He may be taking advice from elsewhere, but do not forget he is a master of self preservation, and therefore restraint is clearly his best strategy.

Although Samak is an unsavory character (amongst many others), I still have some sympathy for his position and the tightrope he is walking between trying to satisfy so many competing interests.

A right winger/royalist leading a a pro Thaksin party which is trying to exonerate Thakin & get back the loot, a party which includes ex communists & republican types, whilst trying to keep the military and most important members of elite establishment on side.

Add in to this mix his past feud with Pa making it a real farce, but perhaps he is the right man for Thailand at this point in time as it keeps everyone guessing who’s side he is really on.
(I think we will have to wait and see if the Privy Council position comes up to know for sure).

“http://thaicrisis.wordpress.com/2008/03/18/samak-burma-killings-are-normal-and-dictators-are-good-buddhists/”>Dictators are good Buddhists .

“http://www.irrawaddy.org/article.php?cat_id=2/”>Aung San Suu Kyi as a political tool of the West .

But of course Andrew Walker had not forgotten that Samak’s “http://asiasentinel.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1402&Itemid=31″> democracy credentials . were forged from battles alongside Thai dictators during the October 1976 massacres (alongside Thanom) and 1992 bloody suppression of pro-democracy protests (alongside Suchinda).

Showing ‘restraint’ is NOT in the Samak Sundaravej character, his past form considering and his dubious concern to defend Thai democracy.

I suspect Samak Sundaravej is NOT really ‘in control’ of the situation is why ‘restraint’ had prevailed so far.

He is clearly not comparing the politics of Thailand and Australia, he is talking about what the Australian response would be to a similar incursion by an opposition group (perhaps with our recently enacted anti-terrorist laws in mind).

Are you saying that, because the government has been doing those ugly things, a group of thugs now has the right to seize a state TV station, trespass government properties, beat up a completely innocent man like Mr Kitti (TV3 news anchor), and prevent elected officials from carrying out their duties?

Even The Nation has turned against the PAD now.

Jon, you have raised some good points about why comparing the Thai situation with Australia is ludicrous, however I think the PAD went too far this time.

I note the commentary about violence & thuggery has been a little over the top (3 guns amongst 82 rebels does not seem that extra-ordinary to me), but IMO they should have waited until PPP/Thaksin actually did the constitutional/73 billion baht dirty deeds before making an all out protest.

The current assault seems premature to me (rather like an unjustified preemptive strike).

In Australia elected governments do not:

1. Spend all their time trying to throw out the constitution.
2. The parliament actually debates and votes on laws
3. Elected officials do not consider themselves above the law
4. The Prime Minister is not out on bail, already sentenced to 2 years in prison on appeal.
5. Elected officials abide by judicial decisions, even if they do not
go in their favour.

Read Shadow Finance minister Korn Chatikavanij for reasons why electoral politics are currently defective in Thailand. If PAD did not keep up the pressure to prevent consitutional amendment, it would be Thaksin-land, not Thailand. Don’t think anyone is going to let that happen.

Keep up the good work PAD!

The wily Samak no doubt will have a strategy (already negotiated with military allies yesterday) to perhaps lull the PAD leadership into a false sense of security.

All the signals from the military and police tell us that violence will be avoided. That is, unless pro-Samak protests don’t get out of hand.