Transcript of the above video: 

As the title of this video suggests, we are discussing how in many ways in my opinion national sovereignty should be an issue at the forefront of the minds of Thai folks going into these elections. And those who are watching this stuff that are kind of trying to get a handle - especially in the expat community - on how this may shape up, on what's going on in Thai politics etc., I think this video is worth a watch because there's multiple manifestations if you will of sovereignty issues that are coming into play right now as we speak. One of them involved a recent apparently a gaff if you will, made by the Prime Minister.

I thought of making this video after reading a recent article from the Pattaya Mail, that is pattayamail.com, the article is titled: Prime Minister apologizes for communication misstep over border remarks. Vows to avoid future confusion. Quoting directly: "Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul has apologized to the public for what he called a "communication error" following his earlier statement suggesting Thai encroachment into Cambodian territory, pledging to exercise greater care in future remarks while affirming Thailand's sovereignty and commitment to peaceful dialogue." Quoting further: "Speaking about the recent incident in Sa Kaeo Province near Nong Chan and Nong Ya Kaeo villages, Anutin expressed gratitude to military, police, and provincial authorities for managing the situation effectively. He noted that while conflicts between states can often be resolved diplomatically, disputes between civilians on both sides are more sensitive and require careful handling to maintain peace. Quote: "I must sincerely apologize to the Thai people," Anutin said. Quote: "It was my mistake and a lapse in communication. I will be more cautious from now on. I want to reassure everyone that Thailand will never lose its territory, sovereignty, or dignity. Our citizens' safety is my top priority, and I will not allow any further losses." On Cambodia's reported withdrawal of BM-21 multiple rocket launchers from the border, Anutin said this was a positive sign reflecting mutual goodwill following an agreement signed last week. Both countries have since withdrawn two tanks each and continued talks on weapon removal and landline clearance, monitored by ASEAN observers." Quoting further: "Asked about the reopening of Border checkpoints, Anutin clarified that no discussion on the issue took place with Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet. Quote: "If we ever consider reopening the Border, we must first consult our people," he said." Quote: "The Government will not reopen any crossing until national security risks have eased, and we are confident the situation is under control." 

So the point being here with regard to why the national sovereignty issue came up in connection with this gaff is Mr. Anutin said, "well, maybe there is encroachment." He seemed to have made a misstatement as to what the Thais had done or there was an outcry for even suggesting that maybe there was encroachment on the Thai side. Look, even though I'm an adoptive Thai if you will, as a Thai I find it yeah, I am concerned about it too. Look, not an inch of our soil; that is I think on everybody's mind, especially in the aftermath of this summer where we saw the violence that we saw. This issue raises people's hackles quite a bit, let's leave it at that. I think Mr. Anutin handled this as well as he could. He apologized and said, "look I misspoke". I've gotten some correspondence from people that seem to be, I don't know, a bit partisan maybe in kind of this teamsmanship thinking, somebody sent me an email and said, "well aren't you going to say anything, the way that you talked about Paetongtarn?” Mr. Anutin made an off the cuff remark that was maybe you could call it flippant, and he should have thought a little harder about what he said. He didn't get on the phone to Hunsen and start saying "oh, we'll just open the Border whenever you feel like it"! It was a qualitatively different thing, so let's first of all start with that. A gaff is one thing, getting on the horn to a foreign strongman is another. That being said, yeah it was of concern. When I read it, I said okay, that's something to consider. But he brings up national sovereignty, and I have discussed in other videos, or another video specifically where during the meeting I was kind of wondering if along the sidelines of the ceasefire discussion which Mr. Trump attended, if there was any discussion between Mr. Anutin and Mr. Trump about the possible threat to national sovereignty that stems from the OECD, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development as well as the World Economic Forum who seem to be pushing a lot of this stuff. 

We saw it in America under the prior Administration up until a recent Executive Order from President Trump titled: The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Global Tax Deal. Quoting further, and this is from whitehouse.gov, Memorandum for the Secretary of the Treasury, The United States Trade Representative, who it is my understanding the trade rep. definitely met with Mr. Anutin. I saw an article I was reading where Trump specifically sort of circled back to Mr. Anutin and said, "hey, we are going to make sure the trade rep. gets to you during this recent ASEAN meeting." And again I keep wondering, is there going to be any discussion of this OECD thing because I view it, much as Mr. Trump did, as we will see in the contents of this Executive Order, OECD is also a threat to national sovereignty here in Thailand, and although it's not the same type of "threat" as clearly missiles being lobbed over a border, these issues have profound ramifications, and I don't think this is particularly good for Thailand both in a business sense and a banking sense and a policy sense, as well as from the standpoint of sovereignty and for the reasons Mr. Trump set forth in his Executive Order. Quoting directly: "The OECD Global Tax Deal supported under the prior Administration not only allows extra territorial jurisdiction over American Income," which I think the same analysis could be applied over possible Thai income here in Thailand, which means outsiders, foreigners, will take jurisdiction over matters possibly pertaining to Thai income should OECD become a reality here in Thailand, should it go through the process of being promulgated into proper law. This is the reason Trump assiduously and affirmatively rejected OECD in this Executive Order because they have done this where oh well, it's all based on the premise that the country is looking to adopt the legislation and is therefore going to take all these different actions like we have seen here in Thailand, the biometric reading at the banks, they're coming in and saying you can't transfer more than 50,000 baht; you need to go through all kinds of Orwellian hoops aligning your phone number to your bank account, aligning your biometrics to your Bank Account in order to do your banking. Again this stuff, we are seeing it in real time, and again this alignment is all done on the, I would argue pretense, but let's call it the pretext that we are looking to pass this legislation. They were doing this in America. Trump's Executive Order which I'm quoting now, killed this effectively because it said "hey, until it's legislation, we're not going to be doing any of this stuff," which by the way is the proper way things work in any country with representative democracy if you will, either parliamentary or in the United States through our Congress you have to pass a law before you start implementing the law. The basis of all of this is "oh, we are aligning things before we pass the law," it's nonsense, it's the cart before the horse, what we call in legal argumentation 'bootstrapping' and it's being done extra-legally because there isn't a promulgated law that says Thailand needs to be in alignment with the OECD. Again I view this as a serious concern to national sovereignty here in Thailand, again for reasons I'll quote further. Again, "allows extraterritorial jurisdiction over American Income but also limits our nation's ability to enact tax policies that serve the interests of American businesses and workers." I think the same thing can be said for Thailand. Quoting further: "Because of the Global Tax Deal and other discriminatory foreign tax practices, American companies may face retaliatory International tax regimes if the United States does not comply with foreign tax policy objectives." This is exactly why this issue of OECD is just as much of a concern as it pertains to Thailand’s national sovereignty as anything we are seeing at the border. Again, "foreign tax policy objectives". Why are foreign tax policy objectives pertinent to Thailand at all, in any way, shape or form. They shouldn't and if they are then that concerns our national sovereignty, and it seriously needs to be scrutinized. Yet another reason the national sovereignty in the form of OECD membership needs to definitely be at the forefront of people's minds going into this next election that we're presumably going to have in the first quarter of 2026, at least according to the Memorandum of Agreement between the People's Party and the Bhumjaithai Party that is currently holding up this current coalition government here in Thailand. That said, quoting further: "This memorandum recaptures our Nation's sovereignty and economic competitiveness by clarifying that the Global Tax Deal has no force or effect in the United States." So again, I urge those who are watching this video, go check out that article from Pattaya Mail, also go check out that article from whitehouse.gov, and again they are both pertinent to the situation at hand here.

Thailand, again I sort of talk about this with the fervour of the converted, Thailand’s sovereignty in my mind is sacrosanct. It is what has protected these people; it is what has protected this jurisdiction; it's what has protected his country for decades, if not centuries, possibly even millennium you could argue. And even though it's quiet, and even though it's in this kind of I don't dry policy, economic banking speak kind of guise, this OECD issue in my mind represents just as much - and as the thumbnail for this video implies - just as much a “clear and present danger” to use you know the scene from the movie Clear and Present Danger for those were sort of the “operative words”, these drug cartels represent a clear and present danger to the people of the United States is what I think the President in that scene says. Well here, OECD as well as matters pertaining to Thailand's border, both represent a clear and present danger to the sovereignty of Thailand. And for this reason, I think it should be of deep concern to anybody looking to cast a vote in the probable upcoming elections we're looking to see here in quarter 1 of 2026, here in the Kingdom of Thailand.