daeng.
Or to hood the surveillance cameras.
Or to shoot the young nurse at Wat Pathum Wanaram.
(Or do whatever with Viktor Bout!)
~
The one thing for certain is that whatever happened at Rajaprasong was more about back-room power than justice for the farmer –the struggle for equality was staged outside under banners in English while the leaders stage-managed the real event in the language of their own private interests in a shipping container behind it.
REALPOLITIK the play is called, co-authored by everyone with a finger in the pie.
Christopher
Abhisit and Thailand’s bad men
“Normally, a well-functioning democracy has ways to remove these (bad) people from power…”
In the Philippines, Thailand and maybe Indonesia, the bad people (and their sons and daughters) gets repeatedly elected and just impossible to weed out from power . . .
Well-functioning democracy remains a dream . . . and flawed democracy will have to do until the next coup.
The red’s northern challenge
“Whilst it may be that these supporters represent the tip of a substantial less-visible Red iceberg, it may simply be that support for the Reds is not as substantive as it once was.”
With Thaksin’s substantially shrunk ATM-potency, “it may simply be that ATM-like-cash-handout support for the Reds is not as substantive as it once was.”
But this is NOT to refute Nganadeeleg’s faith that there were a scattering of Reds ” who paid to attend, rather than being paid to attend” . . .
The red’s northern challenge
are the people of Chiang Mai and Thailand generally, including Steve above, happy to be under military control?
or would they prefer some other government?
Who killed Italian photographer Fabio Polenghi?
Arno D. – 97
I think many would like to know the exact disagreements between Veera and the other first generation leaders and what convinced him not to return to the protest before its fatal ending.
Who killed Italian photographer Fabio Polenghi?
Two points on Christopher’s comment.
The police was actually there. But playing what role ? This is a difficult one to answer.
At 4 pm, i decided i had to leave Wat Pathum Wanaram, as the shooting and explosions were becoming more intense.
The only way out was through the Royal Police HQ. Plenty of journalists and demonstrators were already inside the HQ. But when we arrived – a group of five reporters – the gate was locked and a policeman told us that he did not have the key.
So we jumped the gate.
Once inside, it was an amazing scene. Hundreds of Reds demonstrators, people clad in black clothes were inside, mixing with police officers.
I am not someone who generally speaking like the police, but this time, for the first time in 20 years in Thailand, i felt some gratefulness towards the police.
They were effectively protecting us from the soldiers, especially the special forces on the BTS tracks.
The “Apaitan area” was NOT Wat Pathum Wanaram, but the Police HQ. And some people died because they believed they would be protected in the Temple. The killing of the young voluntary medic and the five others in front of the temple and in the front part of the temple is the most serious single incident of the 19th of May.
The government knows this. And that is why very few detailed reports were published in the Thai press, with exception of the Bangkok Post, Khao Sot, Matichon and Thai Rath. And of course, no TV ever played the clearest footage of the killing in the temple, especially the murder of the young female medic. The death of this young medic is a bomb for a government which used the “Chula’s hospital brutal invasion by the Red Germs” – as Thongchai Winichakul has written – to create hatred among the Bangkok middle class against the demonstrators.
The powerful symbol of the weeping nurse….
The young medic did not weep, she rushed to attend the wounded in the front part of the temple and was shot.
Second point.
It is interesting that Christopher mentioned about the lack of interest of the Red leaders for an election.
It is difficult to answer this question, but we have to notice that the side who broke the negociations is the government side, not the red side. A compromise was in view when Abhisit asked Sukhumband to withdraw. And then the military operation began immediately with the shooting of Seh Daeng.
But remembering Jaran Ditapichai press conference at the beginning of March, before the start of the demonstration on the 12th of April, i was struck by Jaran’s straightforwardness.
He said : we will bring one million people in the streets of Bangkok and the government will have either to accept our demands or suppress it.
It was in a way a blackmail operation : the use of street power to force a diktat on the government. A pure strategy of provocation by exposing a large number of people to a brutal repression.
But at the beginning of June, i think that some of the Red leaders were quite happy about the prospect of an election in mid november. It was obviously the case of Veera Musikapong, Kokeaw Pikulthong and Jaran Ditapichai. But the hardliners : Jatuporn and Dr Weng were not interested. I would like to know the exact position at that time of Nathawut Saikua, who seems to be the most charismatic Red leaders.
Who killed Italian photographer Fabio Polenghi?
I just spent the evening with Max in Chiang Mai — the sad occasion of the death of a close mutual friend.
I have read the article carefully and all of the 95 comments.
Some striking omissions. No one mentions anywhere that the police were nowhere in sight during the whole period. A number observe how extraordinary it was that only 91 died in such a lengthy and explosive situation in the streets of such a huge city, but nobody observed how much more extraordinary this was in the context of the total absence of a police force!
Why the police force was NOT there is a topic in itself, and if one could answer that question clearly all the pieces of the puzzle might fall into place.
Some commentators hinted that the conflict was not really color coded at all, but few went so far as to suggest that the opposing parties in the conflict were about evenly represented on BOTH SIDES. Plenty of the soldiers were “tomatoes,” green on the outside but red within – and of course there were plenty of highly trained military personnel who were sniping from the Red side, goodness knows to what end — and some were in Black and some were in Green!
In other words, those two journalists were caught in a cross-fire that no reporter could ever have covered ‘correctly’, as the protagonists were hidden on both sides, and constantly changing their colors like chameleons. Because the objective was something quite other.
Think through this one: nobody is even sure whose side Seh Daeng was actually on, what’s more who had the more urgent motive to silence him!
Finally, it’s important to observe that only two outcomes could have handed victory to the Red Shirts, and an immediate election was certainly not one of them. The Red Shirt leaders were very aware of this, which explains why they dithered. An election would have been much too slow, much too uncertain, and functionally irrelevant to the true goal. Because the Red Shirt masterminds weren’t interested in a Parliamentary solution at all but in a fundamental resetting of Thailand’ historical clock.
(Cambodia?)
The result which could have brought victory was simply a Coup on the one hand or a Civil War on the other – both of which would have set Thailand back to Year One!
So how does a respectable Government prevent a Coup in such a situation, what’s more an Army??? And who doesn’t want a Civil War, think about that? Who doesn’t want the country to go up in smoke, hospitals closed down, schools gutted, husbands castrated and wives raped all the way up and down the line?
Yes, who stops a Civil War in general, and for what reason? Who does that?
Answer that question, and then get back to the question of who shot Fabio.
Christopher
The red’s northern challenge
Whilst it may be that these supporters represent the tip of a substantial less-visible Red iceberg, it may simply be that support for the Reds is not as substantive as it once was.
Or it may simply be that the farmers are busy with the growing season once again. Wait till next year.
The red’s northern challenge
Having clocked up a few years of living in Chiang Mai rather than just reading about it, I’m bound to say that I view the oft-touted image of it as a “Red stronghold” wildly overblown. Yes, there are the gatherings of the faithful at the Warorot Hotel and very, very occasionally a few pick-ups and motorbikes carrying red-clad supporters on the roads – though not for some time now. At the height of the May events, they blocked a downtown bridge and a main road outside a mall – and some hotheads set fire to a building. The city is home to CM51 – unfortunately a fairly unsavoury bunch who have made a bad name for themselves with homophobic opposition to an AIDS-prevention march as being somehow “not Lanna” and may well be connected to the death of a yellow-shirt figure’s father. There was also enough strength of feeling to mount a very vocal protest when Korn came to speak at CMU. But, well, that’s it…..
The notion that it is “held” by Reds is frankly laughable. I have no doubt that there are still some Thaksin-grateful placemen in a few positions of power/influence – but the effects of that aren’t obvious. As for the proposed new base at Mae Rim – one should be aware that just about all of the land on the west side and much on the east side of the Mae Rim road leading out of Chiang Mai is government-owned and already packed with army installations of one kind or another….. including Special Forces and Artillery regiments. Of course, a further division (if it happens) adds to that – but don’t imagine that there’s exactly a shortage of military resources in the area now.
Thai style reconciliation a recipe for further conflict
c29 Audiophile or – as per c30 – whoever you may be this week…..
“The press report you refer to is an attempt to clean up his mess after the fact on a subsequent occasion and after the negative reaction (which clearly was an annoyance to him). The press was actually kind and gave him the benefit of the doubt based on his startling weak english skills (often wondered about the degrees myself).”
“clean up his mess….. on a subsequent occasion”? The press report I quoted actually appeared the day after the speech was given (which was on Constitution Day) – perhaps the “negative reaction” was unusually quick in coming on this occasion?
For the benefit of those who prefer to read the words for themselves rather than accept others’ somewhat inventive version after the fact, the report is reproduced at http://asiantribune.com/news/2003/12/11/pms-declaration-democracy-not-my-goal-br
Interpret the words how you like – but better from a basis of what was said rather than just The Nation’s take on it. That Thaksin’s ropey English was “smoothed” in the report is as unsurprising as it is irrelevant. It strikes me that the sentiments expressed could have come from many at the top of the Thai hierarchy…..
The red’s northern challenge
Tarrin: Over 4,000 at the Pattaya concert according to police (more according to other reports)
100 baht entrance fee too, so they paid to attend, rather than being paid to attend as is so often claimed.
The red’s northern challenge
Police estimated 4,000 at the Pattaya red shirt concert on Saturday 4/9.
Thai style reconciliation a recipe for further conflict
Hi Audiophile/Devil in the details/truth/sad truth/ etc etc. We accept that some posters want to change their posting name occasionally. But with 10, or more, I think you’re getting a bit carried away with it.
The red’s northern challenge
I think its very hard to gauge what the populace from the North is thinking about their political preference right now. Don’t forget that we are only 3 months away from the May massacre, I’m surprised that 500 people even gather for political movement after all that, some people said we might not see political gathering for a good 6 months. Furthermore, a 21 years old red guard from Chieng Mai has been gunned down by a man wearing a military issued uniform according to some witness, he died a few days later, under that threatening circumstance no one want to speak too load I’m sure if it. However, if the author checked the red concert at Pataya you might be surprise that there are over thousand people joining the event.
Thai style reconciliation a recipe for further conflict
To Steve #18
Er…yes.
Heard it with my own ears in person – in public through a microphone – and in English.
The press report you refer to is an attempt to clean up his mess after the fact on a subsequent occasion and after the negative reaction (which clearly was an annoyance to him). The press was actually kind and gave him the benefit of the doubt based on his startling weak english skills (often wondered about the degrees myself).
Yes, this is old news certainly but do not lose the main point while arguing about the quote.
At that time people had high hopes for T; primarily self deluding themselves into think that a billionaire would not need to carry on the endemic and crippling corruption in Thai. Thus, they chose not to see the clear attitudes evident between the lines – i.e. even dictatorship is fine if it “gives people a good lifestyle, happiness and national progress.” (as defined by me – the man in charge)
Whether at the time of saying it T was naive, arrogant, lost in some narcissist thrall, shooting from the hip, monomaniacal, or just not as intelligent as people gave him credit for is probably irrelevant in retrospect.
History has shown non participatory, dictatorial administrations to be an unsustainable attitude at best, and at worst the cornerstone of disastrous regimes.
In any case his, and the cronies who surrounded him, general disdain for the rule of law and subsequent actions for self enrichment negate any claims to having an understanding, much less commitment, to participatory democracy at any time in his life, other than using it as a beauty contest to elect a new all powerful one man show.
The red’s northern challenge
Interesting read – but seems like just chasing the tail.
Puzzling comments of “crowd up to 500” but according to “red guards” there were 100 plainsclothes officers. hard to visualize.
“Just as Thaksin did in the wake of the social unrest inspired by the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis, the incumbent government is seeking to create a new kind of social compact with the poor and working classes in order to produce a manageable level of social stability”
Good – government delivering something to address peoples needs. The only difference then is Thaksin? Must question why would it must be him to make the action politically legitimate.
“growing Thaksin-fatigue” Apparently peoples real life issues are being distracted from?
“memories of Thaksin’s largesse – the new roads, the street lights and the like – now reach back on ten years. Whilst they may still elicit a certain affinity for the man, ongoing loyalty requires ongoing acts of patronage.”
Sounds like politics as usual – Thaksin largesses was no different that any other Thai politician hoodwinking the populace into think their own money given back to them with a 50-75% haircut came from the man himself – rather than being recognized as his source of income and power. So for the northerners (and I guess Thai in general), corruption is fine as long as it is the local guy and the local elite (i.e. construction companies) and local people benefit from the trickle down more than others.
“ongoing loyalty requires ongoing acts of patronage.” speaks for itself about the general level of political development – and lack of democratic fundamentals or principles anywhere to be found. Good luck to the Reds using T as inspiration for these yet to be experienced principles in thai.
“increasing anger leveled against the Reds over the downturn in the local economy. ” At some point the people generally do figure out how things work.
“Local politics reflects this fluidity and lack of political commitment” Nice summary. Only need to add that in this environment the most successful are more likely to be the morally bankrupt and corrupt. In contrast, having principles generally can hinder the “fluidity” needed to pander, rather than communicate, educate, inspire, and lead.
Thai style reconciliation a recipe for further conflict
“Yes its there are armed element in the protestors but how do you know which side they are on?” (Tarrin #26)
Those armed elements freely mixing with the Red camp during the protests and especially during the repeated violent eruptions of bombings and shootings whose targets are police, military, government institutions (and were NEVER EVER directed at the Red camp), would surely leave no doubts which side they are on.
Thai style reconciliation a recipe for further conflict
Yes Simon,
Nothing like the solid journalism of your beloved “The Nation” huh? Now, that’s an integrity, and factual standards anyone can run with!
Give us a break!