|
"I would like to ask everyone in the country to prepare for life-threatening events like this for a while." - Surayud Chulanont, Prime Minister
On New Year’s Eve at 6pm, six bombs detonated across Bangkok, killing three Thai people and injuring 20 more. Faced with a public safety crisis, the city’s governor swiftly cancelled major celebrations, closed shopping malls, and warned against large gatherings. A few minutes into 2007, a seventh bomb exploded at a sea food restaurant packed with foreign tourists, seriously injuring five. Another six civilians were wounded when an eighth device exploded on a flyover outside Central World. The square below had been scheduled to be packed with thousands of revellers. Police dismantled another bomb at Suan Lum Night Bazaar before it could detonate. With nobody claiming responsibility, and Thailand’s rumour mill in overdrive, who had the power, opportunity and motive to orchestrate these horrific acts? Who stole New Year’s Eve, and what lies ahead for troubled Thailand?
 Southern Insurgents? Insurgents in Thailand’s southernmost provinces have previously confined their violence to their own region. However, there has been mounting speculation that the violence would spill into the capital. Islamist guerrillas recently staged several synchronized bombings in the south. The most notorious took place on August 31 in Yala province when Islamists exploded 22 time-bombs in 22 banks, killing two people. The military has been unable to crush the insurgency, which has killed more than 1,800 people on all sides in the last three years.
Leading up to the festive period, a series of school torchings swept across Thailand from the South. On December 21, Pol General Ajiravid Subranbasaj said that the 18 school fires in the South were deliberate acts of arson by Muslim insurgents, but that the burning of schools in Northern provinces were copycat attacks. The Council for National Security (CNS) had warned that Islamists were planning a sensational attack around January 4 to commemorate a 2004 raid in which they stole more than 100 M-16 assault rifles, attacked schools and police posts and killed four troops before escaping.
One southern rebel group, the Pattani United Liberation Organisation (PULO), denied all involvement. "The PULO had nothing to do with last week's series of bombs in the Thai capital," said the organisation's vice-president. Responding to accusations from ousted PM Thaksin Shinawatra, the PULO added: "We invite you all to stop making myth after myth and face reality instead."
Confusingly, the initials "IRK" were found scrawled in marker in four places at three bomb sites. The IRK is an Afghanistan-trained urban guerilla terrorism unit. However, Interior Minister Aree Wong-araya shrugged off suggestions that the culprits were Muslim militants. Police claimed the graffiti was the work of teenage gangs attempting to scare the public.
Prime Minister Surayud announced on New Year’s Day that the bombings had nothing to do with the southern insurgency, quipping, "I don't think they would come here as they could get lost in Bangkok.
"It is very unlikely that it was linked to the southern violence, because it is much easier for the insurgents to mount an attack in the three southern provinces than to target Bangkok,” he added.
Foreign terrorist groups linked to al-Qaida have attacked tourist resorts in Southeast Asia before, notably in the 2002 and 2005 Bali bombings. However, the New Year’s Eve explosions appear to be on too small a scale, and use employ uncharacteristically crude bombing techniques.
 
Thaksin Shinawatra? Instead, the interim government pointed the finger at Thailand’s ousted Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra and his supporters. The billionaire businessman-turned-premier had a lucrative period in office before being all but banished from the kingdom and made the target of a series of investigations into his family’s finances.
His replacement, Surayud, said that investigations by the government's information and intelligence agencies had shown that the bombings were "the work of people who lost power, but I cannot clearly say which group was behind it… The people who carried out the bombings were ill-intentioned people who want to have political impact. They want to create a scenario of a politically unstable Thailand.”
In a hand-written letter immediately faxed from Beijing, Thaksin denied involvement, shifting the blame to southern separatists. He also criticised the government for distorting information, misleading the public and playing political games. A spokesman for Thaksin’s former party, Thai Rak Thai, called on Surayud to point out exactly who he believes was behind the New Year’s Eve attacks.
Thaksin supporters remain in positions of political power, and the interim government has been criticised for not removing them more quickly. To date, some of Thaksin’s close aides have been called in for questioning by police, but none have been charged. Meanwhile, a public opinion poll revealed that a majority of Bangkokers did not believe the junta's claim that the deposed government was behind the bombings. Surayud would later backtrack and admit that his claim "was just an intelligence analysis" and not based on solid evidence or information.
The CNS has since requested that broadcast media stop reporting on Thaksin’s overseas activities. The military "simply wants the media to cooperate in refraining from airing news on issues deemed to undermine national security," said General Sonthi Boonyaratkalin, army commander and chief of the CNS. The ousted Prime Minister is, for now, considered an active threat to the stability of the Thailand’s rebooted establishment.
 Chavalit Yongchaiyudh? Rumours circulated that army commander and former Prime Minister, General Chavalit Yongchaiyudh had been paid a hefty 1.5 billion baht by Thaksin to orchestrate the NYE bombings and the wave of school burnings. Defence Minister Boonrawd Somtas tried to make it clear that the public speculation stemmed from foreign news reports and not from the authorities, as Chavalit entered a war of words with senior CNS members. As tension mounted, Boonrawd pointed out that no one in the interim government or the CNS had singled out the 75-year-old Chavalit as a suspect, saying: "The prime minister and the CNS chairman have only said the explosions were politically motivated.”
 In December, Chavalit was approached to replace Thaksin as the new Thai Rak Thai party leader. Back in 1997, Thaksin had served as Deputy Prime Minister in Chavalit Yongchaiyudh's government shortly after the Asian Financial Crisis. Thaksin held this position for three months, leaving when Chavalit finally resigned. There were rumours that Chavalit met with the ousted PM last month while on a visit to China. Press reports also linked Chavalit to damaging allegations that PM Surayud illegally purchased land in a forest reserve. Privy Council president, General Prem Tinsulanonda, is said to be currently mediating the tension between Chavalit and senior members of the CNS.
 The Council for National Security? Three months after the bloodless coup, the junta’s iron grip appears to be loosening as it faces accusations of ineptitude and corruption. Speculation has grown that the CNS might be dissatisfied with the performance of the interim government that it installed and may prefer to take complete power for itself.
Chavalit Yongchaiyudh attacked the CNS for trying to link him to the blasts, publicly hinting that the bombing was an inside job. He said the CNS should look at its own members if it wanted to solve the case, fuelling speculation that the military had staged the bombings, perhaps in order to justify the coup. Army commander Sonthi appeared on Thai television to deny responsibility. “I have risked myself to do what the people wished,” he declared. “Why should I do that? I love my people and my country.”
Chavalit then condemned Saprang Kalayanamitr, the CNS secretary-general, for having received intelligence on the bombing, but failing to take appropriate action. He accused Saprang of “gross incompetence” and criticised him for claiming to be in control of the situation. In turn, Saprang refused to reply to the comments of a “shyster.” However, incompetence alone does not directly implicate the CNS. The ruling junta would appear to have enough problems on its hands already, and allowing or planning the attacks would seem irrational and unnecessary. With the support of the monarchy and the people, and having selected the interim government, the CNS had already justified its grasp for power.
 Also, the CNS and interim government do not seem to have benefited from the attacks. An ABAC survey showed that support for, and confidence in, the government and military junta slipped from 90% to 46% after New Year’s Eve. Another survey found that the government's popularity received only 5.27 points out of a possible 10.
 The Military? If the military were behind the bombings, it would seem more plausible that it was from people outside the CNS, perhaps a displeased faction attempting to discredit the ruling junta in order to regain lost power and influence. Such a group would have the motivation, materials and organisational capacity. They would also have the ability to successfully cover it up. As rumours swept the capital that there would be a military counter-coup, General Sondhi Boonyaratkalin went on television to call such an event "impossible."
The military has strengthened its forces in the capital following the bombings, and the events of New Year’s Eve have also been used to justify the approval last week for a 14,000-member Special Operation Force of soldiers and police to maintain civic order. Owners and staff of petrol stations, supermarkets and factories are also being trained by the military as security guards, increasing their power base throughout the country.
The main problem for a military faction attempting to retake the government is that it would need the backing of the monarchy in order to have a chance of survival. Although willing to endorse September’s “bloodless coup,” it is highly unlikely that the monarchy would condone the killing of innocent civilians.
 The Police? Immediately after the coup, new PM Surayud launched a campaign to reform the Royal Thai Police through decentralization, with the force coming under the control of provincial governors and accountable to civilian boards. His proposals were immediately met with fierce resistance by police top brass.
"Please, don't treat the police organization with contempt. Give us some respect," Pol Lt-Gen Achirawit Suphanphesat, spokesman of the National Police Office, pleaded in November. "The day we are transferred to local organizations, the country will go up in flames," he warned.
The army is also widely expanding control of the Internal Security Operations Command (ISOC), and police could face the threat of being directly under the control of the military. Under the CNS, the power of the police force looks set to diminish.
Central Institute of Forensic Science acting director Pornthip “Dr Death” Rojanasunand was barred from collecting evidence from a bombing site in Pratunam. She criticised the police for being unprofessional because they focused on the type of bomb that was used, rather than the identity of the bombers, allowing city cleaners to clean the site before evidence could be collected. Sign of a cover-up, perhaps?
To date, the police force has produced no major leads, prompting speculation that national police chief Kowit Wattana is to be sacked over poor handling of the investigation. Kowit is said to be loyal to Thaksin, only going along with the coup because he saw that pro-Thaksin elements in the military had been outmanoeuvred. Kowit was allowed to promote other Thaksinites after the coup. The interim PM took the step of defending the police chief on December 9 after rumours intensified that he was dissatisfied that no perpetrators of the New Year’s Eve attacks have been either implicated or arrested.
Thaksin himself started his career in the Thai Police, venturing into several businesses while still in service. He quit a decade ago, having ascended to the rank of a Lieutenant-Colonel. On January 9, a political activist alleged that the Immigration Police, still loyal to Thaksin, have been hiring illegal migrant workers in Samut Sakorn province and in the Minburi district of Bangkok to cause unrest. The leader of the People for Democracy Group, Chanapat Nanakorn, claims associates of the ousted PM are spending 2 million baht to generate further political instability.
 Businessmen? On December 19 2006, the interim government announced new controls requiring investors to lodge 30 percent of their money with the central bank, which could only be pulled out after one year. If the capital was withdrawn before that time, one third of the deposit would be withheld, effectively taxing 10 percent of the original investment. This attempt to restrain the surging baht was partly reversed after the stock market slumped 14 percent: the largest one-day fall since the 1997 Asian financial crisis. $US22 billion was wiped off the value of the Thai stock market. The Financial Times cited analysts declaring Thai authorities as “intent on committing financial hara-kiri.”  Could aggrieved business interests hurt by the central bank’s botched capital controls have been motivated to orchestrate, fund or allow the New Year’s Eve attacks? It would certainly be an indirect approach, not to mention self-punitive in the short term. When markets reopened following the attacks on January 3, the Stock Exchange of Thailand's composite index fell 3.2%, declining another 1.67% the following day. Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Pridiyathorn Devakula claimed that the bombings "would not have an impact on this year's GDP.” However, the University of the Thai Chamber of Commerce revised downward its forecast on the kingdom's first-quarter economic growth from 4% to 3.5%, as spending and tourist arrivals take a dip. If a second night of bombing takes place this year in the capital, the annualised growth rate is forecast to fall another 0.5-1%.
The central bank has no immediate plans to lift its remaining capital controls, but is considering revisions of "minor" measures. Bank Governor Tarisa Watanagase told reporters that the baht's relative stability since controls were imposed showed their effectiveness and necessity.
What next? In the aftermath of the attacks, the ability of the CNS to return Thailand to a democratic course this year would seem severely impeded. However, CNS member and Air Chief Marshal Chalit Pukpasuk said on January 12 that elections would be held before the end of 2007. Chalit said that amendments to some of the articles in the constitution should not take long and that drafting of the new charter is proceeding as planned.
More than a week into 2007, a cinema owner reported that a ninth device had detonated on New Year’s Eve at Major Cineplex Ratchayothin in the Phahon Yothin area. Fearing that news reports about the blast could hurt his business, the owner of the premises had tried to cover up the explosion. Luckily, there were no casualties as the bomb had been placed in a back room by a security guard. It is likely that Bangkok’s 30-40% drop in New Year’s Day retail sales would have been higher had the cinema bomb been immediately publicised. "The blasts had a psychological impact on the mood of shoppers as well as foreign travellers," Central Pattana executive vice president for marketing Nattakit Tangpoonsinthana told The Nation newspaper.
The Bangkok Metropolitan Administration plans to allay fears by spending 186 million baht on close-circuit television cameras throughout the capital this year. Some 1,628 closed circuit TV cameras will be operating by the end of 2007. Other security measures have heightened throughout Thailand, with armed guards monitoring hotel entranes and the gates of public areas. CNS chief Gen Sonthi Boonyaratkalin announced that tough powers available under martial law would be exercised if the security environment warrants it. ''Martial law affords us a vast amount of power, but we haven't used it,'' the army chief said. If violence escalates further, it could be disastrous for Thailand's tourist industry, which is still recovering from the tsunami of two years ago.
On January 5, Defence Minister Boonrawd Somtas said that investigators had concluded from security videos that "the bombers were men in uniform, both green [military] and khaki [police]." It is possible that a combination of individuals and groups with similar objectives joined to carry out the New Year’s bombings. If the police or the military - the organizations responsible for public security - are discovered to be involved in some way in the loss of innocent civilian lives, it would be next to impossible for Thailand to recover its international reputation. Perhaps we will never know who stole New Year’s Eve, and perhaps that is in the country’s best interests. However, with the interim Prime Minister asking us to “prepare for life-threatening events like this for a while,” things could get a lot worse before they get better.
 |
