“We are also looking at dual-use helicopters that could raise our ability to fight fires. Or dual-use equipment that can be used in construction work,” Prayut said in an exclusive interview to Russia Beyond the Headlines.

In Russia, Prime Minister Prayut will be joined by his Russian counterpart Dmitry Medvedev in witnessing the signing of a memorandum of understanding on a military cooperation between the defence ministries of the two countries. The MoU is one of nine pacts to be signed between the two countries during Prayut‘s visit. The other pacts include agriculture, the safety of fishery products, the environment and investment promotion.

“In my opinion, the defence industry of Russia has state-of-the-art technology and I have admired your capabilities in this area from the time I was chief of the Royal Thai Army,” Prayut said.

“I believe that cooperation in this area should be complementary. For example, we need to have a competitive price and value. I’m glad that both sides can reach an agreement, because when we look in detail into the quality of the helicopter, the technical specifications are accepted by the Army committee,” he added.

It was reported that the military government was interested in buying several items from Russia including Be-200 amphibious aircraft and T-90s main battle tanks, but the deal is still far from finalised.

On Wednesday, Prayut will meet with Medvedev for the fourth time as prime minister in St Petersburg, where they will discuss bilateral ties and witness the signing of MoUs.

Prayut will head to Sochi the following day to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin, and on Friday he will attend the Asean-Russia Commemorative Summit, marking the 20th anniversary of Asean-Russia ties. Prayut will also attend the parallel Russian-Asean Business Forum that day.

While Thailand and Russia have had diplomatic relations for a long time, Moscow came onto the radar of the government when the Prayut administration needed to forge comfortable relationships with global powerhouses after western countries put harsh pressure on Thailand over its human right practices and democracy setback.

Panitan Wattanayagorn, an international relations academic and a security adviser to deputy PM Prawit Wongsuwan, said Russia tended to “understand” the Thai situation and had a non-interference policy in relation to the country. He said this contributed to smooth relations between the two nations.

Still, he said Thailand was “keeping cool” with its critics, insisting the Kingdom would not take offence at their complaints. “It’s much like when you still want to be with your good friend who fights you every day,” he said. The adviser admitted that Thailand’s long-time ally the US could be “slightly irritated” by the Kingdom’s dealings with Russia.

“But there’s nothing abnormal with this,” Panitan stressed. “Actually, Thailand has managed to keep a balance with a number of rivals. You see, we befriend all

countries.”

He said the Thai-Russian talks this time could result in some purchases of average-scale, security hardware with appealing price tags. Thailand was also interested in Russia’s maritime security expertise and other high technology, he said.

He said it could be a win-win situation for both countries, as the Eurasian power appeared interested in selling military hardware to Thailand, as well as widening anti-terror cooperation with the King-dom and other Asean countries.

Russia also needed agricultural products such as poultry, pork and para-rubber from Thailand as it had been barred from buying them from some European countries.

Panitan said Thailand wanted to attract more Russian tourists after a drop in their numbers dropped off last year.

Read Prayut‘s full interview in ‘Russia Beyond The Headlines’, a supplement distributed with

The Nation on Thursday.

Out of 249 recommendations, 181 were admissible, said Chanchao, who led the delegation to defend the Kingdom’s human rights record before the UN’s Human Rights Council.

But, the remaining 68 suggestions had not yet been accepted because they involved the lese majeste law, human rights limitations, trials of civilians in military courts, computer crime laws and abolishment of the death penalty.

The acknowledged recommendations, which the government can implement without hesitation, are related to education, public health and the protection of the vulnerable, namely children, the disabled and ethnic groups.

That guidance would be proposed to the Cabinet for approval. The results would be reported to the HRC at its 33rd session in September.

During the review, other countries raised concerns over freedom of expression, right to assemble, arbitrary detention and inclusive debates on the August referendum on the draft charter.

However, the delegation explained the necessity of the country to act the way it did.

The international community also appreciated some other issues that Thailand was able to deal with.

In a video documenting the review proceedings, the media were shown that after the session, representatives from 20 countries came over to shake hands with the Thai delegation and praised its achievements.

The review was just a regular protocol with all countries, which Thailand had to attend. However, it was not so “intense”, like in the past, he added.

As the ball was in his court, Arthit wrote that he received a flood of calls from people who identified themselves or refused to identify themselves on what he should do.

What left a lasting impression on him was an unknown man, who approached him while he was having a drink at a department store, and told him that he would leave Thailand for Australia for good if Arthit nominated a politician linked with the National Peace Keeping Council (NPKC); otherwise he would offer to work at Phyathai Hospital (owned by Arthit) for free.

Arthit said this man had a significant influence on his decision because he reflected what the public truly wanted. “No one thought of Anand at that moment, even though after the NPKC had seized power from General Chatichai Choonhavan and appointed Anand to become the PM, the country’s administration went smoothly. At this political juncture, no one was more suitable than Anand. He was a ready-made PM,” Arthit wrote.

Arthit’s first attempt to persuade Anand to accept the PM’s post failed, although he explained to him that he would be only a transitional PM, called in to dissolve Parliament and run the country till a general election was called.

His second attempt showed possibilities as Anand agreed to consider his proposal.

Arthit knew that if he had nominated Somboon – or if he had accepted the Interior Ministry portfolio – the country’s political crisis would not end because the public would perceive such a nomination as the NPKC’s attempt to cling to power.

At first, Arthit called then Privy Council chief Sanya Thammasak to seek Royal advice, but he was not given an audience or advice. He then sought advice from Privy Council chief General Prem Tinsulanonda who recommended that General Chavalit Yongchaiyudh was a good man.

Arthit wrote that the New Aspiration Party, headed by Chavalit, was only the second-largest opposition party. Why not give the post to then Democrat Party leader Chuan Leekpai, the largest Opposition party? However, Chuan refused to lead a minority government, citing such a government would not function.

On June 10, 1992, while the coalition parties were confident Somboon would be nominated, Arthit left for Chitralada Palace with Pairoj Piempongsant, a politician with close ties with former PMThaksin Shinawatra. He followed him like a shadow to ensure Arthit would not sneak into having negotiations with any party. The name of the new PM was kept a secret till the very last minute – even when Arthit was about to seek a Royal audience to nominate the PM. He was holding a blank paper with a garuda emblem.

“I told Dr Paisit Pipattanakul, then Parliament secretary-general, that I could not nominate Somboon Rahong as the PM because the country would be in disarray with a bloodbath. I must nominate Anand Panyarachun. Paisit asked me if I was sure, I insisted, “it is ok, I will take responsibility”.

Under the staircase of the palace, Arthit made a final call to Anand. “I am about to seek a Royal audience now, please be prepared.”

“After I said [this], what option was left for Anand?” Arthit wrote.

Arthit dictated to a typist to transcribe, “The country has been too seriously bruised, I have no alternative but to nominate Anand Panyarachun as the PM to dissolve Parliament.”

Arthit said the King signed the endorsement without saying anything. As Paisit was bringing the Royal command to Anand’s house, he was telling Arthit that the King said you were very brave – as expected of a statesman.

Somboon, who was fully dressed in preparation for the PM’s endorsement, his supporters and an army of reporters were waiting but only to learn about the surprising turn of events.

Anand was left with little time to prepare for the Royal endorsement.

Arthit had been hailed by the public and the media as “the democracy hero”, which also came at a price to him and his family. He and his family “have been targeted for the rest of their lives”.

He said the council would explain to the world community that strict measures taken against people who have different opinions were necessary to maintain peace and order and it would be adopted for just one more year before a general election is held under the NCPO road map.

The defence statement from the junta was made after the country came under severe criticism over the human rights situation in the country with international delegates at the United Nations Human Rights Council raising serious concerns in Geneva last week.

PM’s Office Minister Suwaphan Tanyuvardhana said the Foreign Ministry had been asked by a high-level committee to steer and expedite government policies and to work proactively and explain to the world community Thailand’s context and circumstances.

“What the government has done is aimed at enabling the country to move forward. The concerns expressed by foreign countries are normal,” Suwaphan said.

“We have also expressed such concern to protect our interest. We, however, choose to express our concern in a diplomatic manner that keeps our integrity and dignity,” he said.

“What foreign countries think and say is up to them. Thais must depend on themselves. No one is happy or unhappy with us. Nobody cares what we are facing,” Suwaphan added.

Deputy Prime Minister Wissanu Krea-ngam said the NCPO had not committed any unlawful acts but only acted under its orders. “Our country is not in normal circumstances. The government took control of the country through a coup to solve the country’s problems,” Wissanu said.

“How can people call for high standards of democracy and human rights like when the country had an [elected] Parliament during the past five to 10 years? We have taken action only when there were valid reasons and the need arose,” he said.

A woman in Songkhla recently posted on Facebook, warning police not to arrest her because she was not someone “police should be messing with”. She posted pictures of herself and her friends with guns and a lot of orange-coloured pills, which were seen as methamphetamine. She wrote that the post was just for fun and asked her friends to give her “Likes” and comments.

However, the police did not find the post funny. A police officer posted a Facebook reply to her that Thai police could not be insulted and that they were tracking the woman and would find her. The two women involved with the post were arrested and charged with illegal possession of guns and drugs.

Many online users commented that she had shot herself in the foot.

Veteran business reporter Bighnun BN posted a message asking whether it was a coincidence or intentional that Salinee Wangtal, director-general of the Office of SME Promotion and former chairwoman of SME Bank, met and took group pictures with former premier Thaksin Shinawatra in Dubai. She was joined by dozens of Thai business people, to promote Thai SMEs there.

It was not only the picture that was circulated online. Even the history of her professional rise to the current post under the current government has also been circulated with some comments and analyses.

Meanwhile, earlier this week, a detailed programme for a teachers’ conference held by the Office of the Basic Education Commission at Muang Thong Thani was circulated on the Education Ministry agency’s website. It would not have become the talk of the town but for its note to teachers attending the conference on how they should greet Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha who would preside over the opening ceremony. It said when the PM arrives at the conference hall, the teachers should applaud him and stop when he sits down. After he finishes his speech, they should shout, “PM Soo Soo!” [Keep on fighting!]

The government spokesman immediately came out to clarify that the PM did not want the teachers to please him in that manner and it was the decision of the organisers to issue such a guidance to the teachers. Online users, however, had mixed reactions with some seeing it as a normal Thai tradition, some thought it was funny, while some criticised it as the ways of a dictatorship.

Witchapon Art wrote: “As if this is a game show, with signals to cheer and applaud.”

Parinya Pittayapinun wrote, “What do you think about Singapore? Is it far better than us [Thailand]? People’s living standards, basic welfare, rule of law, are they fair to everyone? Think carefully and ask yourself if you want to be like that.”

Pongchai Yeeram wrote, ” ‘Keep on fighting’, [but] who is there to fight with?”

These may or may not be examples to support the campaign of the “We Need To Talk” group formed by students of Thammasat University’s Faculty of Journalism and Mass Communication campaigning for social media literacy. They recently shared satire about the behaviour of Thai online users and divided them into seven groups.

They are: Keyboard brats – who comment without careful thought; Coconut Shell People – who believe only themselves; Eight-line People – who skim through content and then imagine the story by themselves; Camera People – who initiate dramas with their pictures; Share People – who share content without thinking of the consequences; Enchanted People – who believe whatever they read or see online; and Nosey People – who act as Internet detectives.

“Pheu Thai Party sees that the best way out is to make further amendments to the Referendum Act 2016 so that it is clear, fair and is in line with the international standard,” the statement said.

“All sectors should be able to fully express their opinions and conduct campaigns for the referendum. When the people are able to fully express their opinions, whatever the outcome, the result will become acceptable. But if the situation is left as it is now, there will only be more conflicts.”

The party noted that Article 7 of the referendum law guaranteed individuals’ right to express and disseminate their opinions in an honest manner that did not breach the law. But Article 10 allows Constitution Drafting Commission officials to freely disseminate and publicise contents of the draft charter.

Pheu Thai said that due to its “ambiguous provision”, Article 61 would allow authorities to “make broad interpretations” that could result in offenders being jailed for up to 10 years.

The party noted that the clause prohibits the use of rude or insulting words when commenting on the draft constitution in the run-up to the vote. It said that such an offence was minor under the Penal Code, with a maximum penalty of one-month imprisonment.

Pheu Thai said that its statement was issued after the government and the National Council for Peace and Order failed to positively respond to calls from various sectors of society and some international organisations to ensure a referendum “that is open to different opinions from all sides”.

The party also called for a political environment that allowed people to “use their judgement to choose the future of their country”.

Former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra called on the government and the NCPO to heed the concerns expressed by foreign countries and international organisations regarding the human rights situation in Thailand.

Yingluck, a key Pheu Thai figure, said that she wanted the people in power to ensure an atmosphere suitable for the referendum.

“As a citizen, I want to see an atmosphere that allows people to express their opinions freely and without any concerns, so that a lot of people will turn out to vote,” she said.

Yingluck was speaking yesterday at the Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Political Office Holders while attending her trial for negligence in relation to her then government’s rice-pledging scheme.