• 
• 
• 

His supporters are using "terrorism" to portray a political victim, someone ridiculously charged by a police force whose own "act of terror" against the People's Alliance for Democracy in October last year was apparently far worse than the "song-and-dance" occupation of the international airport. His critics, of course, cannot find another word to describe holding the welfare of tens of thousands of passengers to ransom to press for a political goal.

Kasit is not a terrorist, but he played a part in something highly controversial. His role in the airport seizure presents a real problem, which is both legal and moral. If there's anything that could justify the untold inconvenience and downright suffering of hundreds of thousands of innocent air travellers and their relatives, Kasit must tell us what it is.

The charges may be political, but they take advantage of the solid question that a man in his position must be accountable. Nameless protesters causing an airport shutdown is one thing, a political office holder saying that such action is perfectly alright is another.

Kasit is not on trial as a suspected terrorist here. He is only having his values tested, because, like it or not, the seizure of Suvarnabhumi Airport is too big an issue to be easily swept under a rug. That ghost will never go away, and it is the reason why international reaction was muted at best when rampaging red-shirted protesters forced cancellation of the Asean Summit in Pattaya in April.

Should Kasit resign? It's up to him, because "quitting is an admission of guilt" has somehow become a religion in Thailand. He's taking the "terrorist" charges too seriously and vowing to stay put and fight them. It's a political game for him, and the moral aspects of the issue have been overlooked. Truth is, he was responsible for the airport incident and he needs to defend himself against its alleged immoral consequences. It's a matter of "how" he chooses to defend himself - as an ordinary citizen or as a minister.

We all make mistakes and we don't need to be terrorists to be immoral. The terrorism nonsense and the subsequent outcry only serve to blur the real issue. That you stole some cash once and were wrongly accused of being a robber elsewhere doesn't change the fact that you are a thief. Kasit was deeply involved with the airport blockade, and we should start from there.

The foreign minister used to defend the airport seizure in the most blatant manner, talking about a friendly atmosphere, good food and nice music. But now that the Suvanarbhumi ghost has reared its ugly head, Kasit will have to answer that simple question one more time: Was taking over the international airport for several days right or wrong?

His likely answer may be "it's wrong, but for the right reason". This is the only explanation that could keep him his job, because a clear-cut "right" or "wrong" could raise serious questions about his Cabinet portfolio. Yet, that middle path answer is no less disturbing, not least because it's popular among hooded men with bombs, the very people Kasit insists he's not one of.

As decent a person as he is, Kasit must be thinking that this is unfair. It may be, but again, his resignation could be one of those "wrong things for the right reason". We are languishing here because many people, those who mattered, believed they could have it both ways. Those people wouldn't budge, no matter how hard the evidence was, or no matter how wrong their action seemed. The popular excuse was that they had never been officially found guilty of anything.

Kasit and the PAD set out to fight all that. It has been a long, painful battle, and mistakes were made. It's Kasit's turn now to be on the receiving end of the moral debate, and he should face the issue as it is, and not let it be distorted by talk about terrorism. The Suvarnabhumi episode tested everyone's conscience as to how far one should go to achieve a political goal, and Kasit, having been brave enough to let the public know what he thinks, simply has only one thing left to do - face the consequences of what he stands for.