As much as preparing for a depression may suck, at least we don't have to prepare for a potential civil war as well :eek:
Actually, we aren't thinking about that prospect of civil war any longer.
Most Thais are willing to give the new Abhisit government a chance to prove that it can lead the country out of the current economic mess.
Personally, I'm not hopeful and I've been calling the government as a puppet of the military/elitists/burearucrats that installed the government.
The red shirts are going to have their rallies to keep the pressure on, but it is not a sign of popular uprising in my opinion.
If you are a follower of Thailand events, the country is getting a pretty ugly bad black eye in international press on the jailing of that terribly unfortunate Australian guy, Harry Nicolaides, for self publishing his book that sold about 10copies and got three years in jail for a little blurb in the book that was deemed offensive to the palace.
The worst thing is the Abhisit public whitewash of the murder of 500 or so Burmese seaboat people. This is the Reuters article and it makes me sick to my stomach.
These are my two issues. I want to go protest for those unfairly imprisoned on lese majeste charges and I have always been sympathic to the Burmese since that time the Thai police raided my Baptist church during the church service.
xRTR> ANALYSIS-Boat people tragedy exposes Thai PM's debt to army
By Ed Cropley
BANGKOK, Jan 25 (Reuters) - In his one month in office, Thai
Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva has made much of the need for
human rights and the rule of law at the heart of government.
Yet even as the Oxford-educated Democrat Party leader was
first articulating such noble ideals, a shadowy wing of his armed
forces was allegedly towing 992 Rohingya boat people from Myanmar
out to sea and abandoning them in rickety, engineless vessels.
Accounts from survivors who washed up in Indonesia and on
India's Andaman Islands suggest 550 are now dead. The men, all
Muslims, also reported beatings and ill-treatment, including four
men thrown overboard with their hands tied.
Unsurprisingly -- and true to form whenever abuse allegations
surface -- Thailand's military has denied any wrongdoing.
But the incident refuses to die down, and is casting a harsh
light on Abhisit's commitment to human rights and the extent of
the debt he owes the army for its role in bringing him to power
after the 2006 coup against Thaksin Shinawatra. [ID:nBKK133696]
Abhisit promised a thorough investigation, but simultaneously
issued a blanket denial of abuse on behalf of the military. His
deputy, Suthep Thaugsuban, even suggested the entire episode was
cooked up to besmirch the country's image.
"We are not going to see the Abhisit government going after
the military because it was instrumental in his assumption of
office," said Thitinan Pongsudhirak, a political scientist at
Bangkok's Chulalongkorn University.
"The military has substantial leverage. The Democrats have
made a Faustian pact that Abhsit has to live with. That's why he
has been wishy-washy on the Rohingya mistreatment," he said.
LITTLE FALLOUT FOR THAILAND'S OBAMA
In the short-term, political fallout for Abhisit is likely to
be limited, with much of the domestic media portraying the
incident as legitimate defence of the borders against potential
"Muslim terrorists" in the insurgency-plagued far south.
Similarly, defending foreign Muslims has never gone down well
with Thailand's nationalist and overwhelmingly Buddhist voters,
and Abhisit's star is riding high after the turbulence of 2008,
with some commentators even comparing him to Barack Obama.
Yet the episode, and his knee-jerk shielding of the army, has
echoes in Thailand's recent history and makes him look ominously
like his nemesis Thaksin, condemned as a serial rights abuser
during much of his time in office.
After 80 Muslim demonstrators suffocated to death in the back
of army trucks in the southern village of Tak Bai in 2004,
Thaksin refused to reprimand the army, and even suggested the men
died due to weakness caused by Ramadan fasting.
At the time, analysts explained his comments as an attempt to
appease generals even then showing signs of the dissent that
would lead to a coup two years later.
In Abhisit's case, it looks to many analysts more like
repaying a favour.
Besides the coup, the army consistently undermined Abhisit's
two elected, pro-Thaksin predecessors, disobeying two states of
emergency and orders to remove anti-Thaksin protesters occupying
Government House and Bangkok's two main airports.
Army chief Anupong Paochinda also went on a prime-time news
show to tell Somchai Wongsawat, Thaksin's brother-in-law, to step
down as prime minister -- a move described as an attempted "coup
by television".
"The extent of military influence with the current government
is not clear but Abhisit certainly owes his commanders big
favours," Thailand expert Andrew Walker of Australian National
University wrote in the Sydney Morning Herald.
DEATH SQUAD LINK
There are other links between the Rohingya episode and the
recent past that suggest any serious investigation, let alone
prosecution, of anybody in the armed forces is unlikely.
The colonel at the heart of the Rohingya allegations, Manat
Kongpan, was found by a court to be directly responsible for the
deaths of around 30 Muslim men holed up in a mosque after clashes
with soldiers in the south in 2004.
No action was taken against him, and this week Manat told a
parliamentary committee he gave the Rohingyas food and helped
them on their way -- a version of events totally at odds with
survivor testimonies.
He also admitted to being part of the army's Internal
Security Operations Command, a Cold War anti-communist unit
revived by the military government installed after the 2006 coup.
Human rights groups fear no prime minister, even one without
army baggage, will be able to tackle such an entrenched part of
the security apparatus.
"By law he ought to have had criminal charges pending against
him but instead he is at the forefront of the new government's
response to an international crisis," one member of the Asian
Human Rights Commission wrote under the pen-name Awzar Thi.
(Editing by Alex Richardson)
((
[email protected]; Reuters Messaging:
[email protected]; +66 2 648 9722))
Keywords: THAILAND REFUGEES/ End.
Besides that, the Economist is banned (or chose not to send the latest weekly magazine to Thailand this week) again.
In my opinion, the Economist is the best news magazine around.
xRTR> Economist blocked in Thailand over royalty story
By Ed Cropley
BANGKOK, Jan 26 (Reuters) - This week's edition of the
Economist has not been distributed in Thailand because of local
objections to an article about the royal family, the second
disruption in two months, the magazine said.
"This week our distributors in Thailand have decided not to
deliver The Economist in light of our coverage relating to the
Thai monarchy," it said in an email to Bangkok-based subscribers.
Last month, the magazine published a critical analysis of the
reign of King Bhumibol Adulyadej and questioned the official
neutrality of the palace in the political maelstrom that has
engulfed the country for the last three years.
The magazine did not send that edition to its Bangkok
distributors out of consideration of lese majeste laws that make
any spoken or published insult or threat to the monarchy
punishable by up to 15 years in prison.
The edition published on Friday focused on the case of an
Australian author sentenced to three years' jail last week for
comments in a 2005 novel that were interpreted as a smear to the
Crown Prince. Only seven copies of the novel were ever sold.
[ID:nSP279363]
The article also reported a growing openness among Thais to
discussion of the role of the monarchy in public life due to last
year's turbulence, in particular the occupation of Bangkok's
airports and Government House by a royalist protest group.
Hitherto, the subject had been limited to whispered, private
talk among friends. But Queen Sirikit's attendance at the funeral
of a protester killed in clashes with police in October sparked
an unprecedented flurry of online comment.
"Repressive laws may not be enough to stop a tidal wave of
straight talk," the article said.
Many of Thailand's 65 million people regard the king as a
semi-divine and beneficent "Father of the Nation" who, during his
six decades on the throne, has intervened occasionally but
decisively in politics after bloodshed on the streets.
However, critics have questioned why a country that proclaims
such devotion to its monarch needs such strong laws to protect
his image.
Justice Minister Pirapan Salirathavibhaga, part of the
Democrat Party-led government that came to power last month, has
vowed to toughen the laws yet further and crack down on all
anti-royal commentary online.
Despite the de facto ban, the Economist article was still
available to read on the Internet via a Thai server.
(Editing by Darren Schuettler and Bill Tarrant)
((
[email protected]; Reuters Messaging:
[email protected]; +66 2 648 9722))
Keywords: THAILAND POLITICS/MAGAZINE
End. [/IMG]