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!

Thai Red-Shirted Leaders Seek UN Help

One question that often comes to people's mind is: "Who have turned Thailand into its today's sad condition?" But that is not as depressing as that the people who are hurting Thailand have been asking "outsiders" like the United Nations to intervene their home country's internal affairs. In fact, the situation that is as bad as a civil war could be ended earlier if leaders of the United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship (UDD) accepted the national reconciliation road map proposed by Prime Minister Aphisit Vejjajiva.

Protecting Human Rights
The United Nations or UN is known to be an independent organization with an aim to promote peace in the world. Its key roles are to host dialogues to end disputes, to promote peace and security, to protect human rights and to offer humanitarian assistance to member countries around the world, including other countries. For this reason, it is not surprising or irregular to hear reports that UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has expressed his concern about violent situation in Thailand.

But it is rather shameful that Thais, both leaders of the UDD and members of the parliament from Puea Thai Party, have demanded the United Nations to help mediate problems in their own home despite the fact that it was red-shirted leaders' fickleness that has caused violence, the scenarios that fully armed military troops paraded to surround Ratchaprasong Road, and utilities cut off in areas around red shirt protest sites. They did not keep their promise by ending the protests after Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban has surrendered to the police in the investigation team of the Department of Special Investigation.

Deteriorating Situation
Violent situation in Thailand was triggered by riots in Bangkok, and it has been intensified, prompting 25 people to be killed and over 200 people injured since May 15. But for people who are neutral and who have followed the development of the situation, they would have seen red shirt people began their protests at Phan Fa Road in March and later on moved to Ratchaprasong Road in April. The situation has turned violence after terrorist attacks on Silom Road and Saladaeng.

Protesters have troubled doctors, nurses, and service users at Chulalongkorn Hospital. Eventually, Major General Khattiya Sawatdiphon, or Se Daeng, has been shot in the head and has been in coma. It is hard to deny that UDD leaders who have been irresponsible towards their own action over the past two months have caused all the violence.

For these reasons, if the UDD want to see peace being restored in our country and do not want to see more local residents, pro red shirt communities and other innocent people being at risk of injuries and losing their loved ones, they may solve the problems themselves. They do not need assistance from the UN, or use it as a way to survive the government's stringent operation, in spite of the fact that the UN was once being demeaned by the UDD (big boss) with the sentence: "The UN....not my father," when he was leading the government.

Facing Immediate Threat
We affirm that UDD's request for assistance from the UN would only cause damage. For the first damage, it is the same as handing out our country into the hands of other peoples. Should outsiders be invited to manage our country's internal affairs? For the second damage, the move underlines the fact that UDD leaders did everything for their own interest. They protect themselves with human shields.

Once facing immediate threat of danger, they reached out for assistance from other people and did not care that they have once severely criticized those people. They are real evils

Mayhem in Thailand, Government Under Pressure

The mayhem during the night of 10 April on Ratcha Damnoen Avenue left an image that is hard to explain. The casualties and loss from the clashes between the military officers and the red-shirted protesters are too terrible -- very high a price for victory for any camp.

All parties are flooded by questions - those who were directly and indirectly involved in causing this nightmare for everyone in the Thai society, not only the Bangkok people who live near the scenes of the incidents.

Messages From Media
Certainly, those who consumed the messages from all forms of the media, which broadcast the violent incidents, and who later learned that people were killed on that fateful night, are trying to find the culprit. They are trapped in that frame of mind. Was it the government's fault, as the administration has the responsibility to supervise the policy implementation and take care of the nation's peace and order?

Was it the fault of the United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship (UDD), which incited the mob to become oblivious of death risks and attack the military in each location, which led to the use of force and clashes and war weapon? Was it the fault of Police Lieutenant Colonel Thaksin Shinawatra a person who incited the red-shirted mob -- the 'rear guard' -- to fight for him with all their hearts to restore his power?

Growing Casualties
The latest record of the number of casualties from the clashes on 10 April rose to over 800 injured, who are receiving treatment in various hospitals, while the latest death toll is 21.

Police Lt Col Thaksin twittered the announcement of his deep condolences. He called for Prime Minister Aphisit Vejjajiva to show accountability for ordering the military to use force in mob dispersal, which led to the loss of live and casualties. He said that Aphisit should show responsibility by agreeing to dissolve the House and return the power to the people.

However, this will not in the least redress the wrong that was done -- nor are the apologies from the government leaders who continue to insist on using 'the law' to maintain what is right, in the hope that the society will finally and truly return to peace and order. After the mayhem, it seemed that the loss and casualties still fail to return peace and normalcy to the society. What looms large is a 'war of attrition.'

The (red-shirted leaders) assesses, and believes, that they will be able to use these incidents to their advantage in fanning the flame of discontent. Therefore, they would not tone down, but immediately launched their retaliation and continued with their offensive.

Mounting Pressure
The government is under heavy pressure from all directions, such as from the army, particularly the former high-ranking soldiers who expressed increasingly negative attitude toward the political sector and the government's indecisiveness and lack of determination, which caused the military to be 'trampled on,' suffered casualties and loss.

Another source of high pressure came from the ruling coalition parties. Deputy Prime Minister for Security Affairs Suthep Thueaksuban was forced to lobby the leaders of the ruling coalition parties in an effort to prevent the Democrat Party from being isolated, as the ruling coalition arties did not want to accept the joint accountability for the casualty and loss in the incident on 10 April.

Several parties look back to find the weak spots that led to the violent incidents. They suspect that the weak spots might have been caused by the same old problem that has plagued the government all along: The lack of unity between the government and the army. They wonder whether it was this lack of unity that led to the red-shirted force being able to defeat the army.

Some parties think that the defeat was caused by the weakness of the government leaders, who were unable to lead the army to victory in this battle and 'free the occupied zone' effectively without loss or casualty. The government leaders allowed the golden opportunity during the early stage of the rally to pass by without any decisive action.

Drastic Step Required
Until this very moment, after the violent incident and the heavy casualties, the government is still unable to find its feet and restore the public faith and confidence in it. Meanwhile the red-shirted group continues to announce its victory, since it believes that the government will eventually be defeated.

The best and cleverest approach to fighting a battle is to minimize or avoid the casualties and loss -- whether the loss of fund, supplies and particularly manpower. What is clear here is that both parties suffered losses in these incidents and therefore both are defeated -- they are both losers.

Thai Government Seeks Truce With Red-Shirted Movement Leaders

The Thai Government on 10 April night assigned Korbsak Sabhavasu, the prime minister's secretary general, to negotiate a truce with the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) leaders, after many soldiers were reported to have been wounded by red-shirts firing guns and throwing bombs.

Controlling Further Casualties
Colonel Sansern Kaewkamnerd, Centre for Public Administration in Emergency Situations (CPAES) spokesperson, announced the move in a nationwide television address. He said talks were needed immediately to separate the two sides and end the ongoing clashes, because the situation was heading out of control and there could be further casualties on both sides.

The call for truce came after at least 100 soldiers were reportedly wounded in the clashes with the red-shirts at Khok Wua intersection on Ratchadamnoen Avenue, while trying to advance toward Phan Fa bridge amid fierce resistance by the red-shirted movement leaders.

Attacks Continue
The red-shirted leaders lit a gas cylinder and rolled it toward the soldiers at Khok Wua intersection. The subsequent explosion wounded at least 50 soldiers. At the same time, gunshots were reportedly fired from red-shirted leaders, wounding 50-60 soldiers on Tanao road near Khok Wua intersection.

Hand grenades were also thrown at soldiers who were equipped with only shields, batons and tear gas launchers. Noises of machinegun fire and three M79 grenade explosions were also heard. The soldiers were forced to retreat.

Why State of Emergency Declared in Bangkok, Nearby Provinces?

Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva on 7 April evening declared a state of emergency under the executive degree for administration in emergency situations in Bangkok, Nonthaburi, and some districts of Samut Prakan, Pathum Thani, Nakhon Pathom and Ayutthaya. The state of emergency took effect immediately after it was announced.

Abhisit announced the move in a live nationwide television broadcast from the Centre for Administration of Peace and Order (CAPO) at the 11th Infantry Regiment in the presence of the cabinet members.

Invoking Internal Security Act
The decision was reached at a special cabinet meeting this afternoon after a number of the red shirts of the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) broke into the parliamentary compound, forcing cabinet members, including himself, and MPs attending a House meeting to flee for safety.

According to the prime minister, the government had tried to control the situation by invoking the Internal Security Act in Bangkok and nearby provinces, but to no avail as the red-shirts had continued to step up their activities and resorted to violence in violation of the law and the constitution. Their activities had greatly affected people's lives and their work, as well as the national economy and Thailand's image in the eyes of the international community.

Solving Emergency Situation
A centre for solving the emergency situation had been set up, with Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban, who is in charge of security affairs, as director. The centre is empowered to take action under the emergency law and enforce various orders issued under the law. Other members of the centre include the defense minister, the permanent secretary for defense and the commanders of all the armed forces and the Royal Thai Police Office.

The main objectives in imposing the state of emergency were to return the situation to normal as soon as possible, to stop any attempt to disseminate false information in a way to incite division, to more effectively take legal action against the protest leaders, and to enable other measures to be taken more effectively.

Role of Armed Forces
According to the prime minister, the government, in declaring the state of emergency, does not aim to crack down on innocent people, but wants to maintain the sanctity of the law. The prime minister promised that all measures to be taken would be in line with international standards of practice.

The emergency decree allows the armed forces to detain suspects for an initial period of 30 days in informal places of detention without a court order or immediate access to legal counsel, family members or independent monitoring. It also allows for the declaration of curfews in selected areas and bans on public gatherings of more than five people, prohibits news reports deemed to threaten public order and allows the government to use soldiers to quell unrest.

Opposition's Reaction
In response, the UDD called on all of their red-shirted supporters to get together on Friday and try to topple the Democrat-led government.

UDD leader Natthawut Saikua declared that the protesters will not leave their rally sites at Bangkok's Phan Fa bridge and Ratchaprasong intersection.

He said: 'I ask all red-shirted supporters in the city and nearby provinces to join forces at Phan Fa and Ratchaprasong. We will fight against the guns with our bare hands. The red-shirts in other provinces can converge on their respective city halls. More red-shirted supporters had gradually traveled to Phan Fa and Ratchaprasong while the group had increased the number guards and raised the security level.'

Red-Shirted Leaders, Thai Government Truce Talks Collapse

United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) co-leader and opposition Puea Thai Party MP Jatuporn Prompan said on 30 March that the truce talks between the government and the red-shirted UDD were over because the two sides had totally different standpoints. Jatuporn said that there would be no more negotiations and the red-shirted leaders would not hold talks with the government behind people's back. The two sides just cannot end their differences.

During talks late 29 March, Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva offered the UDD a compromise, saying he was willing to call a general election by the end of the year, one-year ahead of schedule.
Jatuporn said: "We want the government to dissolve the House in 15 days, but the government said it needs nine months. The government and the UDD are like water and oil. We just cannot get along together."

Revocation of Internal Security Act
The government also cannot ask for further talks in exchange for the revocation of the Internal Security Act. The red-shirted rally will now be intensified, from pressuring the government for dissolution to expelling the government, but we will continue to protest peacefully.

However, if the government would consider dissolving the House in three months, the UDD leaders would discuss it and ask for the people's views on the same. Abhisit has expressed regret at the collapse of the talks.

It is a pity that protest leaders have swiftly rejected the government's offer and signaled the immediate end of talks. Despite this, the government is still open for negotiations. Deputy Interior Minister Boonjong Wongtrairat said that the cabinet on 30 March agreed to extend the use of the Internal Security Act (ISA) in Bangkok and two adjoining provinces for another week.

Tough Time Ahead
The security law, invoked in Bangkok, Nonthaburi and Samut Prakan to ensure peace and order during the antigovernment rally, had been due to end on 30 March. The cabinet has approved a plan to impose the ISA in Petchaburi's Cha-am district and Prachuap Khiri Khan's Hua Hin district during the Mekong River Summit, Deputy Education Minister Chaiwut Bannawat.

The Mekong River Commission will meet from 2 to 5 April in Hua Hin, Prachuap Khiri Khan. The invocation of the security law is to ensure security for foreign leaders attending the meeting.