Historicus: Of course the elite think they know best. Unfortunately, I’m not one of the elite, but I also think I know best – it’s human nature!
I agree there are a number of problems facing Thailand, and one is that too many people didn’t think at all and assumed that Thaksin knew best.
Actually, I’m starting to lose interest politics (again) – this is what I posted over at Bangkok Pundits site in a discussion about the economy and revisions of the Foreign Business Act: I would rather have transparency than a continuation of the Nudge, Nudge, Wink, Wink grey zones.
However I think it is up to a new elected government to make the changes, not this interim government.
IMO the junta have already done their main job by being the circuit breaker to get rid of Thaksin and save the country from a Marcos situation.
Dismantle the Thaksin system, allow proper investigations into all problem areas including corruption & the drug war etc, apologise for the heavy handed atrocities in the south, & pave the way for new elections – job done, now move on.
I say after all this time and what everyone should by now know about Thaksin, if the majority of voters still want someone like him, then let them have what they deserve.
Well know that the non-privatisation of Thai state firms is enshrined in law, a better question would be where on earth would EGAT get the money to build said power stations.
Before pointing one’s finger at Thailand one should remember that there are already countries with civil nuclear capacities in the region like Vietnam for example.
Even Myanmar seems to be bargaining a deal with Russia to develop a ‘civil’ program.
Besides nuclear energy in Thailand is not coming out of the blue.Under Taksin’s government it was already discussed.
Nevertheless Thailand should be cautious not to scare some of its stakeholders. Tourism may suffer from a backlash if the plants are not wisely located.
But one should not forget that taming nuclear energy requires a strong technological basis. So the whole Thai industry may profit from such a development in the long term.
Further to Jakraphop’s statement in The Nation last week that “this is a war against the aristocracy”:
There was an interesting development in the Sanam Luang protests last night, reported by Somsak on the Fa Dio Kan (http://www.sameskybooks.org/webboard/show.php?Category=sameskybooks&No=15689 ; the audio file can be downloaded from here) and Prachatai webboards (http://www.prachatai.com/webboard/topic.php?id=272243), and also referred to obliquely in the news I’ve looked at today, Thai Rath, Matichon. Jakraphop released a “secret tape” of conversations of senior kha ratchakans which appear to directly implicate the king in the annulment of the April 2006 elections won by Thai Rak Thai.
One way of reading this is that Thai Rak Thai and its allies now appear to be sending a blunt message to the Palace: either it agrees to negotiate or it can expect more public disclosures – of its frequent political interventions and especially its role in the coup, its manipulation of the judiciary, and presumably also its financial dealings in the Crown Property Bureau (for those interested the latest issue of Fa Dio Kan journal just out focusses in detail on the CPB – and there are already reports that the issue has already been banned from being displayed in certain bookshops). One would expect that there is much more incriminating evidence that Thai Rak Thai and the other opponents of the CNS have up their sleeves, and that they are ready to release if the Palace and the CNS remain incalcitrant. Even after the coup, the dissolution of Thai Rak Thai, the seizure of Thaksin’s assets, and the intimdation of his supporters, my sense is that this game has only just begun. As I mentioned in an earlier post, the objective is the permanent political neutralization of the monarchy, which is the only way that the military and bureaucracy can be defeated as political forces in Thailand.
These disclosures may (or may not) be able to be dealt with by the CNS in Thailand given the censorship regime the dictatorship has in place, but they may raise more questions outside Thailand. It’s one thing for the international community to tolerate a military regime, but if that regime is clearly seen as purely a puppet for the monarchy’s own political interests then this will make things much more difficult for the king.
locke, Thailand never learns from its mistakes. We repeat and aggravate our mistakes, and hope that good rhetoric will produce good outcomes. Witness the coup.
“I am amazed that Thaksin continued to receive support even after he had outserved his initial usefulness to the masses.” – ngana (#32)
I personally believe the so called adulation of the Thai poor for Thaksin Shinawatra was more hype than real. Certainly Thaksin’s spin machine, plus ready cash handouts and populist policies, succeeded to create a sort of cult following among the guillible Thai poor. The Thai poor would cling to a champion that Thaksin was quick to exploit. Were not all the Big Corrupts first and foremost the Defenders of the Poor? Bah!
But surely from such quick “attachment” were not love affairs destiny bound to disappoint? Money can only consumate quickies. True attachment, or love, grow in increments. Only Fools believe in Love at First Sight
The nuclear issue is way overblown. Environmentalists like Greenpeace will rise up to defeat the nuclear power plant in no time. Don’t worry, it’s still at least 15 years away. This government will be long gone before any real decision is made, despite whatever the ever-changing Power Development Plan says now.
The real issue that Thailand needs to take seriously is its heavy dependence on natural gas for energy. While people are so opposed to coal, they appear to have no problem relying on gas imports from the military regime in Burma and an Islamist regime in Iran for the country’s electricity in the future. Thailand must think of its own national security, which should trump environmental needs at this stage of its development. It need not bear the cross, particularly when no other country is.
Besides, the environmental concerns of coal are not what they used to be. Sure, Egat’s first attempt in Mae Mo with lignite was a disaster for locals. But Thailand can learn from its mistakes and import cleaner coals from Indonesia and use technology that will make the environmental impact less severe. Malaysia, which also was formerly heavily dependent on natural gas, shifted to coal a few years ago because it knew the risks involved of relying too heavily on one fuel source, particularly with the geopolitical risks involved.
I wonder whether the pro-coup people are also pro military-intervention-as-a-solution-to-Thai-poltical-problems-forever also, or whether this is a once-off justifiable exception, and if so how do they justify it?
nganadeeleg – the problem is that you think you know better than they do. That’s the elitism that is at the basis of many of the problems facing Thailand. The elite thinks they know best. Maybe they really don’t and just reflect their own interests. Maybe that’s what the plebs do as well.
Well India has proven recently that the US won’t sign a free trade pact and allow your mangoes into the US unless there is a nuclear threat looming in the background, so I suppose going nuclear will be all the rage in the next “Doha” round.
“It’s my money; my family money. They have no right to take it. We will sue them anyway. We have to sue, otherwise we cannot get our money back; because it’s my money. It’s our money…
“I’m planning to go back definitely, but not now,” he said.
“But, you know, everything… the laws of the game… have been set by the military junta. So you know immediately you don’t get the justice. When you don’t have the justice, you have to take some time before you go in until you ensure that you will have the justice.”
He said he was not worried about his safety but worries there will be a major crackdown against his supporters if he returns.
“I don’t want the Thai military to take very strong measures to the Thai innocent people who seek democracy; who are crying for democracy. That is not good for the country. That is the reason why I have to sacrifice by staying abroad for nine months already.”
Likhit has become ‘antic’ for years…due to his interview, one of his suggestion is that political leader should have accountability, which means when a leader cannot properly manage the turmoils / troubles, he / she should resign, as the japanese or korean politicians do. This, according to him, is a just choice.
The headline of the article actually reads “Single-member MPs dropped by the CDA.” In the body of the article, nothing more is said about this most important issue. It is also not said whether the constituency/party-list system will continue to be a segmented system, in which both parts do not have anything do do with each other, or whether they will use a proportional logic to determine the number of MPs a party can claim. This would be a major reform, and indeed it has been discussed within CDC and CDA. The article does not tell us about this issue, neither about the reasons that had led the CDA to switch from SMC to MMC. We also don’t learn how many members of the CDA voted for and against it. Very poor reporting in the tradition of The Nation. But Bangkok Post wasn’t any better. Hopefully, the Thai-language press will provide some more detail.
There are at least three separate arguments going on here.
1) Does Thailand need a Senate. If so why? What would its role be? The aim of the 1997 consitution seemed to be to balance and provide oversight of the more political pairliment.
2) Would the Senate be elected or appointed?
3) How much power would it have?
I have always suspected that the military wants a strong senate (ie. able to stop legislation, remove politicians, head graft committees, etc.). They then want to stack it with appointed (or hald appointed) cronies who will do their bidding. This would ensure that the elected government never really runs the country. It could aslo ensure that a constitution is never abolished.
They just have to:
1) Put a clause in the constitution that says it requires a majority of the Senate and Parliment to change the constitution
2) Have the new constitution say that half of Senators are appointed.
3) Celebrate
The benefits of an elected senate are debatable. The purpose of an appointed Senate is obvious.
Why, in the first place, is an organisation such as the International Whalng Commission allowed to have member countries who have absolutley no possible connection with whaling? Just as, one might ask, how do nations with totalitarian governments and/or brutal dictatorships get appointed to the UN Commision on Human Rights? This is beyond farce simply because these people have no ability to see farce for what it is – and they don’t want us to see it either.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
The sufficiency fig leaf
If the districts of Bangkok were practicing self sufficiency, why would they need 1mn baht to do it?
Will rural voters be “confused to death”?
Historicus: Of course the elite think they know best. Unfortunately, I’m not one of the elite, but I also think I know best – it’s human nature!
I agree there are a number of problems facing Thailand, and one is that too many people didn’t think at all and assumed that Thaksin knew best.
Actually, I’m starting to lose interest politics (again) – this is what I posted over at Bangkok Pundits site in a discussion about the economy and revisions of the Foreign Business Act:
I would rather have transparency than a continuation of the Nudge, Nudge, Wink, Wink grey zones.
However I think it is up to a new elected government to make the changes, not this interim government.
IMO the junta have already done their main job by being the circuit breaker to get rid of Thaksin and save the country from a Marcos situation.
Dismantle the Thaksin system, allow proper investigations into all problem areas including corruption & the drug war etc, apologise for the heavy handed atrocities in the south, & pave the way for new elections – job done, now move on.
I say after all this time and what everyone should by now know about Thaksin, if the majority of voters still want someone like him, then let them have what they deserve.
Nuclear sufficiency
Well know that the non-privatisation of Thai state firms is enshrined in law, a better question would be where on earth would EGAT get the money to build said power stations.
Nuclear sufficiency
Before pointing one’s finger at Thailand one should remember that there are already countries with civil nuclear capacities in the region like Vietnam for example.
Even Myanmar seems to be bargaining a deal with Russia to develop a ‘civil’ program.
Besides nuclear energy in Thailand is not coming out of the blue.Under Taksin’s government it was already discussed.
Nevertheless Thailand should be cautious not to scare some of its stakeholders. Tourism may suffer from a backlash if the plants are not wisely located.
But one should not forget that taming nuclear energy requires a strong technological basis. So the whole Thai industry may profit from such a development in the long term.
Democratic Alliance Against Dictatorship protests, Bangkok
Further to Jakraphop’s statement in The Nation last week that “this is a war against the aristocracy”:
There was an interesting development in the Sanam Luang protests last night, reported by Somsak on the Fa Dio Kan (http://www.sameskybooks.org/webboard/show.php?Category=sameskybooks&No=15689 ; the audio file can be downloaded from here) and Prachatai webboards (http://www.prachatai.com/webboard/topic.php?id=272243), and also referred to obliquely in the news I’ve looked at today, Thai Rath, Matichon. Jakraphop released a “secret tape” of conversations of senior kha ratchakans which appear to directly implicate the king in the annulment of the April 2006 elections won by Thai Rak Thai.
One way of reading this is that Thai Rak Thai and its allies now appear to be sending a blunt message to the Palace: either it agrees to negotiate or it can expect more public disclosures – of its frequent political interventions and especially its role in the coup, its manipulation of the judiciary, and presumably also its financial dealings in the Crown Property Bureau (for those interested the latest issue of Fa Dio Kan journal just out focusses in detail on the CPB – and there are already reports that the issue has already been banned from being displayed in certain bookshops). One would expect that there is much more incriminating evidence that Thai Rak Thai and the other opponents of the CNS have up their sleeves, and that they are ready to release if the Palace and the CNS remain incalcitrant. Even after the coup, the dissolution of Thai Rak Thai, the seizure of Thaksin’s assets, and the intimdation of his supporters, my sense is that this game has only just begun. As I mentioned in an earlier post, the objective is the permanent political neutralization of the monarchy, which is the only way that the military and bureaucracy can be defeated as political forces in Thailand.
These disclosures may (or may not) be able to be dealt with by the CNS in Thailand given the censorship regime the dictatorship has in place, but they may raise more questions outside Thailand. It’s one thing for the international community to tolerate a military regime, but if that regime is clearly seen as purely a puppet for the monarchy’s own political interests then this will make things much more difficult for the king.
Nuclear sufficiency
locke, Thailand never learns from its mistakes. We repeat and aggravate our mistakes, and hope that good rhetoric will produce good outcomes. Witness the coup.
Does Thailand need a senate?
To my idea, before we answer “Does Thailand need a senate?”, you may have to ask “Will Thailand have real Democracy?”.
Indeed, we may have to think whether since 24 June 1902 we really have democracy. As a Thai citizen, I could not demistify such things.
Football and the freeze
Here is an image of Thaksin holding up a Manchester United shirt with Alex Ferguson. It’s not going down too well in the blue third of Manchester…
http://www.teamtalk.com//Images/120057.jpg
Will rural voters be “confused to death”?
“I am amazed that Thaksin continued to receive support even after he had outserved his initial usefulness to the masses.” – ngana (#32)
I personally believe the so called adulation of the Thai poor for Thaksin Shinawatra was more hype than real. Certainly Thaksin’s spin machine, plus ready cash handouts and populist policies, succeeded to create a sort of cult following among the guillible Thai poor. The Thai poor would cling to a champion that Thaksin was quick to exploit. Were not all the Big Corrupts first and foremost the Defenders of the Poor? Bah!
But surely from such quick “attachment” were not love affairs destiny bound to disappoint? Money can only consumate quickies. True attachment, or love, grow in increments. Only Fools believe in Love at First Sight
Nuclear sufficiency
The nuclear issue is way overblown. Environmentalists like Greenpeace will rise up to defeat the nuclear power plant in no time. Don’t worry, it’s still at least 15 years away. This government will be long gone before any real decision is made, despite whatever the ever-changing Power Development Plan says now.
The real issue that Thailand needs to take seriously is its heavy dependence on natural gas for energy. While people are so opposed to coal, they appear to have no problem relying on gas imports from the military regime in Burma and an Islamist regime in Iran for the country’s electricity in the future. Thailand must think of its own national security, which should trump environmental needs at this stage of its development. It need not bear the cross, particularly when no other country is.
Besides, the environmental concerns of coal are not what they used to be. Sure, Egat’s first attempt in Mae Mo with lignite was a disaster for locals. But Thailand can learn from its mistakes and import cleaner coals from Indonesia and use technology that will make the environmental impact less severe. Malaysia, which also was formerly heavily dependent on natural gas, shifted to coal a few years ago because it knew the risks involved of relying too heavily on one fuel source, particularly with the geopolitical risks involved.
Mapping the post-coup academic landscape
I wonder whether the pro-coup people are also pro military-intervention-as-a-solution-to-Thai-poltical-problems-forever also, or whether this is a once-off justifiable exception, and if so how do they justify it?
Will rural voters be “confused to death”?
nganadeeleg – the problem is that you think you know better than they do. That’s the elitism that is at the basis of many of the problems facing Thailand. The elite thinks they know best. Maybe they really don’t and just reflect their own interests. Maybe that’s what the plebs do as well.
Nuclear sufficiency
Well India has proven recently that the US won’t sign a free trade pact and allow your mangoes into the US unless there is a nuclear threat looming in the background, so I suppose going nuclear will be all the rage in the next “Doha” round.
Thaksin come home!
Thaksin, my heart is bleeding for you!
“It’s my money; my family money. They have no right to take it. We will sue them anyway. We have to sue, otherwise we cannot get our money back; because it’s my money. It’s our money…
“I’m planning to go back definitely, but not now,” he said.
“But, you know, everything… the laws of the game… have been set by the military junta. So you know immediately you don’t get the justice. When you don’t have the justice, you have to take some time before you go in until you ensure that you will have the justice.”
He said he was not worried about his safety but worries there will be a major crackdown against his supporters if he returns.
“I don’t want the Thai military to take very strong measures to the Thai innocent people who seek democracy; who are crying for democracy. That is not good for the country. That is the reason why I have to sacrifice by staying abroad for nine months already.”
Bangkok Post 22 June 2007 (org. Financial Times)
Mapping the post-coup academic landscape
Likhit has become ‘antic’ for years…due to his interview, one of his suggestion is that political leader should have accountability, which means when a leader cannot properly manage the turmoils / troubles, he / she should resign, as the japanese or korean politicians do. This, according to him, is a just choice.
Reasonableness, moderation and inanity
Here is a another nicely ideological piece celebrating sufficiency economy as “a gift to the world.”
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2007/06/22/opinion/opinion_30037506.php
Does Thailand need a senate?
The headline of the article actually reads “Single-member MPs dropped by the CDA.” In the body of the article, nothing more is said about this most important issue. It is also not said whether the constituency/party-list system will continue to be a segmented system, in which both parts do not have anything do do with each other, or whether they will use a proportional logic to determine the number of MPs a party can claim. This would be a major reform, and indeed it has been discussed within CDC and CDA. The article does not tell us about this issue, neither about the reasons that had led the CDA to switch from SMC to MMC. We also don’t learn how many members of the CDA voted for and against it. Very poor reporting in the tradition of The Nation. But Bangkok Post wasn’t any better. Hopefully, the Thai-language press will provide some more detail.
“Thailand – a national security state”
A junta government attempt to reinforce military power and set up shadow council.
Yes, very surprising…(yawn)…
Does Thailand need a senate?
There are at least three separate arguments going on here.
1) Does Thailand need a Senate. If so why? What would its role be? The aim of the 1997 consitution seemed to be to balance and provide oversight of the more political pairliment.
2) Would the Senate be elected or appointed?
3) How much power would it have?
I have always suspected that the military wants a strong senate (ie. able to stop legislation, remove politicians, head graft committees, etc.). They then want to stack it with appointed (or hald appointed) cronies who will do their bidding. This would ensure that the elected government never really runs the country. It could aslo ensure that a constitution is never abolished.
They just have to:
1) Put a clause in the constitution that says it requires a majority of the Senate and Parliment to change the constitution
2) Have the new constitution say that half of Senators are appointed.
3) Celebrate
The benefits of an elected senate are debatable. The purpose of an appointed Senate is obvious.
Lobbying Laos for a whale of a meal
Why, in the first place, is an organisation such as the International Whalng Commission allowed to have member countries who have absolutley no possible connection with whaling? Just as, one might ask, how do nations with totalitarian governments and/or brutal dictatorships get appointed to the UN Commision on Human Rights? This is beyond farce simply because these people have no ability to see farce for what it is – and they don’t want us to see it either.