สำนักราชบัณฑิตยสภา

The Journal of the Royal Institute of Thailand Volume II - 2010 Towards A Culture of Peace in Thai Society Preconditions of and requirements for achieving and maintaining a violence-free society and thus lasting peace in Thailand are many. Solid foundations with the individual and the most crucial social groups must be laid first. This requires some adjustment and fine-tuning to socialization and curricula offered in school. Special efforts to enhance dialogue across social groups and communal bonding need to be undertaken, then, in tune with a communal spirit, social cohesion and solidarity will grow as will a culture of peace. Key words: Non-violence, peace, violence, conflict, conflict resolution, Gandhi, King, civil disobedience, Thailand social problems, community action, national dialogue Introduction Non–violence Movements When we speak of non-violence and peace we tend to think of the visionary concepts, the model movements led by Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King, that pursued a non-violent approach in their civil disobedience campaigns. So far, the official Thai response to the challenge posed by the unrest in the South has primarily been a military one or some other form of containment, coercion or enforcement. Would other approaches - without following the immediate reflex of resorting to force - have been feasible, at all, given the circumstances and the actors involved? Interestingly, major civil disobedience, autonomy or independence campaigns have been waged successfully without resorting to, or even purposely banning, violence and also with essentially the other side, those in power, by and large have refrained from using (undue) force, on their part, too. Both, Gandhi and King – leaders of the most well known such movements in recent history - had studied the respective situation and power structure in much detail and for many years, assessed their own strengths and weaknesses and of their followers. They also discussed their grievances and conclusions as well as actions planned. Their non-violent movements set historical precedents for waging emancipation campaigns against the powers-that-be without resorting to violence. In that they needed to depend heavily on the other side’s understanding of their motives and (to some degree) the appreciation of their tactics, so that these would play according to certain rules and avoid state violence wherever possible. Otherwise their various marches and other actions challenging the authorities could have ended in much