“Jika akan bergaya otoriter, ia akan tidak didukung oleh mayoritas partai itu. Ini sama artinya ia tdk akan dapat legitimasi kuat & bisa dgn cepat diturunkan di tengah jalan”, ini sangat jarang terjadi di Indonesia namun yang saya Khawatirkan, justru sebaliknya dengan koalisi, dimanfaatkan untuk melakukan korupsi, saling meminta jatah, Hali terjadi di Pemerintahan yang Sekarang
Yes! I’ll start a blog to post “relevant, helpful, pragmatic information on line.” In your Utopia will have the benefit of the PDRC to ensure that I meet your, and their, high standards of propriety?
Will I get called in for attitude readjustment if my blog doesn’t quite fit the bill?
How pathetic to note that so-called educated Thais can be so obsessed with Taksin that they do not realize that Taksin has only responded to and been the voice of social and economic change presently under way in Thailand. Without Taksin these very same social and economic forces will still be at play and dominate the political scene for decades to come.
seperti khutbah Abu Bakar yang diucapkan setelah beliau terpilih sebagai khalifah pertama, “Wahai sekalian manusia, kalian telah mempercayakan kepemimpinan kepadaku, padahal aku bukanlah orang yang terbaik di antara kalian. Jika kalian melihat aku benar, maka bantulah aku, dan jika kalian melihat aku dalam kebatilan, maka luruskanlah aku. Taatilah aku selama aku taat kepada Allah, maka bila aku tidak taat kepada-Nya, janganlah kalian mentaatiku.” Dari pidato singkat beliau, kita sudah bisa menyimpulkan bahwa sahnya pada saat itu, masyarakat di hadapan hukum sudah dianggap mempunyai kedudukan yang sama. Maka dari itu, bila saja beliau (Abu Bakar) melakukan sebuah kesalahan, beliau meminta untuk diingatkan atau ditegur. Kenyataan ini merupakan suatu fakta bahwa benih-benih demokrasi sudah dimunculkan oleh Islam jauh sebelum para Negara-negara sekuler mengagung-agungkan demokrasi.
Yang penting sekarang mulailah berdemokrasi dengan cara mengakui kelemahan capres pilihan anda masing masing dan menghormati pihak lawan. Nothing person is perfect!
To quote from Sutthiwit Chayutworakan’s article (a reporter not famous for his love of the Shinawatras!): “Mr Apichart was said to have close ties with former premier Thaksin Shinawatra and then commerce minister Wattana Muangsuk.” It sounds simply like guilt by association, one of the easiest of journalistic slurs. This sort of reporting goes down very well at the Chirathivat’s Bangkok Post.
There are many elements of truth in this article, but the impression is they are emphasized to create a distorted image of Prabowo, as a dictator in pectore. Also the rhetoric about human rights and democracy sounds completely out of the context if we consider today’s Indonesia. The impression is to read more a political pamphlet instead of an objective analysis of the Prabowo’s position. In particolar I think the author’s thesis about religious intolerance is quite misguided: on which basis does the author think that the minorities would be affected my Prabowo’s politics? On the contrary I believe he has the right credentials to play an equidistant and impartial role in case of religious conflicts.
Maybe it’s too simplistic but I suspect that behind all this fear for Prabowo actually there’s the fear to see Indonesia growing as an indipendent country in the international system and no more as a country to be exploited of its resources.
notdisappointed: your comment speak truth by itself. The reason you feel Thaksin has the worst record of human right violation in Thai history is that despite all of Thaksin attemps to control media, the country as a whole has been allowed to discuss and be informed of those abuses. It was not illegal to say that Thaksin’s policy in the South of Thailand was ill advised, that the war against drugs has denied thousands the right of a fair justice. Nobody went in jail for it.
But, you abviously have never heard of all the horrible things that have been done to Thais, in 1973, 1976, 1992, 2010. And many more massacre that are so well hidden. This is because those human rights violations are never discussed, information is so distorted that most Thai have only a vague ideas that students have been murdered, tortured and even publicly raped in 1976.
Perfect then, Prayuth has nothing to fair! He can throw an election and if the poll has been done correctly, he will be the next prime minister with a popular basis.
But please, notdisappointed, can you just give us a bit more information on your “poll”: what was the sample? sample selection methodology? Who asked the question and by which means?
Because if the poll was only in Bangkok among public workers, questions asked door to door by interviewers wearing a miltary uniform, then your results are not surprising, and Prayuth still has to worry about his fate in an election..
You all make me laugh with your numbers: opinion poll are moderately reliable when they are done by sound independent agencies in democratic countries, so in a dictatorship like Thailand right now…
Not Dissapointed your quite adept at gushing out sensationalist and unsubstantiated accusations. However you are not so adept at answering simple questions. I guess ignoring such questions is a natural instinct when they tend to highlight massive flaws in your precarious argument.
Anyway, I ask again…….. Are the military dictators you so enthusiastically support totally and utterly incompetent due to their complete failure to find any substantive evidence to back up a wide range of sensational claims like yours, despite investing many months, and thrusting the full resources of their dictatorial regime behind the investigation?
Or do you think they were simply reporting the facts when at the end of their exhaustive investigation there was simply no substantive proof of wrongdoing with which to indict Mr Thaksin for the ‘worst …in Thai history – by far -‘ type crimes you and they accuse him of?
Please take the time to answer these highly relevant questions in detail and dont hide from them simply because they highlight the gaping holes in your argument.
I am most afraid your optimism is premature. Now that Prime Minister Najib Razak has stated that Malays should emulate terrorists and join ISIL in fighting Shi’ites in Syria and Lebanon, which in fact 15 Malays have done so far, PM Najib’s quest for the emulation of terrorists does call into question his credentials in authoritarianism, and after his latest plea for Malay glory as measured by blowing people up, I would say PM Najib’s authoritarian ranking has just jumped a few notches. After all, even ex-TNI strongman Prabowo hasn’t suggested that all Indonesians take courses from the Muslim Brotherhood and head out to Syria for the greater glory of Sunni Islam and Allah. No, that distinction belongs to our dear own Prime Minister Najib. I doubt either Thailand or Indonesia is envious.
1. SBY, one of indonesia president during its 15 tahun of sukses demokrasi, are also military retiree. No need to worry about Prabowo’s military background.
2. You mentioned Prabowo’s personality as the biggest danger (bahaya utama) why Indonesia should not led by him. I see this argument is too naive.
Prabowo memiliki karir yang bagus di militer. Although he was son-in-law of soeharto, he wouldn’t reach that level in military except he has good intelligence, just like Agus compare to Ibas. Don’t forget, Prabowo is also son of genius economist.
3. Human right issues? Silakan ajukan novum ke kejaksaan/pengadilan. Fakta dan bukti yang pernah ada sudah didalami dan kita lihat prabowo tidak terbukti melakukan kejahatan HAM.
4. Dukungan konglomerat media? tvOne? itu baru didapatkan setelah Golkar merapat ke Gerindra pasca pemilu legislatif. we see that Gerindra got 11% in DPR election. It means that Gerindra and Prabowo were already popular before tvOne support.
5. How about Jokowi? There are some high ranked military retiree behind him. some of them has bloody hand (Talangsari, DOM, Timor timur, 27 juli, etc).
Over 6,000 deaths in the 3 southern most provinces in the last 10 years. How many years Thaksin and his so-called nominees were in power during this period? What about the annual budget of 4 trillion baht for the Internal Security Department for fixing the trouble in the Deep South? Which pocket this money eventually ended up?
No matter how hard Malaysia and Singapore try, they are no match to Thailand and Indonesia — who are just natural at providing the right type of popular authoritarian leaders. After LKY and Mahathir, there is no one in the horizon in Malaysia and Singapore to pick up the mantle. But an enviable list is available in both the neighbours above and below. Just how does Thailand and Indonesia do it?
I think this portrayal of Prabowo is too dark, too polarizing. Boucher presents some legitimate concerns regarding Prabowo. His past human rights abuses. His notoriously short temper. His absence from a large chunk of the Reformasi era. His unproven commitment to democracy. These, to me, are all valid, all true.
Still, I believe that this Prabowo-will-be-authoritarian narrative (which gets an oversized representation at New Mandala) misses, what I think, is a truer narrative. When I see Prabowo, first and foremost, I see a person more hungry for power than anyone else in this country. In 1998, he would’ve seized power directly from Habibie had Wiranto not turned him back (he’s rumored to have stormed the palace). And since his failed VP bid with Megawati, he has worked tirelessly campaigning for the presidency for the better part of a half-decade. In front of huge crowds, he’s decried foreign “minions” and gone on jingoistic, populist rantings. In front of small groups of foreign investors, he’s assured them that his policies will be pragmatic and investor-friendly. He’s adapted his message to fit his crowd. In short, Prabowo is not unlike most highly-successful politicians. He WANTS the presidency so bad, and he is employing all the political savvy and intelligence that he has (which, I believe, he has in spades). This does not mean that he a maniac, thirsty to seize a Putin-like hold on the istana. It just means that he’s like any politician, and he’ll adapt to ensure his place in history. To me, this is the defining feature of Prabowo.
For this reason, I think that concerns that Prabowo will have a dictatorial presidency are misguided. Civil society is strong and the public’s commitment to democracy will serve as a bulwark against this. But, more importantly, I believe that Prabowo understands where Indonesia is today. And he understands that to solidify his place as Indonesia’s leader, he must serve as president first. Maybe in 1998, he would’ve been the dictator that many fear he will be, but in 2014 he’ll just be a short-tempered president who respects (although doesn’t advance) Indonesian democracy. Of course, this is just my opinion and I have little more than my impression and my superficial readings to back it up. Still, I think that Prabowo is too pragmatic and too power-hungry a politician to be the divisive boogey man that much of the authors at New Mandala fear he will be. To be such a boogey man in today’s Indonesia would threaten his most fundamental goal: power.
India and BJP are unrelated to Indonesia; please stop the comparisons with Modi and BJP. India is a democracy, with all its faults. Indonesia is not yet a democracy. India is not an autocracy. The Prime Minister can be removed anytime and the Indian Army NEVER was involved in Indian federal politics. The same CANNOT be said for the TNI. The ban on Modi related to riots and Muslim/Hindu deaths in Gujarat, where he was Provincial Leader and his association with right-wing Hindutva movements. These are NOT
to be commended and are legitimate human rights issues. However, the ban on India
had nothing to do with the Indian Army. The ban on Indonesia had EVERYTHING to do with the TNI, and less to do with SBY or Megawati or Gus Dur or Habibie or Soeharto (well, Soeharto was a separate issue, and was an autocrat, by any measure, even if a smart autocrat). ALL of Indonesia’s leaders were autocratic. That Gus Dur promoted tolerance,
and was partially blind, did not prevent him from bouts of childishness, which Megawati
also indulged in. Indonesia is not ready for non-autocratic leadership, or Prabowo AND Jokowi would not be the sole choices. Do not confuse Jokowi’s small frame and quiet demeanour as indicative of Gandhian kumbayaism. Jokowi, as former Governor of Jakarta, was no wall flower or stick-in-the-mud, as much as has been written about Prabowo’s military background and possible human rights abuses. Indonesia is NOT returning to autocracy, it is maintaining it, in modified form, with more press and personal freedoms, but not more federal democratic infrastructures. That will have to wait, until such time, when comparisons between India and Indonesia DO become relevant and valid. That time has yet to arrive.
Recalling one’s ambassador from Canberra is admittedly more ‘benign’ than declaring war or trying to have the Australian prime minister assassinated with a poisoned umbrella in the current inclement weather, but it is still an unfriendly act. Irate though she was at the NSA’s behaviour, Angela Merkel did not withdraw her ambassador from Washington for six months.
Having withdrawn two ambassadors, Yudhoyono has done his bit to routinize what should be seen as an extreme step that is only rarely taken.
He has thereby raised the bar of acceptable diplomatic protest against Australia rather high. His successor, Putin-like or otherwise, could well be obliged to show his mettle by going further, such as by expelling the Australian ambassador, breaking off relations or worse.
“An “urgent return to democratic rule,” however is impossible, because there was never any “democratic rule” to begin with. In fact, this was one of the many issues that provoked the military coup in late May 2014 in the first place. The EU’s calls for respecting “human rights and freedoms,” is also suspiciously hypocritical, as similar calls were absent in the weeks and months leading up to the coup, when the now ousted regime of Thaksin Shinawatra was carrying out a nation-wide terror campaign against his political opponents that left over 20 people dead and hundreds maimed.
In fact, the Royal Thai Army has removed from power one of the worst human rights offenders in Thai history. Thaksin Shinawatra oversaw the deaths of over 3,000 innocent people during his time in power, including under various proxy regimes run by family members including his brother-in-law and his own sister, as well as political allies openly serving as his “nominees.” To describe the Shinawatra regime as “democratic” is to sidestep the fact that Thaksin Shinawatra himself had been running the country from exile with those “elected” serving openly as proxies his proxies – an arrangement as illegal as it is undemocratic.”
Even better, and if you’re not afraid of the separating your truths from your whinging. try reading the whole article here…
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Demokrasi Indonesia Dalam Bahaya
“Jika akan bergaya otoriter, ia akan tidak didukung oleh mayoritas partai itu. Ini sama artinya ia tdk akan dapat legitimasi kuat & bisa dgn cepat diturunkan di tengah jalan”, ini sangat jarang terjadi di Indonesia namun yang saya Khawatirkan, justru sebaliknya dengan koalisi, dimanfaatkan untuk melakukan korupsi, saling meminta jatah, Hali terjadi di Pemerintahan yang Sekarang
ANU event on Thai coup
Yes! I’ll start a blog to post “relevant, helpful, pragmatic information on line.” In your Utopia will have the benefit of the PDRC to ensure that I meet your, and their, high standards of propriety?
Will I get called in for attitude readjustment if my blog doesn’t quite fit the bill?
ANU event on Thai coup
How pathetic to note that so-called educated Thais can be so obsessed with Taksin that they do not realize that Taksin has only responded to and been the voice of social and economic change presently under way in Thailand. Without Taksin these very same social and economic forces will still be at play and dominate the political scene for decades to come.
Demokrasi Indonesia Dalam Bahaya
seperti khutbah Abu Bakar yang diucapkan setelah beliau terpilih sebagai khalifah pertama, “Wahai sekalian manusia, kalian telah mempercayakan kepemimpinan kepadaku, padahal aku bukanlah orang yang terbaik di antara kalian. Jika kalian melihat aku benar, maka bantulah aku, dan jika kalian melihat aku dalam kebatilan, maka luruskanlah aku. Taatilah aku selama aku taat kepada Allah, maka bila aku tidak taat kepada-Nya, janganlah kalian mentaatiku.” Dari pidato singkat beliau, kita sudah bisa menyimpulkan bahwa sahnya pada saat itu, masyarakat di hadapan hukum sudah dianggap mempunyai kedudukan yang sama. Maka dari itu, bila saja beliau (Abu Bakar) melakukan sebuah kesalahan, beliau meminta untuk diingatkan atau ditegur. Kenyataan ini merupakan suatu fakta bahwa benih-benih demokrasi sudah dimunculkan oleh Islam jauh sebelum para Negara-negara sekuler mengagung-agungkan demokrasi.
Yang penting sekarang mulailah berdemokrasi dengan cara mengakui kelemahan capres pilihan anda masing masing dan menghormati pihak lawan. Nothing person is perfect!
ANU event on Thai coup
To quote from Sutthiwit Chayutworakan’s article (a reporter not famous for his love of the Shinawatras!): “Mr Apichart was said to have close ties with former premier Thaksin Shinawatra and then commerce minister Wattana Muangsuk.” It sounds simply like guilt by association, one of the easiest of journalistic slurs. This sort of reporting goes down very well at the Chirathivat’s Bangkok Post.
Return to autocracy in Indonesia?
There are many elements of truth in this article, but the impression is they are emphasized to create a distorted image of Prabowo, as a dictator in pectore. Also the rhetoric about human rights and democracy sounds completely out of the context if we consider today’s Indonesia. The impression is to read more a political pamphlet instead of an objective analysis of the Prabowo’s position. In particolar I think the author’s thesis about religious intolerance is quite misguided: on which basis does the author think that the minorities would be affected my Prabowo’s politics? On the contrary I believe he has the right credentials to play an equidistant and impartial role in case of religious conflicts.
Maybe it’s too simplistic but I suspect that behind all this fear for Prabowo actually there’s the fear to see Indonesia growing as an indipendent country in the international system and no more as a country to be exploited of its resources.
Seven questions for Thailand’s military
notdisappointed: your comment speak truth by itself. The reason you feel Thaksin has the worst record of human right violation in Thai history is that despite all of Thaksin attemps to control media, the country as a whole has been allowed to discuss and be informed of those abuses. It was not illegal to say that Thaksin’s policy in the South of Thailand was ill advised, that the war against drugs has denied thousands the right of a fair justice. Nobody went in jail for it.
But, you abviously have never heard of all the horrible things that have been done to Thais, in 1973, 1976, 1992, 2010. And many more massacre that are so well hidden. This is because those human rights violations are never discussed, information is so distorted that most Thai have only a vague ideas that students have been murdered, tortured and even publicly raped in 1976.
Seven questions for Thailand’s military
Perfect then, Prayuth has nothing to fair! He can throw an election and if the poll has been done correctly, he will be the next prime minister with a popular basis.
But please, notdisappointed, can you just give us a bit more information on your “poll”: what was the sample? sample selection methodology? Who asked the question and by which means?
Because if the poll was only in Bangkok among public workers, questions asked door to door by interviewers wearing a miltary uniform, then your results are not surprising, and Prayuth still has to worry about his fate in an election..
You all make me laugh with your numbers: opinion poll are moderately reliable when they are done by sound independent agencies in democratic countries, so in a dictatorship like Thailand right now…
Demokrasi Indonesia Dalam Bahaya
Answere THIS….WHo is leader that leave his PEOPLE…. That Leader IS JOKOWI….You are People love SOMEONE that Leaves YOU…. INCREDIBLE….
Return to autocracy in Indonesia?
Time for ‘Jokowi’ (Joko Widodo) supporters to step up their campaign as it seems they’ve got the opposition rattled.
The main enemy is complacency.
Seven questions for Thailand’s military
Not Dissapointed your quite adept at gushing out sensationalist and unsubstantiated accusations. However you are not so adept at answering simple questions. I guess ignoring such questions is a natural instinct when they tend to highlight massive flaws in your precarious argument.
Anyway, I ask again…….. Are the military dictators you so enthusiastically support totally and utterly incompetent due to their complete failure to find any substantive evidence to back up a wide range of sensational claims like yours, despite investing many months, and thrusting the full resources of their dictatorial regime behind the investigation?
Or do you think they were simply reporting the facts when at the end of their exhaustive investigation there was simply no substantive proof of wrongdoing with which to indict Mr Thaksin for the ‘worst …in Thai history – by far -‘ type crimes you and they accuse him of?
Please take the time to answer these highly relevant questions in detail and dont hide from them simply because they highlight the gaping holes in your argument.
Return to autocracy in Indonesia?
Greg,
I am most afraid your optimism is premature. Now that Prime Minister Najib Razak has stated that Malays should emulate terrorists and join ISIL in fighting Shi’ites in Syria and Lebanon, which in fact 15 Malays have done so far, PM Najib’s quest for the emulation of terrorists does call into question his credentials in authoritarianism, and after his latest plea for Malay glory as measured by blowing people up, I would say PM Najib’s authoritarian ranking has just jumped a few notches. After all, even ex-TNI strongman Prabowo hasn’t suggested that all Indonesians take courses from the Muslim Brotherhood and head out to Syria for the greater glory of Sunni Islam and Allah. No, that distinction belongs to our dear own Prime Minister Najib. I doubt either Thailand or Indonesia is envious.
Demokrasi Indonesia Dalam Bahaya
1. SBY, one of indonesia president during its 15 tahun of sukses demokrasi, are also military retiree. No need to worry about Prabowo’s military background.
2. You mentioned Prabowo’s personality as the biggest danger (bahaya utama) why Indonesia should not led by him. I see this argument is too naive.
Prabowo memiliki karir yang bagus di militer. Although he was son-in-law of soeharto, he wouldn’t reach that level in military except he has good intelligence, just like Agus compare to Ibas. Don’t forget, Prabowo is also son of genius economist.
3. Human right issues? Silakan ajukan novum ke kejaksaan/pengadilan. Fakta dan bukti yang pernah ada sudah didalami dan kita lihat prabowo tidak terbukti melakukan kejahatan HAM.
4. Dukungan konglomerat media? tvOne? itu baru didapatkan setelah Golkar merapat ke Gerindra pasca pemilu legislatif. we see that Gerindra got 11% in DPR election. It means that Gerindra and Prabowo were already popular before tvOne support.
5. How about Jokowi? There are some high ranked military retiree behind him. some of them has bloody hand (Talangsari, DOM, Timor timur, 27 juli, etc).
Seven questions for Thailand’s military
Over 6,000 deaths in the 3 southern most provinces in the last 10 years. How many years Thaksin and his so-called nominees were in power during this period? What about the annual budget of 4 trillion baht for the Internal Security Department for fixing the trouble in the Deep South? Which pocket this money eventually ended up?
Return to autocracy in Indonesia?
No matter how hard Malaysia and Singapore try, they are no match to Thailand and Indonesia — who are just natural at providing the right type of popular authoritarian leaders. After LKY and Mahathir, there is no one in the horizon in Malaysia and Singapore to pick up the mantle. But an enviable list is available in both the neighbours above and below. Just how does Thailand and Indonesia do it?
Return to autocracy in Indonesia?
I think this portrayal of Prabowo is too dark, too polarizing. Boucher presents some legitimate concerns regarding Prabowo. His past human rights abuses. His notoriously short temper. His absence from a large chunk of the Reformasi era. His unproven commitment to democracy. These, to me, are all valid, all true.
Still, I believe that this Prabowo-will-be-authoritarian narrative (which gets an oversized representation at New Mandala) misses, what I think, is a truer narrative. When I see Prabowo, first and foremost, I see a person more hungry for power than anyone else in this country. In 1998, he would’ve seized power directly from Habibie had Wiranto not turned him back (he’s rumored to have stormed the palace). And since his failed VP bid with Megawati, he has worked tirelessly campaigning for the presidency for the better part of a half-decade. In front of huge crowds, he’s decried foreign “minions” and gone on jingoistic, populist rantings. In front of small groups of foreign investors, he’s assured them that his policies will be pragmatic and investor-friendly. He’s adapted his message to fit his crowd. In short, Prabowo is not unlike most highly-successful politicians. He WANTS the presidency so bad, and he is employing all the political savvy and intelligence that he has (which, I believe, he has in spades). This does not mean that he a maniac, thirsty to seize a Putin-like hold on the istana. It just means that he’s like any politician, and he’ll adapt to ensure his place in history. To me, this is the defining feature of Prabowo.
For this reason, I think that concerns that Prabowo will have a dictatorial presidency are misguided. Civil society is strong and the public’s commitment to democracy will serve as a bulwark against this. But, more importantly, I believe that Prabowo understands where Indonesia is today. And he understands that to solidify his place as Indonesia’s leader, he must serve as president first. Maybe in 1998, he would’ve been the dictator that many fear he will be, but in 2014 he’ll just be a short-tempered president who respects (although doesn’t advance) Indonesian democracy. Of course, this is just my opinion and I have little more than my impression and my superficial readings to back it up. Still, I think that Prabowo is too pragmatic and too power-hungry a politician to be the divisive boogey man that much of the authors at New Mandala fear he will be. To be such a boogey man in today’s Indonesia would threaten his most fundamental goal: power.
Return to autocracy in Indonesia?
India and BJP are unrelated to Indonesia; please stop the comparisons with Modi and BJP. India is a democracy, with all its faults. Indonesia is not yet a democracy. India is not an autocracy. The Prime Minister can be removed anytime and the Indian Army NEVER was involved in Indian federal politics. The same CANNOT be said for the TNI. The ban on Modi related to riots and Muslim/Hindu deaths in Gujarat, where he was Provincial Leader and his association with right-wing Hindutva movements. These are NOT
to be commended and are legitimate human rights issues. However, the ban on India
had nothing to do with the Indian Army. The ban on Indonesia had EVERYTHING to do with the TNI, and less to do with SBY or Megawati or Gus Dur or Habibie or Soeharto (well, Soeharto was a separate issue, and was an autocrat, by any measure, even if a smart autocrat). ALL of Indonesia’s leaders were autocratic. That Gus Dur promoted tolerance,
and was partially blind, did not prevent him from bouts of childishness, which Megawati
also indulged in. Indonesia is not ready for non-autocratic leadership, or Prabowo AND Jokowi would not be the sole choices. Do not confuse Jokowi’s small frame and quiet demeanour as indicative of Gandhian kumbayaism. Jokowi, as former Governor of Jakarta, was no wall flower or stick-in-the-mud, as much as has been written about Prabowo’s military background and possible human rights abuses. Indonesia is NOT returning to autocracy, it is maintaining it, in modified form, with more press and personal freedoms, but not more federal democratic infrastructures. That will have to wait, until such time, when comparisons between India and Indonesia DO become relevant and valid. That time has yet to arrive.
Return to autocracy in Indonesia?
Recalling one’s ambassador from Canberra is admittedly more ‘benign’ than declaring war or trying to have the Australian prime minister assassinated with a poisoned umbrella in the current inclement weather, but it is still an unfriendly act. Irate though she was at the NSA’s behaviour, Angela Merkel did not withdraw her ambassador from Washington for six months.
Having withdrawn two ambassadors, Yudhoyono has done his bit to routinize what should be seen as an extreme step that is only rarely taken.
He has thereby raised the bar of acceptable diplomatic protest against Australia rather high. His successor, Putin-like or otherwise, could well be obliged to show his mettle by going further, such as by expelling the Australian ambassador, breaking off relations or worse.
Seven questions for Thailand’s military
“An “urgent return to democratic rule,” however is impossible, because there was never any “democratic rule” to begin with. In fact, this was one of the many issues that provoked the military coup in late May 2014 in the first place. The EU’s calls for respecting “human rights and freedoms,” is also suspiciously hypocritical, as similar calls were absent in the weeks and months leading up to the coup, when the now ousted regime of Thaksin Shinawatra was carrying out a nation-wide terror campaign against his political opponents that left over 20 people dead and hundreds maimed.
In fact, the Royal Thai Army has removed from power one of the worst human rights offenders in Thai history. Thaksin Shinawatra oversaw the deaths of over 3,000 innocent people during his time in power, including under various proxy regimes run by family members including his brother-in-law and his own sister, as well as political allies openly serving as his “nominees.” To describe the Shinawatra regime as “democratic” is to sidestep the fact that Thaksin Shinawatra himself had been running the country from exile with those “elected” serving openly as proxies his proxies – an arrangement as illegal as it is undemocratic.”
Even better, and if you’re not afraid of the separating your truths from your whinging. try reading the whole article here…
http://journal-neo.org/2014/06/25/eu-punishes-thailand-for-ousting-mass-murdering-dictator/
ANU event on Thai coup
Well said. Sceptic. Thank you!!!