Military Junta Officially Dissolved

[george]

Military junta officially dissolved

BANGKOK: -- Council of National Security (CNS) announced Thursday it had officially dissolved now that the post-election government takes power.

CNS leader air force chief Chalit Pukbhasuk admitted that the coup in September 2006 had failed to achieve their goal of erasing the influence of deposed premier Thaksin Shinawatra.

"The CNS could not to achieve 100 per cent of our goals under the circumstances," he said.

"We hope people understand the CNS was not trying to grab power. We have done our best, but the way things turned out did not live up to our expectations. We cannot blame anyone but ourselves," he told reporters in a press conference.

--The Nation 2008-02-07

[A_Traveller]

Always thought he was one of the honest ones in the whole mess, his summation is a reflection of that, in my view.

Regards

[Gravelrash]

The sad thing is that they had the opportunity with absolute rule and no opposition to actually achieve some real postive changes here. But seemed more interested in increasing military budgets and appointing incompetant and ineffective government with their own corruption problems. Under the CNS stewardship the south has gotten worse, they couldn't even get miltary angle right. Their great claim to fame was a new constitution in favour of the military, an internal security act for the military, trying to restrict foreign investment and tightening visa laws creating an outflow of foreign confidence, capital and businesses to surrounding countries.

"We tried our best" doesn't really cut it when you take power at the end of a gun and then go on to make a mess of it all.

[kankaroo]

The sad thing is that they had the opportunity with absolute rule and no opposition to actually achieve some real postive changes here. But seemed more interested in increasing military budgets and appointing incompetant and ineffective government with their own corruption problems. Under the CNS stewardship the south has gotten worse, they couldn't even get miltary angle right. Their great claim to fame was a new constitution in favour of the military, an internal security act for the military, trying to restrict foreign investment and tightening visa laws creating an outflow of foreign confidence, capital and businesses to surrounding countries.

"We tried our best" doesn't really cut it when you take power at the end of a gun and then go on to make a mess of it all.

I Agree.

[lazeeboy]

he did a job and got the other mob out ,left any longer and the country could have been brought to its knees,be thankful for that

[Pierrot]

In other forums I argued that the Junta was pressurized by western governments to return the power to a "democratic" government.

Comments from someone : "It makes a good material for endless conspiracy theories but has no legs on its own."

Then I post the following links :

www.bangkokpost.com/breaking_news/b....php?id=125620

www.bangkokpost.com/breaking_news/b...s.php?id=125621

Reply : "So no, I don't think there is anything at all in this article, to support your claims. Sorry."

Today will be my final post regarding this subject.

From the BBC online : " The US has announced a resumption of military aid to Thailand, hours after a new democratically elected government was sworn in there."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7231922.stm

If you're not yet convince, there isn't much I can do …

Edited February 7, 2008 by Pierrot

[naka]

Of course they can always regroup !

Naka.

[chownah]

Of course they can always regroup !

Naka.

Yeah, I think they are all relieved that they can now start meeting again on the golf course instead of having to meet in those stuffy gov't offices and board rooms.

Chownah

[younghusband]

Always thought he was one of the honest ones in the whole mess, his summation is a reflection of that, in my view.

Regards

It's a reasonable summation but it would have been improved by a mention of the meddling old fools who put the military goons up to it.

[Plus]

From the BBC online : " The US has announced a resumption of military aid to Thailand, hours after a new democratically elected government was sworn in there."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7231922.stm

How much in funding Thailand has lost? I remember it was about 14 million dollars, that's it. Not a leverage against any country, even the poorest ones.

If you're not yet convince, there isn't much I can do …

Admit you were mistaken?

[Ricardo]

From the BBC online : " The US has announced a resumption of military aid to Thailand, hours after a new democratically elected government was sworn in there."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7231922.stm

How much in funding Thailand has lost? I remember it was about 14 million dollars, that's it. Not a leverage against any country, even the poorest ones.

If you're not yet convince, there isn't much I can do …

Admit you were mistaken?

Plus, I must admit that it makes a much better story, that 'western powers' took action which forced the junta to give up power, the fact that there is no evidence & that the military-backed caretaker-government held the elections when they had always promised to, before incidentally the U.S. had even temporarily-cut their piffling aid, would not register.

You can't convince a 'true-believer' with mere facts ! Which doesn't however make them any more correct.

[toptuan]

Military Junta Officially Dissolved

Whew! Glad I don't ever have to worry about those guys again...

[toptuan]

duplicate post removed

Edited February 8, 2008 by toptuan

[Lilawadee]

How much in funding Thailand has lost? I remember it was about 14 million dollars, that's it. Not a leverage against any country, even the poorest ones.

BILLIONS.

And not funding, but investments. More than a few potential investors were reminded in no uncertain terms that Thailand is politically at the level of your average African banana republic. And if the wages were truly super low while the work force highly educated then high risk = high return... For Thailand however it's just high risk, period.

[TAWP]

Yes, we really feel more secure with this new government...

[Pierrot]

From the BBC online : " The US has announced a resumption of military aid to Thailand, hours after a new democratically elected government was sworn in there."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7231922.stm

How much in funding Thailand has lost? I remember it was about 14 million dollars, that's it. Not a leverage against any country, even the poorest ones.

If you're not yet convince, there isn't much I can do …

Admit you were mistaken?

Plus, I must admit that it makes a much better story, that 'western powers' took action which forced the junta to give up power, the fact that there is no evidence & that the military-backed caretaker-government held the elections when they had always promised to, before incidentally the U.S. had even temporarily-cut their piffling aid, would not register.

You can't convince a 'true-believer' with mere facts ! Which doesn't however make them any more correct.

Or any less. ...

I read in an other forum that you don't trust the foreign press, ok, but do you trust the local one?

Ricardo, if you don't trust what you read, where do you find all these informations that makes you so knowledgeable about what's really going on ? Honnestly, I'm really insterested...

[Plus]

The thing is, Pierrot, none of your quotes - domestic or international, shows any sign of pressure on the junta to return to democracy any faster than they did themselves.

HRW report that came out last week was a wee bit too late to make any difference. US military funding was too insignificant to make any difference, and they didn't even cancel annual military exercises, afaik.

Lilawadee, alleged drop in foreign investment is not exactly what Pierrot had in mind. He said the junta returned country to democracy due to international pressure.

Altogether foreign investment rose some 20% year on year, btw. Apparently not everyone viewed the junta as critically unstable, last year of Thaksin was, perhaps, politically more frightening.

PS. Thanks for that HRW quote, Pierrot. It is an strong indictment of sham democracy Thaksin was running to cover his true nature.

[BigSnake]

Don't go to far guys. Remember what goes around comes around. I think your time will come again VERY soon.

[Pierrot]

The thing is, Pierrot, none of your quotes - domestic or international, shows any sign of pressure on the junta to return to democracy any faster than they did themselves.

HRW report that came out last week was a wee bit too late to make any difference. US military funding was too insignificant to make any difference, and they didn't even cancel annual military exercises, afaik.

Lilawadee, alleged drop in foreign investment is not exactly what Pierrot had in mind. He said the junta returned country to democracy due to international pressure.

Altogether foreign investment rose some 20% year on year, btw. Apparently not everyone viewed the junta as critically unstable, last year of Thaksin was, perhaps, politically more frightening.

PS. Thanks for that HRW quote, Pierrot. It is an strong indictment of sham democracy Thaksin was running to cover his true nature.

First I never believed, or said, that someone put a gun on someone else head to force a change in Thai politic. It doesn't work this way. They have more subtle ways to act, a mix of international pressures to give the people in charge a hint of what is their best interest. Therefore it's much harder to bring hard evidence of such pressures.

Second, it's not specific to Thailand. Think of the pressure and the abuse France had to suffer when they made the "wrong" choice regarding the war in Iraq, the economic choices Taiwan, Japan or Korea have to make to preserve their "special friendship" with their protector. And it's not only the USA, China or Russia don't even bother with "subtle messages" when they want something done.

What the Junta came to understand was there will be consequence if a prompt return to democracy was not quickly organized, just in case they change their mind regarding the election calendar.

What you failed to notice in the BBC report was : "The SANCTIONS were an AUTOMATIC step under a law banning such aid to nations WHERE ELECTED LEADERS HAD BEEN DEPOSED". You can argue that the Junta can have easily ignored such sanctions, agree at least for these ones, but not that there was no pressure, sorry.

[Pierrot]

The thing is, Pierrot, none of your quotes - domestic or international, shows any sign of pressure on the junta to return to democracy any faster than they did themselves.

HRW report that came out last week was a wee bit too late to make any difference. US military funding was too insignificant to make any difference, and they didn't even cancel annual military exercises, afaik.

Lilawadee, alleged drop in foreign investment is not exactly what Pierrot had in mind. He said the junta returned country to democracy due to international pressure.

Altogether foreign investment rose some 20% year on year, btw. Apparently not everyone viewed the junta as critically unstable, last year of Thaksin was, perhaps, politically more frightening.

PS. Thanks for that HRW quote, Pierrot. It is an strong indictment of sham democracy Thaksin was running to cover his true nature.

First I never believed, or said, that someone put a gun on someone else head to force a change in Thai politic. It doesn't work this way. They have more subtle ways to act, a mix of international pressures to give the people in charge a hint of what is their best interest. Therefore it's much harder to bring hard evidence of such pressures.

Second, it's not specific to Thailand. Think of the pressure and the abuse France had to suffer when they made the "wrong" choice regarding the war in Iraq, the economic choices Taiwan, Japan or Korea have to make to preserve their "special friendship" with their protector. And it's not only the USA, China or Russia don't even bother with "subtle messages" when they want something done.

What the Junta came to understand was there will be consequence if a prompt return to democracy was not quickly organized, just in case they change their mind regarding the election calendar.

What you failed to notice in the BBC report was : "The SANCTIONS were an AUTOMATIC step under a law banning such aid to nations WHERE ELECTED LEADERS HAD BEEN DEPOSED". You can argue that the Junta can have easily ignored such sanctions, agree at least for these ones, but not that there was no pressure, sorry.

[aaaaaa]

Military junta officially dissolved

We have done our best,

oh, yeah ! sure

what about Bangkok bombings?

somehow no ANY culprit has been arrested and punished.

instead - the whole case has gone silently into forgetfulness ...

surely the "BEST" would have yelled some results into investigations of those bombings ?

[Plus]

First I never believed, or said, that someone put a gun on someone else head to force a change in Thai politic. It doesn't work this way. They have more subtle ways to act, a mix of international pressures to give the people in charge a hint of what is their best interest. Therefore it's much harder to bring hard evidence of such pressures.

Second, it's not specific to Thailand. Think of the pressure and the abuse France had to suffer when they made the "wrong" choice regarding the war in Iraq, the economic choices Taiwan, Japan or Korea have to make to preserve their "special friendship" with their protector. And it's not only the USA, China or Russia don't even bother with "subtle messages" when they want something done.

The US stopped FTA negotiations, true, but Thais didn't want to go into it on Thaksin's terms anyway. They don't even want to resume them anymore.

Americans were far more pissed off about compulsory licensing than about the coup.

Do you know that under the junta Thailand signed trade agreement with Japan, it's second largest trade and investment partner? That is directly opposite of pressure and threats.

[Pierrot]

First I never believed, or said, that someone put a gun on someone else head to force a change in Thai politic. It doesn't work this way. They have more subtle ways to act, a mix of international pressures to give the people in charge a hint of what is their best interest. Therefore it's much harder to bring hard evidence of such pressures.

Second, it's not specific to Thailand. Think of the pressure and the abuse France had to suffer when they made the "wrong" choice regarding the war in Iraq, the economic choices Taiwan, Japan or Korea have to make to preserve their "special friendship" with their protector. And it's not only the USA, China or Russia don't even bother with "subtle messages" when they want something done.

The US stopped FTA negotiations, true, but Thais didn't want to go into it on Thaksin's terms anyway. They don't even want to resume them anymore.

Americans were far more pissed off about compulsory licensing than about the coup.

Do you know that under the junta Thailand signed trade agreement with Japan, it's second largest trade and investment partner? That is directly opposite of pressure and threats.

Japan governments doesn't have the same pressure from its electors to behave in an "ethical" manner. The same reason China's policy in Africa and other countries is widely condemned.

It a bit the same with big companies who ask their suppliers to behave in an "ethical" manner and ask for "social audit" . They don't give a shit, for them it's just more trouble, make things more complicated, but they are scare to death of the negative publicity if some "rights"group publish picture of a sweat shop with their logo on the products manufactured. Same for Western governments.

[Pierrot]

From the BBC online : " The US has announced a resumption of military aid to Thailand, hours after a new democratically elected government was sworn in there."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7231922.stm

How much in funding Thailand has lost? I remember it was about 14 million dollars, that's it. Not a leverage against any country, even the poorest ones.

If you're not yet convince, there isn't much I can do …

Admit you were mistaken?

Plus, I must admit that it makes a much better story, that 'western powers' took action which forced the junta to give up power, the fact that there is no evidence & that the military-backed caretaker-government held the elections when they had always promised to, before incidentally the U.S. had even temporarily-cut their piffling aid, would not register.

You can't convince a 'true-believer' with mere facts ! Which doesn't however make them any more correct.

Or any less. ...

I read in an other forum that you don't trust the foreign press, ok, but do you trust the local one?

Ricardo, if you don't trust what you read, where do you find all these informations that makes you so knowledgeable about what's really going on ? Honnestly, I'm really insterested...

Ricardo, sorry for the personnal attacks, I maybe overeacted, I apologize for that.

Let's agree we disagree, will you ?

[Ricardo]

No offence taken Pierrot, or meant, I'm sure. We both agree on the return-to-democracy being a very good thing.

First I never believed, or said, that someone put a gun on someone else head to force a change in Thai politic.

The quote which started this, on 29th january 2008, said " The junta hasn't gained MUCH because I still believe until proved wrong that western powers didn't allow them to stay longer".

Which I took ("allow") to mean some sort of coersion, by the western powers, sorry if I had misunderstood that.

What you failed to notice in the BBC report was : "The SANCTIONS were an AUTOMATIC step under a law banning such aid to nations WHERE ELECTED LEADERS HAD BEEN DEPOSED". You can argue that the Junta can have easily ignored such sanctions, agree at least for these ones, but not that there was no pressure, sorry.

We did discuss on TV the US military-aid sanction at the time, shortly after the coup, it was an automatic mandated-by-US-law sanction, although there is some debate as to whether Thaksin was an elected-leader or merely appointed (by our reverred head-of-State) caretaker-PM, at the time of the coup. But lets not re-open that one.

The planned return-to-democracy had already been promised, by the junta's leaders , by the time it was announced. So I'd still suggest that it didn't actually alter the junta's thinking, on the timing of their departure, but I agree it was the sole tangible expression of actual action, by any western power, of which I'm aware. Credit to the USA for that !