A possible “Asian Summer” depends on how the Thai establishment reacts.by Tony Cartalucci
Correction:According toThailand’s Election Commission US-backed Thaksin Shinawatra’s proxy political party received 15.7 million votes out of theestimated 32.5 million voter turnout(turnout of approx. 74%). This gives Thaksin’s proxy party a mere 48% of those who cast their votes on July 3rd (not even half), and out of all eligible voters, only a 35% mandate to actually “lead” the country. This tenuous showing, down from 38% reported earlier, exposes how very little support Thaksin has, despite his and his foreign-backers’ claims of a “landslide” victory and a “sweeping mandate.”Bangkok, Thailand July 4, 2011 – At face value, Thailand has been dealt a horrific blow during July 3rd’s elections. Hailed by the foreign press as a historic landslide victory, US-backed and exiled convicted criminal Thaksin Shinawatra’s proxy party, led via overt nepotism by his own sister, has won the elections and will form the next Thai government. While the foreign-media fixates on the fact that Yingluck is the first female prime minster of Thailand, they fail to mention, or even attempt to dispute, is that she was virtually unknown just weeks ago and is literally running as a place holder for her brother Thaksin.
Photo: Thaksin Shinawatra, a long time servant of the Western corporate-financier elite, since before even becoming Thailand’s prime minister in 2001, reports to the CFR in New York City on the eve of the 2006 military coup that ousted him from power. He has now returned to power in Thailand via a proxy political party led by his own sister, Yingluck Shinawatra. Securing the votes of only 35% of eligible voters puts on full display how tenuous his support really is within a nation he claims stands entirely behind him.
Another factor completely ignored by the media is the actual mandate Thaksin’s party, who claims the majority of Thais stand behind, has to run the country. Out of Thailand’s eligible voters, only 74% actually came out to vote. Of that 74%, Thaksin’s party secured only 265 of 500 seats in the parliament, a mere 53% of the parliament with many of these seats won by very slim margins. Securing only 48% of actual votes cast of the 74% that bothered to even vote gives Thaksin’s Peua Thai Party (PTP) a mere 35% mandate, a far flung, embarrassingly low number for a party that claims support from the majority of the nation.
Elections around the world often sport similar realities when the glossy front pages of Western magazines and carefully worded columns in papers are disgarded and the math actually done. Democracy in actuality, by no stretch of the imagination, is the voice of the people speaking out, but rather a carefully arranged charade composed to lend otherwise illegitimate leaders their “mandate.”
In Thailand’s case, 35% of Thailand’s eligible voters chose a party openly run by a convicted criminal, living in exile in Dubai, who consorts with some of the most notorious warmongers, neo-imperialists, free-traders, and international meddlers on earth. Since the 2006 coup that deposed Thaksin Shinawatra, he has been represented by Western interests via their lobbying firms, including Kenneth Adelman of the Edelman PR firm (Freedom House, International Crisis Group, PNAC), James Baker of Baker Botts (CFR), Robert Blackwill of Barbour Griffith & Rogers (CFR), Kobre & Kim, and currently Robert Amsterdam of Amsterdam & Peroff (Chatham House). Meanwhile, his street mobs dubbed the “red shirts” have received rhetorical support by US-funded NGOs like Prachatai which received 1.5 million baht from the Neo-Con lined National Endowment for Democracy.
With mere pittances on record paid to these organizations for their global campaign on Thaksin’s behalf, and now with his party back in power, it will be time to pay the real fee for doing business with the West. Expect sweeping “economic liberalizations” while NGOs move in to build up an even more invasive network within Thailand.
It should also be noted that even now, Thaksin’s “red shirt” movement and the US-funded NGOs that support it are not only mobilized on Thaksin’s behalf, but to illustrate how US-funded “civil society” actually serves the West’s interests above and beyond their own regional proxies, they have been mobilized to bolster support for other regional stooges including Ibrahim Anwar of Malaysia who is planning a massive rally in the nation’s capital on July 9th, 2011. Indeed, Thailand’s NED-funded Prachatai covered the Thai NED-funded People’s Empowerment Foundation, who were rallying on behalf of Malaysia’s NED/NDI/Open Society-funded Bersih movement at the Malaysian Embassy in Bangkok.
It is unclear what will transpire in Thailand next. Allowing Thaksin’s proxy party to come back to power, but the party itself with an overtly tenuous 35% mandate, may allow nationalist elements to slowly undermine and dismantle the party once and for all. Thaksin Shinawatra himself claims he will remain in exile, as his return would undoubtedly fill the streets with protests and mobilize the military once again to oust him. For years PTP has claimed to have the majority of Thailand’s population behind them. After elections, while they won by a slim majority, the fact that only 35% of voting Thais actually chose them exposes how tenuous their support really is. With this knowledge in hand, whether done by the government or grassroots Thais, a campaign to educate, inform, and get this 35% self-sufficient politically and economically has a real chance of completely undermining the West’s neo-liberal incursion into Thailand.
It will not be easy to educate this 35% however, especially regarding their patron Thaksin and his true, foreign-serving agenda. This is because while imposter academics like Dr. Andrew Walker of Australia’s National University throw up unrelated correlations between a growing number of Internet connections in Thailand and PTP’s rising popularity, reality suggests that the 35% that supports an overt treasonous criminal in direct contradiction to the rule-of-law, did so because of a lack of information, not access to it.
By not contesting Thakin’s party’s return to power, and instead “lying low,” Thailand’s establishment has put off what was admittedly going to be another round of street level bloodshed. Had protests started because of a perceived “stolen election” the level of violence, and the rhetorical justification to completely eviscerate Thailand’s nationalist establishment may have been achievable, just as it was in Egypt and Tunisia where US destabilization has already taken place. Even if the Thai government was able to put down such unrest, as seen in Syria and Libya, heavily armed militants and now overt foreign support have created the beginnings of armed insurrections that have hobbled their countries politically and economically. The prospect of street protests would have also raised the specter of similar “copy-cat” protests in neighboring Malaysia and Myanmar, where Western clients Aung San Suu Kyi and Ibrahim Anwar are planning similar campaigns to conveniently coincide with the predicted unrest in Thailand. This would have translated into regional instability.
Depending on how long Thailand’s establishment draws out their campaign to undermine Thaksin’s proxy party, and how overt they are about it, Thailand’s decision to accept the election’s outcome, albeit one that is sure to frustrate the other 65% that did not vote for Thaksin, may just balk entirely a coordinated attempt at destabilizing Asia. This is news that will make those in Beijing quite happy, and as the International Criminal Court suffers a debilitating rejection by the entire continent of Africa and Western-backed oppositions struggle indefinitely in both Libya and Syria, the West’s inability to stoke an Asian political conflagration may signal the final cracks in their last ditch effort to contain Beijing and Moscow in their bid to consolidate their unipolar global “international order.”
So while it may seem like a crushing defeat, it is still too early to tell. Whether Thaksin’s sister can consolidate once again her brother’s autocratic grip on power, annihilate his enemies, and allow him to return to power and pay back the likes of James Baker, Edelman, Robert Amsterdam, and Robert Blackwill their full “fees” or not will mark the progress of the West in their attempt to reestablish control of Southeast Asia and subsequently contain China. For now, the window of opportunity seems open for both sides, while time seems to be on the side of those favoring a multipolar world order.