Thailand's Local Election

In the latest Bangkok-district-councilor election, held on 6 June, the Democrat Party has scored a landslide victory over its key rival, the Phuea Thai.

From this election, the Democrat has snatched up to 79 Bangkok-district-councilor seats from 10 electorates. The Phuea Thai, meanwhile, has grasped just 26 seats from three electorates.

Defeat for Phuea Thai
With such results, even the Phuea Thai has to concede its political defeat in this local election. The Phuea Thai, in fact, used to dominate the scene. Before 6 June, Phuea Thai members had served as Bangkok district councilors in up to 10 electorates. The Democrat, back then, had held the Bangkok-district-councilor seats in three electorates only. Today, the tides have clearly changed.

The Democrat Party's victory over the latest local election has received just little news coverage, though. Perhaps, this is because the Bangkok-district-councilor polling is just a local election.
Still, many groups of people have pointed out that the Phuea Thai Party has suffered the defeat in the latest Bangkok-district-councilor election mainly because of the recent red shirts' riot in Bangkok. The red shirts have been active under the United Front of Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) banner. (UDD and Phuea Thai are closely linked).

War Against Red-Shirts Movement
Another key element in the Phuea Thai's defeat is perhaps the Center for the Resolution of the Emergency (CRES) orders that bar the 111 executives of the now-defunct Thai Rak Thai Party and people with close links to the old power bloc from making financial transactions. (Phuea Thai is a reincarnation of the Thai Rak Thai).

Some Phuea Thai key members, who oversee the party's affairs in Bangkok, believe the government's propaganda war against the red-shirt movement has also contributed to the Phuea Thai's failure to fly high at the Bangkok-district-councilor election. During the past few months, the government has communicated a lot with people and such communications have the power to influence Bangkok residents to favor the ruling party's candidates in the Bangkok-district-councilor election.

In fact, when the UDD kicked off their latest rally in mid-March, it expected to campaign for the 'class war'. The UDD leaders successfully mobilized a large number of rural people to the capital and they expected 'the middle class' in Bangkok to jump into the bandwagon. The UDD leaders no longer intended to attract just grass-root people.

Cope With Public Suspicion
However, when the red-shirt rally dragged on, the UDD 'stepped up the pressure' on the government through various techniques. In the end, the red activities against the elites adversely affected the 'normal life' of Bangkok residents in general. To Bangkok people, they felt the 'risks' every time the red shirts paraded around the capital and clashed with security officials. The bloody confrontations took place in many parts of Bangkok, and even in nearby provinces.

The red-shirt rally and the bloody incidents on 10 April, 22 April, and 19 May becomes Bangkok residents' nightmare.

Of course, it remains unclear who have commanded the 'men in black' or the 'unidentified armed unit'. But quite a large number of Bangkok people can't help suspecting the red-shirted leaders and their leaders. Not just the government has to cope with the public suspicion.

The government and the red-shirted leaders are the parties in the conflict. To Bangkok people, both parties have played a role in their 'nightmare'.

Do the results of the Bangkok-district-councilor election foretell what will be coming in the general election? Will the Democrat Party snatch most of Bangkok-MP seats? No one can say anything about this at this point of time. Bangkok voters have a unique mindset. The conditions and factors that have influenced their choices at the polling stations are always clearly different from people in other regions.

Power Bloc
Still, one cannot ignore the fact that the Democrat Party's performance has improved hugely in the Bangkok-district-councilor election. And such result reflects to an extent how Bangkok voters 'feel' about the red-shirted leaders. For the time being, it is quite clear whether Bangkok residents 'embrace' or 'reject' the old power bloc.

But the Bangkok-district-councilor election already passed. The government must now think about how to capitalize on 'its good opportunity'. The government, after all, has just defeated the red-shirted leaders outside the Parliament and has just sailed though the censure debate in the Parliament.

Establishment of New Political Party
The government, particularly the Democrat Party, must think about how to keep its huge popularity among people for a long, long time. At the very least, the Democrat Party must make sure that it remains popular among Bangkok residents when the Bangkok Councilor election is held in August.

If the Democrat candidates can snatch most of the Bangkok-councilor seats in the 50 electorates, the Phuea Thai will face a really tough time. Moreover, the Democrat Party's landslide victory in the Bangkok Councilor election -- if takes place -- looks set to send the chill down the spine of Khunying Sudarat Keyuraphan. Banned from officially engaging in political activities for five years alongside other former executives of the Thai Rak Thai, Sudarat has reportedly been trying to establish a new political party for Bangkok people. If the Democrat Party can score landslide victory in local Bangkok elections time and again, Sudarat will of course have the need to think twice.

Necessary Civil War in Thailand

The bargain between the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) core leaders and government over the timing for the dissolution of parliament, reconciliation plan, and conditions for the UDD core leaders to enter into the process of judicial justice should have not caused the civil war.

Avoiding Civil War
However, if we take into consideration the reality of the conflicts involved with the said bargain, we will be able to see that it was extremely difficult to avoid the civil war this time for the following reasons:

1. For more than four years, the Thai society has been plunged into tense conflicts between two groups -- the first group trying to pull the society forward and the second trying to pull it backward. However, it appears that the second group has now turned to trying to pull the society forward.

The red-shirted leaders, who are mostly members of the lower middle class and the grassroot people, are now the ones trying to push the society toward the representative democracy, free it from the domination by the elite bureaucratic polity, and adhere to the fair electoral system of 'one man one vote.'

2. A further complexity is that the progressive democratic side consists of new capitalist groups and interest-oriented political parties sharing the same ideology, while the other side comprises conservative power groups, political parties, and capitalist groups who are defending the obsolete power structure and their immediate political power and interests.

3. The group that pulls the society backward does not believe in and has been trying to discredit the representative democracy. They often mock the said electoral system as the 'four-second democracy' and accuse the red-shirted leaders of selling their votes and being used as tools of corrupt politicians.

4. The aforementioned accusations are based on the assumption that the poor and uneducated do not have any political ideology. They assume that the red-shirted leaders from rural areas came to participate in the antigovernment in Bangkok because: 1. they love Thaksin, 2. they are paid, 3. they want the government to tackle their poverty-related problems, and none of them came with any ideology (except a few whose number was probably less than that of the armed terrorists who mingled with the protesters.)

If ideology is an important ingredient that makes life valuable, people's life that has come out to fight for democracy is also valuable. Their struggle is therefore meaningful and respectable. It is because the educated members of the lower middle class, the poor and uneducated, and rural people have been stereotyped as being unable to profess any ideology. So, they are viewed as persons who are unqualified to fight for democracy and can only serve as 'tools' of corrupt politicians. The losses of their lives (during the dispersal of the red-shirted protesters on 19 May) were, therefore, acceptable because they are not regarded free people with ideology (as there were voices urging the government not to dissolve the parliament, calling on the military to use the martial law against the red shirt people or take quick actions to get rid of the 'social garbage' so as to protect the country, religion, and highly revered monarchy.)

5. The stereotyping of the red-shirted people (the majority of them) as no-ideology, democracy-illiterate, stupid, uneducated, purchasable person has become the repeated discourse during the past over four years.

On one hand, it enables the side who evaluates the red-shirted leaders' value lower than that of its people [who are ideologically imbued with the loyalty to the country, religion, and monarch] to testify that the 'deaths' of the red-shirted people were necessary and justifiable, and on the other, such long-practiced oppression (e.g., calling them 'reckless' and so forth and so on) has created a time bomb of resentment among the red-shirted leaders that could explode at any moment!

Eventually, the explosion took place when the red shirts' media were shut down (after the long closure of their area in the mainstream media which has allowed their stories to be 'told' by 'other people' who are biased against them). The crackdown operation, which resulted in losses of lives and injuries, made the red-shirted leaders dare to challenge death, and, subsequently, violence was necessarily chosen in order to tell the society that they came with ideology and were willing to die for democracy and justice. Of course, natural instinct does not allow them to be bullied all the time.

6. Violence does not solve problems. The use of violence by the red-shirted was wrong (regardless of the fact that they had to put up resistance against the state's soldiers who were equipped with all sorts of dangerous weapons). However, the society should understand them because they always have to bear with verbal insults and the stereotyping that they lack ideology and have little human value. They have been under the pressure of unfair political and economic structures for a long period of time.

Nevertheless, the civil war should not have taken place if the Aphisit Vijjajiva government and the power behind it had not underestimated the red-shirt leaders, abused their power, been excessively frightened by the fear of Thaksin, and disregarded human rights.

Spirit of Democracy
It is regrettable that the Aphisit government had failed to demonstrate its superior maturity and spirit of democracy by allowing the (red-shirted) media to remain open, providing an area in the state-owned media for its opponents, and by dissolving parliament, which can be done at any moment. On contrary, it has been using the military power to solve political problems.

This is the price of the leadership-lacking decision made by the Aphisit government. The behind power and its cruel hearted supporters have caused the civil war, disaster to the country, and dark future of the Thai society!

After May 2010 Bloodbath, Thai Government Must Dare To Launch a Massive Purge

In the morning of 19 May, several people were surprised to see the soldiers brought out military tanks to destroy the bunker lines, which were erected by the red-shirted mob, in Lumphini, Sala Daeng, Bon Kai areas as well as in other areas.

The ball was in the government's court. It held the upper hand and probably enraged Thaksin Shinawatra even further. No wonder this would trigger another vengeful retaliation from Thaksin.

Game Plan After Incident
However, the government must think hard in proceeding with its game plan after this incident. The government could no longer allow the red-shirted group to call up a protest rally and torch the city every year. In 2009, there were riot in April and this year there is again a riot. If the government fails to deal with this problem definitively, the arson that takes place annually might instead take place every three months.

This issue is Prime Minister Aphisit Vejjajiva's homework. He should continue to reflect on this. However, if he wants only to last his term in office, he could just let the problem end there with the mob dispersal. This is what Aphisit must reflect on carefully. The Democrat Party does not lack the opportunity for election victory. The only hurdle is the north and northeastern voters' undiminished faith in Thaksin. The north and the northeastern zones are the key vote base for election victory. Aphisit must try to find out why the voters in these two zones continue to support Thaksin. Why people refuse to forget Thaksin.

The government holds power in its hands and was able to declare the emergency decree, but failed to exercise its power to the full. This is no good for the country.

Losses and Damage
When the red-shirted mob was dispersed and everyone returned home, the red-shirted leaders were incarcerated pursuant to the prescriptions in the emergency decree. After seven days, the situation has returned to normal. The red-shirted members only wait for a signal from their leaders before coming out in another rally to wreck havoc again. They will later think of how to end the rally when the time comes. If this is the case, Thailand will always suffer losses and damage in a never-ending vicious circle.

Therefore, what the government must do is to solve the problem at the root cause, not at the end as usual. The incidents that took place repeatedly should serve as expensive lessons for the government.

The evidence that shows the wrongdoings of the red-shirted leaders are clear to see -- like Natthawut Saikuea, who delivered speeches to incite the mob to torch the city; Aritsaman Phong-rueang-rong, who announced that the red-shirted mob's opponents should be caught and their blood drawn to wash the red-shirted mob's feet; and particularly Chatuphon Phromphan, Phuea Thai Party list house representative, and apparently the only red-shirted leader who hardly respects the law because he enjoys the immunity as a house representative.

Chatuphon previously moved to remove Foreign Minister Kasit Phirom. He accused Kasit of having been one of the People's Alliance for Democracy's leaders. He claimed that Kasit made inappropriate statements to the foreign media and, therefore, was not suitable to be the foreign minister. However, what Chatuphon is doing today is tantamount to swallowing his own words because Kasit, unlike Chatuphon, never led people to torch the country.

Opportunity To Correct Mistake and Misjudgment
The wrongdoings by these red-shirted leaders should serve as clear evidence for the government and relevant agencies to press charges and fully proceed in due process of the law.
This incident is providing the government with another opportunity to correct its mistake and misjudgment as to what it should do to cope with the situation -- will it allow these people to destroy the country or will it teach these thugs a lesson that will make them respect the law?

If the government continues to fear, as usual, the opposition from the common people, the entire country will have no choice but to bear with it and can only count the day when that the red-shirted group will come out the torch down the entire country.

Tough Time Ahead
Thailand should have seen peace had the two-year sentence against Thaksin Shinawatra been carried out. However, the government has been negligent on carrying out the prosecution. If it continues to allow Thaksin to be at large and fails to catch him -- the criminal who fled from justice, the international criminal -- the government can only expect to solve the problem that he will cause.

The government will only go around in circles in its works and will soon meet a dead-end. It will find no way out of the problems because this convict will become more vehement and violent in his action with the clear target to destroy his own native country.

After May 2010 Bloodbath, Thai Government Must Dare To Launch a Massive Purge

In the morning of 19 May, several people were surprised to see the soldiers brought out military tanks to destroy the bunker lines, which were erected by the red-shirted mob, in Lumphini, Sala Daeng, Bon Kai areas as well as in other areas.
The ball was in the government's court. It held the upper hand and probably enraged Thaksin Shinawatra even further. No wonder this would trigger another vengeful retaliation from Thaksin.
Game Plan After Incident
However, the government must think hard in proceeding with its game plan after this incident. The government could no longer allow the red-shirted group to call up a protest rally and torch the city every year. In 2009, there were riot in April and this year there is again a riot. If the government fails to deal with this problem definitively, the arson that takes place annually might instead take place every three months.
This issue is Prime Minister Aphisit Vejjajiva's homework. He should continue to reflect on this. However, if he wants only to last his term in office, he could just let the problem end there with the mob dispersal. This is what Aphisit must reflect on carefully. The Democrat Party does not lack the opportunity for election victory. The only hurdle is the north and northeastern voters' undiminished faith in Thaksin. The north and the northeastern zones are the key vote base for election victory. Aphisit must try to find out why the voters in these two zones continue to support Thaksin. Why people refuse to forget Thaksin.
The government holds power in its hands and was able to declare the emergency decree, but failed to exercise its power to the full. This is no good for the country.
Losses and Damage
When the red-shirted mob was dispersed and everyone returned home, the red-shirted leaders were incarcerated pursuant to the prescriptions in the emergency decree. After seven days, the situation has returned to normal. The red-shirted members only wait for a signal from their leaders before coming out in another rally to wreck havoc again. They will later think of how to end the rally when the time comes. If this is the case, Thailand will always suffer losses and damage in a never-ending vicious circle.
Therefore, what the government must do is to solve the problem at the root cause, not at the end as usual. The incidents that took place repeatedly should serve as expensive lessons for the government.
The evidence that shows the wrongdoings of the red-shirted leaders are clear to see -- like Natthawut Saikuea, who delivered speeches to incite the mob to torch the city; Aritsaman Phong-rueang-rong, who announced that the red-shirted mob's opponents should be caught and their blood drawn to wash the red-shirted mob's feet; and particularly Chatuphon Phromphan, Phuea Thai Party list house representative, and apparently the only red-shirted leader who hardly respects the law because he enjoys the immunity as a house representative. Chatuphon previously moved to remove Foreign Minister Kasit Phirom. He accused Kasit of having been one of the People's Alliance for Democracy's leaders. He claimed that Kasit made inappropriate statements to the foreign media and, therefore, was not suitable to be the foreign minister. However, what Chatuphon is doing today is tantamount to swallowing his own words because Kasit, unlike Chatuphon, never led people to torch the country.
Opportunity To Correct Mistake and Misjudgment
The wrongdoings by these red-shirted leaders should serve as clear evidence for the government and relevant agencies to press charges and fully proceed in due process of the law.
This incident is providing the government with another opportunity to correct its mistake and misjudgment as to what it should do to cope with the situation -- will it allow these people to destroy the country or will it teach these thugs a lesson that will make them respect the law?
If the government continues to fear, as usual, the opposition from the common people, the entire country will have no choice but to bear with it and can only count the day when that the red-shirted group will come out the torch down the entire country.
Tough Time Ahead
Thailand should have seen peace had the two-year sentence against Thaksin Shinawatra been carried out। However, the government has been negligent on carrying out the prosecution. If it continues to allow Thaksin to be at large and fails to catch him -- the criminal who fled from justice, the international criminal -- the government can only expect to solve the problem that he will cause. The government will only go around in circles in its works and will soon meet a dead-end. It will find no way out of the problems because this convict will become more vehement and violent in his action with the clear target to destroy his own native country.

Thai Political Violence Becoming Unavoidable

Now Thailand has become a failed state so anything could happen. It was frightening to hear reports that businessmen pooled their money to try to deal with the situation because they could no longer depend on the government to protect their life and properties anymore.

In several countries, people had to take up guns to fight one another because their government could not protect them, and thus causing civil wars. In the three southern border provinces, some groups of people had to build their own armed force to protect their employees so that their workers could work in rubber plantations. Such a situation is now happening in the capital or Bangkok.

Deteriorating Situation
Now all sides share the same feeling that if troops are deployed to reclaim traffic space from protesters or to break up the rally again, casualties will be higher than what happened on 10 April 2010 by several folds because all sides are now ready to use violence to the full extent. Each side cited justification from different ground to use force.

At the same time, conflicts do not exist only between the government and the demonstrators. But the conflicts are setting stage for a major change of the structure of power. So, this is the transitional period of the current structure, which is being challenged.

And there is a need to build a new order like what happened after the 6 October 1976 massacre of student activists. So, if the red-shirted leaders still hope to earn a victory with help from an invisible hand or a special power, they should have a second thought. This kind of thought will cause them to be overconfident and prompt them to risk the people's life by leading them to their death again.

After the 14 October 1973 uprising by student activists, the democracy was enhanced and student activists earned a special status. They earned a status to become like a mechanism of the state because of the power they earned after the 14 October 1973 uprising. The increase of the power of the pro-democracy students after the 14 October caused certain groups to be dissatisfied, leading to the student massacre on 6 October 1976.

Demand for Immediate House Dissolution
Had the conflicts existed only between the United Front of Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) and the government, the problems would not have had escalated to this level. The UDD insisted on its demand for immediate House dissolution while the government wants to wait for nine months. Had the two sides agreed to negotiate, they should have compromised on the six-month timeframe.

But one side wants the House to be dissolved in 15 days while the other side wants to wait for nine months. This clearly showed that the two sides did not aim to reach a compromise from the negotiation. Instead, they aimed to use the negotiation to create justification for themselves. This caused the conflicts to have reached the point where no more negotiations could be made.

So, some groups started thinking about using a shortcut. And such a shortcut will cause a great loss of life. However, the new order after such bloodshed will lack stability and the country will not be peaceful like what happened after the 6 October 1976 event.

This is because the situation in 2010 has changed much from 1976. A great information revolution has happened and the people have greater access to information - both true and false. So, the belief that "everything could be put under control" is no longer true in today world.

At the same time, rifts exist in several organizations which are state mechanisms, such as the military, police and civil servants. They are divided into groups and their rifts have been amplified, prompting them to be ready to use violence against one another.

Current Power Structure
Since there is no stability in the current power structure, the general people could not depend on the government to protect their life and properties so the country has already become a failed state.

So, it was not unexpected that some private groups took their own actions. Under this kind of situation, a civil war is already knocking on our door. Only a miracle by the great force of pro-peace members in the society can stop this frightening event from happening.