On radio on December 21, Thaksin identified a specific group of "NGO workers who use violence". These people in fact "live well but like making trouble". He later referred to them as "anarchists". Chavalit Yongchaiyudh added they are bent on "overthrowing capitalism". Thaksin earlier said NGOs are financed by foreign organisations "which do not want Thailand to develop". They stir up trouble, record it on video, and send the tapes to their foreign sponsors to secure more funding. Now we know. Thailand is threatened by a foreign-financed conspiracy of rich anarchists.

Who aerthe NGOs? It's true that most of the first generation of Thailand's NGO workers came from the comfortably-off middle class. They were caught up in the student radicalism of the 1970s, and later transferred their idealism to grassroots work. Many of the public faces of the NGO movement still come from this group. But lower down the ranks, the social complexion is changing.

Lamphaen comes from a Lue village in Nan. Her family, unlike their neighbours, kept up the Lue tradition of hand-weaving. This generated just enough extra income to keep her in school. Lamphaen became the first person from her village to get a university degree.

She rejected a secure job in government or a lucrative one in business. Instead she joined an NGO. She found a few simple ways to make weaving more efficient and profitable. She

organised neighbouring families into groups. She found new channels to market the products. Now many villages in the area produce lots of cloth. And a lot more kids stay in school.

Lamphaen's example is multiplied many times. Few NGO recruits over the past decade come from the urban middle class.

Student radicalism and idealism declined, while the commercial job market expanded. Most new recruits come from the villages and the urban underclass.

Often they have profited from the expansion of education, but not used this as a means of personal escape. Instead they have joined NGOs as a way to develop the society from which they come.

This is especially true of new NGO workers in resource and environment issues. Quietly and invisibly, NGO politics are becoming class politics.

What do the NGOs do? Some months ago, Chang Noi ha d the privilege to attend the strategy review meeting of a big national NGO network. No plush hotel. No travel expenses. No fancy cakes at tea breaks. Not even any furniture.

The meeting was held in an unoccupied house loaned by a friend. For the two days of plenary sessions, delegates sat on the bare concrete floor. The breaks were under a tree in the garden. Accommodation was on mats upstairs. Catering was provided by some pushcart vendors from up the road.

Of course several NGO workers are supported by foreign funds. But it's pretty meagre.

The purpose of the meeting was to review the network's strategy in the light of past experience. Many participants noted the situation is changing very rapidly. Earlier, NGO workers had played an important role in organising local people, providing them with information, and helping them express grievances to bureaucrats and politicians.

But local groups have developed very quickly. They have learnt how to get good information and technical help. They have absorbed the techniques of organisation, petition and protest. They have set up their own networks. The role of the NGO workers has moved from foreground to background.

What are the NGOs up against? Non-violence has been one of the guiding faiths of the Thai NGO movement. The 1970s generation reacted strongly against the violence of left-right confrontation. But non-violence is a very delicate practice. Demonstrations always have an element of provocation. And the Thai authorities have a history of using violence.

The videotape of the Hat Yai clash on December 20 is very explicit. As the police move forward to clear the demo, the speaker on the top of the sound truck calls to the demonstrators to stay calm. Sit down. Don't react. Let them beat us if they want to. Don't be provoked. Beware the third hand. A policeman tries to climb onto the truck and smash the sound system with a stick. There is no trouble yet. Apparently he wants to silence this appeal to non-violence. It's not clear what right he has to destroy property.

Unfortunately, he slips and falls back three times. This little tragi-comedy lasts several minutes. No superior intervenes to stop his very visible effort, so presumably he is acting in line with orders. Eventually he gets so frustrated he beats his stick on the windscreen. And then he hits the driver.

As a former government security expert commented after seeing this tape, the Hat Yai clash happened because the authorities treat demonstrators as enemies.

The NGO movement has become so prominent in Thailand because of the failure of bureaucrats to deliver services and the failure of politicians to represent the people. As Kasian Tejapira remarked last week, NGOs are a service which Thailand's middle class gets for free (but fails to appreciate).

The movement is big, varied, and far from perfect. But it is not a foreign-funded plot riddled with anarchists. The movement's little secret is that it depends on a rather small number of people working very hard with very limited resources.

Its strength comes from the issues themselves, and from the base of popular support. It's also changing. It's centre of gravity is moving into the localities, and into the hands of a new generation of more local activists. Thaksin wants to help "the poor" because their complaints are bad for business. But he doesn't understand the intensity and proliferation of local discontent. He wants to turn middle class opinion against NGOs by demonising an imagined anarchist, violent, foreign-funded minority.

At the same time he said, "I am ready to provide funding for the 96 per cent majority of NGOs". He thinks he can buy NGOs as easily as MPs.

CHANG NOI
(Changnoi is a university academic and regular contributor to the Nation)
Opinion - The Nation: Jan 3, 2003