(photo credit: Ratchaprasong on Flickr)

Chang Noi writes in The Nation about another red-versus-yellow battle in the upcoming Bangkok by-election (to be held on 25 July):

[…] In short, this constituency is a true marginal and so the result will be heavy with meaning.

And that meaning is colour-coded. Panich Wikisreth is not so much a Democrat as a yellow, a protégé of Kasit Piromya, a fanatical yellow-shirt. The New Politics Party was somehow persuaded to exit the contest so that the yellow vote would not be split.

Kokaew Pikulthong is not so much a Pheu Thai member as a red. He took a prominent role in the recent demonstrations, and is now in jail on the ridiculous terrorism charge. Panich has a background in local government and fully qualifies as a member of the establishment, an ammat. Detention confirms Kokaew as a member of the unfree masses, a phrai. The symbolism is exquisite.

Pheu Thai pretty much wrong-footed everyone else when they picked Kokaew to run in this by-election. Earlier they even contemplated choosing the more high-profile Natthawut Saikua but some technicalities stood in the way. Nonetheless, that the party decided to make a prisoner their candidate for a public office at all is quite astonishing in the Thai context. And of course, the symbolism wouldn’t be complete without a reference to Bobby Sands, which was duly made by the (still free) red leader and PT MP Jatuporn Prompan (see here).

If the choice of Kokaew shows how close the red shirts and Pheu Thai are to each other, the PAD’s withdrawal from the contest reveals how close the Democrats still are to the yellow shirts. Despite the occasional verbal spats between the two, it’s pretty much undeniable that — in Bangkok at least — the PAD and the Democrat Party rely on broadly the same support base. As Chang Noi points out in the article, the presence of a candidate from the PAD’s New Politics Party in this by-election would unnecessarily split the anti-Thaksin vote.

One thing is clear: it is reassuring to see the two colours, for once, willing to stay calm and allow people to speak their mind at the ballot box. Here’s hoping that the result will be honoured and respected by all sides.

h/t on_off_course

Related posts (automatically generated):

1. Implications of Abhisit’s ‘Road Map’
2. Petition to Council of Asian Liberals and Democrats, Regarding the Violence in Thailand
3. Kasit and Foreign Diplomats

If having the armed M-i-B is a consequence of drawing the lesson from last April, then it’s the wrong lesson drawn. It is, in my view, extremely counter-productive politically to have them. Had it not been for the armed M-i-B, the Red movement would have been in a strong position politically [right] now. Instead the gov used of lethal force had not provoked much resistance-protest among people in the middle, largely because of these armed elements the Reds themselves had, while claiming to be ‘peaceful protests’.

[...]
I’m not a pacifist, not even a ‘peace activist’. I still maintain my sypathy for the CPT’s armed struggle of the 1960s-1970s. But the used of arms in [urban] struggle, during political protest that claims ‘non-violence’ as its motto is political suicide. It didn’t really ‘protect’ the rally, in fact it only provoked heavier deployment of lethal force by the gov, which the protesters, however armed, would not be able to counter, and which would [result] – and this is my strongest objection – in lost of lives of innocent demonstrators themselves.

[...]

they are still largely a movement mobilized and organized by (what I’d call) Thaksin-Phua Thai networks. Most of Reds came from the provinces, mobilized throught Phua-Thai MPs or local supporters (“หัวคะแนน”). And the leadership is firmly in the hands of Thaksin-Phua Thai network.

[...]
Thaksin works this way. He has his key supporters competing among themselves (like a CEO has his executives competing) and he would keep them all, especially now that he’s in exile and would gladly accept all the help he can get.

Overall it appears that the reds have paid the price for allowing armed elements to operate in the manner we have seen. Things could have turned out so differently if the reds had exercised more restraints and genuinely stuck to their proclaimed non-violent agenda. But is Somsak’s view representative of all red-shirt supporters? Absolutely not. Some of the UDD fans, including even a number of those in the academia, have been silently advocating and providing justifications for an armed struggle. If the violent wing of the red shirts succeeds in taking over the whole movement, you would not want to imagine where this country is headed…

Also, Somsak’s observation that Thaksin likes to have his subordinates compete with each other is in line with what I have heard from other analysts. The purpose of this is perhaps that Thaksin does not want any of his loyalists to hold too much power either over the reds or the Peua Thai party because an all-powerful figure could easily betray him.

h/t on_off_course on Twitter

Related posts (automatically generated):

1. Red Shirts: All About Money and Thaksin?
2. Giles: What Have the Red Shirts Achieved?
3. Dr Prawes: Five Types of Red Shirts

Gen. Chavalit Yongchaiyudh, Peua Thai Party chairman (photo credit)

Panthep Puapongphan, PAD spokesman and former close aide to Gen Chavalit Yongchaiyudh, in an interview with Thai Insider (in Thai):

Q: As a former close aide to Big Jiew (Gen Chavalit’s moniker), what do you think about the role he is currently playing?

Panthep: I believe Gen Chavalit is someone who Thaksin still does not trust. [...] Gen Chavalit once declared his intention to serve as a mediator [between the opposing sides in the conflict]. When that became impossible, he said that as he failed to be a mediator, he would instead take side with one camp so that he could deal with the problems in the other camp. Because of his actions and behaviour, Gen Chavalit is never fully trusted by anyone – not by the PAD, not by the Peua Thai Party and not even by Thaksin. It is difficult to read his actions, and I can’t conclusively tell you what he has in mind. It’s been several years since I last met him.

Q : ในฐานะที่เคยทำงานร่วมกับบิ๊กจิ๋ว (พล.อ.ชวลิต ยงใจยุทธ ประธานพรรคเพื่อไทย) มาก่อน มองบทบาทในช่วงนี้ของบิ๊กจิ๋วอย่างไร

A : ผมเชื่อว่าพล.อ.ชวลิต ยงใจยุทธ ก็ยังคงเป็นบุคคลที่คุณทักษิณ (ชินวัตร อดีตนายกรัฐมนตรี) ไม่ไว้วางใจ [...] พล.อ.ชวลิตก็เคยประกาศว่า เป็นโซ่ข้อกลาง เมื่อเป็นไม่ได้ ผมจำคับคล้ายคับคลาว่า ท่านพูดว่า ถ้าเป็นโซ่ข้อกลางไม่ได้-ก็จะเลือกอยู่ข้างใดข้างหนึ่ง เพื่อไปจัดการปัญหาอีกข้างหนึ่ง เพราะฉะนั้นพล.อ.ชวลิตก็จะถูกระแวง ด้วยท่าทีลักษณะแบบนี้แหละ ระแวงจากทุกฝ่าย ไม่เว้นแม้แต่พันธมิตรฯ ไม่เว้นแม้แต่ในพรรคเพื่อไทยกันเอง ไม่เว้นแม้แต่คุณทักษิณ บทบาทพล.อ.ชวลิตอ่านยากครับ คงจะสรุปไม่ได้ว่าพล.อ.ชวลิตคิดอย่างไร เพราะไม่ได้เจอมาหลายปีแล้ว

Q: So Gen Chavalit’s ambiguous role is the reason Thaksin doesn’t trust him?

Panthep: When I was still working for Gen Chavalit, it was evident – judging from the the tasks he was given by Thaksin – that Thaksin did not trust him. I believe this lack of trust still endures today. Even now, the person rumoured to be Peua Thai’s candidate for the PM job is Chaturon Chaisang (former acting leader of Thai Rak Thai) rather than Gen Chavalit. I think this is quite illuminating.

Q : ที่คุณทักษิณไม่ไว้ใจ เพราะบทบาทของบิ๊กจิ๋วที่ยังคลุมเคลือ

A : ในสมัยที่ผมรู้จักพล.อ.ชวลิต ทำงานร่วมกัน ดูจากตำแหน่งและอำนาจหน้าที่ที่คุณทักษิณเคยมอบหมายให้ มันสะท้อนชัดเจนว่า ไม่มีความไว้วางใจ ผมก็เลยเชื่อว่ามันเป็นทัศนคติที่แม้กระทั่งวันนี้ ก็ยังมีข่าวว่าคนที่เป็นแคนดิเดตนายกฯของพรรคเพื่อไทยในอนาคตก็คือ “จาตุรนต์ ฉายแสง”(อดีตรักษาการหัวหน้าพรรคไทยรักไทย) ไม่ใช่พล.อ.ชวลิต มันก็สะท้อนถึงวิธีคิดอะไรบางอย่างพอสมควร

Related posts (automatically generated):

1. More Red-Shirt Infighting: Jatuporn vs Panlop
2. Meet The ‘Traitors’
3. Somsak Jeamteerasakul on Red Shirts and Thaksin

The incident took place early last week, when Puea Thai Party invited the diplomatic community to hear its side of the story.

[...]

The diplomats who visited Ratchaprasong did so with no intention of harming their relations with the government, they only wanted first-hand information from the ground level rather than through the media.

So sensitive was this issue for the government, especially for Minister Kasit, that he called out the dean of the Bangkok diplomatic corps, Philippine Ambassador Antonio Rodriguez, and blasted the actions of the diplomats.

Not happy with calling the dean, Mr Kasit went to Indonesia late last week, where he once again took up the issue and held a press conference.

[...]

The ambassadors’ presence at the protest site was construed as giving legitimacy to people acting illegally by trying to bring down the government through violent means, the dean’s statement quoted Mr Kasit as saying.

And just to demonstrate Kasit’s (and the current government’s) famously short memory:

The fact that the diplomats visited the UDD’s Ratchaprasong protest site is nothing new; I know that many diplomats visited the various protest sites of the People’s Alliance for Democracy (the yellow shirts) but the government at that time did not make any fuss about those visits.

Related posts (automatically generated):

1. Abhisit Faces Foreign Diplomats
2. The War of Colours Resumes at the Ballot Box
3. The Economist: Collapse of Talks Was ‘Tragic’

Peua Thai MP and red-shirt key man Jatuporn Promphan (photo credit: Thai-blogs.com)

With only less than three weeks to go until the potentially earth-shattering assets ruling, the last thing ex-PM Thaksin needs now is infighting within ‘his’ army of red shirts. Yet, after a meeting in Dubai attended by some of the most unsavoury individuals in the movement, it seems the red shirts are once again preoccupied with internal bickering.

First, perhaps immediately after the Dubai gathering, Peua Thai member General Panlop declared that the red shirts would be establishing an armed splinter group. From The Nation:

In a telephone interview on Wednesday, Panlop said that the red shirts, with Thaksin’s blessing, had agreed to form the new armed wing and that Chavalit would lead the red shirts to victory. In the same interview, Khattiya said the organisational structure of the opposition movement was now complete with Pheu Thai as the party, the red shirts as its front and the new unit as its armed force. Many are reminded by that structure of the communist insurgency during the Cold War.

However, it did not take long for leading figures in the Thaksin camp to come out and deny Panlop’s claim. General Chavalit in AsiaOne:

Pheu Thai Party chairman Chavalit Yongchaiyudh yesterday brushed off news reports that he was poised to become the supreme commander of the People’s Army for Democracy under His Majesty the King, a newly formed offshoot of the red shirts.

“I resumed my political activities because I aspire to bring about social unity, and peace by peaceful means,” he said.

Chavalit rigorously denied condoning a violent struggle designed to trigger political changes.

But perhaps the most forceful rebuttal came from red-shirt key leader Jatuporn Promphan, who said that “the planned establishment of the people’s army is not related to the Red Shirts” and that “the idea did not represent the view of the Red Shirts” (source).

Gen Panlop’s response was predictably bitter. The 73-year-old told the press that he would end his involvement with the reds. MCOT reports:

A staunch supporter of convicted former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra on Friday said he would not join any move with the anti-government Red Shirts activists after his idea about the people’s army was shunned by its key leader.

Gen Panlop Pinmanee, retired deputy chief of the Internal Security Operations Command (ISOC) and a member of the opposition Puea Thai Party, announced his decision after key leader of United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) Jatuporn Prompan had said the planned establishment of the people’s army is not related to the Red Shirts.

Yet there seems to be much more in this friction than mere differences of opinion. The latest report in Matichon reveals that Jatuporn has never fully trusted Gen Panlop:

[My rough translation]

When asked by reporters on whether he had consulted former PM Thaksin Shinnawatra about his decision not to apologise Gen Panlop, Jatuporn replied that he had already been in touch with Thaksin and Thaksin also wanted to see an end to this matter. All these people used to side with those who wanted to kill Thaksin. Nobody knew their true purpose of being here with the reds.

[Original]

ผู้สื่อข่าวถามว่า ได้หารือกับพ.ต.ท.ทักษิณ ชินวัตร อดีตนายกฯ ถึงการตัดสินใจไม่ขอโทษ พล.อ.พัลลภ หรือยัง นายจตุพร กล่าวว่า ตนได้สื่อสารกับพ.ต.ท.ทักษิณแล้ว และพ.ต.ท.ทักษิณ ก็ต้องการจะเคลียร์ทุกอย่างให้จบเหมือนกัน เพราะคนพวกนี้เคยอยู่ฝั่งที่จะฆ่าพ.ต.ท.ทักษิณ มาทั้งนั้น ไม่รู้เลยว่า ที่เข้ามาอยู่ที่นี่ใครจัดวางใครมาอย่างไร

Well, is anyone really surprised by all this?

Related posts (automatically generated):

1. Somsak Jeamteerasakul on Red Shirts and Thaksin
2. The Hardliners
3. Thaksin ‘Does Not Trust Chavalit’ – PAD Spokesman

(photo credit: Thaienews)

This photo, purportedly taken in Dubai on 3 February, shows Thaksin Shinnawatra being surrounded by some of his most trusted henchmen. Clockwise from top left: Gen Panlop Pinmanee, Thaksin, Major Gen Kattiya Sawasdiphol, Suporn Attawong, and Arisman Pongruangrong.

Each of these Thaksin loyalists is known to be inclined, albeit to varying degrees, to use violence in order to achieve whatever goals he has in mind. They can be considered members of the “hawkish” wing of the Thaksin camp. The 73-year-old Panlop was, for a while, linked with the car bomb plot to assassinate Thaksin in 2006 (yes I know, the crazy world of Thai politics). Denying his involvement, he famously declared, “If I had wanted to kill him, the prime minister [Thaksin] would not have escaped.”

Could this gathering of hardliners in Dubai be a sign of things to come?

Related posts (automatically generated):

1. More Red-Shirt Infighting: Jatuporn vs Panlop
2. Somsak Jeamteerasakul on Red Shirts and Thaksin
3. Red Shirts: All About Money and Thaksin?

As veteran actor Sombat Methanee and actress Siriam Pakdeedamrongrit (pictured above) are reported to have joined or be on the verge of joining the Peua Thai Party (see ASTV-Manager and Thai Rath - both links are in Thai), I wonder whether they are aware of the potential consequence of doing so.

According to Privy Council President General Prem Tinsulanonda, anyone who dares join the Peua Thai Party risks being called a ‘traitor to the nation’. Yes, becoming a PTP member is now considered a treacherous act. You do not have to kill anyone. You do not have to sell the country’s secrets to our enemies. All you have to do to be a traitor nowadays is to side with ‘the evil one’.

Sombat and Siriam are not the only names expected to be added to General Prem’s list of ‘traitors’, however. The elder statesman must have been fuming when General Chavalit Yongchaiyudh came out of hiatus and re-joined the Thaksin side three weeks ago, an event that provoked Prem to come up with the word ‘traitor’ in the first place. Furthermore, the PTP welcomed around 50 retired military men and former classmates of Thaksin into the party earlier this week. The PTP spokesman even boasted that some Democrat Party MPs are considering switching sides as well.

At this point one question needs to be asked: has Prem ever accuse the generals who took away people’s democratic rights in 2006 of being traitors to the Thai constitution?

Related posts (automatically generated):

1. More Red-Shirt Infighting: Jatuporn vs Panlop
2. Old Soldiers Should Just Fade Away
3. Thaksin ‘Does Not Trust Chavalit’ – PAD Spokesman