Govt-students 'ceasefire' has not cleared the air

Student activism and military autocracy or dictatorship are like oil and water. Although the tension caused by the recent arrest of 14 anti-government student activists has subsided following their temporary release, all fingers have remained crossed. Such a confrontation was always dangerous in “black and white” times, and it’s a lot more so when Thailand is badly divided, when either “black” or “white” can be seen as grey.

Society has treated the students’ detention the same as other political issues. Pro-government people have expressed strong suspicion about the students’ motives and spoken about possible masterminds lurking behind the scenes, while supporters said the arrests simply underlined the lack of tolerance and understanding of democracy; cue foreign organisations, foreign governments and a combative prime minister. 

The past two weeks were extremely tense and unpleasant.

It seems both sides have taken a step back. The students’ release served, at least for now, their demands that they must not be tried in a military court. The activists have admitted, at least privately, that they were under social scrutiny themselves, so their continued campaign should not be perceived as being under certain political influences. In short, the government is getting careful and cautious, and so are the students.

Our divided society has been critical of both sides. But in the end, both the government and the students must have received valuable messages. Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha, who was belligerent at first, talking about masterminds and conspiracies, has failed to present credible evidence to back that up and started to describe student activism as “pure power”. The students were asked a lot of questions, one of them being, where were they when anti-government protesters died in explosions or other forms of violence when the country was under civilrules?

Prayut will face more tests. He 

has always stated that he was 

not against democracy, and the coup was meant to prevent Thailand 

from slipping into a civil war. But his critics have declared that they 

were “right all along”. As a proof, they point to the students’ arrest, which took place when the political situation was calm compared to what is certain to come when charter reform gets into higher gears. The critics are asking ‘Why does Prayut think he has the credentials to establish true democracy now that he has flunked 

a relatively easy democratic exam?’

His opponents, however, face tough democratic questions, too. Emerging from Thailand’s political chaos is an acknowledgement that democracy is not just about elections. Effective checks and balances and anti-graft mechanisms are equally important for a healthy and sustainable democracy. Pro-democracy activists campaigning against military rule must address this issue as well.

Many believe the showdown between Prayut and student activists is a prelude to something worse. But if both sides are sincere, lessons learned from it can lead to something beneficial. Thailand’s situation is crying out for constructive debate, with everybody engaged. Optimistically speaking, constructive debate is sometimes the result of the realisation that a collision course is mutually detrimental.

We hope both sides understand their roles and will play them with integrity. Thailand is rolling towards uncharted territory where everything could be unpredictable and fragile. Patriotism can be misunderstood, or misguided, or pit those with the same goals against each other.

Truly understanding the other side, however, can bring about a solid first step.