It is put forward that Thailand is one of the best established and stable democracies in South East Asia. This stability has resulted in sustained economic growth and development as well as fewer human rights violations than most of its immediate neighbours. However, democracy in Asia is not exactly like the model put forward by its western proponents! Despite the constitutional monarchy’s record, Thailand is currently under a military dictatorship, albeit a benevolent one thus far. The military took control of the government claiming that the people had tired of the former leader, Thaksin Shinawatra, who had just become the first prime minister to lead a government through a full term, but had been implicated in charges of corruption. Elections are scheduled for any day now but in the mean time a number of draconian public order bills have been pushed through parliament under the intern government, which are deemed necessary for national security. The general public has placed a lot of faith in the military government in recent months and it is hoped that the transition back to democracy will be a smooth one. Certainly, the foreign investors have not been scared away as business is booming in Thailand.
My first impressions of the democratic system in Thailand have been mixed. There is no doubt that this government is much more open and accountable than many others in the region and has a relatively decent human rights record. Nevertheless, many people in Thailand do not have a sophisticated sense of democratic values has been evident in the run up to the regional and national elections this December. Corruption is prevalent. Many people I spoke to in the rural areas simply will vote for whoever the village leaders tell them to. The Bangkok Post reported that sixty percent of Thais will vote for anyone in exchange for one thousand Baht (35 Dollars Canadian) and many local and national politicians have been implicated in vote buying. This is either done by direct payments, such as handing out party calendars with money stapled inside them, or by hosting lavish receptions on election days and encouraging their tipsy guests to vote for them. This second problem has become so rife that the sale of alcohol has been banned for three days before regional and national elections, much to the chagrin of those who feel responsible enough to make up their own minds and who also enjoy the odd tipple!
There is a severe lack of education on political issues as most people appear unconcerned or uninterested in politics in general. While this is not unique to Thailand, and indeed, many western states suffer from the same affliction of lethargy, there is very little democratic culture here. Most people would seem to prefer not to have to make any decisions at all. The Monarch remains wildly popular and people place their faith in him. Every Monday all workers wear yellow shirts emblazoned with the Monarch’s symbol and it seems like there is at least one regal celebration per week. All are forbidden by law from criticizing the King or defacing any image of him, of which there are countless thousands posted in every neighborhood. It is the King who seems to hold the country together and who has applied pressure to the military to hand power back to the people. There is a legitimate fear that if the monarchy ends the military will simply depose elected representatives and a return to authoritarianism would be inevitable.
This leads me to ask many questions about democracy’s role in South East Asia. Is it necessary for human rights and economic development? Do all cultures want the same type of democracy? Do some cultures prefer authoritarian states? Is this a ll a matter of education? Can a democratic culture grow? What about minorities in democracies? Many people point to the less democratic regimes in China and Vietnam, who are experiencing unprecedented economic growth and note that authoritarianism produces a more stable foundation for economic development in the long term. I will be watching the Thai elections unfold next week (unfortunately without a soothing restorative) and hope to find answers to these questions in the coming months.
Monday, 17 December 2007
Thursday, 13 December 2007
Human Rights Education and Burma: Part I
It is at times extremely frustrating to teach human rights law to people in a situation like those of my students. As they belong to ethnic minority groups from Burma such as the Mon, Karen, and Kachin, they face a double dose of human rights abuse. In the first place, they suffer the same egregious violations confronting the entire population of Burma at the hands of an unaccountable military junta that uses forced labour, torture, rape, arbitrary imprisonment and forced relocation as regular policy tools. In addition, they are discriminated against as minorities, forced to abandon their cultures through a government sponsored process of Burmanization. As a result, many have fled and sought refugee status in Thailand, China, India and even Bangladesh. Approximately 140 000 live in make shift camps here along the Thai-Burma border.
It is with weary sadness that I must teach them about the inadequate enforcement of human rights law and the seemingly insurmountable failure of the international community to cooperate. Let me assure you, answering the question: “Yes, but what can we do if the government violates refugee/civil and political/economic, social and cultural human rights law,” is a disappointing exercise when your students face this situation daily. Perhaps what angers me more than the recalcitrant attitude of the Burmese military junta is the complicity of the neighboring states, such as Thailand, who have sold their dignity in exchange for cheap natural resources and a supply of energy to fuel their own economic growth. For example, Thailand happily invests in dams and the lumber industry in Burma while its own citizens will not permit it to do so within its own territory. Moreover, the direct abuses of refugee rights in the Karen refugee camp, for example, are shocking and will be the subject of my next addition to this blog. China refuses to help and western corporations still profit in conjunction with the Burmese military junta. Our group discussions inevitably conclude that this is the case and I must face the student’s disenchantment directly.
But all is not lost; we take inspiration form the power of human rights education. There has been a remarkable change in the disposition of the students here. Young men and women who were terrified to speak out and had no concept of critical thinking or voicing opinions now challenge everything they are told and ask endless questions triggering discussions that often run late into the night. The students themselves cannot get enough knowledge of human rights and have begun to develop ideas about ways to convey this empowering information tot their own communities. Songs are being composed, plays written and posters designed all putting forward the notion of human dignity as a human right. They have also begun to apply a human rights based approach to their own organizations that are the only groups operating here on the ground. The students insist on participatory and accountable systems, sometimes confronting the established communal hierarchy in the process. They insist that a rights-based approach starts with them and only once it is established can they move on to advocacy. Of course, advocacy means something totally different here, where you take an enormous risk even criticizing the government.
I do my best to explain that human rights have come a long way in 60 years. International law is a slow process that hopefully increases awareness of the issues they confront and forces states to come to the table and discus them; something unimaginable just two generations ago! Great inroads have been made into the notion of unlimited domestic sovereignty and even the Burmese military regime is forced to temper its own violent responses to calls for basic human rights. I try to point out improvements elsewhere in the world and note that nearby places in which advocacy was equally dangerous only twenty or thirty years ago, such as Cambodia or China, are now allowing for civil society action at least in limited forms. Everyday I learn how human rights education empowers, which is in stark contrast to the complete failure of human rights law’s enforcement mechanisms in Asia.
It is with weary sadness that I must teach them about the inadequate enforcement of human rights law and the seemingly insurmountable failure of the international community to cooperate. Let me assure you, answering the question: “Yes, but what can we do if the government violates refugee/civil and political/economic, social and cultural human rights law,” is a disappointing exercise when your students face this situation daily. Perhaps what angers me more than the recalcitrant attitude of the Burmese military junta is the complicity of the neighboring states, such as Thailand, who have sold their dignity in exchange for cheap natural resources and a supply of energy to fuel their own economic growth. For example, Thailand happily invests in dams and the lumber industry in Burma while its own citizens will not permit it to do so within its own territory. Moreover, the direct abuses of refugee rights in the Karen refugee camp, for example, are shocking and will be the subject of my next addition to this blog. China refuses to help and western corporations still profit in conjunction with the Burmese military junta. Our group discussions inevitably conclude that this is the case and I must face the student’s disenchantment directly.
But all is not lost; we take inspiration form the power of human rights education. There has been a remarkable change in the disposition of the students here. Young men and women who were terrified to speak out and had no concept of critical thinking or voicing opinions now challenge everything they are told and ask endless questions triggering discussions that often run late into the night. The students themselves cannot get enough knowledge of human rights and have begun to develop ideas about ways to convey this empowering information tot their own communities. Songs are being composed, plays written and posters designed all putting forward the notion of human dignity as a human right. They have also begun to apply a human rights based approach to their own organizations that are the only groups operating here on the ground. The students insist on participatory and accountable systems, sometimes confronting the established communal hierarchy in the process. They insist that a rights-based approach starts with them and only once it is established can they move on to advocacy. Of course, advocacy means something totally different here, where you take an enormous risk even criticizing the government.
I do my best to explain that human rights have come a long way in 60 years. International law is a slow process that hopefully increases awareness of the issues they confront and forces states to come to the table and discus them; something unimaginable just two generations ago! Great inroads have been made into the notion of unlimited domestic sovereignty and even the Burmese military regime is forced to temper its own violent responses to calls for basic human rights. I try to point out improvements elsewhere in the world and note that nearby places in which advocacy was equally dangerous only twenty or thirty years ago, such as Cambodia or China, are now allowing for civil society action at least in limited forms. Everyday I learn how human rights education empowers, which is in stark contrast to the complete failure of human rights law’s enforcement mechanisms in Asia.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)