Blockhead regime

The regime is not only composed of criminals but of a bunch of blockheads. The past couple of days have seen several examples of their status as cretins displayed for all to see.

There was the example provided by the blockhead Palang Pracharat MP, who decided on a bit of political point scoring by “claiming double standards in the distribution of queue tickets for COVID-19 screening and vaccination to residents in the crowded communities…”. This after the regime and the MP’s party had completely failed those communities on the virus outbreak. Community leaders responded, demonstrating that they had thought about what they were doing.

Then there is the minister for making things worse. Health Minister Anutin Charnvirakul was asked by Thai PBS “what he thinks is the most challenging factor in the latest wave of the COVID-19.” A reasonable question you’d think, giving a minister with less arrogance a chance to explain the multiple issues associated with the virus. Here was a free pass to explain why cases remain stubbornly high for Thailand and deaths are increasing. But not Anutin. His response: “There is no challenge…”. 

He goes on to show his mammoth arrogance when he says that all the complaining about the terrible vaccine planning and rollout is from just a few: “Anutin pointed out that people who get infected or are related to them will, of course, say the rollout is too slow.” He seems to be serious. He seems to be a mad man.

At around the same time, Anutin announced that “Pfizer has agreed to reserve 10-20 million doses of their COVID-19 vaccine for Thailand, expected to be delivered in the third and fourth quarters of this year…”. Is this a serious announcement? Is it 10 million or 20 million? Is this just the kind of talk around a table in Thong Lor. Seriously, is this how governments and real companies do business? We suspect that it is just blockhead Anutin and his loose lips.

That’s enough. We could go on to the crazy bow-tied looney royalist at the Ministry of of Higher Education, Science, Research, and Innovation who wants to put Thailand in a space race when it can’t get its vaccine policies in order and prefers to spend his time harassing academics for not breaking any laws. Another blockhead.

With a major update: Palace PR at full throttle II

One of hundreds of pieces of graffiti attacking the king and royal family

As we said in an earlier post, the palace public relations machinery has long had to “manage” Vajiralongkorn’s mostly self-inflicted PR disasters, ranging from his erratic and vengeful behavior to rumors of violence, illnesses, philandering and associations with crime. These PR exercises have mostly involved strategies that had “worked” for his father.

King, queen and ultra-royalist

However, as popular criticism of the monarchy has reached levels that no one can recall in their lifetimes, what we have called the Hello! strategy has emerged, mostly revolving around the women currently closest to King Vajiralongkorn: Queen Suthida, Princess Sirivannavari, and chief concubine Sineenat.

The king is now almost always seen arm-in-arm with Suthida, as she guides her often shaky looking husband around crowds of royalist well-wishers, encouraging the “common” touch of selfies, autographs and statements of encouragement to selected ultra-royalists. The queen is seen as the one recognizing the ultra-royalists,  beaming and fist-pumping to supporters, and directing the king to them.

Sirivannavari as “one of us”

Meanwhile, Sirivannavari is high profile, fostering a kind of “people’s princess” image, seeking to link to younger people. This effort has not always been successful. Protesters know that Sirivannavari has been officially promoted and the recipient of “award” just because she’s the king’s daughter. And, protesters know that she’s cycled through a series of expensive “career choices” that have cost the taxpayer plenty. We recall she was the top student at university, a national badminton player, a diplomat, a Paris fashion designer, etc. That knowledge has led to the princess being spoofed by protesters.

Clipped from LA Times. Photo credit: Jack Taylor AFP / Getty Images

Sineenat has sometimes been seen making up the royal triplet in public, but has recently been off in the countryside, also cultivating a “people’s” semi-royal persona. Yet her troubled, on-again, off-again relationship with the king is well known and rumors of her role in palace and royal family tensions are also widespread.

The general idea seems to be to show that the palace is not really aloof, hugely wealthy, grasping, erratic and uncaring, but is really at one with the people. This is a strategy that carries high risk. After all, making the monarchy “popular” challenges the most basic premise of royals as special, divine, blue-bloods. It is blood and position that counts, not popularity.

But when a royal house is challenged, it is often a spur to make the royals “popular.” And the challenges are coming thick and fast.So strong is the anti-monarchism that even the Hello! strategy is having to be surpassed with publicity that shows the grasping king as “generous.”

In the most high profile PR effort to date, the Bangkok Post reports that the king will “give royal land title deeds worth ’10 billion baht’ to four educational institutes in a handover ceremony.” (That the Post puts the figure in quotation marks suggests a need for caution.)

Our first thought was that this declaration is a response to pro-democracy demonstrators having announced that their next rally will be outside the Crown Property Bureau on 25 November. The palace is trying to pre-empt that demonstration by showing that the king and CPB are “generous.”

Higher Education, Science, Research and Innovation Minister Anek Laothamatas reportedly said:

… ownership of royal title deeds covering more than 100 rai of land along Ratchawithi Road in Dusit district would be handed over to two universities and two schools [Rachawinit elementary school and its secondary school] already located on the land…. Suan Sunandha Rajabhat University will receive title deeds covering more than 60 rai, while Suan Dusit University will be granted more than 37 rai, Mr Anek said, adding that the value of the land was estimated at about 10 billion baht.

That statement is not at all clear. Is there a difference between “ownership of a royal title deed” and ownership of land? How much is “more than”?

We recall that, in 2018, there were reports that these universities had been told that they would need to relocate. The CPB kind of confirmed this.

The Post claims, seeming to cite Anek, that the “land where the universities are located originally belonged to the King and the land is part of Dusit Palace, which is a complex of royal residences.” This means prior to 1932 for it was after that revolution that the new regime used (took over?) some of the land “for educational purposes…”. As Wikipedia has it: “In 1932 the absolute monarchy was abolished and part of the Dusit Palace was reduced and transferred to the constitutional government. This included the Khao Din Wana (เขาดินวนา) to the east of the palace, which was given in 1938 to the Bangkok City Municipality by King Ananda Mahidol to create a public park, which later became Dusit Zoo.”

It seems that the current king is the one who has had this land “returned” to him.

The zoo comes into the Post story: “Apart from the handover of the deeds, the royally-owned land where Dusit Zoo, the country’s first public zoo, was once located will be used for the construction of a public hospital.” It seems to us that this is a recent decision designed to reduce the criticism of the palace’s grasping. Add to that the “Nang Loeng racecourse in Dusit district [which did belong] to the Crown Property Bureau (CPB) … is now to be “transform[ed] … into a public park in commemoration of … King Bhumibol…”. Yes, another one. As far as we can tell, this is another new idea.

Clearly the ideological war is expanding.

Update: The Nation has a listing of the “grants”, saying the king “granted nine land title deeds to government agencies and educational institutions.” Hopefully there’s someone out there who knows more about this than PPT, but the PR on this story seems to overwhelm what seems to have been going on. And we are not sure we know, but we smell fish.

The report states that the “King and Queen arrived at Amporn Sathan Throne in Dusit Palace to hand over land title deeds of royal properties in Bangkok and other provinces to use as government workplaces and educational establishments.” That doesn’t quite sound like the land is changing ownership.

When one looks at the properties involved, it gets fishier still. There are plots of land that have long been occupied and used by government bodies, the military and the Border Patrol Police. Take the latter as an example. The report states:

Commissioner of the Royal Thai Police, Pol General Suwat Jangyodsuk, received a land title deed for an area of 185 rai, 1 ngan and 85.20 square wah, in Cha-am district of Phetchaburi province for use as a working place for Naresuan Camp Border Patrol Police headquarters.

Commander of the Border Patrol Police, Pol Lt-General Wichit Paksa, received a land title deed for an area of 275 rai, 3 ngan and 57.20 square wah in Cha-am district of Phetchaburi province to use for Border Patrol Police headquarters, Rama VI Camp (Maruekhathaiyawan Palace) in Phetchaburi, which was in addition to the land bestowed in 2017.

As far as we know, the BPP has been occupying and using these plots of land since the early and mid 1950s. It isn’t clear to us who owned the land back then, but one source states:

Before building Naresuan camp in Hua Hin, the camp site had been allocated to the army’s royal guard to provide security to the royal family but as soon as [the CIA’s] Bill Lair proposed the site for building a camp for PARU, both Phao and the royal family agreed to give the land to Lair and PARU instead of the army.

Lair and the king. Clipped from Amazon

That seems to suggest that the land might have once belonged to the royal family. It remains unclear to us whether there was any official transfer back then. Another source states that Lair “used an old Imperial Japanese training camp in Hua Hin to train a select crew of Thai police in guerrilla warfare, including parachuting.” It is clear that the king developed quite a jolly relationship with the PARU/BPP and with Lair.

So it seems like the king is acknowledging longstanding occupation and use, if not “ownership.” It remains unclear if receiving the title deed amounts to transferring ownership.

Lug nuts and dipsticks II

Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha has sounded daft and predictably reactionary when he babbled about Facebook. His commentary focused on “the Royalist Marketplace page on Facebook operated by Pavin Chachavalpongpun and the Facebook page of Somsak Jeamteerasakul, both of which contain plenty of sensitive issues related to the monarchy.”

“Sensitive” is royalist-speak for anything that is truthful and critical of the long-absent monarch.

As Thai Enquirer reports, he told reporters that student activists “were being led, in-part, by anti-establishment dissidents living abroad who wished to harm the country.”

That report explains that the general’s “statement echoes those of the army chief and other members of the cabinet who say that the students were being guided by a mysterious third hand while other conservative media figures has blamed the United States and the CIA for funding and influencing the students.”

Unlike the students, the geriatrics are lazy, relying on yellow-shirted social media for banal accusations by ultra-royalists and bloggers aligned mad “anti-imperialist” and “leftist” American conspiracy theorists hosted by Russian disruptive media.

In recent days, other geriatric royalists have given their “advice” to students. The Bangkok Post had an interview with failed politician, junta posterior polisher and appointed cabinet member Higher Education Science Research and Innovation Minister Anek Laothamatas.

He deems that the students are ignorant and proceeds to provide a “historical primer” on earlier student movements in Thailand. His paternalism continues as he dismisses their protests as a function of age rather than knowledge and justified political despair. He denigrates them: “The students of today don’t know very much about the past. They have been galvanised by a rather one-sided information passed to them in the social media.”

Presumably, when Anek joined the communists in the jungles, he was similarly dull, led about by the nose, and hotheaded rather than informed and, then, frightened and angry about military massacres. But, no, his arrogance and self-righteousness shines through: “my generation,” he asserts, knew the “real world.”

Like his geriatric leaders, Anek rejects any notion that the students “joined the anti-government protests of their own free will and that they were not led by any political elements or politicians.” Impossible!  Without evidence, he declares “it can’t be denied that some people might try to pull strings.”

His real point is that the students are not “respectful.” Like his yellow-shirted buddies, he considers “they have crossed the monarchy and customs lines, which many people regard as a violation. It’s a blatantly offensive act which might be met with a backlash.” His rhetoric invites rightists to provide the backlash.

Anek then wanders about, praising the general and polishing his posterior.

Thai PBS has another report on ultra-royalist Warong Dechgitvigrom, who also has “advice” for the students he is agitating against, or as the report has it “leading a crusade against anti-government protesters and to protect the country’s most revered institution.”

“Most revered institution” is ultra-speak for the monarchy and the monarch.

The yellowman is apoplectic: “The father of the country is being harassed.… How can Thai people stand by?”

“Father” is ultra-speak for the king. Rarely has Vajiralongkorn had this moniker, previously used for his dead father to instill paternalism.

Warong “has countered these calls with three demands of its own – no dissolution of Parliament, maximum legal action against anyone who seeks to topple the monarchy, and no change to the Constitution except via the proper channels.”

Like Anek, he then rambles about his experience, but he’s more outspoken: “When I was president of Chiang Mai University Student Union, I once wanted to overthrow the monarchy like you, brothers and sisters. But the masterminds were senior students linked with the Communist Party of Thailand…”.

He seems to believe that he was gullible as a student and, therefore, today’s students must be as impressionable and dumb as he was. Perhaps he should reflect on his own conversion and wonder why it is that he has needed an ideological prop throughout his life.

Reflecting the view expressed by Anek and paternalist geriatrics, Warong believes student activists are misled by social media and “fake news.” And, he confirms that there must be people leading the students astray: “scriptwriters are preparing speeches for the protest leaders…”.

The ultras and the regime are petrified. They fear that their corrupt paternalist system is being shaken to its roots. This is why they are even willing to support a king who appears to be more of a nation hater/chung chat than any student activist. After all, he demonstrates his disdain for the nation, sucking up its taxpayer money but living in self-imposed exile, not unlike a fugitive Red Bull scion.

Anek ditched by ACT

Suthep Thaugsuban, still claiming to have nothing official to do with his rightist Action Coalition for Thailand Party, has dumped ACT’s first puppet frontman Anek Laothamatas and had long-time anti-Thaksin Shinawatra activist and minor royal, the aged MR Chatumongol Sonakul “elected” leader of the party.

Anek was always a bit of a long shot, He’s been a kind of politician-cum-adviser for hire for a considerable time and has little real political experience.

Chatumongkol fits the mold for throwback parties, not only being an old man, but a royal and a former permanent secretary of the Finance Ministry and former governor of the Bank of Thailand. Exactly the kind of man needed in the 1980s.

Suthep, having no official position in ACT “chaired the meeting to elect the leader and executive committee members of the party…”.

The kamnan from the south went into political babble mode, saying “he will be steadfast in standing by the people and serving His Majesty the King and the nation,” but “vowed he will not take any position in the party, but only work with the people to build up the ACT Party.”

That seems to include running the party’s meetings, nominating the party leader, nominating all of its executive committee, ditching Anek and doing whatever he likes as “a party founder to make speeches at party forums throughout the country.” Everyone seemed to agree with Suthep.

That’s how parties ran in the 1980s – local influentials controlled everything and traded MPs for influence and money.

All that is old is new again

“New” is a relative term. What is new for a 10 year-old may be old for a 70 year-old. For those now piloting Suthep Thaugsuban’s Action Coalition of Thailand Party the really old conservative ploy of calling for a “national government” is promoted as if a new idea, not one recycled from previous conservatives and fascists.

Whenever such a call is launched it usually suggests that Thailand’s politics is deeply conflicted. And so it is again.

Party puppet leader Anek Laothamatas made an “appeal” to his party’s arch-enemies in Puea Thai. If the report at Khaosod is to be believed, Anek called on the “political rivals [to] bury the hatchet and form a ‘unity government’ after the next election.”

Worryingly, this former “scholar” – in Khaosod’s reporting he is transformed into a “veteran law scholar”- made his call based “inspiration” drawn from “last week’s historic meeting between US President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un…” as his inspiration.

Anek is said to have told reporters: “Even North Koreans and South Koreans – they fought till millions were dead – managed to reconcile. Even Mr. Donald Trump and Mr. Kim Jong Un managed to reconcile.”

It seems Anek is a seer rather than a scholar of any sort, concocting a conclusion to recent events. That unused train station at the DMZ must be suddenly busy!

For the anti-democrat vision of “reconciliation,” the ACT’s fortuneteller “called on all key political parties to form a government in which they will share power and work for the good of the country.” For him, there should be “no opposition elements.”

He mimics dictators of the present and the past.

Suthep’s big lie

We at PPT are bemused by some of the media commentary regarding Suthep Thaugsuban’s political resurrection over the past few days.

Our bemusement is regarding the fact that some commentators expected the Democrat Party’s former bagman and godfather to keep his word when he said he was finished with politics.

Suthep and friends

Few of Thailand’s politicians make promises and keep them. That’s one reason why Thaksin Shinawatra remains so popular – he made campaign promises to the electorate and pretty much kept them. He may have been sneaky and shady too, but he kept the big promises. Or at least the ones the electorate appreciated.

But renege on his promise he did. From never being involved in politics again, he’s back in thick of it.

His excuse for his return in lamentable. He says he has to defend the junta’s constitution. He added that his party – that’s the Action Coalition for Thailand – “will protect the 2017 constitution – arguing support for the charter was reflected when it cruised through the referendum…”. As an anti-democrat it must be remembered that he is content with the unfair and unfree referendum where the junta allowed only one outcome.

He also bellowed: “There will be no pardon for any political prisoners…”. We are not sure if it is the reporting or its his words, but Suthep is acknowledging that the junta has jails full of political prisoners. After all, it is only those arrested and charged sin mid-2014 that are the subject of any proposal for “pardons.”

In his old kit as “a recruiter and fund-raiser for the ACT” – something he did for the Democrat Party using all kinds of dark influences – he declared that he couldn’t just do that: “when brothers and sisters who share the same ideology approached me and told me they were establishing a people’s political party, I had to join…”. He went on with populist rhetoric: “I will not run for the election [we can check on that one later!]. I volunteer to be a slave for the people and serve the people. I will use my 40 years of experience in politics to push and accomplish the establishment of the people’s party.”

It is a minority party, with its organizers who sit in Suthep’s shadow hoping for just 30 seats.

Explaining his big lie, Suthep explained that he was a “good” person, so his lies don’t count. He then added more populist blarney.

Party jumper Anek Laothamatas, who also can’t be trusted on anything political as his spots change daily, said ACT would be “governed by religious ethics and truly owned by the people, is a coalition of citizens that respects and aims to safeguard the monarchy.”

It sounds a bit like Tea Party Thailand, and that’s dangerous stuff, not least for keeping the monarchy at the top of a political agenda. Explanation: using the monarchy for political purposes is okay for “good” people, including former Communists.

In case anyone wasn’t quite convinced of CPT-cum-Democrat-cum-Mahachon-cum-Puea Thai-cum-ACT Anek’s royalism, he added that ACT would be “reducing inequality using the late King Bhumibol Adulyadej’s approach to development…”. We assume that’s the sufficiency economy nonsense.

We understand that Anek has now resigned from the junta’s puppet work and the handsome salary he received there. We guess that ACT moneybags like Suthep and others who supported Suthep in the past, like the Rangsit University proprietor, will stump up the funds for Anek’s services as figurehead leader of ACT.

While ACT wants to “reform in police and justice system by ensuring that the institutions involved will not become tools of politics,” he very pointedly accepts the military’s murderous political role. We can’t recall the last time the police led a coup in Thailand.

Of course, ACT is likely to want to support The Dictator as premier after the junta’s election.

Updated: Suthep’s political party

Readers will probably remember that the military junta was grateful to the Democrat Party’s Suthep Thaugsuban for plowing the ground for its military coup in 2014 through his formation and manipulation of the People’s Democratic Reform Committee.

Readers might also recall that the junta got agitated when Suthep claimed a role in planning the coup and that it was also concerned by Suthep’s capacity for political mobilization. They seem to have threatened him and sent him off to the monkhood.

Since then, Suthep has been careful in his political steps, clearly not wanting to become a target for military assassination, as was yellow-shirt leader Sondhi Limthongkul.

Finally, though, a new political party has been formed as a political vehicle for Suthep and some of his PDRC colleagues. It is called Action Coalition for Thailand (ACT).

It keeps Suthep as a “member” while the frontman Anek Laothamatas is said to be a founder. He’s failed politician who took funds from corrupt politicians and also from the current junta. He was also with the deeply yellow Thailand Reform Institute that brought royalists and anti-democrats together at Rangsit University. Many appear associated with Suthep’s Party.

Anek has been with the Democrat Party, once worked for Thaksin Shinawatra and is a former Communist. For a time he paraded himself as an “academic.” That he now appears as a “Bhumibolist” should be no surprise for someone who can change his political spots as easily as he changes his ties to a clownish bow-tie for his media appearances.

Clarifications. We say he’s a Bhumibolist referring to a clipped image from The Nation, below, where he wears a Bhumibol election pin and has books on the dead king carefully arranged for the photo op. We say he’s fronting Suthep’s Party because that is what he calls it:

Suthep will be just an ordinary party member, with no executive position in the party and no positions in the future, according to Anek. He also said that having Suthep as a member, the ACT could be viewed as “Suthep’s party”.

Unlike other parties, ACT  “will not elect its leader and other party executives at its maiden meeting.” They will do it later, knowing that the junta’s “election” is months away. The party also needs 500 members and Anek says it is short of that.

Some 250 members will meet at their political alma mater, Rangsit University, owned by yellow-shirt moneybags Arthit Ourairat today:

In addition to Anek, those attending the meeting will be former Democrat Party secretary-general Suthep Thaugsuban, who headed the PDRC until its demise following the 2014 coup, Rangsit University deputy dean Suriyasai Katasila and former National Reform Assembly member Prasan Marukapitak, according to Thani Thaugsuban, a former Democrat MP and Suthep’s younger brother.

Suriyasai, Prasan and Thani are formerly key figures in the PDRC, which led massive street protests between November 2013 and May 2014 against the government led by the Pheu Thai Party. The rally culminated in a military coup in May 2014 that overthrew the administration.

Many were previously involved with the People’s Alliance for Democracy.

Anek was generous to say that “he was going to resign from the current positions, before working at the new party.“ At present, Anek is still in the pay of the military dictatorship. He is “serving as chairman of the committee on political reform, which is part of the junta-appointed National Reform Steering Assembly, in addition to being a member and an adviser in other committees.” He gets a very handy income from the junta.

Update: The Bangkok Post reports that, despite all of his previous statements that he had “left” politics, the former Democrat Party godfather Suthep is to be a “co-founder” of ACT. He’s fortunate the T in ACT doesn’t mean Truth.

Worried by the new

We at PPT might be revealing our collective greying but we haven’t paid too much attention to the young phenoms threatening to enter politics and to shake up the system.

We were watching the reporting about the party-to-be (maybe) associated with businessman Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit and law professor Piyabutr Saengkanokkul and thinking about the new parties associated with political newcomers.

We thought of the enthusiasm for business people considering political campaigns following the military-perpetrated massacre of May 1992. They looked at existing parties and the Palang Dharma Party was often mentioned as attractive for “new-style” politicians. Interestingly, Thaksin Shinawatra was mentioned in the Bangkok Post (1 July 1992) as “reportedly preparing to run in the election for the Democrat Party.” We also thought of Thai Rak Thai in 2001. Then it was the new party, with new ideas. It also had enormous backing from business and operated under new rules set by the 1997 constitution. And we thought of the short-lived Mahachon Party led by Anek Laothamatas, said to draw on civil society and new ideas.

So new parties come and go.

But the thing that has caught our attention with Thanathorn’s recent efforts is the way his PR has quickly gotten under the skin of The Dictator and his military regime.

The Bangkok Post reports that Deputy Prime Minister Wissanu Krea-ngam has revealed that the military junta he obediently serves is warning and watching “new-generation politicians.”The junta is keen to limit their operations, threatening them with charges if they engage in “political activities and election campaigns.”

The military bootlicker was specifically threatening Thanathorn who “gave an interview aired on The101.world’s Facebook Live account on Monday.”

Because the junta is full of political troglodytes who fetishize hierarchy, it naturally feels challenged by young upstarts. It also has a knee-jerk reaction against Thanathorn that constructs him pro-Thaksin. This is because he is a nephew of former transport minister Suriya Jungrungreangkit, a former member of the defunct Thai Rak Thai Party…”.

But most worrying for the junta is that “Thanathorn’s interview drew more than 100,000 views and was shared more than 3,000 times, with viewers making comments and asking him questions.” Questions! Wow, that’s challenging for the trogs. When he says that an “election can no longer be delayed and the Pheu Thai Party would likely win…” the regime must be getting angry and vindictive.

That Thanathorn seems to be thinking of an alternative to Puea Thai is ignored because the junta’s own strategy is to set up and/or support a swathe of pro-junta proxy parties because it knows that its own new political rules mean that a coalition is the mostly likely outcome of the junta’s “election.”

When Thanathorn says “the military should now stop meddling with politics” and that “[c]oups did not benefit the country’s future…” he’s marked as a junta opponent.

The junta will work assiduously to undermine any group or party it views as oppositional. We might expect a roll out of treason, sedition and even lese majeste accusations.

Preparing for Premocracy

Former academic and failed political candidate Anek Laothamatas has advised Thailand to prepare for the reincarnation of Premocracy.

The Nation reports that Anek, who seems to be a junta messenger, has told political parties that they should make some sort of agreement or hammer out an “understanding” with the military junta and/or it “proxies.”

He says that “[i]f all the parties and the NCPO [he means the military junta] could get together it would allow them to familiarise themselves with each other, which would be advantageous for the political process…”.

It seems that “advantageous” is used to indicate that the junta is going to be running the political show for several years, so the parties need to deal with it.

Anek says that “if there is a proxy party [representing the junta], it will have a prominent role to play in the election as well as in the administration, alongside the winners [another party?] of the election…”. His view is that an “election” will produce a form of Premocracy where the “government and opposition had to work together to create democracy and make politics work for the national interest…”. He doesn’t think the parties can prevent an “outsider” premier, meaning a military boss or proxy.

He said the new charter “clearly stated that the junta had the power to select a Senate that would have the authority to co-select a prime minister. It was impossible to keep the junta from future politics, he added.”

Anek recalled that during “General Prem Tinsulanonda’s term as prime minister in the 1980s, Thailand was under a quasi-democracy and his government did not have its own party…”. He “urged today’s parties to consider Prem’s approach…”.

He then forgets his political history, claiming that “Prem’s administration … was open to scrutiny.” We understand that Anek is engaged is a “softening-up” process for a military-backed or dominated regime and “quasi-democracy,” but he seems to forget that Prem never, ever faced parliamentary scrutiny. The monarchy’s man almost never appeared in parliament for any substantial debate. He was essentially unaccountable.

The junta is unaccountable now and it can only be imagined that it will be in any future form it decides to take.

Abhisit on ethics (yes, really)

Under a headline “Abhisit evangelises on ethics,” the Bangkok Post reports that Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva called on the puppet political reform committee to prioritize “a set of rules governing the ethical behaviour of politicians is needed before the next elections.”

Anek: working for the junta

Abhisit is said toe be “sharing his opinions with the reform panel on politics headed by Anek Laothamatas.” Anek, once a communist, later styled himself as an academic before deciding that his vocation was politics. He took money from godfathers and set up a party that was dysfunctional and thumped at the polls. This political chameleon then became an anti-democrat and had a makeover that involves geeky glasses and propeller-like bow-ties and hawked himself to the military junta.

In the company of anti-democrats, Abhisit waxed lyrical about ethics and wondered if elections should be held: “It’s hard to say if it’s time to go ahead with the elections because we don’t know how people will behave…”.

Abhisit

When Abhisit speaks of ethics, he is using the side of his brain that eliminates his own unethical behaviors: presiding over the murder of dozens of protesters in 2010; fake military credentials; boycotting elections; coming to the premiership on the tip of a military bayonet; keeping his dual citizenship secret; supporting anti-democrats; disrupting parliament; accepting military “justice”; we could go on and on.