Truly the best for of representation is random selection by computer. Let a computer throw out 480 names every 4 years. And then random selct the cabinet amongst these 480. Fair and square and everyone gets an equal chance.
Moe Aung, I didn’t mean to suggest that had the Khin Nyunt plan, whatever it was, gone ahead, that it would necessarily have been constructive in the sense of good. I was being a bit ironic there. One person I talked with then, Chao Tzang Yawnghwe, mentioned he hoped a deal would be made and that ASSK would accept whatever was on offer as she could then, in his words, start to use the junta as cats paws. I was not so sure (as I thought KN was more clever though still a thug) but it was not for me to weigh in, being only an interested outsider.
Nonetheless with your clear statements identifying the military government as the crux of the problem (warlordism writ large) and stressing the need to understand that “dialogue” has its limitations (when its not an excuse for avoiding something stronger or admitting failure) and that stronger forms of pressure and physical resistance can be well understandable, I do strongly agree.
Well you are not seriously going to tell me that Hun Sen is an honest man, are you!? Sure he helped to foment the last set of anti-Thai riots. I can understand anti-Thai feelings in Cambodia, but riots were hardly constructive.
You and BP are sure prepared to be nice to some pretty corrupt people. But I guess that is the price you pay for being a successful academic.
OFFICE OF THE SUPREME HEADQUARTERS
KAREN NATIONAL UNION
KAWTHOOLEI
It has been brought to the attention of The Karen National Union that a number of US based individuals have made claims to be military supporting and training The Karen National Liberation Army and have such been openly discussing their support with a number of media outlets.
The Karen National Union would like to clarify that ity does not in any way endorse, encourage or seek the support of these individuals or their claims of representation. In making such erenous claims they have tarnished the reputation of both the Karen National Union and the Karen National Liberation Army and we feel it our reasponsibility to request that they desist from such action in the future.
While the Karen National Union welcomes all those who seek to support our struggle in striving towards founding a genuine federal union comprised of all the states of the nationalities in Burma. We feel some individuals have incorrectly portrayed our actions as an attempt to form a seperate republic and in doing so have also suggested that the Karen national Union and the Karen National Liberation Army are persuing seperate goals.
We would like to confirm that the Karen National Union and The Karen National Liberation Army are united and steadfast in our endeavours. We have never sought or needed the support of foreign individuals or countries and we repudiate the suggestions by some that we have. The struggle of the Karen is a just one and we are motre than capable to continue it without such aid.
Centeral Executive Committee
Karen National Union
Date June 28 2008
Thanks Careful Observer. Your quotes are good examples of how this sort of forest mythology is perpetuated. The first quote is so general as to be meaningless. And the second seems to relate to water quality not quantity. So, how does your conclusion follow?
Most of my ideas about the third world and its nations who have little but their cultural heritage as the material world sees them, are to simplistic to be real. I would ask what it is the people, not the Junta’s and the Despots who run rampant all over the peoples want. What can the rest of the world do for the folks who don’t have the ability to speak for themselves for whatever reasons. Once we find out they could use our military or civil assistance, we should formulate a plan of action to remove the Junta’s and the despots from their towers and bring the people forth into the light of the 21st century. Yet, then it means that all I can think of is the phyiscal and not how to diplomatically respond to the folks in power. If they overthrew legally elected governments, then they deserve the same to happen to them. The one thing that always gets in the way is the collateral damage brought upon the innocents of those places. Yet, when you look at life, there are no innocents just victims, wherein some will have to pay the ultimate price for the rest to breath clean air and freedom once again.
So we say to Thailand, Burma, and Sri Lanka, Bangaladesh, how can we help you gain your rightful place at the table of free nations of the world???ED
Your system is nice, but sounds a bit too old and feudal to be accepted. Rather, I suggest going resolutely modern, at least on the outside, with the first ever ” Senator Academy”.
During 3 months, pre-selected luuk nong of conservative phu yai would compete with each other, distract the populace, and extract money from the audience (100B / call to “save” a contestant). Everyday the contestants would be trained, evaluated and at times ridiculed by 3 moral and pure judges. The contestant would be evaluated on their capacity to :
– Explain any problems in Thailand by the deleterious influence of the West, the Thaksin regime and the loss of morality and Thainess in the younger generation
– Responds to critics by ad hominen attacks and suggesting they are plotting against the monarchy, nation and religion
– Accept the opinion of phuyai and recognizes in all situations who’s your boss/patron
– behave hypocritically without loosing sleep,
and finally and not the least:
– Find a way to defend the 1976 massacre, contempt for rural folks and ethnic minorities, domestic violence and rape as somewhat part of thainess.
This system would satisfy the exigencies of liberal democracy as anyone could apply to be a contestant (a few normal folks would be included but rapidly eliminated) and everyone would have 1 free vote to save a contestant (after that, you have to pay 100B to vote). At the same time, this system of selection would also meet the criteria of despotic elitism (or thai-style democracy) as contestants would be pre-selected by a council of self-proclaimed moral guides ( chulalongkorn law professors, artistocrats, privy councillor on temporary leave, etc.), so all “bad” candidacies would be screened out months before the show begins (except again for a few people meant to be eliminated in the process). The final choice of who’s going to be a senator would rest in form with the population, but the powers behind would still have lots of room to manipulate the process (selection of footage, harsh criticism by the three judges on stage, cheating on the vote count). In the end, all happily-selected senators would just “happen” to be clients of some members of the selection council or other influential people.
Have you seen Larry Hamilton’s early piece on the four Ms of watershed forestry and hydrology? It dates from the early 1980s, as I recall (published 1983)? His idea that forests actually USE water was so radical at the time. It’s interesting and exciting to see these more complex understandings of watershed becoming dominant in SE Asia.
Mr. Pedersen,
Given that you are on the scene, would you please provide any interested parties your assessment of the current situation in regards to the latest fighting.
Do you have any thoughts on what/who provoked it?
General area of where it took place?
If you would like to take this offline, my email address is below
R.T., if sincerity on the part of the junta was never doubted, we have only ourselves to blame for not having learnt our lessons. An institution like the UN would have to be invented if none were in existence. Your idea of replacing the UN with a bunch of people from certain parts of the world to talk to people from the same or some other parts of the world is simply re-inventing the wheel.
It’s a forlorn hope on the part of those totally committed to non-violence regardless of whom or what they are dealing with that more dialogue would get us somewhere after so many failed attempts or non-attempts. You are after all expecting the leopard to change its spots.
Sorry for being such a spoil sport but haven’t we tried dialogue to death?
I’m not against more dialogue as such, make it effective by all means, only please don’t close off other options and deny yourselves the right to resist. There’ll be little sympathy for wringing your hands in despair ad nauseum.
Thanks for all of these interesting and provocative comments – Jon, Elli, Aiontay, Bret, and Leif. All very educational.
As a bit of a tangent…
Over the years I have, like Aiontay, met a good number of residents of the Shan and Kachin States, and areas directly adjacent in Thailand, China and India, with a mastery (there is no other word) of more than a half dozen languages.
And I have heard of (and sometimes met) exceptional individuals who are native speakers of about that many languages, and who have some facility in, perhaps, half dozen more.
From across the full range of occupational and ethnic categories I have encountered a “cosmopolitianism” which disrupts the neat ethnic, linguistic and political groupings of which we (all) tend to speak. One typical example, a Catholic priest, in Burma, is worth highlighting. He could speak, in no particular order – English, French, Italian, Lahu, Burmese, Thai, Shan (appropriate to his area), and Akha. My feeling at the time, and this is now some years ago, is that he could also read all of the relevant scripts.
And he claimed to be able to say Mass in another couple of languages, including Latin, Wa, etc. While he does fall into the category that Hanson called the “priests, ‘prophets,’ professional story-tellers and minstrels” who require linguistic skill for their success…he is hardly that unusual.
Around Keng Tung, or Bhamo, or Ruili, or Chiang Rai, or anywhere in the mountains between South, East and Southeast Asia the number of people speaking a portfolio of unrelated languages seems pretty constant, or may even be on the increase. It is, I suppose, one way of staying prepared for whatever the future holds…
I agree with War Monger, the reason the current pace of dialogue isn’t going anywhere is because it is not a serious effort. The junta appointed a special representative to “speak” with Daw Suu Kyi. They have only spoken 3 or 4 times. The UN has achieved very little. No one has even tried to begin a tripartite dialogue to include the Ethnic Nationalities Council. It seems the UN should just get out of the way. The most viable option is for a multinational diplomatic envoy to honestly and strongly engage with ASEAN, India and most importantly China to take the Burma issue seriously. Non-violence is the answer, but it must be attempted before we can dismiss it.
Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea
Democratic Peoples Republic of Congo
Democratic Peoples Republic of Thailand!?
Maybe having used the Democratic Peoples Republic line before is lame, but I’ve observed that really the only way to be truly Democratic and Republican is to allow your elites (in this case the King and everyone else involved in this B grade soap opera, — A grade if Libby Kennedy was involved –) to determine that they are a Republic, and in the case of Thailand, the King, as he has admitted his lack of divine powers, would be re-marketed as a social philosopher and consequently sufficiency theory becomes a basis for Thai fascism. Voting would be determined by how close you live to the King, I mean, #1 Buddy Bhumibol (big bold yellow letters on slightly paler yellow tops), and so obviously, those further away from #1 Buddy would be left to live the Nomadic lives that humans were meant for. Thai people in close proximity to #1 Buddy would admire the rural nomads for saving the environment by relinquishing their farms which have been turned into sufficient military bases as a result of the sufficient national paranoia.
Those close to #1 Buddy would get to vote on important issues such as designated orange juice squeezer, women who have the appropriate Thainess to give birth, and whether to import Mercedes or BMW because one cannot be sufficient and have both.
Moe Aung, and others: I think this whole discussion underlines that there are very likely many more sad days, months, and maybe decades, ahead for Burma. There is very little that anyone can do about this, unfortunately, but a more realistic analysis of the situation and the alternatives available would be a good start. At this point I have nothing more to say on the subject since we do not seem to be getting anywhere through this dialogue. A number of very good points have been made but these must be put together into to a coherent strategy in order to have any hope of reaching a successful outcome. I don’t see anyone doing that, either inside or outside of Burma.
Don, you remind me of the Irish joke, “I wouldn’t start from here if I were you”. But we are here and you seem to have painted yourself into a corner in staying with gradual evolutionary change and stalemate. That’s what we have with Aung San Suu Kyi and the NLD and their friends abroad, more stalemate than evolutionary change as you may have noticed.
I couldn’t agree more regarding outside do-gooders and dissident groups abroad who would have Rangoon bombed or invaded since they themselves are out of harm’s way. I can’t imagine them not having friends and families on whom the bombs would rain down in the event. It struck me however that Naypyidaw could be an attractive and effective target as a one off surgical strike for most Burmese including much of the army. Yes, a spark can start a wildfire, and at the risk of repeating myself the people will fight their own battles.
Totila, another palace coup, another hardliner coming to power will make any gains made by “constructive engagement” diluted or null and void. It’s heartening over the recent decades that separatist goals have been put on the backburner by most minority groups despite some experts talking up the prospect of civil war post-junta, as if it hadn’t been going on for the last 60 years!
I’ve mentioned in another thread the real risk of the hard learned lessons of the civil war, particularly the heavy cost of fragmentation and disunity in challenging the military dictatorship, being lost to the younger generations that gave grown up with bitterness and resentment in refugee camps along the border as in Palestine. Separatist ambitions can be rekindled to the detriment of the more realistic and pragmatic goal of self-determination in a federal union which has gained currency in recent times.
Provincial assemblies and a real provincial media!
Then people could fight their local battles where it counts.
Everytime a news story touches on the provinces, there’s always something hidden and unseen creeping in the background, like a horror flick. The ithipon meud meud of provincial Thailand. Can’t talk about it, or you’ll get shot, people say. A healthy body politic?
When the local mess gets sorted out, this will pave the way for sorting out the current mess at the center.
Forests don’t produce water, but they are an integral part of ecosystems that protect the water supply.
From the US National Forestry Service: “Many of California’s National Forests were created to protect the mountain watersheds so essential to life in California’s semi-desert climate.”
And from the FAO: “The World Water Development Report touches on the role of forests and forestry only briefly. It notes that poor forest management practices can lead to sedimentation. Given the challenge of providing adequate clean water supplies in the rapidly growing urban areas of many developing countries, the recognition that “a third of the world’s largest 100 cities rely on forests … for a substantial proportion of their drinking water” is significant.”
So, the loss of forests could very well lead to lower water levels in dams.
Rather than overhaul the electoral system, I propose a fraud-proof arrangement whereby the only section of the Constitution to be amended is that relating to the qualifications required by the prime minister. In the amended version, any future prime minister would:
1) be required to be a former police officer.
2) be required to have owned a telecommunications company.
3) be required to have done dodgy business deals with Singaporean companies.
4) be required to own an English football club.
5) be required to have a wife allegedly involved in dodgy land purchase deals.
By thus restricting the eligibility criteria, the need for lengthy constitutional amendments relating to the electoral system would be avoided, and only those candidates who met the strict criteria would apply.
So much for gratifying the Thaksin supporters.
This would of course put a bee in the bonnet of the PAD, who would then run straight to the military and order another coup, whose leaders could perhaps go on educational visits to Burma and Zimbabwe to learn how elections should be conducted.
Which in turn would lead to a counter-coup, a new civilian government, a new constitution, and the rise of a new filthy-rich businessman who would win favour with the poor while condoning the killing of alleged drug dealers and muslim insurgents.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Your chance to shape Thailand’s political future
Truly the best for of representation is random selection by computer. Let a computer throw out 480 names every 4 years. And then random selct the cabinet amongst these 480. Fair and square and everyone gets an equal chance.
Your chance to shape Thailand’s political future
Anon, you might have just described a Thai Beauty Pageant contest! Thanks for the good laugh over lunch.
JSEAS special issue on Burma is out now
Moe Aung, I didn’t mean to suggest that had the Khin Nyunt plan, whatever it was, gone ahead, that it would necessarily have been constructive in the sense of good. I was being a bit ironic there. One person I talked with then, Chao Tzang Yawnghwe, mentioned he hoped a deal would be made and that ASSK would accept whatever was on offer as she could then, in his words, start to use the junta as cats paws. I was not so sure (as I thought KN was more clever though still a thug) but it was not for me to weigh in, being only an interested outsider.
Nonetheless with your clear statements identifying the military government as the crux of the problem (warlordism writ large) and stressing the need to understand that “dialogue” has its limitations (when its not an excuse for avoiding something stronger or admitting failure) and that stronger forms of pressure and physical resistance can be well understandable, I do strongly agree.
Unscrupulous Cambodian politicians!
Well you are not seriously going to tell me that Hun Sen is an honest man, are you!? Sure he helped to foment the last set of anti-Thai riots. I can understand anti-Thai feelings in Cambodia, but riots were hardly constructive.
You and BP are sure prepared to be nice to some pretty corrupt people. But I guess that is the price you pay for being a successful academic.
Volunteering to fight in Burma
Dave,
I was wondering how long they were going to sit idly by while all of this happened.
To say they’re pissed off doesn’t even begin to address it.
Volunteering to fight in Burma
OFFICE OF THE SUPREME HEADQUARTERS
KAREN NATIONAL UNION
KAWTHOOLEI
It has been brought to the attention of The Karen National Union that a number of US based individuals have made claims to be military supporting and training The Karen National Liberation Army and have such been openly discussing their support with a number of media outlets.
The Karen National Union would like to clarify that ity does not in any way endorse, encourage or seek the support of these individuals or their claims of representation. In making such erenous claims they have tarnished the reputation of both the Karen National Union and the Karen National Liberation Army and we feel it our reasponsibility to request that they desist from such action in the future.
While the Karen National Union welcomes all those who seek to support our struggle in striving towards founding a genuine federal union comprised of all the states of the nationalities in Burma. We feel some individuals have incorrectly portrayed our actions as an attempt to form a seperate republic and in doing so have also suggested that the Karen national Union and the Karen National Liberation Army are persuing seperate goals.
We would like to confirm that the Karen National Union and The Karen National Liberation Army are united and steadfast in our endeavours. We have never sought or needed the support of foreign individuals or countries and we repudiate the suggestions by some that we have. The struggle of the Karen is a just one and we are motre than capable to continue it without such aid.
Centeral Executive Committee
Karen National Union
Date June 28 2008
Hi Guys,
This is from the horses mouth.
I rest my case.
Cheers,
Dave
More forest mythology
Thanks Careful Observer. Your quotes are good examples of how this sort of forest mythology is perpetuated. The first quote is so general as to be meaningless. And the second seems to relate to water quality not quantity. So, how does your conclusion follow?
Ashley South on post-cyclone Burma
Most of my ideas about the third world and its nations who have little but their cultural heritage as the material world sees them, are to simplistic to be real. I would ask what it is the people, not the Junta’s and the Despots who run rampant all over the peoples want. What can the rest of the world do for the folks who don’t have the ability to speak for themselves for whatever reasons. Once we find out they could use our military or civil assistance, we should formulate a plan of action to remove the Junta’s and the despots from their towers and bring the people forth into the light of the 21st century. Yet, then it means that all I can think of is the phyiscal and not how to diplomatically respond to the folks in power. If they overthrew legally elected governments, then they deserve the same to happen to them. The one thing that always gets in the way is the collateral damage brought upon the innocents of those places. Yet, when you look at life, there are no innocents just victims, wherein some will have to pay the ultimate price for the rest to breath clean air and freedom once again.
So we say to Thailand, Burma, and Sri Lanka, Bangaladesh, how can we help you gain your rightful place at the table of free nations of the world???ED
Your chance to shape Thailand’s political future
Your system is nice, but sounds a bit too old and feudal to be accepted. Rather, I suggest going resolutely modern, at least on the outside, with the first ever ” Senator Academy”.
During 3 months, pre-selected luuk nong of conservative phu yai would compete with each other, distract the populace, and extract money from the audience (100B / call to “save” a contestant). Everyday the contestants would be trained, evaluated and at times ridiculed by 3 moral and pure judges. The contestant would be evaluated on their capacity to :
– Explain any problems in Thailand by the deleterious influence of the West, the Thaksin regime and the loss of morality and Thainess in the younger generation
– Responds to critics by ad hominen attacks and suggesting they are plotting against the monarchy, nation and religion
– Accept the opinion of phuyai and recognizes in all situations who’s your boss/patron
– behave hypocritically without loosing sleep,
and finally and not the least:
– Find a way to defend the 1976 massacre, contempt for rural folks and ethnic minorities, domestic violence and rape as somewhat part of thainess.
This system would satisfy the exigencies of liberal democracy as anyone could apply to be a contestant (a few normal folks would be included but rapidly eliminated) and everyone would have 1 free vote to save a contestant (after that, you have to pay 100B to vote). At the same time, this system of selection would also meet the criteria of despotic elitism (or thai-style democracy) as contestants would be pre-selected by a council of self-proclaimed moral guides ( chulalongkorn law professors, artistocrats, privy councillor on temporary leave, etc.), so all “bad” candidacies would be screened out months before the show begins (except again for a few people meant to be eliminated in the process). The final choice of who’s going to be a senator would rest in form with the population, but the powers behind would still have lots of room to manipulate the process (selection of footage, harsh criticism by the three judges on stage, cheating on the vote count). In the end, all happily-selected senators would just “happen” to be clients of some members of the selection council or other influential people.
Truly, it’s the best system.
More forest mythology
Have you seen Larry Hamilton’s early piece on the four Ms of watershed forestry and hydrology? It dates from the early 1980s, as I recall (published 1983)? His idea that forests actually USE water was so radical at the time. It’s interesting and exciting to see these more complex understandings of watershed becoming dominant in SE Asia.
Volunteering to fight in Burma
Mr. Pedersen,
Given that you are on the scene, would you please provide any interested parties your assessment of the current situation in regards to the latest fighting.
Do you have any thoughts on what/who provoked it?
General area of where it took place?
If you would like to take this offline, my email address is below
Charles Foster
[email protected]
JSEAS special issue on Burma is out now
R.T., if sincerity on the part of the junta was never doubted, we have only ourselves to blame for not having learnt our lessons. An institution like the UN would have to be invented if none were in existence. Your idea of replacing the UN with a bunch of people from certain parts of the world to talk to people from the same or some other parts of the world is simply re-inventing the wheel.
It’s a forlorn hope on the part of those totally committed to non-violence regardless of whom or what they are dealing with that more dialogue would get us somewhere after so many failed attempts or non-attempts. You are after all expecting the leopard to change its spots.
Sorry for being such a spoil sport but haven’t we tried dialogue to death?
I’m not against more dialogue as such, make it effective by all means, only please don’t close off other options and deny yourselves the right to resist. There’ll be little sympathy for wringing your hands in despair ad nauseum.
Ola Hanson from the archive on vocabulary size
Thanks for all of these interesting and provocative comments – Jon, Elli, Aiontay, Bret, and Leif. All very educational.
As a bit of a tangent…
Over the years I have, like Aiontay, met a good number of residents of the Shan and Kachin States, and areas directly adjacent in Thailand, China and India, with a mastery (there is no other word) of more than a half dozen languages.
And I have heard of (and sometimes met) exceptional individuals who are native speakers of about that many languages, and who have some facility in, perhaps, half dozen more.
From across the full range of occupational and ethnic categories I have encountered a “cosmopolitianism” which disrupts the neat ethnic, linguistic and political groupings of which we (all) tend to speak. One typical example, a Catholic priest, in Burma, is worth highlighting. He could speak, in no particular order – English, French, Italian, Lahu, Burmese, Thai, Shan (appropriate to his area), and Akha. My feeling at the time, and this is now some years ago, is that he could also read all of the relevant scripts.
And he claimed to be able to say Mass in another couple of languages, including Latin, Wa, etc. While he does fall into the category that Hanson called the “priests, ‘prophets,’ professional story-tellers and minstrels” who require linguistic skill for their success…he is hardly that unusual.
Around Keng Tung, or Bhamo, or Ruili, or Chiang Rai, or anywhere in the mountains between South, East and Southeast Asia the number of people speaking a portfolio of unrelated languages seems pretty constant, or may even be on the increase. It is, I suppose, one way of staying prepared for whatever the future holds…
Best wishes to all,
Nich
JSEAS special issue on Burma is out now
I agree with War Monger, the reason the current pace of dialogue isn’t going anywhere is because it is not a serious effort. The junta appointed a special representative to “speak” with Daw Suu Kyi. They have only spoken 3 or 4 times. The UN has achieved very little. No one has even tried to begin a tripartite dialogue to include the Ethnic Nationalities Council. It seems the UN should just get out of the way. The most viable option is for a multinational diplomatic envoy to honestly and strongly engage with ASEAN, India and most importantly China to take the Burma issue seriously. Non-violence is the answer, but it must be attempted before we can dismiss it.
Your chance to shape Thailand’s political future
Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea
Democratic Peoples Republic of Congo
Democratic Peoples Republic of Thailand!?
Maybe having used the Democratic Peoples Republic line before is lame, but I’ve observed that really the only way to be truly Democratic and Republican is to allow your elites (in this case the King and everyone else involved in this B grade soap opera, — A grade if Libby Kennedy was involved –) to determine that they are a Republic, and in the case of Thailand, the King, as he has admitted his lack of divine powers, would be re-marketed as a social philosopher and consequently sufficiency theory becomes a basis for Thai fascism. Voting would be determined by how close you live to the King, I mean, #1 Buddy Bhumibol (big bold yellow letters on slightly paler yellow tops), and so obviously, those further away from #1 Buddy would be left to live the Nomadic lives that humans were meant for. Thai people in close proximity to #1 Buddy would admire the rural nomads for saving the environment by relinquishing their farms which have been turned into sufficient military bases as a result of the sufficient national paranoia.
Those close to #1 Buddy would get to vote on important issues such as designated orange juice squeezer, women who have the appropriate Thainess to give birth, and whether to import Mercedes or BMW because one cannot be sufficient and have both.
JSEAS special issue on Burma is out now
Moe Aung, and others: I think this whole discussion underlines that there are very likely many more sad days, months, and maybe decades, ahead for Burma. There is very little that anyone can do about this, unfortunately, but a more realistic analysis of the situation and the alternatives available would be a good start. At this point I have nothing more to say on the subject since we do not seem to be getting anywhere through this dialogue. A number of very good points have been made but these must be put together into to a coherent strategy in order to have any hope of reaching a successful outcome. I don’t see anyone doing that, either inside or outside of Burma.
JSEAS special issue on Burma is out now
Don, you remind me of the Irish joke, “I wouldn’t start from here if I were you”. But we are here and you seem to have painted yourself into a corner in staying with gradual evolutionary change and stalemate. That’s what we have with Aung San Suu Kyi and the NLD and their friends abroad, more stalemate than evolutionary change as you may have noticed.
I couldn’t agree more regarding outside do-gooders and dissident groups abroad who would have Rangoon bombed or invaded since they themselves are out of harm’s way. I can’t imagine them not having friends and families on whom the bombs would rain down in the event. It struck me however that Naypyidaw could be an attractive and effective target as a one off surgical strike for most Burmese including much of the army. Yes, a spark can start a wildfire, and at the risk of repeating myself the people will fight their own battles.
Totila, another palace coup, another hardliner coming to power will make any gains made by “constructive engagement” diluted or null and void. It’s heartening over the recent decades that separatist goals have been put on the backburner by most minority groups despite some experts talking up the prospect of civil war post-junta, as if it hadn’t been going on for the last 60 years!
I’ve mentioned in another thread the real risk of the hard learned lessons of the civil war, particularly the heavy cost of fragmentation and disunity in challenging the military dictatorship, being lost to the younger generations that gave grown up with bitterness and resentment in refugee camps along the border as in Palestine. Separatist ambitions can be rekindled to the detriment of the more realistic and pragmatic goal of self-determination in a federal union which has gained currency in recent times.
Your chance to shape Thailand’s political future
Provincial assemblies and a real provincial media!
Then people could fight their local battles where it counts.
Everytime a news story touches on the provinces, there’s always something hidden and unseen creeping in the background, like a horror flick. The ithipon meud meud of provincial Thailand. Can’t talk about it, or you’ll get shot, people say. A healthy body politic?
When the local mess gets sorted out, this will pave the way for sorting out the current mess at the center.
More forest mythology
Forests don’t produce water, but they are an integral part of ecosystems that protect the water supply.
From the US National Forestry Service: “Many of California’s National Forests were created to protect the mountain watersheds so essential to life in California’s semi-desert climate.”
And from the FAO: “The World Water Development Report touches on the role of forests and forestry only briefly. It notes that poor forest management practices can lead to sedimentation. Given the challenge of providing adequate clean water supplies in the rapidly growing urban areas of many developing countries, the recognition that “a third of the world’s largest 100 cities rely on forests … for a substantial proportion of their drinking water” is significant.”
So, the loss of forests could very well lead to lower water levels in dams.
Your chance to shape Thailand’s political future
Rather than overhaul the electoral system, I propose a fraud-proof arrangement whereby the only section of the Constitution to be amended is that relating to the qualifications required by the prime minister. In the amended version, any future prime minister would:
1) be required to be a former police officer.
2) be required to have owned a telecommunications company.
3) be required to have done dodgy business deals with Singaporean companies.
4) be required to own an English football club.
5) be required to have a wife allegedly involved in dodgy land purchase deals.
By thus restricting the eligibility criteria, the need for lengthy constitutional amendments relating to the electoral system would be avoided, and only those candidates who met the strict criteria would apply.
So much for gratifying the Thaksin supporters.
This would of course put a bee in the bonnet of the PAD, who would then run straight to the military and order another coup, whose leaders could perhaps go on educational visits to Burma and Zimbabwe to learn how elections should be conducted.
Which in turn would lead to a counter-coup, a new civilian government, a new constitution, and the rise of a new filthy-rich businessman who would win favour with the poor while condoning the killing of alleged drug dealers and muslim insurgents.
Which in turn would lead to a new coup…