Korbsak Sabhavasu's Blog

Thaksin’s motives a tangled web
Source – Bangkok Post (Eng)
Monday, January 29, 2007 10:43

In the latest instalment of Thaksin Shinawatra’s well-planned and well-calculated political drama to make a comeback into Thai politics, Mr Thaksin’s legal counsel, Noppadon Pattama, held a press conference on Jan 20 publicly denying that Mr Thaksin had hired US-based lobbying firm Barbour, Griffith and Rogers (BGR) to counter statements made by Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont’s government.

Mr Noppadon further claimed that Mr Thaksin’s motive for hiring one of America’s most influential lobbying firms was simple: the ousted leader wanted the firm to assess news and information concerning the situation in Thailand after the Sept 19 coup.

So the implication was, in fact, that Mr Thaksin had hired the firm after his fall from grace on Sept 19.

Not being one who takes the words of Mr Thaksin and his cronies with much seriousness, I decided to do some research of my own.

Unsurprisingly, I unearthed a lobbying registration form filed by BGR under the US Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 and received by the secretary of senate of the US Office of Public Records. Although the record was received by the office on Nov 10, the effective date of the registration document was in actual fact Sept 7 _ a full 12 days before the coup that brought Mr Thaksin down.

More importantly, the document states BGR was hired by Mr Thaksin to “provide guidance and counsel with regard to Thaksin’s interest in Washington, DC and abroad”.

The form also lists an Ambassador Robert Blackwill _ a deputy national security adviser and deputy assistant to President George W. Bush _ as one of three lobbyists working for Mr Thaksin… Alas, the plot thickens.

The information thus far reveals many discrepancies in Mr Noppadon’s statements and even more obscurity in Mr Thaksin’s real motives.

The following questions need to be asked in order to make transparent Mr Thaksin’s latest political plan.

First, why was there a need for Mr Thaksin to hire a US lobbying firm to represent him while he was still serving as prime minister of Thailand?

As the effective date of the lobbying registration document was dated Sept 7, it can only be concluded that Mr Thaksin had sought the help of BGR to defend his political interest at a time when his political career was most vulnerable and not after his political demise, as Mr Noppadon has asserted.

Second, what was the nature of the work and service rendered by BGR and do BGR’s operations conflict with Thailand’s national interests?

As it is clearly stated that the scope of BGR’s work would be in Washington, DC _ the US centre of power and influence _ one has to wonder what specific interests Mr Thaksin was guarding so zealously. Why did a Thai prime minister have to go to the trouble of hiring foreign lobbyists to represent him?

Worse, what if the interests that Mr Thaksin was guarding were in conflict with Thailand’s national interests? Given Mr Thaksin’s past record with conflicts of interest, it would be wise to be especially suspicious of his motives in such circumstances.

Third, why was there a need for Mr Thaksin to hire one of the most expensive and well-connected lobbyist firms in the US?

One of BGR’s co-founders, Haley Barbour, widely recognised as one of the best-paid lobbyists in the country, is also a former chairman of the Republican Party. However, since Mr Barbour is currently serving as governor of Mississippi he is legally prohibited from representing Mr Thaksin.

This brings us back to Ambassador Blackwill, one of the three principals at BGR who have been detailed to Mr Thaksin.

Prior to lobbying for Mr Thaksin, Ambassador Blackwill, as well as serving as deputy assistant to the president and as deputy national security adviser for strategic planning, was ambassador to India and presidential envoy to Iraq under President Bush.

It is widely believed that Ambassador Blackwill shared seats with Mr Bush on Air Force One during the 2004 presidential elections and at one point even challenged Condoleezza Rice for the position of national security adviser.

It is important to identify some of the personalities behind BGR in order to speculate on the nature and significance of the work they have been assigned to do for Mr Thaksin.

One would need a very wild imagination to picture Ambassador Blackwill collecting news clippings about Thailand’s political situation from the Washington Post’s international section, as Mr Thaksin’s proxy shamelessly claimed.

In conclusion, it is the responsibility of the Thai government to provide the public with full disclosure on this matter. The Thai government must also use its diplomatic channels to appeal for information from the US embassy in Bangkok and from the US government in Washington. Lobbying in the US is a very sensitive issue that is governed by strict laws, especially when it involves a foreign entity and politics.

The US government must clarify its relationship with Thailand by proving that our bilateral relationship is based on mutual national interest, not upon the interest of certain lobbying groups that have special rapport with Mr Bush.

On the part of the Thai public, we must demand the truth from Mr Thaksin once and for all, as he had brought this circumstance upon himself while still serving as prime minister of Thailand and while earning a salary from taxpayers.

If there was ever a time to say “enough is enough” with Mr Thaksin’s lies and deception, that time would be right about now.

Korbsak Sabhavasu is treasurer and executive committee member of the Democrat party. He can be contacted via his website at: www.korbsak.com