Message to the editorial board of the Economist, Wall Street Journal, New York Times, and other West

That is exactly what I would like to ask you to do – scrub your windows of prejudice when it comes to writing about Thailand’s political affairs.

In every article and editorial on Thailand’s political conflict that has appeared in your publications, you pitch our “political schism” as a “class war” – the poor and downtrodden and their supposed champion, against the rich and the powerful.  You paint Thaksin Shinawatra as a man of the rural masses, while his enemies are the “royal court”, “the Bangkok elite”, “the powers-that be”, “the military”, “the establishment”, “entrenched interests”, “the bureaucracy”, “the judiciary”.  Have you ever stopped to ask yourself who these “elites” and “powers-that-be” really are? Have you ever questioned your assumption that the causes of the political turmoil in Thailand today are really that clear-cut, black versus white? Is democracy merely equivalent to an election? Can you not see that poverty in Thailand has been exacerbated, not alleviated, by populist policies which pump most of their money into paybacks for vote-collecting village heads, government officials, and pro-government protest leaders? As for the “establishment”, do you know of whom it comprises? 

Do you recall the days of investigative reporting, when writers actually dug deep into the issues and relied on first-hand accounts, not solely on propaganda?

Regarding the current political situation, allow me to say the following:

Thaksin Shinawatra was one of Thailand’s most visionary premiers, and a real man of action.  He is smart and a veteran in of Thai politics, unrivaled in his understanding of its machinery and the “oil” that makes it run.  His adviser, Pansak Vinyarat, genuinely cares about the rural poor, and together they executed numerous populist policies and hand-outs, including the Bt1-million village fund, one village-one bicycle scheme, one village-one scholarship, one village-one buffalo, one village-one product, welfare housing, welfare taxis, and so on. Thaksin’s first year in office was his finest as a public servant.  The rural poor looked to him as their saviour, someone who really cared. They knew they were only getting the “crumbs” of Thailand’s wealth, but at least they were getting something for a change.

Then, the cronies and the money began to get the better of Thaksin. The bright light of power blinded him, and people around him fed his craving for more because it meant easy access to money, and the ability to run the country every which way he wished. Every rule could be bent. They made him feel invincible, beyond reproach, and in many cases above the law. Things began to deteriorate fast.

Theft of taxpayers’ money was carried out in broad daylight at all bureaucratic and political strata and without an iota of shame.  Bureaucrats were willing to offer the “powers-that-be”, ie the politicians with direct or indirect control over their respective ministries, high prices for promotions. They knew that once they obtained a good position, they could collect their ransom from public money – and in many cases “protection money” from the businesses under their jurisdiction. Government officials spent most of their time and effort brown-nosing, rather than serving the public interest.  

The politicisation of the Thai bureaucracy was almost total, and to the detriment of the public interest.

Independent organisations created by the 1997 Constitution to serve as the check-and-balance agencies vital to any democracy were “neutralised” one by one, either by threats or money. In the end, all but a few had their teeth pulled.

The real “powers-that-be” were and still are the politicians and their cronies. They enjoyed all the perks – the motorcades, the bowing and scraping of their minions and petitioners. Their children demanded the streets be cleared when they drove their enormously expensive fast cars to their nightclubs and meeting places. They are Thailand’s real “establishment” and “entrenched interests”.  

Meanwhile, the military top brass (if you bothered to cultivate contacts among them) would reveal the truth that they are no longer the keepers of the throne, or the traditional “knights in shining armour”. There is little if any unity among our armed forces. The terms “discipline” and “principle” have lost any dignity.

The graft money demanded for every government project has climbed from the “standard” 30 per cent to 50, and even as high as 80 per cent.

Please also look into those who occupy the boards of state enterprises.  You will find plenty of red-shirt leaders, their families and cronies among them. And please take the time to read the well-researched accounts of just where the rivers of money have flowed from all the government subsidy programmes. 

The worst thing that Thaksin and his cronies did for the country was sowing the seeds of corruption and a culture of impunity. These are the same seeds sowed by Ferdinand Marcos, which left the Philippines – once a shining beacon for Southeast Asia – the deprived country it is today.

As for the monarchy that you all love to loathe and at which you like to point your finger for every wrong in Thailand, as the uber enemy of democracy, you should take time to look at the lifelong work of Their Majesties. They have nothing to lose and no reason to fear any politician, even one as powerful as Thaksin.  They are not running for any office. He was never a threat to them, as he himself has told the Western press and public. If you want to really understand Their Majesties and their mindset and philosophy, take time to look at the HRH Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn, and her hard work and dedication. She toils harder than anybody can imagine, has no hidden agenda, and has been through and through apolitical. She is the real representative of the monarchy’s work.

Finally, I would like to ask you to please practise what you preach as far as journalistic standards and ethics are concerned. Be thorough and fair. And please, once in a while, scrub your windows.