No One Will Accept Responsibility For Their Actions: Thai Opinion

[webfact]

No one will accept responsibility for their actions

By The Nation

A new report on the political violence of last year blames both the government and red shirts, but neither will admit to wrongdoing

The truth hurts. But while the Human Rights Watch report on last year's political violence in Thailand cannot be thoroughly classified as the ultimate truth, it hurts all the same. Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban reacted angrily to it, whereas the red shirts have been largely muted. Nobody seems to want to talk about it. We would like to ask why, but in truth we know.

The report points a damning, accusing finger at both sides in the conflict. That's why. That's the problem for Human Rights Watch - which is Thailand's problem to be exact. Neither side in the prolonged political conflict wants to take any responsibility. Each wants to pin the total blame on the other. Everybody wants to come out of this squeaky clean, from start to finish.

That's why we have ended up here. "Double standard" is a term for "the other side". When we do something bad, it's because we don't have a choice. When our rivals do it, it's because they are evil. The HRW report might be questioned for its accuracy, but it can boast one thing that most Thai people cannot boast about: HRW tries to take an unbiased look at the Thai problem.

The 139-page report describes "excessive and unnecessary use of force" on the government side. Troops were said to be shooting randomly. "At everything that moves" according to at least one witness. Snipers, the report says, were employed to enforce the declaration of restricted zones. Many unarmed protesters, bystanders and even medics fell victim to the drastic security measures, the report concludes.

The red shirts, meanwhile, are blamed for their association with the "men in black", who killed and injured soldiers on April 10. The men in black and other militants were armed with assault rifles, grenade launchers and hand grenades, the report says. It also mentions the invasion of the Chulalongkorn Hospital by some protest leaders that prompted the chaotic and traumatic evacuation of patients and medical staff.

At the press conference at the Foreign Correspondents' Club of Thailand to announce the report, HRW Asia director Brad Adams insisted that everyone responsible for the violence, be it on the government's or red shirts' side, should be brought to justice.

He called for a transparent and impartial investigation. HRW noted an "imbalance of justice", as no government official has been held accountable, whereas serious terrorism charges have been levied against many red shirts. "DAAD leaders have been charged with crimes, but despite promises by the government to also hold security forces accountable, no one in the Army or police has been charged," Adams said. "This has fed the understandable belief among many Thais that the scales of justice are imbalanced."

The anti-government movement, however, was urged to renounce violence and take some of the blame. "Regardless of their stated grievances and the conduct of the government, DAAD members responsible for crimes should also be brought to justice," Adams said. "The DAAD leadership should understand that when they use violence they cannot claim to be a peaceful movement."

So, how do we begin to clean up this mess? HRW's calls are almost certain to fall on deaf ears no matter who is in power in Thailand. Suthep's angry reaction has said enough for the government. If the Pheu Thai Party comes to power, will it investigate red-shirt leaders who for months urged followers to turn Bangkok into "a sea of fire" if they were dispersed from the Ratchaprasong intersection?

The "imbalance" is here now, and it will likely remain with a possible shift of power. Thailand has faced this kind of challenge before and it has never passed the test, so the future looks questionable at best. It is quite embarrassing that it has to take an international organisation to tell us that maybe both sides should be blamed for the tragic events of last year. And it will be more embarrassing still if the views honestly expressed by HRW are ignored with the same old attitude that has brought us here in the first place.

-- The Nation 2011-05-06

[TheyCallmeScooter]

Contrary to what my mother and Robert Amsterdam would have us all believe, it does not - in fact - take two to tango.

I'm yet to hear a single legitimate argument outlining what the government could / should have done differently; from the day hundreds or even thousands of children sporting cute revolutionary attire laughed and played in the streets...to the day they cried, hungry and tired, as their parents tried to burn down Bangkok (in particular those days inbetween, where they performed brilliantly, in their all-important - if not quite...acceptable - role as human shields...with some even manning the barricades like heroic little Gavroche's).

nb. they should have done a great deal prior, and their actions after the riots have been reflective of forces pulling in opposing directions, driven by very different interests...but during the crisis? What would you have had them do, instead?

[scorecard]

There's a broader point worth mentioning.

A sociology professor at Chula university has done a lot of research to analyse and profile typical Thai behaviors.

One point he has written about extemsively is that Thai society at large don't accept responsibility.

The most simple example, someone hits your car, the other driver, by the letter of the law, is at fault. But acceptance of respsonsibility is alien to many Thais.

In most Western societies the vast majority or people, in their first quick analysis of the situation make the realization that they have responsibility in this situation, including responsibility to pay costs of repair, injury etc. Why do they make this analysis? From values taught as a child and from observation of behaviors and discussions they have observed after some form of incident.

That same thinking is not part of the way Thais analyse such situations. Why? Well that's a big question, but part of the answer is that they have not (as they have grown up) observed such discussions after accidents or incidents.

Edited May 6, 2011 by scorecard

[AZBill]

And how does this differ from other governments? Anyone follow US politics? It's always the other guy's fault no matter what the issue. Human nature folks. We put in the worst possible people into government positions simply because they look good in a suit then shake our heads and wonder <deleted> happened when it all goes to sh#%t.

[trisailer]

This is the process of change, it's messy, but it is change afterall.

It sure beats sitting on the couch eating potato chips and drinking a Bud while empty, well dressed men wreck what was a perfectly good nation.

People who live in glass houses should not throw stones.

[TheyCallmeScooter]

The 139-page report describes "excessive and unnecessary use of force" on the government side. Troops were said to be shooting randomly. "At everything that moves" according to at least one witness.

A single witness report. Correction - AT LEAST one, unverified witness report. Which happens to be 50% of the requirements, for verification.

Of course, there are a few million non-idiots who would instantly know that witness is lying - and they wouldn't need to have witnessed anything at all.

Like anyone who's ever fired a rifle, for example. Or people who don't credit a witness report which flies in the face of simple logic (as it pertains to the death toll - vs - claims of "random" delivery of automatic fire "at everything that moves", when those rounds were delivered by the twisted miracles of technology that are 21st century military-issue, high-powered, sighted, assault and sniper rifles).

Amsterdam would have us believe every Thai soldier in Bangkok during the crisis, was:

• a vicious & blood-thirsty killer
• a cold-blooded murderer
• armed to the teeth, capable of delivering death at 1000/bodies per minute.
• but so impossibly incompetent, they simply could not hit a barn door with automatic fire from their M16 rifles...but not for want of trying.

One of the four premises is true. One of the four is so laughably idiotic, it precludes any and all possibility of a single Thai soldier fitting Amsterdam's (surely prescripted) profile.

FACT. Give one (1) vicious / pragmatic professional solder a single (1) M16 rifle, pit him alone against a crowd of unarmed protesters who strongly disapprove of his presence which provokes them into violently attacking him, don't bother him with any pesky RoE...and the death toll would not be 90. It would really be either 900 or 9000, depending on how many suicidal martyrs were willing to run into the kill zone. Whether or not the unarmed crowd, would end up getting that rifle off the single soldier, would really just depend on whether there were enough bullets to accommodate every person that desperately wanted one. And all this would occur in mere minutes; it wouldn't take 7 weeks.

The only intriguing aspect of the HRW report, is why they are pretending to be idiotic. It seems to me one could be forgiven for assuming they merely wished to be involved; and are simply more concerned with presenting the appearance of 'objective' neutrality, than anything else. At the expense of considerations including, but not limited to, the appearance that they are too stupid, to function.

But when one considers their peculiar timing, and the (ostensible) extended length of time required, to compile an essay of (unconvincingly) feigned idiocy...one could be forgiven for assuming the Obvious.

The timing of their release of such a balanced (and therefore outrageously slanted) report suggests the Obvious. I suppose, the Rapist and the Victim of Rape could both share the blame. You saw the scratches on his arm right? And what the Mace did to his eyes! *gasp*. Clearly she gave as good as she got....

....or not. The targets of unprovoked assaults, are never guilty of assault. By virtue of self-defence? And common-sense? A raped girl is not apportioned an equal (or any) share of the blame for being attractive, to a rapist. Why HRW is pretending they believe so, is mildly intriguing. I'm having trouble seeing how they could defend themselves against leveled charges of corruption; based purely on their releasing this report, at this time.

But now I'm being ridiculous.

That would suggest they operated in a world of even flimsy accountability - when of course, they aren't restricted by the impositions they place upon others. There is no Watchdog, watching the watchdogs. There almost never is. Which probably explains why they all seem to watch and watch...and watch; only for the injustices and the abuses and the exploitation of innocents to go on and on...and on.

It's remarkable really, how it continues on and on; in spite of their heroic dedication, in endlessly volunteering themselves for - and even refusing to be relieved - of the watch.

[TheyCallmeScooter]

And how does this differ from other governments? Anyone follow US politics? It's always the other guy's fault no matter what the issue. Human nature folks. We put in the worst possible people into government positions simply because they look good in a suit then shake our heads and wonder <deleted> happened when it all goes to sh#%t.

I don't personally think Jutaporn looks all that dashing, in either formal or casual wear (I have not been privy to the swimsuit edition). I accept these things are somewhat subjective.

But if you think meek men in suits, can win out over vicious and shameless brutes (attire unimportant), you'd likely be confused...by the politics of any nation.

Or by politics of any kind (there are two, if you were unaware). Politics is real. Or the politics are Staged. But before you ask...I'm not so arrogant, that I would pretend I could possibly guess at which ones were which.

nb. with the exception of a few laughably obvious spots (if only obvious, in hindsight)...like the 2008 US Presidential Election. To wit.

[WhizBang]

Personally, I think the government acted with remarkable restraint last year.  But yes, they must accept some of the blame, mainly because they took way too long to act against the reds.  Had the government moved in quickly as soon as the reds blocked off Ratchprasong and sent the reds home, most of what occured two months later could have been prevented.

However the reds, the Phua Thai and their leader Thaksin must take most of the blame.  They wanted a confrontation.  They kept pushing and pushing and pushing for a confrontation, and finally, they got what they wanted.  If the government had moved in immediately, none of what happened would have happened, the reds would not have been ready to burn down Bangkok so early in the game.   And who allowed the reds to stockpile the tires, bamboo and other articles while the situitation was escallating?  The police, of course.

So the government must take responsibility for letting everything get so out of hand.  But what of the Police?  They did nothing, and in many cases actually helped the reds.  Immediately after the dispursal there were calls for police reform.  What has happened there?  Nothing, not a dam_n thing.  The BiB have been let off the hook with no reform of any kind in the making and so it's back to business as usual for the BiB, collecting tea money and selectivly enforcing the law at the whim/demands of someone in power.

Amazing Thailand, indeed.

[Robby nz]

The 139-page report describes "excessive and unnecessary use of force" on the government side. Troops were said to be shooting randomly. "At everything that moves" according to at least one witness. Snipers, the report says, were employed to enforce the declaration of restricted zones. Many unarmed protesters, bystanders and even medics fell victim to the drastic security measures, the report concludes.

If that were in fact true there would have been far more than 90 deaths among the rioters, and remember the 90 odd also includes those killed by the armed rioters.

To fire "randomly at everything that moves" in a croud situation would ensure a large number of dead as we see from reports of riots in other countries.

That there were only 90 deaths is a tribute to the patience and restraint of the Govt, particularly the PM.

Remember there were many calls to 'go in and remove them', if you care to look back on this site you will see some of them.

The army could at any time, with snipers, have killed the leaders as they stood on their stage making threats and demands.

But they did not they first confronted them when they tried to march and were greeted with grenades and rifle fire that resulted in dead soldiers, sure the army retaliated, but what were they supposed to do?

Then when, after many grenade attacks, the army put a parimiter round the riot site the reds moved their barricades out and attacked the army, again what else could the army do but return fire.

In the final clean out there was no 'hail of gunfire. just a couple of APC's breaking down the barricades and the brave leaders "We will fight to the last drop of blood" your blood not ours, surrendred.

What happened at the temple I dont know but what I do know is that the rioters were sent home on free buses and trains at the countries expense a great reward for the trouble and expense they had already caused.

They should have been rounded up and made to clean up their mess, but no the citizens of BKK had to come out and do that.

[anterian]

As usual any report critical of Abhisit and his government is immediately rubbished by his supporters. Really this is just like the Thai- Cambodia spat, the facts are not really relevant, what ultimately matter in terms of global image, is the global view of events. From this viewpoint both the government, the army, the reds and the yellows have all played their role in damaging Thailand's image. The longer Thailand behave like an uncivilised country, the longer it will be perceived as such.

[whybother]

As usual any report critical of Abhisit and his government is immediately rubbished by his supporters. Really this is just like the Thai- Cambodia spat, the facts are not really relevant, what ultimately matter in terms of global image, is the global view of events. From this viewpoint both the government, the army, the reds and the yellows have all played their role in damaging Thailand's image. The longer Thailand behave like an uncivilised country, the longer it will be perceived as such.

... who is rubbishing the report?

[Crushdepth]

The "Third Hand" did it.

[LingLek]

There's a broader point worth mentioning.

A sociology professor at Chula university has done a lot of research to analyse and profile typical Thai behaviors.

One point he has written about extemsively is that Thai society at large don't accept responsibility.

The most simple example, someone hits your car, the other driver, by the letter of the law, is at fault. But acceptance of respsonsibility is alien to many Thais.

In most Western societies the vast majority or people, in their first quick analysis of the situation make the realization that they have responsibility in this situation, including responsibility to pay costs of repair, injury etc. Why do they make this analysis? From values taught as a child and from observation of behaviors and discussions they have observed after some form of incident.

That same thinking is not part of the way Thais analyse such situations. Why? Well that's a big question, but part of the answer is that they have not (as they have grown up) observed such discussions after accidents or incidents.

Your point is well taken, but based on an erroneous assumption: that your values translate across cultures. It has been drummed into you (as in other guilt cultures) that you are wrong before you are right, hence your willingness to take the blame (glossed as accept responsibility) for a wrongdoing. Thais (as in other shame-based cultures) feel offended, rather than guilty or not, if they are accused of wrong-doing. Now, my feeling is that before rushing to judgment, we should consider the best way to deal with this environmental or cultural difference.

[trisailer]

"The most simple example, someone hits your car, the other driver, by the letter of the law, is at fault. But acceptance of respsonsibility is alien to many Thais."

The good professor has obviously never been in a car accident in the US where most folks have the number of their lawyer on their speed dial.

The issues of bad behavior by boths sides will or will not be resolved through the courts. I think that a case can be made for keeping the country moving forward with solutions to the problems that caused the conflict. Nothing will change history but something might change the future.

[selftaopath]

There's a broader point worth mentioning.

A sociology professor at Chula university has done a lot of research to analyse and profile typical Thai behaviors.

One point he has written about extemsively is that Thai society at large don't accept responsibility.

The most simple example, someone hits your car, the other driver, by the letter of the law, is at fault. But acceptance of respsonsibility is alien to many Thais.

In most Western societies the vast majority or people, in their first quick analysis of the situation make the realization that they have responsibility in this situation, including responsibility to pay costs of repair, injury etc. Why do they make this analysis? From values taught as a child and from observation of behaviors and discussions they have observed after some form of incident.

That same thinking is not part of the way Thais analyse such situations. Why? Well that's a big question, but part of the answer is that they have not (as they have grown up) observed such discussions after accidents or incidents.

Thanks for your post and informing us of this professor's research. Most of us from the West KNOW the basic/average Thai does no and will not take responsibility for practically anything. This is the Thai culture. Hell they are never wrong either. This might be directly related to the bulls.... "save face" BS mentality which really means: I don't want to look bad/unknowing/wrong/negligent/etc. even if it's the truth.

[scorecard]

"The most simple example, someone hits your car, the other driver, by the letter of the law, is at fault. But acceptance of respsonsibility is alien to many Thais."

The good professor has obviously never been in a car accident in the US where most folks have the number of their lawyer on their speed dial.

The issues of bad behavior by boths sides will or will not be resolved through the courts. I think that a case can be made for keeping the country moving forward with solutions to the problems that caused the conflict. Nothing will change history but something might change the future.

Valid point. It is always posible that some people who are in the wrong in an accident are well realizing they are in the wrong, but will never open admit it and will try every legal avenue / trick / loop hole possible to avoid pay out.

[trisailer]

Why can't people see that all of these things are human things! not Thai, Not farang.....human.

[housepainter]

From the cradle to the grave;

the cradle - allowed to run riot without any restraint.

Fast forward to adulthood - an irresponsible person that has learned no self restraint or that actions have to be accounted for. As a Thai you do what you like when you like and worse no one will ever chastise or intervene or correct you. Park in restricted areas - no problem, drive the wrong way, no problem. Kill a few people along the way, no problem as the place is so corrupt you just negotiate the problem away.

The whole of Thai society is concerned with face. You may never correct anyone over anything at any time. It is lawless.

The law is not applied but worse, the individual has no moral compass to guide them. They actually don't know justy how ridiculous they look to us.

For Thais life is all about lieing, cheating and avoiding. Ask them a question and they will answer with none sense rather than admit they don't know.

As for the child ............. the toy guns are replaced with real ones and we see the results.

It's broke and beyond fixing. We debate this .................. the Thais are sinking the whisky, doing the kaorke or sleeping. You think they care?

[selftaopath]

From the cradle to the grave;

the cradle - allowed to run riot without any restraint.

Fast forward to adulthood - an irresponsible person that has learned no self restraint or that actions have to be accounted for. As a Thai you do what you like when you like and worse no one will ever chastise or intervene or correct you. Park in restricted areas - no problem, drive the wrong way, no problem. Kill a few people along the way, no problem as the place is so corrupt you just negotiate the problem away.

The whole of Thai society is concerned with face. You may never correct anyone over anything at any time. It is lawless.

The law is not applied but worse, the individual has no moral compass to guide them. They actually don't know justy how ridiculous they look to us.

For Thais life is all about lieing, cheating and avoiding. Ask them a question and they will answer with none sense rather than admit they don't know.

As for the child ............. the toy guns are replaced with real ones and we see the results.

It's broke and beyond fixing. We debate this .................. the Thais are sinking the whisky, doing the kaorke or sleeping. You think they care?

Oh I could not agree with you more. These are my observations also. I have great difficulty b/c I STILL want to understand the logic/way of thinking - I know this is an impossibility. Just the other day I saw a 4-5 yr old boy, being raised by his Grandmother, taking a crap on their dirt floor. He was a/b 10 meters from the hong nam. His GM didn't say a word but was near him. One of my curiosities with this type of behavior is: he walks around barefooted. Yea !!! in the same area where he craped. ?????? Maybe they figure their chickens will eat the stuff????? And of course I've seen him urinate everywhere too. They are located across the street from our rental house and our computer room looks out directly toward them.

I also believe Lack of Sanctions (LOS) is beyond modernization/fixing. If the Thai was was "effective" in this 21 century then I'd suggest others take heed and learn from them. I don't think this current culture can teach much other than "what not to do."

Thank you for your posts.