BANGKOK - Thailand's army declared martial law nationwide on Tuesday to restore order after six months of street protests that have left the country without a proper functioning government, but denied that the surprise move amounted to a military coup.
While troops patrolled parts of Bangkok, the caretaker government led by supporters of self-exiled former premier Thaksin Shinawatra was still in office, military and government officials said.
Ministers were not informed of the army's plan before the announcement on television at 3 a.m. (4 p.m. EDT on Monday).
Army chief General Prayuth Chan-ocha said the military was taking charge of public security because of violent protests that had claimed lives and caused damage. Nearly 30 people have been killed since the protests began in November last year.
Prayuth said. "I'm asking all those activist groups to stop all activities and cooperate with us in seeking a way out of this crisis."
Both pro- and anti-government protesters are camped out at different places in the capital and, to prevent clashes, the army ordered them to remain where they were and not march anywhere. The army also called on media not to broadcast material that would affect national security and ordered 10 satellite TV channels, including both pro- and anti-government stations, to stop broadcasting.
The caretaker government, wary of the army given its past interventions on the side of the establishment, welcomed the move to restore order. It said it had not been informed but it was still running the country.
"The government doesn't have a problem with this and can govern the country as normal," caretaker Justice Minister Chaikasem Nitisiri, told Reuters."
This is a very peculiar situation. One that you will not see happened in many democratic societies and nations. However, the army has on many occasions, intervened in politics to form the government in the past. This one is not a coup but just to restore peace and laws and orders. Let's see how it plays out.
Lessons for me are:
1. in a democracy, the majority should rule. Yet, the government elected by the popular votes are not allowed to govern as the minority claimed that it is corrupt, weak and incompetent. Is this the tyranny of the minority?;
2. yet when the analysis done by the educated and intelligent critics and academic groups were shared, it was clear that there were corruption, incompetence, questionable business practices and the suspicion of a 'shadow shogun'! Can democracy work when there are the 'not so educated just pay me and I will vote for you' majority vs. the 'hey something is obviously wrong here with the data and information I had just analysed' minority in the voting population? is there a tyranny of the majority here instead?;
3. whatever the situation, in a country with a huge population and big land mass that are not evenly developed, this potential imbalance exist. Singapore is blessed in that it is a very small nation with a diverse voting population united by a common language, English mainly, among the different races, and the desire to just 'lead a good life in peace, harmony and prosperity'. When these goals can be seen to be achievable, the people will stay quite united. If not, there may be factions like what we see in our neighbours.
The recent rumbling of 'this vs. that' or 'them vs. us', etc may be due to increasing divergence in income growth, unbalance distribution of the fruits of rapid growth, the wealth, etc.
Hopefully it is just the start of the divergence and we still have time to close the gap before it become really hard to bridge and people really dig into their position to demand what they perceived to be 'rightly ours but not given'!
There are many actions and policies by the government towards this end. I am hopeful that we will not face the situation in our neighbours anytime soon.
While troops patrolled parts of Bangkok, the caretaker government led by supporters of self-exiled former premier Thaksin Shinawatra was still in office, military and government officials said.
Ministers were not informed of the army's plan before the announcement on television at 3 a.m. (4 p.m. EDT on Monday).
Army chief General Prayuth Chan-ocha said the military was taking charge of public security because of violent protests that had claimed lives and caused damage. Nearly 30 people have been killed since the protests began in November last year.
Prayuth said. "I'm asking all those activist groups to stop all activities and cooperate with us in seeking a way out of this crisis."
Both pro- and anti-government protesters are camped out at different places in the capital and, to prevent clashes, the army ordered them to remain where they were and not march anywhere. The army also called on media not to broadcast material that would affect national security and ordered 10 satellite TV channels, including both pro- and anti-government stations, to stop broadcasting.
The caretaker government, wary of the army given its past interventions on the side of the establishment, welcomed the move to restore order. It said it had not been informed but it was still running the country.
"The government doesn't have a problem with this and can govern the country as normal," caretaker Justice Minister Chaikasem Nitisiri, told Reuters."
This is a very peculiar situation. One that you will not see happened in many democratic societies and nations. However, the army has on many occasions, intervened in politics to form the government in the past. This one is not a coup but just to restore peace and laws and orders. Let's see how it plays out.
Lessons for me are:
1. in a democracy, the majority should rule. Yet, the government elected by the popular votes are not allowed to govern as the minority claimed that it is corrupt, weak and incompetent. Is this the tyranny of the minority?;
2. yet when the analysis done by the educated and intelligent critics and academic groups were shared, it was clear that there were corruption, incompetence, questionable business practices and the suspicion of a 'shadow shogun'! Can democracy work when there are the 'not so educated just pay me and I will vote for you' majority vs. the 'hey something is obviously wrong here with the data and information I had just analysed' minority in the voting population? is there a tyranny of the majority here instead?;
3. whatever the situation, in a country with a huge population and big land mass that are not evenly developed, this potential imbalance exist. Singapore is blessed in that it is a very small nation with a diverse voting population united by a common language, English mainly, among the different races, and the desire to just 'lead a good life in peace, harmony and prosperity'. When these goals can be seen to be achievable, the people will stay quite united. If not, there may be factions like what we see in our neighbours.
The recent rumbling of 'this vs. that' or 'them vs. us', etc may be due to increasing divergence in income growth, unbalance distribution of the fruits of rapid growth, the wealth, etc.
Hopefully it is just the start of the divergence and we still have time to close the gap before it become really hard to bridge and people really dig into their position to demand what they perceived to be 'rightly ours but not given'!
There are many actions and policies by the government towards this end. I am hopeful that we will not face the situation in our neighbours anytime soon.
No comments:
Post a Comment