Thanks for the comment. NM puts a limit on article length, so one can’t elaborate on important topics. By Buddhism, yes, I meant Thai Buddhism. By spatial norms, simply that Buddhist monarchs, as beings of supreme merit, cannot be placed “under” a constitution which enshrines the rights of the people, who by definition are beings of low merit. Here there is a clash between the Thai Buddhist theory of monarchy, and Western enlightenment ideas of political and legal rights. I talk about this point in my book, Thailand’s Theory of Monarchy: http://www.sunypress.edu/p-6222-thailands-theory-of-monarchy.aspx
On the second point, yes, I do think that Buddhism has been used in the service of despotism and absolutism.
Tradition is something that is handed down the generations. If you read Natthaphon’s excellent edition of the writings of “Mor Leng” and others involved in the 1912 failed coup against the monarchy, the conspirators were honoured by Pridi following the 1932 overthrow of the absolute monarchy for laying the groundwork for what the People’s Party finally achieved. If you read Reynolds’ “Thai Radical Discourse” he makes the excellent point that movements of the Left from the 1950s onwards defined themselves in relation to Pridi. Red Shirt activists as well as left-liberal academics take much interest in the events of 1932. In other words this is a tradition.
This is the sense in which I meant that there is a republican “tradition” in Thailand.
I also noted that a generation of Thais had become estranged from this tradition since the end of the Cold War.
On republicanism in Britain, I like Bageot’s description from his book, The English Constitution, written in the 1860s, that in Britain “a republic has insinuated itself beneath the folds of a monarchy”. Britain was a “disguised republic”. That was in the 1860s. Today it’s even more republican with a celebrity royal family.
I only wrote a comment. I didn’t write the post itself. Somebody who posts a comment is under no obligation to cover every conceivable issue related to the subject, such as the question of personnel.
When writing that Indonesia had no history of naval warfare, I was pointing out a vulnerability, not making a criticism. It is true that most other Asian countries lack such a tradition, but Indonesia championed the acceptance of the archipelagic state concept in the face of considerable international opposition. As I have written before, this has been one of Indonesia’s greatest diplomatic achievements. It should have led to greater priority being immediately given to the navy’s requirements to defend Indonesia’s archipelagic waters and their resources.
You ask what Indonesia should do vis-a-vis China? Well, how about including Chinese fishing-vessels captured when carrying out illegal fishing in Indonesian waters in the Susi Pudjiastuti program of destroying boats caught fishing illegally? As far as I know, only a single Chinese boat taken in 2009 has been destroyed. I think it is very unfortunate that the majority of boats thus far destroyed have been of Vietnamese, Thai or Philippine origin. This issue should have been resolved amicably through some ASEAN mechanism.
I advocate a united ASEAN approach to the South China Sea that doesn’t allow China to pick off one Southeast Asian country after another. Indonesia’s pretence that it has no dispute with China has the consequence of disengaging it from the problems that other ASEAN countries face. This is unseemly for the country that is so often described as the leader of ASEAN, and which played a major role in ASEAN’s foundation.
On another front, the Australian government failed to consult me over the purchase of the F-35 and has similarly neglected to employ me as an advisor on Chinese investment in Australia. It presumably, and accurately, considered that I had no expertise in either domain. As a result, I accept no responsibility for the government’s policy in these areas and I don’t feel obliged to bear these matters in mind when I am offering my opinions about developments in Indonesia.
The South China Sea issue has come to a head in ASEAN. It will be a test for member states to attempt to reach a consensus. My own view is that the non-claimant states should not be drawn into the fray and forced to make a stand which conflicts with their national interests. At best, ASEAN should urge the claimant states, China and the United States to resolve the matter peacefully.
1) Pilgrims main religious freedom Christianity
2) War of Independence, constitution.
3) Civil war over slavery.(secession)
4) Tycoons (capitalists) rip off the land and development of civil society
5) Contention b/t civil society and government continue supposedly constitution guided.
Sooner or later #3 and onward will apply if reconciliation hold,
Myanmar already has an imperfect overbearing yet workable constitution. The NLD must use it to work with the Military on board.
There are common problems that need to be addressed, such as the Kalas in Yakine , Myitsone Dam and internally the inequity of everything for the citizenry, especially the rural one.
These tree common problems can be utilized by NLD , to establish trust /reconciliation and ROL /politics through existing constitution. Having the military on one side is always a plus. Wasting the opportunity to change constitution making the military as it was will squander the moment where condemning Myanmar to perpetual #3.
What’s the aim here? Saying the country has had republican thinkers is not at all the same as having a republican “tradition”. That England had the Cromwell interregnum nearly 4 centuries ago does not mean that they have a republican “tradition”. In fact, it sort of proves that they don’t have a republican tradition. Ditto for Thailand. The best thing that Jory can say is that there have always been republican thinkers in the country, and that their numbers have always grown when the monarchy is seen as the least oriented toward the people and democracy. And that should be the point.
“Even the word “constitution” has been sacrificed, since placing the king “under” a constitution violates Buddhist spatial norms about the proper place of the king.”
I wonder if Dr. Jory would be kind enough to expand upon this. By “Buddhist” does he mean Thai Buddhism? Theravada as a whole? All of Buddhism? And from what source are “Buddhist spatial norms” formulated?
In short, the claim that Buddhist norms entail some sort of despotism or absolute monarchy is strange to me considering Buddhism developed in a milieu closer to the classical Greek city-states, where the Shakya founded an oligarchic republican state known as the Śākya Gaṇarājya. If Śuddhodana is described as a “king”, we can only thank the unfamiliarity of Silk Road translators in other lands with the concept of an elected archon.
First off how many countries in Asia outside of Japan have a recent history of naval warfare (last 100 years)? Navies are expensive, I distinctly remember Sukarno built a large navy and airforce, and almost impoverished Indonesia in doing so. Did you know that in the 1960-70s, the Indonesians had the largest sub fleet in Asia? Here is an interesting link about history of Indonesia’s sub fleet
As for proxy wars etc. How much of it is massaging the army’s ego? What matters, like in most countries, is budgets. Which branch of the armed forces is getting the bigger budgets, particularly in procurement. Then you have to look at the trends in personal. None of that you even raised.
Did you know that Indonesia has the largest Marine CorpS in Asia now? Larger than China, Japan’s, South Korea. It was 13,000 15 years ago, now its 29,000, and in 10-15 years the aim is to take it 85,000. there is the continued upgrades to the Navy. Not to mention that Indonesia is going to buy 8 Su35, which is more advanced than what Chinese have at the moment
Natuna isn’t just posturing, the Indonesian military has been bolstering Natuna It would be absurd for Indonesia to take a more hardline stance than the Filipino or even the US. In many ways Indonesia stance on Natuna is more hardline than if it were US ally. The Indonesians refuse even to entertain that there is a dispute, mirroring China’s stance toward Vietnam in Parcel. Once you say there is a dispute with China, then you entertain the possibility that China’s claims or legitimate.
It was the US that negotiated the deal between China vs Philippines over the Scarborough Shoal a couple of years ago, because they didn’t want a conflict to erupt over a few rocks that would drag the US.
What do you want the Indonesians to do about China. Start sinking Chinese fishing vessels with anti-ship missiles? Attack Chinese Coast Guard ships that enter into Indonesia EEZ with subs and fighter jets.
If Indonesia has its head in the sand, then the rest of Asia, including Australia has its head up their rear end.. Australia continues to allow Chinese investors to basically buy the country up. They are slotted to buy the F-35, but people are saying its a dud.
You talk about decisions based on politics. Which is worse having Indonesians civilians do some “exercises” 1-2 a week, or wasting 1 trillion on a dud as your first line of defense?
There are less companies than you think, they are unregulated, and they all deal with the Government. This is not an advanced, managed economy. There are companies in Cambodia too, almost all from China and Thailand. Does that mean they operate according to ethical guidelines ? How’s that Phnom Penh and Yangon Stock Exchange been doing ? Don’t be naïve. Companies in Myanmar cater to the elite, which is the government. Companies in Cambodia cater to Hun Sen. Even corrupt Malaysia and Indonesia, have some trickle down effect. You need more time spent in Myanmar. It is very undeveloped and the fact that Yangon has 238 fax machines and three 4 or 5 star hotels means squat.
Myanmar has no regulatory environment. No foreign company, except Chinese and Japanese companies, that work straight with the Government and don’t expect any quality control, will succeed. Sweden pulled out and the rest of Europe has been cautious. The US has been typically starry-eyed without understanding Myanmar, and the British don’t have the investment resources to go into Myanmar in a big way. Australia is best placed, but they will want some version of a financial and regulatory system that is more developed; no one expects Singapore-level development, but Burma is not even at Vietnam’s level, yet. They may well be, but the sociocultural issues and political stability, at present, does not allow for that. Daw Aung Suu Kyi will once again be expected by the West to be one-woman Cinderella. First glorifying her, then condemning her, and now glorifying her again. DASSK should tell the West to get lost, go screw themselves and let the Burmese run their own nation, as she has never wavered to do, in 30 years. It is the Western Leftists and their academic acolytes that make a mockery of themselves, and the Burmese quite rightly, ignore or denounce them. Myanmar does not want to be invaded postmodern Western bureaucrats or greedy foreign companies, they have seen enough greed in their own leadership. Under DASSK, I do expect that to slowly change, and it should change to the benefit of Burmese, NOT Westerners.
A New Mandala post on Bela Negara was long overdue. It seems to be one of Jokowi’s programs that hews closest to a New Order approach to governing Indonesia. Just as SBY gave Indonesian-language speeches that were as heavy, cumbersome and tedious as some of Soeharto’s formal addresses, so a lot of what Jokowi seeks to do appears to hark back in one way or another to the Soeharto era.
The focus on identifying domestic enemies has a long pedigree in Indonesia and has attracted infinitely more time and attention than the task of devising an appropriate external defence policy. This may reflect the particular interests of the Indonesian army, as the author of this post intimates. It is also a consequence of the guerrilla, land-based nature of the Indonesian Revolution and of the related circumstance that Indonesia has almost no tradition of naval warfare.
Indonesia has adopted a head-in-the-sand attitude to Chinese encroachments in the South China Sea, despite Jokowi’s flag-waving excursion to the Natunas in recent weeks. The Foreign Ministry’s constant airing of vapid principles of peace and harmony as the solution to territorial and resource competition is little short of a cop-out. Meanwhile, the proxy war will remain a land-based, even if largely imaginary, threat until LGBT sailors manning (please excuse the sexist language hold-over) foreign-financed warships besiege Pulau Seribu and more drug smugglers disembark.
Jokowi’s, Ryamizard’s and Gatot’s obsession with combatting the proxy war postpones the day when Indonesian authorities eventually have to try to understand what the strategic consequences will be if China acquires sovereignty over the whole area marked by the nine-dash line. This obsession also points to the likely failure of the attempted rediscovery of Indonesia’s long-lost maritime culture. This is another objective, but a contradictory one, of Jokowi’s government.
To train 100 million civilians in some of the arts of war over the next ten years will be a formidable undertaking. The aim itself has more than a whiff of totalitarianism about it, though implementation will no doubt fall well short of aspiration. Otherwise, within a decade, about one third of Indonesia’s population will have undergone such training. It will be a relief when one visits Indonesia to stumble across a few people over the age of sixty who will have been spared this ordeal
Learn lessons from history. Prior to world war 2 in Southeast Asia, Japan offered same strategy which China now employs, to its neighbors, uniting South Asia by means of Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere, this time, China uses the term “bilateral relations”. Of course, we know the result. World War 2. I hope and pray diplomacy wins the day but I doubt it.
“This included Isan, the northeast, many of whose citizens constitute the working classes (pedi-cab drivers, sex workers and so on)…”
Whether intended or not this is a derogatory remark. Isan people from all walks of life would find this offensive and presumptous.
In the context of stereotyping, the vast majority of Isan people are far too respectful to assume that many American citizens would constitute a group associated with meddlesome war mongerers; murderous, racist police forces; greedy, money laundering financial institutions and multiple philandering leaders. Especially American scholars for that matter.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Thailand’s hidden republican tradition
Thanks for the comment. NM puts a limit on article length, so one can’t elaborate on important topics. By Buddhism, yes, I meant Thai Buddhism. By spatial norms, simply that Buddhist monarchs, as beings of supreme merit, cannot be placed “under” a constitution which enshrines the rights of the people, who by definition are beings of low merit. Here there is a clash between the Thai Buddhist theory of monarchy, and Western enlightenment ideas of political and legal rights. I talk about this point in my book, Thailand’s Theory of Monarchy: http://www.sunypress.edu/p-6222-thailands-theory-of-monarchy.aspx
On the second point, yes, I do think that Buddhism has been used in the service of despotism and absolutism.
Thailand’s hidden republican tradition
Tradition is something that is handed down the generations. If you read Natthaphon’s excellent edition of the writings of “Mor Leng” and others involved in the 1912 failed coup against the monarchy, the conspirators were honoured by Pridi following the 1932 overthrow of the absolute monarchy for laying the groundwork for what the People’s Party finally achieved. If you read Reynolds’ “Thai Radical Discourse” he makes the excellent point that movements of the Left from the 1950s onwards defined themselves in relation to Pridi. Red Shirt activists as well as left-liberal academics take much interest in the events of 1932. In other words this is a tradition.
This is the sense in which I meant that there is a republican “tradition” in Thailand.
I also noted that a generation of Thais had become estranged from this tradition since the end of the Cold War.
On republicanism in Britain, I like Bageot’s description from his book, The English Constitution, written in the 1860s, that in Britain “a republic has insinuated itself beneath the folds of a monarchy”. Britain was a “disguised republic”. That was in the 1860s. Today it’s even more republican with a celebrity royal family.
Living in a gangster’s paradise
I only wrote a comment. I didn’t write the post itself. Somebody who posts a comment is under no obligation to cover every conceivable issue related to the subject, such as the question of personnel.
When writing that Indonesia had no history of naval warfare, I was pointing out a vulnerability, not making a criticism. It is true that most other Asian countries lack such a tradition, but Indonesia championed the acceptance of the archipelagic state concept in the face of considerable international opposition. As I have written before, this has been one of Indonesia’s greatest diplomatic achievements. It should have led to greater priority being immediately given to the navy’s requirements to defend Indonesia’s archipelagic waters and their resources.
You ask what Indonesia should do vis-a-vis China? Well, how about including Chinese fishing-vessels captured when carrying out illegal fishing in Indonesian waters in the Susi Pudjiastuti program of destroying boats caught fishing illegally? As far as I know, only a single Chinese boat taken in 2009 has been destroyed. I think it is very unfortunate that the majority of boats thus far destroyed have been of Vietnamese, Thai or Philippine origin. This issue should have been resolved amicably through some ASEAN mechanism.
I advocate a united ASEAN approach to the South China Sea that doesn’t allow China to pick off one Southeast Asian country after another. Indonesia’s pretence that it has no dispute with China has the consequence of disengaging it from the problems that other ASEAN countries face. This is unseemly for the country that is so often described as the leader of ASEAN, and which played a major role in ASEAN’s foundation.
On another front, the Australian government failed to consult me over the purchase of the F-35 and has similarly neglected to employ me as an advisor on Chinese investment in Australia. It presumably, and accurately, considered that I had no expertise in either domain. As a result, I accept no responsibility for the government’s policy in these areas and I don’t feel obliged to bear these matters in mind when I am offering my opinions about developments in Indonesia.
Will Laos be a lousy ASEAN leader?
Please would someone advise as to how ASEAN matters squat? That is, other than a venue for major opportunities to party for assorted honchos?
Will Laos be a lousy ASEAN leader?
The South China Sea issue has come to a head in ASEAN. It will be a test for member states to attempt to reach a consensus. My own view is that the non-claimant states should not be drawn into the fray and forced to make a stand which conflicts with their national interests. At best, ASEAN should urge the claimant states, China and the United States to resolve the matter peacefully.
Revisiting country risk for Myanmar
The Hx of USA in 5 lines.
1) Pilgrims main religious freedom Christianity
2) War of Independence, constitution.
3) Civil war over slavery.(secession)
4) Tycoons (capitalists) rip off the land and development of civil society
5) Contention b/t civil society and government continue supposedly constitution guided.
Sooner or later #3 and onward will apply if reconciliation hold,
Myanmar already has an imperfect overbearing yet workable constitution. The NLD must use it to work with the Military on board.
There are common problems that need to be addressed, such as the Kalas in Yakine , Myitsone Dam and internally the inequity of everything for the citizenry, especially the rural one.
These tree common problems can be utilized by NLD , to establish trust /reconciliation and ROL /politics through existing constitution. Having the military on one side is always a plus. Wasting the opportunity to change constitution making the military as it was will squander the moment where condemning Myanmar to perpetual #3.
Thailand’s hidden republican tradition
What’s the aim here? Saying the country has had republican thinkers is not at all the same as having a republican “tradition”. That England had the Cromwell interregnum nearly 4 centuries ago does not mean that they have a republican “tradition”. In fact, it sort of proves that they don’t have a republican tradition. Ditto for Thailand. The best thing that Jory can say is that there have always been republican thinkers in the country, and that their numbers have always grown when the monarchy is seen as the least oriented toward the people and democracy. And that should be the point.
Thailand’s hidden republican tradition
“Even the word “constitution” has been sacrificed, since placing the king “under” a constitution violates Buddhist spatial norms about the proper place of the king.”
I wonder if Dr. Jory would be kind enough to expand upon this. By “Buddhist” does he mean Thai Buddhism? Theravada as a whole? All of Buddhism? And from what source are “Buddhist spatial norms” formulated?
In short, the claim that Buddhist norms entail some sort of despotism or absolute monarchy is strange to me considering Buddhism developed in a milieu closer to the classical Greek city-states, where the Shakya founded an oligarchic republican state known as the Śākya Gaṇarājya. If Śuddhodana is described as a “king”, we can only thank the unfamiliarity of Silk Road translators in other lands with the concept of an elected archon.
Thailand’s hidden republican tradition
One learns something new every day……
Thailand’s hidden republican tradition
bets on how long before this book is on Thailand’s banned list ?
Living in a gangster’s paradise
First off how many countries in Asia outside of Japan have a recent history of naval warfare (last 100 years)? Navies are expensive, I distinctly remember Sukarno built a large navy and airforce, and almost impoverished Indonesia in doing so. Did you know that in the 1960-70s, the Indonesians had the largest sub fleet in Asia? Here is an interesting link about history of Indonesia’s sub fleet
http://www.public.navy.mil/subfor/underseawarfaremagazine/Issues/Archives/issue_50/IndonesianSubSquadron.html
As for proxy wars etc. How much of it is massaging the army’s ego? What matters, like in most countries, is budgets. Which branch of the armed forces is getting the bigger budgets, particularly in procurement. Then you have to look at the trends in personal. None of that you even raised.
Did you know that Indonesia has the largest Marine CorpS in Asia now? Larger than China, Japan’s, South Korea. It was 13,000 15 years ago, now its 29,000, and in 10-15 years the aim is to take it 85,000. there is the continued upgrades to the Navy. Not to mention that Indonesia is going to buy 8 Su35, which is more advanced than what Chinese have at the moment
Natuna isn’t just posturing, the Indonesian military has been bolstering Natuna It would be absurd for Indonesia to take a more hardline stance than the Filipino or even the US. In many ways Indonesia stance on Natuna is more hardline than if it were US ally. The Indonesians refuse even to entertain that there is a dispute, mirroring China’s stance toward Vietnam in Parcel. Once you say there is a dispute with China, then you entertain the possibility that China’s claims or legitimate.
It was the US that negotiated the deal between China vs Philippines over the Scarborough Shoal a couple of years ago, because they didn’t want a conflict to erupt over a few rocks that would drag the US.
What do you want the Indonesians to do about China. Start sinking Chinese fishing vessels with anti-ship missiles? Attack Chinese Coast Guard ships that enter into Indonesia EEZ with subs and fighter jets.
If Indonesia has its head in the sand, then the rest of Asia, including Australia has its head up their rear end.. Australia continues to allow Chinese investors to basically buy the country up. They are slotted to buy the F-35, but people are saying its a dud.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/aviation/f35-already-behind-as-russia-leads-arms-race/news-story/1eae5192a7ac96c37a9b0a6a2e6bae8c
You talk about decisions based on politics. Which is worse having Indonesians civilians do some “exercises” 1-2 a week, or wasting 1 trillion on a dud as your first line of defense?
http://www.news.com.au/technology/the-1-trillion-f35-tries-to-be-all-things-but-succeeds-at-few-say-critics-but-is-australias-new-weapon-now-too-big-to-fail/story-e6frfrnr-1226950254330
Revisiting country risk for Myanmar
Neptunian,
There are less companies than you think, they are unregulated, and they all deal with the Government. This is not an advanced, managed economy. There are companies in Cambodia too, almost all from China and Thailand. Does that mean they operate according to ethical guidelines ? How’s that Phnom Penh and Yangon Stock Exchange been doing ? Don’t be naïve. Companies in Myanmar cater to the elite, which is the government. Companies in Cambodia cater to Hun Sen. Even corrupt Malaysia and Indonesia, have some trickle down effect. You need more time spent in Myanmar. It is very undeveloped and the fact that Yangon has 238 fax machines and three 4 or 5 star hotels means squat.
Revisiting country risk for Myanmar
Think you are wrong about no “foreign” companies. There are many Asean (Singapore, Malaysia and Thailand mainly) companies operating in Myanmar.
Of course you would be almost right, if you consider “foreign” to be only Western.
Revisiting country risk for Myanmar
Daw Aung San Suu Kyi…sorry.
Revisiting country risk for Myanmar
Myanmar has no regulatory environment. No foreign company, except Chinese and Japanese companies, that work straight with the Government and don’t expect any quality control, will succeed. Sweden pulled out and the rest of Europe has been cautious. The US has been typically starry-eyed without understanding Myanmar, and the British don’t have the investment resources to go into Myanmar in a big way. Australia is best placed, but they will want some version of a financial and regulatory system that is more developed; no one expects Singapore-level development, but Burma is not even at Vietnam’s level, yet. They may well be, but the sociocultural issues and political stability, at present, does not allow for that. Daw Aung Suu Kyi will once again be expected by the West to be one-woman Cinderella. First glorifying her, then condemning her, and now glorifying her again. DASSK should tell the West to get lost, go screw themselves and let the Burmese run their own nation, as she has never wavered to do, in 30 years. It is the Western Leftists and their academic acolytes that make a mockery of themselves, and the Burmese quite rightly, ignore or denounce them. Myanmar does not want to be invaded postmodern Western bureaucrats or greedy foreign companies, they have seen enough greed in their own leadership. Under DASSK, I do expect that to slowly change, and it should change to the benefit of Burmese, NOT Westerners.
Living in a gangster’s paradise
A New Mandala post on Bela Negara was long overdue. It seems to be one of Jokowi’s programs that hews closest to a New Order approach to governing Indonesia. Just as SBY gave Indonesian-language speeches that were as heavy, cumbersome and tedious as some of Soeharto’s formal addresses, so a lot of what Jokowi seeks to do appears to hark back in one way or another to the Soeharto era.
The focus on identifying domestic enemies has a long pedigree in Indonesia and has attracted infinitely more time and attention than the task of devising an appropriate external defence policy. This may reflect the particular interests of the Indonesian army, as the author of this post intimates. It is also a consequence of the guerrilla, land-based nature of the Indonesian Revolution and of the related circumstance that Indonesia has almost no tradition of naval warfare.
Indonesia has adopted a head-in-the-sand attitude to Chinese encroachments in the South China Sea, despite Jokowi’s flag-waving excursion to the Natunas in recent weeks. The Foreign Ministry’s constant airing of vapid principles of peace and harmony as the solution to territorial and resource competition is little short of a cop-out. Meanwhile, the proxy war will remain a land-based, even if largely imaginary, threat until LGBT sailors manning (please excuse the sexist language hold-over) foreign-financed warships besiege Pulau Seribu and more drug smugglers disembark.
Jokowi’s, Ryamizard’s and Gatot’s obsession with combatting the proxy war postpones the day when Indonesian authorities eventually have to try to understand what the strategic consequences will be if China acquires sovereignty over the whole area marked by the nine-dash line. This obsession also points to the likely failure of the attempted rediscovery of Indonesia’s long-lost maritime culture. This is another objective, but a contradictory one, of Jokowi’s government.
To train 100 million civilians in some of the arts of war over the next ten years will be a formidable undertaking. The aim itself has more than a whiff of totalitarianism about it, though implementation will no doubt fall well short of aspiration. Otherwise, within a decade, about one third of Indonesia’s population will have undergone such training. It will be a relief when one visits Indonesia to stumble across a few people over the age of sixty who will have been spared this ordeal
Living in a gangster’s paradise
Very interesting
Let me know more
Well conveyed
Judgement day won’t bring the end of times
Learn lessons from history. Prior to world war 2 in Southeast Asia, Japan offered same strategy which China now employs, to its neighbors, uniting South Asia by means of Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere, this time, China uses the term “bilateral relations”. Of course, we know the result. World War 2. I hope and pray diplomacy wins the day but I doubt it.
Thailand’s new politics and a double wrecking ball
Where does Jon attribute anything to the policies of Thaksin?
Thailand’s new politics and a double wrecking ball
“This included Isan, the northeast, many of whose citizens constitute the working classes (pedi-cab drivers, sex workers and so on)…”
Whether intended or not this is a derogatory remark. Isan people from all walks of life would find this offensive and presumptous.
In the context of stereotyping, the vast majority of Isan people are far too respectful to assume that many American citizens would constitute a group associated with meddlesome war mongerers; murderous, racist police forces; greedy, money laundering financial institutions and multiple philandering leaders. Especially American scholars for that matter.