The Thai junta appears to be backing down on its early unsupported claims that linked Thaksin supporters to the bombings. Even the most ardent supporters of the new regime must be starting to scratch their heads about the increasingly bizarre statements being issued.
The Nation reports puppet PM Surayud as saying that there was no evidence to suport his claims that those “who had lost power” were responsible for the bombings – this was merely “an intelligence analysis”. (Exactly what sort of intelligence analysis is made without any evidence is not made clear.) “We cannot pin down exactly any group or individuals who did it. I haven’t had any evidence or information,” Surayud is quoted as saying. (So, why was he so keen to link the bombings to Thaksin supporters?)
Even more bizarre is the claim by Defence Minister General Boonrawd Somtas that a letter from Thaksin denying any involvement had “made the public confused about the bomb attacks.”
The Bangkok Post reports (sorry if the link disappears – that’s how BP manages its site!) on differences of opinion in the Council for National Security:
Gen Saprang Kalayanamitr, deputy secretary-general of the CNS, insisted military officers linked to politicians who had lost power were behind the bombings. However, Vinai Phattiyakul, defence permanent secretary and secretary-general of the Council for National Security, said he had not ruled out southern insurgents.
Loose lips sink ships!
13 responses so far ↓
1 nganadeeleg // Jan 4, 2007 at 9:49 am
Puppet PM – interesting label – I searched the Nation article but could not see them referring to Surayud in that way, so obviously that is Andrew’s label.
So we know who deserves the real blame(or credit) for his actions, would you please enlighten us as to who is pulling the strings?
Who is he a puppet for?
- the country?,
- one person?,
- several people?
- an organisation?
Personally, I would have preferred if Surayud handled the matter differently, and merely said they were investigating all possibilities.
In times of danger, the people (via the media) look to the government to provide answers and reassurances of safety etc, and it is possible that Surayud fell into a trap of trying to comfort the people.
Whilst Thaksin is obviously a very dangerous person with the money to buy a lot of trouble, the thought that the bombings came from him or his supporters is probably less worrying than if they came from the southern insurgents or from within the interim government itself.
My biggest concern is why the Porntip forensic team was obstructed by the police, and therefore I do not have much hope for the real culprits being discovered, let alone prosecuted.
Returning to the subject of labels, what do you think of the following:
New Mandala, a pro Thaksin blog.
2 fall // Jan 4, 2007 at 12:30 pm
Aside from that Surayud do not dare point to insurgent.
One of other benefit could be the first impression effect on both domestic and foreign news.
Without further official announce, the accusation would serve well enough.
3 chris white // Jan 4, 2007 at 3:51 pm
New Mandala – pro democracy bolg more like it!
That’s so true fall – mud sticks. Elements of the junta were involved – even blind Freddy can see that!!!
What I think this blog is missing is some analysis of the types of opposition to the junta – it is just plain naive to say that there is none,
I was up in the northeast again in December and felt the ‘undercurrent’. The junta is definitely on the nose and there was anger and disappointment. However, the reaction was one of disengagement rather than action.
For instance, the loudspeakers that would normally wake us up with the early morning news – curtsey of the military controlled radio network – at 5am were turned off (thank god) and the amount of messages being broadcast by the village head (normally at least one a day) were substantially reduced – there was only 3 that I can remember over a month or so.
1: The call for everyone to participate in the on fathers day activities (normally a big event with a lot of people involved). We were asked to put on yellow t-shirts and join the working bee to clean up the village. It was a real fizzer – only 4 or 5 people turned up. Nobody wore yellow and no work was done.
2: The call to balance the revolving village fund. All the money that was loaned out the previous year was paid back in full and applications were being taken for a new round of loans.
3: The call to donate rice to the flood victims in the central province. I really thought that everyone would smell a rat and see it as a propaganda ploy from the junta attempting to promote unity. However, I was so, so wrong. Everyone responded to this call and about 30 fertiliser bags of rice were collected. Not bad for a small village of only 200 or so people hey!
4 nganadeeleg // Jan 4, 2007 at 4:57 pm
What does ‘elements of the junta’ mean ?
From everything I have read, I have no idea who organised the bombings – that’s a big call to say the junta was obviously involved – did you see a fortune teller while you were in the north east?
Pro democracy!
I’m sorry, but I don’t have your blind faith in democracy if all it can do is serve up someone like Thaksin, and allow him to entrench himself in power for the next 20 years.
Lets hope the people have learn’t something the next time round, so a mess like this can be avoided in future.
(or will voters continue to put personal gain ahead of the good of the country?)
5 Frustrated // Jan 4, 2007 at 5:35 pm
Questions to nganadeeleg,
Your words “(or will voters continue to put personal gain ahead of the good of the country?)” What is the good of the country? What is your definition of “what is good for the country”? If the majority of Thai people see or share the same benefit that one political party can deliver to them and they vote for that. Would you classify this as personal gain, personal gain as oppose to your “the good of the country”?. You do not have faith in democracy, the system which allows you to speak out. May I ask, where or what do you put your faith in? Guns and tanks loaded with propagunda?
6 chris white // Jan 4, 2007 at 5:58 pm
‘Elements of the junta’ means exactly what it says.
Yes I did run into a fortune telling monk who runs a temple near the Cambodian boarder that gets used as a type of reform school for wayward youth. He did give me some numbers to use in the lottery – but, alas, I didnt buy a ticket. I didnt ask so he didnt give me any insight about the political situation. I’ll make sure to ask he next time we meet.
7 nganadeeleg // Jan 4, 2007 at 11:36 pm
Q: What is good for the country?
A: Most important in my opinion is the eliminination of all forms of corruption, but particularly in the police.
Q: Where or what do I put my faith in?
A: Education, and an inner sense of what is right.
Doing what is right, even if it might be at the expense of personal gain.
If the best that ‘democracy’ can serve up is a Thaksin, then yes, I want another system.
8 patiwat // Jan 5, 2007 at 5:03 am
This is getting strange. The junta is admitting that forensic evidence shows that the bomb designs and assembly look very similar to those used in the Southern insurgency.
Yet the “intelligence analysis” shows that the Southern insurgents have never hit Bangkok and presumably don’t have the capabilities to hit Bangkok. Thus the junta exonerate the insurgents and blame it all on Thaksin, who is closely imitating the insurgents. It’s a somewhat bizarre analysis.
9 Muppet Puppet // Jan 5, 2007 at 7:48 am
Eh…a coup installed government is generally called a puppet government hence the puppet PM. Why are you having a fuss with the term? The guy is working with/for those generals, not for the people.
I don’t know where do you stand but, from my point of view, 5 years of Thaksin government’s corruption didn’t match of what the junta is doing in 4 months.
10 nganadeeleg // Jan 5, 2007 at 8:08 am
Muppet Puppet said ‘I don’t know where do you stand but, from my point of view, 5 years of Thaksin government’s corruption didn’t match of what the junta is doing in 4 months.’
Would you care to enlighten us with a list of corruption under the junta over the last 4 months?
Thaksin’s misdeeds are well documented, but the only real criticisms of Surayud I can find are:
- he is too soft
- he may be renting some restricted land
- he implied some things about the recent bombings without any apparent evidence to back up those claims (I will concede that loose lips may be one thing he has in common with Thaksin)
I am sure the usual lower levels of corruption have continued over the last 4 months, and it seems to me that, if anything, Surayud has been been distracted from the reform process by the continual sniping from Thaksin supporters/puppets, academia & media.
11 Johpa // Jan 5, 2007 at 11:31 am
I agree with Patiwat that things are getting strange, curiouser and curiosier as Alice would say, relative to the bombings. On first glance it is classic Bangkok based political action with grenades in the garbage cans. But the police are having problems connecting the dots to any one faction, not usually a weakness in the well connected world of the Thai police. And I ask myself, what purpose would the bombings make for the southern separatists if no claims of responsibility are made? So I am left to ponder upon which faction of the old boys network figures to benefit most by the bombings; and no clear winner comes to my mind as all factions come out about equal.
12 Vichai N // Jan 14, 2007 at 2:26 pm
Am I to presume that I am the only one who read Avudh’s Blog at NationWeb Blog?
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/webblog/view_blog.php?uid=321&bid=1479
Personally I thought Avudh’s blog very intriguing to say the least and his commentary would be about the most plausible theory yet of who the Bangkok NYE bombing culprits are.
For those who REALLY did not read Avudh’s blog – he was suggesting those Class 10 Generals, Thaksin’s generals to be more specific, were responsible.
Now you may think Vichai paranoid but you people will have to understand that I DO view Thaksin Shinawatra as a menace to Thailand, in or out of power. Many before gave Thaksin that label ‘The Toxin of Thailand’. Would this forum be offended if I suggest ‘The NYE Bangkok Bomber’ as well?
13 anon // Jan 15, 2007 at 6:12 am
There are tons of “plausible” theories out there, but none backup up by a shred of evidence.
Thus, people who want a greater crackdown in the South are pointing at the Southern insurgents. Those who want a greater crackdown on Thaksin are pointing at Thaksin. Those who are enemies of Saprang are pointing at Saprang. Those who are against the junta are pointing at the ISOC. All of these are plausible…
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.