As Russia’s special operations continue in Ukraine so does the West’s propaganda war against it. The propaganda is particularly effective but also particularly predictable in terms of who will be drawn in by it and become hysterical because of it.

This includes right-wing extremists from across the Western world but also the many US-sponsored “pro-democracy” movements elsewhere. This includes within the Southeast Asian Kingdom of Thailand.

Reuters in an article titled, “Thai democracy activists sign up to fight ‘tyranny’ in Ukraine,” would claim:

Far-off Thailand might not seem an obvious place for recruits to Ukraine’s efforts to raise an international volunteer force to defend against Russia’s invasion.

But for former Thai Air Force conscript turned political activist Chanaphong “Ball” Phongpai, the cause is a natural fit for members of the pro-democracy movement that emerged in 2020 to protest a military-backed government in the Southeast Asian country.

Reuters would also claim that these Thai “activists” saw Russia as a “superpower and a tyrant,” lifting phrases verbatim from the halls of Western power and from across Western media headlines.

After years of covering up the violent nature of US-sponsored anti-government protest in Thailand, Reuters obliquely admitted in its more recent article that indeed the protests were violent, noting how those interested in fighting in Ukraine claimed they needed to “switch from holding bottle bombs to holding guns.”

The article concluded by quoting one of the so-called activists, claiming:

“We fight for democracy here. They fight for their democracy there,” he said. “We are like friends. Its the same feeling, the same ideology.”

It is without doubt that Thais seeking to fight in Ukraine share a similar ideology with Ukraine’s current regime and those fighting to sustain it. But while Reuters and the Thai “activists” it interviewed attempted to insist that ideology shared is “democracy,” in reality the true common denominator is subordination to US interests, extensive US backing, and belligerent intolerance to alternative views as well as a deep disdain for the primacy of national sovereignty.

Nazis Lead the Fight Thai Volunteers are Joining – So Says the Western Media

Far from “Russian propaganda,” evidence that Ukraine’s current political order is propped up by actual Nazis including those playing a central role in Ukraine’s current security apparatus has been provided by the Western media itself, every single year since the US-backed coup overthrew Ukraine’s last legitimate elected government in 2014.

Scores of articles from each year have covered Nazi military formations folded into Ukraine’s official armed forces.

In 2014, for example, The Guardian in its article, “Azov fighters are Ukraine’s greatest weapon and may be its greatest threat,” would focus on members of the so-called “Azov Battalion,” noting that while they denied they were Nazis, they openly praised Adolf Hitler and used Nazis symbols for their flags and on their uniforms. The article noted the key role Azov played in the ongoing armed conflict already raging at that point in eastern Ukraine.

By 2015 the Western media admitted that Azov Battalion was rolled into Ukraine’s armed forces as part of the National Guard. Reuters in an article that year titled, “Ultra-nationalist Ukrainian battalion gears up for more fighting,” would note:

The 1,000 strong ultra-nationalist militia has a reputation as a fierce pro-government fighting force in the almost year-old conflict with the Russia-backed rebels in east Ukraine, and is disdainful of peace efforts.

But the radical views of the commanders of a group affiliated to Ukraine’s national guard which works alongside the army, and the use of symbols echoing Nazi emblems have caused alarm in the West and Russia, and could return to haunt Kiev’s pro-Western leadership when fighting eventually ends.

Reuters would also point out in its article that Azov had evolved into an organization including infantry, artillery, and even tank forces.

In addition to admissions across the West’s corporate media, are also articles from outlets like Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) funded by the US government. A 2016 RFE/RL article titled, “Right-Wing Azov Battalion Enters Ukraine’s Political Arena,” would note that in addition to Azov’s inclusion in Ukraine’s armed forces, the armed organization sought to work its way deeper into the government itself.

The US government-funded outlet would also admit that, “human rights organizations have accused the Azov Battalion of torture,” highlighting the obvious outcome of arming actual Nazis and giving them an increasing amount of power both on the battlefield and off it.

By 2017 the threat Azov Battalion posed to both Ukrainians and Ukraine’s neighbors had raised serious concerns – concerns that many in the halls of Western political power attempted to dismiss as “Russian propaganda.” However, even Western media outlets would contradict this claim. An article that year by The Hill titled, “The reality of neo-Nazis in Ukraine is far from Kremlin propaganda,” would note:

There are indeed neo-Nazi formations in Ukraine. This has been overwhelmingly confirmed by nearly every major Western outlet. The fact that analysts are able to dismiss it as propaganda disseminated by Moscow is profoundly disturbing. It is especially disturbing given the current surge of neo-Nazis and white supremacists across the globe.

The most infamous neo-Nazi group in Ukraine is the 3,000-strong Azov Battalion, founded in 2014. Prior to creating Azov, its commander, Andriy Biletsky, headed the neo-Nazi group Patriot of Ukraine, members of which went on to form the core of Azov. Biletsky had stated that the mission of Ukraine is to “lead the White Races of the world in a final crusade for their survival … against the Semite-led Untermenschen.”

The idea that Thai volunteers are attempting to travel to Ukraine and fight alongside actual Nazis against “tyranny” takes on a particularly contradictory tone in light of such observations made even across the a Western media landscaped mostly committed to covering up the true nature of Ukraine’s post-2014 regime and its increasingly toxic security apparatus.

By 2018 even US government-funded RFE/RL would note the danger Ukrainian military formations like Azov posed to nations beyond Ukraine’s borders. An article that year titled, “Azov, Ukraine’s Most Prominent Ultranationalist Group, Sets Its Sights On US, Europe,” pointed out the concerted effort made by Azov to build ties with ultra-right extremists from across the Western world.

In 2019, Israeli publication Haaretz attempted to draw attention to the growing danger in its article, “Inside the Extremist Group That Dreams of Ruling Ukraine.” The article would elaborate further, claiming:

The Azov movement insists it is not neo-Nazi, yet its members have been captured giving Hitler salutes and being virulently anti-Semitic.

The threat of Nazism in Ukraine’s security forces and as well as within Ukraine’s political structures was pointed out even by the inveterate Russophobic US government-funded think tank, The Atlantic Council.

In a 2020 article titled, “The Azov Regiment has not depoliticized,” the Atlantic Council would admit that even the US government was debating whether or not to designate Azov as a “Foreign Terrorist Organization” and that Ukrainian Nazis still played a central role in Azov’s political and military activities.

Also in 2020 Western media outlets like Buzzfeed in articles like, “This Neo-Nazi Group Is Organizing On Facebook Despite A Year-Old Ban,” would point out how Azov was by then designated by the US State Department as a “nationalist hate group” and that despite a supposed ban of the organization across US-based social media, US corporations like Facebook continued making exceptions for and profits from Azov’s online activities.

TIME Magazine in an eight minute long video report titled, “Inside a White Supremacist Militia in Ukraine,” would showcase Azov Battalion’s nationwide political and military activities including running camps for children indoctrinating them into white supremacist ideology, providing them with military training, and preparing them to be inducted into military formations like Azov in the near future.

By 2022 US-based media outlet NPR in an article titled, “A closer look at the volunteers who are signing up to fight the Russians,” would admit that members of Azov were the ones receiving foreign volunteers precisely like the Thais mentioned by Reuters seeking to fight “tyranny” in Ukraine.

The NPR article would admit in regards to Azov that:

That regiment has a reputation for having the fiercest fighters in Ukraine. The paramilitary is credited with recapturing the southern port city of Mariupol from Russian separatists in 2014. And despite their neo-Nazi affiliations, they were folded into Ukraine’s National Guard. Groups like this are what Putin uses when he tries to paint Ukraine as rife with Nazis. It’s part of his justification for invading.

And according to the Western media itself, these claims by “Putin” are far from “attempts” to “paint Ukraine as rife with Nazis.” Ukraine is actually rife with Nazis – so much so that those who believe they will be joining the fight against tyranny will instead be received by the worst forms of tyranny – actual Nazis of formations like Azov Battalion – an organization now many thousands strong, consisting of infantry, artillery, tank, and other forces with detachments located in every major Ukrainian city – in other words – an organization of Nazis Ukraine is utterly rife with.

It is abundantly clear that these Thais now volunteering to fight alongside Nazis in Ukraine had nothing to do with democracy back home. The organizations behind the protests they had been a part of were not a product of Thai democratic aspirations, but of US government funding and interference within Thailand’s internal political affairs. Duped once at home, and now by Western media reports depicting Ukraine as a “victim” of Russian “aggression,” they are being thrown into harm’s way once again for a cause even more hopeless and delusional than the one they failed fighting for at home.

“Volunteers” fighting in Ukraine have already been given a stark wake-up call – their training facility in western Ukraine targeted by a missile strike wiping out most of them, and sending those few who survived fleeing back home, before ever stepping foot on the battlefield.

Buzzfeed in their article, ““I Thought I Was Going To Die”: US And UK Fighters In Ukraine Described The “Chaos” Of A Russian Missile Attack,” make it abundantly clear Russia’s statements regarding the operation was not propaganda, but the actual fate foreign fighters face.

Nations who do little to prevent their citizens from being tricked into traveling to Ukraine to face what is almost certain death provide an example of how Western foreign policy objectives have compromised the self-interests of nations worldwide.

Thais victimized by Western narratives illustrate once again the absolute danger a population can be placed in when a nation like Thailand categorically fails to secure its information space, allowing foreign interests like the US to dominate that information space and prey upon Thai citizens to the point of recruiting them into an armed conflict thousands of miles away.

US control over global media and also social media has only tightened since Russia’s special operations began in Ukraine, and the danger this control the US possess over information space worldwide has only grown. Now more than ever nations around the world need to secure their information space as a matter of national security – and not in some abstract way – but to literally protect their citizens from toxic disinformation so pervasive and compelling, that it has Thais and many others from around the globe  literally signing up to join Nazis in combat.

Brian Berletic is a Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

On February 28, 2022 the EU ambassador to Thailand, David Daly, would declare in a social media post that Thailand “should speak up to save our rules based international order,” demanding the Kingdom of Thailand vote at the UN with the West regarding Ukraine.

Accompanying his comments were the flags of the United States, the UK, France, Germany, and Canada among others who visited Thailand’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs to lecture Thailand over what its reaction to the growing crisis should be.

A Bangkok Post article titled, “Neutral on Russia-Ukraine: PM,” would note, however, that Thailand would remain neutral. The article reported:

Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha has insisted Thailand will maintain its neutrality in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, a government source said.

The article also noted:

Speaking after the cabinet meeting, Gen Prayut [Chan-o-cha] said Thailand will adhere to Asean’s stance on the conflict between Russia and Ukraine as the grouping has called for dialogue among parties concerned to resolve the Ukraine crisis. 

Thailand’s position mirrors that of China – Thailand largest investor, trade partner, and infrastructure partner.

Thailand’s relationship with Russia, like many Southeast Asian countries, is also close and long-standing. The Russian Federation represents for the region a reliable counter-balance to Western influence and interference.

In recent years Thailand has begun replacing aging American aircraft with European and Russian alternatives. This includes 3 Sukhoi Superjets used by the Royal Thai Airforce for transportation, as well as several Mil Mi-17 and Kamov Ka-32 helicopters used for military transport, humanitarian assistance, and disaster response.

Conversely, ties with the West have frayed particularly with the United States who for years now funded and encouraged violent protesters in their bid to overthrow the current China (and also Russia) friendly government from power and replace it with leadership backed by and working for Washington, London, and Brussels.

These same representatives recently lecturing Thailand on its stance regarding Russia and Ukraine have regularly injected themselves into the internal political affairs of Thailand, meeting with opposition leaders, accompanying them to police stations, and regularly condemning the Thai government for policing the often violent protests the Western-backed opposition organizes in Bangkok’s streets.

A 2019 Bangkok Post article titled, “Don slams diplomats for accompanying Thanathorn,” would note:

Foreign Minister Don Pramudwinai has accused foreign envoys of breaching diplomatic protocol and intervening in the justice system by being present when Future Forward Party leader Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit reported to Pathumwan police on a sedition charge.

“That could not happen in their own countries, but they did it in our country. We will ask them to cooperate and not to do that again. It was against the diplomatic protocols of the United Nations,” Mr Don said at Government House on Tuesday

These same representatives blatantly violating Thailand’s sovereignty and interfering in the nation’s internal political affairs in recent years, now want to recruit Thailand to support them and their efforts to do likewise – undermine peace, stability, and sovereignty – in Eastern Europe.

In a bid to pressure the Thai government over Ukraine and Russia, the same Western-backed opposition groups and media platforms attempting to overthrow the current Thai government for years, is now being mobilized to poison the Thai public against Russia and the Thai government for not taking a firm stance alongside (or perhaps at the feet of) the West.

This includes Prachatai, funded by the US government through the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and whose director is an NED fellow. Prachatai has published multiple articles promoting recent anti-Russian protests carried out by US-backed opposition groups and Ukrainian expatriates.

However, the Western-backed opposition in Thailand has made itself incredibly unpopular, particularly from 2019 onward. The fact that the Thai opposition is compromised by its Western backers and financiers is widely known among politically-conscious Thais and the reality behind Ukraine-Russian tensions is openly discussed from a Russian point of view among at least some prominent Thai media platforms.

While US-funded and influenced media will parrot Western talking points regarding Russia, much of Thailand’s media will remain neutral with at least some prominent media platforms presenting the conflict from Russia’s points of view. This includes a recent interview by Thai journalist Suthichai Yoon of Russian Ambassador to Thailand Evgeny Tomikhin.

Thailand’s political and information space could have been more favorably positioned ahead of the current conflict to protect Thai neutrality from Western pressure but for the time being, the hysteria sweeping the West has so far not made any significant inroads in Thailand.

Brian Berletic is a Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

Southeast Asia (SEA) is a vast territory surrounded by warm oceans and located in the equatorial, subequatorial, and tropical climatic zones. This geographical position provides suitable conditions for beach holidays and the creation of resorts. In addition to the warm climate, beautiful landscapes, exotic nature, and sea beaches, the countries of Southeast Asia have an ancient culture, a unique folk flavor, and numerous historical monuments. All this makes Southeast Asia a desirable destination for tourists from all over the world. It is not surprising that tourism has developed actively and steadily in recent decades in the region.

Southeast Asia is of interest to vacationers from all over the world, including Russia. The most popular destinations in Southeast Asia among Russians in 2019, before the start of the coronavirus crisis and the massive closure of borders, were Thailand and Vietnam.

Thailand can be called the tourist capital of Southeast Asia. Foreign tourism began to develop in that country as early as the 1960s when civil wars raged in many other countries of the region and regimes succeeded each other that could not find a common language with wealthy states – suppliers of tourists. For a long time, internal conflicts, economic crises, and sanctions pressure from abroad prevented many Southeast Asian countries from developing tourism.

Now tourism for Thailand is one of the most important sources of income. In 2019, the tourism sector brought the country more than $62.2 billion, about 20% of Thailand’s GDP. Almost 40 million foreigners visited the country with a population of 70 million. It is noteworthy that among the states, whose citizens visited Thailand in 2019, Russia took fourth place: more than 1.4 million Russians came to Thailand.

According to forecasts made by the Thai government in 2019, tourism revenues should amount to 30% of the country’s GDP by 2030. However, life made its own adjustments that cast these forecasts into doubt: at the end of 2019, an epidemic of the COVID-19 virus began, which soon turned into a pandemic, covering the entire globe. In January 2020, Thailand became the first country after China to report a case of the disease.

Due to the quarantine measures that various states began to take from the beginning of 2020, the tourist flow to Thailand started to decline. The Thai government has also restricted citizens’ and visitors’ movement to slow down the spread of infection. In April 2020, all commercial flights to Thailand were canceled, and soon the level of revenues from the tourism business in the country was close to zero. Thailand’s tourism revenues remained at this zero level in the second and third quarters of 2020. It was not until October 2020 that the country received its first batch of foreign tourists In the fourth quarter of 2020, tourism brought about $30 million to Thailand, which, of course, cannot be compared with the revenues of previous years.

This massive decline in foreign money inflows has clearly dealt a heavy blow to the Thai economy. In 2020 and 2021, the country was racked by people’s clashes who lost their earnings due to epidemic control restrictions. Realizing that it could not do without restoring the tourist flow, Thailand, however, accepted tourists with several conditions in 2021: even those vaccinated against COVID-19 were required to provide health certificates and serve in their hotels for a lengthy quarantine. Only at the end of June 2021 did the Thai leadership approve a list of countries whose citizens can visit Phuket without quarantine if they are fully vaccinated. Non-quarantine visits to other parts of Thailand by vaccinated citizens of several countries were allowed only in November 2021. So, there is still no reason to talk about restoring Thailand’s pre-coronavirus income.

However, the tourist flow is gradually growing. It is known that only on January 1-4, 2022, more than 32,600 foreign tourists arrived in the country. It is noteworthy that most of them were Russian citizens,

and as mentioned above, another Southeast Asian country popular among Russian tourists is Vietnam. That country does not have such a developed tourism infrastructure as Thailand. Still, it also has a warm climate, extensive sea beaches, natural and cultural attractions, and in recent decades, the tourism business in Vietnam has shown active and stable growth.

In 2016, for the first time, more than 10 million foreign tourists visited Vietnam with nearly 100 million people.

In 2018, more than 15.4 million tourists visited the country, and tourism business revenues amounted to 7.5% of Vietnamese GDP, more than $18.3 billion. It is worth noting that more than 600,000 foreign tourists who visited Vietnam in 2018 were Russian citizens. Thus, Russia ranked 6th in the list of the top countries supplying tourists to Vietnam, after China, South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan, located very close to Vietnam and after the United States.

This prompts a conclusion that Russia is one of the leading partners for Vietnam in the tourism sector among countries located far from the region. Not surprising since the two states have decades of fruitful cooperation in many other areas. At the end of 2018, when a delegation of the State Duma of the Russian Federation visited Vietnam, the parties, among other things, agreed to make efforts so that in 2020, the year when Russia and Vietnam were celebrating the 75th anniversary of diplomatic relations, at least 1 million Russian tourists should visit Vietnam.

However, this plan was not destined to come true due to the pandemic.

Saving the lives of its citizens, the Vietnamese leadership made a wise and challenging decision: to close their country’s borders to foreign tourists. This was done at the end of March 2020. Before the closure of the borders in 2020, only slightly over 244,000 Russian citizens managed to visit Vietnam (at the same time, Russia took 3rd place in terms of the number of tourists who visited Vietnam in the first months of 2020). The total number of foreign tourists visiting Vietnam in 2020 was less than 3.7 million, almost five times less than in 2019.

Of course, due to the closure of the borders, the country’s tourism business has experienced a severe crisis. If Vietnam’s tourism income exceeded $32 billion in 2019, it amounted to just over $13.4 billion in 2020. Government programs to develop domestic tourism helped save at least some income and support Vietnamese small businesses.

However, from the beginning of the coronavirus crisis, it was clear that it would be difficult for Vietnam to do without restoring the tourist flow from abroad. The primary purpose in this situation is to quickly find a cure for COVID-19. While remaining one of Vietnam’s closest partners, the Russian Federation resolved this issue. In 2021, Russia and Vietnam launched the production of the Russian anti-covid vaccine Sputnik V on Vietnamese territory. The Russian Federation also pledged to supply Vietnam with another 40 million doses of Sputnik V produced in Russia by June 2022. By the end of 2021, more than 50 million people out of more than 97.5 million Vietnamese citizens have been vaccinated with Sputnik V and other vaccines in Vietnam.

On December 26, 2021, a passenger aircraft with Russian tourists landed at Cam Ranh Airport in Vietnam for the first time in two years. All Russians had a COVID-19 vaccination certificate. Only two tourist flights a week will be operated from Russia to Vietnam in the coming months. Still, even this rather modest volume of travel suggests that the victory over the pandemic and the tourist flow restoration to Vietnam are not far off.

The tourism business has been and, apparently, will soon become one of the essential sources of income for Southeast Asia, and Russians are largely contributing to this. It can be expected that this factor will play its role in the further development of partnership between Southeast Asia and the Russian Federation.

Dmitry Bokarev, political observer, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

The change of guard in the American White House has proved that nothing has changed from the Trump regime with respect to US foreign policy. President Biden and his party continue the American propaganda attacks on Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba and other nations that try to march to their own tune, and will continue preparations for aggressive actions focused on Russia, Iran and China, in other words for war against those nations.

Already, in just the first week of Biden’s presidency we have witnessed the attempt to weaken Russia internally with the Navalny gambit being used as a device to undermine Russia. The Navalny scenario cannot succeed but the Americans will not stop at that. During that same week, Biden diverted the aircraft carrier, USS Roosevelt, a ship named after a president who a number of historians believe did not die a natural death, from its recent mission of threatening Iran in the Persian Gulf, to a new mission of threatening China in the South China Sea and Taiwan Straight, and China’s important sea trade routes that are concentrated in that region.

While the Democratic Party accused Trump of being a Russian agent, his supporters claim Biden is a Chinese agent. Americans take these absurd claims seriously because they need to believe in foreign scapegoats who they can punish for the failures of their own government and an economic, social and political system that is incapable of solving the many problems facing that declining power and its people.

But the propaganda has become so constant and intense that it takes on a life of its own and becomes an important factor in making decisions. It has been successful in creating hostility and bigotry towards China and Russia that the hegemon uses as a pretext to increase its preparations for war against both countries if they do not bend down and kiss America’s feet.

The American-NATO encirclement of Eurasia progresses with NATO building up its offensive capabilities in the west from the Baltic down to the Mediterranean, through the Black Sea, the Middle East, Afghanistan, to the east with its huge build up of forces in the Pacific, its constant provocations in Chinese territorial waters, in Hong Kong, in western China and its support of the renegade regime in the province of Taiwan. This has reached such a level that China, frustrated with refusal of the Americans to answer continuous calls for dialogue is prepared for war over Taiwan if that is what it takes to defend China’s sovereignty.

But these direct military threats are not the only means they are using to attack and undermine Russia and China.  They use regional alliances, economic blockades, labelled as “sanctions,” cyber warfare, all forms of hybrid warfare to try to weaken them.

The situation in Thailand is a prime example of this strategy. One of the few nations of southeast Asia to escape European imperialism and colonialism, it maintains its independence while trying to balance between competing powers in the region. After the Second World War it cooperated with the United States in its war against Vietnam and fought against communists in its own country, allowed the US to use some of its military bases for their operations and engaged in annual joint military exercises called Cobra Gold.

During most of that time the Americans were not too concerned with “human rights” or “democracy” in Thailand. But since the rise of China from the devastation caused by the west’s colonialism, the invasion and occupation by the Japanese and has succeeded in establishing socialism, a better life for its people and become a world economic power, Thailand has come to regard China as a more reliable and sympathetic regional partner than the United States both in terms of economic issues and with respect to security.

The decline of the influence of the United States in the region and the rise of China’s influence, particularly since the inception of the Belt and Road Initiative, has led logically to Thailand seeking closer relations with China, something which the United States cannot tolerate.

The United States has tried to restore its influence in the region but aside from Japan, and South Korea, still occupied by US forces, and Australia, which enthusiastically supports the US aggression, it has not succeeded in luring other Asian nations away from good relations with China.  But it has not stopped trying, and if it cannot persuade or force a government to adhere to its will, it goes to the next step of attempting to overthrow the existing government and replacing it with one more willing to be its vassal.

The Arab Spring, so-called was an example of this strategy.  Libya was the result.  The Americans have tried this with Vietnam, and The Philippines, among other nations, and is trying with Thailand. To do this it sings the worn out tune of “democracy” of “human rights” and demands the “democratisation of Thailand” and an overthrow of its constitutional monarchy.

That these calls are sheer hypocrisy the world knows all too well.  The United States has never supported any democratic government, whether socialist or capitalist, that does not serve its interests and has supported dictatorships the world over. Where is democracy in Afghanistan occupied by the US, and its allies, for 20 years? Where in Iraq, in Rwanda, in Libya, the former Yugoslavia, or any other country it has invaded or whose government it has overthrown? Where is the democracy in the United States where only two political parties are allowed to share power, each almost a mirror image of the other, and representing not the people but two factions of capital, one of which, represented by Trump, a nationalist faction, and the other, now represented by Biden, a “globalist” faction, which seeks to break the world into small pieces they can easily to dominate for their profit.

Just as it has tried in Hong Kong, in Belarus, in Myanmar, in other places around the world from Africa to Latin America, the United States is increasing its attempts to undermine the Thai government in order to replace it with one that will serve its interests and which will be opposed to China’s influence in the region and its Belt and Road Imitative.  One of the Americans’ key strategies to accomplish this objective is by backing what they calls “democratic groups,” or “ the civil society,” and “human rights” groups.

On December 3, 2020 nine US Senators submitted to the Foreign Relations Committee of the US Congress a Resolution aimed at Thailand which among things,

“Calls on the United States Government to support the right of the people of Thailand to peacefully and democratically determine their future;

and, Unequivocally states that a military coup to resolve the current political crisis would be counter-productive and risk further undermining bilateral relations between the United States and Thailand.”

In other words the United States is directly interfering in the internal affairs of Thailand, something that it will not tolerate from other nations with respect to itself as we saw in the recent US elections and the false American claims of Russian and Chinese influence in the elections.

The United States also tries to manipulate the Thai people, especially the youth, through numerous so-called non-governmental organisations funded by the battalion of agencies it has created to support and encourage them. It flows funds and expertise and personnel through a number of its agencies set up to interfere in other nations under the guise of “supporting democracy” including the National Endowment For Democracy, USAID, the CIA The Peace Corps and related agencies. It also uses military-technical cooperation aimed at gaining influence over young officers in the armed forces, and scholarships to American universities for students they have identified as useful to them in the future.  It’s influence has also been exerted through outside agents, for example some of the British and US financed and controlled “protestors” from Hong Kong travelled to Bangkok land Thai “democracy” activists visited Hong Kong last year to stir up trouble and advised local groups on tactics, even styles of dress and colour codes.

To get some idea of the extent of American interference in Thai domestic politics we need only look at a US State Department Fact Sheet for Thailand, which brags about, “the US Peace Corps Volunteers, active in Thailand since 1963,”

The Peace Corps has long been known as a conduit for the CIA to infiltrate nations and gain influence over people. They go on to state,

‘The US government funds more than 30 exchange programs in Thailand to connect Thai youth, students, educators, artists, athletes and rising leaders to their counterparts in the USA and the ASEAN region…” 

This is not done out of the goodness of their heart but to identify and control youth who regard as potentially useful to them as collaborators willing to advance US interests over Thai national interests. They add,

“Thailand’s alumni community from US government programs is robust, with more than 5,000 members hailing from the Fulbright Program, International Visitors Leadership Program, the Young South East Asian Leadership Initiative and other programs.  The Leadership Initiative has grown to nearly 15,000 members in Thailand since its inception in 2013, 500 of whom have travelled to the US,” and they should have added for indoctrination.

The American organisation USAID (Agency For International Development is very active in Thailand. Their fact sheet states that,

“Recognising the numerous opportunities for and challenges to democracy in Thailand, USAID has committed to working with civil society, the media, and independent agencies to strengthen government transparency and accountability and bring together citizens and government to build a more fair and just society.’

It is astonishing that such a statement can be made when they have not succeeded in establishing a just and fair society in the United States, but America is famous or notorious for its hypocrisy.  And, of course, the “challenges” in their view are the Thai government itself, whose constitutional monarchy established in 1932 is not good enough for the Americans to tolerate thought it tolerates them and absolute monarchies among many of its allies, from many NATO countries to the Gulf States.

One of the main tools used to interfere in nations targeted by the USA is the National Endowment For Democracy, whose function used to be under the aegis of the CIA.  It states on its website that in 2017 (the latest year available on their site but we can assume nothing has changed since then) that, 

‘The Endowment prioritized countries in Asia that faced “fundamental democratic deficits” and states that it has switched significant resources to Thailand.’

It then lists a number of groups and organisations in Thailand to which it has given funds, all having the objective of bringing “democratic values” to Thailand, meaning in reality funding groups used to manipulate the people into overthrowing the present government to replace it with, not a better one, but one willing to supports US interests instead of its own, willing to surrender Thai sovereignty.

The list includes a number with the words “human rights” included in their name. Other examples are the Union For Civil Liberty, Café Democracy, The Thai Volunteer Service, The Solidarity Centre, the EnlawThai Foundation, online media platforms such as 101 Perecent Company Ltd. and The Isaan Record,

US influence is also exerted by the Soros Open Society Foundation, whose name reflects not a respect for democracy but for the opening up of national economies to the free flow of western capital to make profit. George Soros has a bad reputation in Thailand as it believed by many that he helped crash the Thai currency in 1997, harming the Thai people, but profiting him. Soros also funds the Thai journal Prachatai and various ngos as well as the US organisation, Human Rights Watch, to which he gave 100 million dollars in 2010 and which on January 13, 2021 issued a statement condemning the Thai government for repression of protests and encouraging students to carry out further protests.

One can imagine what the US government would do if Russia or China or Thailand called for protestors for democracy in the US to increase their activities there.  But of course, the Americans are an exceptional people, above all laws and morality, always asserting their right to judge others while denying the right of others to judge them.

In their important 1999 paper on military theory, “Unrestricted Warfare,” two Chinese Army Colonels, Qiao Liang and Wang Xiansiu, now both generals, I believe, advanced the idea that the first rule of unrestricted warfare is that there are no rules, with nothing forbidden. They then examined the use of full spectrum warfare and why it is the only strategy to adopt in order to resist a powerful aggressor who does not obey international rules but makes up its own, such as the United States which, as they point out, cannot even be trusted to obey its own rules. How can anyone trust a nation that seems to have the same motto as the Mediterranean pirate chief in the middle ages who said, “Law? I make up my own laws and I take what I want.”

The United States has adopted this type of warfare for its own purposes and the undermining of a nation from within is one of their most dangerous types of this kind of warfare.

Thailand, like Russia, China, and other nations, must ever be alert to the dangers represented by the many tentacles of American influence that have spread across the world and threaten world peace and security. They must demand that the United States respect and adhere to the fundamental principles of international law enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations; the sovereignty of nations, the right to self-determination of and non-interference in nations, and the peaceful resolution of disputes between nations. The Americans want us to forget about those principles. But we cannot. We will not.”

Christopher Black is an international criminal lawyer based in Toronto. He is known for a number of high-profile war crimes cases and recently published his novel Beneath the Clouds. He writes essays on international law, politics and world events, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”

Thailand has for months faced anti-government protests. While portrayed by the Western media as organic, self-organized, and “pro-democratic,” US government-funding and the protest leaders themselves openly aligning with US-funded opposition groups in Hong Kong and Taiwan have revealed the ongoing unrest as aimed at China.

Thailand Today is not the Thailand of Cold War Past 

Despite persistent Cold War rhetoric about Thailand’s “major non-NATO ally” status with the US – Thailand today has shifted (with much of the world) eastward with its major economic, political, and even military ties now residing squarely in Asia.

Today’s Thailand counts China as its largest trading partner with 12.29% of its exports going to China versus 10.75% to the US. The rest of Thailand’s major export partners all reside in Asia.

20.16% of Thailand’s imports come from China versus 5.82% from the US. Again – the vast majority of Thailand’s other major import partners reside in Asia.

China is also Thailand’s largest foreign investor providing over 13 times more direct foreign investment than the United States.

Thailand’s tourism industry has expanded drastically owed to the huge influx of visitors from China pre-COVID-19. In fact, annually, more tourists arrive from China in Thailand than from all Western nations combined.

There are also major infrastructure projects China and Thailand are currently involved in including the rollout of Thailand’s 5G networks and a high-speed railway that will ultimately connect Thailand to China via Laos. The completion of this project will allow the movement of people and goods more directly to and from China not only into Laos and Thailand but into the rest of Southeast Asia and will fuel further growth for the region.

Then there are Thailand and China’s military relationship. Thailand has begun replacing its aging US military hardware with newer Chinese defense systems ranging from main battle tanks and armored personnel carriers to naval vessels including Thailand’s first modern diesel electric submarines. There are also joint-weapon programs including the DTI-1 guided missile system.

US-Funded Destabilization Targets Thai-Chinese Relations 

Considering these economic, financial, and military ties there is little mystery as to why Washington would seek to reverse them.

Lacking any means to offer more attractive economic, financial, or military ties – the US has opted to utilize the tools of “soft power” instead – in other words – the tools of political interference up to and including regime change.

The protests themselves are being organized by Thailand’s billionaire-led opposition including exiled ex-prime minister now fugitive Thaksin Shinawatra and Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit. Core organizations helping drive the protests are funded by the US government via the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) – an organization created by the US government, funded annually by the US Congress and overseen by both Congress and the US State Department.

These US-funded organizations provide the protests its key leaders, legal services, support in the media, and have even organized petitions for the rewriting of Thailand’s entire constitution.

Thanathorn – who at the time was a member of parliament – prompted an official protest from Beijing regarding his relationship with Hong Kong opposition leader Joshua Wong. An October 2019 article in the Bangkok Post titled, “Chinese embassy condemns Thai politician’s meeting with Hong Kong activist,” noted (emphasis added):

A Thai politician has contacted the group calling for Hong Kong’s independence from China, showing a sign of support for the group. This action is extremely wrong and lacks responsibility. China hopes that the relevant individual can be made aware of facts regarding Hong Kong’s problem, be cautious and do what will benefit the relationship between China and Thailand,’’ the spokesman said.

The criticism came after pro-democracy activist Joshua Wong recently posted on social media a photograph of himself and Future Forward leader Thanathorn Jungroongruangkit.

China’s rare criticism for Thailand was prompted by Thanathorn’s open support for Joshua Wong – with Thanathorn leading protests within Thailand itself modelled after Hong Kong’s unrest. Thanathorn and his opposition political party ahead of Thailand’s 2019 general elections would also propose cancelling the Thai-Chinese high-speed railway in favor of non-existent “hyperloop” technology from America – according to Bloomberg.

The protests in Thailand now openly align themselves with the so-called “Milk Tea Alliance” – a united front of US-funded opposition groups aimed at undermining China’s regional rise.

Thai protests now regularly feature chants declaring Hong Kong as “a country” and include protesters flying flags of the so-called “Milk Tea Alliance” including those of the Taiwanese independence movement, Tibetan rebels, Uyghur separatists, and the Hong Kong rioters.

The irony is that among the many complaints made by Thai protesters is the current state of the Thai economy. Yet by attacking Thailand’s relationship with China – the nation’s largest and most important economic partner – protesters are attempting to cut economic ties that cannot be replaced and thus ensuring economic hardship brought on by the COVID-19 crisis extends long after other nations in the region recover.

The protesters’ other demand includes the resignation of the current government in the hopes of Thanathorn and his political opposition party coming to power. Thanathorn’s openly anti-Chinese policies would likewise be disastrous for the country – if for nothing else their economic implications.

It is clear that anti-government protests not only in Thailand but across the region are being stoked by US political interference. The US and its “Milk Tea Alliance” are determined to turn the region upside down just as the US did in 2011 during the so-called “Arab Spring.” It stands to reason that nations in the region should create their own form of cooperation to defend against this interference – both in terms of physical security and across the region’s information space.

Brian Berletic is a Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.  

There is a significant reason why political unrest fueled by US interference is flaring up across Southeast Asia – an attempt at derailing Beijing’s ambitious One Belt, One Road (OBOR) initiative.

The “stitching” holding this emerging shift together is a regional high-speed rail network running from the southern Chinese city of Kunming, through Laos, and into the heart of Thailand. Construction in Laos is well underway with construction having already started in Thailand and expected to be completed in 2-3 years.

The brand new Bang Sue Central Station in Bangkok was built specifically to service high-speed trains.

While the West has heavily criticized this citing costs, debt, and low projections for passenger use – and while all of these issues are already being discussed by China and its Laotian and Thai partners – the West’s own criticism is more owed to its inability to compete with China’s regional rise and its vision for Asia’s future than any legitimate concern regarding the project itself.

A Game Changer

Western criticism has focused on both debt incurred through this leg of OBOR, as well as a perceived lack of demand for high-speed rail passenger services along the routes being built.

However there are two points often left out of Western commentary – or more accurately – out of Western complaining.

First is the fact that infrastructure itself often creates demand simply by being built, existing, and creating options that had never existed before.

Travel along these high-speed rail lines may or may not be options existing travelers use in great numbers but those numbers will likely be joined by additional passengers who would have otherwise avoided the trip altogether because of the lack of appealing options in existence now – flying, conventional rail, buses, and vans – which are still expensive, time consuming, and mostly uncomfortable.

Western critics, who mistakenly believe tourism is Thailand’s largest industry – claim that the high-speed railway travels through areas most (Western) tourists are uninterested in.

However, there are two problems with this. Firstly, most tourists visiting Thailand no longer come from Western nations, but from Asia. More Chinese tourists visit Thailand each year than tourists from all Western nations combined.

Thailand’s northeast region may currently be less appealing to tourists than other regions of the country, but this is simply because few have invested in making the region more accessible and more appealing.

Chinese tourists traveling into Thailand via high-speed rail could just as easily be persuaded to spend time in the northeast, provided investments are made in local infrastructure and attractions. Currently, little incentive exists. Completion of the Thailand-Laos-China high-speed railway will be the first as well as a major incentive in changing this.

Just as mass transportation networks in Bangkok have transformed little-known areas of the city into high-end commercial and residential districts, high-speed rail has the possibility of doing this on a much larger, national and even regional level.

Then there is the fact that in addition to moving passengers, this high-speed rail network could just as easily move freight.

In this regard, the benefits are undeniable. The network passes through one of Thailand’s main agricultural regions and the ability of farmers in Thailand’s northeast to move produce from their farms directly to China by rail would reduce time to market and increase exports – including exports that aren’t practical at the moment.

Articles like Bloomberg’s, “Thailand forges new path for food exports to China,” explains the current options available for moving Thai produce to Chinese markets. This includes moving goods by trucks through Laos and Vietnam. It also includes via air.

The article also notes more recent attempts to use rail in Vietnam, stating:

Thailand began a two-mode system by trucking products to Vietnam, then moving the goods into containers on trains, which complete the deliveries to China. It may sound simple, but this is a first for Thai shipments, according to Narapat Kaeothong, vice minister for agriculture.

How much simpler would it be to place goods on a single train and transport it at higher speeds straight to China, or anywhere else along high-speed rail lines?

The South China Morning Post (SCMP) would report in its article, ” Thailand pushes for high-speed rail link with China to be used for freight,” that:

Vallobh Muangkeo, secretary general of the National Assembly of Thailand, told the South China Morning Post that Thailand had concerns about low demand for the service and called for it to be used to transport freight instead. 

High-speed rail services handling freight is not unprecedented.

France’s TGV La Poste used dedicated trains specifically for moving mail across the country. Similar trains could be used by Thailand, Laos, and future countries in the region connected to the high-speed rail network to move large amounts of goods quickly and directly to China as well as receive goods from China.

China itself plans on using its own high-speed rail network to move freight. A SCMP article titled, ” China planning high-speed rail freight network to help e-commerce sector,” noted:

China’s state-owned railway operator is planning to accelerate the development of a high-speed freight network in the hope of bolstering the e-commerce network.  

 A development plan published in mid-August also includes plans to further expand the passenger network and build an advanced control system that will integrate home-grown technologies such as 5G telecommunications, the Beidou satellite navigation system and artificial intelligence.

It is not a difficult leap to imagine how easily this network could be extended into Laos and Thailand just as China plans on moving passenger services into both nations.

China is already Thailand and Laos’ largest trading partner, largest foreign investor, largest source of tourism, and a key partner in defense and infrastructure.

Connecting these nations together with high-speed rail and giving the population of Southeast Asia a direct route into China’s own massive domestic high-speed rail network will facilitate the movement of people and goods in ways that may not be immediately quantifiable.

There were similar doubts over China’s own high-speed railway when it was first proposed, but it now moves billions of people a year, easily competes with domestic airlines, and has begun to play a role in China’s development in ways not directly connected to simply collecting fares.

Arguments against the construction of Thai and Laotian high-speed rail based merely on passenger numbers and revenue projections are lazy arguments and are made primarily by a West otherwise unable to compete with China’s growing influence and role in Asia – a region the US saw itself maintaining primacy over for another century.

The completion of high-speed rail in Southeast Asia – an admittedly massive project – will take time to prove its worth. But a look at high-speed rail anywhere else in the world indicates that such a network will undoubtedly become a major asset for each nation involved, and the entire region. It is no coincidence that detractors of the ongoing project are also deeply involved in promoting US-funded anti-government protests in Thailand and a generally anti-Chinese stance regarding any issue in the region.

For detractors, it is not doubts about the viability of this major leg of China’s OBOR initiative – it is certainty of how it will contribute to the end of Western hegemony in Asia permanently.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

Ongoing protests in Thailand appearing very similar to those recently seen in Hong Kong are no coincidence.

They are part of an admitted “Pan-Asian Alliance” that – while claiming to be “pro-democracy” are in reality created by the US government and aimed directly at Beijing.

Thailand has tilted too close to Beijing for Washington’s liking and as a response, has scheduled Thailand for destabilization and if possible, regime change.

Thailand Tilting “Too Close” To China

China is Thailand’s largest and most important trading partner, its largest foreign direct investor, and its largest source of tourism with more Chinese tourists coming to Thailand each year than all Western nations combined.

Thailand is also hosting one of the key routes of China’s One Belt, One Road (OBOR) initiative with construction already ongoing for high-speed rail that will connect China, Laos, Thailand, Malaysia, and eventually Singapore.

Finally and perhaps most upsetting for the US is that Thailand has begun replacing its aging US military hardware through a series of major Thai-Chinese arms deals including the purchasing of main battle tanks, other armored vehicles, naval vessels including up to 3 submarines, and jointly-developed arms programs like the DTI-1 multiple rocket launcher system.

Thailand has also recently replaced some of its US-built Blackhawk helicopters with Russian Mi-17V-5’s.

To counter this, the US has mobilized opposition groups and NGOs it has funded in Thailand for years to now demand the current government step down and the nation’s constitution be rewritten, paving the way for US-backed billionaire-led opposition parties of Thaksin Shinawatra and Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit into power. These are opposition parties that have long served US interests in the past and have explicitly promised to roll back Thai-Chinese relations should they take power again.

US NED Was Behind Hong Kong’s Unrest, and are Behind Thailand’s Now 

The US was indisputably behind the protests in Hong Kong with the political opposition and protest leaders confirmed to be recipients of US government cash via notorious regime change arm, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED).

Many of the protest leaders literally flew to Washington DC or visited the US consulate in Hong Kong to receive aid, directives, and other forms of support.

In Thailand too, virtually every aspect of the protests are funded by the US government.

Worse still is that the US is attempting to stitch these various movements together to form a regional front against Beijing with Thai protest leaders regularly traveling to meet their US-funded counterparts in Hong Kong and Taiwan and vice versa while creating an online army with the help of US-based social media giants to stack public narratives in their favor.

It will be a front that if regime change in any or all of the nations currently targeted by Washington in Asia is successful, will transform the region from a rising global economic power to a dysfunctional warzone not entirely unlike the Middle East.

US Funds Thai Protest Leaders 

The core leadership of Thailand’s protests includes Anon Nampa of the US NED-funded “Thai Lawyers for Human Rights” (TLHR). Anon Nampa leads every major rally, taking the stage and delivering the opposition’s demands to the current government including demands for regime change.

TLHR’s founder had in the past admitted that the organization “receives all its funding from international donors,” in an interview given to the English-language newspaper, Bangkok Post.

TLHR’s US government funding was openly displayed on the US National Endowment for Democracy (NED) website in 2014.

Its name has since been removed from NED’s website but continues to receive US funding through the NED via the “Union for Civil Liberty” (UCL) of which it is a member.

The UCL is still listed on NED’s current webpage for programs it funds in Thailand. TLHR is listed as a member of UCL on its official website next to other recipients of US NED funding including the Cross Cultural Foundation, the Human Rights Lawyers Association, and the Asian Network for Free Elections (ANFREL).

US Funds Orgs Trying to Rewrite Thailand’s Constitution 

Another of Anon Nampa’s demands is the rewriting of the Thai constitution. These efforts have been spearheaded by an organization called “iLaw” – also funded by the US NED.

Thai-based English-language newspaper The Nation in an article titled, “iLaw launches petition for charter rewrite,” would claim:

The Internet Law Reform Dialogue (iLaw), a human rights NGO, has launched a campaign seeking signatures from 50,000 voters to sponsor a motion for a Constitution rewrite. 

The organization’s US government funding is not mentioned in the article, but can easily be found on NED’s official website under the name, “Internet Law Reform Dialogue” (iLaw).On iLaw’s own website under “About Us” it admits:

Between 2009 and  2014 iLaw has received funding support from the Open Society Foundation, the Heinrich Böll Foundation and a one-time support grant from Google.

Between 2015 to present iLaw receives funding from funders as listed below1. Open Society Foundation (OSF)2. Heinrich Böll Stiftung (HBF)3. National Endowment for Democracy (NED)4. Fund for Global Human Rights (FGHR)5. American Jewish World Servic (AJWS)6. One-time support donation from Google and other independent donors

Other groups working to rewrite Thailand’s constitution include “ConLab” or “Constitution Lab” (on Facebook) who do so in partnership with US government-funded iLaw and which recently held an event at the US Embassy’s “American Corner” at Chiang Mai University.

The English-language Bangkok Post helped reveal Washington’s growing obsession with Beijing and its attempts to drag Thailand into the middle of its conflict during an interview with the newly appointed US ambassador to Thailand, Michael DeSombre.

In an article titled, “US turns focus to South China Sea,” the Bangkok Post claims:

Early this month, China held a five-day naval drill near the contested Paracel Islands. Then the US carried out military exercises in the waterway showing support for the free and open Indo-Pacific, as the South China Sea has been subject to overlapping claims by many countries, including China.

The article then claims:

In an interview with the Bangkok Post, US Ambassador Michael George DeSombre said the US had carried out its military engagement in support of freedom.

“That is what we have done in the Spanish-American War, World War I and World War II. That is the role we see our military provides in promoting freedom around the world and ensuring other countries have the ability to be sovereign, safe and secure, which is the foundation of our Indo-Pacific strategy,” he said.

This fantastical claims made by the newly appointed US ambassador flew in the face of facts, both in historical and contemporary terms. The new ambassador also never convincingly explained what Washington’s fixation over China had to do with Thailand or what Thailand would gain by supporting the US against Thailand’s largest and most important economic partner.

While another Thailand-based English-language newspaper, The Nation, conducted a similar interview, it included a clear graph illustrating that China’s foreign direct investment (FDI) in Thailand was over 13 times larger than the United States’, perhaps letting economic realities speak where Nation reporters were too polite to point out the increasingly quixotic nature of US foreign policy.

The US Tramples National Sovereignty Worldwide, Not Defends it

In historical terms, it was at the end of the Spanish-American War mentioned by US Ambassador DeSombre in the Bangkok Post that the United States transformed the Philippines into a literal US colony.

The US military brutally put down various attempts afterward at achieving Philippine independence from America including during the Philippine-American War (1899-1902) in which the US used torture and genocide to maintain its grip over the Southeast Asian nation.

Nothing could have been further from “ensuring other countries have the ability to be sovereign, safe, and secure.”

Today, the United States militarily (and illegally) occupies the nations of Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria.

It also carries out deadly drone strikes in Pakistan and Somalia as well as across much of North and Central Africa. The nation of Libya remains destabilised to this day after a US-led war there succeeded in toppling the Libyan government by force.

Concurrently the US is openly attempting to overthrow the governments of Iran and Venezuela after having successfully overthrown the government of Ukraine in 2014.

Beyond open invasion, occupation and subversion, the US also maintains a global network of political interference through US government-funded organisations like the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), its subsidiaries the International Republican Institute (IRI) and the National Democratic Institute (NDI) as well as the U.S. Agency for Global Media which maintains US state media operations like Voice of America and Radio Free Asia.

These networks undermine national sovereignty by propping up pro-US opposition groups and even entire political parties during foreign elections in which these groups represent US interests rather than the interests of the nation and people actually holding the elections. Groups funded and/or promoted by these US organisations are also used to pressure and coerce targeted governments regarding US interests.

It is the sort of interference the US has often cited (with little or no evidence) as a pretext to level sanctions and other forms of punishment against its opponents, but interference the US itself openly engages in around the globe.

Rounding off America’s full-spectrum war on national sovereignty worldwide is its regular use of economic warfare and more specifically sanctions to coerce friend and foe alike to adopt policies conducive to US interests.

This includes sanctions aimed at Russia for spoiling various US regime change wars including in Syria, sanctions aimed at Germany (a supposed US ally) for jointly constructing the Nord Stream 2 pipeline with Russia and various sanctions aimed at both China and its economic partners including a much more specific economic war focused on Chinese telecom giant Huawei.
Again, nothing could be further from “ensuring other countries have the ability to be sovereign, safe, and secure” if the largest, most powerful nation on earth hangs invasion, subversion and sanctions over the heads of all if its dictates are not heeded.

US Ambassador DeSombre indulges in an obvious contradiction between his claims over the US role around the globe and more specifically in Asia-Pacific, and what the US is actually doing around the globe.

This includes within Thailand itself where the US government currently funds opposition groups who have recently been carrying out protests aimed at removing the current Thai government from power. This is also not mentioned by the Bangkok Post, not in this most recent article, nor in any other article.

The US Remains Biggest Threat to Asia-Pacific Stability

The Bangkok Post would cite US Ambassador DeSombre who attempted to frame how US policy in the region somehow served Thailand’s interests, claiming:

The ambassador said the US is now focusing attention on the South China Sea to make sure that Beijing does not illegally extend its control over the waterway. 

“That is an important area for Thailand because Thailand, although not a claimant in the South China Sea, depends upon the freedom of navigation for exports of about 80% of your GDP, so export and import flows through a naval situation that is not free and open would be problematic,” he said.

This is a bid to justify continued attempts by Washington to coerce nations like Thailand into taking up a more confrontational stance against China.

However, in addition to China’s massive FDI in Thailand, China is also Thailand’s largest trading partner both in terms of imports and exports. China has also boosted Thailand’s tourism industry, with over 10 million Chinese tourists visiting Thailand a year, a number larger than that of tourists arriving in Thailand from all other Western nations combined.

China is also an increasingly important military partner from which Thailand is buying hardware to replace its aging inventory of US-made military equipment. Recent Thai purchases of Chinese military equipment include dozens of VT4 main battle tanks, armored personnel carriers, infantry fighting vehicles as well as the jointly-developed DTI-1 guided missile system.

There are also plans for purchasing Thailand’s first modern submarines from China.

Thailand and China have also begun to conduct joint military exercises inside Thailand, balancing the annual Thai-US “Cobra Gold” drills carried out since the 1980s.

Beyond trade and military ties, Thailand is a key partner of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). A joint Thai-Chinese high speed rail line that will ultimately connect China, Laos, Thailand and Malaysia is already under construction.

Thailand thus has absolutely no reason to “confront” China or worry about China cutting off Thai trade (trade China itself depends on).

Only US posturing and US-led conflict in the region could disrupt Thailand’s economic growth.

Already, the US trade war with China has impacted Thai business both domestically and abroad.

US pressure on China in places like Xinjiang where the US government funds and backs militant separatists has spilled over in Thailand with suspected terrorists using Thai territory for transit to hotspots like Syria and terrorists carrying out attacks in Thailand as punishment for Thailand extraditing suspected terrorists back to China in defiance of US demands.
It is the above mentioned network of US political interference and media-might that has been mobilised to first put pressure on Thailand for cooperating more closely with China and when that fails, to shame Thailand while excusing and spinning the terrorism and political subversion Washington aids as punishment for doing so.

Thailand Wants to Stay Out of Washington’s “Great Power” Game with Beijing 

Thailand’s only incentive to heed US Ambassador DeSombre’s call for support against China in the South China Sea and elsewhere is to avoid further US interference aimed at Thailand’s political and economic stability. But by doing so, Thailand would be walking down a blind alley.

This is why Thailand is likely to continue paying polite lip-service to US demands while patiently weathering various methods of US coercion until US influence in Asia-Pacific is sufficiently declined to where it is no longer a threat to either Thailand or the many nations in Asia-Pacific Thailand primarily does business with.

In the meantime, Thailand will continue building its many and multiplying ties with China while balancing these ties with its ASEAN neighbours as well as more reliable alternatives like Russia.

Thailand would also benefit from cooperating more closely with other targets of US coercion to gradually displace US interference while at the same time encouraging more constructive ties with individual US companies capable of doing business in the region without strings attached.

While the Thai government is too polite and too diplomatic to point out US Ambassador DeSombre’s hypocrisy and the true agenda he represents, it is nonetheless important that the public understands what the US is really talking about when it claims it is defending the ability for nations to “be sovereign, safe and secure” in a world otherwise torn apart by the US tramping national sovereignty and triggering crises undermining global safety and security everywhere from South America, North Africa and the Middle East to Central Asia and the South China Sea.

Finally, it is interesting that the US ambassador to Thailand is fixated on a policy that is almost entirely China-centric. The selfishness of US foreign policy even at face value as expressed by US Ambassador Michael DeSombre says all that’s left to say about how the US views Thailand. To Washington, Thailand is a mere means to an end, and an end that involves Washington’s conflict with Beijing concluding in Washington’s favour and at everyone else’s (including Thailand’s) expense.

Joseph Thomas is chief editor of Thailand-based geopolitical journal, The New Atlas and contributor to the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

Democracy by definition is a process of self-determination. For Thailand, democracy means the process of the Thai people determining the nation’s path into the future.

Nothing could have less to do with the Thai people and this process of democratic self-determination than a capital and its interests located on the other side of the planet. Yet that hasn’t stopped the United States from insisting otherwise.

Following the dissolution of Thai opposition party Future Forward for blatant violations of Thai election laws, the US embassy in Bangkok has been regularly mentioned in international and local media reports weighing in on the matter which most certainly constitutes Thailand’s internal affairs and should remain off-limits to foreign interests.

One example of this comes from English-language newspaper Bangkok Post in their article, “Pannika dodges rally questions,” in which Future Forward’s spokesperson explained that the disbanded party would resort to street mobs in order to continue pursing the party’s single-minded agenda of ousting the ruling government.

The article concludes by noting:

On Saturday, the US Embassy in Bangkok said the court decision risked disenfranchising the party’s voters and raised questions about their representation within Thailand’s electoral system.

It said the US strongly supports democratic governance around the world, and appreciates Thailand’s recent seating of a democratically elected government. The US does not favour any party, but noted that more than six million voters chose the FFP.

Indeed, more than six million voters chose Future Forward. However, omitted is the fact that several million more chose its larger and more established partners, Pheu Thai. Several million more still chose Palang Pracharath which currently leads the ruling government coalition which came into power following the 2019 general election.

Redefining “Democracy” as Needed 

In other words, Future Forward came in distant third and belongs to a political coalition with Pheu Thai holding a minority in parliament. In ordinary democracy, the minority does not decide or direct policies at the expense of the majority. In Washington’s version of democracy, facts like Future Forward’s unpopularity are spun or shrugged off in order to present it and its agenda as relevant regardless.

This is because Future Forward and its billionaire founder and leader Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit represent Washington’s latest efforts to place a client regime into power in Thailand as part of a wider regional effort to surround China with uncooperative and even hostile neighbours to hinder its regional and international rise.

Defending a US Client 

Thanathorn has toured the US and vowed to serve US interests. He has vowed to roll back Thai-Chinese relations and has even threatened to replace Chinese-built high-speed rail projects already under construction with non-existent US alternatives like the yet-to-be-developed “hyperloop.” 

Bloomberg’s “Thailand needs hyperloop, not China-built high-speed rail: Thanathorn,” would note:

A tycoon turned politician who opposes Thailand’s military government has criticised its US$5.6 billion high-speed rail project with China because hyperloop technology offers a more modern alternative.

An option such as Richard Branson’s Virgin Hyperloop One — which is working on building networks of pods traveling at airplane-like speeds — is better for Thailand as it would help the nation to be a technological leader, according to Future Forward Party head Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit. 

Thanathorn’s threats to slash Thai military spending are aimed at curbing Thai-Chinese military relations and a recent spending spree by Bangkok to replace aging US hardware with newer and cheaper Chinese alternatives.

Bangkok Post’s “Future Forward Party vows to cut army budget,” reported:

The Future Forward Party (FFP) has vowed to cut the military budget and reduce the number of generals in the army, according to its secretary-general Piyabutr Saengkanokkul. 

Ignoring multiple wars waged by the US alone, Future Forward’s Piyabutr would claim as a tenuous excuse for slashing the military budget that:

“In today’s world, no one engages in wars any more.” 

It should come as no surprise then that the US, a nation engaged in multiple illegal military occupations around the globe would shamelessly inject itself and its interests into Thailand’s internal affairs particularly regarding the dissolution of what was clearly an opposition party backed by Washington. 

As Future Forward’s remnants now organise street protests it should be remembered how the US has backed similar street mobs in recent years including the so-called “Arab Spring” in 2011 and the more recent mobs in Hong Kong and how Hong Kong’s opposition is linked to Future Forward.

The Chinese embassy in Bangkok has condemned Thai politicians for showing support for Hong Kong activists involved in anti-government protests, saying it could harm the relationship between the two countries.

The [Chinese] embassy criticism, in a statement on its official Facebook page late on Thursday, came days after Hong Kong pro-democracy activist Joshua Wong posted a picture on social media with prominent Thai opposition politician Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit.

While many readers may take it for granted that the US embassy’s comments are regularly included in articles regarding Thailand’s internal political affairs, US meddling should not be taken for granted, accepted or in any way tolerated. 

The prospect of this verbal support transforming into material support for disruptive street protests is a direct threat to Thailand’s political and economic stability and that of the wider region and a threat already manifesting itself.

Street protests in Thailand are not only being openly led and supported by Thanathorn and others in his political party, core leaders including lawyer Anon Nampa are drawn from US government funded fronts posing as nongovernmental organisations.

Anon Nampa’s Thai Lawyers for Human Rights (TLHR) is funded by the US via the National Endowment for Democracy (NED).

The Bangkok Post in a 2016 article, “The lawyer preparing to defend herself,” would also note:

…[TLHR] receives all its funding from international donors including the EU, Germany and US-based human rights organisations and embassies of the UK and Canada.

Screenshots of TLHR’s NED funding is also available.

The US NED also funds media platforms like Prachatai and legal organisations like iLaw which is currently petitioning to have Thailand’s entire constitution rewritten, The Nation would report.

It is worth repeating, iLaw, a US government-funded front, is petitioning to have Thailand’s constitution rewritten.

While Thailand’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs will likely defer to patience the public should take note not only of US meddling, but who that meddling is being done on behalf of as Future Forward attempts to cling to its existence and reinvent itself to carry on as a vector of foreign interests at the expense of Thailand and its own best interests.

Joseph Thomas is chief editor of Thailand-based geopolitical journal, The New Atlas and contributor to the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

Animal rights front PETA and British retailers and media have teamed up to deliver a collective and politically-motivated blow to Thailand’s agricultural exports and in particular its large coconut industry (second largest coconut exporter in the world).

PETA makes the absurd claim that Thailand’s immense coconut industry depends on “monkey labour” to collect coconuts from trees and that these alleged monkeys are regularly abused.

The vague, baseless report citing neither specific numbers nor basic statistics regarding Thailand’s coconut industry and practices nonetheless prompted, according to PETA, “more than 18,000 stores around the world” to “never stocking products sourced from monkey labour after speaking with PETA and its affiliates.” The campaign was also publically supported by the British prime minister’s fiancée, Carrie Symonds.

The economic impact is already being felt in Thailand by some with Reuters claiming in an article titled, “Coconut milk maker hit by monkey labour accusation,” one of the nation’s largest coconut product exporters has seen sales drop by 20-30% after the move.

PETA and the UK’s collective action comes at a time when the US and British governments have been increasing pressure on China and its allies.

Thailand has in recent years expanded its cooperation with China at the cost of US-European influence in Asia-Pacific and as a result has suffered serial public relations attacks, political subversion and targeted condemnation from the West.

This most recent attack is hardly an isolated incident. It makes up part of a much larger campaign of baseless attacks aimed at undermining Thailand’s economic and political stability and Asia’s continued rise as a whole.

Thailand’s Coconut Industry is Huge, PETA’s “Evidence” Nonexistent

The use of monkeys to collect coconuts in Thailand in reality is almost nonexistent on large farms. Thailand produces over 800,000 tonnes of coconuts a year, meaning “monkey labour,” if true, would be so extensive PETA would have had an easy time documenting specific numbers and presenting sufficient, overwhelming evidence.

Instead, it posted vague accusations and admits it only visited eight farms (though provides no evidence of even this). Its own “video” shows only 14 scenes from what appears to be only one farm and the same 1-2 monkeys used throughout the entire short 1 minute and 39 second video clip. No information was provided about where or when the video was taken or how representative it is of Thailand’s overall coconut industry.

At least one “scene” was reused twice in the clip meaning PETA didn’t even have enough video footage of its own allegations to pad out its extremely short presentation.

At the time of this writing, no full report is linked to on its website (if one even exists) and no statistics at all are presented amid what is otherwise clearly propaganda aimed at audience’s emotions rather than genuinely investigating and exposing “abuses.”

Hypocrisy and a Warning 

While the UK and other Western countries eagerly target Thailand’s entire coconut industry based on PETA’s 1 minute and 39 second long video of 1-2 monkeys collecting coconuts, these nations and the specific stores boycotting Thai products still eagerly consume products using cocoa produced in Africa through the use of child labour.

A Washington Post article published as recently as 2019 titled, “Cocoa’s child laborers,” would note:

Mars, Nestlé and Hershey pledged nearly two decades ago to stop using cocoa harvested by children. Yet much of the chocolate you buy still starts with child labor.

The article further notes:

About two-thirds of the world’s cocoa supply comes from West Africa where, according to a 2015 U.S. Labor Department report, more than 2 million children were engaged in dangerous labor in cocoa-growing regions.

When asked this spring, representatives of some of the biggest and best-known brands — Hershey, Mars and Nestlé — could not guarantee that any of their chocolates were produced without child labor.

Stores in the UK including Sainsbury’s, Asda, Waitrose, Tesco and others still carry products produced by Mars, Nestlé and Hershey.
Beyond blatant hypocrisy, the UK’s selective outrage demonstrates what are clearly political motivations and serve as a warning for the rest of the world when doing business with not only the UK but the West in general.

What Can Targeted Nations Do? 

Nations like Thailand have several options to avoid or at least manage similar attacks in the future.

First and foremost and as Thailand is already doing, investments should be made in auditing supply chains and being able to provide evidence quickly to refute baseless accusations like those made by PETA.

Better yet would be media campaigns to preemptively showcase labour conditions within key Thai industries to head off potential attacks on economically important sectors.

This could be done by investing more in English-language media to help tell Thailand’s side of the story including through documentaries detailing key Thai industries. Such documentaries like those already done by China’s CGTN, Japan’s NHK or Russia’s RT would help collectively educate the world about Thailand and insulate the public from propaganda like PETA’s recent attack.

A second option is to continue diversifying exports away from Western nations and toward more reliable and trustworthy partners less prone to abusing rights advocacy as a political and economic weapon. Further development of domestic markets would also help soften the blow of such attacks.

This is already happening with nations like China, Japan and other ASEAN partners collectively providing Thailand with its largest and most important export markets. This trend continues as Asia rises and Western economic power continues to stagnate and wane.

While Thai companies and many others in Asia certainly benefit from doing business with the West, they must fully recognize the danger the West’s style of economic warfare presents, the many ways it is waged and ensure nothing critical to Thailand’s and Asia’s wider prosperity or stability is overly dependent on these markets.

For the UK, it makes up but a fraction of Thailand’s export market and its ban on Thai coconuts is just another small step the UK takes in further exposing its unreliability as a trade partner and further isolating itself from a world it attempts to coerce and control through such tactics.

Joseph Thomas is chief editor of Thailand-based geopolitical journal, The New Atlas and contributor to the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.