Tammy, Talks, Swiss, about, Thaksin,, PAD, and, Peace Process

6.19-Peter, a Swiss, has been working in Thailand’s hospitality industry for 30 years. And he tells Thai to keep having hope about the peace process, between the PPP and the PAD.

Tammy: The Singaporeans says one must always keep an eye on Thailand, because it often sets the trend for the world-as a middle of the road country in the US area of influence at least-but it looks to be taking an odd tangent at the moment. Does Thailand still influence the world?

Peter: Actually, the western world is oriented towards the far right, and that has resulted in far right thinking spreading all over the world. The immigration from Eastern Europe and terrorism has made many people forget about democracy, freedom and human right. Thailand isn’t far off that path and isn’t really on an odd tangent.

Tammy: You question Thaksin’s populus policies and strongly disagree with it, but do you respect the philosophy behind it?

Peter: Populus policies isn’t sustainable-just look at the rice price support scheme which has no money to support it, but the philosophy-making capital available to the poor, as a way of helping them move up the economic ladder-can work, if it comes with enough education. I don’t think a few days of training like they are doing with the poor, is meaningful enough. So I am against it, and really agree with Thaksin’s critics that it verges on vote buying.

Tammy: Health officials world wide came to Thailand to see and study the Thaksin’s universal health care plan, and many also looked at the village fund. Even the UN said health care for all is a marvel of development, that every nation should aspire to. Even the Economist, Newsweek, and Time have high praises for Thaksin. Aren’t you too critical-like the PAD?

Peter: Chamlong is a religious fanatic, and Sondhi is a media animal-so together they are potent, but if people listens to them, isn’t that right under democracy, that the government have to listen to them? Even McCain’s running mate is connected to the far right religious sect in the US. About Thaksin, it isn’t Thaksin I am against, but I have seen his type of policies destroyed Europe. Only a very few rich countries, can have a welfare state that works-but for most socialism doesn’t work.

Tammy: What do you make of the peace process? The latest is that Somchai and the Privy Council had met and Chaovalit plans to meet PAD on the 9th.

Peter: There are too many skeptics Thais these days, with people saying how can Amart work with Democracy, but there must always be hope because when at a deadend-what then but but to negotiate and find a way out. Thais will have to live together, correct? If Thais can’t do that, everyone looses, but if you find the way, everyone wins-the meetings are very positive.

Tammy: The PAD only want it their way and to win. They say the PPP comes from vote buying and has no ligitimacy to lead the country. Even the occupation of Government House, they say it is legal and the will of the people. How can you negitiate with that?

Peter: And how can PAD occupy go on indefinately, and isn’t PAD loosing support as time goes by? Sooner than later, they will have to turn to the table and start talking, there is no other way. Chamlong and Sondhi are hard-liners and that is their position for entering talks-to get as much as they can. It is a normal negotiation tactic.

Tammy: Do you think the PPP will uses the redrawing of the constitution to help itself and Thaksin, as the PAD says? And what about the Amart, aren’t they just interested in getting in their agenda?

Peter: What you are asking is what will produce a better constitution, a people’s congress as the PPP wants, or an independent committee as the Amart wants? It is too bad that even the Thai courts are not fair anymore, but that just tells you how divided the Thais are. Right now, the PPP is attacking the committee concept and the Amart is attacking the people’s congress concept. Both has its strong and weak points. However, if it will be of the people and comes from the people, as in democracy, it should be the people’s congress. However, the resulting constitution may not solve some problems.

Tammy: What problems? What is the solution? And what is right?

Peter: It will be less democratic, but the Amart system and its committee idea will result in fewer politician gaining power from vote buying. But my take of it is that if you look at history, the only progress comes from better education of the people, and not the structure. The Amart syetem, may end up just producing a new class of corrupt politicians. Also if the structure doesn’t reflect the people, it will be a structure that is always be under pressure, and so it will not work well. Only through education and democracy can you have political developments and political progress.

Tammy: So you agree with the people’s congress concept, even if corruption and vote buying will not disappear?

Peter: Realistically speaking, looks at the list of countries that have little corruption and they are Singapore, a few Nordic countries, Japan and the US. Do you really think a new constitution in a country like Thailand, at this stage of development, can be a clean country? I agree one must strive to do better and be better, but Singapore, those Nordiac countries and the US-all have very high educational standard, very advance on all sides and they are very wealthy countries. And I must ask you, is corruption in Thailand that bad because all the international study says it is just about in the middle compared to other countries. I don’t see any country coming out and hurt its own economy this bad, just because there are some corruptions going on.

Tammy: Last question, they say Thaksin used the constitution to gain total control of Thailand, like a democratic dictatorship? So Thais needs a new direction for the constitution-to the Amart system.

Peter: That is just propaganda, because I saw it with my own eyes the censure debate by the Democrats, the press attacking Thaksin everyday, the accademic also came out against Thaksin, the same with some Senators, and the courts also ruled against Thaksin many times. But he may appear un-touchable and many don’t like that, but it is because the Thais never had a solid one party majority before. The reaction is understandable. As far as the constitution is concerned, again, the best thing is to educate the people. My fear is that the Amart is clearly trying to keep Thais undereducated-as a way to keep power to themselves.