Taxi Driver: Interesting analysis. I agree there are many forces at work and not all of the political crisis was caused by Thaksin.
As you said, there is a difference between anti-coup and pro-Thaksin.
If more of the anti-coup commentators acknowledged Thaksin’s failures, perhaps Vichai and I would not have to continually point them out. In the end Thaksin was so divisive that he could no longer effectively govern, and the potential for violence was very real given Thaksin’s stubborn stand.
The only other way I could see the situation being resolved was for Thaksin to step down for the good of the country.
There were many ‘whispers in his ear’ including the April meeting with the king, but Thaksin kept playing games and sending mixed signals.
Even if he did not step down, Thaksin could have diffused the situation by merely backing down and acknowledging some of his failures:
-His heavy handed dealings on the southern situation had worsened things
-Tthe drug war killings needed to be properly investigated.
-The Temasek deal could not be undone, but why not at least pay tax on the profits.
If Thaksin had slightly changed his ways, the other forces at play would have been stifled, but that does not seem to be Thaksins nature ,and in the end it came down to ‘Thaksin or the King’
Obviously the country has taken a step backwards because of the coup, and there are still dangers.
Those dangers would be less if Thaksin and his allies stopped playing games, and everyone could concentrate on getting the political institutions in order so that coups can be disposed to history forever.
If anything, the junta has been a little soft, trying to do things ‘by the book’, but that softness may have increased the dangers by emboldening Thaksin and his allies.
The fact that the junta has tread so lightly, even though they already threw out the rulebook, lends credence to the fact that they genuinely want reform (or at least stability) and the coup was not merely a power grab.
Ngarnadeeleg & Vichai N. I’m glad that you both say all three conditions needed to exist to justify the coup. You both seem to dispise Thaksin so much that it was hard to tell whether you were just anti-Thaksin or pro-coup (there is a difference!).
Anyway I wish to encourage discussion on the three points I made earlier. That is: the coup was justified because:
(1) the elected government was corrupt, incompetent & usurping its powers;
(2) constitutional means to remove the government from power failed to work;
(3) the country was heading towards a violent crisis.
Point (1) is hardly unique to the Thaksin regime. The more interesting points which really need serious discussion & analysis are (2) and (3). Why did these conditions exist leading up to Sept 19th? Who caused them? Was it only Thaksin? Or were there other forces that worked to ensure that (2) and (3) existed which forced the King to intervene?
I must point out that I believe the King was forced to intervene (rather than being a co-conspirator). I base this opinion on the fact that the King had earlier encouraged the crisis (after the April elections) to be resolved through the constitutional process (partic through the judiaciary), and Sonthi B. had repeatedly said up until the last weeks leading up to Sept 19 that the “coups were a thing of the past”. Only after it was clear that (2) and (3) had come to pass that the King intervened and ordered Sonthi to take over. Sonthi acted on the instruction of the King.
I personally think the coup was a tremendous setback for the country, and we now have a less secure future than we had before the crisis. Unfortunately the coup was a “necessary evil” that the Palace had to employ to break the deadlock and avert the violence. But I don’t think its as simple as to say “Thaksin caused all this”. I think we all have to be very careful of the forces that conspired to drive the crisis to breaking point. Thailand may have gotten rid of a corrupt government, but are we sure we know & are happy with what we now have? What precedence does this set for future military and palace leaders? Don’t let your hatred of Thaksin blind you to the dangers that the Sept 19 coup brings to the future of Thailand.
Yes there was Veera sentenced to six years (did he serve his full sentence?) in 1987. Then I checked and there were two other Pattani insurgent muslims jailed in early 1990s. Social critic Sulak I believe also had been threatened (but has he ever been jailed?)many times with lese majeste.
But I agree with you people, lese majeste is an anomaly. Only Thailand and Brunei I estimate are the two remaining countries in SEA keeping this outdated law.
I want it scrapped. Patiwat wants it scrapped. Many million other educated Thais would want to scrap this law that serves only the military. Even the King himself make fun of himself as being above criticism. Now that our revered King Bhumibhol has reached 79 and with maybe only a few years left to rule, there is a sense of urgency that lese majeste no longer serve Thailand’s political development or our democratic aspirations.
[…] A few weeks ago I posted comment by Charles Keyes on Sondhi Limthongkul’s presentation in Seattle. Keyes’ comment was first circulated on the Thailand-Laos-Cambodia (TLC) email list. In response to comment on that list Mike Montesano made the following contribution: Whatever one’s views of Thaksin or the putsch that has, at least for the present, ended his premiership, it is high time to put an end to these very curious “Thaksin was the only politician in my memory who did anything for the poor.” lines. In the mid-1970s, Prime Minister Khuekrit Pramot and his finance minister Bunchu Rotchanasathian introduced a raft of policies aimed at Thailand’s rural poor. In comparative perspective, the thoughtful design and frankly progressive rationale (little surprise, in view of Bunchu’s very long association with the Thai left) of these policies set a standard not equaled till today. In the event, Khuekrit and Bunchu had only a brief period in office to implement their policies. Nevertheless, many have endured, both as specific measures (consider, for example, the Thai rural credit system) and as examples to leaders like Thaksin and his advisors. As luck would have it, too, last year saw the publication of Nawi Rangsiwararak’s excellent Bon thanon sai kanmueang khong Bunchu Rotchanasathian. From this book one can learn much about that way that a sophisticated, committed man engaged with the problem of social inequality in Thailand in an era neglected by all too many commentators on recent events. […]
Patiwat you’re more likely bald by now from too much head scratching. Taxi Driver gave three reasons and the second and third by themselves would justify a coup. Patiwat you pile on the tax evasion, extrajudicial killings during the anti-drugs, prisoner executions during the Southern campaign not to mention Thaksin’s management ineptitude thereat plus his conflict of interest. Yet the man won’t resign, he brought his caravan of thugs to Bangkok to provoke more chaos and division.
Patiwat maybe I should be scratching my head instead. I asked you before and I ask you again, what is it about this dangerous man Thaksin that inspires you so? I also asked Republican before, what motivates his malicious posters against the monarchy?
Patiwat – Read Taxi Driver one more time. Taxi Driver listed three very serious circumstances all existing. Conditions (2) and (3) alone by themselves could provoke/justify a coup. You also added tax evasion and extrajudicial killings. You also forgot Thaksin’s ineptitude at the South and his execution of Muslim prisoners.
Patiwat – still not enough? Man your loyalty to Thaksin is like religion. You still have not replied, what is behind your love affair with Thaksin?
The politician Veera Musikapong went to jail for several years for making comments about the crown prince. He not only went to jail, he was banned from politics for several years after being released.
I forgot when, but it was some time in the late 1980’s, when Prem was still Premier.
You said “Corruption allegations would not justify a coup.”
Then what is your justification for the coup? The South? The War on Drugs? Allegations of tax evasion?
None of those seem to carry that much weight. The Southern problem has gotten worse under the junta. The War on Drugs happened way back in 2003, and nobody was calling for a coup back then. It seems quite absurd to imagine that the coup was executed to force him to pay taxes which Revenue Dept bureaucrats had (and continue to) excuse him of paying.
Khun Patiwat wrote “Thaksin was insititutionalizing corruption and that totally denigrates/degrades the whole Kingdom of Thailand.”
Although I am but a mere interested bystander, I have had the opportunity to observe Thailand now for over 25 years and rest assured that Thaksin’s arrival to the Bangkok political scene came well after corruption was institutionalized in the Kingdom. What Thaksin did, or was attempting to do, that was a wee bit different than his predecessors, was attempting to institutionalize himself and his family by taking an ever increasing piece of the pie to himself and his family, a relative upstart family. It is little wonder that the families that represent the ever corrupt old guard, including upper military men, Bangkok based Sino-Thais, and old Sakdina families,including the Palace, moved against him
After reading some other links today on New Mandala, I am tempted to speculate whether Thaksin, if he had not been ousted, might have eventually moved the Thai Capitol, a la Than Shwe, up to Chiang Mai.
[…] The North Eastern States of Myanmar lie adjacent to Myanmar and there is a growing interest there in Myanmar. The New Mandala blog links to a report on a Myanmar related conference held recently in India. Preetam Rai […]
Yes I believe the coup was necessary . . . I haven’t made up my mind yet whether this coup will be evil or will disappoint.
I agree w/ nganadeeleg that all three applied which provoked the coup.
But TaxiDriver wants to know whether point (1) alone is enough to justify a coup. My answer is NO. Corruption allegations would not justify a coup.
But Thaksin was a fool. He should have faced those many allegations of corruption/conflict of interest head on and should have agreed to an independent judicial public inquiry when clearly his legitimacy to rule, because of those allegations, had been seriously eroded. I would have kissed Thaksin if he had resigned, sportmanlike and followed constitutional ethiquette, then face his accusers accordingly. THAT would have set a beautiful constitutional precedent . . strengthened Thai democracy and earned Thaksin my respect.
But Thaksin just showed his true colors as just another power hungry power mad elected leader who forgot keeping a mandate does NOT depend on results of a previous or more recent election alone. Because the Thais have to look up to their elected leader, and that requires qualities of integrity, transparency and that rare quality of readiness to make a personal sacrifice (by resigning) if that will prevent the country from further division and growing chaos.
Drunk Swiss faces Thai wrath for King grafitti Fri Dec 8,
BANGKOK (Reuters) – A drunk Swiss has been arrested for defacing portraits of Thailand’s King Bhumibol Adulyadej on the revered monarch’s birthday and faces up to 15 years in jail, a newspaper and police said on Friday.
Police in Chiang Mai identified the man as Oliver Rudolf Jufer, a long-term resident of the northern province, but declined to give details, citing the sensitivity that surrounds any alleged disrespect to the king, whom many Thais regard as semi-divine.
“I can’t tell you anything because it is a lese majeste case,” Chiang Mai city police chief Colonel Yutachai Puaprasert told Reuters.
The southeast Asian nation’s lese majeste laws carry a penalty of between three and 15 years in jail for anybody found guilty of slandering or defaming a member of the royal family.
patiwat: Despite your nickname, I took you to be pro Thaksin as well as anti coup – maybe I was reading too much into your numerous comments critical of the junta.
Taxi Driver: Another insightful comment.
I cannot speak for all the people in yellow, or Vichai, but my opinion is that all three applied, and hopefully the ends will justify the means.
Patiwat – It is not only in the 90’s . . . Thaksin Shinawatra screws up big time all the time. Thaksin brought the coup . . I detest the coup . . I warned (and hundreds of thousands of others as well) Thaksin many times that his abuses and refusal to step down was creating national security problems that would provoke a coup . . but the man was deaf to all counsels. Thaksin created (yes he did!) the current boil at the South that led to the bombings and savagery we see today. Thaksin was insititutionalizing corruption and that totally denigrates/degrades the whole Kingdom of Thailand. Thaksin broke the laws . . extrajudicially executed thousands during his Y2003 anti-drugs. Thaksin’s conflict of interest at that Temasek-Shin deal only the Shinawatras, and perhaps Patiwat, could not see it. Thaksin . . . .
Patiwat – what is it about Thaksin that inspires you so? It cannot be d-e-m-o-c-r-a-c-y . . hell Thaksin cannot even spell the word properly.
Well let’s get one thing straight, Singapore is not a “democracy”, unusual or otherwise. Yes, the Lees are above criticism – just like the royal family in Thailand. Yes, one can be locked up under the ISA law, just as in Thailand one can be locked up under lese majeste. Singapore is a police-state, large parts of Thailand remain under martial law. So where is the difference?
You say Thailand “does not have to copy any other country’s political system”. Where on earth do you think Thailand’s monarchical system came from? Yes, this is a foreign (Indian / Khmer/ Buddhist) institution whose value to the country in this era Thais should consider very carefully.
You talk about all the yellow shirts. We talk about the 14 million white ballot papers that elected a government in April. If you are so sure of the support for the monarchy then why is the monarchy so afraid of elections and elected politicians? Why does it need the military and the lese majeste law to protect it? What is it afraid of?
Hmong mistreatment latest from The Nation of 9 December 2006:
Bangkok agrees to give details of Hmong to Laos
Published on December 9, 2006
Thailand yesterday agreed to provide Laos with detailed information on the 8,000 Hmong migrants who are now being sheltered in Phetchabun and the 150 currently being held in Bangkok, a step prior to deportation.
Vientiane agreed to take the Hmong back if information provided by Thailand clearly indicated they were Lao citizens, said Lao Deputy Chief of Staff Brig-General Buaxiang Champaphanh.
Buaxiang was in Thailand for a meeting of the Joint Boundary Sub-committee, of which the Hmong issue was a major topic.
There might be Hmong from Laos who were lured by human traffickers believing they had a chance to settle in third countries, the Lao officer told reporters.
They are not refugees seeking political asylum as claimed, he added.
Thailand shelters some 8,000 Hmong who claim they were associated with the CIA’s secret war in the 1960s-70s.
Around 150 Hmong who escaped from the shelter in Phetchabun’s Ban Huay Nam Khao are being held in the Immigration Bureau’s detention centre in Bangkok.
Thailand has already handed details of the identity of the 150 Hmong to Laos and is ready to deport them as soon as Vientiane confirms they are Lao nationals, according to Lt-General Niphon Thonglek, chief of the Border Affairs Department, who co-chaired the meeting with Buaxiang yesterday.
Meanwhile, officials from the United Nations refugee agency were involved in urgent talks in Bangkok yesterday to try to prevent the deportation of 152 Hmong back to Laos.
A spokeswoman for the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees said they believed the Hmong would be at “serious risk of persecution or loss of life” if returned to Laos.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
“Politics is boring”
Taxi Driver: Interesting analysis. I agree there are many forces at work and not all of the political crisis was caused by Thaksin.
As you said, there is a difference between anti-coup and pro-Thaksin.
If more of the anti-coup commentators acknowledged Thaksin’s failures, perhaps Vichai and I would not have to continually point them out. In the end Thaksin was so divisive that he could no longer effectively govern, and the potential for violence was very real given Thaksin’s stubborn stand.
The only other way I could see the situation being resolved was for Thaksin to step down for the good of the country.
There were many ‘whispers in his ear’ including the April meeting with the king, but Thaksin kept playing games and sending mixed signals.
Even if he did not step down, Thaksin could have diffused the situation by merely backing down and acknowledging some of his failures:
-His heavy handed dealings on the southern situation had worsened things
-Tthe drug war killings needed to be properly investigated.
-The Temasek deal could not be undone, but why not at least pay tax on the profits.
If Thaksin had slightly changed his ways, the other forces at play would have been stifled, but that does not seem to be Thaksins nature ,and in the end it came down to ‘Thaksin or the King’
Obviously the country has taken a step backwards because of the coup, and there are still dangers.
Those dangers would be less if Thaksin and his allies stopped playing games, and everyone could concentrate on getting the political institutions in order so that coups can be disposed to history forever.
If anything, the junta has been a little soft, trying to do things ‘by the book’, but that softness may have increased the dangers by emboldening Thaksin and his allies.
The fact that the junta has tread so lightly, even though they already threw out the rulebook, lends credence to the fact that they genuinely want reform (or at least stability) and the coup was not merely a power grab.
Displaced
[…] Here. Posted by Erik Filed in cambodian news, State, Economics, land […]
“Politics is boring”
Ngarnadeeleg & Vichai N. I’m glad that you both say all three conditions needed to exist to justify the coup. You both seem to dispise Thaksin so much that it was hard to tell whether you were just anti-Thaksin or pro-coup (there is a difference!).
Anyway I wish to encourage discussion on the three points I made earlier. That is: the coup was justified because:
(1) the elected government was corrupt, incompetent & usurping its powers;
(2) constitutional means to remove the government from power failed to work;
(3) the country was heading towards a violent crisis.
Point (1) is hardly unique to the Thaksin regime. The more interesting points which really need serious discussion & analysis are (2) and (3). Why did these conditions exist leading up to Sept 19th? Who caused them? Was it only Thaksin? Or were there other forces that worked to ensure that (2) and (3) existed which forced the King to intervene?
I must point out that I believe the King was forced to intervene (rather than being a co-conspirator). I base this opinion on the fact that the King had earlier encouraged the crisis (after the April elections) to be resolved through the constitutional process (partic through the judiaciary), and Sonthi B. had repeatedly said up until the last weeks leading up to Sept 19 that the “coups were a thing of the past”. Only after it was clear that (2) and (3) had come to pass that the King intervened and ordered Sonthi to take over. Sonthi acted on the instruction of the King.
I personally think the coup was a tremendous setback for the country, and we now have a less secure future than we had before the crisis. Unfortunately the coup was a “necessary evil” that the Palace had to employ to break the deadlock and avert the violence. But I don’t think its as simple as to say “Thaksin caused all this”. I think we all have to be very careful of the forces that conspired to drive the crisis to breaking point. Thailand may have gotten rid of a corrupt government, but are we sure we know & are happy with what we now have? What precedence does this set for future military and palace leaders? Don’t let your hatred of Thaksin blind you to the dangers that the Sept 19 coup brings to the future of Thailand.
New species of military democracy discovered in the Pacific!
Yes there was Veera sentenced to six years (did he serve his full sentence?) in 1987. Then I checked and there were two other Pattani insurgent muslims jailed in early 1990s. Social critic Sulak I believe also had been threatened (but has he ever been jailed?)many times with lese majeste.
But I agree with you people, lese majeste is an anomaly. Only Thailand and Brunei I estimate are the two remaining countries in SEA keeping this outdated law.
I want it scrapped. Patiwat wants it scrapped. Many million other educated Thais would want to scrap this law that serves only the military. Even the King himself make fun of himself as being above criticism. Now that our revered King Bhumibhol has reached 79 and with maybe only a few years left to rule, there is a sense of urgency that lese majeste no longer serve Thailand’s political development or our democratic aspirations.
Charles Keyes on Sondhi Limthongkul
[…] A few weeks ago I posted comment by Charles Keyes on Sondhi Limthongkul’s presentation in Seattle. Keyes’ comment was first circulated on the Thailand-Laos-Cambodia (TLC) email list. In response to comment on that list Mike Montesano made the following contribution: Whatever one’s views of Thaksin or the putsch that has, at least for the present, ended his premiership, it is high time to put an end to these very curious “Thaksin was the only politician in my memory who did anything for the poor.” lines. In the mid-1970s, Prime Minister Khuekrit Pramot and his finance minister Bunchu Rotchanasathian introduced a raft of policies aimed at Thailand’s rural poor. In comparative perspective, the thoughtful design and frankly progressive rationale (little surprise, in view of Bunchu’s very long association with the Thai left) of these policies set a standard not equaled till today. In the event, Khuekrit and Bunchu had only a brief period in office to implement their policies. Nevertheless, many have endured, both as specific measures (consider, for example, the Thai rural credit system) and as examples to leaders like Thaksin and his advisors. As luck would have it, too, last year saw the publication of Nawi Rangsiwararak’s excellent Bon thanon sai kanmueang khong Bunchu Rotchanasathian. From this book one can learn much about that way that a sophisticated, committed man engaged with the problem of social inequality in Thailand in an era neglected by all too many commentators on recent events. […]
“Politics is boring”
Patiwat you’re more likely bald by now from too much head scratching. Taxi Driver gave three reasons and the second and third by themselves would justify a coup. Patiwat you pile on the tax evasion, extrajudicial killings during the anti-drugs, prisoner executions during the Southern campaign not to mention Thaksin’s management ineptitude thereat plus his conflict of interest. Yet the man won’t resign, he brought his caravan of thugs to Bangkok to provoke more chaos and division.
Patiwat maybe I should be scratching my head instead. I asked you before and I ask you again, what is it about this dangerous man Thaksin that inspires you so? I also asked Republican before, what motivates his malicious posters against the monarchy?
“Politics is boring”
Patiwat – Read Taxi Driver one more time. Taxi Driver listed three very serious circumstances all existing. Conditions (2) and (3) alone by themselves could provoke/justify a coup. You also added tax evasion and extrajudicial killings. You also forgot Thaksin’s ineptitude at the South and his execution of Muslim prisoners.
Patiwat – still not enough? Man your loyalty to Thaksin is like religion. You still have not replied, what is behind your love affair with Thaksin?
New species of military democracy discovered in the Pacific!
The politician Veera Musikapong went to jail for several years for making comments about the crown prince. He not only went to jail, he was banned from politics for several years after being released.
I forgot when, but it was some time in the late 1980’s, when Prem was still Premier.
“Politics is boring”
I’m scratching my head here, Vichai.
You said “Corruption allegations would not justify a coup.”
Then what is your justification for the coup? The South? The War on Drugs? Allegations of tax evasion?
None of those seem to carry that much weight. The Southern problem has gotten worse under the junta. The War on Drugs happened way back in 2003, and nobody was calling for a coup back then. It seems quite absurd to imagine that the coup was executed to force him to pay taxes which Revenue Dept bureaucrats had (and continue to) excuse him of paying.
“Politics is boring”
Khun Patiwat wrote “Thaksin was insititutionalizing corruption and that totally denigrates/degrades the whole Kingdom of Thailand.”
Although I am but a mere interested bystander, I have had the opportunity to observe Thailand now for over 25 years and rest assured that Thaksin’s arrival to the Bangkok political scene came well after corruption was institutionalized in the Kingdom. What Thaksin did, or was attempting to do, that was a wee bit different than his predecessors, was attempting to institutionalize himself and his family by taking an ever increasing piece of the pie to himself and his family, a relative upstart family. It is little wonder that the families that represent the ever corrupt old guard, including upper military men, Bangkok based Sino-Thais, and old Sakdina families,including the Palace, moved against him
After reading some other links today on New Mandala, I am tempted to speculate whether Thaksin, if he had not been ousted, might have eventually moved the Thai Capitol, a la Than Shwe, up to Chiang Mai.
Welcome to Vieng Say
The art is good, but the statues do not look like Laotian soldiers, they look like Vietnameses.
NE Indian perspectives on Burma
[…] The North Eastern States of Myanmar lie adjacent to Myanmar and there is a growing interest there in Myanmar. The New Mandala blog links to a report on a Myanmar related conference held recently in India. Preetam Rai […]
New species of military democracy discovered in the Pacific!
Let me rephrase my question: Has any Thai citizen been sentenced to jail for lese majeste? If yes when or how long ago?
“Politics is boring”
Yes I believe the coup was necessary . . . I haven’t made up my mind yet whether this coup will be evil or will disappoint.
I agree w/ nganadeeleg that all three applied which provoked the coup.
But TaxiDriver wants to know whether point (1) alone is enough to justify a coup. My answer is NO. Corruption allegations would not justify a coup.
But Thaksin was a fool. He should have faced those many allegations of corruption/conflict of interest head on and should have agreed to an independent judicial public inquiry when clearly his legitimacy to rule, because of those allegations, had been seriously eroded. I would have kissed Thaksin if he had resigned, sportmanlike and followed constitutional ethiquette, then face his accusers accordingly. THAT would have set a beautiful constitutional precedent . . strengthened Thai democracy and earned Thaksin my respect.
But Thaksin just showed his true colors as just another power hungry power mad elected leader who forgot keeping a mandate does NOT depend on results of a previous or more recent election alone. Because the Thais have to look up to their elected leader, and that requires qualities of integrity, transparency and that rare quality of readiness to make a personal sacrifice (by resigning) if that will prevent the country from further division and growing chaos.
New species of military democracy discovered in the Pacific!
Drunk Swiss faces Thai wrath for King grafitti Fri Dec 8,
BANGKOK (Reuters) – A drunk Swiss has been arrested for defacing portraits of Thailand’s King Bhumibol Adulyadej on the revered monarch’s birthday and faces up to 15 years in jail, a newspaper and police said on Friday.
Police in Chiang Mai identified the man as Oliver Rudolf Jufer, a long-term resident of the northern province, but declined to give details, citing the sensitivity that surrounds any alleged disrespect to the king, whom many Thais regard as semi-divine.
“I can’t tell you anything because it is a lese majeste case,” Chiang Mai city police chief Colonel Yutachai Puaprasert told Reuters.
The southeast Asian nation’s lese majeste laws carry a penalty of between three and 15 years in jail for anybody found guilty of slandering or defaming a member of the royal family.
“Politics is boring”
patiwat: Despite your nickname, I took you to be pro Thaksin as well as anti coup – maybe I was reading too much into your numerous comments critical of the junta.
Taxi Driver: Another insightful comment.
I cannot speak for all the people in yellow, or Vichai, but my opinion is that all three applied, and hopefully the ends will justify the means.
New species of military democracy discovered in the Pacific!
Has anyone ever been locked up for lese majeste? That I like to know.
“Politics is boring”
Patiwat – It is not only in the 90’s . . . Thaksin Shinawatra screws up big time all the time. Thaksin brought the coup . . I detest the coup . . I warned (and hundreds of thousands of others as well) Thaksin many times that his abuses and refusal to step down was creating national security problems that would provoke a coup . . but the man was deaf to all counsels. Thaksin created (yes he did!) the current boil at the South that led to the bombings and savagery we see today. Thaksin was insititutionalizing corruption and that totally denigrates/degrades the whole Kingdom of Thailand. Thaksin broke the laws . . extrajudicially executed thousands during his Y2003 anti-drugs. Thaksin’s conflict of interest at that Temasek-Shin deal only the Shinawatras, and perhaps Patiwat, could not see it. Thaksin . . . .
Patiwat – what is it about Thaksin that inspires you so? It cannot be d-e-m-o-c-r-a-c-y . . hell Thaksin cannot even spell the word properly.
New species of military democracy discovered in the Pacific!
Well let’s get one thing straight, Singapore is not a “democracy”, unusual or otherwise. Yes, the Lees are above criticism – just like the royal family in Thailand. Yes, one can be locked up under the ISA law, just as in Thailand one can be locked up under lese majeste. Singapore is a police-state, large parts of Thailand remain under martial law. So where is the difference?
You say Thailand “does not have to copy any other country’s political system”. Where on earth do you think Thailand’s monarchical system came from? Yes, this is a foreign (Indian / Khmer/ Buddhist) institution whose value to the country in this era Thais should consider very carefully.
You talk about all the yellow shirts. We talk about the 14 million white ballot papers that elected a government in April. If you are so sure of the support for the monarchy then why is the monarchy so afraid of elections and elected politicians? Why does it need the military and the lese majeste law to protect it? What is it afraid of?
Mistreatment of Hmong refugees
Hmong mistreatment latest from The Nation of 9 December 2006:
Bangkok agrees to give details of Hmong to Laos
Published on December 9, 2006
Thailand yesterday agreed to provide Laos with detailed information on the 8,000 Hmong migrants who are now being sheltered in Phetchabun and the 150 currently being held in Bangkok, a step prior to deportation.
Vientiane agreed to take the Hmong back if information provided by Thailand clearly indicated they were Lao citizens, said Lao Deputy Chief of Staff Brig-General Buaxiang Champaphanh.
Buaxiang was in Thailand for a meeting of the Joint Boundary Sub-committee, of which the Hmong issue was a major topic.
There might be Hmong from Laos who were lured by human traffickers believing they had a chance to settle in third countries, the Lao officer told reporters.
They are not refugees seeking political asylum as claimed, he added.
Thailand shelters some 8,000 Hmong who claim they were associated with the CIA’s secret war in the 1960s-70s.
Around 150 Hmong who escaped from the shelter in Phetchabun’s Ban Huay Nam Khao are being held in the Immigration Bureau’s detention centre in Bangkok.
Thailand has already handed details of the identity of the 150 Hmong to Laos and is ready to deport them as soon as Vientiane confirms they are Lao nationals, according to Lt-General Niphon Thonglek, chief of the Border Affairs Department, who co-chaired the meeting with Buaxiang yesterday.
Meanwhile, officials from the United Nations refugee agency were involved in urgent talks in Bangkok yesterday to try to prevent the deportation of 152 Hmong back to Laos.
A spokeswoman for the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees said they believed the Hmong would be at “serious risk of persecution or loss of life” if returned to Laos.
The Nation
Udon Thani