Siam Voices 2013 Review - Part 1: Blowing the final whistle on Thailand's political calm

Originally published at Siam Voices on December 27, 2013 Welcome to the Siam Voices 2013 year in review series, where we look back at the most important and interesting headlines, issues and stories that happened in Thailand this past year. Today we start with the political 2013, which looked very different when it started compared to the chaos on the street we have now - and it is far from being over.

NOTE: This was written before Thursday's escalation of violence that killed a police officer. Furthermore, the Election Commission is openly calling to indefinitely postpone the February 2 snap-elections, which was rejected by the caretaker government.

For a while, it looked like the government of prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra was seemingly unshaken by almost everything this year. Neither the increasingly erratic and rabid opposition in and outside parliament nor the problems of their own policies threatened the relative stability of this rule - almost.

The government launched or continued a series of populist policies that were well-intended but not perfect. The rice-pledging scheme did not lift international market prices as anticipated and Thailand lost its top exporter spot. Instead, the country sits on millions of tons of stockpiled rice it cannot get rid of - if so, only at a loss. Furthermore the scheme was tainted by alleged corruption and scaremongering over its safety.

Other incentives didn't bring in the desired effects either, such as tax rebates for first-car-buyers that proved to be a short-term success but backfired later with car owners defaulting on their purchases, or the raise of the daily minimum wage to 300 Baht (about $10) that benefitted a lot of employees but was met with resistance by their employers, especially small and middle enterprises. Also, the 2 trillion Baht borrowing scheme drew considerable criticism, despite the fact that an overhaul of the country's crumbling infrastructure is much-needed.

Politically, Yingluck herself faced a volley of criticism, for example about her constant absence in parliament or the back-and-forth fallout after her uncharacteristically sharp and committed Mongolia-speech in late April. Even the various anti-government (and utterly mislabeled) groups over the year - "Pitak Siam", "Thai Spring", "V for Thailand", "PEFOT" etc. - were not able to do much, but in hindsight were a sign of things to come later that year.

Despite all this, Yingluck managed to maintain a tense, but relative calm in the Thai power struggle at least for the first half the year. Even the military didn't mind that much to have Yingluck taking up the defense minister portfolio in the last cabinet reshuffle.

Maybe that was the reason why her government and the ruling Pheu Thai Party (PT) felt so confident that they thought it could ram a broad amnesty bill through both parliament and senate. Initially only meant to absolve political protesters from the rallies between 2006 and 2010 but not their leaders (and none convicted of lèse majesté either), a parliamentary committee dominated by PT MPs did an audacious bait-and-switch and re-wrote to expand those "accused of wrongdoing by an organisation set up after the coup of 2006" - which would have included former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra's conviction in 2008 and paved him his return to Thailand after years of self-imposed exile.

Protesters' explosion and Democrat Party's implosion

The Pheu Thai Party absolutely underestimated the outrage the bill would spark. It managed to create an amnesty bill broad enough to upset nearly everybody, even their own red shirt supporter base, since it also would have covered those responsible for the violent crackdown of 2010. Thaksin, who undoubtedly still wields considerable influence from afar - has gambled away his ticket home and it'd take a long while until he or his party can try another attempt.

Despite the bill unanimously struck down in the senate and repeated pledges by the government not to resubmit it again, the controversy ignited the anti-amnesty protests which re-united the anti-Thaksin forces and brought them together as a motley crew of self-proclaimed "saviors" against corruption and for "true democracy". After the bill's demise, the movement unmasked itself as an all-out anti-government campaign led by veteran Democrat Party politician Suthep Thuagsuban. The Constitutional Court's rejection of the government's proposed charter amendments did change a little at that time already, as did the House dissolution and scheduling of snap-elections on February 2, 2014.

A lot has been already said here about the protesters and their intentions lately, but it still bears repeating: this drive is not a push against corruption and for true, sustainable political reforms, but an undemocratic power grab that keeps on escalating until there is a complete derailment of the democratic process and the resulting vacuum is replaced by a system (e.g. in form of the appointed "People's Council") that is aimed at disenfranchising a large portion of the electorate only in order to prevent Thaksin and his political influences taking hold in Thailand again, no matter how high the cost. The fact that somebody with such a chequered past like Suthep can now brand himself as the "people's champion" is a cruel punchline of the flexible moralities in Thai politics. Corruption and abuse of power in Thai politics existed before Thaksin and surely will not end with his often demanded "eradication" - somebody like Suthep should know it best.

This is the result of the opposition's pent-up frustration at the electoral invincibility of Thaksin-affiliated parties and the failure to adapt to the changing political and social landscape - especially in the North and Northeast, of which many of the protesters hold dangerously outdated views (e.g. "uneducated rural", "dictatorship of the majority", "vote-buying") of them. The steady demise of the opposition Democrat Party was illustrated by repeated antics in parliament and party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva calling Yingluck a "stupid bitch". After much meandering, the Democrat Party decided not to be part of the democratic solution but part of the anti-democratic problem by announcing to boycott the elections of February 2 and thus declaring political bankruptcy.

This year and especially the last two months have left us with an uncertain future for the state of the country's political stability; divisions are greater than ever before with compromise never further away as we inch ever closer to the brink of chaos. The elections will help little to ease the tensions, but alternatives are no better. The question is now: how do you fix democracy? Surely not by taking down the whole house and letting it be only rebuilt and inhabited by a selected few.

The Siam Voices 2013 year in review series continues tomorrow. Read all parts here: Part 1: Politics - Part 2: Lèse Majesté & the media - Part 3: The Rohingya - Part 4: Education and reform calls - Part 5: What else happened?

Ex-yellow shirt leader Sondhi found guilty of insulting Thai monarchy

Originally published at Siam Voices on October 2, 2013 Thai court sentences former leader of the ultra-royalist and reactionary yellow shirts movement Sondhi Limthongkul to two years in jail for lèse majesté, but for entirely the wrong reasons.

Things went from bad to worse for Sondhi Limthongkul, the media mogul turned leader of the so-called 'People's Alliance for Democracy' (PAD) aka the yellow shirts, on Tuesday:

The Appeals Court on Tuesday sentenced Sondhi Limthongkul, a core member of the People's Alliance for Democracy, to three years imprisonment after finding him guilty of lese majeste, reversing the lower court's decision which acquitted him of the charge. The prison sentence was reduced by one-third to two years in jail because his testimony was deemed useful.

Mr Sondhi was charged that on July 20, 2008 he went up the stage and made a speech at a rally of PAD supporters at Makkawan Rangsan Bridge over a loud speaker.

"Sondhi gets 2 years for lese majeste", Bangkok Post, October 1, 2013

In that speech, which was broadcasted by his own satellite TV channel ASTV, Sondhi quoted pro-Thaksin supporter Daranee Charnchoengsilpaku, more commonly known as "Da Torpedo", demanding her arrest and prosecution.

Daranee's reportedly very strong remarks made in 2008 criticized the military coup of 2006 and the monarchy, which led to her arrest and sentencing to 18 years in jail. But, following a petition from her, the ruling was nullified and her case was declared a mistrial (we reported) since the hearings were not made accessible to the public and the media. Nevertheless, she remained imprisoned and the retrial in 2011 still found her guilty, sentencing her to 15 years in jail. Earlier this year in July, it was announced that Daranee will seek a royal pardon after more than 5 years of imprisonment and several have reported health concerns.

This lèse majesté charge against Sondhi - filed by the police - originates as far back as 2008 as he was issued an arrest warrant shortly after the aforementioned broadcast and eventually faced trial in 2011 after several delays. In September 2012 he was acquitted of the charges by the Criminal Court, as it found that Sondhi had "no intention" of breaking the law. Now, a year later, a higher court has overturned that ruling.

For Sondhi, who was sentenced to 20 years in prison for corporate fraud earlier this year, it is another blow for the man who led a powerful and controversial political movement, more commonly known as the yellow shirts. The group is notorious for their street protests and the siege of Bangkok's airports in 2008 (the trial has yet to commence) in their continuous campaign to rid Thai politics of the influences of former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra (a former business partner of Sondhi), including the current government of his sister Yingluck.

In August, Sondhi and other high-ranking leaders announced their resignation from the movement after they failed to convince their former allies, the opposition Democrat Party, to quit parliament in an effort to topple the government. While all involved insist that the PAD is not dead, their departure effectively disables the already marginalized movement (for now), despite the ongoing existence of ultra-royalist, anti-democracy and reactionary political offshoots.

The lèse majesté case and the conviction against Sondhi shows that even supporters of the monarchy and proponents of the draconian law are not exempt from the deeply flawed Article 112 of the Criminal Code. The reasoning of the judges clearly shows the 'logic' of the law and its perceived purpose:

The Appeals Court found Mr Sondhi guilty as charged, reasoning that it was not necessary for him to repeat Ms Daranee's remarks in public. In doing so, Mr Sondhi caused other people to know what Ms Daranee had said and to talk about it, thus affecting the monarchy.

"Sondhi gets 2 years for lese majeste", Bangkok Post, October 1, 2013

In other words, Sondhi made himself an accomplice to the crime and it doesn't matter if it was used in order to vilify her and demand her arrest, since Daranee's words - as with all other allegedly offensive remarks in all lèse majesté cases - are not publicly discussed outside the court rooms. As explored in a previous blog post here, prosecutors have the contradictory task of pursuing offenses against the monarchy (and also the often cited "national security") yet at the same time insist that they do not have an effect on them personally as loyal Thais.

Notably, while countless other lèse majesté prisoners are rejected bail and remain imprisoned while awaiting trial - as authorities claim they are a flight risk - Sondhi Limthongkul yet again walks free on bail (reportedly 500,000 Baht or $16,000 in this case) and probably will never see the inside of a prison cell.

Is this the end for Thailand's ultra-nationalist yellow shirts?

Originally published at Siam Voices on August 26, 2013 As leaders of the ultra-nationalist People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) announce they have quit their roles in the movement, is this the end for Thailand's yellow shirts?

It was a Friday and the end of a rather tumultuous political week with long parliament debates on constitutional amendments almost coming to a grinding halt because of the antics by opposition Democrat Party that ultimately couldn't stop to vote.

From the outermost sidelines of the Thai political playing field, the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) - the ultra-nationalist, anti-democratic and anti-Thaksin street protest group also commonly known as the yellow shirts - announced that it would make a televised statement later that Friday evening.

A "change in its stance" was touted by the movement. The question was in which direction it was heading. Would the yellow shirts return to mass street protests they have given up on in 2012? Would the Democrat Party return to the fold after their break-up and following ridicule by the PAD?

In the presence of all key yellow shirt leaders such as Sondhi Limthongkul and Chamlong Srimuang - most of whom have kept a rather low public profile in the recent past - from the movement's own TV studio, a spokesman read out a slightly surprising 30-minute statement:

Core bosses of the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) announced last night they have quit the movement's leadership (...)

Their decision, which was broadcast on the satellite-based ASTV station, came after it became clear Democrat Party MPs would not quit parliament to join a campaign to push for political reforms as had been suggested earlier by one of the PAD leaders Sondhi Limthongkul. (...)

The PAD leaders, who face a number of charges as a result of anti-Thaksin Shinawatra protests, claimed their ability to conduct political activities was being curbed by court orders.

If they were to bring about political reform, they would have to violate those court orders but there were no guarantees that their "sacrifices" would pay off in the long run.

They said the PAD alone was not powerful enough to bring about change. The Democrats, however, have the resources and are not restrained by any court orders, they said, but the Democrats have turned their back on Mr Sondhi's proposal.

By rejecting the PAD's offer, the Democrat Party showed that it was only aiming at discrediting the government and, like other political parties, hoped to use other groups for its own political gains, the statement added.

"Top PAD bosses resign en masse", Bangkok Post, August 24, 2013

The leaders further lamented in their Friday night announcement the 'vicious cycle' of politics. Even if the current government of Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra (which they perceive as a proxy government of her brother Thaksin) is overthrown, the ruling Pheu Thai Party would comfortably win again in a reelection scenario. Any other political party would also act purely for their own political gain, their statement continued.

The yellow shirts have put their hopes in their former fellow anti-Thaksin protesters from the Democrat Party (both have large overlapping supporter groups mainly consisting of middle class Bangkokians), but they have moved on and created their own street protest groups. Furthermore, the opposition politicians would also not want to risk their political careers and quit parliament, which was a condition demanded by the PAD for them to join.

It was an admission of failure for the PAD in their mission to 'free' Thai politics of the influence of Thaksin (also a former business partner of Sondhi before ties between two soured) and everything the yellow shirts believe he stands for, among them a corrupt democratic system that needs to be done away with - preferably via a military coup and replaced with appointed representatives instead of elections.

What began as a broad urban anti-Thaksin alliance in 2005 and the (re-)introduction of street politics to Thailand and reached its climax in the 2008 airport siege (their trials have been postponed countless times), became more and more marginalized over the years. All that is left of the movement is the ultra-nationalist and anti-Thaksin core from the beginning.

Will this mean the end of anti-Thaksin protests? Far from it! The sentiments against Thaksin have only run deeper in Thailand over the years, as the various affiliated off-shoot protest groups such the ultra-royalist multi-colored shirts, the short-lived Pitak Siam and the recently emerged 'White masks' have shown. What all these groups have in common - apart from near-facist political leanings - is that while they have identified what they hate, they rarely have offered a proper political solution to the ongoing polarization.

The leaders' resignation wants to be understood as something temporary rather than a complete breakdown. A return of the yellow shirts to the streets is never really out of the question given the right circumstances. However, with Friday's announcement the People's Alliance for Democracy have become a complete misnomer: they do not have enough the mass support they require, nor have they allies such as the Democrat Party and the military, and they certainly do not stand for democracy.

Thailand: Reconciliation games continue as amnesty bill goes to parliament

Originally published at Siam Voices on July 26, 2013 When Thailand's parliament reconvenes next week to continue the political season one of the most discussed and possibly the most controversial issue will be the passing of the so-called amnesty or reconciliation bill. Advertised as a means to overcome the ongoing political division by giving far-reaching amnesty to those convicted for taking part in the countless political protests - of both yellow and red shirts - since the military coup of 2006, opponents are accusing the government of white-washing the activities of the red shirt protesters and exiled former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

Depending on which of the various drafts you read, the bill could issue an even more far-reaching amnesty that also includes the junta behind the military coup, the military and civilian authorities responsible for the violent crackdown of the 2010 anti-government red shirt protests (including then-prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva and his deputy Suthep Thuagsuban), the various protest leaders, erasing the post-coup judiciary (a junta-appointed court which has dissolved deposed prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra's Thai Rak Thai Party and banned 111 politicians from office in 2007) and - according to one draft - even absolve Thaksin himself from a 2008 court sentence for abuse of power in a land purchasing case.

The authors of the drafts nearly all come from the governing Pheu Thai Party (PT). Red shirt leader and current deputy commercial minister Natthawut Saikua and coup-leader and now-opposition politician Sonthi Boonyaratglin may come from opposite ends of the political devide, but have presented similar amnesty drafts, with the main difference that "those who commit terrorist acts and acts causing death" are excluded in Natthawut's bill proposal. The former deputy prime minister and now newly demoted named labor minister Chalerm Yubamrung also throws in a draft of his own in a typically eager attempt to leave a personal mark on this issue, in which almost everybody - including Abhisit and Thaksin - are absolved. None of the bills include those imprisoned under the lèse majesté law.

Last week, another proposal for a reconciliation bill was introduced by a group that has been often neglected in the political infighting but was arguably most affected in the political crisis:

Relatives of those killed in the April-May 2010 crackdown on red-shirt protesters are to submit a "Worachai-plus" amnesty bill as parliament prepares to consider six other amnesty bills next month. (...)

"People from all colours will be absolved of any offence they committed or had committed against against them, except for core leaders," Ms. Payao [Akkahad, the mother of 25-year-old Kamolkade Akkahad, a medical volunteer who was killed inside Wat Pathum Wanaram on May 19, 2010] said of the victims' relatives' version of the bill.

The relatives will submit their five-page bill to Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra tomorrow, and to the parliament speaker on July 24, she said.

This bill, [Punsak Srithep, father of the 17-year-old Samapun Srithep, who was killed on May 15, 2010, on Ratchaprarop Road,] said, would allow judicial lawsuits to be pressed against persons or groups that killed people and/or damaged private property. The relatives' bill also does not prevent private entities whose properties were damaged in the unrest from launching civil suits against vandals or arsonists, he said.

"2010 victims' relatives push amnesty bill", Bangkok Post, July 15, 2013

The draft, coined by local media as the "People's Bill", has found in opposition Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva an unlikely proponent. While he lauds it to be "the first amnesty bill that had been proposed with a reasonable and reconciliatory tone," parts of the proposal directly target him and his administration's role in the violent crackdown on the red shirt protesters in 2010 (both he and his former deputy Suthep are facing murder charges by the DSI on at least one count, if not even more). It comes as no surprise that his party supporters and other ultra-conservatives have criticized Abhisit for voicing his support, many questioning whether or not he actually read the entire thing. The opposition has not yet brought up a proposal on their own.

Meanwhile, the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD), the mainstream red shirt umbrella organization, has voiced skepticism about the "People's Bill":

Prominent Pheu Thai politicians and Redshirts leaders, such as Mr. Weng Tojirakarn, Mr. Sombat Boon-ngarmanong, and Ms. Suda Rangupan, have accused Ms. Payao and Mr. Pansak of trying to slow down the process to pass amnesty bill by picking a fight with the powerful military.

According to those opposed to the ′Victims Families′ amnesty bill, the effort to free detained Redshirts protesters should be a priority over the need to prosecute the security forces. They expressed their fear that the military would never allow Ms. Yingluck′s government to pass such a bill, ruining the chance of any little gain there might be altogether, and might even launch a military coup in retaliation.

Some Redshirts also openly questioned the motives of Ms. Payao and Mr. Pansak, indirectly accusing them of being collaborators with the rival Democrat Party which, strangely enough, had expressed its support for the ′Victims Families′ amnesty bill.

"Fragmentation Among Redshirts Highlighted By Amnesty Debate", Khaosod Online, July 24, 2013

Instead, the UDD and the Pheu Thai Party are reportedly backing the draft by PT MP Worachai Hema, putting it top of the agenda for deliberation in parliament (even before the 2014 Budget Bill!) and ditching all other proposals - a move some observers say is to avoid uproar from the UDD, despite reports of dissatisfaction among certain groups within the fragmented movement. Under Worachai's bill, all political protestors will be granted amnesty - regardless of their political allegiance - while excluding the protest leaders and authorities responsible for the crackdowns.

August rings in a new political season that could get very heated very quickly: on top of the 2014 Budget Bill, the 2.2 trillion Baht (US$ 730bn) loan for infrastructure investments and proposed constitutional amendments, the amnesty bill will spark months of legislative tugs of war and wars of words (and potentially worse antics by the opposition outside and inside parliament like last year) - once again revealing how big Thailand's political divisions really are and that even a far-reaching amnesty will not be enough to close the gap.

Thailand: Ultra-conservatives hijack "Thai Spring" moniker

Originally published at Siam Voices on May 17, 2013 Thailand's political climate could be heating up again after the Prime Minister's Mongolia speech has caused strong reactions, especially from anti-government groups. A new online group now has now claimed the 'Thai Spring' moniker to denounce the government, but it has very little to do with its bigger counterpart in the Middle Eastern revolutions.

When Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra went to Mongolia's capital Ulan Bator in late April, many were expecting yet another trip abroad to drum up economic ties with foreign states and private investors. However, speaking at a conference of democratic countries, she addressed some very sensitive issues for the first time since the beginning of her tenure in 2011.

In her speech, Yingluck praised her brother and former prime minister Thaksin's political achievements (while deliberately overlooking his faults and wrongdoings) during his rule, acknowledged the red shirt protesters who "fought back for their freedom" and gave "their lives defending democracy".

She also condemned the 2006 military coup that ousted Thaksin and said  "elements of anti-democratic regime still exist" and are still working against her, explicitly mentioning "the so called independent agencies have abused the power."

For once, Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra - until then always striking a conciliatory tone and a soft approach - made a politically committed speech and was ready to take sides. She did not shy away from sad truths (e.g. the military drafted constitution of 2007), while highlighting her government's populist policies and those of Thaksin - something she could have done much earlier.

(READ MORE: Bangkok Pundit's analysis of Yingluck's Mongolia-speech)

The strong reactions by her political opponents suggest Yingluck has struck a nerve: the controversy around the misogynist insult by a Thai Rath cartoonist and the ill-advised lawsuit against him by the PM and the even more ill-advised rampage by the ICT minister were just one of many different verbal flash points following her speech.

This week, another front has opened up in the reactionary fallout to Yingluck's Mongolia-speech:

A new website has been launched, Thai Spring, where people can voice their opposition to the Yingluck Shinawatra government, retired police officer Vasit Dejkunjorn and former senator Kaewsun Atibodhi said on Thursday.

Describing himself as a person who adheres strongly to the principle of a democratic administration under the monarchy, and who has experienced many political eras in Thailand, Pol Gen Vasit said he was aware there are groups of people trying relentlessly to undermine the highest institution in the country.

Those people have a plan to take over Thailand and change its administrative system, and he would not stand by and allow this to happen, he said. (...)

"It is a website, <http://www.change.org/users/thaispring>, where they can sign in and express disapproval of the prime minister's speech in Ulan Bator. "More than 10,000 people have signed on to the website so far to express their opinion that in delivering that speech the prime minister acted wrongly. (...)

Pol Gen Vasit called for the government to review its role, otherwise the "Thai Spring" movement would develop, in the same way that the "Arab Spring" phenomenon had led to anti-government protests by huge numbers of people.

"Anti-govt 'Thai Spring' website opened", Bangkok Post, May 16, 2013

The two men behind the campaign, Vasit Dejkunjorn and Kaewsun Atibodhi, are noted ultra-royalists and anti-Thaksinites respectively. Vasit has attended several pro-monarchy rallies in the past, while Kaewsun often publicly slammed Thaksin on the stage of the yellow shirts gatherings and investigated against his administration after he was appointed to a post-coup committee. So, it's pretty clear where these two are coming from politically - as is their the often regurgitated claim of the Yingluck-Thaksin campaign to overthrow the monarchy.

What stands out in this case are the means of their protest: this ultra-conservative group is starting their anti-government campaign online. Unlike what is erroneously reported, "Thai Spring" does not have a self-hosted website (yet) but is rather a group on the Thai section of Change.org, an online petition platform that normally avoids overly politically partisan campaigns.

The petition itself called "ร่วมลงชื่อปฏิเสธปาฐกถาอูลานบาตอร์ของนายกรัฐมนตรี" ("Petition to Denounce the Prime Minister's Ulan Bator-Speech") has at the time of writing reached over 14,000 signatures and have explained in a long open letter how PM Yingluck is just a puppet of the exiled Thaksin, how they're going turn the country upside down, and how all the media in their pockets, comparing at lengths the PM, the government, the ruling party to Kim Jong-Il and North Korea*. Of course, they also claim to speak on behalf of all Thai citizens.

No doubt the attention-grabber here is the name 'Thai Spring' this group has hijacked in order to mimic the 'Arab Spring', which has fundamentally changed several Middle Eastern and North African countries and is still ongoing after over two years. But looking at the two sides here, they couldn't be further apart from each other**:

The 'Arab Spring' was in part sparked by a disenfranchised youth stifled with high unemployment and fed up with decades-old authoritarianism. On the other hand, these men behind the so-called 'Thai Spring' represent an elitist, reactionary force that see their vision of Thailand endangered by Thaksin Shinawatra - who without a doubt is not a democrat either, but (unwittingly) enfranchised a largely neglected rural population with political conscience - and want to stop it with all non-democratic means at all costs (e.g. endorsing a military coup), even at the cost of democracy itself!

This could signal yet another political (re-)entrenchment, as the opposition both in and outside parliament have been clearly agitated by Yingluck's speech, which could be seen as a battle cry for a stronger push in the upcoming political challenges later this year such as the charter amendments, the reconciliation bills, but also the court verdict in the Thai-Cambodian border dispute.

The relative calm over the past years could be pushed aside by the reemergence of the heated political polarization and a further escalation between the two fractions that have diametrically opposing visions about the future of Thailand's rule and its structure. But with the hijacking of the 'Thai Spring' by the ultra-conservatives it has already been made clear: this spring does not signal a fresh new start.

*On the comparison to North Korea, here's another quote from the open letter: "If you pay a visit to North Korea you will witness the omnipresence of portraits of the leader. In Thailand it is the same. These two likeminded families have thus been sending their followers and subordinates to infiltrate all strata of their respective societies." Hmm...!

**More on the (un-)likelihood of an 'Arab Spring'-style uprising Thailand hopefully in a future post.

Thai army ordered to stand down after bullying yellow shirt paper

Originally published at Siam Voices on January 14, 2013 This past weekend, around 40-50 military officers suddenly showed up in front of the building of ASTV-Manager protesting the paper's harsh criticism of the army and the 'slandering' of their armed forces chief General Prayuth Chan-ocha. The soldiers from the 1st army region assembled on Friday afternoon after the newspaper compared Prayuth's most recent outburst to a "woman in her periods". A second protest was staged on Saturday morning at the same spot and they threatened to repeat it again every day until the paper apologizes.

The show of force by the officers in green came after a public tit-for-tat between General Prayuth and the newspaper, the latter attacking the armed forces for their handling of the border conflict with neighboring Cambodia over the ancient Buddhist Hindu temple Preah Vihear. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) will hold hearings in April, after the Cambodia has requested the ICJ to reinterpret aspects of the 1962 ruling in their favor. A decision is expected to take place in October later this year.

Just to be very clear, the publication the soldiers were protesting is far from being the beacon of the Thai press media: ASTV-Manager is the press outlet of the ultra-nationalistic and ill-named "People's Alliance for Democracy" (PAD), also commonly known as the yellow shirts. Apart from their regular anti-democratic diatribes and low punches as seen above (that reflects its comments section), the Preah Vihear temple conflict is one of the issues the political pressure group is using to rally up supporters - just that it's one of the less popular ones compared to those that have a distinct anti-Thaksin and nowadays anti-Yingluck agenda to it.

The last PAD protest over the temple conflict was in early 2011, following another deadly clash at the border between Thai and Cambodian troops. At the short-lived and small protest sit-in, the yellow shirts were at times calling for an open war with Cambodia. Frustrated with their diminished relevance in Thai (street) politics, it was also during that time when they broke off their formerly close alliances with the Democrat Party (which were in power back then) and with hawkish factions of the military, as the PAD accused both of not doing enough for the "interest of the country" over the border conflict.

In the run-up to the ICJ hearings - to which the PAD has urged the government not to accept anything at all by the ICJ in the irrationale fear of losing sovereignty - the PAD's news-outlets are repeating their diatribes against Cambodia, the ICJ and also the army as they started criticizing General Prayuth, which deteriorated into the spat and ultimately to the soldiers' protest, who see not only their army chief being attacked but also the institution of the armed forces as a whole:

The green-uniformed protesters on Saturday said the article has damaged their morale because the army chief is like their "second father". They demanded the media outlet issue an apology to the general.

They also denied being ordered by their superiors to stage the event. Gen Prayuth told reporters earlier that the soldiers were free to hold such rallies because they were trying to protect the armed forces, not just him. (...)

"If [the PAD] were the government, I would have to listen to it. But since it is not, I have no idea what to do with it," Gen Prayuth said during a visit to the border area earlier in the week.

"Prayuth to troops: Stand down at ASTV", Bangkok Post, January 12, 2013

Despite the fact that Prayuth has ordered the soldiers to cease from any more protests, the public display by the soldiers underlines the over-confident self-perception of the armed forces' role in Thai society that they are above from criticism - given Prayuth's erratic outbursts at the media (read here, here and here) that is hardly surprising. While this is mouthpiece of an ultra-nationalistic pressure group we're talking about, having 50 troops show up at their doorstep isn't right either! And to make matters worse, the army is now asking for forgiveness "confidence in the army" - quite an ambitious request after this weekend.

Generally, the reactions by fellow Thai journalists on this incident were swift and clear:

The TJA statement called for the army to respect freedom of the press. If the army feels the media have violated its rights, it can file a complaint with the National Press Council. As well, it said the army chief should listen to media coverage that fairly reflected the army's and his performance without bias and in a constructive way.

At the same time, it said, all media (...) should refrain from distorting the facts or abusing the dignity and human rights of people appearing in the news. They should also refrain from using rude or insulting words, it said.

"Journalists decry threats", Bangkok Post, January 12, 2013

While this response is in principle correct, it begs the question where the TJA was during other (arguably equally severe) interferences and threats to the media and freedom of speech in the past few years? Where was the TJA on the countless lèse majesté cases affecting free speech and charges made against journalists? Where were they when on the verdict of Prachatai webmaster Chiranuch Premchaiporn, held liable for online comments she didn't make? Did they say anything about the media interferences by the Abhisit administration? Was there any criticism made over the apparent failure by Thai TV to inform about a potential tsunami warning? And what did the TJA say when (of all people) journalism students were protesting against reforms of the lèse majesté law?

UPDATE: As soon as this post was published on Monday afternoon, news came out that army chief Prayuth has "apologized". However, he merely did only excuse his choices of words ("a lousy newspaper"), but not the message itself.

Thailand: What we missed in August 2012

Originally published at Siam Voices on August 27, 2012 In a new section on Siam Voices, we look back at some news stories that made the headlines in Thailand this month.

Thailand's Olympic medal winners: Sporting hurt pride

Earlier this month, the 30th Olympic Summer Games took place in London. As usual, Thailand's Olympic ambitions included the expectation of some medals, having won seven gold, four silver and 10 bronze medals at previous games in the weightlifting, boxing and taekwondo competitions. That was not the exception this time around again, as silver medal winners Pimsiri Sirikaew, Kaeo Pongprayoon and bronze medalist Chanatip Sonkham won medals at exactly these sports respectively.

However, it wasn't all smiles and joy: especially in the case of light flyweight boxer Kaeo Pongprayoon, many Thais took offense to his loss in a controversial final against China's Zou Shiming due to some questionable officiating and actions by Zou. Predictably the Thai fans couldn't shake off the feeling that 'they' got robbed and some of them predictably took their anger online, partly in very poor taste. An example of nationalism-fueled rage was to be seen on the Facebook page of the International Boxing Association, whose picture of a celebrating Zou Shiming got over 65,000 comments, most of them negative and still counting two weeks after the end of the games.

And generally, despite the fact that Thailand did quite well compared to its neighbors, these games were a disappointment for the officials, who hoped for two gold medals as a target (that's nothing compared to the secret German medals target that was missed by lightyears) and now have to think about how to improve the support for athletes, both olympic and paralympic, whose summer games are starting later this week.

Pheu Thai's rice scheme: The Price is Right?

It bears many names: pledging scheme, mortgage scheme, fixed pricing scheme - but they all mean the same rice policy of the Yingluck government that has been one of the essential cornerstones of Pheu Thai Party's campaign before the election and of the current administration since last October. In a nutshell, the government buys rice at 15,000 Baht (about $480) per ton - that is 50 per cent more than the market price. What was primarily aimed to help the around 8 million rice farmers in the country was met with criticism and concerns that it will either lead to a global price hike, a loss of Thailand's status as the world's top exporter of rice or both.

Almost a year after its introduction, the criticism has increased in recent months, as export numbers are declining and projections that Thailand will lose its number one position in global exports. And so the critical analysis pieces go on, and on, and on, and on - but the consensus was the same: the government's rice policy causes private rice millers and exporters to suffer and the governments sits on a huge pile of rice that they can't get rid off in bi-lateral deals, as it is about to spoil. Nevertheless, the government will continue it. More details can be read over here at Bangkok Pundit's post.

Policemen found guilty of extrajudicial killing - and released on bail!

In early August the Criminal Court in Bangkok found five police officers guilty of the murder of a 17-year old man. The teenager was arrested by these policemen in 2004 in the southern province of Kalasin for allegedly stealing a motorcycle. That was during the time of the "War on Drugs", a heavily-propagated campaign by the Thaksin administration that targeted drug dealers and traffickers, but also ensured security officials to use a heavy-handed and violent approach, in which, according to rights groups, over 2,500 people were killed - many of them extrajudicially - and over 1,600 died in prison or custody, about 131 of them as a result of police brutality. The 17-year-old was one of them, as he was detained for over a week and later found dead in another province.

Three police officers have been sentenced to death for premeditated murder and hiding the young man's body, one to life imprisonment for premeditated murder and the Police Colonel was sentenced to seven years in jail for abusing his power to cover up the murder. However, despite the convictions, these men are walking free on bail pending appeal. Understandably, the key witnesses are concerned over their safety, since their witness protection program ironically ended with the court verdict. Calls for new witness protection have been so far unanswered.

Thaksin's US travels spark anti-American tantrum

Yeah, Thaksin is still traveling freely around the world, even more so since many countries have re-granted him entry. The United States was the latest to do so and that issue alone has stirred up some diatribes from his enemies, most of all the self-proclaimed Thaksin hunter, diplomatic wrecking-ball and former foreign minister Kasit, who immediately called to severe ties with the US, should they not extradite him to Thailand. If only when he and his cabinet issued an extradition request for Thaksin when they were in government - but they didn't!

The fugitive former prime minister traveled to New York first and then was scheduled to appear at a red shirt gathering in Los Angeles - but Thai media reported that some "700 to 2,000" yellow shirts have allegedly foiled the event and Thaksin had to bail out. The problem is that the numbers were from a Thai community paper in LA and cannot the independently verified. And let's be honest: an assembly of 2,000 similarly dressed people would have made local news already over there - only it didn't! Meanwhile, back in Thailand the anti-Thaksin protesters gathered at the US Embassy and have come up with some rather bizarre conspiracy theories. Let's see where Thaksin goes next...

Thai Senator 'accidentally' kills secretary with uzi - or pistol - or wife - or cousin...!

In mid-August, a news headline from Thailand went around the world that was both shocking and bizarre: "Senator 'accidentally' kills secretary with Uzi". Mae Hong Son Senator Boonsong Kowawisarat was carrying the firearm during dinner at a resort when it accidentally discharged and killed a woman believed to be his secretary. Of course, these circumstances were perfect ingredients for yet another 'quirky' news item from Asia for Western media - and when even Gawker was reporting it (predictably not without mistakes), you know something has hit critical mass.

But the next morning, the circumstances weren't that clear anymore as nearly every detail of this incident was put in question: What was the weapon and who did it kill? In the end it emerged that the Senator's pistol, a 9mm Jericho 941 (also named Uzi Eagle), fired a bullet into the stomach of Chanakarn Detkard, his domestic partner with whom he has two children.

Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai blogger and journalist currently based in Hamburg, Germany. He can be followed on Twitter @Saksith and on Facebook here.

Thailand's yellow shirts change focus, abandon street protests... for now

Originally published at Siam Voices on March 12, 2012 The ultra-nationalist "People's Alliance for Democracy" (PAD), also commonly known as the yellow shirts, have assembled for the first time since Yingluck Shinawatra became prime minister. Yingluck is the sister of their arch-nemesis and former Thai PM Thaksin Shinawatra.

With the change of government came also the concerns of a return of widespread anti-Thaksin protests, and fears that the current administration ultimately only governs to benefit the big brother exiled in Dubai. In other words, if Thaksin re-emerges, so will the yellow shirts.

About 2,000 to 3,000 "rowdy PAD supporters" (not my words, astonishingly the Bangkok Post's!) gathered in a convention hall at Lumphini Park, Bangkok Saturday to discuss the group's future direction. The gathering came amid heated (at times physical) debate over the Nitirat group's proposals to amend the constitution and the lèse majesté law - both pressing issues where the yellow shirts and, especially when it concerns the monarchy, will ferociously defend.

Given its history of protests, blockades and nationalistic diatribes - and amidst the developments of recent weeks - the following results of the  meeting might be surprising at first sight:

The People's Alliance for Democracy yesterday backed away from its threat to stage a major Bangkok rally against the charter rewrite in a move hailed by the government as a breakthrough in easing political tensions.

PAD spokesman Panthep Phuaphongphan said the mass rally may be put on the table again if "the conditions are ripe enough for a big political change among Thai people".

"Under these conditions ... the PAD will hold a major rally immediately," said Mr Panthep. (...)

He said they would start a nationwide campaign as soon as possible about the charter rewrite and the direction parliament has taken on the issue.

Nanta, a 59-year-old teacher from Chon Buri, welcomed the PAD's resolution, saying the issue was far too critical for the group to handle alone and the public needed to be better educated about the issues.

"PAD shelves mass rally over constitution", Bangkok Post, March 11, 2012

The People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) will set up a committee to campaign for national reform instead of holding mass rallies to counter the Pheu Thai-led government of Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra, according to PAD spokesman Panthep Pourpongpan.

Panthep said the group would launch protests if the government changes Article 112 of the Penal Code, amends the charter or any laws to waive penalties on Thaksin Shinawatra and his group, and when the time is right.

"PAD vows to pursue reforms", The Nation, March 11, 2012

There have been some politicians and academics who hail this development as a move forward to "ease the political tension". However, it should be noted that the PAD is neither the same broad alliance against Thaksin seen in 2006, nor the less broad collective who took over government house, then Bangkok's airports in 2008. Under the Democrat-led government, the ties between the two were steadily getting worse, ultimately broken during the conflict over Preah Vihear.

Another issue that plagued the movement were the financial problems of their founder and main leader, media mogul Sondhi Limthongkul. Rumors of his financial demise were further fueled after his satellite channel and PAD-mouthpiece ASTV were forced off air. In general, Sondhi has been largely low-key in his appearances, even a plea for a military coup was (fortunately) largely ignored (and his outlandish conspiracy theories don't help either!). And in the latest sign that even Sondhi is not untouchable anymore, he recently was found guilty on multiple accounts of corporate fraud and sentenced to 20 years. However, he was released on a hefty bail and appealed against the verdict.

In a way, this reflects the marginalized role the PAD has in the political landscape today. The Preah Vihear protests at the beginning of 2011 were an early sign of a diminished supporter base and burned bridges with many political allies. Smaller  off-shoot groups were solely there 'to defend the monarchy' from whatever perceived threat during the Nitirat discussion and Sondhi himself is still obsessed fixated to fight against his former business partner Thaksin:

Sondhi said , "We have to win this fight. This is not to change the government. The country will survive only if bad politicians are gone," he said.

"PAD vows to pursue reforms", The Nation, March 11, 2012

Hard-core yellow shirt leader Sondhi Limthongkul told the crowd he would continue fighting Thaksin as he had done for eight years. He said he did not believe the government's promise not to touch on the issue of the monarchy in the charter rewrite.

"PAD shelves mass rally over constitution", Bangkok Post, March 11, 2012

And again, the focus to (re-)"educate" people about their ideas on how to reform the country does raise some questions whether or not the current mindset of the PAD has changed from a past outright anti-democracy position (including the infamous "close down the country for a few years"-approach) to a more moderate one.

The yellow shirts might have taken a step back, but given the controversy surrounding the planned changes and their arch-nemesis Thaksin still looming in the air, a return to street protests is not out of the question.

Note: A sentence mentioning Sondhi's lastest conviction has been added to this article.

Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai blogger and journalist currently based in Hamburg, Germany. He can be followed on Twitter @Saksith and also on his public Facebook page here.

The Cambodian view on border clashes with Thailand

Originally published at Siam Voices on February 18, 2011 In a comment in the English language The Phnom Penh Post, co-founder and former editor-in-chief Michael Hayes expressed his view on the most recent Thai-Cambodian border clashes and reflects on the national feeling about this issue. He writes:

At the very least I’ve never been called a spin doctor for the Cambodian government. But on the issue of the current border dispute between Cambodia and Thailand surrounding Wat Preah Vihear, I’m as angry as all Cambodians are at what we perceive as a Thai-initiated conflict of grossly unjust proportions. (...)

The nagging question that perplexes us all is why Thailand is trying to export its domestic political problems and dump them on poor Cambodia? The sentiment here is that if the red shirts and the yellow shirts want to fight it out, do so somewhere in Thailand, but don’t use Cambodia as a scapegoat.

"The view from Cambodia", by Michael Hayes, The Phnom Penh Post, February 17, 2011

We have recently blogged about the Thai national(-istic) implications of the border clashes, but just to recap: The PAD are partly to be blamed for the recent flareups in battles at the border that begun earlier this year when seven Thais were captured on Cambodian territory including a Democrat MP and Veera Somkwamkid, an infamous activist of the PAD-allied Thai Patriots Network, who has been very vocal about the border issues and known to getting into trouble several times at the very same place. That's probably why Veera and another activist have been sentenced to multiple years in jail (btw, it looks like they won't get off the hook that easy via a royal pardon).

The PAD have been protesting since late January on the streets near government house and have repeatedly viciously attacked the government and also the army, who may have some "some wounded pride among the top generals as a result of the PAD's assertions that the army has been weak" (Source: Reuters). All in all, as hinted in Hayes' comment, the border clash is a result of Thai domestic politics and ratcheted up by the ultra-nationalistic PAD. But the red shirts are absolutely on the sidelines about this issue.

Hayes continues:

In the 20 years I’ve been in Cambodia the Preah Vihear issue is without question the only one I’ve seen that has united the entire nation. Cambodian TV stations have been running fundraisers off and on with donations large and small pouring in from all quarters for two years. Even the normally truculent Sam Rainsy Party and others in the opposition are fully on board.

"The view from Cambodia", by Michael Hayes, The Phnom Penh Post, February 17, 2011

Really? In an analysis by the Deutsche Presse Agentur (DPA) it paints a different picture of the Cambodian opposition:

Abhisit's PAD problems are somewhat mirrored in Cambodia by the opposition Sam Rainsy Party's hounding of Prime Minister Hun Sen. The party accused Hun Sen of neglecting land controversies in the border demarcation process with Vietnam while highlighting the confrontation with Thailand.

'He is trying to avoid the border issue with Vietnam,' said Chhaya Hang, executive director of the Khmer Institute of Democracy, a Phnom Penh-based non-governmental organization. (...)

Hun Sen might also be under pressure to speed up the Thai-Cambodian border conflict for budgetary reasons.

"ANALYSIS: Domestic politics muddy Thai-Cambodian border spat", DPA, February 9, 2011 (via KI-Media)

Nevertheless, Hayes' comment correctly points out the problems on the Thai side. The conflict stems from made-up false propaganda that is revived by the ultra-nationalists, partly to fight against their descend into obscurity, partly to avenge their disappointment over a government, which they thought have helped to come into existence.

This very government meanwhile, is trying stubbornly to keep this matter and its eventual resolution strictly bilateral, which is one of the reasons it has most recently refused to sign a ceasefire agreement with Cambodia, which asks observers from ASEAN to monitor to area.

Thai-Cambodian border clashes: Nationalist fever boils over

Originally published at Siam Voices on February 10, 2011 It has been nearly a week since the tense situation at the Thai-Cambodian border at the disputed ancient Hindu temple Preah Vihear escalated yet again, when troops on both sides exchanged gunfire and according to independent observers, killed 11 people on both sides. Even though no shooting has been reported since Tuesday, the current calm is more than fragile.

At the same time in Bangkok, the yellow-shirted PAD have been camping and rallying at Government House since late January, demanding the government to step down and calling for a stricter handling of the Thai-Cambodian border issue. By doing so, they are yet again playing the card of ultra-nationalism to justify their cause. But unlike at their last large-scale protest in 2008, this time it appears it is the only thing left for them is to cling on.

Ever since the rally started on January 25, the PAD's narrative and thus their constructed enemies were clear: Thai prime minister Abhsit, Cambodian prime minister Hun Sen, Thai defense minister Prawit Wongsuwan and the Cambodians at the border - they all have to leave in some way, whether its from their post or from the area the yellow shirts claim to be Thai soil. Additionally, the endless line of contributing speakers on the PAD stage are attacking the army for not being fierce enough with the issue, essentially calling them to reclaim the area by force.

But what is the PAD's rationale behind the ultra-nationalistic sabre rattling and the constant ripping of the current Thai government? Pavin Chachavalpongpun, a diplomat-turned-academic, explains:

At a deeper level, however, the conflict reveals a power struggle between the government and the PAD, the two main bastions of royalism in domestic Thai politics. The PAD is apparently manipulating the border dispute between Thailand and Cambodia to undermine the Democrat-led government of Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva.

Relations between the two groups were not always so fractious. The Democrat Party and the PAD fought side-by-side to unseat the government of Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra and its subsequent proxies. They were both also willing to use anti-Cambodian nationalism as a rallying cry. (...)

But after it formed a government in late 2008 through a backroom deal brokered by the military, the Democrat Party gradually distanced itself from the PAD and its yellow-shirt protesters in an attempt to rebuild the government's image. PAD members were infuriated. Many believed that they helped install the Democrat Party in power but never got the credit they deserved from the Abhisit government.

"Thailand's Rising Nationalism", by Pavin Chachavalpongpun, Wall Street Journal, February 9, 2011 (full text can be read here)

Furthermore, political analyst Thitinan Pongsudhirak (also known to some as 'the Quotemeister'), sees in the PAD a larger danger to the government than the red shirts:

PAD leading voices have since turned their oratory guns broadly at the powers-that-be, including the current army chief, Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban, Defence Minister Prawit Wongsuwon, and especially Mr Abhisit. (...)

Mr Sondhi (...) has been playing up his overseas Chinese roots in defiance of what he calls the 'poo dee', the blue-blooded high and mighty with privileged backgrounds. This 'poo dee' happens to coincide neatly with the red shirts' battle cry in 2009-10 against the amataya, although no realignment of these two social movements appears in the offing. But if the various colours against the 'poo dee' and the amataya are lined up at a future point, the powers-that-be should be gravely concerned.

"Where is the PAD going this time with its protests?", by Thitinan Pongsudhirak, Bangkok Post, February 8, 2011

Shawn Crispin of Asia Times Online, elaborates on another angle:

Still, some have speculated that the military has swung back towards the PAD with the transition from outgoing army commander General Anupong to new chief Prayuth as a way to pressure Abhisit out of his early election plan. With the reappearance of the PAD on Bangkok's streets, this time as ultra-nationalists in defense of Thai territory, local newspapers have been awash in unexplained coup rumors. (...)

That leaves Abhisit to convince Prayuth that early polls are a better bet than backing the PAD and fomenting instability on the border.

"Bombshells and rally cries", by Shawn Crispin, Asia Times Online, February 8, 2011

The cracks between the PAD and the ruling Democrat Party were visible for some time already. The most recent scathing attacks by the yellow shirts are a more than crystal-clear sign that their bond is broken beyond repair. Apart from that, it reveals a jaded frustration among the PAD that not only in their view they were not being credited enough for bringing down three governments they saw as morally illegitimate to rule, only then to see the successor not being much better either.

The PAD's experiment at participating in politics (by 'normal' means) in form of the New Politics Party ultimately failed to break ground in the political landscape and at the local voting booths, thus leading many senior figures, including Sondhi, to leave the party and return to the streets with the PAD, as they see it as the only way to bully through their cause. Furthermore, the jaded frustration indicates their struggle against growing irrelevancy and obscurity, with the also anti-government red shirts reenergizing during their last few rallies (which were invited by one PAD activist to join them in chasing out the government).

Meanwhile, the sabre rattling by the PAD's rhetoric has reached a new low on Monday when the leader Sondhi Limthongkul has - well, read it yourself:

Yellow-shirt leader Sondhi Limthongkul has urged the Thai military to seize Cambodian territory, including Angkor Wat, to barter for Preah Vihear Temple. (...)

The Thai armed forces should move forward to seize Battambang, Siem Riap, Angkor Wat and Koh Kong. And then, in negotiations which would be arbitrated by China and ASEAN, Thailand would barter them for Preah Vihear and force Cambodia to adopt the watershed for border demarcation instead of the 1:200,000 map, according to Sondhi.

He said that a diplomatic approach should not be used in a military campaign. Thailand must take the most advantageous position before any negotiation, and it is not making war with China or Vietnam, but with Cambodia which has no warships. Thailand must wield its greater military power when it has to.

‘[To] whoever says that we’re mad for war, none of us sitting here want our children to [go to war and] die, but to die for a great cause, to protect the land, is worth it.  We have 300,000 soldiers who are better equipped than Cambodian soldiers, but we lack the guts, because the senior military figures serve evil politicians.  Today, [Defence Minister] Gen Pravit Wongsuwan is not a soldier, but a politician who says anything for political gain.’

"Sondhi urges Thai military to seize Angkor Wat in exchange for Preah Vihear", Prachatai, February 9, 2011

P.S.: Nationalistic fervor is not exclusively a Thai issue here. The Cambodian blog KI-Media has an analysis about the situation across the border.

Two Thais sentenced to prison for illegally crossing into Cambodia, what now?

Originally published at Siam Voices on February 2, 2011 The Nation writes in today's title story:

Veera Somkwamkid and Ratree Pipatanapaiboon were yesterday given lengthy prison sentences in Phnom Penh over charges of illegal entry and espionage in a case that could worsen ties between Thailand and Cambodia.

In the one-day trial, the Phnom Penh Municipal Court found Veera, who leads the Thai Patriots Network (TPN), and his assistant Ratree, guilty of espionage, illegal entry and trespassing in a military zone. These charges carry a maximum combined penalty of 11 years and six months.

Veera was sentenced to eight years behind bars and a fine of 1.8 million riel (about Bt18,000), while Ratree was given six years and fined 1.2 million riel (Bt12,000).

"Tough prison terms", The Nation, February 2, 2010

The two convicted were part of a group of seven Thais who got arrested by Cambodian authorities on December 29, 2010, claiming to investigate a disputed area at the Thai-Cambodian border. Among them was Democrat MP Panich Vikitsreth, who has received with four others suspended jail terms and have returned to Thailand already. See previous coverage here and here.

The Cambodian court have thrown the whole book at these two. The question is now if these two will have to serve the full term or will be eventually be granted a royal pardon (as seen in the 2009 case of a Thai national being accused of espionage), as two experts previously suggested on Voice of America:

“My opinion is that the first step must be through the court,” said Ros Chantraboth, a historian at the Royal Academy. “After the court's prosecution, based on a suggestion of friendship for both countries, [Prime Minister] Hun Sen will request from [King Norodom Sihamoni] their amnesty and release.”

Sok Touch, rector of Khemarak University, said first the judicial system must be allowed to work before diplomatic negotiations. “Cambodia should show its willingness to use the court system perfectly, and after that open political negotiation,” he said. “As we know, the monarch has the privilege of giving pardons.”

"Analysts See Royal Pardon for Arrested Thais", VOANews.com, January 12, 2011

Veera is a known activist and the leader of the nationalistic Thai Patriots Network, a group that is at least affiliated with the  PAD, which are at the moment still camping out and protesting in Bangkok for a over a week now, dissatisfied with the Thai governments handling of the border issue. Speaking of which...

PAD spokesman Parnthep Puapongphan, speaking at the protest site outside Government House, said the government had never supplied any information that could help Veera and Ratree in court. (...)

Suthorn Rakrong, coordinator of the TPN (...) also said that leaders of the group would meet this morning to come up with a statement rejecting the Cambodian court's verdict.

"Tough prison terms", The Nation, February 2, 2010

This could be the reigniting spark for the prolonging yellow shirts' protests, now that they have one more reason to blame the government. It could be interesting to see what will happen today on the protests' stage.

Confusion Before Saturday's Protests over Preah Vihear

Note: This post has been originally published on August 7, 2010 in series of guest blogger posts forBangkok Pundit at AsianCorrespondent.

Veera Somkwamkid, leader of the Thailand Patriot Network (photo courtesy of Eric Seldin aka @thaicam, click here to see the rest of his gallery)

As previously blogged here, the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD), by the time you read this, are now on the streets again to protest in front of Government House over the ongoing Preah Vihear temple issue, despite the emergency decree - or are they?

Over the course of Friday, developments changed rapidly over the legality of the protests, the venue and in the end who's actually in charge of the protests that have witnessed a fallout between different fraction of the protesters. On Friday morning this was the status quo:

PAD to gather in front of the Govt House starting 8AM tomorrow, to pressure the Govt to cancel MOU43 http://bit.ly/9vptQH

Tweet by @TAN_Network (TAN News Network) on Friday, Aug 06, 2010 at 05:31:44

(Note: TAN News Network is the English language sister channel of ASTV, the PAD's news outlet)

But there were still questions about the legality of the protests, since we still have a state of emergency ever since the anti-government protests some months ago. On this issue, the first conflicting reports appeared. First it was reported the Center for the Resolution of the Emergency Situation (CRES) has issued that the rally "does not violate the emergency decree". In a way the CRES would legitimize the protester's claim why they don't violate against the state of emergency. Last week, when the same protesters were rallying in front of the Bangkok bureau of UNESCO, many were claiming to "protect the country" so they would not violate the emergency decree.

But then the local police has announced the area around Government House is a no-go area. So, the police disagrees with the army. Well, that's not the first that has ever happened.

Short time later though, ASTV reported that the CRES has done a complete 180 degree turn of its earlier decision and also banned protesters from the site. Later that day, CRES has announced more details on the ruling:

CRES announces Government House 'off limits'; four roads around complex closed from 8pm, violators face two years imprisonment,Bt40,000 fine

Tweet by @MCOTEnglishnews (MCOT English News) on Friday, Aug 06, 2010 at 13:08:52

With the legality dealt there were still confusions on who actually are protesting on Saturday and where to go now since Government House was declared off-limits.

To understand who were are dealing with, it has to be noted that it is not actually the PAD (the yellow shirts) that are leading the latest Preah Vihear protests, but the Thailand Patriot Network (TPN) of Veera Somkwamkid. More on him later, but it can be already said that these two groups are affiliated with each other. Officially, the PAD (especially with Chamlong Srimuang being present all the time) are there just to support this campaign.

The more surprising (or not) was the announcement in the early evening that the PAD would move its protest somewhere else:

Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva on Friday said that yellow shirts have agreed to move their rally from the Government House to Kilawes Stadium in Din Daeng area. The decision to move the rally site came after two-hour-and-a-half meeting between Abhisit and representatives of yellow shirts network.

"Yellow rally to move from Government House to a Din Daeng stadium PM", The Nation, August 2010

The Kilawes Stadium is located in the Thai-Japanese Sports Complex in Din Daeng, a Bangkok district that has been constantly the scene of street riots between protesters and soldiers in the past years. It was also reported that the protest has been 'downgraded' to a 'forum' to 'discuss' about this matter. Later, Bangkok Post reported that TPN also agrees to move.

But then in the evening, things have changed again!

Veera's group - Network of Preah Vihear Protectors - is determined to gather outside the PM's office in Government House today as planned. "We don't acknowledge the deal between the prime minister and the other group," Veera declared on television yesterday. [...]

PAD leaders were initially planning to rally in front of Government House to demand that Abhisit revoke the 2000 memorandum of understanding on boundary demarcation with Cambodia as well as voice their opposition to Preah Vihear's inscription as a World Heritage Site.

The Dharma Army Foundation, led by Chamlong Srimuang, later agreed to gather at the Thai-Japanese Stadium in Din Daeng today to express their views, concerns and visions with respect to Preah Vihear. Abhisit was to join the forum later in the day.

However, Veera refused to compromise and continued calling on people to join his protest.

"Defiant PAD group to go ahead with rally", The Nation, August 7, 2010

Evidently, Veera and his group have deflected from the PAD to stage their on protest at Government House, despite the area being sealed off. This apparent split between him and the PAD goes back on a series of incidents and partly some mudslinging between the two. Last year, Veera has led a group of 4,000 protesters under the PAD banner to the Thai-Cambodian border to protest about this very Preah Vihear issue that ended in riots with locals. The following day, the PAD leaders in Bangkok have denied any connections or endorsement to this group and their actions.

Then, earlier this year in June, Veera and the PAD were reported to have fallen out with each other. Matichon has obtained email exchanges between the PAD leaders with the PAD supporter's group in the US and Veera answering questions to someone. In the first mail, the PAD leaders have responded and denied to accusations made by Veera, an anti-corruption activist and until recently host of his own show on ASTV. The accusations includes being overcharged by ASTV to hold his own show, in which as a consequence Veera pulled it off the air and offered it to For Humankind TV (FMTV), that belongs to the religious buddhist sect Santi Asoke, of which PAD leader Chamlong is a devotee. I will not further go into the details of the two mails, as they go too deep to be relevant to this topic.

Nevertheless, it will be interesting to see how and if at all the security authorities will deal with the two protests, especially the one in front of Government House. If the UNESCO protest of last week is anything to go by, it can be expected that the security forces will be far more lenient to the PAD and their affiliated groups than they were with the red shirts. Let alone the fact that prime minister Abhisit has met with these group for talks (again) shows that the what influence they still have over the government and also one must not forget that the yellow shirt leaders still have not been charged for the seizure of Government House and the Bangkok airports in 2008, as they indictments have been repeatedly postponed just as recently as last week.

We can also expect that both these groups will further push their nationalistic agenda under the pretext of 'protecting' the country. Whether the government will give in to the protesters (in a way they already did) or not, this will further complicates the already tense relations between Thailand and Cambodia.

Nothing Clear On The 'Roadmap to Reconciliation' Yet, Reds Still To Stay

After a day of relative political silence due to coronation day and thus a public holiday on Wednesday, the battle of words broke out again on Thursday as the red shirts as well as the PAD (the yellow shirts) have voiced their doubts or rejection of Abhisit's 'roadmap to reconciliation' offer. Whilethe prime minister was able to get support by his own Democrat Party and also the coalition partners, even the opposition Puea Thai Party, this week, the biggest opponent of the 'roadmap' were of all groups were those that have paved his way to power in the first place. In a press conference, the so-called People's Alliance for Democracy (the yellow shirts) have heavily condemned Abhisit for giving the red shirts "a shameful deal which will spawn the growth of terrorist and anti-monarchy activities nationwide," and he should either stop it or else resign. Even a meeting between Abhisit and PAD representatives hours after these statements has not resolved any doubt.

Prime Minister Abhisit promised the PAD not to grant amnesty to any persons or join hands with the opposition Pheu Thai Party to form a new government after an election, said PAD spokesman Panthep Puapongpan.

The PAD has its own New Politics Party (NPP) but Panthep said they did not discuss party matters with the prime minister (...)

Abhisit explained he would not dissolve Parliament for a new election (...) [and] would not amend the constitution for the benefit of politicians or his own Democrat Party, Panthep said.

Both sides did not reach common ground yesterday because they did not negotiate adjusting their stance but just simply exchanged views, said PAD leader Pipop Thongchai.

(...) Abhisit said after the meeting he needed to clear the way with all concerned parties on the implementation of the road map. He would meet Dr Tul Sittisomwong, leader of multicoloured group today, to exchange views as the group remained in disagreement with the plan to dissolve the Parliament.

"Roadmap still in balance", The Nation, May 7, 2010

As if they were still not impressed, the PAD emphasized again after the meeting with Abhisit that "snap poll might cause a vacuum of power, causing  the civil servants to neglect to prosecute the terrorist suspects and the anti-monarchists" and that the time frame until November is an "insufficient time to restore normalcy ahead of the fresh election." (Source) And as if they did not make themselves clear enough, the PAD has called for martial law to be invoked, so that the army can 'finally' clean up.

Meanwhile in the red camp, the leaders of the UDD are still waiting for more concessions from the government, or "more sincerity" in their words, despite a qualified nod to the 'roadmap'. The main point is when the red shirt protesters are (finally) packing their bags and are going home. The Democrats and Abhisit insist that the reds do that before anything happens, but on Thursday red leader Nattawut was still in a defiant mood.

Red Shirt Co-leader Nuttawut Saikua said Thursday the red shirts would still continue their occupation at the Rajprasong intersection unless Prime Minister Abisit Vejjajiva comes up with a final solution from all parties about the reconciliation. (...)

"Now that the PAD wants to the Prime Minister to step down from his post, we are confused as they have the agenda like ours. So PM should clear with the PAD first and also seek approvals from the coalition parties about the reconciliation first. When all matters are cleared, PM can bring the final solution to us. As for now, we will continue to stay here,'' said Nuttawut.

"Red shirts will continue to rally: Nuttawut", The Nation, May 6, 2010

On Friday things looked a bit different as there was another meeting of the red leaders. One of the them, Kwanchai Praipana, jumped the gun and hinted that Monday would be the last day of the protests. However...

The United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship on Friday reaffirmed its intention to join Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva's road map for reconciliation but stopped short of saying when to end the rally.

Speaking after more than two hours of meeting of core members, Nathawut Saikua said the UDD was firm on its intention to take part in a reconciliation plan initiated either by the government or any other organisations which adhere to seeking a peaceful resolution to the political conflict. However, he said the meeting had not reached a decision when to end the rally, which started from Mar 12.

UDD leaders would on Saturday hold another meeting to mete out its conditions for further talks with the government. The UDD would consider when to end the rally if the government responded positively to the conditions yet to be made and ensure safety for the protesters, Mr Nathawut said. He called for the Centre for the Resolution of the Emergency Situation (CRES) to stop intimidating the protesters.

"UDD says it will join reconciliation road map", Bangkok Post, May 7, 2010

Natthawut said the red shirts would today [Saturday] propose to the government their own version of the road map. One of the conditions is the government lift the emergency law. "If the government agrees, the protest will be over, and we'll walk together [towards reconciliation]," Natthawut said yesterday. Responding to the red-shirt condition, Prime Minister Abhisit said he would not end enforcement of the emergency law until the situation eased and the red-shirt protest was over.

"Road map gets red boost", The Nation, May 8, 2010

One of the other key points of the statement Friday evening is the emphasis that they do not seek amnesty from terrorist and lèse majesté charges. The Department of Special Investigation is on the case and have already charged nine of the red shirt leaders.

If they turn themselves in on May 15 as promised, all nine leaders of the Democratic Alliance against Dictatorship will be immediately charged with terrorism and other crimes, the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) said yesterday. Director general Tharit Phengdit said the nine leaders could be released temporarily on bail or face "confidential measures" prepared by the DSI if they failed to surrender on the date earmarked.

The DAAD [or UDD] leaders' alleged crimes are divided into four categories: terrorism, intimidating officials, assaulting state officials and the public, as well as possessing war weapons. The DSI is only relying on the arrest warrants issued under the Emergency Decree, he added. (...)

"Their charges will only be revoked if they are given lawful amnesty as agreed upon by the government and the Parliament," Tharit said. "The amnesty must stipulate specifically what crimes they will be pardoned for and which crimes would need to be further processed."

Tharit said he was leading a separate DSI investigation into anti-monarchy issues and the probe would begin next week.

"DSI waiting for red-shirt leaders to surrender", The Nation, May 7, 2010

And that is, unusual for Thai crime fighting authorities, the last statement of the DSI we are going to hear from them on this case for some time.

Red Shirt Leaders Accept PM's Offer, But...

Unsurprisingly, the red shirts have accepted Abhisit's offer that will eventually lead to new elections on November 14, but not without a list of their demands to be fulfilled before anything happens.

The United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) has resolved to join Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva's roadmap for reconciliation, Veera Musikhapong said after a meeting of UDD leaders on Tuesday evening.

Mr Veera, the UDD chairman, said all red-shirt leaders made the resolution unanimously because the UDD had long proposed for it. Moreover, the UDD did not want to see more deaths and injuries as a result of the political conflict.

However, the UDD, in entering the reconciliation process, wanted the prime minister to set the timeframe for House dissolution because it is within his power to do so and leave it to the Election Commission to fix the election date.

Moreover, the government must immediately show its sincerity by ending all forms of intimidation against the red shirts, he said.

"UDD accepts PM's reconciliation roadmap", Bangkok Post, May 4, 2010

Other demands include...

(...)

- Red-shirt leaders do not need an amnesty for terrorism and lese majeste charges.

- The government must stop dragging the monarchy into political conflicts.

- The Department of Special Investigation (DSI) must take over all cases involving incidents on April 10, 22 and 28.

(...)

- The government should return basic rights to the citizens such as the freedom of movement, expression and the right to know. (...)

- The DSI should also charge the yellow-shirt group, which had earlier closed Bangkok airports, on counts of terrorism and lese majeste.

- The red-shirt protesters reserve the right to continue their rally in the heart of the capital until Abhisit announces the date for House dissolution.

- The government should reopen all red-shirt media outlets and give the movement freedom of communication.

"Acceptable if...", The Nation, May 5, 2010

They have a fair point that the prime minister can not simply set the date for new elections as he has to dissolve parliament first. Also, as mentioned yesterday, section 108 of the constitution says:

Section 108. (...) The dissolution of the House of Representatives shall be made in the form of a Royal Decree in which the day for a new general election must be fixed for not less than forty-five days but not more than sixty days as from the day the House of Representatives has been dissolved and such election day must be the same throughout the Kingdom. (...)

Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand 2007, Unofficial translation

Assuming that November 14 is supposed to be election day, parliament must be dissolved between September 15 until October 1.

The only eye-catching thing for me was the refusal for an amnesty for the red shirt leaders on terrorist and lease-majesté charges. But on the other hand, the yellow shirts probably would protest heavily if their opponents would get a free pass (like the PAD themselves, as the court case against their leaders for seizing the two airports in 2008 has been countlessly postponed until today).

What's next? We are now, if we do not have yet another sudden twist, entering the definite last phase of these anti-government protests now. One issue that was missing from the red shirts answer last night was when the protesters will leave and give up the Rajaprasong rally site they have been occupying for a month now. Obviously the red leaders wanted more concrete concessions by the government before anyone goes home. It will only be a matter of time when they will disperse and by the looks of it, it will be very soon.

As for Abhisit, the ball is back on his court and it's not only up to him how this will fold out, but also his Democrat Party and the coalition partners. One might wonder why Abhisit has not talked with them before the offer? On Tuesday morning, all people (except for deputy prime minister Suthep and a few Democrat MPs) on his side were stumped, including his mentor and former prime minister Chuan Leekpai who was "not aware" of the PM's plans and opposes them, saying that he shouldn't give in to the red shirts demands and that there are other ways to the solution. Abhisit has now a lot convincing to do during the meetings with his own party and the coalition parties, that at least have partly shown their support for the roadmap (or at least the idea of it).

Also one thing that we will see appearing is who will claim victory. The red shirts will because the government has caved in to the protesters and has partly fulfilled some demands, the government will because a political solution was found with no further bloodshed. Either way, like Abhisit said "not all parties will be satisfied with this proposal," as the (surprise, surprise!) the yellow shirts have already voiced their displeasure.

Further reading:

• Bangkok Post: Reds call for clarity on dissolution date (w/ a possible timeline until Nov 14)
• The Nation: Reds 'welcome' offer (analysis Tulsathit Taptim)
• The Irrawaddy: Sunlight Creeping Through the Bangkok Gloom? (includes quotes by political analysts Frederico Ferrara and Thitinan Pongsudhirak)

Aung San Suu Kyi vs Thai Government, Round 2

Sometimes, real life is stranger than fiction... Just yesterday I wrote about the Thai government's reaction on Aung San Suu Kyi's comments about the current political situation. I was thinking about to end with a joke if she was paid by anybody (preferably by Thaksin, of course) for these comments but I didn't (Bangkok Pundit and S_Narut did though). I thought it was too stupid, even for Thailand.

Well, as I said, sometimes real life is stranger than fiction...

นายประสงค์ นุรักษ์ ส.ว.สรรหา กล่าวถึงกรณีที่ นางอองซาน ซูจี แกนนำฝ่ายค้านในประเทศพม่า กล่าววิพากษ์วิจารณ์รัฐธรรมนูญและรัฐบาลไทย จนทำให้ประเทศไทยเสียหายในสายตานานาชาติว่า คนที่กำลังจะจมน้ำตายแต่เหตุใดกลับมาเอะอะโวยวายสอนให้คนอื่นว่ายน้ำ

"ผมจึงรู้สึกผิดหวังมาก เพราะนางอองซาน ซูจีน่าจะเข้าใจประเทศไทยดีกว่านี้ จึงขอให้หาทางตรวจสอบ (...) ว่า [นางอองซาน ซูจี] มีการรับเงินสนับสนุนจากบุคคลใดบ้าง"

Appointed senator Prasong Nurak has commented on the remarks of Myanmar's opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi, who criticized the Thai constitution and the government, saying it [her remarks] damages Thailand's image internationally, "Why do you want to teach the other how swim, when he is currently drowning?"

"I'm disappointed because Ms Aung San Suu Kyi should know better about Thailand. That's why I would like to find a way to investigate (...) if [she] has received any donation money by whom."

"ส.ว.ฉุน"ซูจี"วิจารณ์ไทยทำเสียหายสายตาชาวโลก จี้ตรวจสอบเส้นทางการเงินรับสนับสนุนจากใคร", Matichon, April 26, 2010

Just to give you some context, Prachatai has some background on this appointed senator.

นายประสงค์ เป็นคน จ.ชุมพร เป็นแกนนำพันธมิตรประชาชนเพื่อประชาธิปไตยรัฐไอโอวา รัฐแคนซัส และรัฐอิลลินอยส์ ชุมนุมขับไล่ พ.ต.ท.ทักษิณ ชินวัตร ในปี 2549 (...)

โดยในระหว่างที่นายประสงค์ดำรงตำแหน่ง ได้ร่วมเคลื่อนไหวกับกลุ่ม 40 ส.ว. และพันธมิตรฯ ในการชุมนุมปี 51 โดยตลอด เช่นหลังจากพันธมิตรฯ สามารถยึดทำเนียบรัฐบาลได้แล้วในวันที่ 26 ส.ค. 51 [ต่อมา] ในวันที่ 28 ส.ค. นายประสงค์ได้ติดตาม (...) เดินทางมาให้กำลังใจผู้ชุมนุมพันธมิตรฯ โดยมีผู้ชุมนุมขอจับมือให้กำลังใจ ขอลายเซ็น และถ่ายรูปกับคณะ ส.ว.กลุ่มนี้ตลอดทาง

Mr Prasong, originating from Chumporn province, is a leader of the People's Alliance for Democracy of Iowa, Kansas and Illinois, protesting to chase out Thaksin Shinawatra in 2006 (...)

When in office, Mr Prasong was involved in a group of 40 senators and the PAD during the protests in 2008 after the PAD successfully seized Government House on August 26, 2008. [After that] on August 28, 2008 Mr Prasong came to [the rally site with the 39 other senators] to show support for the PAD protesters by shaking hands, giving autographs and taking pictures with the senators.

"ส.ว.สรรหาไม่พอใจ "ออง ซาน ซูจี" ทำให้ไทยเสียหายระดับโลก จี้ตรวจสอบเส้นทางการเงิน", Prachatai, April 26, 2010

Just to make this clear, he is an appointed senator who profited from the new 2007 constitution drafted by the military and thus proving Suu Kyi's point in the first place. Needless to say, he is an open PAD supporter!

But then again, this argument seems to be too logic for some if a certain fugitive former prime minister can be somehow framed in an international anti-Thai conspiracy...

h/t to S_Narut for the links on both stories

A Thai History of Violence About to Repeat Itself?

"The level of hate in Thailand" (picture courtesy of Mark MacKinnon)

The Economist has yet another article about Thailand that might caused the magazine not to appear on the newsstands there. While there was one topic that certainly was the main reason for the non-distrubuting, the other one is worth discussing in my opinion. Key excerpts:

Can further bloodshed be averted? Two factors suggest not. First, in Thailand violence is more embedded than most care to admit. (...)

The violence first. The shootings on April 10th, in which five soldiers and 18 protesters died, raised the spectre of previous military slaughters of innocents, which also happened in 1973, 1976 and 1992. True, the army has shown restraint this time. It first applied modern crowd-control techniques—water cannon, tear gas, rubber bullets. But the crowds refused to disperse. Worse, the army was caught after dark in civilian-filled streets, which smart commanders know to be a recipe for disaster. Soldiers fired into the crowds, in self-defence (they said) against armed “terrorists”. Then they fled for their lives, abandoning a column of armoured personnel carriers. Humiliated, junior officers want revenge.

Violence is not a military monopoly. Thailand can be a vicious place. Crime and vigilante justice are rampant, hitmen are cheap, militias abound and a Muslim insurgency rumbles on in the south. Under Mr Thaksin, extrajudicial squads killed thousands of suspected drug-pushers and other criminals.

From the start, the red shirts have had a thuggish element. Most reds are disciplined, conscious that a good image counts for much. But a minority has long carried sticks and knives and lobbed petrol bombs. (...)

Both army and protesters, then, have their grievances. And now, after months away, the yellow shirts are back. These are the pro-establishment People’s Alliance for Democracy (PAD) whose own minority of black-clad guards once used guns and explosives against the police and which stockpiled golf clubs as weapons—nicely reflecting the group’s milieu. On April 18th leaders of the PAD called for martial law and gave the government a week to end the protests or, they said, they would order their own people back on to the streets. All this amounts to one big reason to believe peace will have to wait.

"Banyan: Bloody shirts in the city of angels", The Economist, April 22, 2010

There is an ever-present potential of violence since the beginning of the protests and with recent developments showing no sign of easing off tensions at both sides, the possibility of a 'civil war' (especially when the yellow shirts are coming back) is being thrown around. Seven days after the PAD has urged the government to wipe off the red shirts out of Bangkok, the protests are still there. It is yet to be seen if the yellow shirts will up the ante against the red shirts now.

But how likely is it? Patrick Winn examines:

According to analysts, it’s unlikely.

Many academics define civil wars as conflicts that tally at least 1,000 deaths per year and witness the weaker force inflicting at least 5 percent of all fatalities.

The probability of such a large-scale conflict remains “quite remote,” said Federico Ferrara, a National University of Singapore political science professor and author of "Thailand Unhinged: Unraveling the Myth of Thai-Style Democracy."

“The two sides are very unlikely to engage in open warfare with one another,” Ferrara said.

Still, future stand-offs between Red Shirts and troops, rival demonstrators or both could very well serve as flash points for more bloodshed, he said. “Given the firepower and strength of the two sides, the conflict definitely has the potential to create mass casualties.”

The current Thai preoccupation with civil war is more than hysteria, said Kevin Hewison, director of the Carolina Asia Center at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. The civil war threat, he said, has been invoked by the government itself, which has warned that Red Shirts are pursuing a potentially violent overhaul of Thai institutions.

Bitterness is compounded by the insults such as “buffaloes” [see picture above] and pro-government columnists’ insistence that rural voters are uneducated and easily swayed by corrupt politicians.

“For the Red Shirts who fall into this category, this is a terrible rejection of their world and their lives,” Hewison said. This class rage is further stoked by protest leaders’ stage rhetoric, which frequently derides the prime minister and his allies as “murderers and tyrants.”

"Is Thailand headed for civil war?", Global Post, April 25, 2010

Winn then goes on tackling the issue of the 'watermelon soldiers' (as discussed here) and concludes that even though the country will not spiral into civil war but an ugly "urban-rural divide and sporadically violent demonstrations."

The arrogance of many middle-class citizens of Bangkok certainly was there before and is one of the main reasons of the whole political conflict, the ruling establishment has simply neglected much of the rest of the country. All essential decisions are made in Bangkok and now the rest of the country wants to take at least a piece of the power back to themselves.

Some recent incidents outside of Bangkok, most noticeably the seizing of an army train by red shirts in Khon Kaen, indicate that the political conflict may spread out in the countryside and the government now has not only has a frontline in the South, but in the Northeast as well.

Shameless Self-Plug: Al Jazeera's Listening Post on Media Coverage of Thai Protests

This is not going to help ending my continuous praise for Al Jazeera English's regular and good coverage on Thailand and the current protests in particular. The channel's media magazine Listening Post examines the media's role in the anti-government protests and how both sides are battling each other on the airwaves and online. Also, yours truly makes an appearance on the Global Village Voices segment where I give my opinion about the media coverage of the protests, beginning at the 8:15 minute mark - followed by Chiranuch Premchaiporn, webmaster of the embattled news site Prachatai.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pIqkTX_FKDU&playnext_from=TL&videos=WLUBzJqT_jI&w=600&h=360]

:)

Further Reading:

• Christian Science Monitor: Biased TV stations intensify divides in Thailand protests

BREAKING: Deadly Blasts Rock Face Off Between Pro-Government Protesters, Red Shirts At Silom

UPDATE 3 (19.50 h CEST):

Police have released the five suspects in the five bombings at Silom intersection on Thursday night.

One of the suspects, Jaturon Noppakit, 36, was a red-shirt supporter of the anti-government United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD).

Mr Jaturon said he was travelling from Wongwian Yai to join the red-shirt protesters in Silom but insisted he was not involved with the bomb attacks.

The other four were supporters of the multi-coloured group who opposed the red-shirt's movement. They had digital cameras and video cameras containing footages of the soldiers working at Silom intersection.

"Police release 5 supsects in Silom blasts", Bangkok Post, April 22, 2010

UPDATE 2 (19.30 h CEST):

A series of grenade blasts that hit Bangkok's business district on Thursday killed at least three people, Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban told reporters. He also said the government had no plan to crack down on anti-government protesters in the area, because women and children are among them.

"Bangkok grenade blasts kill 3, deputy PM says", Reuters, April 22, 2010

Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban said in a national television broadcast at 11.30pm that the grenades were fired from behind the monument of King Rama IV, at the entrance of Lumpini Park, where the red-shirts were gathering. "They were fired from the red-shirts' side," he said.

He told the pro-government group, who called themselves the Love Silom group, to retreat.

(...)After the explosions, the two rival groups clashed again about 10.45pm near the Dusit Hotel. Both sides were seen hurling bottles at each other. Security forces reportedly had a difficult time controlling the area, according to television reports.

"3 killed, scores injured in Silom attacks", Bangkok Post, April 22, 2010

UPDATE 1 (19.00 h CEST): Reuters now reports three dead.

Shortly after the blasts occurred an angry mob is reported to have attempted to storm the red shirts barricade, but have been stopped by a line of police, which then was attacked, too.

---------------------------Original post---------------------------

A series of grenade blasts that rocked Bangkok's business district on Friday killed at least one person and wounded 75, hospitals and the Thai media said.

Five M-79 grenades hit an area packed with heavily armed troops and studded with banks, office towers and hotels. Four of the wounded had serious injuries, including two foreigners, according to witnesses, hospital officials and an army spokesman.

"Bangkok blasts kill one, injure 75 - Thai media", Reuters, April 22, 2010

This was the third night after the red shirt protestors have barricaded the intersection with bamboo fences, closing a road leading to the rally site. There have been standoffs between police, red shirts and pro-governments "no colors" protestors (while it is possible that man of them are yellow shirts in disguise) in the last few days at that very same spot. See Richard Barrow's map for detailed location.

Gregoire Glachant has video of the aftermath after the first blast. You can see one injured foreigner (probably Australian), also it shows a hole in the roof of the BTS Skytrain station.

Yellow Shirts Threaten to Take Matters Into Their Own Hands

The "Peoples' Alliance for Democracy" (PAD), also known as the yellow shirts, has given the government a seven-day-ultimatum to crack down on the red shirts or else they would take matters into their own hands. The yellow shirts have been mostly quiet during the anti-government protests of the red shirts, apart from a few statements. But now it seems that they have enough standing at the sidelines and watching the situation between the government and the red shirts go nowhere.

According to an article by AFP, the threat sounds like this:

"In seven days we hope that the government will deal with the terrorists from Thaksin immediately, otherwise we will show our voice to protect the country and the royal family," said Parnthep Pourpongpan, a spokesman for the Yellow group formally known as the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD).

The Yellows are calling on the Reds "to value their own lives by not making any untrue statements saying that the government killed the people," Parnthep told AFP.

"The Red Shirts should save their lives by stopping the rally," he said, adding that the PAD's actions would be "according to the constitution".

"Thai govt given ultimatum by 'Yellow Shirt' allies", AFP, April 18, 2010

So what does "according to the constitution" mean? I cannot possibly imagine that the encounter between the two fractions would remain peaceful - it never has been peaceful!

Another PAD quote:

PAD leader Chamlong Srimuang said: "Be prepared for a big and long rally. We will not disperse if the nation and the [royal] institution are still in danger.

"Decide for yourself if you will join the fight. And I am sure if the government cannot do anything in seven days, it will be our biggest rally ever."

"Return of the yellow shirts", Bangkok Post, April 19, 2010

Thanong Khanthong (yes, that guy!) fears the worst facing the possible outcome.

If the Yellow Shirts do actually come out, we'll witness a Civil War. In that event, Thais from all colours will come out to kill each other because by that time they can't differentiate who are their friends or foes.

The Yellow Shirts' warning comes at a critical timing. They have watched the crisis situation develop to upheavals, with a breakdown of law and order and with a Killing War Zone at Khok Wua Intersection. The Abhisit government is getting weaker by the days as the military and police machines no longer function. (...)

Based on these factors, I expect that the Abhisit government must find a way to work with the security forces to take on the Red Shirts. This would also pre-empt the Yellow Shirts from coming out to confront the Red Shirts face to face, which would result in a full-scale Civil War.

"Its the turn of the Yellow Shirts", by Thanong Khanthong, Nation Blogs April 18, 2010

So according to Thanong, there'll be violence either way whether the government cracks down or the yellow shirts will counter protest? That would be a real quagmire!

The yellow shirts' announcement coincides with anti-red shirts protests in Bangkok throughout the weekend. Reuters has this video report.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6Smram2bA4&playnext_from=TL&videos=jCzNuj_IpTU&w=600&h=360]Video by Reuters via YouTube.

As a side note, there also has been a mini scandal involving The Nation and a picture where the crowed number has been allegedly multiplied with the help of photoshop. Even though The Nation insists the picture is untouched, looking at the provided hi-res version still leave me unconvinced.

Gloves Are Off Once Again As Police Failed to Arrest Red Shirt Leader, Military Takes Over Operation

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HV7PrHi_oMU&w=600&h=360]Video by Asian Correspondent via YouTube After a few days of pause during the Songkran holidays, the gloves are off again between the red shirts and the security forces.

We used to the Thai police for being not the most effective force in the world and today's 'skillful' display of 'determination' would have been even better executed by Carey Mahoney's squad.

The Nation thankfully already has written about the Schadenfreude inducing events of today.

Arisman Pongruangrong and other red-shirt leaders on a wanted list could not be apprehended when they were in full public view in the middle of the city, so what convinced Thai police that they could catch them by storming a hotel that once belonged to Thaksin Shinawatra? (...)

Not to mention that two senior officers were taken by the red mob from the hotel to the Rajprasong rally site to "guarantee" the escapees' safe return. How come what was supposed to be a pre-dawn sting operation ended with Arisman staging the escape just before 10am and mobs accompanying all the police targets back to Rajprasong at noon? (...)

The operation reportedly started at 3am, with stake-out forces stationing themselves near the hotel's entrances and exits, with a few disguising themselves as guests. Problem was, nobody knew for sure which rooms the targets - Arisman, Suporn Attawong, Payap Panket and Jeng Dokjik - were staying in. The four reportedly arrived at the hotel at around 4am.

Then around 6am another group of officers, purportedly working for an assistant police chief, arrived. One of them then committed a grave blunder by asking the hotel reception for house keys that could open all suspicious rooms.

That apparently did it. Phone calls must have been made by certain staff members and within minutes red shirts living nearby were gathering at the hotel. By the time the two groups of officers became aware of each other's presence, the hotel was crawling with red shirts. (...)

The police called their superiors and requested commando reinforcements. Through all these hectic developments, the hotel staff managed to buy time and kept the house keys away from the now restless, and pretty much clueless, officers.

When the policemen finally got hold of the keys, Arisman was already playing a Mission Impossible hero, albeit with some difficulty due to his weight. His face was white and he appeared disoriented once he dropped himself to safety, into numerous red hands waiting to grab him on the ground.

"An embarrassing fiasco for govt", The Nation, April 16, 2010

Arisman Pongruengrong, a former singer turned activist, is one of the more radical persons inside the red shirt movement and is also believed to have stirred up the emotions at the storm onto the parliament, which then triggered the state of emergency.

It didn't take long after the botched arrest attempt for the red shirts to take offense in this and soon after that Arisman appeared on stage and more or less declared open season on prime minister Abhisit.

Speaking of Abhisit, he has made his first public appearance after days of suspicious absence and his response to the embarrassment was somehow unprecedented.

Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva, speaking in a special television broadcast on all stations, said Gen. Anupong Paochinda would take charge of the peacekeeping force meant to prevent violence by red-shirted protesters who are seeking to topple his government.

"A decision has been made to make the command line more effective and swifter," Abhisit said. "Therefore I have made an order to change the person in charge to Anupong, the army commander."

Anupong's appointment sends a signal that Abhisit is willing to raise the stakes in his standoff with the tens of thousands of mostly rural protesters camping in the Thai capital by letting the army take direct charge of security. Thai media have reported widely that junior commanders are itching to move against the protesters.

"Thai army chief takes charge of restoring order", by Associated Press, April 16, 2010

Bangkok Pundit has more quotes and also analyses what this move could mean for the next few days.