• 
• 

That he cares about Manchester City's reputation and future simply requires listeners to look at Thailand. His divided motherland narrowly escaped a civil war on Monday night, has been compared to Burma and is painted in colours that scare even the bravest of foreign investors. Disdain for corruption has been distorted and turned into dictatorial and nationalistic fervour and efforts to put things right are being described as a witch-hunt. And all this has been sprinkled with deadpan statements that he loves Thailand. He said it when he was accused of filing false assets reports, an offence that, in a truly law-abiding justice system, would have left him outside politics and would have spared his country this misery. He said it when he was caught using concealed assets to pull off a tax-evasion scheme for the lucrative sale of his telecom company. He said it during his first English exile, when a propaganda campaign was being orchestrated to depict a country where election results were spat on, the voice of the poor ignored and where the elite conspired with the military to keep hold of power.

Now, in his second exile in England, he says he wants to come back one day and die here. In the same breath, he praised the British for giving more importance to democracy than his compatriots. The legal process he has escaped has been smeared by charges that it is dominated by the remnants of dictatorship. Verdicts against Thaksin, his family and associates, according to some foreign editorials, are anything but a step forward for Thai democracy.

It's England's turn. The Thai Constitution Court in 2001 was besieged on the one hand with damning evidence that the man was not honest and on the other with the uncomfortable truth that he had just won an election landslide. The British government and soccer authorities have been warned this day would come. They will have to determine if the man has broken the laws, the coup notwithstanding, or if he is innocent, harassed out of his country by an abusive, prejudiced justice system that his people commanding the executive and legislative branches can do nothing about.

He probably does love Thailand. But violating its rule of law and causing a massive divide through refusal to admit it and the manipulation of his election mandate is hardly proof of patriotism. There were many points along the way when he could have acted differently for his country's sake. He could have made a graceful exit after the 2001 Constitution Court acquittal. He could have asked his wife to hold back the urge to buy cut-price land. He could have sold Shin Corp honestly. When caught using nominees to avoid tax in the Shin Corp deal, he could have resigned.

He should have let a National Telecom Commission be formed and decide how to convert telecom concessions, instead of issuing an executive decree that directly benefited his own business. He should have realised that a Thai loan to Burma to be spent on equipment sold by his company was scandalous. And he should have known how much he would hurt his motherland when he, confronted with legitimate challenges on those questionable acts, wrote that letter to the US president to claim he was a victim of a conspiracy.

He let those opportunities pass him by - every time with "I love my country" rhetoric. Every time he said he loved Thailand, he also portrayed himself as an innocent man. Every time he did that, the image and reputation of the nation for which he often proclaimed unconditional love took a hit.

Manchester City is luckier. A few dents in the club's standing and Thaksin has decided to step aside. He apparently regrets having brought indignity upon the club and this may allow it to move on. That's probably the best news City fans will ever get, because as far as Thailand is concerned, Thaksin will never do that.