Tuesday, 27 April 2010

Thailand in Tatters

Thailand is in the news again, day in and day out. And as always in the last couple of years, it’s not for the good reasons. I moved to Bangkok post-coup and post-election so I saw Samak, the elected prime minister being chased away by the courts for cooking on TV and his successor, Somchai Wongsawat being chased away by the PAD yellow shirts and the courts essentially for being Thaksin’s brother-in-law.

I was in Bangkok when the airport was closed for over a week and suddenly, the streets were full of tourists and the shelves on the supermarket started to thin out slightly. I was also in Bangkok when the red shirts burnt tyres throughout the Bangkok old town and had their little stand-off with the military on Songkran last year.

Through all these times, whenever BBC started their news at the top of the hour with another “anti-government protesters in Bangkok…” snippet I felt a bit honoured to be so close to world-news but also increasingly uneasy that my adapted home, Bangkok and Thailand’s reputation as a whole had slowly been falling. Thailand continued to be a popular destination for travelling, a reputation that is hard to lose.

But now, I feel, things are slowly changing. What we have been seeing in the recent days (me from the distance in Australia) is a different ballgame. This time around, it’s serious. This is not about a few hundred or thousand people being paid by Thaksin to attend a rally anymore, this is about a much bigger issue.

To explain the issues that lie at the heart of all problems, I need to write about some basic issues of Thai history and identity. I take my information from some books and articles by academics, but most of all from my personal experience in Thailand.
Firstly, it needs to be said that Thailand is not alone in its struggle. Throughout Southeast Asia, indeed also Northeast Asia and other parts of the world, there has been civilian unrest during the time of democratisation, often to do with class, religion or ethnicity-based discrimination.

Basically, Thailand is still a feudal state. Very few own very much and the great majority own rather little. When the economy is going well and Thailand can export and gets a lot of incoming tourists, the great majority can also benefit, but the great beneficiaries are the very few rich people.

But the very few rich people do not just enjoy economic benefits, they also enjoy other privileges. The great majority of people and the small minority of people live totally different lives. For the great majority, a step up the ladder of wealth is unthinkable and vice versa too. You are born into a class and that’s it. Les jeux sont faits.

The Thai state however is not only rigid in terms of class but it is also an extremely nationalist and unitary state. Early in the 20th century, Thai nationalism was spurred by proclaiming the three pillars of religion, language and the monarchy as the basis of the Thai nation. Understanding these three pillars, and understanding certain limits of the pillars is at the base of understanding parts of the crisis Thailand is currently in.

The Thai nation, as is commonly taught in schools and shown in the National Museum has never existed as such. The Thai people are originally a mix of different tribes from Southwest and South China, Khmer, Malays and many others. As such, they not only look very differently, but they speak different languages, eat different foods and believe different things.

The Thai state however has for decades lulled everyone under the same tent and given everyone the same identity. It has done so quite successfully and Thailand today, is what social scientists would call a model of an “imagined community”. The great majority of things that hold Thailand together have been artificially created by the state. On top of that, myths are being created, to make everyone believe the common history. This results in people being made into someone they aren’t.

Another factor is education. Education in Thailand never teaches a student to be critical. Instead they are taught to believe what a person of authority tells them. This then applies to practically all situations in life. Responsibility is given away quietly and people who carry more respect (due to age, ethnicity or other social standing) are followed blindly. (in Thai: pu yai)

Even at Chulalongkorn University, the self-proclaimed “pillar of the nation” , the development of own thoughts and processes of reasoning are not taught and as a result of that, not even the brightest of the nation can question the status-quo.

Unless serious changes in the Thai nation occur, and unless Thai people, especially the so-called “elite” starts to learn to question societal norms, Thailand, in my opinion, cannot come to a peaceful and lasting solution.

I don't think however that Thaksin can be the answer. He is again a person of respect, to whom everyone can easily give his or her responsibility. He is an ersatz pu yai to whom people can look up to. Additionally, his motivations are far from clear and there is at least a little bit (if not a lot) of selfish thought being his bid to come back to Thailand.

The current situation in Thailand then, with the reds blocking the Rajaprasong intersection in the centre of Bangkok and having erected a bamboo-guarded camp at Lumphini park vis-à-vis Silom is not a good one. The reds want elections, and soon. But who will ensure that once a “red” candidate wins, the royalist PAD will not come out and block Bangkok again? After all, the reds would have secured an election by paralysing Bangkok. This would serve as precedence for years to come (as the airport blockade by PAD already did).

The military in the meantime is torn and cannot afford a bloodbath or a coup if it wants to remain a credible actor. The government finally cannot afford a blockade that will last much longer either and if elections are held, will probably lose. Were it to launch a violent attack on the demonstrators with the help of the military, it would be even more popular and the reds would regroup in the northeast and north, not only making a fair election impossible but seriously challenging the territorial unity and legitimacy of the Thai state.

The situation is very tense, but is further aggravated by the fact that Thais can be very emotional people, who can from one moment to another, lose all reasoning and engage in foolish acts of brinkmanship. It might only take one silly person throwing a stone or a grenade and more people die, triggering an uncontrollable chain reaction.

I am afraid to say but there is no face-saving solutions for everyone in sight. A pawn will be sacrificed and whether that is Abhisit and his government or dozens, or even hundreds of red shirts remains to be seen in a very near future.
Neither however is what should happen. Change starts in the minds of the people and what needs to happen, is more than just an election (Abhisit said this too, but I am not sure he means what I mean).

A matter of fact is that most Thais feel that they have no power and no say whatsoever in their lives. Deals are struck behind their backs, involving the police, politicians or even other actors in the political and partly outside the political field. The principles of the rule of law are simply not strong enough in Thailand. Matters of law are politicised and important matters of politics are secret.

Unless the institutions become more open, more democratically legitimised and honestly start working for the people, the population is going to continue to feel alienated by the state. And unless centralised Thailand will devolve some of its power to the regions, the rural population will continue to feel distant and powerless.

On the other side, the “elite” must realise that it cannot continue to differentiate themselves from the “commoners”, the people from the regions, farmers, dark-skinned people by treating them with contempt. The privileged must understand that Thailand will become a fairer society and part of that is recognising each and every citizen as an equal, whether poor, black, Muslim or rich, Chinese and white.

As much as I hope for a peaceful solution beneficial for all Thais, I fear that we are still very far from such a solution.

1 comment:

  1. This has to be one of the sanest summaries I have read. Well done :)

    Hopefully, you will also have seen the ABC1 Foreign Correspondent 30 minute special last weekend. That also touched on some of these matters, but went further and commented on the role of the monarchy in all this. I cannot repeat it here for obvious reasons.

    Regretably, I have to agree that things in Krung Thep are likely to get lots worse (I hope they don't ) before they get better.

    The people of Thailand do not deserve all the muck-raking, s***stirring and influence-peddling that is happening presently.

    ReplyDelete