- Posted December 3, 2013 by
Democratically Elected ??
While the great mass of people of Thailand seem to be very close to achieving their goal of purging the country of Thaksinism, most of the West continue to bring up the point that the government, headed by Thaksin's sister, was democratically elected.
This is perhaps the most pervasive myth surrounding the current conflict in Thailand and is perpetuated by Western media sources and the regime itself. Elections did indeed take place, and in those elections, the current regime did garner the most votes, but the same could be said about elections held anywhere, even in nations that are decidedly very undemocratic. Despots throughout history have used elections as a veil of legitimacy behind which they hide - and hiding a despotic, hereditary regime is exactly what the Shinawatras are doing in Thailand.
The campaign slogan in 2011's general election literally was, "Thaksin thinks, Puea Thai (his political party) does," indicating that his sister Yingluck, like her two predecessors, Somchai Wongsawat (Thaksin's brother-in-law), and Samak Sundaravej (who literally declared he was Thaksin's proxy to TIME), is merely filling a superficial role.
West's Defense of "Democratically Elected Government" is really the Defense of their Investment in Shinawatra. So why is the West defending what is clearly a dysfunctional democracy, clearly abusing the mechanisms of real representative governance, to perpetuate a very undemocratic regime? To understand the answer to that question, one must examine the immense investment the West has made in the Shinawatras over the last decade.
Long before Thaksin became prime minister of Thailand, he was already working his way up the Wall Street-London ladder of opportunity, while simultaneously working his way up in Thai politics. He was appointed by the Carlyle Group as an adviser while holding public office, and attempted to use his connections to boost his political image.
He invited Bush senior to visit Bangkok and his home, saying his own mission was to act as a "national matchmaker" between the US equity fund and Thai businesses. He also played host to James Baker III, the US secretary of state in the senior Bush administration. Upon becoming prime minister in 2001, Thaksin began paying back the support he received from his Western sponsors. In 2003, he committed Thai troops to the US invasion of Iraq, despite widespread protests from both the Thai military and the public. Thaksin also allowed the CIA to use Thailand for its various operations.
Also in 2004, Thaksin attempted to ramrod through a US-Thailand Free-Trade Agreement (FTA) without parliamentary approval, backed by the US-ASEAN Business Council who just before 2011elections that saw Thaksin's sister Yingluck Shinawatra brought into power, hosted the leaders of Thaksin’s "red shirt" "United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship" (UDD).
The council in 2004 included 3M, Bechtel, Boeing, Cargill, Citigroup, General Electric, IBM, Monsanto, Goldman Sachs , JP Morgan, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Chevron, Exxon, BP, Glaxo Smith Kline, Merck, Northrop Grumman, Phillip Morris.
It is clear that the regime of Thaksin Shinawatra is in fact, really the regime of immense foreign interests that have built him up and have kept him relevant for years.
The myth of Thaksin Shinawatra's proxy government in Thailand being "democratically elected" is simply another buttress built by the West to keep his regime from crumbling under the weight of the true dimensions of his corruption, crimes, and illegitimacy.