• 

• OPINION ASIA
• MAY 29, 2010

Thai-Style 'Reconciliation'

The government's post-crackdown plan doesn't set a date for free and fair elections.

Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva is back in public view and busy pushing his ideas for national "reconciliation," a catchword that he mentioned nine times in opening remarks to foreign diplomats in a speech Saturday. The premier is clearly trying to move the national political debate beyond his government's recent, bloody crackdown on pro-democracy protestors that resulted in the deaths of at least 88 people. But what little he's said and done since then suggests his version of reconciliation is so far little different than his military-backed predecessor's approach.

Start with the protestors' main demand: a free and fair national election that enfranchises all Thais, especially those living in rural areas. Mr. Abhisit acknowledged Saturday that the country's rural poor have "legitimate grievances," but would not commit to holding an early election. If anything, he's pushing the date back by putting conditions on its arrival. He now wants "a strong economic recovery" and a "peaceful environment" before a ballot is held. That could be a long time coming, especially if global growth slows again. The longer until an election, the more frustrated the so-called "red shirt" movement, backed by the United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship, will be, and the less they'll trust Bangkok's promises.

In the meantime, the Abhisit administration is making strident efforts to control political speech and give pro-government views a megaphone. Over the past two weeks, government authorities have blocked hundred of pro-democracy websites; banned red-shirt publications; and raided community radio stations across the north and northeastern provinces. These actions are legal under Thailand's emergency laws. The signal they send however is that of an administration afraid of a lively and open public debate. Indeed, part of Mr. Abhisit's five-point plan for national reconciliation includes establishing a body to regulate media. Its parameters have yet to be clearly defined.

Mr. Abhisit also seems intent to focus much of his administration's energies on the prosecution of democratically elected former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, who was ejected from office in 2006 by a military coup. On Tuesday the Criminal Court issued a warrant for Mr. Thaksin's arrest on the charge of terrorism for allegedly instigating the demonstrations. Mr. Thaksin vociferously denied the charges and labeled the protestors "grass-roots farmers." The pursuit of Mr. Thaksin will be popular among Bangkok's elite, sections of the military and the bureaucracy. But it may only inflame the one segment of the population that's crucial for real "reconciliation": the rural voters who elected Mr. Thaksin or his supporters in four consecutive elections.

Taken together, these acts show that while Mr. Abhisit may be sincere in his wish to achieve national reconciliation, he wants to achieve it on his terms and on his timetable, without a vibrant and open public debate. This kind of managed democracy will be familiar to those in Russia and Burma, whose leaders also claim to support suffrage. It will also be familiar to Thais, who have heard military-backed rulers call for vaguely defined "reconciliation" umpteen times in the past.

That history teaches that managed democracy won't solve Thailand's ever-deepening political divides, it will only make them worse. If Mr. Abhisit really wants to move the country forward from this month's bloody street confrontations, he'll have to subject his government to elections, and risk winning or losing along with the other candidates. That would be real "reconciliation," and it would take real courage.