|
By Charlie McDonald-Gibson, Agence France-Presse
BANGKOK: A state of emergency and clashes in
Bangkok recall the Thai military’s Bloody May 1992 crackdown, but
analysts say the generals now want to play referee rather than
enforcers of order.
Supporters and opponents of Prime Minister Samak
Sundaravej clashed early Tuesday leaving one person dead and 44
injured, in the worst outbreak of violence since anti-government
protesters stormed Thailand’s main government complex one week
ago.
Thitinan Pongsudhirak, a political scientist at
Bangkok’s Chulalongkorn University, said the clashes were the
deadliest political violence since Bloody May, when 52 protesters
were killed by the army.
“It’s protesters versus protesters and the
worst scenario for us is civil strife,” he told AFP. “That’s
why the emergency decree had to be employed to keep things from
spiraling in that direction.”
In an effort to end the week-long siege of his
offices, Samak on Tuesday declared emergency rule in Bangkok,
tasking army chief Anupong Paojinda to quel the unrest.
Anupong said he would not use force to disperse
protesters, but would instead try to negotiate an end to the crisis.
“There is an interesting twist that the army
apparently doesn’t want to be the enforcer of the emergency
decree, they don’t want blood on their hands,” said Sunai Phasuk,
Thailand consultant for Human Rights Watch.
“I can’t see any ending, how this crisis is
going to unfold,” he added.
The current conflict puts the military in a new
position: Protesters who defied the state on May 18, 1992, were
fighting for an end to military rule and a return to a civilian
government.
But the People’s Alliance for Democracy (PAD)
currently challenging Samak is not what its name implies; the PAD
wants to overthrow the elected premier and install a government with
only 30 percent of lawmakers elected by the people.
Instead of openly confronting the protesters as
in 1992, the military is now playing a delicate balancing act.
“The military is not in direct conflict with the PAD—it is more
a power broker,” said political analyst Panitan Wattanayagorn,
an international relations specialist at Bangkok’s Chulalongkorn
University.
“This time the military is a middle man. They
have more room to maneuver, they have more flexibility.”
Asking the military to intervene in politics
means walking a fine line in a nation that has seen 18 coups since
the end of absolute monarchy in 1932.
The 1992 crisis came after a coup a year
earlier. Army-installed premier Suchinda Krapayoon refused to vacate
the primeminister’s chair despite elections, prompting tens of
thousands of Thais to take to the streets.
|
