Want a new Thai PM? Then vote for someone else

[webfact]

BURNING ISSUE
Want a new PM? Then vote for someone else
Supalak Ganjanakhundee
The Nation

BANGKOK: -- Some Thais appear to have learnt nothing from history - as suggested by a group's calls for the royal appointment of a new premier to replace elected Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra.

On Monday, the Thai Patriotic Front lodged a petition with the Bureau of the Royal Household seeking a new premier through an undemocratic method.

This is the second time in seven years this group of Thai people has sought an undemocratic solution to achieve its political ambitions. The first time was in 2006 when the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) staged a series of street protests to call for a royal-appointed leader to replace then PM Thaksin Shinawatra.

Unlike this time, the first movement was widely supported by many people, including the intellectual elite, who claimed they had fought for democracy their entire lives. The protest of yellow-shirt wearing people ended up with a military coup toppling Thaksin in September 2006.

Chaiwat Sinsuwong, leader of the anti-government Thai Patriotic Front, and about 1,000 followers, claimed they had 8,999,999 signatures of Thai citizens to back up their demands for a new premier. But that is not enough. Chaiwat and his group, which is actually a faction of the former PAD, has obtained no popular support for the crusade this time. Mainstream media, at least for now, has played down the movement, giving little space for news of its activities.

In fact, Chaiwat's group staged a little-noticed protest at Sanam Luang for months. Initially, this group simply wanted the government to reject the International Court of Justice's jurisdiction to interpret the 1962 Preah Vihear judgment. Nobody cared about their protest on that issue, either.

Thailand has had bad experiences already in trying to use undemocratic means for political solutions. This country remains in political difficulty these days because of this kind of thinking. The previous PAD movement and military intervention to oust Thaksin resulted in the ongoing political rift, instability and chaos over the past seven years.

The ultra-rightist Thai elite twisted all principles of law merely to serve their political objectives to get rid of Thaksin. All institutions, including the executive branch set up by the coup and led by well-wishing people, failed to work properly to lead Thailand in a progressive direction because they were just designed to prevent Thaksin and his clan from assuming power, not to run the country.

The rightist elite eventually failed to bar the Shinawatra clan from power because they took a wrong stance in their struggle with Thaksin.

Thaksin himself might not demonstrate good faith in democracy, but he took the right political stance towards democracy. His family members were brought to power by elections, not any other means.

Furthermore, undemocratic political settings and entities set up by a coup or special power cannot last long as they no longer fit the new world order. Most countries around the globe are heading toward democracy and prefer popular power as their source of legitimacy. Not many countries in the world feel comfortable with a government appointed by a 'special power', no matter how good it claims to be.

The simple way to have a new premier in a democratic world is to get people to elect one. Yingluck and her crew cannot stay in power forever. She has only two years left in office. If Chaiwat and his group really have a better choice and good policies to run the country, they should propose candidates for the people to choose in a coming general election.

Rather than sitting still in protest at Sanam Luang and waiting for special powers to grant the new prime minister, Chaiwat, the group and whoever disagrees or is disappointed with Yingluck and the Shinawatra clan, should campaign around the country for a good candidate and good policies for a premier to replace the PM.


-- The Nation 2013-06-19

[Nowhereman60]

Good story, now let's see what the Yellow Skirts have to say about this story.

[PoodMaiDai]

I'm confused. What color shirt or mask should I be reaching for after reading this?

[Jasun]

Fair point. Better off with another 2 years of stability under a controversial govt than having an unelected leader and more tanks on the streets.

[Robby nz]

Good story, now let's see what the Yellow Skirts have to say about this story.

Why cant you reds get it through your thick heads that there is no yellow shirts any more.

They were dead and buried a couple of years ago.

Just because your heroes still choose to were red does not mean anyone else has to wear or identify with a color.

[bigbamboo]

Thanks to PT's failings the Dems have been handed a golden opportunity to come back from the dead. It is up to them to sort themselves out and do what they've been doing recently in by elections, that is to win via the ballot box.

About now the country's support is probably split a fairly even three ways. Those who will be back Thaksin's party, those who will always back the Dems and the crucial element those who went with PT last time but are growing disaffected in increasing numbers.

Two years is a long time in politics but Thailand doesn't need any more caretaker PMs or military coups.

[rijb]

I'm shocked! The Nation is for elections?

[rijb]

Good story, now let's see what the Yellow Skirts have to say about this story.

It's difficult to talk through a mask.

[GentlemanJim]

The previous PAD movement and military intervention to oust Thaksin resulted in the ongoing political rift, instability and chaos over the past seven years.

Now even the newspaper is writing up the Shiniwatra's re-write of history. The second inept article I have read from the Nation today, it seems the B crew were on shift last night, having been ordered to write something to fill up space.

[Neilly]

Good story, now let's see what the Yellow Skirts have to say about this story.

I wouldn't class it as a story as there seems to be no entertainment value in it at all

sto·ry

/ˈstôrē/

Noun

1. An account of imaginary or real people and events told for entertainment: "an adventure story".

Edited June 19, 2013 by Neilly

[rametindallas]

The only thing the Yellow shirts had in common was their desire to remove Dr. Thaksin from power. Once that was done, they broke up into little single issue groups that were as undemocratic as the UDD. They are viewed as 'fringe' crazies now with no power to change anything. The current government is in power legitimately, unlike Dr. Thaksin when he was forced out by the military. and they will stay in power as long as they stay within the rules and win elections. This is as it should be in a Democracy. Sunlight is a great disinfectant and it is good the newspapers report on all the crazy, undemocratic groups' activities so we can protect ourselves.

[OzMick]

There is another way to remove an incompetent or unpopular PM. The MPs of the governing party hold a meeting, ask for nominations, and then vote for a new leader.

This process is not at all unusual in democracies, and electors should feel free to approach their government MPs to suggest leadership change. No voters have voted for the current PM to hold that position. She was nominated to an MP seat by party list, and supposedly selected by elected MPs to be their leader, and therefore has no guaranteed right to the position for the term of the government.

Good luck with that in a PTP "democratic" government.

[jayboy]

Good story, now let's see what the Yellow Skirts have to say about this story.

Why cant you reds get it through your thick heads that there is no yellow shirts any more.

They were dead and buried a couple of years ago.

Just because your heroes still choose to were red does not mean anyone else has to wear or identify with a color.

Probably not too clever to accuse others of having" thick heads" when your own understanding is so rudimentary and prejudiced.PAD, the yellowshirts, Pitak Siam, Tui's multicoloureds may differ in detail but the driving force is the same and in many cases the same leaders are involved - the objective being to thwart representative democracy when it comes up with a government the feudal,reactionary and military interests are uncomfortable with.The Nation's argument is hardly controversial being that it makes more sense for those that are uncomfortable with the current government to follow the universally accepted remedy of voting another one in when the time is right.The Bangkok municipal election and the recent Democrat victory at Don Muang show the way it should be done.A general election has to be called in a couple of years, and the opposition have their chance.There is a small problem I agree since although some have convinced themselves the PM is a major liability and due for replacement, those not not blinded by partisan politics understand she remains the most popular Prime Minister in living memory - obviously not the most competent (but that's a different argument).

What the usual suspects hate about an article like this is the implicit recognition that the old guard has lost the argument.The Democrats may well win power again (though they will need to ditch Abhisit) but the old order has died a death - and some of the less perceptive defenders of reaction have somehow failed to notice it.

[yoshiwara]

Good story, now let's see what the Yellow Skirts have to say about this story.

Why cant you reds get it through your thick heads that there is no yellow shirts any more.

They were dead and buried a couple of years ago.

Just because your heroes still choose to were red does not mean anyone else has to wear or identify with a color.

Probably not too clever to accuse others of having" thick heads" when your own understanding is so rudimentary and prejudiced.PAD, the yellowshirts, Pitak Siam, Tui's multicoloureds may differ in detail but the driving force is the same and in many cases the same leaders are involved - the objective being to thwart representative democracy when it comes up with a government the feudal,reactionary and military interests are uncomfortable with.The Nation's argument is hardly controversial being that it makes more sense for those that are uncomfortable with the current government to follow the universally accepted remedy of voting another one in when the time is right.The Bangkok municipal election and the recent Democrat victory at Don Muang show the way it should be done.A general election has to be called in a couple of years, and the opposition have their chance.There is a small problem I agree since although some have convinced themselves the PM is a major liability and due for replacement, those not not blinded by partisan politics understand she remains the most popular Prime Minister in living memory - obviously not the most competent (but that's a different argument).

What the usual suspects hate about an article like this is the implicit recognition that the old guard has lost the argument.The Democrats may well win power again (though they will need to ditch Abhisit) but the old order has died a death - and some of the less perceptive defenders of reaction have somehow failed to notice it.

....opines the defender of the new reaction Mr I See No Arisman Video.

[Chrisswe]

We all know this jealous and brainless people's. Majority of the Thai people's still make dissision in this matter.

[rametindallas]

Good story, now let's see what the Yellow Skirts have to say about this story.

Why cant you reds get it through your thick heads that there is no yellow shirts any more.

They were dead and buried a couple of years ago.

Just because your heroes still choose to were red does not mean anyone else has to wear or identify with a color.

Probably not too clever to accuse others of having" thick heads" when your own understanding is so rudimentary and prejudiced.PAD, the yellowshirts, Pitak Siam, Tui's multicoloureds may differ in detail but the driving force is the same and in many cases the same leaders are involved - the objective being to thwart representative democracy when it comes up with a government the feudal,reactionary and military interests are uncomfortable with.The Nation's argument is hardly controversial being that it makes more sense for those that are uncomfortable with the current government to follow the universally accepted remedy of voting another one in when the time is right.The Bangkok municipal election and the recent Democrat victory at Don Muang show the way it should be done.A general election has to be called in a couple of years, and the opposition have their chance.There is a small problem I agree since although some have convinced themselves the PM is a major liability and due for replacement, those not not blinded by partisan politics understand she remains the most popular Prime Minister in living memory - obviously not the most competent (but that's a different argument).

What the usual suspects hate about an article like this is the implicit recognition that the old guard has lost the argument.The Democrats may well win power again (though they will need to ditch Abhisit) but the old order has died a death - and some of the less perceptive defenders of reaction have somehow failed to notice it.

Why do the Democrats need to 'ditch' Abhisit? I thought he was the only Democrat that wasn't corrupt through and through.

One other point: if by 'old order' you mean the feudal 'patronage system', it is not dead nor dying. Dr. Thaksin successfully exploited that with the 'One Million Baht Village Fund'. The 'Godfathers' of Thailand enjoy as much power and wealth now as they ever did. If you ;meant something else by 'old order', please elaborate; you make a lot of good points.

[OzMick]

Probably not too clever to accuse others of having" thick heads" when your own understanding is so rudimentary and prejudiced.PAD, the yellowshirts, Pitak Siam, Tui's multicoloureds may differ in detail but the driving force is the same and in many cases the same leaders are involved - the objective being to thwart representative democracy when it comes up with a government the feudal,reactionary and military interests are uncomfortable with.The Nation's argument is hardly controversial being that it makes more sense for those that are uncomfortable with the current government to follow the universally accepted remedy of voting another one in when the time is right.The Bangkok municipal election and the recent Democrat victory at Don Muang show the way it should be done.A general election has to be called in a couple of years, and the opposition have their chance.There is a small problem I agree since although some have convinced themselves the PM is a major liability and due for replacement, those not not blinded by partisan politics understand she remains the most popular Prime Minister in living memory - obviously not the most competent (but that's a different argument).

What the usual suspects hate about an article like this is the implicit recognition that the old guard has lost the argument.The Democrats may well win power again (though they will need to ditch Abhisit) but the old order has died a death - and some of the less perceptive defenders of reaction have somehow failed to notice it.

I find it amusing that the only people calling for Abhisit's removal are his opponents. If he was such a liability, would they bother.

OTOH, a PM who has instigated policies causing huge ("only accounting") losses should be above criticism. Well she might be, because there is no way her party can change leadership.

[moe666]

I am no supporter of this government and there ruinous policies, and they should be replaced at the next election, unless some of the smelly stuff flying around sticks and calls for an earlier ouster. Unfortunately the PM not showing up at parliament, not giving interviews, not chairing the rice committee when in meeting are not impeachable offenses.

Edited June 19, 2013 by moe666

[yoshiwara]

Mr Supalak Ganjanakhundee is a bit of a Thaksin lickspittle when it comes to distorting history and it is for this that he should be shot down. Re the yellowshirts it has to be pointed out (yet again) that they called for no vote to be given to the DP at the last election.

[gerry1011]

BURNING ISSUE

Want a new PM? Then vote for someone else

Supalak Ganjanakhundee

The Nation

BANGKOK: -- Some Thais appear to have learnt nothing from history - as suggested by a group's calls for the royal appointment of a new premier to replace elected Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra.

On Monday, the Thai Patriotic Front lodged a petition with the Bureau of the Royal Household seeking a new premier through an undemocratic method.

This is the second time in seven years this group of Thai people has sought an undemocratic solution to achieve its political ambitions. The first time was in 2006 when the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) staged a series of street protests to call for a royal-appointed leader to replace then PM Thaksin Shinawatra.

Unlike this time, the first movement was widely supported by many people, including the intellectual elite, who claimed they had fought for democracy their entire lives. The protest of yellow-shirt wearing people ended up with a military coup toppling Thaksin in September 2006.

Chaiwat Sinsuwong, leader of the anti-government Thai Patriotic Front, and about 1,000 followers, claimed they had 8,999,999 signatures of Thai citizens to back up their demands for a new premier. But that is not enough. Chaiwat and his group, which is actually a faction of the former PAD, has obtained no popular support for the crusade this time. Mainstream media, at least for now, has played down the movement, giving little space for news of its activities.

In fact, Chaiwat's group staged a little-noticed protest at Sanam Luang for months. Initially, this group simply wanted the government to reject the International Court of Justice's jurisdiction to interpret the 1962 Preah Vihear judgment. Nobody cared about their protest on that issue, either.

Thailand has had bad experiences already in trying to use undemocratic means for political solutions. This country remains in political difficulty these days because of this kind of thinking. The previous PAD movement and military intervention to oust Thaksin resulted in the ongoing political rift, instability and chaos over the past seven years.

The ultra-rightist Thai elite twisted all principles of law merely to serve their political objectives to get rid of Thaksin. All institutions, including the executive branch set up by the coup and led by well-wishing people, failed to work properly to lead Thailand in a progressive direction because they were just designed to prevent Thaksin and his clan from assuming power, not to run the country.

The rightist elite eventually failed to bar the Shinawatra clan from power because they took a wrong stance in their struggle with Thaksin.

Thaksin himself might not demonstrate good faith in democracy, but he took the right political stance towards democracy. His family members were brought to power by elections, not any other means.

Furthermore, undemocratic political settings and entities set up by a coup or special power cannot last long as they no longer fit the new world order. Most countries around the globe are heading toward democracy and prefer popular power as their source of legitimacy. Not many countries in the world feel comfortable with a government appointed by a 'special power', no matter how good it claims to be.

The simple way to have a new premier in a democratic world is to get people to elect one. Yingluck and her crew cannot stay in power forever. She has only two years left in office. If Chaiwat and his group really have a better choice and good policies to run the country, they should propose candidates for the people to choose in a coming general election.

Rather than sitting still in protest at Sanam Luang and waiting for special powers to grant the new prime minister, Chaiwat, the group and whoever disagrees or is disappointed with Yingluck and the Shinawatra clan, should campaign around the country for a good candidate and good policies for a premier to replace the PM.

-- The Nation 2013-06-19

Am I dreaming?

The Nation writing something like this?

Vote? In an election? The PAD movement resulted in instability? Find a better choice for PM? Better policies? Wait for the next elections?

I am confused... I did not read an article of The Nation that makes sense since years.

Must be something wrong with these guys.

>_>

Sent from my GT-I8190 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[PREM-R]

Am I dreaming?

The Nation writing something like this?

Vote? In an election? The PAD movement resulted in instability? Find a better choice for PM? Better policies? Wait for the next elections?

I am confused... I did not read an article of The Nation that makes sense since years.

Must be something wrong with these guys.

Maybe there has been a "Silent Coup" at the Nation, what next, Faarks Nooz praising Obama Oh My Gaard, That's Assum.

[cm das]

I find it amusing that the only people calling for Abhisit's removal are his opponents. If he was such a liability, would they bother.

I think Abhisit is smart and articulate. I think that if he were a more skilled leader and had the power to implement his policies Thailand would be better for it. But I also think he is a liability for the Democrats now. Fair or not, he gets so much crap thrown at him that some of it has to stick, at least in the minds of many Thais who don't exactly have access to a free, thorough, impartial media environment. I believe that the Democrats would be much more able to control the debate, and would do better at the ballot box, if they had a new leadership team in place.

[A Member]

The first line starts " some Thais seem to have learnt nothing from history " but why stop at history ? This country is a living example o fboth doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result and unfortunately of not learning from mistakes, tragedies etc. and doing nothing about them, the recent bridge collapses being a minor case in point.

[jayboy]

Probably not too clever to accuse others of having" thick heads" when your own understanding is so rudimentary and prejudiced.PAD, the yellowshirts, Pitak Siam, Tui's multicoloureds may differ in detail but the driving force is the same and in many cases the same leaders are involved - the objective being to thwart representative democracy when it comes up with a government the feudal,reactionary and military interests are uncomfortable with.The Nation's argument is hardly controversial being that it makes more sense for those that are uncomfortable with the current government to follow the universally accepted remedy of voting another one in when the time is right.The Bangkok municipal election and the recent Democrat victory at Don Muang show the way it should be done.A general election has to be called in a couple of years, and the opposition have their chance.There is a small problem I agree since although some have convinced themselves the PM is a major liability and due for replacement, those not not blinded by partisan politics understand she remains the most popular Prime Minister in living memory - obviously not the most competent (but that's a different argument).

What the usual suspects hate about an article like this is the implicit recognition that the old guard has lost the argument.The Democrats may well win power again (though they will need to ditch Abhisit) but the old order has died a death - and some of the less perceptive defenders of reaction have somehow failed to notice it.

I find it amusing that the only people calling for Abhisit's removal are his opponents. If he was such a liability, would they bother.

OTOH, a PM who has instigated policies causing huge ("only accounting") losses should be above criticism. Well she might be, because there is no way her party can change leadership.

I don't care whether the Democrats replace him or not, except in the sense it would make the Democrats a stronger party and more likely to win a national election.For most middle class well educated people the Democrat Party is a natural home, and I would like to be able to support it.It may surprise some but my natural sympathies reside there.

However if you truly believe there are not powerful interests within the Democrat Party not seriously considering Abhisit's replacement you are profoundly mistaken.There will never be a public debate about it though in the Western sense.

As to the article which has little controversial content - simply that governments should be changed by elections, it's interesting that the fruitier type of reactionary apologist responds by labelling its author a "Thaksin lickspittle".

[yoshiwara]

I find it amusing that the only people calling for Abhisit's removal are his opponents. If he was such a liability, would they bother.

I think Abhisit is smart and articulate. I think that if he were a more skilled leader and had the power to implement his policies Thailand would be better for it. But I also think he is a liability for the Democrats now. Fair or not, he gets so much crap thrown at him that some of it has to stick, at least in the minds of many Thais who don't exactly have access to a free, thorough, impartial media environment. I believe that the Democrats would be much more able to control the debate, and would do better at the ballot box, if they had a new leadership team in place.

The Thaksin team are obsessed with Abhisit. Does Abhisit support the removal of Yingluck outside the parliamentary system? No. But if they can tar him with that brush they will do so.

[rixalex]

Am I dreaming?

The Nation writing something like this?

Vote? In an election? The PAD movement resulted in instability? Find a better choice for PM? Better policies? Wait for the next elections?

I am confused... I did not read an article of The Nation that makes sense since years.

Must be something wrong with these guys.

Maybe there has been a "Silent Coup" at the Nation, what next, Faarks Nooz praising Obama Oh My Gaard, That's Assum.

The Nation, contrary to red shirt supporters beliefs, has consistently published a variety of viewpoints from across the political spectrum. Red shirt supporters will continue calling The Nation yellow propaganda trash until it starts trotting out the sort of nonsense they are used to watching on Truth Today. That's not to say The Nation isn't trash. It is. And that's not to say it is completely without a political slant. What paper is?

[yoshiwara]

Probably not too clever to accuse others of having" thick heads" when your own understanding is so rudimentary and prejudiced.PAD, the yellowshirts, Pitak Siam, Tui's multicoloureds may differ in detail but the driving force is the same and in many cases the same leaders are involved - the objective being to thwart representative democracy when it comes up with a government the feudal,reactionary and military interests are uncomfortable with.The Nation's argument is hardly controversial being that it makes more sense for those that are uncomfortable with the current government to follow the universally accepted remedy of voting another one in when the time is right.The Bangkok municipal election and the recent Democrat victory at Don Muang show the way it should be done.A general election has to be called in a couple of years, and the opposition have their chance.There is a small problem I agree since although some have convinced themselves the PM is a major liability and due for replacement, those not not blinded by partisan politics understand she remains the most popular Prime Minister in living memory - obviously not the most competent (but that's a different argument).

What the usual suspects hate about an article like this is the implicit recognition that the old guard has lost the argument.The Democrats may well win power again (though they will need to ditch Abhisit) but the old order has died a death - and some of the less perceptive defenders of reaction have somehow failed to notice it.

I find it amusing that the only people calling for Abhisit's removal are his opponents. If he was such a liability, would they bother.

OTOH, a PM who has instigated policies causing huge ("only accounting") losses should be above criticism. Well she might be, because there is no way her party can change leadership.

I don't care whether the Democrats replace him or not, except in the sense it would make the Democrats a stronger party and more likely to win a national election.For most middle class well educated people the Democrat Party is a natural home, and I would like to be able to support it.It may surprise some but my natural sympathies reside there.

However if you truly believe there are not powerful interests within the Democrat Party not seriously considering Abhisit's replacement you are profoundly mistaken.There will never be a public debate about it though in the Western sense.

As to the article which has little controversial content - simply that governments should be changed by elections, it's interesting that the fruitier type of reactionary apologist responds by labelling its author a "Thaksin lickspittle".

...and the managing editor of The Nation Thanong Khanthong is a full-on off with the fairies gold bug to add a little more gruel to the mix.

[PREM-R]

The Nation, contrary to red shirt supporters beliefs, has consistently published a variety of viewpoints from across the political spectrum. Red shirt supporters will continue calling The Nation yellow propaganda trash until it starts trotting out the sort of nonsense they are used to watching on Truth Today. That's not to say The Nation isn't trash. It is. And that's not to say it is completely without a political slant. What paper is?

"And that's not to say it is completely without a political slant."

The Amart owned Nation is completely and utterly anti-Thaksin/PTP, that is not to say it is pro Dem.

[yoshiwara]

The Nation, contrary to red shirt supporters beliefs, has consistently published a variety of viewpoints from across the political spectrum. Red shirt supporters will continue calling The Nation yellow propaganda trash until it starts trotting out the sort of nonsense they are used to watching on Truth Today. That's not to say The Nation isn't trash. It is. And that's not to say it is completely without a political slant. What paper is?

"And that's not to say it is completely without a political slant."

The Amart owned Nation is completely and utterly anti-Thaksin/PTP, that is not to say it is pro Dem.

Even when Thaksin was trying to sue/screw the other newspaper into the ground (over reported cracks in the new airport runway oddly enough) the Nation stood up and called him out over his machinations both financial and political. For this The Nation has credit in the bank. It would be a pity if they gave further platform to the rewriting of history rubbish now being peddled by Supalak.

[jayboy]

I find it amusing that the only people calling for Abhisit's removal are his opponents. If he was such a liability, would they bother.

I think Abhisit is smart and articulate. I think that if he were a more skilled leader and had the power to implement his policies Thailand would be better for it. But I also think he is a liability for the Democrats now. Fair or not, he gets so much crap thrown at him that some of it has to stick, at least in the minds of many Thais who don't exactly have access to a free, thorough, impartial media environment. I believe that the Democrats would be much more able to control the debate, and would do better at the ballot box, if they had a new leadership team in place.

The Thaksin team are obsessed with Abhisit. Does Abhisit support the removal of Yingluck outside the parliamentary system? No. But if they can tar him with that brush they will do so.

I don't see how you can be so sure.Anecdotally all the evidence points the other way.He seems incapable of winning a national election, so what other routes to power does he have? Now how exactly did he come to power last time round?