Thai Reconciliation: 'Sorry' Is The Missing Word

[webfact]

STOPPAGE TIME

Thai reconciliation: 'Sorry' is the missing word

Tulsathit Taptim

Old soldiers never die; they just have to live to reflect on their coups.

BANGKOK: -- Or so it seems for General Sonthi Boonyaratglin, who is leading moves that could eventually help undo what he did in 2006. We cannot be certain he's sorry for the military putsch because he has never actually said so, but can a man be transformed the way Sonthi has been without the slightest shred of remorse?

Maybe we are making "reconciliation" far more complicated than it really is. Giving Sonthi two hours on national television and asking him to speak his mind is perhaps the best, quickest and cheapest solution. He only needs to address two questions: Why the heck did he roll out tanks to topple Thaksin Shinawatra six years ago? Would he do it again today?

If the past six years has been a war, Sonthi arguably fired the first shot. And if the man who fired the first shot now wants peace, who are we to argue? All he has to do is tell us nicely whether he thinks that shot was justified or it opened up a slippery slope that sent us all to rock-bottom. So much for the "Let bygones be bygones" cliche that Sonthi invokes in virtually every interview. Either he wishes he had never done it, or he still believes he did the right thing. But we need to know.

Sonthi may claim he's trapped somewhere in between. "I think I did the right thing but now I'm sorry for what I did" could be his graceful exit. Problem is, this kind of attitude is exactly what's making reconciliation virtually impossible. Everybody's convinced he's right, but everybody's proclaiming sadness for how tragically low Thailand has sunk, partly because of him doing the right thing. Nobody has unequivocally admitted that the country is in this dire state because he is wrong.

Have we ever heard Thaksin say his ex-wife's purchase of the Ratchadapisek land was wrong? The closest we've got is him saying the transaction was probably unlawful but that was only because the law was unrealistic or abused. "He did nothing wrong," Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yoobamrung has said again and again. "He only did what the law prohibited."

Sonthi can apply this logic as well. "The coup was not wrong; it's only against normal democratic principles," he can say. The People's Alliance for Democracy can then be adamant about doing what was morally right in flushing an elected administration out of Government House, occupying the property for months, and blocking Suvarnabhumi Airport for days. And so can the red shirts for camping in a business district and invading a hospital. Everyone has resorted to that famous tagline: Sometimes, to uphold justice, you have to break the law.

Thailand's problem does not end there. When the law is on your side, wield it like a Bible and what is morally right or wrong does not matter. You can have nominees hold your stocks and gain massive tax benefits from transactions that confuse the life out of everybody. "Read the law. Does it say anywhere that I have to pay taxes?" You can say that in the face of anyone who dares to raise ethical questions.

So, what do we have here? Thaksin Shinawatra, who doesn't regret the Ratchadapisek land purchase, the stock deceptions and staggering conflicts of interest. The PAD and the red shirts, who don't regret whatever they did but have been condemning each other for doing what they also have done. Sonthi Boonyaratglin, who doesn't regret (at least publicly, not yet) his overthrow of a democratically elected government.

Where can reconciliation come from? Can true peace originate from "I'm right but I understand you" or "You're wrong, but let's put this to rest"? If the answer is no, the bad news is that the approach being used left and right here is exactly that.

Call the ongoing process whatever you want - a quest for justice, a shame or a waste of time - but if this is "reconciliation", who's saying sorry with hand on heart?

Should Sonthi kick-start a turnaround? Who can lead mass confessions better than a coup-maker who has apparently realised the value of a parliamentary system, is now chairing an ad hoc House committee on reconciliation and has agreed to consider calls to erase the legal consequences of his own actions? Should this old soldier say, "I'm sorry, I was wrong" before he fades away?

Of all the key players in the Thai political crisis, Sonthi is the one showing the least fear of losing face, and he doesn't seem to care about his own stake that much - at least not now. That is either a glimmer of hope or a false promise. The only certainty is that the road remains long and bumpy, because even for him, sorry seems to be the hardest word.

-- The Nation 2012-03-14

[whybother]

Sonthi Boonyaratglin, who doesn't regret (at least publicly, not yet) his overthrow of a democratically elected government.

Last I checked, there was no elected government in power at the time of the coup.

[Thai at Heart]

last time I checked, "pooyais" don't apologise to anyone, anywhere, anytime......

[WackySomchai]

There will be no reconciliation until the laws are upheld, including for the redshirts, yellowshirts and fugitive.

[yoshiwara]

Really, the production line of articles on reconciliation go on and on and on. Worthless every one. It was never ever intended as anything other than an attempt to by-pass the law and bring Thakisin back to Thailand as a 'clean' man. Everything else just window dressing.

[Reasonableman]

Like doing the tango, even the Paris version, reconciliation requires more than one participant.

[BigJohnnyBKK]

Really, the production line of articles on reconciliation go on and on and on. Worthless every one. It was never ever intended as anything other than an attempt to by-pass the law and bring Thakisin back to Thailand as a 'clean' man.

That **is the definition** of reconciliation.

Everything else just window dressing.

Exactly

[pramaprow]

Approaching 35 (continuous) years here in Thailand and I have yet to hear 'I'm sorry' ('sia jai') come out of one of their mouths...not once...no joke...live with it...

[jayboy]

Last I checked, there was no elected government in power at the time of the coup.

It's amazing that this tired canard still has legs - as thought the purpose opf the coup was not to eject Thaksin.Not even the coup leaders argue this brain dead proposition.

[trainman34014]

Approaching 35 (continuous) years here in Thailand and I have yet to hear 'I'm sorry' ('sia jai') come out of one of their mouths...not once...no joke...live with it...

I've had a girl bump into me in the market and said 'Solly' a few weeks ago. Well; it's a start isn't it?

[phiphidon]

Really, the production line of articles on reconciliation go on and on and on. Worthless every one. It was never ever intended as anything other than an attempt to by-pass the law and bring Thakisin back to Thailand as a 'clean' man. Everything else just window dressing.

If reconciliation "was never ever intended as anything other than an attempt to by-pass the law and bring Thakisin back to Thailand as a 'clean' man" can you please explain why it was Abhisit who set up the Truth and Reconciliation Commission?

[MaiChai]

Sonthi was just the 'front man' or the visible face of the coup. One could not say he did it all by himself?

So anyone convinced that 'reconcilliation' is possible? I don't think it is, so best put the past behind us and move on with the future? No point living in the past?

Maybe Tulsathit Taptim was thinking of an Elton John song?

Edited March 14, 2012 by MaiChai

[yoshiwara]

Really, the production line of articles on reconciliation go on and on and on. Worthless every one. It was never ever intended as anything other than an attempt to by-pass the law and bring Thakisin back to Thailand as a 'clean' man. Everything else just window dressing.

If reconciliation "was never ever intended as anything other than an attempt to by-pass the law and bring Thakisin back to Thailand as a 'clean' man" can you please explain why it was Abhisit who set up the Truth and Reconciliation Commission?

How the Democrats responded to the calls for 'reconciliation' may be seen as naive or taking the red call at face value and responding accordingly, but the reality of what Thaksin and his supporters mean by 'reconciliation' has become hardly an issue of rocket science. Thaksin's return is the price of 'reconciliation'. Oh, and a whitewash for the red thuggery of 2010. Some will remember that sometime in 2010 both sides did reach what was thought to be an agreement to hold an election ahead of schedule. Maybe this was going to be an opportunity to row back the endless confrontation and a 'reconciliation'. Thaksin deliberately broke that up through Seh Daeng who caught a bullet for his troubles. Post- the red riots both sides have again gone through the motions but nobody believes they are intended other than a weapon which the reds think they can use to advance interests. Even the forum cheerleaders don't think otherwise.

[whybother]

Last I checked, there was no elected government in power at the time of the coup.

It's amazing that this tired canard still has legs - as thought the purpose opf the coup was not to eject Thaksin.Not even the coup leaders argue this brain dead proposition.

That doesn't change the fact that there was no elected government at the time of the coup.

[maidu]

I'm glad the coup happened, even though it was contrary to democracy. Was it more contrary than buying millions of votes or making campaign promises that you know you can't keep? You tell me. If the coup hadn't happened, Thaksin and his inner circle would have made Thailand their personal fiefdom and been getting exponentially richer as the weeks rolled by. He would have made Marcos, Papa Doc, Bokhassa and Sukarno/Suharto look like neophytes.

last time I checked, "pooyais" don't apologise to anyone, anywhere, anytime......

Approaching 35 (continuous) years here in Thailand and I have yet to hear 'I'm sorry' ('sia jai') come out of one of their mouths...not once...no joke...live with it...

I've often said this, but usually one of the first ten or twenty words a farang learns in Thai is 'garuna' (sorry). Yet, in 25 years visiting Thailand, and 13 years residing here, I've heard that word spoken about once or twice (in TV shows?). Another word I've never heard (among the 1st 20 words we learn) is 'sawad ratree' (goodnight). maybe because I live alone, though even among ladies who have spent the night, I've never heard it.

It's like the 6 or so letters of the Thai alphabet which are never used. If it's never used, why keep it?

[OzMick]

Approaching 35 (continuous) years here in Thailand and I have yet to hear 'I'm sorry' ('sia jai') come out of one of their mouths...not once...no joke...live with it...

I've had a girl bump into me in the market and said 'Solly' a few weeks ago. Well; it's a start isn't it?

Perhaps she momentarily mistook you for one of her boyfriends from Israel?

[Nickymaster]

Really, the production line of articles on reconciliation go on and on and on. Worthless every one. It was never ever intended as anything other than an attempt to by-pass the law and bring Thakisin back to Thailand as a 'clean' man. Everything else just window dressing.

Correct!

[Nickymaster]

Really, the production line of articles on reconciliation go on and on and on. Worthless every one. It was never ever intended as anything other than an attempt to by-pass the law and bring Thakisin back to Thailand as a 'clean' man. Everything else just window dressing.

If reconciliation "was never ever intended as anything other than an attempt to by-pass the law and bring Thakisin back to Thailand as a 'clean' man" can you please explain why it was Abhisit who set up the Truth and Reconciliation Commission?

How the Democrats responded to the calls for 'reconciliation' may be seen as naive or taking the red call at face value and responding accordingly, but the reality of what Thaksin and his supporters mean by 'reconciliation' has become hardly an issue of rocket science. Thaksin's return is the price of 'reconciliation'. Oh, and a whitewash for the red thuggery of 2010. Some will remember that sometime in 2010 both sides did reach what was thought to be an agreement to hold an election ahead of schedule. Maybe this was going to be an opportunity to row back the endless confrontation and a 'reconciliation'. Thaksin deliberately broke that up through Seh Daeng who caught a bullet for his troubles. Post- the red riots both sides have again gone through the motions but nobody believes they are intended other than a weapon which the reds think they can use to advance interests. Even the forum cheerleaders don't think otherwise.

If Thaksin would have agreed on holding the elections at the end of 2010, a lot less people would have died. But... it was worth the risk for Thaksin. He needed the DEM government to be out before budget allocation. If he would have been human, he would have agreed on Abhisit's election proposal.

[scorecard]

Really, the production line of articles on reconciliation go on and on and on. Worthless every one. It was never ever intended as anything other than an attempt to by-pass the law and bring Thakisin back to Thailand as a 'clean' man. Everything else just window dressing.

How true, plus IMHO there is already a reconciliation factor - respect for the law, all laws, by all people, and equal justice for all plus leaders being role models to regularly espouse the need to respect and follow the law, and regularly show genuine morals and values.

[scorecard]

Sonthi was just the 'front man' or the visible face of the coup. One could not say he did it all by himself?

So anyone convinced that 'reconcilliation' is possible? I don't think it is, so best put the past behind us and move on with the future? No point living in the past?

Maybe Tulsathit Taptim was thinking of an Elton John song?

Yes, all mve on, and all respect the law, all laws.