The photo of a serene-looking monk being escorted out of a news conference by a group of police officers for a brief "discussion" was on the front page of most newspapers on Tuesday. Is it an image of religious peace versus state violence? Definitely not.
State suppression against freedom of speech, yes. But definitely not a battle of good versus evil as many monks would like to paint it.
Don't be misled by the monk's serene demeanour either. If anything, the clash between the country's two traditional forces -- the military and the Sangha -- is now at full throttle.
Last month, we witnessed scuffles between furious monks and a group of soldiers at Buddha Monthon, which is supposedly a Buddhist centre of peace. The monks were protesting the government's resistance to the Sangha Supreme Council's (SSC) nomination of Phra Maha Ratchamangalacharn, aka Somdet Chuang, as the next supreme patriarch. The elder is known to be an avid supporter of the controversial pro-Thaksin Dhammakaya Temple.
On Monday, the regime cut short the clergy's news conference that had the aim of defying the Ombudsman's ruling which says the SSC's nomination process is illegal. But a group of police officers and soldiers broke in and apprehended the organiser Phra Methithammajarn, secretary-general of the Buddhism Protection Centre of Thailand (BPCT) and deputy rector of a prominent monks university, Mahachulalongkorn Rajavidyalaya, for a "talk" before releasing him.
High-ranking monks are usually treated with respect by officials and the general public. Being summoned for questioning like ordinary folks -- the first time a prominent monk has ever been subjected to an "attitude adjustment" session -- must come as a rude awakening for Phra Methithammajarn.
Undaunted, the monk announced he and his network would gather 20,000 names to oust the Ombudsman president. What is the regime's next move? Who will blink first?
Let's make it clear that the use of threats and intimidation of the military regime to silence the monks' network is absolutely wrong. But that does not make the clergy's demands right.
Apart from insisting on Somdet Chuang as the next supreme patriarch, they also demand Buddhism be officiated as a state religion in the next charter, along with all the monks' perks and privileges that come with it.
The clergy should realise by now that they cannot expect an anti-Thaksin government to have an elder who is perceived to be a supporter of the fugitive prime minister as head of the clergy.
How long does Somdet Chuang, now 90, have to wait? If the regime has its way, at least another five years; that is the amount of time PM Prayut Chan-o-cha says the regime needs to ensure political stability after the general election.
Despite their differences over the choice of the next supreme patriarch, the military and the Sangha share many similarities, more than they realise.
First, they consider themselves protectors of the country's national ideology and its three pillars, namely nation, religion and the monarchy. By nation, they mean only a nation owned by ethnic Thais. By religion, they mean the dominance of Thai Buddhism over other religions. Together, they believe the best protection for the revered institution is severe punishment for dissenters.
Secondly, both the military and the clergy are top-down institutions that are extremely authoritarian and feudal.
After the 1932 revolution, the feudal hierarchy of the bureaucracy was dismantled, but the ecclesiastic hierarchy and feudal ranks remained intact. That is why lay Buddhists still have to prostrate on the floor and use special language with high-ranking monks as if they were royals. It is undeniable that the monkhood now offers the quickest way for poor rural lads to get an education and climb the social ladder. The system has produced many good monks, but they are overpowered by rogue ones. The feudal privilege system is why both young and old monks fight tooth and nail against reform of the clergy.
Thirdly, both the clergy and the military are patriarchal and sexist. While the military celebrates manhood by treating women as sex objects, the clergy treats women as sexual temptations, thus their enemies. So much so that fear has turned to hate, rendering the clergy misogynistic.
Women are the clergy's main supporters. When they give offerings to monks, however, they have to put them on a piece of cloth. Monks argue they need to avoid physical touching. I see it as a cultural affirmation of women's inferiority.
Women under both systems are oppressed. For the Thai Sangha, female ordination is a no-no. Female monks are treated as illegal and monks who support it are subjected to banishment. The white-robed nuns are accepted because they accept their inferior status as temple help, and never as monks' equals.
For the military, oppression goes beyond resistance to female cadets. Militarism is deeply rooted in all aspects of Thai life to keep the citizenry in an old-world social order, and women in "their place".
The clash between the military and the clergy is not one of ideology. It is purely political. It is why no matter who wins, the problems from authoritarianism plaguing Thailand will not get any better.
If the military prevails, the message is clear: No one can stand in the way of the military regime now. We can expect to see more violations of rights in the name of national security, more support for big business to exploit natural resources, and more conflicts on the ground.
That means more suffering for women.
To mark International Women's Day, women's groups held a seminar on how to improve the draft charter so it meets women's needs. How I admire their unwavering optimism. But no matter how many rights clauses the charter has, they will merely be empty words when military power reigns supreme.
The National Human Rights Commission honoured four female rights defenders. Their struggles are telling; a female villager facing lawsuits and physical assault by a state-backed gold mine, an ethnic Karen mother becoming a rights activist after her husband mysteriously disappeared; a victim of the flesh trade struggling with the punishing judicial process to get justice done; a dedicated journalist trying to juggle work commitments with raising children in the absence of state help for single mothers.
And things will get worse if military rule becomes more entrenched.
But even if the clergy prevails, we cannot expect them to be the voices of the underprivileged, nor stand up for justice. The clergy will return to their comfortable cocoon once they have their way.
No matter who wins this supreme patriarch battle, ordinary people -- especially women -- are the ultimate losers amid deep-rooted militarism and patriarchy.
Sanitsuda Ekachai is former editorial pages editor, Bangkok Post.