US says no coup in Thailand

[emilymat]

That was 103fm in Pattaya at 9.30am. Usually they have national news on the hour and Thai/local on the half-hour.

[emilymat]

I'm no expert but when I hoped to listen to the local news this morning the announcer said that the station had been told they could only broadcast 'what the military told them, i.e. nothing inflammatory etc'. He then went back to music. Now that is censorship.

As I understand it

1. A putsch - an armed takeover of government involving force. i.e. Adolf in the 1930's

2. A coup - Takeover and ousting of government usually by the military

3. Martial Law - Imposed by army after discussion and agreement with the political masters.

In a sense it's none of these if, and only if, you consider Thailand has no government.

But, if we/you believe there is/was an 'interim' "temporary" or caretaker government that were no consulted then it can only be a bloodless coup.

There are wiser heads on this forum than me who will say my analysis is wrong, but I still find the whole thing deeply sad.

By the way, I don't believe I have the right to 'blame' either side. What I've seen over the last few years leads me to think that corruption, mis-information and graft apply equally.

I still remember the words of my golf tour guide here 20 years ago. "you will find it hard to grasp the culture and thinking of this country, and you certainly will not be able to change it".

True as ever.

Best you read the "Martial Law B.E. 2457" Act then. The Army only has to notify the government of the day if there is war or insurrection in 'an area' of the Kingdom. Where the whole of the Kingdom is effected then the Act does not require notification to the government. It is what it is - martial law. Edited to correct as per post 48 - the whole of the Kingdom does qualify as part.

Agree that both sides are as bad as the other but what trumps it more against Thaksin above the corruption, mis-information and graft and plain ignorance of both sides is the complete disregard of and lawlessness to democratic rule.

[emilymat]

Thanks, I said I was no expert. However, your post illustrates my earlier point that we simply cannot interpret western 'values' (if you like) into Thai politics - or anything else. It's what makes me keep my mouth shut on this forum, as I'm bound to be wrong!

[tx22cb]

I'm no expert but when I hoped to listen to the local news this morning the announcer said that the station had been told they could only broadcast 'what the military told them, i.e. nothing inflammatory etc'. He then went back to music. Now that is censorship.

As I understand it

1. A putsch - an armed takeover of government involving force. i.e. Adolf in the 1930's

2. A coup - Takeover and ousting of government usually by the military

3. Martial Law - Imposed by army after discussion and agreement with the political masters.

In a sense it's none of these if, and only if, you consider Thailand has no government.

But, if we/you believe there is/was an 'interim' "temporary" or caretaker government that were no consulted then it can only be a bloodless coup.

There are wiser heads on this forum than me who will say my analysis is wrong, but I still find the whole thing deeply sad.

By the way, I don't believe I have the right to 'blame' either side. What I've seen over the last few years leads me to think that corruption, mis-information and graft apply equally.

I still remember the words of my golf tour guide here 20 years ago. "you will find it hard to grasp the culture and thinking of this country, and you certainly will not be able to change it".

True as ever.

Your 3. " Martial Law - Imposed by army after discussion and agreement with the political masters."

What happens if the Army seem to have proof that it is in fact elements within the government that are causing the need for martial law...?

Sent from my XT1032 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Then it's a coup.

[casualbiker]

I'm no expert but when I hoped to listen to the local news this morning the announcer said that the station had been told they could only broadcast 'what the military told them, i.e. nothing inflammatory etc'. He then went back to music. Now that is censorship.

As I understand it

1. A putsch - an armed takeover of government involving force. i.e. Adolf in the 1930's

2. A coup - Takeover and ousting of government usually by the military

3. Martial Law - Imposed by army after discussion and agreement with the political masters.

In a sense it's none of these if, and only if, you consider Thailand has no government.

But, if we/you believe there is/was an 'interim' "temporary" or caretaker government that were no consulted then it can only be a bloodless coup.

There are wiser heads on this forum than me who will say my analysis is wrong, but I still find the whole thing deeply sad.

By the way, I don't believe I have the right to 'blame' either side. What I've seen over the last few years leads me to think that corruption, mis-information and graft apply equally.

I still remember the words of my golf tour guide here 20 years ago. "you will find it hard to grasp the culture and thinking of this country, and you certainly will not be able to change it".

True as ever.

Your 3. " Martial Law - Imposed by army after discussion and agreement with the political masters."

What happens if the Army seem to have proof that it is in fact elements within the government that are causing the need for martial law...?

Sent from my XT1032 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Then it's a coup.

Really! Why. If the caretaker government is still in power?

Sent from my XT1032 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[lomatopo]

Under domestic law, the United States would be forced to impose sanctions if it determines that a foreign military has carried out a coup.

Hence it can't be referred to as a Military Coup.

The relevant law, Foreign Assistance Act from 1961, has really only been used when deemed to be convenient

The relevant section (508):

None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available pursuant to this Act shall be obligated or expended to finance directly any assistance to any country whose duly elected head of government is deposed by military coup or decree: Provided, That assistance may be resumed to such country if the President determines and reports to the Committees on Appropriations that subsequent to the termination of assistance a democratically elected government has taken office.

U.S. has spotty record on law requiring it to cut aid after coups

The Foreign Assistance Act, a U.S. law first enacted in 1961, is pretty clear: It says, in Section 508, that the United States must cut aid to any country "whose duly elected head of government is deposed by military coup or decree."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/07/05/u-s-has-spotty-record-on-law-requiring-it-to-cut-aid-after-coups/

[JohnThailandJohn]

The world is watching

No it's not. The world doesn't a rat's a** about Thailand except for Japanese manufacturers and they are non-political. Thailand never cared if the world watched in 2010 did it?

https://www.google.com/search?q=thailand+martial+law&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS582US582&oq=thailand+mar&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j69i57j69i60j0l2j69i60.2744j0j7&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=93&ie=UTF-8#q=thailand+martial+law&safe=off&tbm=nws

[rametindallas]

The military have a short window of time to announce elections. It is the only way that the world will believe it is not a coup.

The army only needs a short window of time to give the Senate a reason to install a temporary, neutral, caretaker government to run the bureaucracy while a reform committee is preparing the issues for the national referendum to choose which reforms the electorate want to add to the constitution. Once the reforms are in the constitution, voted for by the whole country, the parties will all have a more even playing field when elections are held late next year. . Bob's you uncle.

You know the Senate neither has the power to install a PM, nor change the constitution. Even if they ejected the elected caretaker government, the new government would be a caretaker one, limited till elections.

Also your reforms would need a constitutional change (not permitted by caretaker governments), and that in turn would need an elected government,.... voted on by the whole country.

There is a level playing field in terms of winability, if Yingluk led the Democrats and Abhisit led Pheu Thai, then the Democrats would be winners. It's their god awful elitist policies that make them unelectable.

There is not a level playing field in terms of law, clearly the system is rigged for the Democrats, after 2 election boycotts they should already be banned as a political party to make way for a party that wants to get elected.

You know the Senate neither has the power to install a PM, nor change the constitution. Even if they ejected the elected caretaker government, the new government would be a caretaker one, limited till elections.

Exactly what I wrote: "Senate a reason to install a temporary, neutral, caretaker government to run the bureaucracy"

Also your reforms would need a constitutional change (not permitted by caretaker governments), and that in turn would need an elected government,.... voted on by the whole country.

A referendum of the electorate would be all he authority the caretaker government would need to install reforms into the constitution. It was the same for the 2007 constitution.

There is a level playing field in terms of winability, if Yingluk led the Democrats and Abhisit led Pheu Thai, then the Democrats would be winners. It's their god awful elitist policies that make them unelectable.

When rival politicians are not allowed to campaign in the North and NE and their canvassers are murdered, it is NOT a level playing field.

There is not a level playing field in terms of law, clearly the system is rigged for the Democrats, after 2 election boycotts they should already be banned as a political party to make way for a party that wants to get elected.

The Feb. 2 election was nullified so it is as if it never happened; not a strike against the Democrats.

We can argue this on the forum but just watch what happens

[khaowong1]

it's all over the international press

If you read enough ThaiVisa threads, you'll come to believe that US people only read the sports page and the comics.

Actually, the sports page and comics is the only thing worth reading...

[peterquixote]

During these troubles in Thailand, people have talked about Democracy as if that Democracy was expended and concluded at the election ballot.

But those of us who do live in democratic Nations know that the election ballot is where democracy starts.

The practice of democracy is hard to define, but it boils down to working with and interacting with the people for the best outcome.

That is not what Pheu Thai did was it.

So excuse me but what use is a new election

I thank the correspondent 'Love 1012' at 7.59 for remembering the rice farmers, but I can not see how the Army can help.

Not unless they take control of the Government purse from Thaksin, and I hope they do just that

Government funds must be removed from Thaksin

Edited May 21, 2014 by peterquixote

[sumtingwong]

The General is doing a better job than the PTP.

[umbanda]

You may call all this a coup, negotiation, impasse, etc, etc, etc....your call....do not make any difference......you will lose anyway...

Most countries are ruled by the military, corporations, and world financial powers, not by political parties or leaders anymore....Any government, elected or not, doing something against those interest and people, will not last.....Period.

Edited May 22, 2014 by umbanda