The Last Gasp of Thai Paternalism -New York Times

By DUNCAN MCCARGO

Published: December 19, 2013 

original article

New York — Thailand is not one democracy, but two. In the 1990s the Thai political scientist Anek Laothamatas argued that the middle classes of Bangkok, educated and sophisticated, opposed corruption and embraced democratic values, while the uneducated masses in the rest of the country were susceptible to manipulation by unscrupulous politicians. This narrative is now being repeated by the middle-class Bangkokians who have recently taken to the streets en masse and occupied government buildings, forcing Yingluck Shinawatra, the democratically elected prime minister, to call for early elections in February.

In fact, the protesters themselves are proving Mr. Anek wrong. Now it’s the urban middle classes who are being manipulated by wayward politicians — like Suthep Thaugsuban, a former deputy prime minister who resigned from Parliament last month to lead the demonstrations — and who oppose holding fresh elections. And it’s the voters from the countryside who are backing electoral democracy.

Most administrations have traditionally comprised unstable coalitions of warring factions, which means the traditional elites in the military, the royal palace and the judiciary called most of the shots because they could bring down prime ministers at will. Monarchism is to Thailand what Kemalism is to Turkey: a founding principle that the military can always invoke to justify seizing power on grounds of national security.

At least that was the case until 2001, when Thaksin Shinawatra, Ms. Yingluck’s older brother, won his first election, paving the way for the victory of pro-Thaksin parties in 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2011. An upstart Chiang Mai police officer turned telecommunications magnate and then political hustler, Mr. Thaksin is a controversial and polarizing figure. He was ousted in a military coup in 2006. Now in exile abroad, he faces jail time should he return home. Yet he has managed to consolidate power in the hands of a dominant ruling party, which has survived two court-mandated dissolutions and other judicial challenges.

Thailand’s oldest political party, the Democrat Party, last won an election in 1992; its conservative, pro-bureaucracy bases in Bangkok and the south are not big enough for it to secure a national majority. And this very sore loser is now playing a central role in trying to oust an elected government. Its members have resigned from Parliament and joined the demonstrators who are calling for an end to the broader “Thaksin regime” and claiming that pro-Thaksin politicians have been buying rural voters.

But the protesters are failing to grasp that the Shinawatra family is simply the astute beneficiary of seismic changes in Thailand’s political economy. Although money undoubtedly plays a role in all Thai elections, Mr. Thaksin, Ms. Yingluck and their parties have built up a huge and genuine following, especially in the very populous northern and northeastern parts of the country.

Full-time farmers hardly exist in these regions any more. They have become urbanized villagers: provincials only on paper, who have migrated to work in greater Bangkok but vote in their home provinces. General elections in Thailand are now determined by some 16 million or more urbanized villagers, who make up around a third of the total electorate.

Urbanized villagers have incomes not much lower than their urban middle-class counterparts, but they are often in debt, have insecure employment and have to work more than one job. Unlike the villagers of old, they are not interested in subsistence agriculture; they want to enjoy the benefits of consumer society and send their children to university. Like most Democrat Party supporters, they dream of socio-economic advancement, yet for more than a decade, the pro-Thaksin parties have locked in their support with populist policies such as subsidized healthcare programs and village-development funds to promote small businesses.

The current antigovernment protests in Bangkok are the last gasp of Thai dynastic paternalism. They reflect the determination of the old elite and its middle-class allies to check the rising power of the formerly rural electorate by bringing down the Yingluck administration. They are calling for the creation of a “people’s assembly,” an unelected temporary governing body representing different occupational groups that would oversee a process of political reform — in effect, a dictatorship of the capital over the rest of the country.

The protests are taking place in a climate of growing national anxiety. This nervousness has several sources: fears about royal succession, as the long reign of King Bhumibol Adulyadej approaches its twilight; fears about secession, as one of the world’s worst insurgencies by Malay-Muslim separatists continues to rage in the southern provinces; fears about alienation, as pro-Thaksin groups have established thousands of “red-shirt villages” in the increasingly psychologically isolated north and northeast — and above all, fears among Bangkok’s middle classes about being outvoted by low-class urbanized villagers.

It was all so unnecessary. Just a few weeks ago, Ms. Yingluck was governing Thailand with the tacit support of the military and the monarchy. Her government had numerous failings, but for two and a half years there had been no serious political protests and the country’s deep divisions had been largely papered over.

A new pact among the pro-Thaksin and pro-royalist elites is urgently needed. This time, however, it should be broadened to engage the wider public. More urbanized villagers should be allowed to register to vote in and around Bangkok. Power should be decentralized in favor of the provinces, with some form of autonomy granted to the troubled south.

Instead of occupying ministry buildings in Bangkok, the Democrats would do well to make serious attempts to woo provincial voters. Urbanized villagers cannot be wished away by the Bangkok elites; they rightly expect to share the benefits of Thailand’s remarkable economic success. When they no longer are treated as underdogs, their pragmatic ties with pro-Thaksin parties will wither — and Thailand will stop being two democracies and become one unified nation. 

Duncan McCargo is professor of Southeast Asian politics at the University of Leeds and a senior research affiliate at Columbia University.

Thailand's 'red villages' eye Bangkok protests

 



original story

By Jonathan Head BBC News, Udon Thani, Thailand

The village of Nhong Huu Ling is an unremarkable rural community in north-eastern Thailand.

There are fields of vegetables, growing in the sandy soil, and clusters of fruit trees shading the houses.
Yet Nhong Huu Ling, just south-west of Udon Thani, now calls itself a "red village", as do thousands of others in the region, which is the heartland of support for the governing Pheu Thai party of Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra.
The declaration is little more than a symbolic statement of allegiance to the wider so-called red shirt movement that loosely incorporates the government's mass support base.
Villagers get together to share ideas on practical issues, like supporting small businesses or controlling illegal drug use. They also discuss politics. And these days, there is a lot to discuss.
On the day I visited the village head's house - with a giant-sized poster of former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra in ceremonial robes covering one wall - there was a heated discussion about the comments being made by the anti-government protest movement in Bangkok, in particular the call for the entire Shinawatra family to be forced to leave the country - a call that at one point had reduced Ms Yingluck to tears.
The villagers were outraged by this, and were considering all changing their names to Shinawatra in solidarity.

They were also feeling aggrieved by the common refrain among the protesters that the people of Isaan, as the north-east is known, are too uneducated to know what they are voting for.
"Well, I know they have more education than me," said one old woman, who told me she had left school at the age of 10.
"But at least I understand what democracy is. Those people in Bangkok, who have been to university or studied overseas, how come they don't understand democracy?"
Throughout the recent crisis in Bangkok, the red shirts have been almost invisible.
That is partly because their leaders did not want to risk a confrontation with the protest movement which might prompt military intervention, and partly because their own movement has become factionalised and hard to mobilise from across rural Thailand.
People in the north-east repeatedly expressed frustration that they had to stay put, and watch the Bangkok protesters trying to overthrow the government they elected.
The loudest complaint I heard was about the allegation that the red shirts had been bought by the governing party.

 Rice farmer Daoruang Sinthuwapee (front) says the rice subsidy scheme has greatly benefited his family

They were insulted by the notion that a few banknotes handed out during election time could induce them to give years of unwavering loyalty to Thaksin Shinawatra, and now his sister, Ms Yingluck.
Unprecedented help? But what about the more sophisticated allegation that they had been bought by populist policies?
At a rice mill in Udon Thani, farmers had started queuing from the early hours of the morning to sell their harvest.
It's an annual ritual that begins with their trucks being weighed, samples of rice taken to assess moisture content, and then the sacks are opened, and the rice poured onto the growing mountains of grain stored at the mill.
In the past, they could never be sure what price they would get. Today, they are guaranteed a very generous price by the government.

"It means we have money left over to spend," farmer Daoruang Sinthuwapee told me. "We have enough to school our children, and more for the family. We never had this kind of help before."
But there was some uncertainty over when the farmers would be paid.
The Bank of Agriculture and Agricultural Cooperatives, which makes the payments, has been unable to raise enough funds on the bond market this year to cover the huge cost of the scheme.
In other parts of Thailand, farmers have started protesting over late payments.
The benefits of the rice scheme may ensure most farmers in the north-east vote for the governing party in the February election. But many economists expect the scheme to collapse, because the massive rice stocks cannot be sold on the international market for the price the government paid.
It could backfire badly on the prime minister.
Her decision to raise the minimum wage is also popular with workers. But not with factory owner Pornthep Saksujarit.

 Pornthep Saksujarit's factory was squeezed by the government's decision to raise the minimum wage

He employs 400 people at his plant, making sensors and other electronic components for cars and cameras. It is the kind of investment that is helping the north-east move away from dependence on agriculture.
He told me the sudden rise in the minimum wage, to 300 Baht ($9; £6) a day, squeezed his margins to the point where he has had to stop workers from doing overtime.
"We would like help from the government, with infrastructure, or cutting taxes or the price of utilities," he said.
"But next time they want to raise the minimum wage, please do it gradually."
'Die for democracy' The verdict on Prime Minister Yingluck's populist policies will certainly be a lot harsher than on her brother's, from his time in office, which are still widely praised, even by his opponents, and are the ones most often cited by his supporters to explain their loyalty; the low-cost healthcare scheme, and the micro-credit Village Fund.
Plern Thienyim is a passionate red shirt supporter, but she wasn't always.
"Until Thaksin came along, we always voted for the Democrat party," she told me. "Even when Thaksin was campaigning for the first time and making all these promises, we didn't believe him."

She was working in a textile factory at the time. Then she borrowed from the Village Fund to start a small tailoring business, which she has gradually expanded. No other prime minister had ever given her an opportunity like that, she said.
So in April 2010 she and her brother Wasan joined the red shirt protests in Bangkok, against the then-Democrat government. Wasan was killed by a shot to the head in the first armed clashes with the army.
She is bitter about what she sees as the different treatment given to protesters from her side, and those now in Bangkok, and the attempts to depose the government she voted for.
That sense of injustice is driving even sceptical red shirts to stand by their party, and put aside the reservations some of them have about the continuing influence of Thaksin Shinawatra, and some of the government's policies.
"We won't accept another coup, like in the old days," said Khamsaen Chaithep, wife of the village chief in Nhong Huu Ling.
"We will fight to keep the government we elected."
"And if the military tries a coup again, we are ready to come out, to die for democracy."






 

In Thailand, Standing Up for Less Democracy -New York Times

A man held a poster of King Bhumibol Adulyadej during a government opposition ceremony to mark the king's 86th birthday in Bangkok earlier this month. The nostalgia surrounding the king's reign and the respect for him is profound among protesters.

By THOMAS FULLER

original article

 BANGKOK — In a world now accustomed to democratic upheavals, including the Arab Spring and the Saffron and Orange Revolutions, the weeks of political upheaval in Thailand stand out for one main peculiarity. Protesters massing on the streets here are demanding less democracy, not more. 

From their stage beneath the Democracy Monument, a Bangkok landmark, protesters cheer their campaign to replace Parliament with a “people’s council” in which members are selected from various professions rather than elected by voters.

The embattled prime minister, Yingluck Shinawatra, has proposed new elections as a solution to the turmoil. But that is just what the protesters do not want.

“I am one of the people who will not allow this election to take place,” Suthep Thaugsuban, the main protest leader, told a group of business executives in Bangkok on Thursday. Continued protests “might hurt businesses,” he said, “but just in the short term.”

In today’s fractured Thailand, a majority wants more democracy, but a minority, including many rich and powerful people, is petrified by the thought of it.

Because a number of the protest leaders are members of Thailand’s wealthiest families, some have described the demonstrations here as the antithesis of the Occupy Wall Street movement. This is the 1 percent rebelling against the 99 percent, they say.

The reality is more complicated — the protesters include rich and poor, Bangkok residents and many people from southern Thailand who feel disenfranchised by the current government and its northern power base. What unites the protesters is the desire to dismantle Ms. Yingluck’s Pheu Thai Party, which has won every election since 2001.

That Thailand is being convulsed by an antidemocracy movement is somewhat surprising. The country was one of the earliest in Asia to adopt democracy, and both women and men were allowed to vote in local elections in 1897, more than two decades before the 19th Amendment in the United States banned voting rights discrimination on the basis of sex.

The antidemocracy protests, which have been some of the largest in Thai history, call into question the commonly held belief that a rising tide of wealth in a society will naturally be followed by greater demands for democracy. Thailand today is much richer than it was two decades ago, but it is also much more divided.

To outsiders, and many Thais, some of the protesters’ rhetoric seems to come from a different era.

“I can’t believe we are now arguing about suffrage. Is this 2013 or 1913?” wrote a Thai Twitter user who goes by the handle Kaewmala.

The antidemocratic ideas put forward by protest leaders are a jarring contrast with the image of Thailand as a cosmopolitan country open to the world.

At the Democracy Monument, in Bangkok’s historic district, tens of thousands of protesters gather nightly to speak of their skepticism of the notion of one person, one vote. A block over on Khao San Road, a street legendary with generations of Western travelers, backpackers watch English Premier League soccer, drink beer and enjoy $7 foot massages.

On the face of it, the crux of the protest appears to be a classic power struggle between a dominant majority and a minority frustrated by its losing streak in elections and its inability to influence national policies in a winner-takes-all, highly centralized system.

But Thailand’s crisis is multifaceted and tightly intertwined with the fact that King Bhumibol Adulyadej, the country’s 86-year-old monarch, who during more than six decades on the throne has been revered to the point of quasi-religious devotion, is ailing and that the country is bracing for his death.

A crucial component of protesters’ grievances is a feeling that the king and the monarchy have been undermined and threatened by the popularity of Ms. Yingluck’s elder brother, Thaksin Shinawatra, the former prime minister and patriarch of the Shinawatra clan, Thailand’s most powerful political family.

“This is a war between Thaksin and the king,” said a 64-year-old corn farmer from central Thailand who gave her name only as Muai and was among the thousands of protesters in the streets on Thursday. “Thaksin has been insulting the king for far too long.” 

 Mr. Thaksin has never publicly spoken ill of the king, but many of his supporters have been convicted by the authorities for lèse-majesté, a law that has been aggressively used in recent years to clamp down on dissent toward the monarchy. 

Mr. Thaksin was removed in a 2006 military coup, an event that helped give him the aura of a martyr and allowed his supporters to overlook the controversial aspects of his rule, including numerous allegations of large-scale corruption and a war against drugs that left more than 2,800 people dead within three months.

Verapat Pariyawong, a Harvard-trained lawyer and commentator, says the powerful bureaucracy and courtiers around the king fear that new elites, symbolized by the rise of Mr. Thaksin, will replace them.

The Crown Property Bureau is by far the largest landowner in Bangkok and has controlling stakes in some of the biggest companies in the country. The managers of this fortune are among those “acting behind the scenes,” Mr. Verapat said.

More broadly, Somsak Jeamteerasakul, a leading Thai scholar on the monarchy, argues that Thailand’s protracted political turmoil has been exacerbated by the contrast between a deified king and politicians who appear crass and venal in contrast. “We have an image of monarchy that is flawlessly excellent in everything,” he said in 2010. “If we had not built this image in the first place, we would not have so many problems and complaints with politicians.”

Respect for the king, and the notion of his near-infallibility and beneficence, are deeply ingrained in Thais from the earliest years of schooling.

Some speakers at the protests in recent days have labeled the abandonment of the absolute monarchy in 1932 a mistake; protest leaders have called for the king to appoint a prime minister.

Anuchyd Sapanphong, a Thai soap opera star, recently posted on his Facebook page that he disliked corrupt politicians so much he wished he had been born during the time of the absolute monarchy.

“I don’t think we are suited for democracy right now,” he said on his page. “We don’t understand it that well — including me.” 

Economic Realignment Fuels Regional Political Divisions in Thailand - New York Times

Economic Realignment Fuels Regional Political Divisions in Thailand

 A protester posed for a photo with two riot police officers in Bangkok, where security forces took a softer approach on Tuesday.

By THOMAS FULLER

Published: December 3, 2013 

 BANGKOK — Anand Panyarachun, one of Thailand’s leading statesmen, recently noted that his country seemed to have everything going for it — plentiful natural resources, good weather and fortunate geography free from typhoons or volcanic eruptions. 

Yet Thailand, he said, was “pulling the plug” on itself with destructive politics.

“I cannot explain what continues to overshadow all of this goodness,” he said.

The repeated bouts of violent unrest over the past seven years, including the grinding protests that began here last week, are often attributed to the highly personalized battle between opponents and allies of Thaksin Shinawatra, the tycoon and former prime minister who was removed in a 2006 coup but who remains a force in Thai politics.

Yet researchers and historians say something deeper is ailing the country, a steady unraveling of an old consensus about who wields political power and who receives government largess, questions that will linger long after the last protester in the latest demonstrations goes home.

“What has been happening in Thailand is not about Thaksin or not even about conflicts among the elite — it’s socioeconomic change, enormous change that has taken place for the past two decades,” said Nidhi Eoseewong, a prominent historian.

Mr. Nidhi said the country had changed in tandem with Asia’s rapid economic growth. Millions of peasant farmers have risen into the middle class and are clamoring for more representation. “The old elite, including the established middle class, doesn’t want to tolerate their participation,” he said.

The protests of the past week have illustrated how the old establishment feels threatened by the power of the provincial masses.

The leader of the protests, Suthep Thaugsuban, a former executive in the Democrat Party, Thailand’s oldest political party, has demanded that the country abandon its electoral system in favor of an unelected and ill-defined People’s Council.

The source of mistrust of electoral politics seems clear. The Democrat Party has lost every election since 1992, mainly because it has failed to gain support among the emerging rural middle class in the north.

The electoral power shift from Bangkok to the northern provinces is all the more destabilizing because it comes amid uncertainty about the future of Thailand’s monarchy. In his more than six decades on the throne, King Bhumibol Adulyadej, who turns 86 on Thursday, has helped define the country’s identity and provided cohesion for its linguistic and ethnic groups. But some analysts say the adoration of the king has been a crutch for the nation and that his death could further test the fragile relationships between the powerful military, the elites and the emerging middle class.

Power struggles between Bangkok and the provinces, especially the populous northeast, go back at least a century, according to Charles Keyes, an American scholar and the author of a new book on the integration of the northeast into the Thai state.

An insurrection by northeasterners was brutally repressed by government troops in 1902. Half a century later, an authoritarian government ordered the killings of a number of prominent northeastern politicians.

“There’s been a pattern of trying to negotiate a right to be recognized, to have a political voice and to determine their own future,” Mr. Keyes said of northeastern Thailand, whose inhabitants speak Lao, which is distinct but related to Thai. “We see a lot of echoes of that today.”

Electoral politics, and especially the rise of Mr. Thaksin’s party and its focus on rural areas, has allowed the northern part of Thailand to assert itself. Northeastern Thailand, once considered a backwater, is still poorer than Bangkok but outpaces the capital in economic growth. From relying almost exclusively on subsistence farming, the northeast now has industries, shopping malls and universities.

Home to a third of the country’s voters, the region now effectively makes or breaks governments. The government’s policies cater to the northeast, including a highly contentious program that pays farmers a price well above market rates for their rice — at great cost to the state.

For voters in Bangkok, that is hard to bear. 

“I understand that democracy means being governed by a majority,” said Chaiwat Chairoongrueng, a 36-year-old civil servant protesting last week. “But you cannot use the majority to rule over everything.”  

Protesters did little to hide their sense of superiority, echoing the leaders of the demonstration who repeatedly described the demonstrators as “good people” fighting evil.

“We are the middle class, we are educated and we know best,” said Saowanee Usanakornkul, 43, from southern Thailand who took part in the protest. “We know what is right and wrong,” she said. “But the poor don’t know anything. They elect the people who give them money.”

One of the most contentious issues in recent months, and one of the sparks for the protests, was a battle over whether the country’s Senate should be fully elected.

The military, which has historically represented the interests of the Bangkok elite and the royal court, named a committee after deposing Mr. Thaksin in 2006 that allowed for roughly half the Senate seats to be appointed by judges and senior civil servants.

Mr. Thaksin’s party, which swept back to power in 2011 — a reflection of the electoral might of the emerging middle class in the countryside — passed a constitutional amendment this year to restore direct elections. But before the amendment was signed into law, the country’s constitutional court struck it down, saying it violated the rights of the minority in the country.

This and other rulings against the governing party have engendered mistrust in the country’s institutions among people in the provinces and fueled the constant cycle of volatile street politics.

In recent days, as the protests flared, Bangkok was rife with rumors about shadowy groups commandeering the demonstrations; the Thai news media carries perennial stories about the prospect for another coup.

In discussing Thai politics soon after the last violent clashes in Bangkok — a military crackdown that left more than 90 people dead in 2010 — Benedict Anderson, an expert on Southeast Asia at Cornell, quoted the political thinker Antonio Gramsci to illustrate his fears: “When the old refuses to die, and the new is struggling to be born, monsters appear.”

Mr. Nidhi, the historian, said it might be years before Thailand reached a new ruling consensus and the country was more settled.

“In all societies, politics needs time to adjust to large social transformations,” he said. “You have to give Thailand more time.”

Abhisit Vejjajiva 2013/12/03 CNN สัมภาษณ์ สด!! อภิสิทธิ์ เกี่ยวกับสถานการณในประเทศไทย

Protesting against Thailand's Big Brother  ALJAZEERA Last updated: 03 Dec 2013 07:29

Nepotism, corruption and negligence by Shinawatra's government are the root causes of the demonstrations.  The government of PM Yingluck Shinawatra "has destroyed the 'true democratic value' the Thais hold dear", writes former FM Piromya [Rob Kennedy/Al Jazeera]  Kasit Piromya  on Facebook The protest movement in Thailand is not triggered by class differences as described by many foreign journalists. It is, in fact, inspired by the discontentment towards the unprecedented levels of governmental corruption, the elective dictatorship in parliament, and doubts about the Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra's expertise and competence to lead the country based on good governance and respect for the rule of law.   In 2001, many middle class Thais voted for Thaksin Shinawatra believing that he entered politics to contribute to the development of Thailand. However, it turned out that he came to power to exploit the country for his personal business interests. Thaksin’s era can best be described as the era of unprecedented nepotism and corruption. The self-exiled former prime minister has many corruption and political malpractice charges currently pending in the Thai courts, charges from which he has intentionally fled. All cases were investigated by a special task force set up to perform as an ad hoc attorney general, and by the Office of the National Anti-Corruption Commission. All legal grounds and juridical procedures were based on Thailand’s criminal laws, and not by any special law.  It is a well-known fact that Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra, Thaksin's sister, who has no background in politics whatsoever, acts as his proxy. The majority party in parliament - the Puea Thai Party - is still under total control of Thaksin, given the fact that many Puea Thai members of parliament, as well as cabinet members, still travel abroad to pay homage to Thaksin as a symbol of  "the Big Boss", and in order to receive instructions from him. Yingluch, herself, does not have any leading position in the party. She is neither the leader of the party nor a member of its executive committee.   Governmental negligence                                  At present, governmentally-enabled nepotism is widespread in Thai society and has crept into the civil service and law enforcement agencies. The fact that this government has shown its "true colour", contrary to their promised manifestos, has brought the people to the street.          Additionally, the peaceful demonstration is triggered by the rampant corruption of Yingluck's government. To name a few, the Rice Mortgage scheme, which Thaksin explicitly and publicly claimed as his program, and the current government has wholeheartedly implemented as policy, has caused the country to lose not just $13bn, but also Thailand’s competitiveness in the rice export market. The scheme has many loopholes which allow people with government connections to embezzle money. This government has also tried to circumvent the budgetary practice by submitting a bill to allow them to get $70bn for infrastructure megaprojects - projects that are, at best, vague and in embryonic stage. The bill is only four pages long, lacks any details, and will subject the country to a 50-year loan. The final straw? The main cause that has united the demonstrators, is that the government has circumvented the rule of law by submitting the Amnesty Bill to exonerate Thaksin from all the corruption charges. Moreover, the Amnesty Bill, which is now pending for confirmation by the House of Representatives, will prohibit any investigation into Thaksin’s involvement in the governmentally-ordered extrajudicial killings and abuse of human rights in the restive southern border provinces, as well as the criminal crime cases in the war on drugs, while he was prime minister. This bill also aims to reimburse Thaksin from approximately $1.5bn which was seized by the verdict of the Supreme Court in 2010, when he was found guilty on five counts of corruption, deliberately hiding his wealth, and masking ownership of shares in his family-controlled telecommunications company, Shin Corp. The court also found that Thaksin's government pursued policies that enriched his family's companies, including through loans to countries like Myanmar. Additionally, the demonstrators find the government’s populist policies intolerable. Examples of such policies are, in addition to the rice mortgage scheme, reduction of excise tax for first-time car buyers, credit card for farmers, revolving credit, and free electricity and water for villages. These policies are enacted solely to gain votes while, in turn, bring the country deeper into debt. Responsible politicians do not consciously and morally introduce such policies knowing that they will cause irreparable damage to the country's fiscal situation, as well as imbuing a "culture of beggars" among the people. These policies are not only contrary to fundamental economic principles, but also shake the core of universally accepted democratic values. Populist policies may buy votes, but, they take away the determination for self-improvement and the value and ethics of hard work. Finally and significantly, this government has destroyed the "true democratic value" the Thai hold dear. We value transparent and accountable government, and politicians who respect the rule of law. While the government keeps on insisting that they are lawfully elected within the democratic process, they have intentionally forgotten to mention that the last election was full of electoral fraud and vote rigging. Checks and balances no longer function as Prime Minster Yingluck, her cabinet members and the Puea Thai members of the House of Representative, continuously feign ignorance of the parliamentary system. Censure motions are treated by the government as a joke. The Prime Minister does not answer questions posed by the opposition and rarely attends parliamentary debates. The Principle of the Rule of Law, checks and balances and separation of powers eroded further, when recently, some Puea Thai members of the House of Representative filed rebellion charges against the Constitutional Court judges over their ruling on an amendment to the constitution regarding the composition of the Senate. The Court ruled that the charter the government wanted to amend, violates the constitution, and that the procedure was improperly implemented. Moreover, some Puea Thai parliamentarians committed fraud by voting by proxy. The question is how can we, the Thai people, place our faith and trust in the government when they are the ones abusing, by every means possible, their executive and legislative powers for personal gain and not for the interest of the nation? The Thais have a legitimate right to protest against a corrupt and unlawful government. It has done enough damage to our beloved country. We cannot allow them more time in power to cause more damage. Kasit Piromya ia a former Thai Foreign Minister. He is currently a member of the Thai parliament.

Tensions ease in Thailand as police remove barriers

From Kocha Olarn and Paula Hancocks, CNN

updated 5:00 AM EST, Tue December 3, 2013

 

 

 Bangkok, Thailand (CNN) -- Tensions eased in Thailand on Tuesday as police took down barricades in the capital and allowed anti-government demonstrators to enter the compounds of government buildings.

The Thai government said it had negotiated a truce with protesters for the next several days to honor the birthday of the country's deeply revered King. But the leader of the protests said the fight against Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra and her exiled brother would continue.

Lt. Gen. Paradon Patthanathabut of the National Security Council said that thousands of protesters were allowed to enter the compound of Government House, the headquarters of Yingluck's administration and a key target of demonstrations in recent days.

Police also took down barriers in front of their metropolitan office Tuesday morning and allowed anti-government demonstrators to walk toward the building.

 

Paradon said Tuesday that the government and protesters had "mutually agreed to back down for the sake of our great father, our King." The world's longest-serving monarch, King Bhumibol Adulyadej of Thailand turns 86 on Thursday.

But Suthep Thaugsuban, who has led the demonstrations against Yingluck's government in pockets of central Bangkok in recent weeks, said the campaign wasn't over.

"We will continue fighting until Thaksin's regime is definitively wiped out," he said, referring to Thaksin Shinawatra, the exiled former Prime Minister and brother of Yingluck who is considered to retain considerable influence in Thailand.

Calmer atmosphere

Under the direction of Suthep, a former deputy prime minister for the opposition Democrat Party, protesters have occupied various official buildings over the past ten days.

The situation remained mostly peaceful until Saturday, when clashes between protesters and government supporters left three people dead and dozens wounded -- the worst civil unrest in Thailand since scores died amid a military crackdown on demonstrations in 2010.

In the current crisis, confrontations between police and protesters also hardened over the weekend, despite repeated government promises that authorities wouldn't use violence. Tear gas canisters and rocks were flung back and forth across the barricades. On Monday, police said they used rubber bullets in some instances.

Suthep had declared late Monday that some demonstrators would head for Bangkok's Metropolitan Police Bureau and "seize this police office for the people of Thailand." He made the comments after being told he faces an arrest warrant on insurrection charges.

But by Tuesday morning, police appeared to have adopted a more conciliatory approach. After negotiating with protesters, they took down the concrete barriers that blocked the way to the Metropolitan Police Bureau and allowed thousands of demonstrators to file through.

Some police officers shook hands with demonstrators, happily ushering them past in an area where tear gas had been fired during the night.

Protesters responded with cheers and applause, claiming victory. Some of them hugged police officers and took photos with them. The mood on the streets changed noticeably -- a more carnival atmosphere returned with demonstrators blowing whistles.

One of the senior protest organizers, Anchalee Paireerat, was heard announcing to a crowd "we will stop for now for our King's birthday" over a loud speaker mounted on a truck near Government House.

Call to resign

After meeting with Yingluck on Sunday, Suthep called on her to resign within two days. But the Prime Minister said Monday it would be unconstitutional for her to do so.

Yingluck, who survived a no confidence vote in Parliament last week, said she was open to further talks to resolve the crisis.

The protesters stated goal of ridding Thailand of the "Thaksin regime" appears ambitious. Parties affiliated with Thaksin, who built his political success on populist policies that appealed to Thailand's rural heartland, have won every election in the country since 2001.

Thaksin was ousted in a military coup in 2006, and has spent most of the time since then in exile overseas. If he returns, he risks a two-year prison sentence on a corruption conviction, which he says was politically motivated.

The current protests in Bangkok were prompted by a botched attempt by Yingluck's government to pass an amnesty bill that would have opened the door for her brother's return.

That move added fuel for critics who accuse Yingluck of being nothing more than Thaksin's puppet, an allegation she has repeatedly denied.

The military -- which removed Thaksin amid protests in 2006 -- has remained on the sidelines of the current crisis. Yingluck said Monday that she believes the military is taking a neutral stance.

 

we want to show we have no weapon -pic

rapee sarkrick say goverment say, they come from people's vote but they attack the peoples -pic

Results of Protests

After 8 days of progressively more emotional protesting, tear-gas and rubber bullets, police allowed protestors to enter Government House and Metropolitan Police Bureau.

Metropolitan Police Bureau Commissioner Pol Lt Gen Khamronvit Thupkrajang promised Tuesday that police guarding his bureau would no longer fire teargases to fend off protesters.

 

Anti-Government Protests Roil Thai Capital Bangkok as 3 Killed

Protesters seeking to oust Thai Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra vowed to incite more unrest this week after clashes left three dead in Bangkok at the weekend and the central bank warned the standoff was hurting the economy.
Demonstrators removed barriers surrounding Government House and the prime minister’s office, and tear gas was fired to repel them, said Piya Utayo, a police spokesman. The activists, who are seeking to paralyze the administration, massed outside the police headquarters, Piya said. The army chief offered to broker talks, according to an army spokesman.

At stake is control of Southeast Asia’s second-largest economy in a conflict between supporters and opponents of Thaksin Shinawatra, Yingluck’s brother. Suthep Thaugsuban, head of the protesters and a former deputy prime minister with the main opposition Democrat Party, told supporters it’s necessary to break the law to “root out” Thaksin’s political network and vowed he wouldn’t negotiate with the government.
“Yingluck should listen to the people and return power to the people,” Suthep said in a speech late yesterday. “People don’t just want her to dissolve the house, they want to take part in making changes for the country to have true democracy.”
Suthep has called for Thailand’s democratic system to be replaced by a representative assembly consisting of people from a cross-section of society. Parties linked to Yingluck’s brother, who was ousted in a 2006 coup, have won the past five elections on support from the rural north and northeastern provinces. The protests in Bangkok are led by the Democrats, who haven’t won a national poll in more than 20 years.

Rewrite Constitution

“This will be very bad for the economy because the protests have turned from peaceful to violent,” said Somprawin Manprasert, deputy dean of the economics faculty at Bangkok’s Chulalongkorn University. “We had hoped that government investment will help drive the economy next year. Now the hope is gone.”
Thailand’s economy grew 2.7 percent in the third quarter from a year earlier, the slowest pace since the first three months of 2012, official data show. The central bank cut its 2013 growth estimate to about 3 percent from 3.7 percent on Nov. 27, the same day it unexpectedly lowered its benchmark interest rate by a quarter of a percentage point.
The baht weakened to 32.228 against the dollar on Nov. 28, the lowest level since Sept. 9, and the SET Index of stocks has declined about 17 percent since reaching a high on May 21.
Army chief Prayuth Chan-Ocha is concerned that protesters tried to break into Government House and the Metropolitan Police Office, prompting the use of tear gas, said deputy army spokesman Winthai Suvaree. Prayuth offered to act as mediator to ease tensions, Winthai said.

No Talks

Three people were killed and 54 injured in clashes between pro- and anti-government supporters near Ramkhamhaeng University in Bangkok, the Bangkok Emergency Medical Service said on its website, after earlier saying four were killed.
Suthep said he met Yingluck, Prayuth and the heads of the air force and navy late yesterday, and refused to negotiate. He urged civil servants to go on strike today to aid the cause of the opposition.
Police backed by military forces were stationed at key ministries, Piya said in a briefing broadcast by state-owned NBT television.
“Political unrest has affected consumption, investment and tourism,” Prasarn Trairatvorakul, governor of the Bank of Thailand, told reporters in Prachinburi province, 140 kilometers (87 miles) east of Bangkok. “Political protests also have direct impact on sentiment.”

Paralyzing Government

Tens of thousands of anti-government protesters entered the compounds of the Department of Special Investigation and state-owned telecommunications offices Nov. 30, escalating the drive to overthrow Yingluck’s administration.
Seizing Yingluck’s office, police headquarters and ministries will paralyze the government, Suthep said yesterday, in comments broadcast by Bluesky. Without the ministries, the government will collapse, he said.
Thaksin, a former prime minister, has lived overseas since a court in 2008 sentenced him to two years in prison for helping his wife buy land from the government.
Yingluck said Nov. 30 that violence would not be used against demonstrators and reiterated an offer of talks. Suthep has rejected multiple offers of negotiations.
“If they can change the government, they will want to set up their own government and will rewrite the constitution to give priority to unelected sources of power,” said Thitinan Pongsudhirak, director of the Institute of Security and International Studies at Bangkok’s Chulalongkorn University. The country’s electoral democracy is in the protesters’ view “the source of Thailand’s corruption,” he said.

119 injured in Monday's clashes

• Published: 3 Dec 2013 at 11.40
• Online news: Local News

A total of 119 anti-government protesters were injured in clashes with police at many spots in the vicinity around Government House on Monday, according to the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration's emergency medical centre, or Erawan Centre.

The centre revealed that of the 119 injured, 67 were admitted to Vajira Hospital, 30 to Hua Chiew Hospital, four to Ratchawithi Hospital, seven to  Ramathibodi Hospital, 10 to Central General Hospital, and one to Mission Hospital.  Only nine of them remained in hospitals for further treatment.
On the clashes on Ramkhamhaeng road on Sunday, the Erawan Centre said Pvt Thanasit Wiangkham, who was seriously wounded in one of the incidents had died later in hospital, raising the death toll to four.

 Todays Correspondent ReportReport

 Jonah Fisher BBC News, Bangkok

 The anti-government protesters threw everything they had at the riot police protecting Government House. Rocks, fireworks, crude homemade explosives, even articulated digger trucks were used, but the barricades stood firm.
That was thanks to the police's use of large amounts of tear gas, and at times the use of rubber bullets.
At the end of a long day of noisy skirmishing it amounted to one thing - deadlock. The protesters were unable to take the prime minister's office and the government were unwilling to use the level of force necessary to disperse them.
After the opposition failed to deliver the promised overall victory on Sunday and made little progress on Monday, there had been some speculation that protest leader Suthep Thaugsuban might be about to concede defeat. Instead he has refocused his efforts on the Thai police, whom he now blames for blocking his "people's" uprising.