Yachts, helicopters and warships

After the anti-monarchy rebellion at the beginning of the decade, the efforts of the royalist regime led by Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha, now continued by the Puea Thai-led conservative coalition, appear to have “normalized” ridiculous royalism. Of course, ridiculous royalism fleeces taxpayers.

Ridiculous royalism is not only expensive, but attributes ridiculous attributes to royals. This can be seen in a   recent report at The Nation.

In this report, King Vajiralongkorn and Queen Suthida are reported to have been ferried to the Regent Cha Am Hotel “to preside over a sailing competition across the Gulf of Thailand in celebration of the King’s upcoming 72nd birthday…”.

Clipped from The Nation

This reporting is also a part of a long campaign to link the current king and queen to the legacy of the previous king, Bhumibol. The report trawls up old claims about the dead king as a great sailor. Over the past few months, there have been a few stories extolling Queen Suthida’s sudden emergence as a “skilled” and “winning” yacht sailor.

In this report, she is said to have crewed on a “THA72 sailboat in the IRC zero class, and emerged victorious.” Of course it did.

THA 72 is reported to be “a Sailing Vessel and is sailing under the flag of United Kingdom. Her length overall (LOA) is 15 meters and her width is 4 meters.” It is reportedly a family pro-am team, based in Southeast Asia. For an idea of the limited fields and the interlinked, almost incestuous, nature of the rich persons sport, see this Bangkok Post story from 2023.

This year’s “race started at Cha Am beach in Phetchaburi province and finished at Toey Ngam Beach in Sattahip district of Chonburi province, a distance of 45 nautical miles.” There were just eight teams.

It is reported that the king boarded the “HTMS Bhumibol Adulyadej ship to witness the race along the route off the coast of Phetchaburi to Chonburi province.” That’s a whole navy ship given over to the king for a morning out.

The “race” is “organised by the Royal Thai Navy and the Yacht Racing Association of Thailand…”.

In the afternoon, in Satthahip, the king and queen “visited the Royal Thai Marine Corps Monument in Sattahip district to take photographs with members of the Vayu team and sign their names in the visitor book.” A few hours later they “attended a ceremony at Royal Thai Marine Corps headquarters to present awards to winners of the race. Navy Commander-in-Chief Admiral Adung Phan-iam also presented a commemorative medal to the King.”

Among royalists, the idea that the king should “bestow… a trophy, modelled after the helm of King Bhumibol’s Vega boat, to Queen Suthida, who received it on behalf of the Vayu team” is not seen as in any way silly.

They were then loaded onto a helicopter to be ferried back to Bangkok.

Not a thought for cost. Limousines, luxury hotels, helicopters, yachts, banquets, thousands of personnel, and all paid for by the long suffering and long burdened taxpayer.

Same old royalist tales

Thai PBS chooses to “review” the story around a YouTube animated film that is said to be “controversial.”

The film’s “creator” is Wivat Jirotgul. He provides an interpretation of the 1932 revolution that reproduces the long-held royalist reading of that event, as expressed by numerous princes and other royals since 1932.

Wivat “lists him as the managing director of Nakraphiwat Co Ltd, a creative production house, and president of Pegasus Creative, a marketing and branding consultancy.” The report states that Nakraphiwat Co “was involved in the production of a music video for the song ‘Duay Rak Lae Phakdi’ (With Love and Loyalty) in honor of His Majesty King Maha Vajiralongkorn on his 70th birthday in 2022.” It adds that that “video was made in collaboration with the Royal Thai Army Band and numerous Thai corporations.” It also observes that the company “was paid almost 4 million baht by the Army between 2020 and 2022.”

The royalist filmmaker makes it clear that he is the latest in a line of royalist propagandists when he says “his animation aims to present a picture that is fair to all sides involved, particularly King Rama VII, who he says has been unfairly portrayed in Thai history despite his attempts to avert a bloody revolution and ensure a smooth transition from absolute to constitutional monarchy.”

Berlin, Germany….. Two heads that bow as one, Herr Adolf Hitler, Dictator of Germany (left), bids bon voyage to King Prajadhipok of Siam, when the latter, accompanied by his queen, left Berlin following their extended visit to Germany’s capital. This modern ruling family does all its traveling by airplane, while in Europe, at least.

This view has been, especially during the 9th reign, the standard view of 1932. It is also a perspective that is seen in many texts and some schoolbooks from the second half of the 20th century.

That Wiwat thinks “[m]any history books belittle the sacrifices King Rama VII made,” seems to reflect royalist anger at revisionist historians who have done the research that challenges the previously hegemonic royalist tale.

Repeating the royalist’s account, the “film portrays King Rama VII as the driving force behind Thailand’s political reform, with plans for a constitution to prepare the mostly uneducated population for democratic rule.” That is the standard view and one long held and promoted by the military and the establishment. Just think of the King Prajadhipok Institute, established in royalist celebration of exactly this political position.

Royalists are worried that their perspective is now under challenge.

Wiwat then reproduces a royalist narrative that began around 1932,, that depicts Pridi Banomyong “often … with an octopus in the background – a metaphor for the spread of Soviet communism.” At the time, Prajadhipok, royalists and restorationist princes referred to Pridi’s “Bolshevism.”

The good news is that the “need” royalists feel for reinforcing their narrative is that it reflects a broader rejection of that ideology.

112 update VI

This is the last of our multi-part update on 112 from the past 3-4 weeks:

Thai PBS recently reported: that the highly politicized Constitutional Court held a hearing to consider a petition filed against the Move Forward party and its former leader, Pita Limjaroenrat. This relates to ultra-royalist carping that a wildly popular campaign pledge , to amend Article 112 amounted “to an attempt to overthrow the country’s constitutional monarchy.”

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MFP_B_Final-01-1024×724.png

The petitioner in this case was Thirayuth Suwankaesoorn. He claimed “he is confident that his allegation against the party is valid.” Any sensible person – and the courts lack sense – knows it to be a bogus claim. The problem is that having seen the opposition to the monarchy in 2020-21, royalists are fearful.

Thirayuth disclosed that the court has “allowed to review information submitted to the court by relevant agencies concerning the case and found that it supports his case against the Move Forward party.” We would guess that is accurate.

Thirayuth “maintains that his objective is to stop the Move Forward party from trying to amend the lèse majesté law, which may destabilise the Monarchy…”. He hopes the judges will reaffirm their royalism and find against Move Forward, leading to the party being dissolved.

Pita of course says “his party’s bid to amend the controversial law is not an attempt to overthrow the constitutional monarchy as charged and is in line with the Constitution.”

He hopes the party will receive justice from the court. It is 50:50 at best.

In a related and equally ludicrous case, the Constitutional Court is due rule on Pita’s iTV media share ownership case on 24 January.

Erasing accurate information on king and monarchy

The king used to dress/undress in outlandish ways when he was cavorting with concubines in Germany. Since the revolt against him and his grasping and erratic ways in 2020-21, he’s been confining himself to Thailand (at least as far as we know publicly). And, he’s generally dressed conservatively.

Attending a concert by an ultra-royalist this week, however, the king and queen dressed in somewhat odd but matching clobber. Perhaps he’s reverting to form?

What we do know is that there’s a continuing effort to erase all the accurate but negative information about the king and monarchy. With an undead daughter, a missing concubine, and a succession problem, it seems the state is being prepped to make all that is bad good again.

Thai PBS reports more on the “6.5 million Thais will soon be getting lessons in patriotism and love of the monarchy via four key government ministries.”

Interior Minister Anutin Charnvirakul has signed a memoranda of understanding between his ministry and the Ministries of Education and Higher Education, Science, Research, and Labor “to add the country’s so-called three pillars – nation, religion and king – to its human-resource development agenda.”

The report mentions that new conservative, military-backed governments, “patriotism, royalism and nationalistic history feature prominently in teaching at schools.” The new Puea Thai-led government seems little different.

Of course, the existing curriculum, after years of junta and military tinkering already looks like a royalist fairy tale:

Tanawat Suwannapan, who teaches Social Studies at a state-run school in Bangkok and manages the Krukorson page on Facebook.

He pointed out that half of the assessment standards for civic education are already about the love of nation, religion and king, while half of the indicators for economics concern … King Bhumibol Adulyadej…’s sufficiency economy philosophy.

“If you look into the learning indicators for history, you find the subject is about nationalism and royalism,” he said.

Another observer, Stithorn Thananitichot, of the Office of Innovation for Democracy at King Prajadhipok’s Institute, said:

… Bhumjaithai pushed for the MoU because it wants to position itself as royalist.

“If Palang Pracharath and the United Thai Nation parties are described as blue or royalist, then Bhumjaithai wants to be the dark-blue party,” he continued.

Stithorn predicts that the move will ensure Bhumjaithai wins the hearts of conservative voters who are worried about the young generation’s push for democracy….

Anutin’s going further than schools, seeking to make every civil servant a royalist parrot:

In Tanawat’s opinion, the government wants to see the general population become submissive, obedient and loyal, while believing in the government’s ideas and upholding the values it promotes.

After decades of royalism that Anutin implicitly acknowledges has failed, his solution is to go for hyper-royalism. We have a feeling that he’s whipping a nearly dead horse.

Patriotism, royalism, and indoctination

The Bangkok Post has an editorial discussing the Puea Thai-led government’s latest effort to look like a military-backed government.

Srettha Thavisin’s government has reportedly “come up with an initiative to introduce new history textbooks for schoolchildren in order to boost patriotism and morality.”

This latest consolidation of royalist conservatism emanates from the former cannabis-pushing “health” minister and now “Interior Minister Anutin Charnvirakul in collaboration with ministers … including education and labour.”

Anutin wants “to imbue patriotism in young students so they love the nation more while remaining grateful to the monarchy.”

Was there any point to this year’s election? Probably not, apart from moving the “patriotic” generals aside to make way for “patriotic” civilians.

Anutin seems to believe that the students who campaigned for reform were poorly indoctrinated: “He said children must be groomed into decent citizens who are proud of their nation’s history.”

It is also reported that “Permanent secretary for the Interior Suthipong Chulcharoen said the textbooks, dubbed history version 904 — as they are basically adapted from the lectures given in Thai volunteer classes — will be handed to provincial governors and the Office of Basic Education.”

Of course 904 is silly palace/ruling class code for the king.

The Post observes: “What is clear is that students will have to engage in rote learning.” That is, more political indoctrination. The newspaper also makes the obvious link to increased oversight of the “patriotism” of bureaucrats:

It’s not a coincidence the initiative was declared at the same time as a move by state agencies involved in recruiting new bureaucrats to introduce new exams to test the applicants’ knowledge of Thailand’s history, as well as indicators of patriotism, religion and the high institution [they mean monarchy] along with citizens’ moral duty.

Apparently, these exams may be “included in the university entrance exam.”

Of course, these reactionary moves are “a response to challenges by the younger generation, who have demanded the reform of key institutions.”

The Post rightly refers to these as “outdated ideas of patriotism and Thainess,” that will indoctrinate with “outdated versions of history, overlooking debates about new knowledge.”

It will be royalist imagined history, not real or factual history. It is an effort – that will eventually fail – to keep the Thai clock set in the late 19th century.

Further updated: Srettha buys a load of ISOC buffalo manure

According to Prachatai, Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin has “announced that the Internal Security Operations Command (ISOC) will not be dissolved, arguing that its assistance is needed for development missions.”

How high?

This is a pile of buffalo manure, and there’s good academic research showing why. Read Infiltrating Society. The Thai Military’s Internal Security Affairs by Puangthong Pawakapan, published by ISEAS–Yusof Ishak Institute in 2021.

Then he mentioned what he really wants ISOC to do: Srettha told the press that the core mission is to protect the monarchy.

In our view, that’s all that ISOC does. As well as being a propaganda unit, all of its major work is meant to promote majesty and undermine civil work, politicians, activists, and more. It is a Cold War organization up to no good.

Update 1: We note an excellent op-ed at Thai Enquirer on this topic, referring to Srettha as a “stooge.” PPT does not see him as a stooge, but as a willing accomplice. That is, as a rich man from a family of rich people who built their wealth on royalism and in times of military dictatorship, he favors military interventionism.

Update 2: Of course, Srettha denies he’s a “stooge.” He declares:

… I am the Prime Minister from PTP, elected by the people and endorsed by the parliament. Please do not undermine the voice of the people. If I am only a puppet, I am a puppet of the people.

That’s kind of Abhisitesque in tone when talking of “democracy,” but his notion of treading lightly and now getting the military upset failed for Yingluck Shinawatra. But perhaps Srettha thinks the military is more cuddly now than it was then. He’s probably wrong. Puea Thai will need to compromise on compromises to stay in its current position.

Reversing into the future

The confusion associated with behind closed doors dealing has perhaps peaked. There’s been some commentary that seems worth considering.

One is by academic Patrick Jory, who argues that now over two months after the election, “a sense of realism has set in.” He says this entails “… Pheu Thai, which ran a respectable second place in the May election with 141 seats, which now appears to be taking the lead in forming an alternative, conservative coalition.” Realism but probably not what voters expected.

Jory observes that:

There is a political logic to a Pheu Thai-led conservative coalition. Despite coming second to Move Forward, Thaksin [Shinawatra] and Pheu Thai remain a powerful force in Thai politics. Thaksin has publicly declared that he wants to return home from exile, and is willing to face legal charges and even some (token) jail time.

But Thaksin may also have calculated that a conservative coalition would give considerable leverage to Pheu Thai. With the radical Move Forward on the rise, ironically the conservatives now need Thaksin, hence their apparent willingness to deal with their erstwhile enemy. It would be a win-win situation for Pheu Thai, much preferable to playing second fiddle to Move Forward.

Well, a win-win for Thaksin. Jory looks at the irony:

If Pheu Thai and the conservative parties do form a coalition, this would represent an historic political shift. The two sides have been in a political war since 2006. The conservatives have thrown everything at Thaksin — two military coups, three party dissolutions, the banning of his leading politicians, the seizure of his assets, drafting constitutions designed to keep him from winning elections, and killing scores of his ‘Red Shirt’ supporters in a violent crackdown on protests in 2010. Now, Thaksin may feel satisfied that the conservative parties have come begging to form a coalition to keep out Move Forward, whom they regard as the greater danger.

Pravit Rojanaphruk at Khaosod also has a look at the “conservativisation” of Puea Thai as Thaksin seeks a return, pointing to the conspicuous royalism of the party bosses. He rightly dismisses claims that “redshirt pro-Pheu Thai supporters are and have always been royalists.” Utter nonsense, of course, but these are nonsensical times. Like Jory, Pravit notes the fear among the elite:

Equally important, however, is there is now a far bigger perceived threat to the establishment in the form of Move Forward Party, which is the only major political party pledging to reform the controversial lese majeste law and stop short of saying they want to reform the monarchy institution itself.

They fear that their country and their capacity for political and economic deals will be taken from them if the sky falls. Pravit continues:

Now, the conservative elites under the current and relatively new reign of Rama X need the Pheu Thai Party to be on its side in an attempt to isolate and stop the rise of Move Forward, which is hugely popular among young Thais. It is a classic divide and rule tactic although this time, Pheu Thai leaders and their diehard supporters believe it is time to shift towards the right in politics as they could no longer compete with Move Forward Party’s left-leaning politics.

For us, what we see is that without the radical push from below, associated with red shirts and pro-democracy activists, and without ruling class opposition, Puea Thai is reverting to its original Thai Rak Thai politics.

And, as a final piece, look at the Bangkok Post’s telling of what comes next.

Academic articles on Thailand I

As we do from time to time, PPT has been looking at academic journals to see what is being written on politics, economy, and society in Thailand over the last year and a half. Doing this gives a bit of a feel for what the academic world is thinking about Thailand. This time, we have to say that it is thin pickings in terms of getting PPT interested.

Some papers are free to download while others are behind a paywall. We have always found authors generous in providing copies if they are contacted.

Here’s some of what we found:

Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs

Michael K. Connors, Beyond the Leader: An Ideational-Political Logics Approach to Redshirt Movement Populism in Thailand

Alyssa Gosteli Dela Cruz et. al., Explaining Thailand’s Politicised COVID-19 Containment Strategies: Securitisation, Counter-Securitisation, and Re-Securitisation

Asian Studies Review

Michael K. Connors, Towards a History of Conservative Liberalism in Thailand after the 1932 Siamese Revolution: An Ideological Analysis

Puangchon Unchanam, Capital, Charity and the Crown: Philanthrocapitalism and Monarchy in Thailand

Peera Charoenvattananukul, The End of Compromise: Political Meanings of Thailand’s First National Day Celebrations on 24 June 1939

Pavin Chachavalpongpun, Kingdom of Fear: Royal Governance under Thailand’s King Vajiralongkorn

Pavin Chachavalpongpun, Nationhood in the Cloud: Cyber Sovereignty in Thailand

Journal of Southeast Asian Economies

Nattanicha Chairassamee and Oudom Hean, Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Labour Market in Thailand

Wannaphong Durongkaveroj, Recent Developments in Basic Education in Thailand Issues and Challenges

Sojourn

 Eric Haanstad, Phantasmagorias of Violence in Thai and Filipino Drug Wars: Projecting Police Drug Suppression through Media Spectacles in Southeast Asia

Modern Asian Studies

Tomas Larsson, Religion, political parties, and Thailand’s 2019 election: Cosmopolitan royalism and its rivals

Asian International Studies Review

Poowin Bunyavejchewin, Wichian Intasi and Watcharabon Buddharaksa, The Myth of Sino–Thai Brotherhood: Archival Evidence on Thailand’s Relations with China in Continental Southeast Asia in the 1990s

The Pacific Review

Alexander Bukh, The productive power of rising China and national identities in South Korea and Thailand

Chanintira na Thalang, Making sense of Thailand’s agency in changing global and regional environments

Royalist assaults Thanathorn

Thai Newsroom reports on an attack on Progressive Movement leader Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit at a crowded book fair at the Sirikit International Convention Centre on Sunday. Not all newspapers have reported the attack – for example, as far as we can tell, the Bangkok Post hasn’t mentioned it. We got to wondering why.

But first, the reported details. Thanathorn was attacked by “Kanetpitsanuthep Jakkapopmahadeja [Ganeshpisnuthep Jakphopmahadecha ] alias Kay Roy Larn,” who tried to put Thanathorn in a choke hold and shouting that he had a bomb.

Thanathorn quickly freed himself a bunch of people overpowered Ganeshpisnuthep before police arrived.

As odd as the failure to report, Thai Newsroom does not explain that the attacker is an arch royalist with a very strange background. Perhaps it is Ganeshpisnuthep’s royalism that prevents it being said.

Indeed, the last time PPT posted on this odd royalist, we also discussed media self-censorship. This was in 2019 when Ganeshpisnuthep showed up at the Rajaprasong intersection, clad in a yellow shirt, and in a Mercedes decked out in royal portraits. He carried a large knife and a bag of snakes. Watched by thousands, he was said to have killed some of the snakes and to have cut himself.

Then, newspapers did not report the royal link nor reproduced photos showing that royal decorations on the vehicle.

Even if Ganeshpisnuthep  is mad, his royalism needs to be reported, especially when he’s attacking a person that royalists love to hate.

 

Bureaucrat butt burnishing

During the many years of the last reign, senior bureaucrats came to learn that their careers were enhanced by the degree to which they could polish royal posteriors. Getting the previous king honorary degrees and global awards, particularly from various supine UN agencies became all the rage for those seeking high position or just wanting to bathe in the reflected light from highly polished royal butts.

It seems this continues after death, and especially as King Vajiralongkorn’s ideological positioning includes paying homage to his father, obviously hoping that there’s a rub-off from his dead dad’s highly burnished image.

The Nation reports that the “Education Ministry will next year ask Unesco to add Thailand’s beloved monarch, His Majesty King Bhumibol Adulyadej the Great, to the list of the world’s eminent personalities.” Even his now title was part of the whole posterior polishing process that became a symbol of “nation” and “national security.”

Education Minister Trinuch Thienthong wants her ministry to lead in having the dead king “globally honoured for the work he has done for his subjects as well as the world community.” The claims about “work” for “subjects” was stock-in-trade for past regimes, but the “world community” claim is “innovative.” For a while, such claims were made about agriculture, then about rain-making. The minister, however, emphasizes “King Bhumibol’s philosophy of sufficiency economy is now being adopted across the world.” That claim, like may others made for royals, is stretching the truth, but butt burnishers are used to making all sorts of wild claims in Thailand, where no one may question royal greatness.

Trinuch wants UNESCO “to add King Bhumibol to the list before his centennial birthday is marked on December 5, 2027.”

There’s not much information available – that we could find – on this UN program. What we did find – and it is quite old – suggests that UNESCO goes out of its way to promote royals, including a few Thai royals and connected sycophants.

The last announcement we saw of Thais being added to the list stated:

The United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) has honored two late but legendary Thais. The body approved a resolution by UNESCO to add Her Royal Highness Princess Galyani Vadhana Krom Luang Naradhiwas Rajanagarindra and 19th century scholar Phraya Sisunthonwohan to its list of the world’s eminent persons for their contributions to culture and learning.

HRH Princess Galyani Vadhana was described as the hardest-working member of the royal family [PPT: hold on, wasn’t that meant to be Bhumibol? Royalists tend to get confused on such banal claims] already beloved for its devotion to improving the lives of the Thai people.” Blah, blah, blah.

Back to the report, where Atthapol Sangkhawasi, permanent secretary for the Education Ministry, explained the “process”: “the Education Ministry will get the late monarch’s nomination details ready for the Cabinet to deliberate upon within this year before it seeks approval from King Rama X.” He explained that, as usual for Bhumibol, the “nomination” would be “based on the many achievements … including his talent in painting, sculpture, engineering, innovation and technology, photography, sports, music, language and literature.” It’s almost as if he hadn’t died. All the same old blarney-cum-palace propaganda is repeated ad infinitum, with truth long laid to rest.