In a world of uncertainty nothing is more uncertain than Thai politics especially over the past three years. Nothing has been more frustrating than a society that is so intractably divided and where reason has been jettisoned for skewed personal interests. Latest cyber news suggests that there will be a coup shortly. In some ways this is surprising when one considers that after the 2006 coup the Khor Mor Chor (military junta or CNS) emplaced nearly half of its hand-picked anti-Thaksin Senators (some seventy-six in total out of 150 seat senate) and a small army of investigators – the so-called “independent” state bodies – to find some hard evidence against Thaksin to back up Sondhi Limthongkul’s spurious accusations through his ASTV and the Manager Group’s print media. They were effective over the past three years in the mass brainwashing of urban society with a judgement against Thaksin even as they tried desperately to find real evidence to support the supposition.
Before Khor Mor Chor there were a number of independent bodies such as the NCCC and the Constitutional Court (CC), then after coup they were replaced with the Assets Scrutiny Committee (ASC) and Constitutional Tribunal to target Thaksin. These were handpicked people selected by the coup-makers. The EC was also implanted with the junta’s own people who had something against Thaksin. The coup-makers also created other so-called “independent” bodies such as Draft Constitutional Council (DCC). Most of these folk were taken from the judiciary. After one and a half years of the coup government these bodies were dissolved and the country went back to the NCCC and CC. But the same handpicked junta people remained in these bodies all working in tandem and passing decisions among themselves to ensure a guilty verdict against Thaksin. This was important given the flimsy evidence at hand. They also wanted to ensure that the Democrat Party would become the elected government after the elections. But this did not happen. There was a gentleman’s agreement in place whereby the Democrats would protect the coup-makers and those involved in the junta’s Brave New World 2007 government. After every previous coup in Thailand the Democrats came into government to protect the coup-makers: this was supposed to be the case last year. A coup d‘état, after all, is constitutionally illegal in Thailand.
Thaksin had to be found guilty by whatever means as too many of the junta’s people had their reputations at stake. The new judiciary was bought over with promises of extended tenure for another ten years (they can now retire at seventy years of age), united together and chosen anti-Thaksinites all now firmly embedded in the system to ensure a continued flow of skewed decisions and control and regulation according to the anti-democratic 2007 Constitution; a key element of which was to protect coup-makers and these “independent bodies” from any future prosecution. Many of these bodies will be in power until 2013/2015 to make sure Thai Rak Tha (TRT) and Thaksin will never reappear again on the political landscape.
The problem is that most people actually liked TRT and Thaksin’s policies and could actually see how these policies benefitted them. But then there was a downside: some of Thaksin’s policies actually hurt many elites and powerful interests including local mafia. The People Power Party (PPP) similarly has the popular consensus while other political parties can only look on and see that as things stand they would never have an opportunity to share in the spoils of government from the ballot box. All they could do was to call foul in the election process – and the EC was happy to listen.
The coup seemed so neat. However, neither General Sonthi Boonyaratglin nor appointed junta PM General Surayud Chulanont had the aggression to deliver the coup de grâce on Thaksin and TRT as desired by the Supreme Puppet-Master General Prem Tinsulanonda. While the Democrat Party waited for an opportunity to take government away from the electorate’s choice. The junta underestimated the anti-coup group (red shirts). They thought that, as in the past, they could emplace a puppet government in power (i.e. the Democrat Party) to protect them.
This time things were different. The electorate had seen that Thaksin’s policies were the best so far and could see real benefits from voting for beneficial liberal policies. This was democracy in process. Post-coup PPP were elected with Samak Sundaravej appointed as PM and then the People’s Alliance for Democracy (PAD) reemerged in the streets. Their calls were for a new morality — but whose morality? They were not happy with the people’s choice because TRT had come back to haunt them in a new incarnation. This is why Thailand has suffered from continued riots: PAD and its aristocratic supporters could see they were not going to win on democratic grounds, but instead on issues of primordial national sentiment.
Remember, before the coup in 2006 Prem asked his people who they had primary allegiance to: the monarchy, or the elected government. Prem, as Chief Privy Councilor, has long controlled much of what goes in and what goes out of the palace.
PAD, the “People Against Democracy”, are a grouping of disenchanted intellectuals, elites, NGOs (harking back to the days when governments actually listened to them) and middle class Thai business interests – many of whom lost significantly in 1997 financial crisis and wanted the banks and favorable political interests to “help them along” – which Thaksin refused to do. This motley collection of urban folk, and many supporters from the south of Thailand where the Democrat Party reigns supreme (and of course this is Prem’s home), want to establish a status quo ante and control over government at any cost; even at the cost of the semi-democratizing nation state. Right now PAD has five police generals behind it as well as some senior army bosses. The group of five leaders also claim “higher support”. They started with yellow and then, more recently, changed to predominantly display blue. This perplexed observers for a while until, well, the penny dropped: The queen came out this week in an open show of support for PAD attending the funeral of a female PAD victim from the street violence last week and did not show up for the cremation of anti-PAD protestors some weeks before. But then she had long been close to Prem. It may also be a reaction to Princess Siridhorn’s comment in the US last week when questioned whether PAD were doing this for royalty as she replied that they were “doing it for themselves”. This was only reported in Matichon’s Khao Sod as most of the country’s print media had already chosen sides some years back. This infuriated wannabe media tycoon Sondhi who said that they probably reported it wrong or mistranslated it and then called upon his supporters to boycott this publication. Then when the queen came out yesterday all was clear again for PAD to continue claiming its legitimacy…back to square one.
Meanwhile, the opposition is no longer prepared to take it sitting down. Enough is enough. Nor Por Chor (”People’s Alliance Against Dictatorship”, the anti-PAD group) are hoping to hold out until the end of the month when annual reshuffling will be finished, when many high ranking pro-PAD public servants are due to retire and taking the control of weapons out of the hands of the pro-PAD army elites; hence the urgency of getting the new government’s policy statement read through the house and allowing some movement for the elected PPP to govern…The power holders will then be in place. Traditionally, Prem controlled all appointments. Thaksin did not consult with Prem — and this was his most serious mistake and his subsequent downfall. He was the only PM to challenge Prem. All PMs in the past consulted with Prem as he would position his people in power to control all government sectors. The budget is being determined now for next year. Once people are in place within various agencies and the budget allocated, the process cannot be easily changed.
Prem sent his representative (General Pathompong) to tell the over-stressed police to back off every time — even when police charges are laid against PAD members…They never stay long incarcerated. Pathompong is the husband of Supatra Masadit (a Democrat Party politician and former minister) and is seen on PAD’s stage in full uniform giving encouragement to the mob. It is with Prem’s sanction otherwise he would not do this. The king has been silenced, though he met with the current PM Somchai Wongsawat who emerged from a meeting yesterday looking sombre. Apparently the king told Somchai to continue with his work.
Is Thailand heading towards emulating Burma? Let’s see. There is too much at stake for the Amaat (aristocrats or traditional elites): The arch-enemy of democracy nominated by Kho Mor Chor last year Senator Rosana Tositrakul said something dramatic will happen within seven days. A threat or what?
Red Shirts/Nor Por Chor asked all the faithful to gather at Sanam Luang last Sunday at which time they said they would expose who is behind the anti-democracy campaign. But they did not say anything at the time. Thaksin also knows a lot but he will not talk – as least right now. The queen is either naive or politically bold; she has palace elites around her feeding PAD (literally and metaphorically). Her closeness to Prem has long been well known since she protected Prem during the clash with General Arthit Kamlangek in the 1980s & etc…The queen’s open support for PAD at the funeral yesterday has given the PAD a blank cheque for direct action against the government. Will this be the final coup? Sondhi said way back that his political party was in fact the “Chakri Party”! He knew all along where the buck stopped and in his brashness felt fully protected by the queen. The “Udorn group”, a core PPP Northeast area with entrenched early TRT supporters, are now mobilising. The elite group of people and those around PAD who think the political process in Thailand has to be dumped have destroyed the very seeds of legislative and judicial integrity and the people have nothing left to depend upon; democracy however defined is doomed. Samak Sundaravej, who has been ill, was one of Thailand’s most experienced politicians and knew the consequences of action against PAD. It was a case of damned if you do and damned if you don’t: they got at him anyway. If all this assessment is correct then one may reasonably ask what is left for Thailand other than going the way of Burma?
If this all does not make much sense then remember what Alice said: “If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn’t. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn’t be. And what it wouldn’t be, it would. You see?”
“goodbyedemocracy”
17 responses so far ↓
1 HC lau // Oct 16, 2008 at 6:03 pm
Well said Jim,
Most readers, if they bother to analyse the situation and research a little on the background of the PAD and democratic party will arrive at the same conclusion. Thaksin and TRT though cannot be said to be clean, is not anywhere as corrupt as the previous govt.
Thaksin’s main crime was the attempt dismantling of the old elite power structure. This includes govt / administration and the underground (Thai mafia – the people who control prostitution and niteclubs in Thailand, drug lords etc)
His other crime, as far as the old elite is concern is to spend Govt money on the rural poor. Its a crying shame that the so called educated Thais labeled it as “populist”. Spending on rural development and amenities should be mandatory for govt. That’s the only way out of the perpetual poverty cycles that third world countries suffer from.
2 jonfernquest // Oct 17, 2008 at 2:21 pm
“Is Thailand heading towards emulating Burma? Let’s see.”
Stick to your archaeology pit, please.
Thailand is not like Burma because since 1976 it has had a strong center led by a strong king.
Burma started out as just the socialist “paradise” that you emulate.
Look where it ended up.
3 songtham tawinwang // Oct 17, 2008 at 3:01 pm
As Thais are predominantly Buddhists, nominal or otherwise, they should be careful to discern truth out of illusion. We see today that many Thais are misled by illusion. This is essentially what we must undo to make Thailand a nation of enlightenment.
4 Pracharat // Oct 17, 2008 at 3:26 pm
I do not think that Thailand will revert to Burma style Government, we walk too far toward democracy. The worst case possible is Prem’s style government (Thai-style democracy aka. Half democracy-half aristocracy).
5 fall // Oct 18, 2008 at 2:07 am
“Thailand is not like Burma”
Yes, not yet.
The king and Prem are 80+ old and no one live forever. If the elite succeed in their revolution to install half select/elect democracy and substantial increase in military influence on political position.
I seriously doubt those select and military holding prime, juicy position would suddenly have a change of heart and make way for more elect representative in the future. There can be two ways, either they relish their power or increase their influence.
Guess which way every military dictatorship in the world choose…
6 Katz Waldo // Oct 18, 2008 at 3:40 am
Jim, I am impressed the amount of information you gather. Three future scenario:
1) Thaksin comes back. He leads the country like LKY of Singapore. Kick Sondhi and his opponents out. He became a good leader.
2) He could never comes back. Military Leaders lead it into the Burmese Stlyle.
3) We become so unstable with corrupted leader we become like Phillipines. The leader can be any one here including Thaksin, Sondhi, any crook.
What other scenarios I missed? Can anyone please fill in.
7 rookie // Oct 18, 2008 at 11:57 am
Military leaders will not be able to rule Thailand anymore, let alone in the Burmese style of dictatorship. If one of the military leaders decides to stage a coup now, the reserve will be true, namely anti-coup protesters will roam the streets in the same manner as what PAD mobsters are doing now. Why ? The answer is that Thais, whether they live in Bkk or rural areas, now have a very high political awareness. This is due to the fact they are catching up with mass media technology very fast. One example is this community radio station run for taxi drivers who are mostly pro-Thaksin. Most taxi drivers do not know how to use internet but they listen to this station while driving to pick up foriegn passengers like you and me from the airport. They also use mobile phones a lot. The past few years have been a very good political education for them and they can see the big difference when the country was ruled by Thaksin and the military coupmakers.
8 BkkOptimist // Oct 18, 2008 at 1:04 pm
The authors commentary is well researched, however he appears to have missed some of the highlights of Dr. Thaksin’s reign as PM.
- Extra-judicial executions of approximately 2,500 people
- Tak Bo
- Massive corruption
- Curtailment and corruption of Press Freedom
This author and Bangkok Pundit seem to ignore the downsides of Thaksin’s time in power and make the assumption that he was headed for Democracy – this position is highly fanciful and doesn’t gel with the direction that Thaksin was taking.
Once having solidified power in the administration, military and police, it is highly likely that Thaksin would have become an outright Dictator – and then, yes, given his friendship with the Burmese General’s it would have been a natural for him to emulate them. Have you also forgotten that Samak was the guy that said the Burmese generals are really nice Buddhist people?
So whilst the current situation is not good, nor particularly democratic – the alternative could have been much worse. This was the reason for the coup – the established view is that the “elite” are just holding onto power – it is deeper than that and at the same time simpler – it was to stop one man from holding ALL the power.
9 David Brown // Oct 20, 2008 at 3:53 am
a recent poll shows that the Democrats have gained support since the 2007
election… from about 37% to 43.8%
and the PPP have also (slightly) gained support … from about 37% to 39.5%
at the expense of the smaller parties that are now in coalition with the
PPP, which still seems to give the PPP-led government a reasonably comfortable 56.2% support overall
but what these numbers also show is that it would not require a huge change in peoples votes to change the government
if the PAD would only develop some positive view of the future, instead of the negative “we hate everything and want to get rid of everybody” approach
then its quite possible they could support the Democrats increasing their vote across the country and, with the usual help from the minor parties that swing in the wind, they could win the next election
perhaps the influential figures behind the PAD are getting tired of the delays in actually achieving anything other than promises that “tomorrow will be the last battle”
sooner or later they will recognise it will be more effective and of more long term benefit if their allies just secure their power by working with the people rather than against them.
of course for this to happen, the PAD, and Democrats, will have to reinvent themselves with positive policies that convince the people that they will develop Thailand and everyone will benefit
its unlikely that the people of Thailand would accept that the PAD has really changed from the hate machine to something that is positive and attractive with its current leadership
the hidden and open supporters of the PAD will need to consider whether to dump all or some of the leaders and give them radically new orders and tasks to achieve their real end objectives
in the end this approach is likely to be more productive for them than changing leadership of the current government which has proven very unproductive and wasteful of PAD and democrat resources
we will still have two, or more, groups that are opposed, sometimes bitterly, but at least they will work within the system trying to destroy each other instead of the current quite destructive situation
10 Cup of Tea // Oct 20, 2008 at 11:33 am
“The authors commentary is well researched, however he appears to have missed some of the highlights of Dr. Thaksin’s reign as PM.”
Thank you BkkOptimist this aspect seems to have been rather bizarrely neglected in all the of the debate about the current Thai situation that I have seen.
I am far from pleased at how Thailand has been governed since the 2006 coup and I am rather taken aback by the antics of the PAD and their negative non-message. But I am equally taken aback at how fashionable it has become (particularly in the west) to airbrush over the negative aspects of Thaksin’s administration.
I think we all want democracy to triumph but lets have some perspective here. Thaksin a hero for democracy? I don’t think so. The Economist magazine once described him as a cross between Vladimir Putin and Hugo Chavez.
The politicians who preceded Thaksin were corrupt, autocratic and cynical, and Thaksin was no different. I would even say that he took the game to another level. I think he did some good things, but for all the wrong motives. He knew who his power base were and he knew how to play to them while the (equally dishonourable) opposition were bewildered, disorganised and still trying to grasp the new level of play. The laudable (and long overdue) universal heatlthcare policy was one example. But there were also things that he did that were downright wrong, like the crackdown on drugs with over 2000 extra-judicial killings. I remember an anti-drug taskforce set up by Surayudh (at the time supreme commander of the army) on orders from the government, in order to deal with the anphetamine problem caused by Burmese Junta-sanctioned drug lords who had their own private armies smuggling the stuff across the border. The unit ( task force 362 I believe it was called) was extremely effective but was mysteriously disbanded without explanation after a visit to Burma by someone from the Thai government.
I regret becoming too jaded to bother remembering many of the details of such things during Thaksin’s tenure.Maybe someone with a better memory me can furnish us with with some perspective here?
My point isn’t to rant about and say booyah! to Thaksin. I just want to remind people that like all the politicians before him he rode roughshod over democracy in Thailand and it really is ironic that he has suddenly become (to some) the poster boy for democracy in Thailand…
11 Ralph Cramden // Oct 20, 2008 at 1:09 pm
Cup of Tea must be reading very shallowly to be able to assert that Thaksin’s authoritarian proclivity “seems to have been rather bizarrely neglected in all the of the debate about the current Thai situation that I have seen.” This point has been made many times, but to repeat for COT: read Pasuk and Baker, McCargo and Ukrist, Connors, Hewison and so on in the academic literature. Read Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International for human rights NGO material. Read Chang Noi and any issues of the Nation and Bangkok Post for 2003-2006. It seems bizarre that these have to be mentioned repeatedly.
12 Sidh S. // Oct 20, 2008 at 5:53 pm
“In my many years as a resident here, the most frustrating aspect has been that the Thaksin coin is so shiny on one side and so dark on the other…”
in:
http://www.bangkokpost.net/011008_News/01Oct2008_news21.php
A quote from Dale Bailey written to Bangkok Post’s Postbag on the 1st October that perfectly sums up the root cause of Thailand’s deep societal conflict. Jim Taylor is merely polishing the “so shiny” side of that Thaksin coin for us here while PADites dwell on the “so dark” side.
This is why Thai democracy is “withering”. However, it will never be a Burma. The simple fact is that 1) PMThaksin is not Aung San Su Kyi (even if he did not flee and took a stint in Thai jail) 2) He will not live forever – and out of his shadow, Thai democracy will re-adjust to another reality – it will most likely bloom 3) The Thai military has clearly evolved through its involvement in politics marked by critical events in 1932, 1973, 1976, 1992, 2006 (etc.) – being more aware of its limitations each round…
13 Cup of Tea // Oct 21, 2008 at 12:08 am
Ralph Cramden: I don’t see the issues raised by those authors, reports and newspapers stories being represented in the article that we’re commenting on here, nor have I in most other articles and debates in the general western press.
Indeed it is bizarre that it has been repeated many times as you say, that none of it is a secret, and people who are writing articles such as Jim Taylor or Gwynne Dyer http://www.nzherald.co.nz/democracy/news/article.cfm?c_id=171&objectid=10531139 who seem to know so much yet seem anything but fain to highlight the darker side of the coin along with the light. Why is this?
I am seeing parallels to the Saddam/Iraq debate where some people moan about how Iraq is now is so bad and then some make the leap o don rose tinted glasses for Saddam.
Is Thailand/Iraq in a bad way right now? Yes. Were there some good points about Thaksin/Saddam? Yes. Was getting rid of them a good thing? Hell yes.
I would not argue with what Jim Taylor has to say about the PAD and those behind them, but to leave out the contextualisation of Thaksin’s contribution to the fire that is now smoking is negligent.
14 Ralph Cramden // Oct 21, 2008 at 9:08 am
COT: I don’t think we are that far apart. My point is that you say, “I just want to remind people that like all the politicians before him [etc.] …”. My point is that if we have to say these things every single time we comment on Thailand’s contemporary politics, we’ll be writing books not blogging. If any of the authors of newspaper article and the blog comment above is not aware of this literature, then they can’t use Google. I am willing to allow that they are not such dull persons and don’t require that they continually explain every problem of the Thaksin period.
15 nganadeeleg // Oct 21, 2008 at 2:15 pm
Concentrating on the worst aspects of the opposing side, whilst at the same time ignoring the deficiencies of ones own ’side’ is one of the main reasons why this political standoff shows no sign of ending.
(whichever ’side’ you happen to be on)
Unlike AW, I do not want to see HMK step in to solve things (again) and would prefer it if the people can sort things out amongst themselves (without violence).
Nor do I want to see one group of elites prevail at the expense of the other, enabling the usual ‘winner take all’ plunder.
IMO, the first step required to move forward is for the moderate elements on both sides to acknowledge the democratic deficiciences of their own side, marginalise their more radical leaders, and then try to find common ground with the moderates of the other side.
In short, the PAD mob need to acknowledge that the rural masses have a right to an equal vote, and the Red’s need to accept that some of the things that Thaksin did were unacceptable to many reasonable people.
Once the moderate/reasonable people are on they same page they could them work on how one patronage system can be dismantled without creating another one.
16 Wutikrai // Oct 22, 2008 at 11:42 pm
The author dare to show what’s going on in this country, whiel our media dare not to say about. I am surprise to see our beloved Queen aciting like that. I have long wonder who is supportin this PAD, and I got the answer once she went to the funeral. She decide to expose what she is, supporting PAD. The cost is so high in selecting this political conflict.
17 HC lau // Oct 23, 2008 at 2:09 pm
My dear Khun Wutikrai,
It is sad that, it took you so long to realise that the people behind the PAD are royals / Military and democratic party. I have enunciate this several months ago at the start of the PAD actions, particularly at the bangkok Post commentary pages. The finance for the PAD is mainly supported by Sondhi – the media mogul. It doesn’t take much to see from the obviously propaganda like “news” that the Thai press put out that the media owners are also behind this.
I say it is sad because, an obviously educated Thai like yourself has difficulty seeing through the smoke and mirrors, then the ordinary Thais will have a thougher time. having said that, don’t despair. Unless. Thailand deteriorate into civil war, things will eventually recover and the masses will prevail
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.