Thai Culture Minister’s anti-religious-tattoo-on-foreigners-gate redux

Originally published at Siam Voices on June 3, 2011 Yesterday's post on the Thai Ministry of Culture's declaration of intent to stop foreign tourists from getting religious tattoos has created quite a buzz around the net. No wonder, since this is a) a story affecting a lot of tourists, and b) quite honestly yet another stupid idea by the self-proclaimed heralds of everything 'Thai-ness'. So much so that this story took a life of its own beginning from not giving enough details to going completely hyperbole as these two snippets from the international media show:

BANGKOK (AFP) – Thailand has ordered a crackdown on foreign tourists having religious images tattooed on their bodies while visiting the kingdom, official media said on Wednesday.

"Thailand cracks down on religious tattoos", AFP, June 1, 2011

Thailand ordered a crackdown on the "alarming trend" of foreign tourists having religious images tattooed on their bodies while in the country, the Phuket Gazette reported Wednesday.

"Thailand Orders Crackdown on Religious Tattoos", Fox News, June 1, 2011

Reading from these two excerpts gives the impression that everybody who already has a tattoo will be stripped-searched at the airport and barred from entering the country if there's a Buddha or Jesus tattoo, which is clearly not the case (just imagine the outcry!). But where did this mistake come from? One possible source could be the Phuket Gazette:

The Culture Ministry has attacked the growing trend for tourists in Phuket and other parts of Thailand to have religious images tattooed on their bodies. It has ordered provincial governors across the country, including Phuket, to crack down on such tattoos, igniting a debate on the human rights implications of forbidding the practice.

"Crackdown ordered on religious tattoos in Phuket", Phuket Gazette, June 1, 2011

Wow, let's not get too much ahead of ourselves! I have to admit that the headline of my own article might have been misleading as well depending how you read it, although I think it rather indicates the intention to crack down on tourists from getting tats.

Nevertheless, amidst the apparent flood of bad PR from anywhere, Culture Minister Nipit Intarasombat has now backtracked his own verbosity:

However, at an interview with Pattaya Daily News reporter, Minister Nipit denied making any statements against tourists with religious tattoos.

Minister Nipit clarified that tourists with religious tattoos will not be prohibited from entering Thailand. The warning is directed at those tattoo shops that allow etching sacred images onto tourists’ bodies especially on the lower body parts such as ankles, Minister Nipit said.

Minister Nipit said it was a misunderstanding by foreign media that Thailand would do a body check on tourists while visiting the kingdom.

"Tattooed Tourists Welcomed In Thailand, Culture Minister Says", Phuket Daily News, June 2, 2011

So, case closed and let's move on, right? Not quite! Let's go back to the original Thai quotes he said during the announcement earlier this week that got this brouhaha started in the first place:

"ที่ประชุมมีมติให้แจ้งผู้ว่าราชการจังหวัดทั่วประเทศ โดยเฉพาะจังหวัดท่องเที่ยว ให้เข้มงวดตรวจสอบสถานประกอบการสัก โดยห้ามไม่ให้บริการสักรูปสิ่งศักดิ์สิทธิ์ของทุกศาสนาบนร่างกาย (...) ขอความร่วมมือไม่ให้นำภาพทางศาสนามาให้บริการสักแก่ชาวต่างชาติ (...)" รมว.วธ.กล่าว

"We have come to the conclusion in our meeting that all the governors, especially those in tourist areas, should inspect tattoo parlors and ask them not to use sacred motives of all religions on the bodies (...) and seek cooperation of the parlors not to tattoo sacred motives on foreigners [at all]" said the culture minister.

นายนิพิฏฐ์กล่าวอีกว่า (...) ต้องช่วยกันควบคุมไม่ให้นำรูปที่คนเคารพในทุกศาสนามาสักบนร่างกาย แม้กระทั่งสักบนศีรษะ ใบหน้า หรือขาก็ไม่ควร หากมีพฤติกรรมที่ไม่ดี เช่น ไปนั่งกินเหล้า ทะเลาะวิวาท ภาพนั้นก็จะติดบุคคลนั้นไปด้วย

Mr Nipit further states (...) everybody should support the non-use of sacred motives of all religions for tattoos on bodies, whether it is on the head, the face or the legs; it is inappropriate. If there's is bad behavior, for example alcohol consumption or loud quarrels, this will also stick with the bearer.

"(...) ผมจะนำเสนอต่อที่ประชุมคณะกรรมการวัฒนธรรมแห่งชาติ เพื่อขอความเห็นชอบในการออกกฎหมายในการนำสัญลักษณ์ทางศาสนามาใช้ในเชิงพาณิชย์ต่อไป โดยจะเอาผิดทั้งผู้ให้บริการ และผู้ใช้บริการ" นายนิพิฏฐ์กล่าว

I will inquire at the Office of the National Culture Commission for agreeing on a law banning any religious motives for commercial use, which will penalize both parlors and customers," said Mr Nipit.

"นิพิฏฐ์อีกแล้ว ห้ามสักรูปพระ", Khao Sod, May 31, 2011

I don't know where to start...! Who in their right mind would get a tattoo on their head or on their face (unless your name is Mike Tyson or Stu or you are a Maori warrior)? And the 'sin by association' is quite an argument - the original article also quotes someone form the Cultural Surveillance Center (sad enough that such a thing exists!) warning if “people who showed their bodies for a living, such as prostitutes and go-go dancers, had a religious tattoos, it would undermine respect for religion" - again, why would these people get such a tat? It's pretty much crying hypocrisy at the wrong problem!

And most of all, even though Mr Nipit said in the most recent denial that only the parlors would be targeted, the original intent was to draft a law that would penalize both the customer and the tattoo artist after all!

What this more-than-absurd episode reveals though (and probably will be overlooked by the international media as soon as this story cools down) is the anachronistic mindset of the Ministry of Culture (or also often mockingly referred as 'MiniCult') to control and forcefully define what 'Thai culture' in their view is. Problem is, as explained in our interview with Kaewmala, their vision of 'Thai culture' is a recent construct and not always historically accurate. Another point of contention is the monopoly of Buddhism claimed by the Ministry of Culture and thus to define the religion, as this side note from this tattoo-gate reveals:

Mr Niphit said the ministry would publish guidelines on the "acceptable use" of Buddha images and religious items for business operators and tourists.

The guidelines will give advice on how to portray or treat Buddha images, teachings, pictures and photos. They will also urge respectful handling of monks' garb and items and temples' important features. People are discouraged from dressing like monks, or portraying monks in an unfavourable light.

Tattoo artists, business operators and movie makers are unhappy about the restrictions. Pawat Pawangkasiri, director of Nak Prok (In the Shadow of Naga), a film about bandits who disguise themselves as monks, said the guidelines seem vague and could threaten freedom of expression.

"If a filmmaker wants to portray monks with the aim of constructively criticising Buddhism, would that be allowed?

"Who will judge what is appropriate? If monks are forbidden to do comedy in films, the guidelines have to specify which joke is okay, and which is not," Mr Pawat said.

"Buddha curbs 'stifle expression'", Bangkok Post, June 3, 2011

Indeed this is a real problem in the making should these guidelines be as ambiguous as other laws in Thailand and actually enforced (not that they had a good track record except for one particular issue). The authorities claim to define what the Buddhist religion should be from their point of view instead of letting it evolve naturally by itself. After this there's only one question left: WWBD - What would Buddha do?

Tongue-Thai'ed! Part VI: Wifebeating campaign poster edition?!

Originally published at Siam Voices on June 1, 2011 "Tongue-Thai'ed!" encapsulates the most baffling, amusing, confusing, outrageous and appalling quotes from Thai politicians and other public figures - in short: everything we hear that makes us go "Huh?!". Check out all past entries here.

The campaign season offers many curious incidents and sightings that only appear during the run-up to the elections, political campaign posters are one of them. Usually, they display the constituency candidate, the list number, the name of the party and a more or less witty and memorable slogan. Sometimes, the parties go the extra mile and somehow (deliberately or not) stick out from crowd - whether for the desired effect or not is another story. This year it's no exception and some posters are drawing eyes and raised eyebrows for various reasons.

On Wednesday, Bangkok-based journalist Patrick Winn from the Global Post has tweeted this poster:

It's a poster for the Bhumjai Thai Party, the largest coalition partner of the most recent government and considered to be a potential kingmaker for the next one. The slogan is "เลี้ยงเมีย ต้องตบ" which can be translated to "To take care of your wife, you have to beat" - beat what? Your wife, as Patrick suggested? Is this a reiteration of the proverb "เลี้ยงเมีย ด้วยเข่า" ("To take care of your wife, you got to knee her!") to get the folksy vote? Are they endorsing domestic abuse? What do they want to say? Are we lost in translation somewhere?

The answer is tucked away right under the number and above the name of the party. It says: "'สู้แล้วรวย' สร้างศูนย์ฝึกนักกีฬาอาชีพ" ("'Fight to become rich' [We will] build sport centers for professional athletes). So, they're not saying you should beat your wife but beat (or strike) the tennis ball to get it rolling to personal welfare! (Read James Goyder's post on Bhumjai Thai's godfather Newin and his ventures in local football here)

This is also a move to counter rival coalition partner Chart Pattana Puea Pandin Party's sport centric policies, who recruited a number of former sport stars running as candidates. One of them is former tennis star - or rather he was supposed to be, because he now not on the party list since he didn't vote in the last local elections in 2008 and thus not eligible (source in Thai here)!

Meanwhile, Bangkok Pundit has blogged about another note-worthy election poster:

This is Sophon Damnui also running for the Chart Pattana Puea Pandin Party in Bangkok's constituency number 5. To answer Bangkok Pundit's question why they choose this motive and the panda, one has to look at all the clues: Bangkok's 5th is Dusit, where also Dusit Zoo ist located. Mr Sophon is also the director of the Zoological Park Organization, which overlooks all zoos in the country. And guess who that panda is? Yes, this is Thailand's new national mascot, Lin Ping. And Mr Sophon also credits himself that this cuddly panda can stay in Thailand a little bit longer before the Chinese want him back.

So, the message is clear: "Vote me and Lin Ping will stay" or something like that - and besides, who can resist such cute cuddly thing...? (Author's note: This animal has created a bigger and more annoying hype in Thailand than Knut the polar bear ever did in Germany!)

A lot of stupid things will be said and a lot of strange posters will appear during the election campaign in the coming months. If you come across any verbosities that you think might fit in here send us an email at siamvoices [at] gmail.com or tweet us @siamvoices.

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

Thai Culture Ministry to crack down on religious tattoos on foreign skin

Originally published at Siam Voices on May 31, 2011

Tattoos have a very special place in Thailand. They're more than just permanent fashion statements, not unlike amulets they are regarded as spiritual guardians. Tattoos with religious or spiritual motives, called Yantra tattoos, are yet another sign that Thais take their beliefs skin-deep. Philip Cornwel-Smith dedicated a whole chapter in his excellent book "Very Thai" about this issue:

You are what you wear. While apt in fashion, the saying is literally true if it's a Thai tattoo in which you're clad. Imbued with magical powers, the arcane roi sak (tattoos) possess their owners - mostly men - at intense moments like combat, love or ritual. (...)

Like all amulets, it requires activation by the tattooist [mostly by a monk], who murmurs incantations in khom [ancient Khmer script] while he wields a two-foot steel needle, (...) It's the spell that matter. Call it spiritual insurance, for most seek roi sak for invincibility. (...)

With Thailand's government pledging to bar monks from performing tattooing rituals, roi sak is another tradition on the wane.

From: "Very Thai", by Philip Cornwel-Smith, 2005

Still to this day, religious tattoos are very popular among Thais (especially young men) to an extent that is probably best encapsulated by the annual tattoo festival at Wat Bang Phra in Nakhon Chaisri near Bangkok. And how a simple tattoo can literally turn out the beast in a man can be seen in this video here.

These tats are also a favorite among tourists, who mostly do it for looks and don't care much about the mystery behind it. In that light, it is nearly unavoidable that someone would contest that, right?

Enter the self-proclaimed herald of everything 'Thai-ness'...

Citing a survey in Phuket Island, Culture Minister Nipit Intarasombat admitted that a number of foreigners coming to Thailand are interested in having their skin tattooed with Buddha images or Hindu god Ganesh in several parts of their bodies such as arms, legs, ankles or chests. The minister indicated that using religious objects as tattoo patterns is inappropriate according to the Thai tradition and culture as well as affect the faith of people toward those religions.

Religious tattoo patterns are very popular among foreign tourists and can be as expensive as 20,000 baht each. Some of the tourists deem religious tattoo patterns a fashion without any religious respect while some probably have those tattoos because of ignorance.

Mr Nipit stated that the ministry hence asked provincial governors nationwide, especially provinces with foreign tourists such as Bangkok and Chiang Mai to inspect tattoo studios and seek their cooperation not to use sacred objects of all religions as tattoo patterns. The minister then announced that he will ask the Office of the National Culture Commission to issue a law banning people from using sacred objects or holy beings in Buddhism or any other religions in their tattoo patterns.

"Culture Ministry alerted by religious tattoo patterns", National News Bureau of Thailand, May 31, 2011

After having 'successfully' restored sovereign 'Thai-ness' against the un-Thai drunken, public bearing of bare female breasts by inciting a witchhunt (against what tureds out to be teenagers), Nipit now turns against the non-Thais daring to display the sacred motives of the Lord Buddha without paying respect to the culture, beliefs and moral sovereignty of the Kingdom, just to fulfill their vain pursuit for superficial acknowledgement, a typical Western.... - sorry, I got carried away there...!

Kidding aside, does this mean that Angelina Jolie has to remove some of her tattoos? Also what is evident by that move of the culture minister is the monopoly claim over Buddhism or faith in general and more or less defining what that is and how one should behave within that realm (like they are trying to impose their vision 'Thai-ness' in general). If only the Vatican would complain in the same fashion about the countless Jesus and crosses motives...

h/t to @wisekwai for the link and the Angelina Jolie-joke!

Tongue-Thai’ed! Part V: Shooting for sympathy

Originally published at Siam Voices on May 30, 2011

"Tongue-Thai'ed!" encapsulates the most baffling, amusing, confusing, outrageous and appalling quotes from Thai politicians and other public figures - in short: everything we hear that makes us go "Huh?!". Check out all past entries here.

One of the most discussed issues ever since prime minister Abhisit called for elections was the fear of potential violence against MP candidates and other local politicians in the run-up to the polls on July 3. And right after the announcement earlier this May a Pheu Thai MP in Samut Prakan has been injured in a shooting, marking the first of a series of violent incidents in the following weeks targeting MPs and canvassers, with one of them killed. While many of these shootings have reportedly local reasons (e.g. local rivalry, personal quarrels), the timing is no doubt casting a shadow over the elections. Unsurprisingly, the number of MP candidates requesting police protection has risen to 123 as of Monday.

In a statement today, deputy prime minister Suthep Thaugsuban has commented on the security situation in his usual fashion:

"ทั้งนี้ ในส่วนของพรรคประชาธิปัตย์ที่ต้องคุ้มกันมากเป็นพิเศษก็มีตนและนายกรัฐมนตรี แต่ก็ต้องระวัง เนื่องจากขณะนี้บางพรรคบางพวกกำลังสร้างสถานการณ์ให้คนเอาปืนไปยิงรถผู้สมัครของตัวเอง เอาระเบิดปิงปอง ประทัดยักษ์ไปโยน และโยนความผิดให้พรรคการเมืองอื่นหรือพรรคคู่แข่ง (...)"

"Of the Democrat Party me and the prime minister are those who need special protection. But we have to be careful, because some parties and some persons are deliberately creating a situation [or scenario] by shooting their own cars or throwing bombs and blaming other parties or their rivals (...)"

"สุเทพ แฉ มีพรรคการเมืองยิงผู้สมัครสส.ตัวเอง", M-Thai News, May 30, 2011

Of course, this comes from the same man who displayed his logic by saying that the red shirt protesters died by "running into the bullets".

h/t to a reader

A lot of stupid things will be said during the election campaign in the coming months. If you come across any verbosities that you think might fit in here send us a email at siamvoices [at] gmail.com or tweet us @siamvoices.

Thailand: Pressure mounts to amend lese majeste law

Originally published at Siam Voices on May 26, 2011 The debate about Thailand's draconian lèse majesté law, Article 112 of the Criminal Code, gains more traction with several groups either discussing or demanding to at least amend the law, which forbids any discussion about the royal family and can be punished with up to 15 years in prison - and there's at least one discerning person who begs to differ...

First off was a panel discussion at the Foreign Correspondent Club of Thailand (FCCT) on Tuesday evening on that very subject, with veteran social critic Sulak Sivaraksa, academic David Streckfuss and Benjamin Zawacki of Amnesty International Thailand. Particularly the presence of Zawacki and his views on the law raised some high interest. More background on that at Bangkok Pundit. We will have more on the FCCT panel in the coming days.

In a separate development, the National Human Rights Council's (NHRC) sub-committee on civil and political rights has announced to look into the content of the law and how it's been used.

NHRC sub-committee chairman Niran Pitakwatchara said on Monday that the controversial use of the lese majeste law was urgently called into question, since it could be a condition leading to violence in society.

The NHRC sub-committee held its first hearing on the problem of the application of the lese majeste law last week with some 60 participants, including those being imprisoned, harassed and implicated as a result of people citing Article 112.

Dr Niran said after the four-hour-long session that the sub-committee was hopeful that in the next few months its research into the subject would be completed and a report forwarded to the government and the public for consideration.

He said the sub-committee, which included well-known human rights activists Somchai Homla-or, Jon Ungphakorn, Boonthan T. Verawongse, and Sunai Phasuk, would examine human rights abuses in the cases of Somyot Prueksakasemsuk, a trade unionist and a red-shirt editor of the Voice of Thaksin, and Somsak Jeamteerasakul, a senior historian at Thammasat University [as a study platform]. (...)

"Dealing with the issue has never been an easy matter and I could not pledge how much we can do to resolve the problem as we are also surmounting internal self-adjustment difficulties within the (NHRC) office," said the chairman of the sub-committee on civil and political rights.

"NHRC to study lese majeste clause", Bangkok Post, May 23, 2011

The two cases mentioned in the article are of Somyot Prueksakasemsuk, the editor of a pro-Thaksin publication and a trade unionist who most likely got arrested for collection signatures for a petition to repeal Article 112, and Thammasat historian Somsak Jeamteerasakul, a vocal critic agains the lèse majesté law, who went public saying that he has been threatened and eventually charged, possibly for the contents wrote in an open letter to Princess Chulabhorn about a recent, much discussed TV interview.

Another story dealing with this law was published earlier this week, when a group of 100 young writers joined in an open letter calling to amend the law and stop its use as a political weapon.

Signatories include wellknown youngergeneration mainstream writers such as Probed Yoon and Waning Prasertkul [sic! the whole sentence!]. In an open letter issued yesterday, they urged other writers, irrespective of their political ideology, to defend freedom of expression as a fundamental aspect of a free society.

"We believe you agree that enjoying freedom of expression and freedom of expression is a fundamental part of being writers in a democratic society, disregarding whatever genre of writing one subscribes to," part of the open letter reads. It also called on the army to stop using the monarchy institution as an excuse to crush its opponents.

"100 young writers join forces calling for change in lese majeste law", The Nation, May 21, 2011

The authors are actually named Wansing Prasertkul, Prabda Yoon - but that can happen at The Nation, especially since they misspelled the name of the son of The Nation's executive editor Suthichai Yoon! Many of these writers, including Binla Sankalakiri and Sakariya Amataya, are winners of the prestigious S.E.A. Write Award. The full open letter in Thai can be read here.

So, all in all a lot of debate about Article 112, that undoubtedly has severely damaged Thailand's freedom of speech in both the real and the online world and with very few people in power realizing that the more they stress the need to protect the royal institution from a perceived threat, the more it apparently backfires.

More staggering is how self-proclaimed herald of 'Thai-ness‘ and culture minister Niphit Intarasombat responded to this petition in Matichon, which the colleagues at Prachatai have translated:

On 22 May, Niphit Intarasombat, Minister of Culture and the Democrat Party candidate for Phatthalung, said, in response to a public call to amend the law made by a group of writers last week, that he did not see any problem with the lèse majesté law and its enforcement. (...)

‘I’ve never seen Article 112 being used as a political tool, and over 99% of politicians have no problem with the law. I’ve travelled to several countries which used to have monarchies. People there all said in unison that they regretted that they no longer had monarchs, and they wished to have them restored as head of state and a unifying figure. But Thailand still has a monarch as head of state and a unifying force, so we should have the law to protect the institution,’ he said.

"Minister of Culture sees no problem with lèse majesté law", Prachatai, May 24, 2011

So, he claims to have never seen the law being used as a political weapon? He probably isn't aware that this law actually politicizes the royal institution to a worrying extent. Second, of course why should any politician be against this law and commit career and social suicide, especially everyone since seems to overbid themselves with their loyalty (also arguably a political tool). And finally, I don't know to which former kingdoms he has traveled to and to whom he has spoken to (surely he doesn't ask the common man on a European street, does he?), but I cannot imagine that many people in France, Russia, Germany, Italy, Austria, Greece, Persia (Iran), Iraq, Mexico etc. all want their former monarchs back?

P.S.: Niphit is now the second government minister after finance minister Korn who has openly asked if a former monarchy is sad that they have no king anymore. If only the countries in question could respond...

Tongue-Thai'ed! Part IV: Korbsak and the red menace

Originally published at Siam Voices on May 24, 2011 "Tongue-Thai'ed!" is the new segment on Siam Voices, where we encapsulate the most baffling, amusing, confusing, outrageous and appalling quotes from Thai politicians and other public figures - in short: everything we hear that makes us go "Huh?!". Check out all past entries here.

Korbsak Sabhavasu, former secretary-general of the PM, now main campaign strategist for Democrat Party has recently tweeted this:

RT @ThanongK: RT @korbsak: We have survived the end of the world. >U mean July 3rd?>depends on who win, the reds or Thailand

Tweet by Korbsak Sabhavasu (@korbsak) on May 23, 2011 - 00:55:17

Alright, a lot of things to untwine in these 140 characters: First, was the original tweet by Korbsak referring to the failed doomsday prediction by an American Christian radio host. Second, was the reply by our most beloved 'columnist'/twitter preacher Thanong Khanthong, who asked if the actual doomsday would occur on July 3, the date of the Thai elections.

And last, the verbal coup de tête, comes from Korbsak again who hints that doomsday "depends on who win, the reds or Thailand?" Apparently, he thinks that Thailand will descend into a biblical chaos if the opposition Pheu Thai Party wins and the red shirts take over the Kingdom, because (in his view it looks like) they stand for everything that is not this country and will turn it upside down!

That begs the question though: What is Thailand? And what is Thailand for Korbsak?

UPDATE

Al Jazeera's Wayne Hay has at the Democrat Party HQ today and also asked Korbsak about that tweet. The response: He's just having a joke! Erm, yes...just a joke...!

A lot of stupid things will be said during the election campaign in the coming months. If you come across any verbosities that you think might fit in here send us an email at siamvoices [at] gmail.com or tweet us @siamvoices.

The May 19 Bangkok Crackdown, One Year On - Some Personal Thoughts

Originally published at Siam Voices on May 19, 2011 Note: The views expressed here are solely those of the author and not of Asian Correspondent and of the other Siam Voices authors

I've been blogging about Thai current affairs and politics for over a year and my writing debut coincided with the start of the protests by the red shirts in March 2010. Over the next nine weeks, I was trying to grasp this potentially crucial moment in the recent history of the Kingdom not by documenting each and every minute of what was happening on the ground (since I was and am still based in Hamburg), but more from a different meta-level by providing context and backgrounds on the persons, motives and other backgrounds.

I was in shock after the violent clashes on April 10, 2010. I was angry about the knee-jerk reactions against foreign opinions and international media, which wasn't perfect - but still better than the domestic coverage. I was doubtful if the leadership of the red shirt was too big and indecisive. I was baffled by the ignorance of many people who couldn't see the roots of the problems. There were many stories during the two and a half months that became my daily routine.

And then came May 19, 2010: I was about to go to bed shortly before midnight, when I received first words from Bangkok (where it was already about 5 AM) about a potential troop movement closing in on the under-siege Ratchaprasong intersection and about to strike. Already exhausted I decided to follow that lead and to stay up for a few more hours to see if something actually happened. The rest was, well, not only another 16-hours-streak of live-blogging but also the definitive destruction of a national myth, that Thailand is a unified and peaceful country.

One week after the violent crackdown on the red shirt protests, I wrote a column on my personal blog, stating that the mess had just only begun and a radicalization of all factions could occur. I doubted that there would be any serious attempts at reconciliation since nobody seems to get that understanding is crucial to harmony. I condemned the democratic institutions including the courts and the media for failing to effectively solve or even address problems that had been boiling for years. I feared we Thais would just preach to move on and forget by just putting a blanket over the ever-increasing rift. I hoped that everyone would sincerely think for a moment why we got to this point and does not forget this at the next best diversion.

Unfortunately, one year on, I don't see much has changed.

Of course, one might have a different observation from the one I have and that's totally fine - but this is more an attempt to describe the despair and anger I have when looking at the current state of Thailand from outside - and I'd argue that this distance creates a vastly differently picture than from the inside.

First off, there's the utter lack of even acknowledging that mistakes have been made and the deaths have been caused by the Thai military. Instead, we get the perfect denials and a blatant white-wash by the authorities that not a single soldier could possibly have killed (not even accidentally) a civilian. Of course not, "they all ran into the bullets!" And they wonder why nobody believes them and there's dissatisfaction over their findings?

The problem with reconciliation is that it isn't enough just to give out amnesty to everyone (as the opposition Pheu Thai Party plans, more on them later) and appease both sides. More and more people, especially the red shirt protesters are demanding justice and accountability! But getting a 'mea culpa' from anybody in the higher echelons of power is very unlikely.

It's almost ludicrous to see the 'attempts' at reconciliation when comparing the authorities trying to seize control over the main national narrative of the current state of affairs. It cannot be denied that that there's at least a perceived increase in restrictions of freedom of expressions, especially online. Hundreds of thousands of web pages have been blocked in recent years, cyber-dissidents have been either intimidated, prosecuted or jailed for saying things out of the norm, a subversive 'Cyber-Scout' programme has been created - one cannot help but feel paranoid while giving their views anywhere on the web. But these attempts will ultimately backfire sooner or later and have already created unwanted international attention, as seen in the case of Prachatai webmaster Chiranuch Premchaiporn.

Where does the sudden urge to protect everything that defines 'Thai-ness' come from? Why do the knee-jerk reactions from self-proclaimed heralds of 'Thai Culture' - whatever that is - grow stronger and stronger? Does it seem almost desperate to cling to a constructed ideal and shove it down the throat of the people? What are they afraid of?

It's change!

The perceived threat of many in power may be embodied by a large angry mob, lured in by sweet promises of a capitalist who doesn't play by the old rules (more on him later as well) - but in reality it is the possibility of change that might threaten the status quo even just a bit. So instead of embracing it, they try to push it back as hard as they can. The need for reform is greater than ever, but what many don't (or won't) realize is that reform and long-lasting change is hard and painful for everybody. Instead, many are just looking for quick fixes and instant satisfactions.

Speaking of which, the upcoming election is a chance to give Thailand some normalcy back but on the other hand it is also the return of campaigning, which is a whole other reality than after the elections. The opposition Pheu Thai Party (PT) is banking all their campaign on their leader who isn't there. The fact that Thaksin is the only campaign program they have and that his sister is running as PM candidate shows that Thaksin himself has missed the moment to make room for a new fresh start. But it cannot be denied as well that Thaksin still draws in a big electorate, so a PT victory is not unlikely.

The bigger tragedy in my opinion though is that the red shirts have missed the opportunity for a fresh new start and to emancipate from PT and Thaksin. There was a void one year ago, with most of the red shirt leaders jailed, that could have been filled with a progressive leader that leads a real democratic movement. But ever since seeing Thaksin calling-in again repeatedly and also battling their enemies with means they don't endorse in the first place, the red shirts have not moved forward.

The big question of course is what the military will do after the elections? This question alone shows how far we have fallen back. It is poisonous to democracy to have the armed forces as an unpredictable faction in current affairs, fearing that they could sweep in at any time. The 2006 coup has re-politicized the army and they are more present than ever. I cannot remember a commander-in-chief who has been that vocal and over-emphasized the loyalty to the royal institution. They have a very clear image of what the country should look like, but they cannot expect anybody to agree with them.

Yes, the situation seems to be very desperate - one might even agree with the royalist yellow shirts, who recently demanded to close down the country for a few years and let an appointed government 'cleanse' the political system. But as mentioned before, we should not give in to quick fixes and cathartic moments of making more wrongs to eventually get a right. Change needs time and sacrifices, two things many Thais are unwilling to give, apparently.

The list of problems the country faces is very long and many are debating how to fix them. But even more problems are (willingly or not) left in the dark and are just slowly emerging to the surface. I can't help but feel that Thailand is falling back in many regards and at every opportunity it digs a deeper hole into descending, into insignificance. Yet at the same time I'm confident that the world sees the kingdom in a different light now than the glitzy travel brochures and Thailand cannot hide itself anymore in this day and age.

As I said, these are just my feelings about a country I call my origin, but in recent years became so much more alien to me. I'm not hoping that the Thailand I know will come back, but I hope that the Thailand that will emerge in the future will be a free, thinking and mature one - until that I will not stop doing my part for this hope!

Tongue-Thai’ed! Part III: O brother, where art thou?

Originally published at Siam Voices on May 17, 2011 "Tongue-Thai'ed!" is the new segment on Siam Voices, where we encapsulate the most baffling, amusing, confusing, outrageous and appalling quotes from Thai politicians and other public figures - in short: everything we hear that makes us go "Huh?!". Check out all past entries here.

The election campaign has now really begun this week with the opposition Puea Thai Party finally putting Yingluck Shinawatra forward as PM candidate. Of course, we all know that she is the younger sister of one Thaksin and that this fact alone will certainly irk many voters.

More unsurprising is what Thaksin said during an exclusive interview with Post Today:

“ผมบอกเลยว่าไม่ใช่นอมินี แต่เรียกได้เลยว่าเป็นโคลนนิงของทักษิณเลย ผมโคลนนิงการบริหารให้ตั้งแต่เรียนจบใหม่ๆ สไตล์การทำงานเหมือนผม รับการบริหารจากผมได้ดีที่สุด อีกข้อสำคัญหนึ่งก็คือ การที่คุณยิ่งลักษณ์ซึ่งเป็นน้องสาวผม มานั่งเก้าอี้หัวหน้าพรรค สถานะนั้นสามารถตัดสินใจแทนผมได้เลย เยส ออ โน นี่พูดแทนผมได้เลย”

"I say straightaway that [Yingluck] is not a nominee, but you can say that she is a clone of Thaksin. I have cloned my [way of] leadership [to her] ever since graduation. [Her] style of work is the same as mine. [She] got all my best administration [skills]. Another important point is, since Yingluck is my younger sister and she is head of the party, she can decide for me. 'Yes or no,' she can do that for me."

"ทักษิณบอกยิ่งลักษณ์คือโคลนนิงของผม", Post Today, May 17, 2011 (translation by me)

Clearly, the opponents (both lawmakers and the press) will bite on this bait and point out that this alone is enough not to vote her (as our favorite Suthep already did). But it would a mistake to rail just on that, because having a Shinawatra running for office is exactly why the Puea Thai Party is poised to gain many votes. Attacking her just for being a Thaksin proxy (or worse, digging up her private life) might prove ineffective.

People who hate Thaksin won't vote for Puea Thai anyway and voters who still think highly of him will give their vote to his sister - there's nothing to change about that. What's crucial now is whether she can win over the undecided voters. We'll have to wait for the campaign trail to see if Yingluck can stand on her own. She still has enough opportunities to prove herself as a politician and not only as Thaksin's sister.

(You might ask why this is still filed under "Tongue-Thai'ed" - well, it's the well-known bluntness and bravado of Thaksin's quote that in my view still deserves a spot here. And I can't just put up yet another Suthep quote!)

A lot of stupid things will be said during the election campaign in the coming months. If you come across any verbosities that you think might fit in here send us a email at siamvoices [at] gmail.com or tweet us @siamvoices.

The heiress, the athletes and the pimp... Thailand's celebrity candidates

Originally published at Siam Voices on May 13, 2011 Ever since prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva has announced the dissolution of parliament, thus paving the way for new federal elections on July 3, all political parties (and other groups) are now in full campaign mode giving all their best intentions to win over voters.

While the Puea Thai Party, the biggest opposition party, still hasn't decided on a front-runner yet (but most likely to field Thaksin's younger sister Yingluck Shinawatra as a PM candidate), many names are slowly popping up on the party-lists. Many of them are well-known, but not necessarily for their political work, rather for their illustrious past. Here are some of them...

The Nation writes about a young, attractive woman having a go at a constituency for the first time in her life - and it is not about Yingluck...

Chitpas Bhirombhakdi, a new Democrat Party MP candidate for Bangkok's Dusit-Ratchathewi constituency, is visiting residents around Sriyan Market to introduce herself before the coming election. "This week I'm still introducing myself because I am a 'newbie' and next week I'll be campaigning for the party," she said.

Although, she has been called a "new face", Chitpas is not really a "newbie" in politics. (...) She has been secretary to the Information and Communications Technology minister since 2009 and has been closely involved in politics. (...)

The Democrat Party is highly democratic and has a good political ideology because it is not "led by a capitalist", she said.

"'Newbie' hopes to make political waves", The Nation, May 12, 2011

What the article glaringly omits though is the real background of the 25-year-old: Chitpas Bhirombhakdi is the daughter of Chutinant Bhirombhakdi, executive vice-president of Singha Corporation - and often referred to as the 'heiress' of the beer brewery.

However, the biggest glaring omission of that article (and telling for The Nation's work) was she had more work experience than just at the MICT: Chitpas was a staff member of the PM's secretariat office. In late 2009, her parents' enterprise produced a raunchy pin-up calendar to promote "Leo" beer, a product of the Singha Corporation. The depicted, body-painted ladies caused a stir (very reminiscent to the recent Songkran brouhaha) and it also legally forbidden to advertise alcoholic drinks - no matter if these calendars are given out free or for purchase - and circulation has been stopped. And then this happened:

The hot, hot, hot Leo calendar brought heat to the Bhirombhakdi family that controls Singha Corporation when a Singha heiress brought them to work – the Government House (Thai Prime Minister’s office).

On Wednesday, Chitpas Bhirombhakdi, a 23-year-old daughter of the executive vice-president of Singha Corporation, took out two boxes of calendars from the trunk of her BMW and distributed them at the Government House in Bangkok.

Government House officials (including deputy government spokesmen Phumin Leetheeraprasert and Supachai Jaisamut), MPs, police and journalists (covering the Government House beat) lined up to accept Chitpas’ generosity and within a few minutes, about 200 copies were snapped up.

"Stir over girly calendar", by Philip Golingai, The Star (Malaysia), December 19, 2009

She later resigned from her post after much, much public pressure and issued an official apology - displaying a more sincere behavior than all the officers who hounded her to get one. This is by no means meant to discredit Miss Chitpas, who at least showed more responsibility than many senior political figures, rather this is supposed to showcase the glaring omission the author of the article has (willingly?) done.

Not to be outdone, the Democrat Party really seems to leave nothing to chance, since their literally all-star party-list includes "30 electoral candidates who are celebrities and heirs of political families". Another party that banks on a similar strategy is the Chart Pattana Puea Pandin Party (quite a mouthful name, I know), a hybrid of two parties, which were part of the government coalition. This party goes all out on one particular niche:

The coalition Chart Pattana Puea Pandin Party yesterday formally introduced former soccer hero Piyapong Piew-on as a new member. He is the latest athletic celebrity to join the party, which boasts sports heavyweight Suwat Liptapanlop as its de facto leader.

The party has already enlisted Paradorn Srichaphan, who reached ninth in the world professional men's tennis rankings, and Yaowapa Burapholchai, who bagged a bronze medal for women's taekwondo at the 2004 Summer Olympics in Athens.

"Sports heroes carry parties towards election goals", The Nation, May 11, 2011

This all-star-team comes with a whole laundry list of sport-specific policies, which includes the creations of sports complexes and more financial support for all national sporting associations. Other parties have also enlisted former sport heros, such as olympic boxing gold medalist Somluck Khamsing, who will run with three other former boxing champions for the Chart Thai Pattana Party (not to be confused with the other party with the similar name) - hoping to follow the same example set by another boxing champion in the region.

And to round up the luminary list of curious electoral contenders, an old veteran returns to the political stage in his trademark fashion:

Outspoken politician Chuwit Kamolvisit has launched his own party, aided by a bull terrier.

Mr Chuwit launched his Rak Prathet Thai (Love Thailand) Party at his home in Sukhumvit Soi 10 yesterday. His home will also serve as the party's headquarters.

The massage parlour tycoon-turned-politician who has tried to portray himself as an anti-vice and corruption crusader said his party would work on the opposition benches to monitor the government. (...)

During his party launch, he showed his pet dog, a bull terrier, saying the dog was a symbol of loyalty and honesty.

"Chuwit out to hound govt with new party", Bangkok Post, May 13, 2011

Weighing in with a field of 10 electoral candidates (untypical modest for Chuwit), the primary goal is to be the opposition watchdog (pun intended) to the next government. Unlike all parties mentioned above, the now self-proclaim 'Mr. Clean' claims not to field celebrities but ordinary people - many would say that Chuwit is the star of the party anyways! Certainly Chuwit is one of the most colorful personalities in Thai politics and always a source for head-turning (and sometimes -scratching) activism.

So, there have it: a beer-heiress, several former athletes and a flamboyant former massage parlor-tycoon - if it the current situation wasn't so serious, the backbenchers make up for a very entertaining two-month-campaign.

h/t to a reader for links

Behind the scenes with Thailand's 'cyber-scouts'

Originally published at Siam Voices on May 11, 2011 AFP ran a story on Wednesday about Thailand's 'cyber-scouts', who patrol the internet for material deemed offensive to the monarchy. It follows the work and the motivations of one of the mostly young volunteers:

Wearing his special "cyber scout" polo shirt with pride, Thattharit Sukcharoen scans the Internet pages on his computer in search of remarks deemed offensive to Thailand's revered monarchy. He is one of several dozen volunteers recruited by the Thai justice ministry to patrol cyberspace in search of anybody violating the kingdom's strict lese majeste rules -- an offence punishable by up to 15 years in prison.

"My inspiration to be a cyber scout is the king. There are many ways to protect the institute, and this is one of them," Thattharit, a 39-year-old administrative worker at a school in Bangkok, told AFP. "Sometimes there are just fun conversations among teenagers and they think it's not important, but for those who love the royal institute, some comments that I see are not appropriate. I must report them to the authorities." (...)

According to the project's website www.justice-cyberscout.org, volunteers "will have a duty to monitor information and actions dangerous to the country's security and will protect, defend and hold the royal institute in esteem."

Students in particular are invited to sign up. Thattharit attended one day of training to become a cyber scout. "I learned about the history of the king, his majesty, and how divine he is ... and also how to use a computer, the Internet and Facebook," he said.

The project is in its infancy and so far Thattharit has not reported anybody to the authorities. He explained that if he finds comments deemed offensive to the king he plans to contact the person who posted them to first to warn them and give them a chance to change their views, before informing officials. "Not many people know about the project. They may think they're talking to a friend because I don't tell them I'm a cyber scout," he said. "I feel I am doing an important job. I can give back to the country."

"Thai 'cyber scouts' patrol web for royal insults", by AFP, May 11, 2011

We have previously blogged about the launch of the 'cyber-scout' initiative back last December, where the ministry of justice has organised an introductory seminar and laid out the objectives of the project, including first and foremost "observing [online] behavior that is deemed a threat to national security and to defend and protect the royal institution," and "promote the moral and ethics with the help of the volunteers, to ensure the correct behavior".

This reveals how the cyber scouts work (emphasised in bold above): They seem to roam around certain websites and social networks more or less incognito and look for seemingly insulting posts, only to step in, reveal themselves as a cyber scout and give out a warning "to change their views", otherwise the authorities will be informed - and regular readers know by now how severe the consequences are.

The same notion I had back last year still stands...

But it is quite clear that this is a general trend of over-emphasizing the loyalty by all means and more than a sudden urge to protect the royal institution against a perceived, invisible threat. And since the internet is a quite an anonymous place, it’s an even more frightening threat. Thus these mental and cultural barricades are built with the recruited man-power and the social dogma of loyalty – both off- and online. The term ‘Cyber Scout’ reflects some historical parallels to the ‘Village Scouts’ of the 1970s, which were set up for almost the same reasons in order to battle a perceived communist threat.

"Become a cyber-scout, clean up Thailand’s internet!", by Saksith Saiyasombut, Siam Voices, December 17, 2010

We will probably hear more about their work and their results pretty soon.

BONUS: AFP has posted the accompanying video report on the same topic with the same people involved:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAJeSS8-LXc

Tongue-Thai'ed! Part II: Suthep, HRW and who killed JFK?

Originally published at Siam Voices on May 4, 2011 "Tongue-Thai'ed!" is the new segment on Siam Voices, where we encapsulate the most baffling, amusing, confusing, outrageous and appalling quotes from Thai politicians and other public figures - in short: everything we hear that makes us go "Huh?!". Check our first entry here.

Some backstory before we dive into the quote: I initially had the idea for this segment earlier this year and started to collect a few verbosities here and there. But after two months or so I noticed that one person has trumped everyone else in quantity and 'quality' - deputy prime minister Suthep Thaungsuban. He has said so many stupid things (like "Protesters died because they ran into bullets") during a short amount of time that creating such a segment would ultimately turn this into a segment almost exclusive about him. But since we got this train rolling now, it'd be unfair (and half as much fun) to leave him out! Now, onto the fresh new quote...

Human Rights Watch released their report about the bloody crackdown of the red shirt protests last year on Tuesday, depicting a very detailed account of what happened and finds fault at both government forces and anti-government protesters. Having said that, it didn't took long for anybody to pan the report as a partisan, unbalanced piece of propaganda (without having actually read that).

Enter: Suthep....

Suthep scorns Human Rights Watch, slams "Thai soldiers killed red shirts", tells to take care of America first

In an interview at Government House, Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaungsuban has voiced disappointment after the international human rights organizations Human Rights Watch has reported that Thai soldiers have caused the death of civilians during the red shirt protests, where 91 people have died. He said that after he saw the news he felt sad because he thinks such an organization should be neutral and not be inclined to take sides [...] before they say anything and damage the public image of Thailand, [thus they] should have checked their facts properly first. [Suthep laments] where that organization was during the government of Thaksin Shinawatra, when they killed 3,000 people ["War on Drugs"] but hasn't heard a thing from them.

"That organization should better look into their own country first before, [...] [like] John F. Kennedy's assassination, nothing is still clear about that. Thus all sides are still working and searching for facts, such as the independent [Truth and Reconciliation] Commission of Mr. Kanit na Nakorn [...] we should listen more to them rather than some foreigners. The commission, that the government has set up, has just worked for 10 months and continues to do so [...]"

""สุเทพ" ฉุนฮิวแมนไรท์ วอทช์ ซัด "ทหารไทย" ฆ่าเสื้อแดง ย้อนให้กลับไปดูแลอเมริกาให้ดีเสียก่อน", Matichon, May 4, 2011 (translation and emphasis by me)

I didn't expect him to have actually read the report, but this quote is still astonishingly ignorant. First off, the report criticizes both. Second, Human Rights Watch has actually covered the War on Drugs. Third, the organization was founded in 1978, 15 years after the Kennedy assassination. And last, Suthep still doesn't respect foreigners!

If you come across any verbosities that you think might fit in here send us a email at siamvoices [at] gmail.com or tweet us @siamvoices.

Tongue-Thai’ed! Part I: Nouveau dismiss

Originally published at Siam Voices on May 2, 2011 Welcome to a new segment on Siam Voices where we (for now semi-regularly) encapsulate the most baffling, amusing, confusing, outrageous, appalling quotes from Thai politicians and other public figures - in short: everything we hear that makes us go "Huh?!". We have previously highlighted some noteworthy Thai verbal outings of all kinds, such as the eye-brow-raising, contradictory, ill-considered or just simply outrageous - but now you'll find them all in this segment.

Let's start off with somebody very familiar to observers of Thai politics and somebody who has never been shy to voice his opinion, no matter the circumstances. Thailand's commander-in-chief General Prayuth Chan-ocha commented on the most recent raids on pro-democracy community radio stations (see posts by Bangkok Pundit and Andrew Spooner), specifically comparing this to the clampdown on websites allegedly deemed lèse majesté:

“ปิดยูอาแอลไมได้ปิดเว็บ เพราะยูอาแอลมีคนคุมอยู่ ถ้าเขาคุมไม่ดีเขาก็จะมีความผิดด้วย เราจะไปปิดเว็บไซต์เลยไม่ได้บางทีมันมาจากต่างประเทศ มันต้องไปปิดต่างประเทศและอาจจะโดนต่างประเทศฟ้องอีก เพราะต่างประเทส [sic!] ไม่เข้าใจกฎหมายบ้านเรา กำหมายเรา [sic!] คือกฎหมายเราและประเทศไทยก็คือประเทศไทย ผมไม่เข้า(ใจ)ว่าหลายๆคนอยากจะให้ประเทศไทยเป็นเหมือนประเทศอื่น มีเสรีทุกเรื่อง แล้วถามว่ามันจะอยู่กันยังไงผมไม่รู้ ขนาดแบบนี้ยังอยู่กันไม่ได้เลย ” พล.อ.ประยุทธ์ กล่าว

"We have only blocked the URL, not the internet because the URL is controlled [read: in possession of somebody]. If he or she doesn't control it very well, then it is his or her fault! We cannot shut down the[ir] websites, [because] some of them are in other countries. [When] shut down foreign websites, the foreign countries will protest, because the foreign countries don't understand our laws! Our laws are our laws and Thailand is Thailand. I don't understand why so many people want Thailand to be like other countries - to have freedom in everything - how can we live? I don't know... I can't live even like it is now!" said Gen. Prayuth

"'ประยุทธ์'แจงปิดวิทยุชุมชนหมิ่นยันทำตามกฎหมาย", Krungthep Turakij, April 29, 2011 (translation and emphasis by me)

Well, of course foreign countries don't understand our laws, sometimes we ourselves don't get them either, hence why some of them are being used very arbitrarily. We don't know for certain which countries Prayuth is referring to, maybe he misunderstood that people were telling him that Thailand is actually becoming like one other country. And freedom can be very scary if you can't control it, isn't it?

Today's second quote comes from Thai finance minister Korn Chatikavanij, who wrote this on his Facbook page after he, like so many people, has watched the British royal wedding:

"ได้เห็นความยิ่งใหญ่ของพิธีของราชวงศ์อังกฤษแล้ว อดคิดไม่ได้ว่า คนฝรั่งเศสที่ดูอยู่จะเสียดายไหมว่าตนไม่มีสถาบันกษัตริย์อีกแล้ว"

"After having watched the greatness of the festivities of the British monarchy, I can't stop thinking if the French are feeling sad that they a monarchy anymore?"

Thai finance minister Korn Chatikavanij on his Facebook page, April 30, 2011 (translation and emphasis by me)

Yes, that's really something to ponder on. Over 2,000 people (and very likely not many French) though have already made up their mind and 'liked' it and also the almost 300 comments are largely in favor of Korn's musing. Maybe should have read the papers for an answer...

If you come across any verbosities that you think might fit in here send us a email at siamvoices [at] gmail.com or tweet us @siamvoices.

Thailand’s cyber-police draft new Computer Crimes Act

Originally published at Siam Voices on May 2, 2011 Thailand's authorities have been patrolling the internet more and more vigorously, mostly to clamp down on content that is allegedly lèse majesté and to silence political opponents. In recently published research by Freedom House, the US-based think-tank has labeled the kingdom's internet as 'not free', putting it below countries such as Zimbabwe, Turkey, Venezuela, Pakistan, Rwanda and among countries the likes of China, Saudi Arabia, Iran and Cuba. More details at fellow Asian Correspondent blogger Jon Russell.

That is partly thanks to the Computer Crimes Act of 2007, hastily set up by the interim military government of Surayud Chulanont after videos mocking the King of Thailand appeared on YouTube and the service refusing to delete them despite the request of the Thai government (and subsequently blocking the whole site for a brief time). The law was drafted initially to lay down a legal groundwork against hacking and internet scams, but also sections such as these:

Section 12. The perpetration of an offense under Section 9 or Section 10 that:

(1) causes damage, whether it be immediate or subsequent and whether it be synchronous to the public shall be subject to imprisonment for no longer than ten years or a fine of not more than two hundred thousand baht.

(2) is an act that is likely to damage computer data or a computer system related to the country's security, public security and economic security or public services or is an act against computer data or a computer system available for public use shall be subject to imprisonment from three years up to fifteen years and a fine of sixty thousand baht up to three hundred thousand baht. The commission of an offense under (2) that causes death to another person shall be subject to imprisonment from ten years up to twenty years. ... Section 14. If any person commits any offence of the following acts shall be subject to imprisonment for not more than five years or a fine of not more than one hundred thousand baht or both: ... (2) that involves import to a computer system of false computer data in a manner that is likely to damage the country's security or cause a public panic;

(3) that involves import to a computer system of any computer data related with an offense against the Kingdom's security under the Criminal Code;

The Thai Ministry of Information and Communication Technology (MICT) is currently drafting a new cyber law, but instead of clarifying some vague passages, it rewrites or adds new ones which are even broader in definition than the previous parts and thus creating more leeway for abusing it. The manager of the Thai internet advocacy group iLaw, Orapin Yingyongphatthana, said in an article by Prachatai the draft "contains all the same problems and is even more regressive."

In a post on their own website, iLaw has dissected and commented on some of the passages of the draft (which can be seen here in Thai, including the full draft), including*:

*Section 4 adds the definition of "administrator" which means "a person with the computer rights to provide others with services accessible on the internet or by other means through a computer system, no matter if it's in their own interest or on behalf of others."

[Comment] (...) In the new draft (...) "administrator" (...) could include webmasters, website owners, network administrators, data base administrator, forum moderator, web editors, blog owners and (...) even the internet service providers.

Under this act, the 'middle man' should be as equally punished as the violator, e.g. who writes content that does not match with the truth [and] threatens national security. (...)

With the word "administrator" pretty much left as it is in the law, it could mean that either content manager but (more importantly) content creators such as bloggers and editors can be targeted under this section. Although, as seen in the case of Prachatai webmaster Chiranuch Premchaiporn, it can also mean that content managers (such as a webmaster) can be charged for hosting data or information created by a third party.

With that in mind, the next passage requires even more observation:

*Section 24 ["If any person commits any offense of the following acts shall be subject to imprisonment for not more than five years or a fine of not more than one hundred thousand baht or both:] (1) that involves import to a computer system of forged computer data, either in whole or in part, or false computer data, that causes damage to the national security or causes public panic"

[Comment] The above excerpt includes passages from Section 14 (1) and (2) of the current law to underline the original intention [to act against phishing and other online scams] (...) thus leading to the phrasing that creating incorrect [or wrong] data [or information] can be a misconduct.

iLaw further commented that the very vague wording of "false computer information" is problematic (and not only problematic to translate). What exactly is "false computer information"? With the necessary legal acrobatic you could for instance interpret this making "false statements" or just flat-out simply "spreading lies". So who decides then what is true or not? In this political climate and given the numerous legal cases, it looks like this passage alone will increase the possibility to file charges against opinions differing from a main narrative that is being claimed by the government.

*"Section 26: Whoever (...) provides computer data that depicts [about] another individual (...) that in whichever way would damage, bring disrepute, defame, incite hatred or that would embarrass or lead to others believing this information to be true shall be punished with not more than three years of prison or a fine not exceeding 100,000 Baht or both."

[Comment] In the past, there have been lots of efforts to bring defamation lawsuits by using the Computer Crimes Act, but the current law does not have a suitable section yet except for Section 14 (1) as mentioned above and Section 16, which states ["any person, who imports to a computer system (...), computer data where a third party's picture appears either created, edited, added or adapted by electronic means or otherwise in a manner that is likely to impair that third party's reputation or cause that third party to be isolated, disgusted or embarrassed..."]. The new law creates a convenience for the authorities to charge defamation lawsuits more easily.

Again, uncertain wording makes it hard to determine what is punishable and what not.

The draft further proposes the set-up of a so called "Committee to Prevent and Suppress Computer Crimes", which has the ability to appoint officials and request copies of data. The concern shared by many is that the group could be a powerful enforcer of the even more regressive and even more ambiguous law.

But the draft has hit a bump as prime minister Abhisit surprisingly put it on hold before it could reach the cabinet:

The government's acting spokesman Panitan Wattanayagorn (...) said the Information and Communications Technology Ministry still needed to seek opinions from relevant state agencies about the draft. (...)

ICT Minister Chuti Krairiksh (...) said the [newer] current draft is the version that has gone through the process of public hearings and has already been revised by the ministry's committee assigned to draft the law. He said the version being opposed by the three groups was the one that had been written before the public hearings.

"PM stalls computer crime act", The Nation, April 20, 2011

The problem here though is, that apparently there has been no public hearing on the draft whatsoever, as pointed out in a Bangkok Post column.

That leaves us with the question why the MICT is in a rush to write a new law that is even more ambiguous than the current one? Granted, this is a draft that will see numerous revisions before it will be solidified but if the disputed passages are anything to go by, it tells much about the understand (or the lack thereof) of the MICT on this delicate subject. There always has been an urge to have the capability to 'control' the flow of information, especially with the emergence of social media. Back in 2009, a Bangkok senator has openly asked how to do exactly that.

We have plenty examples of the actions of the authorities to curb online freedom, be it by recruiting 'cyber-scouts' or openly threatening users abroad, all with the aim to fight a perceived, invisible threat. What the authorities repeatedly fail to realize though is that it is an uphill battle to marginalize a diversity of opinions and views of the soon 20 million Thai online users: it doesn't really work. They even have admitted it!

*all passages have been translated from Thai by me

Exiled Thaksin takes center stage at Puea Thai Party campaign launch

Originally published at Siam Voices on April 27, 2011 Last weekend the opposition Puea Thai Party launched its campaign for the anticipated election later this summer (despite the chances that there might be none after all) and unveiled its promises policies at the Rangsit Campus of Thammasat University north of Bangkok (which might be surprising in itself). If you were looking for a bold, fresh new start for Thailand's opposition and paradigm change in Thai politics, you'll be disappointed! Because last Saturday one man stood above all despite the lack of his physical presence.

The exiled Thaksin Shinawatra took center stage and phoned-in during the event, as he did regularly at recent red shirt protests and executive party meetings, to list all the things he'll do if the Puea Thai Party wins the election.

Thaksin later promised to increase the village fund by Bt1 million per village if the opposition Pheu Thai, of which he is the de-facto leader, wins. ... Thaksin then vowed that the party, if elected, would solve the flood problem in Bangkok for good by building a mega-dyke some 30 kilometres in length as in the Netherlands.

Thaksin also vowed to reclaim some 300 square kilometres of land from the sea around Samut Prakan and Samut Songkram provinces and build a new city with an excellent environment and rail link to Bangkok and acting as an IT and financial hub.

The former premier also promised:

- Ten new electric rail lines would be introduced in Bangkok with a fixed fee of Bt20 per ride

- New flats and houses would be built to allow students and poor people to rent at Bt1,000 per month.

- Construct a land bridge linking the Gulf of Thailand and the Andaman Sea.

- Eliminate the drugs problem within 12 months and eradicate poverty within four years.

- Debt moratorium to those owing between Bt500,000 to Bt1 million for three to five years.

- Minimum corporate income tax would be reduced from 30 percent to 23 percent within the next year.

- Fresh university graduates would be guaranteed a minimum monthly salary of Bt15,000 and the minimum wage will be set at Bt300 per day.

"Thaksin woos voters with promises, ready to return and 'serve the people'", The Nation, April 24, 2011

These were just some of the dozens of overambitious campaign promises (anybody recalls his infamous promise in 1995 to solve Bangkok's traffic problems "within six months"?). Many of his new policies are more or less a continuation of his policies during his tenure as prime minister from 2001 until 2006, aimed at the poor and rural population. As mentioned before, those who expected a big progressive change, are left to look elsewhere than the Puea Thai Party. Thus unsurprisingly, it didn't took long until the first critical voices weighed in (apart from the usually shrill "Thaksin is the devil"-trolling):

As good as those might seem in theory at least to some people, coming from Mr. Thaksin the ideas are gimmicky, dilettantish and often cynical. His late conversion to the cause of political freedom fools no one, and his thoughts about fiscal policy are rooted in a superficial understanding of Thailand's competitiveness problem.

As is typical of Mr. Thaksin, then, these proposals fail to amount to a coherent program of government or a formula for addressing Thailand's most fundamental problems of social division, inadequate human capital, and diminishing confidence in leading institutions.

"Thailand Caught on the Thaksin Rebound", by Michael Montesao, Wall Street Journal, April 26, 2011

Exiled Thai academic Giles Ji Ungpakorn also did not have many nice words to say about Thaksin:

The recent speech by Taksin [sic!] was designed to outline policies for Peua Thai Party for the upcoming election. However, there were great weaknesses in this speech. (...)

What Taksin did not talk about was HOW to dismantle the web of dictatorship which has throttled Democracy. He also ignored the Red Shirts who are the only real force which can challenge this dictatorship outside parliament. This is not surprising, since Taksin had no role in creating the Red Shirt movement.

Taksin talked too much about himself, but worse still, he kept insisting that he was a loyal subject of the Monarchy. (...) Taksin refused to campaign for the scrapping of Lèse Majesté.

On issues that really lie in the hearts of most Red Shirts: (...) the need to release all political prisoners and drop charges, Taksin was silent. This was a huge mistake on his part. (...)

On the drugs war, Taksin showed that he has learnt nothing, repeating the need for the failed and violent tactics of the past. On the South he did make some concessions that he had made mistakes (...).

At best, Taksin’s speech was a utopian wish list. It showed the weakness of his party that he had to make the policy speech. The Red Shirt movement must continue to develop its political understanding and campaigning which goes beyond Taksin and Peua Thai. We may have to grit our teeth and vote for Peua Thai, but the struggle will have to continue, whether or not the conservatives and the Military manage to fix the elections.

"Ji on Thaksin’s election promises", via Thai Political Prisoners, April 25, 2011

It is indeed the weakness of the party, but one that is intended - if one proposed slogan "Thaksin thinks, Puea Thai acts" is anything to go by, then it is apparent that Thaksin was never gone and is calling the shots. With still no party leader and PM candidate picked (although most likely Thaksin will choose his politically inexperienced sister Yingluck to run), it rarely made any attempts to move beyond their former prime minister.

Also, the red shirts' continued repression (as seen lately with the crackdown on community radio stations) was blatantly left unacknowledged, his hint to continue the brutal 'war on drugs' (which the current government has resurrected), the lack of support for unions' rights and other social gifts to the people indicate that Thaksin is not interested in a long-lasting, political change that ironically he set off (somewhat unintentionally) by actually doing something for the rural electorate and empower them with at least a political consciousness.

Having said that, it is evident that the Puea Thai Party, despite it's figurehead and his tainted record, is still the lesser evil at the ballot box with no other viable political alternative present at the moment. A vote for the Democrat Party is a vote for the military-dominated status quo, a vote for the opposition is the potential return of social gifts but also a polarizing figurehead - but then again, you could also give up on democracy and not vote at all, as the yellow shirts have decided recently.

Thailand's armed forces: Overemphasizing the loyalty

Originally published at Siam Voices on April 21, 2011 When General Prayuth Chan-ocha took over as commander-in-chief of Thailand's armed forces last year, he made in no uncertain terms right off the bat what his top priorities are: protecting the royal institution and going after everything and everyone that is deemed a threat to it. Since then, he apparently still is not tired to emphasize this.

On Tuesday, the army staged a mock exercise with about 1,100 soldiers, various types of weapons, vehicles and helicopters amid heavy rain in Bangkok, under the theme of protecting the monarchy and apparently also to show that the armed forces are unified, despite reports of possible dissent in the ranks.

“All from the 1st Infantry Regiment are the King’s soldiers. Hence, you must be ready to act on commands of your superiors,” Maj Gen Kampanat told the gathering of infantrymen.

He told them to have faith in their commanders and to strictly obey their orders, and insisted that all soldiers should share the army chief’s stance.

"Show of strength to protect monarchy", Bangkok Post, April 20, 2011

This show of force comes after Prayuth himself has lodged a lese majeste-complaint against Jatuporn Prompan, United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) co-leader and Puea Thai Party MP, and several other red shirt supporters for allegedly making inappropriate comments against the monarchy during a rally on April 10, 2011 marking the anniversary of the bloody clashes. (Sidenote: the accused are suing back)

This was just the last one in a series of actions Prayuth has taken in recent weeks all with the emphasis to protect the monarchy and telling others not to misuse the royal institution for their own gain. Pravit Rojanaphruk has listed some of these in a recent story in The Nation:

Here are just some of the hats that Army chief General Prayuth Chan-ocha has put on over the past few weeks: (...)

- That of a not-so-convincing denier of coup rumours: Prayuth can never be convincing on this subject because of the role he played in the 2006 coup that ousted Thaksin Shinawatra. How can he, who was involved in a coup then be denying the threat now?

- That of an adviser to all Thai voters: "Vote to protect monarchy" was the instruction from Prayuth that this newspaper carried on its front page last week. He was also quoted as saying that a high turnout was the key to safeguarding the monarchy and democracy. But what if the majority of Thai voters vote for the "wrong" party? Will there be another military coup? He also believes that all Thais know who to blame for the ongoing political crisis. "Everyone knows the culprits behind the lost lives and the injuries incurred [last April and May]," he was quoted as saying. Surely, he can't be serious.

- That of chief censor and promoter of the lese majeste law: Prayuth has ordered the Information and Communication Technology Ministry to block more websites and has told his soldiers to file lese majeste charges against red-shirt leaders for what they allegedly said during the April 10 rally. This was even before the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) and police could make a move.

These are just some of the many hats that Prayuth has enjoyed wearing recently, though one can't help but wonder if they really fit an Army chief.

"An army chief who dons too many hats", by Pravit Rojanaphruk, The Nation, April 20, 2011 (hyperlinks inserted by me)

Prayuth repeatedly claims that the monarchy is above politics and thus should not be dragged into political activities. The problem is though, as Voranai Vanijaka lamented in a Bangkok Post op-ed, that the blatant overemphasizing of the loyalty to the royal institution and the act of accusing others the lack thereof is used solely for political gain and thus exactly affects the monarchy in a way that is explicitly (at least officially) not supposed to be, as Pavin Chachavalpongpun notes:

The military may be exploiting its role as protector of the monarchy to legitimize its own involvement in politics, but in the process it is also further politicizing the institution. (...)

The lese-majeste law is a devastatingly effective political weapon. But the more politicians abuse it, the more they damage the monarchy. In the worst-case scenario, it could become a self-fulfilling accusation. By backing the red shirts into a corner where their criticisms of the elites are accused of being anti-monarchy, the government could split society on the role of the monarchy.

"Thailand's Military on the Offensive", by Pavin Chachavalpongpun, Wall Street Journal, April 19, 2011

This whole trend has already backfired on the army, which also is re-politicized ever since the 2006 coup, and continues to do since Prayuth began as commander-in-chief, much to his disadvantage:

First things first. Gen Prayuth probably has come out to speak on the same issue once too often, so nobody seems to care about his message any longer. (...)

That is because the army chief has already dragged the army into politics by showing support for some political parties and thus turning himself into an enemy of the opposition. The move has made the army vulnerable to attacks from politicians annoyed with Gen Prayuth.

"Tussle of the two Tu's - one red and the other green", Bangkok Post, April 21, 2011

Now, with all political parties stopping to mention the monarchy in their activities, either voluntarily (like the UDD did, despite the fight against the indiscriminate use of the lese-majeste-law against them being one of their main points) or involuntarily (with the election commission essentially issuing a gag order to all political parties, much to the dismay of e.g. Bhum Jai Thai, who recently handed out millions of royal portraits to, again, emphasizing their loyalty), it leaves the army to follow suit and tone down, if it does not want to be at the receiving end of it's own heavy campaigning.

P.S.: This whole overemphasizing-thingy sometimes lead to unusual remarks such as by a regional commander, who referred to himself as a "slave to the King and the country" (original sentence: "ในฐานะที่เป็นผู้บังคับบัญชาทหารในพื้นที่ภาค 2  ที่เป็นกำลังสำคัญในการปกป้องประเทศชาติ  เป็นข้าทาสของในหลวง และแผนดินไทย", source: Daily News) - I guess 'servant' wasn't enough for him.

h/t to Andrew Spooner for links and tips

"Only taboo when it’s inconvenient!" - Interview with Thai author Kaewmala on the outrage at topless Songkran dancers

Originally published at Siam Voices on April 19, 2011 Traditionalists and other self-proclaimed heralds of the 'true' Thai culture are having a tough time these days. Especially in the most recent Songkran (the Thai Lunar New Year) festivities they bemoan that it essentially has been reduced to almost a week full of excessive water fights and heavy drinking, that lead to countless deaths on the roads.

Now they have a new reason to cry wolf ever since a video emerged online, depicting three young girls dancing topless during a nightly water fight on a bustling Silom Road in downtown Bangkok. What followed was a flood of public condemnations, with authorities fearing yet further moral decline and the loss of cultural 'Thai' traditions - at least until the moral panic blows over quickly, which normally is within a few days.

Undoubtedly, the girls (who, according to the latest news updates, are actually underage) have done something terribly regrettable and in today's day and age it was a matter of time when somebody whips out his or her cell phone, films it and uploads it to YouTube. In many other countries they would get little to no further punishment to the public embarrassment - but since this is Thailand, all parties involved are being prosecuted, with the girls facing a 500 Baht ($17) fine and the uploader astonishingly threatened with a hefty 100,000 Baht ($3,320) fine and up to five years of prison thanks to the draconian Computer Crimes Act.

All this public fervor is accompanied by a barrage of self-proclaimed moral figures sternly wagging their fingers. Case in point, the Culture Minister Nipit Intarasombat, who openly scolded the girls and suggested them to do social work, like reading the holiday's true meaning to school children. The minister has also urged authorities to prioritize the hunt of the girls, since their actions are "destroying the country's reputation." Come again?

To discuss about the public outrage and what it says about Thai society, we talked to Thai author "Kaewmala". In her book "sextalk", she gives a unique, raw insight into what Thais think about love, romance, sex and everything that comes with it. She also reflects about Thai language, politics and other current affairs on her blog and also can be followed on Twitter @thai_talk.

Saksith Saiyasombut: Were you surprised about the public outcry following the videos of topless girls?

Kaewmala: Not a bit. The “outcry” was entirely predictable, though still ridiculous and tiresome.

Culture Minister Nipit Intarasombat was very vocal about this incident, saying it negatively affects the reputation of Thai Culture. Is there any place for nudity in (modern) Thai culture?

Are you kidding?! Ever heard of Thai body massage? Or been to Patpong (Ed. note: which is actually located just down the road from where this incident happened), Nana or Ratchada? People often shed their clothes in spas and broth-, sorry, message palors, you know.

Seriously, I think Mr. Nipit was just being a good Thai parrot reciting the inviolable state of Thai Culture (with a capital C). The fact that he is the minister of Culture means he has to be an even more zealous parrot with an official mission to “protect” the “reputation” of Thai Culture. Of course what Mr. Nipit and his ministry consider “Thai Culture” may not be the same for much of the Thai public, many of whom have moved along with time to see Thai culture in its existence in the present century— not the one frozen in time or fashion like that exists in the mind of Mr. Nipit and other Thais like him.

In my view it’s the official, fantasized notion of “culture” (shared among many conservative Thais) that is at the root of the “outcry” - and the source of hilarity as we have seen in the Ministry of Culture’s reaction to the Topless in Silom incident and its response to the public criticism of its hypocrisy, its website banner with several traditional beautiful pairs of bare Thai breasts in particular. (Ed. note: on the same day word of the banner made rounds around the banner, the ministry quickly replaced it with another one.)

Is the harsh reaction partly because of the country's sensitivity towards its international cliché of 'easy' girls the government is trying hard to clamp down?

I’m not sure if that’s what people, the source of the outcry, were thinking. I’m inclined to think that their reaction was almost automatic really. Every time a Thai girl’s bare skin is exposed to the public, you can count on people like Mr. Nipit to jump up and down, pointing to the vice, ranting on the deterioration and eventual apocalyptical destruction of Thai Culture like a bunch of Thai cultural Taliban squad. In fact, it would not be inappropriate to call them Thai Cultural Talibans as their idea of Thai Culture is based on faith, not facts.

The way these people go on and on about Thai female chastity you would think all Thai women remain a virgin till their breasts are wrinkled like a pair of old socks. Of course that isn’t the case. Many Thais and non-Thais do know that not a century ago, Thai women were still walking around bare breasted. So where did this make-believe puritan “model” of Thai Culture come from? It sure didn’t come from the old, ordinary Thai ways. Thai folks in the old days weren’t sexually uptight if you read old Thai literature. Just read "Khun Chang Khun Phaen", the classical Thai epic, the hero Khun Phaen made a move on the heroine Nang Pim when he was a still novice in yellow robes, in the temple. He broke into her bed chambers at night, slept with her servant, before making his way into her bed, in the same night

King Rama V’s and his successor’ mission to modernize Siam involved importing Western technologies and values, initially to apply to the royal and noble classes and those in the upper echelons of society. The modernization program was quite successful and the new modern ways would spread among the aspiring classes of officials, merchants and commoners. I gather Victorian values came with this wave of Western import, then another wave when Phibun Songkram made it mandatory for Thais to civilize up, or else! And that included not walking around bare-chested.

Phibun’s time was just 70-80 years ago, but modern Thai history education is funny. Somehow it has managed to make many Thais believe that we’ve always been the way are told to be. Proper, grand, and “civilized.” Thai females are the embodiment of the post-Phibun ideal of Thai Culture: very prim and proper. Of course I’m not suggesting that our ancestors weren’t civilized or Thai women were historically slutty, but this notion of “civilized” and “proper” ("riaproy pen kulasatri Thai") is recently constructed and if it has any root in the old Thai culture it wasn’t from the ordinary folks. What we have here is the adoption of the old Siamese court culture combined with the newly imported and constructed idea of culture to be the official national culture known to Thais only in the last few generations.

The sad part is I don’t think many Thais like Mr. Nipit realize that their idea of Thai Culture is a recent construct, something of a delusion. The problem with what’s made up is that sooner or later it’ll come unstuck, exposed But the problem is it’s culturally delusional people are in the position of power dictating what is and isn’t Thai Culture.

What do you think of some early suggestions that the girls might be working girls or even katoeys?

That to me is quite an interesting aspect, though again, not unpredictable. Those who have a set way of seeing things, in this case an inflexible idea of what “real” Thai women should be can’t process or accept the fact that some actual Thai women would do things outside of their expectations. So some tried to rationalize the incident by supposing that the girls must either be hookers, katoey or drunk. The three Topless in Silom girls turned out to be 13, 15 and 16 years old. Not working girls. Not katoey. Not drunk. They’ll have to chew on that!

The really interesting part of this reaction to me is that the implication that if these girls were prostitutes and not real women (but transvestites) their exposing their breasts would somehow be acceptable. Apparently this may not be the case either, given the cops in Pichit province arrested two katoeys for dancing bare breasted. The subtext of these reactions is that women who sell their bodies and “Type 2 female” transgender have less value than natural born women who are the “good girls.” The same people (men) who would demand female chastity from the “good girls” would be visiting brothels or massage palors and have their ways with “Type 2 females” because they are thought to be game, available, easy.

What does it say about Thai society, when even the person who filmed and uploaded the video is being prosecuted?

Is he? Or she? I didn’t know. But for sure, the punishment for possessing and disseminating the offending clip (100,000 Baht or $3,320 fine and up to 5 years jail) compared to 500 baht fine for the girls exposing themselves, is beyond ridiculous. But this is the usual shooting the messenger syndrome. It’s just the pattern that we’ve known Thai authorities to do: tackle the tail-end of the problem first.

What does this whole brouhaha say about the maturity of society's openness towards sexuality? Is there a sexual hypocrisy?

We can spend hours discussing Thai maturity or lack thereof in sexual matters, but the word hypocrisy sums it up pretty well.

Obviously, sexuality is still a taboo in Thailand, with sex ed lacking on the school curriculum and censorship cracking down harder on nude scenes than on e.g. depiction of gruesome violence. Is this yet another case, as seen in many other cultures and countries, of the youth being more knowledgeable and thus being more comfortable with sexuality?

Sexuality both is and isn’t taboo in Thailand. It is taboo only when it’s inconvenient or causes embarrassment (real or perceived). Thais like to think that we are a conservative and proper society when we really aren’t - at least behind closed doors. People have a delusion that Thai kids are too innocent to be contaminated by sex education, another area of inability to deal with facts. There are people who actually buy into the ideal Thai Culture line (good, grand, long-lived, sexually innocent or sexless, religiously Buddhist). And these people will not tolerate any deviation from this ideal and would sing the chorus to the occasional outcries, whenever the media drum one up. Like most cultures, much of the Thai Culture is sexualized (mostly involving females) and people are drawn to sex.

On violence, my theory is that we Thais still have our originally Thai penchant for violence. Thai people love blood and gore. Stabbing, kick boxing, shooting, blowing things up - you name it. You might even say it’s in the culture. This Thai love for violence has never gone through any westernizing or civilizing process, so here we are. Sex is bad (new notion believed to be old). Violence is normal.

A recent public opinion poll in the aftermath of the controversy, a whopping 91 per cent said that Thai society has long deteriorated. Do you agree?

Deteriorated from what? Some fantasized golden place and time? I don’t know where or when that society was. Plus, the chance of 91% of poll respondents giving the same answer can only result from a set of push questions from the pollsters. I would not lend too much credence to that type of polls.

What needs to be done? Does Thai society need to 'loosen up'?

Thai society needs to get real. Work with the facts, not fiction or fantasy of what Thai Culture is said to be. And understand that cultures are not static. A culture cannot be frozen in time or in some fantasy like a fairy tale. Cultures change as people change. Culture is supposed to evolve, for better and for worse.

As we see, increasingly Thai government is tightening its control over the Thai narratives and rules on culture, morality and behavior of citizens. The tension of late is that more and more Thais are unable and unwilling to accept the official(ly imposed) narratives. We'll see how this emerging struggle will turn out.

Finally it’s just a couple pairs of breasts! Get over it! There are plenty other consequential issues to deal with. People are killed, our systems are broken, the country’s future isn’t looking that great! Don’t get distracted by just a couple pairs of breasts!

Thai military quashes coup rumors yet again

Originally published at Siam Voices on April 6, 2011 Thailand's military has yet again denied any rumors of a coup and that the armed forces would not intervene in an upcoming election later this year. After a monthly meeting of senior military officers, in a joint statement on Tuesday supreme commander Songkitti Jaggabatara, in attendance of army chief Prayuth Chan-ocha, navy commander Kamthorn Phumhiran and air force chief Itthaporn Subhawong, said:

Gen Songkitti said there would "definitely not be a coup". The armed forces operate under the constitution and support democratic rule, he said. [...]

"Any military unit which moves troops out of barracks without permission will be deemed to have committed insurrection. Feel free to file complaints against any soldier who conducts any political activity to pressure you. If there are grounds to the complaints, I will order an inquiry," he said before his announcement was broadcast yesterday. [...]

"Stop linking the armed forces [to the coup rumours]. Don't ever separate the military from the people," he said, adding that the military would work hand in hand with members of the public to ensure the country moves forward.

"Military leaders unified against a coup", Bangkok Post, April 6, 2011

Some noteworthy points here: This is yet another denial of a coup rumors, which have boiled up quite frequently in recent months, mostly fueled by the political opposition. The Thai Report has counted 11 denials so far in this year alone, which given the circumstances not too surprising with an election expected in the near future and the burning question what the military will do if the opposition Puea Thai Party wins and potentially swaps out high-ranking officers.

Some political observers [...] reckon that a Puea Thai-led administration may have more than a few scores to settle. One of them is to remove any standing legacy of the 2006 coup and, if that is true, Gen Prayuth could be shown the door if the party makes its way into Government House. [...]

The moment of truth for Gen Prayuth would come in September, which is reshuffle time and the most crucial career juncture for many ambitious soldiers.

This year, many major military posts will be left vacant. Supreme Commander Songkitti Jaggabatara and defence permanent secretary Kittipong Ketkowit will go into mandatory retirement, paving the way for a potential shake-up where other active top brass could ''move around''.

Gen Prayuth, who retires in three years, may be moved to succeed either Gen Songkitti or Gen Kittipong. But that depends on how strong a sentiment for reconciliation there is prevailing. If there comes a need for a ''colour-neutral'' chief, then Gen Prayuth may have to move aside.

"Whose finger on the trigger?", Bangkok Post, March 26, 2011

The article goes on to mention that the previous Puea Thai-incarnations during the Samak and Somchai governments have made sure to maintain a good relationship to the military (which in the end didn't help though) as does the current government with granting military toys (see previous coverage here and here) among other things. It'd be indeed interesting to see if a PT-led government would uproot all the officers loyal to Prayuth, a move to prevent dissent against him, and plant their people instead.

But for now, sadly the rule of thumb again is, with such a re-politicized military, a coup is never fully out of the question.

Thailand’s opposition searches for a leader

Originally published at Siam Voices on March 23, 2011 With a potential snap election looming in the not-so-distant future all political parties are preparing for a very short, but certainly intense, campaign. For the opposition Puea Thai party (PT) this means finding a new leader and a promising PM candidate. But not much has changed since last year when then-leader Yongyuth Wichaidit was bizarrely re-elected just days after he resigned (see my and Bangkok Pundit's previous posts here and here, respectively). In fact, more contenders have entered the scene.

Last week's censure debate was a good opportunity for Puea Thai not only to attack the government on their countless wrongdoings and thus present them in a bad light, but also for some MPs to audition as the next leader of the party or even of the country. The opposition agreed for Mingkwan Saengsuwan to lead the parliamentary grilling. The former Toyota executive and former Commerce Minister is described as soft-spoken but also largely unknown to the public. And while the mud-slinging was left to others, Mingkwan tried to portray himself as the next PM. Bangkok Post's columnist Suranand Vejjajiva wrote about his performance:

So far Mr Mingkwan has performed better than expected. He was calm and able to control his opening delivery which listed all the allegations of abuse, corruption and mismanagement of the current administration. Although listeners were somewhat distracted by his 119 plates of prepared PowerPoint display, this performance surpassed his previous speeches. If he can tie up the loose ends and make a convincing closing statement tonight, his path towards leading Puea Thai would become clearer.

"Win-lose-draw in the censure debate", by Suranand Vejjajiva, Bangkok Post, March 18, 2011

That also applies to the rest of the sessions, going so far as to announce in his closing speech that he'd be the party's candidate to contest against Abhisit in the next election (btw, the government unsurprisingly survived the no-confidence vote). Nevertheless, or maybe because of that, Mingkwan was criticized for his performance by his own party:

Pheu Thai Party MPs will take their party list MP Mingkwan Saengsuwan to task for "overpresenting" himself as the PM candidate of Pheu Thai during last week's censure motion, a source said yesterday. (...)

Some party MPs are disappointed with Mingkwan's performance in grilling the government saying he spent too much time on the floor wooing voters instead of launching a stinging attack, causing a party setback, the source said.

"Pheu Thai MPs critical of party's censure performance", The Nation, March 21, 2011

And worse, during a general meeting on Tuesday, where a new party leader should have been nominated, Mingkwan was left hung out to dry because the party members couldn't decide on a new front-runner. Part of the plan was to make him the new head of PT and to introduce his restructuring plan for the party. But the plan was thwarted by none other than...

However, Thaksin, who is the party's de facto leader, passed a message to the meeting blocking the group's plan saying it was not the right time to make a choice. The party could continue its activities under its current structure which would not cause it any harm.

Earlier, there had been speculation that Thaksin would choose between Mr Mingkwan and his sister Yingluck Shinawatra, considered an outsider to be the party's candidate for premier.

"Thaksin leaves Mingkwan dangling", Bangkok Post, March 23, 2011

The role of Thaksin in the Puea Thai Party should not be underestimated*. The party is still very much loyal to him and the fact that members are still meeting and consulting him for key decisions indicates that Thaksin is still calling the shots in the re-re-incarnation of his former Thai Rak Thai party. Since late last year, it was reported that he wants to 'install' his own sister Yingluck as the new party leader.

Yingluck Shinawatra is the youngest sibling of Thaksin and an experienced business executive, having served at the family-owned AIS communications and now working at SC Asset, a property firm with the Shinawatra family as the largest major shareholder (conflict of interest, anyone?). Although she is not a party executive or even a member and has virtually no political experience, she claims to have attended several party executive meetings. Despite showing no clear sign of any political ambitions and even just recently ruling out a potential candidacy, Yingluck is still being brokered as the top contender at PT. She is also blessed by the support of somebody, who was just recently considered a front-runner as well.

Those backing her include Puea Thai chairman of MPs Chalerm Yubamrung, who has been disgruntled by Mr Mingkwan's attempt to take the party's helm. The veteran politician has threatened to quit the party if Mr Mingkwan is successful.

"Yingluck rules out taking Puea Thai helm", Bangkok Post, March 28, 2011

Chalerm, a seasoned politician for over 25 years, has made no qualms in the past about his contempt towards Mingkwan. Already earlier this year he threatened to leave the party should Mingkwan lead the censure debates and on Wednesday, as a consequence of being snubbed...

Veteran politician Chalerm Yubamrung has resigned as a party-list MP, but remains a member of the Puea Thai Party, Si Sa Ket MP Thanes Kruerat said on Wednesday. (...)

Asked about a report that Mr Chalerm felt belittled when asked by Chaturon Chaisaeng, a former executive of the dissolved Thai Rak Thai Party and an adviser to Puea Thai's censure debate team, to cut short his debate speech in the House of Representatives, to allow Mingkwan Saengsuwan more time to deliver his conclusion, Mr Thanes admitted that this might also be a reason.

"Miffed Chalerm resigns MP seat", Bangkok Post, March 23, 2011

So that pretty much leaves us with Yingluck and Mingkwan. If Mingkwan becomes the front-runner, it means for the party a step away from Thaksin, since the party restructuring may or may not be a means to lessen the influence of the exiled former prime minister. If Yingluck becomes the party's new leader, it's underlining Thaksin's influence in the Puea Thai Party and strengthening his position as the de-facto leader who pulls the strings even from outside the country. The party has announced that it will reveal its PM candidate after the parliament has dissolved, which should in the coming months. Until then, they will have to assess their options and ultimately decide which way they will go into the next elections.

*I should stress that no one should fall for the over-simplified "Red Shirts = Puea Thai Party = Thaksin" fallacy that many of their enemies would like us to think. Though there are overlapping intersections between these three areas (e.g. red shirt leader Jatuporn is a Puea Thai MP), in my opinion there are (like in any other movement) different visions among the red shirts and part of them want to move beyond Thaksin. But on the other hand, seeing Jatuporn still on stage and Thaksin still phoning-in during the rallies show that the leaders might be one step behind their followers.

Thai deputy PM: Protesters died because they ran into bullets

Originally published at Siam Voices on March 8, 2011 Here's a quote by deputy prime minister Suthep Thaugsuban from a few days ago:

เราไม่คิดเข่นฆ่าประชาชน ไม่เคยใช้กำลังเจ้าหน้าที่ตำรวจทหารเข้าสลายการชุมนุม แต่ที่ตายเพราะวิ่งเข้ามาใส่

We had no intentions to kill our people, we have never ordered the police and the army to use force during the dispersal of the [red shirt] protest but those [who got] killed ran into [the bullets]*.

""เทือก"ลั่นได้ 300 เสียงไม่ง้อ "เนวิน-เติ้ง" แนะจับตาศึกซักฟอกศอกกลับฝ่ายค้าน", ASTV, March 5, 2011

I don't where to start here...! First off, this remark was done during a lecture called "Democrat Ideology" ("อุดมการณ์ประชาธิปัตย์") at a seminar named "The new generation, the Thai future" ("รุ่นใหม่ อนาคตไทย"). More can be read here in Thai.

Suthep has always been a gaffe-tastic politician, who regularly puts his foot in mouth. But this is a new low even for him. Is he really suggesting that these 90 killed and thousands of injured people were just unlucky to ran into the bullets? Is he suggesting the Japanese cameraman and the Italian journalist were victims of their own fault because they ran into the crossfire? Are the nurses and medical workers killed because they just couldn't wait to treat the wounded until the shooting is over? Were those six killed at Wat Pathum Wanaram accidentally shot because they ran for cover from the soldiers on the elevated Skytrain tracks shooting at them? How far can anyone be further from reality?

I could go on forever with this rant, but this shows that Suthep, the DSI and all other authorties are dishonest and not caring about the truth, since it means to take responsibility. All the talks about fear that a hasted investigation might cause unrest is just an excuse not to face the problems at hand and what they seem to realized the least is that the more this drags on, the more attempts to put a blanket over what happened, the wound will not heal and this will eventually lead to more unrest!

h/t to @KrisKoles and Bangkok Pundit

UPDATE: In case anyone thinks that Suthep was misquoted by one source there, you can read this very quote not only at ASTV, but also at Khao Sod, Thai Rath, Spring News and also on Suthichai Yoon's site - they all report the same insane quote!

UPDATE 2: As Bangkok Pundit points out in his take on the story the same quote also appeared on state media channel MCOT and astonishingly also on the website of the RTAF’s Directorate of Intelligence. Also, the fact that not one single Thai news organization has not picked up on this story, neither Thai or English language, speaks volume...!

*Note: For the sake of transparency it should be noted that the brackets were added at a later time.

Unarmed forces: Thai army suffers first weapon theft of the year

Originally published at Siam Voices Media outlets have reported on Friday that over 130 weapons have been stolen from an army arsenal at 1st Infantry Battalion at the army's Infantry Centre in Prachuap Khiri Khan province. The disappearance was noted during an inspection by a commander of the battalion and quickly reported local police on Thursday night. The weapons missing make up quite an impressive loot:

Capt Apiwat [Saengsoong, a company commander of the 1st Infantry Battalion] said the weapons found to be missing were: 117 M16 rifles, ten 11mm handguns, ten rocket propelled grenade (RPG) launchers, five M79 grenade launchers, four M60 machine guns, one 60mm mortar, four Minimi light machineguns and a large quantity of assorted ammunition.

"Guns missing from arsenal, sergeant-major flees", Bangkok Post, February 4, 2011

During the day, some weapons have been found though:

On Friday morning Lt-Col Manorot and military police went to search the house of a sergeant major who was suspected to have stolen the weapons, and found part of the missing arsenal. However, the sergeant major was not there. He fled before military police arrived.

"Guns missing from arsenal, sergeant-major flees", Bangkok Post, February 4, 2011

Army weapons being stolen are a regular occurrence with at least two similar incidents reported in the last 12 months - the last one in September in Lop Buri and the other in March earlier that year from a base in the southern province of Phatthalung. In both incidents, there were no signs of break-ins or any other traces of force. All-in-all, a pretty big embarrassment for the armed forces.

The question now in such cases is what happens with the weapons and where do they go. In this particular case, the suspicion seems to be already very clear:

The source said the sergeant major who had fled was known to be involved in illegal arms trading.  Nobody knew which groups he had sold weapons to -- be they Karen on the Thai-Burmese border, the red-shirts or southern insurgents.

"Guns missing from arsenal, sergeant-major flees", Bangkok Post, February 4, 2011

Also, to underline that this is not a new phenomenon The Straits Times wrote about this matter back in October.

Most of this war material went overland to insurgents in Burma and Laos, (...) But it is the domestic sourcing that is likely most relevant to the unsettled atmosphere now prevalent in Thailand.

Weaponry obtained in Thailand and destined for the black market trade originated mainly from local military stocks or from unscrupulous arms dealers. (...)

"According to a Bangkok-based intelligence source," I wrote in 2000, "one method of siphoning from Thai army stocks involves over-reporting the amount of ammunition consumed during training exercises."

The paper further notes: "Locally- sourced military equipment is largely purloined from Royal Thai Army stocks. This includes material simply stolen from storage areas and material obtained with the collusion of corrupt military personnel who over-report usage and siphon off the excess.

"Arms trafficking in Thailand not a new phenomenon", by Robert Karniol, The Straits Times, October 18, 2010

The author points out the attempts to link the disappearance of the weapons to radical, violent elements of the red shirts or a third party inciting chaos in order to destabilize the national security and to discredit any anti-government movement, as seen during the red shirt protests last year where numerous explosions have occurred, mostly by M79 grenade launchers.

Shortly after the weapons theft in March 2010, there was a certain amount of fear that these would be used during the red shirts' protest that began shortly thereafter. Now we have yet another theft and also another upcoming red shirt protest next week - so let's see how long it will take until the finger pointing starts.

BONUS: For those who understand Thai I recommend to watch this post by @thaitvnews, where it shows that the army has denied the disappearance a few times until they have finally admitted that the weapons are gone...!