Well put, Richard – my sentiments exactly. And thanks Nicholas for posting this and highlighting Par Par Lay and others’ plight. These are great, uncelebrated grass-roots ‘heroes’ in the truest sense of the word. They have my love and deepest admirations too (more than I will ever have for my sports football heroes and rock gods). They are resisting through their art, as with the monks through their beliefs, (almost futilely, it seems, but I hope not) violent nationalist and patriotic narratives such as of the great all-conquering Burmese warrior-kings of the past in which the junta claim to model (which suggests that they are living in a totally different self-aggrandizing world altogether). They clearly have no fear nor any regard for these ‘weak’, non-violent resistances nor for their popularity whether internal or external (my practical mind is still hoping for a coup from within, new military generation willing to establish dialogue and negotiations with democratic reformers).
And that is a very good point Srithanonchai. Personally, if any group of people can be considered ‘disingenous’, to borrow Restorationist, it is these group of people (often elites) who have no real convictions to act for the greater good in the first place (and it usually reflects in the actions/interpretations of SE). I am inclined to judge the group of NLA members who proposed to extend the lese majeste law in that light (unless it is only a political game to contain PAD-allied members). Sadly the ‘Buddhism approved’ narrative has been greatly weakened (and Jatukam’s and the likes of commercial animism will keep making returns), “royally aproved” SE will have to do the job of a national narrative mitigating aggressive capitalism for the time being.
Switzerland and Thailand — time for a comparison? In a few days, Switzerland will see an election, and the campaign is “Blocher ok pai”. Blocher is Switzerland’s Thaksin — a rightist, populist billionaire with rough electoral habits who can buy up as much advertising space as he wants and put election posters whereever he wants . And the voters love him (though not as much as they loved Thaksin). Which poses questions of whether Switzerland has that many desperately poor people who are easily swayed by populist promises, whether the average Swiss voter is so politically immature that he cannot be trusted to vote “right” (remember, we thought that Switzerland was the archetypus of a mature western European democracy), and whether there will be a coup to prevent Blocher’s advance. There have already been violent demonstrations.
I wonder when men will realise that freedom is a basic, fundamental right. It is not something we earn or should have to struggle so hard to attain.
I am heart broken about what is happening in Burma. Yes these men will eventualy be internationally recognised as heroes long after Burma attains freedom, but right now they suffer for no reason what soever except that those in power are so corrupted by this power that they cannot stand to be human.
It is men like that who do not get enough attention from the world. The are among many ‘future legends’ who bravely risk eveything for what the West has and does not consider ‘worth it’. Men and women like this leave me at a loss for words. I would say I genuinely love them.
Aung San Suu Kyi once wrote, “To be Burmese is to be Buddhist”. I would say to be from Burma is to be part of a selfless struggle in which there are many who are willing to suffer great calamities with their own people, Suu Kyi included but certainly not unique.
The people of Burma are the model for humanism that is dying in the West. And here in the states – mediocrity plows forward. I wonder to were.
One of my favorite authors, Ernest Becker, wrote about the Hero Myth in the West. In Burma, it is clear, there is no myth.
So, in Thailand, SD is sold as SE, with the label “royally approved”, to make it more palatable to that section of the Thai population that can never do anything if it is not “to honor the king,” “to celebrate the king’s birthday”, etc. ? As a royalist Thai friend of mine once remarked to me, “I wonder whether these people will stop doing anything when the King is gone.”
During the late 80s, I visited some villages as part of the workshop I attended at YMCA, Chiangmai. I understand that those at YMCA (and other NGOs) have been active players in many rural development projects in the area. In fact, I first heard of such thing as (environmentally/ecologically) sustainable development back then. The community forest in Lamphun was quite impressive back when I visited, as well as women and youth group activities. The PR site of the government doesn’t seem to advertise previous contributions, or maybe I missed it… In terms of equal access to education and health care, I suppose to some it’s still not clear if it’s part of happiness or not. Can a village kid dream about going to Chulalongkorn University some day? When they are viewed unable to adjust to academic workload and life, and should not be supported… I hope this is not off the topic.
Last Friday and Saturday, October 5 and 6, scholars from around the world met at the UW campus in Seattle for a conference on “Religion, Ethnicity, and Modernity: Identity and Social Practice in Asia”. The conference celebrated the twentieth anniversary of the UW Southeast Asia Center, but also – and more importantly – the achievements of its founding director and former AAS President, Charles “Biff” Keyes. Biff was supposed to have retired but he is called back to be interim chair of the anthropology department. The conference was concluded with a very funny keynote lecture by James Scott.
Retirements and conferences happen quite often, but this celebration was special because it was not just Biff’s numerous publications but more importantly his role as educator and supervisor which as highlighted. Biff has served on almost 200 dissertation committees, of which 42 as chair. Of these 42 dissertations, many were (and are being) written by anthropologists and other social scientists from Thailand and Vietnam. As the professor who reportedly has supervised more Thai and Vietnamese doctoral candidates than any other scholar in North America, Biff has made an indelible mark on the development of the anthropological discipline in both countries – something that came across in a number of papers given by his former students. He and his wife Jane were also admired for the warm hospitality that they offered to his many students students from SEAsia, including in their home.
I think that Biff’s achievements in this regard are exceptional and that they should be honored in this forum as well.
[…] todays Nation, further developments in a story New Mandala has been following for some time: Prasong Soonsiri attacked Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont on Wednesday night, […]
Restorationist, please read up on “sustainability” – it is quite a comprehensive concept and does not view the world in black and white. Sustainability acknowledges that modern industrial/postindustrial society have a very long list of negative impacts on society/environment which needs to be redressed. The social, economical, environmental, cultural components of society are intricately interrelated/interconnected. The principles of SE may or may not be driven by the ‘green’ agenda, but it has huge potential implications analysed under the umbrella of ‘sustainability’.
I also don’t agree with the logic that if you don’t like a person or institution, but that person/institution happen to propose a potentially good idea, you oppose/discredit the idea straight away. I also don’t subscribe to the notion that ‘royalty’ is one homogeneous, monolithic body (even the Thai on the street can differentiate) – or even worse, as you seem to suggest that the monarchy and government (via politicians and bureaucrats) are one and the same; or that all the decisions made by directors, managers of businesses wholly or partially owned by the Crown Property Bureau are synonymous with HM the King’s. Let’s resist drawing easy conclusions on ‘sustainability’/SE or blame every Thai societal/environmental ills on one person/institution without careful consideration/implications of concepts and the various agencies.
By, th’ way: that last comment was very rushed. I meant to say : “Sarit” – NOT “Sarin”
Sarit was the brutal dictator and opium trafficker with which the Thai Royal family aligned themselves.
When Sarit went to the US (who was also a very good mate of Sarit – both he and the Thai king were enlisted by the US as “Cold War Warriors”)….the king publicly presented Sarit with a bouquet of flowers.
There are countless copies of documents down on record that support the fact that the the brutal Sarit was the monarchists’ “strong arm man”. During this period, the Thai Royal family invested in business ventures with the ruling generals. These generals were involved in legal and illegal activities.
The world divided by Deumlaokeng as “The Scared” and “The Profane” was nice touch! I would fall under ‘The Profane” according to Deumlaokeng, and, Andrew Walker would be one of “The Scared”.
The damage was done by proposing such law, but for Privy Council to put it down was a double whammy.
The Privy Council should have no right in influencing whether the law can or cannot be pass. It give the image that certain position are influential in making the law. Even the king does not immediately drop the Jufer case, but let it goes through trial and then pardon him.
Either this insane law should have been voted down, or drop quietly without refering to Privy Council call.
For Laura Bush to get involved in any U.S. foreign policy issue is unusual and to get involved as overtly and forecefully as she has in the Burma issue is very unusual. Apparently, she has a circle of contacts who are very involved with the Burma exile groups and she has become very interested in Aung San Suu Kyi as a charismatic, historical personality.
Here is Laura Bush’s column on Burma from today’s Wall Street Journal:
———————————————————–
Stop the Terror in Burma
President Bush is preparing further U.S. sanctions against the dictatorship.
BY LAURA BUSH
Wednesday, October 10, 2007 12:01 a.m. EDT
It is 2 a.m. in Rangoon, Burma. In the middle of the tropical night, army troops pour into the neighborhood surrounding a peaceful Buddhist monastery. The soldiers occupy nearby homes, so that residents will not peek through their windows or go outside to witness the raid. Troops then storm the monastery, brutalizing, terrorizing and arresting the monks inside.
Eventually the monks are imprisoned inside Rangoon’s former Government Technical Institute. According to one eyewitness, hundreds are crammed into each room. They have no access to toilets or sanitary facilities. Many of the monks refuse food from their military jailers. There is no space to lie down and sleep.
These are the stories of Burma’s “Saffron Revolution.” The protests that started a few weeks ago with a 500% spike in regime-controlled gas prices have now unleashed 19 years of pent-up national anger. As the demonstrations play out on front pages, computer monitors, and TV screens across the globe, millions of people have been inspired by the sea of orange-robed Buddhist monks standing up to the military dictatorship.
Millions have also been stunned by the junta’s shameful response: nonviolent demonstrators struck down with batons, tear gas, smoke grenades and bullets; civilians, including children, seized at random; innocent men and women slain.
The generals’ reign of fear has subdued the protests–for now. But while the streets of Burma may be eerily quiet, the hearts of the Burmese people are not: 2007 is not 1988, when the regime’s last major anti-democracy crackdown killed 3,000 and left the junta intact. Today, people everywhere know about the regime’s atrocities.
They are disgusted by the junta’s abuses of human rights. This swelling outrage presents the generals with an urgent choice: Be part of Burma’s peaceful transition to democracy, or get out of the way for a government of the Burmese people’s choosing.
Whatever last shred of legitimacy the junta had among its own citizens has vanished. The regime’s stranglehold on information is slipping; thanks to new technologies, people throughout Burma know about the junta’s assaults. The public mood is said to be “a mixture of fear, depression, hopelessness, and seething anger.” According to reports from Rangoon, “The regime’s heavy-handed tactics against the revered clergy and peaceful demonstrators have turned many of the politically neutral in favor of the recent demonstrators.”
The international community, too, is distancing itself. On Saturday, during a “Global Day of Action for Burma,” thousands of people marched through dozens of cities–from Kuala Lumpur to London, Sydney to Paris–in solidarity with the monks. Spiritual leaders, including Pope Benedict XVI and the Dalai Lama, have enlisted millions of faithful to pray for peace and justice in Burma.
Governments from Spain to Estonia to Panama to Australia have voiced their disapproval. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations has denounced the generals’ actions as “repulsive.” Burma’s neighbor, Malaysia, has urged the regime to hold “unconditional” talks with Aung San Suu Kyi, leader of Burma’s popularly elected National League for Democracy party. India, one of Burma’s closest trading partners, has called for an inquiry into the regime’s crackdown, and encouraged the junta to hasten the process of political reform.
On Friday, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon described the regime’s violent repression as “abhorrent and unacceptable.” Yesterday, Mr. Ban called me to say that he will send the U.N.’s special envoy to Burma, Ibrahim Gambari, back to the region “as soon as possible.” Mr. Gambari will coordinate with Burma’s neighboring governments, encouraging them to use their influence with the junta to bring about a transfer of power.
And last week, the United States led an effort to put Burma, for the first time in history, on the agenda of the U.N. Security Council. The United States expects that the Security Council–especially permanent members Russia and China, who typically support Burma’s military dictatorship–will keep pressure on the regime.
The junta has also shut itself off economically. Money talks–and we know it speaks to those who rule the country, Gen. Than Shwe and his deputies. One of last week’s more promising developments was the general’s statement indicating, for the first time, his willingness to meet with Ms. Suu Kyi–but on the condition that she “stop calling for economic sanctions.” The junta is feeling the financial squeeze.
The economic pressure will only grow more intense. Last week, the European Union tightened its sanctions against the regime; over the weekend, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown called for harsher measures. Amid growing outrage over the murder of a Japanese journalist, Japan–one of the largest providers of aid to Burma–is likely to suspend assistance.
President Bush has directed the U.S. Treasury Department to freeze the assets of 14 senior members of the Burmese junta. Our State Department has identified top junta officials and their immediate families–more than 200 people–as subject to a ban on entry into the U.S., and President Bush is preparing further U.S. sanctions against the dictatorship.
Gen. Than Shwe and his deputies are a friendless regime. They should step aside to make way for a unified Burma governed by legitimate leaders. The rest of the armed forces should not fear this transition–there is room for a professional military in a democratic Burma. In fact, one of Burma’s military heroes was also a beloved champion of Burmese freedom: General Aung San, the late father of Aung San Suu Kyi.
As part of a peaceful transition process, the generals must immediately stop their terror campaigns against their own people.
They must commit to a meaningful, unrestricted dialogue with Aung San Suu Kyi and other opposition leaders–including the demonstrating monks, the 88 Generation Students and members of Ms. Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy party. The junta has taken a small, promising first step by appointing its deputy labor minister as a liaison to Ms. Suu Kyi. Now, the regime must release her–and all members of the political opposition–so they can meet and plan a strategy for Burma’s transition to democracy.
Meanwhile, the world watches–and waits. We know that Gen. Than Shwe and his deputies have the advantage of violent force. But Ms. Suu Kyi and other opposition leaders have moral legitimacy, the support of the Burmese people and the support of the world. The regime’s position grows weaker by the day. The generals’ choice is clear: The time for a free Burma is now.
EXCERPTS FROM LEE KUAN YEW INTERVIEW BY TOM PLATE THAT IS BEING DISTRIBUTED AROUND THE WORLD TODAY:
(For the Burma Generals to be accused of being brutal, ruthless, despotic and blood-thirsty is probably a point of pride for the Generals. BUT to be called dumb in front of the whole world by the Wise Man of Asia, Lee Kuan Yew, that’s got to be a serious loss of face…………..)
—————————————————————————
Myanmar’s generals can’t survive – Singapore’s Lee Kuan Yew Inteview by Tom Plate
Tue Oct 9, 2007 11:20pm EDT
SINGAPORE, Oct 10 (Reuters) – Economic mismanagement by Myanmar’s ruling generals means they cannot survive indefinitely and the population was always likely to revolt in the face of excesses by the junta, Singapore senior statesman Lee Kuan Yew was quoted on Wednesday as saying.
But in an interview reprinted in Singapore’s Straits Times newspaper, Lee said any solution to the political impasse in Myanmar would have to include the military, as they alone had the administrative ability to hold the country together.
“These are rather dumb generals when it comes to the economy,” Lee, 84, told syndicated U.S. columnist Tom Plate in an interview on Sep 27.
“How can they so manage the economy and reach this stage when the country has so many natural resources?”
Lee, who was Singapore’s first Prime Minister at independence in 1965, stepped down as premier in 1990 but remains influential as its “minister mentor”.
He gave the interview at the height of a crackdown by Myanmar’s military rulers after streets protests led by monks saw tens of thousands of people take to the streets to protest against military rule and economic hardships.
At independence in 1948, Myanmar was blessed with vast natural resources and wealthier on almost every economic measure compared to tiny Singapore.
But independent economists say decades of mismanagement by 45 years of military rule have left Myanmar with negligible growth, rampant inflation and a currency, the kyat, considered worthless outside the country.
Lee said Myanmar’s leaders had pushed a “hungry and impoverished people to revolt” on wasteful projects and also by flaunting their wealth.
“…they decided to close down the government in Yangon and go into this Pyinmana, or whatever the place is called, where there’s nothing,” he said, referring to the military’s decision to relocate the capital from Yangon to Naypyidaw, newly carved out of the jungle last year.
“…they are putting up expensive buildings for themselves and a golf course…”.
Lee also made reference to a bootleg video of the wedding of a daughter of Myanmar’s leader, Tan Shwe, in which the bride is showered with cash and jewellery.
“…and the top general had a lavish wedding for his daughter which was then out on YouTube — the daughter was like a Christmas tree,” he said.
Singapore is one of Myanmar’s biggest foreign investors and bilateral trade reached S$1 billion ($679.3 million) last year, but in the interview, Lee rued the risk.
“I had advised several of our hoteliers to set up hotels there. They have sunk in millions of dollars there, and now their hotels are empty,” Lee said.
“Why they believe they can keep their country cut off from the rest of the world like this, indefinitely, I cannot understand.”
The king, Bhumibol, is protrayed as the great, ‘apolitical’, kind gracious, figurehead who often steps in to save Thai democracy.
In fact, in the late 1950’s he – as well as “monarchy Inc.” – sided with Sarin, a brutal dictator, a vain womaniser, an opium trafficker, and a brutal murderer and torturer.
This is the kind of “mates” the king of Thailand has courted in the past to preserve the Chakri lineage. His sentiments often lie on the side of the fascists.
In the late 1990’s, when Nobel Peace Laureates convened in Bangkok to show solidarity for Aung San Suu Kyi, the democracy leader imprisoned in Burma, they were astonished to hear the King of Thailand state that the military regime was the best form of government for Burma. This is a junta that tortures and kills people – Buddhist monks included (of the Theravada school to which Thailand also subscribes)
Indeed, the “Siam Cement Company”, a huge industrial conglomerate established by a former king of Thailand around the turn of the 19th century – and which is still mainly owned by the Thai Crown today – has extensive business interests in Burma. This is a company, owned in large part by the king of Thailand, that does business with thugs that kill and beat up Buddhist monks.
And yet the King of Thailand – thanks to the extensive PR lobby that promote gullible adoration of the monarchy by its people – is potrayed as a “dammarajah”, almost a Buddha incarnate.
The last New Year speech, the King of Thailand states the he is an ordinary man, and that it is right for people to question or criticise him, as it is just to criticise any leaders in a supposed “democracy”.
It’s just that if anyone did so, they’d be charged with the severe lesse majeste laws and probably sent to prison. These are the same lesse majeste laws that the King’s privy council is seeking to strengthen in the new constituion Thailand is currently developing after the last coup. Embellisments to this constitution ban media coverage of any cases involving lesse majeste, as well as increased legal protection for members of the pirvy council (the representatives chosen by the king).
No-one belittles the Thai people’s humble adoration of a magical mystical figure of a fairytale king. But it might be a good idea for the country as a whole to start opening its eyes to a few harsh realities.
Read “The King Never Smiles” by Paul Hanley, and you might get an altogether different picture of the “apolitical” monarch of Thailand.
[…] of Washington’s (UW) 20th┬ Anniversary celebration of their Southeast Asian Center with a series of seminars honoring noted anthropologist Prof. Charles “Biff” Keyes.┬ Prof. Keyes is┬ a Cornell grad (as […]
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Locked up in Burma
Well put, Richard – my sentiments exactly. And thanks Nicholas for posting this and highlighting Par Par Lay and others’ plight. These are great, uncelebrated grass-roots ‘heroes’ in the truest sense of the word. They have my love and deepest admirations too (more than I will ever have for my sports football heroes and rock gods). They are resisting through their art, as with the monks through their beliefs, (almost futilely, it seems, but I hope not) violent nationalist and patriotic narratives such as of the great all-conquering Burmese warrior-kings of the past in which the junta claim to model (which suggests that they are living in a totally different self-aggrandizing world altogether). They clearly have no fear nor any regard for these ‘weak’, non-violent resistances nor for their popularity whether internal or external (my practical mind is still hoping for a coup from within, new military generation willing to establish dialogue and negotiations with democratic reformers).
Examples of “sufficiency economy”
And that is a very good point Srithanonchai. Personally, if any group of people can be considered ‘disingenous’, to borrow Restorationist, it is these group of people (often elites) who have no real convictions to act for the greater good in the first place (and it usually reflects in the actions/interpretations of SE). I am inclined to judge the group of NLA members who proposed to extend the lese majeste law in that light (unless it is only a political game to contain PAD-allied members). Sadly the ‘Buddhism approved’ narrative has been greatly weakened (and Jatukam’s and the likes of commercial animism will keep making returns), “royally aproved” SE will have to do the job of a national narrative mitigating aggressive capitalism for the time being.
The vote of the poor
Switzerland and Thailand — time for a comparison? In a few days, Switzerland will see an election, and the campaign is “Blocher ok pai”. Blocher is Switzerland’s Thaksin — a rightist, populist billionaire with rough electoral habits who can buy up as much advertising space as he wants and put election posters whereever he wants . And the voters love him (though not as much as they loved Thaksin). Which poses questions of whether Switzerland has that many desperately poor people who are easily swayed by populist promises, whether the average Swiss voter is so politically immature that he cannot be trusted to vote “right” (remember, we thought that Switzerland was the archetypus of a mature western European democracy), and whether there will be a coup to prevent Blocher’s advance. There have already been violent demonstrations.
Locked up in Burma
I wonder when men will realise that freedom is a basic, fundamental right. It is not something we earn or should have to struggle so hard to attain.
I am heart broken about what is happening in Burma. Yes these men will eventualy be internationally recognised as heroes long after Burma attains freedom, but right now they suffer for no reason what soever except that those in power are so corrupted by this power that they cannot stand to be human.
Locked up in Burma
Six years.
It is men like that who do not get enough attention from the world. The are among many ‘future legends’ who bravely risk eveything for what the West has and does not consider ‘worth it’. Men and women like this leave me at a loss for words. I would say I genuinely love them.
Aung San Suu Kyi once wrote, “To be Burmese is to be Buddhist”. I would say to be from Burma is to be part of a selfless struggle in which there are many who are willing to suffer great calamities with their own people, Suu Kyi included but certainly not unique.
The people of Burma are the model for humanism that is dying in the West. And here in the states – mediocrity plows forward. I wonder to were.
One of my favorite authors, Ernest Becker, wrote about the Hero Myth in the West. In Burma, it is clear, there is no myth.
Examples of “sufficiency economy”
So, in Thailand, SD is sold as SE, with the label “royally approved”, to make it more palatable to that section of the Thai population that can never do anything if it is not “to honor the king,” “to celebrate the king’s birthday”, etc. ? As a royalist Thai friend of mine once remarked to me, “I wonder whether these people will stop doing anything when the King is gone.”
Examples of “sufficiency economy”
During the late 80s, I visited some villages as part of the workshop I attended at YMCA, Chiangmai. I understand that those at YMCA (and other NGOs) have been active players in many rural development projects in the area. In fact, I first heard of such thing as (environmentally/ecologically) sustainable development back then. The community forest in Lamphun was quite impressive back when I visited, as well as women and youth group activities. The PR site of the government doesn’t seem to advertise previous contributions, or maybe I missed it… In terms of equal access to education and health care, I suppose to some it’s still not clear if it’s part of happiness or not. Can a village kid dream about going to Chulalongkorn University some day? When they are viewed unable to adjust to academic workload and life, and should not be supported… I hope this is not off the topic.
Report on conference honoring Charles Keyes
From the TLC list:
Last Friday and Saturday, October 5 and 6, scholars from around the world met at the UW campus in Seattle for a conference on “Religion, Ethnicity, and Modernity: Identity and Social Practice in Asia”. The conference celebrated the twentieth anniversary of the UW Southeast Asia Center, but also – and more importantly – the achievements of its founding director and former AAS President, Charles “Biff” Keyes. Biff was supposed to have retired but he is called back to be interim chair of the anthropology department. The conference was concluded with a very funny keynote lecture by James Scott.
Retirements and conferences happen quite often, but this celebration was special because it was not just Biff’s numerous publications but more importantly his role as educator and supervisor which as highlighted. Biff has served on almost 200 dissertation committees, of which 42 as chair. Of these 42 dissertations, many were (and are being) written by anthropologists and other social scientists from Thailand and Vietnam. As the professor who reportedly has supervised more Thai and Vietnamese doctoral candidates than any other scholar in North America, Biff has made an indelible mark on the development of the anthropological discipline in both countries – something that came across in a number of papers given by his former students. He and his wife Jane were also admired for the warm hospitality that they offered to his many students students from SEAsia, including in their home.
I think that Biff’s achievements in this regard are exceptional and that they should be honored in this forum as well.
Oscar Salemink
(not a former student of Biff)
Surayud’s conservation zone
[…] todays Nation, further developments in a story New Mandala has been following for some time: Prasong Soonsiri attacked Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont on Wednesday night, […]
Report on conference honoring Charles Keyes
Will some Heeb please invite her over for a Passover seder.
*blinks*
I beg your pardon?
I don’t know about you, but where I come from “heeb” ranks up there with “nigger” and “chink”.
I’ll assume good faith and excuse you on the assumption that you are not aware of the anti-semitic connotation of the word.
Examples of “sufficiency economy”
Restorationist, please read up on “sustainability” – it is quite a comprehensive concept and does not view the world in black and white. Sustainability acknowledges that modern industrial/postindustrial society have a very long list of negative impacts on society/environment which needs to be redressed. The social, economical, environmental, cultural components of society are intricately interrelated/interconnected. The principles of SE may or may not be driven by the ‘green’ agenda, but it has huge potential implications analysed under the umbrella of ‘sustainability’.
I also don’t agree with the logic that if you don’t like a person or institution, but that person/institution happen to propose a potentially good idea, you oppose/discredit the idea straight away. I also don’t subscribe to the notion that ‘royalty’ is one homogeneous, monolithic body (even the Thai on the street can differentiate) – or even worse, as you seem to suggest that the monarchy and government (via politicians and bureaucrats) are one and the same; or that all the decisions made by directors, managers of businesses wholly or partially owned by the Crown Property Bureau are synonymous with HM the King’s. Let’s resist drawing easy conclusions on ‘sustainability’/SE or blame every Thai societal/environmental ills on one person/institution without careful consideration/implications of concepts and the various agencies.
Exhibition: The King – “Father of Thai Innovation”
By, th’ way: that last comment was very rushed. I meant to say : “Sarit” – NOT “Sarin”
Sarit was the brutal dictator and opium trafficker with which the Thai Royal family aligned themselves.
When Sarit went to the US (who was also a very good mate of Sarit – both he and the Thai king were enlisted by the US as “Cold War Warriors”)….the king publicly presented Sarit with a bouquet of flowers.
There are countless copies of documents down on record that support the fact that the the brutal Sarit was the monarchists’ “strong arm man”. During this period, the Thai Royal family invested in business ventures with the ruling generals. These generals were involved in legal and illegal activities.
Report on conference honoring Charles Keyes
The world divided by Deumlaokeng as “The Scared” and “The Profane” was nice touch! I would fall under ‘The Profane” according to Deumlaokeng, and, Andrew Walker would be one of “The Scared”.
A sufficiently tight media lid
The damage was done by proposing such law, but for Privy Council to put it down was a double whammy.
The Privy Council should have no right in influencing whether the law can or cannot be pass. It give the image that certain position are influential in making the law. Even the king does not immediately drop the Jufer case, but let it goes through trial and then pardon him.
Either this insane law should have been voted down, or drop quietly without refering to Privy Council call.
Report on conference honoring Charles Keyes
“Deumlaokeng”, what a name! I still can’t stop laughing and now I can’t concentrate on the article!
Roundtable on Burma in London
For Laura Bush to get involved in any U.S. foreign policy issue is unusual and to get involved as overtly and forecefully as she has in the Burma issue is very unusual. Apparently, she has a circle of contacts who are very involved with the Burma exile groups and she has become very interested in Aung San Suu Kyi as a charismatic, historical personality.
Here is Laura Bush’s column on Burma from today’s Wall Street Journal:
———————————————————–
Stop the Terror in Burma
President Bush is preparing further U.S. sanctions against the dictatorship.
BY LAURA BUSH
Wednesday, October 10, 2007 12:01 a.m. EDT
It is 2 a.m. in Rangoon, Burma. In the middle of the tropical night, army troops pour into the neighborhood surrounding a peaceful Buddhist monastery. The soldiers occupy nearby homes, so that residents will not peek through their windows or go outside to witness the raid. Troops then storm the monastery, brutalizing, terrorizing and arresting the monks inside.
Eventually the monks are imprisoned inside Rangoon’s former Government Technical Institute. According to one eyewitness, hundreds are crammed into each room. They have no access to toilets or sanitary facilities. Many of the monks refuse food from their military jailers. There is no space to lie down and sleep.
These are the stories of Burma’s “Saffron Revolution.” The protests that started a few weeks ago with a 500% spike in regime-controlled gas prices have now unleashed 19 years of pent-up national anger. As the demonstrations play out on front pages, computer monitors, and TV screens across the globe, millions of people have been inspired by the sea of orange-robed Buddhist monks standing up to the military dictatorship.
Millions have also been stunned by the junta’s shameful response: nonviolent demonstrators struck down with batons, tear gas, smoke grenades and bullets; civilians, including children, seized at random; innocent men and women slain.
The generals’ reign of fear has subdued the protests–for now. But while the streets of Burma may be eerily quiet, the hearts of the Burmese people are not: 2007 is not 1988, when the regime’s last major anti-democracy crackdown killed 3,000 and left the junta intact. Today, people everywhere know about the regime’s atrocities.
They are disgusted by the junta’s abuses of human rights. This swelling outrage presents the generals with an urgent choice: Be part of Burma’s peaceful transition to democracy, or get out of the way for a government of the Burmese people’s choosing.
Whatever last shred of legitimacy the junta had among its own citizens has vanished. The regime’s stranglehold on information is slipping; thanks to new technologies, people throughout Burma know about the junta’s assaults. The public mood is said to be “a mixture of fear, depression, hopelessness, and seething anger.” According to reports from Rangoon, “The regime’s heavy-handed tactics against the revered clergy and peaceful demonstrators have turned many of the politically neutral in favor of the recent demonstrators.”
The international community, too, is distancing itself. On Saturday, during a “Global Day of Action for Burma,” thousands of people marched through dozens of cities–from Kuala Lumpur to London, Sydney to Paris–in solidarity with the monks. Spiritual leaders, including Pope Benedict XVI and the Dalai Lama, have enlisted millions of faithful to pray for peace and justice in Burma.
Governments from Spain to Estonia to Panama to Australia have voiced their disapproval. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations has denounced the generals’ actions as “repulsive.” Burma’s neighbor, Malaysia, has urged the regime to hold “unconditional” talks with Aung San Suu Kyi, leader of Burma’s popularly elected National League for Democracy party. India, one of Burma’s closest trading partners, has called for an inquiry into the regime’s crackdown, and encouraged the junta to hasten the process of political reform.
On Friday, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon described the regime’s violent repression as “abhorrent and unacceptable.” Yesterday, Mr. Ban called me to say that he will send the U.N.’s special envoy to Burma, Ibrahim Gambari, back to the region “as soon as possible.” Mr. Gambari will coordinate with Burma’s neighboring governments, encouraging them to use their influence with the junta to bring about a transfer of power.
And last week, the United States led an effort to put Burma, for the first time in history, on the agenda of the U.N. Security Council. The United States expects that the Security Council–especially permanent members Russia and China, who typically support Burma’s military dictatorship–will keep pressure on the regime.
The junta has also shut itself off economically. Money talks–and we know it speaks to those who rule the country, Gen. Than Shwe and his deputies. One of last week’s more promising developments was the general’s statement indicating, for the first time, his willingness to meet with Ms. Suu Kyi–but on the condition that she “stop calling for economic sanctions.” The junta is feeling the financial squeeze.
The economic pressure will only grow more intense. Last week, the European Union tightened its sanctions against the regime; over the weekend, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown called for harsher measures. Amid growing outrage over the murder of a Japanese journalist, Japan–one of the largest providers of aid to Burma–is likely to suspend assistance.
President Bush has directed the U.S. Treasury Department to freeze the assets of 14 senior members of the Burmese junta. Our State Department has identified top junta officials and their immediate families–more than 200 people–as subject to a ban on entry into the U.S., and President Bush is preparing further U.S. sanctions against the dictatorship.
Gen. Than Shwe and his deputies are a friendless regime. They should step aside to make way for a unified Burma governed by legitimate leaders. The rest of the armed forces should not fear this transition–there is room for a professional military in a democratic Burma. In fact, one of Burma’s military heroes was also a beloved champion of Burmese freedom: General Aung San, the late father of Aung San Suu Kyi.
As part of a peaceful transition process, the generals must immediately stop their terror campaigns against their own people.
They must commit to a meaningful, unrestricted dialogue with Aung San Suu Kyi and other opposition leaders–including the demonstrating monks, the 88 Generation Students and members of Ms. Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy party. The junta has taken a small, promising first step by appointing its deputy labor minister as a liaison to Ms. Suu Kyi. Now, the regime must release her–and all members of the political opposition–so they can meet and plan a strategy for Burma’s transition to democracy.
Meanwhile, the world watches–and waits. We know that Gen. Than Shwe and his deputies have the advantage of violent force. But Ms. Suu Kyi and other opposition leaders have moral legitimacy, the support of the Burmese people and the support of the world. The regime’s position grows weaker by the day. The generals’ choice is clear: The time for a free Burma is now.
Roundtable on Burma in London
EXCERPTS FROM LEE KUAN YEW INTERVIEW BY TOM PLATE THAT IS BEING DISTRIBUTED AROUND THE WORLD TODAY:
(For the Burma Generals to be accused of being brutal, ruthless, despotic and blood-thirsty is probably a point of pride for the Generals. BUT to be called dumb in front of the whole world by the Wise Man of Asia, Lee Kuan Yew, that’s got to be a serious loss of face…………..)
—————————————————————————
Myanmar’s generals can’t survive – Singapore’s Lee Kuan Yew Inteview by Tom Plate
Tue Oct 9, 2007 11:20pm EDT
SINGAPORE, Oct 10 (Reuters) – Economic mismanagement by Myanmar’s ruling generals means they cannot survive indefinitely and the population was always likely to revolt in the face of excesses by the junta, Singapore senior statesman Lee Kuan Yew was quoted on Wednesday as saying.
But in an interview reprinted in Singapore’s Straits Times newspaper, Lee said any solution to the political impasse in Myanmar would have to include the military, as they alone had the administrative ability to hold the country together.
“These are rather dumb generals when it comes to the economy,” Lee, 84, told syndicated U.S. columnist Tom Plate in an interview on Sep 27.
“How can they so manage the economy and reach this stage when the country has so many natural resources?”
Lee, who was Singapore’s first Prime Minister at independence in 1965, stepped down as premier in 1990 but remains influential as its “minister mentor”.
He gave the interview at the height of a crackdown by Myanmar’s military rulers after streets protests led by monks saw tens of thousands of people take to the streets to protest against military rule and economic hardships.
At independence in 1948, Myanmar was blessed with vast natural resources and wealthier on almost every economic measure compared to tiny Singapore.
But independent economists say decades of mismanagement by 45 years of military rule have left Myanmar with negligible growth, rampant inflation and a currency, the kyat, considered worthless outside the country.
Lee said Myanmar’s leaders had pushed a “hungry and impoverished people to revolt” on wasteful projects and also by flaunting their wealth.
“…they decided to close down the government in Yangon and go into this Pyinmana, or whatever the place is called, where there’s nothing,” he said, referring to the military’s decision to relocate the capital from Yangon to Naypyidaw, newly carved out of the jungle last year.
“…they are putting up expensive buildings for themselves and a golf course…”.
Lee also made reference to a bootleg video of the wedding of a daughter of Myanmar’s leader, Tan Shwe, in which the bride is showered with cash and jewellery.
“…and the top general had a lavish wedding for his daughter which was then out on YouTube — the daughter was like a Christmas tree,” he said.
Singapore is one of Myanmar’s biggest foreign investors and bilateral trade reached S$1 billion ($679.3 million) last year, but in the interview, Lee rued the risk.
“I had advised several of our hoteliers to set up hotels there. They have sunk in millions of dollars there, and now their hotels are empty,” Lee said.
“Why they believe they can keep their country cut off from the rest of the world like this, indefinitely, I cannot understand.”
Exhibition: The King – “Father of Thai Innovation”
The Thai monarchy is not what it seems.
The king, Bhumibol, is protrayed as the great, ‘apolitical’, kind gracious, figurehead who often steps in to save Thai democracy.
In fact, in the late 1950’s he – as well as “monarchy Inc.” – sided with Sarin, a brutal dictator, a vain womaniser, an opium trafficker, and a brutal murderer and torturer.
This is the kind of “mates” the king of Thailand has courted in the past to preserve the Chakri lineage. His sentiments often lie on the side of the fascists.
In the late 1990’s, when Nobel Peace Laureates convened in Bangkok to show solidarity for Aung San Suu Kyi, the democracy leader imprisoned in Burma, they were astonished to hear the King of Thailand state that the military regime was the best form of government for Burma. This is a junta that tortures and kills people – Buddhist monks included (of the Theravada school to which Thailand also subscribes)
Indeed, the “Siam Cement Company”, a huge industrial conglomerate established by a former king of Thailand around the turn of the 19th century – and which is still mainly owned by the Thai Crown today – has extensive business interests in Burma. This is a company, owned in large part by the king of Thailand, that does business with thugs that kill and beat up Buddhist monks.
And yet the King of Thailand – thanks to the extensive PR lobby that promote gullible adoration of the monarchy by its people – is potrayed as a “dammarajah”, almost a Buddha incarnate.
The last New Year speech, the King of Thailand states the he is an ordinary man, and that it is right for people to question or criticise him, as it is just to criticise any leaders in a supposed “democracy”.
It’s just that if anyone did so, they’d be charged with the severe lesse majeste laws and probably sent to prison. These are the same lesse majeste laws that the King’s privy council is seeking to strengthen in the new constituion Thailand is currently developing after the last coup. Embellisments to this constitution ban media coverage of any cases involving lesse majeste, as well as increased legal protection for members of the pirvy council (the representatives chosen by the king).
No-one belittles the Thai people’s humble adoration of a magical mystical figure of a fairytale king. But it might be a good idea for the country as a whole to start opening its eyes to a few harsh realities.
Read “The King Never Smiles” by Paul Hanley, and you might get an altogether different picture of the “apolitical” monarch of Thailand.
Conference in honour of Charles Keyes
[…] of Washington’s (UW) 20th┬ Anniversary celebration of their Southeast Asian Center with a series of seminars honoring noted anthropologist Prof. Charles “Biff” Keyes.┬ Prof. Keyes is┬ a Cornell grad (as […]
Drugs in mainland Southeast Asia
Grasshopper and Aointay. You are both sounding like backyard speed chemists. This is an academic site, please!