On the Road to Democratic Literacy or Democratic Infantilism?

I have followed closely PAD’s “showdown” demonstrations that started on Tuesday, August 26th with the avowed purpose of bringing down the government of Samak Sundaravej. The PAD cited Article 63 of the Constitution, enshrining the right to peaceful assembly, to justify its action (Nation, August 26th).

The storming of the NBT, “invasion” of the Transport Ministry, Finance Ministry and Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives compounds is indeed as Srithanochai in New Mandala commented a “veritable rebellion (what the constitution calls an attempt to seize power by unconstitutional means) is going on in Bangkok. If it was the military, one would call it [a] coup d’etat…”

What intrigues me is the remarkable restraint shown by the government despite the lawlessness in occupying public installations and even destroying public property in the process (so far: compound fence and an elevator in main building 2 (government house) were damaged. People also intruded in the 44th, 41st, and 26th buildings and toilets were damaged; a “seven-figure sum to repair the 5,000square metre yard and garden”, Nation August 28th a), hooligan behavior towards a female official by PAD guards (Nation, August 28th b).

It appears that many found the behavior of PAD demonstrators over reached the limits of political decency. Polls conducted by Bangkok University on August 27th found that about 71 per cent disagreed with the raid of the NBT station, while 68 per cent found unacceptable the siege at Government House and ministries.(Nation, August 27th a). Tulsathit Taptim of the Nation strongly criticized unbridled “raw impulses” taking over PAD, turning itself into its own worst enemy: “While we can live with traffic nightmares or disruption of school routines, we cannot call seizing a TV station, intimidating news anchors and paralysing public works a non-violent campaign for democracy. Nor was it a show of civil disobedience, because the much-acclaimed political practice isn't supposed to harm or terrorise innocent people doing their jobs.” (Tulsathit, August 27th). A Nation article warned “In the end one must ask whether the group (PAD) is pro-democracy any longer, even if they may have good intentions for society and were pro-democratic at the beginning. The public must not be tempted to support knee jerk attempts to bring about regime change because the only change is from one regime to another, without any democratisation in Thailand” (Nation, August 27th b) (italics by blogger). Business leaders urged restraint on all sides fearing that the PAD demonstrations would lead not only to more violence and bloodshed but also affect investor confidence and drive tourists away (Nation, August 27th c).

There are of course secret machinations going on behind the scenes, a “trump card” (Thanong, August 28th) in the form of Gen. Anupong Pachinda, the Army chief, who became the Army chief in the latest military reshuffle, signed by Prime Minister Samak on Tuesday, Aug 26th perhaps as some kind of reward for staying by the side of Samak (along with First Army chief Lt-Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha on Aug 26, the launching of PAD’s demonstrations at the Supreme Command Centre as a base to deal with the PAD attacks against his administration (Wassana, August 27th):“The prime minister, who is also the defence minister, rewarded them for the protection within hours yesterday by quickly approving the military reshuffle list.” The approval of the military reshuffle list has further strengthened Gen Anupong Paochinda, the Army chief, as the most powerful figure in Thailand. “Whichever side he picks, that party will win in this power play. But at the moment, it’s too hard to read his mind yet.” (Thanong, August 28th).

Prime Minister Samak has been warned not to use "draconian" measures to eject the protesters from the government house compound, the use of force would only provoke more violence and a more serious crisis, leading to military intervention (Nation, August 27th b), that violence will spiral out of hand (Nation, August 27th b).

Some commentators in New Mandala site opined that if the same thing happened in the Canberra government center, the police would have been already called to disperse the crowds. The counter argument put forth was that Thailand’s government is in no position to take the moral high ground. However, is there any objective basis to support the worst case scenario that violence will indeed spiral out of control?

Under the best scenario, where the red shirts are not called by Samak to teach the PAD a lesson (surely with disastrous results for the government) and no provocateurs planted to provoke Thai style berserk rage & violence - what is it that cannot be handled by a professionally trained and well equipped riot control group of law enforcement officers? Or had funds earmarked for training and purchase of non-lethal suppression equipment been diverted elsewhere such that there is scant training for non-lethal crowd control, and the police are as easily volatile as the crowds they are trying to disperse? The line between suppression and oppression is very narrow indeed absent a highly trained and equipped crowd control force of "law enforcement" officers.

Lest I be misunderstood, I am not an advocate of violence – any violence is contemptible. However, a citizenry must learn that part of democratic practice and political maturation consist not only in having rights and privileges but also the exercise of duties and obligations. If there is no respect for the law, society cannot go on. Each duty and obligation carries certain consequences for failing to fulfill or adhere to it. If you wish to overthrow the government you have to do it within the framework of the law, or else, face the consequences. One cannot claim exercising one’s right to “peaceful assembly” if according to Article 28 of the 1997 constitution “as long as they do not breach others rights and liberties or do not violate the Constitution and public morality”. If this provision has been abrogated in the 2006 Constitution, then Thailand will essentially fall into this very kind of mob rule and anarchy that we are now witnessing. Moreover, the option of gingerly treatment of PAD demonstrators that the government of PM Samak has to implement because of imponderable contingencies that could spark more violence will result only in reinforcing the mentality that you must’nt be firm with Thais who have come from a very pampered and relatively secure upbringing. (Note the Police offer of Bus Rides to Protestors (to return home!!), Bangkok Post, August 28, 2008) In this sense, democracy in Thailand will remain a fleeting dream, if it remains an inconsistent exercise where enforcement depends (or varies) on the presence of powerful symbolic accoutrements (who wants to manhandle people wearing yellow shirts?), backstage manipulation and backing by secret powerful persons and class. I seem unable to reconcile the brutal response of the police in the 2004 Tak Bai demonstrators that resulted in 85 deaths from suffocation and beatings. Is there one democratic lesson for young rural Thai Muslims and another for urban based and relatively more privileged demonstrators who have appropriated for themselves the colors and prestige of HM?

References:

Nation (2008), “PAD rally to aim at shutting down the gov't, August 26.
Nation (2008a) PM's Office to sue for damage to Government House, August 27.
Nation (2008b) Female official complains of "hooligan" behaviours” of PAD guards, August 28.
Nation (2008a)PAD's protest activities disapproved by majority, August 27.
Nation (2008b), The politics of morality vs electoral legitimacy, August 27.
Nation (2008c), More violence 'would dent investment', August 27.
Nation (2008d), PAD has gotten too far ahead of itself, August 27.
Thanong Khantong (2008), Army chief holds the trump card, Nation, August 28.
Tulsathit Taptim (2008), PAD must not become its own worst enemy, Nation, August 27.
Wassana Nanuam (2008), PM turns to military top brass for protection, Bangkok Post, August 27.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tak_Bai_Incident

http://rspas.anu.edu.au/rmap/newmandala

* the term "democratic literacy" is from Weerasak Krueathep, "Local Government Initiatives in Thailand: Cases and Lessons Learned", Asia Pacific Journal of Public Adminsitration, 26(6), December, pp. 217-239. an internet version is also available.