Rival camps have no choice but to make a deal: Thai politics

[webfact]

BURNING ISSUE
Rival camps have no choice but to make a deal
Hataikarn Treesuwan

BANGKOK: -- If caretaker Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra could have made the decision herself, many people believe she would have stood aside from politics for the rest of her life when the anti-government People's Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC) stepped up its rallies to oust the government four months ago.

But former premier Thaksin Shinawatra, who is pulling the strings behind the Yingluck administration, would not allow his younger sister to do so. His advisers insisted the PM could not legally resign, saying her duty was to be caretaker prime minister until a new government was elected.

That's one reason today why Yingluck needs patience in waiting out the protests.

However, according to former election commissioner Sodsri Satayathum, the caretaker government could expire in early March - when the 30-day deadline for the House of Representatives to convene is reached - as the number of MPs voted into Parliament in the February 2 election is less than 95 per cent of the possible total of 500. That means the first parliamentary session cannot be held.

Article 127 of the Constitution requires that within 30 days after the election, the first Parliament sitting must be convened.

According to Sodsri, some groups plan to file a petition to the Constitutional Court, seeking a judicial review on whether the caretaker government was ineffective or not, based on the House being unable to call a meeting before March 4 and being unable to elect a new PM within 30 days of the first parliamentary session.

"It would create a political deadlock and might pave the way for establishment of a non-elected prime minister under Article 7 of the charter," Sodsri said.

Eventually, Yingluck is going to be forced to step down.

A Pheu Thai leader, who asked not to be named, said the best time for Yingluck to leave the spotlight has passed already. Thaksin's aides had proposed the party should take leadership back from members of the Shinawatra family in the snap election, but other factions inside Pheu Thai disagreed.

"If the party had dropped Yingluck as a candidate for the prime minister's post in a new election, people would have thought we'd found her guilty of mismanagement. Thaksin, however, saw no need to abandon his sister. So Yingluck was finally picked as No 1 party-list candidate," the source said.

However, his decision turns Yingluck into a liability. There's a chance she may face multiple lawsuits - the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) has pressed charges against her over the rice-pledging scheme and the PDRC will file criminal cases against her for her alleged roles in the crackdown on protesters, which it claims led to many deaths.

In addition, demonstrators are taking aim at businesses linked to the Shinawatra family.

As a result, the government has no choice but to make a deal with PDRC leaders led by Suthep Thaugsuban to resolve their problems at the negotiating table.

Why is this the time for talks?

Because, as Suthep once said, "If someone instigates a civil war, I will tell the people to go home."

Although the two sides raised national reform as a key issue for talking, the condition that both the government and the PDRC really want is to push for an amnesty bill - in the case of the latter, because of possibly illegal acts committed during the protests. And some Pheu Thai leaders have told Thaksin he was close to realising his demand to return home.

While both sides - the red shirt protesters and the whistle-blowing protesters - continue to face off, it's easier to reach agreement than ever before as it would help soften the legal consequences for both the current and former prime ministers from the Shinawatra family. It could also shield PDRC leaders from insurrection accusations.

However, it should be remembered the demonstrators first took to the streets to fight against the blanket amnesty bill that would have paved the way for Thaksin to come home a free man.

The big question is: are the PDRC protesters ready to push for a new blanket amnesty bill?


-- The Nation 2014-02-25

[ShannonT]

Give up democracy is what Suthep wants and this cannot be allowed.

Nobody except a small undemocratic bunch of people who haven't been able to win elections in over 20 years want a China- or North Korea-style people's council.

[Rob8891]

The headline refers to the need for talks.

The very first poster leaps in with the usual rhetoric. Duh!

[jonclark]

Give up democracy is what Suthep wants and this cannot be allowed.

Nobody except a small undemocratic bunch of people who haven't been able to win elections in over 20 years want a China- or North Korea-style people's council.

Small undemocratic bunch of people who polled 12 million in the last election - Yep right on .....fascist; (sorry, but i know its your favourite word)

[Blackmirage2013]

The reason they have no choice but to make a deal or DIE, is because they were too cowardly to manage this conflict in a mature, fair way. Instead, they let greed, selfishness and their emotions take over. With that attitude, there was only confrontation. If you win, I lose or if I win you lose. Forget all this "family" behavior.... it is every man out for himself, and screw the other guy.

Typical Thai leader role model: Take as much as you can, exploit others, oppress others and then act as though you don't know what is going on.

Then everyone follows you, like if you are going down the wrong lane in a street... everyone follows you and says, "well he's doing it so why can't I?"

Nice role model you goofball leaders.

[ShannonT]

Give up democracy is what Suthep wants and this cannot be allowed.

Nobody except a small undemocratic bunch of people who haven't been able to win elections in over 20 years want a China- or North Korea-style people's council.

Small undemocratic bunch of people who polled 12 million in the last election - Yep right on .....fascist; (sorry, but i know its your favourite word)

I don't think Suthep's ideology of a people's council won 12 million votes in the last election. The Democrat party won those 12 million votes based on Democracy policies, not on the basis of Thailand being rules by a self-elected people's council.

Had they presented that idea and ideology, they would have never gotten that amount of votes.

[scorecard]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Give up democracy is what Suthep wants and this cannot be allowed.

Nobody except a small undemocratic bunch of people who haven't been able to win elections in over 20 years want a China- or North Korea-style people's council.

More unfounded rubbish to try to confuse people, but hey it keeps your post count up.

Why not just contribute an X each 10 minutes to keep your count up, it would have as much impact.

[Tatsujin]

 

Give up democracy is what Suthep wants and this cannot be allowed.

Nobody except a small undemocratic bunch of people who haven't been able to win elections in over 20 years want a China- or North Korea-style people's council.

 

You missed "scum" and "fascist" out . . . did you forget?

[chainarong]

A deal would be a miracle , given the present climate , in the early stages of this protest Suthep and Yingluck met, Yingluck could not reach guarantee's or proceed with anything because she had to refer to another party, this turned out to be Thaskin, the situation has decidedly turned nasty since then , the question that has to be asked , who is running the country Thaskin or Yingluck , you can't negotiate with a puppet Prime Minister who's strings are being pulled from Dubai, therefore suthep will now not negotiate.

[fredob43]

Give up democracy is what Suthep wants and this cannot be allowed.

Nobody except a small undemocratic bunch of people who haven't been able to win elections in over 20 years want a China- or North Korea-style people's council.

Small undemocratic bunch of people who polled 12 million in the last election - Yep right on .....fascist; (sorry, but i know its your favourite word)

I don't think Suthep's ideology of a people's council won 12 million votes in the last election. The Democrat party won those 12 million votes based on Democracy policies, not on the basis of Thailand being rules by a self-elected people's council.

Had they presented that idea and ideology, they would have never gotten that amount of votes.

Point of order they didn't win 12 Mil vote's they brought them with their policies.

[djjamie]

Give up democracy is what Suthep wants and this cannot be allowed.

Nobody except a small undemocratic bunch of people who haven't been able to win elections in over 20 years want a China- or North Korea-style people's council.

Boy oh boy. Where do I start here? Lets start at the beginning.

This first part of your statement is called;

Confusion of beliefs with facts.

Dogmatic religious sects with bizarre beliefs are notorious for using this logical fallacy. When you present a true believer member of such a church with facts that contradict his beliefs, he answers, "Well, what we believe is...", and that is supposed to be the end of the argument — the final answer on the subject. The fact that they believe something supposedly makes contradictory facts irrelevant and invalid — contradictory facts are just minor irritants to be ignored and discarded.

In this case your belief is Suthep will take democracy away. Your belief is that Suthep will take democracy away. It is your belief. It is not a fact. It has not even happened. The contradictory facts however are that post PTP ballot box abuse of power has taken place, blatant corruption has been witnessed, ramming through amnesties against the will of the majority, telling voters ", you will get what you want when you vote for PTP", telling voters they are garbage if they disagree with the PTP, cheering and clapping when opponents are murdered by terrorist in a peaceful demonstration. These are all facts. They all happened. It cannot be denied.

So what you should really be saying is that you would prefer yingluck to be the leader and undemocratic as opposed to Suthep being the leader and undemocratic. The "good old boys" should be undemocratic. "My team" should be undemocratic. Not the evil guys. The others that I have not invested my emotional time in.

Second point is;

Unsupported claim

Nobody want this undemocratic bunch?

Anything can be said when the claim is unsupported. I could rebut that and say "Everybody wants this democratic bunch". It is as plausible as your claim. You said nobody? Is that nobody in Bangkok? Nobody in Thailand? Nobody in the world? Is that nobody, the Environmentalists, the corn farmer, rubber farmers, some rice farmers, medical association, rural teachers, academics, private banks, GSB, the EC, AoT, the courts, military, bangkok middle class, business owner, state enterprise staff, Buddhist monks, civil servants, labor unions, Green Politics group and the Thai Constitution Protection Association. Do they not want the PDRC to win?

Without a supporting link we are unable to extract the essence of who "nobody" is. I'm intrigued.


Third point is;

Conflation or False Equality

Suthep wants a China's peoples council

This is say or implying that two things are equal, and the same thing, when they are not.

An example is "If you are patriotic, you will support the War in Iraq, and not criticize it." It is possible to support the troops while objecting to an illegal war. Criticizing lying politicians is not the same thing as criticizing the troops, but the politicians don't want you to know that.

In this case the suggestion is that Suthep peoples council and China's peoples council are one and the same and if you don't agree with that you are undemocratic. Well according to the posters "beliefs of course which refers back to the first point.

It is possible to be democratic and support Suthep's peoples council because the comparison between China's council and Suthep's council is like comparing apples and oranges. For one Suthep's council is about reforming the political landscape so the above FACTS are not abused again and to believe any differently is a belief that the poster holds. It is not facts. It is his belief. China's council has never said they want reform. They have never said they want a democracy. Apples and oranges.

So in essence the whole post is pointless and baseless or as I suspect is written in an attempt to reach out to ones own peers to portray a sense of superiority and keen intellect. None of which, I may add, has been achieved.

And if I may add, if the poster is consistent in his rebuttals when he is losing an argument then we are presented with;

Escape via Relativism

Dismiss an irrefutable argument as simply a point of view, cherry pick or bring into the argument a completely unrelated fact. For example "ummmm, I don't think yingluck is reading this". That allows the poster to leave the argument that he can't refute a feeling he has the upper hand and has superior intelligence over the person presenting the intelligent argument. It's an easy face saving out.

I suspect he will do what he did last time and try to belittle me through PM instead of rebutting this statement.

Edited February 25, 2014 by djjamie

[jonclark]

Give up democracy is what Suthep wants and this cannot be allowed.

Nobody except a small undemocratic bunch of people who haven't been able to win elections in over 20 years want a China- or North Korea-style people's council.

Small undemocratic bunch of people who polled 12 million in the last election - Yep right on .....fascist; (sorry, but i know its your favourite word)

I don't think Suthep's ideology of a people's council won 12 million votes in the last election. The Democrat party won those 12 million votes based on Democracy policies, not on the basis of Thailand being rules by a self-elected people's council.

Had they presented that idea and ideology, they would have never gotten that amount of votes.

Quite right - they may have got more!!!

[NongKhaiKid]

Another ridiculous headline, ' no choice but to make a deal '.

Both sides are completely entrenched in their respective views and just who is going to lose face by blinking first.

Forget the harm to the country, I am Right, I will not Bend.

[Crushdepth]

Give up democracy is what Suthep wants and this cannot be allowed.

Nobody except a small undemocratic bunch of people who haven't been able to win elections in over 20 years want a China- or North Korea-style people's council.

You missed "scum" and "fascist" out . . . did you forget?

It's always useful to include a Hitler reference as well.

[soalbundy]

They have lots of choices;.......

Yingluck can jump ship and resign via Face book from Dubai

Suthep can let it drag on and on and on

Suthep could go on a long holiday in .......Laos, Vietnam,..Whatever,leaving someone else in charge

They could have a civil war

They could secretly agree to let the whole thing slowly dissolve and die out,new votes, no boycot, no arrests.

They could have lots and lots of meetings until everyone dies of boredom

[Nickymaster]

Give up democracy is what Suthep wants and this cannot be allowed.

Nobody except a small undemocratic bunch of people who haven't been able to win elections in over 20 years want a China- or North Korea-style people's council.

China has less corruption, better infrastructure and higher growth than Thailand. In fact, we can say that their system is working better than the Thai system.

Edited February 25, 2014 by Nickymaster

[Centrum]

A Pheu Thai leader, who asked not to be named, said the best time for Yingluck to leave the spotlight has passed already. Thaksin's aides had proposed the party should take leadership back from members of the Shinawatra family in the snap election, but other factions inside Pheu Thai disagreed.

"If the party had dropped Yingluck as a candidate for the prime minister's post in a new election, people would have thought we'd found her guilty of mismanagement. Thaksin, however, saw no need to abandon his sister. So Yingluck was finally picked as No 1 party-list candidate," the source said.

However, his decision turns Yingluck into a liability. There's a chance she may face multiple lawsuits - the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) has pressed charges against her over the rice-pledging scheme and the PDRC will file criminal cases against her for her alleged roles in the crackdown on protesters, which it claims led to many deaths.

To think, if enough PTP toadies had the balls to stand up to Thaksin and demand the removal of Thaksin clan members from the frontline, Suthep would have nowhere to stand.

The arrogance of Thaksin by putting himself first, by only having family members running his party, has led the country to the position it is in.

A smarter politician would have known when to hide.

His arrogance will be his downfall. I hope it isn't Thailand's fate as well.

[ShannonT]

Give up democracy is what Suthep wants and this cannot be allowed.

Nobody except a small undemocratic bunch of people who haven't been able to win elections in over 20 years want a China- or North Korea-style people's council.

Small undemocratic bunch of people who polled 12 million in the last election - Yep right on .....fascist; (sorry, but i know its your favourite word)

I don't think Suthep's ideology of a people's council won 12 million votes in the last election. The Democrat party won those 12 million votes based on Democracy policies, not on the basis of Thailand being rules by a self-elected people's council.

Had they presented that idea and ideology, they would have never gotten that amount of votes.

Quite right - they may have got more!!!

If that's the case ...do you think Thailand should hold a referendum and ask its citizens if they want free elections or if they prefer a people's council to rule them?

I think you know you're trolling but you just can't stop it.

[binjalin]

The headline refers to the need for talks.

The very first poster leaps in with the usual rhetoric. Duh!

Democracy cannot be on the table - a run up to new elections maybe? we know who will win anyway

[h90]

Give up democracy is what Suthep wants and this cannot be allowed.

Nobody except a small undemocratic bunch of people who haven't been able to win elections in over 20 years want a China- or North Korea-style people's council.

China has less corruption, better infrastructure and higher growth than Thailand. In fact, we can say that their system is working better than the Thai system.

And both North Korea and China have a better education system.

[Thai at Heart]

Give up democracy is what Suthep wants and this cannot be allowed.

Nobody except a small undemocratic bunch of people who haven't been able to win elections in over 20 years want a China- or North Korea-style people's council.

Boy oh boy. Where do I start here? Lets start at the beginning.

This first part of your statement is called;

Confusion of beliefs with facts.

Dogmatic religious sects with bizarre beliefs are notorious for using this logical fallacy. When you present a true believer member of such a church with facts that contradict his beliefs, he answers, "Well, what we believe is...", and that is supposed to be the end of the argument the final answer on the subject. The fact that they believe something supposedly makes contradictory facts irrelevant and invalid contradictory facts are just minor irritants to be ignored and discarded.

In this case your belief is Suthep will take democracy away. Your belief is that Suthep will take democracy away. It is your belief. It is not a fact. It has not even happened. The contradictory facts however are that post PTP ballot box abuse of power has taken place, blatant corruption has been witnessed, ramming through amnesties against the will of the majority, telling voters ", you will get what you want when you vote for PTP", telling voters they are garbage if they disagree with the PTP, cheering and clapping when opponents are murdered by terrorist in a peaceful demonstration. These are all facts. They all happened. It cannot be denied.

So what you should really be saying is that you would prefer yingluck to be the leader and undemocratic as opposed to Suthep being the leader and undemocratic. The "good old boys" should be undemocratic. "My team" should be undemocratic. Not the evil guys. The others that I have not invested my emotional time in.

Second point is;

Unsupported claim

Nobody want this undemocratic bunch?

Anything can be said when the claim is unsupported. I could rebut that and say "Everybody wants this democratic bunch". It is as plausible as your claim. You said nobody? Is that nobody in Bangkok? Nobody in Thailand? Nobody in the world? Is that nobody, the Environmentalists, the corn farmer, rubber farmers, some rice farmers, medical association, rural teachers, academics, private banks, GSB, the EC, AoT, the courts, military, bangkok middle class, business owner, state enterprise staff, Buddhist monks, civil servants, labor unions, Green Politics group and the Thai Constitution Protection Association. Do they not want the PDRC to win?

Without a supporting link we are unable to extract the essence of who "nobody" is. I'm intrigued.


Third point is;

Conflation or False Equality

Suthep wants a China's peoples council

This is say or implying that two things are equal, and the same thing, when they are not.

An example is "If you are patriotic, you will support the War in Iraq, and not criticize it." It is possible to support the troops while objecting to an illegal war. Criticizing lying politicians is not the same thing as criticizing the troops, but the politicians don't want you to know that.

In this case the suggestion is that Suthep peoples council and China's peoples council are one and the same and if you don't agree with that you are undemocratic. Well according to the posters "beliefs of course which refers back to the first point.

It is possible to be democratic and support Suthep's peoples council because the comparison between China's council and Suthep's council is like comparing apples and oranges. For one Suthep's council is about reforming the political landscape so the above FACTS are not abused again and to believe any differently is a belief that the poster holds. It is not facts. It is his belief. China's council has never said they want reform. They have never said they want a democracy. Apples and oranges.

So in essence the whole post is pointless and baseless or as I suspect is written in an attempt to reach out to ones own peers to portray a sense of superiority and keen intellect. None of which, I may add, has been achieved.

And if I may add, if the poster is consistent in his rebuttals when he is losing an argument then we are presented with;

Escape via Relativism

Dismiss an irrefutable argument as simply a point of view, cherry pick or bring into the argument a completely unrelated fact. For example "ummmm, I don't think yingluck is reading this". That allows the poster to leave the argument that he can't refute a feeling he has the upper hand and has superior intelligence over the person presenting the intelligent argument. It's an easy face saving out.

I suspect he will do what he did last time and try to belittle me through PM instead of rebutting this statement.

You believe honestly that they will step away from the table when a new constitution is in place and have elections which a shinawatra will probably win?

You really think so?, or hope so?

[h90]

The headline refers to the need for talks.

The very first poster leaps in with the usual rhetoric. Duh!

Democracy cannot be on the table - a run up to new elections maybe? we know who will win anyway

who pays most will win...that is sure.

[animatic]

She can resign any day of the week legally.

There is always someone to fill her chair.

[ShannonT]

Looks like the Luan Poo monk has started negotiating with the government against Suthep's will.

[Scamper]

This article starts off promisingly, but concludes in an absurd fashion. A blanket amnesty should never be granted anyone. The era of " backroom deals " are over. The constitution is poised to take over. It should be allowed to. As the courts should be allowed to proceed, as well. The constitution is and has always been the path forward.

Edited February 25, 2014 by Scamper

[blaze]

"Eventually, Yingluck is going to be forced to step down."

This is news? many- including some I know who hate this gov't- predicted this the day she became PM.

of course she will be booted out- one way or the other- the problem the civil service (in this case the courts) have is how to do so without tarnishing their reputation internationally. Of course, locally, they enjoy less trust than ever right now- and it may be a long time before any semblence of trust is restored- except among those who are more interested in the results than the process.

Somehow- ideally- they have to sell a judicial coup to the reds-- that is going to require hard and incontestible evidence of malfeasance- or better yet, corruption--

Without logical verdicts based on evidence, it will be a hard sell- but Im sure that they are burning the midnight oil- noses to grindstones-- maybe they can get her for accepting a bunch of flowers from an adoring fan- And let this be a warning to any other family or political party that seeks to shake up 'the system'.

Verdicts awaiting process- but all hands are on deck- the process will be ready soon- and its bye bye Yingluck.

Edited February 25, 2014 by blaze

[SICHONSTEVE]

Give up democracy is what Suthep wants and this cannot be allowed.

Nobody except a small undemocratic bunch of people who haven't been able to win elections in over 20 years want a China- or North Korea-style people's council.

You are nauseatingly boring - you forgot to include the words 'fascist Suthep' by the way in your prattle!!!

[soalbundy]

Give up democracy is what Suthep wants and this cannot be allowed.

Nobody except a small undemocratic bunch of people who haven't been able to win elections in over 20 years want a China- or North Korea-style people's council.

China has less corruption, better infrastructure and higher growth than Thailand. In fact, we can say that their system is working better than the Thai system.

And both North Korea and China have a better education system.

Yes i would like to live in China ( without the spitting),the woman look hot. when you have a nice pair of legs to fondle who cares about politics

[Chairman Mao]

Give up democracy is what Suthep wants and this cannot be allowed.

Nobody except a small undemocratic bunch of people who haven't been able to win elections in over 20 years want a China- or North Korea-style people's council.

China has less corruption, better infrastructure and higher growth than Thailand. In fact, we can say that their system is working better than the Thai system.

You have two out of three correct, not bad !

[attento]

The Headline is correct.

You negotiate peace with your enemies. not with your friends.

As with so many conflicts, the objective of each faction is to gain as much ground as possible, before being forced to the negotiating table.

Just a matter of time and ego.

Edited February 25, 2014 by attento