Page 347 - kpiebook63002
P. 347
²££°¸¡§´²²£
ª²±£°À¥i² £±ÉµÈ 347
¤±³µÃ£Ã£ j³¨£i³¿¸Ç®³¤²³
The next point is about, is it sufficient to have only Malaysia as the third party?
There is one interesting experience which the Malaysians have collected in Mindanao.
They have invited four other states and four non-governmental organizations to
support them in their efforts to settle that conflict. The Thai government will be more
reluctant in this respect, but I think it is not impossible to envision an equivalent
which also indicates the deep south could profit from some kind of maybe more
discrete involvement of other third parties.
The last, the eighth point is to mention that one also have to aware not only of
compromises at the negotiation table, but also at the implementation of what
everyone agrees on. That’s a big issue and I would rather shift it later to the
discussion if you’re interested in this, to go more into the details.
The third and last point I would like to address is about the democratic culture
to overcome the violence in sorting out of political conflicts. In my understanding can
only be created if we rethink the way how we organize political debates and our
conflict culture. In German, we have a word which is streitkultur, direct translation is
how to dispute with each other in a constructive way. And in this respect, I would
like to emphasize that the Kingdom of Thailand has taken a very active role and the
support for the so-called sustainable development goals, the SDGs, for the 2030
agenda of the United Nations. And we had, two weeks ago, the famous Bangkok
Forum at Chulalongkorn University talking about Asian futures. And one of the goals
in this respect, the SDG goal 16, is explicitly focus on this topic of political conflicts.
It’s about to promote a peaceful and inclusive society for sustainable development,
provide access to justice for all, and build accountable and inclusive institutions at all
levels. I understand that this is a sensitive topic in Thailand in light of the strong
tradition of unifying Thainess, and the more recent social contract for unity. But with
opening towards multicultural democracy, there might be new opportunities also to
consider spaces for a democratic culture of disputes and debates.
I would like to share in this respect, and that’s my last remark here. A recent
development in Germany, a country which shared with Thailand the experience of
different phases of authoritarian and democratic forms of governance. During the last
three years in Germany, we had an interesting experiment which was initiated by 11
media companies. And this idea was that they created a project called “My Country
Talks”. It happens one day in September. It is a public event, in which these 11
media institutions invite everyone who was interested to participate in a one to one
discussion on seven controversial issues. And these issues change from year to year.
Two examples from this year were:
1. Should Germany control its borders more? Yes or No?
2. Is it possible that Muslims and non-Muslims can live together well in
Germany?
A computer system has then generated a list of persons who disagree with ª£¸²£ª±¡¡²¥¸h¡¢h¢µÈ
each other most and who don’t live too far away from each other, so that they could
