The recent arrest of more than 30 university students engaged in peaceful anti-coup protests shows the military regime remains intent on silencing all forms of dissent.
Questions, however, have been raised about whether the repressive approach is helpful as the regime supposedly winds down to a graceful exit and whether it will be beneficial to the country, still deeply polarised by political conflicts, in the long run.
Prime Minister Gen Prayut Chan-o-cha had some soothing words to say about the students who led the subversive activities last weekend.
The PM said students are the country's future. He said they have a good ideology and they want things to improve. He also said he is trying to understand them.
Still, the PM, who also serves as head of the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO), anchored his understanding of the progressive generation on a traditional, patronising caution that now "is not the right time" to stand up to the authorities.
Does the premier really not understand that no genuine protest occurs when the powers-to-be judge it to be the right time? Also, if now, when the military enjoys sweeping powers over the entire nation while citizens have no right even to assembly peacefully, is not the right time for people to start protesting, then when is?
The PM's stance is similar to that of army chief Udomdej Sitabutr who insisted officials had no choice but to temporarily detain the protesting students.
The authorities must ensure that nothing stirs as they proceed along the NCPO's roadmap to return to democracy, Gen Udomdej said.
The army chief used an interesting choice of words in describing his mission. He said he had to keep the situation ning which translates to "still" or "motionless".
He also said the unarmed, student-led protests to mark the coup's first anniversary caused a "disturbance".
It's obvious the NCPO takes the definition of "peace" and "order" in its name to the extreme. To the military regime, peace is not just stability but total submission. Citizens may speak only when the regime allows them to. They may air their opinions but only along pre-approved channels and in appropriate formats as dictated. But really, does peace necessarily have to mean everything and everyone must be "motionless"?
The repression may have worked during the past year. However, with the military regime set to extend its tenure for another year, maybe two, due to the charter referendum, it's doubtful if the powers-that-be will be able to keep their iron grip on the situation forever.
The zero-tolerance stance for the weekend student protest left a bad taste in the mouths of many who want to see freedom restored. They have not come out or made strong attempts to resist yet but the opposition is there, waiting to erupt if the oppression lasts too long.
Besides, the rationale used by supporters of the regime which includes attempts to portray the students as being misled by politicians or harbouring an anti-establishment agenda only fans the nationalistic fervour among far-right elements in society.
The conservative swing will alienate so-called liberals further. The result will be a widening of the already deep divide that has ensnared the country for more than a decade. If the military regime keeps up with this divisive approach, there will be no hope of the country achieving reconciliation, not within the tenure of the NCPO or after. In a time like the present which is marked by diversity, peace and order does not mean an absence of protest or dissent.
Stability should not be synonymous with stillness but constant motion without volatility or violence. Peace in the modern age means an ability to coexist even in disagreement. A society is functioning and in order when its citizens can make their voices heard, when they feel free to stand up for their rights without infringing on those of others.
The military regime could show the way towards reconciliation by paying heed to the students' agenda and incorporating them in its plan for Thailand's future. A failure to do that will only add further pressure to our deeply polarised society whose sharp-edged conflicts have only been temporarily suppressed. If that pressure is triggered by whatever cause, it could blow up big time.
The scenario is definitely not healthy for Thai society in the long run. It also means the military regime could be with us for an indefinite period of time.
Atiya Achakulwisut is contributing editor, Bangkok Post.