By Enze Han
With Thailand’s army settling into power, a future without military intervention is difficult to imagine.
On a TV screen in one of Bangkok’s BTS trains, a skit with the theme samakkee (unity) was playing again and again, featuring all parts of Thai society talking about the importance of unity in Thailand. With the new post-coup military government in power, headed by General Prayuth Chan-ocha, the message conveyed in the propaganda piece is clear – the Thai military government wants Thai society, deeply divided between Yellow Shirts and Red Shirts, to bridge their differences, and that the Thai military is the only legitimate institution that can maintain the unity of the royal kingdom.
The concept of “samakkee” dates back to the reign of the Rama VI King Vajiravudh (1910-1925), who incorporated it into his nationalist ideology. The same concept was also featured significantly by Thai governments (military and civilian) during the Cold War period in its anti-communist insurgency campaigns. Right now, after another military coup that ousted the Pheu Thai Party government, it seems the military is once again tapping into royal-nationalist ideology, such as samakkee (unity), samanchan (social harmony), andsandiviti (peaceful means), to convey the legitimacy of its control.
Authoritarian governments prefer the use of these slogans to justify their control. The Chinese Communist Party in the recent past, for example, propagated the concept of hexie shehui (harmonious society) at a time when it perceived rising social unrest that began in the early 2000s. Indeed, there are quite a few similarities between Chinese “harmonious society” and Thai “unity & solidarity.” We can observe a similar kind of acquiescence amongst the general public toward authoritarian power in both countries. Certainly there are sporadic protests in Thailand against the coup, and there are also many individuals openly challenging the military government, like those using the three-finger resistance hand gesture. In reality, though, these open gestures of political defiance are few and far between. Indeed, there have been few large-scale, anti-military social movements.
Read the full story at The Diplomat