• 
• 

Somehow, it has dawned on Parliament that going back to basics might help solve the current crisis. House Speaker Chai Chidchob, Senate Speaker Prasopsuk Boondet and opposition Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva agreed on Friday that mediation is the best way to break the deadlock between the government and the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD), who have never talked face to face. Again, the easy part is over, and we are back to the really hard reality of implementing a proposed solution.

Probably the most difficult thing to do in a war is to negotiate a truce when the conflict has reached its make-or-break point. The current showdown has gone past the point of no return with the seizure of Government House and the declaration of a state of emergency. This, however, does not mean we should discard diplomacy, only that we should realise that it will be so difficult.

The recent special session of Parliament ended with the government accusing the opposition of opportunism and the latter obsessed with reopening every old wound of the former. And it did not involve a crucial party, the PAD, which has complicated its anti-Thaksin and anti-Samak campaign to the point where nobody is quite sure what the movement really wants.

The PAD demand for "new politics" is the easiest to say and the hardest to get. The movement's call for Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej to quit is understandable, but it is causing an impasse between the movement and the People Power Party leader. Yet the PAD has further complicated matters with its very questionable stand asserting that since new "Thaksin nominees" will come to the fore if Samak resigns or dissolves the House of Representatives, the movement should be granted the power to dictate politics in the post-Samak era.

It is a stand that even many PAD sympathisers have failed to fathom. If Samak is stubborn, then so is the PAD. How can they ever get close to a compromise as long as each continues to attack the other through separate media outlets? Everyday, their mutual hatred grows. Everyday, they drift apart.

Prasopsuk has been tentatively named mediator and he will have to convince the government and the PAD to work out a resolution to the conflict. This effort will also involve the cooperation of all parties in Parliament. MPs will be told to stop inflaming the situation in order to create an atmosphere conducive to a negotiated settlement.

This idea surely will compete with the government's own plan to hold a national referendum, something critics say is impractical and even unconstitutional. It also follows the utter failure of the declaration of the state of emergency, which has only deepened the divide and been mocked by the protesters who continue to occupy Government House. With the military refusing to use force to flush out the demonstrators, the impasse threatens to take deep roots and undermine the country's social, economic and political situation.

According to Abhisit, top legislative leaders view negotiations as the most practical way out of the turmoil because the national referendum would take too long and could aggravate divisions. Top lawmakers met after Army chief General Anupong Paochinda made it clear on Tuesday that the military would not involve itself in political bickering and that Parliament must do more to find a political solution.

Before the three met, Chai said he was willing to convene another parliamentary session. Prasopsuk said he would volunteer to mediate a settlement. Abhisit said he supported the Senate speaker to act as mediator because the country was in no position to await the outcome of the referendum.

That was a good little step. If the nation agrees to join this path, it could be a very long and exhausting journey. At this juncture, it remains unclear how Prasopsuk will accomplish his task although he pledges to strive for a speedy solution.

Can mediation still work? Nobody knows for sure. But we simply can't lose hope, because the only other way out of the current crisis would mean that there must be a clear winner and loser. That could happen, but we would have to pay for it with a far higher number of casualties than we have already suffered.