Solution for Diversity: Building Reconciliation for Thailand’s Democracy Regime
Main Article Content
Abstract
The current Thai political conflict is a conflict of diverse opinions. Although all parties agree that democratic government with the King as Head of State is a regime that is suitable for Thai society, but there are still differences in ideas, valuing democracy, election focus orientation, people representation, virtue emphasis, integrity of the country's leader, unanswered and unclear doubts that needed to be accepted in Thai and international society, facts at the root of the conflict, political rally, human rights violation, loss of life, physical and mental injuries, property damage and other forms of damage that happened to be the cause of the conflict. Those conflicts have accumulated to cause divisions in society. So the goal is to bring together understanding, remedies and prevention of repeated incidents of violence and damage.
The authors view that building reconciliation in society should be solution for diversity for Thailand’s democracy regime consisting as follows: 1) The political will of government leaders and the strength of civil society to drive reconciliation, 2) Creating a political space to create an atmosphere of the possibility of finding a solution together, 3) Having dialogue with all parties through a process of acceptance of the social forces groups, 4) ) The causes of conflicts are resolved or managed under legitimate mechanisms that contribute to society together and 5) Having explanations for events that affect the feelings of society, sincerely admitting wrongdoing and forgiving one another.
Article Details
- Under a CC Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) license, you can copy, distribute, display, perform, and use any published material (figures, schemes, tables or any extract of a text) for any purpose other than commercially (unless you get permission first).
- Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by the journal (including the editor, any member of the editorial team or editorial board, and any guest editors).
- The editor has the right to edit the content of the manuscript to make it suitable for publication.
References
Boraine, Alexander. (2006). Transitional Justice. A Holistic Interpretation, in: Journal of International Affairs 60, 1, 17-27.
Bar-On, Dan. (2007). Reconciliation Revisited for More Conceptual and Empirical Clarity, in: Janja Bec-Neumann (ed.). Darkness at Noon. War Crimes, Genocide and Memories. Sarajevo: Centre for Interdisciplinary Postgraduate Studies, 62-84.
Bar-Tal, Daniel and Gemma H. Bennink. (2004). The Nature of Reconciliation as an Outcome and a Process, in: Yaacov Bar-Siman-Tov (ed.). From Conflict Resolution to Reconciliation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 11-38.
Bloomfield, David. (2003). “Reconciliation: An Introduction,” in Reconciliation after Violent Conflict: A Handbook, ed. David Bloomfield. Stockholm: International IDEA.
Brouneus, Karen. (2003). Reconciliation – Theory and Practice for Development Copperation. Sweden: International Development Cooperation Agency.
Daniel Bar-Tal, speech held at the “Stockholm International Forum: Truth, Justice and Reconciliation”, April 23–24, 2002
Ericson, Maria. (2001).Reconciliation and the Search for a Shared Moral Landscape: An Exploration Based Upon a Study of Northern Ireland and South Africa. Frankfurt am Main; New York).
Fischer, M. (2011). Transitional Justice and Reconciliation : Theory and Practice.
Galtung, Johan.(1996). Peace by Peaceful Means. London: Sage.
Galtung, John. (2001). “After Violence, Reconstruction, Reconciliation, and Resolution: Coping with Visible and Invisible Effects,” in Reconciliation, Justice, and coexistence: Theory and Practice, ed. Mohammed Abu-Nimer. Lanham,Maryland: Lexington Books).
Hayner, Princilla. (2010). Unspeakable Truths: Confronting State Terror and Atrocity. United Kingdom: Roudtledge.
Kelman, Herbert C. (2010) "Conflict Resolution and Reconciliation: A Social-Psychological Perspective on Ending Violent Conflict Between Identity Groups," Landscapes of Violence: Vol. 1 : No. 1 , Article 5. DOI: 10.7275/R5H12ZX0 Available at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/lov/vol1/iss1/5
Kriesberg, Louis. (2001). “Changing Forms of Coexistence,” in Reconciliation, Justice, and Coexistence: Theory and Practice, ed. Mohammed Abu-Nimer (Lanham, Maryland: Lexington Books.
Kriesberg, Louis. (2007). External Contributions to Post-Mass-Crime Rehabilitation, in: Beatrice Pouligny, Simon Chesterman and Albrecht Schnabel (eds.). After Mass Crime. Rebuilding States and Communities. New York: United Nations University, 243-271.
Lederach, John Paul. (1997). Building Peace: Sustainable Reconciliation in Divided Societies Washington, D.C.: United States: Institute of Peace Press.
Long, W. J., and P. Brecke, “The Emotive Causes of Recurrent International Conflict,” Politics and the Life Sciences, Vol. 22, No. 1 (March 2003), pp. 24-35
Miall, Hugh. (2004). Conflict Transformation: A Multi-Dimensional Task, in: Alex Austin, Martina Fischer and Norbert Ropers (eds.). Transforming Ethnopolitical Conflict. The Bergh of Handbook. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag, 67-90. Available at www.berghof-handbook.net.
Supalak Ganjanakhundee. (2020). Youthquake Evokes the 1932 Revolution and Shakes Thailand’s Establishment. Perspectives, ISSUE: 2020 No. 127, ISEAS Yusof Ishak Institute. Available at https://www.iseas.edu.sg/wp-ontent/uploads/2020/10/ISEAS Perspective_2020_127.pdf
Truth for Reconciliation Commission of Thailand. (2012). Final Report of Truth for Reconciliation Commission of Thailand (TRCT) 2012. Bangkok: Truth for Reconciliation Commission of Thailand.
คณะกรรมการอิสระตรวจสอบและค้นหาความจริงเพื่อการปรองดองแห่งชาติ (คอป.). (2555). รายงานฉบับสมบูรณ์ คณะกรรมการอิสระตรวจสอบและค้นหาความจริงเพื่อการปรองดองแห่งชาติ (คอป.) กรกฎาคม 2553 - กรกฎาคม 2555 : สารจากประธานและกรรมการ. กรุงเทพฯ: คณะกรรมการอิสระตรวจสอบและค้นหาความจริงเพื่อการปรองดองแห่งชาติ (คอป.).
Wuthisarn Thanchai et al. (2012). Final Report on Building Reconciliation for Thailand. Bangkok: King Prajadhipok's Institute.
วุฒิสาร ตันไชยและคณะ. (2555). รายงานวิจัยการสร้างความปรองดองแห่งชาติ. กรุงเทพฯ: สถาบันพระปกเกล้า.
Van der Merwe, Hugo. (1999).The Truth and Reconciliation Commission and Community Reconciliation: An Analysis of Competing Strategies and Conceptualizations. US: George Mason University.