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.

Chatwadee Rose Amornpat - Thailand’s thieves in uniform | New Mandala

Chatwadee Rose Amornpat, 7 July 2015

The ties between the military and monarchy are robbing the country of freedom and democracy.

With all the turmoil in Thailand today, it is interesting to observe that one so-called ‘revered’ institution, the monarchy, has not come out to stop the chaos.

Thai royalists and the royal household often surreptitiously inform the local and foreign media that the King has no political power. But a quick glance at the current constitution reveals the opposite is true.

Junta chief General Prayuth Chan-ocha stated last May, after he successfully seized power from a democratically-elected government, that the constitution was abrogated; that is except all the articles relating to the monarch and the lese majeste law.

That is to say, the laws concerning the power of the king, his welfare and his protection were left intact and enforceable. These are wide-ranging.

For example section three of the constitution states that:

The sovereign power belongs to the Thai people. The King as Head of State shall exercise such power through the National Assembly, the Council of Ministers and the Courts in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution.

But this is like saying the car belongs to the people but only the king can drive it. Or, the people own the gun but only the king can pull the trigger. In both cases, the people have to perform the maintenance and upkeep of the car and gun.

Section eight of the constitution states that:

The King shall be enthroned in a position of revered worship and shall not be violated. No person shall expose the King to any sort of accusation or action.

This section means the Thai King is like God and no one can speak against the King even if he commits robbery, blatant lies, mayhem or murder.

Section 10 places the King as the Supreme Commander of the Thai Armed Forces, while section 11 gives the King the right to create titles and confer decorations.

This all goes some way to explain why today in Thailand we do not have just one dictator, but two.

There is a symbiotic relationship between the monarchy and the military, which has been going on for the past six decades. Every time there is a coup, while the generals may change, the monarchy always remained intact. Because of this we can only blame Thailand’s current ongoing troubles on the very top; the monarchy. This is the main characteristic of Thai society and politics which never changes.

On Friday, 19 June, Thai police arrested 14 students who had been protesting against the ruling junta, in defiance of a ban on public gatherings. These are young university students who are brave and full of democratic spirit. They want nothing except the right to express themselves freely on issues affecting their lives and future. They are now confined to a filthy and crowded jail in Bangkok.

The students took part in peaceful rallies calling for an end to military rule under the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO). The army commander-in-chief, General Udomdej Seetabutr, publicly accused the 14 student activists of being backed by anti-government groups and claimed their actions could lead to disturbances and violence.

Additionally, General Udomdej Seetabutr, indicated that a charge of lese majeste may be leveled against them, because these students may have received support from anti-monarchy elements as well.

It is against the international norm that the Thai Army is designed to protect only the monarchy as opposed to protecting the country and the people. It is now becoming clearer and clearer that Thailand is being governed by two types of thieves in uniforms.

The first, the King, wears his uniform with pride. As head of state, he often wears decorative pins and trappings, occasionally also donning uniforms similar to characters in an ancient Ramayana play, with ceremonial headgear to top it all off.

The first thief is only concerned about their stability and vast wealth, under the control of secretive investment arm, Crown Property Bureau. They intend to prolong their continued status quo and privileges and entitlement for generations to come.

The second thieves in uniform are the generals, who benefit from their collusion with the monarchy. Each top general has benefited from the yearly military budget and allocations for arms purchases. The top brass stands to benefit millions and millions of dollars or bahts in terms of commission.

And now the generals are joined by the rank and file. Under ‘Article 44’, which gives unlimited power to the junta, the military can do just about anything they please, from searching anyone’s house or person without a warrant, to jailing anyone on any minor charge.

Many lower-ranking soldiers are behaving like hooligans extorting money from street vendors and retailers in open daylight with impunity.

Unless the Thai people unite and demand the reorganisation of these two institutions from the ground up, the chance of realising a true democracy, is next to nothing. And if something doesn’t happen soon, the people and Thailand will forever remain robbed.

Chatwadee Rose Amornpat is based in London. She was charged with lese majeste by the Thai military junta in July 2014. For previous New Mandala coverage of her situation see this post.

EDITOR’S UPDATE: The Military Court on Tuesday ruled that the students should be released from jail. However, they still face trial and a possible seven-year sentence for their peaceful protest against the ruling junta. 

Democracy worship in Thailand | New Mandala

Democracy worship in Thailand | New Mandala

 

MAT CARNEY & EMILY DONALD, GUEST CONTRIBUTORS, 

2 JUNE 2015

Photo by Adaptor-Plug on flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/11401580@N03/

Simplistic arguments currently circulating in Thailand are in danger of neglecting the complexities of democracy and ignoring roadblocks to its ‘return’.

In the words of Winston Churchill, “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time”.

Churchill’s statement contains some truth; democracy has been a relatively successful project within the realms of Europe, North America and Oceania. But democracy has yet to be fully established elsewhere. Most countries in Southeast Asia are not ruled democratically and this absence of tangible democracy is spurring an emerging trend that can only be described as ‘democracy worship’.

The people and groups leading this trend have glorified and simplified the basic principles of democracy, elevating the political system to cult-like status. Democracy is discussed and demanded as the instantly required form of government that a state must adhere too. At times individuals describe it, unintentionally and intentionally, as that of perfection and utopianism.

Examples of ‘democracy worship’ can be seen throughout Southeast Asia, however, it is most obvious in Thailand, where democracy is admired and given sacred qualities, with little thought given to the complexities or theory behind it. Equally as clear is the problematic nature of the country’s democracy or lack of it.

Such desire for democracy is valid as Thais have lived in a constant state of semi-democracy, constantly interrupted by aggressive coups, appointed prime ministers, and full blown dictatorships, forming a repetitive pattern that has reoccurred for decades.

Coup culture within Thailand has many distinct characteristics, with two standing out more than others; the worship of democracy within certain areas of society, and an almost blasé attitude towards military coups. Again, there are legitimate reasons for individuals to desire a ‘return’ to democratic governance. However, the simplistic arguments over the desire for democracy currently circulating in Thailand, are in danger of neglecting the complexities of democracy.

Social media, an understated instrument of political discourse within Thailand, helps to demonstrate democracy worship and the cult-like following that has been attracted by democracy’s ideals. The trend may also be enhanced through other forms of worship within Thailand, such as ‘academic worship’ and ‘professor worship’, which can give academics a cult following of their own, whether they like it or not. So-called ‘celebrity’ academics, either living in Thailand or based abroad for political reasons, are highly active in posting and promoting democracy related material on numerous social media platforms.

The majority of the time such posts contain little or no explanation of how democracy can become successful, or what the major obstacles to democracy are – particularly important given the complicated issues related to the balance of power and powerful institutions within Thailand. However, a single post can get over 10,000 ‘likes’ and be reposted hundreds of times. It is also common for these ‘celebrity academics’ to publish up to 10 democracy-themed posts per day, again, demonstrating the need for Thailand to return to democracy but offering no solutions, suggestions, or critiques of the more complicated issues.

Stark divisions and aggressive polarisation is endemic throughout all aspects of Thai society including: governance, the religious establishment, the supreme institution, the military, civil society, and educational institutions. The interconnectedness between networks of power in Thailand is multifaceted, complex and ingrained. Well-known academic Duncan McCargo coined the term ‘network monarchy’ to describe this complex web of interconnected power that holds up the country’s royal institution. By fusing itself to all aspects of Thai society, and spreading influence to all corners of the country, the monarchy has occupied a seat of supreme dominance and reverence in Thailand, entrenching its values to ensure its continued survival.

It is here, within the realm of ‘networks,’ that those who situate themselves within the cult following of democracy, or worship democratic principles, neglect to understand the intrinsically problematic nature of democracy in Thailand. A functioning democracy, adhering to democratic principles, cannot operate within a country that fosters such a complicated network of relationships, all attempting to receive, abuse or hold on to some form of power.

Arguably, these networks of power exist within democratic countries as well, particularly the United States. However, in the United States there are also independent checks-and-balances, reinforced by strong institutions, capable of limiting the means of those seeking to abuse power. These independent reinforcements have disappeared from Thailand’s political landscape.

The power and influence of the Thai military, which sits above all other forms of power, except the royal institution, needs to be completely dismantled. Speaking hypothetically as there is no possibility of this occurring any time soon, before democracy can become any more than a ‘desire,’ the military should be placed in civilian control and given little or no capacity for influencing power relations or promoting democratic ideals. In the future Thailand could take note from Indonesia and how it went about limiting the power and influence of the military.

The legitimacy that the monarchy, and thus in turn the military, receives due to their relationship with the Buddhist establishment, the Supreme Sangha Council, also needs to be understood as a significant road block to democracy. The Sangha is undeniably connected to the realm of long-established networks, and is constantly attempting to protect its members’ privileged position of power and reverence in Thai society.

With such a complicated and multifaceted network, democracy has many obstacles, as the old establishment will always be able to legitimise itself through the many sensitive and controversial aspects of the network, particularly religion.

Another major problem with democracy in Thailand is the issue of regional divides. So called ‘red provinces’ that have been branded as Shinawatra supporters, or endorsers of Thaksin-associated political parties, can boast growing populations and a larger voter base than those on the opposing side, or sides, of politics. Especially those whom are supporters of the old establishment.

If democracy does ‘return’ to Thailand, it is inevitable that those aligned with Thaksin Shinawatra would return to power with a majority of the vote, significantly threatening those aligned to more established power bases, such as the monarchy, military and the consumerist city-based elite. Such established power bases will not accept a threat to their power or loss of power, and will once again support and orchestrate a coup. The cycle will continue.

Those in Thailand who are unofficial members of the democracy cult continue to constantly and simplistically argue for democracy to return to the country. This is admirable at first glance, however with a more in-depth analysis, it is clear to see that democracy is impractical and will likely end in additional violence. Both Thai and foreign academics, journalists and civil society groups all argue for an instantaneous restoration of democracy in Thailand. What they fail to mention or discuss, is how? How does one take on the old establishment, a force that takes its legitimacy from the untouchable royal institution?

Members of the democracy cult or those who worship the idea of democracy need to redirect their attention to aspects of the so-called network power issue. They need to explain how balances of power need to change, the relationship between the military and the monarchy, the enormous division within the Thai population, and the relationship between the old establishment and elite and the monarchy and majority religion.

Worshippers of democracy who argue for instant democracy to take place within Thailand are also underestimating issues of systematic corruption that have plagued semi-democratic governments in the past. Although elections won by both Thaksin and his sister Yingluck were reasonably democratic, and inappropriately nulled, both governments struggled with corruption. However when it comes to corruption, the established elite are significantly more susceptible to its more dramatic forms; thus there is a valid argument behind those who argue that democratic governments foster less corruption.

Arguing for democracy is admirable and deserves respect, however to the extent it is promoted and discussed on social media and elsewhere, it is problematic. Democracy is not possible in Thailand anytime soon, and those who continue to contribute to ‘democracy worship’, do nothing more than demonstrate the lack of solutions and impracticality of democracy in such a fractured society.

It would do the democracy argument well if attention was redirected to tackling some of the larger issues that act as roadblocks to democracy.

Mat Carney is a research fellow and coordinator at the Centre for ASEAN Studies at Chiang Mai University, an independent blogger and ANU graduate.

Emily Donald is an intern at the Labour Rights Promotion Network in Thailand and undertaking her studies at the University of Queensland.

Soldiers with democratic hearts? | New Mandala

Soldiers with democratic hearts? | New Mandala

 

NICHOLAS FARRELLY, 

30 JANUARY 2015

From a distance, it feels like post-coup politics in Thailand is heating back up. Efforts to neuter former Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra’s chances of a political comeback are hitting the mark. Her enemies don’t want a charismatic Shinawatra anywhere near the top jobs.

At the same time, the United States is being called out by Thailand’s generals for the apparently harsh tone of its recent observations about the state of Thai democracy. To my ears, the Americans were just calling a spade a spade.

But that’s not how General Prayuth heard it. He told the media:

It saddens me that the United States does not understand the reason why I had to intervene and does not understand the way we work, even though we have been close allies for years…

In another recent reflection, General Prayuth offered:

I am a soldier with a democratic heart. I seized power because I wanted democracy to live on…

What should we make of these statements? Do we doubt the general’s sincerity?

Just this week, clampdowns on important democratic forums, like this one, are rolling along. There are also new additions to the long list of concerns about limitations on Internet discussions.

For 2014, Freedom House gave Thailand an abruptly downgraded score; the biggest drop anywhere. Given all of the military’s work to strangle the opposition and stamp out dissent, it would be hard to quibble with the Freedom House assessment.

The problem for Thailand’s military rulers (and their sympathisers) is that they don’t much like being called a dictatorship. They get irritated at the assertion that their 22 May 2014 coup or the earlier effort on 19 September 2006 were undemocratic initiatives. They hold to the notion that some coups are democratic, worthy, even righteous.

In our world of infinite spin and media massage, General Prayuth and his key allies, including General Prawit Wongsuwon, must be struggling to maintain a straight face.

It doesn’t help when General Prawit is forced to deny rumours of negotiations with deposed former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra. Whatever he says, the fact of political life in Thailand, and elsewhere, is that there is always the prospect of a deal.

To understand why that matters in Thailand the idea of the “un-state” introduced a few years by Craig Reynolds deserves further attention. It suggests that the entire Thai political system is shaped by pushes-and-pulls. For now, General Prayuth and General Prawit need to push much harder if they want to convince skeptics of their democratic zeal.

Nicholas Farrelly is the co-founder of New Mandala. In 2013 he published an article on Thailand’s “elite coup culture“.