Abhisit - A Prime Minister Tried By War

[Siam Simon]

Whether it has happened or not it is within the rules.

I will say it again:

The only criteria for forming a government is the clear ability to exercise a majority in parliament.

When a PM resigns as a result of not being able to command a majority, the Queen is not obliged to order a dissolution and an election if she is confident that an alternative government can be formed with a clear majority.

Red apologists don't like this.

They don't like it at all.

Why?

Because it does not support their position on Thaksin's allies bolting to the other side.

Well tough!

You are making yourself look ever more foolish by repeatedly referring to the UK and the Queen as examples of why the dodgy installation of Abhisit's government is an acceptable democratic procedure. What happened with the installation of Abhisit's current government has never happened in the UK or in any other mature democracy, nor is it ever likely to.

[whybother]

Whether it has happened or not it is within the rules.

I will say it again:

The only criteria for forming a government is the clear ability to exercise a majority in parliament.

When a PM resigns as a result of not being able to command a majority, the Queen is not obliged to order a dissolution and an election if she is confident that an alternative government can be formed with a clear majority.

Red apologists don't like this.

They don't like it at all.

Why?

Because it does not support their position on Thaksin's allies bolting to the other side.

Well tough!

You are making yourself look ever more foolish by repeatedly referring to the UK and the Queen as examples of why the dodgy installation of Abhisit's government is an acceptable democratic procedure. What happened with the installation of Abhisit's current government has never happened in the UK or in any other mature democracy, nor is it ever likely to.

"Mature Democracy" That's the point isn't it? This IS NOT a mature democracy.

It doesn't matter that it has never happened. It matters that it is with in the rules.

You are applying the situation in the stable democracies that you are used to.

Edited May 21, 2010 by whybother

[Siam Simon]

Whether it has happened or not it is within the rules.

I will say it again:

The only criteria for forming a government is the clear ability to exercise a majority in parliament.

When a PM resigns as a result of not being able to command a majority, the Queen is not obliged to order a dissolution and an election if she is confident that an alternative government can be formed with a clear majority.

Red apologists don't like this.

They don't like it at all.

Why?

Because it does not support their position on Thaksin's allies bolting to the other side.

Well tough!

You are making yourself look ever more foolish by repeatedly referring to the UK and the Queen as examples of why the dodgy installation of Abhisit's government is an acceptable democratic procedure. What happened with the installation of Abhisit's current government has never happened in the UK or in any other mature democracy, nor is it ever likely to.

"Mature Democracy" That's the point isn't it? This IS NOT a mature democracy.

It doesn't matter that it has never happened. It matters that it is with in the rules.

You are applying the situation in the stable democracies that you are used to.

Still forty five posts to go. Leaow leaow! .

[SomTumTiger]

Funnily enough, if the Reds had accepted the PM's road map for peace two weeks ago, they would have come out with a much different aura surrounding them. They could have built momentum, and PTP might have had a real chance to gain control again in the November elections.

Instead, they decided to self-destruct, and the repercusisons of their actions will damage the Puea Thai Party tremendously. No way they gain as many seats as they currently hold. Newin will take many, and the Dems will even pick up a few, in the Bangkok and northwest areas. Abhisit will be PM for the next 6 years, and Thailand will be much stronger for his efforts.

Frankly, more than any other type of punishment, this is the worst punishment for Thaksin - the doubt, second guessing, and "what ifs" will haunt him the rest of his days, in his increasingly smaller sphere of influence. If he had served his 2 year term, he would have been out in less than one, and might even be back in the political mix and on his way back to power.

Oh how the mighty have fallen.

Pride goeth before the fall.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

etc.

[Siam Simon]

Funnily enough, if the Reds had accepted the PM's road map for peace two weeks ago, they would have come out with a much different aura surrounding them. They could have built momentum, and PTP might have had a real chance to gain control again in the November elections.

Instead, they decided to self-destruct, and the repercusisons of their actions will damage the Puea Thai Party tremendously. No way they gain as many seats as they currently hold. Newin will take many, and the Dems will even pick up a few, in the Bangkok and northwest areas. Abhisit will be PM for the next 6 years, and Thailand will be much stronger for his efforts.

Frankly, more than any other type of punishment, this is the worst punishment for Thaksin - the doubt, second guessing, and "what ifs" will haunt him the rest of his days, in his increasingly smaller sphere of influence. If he had served his 2 year term, he would have been out in less than one, and might even be back in the political mix and on his way back to power.

Oh how the mighty have fallen.

Pride goeth before the fall.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

etc.

I despair that you will ever get anything right SomTumTiger.

[Thai at Heart]

Not only are you a pedant you are wrong.

The LibDems could break from the Tories tomorrow and form a government with Labour and the odds and sods without an election.

Weasel chop logic comrade.

Totally and utterly untrue. If you are so sure of yourself then name some countries under the Westminster system (or with a similar Parliamentary / Head of State system to Thailand) where a change of government has occurred under similar circumstances, with some specific examples.

If the LibDems broke with the Tories and allied themselves with Labour (and enough "odds and sods" to gain a majority) they could not form a government; convention in the UK (which governs the UK Parliamentary system in lieu of a written constitution) dictates that the PM would still be the PM (as GB was until he resigned) and that he would be required to ask HM to dissolve the house and call for fresh elections.

If you prefer to look at a country using the Westminster system and a written constitution under these circumstances I suggest you look at the Australian constitutional crisis of 1975.

I am not your or anyone else's "comrade"; I simply prefer facts to factoids.

Sorry comrade but the only requirement is the ability to command a majority in parliament.

This is theoretically possible.

The Conservative PM would tender his resignation.if he cannot do so.

The Queen is under no constitutinal obligation for a general election to be called if another PM can command a majority.

This is true.

And you are wrong.

The reason you are pushing your position is two-fold.

One: you want to give some ideological cover to the anti-working class reds in their destruction of working class jobs. (how embarrassing for your neo-Stalinist politics)

Two: since you are supporting a popular front with Thaksin, you need to de-legitimise the current government which is no less legitimate than the preceding governments.

But none of your 'theoretically possible' have ever happened in the UK or in any similar stable democracy and they likely never will. Your OCD propaganda never disappoints .

And would be extremely likely to happen because the parties have to canvass the opinion of their MP's and to switch sides like that in the case of the libdems would take 75% support from the MP's. So whilst it is "legally" possible, would also have to rely on the relevant party showing absolute disregard for its MP's and voters.

Oh, woops, does that mean then that Newin and his MP's have shown complete disregard for their voters? Umm. Yes.

[Thai at Heart]

Abhisit is like a kid who is on a rollercoaster and is desperate to get to the end.

.............................

Abhisit is performing his duty to the best of his ability, and I have a feeling his prolonged attempt at negotiation and the relatively slow action of the army had his hallmark written all over it.

............................

He has very little choice, and don't underestimate the feeling of obligation he may have to people above him in society for his privilege in life?

My apologies for editing your post, but as I agree with much of it I see no need to repeat those parts.

I certainly agree that he is performing "to the best of his ability", and I even agree that he is among the best currently available, but that doesn't mean that he deserves some of the plaudits and praise he has had here - he is a good administrator and a "nice guy" who is totally out of his depth in this situation.

Everyone has a choice. His was to team up with anyone who would put him in power and keep him there, regardless of their political views and their personal qualities; once in power he could have shown the strength and leadership Thailand so desperately needs and formed a government and, more particularly, a cabinet which really was a change from the past and could have led Thailand into the future. It is possible, even probable, that he would have failed but at least he would have done so for the right reasons and with integrity as both a statesman and a leader; on the other hand there is at least the possibility, however faint, that he would have succeeded - others, such as Anand, took the risk and did so. He chose not to.

He chose instead to sit at the front of the rollercoaster, rather than at the controls.

Whilst in the end ultimately of course everyone has a choice, (I don't want to wrap the discussion about Abhisit in Asian cultural babble) but I think we must understand the concept of obligation in an Asian family and societal concept. He has been prepared and groomed for this role since year dot, and I believe he CANNOT get off the rollercoaster, it is his duty to ride it to the bitter end. He is a career politician in a western political model. His main reason in life is to be a politician, not a businessman who uses politics to line his pocket.

I think he is becoming more and more confident in his role, but it is a political party with many factions and Suthep and Kasit are a necessary evil to hold the party together.

[Ulysses G.]

Funnily enough, if the Reds had accepted the PM's road map for peace two weeks ago, they would have come out with a much different aura surrounding them. They could have built momentum, and PTP might have had a real chance to gain control again in the November elections.

I despair that you will ever get anything right SomTumTiger.

Actually, much of what he says here is spot on.

Edited May 21, 2010 by Ulysses G.

[yoshiwara]

And would be extremely likely to happen because the parties have to canvass the opinion of their MP's and to switch sides like that in the case of the libdems would take 75% support from the MP's. So whilst it is "legally" possible, would also have to rely on the relevant party showing absolute disregard for its MP's and voters.

Oh, woops, does that mean then that Newin and his MP's have shown complete disregard for their voters? Umm. Yes.

That is the point you and the other reds want to make from the start and then work backwards.

However your reasoning is suspect.

The LibDems could have swung both ways for an alliance.

The situation permitted them to go with either Labour or Tories

And still can.

And get a 75% for either option depending on what was on offer.

It is the legality not the likelihood which is the example.

An example which the reds tried to use in this thread in the first place (see above)

So....its a big 'umm no' for you and a 'woopsie' thrown in.

Try again burning tyre man.

[Samuian]

Agreed, there are plenty of "i always knew", "didn't I say..." and plenty of other opinions - but there is a fine difference,

the fine line.. anyone who would, given the entirety of circumstances of players in this attempted struggle for power... anyone who would have handled it better without losing it?

The reds the supposed "leadership" had no choice, there was never the question of accepting a road map -

"all or nothing" was the target of the initiator. Like black Songkran - calling for a "peoples revolution"

I feel sorry for those being misled... very sorry!

After all I wonder how the mastermind of this enactment is going to respond in the future and how

the response will be - his poodles are already rowing back, trying to save what is left - if there is anything left....

let's see how many Louis Vuitton bags are needed to pack all this... looks like looks like

a sore loser has become a complete failure!

[Publicus]

Funnily enough, if the Reds had accepted the PM's road map for peace two weeks ago, they would have come out with a much different aura surrounding them. They could have built momentum, and PTP might have had a real chance to gain control again in the November elections.

I despair that you will ever get anything right SomTumTiger.

Actually, much of what he says here is spot on.

Agreed.

[animatic]

Funnily enough, if the Reds had accepted the PM's road map for peace two weeks ago, they would have come out with a much different aura surrounding them. They could have built momentum, and PTP might have had a real chance to gain control again in the November elections.

I despair that you will ever get anything right SomTumTiger.

Actually, much of what he says here is spot on.

Agreed.

Also agreed.

They had the brass ring and threw it away...

Thaksin wanted power and his revenge, he could have had both...

now just revenge and ignomy.

Oh and some seriously powerful and pissed off business interests

that now want his head on a platter.

[GarryP]

According to my son, the word going round in Thai circles is that the reds had no option but to make sure the negotiations failed. The Dems were working behind the scenes to make sure the PTP was disbanded so a new election would not have benefited PTP anyway. Whether this is true or not he does not know, just reporting what he had read on many of the Thai language blogs he frequents.

[SomTumTiger]

Also agreed.

They had the brass ring and threw it away...

Thaksin wanted power and his revenge, he could have had both...

now just revenge and ignomy.

Oh and some seriously powerful and pissed off business interests

that now want his head on a platter.

Thanks all - always good to feel the support of the reasonable posters. To many TV nutjobs on lately. My ignore list has doubled in the past 2 days, all from posters who have less than 10 posts, yet have been "members" for 3-5 years. Thaksin PR machine at work methinks

[Siam Simon]

Also agreed.

They had the brass ring and threw it away...

Thaksin wanted power and his revenge, he could have had both...

now just revenge and ignomy.

Oh and some seriously powerful and pissed off business interests

that now want his head on a platter.

Thanks all - always good to feel the support of the reasonable posters. To many TV nutjobs on lately. My ignore list has doubled in the past 2 days, all from posters who have less than 10 posts, yet have been "members" for 3-5 years. Thaksin PR machine at work methinks

As opposed to yourself, who has been a member for four months and has over six hundred posts already, including one where you told Jayboy you'd been waiting for him to make a particular comment for years ?

[whybother]

According to my son, the word going round in Thai circles is that the reds had no option but to make sure the negotiations failed. The Dems were working behind the scenes to make sure the PTP was disbanded so a new election would not have benefited PTP anyway. Whether this is true or not he does not know, just reporting what he had read on many of the Thai language blogs he frequents.

Why would the PTP be disbanded? There is nothing to disband them for is there?

Sure, some MPs might be caught up in this, but that would involve individual criminal charges, not a disbanding of the party.

[animatic]

According to my son, the word going round in Thai circles is that the reds had no option but to make sure the negotiations failed. The Dems were working behind the scenes to make sure the PTP was disbanded so a new election would not have benefited PTP anyway. Whether this is true or not he does not know, just reporting what he had read on many of the Thai language blogs he frequents.

Why would the PTP be disbanded? There is nothing to disband them for is there?

Sure, some MPs might be caught up in this, but that would involve individual criminal charges, not a disbanding of the party.

Well imagine for a moment if you will that:

Current PTP leadership conspired with Red Shirts,

to blackmail the nation into Gov Dissolution to benefit them.

And the paper trail proves this beyond a doubt.

Is this less or more than taking campaign donations or bribing voters.

I vote MUCH more.... what does the constitution say I wonder.

Conspiracy to insurrection and terrorism...

Should be a good clause against that somewhere.

Edited May 21, 2010 by animatic

[JohnLeech]

Not only are you a pedant you are wrong.

The LibDems could break from the Tories tomorrow and form a government with Labour and the odds and sods without an election.

Weasel chop logic.

Totally and utterly untrue. If you are so sure of yourself then name some countries under the Westminster system (or with a similar Parliamentary / Head of State system to Thailand) where a change of government has occurred under similar circumstances, with some specific examples.

If the LibDems broke with the Tories and allied themselves with Labour (and enough "odds and sods" to gain a majority) they could not form a government; convention in the UK (which governs the UK Parliamentary system in lieu of a written constitution) dictates that the PM would still be the PM (as GB was until he resigned) and that he would be required to ask HM to dissolve the house and call for fresh elections.

If you prefer to look at a country using the Westminster system and a written constitution under these circumstances I suggest you look at the Australian constitutional crisis of 1975.

I am not your or anyone else's "comrade"; I simply prefer facts to factoids.

Sorry, but the only requirement is the ability to command a majority in parliament.

This is theoretically possible.

The Conservative PM would tender his resignation.if he cannot do so.

The Queen is under no constitutinal obligation for a general election to be called if another PM can command a majority.

This is true.

And you are wrong.

The reason you are pushing your position is two-fold.

One: you want to give some ideological cover to the anti-working class reds in their destruction of working class jobs. (how embarrassing for your neo-Stalinist politics)

Two: since you are supporting a popular front with Thaksin, you need to de-legitimise the current government which is no less legitimate than the preceding governments.

Whether it has happened or not it is within the rules.

I will say it again:

The only criteria for forming a government is the clear ability to exercise a majority in parliament.

When a PM resigns as a result of not being able to command a majority, the Queen is not obliged to order a dissolution and an election if she is confident that an alternative government can be formed with a clear majority.

Red apologists don't like this.

They don't like it at all.

Why?

Because it does not support their position on Thaksin's allies bolting to the other side.

Well tough!

No names, no pack drill - although I would have thought that repeatedly calling people "red apologists" both qualified as name calling and was remarkably unobservant of what they had actually posted condemning both sides.

Yoshiwara clearly has no understanding of the basics of the UK "constitution" or government system, which goes some way to explaining his lack of understanding of the Thai sysem. The UK government operates under a system of convention rather than constitution, as the Magna Carta is a little outdated, so whatever you consider "theoretically possible" under a non-existent written constitution is simply not possible.

I have never said that the present government was not formed "within the rules", as they exist. What I said was that the repeated claim that a government could be formed in such a way in any similar "western democracy" was baseless - as is the argument that Thailand is only a fledgling democracy: Thailand has had universal suffrage regardless of sex and race for as long as many Western democracies and for longer than some (including the United States).

The reason I am pushing my position is two-fold:

One: an innate dislike for those who constantly make up "facts" to suit themselves, regardless of their political leaning, and who resort to name-calling to get their point across.

Two: because my own politics are anything but "neo-Stalinist" and the assertion is as ridiculous as it is uninformed. On the many occasions I have been called on to toast Queen Elizabeth, Queen Margrethe and Queen (later Princess) Julianna, or have called on someone else to do so I have done so not because it was "expected" or the custom (seated and in turn), but because I am a monarchist (small "m") as I believe anything is better than a President and that nothing could be worse than a President Blair or Thatcher, Thaksin or Abhisit. That loyalty, however, is neither unconditional nor unquestioning.

[JohnLeech]

Is this less or more than taking campaign donations or bribing voters.

I vote MUCH more.... what does the constitution say I wonder.

Conspiracy to insurrection and terrorism...

Should be a good clause against that somewhere.

Fortunately you don't have a vote (like me).

....... and there should be lots of good clauses in the constitution, but unfortunately there aren't - just a good many loopholes.

[drken]

Abhisit has one great chance to salvage his legacy and possibly come out of this a national hero. Pardon the Red Shirt leaders and sit down with them and invite them into the government. They have become a true political movement and do not need any association with Thaksin. In fact the Red Shirt Leaders need to disavow any asssociation with Thaksin and work with Abhisit. Suthep,Kasit and Korn and any leaders associated with the fascist PAD movement must be jettisoned from the government. Abhisit seems to want to move in this direction but the reactionaries around him want to push him to be a hard ass. Remember he is a formally trained economist in the great tradition of Adam Smith. He has the potential to deliver what Thailand really needs. I hope he can find the courage to follow what seems to be his instinct. I do believe it is possible for him to be the leader of a national reconciliation. Thaksin and the PAD represent Thailands ugly past. Let Abhisit represent its future.

[RussellHantz]

Funnily enough, if the Reds had accepted the PM's road map for peace two weeks ago, they would have come out with a much different aura surrounding them. They could have built momentum, and PTP might have had a real chance to gain control again in the November elections.

I despair that you will ever get anything right SomTumTiger.

Actually, much of what he says here is spot on.

Agreed.

Actually he is completely off target as usual.

The reds had no reason to believe Abhisit would honour his word -

Take the points for example. If any one of the points was "broken" then Abhisit could call off the election any time,

and the points were full of so many "this and thats" and ambiguity that all it would have taken would be a goverment sponsered

agent provocateur to break the agreement. If it isn't clear by now, it should be - the people behind Abhisit have no intention of

having an election if one of their puppets doesn't get into power, so until then, that means, more money into propaganda,

more money into getting / buying votes, more media suppression and crushing / killing political opponents, and if they still cant win

then we will probably see Samak/Somchai v2 judicial coup scenario. Most international observers who are not thaskinphobes see

exactly what this governemtn is up to.

Meanwhile, Abhisit harps on

about his "5-point" reconcilliation plan which everyone knows is pure politicial bs. It was when he said it the first time in 2008 is still is now.

[whybother]

Abhisit has one great chance to salvage his legacy and possibly come out of this a national hero. Pardon the Red Shirt leaders and sit down with them and invite them into the government. They have become a true political movement and do not need any association with Thaksin. In fact the Red Shirt Leaders need to disavow any asssociation with Thaksin and work with Abhisit. Suthep,Kasit and Korn and any leaders associated with the fascist PAD movement must be jettisoned from the government. Abhisit seems to want to move in this direction but the reactionaries around him want to push him to be a hard ass. Remember he is a formally trained economist in the great tradition of Adam Smith. He has the potential to deliver what Thailand really needs. I hope he can find the courage to follow what seems to be his instinct. I do believe it is possible for him to be the leader of a national reconciliation. Thaksin and the PAD represent Thailands ugly past. Let Abhisit represent its future.

I didn't realise Korn was associated with the yellows. A Dr Suthep is mentioned, but that is a different person to the current DPM.

Political movements don't usually resort to armed insurrection and arsen. And the reds already have a political party in the PTP.

[SomTumTiger]

Abhisit has one great chance to salvage his legacy and possibly come out of this a national hero. Pardon the Red Shirt leaders and sit down with them and invite them into the government.

You made me laugh today - thanks!

[drken]

Abhisit has one great chance to salvage his legacy and possibly come out of this a national hero. Pardon the Red Shirt leaders and sit down with them and invite them into the government.

You made me laugh today - thanks!

Glad to do so. It's my great pleasure

[lannarebirth]

Abhisit has one great chance to salvage his legacy and possibly come out of this a national hero. Pardon the Red Shirt leaders and sit down with them and invite them into the government. They have become a true political movement and do not need any association with Thaksin. In fact the Red Shirt Leaders need to disavow any asssociation with Thaksin and work with Abhisit. Suthep,Kasit and Korn and any leaders associated with the fascist PAD movement must be jettisoned from the government. Abhisit seems to want to move in this direction but the reactionaries around him want to push him to be a hard ass. Remember he is a formally trained economist in the great tradition of Adam Smith. He has the potential to deliver what Thailand really needs. I hope he can find the courage to follow what seems to be his instinct. I do believe it is possible for him to be the leader of a national reconciliation. Thaksin and the PAD represent Thailands ugly past. Let Abhisit represent its future.

Is their money that good?

[drken]

Abhisit has one great chance to salvage his legacy and possibly come out of this a national hero. Pardon the Red Shirt leaders and sit down with them and invite them into the government. They have become a true political movement and do not need any association with Thaksin. In fact the Red Shirt Leaders need to disavow any asssociation with Thaksin and work with Abhisit. Suthep,Kasit and Korn and any leaders associated with the fascist PAD movement must be jettisoned from the government. Abhisit seems to want to move in this direction but the reactionaries around him want to push him to be a hard ass. Remember he is a formally trained economist in the great tradition of Adam Smith. He has the potential to deliver what Thailand really needs. I hope he can find the courage to follow what seems to be his instinct. I do believe it is possible for him to be the leader of a national reconciliation. Thaksin and the PAD represent Thailands ugly past. Let Abhisit represent its future.

I didn't realise Korn was associated with the yellows. A Dr Suthep is mentioned, but that is a different person to the current DPM.

Political movements don't usually resort to armed insurrection and arsen. And the reds already have a political party in the PTP.

Suthep has consistently taken a reactionary and recklessly confrontational stance throughout the protests

Korn took the well adjudicated and completely non-political Supreme Court ruling on Thaksins finances (one that all Thais should be proud that their high court could adhere in such a disciplined manner to the law) and politicised it in an inflammatory manner

Kasit - PAD criminal

If you read what I wrote I didnt state Suthep or Korn were PAD

Perhaps you think a solution is possible without a national reconciliation. I disagree. Doing so would be an out of the box, brilliant move

[animatic]

Funnily enough, if the Reds had accepted the PM's road map for peace two weeks ago, they would have come out with a much different aura surrounding them. They could have built momentum, and PTP might have had a real chance to gain control again in the November elections.

I despair that you will ever get anything right SomTumTiger.

Actually, much of what he says here is spot on.

Agreed.

ALSO AGREED.

The reds had the brass ring in their hand, and dropped in the gutter.

Similar to Thaksin's always grasping for too much and losing more each time,

or this SPECIFICALLY was Thaksin grasping for too much, same result,

but more people burned for their efforts.

[A_Traveller]

Following on from the snatching defeat from the jaws of victory theme an article in the WSJ has the subheading Exiled Opposition Leader Intervened to Thwart Peace Talks, Both Sides Say

Extract... Thai security forces also worried about close ties between Mr. Thaksin and a rogue general who had defected to the Red Shirts and was threatening to turn the antigovernment protest into a full-blown revolt. Maj. Gen. Khattiya Sawasdipol said he answered directly to Mr. Thaksin. He was shot in the head by an unknown sniper on May 13 and died later in hospital.

The final straw for the government—as well as moderate factions in the Red Shirts—came earlier this month when the protesters and government negotiators failed to agree on a deal on that would have enabled the Red Shirts to go home in exchange for elections in November.

People involved in both government and opposition camps say Mr. Thaksin urged hard-liners to come up with fresh demands that stalled the process, ultimately leading to the talks' collapse.

They say Red Shirt leader Veera Musikapong quit the negotiations in disgust.

"He was questioning why they were bothering to talk when Mr. Thaksin was delaying any progress," says one person involved in the mediations. Mr. Veera is in army custody and couldn't be reached for comment.

So this viewpoint doesn't just exist in the Thai press or 'yellow appologists', but has traction in the international domain.

Regards

Edited May 23, 2010 by A_Traveller

[hammered]

Abhisit has one great chance to salvage his legacy and possibly come out of this a national hero. Pardon the Red Shirt leaders and sit down with them and invite them into the government. They have become a true political movement and do not need any association with Thaksin. In fact the Red Shirt Leaders need to disavow any asssociation with Thaksin and work with Abhisit. Suthep,Kasit and Korn and any leaders associated with the fascist PAD movement must be jettisoned from the government. Abhisit seems to want to move in this direction but the reactionaries around him want to push him to be a hard ass. Remember he is a formally trained economist in the great tradition of Adam Smith. He has the potential to deliver what Thailand really needs. I hope he can find the courage to follow what seems to be his instinct. I do believe it is possible for him to be the leader of a national reconciliation. Thaksin and the PAD represent Thailands ugly past. Let Abhisit represent its future.

A number of problems:

1. It means forgetting about the law and forgetting about the victims of these people's crimes. I know victims are not fashionable especially when they are victims of the reds but......

2. It may please the red supporters but it would utterly inflame virtually everyone who wasnt a red and therefore wouldnt have anything to do with reconcilliation but just pandering to one side. Reconcillaition will only be done by involving every group to include a literal majority. Pluralistic democracy where some party gets a majority based on about 32% of the electorate will not solve this either. Neither the red shirts nor their PTP allies nor Abhisit represent a majority of the electorate.

3. It sets a precedent of if you dont like the government then blockade a lump of the business sector, intimidate everyone around there, fire grenades at targets every night and if the authorities move in then burn everything you can and tell your supporters that journalists, firefighters and medics are legitimate targets

[hammered]

Following on from the snatching defeat from the jaws of victory theme an article in the WSJ has the subheading Exiled Opposition Leader Intervened to Thwart Peace Talks, Both Sides Say

Extract... Thai security forces also worried about close ties between Mr. Thaksin and a rogue general who had defected to the Red Shirts and was threatening to turn the antigovernment protest into a full-blown revolt. Maj. Gen. Khattiya Sawasdipol said he answered directly to Mr. Thaksin. He was shot in the head by an unknown sniper on May 13 and died later in hospital.

The final straw for the government—as well as moderate factions in the Red Shirts—came earlier this month when the protesters and government negotiators failed to agree on a deal on that would have enabled the Red Shirts to go home in exchange for elections in November.

People involved in both government and opposition camps say Mr. Thaksin urged hard-liners to come up with fresh demands that stalled the process, ultimately leading to the talks' collapse.

They say Red Shirt leader Veera Musikapong quit the negotiations in disgust.

"He was questioning why they were bothering to talk when Mr. Thaksin was delaying any progress," says one person involved in the mediations. Mr. Veera is in army custody and couldn't be reached for comment.

So this viewpoint doesn't just exist in the Thai press or 'yellow appologists', but has traction in the international domain.

Regards

Matichon had an interesting story on Veera and qutting the talks and movement which I doubt B Pundit will have translated on his site.