December 24, 2025: Bhumjaithai and the Democrats are trying to steal each other’s thunder.
Abhisit Vejjajiva’s denouncement of the Kla Tham Party and Anutin Charnvirakul’s announcement of who would be his deputies if he became the post-election prime minister are competing to grab the headlines. But they are also combining to send out significant messages. Most of all, it’s a vague suggestion about possible post-election alliances.
With Kla Tham likely to be needed to shore up the parliamentary numbers of the Bhumjaithai camp, the Democrats could automatically be pushed towards the People’s Party after the general election in February. In other words, a Democrat-People’s Party alliance is highly possible now, although both parties would wage a fierce electoral war in Bangkok.
Anutin has announced what his fan base wants to hear, an apparently-strong team of deputy prime ministers who would also double in other key Cabinet positions if Bhumjaithai became the core of the next government. They are Suphajee Suthampun, his commerce minister now who could be his commerce minister again; Sihasak Phuangketkeow, his foreign minister now who could assume the foreign affairs post again; and Ekniti Nitithanprapas, who would double as the finance minister, his current position.
Democrat leader Abhisit, in ruling out any possibility of cooperating with the Kla Tham Party led by Thammanat Prompao, cited the issue of honesty and integrity. That’s arguably a hit below the belt because, as controversial Thammanat is, debate can go on forever whether such public branding should be committed by one politician against another.
On his team of “deputies”, Anutin said it did not matter if they are in the prime ministerial nomination list or not. “If Bhumjaithai became the ruling party, I would be the prime minister anyway,” he pointed out.
Anutin’s late-to-the-party tactic
December 23, 2025: The most important guests, or even some hosts themselves, show up late at the party.
That may explain why Bhumjaithai has kept Thailand in a suspense regarding its prime ministerial nominees and important election candidates, in the process allowing other political camps to take the lead.
There are other possible reasons as well. Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul may still be waiting for final answers from the likes of Suphajee Suthampun, his commerce minister, or Sihasak Phuangketkeow, his foreign minister, or Finance Minister Ekniti Nitithanprapas regarding the prime ministerial nomination list. Or the selections have been finished but are not so impressive, hence requiring improvement.
But as of now it looks like he’s resorting to the late-to-the-party strategy. Bhumjaithai, nowhere near the People’s Party and Pheu Thai just a few months ago, is now a big focus of attention, and Anutin is shrewd enough to know how to ramp up and then exploit expectations.
In today’s interview (December 23), Anutin is still holding his cards close to his chest. All he had to say was the Thai public “would not be disappointed”, and that anyone “missing out” (he meant the trio) would continue to work with the party if it was given another chance to serve the public.
By all indications, the wait should be over very soon.
On who Bhumjaithai can work with in a government, he said: “We’d better talk about that after the election. A (unexpected) situation often awaits us if we say something today. If we say something now and we can’t do it later we will be accused of reneging on our promise. A chaos will then ensue. I’d rather stay silent.”
On the People’s Party’s tough stance against his camp, Anutin only said that he managed to become prime minister thanks to it.
Is it healthy to shut out other parties?
December 22, 2025: No.
Strategically, it may be an effective political gamble. When national interest is concerned, however, it’s absolutely counter-productive.
One big political party has declared it would never be a government if its perceived main rival is in it. That’s old-fashioned, divisive politics a lot of people have been made to believe is great for democracy.
If democracy is about giving the people the best, such a strategy is totally not it. That America practices the “us or them” does not mean it’s good. Look at that country now, half of its population, the Democrats to be specific, is demonising its own president, elected through a system touted as the world’s example.
There is no such thing as a constructive rivalry between the Republicans and the Democrats. Some nonpartisan developments do exist, but, they concern relatively-minor subjects and, by and large, the standoff is deepening at an exponential speed, inflicting a lot of unhealthy things on American politics and public life.
It prevents good, capable people on “the other side” from participating in national governance. It tears family members, relatives and friends who support different parties apart. It messes with everyone’s moral judgement, making them so willingly ready to forgive and forget a crime committed by those they support and amplify a similar crime on the other side.
It rules out chances of a true compromise. Instead of sitting together and finding a peaceful way out to avoid making the public suffer, American politicians shut down their government. Instead of coming together to conduct a joint research on infrastructures, they are spending more time digging up dirt on their enemies.
The worst part is that it misdirects the American public. To many people, it’s of utmost importance whether Donald Trump goes or stays.
There are many issues in Thailand that need cool, cooperative heads, like cannabis deregulation, or how school students should be dressed, or how much money should be given to the armed forces. The “us or them” attitude can never resolve those issues permanently. Yes, parliamentary numbers can push an idea through, but in an atmosphere where “only we” are right and the other side is wrong, nothing effected by Parliament is a long-term solution.
It blinds ones to goodness of the other side and to the gravity of the wrongdoings of those they like. It encourages disruptive nitpicking and promotes over-the-top propagandas. Genuine dialogues are impossible and dirty horse-trading is the only way to go when negotiations take place.
It creates an environment where you wait for the people you don’t like to make a mistake, whereas ideally no mistake should be waited for when it concerns public national interest. “Us or them” can almost make ones celebrate a disaster or a tragedy.
It can make a country waste its time. For example, if the us-or-them politics dictates that the Bhumjaithai Party can never work with the People’s Party, Thailand can lose four years, without a thorough and sincere study of how the cannabis should be handled. If the Democrats cannot work with Pheu Thai in a government, it begs the similar question.
If the Democrats are good at education and Pheu Thai at health care, why can’t they work in the same government and the former runs the Education Ministry and the latter the Public Health Ministry? This way, the public would get maximum benefits. Why do Thais have to wait four years to get Education and Public Health ministries that are simultaneously effective?
Political rhetoric makes ones think that “us of them” is a good political dare. It is not. If it is not something that is bad right away, it’s a slippery slope that could easily lead to tyranny of majority.
And all the aforementioned negatives feed on one another. The “rivals” can only do one thing together: They will be joining their hands to dig a hole that will only get deeper and deeper, and finally it will be too deep for the whole country to escape from.
This is by no means a compliment for parties saying let’s wait and see. The wait-and-see attitude of their kind is also unhealthy, because the eventual decisions will be based primarily on parliamentary numbers, not on genuine public interest.
This is just to say that cutthroat politics is not doing anyone any good.
If NIDA is right about Bangkok …
December 21, 2025: A city popularity survey mirrors a nationwide sentiment that voters aren’t having a preferred choice.
NIDA’s latest findings about Bangkok cannot fill the People’s Party with total optimism, although it and its leader still attract the most support as a political party and as an individual. The fact that largest portions of the people surveyed, 47.25% and 40.20%, said they do not like anyone as the next prime minister and as the ruling party respectively, is not good news for the Bangkok reigning champion.
Secondly, Bhumjaithai’s surge in the capital is unprecedented. Although the party and its leader were a far cry from the People’s Party and Nutthaphong Ruengpanyawut in terms of Bangkok’s popularity (26.25% against 10.05% in the party category, and 16.95% against 10.90% in the individual category), Bhumjaithai had never been in the Bangkok conversation and the numbers of undecided voters are too huge to ignore.
Here are the numbers again: When asked if who should be the next prime minister, 47.25% said they did not know who to like. Nutthaphong came second at 16.95% and Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul was third at 10.90%. When asked which party they would vote for, 40.20% were undecided, the People’s Party received 26.25% and Bhumjaithai 10.05%.
The survey covered 2,000 eligible Bangkok voters and was conducted last week.
Democrat leader Abhisit Vejjajiva got 9% in the individual category. His Democrat Party is supported by 9.55% in the party category.
This shows that despite what was believed to be a mini Abhisit fever after his return to the Democrat helm, he and his party still trail Anutin and Bhumjaithai in Bangkok, which used to be Thailand’s oldest party’s home ground.
Back to the People’s Party, it needs to grab big parts of the undecided group. A wild swing against it can overwhelm the advantage of being the most popular in the capital, affecting the popular vote count and may even take away some constituency seats. Analysts believe the People’s Party, the Democrats and Pheu Thai were only three competitors who have realistic chances in Bangkok.
The city findings were also somewhat consistent with nationwide results of recent NIDA polls, which showed that undecided voters are the largest group, and that the People’s Party and Nutthaphong remained the most popular but their popularities were declining, and that Anutin’s and Bhumjaithai’s were significantly rising.
Border row and global diplomatic complications
December 19-20, 2025: China’s mediating, which America may frown upon. Claims about Russian mercenaries add to it.
That’s three superpowers getting increasingly involved, directly or indirectly, in the Thai-Cambodia territorial dispute. And sooner or later everyone could be forced to take a stand, because Thailand allegedly keeps finding landmines and documents showing that the Ottawa convention which bans their use has been violated by Cambodia.
China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi has held separate phone calls on Wednesday with his Thai and Cambodian counterparts, amid renewal of the border tensions that US President Donald Trump has been taking the lead in trying to calm down.
The more big-name mediators the better, some may assume. Others may argue that Washington and Beijing trying to mediate the same dispute may not be the case.
Russia’s involvement is now limited to claims that Russian soldiers and other foreign nationals were participating as foreign mercenaries in fighting for Cambodia. Cambodian strongman Hun Sen has strongly denied such claims.
Former senator Sangsit Piriyarangsan said the situation is a lot more complicated now, so a balancing act and cool heads are required in Thailand, because friendly nations can get easily offended by naïve social media outbursts and well wishes misinterpreted badly.
Worst time to get draft-dodging verdict ever?
December 18, 2025: When it rains, it pours for the People’s Party.
Legally, it can easily steer clear of its former Chachoengsao MP Jirat Thongsuwan, who earlier this week was sentenced to two years in prison for using falsified documents to evade conscription. Politically, it is adding to the growing nightmare of the biggest party at a time when its popularity rating was already on a decline weeks before a general election largely because of its criticism of the Thai military.
A strong candidate to replace Jirat, who sat in the House military affairs committee and has been a staunch critic of the armed forces, in next year’s election under the People’s Party’s banner is his wife. If that is officially confirmed, it can be another subject for opponents’ mocking, as the party often denounced “old-fashioned politics” that includes spouses or family members getting political inheritances.
Jirat, who fought the court case tooth and nail, can still appeal, and politicians and draft-dodging charges are not uncommon in Thailand or anywhere else on earth. But getting your mugshot and those of soldiers killed in a war published side by side on news homepages is rare and impactful.
Tip of new-age iceberg
December 17, 2025: If a teen can do it, imagine well-equipped adults with all the power, technology and facilities.
The focus now is on the disgraced SEA Games Thai player, and how Thailand as the host nation is losing face, but the illegally-installed application that could possibly be fraudulently abused is not unfamiliar. Imagine other applications in existence that we don’t know about or truly understand.
Everyone is living a life that is increasingly dependent on applications in the smartphone, a device that has greater computer power than the one that reportedly sent men to the moon in 1969. Someone somewhere must already have something more powerful than our mobile phones.
The SEA Games girl is in a field where fraud, honesty and fairness are divided by very thin lines. E-sports have been plagued with both old-fashioned and new-age scandals, from match fixing to use of shadow or secretive remote players. Many years ago, an Arena of Valor contest in Thailand was plagued by a more or less similar controversy.
In other parts of the new sports world, the lines are completely blurry. A globally-known game company has been rocked by customers’ complaints that it is manipulating players’ strong desires to win. It allegedly used dishonest codes predetermining the outcomes, thus making gamers spend more money on upgraded characters. To add to that, this very company has been organizing world events where cheating charges are common.
The SEA Games controversy is child’s play. No banking transaction was involved. No personal privacy was involved. No political information dissemination was involved. No stock market was involved. No war was involved. No global diplomacy/politics was involved.
And if AI was involved, it must have had a walk in the park, thinking it was on a holiday.
Will apology be accepted?
December 16, 2025: As playful as it sounds, “You know me little go” is seriously summing up Thai politics.
Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul uttered the broken English phrase many days ago when an old photo emerged to spark a controversy regarding powerful national figures’ alleged connections with questionable characters, and thus his government’s seriousness in cracking down on illegal businesses.
“You know me little go” basically means “Don’t ever underestimate me.” Anutin was virtually saying that those who thought he would not be serious in uprooting scamming racketeers barely knew him. But after the prime minister dissolved the House of Representatives, “You know me little go” has been recited to taunt the People’s Party which had voted him into office but has probably been hurt by him the most.
In other words, the People’s Party “knows Anutin little go”. Perhaps it thought that the Bhumjaithai Party was harmless, coming a distant third in the last election. Perhaps it trusted that Anutin, a leading conservative, would help facilitate the early procedures of proposed charter amendments after getting its vote.
It turns out that Anutin in his executive capacity was useless when the People’s Party’s charter reform agenda was concerned, with the strength of “the other side” (Blue senators) increasing considerably, at least temporarily. This led the party to prepare for a censure. The rest is history.
The People’s Party has issued an apology to the Thai public, referring to obstacles getting bigger in the process of charter amendment. What was missing from the apology, critics say, was an admission that it was naïve, that it “knew Anutin little go”.
There are still almost two months to go before the snap election, so it’s still too early to tell if the apology will be accepted. But things have changed a lot from 2023, and Anutin had apparently made the best out of the few weeks gifted by the People’s Party.
His gain is the People’s Party’s pain. A NIDA poll conducted very recently showed worrisome trajectories for the party. Its leader Nutthaphong Ruengpanyawut has remained the most popular as prime minister, but the support has dropped from 25.8% at the beginning of the year to 17.2% this month, while Anutin’s has jumped to 12.3% from just 2.8% early this year.
The People’s Party’s popularity peaked in the second quarter of this year, or 46%, after starting the year with 37.1%. It was 33% in the third quarter and 25.2% this month.
Bhumjaithai lept from only 3.3% in the first quarter to 9.9% now.
Whether or not the People’s Party’s apology will be accepted depends on how the “undecided voters” do. They started the year below those supporting the biggest party and Pheu Thai at just 13.7% but have become the biggest group now, constituting 32.3%.
People’s Party and its ‘charter reform’ card
December 15, 2025: In 2023 there was Prayut Chan-o-cha and next year there will be Hun Sen.
That is arguably the biggest difference between the last and the upcoming general elections. It also presentsThailand’s largest political party with the biggest problem after Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul has dissolved the House of Representatives.
It’s a problem everyone in the Orange camp knows but declines to talk about. The border row can politically stunt the People’s Party’s dramatic growth that reached unbelievable height in 2023, when the Thai military was less popular, the conservatives were linked with it, and proposed charter amendment was a lot more in the conversation.
Immediately after the unexpected 2023 glory and Pheu Thai’s “betrayal”, there was an unspoken consensus among analysts and general watchers of Thai politics that there was no way the Orange will go but up.
Be patient, the then Move Forward Party was told, because nothing would stop you next time, not after Pheu Thai shook hands with the conservatives.
Then the border fighting happened and one thing led to another, not least the swift downfall of the Shinawatras and the unlikely rise of Bhumjaithai, which until then was a supporting actor at best.
This weekend’s “Picnic” organised by the People’s Party in the wake of the House dissolution announcement can be good or harmful to the camp depending on how you look at it.
Good because the People’s Party can send a reminder to the Thai public that its biggest agenda remains the “much-needed charter reform”, a big selling point in 2023, and bad because there are times and places for such a message.
Problems related to “scamming” can give the People’s Party another electoral ammunition, but the camp will have to sidestep Cambodia if it wants to weaponise the issue. Bringing Cambodians into it might play into the hands of the Bhumjaithai Party, who can then say “Look whom we are trying to defeat.”
This arguably leaves charter reform as the only trump card. Schedules have been thrown into uncertainty following the House dissolution, and the People’s Party must be hoping to tell the voting public that if they want the constitutional agenda to be back on track, they must give it a very strong mandate in the next election.
The People’s Party has no choice but to play the “charter reform” card. It has no executive management records, and opinion polls showed it only clearly outscored other parties on keeping the government in check, a compliment that naturally belongs to every opposition party anyway.
Bhumjaithai, on the other hand, has more good cards to play. The next phase of the co-payment scheme will be on its electoral platform, and so are the tough stance against Cambodia, the head-held-high dealing with the United States and the generally-praised performances of some Cabinet members appointed without political influences.
A large number of “undecided voters” will be up for grabs. The People’s Party will be wanting a considerable portion of that, along with what can be a sizable ideological migration from the Pheu Thai Party. This means that if Bhumjaithai will grow, so can the People’s Party.
One major irony, however, is that Bhumjaithai has the People’s Party to thank for Anutin’s party’s emergence as a real political contender. In other words, the next general election could have been much easier for the People’s Party if it had backed Pheu Thai for the premiership following Paetongtarn Shinawatra’s political demise.
No medal table swings like SEA Games’
December 14, 2025: The Thai-Cambodian row has dampened the ASEAN spirit, and what a time to maybe make it worse.
SEA Games should have done the opposite, in other words reminding the countries in this region that the grouping had come together not just for economic reasons. They are literally a family. Countries have natural differences and gaps, of course, but nobody is inferior or supreme.
Not when sports are concerned, though. The very thing that is supposed to make everyone truly realise the value of constructive rivalry or competition has turned out to often involve complaints, extreme bitterness, social media wars, charges of fraud and ugly attempts to do whatever it takes to win.
The unhealthy atmosphere is on a grand scale, not minimal. Topping the SEA Games medal table is a dead-serious business, and, every two years, the family members stop talking to one another at the dinner table for months straddling the regional sporting extravaganza.
Make no mistake, medals are necessary. Even kindergarten sporting contests provide medals or trophies.
But even kids playing sports and their “fans” are less destructively serious than those involved in the competing apparatuses of SEA Games. And no medal table swings as much every two years.
So, this is by no means calling for an end to the regional event. This is to say that something must have been seriously wrong with how winning and losing is treated by the relevant sporting authorities and their respective public at SEA Games, how medal counts mean especially to the host nations, and how certain refereeing or game-introductory cultures affect outcomes that can be very divisive.
Deadlocked
December 13, 2025: A proposed ceasefire between Thailand and Cambodia hinges on the toughest condition being fulfilled.
It requires either Bangkok or Phnom Penh to admit that it’s the aggressor and then apologise. Anything shorter than that and the fighting will most likely continue.
Thailand has made it clear the earlier landmine explosions that sparked all this were “intentional”.
Cambodia has insisted the devices had been there for ages, long before the signing of the peace declaration in Kuala Lumpur weeks ago.
America said it was an accident, the closest Donald Trump’s White House could say to “Cambodia did not mean it”.
Both Thailand and Cambodia are adamant, with the latter probably buoyed by Trump’s “accident” statement that he tweeted for the whole world to see hours ago. Neither side wants to be deemed a liar and violator of the Kuala Lumpur declaration.
It would be a big loss of diplomatic face, a scar that will last a very long time if not forever.
One possible solution is all agreeing to disagree, leaving it vague, and then restoring ceasefire. It’s possible, but the bonfire would still smoulder.
Everyone will be like watching an active volcano that becomes suspiciously dormant all of a sudden.
Anutin’s smart plea
December 12, 2025: The prime minister is practically telling the Thai public that they shall make his party bigger.
The virtual plea is in the official reason for the House dissolution. He said his minority government could not fully do what it wanted to do.
There could be another influence as well. The parliamentary and government processes of the proposed charter reform will be disrupted, playing into the hands of the conservatives, at least temporarily until more stable political alliances take shape.
Popularity-wise, Anutin Charnvirakul could become a strong prime ministerial contender post-election. Big southern flooding has curtailed his rise, but the co-payment scheme, the problem with Cambodia, the inclusion of perceived capable and hard-working people in his Cabinet would also be on voters’ minds when they go to the polls.
The People’s Party is calling on the Thai voters to give it the same thing, a bigger mandate. But unlike Anutin, it is not helped by the border dispute. Moreover, the mega floods hit a region where conservatives reign and the number of undecided voters is high, a remarkable phenomenon because when a government rating is low, the opposition’s should skyrocket.
Pheu Thai’s decline should benefit the People’s Party a lot, but Anutin’s Bhumjaithai would gain from the problems of other conservative parties as well.
The People’s Party could still emerge the biggest parliamentary camp after the next election, but a single-party rule, something it badly wants, is a tall order. Having to rely on partnership is a big disadvantage which Anutin can capitalise on.
Recently, Deputy People’s Party leader Sirikanya Tansakun, who has been named one of its three prime ministerial candidates, was spot on in telling voters that even if the party won the next election, the victory had to be clear-cut or it could end up in the opposition again.
While her demand for a bigger parliamentary number may not be realistic now, Anutin can be really optimistic.
His key advantage is his party does not even have to win the next election for him to head the government, while the People’s Party has no option but to win, and win big.
How can ASEAN go from here?
December 11, 2025: Invasion. Human shields. Cultural sites targeted. Cultural sites used as military bases. It goes on and on.
Those are words and terms being used by both Thailand and Cambodia, with the same nationalistic purposes that were meant differently, as death and injury tolls rise, international attention increases and the involvement of the United Nations and superpowers grow.
In the end, truth will be buried under the rubbles and neighbourly ties can disappear for generations. Thailand and Cambodia can become Israel and Palestine, so near and yet so far, with not just their governments, but also their peoples, hating each other’s guts.
One thing that should be spoken about more is how Thailand and Cambodia are jeopardising the future of ASEAN, whose founding principles require member states to refrain from using force against one another. Nobody knows for sure how ASEAN can go from here, now that its charter has been tumultuously defied before the whole world.
What Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim showed the other day just twisted the knife. He shared a photo of the Thai and Cambodian leaders after they signed the joint peace declaration in Kuala Lumpur, with him and US President Donald Trump as proud witnesses.
What had led to the signing was sad, but it could pass as an accident, of the kind that makes a loving couple confront or misunderstand each other. It’s what happened afterwards, and is still unfolding, that completely destroys the ASEAN spirit and is truly tragic.
How old should one be to use social media?
December 10, 2025: Ask everyone about Australia’s measures and opinions will split down the middle.
So, the point is not whether teenagers under 16 should be banned from the social media. Debate is getting nowhere, yet it is continuing even after Australia’s ban on Instagram, Facebook, Threads, X, Snapchat, Kick, Twitch, TikTok, Reddit, YouTube and others among its young people has come into effect.
The point is Prayut Chan-o-cha could not have done it, and countries the West does not like would never be able to do it without a major western media firestorm. Such a ban would trigger massive demonising outcries.
This is why democracy is the best, they would say. We will never limit human rights like dictators do, and it does not matter how young people are or how small their communities look, the preachers would argue.
Now that it’s Australia, such words as “bold” or “world’s first” have prevailed over “authoritarian”, with the Australian government’s statement that it was “proud” of taking the lead in the “protection” of children from social media harms being highlighted everywhere.
The Australian government does not even call it a ban. It prefers to use “delay”, meaning children will get more time to grow up before being fully exposed to the social media.
Wait a minute. Are they saying children cannot think for themselves to separate right from wrong? Isn’t it political parenting that authoritarian regimes like to resort to or hide behind?
This is not saying the Australian government is going on the wrong track, with millions of children and teenagers about to lose access to their accounts as we speak. This is to say that, good or bad, the measure is not “democracy” as we know it, and that hypocrisy is not doing anyone any good.
‘Ukraine of Southeast Asia’
December 9, 2025: A factor fueling news about the Thai-Cambodian flare-up is US President Donald Trump.
Haters are mocking the “fragile” peace that he had facilitated weeks ago. Analysts are looking at how the latest clashes might affect Bangkok’s tariff negotiations with the United States and how the rest of the world, split into pro-Cambodia and pro-Thailand camps, is reacting to the renewed fighting. Strategic and logistic significance of this region is increasingly being studied.
The BBC has gone live on its homepage, meaning that, for today at least, the situation at the Thai eastern border is bigger news than the ongoing Russia-Ukraine development, with which Trump is getting heavily involved as well.
Other foreign news agencies have started to play up the tension, describing it as the most serious since the Kuala Lumpur declaration. Thailand’s Manager news website said it has noticed a remarkable change in world media opinions on the conflict.
The issue is catching more attention of the United Nations and international judges, but the fact that much of the world wants to see Trump failing is amplifying mainstream coverage and wildfire discussions on the social media. The volatile border has become, sort of, “Ukraine of Southeast Asia” although no outside assistance has been reported, no invasion has taken place, and Europe and America are not noisily arguing over it.
It’s still far from the Ukraine, Taiwan or Middle East flashpoints, but it’s also fair to say that nobody thought things would go this far this quickly, with hundreds of thousands of people evacuated on both sides, death and injury tolls creeping up, the possibility of long-term drone use and rocket attacks becoming scarily real, and the Thai-Cambodian conflict featuring on the homepages of the likes of the BBC and CNN.
Thais have bemoaned the prevalent and vague use of “air strikes” in world headlines that gave the impression that the launcher might have been the aggressor. A Thai social media influencer has gone as far as going live in English to strongly criticise CNN. The network, however, has said today that it could not verify who fired the first provocative shot.
Like several western media outlets, CNN has said one of Trump’s proclaimed achievements is now on the verge of collapsing entirely.
First casualty of war is truth
December 8, 2025: Thais and Cambodians are living in different universes regarding the question of who fired first.
They will most likely never know the truth and that is the strongest reason why wars, big or small, are the real evil. They deceive the neutrals. They cover up their own crimes. They play victims. They demonise the enemies. They glorify their own acts. They distract attention. They make innocent peoples hate each other. They abuse patriotism.
Last but not least, the winners can convincingly fabricate histories. If they succeed, they can mislead generations.
The latest flare-up at the Thai-Cambodian border does not escape the pattern, which is prevalent in the smallest up to the summit global military showdowns. Every aggressor wants to be seen as being victimised and peace-loving.
With the Kuala Lumpur peace declaration collapsing. Khmer Times has devoted its entire front page for reports insisting that Cambodia has been provoked, but has exercised full restraints, and that its villagers have suffered badly. To be fair, all Thai news websites are as nationalistic.
A country cannot be all bad, be it Thailand, or Cambodia, or Russia, or China. Bad news is wars paint wrong impressions, extremely intentionally. Worse news is those impressions are hard to delete.
Chadchart strolls in popularity poll
December 7, 2025: About 3.5 years in, the city governor’s only problem is there mustn’t be a big flood till the next election.
Even if that happens (and it is not at all impossible), Chadchart Sittipunt might still go into the next Bangkok gubernatorial election a very strong favourite if he wants another term, recent NIDA findings suggest.
Bangkokians surveyed by the pollsters gave him high marks on almost every aspect. Some 2,000 people in all districts of the capital was covered by the poll in late November up until December 2.
The results are music to his ears. Almost 32% said they were “very happy” with his performance. Another 46.5% were “fairly happy.” Only 14.7% were not satisfied and only 6.7% did not like him at all.
The surveyed Bangkok voters gave him strong points on every key aspect of city management _ building more green zones (some 75% love it), giving pedestrian areas more order (more than 77% gave him thumbs up), public cleanliness issues (Over 73% were pleased), public scenery improvement like views of streets and sois (73% liked what they see), safety in city life (71% think it’s great), support for sports (66% were either “very happy” or “fairly happy) and tourism promotion (67.5% compliment him).
The issue of corruption/transparency, which negatively affected the Bangkok administration during his early days in office, seems to be his weakest point. About 25% said they were “fairly” satisfied, compared with 23.5% who said he could do better and almost 23% who gave him absolute thumbs down.
Surveyed Bangkokians were also critical on policies for youngsters. More than 37% liked what he did but over 29% (not “quite satisfied” and “not satisfied at all) thought the opposite.
On the economy, which, to be fair, had to do with the government, not his office, the biggest group (over 53%) was the complainers.
He passed the test on traffic, but barely just. The public satisfaction was not as high as in the other categories in which he was perceived as doing well. More than 41% were “fairly happy” while 26.6% shook their heads and over 11% said no emphatically.
Now, flooding. The finding was a dream come true. More than 40% were “fairly” satisfied and almost 24% were totally happy. That was some 64% altogether.
That is a pleasant surprise when Chadchart is concerned, and he must talk to Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul when it comes to floods and politics, because things can change drastically in the blink of an eye.
Double Fifa shocks
December 6, 2025: A Fifa “peace prize”? They’ve got to be kidding. And guess who is the first recipient.
US President Donald Trump has been named the first winner of the newly created Fifa peace prize. He topped it off by claiming “the world is a safer place now” as he received the award at the draw for the 2026 World Cup in Washington DC.
In a ceremony on Friday, Gianni Infantino, the Fifa president and one of Trump’s closest sporting allies, presented the honour with a glowing tribute, saying the president had been selected “in recognition of his exceptional and extraordinary actions to promote peace and unity around the world”.
Trump’s “Safer world” acceptance speech cannot be completed without a Trump-esque gloating. He claimed to have saved “millions and millions of lives” and that America was “the hottest country anywhere in the world.”
Haters must be thinking they are having a nightmare. Even admirers surely had not expected it. Neutrals’ jaws must have dropped to the floors.
It doesn’t matter “who dies”
December 5, 2025: All that matters is “who kills”.
America’s fatal strikes on “drug boats” making headlines at the moment are no different from Thaksin Shinawatra’s infamous extra-judicial killings in his war on drugs when he was prime minister. Human rights advocates around the globe were up in arms against him, and probably rightly so, and the moral question facing the Trump administration will be drowned out by the same “collateral damage” pretext political rulers like to use.
It will pass. And the ones truly responsible will never be punished.
In one September incident, a US strike destroyed a boat, killing everyone but two. The survivors clung onto a floating part of the vessel, but a second strike was consciously ordered, killing them under the “logic” that they could still be rescued and come back to harm the United States again with possible remains of the drug shipment that survived the first strike.
Since the September 2 strike, the US military has carried out more than 20 additional strikes on boats it has deemed to be manned by “narco-terrorists,” killing scores in a campaign that many legal experts have argued is likely unlawful, CNN said.
Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth did not give the order to "kill them all" during the controversial strike in the Caribbean, many American lawmakers have said. That does not really mean much, does it? Who deployed the soldiers there with clear-cut instructions to prevent drug shipments from entering the United States?
Like Thaksin’s war on drugs, if orders were “legitimate”, nothing could be done about it. The former prime minister did not carry out the extra-judicial killings himself. Yet they died because of his policy, didn’t they?
However, it doesn’t matter who dies. The question of who the killers are justifies right and wrong. If a coup leader condemned by democracy lovers orders the killing, the “war crime” could go to the international court. If an elected leader of a superpower does it, criticism will subside in no time.
Electoral factors more complicated than in 2023
December 4, 2024: It was so simple in the last election, which saw anti-coup voters up against the other side.
The next election, expected to take place early next year, will be far more complex. Pheu Thai and the People’s Party (formerly Move Forward) are no longer allies. Conservative parties are also going separate ways. To add to that, there are other influential factors like the Thai-Cambodian dispute, scamming racketeering scandals, southern flooding, and, of course, a proposed charter reform.
Each of the aforementioned factors benefits some and puts others in a disadvantage. For example, the People’s Party might not gain politically from the Thai-Cambodia conflict as much, but it has its nose in front on scamming. The Democrat Party, meanwhile, is not prospering ideologically but it is seeing its southern fan base rebooting thanks in no small part to the massive flooding.
Proposed charter amendment might help the popularity of the People’s Party and Pheu Thai, but both camps can’t see eye to eye like before, having to fight for the same electoral market in fact. And while the Thai-Cambodian standoff could politically help the conservatives, they are very splintered and have their own big problems.
And, last but not least, there is no longer Prayut Chan-o-cha, who clearly divided the pre-2023 political landscape, providing clear-cut campaign war cries.
All these make the next election and its aftermath so unpredictable.
Anutin’s cryptic message
December 3, 2025: It could mean anything, from a House dissolution to a court ruling affecting a party’s future.
“Fasten your seatbelt” is all Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul said regarding what would happen next week.
He did add that, as far as he is concerned, his government would have to go within January 31 because of a gentleman's agreement with the People’s Party. That means that if his government is to function beyond that, it will have to assume just a caretaking status overseeing a snap election.
On the remaining possibility of Pheu Thai submitting a no-confidence motion, he issued a standard “Everything has its process” reply. However, the general government and media moods are that Pheu Thai would not risk it, since Anutin’s government will not last long anyway.
An earlier-than-expected snap election will unlikely help Pheu Thai, and Anutin always threatened that he would dissolve the House of Representatives even before the end of the agreed timeline with the People’s Party if he smells a censure plan.
Anutin’s “Fasten your seatbelt” remark was a reply to a reporter who asked if there would be a “political accident” next week. He did not say it out of the blue.
Cambodian poll reveals how difficult true peace is
December 2, 2025: When governments fight but ordinary people are not in it, peace efforts are easy.
But when the citizens of warring countries really hate each other, it’s absolutely the other way round.
In a poll conducted last week by Khmer Times amid ongoing tensions between Cambodia and Thailand, an overwhelming 94% of 4,328 respondents supported a boycott of all things Thai, the Cambodian media outlet has announced. The support for boycott was always expected, but the overwhelming number of supporters is more worrisome than Hun Sen and his prime minister son verbally attacking Thailand.
Cambodians rely a lot on Thai goods, both in big industries or normal households, especially those at the border. For them to support a large-scale boycott in unison confirms that the anti-Thai sentiment has extended far beyond the political realm to cover an almost entire nation.
Why do peace plans look more realistic for, say, Ukraine and Gaza? It’s because large numbers of Israeli and Ukrainian people do not agree with their governments. A lot of Russians do not care about national security talks by Vladimir Putin, either.
It’s different when it comes to Thailand and Cambodia, with hateful rhetoric coming prevalently from the man on the street. All politicians wanting the tension to remain high have to do is fan the flame.
Said Khmer Times: “The response to the poll signifies not just a reaction to the detention of (Cambodian) soldiers but also highlights broader issues of national pride and self-determination. Many Cambodians view the boycott as a necessary measure to express their collective discontent with Thai actions, which they perceive as aggressive and manipulative.”
There is still the SEA Games to go.
Thailand’s oldest party has nose in front in South
December 1, 2025: Weeks ago, the Democrats were going into a coma. But a miracle may still happen.
A Hail Mary in October, a decision to bring back Abhisit Vejjajiva, can still prove a very good gamble if the latest NIDA survey is any indication.
The poll does not suggest a grand comeback, but it shows a vast improvement when the same pollsters’ findings just over a year ago were taken into account.
That one confirmed that Thailand’s oldest political party was hitting rock bottom, with leadership turmoil continuing and brain drains showing no signs of stopping. The NIDA poll last year surveyed southern backers of the Democrats, asking them what to do in the next election.
A staggering 41.3% said they would no longer vote for it. Another 41% said they were not so sure this time. Only slightly over 17% would still vote for the Democrats no matter what.
Probably Abhisit’s “stubbornness” and his hard-to-read ideological stand had partly to do with the party’s decline. Yet if the party somehow exceeded low expectations early next year, it will add to a lengthening list of major political ironies Thailand has been experiencing.
Southerners electorally up for grabs
November 30, 2025: Once upon a time there was no need to predict election results in southern Thailand.
The region, under the Democrat Party’s iron grip a decade or so ago, is now a political lottery. That’s what the most recent NIDA poll has found.
The mega floods may have been a big factor, whose lifespan remains to be seen. The survey of 2,000 people covering 14 provinces has found that as many as 32.25% of them favoured no particular prime ministerial candidate. That’s the biggest group, followed by the Democrat Party’s Abhisit Vejjajiva (25.65%), Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul of the Bhumjaithai Party (15.40%) and Natthaphong Ruengpanyawut of the People’s Party (12.85%).
As we can see, even if Anutin and Natthaphong were combined, the support for both men who are favourites for the top job after the next election would still be less than the number of people who say they still don’t like anyone.
When asked about parties they support, the hard-to-please group slid to second, but was almost as big as the group backing the Democrat Party. It was 28.60% against 28.45%, virtually inseparable.
The People’s Party came third (17.80%) and the Bhumjaithai Party (11.65%).
The race is wide open.
Daily updates of, and opinions on, local and global events.
