Army chief's tactics force election offer

[Flashermac]

Bangkok Post

5 May 2010

 

 

ANALYSIS: Anupong's inaction left PM with only one option

 

 

 

Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva has been compelled to offer a house dissolution to break the country's political deadlock because of the army's reluctance to use force to clear anti-government protesters from Ratchaprasong intersection.

 

Army chief Anupong Paojinda made it clear on April 12 that he was opposed to another crackdown on red shirt demonstrators, instead favouring a house dissolution and the use of political measures to solve the impasse.

 

Gen Anupong said politicians should facilitate talks between the government and the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship because the use of force would lead to more deaths.

 

Defence Minister Prawit Wongsuwon, who once said police, not soldiers, should lead any crackdowns on protesters, holds the same position.

 

"It's unacceptable for me to use soldiers to shoot Thais," he said.

 

Although the prime minister forced Gen Anupong to take a more decisive role in ending the rallies by appointing him chief of security operations on April16, the army leader has made no obvious effort to disperse the rally at Ratchaprasong intersection.

 

He has only taken direct action to end red shirt rallies staged outside of the Ratchaprasong area.

 

As the political crisis drags on, the army's dissatisfaction with Mr Abhisit is increasing because of pressure from the government to use force to end the protests.

 

The government has invoked threats to national security, terrorism and attacks on the monarchy as grounds for the army to clear the protesters from Bangkok's streets. But the army has maintained its support for Gen Anupong's position that a political resolution is the only way out of the crisis.

 

A Defence Ministry source said Gen Prawit was feeling increasingly uncomfortable with the differences between the government's and the army's approach to ending the impasse. Gen Prawit felt he was being forced by Mr Abhisit to use military force too quickly, the source added.

 

"Using force against the demonstration needs time," the source said. "It should not have a time frame.

 

"We must gradually contain them [red shirts] by using military tactics. The attack has to come at the right time to keep the loss of lives at a minimum. The government should not rush, demand a time frame or use words to goad the army.

 

[color:red]"Relations between the army and the prime minister are not that good," the source said.[/color]

 

Both field commanders and senior officers oppose the use of the military to end the rallies.

 

"We are not afraid of death," one commander said. "In fact, we sympathise with the foot soldiers because they are risking their lives for a political cause.

 

"The order to kill is easily executed because soldiers have guns. But what will happen afterwards?

 

"After the red shirts are defeated, those still with weapons will go underground and launch operations in other areas," he added. "Soldiers will become their targets after the crackdown. That will bring the country closer to civil war. And there will be more red shirts coming out in other provinces."

 

The reluctance of the military chiefs to act means all the government can do is threaten the red shirts with the use of force.

 

This inability of Mr Abhisit to convert his words into reality resulted in Monday's proposal of the Nov 14 elections - a time frame which can save faces on all sides of the political divide.

 

[color:orange]The offer of fresh elections also comes at the right time for the UDD. It has faced severe criticism over its raid on Chulalongkorn Hospital last Thursday, and a willingness to accept Mr Abhisit's offer on the occasion of Coronation Day would show the movement's loyalty to the higher institution[/color].

 

There is now a clear way out for both the government and the red shirts. The question now is whether they will complicate things too greatly by setting overly onerous preconditions to agreement.

 

 

 

Bt Wassana Namnuam

[doxx]

[color:red]"We are not afraid of death," one commander said. "In fact, we sympathise with the foot soldiers because they are risking their lives for a political cause"[/color]

 

I ask the good army and anybody to give me one conflict, one war, -since the birth of civilization that was not political! Name me one. The truth is, war, under any guise, has always been political and this is just another excuse by a military who is only confident dragging Burmese refuges out to sea. Excuses, excuses and excuses.

[Nervous God]

That's how I've been hearing it. I think the Red's fucked up with the Hospital. They could have gotten 3 months, but pushed too hard. 6 months now and the twist that will bring will be calming at first.

[cavanami]

[color:red]"We are not afraid of death," one commander said. "In fact, we sympathise with the foot soldiers because they are risking their lives for a political cause"[/color]

 

I ask the good army and anybody to give me one conflict, one war, -since the birth of civilization that was not political! Name me one. The truth is, war, under any guise, has always been political and this is just another excuse by a military who is only confident dragging Burmese refuges out to sea. Excuses, excuses and excuses.

I would say that many wars are for financial reasons more so the political.

[Hardy641]

I would say most wars and conflicts have a religious cause.

[ThaiHome]

Not sure I agree that Abhisit was “forced†to make this offer because the Army refused to act. I don’t believe Abhisit wanted them to move in anymore then Anupong did. Both were very much aware of the bloodbath that would likely ensue and they sure did not want that to happen.

 

This piece appears to be one in many that have tried to put Abhisit in a bad light. This is just the same as the ones about him hiding out in the Army Barracks, not being decisive in dealing the reds, etc, etc, etc.

TH

[Flashermac]

I would say most wars and conflicts have a religious cause.

 

 

Yep. Just think of the American Civil War, the Spanish-American War, the Boer War, WWI, WWII, the Korean War, Vietnam, the Iraq-Iran War etc.

 

 

 

[KimDidMeGood]

Not sure I agree that Abhisit was “forced†to make this offer because the Army refused to act. I don’t believe Abhisit wanted them to move in anymore then Anupong did. Both were very much aware of the bloodbath that would likely ensue and they sure did not want that to happen.

 

This piece appears to be one in many that have tried to put Abhisit in a bad light. This is just the same as the ones about him hiding out in the Army Barracks, not being decisive in dealing the reds, etc, etc, etc.

TH

According to reports, Anupong played on the fact that Abhisit refused to sign a written order to proceed to a crackdown post April 10th (which is politically understandable from the PM, mind you). I wouldn’t now if Abhisit is naïve enough to imagine that Anupong would act without a solid political cover.

But Abhisit's real failure was not having a communication consistent with his actions. During the joint TV appearance Abhisit/Anupong, Abhisit was hinting at some kind of insubordination from Anupong for not taking action, despite government’s instructions to restore the rule of the law, while Anupong was sticking to the stance of a political solution. Some analysts interpreted that TV appearance as Abhisit throwing the kitchen sink at Anupong.

The same kind of dichotomy between communication and actions was shown when Abhisit said “no more talks†after the Sala Daeng bombings while apperently, talks resumed secretly between Sukhumband and the UDD to make sure that the reds would not flatly reject Abhisit’s peace offer.

Personally, I understand why Abhisit was so ambivalent: the situation was critically dangerous and there was no such thing as a simple, good solution. And after all, as of now, unless some new negative development happens, Abhisit’s approach was successful. However, from now on, he needs to be more consistent and transparent in his approach because ambiguity has limits and he’s now walking on a thread.

It’s interesting to see that, right now, the harshest criticism against the PM comes from within the Democratic Party and the PAD and not from his opposition PTP/UDD. Actually the PTP now praises him and the UDD refrain from personalizing the unsolved issues on Abhisit.

 

[WorldFun]

Indeed

 

"It’s interesting to see that, right now, the harshest criticism against the PM comes from within the Democratic Party and the PAD and not from his opposition PTP/UDD. Actually the PTP now praises him and the UDD refrain from personalizing the unsolved issues on Abhisit."

[Nervous God]

Then guess what party is going to run hard against him.

 

His enemies are not red 5 5 5 5