Thailand's Color War

By Michele Hong

In a Thai color war of red versus yellow, the latter squeezed to the top in Sunday’s parliamentary by-election — but was this merely a battle in a larger war?

Despite the weekend defeat of Thailand’s biggest opposition group, the so-called red shirts, the results of the vote have demonstrated strong public support for the insurgents and indicated that political strife is not to be overcome easily. Since anti-government protests began in mid-May, the country has experienced its most turbulent and violent period in recent history. While direct fighting has largely subsided, a bombing in Bangkok’s city center during the election was the first fatal incident since May, killing one person and injuring several others.

The incumbent People’s Alliance for Democracy, or colloquially, the yellow shirts, defeated the red shirts by a small eight percent margin, although voter turnout was only 50 percent.  The former deputy mayor, Panich Vikitsareth, was pitted against the Pua Thai party leader Korkaew Pikulthong, who ran his campaign from jail.

While the government has branded the red shirts as terrorists, the group has nevertheless gained a large support base within the population since the anti-government clashes, in which it demanded social equality for the lower classes. The unrest led the Thai government to place the entire country under emergency rule in April after street demonstrations killed 90 people and injured 1,800. On Monday, it extended emergency decree in Bangkok, allowing it to censor and silence media outlets, detain suspects for 30 days without charge, and ban public gatherings of more than five people.

Although the continuation of emergency rule is the government’s way of exerting control during a particularly volatile time, a crackdown on civil liberties may only be working to broaden the red shirt support base. By prohibiting forms of public expression — namely radio and television stations that demand greater political participation for the poor — the government may be threatening societal peace and stability itself. Such staunch exclusion of a political group that pushes lower-class rights could obliterate chances for national reconciliation.

A survey by Suan Dusit Poll this week found that half of Bangkok’s residents support the emergency rule, which still leaves open the question of how much of the other half sympathizes with the political dissent. In early July, the government extended emergency decree even after the initial violence had died down into what seemed to be a return of peacefulness. While it justifies this extension with Sunday’s incident, the bombing was only in Bangkok.

Emergency decree may have been understandable as a very short pronouncement in the heat of violence. However, as rioting has since passed, the government may be hurting itself by continuing this rule instead of truly addressing red-shirt grievances and opening dialogue. While it is necessary for the government to assert its power, one of the most direct ways to foster terrorism and push the movement underground is to clamp down on political expression. It has happened in other countries far too often. If either color dominates this war, the results could be disastrous.

Photo courtesy of Althea Smith