Yingluck’s recent announcement to renew the country’s war on drugs may bring a chill to some given her brother’s past performance. But to many Thais Thaksin’s crackdown on drugs remains a testament to his effective and bold leadership – especially in comparison to subsequent governments’ efforts.
A NIDA Poll taken in April 2011 shows that respondents from all regions of Thailand (even the south) were quite satisfied with Thaksin’s anti-narcotics campaign, and much more so when compared to that of Abhisit’s government.[1] During Peau Thai’s election campaign, it became increasingly clear that Thaksin’s anti-narcotics policy was seen as effective and even desirable. Despite his strategies being heavy-handed and violent , they continue to prove popular among Thais and were brought back, albeit with minor adjustment, by the Samak Somchai and, now, Yingluck governments.
Thaksin’s policy was popular then and still is.[2]
Supporters of Thaksin’s anti-drugs approach insist that his policy worked. From Thanin to Abhisit, few governments made anti-drug policy an urgent priority.[3] But under Thaksin, deputy prime ministers, ministers, chiefs of police, governors, all the way down to village headmen were held directly responsible for seeing this policy through. Between 2001 – 2005, there were more than half a million drug-related charges (while the murder rate doubled). According to the Office of the Narcotics Control Board (ONCB), the price of “crazy pills” jumped from around 60 baht to 300 baht, while heroin’s price skyrocketed.[4] Thaksin spent more than 14 billion baht before he proclaimed the victory over his war on drugs. The public was ecstatic. Poll after poll showed popular support towards Thaksin’s policy.
Since then drugs have “returned” and once again become a major problem for Thais, admits the ONCB. In 2004, the anti-drug agency survey revealed merely 1.8% of the respondents felt narcotics were a national problem. By early 2011, the figure had become 23.4%.[5] Queen Sirikit’s birthday speech asking the newly formed government to make drugs a policy priority reinforced its urgency. Yingluck put Chalerm in charge of counter-narcotics, whereby he announced a 7-4-3-6 formula that targets dealers and youth at risk – much of which resembled the policy of Thaksin.[6]
When asked whether there would be any more of the “silencing killings”, Yingluck said there weren’t any cases (during Thaksin time) that would qualify as such. She also added she would take extra precautions by ensuring that all interrogations be completed within 30 days.[7] Acting police chief, Praewpan Damapong, later announced a reward of 2-baht-per-pill for any amphetamines confiscated.[8]
Thaksin’s policy could not have been a “victory” if the drugs are back as soon as he was out of office. It lacked sustainability. But Thais were willing to accept his policy aimed at “winning the war on drugs” despite more than 2,500 alleged extrajudicial killings and scores being put in jail without due process.
Perhaps the problem is not Thaksin, it is us.
[2] Suan Dusit Poll. (November 22, 2003). The state of narcotics in people’s eyes. Retrieved from http://dusitpoll.dusit.ac.th/2546/2546_526.html
[3] More details on various governments’ policies on drugs: http://www.oncb.go.th/PortalWeb/urlName.jsp?linkName=document/p1-solution.htm
[4] Ibid, p. 7.

“Perhaps the problem is not Thaksin, it is us.”
Perhaps the problem is not so much us, as a gullible electorate. Given that most of us here have absolutely no say in the way this country is run, I don’t think it is that politically incorrect to suggest the case for the latter is far stronger. The role of the electorate here is mainly to endorse rather than to think for itself.
Quality comment or not?
10
8
And the really ironic thing is that repeated investigations by the most extreme of the Thaksin-haters have shown ZERO EVIDENCE that illegal “shoot to kill” orders came from the top.
The military junta and Abhisit accused Thaksin staight out of abuses, and set up commissions to investigate the matter. Yet neither of those committees found a shred of evidence linking Thaksin or his Cabinet with the extrajudicial killings.
Ah, but there was a cover up, the yellow-shirts claim! Thaksin found a way to get his tentacles into the military-appointed committee, even though that committee was established without any constitutional checks and balances. And the findings were censored following the election. And evil of evils, Thaksin also paid the Abhisit-appointed committee to cover up his alleged crimes against humanity.
Seriously?! The military and Abhisit had every incentive to make Thaksin look bad, and had the authority to appoint a bunch of lackeys to make it so. Yet neither of these found ANYTHING… What does that tell you? This blood libel has got to end!
Quality comment or not?
24
12
No one can win the war on drugs. Why not accept the inevitable and be pragmatic by legalising all drugs. The money wasted in fighting this so called war could be spent on proper programmes for the addicted. Programmes should put proper control on drug usage and the money made out of sales go back into education and other related activities.
Quality comment or not?
20
9
How can anyone call this Yingluck’s war on drugs?
Shouldn’t it be Queen Sirikit’s war on drugs as ordered/suggested in her birthday address “they are killing my children”.
And if that is the case, perhaps one should ask why she is not above politics?
And I believe the same suggestion or support was given to the Thaksin Government. Note: Thaksin Government, not Thaksin’s private war.
Quality comment or not?
16
4
@Dan: the author is Thai, so “us” is the correct pronoun. Further, dismissing the Thai electorate as gullible is both condescending and unhelpful. Is the US electorate, for example, any less so?
@frustrated reader: to suggest a leader can only be held responsible for the excesses of his subordinates if he personally orders those excesses is ludicrous.
@Roy Anderson: while I agree in principal, it has to be acknowledged that many members of Thai officialdom (from low level police officers to who know how high up) benefit directly from both the illegal market in drugs and the war against it. Until some modicum of transparency develops in Thai governance, we won’t see any change in this demonstrably counterproductive approach.
The question that this piece raises for me is: why is Thai society so comfortable with state violence, given it’s repeated deployment against innocent citizens over the decades and the lack of any sincere effort to account for those acts on the part of the state?
Quality comment or not?
17
0
Oh come on Frustrated Reader. They shot themselves in the back right? Of course Abhiset did nothing. Another elite scared shitting on his own doorstep. Who cares whether Thaksin directly sanctioned it or not. More to the point he did nothing to stop it.
Quality comment or not?
8
8
Indeed, most democracies have stagnated in recent years Doug. Elections can even appear to have been stolen. What is truly condescending is the idea that you write laws and then ignore them for your own ease.
Quality comment or not?
2
3
@ Doug Olthof,
I agree with you on Thai society’s unquestioning of violence against the so called people involved in the drugs trade. It reminds me of the radio presenter in Chiangmai who was murdered last year. He was reported to have drugs in his possession when murdered by the establishment. He was a Red supporter who his friends state that he had nothing to do with drugs. The press did not challenge the police statements. The war on drugs will be used as a vendetta against political opponents as well as drugs trafficers whilst the top people are left alone. The problem in Thailand is that people have drummed into them loyalty and obedience to the state. They have been brainwashed. However, not all the brainwashing by the Amaart is successful. Lets just hope that the voice of reason soon arrives in Thailand as well as the rest of the world. It needs a leader with courage to stand up and fight back against this very profitable war at our expense. YL does not come into that category.
Quality comment or not?
13
0
Not sure the author is Thai, Doug. Doesn’t change the point much though, does it? (Why is he/she blaming his/her powerless self for the obvious sins of the rich?)
“When is this blood[y] libel going to stop?”
Libel cases are just another form of suppression. Especially when the judiciary does whatever the current government wants it to do. Every government department is in the process of capitulation to the rising-star exchequer-raiding PT wannabes right now. They will probably be no better and no worse than Abhiset – who I blame for doing his worst to make sure we got this awful puppet government.
Quality comment or not?
2
2
#4
Certainly, but perhaps worth remembering that it actually did get very private. It was more or less, “They are targeting my son and so they must pay”. Did he never stop to imagine how his significant resources could be used to help his son. (The rest of us would never have that comfort.) More to the point, did he never stop to think where the real profits were going? But the answer was probably (and remains) too controversial for comfort. So grunts died and took the proof to their funeral pyres.
I wouldn’t argue with your original point, but it seems obvious to me that the Shinawatras show no sign of acting any better when handed power on a plate.
Quality comment or not?
1
1
Some story maybe look complicated. In the past US had a blacklist for Thai Politician who prepared to be a PM. That reason made a change in person to got Thai PM to Mr.Anand .I am surprisedin politician involved in drug in the past.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
I fear that this will be pinned on Yingluck, the same it was for Thaksin. One person spoke, the government responded. See a pattern? And how could they not? They have NO CHOICE.
It just reinforced the image that NOTHING concrete will change in the near future. The problems didn’t came from the Shinnawatras, so removing them would’t make it better.
It’s a nasty cycle, isn’t it?
Quality comment or not?
10
1
@Roger – Thaksin was neither accountable to the legislature nor his own cabinet. It was his war.
Quality comment or not?
7
2
Doug olthof – 5
why is Thai society so comfortable with state violence,
not just state but violence in general, I think the case of nonesense killing has been sky-rocking rectly (an ex-police officer was shot because of 1.2 baht change and so on).
When people felt like the law don’t serve them then they will start taking things to their own hand. This is not just happened recently, Thailand has a really bloody history and this “comfortable with violence” is a decades of making.
Btw want to add abit to Roy Anderson statement
” The problem in Thailand is that people have drummed into them loyalty and obedience to the state.”
Not “state” but Monarchy rather. Maybe everyone should give a bit research on the Malee Wua Pa drug root.
Quality comment or not?
3
2
Without real reform in Thailand’s military or police forces the problems with drugs in Thailand will prevail as there is just too much easy money to be made especially by those who are meant to protect the nation.
Thai children also lack a real education with many dropping out to become the fodder for those who influence them to take and sell drugs.
Thailand’s democracy is a fraud when it targets the plethora of small sellers and thousands of users while the people at the top with major political and security connections go free.
The rule of law must be set for all on Thailand’s wobbly ladder of social justice, not just targeting and striking fear into those who are the most vulnerable.
Quality comment or not?
5
0
We are under a “government of laws”, not a “government of men”. But if someone can plant drugs among your belongings, and if you are then required to prove that the drugs are not yours (which you can’t), then you are under a government of men, namely of those who are willing to plant evidence. Therefore the reverse onus of proof cannot be valid in any jurisdiction.
More: http://is.gd/noreverse .
Quality comment or not?
1
0
@Dan #9: Full disclosure: I know that the author is Thai because she’s a personal friend of mine! More to the point, I don’t think her argument is that the elites in question are not responsible for these violent and ineffective policies, but that holding them to account and pressuring them to adopt a different tact is made much more difficult when the old way of doing things enjoys widespread popular support. The question I keep coming back to is: why are so many Thai’s willing to accept this?
I think Tarrin #9 is on to something when he says that Thailand’s apparent comfort with violence is “decades in the making” and I think he’s right that the acceptance of violence as a norm ties in closely with the breakdown of “the rule of law”. Thailand is often a place where “the law is as the law does”, and when the law shoots people it doesn’t like the foundations of “nation” and “community” stand on very shaky ground.
Quality comment or not?
4
0
“Thai children also lack a real education with many dropping out to become the fodder for those who influence them to take and sell drugs. Thailand’s democracy is a fraud when it targets the plethora of small sellers and thousands of users while the people at the top with major political and security connections go free”
Just wondering if John #15 is refering to the USA, with reference to drugs sale and usage?
Quality comment or not?
2
0
Disgrace to Buddhism.
That is all that needs be said.
For any defense of mass killing.
[Note: You clowns who defend mass killing and consider yourselves to be Buddhist, please go back to the ***words of the Lord Buddha*** and read, please.
]
Quality comment or not?
3
1
Without a popular revolution nothing will change in Thailand. The army will torture and kill with impunity, Police will still use corrupt practices, judges will always rule for the elite, govts will tinker around the edges without confronting real problems and the status quo will continue with lucrative passtimes of the elite still going on whilst small fry bear the consequences. We cannot really discuss anything in a proper manner as we are restricted under 112. That of course is if we live in Thailand. Thailand will never grow up whilst 112 is in force as this stops anyone from researching 20th/21st century history of the country and the main players within Thai society. YL is from the capitalist class and does not want to upset the apple cart. Therefore the problem of the drugs barons in this country will not be addressed and their minnions will die in this war on drugs as their masters laugh all the way to the bank.
Quality comment or not?
9
0
So where does this comfortableness with violence, this Buddhist hypocrisy, this tolerance – indeed, glorification – of mass killing derive from?
“The War on Drugs itself, perhaps the most shameful chapter in Thaksin’s tenure as Prime Minister, was inspired by none other than King Bhumibol, who spoke of such a ‘war’ in his 2002 birthday speech. Shortly thereafter, Privy Councilor Phichit Kunlawanit waxed genocidal about the need to execute as many as sixty thousand drug dealers and drug fiends to deliver the nation of any residual ‘bad karma.’ And once Thaksin had declared victory, in time for His Majesty’s birthday, King Bhumibol publicly endorsed the campaign, noting that ‘victory in the War on Drugs is good.’ He went on to say ‘They may blame the crackdown for more than 2,500 deaths, but this is a small price to pay. If the Prime Minister failed to curb [the drugs trade], over the years the number of deaths would easily surpass this toll.’”
– Federico Ferrara, “Thailand Unhinged: The Death of Thai-Style Democracy”, Page 70
Quality comment or not?
14
0
Aim Sinpeng #13 “…. It was [Thaksin's] war.”
Thaksin’s war on drugs was discussed in some detail on NM just last month http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/2011/08/29/amsterdam-on-thailands-dual-state
Go to Gunter #46 or Albert#68
Albert cites the following good read…
https://thaipoliticalprisoners.wordpress.com/2011/09/11/prem-and-the-war-on-drugs
The war on drugs started at the very highest levels and was not just Thaksin going it alone. And this, Frustrated Reader, explains why committees and commissions will find no evidence because the evidence implicates everybody not just Thaksin.
War on Drugs 2011/2012 seems to be starting in the same way.
Quality comment or not?
5
0
“ไอ้การชัยชนะของการปราบไอ้ยาเสพติดนี่ ดีที่ปราบ แล้วก็ที่เขาตำหนิบอกว่า เอ้ย คนตาย ตั้ง ๒,๕๐๐ คน อะไรนั่น เรื่องเล็ก ๒,๕๐๐ คน ถ้านายกฯ ไม่ได้ทำ นายกฯ ไม่ได้ทำ ทุกปี ๆ จดไว้นะ มีมากกว่า ๒,๕๐๐ คนที่ตาย ที่ตายทั้งคนที่เสพติด แล้วก็ขึ้นไป ฆ่าคน หรือทำอะไร เผาอะไรต่าง ๆ รวมทั้งเจ้าหน้าที่ที่ต้องไปปราบปกติ ก็ตายมากเหมือนกัน แต่ไม่พูดเท่านั้นเอง ไม่ไปนับ แต่นี้เขาก็นับไปชี้ ชี้ ชี้นับ พวกที่ค้า พวกที่ทำ ก็ตายเยอะเหมือนกัน ก่อนนี้ แต่ไม่พูดถึง เชื่อว่าพอๆ กับที่ได้จดว่า มีผู้ที่ตายในการสงครามต่อสู้ยาเสพติด ที่ทราบว่าคนตาย เพราะยาเสพติดนี่ มากมาย
เพราะว่า สังเกตดูตั้งปีที่แล้ว บอกว่า ๔๐ กว่าปี ต้อง ๔๐ กว่าปีแน่ เพราะว่าตอนนั้นอยู่ที่พระที่นั่งอัมพรฯ ก่อน ก่อนลูกองค์นี้ อย่างน้อยลูกเกิด คนเล็กนะยังไม่เกิด ลูกคนเล็กเกิดที่พระที่นั่งอัมพรฯ แล้ว เราถึงย้ายมาที่ตำหนักสวนจิตรฯ นี่ มียาเสพติดก่อนเขา วิธีที่จะทำ ปีที่แล้วมาเล่าให้ฟัง แต่ว่าอาจจะไม่ละเอียดพอ ไม่เข้าใจ ปีที่แล้วอธิบายว่า ทำไมนึกถึงเป็นสงคราม ไอ้คำว่า สงครามเอามาจากปากคนนี้ ว่าเป็นสงคราม เพราะว่า สงคราม ๒ อย่าง สงครามการเมือง และสงครามเศรษฐกิจ สงครามการเมืองเขาใช้ยาเสพติดนี้มาก สำหรับมาบ่อนทำลายประชากรไทย รวมทั้งประชากรของประเทศ
เขาก็ได้เป็นผลพลอยได้เท่านั้นเอง ที่เขาได้เงิน แต่ที่ได้คือ ทำลาย ทำลายประชากรให้เป็นคนติดยา เป็นคนที่เขาว่า ขี้ยา คนขี้ยาคิดอะไรไม่ออก บางคนนึกว่าใช้ยานี่ทำให้แข็งแรง ทำให้มีความคิดดี แต่แท้จริงไม่ คนที่กินนั่นนะ เสพยา ตอนนั้นเป็นเฮโรอีนนะ เขาใส่ในน้ำหวาน ใส่ในกาแฟ ใส่ในน้ำแล้วก็หลอกทั้งเด็ก ทั้งผู้ใหญ่ เมืองจีนเขาทำ แล้วก็ไม่ใช่คนจีนทำ เป็นฝรั่งทำ ที่นี่มีฝรั่งหรือเปล่า เดี๋ยวเขาโกรธเอา แต่ว่าเป็นความจริงว่า ฝรั่งเป็นคนใช้ยาเสพติด ทำลายเมืองจีน แต่ไม่สำเร็จ จนกระทั่งมีสงคราม เขาก็มีสงครามเหมือนกัน แต่ตายมากกว่า ๒,๕๐๐ คน
แล้วที่บอก ๒,๕๐๐ คน นี่ก็ไม่เชื่อ มีมากกว่า ที่เขาตายแต่เราไม่รู้ แล้วก็พวกที่ทางเจ้าหน้าที่ได้สังหาร ไม่ใช่ ๒,๕๐๐ นี่เขาสังหารกันเอง แล้วนี่เราจะรับผิดชอบได้อย่างไร เขาด่าว่า นายกฯ ทำสงคราม ทำให้คนตาย ๒,๕๐๐ คน ความจริงไม่ใช่อย่างนั้น ๒,๕๐๐ คน มันหมดทั้งหมด เขานับแต่ว่า พวกที่ตายเป็นส่วนใหญ่ เป็นพวกที่เขาฆ่ากันเอง พวกที่ค้า พวกที่ผลิต เขาฆ่ากันเอง จำนวนมาก ที่ทางราชการจะรับผิดชอบ ก็อาจจะมีจำนวนหนึ่ง ก็ลองถามทางผู้บัญชาการตำรวจแห่งชาติ ไปแยก จำแนกเป็นเท่าไร ก็เชื่อว่าใน ๒,๕๐๐ นี่ มากที่เขาฆ่ากันเอง แล้วก็ความผิดของเขา มาโยนความผิดให้ท่านซูเปอร์นายกฯ”
– From Bumibhol’s birthday speech, 2003
(Sorry, an English translation is really hard to do. His speech is so brilliant it just brings tears to my eyes and rocks my mind! Farang language just can’t capture the eloquence and deep true meaning of his shining words.)
Quality comment or not?
5
9
@ Bright Eyes #21
Thank you for answering a statement that was directed at me by Aim #13. I answered a similar question/statement on the Bangkok Post Forum a month back, which passed the first line of censors and remained in situ for three days before suddenly being removed. Not only was it removed but so were all my previous posts and I could no longer log in. When I checked the email account I use, I was informed I had committed “a fragrant breach of the rules”.
In my opinion I had told the truth based on the facts I had read both in the Bangkok Post and elsewhere.
The fact that someone complained to MICT, the subsequent removal of the post and me being banned by the Bangkok Post is rather indicative of the fear generated by the elite in Thailand.
As I live in Thailand I could now face 15 years.
C’est la vie. It still won’t stop me saying what needs to be said.
Quality comment or not?
7
0
And let’s not forget the blacklists!
During their pre-New Years visit to the home of Privy Council President Prem Tinsulanonda in 2002, the Defense Minister, chiefs of branches of the military, and the chief of police all received orders to draw up lists of “enemies” in the War on Drugs. This was 3 weeks before Thaksin made his first statement on the War on Drugs.
Source: Bangkok Post, “Identify Drug Foes, Says Prem”, 28 December 2002
People like to criticize Thaksin for the War on Drugs for causing the deaths of people on the bottom of the drug pyramid, without catching the big bosses. Well, ask yourself if Thaksin is also not on the bottom of a pyramid, with other big bosses on top of him!
Quality comment or not?
16
0
http://www.idpc.net/sites/default/files/library/Harm-reduction-policies-inThailand.pdf
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Proffesor Mark Tyndall – MD ScD FRCPC – University of British Columbia -August 2011 – Report : “At the root of this failure has been the pursuit of an aggressive drug policy to reduce drug supply and provide “compulsory treatment” to illicit drug users.This “abstinenceat-any-cost” approach has effectively silenced repeated calls to provide effective interventions that could reduce HIV transmission,improve health outcomes,and engage drug users into effective treatment and recovery programs.It is concerning that the 2008 Annual Report from the office of the Narcotics Control Board (ONCB) does mention HIV or draws any distinction between injection drug use and other forms of illegal drugs.Although goverments around the world have pursued law enforcement strategies,Thailands 2002 “war on drugs” will go down as one of the most regressive and repressive responses to drug use ever attempted at a national level.While no longer officially goverment policy ,the harrassment and brutal enforcement practices aimed at illicit drug users persist.Not only are these approaches ineffective in reducing the use of drugs,they serve to deepen the isolation of drug users and severly limit programs that can prevent HIV transmission.”
Quality comment or not?
1
0
The Thai Gov’ts War on Drugs: Dead Wrong. Stop the Murder of Thai Drug Users.” During Thaksin Shinwatra’s 2003 “War on Drugs” it wasn’t only drug users who were brutally, extra-judicially murdered in the streets, but over 50% of the 2,800 killed during the course of 3 months, were completely innocent, involved in no way with either drug use or trade. This atrocity has been overlooked as he and now his sister, Yingluck Shinawatra have proven their utility to advancing the interests of Wall Street and London.
Quality comment or not?
0
3