In the bustling grandeur of Hua Lamphong station this past Friday, a poignant scene unfolded. Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra gracefully led her daughter by the hand, reminiscent of a mother hen guiding her chick, as they embarked on the journey to attend a pivotal seminar in Hua Hin, Prachuap Khiri Khan. Accompanied by none other than former prime minister Srettha Thavisin and a cadre of Pheu Thai party elites, the stage was set for political discourse unlike any other. (Photo: Chanat Katanyu)
Against this backdrop of political reunion, former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra emerged as a vocal advocate for Thailand’s territorial rights, particularly regarding the picturesque island of Koh Kut in Trat. His resolve was unwavering as he addressed the fervent crowd, asserting that the 2001 memorandum of understanding (MoU) on maritime claims was but a scaffolding for peaceful dialogue between Thailand and Cambodia. The air was electric with anticipation as Thaksin, a figure synonymous with influence within the Pheu Thai Party—a party now led by his daughter Paetongtarn—prepared to delve into the MoU’s nitty-gritty during the seminar.
Thaksin’s voice resonated with authority as he sought to quell any uncertainties concerning Thailand’s sovereignty over Koh Kut. He assured everyone present that Thailand’s claim remained undisputed, despite murmurs from across the border in Cambodia suggesting otherwise. In a trenchant riposte to claims circulating on Cambodian media, he dismissed the reports as nothing short of “fake news,” possibly churned out by the machinations of artificial intelligence. “We must remain vigilant against such misinformation,” Thaksin cautioned.
When probed about Thailand’s adherence to the MoU, Thaksin was candid. “It stands merely as a framework,” he elucidated, “not an enshrining agreement. Therein lies the distinction.” His words left an indelible impression, while in the wings, another drama was silently unraveling.
Calls for transparency, led by the outspoken former yellow-shirt protest leader Sondhi Limthongkul, echoed through the corridors of power. He urged for a public forum to dissect the MoU’s implications, leaving the decision in the capable hands of Prime Minister Paetongtarn. But on Wednesday, Paetongtarn decisively stated there would be no such forum, although she welcomed public insights through the established channels. “Every opinion carries weight, but a forum isn’t part of our plan,” she declared.
As questions swirled about potential negotiations with Cambodia within the MoU’s realm, Paetongtarn confirmed the government was scrutinizing the submitted documents. The establishment of a Joint Technical Committee (JTC) was merely a nascent step, yet to reach fruition.
Meanwhile, within the political theatre, Defence Minister Phumtham Wechayachai calmly dismissed Sondhi’s threats of street protests, underscoring the constitutional right to peaceful assembly. Sondhi, however, unfazed, pressed on with his demand to scrap the MoU, warning of an ill-fated overlap that seemed tailored to Cambodia’s advantage. He submitted a daring petition, pushing for constitutional scrutiny by the court and set an audacious 15-day ultimatum for a government response.
In the public sphere, former red-shirt leader Jatuporn Prompan added his voice, urging a reevaluation of the MoU while advocating for clear delineation of the contentious boundaries before any joint ventures could commence. Thaksin, on the other hand, reiterated the MoU’s role as a conversation starter rather than a binding script. He took a historical stance, recalling the 1907 French-Siamese treaty that unapologetically placed Koh Kut under Thai sovereignty. “We have history’s testament on our side,” he concluded.
Thaksin’s fervor was palpable as he criticized the recent parliamentary absenteeism amongst MPs. “If you’re not committed to showing up, consider resignation,” he admonished, reminding all of the unity essential to coalition government.
Thaksin is just trying to distract from his daughter’s lack of transparency. The MoU should be open for public scrutiny!
Transparency is key, but do we really want these issues dissected in public? It could harm diplomatic relations.
Keeping things secret doesn’t help. We’re entitled to know how our sovereignty is managed!
Isn’t it funny how now people care about the MoU? How many even know what it is?
A MoU is a diplomatic tool, not a binding treaty. People need to understand this differentiation.
How can Thaksin blame AI for fake news and ignore the fact that his own rhetoric can be misleading?
He’s not ignoring it; he’s simply using AI as a scapegoat. It’s what politicians do.
Are we even sure it’s fake news? Some reports seem legit.
Thaksin’s point about the 1907 treaty is strong. Historical facts shouldn’t be overlooked.
But treaties are often outdated. Context matters in modern politics.
History provides context, but doesn’t solve contemporary issues. It’s naive to rely only on the past.
Paetongtarn is handling this well. Street protests aren’t the answer.
Street protests might actually bring attention to an otherwise ignored issue.
Is this really about sovereignty? Feels like an internal power struggle instead.
Politicians often use such topics to gain traction. Sadly, it’s all too common.
Exactly, and the actual issues get sidelined. We need genuine leadership.
This Sondhi guy sounds like a troublemaker. Why not solve things peacefully?
Protests can be peaceful too, you know. It’s not about causing trouble but voicing concerns.
If Thaksin wants people to attend parliament, perhaps he should show up himself.
Funny how politicians demand commitment from others but not themselves.
Koh Kut is a gem. Thailand and Cambodia should cherish it, not squabble over it!
Cherishing a place means protecting it, which requires clear sovereignty.
Why can’t countries share? It seems childish to fight over land.
Sharable resources need clear agreements, or else you have chaos.
Adhering to MoUs isn’t about weakness; it’s about respecting diplomatic processes.
But shouldn’t respect go both ways? Thailand deserves clear ownership assurances.