Every now and then the convicted fugitive Thaksin Shinawatra actually says something that is the truth. Although it is hard to believe, he is actually capable of such an abnormal act for him.
If there is any constant it is Thaksin always says opposite the truth. Not slightly bent or somewhat distorted but totally opposite. No means yes and yes means no to put it bluntly. There are no grey answers when it comes to Thaksin as to do so would show indecision on his part. However as much of a constant as it is, whenever the truth serves him better than a lie, he will simply say the truth.
When it comes to the issue of asylum political or other, that option is off the table for him for the moment anyway. For him to accept asylum means clipping his wings, and for the moment that is totally unacceptable. Thaksin’s goal is to regain his position as Prime Minister of Thailand, then make his enemies disappear forever. Then followed shortly after by stuffing his pockets.
Political asylum requires a few sacrifices to be made on the asylum seekers part. The first one and most significant is not to leave the country that is granting asylum. Once the person leaves the country protection could not be offered as they would be out of that country’s jurisdiction.
The second thing is the asylum seeker must become politically inactive or the asylum could be withdrawn. Once again this is not an option for Thaksin.
For Thaksin to give up anything is not his style so for the moment staying one step ahead of the people that are pursuing him is the game of today. So to travel under a false name or to visit countries that leaders think like him are Thaksin’s only options at the moment.
Thaksin would only accept political asylum if he were truly beat, but even then it may be like his April 2006 I quit story pulling a fast one.
The reason Thaksin spoke the truth about asylum is he needs to preserve his ‘I can do anything’ god like image to his lesser educated supporters. Because they truly do not know or understand, they could be told anything from a person who they see as an authority and they simply would believe it. For the moment to them Thaksin has been done wrong by others and is simply a victim.
“For the moment to them Thaksin has been done wrong by others and is simply a victim.”
While not entirely correct, this idea seems to have a certain extent of truth behind it.
He is indeed a victim, but only of his own doings.