Readers looking for a solid overview of the political situation in Thailand current as of late Wednesday afternoon (Bangkok time) will find much to consider in this piece by Shawn Crispin. It provides a nicely balanced analysis of the situation since General Anupong Paochinda called for the protesters to disperse and suggested that the government should dissolve the parliament. Crispin’s take on the situation includes helpful details on a recent military reshuffle that may prove crucial in coming days.
Shawn Crispin’s analysis of Thai politics today
November 26th, 2008 by Nicholas Farrelly · 2 Comments
Tags: Royal family · Thailand
2 responses so far ↓
1 Srithanonchai // Nov 27, 2008 at 12:43 am
To add some perspective, here is a perhaps not that balanced piece.
In Phuchatkan (now renamed ASTVPhuchatkan) of November 26, 2008, Chermsak Pinthong, a former Thammasat lecturer and anti-Thaksin senator, and now a major PAD ideologue, published a programmatic article headlined “Thailand must not lose – the PAD must not lose!”
Chermsak listed ten reasons.
1) If the individual citizens protesting under the banner of PAD returned home to continue with their private lives, they would live in Thailand only as dwellers, but not any longer as the owners of the country, who could express themselves and take part in determining the direction of Thailand.
2) The executive and legislative powers of Thailand would be subjected more clearly and even bolder than previously under the Thaksin regime. This system did not care about legitimacy and correctness. It would do everything to win elections, such as cheating, vote buying, and buying of MPs. Afterwards, they would use state power solely for the benefit of one person or one group, because they would argue that the people had given them absolute power via the election.
3) The Thaksin regime would also try everything to control and interfere with the judiciary, for example by passing laws that would not permit the courts to try cases concerning Thaksin and his clique. The courts would lose their independence and could not dispense justice for the common good.
4) Under the Thaksin regime, the independent organizations will not be able to perform their accountability role. These organizations and the courts will not any longer be able to apply the law to politicians of the Thaksin regime. Even worse, they would be used to further the interests of those in power.
5) The military and the civil service will be divided and encroached upon. Good and capable people will not any longer be rewarded, while those who serve the Thaksin regime will progress.
6) People’s sector politics will be weak. It will be destroyed so that it will not be able to act in order to put demands on and control the state power of the politicians. If the Thaksin regime returns to take total control of Thailand, it will try everything to destroy its enemies, so that they will not be able to raise and act against it again. This will include the destruction of the PAD’s “intellectual weapons of the people,” namely ASTV, some sectors of the community radio network, and the Internet. The Thaksin regime had learned how important these modern means of communications were for the power of the PAD.
7) Peaceful protests will be devalued. The PAD had always protested peacefully and never used violence. If such peaceful means cannot succeed in making evil politicians come to their senses and show responsibility, then future protests might chose violent means, including assassinations, to be successful. [One remembers that, a few weeks ago, and in the same paper, Chai-anan Samudavanija had suggested that some elements of the PAD, if success was not forthcoming, might go underground, identify corrupt politicians, and assassinate them. Later, Chai-anand suggested at a seminar that 4-5 politicians should be executed as examples for the others. Since Chermsak repeats this line of thinking, one might assume that such ideas are common among PAD leaders.]
9) The Thai political system will be a democracy of only a few families.
10) The monarchy will become a mere symbol without any significance in society, while leading families of the Thaksin regime will lift their status to the same level.
The defeat of the PAD will mean the defeat of Thailand! Therefore, the PAD must not lose, because Thailand must not lose!
The time has come for the Thai people, both within and outside the PAD network, to come out and join hands to fight against the Thaksin regime!
2 Ralph Kramden // Nov 27, 2008 at 7:20 am
Thanks Srithanonchai , much appreciated. So many of these people, who consider themselves public intellectuals, have shown a capacity for anything but intellectual discourse. Actually, what he writes is, in places, a threat rather than an exhortation to PAD supporters. If one had time, one could easily come up with the 10 threats posed by a PAD victory and compare the two. I don’t have time, but let’s try a couple:
1) A society where the monarchy is the only symbol of loyalty.
2) A political system dominated by a conservative elite.
3) All protests, peaceful or not, suppressed (PAD has shown no capacity for allowing alternative voices).
4) A civil society movement completely disarticulated from “the people”.
5) Political dissent suppressed (see item 4) and opponents harassed and hunted down.
and so on.
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.