• 
• 

Published on July 24, 2007

More than 200 protesters and anti-riot police sustained injuries in a clash on Sunday. What lessons can be drawn from a first flare-up of violence involving the anti-coup movement?

Authorities and protest organisers have garnered huge publicity in shifting the blame to one another.

Police justify their anti-riot operation on peacekeeping grounds and cite provocation by unruly crowds.

Anti-coup protesters have projected their street fight with police as a democratic struggle along the lines of the South African civil rights movement spearheaded by Nobel peace prize winner Nelson Mandela.

Sunday's incident becomes more intriguing if viewed in connection with yesterday's book launch by ousted premier Thaksin Shinawatra in Hong Kong. The book is appropriately titled "Thaksin's 24 Hours" and recounts his experience in the aftermath of the September 19 coup. It is written in Chinese by a ghostwriter.

Overseas Chinese have considerable clout in the Thai economy and it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out why Thaksin wants to plead his case with them.

Seen as Thaksin's proxy, the Democratic Alliance Against Dictatorship organised many weekly marches from Sanam Luang to the Si Sao Thewes residence of General Prem Tinsulanonda, a chief royal adviser.

After the May verdict disbanding the Thai Rak Thai Party, the alliance suddenly saw its coffers replenished. Anti-coup crowds began to surge in significant numbers in the past two months. From hundreds, their number grew to thousands.

Many political observers see the growing number of protesters as a sign Thaksin is burning bridges with the junta.

The alliance has become increasingly provocative. Its key organisers - including Veera Musigapong, Jakrapob Penkair and Weng Tojirakarn - have acted more and more in defiance of police. They abruptly turned off their communications with anti-riot forces. They also became belligerent in their verbal attacks on Prem.

In past marches, the alliance would coordinate rally plans with police in order to ensure peace. Protesters would disperse in an orderly manner after they arrived at Prem's home.

It is strange but true that, under military rule, authorities have tolerated peaceful rallies in front of Prem's home but elected leader Thaksin banned the same at his residence.

After rousing the crowds, estimated to range between 5,000 and 10,000, at Sanam Luang, organisers led them in a march to Prem's home in the early afternoon.

Since organisers refused to agree in advance to disperse the crowds following the march, police put up their first roadblock at Makawan Rangsan Bridge on Rajdamnoen Avenue.

The angry crowds broke down the barricade and marched on to their destination by 3pm. Key organisers took turns to deliver fiery speeches until 7pm when the crowds dwindled to around 2,000. They repeatedly vowed to camp out at the rally site until Prem agreed to resign his position as Privy Council president.By 8pm, anti-riot forces started preparations before launching four crowd-dispersal movements between 8.50pm and 11.15pm.

Police were equipped with shields and truncheons while protesters retaliated with rocks and sticks. Four crack units rushed organisers and used pepper spray before employing tear gas in the final operation. After a drawn-out fight, protesters moved back to Sanam Luang.

Even though police claim to have only attempted to still the unruly crowds, their anti-riot measures appear to have departed from their standard in dealing with anti-coup protesters.

This time police were bent on dispersing protesters at all costs, not just keeping the peace.

It is an open secret the military wants to minimise any threats, genuine or perceived, that could derail the August 19 referendum. The convergence of angry crowds and zealous authorities is a recipe for fiasco.

Avudh Panananda

The Nation