Another Leadership Test For Abhisit

[webfact]

BURNING ISSUE

Another leadership test for Abhisit

By Somroutai Sapsomboon

BANGKOK: --Tension in political circles seems to be intensifying as the court prepares to issue a verdict on former PM Thaksin Shinawatra's assets case later this month.

In fact, some political observers believe that if the situation gets out of hand, there could be one of the following scenarios in Thailand:

Firstly, the Democrat-led government could employ its authority and all mechanisms in accordance with the legal framework to handle the situation.

Secondly, things could go beyond control, and the military could be asked to step in.

And lastly, there is the least-wanted scenario - a military coup.

However, things really depend on Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva's abilities - if he can control the situation by just using the legal mechanisms at hand, he would prove that he is a true leader.

At present, Abhisit is trying to maintain order by using his mandate and authority. As long as the government keeps using this mechanism, the public can accept it because it knows this is the best solution.

The government has, so far, ordered some 20,000 soldiers to be deployed in 38 provinces ahead of the verdict on Thaksin's asset-seizure case.

According to government spokesman Panitan Wattanayagorn, about 200 checkpoints would be set up in the capital and its outskirts, where about 5,000 troops or 54 companies will be based, particularly at "points of entry and exit", key state agencies and transport networks.

Though these measures may appear to be an overreaction to some, they could be effective in preventing clashes.

On January 26, the Cabinet approved a resolution that military assistance could be sought to help the police keep order if political clashes are expected. Earlier, if the police needed military help, the Cabinet had to impose the Internal Security Act. However, this procedure sometimes took too long to put in place and could be quite ineffective in handling situations like, for instance, last year's Songkran mayhem.

But if the situation goes beyond Abhisit's control, it is likely that the military would have to step in. If the ball is in the military's court, then it would have to be handled by the key man - deputy army chief General Prayuth Chan-ocha, the likely successor for the army chief's post in October.

Prayuth is known as the incumbent army chief General Anupong Paochinda's man. He has followed Anupong very closely, and will probably do what his boss would do - keep law and order and keep away from a coup.

Yet, in the past, Anupong was criticised for being too reluctant to help control the situation, which upset some hardliners in the political establishment, who wanted the army chief to be harsher with the red shirts.

An insider revealed yesterday that attempts were being made to pull Prayuth away from Anupong, by using the army chief's post as an incentive. Apparently, Prayuth - who would retire in 2014 - has been told that if he keeps following his boss, he will have to forego the top post. In fact, a new name has emerged for the post -Army chief-of-staff General Piroon Paewpolsong.

Looking back in history, one realises that coups in Thailand depend very much on who has the top army post. The 1991 and 2006 coups were successful because they were led by the army chief. The 1980s coups failed because junior officers led them.

So, in other words, the future of Thai politics lies in the hands of whoever takes over a Army chief.

somroutai(at)nationgroup.com

-- The Nation 2010-02-10

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

[poleax]

Only one small comment, to spare y'all my biased drivel.

A test of Abhisit's mandate and authority????????

Many, many would agree with me when commenting on this so-called "mandate". Yeah, I know. He is technically in place through parliamentary procedures which on the surface mirror those of other Constitutional Monarchies. But lets not kid each other, below the surface it was anything but normal.

Until he wins an electoral mandate from the people, does he have a "mandate?' I dont think so. If he wins a fair election, where the voters decide and not the vote counters, than he has a mandate. And would have my respect. Because I think he is a decent, good guy. I can't get the overwhelming bias out of my head.......He has never won a popular election...not one....ever!

A test of his "authority" ?????????? .....The Red Shirt Democracy Movement will tell you where his real authority comes from, and it is not resident in the PMO (Prime Minister's Office).......... I tend to agree with them.

Edited February 10, 2010 by poleax

[tonywebster]

Only one small comment, to spare y'all my biased drivel.

A test of Abhisit's mandate and authority????????

Many, many would agree with me when commenting on this so-called "mandate". Yeah, I know. He is technically in place through parliamentary procedures which on the surface mirror those of other Constitutional Monarchies. But lets not kid each other, below the surface it was anything but normal.

Until he wins an electoral mandate from the people, does he have a "mandate?' I dont think so. If he wins a fair election, where the voters decide and not the vote counters, than he has a mandate. And would have my respect. Because I think he is a decent, good guy. I can't get the overwhelming bias out of my head.......He has never won a popular election...not one....ever!

A test of his "authority" ?????????? .....The Red Shirt Democracy Movement will tell you where his real authority comes from, and it is not resident in the PMO (Prime Minister's Office).......... I tend to agree with them.

good post, but expect to get flamed by the resident Thaksin haters on here that will assume that you are Thaksin lover for empathising with the red shirts and going against the army appointed PM, oops sorry, the appointed pm.

[animatic]

That would be the elected Minsister of Parliament

who was elected by the OTHER Minsisters of Parliament as the Prime Minister.

But why quibble over facts.

Oh and PS horse trading behind the scenes happens in EVER parliamentary government on the planet.

Thailand not being an exception.

[tonywebster]

if you say so. the fact is at the moment in Thailand the party that won the last election and joined with others to form a majority are not in power of the country. the people in power at the moment were not given a mandate by the people to govern, they were placed into power by the forces that wanted them to be in power in the first place. A general election would be the fairest way to go and let the people decide. No doubt you will talk about vote buying etc, but to use your reasoning, vote buying goes on in every election, if I want all the nurses votes I promise them a pay rise etc, simple really.

if the current PM is so confident of winning 240 seats in the next election as he laughingly claimed then let him call an election, let the Thai people decide. it is easy to appear on the tv and in the newspapers saying the people want them in power, some people do actually buy this propaganda and rhetoric, but it is about time he put is balls on the line and prove it is not just propaganda, call the election he is so confident of winning and there can be no arguments about it.

[ChiangMaiFun]

Only one small comment, to spare y'all my biased drivel.

A test of Abhisit's mandate and authority????????

Many, many would agree with me when commenting on this so-called "mandate". Yeah, I know. He is technically in place through parliamentary procedures which on the surface mirror those of other Constitutional Monarchies. But lets not kid each other, below the surface it was anything but normal.

Until he wins an electoral mandate from the people, does he have a "mandate?' I dont think so. If he wins a fair election, where the voters decide and not the vote counters, than he has a mandate. And would have my respect. Because I think he is a decent, good guy. I can't get the overwhelming bias out of my head.......He has never won a popular election...not one....ever!

A test of his "authority" ?????????? .....The Red Shirt Democracy Movement will tell you where his real authority comes from, and it is not resident in the PMO (Prime Minister's Office).......... I tend to agree with them.

Me too - its obvious... now wait for the onslaught from the yellows on the board - I hear it! I hear it!

he's legal, he's legal, he's legal - sung to the sound of 'the Yellow Rose of Texas'

[jenny1990]

if you say so. the fact is at the moment in Thailand the party that won the last election and joined with others to form a majority are not in power of the country. the people in power at the moment were not given a mandate by the people to govern, they were placed into power by the forces that wanted them to be in power in the first place. A general election would be the fairest way to go and let the people decide. No doubt you will talk about vote buying etc, but to use your reasoning, vote buying goes on in every election, if I want all the nurses votes I promise them a pay rise etc, simple really.

if the current PM is so confident of winning 240 seats in the next election as he laughingly claimed then let him call an election, let the Thai people decide. it is easy to appear on the tv and in the newspapers saying the people want them in power, some people do actually buy this propaganda and rhetoric, but it is about time he put is balls on the line and prove it is not just propaganda, call the election he is so confident of winning and there can be no arguments about it.

I agree! Also, an Attorney-General's office panel found that the Democratic Party was guilty of vote bribery, and bribing other parties to boycott the 2006 elections. The same charges that caused the banning of the Thai Rak Thai Party were quietly ignored when brought against the Democrats. Then during the coup to force out of office a second democratically elected party, the leader of the coup, General Paochinda coerced many MPs to support Abhisit's Government. They are illigitimate as they were never voted in by the Thai people.

In power they have been very corrupt, which is funny as that is what they keep critisizing their scapegoat Thaksin for being. They have been charged with corruption with the Thai Khem Khaeng case. They have used the Lese Majeste Policy to censor the internet and to silence people who are against them, as was the case in the Prachathai newspaper raids. They have done far less for the people outside of the rich elite than the Thaksin Government.

The claims that they will win 240 seats are a joke. Everyone where I am from are ready for a new government. Abhisit should call an election now, so that the Thai people can have a democratically elected government and the Red Shirt violence that is around the corner does not happen. They are afraid to do so after getting defeated in the by-elections that they expected to win.

I do not understand all of the pro-Abhisit feelings on this board, his government is illigitamate, weak, and as corrupt as Thaksin's. Just my oppinion but maybe I am just a little brain washed Thai girl from Isaan, or maybe the majority of you anti Thaksin, Abhisit supporters only listen to the Bangkok elite who support Abhisit and forget the rural majorit just as the current government has done.

Jen ^^

[hammered]

if you say so. the fact is at the moment in Thailand the party that won the last election and joined with others to form a majority are not in power of the country. the people in power at the moment were not given a mandate by the people to govern, they were placed into power by the forces that wanted them to be in power in the first place. A general election would be the fairest way to go and let the people decide. No doubt you will talk about vote buying etc, but to use your reasoning, vote buying goes on in every election, if I want all the nurses votes I promise them a pay rise etc, simple really.

if the current PM is so confident of winning 240 seats in the next election as he laughingly claimed then let him call an election, let the Thai people decide. it is easy to appear on the tv and in the newspapers saying the people want them in power, some people do actually buy this propaganda and rhetoric, but it is about time he put is balls on the line and prove it is not just propaganda, call the election he is so confident of winning and there can be no arguments about it.

I agree! Also, an Attorney-General's office panel found that the Democratic Party was guilty of vote bribery, and bribing other parties to boycott the 2006 elections. The same charges that caused the banning of the Thai Rak Thai Party were quietly ignored when brought against the Democrats. Then during the coup to force out of office a second democratically elected party, the leader of the coup, General Paochinda coerced many MPs to support Abhisit's Government. They are illigitimate as they were never voted in by the Thai people.

In power they have been very corrupt, which is funny as that is what they keep critisizing their scapegoat Thaksin for being. They have been charged with corruption with the Thai Khem Khaeng case. They have used the Lese Majeste Policy to censor the internet and to silence people who are against them, as was the case in the Prachathai newspaper raids. They have done far less for the people outside of the rich elite than the Thaksin Government.

The claims that they will win 240 seats are a joke. Everyone where I am from are ready for a new government. Abhisit should call an election now, so that the Thai people can have a democratically elected government and the Red Shirt violence that is around the corner does not happen. They are afraid to do so after getting defeated in the by-elections that they expected to win.

I do not understand all of the pro-Abhisit feelings on this board, his government is illigitamate, weak, and as corrupt as Thaksin's. Just my oppinion but maybe I am just a little brain washed Thai girl from Isaan, or maybe the majority of you anti Thaksin, Abhisit supporters only listen to the Bangkok elite who support Abhisit and forget the rural majorit just as the current government has done.

Jen ^^

I would like to congratulate "little brainwashed Thai girl from Isaan" on her very high standard of English. I am sure with such education nobody will regard you as brainwashed.

[ChiangMaiFun]

if you say so. the fact is at the moment in Thailand the party that won the last election and joined with others to form a majority are not in power of the country. the people in power at the moment were not given a mandate by the people to govern, they were placed into power by the forces that wanted them to be in power in the first place. A general election would be the fairest way to go and let the people decide. No doubt you will talk about vote buying etc, but to use your reasoning, vote buying goes on in every election, if I want all the nurses votes I promise them a pay rise etc, simple really.

if the current PM is so confident of winning 240 seats in the next election as he laughingly claimed then let him call an election, let the Thai people decide. it is easy to appear on the tv and in the newspapers saying the people want them in power, some people do actually buy this propaganda and rhetoric, but it is about time he put is balls on the line and prove it is not just propaganda, call the election he is so confident of winning and there can be no arguments about it.

I agree! Also, an Attorney-General's office panel found that the Democratic Party was guilty of vote bribery, and bribing other parties to boycott the 2006 elections. The same charges that caused the banning of the Thai Rak Thai Party were quietly ignored when brought against the Democrats. Then during the coup to force out of office a second democratically elected party, the leader of the coup, General Paochinda coerced many MPs to support Abhisit's Government. They are illigitimate as they were never voted in by the Thai people.

In power they have been very corrupt, which is funny as that is what they keep critisizing their scapegoat Thaksin for being. They have been charged with corruption with the Thai Khem Khaeng case. They have used the Lese Majeste Policy to censor the internet and to silence people who are against them, as was the case in the Prachathai newspaper raids. They have done far less for the people outside of the rich elite than the Thaksin Government.

The claims that they will win 240 seats are a joke. Everyone where I am from are ready for a new government. Abhisit should call an election now, so that the Thai people can have a democratically elected government and the Red Shirt violence that is around the corner does not happen. They are afraid to do so after getting defeated in the by-elections that they expected to win.

I do not understand all of the pro-Abhisit feelings on this board, his government is illigitamate, weak, and as corrupt as Thaksin's. Just my oppinion but maybe I am just a little brain washed Thai girl from Isaan, or maybe the majority of you anti Thaksin, Abhisit supporters only listen to the Bangkok elite who support Abhisit and forget the rural majorit just as the current government has done.

Jen ^^

here! here! spot on

[cdnvic]

Please limit your quoting. Better that you choose how to edit your posts than us.

[jonclark]

What I want to know is once the reds get into government, how are they going to pacify the yellows, who are bound to come out on mass and paralyze the country. Obviously the red won't use ISOC as they have stated many times that it only encourages violence whan the dems use it against them??

[Scott]

jonclark: That's a good question and one I seldom see asked and certainly haven't seen answered. One thing is for sure, they will be a group that will be hard to 'buy-off.'

[hammered]

The yellows who are currently small and isolated and critical of absolutely everyone else will swell in numbers rapidly if the reds get into power. They (yellows) though will have to again moderate their ideology, but they will.

However, it remains an if as the reds may well not get into power anytime soon unless the old whore parties do a quick side change again

[ThomChook]

There is a rumor doing the rounds in the blogosphere today, that an alliance is being talked about with Sanan's group (who are in the current government) and the PTP to form a new government - with Sanan as the PM (he was once a Democrat but not any more).This could happen as a result of the upcoming censure motion.

The point of my comment is to ask all these posters who continually babble on about Abihisit being a so called "un-elected" PM, how they would view Sanan as PM and leader of a very minor party, in a coalition?

Would we hear the same "rigged" catch cries ?

Edited February 10, 2010 by ThomChook

[hammered]

This is a rumour emanating form the red side and pushed through all media sources and bloggers sympathetic to them especially those that use ex-TRT people as sources. That doesnt mean it isnt true. It could be information, misinformation or disinformation.

It is all poltics and if it happened of course they wouldnt complain about it. They are all hypocrites and liars anyway. After all they are polticiains;) Of course whether true or not it may also be intended to cause Abhsiit to panic and disolve the house or to make judges feel very very nervous.

Everything is a mind game right now with the big issue being the assets

[ThomChook]

This is a rumour emanating form the red side and pushed through all media sources and bloggers sympathetic to them especially those that use ex-TRT people as sources. That doesnt mean it isnt true. It could be information, misinformation or disinformation.

It is all poltics and if it happened of course they wouldnt complain about it. They are all hypocrites and liars anyway. After all they are polticiains;) Of course whether true or not it may also be intended to cause Abhsiit to panic and disolve the house or to make judges feel very very nervous.

Everything is a mind game right now with the big issue being the assets

I agree with most of what you say, but I think you missed my point. This question is directed at the posters on this site who go on and on, and on, about the "legitimacy" of this government and Abhisit as PM.

If one accepts the current rules for forming governments and electing the PM (which I do, until a better system comes along), I am asking all these "naysayer" posters to provide an opinion. If the answer is, that this would be okay, because it puts the PTP back in government, I would question their double standards i.e. it's not okay for others to do this, but for the PTP, it would be.

Edited February 10, 2010 by ThomChook

[hammered]

This is a rumour emanating form the red side and pushed through all media sources and bloggers sympathetic to them especially those that use ex-TRT people as sources. That doesnt mean it isnt true. It could be information, misinformation or disinformation.

It is all poltics and if it happened of course they wouldnt complain about it. They are all hypocrites and liars anyway. After all they are polticiains;) Of course whether true or not it may also be intended to cause Abhsiit to panic and disolve the house or to make judges feel very very nervous.

Everything is a mind game right now with the big issue being the assets

I agree with most of what you say, but I think you missed my point. This question is directed at the posters on this site who go on and on, and on, about the "legitimacy" of this government and Abhisit as PM.

If one accpets the current rules for forming governments and electing the PM (which I do, until a better system comes along), I am asking all these posters to provide an opinion. If the answers were that this was okay, because it put the PTP (but not all of them) back in government, I would question their double standards i.e. it's not okay for others to do this, but for the PTP, it would be.

OK sorry for the misunderstanding

[SomTumTiger]

He's the best PM for the country, and he will come out of this month (and the assets verdict) strong. You guys said he would'nt last 5 months. He keeps laughing at you and doing his best to push the country forward (albeit with little help from his coalition "partners").

[ThomChook]

He's the best PM for the country, and he will come out of this month (and the assets verdict) strong. You guys said he would'nt last 5 months. He keeps laughing at you and doing his best to push the country forward (albeit with little help from his coalition "partners").

...and if this does come to pass, those on this forum who keep yelling out about "legitimacy", will still yell out about "legitimacy".

Others (like me) will say, "let's move on"...

Edited February 10, 2010 by ThomChook

[poleax]

jonclark: That's a good question and one I seldom see asked and certainly haven't seen answered. One thing is for sure, they will be a group that will be hard to 'buy-off.'

Let me take a stab at answering that question, with my biased POV.

To start with, the PAD is not a spontaneous citizens movement such as the Democracy Movement - a minority at that.

It was fabricated by some key movers and shakers in the aristocracy and elite to be their proxies.

The PAD has sponsors who can advance or retreat as they see fit.

Someone in authority must preface any future election with guarantees from all sides that the loser will stay the loser, especially if it can be shown that the election had some transparent legitimacy.

The sponsors of the PAD, who most likely are few in number, will need to agree. And if they decide to accept electoral results pre-emptively, the PAD will not be allowed to do their thing.

The PAD is not an uncontrollable rabble group. They are tightly disciplined and controlled by a very few.

IMHO

Edited February 10, 2010 by poleax

[hammered]

jonclark: That's a good question and one I seldom see asked and certainly haven't seen answered. One thing is for sure, they will be a group that will be hard to 'buy-off.'

Let me take a stab at answering that question, with my biased POV.

To start with, the PAD is not a spontaneous citizens movement such as the Democracy Movement - a minority at that.

It was fabricated by some key movers and shakers in the aristocracy and elite to be their proxies.

The PAD has sponsors who can advance or retreat as they see fit.

Someone in authority must preface any future election with guarantees from all sides that the loser will stay the loser, especially if it can be shown that the election had some transparent legitimacy.

The sponsors of the PAD, who most likely are few in number, will need to agree. And if they decide to accept electoral results pre-emptively, the PAD will not be allowed to do their thing.

The PAD is not an uncontrollable rabble group. They are tightly disciplined and controlled by a very few.

IMHO

You may want to take a look at the statements of the PAD. They have critiicsed every other party and group involved in Thail poltics. Criiticised the coup, the army, Sarayud, the Democrats, collected signatures to impeach about half the current government MPs etc etc. And of course the only serious asssasination attempt in recent Thai history involved their leader

I would suggest your analysis is utterly flawed and simplistic and out of line with what even any sophisticated red analysis says.

The yellows may be an obnoxious group or evolved into one but they are no longer if they ever were controlled by anyone other than their leaders. Even red shirts know that. I have talked to many about it in recent times

Edited February 10, 2010 by hammered

[johncitizen]

As I've said before, the political division in Thailand is serious enough to warrant third-party moderation and peacekeeping, especially if the government keeps abusing the situation like they have been (and the Reds decide they've had enough.)

And to summarize the OP-

The military has decided that Abhisit and Anupong is ineffective and Thailand should be placed under new management (ie. theirs.)

Some political observers (ie. the Nation editorial) believe that there are only three ways out of the "situation at hand" (ie. the Reds are getting too uppity.)

1. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah use of the ISA or Emergency decree to justify military intervention

2. The military step in without asking us to, and the government we wanted them to act anyway

3. The military takes over the government and replaces the Abhisit with a more effective puppet, once they're done kidnapping, killing, indoctrinating, intimidating and law-amending the Reds out of existence.

Meanwhile, the Government has decided to preempt a military intervention by effectively giving the military the right to do whatever they want without the need for an ISA or emergency decree to be enacted beforehand. Because it's more efficient like that.

The political establishment- those who have been resisting democracy since 1932, have decided that Anupong isn't their man any more, as he was too hesitant to justify the colour of the oppositions clothing. So while he is conveniently away raising money for the military through a "bomb-detector" scam, Anupong will be replaced by a reliable hardliner eager to break skulls and eat Thaksin-supporters.

So, in other words, the future of Thai politics lies in the hands of whoever takes over a Army chief.

(Funnily enough I quoted the article directly.)

Honestly, is noone terrified by the message that this article is not-too subtly getting across? What kind of f**king "Democracy" is this?

[h90]

jonclark: That's a good question and one I seldom see asked and certainly haven't seen answered. One thing is for sure, they will be a group that will be hard to 'buy-off.'

Let me take a stab at answering that question, with my biased POV.

To start with, the PAD is not a spontaneous citizens movement such as the Democracy Movement - a minority at that.

It was fabricated by some key movers and shakers in the aristocracy and elite to be their proxies.

The PAD has sponsors who can advance or retreat as they see fit.

Someone in authority must preface any future election with guarantees from all sides that the loser will stay the loser, especially if it can be shown that the election had some transparent legitimacy.

The sponsors of the PAD, who most likely are few in number, will need to agree. And if they decide to accept electoral results pre-emptively, the PAD will not be allowed to do their thing.

The PAD is not an uncontrollable rabble group. They are tightly disciplined and controlled by a very few.

IMHO

most of my office staff, my wife and a lot business partner who are well off were at the PAD and donated a lot. either Bangkok people or southerners. They did not do it for the money so what means fabricated.

[h90]

As I've said before, the political division in Thailand is serious enough to warrant third-party moderation and peacekeeping, especially if the government keeps abusing the situation like they have been (and the Reds decide they've had enough.)

And to summarize the OP-

The military has decided that Abhisit and Anupong is ineffective and Thailand should be placed under new management (ie. theirs.)

Some political observers (ie. the Nation editorial) believe that there are only three ways out of the "situation at hand" (ie. the Reds are getting too uppity.)

1. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah use of the ISA or Emergency decree to justify military intervention

2. The military step in without asking us to, and the government we wanted them to act anyway

3. The military takes over the government and replaces the Abhisit with a more effective puppet, once they're done kidnapping, killing, indoctrinating, intimidating and law-amending the Reds out of existence.

Meanwhile, the Government has decided to preempt a military intervention by effectively giving the military the right to do whatever they want without the need for an ISA or emergency decree to be enacted beforehand. Because it's more efficient like that.

The political establishment- those who have been resisting democracy since 1932, have decided that Anupong isn't their man any more, as he was too hesitant to justify the colour of the oppositions clothing. So while he is conveniently away raising money for the military through a "bomb-detector" scam, Anupong will be replaced by a reliable hardliner eager to break skulls and eat Thaksin-supporters.

So, in other words, the future of Thai politics lies in the hands of whoever takes over a Army chief.

(Funnily enough I quoted the article directly.)

Honestly, is noone terrified by the message that this article is not-too subtly getting across? What kind of f**king "Democracy" is this?

I really don't get your point. Abhisit is Premier. He can make new elections if he want he can do the ISA or Emergency law. The Military can act on its own if the situation gets complete out of control and the politic can't do anything (like government is hold hostage).

I don't see any reason why the military should stage a coup. Most of the politicians are corrupt Dinosaurs, but the current constitution is cleaning away the worst one. So everything gets better as long as Abhisit is in power.

The reds are just a small minority of maybe 2000-3000 communists. Without Thaksins funding the will go sleeping again.

[jonclark]

jonclark: That's a good question and one I seldom see asked and certainly haven't seen answered. One thing is for sure, they will be a group that will be hard to 'buy-off.'

Let me take a stab at answering that question, with my biased POV.

To start with, the PAD is not a spontaneous citizens movement such as the Democracy Movement - a minority at that.

It was fabricated by some key movers and shakers in the aristocracy and elite to be their proxies.

The PAD has sponsors who can advance or retreat as they see fit.

Someone in authority must preface any future election with guarantees from all sides that the loser will stay the loser, especially if it can be shown that the election had some transparent legitimacy.

The sponsors of the PAD, who most likely are few in number, will need to agree. And if they decide to accept electoral results pre-emptively, the PAD will not be allowed to do their thing.

The PAD is not an uncontrollable rabble group. They are tightly disciplined and controlled by a very few.

IMHO

This would only work on the basis of all parties adhereing to this 'gentlemans agreement', personally i think, if an agreement was reached before the election, one of the following could be the possible scenarios we would see.

a) all sides agree and the election is held peacefully, transparently and with minimal vote buying, cohercion etc. A stable government is formed.

the dems agree to the agreement, the reds buy votes and form a governemnt, the dems cry foul play and the yellows come out on masse

c) the reds agree to the agreement, the dems stage the results and form a government, the reds cry foul play, return to the streets and we carry on, with the EC muttering in the background

d) both sides agree to the agreement, neither keeps its word, both cry foul play, a government is formed which spends most of its time defending how it got into office and not much changes for the general publics hopes and aspirations.

e) As with d, except at some point another coup happens.

A gentlemans agreement would be good, but both sides i feel would exploit it to their own advantage

And lets be honest, all the parties affilliated to either the red or yellow movement are s**t. But this is politics, in the UK both the Conservatives and Labour are s**t

There are very few ideology driven political parties left which put the publics best interest before their own.

[connel707]

Only one small comment, to spare y'all my biased drivel.

A test of Abhisit's mandate and authority????????

Many, many would agree with me when commenting on this so-called "mandate". Yeah, I know. He is technically in place through parliamentary procedures which on the surface mirror those of other Constitutional Monarchies. But lets not kid each other, below the surface it was anything but normal.

Until he wins an electoral mandate from the people, does he have a "mandate?' I dont think so. If he wins a fair election, where the voters decide and not the vote counters, than he has a mandate. And would have my respect. Because I think he is a decent, good guy. I can't get the overwhelming bias out of my head.......He has never won a popular election...not one....ever!

A test of his "authority" ?????????? .....The Red Shirt Democracy Movement will tell you where his real authority comes from, and it is not resident in the PMO (Prime Minister's Office).......... I tend to agree with them.

[/quo

But remember where we are... we are in a counrty with many many uneducated peoples who Never watch news channels and who Never read a newspaper further than lottery results... WHY ... because they simply cannot read and do not have television. These people also sell their votes to whoever hands them a 100baht note.. and for sure 100% sure, previous governments have "won" these Democratic elections because of the amount of 100baht notes they gave away on election day.... great Democracy...!

Look at Zimbabwe as an example.... why does Mugabe keep winning those Democratic elections... But for me, Thailand does Very well, just take a look at the neighbours... China, Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, Burma/Myanmar.. which government do you prefer... give me Abhisits government any day of the week... and throw Malaysia and Indonesia into that equasion too.... Where would You rather be.. Mohamed..?

[siampolee]

The only mandate here is as conel707 so aptly describes it.

A corrupt regime comes to power fillets the country to benefit its own members then problems begin.

Exit the corrupt rich thieves, then an interim government is established, in each case over the recent years its been the democrats who have inherited the resultant messes.

They have battled to clean things up and restore some semblence of respectability to a corrupt parliamentary system, as soon as sanity reigns ( such as it is here ) an election is held, and yet again the dog chasing its tail scenatrio begins. All due to the red or purple or grey note party candidates.

Whether we like it or not the democrats are in the long run the more honest of the political parties in Thailand.

There is a different take on power here as opposed to the west, here in the main corruption is overt, in the west it is covert, so perhaps before we knock the system here we would be well advised to observe the''pork barrel poltics in the west.

I do not condone corruption however I like the rest of us chose to live here, if we are disgusted there is an airport and planes can fly you to your personal squeaky clean paradise where ever that may be

'' Let those that are innocent csast the first stone.''

Edited February 11, 2010 by siampolee