Connect with us

News

Thailand’s Shinawatra clan is back in power but for how long?

Published

on

Thailand’s Shinawatra clan is back in power but for how long?

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Thailand’s elevation of its youngest-ever prime minister last week averted an immediate crisis, but the new administration could rekindle old strains between the country’s most influential political family and its powerful royalist-military elite.

Paetongtarn Shinawatra, the 38-year-old scion of Thailand’s Shinawatra clan, was appointed premier last week following the sudden dismissal of her predecessor, Srettha Thavisin, by the constitutional court over an ethics breach.

Her election by parliament has preserved a shaky alliance between the Shinawatras’ Pheu Thai party and its historic rivals aligned with the royalist-military establishment at a crucial time for Thailand, as south-east Asia’s second-largest economy struggles to mount a recovery following the pandemic.

Advertisement

But analysts and political observers are questioning how long Paetongtarn, a political newcomer, will manage to remain in power. The conservative elite has repeatedly removed elected prime ministers through military coups and court verdicts.

“Although Paetongtarn will likely survive in the role for the near term at least, she faces considerable risk of ouster by the establishment,” said Peter Mumford, south-east Asia head at Eurasia Group.

Paetongtarn’s election capped a rapid ascent. The new premier, who has never held political office, is the youngest child of populist former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, a billionaire telecommunications tycoon who was ousted in a 2006 coup and has dominated the Thai political landscape for the past 20 years. Thaksin’s sister Yingluck also served as prime minister before being deposed by the conservative elite.

Paetongtarn Shinawatra, Thailand’s prime minister, is a political newcomer who rose to national prominence during last year’s election © Andre Malerba/Bloomberg

Thaksin, 75, does not have an official position in the new government, but he has played an increasingly active public role since returning to Thailand last year from 15 years of self-imposed exile, and could wield more influence in his daughter’s administration.

A rejuvenated Shinawatra clan is unlikely to be welcomed by the royalist-military establishment, which has maintained its grip on power despite repeated election losses.

Advertisement

“While many anti-Thaksin conservatives will be angered by a Shinawatra running the country again, others likely wanted Thaksin to put his family on the line, perhaps feeling that it gives them more leverage over him,” Mumford said, noting “Thaksin’s penchant for meddling and overreaching”.

Paetongtarn has inherited a coalition government that was an unlikely marriage of convenience. Srettha, a former property tycoon and ally of the Shinawatras, was seen as a compromise between Pheu Thai and military-backed parties keen to block the progressive Move Forward party from power.

Move Forward, which won the most seats in last year’s election, had campaigned on a platform of wide-reaching reforms, including to the country’s notorious lèse majesté law. The party was dissolved this month by the constitutional court, which said Move Forward’s policies amounted to an attempt to overthrow Thailand’s political system as a constitutional monarchy.

The truce enabled Thaksin’s return from exile, where he was avoiding a prison sentence on corruption and abuse of power charges, but signals are rising that the fragile détente is fraying. Srettha was dismissed this month over the cabinet appointment of a former lawyer and Shinawatra ally who had been briefly imprisoned on charges of bribing a court official, a violation of the military-drafted constitution.

Thaksin was charged in May for allegedly insulting the country’s monarchy in 2015.

Advertisement
Thailand’s former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra arrives in court in Bangkok on Monday
Thaksin Shinawatra returned to Thailand last year after 15 years in self-imposed exile, but he still faces charges under the country’s harsh lèse majesté law © Manan Vatsyana/AFP/Getty Images

Paetongtarn’s premiership also faces its most likely challenge from the constitutional court, analysts said. Four Thaksin allies who have served as prime minister have been removed by the court in recent years. The court has also dissolved previous incarnations of Thaksin’s party and Move Forward, forcing them to reconstitute under new banners.

The country’s judiciary has become “part and parcel of the royalist establishment”, said Thitinan Pongsudhirak, professor of international relations at Chulalongkorn University, citing the dissolution of election-winning parties and rulings favouring the elite. “What we are seeing is a judicial overdrive and there will be repercussions.”

Analysts said one threat to Paetongtarn could be a $14bn cash handout scheme, a campaign pledge central to Srettha’s ambitions to reinvigorate Thailand’s economy, which has, with an annual growth rate of just 2 per cent, lagged behind regional peers.

The plan would see the government give one-off payments of 10,000 baht ($290) to about 50mn low-income citizens via a digital wallet. But it has been repeatedly delayed by legal and financial obstacles, as well as opposition from the central bank, which favours structural reform to address weak productivity and an ageing population over stimulus measures to spur consumer spending.

Paetongtarn has said she will examine the policy to ensure it complies with Thailand’s fiscal discipline law, but economists say its prospects are increasingly dim.

Populist policies have doomed previous Pheu Thai governments. Yingluck was impeached by the parliament in 2015 for alleged mismanagement of a rice subsidy scheme, months after she was ousted in a military coup.

Advertisement

“For a political party to advertise populism can be a constitutional ‘no-no’,” said Paul Chambers at Thailand’s Naresuan University. “That’s what has bedevilled the Pheu Thai party.”

News

Under Trump, Green Card Seekers Face New Scrutiny for Views on Israel

Published

on

Under Trump, Green Card Seekers Face New Scrutiny for Views on Israel

For decades, immigrants who have followed the rules and have not broken the law have had hopes of earning a green card, a document that allows them to live legally in the United States and gain a path to citizenship.

But under new guidance issued by the Trump administration, immigrants can now be denied a green card for expressing political opinions, such as participating in pro-Palestinian campus protests, posting criticism of Israel on social media and desecrating the American flag, according to internal Department of Homeland Security training materials reviewed by The New York Times.

The documents, which have not been previously reported, show how expansively the Trump administration is carrying out a directive from last August to vet green card applicants for “anti-American” and “antisemitic” views.

The administration includes criticism of Israel as a potentially disqualifying factor, with the training materials citing as an example of questionable speech a social media post that declares, “Stop Israeli Terror in Palestine” and shows the Israeli flag crossed out.

The materials were distributed last month to immigration officers at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, which is part of the Department of Homeland Security and handles applications for green cards and other forms of legal status.

Advertisement

They reflect how U.S.C.I.S. — long considered the gateway agency for legal migration — has rapidly transformed under President Trump into another cog in his administration’s deportation machine. The agency has worked to strip naturalized Americans of their citizenship and has hired armed federal agents to investigate immigration crimes.

The administration is also granting permanent legal residency to far fewer applicants. Green card approvals have fallen by more than half in recent months, according to a Times analysis of agency data.

“There is no room in America for aliens who espouse anti-American ideologies or support terrorist organizations,” Joseph Edlow, the agency’s director, told Congress in February.

Critics of Mr. Trump’s approach say the administration is seeking to restrict legitimate political speech, and has conflated opposition to Israeli government policies with antisemitism.

Basing green card decisions on “ideological screenings is fundamentally un-American and should have no place in a country built on the promise of free expression,” said Amanda Baran, a senior agency official under President Joseph R. Biden Jr.

Advertisement

Administration officials said they were defending American values.

“If you hate America, you have no business demanding to live in America,” said Zach Kahler, a spokesman for U.S.C.I.S.

Abigail Jackson, a White House spokeswoman, said the administration’s policies had “nothing to do with free speech” and were meant to protect “American institutions, the safety of citizens, national security and the freedoms of the United States.”

The administration has moved aggressively against immigrants for expressing political views that officials have deemed anti-American, making ideology a central part of its immigration vetting process. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has revoked the visas of pro-Palestinian student activists, including one who wrote a column criticizing her university’s response to pro-Palestinian demands.

The Department of Homeland Security has proposed reviewing the social media histories of tourists seeking to visit the United States.

Advertisement

Immigration officers have significant discretion in deciding whether to grant foreigners long-term permanent residence. They have long considered a variety of factors, including criminal records, national security threats, family ties to the United States and employment histories.

Ideology has also traditionally been one of those factors. In some cases, U.S. law forbids officers from granting green cards to people who have belonged to a Communist or other “totalitarian” political party, have promoted anarchy or have called for the overthrow of the U.S. government by “force or violence or other unconstitutional means.”

But in the past, immigration officers have focused on statements that could incite or encourage violence, given concerns about infringing on constitutionally protected speech, former U.S.C.I.S. officials said.

The new training materials reviewed by The Times guide immigration officers through the factors they should consider when ruling on green card applications. They discourage officers from granting green cards to people with a history of “endorsing, promoting or supporting anti-American views” or “antisemitic terrorism, ideologies or groups.”

Immigration officers have been told to weigh those factors as “overwhelmingly negative.”

Advertisement

The documents list support for “subversive” ideologies as among other factors that could lead to an application being rejected. As an example, the materials point to someone “holding a sign advocating overthrow of the U.S. government.”

In addition, the guidance describes the desecration of the American flag as a negative factor, citing Mr. Trump’s executive order last year directing the Justice Department to prosecute protesters who burn the flag. The Supreme Court has ruled that flag burning is a form of political expression protected by the First Amendment.

Immigration officers have also been told to scrutinize applicants who encourage antisemitism “through rhetorical or physical actions.” They were instructed to “focus particularly on aliens who engaged in on-campus anti-American and antisemitic activities” after the Hamas attacks against Israel in 2023, the documents show.

Further examples in the documents of conduct characterized as antisemitic include a social media post showing a map of Israel with the nation’s name crossed out and replaced with the word “Palestine.” Another illustrative post suggests that Israelis should “taste what people in Gaza are tasting.”

Immigration officers must elevate all cases involving “potential anti-American and/or antisemitic conduct or ideology” to their managers and to the agency’s general counsel’s office for review, according to the documents.

Advertisement

In recent months, the agency has also changed the way it refers to the employees who adjudicate green card applications, long known as “immigration services officers.” In job postings, it now calls them “homeland defenders.”

“Protect your homeland and defend your culture,” one posting says.

Steven Rich contributed reporting.

Continue Reading

News

America’s bid for energy supremacy is being forged in war

Published

on

America’s bid for energy supremacy is being forged in war

Additional work by Jana Tauschinski

Oil and gas tanker location and destination data are from Kpler. The map shows the latest position for vessels with an active AIS signal on April 19–20, filtered by minimum capacity thresholds: crude tankers of at least 50,000 deadweight tonnage (DWT); oil product tankers of at least 55,000 DWT; oil/chemical tankers of at least 40,000 DWT; LNG carriers of at least 150,000 cubic metres; and LPG carriers of at least 50,000 cubic metres. Net fossil fuel import data by country are based on Ember analysis of the IEA World Energy Balances 2023.

Continue Reading

News

Roommate faces murder charges in deaths of 2 University of South Florida doctoral students

Published

on

Roommate faces murder charges in deaths of 2 University of South Florida doctoral students

A 26-year-old man is facing two counts of first-degree murder in the deaths of two University of South Florida doctoral students who went missing last week, local authorities said Saturday. 

The Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office in Florida said that evidence presented to the state attorney’s office resulted in the charges against Hisham Abugharbieh, the roommate of Zamil Limon, one of the doctoral students. 

Abugharbieh is accused of premediated murder with a weapon. He was arrested on Friday, the same day Limon was found dead. 

The family of Nahida Bristy, the other doctoral student, told CBS News that police said she is also likely dead. That is based on the volume of blood discovered at Abugharbieh’s residence, which he shared with Limon.

“Police told us she is no longer with us,” Bristy’s brother, Zahid Prato, said early Saturday.

Advertisement

The family was told her body may never be found and police believe she may have been dismembered, according to Prato. 

CBS News has reached out to police for more information.

Authorities said in a statement Saturday they were still searching for Bristy.

Limon’s remains were found on the Howard Franklin Bridge in Tampa Friday morning, Chief Deputy Joseph Maurer with the Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office said. His cause of death was pending autopsy results.

Deputies with the sheriff’s office took Abugharbieh into custody on Friday after responding to a domestic violence call at a home in the Lake Forest Community, a neighborhood near USF’s Tampa campus, officials said. He also faces charges of domestic violence and evidence tampering, as well as a charge of failing to report a death to law enforcement.

Advertisement

Limon and Bristy, both 27, had last been seen in the Tampa area on April 16. 

Limon was studying the use of AI in environmental science and was set to present his doctoral thesis this week, his family said. Bristy is studying chemical engineering. 

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending