I wonder how the Americans will react… Gen. Saprang in response to rumors of a counter-coup:

แต่ผมคิดว่าการปฏิวัติ​จะ​เกิดขึ้นเสมอ​ ​ถ้า​มี​เหตุ​ให้​เกิด​ ​ประชาธิปไตยที่อเมริกายิ่ง​ใหญ่​ ​แต่ทำ​ไมปล่อยท่านเบอร์ริส​ ​เยลซิน​ ​อดีตประธานาธิบดีรัสเซีย​ ​เอาปืน​ใหญ่​ยิง​ใส่​อาคารรัฐสภา​ ทำ​ไมปล่อยปากีสถานปฏิวัติ​ ​โดย​นายเปเวส​ ​มูชาราฟ​ ​แล้ว​ยัง​มี​ความ​นับถือ​กัน​อยู่​ ​เพราะ​ผลประ​โยชน์ของชาติสำ​คัญกว่า

But I think a coup could always happen, if there’s a [legitimate?] reason for it. Democracy is acclaimed in America, but why did they let Boris Yeltsin storm parliament with artillery? Why let Pervez Musharraf overthrow the government in Pakistan and still be respected? Because national interest is paramount…

Indeed, how could they let the generals in Thailand… oh wait, that’s me!

But seriously, is General Saprang increasingly becoming a liability to the junta? With the controversy arising from his AOT study trip to Europe and his increasingly frequent off-the-cuff public statements, he may have less chance to succeed Gen. Sonthi as commander-in-chief of the army.

I think the problem has a lot to do with the image Saprang seems to be projecting – one of slight arrogance. Our military rulers , perhaps taking their cue from Prem, have tried to project an image of benevolent “good soldiers,” responding to criticism in kindly, civil tones and imploring all to care about Thailand’s unity. From what I’ve read, Saprang has consistently been the combative one in answering criticisms of the junta with barbs of his own. It just doesn’t fit the mold of a senior statesman, General.

Update: In the same interview (well, one of those ambushes that the Thai press, with their mics and voice recorders, make on newsmakers), the general lets it slip what he thinks is the public perception of himself – heroic?:

ชี้​แจง​อยู่​แล้ว​ ​แต่​ไม่​จำ​เป็น​ต้อง​ทำ​เป็น​หนังสือ​ ​เพราะ​ไม่​ใช่​จำ​เลย​ ​เราวีรบุรุษ

Of course I will clarify, but there’s no need to do it in writing. Because [we're] not the defendant here, we [are] heroes.