Twilight of the Idols
In the end, they just packed their bags and left. Clutching water bottles, walking slowly towards the buses aboard which they would begin the journey home, the red shirts streaming out of the besieged Government House looked more like a football team’s vanquished supporters than revolutionaries forced to surrender by a violent government crackdown. Dejected and emotionally spent, to be sure, but still walking away from it with their lives, their limbs, and their freedom. Earlier threats to the contrary notwithstanding, when their backs were against the wall their leaders simply asked them to leave. It was the right thing to do. For themselves and for the cause.
The recent wave of demonstrations had started as a stunning success for the red shirts. The series of coordinated actions that led to the spectacular debacle in Pattaya revealed an unexpected measure of discipline and organizational prowess for a movement often thought of as rudderless and unruly. Important goals were achieved. The country’s piteous Prime Minister, Abhisit Vejjajiva, was humiliated and exposed as the puppet that he is — at once so powerless as to fail to afford his illustrious guests the security civilized countries routinely guarantee them and so cowardly as to rely on a private armed militia, the blue shirts, to ambush protesters he could not get the army or the police to keep out of the area.
When the military did step in, following Sunday’s emergency decree, even the incipient crackdown appeared to bolster the red shirts. The reaction of the authorities, in particular, clearly evidenced the “double standard” their leaders had lamented all along. Reactionaries can shoot their opponents, run police officers over with their trucks, riot in front of Parliament, trash Government House, and occupy the airports for a week with the impunity characteristically accorded in Thailand to the champions of the establishment. But if you are against the bureaucrats, the aristocrats, and the generals who have run the country for the last 75 years, shattering the glass doors of a five-star hotel is all it takes to be branded an “enemy of the state.”
The luck of the red shirts turned in a mere matter of hours. By Monday afternoon, the movement’s once-buoyant leadership had effectively lost control of the situation. Supporters scattered all over Bangkok resorted to desperate measures to halt the army’s methodical advance through the capital. The height of irresponsibility was reached as red shirts commandeered LPG tankers and drove them into highly populated areas such as the Din Daeng triangle and Soi Rangnam, as if to threaten the annihilation of entire neighborhoods should the army dare to move in. To protect themselves, at least some of the red shirts had proven willing to endanger the lives of regular people — those whose interests and aspirations they ostensibly advance, those whose support is indispensable to the success of their movement. In the process, the red shirts squandered any good will the local population might have harbored towards them — reducing, for the time being, the prospects of a popular uprising to mere fancy.
As they increasingly lost control of their own supporters, the red shirts quickly succumbed to the mediatic onslaught that accompanied the regime’s crackdown. Given the military’s shameful history of repression and mass murder, it is hard to think anyone would believe a word that comes out of a Thai general’s mouth. But the government successfully disseminated its self-serving narrative nonetheless, portraying its actions as deliberate, orderly, and restrained in the face of an unwieldy terrorist mob. The servile local media eagerly obliged; the facile foreign press swallowed it hook, line, and sinker. Of course, the official version of the events was the usual pack of lies and half-truths. Photographs and video already contradict the preposterous notion that soldiers merely fired warning shots in the air, or that the weapons seen firing directly into the crowds had only been loaded with blank rounds. In the next days and weeks, we will find out just how many red shirts those blank rounds injured or killed.
By Monday afternoon, nonetheless, the red shirts had lost much of their support, their message, and their claim to “democratic” legitimacy. Their numbers vastly diminished, their resources depleted, their credibility in tatters, it would have been suicidal to lead the remaining protesters at Government House into a showdown with the army. Under the circumstances, to beat an orderly retreat was not only the right thing to do, but the smart thing to do. Thanks to its guns, its money, and whatever remains of its traditional stranglehold on the media, the old order lives on. The military and bureaucratic elites are still in charge. But, as wiser and more illustrious colleagues have noted (see here and here), it increasingly looks as if God is dead in Thailand (in the Nietzschean sense of that expression). And so those who yearn for real democratic change — those whose ideals transcend the restoration of Thaksin to an office he occupied legitimately and abused shamefully — should take heart in the recognition that the events of the last few months may have already undone decades of establishment propaganda. Old taboos are being shattered. Old myths are being destroyed. And, at long last, the iniquity of old untouchables is now being increasingly exposed to well-deserved public disgust.
The garbage removal process has only just begun.
(6 votes, average: 4.67 out of 5)
Loading ...
North East people permeate every aspect of the elite’s lives. They are everywhere and without them is no infrastructure, let alone creature comfort. From the indentured maid to the farmer growing the unfairly subsidized rice that the aneamic Bangkokian so depend on, the Isaan people are part of the fabric of Thailand. The genie is out now, watch out for the Khi Kwai to hit the fan again.
Brilliant, brilliant stuff. Thank the Lord there are at least a few thoughtful, articulate people out there reflecting on and writing about the extraordinary events that are reshaping this country. The bumbling, smug sycophants of the Thai press are an embarrassment to themselves, to others all over the world who practice the profession of journalism with honor, and most important, to every Thai who worries about the kind of country in which his children will live.
Nice piece. In sync with much else circulating around the blogosphere.
I’m wondering, though, what do you think of the inevitable claims, already beginning to circulate, that some of those red shirts battling with locals were third hands intending to undermine the public perception of the movement? Plausible? And just how set back is the opposition to the establishment by this sense of public looting and thugery?
Also, what do you see as the implications of these developments for the relationship between the monarchy, democracy and the rule of law, a point others have raised as well, i.e. http://www.opendemocracy.net/article/thailands-democratic-crisis
It was very classy of them to attack the mosque at phetburi near the rajathewi skytrain station. Guess that had to do with democracy eh?
Erick: I wouldn’t put it past the army to have infiltrated the protests and caused at least some of the violence against local residents. This (as well as the removal of bodies from the streets to conceal any evidence of government brutality) is a tactic that seems well established in SE Asia. I actually wrote about this very issue, in the context of the 1988 Burmese student uprising, in a paper titled “Why Regimes Create Disorder” — my first ever academic publication back when I was a graduate student (available here).
Though plausible, at the same time I wouldn’t put it beyond the red shirts to have engaged in much of this senseless violence. In fact, I think that until some hard evidence to the contrary emerges, one has to assume it was them. After all, claims of “third party” involvement are regularly made (by all sides) whenever something like this goes horribly wrong.
As for the consequences of all this, I think this is no doubt a temporary setback. That’s why I think it was smart of the red shirts to eventually give up. That gives them a chance to regroup, collect some evidence of exactly what the government did, and take responsibility for the mistakes they made and the crimes they committed. Ultimately, I don’t think this is a fatal blow, though I have long argued that the movement would have much wider appeal if it went some substantial re-organization.
Slowly but with their customary attention to inevitability PRC Hans will pocket this place soon enough. To whom, I wonder, in the cargo cult iconography of the elite will be given the Dalai Lama gig? Where’s Sir Andrew (Lloyd Weber)when we really need him? All Thais should reflect a moment and thank GAWD there’s no oil here.
Dear Kwai Jok Foong,
I enjoyed reading this thoughtful anlysis. I agree with the idea that the antics of the Red Shirts be an engine for change to the extent that they might have extended the boundaries of political discourse in Thailand and have begun, at least, to make some space in which to discuss topics that have been taboo for way too long. However, I find it hard to envisage any positive change in the social and political landscape arising from the Reds as long as Thaksin remains a central figure in the movement. I’m afraid that for many people he has already become another quasi-religious symbol at the centre of an unhealthy personality cult. And let’s face it, the Thaksin venerated by the Red Shirts bares little resemblance to the cynical, manipulative abuser of press freedom and human rights that I recall from his days as prime minister. Although you seem to share this view of Thaksin, you appear to reserve much of your ire for Aphisit. Perhaps it would be more accurate to state that you despise what he represents rather than the man himself, but isn’t Thaksin equally despicable? I can’t, at present, see any route by which Thailand can navigate the obstacle course of mafia goons, generals, aristocrats, and robber barons, who currently float like turds in the open sewer that is Thai politics. Can you?
Nigel: I agree. In previous posts, I have gone to some lengths to detail Thaksin’s misdeeds and urge the red shirts to throw him under the bus. At the end of the day, however, I consider Abhisit’s patrons a much greater impediment to democratization. Thaksin could have been ultimately thrown out by the people through the electoral process. Those who have put Abhisit in power cannot.
The time for a people’s revolution & restoration of power to the people will eventually come – it invariably does.
After the dust & smoke has cleared, it will be interesting to watch how quickly the current overlords become willing servants to their new masters. Then begins their climb up the newly-formed ladders of power. These kinds of opportunist cockroaches always find a way to survive when the game changes.
just for sharing…
here’s an excellent piece of reporting & analysis by Crispin @ asia times online. really, a rare gem.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/KD15Ae03.html
The Crispin piece raises an interesting question or two. What do you make of his claim of the stockpiling of small arms in Isan? Credible? And if true, a positive or negative development? Which is also to ask, just how non-violent should the red shirts be in their call for change, even ‘revolutionary’ change as some of the leaders now put it?
Erick: I have no contacts of any kind among any Thai politicians or dissidents (on either side), so I have no information about whether these revelations are true or could be true. But I will say this. First, I think the claim is plausible in the sense that, from what I know of the red shirts and their leaders, I can at least imagine them doing such a thing. Second, I think of Mr. Crispin as a highly credible, responsible journalist, so I have no reason to doubt that the information was relayed to him by a well-placed source. The question is whether the well-placed source really knows what he’s talking about or might be deliberately making this stuff up — for vanity or in a calculated effort to exaggerate the threat posed by the red shirts. True or not, though, to openly raise the prospect of a civil war is a very risky strategy on their part because it offers the authorities the pretext to harshly suppress the movement. As for “how non-violent should the red shirts be in their call for change,” my answer would be “as non-violent as they can.” Right now, the biggest problem for the red shirts is to: 1) Reclaim democratic legitimacy; and 2) Get people in both the provinces and in Bangkok to attend their demonstrations in far larger numbers than they have so far. Purely as a strategic matter, to resort to violence or threaten civil war strikes me as suicidal on both of these counts.
Strategically what you say makes sense. But thinking back over the last 40 plus years of political movements in Thailand, it is hard to recall any political movement that was able to resist provocation and violence in the pursuit of political power. Which is to say, what exactly are the ideological, organizational and political prospects and possibilities of a movement seeking ‘revolutionary’ change through the means of non-violent protests and resistance? Typically, it seems to me, non-violence is the strategic choice of groups who are marginal or relatively ineffective. While those that sense they have a shot at seizing the architecture of power are more than willing to use a bit of violence, subversion and deception when it seems useful and necessary, from their perspective.
I also suppose much of this depends up what exactly folks mean by ‘revolutionary’ change. That word has been tossed around a good bit more in the last week or so, but its substantive content is often left vague. Revolutionary in the sense of the rule of constitutional democratic parliamentary rules, in terms of the relations between the executive, legislative and judicial branches, in terms of the relations between capital and labor, or in terms of the role, influence and status of the monarchy and palace.
In this case, the Red Shirts are a “marginal and relatively ineffective” group. To be sure, if you have millions of people in the streets and much of the country behind you, this would be a different story. But it’s important to keep in mind that so far the Red Shirts have, at best, been able to mobilize only about 100,000 people — a fairly paltry crowd in a country the size of Thailand. Under the circumstances, at a time when the Red Shirts have yet to earn the support they need to pose a real “revolutionary” threat (as they would say), any episode of violence is likely to badly damage their reputation, alienate much of the local population, and afford the government the opportunity to restore “order” through its usual brutality. The events of the last couple of days are an important lesson in this sense. As the Red Shirts became increasingly violent, the government grew in a stronger position to crack down. The locals turned on them, while the propagandists of the regime grew louder at home and more credible abroad. And, as the troops advanced through Bangkok, the number of Red Shirts in the streets dwindled so rapidly that by the time they surrendered only 2-3000 people remained at Government House.
You may be right when you say that Abhisit’s sponsors are the greatest obstacle to democracy in Thailand. Still, I don’t really see the Red Shirt movement leading to any kind of revolutionary change at this point, though I must admit to a degree of ignorance regarding the calibre of their leadership (other than Thaksin, who to me represents everything that is currently wrong with Thailand). I had considered Jakrapob Penkair to be Thaksin’s glove puppet, but I’m beginning to wonder if he’s actually the puppet master. I would be interested to hear any informed opinions on the leaders of the Red Shirts. Without oustanding leadership, they are likely to remain a bunch of headless chickens going nowhere.
Nigel, I agree. I think Jakrapob is a guy to watch. I also agree with Kwai Jok Foong; this is not the end, it is a beginning and (call me a conspiracy theorist!) I think that the Reds know the only way this will end is in civil war – I have been saying it in the blogosphere for a year now. Thus it would not surprise me if arms caches have been built up – though have no evidence for or against.
Changes on the scale that need to happen do not occur without the people rising up, I have never heard of a wealthy elite voluntarily relinquishing their power. In Thailand as elsewhere it will be taken from their cold dead hands. This is a shame, it is unnecessary but I am afraid, inevitable.
It seems to be that Thaksin has either transformed himself from a corrupt business man into a social reformer, or is in the process of reinventing himself thus. The authorities appear not to have understood this and that is a big mistake. However much of a shit he is, he will be trying to cast off the corrupt business man image in preparation for acceding to popular acclaim to become [... CENSORED...]
Dull it isn’t.
Rich
Quite frankly I’m glad it’s over, even though I took a holiday from Songkran and followed things from Cambodia.
However I think we have a basic problem here with the Reds: I can’t recall anything they wanted, that was not directly related to Toxin being able to come back and continue his defrauding of the nation. And vice versa I think without Toxin’s money they would not have been coming to Bangkok/Pattaya in these numbers. So until they come up with something, that is requesting genuinely democratic improvements I see them as a bunch of upcountry hooligans, who enjoyed it to come to the big town and create a mess and being paid for it. I doubt there is any political awareness among them as to what they want beside Toxin to come back. I talked to a bunch of Red-shirt taxi drivers and they only proved this. If you tell them, that they shot themselves in their foot, because now a lot less tourists will come and thus they will have less passengers, they just laughed it of,- that kind of helpless laugh of people, who just don’t understand, what you are telling them.
I am convinced, that Thailand needs more democracy, lots of it, but that drive will not come from Toxin or the red shirts, nor the blue shirts or the yellow shirts. As long as such “movements” are led by corrupt politicians, there is no future in any of the action. And btw I would reject the notion, that Toxin came to power in a democratic way. In 2000 he called for all the corrupt politicians, offering 30 to 50 million Baht each as ‘campaign support’ and they all came, from all parties…
Leave your response!
KHÎ KWAI
CALENDAR
Blogroll
ARCHIVES
RECENT COMMENTS