The trouble with Thailand’s new democracy | New Mandala

The trouble with Thailand’s new democracy | New Mandala
Jim Taylor, 28 JANUARY 2016

To restore democracy and topple an ‘ancien regime’, anti-junta activism needs to transform into broad-based, anti-fascist movement, writes Jim Taylor.

The “New Democracy” Movement (NDM, sometimes written in English as “Neo- Democracy”), are now at the forefront of spontaneous anti-fascist activities in Thailand.

The group was founded by a core group of 14 mostly students of working class backgrounds from Bangkok and Khon Kaen, whose families benefitted from former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra’s pro-poor policies.

NDM says it is committed to “fighting for freedom and democracy”. Tyrell Haberkorn’sarticle in Dissent magazine outlines the importance of this group as potential for new democratic leadership. She raises the notion of the NDM as being somehow outside Thailand’s colour code.

The group, declining coded associations, in any case, are not going to paint themselves into a corner; such a move would be dangerous when trying to win over the middle ground sentiment. In general, people do not know about the “red shirts” and if they want to find out more online try, as my students did, a Google search for “red shirts” – all dedicated sites have been infected with viruses!

Any colour sentiments since 2014 that are not “yellow” remain close to the heart, not the mouth. Let’s be clear – ideologically, “red shirts” of whatever orientations adhere to the following values:

• The right to a “one person, one vote” electoral system (and to be able to elect a government of one’s choice);
• The right to social and economic opportunity (especially for the poor: this is one value which really rankles the Thai bourgeoisie who rely on cheap labour);
• The right to freedom of expression and personal liberty; and
• The right to an equitable and fair justice system (ceasing “double standards”, palace commands, and having a more credible and moral judiciary).

I would suggest that these are the core values for democracy in Thailand. It would be hard to see a “colourless” position possible due to intense decades’ long ultra-royalist institutionalised propaganda which has washed away any compromise position.

The salim (สลิ่ม), or “yellow-shirts” as they are called (re-coding themselves since 2006 under various royal colours) have appropriated what remains of the middle ground through sheer political cunning and semantics. This includes the use of terms such as “Reform”, “People’s” (implying a “mass” movement), and “Democracy”, used by fascistic street movements firstly PAD and then PDRC when their collective aspirations were far from “democratic”.  They have effectively pulled the rug from under the pro-democracy red-shirt movement.

Needless to say, declaring oneself “red” in the current fascistic environment is courting (no pun intended) retribution. There is little space of resistance above the ground for these pro-democracy activists. Around 30-40 academics in Thailand have also been active since 2015 and under constant intimidation. At many universities, the army makes regular incursions on campus during lectures and seminars.

Pheu Thai Party (PTP) and United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship (UDD) leaders are pinned to the ground, in some cases individual bank accounts were frozen, individuals incarcerated for flippant reasons or under constant surveillance.  This is why the NDM have an important role to play on the front stage and as students, the media and international human rights organisations tend to watch over their wellbeing and whereabouts.

The NDM have been in the limelight since demonstrations on the one-year anniversary of the 22 May 2014 coup and in calling for an investigation into corruption allegations surrounding Rajabhakti Park in January 2016.

In a smart move, the regime has since renamed the park’s notorious foundation and placed it under royal patronage to silence critics under Article 112. The military court arrest warrants for six are among the 11 activists accused of breaching the military junta’s National Council for Peace and Order, Directive No. 3/2015 on “political gatherings”.

General Prayuth Chan-ocha’s junta and its royalist media lapdogs have been trying to link NDM leader Sirawith “Ja New” Seritiwat with backing from PTP and Thaksin. The fourth-year political science student lives hand to mouth most days, except for some occasional part-time work.  Sirawith, as readers may know, was recently abducted by eight soldiers attached, it seems, to 2nd Battalion, 2nd Infantry Regiment (King’s Guard) ostensibly under Section 44 of the interim constitution.

He was bundled into a vehicle without licence plates to be later dropped at a police station. He had been blindfolded, sworn at, beaten, taken to the bush area and threatened with a gun to his head as he heard the clicking sound of the trigger. This intimidation method is frequently used by Thai fascists.

Interestingly, the army abductors demanded to know why he did not call for an investigation into ousted prime minister Yingluck Shiawatra’s (highly popular) rice subsidy program, rather than drawing attention to army corruption and abuse of power! The five core activists (Sirawith Seritiwat, Chonticha Jaeng-rew, Chanoknan Ruamsap, Korakoch Saengyenpan, and Abhisit Sapnaphapan) have declared the junta’s actions to silence them as “illegitimate”. Among the group, 29-year-old activist Abhisit S needs special watching as he is no longer a student and will be taken before a military court.

Another student activist, Chakraphon Phonla-o “Kankan” was abducted from his home on 25 January and taken to Nawamintharachini Army Base in Chonburi Province. He was freed later in the day. Another example of the increasing abuse of power by the junta. We need to observe events closely in the coming days and weeks, as indeed are some international human rights groups such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International are already doing.

To have any impact on a well-armed, cunning and well-financed ancien régime there needs to be a shift in focus (if not ideology) among informal segmentary student groups such as NDM towards the creation of a sustainable broad-based (anti-fascist) social democratic movement.

“Anti-junta” small group protests are a means to achieving some media attention, but they are readily crushed and the consequence of actions are short-lived. Behind this military junta, there will always be another military junta, similarly tied to royalist apron-strings.

Most silenced red shirts, sickened and hardened by events in 2010, lacking weapons, money and logistics, wait for the inevitable outcome at the palace, or the consequence of a spontaneous battle between two establishment military factions and their respective royal sides.

All the masses can do in the interim is to seemingly wait and endure the social, political and economic consequences of this high-level connivance. Any uprising, should this happen, will be spontaneous in nature.

Dr Jim Taylor is an Adjunct Associate Professor in Anthropology & Development Studies at the University of Adelaide.

Thailand’s constitution conundrum | New Mandala

Thailand’s constitution conundrum | New Mandala

 

KHEMTHONG TONSAKULRUNGRUANG, 

1 OCTOBER 2015

A Thai soldier stands guard in front of the Democracy Monument. Photo: AP Photo/Sakchai Lalit

To draft an acceptable constitution for Thailand the junta must learn key lessons from past failure. 

In September, Thailand’s National Reform Council (NRC), rejected a controversial draft constitution prepared by the Constitution Drafting Commission (CDC).

The decision came after directions from the ruling National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO), which took control of the country in the aftermath of last May’s coup. It has further delayed elections.

The NCPO is now recruiting a new CDC to draft another constitution. But this next draft is also destined to fail. Only a miracle will save the new CDC from the shame and humiliation suffered by former CDC head, Borwornsak Uwanno, and his team.

This constitution will not be a document of unity and prosperity as claimed by the junta. Those opposed to the NCPO will reject it, regardless of its content. Those who are pro-junta will embrace it without even glancing at what is has to say.

Thus, it is crucial that the CDC appeal to Thailand’s silent majority. The draft may then be accepted and drafters dismissed with grace, while possibly ensuring somewhat better governance than the current regime.

However, if a miracle is to happen, lessons must be learnt and the following advice should be taken seriously.

First and foremost, the drafters matter and the team must be well balanced.

Having conservatives in the CDC is not a problem as long as there are liberals too. The more problematic figures are those who actively appeared on the People’s Democratic Reform Committee stage during the ‘Bangkok shutdown’ of January 2014. Or those making contemptuous remarks publicly about the “uneducated lower class.” These radicals will see the drafting’s demise.

The opposite problem is that of deadwood; those who look for fame but contribute nothing to the task at hand. This excess baggage, mostly military generals out of touch with the world, is an obstacle to the drafting process. If they must be appointed for political reasons, it is better to “hide” them in the reform council where their incompetence is better concealed.

Second, be careful with spending. While former CDC members publically aired grievances about their terrible assignment, they forgot to mention that they were paid exorbitantly well.

Upon first meeting, the former CDC approved an allowance of 6,000 to 9,000 baht for each time they met. This was in addition to their salary at the cabinet, the NRC, or the National Assembly, which was also in addition to their regular full-time pay.

Why should a man with three income sources mope? Many of them bagged a lot of cash serving the junta. Combined with the news of the junta’s wasteful spending, the former CDC was criticised for getting too highly paid in exchange for mediocre service. When the draft was rejected, critics suggested they should return these gains.

By drafting the constitution, the drafters often claim they are “serving the country.” But, if you volunteer to serve the nation, you must keep your monetary reward to the minimum. It should not turn into a for-profit enterprise.

Third, keep the draft simple and democratic.

Inventing non-democratic mechanisms is a sure way of getting the draft rejected. Thai constitutions are getting lengthier, more complicated, and less functional. The CDC should avoid discussing a third-party prime minister or the powerful crisis panel – the 23-member panel to take over government during a “national emergency”.

Anything undemocratic should not be bluntly replaced with the tag “Thai-style” or “Thailand only.” These tags are only pretext for arbitrariness and the people know it.

Fourth, be transparent. The former CDC drafted what was to be the supreme law of the land but the people knew nothing about its making. Often, the press was not allowed to observe the constitutional debate.

The only source of information came from the CDC spokesperson and sounded like propaganda, rather than the beginning of a dialogue. Secrecy entails that the wisdom of the Thai majority cannot be trusted. It outright insults Thais’ intelligence.

Finally, involve the public. Meaningful participation is vital for the legitimacy of the CDC and the draft constitution.

The CDC boasted that it conducted public hearings throughout the country, and was blessed by several groups of well-wishers. The CDC must stop fooling itself that the school children, college students, and civil servants who came to give support to the CDC signified genuine public acceptance.

The few formal public hearings never worked because they were too brief and came too late. These meetings simply served as rubber-stamping processes. The CDC should listen more to its critics, who, due to the junta’s suppression, communicate via less formal means such as social media.

Will the miracle happen?

The junta has already put forward some names with doubtful credentials. Certainly, the CDC will not be able to act independently from the NCPO, and it is likely to honor the junta’s wishes. That implies many undemocratic features that should be avoided in any constitution draft.

The junta will not relax its grip on Thailand anytime soon and unfortunately the oppressive atmosphere will only cloud the drafting. The fear of attitude re-adjustment programs renders any attempt to bring in sincere participation fruitless.

Let us wish the new CDC luck; they are really going to need it in the six months ahead.

Khemthong Tonsakulrungruang is a Thai constitutional law scholar.

Thai democracy’s waiting game | New Mandala

Thai democracy’s waiting game | New Mandala

SARAWUT METHAROM, GUEST CONTRIBUTOR, 

9 JULY 2015

An anti-coup protestor demonstrates in Bangkok on 24 May, 2014. Photo by AFP.

To heal current political wounds should Thailand wait five years for free and fair elections?
On any given day, if you are driving between Bangkok and the suburbs, you are likely to encounter traffic jams in the most unusual of places. Most often than not, it will be the police controlling the traffic.

Thai police have the tendency to alternatively block one side of the road to let the traffic flow faster for a while and vice versa. But any traffic engineer will tell you that it is continual flow which is more important, whether fast or slow. Selectively switching the flow on or off actually induces a traffic jam.

This is typical of Thailand.

The country is once again stuck now that a military coup has led to traffic flow for one side of politics, but jammed progress for the rest of the country.

After the coup, one side believed that there would be uprising and democracy would be restored. The other side believed that the economy would roar back and the flow of money to peoples’ pockets would silence any opposition.

But both have not happened.

To make matters worse, the current myriad of actors have no credibility and whatever they achieve will hardly be accepted by their own supporters, let alone the masses.

In the case of both stark choices the country now faces – continuous military rule or elections and the formation of a new government – the outcome is also highly uncertain.

Thailand is in a typically switched off mode. For its citizens, facing so much uncertainty, not knowing if any immediate outcome will solve such an intractable problem, it is easy to enter this phase.

Thais are aware of what they have been deprived of by both this and previous governments. But in a situation so confusing, when one doesn’t know who is their friend and who is their enemy, people withdraw. This is the most dangerous situation a country can descend into.

People don’t just withdraw from politics but economic activities as well. The reason why the Thai economy has stalled is because of this.

An example is neighbouring Myanmar, which stagnated for 50 years. It is only starting to catch up to its past levels of economic development today. Remember, in the 1950s, Myanmar was considered to be the rising star of Asia.

Countries do not become underdeveloped overnight. It is a process which happens slowly when growth stalls for one country while others move forward. Thailand started stalling intermittently in 2005 and is now in full blown decay. The effect is apparent in many spheres.

Physical infrastructure is slowly deteriorating, the education system in tatters, and the economy is uncompetitive and is therefore trying to force down wages. The country also faces a huge ageing problem including an ageing workforce.

Most of these require urgent action and attention, but as the country is not able to come together politically it is suffering economically. Parties which are fighting now will be left with a crippled country. It is like parents fighting over a child and not feeding it, to only later realise that whoever has won is left with a lifeless child.

I don’t want to point fingers. Most of the long-term problems crept into the country long ago and political troubles have only caused crippling inaction. But the question remains; how can Thailand get out of this quagmire? What can trigger progress?

First let us accept that the basic problem is political. Political problems are solved either by confrontation, where one side is often annihilated, or by compromise. As confrontation has resulted in the current untenable situation, it seems to me that compromise is essential.

Who will be the architects of this compromise? We always hear about some backroom dialogue between Thaksin and the elites, but will any agreement between them work in the larger context? Thailand has moved beyond factions and beyond rallies; people have their own ideas and they should be respected.

I think there are some vital steps needed to take the country out of this current mess. There should be grand bargain between current rulers and the people. All current reforms, including the drafting of a new constitution should be disbanded. Instead, the 1997 constitution should be adopted.

The interim administration led by General Prayuth Chan-ocha should only be made up of technocrats and run by decree. These technocrats should be neutral or be chosen by each side. In order to modernise, the country needs to change key systems, including education and the judiciary. Thailand should also improve its criminal justice. And, we must reduce the influence of religious institutions in public life.

Finally, Thailand must aim for a sustainable democratic system within five years. This is because it is not just democracy but the long-term health of the country that is at stake.

After five years Thailand must hold free and fair elections, giving the elected legislature the option to nullify/modify any decree within a year, or else it becomes law. In addition, constitutional change should only be allowed with a two-thirds majority of votes form the lower house and senate.

It may seem distasteful for any liberal commentator to consider not having elections and continuing with an administration led by a prime minister ruling by decree for the next five years. I fully agree with this sentiment.

However, Thailand today is not only stuck in traffic; it is a wounded runner. One side is prodding the country to run while the other side wants to amputate the leg to get rid of the injury.

As hard as it may be, the solution is to let the wound heal.

Sarawut Metharom is a pseudonym. The author is a long-time resident of Thailand.

The Thai junta’s doublespeak | New Mandala

The Thai junta’s doublespeak | New Mandala

 

THONGCHAI WINICHAKUL & TYRELL HABERKORN, GUEST CONTRIBUTORS, 

8 JUNE 2015

Thailand’s rulers have made doublespeak a central strategy of its rule and turned it into an art of absurdity.

During the first year following the coup by the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) on May 22, 2014, the junta in Thailand summoned at least 751 people, including a large number of intellectuals, leaders of local political networks, and those whom the junta considered opponents. These people were variously detained, interrogated, intimidated, or simply warned to cease their opposition to the coup. Some were subsequently charged, but most were released after signing a document that they would not engage in any political activities against the junta.

The junta told the Thai public that the purpose of the summons was “attitude adjustment”.

During the first year under the junta, domestic criticism has been swiftly and, often publicly, punished. Academic and public forums on politics are disrupted or cancelled, or at the very least subject to surveillance. Highly-politicised prosecutions against those accused of lèse majesté and politicians associated with the previous government take place with little attention to due process. Resource grabs across the country at the expense of rural citizens’ land and livelihood are widespread. All of this takes place in the name of “reconciliation”.

“Reform” is another keyword used by the regime to describe the changes enacted via junta order or envisioned in the draft constitution. But rather than improvement, these measures amount to winding the clock back 30 years with respect to democracy, decentralisation, and the role of the military in politics.

This “reform” is pushed ahead under the slogan “Marching Forward Thailand” in order to “Give Happiness Back to People” despite ongoing suppression, injustice and gloomy economic news.

For the NCPO, reconciliation means the elimination of apparent social or political conflict. Attitude adjustment means accepting indoctrination by the junta obediently. Reform means going back to a time before democracy. Orwellian doublespeak is rampant in the NCPO’s Thailand.

Doublespeak is neither new nor specific to Thailand. In 2010, the government under Abhisit Vejjajiva ordered a violent suppression of red shirt demonstrations in central Bangkok and referred to the crackdown as “taking back the space”. During the ‘New Order’ regime in Indonesia between 1965-1998, tens of thousands were sent to prison islands under the “Humanitarian Project”. Then, as now, eloquent words do not mask the violence behind the need to obfuscate.

The current Thai junta’s doublespeak differs from earlier versions in several ways.

First, the junta’s doublespeak is effective primarily because their supporters, the powerful and wealthier sectors of Thai society, share similar understandings of these key concepts. To the junta and its supporters, democracy means rule by uncorrupt and virtuous people who can bring “harmony,” another ubiquitous term in Thailand. They believe in the uniqueness of “Thai-style democracy” with governance by “good people” ruling in the name of the benevolent monarchy. The means by which this kind of rule is achieved is less important than its moral integrity. They contrast this with Western democracy, which they argue results in the election of corrupt politicians by ignorant people.

This is the legacy of age-old Buddhist Dharma politics. After all, “good governance” in Thai is translated literally as “governance by Dharma,” or governance by divine law. “Harmony” which means the maintenance of social order and the absence of serious conflict, is the hallmark of governance by Dharma. Within this framework, reconciliation does not involve truth or justice, but rather the appearance of harmony with dissent swept neatly under the rug.

Second, there is a huge gap in the understanding of these keywords between the junta’s domestic supporters on the one hand, and its domestic dissidents and the international community on the other. The junta knows that a large sector of population opposes their rule and is not fooled by doublespeak, not even for a moment.

The junta is aware of this failure, but continues to employ doublespeak to consolidate its domestic supporters. The junta thus must deal with the gap between their supporters and opponents, particularly the international community. Domestic critics face intimidation, arrest, and detention. In response to criticism from the United Nations, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and democratic governments around the world, the junta flatly denies carrying out human right violations, restricting liberty and tampering with democracy. Heavy suppression domestically and the disregard of criticism by the international community serve the same purpose to reaffirm and strengthen domestic support.

Third, and most important, the repetition and extension of doublespeak over time, combined with the criminalisation of criticism of the junta, denies the truth and produces impunity for state violence. When the current regime misnames detention and torture as “attitude adjustment,” they are following a well-worn path. There have been many previous incidents in which the Thai state suppressed its citizens, including killing them, without any concern of being held to account.

Most recently, when a historic process meant that Abhisit Vejjajiva and company were charged in late 2013 in the criminal court with premeditated murder for their role in the 2010 bloodshed, they maintained that they did not order a crackdown, but aimed to “take back the space” occupied by the protestors. Under legal conditions that remain murky, the charges against them were dismissed following the most recent coup.

The current junta continues to insist that they are reformers working tirelessly for reconciliation in order to return happiness to people, not dictators. They know well that the judiciary is either firmly on their side or at their disposal to legalise their doublespeak and to absolve their wrongdoings.

But as opposition grows, most recently the peaceful protests on the one-year anniversary of the coup that led to the arrest and detention of more than 50 students, cracks are appearing in the façade of normalcy created by the junta’s doublespeak. Although they were released without charges being pressed at the time, the delayedsummoning of at least 11 students to hear charges against them on 8 June is another example of doublespeak in action. The junta may hope that they can ride out the discontent. They may hope that the history of impunity will ensure that time is on their side.

The current junta has made doublespeak a central strategy of its rule and turned it into an art of absurdity. It is incumbent upon all of us who are concerned about the Thai people to name “Thai-style democracy” by the more correct name of old-fashioned dictatorship.

Thongchai Winichakul is a Professor of History at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Tyrell Haberkorn is a Fellow in the Department of Political and Social Change at the Australian National University’s Coral Bell School of Asia Pacific Affairs.

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.