In an earlier post I wrote about the address to be delived in Seattle by Sondhi Limthongkul (so-called pro-democracy advocate) on his “US West Coast Tour”. Some reports of the function are now coming through. New Mandala reader BF provides this link to (Thai-language) coverage of anti-coup protests at the meeting. And another reader, Jopha, provides the following account which I reproduce here in full. Jopha’s summary indicates that Sondhi’s line of argument was very similar to that presented in London. (For full New Mandala comment on the London meeting enter “Sondhi” in the search bar above.) Any other feedback on the Seattle meeting would be very welcome.
Jopha writes: The speech was surprisingly well attended, with even a handful of my fellow Farangs in attendance. I thought I might meet a few grad students and the new generation of Southeast Asian scholars on campus but encountered a number of my Thai acquaintances from the local business community who all assumed I was, to their delight, a Sondhi “supporter” as opposed to an interested bystander.
First, Sondhi’s English is excellent, far better than most. Initially he was to give a 20-minute talk in English, but the talk went on for nearly an hour.
Sondhi is clearly conflicted by the coup, happy to have Taksin out of the way yet frustrated that the only possible method of removing Taksin was a military coup. His reasons for this situation, this failure of “democracy”, and a personal frustration, focused upon a lack of free speech and free press, no surprise from coming from a self-proclaimed media tycoon recently muffled. He also briefly touched upon the failure of the education system to create an educated voting public, but like many Thais, he is unwilling to critically explore the nature of the Thai education system in any depth.
He was almost downright contemptuous of Taksin’s “populist” policies, as if populist notions were too far below him to even dignify a comment. He was equally, in my humble opinion, contemptuous of the poor who he imagines as being easily bought off by simple bribery. (I guess that my experiences of observing election money being distributed in local villages over the past 20 years and what Sondhi imagines it to be are at variance.) According to Sondhi, the poor and the very wealthy do not pay taxes (I believe the rural poor pay taxes indirectly by pricing controls on agriculture products) and that he is the self-proclaimed advocate for the newer emerging middle-class who he believes do pay the taxes. It really seemed to gall his Bangkok sensibilities that Taksin gave his, Sondhi’s, “hard-earned tax money,” to the rural poor. The poor seem to be the problem to Sondhi, as he noted that most of the opposition votes came from the 1st (amphoe muang) districts of a Province whilst Taksin received his support from the more rural districts. There was no mention about how he and the TRT opposition might have attempted to go after the rural votes.
Sondhi appears to be a monarchist and clearly supports the throne having a role in what he described as the “royal prerogative” to bestow or withhold favor on leaders of the nation. And judging by some of the images shown during his talk, methinks he has some support by the Crown Prince although he played down the role of the palace in the recent coup.
He attacked Taksin for the perceived problems at the new Airport (does he read the thaivisa boards?) without noting that this mega project predated his former ally’s rise to power. He also made a comment about someone taking advantage of a bankruptcy filing, an odd remark coming from one who is notorious for defaulting on loans.
I got the feeling, and just an opinion now, but both Sondhi and the other speaker (a vitriolic senator from Buriram) were really pissed off about Taksin because of the amounts of money he made off with tax-free. It was as if parts of the Thai elite, and I know Sondhi is no middle class tax payer, loss face because they could not even imagine getting away with such sums, and would never be in a position to be involved with such sums. I can only imagine, from my humble position, the loss of face having to acknowledge that a competitor stands in a class clearly above you.
I was unable to stay for Sondhi’s talk in Thai as two hours had already passed between Sondhi’s talk and the impassioned rant of the senator from Buriram. And I admit that I have problems following such speeches in Thai for too long.
In a question and answer follow up, Sondhi proclaimed that he was not a politician and had no interest in running for office. I found this rather difficult to accept given the political nature of the speech, with what could only be described as a campaign sign hanging above him, a book for sale, and what was clearly an enthusiastic group of ex-pat Thais here in the USA who wish to support Sondhi and his movement.
Upon my return home I thought that my wife would be happy that I went and met Thai friends but she was rather upset that I had become “involved” in Thai politics. It turns out she had been invited to the talk by several of her friends, but coming from a poor rural background up north, she perceived Sondhi as just another Taksin, another Thai politician, and I confess, I have to agree with her.
6 responses so far ↓
1 BF // Nov 17, 2006 at 5:00 am
Thanks Jopha for your detailed account of Sonthi’s talk.
2 PD // Nov 17, 2006 at 4:23 pm
Thanks, Andrew and Jopha, for the notes.
I can’t explain how disgusted I have been of these hypocrites. I want to unmask their masks, but, writing about them, I would feel really sick. I am just too tired to deal with them now, but I will…soon and as long as I live.
3 New Mandala » Charles Keyes on Sondhi Limthongkul // Nov 17, 2006 at 5:13 pm
[...] Here is a summary of the presentation by Sondhi Limthongkul in Seattle. It is written by anthropologist and Thai scholar Charles Keyes. On November 14, 2006, Khun Sondhi Limthongkul spoke on the campus of the University of Washington in Seattle about the Thai political situation. His visit was arranged by Thai students at the University. An audience of approximately 350 people attended the event; most were Thai by origin who live in the Seattle area, although some came from as far away as Vancouver, British Columbia. There was also a scattering of non-Thai in the audience, including the former US Ambassador to Thailand, Darryl Johnson, who is currently a lecturer at the Jackson School of International Studies at the University of Washington. [...]
4 A Thai in Seattle // Nov 23, 2006 at 7:15 pm
I was there attending the event. Before jumping into any conclusion, one should obtain the facts & analyze them objectively. And here are the facts.
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 their right was violated & the protest was actually aimed to support Thaksin 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 student 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. The campus police was called by the staff because the organizers did not have the specific phone numbers to call.
My acquaintance said that in having the event opened to the public & held at UW, they wanted the public to be informed & involved. 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. It’s rather peculiar that a few non-Thais who posted negative comments against Mr. Sondhi failed to mention that by having a Q&As session after his English presentation, he in fact provided the opportunity for all non-Thai audience to freely participate in the discussion, ask him the questions and/or challenge his stand or viewpoints. This is unquestionably a democratic practice, a proper & bold move. Try to get the ex-PM, Thaksin to do this, anyone!
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 as well as relatives & close associates, these 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 been persistent & widespread rumors about the counter-coup. If their common goal & motive is against the coup, they must fairly & clearly protest all coups including the counter-coup because the coups & counter-coups are all the same. Only the chicken coup is different. This goes for all Farangs or non-Thais every where too.
5 Chalita Bundhuwong // Nov 25, 2006 at 10:33 am
Dear Khun “a Thai in Seattle”
I was the one of Thai student who protested against the coup at Khun Sondhi’s forum on November 14, 2006 in UW.
I would like to inform you that we are not Taksin’s supporters. I was a long-term Thai NGO worker working on agriculture and natural resources management issues that always had some conflicts with the government especially Taksin’s government. If you read our flyer, you may better understand our point. If you don’t have a good chance to read it yet, you can read it as below (I copied and pasted it again for you only).
I’m a very polite person, so I had never ever “aggressively handed out flyers to the attendees who started to come in” as you mentioned. Moreover, I believe that all attendees on that day were not fool, so thay could make a decision by themselves based on information they got.
I’m so disappointed of what happened on November 14, 2006. I have never been treated badly like this before in my life. I feel like am in the dark age, and this is the real of falling apart of Thailand, and there is no room for differrent opinoin anymore.
Chalita Bundhuwong
** We prepared our own snacks and drinks on that day, so we couldn’t have your guys’ coffee and refreshment. Sorry about that. Thanks, anyway.***
9 Myths about the September 19, 2006 Coup
Myth 1: The Coup is necessary because it is able to solve political conflicts that may lead to bloodshed.
Argument: Political conflicts are normal in every society. The one taking place in Thailand can be solved through democratic process. That the Coup was bloodless partly confirms this argument. Thus the Coup is not only unnecessary but also rendering the conflicts more severe and complicated since it doesn’t allow those who have different opinions to freely express and exchange their ideas. Histories and contemporary incidents point that bloodshed always happens under dictatorship regimes rather than in democratic societies.
Myth 2: The Coup doesn’t undermine democracy because democracy has already been destroyed by the “Thaksin regime.”
Argument: Although previous socio-political contexts allowed the governments to cause damage to democracy, they also allowed people’s movements to grow, to take part in political activities and especially to monitor and critique the governments, which can be considered a development to democratic society. But the Coup had undermined such a development since it has completely closed the political opportunity, which had been formed during the past fifteen years. It is therefore the real democracy annihilator.
Myth 3: The Coup just temporarily halts democracy in order to solve crises.
Argument: Democracy is not a VCD or DVD that allows us to pause and replay anytime and anywhere we want. It is a continual process. Once obstructed, the whole cumulative process will be affected. The Coup therefore didn’t temporarily pause democracy. It undermined the basis of democracy Thai society had collaboratively built, be it the rights to participation in institutional politics, the rights to political gathering, the rights to monitor the government, etc.
Myth 4: Thai society is unique. The Coup therefore can be considered part of Thai democracy.
Argument: Every society may be unique. But no democratic societies accept that the coup is part of democracy. Although one might argue that the coup is indispensable to Thai society, one still needs to explain how unique Thai society is that it needs the coup, not just mention it to justify the coup.
Myth 5: The Coup is done. There is nothing we can do with it.
Argument: The Coup is not done yet. The overthrow of the government is just the beginning of the Coup, which wants to establish a new power regime. Thus we are able to stop it either by explicitly expressing the disagreement or by stopping justifying it whether intentionally or unintentionally. Moreover, although it can be argued that the Coup has already happened, we still need to distinguish what is right and what is wrong. Just because we couldn’t bring the rapist murderer into justice doesn’t mean that he is not guilty.
Myth 6: The Coup is capable of tackling the corruption problem of the Thaksin’s government.
Argument: The Thaksin’s government may be corrupt. But it needs to be tackled by transparent procedures that allow all parties to take part – not by totalitarian means that itself is a condition contributing to the corruption in the Thaksin’s government. The Coup is then not only incapable of dealing with the accumulated corruption. It also provides those who have absolute power the opportunity to corrupt without being monitored. The appointment of a number of top brass to many boards of the state enterprises is an alarm Thai society must be aware of.
Myth 7: The Coup is able to solve the crisis in the Deep South that had dramatically mounted during the Thaksin’s government.
Argument: It is true that violence in the Deep South had greatly escalated during the Thaksin’s government. It is also true that the escalation of violence was partly due to the heavy-handed policy of the Thaksin’s government. But the Coup doesn’t help solve the problem. The violence continues. It is possible that the insurgents may evaluate that the interim government installed by the Coup is weak because it had no strong support of the society. History tells that “vassal states” tended to declare autonomy whenever the power center was weak.
Myth 8: The Coup can solve problems caused by the Thaksin’s government.
Argument: It is true that the Thaksin’s government has crated a lot of problems. For example, through its campaign against drugs, more than 2,500 lives had been claimed. But the Coup has never mentioned this problem. On the contrary, despite the fact that economic policies of the Thaksin’s government may create negative effects in the long run, they have been fully adopted by the interim government. The Coup then cannot justify itself on the basis of attempting to solve problems caused by Thaksin’s government, and Thai society cannot expect anything from the Coup and its interim government either.
Myth 9: The Coup can lead to a political reform.
Argument: The Coup has closed the door leading to a political reform. This is because political reform must be based on a whole society in which every party can take part. But the Coup has limited the political participation to few privileged groups whose members are its proxies. The ideas of establishing some organizations working with state agencies are propaganda rather than practical measures. How could what is started with wrong thinking and carried out by wrong methods lead to what is right at the end?
Challenging Questions: If the coup didn’t take place to solve political conflicts (which are normal and the Coup is not the way to cure them), to tackle the corruption (which exists in every government and the Coup will do some soon), to end crisis in the Deep South (which needs a stable government, not an interim one installed by the Coup), to solve problems caused by Thaksin’s government (which needs different paradigms which cannot find from the Coup and its interim government), to enforce “Thai” democracy (which means nothing but is always used to justify the wrongdoing), and to carry out a political reform (which is necessary after Thaksin’s government but the Coup itself destroyed such an opportunity), then WHY the Coup? What FOR? WHO benefits from the Coup?
6 Thai in Seattle // Nov 27, 2006 at 4:57 pm
Sawasdee Khun Chalita,
I commend your courage to admit that you’re the lady distributing the leaflets against the coup. Thank you for posting the 9 myths.
Where were you & why didn’t you voice your strong opposition to Thaksin’s abusive management of Thailand in the past 5 years or so?
Your writing indicates you’re an intelligent person besides very polite as you described. And I’m sorry you were hurt by the incident. As smart as you’re, you could have taken a thoughtful, honest approach by letting the organizer(s) know about your intention. Is it true that you called one of the organizing members & asked questions unrelated to the event itself (but on funding, about the organizers/leader & purposes)? If you did, is there a need to disguise yourself & your intention? You should have been upfront with them about what you would do when you called. Because you failed to take proper & friendly measure, the misunderstanding & undesirable consequence thus incurred. As we’ve seen, Thaksin’s supporters especially those thugs in Thailand have threatened & physically assaulted pro-democracy supporters of PAD and Khun Sondhi. My friend & other organizing members did not want that to happen here.
When you said you had never ever aggressively handed out flyers, did you just seat at or stand by the table? I was quite sure I saw you two walked toward the arriving attendees & handed the flyers to them. I was approached too but I was told that you’re Thaksin’s supporter before having the chance to read it. So, I immediately threw it away.
On your comment that there’s no room for different opinions any more, I have to strongly disagree with you. My friend, other people in the group & myself value different opinions & new approaches to problem. What we don’t like, and I’m sure most people too, is the unpleasant surprise. I can understand their view & concern when you & your male friend showed up before them, unexpectedly took over their spot before they could set up, handed out flyers with questionable contents & aims, created confusion to arriving attendees. After some attendees who were upset about the flyers informed them, what did you expect them to do? Try to put yourself in their shoes. Honesty, courtesy & good communication can go along way. I saw you two entered into the auditorium, sat down & listened to both speakers’ speech. When people (a dozen or so) asked Khun Sondi questions, I couldn’t recall either of you asking any question or making comment. WITH THIS FACT, HOW COULD YOU SAY THAT THERE’S NO ROOM FOR DIFFERENT OPINION? Having the event held publicly in the educational institution, the organizer was fully aware that there would be opposing views & unfriendly comments for the speakers. The speakers were also fully aware of the fact. That’s why they graciously invited you 2 to sit down, listen & evaluate the information that provided. And those who attended, there are Thai faculty members of PhD at UW & WSU, medical doctors, engineers, professionals, business owners, regular workers (in govt & private sector), home makers & students like yours. Most are not fooled by Thuskin & were there to lend supports to the speakers to continue their fight against corruption & for better democracy. Most felt the coup is the means to justify the end; getting rid of the irresponsible nat’l leader who doesn’t know the word “Accountability” & the most corrupted, abusive govt.
On your assumption that Thailand is falling apart, you’re too pessimistic & wrong. Thaksin created a lot of mess & has left the country in limbo. However, we are lucky that Sondhi Limthongkul has the courage to stand up & lead the expose′ on Thaksin’s mismanagement & misconducts. Due to his & the PAD’s fight against the most corrupted govt in Thailand history, and due to the coup, those powerful but dishonest officials who robbed people’s democracy & raped national resources no longer have the free power to cause more damages to our homeland. The crises led to the severely lame & dysfunctional govt. The country, the people, the economy as well as our beloved King had been suffering for a year or so due to the conflict & impasse. To help save the patient’s life, the good doctor must take drastic steps to stop the hemorrhage first. After that, it’s to stabilize the patient, find the cause & remedy to cure the patient permanently, and then, restore the patient’s good health. Likewise, when things went badly wrong or problems persistently encountered threatening & impeding the smooth operation & success, smart people would say hold it, let’s stop & find out what went wrong, what are the causes and options for the solution! Because the nation’s democracy was hi-jacked by the ex-PM & his cronies through manipulation & sophisticated means, the crises went long enough. Because the check & balance system (which was already weak) was made totally ineffective by Thaksin’s govt, there was no other option available to break the stalemate. Based on previous occurrences, no one likes the coup. Gen Sondhi had been very patient & exercised the restrain. But with the impending & highly credible threat of bloodshed on 9/20, he took the risk & responsible leadership to stage the coup; thus stop the hemorrhage & prevent massive loss of lives. It would be extremely irresponsible to allow assault & killing to take place during the mass rally & counter demonstration. The coup is temporarily a step backward for Thailand’s democracy. But it would provide a foundation for the country to leap forward because of the lessons learned, because of the spreading seeds for better democracy, and because of increased activism started courageously by Sondhi Limthongkul & his PAD members. For these reasons, Thailand is not falling apart but is rebounding from a stronger, sounder & new foundation.
By the way, you could have stood up to Khun Sondi with your arguments presented in the 9 myths about the coup. My comments or logics above can also be applied against some of your arguments too. I’d like to point by point countering your arguments but it’s too long already. Though you contend that you’re not Thaksin’s supporter, some of your arguments indicate that you’re.
Leave a Comment
Please note: New Mandala encourages vigorous debate. However, for the moment we will only be publishing high-quality comments that make original contributions to discussion. There will, of course, still be space for pithy, humorous, eccentric and cheeky input. Short and sweet will usually trump long and involved. Repetitive ranting, unimaginative point-scoring and idle abuse will not be entertained. Comments which carry a real name are also more likely to be approved. Thank you for your ongoing interest and contributions.