Newley Purnell

I occasionally get emails from folks who’d like more information about living abroad and working as a freelancer. Here’re three good resources:

– Freelancing Overseas: Casting Off the Parachute: “Notes, tips and insights for journalists who are thinking about freelancing overseas, from one writer who has been there,” by Vanessa Gezari on Poynter Online.

– “I Want to Travel the World While Telecommuting. Any Tips on How to Make This Possible?” A Q&A with Rolf Potts on World Hum.

– “A Year Abroad (or 3) as a Career Move,” a New York Times story from Hillary Chura.

Seth Mydans has a good front-page story in today’s IHT. He sums up the theories regarding who might’ve orchestrated the new year’s eve bombings and weighs in on where Thailand may be heading:

A string of lethal bombs that disrupted New Year’s celebrations here has brought into the open a simmering confrontation between the ruling military junta and the opponents it unseated in a coup three months ago.

The attacks signaled the start of what could be a difficult year for Thailand as the military, the police and the entrenched elite wrestle for control of the country’s future.

Read the whole thing.

In Time magazine, Hannah Beech quotes an analyst who says the bombings probably weren’t carried out by southern insurgents:

…
As the new year began, Bangkok was swirling with speculation about the masterminds behind the bombings. Initial suspicion centered on Muslim insurgents, who have terrorized Thailand’s south with unrelenting attacks that have claimed nearly 2,000 lives over the past three years. But the insurgents, some of whom are fighting for a separate Muslim state, have never taken their bloody campaign out of the south. “It’s unlikely this was the work of southern insurgents,” says Francesca Lawe-Davies, Southeast Asia Analyst for the International Crisis Group. “It’s always been more about their territory; if they were to stage an attack in Bangkok, I think they would choose a target more directly linked to the Thai state instead of public places.” At a press conference a day after the bombings, interim Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont discounted speculation that the carnage was coordinated by Muslim extremists, instead linking the bombs to “people who lost benefits from losing political power.”
…

At USNews.com, however, David E. Kaplan, quoting Zachary Abuza, links the bombings to the southern insurgents:

Add Thailand to the list of Islamist insurgencies spinning out of control.

Best known for its spicy food, sex trade, Buddhist monks, and once booming economy, Thailand is now home to one of the world’s more brutal jihad wars. For three years, a stubborn and increasingly violent insurgency has grown in the heavily Muslim districts of the country’s south, made worse by the clumsy and corrupt response by Thai officials.
…
You can look forward to hearing more about this mess. Add Thailand to a troubled list that includes Afghanistan, Chechnya, Iraq, Kashmir, Mindanao, and Somalia.

And, finally, the Washington Post is running this Reuters story by Ed Cropley:

Army-installed Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont told Thailand on Thursday to prepare for repeats of the bomb attacks which killed three people and wounded 38 in Bangkok on New Year’s Eve.

“I would like to ask our brothers and sisters to brace themselves for a life-threatening thing like this for a while,” Surayud told the National Legislative Council, which is acting as a parliament in the wake of a September 19 military coup.

He gave no details.

His comments are likely to keep the 9 million inhabitants of the sprawling capital on edge after a string of bomb hoaxes and scares since the New Year. Thai media reported false alarms at a government office and major shopping mall on Thursday.

I’ll still be posting about the new year’s eve bombings as news surfaces, but in the meantime I wanted to point out a great little New York Times travel story from Megan Cossey. It’s about Bangkok’s burgeoning lesbian scene, and it contains this excellent lede:

On the night of Sept. 19, military leaders in Thailand suspended the constitution, seized control of Bangkok and imposed martial law. Someone forgot to tell the lesbians.

Several nights after the nonviolent coup, a crush of cheering women crowded around the stage at Shela, a lesbian nightclub near the city’s major downtown park, Lumpini, where a popular singer, Palmy, was performing. Fans crammed the balcony, imported whiskey was flowing at every table and a lone tom, local slang for a butch lesbian, was dancing by herself behind the pool table.

Coup or not, it was just another night out for Bangkok’s puying rak puying, or women who love women.

Five years ago, this scene would have been unthinkable. Lesbians either met each other at non-gay establishments or through word-of-mouth parties and restaurants. But thanks to the rapidly expanding Thai Internet, and a growing number of younger, more self-possessed lesbians, two nightclubs and several weekly parties catering exclusively to lesbians have opened in Bangkok in the past two years.

(Emphasis mine.)

(Image: New York Times.)

Note: I live about 500 meters away from Shela.

Here in Bangkok, four days after the new year’s eve bombings, the mood is still tranquil. But the question remains: whodunit?

My buddy Dan Ten Kate has a good story in the Asia Sentinel:

“Thailand’s Bombing Mystery Gets Murkier: Allegations, conspiracy theories and bomb threats continue to swirl in Bangkok.”

A snip:

Although Thailand’s junta leaders have been generally praised by the local press in the wake of the bombings that rocked Bangkok’s peaceful ambiance at the start of the year, concerns are growing about their competence in the wake of contradictory statements and a seeming lack of political, economic and law enforcement direction.

Contending forces appear to be emerging across a wide range of the power structure including within the police and military. Some political analysts are also theorizing that the bombings, which took the lives of three and injured nearly 30, could be the manifestations of a power struggle within the junta that took power after pushing deposed Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra from power.

Certainly, there were conflicting statements aplenty Wednesday from the military junta and the country’s appointed civilian leaders. Although General Saprang Kanlayanamitr, a leading junta member, told reporters that the “evidence and intelligence information proves that the bombs were the dirty work of politicians who lost power and benefit. Some bad soldiers loyal to the bad politicians collaborated with them with the intention to topple this government,” an hour or so later that statement was contradicted by military-appointed Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont.

Elsewhere:

– Taipei Times/AP: “Thai army says Thaksin backers behind attacks”

– IHT/AP: “Thaksin denies links to New Year’s bombings, Loyalists behind attacks, military says”

And as for the impact that the bombings may have on the Thai tourism industry, MSNBC.com is running two stories, one from the AP and one from Reuters:

AP: “Tourists undeterred by Thai bombing, But blasts concern experts about effects of travel advisories”

Reuters: “Bangkok bombs cast shadow over Thai tourism, Tour operators fear travel warnings will make year’s growth more difficult”

I can say this: My family and I traveled throughout various parts of Bangkok yesterday — from the Oriental hotel on the banks of the Chao Phraya to Emporium mall on Sukhumvit Rd. — and there was no shortage of tourists anywhere. Even the open-air Suan Lum night bazaar, which we visited two nights ago, was crowded, despite the fact that a bomb was reported to have been discovered there on new year’s eve and subsequently disposed of.

Elsewhere, Jotman is blogging about the bombings. And Bangkok Pundit, of course, continues to be a reliable source of info.

The mood is calm in Bangkok today, despite the fact that nine small bombs exploded throughout the city last night, killing three and injuring 34. (Nine of the wounded were foreigners.)

My family and A and I had lunch and walked around central Bangkok this afternoon. All was calm.

Meanwhile, everyone’s wondering: who’s responsible for this monumental act of violence?

From The Nation:
– “Southern insurgency not behind bomb attacks in Bangkok : PM”

From the Bangkok Post/DPA:
– “PM: Politics behind bombs; Thaksin denies involvement”

From the New Mandala blog:

…
I suppose restraint would be too much to expect from the military junta. According to The Nation (thanks Patiwat) members of the Council for National Security are already linking the bombings to Thaksin and using this as a pretext to call for the seizure of his assets:

“A security source said the Council for National Security may order the seizure of assets of former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra to cut money supply for financing disturbance in the country. The source said the CNS believed Thaksin was behind the series of seven bomb attacks in Bangkok Sunday evening.”

This despite the fact that intelligence agencies have been unwilling to identify any culprits. I am not going to lose any sleep about Thaksin’s assets, but this is clearly part of a pernicious campaign whereby political leaders and members of a legitimate political party are labelled as subversive and as acting contrary to some vaguely defined national interest. The ongoing campaign against the so-called “undercurrents” - involving increasingly hysterical vilification - is a blatant attempt to silence a legitimate political force.

Bangkok Pundit:

According to Channel 3, there are 2 theories on who is behind the violence from different academics from southern Thailand.

One view is that it is more likely to be undercurrents because the nature of explosions was not very strong (i.e the number of deaths was not great). Two, because the southern terrorists are not acquainted with Bangkok and it would be difficult for them to stage the attacks.

Another view is that it is most likely the southern terrorists. First, the kind of explosive used with a timer, the shrapnel of 1 cm nail and timing of the events on the evening of 31 Decembers was to cause maximum damage. Says that it is unusual for political movements to use such violence (i.e normally just 1 or 2 small grenades to kill a specific person or go to after a target). Second, the coordinated nature of the bombs also suggests the southern terrorists. Suggested 2 groups of persons involved (one for Victory Monument, Saphan Kwai etc; second, for Klong Toei and other targets on Rama IV road) . Says this would match the modus operandi of the southern terrorists.
…

From an anonymous contributor to Hot Air blog:

Thai authorities are claiming that the bombs set off in Bangkok and a neighboring province are not the work of Muslim terrorists from the south of the country. Political opponents of the recent military coup and the unelected government are said to be responsible for the deaths and injuries.

This explanation has two possible interpretations: the bombings are either the work of supporters of deposed prime minister Thaksin
Shinawatra, or they were committed by other unspecified elements that are enraged by the military’s imposition of an unelected government.

Both possibilities beggar belief…

From Zachary Abuza on Counterterrorism Blog:

The low profile targets at first led me and other analysts that I spoke with to discount the involvement of Muslim militants from the deep south. The bombs at first seemed intended to provoke a domestic response, but not elicit much in the way of international attention. While I have long argued that they have never taken the option of targeting Bangkok off the table, nor are they ideologically against it, at the time they really don’t need to change their strategy. At this point the insurgents are winning (they certainly are not losing). The southern insurgents clearly have the technical capacity to execute large-scale bombings in Bangkok. On a daily basis they detonate far more powerful bombs than what went off in Bangkok. Yet, to carry out so many bombings would require an infrastructure in Bangkok that few would consider them to have. The bombs were also not like the ones usually employed by southern insurgents, in terms of composition or detonation device. The bombs in the south tend to be larger usually 5kg and often 10-15kg, and cell-phone detonated. The insurgents have tried for mass casualty attacks. The bombs in Bangkok could have been larger; the aim does not yet seem to be to create mass casualties.