UN-mediated peace talks? Who are you kidding?: Thai opinion

[webfact]

STOPPAGE TIME
UN-mediated peace talks? Who are you kidding?

"Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak. Courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen," said Winston Churchill.

BANGKOK: -- A less glorified wisdom has it that diplomacy is the art of playing nice until you get hold of a knife or a gun. That's too cynical, maybe, as the craving for peace must be genuine in many circumstances. But has Thailand reached that stage, when warring politicians truly realise that "If I don't have it, you won't have it either" will only further damn their souls?

The answer is no. Calls for negotiations are just a game, and both sides of the political conflict still pretty much want to win. As important, signs are that the losers will try their best to drag the other side down with them. Peace talks will only buy somebody some time, whether the negotiations are mediated by the United Nations or Banharn Silapa-archa.

Thailand has too much "standing up and speaking" courage and too little "sitting down and listening" bravery. It's as simple as that. Yingluck Shinawatra wants to "die defending democracy" and Suthep Thaugsuban wants to protect democracy from her. Do you see how far apart they are? Pessimistically speaking, if millions have died agreeing that God exists but having the relatively tiny difference of whose version of God is better, squabbling Thais do not stand a good chance at all.

That the United Nations is not Thaksin Shinawatra's father is not a big problem. His infamous statement about the world organisation was, admittedly, uncalled for, but that lapse of political judgement should not be immortalised. We must let him live it down. The real problem is that even if the United Nations was indeed Thaksin's father, nothing was going to change one bit.

All indicators show Thaksin remains extremely belligerent. As for Suthep Thaugsuban, it's definitely his turn to say "the UN was not married to my mum". To sum it up, even if both guys' real parents or the people they love most were on their knees begging them to stop, they still almost certainly wouldn't.

Stubbornness of the Thai political rivals aside, the United Nations' own mediating power is suspect. If the world organisation could not prevent the Iraq war, perhaps we should forget about it being able to sort the "Thaksin system" from "democracy" or vice versa. After all, whether "weapons of mass destruction" existed or not was a far simpler question than whether "the rice pledging scheme is an attempt to buy the poor's support so a government can cheat".

Then there is the issue of "stakes" piling up on the card table. It's not just about Suthep and Yingluck & Thaksin any more. A lot of people have emptied their chip racks and they include the likes of Chalerm Yoobamrung, Surapong Towichukchaikul, the police chief, the DSI chief, the Democrats, film stars, singers, businesses, media outlets, doctors, nurses and top bureaucrats. The judiciary has been deeply involved and the military is sticking out like a sore thumb with the various roles it's playing.

If not the United Nations, then who? Of course, Ban Ki-moon would be like a befuddled new teacher walking into a kindergarten classroom at its rowdiest, but at least the projectiles would stop flying, wouldn't they? Here's the thing: Many people don't want the projectiles to be relaunched once the teacher leaves, and they don't trust the UN chief to keep them grounded in his absence.

It's up to the warring parties, not mediators. More importantly, the warring parties have been breeding followers who already have guns, knives or rocks in their hands. (Some may add bombs if we don't give the "third party" claims the benefit of the doubt.) The followers can stand up and speak, all right, but will they sit down and listen? Extremely hard as it is for the leaders to begin a real dialogue, making their followers stand down is a lot harder.

Last but not least, real courage is not just about speaking up or listening. It's about admitting one's own faults, too. If sitting down and listening is rare in the Thai crisis, admitting guilt is even rarer. One may point at the absolute U-turn of ex-coup maker Sonthi Boonyaratglin, but what he has been showing is not even close to "sincere remorse".

So, now we know what elements the prospective "peace talks" are missing. We need people with real decision-making powers (not just someone who has to send an SMS every five minutes), who are capable of really listening and truly remorseful about crimes on their sides. If we don't have this kind of people at the negotiating table, all we will get are talks where everyone says "Nice doggie" while thinking about how he can find a rock thereafter.


-- The Nation 2014-03-05

[chainarong]

While not putting to much emphasis on the people of the Ukraine , but lets see how much help the UN will give them while the big bear rides rough shod over their country, the UN has limited recourses and is not equipped to meditate in a conflict that at the most can only be described as hate , hate for the Shinawatra family, the red shirts , the hate of anything yellow, the hate of the establishment and some hate even go's back eons, the settling of old scores, so unless the UN changes it colours there is no much possibility of success

[ChrisY1]

Whatever eventuates....IMO, Thais, and especially influential Thais, will not take notice of what outsiders suggest...including the UN.

[rreddin]

While not putting to much emphasis on the people of the Ukraine , but lets see how much help the UN will give them while the big bear rides rough shod over their country, the UN has limited recourses and is not equipped to meditate in a conflict that at the most can only be described as hate , hate for the Shinawatra family, the red shirts , the hate of anything yellow, the hate of the establishment and some hate even go's back eons, the settling of old scores, so unless the UN changes it colours there is no much possibility of success

I have not seen anywhere that any party in Thailand is willing to engage in resolving the real question, which is how to develop a modern country with a democratic sytem of elected government, that is tolerant of the views of others, whose armed forces are under proper and accountable political control, and whose wealth is more fairly distributed. By the last point I mean that public expenditure and government policies are not Bangkok-centric and benefit the country as a whole.

The political-military system cannot amend itself. It needs an authorative figure to initiate the necessary changes. What we have been seeing these last few months from PRDC and its supporters, is one view of the county's future. Their authorative figure would need to be another Martial Tito, but look what happened to Yogoslavia after he died. The opposite view would need a "Prince Albert" figure - a forward looking, modernising figure.

[ppmacready]

Whatever eventuates....IMO, Thais, and especially influential Thais, will not take notice of what outsiders suggest...including the UN.

The civilised world suggest that it is safer to wear a crash helmet.

Because they want to ''look'' civilised to the rest of the world ,It is the law in Thailand to wear them.

But Thais do not believe it is important to make even their children wear them.

Stand out side any school and watch the kids drive past the police with impunity.

Plainly because of this Thai mentality, the UN would be wasting its time in Thailand.

Its this ''Thainess'' that makes the Thais their own worst enemy's!

[bigbamboo]

Whatever eventuates....IMO, Thais, and especially influential Thais, will not take notice of what outsiders suggest...including the UN.

True enough . As the most influential Thai of them all himself said, "The UN is not my father."

[Emster23]

It would take years, if not decades for an outsider to sift through the deceit, back door deals, hidden finance, puppet masters, hall of mirrors that is Thai politics before one was foolish enough to dare make a suggestion. Nothing is as it seems.

[rickirs]

Both sides want to negotiate from a position of strength so as to remove any risk of falling short of their goals. That philosophy will lead to intractible positions with the "too little sitting down and listening bravery" for both sides and assure complete failure every time. A mediator could enhance removing barriers of intractibility and the sitting down and listening process.

If there is to be any constructive negotiations, there has to be a safe, nuetral environment to do so. This environment has to be without nationalistic "encouragements" and without the cultural comfort zones that would otherwise reinforce each side's position. A mediator without national and cultural ties to either party would enhance an environment of cooperative interaction. A nuetral place for mediation would further enhance cooperative interaction.

There are a number of internationally recognized sources that fit such a mediator profile. The most obvious ones are the former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan and current Secretary General Ban Ki-moon who can bring vast resouces to assist mediation. There are Nations that have an interest to mediate intractable conflicts that are a genuine threat to international peace and regional stability and still able to provide significant mediation resources such as Norway, Canada, and Switzerland that have international recognition as nuetral parties. As another alternative, albeit with far less resources, there are individuals who have no official role in their own country, or who do not represent his/her country in any capacity that would again enhance a moderator's nuetrality and creditibility such as Jimmie Carter.

My long-winded point here is that there is no intractible conflict between the Thailand government and the "opposition" that can't at least be approached by a mutually agreed mediator to get the parties to sit and listen to each other, and maybe achieve even a limited, concensual agreement for the good of Thailand and its peoples.

[PREM-R]

Suthep has stated many times that he wants to 'eradicate' the Shinawatra family from Thailand, this is not about reform it is about what happens in the future, perhaps the very near future, when the inevitable happens. The Amart put forward Sondhi and now Suthep to try to remove the Shins, who spell the end of the 19th century, Dickensian society that is so dear to the 'old guard' and continues to make them 'unusually wealthy'.

Edited March 5, 2014 by PREM-R

[awakewarrior]

The country has become dangerously polarized over the issue of which path to follow into the future and who will lead that path.

The UN surely could help in getting Thai people to rise up and demand that certain laws that are draconian in nature be removed from any future constitution. Freedom of speech here is but a facade.

Democracy in Thailand is weak, owing to an Amart and Hi-So families existing above the law, lack of civilian control over the military, interference in the electoral regime and judiciary and failures to adequately enforce civil liberties and political rights.

[Scamper]

As the Yingluck administration's caretaker status is stripped as per the constitution, in lieu of a parliamentary sitting yesterday, it seems almost moot to be talking about negotiations, as Yingluck is outside of being in a position to negotiate anything. According to the constitution, and according to two former members of the Supreme Court, she is already a private citizen.

[rubl]

The country has become dangerously polarized over the issue of which path to follow into the future and who will lead that path.

The UN surely could help in getting Thai people to rise up and demand that certain laws that are draconian in nature be removed from any future constitution. Freedom of speech here is but a facade.

Democracy in Thailand is weak, owing to an Amart and Hi-So families existing above the law, lack of civilian control over the military, interference in the electoral regime and judiciary and failures to adequately enforce civil liberties and political rights.

Although part of your comments is correct, you seem to forget to mention the use of the poor as tool by those 'Amart' and HiSO's, lack of civilian control over the police.

The desperate attempt of the Yingluck government (of what ever status) and the police surely looks like continued failures to protest civil liberties and political rights.

Imagine if Suthep let's himself get arrested. Why the Pheu Thai would be stuck with a political prisoner. If harm came to him while under police 'protection' the request by former MoFA Surapong seems to get real farcial.

[JeffreyWitty]

For anyone who doesn't want to read this whole piece, it boils down to this:

Politicians in Thailand need their side to win to save face.

You can go about your day now.