Andrew Spooner has a write-up about four Thailand-related questions put to the United Kingdom government by the Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs, Kerry McCarthy MP. The questions all deal with lese majeste and the death of Ampon “Ar Kong” Tangnoppakul. Andrew notes that we may hear answers by 21 May 2012, although that could be delayed somewhat if the UK government stll needs to determine its formal position. This effort is worth watching closely. I’m sure Andrew will keep us all up-to-date.
Review of Ideal ManNew Mandala book review editor Michael Montesano reviews this new work on a key figure in Southeast Asian history.
Read More
Review of MisallianceKeith Weller Taylor argues that this new book is thoughtful, lucid, original, analytical, and readable
Read More
Review of Thailand’s Hidden WorkforceInga Gruß reviews a book about the work conditions of Myanmar migrant workers in Thailand at this time of immense change.
Read More
Review of Gender, Emotions and Labour MarketsSri Ranjani Mei Hua reviews a book dealing with experiences of women in Southeast Asia.
Read More
Review of Authority of InfluenceScholarly treatments of gender in Myanmar, past or present, remain scarce. Jessica Harriden’s book thus fills a gap in our understanding of an important and controversial topic.
Read More
Review of The King in ExileDonald M. Seekins argues that this book is the story of a dynasty that belongs truly to Burma’s past.
Read More
Review of Buddhist FuryThis book explores the relationship between religion and violence in far southern Thailand, where Buddhist monks are a marginalized local minority.
Read More
Review of Revisiting Rural PlacesRevisiting Rural Places should become an essential reference text for researchers who work on social, cultural, political and economic change in Asia.
Read More
Review of The Institutional ImperativeDe-agrarianisation often isn’t very pretty, but economic disparity may well be the price to be paid for pursuing it as slowly as Thailand has over the past 50 years.
Read More
Review of Imagining Gay ParadiseThe creation of make-shift, idiosyncratic queer paradises provides shelter, community, and belonging for many who have refused to fit into standard narratives of Southeast Asia.
Read More
Review of The Fate of Rural HellThe models of eroticism and faith in the Hell Garden have been left behind by the robust urban bourgeois consumerist culture increasingly prominent across contemporary Thai society.
Read More
Review of Revolution InterruptedQuestioning received notions of revolution, this book offers a passionate and rigorous reconsideration of the period in Thailand between October 1973 and October 1976.
Read More
Review of Land and LoyaltyRead More
Review of The Lovelorn Ghost and the Magical MonkRead More
Review of Saying the UnsayableRead More
Ha ha! That would really be interesting. The death of Ah Kong is now as loud as an atomic bomb.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
It is ironic that questions like these cannot be asked in the Thai parliament. What’s happening to Thai democracy?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Well reported, Andrew. International opinion will do as much, if not arguably more, than local opinion to influence change in Thailand. Thais inherently cannot abide criticism – their entire cultural, social and political systems are designed to control it. They can crush dissent internally, but they know they have a harder battle in the face of international opinion. . The role of the international media is critical, as it was influencing change in South Africa and other internalized regimes that were nevertheless dependent on external relationships for survival. The Thai elite can’t make external criticism go away; they will need to confront it…and so confront themselves.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Picayune!
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Great work by Andrew Spooner.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
not sure what the fuss is here or why the UK Foreign Minister would be compelled to respond with anything other than something to the effect that other countries’ legal and prison systems are internal matters. Why would anyone think the UK FM has any responsibility on this matter?
second, Stuart, there is a ‘yes’ and ‘no’ to your proposition of Thai concerns with international criticism. I seem to recall just a few years ago in the Victor Bout incident that the Thai gov. didn’t really give two hoots what either US or Russia thought… so I wouldn’t want to go overboard in stressing the significance of international opinion on Thai opinion-makers… they can tend to be a fairly insular lot…
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Vichai N: Yes and No. Increased awareness in the UK will help them avoid future PR disasters like the prime minister’s planned trip to Thailand over Xmas 2010 and UK royals will (continue to) maintain their distance from the Thai counterparts. However does the UK hold much leverage over Thailand? Any large projects? Any signatures required to join any international bodies or for access to EU markets? Probably nothing significant. Thai MPs are shooting each other in petrol stations – the staid proceedings in a foreign parliament will hardly register among the Thai leadership.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Billy D
I think you’ll find that, over time, international opinion is very influential…if not the most influential factor… in international affairs. The British Parliament has a long history of commenting on the “internal affairs” of other nations, sometimes to great effect. They’ve even go to war over it; Kosovo, Iraq and Libya being more recent examples. None of the leaders of those particular regimes fared well.
In my own country of South Africa I remember as a child muttering that the sticky-beak Brits ought to butt out of our “internal affairs”, knowing we were in serious kak if they didn’t. And so it turned out. Apartheid was brought down as much by international condemnation as it was by internal protest.
It does take a while admittedly, but one has to start somewhere….and the British Parliament has a track record of being a very good place to start.
As for Thailand, I happen to know personally quite a few of the people who are very influential in shuffling the deckchairs of power in Bangkok. I can assure you they are most concerned about what we think about them. Much more so, in fact, than what their own countrymen in Isaan think about them. They may not say so in public (they’re diplomats after all) – as I grant you they probably didn’t during the Victor Bout affair – but they do read every single comment on this forum. And they will also be reading every single word written in the British press – with some trepidation.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
> “in the Victor Bout incident that the Thai gov. didn’t really give two hoots what either US or Russia thought”
They did, that’s why they changed their decision and deliberated for so long and why his departure from Bangkok looked more like ‘rendition’ than ‘extradition’.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
International opinion varies, understandably, in being either influential or non-influential. The dividing line by the Thais is where embarrassment begins to cost too much financially. A closely related consideration is growing unfavorable reports and comments that arise in any given case.
There is probably no government or state on this planet that really holds human rights and decency in front of everything else. That, too, for understandable reasons.
One major point that has not really been covered academically or otherwise is the line between the state and the government. AI and HRW and CPJ and others can direct well-intended and meaningful messages to the government but it is seldom that they will have any impact given the fact that it is not the government in Thailand that “runs things” but the state. The government is but a caretaker, taking its cues from a military/royalist/Council of State coalition that has little to no respect or patience for western-equivalent democracy or free speech. That the government, whether Democrat, TRT, PT, and so on can’t get a lot done is part of the syndrome of ruling the kingdom by people who have only one objective in mind – to preserve and spread the Old Culture.
The issue of the role of the state in Thailand is another potentially explosive one as it then leads to function, accountability and reform.
I am of the opinion that while letters to the current government (at any time) are fine and proper protocol in their own sense, they need to be accompanied by similar letters, calls and visits to State agencies involved, such as the Council of State and Council on Law Reform, etc. English language information on these agencies needs to be much more available and analyzed.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
It is a good thing that these questions are asked at the British parliament.
Asians put a lot of store in what the others, especially “the advanced people”, think about them all the time.
That was how the sanction worked in Burma by countries which had little or no investment in the country before. Than Shwe was hurt people thought so little of him.
Unfortunately our people’s champi0n is now scoring own goal by rapid dismantling of sanction presumably wishing for flood of foreign money for “development” and jobs as no doubt advised by the honourable ASEAN and “Western” advisers.
Without any technology or renewable products, all Burma has to flog are the rivers, coastal line, minerals and trees (just family silver really) with jobs being manual labourers and sex workers.
Large scale mechanised high yield, high production rice plantation will not only destroy the once fertile land but the whole Burmeseness of the people who currently carries centuries-old tradition.
With hardly any rule of law with more entrenched military and incoming hoardes of international businessmen with usual exploitative methods, we are heading towards Cambodia without the sanction break on.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
It matters to Thais who wish to hobnob with the likes of David Cameron and whose minders indicated to said PM that a Christmas family holiday in Thailand rubbing elbows with his Eaton tub-mate AKA “Butcher of Bangkok” Mark A. might not be favorably viewed by British taxpayers scrimping over budget cuts, petrol prices and European economic turmoil .
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
International opinions is very influential, yes. But it is only that: influential. It is not decisive or binding, and outside nations cannot force Thailand to abolish the law. Thus, until the King dies, lese majeste is not likely to be abolished, and there is nothing other countries can do about it.
If Thailand has as much oil as Iraq or Libya, however, UN may send the international army in, claiming their BS ‘responsibility to protect’ (R2P) principle.
But that won’t happen, as Thailand has no oil for them.
The Monarchy will weaken after the death of the King. Apart from Princess Sirindhorn, no other Royal is so well liked that the army can commit any atrocity and claim that they are protecting him or her. I believe the King’s death is near.
But I really don’t know whether the army has further plans up their sleeve to retain its power after the King’s death.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Interesting coincidence that these questions are being raised at the same time as new interest is awakened in the BBC programme from the early 1980′s “The Soul of The Nation” , actually well worth watching (and listening to given the dulcet tones of John Gielgud narrating it) though very much a period piece.What I suspect will be overlooked is that the fawning and hagiographical nature of the programme was a matter of controversy at the time.Bernard Levin wrote an bizarre commie bashing article in defence of it in The Times (somebody with access to Times archives might like to dig it up) in response to some critical comments from Jonathan Meades.Anyway the Thai army is now reported to be asking if it may use footage as part of its own proposed propaganda piece.I politely suggest that the BBC should inquire what earthly business is this of the Thai army and perhaps rather less politely it should go screw itself.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
I don’t see any point in pinning false hopes on an earth shattering reaction from the British government on a matter that, while tragic, is solely to do with Thailand’s internal affairs.
Why should the British government be expected to make a fuss about the treatment of a Thai in the Thai justice system and prisons when it couldn’t care less about its own nationals caught up in the Thai “justice” system? Even when prisoners are repatriated to the UK under treaty the British government does its utmost to treat them as inhumanely as possible, compared to other Western nations that recognize that draconian Thai sentences are a multiple of tariffs for the same offences in their own countries and release their repatriated prisoners as quickly as possible.
Even British tourists and expat workers are routinely allowed by the Embassy to die for lack of medical care or callously left shackled naked and starving to the bars in Thai police cells. British Embassies have become nothing but trade and tourism missions and I would be surprised if more than a couple of lines about Ah Kong’s case have been sent to the Southeast Asian desk in London.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
# 13 : This interesting article was recently published about the Royal Thai Army and its secret plans.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/NE11Ae03.html
Now we are in for 2 important anniversaries to be kept as low profile as possible – 20 years bloody May and 2 years Ratchaprasong – there is no change in their mindset.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Lots of interesting comment here.
Marteau
Who is pinning false hopes on this? Seems to be a lot of balanced comment here.
I for one don’t think much will happen but getting lese majeste on the record in the UK government is notable. It further diminishes the law’s credibility and undermines those who defend it. Because of this law Thailand’s international reputation is slowly being undermined. No longer can wealthy, privileged Thais swan around the world pretending to be “liberal”. And let’s face it, it is not only the law that is an issue but the failure to conduct proper evidence-based, fair trials; to have a punishment that actually fits the crime; the appalling treatment of prisoners once convicted.
The questions also put the UK’s Bangkok Embassy on the spot as they might be failing to inform their own government as to what is going on.
And you’re right to raise the issue of British nationals in Thailand. I wrote a long story about the matter for the Independent on Sunday several years ago. http://ind.pn/34evD7.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Suspect many governments would be quietly envious of these type of laws and how they can be applied. As the march to a Fascist Utopia in the West progresses unabated, perhaps similar laws against Bankers will suddenly appear on the books. 15 years in jail would soon sort out the Anti-Wall St Fraud protestors, save on mace to boot.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Cassandra: Are there any geniuses on display in that documentary?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
there’s a lot of naive commentary here. Lese Majeste is not a matter of ‘international affairs’ as Stuart suggests. It is an internal matter. And considerations about it by the government of the day are made for internal reasons, not due to ‘international pressure’. Yingluck is coming to Australia in coming weeks and I can tell you for a fact that the Aus PM has been internally briefed not to mention lese majeste or raise any such sensitive issues. Its simply not politics for Western countries to do so, whether we like it or not.
Yes, Thais care to a degree what others think. But they care a lot more about maintaining the present apparatus in place which enables them to maintain power, including the mystification of the monarchy and the use of lese majeste to enforce this.
The other point is this unidirectional idea of ‘influence’. There’s a lot of people these days who think that western contact will liberalise recalcitrant countries (like Thailand or Burma). I’m one who is just as interested in mapping out whether the influence is in fact just as, if not stronger, in the other direction.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Billy D
“there’s a lot of naive commentary here. Lese Majeste is not a matter of ‘international affairs’ as Stuart suggests. It is an internal matter.”
In answer to the first part of your opening point please read this which suggests the opposite has occurred and lese majeste is already on the international agenda. I guess if the Australian government adopts a more cowardly approach that’s their choice. http://www.article19.org/resources.php/resource/2761/en/un:-spotlight-on-thailand’s-lèse-majesté-law-and-computer-crimes-act
“United Nations Human Rights Council Member States expressed widespread concerns about the sharp increase in lèse-majesté and computer crime charges and the serious impact on freedom of expression.
Recommendations to Thailand to repeal or review the lèse-majesté law (Article 112 of Thailand’s Penal Code) and the Computer Crime Act (2007) were made by fourteen member states, including Western European countries, New Zealand, Canada, Brazil and Indonesia.
Both the United Kingdom and France called for Thailand to enable the public to debate the lèse-majesté law without fear of prosecution. In recent years, even the discussion of the lèse-majesté law risks arrest.”
It’s heartening to see Brazil and Indonesia sign up to that – both are hardly “Western” and their inclusion in that list broadens the international base for calls for LM reform.
To answer the second half of your opening point – actually, it’s yes and no. If Thailand fails to reform such draconian laws and the way it enacts them then it has the possibility to foster extremism on both sides (something we’re already witnessing) which could lead to further conflict with one potential outcome being the destabilising of the region. The treatment of Ah Kong has created more anger, was easily avoidable and served no interest whatsoever accept to heighten tensions. All these things happened internally and were self-inflicted, Thai on Thai.
So the international community quietly pressing Thailand into reform is no bad thing. In fact, if they have any interests in Thailand and SE Asia it’s probably in the self-interest of those countries to do so. It is actually the rigid and slavish maintenance of the status quo by a couple of power groups that is fostering instability, not the other way around. Do these groups still represent the desires of the majority of Thais? Election results suggest otherwise. Change is on its way. In that context the international community has a responsibility to support those Thais, such as Nitirat, you are already calling for reform (to infer, as you have done, that all calls for reform of LM are external is a complete misrepresentation and dismissive of those taking huge risks calling for reform. Those Thais deserve our support not our sneers). If they don’t they could, instead, be facing a revolution or civil war.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
billy d LM is a not an internal matter! Its a matter of universal ‘stds’ of human rights and freedom from an unjust barbaric law which has not moral validity. Thai law and culture is meglomaniac and delusional- why does not everyone in the whole world love our king? yes I can think of 112 reasons…
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
The CP has been sent to attend Queen Elizabeth’s Jubilee celebrations. Prince Andrew attended the reverse fixture.
NNT also state that he’s accompanied by Princess Srirasmi – they don’t state whether they made the trip from Bangkok together or met up en-route.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Andrew Spooner #17. I accept your wise comments.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Debating Les Majeste in parliament in a jubilee year?? Good heavens I should hope not. In a shocking BBC report yesterday it was revealed that 3 customers refused to stand for the national anthem in a novelty royalty themed tearoom in Co Durham.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-18141421
They were of course quickly ejected by the patriotic owner but do not as yet appear to have been arrested, let alone imprsoned or lynched.
what is the rule of law coming to? I can only assume they were not properly British.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0