• 
• 

And the search continues, with no success, largely due to the fact that most public figures of any stature have already committed themselves to one political side or another. The same goes for most institutions that have jumped into the current political foray.

Thai media are overwhelming sympathetic, if not outright pro-People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD), save for the state-controlled NBT station, one or two papers, some websites and some community radio. The military is divided- but top brass such as Army Chief Gen Anupong Paochinda, along with a number of well-known public figures- made it clear where they stand when they attended the funeral of a female PAD supporter killed in the recent police crackdown on PAD. Civil society and NGOs are split almost down the middle, with many human rights defenders mutating into coup defenders and PAD apologists. Academia, is deeply divided too with well-known academics busy exchanging articles attacking one another.

Even without media investigative reporting, virtually all important institutions and figures have been subjected to scrutiny as to where they stand. Also, people trying to forge a "third way" have little chance, as they have been "tainted" by past or recent deeds. Here is the list of some visible people calling for a third way, but branded as tainted by one party or the other.

King Prajadhipok Institute secretary general Borwornsak Uwanno - considered by anti-coup and pro-Thaksin Shinawatra camps as having served the interest of the 2006 coup makers by playing an instrumental role in drafting the junta-sponsored 2007 constitution. The thought that he might yet be "involved" in drafting another charter is mind-boggling to some.

Thammasat deputy rector and law lecturer, Prinya Thevanaruemitkul - though not nicknamed "legal butler" like a few other law experts, still regarded by anti-coup activists and the pro-Thaksin camp as a tacit 2006 coup supporter.

Gothom Arya, chairman of the National Economic and Social Advisory Board and director of a Peace Studies Centre at Mahidol University. He is also "not neutral" because he accepted the junta's appointment as member of the now defunct National Legislative Assembly.

At this stage, society should ask whether what is needed is a neutral person to help broker a ceasefire deal; or do they themselves, neutral or not, need to learn how to deal with political differences in a peaceful, democratic fashion and without falling into the temptation of demonising each other.

The call for "national unity" is another favourite political cliche. Thais love Thais - we will all be happy for an eternity - period!

More often than not, such a simplistic notion of "national unity" is based on hegemonic imposition by the powers-that-be on the minority, or "unity" based on brushing aside or even suppressing political differences. Such "national unity" can never truly bring about peaceful co-existence and reconciliation - not to mention genuine unity. The 2006 coup, which claimed to have been staged in the name of national unity, was a clear and disastrous example.

So in the name of "national unity" some are calling for the shutting down of ASTV or NBT, or the banning of Thaksin's recent phone-in speech, even before it was made.

Both sides still insist on spoon-feeding one set of "truth" and that's why we saw the seizure of the NBT channel by PAD supporters, and most recently the surrounding of anti-government TPBS channel by pro-government supporters. These people still believe Thais cannot think for themselves and thus the media must be controlled to serve their propaganda line. It's the same reason why third way groups have been attacked by both sides as "useless".

Thus, what is needed is not a neutral person, but for people from all camps to come to their senses and learn to deal with differences in a civil and democratic manner without expecting a "neutral" white horse to emerge.

Let the differences continue, do not push them under the carpet, let the proxy masters behind the conflict speak more and reveal themselves. And let us learn to deal with challenges peacefully in a way that will hopefully enhance liberty and democracy.

It may be a tall order, but it's much better than having facile "national unity" and "reconciliation" brokered by a phoney neutral person. And all are welcomed to apply - neutral or not.