So... What Has Abhisit Done Wrong Anyway?

[PhootThaiMaiDai]

Other than the usual back and forth, right or left, us versus them, what has Abhisit done wrong - besides have the backing of the Yellow Shirts? If he's actually done something wrong, or been found doing something that he has been charged with, I could understand at least some reasoning (not for what has been going on) behind the up in arms, get him out of office rhetoric. But absent that, has there been anything substantial besides the Red Shirt's version of democracy to overturn his appointment?

[bravingbangkok]

Other than the usual back and forth, right or left, us versus them, what has Abhisit done wrong - besides have the backing of the Yellow Shirts? If he's actually done something wrong, or been found doing something that he has been charged with, I could understand at least some reasoning (not for what has been going on) behind the up in arms, get him out of office rhetoric. But absent that, has there been anything substantial besides the Red Shirt's version of democracy to overturn his appointment?

He is the best thing for Thailand right now, extremely well educated and a politician rather than a businessman. I was watching an interview with him over 3 years ago and even then he was talking about social reforms and better benefits for the poor and an all round better social system in Thailand.

These loans that he is going to get from China (cheers China) are going to help Thailand greatly and with other changes such as land tax and inheritance tax the poor really are going to benefit.

I have always said that Bangkok and Thailand at large need to have a better infrastructure, I would most like to see a better train network throughout Thailand and a better metro system in Bangkok. Once this is in place they should adopt a congestion charge in the centre of Bangkok. However the public transport really has to be top notch for this to work but if it is it works very well and lessens pollution in the city centre.

Thailand needs to move forward sometime or other and I think this needs to happen not next time but this time, the best thing the Thai public can do is get behind this guy because I think he means business and hopefully the proof will be in the pudding.

[zaphodbeeblebrox]

He's only been in office for 4 months, but his economic policies have been in-line with those initiated by Thaksin. Maybe he should have given the rural poor 20,000 baht instead of 2,000.

Don't think that the grievances of the red shirts have anything to do with policy. It has everything to do with personality and nothing to do with policy. They want their guys to control the purse-strings and reap the rewards therefrom. They want the PAD-Kasit-Newin elements out of power.

My personal belief is that if the Thaksin and TRT elements get removed from Thai politics, and a new constitution is enacted, Thailand can revert back to real democratic elections in about a year. The coup did not eliminate the TRT virus. As a result, when new elections took place, Thaksin still essentially controlled the government. Samak and Somchai were taken out on technicalities, but they were ineffective leaders anyway, heavily indebted to Thaksin. We can only hope the yellow shirts will respect a democratically-elected populist government, if that is the result of the next election.

[eldar1]

There is only 1 beef with abhisit and it's not even something he did, it's all about how he came to power.

After the previous (free and fair) elections Samark became PM, but he was later disqualified due to conflict of interest laws.

The lower house then elected Somchai, after the whole PAD airport debacle somchai had to step down and PPP was dissolved. PTP was made but some members defected to the democrates, this gave the democrates and their coalition a majority in the house. The lower house then elected Abhisit. The gripe is that abhisit got elected by the lower house without there being a general election before. pretty much the same as somchai, but since he is thaksins boy, the UDD don't have a problem with it.

[Scott]

Obviously he is a puppet. The military are firmly in control--both of the gov't and of him.

[Joints]

Obviously he is a puppet. The military are firmly in control--both of the gov't and of him.

Obviously you have some proof to back that up?

[churchill]

Both sides should give Abhisit a chance - Nothing is perfect in politics but he is the best chance Thailand has for the momment - He has said that there will be elections in time when all parties can put their views forward again .

[Scott]

The previous gov't asks the military to assist with GH/Airports and they decline. Now, they decide to help. So the ones who make the decisions are the military themselves--that is equal to control. If they are in control, then he is merely a puppet--and only because he doesn't acknowledge it.

The first hint was with the Rohingya business--where he said they didn't tow them out to sea and then later had to recant. It was pretty obvious in that interview he was told what to say. He didn't come across as convincing or knowlegeable.

[thaiwanderer]

will compile a list but in the meantime remember he did say everything was back to normal and stability had returned less than 2 weeks ago

[BigSnake]

He has done nothing wrong legally that I can see, but you can bet your last baht without fear that those that want power will find fault in anything he or any PM does. I do think the government should have took strong action, i.e., much much better security in Pattaya to prevent the cancellation of the ASEAN Summit, having said that maybe government didn't want blood at the front door with guests in the House.

[Morty]

There is only 1 beef with abhisit and it's not even something he did, it's all about how he came to power.

After the previous (free and fair) elections Samark became PM, but he was later disqualified due to conflict of interest laws.

The lower house then elected Somchai, after the whole PAD airport debacle somchai had to step down and PPP was dissolved. PTP was made but some members defected to the democrats, this gave the democrats and their coalition a majority in the house. The lower house then elected Abhisit. The gripe is that abhisit got elected by the lower house without there being a general election before. pretty much the same as somchai, but since he is thaksins boy, the UDD don't have a problem with it.

I think your understanding of what happened is somewhat simplified, What happened was that PPP, the largest party in parliament, was dissolved, several MP from that party was banned from politics. What would normally happen if someone is banned, is that #2 (or number 3,4,5 etc.) on the list from that party would take the seat. Since the whole party was banned, there was no #2 and the seats of PPP in that electorate was up for by elections. This happened while MP's from the other parties in that electorate got to keep their seats. Hence they were able to put forward their candidates a second time to compete with the PPP elected seats, and in many peoples eyes got a second round at the cost of the PPP MP's. i.e a district has 10 MP's lets say the original vote gave a result of 5 mp's for PPP and the rest for other parties, the other parties got to keep their MP's and could put forward new ones to compete for mp's they didn't win in the first round. In this situation the normal thing would be to call for a new election for the whole district, or new elections for the whole country. since this didn't happen the by elections altered the majority in parliament and gave the new PTP some MP's and all the other parties MP's they shouldn't have had. This was the reason Aphisit could secure majority and be prime minister. Democratic or not, is not up to me to judge, but it seems a lot of Thai voters feel this is not what they voted for.

I'm not taking sides here, just explaining the mechanics.

Morty

[Ricardo]

I'm not so sure that he has the total backing of the Yellow Shirts, as you suggest, they're not particularly happy because he ignores many of their demands.

I would blame him for the failure to instruct the BoT to carry out a competitive-devaluation of the Baht against the US $, which I believe time will show, to be a seriously-damaging economic mistake. But I may be wrong.

[eldar1]

I think your understanding of what happened is somewhat simplified, What happened was that PPP, the largest party in parliament, was dissolved, several MP from that party was banned from politics. What would normally happen if someone is banned, is that #2 (or number 3,4,5 etc.) on the list from that party would take the seat. Since the whole party was banned, there was no #2 and the seats of PPP in that electorate was up for by elections. This happened while MP's from the other parties in that electorate got to keep their seats. Hence they were able to put forward their candidates a second time to compete with the PPP elected seats, and in many peoples eyes got a second round at the cost of the PPP MP's. i.e a district has 10 MP's lets say the original vote gave a result of 5 mp's for PPP and the rest for other parties, the other parties got to keep their MP's and could put forward new ones to compete for mp's they didn't win in the first round. In this situation the normal thing would be to call for a new election for the whole district, or new elections for the whole country. since this didn't happen the by elections altered the majority in parliament and gave the new PTP some MP's and all the other parties MP's they shouldn't have had. This was the reason Aphisit could secure majority and be prime minister. Democratic or not, is not up to me to judge, but it seems a lot of Thai voters feel this is not what they voted for.

I'm not taking sides here, just explaining the mechanics.

Morty

I see what you are sating, but i think that MP's of the PPP retained their seats even though their party was dissolved. All the MP's in PTP right now did not have to stand relection either. The only thing that happend with the disolving of the PPP party is that the 5 most executive members got banned and that included somchai the PM.

I agree that it would have been much much better to call for general elections to avoid the confusion there is now.

[PhootThaiMaiDai]

There is only 1 beef with abhisit and it's not even something he did, it's all about how he came to power.

After the previous (free and fair) elections Samark became PM, but he was later disqualified due to conflict of interest laws.

The lower house then elected Somchai, after the whole PAD airport debacle somchai had to step down and PPP was dissolved. PTP was made but some members defected to the democrats, this gave the democrats and their coalition a majority in the house. The lower house then elected Abhisit. The gripe is that abhisit got elected by the lower house without there being a general election before. pretty much the same as somchai, but since he is thaksins boy, the UDD don't have a problem with it.

I think your understanding of what happened is somewhat simplified, What happened was that PPP, the largest party in parliament, was dissolved, several MP from that party was banned from politics. What would normally happen if someone is banned, is that #2 (or number 3,4,5 etc.) on the list from that party would take the seat. Since the whole party was banned, there was no #2 and the seats of PPP in that electorate was up for by elections. This happened while MP's from the other parties in that electorate got to keep their seats. Hence they were able to put forward their candidates a second time to compete with the PPP elected seats, and in many peoples eyes got a second round at the cost of the PPP MP's. i.e a district has 10 MP's lets say the original vote gave a result of 5 mp's for PPP and the rest for other parties, the other parties got to keep their MP's and could put forward new ones to compete for mp's they didn't win in the first round. In this situation the normal thing would be to call for a new election for the whole district, or new elections for the whole country. since this didn't happen the by elections altered the majority in parliament and gave the new PTP some MP's and all the other parties MP's they shouldn't have had. This was the reason Aphisit could secure majority and be prime minister. Democratic or not, is not up to me to judge, but it seems a lot of Thai voters feel this is not what they voted for.

I was under the assumption (based on the popular media or public conversations or my own misinterpretation, phoot thai mai dai), that there was a strong case against the PPP for election fraud or vote tampering, which sparked the PAD and then the Yellow Shirt mob at BKK, and finally overturned the previous election process. Where might I have got that impression, why is it missing in these posts, or am I totally off base and suffering from premature senility or distracteditis?

Short of something drastically outside the norm, and besides the typical grievance with governance, and no one's perfect, it seems there hasn't been enough time for Abhisit to form a record for himself in a terribly unstable and critical time. One might think that this would be the time to put away childish things and use what power the country still has to get through these troubling times.

One observation though - I'm impressed that everyone in this post has been civil and articulate and after a day on the board, hasn't disintegrated into drivel and he said-she said. Which is also interesting in that not one (apparent) Red Sympathiser had chimed in... anything... Just an observation.

[LuckyFive8888]

the only disadvantage that aphisit may have is that he is may be too young for the role. there were rumors that high ranking military officers, police, navy, etc. are reluctant to obey his orders because of seniority status; they are at least 10-15 years older than him. this is something about thai culture that anybody can't change (or asian culture). other than that, he is very well qualified to be a PM right now.

thaksin's advantage was, he was rich and influential (powerful if you want) so the officials respects him for that. he could have been a perfect PM if not for the 'conflict of interest' and greed. he is outstanding as a businessman (manager/CEO). i like thaksin's liberal thinking on business but not on politics. thaksin's mind is set to make money and that is good for business.

[Roadman]

I think he may be seen as a puppet, but then given the puppet master backing he got to be PM that may be a valid view. I wondered if he was a bit of a soft co_k but the events of the last few days have shown the guy may be exactly what Thailand needs right now and into the future.

The PAD are getting annoyed with him, the army and police chiefs that allowed the mob to destroy the ASEAN summit are replaced with leaders that will deliver what he promised, and the REDS carry on in Bangkok has probably delivered him new support from the Isaan middle classes.

If he can cleverly and gradually slip the masters strings then this puppet may be very good for Thailand.

Agree with Churchill. The guy should be given a chance.

[billaaa777]

what has Abhisit done wrong

Other than making too many deals with the devils to get the job in the first place, not too much.

First, he made a deal with the Yellow Shirts just to get the job.

Thailand's present Foreign Minister, who was a past leader of the Yellow Shirts, when asked on his first day on the job by the foreign media, "What it was like invading Thailand's only international airport and causing so much damage to the country?"

Responded by saying, "I had fun; the food and music were great

He is still Foreign Minister, if you are remotely under the impression the present PM did not make a deal with the Yellow Shirts to over throw the democratically elected government, you could not be more wrong.

Second, he made a deal with the army to get his job. Did you ever see this kind of effort to put down the Yellow Shirts demonstrations? Of course not, they let them invade anything and anyplace they wanted.

Third, he has refused to state when he will hold new elections. Why, because he knows he would lose, once again.

A much better question on you part would have been, "What has Abhisit done right?"

[njpski]

Obviously he is a puppet. The military are firmly in control--both of the gov't and of him.

Proof if required, he was installed after the yellow shirts disrupted the nation. Yellow shirts not forcibly removed from government house or airport.

Red shirts are fired on

[PhootThaiMaiDai]

what has Abhisit done wrong

Other than making too many deals with the devils to get the job in the first place, not too much.

First, he made a deal with the Yellow Shirts just to get the job.

...if you are remotely under the impression the present PM did not make a deal with the Yellow Shirts to over throw the democratically elected government, you could not be more wrong.

Second, he made a deal with the army to get his job. Did you ever see this kind of effort to put down the Yellow Shirts demonstrations? Of course not, they let them invade anything and anyplace they wanted.

Third, he has refused to state when he will hold new elections. Why, because he knows he would lose, once again.

A much better question on you part would have been, "What has Abhisit done right?"

Actually the quote, as stands, could be better interpreted as; What has Abhisit done to justify this kind of vilification, or, to create an air of illegality or immoral standing… to incite this kind of backlash. "Much better" is fun and interpretive, but I was asking a simple question as to why the country was coming apart at the seams for a substantiated reason, versus the he said-she said of who some don't like because they just don't like.

If it wasn't for the record of Toxin and his cronies, and the *convictions* of election fraud, and then the subsequent tail tucked scamper of the PPP to prompt all this, I might agree with you. When the Somchai and his band were dismissed, the Red's reaction was knee jerk and suspect and can be interpreted as business as usual for their tactics.

Comparing to the two actions (BKK to Pattaya) is a bit lopsided if you try objectively. An occupation/sit in of the airport to bring national and international attention to your "injustice," is not quite as vicious sounding as the attempted murder of the PM by storming a rescheduled international conference, followed by all the trappings of a Civil War with petrol bombs, bus attacks, and rhetoric of overthrow of the government. Still speaking to the election fraud, if only the US-Democrats had done what the Yellow Shirts had, when Toxinesque Bush stole office in 2000, also with election fraud, the world wouldn't be in the same shape it is today.

While I couldn't believe the limp wristed response to either side by Governmental Authority, comparing offensive to defensive tactics also takes a bit of understanding to objectively compare. Unable to preempt or proactively repel the Yellow Shirts at the airport, the military would have been offensively walking into a hornet's nest at the airport and then a massacre. On the flip-side "puppet" Abhisit didn't seem to receive any help from anyone while he was under attack, which is highly suspect in itself. Then watching the Reds on offense, the military's response petrol bomb attacks and buses being used as battering rams is nothing short of pathetic, more untrained and ill prepared, and just embarrassing. I don't see any playing favorites here.

I've had it with most politicians and their pathos ridden, opportunity starved mobs of hostages that mindlessly appear like lackeys for their side’s talking heads - everywhere - but until someone allows for the better solutions to stand, we're all stuck and will have to make do with what's available lest more perpetuation of hate and anger for the greedy's sake.

[TAWP]

Obviously he is a puppet. The military are firmly in control--both of the gov't and of him.

Obviously you have no clue and have been influenced by another firm-handed boyfriend.

[bertlamar]

After Samak and Somchai as PMs and you guys are concerned 'he might be a puppet'????

Please, give a break while i play the world's smallest violin concerto.

As for not elected...you mean in the same way that neither Samak or Somchai or any of Thailand's other PMs are not elected, but rather appointed by a coalition majority in the house as is the case for MMP systems rather than FPP systems around most of the world?

As for making deals..... you mean like how most coalitions are formed under MMP worldwide?

Policy wise, since the poor are probably no worse off (the Samak/Somchai era brought in what policies, oh that's right a free bus service in Bangkok, some lousy attempts to create a rice cartel which failed, media interference and that's about all) and probably better off, they can't really complain there with regards to policy.

There are very legitimate complaints with regards to whether as PM now he should have a clearly pro yellow shirt in his cabinet (who admittedly did state he made those comments in jest/was misquoted Bila0007, I suppose not too much worse than Samak stating 1 person died in the 70s riots); and whether he should as PM get involved in judicial decisions regarding prosecuting the PAD for their illegal airport occupation. However, much of the claims of the redshirts rings totally hollow given that they chose to fiddle the constitution the moment they got in power and really didn't make any efforts to handle the PAD properly; but rather do cool stuff like sending the thuggish redshirts to beat them up at night; clamp down heavily with police.

This myth that the democrats wouldn't win is a joke; right now without Sanoh and Newin, the PPP/TRT would already be struggling up country; they have completely lost central and south long ago; the by-elections show the democrats making inroads; for the regional powerhouse families who have tolerated being with Thaksin in the past to get into power; they will be quite happy to switch sides....and so will the people who vote for them.

It is rich to hear Thaksin supporters ask for reinstating 1997 constitution, given that they rode right over it - let's hear the record on telco deregulation for instance....his area of expertise and not a single movement in that during his entire tenure as the most powerful PM elected with an absolute majority and no threat of censure...instead we saw corruption on a scale not previously seen and media intimidation documented by reporters without borders type organsations on a level not seen since the dictator years.

Apparently for some, fine to be a puppet of one guy (and claim not to be), but not fine to be an alleged puppet of a group of factions all of which every PM worldwide needs to manage (let's remember Thaksin's way was to place his own family in each line of government including police and military, even when experience and tenure completely didn't deserve that).

Yeah right.

[geeky]

Obviously he is a puppet. The military are firmly in control--both of the gov't and of him.

Obviously you have some proof to back that up?

the army didn't move when the PAD started the whole problem, now that the red's fight back for what was stolen from them, they all of a sudden are in the middle of the street ready and able to fight ... how much promises and deals did the democrats give to the army for that? he's a puppet!

[lannarebirth]

Obviously he is a puppet. The military are firmly in control--both of the gov't and of him.

Obviously you have some proof to back that up?

the army didn't move when the PAD started the whole problem, now that the red's fight back for what was stolen from them, they all of a sudden are in the middle of the street ready and able to fight ... how much promises and deals did the democrats give to the army for that? he's a puppet!

The Army which had special security units in Pattaya for the protection of ASEAN dignitaries didn't move either, except out of the way. Their leader was nowhere to be seen. Observations suggest that Abhisit has gone around Army leadership and formed his own advisory and control panel. The Prime Minister is seemingly now directing the armed forces for the first time in a very long time. His first efforts on the streets of Bangkok would suggest he has shown restraint and competence in that role.

[geeky]

Obviously he is a puppet. The military are firmly in control--both of the gov't and of him.

Obviously you have some proof to back that up?

the army didn't move when the PAD started the whole problem, now that the red's fight back for what was stolen from them, they all of a sudden are in the middle of the street ready and able to fight ... how much promises and deals did the democrats give to the army for that? he's a puppet!

The Army which had special security units in Pattaya for the protection of ASEAN dignitaries didn't move either, except out of the way. Their leader was nowhere to be seen. Observations suggest that Abhisit has gone around Army leadership and formed his own advisory and control panel. The Prime Minister is seemingly now directing the armed forces for the first time in a very long time. His first efforts on the streets of Bangkok would suggest he has shown restraint and competence in that role.

lets hope so, but it's too naive for me ... last coup the army made about 100 billion Baht, that's 100.000.000.000 baht; these guys don't come cheap and if he actually managed to bypass him then his days are counted!

[NovaBlue05]

I really have no objection to Abhisit. I'm not sure he has enough support .....even from his party...to survive. I still think the real powers will throw him under the bus.

I don't know...... Maybe he is going through a crucible right now and will emerge a real leader....maybe not.

[yumidesign]

for the Buddhas sake it is enough that he is the first honest p m the country has had for a very long time, this is a major step forward for the country and all its people whether they appreciate it or not, yes he too is flawed as he is human

[amasus]

According to Thailand Constitution Laws, he has done NOTHING wrong. Previous Taksin's Government did the same thing with Banharn Silpa-archa's party, same Constitution Laws. Unless the Taksin's election was not transparent. I feel much better when Taksin was out of the cabinet/PM before it's too late as he might sell everything even the Country!!!!!!

[barrybike]

he is a good man ........maybe he did wrong by being well educated and not corrupt........