September 22, 2025: The woman at the centre of the BBC controversy had been “unfairly” treated herself.
At 14, Zara Mcdermott, the content maker of the “Thailand: The Dark Side of Paradise”, sent intimate images to her boyfriend and the content was somehow shared and went viral. People focused on that, and instead of viewing her as just a girl in love who would do anything for her man, they considered her with great contempt.
That one incident largely influenced her life, making her a determined lady wanting to fight for justice for other harassed ladies and make people see every victim with fairness, the way he or she should have been seen.
"All I wanted was to be liked,” she told the BBC in 2021 about why she sent the photos. "I did it in order to try and make myself more popular, but it had the complete adverse effect."
School had not been a happy place for Zara. She was bullied, and feeling alone, she thought that if the boy liked her, it might help her social standing among her classmates, said the BBC.
"I wasn’t really able to rationalise it," she told the network which she would do the “Thailand: the Dark Side of Paradise” documentary for many years later.
"It happened at a really pivotal time in my life. You’re trying to find out who you are, and becoming a bit more adult.
"It was such a dark time,” she said. “I’ve blocked out so much. A few days after the picture began circulating I was just so worn down. I think I remember not eating properly, I remember not sleeping properly, I remember just having this constant low mood that you could just never lift.
"I got to a place where I was suicidal. That’s how bad it was. Knowing that when [the images] came out, I was actually going to be bullied more – that was something I couldn’t bear. I’d say it does still affect me to this day."
Said the BBC: “She wasn’t angry only at the people who shared the images, but at the reaction to the incidents: the trolling she received online, and the victim-blaming, where she says people focus on the fact that she sent images to someone, rather than the pictures being shared without her consent.”
The BBC and Zara worked together to highlight the impact of “Revenge Porn”, featuring consequences of betraying former girlfriends and lopsided perceptions of victims.
Many women are badly treated in Thailand, especially in the sex industry. But they are not the only victims when “Thailand: the Dark Side of Paradise” came out. The documentary became controversial because it made the viewers focus on just one aspect, like when those viewing her intimate photos did and she thought of it as being so unfair.
Bhumjaithai's "ambitions" and People's Party's "aspirations"
September 20-21, 2025: Bhumjaithai wants to get a lot bigger, and the People’s Party is prepared to get smaller. That’s what Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit believes.
At a Thammasat University seminar marking a coup d’etat, Thanathorn said he is convinced that Prime Minister Anutinn Charnvirakul will definitely honour his agreement with the People’s Party to dissolve the House of Representatives within four months, largely because the Bhumjaithai Party wants an early election itself.
Bhumjaithai has an ambition to replace the Democrat and Pheu Thai parties as a key pillar of Thai politics, Thanathorn said. An early election will hopefully make that dream come true sooner, he pointed out.
“I don’t think we will see the 121st day,” he said, referring to the Bhumjaithai-People’s Party deal that requires Anutin to dissolve the House within approximately 120 days, an agreement mocked by political opponents and questioned by analysts as unrealistic.
The People’s Party, Thanathorn noted, does not seem to care much about qualities of Anutin’s Cabinet members, because its mind was more on a possible charter review. Under the current national circumstances, with border affairs intertwining with parliamentary politics, “it’s certainly risky” for Thailand’s biggest party, he said.
There could be substantial delays, or there could be incidents affecting the People’s Party’s popularity, or a referendum might derail proposed charter amendment absolutely.
“I believe that my friends in the People’s Party made that decision (to cut a deal with Anutin) because he was holding the key that could open the only one door to a charter reform,” Thanathorn said. “The move by the People’s Party was not about choosing qualified administrators (immediately) or about (checking) past records or past ethics of Cabinet members. It was about who gave them the biggest possibility when charter changes are concerned.”
The Pirapan paradox
September 19, 2025: If you want to be confused like crazy, listen to United Thai Nation leader Pirapan Salirathavibhaga.
In an interview this weekend, the man who leads a badly-split party gave the reason why his faction had opted to stay away from the Anutin coalition.
His group did not want anything to do with a government that is a puppet of the opposition, he said. From this statement, it seems he wanted to portray party members sharing his thoughts as a hybrid (something stuck in between worlds). The problem is that most political systems, the Thai one included, don’t allow that. You are either in the government or in the opposition.
So, let’s get it straight. He decided to be virtually, albeit unwillingly, in the opposition, which naturally would want every ruler to implement its policies, because the prime minister, he believes, would obediently follow its orders.
His conservative party was recently under fire for its decision to stick with Paetongtarn Shinawatra following the infamous leaked phone conversation clip. His unwavering support for her was perplexing, but he has outdone himself with the latest comment.
“To me, a government having to be a pawn of a non-government party is not acceptable,” he said. “This kind of things should never happen in politics.”
If you are scratching your head, asking what his idea of “acceptable politics” is, welcome to the club.
Worrisome signs in Thai-Cambodian standoff
September 18, 2025: Increased civilian involvement in the border dispute between Thailand and Cambodia is apparent, and it’s bad news.
Thailand has reportedly had to resort to riot-control measures, rubber bullets and tear gas to disperse Cambodian protesters, who attempted to dismantle Thai security barriers at Ban Nong Ya Kaeo in Khok Sung district of Sa Kaeo province.
Soldiers of the two countries firing real bullets at each other is a big cause for concern, but it’s a lot more complicated, though, when the confrontation at the border has shifted to villagers on one side and armed forces on the other.
In most, if not all, cases, civilian protesters trying to bring down barriers get political support, be it locally or internationally, especially if the people they are up against are well-armed. It’s complicated already when both confronting groups are in the same country, but the level of danger can skyrocket when one side is from one nation obliged to protect its sovereignty and the other is from another, also driven by nationalism.
Apart from nationalistic impulses, economic factors are actively asserting themselves as well.
It’s worrying indeed. We all know it does not always stop at tear gas.
Dark side of whom?
September 17, 2025: As much as it has been criticised, notably by expats familiar with Thailand, content like the one presented by the BBC is not an exception.
Every media professional knows that the line between “exposure” and “demonisation” was thin, and many have been genuinely confused about what should be the right thing to do. Others know the differences, but they go and do it anyway, mostly dictated by a hidden agenda.
To cut a long story short, the BBC’s “Thailand: the Dark Side of Paradise” documentary is causing a huge backlash virally online. Critics, who include a large number of foreigners, say the presentation was too one-sided, amplifying bad things or practices that are common even in England itself while choosing to ignore great things offered by Thailand that are abundant. Nobody would want to come to Thailand after watching the documentary, they say.
The media are human, too, so biases are to be expected. But that is also why “fairness” is in Journalism 101 anywhere in the world, because many of the audiences will take whatever is shown at face value especially if the content creator is a big, “reliable” news organisation. Simply put, the critics are accusing the BBC of blatantly violating the most fundamental rule of news coverage.
Clips about foreign visitors to Thailand bewildered by what they see and feel that is in sharp contrast with what the western media have told them are all aplenty on YouTube. Agreeable comments are numerous. That is saying something. They are first-hand experiences. If Thailand was so dark like the BBC allegedly tries to project, clips would come out. There is no way to prevent the social media from doing so.
That the BBC documentary has come amid the latest survey describing Thailand as the biggest tourist destination does not help. Bad news sells, so the temptation to be “different” and find out the dark side is understandable.
If the BBC’s intention was simply nitpicking, it would be deplorable but it would also be forgivable. At least there is an element of sincerity in this scenario.
But, judging from the criticism, many believe there is a darker side than that. (One interviewed expat even claimed his comments were intentionally misused to make them sound worse than they really were.) And who should blame them? They probably have not been provided with every piece of information needed.
(Image captured from the BBC website)
Man-made famine
September 16, 2025: Children have their secrets, too, but when they are hungry, they can’t hide.
The above photo captured a scene at a food shelter in Gaza this week. It’s one of those heart-breaking commotions ones normally see following natural disasters like earthquakes or flooding, but the stark difference is that this one was caused by men with guns and bombs, and a government hell-bent on exacting “justice” that was not even an eye for an eye.
The following has been reported by the World Health Organization this week: “More than half a million people in Gaza are trapped in famine, marked by widespread starvation, destitution and preventable deaths.”
Now, from the Unicef: “Child malnutrition in the Gaza Strip continues to deteriorate at an alarming rate, with the latest evidence showing a record proportion of children screened were identified as acutely malnourished in August.
“The percentage of children identified as acutely malnourished in screenings across Gaza increased to 13.5 per cent in August, from 8.3 per cent in July. In Gaza City, where famine was formed last month, the percentage of children admitted with malnutrition was even higher, at 19 per cent, up from 16 per cent in July.”
Meanwhile, Poland has called on Google to remove Israeli ads on YouTube that deny the existence of famine in Gaza, where tens of thousands of innocent women and children have been killed and become the biggest casualties of the war.
As of this month, nearly 2 million people have been reportedly displaced, representing a staggering 90% or so of the population in the territory.
In another related development, the US government, through the secretary of state, has informed Israel that the ties between the two countries remain as strong as ever.
All photos from AFP
In politics, being “victims” isn’t necessarily bad
September 15, 2025: Politics is like sports, in that people often root for the underdogs.
And the Shinawatras of all the people have to know this. The Red Shirt uprising in 2010 ended with a state crackdown, but while protesters were dispersed, the entire political apparatus of the Red toughened and the Pheu Thai Party consequently sleepwalked to an election victory.
Long before that, Chamlong Srimuang won a Bangkok gubernatorial election in a landslide portraying himself as the poorest candidate.
There are plenty of examples in other countries as well. Donald Trump was demonised by much of the US mainstream media and Joe Biden’s White House, and he was a “victim” of “weaponised” justice as well. And no matter how powerful late Ferdinand Marcos was, public sympathy for his main political rivals swept them to political victories.
The Shinawatras might not have expected Thaksin Shinawatra to really have go to jail, but now that he is prison, they can only hope for some positives. Pheu Thai’s most important weapon, public sympathy, is returning. Not in full force, but it’s returning.
And Pheu Thai long-term political fortunes might be going in a direction opposite to those of its main rival, the People’s Party, whose unexpected 2023 election victory (at that time the name was Move Forward) had much to do with the underdog myth in politics.
After that 2023 election, Move Forward was the victim, with Pheu Thai joining hands with the conservatives. Nowadays we are seeing Pheu Thai trying to reclaim that “victim” role at the expense of the People’s Party, which has voted to elect a conservative prime minister, albeit conditionally.
Simply put, it was clear-cut after the 2023 election who was perceived as the victim, but now the line is getting blurry.
Pheu Thai begins “Opposition in the Opposition”
September 14, 2025: The next four months will be fun.
Thailand’s biggest political parties are in the Opposition now, but one is questioning the other of being a shadow government, of trying to dictate everything the executive branch does from here on out.
That is why the Pheu Thai Party has questioned the constitutionality of Anutin Charnvirakul’s parliamentary appointment as the prime minister. To be fair, the question whether the “minority” government is in fact under influences of the People’s Party and thus unconstitutional is solid and has to be addressed.
In other words, the “agreement” between the People’s Party and the Bhumjaithai Party that the latter has to dissolve the House of Representatives within a short period of time and support proposed charter amendment was aimed at tackling Thailand’s political mess, but may be making it bigger in fact.
We are now having a government allegedly having to please an opposition party every step of the way, and one opposition party hell-bent on scrutinizing its peer on the same side of the aisle.
Danuporn Punnakan, Pheu Thai’s spokesman, has doubted if the perceived abnormality will last just four months as largely speculated. He said all the “conditions” about charter reform process including legislative changes for the procedures and the referenda will require a longer time than that to fulfill.
He did not even talk about possible other scenarios yet that could pit the People’s Party against Bhumjaithai and amplify constitutional questions in the process. They include: a national “emergency” requiring extra government money; a new problem concerning Cambodian citizens “suffering” from Thai state measures that the People’s Party often criticises; governmental delays that the People’s Party may not be pleased about, such as Cabinet decisions on the referenda.
Should the People’s Party constitutionally nip it in the bud by joining the government? If that happened it would be two more big ironies in one go. First, hardline “liberals” would be working side by side with the “conservatives”. Second, Pheu Thai, an in attempt to rein in its rivals, could be showing them an effective way out actually.
Thai Democrats on life support
September 13, 2025: Chances of them having to pull the plug on Thailand’s oldest political party are greater a miracle happening.
The Democrat Party went into a coma long before this week’s resignation of its leader, Chalermchai Sri-on, who cited health reasons. The illness once in a while showed signs of recovery but the decline was largely rapid and consistent.
Analysts have identified the key causes: Ideological ambivalence which is not necessarily bad morally but is a political suicide during an extreme national divide; apparent failure to connect with the younger generation; revolving-door leadership changes dictated not by the need to adapt to outside situations but by forever-shifting alliances on the inside; and a virtual brain drain.
In the worst-case scenario, Chalermchai’s resignation is a “Jump ship now!” cry, an unmistakable “Everyone for himself” signal, or the last nail in the coffin of the Democrats, who for decades used to be the big, influential player either in the government or opposition. In other words, the once-relevant party will soon die, with its MPs and potential election candidates scrambling to join other camps.
In another scenario, Abhisit Vejjajiva comes back to the helm and hopefully he manages to somehow make the Democrats a medium-sized party that whoever the election winner is cannot take for granted. Many analysts think this is the harder scenario than the earlier one, because, first, Abhisit might not be tempted to return, and, second, even if he decides to try again, there is no guarantee that he will succeed.
Parties’ charter agreement reflects procedural doubts
September 12, 2025: How do most meetings end? They conclude with “Let’s discuss it in detail next time.”
That’s exactly how the People’s Party, Pheu Thai Party and Bhumjaithai Party emerged from their first crucial talks on proposed charter amendment since the appointment of the new prime minister, leaving the most important question hanging in the air. Can a drafting assembly be elected, and, if not, what options do we have?
They vaguely agreed on the timeline of a House dissolution, which should take place next January but the definite date will be heavily linked to how the proposed constitutional reform proceeds.
Apart from that, judging from what Parit Wacharasindhu, the People’s Party’s spokesman, said, nobody knows for sure whether electing a drafting assembly will not be legally troublesome.
The Constitutional Court ruling on public referendum and a possible new charter does not seem to support electing a specific drafting assembly, he admitted.
“Each party will go back to have its own internal meeting on how to do things in accordance with the Constitutional Court’s ruling,” he said. “I guess each party will have its internal interpretation of the ruling and come up accordingly with a plan.”
He insisted that the three parties will share the same ultimate goal of maximum public participation in the drafting of a new charter.
“Members of each party will debate among themselves how the court’s ruling affects the drafting assembly proposal and what mechanisms will be needed so that the writing allows as much public participation as possible,” he said.
Parit hopes things will be clearer next week. (That’s how the majority of meetings conclude, too.)
Abnormal becoming normal? Or vice versa?
September 11, 2025: Whether it was expected or exceptional, the assassination of US conservative activist Charlie Kirk was frightening either way.
People are asking if his death is a one-off case, an abnormal thing to have happened in “idealistic” America, or if it is something normal that usually hides maliciously under the surface.
If you advocate the theory that this is an exception, you will have to believe that the killings of JFK, RFK, John Lennon and etc as well as the attempt on Donald Trump’s life last year were, too, the exclusive work of crazy persons and no more than that.
If you just shrug and say this was to be expected, that means you characterise the American politics as being unsurprisingly abnormal. In other words, the “normalcy” of “abnormality” in US politics was just reaching a scarier level. (In other words, Kirk’s death was part of a “normal” American politics, bound to happen because sooner or later someone will get killed. He was just the most convenient choice at the moment.)
Both theories are horrifying. For the “This is abnormal” camp, the rate with which brutal “exceptions” have been happening is a very bad sign.
It’s extremely worrisome, too, for those thinking it was normal. Kirk’s assassination shows the “normal” circle of big-name personalities getting murdered once in a while is approaching an “abnormal” notch. The “normal” is becoming alarmingly frequent hence “abnormal”, so to speak.
Lessons from Nepal
September 10, 2025: Corruption can trigger a big political turmoil, and politicians can ban the social media at their peril.
We still don’t know exactly what to call what is happening in Nepal. Is it a political unrest marred by large-scale and tragic lawlessness? Is it anarchy pure and simple? Is it just a violent yet justified protest that real bullets must not be used by security forces by any means? Is it an inevitable uprising following years of injustice and inequality or is it something that should be ended at all costs because an innocent woman has reportedly been fatally burned inside her home, rifles were seen on the streets and public and private possessions have been set on fire?
Did Nepal have it coming? Was the burning of the Parliament building caused by uncontrolled anger or did it signal an absolute loss of faith in the political system?
Ideological matters will come into play, but most neutral observers agree on two things: If politicians had not been so corrupt, things would not have gone so horribly bad. And social media are where highly-discontent people let off their steam, so politicians banning the use of X, Facebook and the likes have made a huge mistake.
Laudable, but also deplorable
September 9, 2025: Not taking anything away from Thaksin Shinawatra, proper “fights for justice” are hard to come by in Thailand.
The country has been so messed up for decades because of disputes over which case is “weaponization” of justice and which politicians or activists belong in jail.
Debate will never end. Ideological biases come in the way without exception. That is natural, but it is also natural that along with it comes violence or turmoil or an extreme national divide or the three of them at the same time.
If we dismiss any possible motive and stop speculating, Thaksin’s latest statement and his decision to return to face the court’s verdict on his controversial Police Hospital stay were the proper way to deal with charges and criminal action that are a fact of life if you play politics.
While it’s commendable, it’s also deplorable because such an attitude could have asserted itself a long time ago and spared Thailand this much misery, which certainly does not end today.
Only Thaksin knows why he comes back
September 8, 2025: Credit when it’s due. The man was in Dubai hours before he might have to go to a “real” prison in Thailand.
Many may say Thaksin Shinawatra had little choice. But still the return had not been largely expected. One YouTube caption said it all: “Thaksin shocks political pundits (by returning)”. That confirms that even when the most educated Thai political analysts were concerned, few had expected his private jet to land back in Bangkok.
Speculation has been wild, just like when he sought to fly out of Thailand on the eve of the parliamentary vote to elect the new prime minister.
Pure guesswork. Thaksin might think he stands a good chance of getting a favorable ruling regarding the 14th floor controversy. Or he could be confident that the mechanism facilitating his return from exile is not totally gone, although the Pheu Thai Party is looking a lot more isolated this week than two years ago.
Or he is prepared for an unfavourable court ruling but betting on it to create a groundswell of sympathy that would reverse the fortunes of his embattled political party. Or he might fear that Pheu Thai, already in disarray, would hit rock bottom if he had stayed in Dubai. Or he is simply just tired of living in exile, which had kept him away from loved ones much of the time.
Only he knows why he has come back.
“Anyone but Red”
September 7, 2025: The Orange wants all critics of its “support” for Anutin Charnvirakul to just think about two years ago.
And the main target of the Orange outburst is the Red. You worked with Anutin from 2023 until very recently so how dare you have the audacity to criticise us! And as if that’s not enough, you are complaining about “twisted politics” as well.
The Orange, therefore, has a very good point in the on-going social media war between its supporters and the disgruntled and demoralised Red fandom.
Biting anti-Orange humours are abundant as Pheu Thai toys keep flying out of the pram. Social media posts shared virally have included such comments as “Orange saplings are growing into cannabis plants.” It mocks both the fact that the People’s Party is made primarily of young people and the Bhumjaithai Party’s everlasting enthusiasm about cannabis deregulation.
Here’s another Red comment: “Look who scolded Anutin when his party voted to elect a Pheu Thai prime minister. Why can’t the People’s Party be scolded for backing him now?”
An anti-establishment activist in exile, Pavin Chachavalpongpun, has joined the fray. In a post, he said: “Anyone can criticise the People’s Party except Pheu Thai. That’s simply because it lived with that guy for two years. This thick-skin behavior (of the Red) must stop.”
We are not thick-skinned and shameless, according to Pheu Thai’s former minister Jiraporn Sindhuprai. We are just confused, she said on her Facebook.
She said she never understood why 1. the People’s Party thinks charter reform has a better chance with Bhumjaithai than Pheu Thai 2. the People’s Party keeps saying it wants a House dissolution but chooses to vote for a delayed House dissolution instead of an immediate one promised by Pheu Thai, and 3. if Pheu Thai is not to be trusted, highly-conservative Bhumjaithai is more trustworthy in the People’s Party’s eyes.
Everyone agrees on one thing, though. They say the Thai politics has become so freaky. A lot of Orange people, both in Parliament and among the public, are reminding Anutin that he was elected to dissolve the House, not govern Thailand.
The Blue is laughing, obviously. Many other Thais are doing the same, although with some hidden pains.
West’s scepticism of China’s parade reeks of hypocrisy
September 6, 2025: Whom should we fear _ a neighbour cleaning up a pistol at home or another neighbour smashing stuff outside his?
China is the former, having held a grand military parade that is making both top rivals and smaller nations alike squirm. Its key opponents, or enemies if you will, are the latter although the term “liberation” more or less has helped diluted the fact that “liberating” is impossible without an invasion.
What worries you more _ China holding the jaw-dropping parade or US President Donald Trump rebranding the Pentagon as the “Department of War”? Which one is more provocative?
Several western news outlets have, while admitting that the Chinese parade this week was nothing short of an unprecedented military spectacle, criticised its “provocative” nature. They are talking about a world order that they imply should not be changed but Beijing wants to. One article ended with a conclusion that China’s impressive show of power might lead to a temptation to test it.
Who has tested military advancement against other nations? Who was the first to use an atomic bomb? Whose stealth jet fighters were launched against proclaimed enemies? Who always flex military muscles while asking “Us or them?”?
Last but not least, should the answers cause a bigger worry than that caused by a nation showcasing its military preparedness at home?
One military parade to humble them all
September 5, 2025: US President Donald Trump’s biggest mistake so far is not the tariffs.
It’s the American military parade in June, which he insisted on holding although a lot of people said it was unnecessary. The parade is being mocked retroactively around the globe after the Chinese have organised theirs this week.
The scales are being compared but the international “judges” have come up with the same “No comparison” conclusion in Beijing’s favour.
Doubters, if there are any, are advised to watch the highlights which are abundant on Youtube. Comments are 99.9 % in one direction. Overseas Chinese said they watched their country’s parade in proud, patriotic tears. Americans said they were embarrassed beyond words. Foreigners hailed China’s innovations, discipline, dedication and tolerance of “enemies’ propagandas”.
Many of the pro-China comments were at the US expense. They said mockingly that while all of the Chinese participants were soldiers who looked to be highly disciplined, young and energetic and took the parade very seriously, their American counterparts, some of them at least, looked like having just been dragged out of pubs and thinking they were having a stroll in the park. While the Chinese unison, enthusiasm and cohesion were impeccable, some American soldiers waved to the crowds and gave them their thumbs up.
Chinese and American leaders’ demeanours during their parades were scrutinised, too. Even the streets where heavy military automobiles rolled by were looked at closely. Again, no match. Comments said while American military jeeps ran and soldiers “walked” on cracked roads during their parade, Chinese military vehicles moved smoothly and troops “marched” on a gigantic, glamorous and perfect square.
One of the Chinese highlights was the elegant marching of young and beautiful female soldiers.
Granted, military parades can be nowhere near telling the whole story, especially when one organizer is a “free” country not familiar with such a thing and the other is anything but. Showcasing all the newest technology can also be a double-edged sword militarily. However, at times like this, with Americans being divided politically down the middle and China’s rise continuing at an exponential rate and encompassing many important aspects, the military parades enhance world perceptions about the two countries very significantly.
Trump's "Make America Great Again" is coming back to haunt him big time.
“Where is the American awe that I’ve seen in Hollywood movies?” one YouTube comment said below one of the rampant “comparison” clips. “Watching this (China’s parade) is like watching the empire parade in Star Wars,” said another comment on another clip.
World analysts believe that, without firing a single battlefield shot, China is humbling everyone. They view the superpowers’ parades as promotional posters at a time when world-order alliances are expanding, or shrinking, or fluid.
(For update and opinion on the Thai parliamentary vote to elect Anutin Charnvirakul as the new prime minister, click here.)
Will cobras strike again?
September 4, 2025: In politics, extreme betrayal can be either noble or evil genius, depending on how you look at it.
If or when the House of Representatives has to vote to elect a new prime minister, “cobras” are expected to crawl out of every corner of the Thai Parliament. Whether they can impact the outcome of the vote remains to be seen.
In Thai politics, MPs voting against resolutions of their parties are called cobras. The meaning is obvious and simple _ you bite the hand that feeds you and rescued you from starving. Late Samak Sundaravej was among the first to link the word “cobra” to politics with a very painful experience.
A famous cautionary tale has it that one farmer saw a cobra which was freezing to near death, so, out of pity, he gave it warmth by literally hugging it. Once the animal regained its strength, it fatally bit him.
Almost three decades ago, Samak, while leader of the Prachakorn Thai (Thai Citizen) Party, took a group of rebellious MPs under his wing, only for them to vote against a Prachakorn Thai resolution on who should be the new prime minister. They effectively changed Thailand’s political balance, giving the executive power to the opposition, to Samak’s great dismay.
It could be very close between the Pheu Thai and Bhumjaithai parties if the House of Representatives has to vote to elect Paetongtarn Shinawatra’s replacement. In that case, a small number of cobras could dictate Thailand’s political course.
Which could renew the old controversial question of how much “independence” an MP can have against his or her own party, a debate that can last forever.
(Thai political cobras often strike when it is very close, like during those fateful Samak days. But, to be fair to them, their excuse is the same as the one used by those in the mainstream. They often say they do it so the country can move on.)
No necessary evil like ones in politics
September 3, 2025: When everyone ends up doing what he or she hates, the time bomb will keep ticking.
The Orange cannot be happy with helping the Blue, and vice versa. The Red certainly never wants a House dissolution, especially at a time like this.
But here we are. The People’s Party wants a major constitutional amendment so bad it is taking a previously-unthinkable action of vowing to conditionally support a prime ministerial candidate of the conservatives. Anutin Charnvirakul of the Bhumjaithai Party cannot be pleased if he is to lead, no matter how briefly, with virtually a main enemy pulling the strings.
Pheu Thai, meanwhile, has decided that if the party will eventually shrink further soon, then so be it. Problems with Cambodia will compound the misery of the last election if a new one is held now, but Pheu Thai has gone beyond caring.
In the big picture, nothing changes. Thailand’s Romance of the Three Kingdoms still features three irreconcilable rivals whose constantly-shifting “alliance” is just a dangerous pretense, temporary and self-serving.
On the surface, the People’s Party’s conditions look fair, as they embrace a public referendum on whether the charter should be amended. But they can be a lot better. Nowhere in there are ordinary people’s problems like concern about prevailing graft across the board seriously addressed.
In short, the conditions seem too ideological for comfort.
In calling Thailand’s political situation “twisted”, Pheu Thai’s Acting Prime Minister Bhumtham Wechayachai is right, but as long as he refuses to admit that his camp is a big part of the “twisted” landscape, he once again brings to the fore the reason why the country’s national divide is unsolvable.
Which is that while doing the most wrong thing to the country, everyone believes he or she is doing the right thing. That keeps misguided and clashing aspirations or motives the most influential part of the game. That keeps the time bomb perfectly alive.
West shuns it, but with one eye firmly on it
September 2, 2025: Western powers are too shy to attend China’s current military parade but finding it too significant to ignore.
It’s not the occasion China is purportedly marking (the end of the Second World War) that makes the parade a must-watch, but it’s the high-profile guests and Beijing’s surefire display of its military might.
At the parade, Chinese leader Xi Jinping will be flanked by some world leaders most dreaded in the West – from Russia, North Korea, Iran and Myanmar – and a host of other leaders of the global south. You know who are going to be absent. Of course, most western bosses.
With Donald Trump’s foreign allies frowning on him virtually on a daily basis, Xi’s unspoken message will be that his “guests” look a lot more united. The world will be told, without Xi having to actually say it: “We are a more stable bunch, and check out our weapons.”
It will be one of China’s largest and most choreographed events in years. Set to be unveiled is cutting-edge equipment such as fighter jets, missile defense systems and hypersonic weapons. Newest military hardware capabilities will be shown. The Guardian calls them a showcase of “the results of a long-running modernisation drive of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA)”.
Russian president Vladimir Putin and North Korea’s Kim Jong-un will attend the victory day parade. It will be the first time the two have appeared in public together alongside Xi, noted The Guardian.
Iranian president Masoud Pezeshkian is also expected to be on there.
Torn between two enemies
September 1, 2025: The People's Party is making a choice, but why did it have to come to this?
It's simply choosing between an ex who has betrayed you like no one ever did and someone you, with every ounce of your body, have hated the most in the whole world.
Politics gives you that dilemma. Sooner or later, it does, without exception.
And politics' cruelty does not stop at that. The worst part is you can never know whether it will be the right decision this time, and, to be fair to the People's Party, even dumping them both cannot guarantee anything.
Updates of, and opinions on, local as well as international events by Tulsathit Taptim.
