History shows a way out of the Thai conflict

[englishoak]

About "their "cultural values" and ingrained perception of their own superiority."

Although I'm not a social scientist, here's one concrete example that I've observed in the last 15 years when I visited friends in Bangkok. These friends may be described as upper middle class people that you would commonly meet in Bangkok. Many are foreign educated, compound living, pdnp (public display of nose picking), european cars, etc.

This is what I've heard often from the owner of the compound regarding househould maids: "Oh, it's not like it used to be. Thai servants are so hard to find these days... Now we can only find Burmese servants and they are not safe." If you grew up in Thailand, Bangkok a while back, you remember that many homes have servants that do everything. They cook, clean, take care of the babies and kids, teach, laudry, drive, gardening, etc. It's also common that they become the mistress of the head of household. It's not just one servant, but it's their entire family that live in the maid quarter. And it's not just this family, but it's their ancestors that the house "owns." This way of life is changing for the upper middle class. Now the servants are proactive and they see that they are actually equal to the rest of their country people.

Isnt it the same in the USA...

If you want to say, its a rural wake up to follow a criminal rich, I must say, you wrong.

The way is the goal...

The USA average middle class dont have live in maids, mai nois or servants like here and hasnt ever really, ok its becoming rarer now here but still plenty have and they are not just the rich.

Do the rich have a right to call the shots for everyone else ? I think not. You are just assuming its not already totally corrupt, which the place is on every level from school to work to ampur.

Do not try and pull the evil farang influence card here. Asia needs no lessons or tips in greed or corruption, all around the world the poor and working class are waking up and fighting for their voice to be heard and its been like this for a few hundred years already. Raspberry is right it cannot be ignored and the genie will not be put back in the bottle, the sooner Thai high society embraces it and takes up a guiding and helping hand the better. It will come by active welcoming or by violence, the logical choice for Thailand being a Buddhist nation should be the middle way which would be not only be very Thai but also an inspiration to other nations. Things could be so well done here and the people would be so willing to help and get behind a real change but there is unlikely to be that feeling in the ruling elite level, it needs some integrity and we can see that in the respect my vote movement and the candle lighting, this is the voice of fair and normal people, not these coloured muppets that are both unworthy along with 90% of the rest of the political class.

If I were a Thai I would not waste my vote on anyone less than a party that really really deserved it, that dose not exist here at present.

[johnj]

What Thailand needs is leaders who serve the people and their country once elected, instead of presuming that once elected, that's their mandate to pilfer the countries assets. This is the mentality of greed driven people and families in many countries of Asia and Africa. People like these should not only be stripped of their assets, but their nationality also and cast out into the wilderness. It makes me angry to see good honest peoples of countries manipulated by the likes of Thaksin, just to abuse the power entrusted to them. Democracy is meant to be elected "To serve the people". If these sort of people love their country, why do they rape its assets? They have no love of their country, only love of the countries GDP., they can steal.

[noitom]

I suppose it is good to have a more reflective piece on the present troubles. The article succeeds well in highlighting the many contradictions and paradoxes in Thai political life, but to my mind fails to draw these together in a coherent narrative. It pays insufficient attention to the changes in Thai society that are driving the present conflict. For all the lip service to cultural context, the central thesis is that the problem is one man and his family. For me, it is more about the erosion of the power of a traditional elite, the changing circumstances of the rural workforce, and the conservative outlook of the urban middle class. Most commentators would be less sympathetic than this writer in their view of the workings of the Thai judiciary. But perhaps I neglected to study the dharmas, which seem central in this author's eyes, but may not interest the 15 million Puea Thai voters as much as they once did.

Thoughtful response.

[noitom]

This author focused on Mr. Thaksin as the fundamental root cause of Thai conflict and extends the reach of his "criminal empire" far beyond anything that would have been possible without the collaboration of most Thais in the elite establishment. Mr. Race's opinion piece also characterizes Thais as some sort of unique "pathological" culture that sets out from the age of reason to defraud and plunder the country as long as they pass the joint around.

The author also fails to introduce the element of a required shift in the application of law, order and justice for all to apply to everyone fairly and equally. This would seem to be a prerequisite and huge mountain for Thais to overcome since their basic approach to law and order is based on money and friends among the elite. It is also surprising that someone with as much Thailand experience as Mr. Race would fail to look back at Thailand's history of conflict beyond his focus on the Shinawatra family and a random mentioning of 1973 conflict. For example, his opinion omits the astonishing wealth accumulation in the Thai military and business class elite complex as the direct result of US and foreign backed investment in military and direct funding aid. Monies that were siphoned off in the elite pecking order and passed around. The Thai military's empowerment by the US and its charter to safeguard the establishment and the elite and the "Thai way." right or wrong.

Mr. Race's article is thoughtful but clearly seeks to curry favor with the establishment, shade and excuse away the self serving motives of his view and pandering to his club member board while he is jogging around the club track feeling intimidated by the lower echelons of Thai society and social structure who are protesting and encroaching on the fence of his high class club with "exclusive" membership. This encroachment by the poor in establishment space was made all right by Mr. Race's awareness that he needn't be concerned since the club fat cats "had made a deal" with the protesters.

The fair, just, and impartial application of law and order at all levels of Thai society, government, politics and business would seem to be the essential way forward toward change. Without rule of law as it applies to all regardless of status or wealth, Thailand is doomed to become a failed state. That happens when the government, military, police, politics, and life in general gets corrupted as a "way of life" it is impossible to repair and citizens are not secure.

Mr. Race thrashes around looking for a two step solution by suggesting that a claw back of money and a willing disappearance of the Thaksin clan would be the first condition. He follows that up with a vague suggestion that someone from the elite class who has a vision of rural uplift and who is "honest" among other qualities and would be the savior of the nation so to speak. This view is not in touch with reality about Thailand. Mr Race and his other club members "making deals" with the lower class to avoid encroachment should consider a revision of the concept of law and order in Thailand.

[metisdead]

A number of posts containing speculation on His Majesty The King have been deleted.


2) Not to express disrespect of the King of Thailand or anyone else in the Thai royal family, whether living or deceased, nor to criticize the monarchy as an institution. Speculation, comments and discussion of either a political or personal nature are not allowed when discussing HM The King or the Royal family. Discussion of the lese majeste law or lese majeste cases is permitted on the forum, providing no comment or speculation is made referencing the royal family. To breach this rule will result in immediate ban.

[jimky]

edit: Actually, not sure if linking that article is illegal so maybe nevermind.

Edited January 14, 2014 by jimky

[Raspberry]

About "their "cultural values" and ingrained perception of their own superiority."

Although I'm not a social scientist, here's one concrete example that I've observed in the last 15 years when I visited friends in Bangkok. These friends may be described as upper middle class people that you would commonly meet in Bangkok. Many are foreign educated, compound living, pdnp (public display of nose picking), european cars, etc.

This is what I've heard often from the owner of the compound regarding househould maids: "Oh, it's not like it used to be. Thai servants are so hard to find these days... Now we can only find Burmese servants and they are not safe." If you grew up in Thailand, Bangkok a while back, you remember that many homes have servants that do everything. They cook, clean, take care of the babies and kids, teach, laudry, drive, gardening, etc. It's also common that they become the mistress of the head of household. It's not just one servant, but it's their entire family that live in the maid quarter. And it's not just this family, but it's their ancestors that the house "owns." This way of life is changing for the upper middle class. Now the servants are proactive and they see that they are actually equal to the rest of their country people.

Isnt it the same in the USA...

If you want to say, its a rural wake up to follow a criminal rich, I must say, you wrong.

The way is the goal...

The USA average middle class dont have live in maids, mai nois or servants like here and hasnt ever really, ok its becoming rarer now here but still plenty have and they are not just the rich.

Do the rich have a right to call the shots for everyone else ? I think not. You are just assuming its not already totally corrupt, which the place is on every level from school to work to ampur.

Do not try and pull the evil farang influence card here. Asia needs no lessons or tips in greed or corruption, all around the world the poor and working class are waking up and fighting for their voice to be heard and its been like this for a few hundred years already. Raspberry is right it cannot be ignored and the genie will not be put back in the bottle, the sooner Thai high society embraces it and takes up a guiding and helping hand the better. It will come by active welcoming or by violence, the logical choice for Thailand being a Buddhist nation should be the middle way which would be not only be very Thai but also an inspiration to other nations. Things could be so well done here and the people would be so willing to help and get behind a real change but there is unlikely to be that feeling in the ruling elite level, it needs some integrity and we can see that in the respect my vote movement and the candle lighting, this is the voice of fair and normal people, not these coloured muppets that are both unworthy along with 90% of the rest of the political class.

If I were a Thai I would not waste my vote on anyone less than a party that really really deserved it, that dose not exist here at present.

My perspective view is that the demographics are changing. And it's a change at the core, a revelation that hey I also deserve that same equal treatment. That that we all share the access to government care and protection.

Is this the same as in the USA? Well yes, probably before 1860's when you own family of slaves like property.

[Mark Thaiford]

Mr. Race thrashes around looking for a two step solution by suggesting that a claw back of money and a willing disappearance of the Thaksin clan would be the first condition. He follows that up with a vague suggestion that someone from the elite class who has a vision of rural uplift and who is "honest" among other qualities and would be the savior of the nation so to speak. This view is not in touch with reality about Thailand.

An excellent analysis by Noitom.

Mr. Race's suggestion that an uncorrupted Saviour from the elite will appear to uplift the rural poor is pure fantasy.

The solution will never arise out of the Conservative elite currently grouping around Suthep - as this group IS the problem.

It is mind-boggling how many supposedly intelligent people such as Mr. Race believe Thailand can return to some feudal idyll where the poor know their place and the privileged elite rule unopposed.

Those days are over. The only way to bring something like this back is to establish an out and out totalitarian dictatorship a la Burma with its adherent oppression of the population. This would change Thailand forever in the eyes of the World and it seems a highly unlikely scenario. It is true that other South East Asian states seem to have established semi-authoritarian governments which keep their countries stable, but these countries have different histories and different demographics to Thailand.

I do not see how the elitists clamouring around Suthep can put the genie back in the bottle - it is not just the North and North-Eastern poor who would resist such a move but also the emergent middle classes in the North and North-East. They will not be cowed like poorly educated and economically deprived peasants have been in the past.

[blabth]

Beside getting a lecture in Thai history the report was not telling what is the way out of the conflict. What did history teach us? Coming back to the old feudalistic system? Thaksin did what most of the Thai ruling PM and government did before use the power for their own benefit. So what will be the solution or the way out of the mess?

Btw Thaksin owned the Shin emporium before he become PM. I still believe if he would not have sold it he most probably would be still here as PM. Selling it tax free to Singapore's investment company has p.....d off the elite. I am not saying that Thaksin is a clean guy but he is only a Wolf under Wolves. Thaksin was the first one who made it obvious, he started the organize the government in a corporate style calling the governors CEO.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

[Crushdepth]

Excellent article. Too bad you don't see this sort of depth from local sources.

[LivinLOS]

Loads of good points.. I especially note the lack of any other political party to replicate the social uplift programs for the rural majority.. In a democracy its amazing to the point of blindness.

The immediate turmoil in the streets will stop when Thaksin and his family figure out that they can make no lesser sacrifice than did their predecessors, everyone from royalty on down.

This assumes Thailand must and will remain the same, this assumes that an elite will continue to dictate to a rural majority without demands.. It almost insists that democracy does not have equal suffrage and that a patriachal, top down, near feudal society will continue to be the same. History shows this not to be the case and hence resistance to the arguably inevitable change is also as much a cause of conflict as the inevitable rise of someone like Thaksin at this time in the countries development.

[LivinLOS]

I suppose it is good to have a more reflective piece on the present troubles. The article succeeds well in highlighting the many contradictions and paradoxes in Thai political life, but to my mind fails to draw these together in a coherent narrative. It pays insufficient attention to the changes in Thai society that are driving the present conflict. For all the lip service to cultural context, the central thesis is that the problem is one man and his family. For me, it is more about the erosion of the power of a traditional elite, the changing circumstances of the rural workforce, and the conservative outlook of the urban middle class. Most commentators would be less sympathetic than this writer in their view of the workings of the Thai judiciary. But perhaps I neglected to study the dharmas, which seem central in this author's eyes, but may not interest the 15 million Puea Thai voters as much as they once did.

As stated in my previous post.. Its a piece that seems to think that the status quo, and what has been before, will always be.

Societies change, people like Thaksin are as much symptoms of that change as they are causes.

[arthurboy]

It would seem that Thaksin has also been a pawn in the hands of certain elites in Thailand. His usefulness in times past now seems to have been exhausted, and recent internal feuding within those elites have caused them to turn their gaze for 'support' elsewhere within the country.

Remember that Thaksin too was sponsored as a younger man, policeman and upstart business mogul. Yes, his family was influential in Chiang Mai, but hardly anywhere else in the early days. Like so many provincial power brokers, the lure of Bangkok became overwhelming and, indeed, inevitable.

Thai political history is littered with similar examples of individuals pinning their colours to a variety of quasi political-business networks and connections.

Simply put, this is so very normal in Thai politics and business and, invariably, explains - to some degree - why and how corruption exists and continues to exist so easily in Thailand.

[LivinLOS]

Rather biased article. For example, locking cellular service to the sale of handsets was surely brilliant business thinking, not immoral or illegal - did it break any Thai laws? It's common practice isn't it now?

I remember this period, my wife back then used to smuggle in 5 handsets every trip.. And yes it did break contract laws.

The GSM alliance contractually agreed to not do this, with the introduction of SIMs that could be easily user swapped. Of course handsets could be locked, but thats not the same and not what Thaiksin did, he linked the sim to the phones IMEI (hardware id) not the other way around. This was clearly against the contracts he agreed to as a GSM alliance partner.

You will notice that in the USA which also locked phones to carriers more than the rest of the world, was not a GSM partner. They contractually chose not to do it and then violate the contract.

Clearly this was against any legal code, domestic or international and was his primary source of major wealth.

Edited January 15, 2014 by LivinLOS

[Crushdepth]

This author focused on Mr. Thaksin as the fundamental root cause of Thai conflict and extends the reach of his "criminal empire" far beyond anything that would have been possible without the collaboration of most Thais in the elite establishment. Mr. Race's opinion piece also characterizes Thais as some sort of unique "pathological" culture that sets out from the age of reason to defraud and plunder the country as long as they pass the joint around.

The author also fails to introduce the element of a required shift in the application of law, order and justice for all to apply to everyone fairly and equally. This would seem to be a prerequisite and huge mountain for Thais to overcome since their basic approach to law and order is based on money and friends among the elite. It is also surprising that someone with as much Thailand experience as Mr. Race would fail to look back at Thailand's history of conflict beyond his focus on the Shinawatra family and a random mentioning of 1973 conflict. For example, his opinion omits the astonishing wealth accumulation in the Thai military and business class elite complex as the direct result of US and foreign backed investment in military and direct funding aid. Monies that were siphoned off in the elite pecking order and passed around. The Thai military's empowerment by the US and its charter to safeguard the establishment and the elite and the "Thai way." right or wrong.

Mr. Race's article is thoughtful but clearly seeks to curry favor with the establishment, shade and excuse away the self serving motives of his view and pandering to his club member board while he is jogging around the club track feeling intimidated by the lower echelons of Thai society and social structure who are protesting and encroaching on the fence of his high class club with "exclusive" membership. This encroachment by the poor in establishment space was made all right by Mr. Race's awareness that he needn't be concerned since the club fat cats "had made a deal" with the protesters.

The fair, just, and impartial application of law and order at all levels of Thai society, government, politics and business would seem to be the essential way forward toward change. Without rule of law as it applies to all regardless of status or wealth, Thailand is doomed to become a failed state. That happens when the government, military, police, politics, and life in general gets corrupted as a "way of life" it is impossible to repair and citizens are not secure.

Mr. Race thrashes around looking for a two step solution by suggesting that a claw back of money and a willing disappearance of the Thaksin clan would be the first condition. He follows that up with a vague suggestion that someone from the elite class who has a vision of rural uplift and who is "honest" among other qualities and would be the savior of the nation so to speak. This view is not in touch with reality about Thailand. Mr Race and his other club members "making deals" with the lower class to avoid encroachment should consider a revision of the concept of law and order in Thailand.

Currying favour with the establishment? Pandering to the board? Feeling intimidated by the lower echelons of Thai society? Oh come on, do you seriously believe that journalists think like this?

I do agree that (lack of) rule of law is one of the main underlying problems afflicting Thailand, in that it is a key enabler of corruption and makes rooting it out through due process near impossible.

[LivinLOS]

The way forward is finding someone who can compete with Thaksin, not against him.

Surely compete makes that sentence make almost zero sense ?

You collude or compete, with or against.

[francescoassisi]

This seems a good overview,

http://www.dw.de/military-undecided-in-thailand-conflict/a-17361237?maca=en-rss-en-asia-5133-rdf

[LivinLOS]

A clearly well read guy that knows his stuff however a couple of things spring to mind.

1) Any article that talks of the writer in the third person stinks of egotism and self righteousness. The guy clearly has a high opinion of himself.

2) The writer states

Understanding the possibilities for the future may be clearer with this explanation of the real motives of the participants

Yet he only analyses in depth the motives of one of the participants, he doesnt even mention Suthep who for most now is seen as the real obstacle to progress.

Sadly like every article written either in Thai or English on the subject it is so woefully one sided as to be deemed useless. To give a real analysis of the situation he needs to move beyond a biography of Thaskin and look at the other forces at work.

The truth is the reason we dont have calm on the streets now is the total failure of the yellow side to put forward a genuine alternative that can appeal to the masses. With growing anger of non payment of rice subsidies and the amnesty bill, the gap between Thaskin and the red shirts was there to be exploited. Instead they have put forward firebrand Suthep who has caused an even bigger rift.

A good read nonetheless but try again with a bit more objectivity and analyse the main organiser of the protests and just maybe you`ll have a decent article.

I completely agree with many of your points however I don't see the point in analyzing Suthep. He is a nobody. Sure he was was the first to step up to lead the protests but take him out of the picture and someone else will take his place. Thaksin however is the main obstacle to possible peace. I know many people think otherwise but look at the relitave calm of society before the amnesty bill was changed in the final hours. The population in opposition were willing to stay quiet in spite of the damage many of ptp's schemes were causing to the country, but absolutely not to an all out pardon for Thaksin. He is the biggest rift in society. Pretty much all the population are after the same thing. A less corrupt and more accountable society. look at the uproar everyone has over the red bull case.

But its very dangerous to publicly analyze the source of power that the ranging forces against Thaksin derives from !!!

Everyone knows.. But no one can say.. Another aspect of this that reaches into the bizarre.

[Briggsy]

Some excellent stuff in there with excellent analysis but glaring omissions and glossing over of massacres. Not all handovers of power here were 'gentlemanly'.

[pisico]

from the article:

"Thaksin's approach to rule, so alien to Thai cultural values, arouses the same level and type of animosity in the minds of his opponents as does an abortion clinic in the minds of pro-lifers in the United States."

Yes, Thaksin's approach to rule arouses a lot of animosity amongst the Bangkok elite as it is the first successful political movement in Thailand that relies on genuine mass support, with genuine policies for the benefit of large parts of the population and not just a narrow Bangkok elite.

The Bangkok elite are not used to this sort of democracy which forces them to recognise their upcountry countrymen as equals to themselves. It is totally against their "cultural values" and ingrained perception of their own superiority.

This is what lies at the heart of the current problems in Thailand - the inability of a conservative elite in Thailand to adjust to modern day democracy. And they will not succeed in turning back the clock as Thailand has changed too much. Thailand outside of Bangkok has changed too much.

The author of this article seems to think Thailand can return to some "Golden Age" where members of the Thai elite took turns to share in the spoils of state without having to care about the creation of policies that are popular with the great mass of people.

Those days are over and as the author recognises in his last few paragraphs the best thing the Thai elite could do is to begin to adapt to modern day democracy by coming up with new policies of their own which will be popular with a broad section of society.

I believe you missed the point and think that somehow there is a revolving group of elites running the country. Where I think the author made it quite clear that one family or group rises to run the country and indulges to a point where they are full enough before a new family or group arises. The Shinawatra's are simply the latest group of elites, however they simply can't get their fill. They just want more.

What Thailand truly needs is an end to unaccountability of any elite group, and move towards a more true form of democracy where justice prevails over money, power and greed.

Since the 6th. century, Thai history shows that the converse is the norm: money, power and greed prevails over justice.

Furthermore, power prevailed over culture.

The 12 Mandates are proof of that. Among other aspects of daily life and customs, the 12 Mandates of 1938 were the cause of today's use of forks and spoons in Thailand, Western attire of the population, cult to a personalty and the underlying Xenophobia and distrust of foreigners from the West. Power even succeeded in changing the ancient name of the country: Siam.

All those changes were sheepishly accepted by the population because of the power of the autocratic government of Pibunsongkhran, The same fellow that allowed the Japanese to occupy Thailand build and run the hard labor concentration camp in Kanchaburi and declared war to the USA and the UK to show the higher power of the Japanese empire that they were, at the time, on their winning side.

[focus27]

Beside getting a lecture in Thai history the report was not telling what is the way out of the conflict. What did history teach us? Coming back to the old feudalistic system? Thaksin did what most of the Thai ruling PM and government did before use the power for their own benefit. So what will be the solution or the way out of the mess? Btw Thaksin owned the Shin emporium before he become PM. I still believe if he would not have sold it he most probably would be still here as PM. Selling it tax free to Singapore's investment company has p.....d off the elite. I am not saying that Thaksin is a clean guy but he is only a Wolf under Wolves. Thaksin was the first one who made it obvious, he started the organize the government in a corporate style calling the governors CEO. Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

Good point re Shin Corp.

So, Thailand for Thais means Thailand's wealth for Thailand's wealthy.

Look at the counter-example of how Berlusconi has kept political power in Italy in the face of numerous legal challenges through the corporate power he continues to wield - yes, he may be in trouble now but has been at it for decades. It has always struck me as a missing piece of the puzzle as to how the Thai elite managed to let Thaksin go so rogue - many elites around the world are used to bringing into their fold any disruptive nouveau super-riche. The tedious mantras about Thaksin being power-mad are just feeble; the whole oligarchy is power-mad, so that trait is no handicap.

If it is Thaksin's obsession with building his own dynasty, then again, oligarchies tend to be family based. Again let's look at Italy, lots of family businesses there: the mafia, camorra, 'ndrangheta and, looking back, the Republic of Venice, the Medicis and all the other family-run city states, including sometimes the papacy itself. Again, this doesn't strike me as a reason to make Thaksin an outcast - they are all traits that are valued by the old oligarchy... so long as they share in some of the gold.

And perhaps it is here that the article fails to mention the elephant in the room - the global elite. There are numerous articles about the formal links between Thaksin and the global corporatists, showing that his masters see Thailand in the broader geopolitical context. One such scenario is the establishment of a US-led "string of pearls" of states bordering China so that control of those states would limit the territorial expansion of Chinese influence. (The US is here used necessarily as a shorthand as it is the most obvious thug on the world stage at the moment but the globalists include others such as the British, Israelis and others.)

Let us not forget that apart from selling "Thai wealth" to foreigners, Thaksin was also prepared to sign a free trade agreement with the USA. As usual, such agreements look good for the smaller nation in terms of access to export markets but are, in essence, a way for US-led corporations to buy up and plunder that country's resources. We all know how restrictive Thai laws are regarding foreign ownership of anything, unless sanctioned by the Thai elite.

So if Thaksin has truly aligned himself with the globalist elite in confrontation with the entrenched Thai elite, this would explain why he has not been welcomed into the arms of the oligarchy. Admittedly, the US support for the Thai army is a hedge, so that a military regime that is pro-globalist would be just as welcomed as a civilian administration. The US has had no qualms in dealing with undemocratic regimes so long as it suits its interests. This may be a relatively peaceful endgame, but how would the Thai elite react to their military going over to the dark side? Are there enough military toys to entice enough Thai generals? We don't know yet.

I personally don't think that the globalists will let go of this bone. How many truly independent countries are there left in the world? Look at what happens to any country that dares to stand alone, irrespective of its regime. I think Thaksin will be removed from the picture only once he has stopped being useful to the globalists. Many redshirt activities are already directly funded by American foundations (one example: http://ned.org/where-we-work/asia/thailand). Many analysts see the Thai redshirts as just another "colour revolution" akin to those in the Middle East. For those who wish to see the end of Thaksin's family business, I think be careful of what you wish - I suspect another leader will appear and the democratic process will continue to be used as a weapon to install a government that will pass through those laws that Thaksin failed to do. Just look at all the other so-called colour revolutions to see how they are doing.

As Bush once said,"You're either with us, or against us." That was not an idle threat. Thais have every right to think of their country as their own... but only in theory; the sad reality is that a small country such as Thailand can no longer be truly independent. So, the third scenario is that the Thai oligarchs accept this and accept some accommodation with the viral globalists. This would, perhaps, be the most peaceful endgame.

However, in all three endgame scenarios, Thailand would no longer be the same.

(There is, of course, a fourth scenario, which is that Thailand falls under the protection of China. But that's another story for now.)

[noitom]

Beside getting a lecture in Thai history the report was not telling what is the way out of the conflict. What did history teach us? Coming back to the old feudalistic system? Thaksin did what most of the Thai ruling PM and government did before use the power for their own benefit. So what will be the solution or the way out of the mess? Btw Thaksin owned the Shin emporium before he become PM. I still believe if he would not have sold it he most probably would be still here as PM. Selling it tax free to Singapore's investment company has p.....d off the elite. I am not saying that Thaksin is a clean guy but he is only a Wolf under Wolves. Thaksin was the first one who made it obvious, he started the organize the government in a corporate style calling the governors CEO. Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

Good points.

[Spalpeen]

Patronising right wing nonsense. I nearly choked at the part where he says the Bangkok elite follow the 'middle way', taking only what they need and leaving the rest for the common people.

Two years ago Forbes magazine ranked the Shinawatras as the tenth wealthiest family in Thailand. Now just stop for a moment and think. If the Shins are up to their necks in corruption - and I don't doubt they are - what are the other nine families up to?

[DMG333]

Beside getting a lecture in Thai history the report was not telling what is the way out of the conflict. What did history teach us? Coming back to the old feudalistic system? Thaksin did what most of the Thai ruling PM and government did before use the power for their own benefit. So what will be the solution or the way out of the mess? Btw Thaksin owned the Shin emporium before he become PM. I still believe if he would not have sold it he most probably would be still here as PM. Selling it tax free to Singapore's investment company has p.....d off the elite. I am not saying that Thaksin is a clean guy but he is only a Wolf under Wolves. Thaksin was the first one who made it obvious, he started the organize the government in a corporate style calling the governors CEO. Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

Good point re Shin Corp.

So, Thailand for Thais means Thailand's wealth for Thailand's wealthy.

Look at the counter-example of how Berlusconi has kept political power in Italy in the face of numerous legal challenges through the corporate power he continues to wield - yes, he may be in trouble now but has been at it for decades. It has always struck me as a missing piece of the puzzle as to how the Thai elite managed to let Thaksin go so rogue - many elites around the world are used to bringing into their fold any disruptive nouveau super-riche. The tedious mantras about Thaksin being power-mad are just feeble; the whole oligarchy is power-mad, so that trait is no handicap.

If it is Thaksin's obsession with building his own dynasty, then again, oligarchies tend to be family based. Again let's look at Italy, lots of family businesses there: the mafia, camorra, 'ndrangheta and, looking back, the Republic of Venice, the Medicis and all the other family-run city states, including sometimes the papacy itself. Again, this doesn't strike me as a reason to make Thaksin an outcast - they are all traits that are valued by the old oligarchy... so long as they share in some of the gold.

And perhaps it is here that the article fails to mention the elephant in the room - the global elite. There are numerous articles about the formal links between Thaksin and the global corporatists, showing that his masters see Thailand in the broader geopolitical context. One such scenario is the establishment of a US-led "string of pearls" of states bordering China so that control of those states would limit the territorial expansion of Chinese influence. (The US is here used necessarily as a shorthand as it is the most obvious thug on the world stage at the moment but the globalists include others such as the British, Israelis and others.)

Let us not forget that apart from selling "Thai wealth" to foreigners, Thaksin was also prepared to sign a free trade agreement with the USA. As usual, such agreements look good for the smaller nation in terms of access to export markets but are, in essence, a way for US-led corporations to buy up and plunder that country's resources. We all know how restrictive Thai laws are regarding foreign ownership of anything, unless sanctioned by the Thai elite.

So if Thaksin has truly aligned himself with the globalist elite in confrontation with the entrenched Thai elite, this would explain why he has not been welcomed into the arms of the oligarchy. Admittedly, the US support for the Thai army is a hedge, so that a military regime that is pro-globalist would be just as welcomed as a civilian administration. The US has had no qualms in dealing with undemocratic regimes so long as it suits its interests. This may be a relatively peaceful endgame, but how would the Thai elite react to their military going over to the dark side? Are there enough military toys to entice enough Thai generals? We don't know yet.

I personally don't think that the globalists will let go of this bone. How many truly independent countries are there left in the world? Look at what happens to any country that dares to stand alone, irrespective of its regime. I think Thaksin will be removed from the picture only once he has stopped being useful to the globalists. Many redshirt activities are already directly funded by American foundations (one example: http://ned.org/where-we-work/asia/thailand). Many analysts see the Thai redshirts as just another "colour revolution" akin to those in the Middle East. For those who wish to see the end of Thaksin's family business, I think be careful of what you wish - I suspect another leader will appear and the democratic process will continue to be used as a weapon to install a government that will pass through those laws that Thaksin failed to do. Just look at all the other so-called colour revolutions to see how they are doing.

As Bush once said,"You're either with us, or against us." That was not an idle threat. Thais have every right to think of their country as their own... but only in theory; the sad reality is that a small country such as Thailand can no longer be truly independent. So, the third scenario is that the Thai oligarchs accept this and accept some accommodation with the viral globalists. This would, perhaps, be the most peaceful endgame.

However, in all three endgame scenarios, Thailand would no longer be the same.

(There is, of course, a fourth scenario, which is that Thailand falls under the protection of China. But that's another story for now.)

Agreed. According to a recent studies, around 80% of the country's GDP is shared and created by 50 Thai elite families, thus in order to abide to this habitude, the elites may loiter in the local politics scene for sometime in order to prolong their dominance and influences.

[bigbamboo]

this article should be pinned!

Yep..... to the notice boards of the local leaders all over the country and translated into Thai.

[mojorison]

Good article, but nothing I didn't know already.

[JRSoul]

Patronising right wing nonsense. I nearly choked at the part where he says the Bangkok elite follow the 'middle way', taking only what they need and leaving the rest for the common people.

Two years ago Forbes magazine ranked the Shinawatras as the tenth wealthiest family in Thailand. Now just stop for a moment and think. If the Shins are up to their necks in corruption - and I don't doubt they are - what are the other nine families up to?

You don't have to be corrupt to be rich. But if you are becoming very rich, very fast, while you are running a country, the odds are that you are as corrupt as it gets.

[gamini]

About "their "cultural values" and ingrained perception of their own superiority."

Although I'm not a social scientist, here's one concrete example that I've observed in the last 15 years when I visited friends in Bangkok. These friends may be described as upper middle class people that you would commonly meet in Bangkok. Many are foreign educated, compound living, pdnp (public display of nose picking), european cars, etc.

This is what I've heard often from the owner of the compound regarding househould maids: "Oh, it's not like it used to be. Thai servants are so hard to find these days... Now we can only find Burmese servants and they are not safe." If you grew up in Thailand, Bangkok a while back, you remember that many homes have servants that do everything. They cook, clean, take care of the babies and kids, teach, laudry, drive, gardening, etc. It's also common that they become the mistress of the head of household. It's not just one servant, but it's their entire family that live in the maid quarter. And it's not just this family, but it's their ancestors that the house "owns." This way of life is changing for the upper middle class. Now the servants are proactive and they see that they are actually equal to the rest of their country people.

what has servants got to do with the article or Thailand.? In the UK we had the same experience with servants. We had a lot when I was a kid. They changed too and we had to get foreign ones.

[KimoMax]

Foreign Media and the AFP covering Bangkok still get it wrong in their continuous, erronious, and speculative descriptions of the two sides and what they stand for.

It is not true that they are either Poor from the North of Thailand that are supporters of Thaksin.

Or they are Well to Do Elites and Royalists.

Red = Those that like the Populist Policies and accept Corruption. They feel their lives have improved under Thaksin Style Governments.

Not necessarily all Thaksin Supporters.

Yellows and PDRC = Those that feel Thaksin has had enough Influence and Sufficiant Wealth Gain from his Influnce and Syle of Governance.

They have had enough of his Win All at All Costs tactics.

Also those that are tired of paying for the corrption and Heavy Handed enforcemtent tactics

[maxme]

Foreign Media and the AFP covering Bangkok still get it wrong in their continuous, erronious, and speculative descriptions of the two sides and what they stand for.

It is not true that they are either Poor from the North of Thailand that are supporters of Thaksin.

Or they are Well to Do Elites and Royalists.

Red = Those that like the Populist Policies and accept Corruption. They feel their lives have improved under Thaksin Style Governments.

Not necessarily all Thaksin Supporters.

Yellows and PDRC = Those that feel Thaksin has had enough Influence and Sufficiant Wealth Gain from his Influnce and Syle of Governance.

They have had enough of his Win All at All Costs tactics.

Also those that are tired of paying for the corrption and Heavy Handed enforcemtent tactics

pathetic analogy but probably logic to the indoctrinated. Each side are equally guilty in hindering the democratic process and development of this country. This won´t go away with one person, it will go away once you get rid of the corrupt side of this culture... the old ways.

Edited January 15, 2014 by maxme