Jakrapop must be quite frustrated that he can reach the reds mainly through his columns in the Red News. In them, he can criticize the present red leaders for limiting their political direction by supporting Democracy with the King as Head of State, and of getting rid of Prem, while, from his perspective, they should establish more fundamental goals. He must have been upset when he saw the picture of his former colleagues signing the get-well-soon book for the king at Siriraj Hospital (wearing red ties…). He might have also disliked when Veera spoke of a “New Thai State” but limited this to a change of the monarchy similar to what had erlier happened in the UK and Japan. Would Jakrapop’s presence in Thailand make things any better for the reds, I wonder?
I am inclined to sympathize with several of Jakrapob’s comments and points made, with a divergence on the so-called car bomb against his mentor Thaksin. I believe there was ample lack of evidence that there ever really was a car bomb per se, but rather that even Thaksin himself might have engineered the whole thing to generate sympathy on the one hand, and as a fake pass on the other to divert attention from his wrongdoings, most of which Jakrapob is hardly willing to admit to.
The pictures shown also spelled Thai words wrong.
The word murder р╕Жр╕▓р╕Хр╕Бр╕гр╕гр╕б, the picture spelled it wrong as р╕Жр╕▓р╕Ор╕Бр╕гр╕гр╕б.
The word Nonthaburi province р╕Щр╕Щр╕Чр╕Ър╕╕р╕гр╕╡, the picture spelled it wrong as р╕Щр╕Щр╕Чр╣Мр╕Ър╕╕р╕гр╕╡. It shows clearly that the pictures were not done by native Thai.
How many countries has nobody lived in? Is s/he trying to tell us that there is no qualitative or quantitative difference between the situation in Thailand and advanced democracies? (To make just one point, the ratio of officers to soldiers in the Thai army is 30x what it is in the US Army).
Jakaprob’s state within a state holds power akin or greater than the elected government. None of nobody’s alternative examples comes even close.
I’m afraid ASSK’s Western education seems to overshadow her earlier school days in India and later sojourns in Bhutan and Japan. Too much of the Western liberal in her but alas not nearly enough of political acumen despite having studied PPE at Oxford.
I remember very well the moment she rejected U Nu’s offer of joining an interim government out of hand in next to no time in 1988. My heart sank as I realised it was over. The split in the opposition, the inability to work together towards the common goal of overthrowing the military dictatorship, and the fear of civil war as if it hadn’t been going on for four decades by then, sealed the fate of the uprising after so many had made the ultimate sacrifice. She had already done the army a favour by denying publicly she wasn’t trying to split the Tatmadaw that her father founded. They of course closed ranks given the wrong signal they received. She could most certainly have done a Cori Aquino otherwise and would have been the premier for the best part of the last two decades. U Nu after all was very old but still with a good following, and did not live more than a few more years; it would have been easy enough to get rid of him later in any case. It’s all spilt milk now, and you would have thought she’d transformed from someone still politically wet behind the ears.
You are absolutely right about getting China and India on side. They are our immediate and giant neighbours after all. And she certainly is not her father. He had no qualms about the people’s right to armed resistance for freedom.
Every country has a state with in a state to some extent. It is just a matter of degree. Elected representatives hold greater to fealty to others than those that voted them in and fealty holding group manipulates.
As well as the state Jakrapob sees there are others even in Thailand
A quick look around up country also exposes another state within a state of the pro-Thaksin and also leftist groups.
Mafia groups also work as a state within a state on a local level.
Some would claim the police also work as a state within the state somewhat seperate from the group Jakrapob identifies.
I am taking a state within a state here to mean an unofficial and unelected network that can influence.
Jakrapob just uses this common concept to analyse one segment from his point of view and political bent. It is of course also a very old analysis in effect. Didnt McCargo write on Network monarchy and also the attempt to create network Thaksin to supercede it?
My personal experience with asbestose was a client who worked in his youth a couple of months only part-time in the central-heating industry in England. His whole live being healthy until 50/60 years later when asbestose was diagnosed which caused his death.
Thanks to Andrew and the translator. Here’s my try at JP’s five constituents of the state within the state:
1 Senior officials both civil and military that flourish constantly under the patronage system of the old power, and share out valuable power among themselves, sometimes coming into conflict.
2 Mechanisms to wield state power such as ISOC, Special Branch, Foreign Ministry, Thai Airways, and PTT.
3 Income-seeking groups, both old and new wealth, and the networking to convert new wealth into old or intermediate.
4 Academics with expertise on controlling politics through law such as by constitution-making, and embedding power and self-interest in subsidiary laws.
5. Agreements with the great powers, especially the US, to preserve mutual interests and avoid conflicting interests.
Alas, Aung San Suu Kyi is not as savvy, smart, pragmatic, dogmatic as her father. If her father was in her place, he would have first made friends with the Chinese and Indians against the junta. Politics is about U-turns and turn-arounds (ref to India’s turn-around’).
Under General Aung San, the Burmese army trained under the Japs to fight the Brits and then later on sided with the Brits to drive the Japs out.
Aung San Suu Kyi has too many friends in the West, she needed to cultivate Eastern friends too, afterall they are the immediate neighbours.
In 1990, after the landslide victory results of NLD, she was said to be flanked by the Western Ambassadors while the Eastern Ambassadors at the distance were hoping to get closer.
When the junta was being isolated, Chinese officials were said to have claimed that the fate of the junta was in the hollow of their hand.
I am waiting to hear responses if any, from China and other world leaders to Obama’s change of policy. The only response I have noticed is from Singapore. I think ASSK has jumped in too early to support this announcement.
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/09/24/myanmar.us/
(CNN) — Myanmar’s imprisoned pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi said Thursday she accepted a new shift in U.S. policy toward her country, her spokesman said. “It’s a good thing, I accept that, but it must be the right engagement on both sides of the junta and the opposition,” Suu Kyi said …”
How is the junta going to respond to Obama I wonder.
I think Observer is wrong. There has been lots written on the military. The observers just haven’t been watching the right space.
On a very rough count, Ockey has written 2-3 articles mainly on the military in the last few years. So has McCargo. Yoshifumi Tamada has written a lot in Japanese, and his main pieces on the military appeared in English in his book last year. In Thai, Surachart Bamrungsuk has been writing a weekly column of about 2,000 words on the military for around 20 years. Ukrist has also been writing a weekly column, of which about one in three or four are about the military – besides his JCA article and several seminar papers in English focused on the military. Wasana Nanuam now has two best-selling Thai books, a Bangkok Post column, and a radio show about the Thai military. Even in Fiji or Burma, I doubt there’s a Wasana equivalent.
Compared to other political topics – monarchy, electoral politics, protest movements, popular organization, media, public attitudes, etc, etc – there’s piles on the military.
Paul Chambers’ piece is a great piece and very timely. But one of the reasons it is so good is that there is such an extensive literature on the military that he can draw on and build on.
Make the democratic government incapable, worthless and deserving to be destroyed, and if it appears worthy and gaining authority, the accusations are immediately raised on corruption, “dictatorship” and lèse majesté which can be deployed immediately to annihilate any oppositional voices.
This is it. How can democracy mature if parties are never allowed to grow?
Observer: no need to be so touchy. I am just suggesting that there is more material about.
Of course, the military was about the only subject of academic commentary in political science for many years (here I over-generalize also, but you get my drift). It went off the radar somewhat after 1992-97 as a transition seemed to have taken place. The relative lack of attention to the military reflected the decline of the military’s overt political interventions (by way of coup) and their greatly reducing budget (until the 2006 coup). But that doesn’t mean that there aren’t people following them.
Ukrist’s article in English was mentioned because it is in English. I could have also mentioned Chapter 4 in his book with McCargo (which Chambers mentions). From about endnote 40 in that chapyer, Ukrist shows there were a ton of commentaries on the military in the Thai press during Thaksin’s time. And, Pasuk and Baker had a long section “Bringing Back the Military” in their Thaksin book.
Many of the news weeklies in Thai have regular commentaries on the military and politics and there is also regular commentary on the role of the military in the south. In English, Wasanna regularly writes her “From the Barracks” in the Bangkok Post and Jane’s still has regular content on teh Thai military.
But I agree that the academic analysis seems to have indeed died away as other themes became more significant, but they may make a return as doctoral students crank up. Like Kremlinologists, though, the political scientists who once watched the military have retired, moved to other topics, or passed on. Some of them, like Chai-Anan, are now engaged in a “higher struggle” even if the tactics are low.
I was shocked that my Thai other half in describing her house in Thailand said; the roof is made of sheet, the stuff that breaks put like this… I think if the populace were aware of the dangers then something might be done. I’m amazed asbestos is still used and more so that Canada is still producing it, shame on them. It’s cheap because so few countries will still allow it’s use. I’ve worked in construction and that side isn’t half the problem, asbestos is great stuff because it is so long lasting, it’ll be around long after it is finally banned and long after the buildings containing it are wanted. Then you have one huge problem.
“It was since the formation of the Thai Rak Thai party, when Thaksin became the Prime Minister in 2001 that we had tangible evidence that the “State within the state” in Thailand really exists”
What did Thaksin do with that ‘tangible evidence’?
and why did he allow the opposing/overarching side such a free kick by structuring his business & tax affairs like he did?
Was he trying to have his cake and eat it too?
(Things could have been different if only he was prepared to pay some tax).
Now there is more talk of a ‘settlement’ or reconcilation – I wonder if the final settlement will be better or worse than having paid tax on the Shin – Temasek deal in the first place?
Most impressive. Jakrapob anticipates the judgement of History.
If the absolutists had not built such a facade of lies, there would be less to condemn.
I may have over generalized to some degree, but that does not mean my core point, that the role of the military in Thai affairs does not receive the attention it deserves, is not correct.
I am now looking at Ukrist’s February 2008 article in JCA; A different kind of coup. I agree that this is another example of a good overview of events. I enjoyed it when it was published and will reread it. I also agree that there are some small efforts to discuss the military and that the Thai press does seem to have a broader scope.
However, this single example does not dent my claim that “The vast majority of commentary in Thailand is either opinion-based analysis or propaganda-based opinion.” or “the detailed role of the military is virtually a blank slate”.
I have made a clear statement: that the role of the military in Thai affairs does not receive the attention it deserves.
You have raised a few petty grievances with how I presented this case in my brief and informal comment. However, you have ignored the actual argument.
Is it your contention that the activities of the Thai military are subject to adequate scrutiny and oversight?
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Jakrapob on the state within the state
Jakrapop must be quite frustrated that he can reach the reds mainly through his columns in the Red News. In them, he can criticize the present red leaders for limiting their political direction by supporting Democracy with the King as Head of State, and of getting rid of Prem, while, from his perspective, they should establish more fundamental goals. He must have been upset when he saw the picture of his former colleagues signing the get-well-soon book for the king at Siriraj Hospital (wearing red ties…). He might have also disliked when Veera spoke of a “New Thai State” but limited this to a change of the monarchy similar to what had erlier happened in the UK and Japan. Would Jakrapop’s presence in Thailand make things any better for the reds, I wonder?
Jakrapob on the state within the state
I am inclined to sympathize with several of Jakrapob’s comments and points made, with a divergence on the so-called car bomb against his mentor Thaksin. I believe there was ample lack of evidence that there ever really was a car bomb per se, but rather that even Thaksin himself might have engineered the whole thing to generate sympathy on the one hand, and as a fake pass on the other to divert attention from his wrongdoings, most of which Jakrapob is hardly willing to admit to.
Jakrapob on the state within the state
Thank you Jakrapob Penkair!!!
The U.S., U.K. and China, did you hear what he said?
Even more Thai ephemera
The pictures shown also spelled Thai words wrong.
The word murder р╕Жр╕▓р╕Хр╕Бр╕гр╕гр╕б, the picture spelled it wrong as р╕Жр╕▓р╕Ор╕Бр╕гр╕гр╕б.
The word Nonthaburi province р╕Щр╕Щр╕Чр╕Ър╕╕р╕гр╕╡, the picture spelled it wrong as р╕Щр╕Щр╕Чр╣Мр╕Ър╕╕р╕гр╕╡. It shows clearly that the pictures were not done by native Thai.
Jakrapob on the state within the state
How many countries has nobody lived in? Is s/he trying to tell us that there is no qualitative or quantitative difference between the situation in Thailand and advanced democracies? (To make just one point, the ratio of officers to soldiers in the Thai army is 30x what it is in the US Army).
Jakaprob’s state within a state holds power akin or greater than the elected government. None of nobody’s alternative examples comes even close.
A Sino-Burmese border dance
Bamar,
I’m afraid ASSK’s Western education seems to overshadow her earlier school days in India and later sojourns in Bhutan and Japan. Too much of the Western liberal in her but alas not nearly enough of political acumen despite having studied PPE at Oxford.
I remember very well the moment she rejected U Nu’s offer of joining an interim government out of hand in next to no time in 1988. My heart sank as I realised it was over. The split in the opposition, the inability to work together towards the common goal of overthrowing the military dictatorship, and the fear of civil war as if it hadn’t been going on for four decades by then, sealed the fate of the uprising after so many had made the ultimate sacrifice. She had already done the army a favour by denying publicly she wasn’t trying to split the Tatmadaw that her father founded. They of course closed ranks given the wrong signal they received. She could most certainly have done a Cori Aquino otherwise and would have been the premier for the best part of the last two decades. U Nu after all was very old but still with a good following, and did not live more than a few more years; it would have been easy enough to get rid of him later in any case. It’s all spilt milk now, and you would have thought she’d transformed from someone still politically wet behind the ears.
You are absolutely right about getting China and India on side. They are our immediate and giant neighbours after all. And she certainly is not her father. He had no qualms about the people’s right to armed resistance for freedom.
Panrit Daoruang free
Gor’s life story “Thailand Life” is available at all Bookazine and AsiaBooks stores, DCOTHAI.com, and other websites, notably Gor’s own site,
http://www.buythaibooks.com/index.php?page=shop.product_details&flypage=flypage.tpl&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=64&product_id=48&category_id=10
Jakrapob on the state within the state
Every country has a state with in a state to some extent. It is just a matter of degree. Elected representatives hold greater to fealty to others than those that voted them in and fealty holding group manipulates.
As well as the state Jakrapob sees there are others even in Thailand
A quick look around up country also exposes another state within a state of the pro-Thaksin and also leftist groups.
Mafia groups also work as a state within a state on a local level.
Some would claim the police also work as a state within the state somewhat seperate from the group Jakrapob identifies.
I am taking a state within a state here to mean an unofficial and unelected network that can influence.
Jakrapob just uses this common concept to analyse one segment from his point of view and political bent. It is of course also a very old analysis in effect. Didnt McCargo write on Network monarchy and also the attempt to create network Thaksin to supercede it?
Asbestos in Thailand
My personal experience with asbestose was a client who worked in his youth a couple of months only part-time in the central-heating industry in England. His whole live being healthy until 50/60 years later when asbestose was diagnosed which caused his death.
Jakrapob on the state within the state
Thanks to Andrew and the translator. Here’s my try at JP’s five constituents of the state within the state:
1 Senior officials both civil and military that flourish constantly under the patronage system of the old power, and share out valuable power among themselves, sometimes coming into conflict.
2 Mechanisms to wield state power such as ISOC, Special Branch, Foreign Ministry, Thai Airways, and PTT.
3 Income-seeking groups, both old and new wealth, and the networking to convert new wealth into old or intermediate.
4 Academics with expertise on controlling politics through law such as by constitution-making, and embedding power and self-interest in subsidiary laws.
5. Agreements with the great powers, especially the US, to preserve mutual interests and avoid conflicting interests.
A Sino-Burmese border dance
Moe Aung,
Alas, Aung San Suu Kyi is not as savvy, smart, pragmatic, dogmatic as her father. If her father was in her place, he would have first made friends with the Chinese and Indians against the junta. Politics is about U-turns and turn-arounds (ref to India’s turn-around’).
Under General Aung San, the Burmese army trained under the Japs to fight the Brits and then later on sided with the Brits to drive the Japs out.
Aung San Suu Kyi has too many friends in the West, she needed to cultivate Eastern friends too, afterall they are the immediate neighbours.
In 1990, after the landslide victory results of NLD, she was said to be flanked by the Western Ambassadors while the Eastern Ambassadors at the distance were hoping to get closer.
When the junta was being isolated, Chinese officials were said to have claimed that the fate of the junta was in the hollow of their hand.
I am waiting to hear responses if any, from China and other world leaders to Obama’s change of policy. The only response I have noticed is from Singapore. I think ASSK has jumped in too early to support this announcement.
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/09/24/myanmar.us/
(CNN) — Myanmar’s imprisoned pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi said Thursday she accepted a new shift in U.S. policy toward her country, her spokesman said. “It’s a good thing, I accept that, but it must be the right engagement on both sides of the junta and the opposition,” Suu Kyi said …”
How is the junta going to respond to Obama I wonder.
Thailand’s military: perpetually political, forever factionalized, again ascendant
I think Observer is wrong. There has been lots written on the military. The observers just haven’t been watching the right space.
On a very rough count, Ockey has written 2-3 articles mainly on the military in the last few years. So has McCargo. Yoshifumi Tamada has written a lot in Japanese, and his main pieces on the military appeared in English in his book last year. In Thai, Surachart Bamrungsuk has been writing a weekly column of about 2,000 words on the military for around 20 years. Ukrist has also been writing a weekly column, of which about one in three or four are about the military – besides his JCA article and several seminar papers in English focused on the military. Wasana Nanuam now has two best-selling Thai books, a Bangkok Post column, and a radio show about the Thai military. Even in Fiji or Burma, I doubt there’s a Wasana equivalent.
Compared to other political topics – monarchy, electoral politics, protest movements, popular organization, media, public attitudes, etc, etc – there’s piles on the military.
Paul Chambers’ piece is a great piece and very timely. But one of the reasons it is so good is that there is such an extensive literature on the military that he can draw on and build on.
Panrit Daoruang free
Hear, hear!
Jakrapob on the state within the state
Make the democratic government incapable, worthless and deserving to be destroyed, and if it appears worthy and gaining authority, the accusations are immediately raised on corruption, “dictatorship” and lèse majesté which can be deployed immediately to annihilate any oppositional voices.
This is it. How can democracy mature if parties are never allowed to grow?
Thailand’s military: perpetually political, forever factionalized, again ascendant
Observer: no need to be so touchy. I am just suggesting that there is more material about.
Of course, the military was about the only subject of academic commentary in political science for many years (here I over-generalize also, but you get my drift). It went off the radar somewhat after 1992-97 as a transition seemed to have taken place. The relative lack of attention to the military reflected the decline of the military’s overt political interventions (by way of coup) and their greatly reducing budget (until the 2006 coup). But that doesn’t mean that there aren’t people following them.
Ukrist’s article in English was mentioned because it is in English. I could have also mentioned Chapter 4 in his book with McCargo (which Chambers mentions). From about endnote 40 in that chapyer, Ukrist shows there were a ton of commentaries on the military in the Thai press during Thaksin’s time. And, Pasuk and Baker had a long section “Bringing Back the Military” in their Thaksin book.
Many of the news weeklies in Thai have regular commentaries on the military and politics and there is also regular commentary on the role of the military in the south. In English, Wasanna regularly writes her “From the Barracks” in the Bangkok Post and Jane’s still has regular content on teh Thai military.
But I agree that the academic analysis seems to have indeed died away as other themes became more significant, but they may make a return as doctoral students crank up. Like Kremlinologists, though, the political scientists who once watched the military have retired, moved to other topics, or passed on. Some of them, like Chai-Anan, are now engaged in a “higher struggle” even if the tactics are low.
Asbestos in Thailand
I was shocked that my Thai other half in describing her house in Thailand said; the roof is made of sheet, the stuff that breaks put like this… I think if the populace were aware of the dangers then something might be done. I’m amazed asbestos is still used and more so that Canada is still producing it, shame on them. It’s cheap because so few countries will still allow it’s use. I’ve worked in construction and that side isn’t half the problem, asbestos is great stuff because it is so long lasting, it’ll be around long after it is finally banned and long after the buildings containing it are wanted. Then you have one huge problem.
Panrit Daoruang free
and my day too..! 🙂
i wish you all the best gor..!
Jakrapob on the state within the state
“It was since the formation of the Thai Rak Thai party, when Thaksin became the Prime Minister in 2001 that we had tangible evidence that the “State within the state” in Thailand really exists”
What did Thaksin do with that ‘tangible evidence’?
and why did he allow the opposing/overarching side such a free kick by structuring his business & tax affairs like he did?
Was he trying to have his cake and eat it too?
(Things could have been different if only he was prepared to pay some tax).
Now there is more talk of a ‘settlement’ or reconcilation – I wonder if the final settlement will be better or worse than having paid tax on the Shin – Temasek deal in the first place?
Jakrapob on the state within the state
Most impressive. Jakrapob anticipates the judgement of History.
If the absolutists had not built such a facade of lies, there would be less to condemn.
Thailand’s military: perpetually political, forever factionalized, again ascendant
Ralph,
I may have over generalized to some degree, but that does not mean my core point, that the role of the military in Thai affairs does not receive the attention it deserves, is not correct.
I am now looking at Ukrist’s February 2008 article in JCA; A different kind of coup. I agree that this is another example of a good overview of events. I enjoyed it when it was published and will reread it. I also agree that there are some small efforts to discuss the military and that the Thai press does seem to have a broader scope.
However, this single example does not dent my claim that “The vast majority of commentary in Thailand is either opinion-based analysis or propaganda-based opinion.” or “the detailed role of the military is virtually a blank slate”.
I have made a clear statement: that the role of the military in Thai affairs does not receive the attention it deserves.
You have raised a few petty grievances with how I presented this case in my brief and informal comment. However, you have ignored the actual argument.
Is it your contention that the activities of the Thai military are subject to adequate scrutiny and oversight?