STOPPAGE TIME
Can Thais be reformed and reconciled all at once?
Tulsathit Taptim

BANGKOK: -- Reform and reconciliation are often mentioned in the same sentence. That's most likely because a lot of people believe, or hope, that the two things can go hand in hand, or at least one can lead to the other.

These two words form the most convenient response when you are asked what should be done to solve the Thai crisis. "Let's reform the country and bring back peace," the embattled Pheu Thai administration insisted before its collapse. Now, the National Council for Peace and Order is embarking on the same mission.

Add the Democrat Party, the "whistle mobs" and the red shirts and we will see that everyone in Thailand basically wants the same things. But here's the problem: What if reform cannot bring about reconciliation and vice versa? A bolder question is: What if reform and reconciliation stand in each other's way? These are questions that often get sidestepped. They have always been the elephant in our room, whether it's a "democratic" room or one supervised by coup leaders.

Thailand's political complexities aside, the two words' simple meanings can clash. Reform means drastic changes so that perceived flaws can be eliminated. Reconciliation generally requires willingness to accept the flaws or imperfections of "the other side". Do lenient, considerate changes constitute a "reform"? Is it "reconciliation" if one side is required to give more and take less than the other?

General Prayuth Chan-ocha's coup was the easy part. When a husband and wife are on the verge of killing each other, the police intervene. The difficult bit has to do with the question "What's next?" What can the police say to a badly estranged couple who have come to hate each other's guts and are never in doubt as to who is right and who is dead wrong?

And that's just one angry and prejudiced couple. Can a nation divided into two ideological camps with apparently irreconcilable differences be truly reunited? They say democracy was invented to deal with such

differences, but what if democracy itself - or how it should be - is the crux of the disagreement? Prayuth's task is gargantuan, not to mention that one side views him as biased.

Before he seized power, Thailand was rocked by the question of whether it should have an election before reform or vice versa. The Pheu Thai government grappled with reform (proposed constitutional amendments) and reconciliation (the amnesty agenda) and both things blew up in its face. Post-coup, Thailand is being condemned by the West despite pledges to improve politics and bring back harmony. As we can see, our big problems have revolved around seemingly wrong timing of "reform" and "reconciliation".

Rightly or wrongly, one side's proclaimed "reform" or "reconciliation" efforts are never trusted by the other camp. The bottom line for Pheu Thai and the red shirts is that "reform" must reflect total renunciation of a coup and unconditional respect for the people's choice. Without that, reform is just a "conspiracy" to deny Thais their democratic mandate.

Meanwhile, the other side's perceived "reform" features absolute intolerance of corruption and decisive and fearless checks and balances.

Can both camps reach a compromise, albeit reconciliation? Let's get back to the husband-and-wife analogy. If he said "Sorry, baby, I was wrong, too" and kissed her, and she did the same, then peace would return to their home. Another scenario has them wait until the police turn their backs so the fight can be resumed. Take your pick of which possibility is more likely.

A most intriguing thing in Thailand's "reconciliation" and "reform" saga occurred after the 2011 election.

It was a time that, ironically, clashing ideologies co-existed reluctantly but effectively. The ballot box was left to rule on who should lead Thailand and the checks and balances kept the powerful brother of the new prime minister out of the country. Corruption was not tolerated and the democratic principle of respecting the people's choice was prevailing. It was awkward. There was constant tension. But both camps' ultimate arguments mattered. "Our vote" mattered. Caution that "our vote" must never be "abused" mattered.

As many things have gone wrong since then, our best hope now rests on whether most people realise that genuine reconciliation is the ultimate type of reform. True reconciliation, after all, requires a drastic change in attitude - and that is the willingness to admit that one's own flaws contribute to the problem. In other words, the only way for reform and reconciliation to co-exist now is for the former to come from within so the latter can materialise. That is the most difficult change of all but also a challenge no Thai can avoid.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/opinion/Can-Thais-be-reformed-and-reconciled-all-at-once-30237501.html


-- The Nation 2014-07-02

The only courses of effective medication for this particular malady will be time, education and reconciliation. All those processes will take and in fact need time and above all the co-operation of all sides involved in the matter.

Open minds and open hearts along with the destruction of blind political and social bigotry and a concentrated attack upon corrupt individuals and entities have to be the starting point nothing more nothing less.

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

The only courses of effective medication for this particular malady will be time, education and reconciliation. All those processes will take and in fact need time and above all the co-operation of all sides involved in the matter.

Open minds and open hearts along with the destruction of blind political and social bigotry and a concentrated attack upon corrupt individuals and entities have to be the starting point nothing more nothing less.

+1 - Great post

The damage done by one person can have great repercussions through out the rest of Thai history, many will not forget and any opportunity in the future to make amends for some warped idea they were hard done by could result in the same as it is today, it has only gone quiet for one reason , however when an elected government is back in power, this along with the Thai attitude and corruption, it will be business as usual, sorry, I don't believe that any lesson has been learned.

"Everyone in Thailand basically wants the same thing"? I see one side that want "one person, one vote" and another side that is still mentally living in sakdina times, and want their votes to have more weight than the other side, or have no elections at all.

Corruption is just a smokescreen, the yellows are equally if not more corrupt than the reds.

Why should their be "reconciliation" with people holding such reprehensible views?

Going to the analogy of the couple. Maybe divorce is the better option. Except when one spouse talked about this, the other side started ranting and raving, wanting to keep them as a prisoner in their own home, with no say in how things are run and no right to leave.

And the "police" cannot be trusted to sort this out, since they are blatantly biased.

ThailandNoob post # 5

"Everyone in Thailand basically wants the same thing"? I see one side that want "one person, one vote" and another side that is still mentally living in sakdina times, and want their votes to have more weight than the other side, or have no elections at all.

Corruption is just a smokescreen, the yellows are equally if not more corrupt than the reds.

Why should their be "reconciliation" with people holding such reprehensible views?

Going to the analogy of the couple. Maybe divorce is the better option. Except when one spouse talked about this, the other side started ranting and raving, wanting to keep them as a prisoner in their own home, with no say in how things are run and no right to leave.

And the "police" cannot be trusted to sort this out, since they are blatantly biased.

So we can assume that you are rather anti any process that may help to improve the future of Thailand and its peoples?

What hope is there will there be for my and others children hers with your standpoint?

Bigotry cannot be allowed to rule.

Reconciliation has to come like it or not, some winners some losers , however in the long run Thailand and its peoples will and must win.

Thais have no genuine interest in reform the corruption benefits the rich and keeps the poor in their place.

They can sure all get on the bus "at once"...get out of the way if you are old or slow. But at least some of them will give up a seat for you once you do get on.

The only courses of effective medication for this particular malady will be time, education and reconciliation. All those processes will take and in fact need time and above all the co-operation of all sides involved in the matter.

Open minds and open hearts along with the destruction of blind political and social bigotry and a concentrated attack upon corrupt individuals and entities have to be the starting point nothing more nothing less.

The NCPO doesn't have two or three generations time, but only till October 2015. Still they seem to give Thailand a reasonable start in the right direction. Details on reforms and how the "Thais are all equal" will work out, will be deciding in how lasting the changes will be.

"Everyone in Thailand basically wants the same thing"? I see one side that want "one person, one vote" and another side that is still mentally living in sakdina times, and want their votes to have more weight than the other side, or have no elections at all.

Corruption is just a smokescreen, the yellows are equally if not more corrupt than the reds.

Why should their be "reconciliation" with people holding such reprehensible views?

Going to the analogy of the couple. Maybe divorce is the better option. Except when one spouse talked about this, the other side started ranting and raving, wanting to keep them as a prisoner in their own home, with no say in how things are run and no right to leave.

And the "police" cannot be trusted to sort this out, since they are blatantly biased.

Let me get this right - in your post you are openly advocating secession and the breakup of Thailand.

This Thai writer still doesn't get the simple idea that the only possible way to change and develop is to start with "truth." Until the Thai press emerges from its denial, Thailand is doomed to repeat the same thing over and over expecting the results to be different.

All that I see on offer - as ever - is reconciliation at gunpoint. I don't know what the solution is, but I do know what it isn't, and that is forcibly silencing your adversary.

Basically, on an individual level too many Thais believe(wrongly imho and many buddist monks) that once bad karma is created(bad action done), it cannot be righted. This means they can't see the point of admitting mistakes, or making ammends.

What's the point of hunting and bringing to justice those guilty ones as their own karma will bite them in the arse.

" reformed and reconciled '

Multi-tasking in Thailand ?

One thing at a time, please .

All that I see on offer - as ever - is reconciliation at gunpoint. I don't know what the solution is, but I do know what it isn't, and that is forcibly silencing your adversary.

The ones who are open to reconciliation can be reconciled through reasonably fair reforms even if they occur at 'gunpoint' as you put it, however there are those who will never be reconciled and always prevent any kind of reconciliation, this applies to both sides, they need to be silenced at gunpoint, as they have nothing to offer that benefits Thailand as a whole, just narrow groups of special interests.

Lets see if Prayuth understands the importance of this opportunity and does not let it go to waste.

I hope that more thai are going to read all the posts on TV.

"checks and balances kept the powerful brother of the new prime minister out of the country"

What a ridiculous statement. Not it didn't. The voice of the majority kept him out. The majority was overwhelmingly against the deformed cancerous cousin of the Worachai bill. The democratic principle of respecting the people's choice was not prevailing when the amnesty bill passed at a vote of 307-0 when over 80% of the population didn't want it.

"Corruption was not tolerated"

Depends on who we are referring too here? The ex government or the courts and NACC?

"the democratic principle of respecting the people's choice was prevailing"

Well that one has been referred to in the above.

"Everyone in Thailand basically wants the same thing"? I see one side that want "one person, one vote" and another side that is still mentally living in sakdina times, and want their votes to have more weight than the other side, or have no elections at all.

Corruption is just a smokescreen, the yellows are equally if not more corrupt than the reds.

Why should their be "reconciliation" with people holding such reprehensible views?

Going to the analogy of the couple. Maybe divorce is the better option. Except when one spouse talked about this, the other side started ranting and raving, wanting to keep them as a prisoner in their own home, with no say in how things are run and no right to leave.

And the "police" cannot be trusted to sort this out, since they are blatantly biased.

Someone, before my time said:

"Those who do not remember history are doomed to repeat it."

In 1938 a military man, Phibunsongkhram, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plaek_Phibunsongkhram) successfully leaded a coup d'etat with farther reaching consequences than the latest one.

Under his rule many changes to the national identity took place from customs to even the name of the country. He replaced the ancient name of Siam for nowadays Thailand. Ordered his image to be displayed everywhere. Instructed in a series of decrees of mandates (read the 12 Mandates: the birth of institutionalized Xenophobia, among other decrees) to change the dress habits of the population (no more men and women nude from the waist up everywhere), no more chopsticks in favor of spoons and forks, etc.

Does anyone think that there was a revolt, an outcry for nixing age old traditions?

Thais, sheepishly, assimilated the changes and made public displays of acceptance of the decreed new ways to "make merit" with the dictator. More here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plaek_Phibunsongkhram

This experiment of attitude adjustments: will it work in today's Thailand?

Nothing will change until the legal system handles all fairly and equally. Until then, corruption pays

"checks and balances kept the powerful brother of the new prime minister out of the country"

What a ridiculous statement. Not it didn't. The voice of the majority kept him out. The majority was overwhelmingly against the deformed cancerous cousin of the Worachai bill. The democratic principle of respecting the people's choice was not prevailing when the amnesty bill passed at a vote of 307-0 when over 80% of the population didn't want it.

"Corruption was not tolerated"

Depends on who we are referring too here? The ex government or the courts and NACC?

"the democratic principle of respecting the people's choice was prevailing"

Well that one has been referred to in the above.

You do understand thr meaning of the word "majority"

The roots of all evil in Thailand is MONEYYYYYY... and every body and every one want more and more,

easy and quick and not to earn it honestly, and as long as people will anything for money, anything,

there will be no peace among the Thai people here......

All that I see on offer - as ever - is reconciliation at gunpoint. I don't know what the solution is, but I do know what it isn't, and that is forcibly silencing your adversary.

Reconciliation at gunpoint at least has curtailed the practice of murdering those with a different political point of view, with the backing of the police and the corrupt government in power.

In fact, the major difference is that the guns are in different hands, and fired much less often.

Taptim raises some great questions but in the context of a complete vacuum of the Thai experience.

Look outside of Thailand and you'll see even from recent history how reform AND reconcliation have been achieved within the democratic framework without military coups. Immediate case in point is India and Italy regime changes. Going further back to more severe national conflicts: South Africa through elected regime change ended apartheid, and West Germany reunification with East Germany through a democratic absoprtion process. If history has taught Thailand anything about its own ability to continue to use the same formula for resolving political conflict, thirteen military coups after 1933 have clearly never been the final soultion.

To date I have not seen any proposals on how the democratic process in Thailand can be expanded and guaranteed but rather how the democratic process needs to be controlled and limited. A parent who continuously spanks a child for every preceived misbehavior will see that child rebel against the parent's authority. When one comes to understand that conflict is the eggshell that encapsulates democracy, can one appreciate the dynamics of democracy.

Thais have no genuine interest in reform the corruption benefits the rich and keeps the poor in their place.

Utter rubbish.

Some Thais (the so called elite) have no interest in reform but the majority would welcome it, The majority would be also be reconciled in the a flash if the politicians on both sides on the social divide they have helped to create were kept out of it for a while.

That is what the army is at least trying to do.

not much changed the last 1000 years, so i guess NOT

Taptim raises some great questions but in the context of a complete vacuum of the Thai experience.

Look outside of Thailand and you'll see even from recent history how reform AND reconcliation have been achieved within the democratic framework without military coups. Immediate case in point is India and Italy regime changes. Going further back to more severe national conflicts: South Africa through elected regime change ended apartheid, and West Germany reunification with East Germany through a democratic absoprtion process. If history has taught Thailand anything about its own ability to continue to use the same formula for resolving political conflict, thirteen military coups after 1933 have clearly never been the final soultion.

To date I have not seen any proposals on how the democratic process in Thailand can be expanded and guaranteed but rather how the democratic process needs to be controlled and limited. A parent who continuously spanks a child for every preceived misbehavior will see that child rebel against the parent's authority. When one comes to understand that conflict is the eggshell that encapsulates democracy, can one appreciate the dynamics of democracy.

India and South Africa really, is that what Thailand should shoot for? Have you seen the state of these countries? You actually think they work through a democratic framework? Even with Thailand's history of coups Thailand has progressed well beyond them in terms of social justice; common people in those countries would swap places with Thais any day.

You have no idea what you are talking about. I am sorry but that is reality.

Even Italy - is that the best Thailand can hope for? What is so special about this so called 'democratic process' if it gives results like these. And in any case if you actually examine any of these countries you will find they are just labelled democracies, if you look at them in reality, they are oligarchies.

To be frank, coups have helped Thailand and elections are often dead ends, as they are undemocratic in the way they are organised, they do not allow consent to be part of the electoral process; that is the dirty little truth.

The most democratic outcome for Thailand can hope for, unless there is reform of the electoral process that allows people to withhold consent, is none of the competing elites fully dominate Thailand and they remain hostile to each other, but they must be contained and kept off the streets.

You can play the "what if" game to infinity...the military...appears to have averted a brewing civil war...possibly splitting Thailand into regions hostile to one another...try giving them a little time to bring the country back from the brink of anarchy...the gov't they replaced was for all appearance self-centered...self-absorbed...consumed with greed...and could not govern the country because of their own personal interests were more important...the military...up to this point...has done a stellar job at moving the country forward...kudos to the General and his staff...

So in other words:

1. Sement the power of the rich upper and upper middle class.

2. Tell the rest to be happy and reconciled.