Thailand’s monarchy
I wish to refer to the article by Sin-Ming Shaw (“Thailand in denial,” April 24, page 9). It is always a pleasure to hear foreigners’ opinions regarding Thailand, especially from those who are currently based in Thailand. However, there are some misconceptions, which regrettably is not uncommon among some foreigners.
First, with regards to the Forbes report on the world’s richest royals published on Aug. 20, 2008, which ranked His Majesty King Bhumibol Adulyadej of Thailand in first place, the Crown Property Bureau has clarified that the report is inaccurate and inconsistent. The report included land and other assets belonging to the Crown Property Bureau, which is not in His Majesty’s personal net worth. Thus, the figure stated in the report should be considered too high.
Second, the Thai monarchy is and remains within the Constitution and above politics. The Thai monarchy has never been a player in politics. While some political groups may have advocated their cause by claiming royal support, any attempts to drag the palace into discussions about the current political conflict and portraying it as a partisan actor are simply wrong and misleading. Any perception of power and influence derives from the respect and reverence that the His Majesty has earned from his over 60-years working in the field, including in the most remote and inaccessible parts of the country, for the good of his people.
Finally, Thailand upholds people’s rights to freedom of speech and expression as guaranteed by the Constitution. The so-call lese majeste law does not prohibit discussions about the country’s monarchical institution or its political future. However, the issue is difficult for Thais to discuss, especially when the country has had such a beloved and respected monarch for so long, it is normal that people may feel anxious and unsettled about the future. It is also typical for many Asian cultures, including that of Taiwan, not to talk about inauspicious matters, particularly when it concerns someone whom you love and respect.
Nichamon Agrasuta
Chief of the information section of the Thailand Trade and Economic Office
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers