Opinion by M Johnson, Bangkok
The Nation
Dear Sir:
Regarding "PAD acting like a cry baby: Kasit" (January 27, 2011) Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya criticises his former allies the PAD yellow shirts for their calling for a tougher line by the government on the Preah Vihear border dispute with Cambodia and claims that he hasn't changed his position since the time before he became a minister. He also says it is "inappropriate to invoke international relations as a bargaining leverage to advance a domestic political agenda". He also calls for common development of "rich resources in the sea," presumably referring to oil and gas deals.
Actually, your story is an example of the reason why the PAD has been criticising Mr Kasit and the Abhisit government.
Mr Kasit says that he has not changed and that "The Abhisit Vejjajiva government is not prone to use force nor to insult the neighbouring country" but in 2009, he himself was quoted as calling Hun Sen "a nakleng." In 2008, he was quoted as calling him a "thug" on the rally stage of the PAD.
The PAD has a legitimate criticism of the way the border issue has been handled by the government since a previous foreign minister signed the notorious UNESCO MOU which led to that person's resignation. In 2008, a Thai court ruled that the bid to support Cambodia's application to have the 11th century temple listed as a World Heritage site was unconstitutional. So, the PAD has been right about this issue all along.
Also, regarding Mr Kasit's reference to "rich resources in the sea," this is what the PAD has been criticising the government for as trading off the Preah Vihear temple and border case due to interest in oil and gas deals.
In your article, Mr Kasit is quoted as saying "Integrity hinges on prudence and maturity; don't act like a baby and allow feelings to cloud judgement," however his own comments about the PAD lacking maturity, being "petulant" and a "cry baby" are not exactly mature.
Khun Sondhi and his followers are citizens of this country and have the right to question the government's leadership and policies. Khun Sondhi always speaks by producing facts, maps, quotes, and information. Mr Kasit offers no proof that the PAD's protests are due to pursuit of "a domestic political agenda."
Mr Kasit should ask himself whether he is applying the same standards to the PAD's protests against his government as to those against the Thaksin Shinawatra government in which he participated.
2 comments:
Warfare is the greatest affair of state, the basis of life and death, the way to survival or extinction. It must be thoroughly pondered and analyzed. Therefore, structure it and evaluate it comparatively through estimations and seek out it's true nature.
As you now know that our leaders' task is to unite the people and make them follow the ruler, then they will die with him, they will live with him and not fear of danger, and as we all clearly see, our leaders in general have encompassed the wisdom, credibility, courage, strictness, and they do understand the laws for military organization and military discipline very well.
As you have heard "The wars win or lose before we ever fought" or another word "evaluating the enemy, subjugating the enemy's army without fighting is the true pinnacle of excellence". If you understand that then you will never blame our leaders for what strategy they have been using vis-a-vis Thailand's military bully. The basic strategy in warfare is to focus upon manipulating the enemy, creating the opportunity for an easy victory, and then applying maximum power at the appropriate moment. Avoiding strong forces is not cowardice, but wisdom, for it is self-defeating to fight when and where there is no advantages, like Sun Tzu's "The Art of War". All of you should have one of these books. He said "One who knows when he can fight, and when he can not fight, will be victorious. One who knows themselves and knows the enemy will not be endangered in a hundred engagements".
As we clearly see, initial estimations show that our gov't does not have or gain more advantage to the nation for going to war right now. Am I right?
The greatest military commanders have always frequently thought and identified solely with the common strategy of "Deceit and Deception". That's the strategy that they will be using in any warfare. Warfare must be viewed as a matter of deception, of constantly creating false appearances, spreading disinformation, and employing trickery and deceit. When imaginatively created and effectively implemented, the enemy will neither know where to attack nor what formations to employ, and will accordingly be prone to making fatal errors. How Deception does it like this if the enemies have greater number of forces full of strength? We avoid them and wait until we create chaos or weakness within the enemy's rank first. If the enemies' unity caused them to be separated, attack where they are unprepared.
Go forth where they will not expect it. If we found ourselves or estimated we are in advantageous position, destroy them. These are ways the military strategists devised to obtain their victories. They can not be spoken of in advance. As all of you have seen, the USA lost war, not on the battlefields in Vietnam, but in the war room in Washington DC. In direct battles, US Army's power machine have sought to obtain victory in every combat, but the press and the people in Washington have opposed the war. They demonstrated and kept on putting pressures on the Gov't to withdraw the US troops from Vietnam.
Now you clearly see war, win or lose, is not about military power, it's about deception, using our brain. Am I right?mike
ប្រកដណាស់ហើយ ហ៊ុនសែន ជាអ្នកលេងមែន
ប៉ុន្តែអ្នកលេងនេះ បានតែឆ្នាំងបាយទេ សូមកុំច្រឡំអី។
Post a Comment