Monthly Archives: June 2014

Keeping The Monsters At Bay

Kurdish PM Nechirvan Barzani (photo credit: US Department of Defense)

In yesterday’s post, I discussed why the combination of local geopolitics, religion and U.S. interference had made the rise of a group like ISIS almost a certainty. Today, we’ll take a look at what might be the best way to stop their advance.

First of all, we have to realize that the Iraqi army is in shambles. The reasons for this go back to May 16, 2003 when Paul Bremer, acting as the head of The Coalition Provisional Authority, issued CPA Order No. 2, which disbanded the Iraqi army. In August of the same year, the first members of the new Iraqi army began training. As the country disintegrated into civil war, members of the new Iraqi army and Iraqi police were targeted by various insurgent groups as collaborators, due to their training by and association with Coalition forces. The army’s training’s been impeded from the beginning by desertions and high rates of extremist infiltration. As the U.S. began to withdraw, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki used the military as a tool against his political rivals, and neglected training and equipping them for actual defense of the country.

Iran has sent assistance in the form of two battalions of Iranian Revolutionary Guards to assist Iraq in fighting ISIS, as well as sending some troops that were fighting for the Syrian government. However, this could lead to even more trouble, as the Iraqi Sunni population could see this as a combined Shia operation, which would legitimize ISIS’s propaganda claim of that being the case. And, if the U.S. joins with Iran as has been proposed, this would put the U.S. in the dubious position of both supporting the Syrian rebels (its stated position), and, through its collaboration with Iran, supporting the Syrian government (Iran’s main ally).

However, there’s another solution. In a June 19 article published on the Foreign Affairs.com website, Dov Friedman and Cale Salih point out that the strongest military in Iraq belongs to the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG). The Iranians have reportedly asked the Kurds to join the fight, and the U.S. would like to see the Kurds join as well. The KRG has had problems selling their oil on the world market; some guarantees of increased revenue could help sway the KRG into supporting the U.S. and Iran against ISIS. Plus, there’s a history of Sunni actions against the Kurds, with more possible along the 620 mile border the KRG shares with the insurgents.

However, the history between the Kurds and the U.S. is filled with broken promises. From Henry Kissinger and the Algiers Agreement, which left the Kurds at the mercy of Iraq’s Ba’athists to 2003 and CPA Order No.2, where the Kurds were disarmed after fighting at the side of U.S. troops, our record with them has been anything but stellar. As long as ISIS respects the Kurds’ existing battle lines, the KRG has very little reason to go to war.

What would the U.S. need to do to enlist the Kurds? 1) Insist that Iraq’s Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki put a stop to inflammatory rhetoric among members of his party and state media. 2) Offer an immediate concession such as helping the KRG market their oil. 3) Arm the Kurdish military, and provide support through air strikes if necessary. 4) Support Kurdish claims to to the disputed territories it recovered last week. Only then would the Kurds consider the U.S. serious in supporting the Kurdish people and army.

Iraq is a mess at the present whichever way you look at it. By enlisting the KRG, Iraq would have a much better chance of surviving than it does at the present.

We Create Monsters

1 Reply

Red = Area controlled by ISIS, Yellow = Area claimed by ISIS, White = Rest of Syria and Iraq. Graphic via Wikimedia Commons

The news out of Iraq has been grim recently. The extremist group known as either ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) or ISIL (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) has been on a rampage through northern Iraq. The campaign is mostly seen by us in the west as a religious war; Sunni extremists (ISIS) against the Shia population (the Iraqis), and indeed the news out of the region seems to underline that theory, with executions of Shia citizens and other atrocities committed by ISIS becoming commonplace news stories. But, is it really that simple?

The two big players in Mideast politics are Saudi Arabia and Iran. And, while it’s true that Saudi Arabia is mostly Sunni and Iran mostly Shia, this isn’t what drives the hostility between the two countries. Both of them are large oil producers and anxious to expand their power and influence upon the region. The US had an ally in Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi (the Shah of Iran), which was to be expected as the CIA and MI6 were behind the coup in 1953 that put the Shah in power. With the Shah in power, the government was secular in nature, as well as being brutal, corrupt, and in the eyes of the more religious conservatives, Westernized, The Shah in turn was overthrown in the 1979 Revolution, which made Iran an Islamic state. As Iran cut its ties to the West, the power struggle between the Iranians and the Saudis grew.

At the same time that the Islamic state was being put into place in Iran, Saddam Hussein formally took power in Iraq. Shortly after Saddam came to power, he invaded Iran with the support of the U.S., Europe and the Arab states. The war dragged on for eight long years. Here is where we first saw Iraq use chemical weapons; weapons supplied by the Germans and the Reagan administration. During the end of the war, the Iraqi government launched a campaign against the Kurdish regions in Iraq, attacking them with chemical agents and then blaming the attacks on Iran (as did the U.S.). It’s estimated that between 50,000 and 100,000 people were killed, with some Kurdish sources saying as many as 180,000.

We’ll skip over the Gulf War and the years of sanctions; that story’s fairly well known. Then, came 2003 and the U.S. invasion of Iraq. I always found the official excuse of Iraq having WMDs as the reason for the invasion to be laughable at best, considering that we were the ones to give them the WMDs in the first place. Time has proven me right- we now know that the Bush administration knew there weren’t any WMDs, and that the U.S. had been planning an invasion of Iraq. In a piece from two months ago, I told how General Wesley Clark had been told by a Pentagon source weeks after 9/11 that the U.S. was going to invade Iraq, even though the government knew that they didn’t have anything to do with the attacks- thus the made up WMD story.

Which brings us to now. ISIS is a monster of our own making. We either put into place or tacitly supported two of the most brutal regimes of the twentieth century so we could have more of their oil. We couldn’t have cared less what they did to their own people as long as they kept selling us oil. In Iran, we put a ruthless dictator into power that ruled the country with an iron fist for twenty five years. When we went into Iraq, we destroyed the country, killed hundreds of thousands of civilians and put into place a government that mostly kept power because we had troops there. Is it any wonder that an extremist group like ISIS would rise up to fight a centuries old war that resumes when we leave, considering all that we’ve done to destabilize the region, and that the two big players in the region would like nothing more than to have Iraq’s oil to add to their own?

The Real Battle Begins

Leave a reply

Yesterday (June 17), Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his cabinet conditionally approved the Northern Gateway Pipeline. The twin pipeline would go from Edmonton, Alberta to Kitimat, British Columbia; a distance of 731 miles.

Graphic courtesy of Enbridge. www.gatewayfacts.ca

In announcing the approval, National Resource Manager Greg Rickford said: “Today constitutes another step in the process… the proponent clearly has more work to do in order to fulfill the public commitment it has made to engage with aboriginal groups and local communities along the route.”

The approval is contingent on Enbridge meeting 209 conditions set forth by the National Energy Board (NEB) last December. But, while some of the conditions address environmental concerns, none of them address climate change.

The pipeline’s far from being a done deal. Nikki Skuce, Senior Energy Campaigner at ForestEthics, said: “This is just such a high risk project that goes through some of the most incredible parts of the world. And for what? To ship unrefined tar sands to get to U.S. and Asian markets. It’s just politically and environmentally and socially a risky project.” She further went on to say: “This Harper government has basically changed all environmental legislation to pave the way for pipelines. They completely gut environmental legislation to make it easier for these kinds of projects to be approved.”

British Columbia Premier Christy Clark says that the five conditions she demands have not been met. “None of the proposals have met the five conditions yet, so therefore, none of them would be approved,. I have said there are five conditions. Any proposal to expand heavy oil through British Columbia needs to meet the five conditions. Enbridge hasn’t met them yet and they need to before they would be approved by our province.” These conditions include consulting with First Nations, environmental concerns and the promise that British Columbia would receive “a fair share” of the pipeline’s profits.

Discussions with First Nations are part of many of the conditions Enbridge must meet. A government release states: “Consultations with Aboriginal communities are required under many of the 209 conditions that have been established and as part of the process for regulatory authorizations and permits. The proponent clearly has more work to do in order to fulfill the public commitment it has made to engage with Aboriginal groups and local communities along the route.”

However, the First Nations are standing firm in their opposition as well. The oilsands boom has come to mean troubling cancer rates, contamination of vital waterways and damage to their homeland, livelihood and culture. Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, president of the Union of B.C. Chiefs, says that they’re considering lawsuits and civil disobedience to try to stop the pipeline. “We fully expected the Harper government to make every effort to ram this project through. But…there’s enormous solidarity here in British Columbia between First Nations people, British Columbians, Canadians, and we’ll do what’s necessary and whatever it takes to stop this project.”

Add to this that two thirds of British Columbia residents are against the pipeline or want it postponed, and that the NDP and Liberal parties are planning on using the pipeline as a campaign issue against Harper’s Conservative Party in next year’s elections, and the pipeline’s going to have a rough time getting final approval. We hope that the others come to their senses and realize that the Northern Gateway is not just a bad deal for the First Nations, but for all of us.

The Ugly Side Of Protest

Leave a reply

Three days ago, I wrote about the protests in Brazil during the World Cup. I normally wouldn’t do a follow up story this quickly, but the situation warrants the return, I think.

On Sunday evening, a man identifying himself as a police officer fired a live round into a group of protesters in Rio de Janeiro.

This was not the only use of live ammunition in Rio that night by police; another man who said he was a police officer fired multiple live rounds into the air. And, there’s been numerous reports of police using rubber bullets and tear gas against the protesters in multiple cities, such as in Curitiba yesterday.

Pedro Dantas, a spokesman for the Rio de Janeiro security secretariat that oversees all security forces, said that if authorities verify the accuracy of the video, “we’ll immediately open an investigation into the incident.” However, judging by the police’s past record in investigating its abuses, I wouldn’t expect much.

Unfortunately, violence seems to be more the norm than the exception as far as the Brazilian police goes. There’s very little oversight of the police; a 2005 report said Brazil’s oversight procedures “have been an almost compete failure in bringing about police accountability,” In 2009, Human Rights Watch reported that Rio and São Paulo police together kill more than 1,000 people every year; many of them being extrajudicial executions in actuality instead of the self defense the police uses as validation. In 2008, Rio de Janeiro police arrested 23 people for every person they killed in 2008, and São Paulo police arrested 348 for every kill. Compare this to the U.S. in 2008, where 37,000 people were arrested for every person killed by the police in a confrontation.

The police aren’t the only ones who are violent, though. There’s a Black Bloc faction participating in the protests on a regular basis. You don’t need to be a rocket scientist to see how a clash between these two groups could spiral out of control quickly.

Freedom To Pollute

Leave a reply

Map of the counties affected by the Elk River chemical spill. By Justin.A.Wilcox (Own work) [CC-BY-SA-3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

On January 9, 2014, 7500 gallons of crude 4-methylcyclohexylmethanol (MCHM) leaked through a hole in a storage tank at the Freedom Industries storage facility in Charleston, West Virginia. The MCHM leaked into the ground, and from there into the Elk River.

The Freedom Industries facility is about a mile and a half upstream from the intakes of the West Virginia American Water treatment plant. Because of the spill, 300,000 people in nine counties had a “do not use” water advisory in place for five days after the spill, and schools, etc. in the Charleston area were closed. On January 17, Freedom Industries filed for bankruptcy, and on January 21. they told the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) that a second chemical, PPH, had also been in the tank; something they hadn’t disclosed when ordered to to so right after the spill.

The spill (and Freedom’s response to it) was front page news, and rightfully so. However, it looks as if Freedom might become news again. Citing unclear records, redundant and uncoordinated work, overstaffed meetings and exorbitant travel expenses as the basis for his ruling, on June 3, U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Ronald Pearson denied or put on hold more than $1 million of fee and expense requests from Freedom Industries’ lawyers. And, as contracting crews have started to tear down Freedom’s storage tanks, nobody knows how much the cleanup costs will be, and whether or not enough money will come out of Freedom’s bankruptcy to pay for it.

Then, last Thursday, the DEP reported that a storm water collection trench on the Freedom site had overflowed into the Elk River. And, on Friday, the trench overflowed again. Two Notices of Violation were issued to Freedom for Thursday’s incident, with another two issued for Friday’s. DEP Secretary Randy Huffman said: ““Freedom and its environmental consultant should have a system in place to handle heavy rainfall. If a better system is not implemented immediately, the DEP will take action to bring in a more responsible contractor to handle it.”

Oh yeah- and there’s a new player in town. Some of the executives who once managed Freedom Industries have formed a new West Virginia corporation named Lexycon, “whose characteristics,” the local paper reported, “are strikingly similar to Freedom Industries.” The Freedom lawyers even asked Judge Pearson for permission to sell what’s left of a Freedom-owned facility in Nitro, West Virginia to Lexycon – wow. But the really crazy thing about it is that the original story about Lexycon, which appeared in the Charleston Gazette, has disappeared. There isn’t a single story about Lexycon that appears in the paper’s online material.

I wonder how long Freedom will get away with their nonexistent compliance with environmental laws, and how much of the resulting cleanup cost West Virginians will end up paying. And, I wonder why the Charleston Gazette removed every trace of the story about Lexycon…

What is a Father?

Leave a reply

Since 1987, every spring there is a ritual that takes place that gives special meaning to my life. It is the annual trip to the cemetery to place the flowers for the season on my Dad’s grave.

The most influential person in my life, past and present, my father was a man unlike any other. I could tell you stories that would mean far more for me to tell than for you to listen to. But this is what is important, because it applies to you and your Dad too.

Dad taught me that a REAL father is human. He gets tired, he can get sick, he can get injured. But Dads, because they are who they are, are the happiest when they are with their kids and all is well.

Real Dads know it is the job of a parent to teach their child how to make decisions, not make all the decisions for their child.
Real Dads know it is more important to encourage critical thinking in your child than to answer their questions in a way that lets you move on with your day.
Real Dads know how to provide opportunity for their child’s interests to be explored, not attempt to live vicariously through their child’s life.
Real Dads know how to give their child hints about how battles are fought, not fight the child’s battle for them.
Real Dads know that a child benefits by seeing a cooperative relationship between genders rather than encouraging gender specific roles or jobs within the home. Boys should know how to cook; girls should know how to mow the lawn.

My Dad’s way of teaching never discouraged me from wanting to learn more. He taught me that life is always about learning, and that process should never end. But perhaps one of the most important lessons learned was how to see people with an open heart rather than a closed mind. A Korean War vet, his comment about the conflict always included “but such a beautiful people and culture.” Foster parents to dozens of children, he would say “I wish I could keep every one of them…” Colorblind to race, accepting of diversity, open to difference, he was the person who everyone turned to in the room for conversation making, peace brokering and leadership. Gifted with music and voice, my Dad would give back through his musical talents in church as well as social occasions.

I could – and want – to wax on about all the virtues that made my Dad the hero I grew up believing him to be. And the older I get, the more convinced I am that my perspective on that has never wavered.

To you Dad, Happy Father’s Day.

And if you are a Dad this description does NOT fit, please GET REAL.

Pay No Attention To The People Outside The Stadium

Leave a reply

World Cup protesters in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, June 12, 2014. By Brian Allen (VOA) [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

In late 2007, it was announced that Brazil would be the host nation for the 2014 World Cup. At that time, Brazil had planned to set aside about $1 billion to update their stadiums. However, of the 18 existing stadiums that could handle the crowds, four would have to be rebuilt from scratch, and all the others needed serious work.

At first, the Brazilian people were happy and excited by the news. As time went on though, problems began to appear. When the Brazilian government realized that the promised private sector money they were expecting to cover most of the costs would not even cover “half a stadium,” they covered the financing themselves.

The estimated $1 billion grew to more than $11 billion. Corruption ran rampant, and the cost overruns on the stadiums alone were 300% over the original estimates. Meanwhile, the public services such as transportation, health care and education, poor as they were, were neglected. Add to this 250,000 people (1.25% of the country’s population) being evicted from their homes to allow construction and expansion of the stadiums, and you have a recipe for social unrest.

Brazil protests 2013. By Tânia Rêgo/ABr (Agencia Brasil) [CC-BY-3.0-br (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/br/deed.en)], via Wikimedia Commons

The protests started last June during the FIFA Confederations Cup. The Confederations Cup is held the year before the World Cup and is looked at as a “dress rehearsal” for the larger event. More than one million people took part in the protests last year, mostly protesting against the fact that Brazil was hosting the World Cup (as well as the 2016 Olympics, as they’ll be held in Rio de Janeiro), yet failed to invest in the people’s welfare.

Unfortunately, the protests haven’t been completely peaceful. Since May, there’s been clashes with the police in various protests across the country. There’s also a Black Bloc contingent who claims that non-violent protest won’t do any good. On Thursday, an AP reporter and two CNN reporters were injured covering the protests in Sao Paulo.

The past couple weeks, besides the protests, have seen strikes by the Sao Paulo subway workers, local police and a threatened federal police strike, which was averted by offering them a 16% raise. The Homeless Workers Movement had occupied a piece of land near the Sao Paulo stadium since May, demanding that the privately held land be given over to low income housing for the people evicted by the work on the stadium; officials agreed to the demand.

Now, Brazil’s made lots of progress through minimum wage raises and the like. For example, a program called Bolsa Família gives financial support to poor mothers. In return, they have to ensure that their children go to school and avail themselves of health care services. The quality of life has improved, BUT the income inequality is still staggering. Although it’s steadily fallen over the last eleven years, Brazil is one of the worst three countries as far as income inequality goes. The taxes are crippling; sales taxes can add an additional 80% to an item’s price. And, like any taxes like that, they affect the lower and middle incomes much more than the high income people.

However, even 15-20% pay raises don’t do much with goods being taxed at rates up to 80%. The police violence in the name of “keeping order” in the favelas is infamous. The common person, while better off than he or she was a few years ago, still have a horrible social service infrastructure; 27% of adults between the ages of 15 and 64 have only rudimentary reading and writing skills, for example. And, with the Olympics coming up in two years, the spending for events that don’t benefit the common person at all will more than likely stay at an outrageously high level.

Occupy World Writes deplores the violence on both sides. While we are in firm agreement with the desire for better schools, etc. (and who wouldn’t be?), we firmly reject the idea that violence is either necessary or desirable. We call on the Brazilian government and all other governments to put the people before gaudy events meant to promote the country’s image. After all, what’s a better way to promote your country and its way of life than having happy, healthy, well educated people?

A Lump Of Coal

Leave a reply

Public Domain via Wikimedia Commons

It’s been almost two weeks since the EPA released its proposed guidelines for limiting the amount of carbon pollution that existing power plants can dump into the atmosphere. I discussed in a piece from last week the new regulations and how nine states in the northeast already have a working cap-and-trade system in place that go beyond the federal proposals. So, how have the guidelines been received?

In an article for Bloomberg, Mario Fisher points out that even before the release of the proposed guidelines, utilities were planning to shut down enough coal-fired generation in the next six years to supply a city five times the size of New York to comply with existing environmental laws, and that coal will still be used to generate 30% of the electricity in this country by 2030, compared to 39% in 2013.

Photo by Rennett Stowe from USA (Coal-fired Power Plant Uploaded by russavia) [CC-BY-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

Of course, the various coal companies and lobbying groups are painting a much darker picture. The Chamber of Commerce, the country’s biggest business lobby, claims that the regulations would cost the economy $51 billion a year by 2030, and would lead to 224,000 jobs being lost. Gary M. Broadbent, media director for Murray Energy, said: “The Obama Administration’s proposed cap-and-tax mandates are absolutely illegal and will destroy millions of jobs, cripple the American economy, and cause massive blackouts in this country.”

However, Paul Krugman, in an article for the New York Times, put that $51 billion into perspective: “Remember, we have a $17 trillion economy right now, and it’s going to grow over time. So what the Chamber of Commerce is actually saying is that we can take dramatic steps on climate — steps that would transform international negotiations, setting the stage for global action — while reducing our incomes by only one-fifth of 1 percent. That’s cheap!” And, the Natural Resources Defense Council says that cutting carbon pollution from power plans would save Americans $37.4 billion on their electricity bills in 2020 due to higher efficiency. Furthermore, they claim that more than 274,000 jobs would be created for roofers and electricians implementing solar and other energy-saving technologies.

Naturally, there’s also the out and out deniers. Robert Murray, the CEO of Murray Energy is threatening to sue the EPA over the new regulations, claiming that the EPA is lying about global warming and the earth is actually getting cooler. All we can say to that is bring it on…

You’d think that Robert Murray got a lump of coal in his Christmas stocking…

Victory In The Court

Leave a reply

Photo by David Shankbone (own work) via Wikimedia Commons

Yesterday (June 10), lawyers for fourteen Occupy Wall Street protesters announced that New York City had agreed to pay $583,000 in a settlement over their arrest during a march on January 1, 2012. The attorneys for the plaintiffs said this was the largest single settlement related to Occupy Wall Street.

The protesters were arrested and charged with blocking traffic. The protesters claimed that they were surrounded, and weren’t given a chance to disperse. Manhattan prosecutors, as has been the case with the majority of the over 2,600 arrests of Occupy wall Street protesters over several months after the beginning of the movement in 2011, declined to prosecute. The protesters sued for false arrest.

Wylie Stecklow, the lead plaintiffs’ lawyer on the case, said in the statement: “This systematic false arrest and misconduct by high-ranking (New York Police Department) officers is a symptom of an institutional practice of chilling expressive-speech activity and suppressing protest in New York City,” He went on to say: “In this case and many others, we have seen that the police do not understand the rights afforded individuals under the Constitution, especially with respect to expressive speech activity. Our hope is that this is the starting point for police retraining.”

David Thompson, another attorney for the plaintiffs, said: “The mass arrest of non-violent protesters has no place in any democracy. The NYPD pursued a policy of arresting thousands of people who had done nothing wrong, I hope that the resolution of this lawsuit will show that the NYPD policy must change. It is my hope that this case and others like it will free our streets and parks for peaceful protest.”

The lawyers were well paid for their remarks. Out of the $583,000, $333,000 were legal fees. Twelve of the plaintiffs will receive $20,000 each. Two had agreed to settlements earlier; they’ll receive $5000 each.

Other lawsuits are pending, including a class-action claim stemming from the arrests of about 700 people while they marched on the Brooklyn Bridge roadway on Oct. 1, 2011.

Occupy World Writes congratulates our brothers and sisters in New York City. We hope this sets precedent for the other lawsuits, and that the police nationwide has had a much needed learning moment.

We will exercise our right to free speech, and we will hold the police liable if they unlawfully interfere with us doing so. We will be heard.

Thais That Bind

Leave a reply

Prayuth Chan-ocha. By Government of Thailand ([1]) [CC-BY-SA-3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

The unrest in Thailand’s something that we’ve covered on numerous occasions, starting with MnGranny’s article about January’s general strike. We then followed that with another MnGranny piece about Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra’s removal from office, and finally, my piece about the military takeover right after it happened. So, what’s happened since then?

When we last looked in on what’s happening in Thailand, martial law had just been declared. Prayuth Chan-ocha, leader of Thailand’s military, had said that the military action wasn’t a coup. The day after our piece on the takeover (May 22), the military said that yes, it actually was a coup. Prayuth then declared himself acting prime minister, suspended the constitution and put a night curfew into effect. Since then, the coup has gained support from the reigning king, Bhumibol Adulyade, who’s been ill in a Bangkok hospital for several years.

Yingluck Shinawatra. By Gerd Seidel (Rob Irgendwer) (Own work) [CC-BY-SA-3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

Former Thai Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra was arrested and then released. During this time, her brother Thaksin announced plans to set up a government in exile. Meanwhile, the military started detaining leaders of the so-called red shirt movement. The red shirts are the Shinawatra’s power base; mostly from poor rural areas in the northern regions of the country. And while some yellow shirt leaders were detained, the red shirts were considered the real threat. The yellow shirts are mostly urban and middle class voters who were the core of the anti-government protests in Bangkok before the coup.

Most of the leaders have signed agreements to refrain from political activities, and have called for cooperation with the military. There are some exceptions to the rule; the most notable one, Sombat Boonngamanong. was arrested last week when the Thai military tracked him through his IP address.

Sombat Boonngamanong. Photo by Markpeak (Own work) [CC-BY-SA-3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0) or GFDL (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html)], via Wikimedia Commons

Last Friday (May 6), General Prayuth told Chinese businessmen that Thailand would have a prime minister and cabinet within three months. The next day, the Cambodian ambassador to Thailand, Eat Sophea, said that Cambodia would not allow politicians or activists to use the country as a base for political movements against Thailand. And, in maybe the most bizarre twist to the whole story to date, Weluree Ditsayabut, Thailand’s entry in the Miss Universe contest, renounced her title yesterday after Facebook posts of hers from a few months ago became public, in which she said about the red shirts: “I am so angry at all these evil activists. They should be executed,”

Thailand, as we’ve stated before, is no stranger to military rule; this latest coup was the 19th attempt since the monarchy fell in 1932. We’d like to think that the military will keep its word and have a new prime minister and cabinet soon, with elections to follow. However, past history doesn’t give us much cause for optimism.