We have marked six months since Thailand ventured into dangerous − but historically familiar − political waters. Slowly, but surely, an iron curtain has descended upon this country, snuffing out many forms of civil liberties we once took for granted.
Thailand is governed under martial law and it seems we have a long way to go until we might see the light at the end of the tunnel. The official line from this regime is that it asks for our understanding and we should all trust that what is being done is being done for the good of the nation as a whole.
Meanwhile we have been "advised" not to engage in any public display of dissent because once this regime has completed its purge and delivered on drastic constitutional reforms a new "Thai style" democracy will finally emerge.
Anyone in their right mind would want to see an end to this decade-long squabble that has divided this nation into bitterly feuding camps. If this military regime can bring an end to this dispute and unite the nation, I would be the first person to sign up for it. However, I see a few problems with the junta's approach.
Firstly, the junta must realise it can no longer brainwash people into reconciliation. It's an outdated concept which proved quite effective during the Cold War, but in today's era of the internet and Facebook, the younger generation have become rather immune to straightforward indoctrination.
Personally, I see nothing wrong with the prime minister's 12 core values, but it's the way the message is being delivered to youngsters by the Minister of Education, which shows how out of touch with modern reality the Ministry of Indoctrination has become. If the prime minister seeks to instil a sense of civic duty into our students and create an informed citizenry, encourage nationwide civilised debate into what those civil responsibilities are, instead of mandating the 12 principles to be recited in class parrot fashion.
If the prime minister wants true reconciliation among our warring factions, then we must first be allowed to air out all our differences in totally free and civilised discussions. This is not happening, because as long as martial law is in place and even the slightest dissenting opinion is met with harsh recrimination, real reconciliation which comes from understanding, compromise and empathy will be but a distant dream.
Secondly, even though the prime minister did not attain this highest political office as a shining example of democratic legitimacy, he should for all our sakes at least attempt to govern transparently and legitimately. If this government wants to avoid squandering its legacy, it must hold itself up against the standard of any government that was elected "for the people and by the people".
I can see that the government is making some attempt at transparency by making cabinet members declare their assets. Although why the National Reform Council (NRC) should be exempt from this is rather puzzling to me. I can also see that the government is trying to govern honestly, by trying to purge Thailand of corrupt government officials, which is great. But let's make sure we go after "all" of them and not just the ones that we don't like very much.
However, in my view the biggest problem the prime minister will have is convincing people that drastic reforms will be legitimate. So far, only "our people" have had their say, stacked to the hilt in the National Legislative Assembly, the NRC and the cabinet.
If constitutional reforms were to have any chance of being remotely legitimate, the prime minister would be wise to lift martial law and engage the nation in free and fair discussions. All stakeholders should be permitted to make their case peacefully in the court of public opinion and then ideally we can all vote on whether we accept these reforms in a national referendum. Without legitimacy, which can only come from the people's participation, any constitution will not be worth the paper it's written on. After 19 constitutions in 80 odd years, surely we have learnt that lesson!.
Lastly, I'm all for Thailand choosing our own system of government instead of adopting someone else's. The United States is not a democracy without glaring faults. Britain, a country I profess to love, also has a democracy in need of change and modernisation. But in choosing a system of government fit for Thailand or "Thai style" democracy, the prime minister must remember that even strong governments will find it impossible to reverse the tide of change with the force of globalisation that is sweeping through our continent. The modern world through technology will empower people. The modern nation will require governments that are adaptable to change. And modern societies will insist on governments that governs only through the consent of its people.
What's done is done. Although I have expressed my doubts and concerns, as a Thai citizen, I honestly would like to see the prime minister succeed in uniting us. But as Benjamin Disraeli wisely said: "I am prepared for the worst but hope for the best".
Songkran Grachangnetara is an entrepreneur. He graduated from The London School of Economics and Columbia University. He can be reached at Twitter: @SongkranTalk