Thaksin Has Ill Intention Toward Country: CNS

[ColPyat]

I think people underestimate the interim government cos they're weak on the PR and marketing side. But I strongly believe they are running this country far better than the previous regime; they react far quicker to problems that the last regime (ie, note quick reaction to flood crisis late last year) and they're not covering up important social issues that need to be revealed (eg, pollution crisis relating to Map Ta Phut, the impact of Singapore's takeover of Shin on military intelligence, etc).

I can't take the time to answer on all the points in your post that are not exactly correct. Just here the most blatant faulty point.

What do you mean with "quick reaction to flood crises"?

Not only that how the government dealt with the flood crises was the only point H.M. criticised the government during last birthday speach, you should also ask the governors, senators and previously elected politicians of the affected provinces on their opinion regarding the reaction to the flood crises. Their opinion differs from yours widely.

The reaction of the governments was in order to protect Bangkok to flood several central rice growing provinces (fair enough, somehow), and then offer the farmers a compensation of 200 to 400 Baht a Rai, which is a slap in the face as it does not even cover a fraction of their investment, not to speak of the around 8000 Baht a Rai they could have gotten by selling their harvest if their fields would not have been artificially flooded.

And what about the most serious social issues here?

What about the landright issue problems, the migration to the few industrial centers?

The only answer here is a fuzzie new economic policy, and no feasable plan. Sorry, but the only 'social issues' that are talked about are highly politicised issues, most with a spin on Thaksin created (even if he had had very little to do with some), issues mostly part of the interest of the relatively small urban middle classes, while the issues that are of interest to the mass of rural poor are falling under the table.

Sorry, Krungthepian, Thailand does not just consist of the capital and its populaton, there are more than 60 million others in 75 more provinces, many of them in provinces that the government does very little about other than using nationalist rethorics.

[asd]

Thaksin hired US-based lobbying company Barbour, Griffith & Rogers (BGR) to counter the government.

He gained media exposure from CNN, the Wall Street Journal Asia, the Economist, Newsweek and TIME magazine.

He has been attempting to create an international image that he was an elected leader removed unconstitutionally by a military coup, that he had done so many good things for Thailand and that without him Thailand has gone off track.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Former Thai PM Thaksin: "I'm Calling It Quits"

TIME magazine

Since he was toppled from power last September, Thaksin Shinawatra has been crisscrossing the globe. TIME's Southeast Asia Bureau Chief Hannah Beech caught up with Thailand's former Prime Minister on Jan. 25 in Tokyo, where they spoke about the military coup against him, the new regime in Bangkok, and what he intends to do with his life. Excerpts:

TIME: You've asserted that you and your old political party, Thai Rak Thai, were highly popular. Yet there was hardly any public outcry against the coup.

THAKSIN: It was the same with Thailand's 17 other coups. First, the people are shocked. Then they start to voice their concerns. And then they start to accept it, especially after it's endorsed by His Majesty the King. They're very disciplined. They obey. But they are watching what [the new rulers] are doing, and when they will return democracy to the people. People's tolerance is limited.

The new government has been responsible for controversial policies—the capital controls in December, and the proposed changes to the Foreign Business Act that could limit overseas ownership of companies in Thailand. What do you think of such moves?

No one can adopt protectionism anymore. Thailand has to be ready for globalization—you cannot turn your back on it. Anything that reverses what is already very open will cause confusion and uncertainty. This is when investors pull out.

You've met with business leaders in Japan, which is traditionally the biggest foreign investor in Thailand. What did you tell them?

I said this is a hiccup for Thailand, to not lose confidence in the country, that democracy will prevail and that their investments will bear fruit.

The junta has claimed that forces loyal to you were responsible for the New Year's Eve bombings in Bangkok. How do you respond?

I absolutely deny any connection. [Those responsible] must be brought to justice. Pointing a finger at somebody else, without evidence and investigation, is not right.

The junta also accuses you and your government of corruption.

The allegations are baseless. I asked very detailed questions about projects that went to the Cabinet for approval, and I shot down many of them. In all the previous 17 coups, corruption was one of the excuses. But some juntas ended up being more corrupt. At any rate, corruption will not go away in Thailand—it's in the system.

You have criticized the junta for muzzling the media, but you were accused of doing the same during your time in office.

The press printed groundless information about me. The press should not print unless it has all the facts because this can hurt the reputations of others. So I criticized them; sometimes I used strong words.

You did more than just express strong words. You slapped lawsuits on newspapers that printed things you didn't like.

That was the only way I could seek justice. But I never intervened in their activities or closed them down.

How mature is Thailand's democracy?

Without democracy it's not possible for Thailand to prosper, because without democracy, we will not get the trust and confidence [of investors] to develop the country. If you look at the development of civilizations, the first curve of civilization is military, or the prestige game. The second curve is industrialization, or the wealth game. The current curve is the wisdom game—information technology. We have to compete in the wisdom game; we should not be competing in the prestige game. But [the junta] wants to bring the country backward. That is not good. You should take the country forward.

Will you return to politics?

Right after I was ousted by the coup, I had mixed feelings. The negative feeling was that this was unfortunate for Thailand and its democracy, that the confidence I tried very hard to restore after the 1997 financial crisis would be lost. The positive part was, oh, I can retire now, I can have time for myself, for my family, I can meet friends and relax. Life is not that long, so if you can bring some happiness to yourself and your family, that's good ... I'm quite confident that if I ran [for election] today, I would win, [but] I have no political ambitions. I am calling it quits.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Thailand: Thaksin's Giant Shadow

Since he was exiled from his homeland, Thaksin Shinawatra has been a man on the move

News Flash: Thaksin Shinawatra, the former Prime Minister of Thailand who was ousted in a military coup last September, is forming a new party. For months, the 57-year-old billionaire had promised not to return to the political arena for fear of further rending the delicate fabric of Thai democracy.But in an interview with TIME in Tokyo last week, he made a bold pronouncement.

"My new party will be called the Enjoy Life Party," declared Thaksin, who in 2005 commanded the largest-ever electoral mandate in Thai history with his old party, Thai Rak Thai, or Thais Love Thais. The new Enjoy Life Party's platform? "Playing golf, traveling, relaxing, meeting friends," jokes Thaksin. "Don't be too serious about life."

Thaksin seems in a blithe mood these days. Though overthrown in Thailand's first coup in 15 years, he is intent on showing the world that he's enjoying exile. He has reacquainted himself with the pleasures of golf—at least until conditions in Beijing, where he spends much of his time, got so icy his bodyguard couldn't put the tee into the ground.

Acknowledging that his suit was hanging a little loose over his frame, Thaksin explains: "I've lost weight because I have time to do yoga, not because I feel grievances. I'm very relaxed." Indeed, the former PM expresses gratitude toward the generals who removed him from power and formed the ruling Council for National Security (CNS). "Thanks to the CNS for this, so I can retire," says Thaksin, with a grin. "After being ousted, I had a very good excuse to quit politics."

Thaksin may claim to be basking in life apr�s coup. But his mere shadow—even an ostensibly retired one—is enough to cause jitters among Thailand's ruling junta. Thaksin presided over a deeply divided nation.

Even as the citified middle class rallied for months to dislodge him from office, rural masses clung to a leader whose populist policies were seen as evidence of his devotion to the poor.

If general elections were held today, Thaksin might very well win, courtesy of a silent majority rising up from their paddies and mountain villages. Just ask rice farmer Mukda Phardthaisong, who l

ives in Nakhon Ratchasima, part of the country's impoverished northeast. "If Thaksin were to run again, I would want him to be our leader because he gave more attention to grassroots people than to the middle class or government officers," she says. "Poor people are not important for the new government." Little wonder that Thailand's unelected generals fear the specter of the exiled leader.

"There is evidence that seems to indicate that he is not about to call it quits," says Foreign Minister Nitya Pibulsonggram, without elaborating what that evidence is. "We are concerned."

The generals are trying to inoculate themselves against the Thaksin effect. Last September's military takeover was initially greeted with little public disapproval—even among Thai supporters of democracy—yet the junta has repeatedly warned the local press not to report on Thaksin, lest the coverage inflame public sentiment. A recent CNN interview with the former PM was blocked from Thai airwaves. Nor are foreign governments exempt.

When Thaksin met last month with Singapore's deputy Prime Minister, Thailand angrily canceled a set of diplomatic meetings between the two countries. A few days later, CNS leader General Sonthi Boonyaratglin intimated that Singapore might be eavesdropping on Thailand's leaders through its ownership of Shin Corp., which runs a Thai mobile-phone operator.

(Formerly controlled by Thaksin's family, Shin was sold last year to Temasek Holdings, the investment arm of the Singaporean government, for $1.9 billion.) "Thaksin makes the CNS very nervous," says Ukrist Pathmanand, associate director of the Institute of Asian Studies at Bangkok's Chulalongkorn University, who has co-written a book about the ousted leader. "I don't believe he will stay out of politics. I could see him returning when people begin to think that the leaders who followed him have failed. He could be seen as the best alternative to the CNS."

Indeed, the CNS, which says it overthrew Thaksin to restore national unity and prevent a violent showdown between his supporters and detractors, is looking less than bulletproof. Sonthi and CNS-appointed interim PM Surayud Chulanont have promised fresh elections by year's end. But just four months after the coup, local polls show that the Thai public is wearying of military rule.

At the same time, financial missteps by the military-appointed Cabinet have spooked international investors, as did fatal bombings in Bangkok on New Year's Eve that the junta has yet to solve. Meanwhile, in the restive south, Muslim insurgents have ramped up their murderous campaign; on Monday, three Buddhists were gunned down. Thaksin says that if he were to eventually return home, he could help heal the nation.

"If you want to have national reconciliation, it's like clapping hands," says Thaksin. "If you try to clap with one hand, and take another hand far away, is it possible? You have to bring that hand back. I have quit politics, don't worry, but I want to help with reconciliation."

That's a warm and fuzzy sentiment, yet Thaksin's own term of office was hardly without controversy. The conflict in the south escalated during Thaksin's tenure and was aggravated by his decision to unleash a heavy-handed military response with little attempt to win hearts and minds. Allegations of human-rights abuses, including the deaths of more than 2,000 people during three months of the 2003 war on drugs, made many wonder whether the former police lieutenant-colonel had taken the law into his own hands.

The tax-free windfall from the sale of Shin Corp., which sparked the mass public protests in Bangkok against Thaksin, hardly burnished his cultivated image as a simple man of the people. And his tenure was plagued by accusations of graft. The CNS is currently investigating 52 cases of possible corruption or abuse of power during his time in office and has said it may bring charges by the end of February.

Thaksin's old Thai Rak Thai party is also being probed for possible electoral fraud in the polls last April, which were eventually nullified. Even the ex-PM's showcase project—Suvarnabhumi Airport, which opened just nine days after Thaksin fell from power—has been tainted by claims of a rush job and of corruption. Late last month, international inspectors refused to certify the airport as safe because of cracks in the taxiways. Resolving all these complex issues, the junta contends, won't be easy. "There certainly were abuses [during Thaksin's regime]," alleges Foreign Minister Nitya. "We are picking up the pieces ... but to get to the bottom of it all is really difficult."

For now, as the interim government stumbles along, Thaksin seems content to adopt the role of happy retiree. He talks of cadging cooking ingredients off Thai massage therapists working in his building in Beijing so he can whip up his favorite omelettes and spicy prawn soup.

And then there's the long list of shops to visit and friends to catch up with, all over the world. "You know, right after the coup, I was in the U.S., and I met some friends who gave me some cheese," says Thaksin.

"I told them: 'Don't worry, I can still smile without cheese.'" The jokes, told in the plush confines of Tokyo's Imperial Hotel, where Thaksin stayed back when he was Prime Minister, meet with appreciative chuckles from the assembled retinue of advisers, who still call him "Your Excellency." But for all of Thaksin's repeated protestations that he will bow out of politics, that his family needs him, that his Buddhist beliefs are propelling him to find an inner peace, the atmosphere in his fancy suite is one of expectation, not closure. Thaksin and Thailand are not done with each other yet.

With reporting by Robert Horn/Bangkok

[Krungthepian]

Hi, just in reaction to ColPyat.. comment re flood crises..

I take your point; flooding of land in Central region and way it panned out was traumatic for farmers in areas suddenly inundated. That decision appears to have come via HM and Royal Irrigation Dept. I don't know the details to get into that whole issue other than having seen how upset they were at the length of time their fields were flooded; and meagre compensation they received.

My main point in raising that was not so much the quality of the outcome, but more the speed Surayud and co sought to deal with that problem. It's a hard call to make, but I reckon this government attends to issues of the day - be it crises or all sorts, payment of compensation or whatever - quicker than the former. I put that down to them being less corrupt and less delayed by the sorts of strings and complications that comes with being bent.

It's just a general impression; that issues are being dealt with slightly more purely.

As to the competence of the PM and various ministers, it's a mixed bag, probably like before. Surayud appears to be making strides in the far South, where you could say progress is most desperately needed, but he's obviously got little idea about economics. However I think he has a far greater grasp of social justice and the need for fair outcomes. Thaksin was tremendously capable businessman, and the markets, foreign investors, etc, loved that. However he was grossly deficient in these other areas - justice, the environment. After all those five and a half years under Thai Rak Thai where economic growth was held up as seemingly the great goal of this country, I really love seeing the balance restored. Maybe it's gone too much the other way, but for the while it's probably necessary.

For me, a decent social justice system (which includes a much more dynamic broadcast media here, freed from Army control, as well as a far better legal system) means a healthy society, and probably a healthier environment.

I've just read a book called The Weather Makers, by Tim Flannery, the scientist made Australian of the Year a week ago. The warming of the planet and resulting climatic changes will, for me, be the issue of the century. It's very serious and scary - forget Thaksin and the mess he caused, cos it's but he's just a smudge the broader canvas that has a far more disturbing shadow on it. However, if we, the human race, are going to get our act together to effectively counter that looming crisis, we need to get rid of growth-obsessed leaders like Thaksin; and for that matter the scumbags running Burma (you could probably say Laos and Cambodia.. China, the US.. God knows, I have hope the latter two might come to their senses, but you can't be sure).

I'm veering off track now, but that's how I see it. Here we are debating the pros and cons of a prime minister who millions in this country now recognise as a complete dog. Back in my country, Oz, global warming is suddenly the Big Issue like never before - partly perhaps because there is so little else to worry about. Yet, the Land of Smiles has so many immediate concerns, global warming is over yonder hills, and in newspaper terms, yet to get off the World News pages. But I want to know what parts of the coast - and what areas of Bangkok - are gunna go under when the seas rise, as surely they must. And what other effects are there going to be here? Surely, we going to see more Uttaradit-style mudslides - caused by illegal logging - plus bigger storms and greater rates of evaporation; much more dramatic floods and droughts. Forget the new airport, shambles that it is. Water management may very well be the number one thing that Thailand really needs to get on top of.

I'd be happy to see old Square Face six-feet under. He is a very unwelcome distraction from the planet's woes. The clouds on the horizon are far bigger, but Thailand and much of this part of the world seem hopelessly unprepared for what lies ahead. Al Gore needs to come here to promote "his doco" The Inconvenient Truth. It's sobering and something we all need to watch. In it, he says the world will face massive refugee crises - 100 million plus people forced to flee their current home/homelands. Many of them will be Bangladeshis, so there is a fair chance the impact on this part of the world, could be severe. And Bangkok is right on sea level; how soon before this city is the "Venice of the East" again? 40-50 years?

We might have time for a few beers... but the more we're on track to face these things, the better they'll go down.

[blaze]

Re: the Time magazine background information following the interview.

If in fact the PR firm is providing whitewashed information on the Taksin era to the foreign media, as some have suggested, --- then maybe it's time Takky hired a new PR firm- While accurate, the background certainly did not paint him as an innocent victim in all this mess.

[ColPyat]

Hi, just in reaction to ColPyat.. comment re flood crises..

I take your point; flooding of land in Central region and way it panned out was traumatic for farmers in areas suddenly inundated. That decision appears to have come via HM and Royal Irrigation Dept. I don't know the details to get into that whole issue other than having seen how upset they were at the length of time their fields were flooded; and meagre compensation they received.

My main point in raising that was not so much the quality of the outcome, but more the speed Surayud and co sought to deal with that problem. It's a hard call to make, but I reckon this government attends to issues of the day - be it crises or all sorts, payment of compensation or whatever - quicker than the former. I put that down to them being less corrupt and less delayed by the sorts of strings and complications that comes with being bent.

It's just a general impression; that issues are being dealt with slightly more purely.

As to the competence of the PM and various ministers, it's a mixed bag, probably like before. Surayud appears to be making strides in the far South, where you could say progress is most desperately needed, but he's obviously got little idea about economics. However I think he has a far greater grasp of social justice and the need for fair outcomes. Thaksin was tremendously capable businessman, and the markets, foreign investors, etc, loved that. However he was grossly deficient in these other areas - justice, the environment. After all those five and a half years under Thai Rak Thai where economic growth was held up as seemingly the great goal of this country, I really love seeing the balance restored. Maybe it's gone too much the other way, but for the while it's probably necessary.

For me, a decent social justice system (which includes a much more dynamic broadcast media here, freed from Army control, as well as a far better legal system) means a healthy society, and probably a healthier environment.

I've just read a book called The Weather Makers, by Tim Flannery, the scientist made Australian of the Year a week ago. The warming of the planet and resulting climatic changes will, for me, be the issue of the century. It's very serious and scary - forget Thaksin and the mess he caused, cos it's but he's just a smudge the broader canvas that has a far more disturbing shadow on it. However, if we, the human race, are going to get our act together to effectively counter that looming crisis, we need to get rid of growth-obsessed leaders like Thaksin; and for that matter the scumbags running Burma (you could probably say Laos and Cambodia.. China, the US.. God knows, I have hope the latter two might come to their senses, but you can't be sure).

I'm veering off track now, but that's how I see it. Here we are debating the pros and cons of a prime minister who millions in this country now recognise as a complete dog. Back in my country, Oz, global warming is suddenly the Big Issue like never before - partly perhaps because there is so little else to worry about. Yet, the Land of Smiles has so many immediate concerns, global warming is over yonder hills, and in newspaper terms, yet to get off the World News pages. But I want to know what parts of the coast - and what areas of Bangkok - are gunna go under when the seas rise, as surely they must. And what other effects are there going to be here? Surely, we going to see more Uttaradit-style mudslides - caused by illegal logging - plus bigger storms and greater rates of evaporation; much more dramatic floods and droughts. Forget the new airport, shambles that it is. Water management may very well be the number one thing that Thailand really needs to get on top of.

I'd be happy to see old Square Face six-feet under. He is a very unwelcome distraction from the planet's woes. The clouds on the horizon are far bigger, but Thailand and much of this part of the world seem hopelessly unprepared for what lies ahead. Al Gore needs to come here to promote "his doco" The Inconvenient Truth. It's sobering and something we all need to watch. In it, he says the world will face massive refugee crises - 100 million plus people forced to flee their current home/homelands. Many of them will be Bangladeshis, so there is a fair chance the impact on this part of the world, could be severe. And Bangkok is right on sea level; how soon before this city is the "Venice of the East" again? 40-50 years?

We might have time for a few beers... but the more we're on track to face these things, the better they'll go down.

I have to pick again a few points of your post.

First of all, global warming and environmental issues are indeed global issues that supercede comparatively small issues on a global scale such as the current mess here in Thailand. Nevertheless, i think you do attribute a bit too much goodwill to Surayud. Many pro junta quarters, and i do count you into that corner, i believe are a but too much influenced by both their hate towards Thaksin and by Surayud's far more gentle and eloquent behavior.

Neverthess, i think we should look beyond that. I am far from a Thaksin supporter or apologist, but i do not side with what i view even less democratic social forces here in Thailand just because they have used the power of guns to get rid of Thaksin.

I do not see how the present powers are indeed more "pro environment". I would say that regardless their rethorics we should wait and see the results. And the gasohol debate might be very politically correct, but i have read articles that it is just that - PC without any substantial improvements, and even more disadvantages than benefits.

Lets go to social issues. You claim that this government is more pro social issues than the last. Sorry to disagree, but their actions so far have not been very much so. They have straight away stopped rice subsidies, and that way have lowered substantially the income of anyhow debt ridden rice farmers. That is not exactly what i consider as social.

They always talk about the money that has to be saved, but on the other hand straight away the military got a substantially higher budget to get some new toys. Hmm... who looks out for whom there?

And yes, the government promised debt referendums to farmers marching to Bangkok. But just hold on, was that because a genuine concern for those people's problems, or just the same old empty promise used by many governments previously?

A free media?

Sorry, but this government has not exactly excelled by allowing a free media, just let me remind you of certain incidents of intimidation such as during the taxi driver suicide issue against ITV (an issue that will come up very soon again during the 100 day festivities), the "request" to broadcast media not to publish anything that Thaksin says, continued military presence in TV stations, closure of community radios, etc.

I am not saying that Thaksin was innocent in terms of media interference, but this government has so not exactly excelled in allowing a free media.

I don't see, as you allege, any move towards the government trying to get the broadcast media out of the hands of the military, more of the opposite.

Also the ITV issue looks as if the government is poised on destroying ITV, as opposed to getting ITV back into the hand of the people as an independent news channel. As it was before the Chuan government allowed for some strange reason that Thaksin could acquire a majority of the shares.

And very concerning are actions such as putting openly critical academics such as Prof. Giles Ungpakorn under 24/7 surveillance.

It is rather interesting, even ironic, that a capitalist populist authoritarian like Thaksin has managed to initiate the most substantial social reforms in recent history here in Thailand. His government introduced the first universal healthcare. His government connected the rural masses to opportunities to get credit (and obviously screwed it up as it was a basically populist measure).

This government though has done nothing whatsoever in those terms, other than spreading a economical theory/philosophy that is mostly rejected by the people that it is aimed at, that is openly criticised by the west, and less openly but as vehemently by many Thai academics.

I am sorry to say, but your argumentation is a bit hopeful without much reason to be so. Please don't forget - this government does come from social extremely conservative corners that never in Thai history have been known to change the status quo which brought up this mess in the first place. And i do not see any indicator that this present government has any will to change the status quo.

Even worse, it seems to be riddled by fractional infighting so endemic here in the military. So far Surayud seems to keep a tap on this rather well with his eloquent speaches, but just wait and see what happens when Gen. Sonthi is closed to retirement. He has not yet recommended his successor.

The one pointed to be behind the coup, and the government, Gen. Prem, has during his tenure as PM (unelected) not exactly excelled at solving the same problems which are faced now.

So far the contents of the new constitution are not known, but guessed at. Lets wait and see.

What though seems to be rather clear though is that the military and the burocracy will reserve itself more power than before. And on the political side, it seems to come again to the point that we will get back to weak Thai style coalition parties that are hindered by the necessary regional based selfserving godfather parties. Those parties are formed again right now.

I have no reason to be optimistic.

[Plus]

There's a huge difference between populism and real care. Populist measures, while attractive on surface, ultimately destroy the very people they claim to safe from sufferings. It' like peddling drugs vs. providing jobs.

The current government hasn't been in power long enough to make a real difference, and their methods aren't quick fixes either, but their moves against Mataphut are impressive.

It takes courage to do the "right thing" against the biggest industrial area in Thailand. It's pissed off investors vs. clean water for generations to come.

[thaimat]

Some brains wouldn't hurt either. To suggest that the economic analysis that occurs within the pages of the Economist can be swayed by a PR firm is at best stupid and childish. At least he didn't accuse the journalists of accepting bribes directly from Taksin - yet.

It's close to libelous and it just shows how uneducated and ignorant these military guys are. The Economist is probably one of the most respected AND unbiased sources in the world.

They are just making soundbites for knuckleheads. Hey, George Dubblya Bush has been doing it successfully for 6 years,(I'm sure citing examples not neccessary here) why should the new leaders here be different?

[thaimat]

Hi, just in reaction to ColPyat.. comment re flood crises..

I take your point; flooding of land in Central region and way it panned out was traumatic for farmers in areas suddenly inundated. That decision appears to have come via HM and Royal Irrigation Dept. I don't know the details to get into that whole issue other than having seen how upset they were at the length of time their fields were flooded; and meagre compensation they received.

My main point in raising that was not so much the quality of the outcome, but more the speed Surayud and co sought to deal with that problem. It's a hard call to make, but I reckon this government attends to issues of the day - be it crises or all sorts, payment of compensation or whatever - quicker than the former. I put that down to them being less corrupt and less delayed by the sorts of strings and complications that comes with being bent.

It's just a general impression; that issues are being dealt with slightly more purely.

As to the competence of the PM and various ministers, it's a mixed bag, probably like before. Surayud appears to be making strides in the far South, where you could say progress is most desperately needed, but he's obviously got little idea about economics. However I think he has a far greater grasp of social justice and the need for fair outcomes. Thaksin was tremendously capable businessman, and the markets, foreign investors, etc, loved that. However he was grossly deficient in these other areas - justice, the environment. After all those five and a half years under Thai Rak Thai where economic growth was held up as seemingly the great goal of this country, I really love seeing the balance restored. Maybe it's gone too much the other way, but for the while it's probably necessary.

For me, a decent social justice system (which includes a much more dynamic broadcast media here, freed from Army control, as well as a far better legal system) means a healthy society, and probably a healthier environment.

I've just read a book called The Weather Makers, by Tim Flannery, the scientist made Australian of the Year a week ago. The warming of the planet and resulting climatic changes will, for me, be the issue of the century. It's very serious and scary - forget Thaksin and the mess he caused, cos it's but he's just a smudge the broader canvas that has a far more disturbing shadow on it. However, if we, the human race, are going to get our act together to effectively counter that looming crisis, we need to get rid of growth-obsessed leaders like Thaksin; and for that matter the scumbags running Burma (you could probably say Laos and Cambodia.. China, the US.. God knows, I have hope the latter two might come to their senses, but you can't be sure).

I'm veering off track now, but that's how I see it. Here we are debating the pros and cons of a prime minister who millions in this country now recognise as a complete dog. Back in my country, Oz, global warming is suddenly the Big Issue like never before - partly perhaps because there is so little else to worry about. Yet, the Land of Smiles has so many immediate concerns, global warming is over yonder hills, and in newspaper terms, yet to get off the World News pages. But I want to know what parts of the coast - and what areas of Bangkok - are gunna go under when the seas rise, as surely they must. And what other effects are there going to be here? Surely, we going to see more Uttaradit-style mudslides - caused by illegal logging - plus bigger storms and greater rates of evaporation; much more dramatic floods and droughts. Forget the new airport, shambles that it is. Water management may very well be the number one thing that Thailand really needs to get on top of.

I'd be happy to see old Square Face six-feet under. He is a very unwelcome distraction from the planet's woes. The clouds on the horizon are far bigger, but Thailand and much of this part of the world seem hopelessly unprepared for what lies ahead. Al Gore needs to come here to promote "his doco" The Inconvenient Truth. It's sobering and something we all need to watch. In it, he says the world will face massive refugee crises - 100 million plus people forced to flee their current home/homelands. Many of them will be Bangladeshis, so there is a fair chance the impact on this part of the world, could be severe. And Bangkok is right on sea level; how soon before this city is the "Venice of the East" again? 40-50 years?

We might have time for a few beers... but the more we're on track to face these things, the better they'll go down.

I have to pick again a few points of your post.

First of all, global warming and environmental issues are indeed global issues that supercede comparatively small issues on a global scale such as the current mess here in Thailand. Nevertheless, i think you do attribute a bit too much goodwill to Surayud. Many pro junta quarters, and i do count you into that corner, i believe are a but too much influenced by both their hate towards Thaksin and by Surayud's far more gentle and eloquent behavior.

Neverthess, i think we should look beyond that. I am far from a Thaksin supporter or apologist, but i do not side with what i view even less democratic social forces here in Thailand just because they have used the power of guns to get rid of Thaksin.

I do not see how the present powers are indeed more "pro environment". I would say that regardless their rethorics we should wait and see the results. And the gasohol debate might be very politically correct, but i have read articles that it is just that - PC without any substantial improvements, and even more disadvantages than benefits.

Lets go to social issues. You claim that this government is more pro social issues than the last. Sorry to disagree, but their actions so far have not been very much so. They have straight away stopped rice subsidies, and that way have lowered substantially the income of anyhow debt ridden rice farmers. That is not exactly what i consider as social.

They always talk about the money that has to be saved, but on the other hand straight away the military got a substantially higher budget to get some new toys. Hmm... who looks out for whom there?

And yes, the government promised debt referendums to farmers marching to Bangkok. But just hold on, was that because a genuine concern for those people's problems, or just the same old empty promise used by many governments previously?

A free media?

Sorry, but this government has not exactly excelled by allowing a free media, just let me remind you of certain incidents of intimidation such as during the taxi driver suicide issue against ITV (an issue that will come up very soon again during the 100 day festivities), the "request" to broadcast media not to publish anything that Thaksin says, continued military presence in TV stations, closure of community radios, etc.

I am not saying that Thaksin was innocent in terms of media interference, but this government has so not exactly excelled in allowing a free media.

I don't see, as you allege, any move towards the government trying to get the broadcast media out of the hands of the military, more of the opposite.

Also the ITV issue looks as if the government is poised on destroying ITV, as opposed to getting ITV back into the hand of the people as an independent news channel. As it was before the Chuan government allowed for some strange reason that Thaksin could acquire a majority of the shares.

And very concerning are actions such as putting openly critical academics such as Prof. Giles Ungpakorn under 24/7 surveillance.

It is rather interesting, even ironic, that a capitalist populist authoritarian like Thaksin has managed to initiate the most substantial social reforms in recent history here in Thailand. His government introduced the first universal healthcare. His government connected the rural masses to opportunities to get credit (and obviously screwed it up as it was a basically populist measure).

This government though has done nothing whatsoever in those terms, other than spreading a economical theory/philosophy that is mostly rejected by the people that it is aimed at, that is openly criticised by the west, and less openly but as vehemently by many Thai academics.

I am sorry to say, but your argumentation is a bit hopeful without much reason to be so. Please don't forget - this government does come from social extremely conservative corners that never in Thai history have been known to change the status quo which brought up this mess in the first place. And i do not see any indicator that this present government has any will to change the status quo.

Even worse, it seems to be riddled by fractional infighting so endemic here in the military. So far Surayud seems to keep a tap on this rather well with his eloquent speaches, but just wait and see what happens when Gen. Sonthi is closed to retirement. He has not yet recommended his successor.

The one pointed to be behind the coup, and the government, Gen. Prem, has during his tenure as PM (unelected) not exactly excelled at solving the same problems which are faced now.

So far the contents of the new constitution are not known, but guessed at. Lets wait and see.

What though seems to be rather clear though is that the military and the burocracy will reserve itself more power than before. And on the political side, it seems to come again to the point that we will get back to weak Thai style coalition parties that are hindered by the necessary regional based selfserving godfather parties. Those parties are formed again right now.

I have no reason to be optimistic.

Concise and well written, thank you.