New Mandala

48 responses so far ↓

• 1 Andrew Walker // Nov 18, 2006 at 6:55 am

  Here is a follow-up email to the comments by Keyes. I am not sure who the author (RBA) is:

  Thanks very much for thi, Biff. There must be some voices that give lie to the oft-repeated charge that rural people are not sufficiently competent to exercise the vote. For all his faults, Thaksin was the only politician in my memory who did anything for the poor. More seriously, what I find is that much of what is taking place is largely a reaction to the sense of loss of power and prestige among the traditional elites (this includes intellectual elites). For example:

  A few years ago, I heard Prawasi Wasi give a talk (in English) in which he said that the problem for Thailand was that people aspired too much, that they should go back to planting their rice fields and be happy. I have held him in contempt ever since, but he is honored by the intellectuals;

  Thirayuth’s comment in March is another blow to democracy: “What is worrisome is that Thaksin has mobilized the poor and gotten them involved in politics….And what is worrisome about that is that the poor vote differently from the middle class.” So, he loses all credibility in my book.

  I must say that Thongchai and Giles Ungpakhorn seem to be among the few Thai intellectuals who can think clearly about the issue. They both suffer from taking rather courageous positions. I hope that we can provide them with sufficient support to continue.

  RBA

• 2 patiwat // Nov 18, 2006 at 7:27 am

  RBA, do you have a source for that “What is worrisome is that Thaksin has mobilized the poor and gotten them involved in politics…” quote? I can’t seem to corraborate that statement.

  To see a 6 October-man saying that is quite revolting. But then I remember that it’s Theerayut Boonmee, who wold his soul out a long time ago.

• 3 nganadeeleg // Nov 18, 2006 at 9:52 am

  That’s why I say Thaksin could have been so good, but he turned out such a disappointment.
  Instead of shaking up the traditional elites for the betterment of the country, he did it to further his own interests and that of his family & friends.

  The Temasek deal was the final straw and proved that Thaksin did not really care about the poor, and was just using them in a dangerous game.

  Do any politicians really want to improve the situation for the poor? Looking at the way they play musical chairs shifting from one party to another, makes me suspect most are just in it for what they can get, so Thaksin was not a lone wolf.

  Thaksin blew it, and fortunately Thailand still has the monarchy to provide some stability.
  Now that the coup has happened, it would be nice if Surayud, the reluctant prime minister, could be allowed to get on with the job without being dragged down by the same old politics, media and intellectuals snapping away at him.

  PS - Hopefully my comment was not too ethnocentric.

• 4 polo // Nov 18, 2006 at 10:02 am

  In the early 1990s I saw some rough estimates by Thai researchers that there were over a series of elections clearly diminishing returns from vote buying, falling from, say, 80% effectiveness in the early 80s to 60 percent by then. I don’t know how solid the methodology but it certainly seemed evident that politicians were haveing to work much harder and spend more to get the same number of votes. If that trend continued it would make it easy to toss views like Sondhi’s into the trash can.
  On the other hand, too, I wonder how many of Sondhi’s vauntd middle class vote their pocketbooks — the SET level, the cost of petrol or whatever.

• 5 lingling // Nov 18, 2006 at 10:29 am

  What to do when the elite are happy to maintain control over the poor and do so in an unapologetic manner?

  It seems that there is an element of socialist, perhaps even communist, sentiment seeping out here. Is this the begining of support for a peasant uprising amongst the bloggers here? Is it possible that we might see an international uniting of the academic elite of America, Australia, and Britain and the peasantry of SEAsia like once before, like in Vietnam? Only fighting for democracy rather than freedom? Or is this support for the rural poor of Thailand merely a twinge of conscience, like in the more liberal days of the end of the Netherlands East Indies, or is it just an academic curiosity?

  I see that Andrew you are interested in development so perhaps it is your humanitarian side that brings you to this issue? But I ask, is this elite view of the peasants as being problematic really that hard to accept considering that over the past 140 years, at least, they have been the focus of political mobilisation by deposed local rulers, milleniarian cults, charismatic leaders, by Kings and Communists, by development workers, and by facists, even by Tiger Cub Scouts…of course they are going to be seen as problematic and especially in a regime change where their allegiance was seen to be with the ousted group, any elite person with half a brain is going to want to delegitamise them as fast as possible…ho hum.

• 6 lingling // Nov 18, 2006 at 10:34 am

  …furthermore, I think it might not be such a far cry from the truth to say that the rural poor’s political choices are subject to some manipulation…the poor elsewhere in the world seem to be…look at the United states and Australia and the abominations they have successively voted in time and again, right wing, elite with a penchant for racism…even the middle-classes were in on those two…

• 7 polo // Nov 18, 2006 at 11:06 am

  What’s really funny about this is that the king has always called the rural poor Thailand’s trustworthy bedrock and has been suspicious of the urban trading and capitalist classes. So Sondhi’s a monarchist who rejects the king’s own thought?

• 8 anti-coup and so Sondhi(s) // Nov 18, 2006 at 10:00 pm

  Please adding that Sondhi never come to visit the countryside more than a day!.

• 9 Curious // Nov 19, 2006 at 1:49 pm

  “I am happy, nonetheless, that Seattle and the University of Washington should have been put on the map of Thai politics through Khun Sondhi’s visit.”

  This comment astounds me. Does this mean that the U. of Washington is “happy” to be a megaphone for royalist ideologues who are attempting to create legitimacy for the disenfranchisement of the Thai electorate at the barrel of a gun? Thai villagers who have just had their right to vote for their own government stolen from them can not protest or even publicly criticize what has happened for fear of arrest (or worse!) under the conditions of martial law, yet the U. of Washington is “happy” to give Sondhi an international stage and the imprimatur of Western academic authority to publicly jeer at the foolish, uneducated villagers! What has happened to your democratic sensibilities? Where is your concern for the weakest and most abused group in Thailand? This makes you “happy”?!

  This is an appalling, disgraceful stance to take, in my opinion. Everyone knows Sondhi’s political-business views (as I have said before, Sondhi is fighting for his business survival; if Thaksin had not fallen Sondhi would have been ruined. Please don’t credit him with any political principle. Only the royalist regime can save him, which is why he defends it so staunchly). So why give Sondhi the satisfaction of being able to trumpet his anti-democratic/royalist views in his media back in Thailand with the endorsement of U. of Washington, which is so well-known in the world of Thai Studies? Why give this man a megaphone to legitimize the coup and the royalist dictatorship it has installed?! One can only conclude that U. of Washington is concerned solely with being put on the “map of Thai politics” - and one knows where on the map it wishes to be located: in that dark, thoroughly corrupt, anti-democratic kingdom of the royalists.

  What this coup has revealed is the complicity of Western centres of Thai Studies around the world (SOAS, U. of Washington, etc.), and a large proportion of the academics that work within them, with the royalist-military seizure of power and instalment of a dictatorship. The next time one reads an article or book produced from one of these centres purporting to be in the interests of the people of Thailand bear this in mind.

• 10 Curious // Nov 19, 2006 at 2:32 pm

  Thai Report from Sondhi’s Trip to U. Washington by ชลิตา บัณฑุวงศ์ posted on ฟ้าเดียวกัน website (http://www.sameskybooks.org/webboard/show.php?Category=sameskybooks&No=448)

  Thai students understand what was behind Sondhi’s visit, why couldn’t the U. of Washington? See especially the last paragraph, which alleges that the organizers of the seminar attempted to effectively censor the Thai anti-coup protesters by various means, including calling the police! This is what the royalist dictatorship is doing in Thailand, how dare they attempt to do it in America! How could the U. of Washington let this intimidation of Thai students protesting for democracy take place? Under such conditions one can only praise the courage of those Thai students.

  นักศึกษาไทยในซีแอตเติ้ลเจาะยางเวทีปราศรัยสนธิ ลิ้มทองกุล
  เรียกร้องหยุดสร้างความชอบธรรมแก่รัฐประหาร

  ซีแอตเติ้ล วอชิงตัน: นักศึกษาไทยในเมืองซีแอตเติ้ล รัฐวอชิงตัน ดำเนินกิจกรรมทางการเมืองคัดค้านรัฐประหาร 19 กันยายน 2549 ในบริเวณงานปราศรัยของสนธิ ลิ้มทองกุล และคณะ ท่ามกลางการขัดขวางและความไม่พอใจของคณะผู้จัดงาน ด้านสนธิ ลิ้มทองกุล ยืนยันจะเข้าใจรัฐประหารต้องเข้าใจประวัติศาสตร์ด้วย

  เมื่อวันที่ 14 พฤศจิกายน 2549 นายสนธิ ลิ้มทองกุล และคณะ ได้เดินทางมายังมหาวิทยาลัยวอชิงตัน เมืองซีแอตเติ้ล มลรัฐวอชิงตัน ได้เพื่อปราศรัยในหัวข้อ “เหตุการณ์ก่อนและหลังปฏิรูป การคอรัปชั่น และประชาธิปไตยในเมืองไทย” โดยมีชาวไทยในเมืองซีแอตเติ้ลเข้าร่วมราว 200 คน และมีชาวอเมริกันเข้าร่วมประปราย
  นายสนธิ ลิ้มทองกุล ได้กล่าวว่าตนยืนหยัดอยู่บนหลักการของธรรมมะและการไม่ยึดติดในลาภยศและทรัพย์สมบัติในการต่อสู้กับรัฐบาลทักษิณ นายสนธิได้กล่าวถึงเหตุผลที่ตนสนับสนุนและปกป้องรัฐบาลทักษิณในช่วงแรกว่า ตอนนั้นตนสิ้นหวังกับรัฐบาลชวน หลีกภัยที่ดำเนินการต่างๆ เชื่องช้า ประกอบกับพรรคไทยรักไทยมีนโยบายที่ดีและมีคนดีๆ เข้ามาร่วมรัฐบาลมาก อย่างไรก็ตาม ต่อมาตนสำนึกได้ว่ารัฐบาลทักษิณได้กระทำผิดอย่างมากมาย และรู้สึกละอายแก่ใจตนเองที่คอยปกป้องคนชั่ว ดังนั้นตนจึงเริ่มนำข้อมูลการกระทำผิดของรัฐบาลทักษิณมาเปิดเผยต่อประชาชนผ่านรายการเมืองไทยรายสัปดาห์จนกระทั่งรายการถูกปลดออกจากผังรายการของช่อง 9 ในทีสุด
  นายสนธิกล่าวว่ารัฐบาลทักษิณได้ฉีกรัฐธรรมนูญหรือยึดอำนาจอย่างเงียบๆ ไปแล้วก่อนการรัฐประหารด้วยการเข้าควบคุมองค์กรอิสระอย่าง ปปช. ศาลรัฐธรรมนูญ และ กกต. รวมถึงการดำเนินธุรกิจที่ผูกขาด และควบคุมครอบงำข้อมูลข่าวสารต่างๆ ต่อประชาชน ดังนั้น การจะเข้าใจรัฐประหาร 19 กันยายน 2549 จึงต้องเข้าใจถึงประวัติศาสตร์หรือความเป็นมาต่างๆ ที่เกิดขึ้นในช่วงรัฐบาลทักษิณด้วย นายสนธิยังได้เน้นย้ำถึงความสำคัญของสื่อมวลชนที่เป็นอิสระในการสร้างความเข้าใจที่ถูกต้องแก่ประชาชน พร้อมทั้งกล่าวว่าการกาบัตรเลือกตั้งในช่องไม่เลือกใคร (NO VOTE) ในการเลือกตั้งครั้งที่ผ่านมามีจำนวนมากถึง 10 กว่าล้านเสียงได้ก็เพราะการทำงานของ ASTV พร้อมกันนี้นายสนธิและคณะยังได้นำหุ้น ASTV และหนังสือ “ปรากฎการณ์สนธิฯ” มาจำหน่ายแก่ผู้เข้าร่วมงานด้วย

  อนึ่ง ในงานครั้งนี้ได้มีนักศึกษาไทยในเมืองซีแอตเติ้ลใช้ชื่อว่า “All the People’s Man Group” มาตั้งโต๊ะคัดค้านการรัฐประหาร โดยได้ปิดโปสเตอร์บริเวณโดยรอบงานมีข้อความว่า “หยุดให้ความชอบธรรมแก่รัฐประหาร” “ไม่มีข้อแก้ตัวแก่การทำรัฐประหาร” และ “’รัฐประหาร’ ไม่ใช่ ‘การปฏิรูป’” พร้อมกับได้แจกจ่ายเอกสารชื่อ มายาคติ 9 ประการเกี่ยวกับรัฐประหาร 19 กันยายน 2549 ให้แก่ผู้เข้าร่วมงาน เอกสารดังกล่าวมีเนื้อหาโดยรวมว่ารัฐประหารได้ขัดขวางและทำลายกระบวนการพัฒนาประชาธิปไตยในสังคมไทย รวมทั้งไม่ได้ช่วยคลี่คลายความขัดแย้ง และปัญหาที่ก่อขึ้นโดยรัฐบาลทักษิณ อันได้แก่ การทุจริตคอรัปชั่น ปัญหาชายแดนภาคใต้ การละเมิดสิทธิมนุษยชน และการเปิดเสรีการค้า อีกทั้งการรัฐประหารก็ไม่ใช่หนทางที่นำไปสู่การปฏิรูปการเมือง (ดูรายละเอียดในล้อมกรอบ/เอกสารแนบ)
  เป็นที่น่าสังเกตว่าแม้นายสนธิ ลิ้มทองกุล และนายการุณ ใสงาม ผู้ปราศรัยอีกท่านหนึ่ง จะกล่าวต่อผู้ฟังว่าพวกตนไม่ได้สนับสนุนและไม่เห็นด้วยกับการรัฐประหาร แต่คณะผู้จัดงานกลับขับไล่และขัดขวาง “All the People’s Man Group” ไม่ให้แจกเอกสารแก่ผู้เข้าร่วมงานโดยสะดวก และต้องย้ายโต๊ะคัดค้านออกจากบริเวณล็อบบี้หน้าห้องประชุมมายังด้านนอกประตูทางเข้าอาคารที่มืดและมีอากาศหนาวเหน็บยิ่ง ในขณะที่นักศึกษาหญิงไทยคนหนึ่งกำลังแจกเอกสารในบริเวณล็อบบี้ให้แก่ผู้เข้าร่วมนั้น คณะผู้จัดงานบางคนได้เดินตามเข้ามาต่อว่านักศึกษาคนดังกล่าวว่าไม่รักชาติและเสียแรงที่เป็นคนไทย พร้อมทั้งประกาศให้ผู้เข้าร่วมนำเอกสารได้รับไปทิ้งถังขยะ นอกจากนั้น คณะผู้จัดงานยังได้ส่งคนไทยคนหนึ่งซึ่งเป็นผู้กว้างขวางแห่งเมืองซีแอตเติ้ลมาเจรจากับกลุ่ม รวมทั้งได้แจ้งเจ้าหน้าที่ตำรวจ (UWPD) ว่ามีผู้มาก่อกวนการจัดงาน อย่างไรก็ตาม หลังจากที่ผู้กว้างขวางคนดังกล่าวและเจ้าหน้าตำรวจได้พูดคุยกับกลุ่มก็เกิดความเข้าใจและเห็นว่าการแสดงความคิดเห็นทางการเมืองเป็นเรื่องปกติของสังคมประชาธิบไตย “All the People’s Man Group” จึงดำเนินกิจกรรมต่างๆ ต่อจนกระทั่งจบรายการท่ามกลางความไม่พอใจของคณะผู้จัดงาน

• 11 Andrew Walker // Nov 21, 2006 at 8:17 am

  A further email comment in relation to Sondhi in Seattle:

  Whatever one’s views of Thaksin or the putsch that has, at least for the present, ended his premiership, it is high time to put an end to these very curious “Thaksin was the only politician in my memory who did anything for the poor.” lines. In the mid-1970s, Prime Minister Khuekrit Pramot and his finance minister Bunchu Rotchanasathian introduced a raft of policies aimed at Thailand’s rural poor. In comparative perspective, the thoughtful design and frankly progressive rationale (little surprise, in view of Bunchu’s very long association with the Thai left) of these policies set a standard not equaled till today. In the event, Khuekrit and Bunchu had only a brief period in office to implement their policies. Nevertheless, many have endured, both as specific measures (consider, for example, the Thai rural credit system) and as examples to leaders like Thaksin and his advisors. As luck would have it, too, last year saw the publication of Nawi Rangsiwararak’s excellent Bon thanon sai kanmueang khong Bunchu Rotchanasathian. >From this book one can learn much about that way that a sophisticated, committed man engaged with the problem of social inequality in Thailand in an era neglected by all too many commentators on recent events.

  Mike Montesano
  Bangkok

• 12 Johpa // Nov 21, 2006 at 11:17 am

  Wow, a bit surprised that Sondhi raises such passion.

  First, despite his claims to the contrary, Sondhi is very much a Thai politican. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, well then I saw a Thai politician quacking away who is currently at the top of the political totem pole in Thailand. Prof. Keyes is justifiably proud to get a top tier Thai politician to speak at the university where he worked for years to establish a bonafide Southeast Asian program. Now you may not like what Sondhi represents or what he says, but having him speak at the UW was indeed a milestone for the Southeast Asian program at the UW, unless of course you are so insecure that you wish to muzzle those with whom you disagree, in which case, may it be cut and thrown to the ducks as food.

  Second, I see no evidence of any seeping out of communist or socialist sentiment here. Nor do I see any elites posting here, only some hapless academics and equally hapless interested parties such as myself. Sondhi’s clearly negative opinions of the rural folks does highlight a problem of Thai democracy in balancing the needs of the rural poor (some 60%+ of the electorate) with the needs of the middle class city folks, as well as the true elites who I doubt are posting here or anywhere else in “bloggoshpere”. (I wonder if the newly imagined bloggosphere fits in with Anderson’s Imagined Communities?…..grad students take note)

• 13 Nicholas Wood // Nov 21, 2006 at 5:57 pm

  The farmers must have a much larger say in the way the country is run.

  How can there be a democracy when one must have a degree to sit in the parliament. If the farmers cannot vote for their own, they have to vote for the rural Phu-yai to represent them. This in itself leads to corruption of the voting process.

  Whether peope like it or not, the rural areas do represent 60% of the population and to deny them a real voice is wrong. Until there is a voice for the poor, as advocated in other posts, a left party, Thailand will continue to be a divided and patronge based country.

• 14 Curious // Nov 21, 2006 at 6:30 pm

  Reply to Johpa: isn’t the problem the fact that the people who ARE being muzzled are those who disagree with the royalist-military coup and the regime it has installed, while its supporters, like Sondhi, are given free reign to build legitimacy for a royalist-military dictatorship by speaking at famous “Thai Studies” universities around the world. Everyone knows the intellectual authority that the endorsement of a Western university confers in Thailand - especially Sondhi. And Sondhi uses that endorsement to jeer at the villagers!!

  Rather than be proud to “get” Sondhi (Sondhi “got” U. Washington, not the other way round) they should be ashamed to have allowed themselves to be used politically in this way. Sondhi is the key ideologue for a dictatorship: you’re telling me that hosting him is something to be proud of?!

  What should Southeast Asian Studies programs be more interested in doing, making “milestones” by hosting corrupt, anti-democratic businessmen/politicians, or by showing solidarity with those Thais whose voices have been silenced by a dictatorship? This is a question or principle, not insecurity.

  If the former then perhaps the next invitee on the list of speakers at U. Washington could be a general from the military junta in Myanmar, or, why not ex-President Suharto? There is a long list of potential speakers…

• 15 Johpa // Nov 23, 2006 at 8:45 am

  Sorry Curious, but after some 25 years of closely observing Thai politics, your concept of an ideological dictator and mine are at odds. Sondhi is just another in a very long string of Thai politicians whose primary goal is to get a bigger piece of the pie, although I think Handley, in his interview, had some interesting thoughts relative to the more global relationship of the military to the palace. I think Handley’s ideas have some credence. (Note that in my first post I remarked that I felt there was possibly some support for Sondhi from the Crown Prince, based upon some images presented in the Power Point demo shown behind Sondhi while he was speaking) But I doubt Sondhi has much ideology at all apart from that core of Bangkok values “what is in it for me?”. You want ideological dictators then I suggest you go across the Salween into Burma. Now that is my concept of ideological dictators and I would not be happy for an academic institution to give, say Than Shwe, a podium .

• 16 Curious // Nov 23, 2006 at 3:08 pm

  Well, I don’t actually think we are at odds, as you say. Yes, Sondhi does want his piece of the pie. My problem is with the Western universities who are helping him along the way. By “ideologue” I meant the way his media group supported the coup and has tried to legitimize the dictatorship it has installed. Yes, of course he has no “ideology” in the sense of a reasoned political program, and yes again, it’s simply a question of “what’s in it for me”. So I ask again, why are Thai Studies programs around the world bending over backwards to give this guy the imprimatur of Western academic authority? And a final yes, Handley does have one of the best analyses of the whole crisis. But I wonder if he has written off Thaksin a little too quickly.

• 17 Thai in Seattle // Nov 23, 2006 at 8:26 pm

  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.

• 18 Vichai N. // Nov 23, 2006 at 11:48 pm

  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.

• 19 Andrew Walker // Nov 24, 2006 at 6:46 am

  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!

• 20 Curious // Nov 25, 2006 at 11:25 am

  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?

• 21 Vichai N/ // Nov 25, 2006 at 1:13 pm

  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.

• 22 Thai in Seattle // Nov 25, 2006 at 7:22 pm

  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.

• 23 Curious // Nov 25, 2006 at 7:24 pm

  The issue is that on New Mandala debate and discussion are encouraged, but in Thailand it is forbidden - by the regime that you support. THIS is what is “criminal”: the use of the threat of violence to seize political power - no different from a common bandit. Why don’t they lift martial law? Do YOU support their use of martial law? Are these your “convictions”?

• 24 Thai in Seattle // Nov 25, 2006 at 7:34 pm

  Andrew,

  There is another error I made in my comment. The sentence “On your answer that rural Thais already knew how to fish, I got it all wrong” should be “On your answer that rural Thais already knew how to fish, YOU GOT IT ALL WRONG.”

  By the way, I posted the factual information about Mr. Sondhi’s visit to Seattle a few days ago here at this web site. But it disappeared. It must have been deleted. I wonder, is there anyone who is afraid of the fact here or what? Is there a censorship here in this web site?
  Please tell me that we don’t have Thaksin’s ex-officials or agents here who will delete people’s comments for speaking out against him like in Thailand’s web sites during his regime.

  Because my first posting that contains factual information on Mr. Sondhi Limthongkul’s visit to Seattle was deleted, I have to post it here again after this.

• 25 Thai in Seattle // Nov 25, 2006 at 7:45 pm

  I was there attending the event. The event was actually organized by Thai business owners & professionals in Seattle not the Thai Students in UW. According to a member of the organizing group, SE Asia Center sponsored only in name so that the meeting hall could be secured for use without going through the red tape. Actually, there’re only 2 students who distributed flyers protesting against the coup. Since the group paid for the rental cost, and since the 2 protesters took over the spot where the event organizer had planned to put a large table full of free refreshment (hot coffee & tea included) without informing the organizer in advance, members of the organizer were not pleased to begin with. They viewed the protest as the support for Taksin Shinnawatra. When the 2 protesting students aggressively handed out flyers to the attendees who started to come in, members of the organizer got upset. So, they contacted the staff manning the facility & asked that the 2 students moved their table & materials away from the spot slated for their use. Since their action created considerable confusion to the arriving attendees, they were asked to be outside the hall separate from the originally planned event.

  My acquaintance said that in having the event opened to the public & held at UW, they were aware that there would be disagreements arising from Khun Sondhi & his co-speakers’ speech. Many members of the organizing team have lived in the US for decades; they know Americans are very opinionated. Therefore, disagreement or opposition was expected. But they did not appreciate that the young lady who led the protest disguised herself days earlier trying to extract information on who actually funded the event and then made the pre-emptive move occupying the rented space before the organizer came to set up the meeting. Nevertheless, after knowing that the 2 protesting students created no trouble other than distributing the flyers, they offered the student free coffee and refreshment including the beverage as well as cookies and donuts.

  It should be noted that both Mr. Sondhi & Senator Karoon went out of their way to chat with the 2 protesting students. They invited the students to sit in & listen to their information. The students sat next to a member of the organizer. They applauded at times during the speech by both speakers.

  By the way, the auditorium can seat 440 people at full capacity. In my estimate, there were close to 400 people attended the symposium.

  It is clear to me & others who know the facts & have the critical thinking ability that in protesting the coup, these 2 students & those people in Thailand are mostly supporters of the ex-PM. They protest because their idol lost out in the game of politics & power. Knowing that their favorite man is homeless & wandering aimlessly from one country to another & knowing that anti-graft committees are piling up evidence against the ex-PM, his wife, relatives & close associates are too much to bear. They feel powerless because the base of their power was gone, suddenly taken away by the coup. One has to question their motives in the protest against the coup despite the 4 main reasons given by the coup leader & despite things are getting better now compared to several months ago. If they are genuinely against the coup, they should include future coups and the counter-coup as well. Since the day after the coup, there have consistently been widespread rumors about counter-coup. If their common goal & motive is against the coup, they must fairly & clearly condemn all coups including the counter-coup because the coups & counter-coups are all the same, different than the chicken coup. This applies to all Farangs or non-Thais every where too.

• 26 Thai in Seattle // Nov 25, 2006 at 7:59 pm

  To Curious, commentator #20 -

  Based on my comment above, I hope you’ll find some of the answers you asked me in your comment. Whenever I have the time, I’ll provide the rest.

  In the meantime, I’d suggest you to at least read the Nation and Bangkok Post to find more info or answers you don’t have. Both are English newspapers & rather independent ones too. Reading Manager will give you another perspective. If you have real closed friends or relatives in Thailand, it’ll even be better. Quite often, when native Thais talk to foreigners, they really do not open up speaking the truth out of courtesy.

  And if you know the facts, I dare say that your view on Thaksin’s behaviors & practices as the man, businessman and head of a government will not be positive or favorable as you’ve shown based on a few comments you posted here.

  Have a good weekend.

• 27 Andrew Walker // Nov 25, 2006 at 9:40 pm

  Thanks Thai in Seattle for your contributions. I am not sure what happened to the comment you made previously. I may have deleted it in error when I thought I was deleting duplicate comments. Sorry. Rest assured, we have no intention or desire to delete comments that disagree with us. The only comments that are not approved are those that are considered offensive.

• 28 Andrew Walker // Nov 25, 2006 at 9:45 pm

  Hi Thai in Seattle (again). In fact your comment was not deleted. It is still available here.

• 29 cheeky // Nov 26, 2006 at 12:34 am

  To Thai in Seattle:

  Now I understand excatly after you advise reading the Nation, Bangkok Post and Manager.

  cheers

• 30 Curious // Nov 26, 2006 at 2:24 am

  To Thai in Seattle: The Nation, Bangkok Post, “independent”?! Ho ho ho, Merry Christmas! I hope you are not a student there in Seattle, because if you were you must already have failed Journalism 100. Now I understand why you post the way you do. Perhaps you should actually talk to some of those “native Thai” people you refer to instead of repeating what is written in phu jat kan, because you have obviously been living out of your country for so long that you don’t have any idea about what is really happening. But it’s not hard to find out, just ask any taxi driver, or read any of the alternative websites, or ask any of the 60% of people who voted for Thaksin, next time you “visit” your native country. You live in America, I hope you would understand the meaning of majority rule in a democracy. Better that, than try to support your argument by referring to your “Thainess” and saying that farang can never understand the mysterious Thai culture.

• 31 James Haughton // Nov 26, 2006 at 2:35 am

  Vichai N:
  If Andrew does not respond to your comments, it is because you show all the maturity of a fourteen year old, which leads me to suspect that you are one. Let me make some basic facts clear to you, since Andrew and Nick are exercising such admirable restraint - I suspect because they either find you amusing, or hope that you will eventually get bored and go find someone else to annoy.

  This is an academic forum. We are here to discuss events and share and improve our knowledge and understanding. We are not here to score points, support any particular politician, or indulge in ad hominem attacks or abuse. We are not here to repeat ourselves over and over, about the ‘war on drugs’ or any other subject, in the vain hope that someone will soothe our ego by paying attention to us.

  Various commentators, including Andrew and myself, share an opinion that rural people in Thailand are generally discriminated against and that some of Thaksin’s policies worked against that discrimination. We also think that the military intervening in politics is a bad idea. We are open to being convinced otherwise, by reasoned arguments based upon evidence.

  However, to make an effort to address your concerns, neither I nor anyone else I know (and I know quite a few people on this forum, including Andrew) thinks that the War on Drugs was a good thing. Personally, I would have been delighted if Thaksin had been placed on trial in a legally constituted court and charged with responsibility for all those deaths, though the balance of probabilities is that a certain charismatic figure gave the go ahead as well. That did not happen. Nor is it likely to happen, because the people who did the killings were the police and the military, and it is almost axiomatic that military dictatorships (which is what Thailand is now, no matter how benign it may be - any country under martial law is under a military dictatorship, that is what martial law means) do not investigate human rights abuses by their own police and military. They are not showing any clear signs of doing so now, which leads many people to believe that the CNS doesn’t care at all about the killings in the war on drugs, and are only using them as a smokescreen to hide their power grab, a smokescreen which you, Vichai, are a part of.

  Please feel free to post again when you have something new, reasonable, and backed by evidence to say (though I will make an exception for your rantings about Khmer voodoo - please, carry on on that topic).

  Have a nice day.

• 32 Thai in Seattle // Nov 26, 2006 at 8:19 pm

  To commentator #20 – Curious

  Based on your comments & questions, I got a hunch you are a Thai more than Aussie, American or other Caucasian origin. Your knowledge of the political chaos in Thailand together with your visit to the Sameskybooks.org’s website also led me to believe so.

  I want to make it clear to you & other readers that I do not belong to any particular party. I am an independent, for more rights, greater freedom & fuller democracy. I am strongly against corruption & misconducts but for higher ethical standards & accountability. I am for peace & against violence.

  In your comment, you mentioned violence a few times relating to the coup. You clearly tried to paint the distorted picture. The whole world knew that it was a bloodless coup; not a single bullet was fired & no violence was involved at all. The world also saw pictures of people (Thais & foreigners of young & old of both sexes) taken with soldiers and tanks. And you implied that I lived in the cave for the past 5 yrs!

  Because I’ve been living in the States for more than 2 decades, I have tasted & participated in the world’s model for democracy. Because of the familiarity, I knew from the beginning that Thaksin was a crook, not a noble or honest man who would dedicate himself to serve loyally for the interest of the nation & people.

  The issues that majority of the commentators & I addressed here are centered on Mr. Sondhi Limthongkul’s anti-Thaksin’s role & his public speeches, the coup led by General Sondhi Boonyaratglin, and Thailand’s political events under ex-PM Thaksin’s administration. These 3 key players and their maneuvering acts that have the direct impacts on Thailand and neighboring countries are more captivating & of the cause for concern to me as a native Thai. They are the instigators, the doers, actors. Although in his Dec 5, 2005 statement, King Bhumibol reiterated that he is a human being & admitted that he made mistakes in his younger days, to us Thais, we know his mistake if any did not hurt Thai people & the country . You or anyone who has tried to link him to the coup got to be insane, has hidden agenda against our beloved King & has hostility against Thailand.

  As for the Crown Prince, he is not much different than Prince Charles; a lot of Thais are not proud of his behaviors. Unlike those fair & open-minded people, people with hidden agenda or ill will would distort the facts & tend to spread falsehoods to hurt others. The Crown Prince or royal family members may have invested in projects, programs, assets to earn income similar to the royal family of England or other nations. I don’t think there is anything wrong with that.

  Again, it is not the royal family but Thaksin who brought the country’s democracy down into the valley, who OKd the war-on-drug campaign that caused innocent lives, who OKd the kidnapping & killing of thousands of innocent civilians, who refused to pay even 1 Satang (100 Satangs equal 1 Baht) tax on capital gain tax for the sale of his $1.8 billion assets, who pushed hard for mega projects with questionable bidding process & non-specific details, who arbitrarily made deals with foreign govt in exchange for personal (his & his cabinet members) gains & business interests, who allowed his family members as well as cabinet members and other high ranking govt officials to enrich themselves (through insider-trading on privatization of national infrastructure & others) so much & so fast at the expenses of the people & nation. It was Thaksin & his cronies who silent the press, stymied freedom of expression/speech & instilled fear into govt workers not to talk about the politics or say anything bad against him. (My sister-in-law is in the management level for a department in the govt agency.) EVEN THAKSIN’S MAID & DRIVER OWNED HIS COMPANY’S STOCKS WORTH HUNDREDS MILLION OF BAHTS! Based on the requirement by Council for Democratic Reform, all Thaksin’s former cabinet members & their immediate family members must disclose their assets. It was very astonishing that many have assets valued more than double from the time before & at the end of their official duties. The assets ranged from hundreds of million to billions of Bahts. Their spouses or unmarried but live-in partner also have millions & hundred million Bahts. Even their children, many are still in grade schools, have millions & hundreds of million Bahts. Where did the money come from especially for the kids?

  On Sondhi’s lese majesty charges against Thaksin, the ex-PM’s deeds & words appear to be offensive against HM in the view of great number of people which include scholars. If Mr. Sondhi Limthongkul committed the lese majesty offense, why did Thaksin’s govt not directly file the charge against him? Why did the govt has to borrow the clowns’ names to file the charge against Sondhi? My response to your question about the law is that most laws are written with good intention to serve the majority of people, and for peace and order of the society and nation. But Thai police and authorities tend to abuse the laws & misuse them to hurt others & for personal gain. The problems lie on the enforcement more than the laws.

  As for the currently appointed PM and parliamentary law-makers, frankly they are better than those elected. These are respectable citizens, seasoned professionals with diverse experience and broad backgrounds. Together with their rather clean records (on corruption), they are more qualified than those crooked politicians without backbones elected in the last 2 elections. Thaksin often copied terms used in the US during his 5 yr as the PM. These terms or words include naming Thailand’s 1st official plane for PM as Air-force 1, changing the honorable governor title of provinces to CEO, calling his TRT party’s meeting room as War room, publicizing his travels to provinces as Road show & Reality show, etc. Despite being good at this & despite his PhD, he did not know nor practice the word “ACCOUNTIBILTY.” With his arrogant self, he does not say “I am sorry; I made the mistake.” This is one of his major mistakes.

  I hope the info & answers provided here will be enough to satisfy your curiosity. If there’s anything else I can help to enlighten you, please let me know.

• 33 Thai in Seattle // Nov 26, 2006 at 8:30 pm

  To Curios #30 - Please think again about getting the information from Taxi drivers particularly on politics.

  Do you think if there is any correlation at all between logics and education? What level of education most if not all cab drivers have in Thailand? Does their profession enable them to accurately provide the facts on politics & its complex ramification? How reliable are their statements?

• 34 Taxi Driver // Nov 30, 2006 at 10:34 pm

  To Thai in Seattle:
  Presumably you consider yourself more educated than “most if not all cab drivers in Thailand” hence your derision of their views/opinions. Does this mean that persons who are more educated than you (I’m guessing, for example, the people who host this blog site) should therefore consider your opinion worthless?

  This elitist attitude is part of the problem faced by Thailand. Rural voters are considered too “ngoh” to be able to vote wisely, and are “ngoh” enough to be duped to sell their vote for a few hundred baht. Has it crossed the elitists’ mind that maybe the rural voters are capable of exercising choice and their actions are entirely rational? Maybe a few hundred baht earned for a vote is more valuable than a vote for a politician that will never truely represent them anyway.

  It is true that the quality, moral and ethical standard of most Thai politicians is very low. Not many enter politics to truely represent their constituency (its usually the other way round). But coup d’tats are not the long term solution to this problem. If Thais continue to believe that its OK for elected governments, no matter how corrupt the administration or the voting process that got them into office, can be overthrown by the royalist establishment at whim, then Thais will never develop and strengthen the institutions that can protect them from such excesses, and they will continue to remain dependent on a “white knight” to be their ultimate check & balance. What if next time there is no white knight, or if the next white knight turns out to be a black knight?

  The next generation of Thais, including those who will become army generals, have just been shown that its OK to overthow an elected government because “they know how to represent the people better”.

  All corrupt politicians (and Thaksin is by no means the first nor the last) should be brought to justice. The law must be enforced equally no matter if you’re a farmer, a taxi driver, a khon ruey, politician or a big shot army/police general (or sons of one who can shoot people to death in bars). This is what the current self-proclaimed moral leaders of the junta should at least set in motion and try to lay as the foundation for a secure and stable Thailand.

• 35 nganadeeleg // Dec 1, 2006 at 5:22 am

  Taxi Driver said:
  “If Thais continue to believe that its OK for elected governments, no matter how corrupt the administration or the voting process that got them into office, can be overthrown by the royalist establishment at whim, then Thais will never develop and strengthen the institutions that can protect them from such excesses, and they will continue to remain dependent on a “white knight” to be their ultimate check & balance.”

  The ‘white night’ would not be needed if Thais did not continue to elect corrupt polticians.

• 36 nganadeeleg // Dec 1, 2006 at 5:45 am

  I meant ‘white knight’.

• 37 Taxi Driver // Dec 1, 2006 at 2:21 pm

  Nganadeeleg #35

  Do you mean voters are too “ngoh” and that’s why they keep on voting in corrupt politicians? (Isn’t this exactly the problematic ‘elitist’ viewpoint I was talking about?)

  It is hardly fair or constructive to blame Thai voters (and presumably you are one yourself) entirely for the problem of corruption in Thailand. Its the corrupt politicians & generals who are at fault, and the ones who should be prosecuted. If a political party or candidate offers bribes to voters at the ballot box, then should not that party or candidate be prosecuted? (rather than simply blame voters who “continue to elect corrupt politicians”)

  If the current establishment who are in power in Thailand wish to leave a stable and secure Thailand for future Thai generations, one of the most important things they can do now (its not too late) is to geniunely begin a process to change the Thai society from one where those who are rich and powerful through criminal or corrupt means are immune from the law, to one where the law is enforced and applied more equally on all citizens. It is undoutedly not an easy task, but the moral force of the current leaders can surely carry it a long way. Question is, will the “establishment” have the will or courage to risk it.

• 38 nganadeeleg // Dec 1, 2006 at 6:42 pm

  Taxi Driver:
  Not necessarily “ngoh”
  They could be either very stupid for continuing to support Thaksin once he showed that he was just in politics for himself and his cronies to make a power/money grab
  OR
  They are somewhat smarter ( or disillusioned with politics) and realise that, based on past history, virtually all thai politicians are similarly corrupt and at least Thaksin passed on some of the leftovers to them.

  I basically agree with your thoughts on leaving a stable Thailand for future generations - I just happen to think there is more chance of that with Thaksin gone.

• 39 Vichai N. // Dec 1, 2006 at 10:35 pm

  I missed James Haughton’s (November 26th, 2006 at 2:35 am) defense of Andrew Walker and why Andrew Walker would require the services of cheerleader James strikes me as odd.

  I am flattered to be mistaken for a 14 year old but even a precocious 14 year old do look up to doctorate academicians like Andrew Walker for guidance. And Andrew Walker had written this fib about Thailand’s Sufficiency Economy and all this 14-year old was asking was for Andrew Walker’s enlightenment on how he arrived at at that conclusion that Thailand’s Sufficiency Economy was conceived to keep the Thai poor in shackles of poverty indefinitely. Andrew can always apologize and admit he lied and this 14-year old will understand.

  I did not realize James Haughton is enthralled by Thaksin Shinawatra Khmer voodoo daily rituals. So far James those Khmer voodoo spells have been a dud for Thaksin, but not for want of faith or devotion. Let me know if Thaksin Shinawatra turn up in your neighborhood in search of shamans and witches to keep his dark powers potent and all-powerful.

• 40 New Mandala » Pro-poor programs // Dec 11, 2006 at 3:35 pm

  [...] A few weeks ago I posted comment by Charles Keyes on Sondhi Limthongkul’s presentation in Seattle. Keyes’ comment was first circulated on the Thailand-Laos-Cambodia (TLC) email list. In response to comment on that list Mike Montesano made the following contribution: Whatever one’s views of Thaksin or the putsch that has, at least for the present, ended his premiership, it is high time to put an end to these very curious “Thaksin was the only politician in my memory who did anything for the poor.” lines. In the mid-1970s, Prime Minister Khuekrit Pramot and his finance minister Bunchu Rotchanasathian introduced a raft of policies aimed at Thailand’s rural poor. In comparative perspective, the thoughtful design and frankly progressive rationale (little surprise, in view of Bunchu’s very long association with the Thai left) of these policies set a standard not equaled till today. In the event, Khuekrit and Bunchu had only a brief period in office to implement their policies. Nevertheless, many have endured, both as specific measures (consider, for example, the Thai rural credit system) and as examples to leaders like Thaksin and his advisors. As luck would have it, too, last year saw the publication of Nawi Rangsiwararak’s excellent Bon thanon sai kanmueang khong Bunchu Rotchanasathian. From this book one can learn much about that way that a sophisticated, committed man engaged with the problem of social inequality in Thailand in an era neglected by all too many commentators on recent events. [...]

• 41 Jon Fernquest // Dec 12, 2006 at 10:29 pm

  Someone will have to draw a diagram explaining the complicated web of inter-related interests that are served by coup and counter-coup. Another piece in the puzzle from Chang Noi today:

  http://www.geocities.com/changnoi2/coupcharter.htm

  I hope the end result of this tortuous political process is that some more baby Thaksins pop out of their eggs and through some miracle keep each other in check and prevent each other from usurping all power and wealth, that a linear evolution that betters the life opportunities of rural folk and gives them some upwards mobility, is possible, rather than a mere cyclical repetition of past history.

• 42 Suvimol // Dec 13, 2006 at 2:22 am

  Are you really wishing for ‘more baby Thaksins’ to pop out Jon?
  What on earth for? Any mother who suspects that they are carrying ‘baby Thaksins’ should abort. That’s the surest way of preventing future Thai coups.

• 43 Jon Fernquest // Dec 13, 2006 at 9:43 pm

  Suvimol: “Are you really wishing for ‘more baby Thaksins’ to pop out Jon?”

  IMHO Thaksin, besides being a real flesh and blood billionaire, also stands for a **type of innovator** one finds sometimes in Thai institutions who, initially unanimously welcomed, is eventually unanimously ostracised.

  These innovators promise to improve traditional Thai practice with non-Thai practice, taken from western books and scholarship, just like Thaksin was doing right up to his final Council of Foreign Relations speech the day before the coup.

  I encountered a female Thaksin in the Thai University I once worked at. She arrived brimming with new ideas and pet projects based on western ideas where she received her PhD, initially everyone loved her, nodding their heads, this woman is going to make changes, within one semester she had stepped on everyone’s toes and alienated almost everyone, her popularity fell as meteorically as it rose, and finally she was ostracized. She remained for another year or two working by herself on innovative little projects in an office all by herself. The ancient Greek definition of ostracism has an uncanny resemblance to what happened to Thaksin:

  “…ostracism was often used pre-emptively. It was used as a way of defusing major confrontations between rival politicians (by removing one of them from the scene), neutralising someone thought to be a threat to the state, or exiling a potential tyrant. Crucially, ostracism had no relation to the processes of justice. There was no charge or defence, and ***the exile was not in fact a penalty; it was simply a command from the Athenian people that one of their number be gone for ten years.”***…by temporarily decapitating a faction, it could help to defuse confrontations that threatened the order of the State….Perhaps merely the sense ***that someone had become too arrogant or prominent*** was enough to get someone’s name onto an ostrakon” IMHO this type of Thaksin-like Thai innovator could eventually change Thailand in significant and good ways.

  Of course, this is all after the fact. I abhorred Thaksin’s coopting of the constitution and extra-judicial killings, although I’m afraid the reasons why many of us find this to be wrong are not appreciated by rural folk (who I live amongst).

• 44 Jon Fernquest // Dec 13, 2006 at 9:50 pm

  Whoops here’s the citation for that quote:
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostracism

• 45 Suvimol // Dec 13, 2006 at 11:08 pm

  Jon, Thaksin was only ‘innovative’ in so far as massive vote buying and subverting the constitution was concerned . . to perpetuate his massive corruption run of course. The path to Thaksin’s billions was ‘innovative’ in the sense that his first millions was earned selling computers to the Police Department where his father-in-law was Police Chief . . both father-in-law and Thaksin drafting the computer sale agreement so there would be disputes later on, see.

  From then on Thaksin just kept on bribing the junta generals in power to get his telcom licenses . . innovative again!

  Thaksin repeated his bribing ways . . . massively to buy the vulnerable village poor . Not content, Thaksin bought small parties and venal politicians to ensure his TRT party would be unopposed.

  Jon Thaksin was NOT ostracized. He was deposed. Booted out. Ousted. By General Sonthi’s coup which was resoundly applauded by the majority of Thais fed up with Thaksin’s corruption and extrajudicial killings and abuse of the Thai constitution.

  I still stay mothers who suspect they carry ‘baby Thaksins’ should immediately abort.

• 46 patiwat // Dec 14, 2006 at 7:25 am

  I have to side with Jon here.

  Before Thaksin, politicians campaigned based on their local patronage, their public image, and the organization of their canvassers. Oh, and they also bought votes.

  After Thaksin, politicians campaigned based on the policy agendas, their record of policy implementation, and the organization of their canvassers. Oh, and they also bought votes.

  By making promises and being able to deliver on the ones that people cared about most, Thaksin helped change Thailand’s political culture.

  Take a look at the Democrats. Their campaign in 2001 was traditional - they campaigned on being a respectable party who knew how to manage things, while Thaksin promised universal healthcare and microcredit. Democrats lost, Thaksin won, Thaksin delivered. In 2005, the Democrats also did a traditional “image” campaign - they said that if you voted 201 Democrat respectable MPs, Thailand’s parliament would be stronger. Democrats lost, Thaksin won. Finally, in 2006, the Democrats started getting smart and made promises: free healthcare, Skytrain expansion, and completely free K-12 education. Using Thaksin’s techniques, they were finally gaining traction with the electorate, but the coup prevented them from finally gaining back some ground.

  Who knows whether post-coup elections will see the Democrats reverting back to 2001/2005 practice, or will see them continue to make Thaksin-style promises, ala 2006.

• 47 Andrew Walker // Dec 14, 2006 at 9:49 am

  Dear Suvimol - why not just post as Vichai? Your comments are welcome but creating multiple identities to inflate the support for your views is playing games.

• 48 Srithanonchai // Jan 4, 2007 at 12:03 am

  A very late comment: “RBA” (comment 1) is Robert B. Albritton.

Leave a Comment