Phuea Thai Party With Two-Face Politics

The second political machine has started and is working to its full capacity after the first political machine or the United Front of Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) had completely failed in its operation to stage riots in the capital to seize power. (For the operation to stage riots or civil war, the UDD was the No 1 machine.)

That is, the Phuea Thai Party is the political machine in Parliament of former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra. It has started working by holding a censure debate against six Cabinet members, including the prime minister.

Not Reaching Goal
However, the goal of the censure debate was not seeking to topple the government in Parliament because it was impossible to reach that goal. But the Phuea Thai wanted at least three consequences from the debate.

First, it wanted to use the censure debate, which was broadcast live nationwide, to defend the UDD and its big-boss, Thaksin, against allegations that the UDD had committed acts of terrorism and had burned the city.

Fight Against Government
At the same time, the Phuea Thai wanted to use the censure debate to cheer the red-shirted people around the country up and to instigate them to go on fighting against the government.

The Phuea Thai assigned party-list MP Chatuphon Phromphan, who is a UDD leader, to debate about the crackdowns on protesters on 19 May. This clearly showed that the censure debate was aimed at allowing Chatuphon to whitewash himself and the UDD.

Second, the Phuea Thai (and the UDD) wanted to use the censure debate to raise an allegation against the government (and the military) inside Parliament and to point out that the government had the people's blood on its hands by killing the people. The Phuea Thai wanted to show that the government itself staged the arson attacks to create a situation and that the government did not want to have reconciliation with the red-shirt people at all.

Allegations Against Government
The Phuea Thai wanted to use these allegations to hold the government and security forces responsible for the violence so that the UDD would not be blamed for what happened.

Moreover, the use of the censure debate to raise the allegations against the government would more or less reduce the credibility of the government's efforts to give explanations to the people and foreign envoys and media.

Because of the censure debate, the government would have to try harder to defend itself and would be endlessly under the UDD's allegations. At the same time, the UDD would have more breathing space following severe charges raised against it by the government. Before the censure debate, the UDD was in a bad situation after the public had witnessed what it did on 19 May and earlier.

Third, the Phuea Thai wanted to use the censure debate to instigate resentment of red-shirt people nationwide by using the 19 May event as the main cause. The Phuea Thai hoped that resentment would lead to an underground war after the censure showdown could not topple the government inside Parliament and could not force the government to apologize to the public and show responsibility for what it has done.

UDD leaders earlier talked about an underground war. They said if the red-shirt demonstration was dispersed, an underground war would happen. Later on, Thaksin used this term when he gave interviews to foreign media after the UDD gave up and ended the Ratchaprasong rally.

As a result, the censure debate by the Phuea Thai was the sequential to the red-shirt rally. The Phuea Thai received the baton passed on by the UDD. The party simply shifted the battlefield from the Ratchaprasong Intersection to the Parliament. And the censure debate remained an attempt to push for political changes undemocratically like what the UDD attempted to.

Creating Underground War
Now, the UDD is clearly aiming at creating an underground war in the cities and rural areas after their attempt to seize power in the capital had failed.

The Phuea Thai now performed its duty in line with parliamentary way by holding the censure debate just to use a democratic form or gesture to join a (civil) political war which already started.

Before the violence happened on 19 May or after the UDD started its mass rally at the Phan Fa bridge on 12 March, the Phuea Thai declined to perform its parliamentary duty at all.

The Phuea Thai declined to perform its duty as a political party and Phuea Thai MPs declined to perform the duty of MPs. They did not carry out the strategy of launching separate attacks with the red-shirt people as they should have done. Earlier, they declined to hold a censure debate by using causes of the UDD, such as double standards, social inequality and the issue of elitist polity's influence, to attack the government.

Providing Financial Support
The Phuea Thai failed to carry out its duty but it supported the non-parliamentary politics of the UDD by mobilizing their constituents to join the rallies as well as providing items needed for the rallies. Some Phuea Thai MPs even provided financial support for the rallies. Moreover, several Phuea Thai MPs joined the rallies by speaking on the stage.

As a result, the Phuea Thai could not deny its responsibility over the loss of lives during the violence. In addition to the UDD, the government, the military, the terrorists and Thaksin, the Phuea Thai must also be held responsible.