Aung Sang Suu Kyi On Thaksin And Current Govt In Thailand

[4223rhodes]

http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/S...ory_518839.html

The above link is a good read on why in Aung Sang Suu Kyi's opinion the current military orchestrated Abhisit govt can't work in Thailand.

Very Good!

[lannarebirth]

I'm not as huge of a fan of ASSK as many, but I do agree with much of her statement. That begs the question, why did Thaksin/PTP put an end to constitutional reform?

Puea Thai MP Chalerm Yubamrung yesterday said the party had changed its mind and would not join the coalition government and the Senate in supporting the six amendments proposed by a special committee on national reconciliation and charter amendments.

Mr Chalerm said the party also disagreed with any plan to hold a public referendum on the charter changes. It also would do all it could to have the 1997 constitution reinstated.

The abrupt about-face could upset a meeting today of government, opposition and senate whips called to decide whether to proceed with the amendments.

Mr Chalerm said the Democrat Party had a hidden agenda and wanted to use the issue to prolong its stay in office.

"We don't trust the Democrat Party and will do everything we can to bring back the 1997 constitution," he said.

Puea Thai's about-face came after ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra telephoned to address party members on Tuesday. He also opposed calls to hold a referendum to decide on the charter change proposals.

Mr Chalerm admitted Thaksin's suggestions influenced the party's position. We are not hiding this," he said.

Edited April 24, 2010 by lannarebirth

[4223rhodes]

Aung Sang Suu Kyi states in the article:

'A new government coming to power under a constitution drawn up by the military will never be stable,' he cited her as saying. 'We do not need to see very far. We just see Thailand,' she said. 'Thaksin was an elected person. The military seized the power from an elected person. The constitution was drawn up by the military,' she said.

'After that, what happened with the first (government)? It was not stable,' she said of the short-lived administration that followed the coup. 'This was a result of the constitution being written by the military.'

[4223rhodes]

I'm not as huge of a fan of ASSK as many, but I do agree with much of her statement. That begs the question, why did Thaksin/PTP put an end to constitutional reform?

Puea Thai MP Chalerm Yubamrung yesterday said the party had changed its mind and would not join the coalition government and the Senate in supporting the six amendments proposed by a special committee on national reconciliation and charter amendments.

Mr Chalerm said the party also disagreed with any plan to hold a public referendum on the charter changes. It also would do all it could to have the 1997 constitution reinstated.

The abrupt about-face could upset a meeting today of government, opposition and senate whips called to decide whether to proceed with the amendments.

Mr Chalerm said the Democrat Party had a hidden agenda and wanted to use the issue to prolong its stay in office.

"We don't trust the Democrat Party and will do everything we can to bring back the 1997 constitution," he said.

Puea Thai's about-face came after ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra telephoned to address party members on Tuesday. He also opposed calls to hold a referendum to decide on the charter change proposals.

Mr Chalerm admitted Thaksin's suggestions influenced the party's position. We are not hiding this," he said.

Agree that you have to get Abhisit out of Thailand before you can address the constitution under an elected govt.

[lannarebirth]

I'm not as huge of a fan of ASSK as many, but I do agree with much of her statement. That begs the question, why did Thaksin/PTP put an end to constitutional reform?

Puea Thai MP Chalerm Yubamrung yesterday said the party had changed its mind and would not join the coalition government and the Senate in supporting the six amendments proposed by a special committee on national reconciliation and charter amendments.

Mr Chalerm said the party also disagreed with any plan to hold a public referendum on the charter changes. It also would do all it could to have the 1997 constitution reinstated.

The abrupt about-face could upset a meeting today of government, opposition and senate whips called to decide whether to proceed with the amendments.

Mr Chalerm said the Democrat Party had a hidden agenda and wanted to use the issue to prolong its stay in office.

"We don't trust the Democrat Party and will do everything we can to bring back the 1997 constitution," he said.

Puea Thai's about-face came after ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra telephoned to address party members on Tuesday. He also opposed calls to hold a referendum to decide on the charter change proposals.

Mr Chalerm admitted Thaksin's suggestions influenced the party's position. We are not hiding this," he said.

Agree that you have to get Abhisit out of Thailand before you can address the constitution under an elected govt.

I never said that and neither did Chalerm. You're adding liar now to your apologist label? You could be working up on the Red stage.

Edited April 24, 2010 by lannarebirth

[4223rhodes]

I'm not as huge of a fan of ASSK as many, but I do agree with much of her statement. That begs the question, why did Thaksin/PTP put an end to constitutional reform?

Puea Thai MP Chalerm Yubamrung yesterday said the party had changed its mind and would not join the coalition government and the Senate in supporting the six amendments proposed by a special committee on national reconciliation and charter amendments.

Mr Chalerm said the party also disagreed with any plan to hold a public referendum on the charter changes. It also would do all it could to have the 1997 constitution reinstated.

The abrupt about-face could upset a meeting today of government, opposition and senate whips called to decide whether to proceed with the amendments.

Mr Chalerm said the Democrat Party had a hidden agenda and wanted to use the issue to prolong its stay in office.

"We don't trust the Democrat Party and will do everything we can to bring back the 1997 constitution," he said.

Puea Thai's about-face came after ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra telephoned to address party members on Tuesday. He also opposed calls to hold a referendum to decide on the charter change proposals.

Mr Chalerm admitted Thaksin's suggestions influenced the party's position. We are not hiding this," he said.

Agree that you have to get Abhisit out of Thailand before you can address the constitution under an elected govt.

I never said that. You're adding liar now to your apologist label? You could be working up on the Red stage.

I wasn't referring to you, Mr. Sensitive. Am I an apologist for the democracy movements in Burma and Thailand? hel_l yes!

[lannarebirth]

I'm not as huge of a fan of ASSK as many, but I do agree with much of her statement. That begs the question, why did Thaksin/PTP put an end to constitutional reform?

Puea Thai MP Chalerm Yubamrung yesterday said the party had changed its mind and would not join the coalition government and the Senate in supporting the six amendments proposed by a special committee on national reconciliation and charter amendments.

Mr Chalerm said the party also disagreed with any plan to hold a public referendum on the charter changes. It also would do all it could to have the 1997 constitution reinstated.

The abrupt about-face could upset a meeting today of government, opposition and senate whips called to decide whether to proceed with the amendments.

Mr Chalerm said the Democrat Party had a hidden agenda and wanted to use the issue to prolong its stay in office.

"We don't trust the Democrat Party and will do everything we can to bring back the 1997 constitution," he said.

Puea Thai's about-face came after ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra telephoned to address party members on Tuesday. He also opposed calls to hold a referendum to decide on the charter change proposals.

Mr Chalerm admitted Thaksin's suggestions influenced the party's position. We are not hiding this," he said.

Agree that you have to get Abhisit out of Thailand before you can address the constitution under an elected govt.

I never said that. You're adding liar now to your apologist label? You could be working up on the Red stage.

I wasn't referring to you, Mr. Sensitive. Am I an apologist for the democracy movements in Burma and Thailand? hel_l yes!

So who were you referring to? Only two comments made in my post, mine and Chalerm's. Neither said what you claim to "agree" with.

[4223rhodes]

I'm not as huge of a fan of ASSK as many, but I do agree with much of her statement. That begs the question, why did Thaksin/PTP put an end to constitutional reform?

Puea Thai MP Chalerm Yubamrung yesterday said the party had changed its mind and would not join the coalition government and the Senate in supporting the six amendments proposed by a special committee on national reconciliation and charter amendments.

Mr Chalerm said the party also disagreed with any plan to hold a public referendum on the charter changes. It also would do all it could to have the 1997 constitution reinstated.

The abrupt about-face could upset a meeting today of government, opposition and senate whips called to decide whether to proceed with the amendments.

Mr Chalerm said the Democrat Party had a hidden agenda and wanted to use the issue to prolong its stay in office.

"We don't trust the Democrat Party and will do everything we can to bring back the 1997 constitution," he said.

Puea Thai's about-face came after ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra telephoned to address party members on Tuesday. He also opposed calls to hold a referendum to decide on the charter change proposals.

Mr Chalerm admitted Thaksin's suggestions influenced the party's position. We are not hiding this," he said.

Agree that you have to get Abhisit out of Thailand before you can address the constitution under an elected govt.

I never said that and neither did Chalerm. You're adding liar now to your apologist label? You could be working up on the Red stage.

Chalerm, Aung Sang Suu Kyi and I all agree that the Abhisit regime needs to go first before the military constitution can be replaced by a People's Constitution.

[4223rhodes]

Aung Sang Suu Kyi states in the article:

'A new government coming to power under a constitution drawn up by the military will never be stable,' he cited her as saying. 'We do not need to see very far. We just see Thailand,' she said. 'Thaksin was an elected person. The military seized the power from an elected person. The constitution was drawn up by the military,' she said.

'After that, what happened with the first (government)? It was not stable,' she said of the short-lived administration that followed the coup. 'This was a result of the constitution being written by the military.'

Aung Sang Suu Kyi is stating what the Reds have been stating for a long time.

[lannarebirth]

I'm not as huge of a fan of ASSK as many, but I do agree with much of her statement. That begs the question, why did Thaksin/PTP put an end to constitutional reform?

Puea Thai MP Chalerm Yubamrung yesterday said the party had changed its mind and would not join the coalition government and the Senate in supporting the six amendments proposed by a special committee on national reconciliation and charter amendments.

Mr Chalerm said the party also disagreed with any plan to hold a public referendum on the charter changes. It also would do all it could to have the 1997 constitution reinstated.

The abrupt about-face could upset a meeting today of government, opposition and senate whips called to decide whether to proceed with the amendments.

Mr Chalerm said the Democrat Party had a hidden agenda and wanted to use the issue to prolong its stay in office.

"We don't trust the Democrat Party and will do everything we can to bring back the 1997 constitution," he said.

Puea Thai's about-face came after ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra telephoned to address party members on Tuesday. He also opposed calls to hold a referendum to decide on the charter change proposals.

Mr Chalerm admitted Thaksin's suggestions influenced the party's position. We are not hiding this," he said.

Agree that you have to get Abhisit out of Thailand before you can address the constitution under an elected govt.

I never said that and neither did Chalerm. You're adding liar now to your apologist label? You could be working up on the Red stage.

Chalerm, Aung Sang Suu Kyi and I all agree that the Abhisit regime needs to go first before the military constitution can be replaced by a People's Constitution.

Well they never said that. Did they call you or something? Like a conference call? Are you the only one they've told so far? On the record Chalerm says they backed out of constitutional reform because Thaksin told them to. Oh, wait a sec, you're not Thaksin are you? That would explain how you're privy to information no one else is.

Edited April 24, 2010 by lannarebirth

[4223rhodes]

Aung Sang Suu Kyi states in the article:

'A new government coming to power under a constitution drawn up by the military will never be stable,' he cited her as saying. 'We do not need to see very far. We just see Thailand,' she said. 'Thaksin was an elected person. The military seized the power from an elected person. The constitution was drawn up by the military,' she said.

'After that, what happened with the first (government)? It was not stable,' she said of the short-lived administration that followed the coup. 'This was a result of the constitution being written by the military.'

Seems the situations in Myanmar and Thailand are mirroring each other!

[twschw]

You seem to keep forgetting to post an important element of the article:

Nyan Win said Suu Kyi was not giving an opinion on the rights and wrongs of the conflict in Thailand, where red-shirted campaigners largely loyal to Thaksin are calling for the ouster of Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva.

[hawthorne]

The answer lies in the forbidden subject.

[geriatrickid]

You seem to keep forgetting to post an important element of the article:

Nyan Win said Suu Kyi was not giving an opinion on the rights and wrongs of the conflict in Thailand, where red-shirted campaigners largely loyal to Thaksin are calling for the ouster of Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva.

Considering the nature of her detention, I do not think she is in much of a position to make statements that her captors could interpret as being negative towards the junta in Thailand's dear neighbor................................

[cdnvic]

Lets do this without name calling and personal jabs, or a couple people are going away for a while.

[4223rhodes]

Lets do this without name calling and personal jabs, or a couple people are going away for a while.

Thank you!

I really encourage people to read what Aung Sang Suu Kyi had to say about the military involvement in constitution drafting and politics and the commonality of the struggle in both Myanmar and Thailand. There is no reason to run from this or silence discussion about it.

[Kitsch22]

The answer lies in the forbidden subject.

Which very fact leads to an inevitably increasing (but publicly unquantified) element of urgency to the search for that answer.

[smokie36]

Aside from the attributed comments which are unsubstantiated at best Aung San Suu Kyi is a widely respected and democratically elected leader untarnished by the corruption which is rife in SEA.

You might as well compare Thaksin to Nelson Mandela or plant a story expressing his supposed views on the conflict. Totally meaningless I'm afraid.

[chadintheusa]

'After that, what happened with the first (government)? It was not stable,' she said of the short-lived administration that followed the coup. 'This was a result of the constitution being written by the military.'

The first government that came to power after the coup was headed by the PPP and was simply a puppet government still controlled by Thaksin and headed by Samak Sundaravej

That government was unseated due to a conflict of interest when the PM continued to host a cooking show on TV, which violated the constitution. The next PM was Somchai Wongsawat

who we all know as Thaksin's brother in law. Leading to the popular belief that this government was also just a puppet of Thaksin. The conditions leading up to the coup saw massive public outrage at the corruption in the Thaksin government, which is why the coup received massive public support at the time. It was completely non violent and many citizens welcomed the soldiers. The PPP party was later disbanded due to electoral fraud and became the PTP. Prime Ministers who commit electoral fraud and conflicts of interest do not lead to stable governments. If they had been obeying the laws that were in place either of these prime ministers might still be in power. The lack of stability of the short-lived administration that followed the coup that Aung Sun Suu Kyi actual refers to in the article was due to the corrupt nature of those governments and not due to the constitution.

The constitution sets up the rules by which a country is government. It is public knowledge and when you violate it repeatedly your government will not last long. It is not whether it was written by the military or not. That is not the reason these government failed. It is that they violated the rules and it is their own fault they did not last. The democrats are also in peril of being disbanded due to possible violations of the electoral laws. If the evidence proves that they received illegal contributions then they also will not last.

Unless Thailand adopts a constitution where electoral fraud is deemed acceptable these same situations will keep repeating themselves until politicians stop committing criminal acts in order to get elected. Blaming the constitution is simplistic and misleading. One must examine the actual reasons why the two previous Prime Ministers lost their position. What they did should be a violation of any constitution whether written by the people, the military, or Aung Sun Suu Kyi herself. I'm sure that a political prisoner in a regime that has a dim view of a free press, in a nation that is historically hostile to Thailand may not be aware of all facts. She is also boycotting elections held this year because she doesn't see them as fair elections, something the Democrats once did under the Thaksin regime.

[Unfaithful]

Thaksin was elected as MP, then elected PM by his party.HE dismissed that parliament himself and became acting temporary caretaker PM for a time, limited by a constitution the military never wrote.When he exceeded his constitution caretaker time, Thaksin was removed nonviolently.

[Ulysses G.]

'After that, what happened with the first (government)? It was not stable,' she said of the short-lived administration that followed the coup. 'This was a result of the constitution being written by the military.'

The first government that came to power after the coup was headed by the PPP and was simply a puppet government still controlled by Thaksin and headed by Samak Sundaravej

That government was unseated due to a conflict of interest when the PM continued to host a cooking show on TV, which violated the constitution. The next PM was Somchai Wongsawat

who we all know as Thaksin's brother in law.

If you get rid of the spin, you have just said that after the illegal military coup threw him out the Thai people kept electing Thaksin or his supporters back into office over and over again only to be thwarted by the same people who got rid of him using any old excuse they could come up with. For example, Samac was thrown out of office for doing a cooking show. This is the exactly why the reds are protesting.

I prefer the current PM personally and do not support the reds using violence to get what they are after and do not trust the leaders on either side, but no one can deny that there are legitimate, longstanding grievances that need to be addressed and demonizing the redshirts is not helping anything.

Edited April 25, 2010 by Ulysses G.

[Roadman]

'After that, what happened with the first (government)? It was not stable,' she said of the short-lived administration that followed the coup. 'This was a result of the constitution being written by the military.'

The first government that came to power after the coup was headed by the PPP and was simply a puppet government still controlled by Thaksin and headed by Samak Sundaravej

That government was unseated due to a conflict of interest when the PM continued to host a cooking show on TV, which violated the constitution. The next PM was Somchai Wongsawat

who we all know as Thaksin's brother in law. Leading to the popular belief that this government was also just a puppet of Thaksin. The conditions leading up to the coup saw massive public outrage at the corruption in the Thaksin government, which is why the coup received massive public support at the time. It was completely non violent and many citizens welcomed the soldiers. The PPP party was later disbanded due to electoral fraud and became the PTP. Prime Ministers who commit electoral fraud and conflicts of interest do not lead to stable governments. If they had been obeying the laws that were in place either of these prime ministers might still be in power. The lack of stability of the short-lived administration that followed the coup that Aung Sun Suu Kyi actual refers to in the article was due to the corrupt nature of those governments and not due to the constitution.

The constitution sets up the rules by which a country is government. It is public knowledge and when you violate it repeatedly your government will not last long. It is not whether it was written by the military or not. That is not the reason these government failed. It is that they violated the rules and it is their own fault they did not last. The democrats are also in peril of being disbanded due to possible violations of the electoral laws. If the evidence proves that they received illegal contributions then they also will not last.

Unless Thailand adopts a constitution where electoral fraud is deemed acceptable these same situations will keep repeating themselves until politicians stop committing criminal acts in order to get elected. Blaming the constitution is simplistic and misleading. One must examine the actual reasons why the two previous Prime Ministers lost their position. What they did should be a violation of any constitution whether written by the people, the military, or Aung Sun Suu Kyi herself. I'm sure that a political prisoner in a regime that has a dim view of a free press, in a nation that is historically hostile to Thailand may not be aware of all facts. She is also boycotting elections held this year because she doesn't see them as fair elections, something the Democrats once did under the Thaksin regime.

Well said and my heart is Isaan to the core. And added that for the time that Anapoung and the Democrats have been in the picture they have been seen to be more than fair and Thailand has been stable.

[chadintheusa]

The political problems in Thailand certainly predate the military constitution. The coup took place after years of political frustration and division. Those same issues existed when the next series of governments came into power, and exist today. The military constitution did not cause these divisions and was not able to solve them. Any changes made to the constitution now could possibly be reversed by future governments. By blaming the military constitution Aung Sun Suu Kyi is using the situation in Thailand to further her own cause in Burma. In Thailand the political divisions run deeper than just the constitution and the 2006 coup.

[chadintheusa]

Aung Sun Suu Kyi complains that the military seized power from Thaksin who was elected. This was after the Democrats had boycotted the elections leaving Thaksin to run virtually unopposed. Aung Sun Suu Kyi is planning to boycott the elections in her country later this year. Will she then consider that government legitimate or not? Would she refuse to seize power from that government? The situations in Myanmar and Thailand are quite different and one should consider the complete history of both nations before making direct comparisons. Suu Kyi is attempting to focus attention on her own issues by using the Thai crisis and she should not be used as a person endorsing either side in Thailand. Which Thai side wants to claim to have Burmese backing anyway?

[SpoliaOpima]

Sad to see Daw Suu Kyi has fallen for Red propaganda, like many western journos. Considering she has been under house arrest nearly 20 years, and thus has restricted access to outside information, it's understandable.

I hope she gets a chance to read Kevin Rafferty's piece in Japan Times.

Much of the international press and media has romanticized the events in Bangkok as some kind of grassroots democracy at work, in which the poor rural masses have come to Bangkok to confront the cruel ruling classes. This is utter nonsense. Thailand is being torn apart by gangs of hoodlums masquerading as democrats and pretending they are embarked on the pure quest for fresh elections. Mobs of "red shirts," proclaiming allegiance to exiled former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, are in command of a glitzy hotel and shopping district close to Bangkok's main financial area.

Certainly, the enthusiasm and dedication of some of the red shirts has surprised neutral observers, as has fraternization between red shirts and local Bangkok people and ordinary soldiers and Buddhist monks. But 30,000 demonstrating red shirts are fewer than 0.05 percent of Thailand's population, hardly a resounding expression of democratic will.

There is big money backing the red shirts, with large numbers of demonstrators being paid 1,000 baht a day, five times the agricultural wage, and their leaders having recourse to the comforts of five-star hotels. The red shirts have also shown good planning and organization and the support of modern weaponry. Some Red leaders have said they are going to wage "war" against the government.

[SpoliaOpima]

Aung Sun Suu Kyi complains that the military seized power from Thaksin who was elected. This was after the Democrats had boycotted the elections leaving Thaksin to run virtually unopposed. Aung Sun Suu Kyi is planning to boycott the elections in her country later this year. Will she then consider that government legitimate or not?

Brilliant point.

[bendejo]

You have to wonder how Suu Kyi gets her news in the first place. I would think those keeping her prisoner would also restrict her communication gadgets, and she maybe gets her news by word of mouth, and that would depend on what visitors she is allowed, so no telling what exactly she was told, maybe just "protesters on the street, army shooting at them."

I don't recall a statement from her when Samak said the guys running Myanmar were good ol' boys, and I'm sure she'd have had something to say about that .

[elkangorito]

The answer lies in the forbidden subject.

I absolutely, totally, unquestionably & 100% agree with you

[MiG16]

if you realise it is 'forbidden' subject, I suggest everyone stops making inuendos or subtle /unsubtle reference to any forbidden subjects

- whatever you maybe referring to

[minburi2]

I'm not as huge of a fan of ASSK as many, but I do agree with much of her statement. That begs the question, why did Thaksin/PTP put an end to constitutional reform?

Puea Thai MP Chalerm Yubamrung yesterday said the party had changed its mind and would not join the coalition government and the Senate in supporting the six amendments proposed by a special committee on national reconciliation and charter amendments.

Mr Chalerm said the party also disagreed with any plan to hold a public referendum on the charter changes. It also would do all it could to have the 1997 constitution reinstated.

The abrupt about-face could upset a meeting today of government, opposition and senate whips called to decide whether to proceed with the amendments.

Mr Chalerm said the Democrat Party had a hidden agenda and wanted to use the issue to prolong its stay in office.

"We don't trust the Democrat Party and will do everything we can to bring back the 1997 constitution," he said.

Puea Thai's about-face came after ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra telephoned to address party members on Tuesday. He also opposed calls to hold a referendum to decide on the charter change proposals.

Mr Chalerm admitted Thaksin's suggestions influenced the party's position. We are not hiding this," he said.

Agree that you have to get Abhisit out of Thailand before you can address the constitution under an elected govt.

I never said that and neither did Chalerm. You're adding liar now to your apologist label? You could be working up on the Red stage.

And then again a constitution which gives space for corupt asses like Thaksin to set all to his own hand??

No thnx