Over at East Asia Forum, University of Queensland academic Patrick Jory has a brief analysis titled “The crisis of the Thai monarchy”. It was written late last year. He concludes by arguing:
The disastrous floods of late 2011 have forced a pause in the ongoing cold war between the forces arrayed behind the monarchy and those supportive of Thaksin, the Pheu Thai government led by his sister, Yingluk Shinawatra, and electoral politics more broadly. It is likely, however, that political hostilities will resume as soon as the floodwaters recede. The stakes involved in this struggle are massive. Vested interests in the military, the judiciary, senior levels of the bureaucracy and certain business groups depend on the monarchy and will fight to preserve its leverage over Thailand’s political system. On the opposing side, deep and widespread resentment against the monarchy exists among those who view it as complicit in the killings of red shirt protestors in the violence of April-May 2010. They are unlikely to tolerate another coup, and with uncertainty surrounding the succession, the monarchy’s future looks precarious indeed.
Jory’s full article is available here.
Patrick Jory said:
“On the opposing side, deep and widespread resentment against the monarchy exists among those who view it as complicit in the killings of red shirt protestors in the violence of April-May 2010.”
The use of the word ‘complicit’ is a good word. This is because no one really knows whether they are the one who ‘directed’ the killing or not (although many believe that they did). However, all the evidences point out that they are indeed complicit in the killing. The Queen attended the funeral of the colonel who came out to kill the protesters, saying that “he has done so much for the Monarchy”. As for the King, the Constitution explicitly states that he is the commander of the Thai army. This means he has the power to stop the army from killing the people. Yet he did not do a thing to stop when his subordinates committed the crimes. Yet he is indeed an accomplice.
Quality comment or not?
35 
9
The statement that Col. Romklao “came out to kill the protesters” is patently false. There had been no reports of deaths of protesters before he himself was killed by a rocket propelled grenade fired by someone among the protesters. The video clips of that incident clearly show Thai troops firing in the air, so as not to kill protesters, until after they were hit by that grenade. Clips from earlier in the day show army troops in hand-to-hand fighting with protesters on Rajadmanern Nok avenue, but they were not firing their guns. There were many reports of injuries, but not deaths at that time. If you are basing the monarchy’s alleged complicity in killing protesters on the idea that Col. Romklao “came out to kill the protesters” then your argument has no merit. The armed wing of the Red Shirts was clearly complicit in the deaths and directly responsible for the deaths of those soldiers and the colonel.
Quality comment or not?
7 
16
JG45 says ” Col. Romklao “came out to kill the protesters” is patently false. ”
Well it is not patently false that he was leading a battalion of armored vehicles complete with heavy weapons in the heart of Bangkok when he was killed.
This at a place not far from Tammasat U where the army in earlier days did kill hundreds of unarmed students.
So what does JG45 suggest the army came out to do?
Quality comment or not?
14 
4
“JG45″:
“There had been no reports of deaths of protesters before he himself was killed by a rocket propelled grenade fired by someone among the protesters. ”
That is quite wrong. First of all – Col. Romklao was not killed by an RPG, but by one of two M67 hand grenades thrown at the soldiers, at Dinso Road, sometime around 20.30 hrs . Secondly, the first protester was killed over an hour before Romklao was killed. The first protester killed that day was killed at Khok Wua at 18.40 hrs (time pulled from the metadata of a photo of the victim taken by a Thai photojournalist – who also confirmed the accuracy of the time of his camera).
As to the intentions of Romklao and the military that day – it is very difficult to come to a conclusion. There still is conflicting information, also important facts are not yet known or disputed, and naturally there is a certain lack of transparency on all sides. The military, especially the units involved in the crackdown, for example, is still adamant that they have not fired one single shot that night, even though there is more than enough proof (including video footage and bullet holes) that they indeed fired at protesters. And on the other side – very little factual has come out yet regarding the Red Shirt militants.
I have photographed Col. Romklao just before the push to Rajadamnern at Dinso Rd. when the soldiers just lined up at about 16.30 to 17.00 hrs. Col. Romklao was highly aggressive and extremely agitated, screaming at his soldiers to fight, not to retreat. Me, and several of my colleagues at the scene were quite shocked by this display. During the push towards Rajadamnern the soldiers advanced very aggressively, pushed and kicked a female protester, and even kicked a few locals who watched from the front of their houses. The advance was stopped when soldiers threw teargas grenades towards the protesters, but the direction of the wind blew it straight back into their own lines, and by far not all soldiers were equipped with gas masks (this particular teargas the military used that day was the worst teargas i have ever experienced).
I doubt that we will ever get sufficient investigation results from that day and night, and the “intention” of the military will remain disputed. Too much may have been lost in the resulting chaos. What though we can clearly state is that the behavior of the military there was marred by almost unbelievable incompetence in all stages of the failed April 10 crackdown attempt.
The lack of public response by the palace regarding this incident has definitely contributed to widespread speculation over complicity under Red Shirt protesters. This was quite evident by comments of protesters in the days after the April 10 incident.
But as many such topics go – speculation is all there is, lacking verifiable facts.
Highly rated. Quality comment or not?
39 
3
There is nothing worse than an eye-witness when you are trying to re-write history!
Quality comment or not?
17 
1
“Do you swear to tell the truth and nothing but . . .” yet many languished in jail or worse because of false testimonies. But does it make (#5) wonder?
What was that about re-writing histories? And there were hundreds, perhaps thousands of eyewitnesses with their downloaded video clips of the violence and mayhem during Red riots of Y2010. But who cares? Every Thai it seems already made up their minds who are guilty and who are not.
Quality comment or not?
2 
6
One death at 18:40 is hardly a massacre. Considering all the heavy weaponry described, one death makes it highly unlikely that their intent was to “come out and kill the people.” If that was their intent, there would have been a slaughter right from the start, and there wasn’t. So, not so hard to discern what their intent was.
Considering the hand-to-hand combat on the streets all afternoon, in which the soldier did not resort to heavy weapons and ended up retreating, it’s not suprising that Col. Romklao would be yelling at his soldiers to fight and not retreat.
The videos show that Romklao’s unit was firing in the air when the RPG hit. Once again, that doesn’t seem like intent to kill the people. Romklao also reportedly played a large part in the 2009 operations, in which basically no one was killed. What was different this time around? The armed wing of the Reds began shooting and firing RPGs at the soldiers. When you shoot at soldiers, they shoot back. And when you shoot at soldiers, you share in the responsiblity for what follows.
In any event, none of what anyone has written here lends any credence to the original poster who claimed that the monarchy was complicit in the army supposedly coming out to kill the people.
Quality comment or not?
5 
9
“JG45″:
Your attempt to build a straw-man cannot obfuscate your lack of factual knowledge. No, in the early afternoon confrontation the military did not end up “retreating” – On the opposite – the units deployed achieved their stated aim: occupy the area until the Wisut Kasat intersection. Until that time the military’s operation that day went still more or less, somewhat, within the rules of engagement.
Things went bad during the late afternoon main attack. It is though quite impossible for the military to only have fired life rounds at the protesters after the grenade attack during which Col. Romklao was fatally injured (again: not RPG’s, but hand grenades, and previous to that at Khok Wua M79 grenades, which still are not RPG’s!), when the first Red Shirt died more than an hour before, and also before the Red Shirt militants arrived at the scene and then engaged the military.
It is indeed hard to discern what the military’s intend that day was. The military’s operation, especially the second part that started in the late afternoon was accompanied by at least incredible incompetence, if not worse.
Romklao was indeed involved in Sonkran 2009. There is clear proof that Red Shirt protesters were injured by military gunfire during the early morning attack on April 13, 2009, some maimed for the rest of their lives. The military until today refuses to acknowledge that they fired life rounds at protesters. But they lie – i was there and was shot at from the military lines.
As to the alleged complicity of the monarchy – many Red Shirts are under this impression. So far the was only one single pubic statement regarding the violence of 2010 by a member of the Royal family made, and that was during Woodie’s interview with Princess Chulabhorn. That statement, as you can surly recall, was not exactly sympathetic to the Red Shirts.
Naturally, we cannot conclude that this statement means that the entire Royal Family was supportive of Chulabhorn’s view, yet there has been no indication either that the family, or individual members would oppose her publicly stated views.
Nevertheless, we can clearly state that sizable sectors of Thai society do not support the monarchy (to differing degrees) anymore, and that the establishment is so far at a loss how to deal with the situation and the perception of the Red Shirts, other than by confrontation (increased use of lese majeste laws, threatening statements by the Army chief and other high ranked officers, etc).
Quality comment or not?
15 
2
Nostitz you were almost always there during those sticky dangerous Red Shirts violent encounters . . . that’s what I could glean from all your testimonies (sworn or otherwise).
Did you not encounter any Red or Black Shirts armed with assault rifles or RPGs during all that time? Were you there when those Red Shirt leaders (Arisman et al) were openly urging their followers for battle and mass arson (one bottle of petrol per Red Shirt)?
I agree with you that those very young army recruits were scared and incompetent? Isn’t that what General Khattiya (and his leader Thaksin) was counting on as he continually provoked the military to respond in kind to the many random shooting/RPG attacks coming from the Red camp?
Quality comment or not?
0 
4
To be quiet for a long time may sometimes tell more than a statement.
The King seems to have recovered somehow recently. To see where his preferences are, just listen to his recent speeches. That’s not too hard to guess, it’s his power base – the military and the judiciary – and there is silence on their recent controversial actions.
He mentioned the military on par with the government in his short New Year speech ( both should work for the benefit of the people)
At most of his appearances since he moved to Sirirat he was swearing new judges in and admonished them to “uphold the law” . Most recently at the end of January, shown nationwide during the Royal News
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
“Vichai N”:
Yes, I did once encounter armed Red Shirt militants, late night at May 14, 2010 (as i wrote at the time, comment 70: http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/2010/05/16/nick-nostitz-in-the-killing-zone/ ).
But then, i also encountered armed Yellow Shirt militants.
And by the way – again – no, not RPG’s, but M79.
Quality comment or not?
9 
0
”Clips from earlier in the day show army troops in hand-to-hand fighting with protesters on Rajadmanern Nok avenue, but they were not firing their guns. ”
There were a lot of reports of live ammunition being used in the early afternoon and several reports of gun shot wounds. Even Thai PBS at the time were reporting the use of live fire and were showing bullet holes in parked cars near where the trouble was taking place.
The use of tear gas which was being dropped from helicopters was also being reported by the main stream media.
”Nostitz you were almost always there during those sticky dangerous Red Shirts violent encounters . . . that’s what I could glean from all your testimonies (sworn or otherwise).”…………..
He was. I personally saw Nick virtually every day during the period of the troubles in April and May, and also at most of the events following the killings when people were coming out to protest against the murders.
Quality comment or not?
7 
1