1. Thailand
A house divided among itself and becoming ungovernable?
The Shinawatras are to say the least controversial. The current Prime Minister though, Yingluck Shinawatra, is popular with a large body of the population - mainly the rural poor in the East and North of the country, which is perhaps weird given that her brother and the former Prime Minister, Thaksin (now in exile to avoid being jailed for corruption), is/was Thailand's richest man.
That her party won a landslide election victory last time round, though, is unquestioned - even with the accusations of vote-buying that invariably occur during Thai elections.
When we left Bangkok on Wednesday a lot of fears were being uttered about today's anti-government demonstration turning violent - fears that seem to have been confirmed:
http://news.yahoo.com/thai-police-fire-tear-gas-clash-hundreds-protesters-052421950.html
Not sure how accurate or neutral that report is, incidentally. The main opposition party, the Democrats, are supposed to have disapproved of the event. One other point - Thaksin is also alleged to have been publicly critical of the Thai royal family, which is actually an offence under Thai law (lèse-majesté)! This will explain the "royalist" references in the above piece.
On Thai television every day at 0800 and 1800 you get the Thai national anthem played along with a film showing the country's positive aspects (including Muslims from the South, as well the majority Buddhists, among the people shown), indicating its royal allegiance, and giving an indication of its military power - principally a warning to some neighbours like poverty-stricken Cambodia and pirates in territorial waters (reasons for the Thai navy getting all the free plugs would take some explanation otherwise).
It will not surprise me if, before long, the military does its usual thing and displaces the democratically elected government. In the name of re-establishing order usw. If Yingluck, who is far more personable than her brother, goes, the question follows as to which member of the family will succeed her as the party head. Like Communist North Korea, though, it is becoming something of a family fiefdom politically - although democratically elected and with no nuclear aspirations, yet at least.
2. The Middle East - Pat Buchanan's take
I may not approve of some his views regarding domestic policy (but how far that is my business ....), but his grasp of international affairs remains as good as any American commentator. That he does not buy into the Israeli lobby's one-sided take of affairs makes him controversial in his own country, but his assessment (article dated November 23rd if you get something else) strikes me as pretty neutral and factual:
http://www.creators.com/conservative/pat-buchanan.html
Unfortunately the window for Middle East peace seems to have closed some time ago, and the whole area has a Doomsday feeling about it. I regard Syria as the next Somalia given the divisions within the country and there is no way that the current conflict will end any time soon. Notably the opposition is united in its hatred of Assad, but divided among itself otherwise (notably Al-Qaeda has a presence in, but does not dominate, the opposition - does the West really like that idea?). Mr Buchanan's comments about Jordan are informative (and depressing), and the Arab Spring turning into the Arab Autumn (see my previous articles on this) seems to be following its inevitable path.
An area divided among itself? Finding things wrong is easy, finding solutions that work is another matter. Islam though is definitely NOT the answer.
3. States seceding from the US - peacefully
One of the fun concepts stemming from the recent US elections is the "sore loser" noises emanating from mainly Republican supporters who, apparently, now wish to leave the USA entirely.
I am somewhat surprised by the response from many Democrats. If Texas seceded, the rest of the country would become virtually a lock-in for the Democratic Party for years. There is the question of the Democrat supporters in Texas. Maybe this is the time for a bit of polite "ethnic cleansing" - Californian Republicans (facing a Democrat supermajority in both houses in the State Legislature (?)) could move to Texas, Texas Democrats could move to California in their place, all property rights exchanged to everyone's satisfaction, everybody could be happy - maybe? No guns to the head, no obligations, no American version of the former Yugoslavia or Iraq of course.
Just an idea.
No comments:
Post a Comment