Anon Chawalawan From triumph to anger: The escalation of political conflict in Thailand from October 1973 to bloodshed of October

6 1976 Introduction 1970s era can be considered as a bloody period in Thai history. Within this short period of time, from the end of 1973 to October 1976 level of political related violence in the Thai society increasing rapidly and transform from latent conflict to be manifest conflict. This article aim is to apply C.R. SIPABIO (Abdala,et.al, 2002) to explain the escalation of political conflict in Thailand from latent conflict to manifested conflict and finally end up with bloodshed at the dawn of October 6 1976. The political history of Thailand in 1970s considered as one of the good case study for peace and conflict student. In the short period of 3 years political conflict escalate rapidly and drastically. During the uprising in 1973 student movement had been support nationwide in the struggle against military dictator regime. However after the regime had been overthrow public opinion toward the progressive movement (triple alliance student peasantry and workers) turn adversary rapidly when the progressive movement extend its agenda further from the struggle for liberal democracy to call for social and economic justice. From triumph and support, the middle class and the rich in Thai society start to felt that the progressive movement was threat to national interest and national security. Under the global politics of Cold War the progressive movement had been frame as Communist and need to be terminated. From now on political conflict escalate rapidly until October 6 1976 conflict reach its peak, violence erupted and end up with bloodshed. Model of Analysis

In this article the mode of analysis was the C.R. SIPABIO model (Abdala,et.al, 2002). This model provides effective and systematic explanation for peace and conflict student. Social Impact (N.D. p. 89), the US based organization had stated in its training book that C.R. SIPABIO was the model that has been developed to ease analyzing the different stages of the process of resolving a conflict. C. R. SIPABIO is the abbreviation of the following elements: Context, Relationship, Sources, Issues, Parties, Attitudes, Behavior, Intervention and Outcome. According to Social Impact (N.D.) definition C.R. SIPABIO model of analysis could considered as comprehensive model because it cover almost every aspect that Peace and Conflict discipline is concern. This is the reason why the C.R. SIPABIO analysis model had been applying for study Thais Political Conflict in this article. The beginning of conflict C.R. SIPABIO model had categorized element of conflict in to seven elements. First element that needs to be discussed was source of the conflict. From the definition and example of source that provide in training book of Social Impact (N.D.) Unequal control, ownership, or distribution of resources and Different ways of life, ideology, or religion could consider as the main source in this conflict. Regarding the unequal in distribution of resource after the uprising in 1973 political environmental was open. The dictator had been overthrow. Democracy had been established in a certain level. The progressive movement shifted its agenda from freedom in politics to equality in social economic issue. Mabry (1980, p. 933) shows the statistic of workers strike in Thailand from 1956 1974 in his article; it showed that from 1973 to 1974 number of workers strike and number of workers who participated in the strike increase from previous year drastically. Worker strike was the sign of the inequality of resource distribution (worker create value of product more than they get paid). The inequality of resource distribution led to another source of conflict that is the different in Political ideology.

Thailand ruled by the Liberal Democracy system (with the king as the head of the state). Under Cold War Politics Communist therefore consider as threat of the Nation and the throne. For the rich and the middleclass their interest related deeply to the existence of Liberal Democracy system. The rise of Communist in Indochina brings about concern to the middle class and the rich because if the regime change took place in Thailand they will be the first group who lost the fortune. The shift in agenda of the progressive movement from struggle for liberal democracy to struggle for socio-economic equality was viewed closely by the rich and the middle class. The agenda of socio-economic equality at that point of time seem to be too progressive for the Thai society. The rich and the middle class viewed it as the propaganda of Communist regime and start to frame the progressive movement as a Communist. Conflict now expands from pure economic conflict to economic+ Political ideology conflict. The student movement and its allies were framed as a communist and were identified as threat of the nation and throne because of the demand for a progressive economics policy. Due to this fact tension between to two sides escalated. The source of conflict that was inequality of resource distribution and political ideology had divine party of conflict in to two sides. One was middle class in town align with elite class; another side was the progressive movement of student peasantry and workers. The two parties had different in interest. For the middle class and the rich, their interest was status quo and political stability which ensure an economic growth. But for the student movement and its allies what they need was the change in social-economic relation in order to increase socio-economic equality. From this point it is clearly that interest of two parties were contradicted and class was the contextual factor that contribute to this conflict. The two parties were origin from the different class, the rich and the poor. Saipradit (1976) mention the different class had different interest, their interests regularly contradict to one another and
1
Kulab Saipradit was the Thai Marxist philosophy who dies in exile (in China) in 1974. His work influence leftist activist in Thailand

this contradiction let to conflict between classes. At this point it is possible to draw a summary that source of conflict and the differentiation of interest related deeply to the contextual factors like class. . The escalation of conflict Class was the crucial contextual factor that contributes to the conflict. The inequality of resource distribution that is nature of class society and liberal democracy society became the source of conflict. Class society also divides conflict parties in to two groups, the rich and the middle class on one hand and the progress movement on the other hand. Both group had a different interest and their interest were contradicted to each other. This is how conflict between the two groups took place in the first place. In this section attitude and behavior of the conflict parties shall be stated. Conflict of interest led to the tension between both parties. For the rich and the middle class status quo is their interest, the demand for social change of the progressive movement considered as threat. . In the period of three year there were many strikes and mass demonstration, due to the strength of progressive movement at that point of time most of the demand had been met (Prizzia, 1985), this fact was the great concern for the factories owner and the capitalist elite. In some extend the fact that most of the demand had been met made the rich and the middle class lost confident in the government because of its weakness. Beside this economic interest issue the elite class in some extends felt that the straight of progressive movement together with the rise of communist movement in Indochina could lead to the regime change. At this point another source of conflict that was the different in ideology came in to picture. The rich and the middle class believed that the progressive movement in fact was communist; they need to overthrow the monarchy and replace the liberal democratic system with communist regime. Overall it is possible to argue that the attitude of the rich and the middle class toward the progressive movement seem to be extremely negative. They also feel that the movement

was a threat, not only for them but for the nation as a whole. Since the government did nothing to prevent the growth of the movement the rich and the middle class felt that they need to take some action. This section aim to illustrate the behavior or action that had been taken by the rich and the middle class to counter the rise of the progressive movement. The unsecured feeling and the distrust in the government led to the creation of various ultra nationalist movements to counter the progressive movement. One of the groups that play a prominent role in the resistance of the progressive movement was a Village Scout. Muecke (1980) stated that The purpose of the Scouts is to provide a large non-military bulwark against threats to Thai independence and freedom, particularly against "communism. (p. 407). Muecke also provided the interesting information that most of the people who participated in the scout activities were mostly rich or middle class people as he argued that [Village Scout was] less accessible to the poor than to the non poor. The very poor cannot afford the time to participate in Village Scouting, as they must work every day for each day's food(Muecke, 1980, p. 411) . The fact that Muecke (1980) provide reaffirm that class contextual did play a crucial role in this conflict. The eruption of violence and the military intervention From the year 1973 to 1976 the progressive movement had organized political rallied for many times both in socio-economic related issues and political issues, the economic issue for example demand for the increase of workers wage, or demand for the decrease of living cost. Political issue such call the government to shut down the entire American military base nationwide or the demand the government to refuse request to return from exile of former dictator leader who was overthrow in 1973. From times to time Village Scout and its allies groups had interrupt and use violence against the progressive movement led protest march. Beside the use of violence the rich also use contextual factors like religion and media to propaganda the people especially the middle class to turn hostile against progressive

movement. Religion play the role when Bhikkhu Kitthi wuttho one of the famous Buddhism monk in Thailand had argued that killing Communists is not demeritorious.(King, 2009, p. 25) Beside the religion the right wing movement used army controlled radio station as a media mechanism to propaganda that the progressive movement is the great threat to nation, religion and king (Girling, 1977 p. 394). 4 October 1976 the student gather the mass of 7000 in Thammasat University, the protester demand to government to expel the former Prime Minister who had just return from exile as a Buddhism Monk.(Darling, 1977, p. 127) the following day the student perform a role play in the rally site. Media had captured picture of the role play and accuse that student for its disloyal act against the monarchy (See Darling, 1977, p. 127) On the morning of October 6, Village Scouts went en masse to Thammasat University as directed, carrying traditional Thai swords.There they joined some 4,000 armed BPP2, Municipal Police and RedGaur (krathing daeng) in an orgy of violence, looting corpses, and burning wounded students to death Over 300 people were killed, thousands were arrested and detained without trial (Muecke, 1980 p. 425) At the end of the same day the military staged a coup, all political activities were suspended, leader of student, workers and peasantry movement were declared out law. Some had been arrest; some executed the remained fled to join the Communist Party of Thailand in the liberation area (in the jungle). Conflict now escalated from political conflict to arm conflict. In conclusion conflict between the rich, the middle class and the progressive alliance was the conflict that escalates rapidly within three years. The reason could be the fact that it was not only economic or class conflict but value and ideology had been involved. Contextual factor like media and religion did contribute to the escalation, media propaganda and rise adverse feeling toward the progressive movement while a monk as a unit in a
3

2 3

Border Patrol Police Name of the radical right wings groups

religion sector legitimized violence against the progressive movement. Finally the military step in and stage a coup to end the violence in favor of the richs side (by outlaw leaders of the movement), however conflict did not deescalate but it escalate from political conflict to arm conflict. This case study proved that to solve the conflict through violence mean not only ineffective but also escalate degree of conflict to go beyond control.

Bibliography Book (In English) Abdala,A et al. (2002). Say Peace: Conflict Resolution Training Manual for Muslim Communities, Virginia: The Graduate School of Islamic and Social Sciences.

Prizzia, R. (1985). Thailand in Transition: The Role of Oppositional Forces, Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press. Sallie, B. King. (2009). Socially Engaged Buddhism, Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press. Social Impact Inc (N.D.). Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning for Fragile States and Peace Building Programs, Arlington: Author. Retrieved from http://www.socialimpact.com/resource-center/downloads/fragilestates.pdf Book (In Thai) Saipradit, K. (1976). Marxist Philosophy, Bangkok: Buadaeng Book Club. Journal (In English) Darling, F.C. (1977). Thailand in 1976: Another Defeat for Constitutional Democracy. Asian Survey, 17 (2), 116-132. Girling, J.L.S. (1977). Thailand: The Coup and Its Implications, Pacific Affair, 50 (3), p, 387 405 Mabry, B.D. (1977). The Thai Labor Movement, Asian Survey, 17 (10), p. 931-951 Muecke, M.A. (1980). The Village Scouts of Thailand, Asian Survey, 20 (4), p. 407-427