The Americans Debate Thailand's Thaksin

[webfact]

The Americans debate Thaksin

By Tulsathit Taptim

The Nation

Has there been any place where Thaksin Shinawatra's past, present and future can be discussed along with those of Thailand without raised voices, microphones snapped off and tables being banged? At least one. On June 10 at Room 2172 on Capitol Hill, a US House subcommittee hearing on the Thai political crisis took place in a manner as solemn as they've come.

In fact, the two-hour hearing, a full video clip of which was obtained by The Nation, was so solemn it looked almost surreal. That didn't mean it was boring, though. "Thaksin was a crook" was part of one testimony, which was countered by another witness saying the former prime minister "represented a rags-to-riches" success that endeared him to poor Thais. The session ended with the chairman's teasing question: Would Thailand achieve reconciliation if Thaksin were allowed to come back and run as prime minister?

The hearing by the House Foreign Affairs Committee's Subcommittee on Asia, the Pacific, and the Global Environment preceded the US House of Representatives' vote that was almost unanimously in favour of peaceful solutions for the Thai crisis and Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva's reconciliation road map. Congressman Eni FH Faleomavaega, the subcommittee chairman, set the tone for the hearing by emphasising the long-term, solid relationship between the United States and its close friend and ally and every panellist stuck with that tone throughout the session, despite diversified opinions on causes and ways out.

The first to testify was Scot Marciel, deputy assistant secretary for Southeast Asia and ambassador for Asean affairs. Throughout his one-hour testimony he was careful not to veer off the this-is-the-matter-for-Thais-to-resolve track, but noticeable was repeated acknowledgement that the crisis was very complex and remained unpredictable. Morale support by the US, yes. Interference, no.

He was followed by a panel of Asian/Thai academic experts, one of whom went further by saying that Abhisit's road map should receive backing. Dr Richard Cronin, who heads the Southeast Asia program at the Henry L Stimson Centre, was apparently not a Thaksin fan, and at one point he described the former prime minister as a crook who had a poor human-rights record.

According to Cronin, giving moral support to the Abhisit government in regard to its reconciliation efforts would not compromise US democratic values, and what was "very important" as far as the United States was concerned was that "oversimplification" of the Thai crisis must be rejected.

Karl Jackson, professor of Southeast Asian Studies at the Paul H Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, was far more sympathetic towards Thaksin. He said poor Thai people could easily identify themselves with a man who went from rags to riches, whose family barely had a warm place to sleep after Thaksin's father died. The evolution of a grass-roots political movement, empowered somewhat by Thaksin but not necessarily needing his support to function, was for real, Jackson insisted.

Catharin Dalpino, visiting associate professor and director of the Thai Studies Programme at Georgetown University's Edmund A Walsh School of Foreign Service, was very cautious about Thaksin's "popularity" among rural people. Southern Thailand was "rural", too, but Thaksin wouldn't be able to land a foot there. And what he did to the Muslim "insurgents" while prime minister was ironically similar to the approach he had condemned his political opponents of applying, she said.

The three academics were, however, more or less in the same tune after chairman Faleomavaega pro-vocatively asked whether a Thaksin political return would end the problems in Thailand, since that was apparently what brought the red shirts to Bangkok. Even Jackson suggested that the only plausible scenario was for Thaksin to do a Thanom Kittikachorn. The former Thai leader overthrown in the 1973 uprising sneaked back to Thailand three years after his downfall, and although the return led to another political bloodbath, he managed to live a quiet, albeit secluded, life later.

Dalpino was more blunt in her response. Thaksin's return would restart it all over again, she said. In her opinion, there was no middle-class prejudice or conspiracy against Thaksin. She noted that when Thaksin first arrived on the political scene, he was very popular among the middle class because he was seen as a sophisticated "globalisation" flag-bearer whose family visits to Starbucks were considered "cool".

Ominously or not, the chairman ended the hearing by saying that he and those who had come to testify might have to meet again. He acknowledged that Thailand's problems were far more complex than a fight between the rich and the poor or lovers of democracy against the military. "I don't even know whether Thaksin can visit our country," Faleomavaega said. If that was intended as a question, it was the only one that received no reply.

-- The Nation 2010-07-27

[zaphodbeeblebrox]

Karl Jackson, professor of Southeast Asian Studies at the Paul H Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, was far more sympathetic towards Thaksin. He said poor Thai people could easily identify themselves with a man who went from rags to riches, whose family barely had a warm place to sleep after Thaksin's father died. The evolution of a grass-roots political movement, empowered somewhat b Thaksin but not necessarily needing his support to function, was for real, Jackson insisted.

Prof. Jackson should lose his tenure for espousing this kind of propagandist nonsense.

"Seng Sae Khu [Thaksin's Chinese grandfather] made his fortune through tax farming. The Khu/Shinawatra family later founded Shinawatra Silks and then moved into finance, construction and property development. Lert Shinawatra opened a coffee shop and several businesses, and grew oranges and flowers in Chiang Mai's San Kamphaeng district. By the time Thaksin was born, the extended Shinawatra family was one of the richest and most influential in Chiang Mai." At age 16, Thaksin helped run one of his father's cinemas. source - Wikipedia

I don't know too many cinema owners in Thailand who are wearing rags.

Edited July 27, 2010 by zaphodbeeblebrox

[chosen1]

The crooks on Capital Hill discuss a crook - is there something wrong with this picture?

[jackdawson]

i'm sorry . did congress do / say something ? i wasn't listening .

[DP25]

countered by another witness saying the former prime minister "represented a rags-to-riches" success

Yes, most rags to riches stories involve your father being a member of parliment and robbing your American business partner

[Wozzit]

The crooks on Capital Hill discuss a crook - is there something wrong with this picture?

How many times have we seen the American Congress hold hearings on other countries with witnesses telling tearful, often heart-wrenching stories, only for these to be discovered later to be a pack of lies! Too many interested parties, including some representatives, use these purely for selfish PR purposes.

[Piengrudee]

Please keep the debate there, and don't bring it over.

[jayjay0]

The crooks on Capital Hill discuss a crook - is there something wrong with this picture?

How many times have we seen the American Congress hold hearings on other countries with witnesses telling tearful, often heart-wrenching stories, only for these to be discovered later to be a pack of lies! Too many interested parties, including some representatives, use these purely for selfish PR purposes.

Good question Also How many times have we seen the American Congress hold hearings on other countries with witnesses telling tearful, often heart-wrenching stories only to find out later that the stories had been understated?

Also how many times have we heard the rags to riches as a excuse to do any thing you wanted regardless of the rights of others.

They forgot to mention the rags to riches of Al Capone.

[laocowboy2]

The crooks on Capital Hill discuss a crook - is there something wrong with this picture?

How many times have we seen the American Congress hold hearings on other countries with witnesses telling tearful, often heart-wrenching stories, only for these to be discovered later to be a pack of lies! Too many interested parties, including some representatives, use these purely for selfish PR purposes.

<deleted>???? Why are US taxpayers (Fortunately I am not one) having to pay for this circus discussing a man and a country far away, neither of which constitute a pressing matter for the US government or people? Obviously these people have far too much time on their hands (and access to too much of the taxpayers' money). Or perhaps I overslept and did not reaise that all the domestic problems in the US have now been solved?

[Artisi]

Nothing like the good old US of A buying into everyone elses problem. Guess everything will now be ok.

[animatic]

Karl Jackson, professor of Southeast Asian Studies at the Paul H Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, was far more sympathetic towards Thaksin. He said poor Thai people could easily identify themselves with a man who went from rags to riches, whose family barely had a warm place to sleep after Thaksin's father died. The evolution of a grass-roots political movement, empowered somewhat b Thaksin but not necessarily needing his support to function, was for real, Jackson insisted.

Prof. Jackson should lose his tenure for espousing this kind of propagandist nonsense.

"Seng Sae Khu [Thaksin's Chinese grandfather] made his fortune through tax farming. The Khu/Shinawatra family later founded Shinawatra Silks and then moved into finance, construction and property development. Lert Shinawatra opened a coffee shop and several businesses, and grew oranges and flowers in Chiang Mai's San Kamphaeng district. By the time Thaksin was born, the extended Shinawatra family was one of the richest and most influential in Chiang Mai." At age 16, Thaksin helped run one of his father's cinemas. source - Wikipedia

I don't know too many cinema owners in Thailand who are wearing rags.

I agree 100%, complete <deleted> from a man who should know better..

[certified]

hahaha, wow just mention America and watch all the anti- American misfits come out of the woodwork! It's so predictable! hahaha:lol:

Edited July 27, 2010 by certified

[Vertigotogo]

<deleted>???? Why are US taxpayers (Fortunately I am not one) having to pay for this circus discussing a man and a country far away, neither of which constitute a pressing matter for the US government or people? Obviously these people have far too much time on their hands (and access to too much of the taxpayers' money). Or perhaps I overslept and did not reaise that all the domestic problems in the US have now been solved?

Well said; bureaucrats keeping themselves in a job perhaps?

[way2muchcoffee]

hahaha, wow just mention America and watch all the anti- American misfits come out of the woodwork! It's so predictable! hahaha:lol:

Indeed. Like clockwork. I'm expecting many more anti-America posts on this thread.

[animatic]

hahaha, wow just mention America and watch all the anti- American misfits come out of the woodwork! It's so predictable! hahaha:lol:

Indeed. Like clockwork. I'm expecting many more anti-America posts on this thread.

Of course, always good to distract from your own problems by blaming others,

and the biggest target is always the easiest.. just forget your own national histories and slag away.

Same stuff, different day.

[ihunnieibee]

If this happened on June 10th - (I gather from reading the article..)

Why has it taken The Nation so long to write something up about it, I feel like if it happened over a month ago that it is really old news......

[stepenwolf1958]

The crooks on Capital Hill discuss a crook - is there something wrong with this picture?

How many times have we seen the American Congress hold hearings on other countries with witnesses telling tearful, often heart-wrenching stories, only for these to be discovered later to be a pack of lies! Too many interested parties, including some representatives, use these purely for selfish PR purposes.

Good question Also How many times have we seen the American Congress hold hearings on other countries with witnesses telling tearful, often heart-wrenching stories only to find out later that the stories had been understated?

Also how many times have we heard the rags to riches as a excuse to do any thing you wanted regardless of the rights of others.

They forgot to mention the rags to riches of Al Capone.

Well, this was punch under the belt. Am i wrong if i notice you don't like Americans much?

[stepenwolf1958]

Is this unprofessional meeting, even incompetent(thanks to Mr. Jackson's story about background of Thaksin's family) an attempt to compensate or alleviate the frustration of current government by the American's move of putting Thailand on the list about human traffiking?

If i see tomorrow some excited comments of democrats, about this so call panel, i will know this is the reason. Americans wanted their ally to don't feel frustrated about the list.

[stepenwolf1958]

hahaha, wow just mention America and watch all the anti- American misfits come out of the woodwork! It's so predictable! hahaha:lol:

It could be but only fools would do that.

I don't like American establisment(s) and ploicy but i have excellent friends of mine, Americans and i never mix oil and water...

[chainarong]

oh hummm

[LaoPo]

Karl Jackson, professor of Southeast Asian Studies at the Paul H Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, was far more sympathetic towards Thaksin. He said poor Thai people could easily identify themselves with a man who went from rags to riches, whose family barely had a warm place to sleep after Thaksin's father died. The evolution of a grass-roots political movement, empowered somewhat b Thaksin but not necessarily needing his support to function, was for real, Jackson insisted.

Prof. Jackson should lose his tenure for espousing this kind of propagandist nonsense.

"Seng Sae Khu [Thaksin's Chinese grandfather] made his fortune through tax farming. The Khu/Shinawatra family later founded Shinawatra Silks and then moved into finance, construction and property development. Lert Shinawatra opened a coffee shop and several businesses, and grew oranges and flowers in Chiang Mai's San Kamphaeng district. By the time Thaksin was born, the extended Shinawatra family was one of the richest and most influential in Chiang Mai." At age 16, Thaksin helped run one of his father's cinemas. source - Wikipedia

I don't know too many cinema owners in Thailand who are wearing rags.

I agree 100%, complete <deleted> from a man who should know better..

Why not send him an email, asking why he said so....? His email address is in the link, below.

Karl D. Jackson

Director, Asian Studies

Director, Southeast Asia Studies

C.V. Starr Distinguished Professor of Southeast Asia Studies

LaoPo

Edited July 27, 2010 by Scott
No email addresses/Scott

[zaphodbeeblebrox]

Karl Jackson, professor of Southeast Asian Studies at the Paul H Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, was far more sympathetic towards Thaksin. He said poor Thai people could easily identify themselves with a man who went from rags to riches, whose family barely had a warm place to sleep after Thaksin's father died. The evolution of a grass-roots political movement, empowered somewhat b Thaksin but not necessarily needing his support to function, was for real, Jackson insisted.

Prof. Jackson should lose his tenure for espousing this kind of propagandist nonsense.

"Seng Sae Khu [Thaksin's Chinese grandfather] made his fortune through tax farming. The Khu/Shinawatra family later founded Shinawatra Silks and then moved into finance, construction and property development. Lert Shinawatra opened a coffee shop and several businesses, and grew oranges and flowers in Chiang Mai's San Kamphaeng district. By the time Thaksin was born, the extended Shinawatra family was one of the richest and most influential in Chiang Mai." At age 16, Thaksin helped run one of his father's cinemas. source - Wikipedia

I don't know too many cinema owners in Thailand who are wearing rags.

I agree 100%, complete <deleted> from a man who should know better..

Why not send him an email, asking why he said so....? His email address is in the link, below.

Karl D. Jackson

Director, Asian Studies

Director, Southeast Asia Studies

C.V. Starr Distinguished Professor of Southeast Asia Studies

LaoPo

Already did it, with a copy to the dean of academic affairs at John Hopkins University.

Edited July 27, 2010 by Scott
email edited out/Scott

[Scott]

Further posting of email addresses will result in suspension of posting ability. It is against forum rules.

This thread will be monitored for the usual off-topic responses which sometimes occur.

Please take care in making your posts.

[moe666]

Why would the US care about Thailand? How about one of our oldest alies I believe going back to 1800's and a supporter during the Vietnam War.

The US has the largest Thai population outside of Thailand.

Edited July 27, 2010 by moe666

[Shotime]

I liken Abhisit Vejjajiva's situation to President Obama's. I believe they would both do the right thing if their hands weren't tied. It seems as if charisma (and money) wins over decency. I know very little about Thai politics, but Abhisit seems to have the people's best interest at heart.

[321niti123]

The crooks on Capital Hill discuss a crook - is there something wrong with this picture?

How many times have we seen the American Congress hold hearings on other countries with witnesses telling tearful, often heart-wrenching stories, only for these to be discovered later to be a pack of lies! Too many interested parties, including some representatives, use these purely for selfish PR purposes.

<deleted>???? Why are US taxpayers (Fortunately I am not one) having to pay for this circus discussing a man and a country far away, neither of which constitute a pressing matter for the US government or people? Obviously these people have far too much time on their hands (and access to too much of the taxpayers' money). Or perhaps I overslept and did not reaise that all the domestic problems in the US have now been solved?

Do u realize how much trade thailand is doing with the US? The US is arguably the most powerful nation presently, and so therefore its influence is expansive, it is also the same vise versa if something were to happen in thailand, it could affect US citizen safety, trade safety, and US economics-as little as that mayb it still has an affect.

[symbiosis]

Dalpino was more blunt in her response. Thaksin's return would restart it all over again, she said. In her opinion, there was no middle-class prejudice or conspiracy against Thaksin. She noted that when Thaksin first arrived on the political scene, he was very popular among the middle class because he was seen as a sophisticated "globalisation" flag-bearer whose family visits to Starbucks were considered "cool".

She forgot the part that came next. Thaksin deigned to help the lower classes and well, that was that.

[animatic]

Dalpino was more blunt in her response. Thaksin's return would restart it all over again, she said. In her opinion, there was no middle-class prejudice or conspiracy against Thaksin. She noted that when Thaksin first arrived on the political scene, he was very popular among the middle class because he was seen as a sophisticated "globalisation" flag-bearer whose family visits to Starbucks were considered "cool".

She forgot the part that came next. Thaksin deigned to help the lower classes and well, that was that.

Or more aptly Thaksin decided to use the lower classes as a mechanism or cudgel,

to gain increased and prolonged power for the profit of his clique at the expense of

most others including the lower classes in certain regions, whom he also rigidly controlled

in their thinking and expectations, in advance of an unavoidable changing of the guard

in the national structure.

Edited July 27, 2010 by animatic

[SpoliaOpima]

Dalpino was more blunt in her response. Thaksin's return would restart it all over again, she said. In her opinion, there was no middle-class prejudice or conspiracy against Thaksin. She noted that when Thaksin first arrived on the political scene, he was very popular among the middle class because he was seen as a sophisticated "globalisation" flag-bearer whose family visits to Starbucks were considered "cool".

She forgot the part that came next. Thaksin deigned to help the lower classes and well, that was that.

Why would the middle class care if he helped the lower classes (if indeed he did, which is rather debatable)? The middle class deserted him in droves when his corruption and brutality became too much even by the normally low standards Thais hold their PMs too. Most his main advisers and co-party foudners, his deputy prime minister, and his key cabinet ministers - resigned and departed.

What he brought to certain rural areas was pure pork barrel at best. The Abhisit administration has maintained and in some cases extended Thaksin's economic and social welfare policies, yet the so-called lower classes seem to adhere to the man. Why? Because their overlords keep the cult of personality alive.

[symbiosis]

Dalpino was more blunt in her response. Thaksin's return would restart it all over again, she said. In her opinion, there was no middle-class prejudice or conspiracy against Thaksin. She noted that when Thaksin first arrived on the political scene, he was very popular among the middle class because he was seen as a sophisticated "globalisation" flag-bearer whose family visits to Starbucks were considered "cool".

She forgot the part that came next. Thaksin deigned to help the lower classes and well, that was that.

Why would the middle class care if he helped the lower classes (if indeed he did, which is rather debatable)? The middle class deserted him in droves when his corruption and brutality became too much even by the normally low standards Thais hold their PMs too. Most his main advisers and co-party foudners, his deputy prime minister, and his key cabinet ministers - resigned and departed.

What he brought to certain rural areas was pure pork barrel at best. The Abhisit administration has maintained and in some cases extended Thaksin's economic and social welfare policies, yet the so-called lower classes seem to adhere to the man. Why? Because their overlords keep the cult of personality alive.

why? fear of "redistribution of wealth". Same as with the tea party in the U.S. The Democrats/PAD are essentially Thai tea partiers and Thaksin is their Obama. It's an old, and rather obvious rerun of history, actually.