Thai Govt, PM Abhisit Not Looking At The Big Picture

[Robby nz]

Because what TV members (unless they are Thai) think means nothing and has no influence on past, present or furure events in this debacle. Surely you must have heard " this is Thailand, we are Thai and we don't need any outside interference."

It would seem the reds do; they asked for help from ambassadors then the UN.

[BexleyBoy]

If prognosticators, like myself and a few others, [as a matter of published record], were forecasting the size, strength and resolve of the red movement and months ago warning of the coming tide it would be a good idea to listen to them now. The ones who were laughing off these 'warnings', as a matter of no published results, now, say they knew it all along.

If you rub a puppy dog's nose in his doo doo they won't poop in the house again. Not so for TV posters.

It is totally WRONG that Abhisit does not see the whole picture in Thailand. It is TRUE he does not have the photo editor, like I do, to correct the focus and double exposures, as The Joseph Solution and The Joseph Plan could do.

Abhisit has OFTEN spoke of doing what is right for all of Thailand, the big picture'. He is Western educated and experienced enough to know what The Silent Majority is. He doesn't realize, in Thailand, can, more accurately, be named The Mute Majority.

When 70%, probably, now, 80% of Thais hate both the Reds and the Yellows, he probably has seen how the apolitical in Western campaigns are wooed and influence elections.

In the West there are strategies for 'reaching' the Silent Majority; in Thailand there is a culture for 'respecting' their indifference.

They are ready to stand firmly behind whatever gang comes out on top.

There are a few reasons I hold out great hope for Thailand, at least the 'potential' for a bright future.

One is this this Mute Majority and the Voice The Joseph Solution gives to it. Another is the the few good politicians that have shone, such as Khun Chuan Leekpai and Khun Abhisit. The 3rd is the be the lifelong efforts and actions of one very great man whose examples and works are Codified in The Joseph Solution.

Abhisit DOES see the big picture: he doesn't know where the paint brushes are: they are right here!

[come and get them, before the autumn military reshuffle!] I'm warning 'again'

Fall 2010 headlines TODAY.

The Joseph Solution is not a solution in itself... The Principal may be idealistic in the main, but dealing with " not very clever" Red Shirts is not quite the same as introducing academics to quantum physics.... lets be real..!!

[Redsunset]

The fact that the red-shirted protest is being labelled by the government as an anti-monarchy movement is an indicator that the ruling Democrat Party and Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva merely want to play a political game to disperse the protesters.

That sentence caught my attention... Now Abhisit and his people are doing it the easy way again, by pointing the fingers... To use the term of Anti Monarchy, (in other words claiming that the reds are against the ideals of Thailand's beloved king), to their advantage and their own self-interested reputation is such a treacherous thing to do and pisses me off.

I think that deep down his heart, King Bumibol is really sad about what happens to his country...

EDIT: I don't know whether I was allowed to say that, but if that post sounds offensive or is not relevant to the topic,... delete it please...

This is a great post.... fact is, Abhisit's new arguement is to link the reds to anti-monarchy.

I don't like it, because I don't think it is true and it is just "an arguement" which Abhisit is good at doing. The original reason was and should be that the reds are disrupting the lives of others and should be dispersed. This is becoming a childish shouting match. Abhisit needs to do his job and get rid of the reds, now. Is this so hard to comprehend?

[Guest]

Abhisit is taking a big risk within a very short time frame. The Democrats stand a high chance of being dissolved, and the next elected government will inevitably be at least red-leaning, and could be looking for a pound of flesh over the 10 April deaths.

[meom]

The vast majority of all Thais, red, yellow, or whatever, hold the monarchy in very high regard, and for Abhisit to keep using the monarchy as a weapon to hide the fact that the Democrats were not properly elected to office in the first place is turning a disagreement into a civil war.

Ask any man or woman in the street what they think of the incumbent. You might be surprised.

[OzMick]

It confirms several points;

1- Abhisit is a Partisan leader not a stateman able to overpass his party for the safe of the Nation.

2- How stubborn and selfish most of the Thai Politicians are.

3- Unfortunately, we are heading to a major conflict which can be out of hand

4- IMHO, it is paradoxical, because I am fundamentally for democracy and against a coup-, but in those circumstances Anupong has shown restraints and -it is my feeling- he appreciates the situation far better than the Government. He should take over and named Anand for a transition period, organising elections after setting up fair rules.

Re your 1/ you should re-read the article. I can't get back to quote, but basically Dems are angry that Ab is not taking the action that they desire.

[dayverne]

Following the airport sit-in and the forcible dissolution of the PPP what sort of democracy remains in Thailand? Since PPP won the majority of seats initially, one can sympathise with the red-shirts now disenfranchised and dissatisfied with the performance of Abhisit and the current coalition even though I feel that not many would support a return to the super-kleptocracy of a Thaksin regime given any reasonable alternative.

Not many complained when, following the bloodless coup of 2006, Gen Sonthi was appointed and served in an interim capacity pending fresh elections, however this only served to further polarise Thai society since, during this period, no apparent effort was made to correct the endemic ills of poverty and corruption.

That leaves us with only four alternatives:

1. A Government of National Unity involving all parties proportionately represented in free and fair elections
   
2. The appointment of yet another Junta
   
3. Re-establishment of a working monarchy with a regally appointed government and no parties
   
4. Revolution (probably Thaksin's ideal)!!!!
   

All require at least initial dissolution of parliament and all make a nonsense of PM Abhisit's quoted reasons for delay. I would suggest that 100 days might satisfy all colour shirts and provide sufficient pause for thought.

I do not believe that martial law in support of the current regime makes any sense since it would surely just increase the antagonism and, while the PM knows it is the only strategy available to him, it would simply turn him into another pariah. As he is evidently not that stupid, in fact I am impressed by his tolerance and tenacity, I deliberately omitted it from the options.

[jcbangkok]

It confirms several points;

1- Abhisit is a Partisan leader not a stateman able to overpass his party for the safe of the Nation.

2- How stubborn and selfish most of the Thai Politicians are.

3- Unfortunately, we are heading to a major conflict which can be out of hand

4- IMHO, it is paradoxical, because I am fundamentally for democracy and against a coup-, but in those circumstances Anupong has shown restraints and -it is my feeling- he appreciates the situation far better than the Government. He should take over and named Anand for a transition period, organising elections after setting up fair rules.

TiT ... reds may pack up and go home any day now with some very harsh words of how evil the PM is and how they have proved it for all the world to see. They won't mention the rain, their becoming marginalized, stuck in one place with the gov't not taking their bate, lost support & followers ... and lets not forget about the rain.

[WinnieTheKhwai]

Agree with the general sentiment; good article.

If I write the same then I have a dozen wannabe Yellow yellers yelling at me! Fortunately for once it's coming from the Pravda, hence the silence...

Edited April 29, 2010 by WinnieTheKhwai

[Jerrytheyoung]

It confirms several points;

1- Abhisit is a Partisan leader not a stateman able to overpass his party for the safe of the Nation.

2- How stubborn and selfish most of the Thai Politicians are.

3- Unfortunately, we are heading to a major conflict which can be out of hand

4- IMHO, it is paradoxical, because I am fundamentally for democracy and against a coup-, but in those circumstances Anupong has shown restraints and -it is my feeling- he appreciates the situation far better than the Government. He should take over and named Anand for a transition period, organising elections after setting up fair rules.

Re your 1/ you should re-read the article. I can't get back to quote, but basically Dems are angry that Ab is not taking the action that they desire.

I have already written several times and at the beginning of the conflict that a Stateman will have adressed directly to the population, not taking into account the Party leaders (on both sides0; he will have announced a serie of measures which will defuse the situation at the roots (example price rice, solidarity funding for the consequences of the drought...) and announce new election after correction of election rules. Abhisit is weak, listens to his coalition members only and, IMO, protects the budget procedure ( because background for election: this is a partisan low level policy, it is not at the level required by this Historical situation).

As mentioned by some posters, he is arrogant for the Northern population and does not understand them.

So weak and partisan....

Edited April 29, 2010 by Jerrytheyoung

[whybother]

Abhisit is taking a big risk within a very short time frame. The Democrats stand a high chance of being dissolved, and the next elected government will inevitably be at least red-leaning, and could be looking for a pound of flesh over the 10 April deaths.

IF the Democrats get dissolved, only the executive get banned.

Elections will not *have* to be held. The PTP (ex PPP MPs) had the option of calling an election after the PPP were disbanded, but chose not to.

By-elections will be held for any banned MPs, but not banned party list MPs.

It is possible, that the current coalition will still have a majority after all this happens, leading to the same ex-democrat led coalition government.

Will the reds still protest after all of that happens?

Ofcourse they will, because they are fighting because *their* party is not in power. It has nothing to do with the fact that legal and legitimate processes were followed.

Edited April 29, 2010 by whybother

[Redsunset]

Why don't you do an updated survey on THAI VISA:

1. Do you think Abhsit is doing a good job dealing with the red shirts?

2. Should Abhisit disperse the protesters now with force?

3. Should he stay the course and continue his softer approach?

4. Is your life better, worse, or the same since the red shirts have occupied Ratchaprasong?

5. How do you feel the red shirt protest will affect Thailand's economy? Very much so, somewhat, very little, not at all?

Because what TV members (unless they are Thai) think means nothing and has no influence on past, present or furure events in this debacle. Surely you must have heard " this is Thailand, we are Thai and we don't need any outside interference."

If you think a poll on an Expat forum has any influence then you are sadly deluded.

This does not mean to say however that we can not have an opinion on the matter, especially when many of us have business and family interests here which are directly affected by present and future events.

By your logic all foreigners including big business, the media and governments should ignore what is happening in Thailand and indeed everywhere overseas.

Those of us voicing opinions on this topic here in TV do so because we ARE minding our own business!

What on earth are you rambling on about???? I never mentioned anything about whether I thought a poll on an Expat forum has any influence. I do not care at all. I am only interested in collective opinions on here. It is the same as reading individual verbal opinions that people like YOU post. You really know how to draw ERRONEOUS conclusions based on fictitious facts. I suggest you read and think first before you respond and comment.

[scorecard]

to hide the fact that the Democrats were not properly elected to office in the first place

OMG how is it that there are still people that don't understand the electoral system here in Thailand. Every MP was elected by his/her constituents and the current government is a coalition of parties whose MPs together form a voting majority and represent the majority of Thais. This government was elected, formed in accordance to the constitution (both pre and post coup) and is the result of the PT party's former manifestation being found guilty of vote buying (evidence of which is on video I believe).

The posters who keep claiming that the Abhisit government is not legitimate will never give up on this point, for one simple reason, they wan't the electoral laws to magically be what they want them to be, to suit their own views.

They will never recognize that Khun Abhisit became PM by the processes provided for in Thailands electoral laws which need to be there, and have been in place for a long time, because they don't want to!

They will never recognize that the same laws exist in many other democratic countries, because they don't want to!

Further, the rural poor who believed that thaksin would be their savior and they would suddenly all have money, wealth, land, whatever, do have some to be disappointed. Their hopes have been destroyed.

But should be angry with Abhisit? NO.

They should be angry with the local stooges who falsely promised them the world, got caught buying votes and as a result destroyed their hopes.

In fact Abhisit (and Khun Korn) have made a lot of porgress to start up structured reform which will ultimately get many of the poor into a sustainable better situation through great opportunity, better sharing of the wealth of Thailand, etc.

What Abhsit and Korn are not doing is putting band-aids on the problems, which don't provide long term solutions. (Which is what thaksin was doing - the saviour (his stooges) turn up just at the right time with a bag of rice or whatever, also called vote buying .)

[Redsunset]

Quiksilva, I would think that you, having over 3,000+ posts here on TV, would be able to respond intelligently to other members posts. I originally posted a comment about whether we should have a survey here on TV. That is all.

You responded by asking me what good a survey on this board would do at influencing. I never even wrote that I wanted a survey to influence. You added your own words and then criticised my simple post.

If this is the way you analyze, think and "discuss" matters, I have serious doubts about your intellectual prowess and judgement!

[Jerrytheyoung]

Abhisit is taking a big risk within a very short time frame. The Democrats stand a high chance of being dissolved, and the next elected government will inevitably be at least red-leaning, and could be looking for a pound of flesh over the 10 April deaths.

IF the Democrats get dissolved, only the executive get banned.

Elections will not *have* to be held. The PTP (ex PPP MPs) had the option of calling an election after the PPP were disbanded, but chose not to.

By-elections will be held for any banned MPs, but not banned party list MPs.

It is possible, that the current coalition will still have a majority after all this happens, leading to the same ex-democrat led coalition government.

Will the reds still protest after all of that happens?

Ofcourse they will, because they are fighting because *their* party is not in power. It has nothing to do with the fact that legal and legitimate processes were followed.

This Country needs to clean the situation. Fresh elections are absolutely required: no more manoeuvers, if not the next government (any side) will have no credibility, and it opens the gate to more turbulence.

Statemen (Churchill, de Gaulle for example) will have returned the decision to people in order to re-start with a blank page. It is an absolute requirement.

[quiksilva]

Quiksilva, I would think that you, having over 3,000+ posts here on TV, would be able to respond intelligently to other members posts. I originally posted a comment about whether we should have a survey here on TV. That is all.

You responded by asking me what good a survey on this board would do at influencing. I never even wrote that I wanted a survey to influence. You added your own words and then criticised my simple post.

If this is the way you analyze, think and "discuss" matters, I have serious doubts about your intellectual prowess and judgement!

Dear oh dear.

If you had bothered to read this carefully you may have been able to see that I was not in fact responding to your post I was responding to the person I quoted.

I was if anything, supporting your case for a poll, whilst accepting the other posters point about us not having any influence.

Edit to add the quoted respondents post just in case you missed it

Because what TV members (unless they are Thai) think means nothing and has no influence on past, present or furure events in this debacle. Surely you must have heard " this is Thailand, we are Thai and we don't need any outside interference."

Edited April 29, 2010 by quiksilva

[Jerrytheyoung]

Abhisit is taking a big risk within a very short time frame. The Democrats stand a high chance of being dissolved, and the next elected government will inevitably be at least red-leaning, and could be looking for a pound of flesh over the 10 April deaths.

IF the Democrats get dissolved, only the executive get banned.

Elections will not *have* to be held. The PTP (ex PPP MPs) had the option of calling an election after the PPP were disbanded, but chose not to.

By-elections will be held for any banned MPs, but not banned party list MPs.

It is possible, that the current coalition will still have a majority after all this happens, leading to the same ex-democrat led coalition government.

Will the reds still protest after all of that happens?

Ofcourse they will, because they are fighting because *their* party is not in power. It has nothing to do with the fact that legal and legitimate processes were followed.

This Country needs to clean the situation. Fresh elections are absolutely required: no more manoeuvers, if not the next government (any side) will have no credibility, and it opens the gate to more turbulence.

Statemen (Churchill, de Gaulle for example) will have returned the decision to people in order to re-start with a blank page. It is an absolute requirement.

[lannarebirth]

It confirms several points;

1- Abhisit is a Partisan leader not a stateman able to overpass his party for the safe of the Nation.

2- How stubborn and selfish most of the Thai Politicians are.

3- Unfortunately, we are heading to a major conflict which can be out of hand

4- IMHO, it is paradoxical, because I am fundamentally for democracy and against a coup-, but in those circumstances Anupong has shown restraints and -it is my feeling- he appreciates the situation far better than the Government. He should take over and named Anand for a transition period, organising elections after setting up fair rules.

Hey Jerry,

Have you been watching any of the legislation that's being passed in Parliament on a daily basis while this crisis has been diverting everyone's attention? Follow the money Jerry. Or as my father taught me, "don't pay too much attention to what people say, watch what they DO"

Edited April 29, 2010 by lannarebirth

[steady]

I’ve been reading all the posts relating to the present situation from both the red shirt lovers and the red shirt haters. All spouting about whether the government is legitimate and what should happen in the future.

As a falang who just happens to live here in Thailand I thought that I would give my contribution, for what it’s worth.

My first observation is that (depending on your loyalty) a crowd representing between 0.1 and 0.2 % of the country’s voting population is causing havoc in Bangkok. That is about 30,000 to 60,000 people in a voting populace of approximately 30 to 40 million. Even 1% of 30 million is 300,000 people. This is not acceptable in any country because it means that they are hurting other individuals businesses and well being. Everyone has to make a living, even if someone else is being paid to demonstrate. Not really a positive if you are shouting about wanting to become a "real" democracy. Before anyone thinks this is one sided, I believe that exactly the same would happen with yellow shirts.

The military and police should be ashamed at the lack of protection they have given the local shopkeepers and business people in the area. Although it is not a surprise.

I can understand a lot of the red shirts grievances, but not the acceptance of Taksin. I believe that so much is in the public domain about his actions whilst in power deems him to be considered a criminal in any country. However all he did was to copy Thai prime ministers before him. Unfortunately he is new money and they were all old money. Even Thailand with its warped sense of justice found him guilty. Taksin just can’t get into the big boys gang and now wants to start his own!

I also think that the future for Thailand must include democracy as understood by most western people. That is one person one vote and no vote buying and no artificial blocks to running for parliament such as educational or financial barriers. Some red shirts advocate this others are much more vague. The yellow shirts ideas of getting more votes depending on educational or social status should be treated with the contempt it deserves.

The red shirt idea that Abhisit should step down and everything will be alright is equally ludicrous. My own view is that Abhisit is one of the few politicians not tarnished by corruption, although his party has an equal amount of “dodgy geezers” as its political opponents.

So, to the red shirts I would say go home and tend to your rice. Your leaders will be giving themselves up to the police in 2 weeks time anyway, at least that’s what they promised. Just remember that when you vote next time don’t sell it for 20 baht to buy a share in a bottle of lao kao. Equally to all you others, just because they do not come from Bangkok does not make people inferior. Bangkok, contrary to Thai masculine belief, has never been the centre of the universe.

[pornsasi]

Abhisit is taking a big risk within a very short time frame. The Democrats stand a high chance of being dissolved, and the next elected government will inevitably be at least red-leaning, and could be looking for a pound of flesh over the 10 April deaths.

IF the Democrats get dissolved, only the executive get banned.

Elections will not *have* to be held. The PTP (ex PPP MPs) had the option of calling an election after the PPP were disbanded, but chose not to.

By-elections will be held for any banned MPs, but not banned party list MPs.

It is possible, that the current coalition will still have a majority after all this happens, leading to the same ex-democrat led coalition government.

Will the reds still protest after all of that happens?

Ofcourse they will, because they are fighting because *their* party is not in power. It has nothing to do with the fact that legal and legitimate processes were followed.

And if the PT wins next election then its the yellows who will protest , back to square 1 . As for corruption in politics hard to fight it if 80% of thais are ok with it . Its a thai thing ...

[chantorn]

I don't see what seems to be the problem in Thailand.

Mark and said again and again (in Hardtalk) that he is in control, and the RED people are contained in just a tiny area.

For those who cannot affort BBC (like me), here are the sound clip.

MP3 of Abhisit on BBC Hardtalk 28th April 2010 Pt. 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETMqNafv6Dg

MP3 of Abhisit on BBC Hardtalk 28th April 2010 Pt. 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXG4qPTZBjw

MP3 of Abhisit on BBC Hardtalk 28th April 2010 Pt. 3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwS2niuMZdU

[swindonabroad]

I don't see what seems to be the problem in Thailand.

Mark and said again and again (in Hardtalk) that he is in control, and the RED people are contained in just a tiny area.

For those who cannot affort BBC (like me), here are the sound clip.

MP3 of Abhisit on BBC Hardtalk 28th April 2010 Pt. 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETMqNafv6Dg

MP3 of Abhisit on BBC Hardtalk 28th April 2010 Pt. 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXG4qPTZBjw

MP3 of Abhisit on BBC Hardtalk 28th April 2010 Pt. 3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwS2niuMZdU

but just saying hes in control doesnt make it so.

I have no Red or Yellow love/hate but when mobs can stop and seach cars, when they have to be negotiated with to open Sky train stations and when the police have more loyalty to the mob than to him it is really hard to belive he is in control

Edited April 29, 2010 by swindonabroad

[kainer]

I completely disagree.

In denying the right of the mob to overturn the government he is probably sacrificing himself to solve the problem of the big picture.

The problem is that the precedent has been set that "mob" protest can remove governments and Abhisit is trying to stop that process.

[way2muchcoffee]

Agree with the general sentiment; good article.

If I write the same then I have a dozen wannabe Yellow yellers yelling at me! Fortunately for once it's coming from the Pravda, hence the silence...

That's because this is a discussion board. We are here to discuss (and all too often attack) events in Thailand that we feel are important. Therefore when you write something people will respond. I have already expressed my disagreement with this opinion piece, but I am glad that The Nation included it as I believe the media in this country has a responsibility to report differing opinions. This is not a responsibility that the media here generally live up to.

Edited April 29, 2010 by way2muchcoffee

[asiawatcher]

It confirms several points;

1- Abhisit is a Partisan leader not a stateman able to overpass his party for the safe of the Nation.

2- How stubborn and selfish most of the Thai Politicians are.

3- Unfortunately, we are heading to a major conflict which can be out of hand

4- IMHO, it is paradoxical, because I am fundamentally for democracy and against a coup-, but in those circumstances Anupong has shown restraints and -it is my feeling- he appreciates the situation far better than the Government. He should take over and named Anand for a transition period, organising elections after setting up fair rules.

I am all for a military intervention - induct the rank and file Police into the army and remove Police NCO's and up completely for refusing to act, allowing seizure of Govt assets (only in Thailand) and then apply military rule, as in 2006. They managed to wipe 800BN Baht off the value of Thai stocks in a week, the currency became softer and Thailand benefitted as a whole. Maybe that was not intended as the military has little or no business sense, but the present situation is untenable in all aspects. Dissolution of the Govt may not be a bad idea - Somalia is a great example of not what to do.

Democracy being sprouted is not the answer, reconstruction of the constitution and the civil code is. Thailand cannot continue in its current vein. It has to change and a good start is to introduce English language media and lessons at all levels of education so Thailand can become truly a part of the global community and not just the well-off privileged few. Unfortunately the army IS a solution right now and perhaps should be.

Edited April 29, 2010 by asiawatcher

[swindonabroad]

I completely disagree.

In denying the right of the mob to overturn the government he is probably sacrificing himself to solve the problem of the big picture.

The problem is that the precedent has been set that "mob" protest can remove governments and Abhisit is trying to stop that process.

mate, how refreshing that you disagree with me but can do it in a civil way. being 100% serious here, we all have different opinions and great to see somone can articulate thier differing views wihout resorting to the abuse, name calling etc which normally happens on here.

I agree with you that he should not give in to violence but I still beilve that he is incorrect to state that he 'is in control'

[way2muchcoffee]

Abhisit is taking a big risk within a very short time frame. The Democrats stand a high chance of being dissolved, and the next elected government will inevitably be at least red-leaning, and could be looking for a pound of flesh over the 10 April deaths.

IF the Democrats get dissolved, only the executive get banned.

Elections will not *have* to be held. The PTP (ex PPP MPs) had the option of calling an election after the PPP were disbanded, but chose not to.

By-elections will be held for any banned MPs, but not banned party list MPs.

It is possible, that the current coalition will still have a majority after all this happens, leading to the same ex-democrat led coalition government.

Will the reds still protest after all of that happens?

Ofcourse they will, because they are fighting because *their* party is not in power. It has nothing to do with the fact that legal and legitimate processes were followed.

This Country needs to clean the situation. Fresh elections are absolutely required: no more manoeuvers, if not the next government (any side) will have no credibility, and it opens the gate to more turbulence.

Statemen (Churchill, de Gaulle for example) will have returned the decision to people in order to re-start with a blank page. It is an absolute requirement.

I agree that elections are the only way forward, but I don't believe that they should take place immediately for several reasons.

1) The protesters have used violence, threat, intimidation, murder, and terrorism to achieve their ends. No government should dissolve itself with this kind of pressure. It sets a very bad precedent.

2) The constitution and electoral law are fundamentally flawed (at least that's what most Thais seem to believe) and need to be amended before any elections can be held. If not then the next election will be just as 'illegitimate' as the last in many people's eyes.

3) It would be impossible at this juncture for elections to be free and fair. There is too much hatred and not all parties would be able to campaign in all areas. Moreover there is the very real possibility that many voters would be coerced into casting a vote that is against their conscience, either through vote buying, propaganda, or just plain bullying and intimidation. This would not be limited to the PTP, but all parties would be strongly tempted to engage in foul play to ensure their victory.

Edited April 29, 2010 by way2muchcoffee

[hammered]

Interesting read. It seems everyone has an opinion but nobody has a solution. Listening is important and one thing that has happened in this conflict is that the various sides (more than 2) have stopped listening to each other.

The Sukhumband interview is good too. It is interesting to see soemone regarded as virtually characterless and quiet with some of the most honest things to say ihmo. Sukhumband who even though a Dem but a maverick one at that and who it seems is trusted across lines would actually probably make a good PM right now not that it will ever happen. In fact that is another problem there are no leaders that are acceptable to all within the political parties and yet a PM must come from the parties. Im not advocating doing away with democracy herer but within a parliamentary system there can be the option of a technocrat as PM and it has been used in several countire sbefore to solve problems. In Thailand though it is not an option which leaves a peretty poor choice of hideously divisive characters even after an election. Anand is another one who is respected across parties but wont get involved in the mess of poltics maybe sensibly.

At the end of the day consensus on at least a few basics is needed and certainly better than conflict. How to get there is the question

[Jerrytheyoung]

It confirms several points;

1- Abhisit is a Partisan leader not a stateman able to overpass his party for the safe of the Nation.

2- How stubborn and selfish most of the Thai Politicians are.

3- Unfortunately, we are heading to a major conflict which can be out of hand

4- IMHO, it is paradoxical, because I am fundamentally for democracy and against a coup-, but in those circumstances Anupong has shown restraints and -it is my feeling- he appreciates the situation far better than the Government. He should take over and named Anand for a transition period, organising elections after setting up fair rules.

I am all for a military intervention - induct the rank and file Police into the army and remove Police NCO's and up completely for refusing to act, allowing seizure of Govt assets (only in Thailand) and then apply military rule, as in 2006. They managed to wipe 800BN Baht off the value of Thai stocks in a week, the currency became softer and Thailand benefitted as a whole. Maybe that was not intended as the military has little or no business sense, but the present situation is untenable in all aspects. Dissolution of the Govt may not be a bad idea - Somalia is a great example of not what to do.

Democracy being sprouted is not the answer, reconstruction of the constitution and the civil code is. Thailand cannot continue in its current vein. It has to change and a good start is to introduce English language media and lessons at all levels of education so Thailand can become truly a part of the global community and not just the well-off privileged few. Unfortunately the army IS a solution right now and perhaps should be.

Do not mistaken...

IMHO, Anupong should take over to give back the Power to ANAND, like it has been done once in Thai History. Anand is a real stateman, appreciated by most of Thais and able to handle a transition, preparing fresh elections within a good environment (rules) and cleaning a little the corruption. It is just a temporay period of few months. Time also that things cool down.

[blaze]

Good article- but the Nation frequently prints columns that appear at odds with its political and social leanings. Problem is that they rarely show up on this forum.