Thai ex-PM Thaksin: Thailand like Myanmar before reforms

[jayboy]

If not for him pushing his amnesty through the whole coup would not have happened. His arrogance set this in motion (or at least gave it the perfect excuse) and now the guy is commenting on a situation he is the main responsible reason for. Priceless.

Some say there is an other reason for the coup (could be well true) but without Thaksin and his amnesty it would have looked totally different and all the changes would not have happened.

If he had not pushed as much and released his red terrorists we would not have been in this mess.

Robblok, you couldn't be more wrong.

Thaksin upset the powers that have ruled Thailand forever.

He got too big for his boots.

They had no control over him.

He had the populace behind him, thus undermining their control.

He also took everything for himself, leaving them the scraps.

He had to go.

That is why they put in the Democrats in control (their party) after the coup, but as soon as the next election was called it was obvious the populace was having none of it and voted in Yingluck.

Now they're making sure another populist government will EVER get elected.

This country is run by half a dozen families who I can't name for obvious reasons.

Actually you both make some fair points but miss the central truth.It is hard to disagree that the proposed umbrella amnesty was a serious error of judgement.Personally I feel that the Yingluck Government was far too accomodating with the forces that eventually overthrew her.In fact I think there's a perfectly sound argument that Thaksin has been acting as a brake on redshirt radicalism and the greatest mistake (from the country's point of view) was not to have done a deal, repugnant as that would have been to many on both sides.Thaksin's outlook and ideology is no different from those who oppose him.

As to the influence of Thaksin himself I find it astonishing that some believe he is the root cause of the terrible position the country now finds itself in.His position was essentially that of catalyst and opportunist, taking advantage of the splits and divisions in Thai society.Those splits and divisions pre-existed Thaksin and it is ridiculous to suggest he was the originator of them.Like any competent politician he saw the merit of giving a voice to those - a majority - who had been silenced,overlooked and patronised.The rage of the establishment against him is partly related to his success here.And who can deny that the populations of the North and North East are not overwhelmingly more prosperous,better educated and more politicised than say twenty years ago.It's reasonable to debate how much Thaksin had to do with this but the fact itself cannot be denied - which in turn means that these vast populous provinces will always be key to forming a calm settled government.

The road to sunlit uplands in Thailand is complicated by the culture of impunity, a subject very well covered by Thomas Fuller in his farewell despatch from South East Asia in the New York Times.If leaders whether Thaksin or others are never made accountable for their record it's hard to see the political logjam being cleared any time soon.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/22/world/asia/reporting-on-life-death-and-corruption-in-southeast-asia.html?ref=topics&_r=0

Edited February 22, 2016 by jayboy

[WhizBang]

When will this has been realize that he is no longer relevant?

[scorecard]

As utterly despicable, corrupt, and loathsome as he is, Thaksin is bang on the money with this. And it shows what a low the NCPO has sunk to when Thaksin has the moral high ground

Yes indeed, the coup and subsequent events post coup has turned Yingluk and Thakisn into heroes, a most unlikely couple, but that is the fact.

Heroes, no.

[webfact]

Ex-Thai PM Thaksin dismisses constitution draft, election plans
by Asian Correspondent Staff

THAILAND’S former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra has criticized attempts by the ruling military junta to push forward a constitution, calling it “crazy” and part of a strategy to avoid a long overdue election.

Speaking to the Financial Times in Singapore recently, the former leader called for talks with the generals, warning that otherwise, the country could soon become an autocratic nation similar to dictator-ruled North Korea or pre-reformation Burma (Myanmar).

In the interview, Thaksin, who has been in exile since 2008 following corruption allegations, said the military and its allies were trying to put off elections out of fears it would lose its grip on power.

Full story: https://asiancorrespondent.com/2016/02/ex-thai-pm-thaksin-dismisses-constitution-draft-election-plans/

-- ASIAN CORRESPONENT 2016-02-22

[JAG]

Blah blah blah, come home face the court , regain respect , at the end of the day casting dispersions from afar just belittles you more,

Is that all you can say? How about his quote, which is by the way spot on. You don't have to like Thaksin to agree with these sentences.

how about his quote ?

who cares about quotes from people who have no credibility at all

Rather than slag off the messenger, why don't directly address the things he says?

Well it would be a little bit uncomfortable. You see, Thaksin is basically right on this one!

[robblok]

If not for him pushing his amnesty through the whole coup would not have happened. His arrogance set this in motion (or at least gave it the perfect excuse) and now the guy is commenting on a situation he is the main responsible reason for. Priceless.

Some say there is an other reason for the coup (could be well true) but without Thaksin and his amnesty it would have looked totally different and all the changes would not have happened.

If he had not pushed as much and released his red terrorists we would not have been in this mess.

Robblok, you couldn't be more wrong.

Thaksin upset the powers that have ruled Thailand forever.

He got too big for his boots.

They had no control over him.

He had the populace behind him, thus undermining their control.

He also took everything for himself, leaving them the scraps.

He had to go.

That is why they put in the Democrats in control (their party) after the coup, but as soon as the next election was called it was obvious the populace was having none of it and voted in Yingluck.

Now they're making sure another populist government will EVER get elected.

This country is run by half a dozen families who I can't name for obvious reasons.

Actually you both make some fair points but miss the central truth.It is hard to disagree that the proposed umbrella amnesty was a serious error of judgement.Personally I feel that the Yingluck Government was far too accomodating with the forces that eventually overthrew her.In fact I think there's a perfectly sound argument that Thaksin has been acting as a brake on redshirt radicalism and the greatest mistake (from the country's point of view) was not to have done a deal, repugnant as that would have been to many on both sides.Thaksin's outlook and ideology is no different from those who oppose him.

As to the influence of Thaksin himself I find it astonishing that some believe he is the root cause of the terrible position the country now finds itself in.His position was essentially that of catalyst and opportunist, taking advantage of the splits and divisions in Thai society.Those splits and divisions pre-existed Thaksin and it is ridiculous to suggest he was the originator of them.Like any competent politician he saw the merit of giving a voice to those - a majority - who had been silenced,overlooked and patronised.The rage of the establishment against him is partly related to his success here.And who can deny that the populations of the North and North East are not overwhelmingly more prosperous,better educated and more politicised than say twenty years ago.It's reasonable to debate how much Thaksin had to do with this but the fact itself cannot be denied - which in turn means that these vast populous provinces will always be key to forming a calm settled government.

The road to sunlit uplands in Thailand is complicated by the culture of impunity, a subject very well covered by Thomas Fuller in his farewell despatch from South East Asia in the New York Times.If leaders whether Thaksin or others are never made accountable for their record it's hard to see the political logjam being cleared any time soon.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/22/world/asia/reporting-on-life-death-and-corruption-in-southeast-asia.html?ref=topics&_r=0

I agree with most of what you say and have underlined the key thing. Leaders need to be accountable if this does not happen there is no way forward. That is why amnesties are a bad idea especially for Thaksin. He has been convicted with many more serious cases waiting. Letting him go will show that even if there is a conviction and many clear court-cases they can get away with it. That is a totally wrong signal.

Come on the guy openly bribed judges with a cake-box full of money. I really can't think of anyone more openly corrupt as him. If there are they should be caught too no matter what side they are on.

[sweatalot]

Thailand’s former leader calls junta’s election plans ‘a charade’

By James Hookway

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

NEW YORK: -- Thailand’s former leader Thaksin Shinawatra said the country’s ruling junta was jeopardizing the fragile economy by pushing plans for a new constitution that would limit the powers of elected governments and could preserve the influence of the generals who ousted his government and that of his sister.

“It’s a charade to show the world that Thailand is returning to democracy,” he said Sunday in a rare interview in a nearby country. “But in reality it would be like Myanmar before its political reforms. There would be a prime minister, but the real power would be in some politburo above him and the economy would suffer. No other government would want to touch Thailand.”

Full story: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/thailands-former-leader-calls-juntas-election-plans-a-charade-2016-02-21

-- MARKET WATCH 2016-02-22

why don't they text closer to truth like

Thailands former steeling despot or convicted criminal, instead of "former leader"

Edited February 22, 2016 by sweatalot

[TKDfella]

Personally I think T.S. must know he hasn't a chance in hell of being heard by the present PM and even if he did come back to face the charges he would probably not be allowed into politics again. I just wonder if by saying he can't be silent it is a message to others in Thailand to do just that. If I was the PM I wouldn't want T.S. back here because it would only stir things up again and possibly more bloodshed. I am a supporter of Democracy but definitely not a supporter of T.S.

[Enoon]

If not for him pushing his amnesty through the whole coup would not have happened. His arrogance set this in motion (or at least gave it the perfect excuse) and now the guy is commenting on a situation he is the main responsible reason for. Priceless.

Some say there is an other reason for the coup (could be well true) but without Thaksin and his amnesty it would have looked totally different and all the changes would not have happened.

If he had not pushed as much and released his red terrorists we would not have been in this mess.

Any "excuse" is the perfect excuse for them.

If there is no excuse, they will create one.

The fundamental, enduring characteristic/flaw of the system is them.

Edited February 22, 2016 by Enoon

[dunks]

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/headlines/I-definitely-stay-out-of-politics-Thaksin-30066726.html

"I definitely stay out of politics" : Thaksin

2:19 pm: Thaksin starts speaking at his press conference.

During the conference, he vows to stay out of politics and apologised to the people for their hardship caused by his involvement in the political conflict.

https://hicomrade.wordpress.com/2008/02/28/thaksin-says-he-doesnt-plan-return-to-thai-politics-update4/

I quit politics, I have other roles to play, Thaksin told reporters at Hong Kong airport today before leaving for Bangkok. Enough is enough. On the plane ride, he said he would never ever return to politics.

Awesome post!

It would seem that old boxface is a pathalogical liar! A common trait amongst the political class some would say....

[sweatalot]

how about his quote ?

who cares about quotes from people who have no credibility at all

Rather than slag off the messenger, why don't directly address the things he says?

Well it would be a little bit uncomfortable. You see, Thaksin is basically right on this one!

even if it might be right - you do not listen to liars with well known evil past and still evil intentions

[MyFriend You]

Thaksin is out of his mind..... He is what took Thailand in a downward spiral, and his sister did the same... Thailand does Not need his false statement in comparing Thailand to the way Burma was.... BS.... He should come back and do his time in the monkey house... He is the criminal...

I know some people will not agree with my thoughts... So what.... I Love Thailand and only want the best for it...

If you lived in Thailand before Thaksin, you wouldn't be just throwing statements like this out there. He's a business man first & foremost. brought the country out of the poor house, and profited from it as well, what business man wouldn't?? He was still better than all before him, or would you like Thailand to go back to men & women wearing Sarongs and going barefoot??

[Bluespunk]

If not for him pushing his amnesty through the whole coup would not have happened. His arrogance set this in motion (or at least gave it the perfect excuse) and now the guy is commenting on a situation he is the main responsible reason for. Priceless.

Some say there is an other reason for the coup (could be well true) but without Thaksin and his amnesty it would have looked totally different and all the changes would not have happened.

If he had not pushed as much and released his red terrorists we would not have been in this mess.

Robblok, you couldn't be more wrong.

Thaksin upset the powers that have ruled Thailand forever.

He got too big for his boots.

They had no control over him.

He had the populace behind him, thus undermining their control.

He also took everything for himself, leaving them the scraps.

He had to go.

That is why they put in the Democrats in control (their party) after the coup, but as soon as the next election was called it was obvious the populace was having none of it and voted in Yingluck.

Now they're making sure another populist government will EVER get elected.

This country is run by half a dozen families who I can't name for obvious reasons.

Thaksin was in it for no one but himself and to believe he cared about the populace as anything but fodder and a means to power is naive. He is as much a part of the elite as any other political leader.

I agree the people have the right to vote whoever they wish into power, thaksin, thaksin' puppets or another party. No problem at all, that's democracy.

However if they then turn out to be greedy crooks who iniate polices that was result in extra judicial murder they should stand trial and reap the consequences of their actions.

All politicians of all parties or whoever takes power. No amnesties, no exceptions.

[Artisi]

When Donald Trump becomes President of the United states the army there may have to do the same thing and take over to clean up the senate and congress.

Imagine that.

I have lived in Myanmar for most of the past 35 years so it comes as a shock how little Thaksin seems to know about Myanmar and how it was run prior to the reforms.

Thailand is becoming like Thailand and it is a long way from Myanmar except in the most superficial likenesses politically.

Having read the article I see he is being concerned about the new charter. Is he concerned about the country or just concerned about his own interests? That seems to be the question.

Where is no question, just remove the unnecessary reference to concern for the country and everything becomes clear.

[Yann55]

'Returning' to democracy would imply that democracy was there.

Well, unfortunately, it was not, thanks to this pontificating buffoon who used democratic tools to abuse democracy in every possible manner, all for the benefit of his own clan.

Elections are not what define democracy, elections are just one of its mechanisms.

What does defines democracy is :

- the separation of powers into three distinct entities : legislative, executive, judiciary,

- the careful and thorough creation of entities whose role it is to monitor the three powers, put them back on track when required, and sometimes oppose them.

There was none of the above under Thaksin. In that respect there is no difference between the before and after coup regimes. If anything, the present regime is simply less hypocritical.

Edited February 22, 2016 by Yann55

[Britannia]

Who is right and who is wrong here,

I do not support Thaksin, however the talk of his attempt at an amnesty being an evil or corrupt thing as it was, needs to be balanced with the acknowledgement of the NCPO and their self applied amnesty on taking power.

Why are some posters so hung up about Thaksin seems to me his way is the Thai way and little different from the actions of those in power at present.

Here Here, got it spot on

[Britannia]

You presumably westerners who genuinely think that Thaksin is more corrupt or more evil than a host of other Thai politicians are lost.

Thailand is bursting at the seams with people just like Thaksin. They all share the same values but not all are equally competent at being corrupt.

Corruption is a fundamental part of Thai culture. Who would deny it?

Do we have any reasons to believe that the Junta, for example, is clean, or do we have reason to believe exactly the opposite?

What about any other political parties?

Westerners of reasonable intelligence should be better able to notice these patterns. There is no good group vs bad group in Thailand just as there is no good gang vs bad gang. They are all variations of the same lawless, unprincipled lot.

Here Here, Well said, someone with their brains in gear

[ChrisY1]

You presumably westerners who genuinely think that Thaksin is more corrupt or more evil than a host of other Thai politicians are lost.

Thailand is bursting at the seams with people just like Thaksin. They all share the same values but not all are equally competent at being corrupt.

Corruption is a fundamental part of Thai culture. Who would deny it?

Do we have any reasons to believe that the Junta, for example, is clean, or do we have reason to believe exactly the opposite?

What about any other political parties?

Westerners of reasonable intelligence should be better able to notice these patterns. There is no good group vs bad group in Thailand just as there is no good gang vs bad gang. They are all variations of the same lawless, unprincipled lot.

You are so correct.

Its astounding to me the percentage of TV members that falls into the Westerners who lack "reasonable intelligence" and can't figure this all out.

Ironic that this article came out today:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/22/world/asia/reporting-on-life-death-and-corruption-in-southeast-asia.html?_r=0

An excellent article and so completely correct.....change may never happen here!...many thanks for posting the link.....

[jayboy]

'Returning' to democracy would imply that democracy was there.

Well, unfortunately, it was not, thanks to this pontificating buffoon who used democratic tools to abuse democracy in every possible manner, all for the benefit of his own clan.

Elections are not what define democracy, elections are just one of its mechanisms.

What does defines democracy is :

- the separation of powers into three distinct entities : legislative, executive, judiciary,

- the careful and thorough creation of entities whose role it is to monitor the three powers, put them back on track when required, and sometimes oppose them.

There was none of the above under Thaksin. In that respect there is no difference between the before and after coup regimes. If anything, the present regime is simply less hypocritical.

You are talking nonsense.The development of democracy in Thailand has been precarious and fragile not least because of the tendency of the establishment to destroy governments that though properly elected do not meet with their approval.The army has usually been their instrument but more recently they have also used the courts.

Nobody suggested Thaksin was a good representative of democracy so dont divert with that stale strawman approach.

Without elections there can be no democracy.Checks and balances are important but most will recall that the last civilian government was checked and balanced at every turn - but still the army grabbed power illegally.

Lastly if you use language like "pontificating buffoon" you give up the right to be taken as anything other than a pub bore.

[Bluespunk]

When Donald Trump becomes President of the United states the army there may have to do the same thing and take over to clean up the senate and congress.

Imagine that.

I have lived in Myanmar for most of the past 35 years so it comes as a shock how little Thaksin seems to know about Myanmar and how it was run prior to the reforms.

Thailand is becoming like Thailand and it is a long way from Myanmar except in the most superficial likenesses politically.

Having read the article I see he is being concerned about the new charter. Is he concerned about the country or just concerned about his own interests? That seems to be the question.

Trump won't win the presidency in the US. He may get the nomination from the republican right wing christian fundamentalist lunatic fringe (though as they dominate a lot of the primaries, maybe not so much a fringe as a trump like coiffure) but he won't win over the country.

That said if he did win (he won't but...) I think he'd turn out to be a lot more pragmatic and small c conservative than the tea party fundamentalists backing trump at present would like. Cruz would be a lot worse.

[baboon]

Thailands former leader calls juntas election plans a charade

By James Hookway

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

NEW YORK: -- Thailands former leader Thaksin Shinawatra said the countrys ruling junta was jeopardizing the fragile economy by pushing plans for a new constitution that would limit the powers of elected governments and could preserve the influence of the generals who ousted his government and that of his sister.

Its a charade to show the world that Thailand is returning to democracy, he said Sunday in a rare interview in a nearby country. But in reality it would be like Myanmar before its political reforms. There would be a prime minister, but the real power would be in some politburo above him and the economy would suffer. No other government would want to touch Thailand.

Full story: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/thailands-former-leader-calls-juntas-election-plans-a-charade-2016-02-21

-- MARKET WATCH 2016-02-22

why don't they text closer to truth like

Thailands former steeling despot or convicted criminal, instead of "former leader"

Simply to annoy you personally. What other possible reason could there be? Edited February 22, 2016 by baboon

[Xonax]

And if Thaksin had stayed in power, Thailand would have been like Zimbabwe!!!

Sadly Thai's deserve the politicians they have.

Edited February 22, 2016 by Xonax

[Britannia]

You presumably westerners who genuinely think that Thaksin is more corrupt or more evil than a host of other Thai politicians are lost.

Thailand is bursting at the seams with people just like Thaksin. They all share the same values but not all are equally competent at being corrupt.

Corruption is a fundamental part of Thai culture. Who would deny it?

Do we have any reasons to believe that the Junta, for example, is clean, or do we have reason to believe exactly the opposite?

What about any other political parties?

Westerners of reasonable intelligence should be better able to notice these patterns. There is no good group vs bad group in Thailand just as there is no good gang vs bad gang. They are all variations of the same lawless, unprincipled lot.

Not many command an armed group of terrorists that kill and celebrate on stage the deaths of people who oppose them. After the trad killings that left 2 kids dead the reds started cheering on stage. I would say anyone who has an armed wing like that would be bad in my book. (he uses them to get back instead of giving up like others)

As for your corruption argument, i cheer for every corrupt official that gets convicted. I don't care what side they are on (can look and read back in topics to confirm). So I want Thaksin to be punished too, he has been convicted and has serveral more serious cases going that would lead to even more convictions so without a doubt he is one of the worst. (just saying that others are bad too does not excuse him of doing time)

If you want to prove otherwise please give me some examples of corrupt officials that are convicted or have so many court cases going against them. You will see me cheering too if Suthep gets caught or an army general. But for now Thaksin is the one who is caught and has many cases going against him but uses violence and murder to get of the hook.

Do you remember anyone who has openly bribed judges like that (cake incident ?) or used threats and violence (his men in black and armed redshirts).

I think the same could be said about Margaret Thatcher and George Bush, Have control of the power of the military, will use it to their own ends. Its stupid to think that people in political or military power are not going to use it for their own goals. Mahatma Gandhi was in deed rare

[jayboy]

Thaksin is out of his mind..... He is what took Thailand in a downward spiral, and his sister did the same... Thailand does Not need his false statement in comparing Thailand to the way Burma was.... BS.... He should come back and do his time in the monkey house... He is the criminal...

I know some people will not agree with my thoughts... So what.... I Love Thailand and only want the best for it...

Childish, historically fatuous and ignorant post - not because it attacks Thaksin which is perfectly legitimate and often necessary.But because it suggests that Thaksin was the prime cause of what has reduced Thailand to its current appalling state.

[jayboy]

And if Thaksin had stayed in power, Thailand would have been like Zimbabwe!!!

Right, as opposed to the current position where FDI in Thailand is reported to have dropped by 80%.

Couldnt we split this forum up into one where there can be more or less serious debate and one where trolls, bigots and dullards could indulge in whatever kind of talk they like.

[terryp]

this is a warning shot , hes prepared now; things could get very interesting very fast here I would be watching ALL the Generals loyal to TS

[webfact]

Thaksin's talk offer rejected



BANGKOK: -- The Thai government today rejected an offer for talks with the fugitive former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra saying he has to follow the rules of law.

Deputy Prime Minister Gen Tanasak Patimapragorn said it was impossible to hold talks with the former premier as he is a convicted criminal.

Therefore it was unlikely that a talk could be held with the person who has been convicted in a crime and everything must follow the rules of law, he said.

Gen Tanasak was commenting on proposed talks offered by Thaksin who gave interview to the Financial Times in Singapore recently.

Thaksin told the Financial Times that he was ready to offer any kind of discussion or talk and he would not set any conditions for the proposed talk.

He called the election roadmap of the Thai military junta a “charade” or wise plan to show the world that Thailand us returning to democracy.

Source: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/content/151797


-- Thai PBS 2016-02-22

[billd766]

? A very bloated self-esteem has just equated himself to Aung San Suu Kyi...

And failed miserably as usual.

[robblok]

'Returning' to democracy would imply that democracy was there.

Well, unfortunately, it was not, thanks to this pontificating buffoon who used democratic tools to abuse democracy in every possible manner, all for the benefit of his own clan.

Elections are not what define democracy, elections are just one of its mechanisms.

What does defines democracy is :

- the separation of powers into three distinct entities : legislative, executive, judiciary,

- the careful and thorough creation of entities whose role it is to monitor the three powers, put them back on track when required, and sometimes oppose them.

There was none of the above under Thaksin. In that respect there is no difference between the before and after coup regimes. If anything, the present regime is simply less hypocritical.

You are talking nonsense.The development of democracy in Thailand has been precarious and fragile not least because of the tendency of the establishment to destroy governments that though properly elected do not meet with their approval.The army has usually been their instrument but more recently they have also used the courts.

Nobody suggested Thaksin was a good representative of democracy so dont divert with that stale strawman approach.

Without elections there can be no democracy.Checks and balances are important but most will recall that the last civilian government was checked and balanced at every turn - but still the army grabbed power illegally.

Lastly if you use language like "pontificating buffoon" you give up the right to be taken as anything other than a pub bore.

I don't agree with you Jayboy, the previous government was not checked and balanced. It did a rice program that they called self financing, the World bank and many other institutes told them it could not be done. They were warned, did it anyway.. dit not take it up in the countries budget and blew on a yearly base (divided the loss by years to be fair) an amount equal to the health budget of Thailand in a year. I no country with goods checks and balances would a project of that magnitude stay off books and unchecked.

I would not have any problems with the rice program if they had put it in the books, they did not as then they could not go for other popular policies. They hid the losses and would have done so with the Chinese loan.

When they an official came out with that it was not going good the government threatened that official, when the democrats showed rotten rice they were sued. Nothing was done at all about this. Fake G2G deals were taking place, YL was informed.. did nothing.

Now also an amnesty that was pushed through and was the catalyst for the coup (or good excuse) was not done lawful and would have excused 25.000 corruption cases. Now if you call that being checked and balanced then I wonder what your definition of checks and balances are.

[Mickmick]

For or against Thaksin is not an issue. The man is right on this one.

Well, he is almost right on part of it .....

There would be a prime minister, but the real power would be in some politburo above him and the economy would suffer, he said.

What he meant was :

There was a prime minister, but the real power was above her, somewhere over in Dubai, or Montenegro, or wherever......

Edited February 22, 2016 by Mickmick