Slightly more than a year ago, on 22 July 2007, Bangkok saw a violent street protest when the United Front of Democracy Against Dictatorship (UDD) protested in front of the compound of General Prem Tinsulanonda, head of the Privy Council. Even today this event is cited as proof of the supposedly uncontrollable violence of Thaksin supporters. Most of the Thai media has reported this event as if enraged protesters attacked police and attempted to storm the compound of General Prem. Most international media were not present, and simply copied their articles from the Thai media. At the time international attention to Thai politics had almost completely vanished. Only Asia Sentinel’s coverage showed a different, and for me far more realistic picture.
The UDD, holding Prem responsible for the military coup, had already once attempted to protest in front of his compound, but were blocked by police. At the next opportunity, however, their strategy was different. At lunchtime 15,000 to 20,000 protesters marched from Sanam Luang. A small group was already diverted on to a different route over Thewet. The main body of protesters reached the first police block on their way to Prem’s compound, but instead of the usual long negotiations they simply used their mass to press through the barricades. Police had to give way, and the protesters used the lorries from the blockade to push through the next police lines. There was minimal violence, mostly hotheads attacking drivers of those lorries, but fellow protesters quickly stopped this. At about 3 pm the protesters reached Prem’s house, sat down, and listened to speeches from a mobile stage. By that time I had already heard about an order given to police to disperse the protesters. I was also given the possible time. After a break at home I returned to Thewet just in time to see the first police assault against protesters which was successfully fought back. After police retreated, protesters themselves quieted their fellow protesters down, and stopped them from further attacking police.
One of these photos shows protesters standing in front of police, stopping other protesters from hurling stones.
Another photo shows protesters waiing police during the clashes.
After a lull the second police attack began, which was also fought back. Also a third attack started soon after, during which the police were beaten back into Prem’s compound. What was mostly reported as an attack on Prem’s compound, was actually an attempt by protesters to block police from leaving Prem’s compound by building a barricade at the entrance. There was also a small group of police that was left over near the Thewet corner. As these officers did not engage in any further active fighting, they were also left alone by the protesters.
Shortly after, the police staged a fourth attack, preceded by a barrage of tear gas grenades. At that time the protest leaders decided to retreat, and there was no more confrontation.
My guess is that at the time of the street battles there were maybe up to 5000 protesters left, and by the end maybe 2000 who walked back to Sanam Luang.
In the days after, I spoke with many police officers, of both high and low ranks, who took part in the clashes. I also spoke with plain clothes officers who were in the mass of protesters. All officers stated that the decision to attack the protesters came directly from the army. In the opinion of police, violent tactics should not have been used because the UDD protesters would have left anyhow during the night as they did not have sufficient people to continuously block Prem’s compound like the PAD did at Government House before the coup.
In conclusion, this protest, if analysed dispassionately, showed several positive developments. The police did not use lethal force, there were no deaths; there was nobody injured beyond mending. The worst injury was the broken leg of a police officer. The protest leaders mostly controlled the protesters very well, and also managed to stop the protest when it was in danger of descending into further levels of violence. In every modern democracy there are protests, and often violent protests — looking at the recent WTO protests, which are often far more violent. The importance issue is how these protests are dealt with by the government authorities — non-lethal force, or all out confrontation by shooting protesters, as has been done often in Thai history.
Here, police used tear gas, both grenades and pepper spray, batons and makeshift missiles such as bottles and stones (I was nearly hit by a bottle that came flying out of Prem’s compound, and the elderly protester in the photo that is helped up by two fellow protesters was hit by a missile that was thrown out of Prem’s compound), while protesters used whatever came handy – bottles, stones, pieces of wood and iron. In this sense, I would judge the events at Thewet as a clear step forward, even though I am equally of the opinion that violence could have been avoided if the army-installed government had used a softer approach.
Obviously in the aftermath both sides politicised this event tremendously. The very one-sided and partial reporting in the Thai medias stems most definitely from the fact that at the time every Thai news outlet still had military officers as censors in their offices. International media was mostly not present, the few who were there were on the ground only very briefly.
8 responses so far ↓
1 Hla Oo // Aug 13, 2008 at 10:25 am
Definitely, Thais are more civilized than Burmese. In any similar case like a mass protest shown in the photos, Burmese soldiers would chalk on the road three lines between them and the protesters, and once the protesters cross the first line they would just blow them away to hell with automatic rifles.
2 Nick Nostitz // Aug 13, 2008 at 5:31 pm
“Hla Oo”:
I wish i could be so sure. These protests were handled much better than the ones in Burma. But ‘76 and ‘92 were handled with utter brutality, and so was the 2003 drug war. I believe the difference is not in the nature of the people, but structural.
Let’s wait and see what the future brings us here in Thailand. I am afraid that there is a slight chance that one day you may have to reverse your position on Thailand.
If you look at the wars in former Yugoslavia, or the Nazi times in Germany, you can see that supposedly civilized people of supposedly civilized cultures can descend into the same brutalities.
In the end, people are the same – we all have the potential to behave in rather uncivilized ways. To some degree it is up to us to decide, and to some degree circumstances limit our ability to decide.
By the way, i very much admire your contributions on violence in Burma. This is a very refreshing perspective and extremely educating to read a viewpoint that breaks with the mostly politically correct simplistic views that dominate the public debate.
It was an eyeopener for me, when i had the opportunity to travel through Wa State with an official journalist’s visa, and had to spend lots of time with our MI escorts. I did find very complex human beings behind the positions they held in this nightmare of a system. Especially after we got drunk together at the end of our journey, many layers of this system fell away.
Things are never as simple as many people make it out to be, especially not in Burma.
3 Sidh S. // Aug 13, 2008 at 11:00 pm
Thanks for this account Nick.
I am relieved to see that while there are violent elements in the UDD (the ability to beat the police attack three times! Impressive!), there are others who favor peaceful protests, urging others to stop attacking, stop throwing stones etc. And it is this group that could be engaged with in open public forums (I won’t be surprised to find a few of my old friends in there!).
What I never really got is why protest in front of PMPrem’s residence (What is the real purpose here of UDD’s leaders? What evidence do they have that PMPrem was really behind the coup?). GenSonthi and the CNS were the coupmakers. Why not protest in front of parliament and demand PMSurayud’s government to resign and CNS to return democracy to the people? Camp there until PMSurayud/CNS gives in (or until the nearby school files a complaint). At least that’s what the PAD did in a comparable situation (or past protestors against coup governments).
Is it for the lack of funding? They can’t afford to camp for months waiting for a violent crackdown from the security forces that will prove to the world the violent, powerhungry bunch the military coupmakers really are and prepare the comeback for the hero of Thai democracy? So they went for broke at PMPrem’s residence?
If the PAD attacked PMThaksin’s house, that may be more comparable to UDD’s on PMPrem’s. In contrast, the PAD always used neutral venues, from SuanLum, Siam, Sanam Luang, Thammasat, in front of parliament, at Udon’s city center. The UDD also seemed to have a tendency to follow PAD around – they seem to like to get personal (throw bottles/rocks, show private parts, violently gang on as in Udon)???
What you’ve merely shown us is that there are elements in UDD that are against violence – but it probably doesn’t do much to change the broad perception of the UDD, ‘misrepresented’ (to put it mildly) by violent actions already committed by the few? The many?
4 Moe Aung // Aug 14, 2008 at 9:22 am
Too right Nick, we all have it in us. It boils down to selective nuturing of nature, doesn’t it? A kind of cultural conditioning if you like whether acute or chronic. Demagogues excel in it. What was this experiment in the US all those years ago when a group of students was given the power to boss over and abuse a second group of students? And all hell broke loose. So power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. By the same token, violence begets violence, given half the chance.
5 Nick Nostitz // Aug 14, 2008 at 10:12 am
“Sidh S.”
One major difference between the pre-coup PAD demonstrations and the post coup UDD demonstrations was that the PAD got the red carpet treatment. They could go wherever they wanted – they went to Prem’s residence to hand him a letter, the walked to Army Headquarters where Sonthi Limthongkul was even invited inside to hand over a letter. They could block government house for weeks, they could sit in front of Siam Paragon.
The UDD could hardly leave Sanam Luang, they were blocked wherever they went. When they went to Army Headquarters – they were blocked.
Between my house – a few kilometers from Sanam Luang upriver – and Sanam Luang there were three military road blocks that turned protesters back. In the outskirts and upcountry there were even more.
In the slums were military patrols that discouraged people from joining UDD protests.
UDD leaders were harrased regularly. Many unpublicized behind the scenes nasties happened, such as the driver of Jakrapop Penkair having been kidnapped overnight a day or two after the Prem Comound clashes, and left drugged at a petrol station in the outskirts.
I am not going here at why exactly the pointed Prem as the initiator of the coup. Many foreign news articles at the time have also speculated on the same. I am sure you can find many of those articles in the archives.
This was the second or third attempt to reach Prem’s house. Previous attempts have been blocked.
I am very sure that the PAD has exactly the same potential for violence. If the PAD would not have been permitted to wherever they wanted, we also would have seen such clashes. Maybe even worse ones, as the PAD had more people.
And don’t forget – the UDD here was attacked by police. PAD was never attacked by police.
The UDD after the elections is different. The main leaders have stayed away from the demonstrations, and most anti PAD demonstration now are demonstrations of small splinter groups. The “Udon lovers” i am not even sure if they are part of the UDD umbrella, or something completely different.
6 Sidh S. // Aug 14, 2008 at 7:32 pm
Nick,
I have drawn parallels with the World Trade incident and the event at Udon. The PAD don’t have it as easy as you assumed WHEN THE STATE COLLUDES WITH THUGS. I urge you to reinvestigate the World Trade incident as it was arguably one of the starting point of the regression into violence – consistent with the old Thai saying “slit the chicken’s throat to scare the monkey”.
At the World Trade, the police colluded with the thugs in black to beat up an old man and a women to send a message to all other protestors and others at home who thought of joining the rally (at least some of my friends decided against attending a rally as a result – as for as I am aware). At Udon, it’s the same scenario, and the leaders of the Udon lovers admitted as much – if you don’t share our views, don’t you dare step into Udon.
In these context, your arguments will only ring true IF and ONLY IF the PAD can freely and safely hold rallies in PPP strongholds. Besides, I understand that the UDD did not formally ask to meet PMPrem to peacefully deliver an open letter of protest. They were shouting abuse all the way from Sanam Luang (maybe you didn’t hear any of that?).
And this also raise an interesting point, that complements your last paragraph that states that the “The UDD after the elections is different” – as the two events I pointed to were BEFORE and AFTER the elections. Why were they “different”? Is it because after the elections, UDD leaders like Jakrapob became a minister in the PPP cabinet (after losing the election, it must be noted) who notoriously manipulated, with full intention of clamping down, on the FREE MEDIA (which then perpetuates, NOT SOLVE, the problem)?
Look Nick, all it takes to avoid violence is for UDD and all its umbrella groups to avoid PAD rallies. Plain and simple. And all it took for PAD to move its rallies is for teachers, parents and their children to file a complaint against the court. If the PAD was a mafia thug, all they had to do is send a letter with a bullet to the school principle and parents…
7 Nick Nostitz // Aug 14, 2008 at 10:44 pm
“Sidh S”:
The fist violence that i have witnessed, insignificant as it may have been, were when lone pro-Thaksin protesters appeared at PAD rallies at Royal Plaza. They were brutally attacked by PAD protesters, and saved by plain cloth police. These were very ugly incidents, i have been only a few meters away.
The only thing i am saying here is that PAD has the same potential for violence, as the recent arming shows.
The major difference in strategy and tactics is that the PAD is far more professionally organized, mostly because of Chamlong’s military expertise, and has with Sonthi Limthongkul a media professional who exactly knows how to manipulate the media.
The UDD has never shown such professionalism in their protests. Their strategies were amateurish, and their media presence was dominated by people who have not been very experienced with the media. Instead of short sound bites that the media needed, they have held endless monologues, nearly impossible to cut down to new format. The UDD’s only person who had good spoken English language skills was Jakrapop.
Jakrapop is an interesting character. For a politician he is a very nice guy, outspoken, and very approachable, and i still think that the FCCT speech on the patronage system was the most courageous public speech i have heard by a Thai politician.
The accusations of media intimidation is a difficult point. There are a lot of behind the scenes games going on the public is rarely aware of. The only thing i am aware of that some of that was a reaction of PAD attempts to infiltrate certain key position of the media.
The way how Jakrapop had to resign because of the lese majeste accusations was the result of an extremely ugly game.
Also i think that UDD had much lower budgets available than PAD had. But any further than speculation is of course not possible here.
In terms of hurling abuse – i should be equally grateful to both groups as they have greatly expanded my vocabulary of colorful swearwords in equal measure.
You pointed out one major difference of pre election and post election UDD already – several UDD key leaders have joined positions in the government, and had to distance themselves from street protests. The last time i spoke with Mor Weng and the other non-politicians of the UDD is a while ago, when i met them during the Lumpini meeting. There they said they will be busy with meetings concerning the constitution change.
I have also not seen Sombat from the ‘Just Say No’ group either in a long time.
I have not met them during the present protests at all. I am not even sure how much the present protest groups can be linked to UDD, or even if they are.
It is rather complicated with the UDD, you can’t lump them together, much less than with the PAD. At the time of the military government and the Prem Compound clashes – the UDD was a unified group made up from very different single groups (where of course the majority of protesters were pro Thaksin and primarily attracted by PTV). The election win of PPP and return to civilian rule of course stopped the reasons for UDD to stage large street protests.
Of course the reappearance of the PAD has fueled counter protests, but i don’t think that they can be directly linked to, and compared with pre-election UDD.
8 Sidh S. // Aug 16, 2008 at 4:51 pm
Thanks Nick. As I’ve said, they’ll be little chance of violence if the UDD and its permutations simply avoid PAD rallies. I also hope the governments of the day, in order to encourage broader democracy, open up new neutral forums whether through the medias and organized public events nationwide to air and discuss differences of opinions. This should also serve long term societal reconcilliation and establishment of ground rules, good practices, minimum expectations of politicians etc. for civic society, from local to national
Andrew has also refused my democratic right to reply to your previous #70 comment addressed to me (”PAD – ready for violence”). I wonder if this is a page from Jakrapob (I agree with your comments about him and that his speech was great, but he was the wrong messenger considering that he is clearly under PMThaksin’s patronage. He owes his political existence to the Shinawatras). I will try posting them here as I think it is related to our discussions:
Andrew, I reserve the right to shortly respond to Nick as he has addressed #70 to me.
I will just say, Nick, that you are fearing what will never materialize – even sane participants in PAD’s rallies realize this. At the end of day, PAD are a group of protestors, while TRT/PPP have been running the country for most of the past 8 years. I am stating the obvious here Nick, but there’s a world of difference between protestors SAYING things and governments IMPLEMENTING things…
To your pessimism, I have no choice but to be optimistic. You might be proven right, but as a Thai with most of my family and friends living and working in the country, I hope and believe that you are very wrong…
And to finish this off, a bit of good news for you as the PAD have finally used their weapon see:
เด็กแว้นซิ่ง จยย.ป่วนผู้ชุมนุม in
http://www.thairath.co.th/news.php?section=politics&content=100558
In the same article, here’s what MajGenChamlong, a protest leader had to say:
พล.ต.จำลอง ศรีเมือง หนึ่งในแกนนำพันธมิตรฯ กล่าวว่า การชุมนุมยังคงดำรงจุดมุ่งหมายเดิม คือให้รัฐบาลชุดนี้ลาออกทั้งคณะ และคัดค้านการแก้ไขรัฐธรรมนูญ ส่วนการลี้ภัยหรือการหนีคดีของ พ.ต.ท.ทักษิณ ชินวัตร และภรรยา ไม่ใช่จุดมุ่งหมายของพันธมิตรฯ และ ไม่มีผลทำให้การชุมนุมยุติลงได้ และกลุ่มพันธมิตรฯคงไม่ไปเรียกร้องกดดันทางสถานทูตอังกฤษให้ส่งตัว พ.ต.ท. ทักษิณกลับมา
Yesterday a 70:30 undemocratic formula, today “against change to the constitution”, what of tomorrow? And SO WHAT? But, IN CONTRAST, a government can continue its War on Drugs policy, or its eye for an eye policies in the South, or change the National Parks law to allow further exploitation by big businesses… It can choose to be more engaging, at least with the people’s representatives in parliament (even better, practice more transparent participatory politics), before issuing directives. Lets also look where the ball is going and not just at the coach shouting protests at the referee…
Leave a Comment
Please note: New Mandala encourages vigorous debate. However, for the moment we will only be publishing high-quality comments that make original contributions to discussion. There will, of course, still be space for pithy, humorous, eccentric and cheeky input. Short and sweet will usually trump long and involved. Repetitive ranting, unimaginative point-scoring and idle abuse will not be entertained. Comments which carry a real name are also more likely to be approved. Thank you for your ongoing interest and contributions.