New Mandala

9 responses so far ↓

• 1 Republican // Aug 23, 2007 at 2:43 am

  I am one of a very small minority who will publicly confess on an academic website that I believe that Thaksin is a superlative politician, a brilliant strategist, and nothing if not far-sighted – far more so than most of his slow-witted academic critics.

  So when I heard the following theory the other day from a colleague it sounded credible, although admittedly it has a conspiracy theory flavour to it and there is no evidence to support it apart from the circumstantial. Anyway, here it is for the expert analysis of any NM bloggers who may be interested:

  … Some time in 2005-2006 (if not earlier) Thaksin realized that the monarchy was out to destroy him, and that once it had mobilized all its political resources he knew his government could not survive. Thaksin’s strategy then shifted to the “long game”. The aim of this game was the long overdue political neutralization of the monarchy – the biggest game there is in Thai politics. Of course, a direct political attack on the king is still too difficult to conceive for most Thais given the edifice of propaganda that has been built up around him over the last fifty years, the elimination or cooption of his enemies, the control of the king’s image in the media, and of course, the lese majeste law. This is the biggest problem for anyone under attack from the king; one can not say one is under attack. The best Thaksin could do was his famous “phu mi barami” speech in June last year. So the strategy had to be to lure the king out from his hiding place and force him to show his hand by frequent, highly visible, political interventions. This would demonstrate both to the Thai electorate (which Thai Rak Thai largely controlled) as well as the international community (who by and large were very impressed by and supportive of Thaksin) the fascistic, anti-democratic nature of the Thai king and the obsolescence of the monarchy, without Thaksin needing to utter the slightest word of criticism. Quite the opposite. On Thaksin’s websites and in his public statements he is always seen to be perfectly loyal to the monarchy – maybe even too loyal. All that was needed was to go after Prem in order to point people in the right direction. Once revealed in this way it would be difficult for the king to revert to his more comfortable, serene god-king / bodhisattva demeanour. According to the theory every public attack by the king on Thai Rak Thai is not a defeat for Thaksin, but in fact a small battle victory, because it publicly demonstrates the king to be an enemy of democracy, and more importantly an enemy of the electorate which supports Thaksin and Thai Rak Thai. This is seen more and more clearly by the electorate, as well as the international community. The high No vote in the referendum was one indication. The unprecedented criticism of the monarchy on websites is another. According to this theory, September 19 was not in fact the end of Thai Rak Thai and Thaksin, but in fact a great tactical victory for Thaksin, and the beginning of the end of the monarchy…

  Believe it, or not …

  I always wondered why Thaksin and Thai Rak Thai didn’t fight harder just after the coup. In fact, in the “long game” it suited Thaksin much better to be overseas and out of power. He gets the sympathy vote from the Thai electorate and the international community; he and Thai Rak Thai take absolutely no responsibility for the disaster unfolding in Thailand; and he does brilliantly with his purchase of Manchester City, which shows that he still has money and international respect and support, gives him a chance to display his undoubted brilliance as a manager, and very importantly, demonstrates to the Thai electorate his ability, as a Thai, to successfully compete internationally (and win) in the modern world on its terms. It’s a win-win situation for him.

  No wonder the junta is as desperate for him to come home now as they were a few months ago for him to stay away.

  Thaksin always looks to be in such a good mood, in contrast to the harried look of Surayud and the ridiculous antics of the Keystone Cops junta as things go from bad to worse. Why? Because all is going to plan?

• 2 nganadeeleg // Aug 23, 2007 at 9:21 am

  So the Finland Plan did exist, but in a slightly different form?

  I believe that Thaksin is a superlative politician, a brilliant strategist, and nothing if not far-sighted
  So brilliant and far-sighted, that he forgot HMK was nearly 80 years old and not in the best health. So instead of waiting things out, he made a decision to give up his position of power & control, take a short term loss for a long term victory ?
  I say substitute ‘greedy & arrogant’ for superlative, brilliant & far-sighted, and you would get closer to the truth.

  Some time in 2005-2006 (if not earlier) Thaksin realized..
  Ah, so the Shin-Temasek deal with tax evasion was all part of the grand plan – he wanted to bring on a coup?

  So the strategy had to be to lure the king out from his hiding place and force him to show his hand by frequent, highly visible, political interventions.
  It looks more like HMK has to occasionally step in to resolve political conflict to avoid the descent into violence.

  According to this theory, September 19 was not in fact the end of Thai Rak Thai and Thaksin, but in fact a great tactical victory for Thaksin…
  And a victory for Samak & Chavalit too?

  Who knows how Thaksin really thinks, but does anyone really think that if such a plan existed there would be no bloodshed?

• 3 Republican // Aug 23, 2007 at 1:56 pm

  Thai king compares Thai people to his dog: I have to thank Piyabut for drawing attention (on the Fa Dio Kan webboard) to this curious report of the king’s speech yesterday, published in today’s Thai Rath (http://www.thairath.com/offline.php?section=hotnews&content=58436):

  “…โอกาสเดียวกันพระบาทสมเด็จพระเจ้าอยู่หัว ทรงเล่าถึงคุณทองแดง สุนัขทรงเลี้ยง ด้วยพระอารมณ์ขันว่า คุณทองแดงยังมีชีวิตอยู่ ทองแดงนี่ไม่ได้เป็นอะไรอายุ 5 ขวบ มีคนเขาลือว่าทองแดงตายแล้ว ตายได้ยังไงมันเดินตาม ถ้าโคลนนิ่งแล้วไม่ต้องมีหลานเหลน เลี้ยงจะแย่แล้วหลานเหลน ทองแดงนี่เป็นคนไทยแท้ ส่วนลูกไม่ใช่คนไทยแท้ เป็นอเมริกันเป็นลูกไอ้กัน สามีเขาก็ยังอยู่”

• 4 bangkokpundit // Aug 23, 2007 at 9:26 pm

  Republican : Is it really a comparison? I mean he says that Tong Daeng is a “real Thai person”. The terminology about referring to the dog and the “husband” of the dog being “American” personally sounds a little odd. Elevating the dogs to the status of a human is a different situation from thinking of a person is a dog.

• 5 Bret Johnston // Aug 24, 2007 at 12:08 am

  I think he was speaking of his dog allegorically…as in Khun Thong Daeng is more of a real Thai than that “American” Thaksin and his wife. It’s a veiled way of saying that the Shinawatras are no better a dog’s offspring, and are not real Thais to boot! I’m not a native speaker but I know that Thais usually “daa thaang awm”!

• 6 Republican // Aug 24, 2007 at 6:00 pm

  Well, because he is a genius the king’s words can be read at multiple levels. But for me, just have a read of his book on Thong Daeng; isn’t it an allegory of his relationship with the Thai people? When I see people forced to grovel in front of him in prostration I always think of Thong Daeng. Perhaps as people have become less in awe of him because they have been corrupted by Western culture Thong Daeng has become a substitute. He has all the desired qualities: loyalty, obedience, gratitude, and easy to train to boot.

• 7 kissmellon // Aug 25, 2007 at 6:19 am

  u guys here don’t get a clue.

  Let’s talk about the excorcists family.
  A sacred dog usually follow his master at a ritual.
  But for a while, it just didn’t show up.

  People want an explanation, but they couldn’t ask.
  If there is wonder, there should be an explanation for it.
  So here comes the rumours, the dog was shot dead by a complusive person.
  That person asked something from the master but denied.
  He did it to threaten the master.
  oh…how sad, poor dog.

  As for an allusion of an american husband, you have to think who married Ai-Gan (a mean nickname for american), and has Thai-American children. One of them was blackmailed by bf in the same manner of Paris Hilton many years ago. So master had to excuse that the grandchild dog is American, not Thai. So the dog won’t be promoted to any pedigree, i think.

• 8 Dog Lover // Aug 25, 2007 at 8:47 am

  Kissmelon: Goodness me, these rumours are years old and keep getting repeated. Surely there is a need to ask why such speculation is even necessary. At the same time the genius of the speaker is so well hidden that multiple interpretations are made. He must be laughing his old head off at the silliness involved. If he isn’t…. Well, perhaps best not to think about that. In any case, I hope the Thongdaeng shirts are being brought out of storage so that people can show their loyalty. All hail the royal bitch.

• 9 serf // Sep 13, 2007 at 3:01 pm

  The trouble with this Thaksin is actually the same as with that other Taksin. He’s far too ‘clever’ for his own good. I can see nothing good about living in a society with Thaksin in control. The WOD made it clear that this Thaksin has NO more scruples about wiping out certain sectors of society than does the royalty and its military-business stooges. The WOD was Thaksin’s 1976, which probably explains for his current desire to climb into bed with Samak.

  Let’s just say that Thaksin succeeds in neutralising the monarchy. It will then be a bare knuckle brawl with those who really control the country. (The monarchy has clearly been hijacked by its own supposedly devoted loyalists.) You could argue that the resulting civil war is already under way. Civil wars almost always rip the guts out of a country. In which case, I would rather take the slow track to a more equitable society.

  The trouble with politicians like Thaksin is that they are too clever to figure out that the simple stuff. If you like, he has been corrupted by too much dishonest dabbling in the black political arts. He’s a sort of political Alistair Crowley – the man who drove himself crazy with his own cleverness. Thaksin has a surprising amount in common with this monarch – who has been completely blinded by the constant & contrived adulation he receives. But the monarch is a tradition which I would be prepared to live with in a true constitutional monarchy system. Especially if accompanied by the possibility of electing a certain number of unashamed socialists (with a small s) to counter the worst excesses of capitalism. I am not be prepared to tolerate a Thaksin dictatorship. Two Thaksin terms were enough to convince me that he shares all the negatives of the current monarchy, but has none of its positives.

Leave a Comment