Ex Thai Foreign Minister Points To Two Root Causes For Conflict

[webfact]

Ex foreign minister points to two root causes for conflict

By Pravit Rojanaphruk

The Nation

It's time for Thailand to face up to the two root causes of the current political turmoil and resolve it peacefully, advised Surakiart Sathirathai, who was foreign minister under Thaksin Shinawatra's administration.

"I think it's time to discuss the root of the conflict," he said. Surakiart distanced himself from Thaksin before the September 2006 coup ousted his government.

According to Surakiarit, the first root cause of the division is "people who defame and attack the institution [of monarchy].

"Lately, examples of such violations are becoming more visible, which is leading to more open opposition," Surakiart said.

The second root cause for the current conflict is that of the "perception" of double standards in Thai law and politics.

"We need the rule of law to replace the rule by law," Surakiart said in a keynote speech to mark the UN International Day of Peace held at the Siam University yesterday. "If there is no due process of law then the law cannot be enforced"

Surakiart suggested that Kanit na Nakorn, who was appointed by the prime minister to chair the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, become the mediator and start dealing with these two root causes.

"Let us not set any preconditions for the negotiation and all differing views must be heard," he said, adding that in a negotiation, there is no winner and the result is most likely a compromise.

Echoing Surakiart at the symposium was peace expert and political scientist Prof Chaiwat Satha-anand of Thammasat University.

Chaiwat said truth, justice and accountability should precede reconciliation and forgiveness.

Drawing from his experience, South African Ambassador to Thailand Douglas Gibson said it was important for people to be able to tell the truth and listen. He explained that if the perpetrators tell the truth, like they did in South Africa, they should be forgiven.

Though South Africa and Thailand are two completely different cultures, negotiation is still a better solution than killing one another.

In a related topic, Chaiwat said the insurgency in the three southern-most provinces was unlikely to be resolved soon due to a number of factors.

First, he said there is an "insecurity industry", which benefits from the on-going violence.

"Every time a school is burned down, someone benefits from the reconstruction. Weapons are widespread and more easily accessible. I think it's a kind of trade promotion and there are people benefiting from it," he explained.

Chaiwat added that the issue of violence in the South had become "securitised" with political solution now taking the back seat.

He also urged Thais to re-examine their beliefs of Thailand being a "peaceful society", adding that political violence in the Kingdom is not rare and its rate of homicides is somewhere near the top in Asia.

The lecturer also reminded the audience that though the Thai-Malay Muslims in the deep South are a minority, they constitute a majority in their homeland and are not migrants like Thai Muslims of other ethnicity. He explained that they are part of the Indo-Malay ethnicity and culture, which stretches all the way to southern Philippines and constitutes a majority of the people in Southeast Asia.

Chaiwat concluded his speech by saying that political will was needed to solve the conflicts but the current administration appeared to be too weak and insecure. "I'm just saying that it's not ready, not that it is not possible."

-- The Nation 2010-09-22

[whybother]

the first root cause of the division is "people who defame and attack the institution [of monarchy].

While there are LM laws, the issue can't even be discussed. Opposition to the "elite" often raises issues that can't be discussed, therefore many of the opposition issues can't be discussed. The government HAS TO censor opposition discussion of their issues because THE LAW says they have to.

If you can't fully discuss the opposition's issues, how do you move forward with them?

Get rid of the LM laws so all the issues are out in the open and can be dealt with properly.

[melissarossi199]

One related factor that is adding to political instability, imho, is that the judicial system appears to have been greatly empowered by the 2007 constitution, and likes flexing that newly-found muscle. Obviously a powerful justice/court system is a crucial part of the checks and balances formula, but the courts' frequent disbanding of parties of late further shatters any attempts at political cohesion. The cases that are prioritized and the rulings may be construed as somewhat favoring the anti-Thaksin camp. That Sondhi was recently found guilty of defaming Thaksin, whom he'd charged was anti-monarchial -- but Sondhi's sentence was suspended -- and all he had to do was send out press releases saying "Ooops" was but one example. And that the PAD airport takeover of 2008 is only hitting the courts now is of course one basis of the double standard claim. (Yes I know "backlog," but it sent out the wrong message.)  Not that I'm criticizing the rulings, which I recently discovered here on thaivisa is illegal. I am however concerned about the clout of the courts. It seems like they might need to be fine-tuned to fit into the balance.<br>

<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden"><div id="refHTML"></div>

[scorecard]

the first root cause of the division is "people who defame and attack the institution [of monarchy].

While there are LM laws, the issue can't even be discussed. Opposition to the "elite" often raises issues that can't be discussed, therefore many of the opposition issues can't be discussed. The government HAS TO censor opposition discussion of their issues because THE LAW says they have to.

If you can't fully discuss the opposition's issues, how do you move forward with them?

Get rid of the LM laws so all the issues are out in the open and can be dealt with properly.

Most of your points are either untue or way of of realistic balance.

There has been plenty of opportunity for people to talk and to discuss.

Abhsiit met the red leaders on TV and tried to engage them in structured and open discussion, it didn't produce anything because the paymaster wouldn't allow it to produce anything which would make a move forward in the overall interests of Thailand for all Thai people.

Why? Because it didn't suit the personal greedy selfish ruthless no morals aims of just one man.

[geovalin]

the first root cause of the division is "people who defame and attack the institution [of monarchy].

While there are LM laws, the issue can't even be discussed. Opposition to the "elite" often raises issues that can't be discussed, therefore many of the opposition issues can't be discussed. The government HAS TO censor opposition discussion of their issues because THE LAW says they have to.

If you can't fully discuss the opposition's issues, how do you move forward with them?

Get rid of the LM laws so all the issues are out in the open and can be dealt with properly.

Right! The best way to make someone crazy is forbid him to speak.

[Robby nz]

Mods, what happened to the quote, bold etc thing I used when replying?

Drawing from his experience, South African Ambassador to Thailand Douglas Gibson said it was important for people to be able to tell the truth and listen. He explained that if the perpetrators tell the truth, like they did in South Africa, they should be forgiven.

The SA gent is correct.

How can their be any reconsiliation when the reds have never admitted responsibility, given an apology or attempted to pay for any of the dammage they have caused?

Right from way back from the Prem attack, the Asean invasion, attack on the PM.s car (assuming he was in it), burning buses, attempting to blow up a fuel tanker near a crowed residence, attacking the army, grenade attacks, hospital invasion, the burnings in BKK and elsewhere.

These are all things we saw as the happened and must be fairly laid at the door of the reds, without bringing into the picture the recent bombings.

The economy, people and reputation of Thailand has suffered from these actions and will continue to suffer into the future.

Sure the Govt is not perfect but they are at least trying to move forward with good legisation.

They have compensated those who lost life, were injured and lost livlyhoods because of the reds rally.

Where is the reds responsibility that Arisman trumpeted from the stage during his POW speech?

It would appear the root cause of all the conflict is in fact Thaksin and his attempts (unsuccessfull) to bring the country to its knees.

If he had used the money he has spent on destruction in a positive way for the good of the country he would likely have been a hero of the whole country by now and well on the way to returning in triumph.

If he had said from the start something like "I am not perfect and have made mistakes but to show my love for the country and the people I will...."

Perhaps if he had opened a bank to give low interest loans say 3% - 5% interest where those in debt could convert their loan shark debt to something more managable, with free financial advice.

Or put forward money for schools, hospitals for the poor.

But no he had to do it the destructive way.

It still continues right to the BKK rally last weekend when we are told the left a mess for someone else to clean up.

Untill they learn to clean up their own rubbish there will be no reconsiliation with them.

[asiawatcher]

I think this is an intelligent article and pin points the two most difficult issue to Thailand assessment of their position. Now if only the Former Foreign Minister could work with Khun Abhisit and formulate and intelligent approach to move on, things could get interesting.

[OzMick]

I think Mr Surkiart should get out more, and not just in his limo. IMHO his 1st point has little validity under the current reign, with the possible exception of the commie section of the Reds and that is miniscule.

His 2nd point is better, but would be much improved by throwing in the T word. False claims of double standards (yes, there are real examples) are part of the Red handbook.

The 1000lb gorilla that he ignores is economic disparity. Every Thai home has a TV, and every soap opera set in the current era shows people living opulent lifestyles - even the poorest can see how the other fraction (much less than half) lives. In the Cold War, the CIA smuggled VCR tapes of "Dallas" into the USSR and they were sought-after items. Not for the plot (was there a plot?) but to goggle and the houses, cars and clothes.

Mr Chaiwat also seems a little confused. Does he really think that schools are burned so that Muslim contractors can reap the benefits? The opposition is to a secular education which spends more time on the 3 Rs than learning to recite chunks of the Koran, and hence turns out graduates with a better chance of economic success. Why isn't a syllabus set for all schools, with failure to comply and attain standards rewarded with closure?

He also claims that a political settlement is possible. One of the professed aims of Indonesian Islamic militants was islamic expansion into Thailand, PI and Australia - all to become islamic states. What political settlement is there with that aim?

[Buchholz]

I think this is an intelligent article and pin points the two most difficult issue to Thailand assessment of their position. Now if only the Former Foreign Minister could work with Khun Abhisit and formulate and intelligent approach to move on, things could get interesting.

He can't. He's banned from politics for 5 years as a member of the Executive Committee for Thai Rak Thai Party and found guilty of electoral fraud... but it's good he can lecture about ethics.

[Buchholz]

"I think it's time to discuss the root of the conflict," he said. Surakiart distanced himself from Thaksin before the September 2006 coup ousted his government.

Actually, he didn't distance himself until AFTER the coup:

The missing bit:

Former Foreign Minister and Deputy Prime Minister and Thai Rak Thai Party executive banned from politics Surakiart Sathirathai (left)

In their speeches in America, Sondhi and Soracha quoted Surakiart Sathirathai as saying that about eight hours after the Sept 19, 2006 coup that he had resigned from the Thaksin government because Thaksin had verbally offended a high institution.

[scorecard]

One related factor that is adding to political instability, imho, is that the judicial system appears to have been greatly empowered by the 2007 constitution, and likes flexing that newly-found muscle. Obviously a powerful justice/court system is a crucial part of the checks and balances formula, but the courts' frequent disbanding of parties of late further shatters any attempts at political cohesion. The cases that are prioritized and the rulings may be construed as somewhat favoring the anti-Thaksin camp. That Sondhi was recently found guilty of defaming Thaksin, whom he'd charged was anti-monarchial -- but Sondhi's sentence was suspended -- and all he had to do was send out press releases saying "Ooops" was but one example. And that the PAD airport takeover of 2008 is only hitting the courts now is of course one basis of the double standard claim. (Yes I know "backlog," but it sent out the wrong message.)  Not that I'm criticizing the rulings, which I recently discovered here on thaivisa is illegal. I am however concerned about the clout of the courts. It seems like they might need to be fine-tuned to fit into the balance.<br>

<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden"><div id="refHTML"></div>

Sorry but I don't agree.

There are very good reasons why political parties should be banned, that's why the provisions for banning were beefed up in the 2007 constitution.

Thailand has made very little progress since 1932 in terms of building a strong democracy.

There are obviosly many reasons for this, however one reason is Thai politics has pretty much from 1932 attraacted the wrong type of people - people with no capability, no morals, no hesitation to break the law, no hesitation to engage in massive (and often open) coruption, no hesitation to intimidate anybody. (And pretty much the same can be said for the ethics which have developed in the police force.)

This is why even today we rarely see highly capable people in parties and therefore in the parliament. And it shows clearly in their lack of ability to engage in insightful balanced argument in parliamentt and also when these incapable and dishonest people are put in charge of ministries, nothing moves forward, their only activity is in regard to their owns pockets and that of their scaly cronies. Additionally, these characters have no hesitation to openly destroy and intimidate the Electoral Commission, etc., etc.

In fact Thailand does have many highly capable people who are sincere and honest and want to contribute and take Thailand forward with a better picture for all Thais, but they won't join the existing parties, they won't allow themselves to be associated with gangs of leeches and thieves.

This is exactly why something needs to be done to gain a better quality of politicians (and I'm not suggesting that they should have higher education, that's not the point).

The scaly dishonest incapable people who are stealing massive amounts of the common wealth of Thailand are going to hang in there s long as possible to make themelves super rich, they don't care how much they are criticed etc, they are driven by one thing - massive greed.

And until there is some strucural approach to get these people out of the picture then nothing will improve (e.g. the provisions of the constitution - the agreed guidebook).

Thailand simply cannot continue with the current status quo.

Edited September 22, 2010 by scorecard

[Buchholz]

And that the PAD airport takeover of 2008 is only hitting the courts now is of course one basis of the double standard claim. (Yes I know "backlog," but it sent out the wrong message.)

What does the earlier Red Riots of 2007 only hitting the courts now do to your claim of double standards?

Edited September 22, 2010 by Buchholz

[OzMick]

"I think it's time to discuss the root of the conflict," he said. Surakiart distanced himself from Thaksin before the September 2006 coup ousted his government.

Actually, he didn't distance himself until AFTER the coup:

The missing bit:

Former Foreign Minister and Deputy Prime Minister and Thai Rak Thai Party executive banned from politics Surakiart Sathirathai (left)

In their speeches in America, Sondhi and Soracha quoted Surakiart Sathirathai as saying that about eight hours after the Sept 19, 2006 coup that he had resigned from the Thaksin government because Thaksin had verbally offended a high institution.

My mind pictures a rat on a sinking ship. If they have a LM trial for T, would he be a witness?

[cocopops]

Yap, yap, yap. Isn't the actual root cause that the reds have won all the elections this century but don't seem to control the government?

[yellow1red1]

Those are not THE 2 main problems. Lack of freedom of speech makes it impossible to get at the real root causes.

Thailand is goin down.

[OzMick]

Yap, yap, yap. Isn't the actual root cause that the reds have won all the elections this century but don't seem to control the government?

No

[givenall]

There is only one root cause, GREED

[MILT]

the first root cause of the division is "people who defame and attack the institution [of monarchy].

While there are LM laws, the issue can't even be discussed. Opposition to the "elite" often raises issues that can't be discussed, therefore many of the opposition issues can't be discussed. The government HAS TO censor opposition discussion of their issues because THE LAW says they have to.

If you can't fully discuss the opposition's issues, how do you move forward with them?

Get rid of the LM laws so all the issues are out in the open and can be dealt with properly.

The Root of the division I believe is do to outside influences that would be in part the Central Banking system, Trilateral commission's overall desire for world dominance. All of these conflicts and how they are carried out are text book approaches use time and time again by the western powers. Thailand is on the very brink of protecting their Kingdom or losing it under the guise of Stability in the region and of course human rights. I believe that the longevity of Thailand's sovereignty has been primarily because of the LM laws.

[ianh68]

"There are very good reasons why political parties should be banned, that's why the provisions for banning were beefed up in the 2007 constitution."

Disagree.

Why not target the guilty individuals rather than the whole party? Banning parties is a recipe for divide and rule. It should come as no surprise that the Democrats are the longest party surviving intact.

[Buchholz]

"There are very good reasons why political parties should be banned, that's why the provisions for banning were beefed up in the 2007 constitution."

Disagree.

Why not target the guilty individuals rather than the whole party?

It falls along the lines of the effective Rico Act in the US.

The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (commonly referred to as RICO Act or RICO) is a United States federal law that provides for extended criminal penalties and a civil cause of action for acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal organization.

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

As the executives in these gangs know what's up with inner workings of the gang. It's best to toss out the whole gang and bar the leaders from politics.

There's no baby in this throwing out of the bath water.

[ryladie99]

I think this is an intelligent article and pin points the two most difficult issue to Thailand assessment of their position. Now if only the Former Foreign Minister could work with Khun Abhisit and formulate and intelligent approach to move on, things could get interesting.

Awesome comment and I read it from Huffington post Blog. I do not think it is an easy answer. Well, we have to hope for a better solution for the Thais....my take.

[rubl]

the first root cause of the division is "people who defame and attack the institution [of monarchy].

While there are LM laws, the issue can't even be discussed. Opposition to the "elite" often raises issues that can't be discussed, therefore many of the opposition issues can't be discussed. The government HAS TO censor opposition discussion of their issues because THE LAW says they have to.

If you can't fully discuss the opposition's issues, how do you move forward with them?

Get rid of the LM laws so all the issues are out in the open and can be dealt with properly.

No need to get rid of the LM laws. Just modernize them like countries in Europe have done.

[whybother]

the first root cause of the division is "people who defame and attack the institution [of monarchy].

While there are LM laws, the issue can't even be discussed. Opposition to the "elite" often raises issues that can't be discussed, therefore many of the opposition issues can't be discussed. The government HAS TO censor opposition discussion of their issues because THE LAW says they have to.

If you can't fully discuss the opposition's issues, how do you move forward with them?

Get rid of the LM laws so all the issues are out in the open and can be dealt with properly.

Most of your points are either untue or way of of realistic balance.

There has been plenty of opportunity for people to talk and to discuss.

Abhsiit met the red leaders on TV and tried to engage them in structured and open discussion, it didn't produce anything because the paymaster wouldn't allow it to produce anything which would make a move forward in the overall interests of Thailand for all Thai people.

Why? Because it didn't suit the personal greedy selfish ruthless no morals aims of just one man.

I don't see how they are untrue.

The red shirts have many issues which CAN be discussed, which they certainly don't seem to be very good at discussing. I agree with you there. But my comments were in relation to that particular "cause of division".

My comments weren't even in relation to the red shirts. The fact is there are issues in general that can't even be discussed to work out if they are really issues or not, because of possibility of bringing up things that "can not be true" because of who they involve.

There are some red shirt issues in relation to particular elite and politics that can not be discussed. It might be only a small part of their issues, but it interferes with their overall view - mainly because it can't be discussed in their overall view, regardless of how small it is.

Certainly it is continuously used as an excuse for not being able to discuss things. And that is part of the problem.