Another weekend ruined by the protesters of Bangkok. Particularly annoying as it's Easter. But I guess I should used to it now. I mean it's been political chaos here virtually since the day I arrived in April 2006. In fact, the very first story I did for CNN in Bangkok was the yellow shirt protests against the government of Thaksin Shinawatra. He was eventually ousted in a military coup in September that year.

Then his allies managed to win the election, amid allegations they'd rigged the result. So that resulted in yet more yellow shirt protests, including the occupation of the main airport in Bangkok.

Red-shirted protesters surround a car in a residential street in Bangkok.

Finally Thaksin's allies were booted out of office by a court ruling which agreed some had been involved in electoral fraud. I thought that was it...but no. More disturbed weekends followed. This time the yellow shirts had given way to red shirts, in favor of, not against Thaksin.

The reds had been slowly ramping up the rhetoric and action, culminating in this weekend's double-whammy. They managed to get the ASEAN regional summit suspended after they stormed the venue.

And now they are trying to catch the Thai Prime Minister, attacking his motorcade and rampaging through government buildings trying to locate him.

The PM, Abhisit Vejjajiva has declared a state of emergency, but you wouldn't know it where I live. The Thai New Year celebrations are already underway with traditional water-fights being the only form of violence in my neighborhood.

What a contrast with the scenes elsewhere in the city, where it was mob rule. So what will happen next? Well, there are several possibilities:

1. Abhisit calls a snap election (which he'd be unlikely to win; Thaksin's allies have consistently led in the polls).

2. Abhisit resigns...then what? Probably more political jockeying for position and a coalition of some sort might be cobbled together....which could result in more protests from one side or the other.

3. Thaksin returns from exile to lead the Red-shirts in a sort of uprising....that'd be messy and bloody, and frankly I think it's unlikely. The former prime minister faces a number of corruption charges and could also be jailed for his conviction last year on one corruption charge.

4. Perhaps the Army might intervene and stage a coup, as it has done frequently in the past. That might help quell the current crisis, but it'd do little to heal the deep divisions between both sides.

5. Abhisit rides it out or gets tough. Either is unlikely to do much for his relations with the reds. Trying to ignore the protests will leave him looking even weaker; ordering a violent crack-down may simply harden the resolve of the red shirts and provide fodder to their questionable claims that Abhisit has dictatorial tendencies.

Whatever happens, I think one thing is sure...it'll happen on the weekend.

The Khmer Rouge trial has been a harrowing story to cover. The unimaginable magnitude of the killing is breathtaking: 1.5 million, 2 million, some even put it as high as 3 million - an abstract and unfathomable number.

But it's when I'm confronted with men like Norng Champhal that the horror and terror are really drawn into sharp, brutal focus. He told me through tears of raw grief, how he was separated from his mother 30 years ago at the most notorious of the 189 torture and detention camps, Tuol Sleng or S-21.

Norng Champhal was just 8 or 9 when he was taken to Tuol Sleng prison. He is one of the few survivors.

He never saw his mother again and spent several days hearing the haunting screams of people being tortured to death. Then finally the Khmer Rouge fled, as invading Vietnamese forces approached. He frantically ran from room to room looking for his mother.

In each, he found iron bed-frames with blankets thrown over the mutilated corpses the KR had hurriedly abandoned.

He told me he peeked under one blanket, trembling as he looked. A nine-year-old boy, checking corpses to see if they were his mother. He never found her, but he thinks it's impossible she survived. He says those memories are still so fresh and clear they are still profoundly painful.

More than 14,000 people died in S-21. Only a few survived, among them Champhal.

His story is repeated across this violated land. At least a quarter of the population died between 1975 and 1979. It would be the equivalent of approximately 70 million Americans being slaughtered in just three years, eight months and 20 days.

Historians argue about the extent to which the U.S. secret bombing of Cambodia contributed to the rise of the fanatical Maoist regime.

Certainly the U.S., U.K. and others continued to back the KR long after they were ousted from the capital. But this trial will not initially dwell on U.S. involvement or the causes of the Khmer Rouge rising to power.

It will begin simply with the story of S21 and the man that put so many, including Champhal's mother, to death.

Duch, or Kaing Guek Eav, is charged with crimes against humanity and has admitted his role as Commandant of S21. Now finally Champhal may begin to get some answers about the nightmare that still casts its long and dark shadow over this traumatized country.

Watch my report on notorious Tuol Sleng and survivor Norng Champhal's recollection of the torture camp.

BANGKOK, Thailand – The emerging scandal involving the Thai army's alleged mistreatment of hundreds of ethnic Rohingya from Burma is slowly getting more and more worrying each day.

This picture taken December 23 by a tourist to Thailand's Similan Islands shows handcuffed refugees under guard.

We don't know yet exactly what happened, but a dark picture of hundreds of deaths at sea is emerging, and some are laying the blame with the Internal Security Operations Command of the Thai army.

The Rohingya have long been persecuted in Burma (or Myanmar as the junta renamed it) – many are stateless, living in horrendous poverty on Burma's border with Bangladesh, unwanted and downtrodden.

Some 200,000 are on the Bangladeshi side of the border, scraping a living in sprawling refugee camps.

That context perhaps explains why so many thousand each year risk their lives in unseaworthy boats to try and find a better life in south-east Asia.

The men that boarded those boats must have known the journey would be perilous. They kissed good-bye to their wives and children and embarked on a voyage that was fraught with risk, destination unknown, but with the ultimate hope it would be transformative.

Just the slimmest chance of earning a few dollars a day in Malaysia, Indonesia or Thailand made it seem worth gambling with their lives. Watch how the refugees' plight came to light

Then imagine their overwhelming relief and delight at finally sighting land after days or perhaps even weeks adrift.

They'd made it – but what these refugees didn't know was this was Thailand, not Malaysia, and the reception would be less than welcoming.

What happened next is unclear. The army insists it did nothing wrong, that it was villagers who took the Rohingya to a remote island in December, where they cared for them until they were ready to leave.

But according to many of the Rohingya survivors' accounts, relayed to aid groups, they were detained by soldiers, beaten and intimidated and then towed back out to sea in their engineless boats, without sufficient food or water.

The lucky ones made it to either the Andaman Islands or Indonesia after weeks drifting at sea but many drowned as they jumped off the boats to try and make it to distant lights on the horizon or swimming in vain towards passing boats.

In the last couple of days the story has focused on another group of 46 Rohingya who came ashore in Thailand just last Friday.

Their whereabouts remains unknown. It's the same story for another group of 80 Rohingya who also arrived recently, possibly part of the original group which arrived in December.

The U.N. has asked for access to these 126 supposedly detained refugees, but the Thai government has dragged its feet for days.

Perhaps it simply doesn't know what became of them or perhaps it has something to hide?

There are reports that they may have already left Thailand, but that leaves more questions. When? How? The fear of course is that they have been dumped at sea again.

If this is true, it is utterly reprehensible and those responsible should be brought to justice.

The Thai prime minister has launched an inquiry, but many are wondering whether this will really result in any prosecutions. Read more from Dan Rivers on the scandal

All told, more than 500 Rohingya are missing and if the survivors are to be believed, the Thai army needs to be held to account.

This represents a major test of the credibility of Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva.

I hope he has the courage to pursue a thorough, impartial and exhaustive inquiry into what has happened.

He needs to move fast – if these Rohingya are still in Thai custody, he must tell us where.

If they are not, who authorized their release, when were they set free and crucially how?

The prime minister has constantly reminded international audiences of the need to rebuild Thai society through the rule of law. This is his chance to put the rhetoric into action.

BANGKOK, Thailand - I'm racing back to Suvarnabhumi airport after having witnessed the chaos at the U-Tapao Naval airbase, around 100 miles southeast of the capital. Thousands of tourists are jostling for position in the burning sun outside the inadequate military terminal building. This remote airfield is one of the only ways out of Thailand now anti-government protesters have closed down Bangkok's two airports.

U-Tapao was a curious mix of typically Thai festival atmosphere, with lady-boys singing and dancing for the bored and tired tourists and some enterprising Thais have opened foot-massage parlours for all the aching foreign feet. There are beer tents, food stalls and lots and lots of passengers, in resigned, polite whsipers, waiting, hoping, praying they'll make it onto one of the few planes leaving this paralyzed country.

It was difficult to get any information, but one Australian official told me they were advising stranded tourists to stay in their hotels, unless they already had been issued boarding passes by their airlines, as the Vietnam War-era airstrip was totally overwhelmed.

At Bangkok's two main airports, the protesters are refusing to end their sit-in, demanding the resignation of the prime minister before they'll go. But many seem tired and flagging.

A short time ago a police helicopter dropped thousands of leaflets over the airport - I presume the message warned the People's Alliance for Democracy to leave or else. But the "or else" seems a long way off. The police remain cautiously positioned on the far outskirts of the airport, having been literally forced back by the apparently better organized and more aggressive protesters.

What is terrible is that as the tourists slowly leave from U-Tapao, none are arriving to replace them. December is normally the high season for visitors - but I'd imagine many people planning of a tropical Christmas break to Thailand are looking at other countries. Those who've already booked are probably beginning to look at their holiday insurance. Thailand's tourism industry is falling apart in front of my eyes and this will only serve to increase the political instability here.

It's a terrible shame and the timing is awful: all this is happening amid the worst financial crisis for decades. The hotels are emptying and the way things are going, it'll be a long time before they are full again.

BANGKOK, Thailand - It's almost three months since anti-government PAD protesters in Bangkok swarmed into government house - the official seat of Thailand's prime minister - and staged a sit-in. They are still there and since their demonstration began a lot has changed, but the underlying issues remain unresolved.

Protesters have barricaded themselves inside Bangkok's Government House.

Thailand has slowly but inexorably, slid downhill. One prime minister has quit, another has taken his place and the issue of cronyism and corruption in politics has become ever more heated.

Last night there was another grim milestone on this slow descent into chaos. A bomb went off at the protest site, killing one and wounding 21 others.

We don't know who planted it or why, but taken together with the other recent blasts, clashes and street battles, it is a sign of just how volatile this situation has become.

The other grenade attacks and bomb blasts of recent weeks have been disturbing, but last night's was the first to kill a PAD protester.

I went to see the protesters today and they are shocked, but determined; many busying themselves by reinforcing their fortifications around government house.

Sandbags block the streets, the stripped carcasses of several buses have also been used as barricades and netting has been strung up to stop other explosives being lobbed into their complex of tents.

It feels as if they are preparing for battle - and I fear last night's fatality is unlikely to be the last in this struggle between those who want to expunge every trace of Thaksin Shinawatra and his allies from the machinery of government and those who feel he was the best prime minister Thailand ever had.

The billionaire former premier himself remains a fugitive; found guilty of corruption here, his visa revoked in Britain, he's thought to be in Dubai trying to find a new home.

He is no doubt following these troubling events in Bangkok closely. What's happening in Thailand now is a struggle for its political soul and Thaksin remains a key player even while abroad.

Profound questions about whether democracy works and whether the majority can be trusted to make the right decisions are being thrown up by a noisy minority who have paralysed the government and are determined to overthrow it.

The current Prime Minister, Thaksin's brother-in-law, Somchai Wongsawat, appears weak and helpless.

The army have refused to disperse the protesters and he's been forced to put on a brave face and try and ignore the fact he can't get into his own office.

This may go on for another three months, or even three years, but sooner or later a decision will have to be made. Who should run this country? A cabal of the Thai elite ruling for the benefit of the people, but refusing to hold free elections for fear they'll lose, or the majority of Thais who have repeatedly voted for Thaksin, and who are susceptible to corruption and vote buying?

It's not a new dilemma - can you really trust people to elect the best leader and if you can't who should decide who runs the country?

It reminds me of a quote by Sir Winston Churchill: "No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."

BANGKOK, Thailand - If this were any other country, I'd say I'd just witnessed a revolution. But this is Thailand, and things aren't quite as they seem.

Protestors gather inside the compound of Thailand's Government House on Tuesday in Bangkok.

The normal check-list of the overthrow of a government seems to have been fulfilled.

Tens of thousands of protesters? Check. Occupying state run TV station? Check. Climbing over the railings of the Prime Minister's office and staging a mass sit-in? Check. Major roads blocked? Check.

But despite all the turmoil in Bangkok, it's still far from clear whether the People's Alliance for Democracy really have the momentum and numbers to oust the government.

The truth is they are well supported among the middle-class and traditional elite of Bangkok, but go outside the city to the countryside, especially the north-east and many hate the PAD.

The PAD wants the overthrow of Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej. Samak is the self-proclaimed proxy for ousted billionaire Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra. I asked Samak once whether that was true once and he snapped back "What's wrong with that?".

And that's the problem. Many of the same people who managed to get Thaksin kicked out after months of mass protests, which culminated in a military coup in 2006, are now demanding that Samak goes as well.

They feel cheated that having got rid of one leader who they say was corrupt and on the make, they've been saddled with another.

Of course both Samak and Thaksin strenuously deny they have done anything wrong, but the fact that Thaksin and his wife have been indicted on multiple corruption charges and have jumped bail to Britain hasn't exactly helped his cause.

No charges have been filed against Samak, but his association with Thaksin, a man effectively on the run, is tainting his entire administration, which is being branded as a Thaksin puppet government by the PAD.

But as I sweated my way through another PAD rally last night in the searing tropical sauna of Bangkok, I tried to find out who all the protesters would have Samak replaced with.

The answers seemed muddled and vague. As they munched on spicy Thai snacks, (no political movement can function here without seriously good fast food!), they told me they know they want to get rid of Samak, Thaksin and all their cronies, but the problem is they don't seem to know what will happen when they do.

The leader of the PAD Sondhi Limthongkul has told me that the entire political system needs to be changed, and says that perhaps Thailand isn't ready for full democracy, because of the endemic corruption. So is it the People's Alliance for Democracy or the People Against Democracy?

It must be remembered that Thaksin won two landslide elections, and a third which wasn't contested by the opposition. Samak's party also won the last election in December, albeit by a narrower margin, but made their allegiance to Thaksin clear. The PAD's argument is that the votes were bought and the system is corrupt, hence the current deadlock.

What's critical now in all this is how the Royal Thai army will react. They staged the coup that got rid of Thaksin, but it seems incredible that they would stage yet another coup to get rid of another democratically elected leader.

The fundamental problem with the current stand-off is that a powerful minority in Bangkok doesn't agree with the government that the vast majority outside Bangkok have elected.

Putting claims of vote-rigging aside, Thaksin and therefore Samak to a lesser degree, are both hugely popular. Until the PAD can offer an alternative which rivals that popularity, overthrowing another government would seem only to undermine the dysfunctional democracy here.

KATHMANDU, Nepal - There is a strange contradiction in Himalayan politics. In the tiny country of Bhutan the king, Jigme Khesar Wangchuk, has recently enforced democracy on subjects who’d really prefer to keep things as they are, thank you very much. They are blessed with a benign monarch, who is adored and worshipped by his subjects.

But the Oxford-educated, 27-year old King clearly realizes that absolute rule by a monarchy is fine when the ruler is a jolly nice fellow, but it has all the ingredients for a total disaster, should one of his descendants decide to abuse their power. He’s recently organized elections, where you guessed it - the monarchists won a thumping majority.

Bhutan is about as remote and isolated as you can get. Television was only allowed here in 1999 and much of the country is still without electricity, roads or the internet. But it’s the only country I can think of where democracy is being imposed on the people, largely against their will.

Contrast that then with neighboring Nepal, where King Gyanendra is about to lose his job. Here the election counting is still going on, amid growing allegations of fraud in some remote areas. So far the Maoists, until recently a guerrilla army that had been fighting a decade long insurgency, are in the lead.

They are still classified as a terrorist organization by the United States, but it looks like they will become a major player in the new assembly that’s been elected to draw up a new constitution. And the first thing that assembly will do is to declare that Nepal is to become a republic, meaning King Gyanendra will presumably be packing his bags soon.

King Gyanendra was suddenly thrust onto the throne after a terrible massacre when almost all of his other relatives were shot by the Crown Prince, who went berserk with a gun before killing himself in 2001. King Gyanendra was therefore the target of much unfair suspicion that he had somehow orchestrated the massacre to get his hands on the crown.

It sounds like a Shakespearean plot - but then much of political life here has a slightly surreal air. Gyanendra further compounded that initial suspicion by declaring martial law in 2005, claiming the government wasn’t doing its job in thwarting the Maoist insurgency. It was only when hundreds of thousands of people took to the streets in violent protests two years ago that he backed down and the Maoists started capitalizing on his mistake.

I was in Nepal in April 2006, dodging the flying bricks and remember the palpable feeling of anarchy in the thin mountain air. Now things seem more stable, and in some sense there is inevitability to events. It’s almost certain this king will be peacefully voted out of a job. The entire edifice of the Peacock throne will be dismantled and Gyanendra will be free to concentrate on his private business interests.

So what to do? Well, perhaps the Royalists among you are crying: "How about letting the King of Bhutan skip over the border and see if he can make a better fist of it than Gyanendra? Swap the Raven Crown for the Peacock throne?"

That’s sort of what happened in England during the 17th-century Glorious Revolution: a group of aristocrats got rid of the Catholic James II. They were infuriated by his autocracy and staged a coup, bringing in his protestant son-in-law, William of Orange from Holland, to become king instead.

But that kind of throne swap would never work between Nepal and Bhutan. There’s been years of acrimony between the two countries over the status of 100,000 refugees stuck in camps in Nepal, who arrived from Bhutan. The Bhutanese won’t allow them to return, saying they’ve forfeited their right to citizenship. The idea of King Jigme Khesar Wangchuk coming over to replace Gyanendra is a non-runner.

It seems nothing will preserve monarchy in Nepal: 240 years of history will end in a few weeks, leaving Bhutan as the only absolute monarchy in Asia.. for now.

The 19th-century political writer Walter Bagehot once said of monarchy: “We must not let daylight in upon the magic." But daylight is streaming into the Himalayan palaces: the Maoists have pulled back the curtain in Nepal, but in Bhutan it's the King himself who's decided to break the spell.