Internet Politics in Thailand after the 2006 Coup
85
Background
While Internet fi ltering has been actively practiced in Thailand since 2002, it did not
become a political issue until after the military coup d ’ é tat of September 19, 2006.
8
The coup overthrew the highly popular Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra
9 and
marked the beginning of a tumultuous chapter in Thai political history. In the aftermath of the coup, the self-exiled Thaksin and his red-shirt supporters have exploited
the Internet as a primary channel for political communication.
10 Meanwhile, much
political expression in Thailand has resorted to cyberspace, which has enjoyed relatively greater freedom of expression than have other forms of mass media. While
broadcast media in Thailand have historically been controlled through state monopoly of the airwaves,
11 and print media generally had a lukewarm attitude toward the
coup,
12 throughout the postcoup period (which international observers call colorcoded politics for its red and yellow shirts), the Internet has emerged as a major public
sphere.
13 Different online political forums, online newspapers, and political Web sites
have become important platforms for expression, exchanges, and debates that represent a wide spectrum of political ideologies and orientations. As a result, authorities
have increasingly zeroed in on Internet content as a target for censorship and surveillance in the post-2006-coup period.
Since September 2006, Thailand has seen four different governments led by four
different prime ministers. The fi rst postcoup PM was an appointee of the military
junta, the Council for National Security (CNS), while the other three were MPs elected
in 2007. The fourth prime minister — Abhisit Vejjajiva, leader of the Democrat Party,
rose to power after the abrupt dissolution of the People ’ s Power Party (PPP)
14 in late
2008, and the subsequent shift of alliance by a major faction in the preceding coalition government. The Democrat-led government, which was approved by the yellow
shirts (the PAD) and the network monarchy, appeared to be brokered in by the military,
and this alleged political illegitimacy was consistently used as a rationale by the United
Front of Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) in staging a series of protests against
the Democrat-led government in 2009 and 2010.
In March to May 2010, when the red shirts took Bangkok in a protest calling for
parliament ’ s dissolution and a fresh election, the survival of the Abhisit government
was again put to the test. Repeated negotiations failed to set an election date. The
protests escalated into prolonged violent confrontations between the protesters and
the military, and attempts to negotiate a ceasefi re failed. More than 90 civilians and
scores of soldiers were killed, with a total of more than 2,100 injured by the time the
military successfully cracked down on the protesters on May 19. However, unrest
rapidly spread throughout Thailand as red-shirt supporters clamored for justice. Many
of these grievances were pouring out into cyberspace through social media where
many dissidents were active.
85
Background
While Internet fi ltering has been actively practiced in Thailand since 2002, it did not
become a political issue until after the military coup d ’ é tat of September 19, 2006.
8
The coup overthrew the highly popular Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra
9 and
marked the beginning of a tumultuous chapter in Thai political history. In the aftermath of the coup, the self-exiled Thaksin and his red-shirt supporters have exploited
the Internet as a primary channel for political communication.
10 Meanwhile, much
political expression in Thailand has resorted to cyberspace, which has enjoyed relatively greater freedom of expression than have other forms of mass media. While
broadcast media in Thailand have historically been controlled through state monopoly of the airwaves,
11 and print media generally had a lukewarm attitude toward the
coup,
12 throughout the postcoup period (which international observers call colorcoded politics for its red and yellow shirts), the Internet has emerged as a major public
sphere.
13 Different online political forums, online newspapers, and political Web sites
have become important platforms for expression, exchanges, and debates that represent a wide spectrum of political ideologies and orientations. As a result, authorities
have increasingly zeroed in on Internet content as a target for censorship and surveillance in the post-2006-coup period.
Since September 2006, Thailand has seen four different governments led by four
different prime ministers. The fi rst postcoup PM was an appointee of the military
junta, the Council for National Security (CNS), while the other three were MPs elected
in 2007. The fourth prime minister — Abhisit Vejjajiva, leader of the Democrat Party,
rose to power after the abrupt dissolution of the People ’ s Power Party (PPP)
14 in late
2008, and the subsequent shift of alliance by a major faction in the preceding coalition government. The Democrat-led government, which was approved by the yellow
shirts (the PAD) and the network monarchy, appeared to be brokered in by the military,
and this alleged political illegitimacy was consistently used as a rationale by the United
Front of Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) in staging a series of protests against
the Democrat-led government in 2009 and 2010.
In March to May 2010, when the red shirts took Bangkok in a protest calling for
parliament ’ s dissolution and a fresh election, the survival of the Abhisit government
was again put to the test. Repeated negotiations failed to set an election date. The
protests escalated into prolonged violent confrontations between the protesters and
the military, and attempts to negotiate a ceasefi re failed. More than 90 civilians and
scores of soldiers were killed, with a total of more than 2,100 injured by the time the
military successfully cracked down on the protesters on May 19. However, unrest
rapidly spread throughout Thailand as red-shirt supporters clamored for justice. Many
of these grievances were pouring out into cyberspace through social media where
many dissidents were active.