Wednesday, March 17, 2010

Bloody Thailand - Exit Strategy/Tactical Retreat

.
Message to red protestors:

To continue now means adopting PAD type escalation tactics aimed to provoke, but you do not have the 'protection' from above that your yellow counterparts have.
Their treatment was an aberration in Thailand, you will not be treated so kindly, and you can expect the typical iron fist, not the kid gloves with which they were dealt - please save your blood for another day.

It's time to go home - you have already proven Abhisit is still afraid of elections, and prefers your blood over going to the people to test if he can truly be a legitimate PM.

Continue raising issues of double standard in the country, don't put all your faith in any leader, and try to to listen to, and understand the concerns of those who see things differently than you do.


UPDATE:

I'm pleased they didn't go home before Saturday's wonderful convoy through the streets of Bangkok - and I admit I'm a poor tactician:)

.

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

Less violent, but otherwise it's the same old story

.
I'm pleased that there has been no real violence to date, and it seems both the government and protesters have learned from the past.
(also more people have camera's at hand now so hopefully any actions by agent provocateur's will quickly be able to be seen as such).

My biggest complaint regarding the media coverage (including many bloggers) is that most are taking a very short term view and cannot see the wood for the trees.
Concentrating on one red herring after another misses the big picture, and plays right into the hands of those who comprise the real power in Thailand.

Most overlook how the current government came into power – no amount of spin can get away from the fact that this government is only in power because of a military & judicial coup.
The lead coalition partner, Abhisit’s (not so) Democrats, refused to participate in elections before the coup, and even after having things rigged in its favour and competitors removed, its still afraid to face the people in an election.

They also fail to look at the history of miltary coups in Thailand, where its always some military General or other deciding a group of ‘corrupt’ politicians need to be removed – the first act of those generals is always to change the constitution to exonerate themselves, and then they move on to enriching themselves and whichever network they are aligned with.
A push then comes for democracy from the people, sometimes elections are held, and sometimes another coup occurs, or even a ’self coup’.

The people are never given the chance to remove governments – The old saying: ‘The rural masses elect the governments and the Bangkok elite removes them’ is a cycle being repeated endlessly.
Like it or not Thaksin's TRT was the only government to win consecutive elections – it should have been left to the people to decide when they want to remove that government.

No lasting good will ever come from a military coup, because two wrongs will never make a right.

If anyone is interested in the background of HOW its been possible for the masses to be continually disenfranchised, they could start with books by Paul Handley & Federico Ferrara.

UPDATE:

In some private contacts it's become apparent that the point I'm trying to make above has again been missed.

For clarification: My point is that democracy has never been ALLOWED to develop in Thailand - since the change from absolute monarchy in 1932, individual players have come and gone (although some have stuck around longer than others:)

Whilst prominent individual politicians have many flaws, the real issue is the system and how military coups have not been delegitimized - ask yourself why is that so? (if you answer that it's because of corrupt politicians, then you are missing the point again:)




Friday, March 5, 2010

Why protest?

.
For those who, like me, have an aversion to Facebook, I'm posting this here as a quick reference of the Red/UDD aims.
(I found it on Teakdoor.com and it apparently comes from Sean Boonpracong/UDD's facebook site)

RED IN THE LAND

Thailand has existed as a democracy in name but not substance for too long. We have stood by as our elected governments were brought down by the might of vested interests. We have endured the hijacking of our media and our judicial system. We have remained silent as those who would lead us failed time and time again to address our legitimate concerns. But a turning point is about to be reached in Thai history.

We, the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) are determined to see Thailand become a nation where the principles of democracy, human rights, and equal justice are not only espoused but upheld. As such, we stand opposed to the illegitimate government of Abhisit Vejjajiva and the aristocracy that backs him. In the coming months, we will launch a campaign aimed at uniting the Thai people in opposition to this junta and bringing about free and fair elections. This campaign is based upon 6 principles:

1) Achieving the goal of establishing a genuine democracy that has the King as our Head of State, with political power belonging exclusively to the people. We reject any attempt, past or future, at using the monarchy to silence dissent or advance a particular agenda.

2) Dissolving the 2007 Constitution and restoring the 1997 Constitution, which may then be amended through a transparent, consultative and democratic process.

3) Bringing Thais together in an effort to solve our political and socio-economic problems, recognizing that such efforts must stem from the power of the people.

4) Implementing the rule of law, due process and a system of equal justice for all, free of any obstructions or double-standards.

5) Uniting all Thais who love democracy, equality, and equal justice within all facets of society, in an effort to deconstruct and move beyond the Amartyatippatai (Aristocracy) system.

6 ) Using exclusively non-violent means to achieve these objectives. We are a peaceful movement, whereas the aristocracy maintains its power through the barrel of a gun. We know that the coming struggle will be as long as it is painful. But our cause is virtuous, just as the status quo is unacceptable. In the coming months, the establishment will use every means at its disposal in its efforts to counter us, including lies and propaganda, legal wrangling, intimidation and violence. This is an opponent that supported the hijacking of our airports and the use of military force to bring down an elected government and suppress the dissenting public. But whatever they throw at us, we will endure it, and we will succeed.


Saturday, February 27, 2010

Court rules Thaksin inept

The Supreme Court verdict spells it out clearly - Thaksin was inept at enriching himself and family, and he failed to learn the proper lessons from older, wiser, predecessors:

Bloomberg:
Shin shares gained 121 percent from when Thaksin took office on Feb. 9, 2001, to when his family sold the company on Jan. 23, 2006, compared with a 128 percent gain in the benchmark SET index, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Siam Cement Pcl, Thailand’s fourth-biggest company, which is controlled by the monarchy’s investment arm, gained 717 percent in that time.

“Whether Thaksin used his influence to benefit his companies is for the courts to decide,” said Vikas Kawatra, head of institutional broking at Kim Eng Securities (Thailand) Pcl, the nation’s biggest brokerage by trading volume. “We analyze the stocks on fundamentals and price movements and based on past performance versus the SET it appears his companies performed no better than others in the benchmark.”


Apart from the courts attempt to legitimize the coup, I am basically happy with the financial aspects of the verdict as it (purportedly) returns to the Thaksin clan an amount that in my view, considering the totality of their business lives, they 'might' have 'earned' legitimately.

The other good aspect to the verdict is that it spells out that holders of public office need to clearly separate their business affairs, or, in the absence of the double standard, they will run the risk of being caught for policy corruption.


In my dream world, the verdict will encourage investigative research by journalists, and activists, into all the business dealings of public office holders, not only politicians, but police, military, bureaucrats and other office holders (both elected, and appointed:)


Update: Or I should say I would be happy with the verdict if I knew the precedents would be consistently applied to all.

There also seems to be considerable doubt about whether anything will actually be returned to the clan, and perhaps this verdict was just a stalling measure to provide a gloss of 'fairness' when he real intention is to grab the remainder with other court actions over time.

.

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

Hidden news?

.
A post on Thai Visa Chiang Mai forum:

"I live in Lamphun 3 klicks from Big C
A large truck was travelling south from Chiang Mai on highway 11 at 6.30pm on Sat 13th Feb, it ran through a set of red lights 4 kiicks before the Big C junction, in so doing it crashed into a number of motorbikes turning onto the highway 11 on green lights, 4 people were killed.

The driver who lives 500 metres from me tried to escape the scene, but was chased by police.

The junction at Big C has an overpass to avoid local traffic mostly motorbikes coming & going to work on the nearby industrial estates, these people use the old road under the overpass.
The driver of the truck veered off highway 11 and took the slip road leading to the busy junction underneath the overpass, the road was very busy with workers returning home, the truck driver again went against the red lights and ploughed into the motorbikes crossing the road on green lights, a further 12 people died, two of those was in a Vigo truck which then brought the runaway to a holt.

The police caught the driver, and according to local opinion he was pretty badly beaten up by them.
A further 3 people have died in hospital making the carnage 19"


I cannot find any reference to this horrific event in any English language papers, but presumably it's true?
Very sad - my condolences to all victims & families.

RIP


Friday, January 29, 2010

Questions on Tactics & Civil War

.
I'm pondering the tactics of each side in the ongoing battle for political control of Thailand.

In the one corner we have Yellow (plus some Blue & Green available for assitance as and when required)
To me, the tactics of the Prem led royalist elite side are fairly predictable - now that they have engineered their team into power they will continue to use the military & judiciary tools at their disposal, combined with royalist symbolism to maintain control.
They will keep trying to paint the reds as anti-monarchy, anti-stabilty, anti-business, anti-nation, unthai etc, and have been laying the groundwork for (and acceptance of) a crushing of the reds should they attempt to make the final push that they keep threatening.
Prem's reference to Senator Chimsak Pinthong's 'important' 'must read' article make things very clear that the old guard are preparing to resort to the same old tricks one again.
(thanks to New Mandala, Political Prisoners Thailand, Bangkok Pundit and others for highlighting that significant development)

The PAD/NPP can be seen a a subset of this side, however rather than being about seeking or maintaining power and control for themselves, their main aim seems to basically be about bringing Thaksin down, now preventing any Thaksin aligned forces from getting into power (and if a Thaksin group ever did get back into power they would revert to the old undermining mode).
If the yellow side is ultimately victorious, expect the PAD/NPP to push for more specific, perhaps moralistic type goals, and its likely they may one day even end up an opposition force to the Democrat Party.


In the other corner we have Red.
The tactics on this side of the battle are much harder for me to read. This side is mainly comprised of Thaksin loyalists, but it also includes those who see Thaksin as the lesser of two evils.
At first glance one would think this side can just sit back and wait for the next election as it is unlikely that their electoral majority has diminished by much, if at all since the last election.
Apart from Abhisit & Korn, the current coalition government is the usual mix of ugly, corrupt and incompetent. One would think the corruption scandals will keep coming, and with the likes of Kasit as Foreign Minister, and Pornthiva as Commerce Minister, there are sure to be more embarrassments.
So one possible course of action for the reds is to just sit back, highlight the mistakes & problems of the coalition government and watch it eventually collapse.
But what then do we make of the regular calls for the final battle by the likes of Jatuporn?
Why the rush?
Is it only because the Shin asset seizure case is looming and Thaksin loyalists are in control of, and are the great majority of the protagonists, on the red side of the fence, or are there other reasons why the reds cannot sit back and wait for elections?

Rather than an inevitable collapse, is the current government consolidating power in a way that will make it difficult for the red side to gain power? (My guess is NO, and judging by his performance so far, the longer Abhisit stays in power the more ordinary Thai's will come to despise him)

By making a final push, would the red leaders be falling into Prem/Chimsak's trap, or is it possible they have some other plan to overcome it?

Prem has proven to be a good tactician over the years (IMO), but has he overstepped the mark and made it more difficult for his successor?
( like what some have argued one other highly influental and aging person on the Thai scene has done?)
The reds may not have completely discredited Surayud, but they certainly have taken the shine off him as Prem's successor, and their tactic of highlighting the double standards is a good one that hopefully they will continue even if Thaksin aligned forces regain power.

Has Thaksin's leadership role in the reds been maintained, or is there a chance that others can step up and inspire the Thaksin loyalist rump that this fight should be about much more than getting Thaksin back to power (or getting his money back)?


It's obvious that whoever controls the guns, controls Thailand
Thaksin, Samak and Somchai could not get the army under government control. So far, Abhisit has not had to face such problems, and despite looking like being in considerable trouble during the April 2009 riots, he came through that with flying colours (no doubt with a little help from those who know who owns the horses, and who are just jockeys)
Have things changed since then? Just how split is the military, and what can be made of the recent (unsubstantiated?) grenade attack at army headquarters?

Sorry, lots of questions - does anyone have the answers????
.