Just as Ex-Ajarn dejectedly noted, just what can an average person do that would be more effective (against this abominable Myanmar junta)?
Guerrilla tactics would be good. We can heckle and throw eggs at these Myanmar junta folks and their relatives . . . or the Myanmar Embassy people when we encounter them at the streets of Bangkok or Sydney or Singapore. Tobe effective of course requires dedicated groups who keep track of the movements of these Myanmar junta ogres and just keep throwing rotten eggs at them at sight every time all the time.
I agree with your point KhunTosakan – and I have (ironically it seemed) actually used it in the “interview with Paul Handley” posting to ‘clarify’ the issue of Siamese/Thai succession. Culturally, succession has been unstable characterized by power plays between various candidates – but once settled, is often followed by relative stability (as, more often than not, the most abled men/women – I am not using ‘man’ here as it has always been a team effort with women often also playing significant roles – has won). I am not sure about statistics, but I suspect (but could be wrong) that most historical Thai kings see out their reign in their deathbeds than by being violently overthrown. They just might not have the peace of mind of who will succeed them with certainty.
It may sound like an oxymoron – but it has been a ‘dynamic’ but ‘stable’ system (someone must have a better term) that guarantees continuity and was, importantly, adaptible to changes. There are conflicts aplenty, but they seem of the ‘creative’ type that does not degenerate into the destruction of whole societies (safe the 2nd fall of Ayutthya?). Arguably, the concept of Uparaj (2nd king) seem to be designed with stability in mind – as it co-opts another highly talented royal, while also serving as a backup system (a complete administrative system in fact) in the case the king/his court fails or passes away suddenly (whether through disease or warfare).
Even more recent ideological/personal conflicts between the alpha males of FMPibul and AjarnPridi seems to illustrate this – especially during WWII. FMPibul sides with the Axis, Ajarn Pridi with the Allies – but there are evidences that they were coordinated all along (for the aims of national survival). AjarnPridi may have eventually lost out to FMPibul then, but we know who will have the last laugh. Democratic government is not necessarily ‘stable and harmornious’, but played maturely (in the spirits of the rules of the game), it is stable – and Thai society is slowly, but surely, growing into it (under the auspices/actions/intents of many from King Prajadhipok, AjarnPridi – even FMPibul, through a succession of many individuals/groups/agencies to the present, HM the King being one of the key players in the past half century).
It is interesting to note that in 1932, Thailand had a military coup against the monarchy to install ‘democracy’ (proto/pseudo-democracy to be more accurate). In this historical context, the monarchy, the military and democracy manifests both eccentric synergies and conflicts. Trace that historical trajectory, there’s no doubt democracy will prevail – and, I stress again, both the monarchy and military (at least a critical mass) knows and accepts that inevitability (which they always had a hand in creating).
Future monarchs will succeed to the throne in a much more, open and democratic age. They will need to be extremely capable and charismatic to emulate HM the King’s achievements and popularity. I suspect they won’t need to be – as, it is hoped, the work has already been done… the people will take care of themselves. The struggle, then, will be like any other democracies – to mitigate money politics and economic inequalities.
Grasshopper: “Boycotting the Olympics would only increase polarity in the international arena.”
Exactly. Everything has a value.
If you want to find the value of a life under 30 baht healthcare.
Take someone in a coma and see if 30 baht pays for an oxygen tank.
Everything has a value and…
The value ***the international community places on change in Burma is low*** despite all the big words.
I raised the issue to point out the gap between words and action.
Sidh: “What are the options for the Burma Junta? Becoming totally shut off like N.Korea?”
Good point. I have been against economic sanctions for 10 years because they hurt Burmese people, making it even more difficult for them to survive economically and was repeatedly called a “Nazi” for having this view by activist friends, but I honestly believe that if the Burmese economy had been restricted in this way over the last 20 years since 1988 Burma would be a much different place than it is today and change would have eventually happened, maybe even Aung San Suu-kyi would be prime minister by now. This is what happened to South Korea under Kim Dae-Chung.
The Jeck are everywhere in northern Laos. They built Laos Vegas in Boten, Luang Namtha province. They took over the market in Oudomsay, Luang Prabang and Vientiane’s Nong Douang market. They are very stingy and don’t hire Laotian. Instead, they bring their own people to work for any project given to them from the Lao govn’t. Once they are in Laos, they refuse to return to China. Their dream is to live in the Souvannaphoum land, the Laotian Golden Land. They want to have Laotian dream with more freedom to raise more children, not one child like their homeland. In 10 more years, Laos will have a population of 10 million and half of them will be Jeck. Wake up uncle Choummaly and camarade Bouasone, your ethnic people in Saravane and Attapeu will be distincted.
From AFTENPOSTEN.no, a Norwegian newspaper, more detail on the Burma officer who crossed into Thailand:
Burmese officer wants asylum in Norway
A high-ranking Burmese officer has deserted the country’s military junta, made his way into Thailand and wants to seek asylum in Norway.
Norwegian-German journalist Hans-Joachim Schilde told Aftenposten.no Tuesday morning that Major Htaly Win, age 42, and his 17-year-old son rowed over a river separating Burma and Thailand.
They were aided by members of the Karen folk who live in the area and long have been persecuted by the military junta.
Schilde said he accompanied the officer and his son as well. They were on their way to Bangkok Tuesday, escorted by a colonel from Thai security forces and an officer from the Karen guerrilla force.
[…] written study of the uses and abuses of meditational practice, in the service of political goals. This piece from New Mandala was one of the first blog articles I read noting the aspect of Buddhist refusal to […]
I argued that the preference for stability, via negotiations/compromise, is culturally deep and Siamese/Thai history (particularly from the rulership – whether they be ‘warrior’ and/or ‘trader’ kings) provides ample evidence. The traditional guarantee of that stability is the military which the king and nobles were also part of. The other is economic stability which Siamese/Thai kings were also known to be very active. The 19th century colonial threat heightened/reinforced the monarchy’s (and nobility’s) role in both military and economic means towards stability/survival…
Response:
The Thai monarchy, for the most part, hasn’t been stable, going back to very ancient times.
Siam has had a long history of fratricide, regicide, and deadly competition by the elites at the highest level.
During the Ayutthaya period, Thai kings and/or elites used foreigners, the Portuguese, Dutch, French, etc as allies in putting down Thai competitors, as well as subjugating Thai muang on the periphery.
During the early Rattanakosin period, the various Chao Phya would be at each other’s throats trying to defend their own political and economic turf, more than willing to sacrifice political stability of the country.
Many, such as the Bunnag clan, would openly defy the king if that meant furthering their own interests.
During the reigns of Mongkut and Chulalongkorn, the 2nd kings were open and active competitors who had their own wealth and armies, and formed informal relationships with foreigners outside the purview of the court.
The institution of the second king was done away with during the fifth reign because the second king rebelled against King Chulalongkorn, and when his rebellion failed, he sought refuge at the British embassy.
There was an attempted coup during the 6th reign.
The absolute monarchy was overthrown during 7th reign
King Ananda was murdered, probably, during the 8th reign.
The only king that has been obsessed with stability has been this one, yet how many coups has there been during his reign? Too many to count
If there is a truism of Thai politics: It isn’t stable and harmonious.
>>I argued that the preference for stability, via negotiations/compromise, is culturally deep and Siamese/Thai history (particularly from the rulership – whether they be ‘warrior’ and/or ‘trader’ kings) provides ample evidence. The traditional guarantee of that stability is the military which the king and nobles were also part of. The other is economic stability which Siamese/Thai kings were also known to be very active. The 19th century colonial threat heightened/reinforced the monarchy’s (and nobility’s) role in both military and economic means towards stability/survival…
You are right of course. The issue is, what has prevented the Royal CPB-Privy Purse-Charity Funds-private funds money complex from being as rapacious as the Suharto or Marcos families? There is a range of explanations, including laziness, lack of desire, incompetence, failure, discipline, self-control, Finance Ministry influence, the king’s influence, and so on.
Likewise, there must be a reason why there is a need for financial assistance from tycoons like Thaksin and Fayed to rebuild old palaces. Could it be true lack of resources, cheapness, habit, working from example (of parents), something else? The government gives a budget for upkeep of the royal family and its buildings and offices — why wasn’t this enough?
Paul Handley: Thank you for your response. I will get the time to read the rest (1/3) of the book. My real reason that I haven’t finished it is that I don’t think it’s a good idea to bring it to read openly at the airport, or train station, in Thailand… Definitely not because it’s a large book with no pictures : )
Ex-A, I too asked the same question at first but after I followed the link , I learn a few things. The petition site is a job well done for this kind of thing really. It’s not just to sign the petition, you see a few suggestions, eg. write to your elected official, email companies operating in Myanmar (addresses listed), give comments/suggestions etc. Joining the protests at different spots around the world on Oct 6 may not be your cup of tea, it’s not mine, but I think at this stage raising the awareness helps. I’m now going to write to my friend who forwarded the petition to me a few days ago, and I kind of dismissed it. In my mind, I did say, hey what do you know, displaced ones are everywhere in Chiangmai, my hometown. I hear their accent, I meet their eyes… Now, I look forward to catching up with that ‘tree hugging’ friend of mine this Saturday, on a different function though. We’ll talk Myanmar for sure. But that’s just me.
Good points Grasshopper. It must be quite hard, as you mentioned before, mitigating the ‘neo-colonial’ line of thinking.
Although I think pressuring China and India is practical to dealing with the problem at hand (end the violence). They are the only external governments/neighbors that seem to have some influence on the Burmese junta (as the other neighbor, Thailand is naturally ignored for the historical baggage; for hosting anti-junta activists; and although the remmitance sent home by the million+ Burmese workers in Thailand must be quite economically significant, it probably does not benefit the junta).
What are the options for the Burma Junta? Becoming totally shut off like N.Korea? This is difficult as they are despised both internationally and by their people (probably more so now since the crack down on Buddhist monks). A ‘positive’ turn of events could be some ‘freethinking’ elements in the armed forces (if they are any – as I’ve just learnt they are internally trained and have minimal contact with the outside world), seeing the situation as a clear dead end, stage a coup against the ruling generals and establish dialogue, negotiate power-sharing arrangement with the democratic and ethnic oppositions. The danger could be a civil war (with no guaranteed result).
Or maybe, the US, to make some amends for Iraq, park a carrier fleet in the Andaman Sea to add military pressure (as economic sanctions clearly failed). The Chinese government will not be happy either but the Burmese Junta just might capitulate?
(I am probably dreaming – but trying to be ‘practical’ at the same time)
“I argue that the king has preferred the “discipline” and “order” (khwaam riaproy) of military rule to “undisciplined” “disorderly” elected parliaments.”
I think this is related to the issue of ‘stability’ that I raised through discussions with Taxidriver and Ngandeeleg in the last posting on your interview. I argued that the preference for stability, via negotiations/compromise, is culturally deep and Siamese/Thai history (particularly from the rulership – whether they be ‘warrior’ and/or ‘trader’ kings) provides ample evidence. The traditional guarantee of that stability is the military which the king and nobles were also part of. The other is economic stability which Siamese/Thai kings were also known to be very active. The 19th century colonial threat heightened/reinforced the monarchy’s (and nobility’s) role in both military and economic means towards stability/survival…
… To cut to the chase and put simply, Thai history in the past century when HM the King is most active in his career, was about the transition from ‘stability’ guaranteed by the military to one through democratic rule. That is why I mentioned that, in studying the King’s career, it may seem to be a close call between the two (military vs democracy) but if one views things as an inevitable transition (military towards democracy) – as I have no doubt HM the King does, then things become significantly different. Evidences can be viewed in a different, much more subtle and complex light (the latest, and this is only my speculation, being the promotion of the ‘cool head’ GenAnupong Paojinda over the ‘militant’ GenSaprang Kalayamitr for army c-in-c – and this if we make the assumption, that I don’t necessarily agree with, that many often make that PMSurayud-PMPrem-HM the King are inseparable).
Also, thank you for providing an evenhanded differentiation between the economic involvement of HM the King’s and Suharto’s families and putting it in very clear context (I’ve also made the point that if the CPB was given priority treatment by the government, it would have benefited, not suffered from the 1997 economic crisis – as it would have been ‘informed’ of and ‘prepared’ for the baht’s pending float). Many have often drawn unfair comparisons – as others have between the Thai and Burmese Junta. It is extremely sad that it has to take a very violent crack-down on protestors (many being Buddhist monks) for the difference to be clearly apparent. But it has drawn out telling remarks from GenSonthi which reflect the kind of embedded military culture Thai society (HM the King included) have been dealing with and tried to mitigate. It is indeed another round of ‘professionalizing’ and ‘democratizing’ the military (good work begun by PMChuan and GenSurayud as army c-in-c). The politicians’ role has been curtailed (no repeats of an all dominating Thaksin) and those of the bureucrats’ enhanced (is this the Japanese democratic model?).
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
More on the Chinese in northern Laos
I think you got the prices wrong for the seed. Normally LVN10 seed sells at around 16,000 – 20,000 kip/kg.
Global protest petition on Burma
Just as Ex-Ajarn dejectedly noted, just what can an average person do that would be more effective (against this abominable Myanmar junta)?
Guerrilla tactics would be good. We can heckle and throw eggs at these Myanmar junta folks and their relatives . . . or the Myanmar Embassy people when we encounter them at the streets of Bangkok or Sydney or Singapore. Tobe effective of course requires dedicated groups who keep track of the movements of these Myanmar junta ogres and just keep throwing rotten eggs at them at sight every time all the time.
FREEDOM FOR BURMA!
Paul Handley replies to comments
I agree with your point KhunTosakan – and I have (ironically it seemed) actually used it in the “interview with Paul Handley” posting to ‘clarify’ the issue of Siamese/Thai succession. Culturally, succession has been unstable characterized by power plays between various candidates – but once settled, is often followed by relative stability (as, more often than not, the most abled men/women – I am not using ‘man’ here as it has always been a team effort with women often also playing significant roles – has won). I am not sure about statistics, but I suspect (but could be wrong) that most historical Thai kings see out their reign in their deathbeds than by being violently overthrown. They just might not have the peace of mind of who will succeed them with certainty.
It may sound like an oxymoron – but it has been a ‘dynamic’ but ‘stable’ system (someone must have a better term) that guarantees continuity and was, importantly, adaptible to changes. There are conflicts aplenty, but they seem of the ‘creative’ type that does not degenerate into the destruction of whole societies (safe the 2nd fall of Ayutthya?). Arguably, the concept of Uparaj (2nd king) seem to be designed with stability in mind – as it co-opts another highly talented royal, while also serving as a backup system (a complete administrative system in fact) in the case the king/his court fails or passes away suddenly (whether through disease or warfare).
Even more recent ideological/personal conflicts between the alpha males of FMPibul and AjarnPridi seems to illustrate this – especially during WWII. FMPibul sides with the Axis, Ajarn Pridi with the Allies – but there are evidences that they were coordinated all along (for the aims of national survival). AjarnPridi may have eventually lost out to FMPibul then, but we know who will have the last laugh. Democratic government is not necessarily ‘stable and harmornious’, but played maturely (in the spirits of the rules of the game), it is stable – and Thai society is slowly, but surely, growing into it (under the auspices/actions/intents of many from King Prajadhipok, AjarnPridi – even FMPibul, through a succession of many individuals/groups/agencies to the present, HM the King being one of the key players in the past half century).
It is interesting to note that in 1932, Thailand had a military coup against the monarchy to install ‘democracy’ (proto/pseudo-democracy to be more accurate). In this historical context, the monarchy, the military and democracy manifests both eccentric synergies and conflicts. Trace that historical trajectory, there’s no doubt democracy will prevail – and, I stress again, both the monarchy and military (at least a critical mass) knows and accepts that inevitability (which they always had a hand in creating).
Future monarchs will succeed to the throne in a much more, open and democratic age. They will need to be extremely capable and charismatic to emulate HM the King’s achievements and popularity. I suspect they won’t need to be – as, it is hoped, the work has already been done… the people will take care of themselves. The struggle, then, will be like any other democracies – to mitigate money politics and economic inequalities.
Global protest petition on Burma
support the Burmeese monks! applaud their bravery to stand up to their oppressive government!
Unconfirmed report from Burma
Grasshopper: “Boycotting the Olympics would only increase polarity in the international arena.”
Exactly. Everything has a value.
If you want to find the value of a life under 30 baht healthcare.
Take someone in a coma and see if 30 baht pays for an oxygen tank.
Everything has a value and…
The value ***the international community places on change in Burma is low*** despite all the big words.
I raised the issue to point out the gap between words and action.
Read a good New York Times article that points out this difference.
Sidh: “What are the options for the Burma Junta? Becoming totally shut off like N.Korea?”
Good point. I have been against economic sanctions for 10 years because they hurt Burmese people, making it even more difficult for them to survive economically and was repeatedly called a “Nazi” for having this view by activist friends, but I honestly believe that if the Burmese economy had been restricted in this way over the last 20 years since 1988 Burma would be a much different place than it is today and change would have eventually happened, maybe even Aung San Suu-kyi would be prime minister by now. This is what happened to South Korea under Kim Dae-Chung.
Global protest petition on Burma
Sad thing is, I can’t think of anything the average person can do that would be more effective.
The Nam Tha dam
The Jeck are everywhere in northern Laos. They built Laos Vegas in Boten, Luang Namtha province. They took over the market in Oudomsay, Luang Prabang and Vientiane’s Nong Douang market. They are very stingy and don’t hire Laotian. Instead, they bring their own people to work for any project given to them from the Lao govn’t. Once they are in Laos, they refuse to return to China. Their dream is to live in the Souvannaphoum land, the Laotian Golden Land. They want to have Laotian dream with more freedom to raise more children, not one child like their homeland. In 10 more years, Laos will have a population of 10 million and half of them will be Jeck. Wake up uncle Choummaly and camarade Bouasone, your ethnic people in Saravane and Attapeu will be distincted.
Stallone: “This is a hellhole beyond your wildest dreams”
From AFTENPOSTEN.no, a Norwegian newspaper, more detail on the Burma officer who crossed into Thailand:
Burmese officer wants asylum in Norway
A high-ranking Burmese officer has deserted the country’s military junta, made his way into Thailand and wants to seek asylum in Norway.
Norwegian-German journalist Hans-Joachim Schilde told Aftenposten.no Tuesday morning that Major Htaly Win, age 42, and his 17-year-old son rowed over a river separating Burma and Thailand.
They were aided by members of the Karen folk who live in the area and long have been persecuted by the military junta.
Schilde said he accompanied the officer and his son as well. They were on their way to Bangkok Tuesday, escorted by a colonel from Thai security forces and an officer from the Karen guerrilla force.
Monastic protests in Burma
[…] written study of the uses and abuses of meditational practice, in the service of political goals. This piece from New Mandala was one of the first blog articles I read noting the aspect of Buddhist refusal to […]
Stallone: “This is a hellhole beyond your wildest dreams”
Here is a link to UK Times article/interview with 2nd Burma officer to cross into Thailand:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article2577680.ece
Stallone: “This is a hellhole beyond your wildest dreams”
UK Times printed long detailed article today titled: ” Thousands of protesters and monks missing in secret gulag of the generals”
Link: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article2577636.ece
Paul Handley replies to comments
Khun Sidh wrote:
I argued that the preference for stability, via negotiations/compromise, is culturally deep and Siamese/Thai history (particularly from the rulership – whether they be ‘warrior’ and/or ‘trader’ kings) provides ample evidence. The traditional guarantee of that stability is the military which the king and nobles were also part of. The other is economic stability which Siamese/Thai kings were also known to be very active. The 19th century colonial threat heightened/reinforced the monarchy’s (and nobility’s) role in both military and economic means towards stability/survival…
Response:
The Thai monarchy, for the most part, hasn’t been stable, going back to very ancient times.
Siam has had a long history of fratricide, regicide, and deadly competition by the elites at the highest level.
During the Ayutthaya period, Thai kings and/or elites used foreigners, the Portuguese, Dutch, French, etc as allies in putting down Thai competitors, as well as subjugating Thai muang on the periphery.
During the early Rattanakosin period, the various Chao Phya would be at each other’s throats trying to defend their own political and economic turf, more than willing to sacrifice political stability of the country.
Many, such as the Bunnag clan, would openly defy the king if that meant furthering their own interests.
During the reigns of Mongkut and Chulalongkorn, the 2nd kings were open and active competitors who had their own wealth and armies, and formed informal relationships with foreigners outside the purview of the court.
The institution of the second king was done away with during the fifth reign because the second king rebelled against King Chulalongkorn, and when his rebellion failed, he sought refuge at the British embassy.
There was an attempted coup during the 6th reign.
The absolute monarchy was overthrown during 7th reign
King Ananda was murdered, probably, during the 8th reign.
The only king that has been obsessed with stability has been this one, yet how many coups has there been during his reign? Too many to count
If there is a truism of Thai politics: It isn’t stable and harmonious.
Paul Handley replies to comments
Khun Sidh wrote:
>>I argued that the preference for stability, via negotiations/compromise, is culturally deep and Siamese/Thai history (particularly from the rulership – whether they be ‘warrior’ and/or ‘trader’ kings) provides ample evidence. The traditional guarantee of that stability is the military which the king and nobles were also part of. The other is economic stability which Siamese/Thai kings were also known to be very active. The 19th century colonial threat heightened/reinforced the monarchy’s (and nobility’s) role in both military and economic means towards stability/survival…
Paul Handley replies to comments
Somsak,
You are right of course. The issue is, what has prevented the Royal CPB-Privy Purse-Charity Funds-private funds money complex from being as rapacious as the Suharto or Marcos families? There is a range of explanations, including laziness, lack of desire, incompetence, failure, discipline, self-control, Finance Ministry influence, the king’s influence, and so on.
Likewise, there must be a reason why there is a need for financial assistance from tycoons like Thaksin and Fayed to rebuild old palaces. Could it be true lack of resources, cheapness, habit, working from example (of parents), something else? The government gives a budget for upkeep of the royal family and its buildings and offices — why wasn’t this enough?
Paul
Paul Handley replies to comments
Paul Handley: Thank you for your response. I will get the time to read the rest (1/3) of the book. My real reason that I haven’t finished it is that I don’t think it’s a good idea to bring it to read openly at the airport, or train station, in Thailand… Definitely not because it’s a large book with no pictures : )
Global protest petition on Burma
Ex-A, I too asked the same question at first but after I followed the link , I learn a few things. The petition site is a job well done for this kind of thing really. It’s not just to sign the petition, you see a few suggestions, eg. write to your elected official, email companies operating in Myanmar (addresses listed), give comments/suggestions etc. Joining the protests at different spots around the world on Oct 6 may not be your cup of tea, it’s not mine, but I think at this stage raising the awareness helps. I’m now going to write to my friend who forwarded the petition to me a few days ago, and I kind of dismissed it. In my mind, I did say, hey what do you know, displaced ones are everywhere in Chiangmai, my hometown. I hear their accent, I meet their eyes… Now, I look forward to catching up with that ‘tree hugging’ friend of mine this Saturday, on a different function though. We’ll talk Myanmar for sure. But that’s just me.
Paul Handley replies to comments
I am still laughing at Alan “I’m-more-Isaan-than-thou”
What an argument. He clearly has not read the book.
Unconfirmed report from Burma
Good points Grasshopper. It must be quite hard, as you mentioned before, mitigating the ‘neo-colonial’ line of thinking.
Although I think pressuring China and India is practical to dealing with the problem at hand (end the violence). They are the only external governments/neighbors that seem to have some influence on the Burmese junta (as the other neighbor, Thailand is naturally ignored for the historical baggage; for hosting anti-junta activists; and although the remmitance sent home by the million+ Burmese workers in Thailand must be quite economically significant, it probably does not benefit the junta).
What are the options for the Burma Junta? Becoming totally shut off like N.Korea? This is difficult as they are despised both internationally and by their people (probably more so now since the crack down on Buddhist monks). A ‘positive’ turn of events could be some ‘freethinking’ elements in the armed forces (if they are any – as I’ve just learnt they are internally trained and have minimal contact with the outside world), seeing the situation as a clear dead end, stage a coup against the ruling generals and establish dialogue, negotiate power-sharing arrangement with the democratic and ethnic oppositions. The danger could be a civil war (with no guaranteed result).
Or maybe, the US, to make some amends for Iraq, park a carrier fleet in the Andaman Sea to add military pressure (as economic sanctions clearly failed). The Chinese government will not be happy either but the Burmese Junta just might capitulate?
(I am probably dreaming – but trying to be ‘practical’ at the same time)
Stallone: “This is a hellhole beyond your wildest dreams”
[…] wrote an interesting post today on Stallone: âАЬThis is a hellhole beyond your wildest dreamsâАЭHere’s a quick […]
Paul Handley replies to comments
Thanks for the response, Paul. You wrote:
“I argue that the king has preferred the “discipline” and “order” (khwaam riaproy) of military rule to “undisciplined” “disorderly” elected parliaments.”
I think this is related to the issue of ‘stability’ that I raised through discussions with Taxidriver and Ngandeeleg in the last posting on your interview. I argued that the preference for stability, via negotiations/compromise, is culturally deep and Siamese/Thai history (particularly from the rulership – whether they be ‘warrior’ and/or ‘trader’ kings) provides ample evidence. The traditional guarantee of that stability is the military which the king and nobles were also part of. The other is economic stability which Siamese/Thai kings were also known to be very active. The 19th century colonial threat heightened/reinforced the monarchy’s (and nobility’s) role in both military and economic means towards stability/survival…
… To cut to the chase and put simply, Thai history in the past century when HM the King is most active in his career, was about the transition from ‘stability’ guaranteed by the military to one through democratic rule. That is why I mentioned that, in studying the King’s career, it may seem to be a close call between the two (military vs democracy) but if one views things as an inevitable transition (military towards democracy) – as I have no doubt HM the King does, then things become significantly different. Evidences can be viewed in a different, much more subtle and complex light (the latest, and this is only my speculation, being the promotion of the ‘cool head’ GenAnupong Paojinda over the ‘militant’ GenSaprang Kalayamitr for army c-in-c – and this if we make the assumption, that I don’t necessarily agree with, that many often make that PMSurayud-PMPrem-HM the King are inseparable).
Also, thank you for providing an evenhanded differentiation between the economic involvement of HM the King’s and Suharto’s families and putting it in very clear context (I’ve also made the point that if the CPB was given priority treatment by the government, it would have benefited, not suffered from the 1997 economic crisis – as it would have been ‘informed’ of and ‘prepared’ for the baht’s pending float). Many have often drawn unfair comparisons – as others have between the Thai and Burmese Junta. It is extremely sad that it has to take a very violent crack-down on protestors (many being Buddhist monks) for the difference to be clearly apparent. But it has drawn out telling remarks from GenSonthi which reflect the kind of embedded military culture Thai society (HM the King included) have been dealing with and tried to mitigate. It is indeed another round of ‘professionalizing’ and ‘democratizing’ the military (good work begun by PMChuan and GenSurayud as army c-in-c). The politicians’ role has been curtailed (no repeats of an all dominating Thaksin) and those of the bureucrats’ enhanced (is this the Japanese democratic model?).