Thai-U S Ties Will Not Change: Interview With Ambassador Kristie Kenney

[webfact]

EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW

Thai-US ties 'will not change'

The Nation

US Ambassador to Thailand Kristie Kenney, right, talks to Nation Group Executive Editor Thepchai Yong in an exclusive interview yesterday.

BANGKOK: -- US envoy Kristie Kenney tells Nation Multimedia Group that relations between two nations will be the same whatever the election's outcome

Thai-US relations will stay very much the same whether President Barack Obama wins a second term or former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney becomes the 45th US president, US Ambassador Kristie Kenney told Nation Multimedia Group yesterday.

Democrat Obama and Repub-lican Romney are equally strong candidates competing in a very tight race, so for Americans to decide on November 6 whom to vote for, this third round of the US presidential election debate today is crucial, she said to Thepchai Yong, group executive editor of NMG, in a television interview broadcast on Nation Channel and Krungthep Turakij TV last night.

Kenney stressed the importance of Thai-US diplomatic relations, which would turn 180 years old next year. The United States and Thailand are treaty allies, friends and strong trade, security and cultural partners. Business profits between them reached US$35 billion (Bt1.075 trillion) last year and could be further boosted.

Obama and Romney share similar qualities that could attract voters, she noted. Both are Harvard Law School graduates, are highly qualified and present outstanding foreign policies on the US presence in the world community. They are both pro-trade. Although Obama has an advantage from running the country for four years, Romney can make up for this by beating Obama in the debate, by simply telling the country how much better he could perform or would deal with problems.

Foreign policy will be focus of the third debate at Lynn University in Florida, and Kenney thinks that US foreign policy, whoever the next president is, will not change much towards China. Despite Romney's tough stance towards that country as expressed in his strongly worded statements, Kenney said strong statements during an election were not always translated into action.

An elected president is not alone in running the US government. He represents the executive branch, but has to deal with the legislative and the judicial branches, she said. And for voters to decide on the foreign policy of both candidates, the third debate is important.

Foreign policy nowadays matters to American voters because of two key factors - today's world communities were much closer than 10 years ago, when relations and trade in separate locations did not affect each other, and the US electorate now is different, the ambassador said.

Nearly 20 per cent of voters are Hispanic, who naturally favour Democrat candidates including Obama, while 7 per cent are Asian, who favour no one in particular, and that is why the third debate will be decisive for them, she said.

Undecided voters are always crucial for a candidate to taste victory and the final three weeks, from the third debate to election day, will be critical. Female voters are also essential and candidates who do well in all three debates usually draw votes from them.

Utilising the third debate, both candidates can recoup their disadvantage in swing states, where voters are still undecided, she said, while excusing herself from predicting or commenting on many aspects that would be answered after the third debate.

As for Myanmar's possible role in the annual Cobra Gold military exercise in Thailand this year, Kenney said it was a positive move, which was discussed among event partners, and an invite would be submitted by the Thai government, awaiting a reply from Myanmar authorities.

Kenney, who was nominated by Obama in July 2010 to head the Thailand mission and confirmed by the Senate in September that year, said she had not decided whom to vote for and would be proud to serve under either US president.

Before the interview ended, she threw the question back to Thepchai: Whom would he vote for if he were an American? Thepchai said he would choose "someone he is familiar with". Kenney told Thepchai, "This time you are familiar with both candidates, and that's a good diplomatic answer," before both shared a good laugh.

-- The Nation 2012-10-23

[asiawatcher]

The joys of having security of tenure as a public servant. Remain neutral.

[noitom]

So "someone he's familiar with" means what? He is familiar with Obama more so than Romney, at least for the last four years. In fact it is doubtful that he is in any way familiar with Romney. Therefore his response implies that he would vote for Obama with whom he is already familiar as the sitting president. Why doesn't he just come out and say that? Unless he has concerns about Obama. He is not a diplomat sidestepping questions. He is a chief editor of one of the two English newspapers in Thailand. Why doesn't he express an editorial view?

He must have a view as to which man's policies would favor Thailand. He is the chief editor responsible for the editorial point of view. What is The Nation's editorial stance on this? Surely they can take a position based on what is "familiar" to them. If neither man is familiar to him , then why is the ambassador wasting her time asking him? And why is she complimenting him on his "slick diplomatic style answer? This seems like a waste of US taxpayer money to take up a senseless pointless interview like this with a man who is not familiar.

[sunshine51]

So...the NSA...errrrr...NASA...finally gets the real go-ahead with their

"weather recon" flights eh?! Good on ya.

[Pimay1]

Nearly 20 per cent of voters are Hispanic, who naturally favour Democrat candidates including Obama

What makes them "naturally" favor Obama?

[MEL1]

That's like kind of asking why Serbs and Croats, and all other sundry of 'excusive exiles' voted for Tony Blair.

He was a winker, and not with his eyes!

-m.

[TruthEyes]

I hope that the good General Prayuth and his backers were made to watch that interview over and over again.

The underlying theme being that in a democracy "the will of the voter prevails"

[Jingthing]

62 percent of Asian Americans went with Obama last time. Asian Americans have shown a trend towards the democratic party in general in recent decades representing a shift from the past. A Thai American woman spoke at the democratic convention this year. Obama got 85 percent of Indian Americans.

Should Thais like Obama or Romney? Well, that's probably linked to Romney's inflammatory attacks on China and also his complete lack of experience on foreign policy. Not to mention evidence of poor aptitude for it in his two major gaffes on his campaign trips to England and Israel. (I'm not the ambassador whose job it is to gloss over such issues.) Labeling China a currency manipulator as Romney shrilly claims he will do on Day 1 in office accomplishes absolutely nothing except to make China angry. Obama has shifted U.S. foreign policy to focus on Asia in general as a counterbalance to Chinese power. Not seeking open conflict of course, more like to prevent it. I see Romney with his crew of Bush era neocon advisers as more likely than Obama to spark conflicts anywhere, including in Asia. I feel Romney has hinted more of a foreign policy focus back to the middle east, Bush style, so if I was Thailand I would wonder if Romney would reverse the Obama-Hillary Clinton historic shift to Asia focus.

There is also the matter of the European crisis as Europe and Thailand are big trading partners. The European leaders are freaking out now at the possibility that Romney might win, something they didn't consider a possibility until recently. The reason is that they have a history now with Obama's dealing with the Euro crisis and a change with U.S. relations at this shaky time is not welcome in Europe. A new president would need a long learning curve to get where Obama is on their issues, and that is seen as a risk and disruptive. As global economics are so closely linked, this might concern Thailand as well.

Edited October 23, 2012 by Jingthing

[yoshiwara]

I hope that the good General Prayuth and his backers were made to watch that interview over and over again.

The underlying theme being that in a democracy "the will of the voter prevails"

Actually one of the best aspects of American history they should have a look at is how vulnerable democracy is to corruption and organised thuggery.

The example of Chicago is a case in point where Al Capone bought elections, the police force and the body politic to bend to his will.

Aided by armed goons. They will then have pointed out to them that Al Capone was brought down by exposed tax evasion.

If they all sat together and watched the movie, they would cry out 'Hey! We know that guy!'

[NowImEasy]

Obama 2.0 would be a disaster for the world. He has already taken powers once reserved for the legislature. With no more worries about re-election, he would be free to do as he pleases, just as he told the Russian President on an open microphone. He would abandon Israel, which would lead to conflagration in the Middle East. His weakness on national defense could embolden China to provoke Japan and the Philippines. Taiwan could easily be swallowed without a shot fired. And its not far fetched to imagine all of SE Asia becoming like Tibet. Obama is a weak leader, with a Marxist idealogical upbringing. He would weaken the American military to the point where there would be no deterrent to any aggression. Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro support Obama. What does that tell you?

To the Thais, and all freedom loving people; If Obama is re-elected, we are all truly f..ked. All educated people who understand world history should be concerned about this American smooth talking, lying demagogue with a hidden agenda.

And his unfettered Neo-Marxist economic agenda will bring misery to the world when markets implode. Who will suffer? The poor, as they always do. Prices for food will rise and riots will follow. But the elites still support Obama. In America, and the 'progressive' Western nations, all people are equal. But some are more equal than others.

[Johpa]

Obama 2.0 would be a disaster for the world. He has already taken powers once reserved for the legislature. With no more worries about re-election, he would be free to do as he pleases, just as he told the Russian President on an open microphone. He would abandon Israel, which would lead to conflagration in the Middle East. His weakness on national defense could embolden China to provoke Japan and the Philippines. Taiwan could easily be swallowed without a shot fired. And its not far fetched to imagine all of SE Asia becoming like Tibet. Obama is a weak leader, with a Marxist idealogical upbringing. He would weaken the American military to the point where there would be no deterrent to any aggression. Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro support Obama. What does that tell you?

To the Thais, and all freedom loving people; If Obama is re-elected, we are all truly f..ked. All educated people who understand world history should be concerned about this American smooth talking, lying demagogue with a hidden agenda.

And his unfettered Neo-Marxist economic agenda will bring misery to the world when markets implode. Who will suffer? The poor, as they always do. Prices for food will rise and riots will follow. But the elites still support Obama. In America, and the 'progressive' Western nations, all people are equal. But some are more equal than others.

Yes Dorothy, this is not Kansas, this is the imagined world of Rupert Murdoch, a displaced Australian who has been feeding the feeble minded in America with such nonsense now for decades with the help of alluring, skinny, leggy blondes who deliver his ridiculous propaganda on his faux news channel. And of course many of you are familiar with the social policy that Murdoch grew up in:

If you are white, its all right.

If you are brown, you may stay around.

If you are Black, you must go back.

But the only major short term difference for Thailand between the two candidates, and Thailand is the HUB of short time everything, is that Romney would be better for the business of the Thai bicycle vendors. Other than that the debate the other night showed that there was little difference in overall foreign policy, at least with the particular version of Romney that spoke on Monday night.