Thanks Srithanonchai. It is quite a interesting then that some members of the constitution drafting assembly like Karoon Saingam and Chemsak Pinthong, on one hand, are presumably paranoid of a fragmented Thailand, but on the other persist in distancing themselves from backward rural politics as evident in their active support of PAD policy.
Who are other CDA members that actively support PAD… or denigrate non-middle class peoples ability to make decisions? These people and their supporters need to be mocked and chastised for their class control views.
Politics will only become stable when the political system reflects and accommodates all the important social forces and political aspirations in the society. Competitive strategies of exclusion will only add to social division and political tension. Democracy succeeds in societies where enough of the major social forces come to realize that elections, parliaments, and public debate (for all their messy faults) are better ways to resolve the conflicts in society than power, repression, exclusion, and violence. – Pasuk Phongpaichit, ‘Thai politics beyond the 2006 coup’, http://pioneer.netserv.chula.ac.th/~ppasuk/thaipoliticsbeyondthecoup.pdf
Yes Srithanonchai, I would have thought in these circumstances federalism would limit competitive strategies of exclusion by only allowing regional competitiveness before decisions are made in a federal assembly for things like budget allocation, rather than have them felt in a class struggle amongst ‘independent’ bodies of the population. How to curb such paranoia?
Additionally, there is a different minimum wage for each province (http://www.thailawforum.com/news/2008/news-June-08.html). That there is a minimum wage relevant to each province, to me, acknowledges a high level of provincial independence. So why not acknowledge local democratic governance systems more relevant to local populations? This way democratic values are ingrained more frequently due to their being ‘more democracy’ and therefore, those ‘rural jokers’ have to pay attention more otherwise they’ll get taken advantage of. Surely “hua mueang” would be a thing of the past due to there being democratic governance and electoral cycles in the province? Clearly there would be electoral racketeering every election?! Is this fear you speak of one of no growth and empirical education, just stagnation and corruption? Isn’t that what PAD argues is going on now?
Here are some facts that can add some more substance to all of the Mandala discussions. These are not secret and I’ve been told I can relate the information. Also, I’m a retired guy and work for no government agency.
Before the cyclone hit Burma, the foreign ministers of seven ethnic groups in Burma were flown to the USA Pentagon. Discussions were held and ministers were then returned to their locations.
The USA Congress expressed concern that if there is a regime change, a civil war and land grab would occur in Burma.
The ethnic groups now seem to be obtaining funding.
While in Thailand, I was handed a document produced by a think tank and allowed to scan it very briefly. It dealt with a time table for regime change in Burma.
Those are facts. Now here is my speculation.
Why was I allowed the above information and told I could publish it here and on other Vet pages? I assume they wanted it leaked in order to make the SPDC nervous. Once again, this is my speculation. You guys got any ideas?
To change the subject:
I am going to email Khaing Pam Aung, the General Secretary and Khin Maung the
President of the National United Party of Arakan.
I will also email Sing Toong, a leader of the Pa-O National Development Organization and contact Abel Tuay (Tweed) the vice Chairman of the KNPP. I’ve attended meetings with all these people and they are eager to have their story told.
I’ll try to meet the Shan, Karen, Lisu, and Chin politicians.
I will give these people The Mandala’s address and ask them to correspond. In this way, you should be able to get some first hand, on the ground information.
Books are great, but some real world experience seems to always round things out. This will all take some time because I just got back from Narathiwat and have some friends to meet in Chiang Mai.
Mr. Slade, you say you know American David (all of us who live on the border know his real name) of the FBR. Although I am not a Christian, I have total respect for this man (I’m glad he got out of his tight spot a while ago). I am going to contact him to see if he wants to accept a couple of volunteers coming to Mae Sot.
As to the titles the KNU gave you and Pastor Melton (or was it Bleming?), the groups do that
as a courtesy. It is best to keep a low profile and just help them out. My opinion and not meant as a criticism.
A point to remember is that fighting as a mercenary can lead to the loss of your citizenship. This is how I remember it. Please check me out on that one.
Mr. Everetts. You mention the Madrid in Patpong. That brings back memories. I used to drink with Jack Shirley there. Then go down to the Washington Square and drink with Tony Poe, Pat Landry, David Pruess, and that old rascal George Pappas.
They are all deceased now. I knew those guys years ago from the Laos adventure. Constructive criticism – Mr. Everetts, if you are doing what you say you are, I think you could better serve the Karen by not broadcasting any firefights, etc. Yea, it is exciting, but it puts them in the position of creating a denial.
These observations are my thoughts. Whatever you guys are doing, at least you walked the walk (as I did just a bit many years ago) along with talking the talk.
I’ll try to get in contact with Bertil Lintner. This guy has been around a long time and really knows what he’s talking about. I’ll give him, the Irawaddy, and Andrew Marshall the Mandala’saddress.
I’m sure they could add much enlightening information. Marshal is based in Bangkok and been through Burma many times. He wrote the Trouser People. Lintner, so I hear has extensive contacts. I’ve never met these guys but they both write brilliantly.
I also want to take the chance here to completely reject the accusation of making “pro-Thaksin” propaganda
It is within your right to do so (reject the accusation), but at the very least from the face of the article, I still believe that it was written in a biased and unfair way against the PAD, which I had already explained why at length in my #6
As to the children on these photos – i have severe doubts about the parenting abilities of their guardians, taking children to potentially volatile demonstrations, regardless of which political side they may be on. This simply is not a place for children, especially not carrying arms.
Well, if your concern was about “parenting abilities” this was not what was conveyed in the Article. My understanding is that the Article is saying that the PAD are deliberately arming the children to fight, which I don’t believe is a reasonable speculation as I already explained in my #6
And the US constitution is not a reference to Thai specific problems.
My reference to the US Constitution was to make the point about how important the basic right to self-defence is. In the US and in the context of the states providing proper police protection, a large number of states allow citizens to carry guns in public, usually it must be concealed though and most states require that one apply for a permit. So I just wanted to contrast the situation, with the PAD who should be able to have a right to self-defence and carrying must less harmful weapons than guns, and in the context of armed militias which had been set up to attack them and also possible lack of proper police protection.
As for your statements regarding the PAD concealment of weapons, since these are “hidden”, I could equally speculate that perhaps they were also hiding bazookas, grenades, and machine guns which they got from the military. But that would be just speculation.
Now, I just want to end off by saying this. There are many things about the PAD which are bad. The irresponsible parents who bring children to the protests, yes that’s bad. The PAD Guards (let’s assume it’s true), who hide swords and knives, that’s bad. The PAD Leaders who encourage the reclaiming of Preah Vihear, that’s bad. But just like there are
some blacks who are murderers, drug lords, burglars, etc, that DOES NOT make all blacks bad and evil. Even the blacks who are bad and evil, they too are entitled to proper police protection, they too should not be allowed to get inhumanely beaten up.
I hate Thaksin very much and most of the “ugly duckling cabinet”. But I would NEVER find it even remotely acceptable for a group of thugs to storm into Thaksins house with axes, machetes, etc. and beat him to near death, or to storm government house and beat the living daylights out of the cabinet ministers. No, that is just unacceptable.
The PAD is a very big group (ie. tens of thousands of people). Some are probably the very violent type who would hide sharp weapons and things but I believe these types do no represent the average protester who number in the tens of thousands; these violent types are probably only the small minority.
The most important point I want to make is, go ahead and hate them all if you want, but please don’t forget that they are humans and deserve to be treated as such as I explained in #19.
[PS. I also want to record my protest of a comment which I tried to post in the “The king, the courts and the former PM” thread, which the webmasters had rejected and I believe that that comment did not fall within one of the stated criteria for rejection.]
The idea of federalism fundamentally contradicts the long-standing conception of Thailand as a unitary state. The constitution states that Thailand is “one and indivisible Kingdom.” Remember that even things such as local self-government by muncipalities and the election of provincial governors had given rise to dire concerns that cities might well declare independence from Thailand. Regarding the elected governors, it is feared that this will be a return to the system of “hua mueang” (semi-independent principalities) that was replaced by King Chulalongkorn with the unitary state of today.
Compared to other countries, all this is made more complicated by the confusion that Thai legal-administrative thinking has with concepts such as “executive” and “autonomy.” Simply speaking, while other countries might perceive local or provincial “autonomy” as a decentralization within the central-level executive (which keeps the resultant local authorities under the control of the central state), Thai thinking mostly sees autonomy as creating “independent” units–independent of the central government, or the central executive branch of the state.
Nick: Thanks very much indeed for this very informative addition to your previous post!
Sidh: First, I have observed and researched the entire process in Thailand since the drafting of the 1997 Constitution until now, that is the period you want me to summarize in a comment as long as my previous statement. And, sorry, but I don’t think that I can do justice to it in a text that is of the length you have in mind.
Second, I will probably never understand why a political analyst has to break into tears on seeing events such as those in Udon in order to verify his analysis.
Third, as to your statement, “I understand it is within their democratic rights to come out on the streets to protest without threats of violence.” You are perfectly right as far as the events in Udon are concerned, even if one perceives the PAD’s rally as a deliberate attempt to provoke violence and bloodshed to further its stretegic ends. These issues are unrelated, since the right to such demonstrations is constitutionally guaranteed, irrespective of their deeper intentions. As far as the PAD’s protest in BKK is concerned, please refer to my longer comment.
Fourth, I don’t really understand where my bias lies when I merely try to add questions that you dislike.
I saw an ad in an inflight magazine the other day (too bad I did not take a copy, maybe someone will and can post a picture) on US Airways, that had the caption “rubies from Bali”, with a photo of a specimen. The accompanying text states that this special (American) dealer happened on his find on the island of Bali (with all the usual exotic qualifiers), where there is someone who had got the “limited quality” of these precious stones from Burma. Maybe the Balinese connection is a way to avoid negative connotations (and sanctions and so on); these are somehow Balinese stones that just happen to have come from Burma. The post above puts all this in perspective. Thanks.
All changes over ‘the next year or so’ have to be done in small reasoned increments. Anything that goes back to reworking the constitution will only lead to more overreactions because it will foster hypocrisy and a lack of faith that Thais have in their political process. Surely the way forward is not to support the justification of elites running the country?!
Most of the above comments could only be ways forward if there was already a system everyone respected. Surely there hasn’t been enough time behind this new system to respect it yet!
Taiwan and Israel spring to mind — they’ve both got democratic systems and recently their respective Prime Ministers have faced corruption charges. Has there been a complete re-working of the constitutions of Taiwan and Israel? No, because the value of democracy is more important than the people who are running it. How will Thai citizens be able to feel this value if their democracy keeps being re-planted?
The way forward is simply to ensure the current systems survival. Hopefully an elite will nurture it with some water or fertilizer in the form of a statement towards a -public- common sense, but this can’t be relied upon – so perhaps this post is really asking when the rain will come….
As to your last question, what?
None of the previous questions can be answered either accurately or logically because of the extent of corruption, greed and avarice, individual ignorance by both voter and candidate, and lack of civic responsibility in Thailand. Not to sound too negative, of course.
What really needs to happen is, as I sad before, some 10,000 PAD-type groups need to be set up as watchdog/activist groups to immediately pounce on corrupt politicians and government leaders even while they are still being considered for posts, such as Kowit, for example.
I think the best way forward would be for the Democrats and the PPP to come together to form a government specifically tasked with putting the mixed (single-member-district/party-list) electoral system back into place.
But rather than returning to a supposedly apolitical senate, the constitution should allow parties to directly field candidates but create malapportioned districts based on region (making it likely that the democrats will at least have effective veto power in the senate as they try to build a more competitive national platform).
This ought to ensure some minimal level of institutionalized checks and balances and eventually lead to a platform-based two-party system. The Democrats would benefit because (after they get a more national base) they will have the hope of forming a government without being held hostage by the smaller parties and larger factions.
There is currently an issue on “Royal approval” of anti-graft and election committee. If they are found guilty. Then my suggestion would be:
– Put both committee in jail
– Nullify the current election result
– Re-election
– Give the PAD a chance to run for election
The future of Thai politic cannot be stable if election result is not accept by all parties.
No, this is not an Academic Article, as i am a Photographer. And no, i did not “chose the worst ones” – there were several people armed with nail spiked clubs and other ingenious weapons designed to maim. Already taking these photos drew some negative comments by some PAD guards, and faced by people armed this way i preferred not to overstay my welcome. I have managed though after these photos were published on NM to take pictures of PAD guards doing baton training, on another day.
In addition to that – the PAD is armed with swords and knifes as well, mostly hidden, or camouflaged – by hiding swords in the handles of their flags, or having pieces of cloth wrapped around the blades. This is well known, i would advise asking the police on the scene for confirmation.
The PAD has not just been armed now, but was armed at least since the first after-coup Thammasat meetings. This was now just the first time i have seen weapons openly displayed.
As to the children on these photos – i have severe doubts about the parenting abilities of their guardians, taking children to potentially volatile demonstrations, regardless of which political side they may be on. This simply is not a place for children, especially not carrying arms.
And the US constitution is not a reference to Thai specific problems. I am not a legal expert, but carrying arms in public is as far as i know not legal (by either side). Disarming them though might cause riots, so there is little the police can do, underfunded, under equipped, and under trained as they are regarding crowd/riot control.
I also want to take the chance here to completely reject the accusation of making “pro-Thaksin” propaganda. I have shown photos here that i believe are important to understand what may come, that the PAD is not what it has so far presented itself to be. If one has to take any side – there are still more sides to be taken than the rather simplistic either pro-PAD or pro-Thaksin side, and nothing in between.
Also the many groups that make the UDD, or groups that are outside of this umbrella organization and still oppose the PAD (such as the individuals that make up the “Sanam Luang voice”) are worthy of deeper analyzes regarding their backgrounds and aims. This is not just unilateral support for Thaksin, but multifaceted groups that range from fanatical Thaksin supporters to early Thaksin opponents who reject the extreme nationalism of the PAD.
Also the PAD, as Thongchai Winitchakul has shown very well, is a alliance of former Marxists and extreme Royalists/Rightists, yet now with clear common aims and no dissent – overthrow of the elected government (ineffective as it may be – still, it was elected), and a political agenda that has very little to do with what i understand under ‘democracy’.
And yes, the UDD rallies have also a large spectrum of Thais from “all walks of life” in their audience. One of them, for example, is a taxi driver that is my neighbor. And one of the PAD guards is an ex-boxer with whom i have trained in the same gym about ten years ago. For me it is a very sobering thought that people i do know and like will maybe soon fight each other on the streets.
Personally – taking photos since three years of all these events, including the Prem compound clashes which have been mostly completely misrepresented by the medias (only Asia Sentinel has a report that does correspond to what i have seen) – the PAD is for me as a photographer one of the more intimidating groups, where i am most careful what i say, as my impression after these three years is that dissenting voices, discussion or debate are not tolerated there.
Yet, on UDD rallies, or TRT events i have never made a secret out of the fact that my support for Thaksin ends at the fact that he was elected, and that i oppose much of his politics. You may be surprised, but there are many TRT/PPP Sor Sor that support him only as the lesser of the many evils here, and not because they support his politics. These sort of compromises are inescapable part of the Thai political landscape.
This is my equally non-academic view.
Gives you a good sense of how long this tragedy has been going on, since World War II.
Engagement with the outside world is the only way to break out of this pattern, not isolation, not economic sanctions, or more violence (Ludu Aung Than style) in the jungles of the border.
(Thanks Stephen, you enlighten me. That must be the origin of our common belief in Burma. Following is taken from the novel “A Boy Soldier” p.9)
Our little town also had a sizeable population of Muslims and a large community of Christians. Most Muslims were the descendants of Indian immigrants from the subcontinent during the colonial times and the Christians were the local ethnic tribe of Kayins and some Chinese traders. The large and only mosque of the town was right across the wide street from our big house. The memories I had of the mosque and its people were the annual slaughtering of a large number of cattle inside the mosque. After the ritual slaughters they always gave away the raw, fresh, and still bloodied beef to the neighboring households including ours.
We Burmese didn’t eat beef for the religious reason and also because of the belief that we owed the cattle a lot, for they were the crucial part of growing and harvesting the rice crop. Only time we had a beef dish in our house was when my grandmother cooked a tasty chili beef curry out of the raw meat distributed free by the Muslims every year during the Ramadan festival celebrating the end of their month-long fast. Whenever I saw a distinctly bearded Muslim man or a head-to-toe burqa-covered Muslim woman out on the streets I always felt a mouth-watering taste of my grandma’s hot and spicy chili beef curry inside my mouth.
nganadeeleg, well actually I think he should face a Thai court with consistent civil law — I don’t think it’s really an international issue because I don’t think it can be successfully argued that he was derailing a democratic system with his personal values and potential corruption. To what degree Thailand was a functional democracy with Thaksin is not the issue here. The degree to which Thailand is a functional democracy is evident now. However, this is deviating from the point of this post a little and delving into the holier than thou, ‘everyone should behave appropriately’ line. What you have quoted was just speculation on what could be done with those who are orchestrating the present turmoil by other states.
One response to the mistaken assumption that westerners have a stronger sense of animal rights than Asians is the following quote (taken from Gustaaf Houtaman‘s 1990 PhD thesis, p.29):
In the year 1885, the foreigners had already captured King Thi-baw. When the Le-di Hsa-ya-daw learnt that Burma was likely to be governed by foreigners, the following occurred to this Noble Great monk. “If foreigners are to rule Burma, it will cause many terrestrial animals to be killed and destroyed. The reason is that western foreigners are the type of people who have appetite for enormous quantities of meat. If they arrive in Burma, they will set up killing factories of cows, of pigs, of goats, where so many such creatures will meet their death.” After musing thus, he spoke the following to the monks: “Monks, the foreigners are about to rule Burma now. When they rule, many creatures are likely to die. Among these creatures, it is the cow that is the saviour of man’s life. This animal is both our mother as well as our father, and mankind is much in debt with them. Therefore, from this day onwards, I shall not eat cow’s meat, and please I implore you not to eat it either.”
It’s indeed been a while since the sakdina issue was discussed, and apparently back then in 2007 not all was overly serious. A brief description for newbies of the sakdina system. The word was used by Da Torpedo in her infamous Sanam Luang LM instances. BTW, anyone know where she really got that nickname?
Rabop Sakdina is the Thai word for feudalism. Feudalism being defined as any of various political and/or social systems that resemple Medieval Feudalism – itself “a system of political organization prevailing in Europe form the 9th to about the 15 centuries having as its basis the relation of lord to vassal with all land held in fee and as chief characteristic homage, the service of tenants under arms and in court, wardship and forfeiture.”
A rather thick Thai dictionary defines sakdina as “land administrative power where land is measured in the number of rai accorded to the individual based on power and capabilities. For example, ?? head of the department of ??, had 3,000 rai; whoops! Beggars only 5 rai, etc.
Hate to pause but translation difficulties…anyone know exactly what the following Thai language terms are currently translated as? Thanks!
р╣Вр╕лр╕гр╕▓р╕лр╕Щр╣Йр╕▓
р╕Юр╕гр╕░р╣Вр╕лр╕гр╕▓р╕Шр╕┤р╕Ър╕Фр╕╡
р╕вр╕▓р╕Ир╕Бр╕зр╕гр╕гр╕Ур╕┤р╕Юр╕Б
I can only piece together a semblance of what they mean and that won’t work. Anyone who can help here will earn merits in the next life. р╕Вр╕нр╕Вр╕нр╕Ър╕Др╕╕р╕Ур╕бр╕▓р╕Бр╕пр╕пр╕пр╕пр╕п!!!
I believe that we (Australia) are NOT ignorant, or at least, we have absolutely no excuse to be ignorant of how the meat on our table has been treated. We have a long history of animal welfare dating back (policy wise) to 1822 when the first act against cruelty to farm animals was passed in Britain and the flow on effect to Australia in the early 1870’s when the (now) RSPCA saw its first beginings.
Animal rights is still a fairly new concept in many developing countries and I struggle against the revolution and anger I feel towards those that cause harm to any animal, and expecting other cultures to do in a few decades, what we have taken (well) over 180 years to do. There’s no quick and easy answer to this issue and comments such as “I will never eat Asian food again” do nothing for a healthy debate.
Khun Manning, maybe you dismissed the Thai courts too easily. I have attached the judges reading in Thai for you to comb through and analyze in detail for judiciary bias:
Besides you can also go into Jonathan Head’s original article and he states:
“All the cases were quite technical, alleging the kind of business and political transgressions which some would regard as routine in Thailand.”
It is my understanding (correct me if I am wrong), an aim of the 1997 Constitution is to set new precedence and lessen these routine “business and political transgressions” in the set up of (the then) seemingly robust and rigourous checks-and-balances.
In fact, the checks-and-balances actually worked very well for the first few years with relatively little “politicization” and laudable performances by the Electoral Commission, Counter Corruption Commission and Constitutional Court to name a few. We have to remember that the most powerful politician during the Chuan II government, MajGen.Sanan Krajornprasat was convicted (in 1999 I understand) of assets concealment, exactly the same allegations that PMThaksin was exonerated for in 2001 (the judiciary branch’s lowest point, I argue – and the begining of rampant “politicization” of the bureaucracies, including the military which, knowing its history, PMThaksin should have known better).
We also have to remember that Kamnan Poh was highly influential in a previous Thaksin cabinet (his son held a high profile ministerial post) when he was convicted by the courts – as was Vatana Asavaheme when the courts accepted the Khlong Dan case.
Where I am disappointed (as noted by many comments) is that all these people have (and will) manage to escape punishment. It is, again, the case of one rule for the elites/those with connections and another for all others (where’s justice for the many victims of the War on Drugs, grassroots activists like KhunCharoen Wataksorn or the recent Matichon reporter raised by Jonfernquest in #15). Remember that high profile political assasinations is extremely rare (so PMThaksin was never really under threat as he claimed – and he is probably quite aware of that). Although we have an unprecedented very high profile conviction, it is a safe bet that they won’t serve their jail term.
I would say that the judiciary branch are now “doing their jobs” as they are expected to. I won’t go so far as Jonathan Head here who classified it as “royal backing” specifically to pursue PMThaksin. It is, however, a royal reminder – such as that received by PMSamak and his ministers when he sworn in or the recent expression of support by HMK. If only they “do their jobs” according to the written law of the day and for the best interests of all Thais…
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
A way forward for Thai politics?
Thanks Srithanonchai. It is quite a interesting then that some members of the constitution drafting assembly like Karoon Saingam and Chemsak Pinthong, on one hand, are presumably paranoid of a fragmented Thailand, but on the other persist in distancing themselves from backward rural politics as evident in their active support of PAD policy.
Who are other CDA members that actively support PAD… or denigrate non-middle class peoples ability to make decisions? These people and their supporters need to be mocked and chastised for their class control views.
Politics will only become stable when the political system reflects and accommodates all the important social forces and political aspirations in the society. Competitive strategies of exclusion will only add to social division and political tension. Democracy succeeds in societies where enough of the major social forces come to realize that elections, parliaments, and public debate (for all their messy faults) are better ways to resolve the conflicts in society than power, repression, exclusion, and violence. – Pasuk Phongpaichit, ‘Thai politics beyond the 2006 coup’, http://pioneer.netserv.chula.ac.th/~ppasuk/thaipoliticsbeyondthecoup.pdf
Yes Srithanonchai, I would have thought in these circumstances federalism would limit competitive strategies of exclusion by only allowing regional competitiveness before decisions are made in a federal assembly for things like budget allocation, rather than have them felt in a class struggle amongst ‘independent’ bodies of the population. How to curb such paranoia?
Additionally, there is a different minimum wage for each province (http://www.thailawforum.com/news/2008/news-June-08.html). That there is a minimum wage relevant to each province, to me, acknowledges a high level of provincial independence. So why not acknowledge local democratic governance systems more relevant to local populations? This way democratic values are ingrained more frequently due to their being ‘more democracy’ and therefore, those ‘rural jokers’ have to pay attention more otherwise they’ll get taken advantage of. Surely “hua mueang” would be a thing of the past due to there being democratic governance and electoral cycles in the province? Clearly there would be electoral racketeering every election?! Is this fear you speak of one of no growth and empirical education, just stagnation and corruption? Isn’t that what PAD argues is going on now?
Rambo and the real war in Burma
Here are some facts that can add some more substance to all of the Mandala discussions. These are not secret and I’ve been told I can relate the information. Also, I’m a retired guy and work for no government agency.
Before the cyclone hit Burma, the foreign ministers of seven ethnic groups in Burma were flown to the USA Pentagon. Discussions were held and ministers were then returned to their locations.
The USA Congress expressed concern that if there is a regime change, a civil war and land grab would occur in Burma.
The ethnic groups now seem to be obtaining funding.
While in Thailand, I was handed a document produced by a think tank and allowed to scan it very briefly. It dealt with a time table for regime change in Burma.
Those are facts. Now here is my speculation.
Why was I allowed the above information and told I could publish it here and on other Vet pages? I assume they wanted it leaked in order to make the SPDC nervous. Once again, this is my speculation. You guys got any ideas?
To change the subject:
I am going to email Khaing Pam Aung, the General Secretary and Khin Maung the
President of the National United Party of Arakan.
I will also email Sing Toong, a leader of the Pa-O National Development Organization and contact Abel Tuay (Tweed) the vice Chairman of the KNPP. I’ve attended meetings with all these people and they are eager to have their story told.
I’ll try to meet the Shan, Karen, Lisu, and Chin politicians.
I will give these people The Mandala’s address and ask them to correspond. In this way, you should be able to get some first hand, on the ground information.
Books are great, but some real world experience seems to always round things out. This will all take some time because I just got back from Narathiwat and have some friends to meet in Chiang Mai.
Mr. Slade, you say you know American David (all of us who live on the border know his real name) of the FBR. Although I am not a Christian, I have total respect for this man (I’m glad he got out of his tight spot a while ago). I am going to contact him to see if he wants to accept a couple of volunteers coming to Mae Sot.
As to the titles the KNU gave you and Pastor Melton (or was it Bleming?), the groups do that
as a courtesy. It is best to keep a low profile and just help them out. My opinion and not meant as a criticism.
A point to remember is that fighting as a mercenary can lead to the loss of your citizenship. This is how I remember it. Please check me out on that one.
Mr. Everetts. You mention the Madrid in Patpong. That brings back memories. I used to drink with Jack Shirley there. Then go down to the Washington Square and drink with Tony Poe, Pat Landry, David Pruess, and that old rascal George Pappas.
They are all deceased now. I knew those guys years ago from the Laos adventure. Constructive criticism – Mr. Everetts, if you are doing what you say you are, I think you could better serve the Karen by not broadcasting any firefights, etc. Yea, it is exciting, but it puts them in the position of creating a denial.
These observations are my thoughts. Whatever you guys are doing, at least you walked the walk (as I did just a bit many years ago) along with talking the talk.
I’ll try to get in contact with Bertil Lintner. This guy has been around a long time and really knows what he’s talking about. I’ll give him, the Irawaddy, and Andrew Marshall the Mandala’saddress.
I’m sure they could add much enlightening information. Marshal is based in Bangkok and been through Burma many times. He wrote the Trouser People. Lintner, so I hear has extensive contacts. I’ve never met these guys but they both write brilliantly.
Good luck to all you guys.
PAD – ready for violence
Re #22
I also want to take the chance here to completely reject the accusation of making “pro-Thaksin” propaganda
It is within your right to do so (reject the accusation), but at the very least from the face of the article, I still believe that it was written in a biased and unfair way against the PAD, which I had already explained why at length in my #6
As to the children on these photos – i have severe doubts about the parenting abilities of their guardians, taking children to potentially volatile demonstrations, regardless of which political side they may be on. This simply is not a place for children, especially not carrying arms.
Well, if your concern was about “parenting abilities” this was not what was conveyed in the Article. My understanding is that the Article is saying that the PAD are deliberately arming the children to fight, which I don’t believe is a reasonable speculation as I already explained in my #6
And the US constitution is not a reference to Thai specific problems.
My reference to the US Constitution was to make the point about how important the basic right to self-defence is. In the US and in the context of the states providing proper police protection, a large number of states allow citizens to carry guns in public, usually it must be concealed though and most states require that one apply for a permit. So I just wanted to contrast the situation, with the PAD who should be able to have a right to self-defence and carrying must less harmful weapons than guns, and in the context of armed militias which had been set up to attack them and also possible lack of proper police protection.
As for your statements regarding the PAD concealment of weapons, since these are “hidden”, I could equally speculate that perhaps they were also hiding bazookas, grenades, and machine guns which they got from the military. But that would be just speculation.
Now, I just want to end off by saying this. There are many things about the PAD which are bad. The irresponsible parents who bring children to the protests, yes that’s bad. The PAD Guards (let’s assume it’s true), who hide swords and knives, that’s bad. The PAD Leaders who encourage the reclaiming of Preah Vihear, that’s bad. But just like there are
some blacks who are murderers, drug lords, burglars, etc, that DOES NOT make all blacks bad and evil. Even the blacks who are bad and evil, they too are entitled to proper police protection, they too should not be allowed to get inhumanely beaten up.
I hate Thaksin very much and most of the “ugly duckling cabinet”. But I would NEVER find it even remotely acceptable for a group of thugs to storm into Thaksins house with axes, machetes, etc. and beat him to near death, or to storm government house and beat the living daylights out of the cabinet ministers. No, that is just unacceptable.
The PAD is a very big group (ie. tens of thousands of people). Some are probably the very violent type who would hide sharp weapons and things but I believe these types do no represent the average protester who number in the tens of thousands; these violent types are probably only the small minority.
The most important point I want to make is, go ahead and hate them all if you want, but please don’t forget that they are humans and deserve to be treated as such as I explained in #19.
[PS. I also want to record my protest of a comment which I tried to post in the “The king, the courts and the former PM” thread, which the webmasters had rejected and I believe that that comment did not fall within one of the stated criteria for rejection.]
A way forward for Thai politics?
The idea of federalism fundamentally contradicts the long-standing conception of Thailand as a unitary state. The constitution states that Thailand is “one and indivisible Kingdom.” Remember that even things such as local self-government by muncipalities and the election of provincial governors had given rise to dire concerns that cities might well declare independence from Thailand. Regarding the elected governors, it is feared that this will be a return to the system of “hua mueang” (semi-independent principalities) that was replaced by King Chulalongkorn with the unitary state of today.
Compared to other countries, all this is made more complicated by the confusion that Thai legal-administrative thinking has with concepts such as “executive” and “autonomy.” Simply speaking, while other countries might perceive local or provincial “autonomy” as a decentralization within the central-level executive (which keeps the resultant local authorities under the control of the central state), Thai thinking mostly sees autonomy as creating “independent” units–independent of the central government, or the central executive branch of the state.
PAD – ready for violence
Nick: Thanks very much indeed for this very informative addition to your previous post!
Sidh: First, I have observed and researched the entire process in Thailand since the drafting of the 1997 Constitution until now, that is the period you want me to summarize in a comment as long as my previous statement. And, sorry, but I don’t think that I can do justice to it in a text that is of the length you have in mind.
Second, I will probably never understand why a political analyst has to break into tears on seeing events such as those in Udon in order to verify his analysis.
Third, as to your statement, “I understand it is within their democratic rights to come out on the streets to protest without threats of violence.” You are perfectly right as far as the events in Udon are concerned, even if one perceives the PAD’s rally as a deliberate attempt to provoke violence and bloodshed to further its stretegic ends. These issues are unrelated, since the right to such demonstrations is constitutionally guaranteed, irrespective of their deeper intentions. As far as the PAD’s protest in BKK is concerned, please refer to my longer comment.
Fourth, I don’t really understand where my bias lies when I merely try to add questions that you dislike.
“Blood jade” and Burma
I saw an ad in an inflight magazine the other day (too bad I did not take a copy, maybe someone will and can post a picture) on US Airways, that had the caption “rubies from Bali”, with a photo of a specimen. The accompanying text states that this special (American) dealer happened on his find on the island of Bali (with all the usual exotic qualifiers), where there is someone who had got the “limited quality” of these precious stones from Burma. Maybe the Balinese connection is a way to avoid negative connotations (and sanctions and so on); these are somehow Balinese stones that just happen to have come from Burma. The post above puts all this in perspective. Thanks.
A way forward for Thai politics?
All changes over ‘the next year or so’ have to be done in small reasoned increments. Anything that goes back to reworking the constitution will only lead to more overreactions because it will foster hypocrisy and a lack of faith that Thais have in their political process. Surely the way forward is not to support the justification of elites running the country?!
Most of the above comments could only be ways forward if there was already a system everyone respected. Surely there hasn’t been enough time behind this new system to respect it yet!
Taiwan and Israel spring to mind — they’ve both got democratic systems and recently their respective Prime Ministers have faced corruption charges. Has there been a complete re-working of the constitutions of Taiwan and Israel? No, because the value of democracy is more important than the people who are running it. How will Thai citizens be able to feel this value if their democracy keeps being re-planted?
The way forward is simply to ensure the current systems survival. Hopefully an elite will nurture it with some water or fertilizer in the form of a statement towards a -public- common sense, but this can’t be relied upon – so perhaps this post is really asking when the rain will come….
The horror of political violence in Burma
I look forward to the day when the Burmese military regime takes your advice, Jon.
A way forward for Thai politics?
As to your last question, what?
None of the previous questions can be answered either accurately or logically because of the extent of corruption, greed and avarice, individual ignorance by both voter and candidate, and lack of civic responsibility in Thailand. Not to sound too negative, of course.
What really needs to happen is, as I sad before, some 10,000 PAD-type groups need to be set up as watchdog/activist groups to immediately pounce on corrupt politicians and government leaders even while they are still being considered for posts, such as Kowit, for example.
A way forward for Thai politics?
I think the best way forward would be for the Democrats and the PPP to come together to form a government specifically tasked with putting the mixed (single-member-district/party-list) electoral system back into place.
But rather than returning to a supposedly apolitical senate, the constitution should allow parties to directly field candidates but create malapportioned districts based on region (making it likely that the democrats will at least have effective veto power in the senate as they try to build a more competitive national platform).
This ought to ensure some minimal level of institutionalized checks and balances and eventually lead to a platform-based two-party system. The Democrats would benefit because (after they get a more national base) they will have the hope of forming a government without being held hostage by the smaller parties and larger factions.
A way forward for Thai politics?
There is currently an issue on “Royal approval” of anti-graft and election committee. If they are found guilty. Then my suggestion would be:
– Put both committee in jail
– Nullify the current election result
– Re-election
– Give the PAD a chance to run for election
The future of Thai politic cannot be stable if election result is not accept by all parties.
PAD – ready for violence
“Karmablues”, post #6:
No, this is not an Academic Article, as i am a Photographer. And no, i did not “chose the worst ones” – there were several people armed with nail spiked clubs and other ingenious weapons designed to maim. Already taking these photos drew some negative comments by some PAD guards, and faced by people armed this way i preferred not to overstay my welcome. I have managed though after these photos were published on NM to take pictures of PAD guards doing baton training, on another day.
In addition to that – the PAD is armed with swords and knifes as well, mostly hidden, or camouflaged – by hiding swords in the handles of their flags, or having pieces of cloth wrapped around the blades. This is well known, i would advise asking the police on the scene for confirmation.
The PAD has not just been armed now, but was armed at least since the first after-coup Thammasat meetings. This was now just the first time i have seen weapons openly displayed.
As to the children on these photos – i have severe doubts about the parenting abilities of their guardians, taking children to potentially volatile demonstrations, regardless of which political side they may be on. This simply is not a place for children, especially not carrying arms.
And the US constitution is not a reference to Thai specific problems. I am not a legal expert, but carrying arms in public is as far as i know not legal (by either side). Disarming them though might cause riots, so there is little the police can do, underfunded, under equipped, and under trained as they are regarding crowd/riot control.
I also want to take the chance here to completely reject the accusation of making “pro-Thaksin” propaganda. I have shown photos here that i believe are important to understand what may come, that the PAD is not what it has so far presented itself to be. If one has to take any side – there are still more sides to be taken than the rather simplistic either pro-PAD or pro-Thaksin side, and nothing in between.
Also the many groups that make the UDD, or groups that are outside of this umbrella organization and still oppose the PAD (such as the individuals that make up the “Sanam Luang voice”) are worthy of deeper analyzes regarding their backgrounds and aims. This is not just unilateral support for Thaksin, but multifaceted groups that range from fanatical Thaksin supporters to early Thaksin opponents who reject the extreme nationalism of the PAD.
Also the PAD, as Thongchai Winitchakul has shown very well, is a alliance of former Marxists and extreme Royalists/Rightists, yet now with clear common aims and no dissent – overthrow of the elected government (ineffective as it may be – still, it was elected), and a political agenda that has very little to do with what i understand under ‘democracy’.
And yes, the UDD rallies have also a large spectrum of Thais from “all walks of life” in their audience. One of them, for example, is a taxi driver that is my neighbor. And one of the PAD guards is an ex-boxer with whom i have trained in the same gym about ten years ago. For me it is a very sobering thought that people i do know and like will maybe soon fight each other on the streets.
Personally – taking photos since three years of all these events, including the Prem compound clashes which have been mostly completely misrepresented by the medias (only Asia Sentinel has a report that does correspond to what i have seen) – the PAD is for me as a photographer one of the more intimidating groups, where i am most careful what i say, as my impression after these three years is that dissenting voices, discussion or debate are not tolerated there.
Yet, on UDD rallies, or TRT events i have never made a secret out of the fact that my support for Thaksin ends at the fact that he was elected, and that i oppose much of his politics. You may be surprised, but there are many TRT/PPP Sor Sor that support him only as the lesser of the many evils here, and not because they support his politics. These sort of compromises are inescapable part of the Thai political landscape.
This is my equally non-academic view.
The horror of political violence in Burma
Pretty horrible. Could easily be a chapter out of U Nu’s Ludu Aung Than or Thaka Ala.
http://peoplewinthrough.com/nagani.html
http://www.angelfire.com/linux/jfernquest/thaka_ala.pdf
Gives you a good sense of how long this tragedy has been going on, since World War II.
Engagement with the outside world is the only way to break out of this pattern, not isolation, not economic sanctions, or more violence (Ludu Aung Than style) in the jungles of the border.
A way forward for Thai politics?
What nganadeeleg said.
Lunch?
(Thanks Stephen, you enlighten me. That must be the origin of our common belief in Burma. Following is taken from the novel “A Boy Soldier” p.9)
Our little town also had a sizeable population of Muslims and a large community of Christians. Most Muslims were the descendants of Indian immigrants from the subcontinent during the colonial times and the Christians were the local ethnic tribe of Kayins and some Chinese traders. The large and only mosque of the town was right across the wide street from our big house. The memories I had of the mosque and its people were the annual slaughtering of a large number of cattle inside the mosque. After the ritual slaughters they always gave away the raw, fresh, and still bloodied beef to the neighboring households including ours.
We Burmese didn’t eat beef for the religious reason and also because of the belief that we owed the cattle a lot, for they were the crucial part of growing and harvesting the rice crop. Only time we had a beef dish in our house was when my grandmother cooked a tasty chili beef curry out of the raw meat distributed free by the Muslims every year during the Ramadan festival celebrating the end of their month-long fast. Whenever I saw a distinctly bearded Muslim man or a head-to-toe burqa-covered Muslim woman out on the streets I always felt a mouth-watering taste of my grandma’s hot and spicy chili beef curry inside my mouth.
A way forward for Thai politics?
nganadeeleg, well actually I think he should face a Thai court with consistent civil law — I don’t think it’s really an international issue because I don’t think it can be successfully argued that he was derailing a democratic system with his personal values and potential corruption. To what degree Thailand was a functional democracy with Thaksin is not the issue here. The degree to which Thailand is a functional democracy is evident now. However, this is deviating from the point of this post a little and delving into the holier than thou, ‘everyone should behave appropriately’ line. What you have quoted was just speculation on what could be done with those who are orchestrating the present turmoil by other states.
Lunch?
One response to the mistaken assumption that westerners have a stronger sense of animal rights than Asians is the following quote (taken from Gustaaf Houtaman‘s 1990 PhD thesis, p.29):
New Sakdina
It’s indeed been a while since the sakdina issue was discussed, and apparently back then in 2007 not all was overly serious. A brief description for newbies of the sakdina system. The word was used by Da Torpedo in her infamous Sanam Luang LM instances. BTW, anyone know where she really got that nickname?
Rabop Sakdina is the Thai word for feudalism. Feudalism being defined as any of various political and/or social systems that resemple Medieval Feudalism – itself “a system of political organization prevailing in Europe form the 9th to about the 15 centuries having as its basis the relation of lord to vassal with all land held in fee and as chief characteristic homage, the service of tenants under arms and in court, wardship and forfeiture.”
A rather thick Thai dictionary defines sakdina as “land administrative power where land is measured in the number of rai accorded to the individual based on power and capabilities. For example, ?? head of the department of ??, had 3,000 rai; whoops! Beggars only 5 rai, etc.
Hate to pause but translation difficulties…anyone know exactly what the following Thai language terms are currently translated as? Thanks!
р╣Вр╕лр╕гр╕▓р╕лр╕Щр╣Йр╕▓
р╕Юр╕гр╕░р╣Вр╕лр╕гр╕▓р╕Шр╕┤р╕Ър╕Фр╕╡
р╕вр╕▓р╕Ир╕Бр╕зр╕гр╕гр╕Ур╕┤р╕Юр╕Б
I can only piece together a semblance of what they mean and that won’t work. Anyone who can help here will earn merits in the next life. р╕Вр╕нр╕Вр╕нр╕Ър╕Др╕╕р╕Ур╕бр╕▓р╕Бр╕пр╕пр╕пр╕пр╕п!!!
Lunch?
I believe that we (Australia) are NOT ignorant, or at least, we have absolutely no excuse to be ignorant of how the meat on our table has been treated. We have a long history of animal welfare dating back (policy wise) to 1822 when the first act against cruelty to farm animals was passed in Britain and the flow on effect to Australia in the early 1870’s when the (now) RSPCA saw its first beginings.
Animal rights is still a fairly new concept in many developing countries and I struggle against the revolution and anger I feel towards those that cause harm to any animal, and expecting other cultures to do in a few decades, what we have taken (well) over 180 years to do. There’s no quick and easy answer to this issue and comments such as “I will never eat Asian food again” do nothing for a healthy debate.
The king, the courts and the former PM
Khun Manning, maybe you dismissed the Thai courts too easily. I have attached the judges reading in Thai for you to comb through and analyze in detail for judiciary bias:
р╕Др╕│р╕Юр╕┤р╕Юр╕▓р╕Бр╕йр╕▓ р╕Др╕Фр╕╡р╕ар╕▓р╕йр╕╡р╕лр╕╕р╣Йр╕Щр╕Кр╕┤р╕Щр╕п in
http://www.thairath.co.th/promote/lawsuit.php
Besides you can also go into Jonathan Head’s original article and he states:
“All the cases were quite technical, alleging the kind of business and political transgressions which some would regard as routine in Thailand.”
It is my understanding (correct me if I am wrong), an aim of the 1997 Constitution is to set new precedence and lessen these routine “business and political transgressions” in the set up of (the then) seemingly robust and rigourous checks-and-balances.
In fact, the checks-and-balances actually worked very well for the first few years with relatively little “politicization” and laudable performances by the Electoral Commission, Counter Corruption Commission and Constitutional Court to name a few. We have to remember that the most powerful politician during the Chuan II government, MajGen.Sanan Krajornprasat was convicted (in 1999 I understand) of assets concealment, exactly the same allegations that PMThaksin was exonerated for in 2001 (the judiciary branch’s lowest point, I argue – and the begining of rampant “politicization” of the bureaucracies, including the military which, knowing its history, PMThaksin should have known better).
We also have to remember that Kamnan Poh was highly influential in a previous Thaksin cabinet (his son held a high profile ministerial post) when he was convicted by the courts – as was Vatana Asavaheme when the courts accepted the Khlong Dan case.
Where I am disappointed (as noted by many comments) is that all these people have (and will) manage to escape punishment. It is, again, the case of one rule for the elites/those with connections and another for all others (where’s justice for the many victims of the War on Drugs, grassroots activists like KhunCharoen Wataksorn or the recent Matichon reporter raised by Jonfernquest in #15). Remember that high profile political assasinations is extremely rare (so PMThaksin was never really under threat as he claimed – and he is probably quite aware of that). Although we have an unprecedented very high profile conviction, it is a safe bet that they won’t serve their jail term.
I would say that the judiciary branch are now “doing their jobs” as they are expected to. I won’t go so far as Jonathan Head here who classified it as “royal backing” specifically to pursue PMThaksin. It is, however, a royal reminder – such as that received by PMSamak and his ministers when he sworn in or the recent expression of support by HMK. If only they “do their jobs” according to the written law of the day and for the best interests of all Thais…