Thai Elections Revive Drug War Controversy

[Foggy Bottom]

..... The sudden need for a war on drugs in Thailand was a wag the dog operation to divert attention from corruption allegations. Manufacture a crisis out of a small problem to remove attention from the real problem, massive corruption and human rights abuses

You are so far wide of the mark with that statement.

The War on Drugs was a knee-jerk, "please pat me on the head" reaction from Thaksin, in relation to a statement of concern regarding drugs being one of the greatest threats to social order in Thailand, which was made in a birthday speech in December 2002.

Thaksin jumped on the statement of concern and within the week announced the War on Drugs would commence in the new year (2003). He announced it would run for 3 months and would purge all of Thailand of all drugs and drugs-related persons.

Given his closeness with Beijing, it was obvious Thaksin was intending the same sort of absolute and total purge widely politicised by the Chinese politbureau following the 1950s cleansing of vice (specifically drugs and prostitution) from the Middle Kingdom.

That it is widely believed it was used as a means of clearing competition for the "official" dealerships to grow their territory, is a viewpoint that initiated in ex-pat circles, and over the years has been taken up by outside agencies and media. Such sentiment would never be officially published in Thailand, and is completely contrary to the statement that originated the government's instruction for the police's actions.

I am sure that long term expats, if they dredge their memories, will recall the above circumstances, which have been conveniently buried as attention has been gradually focussed onto the killings, and away from the cause of the campaign. Quite simply, Thaksin took a few words out of context and used them to justify instructing the police to go on a rampage.

[rubl]

On the topic this article is interesting, posted 2003-09-05

"A chronology of Thailand's "war on drugs"

Meryam Dabhoiwala, Researcher, Asian Legal Resource Centre"

http://www.article2.org/mainfile.php/0203/84/

Amongst others it says:

"Four persons were killed on the first day of the campaign. Police Commissioner General Sant claimed that police would only fire in self-defense. Interior Minister Wan Mohamad Noor Matha reaffirmed that "the police would abide by the law in their campaign against drug trafficking".[6] However, he later defended killings and disappearances of targeted persons: "They [drug dealers] will be put behind bars or even vanish without a trace. Who cares? They are destroying our country."[7] The Prime Minister also endorsed this attitude, saying, "The government's strategy is to smoke out pushers, who will be eliminated by their own kind. I don't understand why some people are so concerned about them while neglecting to care for the future of one million children who are being lured into becoming drug-users."[8] He later concluded, "[Murder] is not an unusual fate for wicked people."[9]"

[anterian]

One problem I find with Thai attitudes is that of non involvement, good citizens are reluctant to help the police if they are not directly involved in a problem. As an example, two people in my village are known drug dealers, one has already served time for this offence but is now out and back in operation. Everyone in the village knows, the police know, but they cannot be caught simply because the police can never catch them with incriminating evidence. The reason is that they live at the end of the road and it is only open at the top end, thus they have about 5 minutes visual warning of the arrival of the police. The police have tried various methods to sneak up on them, arriving by taxis, even mobile food carts, all to no avail. They have an awareness of all unusual traffic, they have lookouts posted in the road, the police are totally frustrated. Unless the 90% of honest villagers help what can the police do? The police loose face, I have seen them openly jeered at by the criminal element. When a Thai loses face he tends to take the law into his own hands, and the police are Thais. I do not condone extra judicial killings, but I can understand why they happen.

[SICHONSTEVE]

Hello,

I'm just new here but I Googled Thaksin drug war and found some different information about the number of people supposedly killed.

According to this story War on drugs a failure says international group about a group calling for legalizing drugs there is a section on Drug arrests in Thailand increased by 1,796% between 2004 and 2009

Wildly proclaimed by some with vested interests as being a bloody orgy of extra-judicial executions by the Royal Thai Police (RTP) in which 2,575 alleged drug offenders were killed in the first three months – the official figure is 72 killed in 58 incidents involving police and 70,000 people arrested – statistics show that the only time the number of drug offenses decreased in Thailand between 1999 and 2009 was in this period.

In the ensuing five year period following the "Thaksin war on drugs" the number of drug cases has risen by 1,797 per cent, with Thailand's Office of the Narcotics Control Board says there was 223,294 drug offenses detected in Thailand in 1999, but in 2004 only 55,243.

The writer also has lots of figures about drug use in Thailand since. There's links in the story and what he says is backed up by other stories, including one that asks where the 2,575 dead figure comes from that a lot of people keep quoting.

If you dig back through all of the links it all comes back to the official figure of 72 killed. His other figures show that drug cases detected haven't risen back to the 2002 figures yet.

You're new here AND you just happened to be googling about Thaksin's war on drugs .............. right ...

Seeing as you're new, you probably aren't able to post links.

Here is what appears to be the link for your quote (http://photo-journ.c...rnational-group) and also to a Bangkok Pundit blog on the numbers (http://asiancorrespo...mber-come-from/).

"In the ensuing five year period following the “Thaksin war on drugs” the number of drug cases has risen by 1,797 per cent, with Thailand’s office of the narcotics control board says there was 223,294 drug offenses detected in Thailand in 1999, but in 2004 only 55,243".

Hardly an endorsement of Thaksin's war on drugs when there was a 1,797% rise in the ensuing 5 years AFTER his war on drugs in 2003!!!!

I don't really understand the numbers quoted though as they contradict the first statement by stating that the detected drug offences in 1999 were 4 times that as in 2004 so something seems amiss somewhere along the line unless of course the drugs related incidence's rose to over a million by 2008 following the 5 year ensuing period stated with that 1,800 % increase from 55,000 NB: Abhisit came on the scene in 2009 I believe!!!!!

[MAJIC]

when Thaksin said he would bring back the war on drugs I think that was a threat, I can't imagine any other reason to say that being that it failed miserably and can only continue to do so based on the results of other countries that have tried it or are still "doing" it.

it did not fail miserably. At the time, organized crime syndicates had effectively established a defacto state in several of the provinces. The military, the police, the judiciary and the civil servants were in league with the drug cartels. The war on drugs was not so much against the drugs, but was an action to prevent Thailand beoming a Panama or Peru or Columbia. In that regard, the war on drugs was a success.Many of the people that died were casualties of the drug cartel feuds, either silencing people that would talk or settling scores. Others were indeeed hardened criminals. Some of the dead were innocent non implicated civilians that were either killed in error by the police and military or were intentionally murdered by the drug cartels to discredit the government's fight to keep the nation free of the drug cartels.

Tell that to the grieving families.

[wolfmanjack]

Hello,

I'm just new here but I Googled Thaksin drug war and found some different information about the number of people supposedly killed.

According to this story War on drugs a failure says international group about a group calling for legalizing drugs there is a section on Drug arrests in Thailand increased by 1,796% between 2004 and 2009

Wildly proclaimed by some with vested interests as being a bloody orgy of extra-judicial executions by the Royal Thai Police (RTP) in which 2,575 alleged drug offenders were killed in the first three months – the official figure is 72 killed in 58 incidents involving police and 70,000 people arrested – statistics show that the only time the number of drug offenses decreased in Thailand between 1999 and 2009 was in this period.

In the ensuing five year period following the "Thaksin war on drugs" the number of drug cases has risen by 1,797 per cent, with Thailand's Office of the Narcotics Control Board says there was 223,294 drug offenses detected in Thailand in 1999, but in 2004 only 55,243.

The writer also has lots of figures about drug use in Thailand since. There's links in the story and what he says is backed up by other stories, including one that asks where the 2,575 dead figure comes from that a lot of people keep quoting.

If you dig back through all of the links it all comes back to the official figure of 72 killed. His other figures show that drug cases detected haven't risen back to the 2002 figures yet.

You're new here AND you just happened to be googling about Thaksin's war on drugs .............. right ...

Seeing as you're new, you probably aren't able to post links.

Here is what appears to be the link for your quote (http://photo-journ.c...rnational-group) and also to a Bangkok Pundit blog on the numbers (http://asiancorrespo...mber-come-from/).

Those are blogs but Bangkok pundit does try to get to the bottom of it well worth reading.

To quote from his blog

"If 70,000 people were arrested, is this not evidence there was not a de facto shoot to kill policy as some have claimed?

If the homicide rate doubled from 400-800, the 1,329 drug-related deaths figure starts to be a more accurate number than the 2,275 figure.

What about the Thai Police’s statement they were only responsible for 72 deaths

Why have those figures never found their way into all the newspapers?

Ok, because it doesn’t paint Thaksin as sufficiently evil enough."

the 72 deaths the police take credit for are the ones that it can be shown there was some justification in shooting the person. Of course the police are not going to take credit for the people hung on trees or shot in the back of the head. I remember one case where the police killed the wife and child of a suspected drug dealer by shooting up the car that the drug dealer was not in. I am sure there were a lot of OOPS cases like that. My wife likes Thaksin because of his war on drugs. When I ask her about the innocent bystanders that get killed while the police are killing a suspected drug dealer she thought that was okay also. Many people think it is okay until it is a member of their own family that gets killed.

[JurgenG]

At the time, organized crime syndicates had effectively established a defacto state in several of the provinces. The military, the police, the judiciary and the civil servants were in league with the drug cartels. The war on drugs was not so much against the drugs, but was an action to prevent Thailand beoming a Panama or Peru or Columbia. In that regard, the war on drugs was a success.Many of the people that died were casualties of the drug cartel feuds, either silencing people that would talk or settling scores. Others were indeeed hardened criminals.

The father of my gf is a retired businessman. I really like to drive him around meeting old friends, I learn a lot of things you can't find in books or newspapers.

One day he told me we're going to meet one of his old "contract enforcer", he warned me the guy was no friend of Thaksin as he had to disappear for a while during Thaksin's war on drug.

The discussion we had later pretty much confirm what geriatrickid is saying, the war on drug was mostly a war on local mafias. That's why I always say that maybe half of the dead during the war on drug were not directly drug related but it doesn't mean those people were innocent bystanders.

[rixalex]

the 72 deaths the police take credit for are the ones that it can be shown there was some justification in shooting the person. Of course the police are not going to take credit for the people hung on trees or shot in the back of the head. I remember one case where the police killed the wife and child of a suspected drug dealer by shooting up the car that the drug dealer was not in. I am sure there were a lot of OOPS cases like that. My wife likes Thaksin because of his war on drugs. When I ask her about the innocent bystanders that get killed while the police are killing a suspected drug dealer she thought that was okay also. Many people think it is okay until it is a member of their own family that gets killed.

With regards your last sentence, the sad thing is that for some it would seem, the only way i think they could understand the inhumane madness and cruelty of accepting killings by the state of innocent people for some supposed greater good, is if they did have first hand experience.

Would Thaksin have ever implemented this policy if someone told him beforehand that there was a possibility that one of his own kids might get killed? Of course he wouldn't. And neither would any of the red supporters on this forum who continue to defend this policy.

Someone else's kids though?... well they are obviously a little more expendable. A sacrifice worth making indeed.

[SICHONSTEVE]

<BR>

<BR>

<BR>

<BR>The objective of a war on drugs is to lower supply and demand to lower the overall production revenue (the area under which supply meets demand). Whatever happened in between, and perpetrated by whomever, the outcome of Thaksin's war on drugs was a huge increase in price and a slight increase in quantity - resulting in hugely increased profit margins for the supply network. The $-value of the drugs trade in Thailand grew due to Thaksin's efforts to stifle it.<BR><BR>So it failed, miserably. But then, it was never intended to impact the drug trade - it was a front to silence those who could not be otherwise legally silenced, as the investigation shelved by the late Samak showed (over half of the fatalities had <U>no involvement in the drugs trade</U>). The "drugs" part was just to give it a semblance of legitimacy - there are far more dealers in Thailand than the 1,050+ possible (but not confirmed) ones that were killed in 2003, or even the 1,450 confirmed innocents whom I refer to above.<BR>

<BR><BR>Go to the top of the class. <IMG class=bbc_emoticon alt= src="http://static.thaivisa.com/forum/public/style_emoticons/default/thumbsup.gif"><BR><BR>This is exactly what the war on drugs was about. Creating a smokescreen of public admiration, whilst clearing the competition and raising profit margins, amongst other things that were going on at the time.<BR>

<BR><BR> I agree with the public admiration bit as Thaksin was always the "gungho" type with a look at 'how powerful am I" kind of attitude. But I have to laugh at your second point as this rediculous take on the reasons for Shinawatra carrying out his illegal and catastrophic actions is nothing to do with raising profit margins (for whom may I ask)?? and just how would Thaksin gain from this?? unless of course you are accusing him of being well and truly entrenched in the whole scene. Are you??<BR>

<BR><BR>May I suggest some reading?<BR><BR>Try this book: <A class=bbc_url title="External link" href="http://books.google.com/books/about/Thaksin.html?id=bPjRk3FMEJwC" rel="nofollow external">Thaksin - The Business of Politics</A><BR><BR>Excellent in-sight into areas of questionable income, and how it goes hand in hand with rapid rise to power in Thai politics.<BR>

<BR><BR>There is no doubt that a fair chunk of Thaksin's wealth has been generated through dubious means but surely he wouldn't try to manipulate the drugs scene for his own purpose. I appreciate that Thai's are money and power mad and resort to extreme means to obtain the former and attain the latter. I think he wanted to look to be looked at favourably by the populus (to be loved) although like most things he did (whether they were well intentioned or not) they failed miserably and were ill conceived in their implementation.<BR>

[OzMick]

Hello,

I'm just new here but I Googled Thaksin drug war and found some different information about the number of people supposedly killed.

According to this story War on drugs a failure says international group about a group calling for legalizing drugs there is a section on Drug arrests in Thailand increased by 1,796% between 2004 and 2009

Wildly proclaimed by some with vested interests as being a bloody orgy of extra-judicial executions by the Royal Thai Police (RTP) in which 2,575 alleged drug offenders were killed in the first three months – the official figure is 72 killed in 58 incidents involving police and 70,000 people arrested – statistics show that the only time the number of drug offenses decreased in Thailand between 1999 and 2009 was in this period.

In the ensuing five year period following the "Thaksin war on drugs" the number of drug cases has risen by 1,797 per cent, with Thailand's Office of the Narcotics Control Board says there was 223,294 drug offenses detected in Thailand in 1999, but in 2004 only 55,243.

The writer also has lots of figures about drug use in Thailand since. There's links in the story and what he says is backed up by other stories, including one that asks where the 2,575 dead figure comes from that a lot of people keep quoting.

If you dig back through all of the links it all comes back to the official figure of 72 killed. His other figures show that drug cases detected haven't risen back to the 2002 figures yet.

You're new here AND you just happened to be googling about Thaksin's war on drugs .............. right ...

Seeing as you're new, you probably aren't able to post links.

Here is what appears to be the link for your quote (http://photo-journ.c...rnational-group) and also to a Bangkok Pundit blog on the numbers (http://asiancorrespo...mber-come-from/).

Those are blogs but Bangkok pundit does try to get to the bottom of it well worth reading.

To quote from his blog

"If 70,000 people were arrested, is this not evidence there was not a de facto shoot to kill policy as some have claimed?

If the homicide rate doubled from 400-800, the 1,329 drug-related deaths figure starts to be a more accurate number than the 2,275 figure.

What about the Thai Police's statement they were only responsible for 72 deaths

Why have those figures never found their way into all the newspapers?

Ok, because it doesn't paint Thaksin as sufficiently evil enough."

And no-one ever questions the veracity of the Thai Police? To Protect and Serve, Fidelity Bravery Integrity, Working together for a safer Thailand - in a pig's eye!

[lannarebirth]

The war on drugs was not so much against the drugs, but was an action to prevent Thailand beoming a Panama or Peru or Columbia.

lol

You'd have to be on drugs to think the situation was even remotely comparable to that. This isn't South Central LA, Mexico, or Columbia, and never was even close. Thais would poop their pants if they saw some real pipe hitting gangsters like in US cities, or head chopping cartel members like on the border. Laughable to think the situation was even close. The sudden need for a war on drugs in Thailand was a wag the dog operation to divert attention from corruption allegations. Manufacture a crisis out of a small problem to remove attention from the real problem, massive corruption and human rights abuses

Now someone's getting it. I wonder how many bodies he'll sacrifice next time.

[ianbaggie]

when Thaksin said he would bring back the war on drugs I think that was a threat, I can't imagine any other reason to say that being that it failed miserably and can only continue to do so based on the results of other countries that have tried it or are still "doing" it.

it did not fail miserably. At the time, organized crime syndicates had effectively established a defacto state in several of the provinces. The military, the police, the judiciary and the civil servants were in league with the drug cartels. The war on drugs was not so much against the drugs, but was an action to prevent Thailand beoming a Panama or Peru or Columbia. In that regard, the war on drugs was a success.Many of the people that died were casualties of the drug cartel feuds, either silencing people that would talk or settling scores. Others were indeeed hardened criminals. Some of the dead were innocent non implicated civilians that were either killed in error by the police and military or were intentionally murdered by the drug cartels to discredit the government's fight to keep the nation free of the drug cartels.

"It did not fail miserably......................Some of the dead were innocent". Where in your twisted mind does the death of innocent members of the population justify a successful operation? You are either one very sad Dude or perhaps you need to engage brain before you hit "Add Reply" button.

......or perhaps the poster is both

[Yme]

Hello,

I'm just new here but I Googled Thaksin drug war and found some different information about the number of people supposedly killed.

According to this story War on drugs a failure says international group about a group calling for legalizing drugs there is a section on Drug arrests in Thailand increased by 1,796% between 2004 and 2009

Wildly proclaimed by some with vested interests as being a bloody orgy of extra-judicial executions by the Royal Thai Police (RTP) in which 2,575 alleged drug offenders were killed in the first three months – the official figure is 72 killed in 58 incidents involving police and 70,000 people arrested – statistics show that the only time the number of drug offenses decreased in Thailand between 1999 and 2009 was in this period.

In the ensuing five year period following the "Thaksin war on drugs" the number of drug cases has risen by 1,797 per cent, with Thailand's Office of the Narcotics Control Board says there was 223,294 drug offenses detected in Thailand in 1999, but in 2004 only 55,243.

The writer also has lots of figures about drug use in Thailand since. There's links in the story and what he says is backed up by other stories, including one that asks where the 2,575 dead figure comes from that a lot of people keep quoting.

If you dig back through all of the links it all comes back to the official figure of 72 killed. His other figures show that drug cases detected haven't risen back to the 2002 figures yet.

You're new here AND you just happened to be googling about Thaksin's war on drugs .............. right ...

Seeing as you're new, you probably aren't able to post links.

Well I Googled it after reading this posting and someone earlier said look it up so I did and I found that website with all of the figures about drug arrests from 1999 to 2009.

What struck me though was the big drop in 2003 and 2004.

I used to work in law enforcement so it interested me.

Is there something wrong with doing that?

[lannarebirth]

Hello,

I'm just new here but I Googled Thaksin drug war and found some different information about the number of people supposedly killed.

According to this story War on drugs a failure says international group about a group calling for legalizing drugs there is a section on Drug arrests in Thailand increased by 1,796% between 2004 and 2009

Wildly proclaimed by some with vested interests as being a bloody orgy of extra-judicial executions by the Royal Thai Police (RTP) in which 2,575 alleged drug offenders were killed in the first three months the official figure is 72 killed in 58 incidents involving police and 70,000 people arrested statistics show that the only time the number of drug offenses decreased in Thailand between 1999 and 2009 was in this period.

In the ensuing five year period following the "Thaksin war on drugs" the number of drug cases has risen by 1,797 per cent, with Thailand's Office of the Narcotics Control Board says there was 223,294 drug offenses detected in Thailand in 1999, but in 2004 only 55,243.

The writer also has lots of figures about drug use in Thailand since. There's links in the story and what he says is backed up by other stories, including one that asks where the 2,575 dead figure comes from that a lot of people keep quoting.

If you dig back through all of the links it all comes back to the official figure of 72 killed. His other figures show that drug cases detected haven't risen back to the 2002 figures yet.

You're new here AND you just happened to be googling about Thaksin's war on drugs .............. right ...

Seeing as you're new, you probably aren't able to post links.

Here is what appears to be the link for your quote (http://photo-journ.c...rnational-group) and also to a Bangkok Pundit blog on the numbers (http://asiancorrespo...mber-come-from/).

"In the ensuing five year period following the "Thaksin war on drugs" the number of drug cases has risen by 1,797 per cent, with Thailand's office of the narcotics control board says there was 223,294 drug offenses detected in Thailand in 1999, but in 2004 only 55,243".

Hardly an endorsement of Thaksin's war on drugs when there was a 1,797% rise in the ensuing 5 years AFTER his war on drugs in 2003!!!!

I don't really understand the numbers quoted though as they contradict the first statement by stating that the detected drug offences in 1999 were 4 times that as in 2004 so something seems amiss somewhere along the line unless of course the drugs related incidence's rose to over a million by 2008 following the 5 year ensuing period stated with that 1,800 % increase from 55,000 NB: Abhisit came on the scene in 2009 I believe!!!!!

It's important to remember that a lot of Thaksin's "drug war" related murders weren't "cases". These people were for the most part just summarily executed without benefit of charges or trial. I LIKE the fact there are more trials (cases) now.

Edited June 24, 2011 by lannarebirth

[monkfish]

the 72 deaths the police take credit for are the ones that it can be shown there was some justification in shooting the person. Of course the police are not going to take credit for the people hung on trees or shot in the back of the head. I remember one case where the police killed the wife and child of a suspected drug dealer by shooting up the car that the drug dealer was not in. I am sure there were a lot of OOPS cases like that. My wife likes Thaksin because of his war on drugs. When I ask her about the innocent bystanders that get killed while the police are killing a suspected drug dealer she thought that was okay also. Many people think it is okay until it is a member of their own family that gets killed.

With regards your last sentence, the sad thing is that for some it would seem, the only way i think they could understand the inhumane madness and cruelty of accepting killings by the state of innocent people for some supposed greater good, is if they did have first hand experience.

Would Thaksin have ever implemented this policy if someone told him beforehand that there was a possibility that one of his own kids might get killed? Of course he wouldn't. And neither would any of the red supporters on this forum who continue to defend this policy.

Someone else's kids though?... well they are obviously a little more expendable. A sacrifice worth making indeed.

Is it fair to blame every killing over 3 month period on the War On Drugs?

considering based on national averages 1400 people would have been murdered or killed with or with out the war on drugs?

Most of the murders are Money related i.e. loan sharks

and to put lenders off paying late they are usually very grizzly.

and why is a reputable news Agency like AFP printing such misleading stories?

Do they not have the duty to inform the Public accurately?

Could it be because they are also involved in a smear campaign against Thaksin?

[Buchholz]

Hello,

I'm just new here but I Googled Thaksin drug war and found some different information about the number of people supposedly killed.

According to this story War on drugs a failure says international group about a group calling for legalizing drugs there is a section on Drug arrests in Thailand increased by 1,796% between 2004 and 2009

Wildly proclaimed by some with vested interests as being a bloody orgy of extra-judicial executions by the Royal Thai Police (RTP) in which 2,575 alleged drug offenders were killed in the first three months – the official figure is 72 killed in 58 incidents involving police and 70,000 people arrested – statistics show that the only time the number of drug offenses decreased in Thailand between 1999 and 2009 was in this period.

In the ensuing five year period following the "Thaksin war on drugs" the number of drug cases has risen by 1,797 per cent, with Thailand's Office of the Narcotics Control Board says there was 223,294 drug offenses detected in Thailand in 1999, but in 2004 only 55,243.

The writer also has lots of figures about drug use in Thailand since. There's links in the story and what he says is backed up by other stories, including one that asks where the 2,575 dead figure comes from that a lot of people keep quoting.

If you dig back through all of the links it all comes back to the official figure of 72 killed. His other figures show that drug cases detected haven't risen back to the 2002 figures yet.

You're new here AND you just happened to be googling about Thaksin's war on drugs .............. right ...

Seeing as you're new, you probably aren't able to post links.

Here is what appears to be the link for your quote (http://photo-journ.com/2011/war-on-drugs-a-failure-says-international-group) and also to a Bangkok Pundit blog on the numbers (http://asiancorrespondent.com/20405/2275-where-did-this-number-come-from/).

Coincidentally, the source of that blog :

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/user/53962-photojourn/

whose credibility has been thoroughly discounted due to extreme bias. There's a reason why he's just blogging and not working for a legitimate news agency.

.

Edited June 24, 2011 by Buchholz

[geriatrickid]

when Thaksin said he would bring back the war on drugs I think that was a threat, I can't imagine any other reason to say that being that it failed miserably and can only continue to do so based on the results of other countries that have tried it or are still "doing" it.

it did not fail miserably. At the time, organized crime syndicates had effectively established a defacto state in several of the provinces. The military, the police, the judiciary and the civil servants were in league with the drug cartels. The war on drugs was not so much against the drugs, but was an action to prevent Thailand beoming a Panama or Peru or Columbia. In that regard, the war on drugs was a success.Many of the people that died were casualties of the drug cartel feuds, either silencing people that would talk or settling scores. Others were indeeed hardened criminals. Some of the dead were innocent non implicated civilians that were either killed in error by the police and military or were intentionally murdered by the drug cartels to discredit the government's fight to keep the nation free of the drug cartels.

"It did not fail miserably......................Some of the dead were innocent". Where in your twisted mind does the death of innocent members of the population justify a successful operation? You are either one very sad Dude or perhaps you need to engage brain before you hit "Add Reply" button.

Show me a war where innocent people do not die. Do you not understand that in some provinces the drug gangs were in control? That meant that the people that were supposed to upholding the laws and protecting the population were turned. That is what happens in a narco state. Look at the current state of affairs in Mexico. That's what Thailand avoided. In no way am I excusing the death of non implicated parties. There were plenty of mistakes. Unfortunately, look at who mounted the operation: A police force woefully inadequate and a military that had a different mission. The people trying to stop the takeover did the best they could with what they had to work with.

It is simplistic to blame one man for the errors of the operation. Individuals made bad decisions and engaged in wrongful acts. When one when man is blamed, the responsible parties are able to avoid that responsibility. The old I was only following orders excuse My point is that in a war, and it was a war to keep criminal cartels from cementing their control of the invlved provinces, innocent civilians die. This is the tragedy of war.

The event is called a war on drugs. This too is a simplistic characterization. It's primary goal was to break the death grip that the drug cartels had on the provincial governments. Had Thailand not done this, the numbers of dead civilians and the cost to Thailand would have been greater. This is the one time where a Thai national government had the support of the military command and other important interest groups in Thailand as well as the general population at the same time. The reason was that Thailand was fighting for its freedom. The forum is filled with threads on corruption. Well, this is what happens when deep rooted systemic corruption is taken head on. People die.

Edited June 24, 2011 by geriatrickid

[Chris Lawrence]

when Thaksin said he would bring back the war on drugs I think that was a threat, I can't imagine any other reason to say that being that it failed miserably and can only continue to do so based on the results of other countries that have tried it or are still "doing" it.

it did not fail miserably. At the time, organized crime syndicates had effectively established a defacto state in several of the provinces. The military, the police, the judiciary and the civil servants were in league with the drug cartels. The war on drugs was not so much against the drugs, but was an action to prevent Thailand beoming a Panama or Peru or Columbia. In that regard, the war on drugs was a success.Many of the people that died were casualties of the drug cartel feuds, either silencing people that would talk or settling scores. Others were indeeed hardened criminals. Some of the dead were innocent non implicated civilians that were either killed in error by the police and military or were intentionally murdered by the drug cartels to discredit the government's fight to keep the nation free of the drug cartels.

"It did not fail miserably......................Some of the dead were innocent". Where in your twisted mind does the death of innocent members of the population justify a successful operation? You are either one very sad Dude or perhaps you need to engage brain before you hit "Add Reply" button.

WW1, WW2, Vietnam, most wars have casualties that are innocent? Unfortunately righteousness takes a holiday when these things are happening; its just the nature of the beast.

Maybe there is some info on what happened post 'war on drugs' as to reduction in rates which helps to explain the situation?

And again some methods used in western countries do not translate well into other areas of the world.

[Chris Lawrence]

The war on drugs was not so much against the drugs, but was an action to prevent Thailand beoming a Panama or Peru or Columbia.

lol

You'd have to be on drugs to think the situation was even remotely comparable to that. This isn't South Central LA, Mexico, or Columbia, and never was even close. Thais would poop their pants if they saw some real pipe hitting gangsters like in US cities, or head chopping cartel members like on the border. Laughable to think the situation was even close. The sudden need for a war on drugs in Thailand was a wag the dog operation to divert attention from corruption allegations. Manufacture a crisis out of a small problem to remove attention from the real problem, massive corruption and human rights abuses

Now someone's getting it. I wonder how many bodies he'll sacrifice next time.

Golden Triangle ring bells? I am aware of people in this area that did covert work for people. They were apparently silent and deadly! Ahh, but short memories, where people now grow tobacco.....

[bf2002]

it was wrong.

it worked though didn't it?  I talked to one ex-dealer who stated she once cleared 1 million baht in a day....after the extra-judicial dealings, she got out of the business out of fear....that was EXACTLY the intention of the extra-judicial killings.

The Thais know 2 things well, they are in some ways so basic.....greed and fear. Especially the types in the drugs biz.

All the reds have to do to do it legally this time around is to implement the death penalty....same effect and legal.  It'll take a few more years  but it'll last.  For an example, just look at Singapore.</div>

Edited June 24, 2011 by bf2002

[bf2002]

Get some common sense you 2.

It's an epidemic here and in the States and all over the world.

It is a real problem.....i don't care what some junkie does to himself. I don't care if you use or not. I don't care if you are clean, a rec user, or an addict. The social issue is the violence of the dealers and the addicts that commit crimes.....don't even throw out the standard crap on legalizing it.....amsterdam is not an example.....there the buyers have money....the issue are the addicts with none who commit crime, and the dealers with guns fearful of each other.....less than 10% of dealers are caught by cops and the main threat is from other dealers and the junkies.

The war on drugs was not so much against the drugs, but was an action to prevent Thailand beoming a Panama or Peru or Columbia.

lol

You'd have to be on drugs to think the situation was even remotely comparable to that. This isn't South Central LA, Mexico, or Columbia, and never was even close. Thais would poop their pants if they saw some real pipe hitting gangsters like in US cities, or head chopping cartel members like on the border. Laughable to think the situation was even close. The sudden need for a war on drugs in Thailand was a wag the dog operation to divert attention from corruption allegations. Manufacture a crisis out of a small problem to remove attention from the real problem, massive corruption and human rights abuses

Now someone's getting it. I wonder how many bodies he'll sacrifice next time.

Golden Triangle ring bells? I am aware of people in this area that did covert work for people. They were apparently silent and deadly! Ahh, but short memories, where people now grow tobacco.....

[whybother]

Well I Googled it after reading this posting and someone earlier said look it up so I did and I found that website with all of the figures about drug arrests from 1999 to 2009.

What struck me though was the big drop in 2003 and 2004.

I used to work in law enforcement so it interested me.

Is there something wrong with doing that?

This issue has been discussed regularly so it's interesting that you decided to join now and post after someone said look it up. Why not the hundreds of other times that this has been discussed.

Given that Thaksin said he had solved the drug problem, why was there an increase cases and offenders in 2005 and 2006. Actually, given Thaksin's statements, why were there any offenders or cases in 2004 - 2006?

[moe666]

As someone said earlier its ok until someone you know has been killed. There is no justification of extrajudicial killing by any department of the government. And those who justifi it have a scew loose.

[Buchholz]

I talked to one ex-dealer who stated she once cleared 1 million baht in a day....after the extra-judicial dealings, she got out of the business out of fear....that was EXACTLY the intention of the extra-judicial killings.

The Thais know 2 things well, they are in some ways so basic.....greed and fear. Especially the types in the drugs biz.

Thank you for sharing your insider knowledge of the Thailand illicit drug business.

It's rare that someone with as much experience with illegal drugs as you seem to have are willing to share that information with the forum.

.

Edited June 24, 2011 by Buchholz

[tlansford]

Show me a war where innocent people do not die. Do you not understand that in some provinces the drug gangs were in control? That meant that the people that were supposed to upholding the laws and protecting the population were turned. That is what happens in a narco state. Look at the current state of affairs in Mexico. That's what Thailand avoided. In no way am I excusing the death of non implicated parties. There were plenty of mistakes. Unfortunately, look at who mounted the operation: A police force woefully inadequate and a military that had a different mission. The people trying to stop the takeover did the best they could with what they had to work with.

It is simplistic to blame one man for the errors of the operation. Individuals made bad decisions and engaged in wrongful acts. When one when man is blamed, the responsible parties are able to avoid that responsibility. The old I was only following orders excuse My point is that in a war, and it was a war to keep criminal cartels from cementing their control of the invlved provinces, innocent civilians die. This is the tragedy of war.

The event is called a war on drugs. This too is a simplistic characterization. It's primary goal was to break the death grip that the drug cartels had on the provincial governments. Had Thailand not done this, the numbers of dead civilians and the cost to Thailand would have been greater. This is the one time where a Thai national government had the support of the military command and other important interest groups in Thailand as well as the general population at the same time. The reason was that Thailand was fighting for its freedom. The forum is filled with threads on corruption. Well, this is what happens when deep rooted systemic corruption is taken head on. People die.

It's not a war. You can't have a war on a noun. :-)

In any case, if the objective is to reduce drug use and illegal trafficking, then there are 2 common sense steps to take with a long-term perspective.

Leave aside marijuana for the moment, for other drugs, ...

Reducing demand :

- invest heavily in education, treatment, and rehabilitation.

Reducing illegal supply :

- the government produces and sells the drugs.

- trafficking otherwise remains illegal.

The first step will reduce demand with time. No question about it. The second cuts the profit out of illegal trade, but maintains the risk.

The criminals will adapt and find a different business.

Regarding marijuana, just legalize it, put production and sale under official control, and allow people to grow it for their own use. This places it on the same level as alcohol & tobacco, 2 substances shown time and time again to be more addictive than marijuana.

Notice that no one gets killed with this solution.

[geriatrickid]

Many of the comments made in this thread are creative attempts to distort the events of 2003. There is no dispute that some innocent people died and that there were individual cases of wrongdoing. What is disputed is the attempt to treat the events as a one off event and the sole responsibility of the former PM. There is a complete disregard of the events at that time including the state of affairs in multiple provinces. The events of 2003 were one part of a national policy developed over a number of years.

Here are some facts that cannot be disputed;

1. The insurgent groups inside Myanmar used drugs as a means to fund their insurgency. As a result, in the 1990's Thailand's northern region was awash with the insurgent produced cheap drugs. Officials were corrupted as a means to facilitate the drug trade. Almost all of the methamphetamine tablets smuggled into Thailand at the time was produced in areas controlled by the UWSA and sourced from UWSA labs in Myanmar.

2. In January 2000, both Royal Thai Army (RTA) commander General Surayud Chulanont and Thai Armed Forces Supreme Commander General Mongkol Ampornpisit visited areas that had been the scene of violence due to the drug trade. They were followed in early February by General Boonlert Kaewprasit, head of the RTA's Narcotics Suppression Committee, who, after a three day tour of the region stated,: "The situation is now quite critical and decisive action inevitable." (As reported by Janes Weekly)

3. Starting in 2000 right up until the Thaksin initiative, there were multiple border clashes between Thailand, the Myanmar army and the insurgents. The Thai military was pushing for an all out offensive on the drug labs.

4. In March 2002 General Surayud Chulanont,ordered one of Thailand's largest military operations of the era, which had Thai troops invade Myanmar to eliminate drug labs and military bases controlled bythe UWSA. It was a bloody confrontation that left many people dead and seriously injured. Does anyone recognize the General's name? Remember the coup that overthrew PM Thaksin and the PM that was appointed during 2006-2008?

5. The initiative of former PM Thaksin was but one small part of an overall national strategy to respond to the national security threat posed by the drug cartel. The military had laid the foundation for the action. The national security theat is not disputed by one credible group. It is why the Thaksin initiative was supported from a cross section of the nation including the military.

Extrajudicial killings of presumed drug traffickers had been occurring in the border areas long before the Thaksin era initiative.

6. The link to Myanmar drug distribution points, and to the corruption that it spawns, continues today.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home/2010/09/15/national/Millions-in-assets-seized-from-drug-kingpin-30138002.html

It should be obvious that the initiative cannot be carved out and criticized as if it was a one off event. One of the reasons former PM Thaksin will never be held accountable for the negligence and wrongdoing was that he was not responsible. The strategy had been set in place by the military and RTP command. It was executed under the auspices of the military high command with the support of the privy council. The reality in Thailand is that the civilian government has no control over the military.

Edited June 25, 2011 by geriatrickid

[Buchholz]

Normal default font and font size restored:

It was executed under the auspices of the military high command with the support of the privy council. The reality in Thailand is that the civilian government has no control over the military.

So it was the military and Privy Council's fault that Thaksin initiated, supervised, modified, and finalized his War on Drugs to the point of personally claiming credit for the complete eradication of drugs in Thailand.

Interesting perspective.

[rixalex]

Show me a war where innocent people do not die. Do you not understand that in some provinces the drug gangs were in control? That meant that the people that were supposed to upholding the laws and protecting the population were turned. That is what happens in a narco state. Look at the current state of affairs in Mexico. That's what Thailand avoided.

The argument you make, of Thailand having little choice but to act in a way no free and fair democratic state would wish to, in order to avoid an upcoming graver peril that has been predicted by some, sounds an awful lot like the argument for the staging of the coup, which if i recall correctly, you oppose as you believe the ends do not justify the means and that there were other solutions less damaging and less drastic. (apologise if that is not your view)

I think when it comes to killing people without trying them, there must be other solutions. There have to be.

I think when it comes to killing already disease ridden democratic systems, there may be other solutions, but given the choice, i'll take a peaceful coup over a dead innocent victim... and i think you would too, were that victim a relative.

[geriatrickid]

Show me a war where innocent people do not die. Do you not understand that in some provinces the drug gangs were in control? That meant that the people that were supposed to upholding the laws and protecting the population were turned. That is what happens in a narco state. Look at the current state of affairs in Mexico. That's what Thailand avoided.

The argument you make, of Thailand having little choice but to act in a way no free and fair democratic state would wish to, in order to avoid an upcoming graver peril that has been predicted by some, sounds an awful lot like the argument for the staging of the coup, which if i recall correctly, you oppose as you believe the ends do not justify the means and that there were other solutions less damaging and less drastic. (apologise if that is not your view)

I think when it comes to killing people without trying them, there must be other solutions. There have to be.

I think when it comes to killing already disease ridden democratic systems, there may be other solutions, but given the choice, i'll take a peaceful coup over a dead innocent victim... and i think you would too, were that victim a relative.

Let me try again. I do not support the killing of innocent non combatant/non implicated parties. My point is that many of the arguments have attempted to treat the Thaksin era drug campaign as if it was a stand alone event. It was not. The campaign was part of a consistent strategy used by the governments and the military leadership that preceded Thaksin.

In respect to your comment that you would take a peaceful coup over a dead innocent victim, I believe you received both. The same commanders that were implicated in the coup that ended Mr. Thaksin's rule were in positions of power and commanded units during the Thaksin drug campaign.

The commonly held view within the military and the government at the time was that the drug trafficing presented a serious threat to national security as the drug trafficing destabilized the Thai border with Myanmar. There were ongoing skirmishes and gun battles wth the drug trafficers in the border region. As such, the military commanders did perceive this as a war. Innocent civilians usually die in wars. There is nothing unusual in that. . It can be argued that the Thaksin initiative, even if crude, succeeded in meeting the military's stated goal of securing the border regions and of stopping the spread of the the trafficers influence. I am neither justifying nor excusing the death of innocents. Rather, I am pointing out that the events must be examined in their entiriety.

[geriatrickid]

Normal default font and font size restored:

It was executed under the auspices of the military high command with the support of the privy council. The reality in Thailand is that the civilian government has no control over the military.

So it was the military and Privy Council's fault that Thaksin initiated, supervised, modified, and finalized his War on Drugs to the point of personally claiming credit for the complete eradication of drugs in Thailand.

Interesting perspective.

Politicians usually do take credit for events if they seem successful. Former President Bush made an error similar to formerr PM Thaksin when Mr, Bush stood on the aircraft carrier in May 2003 under a banner that read Mission Accomplished. As you know, the problems in Iraq continued.

In respect to your cute attempt to twist my comment out of context, your assertion that former PM Thaksin initiated, supervised, modified, and finalized his War on Drugs is incorrect. The strategy was already in place. The planning had started in 2000 following the inspection tours by the military commanders. They were shocked and concerned by what they had seen and learned. Yes, Mr. Thaksin had some input into the initiative, but for all intents and purposes the effectiveness of the campaign relied upon the Third Army and special forces deployment as well as the RTP efforts. Despite the unfortunate loss of civilian life, they did succeed in their goal of securing the region. Thailand had not encountered such a potent and insidious threat before, not even from the communist insurgents.