New Mandala

7 responses so far ↓

• 1 David Brown // Dec 2, 2008 at 10:21 pm

  Just watching HM King reviewing the troops…

  the cars accompanying the King on official occasions, the funeral and now, are red?

  I expect the colour has significance but what is it?

  Did the government buy the cars for the royals?

  What is HR Princes colour?

• 2 Constant Petit // Dec 4, 2008 at 12:44 pm

  Many thanks to Philip Bowring for his illuminating commentary. As a Thai, I find it accurately reflecting the sentiment of many Thais I am in contact with. There seems to be no other explanation for the present situation in Thailand than that fate has made it so, thus making many Thais blind to the right path that is taught in both Buddhism and Islam, which the majority of Thais claim to have faith in but fail to practice enough.

• 3 Aladdin // Dec 5, 2008 at 1:03 am

  Under Section 135/1 of the Thai Criminal Code [see Bangkok Pundit: http://bangkokpundit.blogspot.com/2008/11/what-is-terrorist-act.html the PAD’s armed seizure of Suwannaphum and Don Mueang airports is by definition a terrorist act.

  The seizure effectively held up to 300 000 foreign travellers hostage in Thailand.

  It is well-known that the PAD has the backing of the royal family and in particular the Queen.

  The Thai monarchy deserves the most severe condemnation by the international community.

• 4 Roger // Dec 5, 2008 at 8:19 pm

  Aladdin, I think you’ve overlooked the section that bp emphasized — “If such acts are committed with the intention to threaten, or to compel the Thai Government, a foreign government, or an international organisation to do or abstain from doing any act which will cause serious damage or to cause disorder by creating widespread fear among the public [then] that person has committed a terrorist act.”

  Now even in the West where we expect the courts to be reasonably unbiased, it is notoriously hard to prove intent. Of course if it was the Red Shirts the court would instantly accept without evidence that such was the case, but for the PAD I am sure the Thai courts will demand a very high level of proof, and the PAD will be saying, “We never intended to do any harm.”

  But at least the law is explicit that the acts, which can be proven, are a criminal offense. Still, the PAD may argue, and the court may accept, that the damage done was not serious. By the way, I’m not a lawyer.

• 5 Bangkok Pundit // Dec 5, 2008 at 9:11 pm

  Roger: I think you misunderstand what “intent” means. Proving intent is actually not that difficult that movies make it appear.
  PAD have also stated what their intent was and was for the Somchai, and in some cases, the government to resign. They were trying to compel the Thai government to do something.

  The only question is whether it was serious or not. Loss of 200 billion baht in tourism revenue and other exporters who have been hurt seems fairly serious and causation seems to be established (but for PAD’s actions those things would not happened).

• 6 Aladdin // Dec 6, 2008 at 12:17 am

  Further to the legal issue, I guess the Thai courts will have to go through the motions of considering the charges against the PAD. But given their former lenience towards the PAD, and under the current political status quo, one would think that it would be very unlikely that they would get really tough on the PAD in the near future.

  Also, one would think that Sondhi and Chamlong must have had an “insurance policy” before they decided to take the airports – or Government House, for that matter. For example, if the cases ever came to court and the judges looked like getting tough, more juicy details about who was supporting the PAD and what form that support took might find their way into the media.

  I think there is every reason to believe that “the invisible hand” will see to it that the PAD are treated leniently by the courts, regardless of public opinion (I remember someone telling me once that one reason for the monarchy’s huge influence is that they never forget a favour and always repay debts of obligation).

  Yet the courts will be under enormous pressure to find somebody responsible, both from within Thailand and internationally. So they are kind of between a rock and a hard place.

  It will be interesting to see how they will resolve this one.

  Normally you’d expect a whitewashing campaign launched through the network’s propaganda apparatus. But given the massive coverage by international media and the rapidly growing influence of the relatively freer internet media this is a dangerous game.

  But every game is a dangerous game for the monarchy now.

• 7 Johpa Deumlaokeng // Dec 7, 2008 at 10:49 am

  Leave it to a veteran observer, an “old hand” of Southeast Asian affairs like Bowring to provide both a concise overview of current events as well as an informed view of what might be seen over the horizon. Bowring alludes to the possibility of internal struggles within the palace, and although it would be impossible to find evidence of squabbles within the Walls of Chitralada in print, persistent rumors over the past several decades would seem to indicate that Shakespearean level intrigue does exist. The existence of internal divisions within the Royal Family would also explain their absence, and their continued absence, over the past few weeks. The only direct involvement was the rather unique attendance of Her Majesty the Queen at the funeral of the unfortunate PAD follower a few weeks ago. Clearly Bowring sees the dangers to the existence of the monarchy itself as the power vacuum within the palace sorts itself out.

Leave a Comment