Abhisit's Dilemma: Pacify Your Foes, Offend Your Friends

[webfact]

THAI TALK

Abhisit's dilemma: pacify your foes, offend your friends

By Suthichai Yoon

The Nation

BANGKOK: -- It certainly didn't come out of the blue. Premier Abhisit Vejjajiva had in fact hinted on several occasions that he was drawing up a "road map" that would propose a political settlement in parallel with "security solutions".

But when the proposed "peace pact" did come, it carried a paradox: His opponents were pacified. His supporters were frustrated, even upset.

Abhisit apparently chose to propose November 14 as the date for the new election to prove that he was so serious about not clinging to power that he was willing to set a firm deadline against which all parties concerned could hold him accountable should he break his promise one way or the other.

But, to be sure, Abhisit's dramatic announcement of his "road map" on television on Monday night was anything but unconditional.

In fact, if you read between the lines, he could easily wriggle out of the November 14 election deadline if parts of his five-point national reconciliation conditions aren't met by the red shirts.

In other words, his dual-track proposed solution to the country's most serious crisis may be called off any minute if Abhisit can claim that his opponents are trying to prolong the protest - or if the red-shirts should come up with some counter conditions, including the crucial amnesty for the protest leaders now facing serious criminal charges of terrorism and undermining the monarchy.

Abhisit has made it clear that amnesty is out of the question - and that a written truce agreement wasn't necessary "since I already made my position abundantly clear on the air".

He didn't actually say take it or leave it in so many words. But the main obstacles may be in the fine print of his five-point national reconciliation conditions.

The first few points on the monarchy, national reform, and the media's free but constructive role - in the general and deliberately ambiguous language that he used in his brief television appearance - may not raise immediate controversies. Conflicting views will arise, but those issues can be glossed over for now because of the urgency of the prevailing situation.

But the premier's conditions on setting up an independent tribunal to investigate the serious criminal charges (terrorism and violence against soldiers and protesters), as well as the proposed constitutional amendments, could prove highly tricky.

Some of the questions that may still haunt and throw up roadblocks against the smooth implementation of the road map:

Does the PM intend to pursue the probes into all the allegations related to the armed terrorists accused of having fired at soldiers and protesters in a series of violent shoot-outs?

Does he still want a referendum on constitutional amendments?

Hovering over this political landscape is the uncertainty over the premier's own Democrat Party's future. Will the Constitutional Court rule to disband his party - the same way the Thai Rak Thai, People Power, and Chart Thai Parties were dissolved for having broken the election laws?

And if the Democrat Party is banned, will Abhisit and all the other executive members of the party be banned from politics for five years - the same treatment bestowed upon the leading members of the other parties?

Timing plays a decisive role here too. Will the court's decision on the future of the Democrats come before or after the proposed November 14 election date?

Nobody - not even Abhisit himself - is quite sure what the definitive answers to all these questions are for the time being. But he knows that he will have to fight one crisis at a time. But what matters most before embarking upon the next battle head-on is to make absolutely sure that he can pacify his foes without appeasing them.

More importantly, Abhisit can frustrate his supporters but he can't afford to upset them to the point of turning them into his new enemies.

The yellow shirts and "multicoloureds" have already accused him of selling out to the reds by agreeing to a new election before the end of the year while getting no assurance of a peaceful transition.

He doesn't need to be reminded that the next political crisis is just around the corner.

-- The Nation 2010-05-06

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

[eTiMaGo]

It's called compromise, sometimes the only way out of a sticky situation...

[Ulysses G.]

Abhisit found a way to get out of a no-win situation without a civil war. He should be commended rather than criticized.

[321niti123]

Abhisit did what very few other politicians would have done, he shortened his term for the good of the country, he certainly didnt have to but he is good enough to know that the best compromise is the one that doesnt involve a risk on innocent lives.

[apex2000]

And where is the confirmation, in writing or on video, that 14 November is a fact - it is the actual date of the election?

Haven't seen any proof yet. Just speculation.

@321niti123: Don't praise the man - if he'd had enough sense before Songkran there would not have been such a drastic loss of life in April.

He is a fool with nowhere to run.

[quiksilva]

The middle road is the hardest road to follow...

I don't think he is a fool in any way shape or form. This is the smartest way out, he was stuck between a rock and a hard place, and has compromised not only the government's stance but also his career to seek a resolution out of this mess.

Edited May 6, 2010 by quiksilva

[whybother]

And where is the confirmation, in writing or on video, that 14 November is a fact - it is the actual date of the election?

Haven't seen any proof yet. Just speculation.

@321niti123: Don't praise the man - if he'd had enough sense before Songkran there would not have been such a drastic loss of life in April.

He is a fool with nowhere to run.

Where have you been????

He said November 14 in a speech to the country on ALL tv stations.

He also offered basically the same in the negotiations with the reds 6 weeks ago. But the reds stopped negotiating.

If the reds had continued talking, there wouldn't have been the Songkran riots.

The reds stopped talking, and continued pushing. If THE REDS had enough sense, they could have stopped all this before they even moved to Ratchaprasong.

Edited May 6, 2010 by whybother

[Jerrytheyoung]

Coming back on the title of the Thread:

Should have read "The Prince" from Machiavel: it is a classical politician rule: you have to negotiate with your ennemy which bring you closer to them, so you loose your friends"

[Thai at Heart]

If he manages to get out of this situation still in government it will be a momentous day for Thailand.

For the first time in 80 odd years the army will have finally understood that it's intervention in political disputes should be as discrete as possible, and that despite them having all the guns, they don't know what is best for the country all of the time.

[Insight]

And where is the confirmation, in writing or on video, that 14 November is a fact - it is the actual date of the election?

Haven't seen any proof yet. Just speculation.

@321niti123: Don't praise the man - if he'd had enough sense before Songkran there would not have been such a drastic loss of life in April.

He is a fool with nowhere to run.

Reds called off any further negotiations before then, all in front of the cameras.

[Redsunset]

I agree with Chuan Leek Pai... Abhisit compromised "rule of law."

His five conditions are ambiguous and nonsense. Of course most would agree to these "motherhood and apple pie" statements... that is like saying "education needs to be available for everyone." Most would agree with this comment. But how you go about achieving it, who get the benefits, and who pays for it is the problem.

Also, no way the leaders will agree to NOT have amnesty... NO WAY. They will parlay the "hey the yellow shirts did it and got off scot free!" card.

Forget it... a guy like Nattawut go to jail without a fight... NO F'ing WAY!!!!!!

Deal the way it is written is a NO GO.

[Redsunset]

And where is the confirmation, in writing or on video, that 14 November is a fact - it is the actual date of the election?

Haven't seen any proof yet. Just speculation.

@321niti123: Don't praise the man - if he'd had enough sense before Songkran there would not have been such a drastic loss of life in April.

He is a fool with nowhere to run.

Reds called off any further negotiations before then, all in front of the cameras.

All this posturing, back room dealing is a waste of time... Abhisit is becoming a clown. He needs to treat the red shirt leaders as violent, untrustworthy criminals. He is again, behaving like an Oxford college student.... a good man, but Abhisit does not know how to deal with evil at all.

[Redsunset]

Coming back on the title of the Thread:

Should have read "The Prince" from Machiavel: it is a classical politician rule: you have to negotiate with your ennemy which bring you closer to them, so you loose your friends"

Jerry, I agree, and may I suggest that you look at what you write to avoid the awful typo/spelling mistakes. Your posts lose (not loose) a bit of credibility.

[bubblegum]

I agree with Chuan Leek Pai... Abhisit compromised "rule of law."

His five conditions are ambiguous and nonsense. Of course most would agree to these "motherhood and apple pie" statements... that is like saying "education needs to be available for everyone." Most would agree with this comment. But how you go about achieving it, who get the benefits, and who pays for it is the problem.

Also, no way the leaders will agree to NOT have amnesty... NO WAY. They will parlay the "hey the yellow shirts did it and got off scot free!" card.

Forget it... a guy like Nattawut go to jail without a fight... NO F'ing WAY!!!!!!

Deal the way it is written is a NO GO.

His conditions are nonsense ? What are the REDS conditions? Ohh let me think. House disselusion and then what? WHAT ?

[Redsunset]

The middle road is the hardest road to follow...

I don't think he is a fool in any way shape or form. This is the smartest way out, he was stuck between a rock and a hard place, and has compromised not only the government's stance but also his career to seek a resolution out of this mess.

Actually I disagree.... the middle road in a political strife like this is not the same as bargaining at Chatuchak market. There ARE winners and losers... frankly, the reds should be the losers. They are the ones who BROKE THE LAW.... so what in God's name are we seeking "win-win" for?

If they had done this in a NON VIOLENT disruptive manner, then fine; negotiate. But they chose to BREAK THE EMERGENCY DECREE... if we provide a win win solution, then WHAT GOOD ARE OUR LAWS???!!!

[whybother]

I agree with Chuan Leek Pai... Abhisit compromised "rule of law."

His five conditions are ambiguous and nonsense. Of course most would agree to these "motherhood and apple pie" statements... that is like saying "education needs to be available for everyone." Most would agree with this comment. But how you go about achieving it, who get the benefits, and who pays for it is the problem.

Also, no way the leaders will agree to NOT have amnesty... NO WAY. They will parlay the "hey the yellow shirts did it and got off scot free!" card.

Forget it... a guy like Nattawut go to jail without a fight... NO F'ing WAY!!!!!!

Deal the way it is written is a NO GO.

The red leaders won't use the "yellow shirts got off" card, because they are "smart" enough to know that the yellow's charges are still before the courts.

[gymboy33]

I agree with Chuan Leek Pai... Abhisit compromised "rule of law."

His five conditions are ambiguous and nonsense. Of course most would agree to these "motherhood and apple pie" statements... that is like saying "education needs to be available for everyone." Most would agree with this comment. But how you go about achieving it, who get the benefits, and who pays for it is the problem.

Also, no way the leaders will agree to NOT have amnesty... NO WAY. They will parlay the "hey the yellow shirts did it and got off scot free!" card.

Forget it... a guy like Nattawut go to jail without a fight... NO F'ing WAY!!!!!!

Deal the way it is written is a NO GO.

The red leaders won't use the "yellow shirts got off" card, because they are "smart" enough to know that the yellow's charges are still before the courts.

do you honestly think the yellow shirts will ever get sentenced to anything???

[whybother]

I agree with Chuan Leek Pai... Abhisit compromised "rule of law."

His five conditions are ambiguous and nonsense. Of course most would agree to these "motherhood and apple pie" statements... that is like saying "education needs to be available for everyone." Most would agree with this comment. But how you go about achieving it, who get the benefits, and who pays for it is the problem.

Also, no way the leaders will agree to NOT have amnesty... NO WAY. They will parlay the "hey the yellow shirts did it and got off scot free!" card.

Forget it... a guy like Nattawut go to jail without a fight... NO F'ing WAY!!!!!!

Deal the way it is written is a NO GO.

The red leaders won't use the "yellow shirts got off" card, because they are "smart" enough to know that the yellow's charges are still before the courts.

do you honestly think the yellow shirts will ever get sentenced to anything???

I have no idea. But there are charges before the courts. I hope they get put in jail.

Same for the red leaders. Something needs to be done to stop this mob rule.

[gymboy33]

I agree with Chuan Leek Pai... Abhisit compromised "rule of law."

His five conditions are ambiguous and nonsense. Of course most would agree to these "motherhood and apple pie" statements... that is like saying "education needs to be available for everyone." Most would agree with this comment. But how you go about achieving it, who get the benefits, and who pays for it is the problem.

Also, no way the leaders will agree to NOT have amnesty... NO WAY. They will parlay the "hey the yellow shirts did it and got off scot free!" card.

Forget it... a guy like Nattawut go to jail without a fight... NO F'ing WAY!!!!!!

Deal the way it is written is a NO GO.

The red leaders won't use the "yellow shirts got off" card, because they are "smart" enough to know that the yellow's charges are still before the courts.

do you honestly think the yellow shirts will ever get sentenced to anything???

I have no idea. But there are charges before the courts. I hope they get put in jail.

Same for the red leaders. Something needs to be done to stop this mob rule.

well both sides of the poilitical divide have used mob rule to thier own advantage now...

so its probaly a good time to put a stop to it!

[Insight]

IMHO if the likes of Sah Daeng and Arisman are still publicly running around making mindless threats six months the "road map" should be viewed as a complete failure.

[whybother]

IMHO if the likes of Sah Daeng and Arisman are still publicly running around making mindless threats six months the "road map" should be viewed as a complete failure.

I think that is a reason that the election will get delayed.

The red shirt thugs (not all the red shirts, just the thug element) will not be able to help themselves. They will cause some disruption along the way, along the lines of threatening Abhisit if he goes to Chiang Mai.

Abhisit will use that as a reason to say that free and fair elections can not be held yet. And rightly so.

[Lopburi99]

I can at least semi-understand lessening the enforcement of law by not forcefully dispersing the mob to prevent a possible civil war. But to ignore rule of law for terrorists and riot inciters is cowardice. No force would be involved. Where is the danger?

For God's sake Thailand this is a golden opportunity (at this moment) to begin to restore some regard for rule of law in this country. Don't weasel out of it! NO AMNESTY! Let the Reds roast in the sun and in their own waste and garbage before accepting that!

Edited May 6, 2010 by Lopburi99

[Netfan]

I agree with Chuan Leek Pai... Abhisit compromised "rule of law."

His five conditions are ambiguous and nonsense. Of course most would agree to these "motherhood and apple pie" statements... that is like saying "education needs to be available for everyone." Most would agree with this comment. But how you go about achieving it, who get the benefits, and who pays for it is the problem.

Also, no way the leaders will agree to NOT have amnesty... NO WAY. They will parlay the "hey the yellow shirts did it and got off scot free!" card.

Forget it... a guy like Nattawut go to jail without a fight... NO F'ing WAY!!!!!!

Deal the way it is written is a NO GO.

The red leaders won't use the "yellow shirts got off" card, because they are "smart" enough to know that the yellow's charges are still before the courts.

Unlike most of the red apoligists on this forum

[Robby nz]

And where is the confirmation, in writing or on video, that 14 November is a fact - it is the actual date of the election?

Haven't seen any proof yet. Just speculation.

@321niti123: Don't praise the man - if he'd had enough sense before Songkran there would not have been such a drastic loss of life in April.

He is a fool with nowhere to run.

Reds called off any further negotiations before then, all in front of the cameras.

All this posturing, back room dealing is a waste of time... Abhisit is becoming a clown. He needs to treat the red shirt leaders as violent, untrustworthy criminals. He is again, behaving like an Oxford college student.... a good man, but Abhisit does not know how to deal with evil at all.

Good one redsunset you have finally agreed that the reds are evil

And yes he does need to treat them as they make themselves.

Must be difficult for those on this forum who can only look at things with one red eye.

The PM has done a great job, after the reds refused to negotiate he talked them into building their own prison then when they tried to escape from it they were sent back twice an now have nowhere to go because they know what will happen if they try to break out again.

The pity is that the red leaders made the decision on 10th to break out in the mistaken belief that nothing would be done and because of that decision so many had to lose their lives and be injured.

That decision is the sole cause of what came after and the loss of lives and damage done is all a consequence of that decision; that being so the reds are solely to blame.

They were warned (note not threatned) that they would be stopped if they tried to move out but refused to heed that warning hence the loss of life and injuries.

And incidently all the treats and demands have come from the red side, like death treats against the PM, while the Govt has issued warnings.

Dont see the difference? Didnt think you would

[Zappu]

Abhisit did what very few other politicians would have done, he shortened his term for the good of the country, he certainly didnt have to but he is good enough to know that the best compromise is the one that doesnt involve a risk on innocent lives.

He got his orders - he did what he was told.

[Zappu]

I can at least semi-understand lessening the enforcement of law by not forcefully dispersing the mob to prevent a possible civil war. But to ignore rule of law for terrorists and riot inciters is cowardice. No force would be involved. Where is the danger?

For God's sake Thailand this is a golden opportunity (at this moment) to begin to restore some regard for rule of law in this country. Don't weasel out of it! NO AMNESTY! Let the Reds roast in the sun and in their own waste and garbage before accepting that!

Another deep thinker!

[LuckyLew]

I agree with Chuan Leek Pai... Abhisit compromised "rule of law."

His five conditions are ambiguous and nonsense. Of course most would agree to these "motherhood and apple pie" statements... that is like saying "education needs to be available for everyone." Most would agree with this comment. But how you go about achieving it, who get the benefits, and who pays for it is the problem.

Also, no way the leaders will agree to NOT have amnesty... NO WAY. They will parlay the "hey the yellow shirts did it and got off scot free!" card.

Forget it... a guy like Nattawut go to jail without a fight... NO F'ing WAY!!!!!!

Deal the way it is written is a NO GO.

Would you then prefer they roll in the armored tanks

and what not in order to remove the reds?

Sounds like you do prefer that option.

It is called give and take ...

Sounds like you like to take take take

That kind of logic is what started this issue

in the first place

[eggomaniac]

"""More importantly, Abhisit can frustrate his supporters but he can't afford to upset them to the point of turning them into his new enemies.

The yellow shirts and "multicoloureds" have already accused him of selling out to the reds by agreeing to a new election before the end of the year while getting no assurance of a peaceful transition."""

<<< From the OP.

Is the OP talking about the 'new' Alliance of Patriots? It seems they are being dismissed as an arm of PAD. Are they?

I was, foolishly, hoping they were a real, neutral, peace movement coming out of the Mute Majority.

In the Terms of this Thread, is the AP a friend or foe of the government? I woould appreciate some insightful information on the the multicoloured. It appears they are just the latest joke? not the Rainbow of Hope

[jayboy]

I can at least semi-understand lessening the enforcement of law by not forcefully dispersing the mob to prevent a possible civil war. But to ignore rule of law for terrorists and riot inciters is cowardice. No force would be involved. Where is the danger?

For God's sake Thailand this is a golden opportunity (at this moment) to begin to restore some regard for rule of law in this country. Don't weasel out of it! NO AMNESTY! Let the Reds roast in the sun and in their own waste and garbage before accepting that!

If you are so anxious to restore the rule of law, a start could be made by arresting the criminal generals who launched the last coup (and then pardoned themselves), the Quisling and land cheat Surayud, the PAD leadership and other fascist elements.I jest of course.

Fortunately the country is now being led by a highly educated, wise and measured statesman, who thinks in a more analytical and measured way than many of the Forum's ranting (though often barely articulate) old codgers from the West.

[Teddy3943]

It's called compromise, sometimes the only way out of a sticky situation...

Compromise: YES, but amnesty: NO!

If justice is not being done the government creates a state of monkeys, where murders and other severe crimes can be done without proscecution and punishment.

If the reds really want peace and democracy then they accept that justice has to be done. If they don't want justice being done then they are real terrorists who only want to place themselves out of the law. So, outlaws...