New Mandala

18 responses so far ↓

• 1 Amateur // Mar 1, 2007 at 9:26 am

  I might be influenced by Bangkokian Middle Class, but in Thailand we cannot make this black-and-white dychotomy of military-bad and civilian-good. Originally, I am opposed to the Thai military and still pretty suspicious about it. But let’s face it: Thaksin has abused the Thai democracy which is unique not only in Thailand but can only be rivalled by Berlusconi’s Italy.
  Thaksin is popular with rural poor because they don’t know how he is financing the programmes. He undermines public social welfare by setting up his own companies competing with official organisations. Let’s take the village fund programme. Thaksin has set up his own lending agencies to make profit from the borrowing farmers instead of letting them borrow them from state organisation where the interest would contribute to the public welfare again.
  He bends laws to suit his business interest and to suppress any competitors, under his rule press freedom in Thailand devolves, he trampled the human rights struggle in Burma with his feet by making business with the junta. The list goes on and on. His respect for the King is just a farce.
  No, Thaksin does not fit in the western concept of a dictator, but he is such a kind as Lee Kuan Yew has been.
  To cut it short: How much a slap in the face of Thailand’s democracy the coup and the “puppet cabinet” might have been. It was a necessary step to break the impasse and open free the way for a new democratically elected government.
  However, what I strongly oppose is the abolishment of the people’s constitution. But that is another story.

• 2 21Jan // Mar 1, 2007 at 10:38 am

  Amateur, you can’t have both – coup and constitution – they are contradicting each other. (and if I would have to choose, I would take the constitution)

• 3 anonymous // Mar 1, 2007 at 11:45 am

  You’re exactly right, Amateur. Anything is better than Thaksin.

  Think about what we’ve been willing to accept from the military government: massive censorship, indefinate delay of elections, torture chambers, economic mismanagement, fiscal collapse, a patronizing morality drive, outright war in the south.

  And still, no matter how much of a slap in the face to human rights and basic rationality the military has been, we’re still blessed to have them compared to Thaksin.

• 4 21Jan // Mar 1, 2007 at 1:22 pm

  And the funny thing is – anonymous – that I had to think for a moment, if your comment was serious or satirical – the thai middle class can have a quite distorted view.
  “His respect for the king was just a farce” – that is really a reason to think he is some kind of demon.

• 5 Srithanonchai // Mar 1, 2007 at 2:50 pm

  “It was a necessary step to break the impasse” > To whom was this necessary, and for what reasons? What or who had caused the impasse, and for what reasons? What exactly was the impasse, actually? How can the constitution be “another story” when it is part of both the problem and the coup package?

  By the way, this is the 10th anniversary of Turkey’s “post-modern coup” (AFP) in 1997. At that time, the military stepped in to rescue democracy from the Islamist prime minister.

• 6 Jon Fernquest // Mar 1, 2007 at 3:04 pm

  “And here is a picture from The Nation showing Pridiyathorn with government house reporters after his resignation. Looks like they must have given him a grilling!”

  Looks like Thai cooperative style versus Western adversarial style.
  Cheers to Pridiyathorn for demonstrating this to Westerners.

• 7 patiwat // Mar 1, 2007 at 3:55 pm

  Hey guys and gals, why don’t we discuss Pridiyathorn resignation? That was, after all, what Andrew’s original post was about.

  Several issues I haven’t seen mentioned much in the press:
  * The last thing Pridiyathorn did before his resignation was to urge the Bank of Thailand to cut interest rates by half a point, rather than the much speculated quarter of a point. Since the BoT is supposed to be independent of the government, it’s quite surprising that the Finance Minister would make such a public appeal. Besides, Pridiyathorn was the BoT’s previous Governor, so he should know a thing or two about how the BoT is supposed to work. Anyway, the next day, the BoT cut rates by a quarter of a point. That same day, Pridiyathorn resigns. Was the BoT’s snub the last straw that broke Pridiyathorn’s back?

  * Does this mean that nobody, not even a speculated PM-candidate like Pridiyathorn, is immune from the sting of Khunying Jaruvan Maintaka? They clashed several times. First she accuses the FIDF of selling land on the cheap to the Shinawatras on Pridiyathorn’s watch. Then when he defends the FIDF and claims that they were not the damaged party, Jaruvan gets the junta to draft a law that allows anybody, even if they aren’t a damaged party, to file charges against public officials. She also accuses him of breaking the law by sitting on the boards of more than 3 state enterprises. We all know how powerful Jaruvan is: not even a Constitutional Court ruling could budge her from her royally-appointed seat. Conclusion: King > Jaruvan > Somkid > Pridiyathorn. Sucks to be Pridiyathorn…

• 8 nganadeeleg // Mar 1, 2007 at 4:26 pm

  Anonymous: How about if the junta slung a few billion baht business deals the way of their family & friends – would that make you happier?
  (all tax free, of course – and if required, they should change the laws to allow the deals to happen)

  Or perhaps you would prefer some extra-judicial killings?

• 9 21Jan // Mar 1, 2007 at 5:21 pm

  And this “Thai cooperative style” is the main reason that the press is Thailand doesn’t contributes to the checks and balances of the society (as it does in the Western world). A bit more “grilling” would have been better – in this case, but also before the coup concerning the previous government. It seems to me that the press is usually waiting for statements from government-agencies – investigative journalism seems to be largely unknown in Thailand (if Nixon would have been Thai-PM, he still would be in power)

• 10 Srithanonchai // Mar 1, 2007 at 11:24 pm

  There are also other problems with the Thai press that makes it unable to fulfill “its role”. One you can see on the picture: Those are mostly young people–at government house! This tells us something about how “news” are acquired, and how news are looked at in Thai newspapers. Besides, ever come across the Thai-style front-page article that consists of statements by more or less well-known academics giving their opinions in a “serious” western-style political newspaper?

  For some further insights, and a strong western-normative attack on the lack of professionalism of Thai newspapers, see Duncan McCargo. 2000. Politics and the Press in Thailand: Media Machinations. London and New York: Routledge. (Rethinking Southeast Asia) vii+205 pp. (Pa-perback edition of the same title Bangkok: Garuda Press, 2002. x+300 pp.)

• 11 Amateur // Mar 2, 2007 at 3:25 am

  Srithanonchai, thanks for reminding… The western world accepts the Turkish military as it is regarded as a force to keep islamistic forces checked. This reflects the double morale of the west (see Iran as a comparison).
  To clearify, I do not sympathise with the Thai military in any way and I wish the new election to come as soon as possible. Unfortunately, I am not that deep into Thai politics to comment on every personality like Pridiyathorn.
  21Jan – you may have already forgotten Sondhi, the media moghul. Without him and his investigation there wouldn’t have been such a movement against Thaksin. However, I never get lost of the impression that it is a personal thing that drives him against the ex-premier. And now he is silent. Very suspicious.

  Well, I haven’t eaten wisdom with spoons so I prefer to sit back and observe…

• 12 21Jan // Mar 2, 2007 at 8:53 am

  No Amateur, I haven’t forgotten Sondhi – and while I agree that it was more a personal matter, I don’t regard his conspiration theories (like Finland-plan and “Thaksin wants to sell Phuket to Singapore etc) as serious and investigative journalism.

• 13 21Jan // Mar 2, 2007 at 9:28 am

  Thanks Srithanonchai for the recommendation, I just read the first pages on Amazon and it seems interesting reading “Reporter operate as channels for the pronouncements of ‘big shots’, both senior bureaucrats and party politicians” – that is exactly also my impression of the Thai press.
  Amateur, I forgot to add that the 1997 coup in Turkey was not widely accepted at that time (1997 the western world was not so busy fighting muslim fundamentalism) – but if you want to prove your point just mention Pakistan.

• 14 Srithanonchai // Mar 2, 2007 at 2:27 pm

  “The western world” is a mightily big collective — too big, I think. What is more interesting is that the AFP article mentioned that, on the occasion of the 10th anniversary, there is considerable debate in Turkey as to the virtue of that coup. Big mainstream newspapers seem to think that the coup was necessary to secure Turkey’s fragile democracy. I wonder what the discussion will look like in Thailand–10 years from now…

• 15 21Jan // Mar 2, 2007 at 3:29 pm

  I just wanted to say that at the time of that coup (in Turkey) there was a great amount of critisism – also remember a call for the boycott of turkish goods and holidays in Turkey (I hope I don’t confuse this with some previous coups) – and if it would happen today probably everyone (that is of course exaggerated) wuld be happy with it.

• 16 21Jan // Mar 2, 2007 at 4:13 pm

  There are strong parallels between the view of the military in Thailand and in Turkey – in Turkey the army is seen as the guardian of laizism and the ideals of Atatürk – and in Thailand the military is/was seen as the protector of King, Nation and religion (with the 1992 setback). If Erdogan overacts his islamism, I think the military will quickly step in.

• 17 Srithanonchai // Mar 2, 2007 at 6:08 pm

  For some more context on the situation in Turkey, see an article from Newsweek of December 4, 2006 at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15894450/site/newsweek/

• 18 Johpa // Mar 3, 2007 at 12:39 pm

  Some see parallels with Turkey, but being the history geek that I am, I see parallels with medieval Europe, possible 16th century Germany. Thailand, despite the elimination of sakdina, seems to maintain feudal estates, with the extended palace (M.R.s & M.L.s and their descendents included), backed by the Sangha representing the traditional First Estate of King and clergy.

  Then we have the modern nobility of the second estate, basically the wealthy Sino-Thai business leaders and banking families not represented in the traditional sakdina system. This is the estate of Thaksin, and the estate that is in the most turmoil relative to competition for leadership. It is also the estate engaged in a silent struggle with the first estate.

  Of course the analogy must be changed a bit to somehow include a parallel estate, the military. Similar to medieval times where knights were usually the non-first born sons of the nobility who suffered from the law of primogeniture, the current military is also a bit hereditary, or at least acceptance to the school for future despots, Chulachomklao, is like other schools in Thailand and not based upon merit alone. Either way, it is a convenient place to send the wayward son of a good family for a little discipline.

  Both the nobility and the military engage in the practice of simony, where they pay for positions, as in paying for a higher position within the military or police, or pay for Royal Ranking such as the Grand Order of the Pink Elephant and other such nonsensical medallions with which to adorn themselves when attending social functions at high end hotel ballrooms, with the hope of getting their pictures in the social pages of the leading newspapers.

  And as in medieval Europe, these top estates vie to protect themselves from taxes by insuring that the lower classes take the brunt of the taxation, either directly or indirectly by paying less than market value for agricultural commodities. (I should note that the medieval avoidance of taxes by the elite is equally alive and well in other parts of the world such as in the US).

  And again, as in medieval Europe, these top estates hope to divide the traditional Third Estate by setting the lower middle class against the rural peasantry as we see in the criticism of Thaksin’s “populist” programs by Sondhi and others who feign allegiance to the middle class.

  There are also other parallels, such as the Santi Asoke movement to the Anabaptists movements of the 60th century, although fortunately the Santi Asoke folks are not as militant as the early Anabaptists.

  Yes, I know there are plenty of differences between Thailand today and Europe of 450 years ago and my analogies would probably be ignored, if not laughed at, by those wearing tweed jackets. But it is food for thought.

  A “Peasants’ War” anyone?

Leave a Comment