Over the last few months the “red shirts” have occupied the moral high ground in Thai politics. There have been some unfortunate incidents but, by and large, the red-clad opposition movement has managed to stage large, well-organised and and generally well-disciplined rallies to maintain pressure on the Abhisit government. There has been a clear contrast between the protest strategies of the red-shirts and the provocative escalation practiced by the yellow-shirts in the latter months of 2008.
But, over the past few days, the distinction in tactics between red and yellow has become much less clear. Elements within the red shirts have now embraced violent confrontation. They have lost the moral high ground and given a humiliated Abhisit the pretext for launching a bloody crackdown.
Who knows how events will unfold. The leaders of the red-shirts may end up regretting the confrontational and bloody turn their campaign has taken. But, as Abhisit knows better than anyone else, the royal yellow lesson from 2008 is that thuggery, violence and provocation can reap rich political rewards.
This is my first time in being so confused at this writer’s postings. The Red Shirts started out being violent (Udorn), their hero Thaksin is very violent, and yet somehow when the Red Shirts really expose this side of their modus operandi, somehow the distinction between them and the Yellow Shirts becomes less clear?
I need to grab a drink on this because all along the Yellow Shirts have been non-violent and Red shirts violent. Incident for incident, supportable with facts, tells a clear story and not one that is becoming less clear.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
I don’t think there ever was a sharp distinction in strategy used by the reds and yellows. Neither movement was inspired by Gandhi, and it was clear both would resort to violence if expedient.
The major, sharp difference is in goals.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
A friend mentioned me today that of Abhisit never glad confident morning again.Forgive the indulgence but here’s the entire “Lost Leader” by Robert Browning
The Lost Leader
I.
Just for a handful of silver he left us,
Just for a riband to stick in his coat—
Found the one gift of which fortune bereft us,
Lost all the others she lets us devote;
They, with the gold to give, doled him out silver,
So much was theirs who so little allowed:
How all our copper had gone for his service!
Rags—were they purple, his heart had been proud!
We that had loved him so, followed him, honoured him,
Lived in his mild and magnificent eye,
Learned his great language, caught his clear accents,
Made him our pattern to live and to die!
Shakespeare was of us, Milton was for us,
Burns, Shelley, were with us,—they watch from their graves!
He alone breaks from the van and the free-men,
—He alone sinks to the rear and the slaves!
II.
We shall march prospering,—not thro’ his presence;
Songs may inspirit us,—not from his lyre;
Deeds will be done,—while he boasts his quiescence,
Still bidding crouch whom the rest bade aspire:
Blot out his name, then, record one lost soul more,
One task more declined, one more foot-path untrod,
One more devils’-triumph and sorrow for angels,
One wrong more to man, one more insult to God!
Life’s night begins: let him never come back to us!
There would be doubt, hesitation and pain,
Forced praise on our part—the glimmer of twilight,
Never glad confident morning again!
Best fight on well, for we taught him—strike gallantly,
Menace our heart ere we master his own;
Then let him receive the new knowledge and wait us,
Pardoned in heaven, the first by the throne!
Robert Browning
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Love this website, but have to disagree about the comments about the Reds tactics. To judge the Reds vs Yellows by their tactics totally misses the point, though I will admit in a PR sense they matter. But what PR do the Reds have? Nothing. The Thai media is worse the worthless, they are pro-establishment.
We must judge the Reds and Yellows based on goals and motives. The American revolutionaries used brutal and morally offensive tactics in order to achieve a higher value, freedom from tyranny. There comes at time when a long train of abuses and usurpations when it is the people’s right and duty to throw off the government and to provide new guards for their future security. I know nobody here disagress that it is up to the Thai people to decide when that time comes and how best to secure their rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
The previous governments were legitimate and democratically elected. The PAD motives and goals were to reduce or eliminate democracy and protect the vested interests. Regardless of their tactics, their motives and goals were repugnant and un-democratic. If that’s what someone believes in fine, I guess, but be prepared for a many others to strenuously disagree.
The Abhisit government was not democratically formed, contrary to the spin of the establishment. The motives and goals of the Reds, while diverse, at least include a return to elections of governments based on the votes of the people.
When the dust settles, the approval of the media, the public, the international community and us pundits of how change happens or doesn’t happen is less important than whether that change happens.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
H Frank, when you say “I need to grab a drink on this because all along the Yellow Shirts have been non-violent and Red shirts violent…” You are simplifying, right?
Because I have a tape full of video showing PAD guards beating the crap out of people on Sep 3 (I think that was the date, one Red Shirt killed by them), you recall their shooting gums from the truck on Viphavadi-Rangsit, there are photos of them beating people at the airport, the senior PAD guard almost surely blew himself up in that jeep on Oct. 7, etc etc.
Perhaps you really want to say something like they didn’t use unprovoked violence, a point made by a number of people on this forum. Or perhaps you are suggesting that the Red Shirts depend on a strategy of violence.
But to edge into the idea that the PAD practiced non-violence is just wrong. They used to say it over and over and their followers believe that myth, but I’m pretty sure that you don’t.
I don’t think you meant to raise this debate again, but for history’ s sake, I feel I must note this.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
not just for history, I hope, but also for the truth…. and the devil is often in the details, which I would like to ask:
1. “a tape full of video showing PAD guards beating the crap out of people on Sep 3 (I think that was the date, one Red Shirt killed by them)…” I will pay for a copy of this tape if you can provide it. In essence, you are saying that considerable time and a considerable number of people were involved? Or…?
2. “there are photos of them beating people at the airport, the senior PAD guard almost surely blew himself up in that jeep on Oct. 7, etc etc.” Again, lots of photos? Beating people? Left and right or not in a single of those instances defending themselves, no provocation, etc.? Details. Also, what leads you do think the guy blew himself up?
3. I am not going to crack any eggs we are walking over to say that PADs only respond to provocation, but to make comparisons, glib ones, between the two groups is doing a disservice, I believe, to almost all of the PAD and providing excuses to the Red Shirts. This little trick with the LPG tanker is surely a step in the wrong direction? And what of all the burning, blocking of the ASEAN summit, road closings, actual incitement to kill General Prem and Abhisit? I listened this morning before D-TV got cut off, and more than one was up on stage calling for everyone to go kill Prem and Abhisit. Have you heard the equivalent among the PAD? Also, let’s not ignore the man they all love, a killer and human rights violator of the first order.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
I guess that I am saying is that charges of violence against the PAD should be documented and listed in detail with proof and not claims, the same way, perhaps, that should be done for the Red Shirts.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
I think the difference between the yellows and the reds was provenance and alliance. The yellows were immunized by the complicity of the military and the police in their drawn out creation of chaos. The reds have always know that the powers in charge are opposed to them, and the authorities have all the firepower. As we’re presently witnessing.
And your last observation is right on. The establishment let the genie out of the bottle, again, with their acquiescence to the coup of 2006. It’s been downhill ever since. The fall back in Thai politics seems to be to turn over the table when you’re losing then scramble around on the floor, in the blood and the beer, for the guns and the money. That works until next time.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Frank — I’ll look for my September tape. Does anyone know the easiest way I can transfer it from a videocassette to something more digital?
The airport violence can be seen in links posted on Bangkok Pundit. I specifically recall a photo set linked to Matichon. More work than that I am unwilling to do for you. The guys shooting guns on the highway has been shown again recently on TPBS. There were links to it on many web sites. Including here on NM, I am fairly certain.
Threats? Yes, actually I can , though perhaps they were not as vivid and overblown. There was incitement by a Manager columnist to lynch Chotisak for not standing up during the king’s anthem. It was the subject of a widely circulated petition
Perhaps closer to what you were thinking, there was the not very hidden suggestion by Chai-anan that the PAD movement take to selective assassination if Thai politics wasn’t purged of its bad elements. That was in his own column. Jirmsak publicly endorsed the idea, though I can’t recall the source for that information.
The matter of the guy in the jeep — that’s a very interesting question. I don’t really know. How do you think he died?
I will confess it is an inference on my part, partly because it seems the simplest explanation. You will recall the copious data released about the death of that young woman that same day, including many statements by Dr. Pornthip.
The man in the jeep was just as dead, yet we haven’t seen a single word that I know of from Dr. Pornthip about that. Why might that be? I know she has been asked. Some reader, either here or on Bangkok Pundit, was kind enough a month or two ago to refer to some Matichon article on the case. I don’t have the skills or time to duplicate Dr. Pornthip’s work.
The idea of a documentation project is a very good one, actually. Would you want to take it up? I am sure many readers here would be willing to contribute material. I’m serious, not making a dig at you. I certainly trust you more than a Thai Senate committee.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
If I stopped eating and sleeping I would have time, like some of the rest of us…
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
I’m having a hard time dealing with hypocrisy.
I support neither Red nor Yellow. Both were disruptive and, in the end, barbaric and lawless. So, how come the Yellows seem to exist with such impunity? A disturbing number of people are so quick to condemn the Reds (to everlasting torment in hell – I’m gathering this mostly from comments in Thai), yet seem content to leave the Yellows untouched on their ridiculously righteous high horse.
Are our memories that short? Or are those supporters really so brainwashed – to actually not see any violence and rampant lawlessness in the Yellows’ actions over those many, many months: occupying and defiling government offices (costing millions in repairs), shooting guns in the street, diverting traffic, beating police officers, brandishing sticks and batons, inspecting regular civilians in their cars as they drove up to the useless airport – and they continue to act like they own the country.
Are there any analysts out there who support neither Red nor Yellow? We need balance and impartiality. In the meantime, it would be a relief if more people would acknowledge the hypocrisy of it all, without waving a flag for either side.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Not quite sure whether you are suggesting something or uncomfortable with something. Hypocrisy is a more deeply imbued characteristic than many of us appreciated. Even the way we phrase questions and replies to them carries a great deal of hypocrisy. Part of hypocrisy also lies with our human double standards propensities, one time going one way another time another, to suit the way we deem things to be. Reports of violence and details that are factual and supportable do not often go together, and that is one of the issues in this Red vs. Yellow thing. The first time I saw violence involving the Red and Yellow was when the Yellow were in Udorn and the Reds came in and destroyed their stage, all without any police objection or government condemnation. Surely there is some hypocrisy there.
Frankly, I am really interested in seeing point for point the who, what, where, why, when and how of each incident rather than cite numbers or occasions and assign blame to this side or that. Any of my defenses of the Yellow, by the way, are of course somewhat prejudicial, and will be amended based on hard evidence. the issue of the airport, for example: the idea that the airport was not shut down by the PAD is unacceptable to most readers here, I think. Yet, people go on saying they are not prosecuted because they are the PAD, and don’t say anything about not being prosecuted because they may not have done anything wrong, in that instance.
That today the president of the Legislative constitutional drafting committee comes out and says the government should thank the PAD is poison to most of you, I believe. But when I watched the PAD coverage and the UDD coverage, it was black and white in the extreme. Of course the PAD did not provide a lot of balance when it came to Ungpakorn and others, but that’s the Yellow shirts. But a lot of their TV coverage was relatively decent compared to the UDD’s TV coverage in which some on stage were actually calling for Prem and Abhisit’s murder!
As to current body count, by the way, is it not UDD-caused two civilian deaths and government zero? Or am I being misled?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
…the issue of the airport, for example: the idea that the airport was not shut down by the PAD is unacceptable to most readers here, I think…
Are you suggesting it was not the PAD who shut down Dom Mueang and Suvarnabhumi Airports for a solid week from 26 November until 4 December last year?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
This is spot on. Recent events have definitely dented the image of the Red campaign although it is no surprise to see them hitting the lows of the PAD protests given the reward the Yellows reaped..
I’m still confused as to why the Reds decided to blockade Victory Monument. They gained very little from it yet the reputation of the movement took a massive hit. Suddenly the government had a genuine reason to label them dangerous and arrest key members, look into shutting down their media and, crucially, convince the public that the movement is a threat to the nation.
The tragedy is that Thailand needs an election, as the Reds have been saying. It remains to be seen if, by demonizing the Reds, the government will be able to prolong/go without election simply because it is a Red objective.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Frank said: the idea that the airport was not shut down by the PAD is unacceptable to most readers here, I think. Yet, people go on saying they are not prosecuted because they are the PAD, and don’t say anything about not being prosecuted because they may not have done anything wrong.
And the PAD guards who blocked the expressway, attacked police and stole their equipment and actually detained one of the police? Did they do anything wrong? Were they prosecuted?
Please don’t come back with that tired “show me proof.” It’s arounf, much of it in links on this blog.
If I come back four months from now and ask you to show me proof that “UDD-caused two civilian deaths and government zero,” what are you going to come up with? Can you meet your own standards? Will you say that is a reasonable question? (I’m not suggesting you are misled, by the way.)
Most of the points at issue have been documented, perhaps not to your satisfaction, here and on Bangkok Pundit by references to material most readily available usually in the Thai press, which hardly gave the PAD a rough time.
P.S. I have not yet found that tape of the September 2008 clashes, but meanwhile bothered to go back and look for what appears to be the best on the ground account, from the Straits Times. The link can be found on this blog but here is the URL address directly:
http://blogs.straitstimes.com/2008/9/2/clash-of-the-thai-tans
I don’t think you actually have less free time than I do, but regardless, you will be doing us all a favor if you can be bothered to find us an account you believe provides a more accurate version of that night’s events, Thai or English.
Then let’s stop this silly tit-for-tat thing we have gotten ourselves into (I’ll take the blame for starting it) and move on to more substantive matters, for which I believe you make valuable and well-informed contributions.
All this stuff just covers old ground, and since no one has stepped up to say, hey, I’ll sort through all the materials and present the best available evidence, we are just talking past each other.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
While it’s true that the few mass rallies called by the Red Shirts were generally free of violence, their movement has certainly committed more than its fair share of violent acts, from attacking Chuan and Abhisit in Chiang Mai, the assault on Prem’s house in 2007, the incidents last year in Udon Thani and Chiang Mai again, etc etc. To characterize their movement as nonviolent is dishonest. I’m not excusing violent actions by the yellows, but let’s stop portraying the reds in such false terms.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
On the (UDD) events at Prem’s residence, see (for the sake of falsehood versus truth in the sense of #16)
http://rspas.anu.edu.au/rmap/newmandala/2008/08/12/revisiting-the-prem-compound-clashes/
For the (PAD) events at Parliament on October 7, 2008, see
http://rspas.anu.edu.au/rmap/newmandala/2008/10/11/what-happened-on-7102008/
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
After the last weekends events (storming ASEAN summit looking for Abhisit, lynch mob as Interior ministry etc etc), is any one here seriously arguing that only one side is violent?
IMO, such an argument would surely diminish the thrust of your line of reasoning, and call into question your objectivity.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
That the yellow shirts had upper level protection is out of doubt. As the least, nobody is charged for endangering international air traffic (in most cases regarded as an act of terrorism). The connection between elites and violence has been amply demonstrated. One only needs to turn to the FFT or to 1992 etc. Taking a certain level of historic depth into consideration, it is cynical to speak of violence perpetrated by the red shirts. If you are attacked violently, and are forced to fight back in a violent way, whose fault is it? In difference to feudal orders, where the lords had the right of life over their subjects, in all democracies the right of resistance against suppression, even in a violent way if necessary, is an integral part of the constitution.
However, one might be contained with (feudal) elite hypocrisy: Killing a farmer is more or less o.k., while a farmer throwing a stone is violent and should be punished! Let’s cite Hamlet: “There is something rotten …”
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
HRK: So do you condone and justify all and any violent acts by the red shirts and Thaksin?
Starting to sound a bit like the drug war to me, except substitute ‘elite’, ‘yellow’, or ‘Abhisit’ for the word ‘drug dealer’.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
So far they have been fairly restrained, but hopefully the current government does not follow it’s predecessors by adding things like ‘communist’ and ‘republican’ to the above list.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0