You are right in criticizing Thaksin/TRT in the way that they have not created spaces for open discussion, and have clearly contributed to the present polarization. Yet Thaksin has introduced measures that have helped previously neglected sectors of society.
I believe though that the polarization is also result of differing political ideologies competing since before Thaksin has played a role. Also the Royal issue should not be underestimated, as discussion was never encouraged and possible, especially after the events of the 70’s. And such a discussion is also incredibly dangerous, given the cult status of the institution and the person.
The polarization in my opinion is not only because of Thaksin, but contains historical and social components, and the inevitability of change in Thailand, especially in light of a soon to be coming succession crises, and how people deal with this uncertainty.
In all the turmoil now i do see pockets of very open debate and discussion. For one, in the academic field now enormous amounts of studies have been published that also contain the previously forbidden or circumvented topic of the impact of Thai monarchy – both by Thai and western scholars. Noteworthy here are from the Thai side Ajarn Porphant’s research into the CPB, Ajarn Ji’s papers, from the foreign side of course Handley, McCargo, and Andrew Walker’s research into Sufficiency Economy.
But also in the many groups under the UDD, and related groups there is an amazing amount of debate and discussion going on. I have seen Royalists discussing with opponents of the monarchy, i have seen very Royalist groups developing into harsh critics of the monarchy over the course of the events. I personally find this fascinating observe.
Of course i have no idea where this might lead – into a intelligent discussion and progress, or into senseless violence between the different factions. I don’t know. I understand though that the authorities are very observant, behind the scenes. More than 70 years history cannot be simply wiped away without severe consequences, and too radical anti monarchism will draw dire results.
The only thing i can state with confidence is that previously depoliticized sectors of society start to develop political views, topics that i have previously never heard debated, are in those venues debated.
The authorities presently are watching (unless they are forced to deal with the issue such as in the Da Torpedo case), but i have the impression that they have not yet decided how they are going to handle these new developments. Lets wait and see.
These aspects might be a beginning of a more vibrant and liberal democracy. Of course groups such as the ‘Udon Lovers’ are clearly not – they are dangerous and potentially murderous thugs led by the most unscrupulous godfathers.
On the other hand – i have found the pre-coup “Caravan of the Poor” fascinating. I have visited them first at their campsite at Navanakhorn, and several times more at Chatuchak. I have had some very interesting conversations there, especially about the motivations for their support for Thaksin. I have not encountered the fanaticized masses that blockaded the Nation, and threatened Nation staff. I have found impoverished villagers that had surprisingly subtle reasons for their support, and also accepting that Thaksin had clear failings. Yet do do accept that the same people have behaved in a very thuggish manner at the Nation building.
But i also think that PAD agenda is also not the beginning of a vibrant and liberal democracy, but not very well hidden attempts to return to “guided democracy” and disenfranchisement of the rural sectors of Thailand , such as the “new politics” debate clearly shows, with the use of very dangerous extremist nationalism – the Preah Vihaer issue. Many liberal Royalists are increasingly appalled at the open attempts by PAD to draw the monarchy into political trench fights. This is a very dangerous path the PAD and their backers are taking there.
I will not even think of entertaining any sort of discussion on royal topics during PAD rallies. I am not mad.
Because i do believe that the potential for violence is very clear to see there, as almost everywhere in Thailand. During the pre-coup anti Thaksin protests there were a few cases where lone Thaksin supporters appeared in the crowd, and were brutally attacked. If the ever present plain cloth police officers would not have whisked them away quickly, i have no doubt whatsoever that the crowd would literally torn those brave lunatics into little pieces.
I have spent considerable time taking photos here in areas of town where one wrong look from the eye can result in disgustingly brutal machete attacks or shootings, i have seen and photographed victims of such attacks killed or maimed for no apparent reason other than perceived slights.
Therefore i am extremely careful in how i confront “angry” people here, especially when i know that they are armed. Some may calm down, and others may not. This is not a gamble i am willing to take.
Anyway, and whatever, there are no clear answers here, no easy solutions. Thaksin’s government and its effects will stay enigmatic and disputed for the considerable future. I refuse though the simplistic demonization of Thaksin so prevalant under his outspoken critics, especially in the PAD.
We will soon see just impartial the judiciary is. How committed to the rule of law. Will they aggressively follow up on the red card case involving the Democrats? Will the Democrats be threatened with dissolution? Or will all of that fade into silence…
Sadly, I predict the latter. They seem to quite enjoy their status as privileged (and protected from criticism) servants of the King.
david w, to keep it short, my view is of a perpetually optimist Thai (being an expat, no longer an active part of any local Thai network) who hopes and prays for the best for Thailand. Amongst all the mess and finger-pointing, another political cycle is almost complete and I, a Thai desperate optimist, boldly predicts (‘hope’ is a more accurate word admittedly) an upswing in democratic fortunes (downswing in the economy – as with the rest of the world; but agriculture produce is making a comeback I hear). Please do take it with a grain of salt.
Nick #46. Thanks for your elaboration on both your methods and what you experienced. I find a lot of it insightful. And hence, I point the finger at the TRT/PPP governments for failing the 1997 Constitution and have not created neutral public forums where all these very rich, diverse viewpoints can be openly aired and discussed. It is one of the reasons why Thai society is so polarized today. People of different views cannot come together to have a decent conversation, debate anymore – something that needs to be remedied quickly to mend the rifts especially if PMThaksin REALLY retires from Thai politics (which will truly be a new dawn of sorts)…
And you have misunderstood my points. A disarming smile and a few words of Thai is merely a starting point towards meaningful conversation (it works amongst Thais too, believe me). This is not about being disingenous – it is about establishing some sort of relationship and a degree of respect first, a well known Asian practice. Look, I won’t be surprised if you run into the likes of Karmablues, Kuson, Nganadeeleg. They are probably angry (like me), but they won’t beat you up. Once calmed, they are more than able to have good debates with you…
On the other hand, if you already have an agenda for instance like many in NM and have a deep dislike for any shades of yellow (monarchy), it can easily cloud/color your reading of Thai society and politics. For me it is like the many extreme atheist/secularist dismissal of any form of religion. Very logical and scientific, yes – but also rather unhelpful as it also rejects many basic human conditions – not to mention the cultural charms and material beauty of devotion (the vast majority of which is not violent). My apologies if my suspicions are wrong – and that you only sincerely believe the UDD’s path will lead us to a vibrant liberal democracy and a robust rule of law. Maybe you can articulate the views of the “independent thinkers” in UDD and the likes who held back other protestors from beating up the police further.
Nganadeeleg,
I might add that the War on Drug also exploited the lower socio-economic class in the most discriminating and inhumane way. What I find most tragic is the willingness to massacre 2,000+ small timers and let the Godfathers totally off the hook. If PMThaksin/TRT were sincere and serious about the War on Drugs, catch the small-fry peddlers, the drug-addicts to QUESTION them (not KILL) to get to the bigger boys up the drug-network heirarchy – until you reach the topmost (some likely embedded within the parliament, police, military etc.). No, whatever many in NM try to portray/interpret/twist this, this is DEFINITELY NOT a path towards democracy and the rule of law…
I have to disagree on both counts.
I am not very troubled by many people still supporting Thaksin. I am of the view that this a positive sign for the development of Thai democracy when you analyze the reasons for his support. Some may argue that he is supported because he bought votes and introduced “populist” schemes.
Yet, in line with Andrew Walkers research, i believe that the issue of vote buying is far more complex, and nevertheless the spent money – people did mostly vote for Thaksin because their perception was that they have benefited from the state under the government of Thaksin/TRT. “Sufficiency Economy” clearly did not find much support under the population.
In this sense, i view this as an important stepping stone towards democratic development of Thailand – that people vote for a party that actually works for them, and have been therefore drawn into the political process instead of just being ruled over.
One day, if another political party will develop better alternatives, they will then vote for such. The problem here is though more with the Democrats, who have not managed to present itself as a feasable alternative.
I do very much disagree with the very polemic comment on the drug war you cited. I do agree that the killings were absolutely disgusting. But the drug war was not only killings. For the first time a rough discrimination was made between user and dealer, and users were sent to rudimentary therapies.
Increased budgets were given to counter cross border trafficking.
Of course many of these policies were implemented badly, but they were a step in the right direction.
The uncomfortable fact though is that the drug war as a whole did significantly improve the terrible hold drugs had over large sectors of the population. And no, i want to emphasize here clearly that i do not justify the killings in any way – people i have photographed over a long time, and liked, did needlessly disappear during those terrible days.
I only want to show that the drug war was a very complex issue, and to some extend justified because drugs have clearly became a major destructive force.
Maybe what AW meant was “New Mandala and Andrew Walker will miss Thaksin!”. Because Andrew’s champion of Thai democracy and defender of the rurally constipated had bolted to exile after his wife Potjaman was judicially convicted for tax evasion (the evidence to convict was just overwhelming) and Thaksin had seen the judicial writing on the wall.
But it had always been Thaksin’s belief that only a ‘majority vote’ in an election should be the judge of his sins or virtues. Perhaps Andrew Walker and New Mandala believe so too?
“…if anything the courts seem to have been very lenient on him and his family over the years.”
Yep. A real judicial system with teeth, that will hopefully masticate on other powerful people too.
Predictable western worshippers of pure raw demographic vote count and the overwhelming power this hands to poorer sections of the country will lament this turn of events. Hopefully, the center Bangkok can get on with the important business of diversifying Thailand’s economy out of agriculture, breaking of the political mire it was stuck in.
Running a scare campaign is not so easy when the bogeyman flees with his tail between his legs.
But he has also basically handed them an admission of guilt, which helps to justify their stand against him.
IMO his cries of unfair treatment do not stack up – if anything the courts seem to have been very lenient on him and his family over the years.
As for his claims of assassination attempts, that is sad, but I find it hard to believe that the threats would be any more than previously – remember this is the man who was very tough on the southern insurgency and was the front man in his drug war extra-judicial killing spree.
I wonder, did he notify the authorities of such threats?
Will be interesting to follow the $2 billion money trail!
“I want to catch the ferry to Mandalay”, I replied. “OK, I will authorise the tickets”, he said. As we left, I asked who he was. He said, “U Kyaw Myint, deputy minister for transport.”
It’s weird how sometimes just as Joe tourist you brush shoulders with big wigs in Burma.
I remember going to the ministry of tourism to get a tourist visa extension for which I needed a personal interview with the minister of tourism (or maybe it was the deputy minister).
Hi Moe Aung,
Thanks for your response.
Of course you are right! It seems double standards and morals do go hand in hand and have contributed much to the wealth of the west. But it is good that some in the west have seen a need to reconcile with those they have wronged. Perhaps the UK could follow the theme and reconcile the wrongs that have contributed to Burma’s current position today? It may well be the elixer to lift Gordon Brown from the political doldrums!
In the theme of Yoko Ono’s late partner…”imagine” what the world would be like if we extinguished double standards and instead practiced the higher aspirations of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights! Much better for mankind and the planet than the sociopathic ‘dog eat dog’ mentality that exists within the minds of many at the individual or state level.
You should be concerned about the leaders of the PAD, because they set the political course the protesters support. Obviously.
And, no, there are no “red thugs” in the way you imagine. There are many different groups with very different political aims and backgrounds.
I have elaborated in other comments on these. Please reread them.
The best research on the PAD i have read is Michael Nelson’s “People’s Sector Politics in Thailand: Problems of Democracy in ousting Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra”. Also Thongchai Winitchakul has written some excellent articles criticizing PAD, and so did Giles Ungpakorn. Read Pravit’s article on Prachatai – something like ‘Where are the moderates in the PAD’?
Lets discuss these, please, and not just throw around with highly selective quotes that tell us nothing because they are taken out of context.
Nick: I agree that Thaksin gets blamed for many things he should not be blamed for, and he is definitely not the only problem in Thailand, however he is still being given unconditional support by many, which in my view is cause for a great deal of concern and does not bode well for future improvements in the country.
(Likewise, giving PAD unconditional support is also very troubling, although no one ever elects them so IMO they can be swept aside at anytime the word is given from above)
Regarding the drug war, I condemn all those who supported extra-judicial killings.
Like many, I abhor drugs & drug dealers, but there is no way I can condone the way that drug war was conducted.
I think you are going a bit soft on Thaksin’s role in the war on drugs, and think Vichai N says it best with the following comment he made on the Thaksinskeptic blog http://thaksinskeptic.wordpress.com/2007/08/10/mitigating-factors-arguing-thaksins-case-ii/#comment-15
“Let me add a few points that would suggest that Thaksin’s extrajudicial rampage was inspired by megalomania and that Thaksin was a psycopath. Thaksin is/was a well educated police lt. colonel, who possessed a Ph.D. in criminal justice from Sam Houston University at Texas, USA. And during all the time that the anti-yaa baa war was going on, from start to horrific finish, the FACE of this war had always been Thaksin Shinawatra(Thaksin wanted the glamor of the kill, so to speak) Thaksin Shinawatra therefore, by his police background and educational achievement, and by his position of PM of Thailand should have insisted that RULE OF LAW should be observed religiously while his war on drugs raged on. At no time, when the reports of abuses and extrajudicial killings were coming out did Thaksin hesitate to investigate or to ask for a pause in the killings. That famous “The United Nations is not my father” outburst of Thaksin Shinawatra was the highlight of exactly where Thaksin Shinawatra stand was in the extra-judicials; e.g., he wanted the Thais and the world to know he was the Maestro.
And further, Thaksin Shinawatra as PM of Thailand at that time, and possessing overwhelming unassailable majority in Thai parliament could have authored the most punishing anti-drugs laws, but DID NOT, but instead chose to deliver shoot-to-kill entertainment to the guillible Thai rurals. That certainly allowed Thaksin Shinawatra to feed his megalomaniac lust to be god-like . . . unfortunately at the expense of horrific carnage to many innocents.”
Ok, Nick, so you mention some PAD Leaders again. I am not so concerned about these guys. They may have supported the drug war and Thaksin before, and now they are supporting reclaim temple, 70/30 thing, etc, but the fact is these PAD Leaders have no chance to become next PM. So just don’t listen to their rantings and they can’t annoy us.
As for the Average PAD Protesters, I do have great sympathy for them as I have always shown, especially because I am free-riding them, as they are the ones who are living off the streets and risking their personal safety to protest against the Thaksin Empire.
In terms of PAD as a group, my view is similar to nganadeeleg. I think PAD should continue its protests, to act as whistle-blower for government wrong-doings and keep the public and media’s attention on these wrong-doings especially any attempt to white-wash crimes. There is no alternative group to do this job as effectively.
As for your mention of coup-installed government mishandling of South, I am sure they got some things wrong on this. Anyways, the situation now is that the military have shown many times it will not stage another coup. The military’s true commitment to this, it seems, has provoked the Thaksin camp’s Udon tactic. So for me there no risk of military intervention, EXCEPT, if Thaksin camp do another Udon-style thing. The PAD has done their share with halting the rallies in the provinces, but the question remains whether Thaksin camp will unleash Red thugs on PAD in Bangkok. Let’s hope not, especially for the well-being of the protesters.
As for Thaksin’s mishandling of South, there’s more to it than just the police control thing. His heavy-handed counterinsurgency policy emphasized the use of excessive force, arbitrary arrests and mistreatment of people. A lot of cases of disappearances and torture have also been reported. The injustice and oppression caused a lot of anger and resentment by the people there and thus violence escalated.
For all of Thaksin’s shortcomings and failings – many of the things that radical opponents make him responsible for, he simply isn’t
Ok. Wondering whether Brad Adams, Asia Director for Human Rights Watch is a “radical opponent” when he said this:
“Based on his record, Mr. Thaksin does not appear to us to be “fit and proper” under any reasonable definition of that term. His past actions should lead to him being subjected to investigations by impartial police and prosecutors , not welcomed into the club of owners of the most popular football league in the world…. The rules concerning who is “fit and proper” should ensure that serious human rights abusers are not among the league’s owners.”
Also, wondering whether Chris Baker and Pasuk are “radical opponents”:
– If you look about what he’s done over the last five years, he’s taken the 1997 constitution, which was supposed to be the best constitution that Thailand has ever had, and he’s fundamentally sabotaged all the checks and balances in that constitution .
– “It’s like Moscow before the fall of the Berlin Wall,” says Chris Baker. “There is absolutely nothing but the government view on electronic media. The talk shows are all ministers and officials. There is no discussion. It’s really bleak.”
– “The key political institutions are now the party, the inner coterie, and especially the premier himself. Checks and balances, human rights, critical scrutiny, and parliamentary opposition are discarded as barriers to realisation of the leader’s ambitious vision. With this new electoral mandate, Thaksin is in a position to change Thailand’s politics in a structural way.”
– “Thaksin has rolled back a quarter century of democratic development and hopes to transform Thailand from a beacon of democracy in South-East Asia into another illiberal one-party state ”
– “Thaksin’s economic vision may be fixed on the future and the first world, but his social vision is medieval ”
How about Michael Connors when he said this:
“Thaksin will be remembered for stacking independent institutions such as the Electoral Commission of Thailand with preferred candidates. He allegedly bought influence in the Senate. He gobbled up minor parties to ensure absolute parliamentary dominance. He bought media organisations that criticised him.”
Don’t you think the double standards and seizing the moral high ground consistently go hand in hand? Where would the West be without double standards and a forked tongue?
Practice of buying a profitable government position is definitely true in Burma. Even the army battalions under same divisional command had to buy a profitable posting for themselves.
One particular story from Kachin State was that there were three Infantry Battalions, IB 58, 21, and 36, stationed in Myitkyina and they had to bid competitively for the most profitable position of guarding the Mandalay-Myitkyina train, as only one battalion was assigned for the train escort duty.
Whichever battalion that can give the biggest cash offer to the Divisional Commander, Maj-Gen Ohn Myint for last few years, would get the train and accordingly that battalion would make most money from dealings with jade and opium smugglers while other unsuccessful battalions had totally unprofitable postings of guarding against KIA positions in the jungle by Chinese border.
I have traded a financial futures contract called SPI, Share Price Index, at Sydney Futures Exchange for ten years now and that randomness used to fool me for first eight years of trading.
Most of the time I took a position in the market the stupid market moved against me and made me lost so much money that I started believing that the market was deliberately acting against me. What I didn’t know then was that the market could only go either my way or against me, as simple as that.
Without seeing that simple fact, I tried and wasted money and time to find a particular brilliant system to foresee the market. I failed, miserably. Now I am wise and I follow just a simple plan. For whatever reason I take a position in the market, then if the market moves against me I cut the loss and get out. If the market moves in my way I stay on and make good money.
Like a large school of fish or a large herd of wildebeest, even a very complex system works well just by following few simple rules.
1. Stick together.
2. Move in the same direction as next guy does.
3. Do not crash into him.
Even the learned academics from Harvard University have called it swarm behavior or swarm theory, ha ha, not a black swam though!
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
PAD – ready for violence
You are right in criticizing Thaksin/TRT in the way that they have not created spaces for open discussion, and have clearly contributed to the present polarization. Yet Thaksin has introduced measures that have helped previously neglected sectors of society.
I believe though that the polarization is also result of differing political ideologies competing since before Thaksin has played a role. Also the Royal issue should not be underestimated, as discussion was never encouraged and possible, especially after the events of the 70’s. And such a discussion is also incredibly dangerous, given the cult status of the institution and the person.
The polarization in my opinion is not only because of Thaksin, but contains historical and social components, and the inevitability of change in Thailand, especially in light of a soon to be coming succession crises, and how people deal with this uncertainty.
In all the turmoil now i do see pockets of very open debate and discussion. For one, in the academic field now enormous amounts of studies have been published that also contain the previously forbidden or circumvented topic of the impact of Thai monarchy – both by Thai and western scholars. Noteworthy here are from the Thai side Ajarn Porphant’s research into the CPB, Ajarn Ji’s papers, from the foreign side of course Handley, McCargo, and Andrew Walker’s research into Sufficiency Economy.
But also in the many groups under the UDD, and related groups there is an amazing amount of debate and discussion going on. I have seen Royalists discussing with opponents of the monarchy, i have seen very Royalist groups developing into harsh critics of the monarchy over the course of the events. I personally find this fascinating observe.
Of course i have no idea where this might lead – into a intelligent discussion and progress, or into senseless violence between the different factions. I don’t know. I understand though that the authorities are very observant, behind the scenes. More than 70 years history cannot be simply wiped away without severe consequences, and too radical anti monarchism will draw dire results.
The only thing i can state with confidence is that previously depoliticized sectors of society start to develop political views, topics that i have previously never heard debated, are in those venues debated.
The authorities presently are watching (unless they are forced to deal with the issue such as in the Da Torpedo case), but i have the impression that they have not yet decided how they are going to handle these new developments. Lets wait and see.
These aspects might be a beginning of a more vibrant and liberal democracy. Of course groups such as the ‘Udon Lovers’ are clearly not – they are dangerous and potentially murderous thugs led by the most unscrupulous godfathers.
On the other hand – i have found the pre-coup “Caravan of the Poor” fascinating. I have visited them first at their campsite at Navanakhorn, and several times more at Chatuchak. I have had some very interesting conversations there, especially about the motivations for their support for Thaksin. I have not encountered the fanaticized masses that blockaded the Nation, and threatened Nation staff. I have found impoverished villagers that had surprisingly subtle reasons for their support, and also accepting that Thaksin had clear failings. Yet do do accept that the same people have behaved in a very thuggish manner at the Nation building.
But i also think that PAD agenda is also not the beginning of a vibrant and liberal democracy, but not very well hidden attempts to return to “guided democracy” and disenfranchisement of the rural sectors of Thailand , such as the “new politics” debate clearly shows, with the use of very dangerous extremist nationalism – the Preah Vihaer issue. Many liberal Royalists are increasingly appalled at the open attempts by PAD to draw the monarchy into political trench fights. This is a very dangerous path the PAD and their backers are taking there.
I will not even think of entertaining any sort of discussion on royal topics during PAD rallies. I am not mad.
Because i do believe that the potential for violence is very clear to see there, as almost everywhere in Thailand. During the pre-coup anti Thaksin protests there were a few cases where lone Thaksin supporters appeared in the crowd, and were brutally attacked. If the ever present plain cloth police officers would not have whisked them away quickly, i have no doubt whatsoever that the crowd would literally torn those brave lunatics into little pieces.
I have spent considerable time taking photos here in areas of town where one wrong look from the eye can result in disgustingly brutal machete attacks or shootings, i have seen and photographed victims of such attacks killed or maimed for no apparent reason other than perceived slights.
Therefore i am extremely careful in how i confront “angry” people here, especially when i know that they are armed. Some may calm down, and others may not. This is not a gamble i am willing to take.
Anyway, and whatever, there are no clear answers here, no easy solutions. Thaksin’s government and its effects will stay enigmatic and disputed for the considerable future. I refuse though the simplistic demonization of Thaksin so prevalant under his outspoken critics, especially in the PAD.
PAD and the Democrats will miss Thaksin
We will soon see just impartial the judiciary is. How committed to the rule of law. Will they aggressively follow up on the red card case involving the Democrats? Will the Democrats be threatened with dissolution? Or will all of that fade into silence…
Sadly, I predict the latter. They seem to quite enjoy their status as privileged (and protected from criticism) servants of the King.
Interview with Professor Duncan McCargo
david w, to keep it short, my view is of a perpetually optimist Thai (being an expat, no longer an active part of any local Thai network) who hopes and prays for the best for Thailand. Amongst all the mess and finger-pointing, another political cycle is almost complete and I, a Thai desperate optimist, boldly predicts (‘hope’ is a more accurate word admittedly) an upswing in democratic fortunes (downswing in the economy – as with the rest of the world; but agriculture produce is making a comeback I hear). Please do take it with a grain of salt.
PAD – ready for violence
Nick #46. Thanks for your elaboration on both your methods and what you experienced. I find a lot of it insightful. And hence, I point the finger at the TRT/PPP governments for failing the 1997 Constitution and have not created neutral public forums where all these very rich, diverse viewpoints can be openly aired and discussed. It is one of the reasons why Thai society is so polarized today. People of different views cannot come together to have a decent conversation, debate anymore – something that needs to be remedied quickly to mend the rifts especially if PMThaksin REALLY retires from Thai politics (which will truly be a new dawn of sorts)…
And you have misunderstood my points. A disarming smile and a few words of Thai is merely a starting point towards meaningful conversation (it works amongst Thais too, believe me). This is not about being disingenous – it is about establishing some sort of relationship and a degree of respect first, a well known Asian practice. Look, I won’t be surprised if you run into the likes of Karmablues, Kuson, Nganadeeleg. They are probably angry (like me), but they won’t beat you up. Once calmed, they are more than able to have good debates with you…
On the other hand, if you already have an agenda for instance like many in NM and have a deep dislike for any shades of yellow (monarchy), it can easily cloud/color your reading of Thai society and politics. For me it is like the many extreme atheist/secularist dismissal of any form of religion. Very logical and scientific, yes – but also rather unhelpful as it also rejects many basic human conditions – not to mention the cultural charms and material beauty of devotion (the vast majority of which is not violent). My apologies if my suspicions are wrong – and that you only sincerely believe the UDD’s path will lead us to a vibrant liberal democracy and a robust rule of law. Maybe you can articulate the views of the “independent thinkers” in UDD and the likes who held back other protestors from beating up the police further.
Nganadeeleg,
I might add that the War on Drug also exploited the lower socio-economic class in the most discriminating and inhumane way. What I find most tragic is the willingness to massacre 2,000+ small timers and let the Godfathers totally off the hook. If PMThaksin/TRT were sincere and serious about the War on Drugs, catch the small-fry peddlers, the drug-addicts to QUESTION them (not KILL) to get to the bigger boys up the drug-network heirarchy – until you reach the topmost (some likely embedded within the parliament, police, military etc.). No, whatever many in NM try to portray/interpret/twist this, this is DEFINITELY NOT a path towards democracy and the rule of law…
PAD and the Democrats will miss Thaksin
“… hopefully masticate on other powerful people too.”
Only if they too get in the way of the more powerful people running the courts.
I have no problems getting rid of Thaksin, but the old boss isn’t any better.
PAD – ready for violence
“nganadeeleg”:
I have to disagree on both counts.
I am not very troubled by many people still supporting Thaksin. I am of the view that this a positive sign for the development of Thai democracy when you analyze the reasons for his support. Some may argue that he is supported because he bought votes and introduced “populist” schemes.
Yet, in line with Andrew Walkers research, i believe that the issue of vote buying is far more complex, and nevertheless the spent money – people did mostly vote for Thaksin because their perception was that they have benefited from the state under the government of Thaksin/TRT. “Sufficiency Economy” clearly did not find much support under the population.
In this sense, i view this as an important stepping stone towards democratic development of Thailand – that people vote for a party that actually works for them, and have been therefore drawn into the political process instead of just being ruled over.
One day, if another political party will develop better alternatives, they will then vote for such. The problem here is though more with the Democrats, who have not managed to present itself as a feasable alternative.
I do very much disagree with the very polemic comment on the drug war you cited. I do agree that the killings were absolutely disgusting. But the drug war was not only killings. For the first time a rough discrimination was made between user and dealer, and users were sent to rudimentary therapies.
Increased budgets were given to counter cross border trafficking.
Of course many of these policies were implemented badly, but they were a step in the right direction.
The uncomfortable fact though is that the drug war as a whole did significantly improve the terrible hold drugs had over large sectors of the population. And no, i want to emphasize here clearly that i do not justify the killings in any way – people i have photographed over a long time, and liked, did needlessly disappear during those terrible days.
I only want to show that the drug war was a very complex issue, and to some extend justified because drugs have clearly became a major destructive force.
Green Left Weekly on Burma
Dear Jon,
Interesting tale. Hope the minister got over his ‘kee ben nam’ -perhaps brought on by K9 consumption.
PAD and the Democrats will miss Thaksin
Maybe what AW meant was “New Mandala and Andrew Walker will miss Thaksin!”. Because Andrew’s champion of Thai democracy and defender of the rurally constipated had bolted to exile after his wife Potjaman was judicially convicted for tax evasion (the evidence to convict was just overwhelming) and Thaksin had seen the judicial writing on the wall.
But it had always been Thaksin’s belief that only a ‘majority vote’ in an election should be the judge of his sins or virtues. Perhaps Andrew Walker and New Mandala believe so too?
PAD and the Democrats will miss Thaksin
“…if anything the courts seem to have been very lenient on him and his family over the years.”
Yep. A real judicial system with teeth, that will hopefully masticate on other powerful people too.
Predictable western worshippers of pure raw demographic vote count and the overwhelming power this hands to poorer sections of the country will lament this turn of events. Hopefully, the center Bangkok can get on with the important business of diversifying Thailand’s economy out of agriculture, breaking of the political mire it was stuck in.
PAD and the Democrats will miss Thaksin
Running a scare campaign is not so easy when the bogeyman flees with his tail between his legs.
But he has also basically handed them an admission of guilt, which helps to justify their stand against him.
IMO his cries of unfair treatment do not stack up – if anything the courts seem to have been very lenient on him and his family over the years.
As for his claims of assassination attempts, that is sad, but I find it hard to believe that the threats would be any more than previously – remember this is the man who was very tough on the southern insurgency and was the front man in his drug war extra-judicial killing spree.
I wonder, did he notify the authorities of such threats?
Will be interesting to follow the $2 billion money trail!
Green Left Weekly on Burma
The dog eating is in a different thread.
Green Left Weekly on Burma
“I want to catch the ferry to Mandalay”, I replied. “OK, I will authorise the tickets”, he said. As we left, I asked who he was. He said, “U Kyaw Myint, deputy minister for transport.”
It’s weird how sometimes just as Joe tourist you brush shoulders with big wigs in Burma.
I remember going to the ministry of tourism to get a tourist visa extension for which I needed a personal interview with the minister of tourism (or maybe it was the deputy minister).
The appointment was cancelled with the excuse:
Wun-gyi wun sho-nei-de [Minister diarrhea -ing]
Did get the signature though.
Green Left Weekly on Burma
Hi Moe Aung,
Thanks for your response.
Of course you are right! It seems double standards and morals do go hand in hand and have contributed much to the wealth of the west. But it is good that some in the west have seen a need to reconcile with those they have wronged. Perhaps the UK could follow the theme and reconcile the wrongs that have contributed to Burma’s current position today? It may well be the elixer to lift Gordon Brown from the political doldrums!
In the theme of Yoko Ono’s late partner…”imagine” what the world would be like if we extinguished double standards and instead practiced the higher aspirations of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights! Much better for mankind and the planet than the sociopathic ‘dog eat dog’ mentality that exists within the minds of many at the individual or state level.
PAD – ready for violence
“Karmablues”:
You should be concerned about the leaders of the PAD, because they set the political course the protesters support. Obviously.
And, no, there are no “red thugs” in the way you imagine. There are many different groups with very different political aims and backgrounds.
I have elaborated in other comments on these. Please reread them.
The best research on the PAD i have read is Michael Nelson’s “People’s Sector Politics in Thailand: Problems of Democracy in ousting Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra”. Also Thongchai Winitchakul has written some excellent articles criticizing PAD, and so did Giles Ungpakorn. Read Pravit’s article on Prachatai – something like ‘Where are the moderates in the PAD’?
Lets discuss these, please, and not just throw around with highly selective quotes that tell us nothing because they are taken out of context.
PAD – ready for violence
Nick: I agree that Thaksin gets blamed for many things he should not be blamed for, and he is definitely not the only problem in Thailand, however he is still being given unconditional support by many, which in my view is cause for a great deal of concern and does not bode well for future improvements in the country.
(Likewise, giving PAD unconditional support is also very troubling, although no one ever elects them so IMO they can be swept aside at anytime the word is given from above)
Regarding the drug war, I condemn all those who supported extra-judicial killings.
Like many, I abhor drugs & drug dealers, but there is no way I can condone the way that drug war was conducted.
I think you are going a bit soft on Thaksin’s role in the war on drugs, and think Vichai N says it best with the following comment he made on the Thaksinskeptic blog http://thaksinskeptic.wordpress.com/2007/08/10/mitigating-factors-arguing-thaksins-case-ii/#comment-15
“Let me add a few points that would suggest that Thaksin’s extrajudicial rampage was inspired by megalomania and that Thaksin was a psycopath. Thaksin is/was a well educated police lt. colonel, who possessed a Ph.D. in criminal justice from Sam Houston University at Texas, USA. And during all the time that the anti-yaa baa war was going on, from start to horrific finish, the FACE of this war had always been Thaksin Shinawatra(Thaksin wanted the glamor of the kill, so to speak) Thaksin Shinawatra therefore, by his police background and educational achievement, and by his position of PM of Thailand should have insisted that RULE OF LAW should be observed religiously while his war on drugs raged on. At no time, when the reports of abuses and extrajudicial killings were coming out did Thaksin hesitate to investigate or to ask for a pause in the killings. That famous “The United Nations is not my father” outburst of Thaksin Shinawatra was the highlight of exactly where Thaksin Shinawatra stand was in the extra-judicials; e.g., he wanted the Thais and the world to know he was the Maestro.
And further, Thaksin Shinawatra as PM of Thailand at that time, and possessing overwhelming unassailable majority in Thai parliament could have authored the most punishing anti-drugs laws, but DID NOT, but instead chose to deliver shoot-to-kill entertainment to the guillible Thai rurals. That certainly allowed Thaksin Shinawatra to feed his megalomaniac lust to be god-like . . . unfortunately at the expense of horrific carnage to many innocents.”
PAD – ready for violence
Ok, Nick, so you mention some PAD Leaders again. I am not so concerned about these guys. They may have supported the drug war and Thaksin before, and now they are supporting reclaim temple, 70/30 thing, etc, but the fact is these PAD Leaders have no chance to become next PM. So just don’t listen to their rantings and they can’t annoy us.
As for the Average PAD Protesters, I do have great sympathy for them as I have always shown, especially because I am free-riding them, as they are the ones who are living off the streets and risking their personal safety to protest against the Thaksin Empire.
In terms of PAD as a group, my view is similar to nganadeeleg. I think PAD should continue its protests, to act as whistle-blower for government wrong-doings and keep the public and media’s attention on these wrong-doings especially any attempt to white-wash crimes. There is no alternative group to do this job as effectively.
As for your mention of coup-installed government mishandling of South, I am sure they got some things wrong on this. Anyways, the situation now is that the military have shown many times it will not stage another coup. The military’s true commitment to this, it seems, has provoked the Thaksin camp’s Udon tactic. So for me there no risk of military intervention, EXCEPT, if Thaksin camp do another Udon-style thing. The PAD has done their share with halting the rallies in the provinces, but the question remains whether Thaksin camp will unleash Red thugs on PAD in Bangkok. Let’s hope not, especially for the well-being of the protesters.
As for Thaksin’s mishandling of South, there’s more to it than just the police control thing. His heavy-handed counterinsurgency policy emphasized the use of excessive force, arbitrary arrests and mistreatment of people. A lot of cases of disappearances and torture have also been reported. The injustice and oppression caused a lot of anger and resentment by the people there and thus violence escalated.
For all of Thaksin’s shortcomings and failings – many of the things that radical opponents make him responsible for, he simply isn’t
Ok. Wondering whether Brad Adams, Asia Director for Human Rights Watch is a “radical opponent” when he said this:
“Based on his record, Mr. Thaksin does not appear to us to be “fit and proper” under any reasonable definition of that term. His past actions should lead to him being subjected to investigations by impartial police and prosecutors , not welcomed into the club of owners of the most popular football league in the world…. The rules concerning who is “fit and proper” should ensure that serious human rights abusers are not among the league’s owners.”
Also, wondering whether Chris Baker and Pasuk are “radical opponents”:
– If you look about what he’s done over the last five years, he’s taken the 1997 constitution, which was supposed to be the best constitution that Thailand has ever had, and he’s fundamentally sabotaged all the checks and balances in that constitution .
– “It’s like Moscow before the fall of the Berlin Wall,” says Chris Baker. “There is absolutely nothing but the government view on electronic media. The talk shows are all ministers and officials. There is no discussion. It’s really bleak.”
– “The key political institutions are now the party, the inner coterie, and especially the premier himself. Checks and balances, human rights, critical scrutiny, and parliamentary opposition are discarded as barriers to realisation of the leader’s ambitious vision. With this new electoral mandate, Thaksin is in a position to change Thailand’s politics in a structural way.”
– “Thaksin has rolled back a quarter century of democratic development and hopes to transform Thailand from a beacon of democracy in South-East Asia into another illiberal one-party state ”
– “Thaksin’s economic vision may be fixed on the future and the first world, but his social vision is medieval ”
How about Michael Connors when he said this:
“Thaksin will be remembered for stacking independent institutions such as the Electoral Commission of Thailand with preferred candidates. He allegedly bought influence in the Senate. He gobbled up minor parties to ensure absolute parliamentary dominance. He bought media organisations that criticised him.”
Green Left Weekly on Burma
Don’t you think the double standards and seizing the moral high ground consistently go hand in hand? Where would the West be without double standards and a forked tongue?
Patronage and power in northern Burma
Practice of buying a profitable government position is definitely true in Burma. Even the army battalions under same divisional command had to buy a profitable posting for themselves.
One particular story from Kachin State was that there were three Infantry Battalions, IB 58, 21, and 36, stationed in Myitkyina and they had to bid competitively for the most profitable position of guarding the Mandalay-Myitkyina train, as only one battalion was assigned for the train escort duty.
Whichever battalion that can give the biggest cash offer to the Divisional Commander, Maj-Gen Ohn Myint for last few years, would get the train and accordingly that battalion would make most money from dealings with jade and opium smugglers while other unsuccessful battalions had totally unprofitable postings of guarding against KIA positions in the jungle by Chinese border.
Market economy works even in Burma!
Interview with Professor Duncan McCargo
I have traded a financial futures contract called SPI, Share Price Index, at Sydney Futures Exchange for ten years now and that randomness used to fool me for first eight years of trading.
Most of the time I took a position in the market the stupid market moved against me and made me lost so much money that I started believing that the market was deliberately acting against me. What I didn’t know then was that the market could only go either my way or against me, as simple as that.
Without seeing that simple fact, I tried and wasted money and time to find a particular brilliant system to foresee the market. I failed, miserably. Now I am wise and I follow just a simple plan. For whatever reason I take a position in the market, then if the market moves against me I cut the loss and get out. If the market moves in my way I stay on and make good money.
Like a large school of fish or a large herd of wildebeest, even a very complex system works well just by following few simple rules.
1. Stick together.
2. Move in the same direction as next guy does.
3. Do not crash into him.
Even the learned academics from Harvard University have called it swarm behavior or swarm theory, ha ha, not a black swam though!
“Does anyone care what Jakrapop actually said?”
http://www.bangkokpost.com/080808_News/08Aug2008_news05.php
Are they serious? Increase the penalties? Now we are beginning to get an idea of who really is in charge, as if it were not obvious before.