Thai junta to get its report card | New Mandala

Thai junta to get its report card | New Mandala
Paul Sanderson, 10 MAY 2016

Many have promised to bring Thailand together, but only succeeded in uniting people against them. The increasingly-isolated Thai junta could soon get the measure of their own popularity, Paul Sanderson writes.

Uniting the country is so often the catch-cry of those who would do anything but. In Thailand, a succession of prime ministers both elected and not have pledged to bring the country together as more than a decade of bitter division has seethed and occasionally flared into violence.

Former Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra’s administration gave probably the most obvious example of this when their ill-advised attempt to introduce a bill at 3am giving a sweeping amnesty to the country’s greatest political troublemakers, including her fugitive brother, only succeeded in uniting the country against them. Many of those aligned ideologically with the ruling party, and even several government MPs, joined the chorus of condemnation.

History, as is its wont, is in danger of repeating itself. The military regime, known officially as the National Council for Peace and Order, will mark its second anniversary on May 22. It has held power almost as long as Yingluck had before the Pheu Thaiparty’s tactical blunder.

The junta is embarking on a referendum as it finds itself increasingly isolated: Fewer and fewer voices speak out in support of Prayut Chan-o-cha’s regime and the draft charter it almost dictated to chief constitution writer Meechai Ruchupan.

Even those who were anti-Yingluck in 2013 have condemned the NCPO’s transparent plan to cling on to power for a further five years after the slated 2017 election, should it go ahead. Former PM Abhisit Vejjajiva, who was on the streets for some of the Bangkok Shutdown protests, spoke out against the draft constitution, saying it “distorts” democracy and “weakens people’s power”.

The regime is not quite at the point of uniting the country against it, but the August 7 referendum and the crackdown on dissent will seriously test its support.

The Election Commission has expressed confidence of a turnout of 80 per cent,telling Reuters about 51 million people were eligible to cast a vote. This would be significantly higher than the 57 per cent who turned out for the comparable 2007 referendum on a military-led charter, although commissioner Somchai Srisuthiyakorn would not say why. (Somchai, it is worth noting, is a controversial figure himself.)

It would also be a higher turnout than most general elections of the past 20 years, which have hovered between 60 and 70 per cent – the outliers being the 2007 post-coup poll when 85 per cent went to the polls as the ousted Thaksin Shinawatra and his opponents rallied support, and the 2014 pre-coup ballot, when about 47 per cent  of eligible voters showed up amid protests, cancellations and after a shooting designed to scare people away.

The suggestion that 40 million people could vote on  August 7 may be based on optimistic interpretations of polling. A Suan Dusit poll in mid-April found 85 per cent of respondents thought the constitution was important to the country’s future. But they may as well have asked whether they thought the record-breaking summer was hot: of course it’s important.

A closer look at the results, from a polling agency that has produced headlines favourable to the regime, reveals two-thirds were not impressed by the draft constitution. Curiously, 73 per cent said they might have “other things to do” on the day of the election. More than half said politics served only vested interests and thought the referendum was a waste of money.

The Election Commission made another public foray at the end of April, issuing a list of dos and don’ts for those keen on campaigning. The don’ts are problematic, with activists and political figures questioning the vagueness of phrases such as “false information”, “incite the public politically” and “incites unrest”.

The commission’s guide came after the junta, more worryingly, declared that expressing too strong an opinion in the lead-up to the referendum could bring about a 10-year jail term. Other penalties include a potential 10-year ban from politics and hefty fines. There have already been arrests.

This being a country where smiles are shallow and cynicism runs deep, there is always another theory or three. One goes that the referendum is being set up to fail: Gen Prayut’s terse replies when pressed on what would happen in that event suggest there is a contingency plan they want to keep guarded. Another goes that the smattering of protests will be used to justify calling the referendum off altogether: the roadmap to elections has already been pushed out two years and the military sank its first draft, so there is precedent. Other speculation quickly turns into sad stories of the death of kings.

There is a mindset that the military wasted the 2006 coup and returned the country to democracy too quickly. No chances are being taken this time. This is not a new observation, but with the referendum coming into focus it is worth asking just how long the status quo will be tolerated.

Chulalongkorn University’s Thitinan Pongsudhirak raised all these points in April, with a forecast of long-term military rule and a road ahead that will “most likely be marked by more turmoil”.

The junta is determined to be around in some capacity until at least 2022. The referendum is not likely to alter its grand plans, but it will provide some indication of how much of the country is united behind them, and how much against.

Paul Sanderson is a pen name. The author is an independent writer and consultant based in and around Southeast Asia.

This article is published as a collaboration between New Mandala and Policy Forum, Asia and the Pacific’s platform for analysis and discussion on public policy.

Horror headlines, tourism and the Thai junta | New Mandala

Horror headlines, tourism and the Thai junta | New Mandala
Paul Sanderson, 17 MARCH 2016

Thailand’s economy increasingly depends on tourism, but the junta’s reaction to crimes against tourists leaves a lot to be desired, writes Paul Sanderson.

The Thai junta has been putting the well-worn maxim that there is no such thing as bad publicity to the test. They have responded to a series of crimes against foreigners with almost uniformly callous and blunt statements, yet visitors are coming in greater numbers than ever: Thailand fell just short of 30 million tourist arrivals last year.

Yet, for all the negative headlines, tourism has been one of the few bright points in an otherwise faltering economy. The year 2015 brought a 20 per cent growth in tourist arrivals and a 22 per cent growth in tourism revenue, putting the sector firmly back on track after a slump during the 2013-14 street protests. The sector now accounts for about 10 per cent of the country’s GDP, as exports have weakened and foreign investment has plummeted.

Since taking control in May 2014, Prayuth Chan-ocha’s junta has been confronted with a series of high-profile crimes in famous tourist destinations. The most notorious among them have been the murders of two British backpackers on Koh Tao, and bombs in Koh Samui and central Bangkok – the former injuring seven, and the latter killing 20 and injuring upwards of 120. Late last month four French tourists were attacked, with two women raped at knifepoint, on Koh Kut off the country’s eastern coast.

The junta cannot be blamed for murders, bombings or rapes, of course, but their handling of the cases has been appalling, both in terms of public relations and public policy. The responses to the crimes have followed an all-too-familiar pattern: a promise to “beef up” security and bring someone to justice, the parading of suspects in front of media scrums in highly prejudicial re-enactments, claims the police or army resorted to torture to extract a confession, and a sense of disbelief in the criminal justice system generally and the police in particular.

The killings of Hannah Witheridge and David Miller on Koh Tao in September 2014 were particularly savage, attracting enormous attention nationally and internationally, especially from the British press.

The double murders were the first international scandal General Prayuth’s administration faced after seizing power, and it came as the junta’s handpicked national police chief took over from an incumbent with links to the ousted government.

Pol Gen Somyot Poompunmuang travelled to the island to oversee the investigation and was later on hand for the photo opportunity when two Myanmar migrant workers were led around the beach in bulletproof vests. His presence did nothing to quell allegations the crime scene was trampled on, suspicions DNA had been interfered with, or the rumours that spread online after the son of an influential figure was declared innocent in an oddly public manner. All of this led the Bangkok Post Sunday to call the investigation “rushed, rash, incompetent and speculative”.

General Prayuth, a notoriously short-tempered former army chief not above joking about executing journalists, did the country no favours on the PR front when he said women in bikinis only had to worry about being raped and murdered if they were attractive.

Claims of torture were highly publicised during the Koh Tao trial; less well known are the allegations the chief suspect in the August 2015 Erawan Shrine bombings made against Pol Gen Somyot and two of his deputies. The suspect, a Uighur Muslim, alleged he was punched and intimidated into confessing to the bombing, which killed 14 tourists of Chinese descent and six Thais. He also alleged Pol Gen Somyot was among those present when his life was threatened. Police were quick to dismiss the allegations.

There is a pattern of suspects claiming they have been coerced into confessing, although this is not exclusive to cases involving tourists, as reports of torture that emerged in Ranong after a 17-year-old girl was murdered show.

There is evidence to suggest some allegations are false, and torture claims are sometimes used by defence lawyers in the hopes of winning freedom for their clients. Even this is disturbing, because the strategy presumes coercion is an innate part of the system. It is essentially left to judges to decide how true the claims are, as there have been no serious attempts to independently investigate either specific allegations or systemic problems.

A more transparent Thai justice system and more trustworthy police force would go a long way towards allaying tourists’ fears, but this would require the kind of root-and-branch reform that has long been talked about but never acted on – reform that seems less likely than ever under the current regime.

One positive change the government could easily make would be to do away with the outrageous crime scene re-enactments that have followed every high-profile crime in Thailand. The Koh Tao murders, Erawan bombing and Koh Kut assaults were all the subject of highly prejudicial media stunts organised by the police: in the case of the Koh Kut attacks, the accused men were themselves set upon.

Banning the re-enactments would help shift the onus from the defence to prove their innocence back to the prosecutors, who would need to produce evidence that could be substantiated. Many legal experts have spoken out against the practice, and Thailand’s National Human Rights Commission has fought a losing battle to have them banned.

Government policy, however, has been to blithely continue in the face of public opprobrium; given bad publicity does not seem to have hurt the bottom line the junta is only paying lip service to tourist safety. The tourists, for now, continue to come; given the horror headlines in the past two years, it’s a wonder whether anything will keep them away.

Paul Sanderson is a pen name. The author is an independent writer and consultant based in Southeast Asia. 

This article is published as a collaboration between New Mandala and Policy Forum, Asia and the Pacific’s platform for analysis and discussion on public policy.

New Mandala’s 2015 in review (and Christmas dance)

New Mandala team, 24 DECEMBER 2015

We take our traditions pretty serious at New Mandala. This year some familiar faces are back to dance up a storm. Click through here to check out their moves.

It’s also time to do a recap of what was our busiest year yet.

2015 proved to be massive for Southeast Asia, with free and fair elections in Myanmar (the first in 25 years), as well as Singapore’s first vote in the post-Lee Kuan Yew era.The ballot in Myanmar saw long-time democracy campaigner Aung San Suu Kyi romp home in a ‘red wave’ that has also been seen as a repudiation of military rule in the country.

Elsewhere, 2014’s man of the moment, Indonesia President Joko ‘Jokowi’ Widodo, quickly went from hero to zero, blundering from one policy failure to another and seemingly unable to control his own cabinet, let alone a say in his own party; controlled by matriarch oligarch Megawati Sukarnoputri.

We saw a major scandal in Malaysia that nonetheless hasn’t knocked the PM from his perch (yet). Thousands of Rohingya from Myanmar and neighbouring Bangladeshwere left adrift at sea. And of course Thailand continued its downward spiral from fractious politics into farce; this year seeing a man charged with lese majeste due to a comment he made about the king’s dog.

With so much happening across the region, it’s no surprise that New Mandala also had a huge 12 months.

To date, we’ve published more than 460 articles and other posts (many republished in Australian and regional media), which have generated more than 3,600 comments (that we could actually approve; some of you were very naughty and probably shouldn’t expect a visit from Santa). And of course, we continued to attract many tens of thousands of weekly readers.

So what mattered to us, and more importantly what did our readers care about? Here’s our top 10 articles published in 2015.

In 10th is Singapore swing, Bridget Welsh’s post-ballot box wrap of Singapore’s general election in September, which saw the incumbent and long-ruling People’s Action Party win comfortably. With many arguing PAP would lose seats in this vote, the result proved to be the optimal pendulum swing says Welsh.

Gerhard Hoffstaetder’s snappy photo essay on Malaysia’s massive citizen march for clean politics in August comes in at ninth. Bersih 4.0 takes over Kuala Lumpur combines strong imagery and cogent analysis to beautifully set the scene for the major political rally. Unfortunately, this year’s trends paint a much worse picture for Malaysian politics in general, with people power maybe not enough to improve things.

Sticking with Malaysia, Bridget Welsh’s article on Prime Minster Najib Razak’s introduction of a goods and services tax in April, Najib’s taxing problem: The politics of Malaysia’s GST, takes out eighth. In addition to the excellent insight, the photo of his cat makes this article well worth re-reading (it’s a bit “one million dollars!”. See the video below.)

Good news for those who love bad news. Max Grömping’s article on electoral integrity in the region, Southeast Asian elections worst in the world, takes out seventh.

A meeting between Pavin Chachavalpongpun and Noam Chomsky proved to be popular coming in sixth. A conversation with Chomsky recounts the pow-wow with the well-known intellectual (take your pick which we’re referring to), in which they cover Thai politics, the monarchy and Thaksin.

In fifth is Llewellyn McCann’s look at the Thai monarchy, Political implications of Thailand’s royal succession. In it he looks at whether democracy will move forward with a change at the top, and the palpable fear people have about the current king’s inevitable departure.

Malaysia’s 1MDB scandal garnered worldwide attention this year and Tom Pepinsky’s examination of how it fits in with similar examples of corruption in the country’s past also proved hugely popular. Taking out fourth, Malaysia’s long history of financial scandals paints a sobering picture of how common this type of situation really is.

In the bronze medal position and a spot on the podium, third is Lee Jones’ Thai junta turning tragedy into farce. If you follow Jones on Twitter you will be familiar with his acerbic wit and hot takedowns. Casting his eye over the manner in which Thailand’s military leaders continued to fluff their lines when it came to the investigation of August’s Bangkok blast, this must-read piece is no different!

Bridget Welsh scoops silver with her third appearance in our 2015 top 10, taking outsecond for her article Lee Kuan Yew’s political legacy – a matter of trust. Her assessment of the LKY legacy was not only popular in the wake of the long-time leader’s death, but is sure to be a “go to” reference for future looks at how he helped shape Singapore.

Finally in first (and by some margin) is Michael Buehler’s exposé of dealings between mysterious representatives of the Indonesian government and lobbyists in the US. Waiting in the White House lobby recounts how a third-party paid some $80,000 to US lobbyists during President Jokowi’s less than impressive visit to Washington.

It caused a serious stir in Indonesia, leading to at least two press conferences by senior ministers and generating more than 400 articles in local and international press. (Indonesian media even reported on the fact that we changed the image accompanying the article.) It is an important contribution on politics in Indonesia and the region, and more than a worthy winner for 2015.

An honourable mention must be made of an article that only missed the top 10 by a couple of reads. In 11th, Clive Kessler’s essay on modern Islam and terrorism, A rage against history, examines whether Islam is a religion of peace today. One reader labelled it “deeply unsatisfying, both intellectually and emotionally.” It certainly got people talking – and will continue to do so.

Lastly, we want to say thanks to all our readers, contributors and commenters — you are the lifeblood of the website. See you all in 2016, which, for those keeping score, marks our 10th anniversary. It will be big. In the meantime, be good to each other and yourselves.

The New Mandala team: James Giggacher, Mish Khan, Nicholas Farrelly and Andrew Walker.  

Thai junta turning tragedy to farce | New Mandala

Thai junta turning tragedy to farce | New Mandala

LEE JONES, GUEST CONTRIBUTOR, 

21 AUGUST 2015

A few ideas? General Prayuth talks to Thai journalists. Photo by Reuter/ Athit Perawongmetha.

In the aftermath of the Bangkok bombing, all we’ve seen is an investigation characterised by inconsistency and incompetency.

As sympathetic as everyone must be towards the Thai and other victims of this week’s bombing at Bangkok’s Erawan shrine, we must also recognise that the Thai authorities’ response is turning a tragedy into a farce.

The host of contradictory statements emanating from police and, especially, from the erratic and incompetent dictator, General Prayuth Chan-ocha, suggest severe internal disarray, making it unclear whether the perpetrators will ever be caught.

There have been at least three major sources of confusion. The first is the nature of perpetrator. Initially, they were supposedly Thai: Prayuth instantly linked the bombing to an ‘opposition’ (ie Red Shirt) group based in Thailand’s northeast. The regime’s spokesman quickly rowed back from this, saying they could be foreigners.

Following the release of extremely grainy CCTV footage showing a yellow-shirted figure leaving a backpack at the shrine, police quickly declared – on no apparent basis – they were seeking a ‘“Caucasian” or “Arab-looking” man’ (sic).

However, the advisor to the deputy prime minister for security later stated it was unclear whether the figure was even a man or a woman. The release of an identikit apparently confirms his sex, but certainly not his ethnicity. Police still admit he could have been a Thai in disguise.

Secondly, how many culprits were they? Police initially declared that yellow-t-shirt man was ‘not just the suspect: he is the bomber’. Now they say they are only ‘more than 50 per cent sure’.

They subsequently identified two others in the CCTV footage as his accomplices. They then backtracked, saying that subsequent footage proved their innocence since they reacted ‘girlishly’ to the blast – truly a deduction worthy of Sherlock Holmes. (The two terrified men later handed themselves into police and were swiftly cleared of involvement.)

Even before that, though, other police spokesmen were saying that at least 10 peoplewere involved in a ‘network’ – apparently pure guess work.

Third, were there any international linkages and motives? Initially it was implied that the supposed ‘network’ of 10 involved foreigners – though it took three days for Thai police to file the case with Interpol. However, international terrorists were then ruled out – apparently solely on the basis of discussions with allies’ intelligence agencies.

Prayuth again boldly declared this, while also dismissing any link to the recent deportation of 109 Uighurs to China (which might explain why Chinese tourists were apparently targeted). Yet, it was simultaneously reported that the police had been pursuing this as their main lead, with Special Branch having specific forewarning of a possible attack on Chinese tourists after 11 August.

Nonetheless, this was apparently scotched by Prayuth and his allies, who are stilltrying to refocus attention on internal oppositionists. Others in the police are suggesting an organised crime link – though why the Thai mafia should want to bomb the Erawan shrine is anyone’s guess.

Obviously, any attack of this sort, which catches security forces entirely unaware, creates confusion and panic, and a wide range of hypotheses must be investigated to narrow down an investigation. But the Thai response is particularly chaotic.

Yesterday, BBC reporter Jonathan Head found fragments of the bomb near the shrine and was unable even to hand them in to police – who instead subsequently criticised Head’s own knowledge of explosives.

Indeed, the haste with which the shrine has been swept and repaired may have seriously compromised the investigation. Prayuth and his allies have obviouslyprioritised the restoration of superficial calm and ‘happiness’ over apprehending the culprits.

This is all redolent of the 2006/7 New Year bombings in Bangkok.

Then, as now, the military ruler, Surayud Chulanont, instantly (and baselessly) blamed the Red Shirts. Then, as now, the sites were rapidly swept and repaired, undermining the investigation.

Then, as now, the regime seemed to be caught in complete internal disarray, with suspects ranging from Thaksin’s friends, to Thaksin’s enemies, to the police, to factions within the military regime itself.

Then, as now, Thailand’s Muslim separatists were instantly discounted as suspects – yet the best guess of Thai intelligence today is that the Pattani United Liberation Organisation was responsible (possibly with external assistance from Jemaah Islamiyah). This is consistent with the fact that no one ever claimed responsibility – a hallmark of separatist bombings in the South.

It also refutes the suggestion, repeated today, that the separatists have never struck outside the South and have never harmed tourists (10 foreigners were among the 38 injured).

Ultimately, no one was ever caught for the 2006 attacks. This could well be the outcome this time around.

The Thai police’s professionalism, competence, expertise, political independence and moral rectitude have not noticeably improved in the intervening nine years; they appear well out of their depth. Prayuth is even worse than Surayud: paranoid, bombastic, loose-mouthed, erratic, idiosyncratic and ignorant.

Having presided over a security disaster, he now has every incentive to direct investigators away from anything for which the military could also be blamed – notably the escalating Southern insurgency and the Uighur deportations.

Unsurprisingly, Prayuth immediately refused offers of external assistance – including help from the British government – as attempts to ‘intervene’ in Thailand. His brilliantsolution was instead to urge Thai police to watch the US crime drama Blue Bloods to get ‘tips, ideas and insights’.

Many Thais see all this as a national disgrace. They are right.

Lee Jones (@DrLeeJones) is Senior Lecturer in International Politics at Queen Mary, University of London. He is author, most recently, of Governing Borderless Threats: Non-Traditional Security and the Politics of State Transformation (CUP, 2012).

Solidarity, students and shackles | New Mandala

Solidarity, students and shackles | New Mandala

 

SCHOLARS FOR SOLIDARITY, GUEST CONTRIBUTOR, 

8 JULY 2015

Today 14 Thai students arrested for peacefully protesting against the country’s ruling military junta on 26 June were released from jail.

Although the Bangkok Military Court ruled against further detention on 7 July, the case against the students, who were charged with sedition and breaching an order against public gatherings, still stands. This means they still face the prospect of seven years in jail.

Now out of prison, the students have said that they will continue to use peaceful means to demand democracy.

Thailand’s ruling junta came under sustained pressure to drop the case against the 14 students after the case sparked international condemnation.

Human rights groups slammed the jailing, labelling it as an escalation in the ruling junta’s repression. Last week both the EU and UN both called on the junta to drop the charges and free the activists.

Joining the global calls to free the 14, were scholars, writers, and citizens from around the world.

The campaign, organised under the ad hoc name of International Solidarity for Thai Students and Teachers, saw over sixty people calling for the immediate release and dropping of all charges against Chatupat Boonyapatraksa, Apiwat Suntararak, Payu Boonsopon, Panupong Srithananuwat, Suvicha Tipangkorn, Supachai Pukrongploy, Wasant Satesit, Rattapol Supasupon, Rangsiman Rome, Songtham Kaewpanpruk, Chonthicha Jaengraew, Rattapol Supasophon, Apisit Sapnapapha, Pakorn Areekul, and Pornchai Yuanyee.

The scholars, writers, and citizens wrote individual letters, took photographs, wrote poems, shared poems by others, drew pictures, and sent short messages of support. The messages included the expression of solidarity, the linking of the Thai struggle for democracy to other struggles globally, and the enduring power of liberty, dignity, and freedom.

Following is a selection of the messages. You can see all the messages over at Prachatai’s English website.

Signs of solidarity

Many people sent the students letters. For example, Ariel Dorfman, noted thinker and writer who was forced to flee Chile when General Pinochet launched a coup against democratically-elected Salvador Allende in 1973, came to power, called on the government to cease its persecution of the students:

As someone who has himself suffered repression in Latin America and witnessed it around the world, I urge the government to stop persecuting the fourteen students who want nothing more than the human rights and democracy which are part of the heritage of the whole Thai people.

I write not only as a human rights activist, a distinguished professor at Duke University and a writer, but as someone who has established in the past, through my work, a relationship with Thailand. My play, Death and the Maiden, has been staged there – and an award winning film, Prisoners in Time, starring John Hurt, was filmed there, after I spent a compelling week in Thailand, interviewing people and scouting locations, discovering the deep gentleness and profound wisdom of so many citizens who are now subjected to the worst sort of harassment. If teachers and students are not free to express themselves, to think and act upon their thoughts, the future for Thailand will be bleak.

Other scholars, writers, and citizens wrote poems. Michelle Tan, from the Faculty of Political Science at Thammasat University, wrote:

What will it take to prove to you, who rule at the barrel of a gun, that we…

are not slaves of Thaksin

are not living in a “beautiful world’

are not slaves of Caucasian white-skinned foreigners

are not evil capitalists

but we

are fighting for a stable, peaceful future

which requires the rule of law, not the rule of any individual

are trying to allow for free expression

which will help prevent the pent-up frustration that leads to radicalisation and violence

are willing to listen to you and everyone in this country

are advocating a stable system of checks and balances

are fighting against corruption, regardless of who commits it

are all human???

If there is no “third side”, no neutral space free of double standards, then there is no hope.

Others sent in works of art, like Tessa Morris-Suzuki, a Fukuoka Peace Prize winner and professor at the Australian National University.

May Adadol Ingawanij, teacher, University of Westminster, offered the message that, “You’ll never walk alone,” as well as this short clip.

Chris Baker asked, “Who breaks a butterfly upon a wheel?”

A friend from Hong Kong sent in a visual message of support:

Tyrell Haberkorn from the Australian National University shared part of Adrienne Rich’s poem, Integrity:

Aim Sinpeng from the University of Sydney summed it all up with this clear and sharp message:

See all the messages over at Prachatai’s English website.

V-Day resistance to the junta’s coercive regime | New Mandala

V-Day resistance to the junta’s coercive regime | New Mandala

AIM SINPENG, GUEST CONTRIBUTOR, 

24 FEBRUARY 2015

Source: Event posters, Facebook, Resistant Citizen (พลเมืองโต้กลับ)

Thailand just witnessed the most important anti-government rally since the May 2014 coup. This rare and well-coordinated opposition activity could be a game changer for the growing dissent among the Thai public.

On Valentine’s Day, the newly formed Resistant Citizen Group (พลเมืองโต้กลับ) launched a campaign, “My Beloved (Stolen) Election,” to call for a return to the ballot box. The event was well advertised in advance, with promotional videos, posters,Instagram and other social media outlets such as Facebook and Twitter being tactfully employed. Banners were also seen in Chiang Mai and elsewhere. Parody, comedy and pop culture were weaved through the group’s main pro-election message, “My Beloved Election,” which in Thai was written as “Leuk tung tee rak” where “rak,” which means “love” is seen crossed off and wittily replaced by another word that has a similar sound, “lak” which means “stolen.” An even more ambiguous parody in the poster is the ballot that has been changed to a condom pack with a picture of the Democracy Monument, calling for a variety of interpretations. In another parody, it is a love poem to the men in uniform that describes the longing for the “lost” voices and rights. This style of civil disobedience is reminiscent of the Red Sunday Group, which frequently organized flash mobs calling for greater political rights between 2011 and 2014.

Some 300 supporters reportedly showed up at the rally in front of the Bangkok Arts and Cultural Centre – a normally very busy area in the heart of the capital. In the past, this area used to hold events and campaigns that supported an election, a political process in which the current military government does not seem to want it to happen ‘too soon.’ In anticipation of this event, security measures were tight with army truckslined up outside of some of the major universities and at least two police units and several others in civilian clothing at the rally. After all, this was the most open opposition to the junta since initial anti-coup protests immediately following the putsch in May last year. The rally was eventually broken up by the security forces and 4 main organizers were arrested and later released on bail.

There are 3 reasons for why the V-Day resistance could mark an important turning point for opposition forces against the current military government.

First, this open, deliberate and direct challenge to the government defies and delegitimizes the government’s logic of coercion. Coercion – an act of influencing someone’s behaviour by force – requires the target audience (coercees) to perceive that they are being coerced. Often, those exercising coercion set out reasons for why a particular behaviour is desired and what the consequences are for non-compliance. Up to now, the junta has used a combination of coercion and moral suasion to “direct” and shape citizens’ behaviour.

Indeed, the very legitimacy of the current government depends on its ability to use coercion effectively and to monopolize its use. State-society relations under General Prayuth leadership is marked by an obsession over getting all “Thais” to collectively behave in a certain way, as evidenced by his Principle of 12 Values campaign. Thais are to be patriotic, loyal, grateful, respectful of authority, disciplined, etc. Along with the list of expected behaviour is also a list of “forbidden behaviour,” which includes a mundane listing of prohibitions characteristic of a dictatorial regime like a ban on political protest, for example. Threats and intimidation tactics have been frequently and openly exercised to create a climate of fear, but to also re-establish the social order to ensure Thai citizens “know” whose order to obey.

The push back by the Resistant Citizen has shown that the government’s logic of coercion may be failing. While the Prayuth Administration has generally succeeded in monopolizing the means of coercion, it has not used it so effectively. The V-Day resistance has exposed an important flaw in the government’s coercion tactic: incentives for compliance. Why should we comply, a citizen may ask? He/she may be well-aware of the risks for non-compliance but what about rewards for compliance? Social order? Prosperity? Democracy? The rewards are neither clear nor shared.

Source: Resistant Citizen Facebook

The mission statement of the Resistant Citizen strongly indicates that the current regime of coercion is not working. The way the group describes themselves is quite telling:

“In a climate of fear that is seeping through everywhere with a purpose of establishing a long-term authoritarian rule by the coup makers and their allies…In such environment, we, comprising of students, teachers, activists, relatives of those who have lost their lives due to political persecution, and those who love freedom and democracy, all agree that the first thing we must do is to destroy such climate of fear created by the coup government.”

While many Thais recognize that the junta’s grand plan of creating a morally united and acquiescent Thailand is a pipe dream, they comply or self-censor because the punishment for non-compliance is too costly (and ignorance is blissful). But the acts of defiance by Resistant Citizen has potentially reduced the “costs” of resistance for individual dissent through public demonstration of collective dissent.

Furthermore, the fact that the main drivers behind the V-Day resistance are knownactivists, and some would be considered by the authorities as “repeat offenders” signifies the military’s weakening coercive regime. Siriwit Serithiwat, one of the main organizers, had been detained twice previously and even signed an MOU with the military that he would not further engage in political activities. Yet he did. Anon Nampha, the Resistant Citizen’s leader and a human rights lawyer, told the authorities who detained him that if they were to be released, it would have to be unconditional. Both of these examples show that not only was the threat of reprisal not working, but the opposition leaders perceived their own position of having some leverage vis-à-vis the government.

Lastly, the V-Day resistance drew on support from existing opposition organizations, which demonstrated the strengthening of opposition forces. Unlike previous small acts of defiance, like the three-finger salute, or pro-democracy banners at sportingevents, the recent pro-democracy rally was well planned and coordinated. It drew support, manpower and organization skills from established groups such as the Thai Student Centre for Democracy, the League of Liberal Thammasat for Democracy, and the Liberal Assembly of Chiang Mai University. Even a prominent anti-coup activist and founder of the Red Sunday Group, Sombat Boonngamanong, who is facing up to 14 years in prison for his political activities, came to show tacit support to the Resistant Citizen group by bailing out one of its leaders. Organizational assets like these crucial for oppositional activities to continue on the future.

No the Prayuth regime is not crumbling, but its foundations are shaking against the tides of rising dissent.

Aim Sinpeng is a Lecturer in the Department of Government and International Relations, University of Sydney and Pasoot Lasuka provided invaluable advice on an earlier draft

Thai Junta Compares its Coup to Burma’s 1988 Crackdown

Thai Junta Compares its Coup to Burma’s 1988 Crackdown
AMY SAWITTA LEFEVRE / REUTERS| Friday, July 4, 2014

BANGKOK — Thailand’s military on Friday compared its seizure of power in May to restore stability after months of unrest to the brutal crackdown by Burma’s former junta in 1988 to snuff out a pro-democracy movement.

Tanasak Patimapragorn, supreme commander of Thailand’s armed forces (L), welcomes Burma’s army chief General Min Aung Hlaing during a visit to Bangkok. (Photo: www.nationtv.tv)

Thailand’s military justified its intervention by the need to restore stability after months of unrest and demonstrations by pro and anti-government protesters.

Perhaps unwittingly, the deputy chief of the Thai junta likened its seizure of power to one of the darkest chapters in the rule of Burma’s junta, its crushing of pro-democracy protests in 1988 when at least 3,000 people were killed.

“Myanmar’s government agrees with what Thailand is doing in order to return stability to the nation. Myanmar had a similar experience to us in 1988, so they understand,” said Tanasak Patimapragorn, supreme commander of Thailand’s armed forces, following a visit to Bangkok by Burma’s army chief General Min Aung Hlaing.

Burma’s junta stepped aside in 2011 after nearly five decades of repressive rule and a nominally civilian government full of former military people has pushed through political reforms, freeing hundreds of political prisoners and unmuzzling the press.

In contrast, Thailand’s army seized power after months of street protests designed to oust elected Prime Minister Yingluck Shinwatra.

It has effectively banned criticism by the media and arrested pro-democracy protesters for such innocuous acts as reading books in public that are critical of totalitarian regimes, such as George Orwell’s “1984”.

Yingluck was found guilty of abuse of power and ordered to step down by a court on May 7 in what her supporters say was a move by the military-backed royalist establishment to eliminate her family’s political influence. The coup on May 22 cleared out what was left of her government.

The visit by Burma’s military commander, General Min Aung Hlaing, marks the second by a foreign official since the coup, after that of Malaysia’s defense minister.

Thai officials have visited other Asian countries such as China and Cambodia to seek support as a counterweight to the condemnation of Western countries. The United States and European Union have both downgraded diplomatic ties.

Thailand has been sharply divided since 2006 when Yingluck’s brother, then premier Thaksin Shinawatra, was toppled by the army. Critics, mostly drawn from the Bangkok-based conservative establishment, said he had abused power and harbored republican aspirations, accusations he denied.

Dissent Silenced

On Thursday the military said it had drafted an interim constitution but gave no details on its content. Winthai Suvaree, a spokesman for the ruling National Council for Peace and Order, told reporters the charter would be submitted for royal endorsement this month.

The junta has begun an overhaul of the electoral system and leader General Prayuth Chan-ocha has said elections could take place by late 2015.

The junta has all but silenced dissent by detaining hundreds of activists, academics, journalists and politicians, many at undisclosed locations, before releasing them on condition they do not criticize the regime.

The small anti-coup protests seen immediately after the coup have fizzled out in recent weeks.

A rally on Friday outside the U.S. embassy in Bangkok to show support for Washington’s decision to downgrade ties with Thailand attracted a dozen people, a Reuters reporter said.

Some were taken to police stations for questioning while others were simply asked by troops to produce identity papers.

Under martial law, public gatherings of more than five people are banned.

In the first conviction related to anti-coup activity, a Bangkok court sentenced a protester on Thursday to a one-month suspended jail term and a $190 fine for violating the law.