Srithanonchai: “…people there (and beyond) make non-rational decisions about their political preferences, because **they lack information**, and part of this lack stems from the combination of systematic propaganda, including ceremonies and other public activities, with the equally **systematic withholding of information**…”
Yes. yes, I can understand you. (I’m still working on the paper above) If there was such a thing as local news that probed a little bit into what was happening locally, things might be a lot different.
When I think of all the questions that were not asked by the people around me, that they would have a right to ask in a truly democratic situation, in my one rural Thailand work and life situation a couple years ago, I shudder.
Like why are Burmese migrant workers in squatter camps building that university when the poor Thai farmers who live next door need that job, why did they blow 60 million baht on a spa in back of the uni when the Thai ajaans only get paid 16,000 a month? Whatever happened to the law professor and and university vice president arrested for running a teenage prostitution ring? Why is that accounting professor being pressured into giving the substandard accounting students he just flunked a passing grade by the dean? (we’re not going to fire you, but you simply won’t teach anymore) Why did I receive a memo on my desk ordering to tell the university accreditation committee a bunch of things that might or might not be true, but which it is up to me to decide upon because I am asked for my honest opinion, How did the dean suddenly end up with a new SUV at the end of the semester after irregularities in teacher pay? Why did that Swiss NGO volunteer hang himself in the local prison one day after the police where trying to extort 1.5 million baht from him? What did he say in the journals that were apparently destroyed by the police? why exactly did he get arrested anyway after that argument with another NGO? Why was the Akha father-in-law of that Polish guy shot in head and dumped in the road, apparently by the police? Why were those kids with black masks over their head shot and dumped from the back of a pickup truck in back of the hospital morgue? Why does the head of that Christian hilltribe NGO spend most of his time at the golf course, which I guess is a moot point now, because I hear he’s been canned for sexual indiscretions….
IMHO more time with the details, the information, less time with the fancy French words.
Also Thailand does not exist in a vaccuum. You don’t think countries like South Korea have similar experiences in their post-WWII history? Why the myopic focus on one country all the time?
[…] The distinctive shoulder patch worn by Kachin Independence Army troops. The Lasang Awng Wa group, discussed in a previous post, still wears its KIA uniforms. This can create some initial confusion about which is the […]
On Suphanburi and beyond: From a different perspective, people there (and beyond) make non-rational decisions about their political preferences, because they lack information, and part of this lack stems from the combination of systematic propaganda, including ceremonies and other public activities, with the equally systematic withholding of information (or have Banharn’s dark sides been publicized as much as have been his good sides?).
This situation has long been seen as a major problem confronting any democracy. Here is a quote from a source that is neither related to postmodernism nor to Thailand: “As political scientist John Ferejohn has written, ‘Nothing strikes the student of public opinion and democracy more forcefully than the paucity of information most people possess about politics.’ Few people dispute the well-established conclusion that most individual voters are abysmally ignorant of even very basic political information. Ever since the seminal research of the 1950s and early 1960s, evidence has accumulated to reinforce this finding.”
From Ilya Somin. 2004. “When Ignorance Isn’t Bliss: How Political Ignorance Threatens Democracy.” Policy Analysis (CATO Institute), No. 525, September 22, 2004, p. 3.
If you were interested in maby going over there and working who would you contact , i know some guys who went to south America and a guy just hired them sitting in a park bench any ideas or sites would be great help.
to Jason: I share your feelings, however, it is not the peers, it is the Thai superiors etc. and thus the social, incl hierarchical, pressure that is at work. Working in Thailand, unfortunately, this cannot always be avoided. Finally, publishing in English in Thailand does not necessarily mean that the product is aimed at the “international and educated community.” One even has to fight with Thai superiors over the question of whether an English text written by a non-native speaker should be edited by an experienced native speaker before publication or not. To many Thais, mistakes are perfectly permissable.
Srithanonchai, thank you for your comment. You are correct, of course. The mistake disturbs me because I detest willful ignorance of all kinds. A writer who will ignore or flaunt the rules of the language in a superficial gesture to satisfy his peers has a serious priority problem. Why write in English unless you are targeting the international and educated community? But if you are writing to the educated, why insult them with spelling mistakes?
Mr. Ungpakorn, if you are reading this, consider it minor criticism. I respect your activities. I suggest that you publish your materials under more permissive copyright terms (e.g. Creative Commons), to encourage the sharing of your ideas. If that were the case, I would not hesitate to publish and distribute them myself within Thailand, because I wish to test the extent and workings of the cyber crime law for my own purposes.
To Jason: In many Thai contexts, “king” would be seen as “inappropriate,” although it is recognized that, in English, this is incorrect. Not capitalizing “King” is taken as an indication that the author intentionally belittles his importance or does not pay him the proper respect.
Finally some light at the end of the tunnel! Looking at social and political structures instead of endowing individuals with seemingly unlimited power shifts the perspective. Certainly, history is made by humans and not the least by the charisma of a selected few, but history results from the non-intended effects of intended actions. Perhaps it is worthwhile to turn to such unintended effects with regards to the staging of royalty and Thaksin during the last years. What are the non-intended effects? Here Hegel’s argument on the “cunning of reason” might be of interest. If present day Thailand is mainly defined by the charisma of two persons, as official and much of academic discourse seems to indicate (even if the valorization differs, it doesn’t make a difference in terms of the focus on persons), then none can ever be a substitute for them. Consequently, charisma and personalized pattern of political and social organization have to be substituted with new, may be more participatory forms.
So, is Prem an agent of reason without noticing or intending it?
Why is the word “King” capitalized, as in the second sentence from the quote? What does Elvis have to do with Thailand?
Seriously, I see people do this all the time in reference to HMK. I would expect “the king of Thailand” to be correct, since “king” is his position, not his name. If a writer or other expert can shed some light on this, I would be very grateful.
I sort of agree with Observer, but they are hardly alone. This country is already run by an elite and a King who continually act as if they are all on acid.
“The 2006 Coup was not a Royalist coup against a republican Thaksin, it was a conflict between two sections of the Thai ruling class, both of whom wish to use the Monarchy as an instrument of class rule.”
A little bit more detail would be nice about who exactly these two “sections” are. I’ve seen entrenched bureaucrats use the Monarchy to build up power and avoid transparency. Obviously soldiers invoke it, who exactly else?
“Yet he has also supported coups and goes along with the **myths of ancient powers**.”
Ji Ungpakorn should study this a little before he dashes off 100 vague generalisations without supporting facts.
Post-WWII Thai Monarchy is probably an “invented” tradition in the sense of Hobsbawm with historical roots in the past, but this invented tradition itself can be studied as history, details provided, then Ji can give us some vague deprecating description “myths of ancient powers.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Hobsbawm
For starters, a biography of H H Prince Dhani Nivat would be a good idea, though biographers need to be objective rather than focusing on some preconceived negative Marxist critique which get a little tiresome after a while. Most successful modern states invoke the past for legitimacy, the US included. Tell us something we don’t already know.
A Coup for the Rich was launched at the FCCT. If we need the brothers it is for entertainment and saying things that need to be said. God forbid their nutty marxism ever had an influence on reality.
[…] Not anymore. As an article I read today concluded, in the voice of a Phnom Penh TukTuk driver, “Now the war in Cambodia is over land.” The always-exciting work of Andrew Walker (of New Mandala) includes the just-posted piece on the Thai Royal misrepresentations of rural livelihoods has much of relevance to broader regional discussions, and has graciously put the full text of his presentation on this topic. […]
“…This will be my only post on this matter, as I do not see the point of discussing politics with someone who wields a blunt axe…”
(Hmmm… a “blunt axe”? – blunt because of my obtuseness? Or I’m a neanderthal? I guess I’ll never know!). MC says I am “not interested in real debate”, and then refuses to debate me. What a cunning plan. Well as I’ve said before, this is Thai Studies so we shouldn’t hold its practitioners to any high standards – for example, replying to criticism of what they have written. But as for me I am very happy to reply to criticisms, although on this occasion it might sound a bit like one hand clapping.
Where do I start?
First, the “show trial”. To my mind this statement is quite offensive firstly to those people who have actually been victims of real show trials. But it is also rather pathetic to be seeking sympathy by making the ridiculous comparison of an academic debate to a show trial: you are completely free to respond to my criticisms. No state propaganda is whipping up the crowd (who knows, maybe the crowd is on your side anyway?). There is no judge whose sentence is already known before the “trial” has begun. You can call on friends to help defend you. And no police guard is forcing you into court – in fact you’ve already fled the scene! As for vigorous criticism, even misrepresentation, well isn’t it the bread and butter of academics to respond and rebut?
Then there is the comparison to facing the “firing squad”. So not only is Republican the judge and jury but executioner as well. This case reminds me of Thongchai’s reply to a criticism I made a while back that if “Republican” had power in Thailand he would seek “permanent asylum” in another country.
What is it about Thai Studies academics? They find themselves on the receiving end of a little criticism and they start whining about being sent to show trials and firing squads or going into voluntary exile, or people being too “harsh” on them.
A few other comments (self-indulgence, admittedly)
1. “…The tone of, and misrepresentation by, Republican’s post continues an agenda on these pages and elsewhere; that agenda is that everyone should take a position that Republican asserts to be true….”
Well “duh!!”, as they say – isn’t that the whole idea of an argument, to press the case for what you believe to be true? If you don’t believe it to be true then reply with a counterargument. Isn’t that the whole idea of what academic debate is about?
2. “…agenda is that …we lay down before a “democratic mandate” and remove judicial process in the determination of guilt…”
Here we go again, the quotation marks – courtesy of song mai ao. We should never, ever, ever believe that TRT-PPP have received a democratic mandate. But seeing that you ask my agenda, yes, a little more respect on the part of Thai Studies academics for democratically elected governments would be a rather nice thing. As for “judicial process” (now this DOES deserve quotation marks), given the interventions of “The Foot of Power” over the last 2 years we have seen the results of “judicial process” in Thailand. Given this choice I will go for democratic mandate (without the parentheses).
3. The strategy of academics with weak arguments: when you can’t convince by reason make the argument as prolix and unreadable as possible so at least you can fool the readers who are less confident academically into thinking that, since they can’t understand what you have written its reasoning must somehow be superior to their intelligence. Exhibit A:
“…I would also hold that we are required to make sense of electoral support not simply as the normative mandate of democracy, but also as part of a struggle for hegemony that ultimately rests on undemocratic means, incorporation, response and the structuring by and of subject positions within the political system…”
Let me translate this into the language of Thai Studies for Dummies (like me): “elections are a means by which ruthless undemocratic elites manipulate the stupid, uneducated villagers to gain power”.
4. And about this latest ray of hope:
“…the Thai Farmers Network party, which garnered several hundred thousand votes. Such parties, rather than rightwing networks of capital hold out the hope for progressive social change in Thailand…”
Well now I can tell all of my “progressive” friends that all they have to do is to wait for the farmers to come to our rescue. Several hundred thousand votes! Wow. The evil capitalists must be trembling in fear. I mean, the dogmatism of this comment is comical: “rightwing networks of capital…” It’s like something out of a Red Guards pamphlet in China in the 1960s.
Well, that’s what I think anyway. Sorry, slipped into my Thai Studies for Dummies lingo again. What I meant was, that’s how I wish to “exercise my deliberative capacity”.
Haven’t you heard? Thai history ended with the abolition of slaves.
The rest of history onward are revert back to the glorious antiquity sake of using bard and poet to sing the story orally.
What the use of keeping written history anyway, especially when its bloody and dirty? Not like they are not going to be taught in school or university.
Ignorant is bliss, I told you to take the blue pill Mr. Anderson.
Yes, Aiontay, there were substantial Kachin contingents who came from the Shan State.
However, as far as I am aware there was no official KDA presence. And, unless I missed something (which is certainly possible), there were no KDA soldiers at the Manau. Some official Manau materials – which do note donations from the KIO/A, Lasang Awng Wa Hpung and the NDA-K – are silent on KDA involvement.
That the festivities were so focussed on the “Kachin State” and “Kachin State Day” is one explanation for this. I guess there are others too…
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Power, violence, politics and truth
Srithanonchai: “…people there (and beyond) make non-rational decisions about their political preferences, because **they lack information**, and part of this lack stems from the combination of systematic propaganda, including ceremonies and other public activities, with the equally **systematic withholding of information**…”
Yes. yes, I can understand you. (I’m still working on the paper above) If there was such a thing as local news that probed a little bit into what was happening locally, things might be a lot different.
When I think of all the questions that were not asked by the people around me, that they would have a right to ask in a truly democratic situation, in my one rural Thailand work and life situation a couple years ago, I shudder.
Like why are Burmese migrant workers in squatter camps building that university when the poor Thai farmers who live next door need that job, why did they blow 60 million baht on a spa in back of the uni when the Thai ajaans only get paid 16,000 a month? Whatever happened to the law professor and and university vice president arrested for running a teenage prostitution ring? Why is that accounting professor being pressured into giving the substandard accounting students he just flunked a passing grade by the dean? (we’re not going to fire you, but you simply won’t teach anymore) Why did I receive a memo on my desk ordering to tell the university accreditation committee a bunch of things that might or might not be true, but which it is up to me to decide upon because I am asked for my honest opinion, How did the dean suddenly end up with a new SUV at the end of the semester after irregularities in teacher pay? Why did that Swiss NGO volunteer hang himself in the local prison one day after the police where trying to extort 1.5 million baht from him? What did he say in the journals that were apparently destroyed by the police? why exactly did he get arrested anyway after that argument with another NGO? Why was the Akha father-in-law of that Polish guy shot in head and dumped in the road, apparently by the police? Why were those kids with black masks over their head shot and dumped from the back of a pickup truck in back of the hospital morgue? Why does the head of that Christian hilltribe NGO spend most of his time at the golf course, which I guess is a moot point now, because I hear he’s been canned for sexual indiscretions….
IMHO more time with the details, the information, less time with the fancy French words.
Also Thailand does not exist in a vaccuum. You don’t think countries like South Korea have similar experiences in their post-WWII history? Why the myopic focus on one country all the time?
Lasang Awng Wa Group at the Manau
[…] The distinctive shoulder patch worn by Kachin Independence Army troops. The Lasang Awng Wa group, discussed in a previous post, still wears its KIA uniforms. This can create some initial confusion about which is the […]
Power, violence, politics and truth
On Suphanburi and beyond: From a different perspective, people there (and beyond) make non-rational decisions about their political preferences, because they lack information, and part of this lack stems from the combination of systematic propaganda, including ceremonies and other public activities, with the equally systematic withholding of information (or have Banharn’s dark sides been publicized as much as have been his good sides?).
This situation has long been seen as a major problem confronting any democracy. Here is a quote from a source that is neither related to postmodernism nor to Thailand: “As political scientist John Ferejohn has written, ‘Nothing strikes the student of public opinion and democracy more forcefully than the paucity of information most people possess about politics.’ Few people dispute the well-established conclusion that most individual voters are abysmally ignorant of even very basic political information. Ever since the seminal research of the 1950s and early 1960s, evidence has accumulated to reinforce this finding.”
From Ilya Somin. 2004. “When Ignorance Isn’t Bliss: How Political Ignorance Threatens Democracy.” Policy Analysis (CATO Institute), No. 525, September 22, 2004, p. 3.
Lèse majesté lives on
xSaying that Jiles’ main aim is to increase workers’ political participation sounds like a gross understatement.
Lèse majesté lives on
since Ungpakorn’s “nutty marxism” is mostly about calling for the working class to have a voice in politics, I say more of it is needed.
Volunteering to fight in Burma
If you were interested in maby going over there and working who would you contact , i know some guys who went to south America and a guy just hired them sitting in a park bench any ideas or sites would be great help.
“How much power does the Thai king really have?”
to Jason: I share your feelings, however, it is not the peers, it is the Thai superiors etc. and thus the social, incl hierarchical, pressure that is at work. Working in Thailand, unfortunately, this cannot always be avoided. Finally, publishing in English in Thailand does not necessarily mean that the product is aimed at the “international and educated community.” One even has to fight with Thai superiors over the question of whether an English text written by a non-native speaker should be edited by an experienced native speaker before publication or not. To many Thais, mistakes are perfectly permissable.
“How much power does the Thai king really have?”
Srithanonchai, thank you for your comment. You are correct, of course. The mistake disturbs me because I detest willful ignorance of all kinds. A writer who will ignore or flaunt the rules of the language in a superficial gesture to satisfy his peers has a serious priority problem. Why write in English unless you are targeting the international and educated community? But if you are writing to the educated, why insult them with spelling mistakes?
Mr. Ungpakorn, if you are reading this, consider it minor criticism. I respect your activities. I suggest that you publish your materials under more permissive copyright terms (e.g. Creative Commons), to encourage the sharing of your ideas. If that were the case, I would not hesitate to publish and distribute them myself within Thailand, because I wish to test the extent and workings of the cyber crime law for my own purposes.
“How much power does the Thai king really have?”
To Jason: In many Thai contexts, “king” would be seen as “inappropriate,” although it is recognized that, in English, this is incorrect. Not capitalizing “King” is taken as an indication that the author intentionally belittles his importance or does not pay him the proper respect.
“How much power does the Thai king really have?”
Finally some light at the end of the tunnel! Looking at social and political structures instead of endowing individuals with seemingly unlimited power shifts the perspective. Certainly, history is made by humans and not the least by the charisma of a selected few, but history results from the non-intended effects of intended actions. Perhaps it is worthwhile to turn to such unintended effects with regards to the staging of royalty and Thaksin during the last years. What are the non-intended effects? Here Hegel’s argument on the “cunning of reason” might be of interest. If present day Thailand is mainly defined by the charisma of two persons, as official and much of academic discourse seems to indicate (even if the valorization differs, it doesn’t make a difference in terms of the focus on persons), then none can ever be a substitute for them. Consequently, charisma and personalized pattern of political and social organization have to be substituted with new, may be more participatory forms.
So, is Prem an agent of reason without noticing or intending it?
“How much power does the Thai king really have?”
Why is the word “King” capitalized, as in the second sentence from the quote? What does Elvis have to do with Thailand?
Seriously, I see people do this all the time in reference to HMK. I would expect “the king of Thailand” to be correct, since “king” is his position, not his name. If a writer or other expert can shed some light on this, I would be very grateful.
Lèse majesté lives on
I sort of agree with Observer, but they are hardly alone. This country is already run by an elite and a King who continually act as if they are all on acid.
“How much power does the Thai king really have?”
“The 2006 Coup was not a Royalist coup against a republican Thaksin, it was a conflict between two sections of the Thai ruling class, both of whom wish to use the Monarchy as an instrument of class rule.”
A little bit more detail would be nice about who exactly these two “sections” are. I’ve seen entrenched bureaucrats use the Monarchy to build up power and avoid transparency. Obviously soldiers invoke it, who exactly else?
“Yet he has also supported coups and goes along with the **myths of ancient powers**.”
Ji Ungpakorn should study this a little before he dashes off 100 vague generalisations without supporting facts.
Post-WWII Thai Monarchy is probably an “invented” tradition in the sense of Hobsbawm with historical roots in the past, but this invented tradition itself can be studied as history, details provided, then Ji can give us some vague deprecating description “myths of ancient powers.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Hobsbawm
For starters, a biography of H H Prince Dhani Nivat would be a good idea, though biographers need to be objective rather than focusing on some preconceived negative Marxist critique which get a little tiresome after a while. Most successful modern states invoke the past for legitimacy, the US included. Tell us something we don’t already know.
Here is a book online by Prince Dhani Nivat:
http://www.aseaninfonet.org/thailand/a-history-of-buddhism-in-siam/
Lèse majesté lives on
A Coup for the Rich was launched at the FCCT. If we need the brothers it is for entertainment and saying things that need to be said. God forbid their nutty marxism ever had an influence on reality.
Royal misrepresentation of rural livelihoods
[…] Not anymore. As an article I read today concluded, in the voice of a Phnom Penh TukTuk driver, “Now the war in Cambodia is over land.” The always-exciting work of Andrew Walker (of New Mandala) includes the just-posted piece on the Thai Royal misrepresentations of rural livelihoods has much of relevance to broader regional discussions, and has graciously put the full text of his presentation on this topic. […]
The electorate and the “acute state of Thai politics”
“…This will be my only post on this matter, as I do not see the point of discussing politics with someone who wields a blunt axe…”
(Hmmm… a “blunt axe”? – blunt because of my obtuseness? Or I’m a neanderthal? I guess I’ll never know!). MC says I am “not interested in real debate”, and then refuses to debate me. What a cunning plan. Well as I’ve said before, this is Thai Studies so we shouldn’t hold its practitioners to any high standards – for example, replying to criticism of what they have written. But as for me I am very happy to reply to criticisms, although on this occasion it might sound a bit like one hand clapping.
Where do I start?
First, the “show trial”. To my mind this statement is quite offensive firstly to those people who have actually been victims of real show trials. But it is also rather pathetic to be seeking sympathy by making the ridiculous comparison of an academic debate to a show trial: you are completely free to respond to my criticisms. No state propaganda is whipping up the crowd (who knows, maybe the crowd is on your side anyway?). There is no judge whose sentence is already known before the “trial” has begun. You can call on friends to help defend you. And no police guard is forcing you into court – in fact you’ve already fled the scene! As for vigorous criticism, even misrepresentation, well isn’t it the bread and butter of academics to respond and rebut?
Then there is the comparison to facing the “firing squad”. So not only is Republican the judge and jury but executioner as well. This case reminds me of Thongchai’s reply to a criticism I made a while back that if “Republican” had power in Thailand he would seek “permanent asylum” in another country.
What is it about Thai Studies academics? They find themselves on the receiving end of a little criticism and they start whining about being sent to show trials and firing squads or going into voluntary exile, or people being too “harsh” on them.
A few other comments (self-indulgence, admittedly)
1. “…The tone of, and misrepresentation by, Republican’s post continues an agenda on these pages and elsewhere; that agenda is that everyone should take a position that Republican asserts to be true….”
Well “duh!!”, as they say – isn’t that the whole idea of an argument, to press the case for what you believe to be true? If you don’t believe it to be true then reply with a counterargument. Isn’t that the whole idea of what academic debate is about?
2. “…agenda is that …we lay down before a “democratic mandate” and remove judicial process in the determination of guilt…”
Here we go again, the quotation marks – courtesy of song mai ao. We should never, ever, ever believe that TRT-PPP have received a democratic mandate. But seeing that you ask my agenda, yes, a little more respect on the part of Thai Studies academics for democratically elected governments would be a rather nice thing. As for “judicial process” (now this DOES deserve quotation marks), given the interventions of “The Foot of Power” over the last 2 years we have seen the results of “judicial process” in Thailand. Given this choice I will go for democratic mandate (without the parentheses).
3. The strategy of academics with weak arguments: when you can’t convince by reason make the argument as prolix and unreadable as possible so at least you can fool the readers who are less confident academically into thinking that, since they can’t understand what you have written its reasoning must somehow be superior to their intelligence. Exhibit A:
“…I would also hold that we are required to make sense of electoral support not simply as the normative mandate of democracy, but also as part of a struggle for hegemony that ultimately rests on undemocratic means, incorporation, response and the structuring by and of subject positions within the political system…”
Let me translate this into the language of Thai Studies for Dummies (like me): “elections are a means by which ruthless undemocratic elites manipulate the stupid, uneducated villagers to gain power”.
4. And about this latest ray of hope:
“…the Thai Farmers Network party, which garnered several hundred thousand votes. Such parties, rather than rightwing networks of capital hold out the hope for progressive social change in Thailand…”
Well now I can tell all of my “progressive” friends that all they have to do is to wait for the farmers to come to our rescue. Several hundred thousand votes! Wow. The evil capitalists must be trembling in fear. I mean, the dogmatism of this comment is comical: “rightwing networks of capital…” It’s like something out of a Red Guards pamphlet in China in the 1960s.
Well, that’s what I think anyway. Sorry, slipped into my Thai Studies for Dummies lingo again. What I meant was, that’s how I wish to “exercise my deliberative capacity”.
Republican 24 June, 1932.
Lèse majesté lives on
Whaat?
Lèse majesté lives on
The sad thing is we need the Unpakorn brothers now more than ever. Have they ever spoken at the FCCT?
Lèse majesté lives on
Haven’t you heard? Thai history ended with the abolition of slaves.
The rest of history onward are revert back to the glorious antiquity sake of using bard and poet to sing the story orally.
What the use of keeping written history anyway, especially when its bloody and dirty? Not like they are not going to be taught in school or university.
Ignorant is bliss, I told you to take the blue pill Mr. Anderson.
Lasang Awng Wa Group at the Manau
Yes, Aiontay, there were substantial Kachin contingents who came from the Shan State.
However, as far as I am aware there was no official KDA presence. And, unless I missed something (which is certainly possible), there were no KDA soldiers at the Manau. Some official Manau materials – which do note donations from the KIO/A, Lasang Awng Wa Hpung and the NDA-K – are silent on KDA involvement.
That the festivities were so focussed on the “Kachin State” and “Kachin State Day” is one explanation for this. I guess there are others too…
Best wishes to all,
Nich