Bangkok, October 14, 1973

(Worchi Zingkhai / Shutterstock.com)

It seems very likely that October 14 will lead to a new upsurge of anti-regime protests in Bangkok. It is absolutely no coincidence that the protesters will take to the streets again on that very day. October 14 is a very symbolic date because on that day in 1973 the dictatorial rule of Field Marshal Thanom Kittikachorn came to an end. I also bring this story to indicate how past and present can become intertwined and how striking historical parallels can be established between Bangkok in 1973 and Bangkok in 2020.

In fact, the manifest presence of the military in Siamese and later Thai politics has been around for nearly a century. Shortly after the coup that ended the absolutist monarchy in 1932, the military in the person of Field Marshal and Prime Minister Plaek Phibunsongkhram increasingly came to dominate Thai politics. But it was after the military coup of 1957 that brought Chief of Staff Sarit Thanarat to power that the military really managed to consolidate their power. The years of his military dictatorship were marked by strong economic growth, not only as a result of the booming world economy, but also of the Korean and Vietnam wars.

This growth caused profound changes in Thai society. Until then, the predominantly rural Thai society was hit by a particularly rapid wave of industrialization, which in turn caused a mass migration from the countryside to the big city. Hundreds of thousands left for Bangkok in those years, especially from the impoverished Isaan in search of a better life. However, they were often disappointed because it was mainly the middle class that benefited from the markedly strengthened economic climate. Despite the economic growth, living conditions under the regime of Sarit Thanarat and his successor, Field Marshal Thanom Kittikachorn, hardly improved for the masses. And this led to rapidly escalating political unrest.

By early 1973, the minimum wage, which had been around 10 baht per working day since the mid-50s, had remained unchanged, while the price of foodstuffs had risen by 1973%. Despite the fact that trade unions were banned, the increasing social unrest led to a whole series of illegal strikes. In the first nine months of 40 alone, there were more than XNUMX major strikes across the country and a complete month-long stoppage of work in the Thai Steel Company even led to some, albeit hesitant, concessions. At the same time, the economic cycle caused a spectacular increase in student numbers, which came from the middle and lower classes. While just under 1961 students were enrolled in 15.000, this number had grown to more than 1972 in 50.000. What made this generation of students different from their predecessors was their political commitment. The student revolt of May 68 had not gone unnoticed either. Influenced by figures such as Mao Zedong, Ho Chi Minh or in his own country the writer Chit Phumisak or the progressive intellectuals around the radical magazine Social Science Review, they began to focus on themes such as the democratization of education, the social struggle in the factories and the impoverishment of the countryside.

One of the main drivers in this awareness-raising process has been the interuniversity National Student Center of Thailand (NSCT). Initially started as a good patriotic and pro-royalist student club, the NSCT, led by the student leader Thirayuth Boonmee, evolved into an outspoken socially critical organization that provided a mouthpiece for dissidents and critics of the regime. The NSCT not only hosted all kinds of political and social discussion groups, but also developed into a platform for concrete action. For example, they campaigned against the increase in fares in Bangkok's urban transport system, but also, in November 1972, against Japanese products flooding the Thai market. Buoyed by the success of these high-profile campaigns, NSCT turned against a military junta decree a month later that placed the judiciary directly under its bureaucratic control. After a series of actions at various universities, the junta withdrew the controversial decree a few days later. Perhaps to their own surprise, these contestants discovered that they could exert maximum influence – even over an autocratic regime – with a minimum of effort…

It gradually became clear that the regime and the students were on a collision course. In June 1973, a number of Ramkhamhaeng University students were expelled for publishing a satirical piece about the government. However, the spark was in the powder keg when on October 6, Thirayuth Boonmee and ten of his supporters were arrested for distributing pamphlets proposing a constitutional reform in crowded places in central Bangkok. Two days later, the court refused to release them on bail, accusing Deputy Prime Minister and Chief of National Police Praphas Charusathien of plotting a coup d'etat. This was the gate of the dam. The following day, more than 2.000 students showed up for an anti-junta meeting at Thamasat University. It was the start of a series of demonstrations and actions that quickly gained the support of non-students. On October 11, the police already counted more than 50.000 demonstrators. Two days later, this group of protesters had grown to more than 400.000.

Student protest at Chulalongkorn University (NanWdc / Shutterstock.com)

Faced with this force majeure, the government backed down and decided to grant their main demand, the release of the detained students. She also immediately announced a revision of the constitution, but more than half of the demonstrators thought this was too little and above all too late. Under the leadership of Sexan Prasertkul, another NSCT leader, they marched to the palace to seek advice from King Bhumobol. In the early morning of October 14, the crowd reached the palace where a representative of the king asked the student leaders to end the demonstration. They agreed to this request, but chaos ensued when the assistant chief of police ordered barriers to be erected to divert the crowd. The chaos turned into panic when some explosions, possibly by throwing hand grenades, took place. This was the signal for the security forces to turn out en masse and supported by armored vehicles and helicopters, to disperse the masses using tear gas and live ammunition.

77 demonstrators were killed while 857 were injured. However, the excessive force used against the unarmed demonstrators had the opposite effect. Hundreds of thousands joined the demonstrators and in the late afternoon more than half a million demonstrators poured through the streets of the Thai capital, prepared for the ultimate confrontation with the security forces. It soon became, and for even the most reactionary hardliners clear that the regime simply could not shoot everyone to protect its own interests. In addition, the risk of a real urban guerrilla grew by the hour. There was looting here and there and especially on Ratchadamnoen Road near the Democracy Monument, buildings were set on fire here and there. One militant student group, the so-called 'Yellow Tigers' which had previously come under fire from the police, a fire pump truck filled with petrol and used it as a flamethrower against a police station on the Pam Fa Bridge. The seriousness of the situation became clear to everyone and reached a dramatic climax in the evening when King Bhumibol himself announced the resignation of the Thanom cabinet on radio and TV at 19.15 pm. However, it remained restless during the night and also the next morning because the demonstrators meanwhile also demanded the resignation of Thanom Kittikachorn as army chief of staff. However, peace was restored when it became known that Thanom, along with his right-hand man Praphas Charusathien and his son, Colonel Narong Kittikachorn, had fled the country…

The events not only confirmed the growing influence of politically conscious students and intellectuals on political mores in Thailand. They particularly shook the leading classes to their foundations. After all, this was not just a student campaign for more democracy. What started as a limited protest of a handful of intellectuals quickly and spontaneously grew into a broad mass movement. It was the first time in Thailand's turbulent history that the Pu Noi -the little guys – had taken to the streets en masse and unleashed a revolt from below. It was unplanned and those who took part in it had the most diverse ideas about democracy and the society they aspired to. Without a clear leadership and without a clear political agenda, they managed to oust a despot they considered untouchable

However, this story did not know happy end. The increasingly vocal students and the - modest - electoral success of left-wing parties in the elections in January 1975 became more and more a thorn in the side of the royalists and other reactionary forces and on the evening of 6 October 1976 the situation escalated completely when police, army and para-military stormed the campus of Thamasat University and smothered the Thai Spring in blood.