Thaksin 'fears Economic Recovery Will Shut Him Out'

[webfact]

Thaksin 'fears economic recovery will shut him out'

By The Nation

Published on October 27, 2009

Ex-premier Thaksin Shinawatra and his allies were making all-out efforts to topple the Abhisit government before February, government whips said yesterday.

That was because Thaksin and Pheu Thai believed it would be more difficult to do bring the government down once the economy picks up early next year, when they expect the government's huge stimulus package to take fruit.

Rallies planned by the red shirts next month and Pheu Thai Party chief adviser Gen Chavalit Yongchaiyudh's proposal to form a national government were major concerns for the government.

Chavalit made headlines last week after a trip to Phnom Penh apparently aimed at discrediting and pressuring the government.

"What they are doing is to bring in enemies to dismantle their own home. They have broadly staged the move to discredit the government and create political turmoil to try to show the government is no longer able to run the country,'' Government whip chairman Chinnaworn Bunyakiat said.

The Opposition had also tried to discredit the regime by leaking false information accusing the government of corruption in order to claim the government had lost legitimacy and could no longer function, Chinnaworn said.

During the whip meeting, Chinnaworn said the whips offered moral support for Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva to be strong in order to lead the country out of its economic and political problems.

He said the government must survive until February to sustain the situation.

Government whips would make recommendations to help counter the red shirts.

Part of the plan is to win support from the masses via government ministries and departments. More populist policies may be drawn up to win public support.

-- The Nation 2009/10/27

[Publicus]

Pardon the cynicism but on the last point in the article, populist policies, the government should throw money at the peasants of the North until they forget about Thaksin.

Then the government could make adjustments to whatever populist policies it might have devised to get through this emergency.

[awd]

How could a govt that has no legitimacy lose legitimacy? Very poorly written article by the govt newspaper.

[animatic]

If you go by the laws on the books, the government IS legitimate.

Pub, I of course see the reasons to be cynical, but making them forget Thaksin is a good idea.

Doing it in ways that help the 'N. & N.E. people' is a good idea ANYWAY,

It is the right thing to do whatever the reasons.

Be nice if they helped the Hill Tribe peoples too.

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

Certainly if PTP can't make hay while the economy sucks,

they will have to eat rocks when it picks up, and it 'looks' like the Dems are doing it.

Thaksin is still taking cxredit for having full coffers to 'stroke' the folks up north,

and the Dems currently don't have that luxury for 'patronizing the proles' as Thaksin did.

Yet.

Just what thinking person would want a group that thinks internationally sabatoging the country

for their own political gain, in the worst of possible economic times,

is going to do a good job while back in office?

The good of the country is just not

in their mindset, and that's obvious.

Edited October 27, 2009 by animatic

[Thai at Heart]

If you go by the laws on the books, the government IS legitimate.

Pub, I of course see the reasons to be cynical, but making them forget Thaksin is a good idea.

Doing it in ways that help the 'N. & N.E. people' is a good idea ANYWAY,

It is the right thing to do whatever the reasons.

Be nice if they helped the Hill Tribe peoples too.

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

Certainly if PTP can't make hay while the economy sucks,

they will have to eat rocks when it picks up, and it 'looks' like the Dems are doing it.

Thaksin is still taking cxredit for having full coffers to 'stroke' the folks up north,

and the Dems currently don't have that luxury for 'patronizing the proles' as Thaksin did.

Yet.

Just what thinking person would want a group that thinks internationally sabatoging the country

for their own political gain, in the worst of possible economic times,

is going to do a good job while back in office?

The good of the country is just not

in their mindset, and that's obvious.

By the laws on the books, yes the govt is legitimate. However, the general public is the important arbiter about the issue, and it would appear that in the minds of many, winning a general election adds a certain amount of legitimacy to any govt Democrat or not.

I wholeheartedly agree that the Dems should focus more on the North and North East. Funny how doing this grants the label of being populist. It is only populist in that this is where the most votes are. No one wins elections by forming policies that don't do much for the majority of the population.

Good thought out policies that really effect the amount of money in the hands of the farmers, and produce tangible long term benefits to the rural areas aren't that difficult to come up with, and if Abhisit can come up with them he can stay in power for a very long time. Why it isn't a focal point of the Dems I don't understand? The amount of supporters they have had time immemorial hasn't been sufficient to win an election outright, so wouldn't that suggest that their manifesto has never been designed to allow them to become a truly nationwide party.

Being accused of changing their spots to win elections and focussing on Bangkok and the South isn't enough. If it loses them some friends but gains them many, that is politics. We have just watched many years of the Labour party in the UK which changed itself entirely to gain election. I understand that Thailand isn't the Uk, but according to everyone here, the voters of Thailand aren't as sophisticated as the UK. How hard can it be to put 200 baht a month more in the hands of someone taking home an average of 3 or 4 thousand?

Edited October 27, 2009 by Thai at Heart

[animatic]

If you go by the laws on the books, the government IS legitimate.

Pub, I of course see the reasons to be cynical, but making them forget Thaksin is a good idea.

Doing it in ways that help the 'N. & N.E. people' is a good idea ANYWAY,

It is the right thing to do whatever the reasons.

Be nice if they helped the Hill Tribe peoples too.

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

Certainly if PTP can't make hay while the economy sucks,

they will have to eat rocks when it picks up, and it 'looks' like the Dems are doing it.

Thaksin is still taking cxredit for having full coffers to 'stroke' the folks up north,

and the Dems currently don't have that luxury for 'patronizing the proles' as Thaksin did.

Yet.

Just what thinking person would want a group that thinks internationally sabatoging the country

for their own political gain, in the worst of possible economic times,

is going to do a good job while back in office?

The good of the country is just not

in their mindset, and that's obvious.

By the laws on the books, yes the govt is legitimate. However, the general public is the important arbiter about the issue, and it would appear that in the minds of many, winning a general election adds a certain amount of legitimacy to any govt Democrat or not.

The 'general public' voted on the constitution, and the Dems did it by the rules of that constitution.

That makes it legally done. No qualifying it by saying another election suddenly makes it more legt

changes the legitimacy argument one iota. The MP's in parliament were legaly elected,

and THEY decide on who the government is, NOT directly decided by the people.

It was like that for the 1997 Constitution too. Just the way it is here.

These same rules are not far from other parliamentary governments world wide.

Israel his a government put together by the 2nd biggest vote getters

because the winning party couldn't hold together a coalition... same same.

[hammered]

An economic upturn will help the government. It may not make them shoe-ins at an election but it will help them. PTP concerns are real. They are not stupid. The political game now is for government to try and stay in power until an upturn takes effect and for the opposition to try and force an election before. That is nothing different form in most democratic countries.

[TAWP]

'Ohh, I hope people are continuing to have a hard time and poor people starving, so I have a chance to get back and steal some more of their money!'

Yes, God forbid we would actually be doing good and prosper when he is away...

[PoorSucker]

Hey Democrats.

I have an Idea for you.

Make everyone born in Thailand a Thai citizen.

That makes a half a million more votes for you.

[xminator]

Another government paranoia pr spin article. Pravda wannabie The Nation strikes again. w00t.

[Publicus]

The sides are joined that February is the do or die finish line. Abhisit believes that if he can get to February he should be reasonably positioned for a general election. Thaksin and the Reds believe that if they fail to bring down the government by or during February, Thaksin's mad passion to get his hands on the money again would be lost.

The question from where I sit focuses on exactly what the Reds will do in their rallies between now and February. Exactly what are the circumstances the Reds define and forsee that in their view would bring down the Abhisit government during that small window of time? Violence? Parliamentary throat cutting?

There's the looming but unknown factor - so I ask rhetorically, what's the Red gameplan if the ultimate might happen in the meantime?

Neither the PAD nor the UDD is a political lobbying group. They're mass street orientated organizations. Someone switched a signal to put two big trains onto the same track.

Edited October 27, 2009 by Publicus

[Jingthing]

Remember back at Black Songkran when Thaksin very openly said this is the final push, there will be a winner and a loser. Well, he lost that one. And yet there are always these new "final" pushes. The boy who cried wolf one too many times?

All these "final" pushes have become tiresome. How is he helping his country now, please tell me?

Edited October 27, 2009 by Jingthing

[Thailand]

Pardon the cynicism but on the last point in the article, populist policies, the government should throw money at the peasants of the North until they forget about Thaksin.

Then the government could make adjustments to whatever populist policies it might have devised to get through this emergency.

Oh those peasants that should not even have a vote because they do not know what is good for them- is that who you mean?

[Thai at Heart]

If you go by the laws on the books, the government IS legitimate.

Pub, I of course see the reasons to be cynical, but making them forget Thaksin is a good idea.

Doing it in ways that help the 'N. & N.E. people' is a good idea ANYWAY,

It is the right thing to do whatever the reasons.

Be nice if they helped the Hill Tribe peoples too.

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

Certainly if PTP can't make hay while the economy sucks,

they will have to eat rocks when it picks up, and it 'looks' like the Dems are doing it.

Thaksin is still taking cxredit for having full coffers to 'stroke' the folks up north,

and the Dems currently don't have that luxury for 'patronizing the proles' as Thaksin did.

Yet.

Just what thinking person would want a group that thinks internationally sabatoging the country

for their own political gain, in the worst of possible economic times,

is going to do a good job while back in office?

The good of the country is just not

in their mindset, and that's obvious.

By the laws on the books, yes the govt is legitimate. However, the general public is the important arbiter about the issue, and it would appear that in the minds of many, winning a general election adds a certain amount of legitimacy to any govt Democrat or not.

The 'general public' voted on the constitution, and the Dems did it by the rules of that constitution.

That makes it legally done. No qualifying it by saying another election suddenly makes it more legt

changes the legitimacy argument one iota. The MP's in parliament were legaly elected,

and THEY decide on who the government is, NOT directly decided by the people.

It was like that for the 1997 Constitution too. Just the way it is here.

These same rules are not far from other parliamentary governments world wide.

Israel his a government put together by the 2nd biggest vote getters

because the winning party couldn't hold together a coalition... same same.

Winning by the rules is ok by me. I know how the system works here and all it's imperfections at delivering contrived coalitions.

However, don't you believe that Abhisit and the country's situation would be greatly improved, if at the next election the Dems trounces all comers?

[Publicus]

Pardon the cynicism but on the last point in the article, populist policies, the government should throw money at the peasants of the North until they forget about Thaksin.

Then the government could make adjustments to whatever populist policies it might have devised to get through this emergency.

Oh those peasants that should not even have a vote because they do not know what is good for them- is that who you mean?

As they say in Chicago, vote early and often.

The post was indeed a moment of cynicism for me. It's clear the population in the northern arc of the country from Burma to Laos want something they're not getting. Is it democracy? Is it a familiar face as PM? Is it village funding by Bangkok?

Some of the population that sprawls across the northern tier have enuff of whatever it is they want, others seem to have wants and needs that are outstanding, unsatisifed. The Abhisit government has to find ways to deliver that which those with grievances want.

As has been pointed out, The Democrat party hasn't ever related to the folk up there but maybe the coalition can. They should get on the case now as Abhisit has dithered too long in improving the government's appeal to the restless folk among the population of the North and the Northeast.

Edited October 27, 2009 by Publicus

[plachon]

Pardon the cynicism but on the last point in the article, populist policies, the government should throw money at the peasants of the North until they forget about Thaksin.

Then the government could make adjustments to whatever populist policies it might have devised to get through this emergency.

Oh those peasants that should not even have a vote because they do not know what is good for them- is that who you mean?

Quite right. Peasants (or anyone else for that matter) who repeatedly sell their votes should be denied the chance to vote at future elections. That unfortunately would rule out most of the Isaan and Northern electorate, but hey, vote buying is supposed to be illegal. Vote sellers should be prosecuted and at the very least banned from ever standing for election again if found guilty, although a bit of porridge might be in order to allow them time to reflect on their crime.

As an aside, I've just returned to Thailand after an absence of a few years and note the obvious divisions in Thai society resulting from the Red-Yellow divide and Thaksin's repeated attempts to destabilise the country by any means possible, that were never previously so visible. Most people I've spoken to so far are neither Reds nor Yellows, but still show some degree of affinity to one or other side. However, a couple of days ago I met an overt Red - a village headman from Khon Kaen - who had fallen for the Thaksin propaganda machine hook, line and sinker. According to him, Thaksin is innocent of all charges against him and only has Thailand's interests at heart, especially the "grassroots", as he called them. When questioned about the matter of being found guilty of corruption already he said the judge was biased. When I pointed out that the verdict came while Thaksin's brother-in-law was the PM, he said that the whole of Thai legal system was unfair. This was despite the fact that he was currently studying for a law and public administration degree under a Democrat govt-provided scheme to raise the education level of village headmen nationwide. His willingness to write off the entire legal system was somewhat troubling to me, as was his slavish devotion to Thaksin.

While one swallow does not summer make, if he is representative of other village headmen in Isaan, then it is sure that the Democrats have their work cut out to persuade the villagers to vote for them, even if the Newin and Thaksin networks slug it out for the main prize.

Of course, the idea of debarring vote buying villagers is never going to work as long as money politics is the normal way of going about getting to power upcountry. Makes "New Politics" seem a breath of fresh air in comparison to the present rotten system, eh?

[tig28]

If you go by the laws on the books, the government IS legitimate.

Hi animatic

This has become one of your favorite themes here .... but one with which I must disagree.

The lack of legitimacy of the current government comes not from the coalition they formed to achieve power (however unsavory) .... but rather from the circumstances created to allow them to actually do so!!

After failing to secure power in elections in 2001, again in 2005 and watching in relief as a coup prevented yet another rout in 2006 (only weeks before scheduled national elections) The Democrats once again faced the electorate after every possible road-block had been placed in front of their oponents by the Junta ... and in December 2007 ...... oh well .. you know........ Shock !! Horror !!

Remembering that in this election the PPP was (I think) 14 seats short of an outright majority and after yet another electoral slaughter of the Democrats I find it pretty difficult to describe The Democrats as a "legitimate" Government of anywhere. The PPP had won against all the odds (and expectations of their enemies) then had to endure the non-righteous indignation of the perennial losers --- this -- with some help from their powerful and desperate friends----- drove the truly legitimately elected Government into the wilderness.

Now the Democrats-- who have not won an election in living memory ----- were able to finally grasp power.

Legitimate ?????

Doing it in ways that help the 'N. & N.E. people' is a good idea ANYWAY,

It is the right thing to do whatever the reasons.

Be nice if they helped the Hill Tribe peoples too.

Hear ! Hear !!

By the way .... doesn't this statement look classy when compared to something like this:

the government should throw money at the peasants of the North until they forget about Thaksin.

Edited October 27, 2009 by tig28

[Publicus]

The Chuan Democrat Party led coalition that emerged after the 1997 collapse of the Chavalit-Thaksin government was legitimately cobbled together to respond to the self-induced meltdown of the economy and financial sector. The limited electoral base of the Democrat Party didn't then, nor does it now, diminish the respect the party has in Thai politics, economics and government.

The Chuan led coalition was readily accepted as Thailand looked to it to deal with the catastrophe the usual suspect idiots of the political establishment precipitated upon a deer in the headlights Thai people. And who suffered more because of the collapse of the economy than the subsistence population of the rural agrarian North and Northeast?

Obviously however circumstances have changed relative to the present Democrat Party led coalition cobbled together by the same parliamentary system that produced the 1997 Chuan government. The big new circumstance is a Tycoon/ThaiCon who's mad for his massive ill gotten gains, which he's determined to regain come hel_l or high water to Thailand irrespective of his meglomaniac obsessions.

The 1997 Chuan government was legitimate, as is the present Abhisit government.

Edited October 27, 2009 by Publicus

[tig28]

The Chuan Democrat Party led coalition that emerged after the 1997 collapse of the Chavalit-Thaksin government was legitimately cobbled together to respond to the self-induced meltdown of the economy and financial sector.

Hi Publicus

That was a looooong time ago.

This current Democrat Government was "legitimately cobbled together' also --- but that certainly does not make them legitimate.

The election of December 2007 established just who was the legitimate Government.

[LuckyLew]

The fact that Taksin would rather the country stay in

a recession than recover says it all.

Only cares about himself

[animatic]

The Chuan Democrat Party led coalition that emerged after the 1997 collapse of the Chavalit-Thaksin government was legitimately cobbled together to respond to the self-induced meltdown of the economy and financial sector.

Hi Publicus

That was a looooong time ago.

This current Democrat Government was "legitimately cobbled together' also --- but that certainly does not make them legitimate.

The election of December 2007 established just who was the legitimate Government.

I iknow quite a few people who were alive and have memories of Chuan's term,

and don't vilify him for the tough decisions he was forced to make for the country.

Living memory lives on with many people.

It TRT and PPP hadn't gotten so greedy, they might not have cheated

so bad they got caught at the TOP and sealed their fate with their own sticky fingers.

Interesting that finally some accountability happens and it is decried as a bad thing for Thailand.

But only by the losing side of course... Obtuseness of a high order.

[tig28]

The fact that Taksin would rather the country stay in

a recession than recover says it all.

Only cares about himself

"Fact ??" ---- Please advise me of even a hint of something that can substantiate this "fact."

This type of post really really really "says it all."

[animatic]

The fact that Taksin would rather the country stay in

a recession than recover says it all.

Only cares about himself

"Fact ??" ---- Please advise me of even a hint of something that can substantiate this "fact."

This type of post really really really "says it all."

Well change the word 'Fact' = 'words from his own mouth in public'.

Paraphrased:

'He says ONLY he can save Thailand from economic woes,

but only if he is given control of Thailand on his terms,

otherwise Thailand can screw itself.'

If he really wanted to help Thailand he would lay out his whole plan for all to see,

it would fly on his merits, he would tell PTP to back it 100% no matter WHO implements it,

and a grateful public would applaud him...

He wants the applause, but wants the POWER more.

Oh and his sequestered cash too.

Edited October 28, 2009 by animatic

[hammered]

This has been said before but in parliamentary democracies the peopel elect their MPs or reperesentatives and then the parliament selects the PM who sets up the government. This usually results in the leader of the largets party becoming PM becuase of numerical reasons. However this is not exclusively true or even mandated in most demcoracies of this kind. Governments where the PM comes from a party other than the largest have recently been seen in Israel and Ukraine and it has happened in Thailand long before this where one PM actually had only abot 18 MPs in his party. When an election is called or the timeframe of the parliament expires the peole in a parliamentary democracy then get to have their say. If a government of any kind has not been kind to them or has not met their approval or they see it as not what they previosuly voted for they have their opportunity to punish it although after the election that doesnt mean the largest party gets to form the government unless an overall majority is garnered as has been seen repeatedly in the Ukraine.

Anyway that is the techincial and legal side. Of course due to the nature of politics this is rarely going to be a non-contentious issue and of course trying to get people to favour either a government or oppsotiion in to try and win the next election is the name of the game. Consensus poltics world wide is increasingly a thing of the past and in Thailand well.........

[tig28]

The fact that Taksin would rather the country stay in

a recession than recover says it all.

Only cares about himself

"Fact ??" ---- Please advise me of even a hint of something that can substantiate this "fact."

This type of post really really really "says it all."

Well change the word 'Fact' = 'words from his own mouth in public'.

Paraphrased:

'He says ONLY he can save Thailand from economic woes,

but only if he is given control of Thailand on his terms,

otherwise Thailand can screw itself.'

If he really wanted to help Thailand he would lay out his whole plan for all to see,

it would fly on his merits, he would tell PTP to back it 100% no matter WHO implements it,

and a grateful public would applaud him...

He wants the applause, but wants the POWER more.

Oh and his sequestered cash too.

Hi animatic

The point was that the somewhat overly enthusiastic poster was getting all oh so excited over a nothing 'puff piece' with a lot more imagination than substance ---- and then calling it "fact". He may have even believed what he posted ---- who knows??

Paraphrasing is a little naughty ------ although with your main points I can but agree!

How's this for a dream:

Abhisit can free his soul from those to whom he sold it. He turns out to genuinely want to help the country. His party actually wins an election. The Government (not others) can actually govern.

Then the problem with the "Great Satan" is ended. Thailand can achieve some real progress.

Contrary to popular belief it is possible that this might happen.

[hammered]

The fact that Taksin would rather the country stay in

a recession than recover says it all.

Only cares about himself

"Fact ??" ---- Please advise me of even a hint of something that can substantiate this "fact."

This type of post really really really "says it all."

Well change the word 'Fact' = 'words from his own mouth in public'.

Paraphrased:

'He says ONLY he can save Thailand from economic woes,

but only if he is given control of Thailand on his terms,

otherwise Thailand can screw itself.'

If he really wanted to help Thailand he would lay out his whole plan for all to see,

it would fly on his merits, he would tell PTP to back it 100% no matter WHO implements it,

and a grateful public would applaud him...

He wants the applause, but wants the POWER more.

Oh and his sequestered cash too.

Hi animatic

The point was that the somewhat overly enthusiastic poster was getting all oh so excited over a nothing 'puff piece' with a lot more imagination than substance ---- and then calling it "fact". He may have even believed what he posted ---- who knows??

Paraphrasing is a little naughty ------ although with your main points I can but agree!

How's this for a dream:

Abhisit can free his soul from those to whom he sold it. He turns out to genuinely want to help the country. His party actually wins an election. The Government (not others) can actually govern.

Then the problem with the "Great Satan" is ended. Thailand can achieve some real progress.

Contrary to popular belief it is possible that this might happen.

Absit's problem would then be with the military Seriously even if Abhisit wanted to do this it is likely there are many in the coalition who wouldnt. It would of course be nice to see, but unlikely imho.

[Publicus]

It is hard to see any light at the end of this tunnel. Indeed, the tunnel has turned out to be far longer than anyone could have conceived. I fear the tunnel travels straight down rather than parallel to the surface.

Edited October 28, 2009 by Publicus

[TAWP]

If they really cared for the poor, why didn't they request the demand for a uni-degree to be an MP to be removed?

[Jingthing]

Thaksin 'fears Economic Recovery Will Shut Him Out', Efforts to topple the Abhisit government before February

Many of us hope his fears are well founded. Really, in all seriousness, how can one man be so egotistical to think he is the one and only possible savior of a large country?

[Rumfoord]

He said the government must survive until February to sustain the situation.

Government whips would make recommendations to help counter the red shirts.

Part of the plan is to win support from the masses via government ministries and departments. More populist policies may be drawn up to win public support.

Awesome!

Government whips are awesome government whips.