Thai editorial: The thin line between peace and civil war

[webfact]

EDITORIAL
The thin line between peace and civil war
The Nation

Battle-torn countries across the world offer sobering lessons for divided Thailand

BANGKOK: -- Civil wars and internal armed conflicts rage on in many countries across the globe, and as ever it is innocent bystanders who bear the brunt of the violence. Each day sees more ordinary men, women and children fall victim, killed, maimed or fleeing their homeland to escape the fighting.

Opposing armies are waging fierce battles in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Somalia and South Sudan, while more low-level insurgency plagues other countries divided by religious, ethnic or political conflicts.

None of us wants to live in a country torn by fighting between compatriots, and we should consider ourselves fortunate not to be in such a dire situation.

Any war, regardless of its size, has various and devastating impacts on innocent residents caught in its midst.

In addition to the slaughter of innocents, large-scale armed battle typically leads to destruction of homes and property, displacement of people, and catastrophic consequences for the economy. That economic decline heightens suffering as more people succumb to poverty and malnutrition. Meanwhile survivors can be left with grave physical and psychological scars that last long after the final bullet has been fired.

Children and youngsters are the most vulnerable to the devastating impacts of war. Impressionable minds have few defences against the onslaught of violence, exploitation, fear and loss. An ever-present dread is that of losing a parent to the random barbarism. Ripped apart, communities are no longer capable of providing a secure environment for their youngest and most fragile members.

Busy with the daily struggle to survive, parents have little time for their children, according to War Child, a non-governmental body that provides assistance to youngsters in areas experiencing conflict.

Several countries have been engulfed in civil war following intervention by regional or world powers. The ousting of dictatorial regimes by global powers in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya - and the attempt to do so in Syria - has led to political vacuum, disintegration of authority and deadly armed conflicts. The impact is now being felt in Europe, where tens of thousands of refugees from war-torn states have arrived in search of a new life away from the fighting.

Armed conflict is often triggered by political leaders who see an opportunity to exploit a fragile society divided along religious, ethnic or political lines. But it is the ordinary citizens, especially the poor, who suffer most when the order for battle is given.

Thailand has had past experience of the effects of civil war on innocent communities, hosting several camps for refugees fleeing conflict in Vietnam, Cambodia and Myanmar. The latter continues to witness sporadic fighting between government troops and armed ethnic groups, forcing villagers to flee over the border into Thailand.

Internal divisions along ethnic or political lines bring the nightmare scenario of civil war closer to realisation, and Thailand is no stranger to that dread. Yet, as citizens, it lies within our power to head off doomsday scenario merely by refusing to nurture its divisive seeds. Differences of views should be resolved peacefully, with an eye firmly fixed on the alternative - violence and killing. Justice must be guaranteed to all groups. The law must be fairly enforced, and no individuals or groups should be allowed to escape its reach.

More difficult perhaps is finding a way to curb the negative impacts of foreign intervention, though as a sovereign nation we have the right to stand up to pressure or conditions brought to bear over our internal affairs. We have never been a "failed state" that might require foreign military intervention in order to restore peace.

As a nation we remain free from large-scale armed conflict, but amid deep social division it depends on all of us to maintain this fragile peace.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/opinion/The-thin-line-between-peace-and-civil-war-30271816.html


-- The Nation 2015-10-29

[MaiChai]

Thought Thailand's ills were more of a clash between the new and old elites? The ordinary folks just being used as pawns of either side?

[tbthailand]

whenever you have a military junta, you never have "peace", you only have an enforced calm.

stripping your own citizens of their basic human rights is never a formula for peace and reconciliation... but in spite of their claims, peace and reconciliation were never the real objectives of this latest junta-in-a-series-of-juntas...

As for the editorial, it's a typical piece of distraction-crap from The Nation. There never was a threat of real civil war before the current set of self-appointed rulers took control and the editorial pulls out the thoroughly beaten and dead horse of "it's all the fault of politicians". Their comparisons with Syria and other countries are not only ludicrous, such comparisons also have nothing to do with their politicians-are-the-boogeymen version of Thailand's history.

Anyone who wants to find the real boogeymen in Thailand should just look at the Generals and their allies among the richest families in Thailand's conservative elite-class...

[ChrisY1]

"As a nation we remain free from large-scale armed conflict, but amid deep social division it depends on all of us to maintain this fragile peace."

So 6000 people killed in the south doesn't count??

[Charlie1]

This editorial is humiliating towards the people that really suffer in armed conflicts. There never was such a threat that would justify to stage a coup. We all know why this coup was done. No need to spin stories around it. Period.

[RubbaJohnny]

War is a business for many, the vendors of arms bodybags etc

[NCC1701A]

Civil war would be madness. How will Issan girls get to Bangkok?

[Joe Reality]

Thai men don't have the cahones to start something unless they have 20 - 1... so a civil war would never happen.

[Joe Brennan]

The way I interpret history is that democracy is never won without bloodshed, the one thing that is always certain about ruling classes (or people who believe they are the ruling classes), is that they will not give freedom while they have a choice, It is always taken, never given.

Even allowing for the Thai nature, civil war is inevitable. In my opinion.

[FangFerang]

The way I interpret history is that democracy is never won without bloodshed, the one thing that is always certain about ruling classes (or people who believe they are the ruling classes), is that they will not give freedom while they have a choice, It is always taken, never given.

Even allowing for the Thai nature, civil war is inevitable. In my opinion.

I really hope you are wrong.

I fear you are correct.

I pray all involved take their heads out of the sands of their favorite beaches.

[kingalfred]

Before the Military restored calm the politicians and the associated mobs on the streets couldnt resolve differences. Nearer to any "civil war"'at that time!

[Srikcir]

"As a nation we remain free from large-scale armed conflict"

The Thai people should be grateful that they have a military establishment that can operate outside the rule of law through armed force to place itself as the sole gatekeeper of Thai sovereignty. When you know your proper place in society, there is no need for conflict.

[Rancid]

Interesting that there is one common denominator in the conflicts cited, the US bringing them freedom and democracy.

[John1012]

I would rather have the 'calm' of this ruling junta, than the chaos of that idiot Suthep and the rest of the multi colored morons called elite/politician. At least now the average Thai can go about his/her business on a daily basis without becoming involved in the power struggles of the pr*cks who are called politicians. The only people who want democracy to return as was before are the politicians/elites who have lost their place at the corruption trough.Thailand, the hub of mediocraty.

[tbthailand]

This editorial is humiliating towards the people that really suffer in armed conflicts. There never was such a threat that would justify to stage a coup. We all know why this coup was done. No need to spin stories around it. Period.

ah, but for this self-appointed government and their elite backers, there is most definitely a need to spin a story...

Their success at holding onto a feudalistic rule of the Thai people depends a great deal on the people not understanding...

[tbthailand]

Before the Military restored calm the politicians and the associated mobs on the streets couldnt resolve differences. Nearer to any "civil war"'at that time!

nonsense.

one side of this divide can't win elections and doesn't want a democracy in any case.

The conflicts in Thailand exist because the people are having their basic rights - like the right to self-governance among others - trampled on by the part of Thai society which has run this country nearly non-stop since the revolution.

The issues in this country won't be resolved because this same group which has power now doesn't want any resolutions. They want the country to be run by them and for their benefit. Period. It has been like that for over 50 years. And there can be no debate because these same people silence all meaningful discussions with Art 112. That is the way they want it.

They have the money. They have the muscle.

It will be a long road for the Thai people to take back their country.

[lovelomsak]

Before the Military restored calm the politicians and the associated mobs on the streets couldnt resolve differences. Nearer to any "civil war"'at that time!

I feel if the army had backed the elected government a coup wouldnot have been necessary. But they stood back and watched and waited. Shutdown Bangkok would not have gone to war.

[waldroj]

... We have never been a “failed state” that might require foreign military intervention in order to restore peace.

True, but the country is pretty fragile at the moment! According to http://fsi.fundforpeace.org/, Thailand slots in with a group of countries between Russia and China on the Fund for Peace Fragile States Index (formerly known as the Failed States Index).

Looking back a little, Thailand was the first country in Asia to become a failed state during the Asian Contagion back in 1997!

While it may not have required foreign military intervention then, it did require intervention from the IMF and World Bank.

Thailand has come a long way since 1997, so one has to question why this editorial should suddenly appear at this time, especially as the junta has given the country (by their own assessment) 17 months of peace, happiness, and reconciliation as it creeps along its roadmap to reform.

Perhaps, the editor is worried about the fallout once Yingluck has been found guilty of her alleged negligence of duty in the rice pledging scheme that resulted in loss of over 500 billion baht to the state.

Another point of concern may be whether the CDC Mark II draft Constitution (with its ‘crisis panel’ clause) will be accepted by Thai citizens at referendum. If it is rejected then the whole reform process falters, and the timeline for democratic elections becomes very confusing indeed.

Maybe also, the editor fears the future without His Majesty, and the political upheaval that may ensue. The very real concern will be the issue of succession that (as I understand, is currently left to Palace Law to decide).

All in all, there is a lot for Thailand to consider moving forward, and there are some especially pressing short-term challenges to also be overcome (drought, political and social divide, corruption, lack of investor confidence, personal debt). If ever this country needed to be reconciled it is now, but alas, is seems to be just as fractured as it was when the junta assumed control.

[micmichd]

The way I interpret history is that democracy is never won without bloodshed, the one thing that is always certain about ruling classes (or people who believe they are the ruling classes), is that they will not give freedom while they have a choice, It is always taken, never given.

Even allowing for the Thai nature, civil war is inevitable. In my opinion.

And Europe?

[Joe Brennan]

The way I interpret history is that democracy is never won without bloodshed, the one thing that is always certain about ruling classes (or people who believe they are the ruling classes), is that they will not give freedom while they have a choice, It is always taken, never given.

Even allowing for the Thai nature, civil war is inevitable. In my opinion.

And Europe?

Excuse me?

[micmichd]

The way I interpret history is that democracy is never won without bloodshed, the one thing that is always certain about ruling classes (or people who believe they are the ruling classes), is that they will not give freedom while they have a choice, It is always taken, never given.

Even allowing for the Thai nature, civil war is inevitable. In my opinion.

And Europe?

Excuse me?

I believe that all nations have their internal conflicts, which can be solved in a peaceful or a violent manner.

I can't see that Europe is really peaceful at the moment.

Edited October 29, 2015 by micmichd

[phoenixdoglover]

The article makes no case for there being a "thin line" between peace and civil war.

This is just fear mongering.

[dhream]

Civil war would be madness. How will Issan girls get to Bangkok?

They can all come to Chiang Mai and stay at my place, I accept Bitcoin, or a bit on the side.

Edited October 29, 2015 by dhream

[ksamuiguy]

Thailand stands by it's self!

No one cares or even reports what is happening here in Thailand.

The Erawan bombing got less than a mention on international news.

I would venture that most people in the world have never heard of Thailand, nor could they locate it on a world map..

No one cares what happens here in Thailand, lip service, but enlarge Thailand is on it's own.

There are a lot of really big problems else where in the world.

The Thai's need to sort the problem out on there own.

No one has the time or incnition to help.