Thaksin Supports Reconciliation Talks: Sanan

[webfact]

FUGITIVE EX-PM

Thaksin supports reconciliation talks: Sanan

By Satien Wiriyaphanpongsa

The Nation

Fugitive ex-prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra supports a national reconciliation plan unconditionally, Deputy Prime Minister Sanan Kachornprasart said yesterday.

“Thaksin said he agrees with my reconciliation effort and wants to see Thai people talking to each other,” the Chart Thai Pattana Party adviser said during a press briefing yesterday.

Sanan, who initiated the reconciliation plan, met Thaksin for 15 minutes during a work trip to a temple in Norway last Saturday.

“I asked him to forget the past and not to get furious. Everybody should join hands to solve the problems in the country. Thaksin just laughed and told me to continue the plan,” Sanan said.

“Neither of us laid down any conditions. I didn’t talk about an amnesty,” he said.

“Thaksin is healthy and doesn’t look ill, as rumoured. We giggled,” the deputy prime minister said, adding that he had not asked Thaksin about where he was living, or been told of his movements.

Sanan said he met Thaksin personally and was not working on behalf of the government.

“I’m not a policeman and have no power to arrest anyone. Even policemen who have met Thaksin abroad cannot arrest him. They have to inform the host country first. Don’t be confused,” the deputy PM said.

Sanan said he had informed Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva about the meeting. He said he would pursue reconciliation further by having talks with Democrats, the Bhum Jai Thai, Army and red-shirt leaders. He expected his own reconciliation blueprint could be finished and presented to all concerned parties in January next year.

The deputy premier has had talks with numerous political groups over the past few months to gather views on ways to bring about reconciliation.

-- The Nation 2010-11-10

Related topic:

Sanan, Thaksin Meet In Norway

[webfact]

Sanan: I met Thaksin by chance

By The Nation

Deputy Prime Minister Sanan Kachornprasart said Tuesday that he met former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra by chance in Norway.

Sanan said he talked to Thaksin for about 15 minutes at an temple event in Norway.

"We giggled and he didn't look ill," Sanan told a press conference Tuesday.

"I and Thaksin talked about reconciliation but neither of us laid down any condition."

Sanan said he had briefed Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva on the meeting and told Abhist that amnesty would not be part of any deal for reconciliation with Thaksin.

Sanan added he planned to present his own reconciliation blueprint to "all parties concerned" in January.

-- The Nation 2010-11-10

[webfact]

Thaksin cool on Sanan's bid for reconciliation

By Piyanart Srivalo

The Nation

Fugitive ex-prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra appears to have rebuffed a bid to try to enhance national reconciliation by Deputy Prime Minister Sanan Kachornprasart.

“Thaksin is not OK with Sanan’s proposal. He said he would continue to fight,” a source close to Sanan revealed without elaboration.

Sanan met wit Thaksin in Norway during a working trip last week. He was tight-lipped after his return to Thailand yesterday, but said he would hold a press conference about his meeting with Thaksin today.

“If it [the talk with Thaksin] won’t help improve the political situation I won’t do it,” the deputy prime minister said.

Sanan, an adviser to the Chart Thai Pattana Party, has tried to be a middleman between political parties, plus the red shirts and yellow-shirt supporters in order to enhance national reconciliation.

He has met red-shirt leaders in prison, plus key leaders of the People’s Alliance for Democracy (yellow shirts), Sondhi Limthongkul and leaders of the New Politics Party, key figures in the opposition Pheu Thai Party, and leaders of small and medium sized parties" all except the ruling Democrat Party.

Thaksin, meanwhile, sent a note via Twitter last night that the Thai media should ask Sanan directly about their meeting in Norway.

Somchai Wongsawat, Thaksin’s brother-in-law, vowed yesterday to bring Thaksin back to Thailand.

“I support the reconciliation plan but it’s not that easy because it involves many people. I don’t

expect 100 per cent success but we should try,” Somchai said.

He said the government should take a leading role in the plan, have an open mind, and not set too many prerequisites, otherwise the mission would fail.

“As far as I know, Thaksin has no conditions. He would never mind his difficulties as long as the people are happy,” he said.

-- The Nation 2010-11-10

[whybother]

“Thaksin said he agrees with my reconciliation effort and wants to see Thai people talking to each other,” the Chart Thai Pattana Party adviser said during a press briefing yesterday.

“Thaksin is not OK with Sanan’s proposal. He said he would continue to fight,” a source close to Sanan revealed without elaboration.

I'm confused.

Thaksin agrees with the reconciliation effort, but is not OK with the proposal. Thaksin wants to see Thai people talking to each other, and will continue to fight.

[timekeeper]

who cares what he thinks?

the opinion of a wanted terrorist and convicted criminal on the run deserves no consideration at all

Thaksin is spent force.

Thailand is much better off with Abhisit and Korn at the helm

lets move on

[givenall]

who cares what he thinks?

the opinion of a wanted terrorist and convicted criminal on the run deserves no consideration at all

Thaksin is spent force.

Thailand is much better off with Abhisit and Korn at the helm

lets move on

Who cares? It impossible to trust this man anyways

[waza]

I am confused. Is it me or is it OK for a government official to meet, discuss, seek approval of government policy and giggle with a wanted fugative, charged with corruption, treason and funding the overthrow of that government? Not to mention a convicted criminal on the run to avoid his goal sentence and further prosecution?

[brahmburgers]

“As far as I know, Thaksin has no conditions."

Of course he has conditions. Everything he does or says is hyper political, manipulative and fraught with conditions. That statement fits with everything Thaksin says: lies lies lies. Thaksin is one of those odd people who absolutely cannot tell the truth. You look at any one of his thousands of public statements during the past 10 years, and every single assertion he's made is a lie. If you find any exceptions, let us know.

For a satirical parody of the man, check out this new ebook. There's an English version and a Thai/English version

Edited November 10, 2010 by brahmburgers

[waza]

Damm it I double posted......

Edited November 10, 2010 by waza

[jayboy]

I am confused. Is it me or is it OK for a government official to meet, discuss, seek approval of government policy and giggle with a wanted fugative, charged with corruption, treason and funding the overthrow of that government? Not to mention a convicted criminal on the run to avoid his goal sentence and further prosecution?

Yes I think you are a bit confused.Sanan isn't a government official and can meet who he likes.Secondly this isn't the first meeting by neutral parties with Thaksin, for example the respected Bangkok Mayor Sukhumbhand met him in Brunei some months ago.Thirdly Thaksin remains the most popular politician in the country (and I grant you the most unpopular) and thus has a huge domestic base which can't be ignored.Fourthly he has transformed politics in Thailand, with the present government copying many of his policies.Fourthly he has been found guilty of only one relatively trivial offence.Fifthly there's a widely held view that many of the other charges against him are politically motivated.I don't think he's been charged with treason, has he?

In terms of the overthrow of governments, much of the current difficulty can be tracked back to the criminal coup of 2006 where the perpetrators remain unpunished.They awarded themselves a post facto pardon.I suggest first on the critical path is to nail these brutes and their not so hidden amart supporters.

And Thaksin? I think he's finished - too divisive and flawed.Let him stay in exile for a few years.But he's changed the country permanently so that the majority can no longer be patronised and ignored - which explains the fury and vengeful behaviour of the greedy, corrupt elite.

[philw]

I am confused. Is it me or is it OK for a government official to meet, discuss, seek approval of government policy and giggle with a wanted fugative, charged with corruption, treason and funding the overthrow of that government? Not to mention a convicted criminal on the run to avoid his goal sentence and further prosecution?

Yes I think you are a bit confused.Sanan isn't a government official and can meet who he likes.Secondly this isn't the first meeting by neutral parties with Thaksin, for example the respected Bangkok Mayor Sukhumbhand met him in Brunei some months ago.Thirdly Thaksin remains the most popular politician in the country (and I grant you the most unpopular) and thus has a huge domestic base which can't be ignored.Fourthly he has transformed politics in Thailand, with the present government copying many of his policies.Fourthly he has been found guilty of only one relatively trivial offence.Fifthly there's a widely held view that many of the other charges against him are politically motivated.I don't think he's been charged with treason, has he?

In terms of the overthrow of governments, much of the current difficulty can be tracked back to the criminal coup of 2006 where the perpetrators remain unpunished.They awarded themselves a post facto pardon.I suggest first on the critical path is to nail these brutes and their not so hidden amart supporters.

And Thaksin? I think he's finished - too divisive and flawed.Let him stay in exile for a few years.But he's changed the country permanently so that the majority can no longer be patronised and ignored - which explains the fury and vengeful behaviour of the greedy, corrupt elite.

All good points.

[waza]

So Deputy Prime Minister Sanan Kachornprasart doesnt hold a position in government and isnt a government official? Hmm I stand corrected. But the rest still stands.

Edited November 10, 2010 by waza

[animatic]

Not really news, because nothing is new except that they talked.

And considering the Nopadum has been trumpeting the meeting for a week it

was hardly 'met by chance in Norway'.

Thaksin's position isn't news;

he wants the whole shooting match in his hands or he keeps fighting.

Reconciliation with him still in the picture is a red herring.

Not going to happen.

We are so past the 4 year old coup that it is irrelevent to the actual reconciliation. It's not the coup but Thaksin wanting 'power' back that is the current issue at hand. Wailing on about the long past coup is just a political talking point.

Legal or not AT THAT TIME, it is legal now, since the country voted on a post coup constitution. To say that Thaksin's actions in the last 2 years have been legal is just so much smoke and mirrors. Many have not been and his illegal wrongs do not balance out the actions of the coup makers, and suddenly become legal, because they may have not acted legally.

Let's also not forget Thakin resigned as PM before the coup. and was no more than acting PM prior to that, and has returned and left again while his own crew was in power.

This is Thaksin wanting power again and nothing more,

no matter the talking points.

Edited November 10, 2010 by animatic

[Piengrudee]

Sanan: I met Thaksin by chance. So why the media knew this event was going to happen a week ago?

Edited November 10, 2010 by Piengrudee

[jayboy]

Not really news, because nothing is new except that they talked.

And considering the Nopadum has been trumpeting the meeting for a week it

was hardly 'met by chance in Norway'.

Thaksin's position isn't news;

he wants the whole shooting match in his hands or he keeps fighting.

Reconciliation with him still in the picture is a red herring.

Not going to happen.

We are so past the 4 year old coup that it is irrelevent to the actual reconciliation. It's not the coup but Thaksin wanting 'power' back that is the current issue at hand. Wailing on about the long past coup is just a political talking point.

Legal or not AT THAT TIME, it is legal now, since the country voted on a post coup constitution. To say that Thaksin's actions in the last 2 years have been legal is just so much smoke and mirrors. Many have not been and his illegal wrongs do not balance out the actions of the coup makers, and suddenly become legal, because they may have not acted legally.

Let's also not forget Thakin resigned as PM before the coup. and was no more than acting PM prior to that, and has returned and left again while his own crew was in power.

This is Thaksin wanting power again and nothing more,

no matter the talking points.

The same tired discredited points wheeled out again.Some people have no sense of shame.

To take but one example the constitution was imposed on the Thai public by the junta.It passed only barely because most people just wanted an end to the incompetent quisling government.The junta made it clear that if the constitution didn't pass it would be promulgated anyway.Even then with the full weight of the army and state apparatus pushing it, the constitution only scraped through - a massive slap in the face to the criminal regime.

[Felt 35]

I am confused. Is it me or is it OK for a government official to meet, discuss, seek approval of government policy and giggle with a wanted fugative, charged with corruption, treason and funding the overthrow of that government? Not to mention a convicted criminal on the run to avoid his goal sentence and further prosecution?

Your not alone. How can Norway let in this criminal when he is not welcome in many other countries, included England. Something is not right here.

[Phuket Stan]

Quote "Yes I think you are a bit confused.Sanan isn't a government official and can meet who he likes.Secondly this isn't the first meeting by neutral parties with Thaksin, for example the respected Bangkok Mayor Sukhumbhand "

Bangkok has a governor...and as him being respected is still to be judged

Edited November 10, 2010 by Phuket Stan

[hammered]

A non-event in terms of substance but a symbol more likely that talks are or have been ongoing and may produce something. Probably the substantive stuff is done very secretly.

[hammered]

Quote "Yes I think you are a bit confused.Sanan isn't a government official and can meet who he likes.Secondly this isn't the first meeting by neutral parties with Thaksin, for example the respected Bangkok Mayor Sukhumbhand "

Bangkok has a governor...and as him being respected is still to be judged

Sukhumband is one of the very very few polticians across the poltical spectrum in Thailand who is willing to buck party lines and express an opinion. For that alone he deserves respect, or at least more respect than the 99% who just regurgitate lines given to them.

[rubl]

Not really news, because nothing is new except that they talked.

And considering the Nopadum has been trumpeting the meeting for a week it

was hardly 'met by chance in Norway'.

Thaksin's position isn't news;

he wants the whole shooting match in his hands or he keeps fighting.

Reconciliation with him still in the picture is a red herring.

Not going to happen.

We are so past the 4 year old coup that it is irrelevent to the actual reconciliation. It's not the coup but Thaksin wanting 'power' back that is the current issue at hand. Wailing on about the long past coup is just a political talking point.

Legal or not AT THAT TIME, it is legal now, since the country voted on a post coup constitution. To say that Thaksin's actions in the last 2 years have been legal is just so much smoke and mirrors. Many have not been and his illegal wrongs do not balance out the actions of the coup makers, and suddenly become legal, because they may have not acted legally.

Let's also not forget Thakin resigned as PM before the coup. and was no more than acting PM prior to that, and has returned and left again while his own crew was in power.

This is Thaksin wanting power again and nothing more,

no matter the talking points.

The same tired discredited points wheeled out again.Some people have no sense of shame.

To take but one example the constitution was imposed on the Thai public by the junta.It passed only barely because most people just wanted an end to the incompetent quisling government.The junta made it clear that if the constitution didn't pass it would be promulgated anyway.Even then with the full weight of the army and state apparatus pushing it, the constitution only scraped through - a massive slap in the face to the criminal regime.

Look in the mirror and see this:

"The same tired discredited points wheeled out again.Some people have no sense of shame."

[CharlieH]

Why do the press keep giving this man "ink" space, they are only perpetuating his constant intereference.

As said who cares about "the opinion of a wanted terrorist and convicted criminal on the run deserves no consideration at all" and shouldnt even be given one word in the press/media. Move on, as long as people keep writing about what he thinks and does it will feed his ego and give him unwarranted attention.Ignore him totally and hope he just fades away to obscurity.

[rixalex]

To take but one example the constitution was imposed on the Thai public by the junta.It passed only barely because most people just wanted an end to the incompetent quisling government.The junta made it clear that if the constitution didn't pass it would be promulgated anyway.Even then with the full weight of the army and state apparatus pushing it, the constitution only scraped through - a massive slap in the face to the criminal regime.

It passed only barely

The margin by which a vote gets won is all pretty irrelevant. A referendum either gets passed or it doesn't. This one did. End of.

because most people just wanted an end to the incompetent quisling government.

Who are you to tell us why Thai people voted the way they did? And furthermore, how is it important? The important thing is that citizens vote of their own free will. Why people vote the way they do is entirely their business, just as with general elections, and trying to discredit the results of a vote on the basis of not liking the reasons why you think people voted the way they did is a pretty weak argument, if i may say so.

the constitution only scraped through - a massive slap in the face to the criminal regime.

Arguing that the passing of the constitution was a slap in the face to the people who were putting it forward just because it didn't win by a large margin might be over-stating things a little. I think if anyone's face was slapped it was those who were campaigning for the "no" vote, which mainly consisted as we know of Thaksin's friends and family. How differently things might have turned out had enough people listened to them and voted accordingly. They didn't.

[jayboy]

Who are you to tell us why Thai people voted the way they did? And furthermore, how is it important? The important thing is that citizens vote of their own free will. Why people vote the way they do is entirely their business, just as with general elections, and trying to discredit the results of a vote on the basis of not liking the reasons why you think people voted the way they did is a pretty weak argument, if i may say so.

I don't suppose I am the first to offer an opinion on this forum.That's what it is, an opinion.I have already pointed out why the junta's constitution is discredited and there's no need to rehearse those points.Your argument (such as it is) doesn't add up to much since when the full state apparatus, military, and directed judicial system are lined up to frustrate the popular will the results of the referendum on the constitution don't represent a popular free will decision.We have seen that in Burma,North Korea and other military dominated states with totalitarian tendencies.I'm not saying Thailand is in that category as witnessed the stinging slap in the face given to the elite and their henchmen despite all the pressures to tick the right boxes.

[whybother]

The same tired discredited points wheeled out again.Some people have no sense of shame.

To take but one example the constitution was imposed on the Thai public by the junta.It passed only barely because most people just wanted an end to the incompetent quisling government.The junta made it clear that if the constitution didn't pass it would be promulgated anyway.Even then with the full weight of the army and state apparatus pushing it, the constitution only scraped through - a massive slap in the face to the criminal regime.

I suppose the fact that the PPP couldn't even get a majority of thai people to support them in the 2007 election is a huge slap in face for them too.

[jayboy]

The same tired discredited points wheeled out again.Some people have no sense of shame.

To take but one example the constitution was imposed on the Thai public by the junta.It passed only barely because most people just wanted an end to the incompetent quisling government.The junta made it clear that if the constitution didn't pass it would be promulgated anyway.Even then with the full weight of the army and state apparatus pushing it, the constitution only scraped through - a massive slap in the face to the criminal regime.

I suppose the fact that the PPP couldn't even get a majority of thai people to support them in the 2007 election is a huge slap in face for them too.

It was a defeat of course, but you're comparing apples and oranges.The PTP didn't have the organs of state pressing for its victory.(to say nothing of the Democrats scummy deal with Newin)

[hammered]

Not really news, because nothing is new except that they talked.

And considering the Nopadum has been trumpeting the meeting for a week it

was hardly 'met by chance in Norway'.

Thaksin's position isn't news;

he wants the whole shooting match in his hands or he keeps fighting.

Reconciliation with him still in the picture is a red herring.

Not going to happen.

We are so past the 4 year old coup that it is irrelevent to the actual reconciliation. It's not the coup but Thaksin wanting 'power' back that is the current issue at hand. Wailing on about the long past coup is just a political talking point.

Legal or not AT THAT TIME, it is legal now, since the country voted on a post coup constitution. To say that Thaksin's actions in the last 2 years have been legal is just so much smoke and mirrors. Many have not been and his illegal wrongs do not balance out the actions of the coup makers, and suddenly become legal, because they may have not acted legally.

Let's also not forget Thakin resigned as PM before the coup. and was no more than acting PM prior to that, and has returned and left again while his own crew was in power.

This is Thaksin wanting power again and nothing more,

no matter the talking points.

The same tired discredited points wheeled out again.Some people have no sense of shame.

To take but one example the constitution was imposed on the Thai public by the junta.It passed only barely because most people just wanted an end to the incompetent quisling government.The junta made it clear that if the constitution didn't pass it would be promulgated anyway.Even then with the full weight of the army and state apparatus pushing it, the constitution only scraped through - a massive slap in the face to the criminal regime.

A 16% win isnt bad in a vote actually and certainly isnt barely. Assumptions of why people voted for or against something or for or agaisnt a party are interesting to debate but irrelvent in practice. I take it you wont be arguing that people voted for X becuase their votes were bought which is a similar arguement;) The 58% turnout was on the low side compared to a national election but as there has never been a constitutional vote In Thailand before and one in which elements of a political party campaigned for people not to vote at one point it is difficult to state whether it was good or bad. As an aside it compares very well with the 40.3% turnout for the recent US elections.

Maybe in the critical thing is that we have just heard that the vast majority of people have never read or know nothing about the Thai constitution or have read a fraction of it or have minimal knowledge which isnt surprising to those who have discussed such things across the social spectrum

[rixalex]

I don't suppose I am the first to offer an opinion on this forum.That's what it is, an opinion.I have already pointed out why the junta's constitution is discredited and there's no need to rehearse those points.

OK. And it's my opinion that the points you make as to why you believe the constitution is discredited are extremely weak and your decision to not rehearse them a wise one.

Your argument (such as it is) doesn't add up to much since when the full state apparatus, military, and directed judicial system are lined up to frustrate the popular will the results of the referendum on the constitution don't represent a popular free will decision.

Convoluted babble.

If the results of the referendum on the constitution didn't represent a popular free will decision, then why was it, as you are so eager to point out, such a narrow margin of victory?

[whybother]

The same tired discredited points wheeled out again.Some people have no sense of shame.

To take but one example the constitution was imposed on the Thai public by the junta.It passed only barely because most people just wanted an end to the incompetent quisling government.The junta made it clear that if the constitution didn't pass it would be promulgated anyway.Even then with the full weight of the army and state apparatus pushing it, the constitution only scraped through - a massive slap in the face to the criminal regime.

I suppose the fact that the PPP couldn't even get a majority of thai people to support them in the 2007 election is a huge slap in face for them too.

It was a defeat of course, but you're comparing apples and oranges.The PTP didn't have the organs of state pressing for its victory.(to say nothing of the Democrats scummy deal with Newin)

And, of course, Thaksin never had any scummy deals with Newin, did he?

Any deals that the Democrats have or had with other political parties are no better or worse than deals that the other political parties had with the Thaksin or the PPP.

And, even after several months of asking, I have never been shown any evidence that "the organs of state" forced anyone to vote one way or the other.

For the junta constitution, they said accept it or we will have to come up with another one. Most people chose to accept it rather than waiting around for one that may or may not have been acceptable to them. The politicians are still trying to come up with a constitution that is acceptable to the masses. The people didn't want to wait this long for the junta to come up with one.

[jayboy]

Not really news, because nothing is new except that they talked.

And considering the Nopadum has been trumpeting the meeting for a week it

was hardly 'met by chance in Norway'.

Thaksin's position isn't news;

he wants the whole shooting match in his hands or he keeps fighting.

Reconciliation with him still in the picture is a red herring.

Not going to happen.

We are so past the 4 year old coup that it is irrelevent to the actual reconciliation. It's not the coup but Thaksin wanting 'power' back that is the current issue at hand. Wailing on about the long past coup is just a political talking point.

Legal or not AT THAT TIME, it is legal now, since the country voted on a post coup constitution. To say that Thaksin's actions in the last 2 years have been legal is just so much smoke and mirrors. Many have not been and his illegal wrongs do not balance out the actions of the coup makers, and suddenly become legal, because they may have not acted legally.

Let's also not forget Thakin resigned as PM before the coup. and was no more than acting PM prior to that, and has returned and left again while his own crew was in power.

This is Thaksin wanting power again and nothing more,

no matter the talking points.

The same tired discredited points wheeled out again.Some people have no sense of shame.

To take but one example the constitution was imposed on the Thai public by the junta.It passed only barely because most people just wanted an end to the incompetent quisling government.The junta made it clear that if the constitution didn't pass it would be promulgated anyway.Even then with the full weight of the army and state apparatus pushing it, the constitution only scraped through - a massive slap in the face to the criminal regime.

A 16% win isnt bad in a vote actually and certainly isnt barely. Assumptions of why people voted for or against something or for or agaisnt a party are interesting to debate but irrelvent in practice. I take it you wont be arguing that people voted for X becuase their votes were bought which is a similar arguement;) The 58% turnout was on the low side compared to a national election but as there has never been a constitutional vote In Thailand before and one in which elements of a political party campaigned for people not to vote at one point it is difficult to state whether it was good or bad. As an aside it compares very well with the 40.3% turnout for the recent US elections.

Maybe in the critical thing is that we have just heard that the vast majority of people have never read or know nothing about the Thai constitution or have read a fraction of it or have minimal knowledge which isnt surprising to those who have discussed such things across the social spectrum

All fair points made in an intelligent and temperate way, and I note you aren't defending this discredited constitution.Others could learn from you.

Nevertheless I think one has to acknowledge the informal (and actually somewhat unfair) pressures brought by the state to get the constitution through.

Edited November 10, 2010 by jayboy

[rixalex]

Nevertheless I think one has to acknowledge the informal (and actually somewhat unfair) pressures brought by the state to get the constitution through.

Let's get specific here. What were these unethical pressures?

The state simply telling citizens that voting "yes" is in the best interest of the nation for moving fowards is not. It's no different from what the "no" lobby group were doing. Both sides were selling their argument (not literally one hopes). It's what happens when referendums are called.