The Nation reports:

A series of explosions happened at two discotheques in this southern border province early Monday, injuring 31 people.

Police said insurgents apparently used timing device to detonate a bomb each inside the discotheques and detonated bombs outside with remote control.

Panicked patrons and employees of the discotheques ran out to be injured by more explosions outside, police said.

The first attack happened at the Riviera Hotel at the 4 am and the second attack at Marina Hotel. Both hotels are located in Narathiwat's Sungai Kolok district.

Insurgents planted time bombs in certain motorcycles, which shortly exploded after the explosions in the discotheques.

Most of those, who were injured, were patrons trying to retrieve their motorcycles to flee the scenes.





SOURCE: The Nation

BBC reports two of the injured were seriously injured. Another The Nation article reports an increase in the number of people injured and that 3 suspects had been arrested:

Police have arrested three men for alleged involvement in the explosions at two discotheques in Narathiwat's Sungai Kolok on the New Year's eve.

Police claimed the three confessed to the attack which wounded 58 people, including foreign tourists.

Two bombs planted behind loudspeakers at the discotheque of the Riviera Hotel on Prachawiwat Road went off at about 4am, sending New Year revellers fleeing in panic.

Some ran to the parking lot behind the hotel to retrieve their motorcycles when a third bomb attached to a motorcycle exploded. Fire engulfed the motorcycles, damaging about 20 of them.

Later a similar bombing attack took place at the Marina Hotel on Charoenkhet Road.

A bomb went off in the discotheque on the second floor of the hotel, sending revellers running in panic. A second bomb then exploded in the hotel parking lot.

Police said 31 people were injured in the second hotel attack, two in serious condition.

Meanwhile, Narathiwat governor Karun Suppakitwilekakarn said the three suspects were Muhammad Saki Madeurae, 23, Sahae Saa, 24 and Assaroh Mayi, 29, all from Narathiwat.

The arrest of the three suspects came after police inspected security cameras at the hotels, Karun said. Karun said one suspect confessed that the group wanted to instigate chaos during the New Year holiday.

An initial investigation by police showed that the three suspects had criminal records for involvement in violence in the province's Sungai Kolok and Sungai Padi districts.

COMMENT: I would assume the foreign tourists are Malaysians give the close proximity to the border. Involvement in the violence? As in part of the insurgency?

The Bangkok Post reports (cache):

EC member Prapan Naikowit said yesterday the commission had agreed to look into the distribution of VCDs of deposed prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra's speeches by PPP candidates.

''If the VCD is an introduction of party candidates, it is considered election campaign material. If it is just about Mr Thaksin, it is considered a gift,'' he said.

COMMENT: Perhaps, PPP should ask everyone to return them then. What are people going to do with them sell them? How does a VCD of Thaksin have any intrinsic value? It is not a movie which can be resold. VCDs cannot be reused. Even election flyers can be reused as scrap paper. Does it really constitute a gift in exchange for a vote? It was an endorsement by Thaksin, if such endorsements are illegal why not prosecute on these grounds?

The Democrat Secretary-General Suthep says that 30 candidates should be issued red cards because of the Thaksin VCD. He knows that is the only way the Democrats can win.

Before the election, there was wide speculation that the elite would issue red cards (requiring a by-election, banning the red-carded candidates and also preventing that party from fielding new candidates) or just dissolve PPP. Up until yesterday, it seemed that PPP's victory would be accepted and PPP would be controlled to some extent by Puea Paendin and Chat Thai as Prem seemed to be controlling what they would do.  Last week, there were  rumours of the CNS meeting the Election Commission, but when one of the commissioners (Sodsri), who is viewed as more hardline and anti-Thaksin stated that the number of red and yellow cards would be "less than ten" this seemed to be nothing. Three yellow cards (requiring a by-election, but the yellow-carded candidates can contest) were issued to PPP candidates so at worst it would have meant 7 red cards to PPP candidates. At this time, Democrat Suthep Thuagsuban said he anticipated the People Power to conclude a coalition deal soon and said "he did not expect a great number of disqualifications to drastically change the balloting outcome".

That was then. Now, Suthep is talking about 60 red cards for the PPP. 3 PPP candidates are suddenly issued red cards in Buriram without requesting evidence or an explanation from the candidates. Such an opportunity has been afforded to other candidates.* PPP secretary-general Surapong was not taking things lying down as The Nation reports:

He suggested "someone in a powerful position" was attempting to block the PPP from becoming the government by issuing its winning candidates with red and yellow cards.

"We know the person is working to get the man it wants to be prime minister into power. Further, it is an attempt to force other parties to change their minds and join the Democrats in order to form a government," he said.

Surapong called on the Election Commission to be fair in ruling on poll infringements.

The commission announced yesterday three successful PPP candidates in Buri Ram's Constituency 1 had been disqualified.

They are Prakij Poldej, Pornchai Srisuriyanyothin and Rungroj Thongsri, commission secretary-general Suthiphon Thaveechaiygarn said.

He said the commission found the three guilty of vote-buying and transporting voters to polling stations.

The commission revoked their right to stand in an election for one year. Where by-elections are required, the disqualified candidate must meet the costs. The three face criminal action, too.

Earlier, the commission issued yellow cards to three PPP winning candidates in Nakhon Ratchasima. A yellow card allows recipients to contest by-elections.

To date, six PPP candidates have been disqualified. This has reduced the number of seats the party won to 227.

PPP deputy secretary-general Choosak Sirinin said it would face more red and yellow cards than other parties because it had won the election.

"However, we believe other parties must get some cards," he said.

PPP spokesman Kuthep Saikrajang admitted he was concerned the commission may red-card many successful candidates, affecting the party's House seats.

Candidate Rungroj was shocked at his disqualification. He insisted he was innocent and said the commission had not spoken to him about the allegations. Pornchai said the commission was unfair. "We have not broken the law," he insisted.

Prakij said disqualification would affect the party's ability to form a government.

Candidates who contested in seats where candidates have been disqualified will now satnd for the byelections scheduled for January 13.

Disqualified candidates are not allowed to contest and their respective parties cannot field substitute candidates.

With the PPP candidates disqualified, the failed competitors from Puea Pandin and Matchima Thipataya, who won considerable votes, would have a good chance to win in the by-election.

COMMENT: Would that person in a powerful position happen to be a Privy Councilor who first name begins with P? Sodsri is again quoted that there will not be lots of cards, but the same Bangkok Post article (cache) 12 yellow cards will be issued to PPP candidates in Chiang Rai with a red card going to a PPP executive. If yellow, PPP won't mind too much, but the issuing of the 3 red cards to the 3 PPP candidates in Buriram is ominous. Surapong notes, according to Matichon, that the issuing of the 3 red cards bypassed standard EC procedure and was investigated by a special investigation committee whose head was part of the anti-Thaksin movement.** The party is looking into whether this is "just" - see *.

Hi-Thaksin reports that at least 20 red cards will be issued to PPP on the orders of Prem. Another Thaksin-friendly news source reports that there will be 20-30 cards issued, but PPP will tell voters in constituencies where candidates receive red cards to vote for their allies which is the Thai People party, Samak's old party and led by his brother. The report says that PPP voters in the Northeast will not suddenly switch to the Democrats or Puea Paendin.

Someone on the Prachatai webboard speculates that the EC will try to dissolve PPP. Two days ago, I would have said that was fanciful, but if a PPP executive is issued with a red card there will be enormous pressure placed on the EC by the anti-Thaksin media and the elite to forward a dissolution case onwards. Things will not be pleasant though.

By Wednesday or Thursday we should know how many cards will be issued.

Finally, Matichon reports that around 1,000 protesters gathered in Buriram last night to protest the issuance of red cards to PPP candidates quoting one voter as speaking on behalf of the others as saying that they didn't receive money to vote for the 3 PPP candidates and think it is unjust the candidates have now received red cards.

*As a standard rule in any judicial system where due process/natural justice/procedural fairness applies someone affected by a decision is given an opportunity to respond. Thailand has administrative courts to adjudicate on such matters.

** Chalerm mentions this person is a Maj. Gen who is close to PAD. Hi-Thaksin names him as พล.ต.ต.ชัยยะ ศิริอำพันธุ์กุล (Pol. Maj. Gen. Chaiya Siriumpungul) and states he looks after security of The Manager headquarters  of Sondhi L.

With Chat Thai and Puea Paendin seemingly joining the coalition it seems that there is no hope for the Democrats. Defence Minister Boonrawd, who earlier last week still hold hopes out for a Democrat government, yesterday was quoted in Thai Rath as saying there will be no miracles of a Democrat government.

However, Democrat Party Secretary-General and power broker, Suthep thinks otherwise as reports The Nation:

Democrat Party secretary-general Suthep Thaugsuban Sunday expressed confidence that dozens of People Power Party's winning candidates would be disqualified.

As a result, he said, the Democrat would still have a chance to challenge the PPP in the attempt to form a coalition government.

He said the PPP should not rush to set up the coalition now but should wait until January 6 or 7 when the EC would announce its final decisions whether to issue red or yellow cards to certain winning election candidates.

Thai Rath quotes Suthep as theorizing that up to 60 PPP candidates would be given red cards. He says this is not out of the question (เลื่อนลอย) as there many wrongful acts committed like the distribution of VCDs and also that all 12 MPs in Chiang Rai should be in trouble.

In relation to Chiang Rai, Matichon have the leaked investigation documents from Chiang Rai which outlines how PPP paid for important kamnans of PPP to come to Bangkok where they were taken by a PPP canvasser. They were then given money to provide votes for the PPP. Matichon states there is a CD with photos of the trip.

The red cards, of course, started today:

The Election Commission announced Sunday that it decided to disqualified three winning candidates of the People Power Party in Buri Ram's Constituency 1 for alleged vote-buying and decided to ban them from contesting in the sub-sequent by-election.

COMMENT: Last week, I stated based on a newspaper report, that there would be no by-election in constituencies where red cards are issued. This seems wrong to quote from the words of EC as reported in the Thai media. With a yellow card the candidates who receive them can contest the by-election, but with a red card the candidates cannot contest the by-election. However, I assume that the PPP can put up other candidates (does anyone know??? (UPDATE: According to AFP, PPP can't send new candidates). If so, it seems at worst PPP would lose one seat based on the Dec 23 results.

Last week, EC member Sodsri was quoted that red cards would have to have been handed out by last Thursday - due to the process which needs to happen after that for January 13 by-elections. However, today another EC member Sumet is quoted in Thai Rath as saying that the total number of yellow and red cards issued should be known in 2-3 days. It seems now that the January 13 by-elections might be delayed.

So how many PPP candidates will get red and yellow cards compared with those from other parties? Will this provide an opportunity for the Democrats?

Source: The Nation
Caption: Former Chart Thai MP Chuwit Kamolvisit visited party headquarters yesterday to mock leader Banharn Silapa-archa for entertaining an invitation to join a People Power Party-led coalition government.

COMMENT: Argh Chuwit in fine form as always.

The Bangkok Post reports:

People Power party (PPP) executives yesterday angrily rejected the five conditions to forming a coalition government set by the Chart Thai and Puea Pandin parties, saying the conditions were an insult to them.

PPP leader Samak Sundaravej said yesterday the move by Chart Thai party leader Banharn Silpa-archa to team up with the Puea Pandin party and issue conditions before forming a coalition government with the PPP showed contempt against him and his party.

Chart Thai and Puea Pandin executives on Thursday night made public five conditions for joining a PPP-led coalition.

The conditions are:[1] the PPP must have reverence for the monarchy, [2] not offend Privy Council president Prem Tinsulanonda, [3] not take revenge against political opponents, [4] not interfere in the judicial process against former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, [5] and not dissolve the Assets Scrutiny Committee (ASC).

Mr Samak and the PPP executives regarded these conditions as messages directed at them, and what upset Mr Samak the most was the first condition regarding reverence for the monarchy.

''I want to tell Mr Banharn that him expressing such an opinion was tantamount to insulting me,'' Mr Samak said.

The Chart Thai leader was not entitled to lecture him on the issue since his family had shown their reverence to the monarchy for generations, he said while showing reporters a framed picture of himself wearing royal decorations.

Mr Samak also said neither he himself or any PPP executives had said they would take revenge against any political rivals, especially the military top brass.

''I don't know what is happening. I had expressed my admiration towards the army chief [Gen Anupong Paojinda] since his first days in office,'' he said, referring to a statement by Gen Anupong that the military would not stage a coup even if the PPP was in government.

PPP secretary-general Surapong Suebwonglee said the party's stance is that the monarchy and privy councillors are above politics. The party is determined to protect the monarchy and respect all privy councillors, including Gen Prem, Mr Surapong said.

Video of Samak and Surapong's press conference (in Thai, of course):

COMMENT: You can listen to the press conference above and it was not my impression that PPP were rejecting all 5 "conditions" or even did so "angrily". The Bangkok Post even quotes Chart Thai deputy leader Somsak Prisnanantakul as saying "the PPP has acted positively to us and willingly accepted the five conditions (for joining the government) which were put forward by the Chart Thai and Puea Pandin leaders on Thursday".

Samak ripped into Banharn on condition No 1 (btw, the anti-Samak person who watched it with me thought Samak had a point). Samak's point was that this condition inferred that PPP, and him in particular, didn't respect the monarchy i.e that everyone respects the monarchy and to require as a condition suggests otherwise. The whole point in PPP choosing Samak was that his loyalty to the monarchy hasn't been questioned. Samak outlined his family history in serving the Royal Family. He pointed out that he had received higher decorations than Banharn - he even has a photo to prove it!. He was clearly annoyed, but he wasn't out of control. I think it could be argued he actually had a reason to be upset. His voice is very hoarse, but as he says at the end he has a doctor's appointment and leaves Surapong to answer the rest.

On the rest of the conditions, PPP didn't actually reject them. Surapong states he is giving PPP's opinion on the 5 conditions which in essence he is tacitly accepting them. On 1, Surapong says all Thais respect the monarchy and PPP will uphold the institution of the monarchy. On No 2 (about Prem), he agrees, but interestingly, states they would respect all privy councilors which could imply that PPP don't think it was necessary to single out Prem. No doubt, a little dig at Prem.

On 3 (not taking revenge against political opponents) PPP said that everyone has to respect the Constitution and anyone who has breached the rights of others need to be investigated in accordance with the law.

On 4 (Thaksin facing justice), they agree and state everyone is subject to the law. He also says that no one or not party should interfere with the judicial system. Actually, this could be taken as a dig at Prem too.

On 5, they don't see any need to dissolve ASC and there is no benefit to Thaksin in dissolving the ASC as they would just be transferred to another agency.

Says that will need to speak with other parties besides the 3 smaller parties (i.e Chat Thai and Puea Paendin) in regards to policy.

This article in The Nation has more on "conditions" no 3, 4, and 5:

He said the Council of National Security, set up following the coup, had been granted an amnesty in the Constitution, so no legal action could be taken against it.

However, the new government will scrutinise major arms-purchase contracts to see if there are irregularities, the source said.

The Assets Examination Committee, which launched an extensive investigation of Thaksin and his family, will remain intact, because its dissolution would damage the image of the PPP, the source said.

"We could be condemned if we disbanded the committee, so we will just ensure it works within the rule of law," added the source.

COMMENT: Is scrutinising deals for irregularities revenge?

Of course, Chat Thai later responded stating:

Two top executives of Chart Thai Party Friday toned down a five-point demand, saying it was meant as the working guidelines and not a precondition to joining the coalition alliance led by the People Power Party.

Deputy leader Somsak Prissanananthakul and chief adviser Sanan Kachornprasart said Chart Thai and Puea Pandin parties put forward the five guidelines with the hope to overcome the turmoil.

"The Chart Thai is ready to join the coalition if the People Power agrees with the guidelines," Somsak said.

...

Sanan said the ball was now in the People Power's court to decide whether to invite Chart Thai and Puea Pandin to join the coalition.

COMMENT: From conditions to guidelines? It shows you how important they really think they are.

PPP later formally invited Chat Thai and Puea Paendin to join and Banharn accepted on behalf of Chat Thai and they will announce this on Wednesday.

The Nation's editorial:

The Army, which is responsible for national security, fares no better. In his attempt to salvage the country's reputation by assigning blame elsewhere, Army spokesman Colonel Acra Thiproch was quoted earlier this year as blaming the series of beheadings of innocent victims in Thailand's deep South on Indonesian militants.

"You really need to know certain bones of the necks to behead someone and Thais don't really know how," Acra said. "You need someone to be trained overseas or foreign trainers to teach them how."

Perhaps Acra deserves to be given some slack. After all, he was only repeating statements made by top military brass who continue to insist - despite the growing body count in the southernmost provinces - that things are moving in the right direction. One could not help but wonder what benchmarks these generals are using to gauge the situation. They, like the rest of the society, need to understand that national security is everyone's responsibility, not an area for idle babbling by incompetent officers who have no sense of public accountability. It is a dead-serious business for security agencies.

COMMENT: It reminds me of The Nation's editorial in June where they were also angry with the military.

The body count is really the only gauge that can be used and there are no long-term trends downwards as of yet. Although, the military might be lucky with the floods in December in the Deep South, the death toll might be lower.

The Nation reports:

Matchima Thipataya executives sent a petition to the party deputy leader yesterday, asking for the status of Prachai Leophairatana to be verified.

The letter was filed with deputy leader Pramual Leophairatana, Prachai's younger brother.

The petition was raised after the Matchima Thipataya Party registrar, Thanaporn Sriyakul, attempted to stop a meeting designed to oust him yesterday. The meeting had been called by Prachai.

Thanaporn argued that because Prachai was in his view no longer the leader of the party, the meeting was illegitimate.

Thanaporn said he had climbed 10 flights of stairs in order to block the meeting and instructed other executives to remove Prachai from the proceedings. As a result of his action, the meeting fell through.

However, another meeting took place - without Prachai - at which Anongwan and the party's seven winning candidates discussed issues related to forming the next government.

Before the talks took place, Thanaporn, the former caretaker leader, said Prachai had no right to preside over the meeting, and the decision to oust the registrar belonged to the party's executives.

Thanaporn said he based his opinion on the fact that he had signed his approval after Prachai submitted his resignation from the party on December 4.

He said his approval had made the document effective, even though Prachai tore it up two days later.

As a result of yesterday's events, the protesting registrar has been put on probation for provocation.

Party spokesman Narong Piriya-anek added a fresh twist when he said he had met with election commissioner Sodsri Satayathum a week ago.

He said she had informed him that Prachai was still the party leader, as the document Thanaporn filed to the Election Commission was merely a copy.

The commission has not approved Prachai's resignation.

Prachai was the party's financier for the December 23 general election.

COMMENT: What can anyone who belongs to an organisation with Prachai as head expect? Do they know nothing about TPI? It would be easier to get blood out of stone then to remove Prachai.

btw, why was he climbing 10 stairs? Were Prachai's bodyguards guarding the lifts?

In what sounds like a good law, in theory at least, we have this as The Nation reports:

The Emergency Medical Service Act, which requires rescue workers to reach accident victims within 10 minutes, will be implemented next April, Public Health Minister Mongkol Na Songkhla said yesterday.

COMMENT: Is this some aspirational goal? Or is there some stick to punish rescue workers if they don't get there in 10 minutes? Knowing the Thai legal system's penchant for criminalising all kinds of behaviour, I worry it is the later and with traffic in Bangkok you hope that rescue workers can get there within 10 minutes, but is this actually possible.

Matichon's Boonlert's recent op-ed is translated (cache) by the Bangkok Post:

The late Chartthai party leader Chatichai Choonhavan presided over the government for over 3 years from 1988-1991. His government was accused of widespread corruption as well as creating confrontations with the military by trying to intervene in a high-ranking military reshuffle. Some ministers also acted as lightning rods for controversy, causing conflicts with the people and the media. Eventually, the government was undone by a military coup on Feb 23, 1991.

Democrat party leader Chuan Leekpai lasted only 2 years and 7 months, from 1992 to 1995, due to the government's stubbornness in refusing to rectify the problems stemming from land distribution, in particular the awarding of land to many influential Democrats under the Sor Por Kor 4-01 scheme. When facing the prospect of defeat in a no-confidence motion, Mr Chuan decided to dissolve the House and called a general election. The Democrat party failed to win the most seats and was relegated to opposition.

Chartthai leader Banharn Silapa-archa stayed in power for only one year and 3 months. The administration was not popular, as several ministers were deemed unsuitable from the start. When facing his own no-confidence debate and the prospect of defeat due to likely defection of coalition partners, Mr Banharn, like Mr Chuan, decided to dissolve the House.

The next in line was Gen Chavalit Yongchaiyudh, who lasted only 11 months, from Nov 1996 to Nov 1997. Gen Chavalit decided to resign when his administration failed to solve the country's financial meltdown, the so-called Tom Yum Kung disease.

All four prime ministers were leaders of a political party which had won the most seats in the House and led a coalition government, yet all failed to last the four-year term.

Thaksin Shinawatra is the only prime minister to date to have finished his term, from 2001 to 2005. Yet when his Thai Rak Thai (TRT) government made history by winning 375 seats in the 500-seat House in the 2005 general election and formed the nation's first single-party government, it could last only one year before Mr Thaksin decided to dissolve the House to seek a new mandate to bury the issue of his family's Shin Corp sale to the Singapore government's investment arm Temasek Holdings, on which the family paid no taxes.

The TRT saga shows that no matter how many MPs a party has in the House it could not help much if the prime minister is mired in scandal and quarrels with critics and the media. His behaviour resulted in rebellious factions within TRT constantly leaking out misdeeds, and popular demonstrations outside Parliament building led by the People's Alliance for Democracy with support from academics and the media.

However, Mr Thaksin persisted in confronting the people and the media, thinking he was doing the right thing. He chose confrontation rather than resignation. Ultimately, he was toppled from power by the military coup in 2006 and decided to stay out of the country due to fear of personal harm.

COMMENT: Huh?! When faced with problems Chuan and Banharn dissolved parliament, but the only reason they weren't part of the next government is that the majority of MPs didn't want them to be. Thaksin dissolved parliament in February 2006, the other parties (knowing they would lose) boycotted, and TRT won a majority of votes (compared with no votes). Was it confrontational just because Thaksin won?

In the latest Southeast Asian Press Alliance for Thailand it states (Word DOC):

...television and radio stations were subjected to severe censorship and tightened controls with regards to political comments and any reports about Thaksin

COMMENT: So now we have had an election and PPP are on the cusp on forming a new coalition you would think we would have more open reporting on Thaksin. Well, don't bet on it as AP reports:

A Thai TV news show was blocked from broadcasting an interview with deposed Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, which contained reactions to his allies' victory in last weekend's election, senior editors said Friday.

Channel TITV, which is controlled by the military-installed government, planned to air an interview with the deposed leader on Wednesday evening but the program was replaced at the last minute, said Jom Petchphradub, the program's host who conducted the interview in Hong Kong.
...
In a 40-minute interview conducted Monday, Thaksin voiced his reaction to the election, his plans to eventually return to Thailand and spoke about his year in self-imposed exile, among other topics, Jom told The Associated Press.

Jom said officials in the government's Public Relations Department, which falls under the Prime Minister's Office, called one of his editors to inquire about the interview, which was subsequently yanked from the air Wednesday evening.

The channel's news editor, Sonthayan Chuenraethainaitam, confirmed that the interview was pulled from the air but said he did not have details "from the officials concerned."

It was unclear if government officials barred the broadcast or if the network's executives censored the program after getting a call from the Public Relations Department.

The head of the Public Relations Department, the only official authorized to comment on the matter, was not immediately available, his office said.

COMMENT: So before the call from the PRD, the interview was to be aired, but after the call it was pulled. I doubt there was a specific order not to screen the interview, but just a "friendly reminder" on where things sit. It comes after today, some TITV staffers filed a lawsuit against the Public Relations Department for the transfer of 16 news staff including the News Director and stated there has been interference. Won't the powers that be give up? Come on Surayud, PPP won the election. Can't the Thai public see Thaksin on TV. Jom is quoted in Thai Rath as saying that the executives agreed the interview was newsworthy, but the correct procedures have not been followed so the interview was pulled. So is there some special "must seek permission before interviewing Thaksin rule"? Is this what will happen for our new independent broadcaster?

Anyone who has watched the Dtua Jing Chud Jen program, which screens Monday-Friday 8:30pm-9:15pm, will know that Jom is very fair. It is not Meet the Press, but we do see substantive discussion of political issues. Last week, he interviewed Abhisit and Samak on consecutive nights.

With terrorists act in Pakistan being a major issue of the day, I should point out this little tidbit from a PBS Frontline program in 2001 (?):

For instance, in one madrassa in Pakistan, I interviewed 70 Malaysian and Thai students who are being educated side by side with students who went on to the Afghan war and the like. These people return to their countries, and then we see the results in a short while. ... At best, they become hot-headed preachers in mosques that encourage fighting Christians in Nigeria or in Indonesia. And in a worst case, they actually recruit or participate in terror acts.

Pakistan banned foreign students from madrasses in 2005 although some have permission of their own government to stay, but you cannot ignore the students who have already studied there. See this:

An important fact that contributes to thinking in terms of internationalisation of the Southern Thailand insurgency, is the large number of Muslims from Thailand studying in the Madrasas of Pakistan; some of them have been trained in the Jihadi training centres of the Taliban and Gulbuddin Heckmatyar's Hizbe Islami (HEI) and have participated in the current Taliban-HEI-Al Qaeda offensive in Afghanistan from sanctuaries in the NWFP and Balochistan.

COMMENT: I have said it before, quoting others usually, that the violence in the Deep South was fermenting for a long time. Perhaps, since the mid-90s. You cannot ignore the religious element to the violence. Now, back to the usual news stories about "Thaksin's heavy-handed tactics in the Deep South" started the violence without any analysis or mention on the rise of fundamental Islam terrorism elsewhere in the world.

The Nation reports:

Commissioner Sodsri Sat-ayathum said EC members had met and agreed to exchange responsibilities among themselves as part of work adjustments after the election.

She said Somchai Jueng-prasert, her fellow commissioner who is in charge of investigations, would be replaced by EC chairman Apichart Sukhagga-nond. Sodsri said she and Somchai both expressed interest in supervising public participation affairs, currently under the charge of Sumeth Ubanisakorn.

Sumeth and fellow EC member Prapun Naigowit have not made up their minds about the jobs they are interested in taking up, she said.

However, EC chief Apichart said commissioners had not discussed changing their responsibilities. "At the meeting we discussed how to improve the investigation process after the election," he said.

When pressed about the matter, Somchai responded: "You don't listen to a mad person, otherwise there will be confusion. This is a comment by one person. Other EC members haven't talked about it."

A few days before the election, Sodsri complained publicly about the EC's failure to disqualify candidates accused of violating electoral law. She put the blame on officials in charge of investigations, saying hundreds of fraud complaints were questionably rejected.

Somchai expressed his dissatisfaction at Sodsri's allegation.

COMMENT: Somchai was the dissenting voice the other day in the 4-1 decision to issue yellow cards to PPP candidates, so was Sodsri (who doesn't think the CNS should be accountable) trying to remove him? Obviously, Somchai is referring to Sodsri as the "mad person". It would be hilarious if they weren't responsible for running elections and will be for the next couple of years (from memory 6 in total, but not sure when the time period starts)

Thanong Khanthong (yes, Thanong!) in The Nation:

First, his People Power Party has won 233 parliamentary seats out of 480, giving him a good chance to form the next coalition government. Second, the Criminal Court has sentenced Sondhi Limthongkul, his nemesis, to three years' imprisonment over a libel case against him. Third, if his Manchester City team prevail over Liverpool tomorrow, it would complete a triple triumph.

COMMENT: Ok, the game is on Sunday, but that is a minor point given to what is below.

The next item on the agenda of the Master of the Universe is to plot his return to Thailand after more than a year in exile. He would like Samak Sundaravej to form the next government and his people to be in all the key positions before he boards a flight home, possibly on Valentine's Day. Thousands of his supporters will greet him with red roses at the airport. "We all miss you dearly, Master," they would cry out from the top of their lungs.

Then perhaps it will be time to settle scores. The Master will not forgive Somsak Thepsuthin, who was quick to kowtow to the junta right after the coup; Dr Surakiart Sathirathai, who played a key role in creating Puea Pandin to fight PPP; and Dr Somkid Jatusripitak, who spoke against him when trying to join the Surayud government as a spokesman for economic sufficiency.

COMMENT: Not sure how much hatred towards Dr. Somkid, but Surakiart is certainly persona non grata. I imagine there are not nice feelings towards Somsak either. Settling scores will be difficult, but no amnesty means no Cabinet positions in a PPP-led government. Well, Thaksin can hardly be a Minister now so it is no skin off his nose.

General Sonthi Boonyaratglin, the coup leader, should have sleepless nights, as he is now a retired without any military back-up. General Anupong Phaochinda, the Army chief, appears to have distanced himself from him. Other members of the junta are also feeling sick to their stomachs.

Anupong, a key member of the Queen's Guard, is an exception. He has announced that he has taken the military back to the barracks to maintain political neutrality. By doing so, he is still a force to be reckoned with amid the polarisation in Thai politics and the looming political confrontation and turmoil. Anupong's power lies in his ability to maintain neutrality. Then he can act decisively if the political situation gets out of control.

COMMENT: Gen. Anupong still might be booted upstairs next year to become Supreme Commander - technically Supreme Commander is a higher position than Army C-in-C, but the real power is with the Army C-in-C. PPP will want to maintain some influence over the army. Thaksin acquiesced in 2005 and allowed Gen. Sondhi to become Army C-in-C and a fat lot of good that did him. The coup has made it necessary for a civilian government to exercise control over the army and not leave it up to Prem.

A week before the election, a military poll found that the PPP would win around 220 seats. The junta was deeply troubled over its failure to block the PPP in the North and Northeast.

The junta has miscalculated its strategy. It believed that if it could block the PPP money flow, it would be able to weaken the candidates of the Master of the Universe. Then the Puea Pandin Party, which got tacit support from the military, would get elected instead. Puea Pandin is a break-way bloc from Thai Rak Thai. About 30-40 of its members are ex-Thai Rak Thai.

Before the election, Puea Pandin was seen as a counter to the PPP in the Northeast, as it was expected to win 60-70 seats. The Democrats also got the blessings of the military to serve as the core of the new government. The party had decided not to campaign in the Northeast at all, leaving the whole field open to Puea Pandin and the PPP.

Puea Pandin had deep pockets. It spent heavily in this campaign. But something was wrong. The voters took the loot but they were not enthusiastic about the Puea Pandin candidates. They had already decided to vote for the PPP.

The Master of the Universe did not spend a lot of money in this campaign because he had already won their hearts and minds. His strategists knew how to mobilise and organise people at the grassroots level. There were reports that the campaign against the national referendum for the 2007 Constitution cost him even more.

The Master produced 10 VCDs during the campaign, each carrying his message about how the coup had damaged the Thai economy and hurt the pockets of the poor. If the people wanted his return to Thailand, they must vote PPP. The message was simple enough. In the last VCD, the Puea Pandin Party was portrayed as a traitor not to be trusted or voted for. As a result, Puea Pandin was routed, blowing away the chance of the Democrats forming the government. For if the PPP had only mustered less than 200 MPs, it would certainly have to serve as the opposition.

COMMENT: Finally, a newspaper takes on the myth that PPP's victory was through massive vote-buying. I am not saying that no vote-buying by PPP went on, but Puea Paendin was heavily financed by the elite. As Thanong states the money they spent per candidate would have far exceeded what PPP spent. There are a number of suspicions of where the money came from - certainly not Thaksin, but it was likely through corruption or even direct financing somehow. The money had to come from somewhere so if someone can find a source, not connected with the military/elite, for the very large amount of money they spent please do tell.

This is what makes the EC ridiculous if only PPP is punished.

What has Surayud Chulanont, the prime minister, been doing over the past year? He has virtually done nothing to educate the Northeastern and Northern people about the threat of Thaksinomics. He is only interested in killing time before getting out of office.

The Master of the Universe has only one last hurdle to overcome. Once again, it will be a battle with the judiciary. In 2001 he got off the hook in the assets concealment case in the Constitution Court. If he returns to Thailand this year, he will have to stand trial in the Supreme Court's political unit. There, we'll know the final fate of the Master of the Universe and the fate of the country.

COMMENT: What charges will they bring against Thaksin is the question? Just the Rachadaphisek land deal? I am still waiting for Thanong to explain about the threat of Thaksinomics. Is it its budget surpluses compared to budget deficits under sufficiency economy?

UPDATE: Below

All the big wigs of Chat Thai and Puea Paendin have met at Surakiart's house and outlined 5 conditions for joining a coalition as reported by Thai Rath:

1. Must respect the institution of monarchy and must not violate it (ต้องเทิดทูนสถาบันพระมหากษัตริย์ และจะล่วงละเมิดมิได้)
2. Prem, the Chairman of the Privy Council, is a Senior Statesman among people and is respected by people throughout the country. He must be protected and not violated (พล.อ.เปรม ติณสูลานนท์ ประธานองคมนตรี ถือเป็นรัฐบุรุษที่สูงสุดในบรรดาผู้คนทั้งหลายและเป็นที่เคารพของพี่น้องประชาชนทั่วประเทศ ต้องรักษาไว้ และต้องไม่ก้าวล่วง

3. Revenge must not be taken. If revenge takes place then things will not end and there can be no resolution. (ต้องไม่มีการล้างแค้นซึ่งกันและกัน เพราะหากมีการล้างแค้นเกิดขึ้นแล้วก็จะเกิดการล้างแค้นไม่สิ้นสุดและไม่สามารถหาข้อยุติได้)
4. Thaksin must return to Thailand, face the judicial system and there must not be any interference ( พ.ต.ท.ทักษิณ ชินวัตร อดีตนายกรัฐมนตรี ต้องเดินทางเข้าสู่กระบวนการยุติธรรมโดยต้องไม่มีการแทรกแซงและก้าวก่าย)
5. The Assets Examination Committee must not be dissolved and must not be touched ( 5. คณะกรรมการตรวจสอบการกระทำที่ก่อให้เกิดความเสียหายต่อรัฐ (คตส.) จะต้องไม่ยุบไม่ยกเลิกและต้องไม่ไปแตะต้อง).

"If these conditions are met then both parties are willing to work with any other group who agree and the problem of divisiveness in the nation can be solved. Harmony and unity can be restored to the nation" said Chat Thai Leader Banharn.

COMMENT: Oh, I forgot Surakiart specifically asked that the Foreign Ministry's e-passport bidding irregularities be investigated by the AEC.*

Obviously this is aimed at PPP although they are not named. I will quickly comment on the conditions. For obvious reasons, 1 is a no brainer, but don't you just love 2? So Prem wants the attacks by Samak to stop? Did Surakiart specially insert that provision at Prem's request? Prem can't get lese majeste provisions extended to him so there has to be a special deal as part of the coalition. Does setting up a committee to investigate whether there was any corruption by the CNS, financing of any political parties, or government corruption constitute "revenge"?

PPP will agree to this because we will have a coalition formed and the election commission will likely not issue a string of red cards to PPP candidates. PPP can get on with implementing new policies. Then, we will have to see whether they actually follow all 5 conditions and then what Puea Paendin and Chat Thai do later and how serious they are with the conditions or whether it is a face-saving measure to placate some of their supporters who might not like Thaksin - this is more for Chat Thai. Puea Paendin are far from united particularly their Northeast MP who want to join PPP.** The real conditions and dealings are in relation to the Cabinet positions. On one hand, it looks like Chat Thai and Puea Paendin are playing hardball, but I just think they are desperate to get in government and earn some money so they need some deal to placate some of their anti-Thaksin voters. Well, that and Banharn needed to satisfy a person who he has respected for 30 years.

btw, note there is no requirement that there be no amnesty. If, as The Nation thinks, the amnesty is such a concern for coalition partners, why not? We have a special Prem provision. Simple, Puea Paendin wants an amnesty.

Also, check the Thai Rath link. Isn't Surakiart banned from "politics"? What is he doing all them to his house to talk about joining a coalition government? Sufficient to dissolve Puea Paendin?

*Oh, he didn't say that, I jest. Surakiart was Foreign Minister when there were problems with the bidding for the 7 billion baht e-passport scheme. Just before the coup, The Nation reported:

Sources close to the investigation said the auditor found a pattern of irregularities in the bidding procedure

COMMENT: This investigation has gone quiet since Surakiart left the "dark side".

** First, some background. Earlier tonight, TITV news (amongst others) reported from a Puea Paendin press conference earlier in the day where two Northeast MPs specifically said they wanted Puea Paendin to go with PPP as their policies were very similar. One of them specifically stated he was just stating his personal opinion.

UPDATE: The Nation reports:

"We can work with any political party that accepts these conditions," Banharn said.

He said these conditions had not been proposed to the People Power Party. "We have just made public our conditions and we welcome it if the PPP accepts them," he said, adding he expected the PPP to approach his alliance.

There is no deadline for these conditions, he said.

Asked why the conditions did not include the possible amnesty to the 111 banned executives of the disbanded Thai Rak Thai Party, Banharn said the alliance had not discussed the matter.

"We haven't gone that far. That's an individual matter. We focused on security matters," Banharn said.

COMMENT: Security matters? Criticising Prem is a security matter. Had not discussed the amnesty? Really?

Finally, when I say PPP will agree, they will want Samak as PM, to have the Defence Ministry, Interior Ministry, all key Finance positions, Education, and Health - as per this list - maybe they will agree to give away agriculture. I don't think they will support Banharn as PM as Banharn wants.

Chris Baker has a guest post at New Mandala which has election results plotted on a map of Thailand. It is very useful for seeing how the country is divided along party lines.

The Bangkok Post reports:

Mr Surapong countered the Democrats, announcing that the PPP will form a government with Ruam Jai Thai Chart Pattana, Matchimathipataya and Pracharaj. The four-party government would have 254 seats.

The leaders of the four parties would hold a press conference on Jan 3, or the day after the poll results are approved by the EC, he said.

Mr Surapong said the Chart Thai and Puea Pandin parties still have time to make their final decisions, but the PPP would go ahead with or without them.

Puea Pandin leader Suvit Khunkitti denied his party had officially discussed forming a coalition government with the PPP and Chart Thai.

However, a Puea Pandin source said Mr Suvit was siding with the PPP, but de facto key figure Surakiart Sathirathai had advised he wait for the disqualification of election cheats.

COMMENT: Barring a red card disaster for PPP Puea Paendin will join the government. The Thai media suggest the same simply as most of their MPs are from the Northeast where siding with the PPP (ie Thaksin) is good for their future electoral chances. No doubt their poor electoral performance suggests they need some ally.

Reuters reports:

"To create that coalition and actually get it going, the hurdles are relatively few," said Bangkok-based political historian Chris Baker.
...
The new government will have few friends in the royalist establishment, the capital or the media, a combination that suggests the political dinosaurs likely to make up the next cabinet will soon find skeletons emerging from cupboards.

"There will be scandals very quickly, within two to three months. The press will ride them extremely hard," Baker said. "Thailand will muddle ahead, not necessarily muddle through."

COMMENT: The new government needs an economic plan and it needs to start implementing the plan immediately. No doubt The Nation after staying quiet about so many things under the military junta will now spring into life.

The Bangkok Post reports:

People Power party leader Samak Sundaravej has scheduled a press conference for January 4, when he says it will announce the formation of a new government.

PPP spokesperson Kuthep Saikrajang made the announcement early Wednesday, confirming that the PPP now has 254 seats in the bag.

“There is no doubt that the PPP will be able to form a new government and we hope that Puea Pandin party will join us,” he said.

COMMENT: That 254 number doesn't include Chat Thai

It comes just hours after Banharn's daughter held a press conference as the Bangkok Post reports:

Kanjana Silpa-archa has spoken in defense of Chart Thai party leader Banharn Silpa-archa at a press conference saying he did not propose to form a coalition with the People Power party (PPP) on the condition that he becomes the prime minister as stated by PPP deputy secretary-general Noppadon Pattama.

Ms Kanjana, who is a Chart Thai party member and daughter of Mr Banharn, hit back at claims made by Mr Thaksin’s legal aide, Noppadon yesterday, where he stated that Mr Banharn should “assess his bargaining power before proposing to be the next prime minister.”

Ms Kanjana described the statement as “false and damaging to Mr Banharn’s reputation and to Chart Thai party” and urged him to “get his facts straight before accusing others.”

COMMENT: PPP can't really cave. If Chat Thai demands too much shut them out. Then let Puea Paendin choose whether they want to be in opposition or in government. Chat Thai appears to be demanding Agriculture and Transport (lots of money to be made from these ministries).

UPDATE: The Bangkok Post reports:

The People Power party (PPP) is divided over whether it should try to bring Chart Thai into its planned coalition government, following its apparent success in getting Puea Pandin. Key PPP figure Newin Chidchob believes Chart Thai is now dispensable.
...
But a PPP source insisted Ruam Jai Thai and Puea Pandin were just trying to increase their bargaining power. They had already confirmed their participation in the PPP's bid to form a coalition, the source said

COMMENT: I think everyone would like to avoid Chat Thai particularly as Banharn is demanding. That his party did badly at the election won't stop him.

AP reports:

"This is the people's decision. The military has to accept that people disagree with the coup," Prinya Thaewanaraemitkul, a law teacher at Bangkok's Thammasat University, said Monday.

COMMENT: Prinya used to be firmly in the anti-Thakin camp like many other academics, but has been very critical of the retroactive application of laws banning the 111 TRT executives from holding certain political positions.

The Nation reports:

This was the outcome of a meeting yesterday of the selection committee, as stipulated by the new constitution.

The selection committee is made up of representatives from seven organisations. It includes Election Commission head Apichart Sukhagganond; Col Teeradej Meepian, chief of the Ombudsman's Office; Virat Limvichai, president of Supreme Court and acting president of the Constitution Court; Panthep Klanarongran, chairman of the National Counter Corruption Commission; Khunying Jaruwan Maintaka, on behalf of the Asset Examination Commission.

Virat was elected chairman of the selection committee.

Nomination for the 74 appointed senators will be accepted from January 3 to 17.

COMMENT: I can't believe there are just announcing this now. It is like a week away.

Suthiphol Thaweechaikarn, secretary of the Election Commission (EC), reiterated that only organisations with legally recognised status could endorse a candidate for consideration. These include professional organisations, NGOs, state organisation and more, but they all must have been registered for no less than three years and must not be profit-making.

Each organisation could only submit one name as a candidate and the seven person selection committee would consider various expertise, experience, gender and age balance. They would also ensure that the socially underprivileged would be considered.

Five subcommittees would be set up, said Suthiphol, and would include a public relations subcommittee to inform the public about the process.

The system differs from those under the 1997 charter, whereby all senators were elected. Under the 2007 constitution, 74 will be selected and appointed, while 76 - one from each province - would be elected.

There were concerns about the large pool of candidates likely to be submitted but Suthiphol said he was not too worried.

Bona fide candidates must, under Article 128 of Election of MPs and Selection and Election of Senators Law, have a record of working for the organisation that nominates them.

Anyone opposed to any selection after the announcement can petition the Supreme Court, which will have a year to consider such cases.

The Election Commission has set March 2 for the Senate election. Under the new system 76 of the 150 seats in the upper chamber will be elected via direct voting. Each elected senator will represent one province.

For the remaining 74 seats, a panel, made up of representatives from the courts and independent organisations set up by organic laws, will select candidates nominated by various professional groups.

COMMENT: So the Independent Organisations appoint the Senators, the Senators later appoint the Independent Organisations and vice versa. What a system?

Today's editorial in the junta gazette The Nation states:

As a member of the former Thai Rak Thai Party, Thaksin has also been barred from politics for five years, along with 110 other executives of the party. The Constitution Tribunal found that the party was involved in election fraud.

Thaksin told the reporters in Hong Kong he was ready to prove that the charges against him were unfounded. "I'm sure I can prove my innocence as all the allegations are empty."

We welcome Thaksin's return if he really wants to come back. But he should return to Thailand as a private citizen who will have to go through the normal justice system to fight the cases against him. He, or his supporters, should not try to overturn the justice system or the existing legal process by abolishing the Assets Examination Committee or by influencing Parliament to introduce legislation to grant amnesty to the 111 ex-Thai Rak Thai members banned from politics.

If this were to be the case, then confidence in Thailand would evaporate. There would be political turmoil once again. If Thaksin really believes he is innocent of all the charges against him, he should stand trial in court to prove his case. Only then may Thailand return to normalcy. Then we can all look forward to putting Thailand back on track.

COMMENT: Why is there a need for a special Assets Examination Committee to investigate Thaksin? Why not give it to the National Counter Corruption Commission or to a prosecutor like every other case? Should Thaksin be singled out? What if a PPP-led government was to set up a Investigate the Assets of Military Junta Committee, would The Nation approve? Or would it say such actions smacks of divisiveness and will cause political turmoil? You and I both know it would be the later. The Nation thinks Thaksin should not be given special treatment and let off the charges, which I agree with, but thinks there needs to be a special agency to deal with Thaksin. This is singling out Thaksin for special treatment which is something The Nation claims it is against, but The Nation is ok with it because it negatively affects Thaksin.

On the amnesty, the coup leaders broke the law and acted contrary to the constitution by staging the coup. After doing something illegal, they then granted themselves an amnesty. The Nation doesn't seem to think this is a great wrong or at least not one to harp on about continuously. Yet, for 109 executives (I exclude the two who were found to have breached the law), they were only subject to punishment because a law was retroactively applied to them - the acts of two members of TRT affected all 111 executives. At the time the acts were committed they should not have been subject to punishment. It was only after the acts were committed that the military changed the law. Yet providing an amnesty to restore their status as it would been before the military issued a special law is somehow wrong just bewilders me. Just wait for The Nation to drag out rule of law arguments.

I have no objection to an amnesty for the 109 executives. I don't think the two who were found to have breached the electoral law - despite my dislike of Constitutional Tribunal and Prem's interfering - should be granted an amnesty. Just like I don't think the coup leaders should be granted an amnesty.

Nevertheless, this does not mean an amnesty should be a government priority. It shouldn't be and it would be stupid for the PPP to grant an amnesty in the first couple of months - I actually think the first year. This is aside from the fact that Senate elections won't be held until March at the earliest and the junta-appointed NLA are the Senate now so no possibility of an amnesty now - well unless a certainly white-haired fellow with the initial P instructs "his children" otherwise. The PPP have been making sounds over the last few days that they are heeding this advice. There just won't be an amnesty until at least April at the earliest so the PPP should just say "we are not even considering an amnesty now, it is not a priority. There are a number of reasons why there should be no amnesty now.

First, an amnesty sends a signal to the electorate that PPP are more concerned about their own interests. There would need to be some wheeling and dealings behind the scene for an amnesty to take place and this takes valuable time. Trying to put the economy and country on track are more important priorities. Once there are least some signs that things are getting better then they could can look at an amnesty.

Second, there are good tactical reasons why the PPP should not grant an amnesty now as it keeps a PPP-led government from falling regardless of whether Puea Paendin enter the coalition or not. Puea Paendin and Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana need the amnesty, probably even more so than PPP. It is difficult to say precisely how badly the banning affected them compared with PPP, but the electoral results showed PPP did quite well and both of them did badly. I think the banning of the 111 executives affected Puea Paendin and Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana more than it did PPP. Somkid was the face of Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana and without him they were nothing. Surakiart and Suranand amongst others would have helped Puea Paendin too. Both bitterly complained about the EC interpretation of the rules which shut them out as advisers. Until there is an amnesty, will either Puea Paendin or Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana want parliament dissolved and to have to face an election without their star performers? I don't think so. Thaksin also gets to take revenge on all the TRT executives who jumped ship and didn't join PPP (principally you Surakiart) and would be happy to align with the Democrats. It would be like rubbing salt in the wound after the failing of their parties at this election as well. Obviously, the former TRT executives who are linked with PPP (like Chaturon, Sudarat) won't be happy, but it is in their interests for the government to survive and for the economy to improve. Both are still young and can still work behind the scenes.

Finally, some advice on what the amnesty should look like. Obviously, the two executives who were found responsible should not be granted an amnesty. I don't think that Thaksin should be included either. It would simply create too much trouble for PPP. I am not sure how PPP could manage it. They could amend the electoral act to allow for an individual to personally renounce their ability to be an MP, Minister or PM for as long as they want and make such a renunciation binding - Thaksin can then sign an renunciation and for it to last until May 31, 2011 (five years from the Constitutional Tribunal dissolution of TRT). Alternatively, Thaksin could say he doesn't want to be included in such an amnesty "for the sake of the country" or some similar wording.

From the Washington Post:

THE GENERALS who overthrew a democratically elected government and took power in Thailand in September 2006 have performed two useful functions. They have provided yet one more persuasive example that military rule is not the panacea its promoters often fantasize it will be. And they allowed what appears to have been a reasonably free election to take place on Sunday. Now -- though the election was a triumph for the same forces that the generals objected to 15 months ago -- they should perform one more service to their country and get out of the way of its politics

COMMENT: The thing is, I don't see the generals have actually lost as much as some say. They almost doubled the military budget, they have a new internal security law, they have a new constitution which allows a half-appointed Senate - more than a few generals will be in there. Sure, they were incompetent in government and didn't defeat Thaksin, but they were like a lame duck President in their final term with full executive authority. They still got most of what they wanted.

The question will be now, what of civil-military relations for the new government? On one hand, the new government doesn't want to provoke the military into staging a new coup, but on the other hand the fear or the threat of another coup is in the back of very politician's mind so they need to assert some control over the military to neutralise this. A change in personnel as opposed to a weakening of military power in the short-term is the best bet. They can't just leave the coup leaders anointed successor, Gen. Anupong, in place as Army C-in-C. I really can't see them not appointing one of his fellow Army pre-cadet Class No 10 classmates - also a Thaksin classmate too - as Army C-in-C. "Promote" Gen. Anupong up to Supreme Commander next year would be my bet. Then it will take another couple of years to weaken military power, but he military will still have their increased budget in place so they might still see this as having come out ahead.

The other one from the Jerusalem Post is well quite simplistic. About the only key quote is:

The PPP will have to come to terms with a powerful military establishment that under the Internal Security Act may intervene in the political process without consulting the civilian government.

It has started. Basically, a yellow card signals a by-election with the candidate(s) receiving the yellow card able to run again in the by-election. A red card purportedly bans the candidate and moves the person who finished next on the vote into parliament (ie. on the constituency vote in a 3 MP constituency, the person who finished fourth) (UPDATE: By-election and the red-carded candidates are banned from contesting). There is no specific legal provision which states "yellow card" or "red card" it is just the names they are colloquially known as. The EC have broad discretionary powers.

The Nation reports:

The Election Commission decided Tuesday to issue yellow cards for three winning People Power Party candidates in Nakhon Ratchasima's Constituency 3, EC member Sodsri Satyatham said.

They are Boonlert Krutkhunthot (110,944), Linda Cherdchai (89,976) and Prasert Chantarawongthong (88,139).

EC regulations allow those who were given yellow cards to re-run in the by election set tentatively on January.

The Nation explains their "crimes":

He said the three candidates were found to have benefited from their canvassers hiring people to join their campaign rally and from donating money to a local temple.

COMMENT: Hiring people to join rallies? The election regulations are so broad and wide-ranging that I honestly don't think there are very few candidates who haven't broken some law. A look at the constituency vote shows a 12,000 vote gap between number 3 and number 4 so certainly PPP have a good chance of retaining all 3 seats - Kom Chad Luek quotes one of the candidates (Boonlert) of being confident of winning the by-election which will be held on January 13. The Nation Channel reports Sodsri as saying they don't have sufficient evidence to take further action (ทั้งนี้เป็นเพราะข้อมูลหลักฐานไม่สามารถเอาผิดกับผู้สมัครได้สักเท่าไหร่ ), but quotes here as saying there is no appeal procedure for yellow cards. However, the candidates don't have to pay for the cost of the by-election, per section 113 of the Electoral Act.* Over the next 10 days expect more red and yellow cards. The Nation further reports:

[EC] resolved to summon six winning candidates - four of them from People Power and two from the Democrats - to explain allegations of vote buying or making false accusations against other candidates, he said.

COMMENT: Sodsri is quoted in Thai Rath as hinting that 3 more cards might be issued to the 3 PPP candidates in Lampang Constituency No. 1, but the 3 PPP candidates received 145,101, 124,586, and 90,589 votes respectively. The fourth-placed candidate received 75,321 votes so maybe PPP might lose one if yellow cards are issued, but you can't see them losing any more. So how many red and yellow cards will be issued to PPP vs the other parteis?

btw, PPP have moved up from 232 to 233 votes and Puea Paendin down to 24 from 25 after the official results from the EC (Source: Kom Chad Luek)

*Organic Act on Election of Members of the House of Representatives and the Installation of Senators (PDF)

Section 113 In the case where the Election Commission or the Supreme Court ordered the derogation of the right of candidacy of any candidate or Member of the House of Representatives, causing a new election to be held, the person whose right of candidacy was derogated shall be liable for the re-election expenditure.

Useful tidbit from Tulsie:

Dec 25. 4 pm: Good afternoon and Merry Christmas everyone. Well, there was a major discovery while we were celebrating the Christmas Eve. Someone pointed out that there was no chance the Democrats could form the new government, unless they managed to fill the Cabinet with outsiders (non-MPs) only. Why? Because the new Constitution won't allow Cabinet ministers to cast their votes in the event that the entire government is censured. This means if 248-MP coalition government led by the Democrat Party will have its strength reduced by 30 or so MPs if the MPs-dominated Cabinet is censured by the opposition.

The constitutional rule will badly affect a PPP-led coalition as well, unless Samak is able to form a 300-MP coalition, which of course needs support from either Chat Thai or Pua Paendin in addition to the smaller parties.

Let's take the 278-MP coalition scenario of the PPP as an example. If 20 MPs become ministers, the parliamentary strength will shrink to 258 if the entire Cabinet is censured. That's only an 18-MP advantage. In Thai politics, it's a big risk.

This constitutional rule, in other words, seem to have boosted the bargaining power of the Chat Thai and Pua Paendin parties  significantly. Again, red card announcement could change things a bit, but you'll get the whole picture now. The constitutional rule must be taken into account in future speculation and analyses.

COMMENT: Obviously, this is where the amnesty can be crucial for PPP, but also shows why the Dems have no chance of forming a government unless the EC start with a red card bonanza. PPP can appoint a lot of outsiders to Cabinet positions. What will they do with Prachai is the question?

I am not sure it has really boosted Puea Paendin and Chat Thai's bargaining power. If they want to be in government, they have to go with the PPP. If not the PPP can appoint outsiders to Cabinet (i.e family members) and reward the smaller parties. Both Puea Paendin and Chat Thai are desperate to be in government so it could be a matter of who is more desperate.

Either way, it will be eventful.

The Bangkok Post reports (cache):

The Wadah faction's confidence has been somewhat restored, despite winning only two of the 12 constituency seats in the three southern border provinces. Running under the People Power party (PPP) banner, its candidates Najmuddin Uma and Sukano Matha won in Narathiwat's constituency 2 and Yala's constituency 1, respectively. Mr Sukano is a younger brother of Wadah leader Wan Muhamad Nor Matha.

Leading Wadah member Areepen Uttarasin, a party-list candidate, won in zone 8 which covers the southernmost provinces of Pattani, Yala and Narathiwat.

Still, several core members of the faction failed. They include former senator and MP Den Tohmeena, Muk Sulaiman and JehIsma-ae Jehmong.

The Democrat party which won almost all constituency seats in the far South in the Feb 6, 2005, election, lost some of its seats. The Democrats won five seats in the area. Three of the remaining seats went to Puea Pandin candidates, one in Narathiwat and two in Pattani, and another two went to the Chart Thai party in Pattani.

In 2005 the Democrats took 11 of the 12 seats, obliterating the Wadah faction, which ran under the Thai Rak Thai party. The 12th went to Chart Thai.

Mr Areepen said the faction's comeback, winning two constituency seats, proved it was still popular.

He admitted Wadah had a tough job ahead if it was to rebuild its popularity.

''In the previous election, the Democrats gained 11 seats because southerners wanted to teach Mr Thaksin that his southern solutions were wrong.

''Now local people know that southern problems cannot be solved and violence will happen anyway,'' said Mr Areepen.

Mr Najmuddin said the locals realised that Wadah had not masterminded the robbery of military weapons in Narathiwat on Jan 4, 2004, which marked the start of renewed separatist insurgency.

Puea Pandin's win was due to the popularity of deputy leader Waemahadee Waedao, who contested constituency 1 in Narathiwat. Dr Waemahadee said people voted for him and his party because of interest in its policies for solving southern problems and his devotion to door-knocking campaigns.

COMMENT: Dr Waemahadee was of course arrested in June 2003 for allegedly being a JI member and was later acquitted.

The Dems went from 11 to 5 seats. I think they will be a little disappointed.

Time reports:

In the aftermath of his victory, Samak said Thaksin "must stay away from politics for a while" while he fights to have the cases against him resolved in the courts; other members of the PPP have predicted Thaksin could return by Valentine's Day. But Panitan Wattanayagorn, a political scientist at Chulalongkorn University, says that Samak will have to keep Thaksin off the agenda — and out of power — if he wants to win over parties to join his coalition. "Samak will need to be pragmatic and flexible. He may have to listen to Thaksin, but he also has to listen to civil society," Panitan says. As he sets about negotiating with other parties to form a government he hopes will last, Samak would do well to bear in mind a common Thai saying: The provinces send governments to Bangkok, and Bangkok sends them back.

COMMENT: Panitan is right, but the amnesty of 111 former TRT executives will still happen as the majority of MPs come from parties where important leaders were affected by the ban. It would be adviseable to wait a few months - need to wait until new Senate anyway - before they look at passing such legislation.

Thai Rath reports (1am Dec 25) that HM the King in an address to navy and air force students told them that the military and the civilians must uphold the nation's harmony and cooperate together. Don't allow anyone to divide into groups (ทั้งทหารและพลเรือนจึงต้องรักษาความสามัคคีในชาติ รักษาความร่วมมือร่วมใจของคนในชาติไว้ทุกเมื่อ อย่ายอมให้ผู้ใด สิ่งใด มาแบ่งพวกแบ่งฝ่ายคนชาติไทยเป็นอันขาด ชาติของเราจึงจะตั้งมั่นอยู่โดยอิสระเสรี มีความผาสุกสงบและเจริญมั่นคงได้ตลอดไป)

COMMENT: What does this mean for coalition negotiations?

Thepchai Yong on the Assets Examination Committee:

And all the members of the investigation commission are well respected, highly credible figures.

COMMENT: Only Yong could write this. About the only thing the members have in to common as the are anti-Thaksin, The Nation said so last year. One of them, Kaewsan Athibodi, wrote a book called "Stop the Thaksin Regime" and used analogies comparing Thaksin to a hijacker and a rapist. Another two attended anti-Thaksin rallies earlier in the year. Need I mention what another one, Banjerd, said in March last year about Thaksin being worse than Hitler:

Mr Banjerd criticised Mr Thaksin during the meeting as a dictator, worse than Adolf Hitler.

Hitler, despite being a dictator, had contributed a great deal to Germany, especially in developing a modern infrastructure system.

“What makes Mr Thaksin different from Adolf Hitler was that Hitler did not do things for his own benefit.

“Hitler killed Jews but he did several things for his country. He was more useful for the country than Mr Thaksin was.”

The AEC were selected for their purity to the anti-Thaksin cause. Yong respects them as they are fellow anti-Thaksinites. Why won't Yong just admit it?

UPDATE: Below

I have just became aware that The Nation's editor Tulsathit Taptim live-blogged the election. Some choice excerpts in relation to which parties will side with who. From Dec 23:

11 pm: A source who is a senior Pua Paendin member told us that his party won't back Samak. Without Pua Paendin, the PPP can't live without Chat Thai, as forming a government with the other small parties will be too risky.

Rumours _ sorry friends, you are going to hear this word a lot but I would rather share everything with you _ have it that Banharn has laid down a tough condition: If he is to join the PPP, he has to be prime minister. This condition, according to the rumours, has been supported by Sudarat Keyuraphan and Chalerm Yoobamrung. Samak, of course, won't take it.

It continues Dec 24:

11 am: Last night, the leaders of the Chat Thai, Pua Paendin and Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana, which together control around 80 seats, ganged up at a Vatana residence in a bid to give themselves a strong leverage.

The idea reportedly was to go to the Democrats and demand the Agriculture and Communications ministries for Chat Thai and Commerce Ministry for Pua Paendin. It was unclear yet how Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana will get and how committed it is to this alliance.

Anyway, it was said that the Democrats agreed with this in principle.

Problem is, this alliance plus the Democrats will yield around 244-246 seats, a very very thin majority. The PPP, meanwhile, was trying desperately to get support from the rest of the smaller parties, but the planned meeting with the Matchima Thipataya, Pracharaj parties this morning did not materialised. (The initial names of participants included Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana as well)

Abhisit is quoted in The Nation today as saying:

"If Chart Thai, Ruam Jai Thai Chart Pattana and Puea Pandin announce they will not join the PPP, then the PPP will not be able to form a government because it has too few seats," Abhisit said.

COMMENT: The problem with the scenario above is that the finalised figures means it is no longer possible. The Dems + Chart Thai, Ruam Jai Thai Chart Pattana and Puea Pandin only results in 236. PPP could still join up with Pracharaj and Matchima to form a government as Tulsie mentions below. It is a pity The Nation didn't mention that in the news story - not Abhisit's fault as at the time he said it could have been true.

7 pm: Samak has reconfirmed the PPP had "locked up" two unnamed parties under its wings and was trying to "boost stability" of the new government by seeking alliance with two more parties.

An unlikely name has been circulated as the PPP's first ally. You wouldn't guess it. Snoh Thienthong of all people!!!! The man who only a year or so ago said the worst moment of his political life was when he raised Thaksin Shinawatra's hand and proclaimed him the country's hero is said to be ready to raise Samak's hand and proclaim him the next saviour.

It's worth noting that the report could not be confirmed, as any agreement or pact has to wait for the red card decisions.

7.50 pm: We have just been done with another round of news meeting. What we have learned is that the PPP's strategy is to hold on to Pracharaj and Matchima Thipataya parties for dear life. Why? Because as long as the two parties is with the PPP (232+5+7), the other camp can never muster majority control of Parliament. Now what the PPP needs to do is convince and get firm commitment from Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana. Then the next step will be to extract Pua Paendin from its loose alliance with Chat Thai. (Please note that we are talking about the second PPP-led scenario here).

Our sources said Banharn seemed to have priced himself out of the market by making an impossible demand (for the premier post) in exchange for supporting the PPP. If he could not hold on to the Pua Paendin Party, it 's likely that he would be in the opposition with the Democrats. What a deja vu.

COMMENT: Thai Rath have also stated that there are plans for a PPP-Puea Paendin-Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana-Pracharaj-Matchima government. Samak is also quoted as saying they have the support of 2 small parties (assume Pracharaj and Matchima) and will get the support of two other parties (assume Puea Paendin Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana).Once Pracharaj and Matchima are on-board, I am doubtful that Puea Paendin will stay out of the coalition despite those supposed deal with Chat Thai simply for the reason as they have lost the military as their support based now they need to be in government to finance the next election, but Puea Paendin might opt to stay out at the beginning until the number of red cards is known. With Puea Paendin and the three other small parties, the coalition would have 278 seats vs 202 for Chat Thai-Democrats. A very comfortable majority. If Puea Paendin don't join then a coalition of 253 vs 227. Not so comfortable.

Thai Rath reported late last night that Suvit of Puea Paendin will hold a press conference at 11am to state whether he will join the government or not. Another Thai Rath report states than Banharn and Suvit meet last night and said they will wait for official figures before deciding their position. The Election Commission will announce the results of the election at 12pm so Suvit seems to have made up his mind.

Everything now depends on how many yellow and red cards are issued and to who. By-elections are scheduled for January 13th.

UPDATE: Matichon reports on the 278 seat coalition (PPP-Puea Paendin-Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana-Pracharaj-Matchima), but sees the two smaller parties who have already agreed are Pracharaj and Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana and that talks are still underway with Matchima. Matchima were expected to join as most of its 7 former MPs came from TRT although nothing had been finalised.

COMMENT: That Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana is one of the smaller parties makes more sense as in the evening of Dec 23 they were meeting with Chat Thai and Puea Paendin, but by last night they weren't in on the meeting. This suggests they had already made up their mind. The tidbit from the Matichon article is that Suriya Jungrungreangkit, former Secretary-General of TRT, is in on the negotiations with Somsak Thepsutin - they were both leaders of the Wang Nam Yom faction in TRT.

The same Matichon article quotes a Puea Paendin source as saying it has heard that 17-18 yellow and red cards will be handed out. If a red card then this means no need for a by-election and that the next candidate on the vote moves up (ie the person who is fourth in a 3 MP constituency moves up to third and becomes an MP), but if a yellow card there is a by-election and aligning with Chat Thai is not good for candidates chances compared to aligning with PPP. Many Puea Paendin candidates from the Northeast have apparently called Suvit to complain.

Latest Vote Count (11pm - 24 Dec) : It seems final now.

Overall

Party Con PL Total PPP 199 34 233 Dems 132 33 165 Chat Thai 33 4 37 Puea Paendin 17 7 24 Ruam Jai Thai 8 1 9 Matchima 7 0 7 Pracharaj 4 1 5 Total 400 80 480

Source: MCOT

Yellow and red cards still to be handed out.

Constituency Vote

Party Votes Percentage Seats PPP 26,971,230 36.83% 199 Dems 22,128,334 30.21% 132 Puea Paendin 6,647,193 9.08% 17 Chat Thai 6,486,553 8.86% 33 Matichima 3,912,330 5.34% 7 Ruam Jai 3,482,904 4.76% 8 Pracharaj 1,675,205 2.29% 4 Others 1,935,235 2.64% 0 TOTAL 72,238,984 100% 400

Source: Based on a spreadsheet downloaded from the ECT which I crudely sorted and through a couple of cancellations obtained the total number of votes for each party which won at least one constituency. I have uploaded the page of the spreadsheet here.

NOTE: Voters can vote for 2 or 3 candidates (depending on which constituency they live in) so there are not 72 million voters, but 72 million votes. You will see the importance of being a large party - Puea Paendin, Chat Thai, Matichima, Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana, and Pracharaj got around 22 million votes between them but only won 69 seats compared to the Democrats 132. PPP could break up into two, but I expect the smaller breakway from PPP parties (ie Puea Paendin, Matichima, Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana, and maybe Pracharaj) might join one of the two or at least some consolidation particularly in regions.

Party Vote

Party Votes Percentage Seats PPP 12,331,381 41.08% 34 Dems 12,138,960 40.44% 33 Puea Paendin 1,599,077 5.03% 7 Chat Thai 1,213,093 4.04% 4 Ruam Jai 740,501 2.47% 1 Pracharaj 408,797 1.36% 1

Source: Prachatai. Also Dr. Kriengsak has the same figures (PDF) - also here is a slightly modified spreadsheet (percentages added) from the EC website (original EC figures can be found in this large ZIP file with multiple spreadsheets)

UPDATE: Spoilt and No votes are not included in the percentage breakdown.

BP: A number of voters gave the Democrats their party vote, but not their constituency votes. Is this because of better campaigning by the Democrat party brand (ie. youthful Abhisit) or that their local candidates in the constituencies were not as strong as the Democrat brand? Probably, a mixture of both. PPP didn't have some of a problem. The party vote for some of the small parties, particularly Matichima evaporated.

The Bangkok Post reports (cache)

Meanwhile, the commander of the 3rd Battalion of the 1st Infantry Regiment, Polsak Sripen, denied he had ordered his men to vote for the Democrat party yesterday.

His comment was in response to an audio clip posted on a website last week in which senior army commanders instructed the rank and file to vote for the Democrats.

Lt-Col Polsak dismissed the video clip as a trick, possibly manipulated by an audio-editing programme.

His battalion is headquartered on Rama V road in Bang Sue district.

The Democrats took most seats in Bangkok, according to unofficial results.

Army chief Gen Anupong Paojinda said he had heard about the sound clip and was waiting for an official report before ordering an investigation.

Well, as usual, the Thai papers have more. Thai Rath reports:

ผู้สื่อข่าวรายงานวานนี้ (23 ธ.ค.)ว่า ได้มีการนำคลิปวีดิโอบันทึกเสียงการประชุมของทหารในหน่วยหนึ่งของกรุงเทพมหานคร (กทม.) ที่เรียกประชุมกำลังพล เรื่องการเลือกตั้ง มาเผยแพร่ผ่านเว็บไซต์เสรีชน ใช้หัวข้อในการโพสต์ว่า “ไหนว่าทหารเป็นกลางเหตุเกิดที่หน่วยหนึ่ง” โดยใช้ชื่อผู้ โพสต์ว่า lek 12 เวลาโพสต์ 11.17 น. ของวันที่ 22 ธ.ค. 2550 มีความยาว 26.28 วินาที

[My own summarised translation: A sound clip from a military gathering in Bangkok about the election has been distributed on Serichon website under the topic "One instance of the army supposedly being neutral". Uploaded by lek12 at 11:17am on December 22. 26.28 minutes in length].

เนื้อหาในคลิปช่วงแรก ผู้บังคับหน่วยได้ขอให้กำลังพลออกไปเลือกตั้งในวันที่ 23 ธ.ค.ให้มาก และมีการชี้ให้เห็นถึงผลเสีย ที่เกิดจากนโยบายประชานิยมของรัฐบาลที่ผ่านมา ต่อมาเป็นช่วงที่นายทหารยศ พ.ท.นายหนึ่งขึ้นไปกล่าวบนเวที มีเนื้อหาพอสรุปได้ว่า “ไม่ต้องพูดอะไรมาก อย่างที่ผู้บังคับการพูดไปแล้วว่าเราลงเรือลำเดียวกัน ก็ขอให้เราไปเลือกตั้ง เดี๋ยวนะผมเลี้ยงขนมจีนแกงไก่ อย่างที่บอกว่าพัน 3 เราซื้อไม่ได้ แต่ถ้าให้ตังค์เรารับ แต่ว่าเราจะเลือกตามใคร ถ้าพอไปกันได้ก็ประชาธิปัตย์ 4-5-6 ทั้งพรรคทั้งคน ผมไม่ขออะไรมาก ไม่เอาเหตุผลอะไรทั้งสิ้น เรามาแสดงในความเป็นหน่วยสามัคคี”

[My own summarised translation: The contents of the clip start with a commander asking soldiers to go out and vote on Dec 23 in great numbers and reminding them of the bad effects of the populist policies of the previous government. Then a Lt. Col. came onto the stage and stated "No need to say too much and it is as the Commander said that we are in the same boat. We need to vote. I will soon buy kanom jeen gaeng gai [a kind of noodle with green curry]. As I say you cannot buy the 3rd Battalion, but if money is given we will receive and then will we choose the same as others. To get along well there is Democrats 4-5-6 [the numbers of the Democrat candiates], the whole party. I don't ask for much. There is no reason. We can show are unit is in harmony"

ในคลิปวีดิโอนายพันโทยังกล่าวอีกว่า “แต่จะบอกไว้อย่างหนึ่งว่า หน่วยเลือกตั้งของเรานับคะแนนในหน่วยเรานี้ ฉะนั้นเย็นนั้นก็รู้เลยว่า เราสามัคคีกันหรือไม่ เราแสดงพลังกันทั้งหมดทั้งหน่วย ถือว่าผมขอก็แล้วกัน เหมือนผมเป็นพ่อบ้าน ถ้าตลกก็คุณพ่อขอร้อง คุณแม่ ขอร้องคงไม่มีอะไรมาก เดี๋ยวกินข้าว 4-5-6 ประชาธิปัตย์ เหตุผลไม่มี แต่ผมมีอยู่ในใจ ทุกคนไปวิเคราะห์กันเอง ว่าเหตุผลผมมีอยู่ในใจ ทุกก็คงไปวิเคราะห์กันเอง จะบอกถึงผลดีถ้าเราได้มาซึ่งความเป็นหน่วย เราจะได้มาเป็นกอบเป็นกำ อันนี้ผมไม่ได้ไปรับเงินใครมาทั้งสิ้น แต่เราสามารถต่อรองได้ เฮ้ย! ... เพราะว่าผมมีกำลังพล 1,000 คน เอาตามผมหมด เพราะฉะนั้นผมอยากได้ คือไม่ใช่อยากได้ตังค์เข้ากระเป๋านะ ผมก็รู้ว่ามีทหารบางคนเป็นคนขวางโลก ผมก็ขอแค่นี้ ถ้าไม่ได้ก็ถือว่าคุณพ่อขอร้อง 4-5-6 ทั้งพรรค ถ้าเลือกพรรคก็เบอร์ 4 ขอร้องล่ะ ”

In a video [should this be sound?] clip, a Lt. Col further stated that "but I will say one thing. Our election counting unit will count the votes in this area. Therefore, we will not whether we are in unity or not. Whether we show power/force together as a unit, take at as me asking [you]. Think of me as a father of the house. If being funny then father begs/requests of you, mother begs/requests of you [the phrase of a famous comedian]. Nothing really. We will eat. Democrats 4-5-6. I have no reason, but I have reasons in my heart. You can all analyse for yourselves what my reasons are. It is very beneficial. I haven't received money at all, but I can haggle!... because I have a battalion of 1,000 people to follow me. Therefore, what I want is not money in my pocket. I know that there are some soldiers who are different. I just ask for this. If not then I beg/request of you 4-5-6, the whole party. If you choose the party [on the party list] it is No. 4"

Audio is available here.

COMMENT: I don't know whose voice it is, but by his suggestion that it has been edited he is tacitly admitting it is his voice. I suppose he can argue that is has been edited or manipulated in the same way Britney could argue that those up-skirt photos weren't of her.

For me, the only interpretation of what he can say is that he wants his soldiers to vote for the Democrats. He mimics a comedian in saying so, but his words are clear.

So much for the military being neutral. I wonder how many other instances like this will surface or happened around the country.

NOTE: This was awfully difficulty to translate as he is not talking complete sentences and in parts it is confusing, but I didn't want to insert my own spin when translating - that comes in my comment :) So if you don't think he was calling for the soldiers to vote for the Democrats feel free to say so.

This is an argument which Shawn Crispin seems to be pushing in Asia Times:

PPP party leader Samak Sundaravej told reporters that the result guaranteed he will assume the premiership of a PPP-led government, though its not clear which if any of the five small- and medium-sized parties which received votes would be willing to join forces with his party.

The runner-up Democrat Party won a better-than-expected 166 seats and party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva has so far not ruled out trying to cobble together a coalition government with other parties that secured votes, including the next runner up, Chat Thai Party, and fourth placed Pua Pandin, which respectively notched 39 and 26 seats, according to unofficial results.

COMMENT: Just to note the latest figures are 232 for PPP, 165 for the Democrats, 37 for Chat Thai, 25 for Puea Paendin. Together the Democrats, Chat Thai and Puea Paendin have less than PPP (227 vs 232). I don't put much credence on a Democrat-led government unless these 3 parties actually have more seats than PPP. Psychologically, it is an important advantage.

The article continues:

Despite the poll results and international press reports which have universally portrayed the vote as democratic vindication for Thaksin over the military coup-makers that removed him from power and later disbanded his TRT political party, there is still plenty of motivation and room for maneuver for powerful invisible forces - including the military’s and royal privy council’s hidden hands - to keep the PPP from entering government.

Accusations are already flying. PPP party advisor and former TRT government spokesman Jakrapob Penkair said that he received information that both Chat Thai and Pua Pandin party leaders met discreetly on Sunday with Privy Council president Prem Tinsulalonda, widely accused of masterminding last year’s coup, at his private residence while votes were still being tallied. It’s still unclear if the meeting actually took place, but the allegation represents the latest PPP complaint that the military and Prem were working behind the scenes to undermine the pro-Thaksin party.

What is certain is that the negotiations and horse-trading towards forming the next government have already begun in earnest. The local press reported that Samak had planned to meet with potential coalition partners on Monday at a Bangkok hotel, but that the meeting was for undisclosed reasons cancelled. The Chat Thai party, former prime minister Banharn Silapa-archa, has been mum on his intentions, saying only that his party would remain joined with Pua Pandin, either in government or in the opposition.

It still seems more likely that Chat Thai, which previously stood in opposition to the TRT-led government, and Pua Pandin, which includes a large number of former TRT party members and senior advisors who for various reasons decided to break away from Thaksin, will opt to join forces with the Democrats. There are already murmurs of a potential grand bargain whereby Banharn would emerge as a compromise prime minister inside a four- or five-party coalition, while the Democrats controlled the major economic and finance portfolios and Abhisit assumed the post of parliament speaker rather than premier.

COMMENT: The numbers, as they stand now, won't allow a four party coalition as Democrats, Chat Thai, Puea Paendin, and Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana only have 236 seats between them. They need either Matchima (7 seats) or Pracharaj (5 seats) or even both. So you might have a 6 party coalition with Banharn at its head. Wouldn't the middle class voters who hoped for Abhisit not be a little disappointed? Wouldn't this be a PPP dream?

I would say Abhisit is easily a positive for the Democrats and without him as PM in a Democrat-led government and what is he going to campaign on next time? At this election, he campaigned on a choice between him and Samak and I think it is fair to say he won this contest. Abhisit dominated the Democrat ticket. He was the one who spoke and was easily the single dominant force in the Democrat campaign - contrast this with PPP where you had Chalerm, Samak, Mingkwan and Dr Surapong.

A Banharn-led Democrat majority government would be a disaster for the Democrats. Abhisit is liked as he portrays a modern image - well-educated, articulate and that he looks nice is an advantage - but what kind of message would it send to Democrat voters who have more than a third of all seats and have put in their best performance electorally ever, that Abhisit still can't lead? Instead, Democrat voters would get an old man who has trouble stringing together sentences, can't speak English etc. Under Thaksin, Thailand has moved towards a leader focused government, the Democrats copied that in their campaign (see above), but now we would get Banharn. The Democrats would be better served in opposition.

I think Crispin's problem is who is he talking to within PPP. There are different factions. Certain factions, particularly those linked to Surakiart and in the Bangkok area, have split with Thaksin now, but Puea Paendin won no seats in Bangkok and only 1 seat in the Central Region. They won a majority of seats (13 out of 25) in the Northeast. These power brokers haven't helped Puea Paendin in the election so they sway they might have other factions is difficult to say particularly in the Northeast where Thaksin is still No 1. Given a 1 or 2 year government, do they want to take a chance with the Democrats?

The article continues:

The three smaller parties which won seats, Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana with 11, Matchima Tippitai with seven, and Pracharaj with four seats, could hypothetically in combination give the PPP the numbers needed to get over the 241 seat majority hump - but the latter two parties are known to be strongly anti-Thaksin and appeared at least on the hustings predisposed against joining with the PPP.

COMMENT: The problem with this is that their apparent anti-Thaksin platform failed miserably. Do any voters actually know what these parties stand for? Has Snoh of Pracharaj even been in alliance with the Democrats either? The king-broker only has 5 seats so those who lost out might need support if they want to survive at the next election. Those who were formerly with TRT might want to rejoin the Thaksin fold to give them a better chance at the next election.

PPP-polarized
For all the hopes that the restoration of democracy would help achieve national reconciliation, the election results indicated a nation still badly polarized on pro- and anti-Thaksin lines. Both the PPP and Democrats outperformed initial pollster expectations, which had predicted a PPP win but with considerably fewer than the 228 votes that it actually received. The PPP placed strongly in the country’s north and northeastern regions, winning respectively 59% and 71% of the popular vote.

The Democrats, meanwhile, swept their traditional stronghold, the less populated, southern region, as well as Bangkok, where last year’s coup was embraced by the middle classes. The two parties virtually tied in the rice-growing central region, where initial results published on The Nation website showed both parties receiving 5.65 million votes, with the PPP edging the Democrats by less than 800 votes. They also were in a dead heat for the 80 proportionate seats, where 10 seats were up for grabs on party lines across eight different geographical zones.

Those figures paint a more complicated picture of voting behaviors than the simplistic mainstream media analysis that grass roots voters almost universally favor the PPP, while urban-based constituencies prefer the Democrats. Rather than divided sharply on class lines, the country is more clearly divided on regional ones, where well-entrenched political machines and popular local personalities appeal to their respective grass roots and often poor constituencies.

COMMENT: I agree here. The country is divided on regional lines. PPP dominated the North and the Northeast and the Democrats the South and to a lesser extent Bangkok - yes, the Democrats are leading 27-9 in Bangkok, but the numbers for around 6-7 seats are quite close so at the next election doesn't require a great swing for PPP to pick up these seats.

Some of these popular local personalities didn't do so well, e.g Suvit of Puea Paendin who has lost in Khon Kaen.

To be sure, despite the US government’s note of congratulations to Thailand for holding “free and fair” elections, the polls were riddled with irregularities. The PPP overcame tall hurdles to win the elections, including the military’s maintaining martial law in several of the northeastern provinces where the PPP’s support was known to run strongest and a new election system designed to dilute the power of big parties. Despite several reports of grass roots level intimidation and harassment, as well as bombshell revelations about a secret military plot to undermine the party on the campaign trail, PPP still won resoundingly in the pivotal north and northeastern regions.

At the same time, the military, which did not formally back any particular party or candidates at the polls, and in the end honored its vow to restore democracy within one year after seizing power, was only the symbolic loser at the polls. Regardless of whether the PPP or Democrats form the next government, the next administration is expected to be weak and subjected to frequent factional infighting - similar historically to the short-lived democratic regimes the military has moved to topple.

COMMENT: The military suppression of PPP was an utter failure. I don't think it really affected the PPP vote in the end aside from Puea Paendin leaving TRT/PPP.

For now, Council for National Security junta chairman Air Chief Marshal Chalit Phukpasuk and army commander-in-chief Gen Anupong Paochinda have both ruled out another coup, even if the PPP rather than the Democrats eventually form the next government. Samak repeated his pledge on Sunday during an interview with CNN to roll back the military ruling on May 30 that legally disbanded TRT and banned from politics for five years 111 of the party’s senior executives, including Thaksin. He has already scheduled February 14 as the day for the exiled former premier to return to Thailand to answer criminal charges brought against him by the coup-makers.

Because the military-appointed National Legislative Assembly (NLA) automatically becomes the new Senate after the democratically elected lower house is installed, a PPP-led government will likely find it difficult to ram through any constitutional amendments, including any attempt to roll back the new charter’s provision which gives amnesty to the coup-makers and their appointees.

COMMENT: Yeah, and when that tool Surayud says that a democratically elected government can amend all the new bills passed by the NLA when the NLA have a veto as Senate - they are the Senate by virtue of Section 293 and until the new Senate is appointed/elected although this could be until March by my calculation (150 days since the organic electoral act came into force). Then we get a half appointed Senate.

Latest Vote Count (4:55pm - 24 Dec) : Yesterday, was showing 90%, but now it shows 77.83%. This seems to be not the percentage of votes counted from the number of people who voted, but the percentage of votes  counted out of the total eligible number of voters.*

Party Con PL Total PPP 197 34 231 Dems 132 33 165 Chat Thai 33 4 37 Puea Paendin 18 7 25 Ruam Jai Thai 9 1 10 Matchima 7 0 7 Pracharaj 4 1 5 Total 400 80 480

Source: MCOT

There is still around 10 very marginal seats and PPP's figures swing between 225-233 (PPP's figures go up and down every 5 minutes or so), but stabilising around 230. Obviously, the closer PPP get to 240 the easier it is easier for them to join up with the minor parties of Ruam Jai Thai, Matchima, and Pracharaj who have little base and have been decimated by going it alone at the election.

Interestingly, the Democrats are beating PPP in the party vote (14,084,265 vs 14,071,799). Compare this with the 2005 General Election where the Democrats won only 7,066,000 compared with TRT's 18,896,000. There is a higher turnout this time - see comment below - but a doubling of their party vote is still impressive. Actually, it means they will have a formidable number of MPs (around 160-165) in opposition. This is nothing to be sneezed at.

btw, more to come later particularly from the Thai media.

*At first, we are told there is a 70.27% turnout, but actually this was turnout yesterday as The Nation reports:

"There were 32.08 million people, or 70.27 per cent of the total eligible 45.65 million voters, who cast their vote yesterday (Sunday)," said Suthiphon Thaweechaiyagarn, secretary general of the EC.

COMMENT: Add together the 3 million absentee and advance votes and we have around 35 million people who voted and turnout closer to 78%. Honestly, why are we not told the total turnout, this is more important and it seems to have confused everyone.

The other day The Economist made a Pakistan analogy:

Pakistan is not the only Asian country where a dodgy military regime is running a general election under dubious electoral rules in the hope of keeping out a similarly dodgy civilian whom it overthrew. The difference is that unlike Benazir Bhutto in Pakistan, the exiled Mr Thaksin is not being allowed to take part in the vote himself, and there may be slightly more hope that things will come out right in the end.

Now, Newsweek have a Juan Perón analogy:

Thaksin may even soon manage to return to office. That's largely thanks to his sharp political skills, his abiding popularity and his compelling vision for Thailand's 70 percent rural majority. Economic growth slowed to about 4 percent in 2007, down from 6.4 percent in 2003, a level Thaksin managed to achieve while narrowing the rural-urban income gap. Now his maneuvers are increasing his resemblance to another iconic populist: Juan Perón, who ruled Argentina from 1946 to 1955, was exiled by a military junta, but then clawed his way back to power in 1973. "Peron took 18 years to come back," says Christopher Bruton, a political-risk analyst for Dataconsult in Bangkok. "Thaksin thinks he can make that 18 months."

Like Perón, Thaksin came to power by shattering a long-established political order and energizing the dormant countryside with a raft of pro-poor policies. Thaksin managed to secure huge electoral majorities for his Thai Rak Thai party by doling out village-development loans, rural export schemes and various other brands of political pork.
...
As with Perón, Thaksin's enemies denounced him as a corrupt populist despot. In a counterintuitive twist, they even cast his ouster as a victory for democracy; as Anand Panyarachun, who was appointed prime minister after an earlier putsch, told NEWSWEEK in 2006, "a coup d'état in the Thai context is not like a coup in Africa or Latin America."
...
Rural voters also viewed the new order as a big step backward. "It was one thing to seize power, but entirely different to bring back the older Thailand," says Thitinan Pongsudhirak, director of the Institute of Security and International Studies at Bangkok's Chulalongkorn University. "We are in the midst of a transformation that [the generals] can't come to grips with. The genie is out of the bottle."

That genie, for want of a better word, is populism. Thaksin won over the hinterland by offering benefits like better education and nearly free medical care. That remains a compelling formula in Thailand; most if not all of the 63 parties contesting seats in December embraced similar ideas. In past elections, says Bruton, voters merely expected a 500-baht bribe. "Now the electorate expects 500 baht plus a whole gift basket of stuff."

Thaksin, meanwhile, has been carefully plotting his comeback. Like Perón, who was able to return to Argentina after his former personal secretary, Héctor Càmpora, ran as a stand-in candidate and won the presidency, Thaksin countered the forced dissolution of his Thai Rak Thai party early in 2007 by helping to create a new group, the PPP, which absorbed most of his supporters. Now the PPP's anticipated victory could box the junta into a corner, relegitimize Thaksin and pave the way for his return. PPP leader Samak Sundaravej has said that should he become prime minister, he will lift the ban on Thai Rak Thai and welcome Thaksin home. In response, junta leaders have refused to rule out another coup.

COMMENT: Person then came back in 1973, but died in 1974, his wife took over until another military coup in 1976. While, theoretically plausible, will we see Potjaman (Thaksin's wife) as PM? I don't think we will see Thaksin as PM, it just won't work.

Daniel Ten Kate:

Given those sentiments, it’s not surprising that the conflict between the junta and Thaksin is more likely to be solved in a backroom that through an election. The political chaos of the past year has taken an economic toll on the country, with private investment dropping considerably and the economy overall not living up to its potential.

“In fact, Thaksin and [coup leader] Sonthi [Boonyaratglin] talk together all the time, trying to resolve these problems,” claimed a Thaksin aide, speaking on condition of anonymity. “They know the conflict hurts everyone, so they are talking together to set up a story to make Thailand have a political soft landing. This is the real game; the election is a low-level game.”

“The most difficult part is coming up with something they can tell the public,” the aide added. “They need a good story to tell people so that Thaksin can come back and everyone can be assured that everything is still in the legal process.”

Observers say the signs are encouraging. Thaksin and the PPP have faith that the new army commander, Anupong Paochinda, will reposition the military to be more neutral and stay out of politics. Samak said as much in his press conference, calling him a “good guy” who vowed never to stage a coup.

Part of a deal for Thaksin’s return, the aide said, would be to dissolve a special investigation into the former premier’s business dealings and move those cases to a normal prosecutor. Most charges could then fade away, he said, but a few would be kept to punish Thaksin and keep the public happy.

Thaksin would then need to reaffirm his loyalty to the royal family, which came under question in the run-up to the coup. Thaksin’s perceived threat to King Bhumibol Adulyadej’s popularity was a prime reason the generals booted him out of power.

Although Thaksin has spent the bulk of the past 15 months in London and Hong Kong, his influence is pervasive. His purchase of the Manchester City Football Club has ensured he stays in the headlines, and his deep pockets endear him to Thai lawmakers.

“I don’t think Thaksin needs to be prime minister; he’s beyond that now but he still likes to control the game,” the aide said. “He still wants to have influence in both the political and economic sphere. Remember he still needs to get his money back.”

Any deal would also have to ensure that neither Thaksin nor the PPP retaliate against the military. The party has said it won’t do so, but it’s unclear if the generals would trust them.

“The military is not quite sure that Thaksin would commit to what they agree to,” the aide said. “Nobody can guarantee anything.”

Many expect the next government’s tenure to be short. The PPP will try to put Samak up as prime minister, but if that triggers a public backlash the party may offer the top spot to a coalition partner. They could align with every party except the Democrats. In a testimony to the fickle nature of Thai politics, the group seems certain to link up with Matchimathippitai, which is led by key anti-Thaksin financier Prachai Leophairatana, who was not elected.

If the Prem-linked Pua Paendin joins the coalition it may signal a détente. Chat Thai may also join. Both parties saw their bargaining positions weaken considerably with the poorer-than-expected results.

COMMENT: Talks of a deal have long been in the making. Thaksin needs a détente if he wants a PPP-led government and Puea Paendin needs Thaksin if they are to have any kind of chance of being a force in politics. Directly competing against the PPP in the Northeast hasn't really worked for them. The same applies for Matchimathippitai who were devastated this election.

An academic was making a similar comment last night and that was all these politicians who appear to be enemies talk to each other and everything is worked out behind-the-scenes.

The Nation reports:

Jakrapob Penkair, a leading member of the People Power Party, alleged that Privy Council President Prem Tinsulanonda had interfered in politics by calling the leaders of the Chart Thai and Puea Paendin parties to a meeting.

Jakrapob said he had received confirmed reports that Chart Thai leader Banharn Silapa-archa and Suwit Khunkitti were summoned to meet Prem at his Sisao Theves residence at 7:30 pm.

COMMENT: I blogged about this earlier, but as we all know Prem is "above politics" and after some denials so in an amazing "coincidence" Banharn announced:

Chart Thai Party leader Banharn Silapa-archa announced late Sunday night that his party would stay with the Puea Pandin Party.

But, Banharn said, it was not certain yet as to whether the two parties would join the People Power Party or Democrat Party.

Banharn said the ballot tally was still going on so he and Puea Pandin leader Suwit Khunkitti decided to wait until the final results of the election were known first.

COMMENT: So two parties who have never publicly had an alliance before suddenly align. Obviously, Prem had nothing to do with it. The Nation reports:

Key figures from the PPP would meet their counterparts from Matchima Thipataya, Ruam Jai Thai Chart Pattana, and Pracharaj at the Radisson Hotel, a source said.

If successful, this coalition would have 253 MPs, a very slim margin as the opposition would have 227 MPs.

Meanwhile, Puea Pandin, which was previously expected to join a PPP-led coalition government, is likely to have talks with the PPP because its leader Suwit Khunkitti failed to win a seat in Khon Kaen.

Puea Pandin came fourth with 24 seats in last night's result.

Another reason is that Vatana Asavahame, Puea Pandin's chief adviser and key financier, has had a sour relationship with ex-PM Thaksin Shinawatra. He asked the party not to join a PPP-led coalition.

Within the PPP, conflict was brewing among key figures about who should become the next prime minister following a rumour that Chart Thai Party leader Banharn Silapa-archa met Privy Council President Prem Tinsulanonda to discuss the election outcome. Banharn told Prem that he was prepared to become prime minister in a PPP-led coalition government, according to a source.

With Chart Thai included, a PPP coalition would have more than 290 MPs.
...
A People Power Party executive said preliminary estimates showed it would clinch 230 seats, although several of its Northeast candidates could be disqualified.

"But we're still No 1 and have legitimacy to form the next government. To ensure we have enough votes, we'll bring in the Chart Thai and Puea Pandin parties as partners in the government," the executive said.

Later, another PPP source said the party had decided to drop Chart Thai from its list of potential coalition partners and would aim to form the new government with Puea Pandin, Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana and Matchima Thipataya, who are made up of ex-Thai Rak Thai members.

If PPP succeeds in linking up with these three minor parties, it would have some 274 MPs - not counting any who might be struck off for electoral violations. This would amount to a resurrection of Thai Rak Thai.
...
About two months ago, Banharn and Sanan Kachornprasart travelled to meet Thaksin in London to discuss a future government.

COMMENT: A PPP-led government with Puea Pandin, Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana and Matchima Thipataya make sense.

Latest Vote Count (9:57pm) : Was 92% before. Not sure now.

Party Con PL Total PPP 198 35 233 Dems 128 33 161 Chat Thai 36 4 40 Puea Paendin 18 6 24 Ruam Jai Thai 10 1 11 Matchima 7 0 7 Pracharaj 3 1 4 Total 400 80 480

Source: MCOT

Latest Analysis/Comment/News (11:32pm:) Some articles. SMH, The Australian, The Telegraph. The PPP numbers seems to go up and down. The latest it was 226. It is hard to say how many votes are yet to be counted.

Latest Analysis/Comment/News (11:15pm:) TITV interview Prachai and he wants a recount in Zone 6 as Matchima only have just over 30,000 votes - thus meaning Prachai will lose out.

Latest Analysis/Comment/News (10:35pm:)

In the South, there were 56 seats. The Democrats are leading in 50 seats at the moment and have leading in all 44 seats outside the southern border provinces. In the 12 seats in the 3 southern border provinces, the Democrats are leading in 6, PPP in 2, Puea Paendin in 3, and Chat Thai in 1.

In Bangkok, the Democrats are leading in 26 compared to PPP's 10

In the Central Region, PPP are leading in 40 seats, the Democrats in 34, and Chat Thai in 17, Matchima in 2, Pracharaj in 3, and Puea Paendin in 2.

In the North, PPP are leading in 46 seats, the Democrats in 16, 8 Chat Thai in 8, Matchima in 2, Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattani in 2, Puea Paendin in 1.

In the Northeast, PPP leading in 98 seats, Puea Paendin in 12 seats, Ruam Jai Thai Chattana in 9, Democrats in 3, Chat Thai in 10 and Matchima in 3.

COMMENT: PPP will be disappointed by their performance in Bangkok, but will be pleased by their performance in the Central Region and their dominance in the Northeast. The Democrats will be pleased by their performance in Bangkok and on the party vote. All the other parties will be disappointed. I think the PPP's poor performance in Bangkok is a problem for both Chalerm and Samak as they were expected to increase the PPP vote. Polls suggested they would too. While the votes were quite close in many constituencies, a loss is a loss.

Latest Analysis/Comment/News (10:02pm:) Peau Paendin leader Suvit appears to have lost his seat in Constituency 3 in Khon Kaen. He is in fourth place now with 92,877 and the third place PPP candidate who has 98,241.

COMMENT: He needs a miracle or a little helping hand from the EC with a PPP candidate getting a red card otherwise Suvit can't be Prime Minister. So Samak it must be then.

Latest Analysis/Comment/News (9:52pm:) The Manager reports Puea Paendin spokesman denies that party leader Suvit has been invited to Prem's residence. The spokesman says he is at the residence of a Puea Paendin executive, but refuses to say which one.

Latest Analysis/Comment/News (9:45pm:) Kom Chad Luek reports that Sanan (yes that Sanan) of Chat Thai says if the EC gives PPP 20 red card votes then the Democrats have a chance.

Latest Analysis/Comment/News (9:37pm:) On constituency vote, PPP won 19,304,821 votes compared to the Democrats 15,723,776 - please don't compare such votes to previous elections as now some voters have 2 or 3 votes. On the party list vote, PPP have 11,389,226 party list votes compared to 11,177,038.

Latest Analysis/Comment/News (9:31pm:) Democrat press conference:

Think about the people before thinking about the 111 executives [BP Good quote].
In English, "The PPP has failed to win an overall majority it wanted. We don't know yet the results of the proportional representation race". The PPP has won the most number of seats and has issued an invitation to other party leaders. We have won more than 10 million votes on the constituency seat.

Latest Analysis/Comment/News (9:20pm:) Democrat press conference:

Abhisit flanked by Suthep thanks all the voters who voted for them. Abhisit says the appro 160 seats is the highest the Democrats have ever received and also on the party list that both PPP and the Democrats are very close.

In reference to Samak's press conference about parties joining in coalition with PPP, the Democrats will not join with the PPP. Abhisit says they will accept the decision of other parties if they decide to join PPP.

Abhisit also says if PPP cannot form a government then the Democrats are willing to form a government, but now up to other parties whether they want to talk to PPP.

 

Latest Analysis/Comment/News (9:13pm:) From New Mandala:

Jakrapob Penkhair, PPP spokesman, just had a press conference at the party headquarter saying that the two parties, Chart Thai and Motherland, have been summoned to meet at Gen Prem’s residence. The news is not confirmed by other involved parties.

COMMENT: I also heard that Banharn and Suvit went to see Prem. It seems there was a question asked about it at the press conference, but it was not possible to hear all the questions.

Latest Analysis/Comment/News (9:03pm:) PPP press conference:

Samak was talking about the entire country being in sync with the Suan Dusit exit poll except for Bangkok. He makes mention of the absentee and adance voting and no exit poll of them.

COMMENT: There is a hint that there might have been some shenigans, but is is extremely open to interpretation.

The TV screen shows the Democrat Party HQ when Samak is talking at the press conference. They don't look happy. A lot of sad faces. They appear to be listening to Samak speaking.

Latest Analysis/Comment/News (8:55pm:) PPP press conference:

Samak: Thanks for all the people who voted for PPP. Says they are 10 away from a simple majority. I will invite all parties who can work with us to join us in order to form a government. About 300 seats for a coalition. When people seize power, this election shows the people will respond in the only way they know how.

Samak: I will be the PM. Thanks for the EC. Says that many people tried to prevent the election from taking place.
People lost their freedom on September 19. The election results are a message to any future persons who want to seize power.
When asked how many parties will join the coalition, he said as many are needed to make the coalition strong. Samak said Thaksin called someone close by
Samak takes questions from the foreign journalists. He is asked about whether he has been in contact with the CNS. He says there is no need to do this. [He just repeats what he says above]. After 15 years no one think they would do something like this. If there is an opportunity, there will be amnesty for the 111 TRT executives.

COMMENT: Actually, Samak sounds quite articulate in English. A Samak-hater has passed on a message to me that the are surprised as to who good Samak sounds when talking in English.

Analysis/Comment/News (8:35pm:) PPP press conference:

Samak: Thank your for everyone for waiting.
Dr. Surapong: Following the results from the evening until now, it is consistent with our internal polling numbers except for Bangkok which is vastly different from their numbers. They say there are big differences between the advance/absentee voting and now.

Latest Analysis/Comment/News (8:35pm:) TITV the Dems are leading in 25 seats in Bangkok to 11 for PP. About 5 or 6 are still close.

New Mandala has some analysis. It starts with "The Democrat Party have only themselves to blame for their disappointing poll result". Actually, most polls predicted they would get around 120-130 seats so I don't think it is a disappointing poll result for them. They won less than 100 seats at the 2005 election so around the 160 amount is a good figure for them. Their problem is their coalition partners have done very badly. Actually, I would say there is greater support by the military for Puea Paendin than for the Democrats. Yet this support for Puea Paendin doesn't seem to have helped them. If the military had really supported the Democrats I wonder what that would have done for their poll numbers. The military can control or limit the information that people receive, but they can't make people vote for their candidates. The elite should take notice.

Latest Analysis/Comment/News (8:13pm:) The MCOT website isn't reloading. TITV reports PPP with 233, Democrats with 161, Chat Thai with 36, Puea Paendin with 24.  

Latest Analysis/Comment/News (8:09pm:) Photo of the Day:

 Source: The Manager.

Abhisit looks tired, darker and that he has put on weight -this is what he normally looks like. This is what election campaigns can do.

Latest Analysis/Comment/News (7:58pm:) A friend passes on this AFP article:

This is a victory for people and democracy. It shows that the coup one-and-a-half years ago has not benefited the country or anyone,' said Surapong Suebwonglee, secretary general of PPP.

An exit poll by Assumption University gave PPP, linked with Thaksin Shinawatra, 202 out of the 480 seats up for grabs, while a poll by Rajabhat University at Suan Dusit gave the party 256 seats.

Thailand's oldest political outfit, the Democrat Party, came in a strong second, while four small parties each took a handful of seats, the polls said.

'It will definitely be a coalition government,' said Surapong, adding that it was 'normal practice' for the party with the majority of seats to form a coalition.

Democrat leader Abhisit Vejjajiva said he was not surprised with the exit polls, which tallied with their forecasts.

'So now we are in second place, and forming a coalition government is for the one that got the most,' he told reporters, but later added they were still waiting for the official results.

'If the PPP won the highest number, so it is their right to form the government, but it depends on the reaction of other parties as well,' he said.

COMMENT: The Dems see the writing on the wall on their chances of being in government, but I don't think they should be too disappointed as they have done much better than expected. They could even top PPP on the party vote. After 2005, PPP didn't form a coalition government. This timed they are forced to, but it might help them anyway.

Latest Analysis/Comment/News (7:53pm:) More senior PPP leaders are heading towards PPP HQ.

Latest Analysis/Comment/News (7:48pm:) Manager reports that Chat Thai leader Banharn feels extremely stressed about the poor showing by Chat Thai.

Latest Analysis/Comment/News (7:43pm:) Now, we have a question of how many red cards the EC will give out to PPP. If more than 20, the Democrats can have a chance, but if they only give the red cards out to PPP candidates, more questions will be raised as to whether they are politically impartial.

Latest Analysis/Comment/News (7:40pm:) Look for PPP to form a coalition and to have around 270-300 seats. Won't want more than 3 parties. Puea Paendin, or a faction of theirs, to definitely go with PPP. Their Northeast MPs will be regretting leaving the "Thaksin fold". The other one is hard to say. I don't think they want to go with Chat Thai really, but might have to.

Latest Analysis/Comment/News (7:07pm:) In the three southern border provinces:

-Narathiwat Constituency 1: Dems 1, Puea Paendin 1, Chat Thai 1
-Narathiwat Constituency 2: Chat Thai 1, PPP 1
-Yala Constituency 1: Dems 3,
-Pattani  Constituency 1: Dems 1, Puea Paendin 1,
-Pattani Constituency 2: Puea Paendin 1, Dems 1.

COMMENT: 40 minutes ago it was Dems 4, Puea Paendin 4, PPP 2, Chat Thai 2. Now, Dems 6, Puea Paendin 3, Chat Thai 2, and PPP 1. So the Dems only half.

Latest Analysis/Comment/News (6:16pm:) Ok, The Nation's election figures seem to be a bit wonky compared with others and more importantly compared with the EC figures. PPP are improving compared with The Nation's figures (29 Dems vs 7 for PPP). According to the EC, at the latest count 25 Dems vs 11 PPP, but about 10 seats the numbers are very close.

Latest Analysis/Comment/News (6:07pm:) There are a number of close seats. The Dems seem to be doing well in Bangkok although it is very close in a number of seats

Latest Analysis/Comment/News (5:45pm:) TITV interview Chalerm of PPP at home and is quoted as saying that PPP's strong results is from (1) Thaksin's work as PM and PPP policy is supported by the people, (2) people want the economy to be fixed, and (3) the people want Thaksin to come back safely. Chalerm denies talking with other party leaders and this is up to Samak. Chalerm say that PPP will get more than half of the seats.

Latest Analysis (5:35pm:)  Former Democrat Party PM and key advisor Chuan is being interviewed and is  talking up Democrat party list vote and mentioning the third party votes haven't done well. [BP: Actually the Democrats shouldn't be too depressed, they have done well and better than expected]

COMMENT:

Latest Analysis (5:30pm:) Still looks good for PPP as long as they can get over 220. I can't see how the Democrats can form a government. Still very close in a number of seats with PPP just ahead (constituency votes for PPP 2,134,918 vs 1,888,574 for Dems). Actually the Democrats seem to be doing quite well. The problem is the third party vote has moved to PPP.

Latest Analysis (5:15pm:) So far looks good for PPP.

4:42pm  Final Exit Poll look:

Party Suan Dusit ABAC The Nation   PL Con Tot PL Con Total PL Con Tot PPP 35 221 256 37 165 202 38 162 200 Dems 35 127 162 35 111 146 25 108 133 Chat Thai 5 24 29 3 46 49 9 43 52 Puea Paendin 2 8 10 3 39 42 4 37 41 Matchima 1 3 4 0 15 15 1 16 17 Ruam Jai Thai 1 14 15 2 17 19 3 22 25 Pracharaj 1 3 4 0 7 7 - 12 12 Total 80 400 480 80 400 480 80 400 480

Source: Kom Chad Luek

NOTE: PL = party list/proportional representation; Con = constituency/electorate seats.

COMMENT: Well we will in a few hours see who was the most reliable.

4:40pm One of the TITV analysts saying they are hearing stories out of Hong Kong [where Thaksin is now] that Puea Paendin leader, Suvit, will be PM in a PPP-led government.

4:18pm The Nation has English language results which are a bit behind the Thai language resources.

4:06: Jorm from TITV (the Dtua Jing Chud Jen host) is interviewing to analysts. One from the Bangkok Post (or Bangkok something) and another person from King Prajadhipok's Institute (KPI). Both say that the main difference between the two polls is that the in the Suan Dusit poll shows Puea Paendin and other parties from former TRT members losing votes to PPP.

4:04pm According to TITV quoting from someone from PPP (missed the name), that PPP will not form a one party government, they will be in a coalition with others.

4:02pm Ok, no more exit polls. Now, real results. According to MCOT, so far PPP with 152, Dems with 111, Chat Thai with 39, Puea Pandin with 31, but these are very primarily results with less than 1% counted. Turnout is stated to be 69.99%.

COMMENT: Remember than urban areas will be counted first so the strong PPP numbers will come in later.

3:59pm Still nothing from the EC website, but the MCOT website has prompt results - even if you can't read Thai you can figure things out (PPP first, Dems second, Chat Thai third).

3:55pm Via Red & White in the comments from the Bangkok Post:

Election Commission member Sodsri Sattayatham criticized election commission officials tasked with investigating fraud cases for working too slowly.

“There are 578 outstanding cases and only 10 have been closed which is a bit unusual,” she said. “I think we should really consider dissolving the Election Commission if it is unable to hold the election transparently and have the Interior Minister hold the election instead. All 5 election commissioners should think about pulling their socks up because I believe they’re not up to the mark,” she said.

COMMENT: Well, if it was up to Sodsri, all candidates will be banned. Has she been given the word by the powers that be that the election isn't going as planned and so we won't accept the results?

3:43pm: The Suan Dusit poll has Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana at 4th. TITV interviewing Gen. Chetta, party leader and former Deputy PM under Thaksin. They expected to get at least 25 seats.

COMMENT: If it is true that Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattna got 4th, but personally they seem to have a reasonable policy platform so it is a pleasing result.

3:40pm: No results or counting yet from the EC website.

3:37pm: TITV interviewing Democrat power-broker Suthep [see this post] who says they expect to get 170 seats. Wary of the polls. Says doesn't expect PPP to get more than 240 seats. Says that if PPP don't get more than 240 then it means the public have rejected PPP. Says tomorrow that should have more news on what the coalition will be, but it all depends on how many seats PPP gets.

COMMENT: Reading between the lines it seems the Dems internal polling puts PP at over 200 seats and is trying to turn it into unless PPP get 240 it is a "loss" for them.

3:33pm: Samak asked (actually mobbed by about 30 reporters) what he thinks about the exit polls. He says he will comment at 8pm, but thanks the people for voting for him. He then said that he will be PM.

3:29pm According to Channel 9, the exit polls (Suan Dusit poll) with constituency and party list:

• PPP: 256 seats (221 constituency + 35 party list)
• Dems: 162 (127 constituency + 35 party list)
• Chat Thai: 29 (24 constituency + 5 party list)
• Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana: 15 (14 constituency + 1 party list)
• Puea Paendin 10 (8 constituency + 2 party list)
• Matchima 4 (3 constituency + 1 party list)
• Pracharaj 4 (3 constituency + 1 party list)

Also, see The Nation with the Suan Dusit exit poll figures.

3:27pm: Channel 9 interviewing Sanan (former Democrat Secretary-General and now with Chat Thai) says that if it is the ABAC poll then it will be up to negotiating.

3:20: Channel 9 interviewing Prachai of Matichima (yes TPI Prachai). Very graceful thanking the people for voting them. Doesn't believe any exit polls or any opinion polls. We (the party) will continue no matter what the results. He will accept the results if they are fair (BP: If they do badly, will he see it as fair?)

3:15 pm According to Channel 9, the ABAC exit poll:

• PPP: 202 seats
• Dems: 146
• Chat Thai: 49 - 46 constituency and 3 party list
• Puea Paen Din : 42
• Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana: 19

COMMENT: Chuwit - not that Chuwit, but a Channel 9 reporter Chuwit at Chat Thai is saying they don't believe the Suan Dusit poll. Banharn says that Chat Thai will get more than 30 seats, but less than 50 as some polls predict. Oh it is hilarious the reporters are asking Banharn questions and he suddenly says he can't hear the questions, but will be able to hear them tomorrow. His children are in the background smiling.

Suan Dusit polls have Democrats and PPP at 35 each for the party list, but PPP have completely cleaned up in the North and the Northeast on the constituency.

3:05pm According to Channel 9, the exit polls (Suan Dusit poll):

• PPP: 256 seats (221 constituency + 35 party list)
• Dems: 162 (127 constituency + 35 party list)
• Chat Thai: 29 (24 constituency + 5 party list)
• Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana: 15 (14 constituency + 1 party list)
• Puea Paendin 10 (8 constituency + 2 party list)
• Matchima 4 (3 constituency + 1 party list)
• Pracharaj 4 (3 constituency + 1 party list)

 

COMMENT: Channel 9 speaking to Abhisit about the exit polls. Abhisit is saying that the Suan Dusit poll is not an exit poll, but a tracking poll and ABAC poll is quite different.

2:50pm EC live counting is available here.

2:30pm According to Channel 9, in Kanchanaburi in the 2 constituencies at 2pm only 58% of voters had voted which was well short of the 75% hoped for by the local provincial election commission (BP: Is this counting the absentee and advance voting?)

2:25pm:), Under the 2007 Constitution, in the Thai electoral system the House of Representatives consists of 480 Members of Parliament (MPs). This is divided into:

• 400 constituency/electorate seats. There are 157 multi-seat constituencies throughout the Kingdom. By my calculations there will be 86 three MP constituencies (ie having 3 MPs) and 71 two MP constituencies.
  
• 80 seats from proportional representation/party list. However, there is no longer one nationwide party list. There are now 8 provincial groupings/zones and each zone has its own party list (section 96). This means 10 seats are available in each zone. To see how the country is divided up into the 8 provincial zones see this The Nation article which has a nice graphic. My predictions on how many seats each party will get from the proportional representation/party list is available here.

2:15pm: The polling booths close at 3pm Thailand time and exit polls will apparently be available just after that. Some of the first results will come from the Dusit area in Bangkok - military stronghold and apparently they have lots of soldiers on hand to count the votes.

The Bangkok Post reports:

But Democrat election campaign director Korbsak Sabhavasu thinks the party can get back into power even without a huge support base in the Northeast.

Bangkok voters are well educated and their support for the Democrats on Sunday would give the party a mandate to form a government, he said, even though the Democrats might not win the overall contest.
...
But Mr Korbsak remains optimistic, saying the level of support claimed by the PPP will surely prove overblown when the final tally is known.

He pins his hopes on a 61% swing to the Democrats by the large number of people in Bangkok who remained undecided earlier this week.

Mr Korbsak said he did not give credence to late opinion polls putting the People Power party in the lead over the Democrats in Bangkok.

The opinion surveys only reflected the feelings of people at the grassroots levels, he said.

They did not represent the inclinations of the all-important middle- and upper-class vote in Bangkok.

COMMENT: Hmmm. If the Democrats are depending on only the "all-important middle- and upper-class vote in Bangkok" then they won't win Bangkok. There are plenty more lower and lower-middle class than middle-and upper-class votes.

btw, I don't think that Korbsak will endear himself to the urban poor in Bangkok with such comments.

AP has a look at PPP leader Samak Sundaravej, another high-profile PPP candidate Chalerm Yoobamrung, Democrat leader Abhisit Vejjajiva, 43, Chat Thai leader Banharn Silpa-archa - who is called "Walking ATM Machine" and "Mr. 20 Percent" (for allegedly skimming that amount off past government contracts).vAbout the only thing of note is a quote from the quotemeister:

"Unless the old guard has come up with new ideas, it is likely that Thai politics will return to the same vicious cycle of vote-buying, election, corruption, protests — and then, perhaps, another coup," said Thitinan Pongsudhirak, a political scientist at Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok.

Another AP article has more on Samak and Abhisit including some Thitinan quotes:

"Samak is acerbic, belligerent, polarizing and divisive," says Thitinan Pongsudhirak, a political scientist at Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok. "He is not very appealing."

His opponent, Abhisit Vejjajiva, the 43-year-old head of the liberal Democrat Party, has other shortcomings. Born and educated in England, in the hallowed halls of Eton and Oxford, he is out of touch with regular people and downright boring, some experts say.

"He is well equipped on paper but he has not been able to connect to the grass roots," Thitinan said. "He has not been able to widen and broaden his appeal to become a national candidate for prime minister.

COMMENT: Well Samak does appeal to some people - see my profile of Samak for more. Time has a profile of Samak with a more recent look of what he has been up to:

During the late 1990s, he and Thaksin served as cabinet ministers in the scandal-plagued government of Prime Minister Banharn Silpa-archa. Samak and Thaksin were publicly admonished by the King for arguing with each other rather than solving the capital's notorious traffic problems. Nonetheless, in 2000, Samak was elected Bangkok governor, winning in a landslide. Though his term lacked notable accomplishments — and he's under investigation for alleged corruption in the procurement of fire trucks — Bangkok voters sent him to the Senate in April 2005.

COMMENT: The Senate election was actually in April 2006. A certain book by Handley has more on the Samak-Thaksin fight. The article continues:

How can Samak, voted the most hated civilian in a newspaper poll after Black May, retain such solid support? Chris Baker, co-author of Thaksin: The Business of Politics, says Samak is a hit among lower-middle-class citizens — they admire his strong persona and see him as someone who gets things done. Small shopkeepers, taxi drivers and day laborers love tuning in to Samak's television and radio political talk shows — and his immensely popular cooking programs — to hear him sound off and bash others. "He's entertainment," Baker says.

Samak's clout with Bangkok voters could deny the Democrat Party, the PPP's chief challenger, victory.
...
In a skillful bit of mud-slinging, Samak, once himself known as a militarist, has used this scenario to accuse the Democrat Party, which has consistently criticized the coup, of being the army's puppets. Asked if he believes the generals will truly interfere if the PPP wins, Samak told TIME, "I would like to see how they will try. The world will be watching."

The Telegraph has a favourable article about Abhisit.

COMMENT: As with Chuan, it is not just with the leader being "honest" and having "integrity", if others in his party and his coalition are being corrupt and he does nothing then isn't he condoning this. Remember his first call after the election will be to "Walking ATM Machine" and "Mr. 20 Percent".

For Abhisit and policy, see my report of his talk at the FCCT or this recent interview by Cripsin in the Asia Times. The BBC also looks at 3 party leaders.

COMMENT: Is it telling that Puea Paendin/Motherland Group party leader Suvit doesn't get his own profile?

The Star quoting Worapol Promigabutr associate professor of sociology and anthropology at Bangkok’s Thammasat University on whether Chat Thai will go with the Democrats or PPP:

“Any party that can get Banharn Silpa-archa (the leader of Chart Thai Party) can be in a secure position for at least a year. But Banharn will ask for more and more,” he figures.

Worapol isn’t sure why Abhisit is so confident his party will team up with Banharn’s Chart Thai Party to form the next government. “Abhisit’s terms (that he becomes prime minister) will not be to Banharn’s interest,” he notes.

COMMENT: The Democrats are placed in a difficult position as they have to align with Chat Thai - they have already said they won't join up with PPP and this means mathematically any Democrat-led coalition has to include Chat Thai. Banharn can shop and choose whether to align with PPP or the Democrats. PPP, if they can get 200 or very close to 200, have many more options for coalition partners. So when Banharn asks for more, what can do Abhisit, if he becomes PM, do?

The possibility of a coup in case the PPP forms the next government is slim, according to Worapol. “Right now there are different factions within the military. The clique of coup makers has gotten smaller and less powerful,” he says.

The Nation reports:

National Legislative Assembly Speaker Meechai Ruchuphan thanked NLA members for their works during the pass year, especially the last three days of bill enactments which saw 64 bills passed.

Meechai said 64 bills were passed on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday, leaving only three other bills to lapse because they could not be passed in time.

COMMENT: Yes, a law factory is really the operable word.

The Bangkok Post reports:

The Thai government has given the green light for international community to monitor the general election to ensure that it is carried out freely and fairly.

After encouraging Thais to exercise their voting right, Prime Minsiter Surayud Chulanont said his government was prepared to let international groups to oversee the election.

“I am confident enough in the transparency of the voting process and am open to the idea of international groups coming in to monitor the election,” the premier said.

COMMENT: Isn't this a bit late. The news article was published at 11:00pm on December 22, 2007 a mere 9 hours before the election. Mere talk.

AFP has some interesting Giles quotes:

"What emerges very clearly is this election is about whether or not you support Thaksin and (his party) Thai Rak Thai, or whether or not you support the junta and those who opposed him," said Giles Ji Ungpakorn, a politics lecturer at Bangkok's Chulalongkorn University.

COMMENT: Argh, I am not sure whether the contrast is that great although I can imagine that this is what PPP would argue.

Another AFP article has more on the Thaksin election:

"This is not a normal election. It is being held under pressure from the military," said Ukrist Pathmanand, professor of political science at Bangkok's Chulalongkorn University.

"There have been no real policy discussions in this election. The only issue here is whether you love Thaksin or hate Thaksin," he said.
...
Sunai Phasuk, a Thai consultant for Human Rights Watch, said the junta has done nothing over the past year to heal the social divide, and argued Sunday's election boiled down to whether voters still support the deposed leader.

"What has not changed since the coup is that we still have the division between those who support Thaksin and those who are against him," Sunai said.

"Sadly, the election is really about Thaksin. The popularity of PPP, which is the reincarnation of Thaksin's dissolved party, means that people still think Thaksin is the right choice for a leader," he said.

In The Times, Richard Lloyd Parry has more on the Thaksin election:

It would be hard to imagine a more humiliating series of knockout punches than those landed in the face of Thaksin Shinawatra.

First he was deposed as Thailand’s Prime Minister in a military coup. Then his political party was banned by the incoming junta, and Mr Thaksin and his wife were charged with corruption.
...
And yet Thailand’s most popular, and most hated, leader is on the verge of an astonishing comeback.

...
But rather than focusing on the country’s struggling economy or the continuing Islamic insurgency in the south, this is an election about one question: when will Mr Thaksin return to Thailand? “They can make criminal charges against Thaksin, and they can use the law to stop him taking part in this election,” says Chalerm Yubamrung, one of his senior supporters. “But they cannot stop the people’s feelings of love for him.”

COMMENT: Argh, Chalerm.

Anurag Viswanath in the Business Standard:

The political landscape has become a “them” and “us” battle — between junta supporters and ousted PM Thaksin Shinawatra. Caught in the quagmire of acrimonious cross-fighting between politicians, military and bureaucracy, is a weary electorate and a tired economy.

COMMENT: The article is a good primer on political issues over the last couple of years although I do think it misses a couple events, but nevertheless it is worth of a read for those not familiar with Thai politics.

The Democrats have gone negative on Thaksin too as it plays well for their supporter, but they are part of the reason why this is the "Thaksin election" and their declining support.

In a previous post, I alluded to some anecdotal evidence that some anti-military voters, not necessarily fans of Thaksin and wouldn't have voted for TRT or PPP, The Nation reports:

Twenty-eight-year-old Arthit Suriyawongkul, who is known in cyberspace for his social and political blog at bact.blogspot.com, thinks perhaps it's time to stop prolonging what he sees as the inevitable social and political upheaval.

"Perhaps it's time that whatever will happen should happen," he said, referring to continued social division between conservative and progressive forces and classes that led to the coup last year.

He said facing political and ideological divisions head on right now might be better than sweeping the dirt under the carpet for another 10 years. "Let's have chaos now. Wouldn't it be better, so it can all be over?"

Arthit, who has a master's degree in Artificial Intelligence from the University of Edinburgh, said his vote would likely be a statement against the military junta who staged the coup. His choice will likely be People Power Party even though he's no fan of either Thaksin or the party's leader, Samak Sundaravej. "But I also fear what will happen if I vote for PPP. But in the end, what will be will be."

As for others, Arthit said they should vote for whichever party they like as long as "the military and any forces above the military" will not win.

"I don't think the military will return to barracks. The next government will be considerate to them," he said, adding that newly approved laws, such as the Internal Security Act that grants the Army chief more power and budget, would ensure that.

Jittat Fakcharoenphol, a 30-year-old UC Berkeley-trained computer scientist who runs woman.

exteen.com blog, is against both Thaksin and the coup.

"I don't like either the Democrat Party or the PPP. And to cast a 'no vote' might be a waste. But I may have to vote for PPP so Thaksin can return," he said, adding that people can then oust Thaksin properly without a coup. "But still I haven't decided."

He agrees with Arthit that the military will continue to cling to power through bills passed by the junta-appointed National Legislative Assembly (NLA), although they're trying to make it look inconspicuous. But no matter who wins, all three admit that Thai-language blogging is still limited in its influence and reach and will not likely shape the political landscape anytime soon.

The Star's Philip Golingai in his latest piece:

“I don’t remember their number or name but I will vote for anyone with the PPP,” declares the associate professor of sociology and anthropology at Bangkok’s Thammasat University.

To Worapol, it is not who he will vote for but what he is voting against that is more important. He is backing the PPP, which has promised to bring back self-exiled Thaksin Shinawatra, because he opposes the coup that ousted the former prime minister on Sept 19 last year.

“I have to tell myself again that I believe in democracy and not in coups. We cannot allow a small number of people to steal sovereignty from the people through the barrel of a gun,” he declares.

His decision, he clarifies, is not based on a personal bias against any political leader.

“Personally, I know many people in almost every political party. For example, Abhisit (Vejjajiva, the leader of the Democrat Party) and I have worked together previously.”

The Democrat Party will not get his vote because he believes a clique within the party is linked to the coup makers.
...
In Bangkok, Worapol believes the Democrats will not win as many seats as it expects. Some sections of the middle class, he observes, have grown unhappy over the coup as, on a micro level, the Thai economy is not as good as what the military-installed interim government is propagating.

COMMENT: I think this is part of the Democrat problem. They, or at least sections of the Democrats, are too closely aligned with the coup and the military compared with the PPP. Thus, those dissatisfied with the current state of events, the coup, and the economy are limited in their option on who to vote for.* Now, while the Democrats, and particularly Abhisit will deny this - he did at the FCCT the other night - the record of what the Democrats said just after the coup is clear and that is the coup was necessary because of what Thaksin had wrought (e.g Chuan said Thaksin "forced the military to stage the coup"). It is also beyond what they said and how they said things. I noted at the time, you could almost hear the "glee" in the voice of the Democrats that the military had got rid of their main opponent, Thaksin. They can try to parse words now, but the choosing of the son of one of the coup leaders as a election candidate and the support of those linked to the coup also backs up this perception.

*As I also said in the other post there are not necessarily millions like this, but about 3-4% of the population. I think they will break for PPP in much greater numbers than other parties simply as PPP is a more effective protest vote than the "no vote" option.

In their regular section entitled "Your Views" on the BBC website. Here is 4 of the 8:

Roongchai, bike taxi driver

I’m voting for PPP, the party linked to Thaksin. Their policies are concrete – you can see the results.

I liked Thaksin because he was brave enough to change things. He might have made mistakes, but overall he brought positive change.

I’m worried PPP voters might stay at home because they are concerned about what the military will do if PPP wins.

...

Nattira, store-holder

I’m voting for the Democrats. One of their advisors is (former PM) Chuan Leekpai - when he ran the country, there was less corruption. Thaksin’s government has shown us the problem of corruption is very serious.

Other leaders are more experienced, but then we saw what they did to the country. So I want to give (Democrat leader) Abhisit a try.

...

Serm, optician

I voted in advance, for PPP. In my province in the north, PPP has worked hard for the villagers. The MP brought development projects like roads and reservoirs. He has served four terms and I trust him.

I am worried about what might happen if PPP win – there are rumours going around about what the military will do. But it’s too late - I've voted.

...

Wararat, tarot reader

I will tick ‘No vote’ – I don’t think any of them are qualified.

I liked Prachai, of Matchima party, but I don’t like the rest of his party. I think the Democrats are slightly better than the others, but they haven’t done anything for the country yet. (Democrat leader) Abhisit is a good man and he’s smart, but again I don’t like people around him.

COMMENT: An interesting bunch of people. Note the concerns from PPP voters about the military.

The Bangkok Post reports:

Deposed prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra may be an idol for many People Power party (PPP) candidates, but not Piya Angkinant. The six-time MP in the central province of Phetchaburi has avoided mentioning his name during his campaign, saying it could pose a threat to his election hopes.

While many PPP candidates have put a strong focus in their campaigns of bringing back Mr Thaksin and spoken about the alleged injustices against him, Mr Piya and his team have tried not to talk about Mr Thaksin because they are afraid it could make the former prime minister's opponents turn their backs on him.

Phetchaburi is one of the provinces where a large number of voters abstained in the annulled polls last year, which was seen as a move opposing the Thaksin administration, which was allegedly plagued with corruption. The abstention votes defeated all three candidates of the Thai Rak Thai (TRT) party, which was founded by Mr Thaksin.

''If we say something about him, it would be a threat to our campaign,'' said Mr Piya, who is running alongside his daughter-in-law Thivalratch. ''Those who don't like Mr Thaksin can use it to attack us verbally.''

COMMENT: When I first read the headline, I assumed the candidate was referring to the possibility that the EC might give him a red card for the use of Thaksin's image (i.e if the EC ruled it was somehow illegal), but of course Phetchaburi province was never a TRT stronghold. It is a central province, but from Phetchaburi downwards is really Democrat country.

Like New Mandala, I intend to live-blog the election with plenty of coverage of the results, summarised translations of what the Thai media (print and TV media).

New Army Commander-in-Chief Gen. Anupong has some comments on his policy for the Deep South as the Bangkok Post reports (cache)

Army leader Anupong Paojinda is more concerned about finding a workable strategy to end the daily violence in the restive South than protecting his own position.
...
While those close to him are worried about his future given the rising popularity of the pro-Thaksin Shinawatra People Power party in opinion polls, the number one man in the army is not.

Instead of the PPP, it is the Runda Kumpulan Kecil (RKK) extremist group operating in the deep South that worries him the most.

''This group is very influential,'' he admitted.

But the RKK is not the real brains behind the unrest. It is a militant wing of the BRN-Coordinate, the main group causing all the problems in Narathiwat, Pattani, Yala and part of Songkhla since 2004.

The BRN-Coordinate masterminds the moves and the RKK executes the destructive strategy and does all the killing.

Gen Anupong has made his intention clear from the start. He went down to the area within days of being named Gen Sonthi's successor.

COMMENT: If the military wants to win some kudos, do something for the South while they have complete control.

It is also reflected in the 16-page report distributed at the Nov 28 meeting. It devotes considerable space on how to tackle the instability in the southern border provinces.

What he is trying to do is to create better unity in the command line for soldiers deployed in these highly dangerous areas.

His initial tactics to fight the insurgency call for the rearranging of troops by assigning each army region to one troubled province.

The First Army has been given the responsibility of looking after Narathiwat, the Second Army must take care of Pattani, the Third Army oversees Yala and the Fourth Army's area of jurisdiction is Songkhla.

''The changing deployment strategy gives each army region a specific area of responsibility and will lead to better control of the area, and deter those involved in creating instability,'' he says in the report.

He accepts that there have been shortcomings in the government's fight against the insurgency over the past four years. Troops and police were always told to be on the defensive and that allowed the RKK fighters to hold sway over the fearful villagers.

That has now changed, he said.
Since insurgents also live in villages, they can intimidate the villagers and force them not to cooperate with the authorities.

''Villagers fear them because it's mainly about survival,'' the 58-year-old general said. Soldiers and police come and go, but the insurgents are always there in the villages.

A solution for this, according to Gen Anupong, is to order soldiers, border patrol police and local police to frequently visit villagers and even set up kiosks close to the villages to boost the residents' confidence, encouraging them to turn their backs on the insurgents.

Still, he asked his critics for more time to prove that this strategy will ''cure the cancer'' in the long run.

Last week, The Nation had an editorial which touched on soldiers being based in the barracks:

For almost four years, the armed forces have tried every conceivable measure, ranging from political efforts to win the hearts and minds of local people to different military tactics to try to quell the violence. But insurgents continue to be able to wage their campaign of terror against civilians through assassinations and bombings in public places, as well as guerrilla warfare against government forces.

In all this time, the military has not learned how to effectively conduct counter-insurgency and counter-terrorism operations. The occasional raids on villages and communities suspected of being infiltrated by insurgents may enable the armed forces to arrest suspects and their supporters, but usually yield little evidence to substantiate charges against them in court.

The insurgents usually carry out their attacks and then hide their weapons before blending in with the nearest civilian population, whose members either willingly abet the armed struggle against the state or are coerced into silence. There is no easy way to separate insurgents from civilians. Most of the military commanders lack combat experience and are reluctant to expose their troops, who receive little or no counter-insurgency training, to danger. The tens of thousands of troops dispatched to Yala, Pattani and Narathiwat are concentrated in urban areas, if not confined to their barracks.

Even at this late stage, when the insurgency has gone from bad to worse, there is no attempt by the armed forces to seal off the porous border with Malaysia or to establish any sort of security grid to restrict the freedom of movement of insurgents. The insurgents appear to have a free hand in choosing the time and place for ambushes of military convoys or bombings of public places.

The military's failure to establish even a semblance of law and order inspires little confidence among the people. That is why few risk endangering themselves and their families by volunteering valuable intelligence against the insurgents.

If the military has failed to show the will to engage insurgents during military rule, it will be much more difficult for the new civilian government to persuade them to fulfil their duty to bring peace to the deep South. It may be true that permanent peace can only be achieved through a political solution, but any political offer that is not backed by a strong military that knows how to do its job is doomed to fail.

COMMENT: See my related thoughts in this post. Hopefully, we will actually seem implementation of this:

1-149. Ultimate success in COIN [Counter-insurgency] is gained by protecting the populace, not the COIN force. If military forces remain in their compounds, they lose touch with the people, appear to be running scared, and cede the initiative to the insurgents. Aggressive saturation patrolling, ambushes, and listening post operations must be conducted, risk shared with the populace, and contact maintained. . . . These practices ensure access to the intelligence needed to drive operations. Following them reinforces the connections with the populace that help establish real legitimacy.

From “Counterinsurgency/FM 3-24/MCWP 3-33.5”

NOTE: That is a PPP advertisement on the rear wind shield of a Bangkok taxi - note the election posters on the road in the background.

The Age reports:

Ake, a 28-year-old Bangkok taxi driver, said his income has fallen from 1000 baht ($A33) a day to a few hundred since the coup. "Some people hate him and score him badly," Ake said. "But if you like him, you think Thaksin will win." Asked if he meant the People Power Party, he said "No, I mean Thaksin."

Reuters reports:

"This year has been very tough because the economy is so bad," said 32-year-old taxi driver Preecha Potana, bemoaning the slowest annual growth in six years.

"I'm not sure if things will improve, but I'm just hoping for the best after the election. Many things have happened over the past year, but it has done little to help us".

Time reports:

Thaksin loyalists see the corruption charges against him as either baseless or simply an inescapable part of doing business in Thailand. They also associate Thaksin with more prosperous times; the junta’s shaky grasp of economics — growth has slowed and an ill-conceived currency-control measure in December 2006 led to the biggest one-day loss in the stock market’s history — makes it easy to get nostalgic. “The economy was good then,” insists taxi driver Narongsak Iamsamorn, 39, who hasn’t decided who to vote for this time round. “But now Vietnam is laughing at us. Even a schoolchild can tell you how bad our economy is.” His fares have dropped by two-thirds since the coup. “I want Thaksin to come back and make Thailand better again,” he says.

COMMENT: For a number of middle-class people taxis are a "luxury" so with economic problems many people shift away from using taxis to take other forms of transport in greater numbers than their drop in incomce hence the rapid drop in income. From personal experience, taxi drivers told me the drop in income pre-dated the coup - around the time of the PAD protests in February 2006 hence some view Sondhi L and the PAD protesters negatively too. Perhaps, for some taxi drivers their income has dropped by two-thirds, but I have heard slightly lesser figures of around 40-50% from the half a dozen taxi drivers I have asked. Nevertheless, it is still a big drop.

Thaksin also implemented a number of policies which specifically benefited taxi and motorcycle drivers as Patiwat commented last year in one of my posts:

Motorcycle taxi drivers love Thaksin primarily because he destroyed the "Chao Phor Paak Soi" system in Bangkok. Before, soi-based mafia collected a protection fee from motorcycle drivers who want to run the soi routes. Thaksin cracked down hard on these mafias, and most importantly, didn't replace them with his own cronies or the police. This dramatically increased the effective income of the typical motorcycle taxi driver.

Secondary reason (which applied more for taxi drivers than motorcycle drivers) was that he put the conditions in place such that taxi drivers could actually get reasonable loans. Remember, during the Chavalit/Chuan years, you basically couldn't get a loan through "the system". You wanted a taxi and didn't have cash, you got a loanshark to front you. When the economy recovered under Thaksin in 2001 (in the middle of a world-wide slump, nonetheless), banks started giving out loans again. Plus, financial liberalization meant that you didn't have to go to a bank if you didn't want to. Lots of consumer finance companies sprung up. The government's taxi loan program was another factor, but not the major factor. It's hard to be a loanshark or pawnshop owner these days.

Third, and this affected only taxi drivers, was that Thaksin dramatically reduced the cost of operating a taxi. Thaksin took power in 2001. What else happened in 2001? 9/11. What happened from then on? World-wide gas prices shot up. This was great for PTT and the global oil companies, but horrible for people who had to rely on gasolene. Thaksin ordered an expansion of LPG/LNG/whatever it is that those taxis put into their rear trunk. The stuff is dramatically cheaper than gasolene, and also pollutes less. I think >90% of all taxis I've ever ridden in use compressed gas rather than gasolene. Without it, the economics of running a taxi would not make any sense.

Last is demographics. The vast majority of taxi drivers are from the provinces and have family who still live in the provinces. Their first priority is making money, their second priority is seeing the quality of life in their home towns improve. Microcredit and universal healthcare have done a lot to provide opportunities for the poor.

COMMENT: So despite Gen. Sonthi's "little payment" (bribe ?) to them the other week, you can see why taxi drivers were supportive of Thaksin.

Bloomberg reports:

Thailand’s third-largest newspaper, the Daily News, on Dec. 14 predicted the PPP could win around 190 seats, the Democrats about 125 and the Chart Thai party, headed by former Prime Minister Banharn Silpa-archa, 58 seats.

COMMENT: Quite similar to Matichon Weekly's forecast.

Andrew and Nick have an op-ed in the Canberra Times on the Royal Family and the upcoming election/politics. It is well worth a read although I am not sure that this correct, "In December 2006 the king celebrated 60 years on the throne". No doubt the Royal Thai Embassy in Canberra will be horrified over such talk about such "gossip" and can't wait for their letter to the editor with Foreign Ministry talking points.

Via New Mandala, of course

New Mandala have a translation of an interview with Privy Councilor Prem from today's Matichon:

Q. After the election, should everyone accept the result?
A. Of course. There are rules. These rules have to be accepted.
Q. Even were PPP to win the election and its leader Samak Sundaravej form the government, must the rules be accepted?
A. (after pausing to think) I… I would not go that far, would not go that far ["ผม...ผมไม่ไปไกลถึงขนาดนั้น ไม่ไปไกลถึงขนาดนั้นครับ"].

COMMENT: Astonishing really. Aren't privy councilors meant to be above politics? What about the rules have to be accepted ("ต้องยอมรับกติกา")? Or doesn't this apply when you don't like the result? Well, everyone knows this is what Prem actually thinks, but it is still astonishing for him to say so publicly.

Ok, yes we all know Thaksin is popular in the Northeast, but it helpful when people explain why as Bernama reports:

Retired teacher Sukin Klangseng waits patiently for his turn to see the doctor at the government hospital for his monthly check-up.

"I cannot afford to go to the private hospital, it's too expensive...sometimes costs me Bt2,000. With my small pension and some money from my children to survive, I would rather wait here for a few hours," said the 72-year-old ex-teacher.
Sukin said it was much easier more than a year ago when the 62.8 million Thai population was enjoying the Bt30 healthcare programme mooted by then prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, where they could seek treatment at any hospital for that sum.

But when the military ousted Thaksin on Sept 19, 2006, his populist schemes also went down the drain with him.

"The government said we don't need to pay anymore for medical but now we can only go to the government hospital.

The queue is very long...I am very sad Thaksin is no longer here," said Sukin who openly declared his support for the deposed premier.

In fact, analysts and politicians are predicting that people in Isaan, Thailand's northeast region, would give strong mandate to the People's Power Party (PPP), formed by Thaksin's allies and which has pledged to restore the previous populist programmes like the Bt30 scheme, at the Dec 23 general election.

In the 19 north-eastern provinces, more than 1,500 contenders are vying for 135 seats.

Peerapet Sirikul, a former member of parliament for Kalasin which is known as an agricultural province producing sticky rice and other cash crops as well as silk, said the region used to be poor until Thaksin introduced schemes like the small business loan and the one-million baht village fund programmes.

"People want the old policy back, such as the Bt30 healthcare plan, small loan and interest free loan. Since PPP's programme is similar to Thai Rak Thai's (TRT), they have accepted us...they want back the policy and Thaksin," said the former TRT MP who is now contesting under the PPP banner after the former was dissolved by the court in May.

With one third of the 400 available constituency seats located in the Isaan region, Peerapet said PPP was likely to win more than 80 per cent of the seats, and with similar support from the north and some areas in the central, should be able to form the new government on its own.

"The people are not concerned about the candidate. As long as they are from PPP, they will vote them because Thaksin is the key factor. Because of this, some people from other parties are claiming they are getting support from Thaksin ," he said.

Opinion polls taken in the run up to the election showed that PPP will sweep the majority of the 135 consituency-based seats from the region, similar to the 2001 and 2005 landslide victory.

The "No Vote" majority here against the new Constitution during the August referendum was clear indication of Thaksin's continued support. Puea Pandin, Ruam Jai Thai Chart Pattana, Democrat could win the rest.

Asked on claims of vote buying, Peerapet said such practices still existed in some areas despite the strong warning from the Election Commission of Thailand, with reports of certain people giving Bt200 to each family.

Reports of rampant vote buying in the region in past elections did not go down well with the people here.

"One of the reasons people don't like Democrat is they keep on claiming that we are being bought over. The truth is they just don't care about rural people like us," said Sukin's nephew, Ponchai Klangsengwan, who received a Bt20,000 loan under the village fund to open a sundry shop.

COMMENT: There is nothing the CNS can do about it really. No doubt Ponchai won't be happy by Korn's latest statements:

The Democrats, the main opposition party and the only one that has ruled out forming a government with the PPP, say Thaksin is pumping large amounts of money into the campaign and the Election Commission has failed to clamp down on vote buying.

”Every man and his dog knows money is being used in enormous amounts, but yet there has been no action taken by commission on this issue,” said Korn Chatikavanij, deputy secretary-general of the Democrats.

Perhaps, this is the kind of clampdown from this month is what Korn means:

Democrat candidate Boonmak Sirinavakul yesterday lowered the curtain on his political career after a high court ruling banned him from elections for 10 years for a vote-buying conviction in 2001.

Yesterday's ruling effectively disqualified Boonmak from the race in Ratchaburi constituency 2. "This is the end for me. From now on I will go back to teaching," Boonmak said. He was a university lecturer before entering politics.

Boonmak said he was grateful to his constituents and the Democrat Party for their support throughout the lengthy litigation.

Four years ago, the Election Commission red-carded him after a sting operation to link him to vote buying. Two electoral officials testified as eye witnesses to a transaction that two constituents received Bt1,000 in cash from him.

COMMENT: Then again, the Democrats deny they buy votes.

btw, I am not sure that women is right that she can only go to a government hospital, perhaps the private facilities in the area where she lives have left the government health scheme. Nevertheless, she perceives that under Thaksin the hospital care was better. As people remember things being better under why Thaksin he is the major factor in this election.

The Bangkok Post reports (cache):

'I won't beat around the bush. The first party I'll phone will be Chart Thai because we have stuck together through thick and thin,'' Mr Abhisit said, drawing a cheer from Chart Thai supporters in the conference room of the Centara Grand hotel in the CentralWorld shopping complex.

Mr Abhisit's announcement drew a smile from Suchart Jaovisidha, Chart Thai's economic guru. The Chart Thai and Democrat parties could get along with each other in terms of their political and economic policies, said the former deputy finance minister under the Thaksin Shinawatra government.

However, his party leader, Mr Banharn, would be the best person to answer the question, he said.

COMMENT: Yeah, because all decisions in Chat Thai are made by Banharn. Banharn responded:

Banharn Silpa-archa has thanked Democrat party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva for reaffirming his political alliance with Chart Thai party if the Democrat won the election. The Chart Thai party leader described it as “a kind gesture” but failed to elaborate what his merger plans are.

“Let’s wait until after the election,” he said, “I get headaches when I talk about this now.

COMMENT: Merger? That is the second time today I have noticed the Post used merger instead of coalition plans. The first time I was thrown, but it seems someone is confused over the difference between merger and coalition - yes, I know my use of words isn't always right, but I ain't a media organisation with editors and sub-editors.

PPP have also been courting Chat Thai publicly as well as noted by Tulsie in The Nation:

The problem, as far as the Democrats are concerned, is that a resounding PPP triumph will unshackle the likes of Banharn Silapa-acha. The Chart Thai leader will no longer be bound by the unspoken you-can't-support-Thaksin rule. Banharn may be condemned by some academics, but his constituents won't even care. On Monday, Samak gave this blatantly honest message to Banharn: "The Democrats won't give you the prime minister's post, and I won't, either. But will it be nicer to join someone who never dug up dirt on your ancestors?"

The Nation explained:

In September 1996, the Democrat-led opposition had staged a censure debate against the Banharn administration, alleging he should be disqualified from assuming the prime ministership.

The Democrats had said Banharn's father was a migrant from mainland China, so he did not hold Thai citizenship. Thus, Banharn as his son lacked the qualification needed by a prime minister that both parents must be Thai citizens according to the law.

Although Banharn survived the censure debate, but he was forced to dissolve the Lower House after then Chart Thai Party secretary-general Snoh Thienthong defected, backing Chavalit Yongchaiyudh to replace Banharn. Chavalit's New Aspiration Party then withdrew from the coalition government.

Banharn decided to announce he would quit by the next seven days. When the day came, however, he dissolved the House, causing fury among Chavalit and his allies.

COMMENT: Samak is opening up old wounds. I am sure Banharn wants to forget about the last few months of his time as PM.

Last week, 24 bills in one day, but we have a new record now as the Bangkok Post reports:

The internal security bill sailed through the National Legislative Assembly (NLA) yesterday with some changes as military-appointed legislators passed a total of 31 bills in just one day. One hundred and five NLA members voted to pass the bill, while eight members voted against. There were two abstentions.

COMMENT: Give me some time to work through the ISOC Bill as it has been amended so many times.

If you are interested in the Green's alleged payment of bribes to former TAT Governor Juhtamas, as blogged about here yesterday, then I suggest you have a read of Thailand Jumped the Shark's post on Craig Prater, who has called himself the Executive Director of Bangkok International Film Festival and appears to have been one of the FBI's cooperating witnesses.

From Matichon Weekly, 14-20 December 2007, Edition No 1426, here is a summary of their article on page 10:

Party	Number	Plus or Minus
People's Power Party	196	10
Democrats	126	10
Chat Thai	55	10
Motherland/Puea Paendin	48	10
Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana	27	5
Matichima Thippathai	20	5
Pracharaj	8	3

NOTE: For more details on the parties, see Wikipedia.

Research experts believe the number of undecided is likely too high and speculate that some voters are just too afraid to tell the pollsters the truth on who they will vote for.

Thaksin fever is helping the PPP vote in the Upper North and the Northeast, but also Bangkok. If this "quiet power" [ie those who say they are undecided but have made up their mind] go for PPP then there might be a landslide in Bangkok, the Upper North and the Northeast. Matichon Weekly estimates that PPP will win 196 seats, but more likely to be higher.

For the  Democrats, whether they can win more than 126 seats will depend on how many seats they get in Bangkok. If they can win 20 seats [out of 36] then they have a chance to reach 130, but if PPP do very well the Democrats might get less than 120. However, they are likely to be in the 120-130 range. The Democrats will clean up in the South. They will no more than 3 seats in the Northeast.

For Chat Thai, they will be in the 50-60 range. 25-30 will come from the Central Region. The rest will come from the North and Northeast although Janista Lewchalermwong, ala 'Bam', and a member of the Hongsakul family have a chance.

COMMENT: This Bangkok Post article (cache) looks further at Bam's chances. From poll number it seems she is out of the running, but she is certainly a chance given her name recognition and weak Democrat candidates.

Puea Paendin have the most unstable numbers. They were set up to snatch votes from the PPP in the Northeast, but their numbers will depend on "Thaksin fever". They could sink to 30-35 seats if Thaksin fever is very strong in the Northeast as their MPs are in close competition with PPP. They are more likely to get less than 48 than more than 48.

Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana's stronghold is in Nakhon Ratchasima. Even PPP executives admit that this is a stronghold of Suwat Liptapanlop [former deputy prime minister in Thaksin]. Almost half of their MPs will come from Nakhon Ratchasima. Others from the Northeast and the North.

Matchima Thippathai have the greatest chance that their party leader, Prachai Liewpairat, will not win a seat. The parties seats will mainly come the Central region, North and Northeast and who are linked to Somsak Thepsuthin.  It is more than likely they will get less than 20.

COMMENT: Oddly, I think it is in Matchima's interests for Prachai to lose as without him they have a better chance of being in government.

For Pracharaj, there is a 50% chance that party leader Sanoh Thienthong [former Thai Rak Thai party chairman] will not win a seat. Their MPs will mostly come from Nonthaburi and Sa Kaeo.

If PPP win the election, it will be amazing if one considers that just over one year ago it seemed unlikely that Thakin would gain power this easily. With his assets being seized, TRT being dissolved, and Thaksin being out of the country.

On PPP's chances of forming a government, if PPP win less than 180 seats it is almost certain they will be in opposition. If they win 181-200 seats, they have a 50% chance of forming a government. If they win 200-220 seats, they have a 80% chance of forming a government. To really make sure of victory PPP needs to win more than 240 seats. In the last 10 days, it is not surprising that PPP are relying on the strength of "Thaksin fever" as this is their best way to get closer to 240 seats. At the same time, the government/CNS is looking at dissolving PPP.

COMMENT: Reuters also sees that if PPP can get more than 200 seats their chances of forming a government go up greatly as they will be able to convince other parties to join.

PPP are certainly not out of the game as Dan Ten Kate in Asia Sentinel reports:

Since no party is likely to win an outright majority, the middle parties hold the key to victory. Chat Thai has vowed to stick with the Democrats but most analysts believe the malleable Banharn can be easily persuaded to switch sides with the right offer.

The other intriguing party is Pua Paendin, a new party formed by ex-Thaksin ally Surakiart Sathirathai. The party has reportedly received an influx of funds from the military and behind-the-scenes support from Prem Tinsulanonda, the highly influential former prime minister who heads the king’s Privy Council. The party has steadily risen in pre-election polls, but may be fragmented, giving Thaksin a possible opening to woo some Pua Paendin MPs to vote for the candidate the exiled premier wants in power.

“The Surakiart faction cannot work with Thaksin at all, but another faction in Pua Paendin has no loyalty to Prem and just wants to win,” said a former Thaksin aide, speaking on condition of anonymity. “Thaksin himself is unlikely to come back for another two or three years, so he can sit back from the outside with the remote control and choose either Banharn or [Pua Paendin leader] Suvit [Khunkitti] to act as a nominee. MPs don’t have to vote along party lines, so that gives Thaksin more options. It’s easier for Thaksin to buy MPs than it was to buy votes.”

COMMENT: Obviously, common sense will tell you that the more seats PPP wins the greater chance that PPP will form a government, but there is also a flow-on effect and that is for Puea Paendin most MPs in this faction will come from the North and the Northeast and being associated with Thaksin when there is such a strong surge of support for PPP is in their interests - this support is really for Thaksin. This is exactly the same reason most TRT MPs never abandoned Thaksin and TRT and that he was popular so leaving TRT directly affected their chances of winning at this election. Obviously, Thaksin's financial support helps, but these are long-term political players and the reason they abandoned Thaksin's fold and moved to Puea Paendin was it was in their interests - financially and politically - as it seemed PPP's chances of being in government were quite low, but with the increased support for PPP because of the Thaksin factor those same MPs who jumped from the Thaksin ship might want to return to the fold.  

I would say that the same situation also applies for Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana and Matichima Thippathai.

In case, I don't get an opportunity to make another prediction, Matichon's figures closely resemble what I think. I would probably give PPP 5-10 more seats and take these away mostly from the Democrats based on recent surge of support for PPP in Bangkok,* but also other support in the North and the Northeast.

*This is based on the latest poll and Special Branch figures which both show PPP to win 23 seats compared to the Democrats 13 in Bangkok.

The Bangkok Post's headline is "Chalerm admits to PPP/Chart Thai merger talks":

People Power party (PPP) member Chalerm Yubamroong has admitted to claims of talks between the PPP and Chart Thai party’s deputy leader Maj-Gen Sanan Kajornprasart.

“Maj-Gen Sanan called me while I was giving a speech in Nong Khai Province,” Chalerm said. “We only discussed how many seats we expect to win at the election. I told him PPP would probably win more than half the seats.

Chart Thai expects to win at least 50 so there is a possibility of forming a coalition there, but let me stress that this is only a possibility. We have not committed ourselves to anyone.”

Mr Chalerm is expected to deliver a major speech from the grounds of Sanam Luang on Friday where he's widely expected to give details of ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra’s return to Thailand.

COMMENT: Talk of possibility coalition = merger talks? I wondered what was missing then I read another Bangkok Post article and it all became clearer:

Speculation is rife that Chart Thai party is preparing to form a three-party coalition with the People Power party (PPP) and Puea Pandin parties. It was only recently that deputy Chart Thai leader Somsak Prisananantakul was said to have met with Surakiart Sathirathai, former coordinator of Puea Pandin party to discuss merger plans.

COMMENT: Is the writer confusing coalition and merger? A Chat Thai-Puea Paendin merger is not improbable, but a PPP-Chat Thai merger seems extremely unlikely.

The Sydney Morning Herald's Bangkok correspondent has these interesting tidbits:

But foreign investors don't vote, and when Mr Abhisit pulls up a plastic stool at a noodle stand in Udon Thani, in the battleground north-east of the country, he looks awkward and out of place.

"He's a good guy, just not ready yet," Suwatchai Kumlim, 45, who was recently laid off as foreman in an iron foundry, said. He grew up in Udon Thani and said Mr Abhisit's ideas showed a lack of understanding for rural life. "He suggests a backhoe for every village, but I don't think it will work; if it belongs to a group, no one will look after it."

Thitinan Pongsudhirak, a political scientist at Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok, said all the polls pointed to the People Power Party getting the largest number of votes. "You can do it by income and professions, people who drive cars will vote for Democrats, people in the country will vote for other parties," he said.

COMMENT: The quotemeister, Thitinan, is at it again. Aside from the South, I think his statement is broadly correct in a numbers sense although not every car owner will vote for the Democrats. But as the middle class increases their will be increased competition for votes.

The Economist has a good overall article on the election and is worth reading in its entirety. I just wanted to highlight these comments at the end:

The generals, courtiers and bureaucrats who have been in charge for the past 15 months have ruled dismally. Thailand's economy is now one of the slowest-growing in booming Asia. The army-appointed interim government has become ever more invisible as its popularity has sunk. General Sonthi, presumably fearing humiliation, quietly dropped plans to stand in the election. But it is unclear whether the army and its civilian backers have learned the old lesson that coups and extra-constitutional excursions tend to make political crises worse and do not produce good government.

Thailand's judicial and regulatory institutions are on trial in the election. For example, a new Election Commission, appointed with little dissent in the turmoil shortly before the coup, faces accusations of partiality. It absolved the military junta of plotting to subvert the election by undermining the PPP, despite the discovery of army documents detailing the plot. But the commission is now threatening to disqualify the PPP over the less serious matter of a video clip in which Mr Thaksin breaches his ban on politicking and urges support for his party.

The commission and courts will have lots of complaints to handle after the polls close. If they enforce the rules impartially and promptly, they could set Thailand back on the road to democracy. If they are arbitrary, biased or dilatory, they may doom it to more years of instability—especially if they leave the impression that the people have voted for Thaksinism, only to have their will subverted.

COMMENT: Surayud and the Cabinet are invisible now. We hear nothing from them. I really think that the PPP knew that two things would happen either (1) someone within the CNS would be punished and it would raise the question of whether the elections would be free and fair, or (2) or would be punished over the secret CNS documents, but it would place the EC in such an awkward position politically if they try to ban PPP later.

Not The Nation is a The Onionish type piss take of news in Thailand. I must admit when I first read saw it was I was slightly disappointed as I was expecting a satirical attempt of The Nation's op-ed/editorial style ( then again they could probably just change the by-line on one of Sopon Ongkara's op-eds and no one would know if it was satire or real). It is not really an anti-The Nation site as such, well at least not yet anyway, but just a satrical English language news website whose main focus is Thailand. The connection with The Nation is its website design.

They have added more content over the last week and are getting much better. So if you don't like it when you first read it, I suggest you take another look.

On the Democrats:

Claiming “continued victory over the forces of opinion-having,” Democratic Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva inaugurated an event on Saturday celebrating the party’s 25th consecutive year of not having any political platform.

At an understated dinner in the Grand Ballroom of the Plaza Athenee Hotel on Wireless Road, Democratic Party leaders and about 200 senior officers sat down to a gala dinner evening filled with keynote speeches expounding and praising Thailand’s oldest political party, and attributing its longevity to its consistent absence of opinions, positions, or remotely distinguishable ideas. “In a world of increasingly ugly partisanship, where extremist views and cults of personality have shaken the foundations of national unity, the Democrats stand alone in their refusal to feel anything about anything or anyone, or at least not to express those feelings in public,” continued Abhisit, to sustained but controlled applause. He vowed that the party would soon take control of Parliament, “as long as it was okay with the CNS. And Prem.”

Don't worry Samak doesn't go untouched as well - although this article is satrising everyone

And when you give bureaucrats power this is what happens as AP reports:

Scantily clad dancers were hired to spice up a political rally ahead of Thailand's weekend general election, prompting the Election Commission to declare Wednesday that "sexy shows" are inappropriate campaign events.

Five dancers dressed in bikini tops, hot pants and stilettos gyrated on a stage, as loud music blared between speakers.

The rally in Ratchaburi province, 80 kilometers (50 miles) west of the capital, Bangkok, was organized by a provincial branch of the Election Commission on Tuesday evening. Local candidates from all political parties were invited to speak.

"We wanted something exciting to draw people to the event," said Chavalit Bunyeun, head of the commission's provincial office, which organized the event. He noted that the plan didn't really work: "Even though we had dancing girls, there were less than 100 people who came to hear the candidates."

Election laws prohibit political parties from offering entertainment at rallies, but Chavalit said he didn't think the law applied to events organized by the Election Commission itself.

The body's central office in Bangkok said it was shocked by the event and had opened an investigation.

"We are seeking an explanation from our local office and have asked them to provide us with the reasons such a performance was permitted," said Sodsri Sathayatham, one of Thailand's five election commissioners.

The Commission issued a memo later Wednesday to its offices nationwide.

"I have sent a letter to all local EC offices in every province telling them to refrain from organizing sexy shows," said a commission spokesman, secretary-general Sutthiphon Thaweechaikan. "It is not appropriate."

COMMENT: Where does one start? That they had to send a letter to every provincial EC to tell them it was inappropriate shows you just how out of touch some bureaucrats are. I just love how Chavalit doesn't even know whether what they did was legal. It just shows how many campaigning regulations there are and if the bureaucrats don't know how are the parties meant to know - election campaigning laws post by Sunday. Then you have the fact that it didn't even work. Well, it is not as if they are organising anything important, just a mere election.

Well, I would link to some examples of what the dancers look like, but this is a safe for work blog. Putting "coyotes Thailand" into a google image search will help those wanting to do their own research.

Variety reports:

Movie exec Gerald Green and his wife Patricia have been arrested and charged with corruption in a Los Angeles federal court in a case concerning the Bangkok Int'l Film Festival.

The Greens were arrested on Dec 7 and details of the case were unsealed on Tuesday.

The U.S. Justice Department said that the complaint alleges that the Greens conspired to make $1.7 million in bribery payments to a Thai government official in order to obtain contracts worth more than $10 million to manage the Bangkok fest and other events between 2003 and 2007.

The Department did not name the official in its press release, but clearly identifies the ultimate recipient of the bribes as the President of the BKKIFF and the Governor of the Tourism Authority of Thailand during that period.

Juthamas Siriwan served as the governor of TAT between 2003 and 2006, and headed the festival during that time. She is now running for a parliamentary seat in the Dec 23 general election as a representative of the Puea Pandin Party.

An accompanying FBI affidavit identifies some 41 payments that were made to the Governor's daughter, who was not an official of the festival.

COMMENT: Actually, Juthamas is (or was - see below) a Deputy Leader of Puea Paendin. One must really read, or scan, the affidavit (PDF) in its entirety to fully grasp how much evidence the FBI have against the Greens and the link to Juthamas. These aren't just newspaper allegations. They have a confidential informant, two cooperating witnesses, they have documents obtained from a search of their work premises with list of "commission" payments which correspond with bank transfers to the Governor's daughter - they know it is the Governor's daughter as she applied for a US visa to accompany her mother in 2001. Two FBI agents also followed the Greens to Thailand a few months ago where they met at the Oriental Hotel.

One of the cooperating witnesses believes that the commissions (ie bribes) first started for a web design contract in 2000 (see 19B on Page 14). It seems she was Deputy Governor of the TAT at the time.

The article continues:

The Greens owned and operated Film Festival Management, a LA-based business that was formed in 2003 specifically to bid for the festival management contract. The affidavit says that FFM retained the contract each year until 2007 following a government coup and the Governor's departure from office.

The complaint also alleges that the Greens attempted to conceal their bribery using different business entities, some with dummy business addresses and telephone numbers, in order to hide the large amount of money the Greens were being paid under the contracts; and by making 'commission' payments to the Governor through the foreign bank accounts of intermediaries.

If proven, the conspiracy and charges under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act each carry a maximum of five years in prison.

That Thai anti-graft agency has been extremely busy investigating cases involving associates of the deposed former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra. It is not clear whether the agency co-operated with the FBI in the Green investigation or whether it will bring its own charges against Siriwan.

Pornsiri Manoharn took over the TAT job from Siriwan in late 2006. The deal with Film Festival Management was cancelled and the organisation of the fest's 2007 edition was transferred to a local team. The budget was also cut from Baht 200 million ($5.8 million) to less than $1.2 million.

Siriwan held a press conference Wednesday in Bangkok to face down the accusations.

"I have made an inquiry into the company in L.A. and was informed that the issue of bribery was raised by staff who were fired from the firm, so I believe this is an internal conflict of the company," she said.

"This is not directly involved with Thailand, and I'm not worried since it is only an accusation and the investigation is still under way. But if the US agency finds me being guilty I will counter-sue them since it's a case of mud-slinging and a groundless accusation".

Asked whether the scandal will have a negative impact on her newly launched political career, Siriwan said: "I don't think so, because it was something that happened many years ago and it was about internal conflicts between the company and staff who were fired. It has nothing to do with my running for parliament''.

The TAT has now set up a committee to look into the scandal. The Foreign Ministry has also been informed of the FBI allegation and said it will coordinate with the investigation.

COMMENT: She has since changed her mind on whether it will affect her political career as it has been announced she will resign from Puea Paendin tommorrow. Post Today quotes her as saying that it is unrelated to the investigation in the US although then she later states that she she did not want the case to have impact on the party's political campaign - The Nation's wording.

The Thai media are all over it although surprisingly I can't find anything in my scanning of Manager front page - it is blasted all over the Kom Chad Luek, Thai Rath, and Matichon. Matichon have summarised the affidavit here. Kom Chad Luek adds that DSI have liaised with the FBI over the issue since the beginning of this year.

One wonders with all this evidence whether the Greens might eventually strike a deal and plead guilty. If so, it would make things interesting for the Thai authorities if they don't press charges.

Thai Visa has an interesting thread - although I am uncertain whether her husband is the Dusit mentioned. They share the same surname, but I can't find any news article or webpage through a google search that they are husband and wife. There are other people who have the same surname. Anyone?

Finally, on the political fall-out. Unsurprisingly, the Thai Visa folks are just mentioning Thaksin and Samak connections. I don't think it has much of a political affect for PPP. Yes, Thaksin appointed her Governor, but she was a Deputy Governor before that. She joined Puea Paendin and not the PPP. With some of the Thai papers providing full details of the affidavit and they are particularly juicy I think the party affected is Puea Paendin although her resignation will probably limit the fall-out. Nevertheless, it was the political issue of the day and coming so close to the election it doesn't make Puea Paendin look squeaky clean.

Giles Ungpakorn of Chulalongkorn University provides some of the most brilliant quotes on Thai politics - a list of previous posts on Giles is here. He is at it again in this article by Philip Golingai in The Star:

“The election is part of the coup process. It is an attempt to manipulate democracy,” he[Giles] argued. “And the military has to be subtle on how to manipulate it as they can’t stuff the ballot boxes.”

The military has manipulated democracy by dissolving the TRT, pressuring the EC to disqualify PPP candidates, controlling the media and using threats.

The likely aftermath of the Dec 23 polls, he said, is the return of a weak coalition government where non-elected institutions like the military will have a greater balance of power.

On whether the military would launch a second coup if PPP formed the next government, Ungpakorn asked, “what excuse will they give this time?”

“We staged a coup and we were inept about it so we have to stage another one? That will not be popular.

“What the military is going to do is ensure PPP will not win an overall majority and lean on other parties not to form a coalition government with it.”

COMMENT: Classic Giles. This is the military's problem and they their only hope is to suppress the PPP vote.

h/t: HiComrade

Last week, at The Foreign Correspondents' Club of Thailand (FCCT) Professor Kevin Hewison, University of North Carolina stated:

People in the north east are becoming purposely disenfranchised. Election campaigns are huge in Bangkok and nearby - where Abhisit is popular - and non existent in former TRT strongholds. The election will not progress democracy.

AFP reports from Buriram in the Northeast:

Under the military's watchful eyes, Prakit Poldeeh, a supporter of deposed Thai premier Thaksin Shinawatra, is keeping a low profile as he campaigns for this month's elections.

"This is the most difficult campaign for me," said 59-year-old Prakit, who is running for his seventh term in parliament in Sunday's polls, the first since last year's coup ousting Thaksin.

"Election rules are so unclear that I can't really do much. I've opted to stay quiet for fear of violating the rules. Instead of me going out, I send volunteers to voters to explain my policy," he told AFP at his office.

Prakit is running for the People Power Party (PPP), which was taken over by members of Thaksin's disbanded Thai Rak Thai (Thais Love Thais) party.
...
While the junta says the polls will restore democracy, observers ask how free and fair the elections can be when about one-third of Thailand, mainly Thaksin's strongholds such as Buriram, is still under martial law.

"The coup government wants to block PPP from winning," Prakit says, adding authorities have yet to allow him to display campaign billboards even though those of opposition candidates are seen across this rural province.

"I am still waiting for permission on the billboards. What can I do?" shrugs the softly spoken man.

While no troops or tanks are seen in the streets of Buriram, about 410 kilometres (250 miles) northeast of Bangkok, Prakit says soldiers, often disguised as villagers, come to his town meetings with voters.

"I am under pressure from 'observers,'" the candidate says, referring to soldiers.

"They record my speeches. Villagers told me they are afraid to go to my meetings because of the presence of soldiers. I can't really go out to meet villagers," he sighs.

When Prakit ventured out for campaigning on one Saturday afternoon, he spoke for just five minutes in front of around 50 voters, mostly farmers.

"Thank you for your support, and please vote for me," he said, wearing a blue shirt and jeans with a colourful scarf around his waist in a traditional Thai style.

The small crowd cheered and clapped. After the brief speech, one villager offered Prakit a drink.

The scene was in stark contrast to that at a recent event in the campaign by Thailand's oldest political outfit, the Democrat Party, which aims to make inroads into Thaksin's electoral bases such as Buriram.

When Democrat candidate Chaiwat Sinsuwong spoke on the top of his campaign pick-up truck here, not a single voter showed up to see him.

The 58-year-old man was visibly angry when asked about campaigning in the pro-Thaksin province, only saying: "This is no longer Thaksin's stronghold."

Not so for Kiean Pawasri, a 55-year-old farmer, who was among the crowd during Prakit's speech.

"I will vote for PPP because PPP will carry on Thaksin's policy to help the poor," he said, adding: "I want Thaksin to come back and work for us again."

Thaksin led his party to two election victories on the back of strong support among farmers as he launched populist measures -- debt relief, investment funds and cheap medical care -- in a bid to boost the rural economy.

Most of Thailand's 64 million population live in rural areas.

But average monthly household income in impoverished Buriram, whose main business is rice farming, still stands at just 7,800 baht (about 200 dollars), roughly a quarter of the 30,000 baht average in Bangkok, according to official statistics.

A 31-year-old elementary school teacher with a baby also said she would vote for Prakit.

"I support PPP. I know which party is good for our country," said the woman, who declined to be named, as she chatted with villagers at Prakit's campaign stop.

Prakit says he is confident of victory in the December elections.

"Although coup leaders use tricks against us, and want people to get confused about the elections, I know villagers support me," he said.

"Villagers want PPP to win so that the party can work for them. I am ready to work for them," Prakit said.

COMMENT: Doesn't look like the Democrats are making in-roads in the Northeast.

btw, last night at the FCCT, Abhisit said* this election was fairer than elections held in 2005 (and I understand he also said 2006 as well although I am not sure whether you would say that there were competitive elections then). I guess fairer in the eyes of the Democrats.

*R&W has a report of Abhisit's speech.

In May 2007:

Other countries, especially in the West, should not look at the Thai monarch's role in solving a national crisis based solely on their own perception, said Visanu Krua-ngam, a member of the National Legislative Assembly (NLA).

Mr Visanu was speaking at the seminar titled ''Monarchy in a Democratic System'' at the United Nations building in Bangkok, jointly organised by King Prajadhipok's Institute, the NLA, and Thammasat and Chulalongkorn universities.

European kings and queens have never been in that kind of a situation. Nor have they encountered any crises beyond government control, a parliament or the people, as Thailand has, the legal expert noted.

COMMENT: Actually, this was the first puu yaism although I hadn't coined the term at the time and as I (and TJTS/Fonzi before me) blogged at the time had the Spanish example. But now we have another example, Belgium. As the BBC reports:

Rival parties representing Belgium's Dutch and French-speaking populations have formed an emergency government, ending six month of deadlock.

The government of caretaker Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt will stay in office for no more than three months.

It is then set to hand over power to Christian Democrats and Liberals - the winners of elections in June.

The two parties have so far failed to reach a deal, prompting fears Belgium could split along linguistic lines.

The Liberals and Christian Democrats won 81 of the 150 seats in June's elections.

But their efforts to form a government have floundered in a dispute over greater regional autonomy - broadly favoured by the Dutch-speaking Flanders region but opposed by the French-speaking south.

Belgium's King Albert II earlier this week asked Mr Verhofstadt to form an interim government.

"The prime minister has unblocked the situation," a spokesman for Mr Verhofstadt said of the decision by the Christian Democratic party to join an interim government.

The interim government now faces a parliamentary vote of confidence on Sunday. Assuming it passes the vote, it will remain in office until no later than 23 March next year.

On Saturday, thousands of trade unionists took to the streets in Brussels, complaining about the political stalemate and rising food and fuel prices.

Last week, the European Commission warned that the political paralysis was beginning to affect Belgium's economy.

COMMENT: So a political crisis which had gone unresolved for many months before the Belgium King intervened? Come on Wissanu, explain what you were on about.

Actually, I have been critical of The Nation in the past (ok, more than critical, but they deserve it at times), but their political desk recently have had a couple of good analytical articles. Their latest analytic piece looks at the heart of the Democrats problems:

During his [Abhisit's] time as Prime Minister's Office minister, his work was dealing with "abstract" matters.

Some of his tasks were simply too big to be completed within a coalition government - such as the reform of the bureaucracy that was eventually completed during the Thaksin administration.

According to People Power secretary-general Surapong Suebwonglee, Thai Rak Thai won its landslide victory in 2005 thanks to Thaksin's decisive and quick handling of the tsunami disaster of 2004. Thaksin performed well in the crisis.

He said People Power policies would satisfy voters and be deliverable.

Surapong said voters might like the policies served up by other parties, but if they were not deliverable, this would be a setback for them.

This might be what is happening to the Democrats. Not many voters believe Abhisit and his party can deliver on its "Urgent Operation Plan Doable in 99 Days" promises.

The policy platform is intended to rid it of its "sluggish" image, and make voters confident the party can do what it says.

A lifelong Democrat voter, who asked not to be named, said she was now undecided. She has never hesitated to cast her ballot for the Democrats in the past.

"It's different this time. I think the People Power's policies are interesting. On the contrary, I can't recall what the Democrats' policy is or what they did for us when they were in government. But, one thing I believe is that they are the best opposition party," she said.

COMMENT: Even in opposition they haven't been that good, but Abhisit has started to come into his own in the last year or so and is resonating with Democrat supporters. He can talk the talk, and this is easy to do in opposition or on the campaign trail, but he will disappoint a lot of voters if he can't walk the walk. The article continues:

Another big problem for the Democrats is the Northeast, one of the most important areas in this election.

The region has 135 seats, one third of the 400 constituencies. The party winning this region normally takes the country and forms the core of a coalition government. This was the case with the Thai Rak Thai and New Aspiration parties.

In the 2001 and 2005 elections Thaksin's Thai Rak Thai swept almost all the region's seats. Voters were attracted by the party's populist policies.

While the region became a Thai Rak Thai stronghold, the Democrats seemingly ignored the region. Last election they won only two seats there. Democrat secretary-general Suthep Thaugsuban once declared he did not want to campaign in the Northeast.

It is interesting to note the comment of a Democrat that the party did not sit well in the hearts of Isaan voters. He said it was "political game" within the party.

COMMENT: The latest Matichon Weekly estimates they will only 3 constituency seats in the Northeast - more on what Matichon Weekly later.

It is known as the party of the South. Most key members are popular in the South. They are powerful in the party. It is said some of these people did not want the party's influence in the Northeast to grow because they would have to share power and influence with members from there.

So, if the Democrats want to compensate for their weakness in the Northeast it will have to sweep almost all seats in the South and Bangkok, a total of 92. This is comparable with the seats People Power is expected to win in Isaan.

Bangkok could be a problem. It is an arena hard to predict. Realising this, the party says if it cannot win at least 24 seats in the capital it will not be able to form the next government.

Despite a People Power poll lead, as much as half of all voters remain undecided.

The Democrats still have time to win these undecided ballots.

Bangkok voters are contradictory. Many polls show People Power ahead of the Democrats, but ironically find Abhisit the favoured candidate for prime minister.
Vote buying and money are always Democrat excuses. This time those excuses are no good. The leader of the 2006 coup is in charge of a special panel to end vote buying and the Election Commission is ready to arrest crooked politicians.

A new excuse the party is using this election is the news media. A Democrat source said newspapers and broadcasters were helping its opponents, intentionally and unintentionally. The publication of poll results that Democrat popularity is dropping added salt to the wound, he said.

The news media shed a negative light on the party by speculating on its defeat. If it wins the election, they will say it won unfairly, by luck or with the help of the military, he said.

He believed, however, that it would win and that its popularity was increasing.

Democrat accomplishments are not remembered because the last time it was in power was a decade ago, he added. [BP: Huh? They were in government in 1998-2001 too]

Other perceived problems are Abhisit and the party's strategies.

Simply saying Abhisit will be an honest prime minister who will not create chaos is not enough to win votes. It is true, people need reconciliation and peace. But, what they need most is a government that can tackle economic problems, increase incomes and give people a better life.

"It's okay if politicians are corrupt as long as we have a good living" was a popular phrase used by Thai Rak Thai supporters after the generals ousted their party.

Abhisit is seen as a good speaker, but someone who does little.
"He is too keen at talking. People are afraid he will not be able to perform when the time comes," another Democrat supporter said.

Abhisit realises his weak points so has "rebranded" himself as a "down-to-earth" politician - his motto is "Abhisit anywhere, any time".

The road to Government House has never been as open for the Democrats. But it remains to be seen if the oldest party can achieve its objective.

The referee has blown for kick off; can the players score?

COMMENT: The Democrat's two biggest problems over the last few weeks are not of their own making and can't necessarily be blamed on the current leadership. First, the government/CNS/EC are almost turning Thaksin into a "hero" or "martyr" by continually being seen to be against him and attacking him. The Democrats haven't anything to do with this, but it is still helping PPP. Second, the indecisive nature of the current government is just reminding people of what governments were like in the 10 years before TRT came to power and makes people long for the return of TRT through PPP. Perhaps, people forget some of the failings of TRT on many issues as TRT just seemed more decisive then. Democrat-led coalition governments are not remembered that fondly even if they were not necessarily a disaster (ala Banharn 95-96 and Chavalit 96-97 governments). I think it is only fair to acknowledge this as you can't blame the Democrats for this. I think they know this and it is frustrating them.

My next point is going to sound odd and counter-intuitive, but hear me out. A strong result for the Democrats is not necessarily the best news for them given all they are promising, the weight of expectations which will be on them, and the likelihood that any government will last at most 2 years. If the Democrats do better than expected (say 135+) then I see it is because they have been able to convince enough voters that they are "real deal" this time - yes the CNS suppression of the PPP vote helps, but in the Northeast such votes won't be going to the Democrats. However, if they are able to form a Democrat-led government they will also be stuck with the "weight of expectations" and might suffer if they can't deliver quickly. Those doubts will come back amongst people and being able to implement all their policy goals quickly, as they have promised might not be possible and the the subsequent election might not be pleasant for the Democrats. Nevertheless, if they do slightly worse than expected (say less than 120), but the PPP get less than 205 and the Democrats manage to cobble together a coalition, there will be such low expectations for the government that they can only really surprise people by achieving something. Even if the coalition falls apart within 2 years because of in-fighting, the Democrats don't necessarily have to be outstanding and just rise above the fray and they might gain enough kudos to take away votes from their coalition partners at the subsequent election. For the Democrats, it is about managing expectations from now on and trying to convince those undecided voters.

btw, Abhisit spoke at the FCCT last night (see Bangkok Post article) - sorry no audio this time. At times, Abhisit seems to eager not to take any position or to word a position in such a way that he always has an out-clause. He needs to learn that this doesn't work everytime as people don't necessarily talk the qualifiers into account and can come across as just fluff. A marginally better performance than last time, but still too bland and rehearsed.

Thepchai Yong has an interesting op-ed in The Nation on the role of politicians in the violence in the South:

Candidates running in southern constituencies in the December 23 election are not short of ideas on how to tackle the spiralling violence in the region.

In fact, one could say that this is the first general election in which the insurgency in the three southern provinces of Yala, Pattani, and Narathiwat has been made a top priority by political parties.

But the irony is that politicians themselves might have been part of the problem. They could not pretend to be bystanders as the situation in the region went from bad to worse - nor could they avoid being held accountable for the more than 2,600 deaths since January 2004, which marked a crucial turn in the decades-old insurgency in the strife-torn region.

While former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra took the brunt of the blame for the worsening situation in the three provinces because of his heavy-handed approach there, Muslim MPs representing the region in his Thai Rak Thai party were no less guilty. Don't forget that several of them occupied ministerial positions and other prominent parliamentary posts and were obviously in a position to make noises when they saw disaster on the horizon as a result of the misguided policies of their leader going astray. ...
It's no surprise that in conversations and panel discussions in the run-up to the election, all candidates - several of them veteran politicians with high positions in the previous administration - tried to distance themselves from past policy blunders. Instead they are all trying to peddle grandiose platforms, unfailingly tinted with high degrees of populism, designed to bring peace back to the South as if they have nothing to do with the past.

Political expediency aside, one silver lining of all this is that for the first time all political parties, seem to be paying serious attention to the region. It certainly does not escape them that the next government can never have political stability unless they can contain the insurgency and restore security in the region.

Though the policies put forth by most political parties represent their serious attempts to find long-term solutions to the problems plaguing the area - notably poverty, income disparity and social injustice - they do not guarantee an immediate stop to the violence. Those behind the killing sprees and mayhem since 2004 are unlikely to pause simply because of a change of guard in Bangkok.

Probably the most urgent task facing the next government is determining how to unify the approaches being pursued by different government agencies in dealing with the strife-torn region. Despite Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont's vow to contain the insurgency, his government has done little to bring the region closer to peace. The Army has been put at the forefront in the fight against the insurgency and in some respects has been successful in containing the violence in certain areas.

But soldiers are equipped to deal only with the immediate security threat. When it comes to long-term solutions to the insurgency they are obviously at a loss, while other government agencies are far from united in tackling the root causes of the violence.

What is urgently needed is a strong commitment from the central government to deal with the problems in the three southern provinces.

Equally necessary is a more effective central command that can pull together all the resources available to work on long-term approaches.

Since the violence in the region took a turn for the worse in 2004 there has been a serious lack of political leadership in pushing through badly needed solutions that are both workable and comprehensive.
It should have dawned on the political parties vying in the general election by now that unless the new political leadership has the will and is truly committed to finding ways to end the carnage, the ideas and proposals they are peddling will be useless.

COMMENT: Thepchai doesn't actually mention what these solutions so the end of the op-ed is filled with cliches, but at least it doesn't start from this position. Hey, I have low expectations as long as a journalist or a politician doesn't start preaching that poverty is the root of the violence then it is not your ordinary run-of-the-mill copy-and-paste article on the South - see here for my post on reduction in poverty in the South in the years preceding the violence.

I should really do this in a longer post to elaborate on what I think the government should do, but in a nutshell, the security forces need increased numbers of trained officials whether police or military who are based in the local community and not in the barracks. They should only detain those with real intelligence and not these wholesale rounding up of insurgents with little evidence to back up and no hope of convictions. Frequent patrols by trained officials, who have some understanding of the language and culture, is needed. Yes, justice is important, but law and order is equally important. Unless people feel safe they won't help the government.

The Nation's Pravit Rojanaphruk has another excellent article this time on the NGO groups opposed to the NLA:

Last Wednesday, about 1,000 protesters surrounded Parliament and dozens eventually climbed over the building's fence in order to stage a more dramatic protest, leading to the cancellation of the NLA session that afternoon. Protesters demanded an end to the NLA's controversial passing of laws, many of which protesters deem anti-democratic and detrimental to civil rights, such as the draconian Internal Security Bill and others.

The problem, which perhaps led to Samak's allegation, is that roughly half of the protest leaders were either part of the anti-Thaksin Shinawatra People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD), which tacitly endorsed last year's military coup, or were active in working with the NLA to try to draft some bills in the first few months of the controversial assembly's existence.

COMMENT: Read the whole thing as usual. As usual, he covers at topic which overs haven't looked at yet.

The Nation reports:

A senior Army officer in Chiang Rai, who asked to remain anonymous, alleged that Army units had been instructed by superiors to vote for the Chart Thai party.

COMMENT: It might be down to local candidates. No Puea Paendin or Democrat candidate to support? Meanwhile in related Chiang Rai political news as the Bangkok Post reports:

Third Army commander Samrerng Sivadamrong, meanwhile, hit back at Mr Yongyuth's claim that soldiers have intimidated PPP candidates and its canvassers and tried to block the party's election rallies in Chiang Rai.

Lt-Gen Samrerng said security searches of houses did not focus only on PPP members, as has been alleged. In fact, soldiers had remained calm despite provocation by the party, the commander said.

Buasorn Prachamorn, a PPP party list candidate in zone 1, complained yesterday that a former Chiang Rai deputy governor had warned PPP canvassers to withdraw support from the party during a recent meeting which the deputy governor said was arranged at the request of the military.

Panthongtae and Pinthongta Shinawatra, the children of ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, travelled to the North over the weekend reportedly to meet key figures of the PPP.

Mr Panthongtae was in Chiang Rai and his sister in Chiang Mai. Their trips were said to help the PPP boost its popularity.

COMMENT: Not focusing only on PPP members? So comforting to hear. How are any candidates a security threat? Is it because some of them don't want to see perpetual military domination of politics?

Argh, I see PPP's "secret weapon" is in action in Chiang Rai. Given that Thaksin is turning into the defining issue of the election, it shouldn't be surprising that PPP are wheeling out Thaksin family members. It is to remind former TRT voters who are mulling up whether to vote for PPP or other third parties formed by ex-TRT MPs that PPP is the "pure Thaksin" party. While to some this may seem a negative, in the Upper North and Northeast it is a distinct positive. PPP really need to get voters to switch away from third party candidates to get beyond the 200 MP threshold to ensure the best chance of governing. Thaksin is the key to this election. Even Sopon, the most anti-Thaksin English language writer around is concerned that the Surayud government/EC/CNS is turning Thaksin into a "hero".

The article also has an update about a missing PPP canvasser. It seems, if the police are to be believed (hmm, did I just say that?) , that there is less money than initially believed. Read the article for more.

Abhisit's car:



Source: The Nation
Caption: Police inspect BMW of Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva that crashed into a rear of a truck in Nakhon Ratchasima's Kaengkoi district on Monday night. Abhisit who sit in the back seat had minor wounds.

The Bangkok Post reports:

Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva was injured in an accident between his BMW and a 6-wheeled truck in the early hours of Tuesday morning.

Mr Abhisit was on his way back to Bangkok from Nakhon Ratchasima where he had been supporting Democrat party candidates with their election campaigns when the truck cut him off on Mitraparp road, Saraburi province.

The driver of the BMW, 36-year-old Thanusilp Chaichart, told police after the accident that he had been driving at high speed when the truck emerged from a petrol station on the left side of the road and immediately tried to make it to the far right lane to do a U-turn. Mr Thanusilp was unable to step on the brakes in time to avoid the collision.

Mr Abhisit received minor injuries but has now returned home to Bangkok.

COMMENT: I was siting next to someone once, who was an experienced law enforcement officer, as we were coming upon a crash site, he commented on how well German and Swedish cars hold up after accidents compared to Korean and Japanese cars. Given the speed Abhisit's car would like have been traveling at and what his drive hit, Abhisit seems lucky to have only escaped with minor injuries. He should be thankful for the Germans.

Not to sound like an elitist, but in a democracy campaigning is a necessary ingredient. Can't the authorities at least provide some form of escort and security for the major party leaders. No need to close off the roads, just a lead car and a tail motorcycle.* Perhaps, they can finance this by having Gen. Sonthi leave one of this three tax-payer funded mansions. There is no shortage of security personnel either who provide security for senior members of security agencies, Ministers, and the Royal Family. It is question of priorities and major political party leaders don't feature within the framework.

Another The Nation article adds:

He said he was not superstitious, hence refusing to interpret the accident as an omen.

COMMENT: Oh dear, I guess the question had to be asked, but will anyone actually change their mind over who they vote for? Well, I hope not.

*I would say that the authorities should drive the candidate, but who wants government functionaries in Thailand driving you around. The government will have tabs on party leaders anyway, this can save on any surveillance they want to do.

NOTE: I am assuming that Abhisit wasn't offered some form of escort. From what I know in the past it has not been provided so would be surprised that it would have changed.

The Nation reports:

People Power Party candidates in Bangkok's Klong Toei constituency met with resistance from market vendors during a campaign rally Sunday.
...
Vendors said they were annoyed because the candidates were attacking other parties.

"Do they know they are the cause of the rift in the country? They should change the way they rally by stopping mudslinging and campaigning more constructively,'' a vendor said.

So will they vote for then? The Democrats? Maybe not as The Bangkok Post reports:

The People Power party (PPP) has been accused of misleading the public through its election campaign by the Democrat party.

The Democrat party's deputy secretary-general, Mr Korn Chatikavanit, today held a press conference slamming the PPP for making the reduction of household debts one of its main "selling points".

"I'm calling on the PPP to stop distorting the truth about the economy. The party's election campaign involves a promise to reduce household debts. People could easily be misled into thinking that voting for the PPP is their only hope to seeing their debts decrease, which isn't true," Mr Korn said.

To back his claim, Mr Korn said between 2002-2006 under the Thaksin Shinawatra administration, household debts increased by 40 per cent - a figure he described as "an historic high".

"Credit card debts also increased by 425 per cent as a result of the irresponsible distortion of truths about the real economic situation," Mr Korn said. "With just a few days to go before the election, this type of campaigning should stop immediately. The PPP should make promises based on the reality of the economic situation."

COMMENT: Huh?! I realise Korn is in politicking mode, but come on. Do PPP actually say that it is only PPP that will decrease your household debts? Irresponsible distortion of what economic situation? So do all the Democrats big spending promises take into account the reality of the economic situation? If you are going to accuse other parties of distorting the truth, shouldn't Korn also note that total personal credit including credit cards only makes up 3% of household debt. A lot of that increased household debt went into mortgages - so instead of paying rental money (non-debt) they are not paying off loans and interest (debt). Also, interest rates are much lower now and so it is the percentage of income that it is used to service that debt which is more important than simply the percentage increase in household debts. If household debts went up, didn't household incomes also go up?

A little context, as outlined in this earlier post, might suggest Korn isn't providing the full picture either. Personally, I don't have such a problem with this as Korn as a politician, but he accuses others of distorting the truth he needs to be careful what he says.

btw, Thai Rath reports a Democrat spokesperson as saying"if you an honest PM, choose the Democrats" and "choose Abhisit to solve the economic crisis", would Korn take this to mean that other party leaders are not honest and can't solve the economic problems? Korn is usually so sensible so I have no idea what he is on about here. Perhaps, the pressures of the campaign.

In an update to my earlier post on the National Legislative Assembly (NLA) hurriedly trying to pass numerous law, former Senator and prominent lawyer,Thongbai Thongpao, writes in his weekly op-ed (cache) in the Bangkok Post on the NLA:

When it was formed after last year's coup, the NLA had 250 members. To date, 10 have resigned, meaning that 121 or more now constitute a meeting quorum. For most laws, half of that number is required for passage, but for laws of high significance more votes are needed.

On Thursday, less than 100 members attended the NLA meeting. A Parliament official told me that actually more than 100 members had signed in, but less than 100 remained in the meeting chambers because some had to attend panel meetings. At the meeting, 24 laws were passed. Among them are the law on the appointment and term of senior public attorneys (42 votes in favour, two against, two abstentions), the law on nuclear energy for peace (57 in favour, three abstentions), the law on milk cows and milk-cow products (52 in favour, two against, one abstention) and the law on court official regulations (67 in favour, one abstention).

Unlike the atmosphere common in an elected House, the NLA meeting was relatively quiet. It went on smoothly with not many debates or proposals, which could be because they had done their homework well. In my view, this is what we would expect of an appointed legislature. Judging from the smooth process, it's no surprise that the NLA could deliberate so many laws at such a dazzling speed. With so few questions asked and everything so systematic, it looks more like a law factory.

All laws affect the people, but all too often they are passed to serve the ruling class.

COMMENT: I detect some sarcasm from Thongbai NLA members about doing their homework. Factory is really the appropriate word. Did any of the NLA members bother to read the legislation? Only a quarter of all NLA members bother to turn up for some votes.

The Bangkok Post reports:

While some parties prefer to remain cautious about predicting the election outcome, Puea Pandin party leader Suvit Khunkitti is choosing to make his confidence known to the public.

In an interview with reporters, Mr Suvit said he was certain that his party still had the chance to win the majority of the votes and set up a new government.

“Politics is in a bad state right now,” he said. “What’s important is that the polls show more than 60 percent of the people haven’t decided who to vote for.”

Asked if Puea Pandin already has a party in mind with which to merge after the election, Mr Suvit said he prefers to leave that question unanswered until after the election on Dec 23.

Mr Suvit also said that corruption was still rife, and warned voters not to be duped into selling their vote despite new tactics being used by canvassers.

COMMENT: Puea Paendin have as much as a chance of winning the majority of votes on December 23 as Derby County FC have of winning the English Premier League 2007-08 - Derby are currently in last place in the league, have a -33 goal difference, and count their number of wins so far this season on one finger.

Just to give you a respite from the election coverage, I will just do a brief update on the situation in Burma. First, belated and very late congratulations to Jotman for his "Reporters Without Borders Award" from Deuche Welle. As opposed to myself, Jotman has been in the "field" doing some reporting whether it is interviewing monks who have escaped from Burma (1, 2, or 3) or is video interview with a Burmese opposition strategist. He has plenty of other Burma live reports, but he also does political commentary on Thailand too. I recommend you check out his latest post on the possibilities of another coup.

Daniel Ten Kate has an article in the Asia Sentinel looking at UN-Burma interaction. Key quotes:

A new UN report presented Tuesday at a meeting of the 47-member UN Human Rights Council in Geneva said that at least 31 people were killed last September when Burma’s military regime used guns to stifle pro-democracy protests. The junta had previously admitted to only 10 deaths.

Burma quickly rejected the findings of Special Rapporteur Paulo Sérgio Pinheiro, who said he was not granted the freedom to investigate fully and noted suspicious activity that suggested the actual death toll was much higher.
..
“All the disjointed responses from the international community play right into the hands of the SPDC,” said David Mathieson, a consultant on Burma for Human Rights Watch. “The danger is – and the SPDC knows it – that the international community will set the bar so low that when the regime throws a few tidbits their way people will actually start cheering.”

COMMENT: This is the problem. If Burma refuses to do anything, what will the international community do? Threaten it with more talkfests?

UPDATE: Below

The Bangkok Post reports:

Analysts have said that yesterday's high turnout can be seen as representative of the mood around the country towards the election and that it shows that the general public is anxious to get the country back on the democratic track.

A total of 893,659 people turned out for the first of two days of advance voting yesterday - 43% of the 2.09 million people who registered to cast advance ballots outside the constituencies where they have house registrations. Advance voting ends at 5pm today.

A total of 415,803 people from other provinces who registered for advance voting cast their ballots in Bangkok yesterday. Another 94,536 voters registered in the capital also took the opportunity to get in their votes early.

However, a number of polling stations across the country were caught off-guard by the higher-than-expected voter turnout, with many places struggling to cope with the streams of people turning up to cast their votes. Additional ballot sheets also had to be brought in to meet the overwhelming demands of voters.

COMMENT: So perhaps people are somewhat annoyed that the military choose to get remove their choice of government for more than a year?

In addition, to the 893,659 people who turned up for out-of-seat constituency voting, a further 570,000, on Saturday, turned up for in-seat constituency voting - I assume they might be away or working on December 23, 2007.

Thai Rath reports (late Sunday evening) that voter turn-out for advance voting was 80%. This is very high. Might we have a 70-75% turnout for next Sunday?

btw, you have this from the Bangkok Post article above "He said EC officials had already been sent to investigate the burning of some 2,500 ballot papers in Roi Et. An initial investigation found local officials were careless in bringing ballot papers used for advance voting to burn along with ballot papers used for the Aug 19 public referendum on the new constitution."

COMMENT: Careless? It just sounds odd. Why weren't the referendum ballots burnt ages ago?

UPDATE: The Nation reports:

The turnout of absentee voters was 87.77 per cent amounting to 1.83 million ballots and some 1.12 million voters cast advance ballots on Saturday and Sunday, Election Commission member Prapun Naigowit said on Monday.

Another The Nation article:

The Sunday's voter turnout for Bangkok might be higher than 70 per cent because of the enthusiam shown in the advance voting over the last weekend, city clerk Pongsakti Semsan said on Monday.

In past elections, the turnout of Bangkok voters hovered around 60 per cent.

"The enthusiam for advance balloting might lead to a higher turnout than has been anticipated," Ponsakti said.

For advance voting, 201,683 Bangkok residents, accounting for 4.91 per cent of 4.1 million eligible voters, cast their ballots last Saturday and Sunday.

Phaya Thai district ranked first with the turnout of 9.11 per cent, followed by Saphan Sung (7.08 per cent), Lat Phrao (6.81 per cent), Wang Thonglang (6.71 per cent) and Thawi Watthana (6.42 per cent).

For absentee voting, Bangkok saw a recorded turnout of 91.09 per cent, the highest number since the introduction of absentee votes in 1997. Of 903,889 eligible voters, 823,332 cast their absentee ballots.

COMMENT: So some 3 million people have already voted. Many absentee (those living outside the area they are formally listed on their household register) votes will be those people from the Northeast who live elsewhere in Thailand - well I would say at least a higher percentage than the rest of the country. It seems much easier this time around for such people to vote. For example, this Bangkok Post article:

Voters from the Northeast working in this central province flocked to cast ballots in Phra Nakhon Sri Ayutthaya district yesterday, but many said they had only limited information about the candidates they voted for.

Many voters, who had registered to go to the polls a week early instead of having to travel long distances to their hometowns to vote next weekend, said their decisions were mainly influenced by relatives at home or political canvassers.

Voters are normally required to cast their ballots in their home constituencies but those that registered beforehand were allowed to vote from afar in advance polling that took place over the weekend.
...
Sakda Joong-jai, a 27-year-old factory worker from Nakhon Ratchasima, said he been working in Ayutthaya for three years and did not know the candidates running in his home constituency. He had to ask friends and family back home for advice on who to vote for, he said.

Preecha Kotsri, 39, also from Nakhon Ratchasima, who has been living and working in Ayutthaya since 2002, said it was hard to make a decision as he did not know any of the candidates. He, like many others, called his family in the Northeast to ask for advice.

COMMENT: This is just anecdotal evidence, but given the widespread availability of mobile phones (though these evil policies of Thaksin) it would not be surprising if many people from the Northeast asked friends and family back home who to vote for. My educated guess would be that this helps PPP at they will win a higher percentage of votes in the Northeast than elsewhere, so the high absentee ballot numbers will likely be good news for PPP.

The Nation reports:

Somkiat Naiwikul, a candidate of Matchima Thippataya candidate for Ubon Ratchathani, led some 1,000 villagers to rally outside the TPI Plc head office to demand party leader Prachai Leophairat to pay for election campaign expense.

Somkiat said if Prachai refused to pay him and other Matchima candidates in Ubon Ratchathani for the election expenses, he would file complaints with the Election Commission alleging Prachai with having spent the money to buy votes.

COMMENT: Bad enough having to compete other parties, but when you are at war with your own candidates it doesn't look good or suggest stable leadership. I wonder if Prachai doesn't win a seat, how much support he will have after the election? Or is he just backing the right MPs and those with no chance receive no money.

Before the coup, Armed Forces Security Centre chief Lt-General (as he was then) Vaipot Srinual attended a number of talks with "leaders of Bersatu, a coalition of Muslim separatist organisations in the South consisting of the BRN, the Pulo, the Pattani Islamic Liberation Front and the Muslim Mujahideen Movement of Pattani". In the aftermath of the coup, he was made a full general and appointed head of the National Intelligence Agency, Thailand's domestic intelligence agency (ie. think MI5). He was also appointed to the National Legislative Assembly - hmm odd that the head of the domestic intelligence agency is also a member of the legislature. However, after 8 civilians were executed by the terrorists in a brutal attack in the South, Gen. Surayud said he wanted to move Gen. Vaipot back to the Defence Ministry.

The Nation's Don Pathan reports on a recent visit by Gen. Vaipot, who is still at the NLA, to Singapore:

In the middle of this year, Vaipot jolted the National Legislative Assembly and military-appointed government when he lashed out at the government's policy for the southernmost provinces, where more than 2,600 troops and civilians have been killed in the past five years of daily rebel violence.

Vaipot was suggesting to fellow NLA members that the government was digging graves for the young soldiers dispatched to the deep South to contain a new generation of Malay separatists.

During a recent visit to Singapore, where he attended a workshop with security chiefs from Indonesia and the Philippines, as well as international experts, on the sticky issue of dialogue with insurgents, Vaipot chose his words carefully but didn't shy away from controversy.

He said too much had been pegged on the upcoming general election and the country, including its political leaders and parties, had to take the long view.

"If you ask people in the country, most will tell you that they don't trust the next government, regardless of which political party comes to power, to tackle the key problems facing the country. And because of the general perception that the next government will be short-lived, perhaps the general election shouldn't be the answer," he said.

The country's political leaders need to look for "additional options to move the country forward". Being a hostage to politics has also taken its toll not only on the country's development, but also that of the southernmost provinces.

"We can't afford to come up with a brand new blueprint for the South each time a new government comes into power. There has to be a continuity of political will and policy that is not bound to an administration, keeping in mind that essentially the problem in the South will be solved through political, not military, means," he said.

The former chief of the Armed Forces Supreme Command's Security Centre, who took up the post of National Intelligence Centre director following the September 2006 coup, insisted that the military was not the solution.

While the unremitting violence has frazzled the fabric of local communities, in many cases pitting Muslims and Buddhists against one another, Thais have to "look beyond the daily violence and politics of the day and make the needs and benefits of the local community the centre of the debate. We don't and can't see the groups behind the unrest as a conventional enemy, because they are Thais. They are our citizens."

COMMENT: Does he mean the election shouldn't be the answer or the election will not be the answer to solve the violence in the South? I agree the election will not magically turn things around and people should be careful if they think new government can wave some magic wand and things will improve.

He says the military is not the solution for the South, but does he think the military is the solution to the country's political problems? Who does he think the people trust to "to tackle the key problems facing the country"? The military? I am not quite sure if this is what he means.

He wants continuity of policy, but continuity of exactly what policy? Surely, we need to work out an exact policy first. What kind of political solution does he mean?

Earlier this year I blogged about an op-ed piece by academic Surachat Bamrungsuk who made Burma comparisons in the aftermath of the coup:

He said the Thai middle class and mass media, who professed to be pro-democracy, must think harder about how democratic their support for the September 19 coup was.

"Today, intellectuals, former leftists and the media are supporting the coup. We're turning the clock back to the time when the belief that the military can solve political problem held sway," said Suchart, who warned that the cycle of coups would mostly continue.

"The important question is: do Thai intellectuals want democracy or dictatorship? Those who opposed the military in 1992 are now serving the military."

Suchart said his fellow lecturers were now happy to receive Bt104,000 and serve as members of the National Legislative Assembly.

The coup has put Thailand's level of democracy back on par with Burma, he claimed. "Thailand and Burma are now in the same boat - with a junta at the helm," he said.

At the time, I said:

I agree with what he has to say about academics and the middle class supporting the coup, but I disagree with his comparisons about Thailand's level of democracy being on par with Burma. Yes, there are a number of parallels with Burma (ie military taking control for national unity, drafting a new constitution, excluding the elected government from the process, suppressing the media etc) but I would say for all the flaws in Thailand's democracy, its level of democracy greatly exceeds Burma.

Surachart the other day:

Assoc Prof Dr Surachart Bamrungsuk of Chulalongkorn's Political Science Faculty said in a seminar marking Thailand's Constitution Day on Dec 10 at Chulalongkorn University that 2008 will probably be one of the most challenging political periods in our lifetime, maybe harsher than 1992 [‘bloody May] if the general elections on Dec 23 do not happen, or there is another coup.

In the event of another coup, according to a leaked confidential document to which the media has not paid as much attention as it did to another leaked document concerning the junta's plan to undermine the People Power Party, Thailand would resemble Burma back in August 1988 when the Burmese junta ejected the election results. If another coup occurs after the Dec 23 elections, all will be disaster.

Even if the Dec 23 poll happens as scheduled, grim prospects still loom ahead in Thai politics, he said. If the People Power Party wins the elections as predicted in many opinion surveys, will it be dissolved, or will the election results be nullified by ‘a certain process', using the excuse of all the problems expected to plague this poll? The country will see a weak democracy, a weak economy and insecurity, but will have a strong military, he said.

COMMENT: The comparisons continue. Hmmmm. Need I remind anyone of this post a few months back:

Soldiers must be allowed to participate in politics, otherwise "the country cannot escape from coups," said Phasit Sonthikhan, who was representing Council for National Security (CNS) deputy secretary-general Saprang Kalayanamitr at a forum on soldiers and democracy yesterday. Gen Phasit, deputy director of the CNS Secretary Office, cited examples of the political roles assumed by the armed forces in Burma and some African countries. He said the military was permitted to play a role in politics to prevent it from staging coups. "It's the way out for their soldiers," he said.

COMMENT: Burma is the model the Thai military want to follow, but I am not sure how much longer they can go at it before people start getting not just upset, but mad. If they try to dissolve PPP on trumped up charges after the election, it is difficult to predict what might happen, but I don't think many people will take it quietly.

After coming under pressure from the international community and to ensure that the election is free and fair, Thailand has lifted martial law.

Ok, I lie. It is that democratic stronghold of Pakistan which has lifted the state of emergency before the January elections. In Thailand, we still have martial law in a number of provinces throughout the country.

The junta-appointed National Legislative Assembly (NLA) is hurriedly trying to pass a whole range of laws before the election, including a new internal security law. Today, the Bangkok Post reports (cache) on what Prime Minister Surayud has to say:

The move came after 50 protesters led by former senator Jon Ungphakorn stormed parliament and disrupted an NLA session on Wednesday.

The protesters claimed the assembly lacked legitimacy as it was not a democratically-elected body and that it issued controversial laws that showed disregard for human rights and the principle of democracy.

Protesters said they would stage a rally in front of parliament again on Monday to oppose attempts by the NLA to pass those laws.

Meanwhile, Deputy Prime Minister Paiboon Wattanasiritham met Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont yesterday to convey activists' concerns over 11 government-sponsored bills, including the much-criticised Internal Security Bill.

After the meeting, the prime minister reiterated the need to enact those laws, but he said some of them were now being amended to better suit the changing circumstances.

Gen Surayud said opponents of the laws ought to solve the conflict through dialogue.

''I dislike the use of force. We can use reason. Actually, the laws are not impossible to amend.

''If you are unhappy with the bills that are enacted into law, you can push for their amendment later [in the next government],'' he said.

He dismissed allegations that it was illegitimate and careless of the NLA to rush numerous bills through each day.

Gen Surayud said the NLA was an independent body that was not influenced by anyone.

''An elected assembly sometimes could be dictated to by the policies of political parties. But the present NLA cannot be. Its members are very much their own men,'' he said.

COMMENT: You can read Jon's views here - Prachatai also has a few other excellent articles on the NLA here and here.

Surayud frustrates me. He is such a tool. I understand Ukrist of Chulalongkorn University passed on an anectode from a fellow academic from his faculty who was appointed the NLA and it was 50% of them knew each other. Unsurprising, it is dominated by the military, or as The Nation called Prem's sons. Yet, Surayud is under the delusion that they aren't under the influence of anyone. Did they all just independently came together to think up the internal security law? A bit of a coincidence.

The problem with amending these laws later is that those in the NLA now are some of the same bunch who will make up the elected senators later.

I earlier blogged about the discussion that would take place at the FCCT this past Thursday which touched on that Special Issue of Journal of Contemporary Asia. New Mandala has Kevin Hewison's speech/presentation. Red & White was there and has a report. I have highlighted a couple of interesting passages (but there is plenty more at his site):

[Professor] Kevin [Hewison, University of North Carolina]: The conservative agenda in Thailand is challenged and the heaviest challenge comes from the rural poor, hence Thaksin's immensely successful populist policies.
...
4) Are some "old money" powerful families part of the think tank behind the coup?

[Professor] Pasuk [Phongpaichit of Chulalongkorn University]: One theory says that the military wanted to make a comeback and engaged the support if some business groups frozen out by Thaksin.

Ukrist [Pathmanand of Chulalongkorn University]: Certain figures like General Saprang were crucial to the legitimacy of the coup.

Kevin: Look at the financial data for Thailand. Pre - coup the biggest profit makes were in the telecom sector, such as the Thaksin owned Shin Corp. Post - coup, the biggest profiteers were those in the land and hosing sector. It is interesting to look at people such as Privy Council head General Prem and see where they have listed directorships.

5) What are your hopes and fears for the next eighteen months?

Pasuk: I hope PPP get a lot of seats simply to send a message to the military. However, I fear the coalition government will be weak and will collapse or be dissolved within one year. The possibility of violence cannot be ruled out.

6) Was Thaksin a threat to the monarchy?

Kevin: Yes. His economics - such as the use of SCB in the Shincorp sale - could be an issue. Also, Thaksin appealed to the same demographics in Thailand with a very different message: work your way into business and city life.(capitalism, compared to sufficiency economy)
...
9) Is popular sovereignty on the rise?

Kevin: No. People in the north east are becoming purposely disenfranchised. Election campaigns are huge in Bangkok and nearby - where Abhisit is popular - and non existent in former TRT strongholds. The election will not progress democracy.

Pasuk: We do not want a regime that killed 2,500 people ("war on drugs" reference) but sadly more violence may be ahead.

MC: Based on personal interviews, rural people don't care about Samak but they think a PPP vote will bring Thaksin back.

Kevin: People should also consider the human rights record of Samak (it's poor).

MC: The VCD's of Thaksin are "very slick". Thaksin seems to be purposely copying the speaking style of the King and it is a powerful message that the rural folk are being exposed to in a campaign where the military have already attempted to disenfranchise rural voters.

NOTE: I understand the moderator/MC was Jonathan Head from the BBC.

COMMENT: I understand Pasuk predicted (hoped?) PPP would win 200+ MPs. Pasuk was the optimist, but Kevin the pessimist. Despite Pasuk being an optimist, she thought the new government would last only a year.

We will have to wait for the results, but I am not so sure that this disenfranchisement of rural voters (that Jonathan and Kevin mentioned) is going so well. Every time Thaksin does something, the government/EC/Surayud government reacts and it almost seems as if they are ganging up on Thaksin and further making him into some kind of hero. It will have some affect

On Thaksin being a threat to HM the King - I think it is really a threat to the power base of the minority as opposed to wanting to overthrow the monarchy - I recommend this Daily Yomiuru piece by the Bangkok bureau chief.

UPDATE: Below

The other day, I blogged about the latest Bangkok and surrounding provinces poll from Ramkhamhaeng University showing PPP with a big lead in the constituency seats, but also a reasonable lead for the party vote. This time a Bangkok University poll as the Bangkok Post reports:

The Democrat party leads People Power party (PPP) in a tight race in party-list candidacy, according to a survey conducted by Bangkok University.

The survey, which assessed opinions of 1,472 people from Dec 4-10 in 16 provinces, said 34.2% of respondents will vote for Democrat party while 31.9% will vote for PPP. Of all respondents, 34.8% think Democrat party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva is most suitable to be a new prime minister while 28% support PPP leader Samak Sundaravej.

COMMENT: I think it is best to compare polls from the same source as there are big differences between the Ramkamhaeng and Bangkok University polls. Previous Bangkok University polls seemed to be skewed towards urban areas* and unfavourable to TRT. For example, this Bangkok University poll from September asked those who were polled whether they voted for the "no vote" option in the 2006 election and the result was much higher than the actual 2006 "No Vote" result. This doesn't mean we should ignore such polls, but to compare apples with apples. The last Bangkok University poll I blogged just over 2 weeks ago is extracted below:

...then you have this Bangkok University poll (Thai language only) of 1,507 people from 16 provinces throughout Thailand conducted during 16-19 November and released on 22 November around the same time as the The Nation's poll above. In this poll, the Democrats scored 43.5% compared to 24.8% for PPP. Actually, if you were to swap the two figures, it would be more realistic. Surely, even an optimistic Democrat supporter would be a little surprised by this poll.

COMMENT: In just over 2 weeks, PPP jump from 24.8% to 31.9% whereas the Dems go from 43.5% to 34.2%. Like with the Ramkamhaeng poll, the Bangkok University poll suggests there is move away from the Democrats to PPP.

*UPDATE: In reference to my comment that the poll is skewed towards rural areas The Nation notes in relation to the poll that "[a]bout 60 per cent of respondents live in rural areas". WHO reports that "[t]he population in urban areas has increased from 30 percent of total population in 1990 to 33 percent in 2005 and is estimated to further go upto 34.7 percent, whereas rural population has declined from 69.9 percent of total population in 1990 to 67 in 2005."

COMMENT: I thin this explains why the the Democrats do so well in the poll (i.e they have greater support in urban areas).

At a PPP campaign rally the other night:

He urged the estimated 5,000 people who rallied at the King Taksin monument, or Wong Wian Yai, to give the party a majority in the new 480-seat lower house, to ensure a continuation of the policies of ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

PPP loyalists loudly applauded the presence of Mr Thaksin's son, Panthongthae, at the rally. He stood beside Mr Thaksin's mother-in-law, Pojanee na Pomphet.

Source: Thai Rath

COMMENT: Can the CNS or EC think of any way to ban this? Obviously, if the VCD wasn't enough, this is to convey the message that PPP is Thaksin's party.