Please pardon for my poor English. As you can see one of many mistakes I made involving the word “ruler” instead of “rural”, the correct & intended word. Thanks for your answers to my questions. Based on your answers, it’s clear that you know quite a bit about the recent problems on Thai politics but there’re also quite a lot that you don’t know in greater details beyond superficial headlines. With due respect, I must say that native Thais even living in overseas would still know better than foreigners because we have friends, relatives & families in Thailand & because we can read Thai. The knowledge on our culture & customs is also an advantage for native Thais over the non-natives for it give us better sense of what’s right/wrong, acceptable in certain practices. Because of this, may I share a few factual information with you, and other non-Thais.
Though a long time resident in the US, I’ve returned to my homeland on average once a year. Though I was born & grew up in Bangkok, I have relatives & friends in central & NE provinces. One of my relatives was a provincial senator with 15 year service representing his district. Vote buying & selling is not a myth but real & has been widely practiced since I knew about voting in Thailand. It’s more so in large scale under Thaksin’s run on politics. Most voters in all regions except the south have a saying that “Ngeon Mai Mah – Gah Mai Tookh” which is translated as “Money does not come, I don’t know how to mark the ballot.” With his wealth & new techniques in vote rigging (besides him, many of his TRT party leaders as well as ministers graduated from the US with PhD & master degrees), wining elections were no problem. Having bought out all the Election Committee Members except one central committee member & a couple more in provinces, winning was a guarantee. That’s why Thaksin & his TRT party cronies love to have the election. And I’m sure you’d already known the reason why Apr 2nd election was nullified & declared undemocratic. As for the poor voters, after receiving a few hundred Bahts from the Hua Ka-nan (the vote solicitors/getters who are mostly local thugs in the villages, districts of provinces), they would spend about 4 minutes in the poll booth to vote as they were told & promised. After that for the remaining years until the next election, the poor would be more concern about making a living than seriously getting involved in the politics or scrutinizing the work of their representatives or govt officials. While campaigning to win the election, the candidates would be very nice, humble & respectful to them. After elected, their rep’s are hot shots & won’t be easily accessed. The poor would usually be treated differently. On-going participation by the poor in the democratic processes is mostly non-existent. Thus, their democratic practice lasted only 4 minutes in each election.
On your answer that rural Thais already knew how to fish, I got it all wrong. As we know, majority are farmers but sizable population are young but have no jobs and without steady income. Most can read but did not graduate from high school nor have any vocational skills. My distant young relatives in the central province have been without job for years. When Thaksin’s govt offered them loans or gave them money, they naturally liked it; who would refuse the easy money. The problem here is Thaksin’s policy emphasized on the demand side. With major businesses of wide ranging products (from cell phones, entertainment to food & alcoholic beverages) controlled monopolistically by Thaksin & his cronies, these poor people were encouraged to spend the money buying their products. So, we have farmers & grade school students all over the country owned cell phones & used them heavily as if they’re another necessity items in life that cannot do without regardless of the high cost involved. Text messaging & downloading ring tones are the fashion with costs. Consumers have to pay high prices because the telecommunication, media, energy businesses among others controlled by Thaksin & his cronies without any real competition. Another serious problem is how these poor people will be able to pay back the loans when it matures. Without occupational skills or the knowledge on how to fish, how could they make the living? With the implementation of FTAs with China & Australia (where you’re, I assume), the imported farm products are so cheap; making the crops from Thai farmers worthless. The King’s projects that helped farmers & mountain tribal peoples have been ruined.
Regarding the Ungpakorn brothers, if Dr. Puiy Ungparkorn was alive, he would be very disappointed on his descendents’ stand in siding with Thaksin Shinawatra instead of the democratic & moral principles. In fact, information recently disclosed on the media reveals that the Ungparkorns hold stocks in company where Thaksin was accused of having conflict of interest. With the nation in deep crises created by Thaksin’s blatant blunder in the deep south along with over 40 alleged grafts and misconducts as well as gross human right violations, Dr. Puiy would have lead the charge just like Mr. Sondhi Limthongkul has been doing in the past year or so. Instead of providing any answers to the charges of impropriety, Thaksin decided to dissolve the parliament without a valid reason. Throughout his +5 years as the PM, he failed to appear in the parliament where majority members were his own party. Under Thaksin’s regime, the weak system of check & balance in Thai Constitution was made totally ineffective. Unlike the US Constitution or those of England, Australia, Canada & western European countries, Thai Constitution & laws were legislated & enacted in the not so well thought out manner. With the absence of effective check & balance system & with the loss of independent agencies (under Thaksin’s control), the only buffers that remain are the King and the arm-force. Unfortunately, most of the country’s powerful generals were also bought out by Thaksin. (He also had installed his police officers in key offices. It’s the period that police were so powerful unparallel in Thailand’s history. Thus, Thailand was more of the police state than the democratic society) So, only a few military strongmen and the King were left for Thai people to rest their hopes on representing the final check & balance system to Thaksin’s Thaksinomic policy. No matter how powerful the evil force is & how many times the evil doers have won, eventually the underdog good guys will fight back & overcome the bad guys.
We know that sizable of Aussies, Canadians & Americans still considerably admire, adore & respect Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth. To 99% Thai people (1% reserved for margin of error), our present King (Bhumibol) is the most revered person & dearest to our hearts because of HM has been a working monarch who genuinely cares & mindful about the people and country for the past 60 years. Our King is an important & integral part of our society, nation & democracy. Therefore, we will always be loyal to King Bhumibol as long as we live. You can call us or Mr. Sondhi royalist but the fact is we do (Thais who oppose Thaksin’s administration and the like) value our freedom, democracy and ethical standards no less than you. We are also more fortunate to have such a monarch as King Bhumibol as the head of the state. Nations on earth have their own culture & customs as well as legal system. Likewise, democratic system in each country varies more or less from others. Thailand’s democracy has a long way to go to be comparable to the West standard. But it is unique that we have our beloved King who has been an effective check & balance force whenever the country strays away from democratic path & ethical standard. Our King in fact has been a staunch supporter of democracy. There have been opportunities for HM to gain real power but the King refused to take advantage. I hope you have heard HM’s Dec 5th, 2005 speech about the King can do no wrong is wrong. This and the statement HM made 60 years ago as a teenage King should reveal a whole lot about our King’s moral principles, vision & democratic stand.
Based on the aforementioned facts, Thai’s democracy was in fact hi-jacked by Thaksin during the 5 year rule. With the press being silent as well as people lived in fear and dare not speaking out while innocent victims were kidnapped & killed, do these conditions represent democracy? To me & more than half of my countrymen, the coup is a step backward but necessary and will be great leap forward.
I hope the info provided here would help you gain more knowledge and the truth (not distorted fact or half truth) you learned from other sources.
Lyttleton has done a few pieces on the spread of HIV into Laos: one is called “Sister cities and easy passage” about the sex trade between Savannakhet and Mukdahan; another is called Watermelons, bars and trucks – dangerous intersections in Northwest Lao PDR and is available here. http://www.rockmekong.org/pubs/he-pubs/Watermelon.pdf
I’m not sure that the issues which confront foreign migrants are that different from those confronting girls from Isaan. While the migration of girls from Isaan is not illegal it is definitely constructed by Bangkok discourse as immoral (cf the discussion here about the so-called death of Somtam) and they are subject to similar forms of exploitation.
Not directly relevant to Grant’s book, but people may be interested in checking out Juth Pakai (New Thought): the UNDP journal of development in Laos. It is published simultaneously in Lao and English 3 times a year and is available for free download here: http://www.undplao.org/newsroom/juthpakai.php
To me it seems to be maturing fast and encouraging a critical stance on many issues. It would be a good place to send a review of Grant’s book if we wanted to increase awareness of it among educated Lao.
You two do sound very pissed that ‘Thai in Seattle’ posed those questions that compelled both of you to grapple with your convictions.
Take that one issue alone that both of you I am certain are thoroughly knowledgeable on: The Extrajudicial Slaughter of thousands of village innocents ordered and directed by Thaksin Shinawatra during his Y2003 insane anti-drugs war.
Andrew is an Aussie and an eminent Ph.D. holder at that too . . surely Andrew cannot keep on protecting Thaksin Shinawatra as a legitimate PM still, after Thaksin had so blatantly violated Thailand’s constitutional rule of law? Andrew: Thaksin Shinawatra is a CRIMINAL! Andrew do you agree, or, are you more interested in collecting commissions trying to find Thai buyers for Paul Handley’s anti-monarchy book?
I am not too sure of Curious — he is so obviously a Thaksin Shinawatra courtier and may have shot some village ya-ba suspects too.
Perhaps you will allow me a belated entry into this discussion as I further explore this website.
I can not comment upon the thoughts of HM as I do not know what he thinks on the subject. But I believe there are some misconcpetions in some of the comments above.
First, having spent nearly a decade living in a rural village in Chiang Mai Province, I have never encountered a “village” policeman of the description “…..uneducated, undertrained, underpaid and most probably very corrupt, were unreliable hicks.” In fact, unless there was a crime that had been committed, the only police I ever saw were those who came to visit friends or relatives. And those I met were all equally trained, equally educated, and alas equally underpaid so consequently prone to accepting a bribe here or there. But they were all stationed down at the Amphoe and, by my standards after living amongst the rural folks, not hicks. You want to see Thai hicks I can certainly introduce you to some bonafide “hicks”, but they aren’t policemen and would never be seen celebrating on wan tamruat.
Second, not all the 2,500 people killed were total innocents. I know a few, including a distant cousin of my wife, who was killed but who were known to be local dealers. This does not mean I support these killings. I just want to correct the notion that all 2,500 people who were killed were not connnected to the drug trade.
And the third point I would like to make is that in the villages, at least those I am familar with at a very personal level, the scourge of the meth trade had become so intolerable that my in-laws and friends shed no tears for the cousin who was gunned down. Almost every day my nephew and nieces (ages 12-16) would come back home from the local secondary school with tales of drugs being openly sold and used. The crime rate, especially theft and domestic violence had skyrocketed. What few people in the towns understand is that the rural areas already suffer from a high rate of violence. The open meth trade had created an intolerable situation, even by rural Thai standards, and nobody in the villages knew how to respond.
For the villages up north, the meth epidemic came close on the heels of the AIDS epidemic. I once had a talk with the local kamnaan (sub-district head) and we estimated that over the past decade that the tamboon had lost the equivalent of 5% of its total population to AIDS. So when people heard that a few people in the Amphoe had been killled for suspicion of drug dealing, well relative to having a funeral once a week for years, it just wasn’t a big event. We are talking maybe 33 people per province, so one or two per district over three months is not going to attract much attention from people who rarely travel outside their district.
I am not trying to condone the killings. I am no fan of Taksin. (Heck, I was protesting in the streets of Chiang Mai with my fellow teachers after the Sankampeng branch of the family shot the local teacher complaining of their encroachment upon public lands.) And I admit that my rural neigbors are not always as sophisticated as the readers of these boards, but their reactions to the killings should not be seen and judged only from the perspective of college grads who have no clue just how bad the meth plague had become.
Again, my personal feelings on the subject do not coincide with the villagers, but I do not judge them as I do understand why they feel the way they do and I do respect their opinion. To all you anthros out there, their reactions were both moral and rational.
You will be surprised by how the army information is so different than what’s on the newspaper. Used to talk to one of them often, and their view and perspective of state security problem is so different from civillian. One thing for sure, army always has in thier mind the idea of conflict between nation and outsider.
Might not be just the media effect, since Surayud was already known and admired among Thais when he was Chief of the Army. His style of calmness contrast what Thaksin was, it’s not too difficult to find Thais that like his personalities (may be one of the Buddhist effect, I guess).
However, the writer may try to romaticise Surayud in Apec too much. From what she wrote, I couldn’t find any evidence to be so charmed about what Surayud has done.
Interesting to see how Surayud regime will goes, esp for all the liberalisation things that went quite far prior to the fall of Thaksin regime. I suspect, this will be more of Pridiyatorn task than Surayud.
To Thai in Seattle: one would have to have been living in a cave for the last 5 years not to know the answers to all the questions you have asked. I’m surprised you have to ask them once again on this website, because Sondhi has been repeating them over and over again at all his rallies and talks for the last year – I guess that’s where you must have heard them. We can find all your questions on “phu jat kan”, no need to post them again on New Mandala. Now some questions for you: do you know that Thaksin went to the Thai people three times in five years to ask them whether they wanted to elect his government, despite all of the issues you mentioned above, and on each of these occasions their answer was an overwhelming “yes”. Do you know that the royalists threatened violence using tanks and guns to seize power from the People on September 19? Do you think this is worse than a “manipulation of the Constitution”? Do you think it is “right and fair” for the unelected chairman of the Privy Council to stage a coup against an elected government? Do you think it is right for the King to endorse this violent seizure of power? Do you think it is corrupt for a royalist dictatorship to appoint cronies to (i) Cabinet (ii) Legislative Assembly (iii) Government boards without the mandate of the People? Do you think it was corrupt for Sondhi’s debts running into the 100s of millions of baht to be forgiven? Do you think the Crown Property Bureau’s financial dealings should be more transparent? Do you think we should know more about the involvement of the Siam Commercial Bank, in which members of the royal family have a major interest, in the Shin Corp-Temsek deal? Do you think that there should be a truly independent audit of the Royal Projects to make sure that the money they have creamed off the national budget has been fairly spent? Do you think that the lese majeste law that it is abused by people like Sondhi in attacking his enemies should be abolished? Do you think that the only reason Sondhi is attacking Thaksin is for the benefit of his own businesses? Do you think martial law should be lifted? When? Thai in Seattle, you have the right in the US to debate and discuss these issues; Thai people in Thailand cannot because of martial law. Why do you support such a regime?
I was the one of Thai student who protested against the coup at Khun Sondhi’s forum on November 14, 2006 in UW.
I would like to inform you that we are not Taksin’s supporters. I was a long-term Thai NGO worker working on agriculture and natural resources management issues that always had some conflicts with the government especially Taksin’s government. If you read our flyer, you may better understand our point. If you don’t have a good chance to read it yet, you can read it as below (I copied and pasted it again for you only).
I’m a very polite person, so I had never ever “aggressively handed out flyers to the attendees who started to come in” as you mentioned. Moreover, I believe that all attendees on that day were not fool, so thay could make a decision by themselves based on information they got.
I’m so disappointed of what happened on November 14, 2006. I have never been treated badly like this before in my life. I feel like am in the dark age, and this is the real of falling apart of Thailand, and there is no room for differrent opinoin anymore.
Chalita Bundhuwong
** We prepared our own snacks and drinks on that day, so we couldn’t have your guys’ coffee and refreshment. Sorry about that. Thanks, anyway.***
9 Myths about the September 19, 2006 Coup
Myth 1: The Coup is necessary because it is able to solve political conflicts that may lead to bloodshed.
Argument: Political conflicts are normal in every society. The one taking place in Thailand can be solved through democratic process. That the Coup was bloodless partly confirms this argument. Thus the Coup is not only unnecessary but also rendering the conflicts more severe and complicated since it doesn’t allow those who have different opinions to freely express and exchange their ideas. Histories and contemporary incidents point that bloodshed always happens under dictatorship regimes rather than in democratic societies.
Myth 2: The Coup doesn’t undermine democracy because democracy has already been destroyed by the “Thaksin regime.”
Argument: Although previous socio-political contexts allowed the governments to cause damage to democracy, they also allowed people’s movements to grow, to take part in political activities and especially to monitor and critique the governments, which can be considered a development to democratic society. But the Coup had undermined such a development since it has completely closed the political opportunity, which had been formed during the past fifteen years. It is therefore the real democracy annihilator.
Myth 3: The Coup just temporarily halts democracy in order to solve crises.
Argument: Democracy is not a VCD or DVD that allows us to pause and replay anytime and anywhere we want. It is a continual process. Once obstructed, the whole cumulative process will be affected. The Coup therefore didn’t temporarily pause democracy. It undermined the basis of democracy Thai society had collaboratively built, be it the rights to participation in institutional politics, the rights to political gathering, the rights to monitor the government, etc.
Myth 4: Thai society is unique. The Coup therefore can be considered part of Thai democracy.
Argument: Every society may be unique. But no democratic societies accept that the coup is part of democracy. Although one might argue that the coup is indispensable to Thai society, one still needs to explain how unique Thai society is that it needs the coup, not just mention it to justify the coup.
Myth 5: The Coup is done. There is nothing we can do with it.
Argument: The Coup is not done yet. The overthrow of the government is just the beginning of the Coup, which wants to establish a new power regime. Thus we are able to stop it either by explicitly expressing the disagreement or by stopping justifying it whether intentionally or unintentionally. Moreover, although it can be argued that the Coup has already happened, we still need to distinguish what is right and what is wrong. Just because we couldn’t bring the rapist murderer into justice doesn’t mean that he is not guilty.
Myth 6: The Coup is capable of tackling the corruption problem of the Thaksin’s government.
Argument: The Thaksin’s government may be corrupt. But it needs to be tackled by transparent procedures that allow all parties to take part – not by totalitarian means that itself is a condition contributing to the corruption in the Thaksin’s government. The Coup is then not only incapable of dealing with the accumulated corruption. It also provides those who have absolute power the opportunity to corrupt without being monitored. The appointment of a number of top brass to many boards of the state enterprises is an alarm Thai society must be aware of.
Myth 7: The Coup is able to solve the crisis in the Deep South that had dramatically mounted during the Thaksin’s government.
Argument: It is true that violence in the Deep South had greatly escalated during the Thaksin’s government. It is also true that the escalation of violence was partly due to the heavy-handed policy of the Thaksin’s government. But the Coup doesn’t help solve the problem. The violence continues. It is possible that the insurgents may evaluate that the interim government installed by the Coup is weak because it had no strong support of the society. History tells that “vassal states” tended to declare autonomy whenever the power center was weak.
Myth 8: The Coup can solve problems caused by the Thaksin’s government.
Argument: It is true that the Thaksin’s government has crated a lot of problems. For example, through its campaign against drugs, more than 2,500 lives had been claimed. But the Coup has never mentioned this problem. On the contrary, despite the fact that economic policies of the Thaksin’s government may create negative effects in the long run, they have been fully adopted by the interim government. The Coup then cannot justify itself on the basis of attempting to solve problems caused by Thaksin’s government, and Thai society cannot expect anything from the Coup and its interim government either.
Myth 9: The Coup can lead to a political reform.
Argument: The Coup has closed the door leading to a political reform. This is because political reform must be based on a whole society in which every party can take part. But the Coup has limited the political participation to few privileged groups whose members are its proxies. The ideas of establishing some organizations working with state agencies are propaganda rather than practical measures. How could what is started with wrong thinking and carried out by wrong methods lead to what is right at the end?
Challenging Questions: If the coup didn’t take place to solve political conflicts (which are normal and the Coup is not the way to cure them), to tackle the corruption (which exists in every government and the Coup will do some soon), to end crisis in the Deep South (which needs a stable government, not an interim one installed by the Coup), to solve problems caused by Thaksin’s government (which needs different paradigms which cannot find from the Coup and its interim government), to enforce “Thai” democracy (which means nothing but is always used to justify the wrongdoing), and to carry out a political reform (which is necessary after Thaksin’s government but the Coup itself destroyed such an opportunity), then WHY the Coup? What FOR? WHO benefits from the Coup?
The AHRC report is as conflicted about this coup as everyone else. It clearly indicated the group’s severe reservations about Taksin’s reign yet are horrified that it took a military coup to remove him. Sort of condeming Thailand to a damned if they do and damned if they don’t political purgatory.
Quite frankly, I thought that the comparison of the current coup leaders to Sarit to be at minimum a bit premature and, dare I say, perhaps politically naive.
For all the criticism about the coup being bad for ‘democracy’, I have yet to see any coherent comment on how the political stalemate under the Thaksin caretaker government was going to be resolved (not here, and especially not on Bangkok Pundit’s blog)
Do you really believe the country would be more ‘democratic’ if Thaksin remained (even if he was elected).
True democracy is much more than being able to win votes.
I found that site too. While the copy is unauthorised, I rather think that allowing people in Thailand to read the book justifies the copy.
The (Thai) person who posted it is also apparently thinking of contacting Handley and doing a Thai translation. That would be very courageous indeed !
Do you know that the Ungpakorns have vested interests & close ties to the owner/operator of Thai TV channel 3? NO.
Have you heard about the shoot-before-asking the question policy approved & practiced by Thaksin Shinawatra on drug suspects? YES, THE WAR ON DRUGS HAS BEEN EXTENSIVELY DISCUSSED IN THIS FORUM.
Do you how many people were arrested, prosecuted without due process, missing and murdered on the war-on drug campaign? NO, BUT PUBLIC ESTIMATES OF THE NUMBER KILLED TEND TO BE AROUND 2500.
Have you heard of the Takbai incident over 2 years ago in southern Thailand? YES, IN FACT I SIGNED A LETTER BY AUSTRALIAN SCHOLARS CONDEMING THIS APPALLING ACT.
Do you know how many innocence people have disappeared without trace at the hands of police officials in the country but more in the south during Thaksin’s regime? NO
Do you know how Thaksin & his cronies had manipulated Thai Constitution, laws (election & others) & annual budget for their personal & political party gains? THIS IS A COMPLEX ISSUE!
What had happened to donations from around the world earmarked for Tsunami relief & rebuilding effort? I HAVE NO PARTICULAR KNOWLEDGE ON THIS. NEW MANDALA WOULD WELCOME A POST ON THIS ISSUE.
Is the practice of handing out money (giving the fish) to the ruler poor better than teaching them how to fish? MOST OF THEM KNOW HOW TO FISH ALREADY. THEY HAVE A LEGITIMATE NEED FOR CREDIT, INFRASTRUCTURE ETC (JUST LIKE PEOPLE IN BANGKOK).
After the 4 minute democratic practice of voting, do the ruler poor in provinces actively involve in political issues or problems hindering their freedom & rights? I AM NOT SURE WHAT YOU MEAN HERE. THE ISSUE OF LOCAL ELECTORAL CULTURE HAS ALSO BEEN EXTENSIVELY DISCUSSED IN THIS FORUM.
Do you think Thaksin did not engage in monopolistic business practices? MONOPOLISTIC? I DON’T THINK SO. BUT, AGAIN, NEW MANDALA WOULD WELCOME A POST ON THESE BUSINESS ISSUES.
Do you think it is right and fair to exempt Thaksin from paying capital gain tax from his $1.7 billion sales of assets while the agents of the Dept of Revenue were sent to count the numbers of bowl of noodle sold in the noodle shops? RIGHT? FAIR? LEGAL? MORAL? THESE ARE ALL RATHER DIFFERENT ISSUES. BUT, I AGREE, BOWLS OF NOODLES SHOULD NOT BE COUNTED UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES!
I lived in Laos for the last year working with the Akha Hill Tribe. I also got to know forestry experts who had been working in the country for 30 years.
Problems for forestry in Laos should not soley be placed on the Lao government by any means. Multinationals and foreign governements pressed Laos to decentralize control of resources to the province, where once done, these regions were immediately plundered by foreign countries and companies.
NGO’s, foreigners, from shifting agriculture policy and bans, the opium eradication, forestry, it has all been initiated and run by foreigners plundering the country, all the way back to US bombs which are still there.
The AHRC desbribed the current coup group as ‘inheritors of the ideological legacy’ of Sarit – the thinking that peace and order in society was a primary societal goal, to be enforced from the top down for the good of all. I think perhaps the junta has more of the model of King Ramkamhang’s reign in mind (or at least the version retold to us Thai schoolchildren). They’re much too nice to use Sarit’s tools (state violence, political assassinations), but I don’t see a difference in the ideology.
Khun Vichai – I don’t think it’s fair to call someone out as ‘an outsider, a foreigner’ and basically say their commentary isn’t as valid. There’s something to be said about looking from the outside and having a bit of perspective too.
I had no idea that the junta used the fear of ‘armed clashes’ to justify the coup. Did I miss some ‘first-hand exposure’ that would warrant this fear? Maybe a middle-class mob broke into an arms silo?
As a new visitor to this web site, and having read Mr. Walker’s comments on Mr. Sondhi’s speech in Seattle, I was impressed by Andrew’s knowledge & keen interest in Thai politics. With due respect, however, I must say that you’re off the mark on a few points. Instead of laying out all the details, I’d like to ask you the following questions.
Do you know that the Ungpakorns have vested interests & close ties to the owner/operator of Thai TV channel 3?
Have you heard about the shoot-before-asking the question policy approved & practiced by Thaksin Shinawatra on drug suspects?
Do you how many people were arrested, prosecuted without due process, missing and murdered on the war-on drug campaign?
Have you heard of the Takbai incident over 2 years ago in southern Thailand?
Do you know how many innocence people have disappeared without trace at the hands of police officials in the country but more in the south during Thaksin’s regime?
Do you know how Thaksin & his cronies had manipulated Thai Constitution, laws (election & others) & annual budget for their personal & political party gains?
What had happened to donations from around the world earmarked for Tsunami relief & rebuilding effort?
Is the practice of handing out money (giving the fish) to the ruler poor better than teaching them how to fish?
After the 4 minute democratic practice of voting, do the ruler poor in provinces actively involve in political issues or problems hindering their freedom & rights?
Do you think Thaksin did not engage in monopolistic business practices?
Do you think it is right and fair to exempt Thaksin from paying capital gain tax from his $1.7 billion sales of assets while the agents of the Dept of Revenue were sent to count the numbers of bowl of noodle sold in the noodle shops?
These are some of the question I have for you. Any non-Thai is welcome to help find the answers. To answer them or not is up to you.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Charles Keyes on Sondhi Limthongkul
Hi Andrew,
Please pardon for my poor English. As you can see one of many mistakes I made involving the word “ruler” instead of “rural”, the correct & intended word. Thanks for your answers to my questions. Based on your answers, it’s clear that you know quite a bit about the recent problems on Thai politics but there’re also quite a lot that you don’t know in greater details beyond superficial headlines. With due respect, I must say that native Thais even living in overseas would still know better than foreigners because we have friends, relatives & families in Thailand & because we can read Thai. The knowledge on our culture & customs is also an advantage for native Thais over the non-natives for it give us better sense of what’s right/wrong, acceptable in certain practices. Because of this, may I share a few factual information with you, and other non-Thais.
Though a long time resident in the US, I’ve returned to my homeland on average once a year. Though I was born & grew up in Bangkok, I have relatives & friends in central & NE provinces. One of my relatives was a provincial senator with 15 year service representing his district. Vote buying & selling is not a myth but real & has been widely practiced since I knew about voting in Thailand. It’s more so in large scale under Thaksin’s run on politics. Most voters in all regions except the south have a saying that “Ngeon Mai Mah – Gah Mai Tookh” which is translated as “Money does not come, I don’t know how to mark the ballot.” With his wealth & new techniques in vote rigging (besides him, many of his TRT party leaders as well as ministers graduated from the US with PhD & master degrees), wining elections were no problem. Having bought out all the Election Committee Members except one central committee member & a couple more in provinces, winning was a guarantee. That’s why Thaksin & his TRT party cronies love to have the election. And I’m sure you’d already known the reason why Apr 2nd election was nullified & declared undemocratic. As for the poor voters, after receiving a few hundred Bahts from the Hua Ka-nan (the vote solicitors/getters who are mostly local thugs in the villages, districts of provinces), they would spend about 4 minutes in the poll booth to vote as they were told & promised. After that for the remaining years until the next election, the poor would be more concern about making a living than seriously getting involved in the politics or scrutinizing the work of their representatives or govt officials. While campaigning to win the election, the candidates would be very nice, humble & respectful to them. After elected, their rep’s are hot shots & won’t be easily accessed. The poor would usually be treated differently. On-going participation by the poor in the democratic processes is mostly non-existent. Thus, their democratic practice lasted only 4 minutes in each election.
On your answer that rural Thais already knew how to fish, I got it all wrong. As we know, majority are farmers but sizable population are young but have no jobs and without steady income. Most can read but did not graduate from high school nor have any vocational skills. My distant young relatives in the central province have been without job for years. When Thaksin’s govt offered them loans or gave them money, they naturally liked it; who would refuse the easy money. The problem here is Thaksin’s policy emphasized on the demand side. With major businesses of wide ranging products (from cell phones, entertainment to food & alcoholic beverages) controlled monopolistically by Thaksin & his cronies, these poor people were encouraged to spend the money buying their products. So, we have farmers & grade school students all over the country owned cell phones & used them heavily as if they’re another necessity items in life that cannot do without regardless of the high cost involved. Text messaging & downloading ring tones are the fashion with costs. Consumers have to pay high prices because the telecommunication, media, energy businesses among others controlled by Thaksin & his cronies without any real competition. Another serious problem is how these poor people will be able to pay back the loans when it matures. Without occupational skills or the knowledge on how to fish, how could they make the living? With the implementation of FTAs with China & Australia (where you’re, I assume), the imported farm products are so cheap; making the crops from Thai farmers worthless. The King’s projects that helped farmers & mountain tribal peoples have been ruined.
Regarding the Ungpakorn brothers, if Dr. Puiy Ungparkorn was alive, he would be very disappointed on his descendents’ stand in siding with Thaksin Shinawatra instead of the democratic & moral principles. In fact, information recently disclosed on the media reveals that the Ungparkorns hold stocks in company where Thaksin was accused of having conflict of interest. With the nation in deep crises created by Thaksin’s blatant blunder in the deep south along with over 40 alleged grafts and misconducts as well as gross human right violations, Dr. Puiy would have lead the charge just like Mr. Sondhi Limthongkul has been doing in the past year or so. Instead of providing any answers to the charges of impropriety, Thaksin decided to dissolve the parliament without a valid reason. Throughout his +5 years as the PM, he failed to appear in the parliament where majority members were his own party. Under Thaksin’s regime, the weak system of check & balance in Thai Constitution was made totally ineffective. Unlike the US Constitution or those of England, Australia, Canada & western European countries, Thai Constitution & laws were legislated & enacted in the not so well thought out manner. With the absence of effective check & balance system & with the loss of independent agencies (under Thaksin’s control), the only buffers that remain are the King and the arm-force. Unfortunately, most of the country’s powerful generals were also bought out by Thaksin. (He also had installed his police officers in key offices. It’s the period that police were so powerful unparallel in Thailand’s history. Thus, Thailand was more of the police state than the democratic society) So, only a few military strongmen and the King were left for Thai people to rest their hopes on representing the final check & balance system to Thaksin’s Thaksinomic policy. No matter how powerful the evil force is & how many times the evil doers have won, eventually the underdog good guys will fight back & overcome the bad guys.
We know that sizable of Aussies, Canadians & Americans still considerably admire, adore & respect Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth. To 99% Thai people (1% reserved for margin of error), our present King (Bhumibol) is the most revered person & dearest to our hearts because of HM has been a working monarch who genuinely cares & mindful about the people and country for the past 60 years. Our King is an important & integral part of our society, nation & democracy. Therefore, we will always be loyal to King Bhumibol as long as we live. You can call us or Mr. Sondhi royalist but the fact is we do (Thais who oppose Thaksin’s administration and the like) value our freedom, democracy and ethical standards no less than you. We are also more fortunate to have such a monarch as King Bhumibol as the head of the state. Nations on earth have their own culture & customs as well as legal system. Likewise, democratic system in each country varies more or less from others. Thailand’s democracy has a long way to go to be comparable to the West standard. But it is unique that we have our beloved King who has been an effective check & balance force whenever the country strays away from democratic path & ethical standard. Our King in fact has been a staunch supporter of democracy. There have been opportunities for HM to gain real power but the King refused to take advantage. I hope you have heard HM’s Dec 5th, 2005 speech about the King can do no wrong is wrong. This and the statement HM made 60 years ago as a teenage King should reveal a whole lot about our King’s moral principles, vision & democratic stand.
Based on the aforementioned facts, Thai’s democracy was in fact hi-jacked by Thaksin during the 5 year rule. With the press being silent as well as people lived in fear and dare not speaking out while innocent victims were kidnapped & killed, do these conditions represent democracy? To me & more than half of my countrymen, the coup is a step backward but necessary and will be great leap forward.
I hope the info provided here would help you gain more knowledge and the truth (not distorted fact or half truth) you learned from other sources.
Thai Studies Conference, Bangkok, 2008
Lyttleton has done a few pieces on the spread of HIV into Laos: one is called “Sister cities and easy passage” about the sex trade between Savannakhet and Mukdahan; another is called Watermelons, bars and trucks – dangerous intersections in Northwest Lao PDR and is available here. http://www.rockmekong.org/pubs/he-pubs/Watermelon.pdf
A good source for development literature on foreign migrant labour is UNIAP – the UN Inter Agency Program on Human Trafficking in the GMS, their home page is here: http://www.no-trafficking.org/uniap_frontend/Default.aspx
I’m not sure that the issues which confront foreign migrants are that different from those confronting girls from Isaan. While the migration of girls from Isaan is not illegal it is definitely constructed by Bangkok discourse as immoral (cf the discussion here about the so-called death of Somtam) and they are subject to similar forms of exploitation.
Contributing to the dialogue on Lao history
Not directly relevant to Grant’s book, but people may be interested in checking out Juth Pakai (New Thought): the UNDP journal of development in Laos. It is published simultaneously in Lao and English 3 times a year and is available for free download here: http://www.undplao.org/newsroom/juthpakai.php
To me it seems to be maturing fast and encouraging a critical stance on many issues. It would be a good place to send a review of Grant’s book if we wanted to increase awareness of it among educated Lao.
Contributing to the dialogue on Lao history
What an interesting article! The link to the publishers (Silkworm) has also interesting. Thank you for sharing the info, it is greatly appreciated…
The LC Team.
Charles Keyes on Sondhi Limthongkul
To Curious and Andrew Walker,
You two do sound very pissed that ‘Thai in Seattle’ posed those questions that compelled both of you to grapple with your convictions.
Take that one issue alone that both of you I am certain are thoroughly knowledgeable on: The Extrajudicial Slaughter of thousands of village innocents ordered and directed by Thaksin Shinawatra during his Y2003 insane anti-drugs war.
Andrew is an Aussie and an eminent Ph.D. holder at that too . . surely Andrew cannot keep on protecting Thaksin Shinawatra as a legitimate PM still, after Thaksin had so blatantly violated Thailand’s constitutional rule of law? Andrew: Thaksin Shinawatra is a CRIMINAL! Andrew do you agree, or, are you more interested in collecting commissions trying to find Thai buyers for Paul Handley’s anti-monarchy book?
I am not too sure of Curious — he is so obviously a Thaksin Shinawatra courtier and may have shot some village ya-ba suspects too.
Surayud to bring love, harmony and virtue (with strengthened military potential)!
Perhaps you will allow me a belated entry into this discussion as I further explore this website.
I can not comment upon the thoughts of HM as I do not know what he thinks on the subject. But I believe there are some misconcpetions in some of the comments above.
First, having spent nearly a decade living in a rural village in Chiang Mai Province, I have never encountered a “village” policeman of the description “…..uneducated, undertrained, underpaid and most probably very corrupt, were unreliable hicks.” In fact, unless there was a crime that had been committed, the only police I ever saw were those who came to visit friends or relatives. And those I met were all equally trained, equally educated, and alas equally underpaid so consequently prone to accepting a bribe here or there. But they were all stationed down at the Amphoe and, by my standards after living amongst the rural folks, not hicks. You want to see Thai hicks I can certainly introduce you to some bonafide “hicks”, but they aren’t policemen and would never be seen celebrating on wan tamruat.
Second, not all the 2,500 people killed were total innocents. I know a few, including a distant cousin of my wife, who was killed but who were known to be local dealers. This does not mean I support these killings. I just want to correct the notion that all 2,500 people who were killed were not connnected to the drug trade.
And the third point I would like to make is that in the villages, at least those I am familar with at a very personal level, the scourge of the meth trade had become so intolerable that my in-laws and friends shed no tears for the cousin who was gunned down. Almost every day my nephew and nieces (ages 12-16) would come back home from the local secondary school with tales of drugs being openly sold and used. The crime rate, especially theft and domestic violence had skyrocketed. What few people in the towns understand is that the rural areas already suffer from a high rate of violence. The open meth trade had created an intolerable situation, even by rural Thai standards, and nobody in the villages knew how to respond.
For the villages up north, the meth epidemic came close on the heels of the AIDS epidemic. I once had a talk with the local kamnaan (sub-district head) and we estimated that over the past decade that the tamboon had lost the equivalent of 5% of its total population to AIDS. So when people heard that a few people in the Amphoe had been killled for suspicion of drug dealing, well relative to having a funeral once a week for years, it just wasn’t a big event. We are talking maybe 33 people per province, so one or two per district over three months is not going to attract much attention from people who rarely travel outside their district.
I am not trying to condone the killings. I am no fan of Taksin. (Heck, I was protesting in the streets of Chiang Mai with my fellow teachers after the Sankampeng branch of the family shot the local teacher complaining of their encroachment upon public lands.) And I admit that my rural neigbors are not always as sophisticated as the readers of these boards, but their reactions to the killings should not be seen and judged only from the perspective of college grads who have no clue just how bad the meth plague had become.
Again, my personal feelings on the subject do not coincide with the villagers, but I do not judge them as I do understand why they feel the way they do and I do respect their opinion. To all you anthros out there, their reactions were both moral and rational.
“Tom Yam Kung” fuelled insurgency
You will be surprised by how the army information is so different than what’s on the newspaper. Used to talk to one of them often, and their view and perspective of state security problem is so different from civillian. One thing for sure, army always has in thier mind the idea of conflict between nation and outsider.
Surayud charms Nation reporter
Might not be just the media effect, since Surayud was already known and admired among Thais when he was Chief of the Army. His style of calmness contrast what Thaksin was, it’s not too difficult to find Thais that like his personalities (may be one of the Buddhist effect, I guess).
However, the writer may try to romaticise Surayud in Apec too much. From what she wrote, I couldn’t find any evidence to be so charmed about what Surayud has done.
Interesting to see how Surayud regime will goes, esp for all the liberalisation things that went quite far prior to the fall of Thaksin regime. I suspect, this will be more of Pridiyatorn task than Surayud.
Charles Keyes on Sondhi Limthongkul
To Thai in Seattle: one would have to have been living in a cave for the last 5 years not to know the answers to all the questions you have asked. I’m surprised you have to ask them once again on this website, because Sondhi has been repeating them over and over again at all his rallies and talks for the last year – I guess that’s where you must have heard them. We can find all your questions on “phu jat kan”, no need to post them again on New Mandala. Now some questions for you: do you know that Thaksin went to the Thai people three times in five years to ask them whether they wanted to elect his government, despite all of the issues you mentioned above, and on each of these occasions their answer was an overwhelming “yes”. Do you know that the royalists threatened violence using tanks and guns to seize power from the People on September 19? Do you think this is worse than a “manipulation of the Constitution”? Do you think it is “right and fair” for the unelected chairman of the Privy Council to stage a coup against an elected government? Do you think it is right for the King to endorse this violent seizure of power? Do you think it is corrupt for a royalist dictatorship to appoint cronies to (i) Cabinet (ii) Legislative Assembly (iii) Government boards without the mandate of the People? Do you think it was corrupt for Sondhi’s debts running into the 100s of millions of baht to be forgiven? Do you think the Crown Property Bureau’s financial dealings should be more transparent? Do you think we should know more about the involvement of the Siam Commercial Bank, in which members of the royal family have a major interest, in the Shin Corp-Temsek deal? Do you think that there should be a truly independent audit of the Royal Projects to make sure that the money they have creamed off the national budget has been fairly spent? Do you think that the lese majeste law that it is abused by people like Sondhi in attacking his enemies should be abolished? Do you think that the only reason Sondhi is attacking Thaksin is for the benefit of his own businesses? Do you think martial law should be lifted? When? Thai in Seattle, you have the right in the US to debate and discuss these issues; Thai people in Thailand cannot because of martial law. Why do you support such a regime?
Sondhi in Seattle … update
Dear Khun “a Thai in Seattle”
I was the one of Thai student who protested against the coup at Khun Sondhi’s forum on November 14, 2006 in UW.
I would like to inform you that we are not Taksin’s supporters. I was a long-term Thai NGO worker working on agriculture and natural resources management issues that always had some conflicts with the government especially Taksin’s government. If you read our flyer, you may better understand our point. If you don’t have a good chance to read it yet, you can read it as below (I copied and pasted it again for you only).
I’m a very polite person, so I had never ever “aggressively handed out flyers to the attendees who started to come in” as you mentioned. Moreover, I believe that all attendees on that day were not fool, so thay could make a decision by themselves based on information they got.
I’m so disappointed of what happened on November 14, 2006. I have never been treated badly like this before in my life. I feel like am in the dark age, and this is the real of falling apart of Thailand, and there is no room for differrent opinoin anymore.
Chalita Bundhuwong
** We prepared our own snacks and drinks on that day, so we couldn’t have your guys’ coffee and refreshment. Sorry about that. Thanks, anyway.***
9 Myths about the September 19, 2006 Coup
Myth 1: The Coup is necessary because it is able to solve political conflicts that may lead to bloodshed.
Argument: Political conflicts are normal in every society. The one taking place in Thailand can be solved through democratic process. That the Coup was bloodless partly confirms this argument. Thus the Coup is not only unnecessary but also rendering the conflicts more severe and complicated since it doesn’t allow those who have different opinions to freely express and exchange their ideas. Histories and contemporary incidents point that bloodshed always happens under dictatorship regimes rather than in democratic societies.
Myth 2: The Coup doesn’t undermine democracy because democracy has already been destroyed by the “Thaksin regime.”
Argument: Although previous socio-political contexts allowed the governments to cause damage to democracy, they also allowed people’s movements to grow, to take part in political activities and especially to monitor and critique the governments, which can be considered a development to democratic society. But the Coup had undermined such a development since it has completely closed the political opportunity, which had been formed during the past fifteen years. It is therefore the real democracy annihilator.
Myth 3: The Coup just temporarily halts democracy in order to solve crises.
Argument: Democracy is not a VCD or DVD that allows us to pause and replay anytime and anywhere we want. It is a continual process. Once obstructed, the whole cumulative process will be affected. The Coup therefore didn’t temporarily pause democracy. It undermined the basis of democracy Thai society had collaboratively built, be it the rights to participation in institutional politics, the rights to political gathering, the rights to monitor the government, etc.
Myth 4: Thai society is unique. The Coup therefore can be considered part of Thai democracy.
Argument: Every society may be unique. But no democratic societies accept that the coup is part of democracy. Although one might argue that the coup is indispensable to Thai society, one still needs to explain how unique Thai society is that it needs the coup, not just mention it to justify the coup.
Myth 5: The Coup is done. There is nothing we can do with it.
Argument: The Coup is not done yet. The overthrow of the government is just the beginning of the Coup, which wants to establish a new power regime. Thus we are able to stop it either by explicitly expressing the disagreement or by stopping justifying it whether intentionally or unintentionally. Moreover, although it can be argued that the Coup has already happened, we still need to distinguish what is right and what is wrong. Just because we couldn’t bring the rapist murderer into justice doesn’t mean that he is not guilty.
Myth 6: The Coup is capable of tackling the corruption problem of the Thaksin’s government.
Argument: The Thaksin’s government may be corrupt. But it needs to be tackled by transparent procedures that allow all parties to take part – not by totalitarian means that itself is a condition contributing to the corruption in the Thaksin’s government. The Coup is then not only incapable of dealing with the accumulated corruption. It also provides those who have absolute power the opportunity to corrupt without being monitored. The appointment of a number of top brass to many boards of the state enterprises is an alarm Thai society must be aware of.
Myth 7: The Coup is able to solve the crisis in the Deep South that had dramatically mounted during the Thaksin’s government.
Argument: It is true that violence in the Deep South had greatly escalated during the Thaksin’s government. It is also true that the escalation of violence was partly due to the heavy-handed policy of the Thaksin’s government. But the Coup doesn’t help solve the problem. The violence continues. It is possible that the insurgents may evaluate that the interim government installed by the Coup is weak because it had no strong support of the society. History tells that “vassal states” tended to declare autonomy whenever the power center was weak.
Myth 8: The Coup can solve problems caused by the Thaksin’s government.
Argument: It is true that the Thaksin’s government has crated a lot of problems. For example, through its campaign against drugs, more than 2,500 lives had been claimed. But the Coup has never mentioned this problem. On the contrary, despite the fact that economic policies of the Thaksin’s government may create negative effects in the long run, they have been fully adopted by the interim government. The Coup then cannot justify itself on the basis of attempting to solve problems caused by Thaksin’s government, and Thai society cannot expect anything from the Coup and its interim government either.
Myth 9: The Coup can lead to a political reform.
Argument: The Coup has closed the door leading to a political reform. This is because political reform must be based on a whole society in which every party can take part. But the Coup has limited the political participation to few privileged groups whose members are its proxies. The ideas of establishing some organizations working with state agencies are propaganda rather than practical measures. How could what is started with wrong thinking and carried out by wrong methods lead to what is right at the end?
Challenging Questions: If the coup didn’t take place to solve political conflicts (which are normal and the Coup is not the way to cure them), to tackle the corruption (which exists in every government and the Coup will do some soon), to end crisis in the Deep South (which needs a stable government, not an interim one installed by the Coup), to solve problems caused by Thaksin’s government (which needs different paradigms which cannot find from the Coup and its interim government), to enforce “Thai” democracy (which means nothing but is always used to justify the wrongdoing), and to carry out a political reform (which is necessary after Thaksin’s government but the Coup itself destroyed such an opportunity), then WHY the Coup? What FOR? WHO benefits from the Coup?
Asian Human Rights Commission on the coup
The AHRC report is as conflicted about this coup as everyone else. It clearly indicated the group’s severe reservations about Taksin’s reign yet are horrified that it took a military coup to remove him. Sort of condeming Thailand to a damned if they do and damned if they don’t political purgatory.
Quite frankly, I thought that the comparison of the current coup leaders to Sarit to be at minimum a bit premature and, dare I say, perhaps politically naive.
Surayud charms Nation reporter
At least The Nation does offer some positive suggestions, instead of of just criticising:
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/11/25/opinion/opinion_30019918.php
For all the criticism about the coup being bad for ‘democracy’, I have yet to see any coherent comment on how the political stalemate under the Thaksin caretaker government was going to be resolved (not here, and especially not on Bangkok Pundit’s blog)
Do you really believe the country would be more ‘democratic’ if Thaksin remained (even if he was elected).
True democracy is much more than being able to win votes.
Asian Human Rights Commission on the coup
A further comment by the AHRC on human rights abuses during the war on drugs is available here.
Banned but scanned
I found that site too. While the copy is unauthorised, I rather think that allowing people in Thailand to read the book justifies the copy.
The (Thai) person who posted it is also apparently thinking of contacting Handley and doing a Thai translation. That would be very courageous indeed !
Asian Human Rights Commission on the coup
Good article. But the idea is not one that had not been said before. Totalianism vs. Democracy.
Charles Keyes on Sondhi Limthongkul
Hi Thai in Seattle. Here are some brief answers:
Do you know that the Ungpakorns have vested interests & close ties to the owner/operator of Thai TV channel 3? NO.
Have you heard about the shoot-before-asking the question policy approved & practiced by Thaksin Shinawatra on drug suspects? YES, THE WAR ON DRUGS HAS BEEN EXTENSIVELY DISCUSSED IN THIS FORUM.
Do you how many people were arrested, prosecuted without due process, missing and murdered on the war-on drug campaign? NO, BUT PUBLIC ESTIMATES OF THE NUMBER KILLED TEND TO BE AROUND 2500.
Have you heard of the Takbai incident over 2 years ago in southern Thailand? YES, IN FACT I SIGNED A LETTER BY AUSTRALIAN SCHOLARS CONDEMING THIS APPALLING ACT.
Do you know how many innocence people have disappeared without trace at the hands of police officials in the country but more in the south during Thaksin’s regime? NO
Do you know how Thaksin & his cronies had manipulated Thai Constitution, laws (election & others) & annual budget for their personal & political party gains? THIS IS A COMPLEX ISSUE!
What had happened to donations from around the world earmarked for Tsunami relief & rebuilding effort? I HAVE NO PARTICULAR KNOWLEDGE ON THIS. NEW MANDALA WOULD WELCOME A POST ON THIS ISSUE.
Is the practice of handing out money (giving the fish) to the ruler poor better than teaching them how to fish? MOST OF THEM KNOW HOW TO FISH ALREADY. THEY HAVE A LEGITIMATE NEED FOR CREDIT, INFRASTRUCTURE ETC (JUST LIKE PEOPLE IN BANGKOK).
After the 4 minute democratic practice of voting, do the ruler poor in provinces actively involve in political issues or problems hindering their freedom & rights? I AM NOT SURE WHAT YOU MEAN HERE. THE ISSUE OF LOCAL ELECTORAL CULTURE HAS ALSO BEEN EXTENSIVELY DISCUSSED IN THIS FORUM.
Do you think Thaksin did not engage in monopolistic business practices? MONOPOLISTIC? I DON’T THINK SO. BUT, AGAIN, NEW MANDALA WOULD WELCOME A POST ON THESE BUSINESS ISSUES.
Do you think it is right and fair to exempt Thaksin from paying capital gain tax from his $1.7 billion sales of assets while the agents of the Dept of Revenue were sent to count the numbers of bowl of noodle sold in the noodle shops? RIGHT? FAIR? LEGAL? MORAL? THESE ARE ALL RATHER DIFFERENT ISSUES. BUT, I AGREE, BOWLS OF NOODLES SHOULD NOT BE COUNTED UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES!
Forest science or forest politics in Laos?
I lived in Laos for the last year working with the Akha Hill Tribe. I also got to know forestry experts who had been working in the country for 30 years.
Problems for forestry in Laos should not soley be placed on the Lao government by any means. Multinationals and foreign governements pressed Laos to decentralize control of resources to the province, where once done, these regions were immediately plundered by foreign countries and companies.
NGO’s, foreigners, from shifting agriculture policy and bans, the opium eradication, forestry, it has all been initiated and run by foreigners plundering the country, all the way back to US bombs which are still there.
That is where the finger pointing has got to go.
Matthew McDaniel
Asian Human Rights Commission on the coup
Interesting read!
The AHRC desbribed the current coup group as ‘inheritors of the ideological legacy’ of Sarit – the thinking that peace and order in society was a primary societal goal, to be enforced from the top down for the good of all. I think perhaps the junta has more of the model of King Ramkamhang’s reign in mind (or at least the version retold to us Thai schoolchildren). They’re much too nice to use Sarit’s tools (state violence, political assassinations), but I don’t see a difference in the ideology.
Khun Vichai – I don’t think it’s fair to call someone out as ‘an outsider, a foreigner’ and basically say their commentary isn’t as valid. There’s something to be said about looking from the outside and having a bit of perspective too.
I had no idea that the junta used the fear of ‘armed clashes’ to justify the coup. Did I miss some ‘first-hand exposure’ that would warrant this fear? Maybe a middle-class mob broke into an arms silo?
Charles Keyes on Sondhi Limthongkul
Very good questions ‘Thai in Seattle’.
Any time you ask a direct to Andrew Walker, he had not responded. At least that was my experience in this forum.
I believe ‘Thai in Seattle’, you will also get no response to any of your questions directed at Andrew Walker.
Charles Keyes on Sondhi Limthongkul
As a new visitor to this web site, and having read Mr. Walker’s comments on Mr. Sondhi’s speech in Seattle, I was impressed by Andrew’s knowledge & keen interest in Thai politics. With due respect, however, I must say that you’re off the mark on a few points. Instead of laying out all the details, I’d like to ask you the following questions.
Do you know that the Ungpakorns have vested interests & close ties to the owner/operator of Thai TV channel 3?
Have you heard about the shoot-before-asking the question policy approved & practiced by Thaksin Shinawatra on drug suspects?
Do you how many people were arrested, prosecuted without due process, missing and murdered on the war-on drug campaign?
Have you heard of the Takbai incident over 2 years ago in southern Thailand?
Do you know how many innocence people have disappeared without trace at the hands of police officials in the country but more in the south during Thaksin’s regime?
Do you know how Thaksin & his cronies had manipulated Thai Constitution, laws (election & others) & annual budget for their personal & political party gains?
What had happened to donations from around the world earmarked for Tsunami relief & rebuilding effort?
Is the practice of handing out money (giving the fish) to the ruler poor better than teaching them how to fish?
After the 4 minute democratic practice of voting, do the ruler poor in provinces actively involve in political issues or problems hindering their freedom & rights?
Do you think Thaksin did not engage in monopolistic business practices?
Do you think it is right and fair to exempt Thaksin from paying capital gain tax from his $1.7 billion sales of assets while the agents of the Dept of Revenue were sent to count the numbers of bowl of noodle sold in the noodle shops?
These are some of the question I have for you. Any non-Thai is welcome to help find the answers. To answer them or not is up to you.