Aung Sang Suu Kyi On Thaksin And Current Govt In Thailand

[griser]

I think Aung Sang Suu Kyi has a bit of a grudge against governments that have anything to do with the military.

I dont think shes impartial on this type of matter. heh

Greg

[hoilai]

must be a joke to cite the straits times of of singapore as this newspaper's government is trading arms with - if not providing arms to the present junta.

Edited April 25, 2010 by hoilai

[4223rhodes]

I think Aung Sang Suu Kyi has a bit of a grudge against governments that have anything to do with the military.

I dont think shes impartial on this type of matter. heh

Greg

Most Thais deeply resent the Thai governments being birthed by the military. Anyone for elections?

[4223rhodes]

must be a joke to cite the straits times of of singapore as this newspaper's government is trading arms with - if not providing arms to the present junta.

Just for clarity, are you referring to the junta in Thailand or the junta in Myanmar?

[chantorn]

I remember someone used to post this:

Thailand = Myanmar with electricity.

Could not agree more.

[barnsworth]

'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.

This post misses the point she made completely. "we do not need to see far" means just that. Your post is just opposition beefs with an elected government.

No doubt at all that the PPP would have had a bigger majority in that election if the elections had been free and fair.

It would also not have fallen without lots of interference from behind the scenes, and these forces putting the PAD on the street and protecting them.

No convictions or court dates for invading an international airport!! ASTV still on the air? PAD on the streets at the Army Barracks with the CRES, the very same CRES who are banning gatherings of more than 5 people..... Right on their doorstep encouraged by them!!

Try and see it as an outsider or neutral. This stinks of an Elite clinging to their power by increasing desperate and more transparently corrupt and one sided measures.

What people see is this. Elected Thaksin overthrown by Elite, Elite write own constitution, elite ban two opposition parties, ban criticism of their constitution, lose election despite all this interfering, then remove 2 more elected PM's.

That really is how the world view this. Forget which branch, Army, PAD, Dems, it is all Elite controlled.

Anything else you mention is not relevant. Elected is the key word here and the Dems are not. Having the the future PM Newin shore them up for a term is not the same as a mandate at the ballot box.

[321niti123]

But as I recall they held a general election to vote whether or not to accept the constitution therefore its a democratically approved constitution, even if its military written. And i agree with abhisit, if you want change the constitution you need to hold a general election. BTW...1997 constitution caused all of these problems so PTP obviously has no right to go back to a faulty constitution that allowed Thaksin to escape on tax evasion, that's just stealing from what could be done for the poor.

[hardy1943]

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.'

"The Lady" is right. Whats the argument. Thaksin was elected and like or not got to popular with the masses and had to go.

Corruption? Who cares as long as I have a better life also they have to deal with the biggest crooks in the world.

Look at Obama he is finding out how corrupt Washington DC is.

[WinnieTheKhwai]

I kind of wonder where all the yellow posters are who got all indignant at any comparison of Thaksin with iconic leaders struggling for democracy elsewhere, including Aung San Suu Kyi...

Aside from that, I completely agree with her statement, which wasn't so much pro Thaksin as it was against military interference in democratic process. How anyone can argue against what she actually said is beyond me. ( Oh wait, "educated Westerners"... riiiiiggghttt.. )

[4223rhodes]

There's a good piece on Bangkok Pundit regarding Suu Kyi's statement and the very weak Abhisit govt response.