But he does not say how. The performance of his Cabinet in the past six months has been somewhat sloppy and far short of public expectations, judging from the sinking popularity ratings. Still, most people questioned in public-opinion polls continue to prefer Surayud to stay on.

His promise to tough it out would be far more convincing if it were not for the fact that former prime minister Anand Panyarachun has been approached to take over the premiership following speculation that Surayud does not have the stomach to deal with the overwhelming problems.

Anand is known to have declined the offer, sensing that the political adversity ahead would be difficult to tackle. What's more, he did not want a third term as prime minister under a military junta. Demanding a free hand in dealing with national problems might not be easy. The terrorism problem in the South made the offer even far less palatable.

Hard pressed and without much choice, Surayud had to bite the bullet. There is still doubt about his assertion that he would try hard to fulfil his mission. His soft approach to mounting adversity and the "undercurrent" of political movements is the cause for bolder challenges to the power of the government and of the Council for National Security (CNS) - the military junta.

Surayud's soft approach, based on his claim of a need for national reconciliation, has made it difficult for the committee investigating corruption and irregularities in the Thaksin government to get evidence and cooperation from civil servants. Many of them still fear that they will meet with tough reprisals if politicians loyal to Thaksin regain power after the general election tentatively scheduled for December this year.

Surayud's formula for national reconciliation was that "thieves should be given a chance to show repentance" and become law-abiding citizens. This could be a pretext for not having to take tough and resolute action, by legal or other means, against corrupt politicians, Thaksin or members of his Shinawatra clan.

Surely Surayud has heard the time-tested adage that "there is no honour among thieves". If their past behaviour serves as any guide, his hope that the thieves would repent was merely wishful thinking.

He should have known better. If the thieves had shown signs of repentance, as Surayud expected, there would not have been reports of continued flows of funds to support undercurrent movements against the government and the CNS under the guise of demanding early elections and the return of democracy through the ballot box.

The thieves have already plundered national assets and caused severe structural damage that will require many years to be restored - if it can ever be, since our gutter politics never allows sufficient time for a clean slate and rebuilding. Political reform, among the numerous goals set for the government, has yet to take shape with not much time left before the general election.

By waiting for the thieves to repent, Surayud has given them more time to enjoy their spoils, plot more sinister game plans and expose the people to more risks and threats to national security. The soft approach has already undermined confidence in the private sector, resulting in an economic slowdown, decline in investment and weakening consumer purchasing power.

In the past six months, the soft approach on the part of Surayud and the atrophy of the CNS's powers through disuse have left both the government and the junta with growing frustration and a growing challenge from activist groups loyal to Thaksin.

There was a warning from a member of the People's Alliance for Democracy, which was instrumental in the movement against Thaksin, that Surayud might not have the opportunity to regret and make amends if he continues to believe that there is honour among thieves. That warning said a cobra is always a cobra.

There are signs that the political movements will intensify right after the Songkran festival, with Surayud being spared and more protest rallies and tirades directed at the CNS to cause friction and an atmosphere of distrust between the two ruling bodies.

The assets investigation committee is having enough trouble tracing the spoils looted by the thieves. The people have problems in trying to predict what kind of future they face and wonder whether the coup was just a wasteful exercise for a lost cause because those who were supposed to fulfil its aims did not have the courage to strive for success. Such failure could pave the way for even more conflict and turbulence.

Sopon Onkgara