While we all cheer the release of seven UDD leaders we should keep in mind the 151 ordinary people who still remain incarcerated and whose families rely on them for livelihoods. We must not forget the personal sacrifice of Surachai “Sae Dan” this week and work to secure his early release. Here are Surachai’s words (my translation) while in custody on 22 February 2011:
I haven’t confessed or denied anything yet. But I will fight to say that ‘the [power] above’ has been pulled down; we want this situation to be changed. Is it going to be possible, for example for Thailand to be like Japan?!! To cancel article 112 is the reason for my fighting. I’m not worried whether I would be allowed bail as I have made up my mind already that I want to see changes happen. I want to send a signal to ‘the [power] above’ to know that there is currently a serious institutional crisis. The anti-monarchy feeling is very strong now. There will be a civil war if this government is allowed to continue controlling the country, because there has already been an incident involving protestors at Rachaprasong… If we allow this to continue it will end up like in the Middle East. Therefore, the way of fighting in this case is not for seeking my release, but to fight for ‘change’. The ‘[power] above’ has to find a resolution to the problem in this country. I will fight for this, rather than ‘for myself’.
The suffering does not stop with the celebratory parties for the seven released; neither does the “game plan” stop for the mass movement (is there one?). The seeming lack of an action plan among UDD’s current acting leadership has been under some criticism, as is the inability to listen and reflect on the needs and aspirations of the masses. UDD is after all, however defined, a “New Social Movement” (การเคลื่อนไหวทางสังคมใหม่) at a national level, and should not be driven by a few intellectuals at the centre. We all know that there are some fundamental disagreements over certain institutional issues and over ex-PM Thaksin’s role as either some kind of “revolutionary leader” (ผู้นำปฏิวัติ) or someone who has not complete clear vision; but simply and reasonably wants to see “wrongs righted” without of course changing the existing social system or its elite institutions. Differences are normal among a mass social movement so we should not be too concerned; it is even a healthy sign in a democratic context.
Expatriate Red Shirt leader Chupong (ชูพงศ์) explained recently that there are basically three divisions, though these clearly overlap, especially in the countryside:
- “Election” group, under Pheua Thai Party; hoping to get into government after the next election – assuming there will be one, and that it is going to be “fair play” (and if it is not, then what?);
- “Pro-Thaksin” group (the masses, simply because they will not forget what Thaksin did for them: social, economic and political inclusion; opportunity and economic development); and
- “Democracy revolution” group, under its leader Surachai “Sae Dan” Danwattananusorn, statistically increasing in numbers as a drift occurs from dissatisfaction with UDD leaders, other than its immediate objectives – the most important (the release of core leaders) having now been achieved.
Many also feel that UDD’s “tail wag the dog” policy is not going to see substantive changes to the status quo; it is a strategy of “reform” (ปฏิรูป) to what can only be called the impossible. Tida Tawornsed warned UDD followers in a media conference that change may take a long time and also that “we cannot take risks”. In other words: stay where we are and continue to rattle the foot-clappers. But can people wait? The UDD’s lack of intent to tackle the contentious 112 and the constitutional framework in which this is embedded for instance has not gone unnoticed by the masses. Unless Article 112 is addressed directly, then nothing will change the injustices that many people are confronting. It will not all go away by simply closing our eyes.
Some within the movement feel that the existing power equation and its imposed politico-legal framework itself must be completely uprooted – as for example looking to the Middle East for case studies. In this logic, the more we are constrained to have to work within social, cultural and political structures and accept these, regardless of whether they are indeed ethical or legitimately based, the more we infuse credibility to a regime that we do not agree with. We cannot “beat the devil” at her/his own game.
OK, so there are different strategies and views as to where to next; but we should all share the same goals. It is, as Chupong noted, like a big intergenerational family with differences among members (so who did not argue with their parents when growing up?): but at the end of the day everyone shares the same common interests and should recognise the same enemy outside.
As the celebrations die down for the seven core leaders we should reflect on where we have come and where to go from here. Let the existing UDD leaders have time to consider and listen to their constituencies so as not to become out of touch with the masses. The leaders then need to identify and fix any errors before it is too late. The process of uprooting the amaat regime “lock, stock and barrel”; of seeking electoral democracy with proper political representation, and achieving good governance for the people of Thailand should go forward. And it should go forward according to a concrete plan agreed among all members within the family; not as a response to the tail wagging…
61 responses so far ↓
1 LesAbbey // Feb 25, 2011 at 5:31 pm
So will the UDD campaign for the release of Surachai?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
2 Tweets that mention Where to now for the UDD? -- Topsy.com // Feb 25, 2011 at 10:17 pm
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Emilio Esteban, New Mandala. New Mandala said: Where to now for the UDD?: While we all cheer the release of seven UDD leaders we should keep in mind the 151 or… http://bit.ly/eC0r7Q [...]
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
3 Vichai N // Feb 25, 2011 at 11:02 pm
Where to now UDD? – good question Jim Taylor
First the UDD has to get its act together. The first two groups you identified: (1) ‘Election group’ under PTP and (2) ‘pro-Thaksin group’ are one and the same. Pheau Thai Party is, was and continues to be now and in the near future, a political party to serve Thaksin and only Thaksin, or haven’t you been reading your Thai news lately?
The no. 3 group, ‘the Democracy group’ has to completely distance itself from the Thaksin group(s), then mold its image as democracy-seeking peaceful movement with only two primary objectives: (1) to uproot the ‘amaat’ political influence and (2) to cancel article 112. Simplify and focus on these two objectives only . . . strongly articulate and circulate to the Thai people why so, but peacefully . . . and let the strength of truth generate widespread clamor from every sector . . . the masses of the poor, and the middle class for real democracy to take roots in the Land of Smiles, Thailand.
Quality comment or not?
22 
6
4 FM Slug // Feb 26, 2011 at 2:33 am
“The process of uprooting the amaat regime “lock, stock and barrel”; of seeking electoral democracy with proper political representation, and achieving good governance for the people of Thailand should go forward. And it should go forward according to a concrete plan agreed among all members within the family; not as a response to the tail wagging…”
If only it were that simple. The more sincere elements of UDD have yet to admit how much they have injured themselves by allowing themselves to be manipulated (diverted from the real cause) by disaffected elements of the amaat. The real struggle is to regroup into more realistic and disciplined political units. It’s either that or a bloodbath.
Quality comment or not?
6 
0
5 Tarrin // Feb 26, 2011 at 10:40 am
I’m really surprise to see Chupong name on Newmandala.
There are certainly a lot of disagreement among the red right now especially the direction that the UDD leaders is taking. There are even talks of their leaders striking deal with the amaart to release them so that they can have Surachai instead. Maybe, Surachai might be Nelson of Thailand after all.
Quality comment or not?
6 
0
6 Not really red // Feb 26, 2011 at 11:28 am
I really think Thailand should be changed ,and how, first of all UDD leaders should take a long vacation then let Red Siam to do the job. We need someone or some group of people who have more progressive idea(or thinking) to (are brave to) bring up the issue, not flight and bow in the same time like UDD doing, – we will not go anywhere. And does Surachai have enough charisma to lead and to make a change?
Quality comment or not?
8 
1
7 Jim Taylor // Feb 26, 2011 at 11:34 am
As a postscipt/a bit more detail: Three agencies were involved in the illegal arrest: public security office (สันติบาล); ISOC (กอ.รมน.) thugs from a special division of the military; and Police from Chokchai Police Station (Surachai was accused with LM for giving a talk at the Imperial in this precinct in December last year). There was no arrest warrant, so the taking of Surachai was absolutely illegal. Secondly, it was clear they wanted to kill him. There were ten plainclothes agents all with full arms and a gun pointed to the 69 year-old unarmed man’s head. Surachai was coming back to his home in Nonthaburi after giving a talk at Sanam Luang on evening of the 22 February. It was 2 am in the morning. In the car were four accompanying supporters: three women and two men, including the driver and they wanted to take him away in their vehicle. They waited til his car turned into a dead-end lane and surrounded him with four ISOC standard white Toyota Fortuner SUV cars. Surachai got out of the car first and refused to go with them (wisely) and insisted on going with his own vehicle to the police station and with his supporters accompanying him. The presence of the supporters, especially females, saved his life on this occasion.
It is clear that violence is going to increase now in Thailand against non-compliant red shirt leaders. The seven core UDD leaders as conditional n their release brokered by amaat’s Sanan Kachornprasartand and Khanit na nakhon (Abhisit’s chair of investigation committee) had to make certain agreements which placed the safety of their families first, especially Nuttawut and Korkaew who had children born after they were in prison. Depressing to red shirt followers was their acknowledgement of gratitude to the corrupt falange judicial system after their release on bail- a system that had actually put them away illicitly for 9 months. They should have been bailed out after their arrest May 2010. well, they tried their best over the past few years and deserve some credit for that, but are now out of the equation and can at best only make only passive, conciliatory statements to the masses. Same thing happened to Veera. The [falange] amaat regime turn the screws on families threatening them, as they did with Veera’s son (even threatening to plant drugs on him), if they cannot get to you directly.
The movement desperately needs new inspirational leaders to take it forward to the next stage…
Quality comment or not?
18 
1
8 LesAbbey // Feb 26, 2011 at 12:47 pm
Tarrin – 5
Maybe, Surachai might be Nelson of Thailand after all.
Tarrin, you could well be right on that. He certainly has a history that would fit that sort of profile. He certainly has held a consistent line for many years.
Now just to jog my memory, had Surachai taken his group out of the last year’s protest before its bitter end? If so, was this due to tactical differences or was it a question of principle?
Quality comment or not?
3 
1
9 Nganadeeleg // Feb 26, 2011 at 1:03 pm
For once I agree with Vichai N (#2 above).
Time to call a spade a spade, anything less is just supporting the Thai charade.
Quality comment or not?
8 
0
10 Jesse R // Feb 26, 2011 at 7:25 pm
I for one hope that the “Democracy Revolution Group”, aka the Red Siam Group are increasing in number and influence within the Red Shirt Movement. The UDD Leaders seem to be more concerned with reinstating Thaksin than disempowering the Amaat regime. Having witnessed recent Red Shirt rallies it is clear that many Red Shirts are demanding much greater societal changes than the UDD Leaders and their Thaksin supporting masses.
Positive political development will not occur in Thailand until the upper institutions and the military’s influence on politics are severed. Unfortunately, the current Red Shirt leaders are not as willing to fight for political reform as they are for power.
Quality comment or not?
10 
0
11 Lese majeste (sort of) debated II | Political Prisoners in Thailand // Feb 26, 2011 at 10:58 pm
[...] is also telling that the comment tends to treat the red shirts as a monolithic pro-Thaksin movement when others are showing the schisms within it. Not seeing these developments is what makes the “Thaksin-as-puppet-master” discourse [...]
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
12 Simon // Feb 26, 2011 at 11:25 pm
I’m inclined to agree with Jesse here, at least in part. Personally dont think that the choice of name ‘Red Siam’ is prudent, evoking memories of marxism/communism as it does.
I believe that Thailand’s major political problem is that the PTP regards the people it purports to represent, not as people whose aspirations ought to be given room, but as a vehicle for gaining power. This explains the notable absence of any manifestos in Thai politics, and also explains the disconcerting habit Thai pollies have of jumping parties – not according to changing party policies or their individual beliefs and opinions, but according to who is paying a sufficient bounty.
It seems clear to me that anyone who believes Thai politics is likely to achieve any kind of democracy is likely to become quite depressed quite quickly. The bottom line is that most of the pollies are bottom feeders who joined politics not to benefit the Thai people or Nation, but to enrich and aggrandize themselves. In this of course, Thailand is not alone, but most other countries do at least have some policy differentiation between parties. In Thailand, they’re all the same, and that’s because they are all seeking the same things; wealth, power and influence – they just see differet market audiences as their vehicle to achive those things. Notice the preponderance of local godfathers in Thai politics and there is only one conclusion about motivation. Chalerm, Barharn, Chidchob (both of them), Thaksin, Sudarat and the rest, they’re all either gangsters or bandits or gangsters or bandits who’ve learned to put on a suit of clothes to suggest they’re something other than gangsters and bandits. All governments in Thailand are and always have been putrescent with corruption, it’s a way of life, which, given all of the above makes a perfect kind of sense – well it does to me anyway.
I believe what Thailand needs most is many more conviction polticians, but first they have to do something drastic with the monarchy, the military leadership, the judiciary and a large percentage of the bueaucracy. All of which is the real problem, because this is a very big job and it won’t be done quickly or painlessly. All these institutions have failed Thailand miserably. All need to see the inside of history’s great garbage bin in the sky.
I frankly don’t see an alternative to armed conflict in Thailand if a respectable democracy is to be given room to grow. It’s a part of the growing process, and at the very root of it all is the fact that Thais are only just now beginning to mature psychologically and emotionally from children to adults. Thailand has to commit to educating Thais properly, which means the Thai elites have to be made to stop regarding the rest of the Thai people as serfs, whose only purpose is to provide cheap labour and sex services.
The advantage of being the Thai elite is that you don’t have to work within the law but you can tell everyone else they do have to. If you’re in the Thai elite, you own the judiciary, the police and the military, and the Palace will go along with whatever scores another few billion US for the network monarchy, as it has always done. The elites don’t mind paying to be able to use the King as their talisman, and the people at the Palace don’t mind letting them.
On balance, I hope that Thida and her friends do not try to lead the Redshirts down the path of gentle change, the elites are well experienced in foiling that approach, (so obviously they’ll be encouraging it for all their worth). But it just won’t work and will only delay what I believe is the inevitable conflict.
Gloomy? Yes. Accurate? I think so.
Quality comment or not?
19 
0
13 Tarrin // Feb 27, 2011 at 3:34 am
LesAbbey- 7
Surachai didn’t pull away, he was chasing away from the UDD by the 3 amigo even before the March rally. Surachai even told his supporter to join the UDD protest although he’s not with the UDD anymore at that time.
Quality comment or not?
6 
1
14 LesAbbey // Feb 27, 2011 at 1:34 pm
Tarrin – 14
Surachai didn’t pull away, he was chasing away from the UDD by the 3 amigo even before the March rally.
Thanks Tarrin, that explains it. Do you know what reasons the UDD leadership gave for expelling Surachai from the protest?
Also do you know what ideology Surachai, and I guess Red Siam follow? I read he wasn’t one of those who gave himself up in the 80s, he was captured. Is he Maoist or closer to the Vietnamese communists, or has he changed totally from his youthful beliefs? I do wonder when I see his Mao cap.
Where does this leave the left in relation to the UDD leadership? Did Weng support the expulsion of Surachai? Is there a left-right split in the red-shirts? If so is the right the Thaksin supporters and the Phue Thai MPs who have financial support from the Thaksin camp?
Returning to your comparison with Mandala. Of course it should be pointed out that Nelson Mandala didn’t seem to be tied to old South African Communist Party/ANC beliefs when he was finally released from prison. Both he and the world had moved on by then. It would be a shame if Surachai still thinks the answers lie in a little red book.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
15 LesAbbey // Feb 27, 2011 at 1:53 pm
Jesse R – 11 Simon – 13
It’s the very problem that some of us have been warning about for far too long. The left has damaged itself by being part of the pro-Thaksin movement. To put it bluntly, if you sleep with the pigs you will end up smelling like them too.
In 2006 there was a chance for some in the left to take a principled stand. It would have been to still argue against the coup, but not to roll themselves into the Thaksin financed red-shirt movement. I understand how tempting it must have been seeing Thaksin money recruiting taxi drivers, Isaan peasants and such to the cause, to feel that joining such a movement would give the left a chance of recruiting so many more to their cause.
If we learn anything from history, it should be in this case, that opportunism seldom works. For every October 1917 power grab there are far more disasters. Try and find someone from the left in Iran today. They supported the revolution but were killed off by the religious right as soon as it succeeded. I wonder what Thaksin will do with the left if he manages to return. One thing I would definitely forget is any reform of the LM laws under him.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
16 john francis lee // Feb 27, 2011 at 2:26 pm
Unprincipled opportunists… Puea Thai are morons as well?
The UDD has basically said that ‘it doesn’t do politics’… only ‘movements’… so clearly there is a need for another political party that will, mirabile dictu I, too, (almost) agree with Vichai N, stand for
(1) to uproot the miltary’s political influence and
(2) to cancel article 112, and to
(3) reinstate and amend the 2540 Constitution.
Splitting the red shirt vote between Puea Thai and, let’s call it the NLD-th, is not a problem. Coalitions rule. And without faction number 3, as it’s been styled Puea Thai, will not have the strength alone to prevail.
In the fullness of time the opportunists/morons can fade away and those dedicated to democracy in Thailand prevail.
And the UDD can watch… and ‘move’, I guess.
Quality comment or not?
8 
0
17 Andrew Walker // Feb 28, 2011 at 8:36 am
This statement circulated by Ji Ungpakorn responds to some of the points in this post:
Quality comment or not?
6 
5
18 Jim Taylor // Feb 28, 2011 at 9:45 am
As confirmed last night by Chupong’s interview, and what many us had sensed or heard indirectly, UDD did a backroom deal through the arch-conservative amaat Sanan Kachornprasart to secure release of the 7 core leaders on the premise that UDD promotes the king as head of the state and softens its attacks against the amaat regime. Sanan went to see Thaksin who was put in a position where he could not refuse and he asked UDD to agree to these terms. In fact the first new “Immediate policy of UDD” (under Tida’s acting headship) is “To achieve democracy with the king as the head of the state…” Emphasising the institution’s continuing and real power over politics, Sanan volunteered through the summit to negotiate and also with the governing political regime. No doubt he was duly rewarded.
UDD agreed because they had little choice. Tida wanted her husband out of prison. As part of the deal the seven leaders can stand as MPs as the next election (when/if that takes place). They are happy because most of them were politicians anyway in before the coup and the (il-)logic is that if they win government they will change nasty things bit by bit. This is a Daft idea, because there is no way that the summit/amaat regime will allow that now. UDD have in effect allowed itself to be held ransom to the regime. The 7 core leaders are trying to put a positive spin in public and said that, well, they achieved the first step be being released and being allowed to stand for elections. UDD will not go far with the masses. Remember Nuttawut’s poetic reference to the “sky”? This is why people went over to listen to UDD core leaders on stage en masse at Sanam Luang four years back. People were then starting to become “taa sawaang”. They can be no going back.
Everyone is concerned that they were losing people to Daeng Siam who alone now keeps the focus on core structural cultural and social issues. Students are taking over the Daeng Siam stage and are fearless. Both male and female students refer to themselves on stage by the name “Surachai… [followed by their own names]”. The calls from Daeng Siam are (a) release all political prisoners, and (b) abandon Article 112. Meanwhile an overseas academic claiming left-wing credentials (who even suggested the falangist Labour Movement could work with Red Shirts!) show jealousy and try to bag the movement at any opportunity. We have to get beyond pettiness if we want to move forward. People will find out later after UDD’ failed compact with the devil that people will again be “taa sawaang” in the millions and there will not stopping the flow towards democracy.
Quality comment or not?
5 
4
19 john francis lee // Feb 28, 2011 at 11:01 am
There needs to be a political party representing the reds willing to make a statement of the principles for which it stands.
Keep it radicle and keep it short.
Quality comment or not?
3 
0
20 Somsak Jeamteerasakul // Feb 28, 2011 at 11:51 am
Some details of the so-called ‘backroom deal’ Jim is talking about is here (sorry, in Thai):
http://www.prachachat.net/news_detail.php?newsid=1298698287&grpid&catid=04&subcatid=0401
Here’s my comments (again in Thai and only on Facebook)
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=185373074833800&id=100001298657012
I must emphasize, as I wrote there, that I don’t think the deal involve a ‘swap’, as suspected by quite a number Red Shirt supporters, between arresting Surachai and freeing the seven leaders. (Thida conveyed this to me, and I believe her on this point.) But it does involve a somewhat lowering of mass rallies in Bangkok (including the prolonged, stay-over-night one as Jatuporn threatened to do at the last rally) and the re-emphasis on the “Democracy with the King as head of state”, and all the other things as Jim very well describes above. (One “small” point that I must disagree with Jim’s description is the “freeing her husband” factor. I don’t think this accounted for the deal.)
The lowering of mass rallies and the “switch” to so-called “election mode” of the UDD also involve something quite troubling, apart from what Jim already says. I can confirm from unquestionable source that the UDD’s on-line TV, the Asia Update, has ordered its staff NOT to put reports of Red Siam rallies to demand Surachai’s release and the abolition of LM law these past few days on air. I also heard that there are other actions to exclude Red Siam activities in the provinces from the UDD there too. Jakkrapob Penkae had a “phone-in” to a Red Siam rally at a Bangkok outskirt location last night, appealing to the UDD not to “ขัดขา” (obstruct) Red Siam activities.
Quality comment or not?
8 
0
21 Simon Iffe // Feb 28, 2011 at 12:10 pm
@ Jim Taylor (15):
“This is a Daft idea, because there is no way that the summit/amaat regime will allow that now. UDD have in effect allowed itself to be held ransom to the regime. “
Indeed. Several events recently have shown clearly how the amartya works. That it is not obvious to all shows only that “Ta mais koi sawaang muen kow kit”. Yet.
” “To achieve democracy with the king as the head of the state…”
And there we have it.
And yet, if anyone suggested a new Christian church wih the antichrist at the head of it, or if the USA was to have a New Democrat party with Ronald Reagan or George Bush at the head, it would be laughed off.
Probably not in Thailand…
Quality comment or not?
2 
0
22 LesAbbey // Feb 28, 2011 at 1:03 pm
So are those from the left that supported the UDD beginning to break away from the UDD leadership. Jim says yes while Giles says no.
Quality comment or not?
1 
0
23 Nick Nostitz // Feb 28, 2011 at 4:02 pm
“LesAbbey”:
You asked:
“So are those from the left that supported the UDD beginning to break away from the UDD leadership. Jim says yes while Giles says no.”
Definitely not, as you cannot see “the left” as a cohesive group. This is not the 70′s anymore, and there will most likely not be a re-awakening of a large 70′s style communist/socialist revolutionary movement. There are people with a leftist background in all Red Shirt factions – in the UDD, in Daeng Siam, in the 24th of June Group, and also in Sombat’s Red Sunday (don’t forget that also in the PAD are many leftists as well).
On ground level there is much overlap – many, if not most protesters at Daeng Siam will also be present at UDD events. Yesterday, for example, many of the protesters at the Daeng Siam stage, i have seen at Wat Patum in the morning. I found that many protesters listen to the positions of all different stages, and form their own views then.
It is far too early to make any statements over Daeng Siam. So far, on average Daeng Siam and their affiliated groups such as the student group, draw on average several hundred to 2000 people at their rallies. Will the differences between them and the UDD widen, or will it come to some form of co-existence remains to be seen.
Many of the speeches at Daeng Siam stages are very emotional (Surachai is not the only speaker there), and stretch the limitations of what can legally be said here in Thailand. This is a position the UDD as a mass movement tries to avoid, given the sensitivity of the issues, and the possible counter reaction by the state.
I don’t think that describing the UDD’s position as simply looking towards elections is an accurate description. I believe, judging from many conversations i have had with many of its leaders, that the UDD aspires far more, but tries to avoid further violent confrontations as best as they can, and is not willing to have any more of their protesters killed.
Things are in a flux, and positions are redrawn according to recent developments. Much can, and will change within the Red Shirt movement and their different factions (as it has since they began 4 1/2 years ago).
Quality comment or not?
10 
2
24 Jim Taylor // Feb 28, 2011 at 4:54 pm
LesAbbey, well, to me it all depends on how you define “left” and without trying to obfuscate it is complex and goes back to beginning of 1980s, CPT granted amnesty under Prem gaze; two sections emerged depending on their network alliances: CPT now aligned with red shirts/pro-electoral democracy and yellow shirts/ those former CPT now working with palace/old regime- and lobbied by military in helping them stage coups (I call this group members of the “thai falange”). And the schism is deep. The “left” Red and “left” Yellow divisions are reflected in the CPT leadership…As we know the core group disbanded in 2009 (officially at least) when its then Secretary General of the central committee Thong jamsii (a Marxist) quit. The new Secretary General Vinai Permpoonsap, is pro-yellow-shirt/falangist/ and probably aligned with the reactionary elements of the Labour Movement and has gained some influence.
Interestingly, PAD earlier included Weng and Tida on their ticket. They first became “politicised” in May 1992 and went on to for a pro-democracy group with Prateep Ungsongtham Hata. Weng was known by “comrades” as somewhat ambitious and seemingly upset the organisation when in the forest. What Ji did not mention was that both Weng and Tida were among the earliest groups to come out of the forest at the invitation of the amaat regime. Surachai did not surrender and was tricked to come out of the forest in the south of Thailand much later and spent the next 16 years in jail…His life story is tragic since childhood and to me it is full of folk heroism. Ji says he is a “chalatan” and seems to infer that he/Ji is the only pure “leftist” remaining. The rest are simply fake Socialists. There is nothing fake about Surachai – I spent time with him in January and I have nothing but admiration. But he doesn’t actually claim to be “left” – just someone sincere in seeking justice and fairness in Thai society.
Quality comment or not?
6 
3
25 laoguy // Feb 28, 2011 at 5:20 pm
Perhaps Giles ought be a little more circumspect in his “analysis” of Surachai.
Surachai is undergoing what Giles himself is transparently unwilling to
experience. I suppose showing even a fraction of uncertainty in the purity of our ideals
is a sign of weakness but rather that than be damned a fool.
Quality comment or not?
9 
1
26 Jim Taylor // Feb 28, 2011 at 5:34 pm
Ji #14 (Andrew Walker) I never said that the “deal” was a swap for Surachai’s scalp- though conjectually it may have appeared to many to be the case. UDD would not do that for reasons Ji states. This was part of the regime’s cunning/the arrest warrant was in the pocket of the police for months and they were waiting for the right time to exacerbate a division they could see was already becoming more evident in the movement…
The masses at bimonthly demonstrations were talking about different concerns to those talking on the stage. This is precisely the problem of disjuncture in UDD leadership.
Quality comment or not?
2 
2
27 LesAbbey // Feb 28, 2011 at 7:02 pm
So what were the tactical reasons for those left groups that joined the red-shirt UDD movement? Do/did they see a means of increasing their own organizations strength in numbers by joining the pro-Thaksin and Thakisn financed movement?
There is nothing new in this. Even in the UK groups ranging from the old Stalinists to post-war Trotskyists have argued about the tactic of ‘entryism’, mainly in relation to the British Labour Party. There are three ‘get-out’ points as far as I know. First expulsion – as when the the Militant Group was expelled from the British Labour Party in the 80s. Second would be when the group thought it had achieved as much increased membership as it possibly could. Third would be when it took over the entire movement it had entered, rather than exiting.
Is the third option achievable? Some accounts have that Surachai’s group has already been the victim of option one. How long is Giles in the red-shirt movement for? Does he see an exit point?
Myself, as I have made clear in the past, I see joining a Thaksin controlled movement as unprincipled. The UDD was never a Thai equivalent of a pro-democracy movement anywhere else in the world and neither is it a social democrat grouping.
Only the most cynical could see the problems associated with the return of Thaksin as an opportunity to carry forward their own group’s aspirations. Again I will remind people that in Iran the mullahs murderously turned very quickly on the Iranian left that helped them to power. I suspect there is a lesson in that.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
28 FM Slug // Feb 28, 2011 at 7:04 pm
Q “Ji says he is a “chalatan” and seems to infer that he/Ji is the only pure “leftist” remaining. The rest are simply fake Socialists. There is nothing fake about Surachai – I spent time with him in January and I have nothing but admiration. But he doesn’t actually claim to be “left” – just someone sincere in seeking justice and fairness in Thai society.” UQ
So, Ji is the only leftist left in the villages? Or rather, in exile. Can’t say I blame him. No one has really listened to him much in his entire career.
It doesn’t look like we will be seeing an electable named socialist party anytime soon. Presumably that is why we only ever hear talk about colors. In full knowledge that say 50% of the electorate would never be able to accept such a name – not even those who are prepared to wear red, yellow or farm out all their social responsibilities to despots and their amaat kith & kin. In such a pathetic situation, it surely can’t be too difficult for intellectuals to realize that we have all been going down a very long cul-de-sac for decades. Presumably in the hope that someone will have bulldozed a way through just before we reach the end. Some hope.
Quality comment or not?
2 
0
29 Dickie Simpkins // Feb 28, 2011 at 8:49 pm
My only wonder is
as an opposition movement against the government
as a liberal movement against military rule
as a justice movement against double-standards
why haven’t the mainstream red shirt leaders, financiers included, come out to speak in favor of the ‘freedoms’ that should be awarded to Daranee, Chiranuch, and Surachai while (for political reasons) completely distancing themselves from the held positions?
ie: in our ‘belief’ system, we fully support the freedom of said ppl because we believe in an open and multi-representative society.
Lack of such support only makes me suspicious that the very freedoms curbing speech and free thought are exactly the rules and laws under which they (the opposition phuea thai and mrT) want to use to recement their power and their power bases.
am i so wrong?
again, this is not in defense of the reprehensible movements of the current government, but this post is titled “where to now for the udd” and I really wonder if they will take the harder road (protect all free speech, even the ones they disagree with).
Quality comment or not?
11 
0
30 Tarrin // Feb 28, 2011 at 11:57 pm
Dickie Simpkins – 26
I actually agree with your observation. The UDD leaderships refuse to touch on the matter sort of indicated their unwilling to tackle one of the most important core problems of Thailand. This is certainly not a good sign for a movement that is suppose to revolve around social change and democratic revolution.
Quality comment or not?
7 
0
31 Uboot // Mar 1, 2011 at 4:58 am
Guys, do me a favour — find a real leader who can unite fractions. You Reds certainly don’t have a charismatic leader – someone with vision and the heart and mind to lead. You couldn’t even do with external help from a non-red observer last May. I couldn’t help myself to write as I’m seeing la-Terreur (1793-94) in reverse. Don’t even think about a revolution when unity and competency of leadership is not in store.
Guizot’s “Memoirs to Illustrate the History of My Time” (1859, first ed.); a book to recommend to Mor Weng and Thida.
Quality comment or not?
7 
0
32 John // Mar 1, 2011 at 7:55 am
What all color codes in Thailand’s slow walk towards democracy lack are leaders who are truly ‘altruistic’.
All factions are vying for the position to lead as they follow the only social behavior they know, which is to control and rort those who have no wealth, power or influence.
Thailand has a massive ‘shadow economy’ that is run with a ‘clique mentality’. They deceive the underclasses into believing they will have a voice when in actual fact they continue to behave with impunity.
Money, family and status as a previous poster had mentioned in a different post is what really matters, no matter how it is acquired.
All colour codes have their influential backers, as Thailand’s social culture which is heavily influenced by its archaic ‘patronage system’ which allows those that get elected to resume their corrupt activities. In their hearts they assume the vast majority of the people are not ready for real democracy.
Its much the same as whats happening in the Arab world yet when the parallels are made many deny Thailand has a similar problem. The autocrats of Thailand hide behind the scenes while those in the Arab world love to take center stage. At least in the Arab world the people are finally standing up and saying ‘enough’ as they truly understand what it means to have a ‘democratic voice’ as they are willing to die for it. They are not just empty slogans that you see coming out of Thailand’s various colour groups, as at the end of the day in Thailand its always been about the money, power and influence and who gets the opportunity to take what the previous regime had taken.
The ‘social culture’ is at the core of Thailand’s economic and political problems yet there is no one willing to open it up and expose it for what it really is.
Quality comment or not?
8 
0
33 FM Slug // Mar 1, 2011 at 2:00 pm
Some very encouraging sentiments in this thread, if it weren’t for the fact that there is no one listening of any significance to the real plot.
Quality comment or not?
1 
0
34 LesAbbey // Mar 1, 2011 at 2:11 pm
Tarrin – 31
This is certainly not a good sign for a movement that is suppose to revolve around social change and democratic revolution.
But that was always the problem. Unless we consider exactly what the UDD’s raison d’être is then nothing else will make sense.
Quality comment or not?
3 
1
35 sam deedes // Mar 1, 2011 at 2:15 pm
On balance, I hope that Thida and her friends do not try to lead the Redshirts down the path of gentle change, the elites are well experienced in foiling that approach, (so obviously they’ll be encouraging it for all their worth). But it just won’t work and will only delay what I believe is the inevitable conflict. (Simon – 12)
The elite may be smart, granted, but that doesn’t mean to say the opposition isn’t and can’t get smarter. Non violent opposition is smarter than using violence. These are the ideas of Gene Sharp which have been a factor in the recent uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt.
His “From Dictatorship to Democracy” was originally published in Thailand in 1993. It can be downloaded free from http://www.aeinstein.org/
Quality comment or not?
4 
0
36 Dickie Simpkins // Mar 1, 2011 at 4:37 pm
at this point, I believe that the government through its “divide” strategy to split the varying Red camps against each other is truly calling the ‘bluff’ of the Red Shirt leaders who never really had any guts in the first place.
So much for a revolutionary movement *yawn* nothing to see here people, move along.
Again, if the Red shirts (and their financiers) actually stand up for free speech, whether or not they agree with it, and their main leadership take some risks (as opposed to telling their followers to take all the risks, and then they go to a ‘resort’ style prison afterwards); then we can easily conclude that the Red shirt as a “real” movement for freedom and justice never existed. It is and was always about 1 mans return to political power, through any means.
Without mrT monetary backing Red Shirts cannot do anything monumental (symbolic yes, monumental no).
Who in Thailand will actually bother to do anything?
another case of This Is Thailand (as Bernard Trink might say)
let’s not forget the lack of outrage over the “reserved for white-skin people” ads in the BTS
so Jim Taylor, awake to realities now?
Quality comment or not?
5 
5
37 Tarrin // Mar 1, 2011 at 5:43 pm
Dickie Simpkins – 33
Pointing finger to just 1 guy is a very shallow analysis here. Thaksin might hold very large influence in the UDD, but the recent surge of Red Siam and the SFT really say that the movement is really more about a man. At this point it is almost certain that the UDD leadership doesnt represent the Red as a whole. If you watch one of the announcement by Thida in Udorn, someone actually throw a sandal at her during one of her many degrading speech.
If you listen to Jakaprob or some other speaker that was not from the UDD, you will know that they have criticize Thaksin many times. Furthermore, Thaksin’s money is nothing comparing to the elite own coffer, so your logic of one man money actually goes both way here.
Quality comment or not?
6 
2
38 Soonuk Dum // Mar 1, 2011 at 8:48 pm
Les Abbey – 31
Let’s not beat about the bush here.
The aim of the UDD is to usurp the Monarchy and install Thaksin Shinawatra as King.
Taksin will then return Thailand to the status of vassal state of China.
What we really have here is a Chinese grab for power.
Quality comment or not?
1 
15
39 LesAbbey // Mar 1, 2011 at 9:12 pm
Soonuk Dum – 39
The aim of the UDD is to usurp the Monarchy and install Thaksin Shinawatra as King.
I think not Soonuk, but I suspect that would play well among some sections of the PAD. How much megalomania has Thaksin got? I don’t know;-) But from the little we have had so far from Wikileaks it seems that Thaksin has put his bets on in the royal succession already.
Quality comment or not?
6 
0
40 FM Slug // Mar 2, 2011 at 3:05 am
#35
The megalomania has never been in any doubt. Rather, he seeks to neutralise in order to continue (and even maximise) what we would call kleptocracy. God knows what weasel-worded metaphor he would choose to soften the blow. I doubt the vassal state conspiracy thing, although it might well end up as the reality. I’m sure China is more than capable of exploiting the crass stupidity of a friendly local despot.
Quality comment or not?
2 
0
41 Dickie Simpkins // Mar 2, 2011 at 4:38 pm
Tarinn – 34
Sorry, I am well aware that the Red Shirts have many factions and are much more than a single-issue group bringing Thaksin back to power.
I am also well aware of the bread and other items that the Red Shirts like to bring and talk about more openly.
I am also further aware that the Red Shirt issues and discussions have opened more eyes in the country to the shadow political system in Thailand.
What I am saying is this:
That lacking any outward support for freedom of speech in Thailand, then one would not be wrong to say that the Red Shirts (in terms of leadership structure) are only about putting the Thaksin clique back in power. Also, I am saying that the government has realized this, and is calling the ‘bluff’ of the Red Shirt leaders in their capacity to actually risk themselves for anything.
As evidence I have the 2009 and 2010 Songkran uprisings wherein the leaders never actually ‘fought’ gave in as soon as things got heated up around them.
Further evidence is lack of support for the free speech of Daranee, Surachai, and all others locked up under an arcane law.
I don’t mean to “simplify” the movement intellectually, emotionally, and understand that like still water, the movement runs deep. But lacking anyone standing up for freedom of speech, regardless of whether or not they agree with the speech makes me say that financially and in the terms that is reality (ie: the decision making structure) it truly is about 1 person; and up until you can provide me actual proof that it is not, and I mean major points, not 2000 people giving a speech here and there, but the “mainstream” of the movement standing up for the would-be martyrs in jail, leading vigils, walks, and protests FOR THE FREEDOM OF THOSE PEOPLE, and NOT FOR ELECTIONS OR THE RETURN OF mrT, then I stand by my words.
Else, I don’t think that I think too differently from you.
Also your last line:
“Furthermore, Thaksin’s money is nothing comparing to the elite own coffer, so your logic of one man money actually goes both way here.”
–> that could counter someone who is standing up for the current regime. Unfortunately its a non-starter for me. I’m no defender of the status quo. I’m just not going to rush into a movement that is not doing anything concrete to show that it is ‘not’ another variation of the status quo.
khao jai mai khrub?
Quality comment or not?
8 
1
42 Anthony // Mar 3, 2011 at 12:27 pm
Though “The anti-monarchy feeling is very strong now.” the Thai people should realize the Thailand is not and has not been a monarchy since about 1932-33. The king though renowned and revered, has no real power and that the power rest with the so called ‘elected officials’ . Article 112 does not necessarily need to be removed but changed. As it stands now missing from the Code, of article 112 however, is a definition of what actions constitute “defamation” or “insult”, that should be clearly defined so that Lèse majesté can not be used as a personal shield or sword for those in power to incarcerate and silence their opposition.
And for Thaksin certainly or at least hopeful Thai people are not considering putting him into any position of power of influence. He most definitely through his actions and past record is no friend of free speech and human rights. Though he did through some social and economic reforms enact a few pieces of legislation provisions that aided the poor and less well off, does not make him a beacon for Democracy, free speech and true democratic change.
What Thailand needs is a leadership that is going to attempt to tackle the almost insurmountable problem of corruption here. And that can only be achieved through better economic policies, not social welfare for the masses, as that type of program is not sustainable. Real democratic changes must occur and policies need to be enacted that make it more conducive for foreign investors to do business here, not harder. While Taiwan and India are seeing huge influxes of foreign investment and countries setting up shop there Thailand is being left out of this picture. With it’s huge work force and many other benefits Thailand should be a part of this global economic boom, instead it’s policies remain isolationistic and unfriendly to foreign traffic and investment, relying solely on tourism “which of course should not be neglected.”
Quality comment or not?
6 
6
43 Dickie Simpkins // Mar 3, 2011 at 2:57 pm
in the Bangkok Post today:
“Phuea Thai certain to restrict role of Red Shirts”
read the article.
Another piece of evidence I would like to show you Tarinn and Jim.
First I want to thank NM for ‘opening’ my eyes.
Now I ask you to open yours as well.
Quality comment or not?
2 
0
44 Tarrin // Mar 3, 2011 at 5:13 pm
Anthony – 39
Thai people should realize the Thailand is not and has not been a monarchy since about 1932-33. The king though renowned and revered, has no real power and that the power rest with the so called ‘elected officials’ .
I think you simply get your fact wrong there, first of although it is true that Monarchy was pretty much non-existed right after 1932 but then Rama VIII was bought back from oversea by Pridi. After Sarit Thanarat stage the coup to get rid of the last of the People Assembly, Sarit pretty much gave back all the power to the Monarch, the prime example is the increase the severity of the article 112 from 6 months-2 years jail term to 3 – 15 years jail term.
The incident during massacre of 1973, 1976, and 1992 pretty much shows that the Monarch still veil significant influence, and corruption is the last thing Thailand has to worry now.
Quality comment or not?
9 
1
45 Ralph Kramden // Mar 3, 2011 at 11:17 pm
Some brief comments for Anthony (#39): leaving aside your dated (for this site) comments on the monarchy and system of government, better look at this site: http://www.doingbusiness.org/rankings
You might notice that Thailand ranks above Taiwan and India.
Last DFI data I could find (2009) shows Thailand behind India (but well ahead per capita).
You say: “What Thailand needs is a leadership that is going to attempt to tackle the almost insurmountable problem of corruption here. And that can only be achieved through better economic policies, not social welfare for the masses, as that type of program is not sustainable. Real democratic changes must occur…”. Corruption is a big issue, but on the next point, couldn’t social welfare be a democratic choice? In fact wasn’t it in 2001 and 2005?
Quality comment or not?
2 
0
46 john francis lee // Mar 4, 2011 at 12:15 am
While Taiwan and India are seeing huge influxes of foreign investment and countries setting up shop there Thailand is being left out of this picture.
That’s good for India and Taiwan, and bad for Thailand? I rather take the opposite view.
Quality comment or not?
0 
1
47 Anthony // Mar 4, 2011 at 5:48 am
Tarrin – 41
I’m pretty sure that I have my facts correct.
I never said that the Monarchy had no influence just no “official” power.
Since 1932 Thailand has had 17 Constitutions and 11 different coup’s or attempted coup’s
The other thing that I did not mention, obviously is the influence of the military. In order for a true democracy to work leaders would have to elected who would turn the military into an arm of the government, for protecting it citizens and country not a ruling force. But of course that would cause another coup d’etat. What a circular mess there in here.
You know many children either want to be a policeman or a General here when they grow up, and not for altruistic reasons, but it is seen as an effective way to earn money, power and status.
And I certainly do agree with you on your position of Les Majeste, Thailand does have one of the harshest penalties for that of all European and most Asian countries. But other monarchies also have such Les Majeste laws but they are defined and clear and not arbitrarily used to silence and oppress. And this king himself implied that these laws should be changed and he did not believe that he was above criticism in his 1995 speech.
1932: a coup d’etat
1933: Manopakorn dissolves the National Assembly and rules by decree
1947: Military coup by General Phin Choonhavan
1951: Phibun leads another military coup
1957: a coup by General Sarit Thanarat
1976: An attempted military coup
1977: a military coup
1981: An attempted coup
1985: An attempted coup
1991: a military coup
2006: The armed forces take power, and to some degree still hold it I believe anyway
Quality comment or not?
2 
0
48 Jeff // Mar 4, 2011 at 6:20 am
Tarrin – 39
Where have you been, corruption by the elite has been the core argument of the UDD, what can you possibly mean by “corruption is the last thing Thailand has to worry now.” There whole argument is this government came to power through the corruption and melding of the military and it has no legitimacy, and should be dissolved and new elections held.
Quality comment or not?
1 
0
49 Anthony // Mar 4, 2011 at 1:53 pm
Ralph Kramden — 42
Please let me clarify, I’m not saying that socio-economic programs not be enacted, on the contrary they must be for there has been and alway will be less fortunate that need help and indeed it is a societies responsibility to assist. But a social welfare system without economic reform that allows the bulk of society to earn a living and contribute back to the economy through some form or other, (in the US it is taxes) is not and could not be sustained as there would always be more money going out than coming in (that in itself is not unusual of a government entity). Economic programs to help people get a hand up are definitely needed especially amid the turmoil but they should be looked at as a short term, the long term goals must be economic and democratic reform. And for the other I didn’t say that it wasn’t easy to do business here, in fact (the friendlier (generous) you are with military and government officials it gets even easier. I’m simply stating that international companies are not flocking to Thailand as they are India and Taiwan. Many many companies in the tech industry are setting up shop in India, they come in build call centers and factories, train the staff, teach them English etc… When in my opinion Thailand has so much more to offer. Don’t believe me, just call Dell, HP, or Gateway for tech support and you find your call routed to India. Perhaps it has to do with the 11 different ‘regimes’ and 17 different constitutions here, after all nothing shakes investors confidence like the inability to predict the future of the government in the country in which they want to do business.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
50 Anthony // Mar 4, 2011 at 2:38 pm
john francis lee — 43
OK you see foreign investment as a bad idea, what would you suggest? Though Thailand’s exports in Textiles and footwear, Fishery products, Rice, and Automobiles and a few other items in 2009 were worth 150 billion which has been great for a few fortunate (and don’t forget the automobile export business is funded by foreign investment, mostly Japan ad US) it has not been working for 75% of Thailand’s population many of which live on less 72,000 baht (2,362.18 USD) per year.
“Thailand’s labor force was estimated at 36.9 million. About 49% employed in agriculture, 37% in tourism and services, and 14% in industry. Women constitute aprox. 48 percent of the labor force and hold an increasing share of professional jobs.
Bangkok is one of the most prosperous parts of Thailand, and heavily dominates the national economy, with the northeast being the poorest.
Although little economic investment reaches other parts of the country except for tourist zones, the government has been successful in stimulating provincial economic growth in the Eastern Seaboard of Thailand, and the Chiang Mai area. Despite much talk of other regional developments, these 3 regions and other tourist zones still dominate the national economy.
Although the economy has demonstrated moderate positive growth since 1999, future performance depends on continued reform of the financial sector, corporate debt restructuring, attracting foreign investment, and increasing exports.”
I’m open for ideas, other than criticizing mine what are yours?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
51 Tarrin // Mar 4, 2011 at 3:04 pm
Anthony – 44
Where do you think the “influence” came from? maybe you should give it a thought about it.
Jeff – 45
That might be the Red in the Land’s argument but hardly the point that I agree with. If what you said is true “There whole argument is this government came to power through the corruption and melding of the military and it has no legitimacy, and should be dissolved and new elections held.” How is the new election going to get rid of the elite’s corruption? How will another election going to make sure the hidden hand doesn’t reach into the parliament decision again?
Quality comment or not?
2 
0
52 Anthony // Mar 4, 2011 at 5:25 pm
Tarrin –
You are absolutely right. I’m not saying a new election will help, in fact it may divide the country even more if it doesn’t turn out the way certain factions want or was perceived to be unfair or rigged. A new election may do nothing to curb corruption at all, in fact who’s to say that some of the Red Shirt leaders aren’t just as corrupt. Unfortunately no one knows at this time.
I can tell you though from some one who spent two months at the rally right till the end, that I was stunned when in the evening of the 12th of May the leadership at that time stood on stage and rejected the governments conciliation’s, after all they had conceded to everything they had been asking for. Then they said they would only end the rally if they would be “guaranteed” bail after their arrests. I knew in that moment it would only end badly and in bloodshed. I know that I felt betrayed by the leaders of the movement who in my opinion were not looking out for the core membership but had some other agenda in mind, what though only they can tell you.
The other sad thing is that the credibility and support from the international community the Red Shirts had worked so hard to gain was mostly destroyed by the violence and destruction that followed the ending of the rally on the 19th (and I can assure that though much of the destruction was done by a small percentage of the Red Shirts, much of the looting and destruction on the northern end by Big C WAS NOT Red Shirt related.
Unfortunately there is no easy answer. But I do know that we must peacefully continue to strive for an open, democratic society were free speech and freedom of expression and new ideas are encouraged and not punished, a county where economic opportunity and the rule of law is applied to all citizens equally and fairly, a society where even our elected officials are not above the law.
Quality comment or not?
6 
0
53 LesAbbey // Mar 4, 2011 at 7:51 pm
…for tech support and you find your call routed to India. Perhaps it has to do with the 11 different ‘regimes’ and 17 different constitutions here…
More likely it has to do with the English language playing such a large part in Indian life compared to Thailand. The move of these services to India predates the recent problems here.
Quality comment or not?
3 
0
54 Tarrin // Mar 4, 2011 at 9:49 pm
Anthony – 48
Actually the election response was meant to be for jeff but anyway. I agreed with you in most of the point, but only couple of things that I see differently. First, I still believe the monarch and its network still have a significant influence in Thailand internal affair. Much of its assets are not able to be review by public, most of the “royal” activities are still pretty much been kept a secret, the constitution article 8 and criminal law article 112 are still being use in full effect. Under this condition it is impossible to achieve the democratic society were free speech and freedom of expression and new ideas are encouraged and not punished, a county where economic opportunity and the rule of law is applied to all citizens equally and fairly, a society where even our elected officials are not above the law.
Furthermore to add to your quote, it is not the elected officials that are above the law, it is the unelected one that is above the law.
Quality comment or not?
1 
0
55 Anthony // Mar 5, 2011 at 12:49 am
Tarrin –
I do agree with you and I certainly won’t pretend to know what if anything the monarchy may do in secret. But those two articles do need to be either removed or dramatically changed so that politicians, military and government officials can not trot them out to silence and oppress others.
Fortunately the Internet has allowed many to continue to share and express ideas and opinions, though Thailand’s ICT has tried to restrict or block access to over 2,800 different sites, Fortunately Netizens always find a way to share. This site is an example.
Quality comment or not?
1 
0
56 LesAbbey // Mar 5, 2011 at 3:39 pm
So is it time for the left top part ways with the pro-Thaksin UDD and form a separate pro-democracy movement? Giles says not but Surachai may feel different. What do those who have supported the UDD on New Mandala now think? Is there a split? I would see that as a positive move, but also as dangerous personally for those outside of Phue Thai umbrella.
Quality comment or not?
3 
1
57 Vichai N // Mar 5, 2011 at 10:26 pm
Where to now UDD?
Time to drop the pretensions superfluous name UNITED FRONT FOR DEMOCRACY AGAINST DICTATORSHIP:
(a) certainly NOT united
(b) the ‘Against Dictatorship’ is superfluous (is there a democracy movement in the world rooting for dictatorship?)
So what we have left is a “FRONT FOR DEMOCRACY’. Sounds more appropriate doesn’t it, comrades?
Quality comment or not?
6 
6
58 Albert Park // Mar 6, 2011 at 10:10 am
Vichai N: “(b) the ‘Against Dictatorship’ is superfluous (is there a democracy movement in the world rooting for dictatorship?)”
Yes, the People’s Alliance for Democracy.
Quality comment or not?
7 
2
59 Vichai N // Mar 6, 2011 at 12:32 pm
Albert Park (#54) spot on! It is always healthy to be skeptical of people or movements who protest ‘for democracy’ the loudest. Both of Thailand’s Yellow and Red movements smell . . . just a question of which of the two are more rotten and/or more dishonest.
At least there are/were a few honest men in Thailand like Chalerm Yubamrung and the late General Kattiya who never wavered in their pronouncements that Pheu Thai Party and the Red Shirts movement are for the service of Thaksin and only Thaksin. Include too Thailand’s current military chief General Prayuth among the “honest” when he declared that the ‘Thai military first (sole) mission is ‘to protect the monarchy’.
Quality comment or not?
6 
8
60 Anthony // Mar 8, 2011 at 7:07 pm
Interesting article in the Bangkok Post today
http://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/opinion/225380/can-internet-be-free-again
Quality comment or not?
2 
0
61 Tossaporn Sirak // Mar 9, 2011 at 3:55 pm
Some information to add to your discussion on this subject. (No comment from me. I’m afraid of all of you. So I just shut up)
Look at this ABC’s Zoe Daniel exclusive interview with Dr. Weng two days ago.
http://www.radioaustralia.net.au/connectasia/stories/201103/s3156971.htm
The headlines read: “Thai red-shirt leader vows to respect polls”
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
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.