Natthawut may have blundered by suggesting army improprieties

The way Natthawut is crying foul about the military meddling in politics is like a carbon copy of what former prime minister Samak Sundaravej did during the lead-in to the 2006 general election.

In comparison to Samak, Natthawut is a greenhorn in military affairs,hence he has made a spectacle of himself but failed to make a serious dent in the military establishment.

Samak commanded full attention when he accused the junta of plotting to sway votes in a bid to defeat his People Power Party,under the pretext of uprooting the Thaksin Shinawatra regime.

Junta leader General Sonthi Boonyaratglin did not even try to question the credibility of how Samak could access the damning information, although spin doctors churned out several conspiracy theories designed as distractions.

Samak was legendary about his inside knowledge of the military establishment. And he timed his disclosure in such a way as to inflict the utmost embarrassment on the military.

He put his mouth in good use and managed to force the junta to shelve its plot to fix the balloting.

Based on its 2006 debacle, the military has learned its lesson on how to draw up a civil affairs project without giving away its political overtones.

Natthawut may be striving to emulate Samak's defiance of the military. But he has overlooked the fact that the project in question was couched in murky jargon without any references to the red-shirt crowd or the opposition movement.

The Army's project on civil affairs is dubbed the building of the people's solidarity. It came into existence after the Somchai Wongsawat government pushed for reconciliation as one of its key policies.

The budget for the project was earmarked when Somchai held dual positions as prime minister and defence minister.

Natthawut has left out key facts about the project to make it appear like a secret plot hatched under the Abhisit Vejjajiva administration.

The leaked Army document in his possession addresses how to raise awareness of the theory of a sufficiency economy and forge harmony in the rural community.

Natthawut contends that certain officers tipped him off about the actual purpose of the project designed to derail the opposition movement. But Natthawut's sources have yet to step out to back up his argument.

It is noteworthy that Natthawut has relied mainly on the so-called witnesses who remain unidentified rather than the document itself.

He has quoted his witnesses as saying that Army chief of staff General Prayuth Chan-ocha presided over the opening of a meeting of 500 to 600 military commanders at the Army headquarters last month.

After Prayuth convened the session and greeted participants, he left the scene and his assistant Lt General Daopong Ratanasuwan took over to chair the meeting.

According to witnesses, it was Daopong who led the discussion on how to sway sentiment to undermine the red-shirt crowd.

Natthawut asserts that Bt2 billion in secret funds has been earmarked to fix the sentiment. About Bt15,000 will be spent in each of 74,000 villages nationwide.

In order to make his allegations stick, it might be unavoidable for Natthawut to convince his

sources to step forward and verify what transpired at the meeting.

Otherwise the verbal exchange between Natthawut and the soldiers will remain the trading of barbs and innuendoes.

Unlike Samak who had documented proof, Natthawut has just a flimsy account from unidentified sources.

It is a curious coincidence that Natthawut's sources tried to link Prayuth to the story even though he did not play a crucial role.

Prayuth is a top contender to succeed Army chief General Anupong Paochinda. Is it possible the leak was actually about a power struggle within the Army? If so, Natthawut may not be a key player as he sees himself but a mere pawn.