In Seeking Reconciliation, We Move Further Away From It: Thai Opinion

[webfact]

STOPPAGE TIME

In seeking reconciliation, we move further away from it

Tulsathit Taptim

What makes it most difficult for two people to mend fences?

BANGKOK: -- If both think they are absolutely right and each believes without a shred of doubt that the other is wrong, that is. Reconciliation can never materialise under such circumstances, for it is never a process of proving you are right. It's all about accepting guilt on your part and never looking beyond that.

We have a Truth for Reconciliation Commission of Thailand, reconciliation bills and an Ad Hoc House Committee on Reconciliation. Constitutional reform is also around the corner, providing that the present standoff does not snowball into something worse. None of the methods or measures purportedly intended to restore political peace is making anyone accept their own sin. Everyone has been exploiting the term "reconciliation" to prove that he was right all along and the others have been wrong all the time.

Whenever "Good" is up against "Evil", the only outcome is devastation. The reason why is simple: everybody will do whatever it takes not to be deemed evil. The Thai situation has come down to that black-and-white mentality, which prevails on both sides. The whiter they think they are, the blacker the other side becomes, and the greyer both camps actually turn. Reconciliation lies in both sides coming to accept the grey elements on their part, which, as things stand, is not happening.

On one hand, Thailand seems painfully close to a solution. As far as democracy goes, the sister of a political fugitive is running a strong government. That is not something we see every day in this world. Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra has a full mandate to implement all kinds of conventional policies, no matter how controversial, and use taxpayers' money the way her party wants to. The minimum wage has been drastically raised despite an outcry from the business sector. Computer tablets have been given to school kids for free despite scepticism about the motive. The government has removed a police chief, transferred a respected head of the national airline, flexed its muscles over the Bank of Thailand and allowed the United States to use a Thai air base, albeit for "humanitarian" reasons. Whatever Prime Minister Yingluck wants to do within her democratic powers, she has been able to do.

As far as the rule of law is concerned, the big brother of the prime minister is being kept outside Thailand. He is unable to return unless he serves his punishment as prescribed in a court verdict. There is nothing "democracy" can do about it, unless, of course, Yingluck stretches her so-called mandate beyond its limits. Which she is trying to do. The reconciliation bills may absolve Thaksin Shinawatra if they pass Parliament. The charter amendment, again being engineered through the Pheu Thai Party's supremacy in Parliament, could also make his family's illegal purchase of the Ratchadapisek land look like it never happened, and the seizure of his assets illegal.

Will Yingluck be able to complete her four-year term if her government drops the reconciliation bills and charter amendment from its agenda? Of course, she can. Will that be good for democracy? Of course, it will be. Do the reconciliation bills and charter amendment breach the rule of law? This question brings us to the heart of Thailand's crisis, in which democratic "mandate" means different things to different people. Is the crisis good or bad for democracy? We all know the answer.

Thais are already living in a "grey world", where Yingluck is prime minister and implementing any state policies she deems fit, and where the only thing she cannot do, as yet, is whitewash her brother. Problem is, even now that we are so close to drawing a line under matters, political rivals cannot accept their own limitations. If one side is guilty of denouncing Yingluck's democratic rights and powers, her ruling camp is guilty of over-extending them. The showdown has pitted two key pillars of Thailand against each other although they are supposed to function together in an effective and peaceful manner for the country's best interests.

But what if this status quo is as good as it gets? Real "reconciliation", perhaps, can only be achieved when both sides accept with an open mind the prevailing reality and do not try to change a thing. It sounds simple enough but is probably the hardest thing to do. To the political rivals, the reality means something is wrong. Which is correct. How they try to change it, thinking they are absolutely right, is the root cause of Thailand's never-ending predicament.

-- The Nation 2012-06-13

[virtualtraveller]

Difficult to imagine how you can get anything done when the chief protagonist is the guy running the country, and doing so without a legal mandate. Whether he should be in jail or not, or the others in jail or not, is contentious but so long as the party that is trying to sponsor a truce between the two sides through legal channels is actually a proxy for one of the two protagonists, it's never, ever, going to work. We may as well ditch the idea and carry on fighting ad infinitum.

[Yunla]

PTP don't want reconciliation with opponents, or justice for the poor, they want autocratic totalitarianism.

[Reasonableman]

Interesting. For the vast majority of Thais (yes, and even farang) who are not involved in this conflict, other than as casualties, to what "fault" should they admit, to achieve reconciliation for all the wrongs done to them over the years? The level of bitterness we see here on TV towards both sides for their lack of acknowledgement and lack of responsibility for the "unintended consequences" or "collateral damage" will make any national reconciliation very difficult indeed.

Edited June 13, 2012 by Reasonableman

[Siripon]

Thaksin has never reconciled with anyone, his entire modus operandi is to use money, divide and rule and threats. The man has no conscience.

[LuckyLew]

PTP do not want reconciliation

They want one thing and one thing only

Bugger everything else

Unless the guy is bullet proof, I have no clue why he would want to come back

[OzMick]

IMHO the political wounds of 2010 were healing nicely if slowly. This "reconciliation" bill has just removed the scab with a wire brush and thrown Bettadine on it - but it's for your own good!

[Crushdepth]

The problem is basically that Thaksin is holding the reconciliation process hostage to his own personal welfare.

Unless the two issues are separated the process will remain a battle for domination instead.

[skorchio]

PTP do not want reconciliation

They want one thing and one thing only

Bugger everything else

Unless the guy is bullet proof, I have no clue why he would want to come back

He wants his money back. It is a lot of money, it took him years and years to squirrel it away, and he has dedicated a further 3 years trying to get it back. Its all about the money ....

Buit I see your point ..... I am surprised that somebody has not had a pot-shot at him already. When he was dancing around Laos and Cambodia, there must have been opportunity. But who knows what that would ultimately lead to ....

Edited June 13, 2012 by skorchio

[gregb]

In any compromise, which is the only way reconciliation can ever be obtained, both sides must identify the areas where they absolutely must draw a line in the sand, and the areas where they can be flexible. For those areas where they are not flexible, they have to recognize the consequences of what they are doing, and decide whether the consequences are worse than the injustice they are fighting.

In this case, the anti Thaksin forces will compromise on absolutely everything *EXCEPT* Thaksin returning home without admitting deference to the rule of law and the courts. Thaksin, by contrast, will compromise on absolutely everything *EXCEPT* deferring to the rule of law and the courts and placing himself beneath them.

How, may I ask, does anyone expect anything even remotely resembling a compromise or reconciliation to happen in this environment? It is the height of ignorance to even talk about it. There are only 3 options. Continuing war, surrender by Thaksin, or surrender by the anti Thaksin coalition. No compromise is possible, and hence no reconciliation is possible.

The demands of the red shirts and of the poor are irrelevant. Those could be resolved as they are areas that are largely open to compromise. This fight is about one man and one man only.

Post WWII Europe would have been a much better place had the anti Hitler forces stood up to him and not allowed him to take over the country, no matter how much support he had from the German people. Sometimes, it truly is a bad idea to try and appease a demagogue, and no matter how much damage an early war with him means, the consequences of not defeating him can be far, far worse.

Anyone who thinks that Thaksin is just another corrupt politician and no different than anyone else is ignorant and doesn't know the man. Remember the legacy of Hitler and what he was capable of when thinking about the costs of "reconciliation" under Thaksin's terms. Appeasement doesn't generally work as a policy with certain types of personalities.

We are not moving further away from reconciliation. Some may finally be waking up to the futility of it, however.

[gregb]

PTP do not want reconciliation

They want one thing and one thing only

Bugger everything else

Unless the guy is bullet proof, I have no clue why he would want to come back

He wants his money back. It is a lot of money, it took him years and years to squirrel it away, and he has dedicated a further 3 years trying to get it back. Its all about the money ....

No. It is not all about the money. If that were all this was, the whole thing would be over. The money is a symbol of the fight. The fight is over Thaksin's unwillingness to defer to the courts and the rule of law. The money would be returned to him immediately, indeed it never would have been taken away, if he were a different type of person and willing to accept a legitimate role in society.

[bigbamboo]

This is not about reconciliation, this is about rehabilitation.

And an awful lot of money.

[gand]

Did not Yingluck say without this so called reconciliation bill to grant her brother amnesty and his money back that there will be big trouble, an increasing cycle of violence?

Edited June 15, 2012 by gand