At the outset of the confrontation, the objectives of both sides were fairly clear, but after more than ten days, it became evident that the nature of the confrontation had changed significantly. Regardless of the outcome, losses were inevitable, including substantial casualties and injuries, as well as extensive material damage to both government property and private assets. Moreover, there were immeasurable impacts on the national psyche and economy. If the situation were allowed to continue, whatever the reasons or origins, Thailand would face collapse, and the nation that had been carefully built over many years would be rendered meaningless or largely detrimental, which was already beginning to manifest. Therefore, it was necessary to identify conflicts and address them systematically, for the current problems over the past few days were no longer merely political or related to official positions, but issues threatening the very survival of the nation, and thus required collective resolution.

Many individuals submitted recommendations for resolving the situation—hundreds of suggestions came from both within Thailand and abroad. The proposals ranged widely; initially, some advised resolving the matter by dissolving the parliament, which was discussed with all eleven political parties. The majority responded that dissolution was unnecessary, with only one supporting it, and so that proposal was dismissed. Other petitions and recommendations were offered, suggesting various approaches. These were forwarded to the Cabinet or the Prime Minister’s Office for consideration, but they could not be implemented as proposed. Alternatives included dissolving the parliament or amending the constitution to achieve the intended objectives, meaning those objectives that had sparked the confrontation in the first place.

In fact, this method was previously addressed on December 4, 1991, before several thousand members of an association, and it seemed to be well received, as the reasoning presented was considered a feasible solution. At that time, it was emphasized that either “amend first, enact later” or “enact first, amend later” could work, which everyone understood as referring to the constitution. Constitutional amendments had been ongoing, improving upon previous versions. Before speaking at Dusidalai Hall, General Suchinda had agreed that the constitution could be enacted and subsequently amended gradually to align with democratic principles. This process had been discussed for several months. The rationale for enacting the constitution, even if incomplete, was that it was of sufficient quality, better than the interim constitution used for nearly a year, as certain provisions of the interim constitution were harmful and inadequate for governance. Thus, if the plan discussed on December 4 were followed, it would be a return to addressing prior issues, not the present ones.

Today’s problem is not one of drafting or amending the constitution, but concerns the safety and morale of the people. Currently, citizens across the country are anxious about potential dangers and fear the nation’s collapse, making resolution difficult. According to reports from abroad, sons and daughters residing overseas are aware of the situation and have attempted to inform those in the country that Thailand can still resolve the crisis, though such hopes may be somewhat optimistic. Therefore, I urge you, especially General Suchinda and Major General Chamlong, to work together by facing each other rather than confronting one another. The country belongs to all, not just one or two individuals. Cooperation, not confrontation, is required to address the danger. When people act violently in a state of frenzy, they lose awareness, fighting without purpose, aiming only to dominate. No one truly wins; confrontation brings only defeat, and the greatest loss is that of the nation. The people are the population of the entire country, not just those in Bangkok. If Bangkok is damaged, the entire nation suffers, and there is no value in claiming victory atop ruins.

Therefore, I request that both of you come together—not to confront each other, but to face each other. You represent the opposing sides, not merely two parties, and are called upon to resolve the present crisis of violence. Once this situation has been addressed, you may discuss and consult on how Thailand can be rebuilt and restored. This is the reason for summoning both of you, and I trust that you understand your role in reconstructing the nation from the ruins, bringing personal fulfillment through doing good. The following observations are offered for consideration.