UPDATE: Matichon has some photos from the trial today with the Shinawatra clan looking very glum. MOre later

Bangkok Post:

In a politically-loaded ruling, Criminal Court on Thursday found Pojaman Shinawatra - wife of coup-ousted premier Thaksin - guilty of tax evasion in a 1997 share transaction, court official said.

The heavily-guarded court, surrounded by some 2,000 Thaksin-supporters holding red roses, sentenced Pojaman to three years in jail for avoiding a tax bite amounting to 546 million baht (16.3 million dollars) on a share transfer to her step-brother Bannapot Damapong and her secretary Karnchanapa Honghern in 1997.

Bannapot was also sentenced to three years in jail and Karnchanapa to two years.

Thaksin and the couple's three children sat stony-faced throughout the ruling at the Bangkok court which was guarded by some 500 police. Pojaman had pleaded not guilty to the charge of tax evasion, claiming that the 738 million baht (22 million dollars) share transfer of Shinawatra Computer and Communications stock was a gift, not a business transaction.

The court said it had decided on a heavy sentence because both Pojaman and Bannapot were well-known public figures with responsibility to society.

BP: The Nation has more details on the decision.

This case always seemed to be the more substantive legal case compared with the Rachadphisek case or the lottery case so the guilty verdict is not surprising although I question the rationale for the length of sentence and whether suddenly this will now be the standard applied to all "well-known public figures".

If the defendants can appeal, they might get it below two years and hence can qualify for a suspended sentence - the sentence range is a "jail sentence of between three months and seven years" although this is up to the court's disrection. Thai Rath reports the Court as saying for those who dislike verdicts, they can appeal (สามารถใช้สิทธิ์อุทธรณ์) and The Manager has a quote from a Thaksin lawyer saying that he has applied for bail for all 3 and they will appeal. The screws tighten.

I have already blogged on coalition troubles and the cabinet reshuffle.
The Nation:

Information and Communications Technology Minister Mun Patanotai said on Wednesday that 20 of 24 MPs from Puea Pandin Party decided to remain in the coalition alliance even though party leader Suwit Khunkitti pulled out.

For portfolios under its quotas, the party will nominate a successor to Deputy Finance Minister Ranongrak Suwanchawee who resigned, Mun said.
Suwit's position as industry minister might be switched to one of the coalition parties, he said.

Deputy Interior Minister Sithichai Kowsurat will be replaced by a newcomer nominated by Puea Pandin, he said.

BP: 20 out of 24 MPs? That was even more than predicted. I am little surprised that Suwit's position didn't have more support than that from the segments in the party who dislike Thaksin. According to Matichon there are 6 factions in Puea Paendin. It seems that the only faction which supports Suvit's position is the 4 MP faction in the southern border provinces controlled by Waemahadee Waedaoh who has publicly stated he agrees on the position to leave the coalition due to their failure to solve the violence in the Deep South. Then again, Mun is quoted in Matichon as saying Puea Paendin will keep their quota of 4 which is no doubt part of the (the whole?) reason the 20 MPs are staying so their factional leaders can share in the spoils.

It is not just the MPs, but Mun also says he has "talked to the party financiers and party leaders and co-ordinated with 20 MPs and they insisted the party continue as a coalition partner".

btw, The Nation has the backstory on the Suwit announcement - the article seems to be confused about Somkid as he joined Ruam Jai Thai Chat Pattana and was not part of Puea Paendin although he has been close to Suwit and Surakiart from their TRT days.

In regards to Chat Thai, the Agriculture Minister and Deputy Party Leader Somsak says they need to speak to Suwit directly to see if he was speaking for himself when he announced the party was pulling out. He said Chat Thai gave greater weight to the party decision. He also said that Chat Thai still supports the PPP-led government. Sanan basically says the same thing. He says that Suwit never told Banharn the reasons for Puea Paendin's pull-out.

The Nation has more:

Chart Thai Party deputy leader Nikorn Chamnong said the party would reach the decision about its stance within two days. He said although Chart Thai had signed a pact with Puea Pandin to stick together on whether to pull out from the government, the criteria cited by Suwit were not among the five conditions set in the pact.

Deputy Prime Minister Sanan Kachornprasart, Chart Thai's chief advisor, said his party's stance remained unchanged. He said there were no solid reasons for the party to withdraw its support from the government. "Making such an abrupt decision is not good political etiquette,'' he said.

BP: It certainly doesn't sound like Chat Thai will jump ship. The eel (ie Banharn) might be angling for better Cabinet positions though for being loyal and agreeing with the constitution amendments. Suwit has found himself isolated.

On Cabinet reshuffle speculation:

As of yesterday, Mingkwan Sangsuwan was expected to be moved from the top job at the Commerce Ministry to the Industry Ministry, Pol Gen Kowit Watana replace Mr Chalerm as interior minister and Mr Chawarat become new health minister replacing Chaiya Sasomsab, who will be a deputy commerce minister.

BP: Kowit seems to be firming as Interior Minister. Just yesterday Chaiya was rumoured to be Commerce Minister. If not he has been demoted to Deputy, have they found a technocrat to bring in?

Irrawady:

US President George W Bush will travel to South Korea, Thailand and China next week before taking part in the opening ceremony for the Beijing Olympics.

While in Thailand, Bush, accompanied by his wife, Laura, will make a major policy statement on Burma while also meeting Burmese opposition group members.

On his second day in Thailand, Bush will attend a briefing by nongovernmental organizations and US agencies on the Cyclone Nargis relief effort.

"He will have a lunch in Bangkok with Burmese activists and hear their stories. And then he will be interviewed by the press in Thailand that broadcasts into Burma, so he can give a message directly to the Burmese people," said Dennis Wilder, the senior director for Asian affairs at the National Security Council.

"During the time that he is doing these events, Mrs. Bush will travel to Mae Sot, Thailand," Wilder said. The first lady has shown an exceptional interest in the affairs of Burma and the Bush's administration policy with regard to this country to some extent is driven by her strong support to the pro-democracy movement people.

Laura Bush will meet with refugees of the Mae La Refugee Camp, one of the largest refugee camps on the Thai-Burmese border.

"Following her visit to Mae La, she will travel to the Mae Tao Clinic," Wilder said. The clinic was founded by Dr. Cynthia Maung.

"You may remember that Mrs. Bush had a television event with Dr Cynthia Maung not long ago, and she is very much looking forward to getting on the ground and seeing the clinic in operation," Wilder said.

BP: That lunch with the Burmese activists will be at the US Embassy. Perhaps, someone should ask him about Samak's statements about Burma.

The verdict in the tax evasion case against Thaksin's wife Potjaman and his brother-in-law is handed down tomorrow - around 9:30-10:00. It is the first criminal case against the "Thaksin regime". AP:

The Assets Examination Committee, a team of military-appointed graft investigators, ruled Monday, that Thaksin's brother-in-law, Bhanapot Damapong, had to pay the tax bill of 546 million baht on the purchase of Shin Corp shares in 1997 from one of Thaksin's domestic helpers, a deal valued at 738 million baht.

Thaksin's wife, Pojaman, bought the shares from a Shinawatra domestic helper, Duangta Wongpaki, and also paid the required 1 percent transaction fee and called the purchase a gift for her brother, said Sak Korsaengruang, a spokesman for the AEC. Thaksin was known to have transferred shares in Shin, his telecommunications empire, to his maid, driver, relatives and others to shed holdings before taking public office.

At the time, the 1997 deal was deemed to be tax-free since it was called "a gift," Sak said. But an investigation found that the check issued to Duangta was later deposited in a new bank account belonging to Pojaman.

"Evidence shows that Bhanapot and Pojaman covered up illegal activity to avoid paying taxes," Sak said.

The AEC ruled the deal was a handout from Pojaman to her brother and should be taxed and suggested that those involved face criminal charges, Sak said.

The committee ruled that Bhanapot should pay 273 million baht in taxes plus a fine of the same amount.

BP: I predict a suspended sentence and a large fine.

The Bangkok Post:

The House subcommittee studying the 2007 constitution has found the charter hands too much authority to independent agencies, but fails to make them accountable to parliament or the public. The subcommittee, appointed by the House special joint committee on charter amendment, is chaired by Kanin Bunsuwan, a former constitution drafter.

The subcommittee studying the charter's format, structure, section divisions and language usage yesterday reported its findings to the House special joint committee chaired by Kramol Thongthammachart.

The subcommittee secretary Winai Pattaraprasit said the authority that the 2007 charter gives to independent agencies such as the Election Commission, the National Counter Corruption Commission and Office of the Auditor-General and Office of the Attorney-General have made those organisations the ''fourth power estate'' in the country's administration system besides the legislative, executive and judicial branches.

BP: There have been a few examples in the last couple of days which bring into question the role and functions of the independent agencies. First, the The National Counter Corruption Commission have set up a committee to investigate the Udon Thani governor, the provincial police chief and other local officials for alleged dereliction of duty in connection with last week's attack on anti-government protesters. This does not seem to have connection with corruption and there are already House and Senate committees looking into it - the House Panel is chaired by a Democrat MP as well and well given the 74 Appointed Senators you can't imagine them sweeping things under the carpet. Why is the NCCC prioritising this issue?

Second, is the National Human Rights Commission of Thailand writing to the United Nations Secretary-General to "express and register the most serious concern and dismay... over the blatant violation of human rights committed by organs of the United Nations in total disregard of the letters and spirit of the UN Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights". What horrible crime has the UN perpetrated you ask? Has it killed puppies?

No, its crime was for UNESCO to list Preah Vihear on the World Heritage List, as unilaterally proposed by Cambodia. I am not kidding, Prachatai have a scanned PDF of the letter.

The letter really needs to be read in its entirety to witness the absurdity of the letter. It talks of suspicion of a "hidden motive in this hasty decision of the World Heritage Committee". Queue
X-Files music and CIA conspiracies at The Nation.

Is this really a human rights priority for the NHRC? I thought one of the reasons for such independent agencies is they wouldn't be susceptible to the whims of popular opinion. If criticisms are directed towards such agencies for what they failed to do under Thaksin, should we also not criticise them for what they are doing now? With so much at stake and with so much power, it is easy for independent agencies to be politicised, but as long as they are venturing off on follies against the "Thaksin regime", the media do not question it.

Interior Minister: In yesterday’s Matichon, a source said that that PPP MPs also wanted Chalerm to be replaced. The same article also has a direct quote from Chalerm acknowledging that he will no longer be Interior Minister.

BP: For Chalerm, I would imagine it is style and his children. I am not so sure if this means Chalerm is out of the Cabinet or has just lost Interior Ministry position as the Matichon article also quotes a PPP MP Prasert J who with 10 other MPs showed up at the Interior Ministry to provide support for Chalerm and said that no less than 100 MPs supported him so expect him to make a comeback in the future, but perhaps in a less prestigious post.

Purachai, social crusader and former Minister under Thaksin, was initially rumoured to be a replacement for Chalerm as Interior Minister. Thai Rath’s political analysis speculates that Interior Minister might not be the only job for Purachai. He might later become PM – not sure how as a PM has to be an MP.

NOTE: Purachai is one of the 47 Cabinet Ministers “affected” by the lottery case.

Although, more recent speculation is that former Police Chief Kowit is the more likely Interior Minister (Matichon and The Nation).

The Three Affected by the Lottery Case: The Nation reports:

Source said the reshuffle will also likely see replacements for deputy premier and finance minister Surapong Suebwonglee, Deputy Transport Minister Anurak Jureemas, and Labour Minister Uraiwan Thienthong.

Matichon’s source says that Samak will wait for the Council of State ruling on whether they can serve as Ministers, but also notes that Chat Thai wants to replace Anurak anyway with one of the Silapa-Archa clan.

Puea Paendin Ministers: Suwit is clearly gone. Of the other three, Ranongrak Suwanchawee (deputy finance minister) and Sithichai Kowsurat (deputy interior minister) are reported to have now resigned to try to save themselves from impeachment.

Mun Patanotai (Information and Communications Technology Minister) is quoted as saying he was certain there will still be 4 Puea Paendin Ministers/Deputy Ministers in coalition although they might be moved to different positions. However, The Nation prints speculation that Puea Paendin's ministerial quota was being cut to one. Mun was also asked whether he would replace Suwit, but says he cannot give an answer as Suwit has not announced he is leaving the party.

BP: I would say down to 2 or 3.

Other Ministers: The Bangkok Post reports:

Deputy House Speaker Somsak Kiatsuranont would be made social development and human security minister, Preecha Rengsomboonsuk a deputy interior minister, Chaiya Sasomsab the commerce minister, Parnpree Mahitthanukorn a deputy commerce minister, Chawarat Charnveerakul the public health minister, Pol Gen Kowit Watana the interior minister, Sahas Banditkul a deputy prime minister and the transport minister, and Worawat Ua-pinyakul a deputy education minister.

Matichon reports that Chaiya Sasomsub will be the new commerce minister and Mingkwan Saengsuwan as a deputy premier or the new PM's Office minister in charge of the mass media sector.

BP: Will the ugly Cabinet become less ugly? From what we have seen above and with Tej Bunnag becoming Foreign Minister and it being widely speculated at least one or two more technocrats will move into the Finance and Commerce roles, it seems Samak is getting his way. I don't think he has a free hand as he coalition and factional interests to worry about, but he has more choice in which person goes where. If an experienced finance technocrat is found, I think, together with Tej's appointment,* you can take it is a vote of confidence in the stability of the coalition. 4-5 months ago PPP was struggling to find such persons, but now this doesn't seem to be the case.

I think you can also see elements of a grand compromise between the PPP and elements of the elite with at least one technocrat and possibly more becoming keys ministers in the government. It is only a small concession though. More important will be the military reshuffle and Samak looks set to keep his role as Defence Minister so he is keeping all his aces in his hand.

The new Transport Minister is Samak's right-hand man. I imagine he might see some movement on the Bangkok bus deal now.

*Tej has taken a temporary leave of absence from his position as adviser to the Office of HM's Principal Private Secretary and Samak

The Nation:

The anti graft agency yesterday set up a committee to investigate the Udon Thani governor, the provincial police chief and other local officials for alleged dereliction of duty in conฌnection with last week's attack on antigovernment protesters.

The National Counter Corruption Commission (NCCC) decided to look into the matter, in which a group of progovernment people attacked protesters affiliated with the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) durฌing their rally at a park in Udon Thani province, a source said.

Among those to be investigated are Udon Thani Governor Supot Laowansiri, the provincial police commander Maj General Permsak Paradonsak, and Police Colonel Kokiat Wongsumet, superintendent of the Muang Udon Thani district police station.

Thirteen people were injured in the incident, including a few police officers trying to block the angry mob.

Wicha Mahakhun, a member of the NCCC, is to head the investigative panel.

BP: Is this really a matter for the NCCC? There are House and Senate committees looking into it.

The Nation:

The leader of the anti-People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) group in Udon Thani has resigned from his position at Government House in order to distance the government from his involvement in the violent clash in the province last week.

Kwanchai Sarakam, also known as Kwanchai Praiphana, is chairman of the Khon Rak Udon (People Love Udon) group, yesterday said the resignation would allow him to concentrate on leading the antiPAD campaigners.

He said he plans to use the local radio station to argue against the PAD and would be ready to act if any of its members visited the province.

Kwanchai said he did not lead the people who stormed into the PAD rally at a park in the northeastern province last Thursday as he still held his Government House position.

Uthai Saenkaew, younger brother of Deputy Agriculture Minister Theerachai Saenkaew led the progovernment activists on that day.

Deputy Government Spokesman Natthawut Saikua said Kwanchai's resignation had been effective from yesterday.

The government did not force Kwanchai to resign and it was not its attempt to distance itself from the incident, Natthawut said.

Kwanchai surrendered himself to police on Monday to face charges relating to the violent attack against the PAD.

BP: So what was his job?

The Nation reports:

Puea Pandin Party leader Suwit Khunkitti on Tuesday announced his decision to pull out of the government after Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej confirmed he would on Wednesday reshuffle the Cabinet.

Suwit cited his party's concern over the Preah Vihear Temple as reason to abandon the coalition alliance. Speculation spreaded, however, that Samak might remove Suwit from the Cabinet line-up.

Regardless of the shift in the coalition alliance, Samak said the new Cabinet line-up will be submitted for royal endorsement.

He refused to state the extent of the reshuffle although he earlier said changes might involve more than 10 positions.

BP: Suwit is party leader and says he was speaking for the whole party. However, Matichon reports that at 9pm, 5 Puea Paendin MPs announced that they don’t accept the announcement by Suwit and didn’t know of it beforehand. They said there was no party meeting and that at least 15 of the 24 Puea Paendin MPs support the government. Aside from Suwit, the other 3 Puea Paendin Ministers have been told by senior people (ผู้ใหญ่) that they will keep their jobs. The Nation reports that they can’t move to a new party, but can vote as they wish in Parliament. There has always been the elite faction of Puea Paendin and the pro-Thaksin faction who just disagree – the former probably regret jumping ship and abandoning TRT. I think the former with between 12-18 MPs will vote with the PPP. Of the remaining 6-12, I am not so sure. (UPDATE: Matichon divides Puea Paendin into 6 groups without specifying where they will go, but ntoes that Suwit actually does not control any MPs)

Thai Rath’s article on it points out in the headline that Suwit called the press conference and he spoke alone. Suwit was rumoured to be on the way out anyway. In today’s Matichon, a source close to Newin Chidchob, a powerbroker behind the scenes, said that after a meeting of MPs it was agreed that Suwit was not one of the Cabinet Ministers who the PAD sought to impeach in regards to breach of Section 190 of the Constitution in regards to the Joint Communiqué and they do did not have confidence in him.

Well, I don’t think it was really anything to do with Joint Communiqué, but more that Suwit was seen as to closely associated with the CNS.

In regards to Chat Thai, it is unlikely they will jump ship. While they have had a coalition with Puea Paendin, Banharn has come out in favour of amending the constitution – Chat Thai are up for dissolution prior to PPP. Chat Thai will have a meeting today and Sanan is quoted as being shocked by Suwit’s announcement and repeatedly tried to telephone Suwit, but hasn’t been able to get through. Suwit is reported as saying he told Samak and Banharn before making his decision. If Chat Thai do jump ship then PPP will need will be in some difficulty in a non-confidence vote even if they can get 15 Puea Paendin MPs because of red and yellow cards. I would say there is only a 10% chance that Chat Thai would jump ship. They also don’t want to miss out on the spoils of the Bangkok bus project!

Courtesy of YouTube I have found 3 videos of the Udon Thani incident where pro-government supporters attacked PAD protesters. The video quality is much better than the video on the Manager website, linked to in this post, and well it is YouTube so the buffering works much better. Video 1, Video 2, and Video 3.

BP: Videos 2 and 3 largely show the protesters burning what seem to be left over PAD t-shirts and signs and attacking the remains of the stage - there are some people waving sticks, but there doesn't seem to be any violence (again the video quality is not perfect and was watching it while listening to something else so if you see someone getting hit mention which video and the time).

Video 1 is something completely different and you clearly see what clearly appears to be some PAD protesters* being beaten and set up by thugs. Again, one can see a police failure once the pro-government supports break through the barricade - this is not the first time that police just ignore what happens when protesters break through the barricade. Police exist to serve and protect and while there is one instance in the video of a police officer coming to the aid of a protester police need to find some middle ground between shooting people and just watching. Waiting until afterwards to find the perpetrators. They need to rethink their crowd control strategy.

*I say appears as it is often in these videos difficult to work out exactly who is - it is not football game with uniforms.

AP:

Cambodia and Thailand agreed Monday to pull back 1,200 troops stationed near a historic temple, but failed to end the long-running border dispute that has stirred up nationalist anger on both sides.

Foreign ministers from the two Southeast Asian neighbors agreed to hold further meetings on how to demarcate a slice of land near the 11th century Preah Vihear temple, but no date was set for the next meeting.

About 800 Cambodian troops and another 400 from Thailand stationed inside and around a pagoda near the temple complex will be pulled back. It is unclear, however, where those troops will be moved and when it will take place.

"We cannot solve all problems at one meeting. We need to take gradual steps," Cambodian Foreign Minister Hor Namhong. "The immediate task is to avoid clashes through the redeployment of troops."

Thai Foreign Minister Tej Bunnag agreed "the meeting would help reduce tension at the border."

Moving troops from the Keo Sikha Kiri Svara pagoda is considered significant, since that is where Thai troops first deployed earlier this month. Soon after, Cambodian moved troops into the area and the two sides engaged in a tense armed confrontation on July 17 when Cambodian monks sought to celebrate Buddhist lent in the pagoda.
...
Political analysts in Thailand say Cambodia may be more willing to negotiate a compromise after the strong election showing by Prime Minister Hun Sen's Cambodia People's Party — something Cambodian authorities have dismissed.

BP: Kom Chad Luek reports that there were 5 areas of agreement (1) both sets of soldiers will be patient and use force (1.ทหารทั้งสองฝ่ายจะอดทนอดกลั้นไม่ใช้ความรุนแรง) (2) to hold a General Border Committee meeting as soon as possible (2.จะจัดประชุมคณะกรรมการเขตแดน (เจบีซี) ต่อไปโดยเร็วที่สุด) (3) 3. Both parties agree to remove their troops from Keo Sikha Kiri Svara pagoda around the area of Preah Vihear (ทั้งสองฝ่ายจะถอนทหารออกจากวัดคีรีสุขสวาย บริเวณปราสาทพระวิหาร) (4) Both parties agree to liaise in relation to landmines in the area (4.ทั้งสองฝ่ายจะประสานกันในการเก็บกู้กับระเบิดในบริเวณนั้น) (5) This meeting will not bind either party in anyway in relation to border ( 5.การประชุมครั้งนี้จะไม่มีข้อผูกพันต่อการปักปันเขตแดนที่จะมีต่อไป)

BP: Given the Constitutional Court decision over the joint communique, (5) is required by the Thai side, but I imagine there are political considerations on the Cambodian side and the removal of Thai soldiers means the end of the "invasion". I assume there will be no written agreement either to ensure no Constitutional Court decision repeat*

The Thai Foreign Minister is quoted in Thai Rath as saying that he has already reported to Samak and a written report will be presented to Cabinet tomorrow.

I think the agreement is too the benefit of both sides. Having troops in the area is hurting trade and tourism and this is affecting local communities on both sides. For the Thai government, it allows for a change in the news cycle and they hope it will allow the Udon Thani rally debacle to be relegated to the back pages - no doubt partially helped by the police statement today. I wonder how Sondhi L and Co will respond? Earlier in the evening Sondhi L said they can change the Foreign Minister 100 times, but it won't stop the policy of "selling the nation" (นโยบายรัฐบาลขายชาติ). Prediction, he won't be happy, but attacking Tej Bunnag would be a mistake for PAD - hence they will likely do it.

* Banharn, head of Chat Thai, came out today to support the amendment of the Constitution and specifically mentioned the need to amend Section 190 (the provision about treaties and which got Noppadol and the Cabinet in trouble over)

**

Bloomberg:

Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen, a former communist who has ruled for two decades, won 73 percent of seats in yesterday's election due to rising prosperity and nationalism that has strengthened his grip on power.

Hun Sen's Cambodian People's Party won 90 of 123 parliamentary seats, up from 73 in the previous election five years ago, Khan Keo Mono, a spokesman for the National Election Committee, said by phone today. Opposition leader Sam Rainsy's party, named after himself, won 26 seats, two more than in 2003. The royalist Funcinpec party, which took 26 seats and second place in the 2003 poll, won two this time due to party infighting.

``For Hun Sen it's really business as usual,'' said Jacob Ramsay, Southeast Asia analyst at Control Risks Group in Singapore. ``His dominance of the political landscape has been unrivaled since 1997 at least, and even prior to that there were very few doubts he was the most ambitious and shrewd politician in the country.''
...
Election observers, who noted the missing names on voter lists, said the poll was cleaner than in previous years. Human rights groups have said political violence during this campaign season didn't reach the level seen in years past.

``This election was better,'' said Hang Puthea, executive director of the Neutral and Impartial Committee for Free and Fair Elections in Cambodia, a non-governmental organization. ``We saw irregularities but they were fewer than we saw before.''
...
Foreign investment is set to double from $2.7 billion this year, according to the Cambodian Investment Board, a government agency. As the country prepares to open a stock market next year, foreign investment funds such as Leopard Capital are looking at banks, office buildings, luxury hotels and other projects.

BP: There are some complaints about irregularities, but political violence is down and independent observers view that Hun Sen was the clear winner - he managed to persuade a number of opposition MPs to switch sides and the strong economic growth over recent years has no doubt helped. For a contrary view on Hun Sen, read this blog.Then of course you have the Preah Vihear issue and the border dispute The border dispute seems to be one of the main issues. AFP:

Saffron-robed monks, uniformed policemen, and university students in T-shirts all said they had one thing on their mind as they voted in Cambodia: the tense military standoff on the Thai border.
...
The conflict has fired up nationalist sentiment in Cambodia, where many people resent the slow loss of their territory over the centuries to their larger neighbors Thailand and Vietnam.

"The new government must solve the temple problem. I don't want to see that invasion...it hurts me," said 23-year-old university student Leng Sok Im at a polling station in the capital.

The border feud has overshadowed the election, which is expected to extend the reign of Prime Minister Hun Sen's Cambodian People's Party (CPP), which has held power for decades.
...
"Preah Vihear temple is the hot issue. The new government must be brave enough to solve the problem," said 27-year-old policeman Khieu Sopheap.

Throughout Cambodia, discussion of the temple standoff dominates. Some people have boycotted Thai goods, and many have donated money and food to the Cambodian soldiers and villagers at Preah Vihear. [BP: See this blog post for the donations]

As scores of voters lined up from dawn at polling stations in Phnom Penh, many said the territorial dispute was the most important issue in the election, and called for the new government to resolve the standoff as soon as possible.

"I will vote for those who could solve the issue of Preah Vihear temple immediately after they take power," said 56-year-old businessman Lam Chanvanda, said, standing in a long queue waiting to cast his vote in a schoolroom.

"Before I was never interested in the border issue, but now it is in my heart," he added.

Buddhist monks, whose superiors have permitted them to vote for the first time since they led mass street demonstrations against Hun Sen's 1998 election victory, said the threat from Thailand concerned them most.

"Preah Vihear temple is a controversial issue between the two countries which so far has no solution yet. I came to vote because I want the new government to solve that border problem," said 24-year-old monk Chan Phearun.

AP:

"The election is necessary but has become a secondary concern for me now," 27-year-old Sy Buntheng, a university student in the capital Phnom Penh, said ahead of the vote. "The encroachment by Thai troops on our land is the greatest national concern for me."

Hun Sen, 57, who has run Cambodia since 1985, is Asia's longest-serving leader and already was expected to win re-election before the dispute flared July 15. But passions over Preah Vihear temple and Hun Sen's firm stance against Thailand have galvanized undecided voters in his favor, analysts say.
...
"Now everybody is behind the government because it's the only institution that can deal with the Thai government. That means more votes for (Hun Sen)," said Kek Galabru, a prominent Cambodian human rights activist and election monitor.
...
Under his free-market policies, Cambodia's economy has been one of the fastest growing in Asia, expanding at 11 percent in each of the past three years.
...
Cambodian refugees fled in droves across the border to Thailand after the 1979 invasion to escape conflict in their homeland.

Keo Neang, a 46-year-old nurse who lives near the temple, said she and hundreds of other Cambodians were shoved down steep slopes by Thai troops near the ancient temple, which sits high on a cliff along Cambodia's northern border with Thailand.

Though Thailand denies the incident happened, she said she remembers her companions blown apart by land mines that littered the jungle below the magnificent sanctuary, while other Cambodian refugees were gunned down by Thai soldiers as they tried to escape back into Thailand.

"I heard cries for help from people who were injured. Some were begging for water as they were bleeding to death," said Keo Neang, tears streaming down her face.

BP: In a conversation with someone who has been on the ground in Cambodia recently, the AP and AFP stories read true and the feelings amongst Cambodians is very strong. There is a well-known sms going around by Cambodians expressing very "negative sentiments" towards Thailand and calling on a boycott of Thai goods - see here - Matichon had one such sms (the same one?) on the front page the other day.

The nationalist sentiments in Cambodia are much stronger than in Thailand where there are a number of prominent academics and intellectuals agreeing with the Cambodian position. Also, from reading around dozen Cambodian English language blogs and the comments made on this blog, it is the same nationalistic rhetoric - see these comments for an example. To find the same nationalistic rhetoric on the Thai side, I really needs to read Thai language blogs and certainly amongst the PAD crowd it is complete nationalistic rhetoric, but it is much more mixed.

btw, on Cambodia's Royal Party, notice anything similar?

TNA:

Leaders of the anti-government People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) and two PAD supporters injured in a clash between pro- and anti-government groups in the northeastern province of Udon Thani on July 24 submitted a petition to the United Nations through Bangkok–based UN officials.

Pipop Thongchai, Chamlong Srimuang, and Suriyasai Katasila went to the UN regional headquarters in Bangkok on Monday to seek the world body's help after the PAD protestors were injured in a clash with a pro-government group.

The letter said the attack on PAD protestors by the opposite group is a human rights infringement.

The dedmocracy activist PAD called for the UN to intervene in the case and advise the Thai government to protect the protestors and to prevent any violence in the future.

According to Mr. Pipop, the UN officials said the response is expected within a week.

BP: And they trust the UN? The same organisation of which world-heritage-granting-UNESCO is part of?

Meanwhile, to undercut the PAD efforts the police announced today:

Udon Thani police will take action against two leaders of last week's attack on supporters of the People's Alliance for Democracy during their antigovernment rally, the provincial police chief said Monday.

Maj General Permsak Paradon, the Udon Thani police commissioner, told a press conference that an initial investigation found that Kwanchai Sarakham (also known as Kwanchai Phraipana) and Uthai Saenkaew led troublemakers who stormed into the PAD rally at a park in the northeastern province last Thursday.

Uthai is a younger brother to Deputy Agriculture Minister Theerachai Saenkaew from the ruling People Power Party.

BP: Police probably needed to make an announcement, even if it was a little early in their investigation on what specific charges will be laid, to reduce pressure on the police and the government. It is a good thing that there is progress and an investigation.

btw, has there been any investigation of the incidents back in May when the PAD outnumbered the anti-PAD protesters and were bashing people on the ground?

Thongchai Winichakul has a column (Thai version) based on his research at Prachatai - an English translation of the column is here. Key excerpts:

The rightists’ discourse of capitalist threat obviously differs from the leftists’ Maoist anti-capitalist discourse of 30 years ago. These rightists speak pretty much the same anti-neo-liberalism and anti-globalization language which Thai intellectuals and activists have adopted since after Oct 6, 1976.

Although all the interviews were done years after the 1997 economic crisis, the pain caused by the capitalist crisis was still alive in their memories. Their discourse on the cause of the crisis turned out to be nationalist and against ‘farang’ or western capitalism, pointing to western capitalist giants led by the US bullying emergent smaller capitalist nations. For the ease of digestion and propagation, it was made a story of conspiracy among a handful of global political and financial figures, often including George Soros in particular. The ‘Washington Consensus’ was understood simply as a plot by western capitalist neo-conservatives to destroy smaller states. With the calamity besetting Thai nationalist capital which had eagerly embraced globalization over a decade earlier, globalization has become undesirable. Their discourse against western capitalism was therefore not of a socialist bent, but was outright nationalist, against those ugly farangs abusing decent Thais.

Most of the interviews were done during the years of Thaksin administration which was seen as representing the evil western capitalism, subsequently labelled as ‘vicious or immoral capital’. The exasperation against Thaksin and globalization and the global anti-American sentiment fed into one another. Among the rightists I interviewed then, only one person liked the Thaksin government, and the rest were suspicious of Thaksin because he was pushing the agenda of globalization.
...
The post-Oct 6 leftist intellectuals take on globalization from a nationalist, bourgeois moral high ground, prioritizing as the most crucial socio-political agenda the crusade against the western capitalism.

Post-Oct 6 left and right alike thus loathe and fear those they hold as agents of the globalized capitalist ‘farangs’, or the ‘mean capital’ as the ultimate threat to Thai society. This anti-globalization stand, however, does not remind them of the evil of the huge monopolistic capital which has taken a much deeper root in Thai society, having a much broader and firmer economic and business base than any other due to its holding of real estate assets, holding the unmatchable social cost due to the association with sacredness, securing a strong conservative political base underpinned by the bureaucratic and judicial forces, and in essence being also part of globalization. They just turn a blind eye because it is so closely associated with being Thai.
...
The anti-capitalism sentiment of the post-Oct 6 ‘people’s movements’ has become of the moral, conservative and nationalist type, with the remaining left, if any, being under its umbrella. Because of that, the post-Oct 6 so-called left can collaborate with the bourgeoisie’s conservatives and nationalists, as well as nationalist capital without problem, as long as the fight against western capitalism is the priority agenda. Certain thinkers in the ‘people’s movements’ believe that ‘the people’ are ‘using’ the institution to fight globalization, the greatest foe. They just ignore the history that points out that Thai-associated capital and the royalists have been the biggest obstacle of Thai democratic development.
...
The royally-composed anti-communist songs and the leftist songs like the Internationale, whose meanings have been deeply associated with the politics during the October era, have been losing their original implications, along with the line dividing the left and right. New and different meanings for those songs are now up for grabs. One gets to hear these songs nastily back to back on the People’s Alliance for Democracy (PAD) stage in 2008, because the PAD is the utterly vicious manifestation of the changes

BP: I agree that the "Thai-associated capital and the royalists have been the biggest obstacle of Thai democratic development". The convergence can really be seen in the PAD movement where I would say the extremes of the political spectrum have converged.

DPA:

The former Khmer Rouge fighters of that movement's final stronghold don't care too much about the upcoming trials of their former leaders - but they do care about alleged Thai incursions into Cambodian territory, they said Sunday.

Once fiercely loyal to former Khmer Rouge military commander Ta Mok, who died in 2006 after seven years in jail awaiting trial for genocide, now they say they have embraced democracy.

They are not, however, afraid of war - especially when it comes to Cambodian territory they believe has been violated by hundreds of Thai troops in nearby Preah Vihear, and these northern mountains of Cambodia are almost completely populated by former Khmer Rouge.
...
'I only have one leg, and I am old, but my former troops are still in Preah Vihear, and I am willing to give military advice or any other assistance I can to protect Cambodian sovereignty,' said former Khmer Rouge fighter Try Nin, 56.

'We are former Khmer Rouge. We are not scared of foreign aggressors. We respect the government's decision to meet the Thais with diplomacy, but if that fails, everyone here is ready to fight.'

Former photographer at the Khmer Rouge's infamous Toul Sleng torture centre turned CPP commune leader, Nhem En, 47, who claims Anlong Veng's several thousand voters are 99 percent CPP, agreed.

'I am ready to fight the Thais. All we wait for is an order from Prime Minister Hun Sen,' he said. 'We don't want war - we want peace and development. But we need tourists, and while the Thais do this, the tourists do not come.

'Thais already have their own problems in their south,' he said, referring to Muslim insurgency. 'Why do they want an extra problem?'

En's son, Meas Bunlo, aged 20, said that like almost three quarters of the Cambodian population today, he was too young to remember the Khmer Rouge and it's 1975-79 regime and has only ever known the 23-year reign of Hun Sen.

'I went to Ta Mok's funeral, but I don't feel close to the history because I am too young,' he said. 'However I am Cambodian, so I care about our border and foreign invaders.'

BP: I can't see how it would help Cambodia as Thailand would crush them militarily given the hardware they have and the numbers, but one can see the anti-Thai feelings on the Cambodian side. With Hun Sen's likely victory in yesterday's election, we see a move towards diplomacy with the meeting tomorrow.

The anti-PAD group, who call themselves "We Love Udon", have issued a press release - they have a website and a radio station (I think they have more morphed into an anti-PAD). They also have a timeline on what happened on Thursday and their main points are:

First, the PAD stage setup was illegal so hence they needed to act. Second, not all the "We Love Udon" group had any weapons and it was only a few number - they have some photos of them marching earlier. Third, the PAD had weapons and started it. Fourth, they suffered two injuries themselves.

BP: It is if they feel the PAD affected the pride of the Udon people and hence they needed to act. They can't just take the law into their own hands and arm themselves. Their explanation is not very convincing.

I should also note that the Manager Group affiliated Thailand Outlook Channel had promised on Friday to upload raw footage of what happened and they uploaded one video now. In the introduction to the footage, they state that:

This is a raw footage of what happened in Udon Thani province yesterday when allegedly 1 thousand men brutally attacked a group of unarmed PAD protesters.

Udon Thani governor claims none of the PAD protester died but around 17 of them sustained some injuries. As can be seen in the footage, a larger number of police officers merely stood by and failed to put an immediate end to the violent attack.

BP: There is video, but it is difficult to watch as it is very shaky (think home video with the owner constantly moving the camera around) and low quality so it was difficult to assess their claims. I got around 3-4 minutes in and then it reset for some reason. You can one or two police officers - who I assume were they to watch the PAD protest and not part of the blockade standing around. The only still photo on the page is that of a policeman helping up someone who is blood on them after being attacked.

I also see they have dropped the one death claim for now.

Manager also has video. The lead video doesn't show any violence by the "evil, hellish animals" (The Manager's words for them) directed towards PAD members - although shaky, low quality video again. We see the love Udon group taking delight in stamping all over PAD t-shirts.

BP: Samak is still being quiet about this. How long can that go on? The police and governors are ordering police to prevent any future attacks.

The Nation reports:

High-ranking military officials yesterday requested a 17.8-per-cent budget increase for 2009 - Bt25 billion more than in fiscal 2008.

The military cited the need to improve its competence and maintain superiority over its counterparts in neighbouring Laos and Cambodia.

Royal Thai Navy commander Admiral Satirapan Keyanon, Royal Thai Air Force commander Air Chief Marshal Chalit Pukpasuk and Defence Ministry permanent secretary General Winai Pattiyakul gave reasons to the House special committee scrutinising the budget as to why they requested an allocation of up to Bt169.09 trillion [BP: They mean billion] or 1.68 per cent of the country's GDP.

Winai said the ministry's budget had been cut over the past nine years as the country was hit hard by economic crises, while the military lacked equipment and maintenance funds. At the same time, the country faced new security threats. The military needed to secure new weapons because it could not depend on the low efficiency of the old weaponry.

"Our survey found that our military power is lower than that of Singapore and South Korea but a bit higher than Cambodia and Laos,'' he said.

Satirapan said the Navy has spent Bt120 million to maintain HTMS Chakri Naruebet, Thailand's first and only aircraft carrier, keeping it ready for use in warfare and social functions such as disaster relief.

BP: Where do I start?

First, the military budget went up from 86 to 143 billion baht under the Surayud-led government yet the Defence Permanent Secretary claims that the "ministry's budget had been cut over the past nine years".

Second, on the military needing to "maintain superiority over its counterparts in neighbouring Laos and Cambodia" and the Thai military's survey finding that Thai military power is "a bit higher than Cambodia and Laos". Below, are some Australian government charts and information (from 2007).

For Laos:



For Cambodia:



Source: Defence Intelligence Organisation (4MB PDF)

BP: Thailand's defence budget so overwhelms its two neighbours that there is no rationale a 17.8% increase to its budget on these grounds. Comparing Thailand to Laos, would be like the US military saying it needs a funding increase to stave of the threat posed by the Thai military.

Now, if they were to make an argument about the money being spent in the South and increased fuel costs, they could probably get a small increase - I should ntoe that Samak recently confirmed the purchase of the 96 armored personnel carriers for 3.8 billion (Source: Samak and the Military, Matichon, July 25, Page 2), so it is not as if the military are suffering now.

Real Life Thailand has a post on this issue with a good quote.

UPDATE: Link fixed.

This new article really takes the cake for nonsense. Thankfully, Fonzi has fisked it. Two comments.

First:

Then, the Surayud government came to power following the coup. Its position was to insist that Thailand and Cambodia jointly apply for the listing of Preah Vihear as a World Heritage site.

BP: Why repeat this when it is not true? Last year, the Surayud government said it would support a sole application by Cambodia. Its original position might have been to insist on a joint application, but when push came to shove it agreed on Cambodia's sole application.

Second, Thailand is now relying on the US map so the whole espionage thing seems like a red herring - the evil foreigners again. Was there anything secret or special about the Cambodian evidence? Perhaps, someone call look in the US archives as enough time would have passed to find out what the US government was doing.

The Nation:

Privy Council President Prem Tinsulanonda Saturday expressed concern over the social divisiveness.

"Definitely, I don't want to see the society divided," Prem when reporters asked if he worried about social divisiveness.

Prem was speaking to reporters after giving a speech about the use of the Thai language at his foundation.

Prem said the situation was not good.

But he believed that when the situation warranted, all Thais would be united.

"I believe when it's time, all Thais will come together," Prem said.

BP: When it's time? I take this as sign of government strength hence Prem is concerned. He has very silent up until now.

Bangkok Post:

Retired career diplomat Tej Bunnag was appointed foreign minister Saturday in time to lead fresh talks with Cambodia over a bitter border dispute.

He is widely considered a "professional choice" following the resignation of his successor Noppadon Pattama earlier this month.

Mr Tej is a foreign affairs veteran and former ambassadors to several countries during the past 20 years. His appointment was announced on Saturday through a royal decree..
...
Tej Bunnag, 65, educated at Malvern College and Cambridge University in Britain, has served as ambassador to China, France, the United Nations and the United States.

BP: The OxBridge grad is a very safe, establishment choice - he is a Bunnag so that should tell you how establishment he is and if that wasn't enough he gets the thumbs up from Anand. His first task will be on Monday when he flies to Cambodia for talks aimed at resolving a tense dispute over the 4.6 square kilometers of land near Preah Vihear.

First, the PAD crowd and the media will have much more difficulty as painting him as a Thaksin lackey - he was an advisor to the Surayud government and worked on the Preah Vihear issue. Second, it might be a sign of things to come with more qualified people being put in the right positions. Samak will probably bring in a couple more outsiders in the reshuffle which is scheduled to be announced next week and move a few of the current Ministers around to more suitable positions where their qualifications match. We will have to wait and see, but the first Cabinet has come under fire so we will see if mistakes have been learned.

The Bangkok Post:

The People Power party (PPP) is moving to impeach three judges of the Central Administrative Court and to challenge the signed and sealed purchase of fighter jets from Sweden by the air force.

The actions are seen as a bid to settle old political scores.

The three judges issued the injunction suspending the joint communique the government signed with Phnom Penh in support of the listing of the Preah Vihear temple as a World Heritage site.

Air force chief Chalit Pukpasuk served on the coup leaders' Council for National Security. He is regarded as a remnant of the powers that toppled Thaksin Shinawatra, who is a respected figure among many PPP members.

People Power MP Chumpod Boonyai said he was assigned by the party to draft a petition seeking the impeachment of the three Central Administrative Court judges _ Chachiwat Srikaeo, Pravit Boonthiem and Nat Rathamarit.

He said the three judges refused to rule on a complaint against the Surayud Chulanont government's signing of the Japan-Thailand Economic Partnership Agreement. The judges did not see the signing as an administrative matter and therefore outside the court's jurisdiction.

However, the same judges deemed the joint communique an administrative issue and admitted the case for hearing before issuing the injunction.

BP: A Thammasat University public law expert made the same comparison about the Japanese-Thai FTA being the same as the joint communique

Mr Chumpod said the drafting of the impeachment petition would be finished on Monday and he would then gather the signatures of at least a quarter of MPs in parliament to ask the Senate to remove the judges.

He was also drafting a petition to ask the Constitution Court to rule if the air force had violated the same article by signing a 19-billion-baht contract to buy Gripen jet fighters from Sweden without seeking parliamentary approval.

Mr Chumpod claimed the signing violated Article 190.

He denied the two petitions were aimed at exacting revenge on anyone.

ACM Chalit, who signed the jet purchase agreement, disagreed. He viewed the PPP's move as politically motivated.

He said the Gripen agreement could not affect national sovereignty and thus was not relevant to Article 190.

BP: There is more to Section 190 than just national sovereignty, you have social considerations and economic considerations as well. What is more interesting is that the PPP are making moves against the CNS...

Is the Democrat, PAD's, and Senator's request to impeach the whole cabinet also not politically motivated?

An editorial today:

Article 112 of the Criminal Code was crafted by our legal minds more than five decades ago, with the intention of protecting the monarchy from any individual who defames, insults or threatens the King, the Queen, the heir-apparent or the Regent. The maximum penalty is imprisonment of up to 15 years.

In recent years, however, this law concerning lese majeste has been exploited as a political tool by politicians and their ilk, against rivals under the pretext that they are safeguarding the royal institution. In the meantime, police have handled such cases in a manner that leaves much to be desired, ranging from half-heartedness and foot-dragging, to unusual haste in processing them.

Four high-profile lese majeste cases are now pending with the Metropolitan Police - all of them capturing public attention. As such, the way police are handling each of these cases is being closely watched and monitored by the media, the anti-government People's Alliance for Democracy, as well as the pro-government United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD). In other words, the police are under pressure from all sides of the political divide.

BP: So far so good (ok, I will disagree about the so-called origins of lese majeste law) then...

As a matter of fact, the initial handling by police of the lese majeste case against former PM's Office minister Jakrapob Penkair, a UDD core leader, and the recent one against Daranee Charnchoengsilpakul, a UDD follower, raises more questions than answers.

In the case of Ms Daranee, the Metropolitan Police only decided to file the lese majeste charge against her after they received a "push" from the army, which asked the police on July 21 to investigate whether her speech at a UDD rally at Sanam Luang on July 18 offended the monarchy. Apparently the police had not been very anxious to take action against the accused, despite the fact that policemen had been posted at that rally to monitor activities.

Mr Jakrapob's case was different. The police may be forgiven for not being aware of Mr Jakrapob's allegedly offending remarks against the monarchy made in his speech at the Foreign Correspondents Club of Thailand in August 2007.

The case was brought to their attention on March 24 this year by Pol Lt-Col Watanasak Muangkijkarndee, a police investigator at Bang Mod station, after he had studied a text of the controversial speech given to him by a friend. For reasons which have not been clarified, the police chose to sit on the case. It was the Democrats who got wind of this and cried foul against the police. It was only then that things started to move and eventually Mr Jakrapob was forced to resign from the cabinet. Still, for some unexplained reason, the police have not yet submitted the case to the prosecution.

BP: Actually, the police were aware of his speech way before this year, but this was when Surayud was PM. I am reliably informed that some elements of the police were aware of what was said on the night of the speech. This is essence part of the problem with the Jakrapob case for the police, but that will be revealing too much for today.

In contrast, the police were unusually speedy in charging Democrat MP and PAD core leader Somkiat Pongpaibul with lese majeste. The charge was in response to a complaint filed against Mr Somkiat by an MP of the ruling People Power party, who accused the former of showing disrespect to Rajavinit school teachers - the school was given its name by His Majesty the King.

Similarly, the police were unusually swift in charging and arresting PAD core leader Sondhi Limthongkul for allegedly repeating some of Ms Daranee's allegedly offensive statements to the PAD audience.

As such, police performance in handling highly sensitive lese majeste cases has been a big letdown. They lack professionalism, standard procedures of practice and thus appear prone to the possibility of political interference. There is little hope their performance will improve, unless a stop is put to political interference.

BP: If one is look at "double standards" one should also note that Sondhi L was allowed to turn himself in whereas Daranee didn't have that opportunity. Sondhi L was also granted bail whereas Daranee was not - given it is the same offence and Sondhi L repeated her statements which by defamation law standard is the same as the original offence - there is some discrepancy here. No mention of the speed on which they arrested Daranee? The Post is even complaining it wasn't fast enough.

The Nation:

Big gratitude to Anthony Pearson, who helped clarify on Thaksin's Manchester City future by explaining that if the former PM is convicted of one charge - appeals and Supreme Courts notwithstanding - he will be made to divest his shares in full.

BP: If he is convicted, I would predict he will then sell the shares to his son, his daughter, or some other family member. I am just waiting for The Nation to be outraged. Will any ManCity fans care though?

The Nation:

Kwanchai Praiphana, leader of the Udon Thani Guard Group, admitted during an interview on Channel 3 that he let his supporters to beat up protesters led by the People's Alliance for Democracy.

Kwanchai vowed to lead his supporters to beat PAD protesters again if they hold another rally in the northeastern province.

On Thursday, Kwanchai led hundreds of protesters demolish PAD's stage and beat up PAD protesters, seriously injuring two of them.

Kwanchai said he had warned local PAD supporters several times not to organise a rally in the province, because he regarded that anti-government rallies damaged the province's reputation.

"Yes, I did it and I am not afraid of legal action because I will be charged only public brawl charges," Kwanchai said.

"I've warned them several times that they must not come here."

BP: Given the arrests today in Buri Ram, surely the police can grant him his wish.

Reuters reports:

Thirteen people were wounded when supporters of Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej clashed with anti-government protesters in rural Thailand on Thursday, police said, as protests moved off city streets into the countryside.

About 700 government supporters armed with wooden planks, axes and slingshots broke through a police blockade to clash with 150 unarmed anti-government demonstrators in the city of Udon Thani, 650 km northeast of Bangkok, television footage showed. Two of the wounded were in critical condition, police said. Most of the wounded were from the anti-government group, they said. No arrests had been made yet.

"I have been informed that 13 people were injured in the clash, but no one was killed as reported by some media outlets," national police spokesman Surapol Thuanthong said. The clash was the most serious yet as government supporters in the provinces, led by local politicians from the ruling parties, react with violence to anti-government rallies that are moving out of Bangkok into the provinces.

Thai Rath reports that the brother of Mr. Theerachai Saenkaew, Deputy Minister of Agriculture and Cooperatives, "led" (by way of speaker - he of course wasn't on the front line) a group of protesters who broke through the police barricade. They were also armed with Thai flags. It took them 5 minutes after breaking through to remove the stage. They then burnt the clothes and signs (of PAD?). Police say they tried their best to keep the groups separated - there were only about 100 PAD supporters. Two police were injured. The Governor of Udon Thani has ordered the police collect all evidence and to gather still and moving images (video) [BP: There is certainly video as you saw some of it on TV].

AA comments:

Unfortunately this and the recent pro-Thaksin group's violent attack on the PAD in Udon Thani is not only stupid politically, but is morally detestable. That a brother of a Cabinet Member would lead it so brazenly is also stupid.

What does this say about the PPP's internal politics? Samak must surely condemn, censure, and distance himself from this.

BP: I agree with what AA says. Samak now has more power and influence so he should ensure the police are not prevented from carrying out their investigation.

People should also be able to protest without being subject to violence. On numerous occasions, we have learnt that police barricades are mere doors, whereby if you push a little they will move. I really can't fathom if the police decide to set up a barricade to separate two groups as they are concerned that violence might take place (when both sides are armed with machetes, sticks etc) that they don't have a loudspeaker and teargas. There are seemingly no crowd control measures in place. Just get enough numbers and you can push through a police barricade and destroy anything. An investigation can be done and evidence gathered, but picking out people's faces from a crowd and finding their name is not easy.

Given a choice between teargas and protesters being subject to violent attacks, I choose teargas.

The Nation:

Oil retailers are slashing their gasohol pump prices by Bt4.70 per litre on Friday, following the effective cut in excise taxes as well as the softening global oil prices.

Diesel price would also come down by Bt3.50 per litre.

Starting on Friday, the excise taxes for gasohol products and diesel would be cut for six months by Bt3.30 and Bt2.30, respectively.

BP: The falling world crude oil price helps, but this quite a dramatic drop.

The Nation has a brief profile of Daranee Chanchoengsilapakul ("Da Torpedo") who was arrested on Tuesday for committing lese majeste. It notes the DAAD people distancing themselves from her:

The DAAD abruptly isolated Daranee. Nutthawut Saikua, the government's spokesman and one of the core members of the DAAD, said on Tuesday that "Da Torpedo is not related to the DAAD, even though our stances are close."
...
After the news broke of Daranee's arrest, the DAAD's celebratory gathering became somewhat subdued. Key members such as Veera Musikapoing, Weng Tojirakan and Nutthawut also failed to make an appearance at the rally, which was organised at Sanam Luang close the venue of the Voice of People's Stage.

BP: It has some brief information about her work history as well. Will Veera, Weng et al keep away from the rallies for a while now?

The Nation:

Speaking to reporters after the weekly Cabinet meeting, Samak said he had received a police report that Daranee Charnchoengsilpakul, better known as Da Torpedo, attacked the highest institution while joining a demonstration at Sanam Luang against the People's Alliance for Democracy.

Samak said police would take legal action against her.

"The person violated the laws with her words, which affected several institutions. I ordered police to take action against the person immediately," Samak said.

Earlier, the Army filed a complaint with police to take legal action against Daranee for having attacked the highest institution while speaking on stage of the Democratic Alliance Against Dictatorship.

Pol Maj Gen Amnuay Nimmano, commander of Metropolitan Police Division 1, said Dararnee allegedly made statement in contempt of the highest institution on the DAAD stage at Sanam Luang on Thursday and Friday.

Amnuay said the South Bangkok District Court approved an arrest warrant against her and she was arrested by Chana Songkram police in Phaholyothin area Tuesday.

BP: It is Samak's role which is confusing to me - the Post ignores Samak completely. A complaint has been filed, an arrest warrant is being sought, then after coming under attack from the Democrats and the PAD for not doing anything, Samak speaks out. It is a bid odd as I when I first heard the story it seemed that Samak had instigated the arrest, but it seems clearer from reading reports that Samak is inflating his role - if police tell him someone is doing something illegal he can hardly say take no action - to appear as a defender of the monarchy after coming under attack from the Democrats and PAD over Jakrapob. After the Democrats and PAD, complained over the police acting more quickly against Democrat MP and PAD leader Somkiart over a lese majeste action, it appears Samak has decided he needs to appear decisive and royalist enough. If the government didn't act upon the army complaint, what would the consequences be?

The Manager has a transcript of what Daranee said and I am unsure what specifically got her into trouble - that she is being Sondhi-like in talking about possible bloodshed and the need to fight is clear as well as praising Thaksin for everything including the war on drugs and attacking Surayud is clear,* but she has been charged with lese majeste not incitement. There is talk of 70 years having past and those of Oct 14 having sacrificed themselves, but that is it. Anyone? [UDPATE: The Manager did include the full text have a look at Thai Crisis for a brief transcript and a different audio version]

Daranee did not receive bail for her own safety, but then it got interesting:

The Criminal Court yesterday approved an arrest warrant against People's Alliance for Democracy co-leader Sondhi Limthongkul for relaying remarks by Daranee Choengchansilapakul ('Da Torpedo') deemed offensive to the monarchy.

Sondhi put off surrendering to police from yesterday to 9am today to avoid facing reporters.

The court approved the arrest warrant at the request of police.

Police alleged Sondhi had repeated the lese-majeste statement at the rally of the PAD Sunday night.

"Sondhi and those involved in recirculating the offensive remarks at the PAD rally site and via media and Internet outlets will have to face legal proceedings," Metropolitan Police commissioner Lt-General Aswin Kwanmuang said yesterday.

On Monday, police arrested anti-PAD activist Da Torpedo and charged her with committing lese majeste in a rally speech at Sanam Luang on Friday.

Aswin said Sondhi and pro-PAD media outlets were equally guilty for repeating the remarks.

He said he expected to serve the arrest warrant for Sondhi this week.

Police will proceed directly to arrest those committing lese majeste in every case and without exception, he said, in rebutting Da Torpedo's argument that police had committed a double standard by picking on her but not the PAD leaders.

A Chulalongkorn University lecturer assisted Da Torpedo in filing a second bail application. Her first application was rejected and she had to spend a night in the remand prison for women.

Suthachai Yimprasert said he had used his academic position as bond for the temporary release. He said he is a close friend of the suspect. However, the court rejected the appeal.

On her first night in a cell, Da Torpedo was allowed to take pain and anti-depression medication. She suffered jaw ache before being arrested and appeared stressful.

She had not received any visitors. She was put in the same block as paralegal Supasri Srisawat, who is serving a six-month jail term for contempt relating to the Bt2-million "pastry-gate" case.

In the meantime, a lawyer of Newin Chidchob asked police to charge Sondhi with defamation. Newin, a close aide to former premier Thaksin Shinawatra, alleged Sondhi had accused him of backing Daranee to insult the monarchy.

Newin denies the allegation, his lawyer said.

BP: Some have suggested this is a pawn sacrifice - although one shouldn't take the chess analogy further - but I think this inflates Sondhi L's importance. He's no queen, well no chess queen. She is more a sacrificial lamb than a pawn although I doubt she intended for this. Samak's words of approving action against Daranee enables the Sondhi L arrest as it negates the "double standard" problem for the government.

If Daranee can't get bail, what about Sondhi L?

btw, does her jaw ache come from screaming into the microphone?

*Go to 2bangkok.com to see a link, if you must, to the audio of the rant. Turn the volume down as she doesn't talk, she screams and very loudly. Can we just not put the PAD lot and her mob into a caged room and let them take their repressed rage out of each other?

For a while in the Deep South, it seemed that the authorities were too scared (not just of dying, but of seen to be too harsh in cracking down) on the perpetrators of the violence. It wasn't also helped that they didn't have the strength of numbers - the insurgents/terrorists often stage ambush attacks in groups of 10 or more so the authorities need to go in large numbers to ensure that an insurgent attack can be more easily neutralised. Yesterday, 1 solider and 5 more were injured in a 20kg IED and then set upon by 10 gunmen. Then:

Following the attack, a 100-strong paramilitary unit with sniffer dogs began trying to hunt down the attackers within a one-kilometre radius of the ambush scene.

BP: Nowdays, it seems as soon as incident happens, the authorities come out in large numbers - no doubt helped by the surge of the military forces based in the Deep South - but it is clear that they have more resources now and ensuring they don't just stay on the defensive.

Also from the same article:

Also in Narathiwat, three suspects connected to the death of teacher Juling Pongkunmul were arrested in a major raid on three villages in Rangae district yesterday morning.

A large arms cache was also seized during the six-hour operation launched by a 1,000-strong combined force of police, soldiers and local administrators.

Juling was brutally beaten by villagers on May 19, 2006, and died after almost eight months in a coma.

Apart from the three arrested suspects, 57 others were detained in the raid, but police released them later after profiling, fingerprinting and DNA-testing them.

BP: I don't imagine they randomly came across the camp/weapons cache and so it was likely through a tip-off from an informant or information from someone else detained. When the authorities came across a large weapons cache in an area, there are difficulties in discerning who is who so I think it is acceptable to fingerprint and DNA-test (I assume it wasn't every single person), but those who don't bring up an instant match should be promptly released as has been done. There are numerous instances - the tragedy at Tak Bai is a class example - where the authorities just arrested everyone (in Tak Bai over 1,000 people) for 7 days. Briefly detaining and fingerprinting those in the scene is a much better idea.

Also from the same article:

In Yala, volunteer rangers came across a small rebel group preparing to launch an attack in Yaha district yesterday.

The encounter led to a brief armed clash. No casualties were reported.

Three suspected militants fled the scene but left a chainsaw and their rucksacks behind. The rangers found food supplies and medicine inside.

The ranger unit also managed to deactivate two homemade bombs placed to kill the crime scene inspectors.

BP: Yes, the violence is far from gone and there are many documented cases of abuse, but the authorities seem better prepared, better resourced, and much smarter in going after the perpetrators than what they were a couple of years ago. This is a good thing. Now, if only they can sort out the abuses directed towards those detained.

There have been many comparisons (from media ownership, style, and football club owner) between Italy's PM Silvio Berlusconi and Thaksin - the first comparison was made in 1995 and has continued throughout - see this article from 2006. The BBC today:

Italy's parliament has given its final approval to a controversial immunity bill put forward by Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi's government.

The bill was passed by 171 votes to 128 by the Senate. The lower house backed the measure earlier last month.

The bill protects top public officials, including the prime minister, from prosecution while they are in office.

Critics say it is tailor-made for Mr Berlusconi, who faces a corruption trial. The PM says he is innocent.

The 71-year-old media tycoon has been charged numerous times for corruption, tax fraud and illegal party funding.

Mr Berlusconi - who has never been convicted - has criticised the court cases, saying they are a result of a witch-hunt against him by the judiciary.

'Endless' court hearings

The bill grants immunity to the incumbents of Italy's four highest state posts - the president, the prime minister and the speakers of both houses of parliament.

It must be signed by President Giorgio Napolitano before officially going into effect.

The bill's supporters have argued that the amendment is needed to allow the top state officials to focus on doing their jobs - without legal destruction.

Mr Berlusconi currently faces a corruption case in Milan.

The Italian prime minister also faces prosecution in Rome for alleged collusion between his Mediaset network and state broadcaster, Rai.

Mr Berlusconi claims that he has attended 2,500 court hearings, had 587 police visits and spent some 174m euros (£135m; $271m) in legal fees since entering the political scene 14 years ago.

BP: I am not suggesting this should happen in Thailand, but given the Berlusconi-Thaksin comparisons and the trouble for the Samak government where the entire Cabinet is refusing to sign any document with a foreign country lest it be interpreted as a treaty, there is a valid question as the extent to which senior political leaders should face criminal prosecution (as opposed to simple removal from office via an impeachment) while they are in office - they off course will be subject to prosecution once they leave office, but their opponents might not see the political need to pursue the matter then. Berlusconi is a special case, but it has certainly happened in other countries with leaders incurring large legal fees. Or is justice delayed, justice denied?

Note: Immunity for current leaders does of course not include Thaksin. That was just a segway into the topic.

Asia Times on Preah Vihear ahead of the Cambodian election on July 27:

The premier's media-influenced popularity was recently pushed to greater heights by the listing last week of the Preah Vihear temple complex as a United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) national heritage site. When the decision was announced live on national channel CTN, Hun Sen's image was shown with revolving stars around it. A televised concert held to celebrate the listing was attended by hosts regularly shouting words of support for Hun Sen among other cheers of national glory.

The ensuing border tension with Thailand over the controversial listing will be a strong test of his government's ability to stand up to stronger neighbors before a watchful Cambodian public in the heat of an election season.

BP: So will there be a backdown after July 27?

The Nation:

HM the King on Tuesday provided moral support to the government and prime minister Samak Sundaravej.

The King expressed a wish that the government and Samak can achieve their works.

HM the King was addressing to an audience of senior officials, led by Samak, who participate in a project making memorial pins on the ocassion of his 80th anniversary accesssion to the throne.

HM the King thanked the audience for giving him moral supports. He said he provided them, including the government and Samak, the moral supports in return.

He also said he thanked them for working for the country and he wished that the country is free of troubles.

Thai Rath reports that today HM the King granted an audience for Samak and others in Hua Hin in regards where HM the King stated "[Your] coming to Hua Hin is providing [me] with moral support. In your future work, I also provide you with moral support in your work and in carrying out your work. Your coming here this time provides a lot of moral support. I also give moral support to others. I give moral support to you in [your] work. This includes the government and the Prime Minister in carrying out their work. I would like to thank you for paying attention to your work. Progress has been made. I want there to be progress in the country and for there to be no chaos and just further progress".

Oddly, Matichon has seemingly the same quote, but with more details. It sounds more positive towards Samak, but also quotes HM the King as saying the government should work for the public interest. Matichon has a picture here.

BP: At the minimum, one could say it is not criticism - The Manager is noticeably silent.

Simon Montlake in CSM has a good summary of recent activities

Senior security officials from Thailand and Cambodia failed Monday to defuse a border dispute centered on a 10th-century temple that has seen hundreds of troops mobilized on both sides and claims by Cambodia of incursions by Thai soldiers.

After a week of saber-rattling over Preah Vihear, which UNESCO recently designated as a World Heritage Site for Cambodia, Thai analysts and Western diplomats say there is a risk that tempers could flare. Neither side wants to be seen backing down, since parties on both sides are using the dispute to further domestic political goals, especially in Thailand.

"Nobody wants to see this dispute escalate," says a Thai military officer, who requested anonymity. "We are doing our best not to let anything happen.... Cambodia understands that the problem arises from domestic political problems in Thailand."

The risk of violence, though, remains slight as the two militaries have a close working relationship. No shots have been fired, and the only injuries came when Thai nationalists clashed last week with local Thai villagers opposed to their campaign against Cambodia's claim to the temple.
…
A more proximate cause, though, lies in Bangkok. Here, opponents of Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej, who have led months of street protests and lawsuits against his government, have used the issue to accuse it of surrendering sovereignty.

"It doesn't seem too complicated to fix [the dispute]. But Thai politics [are] so polarized that it's being used to accuse the government of selling out the country. Sentiment is high on the Thai side," says Gothom Arya, a peace advocate and chairman of the National Economics and Social Advisory Council, a government think-tank.
…
Critics allege that Thaksin is cutting business deals in Cambodia and that his friends in government are smoothing his path. "This is a very sensitive issue on both sides of the border. The [Thai] government should have informed the people from the beginning. The suspicion is that there are dealings under the table," says Kasit Piromya, a former Thai ambassador to Washington and opposition supporter.
….
Until this month, day trippers from Thailand could visit the temple, which sits atop a rocky escarpment that is much harder to ascend from Cambodia. Both countries benefited from this arrangement by levying fees on visitors, but Cambodia eventually plans to channel tourists from its side of the border, capitalizing on its UNESCO designation.

For now, there are no tourists, only soldiers hunkered down around the ruined temple.

Cambodia wants to involve ASEAN and the UN, Thailand doesn’t:

Cambodia's foreign ministry said Tuesday that "in order to avoid armed confrontation," the country would ask for "an emergency meeting of the United Nations Security Council to find a solution to the problem."

"We need a third party to solve this problem," Cambodian government spokesman Khieu Kanharith told AFP.

Thailand however does not want foreign mediators involved in the dispute, said the head of the armed forces, General Boonsrang Niumpradit.

"The dispute should be discussed between the two countries," said Boonsrang, who led the talks with Cambodia on Monday. "Better that than elevating it to ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) or the UN."

Seth Mydans has more with a quote from the Cambodian Foreign Minister:

"In the face of this imminent state of war, this very serious threat to our independence and territorial integrity, we have an obligation to resort to the United Nations Security Council," said Foreign Minister Hor Namhong of Cambodia.
…
"A Thai Foreign Ministry spokesman, Tharit Charungvat, said that Cambodia was within its rights to appeal to the Security Council but that "we believe that bilateral options are still not exhausted."

Thai Supreme Commander General Boonsrang Niumpradit and leader of the talks on the Thai side blames the problem on maps:

"The problem was that we and Cambodia are using two different maps. Cambodian is using the French version while we used a US-drawn map, thus it's hard for us to reach agreement," he said on Thai television.

AP:

Panithan Wattanayagorn, a professor at Bangkok's Chulalongkorn University, said a solution to the tensions may only emerge after Cambodia holds national elections July 27.

"Prime Minister Hun Sen will use the issue of Preah Vihear for political gain so the meeting is symbolic to show that both countries are serious about national interest and national pride," Panithan said.
…
Surachart Bamrungsuk, a security analyst at Chulalongkorn University's faculty of Political Science, said Monday's failure to settle the dispute would only further increase tensions.

"It is a deadlock at this point and that means the relationship between the two countries will go from bad to worse," Surachart said adding that "the situation is still volatile and if there is a confrontation, it would be difficult to stop since there are political agendas on both sides."

Daniel Ten Kate in Bloomberg has some quotes from the ASEAN meeting:

“Both Cambodia and Thailand reiterated that they were committed to a peaceful resolution,'' said Singapore Foreign Minister George Yeo, who spoke today on behalf of the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations.
…
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said yesterday that Asean cannot “stand idly by without damaging its credibility,'' referring to the border dispute. Asean operates by consensus, meaning that both Thailand and Cambodia would need to agree to its involvement.

“The problem is that the parties are not in full agreement'' on allowing Asean to help mediate in the conflict, Indonesia Foreign Minister Hassan Wirajuda said, adding that Thailand still hopes to resolve the issue with one-on-one talks.
…
”Both sides have their own domestic ordeals, domestic constituencies to deal with,'' Surin Pitsuwan, secretary-general of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, told Bloomberg News today.
…
”We cannot control the situation,'' Surin said, adding that the dispute was ``unfortunate'' given that Thailand is set to take over the chairmanship of Asean later this year.

AFP has the Malaysian view:

"The border engagement is not only relevant in terms of the problems that we see between the two states but also could be a test for ASEAN," Malaysian Foreign Minister Rais Yatim told reporters.

"For the first time now two of its members are facing what we call a border predicament."

Jakarta Post editorial:

Cambodia and Thailand have slapped ASEAN right in its face at a critical time when the regional group's foreign ministers are holding their annual meeting and regular consultations with key nations, including the United States, China, India and Japan. The military standoff between the two countries has embarrassed their neighbors, who take pride that their organization is one of the few with an effective mechanism to maintain regional peace and to resolve problems among themselves amicably without outside interference.
…
Cambodia directly reported the dispute to the UN Security Council (UNSC) without prior consultations with other ASEAN members, an organization which played a crucial rule in ending the prolonged war in Cambodia in the 1980s.

Placing this dispute in UNSC hands puts ASEAN in an awkward position and makes it more difficult to find a regional solution. Although Cambodia insisted the report to the UNSC was not extraordinary in nature, that country's leaders need to remember it has humiliated ASEAN by belittling its capability to mediate a peaceful solution.
…
Thailand is scheduled to assume the rotating ASEAN chair for one year starting Monday and to host the ASEAN summit in Bangkok this year. How can it effectively chair the meetings when the country is facing border disputes with Cambodia?

Thailand needs to seriously consider voluntarily giving up the position for the sake of ASEAN credibility and to hand over the chair to the next host

Statement from the UNSG:

The Secretary-General is closely following the situation on the Cambodia-Thailand border near the Preah Vihear Temple. He is concerned about the current escalation of tensions between the two countries, including the buildup of troops.

The Secretary-General calls for restraint on both sides and hopes that this matter can be resolved peacefully and by diplomatic means in the context of the excellent relations that traditionally exist between the two countries.

BP: I can’t see anything happening until after the Cambodian election and the Cabinet reshuffle in Thailand on July 28. Neither side can back down because of domestic political pressures, but they might take a few small steps back to reduce tensions. The Cambodians are really pushing the situation onto the international and regional stage now.

A question to consider, how control is the government in the situation and over the military?

TVNZ:

"The PAD must respect the mandate that the majority of people have given these parties to run the country," said Pramuan Kiddeejing in Hinkone, a village 600 kilometres northeast of Bangkok that mainly grows fragrant jasmine rice.

"What they are doing on the street is no different from how our kids behave in the village," the 49-year-old farmer said.

Because of the protests, which are spreading out to many provinces from Bangkok, the government had no time to help the poor fight the rising cost of living, people in the village said.

"The protesters should stop and let the government get on with its work," Pramuan said.

BP: The PAD have adopted a scatter-gun approach with their criticisms. The PAD is insulated as they are not a political party and it doesn't matter to them whether the majority of the population are not on their side.Tthey only worry about some criticisms sticking or resonating and motivating their "base". But throwing too much mad all the time doesn't make them appeal to the majority of the public. Their attacks on the government have become too broad (i.e not targetted enough) and gone on for such a long period of time that they can be seen as the scapegoat for all problems. PPP have been pushing the line for a while now, although not very effectively at times, that the PAD is a contributing factor of the economic problems. More importantly the PAD have turned the so-called silent majority into Samak supporters.

To me that Democrat's problem seems to be the PAD are just so outrageous in their commentary that it is only the outrageous commentary which makes news. If the Democrats act all sensible and offer constructive criticism it is as if it is too plain and dull to gain any coverage. The only time the Democrats really got coverage in the last couple of months (censure debate aside) is when they were pushing the lese majeste case against Jakrapob and whipping up a nationalist frenzy over Phreah Vihear. They have had a window of opportunity in the aftermath of the censure debate to provide an alternative policy platform, but the PAD and others have quickly taken back the mantle with the Preah Vihear issue. The only time the Democrats can get on the news now is when they act all nationalistic. I have some sympathy for them here, but do worry that some of them actually believe the nationalist sentiment they have been whipping up given how far they have been willing to push it at times.

I don't really think this helps the Democrats in the long-term. To need to out-PAD the PAD is not a path to electoral success. It only helps them gain headlines in the short-term. The quantity of criticism does not equal quality. Just look at Samak on how his approval rating has almost doubled to 60% since he stopped talking to the media. His complaining which often comes across as whining is now limited to a thirty minute period on his Sunday talkshow and he primarily controls how the content is viewed by the public.* I am of the view that his approval rating hasn't risen primarily because of him, but because the alternative is seen as even worse. If he was talking to the media every day, he would across as a little child throwing a tantrum. As he is not talking, other little children have needed to take his place. If anyone needs the PAD to go away, it is the Democrats and not the government.

h/t Absolutely Bangkok

*This might change because of the foolish decision for the government/PTV/DAAD or whoever to take a 10pm spot on NBT. More coverage is a double-edged sword.

With the stimulus package, "ceasefire", and the intensified Preah Vihear dispute all happening around the same time, I am sure readers have noticed I am way behind in covering all the issues adequately. All three are very broad and can be looked at from various angles. I have basically finished with the stimulus package for now, but still have a few more posts on the ceasefire. The intensified Preah Vihear dispute is next on the agenda.

The current dispute largely (I say largely as some of the Thai nationalists are still going on about the temple itself and its world heritage status) involves the 4.6 sq km of "disputed land". I have numerous blog posts looking at the legal situation of the temple and have been meaning to look at the ICJ decision in relation to the 4.6sq km. The other day in a comment, Mulder (or is is Scully) commented:

http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/45/4873.pdf

However, the last two paragraph is quite scary.

From these facts, the court concluded that Thailand had accepted Annex I map .....
....

The court therefore felt bound to pronounce in favour of the frontier indicated on Annex I map ....
It become unnecessary to consider whether the line as mapped did in fact correspond to the true water shed line

BP: One could conclude that the land is Cambodian.

Fortunately, a farang international law lecturer at Chulalongkorn has some interesting comments in an op-ed in today's Bangkok Post on the issue:

This understandable feeling of hurt and dismay is by no means lessened - and indeed must be exacerbated - by the reasons the Court found in favour of Cambodia. To put it bluntly, if somewhat crudely, the Thai government repeatedly botched this matter from 1907 to 1959. From the Court's meticulous and careful recitation of the facts, it is clear that over the years there were numerous opportunities for Thailand to rectify or "fix" the matter in Thailand's favour, but on each occasion the opportunities were either ignored or missed entirely.

These facts amply support the Court's conclusion that the Thai government, by its own conduct, implicitly had accepted the Annex I map as accurately marking the border with Cambodia.

Nonetheless, from Thailand's perspective today, the temple and the surrounding area all should have belonged to it, and the current effort to assert sovereignty over the "disputed area" adjacent to the temple is based on an understandable desire to retain as much land in the area as it possibly can.

By contrast, the Cambodians are justly proud that a magnificently located temple, built by their Khmer ancestors, is recognised not only as being in Cambodian territory, but is now a World Heritage Site!

Needless to say, on maps published by Cambodia, the border with Thailand is in conformity with the Annex I map relied upon by the ICJ, making the temple and the surrounding "disputed area" clearly Cambodian territory.

The Practical

From the above discussion it should be plain that both sides, Cambodia and Thailand, have understandable, and indeed strong, "claims" to the disputed area.

And that is precisely the problem.

The current fight over this area is being waged on the basis of "sovereignty": the disputed area is either Cambodian or Thai, allowing no room for compromise.

Cambodia undoubtedly feels that, from a legal standpoint, if the case involving the disputed area were once again to go before the ICJ, Cambodia would win.

The Thai government most likely thinks the same thing, and so, politically, it will never agree to such a venue ("once burned, twice shy!").

(In 1959, Cambodia was able to bring Thailand to the ICJ because, in 1950, Thailand had accepted the Court's jurisdiction for a period of 10 years. That acceptance has not been renewed, and so without Thailand's express consent, Cambodia today cannot force Thailand to have the ICJ adjudicate the current boundary dispute.)

However, the disputed area surrounding the temple itself also contains related Khmer artefacts, and in administering the temple, particularly as a World Heritage site, the entire area (perhaps even beyond the "disputed area") should be administered as a single entity. Indeed, the World Heritage listing provides both countries with an excellent opportunity for increased tourism and accompanying revenue.

But so long as the two countries remain at loggerheads over the sovereignty issue of the disputed area, progress on joint administration of the entire area most likely will be difficult and lengthy.

As a result, not only will Thailand lose the opportunity to reap the obvious immediate benefits of being the only viable gateway to a new World Heritage Site (access from Thailand currently is denied because of the "tensions"), but these delays in administering the site are giving the Cambodians time to develop their own competing tourist infrastructure - including plans to provide easier access to the temple from Cambodia itself.

Rather than continue arguing endlessly about which country owns the disputed area, a much better approach would be for both countries to immediately agree that it is something akin to an "international peace park," with neither side claiming "sovereignty".

Instead, a joint commission could be established to provide security in the disputed area, and, in close cooperation with the World Heritage Committee, provide overall administration for a larger area reasonably related to the temple compound.

In this way both countries could immediately begin to benefit from a site which, historically, has been considered sacred to the people on both sides and one without borders.

BP: I agree that Cambodia has a better legal claim to the land. Cambodia could actually ask the ICJ for a ruling on whether the judgment itself ruled that the 4.6 sq km was Cambodian (ie. a clarification of the scope of the meaning and not a new case) given it ruled in favour of Cambodia on the map. Thailand would oppose this for the fear that they would lose, likewise Thailand would not accept the Court's jurisdiction (both parties need to consent/have accepted compulsory jurisdiction) if a new judgement was needed as Thailand would more than likely lose. So Thailand's position is now to posture. Cambodia can threaten to involve ASEAN or the Security Council precisely as they are in a better legal position. Practically though, Thailand is the bigger neighbour, and could conceivably use a variety of mechanisms to pressure Cambodia, so it does have some cards up it sleeve.

Obviously, a compromise is the best situation as it would reduce tensions, but I can't see any of the nationalists and with the frenzy they have whipped up accepting anything less than full Thai sovereignty over the 4.6 sq km and the temple - a former NLA member, lawyer, and PAD supporter was quote in The Manager last week as complaining about the government calling the area a "disputed area" was wrong as it implies there is a dispute over the area when there should be none as it is Thai territory! More importantly, any compromise would need to be in writing and given the Constitutional Court decision on the Joint Communique, no Thai official or Minister is going to sign anything - can you imagine the frenzy if there was a public hearing before being brought before parliament (this is likely the legal problem which has been holding things as have been mentioned). Talk of managing the land with 8 other countries as requested World Heritage committee has sent the nationalists into a tailspin with some calling for Thailand to withdraw from UNESCO/World Heritage status (will Thailand leave its toys in the sandpit on the way home?) and others wanting Thailand to militarily retake the 4.6 sq km and the also the temple.

The only way out is an oral agreement and for the troops to revert back to the barracks. If they weren't up to 4,000 troops on the border now, one would want to roll ones eyes at how emotive the issue has become. Can both sides work out a compromise? They must, but wait for the knives to be out in Thailand once a compromise has been worked out.

NOTE: Will Surin be added to the "traitor" list?

On the day the video was released, The Nation reported:

Anupong said Malipieng has tried to unify various separatist groups but failed because the members did not believe in his leadership.

Anupong identified him as Mali Peng Khan, a former militant who was active in the 1984-1987. He said Mali Peng became inactive after 1987.

Bangkok Post though:

An intelligence source working in the far South denied two of the three TUSU leaders who appeared on Channel 5 were the same men.

One of the three was positively identified by army chief Gen Anupong Paojinda as Madipeng Khan. Another was believed to be his brother, Maruding. But the source who knew the two well said they were not Mr Madipeng and Mr Maruding.

The Nation reports similarly:

General Anupong Paochinda identified the self-proclaimed leader as Malipeng Khan, a former separatist leader who was active from 1984-87 and who tried but failed to unify various insurgent factions.

But an Army intelligence officer who claimed he met Malipeng in Egypt and Syria about a decade ago cast doubt on whether it was him or his brother Shamsudin as the person had dyed hair and a fake moustache.

Isra News reports:

Gen. Anupong has said that the the person who claims to be the leader is Maripeng Kahn (มะรีเป็ง คาน), but is still checking out who the other two are.

Gen. Chetta has refused to reveal the names of the persons saying that “as they say they are the leaders, they need to prove themselves” ("ในเมื่อเขาบอกว่าเป็นหัวหน้า เขาก็ต้องพิสูจน์ตัวเอง").

A former senior police officer,  Pol. Maj. Gen Jomrun Denudom (พล.ต.ต.จำรูญ เด่นอุดม)  who was a deputy regional commander for the South and is now the Chairman of Islamic Foundation based in the South says that one who read out the Malay statement is Hayeesamaae Mareubo and a former leader of a group in PULO (หะยีสะมะแอ มะรือโบ หัวหน้ากองกำลังติดอาวุธกลุ่มพูโล).

This is consistent with what various agencies based in the South say and that Hayeesamaae is a former PULO leader based in Rangae District in Narathiwat in the 80s. The other one, who read in Thai, is said to be Ustaz Ahsil (อุสตาซอาซิส).

Gen. Panlop said in regards to Ustaz Ahsil that the was one of the 130 Thais who fled to Malaysia in 2005 to see asylum.

Chaiyong, the head of the newspaper association of southern Thailand said that that one of the men was likely to be PULO's Lukman B. Lima, a former Old PULO spokesman. This grouping tried to make a lot of noise on the internet with their website in order to negotiate with the government.

However, another Isra News article says the Malay speaker was Maripeng Kahn. His birth name is Ahrefen Kahn, but was given the name Maripeng when he joined PULO. His older brother Shamsudin is a former Deputy Secretary-General of Old PULO when Tengku Bira Kotonila was President, who has since died in Syria. Maripeng is a former foreign affairs representative of PULO based in Sweden and has negotiated with the Thais twice. First, 9-12 April, 1993 he was there in Cairo along with others. Between 26-28 April, 1994, in Damascus as well. He tried to assemble the various groups to negotiate with the Thai government for peace, but was unsuccessful

BP: First, Kom Chad Luek also quotes Pol. Maj. Gen Jomrun Denudom as saying it was Hayeesamaae Mareubo and a former leader of the armed wing in PULO.

Second, I should note that now Deputy President of PULO Lukman has sent an e-mail to AP referring to the group that issued the ceasefire stating "It is an opportunist group which was created and orchestrated by an individual to confuse and divide the liberation movement" so one assumes that you can rule him out – although PULO are a propaganda machine so I can also imagine them have some role.*

Another PULO leader as AFP reports:

One veteran militant leader, Kasturi Mahkota, disavowed the statement, saying his group knew nothing about the militants who appeared on television

BP: Third, I don't believe that PULO doesn't know who these people are - both of the suspected Malay speakers are PULO guys. Even if one or all of them are not former PULO people, we are talking about 50 year old men who from all educated guesses were involved in the insurgency in the 80s like PULO. I mean are they that well disguised? Or the PULO guys who have issued statements playing politics? I say this as I am wondering about the timing. The Nation of June 30, 2008:

Tengku Bira Kotonila, the founder and president of the Patani United Liberation Organisation (Pulo), passed away Sunday evening while living abroad in exile, his associates said.

Kasturi Makota, Pulo's foreign affairs chief, confirmed the passing of Tenku Biro but declined to provide further details about the exact location except to say that it was in the Middle East.

"Out of consideration to the host country, we are not prepared to go into further details," Kasturi said.

Konku Bira was said to be in the late 1970s [BP: Late 70s?] and his exact birth date was not known. He was borned in Narathiwat's Yi-ngor district.

Kasturi said Tonku Bira "will be missed."

Although he started his career in exiled as Pulo president of, over r the past recent years, Tonku Bira has become more nominal leader for the various Pulo factions.

"He has been ill for some time. Our struggle will go on," Kasturi said.

Thai intelligence sources said Tenku Bira spent much of his exiled life in Damascus, Syria, which they described Patani-Malay intellectual centre.

Tengku Biro founded Pulo in 1968 while studying at the Aligarh Muslim University in India.

In late 1990s, Pulo and other long standing separatist groups went under as their foot soldiers on the ground opted for amnesty from theThai government.

Since this round of separatist violence resurfaced in the deep South in late 2001, Tengku Bira once again resumed his old role, becoming the unifying symbol of the exiled separatist movements aborad.

"I found him to be quite a charming person, a man who was willing to listen to our side and willing to compromise," said a Thai Army intelligence officer who "enter into a dialogue with the Pulo leader in 1995.

"He supported the idea of dialogged in 1995, a time when other separatist organizations were still clinging on to very uncompromising positions," said the officer who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Kasturi said the Pulo will hold a congress in the near future to elect a new president

Tengku Biro is survived by a son and a separatist movement that is at a crossroad. Pulo has been in engaging in secret dialogue with the Thai Army over the past four years but no major breakthrough has been reported.

The group consistently called for independence for the Malays' historical homeland in the southernmost border region of Thailand. But over the four years the group has lowered its demand and opted for dialogged with the Thai Army.

In April 7, 2007, Kentku Bira issued a statement calling for a "peaceful resolution to the conflict" in Malay-speaking southernmost provinces.

He said Pulo was " fully committed to finding a peaceful resolution t the conflict in Patani that has cost more than 3,000 lives since 2004."

BP: Founder dies? Has a new leader been elected? Doesn't seem so as no one is now called "President". I will focus on the motives on the "Thai side" (military, govt, Chetta etc) in a later post, but what are the motivations of the 3 individuals and the other groups? The various old groups from the 80s all have differences, but it seems there must be some power struggle going on and the 3 individuals and whoever they are and represent are trying to increase their influence. Whether they will be successful or not is a different question, but I am struggling to see any other motivation for the video.

*You can read one of Lukman's previous rantings here.

Bloomberg:

Thailand's baht held near a four- week high on speculation the biggest weekly drop in crude oil prices in three years will reduce the cost of fuel imports, damping demand for dollars. Government bonds advanced.

The baht had its biggest weekly advance in more than four months last week as the price of crude oil in New York dropped 11 percent, the most since December 2004. Thailand imports almost all of the oil it consumes.

BP: Previously, it was the reverse where the rise in the price of crude oil resulted in a weakened baht. This meant that not only was crude oil becoming more expensive in US$ terms, but because of the weakened baht at the same time, it was becoming even more expensive in baht terms. Now, the reverse is happening so there is some glimmer of light, at least for now.

Bloomberg today:

One-Two-Go Airline, Thailand's second-biggest budget carrier, will suspend operations for about two months after fuel prices almost doubled in a year and a crash in September killed 90 people.

The carrier will ground its planes from tomorrow until Sept. 15, it said in an e-mailed statement yesterday. The Orient Thai Airline Co. unit will ``reorganize'' its operation and staff before resuming flights, it said.

Bangkok Post this afternoon:

Civil Aviation Department Director-General Chaisak Angkasuwan announced at a press conference on Monday that Orient Thai Airline and its subsidiary, One-Two-Go Airline were to suspend operations for 30 days, starting July 22.

It was reported the air operator certificates of the two airlines were suspended because of poor safety standards.

Mr Chaisaik went on to say that the airlines were the second group to face service suspension, after Sky Aviation.

The Civil Aviation department will file criminal suits against their pilots, inspectors and the companies within two weeks.

BP: And fuel was the reason that they were suspending operations? It doesn't really give you much confidence in the airline.

Bangkok Post translates a Thai Rath column:

The Thai Rath writer agreed that in theory the Democrat party could be dissolved if the party executive is found guilty by the Supreme Court, and all party executives could be barred from politics for five years, including party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva. In practice, however, this is very unlikely. This is because four government coalition parties are now facing dissolution. If the Democrat party joins them, who will form the government, asked the writer.

He believed that at most the Democrat executive would face a yellow card, not a red card. If the Democrat party were to be dissolved, it should have been dissolved together with Thai Rak Thai last year when it faced even greater accusations, concluded Thai Rath.

BP: What principle of the rule of law states that you can't punish those who are last in line? He is probably right though as in the scheme of things the Democrats can't be allowed to be dissolved.

If Chang Noi had ever been on PAD's christmas card, I think Chang Noi has been well and truly struck off now. Key excerpt in latest column:

The movement's longer-term aim is to undermine the central principles of electoral democracy, namely the sovereignty of the people, and the selection of a parliament by the system of one-man, one-vote. The PAD leaders claim that the electorate cannot be trusted with the franchise because the mass of rural people are uneducated and corrupt. They want the elected portion of the lower house reduced to a minority (perhaps 30 per cent), and the remainder filled partly by "retired officials and important people" and partly by ordinary people and workers, selected by appointment. Since the logic of the PAD's proposal is to disenfranchise the rural poor, this new system is likely to favour the rich, the urban, and the higher educated.
...
Analysing the PAD's audience on the streets and in front of television screens is difficult. There are only stray interviews, plus pictures. Perhaps the single word that emerges from this impressionistic data is "respectable". The crowds are generally smartly dressed. The age profile is quite high, though there are also many families in attendance (and the TV audience may be significantly younger). Head-counting from press photos shows a slight preponderance of women over men. From the few on-site interviews available, the crowds include retirees, public servants, small business people, and senior executives from modern firms. There seem to be relatively few manual workers.

The PAD is clearly well connected to other institutions. One of its leaders is a Democrat MP. Other Democrats have spoken from its stages. So too have academics from some of Bangkok's major universities. A serving general has taken the PAD stage in his full uniform. Other military figures, including General Saprang Kalayanamitra, have been seen backstage and are open in their support.

The PAD seems to be protected, perhaps by friends in important places, but also by virtue of its widespread urban support. No other Bangkok protest has suffered so little harassment.
...
In short, PAD is an anti-democratic movement, supported by high investment and shadowy protection, that exploits the fears of the privileged and a deliberately anti-rational nationalism, and flirts with militarism and violence.

BP: Read the whole thing. Chang Noi also covers PAD's use of symbolism.

My impression from watching the rallies and based on a number of reports from different people who have attended the rallies is more in line with Crispin's column last month and that is there is less urban and middle-class support as well as less support from the institutions.* PAD deliberately stage manage and The Manager and ASTV choose more respectable people to highlight in pictures and to interview. The core base is more provincial than the Bangkok middle class. This can change with a temporary swell of numbers at times. Polls indicate there is some urban support for the PAD, but they didn't turn up to the protests.

*Any Prem speech recently? Key military support is not there and Sondi L has attacked Army C-in-C Gen. Anupong.

While there has been some criticism of the economic aspects of the stimulus package, the consensus seems to be that it will help the government, and PPP in particular, electorally.

Thitinan sees it is part of the Samak government going on the offensive:

By last Tuesday, when the cabinet held its weekly meeting, the government's offensive was in full bloom. A new, six-month relief package of tax cuts and utilities and fuel subsidies to the tune of 47 billion baht was announced to offset higher living costs, with the emphasis on low-income earners.

Having been distracted and obstructed by its opponents in recent weeks, the PPP-led government has returned to its populist roots. The majority of the electorate is the PPP's greatest asset.

Mr Samak and the ruling party are now poised to fight its upcoming battles with its support bases firmly in tow.

The conspicuous return to its tried and tested populist agenda is a win-win outcome. Even if the government is aborted and new elections are due, relief measures for the poor and downtrodden will translate into votes.

BP: The WSJ is off a similar opinion. This Bangkok Post article provides an interesting comparison on the differences between those in different socio-economic groups to the package. Those who are critical:

"It's like the government is giving out desserts on Children's Day. Once the festival is over, everything will be gone," said businessman Chalermchai Kongthaiin in Lampang's Muang district.
...
"I think the government has rushed the measures through to only to please people and cash in on the popular vote," said Surapon Tansuwan, mayor of Lampang municipality.
...
People in Phuket echoed this view.

Phuket tourism association deputy chairman Purit Maswongsa said the package was populist and offered arbitrarily to certain groups of people to lessen political pressure on the government.

For example people could not take advantage of the free bus rides if they live outside of Bangkok, he said.

"Why doesn't it solve problems at a macro rather than a micro level?"

Those who are supportive:

Yaowaman Chansuwan, a 50-year-old food seller, said the aid package, which includes free electricity and tap water for low energy users, would not end their hardship. But it would at least give them more breathing space.

"Thank you so much" was her response to the government for offering the measures.
...
Many people in Chiang Mai, however, gave full backing to the package.

Maejo University student Sirinpa Jantorata said families would be able to save on their monthly utilities bills. She added it may actually encourage people to use less electricity and water to make sure their consumption stays within the levels that would qualify them to get free use of utilities.

"We have to seize this opportunity the government has given us," she said.

BP: The views in Bangkok were mixed, but the above chart about sums the situation up. There have been a couple of polls. First, the Suan Dusit poll:

The poll is of those in Bangkok and outside of Bangkok and was conducted between 16-18 July. The poll surveyed 2,801 people.

66.75% of those in Bangkok agree with the measures compared with 66.42% of those outside of Bangkok.

The most popular measure was keeping the cooking gas subsidy which 84.42% of those in Bangkok and 81.2% of those outside of Bangkok agreed with. The next popular measure was the reduction in excise tax on diesel and gasohol where 77.92% of those outside of Bangkok and 74.19% of those in Bangkok agreed with. For the free/reduction in price of electricity and water, 67.84% of those in Bangkok and 71.08% outside of Bangkok agreed with the measures.

51.43% of people think it will improve their lives, 44.01% think their lives will stay the same, 4.56% think their lives will get worse. In regards to support of the government, 45.38% think it will stay the same, 40.99% think it will improve and 13.63% think it will decline.

The reason why people think that 45.48% people's support of the government will stay the same is that the measures are short-term, no real effort to solve the real problems, and for the government's own political popularity.

Source: Manager, Khao Sod, Thai Rath.

There is also an ABAC poll which was released today:

Poll of 2,447 people in 18 provinces throughout Thailand from July 15-20. On the 6 measures, the three most seen has helping to reduce costs were keeping the subsidy on LPG cooking gas (76.6%), free electricity for those who use less than 80 units per month (64.1%) and reduction in excise tax for 6 months (57.3%).

Sourcce: The Manager.

BP: There is another part of one of the two polls which I can't find in the newspapers, but I have seen on TV shows greater satisfaction with the measures for those with incomes under 10,000 baht a month (i.e the typical PPP voter) compared with those with incomes over 10,000 baht a month.

The pressure was mounting on the government to do something, but when it does it is criticised for doing so. To paraphrase others, there is no magic wand to reduce prices. I think you can find some faults with some of the measures, but they are surprisingly well-targeted at the poor and have received broad support which I think nullifies that the government was doing nothing. To paraphrase Samak, those who can afford to purchase an air-conditioning unit and turn it on all day can afford to pay. It is difficult to give money to the poor through the tax system as many pay no tax as it is and/or many are not part of the tax system. This is why the free elecriticty measure has been popular. I can't remember seeing a single piece of criticism of this measure.

The reduction in excise tax on diesel doesn't really directly affect most of the public. But transport companies are facing problems with price controls so the reduction in cost will lessen the pressure and need to raise prices so there will be an indirect affect. I am not sure selling higher energy prices is a vote winner for the Democrats either.

6 measures for 6 months is rather catchy. Some of the measures (free rail travel and bus travel) have all kinds of conditions, but the free elecricity and keeping the LPG cooking subsidy are fairly simple to understand and calculate. Now, that the government has reduced the pressure, it will allows the government to shift to the constitutional amendments, megaprojects, and the budget.

I don't see how this doesn't help PPP politically in the short-term and with likely elections next year.

The Manager has the latest ABAC Poll showing that Samak's popularity continues to rise:

Poll of 2,447 people in 18 provinces throughout Thailand from July 15-20 shows that Samak's support has increased from 30.7% in March to 52% just after the censure debate to 57.1% now. His disapproval rating has dropped from 52% in March to 40.6% after the censure debate to 40.4% now.

BP: Actually, between the 30.7% and 52% numbers, he polled 48.5% in early June. The undecideds have moved dramatically to Samak. 22% of people were undecided in March. This is down to 2% now.

It would make no logical or rational sense for Samak to resign or for those within PPP to want Samak to go. and for those newspapers who believe Samak is on his last legs, perhaps, they should have a look at what the polls say. In fact, if you don't believe the polls have a look at how Samak dominates political coverage despite him limiting his talking to the media almost exclusively to his Sunday talkshow. The upcoming coalition reshuffle might be further evidence of the power Samak now wields.

Abhisit keen on waiting for the police investigation to conclude:

Democrat leader Abhisit Vejjajiva yesterday refused to dismiss MP Somkiat Pongpaiboon from the party despite pressure from the People Power party (PPP) which has demanded the opposition take action against him.

Mr Somkiat, facing a charge of lese majeste, is in a comparable position to former Prime Minister's Office minister Jakrapob Penkair, who faced a similar charge and opted to resign from cabinet.

"We cannot use the same standard in this case," Mr Abhisit said. "Somkiat is not a minister. He's only an MP."

Mr Somkiat is an MP under the proportional representation system, known as the party list. The former lecturer at Rajabhat Nakhon Ratchasima University is also among the five key leaders of the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD).

An address he made to anti-government protesters put him in hot water. He was alleged to have shown disrespect to Rajavinit school teachers by calling them Khmers. His Majesty the King gave the school its name.

The former academic was later charged with lese majeste. The charge was lodged by the PPP.

Mr Abhisit said he talked with Mr Somkiat about the charge. Mr Somkiat said he never intended to insult the King.

"The party does not have sufficient reason to expel him," Mr Abhisit said, adding the party would wait for the outcome of the police investigation

BP: So should we take it Abhisit won't appoint Somkiat as a Minister then? I do think that Ministers and MPs are different, but in either case isn't waiting for the outcome of the police investigation the purdent thing to do.

Bangkok Post has this interesting quote from PAD leader Suriyasai:

"The monarch is being exploited to serve as a political tool," Mr Suriyasai said.

BP: Isn't that like the pot calling the kettle black? The entire PAD campaign since 2006 has been about how Thaksin and his "regime" are not loyal to the monarchy.

Suriyasai is responding to PPP MPs pressing a lese majeste charges against fellow PAD leader and Democrat Somkiart in regards to this:

An address he made to anti-government protesters put him in hot water. He was alleged to have shown disrespect to Rajavinit school teachers by calling them Khmers. His Majesty the King gave the school its name.

BP: Yes, the lese majeste charge is ridiculous - although it does give you an insight in the nationalistic PAD line of thinking - but I am just amazed at the audacity of the PAD criticizing others for using the monarchy as a political tool.

Bangkok Post:

The Cambodian government has launched a diplomatic offensive, alleging Thai "interference on its soil" at the Preah Vihear temple to the United Nations Security Council.

"The Thai ambassador to the UN has reported to the Thai government that Cambodia has filed a complaint with the UN over the dispute between Thailand and Cambodia," Thai government spokesman Wichianchote Sukchotrat said.

He said Cambodia wanted the UN to intervene and the Thai government would study the complaint before sending a letter to UN officials.

BP: I have some free time to come today so more on this and other issues:

The Post has an editorial today regarding the physical clash between PAD and the local community on the Thai side of the border near the Preah Vihear temple. Key excerpt:

The bloody clash between members of the the anti-government People's Alliance for Democracy and a group of local people in Si Sa Ket at the foot of the contentious Preah Vihear temple complex is a sad event. It is a culmination of the relentless building up of nationalist frenzy to the point that it bypasses reason and good judgement.

The touchy issue of Preah Vihear could not have occurred at a worse time for Thai-Cambodian relations, either. An ill-natured election campaign in Cambodia and an equally vengeful government-opposition face-off in Thailand have turned a cultural subject back into a political and nationalist confrontation. The governments on both sides of the border have caved in to the actions of self-styled super-patriots. A border committee meeting scheduled for Monday has to take firm action on both sides of the border to end all threats of violence and ratchet down the ugly voices.

The near-crisis around the temple issue has occurred for a variety of unfortunate reasons. For separate but equal reasons, neither Thai nor Cambodian authorities have been totally in control of events focusing on the ancient treasure. In both countries, extreme nationalists managed to gain the upper hand, leading to an ugly confrontation at the Preah Vihear site.

The priority on both sides of the border must be for the proper authorities to gain total control. There has been neither cause nor justification for the self-styled patriots of either Thailand or Cambodia to challenge the status quo at the temple site. Thais and Cambodians have long inhabited the region around the temple peacefully. Credit is due to both governments and both local military commands at the frontier for dealing peacefully and leniently with the mobs set on "liberating" the temple and the disputed surrounding territory.

It is an unhappy coincidence that both the Thai and Cambodian authorities have had to deal so cautiously with such embarrassing groups. Still, the army should have moved much more forcefully to block extremists in their quest to violate long-established border controls. The brief arrest of three Thais for crossing illegally into Cambodia was embarrassing to Thai forces responsible for border security - and to all Thais who want to see a peaceful resolution to existing disputes around the temple.

BP: I agree with the "say no to ugly nationalism", but I don't get the example. Nationalism was part of the PAD agenda, but not for the locals based on what I heard them say on TPBS and the TPBS analysis. The locals become even more enraged after the PAD accused of them being paid. As the Democrats and the PAD have whipped up a nationalist frenzy, the locals were stated to be annoyed as their economic livelihood had been affected by the closure of the border. They couldn't trade as per before. The confrontation was because the locals didn't want PAD coming into their community and making things worse for them. It was not a clash between Thais and Cambodians, but a clash between Thai nationalists (PAD) vs locals affected by the nationalist frenzy.

UPDATE: AP has more on what I mean:

One such clash took place Thursday about five miles from the temple in Sisaket Province, and about 10 people were injured, said Sisaket Governor Seni Jitkasem.

"It was a chaotic scene. People were beating one another with flag poles and kicking and punching," Seni said. "But the situation is now under control."

Earlier, hundreds of villagers blocked the anti-government protesters from marching to Preah Vihear, some shouting for them to "go home" and stop fomenting trouble. Police stood by a barricade blocking the road to the temple.

"We are Thais. We should be able to talk about this" to settle any differences, villager Ubondej Panthep said. "We don't want to provoke anyone to start shooting."

One protest leader, Pramoj Hoimook, said Cambodians have settled on Thai soil "and we want to correct that."

BP: Those are PAD protesters.

Where does one start on the package? First, it is clearly aimed at the poor unlike the previous stimulus package earlier this year which was more aimed at the middle and upper classes. There are 6 measures in the stimulus package:

1. Water: For households that consume less than 50 cubic liters of water each month, there is no charge. The cost is around 4 billion baht. Authorities estimate that 3.2 million households nationwide will qualify.

2. Electricity: For households that consume less than 80 units of electricity a month, the cost is free. For households using between 80-150 units a month, the government will pay half the cost. The cost is around 12 billion baht. Authorities estimate 6.47 million households will benefit for the electricity waiver of less than 80 units. Another 9.86 million households using 81 to 150 units of electricity per month will benefit from the 50% discount.

3. Gasohol and Diesel: Reduction of excise charges for gasohol and diesel will be reduced to 1 satang per litre from Bt3.30 and Bt2.30, respectively, paving way for the cut in retail prices by the same amount. The cost of the tax cut is 32 billion baht.

Note: Another source says reduced to 1 baht per litre whereas from the Thai papers they have just mentioned a reduction.

4. Free Transportation: A further 1.2 billion baht will be spent on free bus travel on non-airconditioned buses around Bangkok and the suburbs for 800 buses - out of the 1,600 buses. 16 million passengers will benefit from free train fares, costing the government 250 million baht.

5. Cooking Gas Subsidy: The government will keep the subsidy.*

All these measures will take effect from August 1, except excise taxes cut that will began earlier on July 25

Economic commentary on the entire stimulus package, from AP:

"First, it is unlikely to play a significant role in boosting the economy as a whole," Sombat Thamrongtanyawong, a professor at the National Institute of Development Administration. "The protesters also have other demands which will not be met with the package."

The Bangkok Post reports:

But while the programme should help increase household income, business leaders are not hopeful that this will translate into added spending.

Likit Fahpyochon, a former president of Thai Retailers' Association and an executive of the Central Retail Corporation, said the package would have little impact on the retail market.

"Even though low-income earners will have more money in their pockets, they won't spend because they are not sure whether the government will help them more in the future. The measures will last only for six months," he said.

Mr Likit noted that many poor residents residing in flats may not even qualify for the free water and electricity, as their bills were paid to the flat owners rather than directly to the public utilities.

BP: I am not sure really that many poor people live in flats - hard to say without looking at the specific modeling - but flats are really urban whereas the vast majority of the poor are in rural areas. The free Bangkok buses is aimed at the urban poor in Bangkok.

I am not really sure it was designed to increase spending, more to restore previous household spending of the poor who have been affected by inflation. It is not designed to help Central's bottom line, but to enable the poor to use the money they have to purchase basic necessities.

The Bangkok Post has views from Korn Chatikavanij, the deputy secretary-general of the opposition Democrat Party:

"I think these measures are just a waste. For instance, the cuts on diesel fuel taxes. There are many who are not suffering from diesel prices who will benefit. In fact, the measure may only encourage people to use more fuel, rather than take steps to conserve energy," Mr Korn said.

The free bus rides for Bangkok residents were equally ill-designed, he said, as free trips would not automatically apply to all buses, but only selected ones, resulting in confusion among commuters and unfair treatment for private operators.

BP: On the second point I agree. It would see a much better idea and wouldn't cost that much more to reduce the cost to 5 baht (a single coin) for all 1,600 buses. On the diesel costs, see below.

Not all of the commentary has been critical as the Bangkok Post reports:

The Kasikorn Research Institute yesterday estimated that the package should help cut inflation to an average of 7.3% this year from an earlier forecast of 7.8%.

"The relief on inflation, however, is a tradeoff with the fiscal deficit, which could rise to 220 billion baht this year from earlier forecasts of 172 billion," the institute said in a research note.

An economist at Thammasat, Pichit Likitkijsomboon, is quoted in Matichon as saying he agrees with the measures and even though they will only be in place for a short time, they can help reduce the economic problems faced by the poor (เห็นด้วยกับมาตรการ 6 เดือนของรัฐบาล แม้ว่าจะเป็นระยะสั้น แต่ก็สามารถบรรเทาความเดือดร้อนของพี่น้องประชาชนคนจนได้).

The WSJ is glowing:

The real purpose of this "stimulus" isn't so much to stimulate as to ease the burden of inflation on low-income Thais.
...
It's always refreshing to see a government respond to bad economic news by cutting taxes instead of increasing government intervention. Contrast this approach to that floated by a South Korean Vice Minister of Finance, who suggested this week reintroducing price controls, according to Bloomberg.

But the Thai plan can only be a stop-gap. The only surefire way to ease the burden of inflation on the poor is to reduce their number through economic growth. Thailand has already made strides in this respect over the years, and the best next step would be a genuine stimulus package that boosts economic growth further.
...
With this week's plan, Mr. Samak has shown a good instinct for tax cutting over the alternatives. Bangkok needs more of that on a truly stimulative scale, for the sake of Thailand's poor as much as for its businessmen and foreign investors.

BP: I'll look at the political implications of the stimulus package in my next post.

*I initially left out 5.

I had always wondered about this before, but this account from Reuters is interesting:

Tokyo rubber futures fell 1.1 percent on Friday as investment funds cut their positions due to sharp falls in oil prices and a weakening technical trend.

* As of 0129 GMT, the key Tokyo Commodity Exchange rubber contract for December delivery <0#jru:> was trading at 328.4 yen per kg, down 3.7 yen or 1.1 percent.

The December contract was nearly 6 percent below an intraday high of 348.5 yen touched on Monday.

* "Funds are actively slashing their buy positions based on weakening technical trends. Sharp falls in crude prices are also adding downward pressure," said Jun Nishimuta, an analyst at Kanetsu Asset Management.

* TOCOM rubber's open interest, or the number of contracts outstanding, fell 9 percent to 46,502 contracts as of Thursday from 51,343 at the start of the week.

* "Open interest has come down but there is more room for funds to sell. A bigger fall below 330 yen would trigger active stop-loss selling," Nishimuta said.

* Supply concerns may ease after a group claiming to be the leaders of a four-year-old separatist insurgency in Thailand's Muslim south said on Thursday they had agreed to a ceasefire.[ID:nBKK247795]

It would be the first time the rebels have claimed responsibility for near daily attacks that have killed more than 3,000 and hit rubber production in the provinces bordering Malaysia. The region accounts for 10 percent of rubber output from Thailand, the world's top producer.

BP: The commodity price yo-yo.

Thanong:

In the meantime, General Anupong has developed a very good rapport with Samak. If Samak does not mess with military affairs, then General Anupong will preserve his neutrality. Samak also realises that the stability of his government depends on its military backing at this crucial juncture. Samak is loyal to the monarchy and gets military support. That's all he cares about.

BP: Aren't they the two things that really matter now?

The Nation has some excellent coverage on the ceasefire announcement by the United Southern Underground:

Speaking through a translator, the spokesman announced an end to all violent attacks and separatist activities in the Muslim-majority region.

He added that any armed groups resisting the order would be considered renegades and could be eliminated.

"We want to see peace and stability in the region. All forms of attacks has come to an end," the spokesman said. Names of the leaders were unknown.

He said the ceasefire goes into effectively on July 14, 2008. However, the videotape was not broadcast until today at noon. The statement was aired today through Thai TV5, an Army-run station and TV 7.

But attacks in the restive region continue unabated with police headquarters in Pattani and Yala coming under bomb attacks this past week.

Former army chief and defence minister Chetta Thanajaro claimed credit for the so-called breakthrough.

Chetta said he has been carrying out secret negotiation with members of these eleven "underground" movements operating in southern Thailand and abroad.

Chetta said the decision was made "unconditionally" and the spokesman did not make any demands as to what deals, if any, was reached between the Thai state and the eleven groups he claimed to represent.

Hurman Right Watch's Sunai Phasuk said Chetta may have "jumped the gun" with the announcement but added that only time will tell.

"His credibility is on the line. Besides, there has been nothing to suggest that the militants on the ground would let up with their activities," Sunai said in a telephone interview.

Place of the recording is said by an intelligence official as in Germany.

BP: Thai TV also report it was in Germany, but the persons concerned actually are in "neighbouring countries" - mentioned on TPBS that Gen. Chetta has close relationships with the Indonesians.

Audio of what they say, in a Malay dialect, can be heard here, with a Thai translation at the end. Video of what Gen. Chetta said as his press conference today is available here.

Gen Chetta said that if there are any problems with the ceasefire that he, and he alone, will take all responsibility. He also said the situation will improve compared to before.

BP: I should note that Gen. Chetta is not some golfing general. He is a former Army C-in-C (Gen. Surayud succeeded him in 1998) and Defence Minister under Thaksin. He is also the leader of a coalition party. He was granted time on TV although no one knew in advance what he was talking about - The Manager states Gen. Anupong as knowing that Gen. Chetta wanted time and a TV 5 bigwig says that Gen. Anupong gave his approval, but for the army not to get involved. AFP has more:

Hours before the broadcast, ex-army chief and former defence minister General Chetta Thanacharo appeared on the same channel to announce he had brokered a deal with the group, which he said was party to the separatist conflict.

Chetta, leader of the Ruam Chai Thai Chart Pattana party, a minor member of the governing six-party coalition, told Channel 5 he would take full responsibility if violence resumed.

"They must prove their intention to cease their activities for the sake of sustainable peace in the south," the general said. "Everything is not 100 percent certain."

It is also important to note something else what was said by the insurgent "leader" in the video:

One of the three men, speaking in the southern Yawi dialect, claimed to be in charge of 11 sets of insurgents including known militant groups called PULO and RKK. He called on other groups to end their activities.

BP: PULO are a bunch of secular fighters from the 80s who are completely irrelevant. RKK is slightly different, but under which "name" the groups that are completely perpetrating the violence is not clear. Sometimes the RKK is used, other times the BRN Coordinate - Isara News Centre (independent but respected source of commentary on the South) also notes that the statement was PULO connected and coordinated (they say a former PULO spokesman was involved) and we have heard nothing from BRN Coordinate.

Obviously the proof will be in the pudding, but why doe he need to call on others to end their activities if he is a leader. Gen. Chetta also said the reason why the tape needed to be released today, as opposed to after 30 days, was that the leaders needed to tell their subordinates about the ceasefire. This doesn't really he suggest he has much control.

Gen. Anupong has identified one of the "leaders as The Nation reports:

Anupong said Malipieng has tried to unify various separatist groups but failed because the members did not believe in his leadership.

Anupong identified him as Mali Peng Khan, a former militant who was active in the 1984-1987. He said Mali Peng became inactive after 1987.

BP: Most of the military have been publicly quiet, probably not wanting to criticise a former Army C-in-C. Gen. Boonsrang, Supreme Commander, said we will need to take a wait-and-see approach, but he had no details of what transpired between Gen. Chetta and the insurgents. When asked if it was just a hoax, he said "don't think like that" as if it is true it will be good. However, some elements of the military, when speaking anonymously have dismissive:

A military official told AFP on condition of anonymity he was suspicious of the politician's motive.

"This is likely to be a joke," he said. "General Chetta may be doing this for his own political benefit. Besides, the group's name sounds unfamiliar."

AP reports the military as wanting themselves to distance themselves from what Gen. Chetta has been doing:

Army spokesman Col. Akara Thiprote said the army has never heard of the organization.

"The army played no role in the negotiation that led to this announcement," Akara said in a telephone interview. "We will continue to be vigilant in providing security in the region."

A Democrat MP from Narathiwat says that locals don't know the insurgent leaders are. The Deputy Governor of Narathiwat also tells locals not to be too confident in the ceasefire.

Srisompob on Prince of Songkhla University says there are two important observations. The group has never appeared/doesn't have a presence in the South and they have made no demands.

AP reports:

"It is a positive signal from one group but it is too early to tell whether it will have any impact on the situation on the ground," said Chitchanok Rahimmula, a political scientist at Prince of Songkhla University in Pattani.

"Different people claim to represent the insurgents, saying they are the leaders, but it is not clear who is actually in charge," said Chitchanok, who like many experts on the region said she has never heard of the group.

Reuters reports:

"Everyone is extremely suspicious and it seems as if it may be a hoax of some sort. No one seems to recognise the flag either," an analyst at a Bangkok-based security firm said.

Panitan Wattanayagorn, a political analyst and security expert at Bangkok's Chulalongkorn University, was also cautious.

"In the past, it (the government) has met people claiming to represent insurgents in the region, but the violence never stops," he said.

BP: You can see the flag in the background here.

I am not very confident there will be a ceasefire. There was an attack around 3pm injuring two soldiers and in the last hour there has been another attack. If anything in the next couple of days, you could see a surge in violence to basically discredit the "leaders" to show they do not speak for the current group of insurgents. It will be very hard to prove any reduction of violence is connected either as there has been a downward reduction in violence since October last year. If this continues, is it really because of the ceasefire? The "no demands" surely must be a joke too because why would they give up now for nothing? It makes no logical sense.

BBC: A good backgrounder, but this was interesting:

But there are also genuine historical grievances at play.

The international court decision awarding Preah Vihear to Cambodia in 1962 was not unanimous. It rested largely on Thailand's failure to protest against the French-drawn border line in the decades before.

At the time it was mapped, a hundred years ago, Thailand had few skilled cartographers of its own.

The French colonial cartographers were supposed to draw the border along the forested edge of the Dangret Escarpment, but they veered in a few hundred metres to put the temple on the Cambodian side. It is not clear why the Thais did not object then.

But it is worth remembering that in 1941 Thailand fought its only war of the 20th Century with French colonial forces over where the border with Cambodia should lie. A huge monument in the centre of Bangkok still commemorates that conflict.

At different periods in the past Thai and Khmer empires have vied for dominance in the region; the town next to the famous Khmer ruins at Angkor Wat is Siem Reap, which means "Siam [Thailand] flattened".

BP: The Siem Reap and link to Siam is interesting.

h/t Siam Sentinel

Another classic:

The opposition Democratic Party widened their censure targets yesterday to include non-members of the ruling party, including underperforming international footballers involved in the UEFA Euro 2008 Tournament in Switzerland and Austria. During emotional and heated testimony, MP Trairong Suwankhiri singled out the performance of Czech Republic national goalkeeper Petr Cech, whose handling error in last weeks’ quarter-final match against Turkey led to the ouster of the favored side. “His international performance continues to pale in comparison to his work at (club) Chelsea,” Trairoing said. “I declare that he is unfit to serve the national team.” Rumors that Trairong had wagered large amounts of money on a Czech-Spain final were firmly denied. 

BP:Unfit to serve?

Andrew Walker of New Mandala fame in the Canberra Times. Key excerpt:

If you can’t win an election then why not change the rules? The People’s Alliance for Democracy don’t trust the electorate. They think that most voters, especially rural voters, are naive and gullible. They don’t want these voters to be able to determine who forms a government. Samak is a rough and tumble politician with a highly-dubious political history.

BP: Read the whole thing and comment here.

The "progressive" Matichon had a very nationalistic editorial yesterday. It focuses mainly on the Preah Vihear issue and concludes by saying that all Thais need to wake up to see what is happening and what politicians are doing. Their actions show they don't feel anything/care (ที่ยังทำตัวไม่รู้ร้อนรู้หนาว). This is despite sovereignty and territory in the area around Preah Vihear being placed at a risk and could fall into the hands of Cambodia.

BP: This kind of rhetoric along with The Nation's traitor rhetoric (need I even mention The Manager) is just fanning the nationalist flames.*

h/t Chuts

*Since we are talking about nationalist rhetoric. On his weekly show on Sunday, Samak was talking about the signing of international agreements and said the Democrats were also involved in signing treaties with foreign countries/international countries. One was a letter to the IMF where they essentially pawned the country off to the IMF.

BP: So Samak is now using the nationalist card blatantly and reminds of all the ridiculous charges against the Dems back then. Interestingly, the Democrats responded to a number of points on what Samak said although I have seen no report on them saying anything about the IMF card. I guess they still think it is too sensitive to bring it up even after all these years.

Muad Dtee or Lt. Dtee was a police officer who was working in the Deep South. He had an online diary/blog. On his 24th birthday (and also his mother's birthday), he was on teacher protection patrol in Yala (actually near Santi 1 - Peace Village 1) and there was an ambush and he was killed. There were many messages on the night before his death and you can see the messages wishing him a happy birthday, some concern and his lack of responses, and then a commentator announcing his death. In the online community, he had same fame with the pictures he posted.

After his death, his unit got into a firefight with a group of insurgents/terrorists and 6 insurgents/terrorists were killed. It has been speculated it was a revenge attack and posts of satisifaction have been post on various webboards. The deaths were reported in the English language press here.

Last night, two of his friends of Muad Dtee and his parents appeared on Sorayuth's Jub Kaow Kui. It is available on YouTube - parts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5.

BP: One of his friends who was also a police officer based in the South who notes that lack of personnel resulted in the unit that lacking the necessary numbers. He says they could have fought back if they had their normal numbers - there would be a different configuration with a lead vehicle etc.

This is a political blog so one of the reasons I have blogged on this is how his death and the coverage of it plays out and what it means for public support of military operations in the South.
He was on his second tour and had volunteered to go there. He had written of his pride on serving in the South. Both is parents, while still obviously upset, also talked about being proud of what he had done. There is certainly "no what are we doing there" and by the biography presented of him on the show and through other segments of the media, I think it certainly strengthens the resolve.

There is a human aspect to the violence which you can often forget or overlook. I have blogged about the abuses perpetrated by the military/police in the past, but each month there are police and soliders killed, often brutally as well. I don't normally get into personal anecdotes, but I know of someone serving in the Deep South who is in a very dangerous role. Meeting up with this person's partner recently, it was clear the stress it was placing on family life.

University of Miami Libraries' Honor with Books program:

Vivacharawongse, Sujarinee - Donor
Vivacharawongse, Chakriwat - Honoree
Brave new world and Brave new world revisited

BP: If that name means nothing to you, look here, and if the book means nothing to you well go here. For some reason I found the choice of book amusing....

The Bugle blogs that The Nation Group's Daily Xpress has ceased its Saturday and Sunday editions. The comments in the post make for interesting reading with a commentator saying that staff over a certain pay grade have been asked to take a 15% cut. I have heard strong rumours that at least one senior Thai journalist/columnist is leaving or will take a severely reduced role. It can't be Yoon. Tulsie, Thanong, or Sopon? I imagine we will find out over the coming weeks.

I have previously blogged about Thailand's treatment of Hmong refugees here and here, but there is an interesting report issued by the US Committee for Refugees and Immigrants (USCRI) in June which ranked Thailand as one of the 10 worst places for refugees. Nevertheless, as this article states:

Thailand has not ratified the 1951 UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, a key legal document in defining a refugee, their rights and the legal obligations of states.

“In spite of having not signed the convention, they have been very hospitable to refugees,' [UNHCR senior regional public information officer, Kitty] McKinsey said. “Thailand has hosted 1.2 million refugees over the past 30 years, so that shouldn't be forgotten.”
...
“Although Thailand is not a signatory to the UN refugee convention and protocol, its humanitarian record in providing asylum to refugees is better than that of many countries that have acceded,” Sally Thompson, executive director of the Thailand-Burma Border Consortium, told IRIN.

BP: So certainly not a good record, but Thailand has had and continues to have today a large number of refugees.

btw, I have also blogged about North Korean refugees in Thailand here and here.

AP:

About 40 Thai troops entered Cambodian territory on Tuesday as tension escalated over disputed land around an ancient temple, a Cambodian official said.

The Thai military denied any border violation, saying the troops had only deployed near the disputed area near the 11th-century Preah Vihear temple "to protect our sovereignty."

The claimed intrusion follows the arrest by Cambodia of three Thai citizens who crossed the frontier near the temple, which was recently awarded World Heritage Site status by UNESCO.

Thailand claims some of the territory near Preah Vihear.

The Thai troops entered Cambodian territory near the temple, said Hang Soth, director-general of the national authority for Preah Vihear temple, an agency responsible for the monument.

Cambodian troops have been ordered to be on alert but not to be the first to fire, Hang Soth said.

Thai Maj. Gen. Kanok Netakawesana, the regional army commander [BP: He is not the Second Army Region Commander], said in a telephone interview that the troops were on Thai soil close to the disputed area. He declined to give the number of soldiers deployed.

"We are not violating the territory of Cambodia. We have every right to deploy troops here to protect our sovereignty," Kanok said.

Hang Soth said a Thai Buddhist monk, a woman and a man apparently managed to evade a checkpoint on the Thai side and crossed through a jungle border into Cambodia.

The incident marked the first cross-border foray by Thai protesters since Cambodia shut off access to Preah Vihear temple to visitors from Thailand late last month.

He said they were immediately stopped by Cambodian guards and were being held until Thai officials came to take them back. Earlier, he had said the protesters had already been returned to Thailand.

BP: In Cambodian territory or the 4.6 sq km of disputed territory?

Second Army Commander Lieutenant General Sujit Sittiprapha (สุจิตร สิทธิประภา) is quoted in Matichon as saying the 3 Thais have been detained by Preah Vihear guards and they are still negotiating - they had negotiated with the Cambodian army, but he noted they are not in the custody of the army. He said he had received confirmation that the three are being looked and are safe. He further said the situation is under control.

Manager reports one Thai solider was seriously injured, from what I understand after stepping on a land mine. It was in a location about 1km from Preah Vihear.

BP: The article only quotes from AFP's wire report in regards to the 40 Thai soldiers so nothing on them yet.

btw, this kind of overshadows the government's stimulus package announced today.

UPDATE: Bloomberg:

Thailand denied reports its soldiers entered Cambodia near a disputed temple, and said the two countries' relationship remains "normal,'' according to Foreign Ministry spokesman Tharit Charungvat.

Earlier Agence France-Presse reported that about 40 Thai soldiers entered Cambodia near a disputed border area containing a 900-year-old Hindu temple. Thailand sent about 10 paramilitary personnel into Cambodia to escort three Thai protesters back who were arrested for illegally crossing the border, Tharit said.

Thai troops "definitely'' did not cross into Cambodia, Tharit said, adding that ``the two governments very much understand each other.''

BP: Can someone just give us the GPS coordinates the land so we know whether it is in Thailand, Cambodia, or in the disputed 4.6 sq km (I assume the last one). I wonder if the Cambodians knew whether the paramilitary escort from Thailand was coming

The Phnom Penh Post (thanks to (ns(op)) in the comments:

At least 30 Thai troops entered Cambodia near Preah Vihear temple Tuesday, officials said, following the arrest of three Thai protesters who had illegally crossed the Cambodian border in the latest flare-up over the disputed 11th-century Hindu monument.

The armed soldiers have chased Cambodian villagers away from the site, said Koy Chan Sophal, deputy chief of a detachment of special Heritage Police who were deployed to Preah Vihear last month as tensions over the temple rose.

"Right now we are ... like hostages of the Thai soldiers. But we are keeping silent and awaiting orders from our top officials," he told the Post.

"If the government tells us to arrest them, we will arrest them immediately," he added.

Hun Saravuth, deputy military police commander for Preah Vihear province, said the Thai soldiers had spread out in a forested area within the temple complex after occupying a Buddhist pagoda located on a mountainside underneath the temple.

"We do not know why they are here," he said.

Earlier in the day a group of more than 100 soldiers and angry Thai demonstrators massed at the international checkpoint located near the temple to demand the return of three Thais – a monk, a nun and a layperson – arrested for crossing the border.

The checkpoint was closed last month after a group of Thai demonstrators approached Preah Vihear, protesting Cambodia's claim to the temple.

Reinforcements from the Choam Kh'san district and border police have been rushed to the temple complex, said district governor Kao Long, but Cambodian officials have vowed to remain calm.

"The Cambodian side is cool and patient," said Hang Soth, director of the National Preah Vihear Authority.

"The top levels of government are trying to resolve the situation. We do not want to fight," he added.

BP: Dare I say the Thai Foreign Ministry spokesman's account of the "escort" doesn't match up with what the Cambodians are saying. How high up the chain of command was the person who ordered the soliders to go in? Did the Cambodians really not know the Thais were coming?

The Cambodian election is coming up and as the ruling party is viewed by analysts to have a commanding lead in the polls and will romp home, so maybe it suits the opposition more to stoke nationalist sentiment. A Thai "invasion" is one of those stories.

I saw briefly the details earlier today and from what I read at the time I was about to criticize the government for further adding to inflationary pressures and say instead of spending more money, they should try targeted tax cuts to the poor, but it seems that it is what they are going to do as Thompson reports:

Thailand plans to announce a new economic stimulus package that will include tax cuts aimed at helping the poor cope with rising inflation, which is at a 10-year high, the finance minister said Monday.

The new measures should be announced after the weekly cabinet meeting Tuesday, Finance Minister Surapong Suebwonglee told reporters.

"I cannot reveal the details of this package because it needs approval from the cabinet meeting tomorrow. But the package will not affect individual income taxes or the value-added tax," Surapong said.

Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej will also elaborate on a food stamp project to help the poor as food and fuel prices soar, driving inflation to its highest levels since the 1997 financial crisis, Surapong added.

Inflation hit 8.9 percent in June, and officials have warned that it could reach double digits this month, driven by high food and fuel costs.

The Commerce Ministry reported last month that prices for the staple grain rice had jumped nearly 36 percent compared to one year ago, while pork costs jumped almost 32 percent.

The Bank of Thailand is widely expected to raise interest rates at its monetary policy meeting on Wednesday in a bid to rein in inflation.

Thailand's cabinet in March already approved a 40-billion-baht ($1.3-billion) package of tax cuts and other measures to shore up the kingdom's flagging economy.

BP: I think we can take the BOT will raise interest rates given the Cabinet is announcing the package this week to try and relieve pressure.

How do you design a food stamp scheme which won't be subject to corruption?

Philip Golingai:

On Thursday, The Nation gave three possible scenarios.

Scenario I: Samak tenders his resignation as prime minister to pave way for A) a new nominee of Thaksin, B) Banharn Silapa-archa, the Chart Thai Party leader, C) Abhisit Vejajjiva, Democrat leader, or D) a non-elected prime minister.

Scenario II: Samak dissolves parliament and calls for a snap election.

Scenario III: Samak hangs on but will not last long because A) the Constitutional Court case will rule whether the prime minister’s hosting of a TV cooking show on commercial television was in breach of the constitution, B) he is appealing a libel case that carries a jail term, or C) he faces corruption charges related to the procurement of fire trucks when he was Bangkok governor.

Suthep plays political analyst:

The government of Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej looks secure until at least the end of the year, predicts Democrat secretary-general Suthep Thaugsuban.

Mr Samak was likely to give some hints about how he intends to get his government through its worst political crisis in his weekly political broadcast on Sunday morning.

Mr Suthep said yesterday the ruling People Power party (PPP) can buy at least six months until the Constitution Court hands down a verdict on whether the party should be dissolved for electoral fraud.

He said a House dissolution is likely to be the last resort for the PPP as long as it has yet to complete the constitutional amendments it wants.

"Mr Samak will struggle on by reshuffling the cabinet so the government is refreshed, and it may survive until the end of the year or January next year," he said.
...
"Dissolving the House seems out of the question and it does raise risks for Mr Thaksin. In the case of a House dissolution, at least four months would elapse before a new government is formed.

"By that time, his court trial will be over," he said.

Reuters:

Thanachart's Pimpaka said there was a good chance Samak would dissolve parliament "within this quarter" to avoid the possible disbanding of his party.
...
Other analysts said a snap election was unlikely, but Samak might shuffle his cabinet to buy time

BP: All I will say is that Suthep is a future in political analysis as I think he is correct as stated before here and here.

I see only a 10% chance of Samak resigning before the dissolution. I have blogged previously that "I have heard reliably that, as of very recently, that Thaksin did not want Samak to resign". I see the Bangkok Post has heard (or at least speculates) similiarly '[i]t is believed the ''string-pulling boss'' behind the PPP remains determined to keep the party in government and Mr Samak in the prime minister's seat'.

The dissoution will not happen before November. In addition to the reasons mentioned, the Bangkok Post has an ever better reason why a dissolution is not on the cards now and that is "[e]lections cost a lot of money and the parties have only been in government barely six months".

I personally think now the dissolution is being pushed back to the very beginning of next year - elections in February/March or after Songkran. The dissolution will happen when things are ready (i.e. after the constitution has been amended) and not because of political pressure so the November date can be adjusted depending on how things are progress on the amendment timeline.

The government/Ministers have been under attack from the PAD, the Democrats, and the Senate over breaching the constitution. One received a red card last week, another was banned for politics for 5 years as his wife held shares of more than 5% in a company. Now, they are going on the offensive as The Nation reports:

The ruling People Power Party has asked the Election Commission to remove 28 Democrats and 33 senators from office for alleged breach of the Constitution because they own stocks in telecom, media and other firms that hold government concessions.

PPP deputy spokesman Suphachai Jaisamut filed the complaint with the EC yesterday by producing a list of MPs and senators holding stocks in companies that operate businesses that have state concessions.

Article 48 of the Constitution prohibits political office-holders from holding shares in telecom and media companies, while Article 265 bars them from holding stakes in companies that enjoy government concessions.

Supachai said he had obtained the list of MPs and senators from their personal assets declarations filed with the National Counter Corruption Commission when they assumed office.

Democrat secretary-general Suthep Thaugsuban admitted he held 5,000 shares worth Bt50,000 of telecom firm True Corp, which he bought from the stock market.

"They have to conduct the investigation because I bought these stocks from the stock market at only Bt50,000. My stocks are worth little. It should not be a problem," Suthep said.

Seri Suwanphanond, one of the authors of the 2007 Constitution, said Article 48 of the charter bars political office-holders from holding, directly or indirectly, even one stock in a media company.

"Violating it would affect their political status. The EC must determine this matter. If the politicians think otherwise, the Constitution Court will have to deliberate this case," he added.

Banharn Silapa-archa and his daughter Karnjana Silapa-archa of the Chart Thai Party have been found to own Bt80 million-Bt90 million worth of Siam City Cement stocks. The firm produces cement with concessions from the government.

Other big-time politicians include Khunyin Kalaya Sophonpanich, who holds stocks in Siam Cement; Somkiat Chanthavanic in Thai Oil, Siam Cement, Nation Multimedia, PTT and PTT Exploration & Production; and Ong-art Khlamphaiboon in Thai Oil.

The case of Suthep and other politicians is similar to what Chai Chidchob, the House Speaker, is now facing. Chai and his wife La-ong are found to own stocks in a company that has a concession with the government.

Reungkrai Leekijwatana, a senator, who has filed a complaint against Chai, said Suthep's owning of True is also a violation.

"Suthep's stock holding, directly or indirectly, [in True] violates the Constitution even though he does not have any involvement in the policy of the company," he said.

NOTE: The Nation states that the PPP attacks Banharn, but Banharn and Co aren't in the 61 names. Having first heard Supachai on TV, read in The Manager, and Thai Rath there was no mention of Banharn and neither is there in the article so I am unsure where this comes from.

BP: The result is a 5 year ban. It is tit-for-tat, but I think the more persuasive argument for PPP is that the current constitution is unworkable and hence has to be amended. After ruling against Chaiya it will be difficult for the Court to reverse itself given:

Section 48. No person holding a political position shall be the owner of, or hold shares in, newspaper, radio or television broadcasting or telecommunication business, irrespective of whether he so commits in his name, or through his proxy or nominee, or by other direct or indirect means which enable him to administer such business as if he is the owner of, or hold shares in, such business.

BP: Now where do we go? That the stocks are not worth much is not what the law says.

Samak yesterday:

But the premier, always the tough speech maker, also tried to get in a blow on the Democrats. Three oppositon MPs from the Northeast are likely to be red-carded soon by the Election Commission for fraud during the Dec 23 election campaign, he said.

"So the opposition party is also at risk of being dissolved," he said, and "I will wait to see whether the Democrat party will support the constitutional amendment" along with the coalition parties

The Nation reports:

The future of Democrat Party could look uncertain as Election Commission (EC) member Prapan Naikowit on Monday said an EC investigative panel was looking into the electoral fraud allegation against Deputy Democrat Party leader Witoon Nambut.

Prapan said the EC had once reviewed the electoral fraud case against Prapan who had been accused of distributing movie tickets while he was campaigning for the general election.

However, the EC found that the investigation file was incomplete and needed more evidence so it instructed the provincial EC to further investigate the matter.

Prapan downplayed that Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej was pressuring the EC by giving a comment during "Talk Samak Style" that the Democrat Party may also face dissolution.

EC chairman Apichart Sukhagganond however said the EC did not leak the information regarding the electoral fraud case against the Democrat MP and he did not know how Samak knew about the case. He said the EC has yet to receive the investigation file from Ubon Ratchathani Provincial Election Commission.

He denied that the information was leaked to bargain over possible dissolution of the ruling parties.

BP: This is about the case I blogged about previously. It is slowly moving its way through the wheels of justice. There is a video and PPP have a copy - I remember back in February the PPP was talking about video evidence against the Democrats so it is likely PPP hired someone to collect evidence against Democrat executives.. A PPP spokesman showed snippets of the video yesterday and said that they have witnesses to back it.

On one hand, it makes sense for the Democrats then to support an amendment to Section 237, but it would undermine the position they have taken now of no amendements to the constitution. Given it could be months before the EC, let alone the Supreme Court, if it gets to there, it is to the Democrats advantage to stick to their current position well at least for 6 more months.

In the aftermath of the Constitution Court decision finding the Joint Communique between Thailand-Cambodia was unconstitutional. There has been talk of the PAD, Senators, and the Democrats impeaching Noppadol, Samak, and/or the entire Cabinet.

Having a read through the Constitution and some analysis by Matichon had some of the potential legal pitfalls for the government, I can summarise as follows:

1. The Senate can remove the PM and Ministers from office on the grounds of (a) unusual wealthiness indicative of the commission of corruption, (b) malfeasance in office, (c) malfeasance in judicial office or (d) an intentional exercise of power contrary to the provisions of the Constitution or law or (e) seriously violates or fails to comply with ethical standard, may be removed from office by the Senate (Section 270, 2007 Constitution).

BP: Obviously (e) is very broad and a catch-all, but (d) seems to be what they are going after the government for.

2. For the matter of removal of office to be considered by the Senate, MPs or Senators totaling not less than one-fourth of the total number of the existing members of the House have the right to lodge with the President of the Senate a complaint. The complaint must "itemise circumstances in which such persons have allegedly committed the act". (Section 271, 2007 Constitution).

BP: The Democrats have the numbers - they need 120 MPs and have 160+. 77 Senators have sought to impeach the entire Cabinet. As this is more than half, it is clearly more than one-fourth.

NOTE: Anyone have any idea on the breakdown of the 77 Senators and how many appointed and how many elected?

3. After the request in (2), the President of the Senate "shall refer the matter to the National Counter Corruption Commission for inquisition without delay". If a majority of NCCC members agree that there is a prima facie case, person shall no longer perform their duties until the Senate has decided the matter. If there is no majority, the accusation shall lapse. The NCCC also need to prepare a report about the matter to the Senate (Section 272, 2007 Constitution).

BP: Basically, they are not removed from office, but cannot carry out their duties. The Nation says "this would potentially plunge the country into a power vacuum". In essence, the Cabinet would have to resign and an entire new Cabinet would need to be appointed - I assume completely different personnel. Prima facie is a very low standard to meet.

The affect of the "accusation shall lapse" seems only to be mean that the persons accused are not temporarily removed from office as the Senate still has to consider the report.

4. Upon receiving the NCCC's report in (3), a resolution of at least 3/5 of Senators is required to remove the Minister or Prime Minister. The person is then banned from office for 5 years (Sections 273 and 274, 2007 Constitution).

BP: 90 Senators are needed. This could be 74 appointed and 16 elected Senators. One would assume there is 77 already, given they have filed a petition of impeachment.

A number of questions. (1) Can NCCC accept the case? (2) Did the Samak Cabinet or individual Ministers intentionally exercise power contrary contrary to the provisions of the Constitution?

On (1), I thought I have heard a NCCC spokesman say they could not accept the case as it was not a corruption case and these were the only types of cases they were authorised to accept under statute. I can't find anything in the papers about this although searching for NCCC and impeachment brings up so many articles and I have skim-read a dozen of them and got nothing.

On 2 in regards to Noppadol, Matichon states it is clear he intentionally breached Section 270 of the Constitution although their analysis is a little light on how they come to this conclusion.

I have heard the Democrats argue that Samak intentionally breached the constitution as there had been academic criticism that the Joint Communique was illegal before the Cabinet meeting gave its approval - it seems to be a constructive knowledge argument then against the rest of the Cabinet. I have heard Chalerm counter that they asked for the legal advice of the Head of the Treaties Division at the Foreign Ministry who was of the opinion it was not a treaty and not in breach of Section 190(2).

BP: If the government had sought the advice of the Head of the Treaties Division at the Foreign Ministry in regards to the Joint Communique and they were acting on this advice, I think it would be travesty if the government is somehow impeached, let alone convicted of a criminal offence. We have legal gridlock as it is and the government is doing nothing.

I wonder though how this will actually affect poll numbers. The government has been putting out the narrative that they are unable to govern effectively because of all these rules and the opposition/Senate/PAD trying to impeach them and jail them. Might the public response be that this is over the top? Yes, the government did misread public opinion on Preah Vihear, but despite Noppadol resigning the Democrats have insisted they will impeach him anyway. Not just impeach him, they want to prosecute under the Criminal Code and the death penalty applies. Then it is not just impeaching Noppadol, but the whole Cabinet him and talk of criminal action against the whole Cabinet. I am not so sure that public opinion supports taking this level of action against the government. The result will be political paralysis. After the censure debate which the print media read as disastrous for the government, the government and Samak favourable ratings actually increased. I think this is because people perceived the Democrats as going too far and not helping the economic situation - there was a poll before the censure debate where a majority (or was it just plurality?) felt the censure debate was too early/disagree with it. We will have to wait and see what poll numbers say. The government will likely lose some support, but I am not so sure that the Democrats will gain and the undecideds will go up.

In addition, Matichon reports that Senators, led by Rosana, have also sought to bring criminal proceedings against the entire Cabinet under Section 275 of the Constitution.

Baker and Pasuk in WSJ:

On the face of it, a more assertive judiciary is a plus. A tradition of judicial passivity helps explain why politicians still often act as if they had total immunity...Already legal academics have charged that some recent verdicts show political bias and will create awkward precedents.

Much of this judicial activity could be construed as politics by other means, with Mr. Thaksin as the target. The convicted ex-speaker, Yongyuth Tiyapairat, is a local ally of Mr. Thaksin's. The foreign minister, Noppadon Pattama, used to be Mr. Thaksin's lawyer. The businessman was a former heavyweight in Mr. Thaksin's former party, Thai Rak Thai (which is now dissolved).
...
Whatever verdict the judges hand down in Mr. Thaksin's land case, it will not soothe the political divisions that underlie this tension between Mr. Thaksin and his detractors. If the Thaksins are acquitted, it will confirm for some that the rule of law is still subservient to money and power. If they are convicted, Mr. Thaksin's rural supporters may think their favorite leader is being persecuted by old elites. Were Mr. Thaksin to contest elections again today, there is little doubt he would win another landslide victory.
...
But it's not all bad news. Thais have learned to wield their electoral power at the ballot box. The judiciary has been hurled into the political front line, and been forced to become more active. The military, bureaucracy and political classes will have to adjust to these changes. That process will be messy, and will take time. But in the long run, a more open and inclusive democracy with a firmer rule of law might prevail.

BP: The current cases are about taking out Thaksin, not establishing a rule of law. If it was about the rule of law and stamping out corruption, what has happened to the e-passport scandal? Just before the coup this:

Auditors find irregularitiesin Bt7-bn bid

Foreign Ministry asked to explain awarding of big contract to a firm called 'incapable'

The Office of the Auditor-General (OAG) has found irregularities in the Foreign Ministry's tender for a Bt7-billion electronic passport project, a source said.

"There is a pattern of irregularities. It seems unfair to award the project to an incapable company [consortium] and leave others disqualified with unfair practices. This has caused the country a huge revenue loss," said an OAG source, who asked not to be named.

BP: Now, nothing. Why? Surakiart was in the firing line and he is no longer in the Thaksin regime camp so we can ignore it

The Nation reports:

The Election Commission reached a decision Friday to ask the Constitution Court to dissolve the Chart Thai and Matchima Tipataya parties.

BP: PPP will likely be next up, followed by Puea Paendin/Motherland. Will Banharn be more eager to amend the Constitution now?

Crispin in Asia Times writes that economic problems might bring down the government:

Driven by spiking global oil prices, Thai headline inflation hit a 10-year high of 9.6% in June, further undermining already flagging consumer and investor confidence. Core inflation breached the 3.5% upper band limit of the Bank of Thailand's inflation targeting regime, a floating mechanism implemented in the aftermath of the 1997-98 Asian financial crisis to anchor market expectations about future inflation. That's taking a toll on business, seen in the estimated 4,000 to 5,000 small- and medium-sized enterprises that shuttered operations in June due to rising input prices.

While several countries in the region are now grappling with how to handle oil price-driven cost-push inflation, Thailand is exceptionally exposed due to its heavy dependence on imported oil, which at 12.5% of gross domestic product is among the highest ratios in Asia.
…
Before those clouds gathered, there were already market questions about the PPP's technocratic credentials, particularly in relation to politically motivated appointments to the crucial finance and commerce portfolios. Neither Finance Minister Surapong Suebwonglee, a former communist guerilla, nor Commerce Minister Mingkwan Sangsuwan, a former auto industry executive, has a technocratic education or background.

BP: Communist guerilla? Surapong has been overshadowed by Mingkwan, but is really necessary to resort to calling him a communist guerilla without meaning any of his qualifications.

Crispin notes:

...investor concern is that the PPP-influenced finance ministry has restrained the Bank of Thailand (BoT) from boosting the benchmark interest rate due to political concerns that a tighter monetary policy would slow economic growth and undermine the government's already waning popularity in Bangkok and possibly in the northern and northeastern provincial areas, which voted overwhelming for the populist party in elections last December.

...
Against that background, a steep rise in interest rates would inevitably slow growth and would, some analysts estimate, be tantamount to political suicide.

To his credit among foreign investors, Samak, honoring his campaign trail pledge, quickly rolled back xenophobic policies including capital controls implemented by the preceding military-appointed administration. He also won investor kudos for abandoning the previous government's motion to amend the Foreign Business Act in ways that foreigners said would jeopardize existing, and deter future, long-term investments.
...
Sansern Samalapa, the opposition Democrat Party's shadow deputy finance minister, says that, if in power, his party would manage differently the country's mounting inflationary problems. His proposed policies include cutting into the estimated 1 billion baht annual profit earned by PTT, a majority state-owned oil-and-gas enterprise, and redistributing it to reduce electricity tariffs, and implementing new income-generation schemes for the grassroots economy.

BP: 1 billion baht? It is actually 100 billion baht. Assume an Asia Times error. The government as it is trying to bleed PTT as it is, do the Democrats think this not enough?

He claims the government ignored a 50 billion baht supplementary budget the Democrats proposed over three months ago to head off inflationary risks. Some analysts believe that the recent impact of inflation on business and the rural poor has taken the pro-growth sheen off the PPP's national image, which was enhanced by its perceived association with Thaksin’s former ruling and now disbanded Thai Rak Thai party.

BP: And will spending more government money necessarily help inflationary pressures? I agree that PPP has lost some of the TRT image of being a "can do" government.

Others predict that a sustained and deep economic downturn might provide a political opening for the opposition Democrats to retake government without winning elections on a technocratic savior card.

That's what happened in 1997 when the baht collapsed and the economy froze. Under pressure from above, then prime minister and former army commander Chavalit Yongchaiyudh stepped down to allow the more technocratic-minded Democrats to steer the economy through the crisis. At least one Democrat party operative recently told a foreign analyst with a multinational bank that the party is reveling in the public's fading faith in the PPP's ability to manage the economy.

Opposition politician Sansern says the Democrats have no intention of winning power in a worst-case economic collapse scenario and that his party would assume office only with the support of "the people" or "coalition partners".

BP: The Democrats need to wait until after the next election. There is not sufficient parliamentary support for the Democrats now. Taking over as technocratic saviour card now would be a bad idea.

The final quote is key:

Unlike in 1997, Thailand's new economic problems are directly linked to the country's divisive political crisis, leaving some to wonder whether either party to the conflict necessarily has the country's best interests in mind.

BP: The Democrats are certainly not playing softball anymore.

Pongpol Adireksarn is an interesting character. He is a former well-known politician and TRT Cabinet Minister and writer. He has served in a few governments over the years and was a Minister in the Democrat-led government of 1997-2001. He was also a Deputy Minister and Minister of Education under Thaksin. He comes from a very political family (his dad was one of the founders of Chat Thai) and is from the Ratchakru group.

It was only after the Joint Communique with Cambodia was signed that Pongpol was approved by the Cabinet to become a board member of Thailand's World Heritage Committee to replace Adul Wichiencharoen - I should note that he has previously been Chairman of the Thai National Commission for UNESCO so he is no unqualified flunky. He certainly has had a career, as a writer, outside of politics and criticised Thaksin just before the coup in September 2006 saying that there would need to be an investigation of Thaksin - although he still intended to contest the 2006 election. He is one of 111 banned TRT executives and was still involved in post-TRT activities in 2007. Yet, I must say I was surprised at the time of appointment to Thailand's World Heritage Committee that no one was mentioning his role as a Minister under Thaksin. If Samak is deemed a lackey, what a former TRT Minister under Thaksin who has shown no signs of jumping ship to the smaller parties? Yet nothing.

After his appointment, he became the main source of information on the issue. He was on TV and radio repeatedly, seemingly giving interviews all the time to the media who were desperation for information. I heard his previous political life mentioned, but I never heard that he was asked whether he was a lackey for Thaksin. I imagine this was because he was arguing for a joint application. From his public statements, it seems he was opposed to Cambodia's application, but then he was still saying ''The ministry officials told us that Thailand will not lose one square inch of territory if Cambodia nominates the temple as a world heritage site''.

He was the source of news, basically preparing the public, when he was saying that the result of Cambodia's sole application for Preah Vihear was that it was likely to be listed. Once it was listed, he blamed the political situation in the last two years then at the same time praised the current government the Surayud government at The Nation reports:

"We have some problems after the 2006 military coup since many democratic countries such as the United States gave full support to Cambodia for political reason," Pongpol said via telephone conference from Quebec.
...
Pongpol said listing of the Preah Vihear has nothing to do with Thai sovereignty as Cambodia proposed only its part, not the overlapping area.

"We did not lose territory since the Foreign Ministry both under the previous government and this government has done a good job to protect our sovereignty," Pongpol said.

BP: He has been sending missed messages, but he has made himself fully available to the media and well they have lapped it up.

Just yesterday, he requested, and was a granted, a meeting with Abhisit and other senior Democrats. The Post:

He said he wanted to clarify the issue - indicating there may be a lot of misinformation around.

He insisted Thailand lost no sovereignty after the committee approved the listing of the Hindu temple.

Mr Pongpol said he would like to explain to Mr Abhisit all the facts to prevent any misunderstandings about the matter that could lead to national rifts.

BP: He also said he was willing "to explain to any platform, except to the ongoing anti-government rally organised by the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD)" that Thailand had not lost any sovereignity.

He has done a much more effective job than Samak and Noppadol combined. This is partly because he has been very forceful in communicating his ideas, but also because the media don't believe anything that Noppadol or Samk say. However, while seemingly acting as a surrogate, Pongpol has gotten a free pass.


http://www.bangkokpost.com/110708_News/11Jul2008_news09.php
http://enews.mcot.net/view.php?id=5201
http://www.bangkokpost.com/090708_News/09Jul2008_news13.php
http://www.bangkokpost.com/260608_News/26Jun2008_news04.php
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/09/13/politics/politics_30013480.php
http://www.seameo.org/vl/library/dlwelcome/photogallery/president/pongpol_cv.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pongpol_Adireksarn

VOA:

In a statement Saturday, international rights group Human Rights Watch said it feared for 1,300 refugees who left Huay Nam Khao camp, in the country's northern Petchabun province, for a mass protest.

Some 5,000 ethnic Hmong left the refugee camp on June 20 after a year in detention to highlight their plight with a march to Bangkok, some 350 kilometers away.

Thai soldiers returned 800 protesters to Laos and thousands returned to the camp, but 1,300 refugees are still missing, according to aid agency Doctors Without Borders.

Human Rights Watch accused Thai authorities of inciting fear and uncertainty in an effort to pressure the Hmong to give up their refugee status in Thailand or resettle to other countries.

Human Rights Watch and Doctors without Borders, which has access to the camp, called for Thai authorities to halt the use of intimidation and forced deportations.

The United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) said it has written to the Thai Government saying it feared the Hmong face persecution upon their return to Laos. The Thai military claims all repatriations are voluntary. UNHCR spokeswoman Jennifer Pagonis, called for more transparency in the repatriation process.

"The lack of transparency and the absence of any third party to monitor the return operation makes it impossible to verify the voluntary nature of their repatriation," she said.

But the Thai Foreign Minister, Noppadom Pattama, told reporters the Thai government stood by its procedures in the screening of the Lao Hmong refugees.

"Regarding Hmong, Laotian Hmong, we will not engage in any forced repatriation," he said. "Regarding our screening process, to screen those whether they are genuine refugee or economic refugee. Whatever are going to do we will take humanitarian consideration very, very seriously.

BP: I guess it all depends on how Clintonian you can be about how voluntary they are and what "forced repatriation" means. The government won't allow more international organizations to be involved in the repatriation as this will either slow down the repatriation or results in many of the Hmong not wanting to go back. Why go back and give up the chance of refugee status in the US or elsewhere?

I don't see the current pressure working against the Thai government unless NGOs or international organizations can come up with evidence that those who are repatriated, under the current policy, are subject to persecution. Then the pressure on Thailand would grow, and as the Hmong have some strong political support in the US, Thailand might decide it needs to change tack, but this might only result in Thailand seeking assurances, if they have not done so already, from Laos. I can also think of a few international examples of western countries deporting persons back to third world dictatorships and where there is evidence of persecution which Thailand could raise in its defence.

btw, see the HRW report here and my previous post on the issue here.

Xinhua:

Special warfare troops from Thailand and China on Friday started their second combined training, with a theme of anti-terror, in Thailand's northern province of Chiang Mai.

Coded "Strike-2008", the training will last twenty days. This is the first time the Chinese army has ever engaged in combined training conducted overseas for such a long duration.

The first Sino-Thai combined training "Strike-2007" was conducted in Guangzhou, capital of south China's Guangdong Province in July last year.

Major General Supharat Phatthanawisut, Deputy Commanding General, Special Warfare Command of The Royal Thai Army, and Major General Zheng Qin, Deputy Commander of the Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) Guangzhou Military Area Command, each led a delegation to attend Friday's opening at the camp site of the Thai Army Special Troops fifth Corps in Chiang Mai.

In presiding over the opening ceremony, Zheng said this year's training will highlight the theme of anti-terrorism, which is in line with the trends in current global and domestic security situation. He reiterated that China is willing to enhance military exchange and cooperation with other countries to strengthen readiness for anti-terror warfare and contribute to regional and global peace and stability.

The training involves 48 personnel from the special troops of both sides, 24 for each, who will be mixed into two teams to join in the combined training.

Divided into four stages, the training include basic training, skills training, combat tactics training, and comprehensive exercise, aiming to strengthen capability and readiness in combined training and commanding of the troops.

BP: For background, please see my previous post here, and here, here, and here which touch on Sino-Thai relations with some mention of the US-Thai relationship.

Also, from the Bangkok Post we have some quotes from analysts:*

Chulalongkorn University associate professor on political science, Surachart Bumrungsuk, said Sino-Thai military cooperation has been proceeding for some time but the first-ever joint military exercise in Thailand might reflect an improvement in relations between US-Asean and Asean-China.

''China has been participating as an observer in the Thai-US Cobra Gold exercise. Still, any closer relations between Thailand and China should be well-balanced,'' said Mr Surachart.

Vorasakdi Mahatdhanobol, a China expert from the same faculty, said Thailand's closer ties with China are being monitored by its Asean neighbours.

The US agenda against terrorism in the Southeast Asian region has made some Asean members uneasy and they were now keener on cooperation with China, which was also embracing its own anti-terrorism policy, said Mr Vorasakdi.

Associate Professor Panitan Wattanayagorn from Chulalongkorn University's political science faculty said the US was concerned about intensified military cooperation between Thailand and China.

BP: Is Thailand moving too far towards China? Probably for the US liking yes, but as I quoted this excerpt recently, the excercises need to be put in perspective:

Moreover, Sino-Thai military relations have a long way to go before they start to rival that between the U.S. and Thai militaries, who conduct more than 40 joint military exercises every year. A sense of perspective is important: the May 2008 U.S.-Thai Cobra Gold exercise (in which Japan, Singapore, and Indonesia also participated) was conducted over a 13-day period and involved 12,000 military personnel, 14 naval ships, and 96 combat aircraft; in contrast “China-Thailand Friendship 2005” involved three ships and lasted 3 hours and 20 minutes. Nevertheless, the military-security relationship between China and Thailand is on an upward trajectory.

BP: The current one involves 48 personnel (24 from each side) where last year's one involved 30 personnel (15 from each side). If it is a sign of things to come and even closer Sino-Thai military relations, we are still a long way off.

* The headline and the lede both state this is the "first-ever Thai-Chinese joint military exercise" although later in the article it notes "Last July, the two countries held their first joint training exercise in Guangzhou". And the different between a military exercise and a training exercise is? You read the description of the previous exercise here and I am just wondering about the distinction.

UPDATE: By Observer in "Judicial Revolution or Judicial Coup?":

Rule of law would be great for Thailand. Rule by judges not.

BP: There are some great comments in that thread as well.

In my post on "Judicial Revolution or Judicial Coup?", there has been much debate (41 comments and counting) about the power vested in the judiciary and whether this is a good thing. The judiciary can come under all kinds of influence, but there is little mention in the media about corruption in the justice system. One could be blind to corruption and put faith in the justice system including the judiciary, but it is difficult to make a judgment about this without knowing how corrupt the justice system is.

From this 2004 report (PDF) quoting a Thai government survey on corruption:




Pasuk in 2001 puts the judicial corruption into perspective with details of the surveys (including the above chart):

As to the general level of corruption in Thailand, 10 percent of households said that they had paid bribes when visiting public offices, averaging 1000 baht per year per household (about US$22 ). Of those involved in court cases over the years 1999–2000, 31 percent had been asked to pay bribes averaging 30,000 baht per case, with payments going to the police, public prosecutors, judges, secretary and clerical staff of the court and middlemen. Thirty percent of voters said that had been offered money for their votes, averaging 700 baht per household (Pasuk et al. 2000).

All the surveys were done for the Civil Service Commission, and financed by a grant from the World Bank and the Asia Foundation.

BP: That 31% includes all aspects of the justice system and not just the judiciary, but as vote buying is treated as such a serious matter when it involves 30%, why is not corruption in the justice system also not treated as such a serious matter when 31% of people are asked to pay bribes?

AKI reports:

Bombs that were discovered during a recent police raid on the Indonesian island of Sumatra could have originated from Thailand or the southern Philippines.

Noor Huda Ismail, a regional terrorism expert told Adnkronos International (AKI), he was concerned that the devices found in the raid in Palembang, where 10 militants were arrested, were linked to two key regional zones of conflict.

Noor Huda, vice president of Sekurindo Global Consulting, said the bomb may have come from other parts of Asia.

"It is possible. Indonesia has very porous maritime boundaries while internal sources of supply are constrained by police surveillance," he told AKI.

The expert also added that a former supporter of one of Asia's most wanted men, Noordin Mohammed Top, had told him that the group had been looking for "new channels" for moving arms for some time.

Allegedly to be one of the key bomb makers for the Islamist Jemaah Islamiyah, Noordin Top, is now the leader of one of its splinter groups, Tanzim Qaedat al-Jihad.

In the recent raid the suspects were found with a cache of bombs in Palembang, 425 kilometres northwest of Jakarta, and other areas in South Sumatra.

Indonesian police said the bombs were packed with bullets to inflict maximum carnage.

"The source says the explosive is new, in other words it was not a part of Noordin's arsenal and was possibly acquired from new channels," said Noor Huda.

Police said the bombs found at Palembang had five times the power of the bombs used in the 2002 Bali bombing which killed 202 people, mostly foreign tourists.

During the 2 July raid, 19 bombs were found including 14 tube-bombs.

BP: This is the links connection, if it exists here, that I have mentioned in the past is that the various terrorist groups share information tactics, financial resources etc.

On July 2, 2008, Democrat Party Leader Abhisit Vejjajiva spoke at the FCCT. The topic was "Thai Politics: Progress or Paralysis? An evening with Abhisit". His presentation lasted after 25 minutes and you can either (a) listen to below - as streaming, or (b) download it to your MP3 - link here. The size is just under 10MB, but the audio quality is still very good.

.

Below are some notes of mine of his presentation.

Thai Democracy and Thai politics continues to move forward. It is making progress.

Three areas where we have seen progress, despite the hiccups and setbacks. First, the events surrounding the coup. Second, looking at the electoral landscape. Third, in terms of participation by Thai people in politics.

First, even looking at the events surrounding the coup, Thailand still moves forward. Coups are taking into more public opinion. Prior to 1991, military leaders set up government, military leader is PM, they have wide powers etc. This changed during the 1991 coup. They needed to find someone who was respected by the international and business community so they chose Anand. The coup government was to last one year. In 2006, it was also clear, the coup leaders needed to find someone who was "respected" and acceptable to all sides. They find it in Gen. Surayud. There was also a timeframe to return to democracy. Even tried to give legitimacy to the constitution they were drafting, by way of a referendum, and ensure no abuses fo power against Thaksin. Just looking at the cycles of coup that the democratic forces continue to grow and place constraints on the military. This is why I say there continues to be progress on democracy and politics in Thailand.

Second reason why I say democracy is making progress is the behaviour of the electorate. The electorate spoke loudly and clearly in 2001 when they threw out the Democrat-led government and gave a majority to TRT. They were able to express their disappointment at the ballot box. "Whatever you thought about the Thaksin government. A lot of people felt they had a government that for the first time moved swiftly to implement policy pledges. They rewarded that government with a resounding victory in 2005". Although, there were irregularities in the 2005 election and the true majority was probably not to the extent it was, there is no denying that the TRT was being rewarded for the policies.

I would point to subsequent results to demonstrate why the Thai electorate has become more "sophisticated". After the 2005 election, there was the Shin Corp scandal. Elections were called in 2006. There was a boycott and the only real party was TRT. 10 million voted "no", whereas 12 million or 14 million voted for TRT [BP: difference between the constituency vote and the party vote] compared with 19 million in 2005. Many people were aware on concerns raised by Thaksin's authoritarian style.

For the 2007 constitution, you had 10 million Thais voting no. 14 million voted yes although not necessarily because they liked the constitution, but because they wanted an election. In the 2007 election, if you actually look at the party vote, only 100,000 separated between PPP and the Democrats on the party vote compared to 12 million 3 years ago [BP: 19 million for TRT vs 7 million for the Democrats]. This shows there were a slight majority who showed disatisfaction with the coup leaders and wanted the TRT policies back. You also had almost the same number wanting to move in a slightly different direction with the Democrats. More on national interests compared to personalities in the past.

If you look at the local electoral results, you can see this sophistication more clearly. Many PPP candidates losts in the North and Northeast whereas Democrat candidates lost in the South. We have developed a healthy democratic system.

Third reason I cite as progress is civic particiaption. People now want to have direct participation. When it was seen the government was going too far, the PAD came out to protest. On the other hand after the consitutional amendments were put off and Jakrapob resigned, the numbers dwindled. People are now more politically aware and active. This is not just PAD, but also farmers and workers. People want a direct say in the political progress.

There is a catch. Why people want to move forward, politicians haven't kept up. Don't blame Thai people and Thai society for this. Politicians need to understand an election doesn't give them a license to do anything, there is limited government to abuses and to use the power for their own gains. Suspicions now and cause of paralysis is of the PPP to protect Thaksin. For Thailand to make progress, Samak needs to step out of Thaksin's shadow. If he would prioritise and putting people's problems before other things. The six days of debate and censure debates showed vibrancy of Thai democracy and took the tension out of the air.

For the first part of the Q&A, you can download the MP3 here (less than 10MB and about 20 minutes). Second part is here (less than 10MB and about 20 minutes). I will see if I can get the other parts up some time.

BP: Abhisit faced a number of hostile questions and I understand joked at the very end that he was told that that the audience would be semi-hostile, but this was only half right. The critical questioning was in distinct comparison with his two previous appearances in 2007. He faced a number of questions over Preah Vihear and lese majeste case against Jakrapob as well as others being very critical of the Democrat Party stance towards the coup and other matters.

On style, I would give him 8 out of 10. He has his talking points and doesn't steer from them, but is still able to give an articulate answer. His speaking style has improved over the last 3 years and he is able to much more forcefully make his points. His problem is while he is quite good in such a setting as the FCCT, he sounds almost the same when talking on TV to the masses. He lacks charisma and often comes across as an elitist who most people don't grasp his concepts. I am sure the Democrats have made some political consultatns rich, but in this type of setting Abhisit excles.

On substance, for the presentation, I will give him a 7 out of 10. I thought he advanced a reasonably good argument and largely kept free of attacks. He had some subtle digs, but he helped weave them into his argument as opposed random attacks - he is a politician so I would actually be disappointed in his professionalism if he didn't. I didn't really get the "catch" part at the end, but was impressed by his argument that TRT actually had support and it wasn't just through vote buying, something he actually makes clear in the Q&A, where to paraphrase him, people take money and vote for whoever they want.

On substance, for the Q&A, I will give him a 5 out of 10. Hard to explain and I don't want to have to type up the Q & A. He basically denies they are exploiting the royal issue over the demand government take action against 29 websites for lese majeste, the Jakpraob issue and whipping up nationalist sentiment, but I am of the view this is happening and found his denials unpersuasive. He had some good answers to some questions though.

UPDATE: See this previous post of mine here about the targeting of teachers. The Bangkok Post:

A total of 128 teachers, students and education staff have been killed and 213 others wounded in the deep South since the start of the separatist violence there in 2004, said Karun Sakulpradit, head of a regional education inspector-general's office. He said 296 schools were also torched in the strife-torn region encompassing Yala, Pattani and Narathiwat provinces and four districts of Songkhla. The figures on school arson were collected from Jan 4, 2004, when the violence broke out in Narathiwat, until June 17. The casualty figures were gathered from Jan 4, 2004, to July 7. Of the 128 people killed, 29 were school students according to the figures released by the educational collaboration centre under the inspector-general's office. ... Army chief Anupong Paojinda said that keeping one step ahead of the southern militant groups, as Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej had instructed, was easier said than done. Gen Anupong was speaking after meeting Mr Samak on southern security policies yesterday.

BP: Teachers and schools are symbols of the Thai state and hence they are attacked.

Channel News Asia has the Forbes list:

Chaleo Yoovidhya, worth $4 billion, returns to his No 1. spot--up $500 million, thanks to strong global sales of his Red Bull energy drink. His runner-up again is beer maker Charoen Sirivadhanabhakdi, up $600 million [to 3.9 billion]. They are two of eight tycoons who made most of their fortune in food and beverages, more than any other industry (auto parts had six).

BP: I contribute to helping both number 1 and number 2 richer. Thaksin comes in at number 16 - this is minus the $2 billion which has been frozen. There had been suggestions that Forbes was going to put a new person at No. 1 based on Crown Property Bureau assessments. Maybe, we will have to wait and see until we have the next world's richest list to see whether it will happen.

The Rachadaphisek land case is currently before the Supreme Court. Chuan and Banharn testified on Tuesday:

The testimony yesterday also saw two high-profile witnesses, both former prime ministers. Former premier Banharn Silpa-archa and Chuan Leekpai were briefly questioned about the relationship of the prime minister with the FIDF. Both told the court that the prime minister would not directly give orders to the FIDF as the fund is overseen by the Bank of Thailand, which works under the Finance Ministry.

Matichon has more actually saying that Banharn said that when he was Prime Minister he had no power to issue any orders in relation to the FIDF as there was already a Deputy Prime Minister and Finance team who were looking after it. Chuan says that under the law, the PM has not power to issue any orders in relation to the FIDF, which is under the Bank of Thailand, but it is the duty of the Finance Minister to oversee it and the Prime Minister oversees the Finance Ministry indirectly.

BP: Banharn doing what he does best. Even if Thaksin oversees the Finance Ministry indirectly, the FIDF is independent of the Finance Ministry.

It is not sold legally here, but there is a grey market for them as Reuters reports:

AIS estimates that there are 140,000 users of the old iPhone in Thailand, where a 3G network is only in the testing stage for now.

BP: 140,000? That personally seems a little high to me although perhaps that is because of all the LoSo people I know....

Marwaan Macan-Markar in IPS:

Several rulings handed down by Thai courts recently suggest that the country’s political landscape is being altered by the judiciary. Some are calling it a ‘’judicial revolution’’.
...
Yet neither the opposition, the press nor the PAD has shaken the government in the way the judiciary has with its recent verdicts.
..
Little wonder why a new expression has been coined and is being advanced within academic and media circles here to describe the judiciary. ‘’We are witnessing a new trend involving the judiciary. This month’s cases are the latest. It is being called a ‘judicial revolution’,’’ says Thanet Aphornsuvan, a historian and dean of the liberal arts faculty at Bangkok’s Thammasat University. ‘’The courts are playing a more decisive role in politics than before.’’

The immediate beneficiary will be the country’s nascent, struggling democracy, Thanet explained in an interview. ‘’The judiciary is helping to strengthen the checks of executive power for the good of our democracy. The public is welcoming the presence of the judiciary in our political struggle.’’
...
The excitement about a judiciary with a backbone is understandable in light of how the courts have been viewed in this South-east Asian country over the last decades. ‘’There has been a long-standing belief that courts are so corrupt, so biased, that people had no faith in going to them,’’ says David Streckfuss, an U.S. academic specialising in Thai political culture.

On the political front, too, the superior courts in the past did not stand up to power, when Thailand was under the grip of its many military dictators. ‘’In the 1950s, the courts were happy to justify coups and legitimised the laws introduced by the military dictators that undermined the very laws the judges were supposed to defend,’’ Streckfuss told IPS. ‘’The courts were not taking cases to determine standards and the rule of law, making the government accountable.’’
...
Then came the April 2006 speech by the country’s revered monarch, King Bhumibol Adulyadej. He told the judges of the administrative and supreme courts to do their job to help resolve a political deadlock and growing tension on the streets. Within weeks, the constitutional court annulled the results of a controversial parliamentary election where the party Thaksin led won sufficient seats to create a one-party state.

‘’Until April 2006 there hadn’t been much awareness that the courts should and could play such a decisive role in the country’s politics,’’ says Streckfuss. ‘’The king’s speech directed the courts to be more active. And since then, the courts have been causing the government a lot of grief.’’

‘’The courts are emerging as a possible key entity to redefine the relationship between the people and the government,’’ says Thanet, the historian. ‘’What we have is a new power equation. Governments will have to face up to it.’

BP: There is certainly a new power equation, but I am doubtful it is a good idea. Yes, the judiciary can and should be a check on executive power.* But power has been shifted too far towards the judiciary. The judiciary do not exercise just judicial power, they are involved in selecting Senators (who then in turn confirm judges) and members of independent organsiations. They choose amongst themselves who will fill the top positions and are of course unelected.

If you criticise members of the judiciary or their decisions, they will charge you with contempt (also see these posts about contempt of court here and here) where those who you criticise will act in judgment on what you said. This hasn't stopped the judiciary from making public comments criticising politicians and the political system. Who will guard our judicial guardians? Quite simply, it is a judicial coup and one we cannot criticise.

*The executive must act within the law as famously put by Lord Hamden in Entick v. Carrington in 1765:

If he admits the fact, he is bound to show by way of justification, that some positive law has empowered or excused him. The justification is submitted to the judges, who are to look into the books; and if such a justification can be maintained by the text of the statute law, or by the principles of common law. If no excuse can be found or produced, the silence of the books is an authority against the defendant, and the plaintiff must have judgment

UPDATE: For more details on the local contractor and their connections with many other instances of alleged corruption see TJTS

The Bangkok Post:

The Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA) will send a letter to the Japanese ambassador and a Japanese contractor seeking information about an alleged 125-million-baht bribe paid to senior BMA officials. Bangkok Governor Apirak Kosayodhin has launched an investigation into the matter, which came to light during a court case in Japan.

He said yesterday the letter will be sent to the Japanese ambassador and Nishimatsu Construction Co, asking for a response in seven days so that the BMA can complete its investigation as soon as possible.

The Japan Times and Japan Today daily newspapers reported on Monday that Nishimatsu Construction admitted to Japanese prosecutors that it had given a bribe of more than 400 million yen to ''Thai officials'' to win a drainage tunnel project in Bangkok.

The Japanese company had tendered for the project through its consortium with Italian-Thai Development Plc (ITD) five years ago.

Mr Apirak said he hoped the investigation would be free of political influence because Japanese prosecutors were also handling it.

City Hall would certainly forward its findings to the National Counter Corruption Commission, he said.

Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej and Deputy Prime Minister Sahas Banditkul declined to comment yesterday on the corruption reports.

Mr Samak was Bangkok governor and Mr Sahas was deputy governor when City Hall implemented the five-kilometre-long drainage tunnel project. Completed last year, the 2.09-billion-baht tunnel stretches from Lat Phrao to the Saen Saep canal.

Mr Samak arrived at Government House yesterday morning for the regular cabinet meeting.

Asked for his reaction to the bribe allegation he refused to talk and walked straight to the cabinet secretariat building, the venue of yesterday's meeting.

Mr Sahas also arrived for the cabinet meeting. Unusually, his limousine went directly to the underground parking space of the cabinet secretariat building and he walked hurriedly to the meeting.

Normally, Mr Sahas walks from the command building to the secretariat building for Tuesday cabinet meetings.

"I'm busy," he told reporters yesterday.

City Clerk Pongsak Semsant confirmed yesterday the investigation would be concluded in seven days. His probe panel would also seek information from Japan.

Charnchai Withoonpanyakit, director of City Hall's Department of Drainage and Sewerage, also refused to talk about the project. He told reporters to get information from Japan, as that was where the bribery allegation originated.

Five years ago, he said, he had taken part in the bidding contest only to check the technical proposals from contenders and he had nothing to do with the final selection of the contractor.

The quotation of the ITD-Nishimatsu consortium was selected because it was the lowest among the three qualified bidders, he said.

The Nation:

Chanchai Witoonpanyakij, who heads the BMA's Drainage and Sewerage Department, said he would today submit relevant information to Bangkok City Clerk Pongsak Semsant.

The tunnel-construction project is under the supervision of Chanchai's office.

BP: I think an interesting question is when was the Japanese businessman actually "caught". I was reading something the other day suggesting that bribes were paid to BMA officials - which squares with the Japanese account - and it was not just in 2003, but extended beyond 2003. This doesn't mean Samak is in the clear as there will be an investigation - so far the BMA, NCCC, DSI, and a parliamentary committee and all will be investigating to some degree - but I think you can judge how close/farthe connection to Samak is by how quickly this is buried. Well, that and the local contractor will be keen to bury it too .

Just look at the Juthamas case where we have an indictment from the US with bank account details and specific details on transfers. Not much has been heard since January. I think you will find this case will work through the system slowly. You have the CTX scanner issue where you also have involvement of the US authorities. All these foreign cases should seemingly be front and center as we have actual evidence from non-Thai political actors - which gives them an air of respectability - compared to coup-appointed investigators. It is odd that in the fight against corruption, where you have alledged cases of corruption (where money is paid for a project), the focus is on a land deal (where there is no suggestion of any under-the-table payments), the lottery case etc. What about putting resources into investigating these cases?

The paper of record:

The foreign minister returns to a nation baying for the 'traitor's' blood for signing away historic landmark

BP: They like the word traitor.

On the PAD's New Politics platform, I suggest you read this article in The Nation which is a translation of an editorial from Thai Rath. Key excerpt:

The PAD had yet to expand on the idea of the new politics initiative, saying only that a 70-30 House composition formula should consist of 70 per cent of representatives nominated or appointed and 30 per cent coming from an election. The PAD left the option for the military to have a role in politics. But the People Power Party opposes this view, reasoning that it could be treacherous because it could be seen as an attempt to abolish the democratic system.

Thai Rath said that those who support the 70-30 formula claim they have modern political views. But in fact, Thai Rath said, the idea is outdated, lagging behind even the constitution of 1932. Back then, the People's Party came up with a 50-50 formula, half from the election and half appointed by the People's Party. The portion of elected MPs would increase later when the public was better educated, the People's Party said.

The 70-30 formula also lagged behind the "Half Democracy" constitution of 1978, which provided for an equal number of appointed senators and elected representatives in the House. The 2007 Constitution allocated 76 seats for elected senators compared to 74 for nominated senators.

Michael Connors at Asia Sentinel who went to a PAD rally. Key excerpt:

The New Politics is unashamedly pro-military and even codifies the conditions under which military intervention may occur. Sondhi has spoken of four conditions for military intervention: when charges of lese majeste are not acted on; when a government is incompetent; when corruption is rife; when a government betrays national sovereignty.

It is not clear if permissible military intervention according to PAD’s envisaged system of selectocracy is to be in the form of a coup d’etat or the exercise of some new administrative power to compel government agencies to rectify a wrong. But what is clear is that PAD has explicitly sanctioned ongoing military intervention in politics.

BP: Clearly, I am not a supporter.

Bangkok Post:

Public Health Minister Chaiya Sasomsab was found guilty of contempt of court and fined 25,000 baht by the Administrative Court yesterday.

The court also issued warnings to three newspapers _ Manager Daily, Matichon and Post Today _ which published the minister's criticism of the court's order reinstating the chairman and five-member board of the Government Pharmaceutical Organisation (GPO).

Mr Chaiya had recommended the board's dismissal, and the cabinet approved their removal.

Former chairman Vichai Chokewiwat and the other board members had petitioned the court to overturn the cabinet's ''unfair'' decision.

In its verdict yesterday the court said Mr Chaiya's comment published on June 26 questioning the judges' qualifications was ''not academically sound''. He was initially fined the maximum of 50,000 baht under article 65 of the Administrative Court Establishment Act.

The court halved the fine because Mr Chaiya confessed during the hearing to making the comment and apologised.

Bangkok Post:

Supreme Administrative Court president Ackaratorn Chularat insists the Central Administrative Court has the authority to rule against the cabinet's resolution on the Preah Vihear temple issue.

Still, the court president said yesterday he did not pay any attention to Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej's remarks querying the Central Administrative Court's role in the case.

Mr Samak made his remarks during his weekly Pood Ja Prasa Samak (Samak-Style Talk) TV programme, citing a group of law lecturers from Thammasat University, led by Worajet Phakeerat, who said that the Central Administrative Court's injunction against the cabinet's support of Cambodia's attempt to list the temple as a World Heritage Site may be not within the scope of the Administrative Court's authority.

Mr Samak said he agreed with academics who believed that the ruling interfered with the work of the administration authority.

The academics feared it could set a precedent and would damage the credibility of the administration in dealing with other countries.

The prime minister said the ruling ran counter to the checks-and-balances system between the administrative, legislative and judicial branches, he quoted academics as saying.

Mr Ackaratorn said the Central Administrative Court did not base its decision to hand down the injunction on the petitioning alone. The court has considered the evidence and concluded that national interests could be irreversibly damaged.

As a result, the court decided to order an injunction, but did not rule whether the cabinet or Foreign Minister Noppadon Pattama have mishandled the issue, said Mr Ackaratorn.

"I don't dispute that it is the executive branch's authority to issue administrative policies, but the Preah Vihear case is not only a policy matter. It also concerns the government's actions, on which the Administrative Court can rule," he said.

Mr Ackaratorn said the prime minister's remarks could not be considered contempt of court, as they would be classed as opinion rather than fact.

However, the citation of academic comments could be considered contempt of court on certain occasions, depending on the motivation and intention of those citing the comments.

"The prime minister's comment doesn't bother me. But for the country, it's a dark joke," said the Supreme Administrative Court president.

Mr Ackaratorn said he was surprised Mr Samak did not realise that without the Central Administrative Court's injunction, Thailand could lose part of its territory to Cambodia.

"I wondered if he didn't see the point or that he didn't have enough knowledge base about the issue," he said.

BP: So a judge can criticise the government minister's knowledge on an issue and call what they say a joke. What if Samak made the same comment about a judge? Government ministers are not allowed to criticise judge's qualifications* and I agree with Samak in that the balance between the executive, legislature, and judiciary is tiled to give the judiciary too much power.

* I can't find a direct quote in Thai on what Chaiya said, but from my reading, he is referring to them being in the best position to make the decision and not saying they are not legally qualified to be judges.

From 2Bangkok.com, a summarised translation from Matichon Weekly; Column: Special Report; Author: Paruehad Assadong, June 27, 2008:

[snipped info about Gen. Saprang - which you should have a read of at 2Bangkok.com - July 8, 2008]

In a similar manner to Gen. Saprang, General Pathompong Kaysornsuk is also said to be providing support to the PAD. Gen. Pathompong recently rescued Sunai Manomai-udom from police arrest. Sunai is a former Director of the Department of Special Investigations (DSI) in the Royal Thai Police. He is additionally an arch-enemy of deposed Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra. Sunai once tried to expose an alleged illegal shareholding scheme in Thaksin’s SC Asset Company. Gen. Pathompong is also said to be urging the Thai military and the leadership of the PAD to remain vigilant in the face of possible threats to Thai sovereignty that might result from the current political turmoil over Khao Preah Vihear.
...
[A 2007 entry in the following forum says that Gen. Pathompong was then the chairman of an NLA sub-committee on SBIA that supposedly found irregularities in the King Power contract. ]

BP: The part about rescuing Sunai is interesting. Sunai had an arrest warrant issued to him after failing twice to respond to a police summons. His situation was complicated as he had left the country and upon re-entering the country he needed to pass through immigration control and immigration police would be legally required to arrest him if there was a summons out for his arrest entered into the immigration computer. Instead what happened was he was ushered through by the military under escort. From the translation above, it was Gen. Pathompong who arranged this.

So how impartial was that NLA sub-committee?

It doesn't end there with Gen. Pathompong. Two days the PAD announced:

"Finally, one senior military figure with the rank of general will appear on our Hyde Park stage to express how he's depressed about the Preah Vihear Temple case."

Thai Rath reports that Gen Pathompong Kasetsuk, chief advisor of the Supreme Command, wore his full military uniform and went up on the stage to express hid disagreement that the government allowed Cambodia to register Preah Vihear as a world heritage site. He also called on soldiers to show courage. He said that getting on the stage of the PAD was not against the code of conduct. He wasn't doing it for personal benefit and the wearing of the full military uniform is so that the population feels comforted.

This photo accompanies the article:



The PPP wasn't taking it sitting down lightly:

Former supreme commander Gen Ruangroj Mahasaranon Wednesday criticised Gen Pathompong Kasetsuk, chief advisor of the Supreme Command, for going on stage of the People's Alliance for Democracy in full military uniform.

Ruangroj, a deputy leader of the People Power Party, said a senior military officer should set a good example to the members of the public so Pathompong should not have attacked the government in public.

BP: Should a senior military officer were their full military uniform when protesting against the government? One General isn't much to go on - yes, coup leader Gen. Sonthi B might support them, but he got shafted by Gen. Anupong after the coup with those close to him being moved out of keep positions so his influence is diminshed now. It is a question of how many they have in the background. I imagine a few, but I am yet to see evidence of high-level support for the PAD.
PAD also don't seem to have support of Gen. Anupong and other key military commanders though, I am not so sure it means that much.

NOTE: The difference in surname is a transliteration issue.

The Nation reports:

Judges rule 8-1 that communique with Cambodia unconstitutional

Less than 12 hours after the World Heritage Committee agreed to list Cambodia's Preah Vihear Temple as a World Heritage site, Thailand's Constitution Court yesterday ruled as unconstitutional the joint communique signed by Foreign Minister Noppadon Pattama and Cambodian Deputy Prime Minister Sok An to support the application.

The ruling poses a political threat to the government, because senators and the opposition Democrat Party will seek impeachment of the Cabinet for violating the Constitution.

Civic groups and academics called on Noppadon to step down.

The joint communique is regarded as a treaty in line with the definition in the 1969 Vienna Convention, said court secretary-general Paiboon Warahapaitoon.

The judges also unanimously deemed it a treaty, in accordance with Article 190 of the Constitution, he said.

As it was deemed a treaty, the second paragraph of the article requires it to pass parliamentary reading before it is signed with foreign countries.

Another article from The Nation seemingly expounds on this:

Article 190 of the Constitution stipulates that any treaty providing for changes in Thai territory or extraterritorial areas over which Thailand has sovereign rights must be approved by the National Assembly.

The Bangkok Post though states:

Article 190 requires any treaty affecting Thailand's society, its economy or the integrity of its borders to be scrutinised by parliament before being signed.

BP: From what I have read from Thai Rath and Matichon the Court only state that it was a treaty as per Section 190(2):

A treaty which provides for a [1] change in the Thai territories or [2] the Thai external territories that Thailand has sovereign right or jurisdiction over such territories under any treaty or an international law or [3] requires the enactment of an Act for its implementation or affects immensely to [4] economic or [5] social security of the country or [6] results in the binding of trade, investment budget of the country significantly must be approved by the National Assembly.

BP: I have yet to see any mention in which of the six (or five or seven however you want to divide them up) possible categories the treaty was under. There was an op-ed last week by Borwornsak Uwanno in Matichon that it was a treaty, but didn't fall into [1] or [2], but instead [5]. He said it was not within [1] or [2] as the Joint Comminque clearly stated that "shall be without prejudice to the rights of the kingdom of Cambodia and the kingdom of Thailand". However, he viewed it fell within [5] (affect immensely the social security of the country) as there has been an "actual impact". This can be seen by criticism of the people and the media in both countries (ดังจะเห็นได้จากการคัดค้านการวิพากษ์วิจารณ์ของประชาชน และสื่อมวลชนทั้ง 2 ประเทศ).

BP: That some people dislike it hardly means it affects immensly the social security of the country. I don't get his rationale. When the Surayud government pledged to provide "active support" in 2007 there was no public reaction. The public reaction this time around did not come really until after Noppadol had signed the Joint Communique. Public reaction is difficult to predict so if this is the standard going to be used, must a government do a poll to see public reaction to an issue will be first before signing such a treaty? What happens if a natonalist frenzy can be whipped up by the opposition on misleading and mostly inaccurate information? Modelling can be done for economic effect, but social security is so vague.

If anyone can find something from the Constitutional Court explaining their decision please post a link.

Reuters has a good article. Key quotes:

The Democrats and other opponents of ousted Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra have whipped up a nationalist frenzy over the temple, which many Thais believe belongs to Thailand, to try to kick out the five-month-old, pro-Thaksin government.
...
UNESCO's Bangkok office said Preah Vihear's listing was based on a new plan which differed from the joint Thai-Cambodian communique issued on June 18 and criticized by the Thai court.

UNESCO said it "has no implications for any ongoing negotiations concerning the boundary between the two countries and does not prejudice the rights of both governments to reach an amicable settlement of the disputed boundary".

Nevertheless, some Thais were angered by the decision.

"The government should have tried much harder in convincing the UNESCO people not to believe what Cambodia has told them. The government must be held responsible," student Natcha Lorsuwannarat said.

Charnvit Kasetsiri, a distinguished Thai historian, said the issue had been politicized by Thaksin's opponents.

"It is not a problem between Thailand and Cambodia, but it is a problem among Thais," he told Reuters Television. "It is a black hole Thais have fallen into and found it hard to get out."

BP: Not to believe what Cambodia has told them? (That Cambodia won the ICJ decision?)

Question: If Thailand had won the ICJ decision in 1962 what there be such demands for a joint application? Would the Democrats and the PAD be taking the same decision and demanding respect for the Court? Perhaps, the ICJ needs Thai contempt of court powers....

The Bangkok Post:

The Supreme Court on Tuesday backed an Election Commission ruling that influential ex-House speaker Yongyuth Tiyapairat committed fraud during campaign for the Dec 23 election. The verdict expels him from parliament and threatens the ruling People Power party with imminent dissolution.

After the verdict, PPP members began arguing whether to dissolve the House and call snap elections, a path reportedly favoured by Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej and several coalition party leaders.

Mr Yongyuth immediately lost his own Chiang Rai seat. He is barred from politics for five years.

The Supreme Court's Electoral Fraud Division ruled that Mr Yongyuth had attempted to bribe influential kamnan to back him and his PPP candidates in Chiang Rai. Mr Yongyuth's sister was earlier given a yellow card, and the verdict upheld that as well.

By a 3-2 vote, the court decided that Mr Yongyuth was guilty of the alleged vote-buying.

The court took two hours to read the background to the case and the verdict. The verdict cited a key witness in the case, kamnan Chaiwat Changkaokham of Mae Chan.

BP: 3-2? That was close. Chaiwat went and celebrated by appearing on the PAD stage last night. I think the consequence of this decision and Article 237 (which seemingly provides for the dissolution of a political party if an executive is found guilty) is that political parties will hire people to provide evidence on other political parties - PPP have stated they have a video of a Democrat MP talking on video about providing money and other items to voters. Will this just lead to non-executives being involved in the vote-buying?

The Nation reports:

Thavorn Sen-niem, deputy secretary-general of the Democrat Party, said the coalition government now lacked legitimacy to continue to run the country.

This follows the verdict of the Supreme Court's Office of the Political Holders, which stood by the ruling of the Election Commission that Yongyuth Tiyaphairat, deputy leader of the People Power Party, violated election law. Yongyuth effectively loses his MP status and is barred from politics for five years.

Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej is also struggling with a corruption case in court involving Bangkok Metropolitan Administration's procurement of a fleet of fire trucks. He is also facing a libel charge in the Appeals Court.

"In other countries, when governments are found to lack ethics, they cannot continue to run their countries," Thavorn said.

Thavorn suggested that other coalition partners should consider forming a new government, presumably with the Democrats as a core leader.

He said the People Power Party, which has 233 MPs, might lose 10 MPs if it were to be dissolved in connection with Yongyuth's election violation.

"If other parties - except the People Power Party - think about the possibility of forming a new coalition government, there would be nothing wrong about it," he said.

Thavorn said the prime minister must not dissolve Parliament as a way out because the MPs from other parties have committed nothing wrong.

"It is not right to use Bt3 billion to Bt4 billion of public money to hold the general election in order to resolve the internal problems of the People Power Party or some Cabinet members from this party," he added.

Thavorn said it would be rather difficult to form a new coalition government, but there is a possibility that it might happen.

BP: Translation : They think they will lose. Coalition partners have no money either and the Democrats need to wait until the PPP dissolution to have the numbers so I don't see the coalition partners moving soon. Also, surely the Coalition partners will get the chop first so no one has the numbers.

Bangkok Post:

Army leader Gen Anupong Paojinda yesterday strongly criticised the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD), which recently attacked him for siding with the government.

Gen Anupong used his urgent meeting with 500 generals and senior commanders to blast the PAD, especially Sondhi Limthongkul, one of its leaders.

''I stay neutral but I still was attacked for being on the government side,'' a source in the meeting quoted him as saying.

Mr Sonthi recently claimed that the army leader had dinner with Khunying Sudarat Keyuraphan, an allegation Gen Anupong denied.

The army leader also phoned Mr Sondhi to tell him the allegation he made on the PAD stage was groundless.

The army chief was also very upset about allegations made by the PAD that his wife was close to Mr Thaksin's wife, Khunying Potjaman, the source added.

Gen Anupong urged his subordinates to be patient and stand firm amid calls for soldiers to join the PAD and ignore his leadership, said the source.

The army leader told all four regional commanders who sat in the front row of the meeting at the army auditorium to have confidence in his position, which would not be swayed by any calls to stage a coup or any attempts to divide the army.

He told reporters after the meeting that he still had the confidence of all unit commanders and would put the national interest above anything.

Gen Anupong said the confrontation between the PAD and the government worsened the economic situation. The best solution was through political processes, he added

BP: Doesn't sound like we will have a coup and from all I have heard about Anupong, a coup for either side seems out of the question.

Not for the reasons stated by The Nation,* but as Foreign Minister he is responsible for the Foreign Ministry. The Foreign Ministry advice was wrong so Noppadol needs to be accountable. Life is tough but when you fail to read the political mood this happens.

BP: I expect he will resign by next week - Matichon reports his secretary as packing her things.

*Odd that The Nation admits:

It is clear that the temple's listing will not affect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Thailand, as many have suggested. This was the bone of contention for protesters against the Samak government and Foreign Minister Noppadon Pattama.

BP: Yoon and Co admit that the Democrats and the PAD were wrong?

AP reports:

Suspected Islamic insurgents opened fire on a school bus in Thailand's restive south on Monday, killing two paramilitary rangers and wounding three teenage students, police said.

The bus was taking 10 students -- aged from 13 to 18 -- home from a school in Pattani province's Nong Chik district when an unknown number of assailants opened fire from a hiding place on the roadside, said police Maj. Gen. Kririn Inn-kaew.

Two paramilitary rangers who were providing security for the students were shot and fell from the bus, Kririn said. He said the assailants continued to fire at the rangers, killing them and then taking their guns.

Three female students, all Buddhists, were wounded and taken to a hospital, Kririn said. There was no immediate word on their condition.

Kririn said initial investigations indicated the assailants were targeting the rangers.

BP: Rangers or the students?

Via Siam Sentinel is this very disturbing and graphic article on an instance of violence
directed against a teenager by soldiers in the Deep South.

Human Rights Watch has more on another case.

btw, hope to have some posts up tomorrow morning on the political issues over the last 36 hours.

On Saturday:

The anti-government activist group, People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD), which has been demanding the departure of Thai Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej from office, wants to see a new government in which people have "sufficient" say on the future of the country.

Sondhi Limthongkul, one of several PAD core leaders, told rally attendees at Government House today that the people must have sufficient input in charting the future of the country and the government must not be allowed make decisions of its own accord as at present.
A new referendum must be held on where the country should be heading, Mr. Sondhi told the demonstrators.

The former media tycoon's views were delivered after retired Army Maj-Gen., former Bangkok governor Chamlong Srimuang, another PAD leader, told the crowds that the democracy activist rally which has been ongoing since May 25 will eventually lead to a better political administration, not simply chasing the present government from office and opposing its plan to amend the 2007 constitution, prepared by military-appointed legal and constitutional experts.

Members and supporters of the PAD are for the first time this weekend meeting on a round-the-clock basis after the Civil Court on Monday issued a temporary injunction forcing the protestors to unblock two key roads near Government House and to stop using loudspeakers on weekdays between 7.30 am and 4.30 pm.

The Civil Court upheld its earlier ruling on Wednesday despite a PAD appeal.

The court is scheduled to hold its next hearing Monday after the lawyer of the plaintiffs, comprising teachers and parents of the students at a school near the rally site, told the court that the defendants continued to block the roads and were not obeying the court injunction.

On Sunday:

Thailand's People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD), a civil society movement dedicated changing the government, is prepared to obey a Civil Court order, set to be issued Monday, to either suspend its ongoing rally or move the demonstration to a site other than Government House, according to a PAD core leader.

The PAD, despite demanding the ouster of Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej and his coalition government, is ready to strictly obey the court's order because it believes that it has already achieved a victory which has benefited the people, Chamlong Srimuang said on Sunday.

Chamlong said the PAD rally, which began May 25, could end at any time now.

PAD members and supporters will gather at Thailand's national police headquarters early Monday to learn about progress on charges against ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra and against the pro-government group called the United Front of Democracy against Dictatorship (UFDD), he said.

Chamlong said his group wanted the police to treat the groups equally like ordinary citizens.

On Monday:

The Civil Court yesterday ordered leaders of the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) to open blocked roads to traffic for an extended period of hours each day after hearing testimony from senior police officers and protest leaders.

In its additional ruling, the court ordered the PAD leaders to open all lanes of Rama V and Phitsanulok roads to traffic between 5am and 6pm Monday to Friday. Any structures and objects related to the rally will have to be removed from the roads during that period.

The court said the order would be applied to people or objects that could obstruct traffic.
...
The Civil Court yesterday explained that the additional order regarding the PAD's road blockade came after both the plaintiffs and the defendants had "an inaccurate understanding" of the court's previous order.

BP: Inaccurate understanding?

btw, how did PAD change from "anti-government activist group" to be "a civil society movement dedicated changing the government" in one day? (both articles sourced from TNA).

Screenshot from The Nation:



NOTE: Click on the Screenshot for a larger image

BP: Surely it is listed or it is yet to be listed.

Ian Storey for the Jamestown Foundation:

This week Thai Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej was in China for a 4-day visit, his first since taking office in January. Samak, who is concurrently defense minister, met with Chinese Defense Minister Liang Guanglie and the two sides agreed to strengthen bilateral military ties. Although Thailand has been wracked by political uncertainty for over 18 months, this has not impaired the close relationship between Bangkok and Beijing. Indeed, in the immediate aftermath of the September 2006 coup, China moved to embrace the new government while its treaty ally, the United States, looked on disapprovingly at the regression of Thai democracy.
...
Military cooperation between Thailand and China goes back further for China than with any other founding ASEAN member [1], and was catalyzed by Vietnam’s December 1978 invasion of Cambodia. Bangkok and Beijing quickly cast off two decades of hostility and entered a strategic alignment designed to curb Vietnamese expansionism.
....
It was not until Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra took office in February 2001 that the bilateral military relationship was reenergized and expanded. This was partly a result of the prime minister’s desire to bolster relations with the PRC across the board, but also owed a great deal to the personal interests of General Chavalit Yongchaiyudh, who concurrently served as deputy prime minister and defense minister for much of the Thaksin government’s six years in office.
...
Surayud moved quickly to implement some of the cooperative military activities identified in the Joint Action Plan. In July 2007 “Strike 2007” took place, a 13-day exercise in Guangzhou involving two teams of 15 Special Forces each from the Thai and Chinese militaries. The exercise—the first Special Forces exercise between China and another country—included marksmanship, hand-to-hand combat techniques, jungle warfare training, and hostage rescue situations (Xinhua, July 30, 2007).
...
Moreover, Sino-Thai military relations have a long way to go before they start to rival that between the U.S. and Thai militaries, who conduct more than 40 joint military exercises every year. A sense of perspective is important: the May 2008 U.S.-Thai Cobra Gold exercise (in which Japan, Singapore, and Indonesia also participated) was conducted over a 13-day period and involved 12,000 military personnel, 14 naval ships, and 96 combat aircraft; in contrast “China-Thailand Friendship 2005” involved three ships and lasted 3 hours and 20 minutes. Nevertheless, the military-security relationship between China and Thailand is on an upward trajectory.

BP: Also see my previous posts here, here, and here which touch on Sino-Thai relations with some mention of the US-Thai relationship.