I like your $64,000 question. I doubt it if China and India would mind very much if Burma’s nuclear deterrent were aimed principally at the West so it couldn’t mess with the generals whilst they happily carried on with their own internal affairs of exploitation, repression and human rights violations. Pakistan has the nuke supposedly to counter India, but look how the US treads softly and handle Pakistan with kid gloves. The US probably wouldn’t pay much attention to Thailand’s concerns and fear of its old enemy unless it serves the purpose of a useful pretext to implement its own grand geopolitical design.
Well said Nick – Kavi is an otherwise highly intelligent man, but this is the silliest I’ve ever seen him. In conjunction with the torrent of PAD propaganda pouring out of The Nation, they’re obviously trying to pressure a pro-PAD coup.
Thank God for the cool, clear, calm Anupong.
Be very careful about this “Thailand” – there will be no more
“Thailand” if PAD comes to power. Lao Isaarn will fight by every means – its’ Third Army, the retired generals now joining
Peau Thai, “Seh Daeng”, prolonged guerrilla war.
Lao PDR will find it extremely difficult to stay neutral – and Lao PDR is ultimately protected by China. Cambodia’s Hun Sen is ultimately protected by Vietnam. “Thailand” against either, will be broken to pieces. Prem is too old.
Long live the Thai monarchy – though it needs modernising.
Chulalongkorn especially remains hugely reverred in Isaarn, and among Red Shirts – as liberator of slaves and father of democracy.
There’s not much mass base support for a “Thai” republic.
There’s a far larger mass base for Isaarn breaking away from “Thailand”, but under a common monarchy, if Bangkok – especially the Yellow Shirts – try to overthrow Chulalongkorn’s legacy, i.e. by disenfranchising, ie. re-enslaving Isaarn.
Susie Wong – I agree with what you say about Thailand’s ridiculous, repressive LM laws.
But you do not have to worry about the Crown Prince going to Germany.
I was once an exchange student in Germany – it has long been a completely different type of country, compared to when Rama 7 visited.
Also it should be noted that Rama 7 visited in 1933, when Hitler had only just come to power – few people had much idea then about how just how bad Hitler would turn out to be.
Ralph – you are being succinct, for once.
FACTS are listed in my post above – but I’ll give you page numbers in due course, also.
But – don’t expect me to do your homework for you : otherwise
I’ll suspect YOU of being “lazy”.
But to help you, I’ll, give you this :
in a much earlier post you said you were having difficulty finding evidence of Newin’s involvement in the 1,ooo rifles held by Khao Yai Rangers, which formed a major pretext for 2006 coup.
Here’s a hint :
Bangkok Post or Nation, one or two days after the coup, Newin’s face front-page. Now even YOU Ralph can find that !
I would like to add a historical fact intertwined with the reason behind why Phumipon sided with Chatchai Choonhavan in the 1992. Chatchai’s father, Phin Choonhavan took part in Boworadet rebellion against the 1932 Coup d’etat group. Phumipon has a preference in favor of those supporting Boworadet rebellion. The current privy councilor General Surayudh’s father also took part in Boworadet rebellion against the 1932 Coup d’etat group. That’s the main reason why Phumipon chose Surayudh as privy councilor. It’s not about about against military and for democracy. It is about consolidate Phumipon’s own power.
Another point, Phin Choonhavan served Japan with his 1947 coup against Pridi. Furthermore, during the 1980s-1990s Japan’s Liberal Democratic Party foreign policy objective was to put the children of those pro-Japan in power. In Burma, Aung San Suu Kyi won an electionin 1991, while Chatchai won election in 1988. Aung San collaborated with Japan and kicked the British out of Burma. Phin Choonhavan collaborated with Japan and drove Pridi Banomyong into exile in Paris.
I think in order to understand Phumipon’s political behavior, it would help if one makes a reference to history.
Stan G: “Perhaps the pretense that this latest bout of Nation bashing is being caused by feelings for Nazi victims is doing more damage to their memory than Kavi ever could.”
Congrajulations on one of the finest pieces of circular logic I’ve ever come across. So let me get this straight, in your little world damage is being done to the memory of holocaust victims, not by Kavi trivialising their plight, but by people *pointing out* that he’s trivialising their plight.
That’s truly wonderful Stan.
Just when I think the PAD ameoba can’t astonish me any further…
In modern monarchy system like the British monarchy, everything they do is public and transparent. On the contrary, majority of Thais didn’t even know that Vachiralongkorn went to Germany or why he flew to Germany so often.
More importantly, Thai political history record of King Prachatipok (Rama 7) met with Hitler in 1933 before World War II. So when Vachiralongkorn made frequent flight to Germany, the past history came back to haunt Thais again.
Foreign policy alliance is paramount involving the State. Yet Siam has an out-of-date lese majeste law that prohibits discussion about someone whose actions affect public affairs. In this context, the country will always be in crisis because the top is not in step with majority of Thai people.
The whole article sounds interesting until Kavi begins to bring the same tired old Nazi comparisons. My sycophancy radar though goes up when he salivates over Abhisit – “Abhisit’s ceaseless luck and good karma”, “His leadership’s transparency and accountability”, “The boyish leader”, “Unshakeable composure”, etc.
I think it is quite questionable when journalists describe any Prime Minister or holder of a high office with such adoring terms. We are supposed to be journalists, and not the self-appointed PR department of any given government.
Oh, Kavi is guilty of trivializing the enormity of Nazi crimes now.
Perhaps the pretense that this latest bout of Nation bashing is being caused by feelings for Nazi victims is doing more damage to their memory than Kavi ever could.
Agree with Somsak and Srithanonthai on the way that Kavi has been little different from the other ranters at The Nation since he decided that Thaksin was evil. But to complain of lies from anyone when The Nation’s op-ed page are so full of them is just ludicrous.
I’d like to comment of what he says about the king. Is he serious that “Thais have taken for granted that their King would live forever”? I doubt that Thais are as stupid as Kavi is portraying them. Just for starters, think of all the discussion of succession over many years. That hardly suggests that Kavi is conjuring.
Burmese generals will eventually get nukes with the cooperation of Russians if they really want it. Burma has had a very long history of technological cooperation with former Soviet Union, now Russia, since U Nu’s AFPFL government.
The only significant technical university in Burma, RIT, was built free by Soviets in the early fifties and run for a very long time by expatriate Russian Engineers and professors, and a small research reactor still running in then CRO now the Ministry of Technology and Scientific Research in Rangoon was also from Russia and run by the Russians.
Now the army has its own engineering university called Defense Services Technical Academy, DSTA in May-Myo, whose graduate officers have been sent en-massed secretly to Moscow mainly just to study the nuclear engineering.
Burma also has a significant deposit of Uranium and a massive load of slush-cash from selling tanker-loads of Natural Gas to China and Thailand over the years. The army also has a huge defense-industrial complex gradually and aggressively built over many decades to achieve the self-sufficiency in producing its own weaponry.
It is just a matter of few years before the army started spinning the thousands of sub-critical-speed Zippe Centrifuges made locally to the Russian designs to collect Uranium-235 from the raw Uranium from the Burmese mines.
North Korea has easily done it. Iranians have been successfully doing it. Not to mention India and Pakistan with their nuclear-armed-warheads. General Maung Aye’s dream of having a nuke by 2020 seems realistic enough.
But will the Burma’s powerful and massive neighbors, i.e. India and China and especially US through her proxy Thailand, let it happen?
It’s good you mention this, even though it seems pretty clear, to me at least, that the comments were addressing this point, and any educated reader would understand that.
As far as I can see, it undermines Kavi’s case even more. Tossing around references to Goebbels, as Ajarn Somsak points out, is not a compelling argument.It suggests an absence of evidence, not to mention a vacuity of mind.
I’d match Jatuporn’s credibility against The Nation’s any day of the week (you could start by reviewing Thanong’s writings for the past four years). I have to think he would also come out ahead in comparisons with the army, and the Democrat Party, the latter of which constantly traffics in rumors and calumny (an approach the more historical-minded will recall goes back to Pridi’s time.)
What big lies did you have in mind, by the way?
StanG said: On the other hand, in the rest of the quote Kavi explains the connection with Goebbels and his famous dictum on telling big lies, but that was conveniently left out by commentators.
To me the most surprising thing is that Kavi does not mention directly (though he hints) the possibility that Isaarn, and perhaps
Lanna, will break-away from “Thailand”, into an independent Lao state, perhaps in alliance with Lanna.
Certainly seeking help from the PDR, Cambodia, and Vietnam.
If Isaarn’s vote is not respected in the next election – or if the
election is cancelled via another anti-Thaksin coup – the likelihood of an independent Isaarn, rises significantly.
There will be no point in pretending the fiction that they are “Thai”.
Isaarn will have concluded that the “Thais” will never respect them, never treat them as equals, never listen to them.
I’ve never met an Isaarn person who did not say they were Lao
– well before any slight mention of them being “Thai” .
This despite decades of attempted “Thai” nation-building by
Bangkok’s military, via school indoctrination, etc.
Paul – YOU don’t get it ”
1) It was not a PERSONAL attack. But how could I possibly
know the inner workings of FEER ?
2) Agent provocateurs : I had been led down severeal soi by pu noi, into the area just past Phan Fa Bridge, into the main area
in front of Nang Lerng Police Station, where the atmosphere was extremely tense. After awhile standing around, some shots loudly broke out.
It was the first time in my life I’d ever heard live gun-fire – despite having been close to African revolutions / attempted coups due to my fathers’ UN background – and I’ll never forget that distinct sound of bullets.
Shortly after a journalist from your American ABC Network came up to me, and said :
he had crossed over Phan Fa, and had been among the crowd
along the narrow soi which runs along the canal on the right, as one faces towards the equestrian statue of Rama V, at the far end of Ratchadamoen Nok.
This ABC reporter told me he saw three men come out of a side-building facing that soi, and fire pistols with live ammunition directly into the crowd, at close quarters :
in retaliation what had hitherto been a largely peaceful demonstration (apart from bottle throwing, mentioned in your FEER coverage), turned violent.
I’ve no idea who these pistol-firing agent-provocateurs were, or who they worked for.
Only that you and FEER did not cover this.
YOUR FEER report blamed the violence on “past civilian-military confrontations”.
The main trigger for violence was these pistol-firing agent provocateurs – who fired intermittently for about 15-20 minutes, killing at least 3 people, according to that ABC reporter.
I reported this for Australia’s Broadside and Green Left Weekly, neither of whose politics I supported, simply because they were the only ones who would publish this truth.
I also spoke publicly about what I had witnessed at Sydney University’s Thai Update, later in ’92, in front of ANU’s Professor Peter Jackson, and – now ironically – Sondhi Limonthongkul !
At that time I knew little about the cynicism of Thai politics.
3) the EVIDENCE that your somewhat tortuous argument is wrong is that Thailand enjoyed 15 years of democracy !
Plus that May’92’s uprising was not totally crushed – when Generals Suchinda and Kaset seemed certainly to have almost done that.
You speak of the role of “technocratic bureaucrats and generals” waking Prem up to “falling over a cliff”.
WHAT DO YOU MEAN “FALLING OVER A CLIFF” ?
The stock exchange was close, but certainly would have re-opened if Suchinda, et al, had pushed their crack-down just a few steps further.
The ONLY explanation I can come up with is THE ONE WHICH CONTRADICTS YOUR ARGUMENT – namely that
HMK intervened on the side of democracy, BACKED ANAND, and supported democracy.
As you and Ralph rely SO MUCH on rumours, I’ll mention here one doing the rounds in the immediate aftermath of Suchinda’s
crackdown – namely that Prfem-loyal troops were moving on Bangkok, to protect the urprising. I first heard this from Western journalists, and when I mentioned it to Thais they treated it as common knowledge.
There’s no mention of this in your book. This is what I mean about your book “washing over” military factionalism.
Like clear Andaman Sea waves, your book is crystal-clear that there was military factionalism – but YOU HAVE MISSED THE POINT OF WHAT HAPPENED.
Finally, your points re. a) the Crown Prince and b) coups being stable or not :
a) I lived in the Don Meaung area for about 3 years, and found HRH popular out there – away from your elite journalist
“sources”.
b) even your American democracy took severeal centuries to
achieve stability, without further (?) threat of coups / civil war,
assassinations, etc.
To even begin to compare Jatuporn to Hitler’s henchman is so stupid there’s nothing more Kavi can intelligently say thereafter. (Goebbels had a blood-soaked, sinister, genocidal and industrially most advanced state machine in Europe behind him, what Jatuporn has that would even begin to enable a comparison?)
And consider this. The other side of the coin of those intellectually banckrupted journalists who’re quick to invoke Nazi personalities’ names is to trivailize the enormity of Nazi crimes, make them just ordinary, that can be conveniently invoked every time those journalists ran out of ideas, facts, and proper perspectives to write about (which unfortunately for readers, happens all too often).
On the other hand, in the rest of the quote Kavi explains the connection with Goebbels and his famous dictum on telling big lies, but that was conveniently left out by commentators.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Al Jazeera on Burma’s nukes
Hla Oo,
I like your $64,000 question. I doubt it if China and India would mind very much if Burma’s nuclear deterrent were aimed principally at the West so it couldn’t mess with the generals whilst they happily carried on with their own internal affairs of exploitation, repression and human rights violations. Pakistan has the nuke supposedly to counter India, but look how the US treads softly and handle Pakistan with kid gloves. The US probably wouldn’t pay much attention to Thailand’s concerns and fear of its old enemy unless it serves the purpose of a useful pretext to implement its own grand geopolitical design.
The sum of all fears
Well said Nick – Kavi is an otherwise highly intelligent man, but this is the silliest I’ve ever seen him. In conjunction with the torrent of PAD propaganda pouring out of The Nation, they’re obviously trying to pressure a pro-PAD coup.
Thank God for the cool, clear, calm Anupong.
Be very careful about this “Thailand” – there will be no more
“Thailand” if PAD comes to power. Lao Isaarn will fight by every means – its’ Third Army, the retired generals now joining
Peau Thai, “Seh Daeng”, prolonged guerrilla war.
Lao PDR will find it extremely difficult to stay neutral – and Lao PDR is ultimately protected by China. Cambodia’s Hun Sen is ultimately protected by Vietnam. “Thailand” against either, will be broken to pieces. Prem is too old.
Thailand’s crown prince
Long live the Thai monarchy – though it needs modernising.
Chulalongkorn especially remains hugely reverred in Isaarn, and among Red Shirts – as liberator of slaves and father of democracy.
There’s not much mass base support for a “Thai” republic.
There’s a far larger mass base for Isaarn breaking away from “Thailand”, but under a common monarchy, if Bangkok – especially the Yellow Shirts – try to overthrow Chulalongkorn’s legacy, i.e. by disenfranchising, ie. re-enslaving Isaarn.
New year wishes from …
Susie Wong – I agree with what you say about Thailand’s ridiculous, repressive LM laws.
But you do not have to worry about the Crown Prince going to Germany.
I was once an exchange student in Germany – it has long been a completely different type of country, compared to when Rama 7 visited.
Also it should be noted that Rama 7 visited in 1933, when Hitler had only just come to power – few people had much idea then about how just how bad Hitler would turn out to be.
Thaksin on Crown Prince Vajiralongkorn
Ralph – you are being succinct, for once.
FACTS are listed in my post above – but I’ll give you page numbers in due course, also.
But – don’t expect me to do your homework for you : otherwise
I’ll suspect YOU of being “lazy”.
But to help you, I’ll, give you this :
in a much earlier post you said you were having difficulty finding evidence of Newin’s involvement in the 1,ooo rifles held by Khao Yai Rangers, which formed a major pretext for 2006 coup.
Here’s a hint :
Bangkok Post or Nation, one or two days after the coup, Newin’s face front-page. Now even YOU Ralph can find that !
Thaksin on Crown Prince Vajiralongkorn
I would like to add a historical fact intertwined with the reason behind why Phumipon sided with Chatchai Choonhavan in the 1992. Chatchai’s father, Phin Choonhavan took part in Boworadet rebellion against the 1932 Coup d’etat group. Phumipon has a preference in favor of those supporting Boworadet rebellion. The current privy councilor General Surayudh’s father also took part in Boworadet rebellion against the 1932 Coup d’etat group. That’s the main reason why Phumipon chose Surayudh as privy councilor. It’s not about about against military and for democracy. It is about consolidate Phumipon’s own power.
Another point, Phin Choonhavan served Japan with his 1947 coup against Pridi. Furthermore, during the 1980s-1990s Japan’s Liberal Democratic Party foreign policy objective was to put the children of those pro-Japan in power. In Burma, Aung San Suu Kyi won an electionin 1991, while Chatchai won election in 1988. Aung San collaborated with Japan and kicked the British out of Burma. Phin Choonhavan collaborated with Japan and drove Pridi Banomyong into exile in Paris.
I think in order to understand Phumipon’s political behavior, it would help if one makes a reference to history.
The sum of all fears
Stan G: “Perhaps the pretense that this latest bout of Nation bashing is being caused by feelings for Nazi victims is doing more damage to their memory than Kavi ever could.”
Congrajulations on one of the finest pieces of circular logic I’ve ever come across. So let me get this straight, in your little world damage is being done to the memory of holocaust victims, not by Kavi trivialising their plight, but by people *pointing out* that he’s trivialising their plight.
That’s truly wonderful Stan.
Just when I think the PAD ameoba can’t astonish me any further…
New year wishes from …
In modern monarchy system like the British monarchy, everything they do is public and transparent. On the contrary, majority of Thais didn’t even know that Vachiralongkorn went to Germany or why he flew to Germany so often.
More importantly, Thai political history record of King Prachatipok (Rama 7) met with Hitler in 1933 before World War II. So when Vachiralongkorn made frequent flight to Germany, the past history came back to haunt Thais again.
Foreign policy alliance is paramount involving the State. Yet Siam has an out-of-date lese majeste law that prohibits discussion about someone whose actions affect public affairs. In this context, the country will always be in crisis because the top is not in step with majority of Thai people.
Thaksin on Crown Prince Vajiralongkorn
Nope, Chris doesn’t get it. I’m still waiting for facts and page numbers.
The sum of all fears
StanG: Kavi is trivialising by the ludicrous comparisons he makes.
The sum of all fears
The whole article sounds interesting until Kavi begins to bring the same tired old Nazi comparisons. My sycophancy radar though goes up when he salivates over Abhisit – “Abhisit’s ceaseless luck and good karma”, “His leadership’s transparency and accountability”, “The boyish leader”, “Unshakeable composure”, etc.
I think it is quite questionable when journalists describe any Prime Minister or holder of a high office with such adoring terms. We are supposed to be journalists, and not the self-appointed PR department of any given government.
The sum of all fears
Oh, Kavi is guilty of trivializing the enormity of Nazi crimes now.
Perhaps the pretense that this latest bout of Nation bashing is being caused by feelings for Nazi victims is doing more damage to their memory than Kavi ever could.
The sum of all fears
Agree with Somsak and Srithanonthai on the way that Kavi has been little different from the other ranters at The Nation since he decided that Thaksin was evil. But to complain of lies from anyone when The Nation’s op-ed page are so full of them is just ludicrous.
I’d like to comment of what he says about the king. Is he serious that “Thais have taken for granted that their King would live forever”? I doubt that Thais are as stupid as Kavi is portraying them. Just for starters, think of all the discussion of succession over many years. That hardly suggests that Kavi is conjuring.
Al Jazeera on Burma’s nukes
Burmese generals will eventually get nukes with the cooperation of Russians if they really want it. Burma has had a very long history of technological cooperation with former Soviet Union, now Russia, since U Nu’s AFPFL government.
The only significant technical university in Burma, RIT, was built free by Soviets in the early fifties and run for a very long time by expatriate Russian Engineers and professors, and a small research reactor still running in then CRO now the Ministry of Technology and Scientific Research in Rangoon was also from Russia and run by the Russians.
Now the army has its own engineering university called Defense Services Technical Academy, DSTA in May-Myo, whose graduate officers have been sent en-massed secretly to Moscow mainly just to study the nuclear engineering.
Burma also has a significant deposit of Uranium and a massive load of slush-cash from selling tanker-loads of Natural Gas to China and Thailand over the years. The army also has a huge defense-industrial complex gradually and aggressively built over many decades to achieve the self-sufficiency in producing its own weaponry.
It is just a matter of few years before the army started spinning the thousands of sub-critical-speed Zippe Centrifuges made locally to the Russian designs to collect Uranium-235 from the raw Uranium from the Burmese mines.
North Korea has easily done it. Iranians have been successfully doing it. Not to mention India and Pakistan with their nuclear-armed-warheads. General Maung Aye’s dream of having a nuke by 2020 seems realistic enough.
But will the Burma’s powerful and massive neighbors, i.e. India and China and especially US through her proxy Thailand, let it happen?
The sum of all fears
It’s good you mention this, even though it seems pretty clear, to me at least, that the comments were addressing this point, and any educated reader would understand that.
As far as I can see, it undermines Kavi’s case even more. Tossing around references to Goebbels, as Ajarn Somsak points out, is not a compelling argument.It suggests an absence of evidence, not to mention a vacuity of mind.
I’d match Jatuporn’s credibility against The Nation’s any day of the week (you could start by reviewing Thanong’s writings for the past four years). I have to think he would also come out ahead in comparisons with the army, and the Democrat Party, the latter of which constantly traffics in rumors and calumny (an approach the more historical-minded will recall goes back to Pridi’s time.)
What big lies did you have in mind, by the way?
StanG said: On the other hand, in the rest of the quote Kavi explains the connection with Goebbels and his famous dictum on telling big lies, but that was conveniently left out by commentators.
The sum of all fears
Kavi just committed LM!
Let’s lock him up with the same cell as those three(or four) including that doctor for dare talking about the king’s health!
Jatuporn can outwit Goebbels? Oh, please…
The sum of all fears
To me the most surprising thing is that Kavi does not mention directly (though he hints) the possibility that Isaarn, and perhaps
Lanna, will break-away from “Thailand”, into an independent Lao state, perhaps in alliance with Lanna.
Certainly seeking help from the PDR, Cambodia, and Vietnam.
If Isaarn’s vote is not respected in the next election – or if the
election is cancelled via another anti-Thaksin coup – the likelihood of an independent Isaarn, rises significantly.
There will be no point in pretending the fiction that they are “Thai”.
Isaarn will have concluded that the “Thais” will never respect them, never treat them as equals, never listen to them.
I’ve never met an Isaarn person who did not say they were Lao
– well before any slight mention of them being “Thai” .
This despite decades of attempted “Thai” nation-building by
Bangkok’s military, via school indoctrination, etc.
Thaksin on Crown Prince Vajiralongkorn
Paul – YOU don’t get it ”
1) It was not a PERSONAL attack. But how could I possibly
know the inner workings of FEER ?
2) Agent provocateurs : I had been led down severeal soi by pu noi, into the area just past Phan Fa Bridge, into the main area
in front of Nang Lerng Police Station, where the atmosphere was extremely tense. After awhile standing around, some shots loudly broke out.
It was the first time in my life I’d ever heard live gun-fire – despite having been close to African revolutions / attempted coups due to my fathers’ UN background – and I’ll never forget that distinct sound of bullets.
Shortly after a journalist from your American ABC Network came up to me, and said :
he had crossed over Phan Fa, and had been among the crowd
along the narrow soi which runs along the canal on the right, as one faces towards the equestrian statue of Rama V, at the far end of Ratchadamoen Nok.
This ABC reporter told me he saw three men come out of a side-building facing that soi, and fire pistols with live ammunition directly into the crowd, at close quarters :
in retaliation what had hitherto been a largely peaceful demonstration (apart from bottle throwing, mentioned in your FEER coverage), turned violent.
I’ve no idea who these pistol-firing agent-provocateurs were, or who they worked for.
Only that you and FEER did not cover this.
YOUR FEER report blamed the violence on “past civilian-military confrontations”.
The main trigger for violence was these pistol-firing agent provocateurs – who fired intermittently for about 15-20 minutes, killing at least 3 people, according to that ABC reporter.
I reported this for Australia’s Broadside and Green Left Weekly, neither of whose politics I supported, simply because they were the only ones who would publish this truth.
I also spoke publicly about what I had witnessed at Sydney University’s Thai Update, later in ’92, in front of ANU’s Professor Peter Jackson, and – now ironically – Sondhi Limonthongkul !
At that time I knew little about the cynicism of Thai politics.
3) the EVIDENCE that your somewhat tortuous argument is wrong is that Thailand enjoyed 15 years of democracy !
Plus that May’92’s uprising was not totally crushed – when Generals Suchinda and Kaset seemed certainly to have almost done that.
You speak of the role of “technocratic bureaucrats and generals” waking Prem up to “falling over a cliff”.
WHAT DO YOU MEAN “FALLING OVER A CLIFF” ?
The stock exchange was close, but certainly would have re-opened if Suchinda, et al, had pushed their crack-down just a few steps further.
The ONLY explanation I can come up with is THE ONE WHICH CONTRADICTS YOUR ARGUMENT – namely that
HMK intervened on the side of democracy, BACKED ANAND, and supported democracy.
As you and Ralph rely SO MUCH on rumours, I’ll mention here one doing the rounds in the immediate aftermath of Suchinda’s
crackdown – namely that Prfem-loyal troops were moving on Bangkok, to protect the urprising. I first heard this from Western journalists, and when I mentioned it to Thais they treated it as common knowledge.
There’s no mention of this in your book. This is what I mean about your book “washing over” military factionalism.
Like clear Andaman Sea waves, your book is crystal-clear that there was military factionalism – but YOU HAVE MISSED THE POINT OF WHAT HAPPENED.
Finally, your points re. a) the Crown Prince and b) coups being stable or not :
a) I lived in the Don Meaung area for about 3 years, and found HRH popular out there – away from your elite journalist
“sources”.
b) even your American democracy took severeal centuries to
achieve stability, without further (?) threat of coups / civil war,
assassinations, etc.
The sum of all fears
StanG:
“conveniently left out”?
To even begin to compare Jatuporn to Hitler’s henchman is so stupid there’s nothing more Kavi can intelligently say thereafter. (Goebbels had a blood-soaked, sinister, genocidal and industrially most advanced state machine in Europe behind him, what Jatuporn has that would even begin to enable a comparison?)
And consider this. The other side of the coin of those intellectually banckrupted journalists who’re quick to invoke Nazi personalities’ names is to trivailize the enormity of Nazi crimes, make them just ordinary, that can be conveniently invoked every time those journalists ran out of ideas, facts, and proper perspectives to write about (which unfortunately for readers, happens all too often).
The sum of all fears
On the other hand, in the rest of the quote Kavi explains the connection with Goebbels and his famous dictum on telling big lies, but that was conveniently left out by commentators.