New lengthy piece by Robert Amsterdam, about the elections and the military links to the Democrat's. Wont post it all here, it is too long, but worth 5 minutes of your time....introduction included. This is to be part of a series.....
Edited out one bit.
Puppetmasters: Elections As Instruments of Military Rule
One year ago, the Royal Thai Government massacred ninety-one people to avoid an early election it feared it might lose. Finally, the general elections for which dozens of Red Shirts gave their lives are on track to take place in June or July 2011. While it is hoped that the elections will be free of outright fraud and ballot stuffing, the com-petitiveness and fairness of the process are being under-mined in many other ways.
The upcoming elections will take place in a context of in-timidation and repression, coupled with the continuing efforts by most of the institutions of the Thai state to secure a victory for the Democrat Party. Aside from com-peting against a hobbled opposition under rules designed to artificially boost its seat share, the Democrat Party will once again avail itself of the assistance of the military, the bureaucracy, the judiciary, and the rest of the establish-ment. These institutions stand ready to commit whatever money, administrative resources, and television airtime might be necessary to haul the otherwise unelectable Mark Abhisit Vejjajiva over the hump.
In this series of reports, Amsterdam & Peroff details the attempts by Thailand’s Establishment to fix the results of the upcoming general elections. This report — the first in the series — focuses on the Royal Thai Army’s effort to protect its dominant position in Thailand’s political life by manufacturing a victory at the ballot box for the Democrat Party. As usual, fraud and intimidation are the generals’ stock-in-trade.
1. INTRODUCTION
The Commander-in-Chief of the Royal Thai Army, General Prayuth Chan-ocha, promised the Thai public that the military will observe a policy of strict neutrality in the 2011 general elections. Given the resources that Thailand’s armed forces have expended since 2006 to steer voters into returning the desired election results, overthrow elected governments it did not consider worthy of its support, and impose its own proxies on a recalcitrant electorate,there is no chance that the generals will stay on the sidelines. Indeed, just asin the 2007 elections, the Royal Thai Army has its own candidate for Prime Minister — Mark Abhisit Vejjajiva. Whereas their efforts failed to save the Democrat Party from defeat in 2007, this time Thailand’s armed forces are determined to stop at nothing to manufacture a legislative majority on behalf of Mark Abhisit. Not only is the dominant role that the military has managed to assert over Thailand’s political system at stake in these elections; the prospect that an opposition victory might result in the investigation and prosecution of senior generals for their role in the massacre of Red Shirt protesters in April and May 2010 has raised the stakes even further. For Thailand’s armed forces, defeat is not an option in the 2011 general elections.
A few months ago, Mark Abhisit made the imaginative claim that the Thai military remains under civilian control.1 Considering that he owes his job to the generals, the Prime Minister knows better. In fact, with the choice of Mark Abhisit as its frontman, the Royal Thai Army has shown that it has learned the lessons of 1992, when General Suchinda Kraprayoon’s insistence on personally serving as Prime Minister triggered massive protests in Bangkok, complete with a massacre of unarmed protesters. To avoid a repeat of that debacle, Mark Abhisit’s urbane demeanor and patrician pedigree are the ideal cover for the military’s continued dominance of Thailand’s political life. Beyond the window-dressing, however, the reality is that the Thai military has almost never been under civilian control. What is worse, the generals have more power today than they have had in decades.
Having staged more coups than any modern army, the Thai military’s views still figure into every political calculus. And while its budget has more than doubled since the 2006 coup, the events of April and May have shown that its competence and commitment to democratic values are beyond the pale of analysis. Unlike his predecessor, General Prayuth Chan-ocha finds it impossible to resist the temptation of reminding the public that he is in charge. Almost every day, the public is treated to his wind baggery on a range of topics lying well beyond his narrow constitutional authority and still more limited intellect.2 The military’s handling of the border dispute with Cambodia, moreover, has offered ample evidence for the proposition that the generals take no orders from civilians. Embarrassingly, General Prayuth and Defense Minister Prawit Wongsuwon recently rejected Indonesian mediation of the dispute, to which the government had already agreed, leaving dumbfounded Cambodian officials to wonder aloud whether it is the generals or the civilians who have the right to negotiate.3 Free to disregard, in the most conspicuous ways, whatever instructions are issued by a feeble civilian government, General Prayuth and his associates are determined to return Mark Abhisit’s servile administration to power — if at all possible, through means that may allow the government to claim some “democratic” legitimacy.
This report examines the state of civil-military relations in Thailand, highlighting the dominance of the Royal Thai Army over the country’s civilian government on each of the five dimensions that experts generally consider to measure civilian control — elite recruitment, public policy, internal security,external defense, and military organization. The report goes on to illustrate the crucial role that Thailand’s armed forces will play in the upcoming general elections in support of the Democrat Party. The generals appear to have taken a two-pronged approach to the elections. On the one hand, the rumors of a military coup, the thinly veiled threats of violence and chaos, <snip> hurled against the opponents of the regime serve to intimidate the electorate into voting for the Democrat Party, out of fear of what the military might do should the opposition win yet again.On the other hand, the Royal Thai Army has committed massive financial, organizational, and logistical resources to fixing the outcome of the elections. In constituencies around the country, the military is actively engaged in the effort to mobilize Democrat Party voters, buy the support of influential local figures, bully opposition candidates, and suppress the opposition’s vote. While the junta’s recourse to these practices in lead-up the 2007 elections was extensive (and well documented), the military’s aggressiveness has since intensified with the skyrocketing costs of a potential electoral defeat.
1. Shawn W. Crispin, “Tentative Democrat, Reluctant Autocrat,” AsiaTimes Online,December 15, 2010.Asia Times Online :: Southeast Asia news and business from Indonesia, Philippines, Thailand, Malaysia and Vietnam
2. See Pravit Rojanaphruk, “The Army Chief Who Dons Too Many Hats,” The Nation,April 20, 2011.An army chief who dons too many hats
3. “Govt United on Border Observers, Says Abhisit,” Bangkok Post, April 11, 2011.Bangkok Post : Govt united on border observers, says Abhisit
Results 1 to 25 of 1621
Hybrid View
-
21-04-2011, 02:37 PM #1Out there...
- Join Date
- Jul 2009
- Last Online
- @
- Location
- BKK
- Posts
- 40,030
Last edited by StrontiumDog; 21-04-2011 at 02:43 PM.
"Slavery is the daughter of darkness; an ignorant people is the blind instrument of its own destruction; ambition and intrigue take advantage of the credulity and inexperience of men who have no political, economic or civil knowledge. They mistake pure illusion for reality, license for freedom, treason for patriotism, vengeance for justice."-Simón Bolívar
-
22-04-2011, 01:06 PM #2Thailand Expat
- Join Date
- Dec 2006
- Last Online
- 19-10-2023 @ 10:19 PM
- Location
- Bangkok Thailand
- Posts
- 2,231
If we are going to post everything bobbie says, then it seems ok to post what tony has to say as well. At least we know tony doesn't get paid by the word.
Originally Posted by StrontiumDog
TH
Thursday, April 21, 2011
Warning Signs Over Old Siam
Wall Street Journal article signaling uptick in Thai-globalist agenda.
by Tony Cartalucci
Thailand's army has recently been flexing its military might, but to what end? The globalists make their predictable suggestions.
Bangkok, Thailand April 22, 2011 - The Thai armed forces have this week been carrying out a series of military exercises across the country in a show of strength. With one particular exercise taking place in Thailand's capital of Bangkok, one must wonder what sort of security threat requires a mechanized army in the heart of the nation, far from any of its borders?
The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) offers up one possible answer in an article written by Pavin Chachavalpongpun of the globalist funded Institute of Southeast Asian Studies* titled "Thailand's Military on the Offensive." Pavin suggests the Thai military is attempting to discredit and intimidate political opponents ahead of an upcoming election, using the threat of a coup and Thailand's lese-majeste law. Lese-majeste, under Article 112 of the Thai Criminal Code includes defaming, insulting or threatening the Thai Royal Family. The WSJ piece suggests that 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."
Another possible answer becomes apparent when delving into the military's "political opponents" which the WSJ article only eludes to. What if any threats have they really made against Thailand's long standing, highly revered monarchy and what are their implications in a broader geopolitical context? The WSJ specifically mentions as the military's political opponents the "proxies of former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra," the billionaire globalist now residing in Dubai as he directs a by-the-book color revolution in the streets of Bangkok.
The cult of Thaksin: through years of socialist handouts and ceaseless propaganda, Thaksin has managed to create a cult ofpersonality around himself, unassailable by even his own misdeeds.
Thaksin, a former adviser to the Carlyle Group, was literally standing in front of the CFR in NYC on the eve of his ousting from power in 2006 via a bloodless military coup. Since 2006, he has been represented by fellow Carlyle man James Baker and his Baker Botts law firm, International Crisis Group's Kenneth Adelman and his Edelman Public Relations firm (also a corporate sponsor of the "color revolution college" Movements.org), Belfer Center adviser Robert Blackwill of Barbour Griffith & Rogers, and now Robert Amsterdam of Amsterdam & Peroff, a major corporate member of the globalist Chatham House.
With Robert Amsterdam concurrently representing Russian oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky, who likewise was ousted from financial and political power for selling-out his own country, a disturbing pattern is evident. Amsterdam appears to specialize in using embattled Western proxies, portraying them as political victims and leveraging this supposed moral high ground to undermine target regimes. For Amsterdam's client Khodorkovsky, in addition to criminally consolidating Russia's economic resources and preparing to put them under Western receivership, he had also been building a Soros style "Open Russian Foundation" with Henry Kissinger and "Lord" Jacob Rothschild. This foundation aimed at permanently replacing Russia's establishment with the globalists' civil society underlay.
Globalist lawyer Robert Amsterdam using human rights and contrived reports as leverage to undermine the Thai government and bolster the color revolution. Amsterdam also represents Russian criminal billionaire Mikhail Khodorkovsky.
Thaksin too, after a promising first term in office, began criminally consolidating power and wealth, eventually trying to ramrod through a US-Thai FTA without parliamentary approval. He also meticulously built up a Tammy Hall-style political machine up north which served as the groundwork for what would later become the current red shirt color revolution. Through village funds, socialist handouts, and outright vote buying, Thaksin built a voting bloc that would consistently return him, or any proxy running in his name, to power regardless of their flagrant crimes against both Thailand and humanity, including his drug war which saw over 2,000 people extra-judicially murdered in the streets of Thailand over a 3 month period. Thaksin's supporters, much like the globalist Newsweek magazine, are more than happy to exonerate him, citing the "democratic" strides he made while in office.
As with Khodorkovsky's "Open Russian Foundation," there was a social component to Thaksin's activities aimed at not only undermining Thailand's establishment and culture, but entirely replacing it. This became more than evident after his ousting in 2006 when his red movement's official publications began frequently featuring stories of various historical monarchies being deposed and replaced by alternative systems of governance. Monarchies frequently featured within these publications include the French & Burmese monarchies and the Russian monarchy. It should be noted that each was replaced by a despotic system in many ways more tyrannical than the systems they sought to replace - in France the Emperor Napoleon, in Burma the British Empire, and in Russia the Soviet Union.
From the official publications of Thaksin's "red" color revolution. Anti-Monarchist, pro-Communist propaganda. (click image to enlarge)
Throughout the red shirts' publications other themes include insinuated threats aimed at the monarchy and more recently, calls to emulate uprisings in Tunisia, Egypt, and perhaps most alarmingly, comparisons made between ousting Qaddafi in Libya and Thailand's current prime minster. Considering that each one of these nations amongst the "Arab Spring" are textbook examples of foreign funded subversion, it is telling and troubling indeed that Thailand's red shirts are standing in open solidarity with them. Red shirt propaganda can be found online as well, including on the National Endowment for Democracy funded Prachatai website.
The red color revolution of Thailand stands in solidarity with US-funded "Arab Spring." The middle scan compares Qaddafiwith Thailand's current prime minster, stating they will both die in their seats of power. (click image to enlarge.) For more red shirt propaganda, please visit 2bangkok.com's
publication archives.
Red shirt intelligentsia Giles "Jai" Ungpakorn gives us further insight into the "alternative system" the red shirt movement under Thaksin plans to usher in. Ungpakorn is a self-confessed Marxist and believes in turning Thailand into a socialist welfare state, expanding on Thaksin's populist policies with the complete redistribution of wealth, and the entire removal of the monarchy from Thai society. He published the "Red Siam Manifesto" within which he enumerates nearly every policy in the globalists' playbook including abortion, environmentalism, and outright communism.
Considering Thaksin's affiliations and his agenda, stated ad nasuem in manifestos and a library's worth of official publications stretching back to 2009, it is quite clear that the Thai military's recent show of strength is not merely attempting to use lese-majeste law to pressure their political opposition. They are responding to a foreign funded, globalist influenced, concerted attempt to remove entirely Thailand's laws, institutions, economic foundation, and even its history and culture. While the WSJ warns the military of possibly politicizing the monarchy by being overprotective, the truth is that Thaksin and his color revolution have already done so long ago in their bid to forcibly transform Thai society.
"We need International Democracy:" Same revolution, different country, different color. The "Arab Spring" is a global gambit.
The threat is very real, as in April 2009, Thaksin's red shirts turned up in the streets of Bangkok, rioting, burning, and destroying property as they heeded their Dubai-based leader's call to rise in revolution. The military was able to disperse the mobs and restore order. Similar street demonstrations and even bloodier violence would play out in Bangkok in April and May of 2010. This time, red shirt leaders made good on their promises to bring in armed militants to wage their "people's war."
300 militants armed with M-79 grenade launchers were admittedly fielded by red shirt leaders. Ensuing battles would kill 7 soldiers in an April 10, 2010 ambush, and ultimately 84 other people through a combination of gun battles, arson, and grenade attacks over the following weeks. However, despite the chaos and widespread damage caused by this second attempted "people's revolution," Thai troops were again able to restore order. While Thailand's 70 million people cringe in anticipation for a third round, recent military exercises may have been a show of readiness and willingness to do their job again.
With uprisings in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Syria, and Yemen all featuring militant components and rogue military officers leading coups, insurrections, and regime change, now admittedly all US-funded and orchestrated, Thailand's recent military show of force may well be aimed at potential dissenters within the their own ranks. Thaksin's political party included retired General Chavalit Yongchaiyudh until he recently and unexpectedly announced his supposed resignation. Thaksin's cousin Chaisit Shinawatra is also a high ranking retired general. Both are still highly influential politically and militarily, with Chaisit just recently giving his blessings to Thaksin's nomination of his own sister to run in his place in upcoming elections.
Whether or not Chavalit or Chaisit would, or could stage an "Arab Spring" style regime change is entirely speculative. There are many other possible candidates, as Thailand is neither militarily nor politically homogeneous, centralized, or for that matter, evenly divided. What is certain is that the political chess pieces are moving rapidly now within Thailand, as globalist eyes watch and hands meddle, including those of George Soros and Zbigniew Brzezinski's International Crisis Group (ICG).
The ICG has recently called for international observers to monitor upcoming elections. Such monitoring, as was the case in Belarus, is ill-advised, as unsatisfactory results for western-backed candidates, coupled with the alleged legitimacy of international monitors, only gives opposition leaders more leverage to escalate their campaigns with calls of "rigged elections." That the ICG has turned its attention toward Thailand as of late is especially troubling, considering its recent role in facilitating regime change in Egypt.
Geopolitical Implications
Thailand of course, constitutes part of China's "String of Pearls." Through destabilizing or instituting regime changes in Thailand, Myanmar, Vietnam, or even as far as Pakistan, essential links in China's logistical and tactical chains would be compromised or entirely broken. With recent attempts to foster an overtly foreign-backed color revolution against Beijing itself, it is not difficult to believe that similar attempts have or will be made in China's peripheries, just as Western-funded color revolutions have racked Russia's borders since the fall of the Soviet Union, and still threaten to rack republics like Belarus.
Regarding Thailand's strategic importance to China, it possesses the narrow Kra Isthmus that China would like to develop into a Suez/Panama Canal-like project to shorten trips for its oil laden, China-bound tankers. Thailand also serves as an overland conduit, running north and south with a developed rail system connecting Singapore's shipping yards to Laos' capital of Vientiane. China has begun the development of a rail system through Laos and the joint upgrading of Thailand's rail system. Thailand also is one of the world's largest rice exporters, which makes the nation vital to China's future growth and food security.
As with Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Syria, and now Yemen, before US funding, backing, and manipulation was publicly admitted and the geopolitical gambit revealed, armies of faithful devotees and propagandists peddling the empty dream of international democracy will argue that Thailand's red shirt movement is somehow different. They will go through great lengths to deny foreign influence, just as the "Arab Spring" tried, and great lengths to maximize the world's scorn toward the regime they seek to replace.
It is essential that we research entirely all aspects of each upcoming conflict, separating our research from attempts made to play against our emotional and cultural prejudices. While many in the West abhor monarchies, Thais have a similar skepticism and distaste towards the circus that is modern "democracy." We must weigh the globalist dystopia attempting to establish itself worldwide against the regional, nationalistic regimes it seeks to replace. It is also essential that we look to ourselves and our community for pragmatic solutions instead of demagogues like Thaksin Shinwatra and his proxy party which offers socialist handouts and political solutions in exchange for your servile dependency on them and ultimately, their globalist paymasters.
*Donations and support for the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies can be found on .pfd page 88 of their annual report.
Posted by Land Destroyer
Reply With Quote
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
