Last week I had a lengthy overview of Thai politics published at Inside Story. There are a few different sections that will be of interest to New Mandala readers. I conclude that:
Under these circumstances the final months of 2012 are likely to see more aggressive efforts by Thaksin to return to the kingdom. He will not want to miss an opportunity to pay his final respects to King Bhumibol. It is easy to overlook Thaksin’s own royalist views and the fact that he has worked very closely with the palace and the military in the past. The coup put an end to that, but Yingluck’s words and actions have signalled that rapprochement is conceivable.
Radical shifts in allegiance have happened before in Thai politics and they will happen again. Far from being a republican trouble-maker, Thaksin may ultimately prove a key ally for the palace in any future crisis. His capacity for personal reinvention is legendary, and this means that as he and the palace both face the challenges of the years ahead they may find that a common cause can guarantee mutual survival.
Thaksin has a track record of indestructibility. It makes sense that in the difficult years to come the palace will want him on their side.
…”He will not want to miss an opportunity to pay his final respects to…”…
Has any information missed here? Where the “final” is on, the side of the payer or the payee, or both?
I have heard somewhere that a man wishes to live to 120!
Quality comment or not?
3 
3
The issue is not whether or not Thaksin is on the side of the monarchy.
There will be an interesting turn of events soon. An ironic turn of events…
Quality comment or not?
4 
2
Maratip’s enigmatic comment will keep us all on the edge of our seats. Teflon Don may be reconciled? It would be the perfect “Thai solution” to the Mexican Standoff we have been watching.
That there has been significant behind-the-scenes movement is hardly a guess needing to be made. The big issue is how to handle the PAD’s iconic loyalties, but even that is easily “put into framework.”
Quality comment or not?
2 
0
To me, this theory of a palace + Thaksin alliance seems highly implausible without a clear motivation both groups would need for this to happen. I simply cannot think of one. Not to mention that a part of Thaksins support base is anti-palace anti-112, and he would risk alienating it.
When the time comes, the next in line will no longer offer the credibility needed for a passionate nationalistic rallying cry. I suspect a power vacuum in the inner royalist circles with in-fighting and temporary factional divisions. In the mean time, unopposed, the democratic bureaucracy will likely and permanently fill that vacuum. It will be the final death knell signally that the good ol’ days are gone.
At least, that’s my theory . . .
Quality comment or not?
3 
1
Apirux, # 1
If that person can live up to 120 years old, he can be added to the list of the Chinese Eight Immortals:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight_Immortals
Or perhaps Dhammakaya temple can now predict which heaven that person will be reborn after this life:
http://www.bangkokpost.com/breakingnews/308543/dhammakaya-boasts-steve-jobs-afterlife
Quality comment or not?
1 
1
Thaksin’s only real anti-royalist infraction was seeing the inevitable future and having the gall to be open about it. Thus, his cozying up to the Crown Prince, and his administrative preparations for a post-Rama 9 influence vacuum. Of course, the old guard has been making similar preparations for decades, but they have the Thai-face decency to do it in secret.
Like the strongmen before him (Sarit, Suchinda, et al) Thaksin knows a useful mythology when he sees one. The author’s note about “radical shifts in allegiance” cannot be overstated; the army is pragmatic to the core. But to refer to “the palace” in monolithic terms belies some pretty big factional variables, doesn’t it? The palace of the king, the palace of the queen, the palace of the Privy C, the palace of the prince, the palace of the princess, or the palace of the non-titled employees who haven’t had a real job for 65 years?
Whether Thaksin is invited to join the coalition depends on which “palace” has prominence 100 days after Rama 9′s funeral.
Quality comment or not?
9 
0
The question to ask is who will be supporting the lese majeste law and who will be opposed to it and why in the near future.
Quality comment or not?
1 
3
I believe there will be a lengthy “waiting period” after a certain person’s demise, which could be 3 years or more but certainly will be at least 1 year, before the world’s most gigantic ritual funeral since Ancient Egypt. Does anyone know on what basis the “waiting period” time length will be determined, what length of time signifies in terms of reincarantion, etc., and who will in control of this decision and what happens in the possibly 3 year interim period? For instance, does the person’s son have to wait until after the actual funeral to ascend to full power? And in the meantime, who has control over the army and CPB billions?
Quality comment or not?
6 
0
Maratjp’s intriguing and enigmatic comments, which tantalizingly hint at some kind of privileged access to information and deep insight into how future events will unfold, are typical of one of the key genres of discourse about the Thai royals — bogus insider intelligence. An easy way to signal high status in Thailand is to make throwaway comments that give the impression one has special access to esoteric information about the highest elites and the monarchy.
In fact, of course, the speaker is almost always as clueless as everybody else — even people within the palace mostly struggle to know what is really going on, as Eric John’s now-famous cable 09BANGKOK2967 notes: “Even Thai relatively close to royal principals treat purported wishes conveyed by other royal associates with caution, given the tradition of self-serving ‘ang barami’.” But the beauty of bogus insider intelligence is that if you follow a few simple guidelines, nobody will challenge you, and you can keep pulling off the same trick for decades.
The key thing is to be as vague as possible, because obviously if you make specific predictions in unambiguous language, your credibility will rapidly be depleted when they turn out to be wrong. So those wanting to deploy bogus insider intelligence to win respect and admiration among the Thailand Tatler set or at the FCCT bar should follow the example of Maratjp and say something portentous and gnomic like: “The issue is not whether or not Thaksin is on the side of the monarchy. There will be an interesting turn of events soon. An ironic turn of events.” Everybody else is totally baffled by such comments, but to admit this would be to signal that they are lower status and not privy to such lofty knowledge, so usually they all just not their heads sagely to try to signal that they, too, are within the circle of special knowledge. If anyone does ask impertinent questions, you can usually silence them by revealing a few more impenetrable details. Again, Maratjp is playing a textbook game here, adding “The question to ask is who will be supporting the lese majeste law and who will be opposed to it and why in the near future.” The implication is that if you don’t know the answer you are clearly an idiot, and so usually everybody agrees vehemently while exchanging knowing looks.
Bogus insider intelligence works on the same principle as the weavers’ swindle in The Emperor’s New Clothes — people are reluctant to challenge it for fear of seeming ignorant and out of the loop.
Michael Connors skewers this behaviour very accurately in Democracy and National Identity in Thailand, in a chapter 6 discussion of “the use of an informal and highly skewed body of knowledge about the king within academic and elite circles”:
“Essentially, a number of royalist liberals are in a position to informally and formally highlight their interpretations of the king through anecdote and official versions of history. This provides the interpretation with some authority. Such interpretations emerge from what may be called the ‘insider knowledge complex’. Interviewers are often at the receiving end of this informal production of royal mythology. Many will be asked to turn off tape recorders during interviews so as to hear of the king’s positive interventions in politics and the like. Note, here, that even positive insider knowledge cannot be entrusted to the impersonal record of a tape recorder; rather it is dispatched for public consumption in a cautious and controlled way. When the insider puts it on public record, moving it from the level of privileged knowledge to public knowledge, it then becomes part of the staple of democratic justifications about the present monarch. The insider knowledge complex basically valorizes those close to the monarchy as being able to interpret the role of the king, while outsiders, Thai and foreign, are seen as incapable of presenting authentic accounts of the role of the monarch. However, the tenability of insider knowledge is highly dubious… Insiders are not so much privileged observers of the real, but ideological proponents of skewed interpretations of the informal political role of the royals. It is, one might say, the hearsay of the ‘nudge and wink’ school.”
One can understand the necessity of being vague and enigmatic sometimes when discussing the monarchy in Thailand — it’s essential if you want to stay out of jail. But New Mandala is a forum where even the most taboo royal issues can be discussed, and Maratjp is posting under a pseudonym. So there is really no reason to be so mysterious.
So can you tell us in plainer and more straightforward language, Maratjp, what exactly you are talking about?
Is it simply that Thailand’s royalists hate Vajiralongkorn and plan to sabotage his succession, while Thaksin’s network wants the crown prince to become Rama X, and so when Bhumibol dies the traitorous Thaksinites will be backing the legitimate heir to the throne while the royalists will be doing their utmost to undermine him? If so, this is a fairly obvious point and could have been made simply and without the theatrics.
Or do you have inside knowledge of some crucial impending development? If so, just tell us what it is. If you are worried that doing so could put you in danger, you and anyone else with dramatic insight into future events would be welcome to e-mail it privately to me and I will be delighted to post it here without giving away your identity, for the benefit of the wider community. That way, we can start to shift discourse about the royal family out of the realm of hints and whispers and bogus intelligence, and into the light.
Highly rated. Quality comment or not?
36 
3
Andrew MM,
Interacting with you is always a treat. Your comments here are entertaining. I laughed several times.
I have to speak like Deep Throat because I simply cannot betray my source, and yes, I would consider it a privileged source. And also a source that has been corroborated. The looks I have received from the Thais who I have spoken with about this have just given me this look of astonishment wondering how a farang would know such a private thing.
(No, I’m not drawing conclusions about Thailand based on a few conversations. Just a bit of insight.)
Never thought I’d get to a point where I felt I’m just knowing a bit too much.
And please don’t make these comments out to be bigger than they are. I’m not talking about some single event. I’m merely talking about what I now believe is the interpretation by the Thai middle class, of the future direction of their nation.
Two individuals, lese majeste, the middle class, and the ultra royalists. What a witch’s brew.
What a time in history for Thailand. What a feast for Thai scholars…
Quality comment or not?
1 
30
“The looks I have received from the Thais who I have spoken with about this have just given me this look of astonishment wondering how a farang would know such a private thing.”
Oh please… a look of incredulity based on their wondering how a farang could know such things, would be hard to distinguish from a look of incredulity that reflects their believing the farang is raving mad.
“Never thought I’d get to a point where I felt I’m just knowing a bit too much. “
Don’t believe this either, most people who cast themselves in this role spend a lot of time admiring the extent of their own knowledge and perspicacity.
In my opinion, responding in the way you did to AMM’s comments was counter-productive for you. A foot-shot.
Quality comment or not?
22 
2
“the future direction of their nation” >> Don’t you make things bigger than they really are? Surely, monarchy and succession are important issues. But what do they have to do with the “future direction” regarding a unit as huge as the “nation” (provided we will find a way of determining what this thing–the “nation”–actually is)?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Maratjp
Let me get this straight. The Thai middle class — which however you want to define it comprises several million people — has somehow formed a consensus forecast about how political and/or palace power struggles are likely to unfold. They have decided to keep this forecast secret from everybody else (and presumably from foreigners in particular) and not even a hint of it has leaked out so far. Not a single member of the middle class has broken ranks to publicly reveal this mysterious prediction about Thailand’s future.
You, however, have somehow managed to penetrate the veil of secrecy surrounding the notoriously tight-lipped Thai middle class and have won the confidence of a “privileged source” who trusts you enough to reveal the secret wisdom to you. You have also managed to corroborate the source, whatever that means. So you now believe you are one of the few outsiders — perhaps even the only one — privy to “the interpretation by the Thai middle class of the future direction of their nation”.
Thais with whom you have discussed this secret middle class prophecy have given you a “look of astonishment”, stunned that “a farang would know such a private thing”. And in fact, such is the enormity of the bombshell with which you have been entrusted that you think you maybe even know “‘a bit too much” — presumably because, rather like the Mob, the Thai middle class may decide to drop you into the Chao Phraya wearing a pair of concrete boots to ensure that you can never spill their secrets.
Maybe even now, in a smoky backroom somewhere in a suburban mooban, middle class godfathers are holding an urgent conclave to decide how to respond. “The farang, Maratjp. He cannot be allowed to live. He knows too much.”
Understandably in the circumstances, you cannot reveal the full details of what you know to the ignorant masses here on New Mandala — the risks to you and your privileged source would be too great. But you have courageously decided to “speak like Deep Throat” and give us a few cryptic clues, despite the danger.
These hints are as follows: The prophecy foretells that something interesting will happen soon; it will be ironic; it concerns who will be supporting the lèse majesté law and who will be opposing it in the near future; two individuals in particular will be involved, plus the middle class and the ultra-royalists; it will be a witch’s brew and a feast for scholars.
And this, alas, is all you can reveal.
Please correct me if I misunderstood any of your revelations but I think that’s a pretty accurate summary. Many thanks for sharing — people will now be able to draw their own conclusions about your credibility and the value of your insights.
I’m not surprised that Thais with whom you discussed your secret wisdom gave you a look of astonishment. I have one on my face right now too. I’ve met plenty of people trying to peddle bogus insider intelligence that they pretend comes from within the palace, but this is the first time I have ever encountered somebody trying a similar stunt with an alleged secret prediction known only to the insular and mysterious cabal known as Thailand’s middle class.
Thanks for making my day.
Highly rated. Quality comment or not?
37 
4
The self-perpetuating economy of “insider information” is actually quite general to the human population; in Thailand it’s just focused on one topic because of that topic’s ubiquity, enormity, and suppression. Go to any blog discussing US politics and you’ll get a slew of self-promoting tossers claiming to know secrets about the president, the CIA, the Freemasons. Visit any webforum about rock music and 10% of the posters will know secrets about how Hendrix/Morrison/Cobain REALLY died. Chat with Chinese people in the teahouse and they’ll all know someone who knows someone who knows what the CCP is about to do and why.
Information is currency that can be forged, and in large denominations, by those who lack the more material currencies of wealth, influence, and the respect of their peers.
Anyone who can’t reveal his “secret” but must tell everyone in the room that he is in possession of one is already revealing everything. But I see nothing particularly Thai about it.
Quality comment or not?
10 
0
Fully agree. Well noted.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
I agree with you too, although I think you encounter people peddling bogus insider information much more often in Thailand than in most other countries. The reason is obvious — Article 112 means that reliable information about the monarchy and succession is extremely scarce, and information has to be shared via gossip and hints rather than reliable official media. This gives huge scope for people pretending to have secret insights to get away with it. I make a point of calling their bluff whenever I encounter them, as the hapless Maratjp has discovered.
Quality comment or not?
11 
1
Hey, Andrew– Pakistan can give Thailand a run for its money on gossip mongering, conspiracies and “insider information,” because only about three people in the entire country know what’s actually going on. But I take your point.
Quality comment or not?
2 
0
The idea of Thaksin having or developing royalist leanings would be totally consistent with his behavioural patterns, if he believed that could assist him to acquire or retain power and wealth more effectively. It is certainly no more preposterous than the idea of him becoming a popularist hero of democracy loved by the peasantry would have been 25 years ago when he was laying the foundations of his capitalist empire. What remains to be seen is how the palace will perceive Thaksin’s usefulness in future. Currying favour with the monarch will be a different proposition from currying favour with the next in line, who is always bound to be in a tricky situation in any hereditary monarchy, having to wait well into middle age for a prestigious job while most of his or her contemporaries are reaching retirement. Thaksin’s baggage of divisiveness might turn out to be just what the palace doesn’t need when the time comes for it to reinvent itself.
Quality comment or not?
6 
0
Agree to a point, though one person cannot create division in the absence of one or more opposing force(s) of similar magnitude.
In this case, the opposing force is Prem, the wielder of unconstitutional power applied through the network of royalist supporters and hangers-on.
It makes no sense whatever to accuse one person of being the instigator of all ills in Thailands political landscape. As flawed as he was, Thaksin was a prime minister and Prem was the person marshalling the contrary forces to illegally unseat him, this much at least is the consensus view.
Thaksin may have been a shit (and may still be a shit), but he was the elected shit. Prem was just an opportunist, a carrion crow trying to engineer his own legend. As he continues to do.
Thailand has rather a lot of problems right now, which have been predictable and predicted, and it seems that events are proceeding towards a crescendo of some kind. Trying to understand Thai politics is difficult for foreigners, not because Thai politics are subtle or serpentine, but because they are chaotic and reflect immaturity, self- interest and unprofessionalism rather than national interest and planning.
This much is certain: if the rumour which forms the center of what seems to be latest lese majeste travesty in Thailand is true, then many if not most Thais are going to be polarised in their opinions, as anyone who understands Thais will know, and it won’t have been Thaksin that caused it. (http://thaipoliticalprisoners.wordpress.com/2012/08/27/saudi-jailed-for-lese-majeste/)
Quality comment or not?
14 
1
@Annie
I think your ideas are generally right, but you still try to fabricate a position that makes one side better than another. It doesn’t matter that thaksin was elected, what matters was that he never respected the electorate in exactly the same way as his opponents.
I tend to out aliterate on thksin’s shoulds as he has always been the aggressor, and his opponents defending their ground, it was an unnecessary conflict, and has in fact put thailand back years in terms of democratic and economic development.
The army and other non elected power bases are on the back foot, but are more united than before and are more powerful than they have been for a long time. It’s such a pity that people on this site in particular carp on about what is not perfect before, but aim to replace it with something that is just as bad,or worse. Democracy for you guys is just a totem word with no meaning beyond a religious symbolic sense. You support the forms of democracy with none of the substance.
Btw don’t make the mistake of thinking that all non elected power bases that have gained from this conflict are opposed to thaksin,
Quality comment or not?
7 
10
Longway: “…has in fact put thailand back years in terms of democratic and economic development.”
What is the “in fact” that supports this outlandish claim? Pre-2001, a huge proportion of the Thai electorate had no sense that their vote counted for anything beyond hoisting the next phu yai into office – nothing else changed. Post-2001, after Thaksin’s party actually delivers on campaign promises (just fancy that), there’s a real sense that their votes are starting to count for something. Self-interest (on both sides of the bargain) certainly, but – equally certainly – something more like recognisable democracy in action….. and a genie that won’t now go back in its bottle.
“put back… economic development”? 2001-6 growth and development look pretty good. Could you say that the military regime even sustained let alone improved on it in 2006-7? Did all the post-2007 judicial coup-making and continuing activism help the economy? Does the military’s lurking threat (albeit “on the back foot” of late) help or hinder the climate for investment and further growth? Oh but, of course, Thaksin was “the aggressor” – so none of what follows September 2006 is anyone’s fault but his. Jaw-dropping stuff…..
Democracy for this “guy” is not just about some abstract idealised principle but about real (however imperfect, bumpy and slow) progress towards a real end with improving tangible results for more of those exercising their vote – and not just as before for the privileged few. And the growing awareness behind that is “substance” – even if there’s still a long way to go yet (no pun on your moniker intended).
Quality comment or not?
16 
4
I concur with Longway that in big sense, Thaksin did in fact murder Thailand’s nascent democracy.
Thaksin was on his way towards eviscerating constitutional checks and institutions that would impede his march towards a tyrannical one-party rule. Thaksin was a convicted election cheat . . . hence the main reason his former Thai Rak Thai Party was outlawed along with 110 party executives. Thaksin disdain for constitutional proprieties (rule of law) was evident in his orchestration of the extra-judicial police killing rampage during his infamous war on drugs.
Quality comment or not?
4 
16
I was thinking more about the consequences post 2006.
Nothing outlandish behind it. Since then all governments, including this one, have been paralysed, or incompetent, or riven with internal divisons or a mixture of all 3. With a huge amount of energy being put into the conflict and diverting attention from important issues, rather than important issues rather this manipulated pile of garbage.
The 2007 constitution severely weakens democracy in Thailand, and now the army and associated factions are stronger and more united than ever. Thaksin has won a resounding election win and he cant even enter the country now let alone run it.
I think your characterisation of pre-2001 is outlandish. Do you know when the 1997 constitution came into effect (there is a hint in there), this document, as imperfect as it proved to be was the result of years of stability and effort to create ‘real’ democracy in thailand. Thaksin strangled and weakened and stagnated democratic progress during his tenure, and the army destroyed it in 2006 (no coincidence there), nothing has gotten better since then.
The red shirts are useless, with nothing positive to offer, only negative protesting ‘against’ something never a positive suggestion of how to make things better.
Criticise sure, but respect comes when they can demonstrate they can replace it with something better.
Don’t even get me started on the UDD; the unelected upper echelons are a fraud and so cynical manipulative I can scarcely believe it.
The lower levels are a mystery all I hear is how they ‘hate’ certain figures, again nothing postive just negativity.
As imperfect pre 2001 was its better than what is in place today.
It’s got supposedly itelligent people making the argument that critisising politicians is bad for politics and undermines it, where are your brains people?
Quality comment or not?
1 
1
“ but you still try to fabricate a position that makes one side better than another. It doesn’t matter that thaksin was elected, what matters was that he never respected the electorate in exactly the same way as his opponents
On the contrary, I fabricate nothing. I merely point out that Thaksin was the Prime Minster, after his party was democratically elected, And Prem was the person who thought he knew better.
“Democracy for you guys is just a totem word with no meaning beyond a religious symbolic sense.
Ah. Mind-reading. Democracy is democracy. Coups are not democratic. Simple as that really.
“It doesn’t matter that thaksin was elected,”
On the contrary, its the only thing that does matter but you will not agree because you have bought into the whole propaganda thing that says he should not have been elected and should have been kicked out. It’s always tough for propagandised people to sawaang their ta’s. Fortunately the majority of Thais appear to have done so even if the majority of Pattaya-bar-stool-based foreigners haven’t. Proof of the pudding? They re-elected a Thaksin-sponsored party to government. Must have irritated Prem no end.
Quality comment or not?
2 
0
“It doesn’t matter that thaksin was elected, what matters was that he never respected the electorate in exactly the same way as his opponents.”
Here’s the central problem. If elections don’t matter, then representative democracy can’t exist and the fall back position is support of unelected, unrepresentative powers who also think elections don’t matter.
Further, by saying that elections don’t matter, the implication is that voters don’t matter. If they don’t matter, who does? And if you find one or an institution that matters, how are they to be retrained from autocratic behaviour?
Of course undemocratic regimes can always try to work out other ways of representation. Yet it remains an undemocratic regime and the other means of representation are chosen by the regime and stay at its whim and fancy.
Quality comment or not?
13 
1
I have not said elections are not important. Answer this question: what us more important for democracy. That the president of the USA is elected by a fair and free election or that he follows the constitution once he is elected?
You only focus on one aspect of democracy, it’s just a totemic ritual for you, what you defending us not democracy.
If you think about it, holding politicians accountable and ensuring they adhere to the laws even if other groups do nit will make it very difficult to non elected power blocs to use their power against the wishes of the electorate. When politicians play games, it’s the people who lose, not the politicians.
Quality comment or not?
1 
0
Indeed. I think it was Winston Churchill who said ‘Democracy is the worst system we have. Except for all the others.” or some such thing. No personally I think WC was an emotionally damaged opportunist whom WW2 trabsformed into a national hero, but that doesn’t mean he could’nt come up with a turn pf phrase from time to time, especially when confronting Lady Astor.
And ‘all the others’ includes what the nincompoop Thais like to call ‘Thai-style democracy’ which, of course, means no democracy at all. It has about as much credibility as ‘sufficiency theory’, which is none at all among people with an IQ higher than a carrot.
Of course you are right. In my view, the fact that Thaksin was elected is the only thing that matters. Or it would be if Thailand was a democracy.
ps. My considered opinion is that the new forum software is a step backwards. I get ‘you are posting too quickly slow down’ every single time. Still, at least the moderation policies don’t delete my posts because they are… well, my posts. Progress of a kind I suppose.
No, actually that’s not right. This is the second attempt. Moderation policies seem as arbitrary and person-dependent as ever.
Quality comment or not?
6 
5
Annie – you clearly know why your previous comment was not approved, that’s why you moderated your language in this one. On the “you are posting too quickly” error message. This is unrelated to the new template. From a quick bit of googling I have done it seems to be a not uncommon problem, perhaps an error in the spam filter. I will see if our IT people can get to the bottom of it.
Quality comment or not?
5 
1
If Thaksin does want to come back to pay respects, then I’m sure his opponents will redouble or quadruple their efforts to prevent this. If he was to show loyalty it will undermine their position of opposition and claims that he is a republican.
Chris Baker and Ajarn Thitinan spoke at the FCCT the other week on Thai politics. They said he would love to come back for just one minute, but that the chances were slim. “You’d need to lock up every hired gun in Thailand first,” said Baker.
Neither of them thought the latter point was positive, I’d hasten to add.
Quality comment or not?
2 
0
The statement that says, “It is easy to overlook Thaksin’s own royalist views and the fact that he has worked very closely with the palace and the military in the past,” cannot be proved to be true, especially Thaksin’s relationship to the palace. There has been a lot of evidence that Thaksin has been disloyal to the Thai monarch. If anyone understands the Thai language well enough (not snake snake fish fish 555)s/he would know that while he is talking ‘yes’ to the the monarch he means ‘no’.
Quality comment or not?
0 
1