Anutin on American tariffs and Thai divide

October 3, 2025:The new prime minister is subtle about US import taxes and clearer on local political polarisation.

Giving a speech at an economic seminar at the Queen Sirikit National Convention Centre today, Anutin Charnvirakul politely suggested that if America lowered the taxes even more, it would be easier for both countries to talk about “other things.”

He thanked the Paetongtarn administration for bringing it down to 19% after its “utmost efforts”, but subtly said that the lower the better.

“The United States wanted both of us to reach an agreement that was mutually beneficial, be it for the sake of the economy or security,” he said. “I think all conditions can be discussed. Whether we can accept all of them is another matter. To me, if the tariffs are lowered further, it will make our decisions easier on their other advices.”

He chose his words carefully. But what he meant by “other advices” sounded like it did not concern trade.

He was relatively less ambiguous when talking about political divide, saying if Thais really wanted to end the national polarization, politicians will get the message and act accordingly.

Thailand’s economic progress is less tied to politics than everyone thought, he said.

“Thailand does have a future,” he said. “In politics, there have been disruptions, but if only we could just let politics take care of itself. All Thais need is unity and politics will take care of them. When people in the country do not need conflicts, politicians will dare not have (cutthroat) conflicts. Don’t let politicians lead you. You must lead politicians.”

As for himself, “I must have done good things (in the past life) and I will use this opportunity to do my best.”

Not too bad. What remains is walk the talk.

Govt shutdown: Political infamy with hair combed

October 2, 2025: What do we creatively call holding the public hostage? Government shutdown, that is.

The US shutdown is nothing serious, but the action betrays prescribed obligations of politicians on both sides of the aisle all the same. If you are a politician, you give your enemy inconveniences, but any effort to disturb your enemy must not affect the public, period. For this, both Republicans and Democrats in the US Congress have utterly failed.

And the shameful irony is that what led to the shutdown were proclaimed attempts to help the people. Both sides have argued about healthcare spending, and the Democrats have refused to back a Republican plan that they claim would make it harder for Americans to afford healthcare.

On the surface, such showdown over Obamacare (Democrats want immediate assurance of substantial subsidies but cost-cutting Republicans are saying we will debate that later) is over public interests.

Truth is it’s an ego fight. Every advocacy and non-advocacy of any programme can be characterised as “for the people”. The bottom line is that a political clash between the disagreeing politicians shall never cause grievances to the public.

Imagine a conflict between the Thai government and the opposition over the Entertainment Complex plan results in many state services halting and many state employees not getting their much-needed salaries.

Imagine mom and dad fighting and the kid having to walk to school, getting hit by a car on the way.

US President Donald Trump has blamed his Democratic rivals for the current public misery stemming from unsettled healthcare disagreements affecting government spending bills. They are blaming him back.

Both sides should be blamed, anyway, because the American public have nothing to do with their conflicts and failures to bargain or who flex what muscles.

Both parties had come up with a nice name for the betrayal of public obligations, though. They have been calling it a government shutdown, which happens once in a while in what some call “the world’s largest democracy” where every right of the citizens “is respected.”

US at crossroads on Israel

October 1, 2025: America and Israel are being pulled away from each other by their own political gravities.

Their youths, who will grow up to control politics, are polarised on Gaza, polls unambiguously show. Signs of Washington getting increasingly restless over what’s happening in the territory are in response to that, as well as to the gradual change of heart in Europe and to the growing ambivalence among older American politicians themselves.

Politico, a media organization with an American root whose content is always indicative of how political winds blow in the United States, has said in an article this week that an “entire generation” of Americans is turning on Israel. Which is in the opposite direction of how the new Israeli generation is thinking, it added.

American and western media growing more and more critical of Israel is no surprise. The increasing isolation of Israel also explains why Donald Trump will say one thing today only to contradict himself tomorrow.

According to Politico, atan April 2024 rally, Trump joined in with a crowd that was chanting “Genocide Joe,” originally a left-wing chant aimed at protesting Biden, whereas a month earlier during a Fox interview he criticized Biden for being “soft” and urged Israel “to finish the problem” in Gaza.

EvenPolitico virtually admits that when it comes to Israel, the Democrats and Republicans are not that different. Both camps, however, will soon have to review their policies, and Israel will be an issue that could make or break presidential ambitions in their next electoral clash.

And while the Republicans and Democrats review their Israel policies, they will keep what Politico said in mind. “Young people — on the left and right — are growing increasingly skeptical of Israel.”

They will also have to keep in mind that a virtually entire young generation of Israelis is supporting Netanyahu, meaning that whatever Israel is, it will unlikely change anytime soon.

But to Trump, the first test will come very soon, as the United Nations is pushing on more proper independence for Palestine. What his government has to say about it will not escape the attention of young voters in America, anxious to see which one between the Republican and Democratic parties has a more acceptable Israel policy.

Trump moreover is having to deal with media prejudices in his country. Some outlets not critical of Joe Biden when he was the American president allowing Israel to do what it did in Gaza have highlighted Palestinian plights like never before.

This paragraph fromPolitico tells much about complications and hypocrisies arising from the controversial US-Israel relationship: “The nationwide campus protests that sprung up against the war in Gaza have been the most obvious signs of youth discontent with US support for Israel’s war, and that largely stemmed from energy on the left. But such sentiment has been bleeding into the right, in part spurred along by Trump, who has made real inroads with younger voters and who was happy to seize on disaffection with President Joe Biden’s Israel policy.”

Those young Americans may call themselves “liberals”, but it’s harder than ever to tell liberalism and conservatism apart these days.

For example, in America, supporting Israel and you can be considered a conservative. Charlie Kirk, the slain leading pro-Trump activist, sent a private letter to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu shortly before he died, offering to help push back an “information war” that he (Kirk) thought Israel was losing.

It is safe to say that if you are an American and you support Palestine, you can call yourself a liberal.

Elsewhere, it is not necessarily the case. In Thailand, for instance, anti-Israel voices coming from the country’s “conservatives” are noticeably louder than those from among the so-called “liberals”. In other words, if those pro-Palestine young Americans come to Thailand, Thai conservatives will welcome them with open arms.

(That’s one thing. Another thing concerns how time affects the meanings of the words. While “liberal” gives out the sense of newness, a “liberal” idea can actually get old someday. A conservative idea, on the other hand, can be long forgotten and then re-emerge or become reborn and be considered a liberal view in the future.)

As to which doctrine is more open to different thinking, let’s just say both camps have similar degrees of tolerance and intolerance. We have seen both “conservatives” and “liberals” believing only they are right and others are wrong. (The term “liberalism” indicates more openness than “conservatism”, but constantly there is evidence to the contrary.)

What is a key difference between young people in America and young people elsewhere regarding Gaza. Rebellious American youngsters don’t need Washington’s help for their cause, but many of their foreign counterparts do. Attacking Israel and bemoaning the Gaza atrocity can hurt America too, so a lot of them (foreign “liberals”) have refrained from it. This kind of dilemma has affected the United States’ European allies as well but with the innocent death and injury tolls mounting in Gaza and famine worsening, more and more are finding that they have no choice but snap out of it.

Daily updates of, and opinions on, local and global developments by Tulsathit Taptim