[…] NEW MANDALA – Newin @ Samak’s Funeral: Conflict to the End BANGKOK POST – Police Swoop on Corruption Suspects in Major Raid (police vs. police) THE CASUAL TRUTH – Why Are Thais Always Protesting? BANGKOK POST – Thaksin’s Merely a Symptom of the Widespread Malaise ISN – Muddy Waters in Thai Deep South IPS – “Evacuation Drills Have Begun”: Thai-Cambodia Tension Gives Rise to Schools With Bunkers WASHINGTON TIMES – Thailand Seeks U.S. Help Battling Insurgents ASIA SENTINEL Don’t Cry for Samak: No Tears for a Thug BANGKOK POST – Last Rites: Large Turnout to Mourn Samak DAYLIFE/AP – Samak Bathing Rite (photo) TAN – The Prem Interview (transcript) THE NATION – The End Is Near: Thaksin’s Plan for Civil Chaos (who is Suriyasai?) […]
Surely gentlemen Wassana should essentially be judged on how accurate her information – i.e. her reporting – is, rather than whether or not she has precisely grasped the finer details of Thai prose, academic precision and fine tuning, etc.
There’s a famous saying : “journalism is history’s first draft”.
As far as I can see, she writes this superbly – full of insights, often accurate, rather than the endless whirligig of gossip which plagues and hampers so many attempts by us outsiders to understand this perplexing culture.
Conflict to the end or the end of conflict ?
Nick – congratulations once again for your continuing excellent, brave, on-the-scene reports.
When is your next book published?
At least the Thai elite gathered in a reasonably peaceful atmosphere – a somewhat hopeful sign they may eventually reach a compromise, thereby avoiding untold bloodshed and possibly the violent break-up and collapse of Thailand.
Samak was a distasteful character, in certain ways, but it would
be wonderfully ironic if his funeral rites became part of a national healing process, under Royal auspices.
According to the graph, it argues that government policies prior to 2000 worked against agricultural prices. In other words, the previous Thai government policies from 1970s to 2000 worked against the Thai farmers, only from 200o Thaksin’s government policy onward that the agricultural prices were above the zero line which gave farmers a better deal.
I have an agree and disagree arguments to make.
Agree:
I agree that “from the mid-1990s in China and 2000 in Southeast Asia the average NRA [nominal rates of assistance] switched sign and became slightly positive. (page 6)”. Like most other developing countries government in Latin America and Africa, Thaksin had introduced populist policy which benefited the Thai farmers. China was also attempting to bridge the gap between urban and rural sector for the country stability.
Disagree:
I think the chart and its argument provide only one-dimensional perspective of the multi-faceted historical context during 1970s-2000s. It failed to explain the politics of the past period which had played a crucial role in the economic and political development of China and Southeast Asia. Basing on one-dimensional graphic chart, the historical fact could be distorted. Let me explain my argument in three sections:
I) “Prior to the 1980s, agricultural price policies, together with trade and exchange rate policies, almost always reduced farmers’ earnings in China and Southeast Asia.” I argue against this statement for the following:
a) Prior to 1980s, China was preoccupied with its internal chaos of proletarian cultural revolution from 1966-1976 (1966-1969 on Mao’s Cultural Revolution and 1969-1976 the Gang of Four problem). China didn’t have any agricultural policy toward any farmers, it was a central plan economy, everyone worked for the State and the whole country were simply starving. In other words, Mao was pursuing an equal distribution of poverty.
b) Prior to 1980s, Thailand was the host country for the U.S.military base against Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia in the Vietnam War. During the 1960s, Thailand was still truly backward agricultural country. The First National Economic Development Plan (1961-1965) was initiated by Dr. Puey Unphakorn who also laid down the financial foundation for Thailand’s future industrialization in his capacity as the Governor of the Central Bank. Foreign Direct Investment began to pour in. Import liberalization for infant industry was introduced. From the Second to the Fourth National Plan (1966-1976), amidst the 1973 world oil crisis and depression, Dr. Puey successfully moved the country toward export-oriented industries which had made Thailand a higher GNP than its immediate neighboring countries at the present time (Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, Myanmar). Prior to 1980s, three-fourth of the Thai farmers were engaged as communist insurgencies, thus, the agricultural price policies had no impact on them. Thailand revenue at the time was not based on the Thai farmers, it was based on the USAID and the Pentagon during the Vietnam war.
II) “The only exceptions were the Philippines in the latter 1960s and Indonesia in the latter 1970s.” I also think this statement fails to reflect the reality of those two countries political economy.
a) Prior to 1980s, both the Philippines and Indonesia were not seriously undertaken their National Economic Development Plans as other ASEAN countries at the time. As a result, their GNP currently are far behind Thailand, Malaysia, and Singapore. More importantly, Singapore ( South Korea and Taiwan) has been focused on urban development to increase its human capital and high value-added industries which has made Singapore now a developed country, while Thailand, Malaysia, the Philippines and Indonesia are still a developing country because of their policies against urban development and only put an emphasis on rural development and agricultural growth.
Based on 2004 Purchasing Power Parity GNP Per Capita in international $
Singapore $27,370
Malaysia $ 9,720
Thailand $ 7,930
Philippines$ 4,950
Indonesia $ 3,480
III) “That explicit or implicit taxation declined from the early 1980s,”
I argue in contrary to the statement for the following reasons:
a) In early 1980s, Deng policy which reversed Mao’s policy began to take effect. Deng, the pragmatic reformist, came to power in 1978 and opened up China to the world as well as initiated the reform toward market economy. Graduated with economics degree from France, Deng strongly believe in market mechanism. Deng’s “Seek Truth from Facts” policy had made the Chinese farmers better off because Deng let the market worked its rule. China was still a mixed economy of central plan and market economy. Thus, I think it is inaccurate to say that it was the explicit or implicit taxation declined that was responsible for the better off of the Chinese farmers when in fact it was the opposite. In other words, the article said that it was the government intervention when in fact it was the government less intervention in the case of China.
b) In the case of Thailand, in early 1980s, Prem initiated the negotiation with the members of the Communist Party of Thailand. Consequently, the amnesty was declared. This helped to end the violent fighting between the government and the communist fighters. In addition, the U.S. poured in all kinds of aids for agricultural development as the communist fighters turned farmers, i.e. IFPRI to increase rice productivity, road infrastructure, etc. It wasn’t the explicit or implicit taxation decline rather it was the external assistant that determined the welfare of the Thai farmers at the time. Prem initiated the policy that created peace and prosperity for the Thai farmers but according to this chart it was the contrary.
I think the chart is too one-dimensional to explain the complex situation from 1970s-200o in China and Southeast Asia.
Stephen
Points well taken. One should read this well researched thoroughly objective article by My Kipen: http://kukiforum.com/community-articles/articles/1645-us-engagement-must-understand-burmas-diversity.html
and realize how far off reality the west has strayed in using that as one of the whip against SPDC.
Tom Kramer might be helpful to the citizenry through his uncoupling of Humanitarian, Healthcare and Educational aids advocacy.
“I salute him for this bold effort and promise to challenge any detractors of this great advocacy to the hilt”.
That being sad TF made a serious and flawed assumption of the ethnic groups-“self serving” deals and imply that as negative giving KNU as an example who has continually opposed SPDC. KNU has no choice the others do under the do or die policy of Ne Win and now SPDC.
TF assumption again dangerously reflect the west flippant attitude of simplifying the ongoing Ethic strives.
KNU is the result of a failed remnant of of HRM attempt to destabilized Burma. The animosity b/t Kareni and Burman were initiated solely by HRM divide and rule tactic that went out of control with historical documented repeated atrocities from both sides.
TF is at best guilty of not looking at Myanmar history far back enough at worst justify the west useless careless application of sanction using now “ethnic” as a reason.
Again an absolutely BAD reason to use to justify their unjustifiable acts of last 2 decades!
I am afraid he build his advocacy on wrong premises.
As you know well the result of “a house built on sand as opposed to rock”
He should simply has said the sanctions that have been
inclusive of Education, Healthcare and Humanitarian aids to the targeted country is intolerable,Period.
Thaksin’s son Panthongtae and daughter Pinthongta also launched their own internet TV station on Monday. Please check
One clickable icon shows bathing rites for Samak and also when he was interviewed by former iTV journalist Chom, who was recently kicked out from a govt-controlled station for interviewing Thaksin.
Your interpretation of Yasmin Ahmad’s is interesting. In my mind, the young Chinese boy, refused to sell/give the chocolate to the Malay girl – although he likes her – because of the hounding of his mother – who reminded him that he was not welcomed in this (Malaysia) country. So, I’m not sure how you came to the above conclusion.
In reality “Peace” is only on the surface – with a citizenry that is outright fearful of its government (as in the case of Singapore) and a citizenry that is blatantly brutalised by the government for speaking up (as in the case of Malaysia).
However, your view is representative of many Malaysians & Singaporeans who have come to accept injustice as fait accompli to “prosperity”, “peace” & “stability”, of many foreigners who are taken by Malaysia & Singapore’s sophisticated advertising campaigns and the illegal immigrants who finds Malaysia a paradise compared to the brutality he/she has to suffer in his/her home country (I’m referring to refugees from Burma, or the abject poor from Malaysia & Singapore’s neighbours.)
I’d humbly recommend that you watch all 15 videos and also have chats with Malaysians of different race and background to get a better understanding of Malaysia.
Have recently returned from VTE and indeed there’s a widespread sense of anticipation and a very active campaign to see the place spruced up. While it’s pleasing to see that Laos intends to put the best possible face on their moment in the spotlight, it’s regrettable they don’t feel it can be done without a very visible increase in uniformed security.
When I watched the film I couldn’t help making a comparison between Singapore and Malaysia. It seems to me countries that pursue diversity policy and economic growth produce peaceful harmonious society as well as high purchasing power among their citizens. It simply creates a prosperous country where everyone can buy chocolate without expecting panhandling or making race and religious out of a chocolate.
By the way, it’s in Mandarin Chinese.
PlanB, having read Kramer’s Neither War Nor Peace, I do not think that he is suggesting (veiled or otherwise) military assistance to ceasefire groups to overthrow the SPDC. Rather, he is suggesting that “international actors… should actively engage with them, and involve them in discussions.” I believe his approach is coming from the understanding that many in the West have vilified ceasefire groups as being unprincipled, abusive and self-serving as compared with the KNU and others who have not agreed to ceasefires and who are deemed to be principled, pro-human rights etc.
Such engagement is also somewhat akin to Ashley South’s argument of supporting civil-society and development work in ceasefire areas:
“if the ceasefires can be turned into vehicles for the reconstruction of local communities and economies, they may promote reconciliation and reform in Myanmar, and over time foster the emergence of genuine peace.”
I also believe that you have elsewhere argued that engagement (diplomatic, economic, humanitarian etc.), rather than vilification, is a crucial and ethical international approach to Burma/Myanmar.
Tom Kramer
Veiled suggestion of assisting the “ethnic group” by the west is exactly how the present SPDC has come about through similar perceived west approach. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb6479/is_3_30/ai_n31178685/
Playing a political chess game that he has no personal stake in is fine and dandy.
What if the west is so successful and SPDC became an armed marauding faction?
Tom Kramer is not promoting dialogue or engagement or even proof himself being knowledgeable about Myanmar.
His intent is clearly to bring down SPDC.
This has been done carelessly for 2 decades with the strengthen defiant SPDC.
Tom Kramer should do his home work on Myanmar again starting with understanding the culture.
and for those who are not aware there is now a Thai Red News (Thai language weekly tabloid) available on some newstands since May (and Thai Red News sms; and online site -though/surprise, surprise/with links blocked from time to time: http://www.thairednews.com/
They are off to a good start with homophobic suggestions about Newin and the “non-political” king’s mate Vasit Dejakunchorn railing against Thaksin. Not exactly “beyond tabloid” but I guess you could say that in the overall dumbing down of Thai media.
After 2 decades of relentless vilification, sanctions and constant threat of being topple the west have the audacity to assume that just by saying “let’s talk” will make SPDC salivate for west’s trade.
The SPDC survived albeit at the expense of the citizenry.
DO you think the west might like to even admit that fact let alone dignify the damages in terms of sufferings of the maost vulnerable?
SUsie Wong you are correct. Hillary is a good example of the west do not know Burmese or even care to know.
Sanctioned for 2 decades expecting result of engagement in western term for 2decades more?
As I see it there is no genuine engagement effort by the west.
Yet
40 baht once a week puts it into the market with Matichon and Nation weekly productions (the Nation weekly Thai magazine not English newspaper) aimed at the more “discerning” political readers. It is quite competetive now especially since Matichon readership declined. The market is mostly aimed at middle class, urban people with the biggest market in Bangkok. ASTV are no doubt aiming at picking up some of Matichon’s lost readership who abandoned the magazine of repute when its line diverged far from the PAD one (and the PAD and some others have accused Matichon, and not without some effect, of being anything from too Thaksin orientated to being under his control). They will also no doubt pick up some from Nation magazine. Interesting development. The PAD does have a fair deal of support among the middle classes and this magazine could do well.
Interesting that ASTV have also now moved beyond tabloid and TV journalism to a more highbrow sector where they previously were not represented. Their coverage is growing even if their overall support is probably as low as it has been yet.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Samak: Conflict to the end
Once again, Nick Nostitz is the reporter on the spot, taking the photos that reveal all………..
Samak: Conflict to the end
[…] NEW MANDALA – Newin @ Samak’s Funeral: Conflict to the End BANGKOK POST – Police Swoop on Corruption Suspects in Major Raid (police vs. police) THE CASUAL TRUTH – Why Are Thais Always Protesting? BANGKOK POST – Thaksin’s Merely a Symptom of the Widespread Malaise ISN – Muddy Waters in Thai Deep South IPS – “Evacuation Drills Have Begun”: Thai-Cambodia Tension Gives Rise to Schools With Bunkers WASHINGTON TIMES – Thailand Seeks U.S. Help Battling Insurgents ASIA SENTINEL Don’t Cry for Samak: No Tears for a Thug BANGKOK POST – Last Rites: Large Turnout to Mourn Samak DAYLIFE/AP – Samak Bathing Rite (photo) TAN – The Prem Interview (transcript) THE NATION – The End Is Near: Thaksin’s Plan for Civil Chaos (who is Suriyasai?) […]
Review of Wassana
Surely gentlemen Wassana should essentially be judged on how accurate her information – i.e. her reporting – is, rather than whether or not she has precisely grasped the finer details of Thai prose, academic precision and fine tuning, etc.
There’s a famous saying : “journalism is history’s first draft”.
As far as I can see, she writes this superbly – full of insights, often accurate, rather than the endless whirligig of gossip which plagues and hampers so many attempts by us outsiders to understand this perplexing culture.
Samak: Conflict to the end
Conflict to the end or the end of conflict ?
Nick – congratulations once again for your continuing excellent, brave, on-the-scene reports.
When is your next book published?
At least the Thai elite gathered in a reasonably peaceful atmosphere – a somewhat hopeful sign they may eventually reach a compromise, thereby avoiding untold bloodshed and possibly the violent break-up and collapse of Thailand.
Samak was a distasteful character, in certain ways, but it would
be wonderfully ironic if his funeral rites became part of a national healing process, under Royal auspices.
Engaged Buddhism Conference in Chiangmai
I think the Thai Buddhist monks should get a real job to bring in income so that the Thai women don’t have to work as prostitutes.
The historical origins of populism
According to the graph, it argues that government policies prior to 2000 worked against agricultural prices. In other words, the previous Thai government policies from 1970s to 2000 worked against the Thai farmers, only from 200o Thaksin’s government policy onward that the agricultural prices were above the zero line which gave farmers a better deal.
I have an agree and disagree arguments to make.
Agree:
I agree that “from the mid-1990s in China and 2000 in Southeast Asia the average NRA [nominal rates of assistance] switched sign and became slightly positive. (page 6)”. Like most other developing countries government in Latin America and Africa, Thaksin had introduced populist policy which benefited the Thai farmers. China was also attempting to bridge the gap between urban and rural sector for the country stability.
Disagree:
I think the chart and its argument provide only one-dimensional perspective of the multi-faceted historical context during 1970s-2000s. It failed to explain the politics of the past period which had played a crucial role in the economic and political development of China and Southeast Asia. Basing on one-dimensional graphic chart, the historical fact could be distorted. Let me explain my argument in three sections:
I) “Prior to the 1980s, agricultural price policies, together with trade and exchange rate policies, almost always reduced farmers’ earnings in China and Southeast Asia.” I argue against this statement for the following:
a) Prior to 1980s, China was preoccupied with its internal chaos of proletarian cultural revolution from 1966-1976 (1966-1969 on Mao’s Cultural Revolution and 1969-1976 the Gang of Four problem). China didn’t have any agricultural policy toward any farmers, it was a central plan economy, everyone worked for the State and the whole country were simply starving. In other words, Mao was pursuing an equal distribution of poverty.
b) Prior to 1980s, Thailand was the host country for the U.S.military base against Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia in the Vietnam War. During the 1960s, Thailand was still truly backward agricultural country. The First National Economic Development Plan (1961-1965) was initiated by Dr. Puey Unphakorn who also laid down the financial foundation for Thailand’s future industrialization in his capacity as the Governor of the Central Bank. Foreign Direct Investment began to pour in. Import liberalization for infant industry was introduced. From the Second to the Fourth National Plan (1966-1976), amidst the 1973 world oil crisis and depression, Dr. Puey successfully moved the country toward export-oriented industries which had made Thailand a higher GNP than its immediate neighboring countries at the present time (Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, Myanmar). Prior to 1980s, three-fourth of the Thai farmers were engaged as communist insurgencies, thus, the agricultural price policies had no impact on them. Thailand revenue at the time was not based on the Thai farmers, it was based on the USAID and the Pentagon during the Vietnam war.
II) “The only exceptions were the Philippines in the latter 1960s and Indonesia in the latter 1970s.” I also think this statement fails to reflect the reality of those two countries political economy.
a) Prior to 1980s, both the Philippines and Indonesia were not seriously undertaken their National Economic Development Plans as other ASEAN countries at the time. As a result, their GNP currently are far behind Thailand, Malaysia, and Singapore. More importantly, Singapore ( South Korea and Taiwan) has been focused on urban development to increase its human capital and high value-added industries which has made Singapore now a developed country, while Thailand, Malaysia, the Philippines and Indonesia are still a developing country because of their policies against urban development and only put an emphasis on rural development and agricultural growth.
Based on 2004 Purchasing Power Parity GNP Per Capita in international $
Singapore $27,370
Malaysia $ 9,720
Thailand $ 7,930
Philippines$ 4,950
Indonesia $ 3,480
III) “That explicit or implicit taxation declined from the early 1980s,”
I argue in contrary to the statement for the following reasons:
a) In early 1980s, Deng policy which reversed Mao’s policy began to take effect. Deng, the pragmatic reformist, came to power in 1978 and opened up China to the world as well as initiated the reform toward market economy. Graduated with economics degree from France, Deng strongly believe in market mechanism. Deng’s “Seek Truth from Facts” policy had made the Chinese farmers better off because Deng let the market worked its rule. China was still a mixed economy of central plan and market economy. Thus, I think it is inaccurate to say that it was the explicit or implicit taxation declined that was responsible for the better off of the Chinese farmers when in fact it was the opposite. In other words, the article said that it was the government intervention when in fact it was the government less intervention in the case of China.
b) In the case of Thailand, in early 1980s, Prem initiated the negotiation with the members of the Communist Party of Thailand. Consequently, the amnesty was declared. This helped to end the violent fighting between the government and the communist fighters. In addition, the U.S. poured in all kinds of aids for agricultural development as the communist fighters turned farmers, i.e. IFPRI to increase rice productivity, road infrastructure, etc. It wasn’t the explicit or implicit taxation decline rather it was the external assistant that determined the welfare of the Thai farmers at the time. Prem initiated the policy that created peace and prosperity for the Thai farmers but according to this chart it was the contrary.
I think the chart is too one-dimensional to explain the complex situation from 1970s-200o in China and Southeast Asia.
Engaged Buddhism Conference in Chiangmai
[…] […]
Prospects for ceasefire “engagement”?
Stephen
Points well taken. One should read this well researched thoroughly objective article by My Kipen:
http://kukiforum.com/community-articles/articles/1645-us-engagement-must-understand-burmas-diversity.html
and realize how far off reality the west has strayed in using that as one of the whip against SPDC.
Tom Kramer might be helpful to the citizenry through his uncoupling of Humanitarian, Healthcare and Educational aids advocacy.
“I salute him for this bold effort and promise to challenge any detractors of this great advocacy to the hilt”.
That being sad TF made a serious and flawed assumption of the ethnic groups-“self serving” deals and imply that as negative giving KNU as an example who has continually opposed SPDC. KNU has no choice the others do under the do or die policy of Ne Win and now SPDC.
TF assumption again dangerously reflect the west flippant attitude of simplifying the ongoing Ethic strives.
KNU is the result of a failed remnant of of HRM attempt to destabilized Burma. The animosity b/t Kareni and Burman were initiated solely by HRM divide and rule tactic that went out of control with historical documented repeated atrocities from both sides.
TF is at best guilty of not looking at Myanmar history far back enough at worst justify the west useless careless application of sanction using now “ethnic” as a reason.
Again an absolutely BAD reason to use to justify their unjustifiable acts of last 2 decades!
I am afraid he build his advocacy on wrong premises.
As you know well the result of “a house built on sand as opposed to rock”
He should simply has said the sanctions that have been
inclusive of Education, Healthcare and Humanitarian aids to the targeted country is intolerable,Period.
PAD supporters magazine
Thaksin’s son Panthongtae and daughter Pinthongta also launched their own internet TV station on Monday. Please check
One clickable icon shows bathing rites for Samak and also when he was interviewed by former iTV journalist Chom, who was recently kicked out from a govt-controlled station for interviewing Thaksin.
Jakrapob on the state within the state
In other words, John:
I honestly believe that the Thai public isn’t so naive as to think that any politician has their real interests at heart.
It seems we agree.
Engaged Buddhism Conference in Chiangmai
??? http://www.newmandala.org/2009/11/16/religion-is-the-opiate-of-the-masses/#comments
Malaysia in short films
Hi Susie,
Your interpretation of Yasmin Ahmad’s is interesting. In my mind, the young Chinese boy, refused to sell/give the chocolate to the Malay girl – although he likes her – because of the hounding of his mother – who reminded him that he was not welcomed in this (Malaysia) country. So, I’m not sure how you came to the above conclusion.
In reality “Peace” is only on the surface – with a citizenry that is outright fearful of its government (as in the case of Singapore) and a citizenry that is blatantly brutalised by the government for speaking up (as in the case of Malaysia).
However, your view is representative of many Malaysians & Singaporeans who have come to accept injustice as fait accompli to “prosperity”, “peace” & “stability”, of many foreigners who are taken by Malaysia & Singapore’s sophisticated advertising campaigns and the illegal immigrants who finds Malaysia a paradise compared to the brutality he/she has to suffer in his/her home country (I’m referring to refugees from Burma, or the abject poor from Malaysia & Singapore’s neighbours.)
I’d humbly recommend that you watch all 15 videos and also have chats with Malaysians of different race and background to get a better understanding of Malaysia.
SEA Games going to pot?
Have recently returned from VTE and indeed there’s a widespread sense of anticipation and a very active campaign to see the place spruced up. While it’s pleasing to see that Laos intends to put the best possible face on their moment in the spotlight, it’s regrettable they don’t feel it can be done without a very visible increase in uniformed security.
Malaysia in short films
Thanks for the chocolate!
When I watched the film I couldn’t help making a comparison between Singapore and Malaysia. It seems to me countries that pursue diversity policy and economic growth produce peaceful harmonious society as well as high purchasing power among their citizens. It simply creates a prosperous country where everyone can buy chocolate without expecting panhandling or making race and religious out of a chocolate.
By the way, it’s in Mandarin Chinese.
Prospects for ceasefire “engagement”?
PlanB, having read Kramer’s Neither War Nor Peace, I do not think that he is suggesting (veiled or otherwise) military assistance to ceasefire groups to overthrow the SPDC. Rather, he is suggesting that “international actors… should actively engage with them, and involve them in discussions.” I believe his approach is coming from the understanding that many in the West have vilified ceasefire groups as being unprincipled, abusive and self-serving as compared with the KNU and others who have not agreed to ceasefires and who are deemed to be principled, pro-human rights etc.
Such engagement is also somewhat akin to Ashley South’s argument of supporting civil-society and development work in ceasefire areas:
I also believe that you have elsewhere argued that engagement (diplomatic, economic, humanitarian etc.), rather than vilification, is a crucial and ethical international approach to Burma/Myanmar.
Prospects for ceasefire “engagement”?
Tom Kramer
Veiled suggestion of assisting the “ethnic group” by the west is exactly how the present SPDC has come about through similar perceived west approach.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb6479/is_3_30/ai_n31178685/
Playing a political chess game that he has no personal stake in is fine and dandy.
What if the west is so successful and SPDC became an armed marauding faction?
Tom Kramer is not promoting dialogue or engagement or even proof himself being knowledgeable about Myanmar.
His intent is clearly to bring down SPDC.
This has been done carelessly for 2 decades with the strengthen defiant SPDC.
Tom Kramer should do his home work on Myanmar again starting with understanding the culture.
PAD supporters magazine
and for those who are not aware there is now a Thai Red News (Thai language weekly tabloid) available on some newstands since May (and Thai Red News sms; and online site -though/surprise, surprise/with links blocked from time to time: http://www.thairednews.com/
PAD supporters magazine
They are off to a good start with homophobic suggestions about Newin and the “non-political” king’s mate Vasit Dejakunchorn railing against Thaksin. Not exactly “beyond tabloid” but I guess you could say that in the overall dumbing down of Thai media.
Burma sanctions debate simmers
After 2 decades of relentless vilification, sanctions and constant threat of being topple the west have the audacity to assume that just by saying “let’s talk” will make SPDC salivate for west’s trade.
The SPDC survived albeit at the expense of the citizenry.
DO you think the west might like to even admit that fact let alone dignify the damages in terms of sufferings of the maost vulnerable?
SUsie Wong you are correct. Hillary is a good example of the west do not know Burmese or even care to know.
Sanctioned for 2 decades expecting result of engagement in western term for 2decades more?
As I see it there is no genuine engagement effort by the west.
Yet
PAD supporters magazine
40 baht once a week puts it into the market with Matichon and Nation weekly productions (the Nation weekly Thai magazine not English newspaper) aimed at the more “discerning” political readers. It is quite competetive now especially since Matichon readership declined. The market is mostly aimed at middle class, urban people with the biggest market in Bangkok. ASTV are no doubt aiming at picking up some of Matichon’s lost readership who abandoned the magazine of repute when its line diverged far from the PAD one (and the PAD and some others have accused Matichon, and not without some effect, of being anything from too Thaksin orientated to being under his control). They will also no doubt pick up some from Nation magazine. Interesting development. The PAD does have a fair deal of support among the middle classes and this magazine could do well.
Interesting that ASTV have also now moved beyond tabloid and TV journalism to a more highbrow sector where they previously were not represented. Their coverage is growing even if their overall support is probably as low as it has been yet.