The art of rhetoric

The word war has continued...

After violence occurred on Thursday evening resulting in one confirmed death and about 80 injuries, the red shirt leaders (aka UDD) declared they would compromise by demanding the government step down in 30 days and call elections within 90 days (so, 60 days after the government steps down and a temporary, quite powerless government steps up). Their previous demand was the the government step down immediately (which has been the demand for about, oh, 40 days).

The Thai PM's response on Sunday was this: “Thirty days is out of the question... I don’t think this problem can be solved within 30 days... negotiations must be done to find a solution for most of the country, not just the red shirts... I never reject a political solution, but a political solution must not create a precedent that intimidation will bring about social change.” (Thank you, NY Times for the concise, English quote.)

Now, I find both the compromise and the response quite amusing. I'll begin with why I think the red shirt leaders' compromise (just because this is what happened chronologically).

The red shirts are actually the National United Front of Democracy Against Dictatorship. Democracy, you say? Isn't that the form of government created in ancient Greek city states where everyone has the right to vote directly for their government? Oh yes... well, it's been used to describe other governments as well (like the United States, which is actually a republic). But, the idea is that citizens are given the right to vote on their government. While the current government was not elected (more on that in my response to Vejjajiva's quote), staging a protest to force down the constitutionally-recognized government by means of force (yes, protests here are force - why do you think the red shirts moved to the commercial area and threaten the financial city center?) is not democratic. Why not wait until the elections next year to prove your point that the reds rule? Staging protests (which I recognize is a form of democracy) seem to hurt the country and the people the reds claim to support more than the government. If anything, the protests seem to have lodged the current government even more into its current positions and created a much more vocal, centralized organization to support it. On top of all of the damage done to the country, the protests have marred the international community's view of Thailand, damaging the financial sector and the tourism industry.

Now, the response by PM Abhisit Vejjajiva... to understand why his comment is particularly amusing, you need to understand a bit about recent Thai politics. This brief history is all according to what I understand. Thaksin Shinawatra became prime minister in 2001 and served until 2006, when he was ousted in a coup by the army. He was the first prime minister to serve a full term. (While Thailand has had one king for the past 64 years, it has had 17 constitutions and 27 prime ministers.) There were some strong feelings about Thaksin, both positive and negative (yellow shirts, aka People's Alliance for Democracy). So, after Thaksin was ousted in the coup (due in part to yellow shirt protests), the army held general elections approximately a year after the coup. Thaksin's party won the general elections. The yellow shirts (probably pissed off) staged protests, again, in 2008, taking over the Government House (much like the red shirts did earlier in their protests). The resolution to this set of protests was a court decision to remove the current prime minister (because he accepted money from being on a cooking show!). The brother-in-law of Thaksin then became PM. The yellow shirts continued their protests, culminating in a take-over of the international airport. The solution: the courts invalidated Thaksin's former party. Abhisit became prime minister after all of this.

So, the amusing part - how Abhisit came to power... after a PM was removed by the courts for getting paid for a cooking show and after a PM stepped down because his party was abolished AFTER yellow shirt protests. Sorry, Abhisit, the precedent is already set and you benefited from it. I agree that "a political solution must not create a precedent that intimidation will bring about social change" but in Thailand's recent history, that's been the case. You have a problem with the current government? Stage a protest, take over an important area in Bangkok, and stay there long enough for the courts or the army to invalidate a party or stage a coup.



P.S. The italics are added to emphase my point of view.