A call by groups of journalists, academics and business communities urging all parties to exercise restraint and not use violence against each other during the red-shirt demonstration this weekend will be in vain. The political power play has gone far beyond compromise - and peace can exist only in a compromising atmosphere.
Those who emerged in the name of peace are neither neutral agents nor honest brokers, but manufacturers of consent, shaping public opinion against their opponents. These peace lovers spoke no differently from the authorities who they believe tend to use less violence than the others.
Both sides, indeed, are not in a mood for compromise. What they are doing now is not a solution to end the conflict, but a battle with different tactics to win over the other.
The government, with collaboration from the mainstream media, managed to portray itself as an angel and the red-shirt group as former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra's evil lackeys - ready to use all violent means to bring their boss back to power. Visions of last April's bloodshed have been planted in the public mind many times a day to show the red-shirt group is nothing but a bloodthirsty monster.
Even a foreign diplomat like British Ambassador Quinton Quayle subscribed to such discourse as he rushed to see Pheu Thai Party leader Yongyut Wichaidit on Tuesday, to urge the party with its strong links to the red shirts not to use violence in the weekend demonstrations.
Nobody knows what exactly will happen this weekend, but Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban floated many ideas and led the public to understand the red protesters would explode at some 40 locations around Bangkok.
As the person who oversees security matters, Suthep recommended his Cabinet members find 'safe houses' for themselves. Government intelligence anticipated some 1 million red protesters and Suthep expected even more angry demonstrators would march into the capital on March 12-14. The Cabinet approved a more than Bt200-million budget for more than 50,000 armed forces and police to handle the situation. With such preparation, it is naive to say the government will refrain from using violence against the protesters.
The red-shirt movement seems to pay no attention to 'managed' public opinion against it. Image is unlikely of importance to them anymore, and they have failed to produce any counter discourse to shape public opinion. Many of their leaders fed contradicting information to the public. Some, like Jaran Ditthapichai, said they would use peaceful ways - but many others such as Arisman Pongruangrong called people to set the capital in flames.
Many elements among the red shirts may have political ambitions far beyond bringing Thaksin back to power. They might be fighting aristocrats for electoral democracy and justice, but the public knows little and the media does not highlight these points.
In the meantime, Thaksin's role in their movement cannot be ruled out. Many people might think it was fair for the court verdict to confiscate only 60 percent of his Bt 76 billion assets - but it's hard for him to keep the remaining Bt 30 billion from the authorities easily. With tax and other charges, there would be a few hundred million baht returned to him eventually. From Thaksin's point of view, toppling his administration with a military coup, installation of his opponent into power and seizure of most of his assets was not a fair play with any compromises.
