Role of Army in New Thai Government

The Thai Army chief's statement about the military's feeling has led to an understanding and sympathy for everything it has done for the nation, religion, the Monarchy and the people. It has devoted to working for public interest over its own and yet has been subject to criticisms over its tasks that involved politics since they have affected the wrangle between rival political parties. The top military leader, therefore, has had to come out to comfort his subordinates.
Decentralizing Power
The Armed Forces will have to get back to their work anyhow as they are so obliged by the Constitution. As they are seen as a main condition for the survival of the government, politicians do not trust them and have to try to rein in their power. Therefore, they have to check and balance structures of command and personnel of the Armed Forces so as to decentralize the power from the old clique of officers in charge, especially the Burapha Phayak faction which has been enjoying its dominance during the past three years.
The post of defense minister is the first mechanism that the political branch will use to counter the power of incumbent military commanders. Although the minister cannot play a significant role in preventing and prewarning a coup, he as access to high-level information from the Defense Council's meetings on the reshuffle of military top brass in key commanding posts.
Preventing Political Intervention
Despite speculations that the Phuea Thai Party is planning vengeance on certain Armed Forces commanders and kick them out of power, it will not be easy to do so. Existing mechanisms on reshuffling senior military officers at the level of general are designed to prevent political intervention. However, if the political branch manages to put its people to the top posts of the Armed Forces during a routine shake-up, they can later vote to bring in their men in future reshuffles.
It is common for Army Commander-in-Chief General Prayut Chan-ocha to spell out his stand on that the new defense minister must be versed with military affairs, including the Thai-Cambodia border conflict and the unrest situation in the southern border provinces besides being acceptable to the Armed Forces. This is like the military's recommendation to the new government for its selection of the defense minister.
It might look like the military has no choice but give in to conditions set by ousted Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra. It seems to have nothing to bargain as Thaksin's sister Yingluck Shinawatra is becoming the country's first woman prime minister after the Phuea Thai Party won a landslide victory in the recent election and is also enjoying support from other coalition parties. But opening the door for the political branch to have a say in the nomination of the defense minister could also be seen as collusion to allow the person backed by the Armed Forces to take the defense minister post so that incumbent military top brass will remain in power.
Many military figures who have slipped out of the power circle are hoping to make use of the political situation to make a comeback as they know that the political branch's need for a power balance with the Armed Forces will challenge the power hierarchy laid down by the dominant military clique.
Trading and Bargaining With Military
The military leaders' move on the new defense minister is interesting in the way that it reflects the political branch's awkward attempt to tie its dealing with the Armed Forces to national reconciliation. As a matter of fact, it is all about trading and bargaining with the military. The political branch has an advantage in terms of righteousness, image and public support while the Armed Forces will only be subject to attacks once they express their views. They are at disadvantage as they are seen by the society as having to stay out of politics since they are government officials.
Game of Politicians
Anyway, a move by the military still holds some significance as it can be used as deterrence t o politicians prone to tyrannous governing. But it has to stop and step back to an appropriate distance once the point is made.
The political branch can exploit this to slip its people in as defense minister and Armed Forces commanders. But if the military becomes the first to initiate bargaining, it will ruin its own image in addition to playing into the game of politicians who could exploit the situation for even greater bargaining.

Thaksin Gauges International, Domestic Resentment

Former Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra has kept a low profile after the Phuea Thai Party won the general election to avoid creating any barrier on Yinglak Shinawatra's path toward the prime minister post and the formation of the Phuea Thai-led coalition government. Nevertheless, Thaksin could not avoid causing troubles to his sister and her government.
Lately, Ms Yinglak and the government, particularly Foreign Minister Suraphong Towichakchaikun who is facing questions from the public about his qualification and the reasons he was nominated to this position, have to handle a hot potato right after assuming their offices. It is related to Thaksin's request to travel to Japan. The Japanese Government has allowed Thaksin to enter Japan and also announced that the Thai government has asked the Japanese Government to give permission to Thaksin's entry.
Thai Government's Stance
Recently, Yinglak said that the Japanese Government has asked Suraphong about the Thai Government's stance on Thaksin's entry into Japan. She said Suraphong has informed the Japanese Government that the Thai Government had no policy to prohibit his entry. The Japanese Government could freely decide to or not to allow Thaksin's entry.
It was unveiled later that Thaksin has requested for a visa to enter Japan after receiving an invitation from a private company there. The Japanese Government was reluctant to intervene. It does not want to spoil its ties with the Yinglak administration as well. They then consulted the Thai Foreign Ministry. Suraphong consequently replied that it had no policy to prohibit Thaksin from entering Japan. Eventually, the Japanese Government has granted Thaksin the permission to enter Japan.
Nevertheless, Yinglak government was consequently questioned by the public why the government did not ask the Japanese Government to bar Thaksin, who is a fugitive, from entering its country. Instead, it has given a green light to the Japanese government to allow his entry. People also questioned why the Thai Government did not ask its Japanese counterpart to extradite Thaksin back to Thailand.
This case is, therefore, a hot potato for the Yinglak government from its first day in office. We believe that Thaksin will continue to trouble the Yinglak government as long as Thaksin is still a fugitive.
Consequences of Japan’s Visit
Has Thaksin anticipated that his entry into Japan would cause any trouble to his sister's government? Certainly, he must have foreseen that it would become an issue. However, Thaksin still traveled to Japan. He might want to test certain political consequences of his visit.
First, he might want to find out how the international community would respond to the fact that he has led the Phuea Thai Party to win the recent general election and to successfully push for the appointment of his sister as the prime minister on behalf of him.
He opted to try the stance of Japan, which is a powerful country first. It would certainly be the precedence for other countries. Thaksin would then be able to use Japan's decision to pave the way for his convenient entries into other countries.
Certainly, from now on, Thaksin would travel to more important destinations around the world to show the world community that he has already got back his liberty to travel around, as well as implying that he is the one with tru e influence over the Thai government.
Second, Thaksin wanted certain groups in the Thai public to protest against his trips to build up political pressure against his opponents. He is forcing them to make decision whether they wanted him to remain a fugitive after he has already sent out reconciliatory signs. He did not hand any cabinet seat to any red-shirt leader. He has not selected any Class 10 alumna at the Armed Forces Academies Preparatory School to be the defense minister.
He should receive some reconciliatory signs in return, particularly the signs related to legal cases that have been barriers of his normal living.
At the same time, Thaksin needs to assess the level of resentment against him in Thailand.
He might be satisfied with the outcome. Nobody paid attention to his visit to Japan apart from the opposition Democrat Party that has been adamant to bring down the Yinglak administration and Foreign Minister Suraphong, and the media that have done their job of reporting the issue.
Hostile Moves Against Thaksin
It seems several parties that were once Thaksin's opponents have already lower their guards. They might have come up with such reaction due to reconciliatory stance of Thaksin himself or other reasons.
At present, the Democrat Party is the only one that has not stopped its hostile moves against Thaksin and left no room for the development of reconciliatory atmosphere.
In fact, at this moment, the Democrat Party should ignore some issue and take a wait and see position, instead of trying to trigger conflicting sentiment for political purposes.
Has the Democrat Party's defeat in the general election lent any lesson to the party at all? Has it got any idea why the party has lost? Isn't it because the party has concentrated on its fight in political games and political issues that the public has been tired of?

Role of Army in New Thai Government

The Thai Army chief's statement about the military's feeling has led to an understanding and sympathy for everything it has done for the nation, religion, the Monarchy and the people. It has devoted to working for public interest over its own and yet has been subject to criticisms over its tasks that involved politics since they have affected the wrangle between rival political parties. The top military leader, therefore, has had to come out to comfort his subordinates.
Decentralizing Power
The Armed Forces will have to get back to their work anyhow as they are so obliged by the Constitution. As they are seen as a main condition for the survival of the government, politicians do not trust them and have to try to rein in their power. Therefore, they have to check and balance structures of command and personnel of the Armed Forces so as to decentralize the power from the old clique of officers in charge, especially the Burapha Phayak faction which has been enjoying its dominance during the past three years.
The post of defense minister is the first mechanism that the political branch will use to counter the power of incumbent military commanders. Although the minister cannot play a significant role in preventing and prewarning a coup, he as access to high-level information from the Defense Council's meetings on the reshuffle of military top brass in key commanding posts.
Preventing Political Intervention
Despite speculations that the Phuea Thai Party is planning vengeance on certain Armed Forces commanders and kick them out of power, it will not be easy to do so. Existing mechanisms on reshuffling senior military officers at the level of general are designed to prevent political intervention. However, if the political branch manages to put its people to the top posts of the Armed Forces during a routine shake-up, they can later vote to bring in their men in future reshuffles.
It is common for Army Commander-in-Chief General Prayut Chan-ocha to spell out his stand on that the new defense minister must be versed with military affairs, including the Thai-Cambodia border conflict and the unrest situation in the southern border provinces besides being acceptable to the Armed Forces. This is like the military's recommendation to the new government for its selection of the defense minister.
It might look like the military has no choice but give in to conditions set by ousted Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra. It seems to have nothing to bargain as Thaksin's sister Yingluck Shinawatra is becoming the country's first woman prime minister after the Phuea Thai Party won a landslide victory in the recent election and is also enjoying support from other coalition parties. But opening the door for the political branch to have a say in the nomination of the defense minister could also be seen as collusion to allow the person backed by the Armed Forces to take the defense minister post so that incumbent military top brass will remain in power.
Many military figures who have slipped out of the power circle are hoping to make use of the political situation to make a comeback as they know that the political branch's need for a power balance with the Armed Forces will challenge the power hierarchy laid down by the dominant military clique.
Trading and Bargaining With Military
The military leaders' move on the new defense minister is interesting in the way that it reflects the political branch's awkward attempt to tie its dealing with the Armed Forces to national reconciliation. As a matter of fact, it is all about trading and bargaining with the military. The political branch has an advantage in terms of righteousness, image and public support while the Armed Forces will only be subject to attacks once they express their views. They are at disadvantage as they are seen by the society as having to stay out of politics since they are government officials.
Game of Politicians
Anyway, a move by the military still holds some significance as it can be used as deterrence t o politicians prone to tyrannous governing. But it has to stop and step back to an appropriate distance once the point is made.
The political branch can exploit this to slip its people in as defense minister and Armed Forces commanders. But if the military becomes the first to initiate bargaining, it will ruin its own image in addition to playing into the game of politicians who could exploit the situation for even greater bargaining.

Major Challengess for New Thai Prime Minister

Phuea Thai Party core members have shed their tears of joy after their party scored a clear majority victory, winning 265 MPs. But several problems, caused by factors both inside and outside the party, are lying ahead of female prime minister-designate Yinglak Chinnawat.
Several core members of the Phuea Thai realized that it is not easy for the five-party coalition government with 299 MPs to stay in office until it completes the four-year term without facing major obstacles.
War of Political Conflicts
The country is still in the war of political conflicts while major power realignment is taking place in the Thai society. In particular, the results of the election showed that the Phuea Thai won the hearts of many grassroots people in the North and Northeast but it still failed to win support of the middle-class people in the capital.
The Phuea Thai won 265 House seats but failed to seize control of the capital. It was beaten by the Democrat Party in Bangkok at the rate of 10 to 23 MPs. This should serve as a reminder that if Yinglak fails to please the middle-class people by failing to tackle economic woes and by making mistakes in her administration, the city residents could lose faith in her very fast.
To remain popular and remain in office as long as possible, the government must be able to win support from all classes, not only the grassroots. The government must also win support from the middle-class and high-class people and former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra has learned this lesson bitterly.
Tough Time Ahead
Survival of Yinglak and the Phuea Thai-led government will depend on her ability to tackle so many problems, which are waiting for her. The lack of political experience is a major weak point that may cause Yinglak to fail to pilot her government ship to the shore.
Unlike Yinglak, the two previous proxy prime ministers of Thaksin - Samak Sunthorawet and Somchai Wongsawat - had experience in country administration quite a lot.
Late Samak was a veteran politician, who had a lot of experience from several election contests. He also had rhetoric but he eventually succumbed to the pressure from the opponents. His government could last for only nine months before the Constitution Court disqualified him as the prime minister for working as a TV host in a cooking program. Somchai, a brother-in-law of Thaksin, stayed in office as the prime minister for only three months before he faced a legal case for ordering the crackdown on protesters led by the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) on 7 October. Eventually, the Constitution Court dissolved the People Power Party, leading to power realignment that saw the Democrat becoming the government.
It is worth waiting to see whether inexperienced Yinglak will be able to withstand all the pressures. Will her strong points, which are her gender, her humbleness and her willingness to compromise, help her survive?
Major Adversaries
Of course, the condition in this battle for Yinglak has changed a lot. But several characters, who stand on the opposite side from Thaksin, remain unchanged. They include the PAD and the Army, which remain Thaksin's major adversaries until now. A factor that could affect the survival of the Yinglak government is amnesty for Thaksin. Although Yinglak and Thaksin have insisted that no amnesty would be given for a single person, it could be seen that an amnesty would definitely be given eventually. They likely to grant a blanket amnesty for all cases happened after the 19 September 2006 coup. A new constitution-drafting assembly may be assigned to draft a new charter with a provisional clause to grant the amnesty.
And the immediate problem Yinglak will face is to satisfactorily share benefits inside the Phuea Thai. Earlier, Thaksin has used several Phuea Thai and red-shirt leaders to fight for him in the war for power, causing several of them to face legal cases. As a result, after the war has been won, these Phuea Thai and red-shirt leaders hope to receive rewards from the big boss.
Whi le there are several persons waiting for the rewards, the Phuea Thai will have only 27 to 28 Cabinet seats for sharing after giving the others to four coalition partners. Lessons from the past showed that when a major party allocated Cabinet seats, rifts often occurred after all factions could not be satisfied. The People Power was an example, which showed that rifts from Cabinet seat sharing caused it to eventually fall during the Samak term.
But if Thaksin allows red-shirt leaders and Phuea Thai core members, who are facing legal cases, to become Cabinet members, the new Cabinet will lack public trust. The Phuea Thai scored an overwhelming victory partly because the people have high expectation in the Phuea Thai government. As a result, the Phuea Thai must rush to shore up public confidence by making its Cabinet look good. Good and capable persons must be brought into the Cabinet to tackle the economic crisis. The government must also refrain from touching sensitive issues that will bring about criticisms and conflicts in the society.
Another problem waiting for Yinglak is the ties with the Army, which remain volatile. Army Commander-in-Chief General Prayut Chan-ocha stands on the opposite side with Thaksin and Yinglak so if Yinglak rushes to put Army officers loyal to Thaksin to power inside the Army, her government could face severe resistance from the Army.
Another problem waiting for her government is related to the issue of loyalty to the King. Thaksin and Phuea Thai members have been trying to portray themselves as being loyal to the King. Yinglak has announced that she would hold a grand celebration for His Majesty the King to mark his 84th birthday anniversary. Such a grand celebration may prompt certain groups of red-shirt people to become dissatisfied against the Phuea Thai government. The groups earlier attacked the Phum Chai Thai for what they saw as wasting the money for organizing such a grand celebration.
Moreover, the ties between the red-shirt movement and the Phuea Thai could become a time bomb in the future. This is because the United Front of Democracy against Dictatorship still adheres to its ideology to fight against the aristocrats. Their stand could contradict with the future stand of the Phuea Thai. And if the Phuea Thai pushes for a blanket amnesty for all sides, its policy could run against the stand of the red-shirt people.
Implementing Populist Schemes
As a result, it is not easy for Yinglak to run the country as the prime minister amid volatile rifts both inside and outside her party. Worse still, she will be also be required to honor her words to implement several populist schemes, which will require several hundreds of billions of baht.

If her government really implements the populist schemes, the fiscal status of the country could be affected. But if she declines to implement the schemes or implement them only a little, she will be regarded as failing to keep her words.
Other Major Challenges
1. Consequence of Uncertainty Related to Mps Endorsement by the Election Commission (EC): So far, the EC has not yet endorsed up to 95 per cent of MPs so that the House of Representatives could convene its first meeting within 30 days after the election. Yinglak herself and 12 red-shirt leaders, who are Phuea Thai party-list MPs-elect, have not been endorsed either.
2. Election Cases and Complaints Against Coalition MPs: These cases range from vote-buying complaints in constituency-based elections to frauds that may require the Phuea Thai to be dissolved. Moreover, a Phuea Thai candidate, Somkhit Banthaisong, who won most votes in Nong Khai's Constituency 1, has received a yellow card. The Democrat has planned to attack the Phuea Thai when it announces the policy statement to Parliament. The Democrat is expected to hit the Phuea Thai over the yellow card and over allegations that it violated Article 53 of the MPs and Senators Election Act by allegedly telling lies during election campaigns. The Democrat will also attack the Phuea Thai for allowing former prime minister Thaksin Chinnawat, who is under five-year political ban, to interfere in the management of the party.
3. A Direct Hot Potato in Yinglak's Hands: If she becomes the prime minister, her assets declaration to the National Anti-Corruption Commission will be a hot potato for her. Her assets statement will be watched and scrutinized because parts of her assets will be related to the sale of Shin Corp's shares and her stake in the SC Assets firm. Moreover, her testimony to the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Holders of Political Office in the Bt46 billion seizure case against Thaksin may also return to haunt her in the assets declaration.
4. Rhetoric of the Professional Opposition Democrat Party: Democrats are eagerly waiting to test Yinglak's limit in a parliamentary debate. The party is rushing to elect its new executive board before the Yinglak government announces its policy statement in Parliament. The policy debate will become like a censure debate against her by the Democrats.
5. Promise of Bt300 Daily Minimum Wage: The Phuea Thai's promise to increase daily minimum wage for unskilled workers to Bt300 has not been welcomed by the private sector because it will raise the cost of the business sector. It is also in doubt as to whether the Bt300 wage policy could be implemented because the daily minimum wages will have to be approved by the tripartite Wage committee, whose members are representatives of the government, employers and employees. Moreover, the Constitution and the convention of the International Labor Organization require wages to be given equally without discrimination. This means foreign laborers in Thailand will also be entitled to the Bt300 minimum wage.
6. Promise To Guarantee New University Graduates' Salary of Bt15,000 a Month: This policy is opposed to by businessmen because it will increase the manufacturing cost. And the measure to reduce corporate income tax rate from 30 per cent to 23 per cent would not compensate the added cost caused by salary increase. Later on, some Phuea Thai members corrected themselves by saying only university graduates, who have received a special training, would be eligible for the Bt15,000 monthly salary. But the Phuea Thai failed to state this point during the election campaigns. It is also in doubt whether the plan to increase salaries of state employees to Bt15,000 for private firms to follow suit would be successful. Critics fear that this measure would instead add a budget burden on the government.
7. Rice Pledging Scheme: The pledging scheme is seen as having impact on the market mechanism and it is still unclear how to prevent massive corruptions that happened in the past.
8. Promise To Hand Out Free Tablet Computers to Students: There is a question about the budget for buying the co mputers and quality of the computers. Critics also question how to make sure that students will make most of the computers for studies and creativities.
9. Living Cost and Economic Hardship: So far, it is still unclear how Yinglak would tackle the rising prices of consumers' goods although Yinglak talked about this problem repeatedly during her election campaigns.
10. Political Time Bombs: There are several political time bombs including the reconciliation process, political amnesty and efforts to help Thaksin return home. Will these lead to another round of severe rifts in the country?
All of these challenges will come up for the Yinglak government to handle one by one. If she fails to tackle these problems or deal with these issues with satisfactory results, not only her government will have no future but Thais also will see their future dimmed.
Our words will become our master. So, no one should blink while watching Yinglak facing the challenge as Thailand's first woman prime minister.

Possible Formulas of Government Formation After Election in Thailand

In the next 19 days, the results of the general election will dictate the direction of Thai politics. Each political party has adjusted its strategy in the last phase of the run-up to the general election, while poll agencies have released their survey results to incite psychological effect on supporters of each political camp.
Choices of 'partnership formulas' for the government formation have been unveiled to the public to test public sentiment, while some political parties have hinted that they have loosely formed their alliances before making final decision when learning the results of the coming general election.
Key Factor
The key factor is the election results. They will indicate that all political parties will end up in which of the government formation formulas that have been envisioned at the moment. In the first formula, the Phuea Thai Party, could lead the formation of the next government in the case that the party won more than half of the House seats, or more than 250 seats. If the Phuea Thai could win up to 270 seats as it has boasted, there would be no problem in their effort to form a government.
The partnership formula of the Phuea Thai, the Chatphatthana Phuea Phaendin and the Chat Thai Phatthana could be a combination of around 300 House seats. They would be able to form a rather stable government.
However, there is a key condition. The Phuea Thai must win more than half of the House seats. This is not easy for the party even though survey results from several poll agencies have affirmed that that the party was more popular than the Democrat Party in several constituencies. At the same time, key members of the Democrat have insisted that their information showed that the Democrat still enjoyed about the same level of popularity as the Phuea Thai Party.
Other Formula
In the next formula is the partnership between the Phuea Thai, Chatphatthana Phuea Phaendin, other smaller parties and Chatthai Phatthana Party. We might see this formula if the Phuea Thai won the majority of the House seats, but failed to win 250 seats. The Phuea Thai then would have to work hard. Apart from the Chatphatthana Phuea Phaendin Party that is ready to join the Phuea Thai-led coalition, the Phuea Thai would have to secure its ties with as many smaller parties as possible. Those smaller parties are, for example, the Phalang Chon, Matuphum, Kitsangkhom and Rak Santi Party.
If the Phuea Thai could secure its control over 250 House seats, it would have the leverage to attract the Chatthai Phatthana to join its coalition government and help boost the stability of its coalition. Otherwise, the Democrat would get the chance to form the government even though it could win less House seats. We have already seen that in the past the Democrat Party had managed to gather enough votes in the House to form a coalition government amid crisis and to remain in power until the recent House dissolution.The scenario has continued to haunt the Phuea Thai, prompting the party to demand the Democrat Party to promise not to try to form a coalition government at the same time as the Phuea Thai in the case that it won lesser House seats. The Phuea Thai has also recited criticism against the Democrat that is related to the 'invisible hand' or 'the formation of a government in a military barrack.' Another formula that people have kept an eye on is the partnership between the Democrat Party, the Phumchai Thai, the Chatthai Phatthana and the Ruam Chatphatthana Phuea Phaendin Party.
Stable Coalition Government Likely
Certainly, in this formula, the Democrat Party needs to win enough House seats. If it did not win more House seats than the Phuea Thai, the margin between the two parties' House seats must be small. Then, the Democrat would have enough leverage to secure its partnership with other political parties and to form a stable coalition government.
However, if the Democrat Party could win higher House seats than the Phuea Thai and control the majority of seats in the House, it could easily convince its former coalition parties, that are the Phumchai Thai, the Chatthai Phatthana and the Ruam Chatphatthana Phuea Phaendin Party, to join its coalition government, and would not need to partner with smaller parties.
Nevertheless, in this formula, there are problems about medium-sized parties that might want to get cabinet seats of the same ministries that they had got in the previous coalition government. But the Democrat may not agree on such condition. As Aphisit Vejjajiva has said earlier, the Democrat wants to control the Interior and the Commerce Ministry itself. The negotiation in this formula would take quite some time.
Feasible Government Formula
After all, if all major parties failed to win significant portions of House seats as many have anticipated and medium and small-sized parties won enough seats to gain leverage over the direction of the government formation, the formula that the next prime minister could be a reconciliatory or alternative prime minister who is not from the two major parties as Newin Chitchop has mentioned earlier could be another feasible government formula that should not be ignored.
The reconciliatory prime minister formula could comprise the Chatthai Phatthana Party with Major General Sanan Khachonprasat, the party's chief advisor, as the prime minister, the Phumchai Thai Party, the Chatphatthana Phuea Phaendin Party and the Phuea Thai Party.
Certainly, whether or not we would see the reconciliatory prime minister formula depends on the Phuea Thai's decision to sacrifice the prime minister seat. In the case that it is not the only party that win the majority of House seats and it could not let the Democrat Party have a free hand in garnering support from other parties and form a government, it is certainly better for the Phuea Thai to be a ruling party with the majority of House seats while its candidate will not be the prime minister. It is better than allowing the Democrat to become the ruling party again. For this reason, the formula of conciliator or reconciliatory prime minister will certainly not include the Democrat Party. This is because the Democrat Party will only support Aphisit to be the next prime minister.
For the last formula which has been pushed forward by the Chatthai Phatthana, the Democrat Party and the Phuea Thai Party may together form a government. However, due to the total difference in political approaches and ideologies between the two parties, this formula is not feasible from the beginning.
Last, on what formula of the government formation would be used, we would have to first wait for the results of the July 3 election, which will be the most important factor.

Significance of Rallies in Thailand

Coup rumors persisted although Prime Minister Aphisit Vejjajiva sent out a clear message, which known on 11 March as to when the House will be dissolved. The rumors persisted although the event of fund raising by the Democrat Party at the Queen Sirikit National Convention Center was held grandly. The function was held in amicable atmosphere of coalition partners. All leaders of Democrat's partners joined the event.

People's Grievances
This kind of grand event was like an announcement by the Democrat that it has potential to return as the leader of the next coalition government. The message was directed to politicians and groups of funders. All of these messages failed to become a magic, which was powerful enough to quash rumors, bad news and coup smell.

And these messages could not stop groups of people, who are suffering from economic hardship, from coming out to hold demonstrations to demand the government to help them. These groups of people with grievances have been rallying along with various groups of protesters, which have been protesting throughout the past month.

In the latest move on 7 March, about 400 farmers, who belong to the Land Reform Network for Thailand, the Assembly of the Poor, the Network of the People for Social and Political Reform, gathered in front of the Government House to call on Aphisit to help them regarding to the issuance of community land deeds. They also called on the prime minister to open the hydroelectric Pak Mun Dam.

Earlier, about 30 people, who are members of the Federation of Communities in Thailand and the Thai Phophiang (Sufficiency) Party, came to the Government House to ask the prime minister to help them about high-interest non-banking loans. They called for help after they used to file a complaint to the government in early 2009.

Several groups of people came out to air their grievances and called for help from the government while the government and the prime minister were seen as being on the downtrend.

Economic Hardship
The protests have been going on while the people were having economic hardship and facing rising prices of consumers' goods. This situation apparently affected the popularity of Aphisit and his Democrat Party.

However, the rallies and protests by several groups of people under grievances were not new things as they happened during all governments' terms. But what is special for the Aphisit government now is that the rallies by various groups in grievances and the civil sector are happening while the Aphisit government is facing protests from yellow-shirt and red-shirt people, who want to bring down the government due to political conflicts and problems.

This may lead to complicated situation caused by political conflicts and people's grievances. The complications may provide an opportunity for some people to use in their quest for perfect political victory.

Some observers see that the rallies by civic groups to demand the government to tackle the public grievances while the government's term is ending may not pose as the real trouble for the government.

But the current protests by various groups may be only the prelude to the real trouble, which will happen after the no-confidence debate. After the censure showdown, protesters of the civic groups and political groups will step up their demonstrations to pressure the government.

In particular, certain civic groups are waiting for a right moment to join rallies to try to oust the government. These groups may join rallies of both the yellow-shirt and red-shirt people if these civic groups see that Aphisit and his Democrat are severely bruised by the censure debate. The opposition plans to attack the government over palm oil shortage and allegation that someone in the government had interfere in a legal case to help a cigarette importer.

Thai-Cambodian Border Dispute
And the longer the government remains in office, the problem related to Thai-Cambodian border dispute may reach its climax and the situation may prompt the armed forces to decide to use harsh measures against Cambodia. The military may resort to military measures if talks in major venues fail to become successful. Such a situation may provide justification for the People's Alliance for Democracy to attack the government and their campaign for the ouster of the administration may have more weight.

By that time, it is highly possible that all groups of protesters will become stronger, in particular groups that are related to political leaders and the yellow-shirt and red-shirt groups as well as demonstrators, who are close to the Phuea Thai Party, and even demonstrators who are close to certain coalition partners.

Aphisit may not be completely cornered by protests of various groups, whose members were suffering because of the country's administration. The government could not give in to the demands of the groups or else more groups of protesters would come out to demand the government to help them.

In fact, the Democrat and Aphisit could read through the game and realize the relations between politicians and groups of protesters. As a result, no one should be surprised that the prime minister always came up with clearer date for House dissolution when calls and criticisms against his administration grew louder.

Assessment of Situation
This is because the Democrat and Aphisit have assessed the situation and believe that House dissolution and new election will be worthwhile for their "investment". They see that House dissolution can cool down the political heat both inside and outside Parliament and calm down protesters from both political groups and civic groups.

Aphisit definitely realizes that some groups of protesters have special agenda for their campaigns. They are waiting for a right chance to step up pressure on the government when the situation permits them. And some groups of protesters, which have been established by the opposite side, will never be satisfied with the Democrat anyway.So, giving in to conditions of groups of protesters will be futile and will not boost the Democrat's popularity before the election day.

Thailand's Local Election

In the latest Bangkok-district-councilor election, held on 6 June, the Democrat Party has scored a landslide victory over its key rival, the Phuea Thai.

From this election, the Democrat has snatched up to 79 Bangkok-district-councilor seats from 10 electorates. The Phuea Thai, meanwhile, has grasped just 26 seats from three electorates.

Defeat for Phuea Thai
With such results, even the Phuea Thai has to concede its political defeat in this local election. The Phuea Thai, in fact, used to dominate the scene. Before 6 June, Phuea Thai members had served as Bangkok district councilors in up to 10 electorates. The Democrat, back then, had held the Bangkok-district-councilor seats in three electorates only. Today, the tides have clearly changed.

The Democrat Party's victory over the latest local election has received just little news coverage, though. Perhaps, this is because the Bangkok-district-councilor polling is just a local election.
Still, many groups of people have pointed out that the Phuea Thai Party has suffered the defeat in the latest Bangkok-district-councilor election mainly because of the recent red shirts' riot in Bangkok. The red shirts have been active under the United Front of Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) banner. (UDD and Phuea Thai are closely linked).

War Against Red-Shirts Movement
Another key element in the Phuea Thai's defeat is perhaps the Center for the Resolution of the Emergency (CRES) orders that bar the 111 executives of the now-defunct Thai Rak Thai Party and people with close links to the old power bloc from making financial transactions. (Phuea Thai is a reincarnation of the Thai Rak Thai).

Some Phuea Thai key members, who oversee the party's affairs in Bangkok, believe the government's propaganda war against the red-shirt movement has also contributed to the Phuea Thai's failure to fly high at the Bangkok-district-councilor election. During the past few months, the government has communicated a lot with people and such communications have the power to influence Bangkok residents to favor the ruling party's candidates in the Bangkok-district-councilor election.

In fact, when the UDD kicked off their latest rally in mid-March, it expected to campaign for the 'class war'. The UDD leaders successfully mobilized a large number of rural people to the capital and they expected 'the middle class' in Bangkok to jump into the bandwagon. The UDD leaders no longer intended to attract just grass-root people.

Cope With Public Suspicion
However, when the red-shirt rally dragged on, the UDD 'stepped up the pressure' on the government through various techniques. In the end, the red activities against the elites adversely affected the 'normal life' of Bangkok residents in general. To Bangkok people, they felt the 'risks' every time the red shirts paraded around the capital and clashed with security officials. The bloody confrontations took place in many parts of Bangkok, and even in nearby provinces.

The red-shirt rally and the bloody incidents on 10 April, 22 April, and 19 May becomes Bangkok residents' nightmare.

Of course, it remains unclear who have commanded the 'men in black' or the 'unidentified armed unit'. But quite a large number of Bangkok people can't help suspecting the red-shirted leaders and their leaders. Not just the government has to cope with the public suspicion.

The government and the red-shirted leaders are the parties in the conflict. To Bangkok people, both parties have played a role in their 'nightmare'.

Do the results of the Bangkok-district-councilor election foretell what will be coming in the general election? Will the Democrat Party snatch most of Bangkok-MP seats? No one can say anything about this at this point of time. Bangkok voters have a unique mindset. The conditions and factors that have influenced their choices at the polling stations are always clearly different from people in other regions.

Power Bloc
Still, one cannot ignore the fact that the Democrat Party's performance has improved hugely in the Bangkok-district-councilor election. And such result reflects to an extent how Bangkok voters 'feel' about the red-shirted leaders. For the time being, it is quite clear whether Bangkok residents 'embrace' or 'reject' the old power bloc.

But the Bangkok-district-councilor election already passed. The government must now think about how to capitalize on 'its good opportunity'. The government, after all, has just defeated the red-shirted leaders outside the Parliament and has just sailed though the censure debate in the Parliament.

Establishment of New Political Party
The government, particularly the Democrat Party, must think about how to keep its huge popularity among people for a long, long time. At the very least, the Democrat Party must make sure that it remains popular among Bangkok residents when the Bangkok Councilor election is held in August.

If the Democrat candidates can snatch most of the Bangkok-councilor seats in the 50 electorates, the Phuea Thai will face a really tough time. Moreover, the Democrat Party's landslide victory in the Bangkok Councilor election -- if takes place -- looks set to send the chill down the spine of Khunying Sudarat Keyuraphan. Banned from officially engaging in political activities for five years alongside other former executives of the Thai Rak Thai, Sudarat has reportedly been trying to establish a new political party for Bangkok people. If the Democrat Party can score landslide victory in local Bangkok elections time and again, Sudarat will of course have the need to think twice.

After May 2010 Bloodbath, Thai Government Must Dare To Launch a Massive Purge

In the morning of 19 May, several people were surprised to see the soldiers brought out military tanks to destroy the bunker lines, which were erected by the red-shirted mob, in Lumphini, Sala Daeng, Bon Kai areas as well as in other areas.

The ball was in the government's court. It held the upper hand and probably enraged Thaksin Shinawatra even further. No wonder this would trigger another vengeful retaliation from Thaksin.

Game Plan After Incident
However, the government must think hard in proceeding with its game plan after this incident. The government could no longer allow the red-shirted group to call up a protest rally and torch the city every year. In 2009, there were riot in April and this year there is again a riot. If the government fails to deal with this problem definitively, the arson that takes place annually might instead take place every three months.

This issue is Prime Minister Aphisit Vejjajiva's homework. He should continue to reflect on this. However, if he wants only to last his term in office, he could just let the problem end there with the mob dispersal. This is what Aphisit must reflect on carefully. The Democrat Party does not lack the opportunity for election victory. The only hurdle is the north and northeastern voters' undiminished faith in Thaksin. The north and the northeastern zones are the key vote base for election victory. Aphisit must try to find out why the voters in these two zones continue to support Thaksin. Why people refuse to forget Thaksin.

The government holds power in its hands and was able to declare the emergency decree, but failed to exercise its power to the full. This is no good for the country.

Losses and Damage
When the red-shirted mob was dispersed and everyone returned home, the red-shirted leaders were incarcerated pursuant to the prescriptions in the emergency decree. After seven days, the situation has returned to normal. The red-shirted members only wait for a signal from their leaders before coming out in another rally to wreck havoc again. They will later think of how to end the rally when the time comes. If this is the case, Thailand will always suffer losses and damage in a never-ending vicious circle.

Therefore, what the government must do is to solve the problem at the root cause, not at the end as usual. The incidents that took place repeatedly should serve as expensive lessons for the government.

The evidence that shows the wrongdoings of the red-shirted leaders are clear to see -- like Natthawut Saikuea, who delivered speeches to incite the mob to torch the city; Aritsaman Phong-rueang-rong, who announced that the red-shirted mob's opponents should be caught and their blood drawn to wash the red-shirted mob's feet; and particularly Chatuphon Phromphan, Phuea Thai Party list house representative, and apparently the only red-shirted leader who hardly respects the law because he enjoys the immunity as a house representative.

Chatuphon previously moved to remove Foreign Minister Kasit Phirom. He accused Kasit of having been one of the People's Alliance for Democracy's leaders. He claimed that Kasit made inappropriate statements to the foreign media and, therefore, was not suitable to be the foreign minister. However, what Chatuphon is doing today is tantamount to swallowing his own words because Kasit, unlike Chatuphon, never led people to torch the country.

Opportunity To Correct Mistake and Misjudgment
The wrongdoings by these red-shirted leaders should serve as clear evidence for the government and relevant agencies to press charges and fully proceed in due process of the law.
This incident is providing the government with another opportunity to correct its mistake and misjudgment as to what it should do to cope with the situation -- will it allow these people to destroy the country or will it teach these thugs a lesson that will make them respect the law?

If the government continues to fear, as usual, the opposition from the common people, the entire country will have no choice but to bear with it and can only count the day when that the red-shirted group will come out the torch down the entire country.

Tough Time Ahead
Thailand should have seen peace had the two-year sentence against Thaksin Shinawatra been carried out. However, the government has been negligent on carrying out the prosecution. If it continues to allow Thaksin to be at large and fails to catch him -- the criminal who fled from justice, the international criminal -- the government can only expect to solve the problem that he will cause.

The government will only go around in circles in its works and will soon meet a dead-end. It will find no way out of the problems because this convict will become more vehement and violent in his action with the clear target to destroy his own native country.

After May 2010 Bloodbath, Thai Government Must Dare To Launch a Massive Purge

In the morning of 19 May, several people were surprised to see the soldiers brought out military tanks to destroy the bunker lines, which were erected by the red-shirted mob, in Lumphini, Sala Daeng, Bon Kai areas as well as in other areas.
The ball was in the government's court. It held the upper hand and probably enraged Thaksin Shinawatra even further. No wonder this would trigger another vengeful retaliation from Thaksin.
Game Plan After Incident
However, the government must think hard in proceeding with its game plan after this incident. The government could no longer allow the red-shirted group to call up a protest rally and torch the city every year. In 2009, there were riot in April and this year there is again a riot. If the government fails to deal with this problem definitively, the arson that takes place annually might instead take place every three months.
This issue is Prime Minister Aphisit Vejjajiva's homework. He should continue to reflect on this. However, if he wants only to last his term in office, he could just let the problem end there with the mob dispersal. This is what Aphisit must reflect on carefully. The Democrat Party does not lack the opportunity for election victory. The only hurdle is the north and northeastern voters' undiminished faith in Thaksin. The north and the northeastern zones are the key vote base for election victory. Aphisit must try to find out why the voters in these two zones continue to support Thaksin. Why people refuse to forget Thaksin.
The government holds power in its hands and was able to declare the emergency decree, but failed to exercise its power to the full. This is no good for the country.
Losses and Damage
When the red-shirted mob was dispersed and everyone returned home, the red-shirted leaders were incarcerated pursuant to the prescriptions in the emergency decree. After seven days, the situation has returned to normal. The red-shirted members only wait for a signal from their leaders before coming out in another rally to wreck havoc again. They will later think of how to end the rally when the time comes. If this is the case, Thailand will always suffer losses and damage in a never-ending vicious circle.
Therefore, what the government must do is to solve the problem at the root cause, not at the end as usual. The incidents that took place repeatedly should serve as expensive lessons for the government.
The evidence that shows the wrongdoings of the red-shirted leaders are clear to see -- like Natthawut Saikuea, who delivered speeches to incite the mob to torch the city; Aritsaman Phong-rueang-rong, who announced that the red-shirted mob's opponents should be caught and their blood drawn to wash the red-shirted mob's feet; and particularly Chatuphon Phromphan, Phuea Thai Party list house representative, and apparently the only red-shirted leader who hardly respects the law because he enjoys the immunity as a house representative. Chatuphon previously moved to remove Foreign Minister Kasit Phirom. He accused Kasit of having been one of the People's Alliance for Democracy's leaders. He claimed that Kasit made inappropriate statements to the foreign media and, therefore, was not suitable to be the foreign minister. However, what Chatuphon is doing today is tantamount to swallowing his own words because Kasit, unlike Chatuphon, never led people to torch the country.
Opportunity To Correct Mistake and Misjudgment
The wrongdoings by these red-shirted leaders should serve as clear evidence for the government and relevant agencies to press charges and fully proceed in due process of the law.
This incident is providing the government with another opportunity to correct its mistake and misjudgment as to what it should do to cope with the situation -- will it allow these people to destroy the country or will it teach these thugs a lesson that will make them respect the law?
If the government continues to fear, as usual, the opposition from the common people, the entire country will have no choice but to bear with it and can only count the day when that the red-shirted group will come out the torch down the entire country.
Tough Time Ahead
Thailand should have seen peace had the two-year sentence against Thaksin Shinawatra been carried out। However, the government has been negligent on carrying out the prosecution. If it continues to allow Thaksin to be at large and fails to catch him -- the criminal who fled from justice, the international criminal -- the government can only expect to solve the problem that he will cause. The government will only go around in circles in its works and will soon meet a dead-end. It will find no way out of the problems because this convict will become more vehement and violent in his action with the clear target to destroy his own native country.

Thai Prime Minister Announces National Reconciliation Plan

The road map for national reconciliation that Prime Minister Aphisit Vejjajiva presented during a television broadcast in the night of 2 May has been viewed by many people as an effort to come up with a 'quick political answer.' For those observers, he appears to be trying to complete the reconciliation plan within a period of time and it is obvious an agreement was reached earlier.

Aphisit's political answer has obtained mixed reactions -- both positive and negative. Some people view it as a 'win-Win' solution to the political problem that provides 'an exit' for both sides of the feud. Some people say Aphisit is taking 'too much risk' in making the move. This could be his quick solution to the problem, without taking into account possible negative consequences. Most of his proposed five points for reconciliation are not new; he already talked about them since he became the prime minister.

Real Mastermind
The story behind that happened is not a talk between representatives of Aphisit and the red shirt leaders who are only 'a proxy.' It is a talk with someone outside of the country who is the real 'mastermind'.

So, the talk had to be done in a very secret manner, through no more than two people who are close to Aphisit -- and even Chuan Likphai did not know about it. Thaksin Shinawatra was represented by two or three people in the 'politburo'. The negotiation went on for a considerable period of time.

The representatives from both sides regularly reported the progress of the negotiation to their respective bosses. The conclusion of the talk was that the government would move up House dissolution and a new election in the next five to six months. Before the next election, there will be constitutional amendment in a way the current coalition parties want. After the election, all sides must accept the election result and whichever party gets the most House seats will form the next government, which may be a coalition government. Later, there must be attempts to seek amnesty for political offences that took place after 19 September 2006.

Justice Process
Thaksin promised to wash his hands off politics and said he was ready to enter the justice process. He reserved his right to appeal the court ruling in his asset seizure case.

Both Thaksin and the government have arrived at a dead end and they cannot make any further moves। For Thaksin and the UDD (United Front of Democracy against Dictatorship), the longer their rally, the less the legitimacy they have. The majority of the country does not support their rally because it has caused damage to the country estimated at several billions of baht.

Moreover, the government appears to be serious about use of force in dispersing the protest. It seems the 'politburo' provided Thaksin with analysis and report, with advice that going further will bring more harm than good for them. Although Thaksin has invested almost a billion of baht in this protest, he eventually has to admit the fact that he is unable to achieve his goal, now. So, it is good for him to accept the offer now and to make up for his failure later.

Aphisit has been under heavy pressure from society. Bangkok residents, particularly the people of multi-colored shirts, want the government to enforce the law strictly and swiftly. The longer he waits the more pressure he gets. There is also pressure from certain superpower countries that want to see both sides sitting down for a talk. So, Aphisit needs to find a fast exit urgently before he has no choices left other than using military force to disperse the protest.

Aphisit regards his offer as the 'lowest threshold' he could yield to Thaksin and the UDD. And he would not step back any further. If Thaksin and the UDD do not agree to it, the government will go ahead with the dispersal plan. The reconciliation offer is proposed as 'an exit' or 'a way to climb down' for Thaksin and the UDD, and this is their last chance.

Disadvantage for Coalition Parties
The tentative election date of 14 November, has been proposed. If Thaksin does not agree to it, the government will go ahead taking action against the UDD. Some people may view that the proposed date will put the Democrat and other coalition parties at a disadvantage. But on the contrary, the coalition parties have no fear about it. It is because the Phuea Thai Party still has an image of being connected to the UDD and the armed men in black, which may put them in a disadvantage. It is not easy to shake off that image and their perceived connection with the hooligans. Moreover, people still remember the behavior of Phuea Thai MPs who went onto the UDD stage and made improper remarks about the monarchy.

Aphisit is well-aware about the concern of his supporters who are worried that the government may offer amnesty to UDD leaders who committed offences and are wanted by police with arrest warrants. To allay that concern, Aphisit stressed that definitely there will be no amnesty to those who committed 'criminal offences'. He said the government would adhere to the rule of law and the legal principle in running the country. But Aphisit did not say whether there would be amnesty for political offences.

Tough Time Ahead
Nevertheless, members of the general public are looking to see how serious the government will be about the acts through the Red media in contempt of the monarchy.

Initial reactions to the road map are generally positive. And if Aphisit insists there will be no amnesty for criminal offenders and there will be serious action against people who are undermining the country's highest institution, the general public will be able to accept this road map.

Red-Shirted Movement Challenges Thai Government

Political conflicts over the past four years have prompted the society to learn and see that the root of the conflicts is not only about former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra or about different levels of intelligence and accesses to information as claimed by some people. The actual root of the problem is "the disparity" in the society.

Prime Minister Aphisit Vejjajiva has told the media "The disparity problem is a fact that has been in Thai society for a long time. We shouldn't raise this issue to be the condition for stirring up hatred in the society. During the Thaksin government, the proportion of debt per households among Thais has increased more than one fold. Thaksin's wealth also increased more than one fold. This is also a kind of disparity."

Social Disparity Through Class System
Red-shirted leaders have been trying to explain social disparity through class system, "amataya-commoners." It could be concluded that the "amataya system" is "the cultural structure of power that lends power to a group of people that are the minority in the society without going through a democratic process which is an election. However, the group can exercise their power by intervening politics and public administration system without being accountable to the public. And they are not held responsible to the exercising of their authority politically or legally."

Amataya's power has been sometime dubbed "non-constitutional power." However, its meaning according to the norm is "influence." It is a kind of power in the conventional cultural structure of power, which accepts the existence of some "special power." The society believes that such power is the representative of morality, or the power of morality.

Blocking Democratic Consolidation
Although Thailand's administration system has been changed to democracy almost 80 years ago, some are still ''yearning for" the power of morality. The trace of nostalgia has been clearly reflected during the early phase of the "New Politics" proposal. It was proposed "If the government were corrupt of disloyal to the monarchy, the military may stage a coup d'etat. The monarch, on the capacity of the supreme commander of Thai armed forces, may freely appoint armed force commanders without waiting for the nomination by the prime minister."

The amataya system is hinged on the special power. In fact, there are two perspectives on the amataya system. One group views that the system is a unique attribute with historical value related to national development. At present, the system is still worthful because it could balance the power of corrupt politicians. (For example, it has helped get rid of a corrupt government.) However, another group says such special power is the root of problems that block democracy consolidation and cause social disparity.

This is because 1. Amataya power is not hinged on people power because amataya or elite bureaucrats are not elected; 2. amataya has intervened politics and public administration system. As a result, the power has undermined the importance of election because the government elected by the people has been dominated or regulated by another power. The government then may not implement policies according to the wills of the people. Amataya power could even overwrite the importance of election because the power has staged a coup to topple the government elected by the people.

This kind of disparity is the root of inequality problem in the "one man = one vote" system. It causes the minority to have "privilege" over the allocation of power and social and political interests beyond the majority in the society. It leads to law issuance and law enforcement with "double standards." The law that is contradicted to the equality of human beings and that violates the freedom of expression or other rights have been issued. And the law has been unequally enforced against people from different classes or different groups.

For this reason, "amataya" is viewed as a "privilege class." For "commoners", they are people in the class that has been exploited by privilege people or has been branded by the latter as being stupid, poor, sick and being used as corrupt politicians' tools. The latter thought they were not free people who understand "democracy" and they are not capable of exercising the rights to govern themselves with free judgment. Therefore, "commoners" should not have the rights to fully govern themselves. The power should be centralized for unity and security of the state.

However, the picture of disparity reflected through the "amataya-commoners" discourse is merely the reflection of disparity in only one direction. There are several more other directions of disparity. An example that could be easily seen is the disparity in educational opportunities. Farmers, papaya salad sellers, motorbike, taxi drivers or daily wage earners in general cannot or have any bargaining power to ask any educational institution to admit their children without going through the official admission system. At the same time, the number of "students admitted through special channels" from civil servants and generals might not be as high as the number of "students admitted through special channels" from business people, local politicians and national politicians who often have long lists of students that they have to place in various educational institutions.

Problems Between Conflicting Parties
University lecturers also have privilege over university officials, security guards and cleaners. Thaksin and retired generals that became Phuea Thai Party members, politicians, business people, and academics in Phuea Thai Party and in the red shirted movement, or those supporting the red shirted movement also have life styles and economic and social statuses that are different from those of exploited "commoners" in red shirted rallies, most of whom are from northeastern and northern provinces.

Generally speaking, there are several directions of disparity in the society. But even though political conflicts right now have made disparity more visible for us, the debating issues and negotiation conditions that could end conflicts still focus on individuals or conflicting parties.

Each party still talks about General Prem-Thaksin-Aphisit, or government– red-shirted people, amataya-commoners or yellow-shirted-red shirted. As a result, the negotiation to compromise or to save faces of certain individual or party has gained priority over a talk to find solution together to end social disparity problems.

Demand of Situation
Hence, the attempt to prolong conflicts is rather about ''winning or losing" a political game. If the parliament were not dissolved, no one could see a way out of the conflicts. If the parliament were dissolved, we might see the changing hands of power. But we might not see a way to solve "structural problems" that would concretely reduce disparity in different directions.

If we all insisted that ongoing political conflicts have developed to the point that people are clearly aware of disparity problems beyond problems of an individual or problems between conflicting parties, a question that should be raised during the negotiation between red shirted people and the government is how the decision to dissolve or not to dissolve the parliament could be a condition leading to the attempt to solve social disparity.

Each party should talk about the solution of disparity problem, which has been the root cause of conflicts. They should show the public their suggestions on how to solve disparity problems, to drive the society to move forward.

Otherwise, the attempt to end social disparity should be a key issue that political parties, civic groups or people in all sectors should campaign during the next canvassing campaigns or during the design of constitution or political reform in the future.

Red-Shirted Rally Unlikely To Oust Thai Government

The red-shirted group scheduled a big rally on 14 March in Bangkok, the capital of Thailand, saying there would be hundreds of thousand protesters. I believe that the group will be able to gather that many protesters, but I do not think that it will be able to oust the government.

Meanwhile, the red-shirted group can hardly back down at this stage. If it fails to stage the demonstration, it will lose its credit in the long run. The government will not back down either. It invokes the Internal Security Act. It uses the media to stir up antagonism against the red-shirted group, wages a psychological warfare, and spreading rumors that the red-shirted would resort to violence. Its continuous mudslinging campaign is annoying.

Antibureaucratic Polity
The situation hangs precariously in the balance, no one knows how it will turn out and today no one can deter its development. I cannot say that I am neutral because I am antibureaucratic polity (antiestablishment) and I reject any illegitimate government, but I do diverge from the red-shirted group in certain issues. For days, I have wanted to write my comment on the current situation, but I had a mental block.

Today, I want to say that the red-shirted move this time is very risky. It might be suppressed and devastatingly defeated. Its objective to achieve "full democracy" for Thailand seems unachievable and a long struggle seems to lie ahead.

It would be unfair to tell the red-shirted group not to do anything and suffer the harassment and blatant injustice. It must be admitted that the red-shirted group has its democratic right to its "expression of sentiment" in the same vein as the middle class people from the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD).

Be that as it may, what will this rally bring about? This is a worrying issue. My friend who is a PAD member (in the progressive wing of the civil sector, not the bureaucratic elites' hangers-on) told me by the telephone of his (or her) concern for the protesters. He did not want to see a bloodbath. He heard that the northern people (Police Lieutenant Colonel Thaksin's stronghold) raised fund for the trip to Bangkok, although contributions. He said that they seemed to be truly angry and hot-headed, and they would come in their hordes.

What one can hardly trust is the state machinery, bureaucratic elites, and some red-shirted members, including Thaksin Shinawatra. The bureaucratic elites are atrociously barbaric and used to say that four of five deaths in a mob of one hundred thousand mean nothing. However, the stake is higher for the precious Aphisit Vejjajiva administration. It must also win on the political front. It must find a pretext to justify the use of force, like it did during the Songkran [Thai New Year] incident in 2009, otherwise it might have to dissolve the House, or might even trigger a coup, and its hand would be stained with blood for nothing.

Question of House Dissolution
What does the red-shirted group want from the demonstration? It calls for House dissolution, while some members might hope to trigger a coup, which will speed up their movement to topple the bureaucratic polity, but to trigger a coup, violence must take place.

If the red-shirted group is seen as divided into two factions, it will be clear that the faction that fights for democracy does not need violence since it sees this rally as a part of a long struggle with many battles ahead, while no one knows what the Thaksin associates and cronies think. No one knows their hidden agenda. Therefore, it is of grave concern. If I were Thaksin, I would certainly want to risk an all-out war.

Democratic Perspective
If one looks at the situation from the perspective of a democracy advocate, one must admit that there is no light at the end of the tunnel, yet for the political conflict in Thailand. No complete victory for one camp or the other is possible. To be defeated in this round of fight would only constitute a tactical defeat.

Suppose the red-shirted is defeated, it might stagger and falter for a while before it will return for another round of fight in the same move as it is about to do now after its defeat during Songkran in 2009. Suppose the red-shirted group is able to bring about House dissolution and fresh general elections and the Phuea Thai Party wins a majority and forms the government, it will fail to govern because it will be hurdled by the PAD, the military, the judiciary and the independent agencies.

The cronies and politicians in Thaksin's camp might think that winning in this way is better than being defeated, but a democracy advocate views that one must not trade people's lives for political victory.

Thai Government To Survive Red-Shirted Coming Onslaught

The period 16 February to 26 February, the date set for the court to give its verdict on the case regarding the seizure of the 78-billion-baht frozen assets of Police Lieutenant Colonel Thaksin Shinawatra and his family, is the 10 days of danger. In related developments, four major incidents which were seen as the signs of real "danger" for the Aphisit Wetchachiwa government happened during the past weekend. The prime minister's motorcade was disrupted by ill-intention motorists twice on the Yommarat expressway ramp. An M79 grenade was fired into the Rajamangala University's Phra Nakhon campus. Three pounds of C-4 explosive was discovered near the Supreme Court's Division for Political Post Holders where the assets seizure case will be decided.

Attacking Government Security System
Security agencies have assessed the situation that the threat to the government's security is classified as the "red code," which is the highest level and there are four groups who are suspected of being involved in the M79 grenade attack and the planting of the C-4 explosive as follows:
1. A government-supported group who was assigned to create a violent situation to "justify" the imposition of the Internal Security Act or martial law to control the anti-government protesters in Bangkok and surrounding areas.
2. A certain military group who wants to stage a "coup d'etat" to seize the power from the government. This is because a violent situation will lead to the seizure of power by military force and setting up of an interim government.
3. The red-shirted group which has been broken apart into small uncontrollable factions. Among them there are those who believe in the use of "violence" and are skillful in using weapons. These people want to show off their prowess and potential to the government.
4. A group who wants to create a chaos to preempt the court's decision of the assets seizure case.

Unrest Situation
However, the security agencies have assumed that the incidents which can lead to an unrest situation will solely be triggered by the antigovernment elements. This includes the rallies of the red-clad protesters in 38 provinces, activities of the opposition MPs under the support of Thaksin, and the coming no-confidence House debate by the Phuea Thai Party. Amid the coup rumors, activities and big rallies of the red-shirted group are designed to give support to the Phuea Thai Party and members of the Thai Rak Thai House No 111 (banned politicians of the now defunct Thai Rak Thai Party). Particularly, the red-clad protesters will hold big rallies during the no-confidence debate against the government. They also plan to lead the masses to surround the "Parliament."
At the same time, the red-shirted group upcountry will launch their people's revolutionary (Red-in-the-Whole-Land) strategy by staging rallies to surround the city halls and important government offices in the provinces. Meanwhile, the rallies in Bangkok will be held at Sanam Luang grounds, along Ratchadamnoen Avenue, the Equestrian Plaza, and around Government House.

Tough Time Ahead
However, authorities have anticipated that the number of participants of the rallies should not exceed 60,000. The number of the protesters will be the highest only on the first day of the rallies and decline after that just like when it happened during the "Songkran bloodshed" in the capital in mid-April 2009. Cautions must be taken against any attempts among the red-shirted groups to "create a situation" leading to more violence.
The security agencies are still of the opinion that financial support is the main factor that determines the success of the red-shirted groups' attempts to trigger violence, number of rally participants, and how long the rallies will last.
After all, they still firmly believe that the government, security agencies, and armed forces are capable of coping with the situation as long as the government of Aphisit and the military stand together side by side and the silent-power groups of students and majority of the people in Bangkok do not joint the red-shirt movement. It will probably be difficult to topple the Aphisit government solely by red-shirt people from the provinces!

Thaksin’s Assets Seizure Case

The Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Holders of Political Positions will hand down the verdict on the seizure of Police Lieutenant Colonel Thaksin Chinnawat's 76 billion baht assets plus interest on Friday, 26 February 2010.
Several people will keep an eye on the day which is the day of an important political changing point, whether or not the verdict will be in favor of Pol Lt Col Thaksin Chinnawat. It is believed that before the verdict day, political situation inside and outside the parliament will be increasingly intensified. The intensity will reach its peak after the judge panel in this assets seizure case finishes reading the verdict in the evening of that day. The judge in charge of preparing the verdict is Somsak Netmai.
For this reason, right now the government and armed force leaders have closely analysed political situation and prepared to handle political activities before or after 26 February 2010. For example, Thaworn Senniam, the deputy interior minister, has announced that the government is ready to handle mass rallies by red shirted people. He only hopes the mass rally to be carried out under the framework of the law. However, if the situation was to turn violent, the government might have to invoke the security act in a bid to be prepared for the situation.

Clarification on Progress
At the same time, looking at the moves by red-shirted people, the leaders and MPs of Phuea Thai Party have tried not to talk about the Supreme Court's verdict reading on 26 February 2010 that how the verdict would affect the red shirted people and Phuea Thai Party's political moves, ranging from the no-confidence debate to the red shirted people's mass rallies. They only talked about places that the red shirted people will hold rallies. For example, they will hold a rally at Khao Soidao Resort in Chanthaburi Province on 23 January 2010. They will gather in front of the Justice Ministry to demand the clarification on the progress of the petition for the royal pardon for Pol Lt Col Thaksin that they have submitted.
The reason that the red shirted people and the Phuea Thai Party have not shown their clear stance about the no-confidence debate and the mass rally might be that they did not want to be viewed that they were planning their moves for political effect on the asset seizure case, both before and after the verdict was read. It is a political strategy that is understandable.
However, what many people are watching is that before the Supreme Court reads the verdict on the assets seizure case, political pressure related to the voting by nine members on the judge panel is expected. The pressure could be in the form of the release of information that could confuse the public about the working process of the Supreme Court in this case. For example, a rumor might be released among people in politics that the judges have already made decision on the verdict in advance. Or, there might be rumors on lobbying attempts, which are all inappropriate. And there might be an attempt to forecast the court's verdict that is to be handed down despite the fact that members of the judge panel have not yet voted on the verdict.

Judicial Process
In this kind of attempts to discredit the judicial process, relevant people intend to discredit judges' working process and also to create political pressure on this case.
However, the public could be ensured that they could trust the court's ruling. This is because the ruling is a result of a working process which has been carried out neutrally and fairly according to the law and facts. The working process has not been politicized. The court has not treated the defendant with double standard as certain group of people has tried to mislead the public.
The verdict is a result of the hearing of relevant facts from all facets, from all witnesses of the plaintiff, which is the public prosecutor, and witnesses of the defendant, which is Pol Lt Col Thaksin; witnesses summoned by the court, and documents that are evidence in this case. For this reason, it is believed people who try to pressure the court in this asset seizure case would not be able to do what they want.

Tackling Signature Campaign for Royal Pardon in Thailand

Again, the Democrat-led government is on the defensive. Ministers from the main ruling party have indeed just started educating people about what red-shirt folks, Phuea Thai Party and former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra have been trying to do.

Their latest move surrounds a campaign to gather people's signatures for a petition that will seek a royal pardon for the fugitive Thaksin. The Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Holders of Political Positions has convicted Thaksin of corruption in the Ratchadaphisek-land deal case.

Criticism of Signature Campaign
The Democrat-led government is clearly on the defensive because so many groups and organizations have long come out to criticize the signature campaign. They have also expressed concerns that such petition campaign is clearly against the normal procedures for seeking royal clemency and it has interfered with His Majesty's royal power.

Many critics have loudly lamented that the signature campaign will only inflict greater divide in Thai society. Moreover, they believe that the red-shirt leaders and their mastermind want to use this signature campaign to incite Thaksin's supporters once more. Perhaps, the red-shirt folks will use the lack of progress in the petition process as a ground to begin a fresh round of political rallies.

Various organizations, academics, legal experts and political parties especially the Phum Chai Thai have shared these concerns.

Key Government Figures
So far, key government figures had kept silent. Prime Minister Aphisit Wetchachiwa, Suthep Thueaksuban, the Deputy Prime Minister overseeing security affairs, and PM's Office Minister Sathit Wongnongtoei, who oversees media, had acted as if nothing happened.

It is true that the government will not be able to bar people from signing the petition. People have the right to make their own decision and to join any signature campaign, if they want. Anyway, the government is expected to explain to people about the procedures involved. The government should have told people that the Criminal Code does not allow anyone other than Thaksin or his close relatives to submit a petition for royal pardon. By law, gathering one million signatures will not help Thaksin particularly if he has yet to start serving his term. He has never been jailed. If he is not in jail, the process to seek royal pardon can never legally start. Thaksin's brother-in-law Somchai Wongsawat and two of Thaksin's younger sisters, Yinglak and Yaowaret Shinawatra, have already announced that they will not sign the petition. They insist that they are not involved in this campaign. Given this, the government should in fact inform people of whether they should join this signature campaign.

About this campaign, the government has indeed been so slow to react. Only after the red-shirt folks are about to conclude their campaign, the government has started some moves.

The belated moves also come after so many respected figures like Privy Councilor General Phichit Kunlawanit, senators and civic-organization leaders have already directly expressed concerns that the signature campaign will divide people in the society even further and that it will interfere with His Majesty's royal power.

Government’s Approach
Finally, the Democrat-led government has just started to do what it should have long done. Now, the government is preparing to use the state-owned TV station, Channel 11, to educate people about the right process to seek a royal pardon. On July 30, the government also instructed all heads of government units to make locals in their areas understand about how a royal petition can be sought under laws.

Anyway, at this juncture, many people can't help questioning why the government was so slow in reacting to such challenge. When will the government start working proactively? Will the government stop working like passive bureaucrats? With much publicity about the signature campaign to save Thaksin, the government should have realized long ago what it should do. At this juncture, the government is thus questioned as to why it is so slow about all political matters.

The signature campaign to seek royal pardon is a big issue. As the country's oldest political party, the Democrat is expected to take active role in defending the monarchy and educating people about what the right procedure to seek royal clemency is. Instead, it's the months-old political party like Phum Chai Thai that has spearheaded a nationwide campaign against the red-shirt folks' signature-gathering move. Indeed, the government figures from the Democrat are expected to be more alert and active in resolving the country's political divide.

Preventing Political Moves
The Democrat-led government should have learnt a lesson from its failure to prevent the Songkran bloodshed. Due to its wrong assessment of the red-shirt rallies that dragged on between March and early April, the situation then spiraled out of control over Songkran holidays. After such a lesson, the government should make a thorough analysis of all political moves so as to prevent them from causing many other adverse impacts.

At present, the government is rather late in reacting to the signature campaign by the red-shirt folks and Thaksin. Complaints from many people thus grow loud. Anyway, it is good that the government has now acted. Acting rather late is still better than doing nothing at all.