It’s only 6 PM in Thailand and there is still time for further developments. But it’s getting late here in Australia so here is my brief reflection on the day’s events.
After today’s “final showdown” things are as unresolved as ever in Thai politics. Both sides can claim victory. The PAD succeeded in delaying the joint meeting between MPs and Senators and, although they showed their now familiar disregard for the rule of law, their behaviour was more restrained than many had expected. The government can claim credit for avoiding a confrontation over the parliamentary meeting and for the restrained police handling of the PAD protestors. The pro-government red-shirts wisely kept their distance. Hopefully, if the night ends peacefully, overblown PAD rhetoric will be the only casualty.
Where to now? Of the various scenarios set out by Ed Cropley (of Reuters) I’m leaning towards the “PAD campaign fizzles out” alternative. Thaksin’s provocations will give them some energy, but the PAD simply cannot mobilise sufficient mass support to maintain a drawn out campaign. Today’s rowdy bus trip to Don Muang was probably as far into the electoral hinterland as many of the protesters are willing to venture. And their allies in the union movement may well be more talk than action when it comes to widespread strike action. There is every chance that, left to their own devices, the PAD will degenerate into a rather eccentric political cult with a bankrupt and self-absorbed leadership. They may be able to maintain a few shrines of protest at key locations in Bangkok but eventually the time will come for a civic clean up.
However, this will only happen if they are left to their own devices. As I wrote in May this year when the latest phase of PAD street protest was still in its early days:
Whoever is launching the attacks on the rallies held by the People’s Alliance for (Sufficiency) Democracy in Bangkok is doing the PA(S)D a big favour. With their cause looking increasingly tawdry and discredited, the most the PA(S)D can hope for is that their credibility will be boosted by the impression that they are standing firm against the dark forces of violence and dissension. … Whoever is organising the attacks must be aware that they are doing the PA(S)D a big public relations favour.
Nothing has changed.
24 responses so far ↓
1 Mariner // Nov 24, 2008 at 11:39 pm
I agree. PAD seems to be going nowhere. For a time it genuinely seemed to be a political force to be reckoned with. Now it conjures up the air of a bunch or rather noisy eccentrics. Here’s to hoping the current antics won’t be followed by a ‘final, final final, battle.’
And what’s with those ridiculous plastic hand devices?
Tomorrow it’s just business as usual; you’ll see .
2 Ralph Kramden // Nov 25, 2008 at 12:04 am
Andrew: ever the optimist! I doubt that the PAD ideologues will allow a fizzle, although I hope you are right. My feeling is that they are the ones who want blood. Look at the Nation last week, where all the editorialists bayed for blood. They reflect elements of the PAD leadership. How disappointed have they been to see the red shirts simply rallying and then going home. My guess is that they will push and push until even more martyrs are created. They crave a clash.
3 Ralph Kramden // Nov 25, 2008 at 12:09 am
BTW, see http://www.bangkokpost.com/breaking_news/breakingnews.php?id=132261 where PAD claims victory in preventing parliament meeting. How about that! Preventing the elected parliament from meeting is a victory. Of course it is a victory based on PAD-disseminated rumours that there were to be constitutional changes. PAD deserve to be condemned for more fascist-like behaviour.
4 Frank G Anderson // Nov 25, 2008 at 12:09 am
While two wrongs proverbially don’t make a right, the idea that the PAD is showing its disregard for the law is somehow being elevated over and above current and past Thai administrations and their cabinet members, elected reps and so on who have been disregarding the law for decades and decades – why else is Thailand so corrupt and its social infrastructure on the verge of collapse?
Let’s not try to convert a dozen apples into half dozen each apples and oranges. Thaksin’s brother-in-law running the current government! Anyone home there? Isn’t this a flaunting of ethics and the law by prearranging who runs the country? Don’t blame the PAD. All they aer doing is insisting on change. The Thai elite don’t want it. Neither do comfortable foreigners.
5 rookie // Nov 25, 2008 at 2:45 am
PAD (invisible) backers are now wondering whether it is still worthwhile to continue supporting this cult movement. In one day alone, they cut power lines to parliament, hijacked buses, and worst being assaulting a police colonel. So far there is no word that the two PAD members who recently died of bomb explosions will get a royally sponsored funeral, unlike the earlier ones who died in clashes with police. With today’s assault against the police colonel at Don Muang, the whole world can now ask: who is using violence ? Try to ask this question to The Nation daily newspaper !
6 Neilson // Nov 25, 2008 at 2:52 am
No sympathy for PAD! No sympathy for Thaksin! These fools are destroying the futures of millions of people with their bone-headed criminal greed!
7 Ralph Kramden // Nov 25, 2008 at 8:51 am
PAD is showing its disregard for the law – a brilliant way to express it. Come on Frank, these are the guys who once seriously called for rule of law, and now they are flagrantly abusing it. It seems you can have your cake and eat it too.
8 Frank G Anderson // Nov 25, 2008 at 10:58 am
Having cake and eating it too has been the hallmark of Thai politics since time began. Simplistically speaking, does anyone here honestly believe that Thailand can have a truly democratic society and form of government without violence? Even America’s ancestors settled that issue with a violent revolution – because the other side would not let go. We should be big enough to admit that in the LOS the elite are also not willing to let go. They are reaping as they sew. The PAD has taken a turn for the violent and it’s more than just a shame. It’s a tragedy. When they were first attacked physically, did the corrupt Thai police readily investigate and prosecute those who were guilty? I don’t believe so.
Thai authorities have built up a consistently bad reputation and habit of ignoring important human rights abuses and supporting those who keep on committing them. It’s a vicious cycle and begging the question by suddenly disclaiming the other side that is now using the same methodology – albeit in much smaller degree – is not logical.
No one should be using violence. But if Thailand is destined to become another Burma, blaming the PAD and crybaby-absolving the major wrong-doers in this standoff is hardly justified.
As I havae said in the past, the people who don’t want a change consist of many groups, including foreigners who live in an idyllic setting while their Thai counterparts face the music day in and day out. As well, there are the academics and others who rationalize either violence or peaceful means based on their own traditional way of handling such situations.
Looking at it from a strictly objective viewpoint, I would say today that the only way to effect change in Thailand is through the same way change has been prevented – by violence. Fighting fire with fire, so to speak. Am I advocating violence? No. Am I suggesting that it is the only way to deal with dictatorial Thai rulers who won’t ever allow democracy to bloom in Thailand? Yes. It’s not a comfortable conclusion, nor is it one easily made. But when you consider the fate of peoples in the region who have not fought for what they have, you get the idea…
9 rookie // Nov 25, 2008 at 11:49 am
To repeat my observation: it’s now time for PAD “backers” to realize that the movement has become an uncontrollable monster which conveniently break laws while the police dare not do anything for fear of being accused of committing violence like in the 7 Oct clash. So far the authority wearing uniform (police) are helpless to act against this monster because they know who are the backers of this detestable movement. Now only the Red Shirts dare to provide a counter balance to PAD but this movement is playing its cards carefully and wait for the correct time to act. If there is a showdown leading to bloodshed, I would hold the “backers” responsible because these people fail to control PAD. Without these backers, Sonthi/Chamlong etc are now in jail.
10 Ralph Kramden // Nov 25, 2008 at 11:56 am
Frank – I address Frank, but the issue is wider than his debate with me and, in many respects I agree with Frank and want to add to what he says.
In criticizing a somewhat muted approach to PAD’s lawlessness I was pointing out that the PAD leadership was once for rule of law and it is now breaking many laws, every day, repeatedly, in the name of good governance. Jeez. When some of their hoods get their Uzis out (see Bangkok Post of last week for this reference) can we still say that they display a disregard the law or do we say more than that?
That PAD’s leadership are two-faced is what we might expect of a bunch of bankrupts, former mercenaries, religious cranks and so on.
[Here insert any statement one cares for acknowledging that Thaksin and his cronies occupy a similar space but with some different pejorative terms].
Violence to what end Frank? Democracy? Okay, but whose democracy are we likely to get? It seems like there are two varieties on offer at present (especially as the palace’s proposed third way seems to have no traction as it has no real commitment from the ones who really matter). PAD’s non-democratic “new politics” which is actually nothing more than “Thai-style democracy” that has been promoted for years by conservatives.
On the other side you have a group promoting democracy based on election results. Not a bad place to start, but then you might want to be PADite on this and say that elections are all corrupt and so are all of Thailand’s politicians, even those nice Dems .
Not much of a choice. (Especially as those clean cut lads running the Dems have no substance and no ideas to demonstrate.)
You might want to consider that violence may lead to many things other than these versions of democracy (or, indeed, however defined, but hopefully something that gives voice to the disenfranchised). It may lead to something much darker. You mention Burma and there are other examples of fascist control and repression. That could be dressed up as Thai-style government (a la Kukrit Pramoj’s propaganda for the Sarit dictatorship).
Fighting for what you have may be useful but I suspect that most in PAD prefer to fight for what they think they are losing. That might be the start of a quick trip down the dark path.
11 HC lau // Nov 25, 2008 at 12:12 pm
Frank,
Please read up on recent Thai political history – before TRT.
The PAD leaders and members and thugs, whom you hold in such great regard were the corrupt rip them off govt whom you are condemning. They lost power and now the only way to get it back is thru violence (that you advocate)
Simply put, under Thaksin, the ordinary Thais have tasted freedom and economic well being they never had while under the PAD sponsors, and they are never giving it back. That’s why the TRT or its incarnation will always win any elections in Thailand.
Your simple minded acceptance of the rheotoric of the PAD is really sad, given an assumed intellect – no wonder the paid old ladies that form the bulk of the PAD human shield can be duped
12 Frank G Anderson // Nov 25, 2008 at 12:38 pm
Ah, a simplistic response. Paid old ladies…no arguing against this kind of logic. All yours!
13 amberwaves // Nov 25, 2008 at 4:42 pm
Frank Anderson’s long view is reasonably debatable, but he neglects the medium term, say, the next 10 years or so. Let’s go back to the original (2008 edition) anti-PAD meme — sprung from the NBT takeover attempt — its actions constitute mob rule. We can cut the crap about civil disobedience, non-violence, ahimsa — does anybody seriously believe they apply to the PAD’s approach?
With the tacit endorsement of the Thai establishment — most clearly evidenced in court decisions and the stand taken by various public intellectuals — mob rule had been validated. The fallout from this is already visible in the so far mostly verbal stirrings of the red shirts.
The PAD has also promoted a culture of hate and contempt, in the speeches from the PAD stage and page of their house organs, The Manager newspaper and web site. Again, its spread is readily visible.
It’s pretty clear that the main legacy of the PAD is divisiveness. Perhaps FA’s point is that you have to shatter something to rebuild it better. But I’m not convinced that the PAD has planned beyond the shattering stage.
14 HC lau // Nov 25, 2008 at 4:58 pm
hai Frank,
I still think you should read up on recent Thai political history – just a couple od decades before TRT would do. Please have a notebook and take down names of the “leadership”
15 Sidh S. // Nov 25, 2008 at 5:00 pm
Good points Frank. KhunHC Lau, you’ve never addressed the shortened list of PMThaksin/TRT abuses of power and conflicts of interests that I asked you to that is RECENT Thai history that led to today’s deep conflicts… Until you do so, you have no right to call anyone “simple minded”…
16 David Brown // Nov 25, 2008 at 11:41 pm
have just seen news that foreign travellers are upset and confused as police and security move them to security zones at Suvarnabhumi airport…
seems the PAD have arrived
17 Somsak Jeamteerasakul // Nov 26, 2008 at 12:42 am
Forgive me for quoting some previous posts first (please read on, you’ll see why).
above,
Frank G Anderson write (Nov 20) :
….current and past Thai administrations and their cabinet members, elected reps and so on ….have been disregarding the law for decades and decades – why else is Thailand so corrupt and its social infrastructure on the verge of collapse?
and (Nov 25) :
KhunHC Lau, you’ve never addressed the shortened list of PMThaksin/TRT abuses of power and conflicts of interests that I asked you to that is RECENT Thai history that led to today’s deep conflicts… Until you do so, you have no right to call anyone “simple minded”…
similarly, at another topic
http://rspas.anu.edu.au/rmap/newmandala/2008/11/19/what-next-in-thai-politics/#comment-580583
Sidh S. writes (Nov 24}:
KhunHCLau, yes, everyone is behaving above the law – but my argument is quite basic. The prime minister, in any functioning democracy, must be the standard-bearer of the rule of law. It is his clear role under the constitution. In any mature democracy, the issue of accountability is fundamental and the punishment is much more severe for office-holders that break the law – as it should be.
The problem we have today, where everyone disregards the law, stems from PMThaksin’s power abuses and cynical approach to the 1997 Constitution…
…………..
Now what I’m writing below has “nothing to do” with the above quotations “whatsoever”. I just feel like it. I’m just bored, having too much time on my hand etc. But, read on please …
(I think I wrote about this hear somewhere before. Forgive me, but as I said I’m just dying with boredom.)
On 16 September 1957 immediately after the historic coup d’etat by Sarit Thanarat that toppled Phibun, the last remaining leader of the 1932 People’s Party still in power, King Bhumibol issue a Royal Proclaimation (พระบรมราชโองการ – a literal translation would be A Royal Order) titled “Appoining the Military Defender of the Capital”. It reads: “I thereby appoint General Sarit Thanarat as the Military Defender of the Capital [ผู้รักษาพระนครฝ่ายทหาร] I urge all the people to stay calm and all the civil service personel to follow the orders of General Sarit Thanarat from now on.”
(Royal Gasett, vol 74 section 76, 16 September 1957, special issue page 1)
What is remarkable about this Royal Order is that: it is issued under the King’s name only, there is no counter-signature whatsoever. In effect, this means the King alone was responsible for this document.
Furthermore, at the time, the 1952 Constitution was still in force, it had not been overturned by the coup group. Article 98 of that “supreme law of the land” stated (my translation):
…all laws, all royal writings [พระราชหัตถเลขา], and all Royal Proclaimations regarding official business of the land [ราชการแผ่นดิน] must be counter-signed by a minister.
………………
As I said earlier, I just got some time to kill, my post “has nothing whatsoever” with all the above posts by Anderson and Sidh S., our passionate defender of the law, who would be trembling with rage to see any Thai elite break the law (no matter when it happened “for dacades and decades” – see Anderson above), and would denounce them mercilessly, with all the force of their moral fortitude …..
18 rookie // Nov 26, 2008 at 1:46 am
Just watched a Thai tv at 9:30 pm local time showing police at Dindaeng station arresting a PAD guard who drove a pick-up truck and he was found to be carrying an Uzi submachinegun and ammunition. After checking, it was confirmed that the Uzi rifle was one of those missing from the Govt House, now still occupied by PAD. Now what happens to Sonthi/Chamlong’s claim that their movement is peaceful and without weapons ? These men are hypocrites and I am truly puzzled why some postings in this forum still defend PAD !!!
Now the issue is no longer pro and anti-Thaksin, but pro- and anti PAD ! Many people who are now anti PAD were/are not Thaksin cronies. Even Panlop who was once sacked by Thaksin has now shown its opposition to PAD and become Thaksin’s ally.
19 Marko // Nov 26, 2008 at 1:51 am
With all due respect to “Rookie”, and his comment of today, “Now only the Red Shirts dare to provide a counter balance to PAD but this movement is playing its cards carefully and wait for the correct time to act” I beg that the article misses the point slightly.
Whilst neither a supporter of red or yellow, wasn’t it red who marched 3-4km to attack yellow in the middle of the night just a couple of months ago?
Isn’t it yellow who openly seek confrontation? So why do red offer it? That’s not playing your cards carefully, that’s responding to the slightest provocation.
Choosing between red and yellow is like choosing between Communism and Fascism, they are the same except in name.
They both seek to control the media. At least one seeks to remove the checks and balances that a “mature democracy” should have (no pun intended) They both hold mass rallies of ‘yellow/red/brown’ (delete as applicable) shirts decrying the opposition whilst proclaiming their own righteousness.
They both seek a ‘final battle’ or ‘Reichstag fire’ scenario where the other side is vanquished. This is through the argument that one side holds, “anyone who disagrees with me is wrong” and the other side, “he’s always wrong” The moderates are squeezed out as the fringe gains control.
There are no angels here, only demons, we just stand aside and hope our lives aren’t affected too deeply.
Democracy is indeed the least worse form of government we have but without checks and balances, it is nothing. Why was the OAG redundant for two years? Because a democratically elected leader didn’t want to be investigated. Why has government house been occupied? Because a group of political thugs chose to do so.
It’s also a waste of time quoting the current PM, you should just get a quote from the UK’s recent reject or the chap exiled in Cambodia! Why else do cabinet members fly to meetings in Hong Kong or a casino in north-west Cambodia??
The whole shebang is just an argument between two right-wing groups seeking to gain/maintain their grip on power.
20 Ralph Kramden // Nov 26, 2008 at 7:36 am
Marko suggests a pox on both their houses. If we believe him (and some of his observations suggest a short memory), what happens? Sit back and watch Bangkok burn? Just nihilism? Go shopping when there is a break in the lawlessness? Recall that when there were angels and devils in the past (1992), not all the angels were pure white. One of the points of political activity is choosing least worst outcomes, as you indicate. Indeed, not everyone writes history as they want it. Actors get caught up in events which they think they control and the whole “shebang” gets somewhere other than a planned destination.
It may be significant that the UDD have shown a capacity to bring their goons under control, whereas PAD’s leadership is letting their’s off the leash. Maybe that won’t last, but its a start.
21 Frank G Anderson // Nov 26, 2008 at 8:53 am
All of this claiming of one thing or another happening seems a bit half-witted, even my own comments BTW. For example, the idea that the PAD is seeking confrontation – I would both agree and disagree with that. Anyone in Thailand, in fact, who wishes to speak openly on any issue will be in direct confrontation with most apathetic players, of which there are indeed many, many of them. That the PAD and/or some of its members have resorted to violence seems to be a focus by those already assuming that things would change peacefully in Thailand if a normal regimen is adhered to. Whatever that means. I submit, as more than hinted recently, that things in Thailand will not change for the better without force being used. In Thai political terms, as elsewhere, this means violence. We can argue pro and con all the way to the grave, but political and social systems such as exist in Thailand don’t offer much in the way of human rights and democracy, to name but two, unless they are forced to change. Thai authorities are not amenable to peaceful change, by the way.
There is another aspect of overview here, and that is the idea that Thaksin brought a form of democracy to Thailand that is somehow wonderful and that it has to be copied, promoted and idolized. Those in this group who also see what Thaksin did to human rights and instigated cold-blooded killings and more will not share the same proclivity toward idol worship.
If Thaksin accomplished one thing with his overwhelming pseudo-democratic victories, it’s proving beyond a doubt the gullibility and ignorance of the Thai voter, notably out of the urban areas. Of course, Bush did likewise in the States, but we are addressing Thailand for this argument.
22 Ralph Kramden // Nov 26, 2008 at 9:21 am
Frank, old chap, you missed my earlier posting, where I asked some questions about the nature of violence and its outcomes. Violence is not just violence. There are different kinds of violence and violence occurs in many different contexts. There might be violence that has “good” outcomes and other kinds of violence. So while I agree with your basic point, I feel you are being a bit too shallow in your discussion.
23 krid // Nov 26, 2008 at 2:09 pm
@Frank: To sum up your point: “Change” (good), through “violence” (er, good), leads us to disenfranchisement of those “gullibe and ignorant” (bad) voters (this is the confirmed agenda of the PAD). How is this democratic and what is the medium and long-term outlook? How will democracy thrive? Or is Thailand “not ready for democracy” as you seem to imply also: “…”things in Thailand will not change for the better without force being used..”. What if those disenfranchised voters use violence to further change for their own ends against the “elite” (old ladies paid or not)? What about the Democrat party finally working as an effective opposition with a viable platform as a more non-violent option? Sorry for adding another half-witted comment.
24 I. Rei // Nov 27, 2008 at 1:46 am
@Frank/Sidh
The regularity of leadership change in Thailand is so frequent that it would be extremely naive to think that the current players are firebrands of democracy. Again, what is the definition of democracy to a Thai? Constitutional Democracy is the term that is used and it’s something that is still quite nebulous. Like many things, it can be used to represent the interests fitting the people in charge at any instance/period of stewardship.
What is the meaning of democracy to any of you?
Just to bring an example to the table, and you can find many parallelisms to it in Thailand as well, the Dutch proposed dyke systems back in the 19th century in Indonesia but these were not completed for various reasons during their sovereignty and still up till today the country is crippled from serious (1m) flooding after rains. A democratically-elected government without the financial muscle to pull of a serious public project for the good of the international image of the country? It is a loud secret that the reason this, among a multitude of things, has happened because of corruption.
Like the term lese majeste, the term corruption is a term that is thrown about too loosely. It is both an insult to the morals as it is to the legality of being. Not many things are injurious legally and morally; not even lese majeste. Is paying a fee to expedite a service corruption? In the Western mind, if it’s stated and accepted, no; but here, anything expedited, eased through, made comfortable, is tinged with corruption. What do you know about real corruption? You speak about it like you know it. If you know “corruption,” you’ll know that it is the fabric of the way that we live and, as with anything in ostentatious doses, a poison that renders us. It doesn’t matter who you are or your station in society. You would have tasted corruption, enjoyed its benefits. Yet in egregious circumstances, it becomes unpalatable (or perhaps you’re on the the receiving end of it).
So consider what is said about the PAD. I do not know them, do not like or dislike them (but veering toward the latter), but what I do know is that what they are doing is injurious to the country. Their goal is carnal and not at all of a Buddhist nature: depose of the people in power. The means are unimportant.
Even if you accept that–this is not much to accept because history has taught us even more difficult life-sacrificing lessons–you’d have to ask yourself if the PAD is a government that will function as you think. You put total loss foremost before cutting loss. I don’t know the leadership of the PAD–and do not judge their character–but do you think that the hordes that are mustered there are gathered there legally? through their own means for almost the last 2 years? doing nothing of constructive effort?
I am the tax-payer and the bread winner for this country. The PAD have an agenda but no clear way to achieve it. This is a two-year siege gone nowhere, imposing attrition by the 0.1% of the population on the entire nation. We can at least laugh and take relief because at real dollar values, the SET is worth peanuts; before or after the cessation of the worldwide crisis. But in one of the hugest growth years worldwide in 2007, Thailand was the big boy with the small tool.
The PAD has turned out to represent undeliverable, untranslatable, unknowledgeable, unclear ambitions and aims. How more lawful are their methods, compared to vote buying, the bane and seeming root of this problem? You know all the events and are much better versed than me; I’m busy paying for street cleanup and lost opportunity.
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.