Now it’s very rare that I defend either the UDD or Thaksin, but you do have to put the army and the government at head of the suspects list on Seh Daeng’s assassination. You have to look at the most obvious first. Whether it was revenge by Romklao’s friends or a deliberate attempt to remove the military leadership from the UDD’s guards, the finger is still pointing in the direction of the government and/or army.
Now what is another question all together is whether a high body count this year was always an aim of Thaksin and the UDD leadership if Abhisit didn’t resign.
This is something different, I must say! Study of politics via road and housing planning in sense. Never thought things this way. Definitely gives food for thought and shows that there is so many many “explanations” for things we see. Theories that could fit the results so to speak.
Hi Simon.
I do agree the patronage system is a core part of Thai culture but I am not asking for it to be removed but to be assessed.
Social culture is never stagnet it continually evolves hopefully for the betterment of all.
Patronage in it’s essence like that of Buddhism is a positive thing when practiced with a true comittment to ethics and morals.
The nature of helping ones neighbour or family has changed dramatically as ‘wealth and greed’ and the influence that goes along with it have changed the very fabric of what makes social constructs such as the patronage system effective.
Yes good governance is needed but when you have such disparity in wealth distribution, how can you see patronage at both a political and social level actually being effective or even fair when so many double standards exist.?
As a core part of Thai culture ‘patronage’ is closely aligned with how the country is governed.
I never meant to dimnish it’s role in terms of security but only wished to emphasise how it has been abused at many levels within society.
There are plenty of examples in the developing world where one big city completely dominates its surroundings. In the region (minus Indonesia) only Vietnam has two centers, a legacy of the war, of cause.
Even in India big cities like Calcutta, Delhi or Mumbai have no rivals for hundreds of kilometers around.
They don’t get the same troubles every year, however.
And why compare to Canberra? The protesters didn’t block the govt offices at all.
When yellows occupied the govt house it had little impact, the country lived for months and nothing happened.
When Rajprasong was closed it was a blow to tourism but the majority of Bangkokians simply went shopping elsewhere, the city adjusted.
Airport was a better attacking move in that sense, it’s truly irreplaceable.
Hi Huw, good article with provocative sentiment. Makes its own case to appear in print for more exposure so as to ‘shatter the silence’! To be cynical, people care little for things beyond their immediate remit. How do you take Burma to everyone? Exposure is the only way the muted crisis will be any sort of 2010 international ‘watershed.’ Will you keep talking about Burma to everyone a few weeks from now? I won’t to people without a passing interest, and I probably won’t for a while to people with a passing interest. Also, one must be careful that unwavering adherence to the principles of justice doesn’t perpetuate instances of needing to protect. I didn’t go. Well done for going and engaging.
People have it tougher in Burma than they do in Thailand. But the Thai-Burmese Regime Model is converging from opposite polls — overt military rule giving way to nominal civilian but continuing military rule in Burma, overt civilian rule giving way to nominal civilian but continuing military rule in Thailand — and what the Burmese have now and its new facade are what the Thais have to look forward to.
And in the interests of globalized profit both will be blest my the neo-liberal and neo-con regimes in “the world’s most powerful and influential governments”.
Because the charade of no elections has given rise to a multi-party system in which civilians find themselves in positions of nominal power, it is plausible that major nations may surrender even more readily to claims of ‘progress’, ‘development’ and ‘rights’ issued by the junta as disenfranchised and disempowered citizens slip even further into the back pages of history. This path spells disaster for the decades-old movement calling for human rights for Thai citizens.
Down a second path lies an unflagging adherence to principles of justice, human rights and equity no matter the outcomes of any proposed election. In this scenario, millions of Thai citizens may retain some shred of hope for a more humane future to benefit their children and grandchildren. The international community has a responsibility to protect. We as citizens of freer countries than Thailand have a responsibility to raise our voices on behalf of those who face persecution for their political beliefs and ethnicity. We must shatter silence in Thailand absolutely outside the reach of the junta’s power.
2010 could be a watershed year in the 78-year fight for independence from unjust rule for Thailand. It could also be just another link in the chain lashing innocent Thai and minority peoples to a hazy future of fettered freedoms. May we… take strength from the stolid resilience of Thailand’s people. May we strive to stem the tide of absurdity and violence that threatens to bleach the colour from the tapestry of Thailand’s diverse histories and cultures and condemn generations of fellow humans to an existence of distorted propaganda and delusionary politicking. In this endless wash of global current affairs and political change, may we not forget Thailand.
But the Thai and Burmese peoples, like all people everywhere, have only themselves to look after their interests.
The title is “The challenges for Thailand’s arch-royalist military” and it’s the most detailed description of military factions and infighting so far and there’s nothing about plans to dominate civilian politics or deal with the succession, much less about plans “to get rid of any government” – the self-evident truth to some of NM extra enlightened commentators.
Oh, yeah, Chambers didn’t include it because he was scared of the govt persecution…
Tarrin, weren’t you the one arguing that army chiefs have no control over such basic things like the size of the army and they are entirely in the civilian Cabinet domain?
The essential weakness of Thai government is that “the government” does not control the military, the police, or the civil service. The government issues orders that these groups blithely ignore. Of course, the Constitution specifies that the primary allegiance of the military is not to a democratically-elected government, but to the king. “Permanent secretaries” handle the issue as far as the bureaucracy is concerned. This arrangement means that actions of the three in opposition to the government are “legitimate” if they have the blessings of higher authority which, historically, has been forthcoming. Under these conditions, democracy is impossible.
While the lack of confidence in democratically-elected governments gives many Thais pause about entrusting the future of Thailand to “the government,” democracy is not possible until government is supreme over the military, the police, and the civil service. What is necessary is for Thais to learn to live with governments chosen by ballot of the people, no matter how disreputable they might be, and to change the government only at the next available ballot. If citizens are patient for the next ballot, then they must accept responsibility for the government they get (whether bought or not). Democracy is about citizens being able to choose who governs in their behalf – nothing else. All other considerations (patronage, vote-buying, etc.) tend to make the perfect the enemy of the good.
Thanks for your efford with the vodcasts, very interesting and informative.
I’d like to see some discussion of political factions and vote buying, both in historical and present day context. I have a general sense of yours (and even more so) Andrew’s views on the active thoughts processes and informed choices made in rural areas, which I agree on up to a point. But I still feel that factional/personalised political machinations exert a large influence on how things develop (whether its Thaksin’s co-opting of smaller parties, Newin’s jump over to the Democrat side etc etc etc…).
How can the patronage system be ‘removed’? It’s a core part of Thai culture. You may as well ask Thai people not to be Thai.
There are good reasons for the evolution of a patronage system. It’s a form of social security in a country without a social security system. Helping your neighbour is, I would have thought, a concept that Australians would be well acquainted with.
Patronage is not a problem and it is hardly the master-servant relationship that some of our wannabe revolutionary comrades like to imagine (apparently they would rather get their patronage from a failed state).
It’s the lack of governance that is a problem and ‘dismantling patronage’ is not going to happen until there’s an alternative.
James: Apologies.
John: You do realise who actually lives in the smellier and more sunken bits of Bangkok? You may care to review the reaction of the red-leaning residents of Khlong Toey, my neighbours, to recent attempted mob incursion targeting the adjacent port fuel tanks. They had the crap beaten out of them.
You know who is bore the economic brunt of your unpopular revolutionary fantasy? As usual, it was the poor. The amataya have insurance.
Who benefited the most from the assassination of General Khattiya, a.k.a. Seh Daeng?
Or the same question from a different viewpoint: Had the overly talkative General Khattiya been alive and was captured/arrested, who do you think will he name as the Supreme Maestro of the Reds terrorist rampage during Black May 2010?
You got it David Brown. Who else but Thailand’s Supreme Maestro of 2002-2003 extra-judicial anti-drugs killings notoriety, Mr. Thaksin Shinawatra.
(But there were many with strong motives and urgency who surely wanted Seh Daeng killed. Somebody somewhere I recalled said, it was just a question of who got to him first.)
Les Abbey. It seems probable but is by no means certain that the murder of Seh Daeng was an extra-judicial killing. There was plenty of motive to have him taken out both for reasons of revenge for the murder of Col Romklao and to lessen potential resistance to the final assualt on the red enclave at Saladaeng. This could have been discretely ordered by CRES high or even done on the private initiative of a senior field commander. On the other hand it is also possible that an opposing red shirt faction had him taken out. Seh Daeng had his own small band of armed militia around him at Saladaeng but he never approached the larger group of black shirted militia that hung around the Four Seasons Hotel and stored their weapons in the police box in front of it. This was clearly another faction that he had no direct control over and no doubt there was at least one more faction of armed black shirt rebels operating in the area. Since the black shirts clearly comprised acting and/or retired military personnel who were trained in the use of weapons and happy to use them for pay, it is quite possible that black shirt factions not under Seh Daeng’s control had the capability to perform the assassination. Things were obviously quite tense between the different red shirt factions after Thaksin vetoed the main leaders’ decision to accept the road map. In addition there may well have been disputes about remuneration and not paying assassins and armed mercenaries what they think they have promised is a dangerous game. Another interesting question that will probably also never be solved is who ordered the failed assassination of Sondhi.
Once again, great to see a focus on Myanmar media.
On the private education, there’s still a lot of uncertainty as to how it’s going to work. As far as I’m aware, the law still hasn’t been issued even though the school year started on June 1. There’s been a lot of uncertainty for parents and those who have applied for licences.
If those information is readily available we wouldn’t be discuss about this, it was because the Thai military is one of the most secretive and shady organizations in Thailand. Writing an article or research that pain the military bad will get you into serious trouble here. Aint you wondering why there’s nobody interested in making movie about 6 Oct 1976?
anyway, to answer your first request – the first sentence seems to represent the situation in Thailand
to say its applies in most countries, maybe, but not in any sensible democracy… whats this bullshit of a nexus? the military must be wholly subservient and obey the civilian rulers otherwise the country, like Thailand, is in deep trouble
their plan is to get rid of any government, including the Democrats, if they dont do what they are told
Doubt if the Burmese angle has anything to do with the company delaying its IPO. There are no details, but as an exploration it probably will be a NL listing. Given the stated pre-IPO fundings, I think it is just a tiny little company, that would not be able to do much in Oil and Gas exploration, whether in Burma or Oz.
Cost of O&G exploration is far greater than mineral exloration. The best the company can do is to farm-in to leases already owned. It would not have the capacit to actually bid for leases.
As far as saunctions goes, that doesn’t seem to work for O&G exploration. During the height of Burmese noise, American oil firms were in Burma exploring for Oil – I know, I was there!
I think you are missing the underlying issue… it is not money or even political corruption that is the problem its the means used to be corrupt
the amart/military use military force to take power and corrupt everything in Thailand
Thaksin used democratic processes to take power and challenge the military, illegal businesses, drugs, underground lottery, the power of the established families and repression of the regions
also, Thaksin took the risk at each electionthat the people would choose someone else to govern, he called 3 and tried to call another
its the methods that are important, if you use the right democratic methods then the people will decide again and again who they want to govern
if you stick with the traditional Thailand then its the amart/military that decide, everything
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Violating human rights? Yes, indeed!
Portman – 104
Del – 105
Now it’s very rare that I defend either the UDD or Thaksin, but you do have to put the army and the government at head of the suspects list on Seh Daeng’s assassination. You have to look at the most obvious first. Whether it was revenge by Romklao’s friends or a deliberate attempt to remove the military leadership from the UDD’s guards, the finger is still pointing in the direction of the government and/or army.
Now what is another question all together is whether a high body count this year was always an aim of Thaksin and the UDD leadership if Abhisit didn’t resign.
Najib, what’s the political strategy?
Thanks very much Neptunian. Yes, that should be the strategy.
Will see if Najib can overcome fears of internal sabotage to take on these much needed reforms.
Paul Handley replies to comments
“In the land of the blind
the one-eyed man is king…”
Here lies a toppled god – Bangkok
This is something different, I must say! Study of politics via road and housing planning in sense. Never thought things this way. Definitely gives food for thought and shows that there is so many many “explanations” for things we see. Theories that could fit the results so to speak.
Here lies a toppled god – Bangkok
Hi Simon.
I do agree the patronage system is a core part of Thai culture but I am not asking for it to be removed but to be assessed.
Social culture is never stagnet it continually evolves hopefully for the betterment of all.
Patronage in it’s essence like that of Buddhism is a positive thing when practiced with a true comittment to ethics and morals.
The nature of helping ones neighbour or family has changed dramatically as ‘wealth and greed’ and the influence that goes along with it have changed the very fabric of what makes social constructs such as the patronage system effective.
Yes good governance is needed but when you have such disparity in wealth distribution, how can you see patronage at both a political and social level actually being effective or even fair when so many double standards exist.?
As a core part of Thai culture ‘patronage’ is closely aligned with how the country is governed.
I never meant to dimnish it’s role in terms of security but only wished to emphasise how it has been abused at many levels within society.
Here lies a toppled god – Bangkok
There are plenty of examples in the developing world where one big city completely dominates its surroundings. In the region (minus Indonesia) only Vietnam has two centers, a legacy of the war, of cause.
Even in India big cities like Calcutta, Delhi or Mumbai have no rivals for hundreds of kilometers around.
They don’t get the same troubles every year, however.
And why compare to Canberra? The protesters didn’t block the govt offices at all.
When yellows occupied the govt house it had little impact, the country lived for months and nothing happened.
When Rajprasong was closed it was a blow to tourism but the majority of Bangkokians simply went shopping elsewhere, the city adjusted.
Airport was a better attacking move in that sense, it’s truly irreplaceable.
The Teacher and the Princess: Dissidence in Burma
Hi Huw, good article with provocative sentiment. Makes its own case to appear in print for more exposure so as to ‘shatter the silence’! To be cynical, people care little for things beyond their immediate remit. How do you take Burma to everyone? Exposure is the only way the muted crisis will be any sort of 2010 international ‘watershed.’ Will you keep talking about Burma to everyone a few weeks from now? I won’t to people without a passing interest, and I probably won’t for a while to people with a passing interest. Also, one must be careful that unwavering adherence to the principles of justice doesn’t perpetuate instances of needing to protect. I didn’t go. Well done for going and engaging.
The Teacher and the Princess: Dissidence in Burma
People have it tougher in Burma than they do in Thailand. But the Thai-Burmese Regime Model is converging from opposite polls — overt military rule giving way to nominal civilian but continuing military rule in Burma, overt civilian rule giving way to nominal civilian but continuing military rule in Thailand — and what the Burmese have now and its new facade are what the Thais have to look forward to.
And in the interests of globalized profit both will be blest my the neo-liberal and neo-con regimes in “the world’s most powerful and influential governments”.
But the Thai and Burmese peoples, like all people everywhere, have only themselves to look after their interests.
The challenges for Thailand’s arch-royalist military
The title is “The challenges for Thailand’s arch-royalist military” and it’s the most detailed description of military factions and infighting so far and there’s nothing about plans to dominate civilian politics or deal with the succession, much less about plans “to get rid of any government” – the self-evident truth to some of NM extra enlightened commentators.
Oh, yeah, Chambers didn’t include it because he was scared of the govt persecution…
Tarrin, weren’t you the one arguing that army chiefs have no control over such basic things like the size of the army and they are entirely in the civilian Cabinet domain?
The challenges for Thailand’s arch-royalist military
The essential weakness of Thai government is that “the government” does not control the military, the police, or the civil service. The government issues orders that these groups blithely ignore. Of course, the Constitution specifies that the primary allegiance of the military is not to a democratically-elected government, but to the king. “Permanent secretaries” handle the issue as far as the bureaucracy is concerned. This arrangement means that actions of the three in opposition to the government are “legitimate” if they have the blessings of higher authority which, historically, has been forthcoming. Under these conditions, democracy is impossible.
While the lack of confidence in democratically-elected governments gives many Thais pause about entrusting the future of Thailand to “the government,” democracy is not possible until government is supreme over the military, the police, and the civil service. What is necessary is for Thais to learn to live with governments chosen by ballot of the people, no matter how disreputable they might be, and to change the government only at the next available ballot. If citizens are patient for the next ballot, then they must accept responsibility for the government they get (whether bought or not). Democracy is about citizens being able to choose who governs in their behalf – nothing else. All other considerations (patronage, vote-buying, etc.) tend to make the perfect the enemy of the good.
Thailand in crisis – Episode 3
Hi Nich,
Thanks for your efford with the vodcasts, very interesting and informative.
I’d like to see some discussion of political factions and vote buying, both in historical and present day context. I have a general sense of yours (and even more so) Andrew’s views on the active thoughts processes and informed choices made in rural areas, which I agree on up to a point. But I still feel that factional/personalised political machinations exert a large influence on how things develop (whether its Thaksin’s co-opting of smaller parties, Newin’s jump over to the Democrat side etc etc etc…).
Here lies a toppled god – Bangkok
How can the patronage system be ‘removed’? It’s a core part of Thai culture. You may as well ask Thai people not to be Thai.
There are good reasons for the evolution of a patronage system. It’s a form of social security in a country without a social security system. Helping your neighbour is, I would have thought, a concept that Australians would be well acquainted with.
Patronage is not a problem and it is hardly the master-servant relationship that some of our wannabe revolutionary comrades like to imagine (apparently they would rather get their patronage from a failed state).
It’s the lack of governance that is a problem and ‘dismantling patronage’ is not going to happen until there’s an alternative.
James: Apologies.
John: You do realise who actually lives in the smellier and more sunken bits of Bangkok? You may care to review the reaction of the red-leaning residents of Khlong Toey, my neighbours, to recent attempted mob incursion targeting the adjacent port fuel tanks. They had the crap beaten out of them.
You know who is bore the economic brunt of your unpopular revolutionary fantasy? As usual, it was the poor. The amataya have insurance.
Violating human rights? Yes, indeed!
Who benefited the most from the assassination of General Khattiya, a.k.a. Seh Daeng?
Or the same question from a different viewpoint: Had the overly talkative General Khattiya been alive and was captured/arrested, who do you think will he name as the Supreme Maestro of the Reds terrorist rampage during Black May 2010?
You got it David Brown. Who else but Thailand’s Supreme Maestro of 2002-2003 extra-judicial anti-drugs killings notoriety, Mr. Thaksin Shinawatra.
(But there were many with strong motives and urgency who surely wanted Seh Daeng killed. Somebody somewhere I recalled said, it was just a question of who got to him first.)
Who or what is Webair?
Violating human rights? Yes, indeed!
Les Abbey. It seems probable but is by no means certain that the murder of Seh Daeng was an extra-judicial killing. There was plenty of motive to have him taken out both for reasons of revenge for the murder of Col Romklao and to lessen potential resistance to the final assualt on the red enclave at Saladaeng. This could have been discretely ordered by CRES high or even done on the private initiative of a senior field commander. On the other hand it is also possible that an opposing red shirt faction had him taken out. Seh Daeng had his own small band of armed militia around him at Saladaeng but he never approached the larger group of black shirted militia that hung around the Four Seasons Hotel and stored their weapons in the police box in front of it. This was clearly another faction that he had no direct control over and no doubt there was at least one more faction of armed black shirt rebels operating in the area. Since the black shirts clearly comprised acting and/or retired military personnel who were trained in the use of weapons and happy to use them for pay, it is quite possible that black shirt factions not under Seh Daeng’s control had the capability to perform the assassination. Things were obviously quite tense between the different red shirt factions after Thaksin vetoed the main leaders’ decision to accept the road map. In addition there may well have been disputes about remuneration and not paying assassins and armed mercenaries what they think they have promised is a dangerous game. Another interesting question that will probably also never be solved is who ordered the failed assassination of Sondhi.
Private schooling returns to Myanmar
Once again, great to see a focus on Myanmar media.
On the private education, there’s still a lot of uncertainty as to how it’s going to work. As far as I’m aware, the law still hasn’t been issued even though the school year started on June 1. There’s been a lot of uncertainty for parents and those who have applied for licences.
The challenges for Thailand’s arch-royalist military
StanG – 34
If those information is readily available we wouldn’t be discuss about this, it was because the Thai military is one of the most secretive and shady organizations in Thailand. Writing an article or research that pain the military bad will get you into serious trouble here. Aint you wondering why there’s nobody interested in making movie about 6 Oct 1976?
The challenges for Thailand’s arch-royalist military
Stan G #34
would it be stupid to work for Webair?
anyway, to answer your first request – the first sentence seems to represent the situation in Thailand
to say its applies in most countries, maybe, but not in any sensible democracy… whats this bullshit of a nexus? the military must be wholly subservient and obey the civilian rulers otherwise the country, like Thailand, is in deep trouble
their plan is to get rid of any government, including the Democrats, if they dont do what they are told
The challenges for Thailand’s arch-royalist military
DB #31,
No, I “troll” this blog out of sheer stupidity.
How about some pointers instead? Where in the article there’s any evidence the military is looking to dominate politics beyond keeping Thaksin at bay?
What is their contingency plan if/when PTP forms a government?
On oil exploration and Burma
Doubt if the Burmese angle has anything to do with the company delaying its IPO. There are no details, but as an exploration it probably will be a NL listing. Given the stated pre-IPO fundings, I think it is just a tiny little company, that would not be able to do much in Oil and Gas exploration, whether in Burma or Oz.
Cost of O&G exploration is far greater than mineral exloration. The best the company can do is to farm-in to leases already owned. It would not have the capacit to actually bid for leases.
As far as saunctions goes, that doesn’t seem to work for O&G exploration. During the height of Burmese noise, American oil firms were in Burma exploring for Oil – I know, I was there!
Here lies a toppled god – Bangkok
Fred and John
I think you are missing the underlying issue… it is not money or even political corruption that is the problem its the means used to be corrupt
the amart/military use military force to take power and corrupt everything in Thailand
Thaksin used democratic processes to take power and challenge the military, illegal businesses, drugs, underground lottery, the power of the established families and repression of the regions
also, Thaksin took the risk at each electionthat the people would choose someone else to govern, he called 3 and tried to call another
its the methods that are important, if you use the right democratic methods then the people will decide again and again who they want to govern
if you stick with the traditional Thailand then its the amart/military that decide, everything
which method do you favour?