But now many people are questioning not only the lack of progress in achieving that goal, but also the merit of a unity that is in fact artificial and even counterproductive to the furtherance of democracy in this country.

"National reconciliation [to the coup-makers] so far means shutting down political space for dissenting views," said Kanokrat Lertchoosakul, a Chulalongkorn University political scientist.

"The way the military handled the dissension to foster unity tells me it does not have a clue about the complexity of political conflicts during Thaksin's time.

"After all, the coup-makers are the generation that missed out on the democratisation process in the country over the past 15 years."

The military's quashing of opposition may reflect a misunderstanding that the pro-Thaksin and anti-coup elements are a homogeneous conglomeration of grass-roots supporters and urban poor who have been paid by Thaksin, and of intellectuals and activists who hold overly rigid ideas about democracy.

"But not everybody who supported Thaksin was paid," the young political scientist said. "Many of his rural supporters felt they were receiving tangible benefits from his leadership. Despite criticisms for being populist, his policies touched right at people's problems. Chatting with taxi drivers today, I find them still talking about how the Bt30-healthcare scheme and village fund saved their lives at a crucial moment."

Je Jiew, a clothes merchant at Bo Bae Market in Bangkok, said she and her vendor friends were still loyal to Thaksin. His "war against the mafia" helped them stamp out financial and even physical abuse by local gangsters. For a few Saturdays now, Je Jiew and dozens of her friends have attended the weekly anti-coup rallies organised by student activist groups under the umbrella of the Anti-19 September Coup Network at Thammasat University.

"I don't think it's realistic to hope that Thaksin comes back as the premier, but I'm still against the coup because it's not democratic. I saw how bad dictatorship was before the October 14 [uprising]," Je Jiew said.

Nor do the pro-Thaksin and anti-coup factions among the urban middle-class present a common front, said Prapas Pintoptaeng, another Chulalongkorn political scientist. Nowhere is this more evident than when looking at how society has become even more fractured since the coup.

"The NGOs, the media, many in academia, are facing some of the deepest rifts in decades, after the coup took place. These divisions are unlikely to disappear unless the coup leaders continue to screw up," he said.

Suwit Lertkraimethi, a graduate student in political science at Thammasat University, said such differences could not be swept under the rug with a national unity slogan.

It's just the opposite.

"Democracy functions best when all views are available to be discussed and debated, and policy results from the best compromise achievable among the disparate views," said Suwit, also a member of the Anti-19 September Coup Network.

"I don't see how the suppression of the so-called 'undercurrent' Thaksin supporters will create unity. They will just become a time bomb waiting to explode.

"There is probably no unity within the military itself. The coup has caused shifts in power for different cliques in the military and who knows if the insistence on maintaining martial law is in fact meant to control potential rebels in the armed forces," Suwit said.

The military tactics to restore peace could well create further cracks in society, Chula's Kanokrat said.

"The military's excuse for not lifting martial law is that most people aren't affected by it, so why worry? This could make the so-called majority point fingers at people who oppose the coup for stirring unrest."

Lt-General Palangkul Klahan said about the junta's strategies toward unity that they really had not done much, nor had much of a plan.

"We in the military don't like complications," he told The Nation from Army headquarters.

"We just want to see the country safe and people united again. From our meeting with government agencies, they already know what to do for national unity. Every important national day, people already show unity by expressing deep respect and loyalty to the national institutions."

But as Kanokrat observed, the military's attempt to instil unity, which relies solely on old nationalist ideas that rally around traditional institutions, could be problematic. The roles of some of the traditional institutions in politics are the point of the ongoing contentions that have continued from Thaksin's time, she said.

"[To varying means and degree], the People's Alliance for Democracy, the elite groups and Thaksin himself all used the same institutions to fight against one another. Now the coup-makers also use the same establishment to restore unity. I don't know where this hegemony campaign will lead us to," she said.

Kasem Penpinan, a philosophy lecturer at Thammasat, warned that tensions could escalate next year when the government holds a plebiscite on the constitution to be drafted soon under the military's direction.

"The government will use loyalty to national institutions to create a condition for people to say 'yes' to the constitution. The 'yes' in the referendum may look like we have national unity, but it would be a unity under no democratic debate."

Nantiya Tangwisutijit

The Nation