Moe Aung: “There never was a socialist revolution in Burma unless again you suffer from another common misconception equating nationalisation and state capitalism with the real thing.”
The real thing? The “real thing” is what people actually do and achieve which unfortunately hasn’t been, comparatively, very much for post-WWII Burma under socialist-inspired ideas. Both before and after WWII many in Burma were inspired by the works of Marx and Fabian socialism (e.g. Furnivall and his Naga Nii book club). This trend culminated in a rainbow of different communist factions in revolt post-WWII (white flag, yellow flag, red flag,…) as well as the “Burmese Way to Socialism” ideology in Nei Win’s post-1962 government that seems to bear great resemblance to other failed socialist Marx-inspired political experiments, in eastern Europe, for instance, and is very different from Thailand where socialist meanderings were put to an abrupt halt in 1976, much to the betterment of the country’s prosperity. For the full story, I guess we’ll have to wait for the following book to see, I guess, due out early next year:
A History of Modern Burma (Paperback)
by Michael W. Charney (Author)
Paperback: 256 pages
Publisher: Cambridge University Press (January 31, 2009)
Let me be the first person here to welcome Thaksin Shinawatra back to politics. (Did he ever leave?)
It’s great to hear that he wants to fight his way out of a corner. I would encourage him to fully reveal the sins of his enemies so that they will be forced into revealing his.
To keep harping on the conviction of Thaksin, one must ignore the fact that the laws and constitution was changed by the military junta. My question is this. Is the military junta considered a legitimate law making body. If it is then I would argue that Aung San Suu Kyi is guilty as charged by the ruling Junta in Burma (OK, that may be a bit extreme, but the concept is the same)
The current constitution is made by th military to maintain ultimate control. The last time I read “democracy and rule of law 101” the only legitimate law making body in a democracy is the elected parliement. A military junta or a junta appointed govt has no business passing any laws, let alone changing the constitution.
When all participant get that clear, then we can have a real discussion, otherwise its like Betrand Russell said “If we start with the premise that a dead rat can jump” we can argue anything
Hello Jon
Afraid you ‘ve made a common enough mistake of confusing opinion with activist or group-think. There never was a socialist revolution in Burma unless again you suffer from another common misconception equating nationalisation and state capitalism with the real thing. It’s not so much the means but the end that matters, who benefits from any of these measures whomsoever you deal with, East or West. Cutting deals with the military regime is certainly the way to riches for all entrepreneurs, domestic or foreign. Feeding the people is quite another matter that takes sufficient political will on the part of the ruling elite to want to share the nation’s wealth. People don’t often see the wood for the trees, and a lot of learned analysis gets bogged down in detail and specifics.
“There are literally thousands of “NGOs” operating in Cambodia that are simply used as a tax loop hole. NGOs don’t pay taxes and can employ foreigners without much bureaucratic fuss. NGO laws, or lack there of, for many years have provided relatively easy visa entry for foreigners of dubious morals to stay for extended periods in Cambodia.”
Sounds a little bit like Thailand. An NGO or missionary status soliciting donations is a much easier way for people to support themselves and stay in Thailand long-term than running a business subject to the usual cut-throat competition and strict laws and capital requirements. Unquestioned praise with no critical questions asked is the usual response to NGOs. Who is going to question an NGO that helps AIDs babies or hill tribe orphans? This is the idea that one do-it-yourself NGO guy uses that he recommended to me also (not interested). A lot of fishy stuff is associated with NGOs also, like not drawing a line between your own personal assets and the NGOs assets, males overseeing large numbers of young women or boys unsupervised, accusations of human trafficking in collusion with the police, NGOs might even be a deceiving front for criminal activities sometimes…Thaksin cracked down on NGOs. Made the rules tougher. If anyone knows a source for Thaksin’s NGO policies please let me know. I only have anecdotal evidence. They probably want to eliminate the diehard cowboy activists like Matthew McDaniel who actually do reveal all sorts of things that powerful people don’t want people to know.
you have not been listening to what people from the Truth Today rally have been saying
the primary focus for them is one-person one-vote democracy!
I know from personal experience at the rally, the surprising number of people that volunteered they were their to support democracy!
and others have made the same comment in public!
most of these people also admire Thaksin, many are waiting to see if any of the court cases really stick on him, but actually they admire him because he convinced them all that democracy is useful and effective for electing governments in Thailand.
Democracy is what we are about!
And I think the PAD are not sincere about hating or despising or focussing on Thaksin…. peoples emotions about him are just a means to the end for the PAD leaders to fool you supporters!
The PADs real purpose is to get rid of elected governments, they want elite control… and the hate Thaksin campaign is just to fool you supporters!
I like the optimism of Srithanonchai and David Brown and hope Thai Democracy can evolve in that direction post-PMThaksin and PAD. But it will take a significant societal shift from present realities highlighted by Jonfernquest where convicted fugitives such as Vatana or Thaksin still hold so much influence on and respect from elected political office holders…
Thanks for the comments #31 & #32 Nick. I maintain my point made – and this should address Dog Lover’s comment #33. AjarnSulak is not writing as an ‘objective observer’ concerning LM – but as an experienced and scarred veteran. He is, unlike us, a full participant in the mainly political game of LM and thus his “understandings”, at least as publicly expressed, will rarely match ours…
Of course the police dread LM – as it is an elite’s game played with multiple pawns/nominees. The police often either ‘drag their feet’ or prosecute with gusto, depending on the influence of powerful backers behind the pawns/nominees – and this applies for both sides in the present situation, whether Red or Yellow. PMThaksin, for one, has often been accused of LM, but is pretty much ‘TeflonThaksin’ in this case – not as lucky are his underlings…
On comment#31, we agree on the general point there that Thai politics is now a highly complex game played by multiple agents with varying agendas – so many that, viewing from outside, ‘democratic principles’ and ‘self-interests’ seemed to have been totally blended.
We can also agree that the main rallying point for both sides is PMThaksin. I doubt that the multiple factions in PAD or UDD/PPP will hold together or agree on much post-PMThaksin. Look how quickly the Red crowd in Rajamangkhla Stadium dispersed once The Master’s phone-in was over! A general election is near (with party dissolution pending) and all PPP factions need PMThaksin phone-ins in their respective provinces. As with PMSamak and Newin, they are not always loyal once in power – hence now only members of The Family can take the helm (with Thaksin’s sister Yinglak or GenChaisit rumored as favorites after PMSomchai gets his likely 5 year ban) .
I also agree with your comment:
“… Media reporting lags mostly far behind those developments, which unfortunately means that the general public is relying on mostly wrong analyzes…”
However, this applies in most societies, especially those more connected to the internet, with information overload. It is increasingly hard to separate ‘truth’ from ‘infomercials’ and ‘spin’ – in the Thai context, if INN, who is the source of ‘global’ news favourable to PMThaksin (e.g. Honorary Citizenship of Bahamas; Anti-poverty advisor to Central Africa; Bahamas propose ‘Government in Exile’ – which Thairath seemed to have quoted etc.) turn out to be questionable:
Finally, when it comes to present Thai politics, it is quite likely that we are all relying on the “wrong analyzes”! Even PMThaksin – who’s gamble after gamble seemed to have backfired on a grand scale (and it doesn’t bode well for Thai politics and PMThaksin himself when he is very angry, vengeful, cornered, humiliated. He will not think straight and only make more big ‘mistakes’)…
“‘transformative potential of mass mobilisation’ on both sides could go either way, and proto-fascism could becomes real fascism (a la 1976-7).”
thankfully, the mass mobilisation has happened on the side of one-person one-vote democracy
there isnt any mass to mobilise on the side of the PAD, they represent a small and getting smaller minority and they know it
the big majority of Thai people that approve of being able to judge their politicians and vote directly for them at elections are showing their face and, I believe, will not be able to be squeezed back into the tube as happened previously in Thailand
even at the last coup, the people docilely accepted the military rule… but I think that was an educational experience and, as observed, they came roaring back at the 2007 election
the PAD and their backers are finding that the mass of people have too much inertia to be moved from their new found freedom and authority
so, the PAD are now tring to negotiate their immunity from prosecution then will fade from the scene leaving their arms and mess to be cleaned up by a relieved and peaceful community
if the Democrats can escape from their reputation soiled by association with the PAD they may continue to poll reasonably well and may be able to compete with the PPP at the next and further elections
What the SPDC/DKBA is doing (disinformation) against Antonio Graceffo comes as no surprise to me, nor should it come as much of a “surprise”to anyone knowing the way the beast (SPDC), operates and how propaganda plays a big part in their overall plan. Just like
almost everyone thought that the Thai’s were quietly “looking the
other way”, when it came to the KNLA, then in early October
they allowed the Burmese to attack the KNLA from behind, using Thai territory to launch frontal attacks throughout the Republic of Kawthoolei and thus permitted the SPDC/DKBA to overrun the Karen army bases !
When I was coming and going out of Mae Sot (March and April of this year), I was informed that the SPDC/DKBA were doing their damnest to try to locate me for one of their hits and so I was always on the move when I was back in Mae Sot. This I discussed with Colonel Nerdah at his base camp (which later was overrun by the SPDC six weeks ago), who informed me that my hunches that their was a possible SPDC mole within the KNU leadership, were perhaps correct after all, as after I had the meeting at the KNU main headquarters just outside Mae Sot, I was notified by a good friend of mine in the Thai National Police/Intelligence that the SPDC were scouring all over Mae Sot to locate me for a hit.
Let me assure your readers that I have some surprises saved for the SPDC and their DKBA stooges. I have been in the ”business” for over 40 years and can assure the enemy that they are not too far removed from my thoughts, and so I shall leave that comment for all of you to ponder over.
Oh, by the way I have heard (thru the rumor mill in Mae Sot), that a fresh contingent of foreign fighters has arrived into the Republic of Kawthoolei to assist the KNLA.
Srithanonchai: while I detect a tongue lodged in a cheek, it is probably worth saying out loud that the Democrats have, from day one back in the 1940s, been the royalists.
For Dr. Connors (who has no comment function at his blog): I agree with you that there is royalism on all sides, but how could it be otherwise, at least when it comes to public posturing? I haven’t read Prachathat, but it does seem like a nice bit of needle to attack PAD on the funeral. So I’m not sure that this is the best example of your point.
However, I agree with your implicit notion that republicanism has been more firmly put back on the agenda, and it may be that this is the more remarkable outcome of this nascent civil war. That outcome doesn’t map neatly to PAD and UDD, but everywhere, the monarchy is now on the agenda. Hence, the palace is now in full damage control mode – that’s what happens when you unleash such forces via a coup. Getting those forces packed away again is not so easy these days, perhaps.
The worry is that the ‘transformative potential of mass mobilisation’ on both sides could go either way, and proto-fascism could becomes real fascism (a la 1976-7).
The damned foreign press just can’t get it right for jonfernquest. Even when this short article mentions that Thaksin is a convicted criminal and includes some of the usual fawning accounts of the royals, jonfernquest still complains.
The complaint is that the journalist neglects to mention anti-PAD groups. These days, those 1000-1500 word articles need to cover a lot! Maybe there could have been more on PAD’s violence, its black magic and the allegations that Sondhi is ripping off the fighting fund? But it is difficult to include everything.
By the way, which pro-Thaksin thugs (outside of the police and army) were active prior to the coup? I would like to be reminded of this.
jonferquest also complains – apparently without looking at the source (Thitinan’s article in the Journal of Democracy, and as amberwaves points out, it is readily available) – that this foreign journalist has set up a conspiracy theory: ‘Seems to be typical foreign journalism biased representation of conflict. Mapping the opposition to an elite conspiracy.’ It is interesting that this is now the standard Thai government response whenever the palace’s role in the coup is mentioned. In Thitinan’s article, it would be reasonable to conclude that he sees an old elite clashing with broader forces unleashed by Thaksin and TRT. (The link to Michael Connors piece also provided at NM is critical of such views).
Of course, Thitinan also says more than this. He talks of the rural-urban divide (sort of buying the older Anek critique and ignoring the south) and also identifies the anti-Thaksin/TRT forces as ‘The Bangkok-based urban elites (comprising the car- and home-owning middle classes in and around that city of ten million), the intelligentsia and civil society groups, the old nobility, sections of the private sector, the bureaucracy, the military, and implicitly the monarchy under King Bhumibol Adulyadej.’
One could read the source material (at least in this case). Thitinan’s article is well worth reading as a solid summary of recent political events in Thailand and it is good to see a foreign journalist actually doing a little bit of reading rather than just seeking out the quotable quotes from a short interview. Pity about the royal kowtowing though.
Burma’s ruling junta, the SPDC, uses disinformation and modern technology to issues a wanted order against Antonio Graceffo. http://www.asiantribune.com/?q=node/14248
this we are all worry about
A friendly Burmese soldier told the source that the trucks were carrying ammunition and shells for heavy weapons such as 120mm and 150mm howitzers.
Over on Bangkok Pundit I posted this on the Sulak article. Apologies for cross-posting this, but want to see the response from NM readers:
If I read it correctly – and it is somewhat incoherent – Sulak is unhappy that he is charged with LM but considers Thaksin and his supporters and the current govt should all be accused (again and again) of LM. He then says the law is over-used and lacks meaning (presumably not when it is used against his enemies).
Let’s be clear on Sulak. He is a monarchist but is not very enamored of the current incumbent of the throne. That has always been his position.
Sulak also expresses his gratitude to the palace and the king’s sister for having been nice to him on previous occasions when he has been accused of LM.
That’s good for him I suppose, but I was in a meeting back in the mid-1980s when Sulak had been released from Prem’s prison (to coin a phrase) on LM charges and a member of the palace made it clear that they thought Sulak was just a little mad and had needed to be taught a lesson.
It does seem that there were more LM charges thrown about under Thaksin’s govt than immediately previous govts. However, it must be recalled that much of this had to do with being seen to be loyal. Indeed, Thaksin’s govt did go on the warpath over the publication of the Handley book in what was largely a show of loyalty.
In this article, Sulak takes a rather too personalized approach to LM when he might have taken a more principled approach. But that is Sulak I guess.
I am an oldie with some intelligent observer but not academic claims for myself
but I am seeing the institutionalized political party system as important for the consolidation of democracy and am pleased that it is trying to develop
the biggest obstacle right now is the PAD, which I was being run as a successful protest business by Sondhi but is now decaying
I think Chamlong has been released by Sondhi to try to negotiate immunity from prosecution for the PAD leaders
If that happens I see the grand democratic experiment continuing with a lot of issues being raised by the old traditional rulers as they gradually find some sort of place for themselves in the majority of Thailand that will not permit them to dominate anymore
So, two parties plus an emerging right-wing military-industrial complex that will eventually form another party
Srithanonchai: “Academics seeing the development of an institutionalized political party system as important for the consolidation of democracy will be interested to learn that Thailand is moving into this direction…”
What? The details paint an entirely different picture. As Chang Noi observes: “The political parties are a highly undemocratic part of Thailand’s political system” and there is no evidence that this is changing. Socialism the answer? The Burmese Way to Socialism of the 1960s slowly degenerated into the nightmare we find there today. Vatana Asavaheme is the best example of how “undemocratic” so-called democratically elected politicians can be. The ICT minister for example is one of his close buddies.
“Consider the example of Vatana Asavaheme. In mid last year, Vatana emerged as the major business financier of the Puea Phaendin party. When the party leader, resigned his ministership, Vatana orchestrated the changes in the party’s line-up of ministers. During the recent negotiations over the Cabinet, Vatana was again reported to have selected the Puea Phaendin ministerial cadre. The fact that he is a convicted criminal and fugitive from justice, and that his lieutenants had to leave the country and consult him in the back-rooms of a Cambodian casino, made no difference to his influence. A former police chief did not mind being among Vatana’s choices. A party spokesman explained that party MPs “still had respect” for Vatana. It’s not difficult to decode what that statement really means.
Consider, then, the social cost of such a politician. Take the Khlong Dan case on which he was convicted. In order to make massive profits, a public investment project was significantly altered from its original design and location, resulting in a higher cost to the taxpayer, lower efficiency, greater environmental damage, greater inconvenience to large numbers of people, and ultimately large expenses for a long judicial process.
Now multiply those costs across a long political career. .(many more damning examples)..scandals over land, forest encroachment, construction contracts, and forgery.”
(Source: Chang Noi, The problem is politician-buying not vote-buying, 29 september 2008)
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Ashley South on liberal-democratic interventions
Moe Aung: “There never was a socialist revolution in Burma unless again you suffer from another common misconception equating nationalisation and state capitalism with the real thing.”
The real thing? The “real thing” is what people actually do and achieve which unfortunately hasn’t been, comparatively, very much for post-WWII Burma under socialist-inspired ideas. Both before and after WWII many in Burma were inspired by the works of Marx and Fabian socialism (e.g. Furnivall and his Naga Nii book club). This trend culminated in a rainbow of different communist factions in revolt post-WWII (white flag, yellow flag, red flag,…) as well as the “Burmese Way to Socialism” ideology in Nei Win’s post-1962 government that seems to bear great resemblance to other failed socialist Marx-inspired political experiments, in eastern Europe, for instance, and is very different from Thailand where socialist meanderings were put to an abrupt halt in 1976, much to the betterment of the country’s prosperity. For the full story, I guess we’ll have to wait for the following book to see, I guess, due out early next year:
A History of Modern Burma (Paperback)
by Michael W. Charney (Author)
Paperback: 256 pages
Publisher: Cambridge University Press (January 31, 2009)
On Thaksin
Let me be the first person here to welcome Thaksin Shinawatra back to politics. (Did he ever leave?)
It’s great to hear that he wants to fight his way out of a corner. I would encourage him to fully reveal the sins of his enemies so that they will be forced into revealing his.
On Thaksin
To keep harping on the conviction of Thaksin, one must ignore the fact that the laws and constitution was changed by the military junta. My question is this. Is the military junta considered a legitimate law making body. If it is then I would argue that Aung San Suu Kyi is guilty as charged by the ruling Junta in Burma (OK, that may be a bit extreme, but the concept is the same)
The current constitution is made by th military to maintain ultimate control. The last time I read “democracy and rule of law 101” the only legitimate law making body in a democracy is the elected parliement. A military junta or a junta appointed govt has no business passing any laws, let alone changing the constitution.
When all participant get that clear, then we can have a real discussion, otherwise its like Betrand Russell said “If we start with the premise that a dead rat can jump” we can argue anything
Ashley South on liberal-democratic interventions
Hello Jon
Afraid you ‘ve made a common enough mistake of confusing opinion with activist or group-think. There never was a socialist revolution in Burma unless again you suffer from another common misconception equating nationalisation and state capitalism with the real thing. It’s not so much the means but the end that matters, who benefits from any of these measures whomsoever you deal with, East or West. Cutting deals with the military regime is certainly the way to riches for all entrepreneurs, domestic or foreign. Feeding the people is quite another matter that takes sufficient political will on the part of the ruling elite to want to share the nation’s wealth. People don’t often see the wood for the trees, and a lot of learned analysis gets bogged down in detail and specifics.
Cambodia’s four letter word: NGOs
“There are literally thousands of “NGOs” operating in Cambodia that are simply used as a tax loop hole. NGOs don’t pay taxes and can employ foreigners without much bureaucratic fuss. NGO laws, or lack there of, for many years have provided relatively easy visa entry for foreigners of dubious morals to stay for extended periods in Cambodia.”
Sounds a little bit like Thailand. An NGO or missionary status soliciting donations is a much easier way for people to support themselves and stay in Thailand long-term than running a business subject to the usual cut-throat competition and strict laws and capital requirements. Unquestioned praise with no critical questions asked is the usual response to NGOs. Who is going to question an NGO that helps AIDs babies or hill tribe orphans? This is the idea that one do-it-yourself NGO guy uses that he recommended to me also (not interested). A lot of fishy stuff is associated with NGOs also, like not drawing a line between your own personal assets and the NGOs assets, males overseeing large numbers of young women or boys unsupervised, accusations of human trafficking in collusion with the police, NGOs might even be a deceiving front for criminal activities sometimes…Thaksin cracked down on NGOs. Made the rules tougher. If anyone knows a source for Thaksin’s NGO policies please let me know. I only have anecdotal evidence. They probably want to eliminate the diehard cowboy activists like Matthew McDaniel who actually do reveal all sorts of things that powerful people don’t want people to know.
Anti-democracy in Thailand
hi Sidh S
you have not been listening to what people from the Truth Today rally have been saying
the primary focus for them is one-person one-vote democracy!
I know from personal experience at the rally, the surprising number of people that volunteered they were their to support democracy!
and others have made the same comment in public!
most of these people also admire Thaksin, many are waiting to see if any of the court cases really stick on him, but actually they admire him because he convinced them all that democracy is useful and effective for electing governments in Thailand.
Democracy is what we are about!
And I think the PAD are not sincere about hating or despising or focussing on Thaksin…. peoples emotions about him are just a means to the end for the PAD leaders to fool you supporters!
The PADs real purpose is to get rid of elected governments, they want elite control… and the hate Thaksin campaign is just to fool you supporters!
Cambodia’s four letter word: NGOs
So who decides which ones are the “real” NGOs?
BTW, aren’t we assuming here that all NGOs are non-profits?
On Thaksin
I like the optimism of Srithanonchai and David Brown and hope Thai Democracy can evolve in that direction post-PMThaksin and PAD. But it will take a significant societal shift from present realities highlighted by Jonfernquest where convicted fugitives such as Vatana or Thaksin still hold so much influence on and respect from elected political office holders…
Anti-democracy in Thailand
Thanks for the comments #31 & #32 Nick. I maintain my point made – and this should address Dog Lover’s comment #33. AjarnSulak is not writing as an ‘objective observer’ concerning LM – but as an experienced and scarred veteran. He is, unlike us, a full participant in the mainly political game of LM and thus his “understandings”, at least as publicly expressed, will rarely match ours…
Of course the police dread LM – as it is an elite’s game played with multiple pawns/nominees. The police often either ‘drag their feet’ or prosecute with gusto, depending on the influence of powerful backers behind the pawns/nominees – and this applies for both sides in the present situation, whether Red or Yellow. PMThaksin, for one, has often been accused of LM, but is pretty much ‘TeflonThaksin’ in this case – not as lucky are his underlings…
On comment#31, we agree on the general point there that Thai politics is now a highly complex game played by multiple agents with varying agendas – so many that, viewing from outside, ‘democratic principles’ and ‘self-interests’ seemed to have been totally blended.
We can also agree that the main rallying point for both sides is PMThaksin. I doubt that the multiple factions in PAD or UDD/PPP will hold together or agree on much post-PMThaksin. Look how quickly the Red crowd in Rajamangkhla Stadium dispersed once The Master’s phone-in was over! A general election is near (with party dissolution pending) and all PPP factions need PMThaksin phone-ins in their respective provinces. As with PMSamak and Newin, they are not always loyal once in power – hence now only members of The Family can take the helm (with Thaksin’s sister Yinglak or GenChaisit rumored as favorites after PMSomchai gets his likely 5 year ban) .
I also agree with your comment:
“… Media reporting lags mostly far behind those developments, which unfortunately means that the general public is relying on mostly wrong analyzes…”
However, this applies in most societies, especially those more connected to the internet, with information overload. It is increasingly hard to separate ‘truth’ from ‘infomercials’ and ‘spin’ – in the Thai context, if INN, who is the source of ‘global’ news favourable to PMThaksin (e.g. Honorary Citizenship of Bahamas; Anti-poverty advisor to Central Africa; Bahamas propose ‘Government in Exile’ – which Thairath seemed to have quoted etc.) turn out to be questionable:
http://www.matichon.co.th/news_detail.php?newsid=1226908633&grpid=00&catid=01
Finally, when it comes to present Thai politics, it is quite likely that we are all relying on the “wrong analyzes”! Even PMThaksin – who’s gamble after gamble seemed to have backfired on a grand scale (and it doesn’t bode well for Thai politics and PMThaksin himself when he is very angry, vengeful, cornered, humiliated. He will not think straight and only make more big ‘mistakes’)…
Wanted in Burma? …but more adventures to come
The laughs just keep coming.
On Thaksin
“‘transformative potential of mass mobilisation’ on both sides could go either way, and proto-fascism could becomes real fascism (a la 1976-7).”
thankfully, the mass mobilisation has happened on the side of one-person one-vote democracy
there isnt any mass to mobilise on the side of the PAD, they represent a small and getting smaller minority and they know it
the big majority of Thai people that approve of being able to judge their politicians and vote directly for them at elections are showing their face and, I believe, will not be able to be squeezed back into the tube as happened previously in Thailand
even at the last coup, the people docilely accepted the military rule… but I think that was an educational experience and, as observed, they came roaring back at the 2007 election
the PAD and their backers are finding that the mass of people have too much inertia to be moved from their new found freedom and authority
so, the PAD are now tring to negotiate their immunity from prosecution then will fade from the scene leaving their arms and mess to be cleaned up by a relieved and peaceful community
if the Democrats can escape from their reputation soiled by association with the PAD they may continue to poll reasonably well and may be able to compete with the PPP at the next and further elections
Wanted in Burma? …but more adventures to come
What the SPDC/DKBA is doing (disinformation) against Antonio Graceffo comes as no surprise to me, nor should it come as much of a “surprise”to anyone knowing the way the beast (SPDC), operates and how propaganda plays a big part in their overall plan. Just like
almost everyone thought that the Thai’s were quietly “looking the
other way”, when it came to the KNLA, then in early October
they allowed the Burmese to attack the KNLA from behind, using Thai territory to launch frontal attacks throughout the Republic of Kawthoolei and thus permitted the SPDC/DKBA to overrun the Karen army bases !
When I was coming and going out of Mae Sot (March and April of this year), I was informed that the SPDC/DKBA were doing their damnest to try to locate me for one of their hits and so I was always on the move when I was back in Mae Sot. This I discussed with Colonel Nerdah at his base camp (which later was overrun by the SPDC six weeks ago), who informed me that my hunches that their was a possible SPDC mole within the KNU leadership, were perhaps correct after all, as after I had the meeting at the KNU main headquarters just outside Mae Sot, I was notified by a good friend of mine in the Thai National Police/Intelligence that the SPDC were scouring all over Mae Sot to locate me for a hit.
Let me assure your readers that I have some surprises saved for the SPDC and their DKBA stooges. I have been in the ”business” for over 40 years and can assure the enemy that they are not too far removed from my thoughts, and so I shall leave that comment for all of you to ponder over.
Oh, by the way I have heard (thru the rumor mill in Mae Sot), that a fresh contingent of foreign fighters has arrived into the Republic of Kawthoolei to assist the KNLA.
Anyone out there know more on this?
On Thaksin
Srithanonchai: while I detect a tongue lodged in a cheek, it is probably worth saying out loud that the Democrats have, from day one back in the 1940s, been the royalists.
For Dr. Connors (who has no comment function at his blog): I agree with you that there is royalism on all sides, but how could it be otherwise, at least when it comes to public posturing? I haven’t read Prachathat, but it does seem like a nice bit of needle to attack PAD on the funeral. So I’m not sure that this is the best example of your point.
However, I agree with your implicit notion that republicanism has been more firmly put back on the agenda, and it may be that this is the more remarkable outcome of this nascent civil war. That outcome doesn’t map neatly to PAD and UDD, but everywhere, the monarchy is now on the agenda. Hence, the palace is now in full damage control mode – that’s what happens when you unleash such forces via a coup. Getting those forces packed away again is not so easy these days, perhaps.
The worry is that the ‘transformative potential of mass mobilisation’ on both sides could go either way, and proto-fascism could becomes real fascism (a la 1976-7).
On the PAD
The damned foreign press just can’t get it right for jonfernquest. Even when this short article mentions that Thaksin is a convicted criminal and includes some of the usual fawning accounts of the royals, jonfernquest still complains.
The complaint is that the journalist neglects to mention anti-PAD groups. These days, those 1000-1500 word articles need to cover a lot! Maybe there could have been more on PAD’s violence, its black magic and the allegations that Sondhi is ripping off the fighting fund? But it is difficult to include everything.
By the way, which pro-Thaksin thugs (outside of the police and army) were active prior to the coup? I would like to be reminded of this.
jonferquest also complains – apparently without looking at the source (Thitinan’s article in the Journal of Democracy, and as amberwaves points out, it is readily available) – that this foreign journalist has set up a conspiracy theory: ‘Seems to be typical foreign journalism biased representation of conflict. Mapping the opposition to an elite conspiracy.’ It is interesting that this is now the standard Thai government response whenever the palace’s role in the coup is mentioned. In Thitinan’s article, it would be reasonable to conclude that he sees an old elite clashing with broader forces unleashed by Thaksin and TRT. (The link to Michael Connors piece also provided at NM is critical of such views).
Of course, Thitinan also says more than this. He talks of the rural-urban divide (sort of buying the older Anek critique and ignoring the south) and also identifies the anti-Thaksin/TRT forces as ‘The Bangkok-based urban elites (comprising the car- and home-owning middle classes in and around that city of ten million), the intelligentsia and civil society groups, the old nobility, sections of the private sector, the bureaucracy, the military, and implicitly the monarchy under King Bhumibol Adulyadej.’
One could read the source material (at least in this case). Thitinan’s article is well worth reading as a solid summary of recent political events in Thailand and it is good to see a foreign journalist actually doing a little bit of reading rather than just seeking out the quotable quotes from a short interview. Pity about the royal kowtowing though.
Wanted in Burma? …but more adventures to come
Wanted for Opposing the Junta
By Antonio Graceffo
Burma’s ruling junta, the SPDC, uses disinformation and modern technology to issues a wanted order against Antonio Graceffo.
http://www.asiantribune.com/?q=node/14248
Wanted in Burma? …but more adventures to come
http://myanmarnargis.org/content/view/40/5/
wanted
this we are all worry about
A friendly Burmese soldier told the source that the trucks were carrying ammunition and shells for heavy weapons such as 120mm and 150mm howitzers.
http://www.shanland.org/war/2008/junta-military-builds-up-more-forces-and-weapons-on-the-thai-burma-border
Anti-democracy in Thailand
Over on Bangkok Pundit I posted this on the Sulak article. Apologies for cross-posting this, but want to see the response from NM readers:
If I read it correctly – and it is somewhat incoherent – Sulak is unhappy that he is charged with LM but considers Thaksin and his supporters and the current govt should all be accused (again and again) of LM. He then says the law is over-used and lacks meaning (presumably not when it is used against his enemies).
Let’s be clear on Sulak. He is a monarchist but is not very enamored of the current incumbent of the throne. That has always been his position.
Sulak also expresses his gratitude to the palace and the king’s sister for having been nice to him on previous occasions when he has been accused of LM.
That’s good for him I suppose, but I was in a meeting back in the mid-1980s when Sulak had been released from Prem’s prison (to coin a phrase) on LM charges and a member of the palace made it clear that they thought Sulak was just a little mad and had needed to be taught a lesson.
It does seem that there were more LM charges thrown about under Thaksin’s govt than immediately previous govts. However, it must be recalled that much of this had to do with being seen to be loyal. Indeed, Thaksin’s govt did go on the warpath over the publication of the Handley book in what was largely a show of loyalty.
In this article, Sulak takes a rather too personalized approach to LM when he might have taken a more principled approach. But that is Sulak I guess.
On Thaksin
hi Srithanonchai
I am an oldie with some intelligent observer but not academic claims for myself
but I am seeing the institutionalized political party system as important for the consolidation of democracy and am pleased that it is trying to develop
the biggest obstacle right now is the PAD, which I was being run as a successful protest business by Sondhi but is now decaying
I think Chamlong has been released by Sondhi to try to negotiate immunity from prosecution for the PAD leaders
If that happens I see the grand democratic experiment continuing with a lot of issues being raised by the old traditional rulers as they gradually find some sort of place for themselves in the majority of Thailand that will not permit them to dominate anymore
So, two parties plus an emerging right-wing military-industrial complex that will eventually form another party
On Thaksin
Srithanonchai: “Academics seeing the development of an institutionalized political party system as important for the consolidation of democracy will be interested to learn that Thailand is moving into this direction…”
What? The details paint an entirely different picture. As Chang Noi observes: “The political parties are a highly undemocratic part of Thailand’s political system” and there is no evidence that this is changing. Socialism the answer? The Burmese Way to Socialism of the 1960s slowly degenerated into the nightmare we find there today. Vatana Asavaheme is the best example of how “undemocratic” so-called democratically elected politicians can be. The ICT minister for example is one of his close buddies.
“Consider the example of Vatana Asavaheme. In mid last year, Vatana emerged as the major business financier of the Puea Phaendin party. When the party leader, resigned his ministership, Vatana orchestrated the changes in the party’s line-up of ministers. During the recent negotiations over the Cabinet, Vatana was again reported to have selected the Puea Phaendin ministerial cadre. The fact that he is a convicted criminal and fugitive from justice, and that his lieutenants had to leave the country and consult him in the back-rooms of a Cambodian casino, made no difference to his influence. A former police chief did not mind being among Vatana’s choices. A party spokesman explained that party MPs “still had respect” for Vatana. It’s not difficult to decode what that statement really means.
Consider, then, the social cost of such a politician. Take the Khlong Dan case on which he was convicted. In order to make massive profits, a public investment project was significantly altered from its original design and location, resulting in a higher cost to the taxpayer, lower efficiency, greater environmental damage, greater inconvenience to large numbers of people, and ultimately large expenses for a long judicial process.
Now multiply those costs across a long political career. .(many more damning examples)..scandals over land, forest encroachment, construction contracts, and forgery.”
(Source: Chang Noi, The problem is politician-buying not vote-buying, 29 september 2008)
On the PAD
jonfernquest:
Thitinan’s article has been available online since it was published at:
http://www.journalofdemocracy.org/articles/gratis/Pongsudhirak-19-4.pdf
Links to it have been easy to find, including in a discrete entry about it at Bangkok Pundit.
You ever gonna cough up that essay by Thak that you keep mentioning? It seems a lot more difficult to find.