jayboy

Protestors in Thailand call on the army to undertake a coup.Obviously comments on the forum should primarily focus on local events.Nevertheless there are similar essentially middle class/old establishment versus democracy in other parts of the world, notably Egypt and Turkey.Any educated intelligent person would wish from time to time to compare and contrast.The similarities between say Thailand and Egypt are fascinating, as are the differences.To compare and contrast is certainly not muddying the waters.

While we compare and contrast, perhaps we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that a democratically elected government has proven itself incapable of governing according to parliamentary democracy.

The mad rush to change laws to allow them complete freedom to 'legally' govern against thailand's best interests is perhaps the most blatant example.

You seem obsessed with the people who aren't in power.

What was the result of the last coup? A greedy despot was removed from power, the military presided over a popular 'cooling down' period, then democratic government was restored. Shame the Thai obsession with repeating its mistakes, means that the chance afforded them by the military has been thrown away - again

I am struggling to understand how these comments are in any way a response to the points made in my post.

As for your remarks about Thailand, it must be galling for those holding these views that the Thai people seem to regard them of little account.

Protestors in Thailand call on the army to undertake a coup.Obviously comments on the forum should primarily focus on local events.Nevertheless there are similar essentially middle class/old establishment versus democracy in other parts of the world, notably Egypt and Turkey.Any educated intelligent person would wish from time to time to compare and contrast.The similarities between say Thailand and Egypt are fascinating, as are the differences.To compare and contrast is certainly not muddying the waters.

Amazing! - your response summarised:

PTP is not perfect but close too it.

Back to the denigrating the Democrats.

And you have difficulty understanding my preoccupation with a party which has accumulated estimated losses now approaching a trillion baht and ever increasing in a continuing policy. But this is alright because they won an election! Economic development might be set back 50 years, but look how healthy their democracy might be, assuming there is no slide into dictatorship.

Please pay closer attention.I did not say that the PTP was perfect, far from it.My point was that it has become a formidable organisation in winning elections and there are a variety of reasons for this. In contrast the Democrat Party is in disarray and with an appalling record in recent national elections.This is important because Thais must learn to debate their differences in a democratic framework, and not resort to absurd coup fantasies( your problem it seems) or on the other side threaten the cities with red mobs.Simply won't do.

I do not really understand the rest of your post which veers into incoherence. If you are saying a coup is needed because of the losses under the rice price pledging scheme, that simply puts you squarely in the ranks of the extreme reactionaries.In any case I have made my points politely and clearly, and perhaps we should end on that note.

My apologies. I forgot that academics in ivory towers don't need employment, education, infrastructure and other basic necessities of a modern life when they can have ethereal concepts to evaluate and quibble over. Meanwhile, the "extreme reactionaries" who would like these essentials of life improved become "agitated" over seeing their countries resources plundered and wasted, are asking just how much should we tolerate before lowering our democratic expectations and ending the waste/theft.

There was nothing incoherent about the question but I will simplify it for you. Just how much corruption and/or incompetence is enough? A trillion baht? 2 trillion and 50 years of reduced economic development?

I am afraid your latest offering does not dissuade me of my earlier decision.My points were made clearly and you are now in the realm of hysteria.

Amazing! - your response summarised:

PTP is not perfect but close too it.

Back to the denigrating the Democrats.

And you have difficulty understanding my preoccupation with a party which has accumulated estimated losses now approaching a trillion baht and ever increasing in a continuing policy. But this is alright because they won an election! Economic development might be set back 50 years, but look how healthy their democracy might be, assuming there is no slide into dictatorship.

Please pay closer attention.I did not say that the PTP was perfect, far from it.My point was that it has become a formidable organisation in winning elections and there are a variety of reasons for this. In contrast the Democrat Party is in disarray and with an appalling record in recent national elections.This is important because Thais must learn to debate their differences in a democratic framework, and not resort to absurd coup fantasies( your problem it seems) or on the other side threaten the cities with red mobs.Simply won't do.

I do not really understand the rest of your post which veers into incoherence. If you are saying a coup is needed because of the losses under the rice price pledging scheme, that simply puts you squarely in the ranks of the extreme reactionaries.In any case I have made my points politely and clearly, and perhaps we should end on that note.

Glad you agree that PTP is not perfect. Perhaps you would like to share with us you views on reforms to it, similar to your suggestions re the Democrats, as to how it could be made more democratic in nature, dispensing with a leader carrying too much baggage, facing up to its failures, and admitting its mistakes which have caused detriment of the country? Perhaps not.

If the government party is unwilling to reform, and to cease causing huge losses while enriching itself, perhaps we could quantify the level of damage they should be allowed to inflict before a coup becomes a viable option? If a B2.2 trillion loan is estimated to take 50 years to repay, and the rice scam losses approach that, would a coup not be preferable?

If the current government is as flawed as you suggest no doubt the Thai people will make its opinion clear at the next general election.

However there is something distinctly odd in your preoccupation with the reform of a party which, along with its previous incarnations, has been the most successful election winning machine in Thai history.No doubt it could be improved but surely it isn't even a matter of controversy to point out that the Democrats are in a worse state by far.That's why there's a need to detoxify the brand, remove the incompetent and disgraced leadership and present a credible set of policies.I have already noted there would be huge support for any such reformed Democrat party, and an election victory would be healthy for Thai democracy - and greatly lessen the chance of damaging coups by the military and their shadowy backers.

Of course you don't understand. Read the subject of the thread - it is EXACTLY what you deny; some people are calling for a coup, and others think it IS a solution to a seriously flawed government. But instead of ANY discussion of those flaws or reforms to avoid a coup, you only wish to discuss the Opposition. The only way to prevent " unpalatable truths being aired" is to drag the thread away from the subject. Please stop.

NB Opposition and Election are NOT the subject. Coup and government are.

I cannot see that anyone other than yourself has become agitated at the direction this thread has taken.Most understand that those now calling for a coup are unrepresentative extremists typified by the Pitak Siam group, and it's extremely unlikely there will be a crossover into mainstream politics.Nevertheless most also understand there are serious and widespread criticisms of the government particularly relating to the rice pledging scheme.The realistic chance to depose this government without inflicting the damage of a military coup is to remove it in a general election.To this end the Democrat Party needs to make itself more attractive.All connected then, on topic and relevant.

You just can't stop, can you? In a thread about calls for a coup against the PTP government, you continually change the subject to the faults of the Democrat party and how they should reform.

And refuse to even broach reforms and/or change of leadership of the autocratic party currently in power. Or how they are causing huge financial losses which grow larger each day, and which they refuse to address, let alone acknowledge their extent. This is what may well trigger a coup - flagrant mismanagement coupled with unrepentant corruption that a patriotic minded military might see as reason to act.

I am not entirely sure what your objections are based on.No reasonable person, certainly not in mainstream Thai politics or even in the military, is arguing that a coup now is the appropriate way of dealing with the government's shortcomings.The argument therefore is that the main opposition party, namely the Democrats, must reform itself so there is a fighting chance of winning the next general election.This is entirely relevant to the thread's topic and some interesting comments have been made by members of different political views.

Therefore the discussion is entirely relevant and one must either assume you either do not understand the argument ( hence my explanation above) or that you simply resent unpalatable truths being aired.If the latter I am afraid few would regard that of any significance.

Who said Chula was one of the top Uni in the country ? well they probably never went to world History courses.... if there are any .which is not sure.

Chulalongkorn is considered the Oxford-Cambridge-Harvard-Yale of Thai education. Thammasat is a little way off as #2.
In reality, the Oxbridge unis in England are not the top ones for many subjects (e.g. Economists at LSE are the elite, science at Imperial College).
Likewise universities like Khon Kaen University have been hailed as offering better courses in various subjects.

Thank you for your view and opnion. Do you have links to all the research to support your assertive statement please?

No I don't. Oxford are Cambridge are "considered" the best in England. If you disagree, you are more than welcome to your opinion.
A University of London BSc Economics course requires a BBC at A-level, a Cambridge course requires a AAB. So why are Britain's top economists at LSE? And why do LSE turn away undergraduates that Cambridge accepts?

Anyway, without wanting to belittle you, the point of my post was that the traditional elite universities such as Chula do not always produce the brightest minds. And before you start... yes, I do (albeit in a classical subject of no use to anyone).

There is only one Thai university with a ranking 351-400 in the THES World University Rankings list. That is KMUTT. Chula, Thammasat and KK not in the top 400. (PS Uni ranking is not determined by A level entry. Entry quals are one variable)
PPS Harvard/Yale not the top ranked US unis here, but CIT and Stanford, both positioned above O+C.

http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/2012-13/world-ranking/institution/king-mongkuts-university-of-technology-thonburi

It always makes me snigger when Thais describe Chula and Thammasat as the Harvard and Yale or the Oxford and Cambridge of Thailand.With a very few departmental exceptions by international standards they are second rate.The THES ranking quoted makes this clear.Incidentally my quick reading of these tables shows Oxford as 2= with Stanford, not below it.Not that it matters much.Any university in the top 20 would be excellent and any in the top 50 or even 100 not far off the very highest world standards.Thailand's crappy universities are not even in the right ballpark ( ok KMUTT is near enough).

Why would you suggest that "the political opposition to ditch their incompetent and discredited leadership" rather than the current government? .Wouldn't that remove the impetus for a coup?

And be on topic rather than your standard response "what about the democrats"?

Perhaps it's because leadership change is not a possibility in the autocratic PTP.

Er,because the opposition is in opposition and the current government is in power.

Now that I've restored my post to its original content, would you care to answer the emphasised question rather than just state some inanity?

If the opposition improved its act by shaking up its discredited leadership and presenting a platform of policies that could secure a general election victory, that wouldn't necessarily "remove the impetus for a coup" because the Democrat party would no longer be a willing tool for reactionary interests and the military dinosaurs.But clearly it would be helpful because the unelected elites would no longer have a tame major political party to act as their agent.

• Here we go again. Yingluck was elected PM by the votes of the Thai people. Whether TV keyboard experts like it or not that is a fact.

Whine and complain and come up with a zillion conspiracy theories and "insider info"......or leave Thai politics to the Thai people and go for a nice lunch.

Can you please tell me which constituency Yingluck stood in and the elction results.

It may be a little difficult as she has NEVER stood in a constituency vote because she was a party list MP, actually number 1 on the list.

Therefore she was NOT ELECTED by any votes of the Thai people at all but nominated as the PM by the PTP membership committee and oddly enough the PTP is owned and paid for by her brother.

Please do a little simple research before you post drivel and try to get it right sometimes.

I'm not sure you should be giving lectures to anyone about simple research since your own understanding is so flawed.The party list aspect isn't relevant.At the last general election Yingluck headed the party which won the election.She was not nominated after the event so the country was perfectly aware of what they were voting for.The Thai people were presented with a choice of PM from Abhisit and Yingluck.They chose Yingluck by a significant margin.Got it now?

If there is one person who shouldn't be giving pompous lectures it is you. You unfortunately conveniently forget that though the PTP members were elected the PM and the cabinet are openly lying as to the process of government namely their cavorting with Thaksin your hero in exile. As for 'getting it now' you never will, so lay off the obfuscations please.

The relationship between Thaksin and the current government is I am afraid a different question, and I'm not certain why you have introduced the topic.My point however was a simple one,namely that Khun Yingluck has a clear and irrefutable democratic mandate from the Thai people.I don't necessarily expect a high level of comprehension but on this occasion it's hard to see how the subject could be simplified further.

Why would you suggest that "the political opposition to ditch their incompetent and discredited leadership" rather than the current government? .

Er,because the opposition is in opposition and the current government is in power.

Maybe the army should of done something about it one of the other 17 times they took over.

It is not the role of the army to set up an effective education system, or to install a critical press, though they have tried to enable corruption control agencies.

Maybe if they started shooting corrupt politicians instead of ejecting them from office...........at least we wouldn't see the same old faces heading back to the trough.

Well if they keep taking over and allowing corrupt and ineffectual Governments to be in place, I would question what the hell the point of them taking over is.

It would seem that both the politicians and people of Thailand are slow learners, and the cultural tendency to admire the wealthy and powerful even when they are obviously criminals is difficult to change.

Like it or not, the threat of a coup hangs over the government like a Sword of Damocles, reminding them there a legal and constitutional limits to their powers. There are better ways of doing it, but they don't exist here (for now).

But the factions that would undertake the coup, that is the reactionary army generals are themselves wealthy, corrupt and powerful criminals.Wouldn't it be rather better for the political opposition to ditch their incompetent and discredited leadership, detoxify their image and present a credible platform at the next general election for the Thai people to consider.

It's obvious that some have become very excited by events in Egypt where an elected government was ejected by the army, and fantasise that this could be replicated in a Thailand coup.Dream on.

• Here we go again. Yingluck was elected PM by the votes of the Thai people. Whether TV keyboard experts like it or not that is a fact.

Whine and complain and come up with a zillion conspiracy theories and "insider info"......or leave Thai politics to the Thai people and go for a nice lunch.

Can you please tell me which constituency Yingluck stood in and the elction results.

It may be a little difficult as she has NEVER stood in a constituency vote because she was a party list MP, actually number 1 on the list.

Therefore she was NOT ELECTED by any votes of the Thai people at all but nominated as the PM by the PTP membership committee and oddly enough the PTP is owned and paid for by her brother.

Please do a little simple research before you post drivel and try to get it right sometimes.

I'm not sure you should be giving lectures to anyone about simple research since your own understanding is so flawed.The party list aspect isn't relevant.At the last general election Yingluck headed the party which won the election.She was not nominated after the event so the country was perfectly aware of what they were voting for.The Thai people were presented with a choice of PM from Abhisit and Yingluck.They chose Yingluck by a significant margin.Got it now?

This is not a surprise at all, he was always told by others what to do. Abhisit was only a puppet for the military. He never made any decisions by himself, but a PM who was an elite british academic provided something that the military junta lacked in their own men.

Perhaps this academic training has led to his downfall that he finds himself in now, taking the fall for the military's own crimes. Tough luck pretty boy. Is your British education going to save you?

This is not a surprise at all, he was always told by others what to do. Abhisit was only a puppet for the military. He never made any decisions by himself, but a PM who was an elite british academic provided something that the military junta lacked in their own men.

Perhaps this academic training has led to his downfall that he finds himself in now, taking the fall for the military's own crimes. Tough luck pretty boy. Is your British education going to save you?

If former prime minister Abhisit would be British his career would have long since terminated

No sniper in any professional Army 'takes out' his fellow countrymen with out clear instruction from the top.

Unfourtunatly Prime Minister Abhisit was at 'the top at the time' of those executions whilst orchesrating events from the Barracks of the Eleventh Infranty in Bangkok.

If Thailand was England, Thaksin would have been banned for plainly lying about his hidden assets in 2001.

And as for the reds seizure of Ratchaprasong- no western government would have tolerated that for more than a few days.

Apisit was put in an impossible situation and did the best he did- unlike the coward in Dubai or Hong kong.

What you say about Thaksin and the reds seizure of Ratchaprasong is no doubt true.But equally there would have been a very high political price to pay for Abhisit presiding over the deaths of so many people - at the very least a complete end to his political activity.So by all means reflect on " a what would have happened in the UK " scenario but do try and be honest about it.

After listening to Abhisit in a debate on the BBC, one suspects his grasp and usage of the English language is better than both yours or mine...

I can't see how you get from his parents being worrried about him, to them knowing he is guilty .. however I will concide that the English skills of the jouro who wrote this piece may be at a lower standard that that of the person he interviewed...

although there is a lot of political showboating in this piece.....If Abhibsit stands by what he has said about taking responsibility, if need be and not negotiating with the thugs in power to allow our man in dubai a free pass...well done to him, Thailand politics needs a few more like him....

If you mean the two interviews on BBC Hardtalk with Stephen Sackur and earlier with Zeinab Badawi, I thought his grasp and usage of English while very competent was less impressive than expected (and definitely not superior to mine), given his many years of education in England at elite institutions.Whether his grasp of English is better than the typical forum member, that is a matter on which I could not possibly comment.

Another interesting take on the Egypt crisis.The Arab Spring was about freedom (and capitalism) more than democracy argues Fraser Nelson in the Daily Telegraph

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/egypt/10159983/It-is-capitalism-not-democracy-that-the-Arab-world-needs-most.html

@jayboy: From searching the internet in 2009 it was estimated the Egyptian military budget was approx US$6 billion, that includes US$1.3 billion from US military aid, so I would not say that the US bankrolls the military. In addition the Egyptian military controls around 40% of industry & commerce, so probably not to pleased with Morsi's management of the economy.

If US Dlrs 1.3 billion isn't bankrolling,I wonder what is.

On the Egyptian crisis generally (and Western attitudes to) Simon Jenkins in The Guardian writes some good sense.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/04/mobs-egypt-les-miserables-absurd

Er no actually it doesn't show what the Egyptian people feel at all.It shows (courtesy an Israeli news outlet) what a rather excitable small group of middle class journalists in a TV studio feel.Of course Egypt is divided and the huge demonstrations on the streets show the extent of opposition to Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood - and these demonstrators would of course empathise with the hyped up guys at the TV studio.But equally there are many more millions of Egyptians whose loyalties are to the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) - who won a general election a year ago that was generally perceived to be fair.So this game isn't over.My take? Morsi screwed up badly: he had the chance to bring Egyptians together and failed to do so.The concern is that the Egyptian majority whose sympathies lie in the MB direction will feel - we tried democracy and look what happened.Next time round - and there is always a next time round - the Islamicist movement may resort to much more unpleasant strategies.Then the middle class cry babies in the TV studio may look back on Morsi with some nostalgia.

I think this video tells the story about how the Egyptian people feel about Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood's ouster....

Note: Read the English language subtitles closely ....

Jubilation in Egyptian TV Studios following Morsi’s ouster

http://www.israelunseen.com/jubilation-in-egyptian-tv-studios-following-morsis-ouster/#.UdYVoW0o0Qs

Good try ... I have to resist laughing ... The vast majority of Egyptian citizens including Muslims and Christians - whose beliefs are secular compared to the fundamentalist - Islamist - Sharia law Morsi advocates is overwhelming ... Obviously the Egyptian Military has had enough of the radical Islamist and have shown they are ready - willing and able to support the masses ... not the extremist who support Morsi. My money is on the masses of people who revolted and threw Morsi out... they are supported by the vast majority of the people of Egypt - plus the Military ... wishful thinking otherwise...

What part do you find amusing? For my part I'm pleased Morsi was overthrown - he had a great chance and squandered it through his repressive policies and lack of determination to work for all his countrymen (and I loathe all extremists).But in terms of wishful thinking,perhaps those who underestimate his support need to reflect.In the second round of the election Morsi won just under 52% of the votes cast, and was democratically elected into power in elections which were held to be fair.It's true that Egypt has a strong secular tradition but it's ignoring reality to pretend that the majority are not susceptible to the Muslim Brotherhood or its even more extreme versions.Turkey which through Ataturk has an even stronger secular tradition is learning about the same problem.By all means argue that the recent change of government in Egypt is positive but don't pretend there aren't great dangers particularly when the broker is the bloated and corrupt army, bankrolled by the US.Some people were arguing that Iran was basically a secular state in the time of the Shah .. now what happened there?

So it's up to you.Believe that some lachrymose TV journalists "speak" for the Egyptian people or look at the facts.

Judging by the monumental amount of population resistance in the Egyptian streets protesting and throwing Morsi out ... the idea that Morsi won 'fair and square' the first time around ... well it doesn't seem to add up.

And yes I do believe that the TV news personalities in the video reflected the sentiment of the tens of millions of Egyptians protesting in the streets of Egypt - quite naturally so ... Did you read the captions ... ? Contrary to some posters -- the primary reason for rising up was the forced imposition of Sharia Law that Morsi was imposing ..

Ah so now the election was fixed - opposite to views of all international observers.

I have never argued that the coup didn't have the support of tens of millions of Egyptians, simply that's it unrealistic to ignore the larger number that is susceptible to the Muslim Brotherhood or its more extreme version.With the army in control I agree no early resurgence is likely.

I think this video tells the story about how the Egyptian people feel about Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood's ouster....

Note: Read the English language subtitles closely ....

Jubilation in Egyptian TV Studios following Morsi’s ouster

http://www.israelunseen.com/jubilation-in-egyptian-tv-studios-following-morsis-ouster/#.UdYVoW0o0Qs

Er no actually it doesn't show what the Egyptian people feel at all.It shows (courtesy an Israeli news outlet) what a rather excitable small group of middle class journalists in a TV studio feel.Of course Egypt is divided and the huge demonstrations on the streets show the extent of opposition to Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood - and these demonstrators would of course empathise with the hyped up guys at the TV studio.But equally there are many more millions of Egyptians whose loyalties are to the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) - who won a general election a year ago that was generally perceived to be fair.So this game isn't over.My take? Morsi screwed up badly: he had the chance to bring Egyptians together and failed to do so.The concern is that the Egyptian majority whose sympathies lie in the MB direction will feel - we tried democracy and look what happened.Next time round - and there is always a next time round - the Islamicist movement may resort to much more unpleasant strategies.Then the middle class cry babies in the TV studio may look back on Morsi with some nostalgia.

Good try ... I have to resist laughing ... The vast majority of Egyptian citizens including Muslims and Christians - whose beliefs are secular compared to the fundamentalist - Islamist - Sharia law Morsi advocates is overwhelming ... Obviously the Egyptian Military has had enough of the radical Islamist and have shown they are ready - willing and able to support the masses ... not the extremist who support Morsi. My money is on the masses of people who revolted and threw Morsi out... they are supported by the vast majority of the people of Egypt - plus the Military ... wishful thinking otherwise...

What part do you find amusing? For my part I'm pleased Morsi was overthrown - he had a great chance and squandered it through his repressive policies and lack of determination to work for all his countrymen (and I loathe all extremists).But in terms of wishful thinking,perhaps those who underestimate his support need to reflect.In the second round of the election Morsi won just under 52% of the votes cast, and was democratically elected into power in elections which were held to be fair.It's true that Egypt has a strong secular tradition but it's ignoring reality to pretend that the majority are not susceptible to the Muslim Brotherhood or its even more extreme versions.Turkey which through Ataturk has an even stronger secular tradition is learning about the same problem.By all means argue that the recent change of government in Egypt is positive but don't pretend there aren't great dangers particularly when the broker is the bloated and corrupt army, bankrolled by the US.Some people were arguing that Iran was basically a secular state in the time of the Shah .. now what happened there?

So it's up to you.Believe that some lachrymose TV journalists "speak" for the Egyptian people or look at the facts.

I think this video tells the story about how the Egyptian people feel about Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood's ouster....

Note: Read the English language subtitles closely ....

Jubilation in Egyptian TV Studios following Morsi’s ouster

http://www.israelunseen.com/jubilation-in-egyptian-tv-studios-following-morsis-ouster/#.UdYVoW0o0Qs

Er no actually it doesn't show what the Egyptian people feel at all.It shows (courtesy an Israeli news outlet) what a rather excitable small group of middle class journalists in a TV studio feel.Of course Egypt is divided and the huge demonstrations on the streets show the extent of opposition to Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood - and these demonstrators would of course empathise with the hyped up guys at the TV studio.But equally there are many more millions of Egyptians whose loyalties are to the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) - who won a general election a year ago that was generally perceived to be fair.So this game isn't over.My take? Morsi screwed up badly: he had the chance to bring Egyptians together and failed to do so.The concern is that the Egyptian majority whose sympathies lie in the MB direction will feel - we tried democracy and look what happened.Next time round - and there is always a next time round - the Islamicist movement may resort to much more unpleasant strategies.Then the middle class cry babies in the TV studio may look back on Morsi with some nostalgia.

I think they are perhaps taking a slight step back to let the red shirts implode all on their own?

Dream on.They were infiltrated by Pitak Siam and former yellow shirt proto fascists and in view of this quite sensibly decided to call it a day in Bangkok at least.But the Guy Fawkes jokers will continue in other parts of the country - I wonder when they will cotton on to the fact that their hero was executed for attempted regicide.

Solving the South China Sea impasse - I'm surprised Yingluk hasn't suggested a canal to go around it.

Now that she is the MoD with the might of Thailand's military behind her, I'm sure the recalcitrant Chinese will pay more attention to her pearls of wisdom (Mikimoto, bought in Paris).

It's extraordinary how some can introduce their obsessive hatred of the PM into topics where it is entirely irrelevant, and in this case fatuous to boot.

Returning to the topic the article contains the comment:

"The dispute over this single issue should not dismantle the entire group and its creditability - or relations with major partner China."

The reality is that its ASEAN partners know that Thailand's reflex action is to kowtow to the Chinese.It doesn't matter which party is in power and the unelected feudal,SinoThai corporate and military elites are equally submissive - partly through greed and lack of moral courage (and to be fair partly through cultural interest).Other ASEAN members stand up for their interests - notably Singapore, Indonesia, Philippines and Indonesia - when it is necessary.But Thailand is by tradition a vassal state and will never confront China.Some will point to cultural and ethnic similarities to explain this supine attitude.But this can only be partly true since Singapore for example has equally strong ties.It's also typical of a particularly Thai brand of silliness that the author of the article appears to attach more importance to issuing joint communiques after ASEAN meetings than dealing with Chinese bullying and aggression.I have no idea what were the codes of conduct negotiated by the Thai team in Brunei but you may be sure when push comes to shove the Chinese will pay scant attention to them.I don't blame the Chinese.They are entitled to be taken very seriously as a great power and as Charles de Gaulle noted the state is a cold monster, ie countries are ruthless when it comes to defending their own interests.This powerful motive explains why ASEAN are keen for the US to retain a powerful military presence in the region.Thailand of course wants to play it both ways.And on the sidelines an aggrieved Japan monitors China's rise closely - a rivalry which I predict will become much more dangerous in the next decade.

Just to clarify -

1) I said Ji Ungpakorn is not Thai "any more" - as in, he was, now he's not. I was not referring to his mother's farang DNA nor his education at Durham University, SOAS and wherever it was that he got his other degree in England; I was referring to Thais loving Thailand and HM The King. FYI I am a farang-born Thai-nationalised caucasian, which makes it hard for me to play the race card here!

2) I, as an inherent fascist myself (I am happy to explain this, but it's rather off-topic and very long-winded) and a vocal critic of democracy, consider "proto-fascist" to be a rather silly term; but I suppose if there was ever an opportunity to use it, then jayboy has found an appropriate one.

Of course, even though I think he's a traitor, I think that Giles does have one or two endearing qualities. Such as the conviction in his belief that social change is needed (which is why he sometimes stretches the truth/tells outright lies) and his abhorrence of the use of violence to put points across.

The problem with labelling someone a traitor under such draconian lese majeste laws as there are in Thailand, is that by definition to even get involved in discussing or defending anyone's position is a complete non-starter.

I don't think he's a traitor. I think he's entitled to his opinion and it's fine if the vast majority don't agree with him.

Hope I didn't offend anyone??????

No offence from me. But you're wrong in that Lese Majeste can be debated as can discussing individuals accused as long as you don't quote what they are alleged to have said.

Many have expressed an opinion on LM (including me - that it needs drastic amendment or scrapping) and HM the King has also spoken against it. What Ji Ungaporn has done is gone much further (not quotable here) in his writings and it is this that causes the traitor label to be used. I 'm not supporting it but I can understand why many Thais (naturalised ones too!) who have seen his work feel that way.

There is no general adverse reaction to Giles from most Thais for the simple reason that 90 % have never heard of him.Those that have heard of him will associate his name primarily with his very distinguished father.

Giles is in many ways a rather tedious lefty but he's no traitor.Those who label him as such need to rethink what's important and what's not.

I can't claim to be 'a lickspittle for the military' or a 'proto fascist' but applaud Pi Sek for his opinion on Ji Ungaporn's writings.

I know Ji (not very well though) and he is an honourable man. But not long ago some of the red shirt fascist supporters were claiming that Abhisit is not Thai because of his birthplace & dual nationality. Pi Sek is using the same argument about Ji and his running away from Lese Majeste charges to reside in the UK as well as his dislike (verging on hatred) for the monarchy here does have some justification.

Coming from a republic, I don't normally have a lot of regard for monarchies as such but living in Thailand has made me aware of the enormous respect & love that Thais have for their King. I respect that.

I don't respect arrogance which is why I'm not directly responding to the 'Proto Fascist' (the most idiotic term I've seen on Thaivisa) accuser.

Of course there's more of the usual belittling of Abhisit in case he might just be braver, cleaner & far less of an arrogant prick than DL in Dubai. He is right to have confidence in the law which doesn't need any 'allowed to be' type of interference, typical of conspiracy theorists.

Anybody's position is set out in many posts.It is is probably for others to assess how craven one is to reactionary forces in Thailand.

The redshirts who branded Abhisit as non Thai are as stupidly wrongheaded as those that label Acharn Giles as non Thai.Odd that the person you defend didn't mention the Abhisit case.

You may not like the term proto fascist or even understand what it means, but it's a perfectly fair label.