Despite agreement reached on 29 July on the redeployment of Cambodian and Thai troops away from the area surrounding the Preah Vihear temple, Cambodia has accused Thailand of having occupied a second temple along the common border. Situated 130 kilometres west of the Preah Vihear temple, the 13th century Ta Moan Thom temple has become another source of dispute between the two states.On 3 August, Maj. Sim Sokha, a Cambodian border protection unit deputy commander, was reported as saying that since 31 July some 70 Thai soldiers have been deployed in an 80-metre radius around the temple and have prevented Cambodian troops, who have always been allowed into the temple for religious purposes, from entering it. In response to these allegations, on 4 August a spokesman from Thailand’s foreign ministry Tharit Charungvat denied that any unusual military build-up has occurred at Ta Moan Thom and said that while all visitors were welcome, access has been denied to armed Cambodian soldiers on the grounds that tension between the neighbouring states was still high around the Preah Vihear temple. He also added that Thai soldiers have always been deployed around the Ta Moan Thom to monitor the border area and the temple which, according to Thai authorities, lies within its territory. As the director of Thailand’s Fine Arts Department Kriengkrai Sampatchalit explained, Ta Moan Thom is located “just about 100 meters from the border in Thai soil” and was registered with the Fine Arts Department in 1935. Since then the temple has been renovated and open to the public with Cambodia raising no questions about its location in Thai territory. The head of Thailand’s armed forces Gen. Boonsang Niampradit invited Cambodia to withdraw their soldiers from the border area around Ta Moan Thom. However, Cambodian defence minister Tea Bahn said that with access to the temple denied, Cambodian troops will remain in the area.The events at Te Moan Thom temple do not help ease the tension between the two neighbouring states that has so far focused on the temple of Preah Vihear. Despite the joint statement of 29 July according to which the two countries committed in redeploying their troops away from the Preah Vihear complex, no further steps towards resolution have been undertaken. The Cambodian and Thai foreign ministers are expected to meet soon for the second round of talks aimed at easing the growing military tension along the border.Sources: ‘Cambodia, Thailand in standoff over second temple’ Associated Press Newswires, 3 August 2008; ‘Border Dispute – New Cambodia allegation’ Bangkok Post, 4 August 2008; ‘Thailand in wrangle with Cambodia over second disputed border temple’ SINA English, 4 August 2008; ‘Thailand asks Cambodia to withdraw from second temple’ Agence France Presse, 4 August 2008; ‘Thai commander claims ownership of land at temple near Cambodian border’ BBC Monitoring Asia Pacific, 4 August 2008. Again from DUBRU
Great interview. Love the way the interview reveals new personal details about the work practices of scholars.
“So I really try to resist the temptation to be constantly updating myself: I don’t read a lot of newspapers or news sources.”
Like Nicholas Taleb says: daily news is noise (statistical white noise). McCargo might be pointing the way to new value added investigative journalism techniques, something sorely needed.
There are other reasons to be involved with the news, academic blogging such as New Mandala, for instance. This would complement his exemplary work with Thai graduate students. (BTW I mentioned New Mandala in a presentation I gave Tuesday at Assumption University on academic blogging).
“I do need to view the Thailand stuff through a comparative perspective, and to have a sense of wider trends and issues.”
Exactly, avoid area studies myopia.
“I think it’s dangerous to go down this road of branding yourself, or being branded by others, as somebody who only works on one country.”
How can one avoid being branded when it takes so long to get up and running with sources in the local languages?
9 August 2008
After a discussion last night with a long-time Thailand resident, held specifically re. the lese majeste issue and how it is/should be addressed, a suggestion came up – it had been lurking behind stage earlier but not been proposed specifically – for a central resource [online et. al] for LM, where information would be available for researchers and others involved in lese majeste, including ‘victims’ who are seeking advice and information on handling strategy in dealing with LM charges. Is the best defense a good offense? That is, should those accused/supporting accused have access to a ready-to-use closet packed with information, support form letters and so on, as well as access to other mechanisms that will lend support to their cases?
Some organization would be needed to get this resource up and flying.
As to its uses, ‘victims’ and researchers could access not just information but opt for approaches to take in their own defenses as well as to solicit assistance from outside, such as human rights organizations, in part through this central resource. As well, letters of concern could be sent to those actually filing the cases with the police, either expressing concern or accompanying, where possibly deemed appropriate, legal notices of pending charges to be filed against them for various civil or criminal acts ‘disguised’ behind lese majeste charges.
There is also a question of whether or not lese majeste is always a political issue. It involves an arm of government – in Thailand, the head of state – and is instigated by another state agency – the Royal Thai Police. So should there be a centralized approach toward all LM cases to identify them as political?
There are various nuances, of course. The Chotisak case, the Da Torpedo case, and others have particular types of ‘offenses’ and need different treatment in some ways, but is LM not entirely a political charge to begin with?
These are just some ideas, but the idea is to start putting together a credible resource on the one hand and provide resources on the other to enable people to conduct meaningful defenses and to help bring about change in this area. Comments would be appreciated.
The PAD and the pro government thugs are just two sides of the same coin – foot soldiers for vested interests of competing power networks, none of them progressive.
We all know there are ‘pro government thugs’, but did you mean the thugs within PAD, or are you implying all PAD are thugs?
IMO, only a minority of the PAD protesters are thugs, whereas I am not so sure that can be said for the pro government protesters (as distinct from pro government supporters).
Thank you, Jud, for that well thought out response. I’m sure that NM readers will be able to read between the lines and quickly ascertain exactly what you mean.
Lots to answer here. Lets start with your assumption on the UDD having proven their violence already. You do simplify here a very complex issue. First, during the World Trade Centre brawl, there was no UDD. The UDD was only formed from several smaller and larger groups, both pro- and anti – Thaksin, during the times of the military coup.
I was not present during the World Trade Center brawl, therefore i will not comment on it other this was brought way out of proportion.
I was though present during the clashes at Prem’s residence, and there the situation was very clear – the police attacked the protesters on orders of the army, and not as you suggest – protesters attacked police, or Prem’s residence.
UDD protesters in the early afternoon marched from Sanam Luang, pushed through understaffed police barricades (police gave way) – there was neglegible violence of a few overexcited protesters which was stopped straight away by their fellow protesters, and reached Prem’s compound at about 15.00 to 16.00. There they sat down, built a mobile stage, and held speeches.
At about 20.00 the police then attacked the protesters, trying to disperse them, and the protesters refused. Altogether protesters fought back three attacks, and left themselves at the fourth attack, as it was rumored that behind the police line armed soldiers were marching.
At no time during the clashes the protesters tried to get into Prem’s compound, they only built barricades to lock police into the compound. They threw bottles and stones into the compound, and same came flying out (i was nearly hit by a bottle that came flying out of Prem’s compound.
When police receded, the protesters themselves stopped attacking police. There was, for example, a small group of police that has lost contact with their fellow officers at the first attack, and stopped fighting. That group was then left alone by the protesters (during the fourth attack these officers gave me water to wash teargas out of my eyes).
I spoke with several police officers after the event, both high and low ranked, and all said more or the less the same – they did not want to attack the UDD demonstration as the protesters would have eventually left anyhow, but were ordered so by the army.
I am a bit astonished how you can find the arming of the PAD ‘brilliant’, followed by a somewhat strange analogy with ‘schoolyard bullies’ justifying such. What i see is a political pressure group whose ‘democratic’ credentials are very doubtful, which has a proven track record of being agent provocateur, now taking up arms in preparation of street violence, be it against their political nemeses, or against police.
What is ‘brilliant’ about an increasing lawless society? Because carrying arms in public without the necessary permits is still illegal in Thailand.
Yes, it is a sad fact that the government cannot guarantee safety for demonstrations, but in my experience that has less to do with the government’s willingness than with its ability to control provincial vested interests. This is a sad fact for Thai democracy, and has been since a very long time. But that a political pressure group can take up arms, as the PAD is doing is as sad, and furthers the present deterioration of Thai society.
The PAD and the pro government thugs are just two sides of the same coin – foot soldiers for vested interests of competing power networks, none of them progressive.
I just came across this web site that belongs to the British government. On it, they’re discussing the assassination of Pado Manh Sha, and the possible involvement of Timothy Laklem in his murder. Your readers may find it of interest.
Srithanonchai #29, interesting research! I hope to have the honor of reading it.
“Moreover, you also seem to be extremely unbiased” – complimenting or sarcasm?! I am fine with both.
Kuson and Karmablues, as Nick said, the barbarism of UDD is globally renown already – and photos/videos of their thuggery are widely documented and available (from World Trade, PMPrem’s house, Thammasat Udon etc.). Although I agree that a more evenhanded treatment would have been preferred – but I have been engaging in NM long enough not to expect that. However, I do appreciate that you are bringing your views to balance the biases in NM.
PAD have already taken responsibility and end their rallies at TRT/PPP strongholds. That the government and security officials could not convict anyone despite incriminating evidences already speaks volumes. That they also refuse to guarantee the safety of such rallies settles it. This I feel that this is extremely sad for Thai democracy which, as we know, will not be raised as a blog here. And here I point the finger at the PPP government, who’s responsible – if they REALLY ASPIRE for the ideals of democracy – it is up to them to open up society to debate and opposing view points, in a facilitated and peaceful manner.
What this reveals is a government that want to protect its ELECTORAL MONOPOLY of sections of society with every means possible – even if illegal and violent. There are ample evidence of that and because of that, PAD should protect itself. I will say that the strategy of openly showing their weapons (for Nick’s camera in this case) is brilliant. We all are grown-up enough to know the psychology of schoolyard bullies. You stand up to them, you show them that you are willing to fight back, they often back away and pick on the weaker and more timid… (I hope Nick can prove me wrong, but I suspect that the violent thugs at Udon are the same kind of hired thugs that tear down slums and markets – or, in extreme cases, murder grassroots activists standing up against capitalist mafias)…
I just want to put in a few thoughts of mine on this:
Still, one should keep in mind that the constitution only guarantees assemblies that are “peaceful and without weapons.”
I think we also need to keep in mind that when the drafters wrote this provision, their assumption was that the state would be providing police protection for the protesters, ie. don’t carry weapons guys, because the police will protect you.
So, since the state has proven itself ready to collude with the Red thugs in acts of terrorism against the protesters, the situation is different to what the drafters of the constitution had contemplated. In any case, the basic right to self-defence is one which can be exercised independently and can be seen to supplement the right to freedom of assembly in this context (where there is good reason to believe that the police will not do its job and there is a group of armed thugs ready to launch attack).
Also, since evidence of the PAD Guards bearing weapons is clear, the only reason why the government has not instituted a legal case against the PAD, I suspect, is because they are afraid of putting themselves and their best buddies (i.e the Police) in the hot seat. Because, in any accusation of bearing weapons illegally, the PAD would immediately argue that they have a basic right to self-defence (moreover, the job of the PAD Guards is also to protect the “weak” people such as the elderly and women, so they can also be seen as a Team of Bodyguards, making their existence even more justified). And this could lead to a court-ordered inquiry about the police and who was behind the organziation of the armed Reds, which of course the government and police don’t want since they know they are wrong and are the ones who should be blamed for this.
do you really expect that this “army” would attack the PAD on its march on Rajadamnoen Road, for which reason the PAD’s march had to be led its uniformed own “PAD Army”?
Though not very likely, I think there was a possibility. Look what happened in Udon. There were over 700 people who were not afraid of the law and commited brutal acts of violence in front of TV cameras without shame and without fear. These guys are not afraid of the law. I suppose most of them right this very moment are still walking free.
They are directed against the police in case it tried to dissolve the protest
I believe that is not the case because the police did not have a policy of dissolving the protest that day. I think it was more to deter an attack and to defend if there is an attack by the Reds.
Kuson: “simply stupid if PAD does not have any self protection mechanisms” >> Still, one should keep in mind that the constitution only guarantees assemblies that are “peaceful and without weapons.” In addition, the weapons of the PAD are not mainly directed against attacks of the “Red Army” (do you really expect that this “army” would attack the PAD on its march on Rajadamnoen Road, for which reason the PAD’s march had to be led its uniformed own “PAD Army”?) They are directed against the police in case it tried to dissolve the protest.
Thank you for pointing that out. I tried to, but my post was deleted. I stated that it was written by Timothy Laklem. It was part of an email I received from him.
The man of God threatening death to those whom he disagrees with.
In reference to the posting by Boon regarding response to ‘asiaviews’ the society also has the same document and it has been signed ‘Dr Timothy’ with ‘Pastor Timothy’ printed below the signature.
Regular New Mandala readers (or those who just stumble upon this thread) may want to pursue this story before they head off for adventures on the Ledo Road.
Sidh, based the two articles below, I would agree with your comment that greater transparency and better financial advice to the borrowers would be beneficial to VRF. I would also add better management of the funds.
Yes, i have many photos of the UDD and affiliated groups as i have followed them closer than the PAD (they are not just “the Reds”, or the “Red Armies” – they are very diverse and independent groups). Only in Bangkok i have followed them though, and there i have never seen these groups openly carrying weapons. I am aware that they do have access to weapons, but i can’t take photos of something that is not openly carried.
I have photos of a splinter group of the UDD throwing water bottles at PAD protesters at the first PAD Thammasat meeting, but that was only thirty seconds before police managed to get the PAD guys back into Thammasat, and UDD to stop throwing bottles. Both PAD and the UDD splinter group had weapons stockpiles (mostly rocks and wooden clubs, according to Special Branch), but they were hidden.
I also have photos of PAD protesters who attacked lone Thaksin supporters during the pre-coup protests, and who were saved by plainclothes police officers.
Anyhow, the reason why i have just posted the PAD pictures, at this time, was that violence of the “Udon Lovers” was well known, well portrayed in the medias.
Yet until today the arming of PAD guards and protesters seems to have mostly escaped the local media. The international medias, for whom i am working, are simply not interested in Thailand’s comparably small problems until a bloodbath has happened already. This is my attempt for a bit more balance and not a theses on the different political groups opposing each other in contemporary Thailand.
Point 1: Nick Do You Have “Red Army” Photos?
I thank Nick for the pictures. But taken the quite over-reaction of the NM guests on pictures of boys and sticks, Maybe Nick (or anyone) can do some pictures of the “Red Guards” and I hope we can all denounce violence in any form and close this thread. IMHO picture representations of “Reds” bashing photos is important, if NM site is to correctly represent violence or the situation fully.
Point 2: PAD’s Safety First is Anyone’s Common Sense
Taken probable violent times [Thaksin in the Cornered Spot, “The Law” — Government Police willing to let the “Red Guards” terrorize, and the Red’s position], it would be quite * dumb * for PADites not to be more and more careful and simply stupid if PAD does not have any self protection mechanisms.
Not having any self protection mechanisms simply could Provoke the “Red Guards” to commit to more violence and so in this case, as people will probably call you dumb and stupid if your house was burglared because you told everyone you practiced non-violence and you left your house unlocked.
Point 3: PAD is not Gandhi, & Not Perfect
“Gandhi should be Gandhi, and his Non-Violence means was examplary and special on own rights” . Even though for PAD the principle is towards “Not Being Violent”, I am sure that there are some violence are displayed (NM guys have talked alot about it on this thread- pushing this and that, etc) but should not be blown out of proportions here.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Not too fast: Resolving border disputes in Southeast Asia
Despite agreement reached on 29 July on the redeployment of Cambodian and Thai troops away from the area surrounding the Preah Vihear temple, Cambodia has accused Thailand of having occupied a second temple along the common border. Situated 130 kilometres west of the Preah Vihear temple, the 13th century Ta Moan Thom temple has become another source of dispute between the two states.On 3 August, Maj. Sim Sokha, a Cambodian border protection unit deputy commander, was reported as saying that since 31 July some 70 Thai soldiers have been deployed in an 80-metre radius around the temple and have prevented Cambodian troops, who have always been allowed into the temple for religious purposes, from entering it. In response to these allegations, on 4 August a spokesman from Thailand’s foreign ministry Tharit Charungvat denied that any unusual military build-up has occurred at Ta Moan Thom and said that while all visitors were welcome, access has been denied to armed Cambodian soldiers on the grounds that tension between the neighbouring states was still high around the Preah Vihear temple. He also added that Thai soldiers have always been deployed around the Ta Moan Thom to monitor the border area and the temple which, according to Thai authorities, lies within its territory. As the director of Thailand’s Fine Arts Department Kriengkrai Sampatchalit explained, Ta Moan Thom is located “just about 100 meters from the border in Thai soil” and was registered with the Fine Arts Department in 1935. Since then the temple has been renovated and open to the public with Cambodia raising no questions about its location in Thai territory. The head of Thailand’s armed forces Gen. Boonsang Niampradit invited Cambodia to withdraw their soldiers from the border area around Ta Moan Thom. However, Cambodian defence minister Tea Bahn said that with access to the temple denied, Cambodian troops will remain in the area.The events at Te Moan Thom temple do not help ease the tension between the two neighbouring states that has so far focused on the temple of Preah Vihear. Despite the joint statement of 29 July according to which the two countries committed in redeploying their troops away from the Preah Vihear complex, no further steps towards resolution have been undertaken. The Cambodian and Thai foreign ministers are expected to meet soon for the second round of talks aimed at easing the growing military tension along the border.Sources: ‘Cambodia, Thailand in standoff over second temple’ Associated Press Newswires, 3 August 2008; ‘Border Dispute – New Cambodia allegation’ Bangkok Post, 4 August 2008; ‘Thailand in wrangle with Cambodia over second disputed border temple’ SINA English, 4 August 2008; ‘Thailand asks Cambodia to withdraw from second temple’ Agence France Presse, 4 August 2008; ‘Thai commander claims ownership of land at temple near Cambodian border’ BBC Monitoring Asia Pacific, 4 August 2008. Again from DUBRU
Interview with Professor Duncan McCargo
Great interview. Love the way the interview reveals new personal details about the work practices of scholars.
“So I really try to resist the temptation to be constantly updating myself: I don’t read a lot of newspapers or news sources.”
Like Nicholas Taleb says: daily news is noise (statistical white noise). McCargo might be pointing the way to new value added investigative journalism techniques, something sorely needed.
There are other reasons to be involved with the news, academic blogging such as New Mandala, for instance. This would complement his exemplary work with Thai graduate students. (BTW I mentioned New Mandala in a presentation I gave Tuesday at Assumption University on academic blogging).
“I do need to view the Thailand stuff through a comparative perspective, and to have a sense of wider trends and issues.”
Exactly, avoid area studies myopia.
“I think it’s dangerous to go down this road of branding yourself, or being branded by others, as somebody who only works on one country.”
How can one avoid being branded when it takes so long to get up and running with sources in the local languages?
Pithy summary of lese majeste in Thailand
9 August 2008
After a discussion last night with a long-time Thailand resident, held specifically re. the lese majeste issue and how it is/should be addressed, a suggestion came up – it had been lurking behind stage earlier but not been proposed specifically – for a central resource [online et. al] for LM, where information would be available for researchers and others involved in lese majeste, including ‘victims’ who are seeking advice and information on handling strategy in dealing with LM charges. Is the best defense a good offense? That is, should those accused/supporting accused have access to a ready-to-use closet packed with information, support form letters and so on, as well as access to other mechanisms that will lend support to their cases?
Some organization would be needed to get this resource up and flying.
As to its uses, ‘victims’ and researchers could access not just information but opt for approaches to take in their own defenses as well as to solicit assistance from outside, such as human rights organizations, in part through this central resource. As well, letters of concern could be sent to those actually filing the cases with the police, either expressing concern or accompanying, where possibly deemed appropriate, legal notices of pending charges to be filed against them for various civil or criminal acts ‘disguised’ behind lese majeste charges.
There is also a question of whether or not lese majeste is always a political issue. It involves an arm of government – in Thailand, the head of state – and is instigated by another state agency – the Royal Thai Police. So should there be a centralized approach toward all LM cases to identify them as political?
There are various nuances, of course. The Chotisak case, the Da Torpedo case, and others have particular types of ‘offenses’ and need different treatment in some ways, but is LM not entirely a political charge to begin with?
These are just some ideas, but the idea is to start putting together a credible resource on the one hand and provide resources on the other to enable people to conduct meaningful defenses and to help bring about change in this area. Comments would be appreciated.
PAD – ready for violence
The PAD and the pro government thugs are just two sides of the same coin – foot soldiers for vested interests of competing power networks, none of them progressive.
We all know there are ‘pro government thugs’, but did you mean the thugs within PAD, or are you implying all PAD are thugs?
IMO, only a minority of the PAD protesters are thugs, whereas I am not so sure that can be said for the pro government protesters (as distinct from pro government supporters).
“We’re preparing for a confrontation”
Thank you, Jud, for that well thought out response. I’m sure that NM readers will be able to read between the lines and quickly ascertain exactly what you mean.
“We’re preparing for a confrontation”
KNLA are Junta dogs and this guy is a liar
PAD – ready for violence
“Sidh”:
Lots to answer here. Lets start with your assumption on the UDD having proven their violence already. You do simplify here a very complex issue. First, during the World Trade Centre brawl, there was no UDD. The UDD was only formed from several smaller and larger groups, both pro- and anti – Thaksin, during the times of the military coup.
I was not present during the World Trade Center brawl, therefore i will not comment on it other this was brought way out of proportion.
I was though present during the clashes at Prem’s residence, and there the situation was very clear – the police attacked the protesters on orders of the army, and not as you suggest – protesters attacked police, or Prem’s residence.
UDD protesters in the early afternoon marched from Sanam Luang, pushed through understaffed police barricades (police gave way) – there was neglegible violence of a few overexcited protesters which was stopped straight away by their fellow protesters, and reached Prem’s compound at about 15.00 to 16.00. There they sat down, built a mobile stage, and held speeches.
At about 20.00 the police then attacked the protesters, trying to disperse them, and the protesters refused. Altogether protesters fought back three attacks, and left themselves at the fourth attack, as it was rumored that behind the police line armed soldiers were marching.
At no time during the clashes the protesters tried to get into Prem’s compound, they only built barricades to lock police into the compound. They threw bottles and stones into the compound, and same came flying out (i was nearly hit by a bottle that came flying out of Prem’s compound.
When police receded, the protesters themselves stopped attacking police. There was, for example, a small group of police that has lost contact with their fellow officers at the first attack, and stopped fighting. That group was then left alone by the protesters (during the fourth attack these officers gave me water to wash teargas out of my eyes).
I spoke with several police officers after the event, both high and low ranked, and all said more or the less the same – they did not want to attack the UDD demonstration as the protesters would have eventually left anyhow, but were ordered so by the army.
I am a bit astonished how you can find the arming of the PAD ‘brilliant’, followed by a somewhat strange analogy with ‘schoolyard bullies’ justifying such. What i see is a political pressure group whose ‘democratic’ credentials are very doubtful, which has a proven track record of being agent provocateur, now taking up arms in preparation of street violence, be it against their political nemeses, or against police.
What is ‘brilliant’ about an increasing lawless society? Because carrying arms in public without the necessary permits is still illegal in Thailand.
Yes, it is a sad fact that the government cannot guarantee safety for demonstrations, but in my experience that has less to do with the government’s willingness than with its ability to control provincial vested interests. This is a sad fact for Thai democracy, and has been since a very long time. But that a political pressure group can take up arms, as the PAD is doing is as sad, and furthers the present deterioration of Thai society.
The PAD and the pro government thugs are just two sides of the same coin – foot soldiers for vested interests of competing power networks, none of them progressive.
“We’re preparing for a confrontation”
I just came across this web site that belongs to the British government. On it, they’re discussing the assassination of Pado Manh Sha, and the possible involvement of Timothy Laklem in his murder. Your readers may find it of interest.
http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm200708/cmhansrd/cm080609/text/80609w0001.htm
PAD – ready for violence
Srithanonchai #29, interesting research! I hope to have the honor of reading it.
“Moreover, you also seem to be extremely unbiased” – complimenting or sarcasm?! I am fine with both.
Kuson and Karmablues, as Nick said, the barbarism of UDD is globally renown already – and photos/videos of their thuggery are widely documented and available (from World Trade, PMPrem’s house, Thammasat Udon etc.). Although I agree that a more evenhanded treatment would have been preferred – but I have been engaging in NM long enough not to expect that. However, I do appreciate that you are bringing your views to balance the biases in NM.
PAD have already taken responsibility and end their rallies at TRT/PPP strongholds. That the government and security officials could not convict anyone despite incriminating evidences already speaks volumes. That they also refuse to guarantee the safety of such rallies settles it. This I feel that this is extremely sad for Thai democracy which, as we know, will not be raised as a blog here. And here I point the finger at the PPP government, who’s responsible – if they REALLY ASPIRE for the ideals of democracy – it is up to them to open up society to debate and opposing view points, in a facilitated and peaceful manner.
What this reveals is a government that want to protect its ELECTORAL MONOPOLY of sections of society with every means possible – even if illegal and violent. There are ample evidence of that and because of that, PAD should protect itself. I will say that the strategy of openly showing their weapons (for Nick’s camera in this case) is brilliant. We all are grown-up enough to know the psychology of schoolyard bullies. You stand up to them, you show them that you are willing to fight back, they often back away and pick on the weaker and more timid… (I hope Nick can prove me wrong, but I suspect that the violent thugs at Udon are the same kind of hired thugs that tear down slums and markets – or, in extreme cases, murder grassroots activists standing up against capitalist mafias)…
Tusks at the Laiza Manau ground
i want to see my kachin land picture….
im living in singapore …
thanks
PAD – ready for violence
I just want to put in a few thoughts of mine on this:
Still, one should keep in mind that the constitution only guarantees assemblies that are “peaceful and without weapons.”
I think we also need to keep in mind that when the drafters wrote this provision, their assumption was that the state would be providing police protection for the protesters, ie. don’t carry weapons guys, because the police will protect you.
So, since the state has proven itself ready to collude with the Red thugs in acts of terrorism against the protesters, the situation is different to what the drafters of the constitution had contemplated. In any case, the basic right to self-defence is one which can be exercised independently and can be seen to supplement the right to freedom of assembly in this context (where there is good reason to believe that the police will not do its job and there is a group of armed thugs ready to launch attack).
Also, since evidence of the PAD Guards bearing weapons is clear, the only reason why the government has not instituted a legal case against the PAD, I suspect, is because they are afraid of putting themselves and their best buddies (i.e the Police) in the hot seat. Because, in any accusation of bearing weapons illegally, the PAD would immediately argue that they have a basic right to self-defence (moreover, the job of the PAD Guards is also to protect the “weak” people such as the elderly and women, so they can also be seen as a Team of Bodyguards, making their existence even more justified). And this could lead to a court-ordered inquiry about the police and who was behind the organziation of the armed Reds, which of course the government and police don’t want since they know they are wrong and are the ones who should be blamed for this.
do you really expect that this “army” would attack the PAD on its march on Rajadamnoen Road, for which reason the PAD’s march had to be led its uniformed own “PAD Army”?
Though not very likely, I think there was a possibility. Look what happened in Udon. There were over 700 people who were not afraid of the law and commited brutal acts of violence in front of TV cameras without shame and without fear. These guys are not afraid of the law. I suppose most of them right this very moment are still walking free.
They are directed against the police in case it tried to dissolve the protest
I believe that is not the case because the police did not have a policy of dissolving the protest that day. I think it was more to deter an attack and to defend if there is an attack by the Reds.
PAD – ready for violence
Kuson: “simply stupid if PAD does not have any self protection mechanisms” >> Still, one should keep in mind that the constitution only guarantees assemblies that are “peaceful and without weapons.” In addition, the weapons of the PAD are not mainly directed against attacks of the “Red Army” (do you really expect that this “army” would attack the PAD on its march on Rajadamnoen Road, for which reason the PAD’s march had to be led its uniformed own “PAD Army”?) They are directed against the police in case it tried to dissolve the protest.
“We’re preparing for a confrontation”
Thank you for pointing that out. I tried to, but my post was deleted. I stated that it was written by Timothy Laklem. It was part of an email I received from him.
The man of God threatening death to those whom he disagrees with.
Rambo and the real war in Burma
I recently stumbled upon another review of Thomas Bleming’s War in Karen Country. It is available here.
Readers may find it a useful addition to this conversation.
Best wishes to all,
Nich
“We’re preparing for a confrontation”
In reference to the posting by Boon regarding response to ‘asiaviews’ the society also has the same document and it has been signed ‘Dr Timothy’ with ‘Pastor Timothy’ printed below the signature.
The Stilwell Road
Regular New Mandala readers (or those who just stumble upon this thread) may want to pursue this story before they head off for adventures on the Ledo Road.
Best wishes to all,
Nich
Thaksin’s village funds: “markedly pro-poor”
Sidh, based the two articles below, I would agree with your comment that greater transparency and better financial advice to the borrowers would be beneficial to VRF. I would also add better management of the funds.
http://www.time.com/time/asia/2005/thai_thaksin/story3.html
http://www.thaiworld.org/en/thailand_monitor/answer.php?question_id=113
PAD – ready for violence
“Kuson”
Yes, i have many photos of the UDD and affiliated groups as i have followed them closer than the PAD (they are not just “the Reds”, or the “Red Armies” – they are very diverse and independent groups). Only in Bangkok i have followed them though, and there i have never seen these groups openly carrying weapons. I am aware that they do have access to weapons, but i can’t take photos of something that is not openly carried.
I have photos of a splinter group of the UDD throwing water bottles at PAD protesters at the first PAD Thammasat meeting, but that was only thirty seconds before police managed to get the PAD guys back into Thammasat, and UDD to stop throwing bottles. Both PAD and the UDD splinter group had weapons stockpiles (mostly rocks and wooden clubs, according to Special Branch), but they were hidden.
I also have photos of PAD protesters who attacked lone Thaksin supporters during the pre-coup protests, and who were saved by plainclothes police officers.
Anyhow, the reason why i have just posted the PAD pictures, at this time, was that violence of the “Udon Lovers” was well known, well portrayed in the medias.
Yet until today the arming of PAD guards and protesters seems to have mostly escaped the local media. The international medias, for whom i am working, are simply not interested in Thailand’s comparably small problems until a bloodbath has happened already. This is my attempt for a bit more balance and not a theses on the different political groups opposing each other in contemporary Thailand.
PAD – ready for violence
Conclusion?
Point 1: Nick Do You Have “Red Army” Photos?
I thank Nick for the pictures. But taken the quite over-reaction of the NM guests on pictures of boys and sticks, Maybe Nick (or anyone) can do some pictures of the “Red Guards” and I hope we can all denounce violence in any form and close this thread. IMHO picture representations of “Reds” bashing photos is important, if NM site is to correctly represent violence or the situation fully.
Point 2: PAD’s Safety First is Anyone’s Common Sense
Taken probable violent times [Thaksin in the Cornered Spot, “The Law” — Government Police willing to let the “Red Guards” terrorize, and the Red’s position], it would be quite * dumb * for PADites not to be more and more careful and simply stupid if PAD does not have any self protection mechanisms.
Not having any self protection mechanisms simply could Provoke the “Red Guards” to commit to more violence and so in this case, as people will probably call you dumb and stupid if your house was burglared because you told everyone you practiced non-violence and you left your house unlocked.
Point 3: PAD is not Gandhi, & Not Perfect
“Gandhi should be Gandhi, and his Non-Violence means was examplary and special on own rights” . Even though for PAD the principle is towards “Not Being Violent”, I am sure that there are some violence are displayed (NM guys have talked alot about it on this thread- pushing this and that, etc) but should not be blown out of proportions here.
Perhaps we should close this thread?
Interview with Professor Duncan McCargo
Interesting thoughts by Prof. McCargo on the southern conflict. Look forward to reading his book.