Red shirts visible again at protests in Bangkok
A grand 'vehicle protest', that was the aim of a demonstration yesterday in the center of Bangkok. The group of demonstrators in cars and motorbikes gathered at the Ratchaprasong intersection and again many red T-shirts and flags were seen. The main demand of the mob: Prayut must leave! He is unable to lead the country through the Corona crisis and back to democracy.
The protest was organized by red shirt leader Nattawut Saikuar, activist Sombat Boonngam-anong and the Tha Lu Fah movement. A special collaboration because the background of the red shirt movement is completely different from that of Tha Lu Fah, which mainly consists of highly educated young people. There were also protests in Chanthaburi, Chon Buri, Chachoengsao and Chiang Mai on Sunday.
Before the procession departed from Ratchaprasong, the red shirt leader stated that the protesters would avoid confrontations with police and stay away from politically sensitive places, including Government House and the prime minister's residence.
Protests in Bangkok were mostly peaceful, but violence broke out at the Din Daeng intersection, the scene of other recent clashes. Police used water cannons, rubber bullets and tear gas to ward off demonstrators who approached the blockade of shipping containers.
Source: Bangkok Post – Photos: teera.noisakran / Shutterstock.com
The “car mob” protests, where people drove through Bangkok in cars and motorcycles to express disapproval of the regime, were largely without incident. They were there around evening, just like in previous days, part of the demonstrators are more than angry. Especially among the youth. They have tried more than once to advance to the military base in the middle of Bangkok where General Prime Minister Prayuth has free room and board (just east of Victory Monument).
With shipping containers, barbed wire, water cannons, tear gas and rubber bullets, the riot police keep the angry crowd at bay. The police do not always use the correct procedures and resources. For example, there are several images of people shot in the upper body, sometimes from point blank range (agent shooting with the weapon centimeters from the demonstrator). That is contrary to how you should use these "non-lethal" weapons. A well-known youthful protester (formerly from the yellow PDRC camp, a member of the Democrats and once drove his Ferrari into red shirts at the time) who is now on the side of the "red" democracy protesters was shot into view this weekend by such a rubber bullet lost his right eye.
The police also have weaponry that is intended for evacuating a room where someone has entrenched themselves and shot directly at people, while the manufacturer indicates that this projectile should be shot through glass windows or thin doors:
https://twitter.com/Nrg8000/status/1426896367755022350
The demonstrators themselves do not always use proportional violence: ping pong bombs, shooting marbles with the slingshot, shooting light and heavy fireworks at police officers. See, for example, Khaosod. Due to tough action by the police and some of the demonstrators, there is a threat of escalation.
In the photo accompanying this article, someone pasted this text on the spine:
# Prayuth ohk Pai (Prayuth fuck off)
Prayuth Get out!! (Prayuth get out!!)
# Prayuth ie-sat (Prayuth dirty dog / Prayuth k*te beast)
Maethap gnoo Naa-kluwa..*unreadable* (Foolish General, Scarier/fearier. *unreadable*)
Visual material: a small selection, for those who want to see photos and film footage from this weekend;
– Thai Enquirer:
https://www.thaienquirer.com/31278/snapshots-from-a-weekend-of-violence/
– Khaosod / Pravit facebook live video and photos:
https://www.facebook.com/pravit.rojanaphruk.5
I'm not sure the billionaires waiting in the shadows to take the helm again have an easy solution to the economic fallout from the COVID crisis.
Yes, the demonstrations are starting again, but they have not learned from the previous times and unfortunately the violence is also present again. Part of the protesters always ruin it for the vast majority and give the protest a negative look. Violence does not achieve anything, it just calls for more violence. I do understand the impotence that affects many and for which it is difficult to find a solution. Prayut and associates will not resign of their own accord. They have made too much effort for this and loss of face is more difficult for them. They also have a specific constituency that must be satisfied. The best man and many army men who are now in politics should have stuck to their last. The profession of a politician is of a different order, this is not in her genes. Fighting is, so that way there is no solution for the protesting people. It must be done through persuasive persuasion. But who is capable of that. Thailand is still ruled by the political powers that are not elected by the people, allied to the people with the big money. In fact, not much different from hundreds of years ago when the nobility and the clergy were in charge. Just give them bread and play doesn't work anymore these days. It is actually fighting a dead end with these kinds of regimes and the Thai people are still very divided with differing opinions. It is important for now to keep your head together and to suppress the pandemic, so that "normal" can be lived again. All parties are important for this and a collaboration must be found that produces results. Fighting each other is a bad choice.
The “car mob” (car/motorcycle protest) has been a good attempt to apply a different strategy, I think. There is less chance of a Covid outbreak if everyone uses vehicles instead of a large crowd of people side by side. I wouldn't call it a violation of the rules on gathering due to Covid either (the police do, by the way). And it still reduces the chance that people throw things or get shot at by the riot police (although last week I will post images on social media of a car where riot police walked past a car, stopped and started to smash the windows ).
From previous protests (2020), there were retrospective interviews with officers who indicated that they themselves were involved, and who questioned the force and power that had been deployed (source: Prachatai? Have you ever included it in a response last year on this blog). It would of course be nice if the demonstrators could generate doubt and sympathy among some of the police officers. After all, this government is following a coup (illegal, the death penalty is on…) and highly debatable elections (the run-up to it, the handling by the electoral council, the undemocratic senate appointed by the junta that allowed Prayuth to become prime minister, etc.). Officers who joined the service with the idea “I want to serve people and society” should be scratching their heads why they would participate in such police actions. Of course, there remains a part of the policemen who wear a uniform because power, belittle, apply legal violence, etc., makes them very happy, supplemented by officers (who are also people) who, after pelting, etc., do not take it too seriously when acting according to the handbook… Those can then fight it out with the part of the citizens who also do not object to violence or find it difficult to restrain themselves. Fortunately, there have been no deaths yet.
A large part of the agents and part of the military are said to be "red inside". A revolution or coup will not easily survive without the use of pressure, means of power and the (threat of) violence. I don't see a kind of "orange coup" around this former NCPO regime and their friends (read: cleaning up the senate, electoral council, ...) happening anytime soon. I do feel sorry for a country that has had little or no democratic figures since May 2014.
What other options are there besides protests? Strikes... also difficult if you can lose your job and income while it's already tough with Covid. Slow action? work strictly according to the rules (they sometimes contradict each other) in order to seriously reduce production? Can perhaps also put some pressure if the ordinary wage slave does not also see their own income plummet towards the abyss… So I would not know of a ready-made solution. It's not going to be easy, but every day that people like Prime Minister General Prayuth, Minister Anutini, the Senate (half full of soldiers!) and so on are sitting on their seats is a day that I consider lost.
Dear Rob,
As you yourself indicate, there is simply very little room to change Thailand into a democracy according to the European model, whereby the question is whether people want that as a population.
There are a few possibilities, ie put it on the agenda every now and then, make the best of it or let it escalate.
The majority of the population is not yet behind these actions and can you blame them if they are not really concerned about it? That you see every day as a lost day since 2014 is of course possible, but do you really believe that the personal life of many Thais has become worse since then and corona left out?
I have no idea what "democracy on the European model" is. There are quite a few differences in this interpretation within Europe and other Western countries. Think of whether or not to have a president, a single chamber or a separate senate and parliament, the appointment of those representatives, the exact method of voting, distribution keys and so on. Each country must indicate its own interpretation there, the Thai can easily decide for themselves how to put together a good parliament in which certain clubs do not have a disproportionate or unreasonable amount or little to crumble in the (coconut) milk. Which Thai doesn't want that? The ones who now of course benefit at the expense of the others. Enough grabbers at the top who have beaten down the plebs with a hard, bloody hand over the past century.
And yes, I think that with a more representative and democratic parliament, things would have gone less badly, less unfairly, than they do now. Obviously not perfect, the entire system of networks and elites that parasitize at the expense of the plebs cannot be solved just like that… if profiting and exploiting at the expense of another can be reduced to virtually zero at all…
Dear Rob, peaceful protests will not involve violence on either side. The change that often takes place gives rise to the use of violence. The monopoly of violence is in the hands of the government (police and army). I agree with you that an important component for the performance of the police task, namely discipline and the correct use of force, is lacking in a considerable number of those involved. This is not only observed in Thailand. Something really needs to be done about this, because it damages the organization itself and the trust of the public. Depending on the basis of the violent abuse, punishments should be imposed and no cuts should be made in the granting of dismissal. Not capable then get out, find another job. A police officer has more powers, but they must be used in accordance with the prescribed rules. That certainly requires restraint and thinking before you act. In addition, there are too few people with sufficient self-knowledge, including among the police officers. So resigning of your own accord will not be seen soon. It would be a great turnaround if the police leadership (people) would turn against government policy and take a clear position on the whole. Command is command is an outdated idea that may only need to take place on a real battlefield in a war situation. That is not the case here. We should have already seen this in Myanmar, where it is still doom and gloom and where we hear very little about the resolving atmosphere.
The demonstrations are spreading to other cities as well, including as I heard in Lamphun-Chiangmai and Lampang, I saw myself on TV here in Sisaket.
What strikes me is that Thanatorn from Futere Forward and his fellow companions keep quiet, he may already be in prison.
Or am I missing something.
In my opinion, now is the time for him to give his mouth a good stir.
Return of the red shirts with that family from Dubai won't get us anywhere with this.
Getting old cows out of the ditch for the umpteenth time.
Thailand is in desperate need of new management and not that dusty club that has been running the show here for years with its own financial gain as the ultimate goal. But I once mounted a nice loud air horn on my Mitsh, would like to participate.
Jan Beute.
The farmers and workers in the small northern Thai where we live put it this way:
“The big fish always eat the most, but at least Thaksin left something for the small fish. Now the big fish gobble up everything and there is nothing left for the little ones.”
The Red Shirt movement is essentially a farmers and workers movement. The party is its political emanation. The party was weakened by opportunistic defection and internal strife. The political soldiers even managed to lure some of them into their camp. The political branch of the Forward movement was spared this. Their image therefore remained pure. Many villagers say this is only because they have never touched the large meat pots in Krungthep. For them, the Forward leaders are also big fish and are no different from the others.
The Forward movement is rooted in the intellectual milieus, urban, netizens and middle class. She also scored well electorally among young people in more rural areas.
The traditional red shirt supporters are suspicious of the Forwarders' "innovation". I have the impression that the Red Shirt base is not too much in touch with the thinking and living world of the Forward base, and vice versa.
I find it remarkable the speed and vehemence with which nr.10 and its institute have recently lost support among the rural population. Until recently, papa was idolized there as if he were the Buddha himself. The “Siam Bioscence story” seems to be the reason that makes the bucket overflow. Villagers regularly trot out with very “beautifully told” stories about “lavish debauchery” (to put it diplomatically). They ask my wife and me if all this is true. We should know that because we have lived there for 40 years where he also resides. We always answer that talking about it is forbidden by law in Thailand. The truth and nothing but the truth 🙂
Private indulgences are found throughout the world's jet set, from royals (Edward, Juan Carlos, Albert II, etc.) to politicians (Trump, Johnson, Prawit, Como) to movie stars (Pitt, Jolie, Weinberg) and sports heroes. ' (Owen, Neymar, Ronaldo etc). Of course that influences the image that people have of such a person.
However, it has very little to do with the formal or informal power these individuals hold based on their position in society. If you can't separate the two, you can only come to the wrong conclusions.
Chris, no matter how you look at it, power corrupts. The winner takes it all…
Yes, but some persons have no formal power…..
Only informally and that is only possible because the formal leaders allow it….
…and not only in Thailand.
Just think of some other ASEAN countries: Myanmar, Laos, Vientnam, Brunei, Cambodia, Malaysia and even Singapore, where the same oligarchy has been in power since their independence: “The winner takes it all” applies everywhere.
Dear Chris, the comparison you make with other crowned heads in the world is flawed. Let's stick to crowned heads and not make an amalgam with sports stars, jet-set, starlet and presidents with personality disorders.
I never saw the quasi-divine adoration of number 9 by almost the entire population of a country in other countries. His portrait still hangs in the smallest hovel. TiT.
In this sense, the "defection" of the ordinary Thai and his questions about the son are remarkable.
I don't know much about the formal or informal power of the crowned head of state. Someone who claims to have contacts in royal HiSo circles could. 🙂
There are some events that show that the separation of powers, in particular and the position of the crowned head of state in the Thai political spectrum, are very different from those of, say, Willem-Alexander, van Oranje Nassau, Filip van België, or even the Queen. . (e.g. a sister that was banned from a list, or assets in a royal foundation that were registered, or an extreme share in a pharmaceutical company)
If you don't see and distinguish that properly, you will not only come to the wrong conclusions, but your argument will be based on wrong premises. Better to test empirically scientifically first, before making deductions and associations based on incorrect premises, right?
I try to represent what lives in a small rural village in Northern Thailand, as a privileged witness ... and that will undoubtedly not be exactly the same as in metropolis Krungthep. But if you tell me, I will read with pleasure. 🙂
“a sister that was excluded from a list, or assets in a royal foundation that were registered, or an extreme share in a pharmaceutical company”
Apart from the first example (it could lead to an important conflict of interest; I think that Willem-Alexander would also 'call to order' Prince Bernhard if he wanted to become party leader of the VVD), these matters have nothing to do with with the political power of R10. The Crown Property is an organization ('foundation') that manages the wealth of the Chakri dynasty (not just R10). Changes in this are not a state affair but a family affair.
Have you ever heard that many royalty have shares in companies, for example, Shell??? What's wrong with that?
Let's get off topic, but let's set it straight:
– she is no longer a princess, a better comparison would be “suppose former Prince Harry is running on behalf of *insert party set up by multimillionaire* here”
– The CPB is a kind of foundation that manages both strictly personal property and property of the monarch as title. The latter is something that used to be handled by a team of people, partly appointed by the government. Since 2018, the law has changed and the government no longer has any say in it. So this is not the same as say our WA with or without personal shares in a Shell or something.
These topics are also sensitive and off topic so I'll stick to this. The enthusiast can find out more via Google with the right keywords.
Dear Mark,
“Villagers regularly come trotting along with very “beautifully told” stories about “lavish debauchery” (to put it diplomatically). They ask my wife and me if that is all true.”
If this is hearsay and they don't know how to figure it out for themselves how can one choose who to vote for in elections? There is a good chance that 500 baht determines the choice, which is not really democratic and that it was less in the last elections, which may have a lot to do with a mistake in the past. If the payers cheat, can't that also be compensated by another measure so as not to short-change the hard-working middle class or the cash cow?
Protesting must have a clear purpose. And that is not the removal of the Prayut government, but the creation of a general and political climate that the government either resigns itself or is dismissed by parliament. This is done through so-called public opinion: the feeling of the majority of the people that the government had better resign. Now the various opinion polls show that that majority has long been achieved. So there is no strict need to protest beyond emphasizing the feelings of the majority. I don't think that happens by driving around Bangkok (and other cities) with a few thousand mopeds and cars and honking loudly at 6 o'clock. Then they confront the police or the police with the demonstrators to make them look bad in the press. And that seems to be working because the support for these car protests is very low, not counting the Covid vicissitudes everywhere, but especially in the minds of the Thai people. Furthermore, the whole discussion is diverted to the question of who started it and whether the methods used are allowed, instead of the support for the demonstration requirement. It is completely snowed under.
It is high time (and perhaps too late in view of the confidence debate in parliament soon) to find allies in parliament to support a motion of no confidence. Of course you should not wait until the day of the debate, but work behind the scenes. There are/were clear voices from some coalition parties that they do want to get rid of Prayut.
So far, no opposition party has publicly spoken out for the protesters, let alone any party (or MPs) that is part of the coalition. I think that means that the demonstrators have no real connection with the political business in this country. One of the reasons, I think, is that the protest movement started with a laundry list of demands (from reform of the monarchy to abolishing Wai Kru) that has created division rather than cooperation/concord. No MP or party can agree with all the demands and so support has diluted.
Chris, there are several ways to reach a goal. The primary goal is for this government clique (Prayuth & co) to leave. The regime can of course resign itself, be voted out (note: how fair, free and representative the elections were and therefore the parliament is seriously under discussion, don't forget the senate appointed by the junta that can vote in many areas and Prayuth's grip on parliament). But a parliament can also be chased away from the outside (revolution, coup, …). Sending a regime away through democratic channels would personally be my preference, but if those in power don't care about democracy, other options cannot be ruled out, I think...
And why should demonstrators give up their pressure when Prayuth & co's resignation may be imminent? Stop just before the finish line? In addition, there are other requirements than just the resignation of Prayuth. Now there are various protest groups active, but the overarching three main demands are:
1 – Get rid of Prayuth and his government (often people also hint at the not exactly democratic senate, which should also be gone so that Prayuth does not have a lead again in new elections).
2- Reforming the constitution (the current one is not determined from, for and by the people, so the demand is a constitution that makes the country more democratic. See also iLaw).
3- stop violence against civilians (think of the arrests under Article 112, 116, etc., the various disappearances, the pressure from those in power through “talks” to stop the struggle, etc.)
3b- Reform of monarchy (monarch under the constitution, etc.) This point is more sensitive, so it is not the third point for all groups.
These were the main requirements from day one, read the newspapers from a year ago again. The first speeches of the Free Youth group and the Thammasat group caused quite a stir. Additional/secondary wishes were added later on. Logical, of course, because there are more frustrations / wishes among the population than just those three / four points. Depending on the situation, these other demands are also expressed (education reform, covid approach, you name it, there are many things where people want change). But the main demands, headed by the resignation of these rulers, are not exactly unclear, are they? Every protest again we hear sounds that Prayuth and his club have to leave.
Also don't forget that there are several groups demonstrating, where there is also talk of overlap, joint action or participation, and so on. Of course, the groups do not agree 100% with each other. The main groups:
– Free Youth movement / Restart Democracy (ReDem); เยาวชนปลดแอก. Organize mostly through (online) voting on how, what and where to give substance to the demonstrations. In the background, Tattep 'Ford', among others, is in charge.
– United Front of Thammasat and Demonstration (UFTD); image. This under the leadership of Parit “Penguin” and Panusaya “Rung” (Roeng).
– Talu Fah (Thaloe Faa) or “Punch the sky”; ทะลุฟ้า . Head piece is Jatupat “Pai Dao Din”.
And of course the old guard, the red shirts (Democracy against Dictatorship, UDD) who initially kept their heads down but increasingly made themselves heard. Chief among others is Nattawut
Dear Rob,
“Sending a regime away through democratic channels would personally be my preference, but if those in power care about democracy, other options cannot be ruled out, I think…”
Now I'm genuinely curious what you mean by other options. You think so so there is a direction that you can indicate.
Dear Johnny, it wouldn't be the first time in history that a civilian and/or (sometimes) military has removed an undemocratic or semi-democratic regime from power. As I said: revolution, coup and so on.
Not that I see that happening anytime soon in Thailand. Another 1932 is not likely and the coups in the country since then have not been to restore democracy. A revolution is also not obvious, then the people have to be a lot angrier and it usually goes bloody… rather not.
Who has the golden tip to make a "less democratic" regime fall from its pedestal so that there can be a people's representation in the senate and parliament that are representative of the citizens, with a people's constitution as a foundation?
just a few notes:
– if you take democracy seriously, you send a government home democratically. That is not easy, not in Thailand, nor in the Netherlands. And it seems that it is also becoming increasingly difficult because EVERYWHERE the rulers are tied to their seats...... And Rutte also thinks he will return as prime minister, doesn't he?
– you must stop demonstrating if the means does not bring the goal closer but, on the contrary, takes it further away. And that's the case now, I think. Many people sympathize with the main demand, a minority with the chosen strategy. The result: you get public opinion against you. And you won't get that back by claiming that the police are overreacting. On the contrary: the people (certainly outside Bangkok where most Thais live) are fed up with such discussions.
-if you want to succeed with your democratic power you have to enlist politicians who agree with you and influence MPs. Politicians who have prestige and/or are no longer in direct politics. Not politicians from the opposition parties, but 'neutral fringe figures'. So not Nattawut and not Abhisit. In the 70s, the student movement did not opt for Marcus Bakker (CPN) or van der Spek (PSP) but for someone like De Gaaij Fortman or Jan Terlouw.
But Chris, how do you send a government home democratically when the government is cheating? If a prime minister has come to power through a coup, has thrown the constitution in the trash and, through an unfree referendum, has set up a copy with the heels over the ditch that is better suited to the club of those in power, and if after extremely questionable elections, the prime minister then manages to regain his position because the senate is half full of high-ranking soldiers and appointed by the same prime minister and cronies… then democracy is behind 1-0, isn't it? Winning against a cheater with fair play is quite a challenge…
Wouldn't it be better to start with a clean slate? A reset with a people's constitution, free elections for which all parties have had ample time to prepare, with above all doubt objective / neutral arbitrators so that the people's representation that will then be established in the parliament and senate will simply be a good reflection of all the people?
You simply cannot send a regime that has not or not fully democratically got into the saddle in a democratic way… Those demonstrations are there for a reason, a sign of impotence because the normal roads are full of blockades.