SOUTH:PULO(&BRN-C?)Overtures? [Archive]

Nekochan

29-10-04, 02:08 AM

This is one main reason I left Pantip.com forever!!

A prominent monk wrote an article about violent thinking of today's Thais few days just before the incident.

Are we too narrowed minded, mean, uncaring, having malevolent views to anyone who is just different?

If you guys can read Thais, you feel disheartened!!

Justified killing!! most Thais seem to agree. So, they deserved it!! We could have gone for more!!

Or those in webboards just represent minority of the society.

Personally, I think Thai culture itself plays important role in this!! Considering being Thais in most people's point of views. Anyone who cannot fit in Thainess will be driven away.

Hilltribes and Muslims are examples. Plus foreign born residents (Vietnamese, Burmese, and minorities)

They are not one of us. We do not need to be Jai Dee. Jai Dee is for us only.

I remembered an excuse of an ex governor (who?) about students killed at Thammasat on Oct 6, 1976. They were VC!!

Someone fired rifles from a building nearby, we captured one and he could not speak Thai!!

God Army did not surrender, so they faced the consequences!! (with bullet holes on their heads .... shot in close range!)

Nobody cried, nobody cared since they were not one of us.

It is a frauded logic and it is real horror much more than I read about bad engineering practices in Thailand.

I do not khow. I hope we will have a better way than resort violence counter violence.

Wisarut

29-10-04, 02:32 AM

Turnign the radio knob during the economic crisis during 1997 - 1998, anti foreigner rhoteric are blasting since too many people have such bitter feelign so the radio that speak the same language of bitterness as THEM is the ONLY one they will LISTEN ... other opinion whcih cannot be fitted into theri viewpoints woiuld be DISCARDED and TRASHED ...

jpatokal

29-10-04, 12:54 PM

The only way to stop terrorism is to stop people from wanting to blow themselves up.

But yeah, Singapore is more "civilized" -- instead of suffocating suspected Muslim dissidents, they just imprison them under the Internal Security Act and throw away the key. :rolleyes:

Hitesh

29-10-04, 02:51 PM

this is ridiculous.
if the government thinks it can solve this never ending problem by indoctrinating the uneducated Thai population (which seems to be the majority) into adopting an "us vs. them" attitude, we will, as jpatokal pointed out, be in the same situation as Israel is. Hated by the world. Hated by our neighbours. Hated by ourselves but at the same time under the impression that we have no other choice.

Thaksin's over-inflated ego does not allow himself to apologise to the muslims in the south for the way this was handled previously. I do not see why the rest of the nation has to suffer. If the population cannot acknowledge that there is a racist attitude toward hilltribe and muslim people residing in the contry (as opposed to leg-humping every rich white man that lands in don muang), it says a lot about this 'Thai' way of life that we pride ourselves on.

Mangoboy

29-10-04, 02:57 PM

Read Democracy Shaken and Stirred by Win Lyovarin to get an accute idea about how fervant nationalism has been a mainstay and arguably a necessity for more or less every leader Thailand has had since 1932.

Each leader has had to convinvce the electorate that he is doing what he is doing in the best interests of Thailand (be that the case or not). To argue against this nationalism is to be un-patriotic and therefore a blight on the country. Repeated and repeated, this assumption becomes embedded in the national psyche.

Thailand is not alone. Look at the nationalistic rhetoric coming from the president of the USA. To be anti-Bush is to be anti-American. To not support your president is to be more than a just an oponent to him, it is to be an oponent to every one of your countrymen.

Both of these institutions of belief have resulted in massive loss of life. Are these humanitarian crises or is it protection of one's national identity.

Jai Dee is not for everyone. Defining your self as a member of one group necessarily excludes members of other groups from your good heart.

Does it? Should it?

Wisarut

29-10-04, 11:12 PM

Khun Mangoboy,

You are refering to "Prachathipatai Bon Sen Khanan" by Khun Win.
This has become the required reading for those Political Science Students ....

It is the utterly FAILURE of Absolute Monarchy that gave a rise of Thai nationalism ... modeled from Frace ....

Life has been valued too cheap to be metered ....
Even today .....

Wisarut

30-10-04, 02:35 AM

Now, those dead Muslim in custody are much worthless than those chickens died form Bird Flue
Loat this website and you'll see:

http://www.geocities.com/bloodsiam

Eyewithess Accounts for the tragedy at Takbai
http://www.pantip.com/cafe/rajdumnern/topic/P3090582/P3090582.html

nathawat

03-11-04, 07:06 PM

I don't think the prime minister wanted this bloody situation to happen. Why? Because I didn't see any benefits he could get out of this mess. It seems to me that its an accidents from careless guards who transferred those suspects. It should have been much more benefits if those were survived and disclosed some piece of information about the extremist mastermind. If I were at Tak bai that day, I would immediately go away from that place when the police casted the first warning. Would you?

I believe it's very important to be united among thai. Religion is nothing to do with this. However, decades-long terrorist that kill hundreds innocent people must be punished. And the government is doing something about it. Blammings would not be useful for anyone except for the terrorist and the third hands.

jpatokal

10-11-04, 01:57 PM

Perhaps the most troubling and infuriating issue for Thais now that the 'Southern problems' have blown into truly international proportions are foreign commentaries--especially from Malaysia--suggesting that the problems of the South are real because the people there are not really Thai.
We have to understand that the history of the southern Thailand is a clear cut case of Thai imperialism and colonisation. The southern Thai people are in fact Malays by race and Muslims by religion. They speak the Malay language...
I'll probably ignite a firefight here, but... isn't this true? If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and prays like a duck then it is a duck. And I think Thais themselves subconsciously understand this, which is why you have the "kill all the Muslims" flamage. Nobody is saying "kill the Thai Muslims", because they are already defining Muslims as "not Thai".

The Enforcer!

10-11-04, 04:42 PM

You are right in that they were Malay nearly 100 years ago .....

The Anglo-Siam Treaty of 1909 made the modern border between what were then called Siam [Thailand] and British Malaya [Malaysia] by securing Siamese authority on the provinces of Pattani, Yala, Narathiwat and Satun, which were previously part of the semi-independent Malay sultanates of Pattani and Kedah.

The Enforcer!

Nekochan

12-11-04, 12:19 AM

If what we believe is correct, no one is Thai. I am not an expert in Siam history. But Thais were ethnic groups that blended in each other for a long period of time.

If people in the South are not Thai. Lanna (North) or Esan people are not Thai, either. They had their languages, alphabets, cultures, etc. It was until late Rattakosin when a concept of nation was spreaded amont Thai elite.

But for Islam. I (and most Thais) consider Islam as the main reason that Southern people (Malay origin) cannot be simply integrated into Thai society. There is no place in Thai history for Islam way of life. Most Thais are Bhuddhists. But Buddhist way of life itself cannot penetrate Muslim tighted knitted society.

Islam in Thailand is a state within. They have their own food, holidays, language, faiths, banking system!! (no interest) We are talking about civilization within a larger civilization.

Thais know they cannot convert any Muslim! Buddhist Thais move to Southern provinces hoping just to outnumber Muslim. It does not work. Same tactics used and achieved to assimilate Chinese did not work, they fail miserbly! Inter-marriage? Muslim will never marry non Muslim! Birth control? That is against Islam.

A friend of mine asked a disturbing question when Thai news showed Thai Muslim praying for people in Afrikanistan ..... 6 Million Muslim altogether.

What if......he asked that one day there were more and more of them ..... enough to change political landscape!!

I did not answer...

But I think it is fear (and the sum of all fears) among some Thais. Fears turn to paranoid and hatred. I posted before that most people in some webs like Pantip.com agreed to the justified killing in Takbai.

They are forever strangers....so they pay.

US may suffer the same symtom ..... what if the next US president and most of the supporters (majority of people) have the names started with "Ammed Racheed"

Just like the next Malaysian premier is Mr. Lee Weng Chen (HO HO!! it's Confucious way of life, don't you buy it!!)

nathawat

16-11-04, 11:23 AM

It's good to refer history about the southern thailand story. But what's matter. Now people there must be thai because they are happy to stay in thailand, not another side of boarder. All of them, except the separatist group, respect thai laws and happy to live peacefully under our Majesty kingdom.

Here is the group that I doubt if they are really thai: The professor group on TV complaining government actions.

The professor group should not blame govermnent via media. Our nieghbors heard and laughing. Our enemy (separatist) is encouraged to do whatever they want because we are busy fighting ourselves. Our own people divided into two ideas. The prime minister has more difficulty to solve the problem because he has to fight all sides now (even his side).

To the professors, your comment may be theoritically right or may be worng. But your action (complaining via media) is totally NOT appropriated!!!! You just made our family (country) loose more dignity and unity by throwing your comments through media.

You should give your comments to government privately, if you really want to help the country.

If prime minister is the master of a house, and you (professor) are housewife. You should not shout to neighbors about your husband's mistake (even if there is one). It's shamefule and look stupid to the whole house. Would you agree?
:confused:

zero

17-11-04, 07:18 AM

> You should give your comments to government privately, if you really want to help the country.

That is a good theory, but it does not help if the government trusts that it has got absolute wisdom with its mothermilk already and therefore everyone who proposes an idea that does not match the policy of this "wisdom" is simply ignored or, even worse, faces reprisals.

> If prime minister is the master of a house, and you (professor) are housewife. You should not shout to neighbors about your husband's mistake (even if there is one). It's shamefule and look stupid to the whole house. Would you agree?

No I would not agree at all, because even in Thailand there is - although in theory only - the equalty of rights between men and women, so there is no "master of the house", but 2 equal people. So if the housewife has to say something, she is entitled to do so without asking her hubby, because he will also not ask her in first place when he has something more or less important to say. Simply think how Thailand would look today if not for the many women who run the country rather than the men. The latter hang around in bars or with their mia noi while the women run the economy. I can't remember when last time I saw a man behind a booth or stand at a market. A one-day-strike of the "housewives" in Thailand would create the complete chaos, a one-day-strike of the so-called "masters of the house" would not even be noticed, because their contribution to the life in Thailand is so unimportant. So, the housewife is in fact the one who is entitled to speak for the family!!

To come to the point, viz the problems in the South: Thailand, and in particular the PM are well advised to study the situation in other countries of the world with a minority that has a different culture, language or religion. There are examples where it works and there are examples where it gets worse and worse all the time. History shows that the reason why it comes to clashes are always the same: The majority in the country thinks that the minority has to live according to their way of life.

If Thailand would have granted the provinces a certain amount of freedom, things would have developed completely different. It was no good idea to enforce that the people in the south had to adopt Thai surnames instead of their Malayan ones after the provinces had been annexed by Thailand and it was no good idea to have so many people deported and replaced by Thai people over the last 80 or 90 years. It also was no good idea to withhold the means for an economic developement, just as a penalty because the Malayan majority in the south was not singing hymns of thanks all day long for having been annexed.

To grant the southern provinces to live according to their wishes, to help them to develop their economy, to encourage tourist developements are the best ways to stop the crisis. If the people there have the same economic standards as the rest of Thailand, noone will be interested to fight for rights, quite contrary they will do everything to keep the high standards and any remaining terrorist activities will be stopped from inside by the local people. At the moment, though, they have support, beause so many Malayan people in the southern provinces see no future. If the PM would give them a perspective for a future, the support for the terrorists will seize very quickly.

I doubt, though, that it will happen as I suggested, because the government and many Thais (mainly the "masters of the house" discussing these problems with Mekhong or Whisky at a bar) are more concerened about losing "their face" when they grant the south a few rights. If the housewives would have the power in this country, the problems in the South would have been solved already.

Mangoboy

19-11-04, 04:39 PM

I have to agree with Zero here. The 'masters of the house' have to wake up to the fact that intelligent and open discussion is the way to find solutions to difficult problems, regardless of whom brings the discussion into the open.

Respect for the public image of everybody is an imprtant mainstay of Thai culture. However, if this is done at the cost of open discourse (which allows evrybody to hear all sides of the argument and thus make better formulated decisions) then ultimately nobody benefits.

The cost of a fractured society is surely a heavier one to bare than that of a lost face or two.

If 'the masters of the house' can not accept criticism and advice regarding how to make theirs a better house (to extend the metaphore) then perhaps they should pass over the running of the house to someone else.

nathawat

20-11-04, 03:04 PM

Dear K.Zero and K. Mangoboy

First of all, sorry about using words that lead to men-women rights argument. It’s nothing to do what I tried to say.

Master of the house, in my sense, means a person who has duty to manage the country. This person has 100% right to say which direction the country should go because majority of 65 millions Thai trusts and votes to this person. The housewife means any citizen who behind the master and provide supporting role for the country’s sake. I meant “role discrimination”, not “sex discrimination”. By the way, any housewife can vote to change the master, or being a candidate for the next master as well if one wishes to. So, everyone has equal right in that sense Then, if you are elected to be master already, you also have right to make final decision by your own judgment either (can choose to accept or reject suggestion).

I have no objection on “open discussion” issue. In fact, I was really glad that the professor group went to see PM face to face (couple days before they were on TV) and discuss about this problem. It showed unity and corporation. But when they were on TV complaining what governments did wrong for the past century until the last incident in Tak Bai and did not give any more creative solutions than what most people already know (including the government), then questions pop up:

- Is it true that the government totally doing nothing what they suggested to?
- Did they really know all facts of the incident?
- Was the theory to the solution practical?
- Why they focus only on government’s mistake handling the protesting group who obviously cherish the separatist?
- What’s about the right of innocent people who has been killed by this group?

I’m sure I was not alone because I saw most SMS from other audience indicating the same doubts. To make ordinary people like me clear and believe all answers to above questions, it needs more parties involved in this type of show (government, local people, local authority, the victim relatives etc.). Then I would call it an “open discussion” where others have chances to correspond and share their facts instantly as well.

Since the show did not address above questions, here come questions about quality of the show:

- Are they really on TV just to help government solve the problem? (????)
- Did the show REALLY improve situation to the problem in hand? (Definitely not. Propaganda is the only true weapon that the separatist has. If they can prove our government is worst than them, then they will win. And the show was too much concentrate on what’s wrong with our government rather than what’s wrong with the separatist)
- Which side these professors really are? (??????)

I think this was all led to my previous post about the professors: Their comment on TV are “not appropriated” and “may theoretically right but practically wrong”.

For your reply about how previous government officer treated southern Thailand wrongly in the past decades, I certainly believe you. But I will not believe at all that it only happened in southern Thailand region. I believe the effects from the same wrong doing actions were hugely magnified in southern by many factors (I know you can guess some). So I don’t believe the former governments purposely treat this region worst than others.

For example, the recent incident that police shocked the prisoner’s testicle, what would be the news if it happened in the southern region instead? This news probably go couple world rounds and would last decades in our history, instead of ending story in our police campus and ceased within couple weeks, if it happened somewhere else.

I believe Thailand is among top countries that treat all citizens equally. I have been traveling in many countries for years. They are all envy our level of freedom and democracy that hard to find from other multi-religious countries. Why not ourselves?

boonnak

15-12-04, 12:59 AM

Thanks to the Royal Thai Police for having closed the most dangerous site http://www.manusaya.com. This site is a rightist and anti monarchy in Thailand.

However, when I visited the site via an university in Bangkok, the site still has had hundreds of visitors.

Wisarut

15-12-04, 09:23 AM

Forthe case of Manusaya_dot_com, they just advocate Republican regime over Constitutional Monarchy ... and I guess it has th base in either US or Canada ... done by Thailanders who STILL live in exile ... They just want to grab the Throne for their own selfish interests ...

The Enforcer!

08-01-05, 08:56 AM

Originally posted by Hat-Yai Junc
What country doesn't have these problems? Some of the ultra-nationalists you mention above have done a fine job of making this worse. I suspect most of them are conniving for personal gain anyway. And the ugly election looms with a Tsunami of 500 Baht notes form ALL directions.
A politician "conniving for personal gain" ... well there's a strange fact!

The Enforcer!

admin

25-06-05, 10:40 AM

Comment from a reader on the Bomb Damage story (http://www.2bangkok.com/south.shtml#fire): I don't want to minimise the troubles in the South, and I'm surprised the number of deaths hasn't caused more of a stir in the world press. But your photo of the "bomb damage" yesterday actually made me smile. From now on I'll be sure to interpret the reports of "minor structural damage" as "scorched paintwork"; and "damaging 10 vehicles" appears to mean "knocking over a row of motorbikes".
They should see the violent civil wars between security forces and rioting armed protesters at 12pm every Friday night in town centres across the UK... Come to think of it, that would probably benefit from martial law too.

ncr

18-08-05, 01:12 AM

Let them watch cable: Thailand to install TVs in restive south
http://asia.news.yahoo.com/050816/afp/050816061234asiapacificnews.html

also:

SOUTHERN GIVEAWAY: Soccer plan fails to score
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2005/08/17/headlines/index.php?news=headlines_18362203.html

WTF? I almost dropped from my chair reading this today. Is this 'government' (read: one man show with rotating puppets) totally nuts now? Kongsak Wantana achieved the dubious feat of setting a new record for disqualifying himself in office and making a fool of himself in the shortest time possible.

I mean, we are talking about an Interior Minister with thoughts like this: ......southern Muslims need to put some 'colour' in their lives with the English Premier League...... poor people never gamble because they don't have enough money to do so....... people who sit in teashops watching UBC don't have time to plant bombs....... great idea, Air Chief Marshal. Surely, the solution to all violence that plagues this planet. Why didn't this tactic occur to someone else before? Someone propose him for the Nobel Peace Prize! (How did such a person manage to become Airforce Commander, anyway?)

How much more absurd can politics in this country get?

Oh, wait a moment - also from today's Nation: the PM appoints everybody's favourite a**hole Newin Chidchob to act as a coordinator in order to solve Bangkok's traffic problems (which was welcomed by OTP's Kumropluk Suraswadi)....... (how about allowing a certain company to extend its mass transit routes instead, Mr. Thaksin????????)

BANGKOK LOGJAMS: ‘Mr Fix-it’ to tackle the traffic
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2005/08/17/national/index.php?news=national_18362235.html

The Enforcer!

18-08-05, 09:18 AM

How did such a person manage to become Airforce Commander, anyway?

Money?

The Enforcer!

GWR

17-09-05, 07:28 PM

This article by the (usually dependable) Christian Science Monitor suggests 34,000 + Buddhists have already left the afflicted provinces of Yala, Pattani & Narathiwat, out of an estimated 360,000 Buddhists in that area:-

http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0720/p06s03-woap.html

Between January and June 2005, more than 34,500 residents - mostly Buddhists - moved out of the three southernmost provinces, the Associated Press reported, citing household registration figures. Of the 1.8 million people living there, around 360,000 are Buddhists.

This exodus is having a perceptible impact on Hat-Yai land values, as most don't want to move too far. These are the ones who can afford to move. Your ordinary rubber-tapper (of any persuasion) is often stuck with living in a conflict zone; and can't afford to live elsewhere. Many teachers & civil servants also want to leave, but there aren't sufficient jobs for them elsewhere; and of course the Government has a rather (cynical) interest in their staying put; to stave off separatist attempts to appear more legitimate in the eyes of world opinion. Doubtless, many of these communities were deliberately persuaded (without the full facts) to settle in this area (decades back) to weaken such separatist claims.

The above statistic would appear to hold some truth. The collapse of the economy in these three provinces is not out of the question.

GWR

15-11-05, 03:02 PM

http://203.150.224.53/2005/11/14/opinion/index.php?news=opinion_19145675.html

The South? C’est moi!

Published on November 14, 2005

The prime minister has offered a new interpretation of the troubles in Thailand’s far South: they are all part of a plot to get rid of him.

They are orchestrated by a coalition of his enemies. The main issue is not religion, language, history, oppression, poverty, cultural differences, official neglect, the ideology of the Thai state, or whatever. “We thought it was separatism, but it turns out their main target is me.”

Maybe this revelation has some links to an academic paper that circulated earlier this year. Perhaps Thaksin read the paper. Or one of his aides summarised it for him. Or the gist reached him by some other route.

The paper was written by a British political scientist and leading commentator on Thailand. It argues that the key to understanding why the far South has blown up must be found in Thailand’s national politics, in Bangkok, not in Pattani, Yala, and Narathiwat.

Over the previous 20 years, the old separatist movement had seemed to fade away. The army established some control. Some local Muslim politicians from the far South did well in the new parliamentary politics. The few remaining separatist ideologues fled into exile. Attacks on schools and railways still occurred but were sparse and unfocused. A few old separatists metamorphosed into bandits and used violence as part of their business of protection rackets.

Why then did it blow up again? The paper argues that Thaksin’s rise to power in 2001 threatened a “network” which had dominated Thai politics over at least the previous two decades. This network included major figures in the army, the bureaucracy and other important institutions in Thai society. It was closely linked to the Democrat Party.

The central figure was General Prem Tinsulanonda who had been head of the army, then a long-standing prime minister and later head of HM the King’s Privy Council. Long after retirement, he remained a public figure with exceptional influence.

This network did not work in the front-line politics of elections or in Parliament or the Cabinet but exerted enormous influence in the dim background. It could affect key appointments, especially in the armed forces and Ministry of the Interior. It could intervene during crises when elected leaders were in trouble, and it could exert pressure in little ways which are invisible to those outside the charmed circle. According to the paper’s argument, Thaksin Shinawatra was the first elected prime minister with the power to challenge this network. The 1997 Constitution strengthened the prime minister.

The backlash from the 1997 economic crisis gave Thaksin unprecedented domination of Parliament. The massive profits of Shin Corp gave him lots of the magic ingredient in Thai politics.

Thaksin also had strong motives to challenge the network. The only other remaining party was the Democrat Party, an affiliate of this network. Political events of a decade earlier offered an important lesson.

The Chatichai government that came to power in 1988 later challenged the power of the generals and the senior bureaucrats and was promptly tossed out by a coup in 1991. Besides, there was a bigger issue. If the parliamentary system was to fulfil its constitutional role, it needed to destroy the remnants of an older political order.

According to this argument, one element of the Thaksinite assault on this old network was the abolition of the Southern Border Provinces Administrative Centre (SBPAC) in May 2002. Prem had set up the SBPAC in 1981, and it remained a key node of the network’s influence in the South and in the Army.

Thaksin initially replaced the SBPAC with the police. It was not long before the turf wars erupted. These wrangles were about the usual questions of power and face, but also about loot.

The far South has elements of the usual excitement that is found in border regions. Thai rice is smuggled southwards, consumer goods northwards. The border towns do a booming business in the sex trade, servicing customers from Malaysia and Singapore. Human-traffickers funnel people out to the world over the southern frontier. By late 2002, units of police and military in the South were using the media to attack one another for being deeply involved in these mafia businesses.

After the theft of rifles from an Army camp on January 4 2004, a report alleged that the rifles had already been sold to rebels in Aceh and the incident staged as a cover-up. This report came not from some rash journalist, self-publicising NGO or foreign organisation trying to discredit Thailand but from the Thai police, the prime minister’s previous employer. The Army was furious.

These turf wars have been a major instigating factor for the repeated revisions of the security arrangements for the South during Thaksin’s watch. According to the academic paper, this infighting had big consequences.

Competition over the border trade has become freer and more heated. Rivalry in local politics has become more open because local politicians with connections to the SBPAC no longer have special advantages.

Altogether, this created an atmosphere in which political activists could exploit the space created by the divisions among security agencies, the competition among gangs and the rivalry between local political factions. It became impossible to determine whether a killing was about separatism, turf, profit or other rivalry.

In academic circles this paper has been criticised for oversimplifying the problem. The network idea may be an important insight on the hidden realities of Thai politics, but using this as the sole way to explain the southern issue may be short-sighted. It argues that questions of religion, culture, history, poverty, bureaucratic exploitation and so on are not important.

It suggests that all is needed is an administrative fix.

Thaksin’s recent revelation goes a step further. The troubles are happening because the network is fighting back. His revelation may or may not be related to this academic paper at all, but it belongs to the same line of thinking.

He wants to sweep aside difficult questions of history, religion, and culture in favour of a simple explanation confined to the world of politics. Moreover, Thaksin’s further simplification has the hallmark of the autocrat: “It’s all about me”.

Chang Noi

GWR

18-11-05, 11:15 AM

A few days back, there were reports on some villages having created zones where there was a fairly high degree of co-operation with the authorities. At the time, I wondered just how wise this sort of publicity was - given that the Govt's own PRD probably led reporters to the area, and organised the interviews:

http://www.bangkokpost.com/171105_News/17Nov2005_news51.php

http://www.bangkokpost.com/News/18Nov2005_news51.php
SOUTHERN VIOLENCE / REVENGE MASSACRE
Rebels slay family that chose to side with state

Post reporters

A former militant who switched his allegiance to the state, along with eight members of his family, were massacred by heavily armed men who stormed their home in Narathiwat's Rangae district early yesterday morning.

[PHOTO & MAP with CAPTION:]Police examine damage at one of the houses in Ban Krathon hit by M79 grenade launchers and automatic weapons. A family of nine was wiped out and nine other people were wounded in the attack. — Tawatchai Kemgumnerd

The dead included an eight-month-old boy. Nine other people were wounded in the attack.

The Ahwaebuesa family, both parents and their seven children, was wiped out in what was described as a "revenge attack by insurgents".

The gang burst into the family's home in tambon Ba-ngo's Ban Kathong at about 1.30am.

After firing bullets and launching grenades into the house, the killers shot each member of the family at close range with handguns, forensic police officials said.

"It's the brutal work of militants. They will kill anyone if they discover they have taken sides with the government," provincial governor Pracha Terat said.

Police did not begin their investigation until daybreak for fear of another possible attack or confrontation. It was reported that villagers were gathering at the scene of the attack.

Almost 12 hours after the murders, about 300 members of the security forces finally moved in to examine the scene of the carnage.

The Ahwaebuesa family's elevated wooden house was riddled with bullet holes and the bodies of the victims were sprawled on the floor amidst spent bullet cases from M-16 and AK-47 assault rifles.

The dead were identified as Suteng, 40, his wife, Ahseeya, 42, and their seven children - Leeda, 20, Sureeyana, 18, Seera, 17, Muranee, 15, Kasama, 14, Ardehya, 8, and eight-month-old Burakon.

Police then examined two other houses in the same village where nine people were wounded. The injured were taken to Narathiwat Ratchanakharin Hospital.

They were identified as Asaming Jehsoh, 4, Marofi Jehsoh, 16, Atchawan Jehsoh, 10, one-year-old Ahrueman Jehsoh, Yukee Uma, 18, Sulaiman Uma, 7, Rosidah Yamasuesah, 40, Sakareeya Yamasuesah, 5, Abdultorleh Ahwaebuesa, 23.

A villager said he heard an explosion and then the sound of gunfire at the Ahwaebuesa house. "Several villagers opened their doors to see what happened and the assailants opened fire on them."

Authorities did not enter the village until 7am, amid rumours the village had been sealed off. "That wasn't true," the same villager said.

jpatokal

23-01-06, 01:17 PM

RKK is the Malay abbreviation of "Runda Kumpulan Kecil," which literally means "Pattani State Restoration Unit."
I'm not sure what runda means, but "Kumpulan Kecil" is literally "Small Group" -- so where is the rest of that translation coming from? Google finds a grand total of 38 hits for the phrase, and one of them (http://www.pim-fortuyn.nl/pfforum/topic.asp?whichpage=-1&TOPIC_ID=40927&REPLY_ID=491856) states that the term means "tactics for small groups" as a generic term, not the name of any specific group.

onslaught

02-02-06, 08:13 PM

i should think that the Thai's emphasizes too much on nationalism. Although it is definately a good trait, to unite the people when a crisis arises, it cannot be carried out to such an extent. Certainly, it is against the court of law that someone be declared guilty until proved innocent. This is totally outrageous! How can someone be guilty without trial. Isn't this something like exceuting a person because you like it? Isn't it like the Jew Holocaust, when Hitler wiped more than 6 million Jews off the planet. if thailand continues to be so self-minded, then i guess they might as well go into isolation. However, this is definately not a case! How can Thailand survive by itself without other countries? Does it need to trade or extablish good ties?

Wisarut

03-02-06, 01:25 AM

Khun onslaught,
Well, Many Thailanders said they don't have NATIONALISM, despite of your outcry that ""

Well, for Police, they thought that Anybody's who are NOT somebody are Guilty , even after proven Innocent .... :mad: :eek:

Sorry, Many of Thai folks would NOT listen to that Highbrow Junk, really!

onslaught

03-02-06, 08:48 PM

sincerely, I should comment that the previous thais, from the 1960s really have a strong sense of nationalism rising from their desire to honor their consitutional monarch. These kings of Thailand, definately serve as a symbol of pride for the thais, and the removal or making the kings less powerful over state affairs would definately anger the people. To define nationalism, it is really the same group of people, who live near almost in the same location, and share the same belief, religon, same goal they have for their country, and thats what binds them as a nation. By saying that most thais do not have a sense of nationalism, it means they are just a group of people who work together and if crisis befalls, they just scatter and have no desire to fight for their country. denying nationalism is equivalent to denying patriotism, because if a certain national symbol, like the king was to be assasinated, then the people would certainly be angry that they have lost their beloved king and then oppose the people who did it. Isn't it the same way like the americans, because a national symbol-- the trade towers was attacked, it bonded the americans together, to fight against the terrorists. Now, what makes these people bond? the same belief that the trade towers were important to them, it was their pride, it represented their country, thats why, when it was destroyed, the americans rebuilt it, to regain their pride, became angry for the same cause and stand to defeat whoever caused the incident.

As for the police, i must apologize that i have misunderstood the statement. However, the assertion made was equally unreasonable.

with regards to my personal opinion, I definately believe that it is right for anyone who have their point of view, whether it is really stupid or outrageous. I must stress that the previous message was my opinion and anyone is free to oppose or agree to that.

GWR

07-02-06, 11:58 PM

Patani Malay Human Rights Organization
Which might be a PULO associate, according to the Thai Government.

The site have published this translation of the official report on the Kruse Mosque incident by a government fact-finding team (released by the Thai National Reconciliation Commission):-

http://www.pmhro.org/news/krusereport.htm

And the Takbai incident:-

http://www.pmhro.org/news/takbaireport.htm

Homepage:-

http://www.pmhro.org/index.htm

Patani Malays: Population & Geographical Distribution:-

http://www.pmhro.org/patani.htm

GWR

08-02-06, 12:07 AM

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/specials/takbai/index.htm
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/specials/takbai/p1.htm
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/specials/takbai/p2.htm

This version of the Kruse/Takbai report appears to have been distilled a bit.

GWR

08-02-06, 11:18 AM

BangkokPundit

10-02-06, 09:29 AM

Often have I heard in the last few years 'We don't know who's doing this'.

This site confirms that PMHRO is thought of as a PULO offshoot:-

http://www.angelfire.com/trek/webcop/

Thanks for the Angelfire link.

As much as I agree with Thaksin on some matters, I can't fathom the government policy on the South and lack of action against police/military leaders who stuff up - not every crime requires intention! Sure, you don't want to annoy the military, afraid of a coup etc, but to nothing is just criminal.

The thing that disturbs me the most about the Tak Bai issue is the response of many Thais. I remember watching Sorayut interview Lt. Gen Pisarn on the Thai political talkshow Teung Luuk Teung Kon just after the incident. He of course said he had left the scene and wasn't responsible etc... The concerning thing for me was on the righthand side of the screen you have all the SMS messages which are sent in by people who want to comment. I was listening to Lt. Gen. Pisarn the first time round and didn't pay that much attention to what each message was saying, but I started to notice a disturbing trend so I watched the tape again. There would have been more than 100 different SMS messages and only one single message was critical of the military. Most of them were like 'you did your best', 'Keep fighting'. Here, he was admitting on TV that the army had basically stuffed up causing 78 people to die and no one cared. NOthing like, we want a proper investigation and be held responsible.

Yes, I am aware that this was not a scientific poll, but I was surprised by the lack of criticism.

Lt. Gen. Pisarn is not Gen. Pisarn after being promoted (http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?F=1091009&C=asiapac) last year.

GWR

10-02-06, 12:04 PM

Yes, that is pretty much the reality of it. Small wonder that ambitious people with some kind of status impediment often prefer to go elsewhere to make a living.

SMS isn't a particularly good Vox Populi. If you are a member of the security forces, you are more or less duty bound to show support for another; even if you know he has little merit.

Compulsive liars do have a tendency to live in their own little fantasy world. Certain sectors of society have spent so long dissembling over this issue, they have completely forgotten their own complicity in the mess.

And as regards the NRC, I'm sure the forces of recalcitrance have yet to forgive Anand Panyarachun for showing some personal initiative in 1992. His current efforts appear to be on a hiding to nothing.

Little wonder that some folk are moving towards far more radical (& dangerous) solutions. The reality is that 'ethnic cleansing' has been going on for some years. We may not be so very far away from an extremely ugly backlash from Thailand's majority.

BangkokPundit

10-02-06, 07:13 PM

SMS isn't a particularly good Vox Populi. If you are a member of the security forces, you are more or less duty bound to show support for another; even if you know he has little merit.

I realise this. However, the sheer numbers shocked me a little bit. Newspaper coverage and comments on stories on the various newspaper websites in the aftermath of Tak Bai was quite similiar. Going from memory, the numbers weren't as skewed as the SMS poll, but still a vast majority were either criticising protestors saying they brought it up themselves, saying the military did all they could etc...

I don't doubt there was some members of the security forces sticking up for their colleagues, but I don't think all of the people sending in SMS messages were members of the security forces

GWR

11-02-06, 12:10 AM

This Bangkok Post probably won't last long, so I've posted the most relevant quote in below:-

http://www.bangkokpost.com/News/10Feb2006_news12.php

A recent research study found that the southern situation has become increasingly violent with most victims being Muslims.

A study by Assist Prof Srisomprob Jitpiromsri, from the political science faculty at Prince of Songkla University in Pattani, shows a total of 2,940 people were killed or wounded in the violence in 2004 and 2005 - 1,175 of them died.

The findings showed 51.7% of the victims were Muslims or 607 people, followed by Buddhists, 45.8% or 538 people.

Most victims were civilians, or 471 people in 2004 and 564 in 2005, followed by police (247 officers in 2004 and 154 in 2005), soldiers (91 officers in 2004 and 131 in 2005).

GWR

16-04-06, 01:11 AM

Found this in the recent news section of Amnesty International USA. It appears to date from the end of 2005. Will read before adding any further comment. Maybe this one missed the usual Thaksin rant, because of the political crisis in Bangkok:-

http://www.amnestyusa.org/news/document.do?id=ENGASA390012006

Scuba22

30-05-06, 04:09 PM

Mr Naphat & Mr Pundit:

Thanks for the links to the articles regarding the South. Unfortunately, many were paid content. I did find this overview from the US Navy Postgraduate School: http://www.ccc.nps.navy.mil/si/2005/Feb/croissantfeb05.asp

I'd be interested in your take on what it says, especially regarding the history. The basic idea seems to be that there's a long history of attempted "Siamification" of the South that they've resisted; things got better with Prem, who pursued a more multi-ethnic co-existence type of approach.

For the past few years, it cites a number of causes for the worsening situation, including an attempt by TRT to impose more central control in order to weaken the southern Democrat infrastructure, leading to a resurgence in resistance thinking; the TRT's completely ineffectual handling of that resurgence; connections with international Islamic revolutionary/ insurgent movements; and also continuing disparities in economic development between the South and Bangkok (though i would have thought this last point was more of an issue in Issan where TRT's support is very high).

What strikes me here is the eerie similarity to TRT's activities regarding rural development - policy based on marketing rather than problem-solving, coupled with behind-the-scenes maneuvers to consolidate power. Sooner or later, the fact that you have no real workable solutions will be evident despite your marketing pitch. When people are shooting at you, that's sooner; when you need to wait for widespread rural bankruptcies, that's later. - but we'll get there.

I can't see any substantial, fact-based, honest objective assessment of Thaksin or TRT that could come to any other conclusion that he/they are mostly about marketing hype to gain votes while consolidating power and wealth through various activities that they prefer to keep hidden. I'm still waiting to hear about any specific policy or program that can be shown to have improved Thailand in the past five years.

Is unsubstantiated slander really necessary to get rid of these liars and crooks? It's too depressing to think that liars and crooks are the best the country can do.

Cheers,

Scuba22

BangkokPundit

30-05-06, 05:41 PM

Just quickly as I am working on a deadline - but it would nag at the back of my mind if I didn't reply.

I think the article you link is reasonably well-written and I have read it before - it least tries to look at multiple factors.

I'd be interested in your take on what it says, especially regarding the history. The basic idea seems to be that there's a long history of attempted "Siamification" of the South that they've resisted; things got better with Prem, who pursued a more multi-ethnic co-existence type of approach.

On the Prem issue, I think he did a good job. He stopped the assimilation policy, but Thaksin didn't start it again. If anything the 1997 Constitution includes greater religious freedom and community rights than previous constitutions. However, Thaksin didn't reimpose the assimilation policy when TRT came into office in 2001. In fact, since the mid-90s, when Prem was no longer in power, greater efforts have been made to allowing and promoting the use of the Malay language. This has been expanded in the last couple of years.

For the past few years, it cites a number of causes for the worsening situation, including an attempt by TRT to impose more central control in order to weaken the southern Democrat infrastructure, leading to a resurgence in resistance thinking;

Now, I am not going to dispute that this has taken place, but this seems more of a correlation than a causation issue. I think this ICG report (http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=3436&l=1)(p33-34) make a better argument, but to me it still doesn't explain how this caused the violence - ICG also don't mention that other institutions were then set up after the dissolution of SBPAC.

In hindsight, it was a mistake to dissolve SBPAC and CPM 43, but on its own I am not sure that this would have prevented the violence.

the TRT's completely ineffectual handling of that resurgence;

I think this links to what I say above, but it is not a cause of the violence. It hasn't helped. I think a better argument was what did the government know in 2001-2003 about the violence and why didn't it do more to stop it from expanding then - although if the government had arrested anyone they would be criticised as well so sometimes it is a no-win situation.

connections with international Islamic revolutionary/ insurgent movements;

See I think this factor is often downplayed, but there are more religious overtones to the current violence than previously. Urban Buddhist civilians are now the major target of the militant/terrorist groups and not military and police officers based in rural areas. Beheadings are often used.

and also continuing disparities in economic development between the South and Bangkok (though i would have thought this last point was more of an issue in Issan where TRT's support is very high).

I don't this factor is a major factor because, as you state, the economic situation in the 3 southern border provinces is not as bad as it is in other parts of the countries. Unfortunately, this factor is one that sounds easy to solve as the government can just try to throw money at the problem.

Internationally, some dispute the link between poverty and terrorism. One of the journal articles I linked to, also questions this assumption in relation to the 3 southern border provinces. This ICG report (http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=3436&l=1)(p33) also questions this assumption

I will try to respond in full next week.

Scuba22

30-05-06, 05:59 PM

Mr Pundit:

Thanks for the cogent replies and the links. I'm looking forward to reading the ICG reports.

Regarding the role of international Islamist networks in Southern Thailand, I've heard lots of different accounts from people who you'd think should know something about the situation (e.g. top US diplomats). Yet I find the disparity of conclusions to be quite astounding - from "its a purely a local affair" to "al-Quaeda's behind it all". Frankly, I think the whole area of international islamist terrorism is so charged both emotionally and politically, and that there's so much misinformation out there, both deliberate and unintentional, that I find it difficult to believe anything that I don't experience personally (I also feel that way about most "news" I read about Thailand, and by extension, about anything). Of course, with regards to international terrorism, I'm not all that keen to experience any of that personally.

I have the similar skepticism about the poverty-terrorism connection. I think it's more complicated than that. But let's leave that for later - I'll take a look at the ICG paper on that as well.

Cheers,

Scuba22

PAC

01-06-06, 02:28 AM

Mr Pundit:

Thanks for the cogent replies and the links. I'm looking forward to reading the ICG reports.

Regarding the role of international Islamist networks in Southern Thailand, I've heard lots of different accounts from people who you'd think should know something about the situation (e.g. top US diplomats). Yet I find the disparity of conclusions to be quite astounding - from "its a purely a local affair" to "al-Quaeda's behind it all".

Scuba22

Scuba22 - I second the ICG recommendation - very informative.

On the "international" component of the conflict in the South, excluding the role of ethnic Malays, the violence has, from all accounts I can find, been homegrown. Where the outside world has played a role is in the shaping of the movement and in the techniques employed. Thus we see in Pattani the same IED's used in Iraq, built according to directions on the internet. We also see a strategy similar to the one advocated by various Islamic extremist groups - targeting both the state' soft presence (i.e. teachers) as well as fellow Muslims viewed as failing to follow the Shari'a (i.e. working with the state).

To me the most interesting thing to date has been the lack of attacks outside of the South. Is it a conscious decision to avoid a direct confrontation with the state? An inability to carry out attacks in Bangkok? A belief that doing so does not fit into the movement's plans?

Tettyan

01-06-06, 07:54 PM

I've been quite surprised at the level of autonomy available at the local level if anyone bothers to exercise it. I had always assumed that Thailand was very centrally run, but what I've seen upcountry is that much of this is based on budget allocations. A municipal mayor or provincial authority using local funds can do quite a bit if they wanted to - but of course a lot of local politics is precisely about getting central funds.

That sounds pretty similar to Japan, where local governments also appear quite powerful on paper. One problem that people tend to focus on is the ability to secure funds and an adequete tax base. The other factor that I don't think gets as much attention as it should is the lack of qualified personnel and human resouces, especially in smaller and more isolated local governments. There's not much one can do with local autonomy if you're not quite sure how to deal with it.

Why don't the Democrats (or anyone else for that matter) see the opportunity in local government? The Republicans in the US and even Hamas saw it and rode it to power. Lessons don't seem to make it over here.

I think this may be changing, and none too soon. After some initial reluctance, the Dems ultimately backed Prai Pattanao's decision to resign from parliament to run for Hat Yai Mayor (I think GWR probably knows more about this than I). And they did eventually field some pretty high-profile candidates in the 2003 PAO elections, if I recall correctly. I'm still waiting though for the day when the Dems field candidates for all municapal and TAO elections...

BTW - I sent you a private email, did you get it?

I did get it, thanks. I sent a reply a while back, did you get it? Let me know if you didn't, I'll send it again.

BangkokPundit

01-06-06, 10:32 PM

To me the most interesting thing to date has been the lack of attacks outside of the South. Is it a conscious decision to avoid a direct confrontation with the state? An inability to carry out attacks in Bangkok? A belief that doing so does not fit into the movement's plans?

I don't think it is the inability to carry out attacks attacks in Bangkok which is holding them back. PULO's FAQ which is no longer online does provide a reason. The relevant part (which I have translated into English is:

Do you know if PULO is a rebellion who want a separate [territory] by criminal means?

PULO is not a rebellion. PULO wants to reclaim the right of the Malay-Pattani people and that is land of Pattani Raya.

PULO's aim is not to be a separatist movement. PULO wants to reclaim independence over the land which has been lost.

PULO has never intended to attack the Siamese people in Siamese territory.

Therefore, PULO and other Pattani independence movements are not acting against law and morality.

Now, I don't think PULO personally are behind the violence, but the different groups share similiar values so I think it is likely that they have same view which is attacks in Siamese Territory are not justified, but attacks in "Pattani Raya" (Greater Pattani)* are justified.

The FAQ then seems to justify attacks on Siamsese Territory by stating that Thailand has also used military force. It states:

Is the use of arms against the government a rebellion or terrorism?

Siamese people should ask themselves the same question regarding King Naresuan and King Taksin who regained independence from Burma, did they do so by legitimate means?

NOTE: The use of the term "Siam", they never refer to the government as the Thai government just the Siamese government.

*which includes Setun (Satun), Singaranakhara (Songkhla), Yala, Bangnara (Narathiwat) and Pattani (Pattani)

Scuba22

01-06-06, 11:53 PM

Tettyan -

Actually I didn't get your response - can you please re-send? Thanks!

lack of qualified personnel and human resouces, especially in smaller and more isolated local governments.

Very true. I've been seeing this first-hand working in a rather technical area out in the provinces. People with hardly a high-school education are trying to make pretty complicated decisions. Corruption gets the general press for things being difficult in the provinces, and it is definitely a problem; but even if things were completely clean, it's not like the countryside would magically develop. That's the main gripe I have with TRT policy, it pretends that throwing money around solves everything - it doesn't, and getting people to believe it does is worse than doing nothing, IMHO.

I'm still waiting though for the day when the Dems field candidates for all municapal and TAO elections...

Fielding and winning spots is a start, but then you've got to do something with the position to be credible. Christian fundamentalists in the US got on school boards and started pushing creationism; Hamas didn't even bother with positions and just provided social services for their communities - look where they are now. Contrast that with the Democrats who've had the BMA for a few years now - I don't really see them having made a big splash where they could. In fact I see some pretty dodgy looking overpasses that look like big boondoggles to me.

OK man, I'll hope to see your email soon.

Cheers,

Scuba22

Scuba22

02-06-06, 12:04 AM

... I think it is likely that they have same view which is attacks in Siamese Territory are not justified...

This is actually quite consistent with what I have read about various Islamist movements - that there were separatist movements as in the Philippines and "national liberation" movements as in the Sudan and Egypt, but as of 9/11, there were only a very small minority of Islamists who advocated targetting the US or the West in general. In fact the vast majority of folks captured in the Afghan Taliban training camps had nothing to do with al-Quaeda; they were training for operations against their home governments. And now they're sitting around in Guantanamo.

Of course, US actions in Iraq and elsewhere have managed to create a far bigger enemy than every existed before - but that's another story (or perhaps not).

I've been reading the ICG report and it's striking me how relatively mundane and easily solvable many of the complaints have been - teaching in the local language, wearing muslim dress - doesn't seem like it's worth engendering violent protest to allow. Having dual legal systems for different people is somewhat problematic, but historical "assimilation policies" like having Buddhist monks teaching ethics and southern schools seem needlessly provocative.

Thais aren't the only ones struggling with making a multicultural society work; I do wonder why it's so damn difficult.

Cheers,

Scuba22

PAC

02-06-06, 01:41 AM

This is actually quite consistent with what I have read about various Islamist movements - that there were separatist movements as in the Philippines and "national liberation" movements as in the Sudan and Egypt, but as of 9/11, there were only a very small minority of Islamists who advocated targetting the US or the West in general. In fact the vast majority of folks captured in the Afghan Taliban training camps had nothing to do with al-Quaeda; they were training for operations against their home governments. And now they're sitting around in Guantanamo.
Scuba22

I think you are right on in your comments, although the line between fighting home governments and targeting Western interests in one’s home country may not be so distinct. The attacks on 9-11 marked a traumatic turning point for the Islamic movement, and created significant rifts in it. The decision to attack the "far" enemy was anything from a unanimous one, and in retrospect some radical Islamist thinkers have quietly (and in some cases not so quietly) condemned the attacks for the violent response they provoked from the West. The “national liberation” movement in Egypt was from its earliest days firmly grounded in radical Islamist thinking. The goal was to set up a true Islamic regime. Unable to win popular support and at the same time severely depleted by effective (and brutal) prosecution by Egyptian forces, the movement split following the assassination of Anwar Sadat. The Egyptian Islamic Group (EIG) pushed for non-violent action while the Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ) under Ayman al-Zawahiri wanted to continue the jihad. Much of EIJ, including al-Zawahiri relocated to Afghanistan where they began to interact with Bin Laden’s movement.

I've been reading the ICG report and it's striking me how relatively mundane and easily solvable many of the complaints have been - teaching in the local language, wearing muslim dress - doesn't seem like it's worth engendering violent protest to allow.
Scuba22

At this point, I think the “ideological” component has made the problem much more challenging. During the 1970s and 80s, the key issue for the various groups (with the possible later exception of the GMIP) was an independent Patani. The idea of establishing a strict Ummah was still foreign. Today that has changed; the independence issue has become a way for the insurgents to drive a wedge between the Muslim population and the government. Reestablishing an approach similar to Prem’s "Policy of Attraction" during the early 1980s will certainly help win the common man back, but it won’t solve all of the problems. The key is to couple this approach with continued efforts to peruse the violent extremist core through better intelligence and more restrained military action.

PAC

02-06-06, 01:55 AM

Now, I don't think PULO personally are behind the violence, but the different groups share similiar values so I think it is likely that they have same view which is attacks in Siamese Territory are not justified, but attacks in "Pattani Raya" (Greater Pattani)* are justified.

Its interesting that PULO explicitly rules out attacks in Siamese Territory - weren't they responsible for the 4 bombings in Bangkok in July of 1980? (Could be PULO vs. New PULO?)

The one issue I would take with this explanation for the lack of violence outside of the deep South is, that as you point out, PULO is not alone. I’m not sure the main goal of other groups is territorial, establishing an Islamic Southeast Asia remains a driving force in some of their ideology. While this may not be a realistic goal, it does suggest a willingness to adopt 'outside' thinking, which may include targeting Siamese Territory. Of course it hasn't happened so maybe you are correct.

Scuba22

02-06-06, 09:49 AM

... the line between fighting home governments and targeting Western interests in one’s home country may not be so distinct.

Right, I should have been more clear - I meant to say that the idea of targetting the Western homeland - US or Europe - was a small minority opinion among islamists prior to the Iraq war. I'm no expert in this, most of what I'm saying comes from a BBC documentary, "The Power of Nightmares" by Adam Curtis - it seems well researched, but I'd be happy to hear about holes in its story.

The piece states that al-Zawahiri was one of the few proponents of attacking the US at the source, but he never got much traction - apparently he never had much of a following in Afghanistan, often hiring people to stand around him during media appearances like on CNN. His deal with Osama was to make Osama the leader in return for access to Osama's money. But they still never had much of a following. According to the documentary, the Islamist movement was pretty much dead after the Afganistan action, but came to life powerfully after the Iraq war, which mobilized lots of latent anti-Western feeling.

The attacks on 9-11 marked a traumatic turning point for the Islamic movement, and created significant rifts in it.

Curtis claims that 9-11 was more of a "last-ditch effort" rather than the start of a new wave of terrorism, implying that if the US had stopped with the Afghanistan invasion, western-targetted terrorism would have been pretty much over. You think that's right?

Reestablishing an approach similar to Prem’s "Policy of Attraction" during the early 1980s will certainly help win the common man back, but it won’t solve all of the problems. The key is to couple this approach with continued efforts to peruse the violent extremist core through better intelligence and more restrained military action.

One might assume that winning the common man back would help with the intelligence situation. I'm struggling to think of violent separatist movements that were eventually placated - is ETA negotiating with Madrid now? - any examples you can think of?

Cheers,

Scuba22

PAC

03-06-06, 01:14 AM

Right, I should have been more clear - I meant to say that the idea of targetting the Western homeland - US or Europe - was a small minority opinion among islamists prior to the Iraq war. I'm no expert in this, most of what I'm saying comes from a BBC documentary, "The Power of Nightmares" by Adam Curtis - it seems well researched, but I'd be happy to hear about holes in its story.
Scuba22

I haven't had a chance to watch Curtis' piece - it's on my list though. I'm not sure I would agree with his assertion that 9-11 was a last gasp action. The success of al Qaeda's operations against western targets prior to 9-11 suggests the group was solidifying its control over the portion of the extremist movement advocating a global jihad. Well funded, thanks to bin Laden and the Saudi charity network, and able to attract recruits, it's difficult to imagine why the 9-11 plan would have been a desperate last gasp. The US response certainly caught the movement off guard, as indications are bin Laden assumed the Bush administration would reply along the lines of the Clinton government following the East Africa embassy attacks.

The effectiveness of the US action Afghanistan certainly weakened al Qaeda, but would the problem be over if the Iraq invasion had not taken place? My guess is that had the War on Terror stopped with Afghanistan, al Qaeda would have retained enough ability to carry out attacks. JI remained fully capable and demonstrated its willingness to attack prior to the 2003 Iraq invasion. The occupation of Iraq represents a tremendous PR nightmare for the West and a recruiting dream for the extremist movement. The huge commitment of assets and energy alone has hampered the West ability to persecute the real war on terrorism. In that sense I would agree with Curtis - we would be better off had the invasion not taken place, but free from worrying about terrorism? No.

One might assume that winning the common man back would help with the intelligence situation. I'm struggling to think of violent separatist movements that were eventually placated - is ETA negotiating with Madrid now? - any examples you can think of?

Scuba22

The infamous cliché "winning heats and minds" comes to mind. Gaining the support of the population is vital in any counterinsurgency effort. In my opinion it's particularly key in the case of the deep South where the battle for the support of the Muslim population has yet to be decided, and where the extremists' use of abhorrent levels of violence offer an opening for the government to sway opinion.

Placating separatist movements often presents a challenge for governments in that it is difficult to negotiate with groups bent of dismantling the fabric of the state. The willingness to come to the table in the case of ETA and also the IRA(PIRA), I think, reflects more of an admittance of exhaustion than anything else. The IRA's legitimate claim to being a separatist movement as opposed to an organized crime syndicate has been dubious for some years, and ETA's inability to hold the Basque public?s support made continuing the struggle difficult.

GWR

05-06-06, 01:01 AM

I've been trying to figure out where Dusun Nyior is, the small 'town' that was apparently bombed by the RTAF as a result of an insurrection in the late 1940s. It is almost certain that the Thai Government decided to rename it. All I know is that it was in Narathiwat Province's Rangae District. Indeed, I'm wondering if it was the admin center of Rangae District itself. Some people call the station there Tanyong Mat. I suspect the government deliberately decided not to call it Tanyong Mat District because it was too Malay. No map of the area shows Dusun Nyior.

Wisarut

05-06-06, 01:35 AM

Tanyong Mas is the name of Commune where the station is ... Tanyogn mas is the main station for both Maung district and Ra Nga district of Narathiwat since there s a road direct from Tanyong Mas station to both Ra Ngae district and Muang district at bang Nara Commune .... 20 Baht to go from Tanyogn Mas to Bang Nara :)

Scuba22

05-06-06, 02:15 PM

A bit off topic re Southern violence, but since we're here...

The success of al Qaeda's operations against western targets prior to 9-11 suggests the group was solidifying its control...

My guess is that had the War on Terror stopped with Afghanistan, al Qaeda would have retained enough ability to carry out attacks.

One of Curtis' central theses is that "corporate al-Qaeda" as an structured hierarchical organization never really existed; instead there was an "entrepreneurial al-Quaeda" with various individuals and small groups around the world who would put together plans and projects and then try to get funding from Osama, a kind of "angel investor" - or perhaps "devil investor" is more appropriate. The term "al-Qaeda" apparently was never really in use prior to 9/11, and Curtis claims that the corporate structure was invented by US prosecutors trying Osama in absentia for the earlier (1992?) WTC bombing. For that trial, prosecutors used federal RICO statutes, which were originally written to combat Mafia families with a hierarchy, therefore they needed to create a hierarchical structure to make the case - hence the invention of "al-Quaeda" with Osama as the string-pulling mastermind.

Curtis claims that the major enemy was not an organization, but an idea -the idea that the west should be attacked directly. Whether that idea was on the rise or decline in 2001, I don't know. It's definitely on the rise now, that's evident.

Curtis never claims that terrorism is benign or noexistent, but that its structure is far more complicated than we have been led to believe, and that our reaction to it has been both misguided and way out of proportion to the real threat (as opposed to, say, securing nuclear material in the ex-USSR - a far more dangerous situation that gets very little media attention). A lone financier (or small group) willing to provide money for various nefarious schemes is a very different thing than an organized group. It always makes me wonder when the media reports that one of the "top people" in al-Qaeda has been captured or killed. What does that even mean? Is there a Board? An Executive Committee? The difference has major implications on how to fight these groups.

Where the situation starts looking similar to me as the Southern Issue (the little bits I've read of that) is that I bet the structure of the insurgents in the South is similarly complicated - we already see that with various groups out there. And of course the underlying issues are also far more complex than simply "they hate our freedom" type of rhetoric.

Cheers,

Scuba22

PAC

06-06-06, 12:24 AM

Has anybody seen an English version of the NRC recommendations report that was released 6/5/6? Not sure TRT will pay much attention to it but should provide some fascinating insights into the south.

PAC

06-06-06, 12:54 AM

One of Curtis' central theses is that "corporate al-Qaeda" as an structured hierarchical organization never really existed; instead there was an "entrepreneurial al-Quaeda" with various individuals and small groups around the world who would put together plans and projects and then try to get funding from Osama, a kind of "angel investor" - or perhaps "devil investor" is more appropriate.
Scuba22

Curtis' theses are probably both right and wrong. He really seems to be arguing both sides of the structure issue - his acknowledgement that bin Laden served as a financier confirms that a structure existed. I don't think many experts would argue there was a formal "corporate" org chart, but the loose network of affiliates operated within a system with leaders, rules and norms.

Curtis claims that the major enemy was not an organization, but an idea -the idea that the west should be attacked directly. Whether that idea was on the rise or decline in 2001, I don't know. It's definitely on the rise now, that's evident.
Scuba22

The struggle has always been against the ideas behind extremist Salafi jihad. Bin Laden gave it the ability to carry out operations involving years of planning, as opposed to the much shorter and less logistically demanding operations we have seen in Spain, Indonesia, and the UK.

Curtis never claims that terrorism is benign or nonexistent, but that its structure is far more complicated than we have been led to believe, and that our reaction to it has been both misguided and way out of proportion to the real threat (as opposed to, say, securing nuclear material in the ex-USSR - a far more dangerous situation that gets very little media attention).
Scuba22

Agree 100%. The US response is certainly a case of a knee-jerk reaction. Not to say there isn’t a threat, just that it doesn’t justify the huge response.

A lone financier (or small group) willing to provide money for various nefarious schemes is a very different thing than an organized group. It always makes me wonder when the media reports that one of the "top people" in al-Qaeda has been captured or killed. What does that even mean? Is there a Board? An Executive Committee? The difference has major implications on how to fight these groups.
Scuba22

A hierarchy certainly exists. In the case of al-Qaeda, it’s very much an organization in flux due to the west's efforts to destroy it. A fascinating book on the structure of terrorist groups is "Understanding Terror Networks" by Marc Sageman. In a one sentence summary - he suggests the key to understanding networks is to understand social bonds rather than ideology.

Where the situation starts looking similar to me as the Southern Issue (the little bits I've read of that) is that I bet the structure of the insurgents in the South is similarly complicated - we already see that with various groups out there. And of course the underlying issues are also far more complex than simply "they hate our freedom" type of rhetoric.
Scuba22

Understanding problems in the South certainly posses a challenging situation. Thaksin's heavy-handed approach has had a tremendous impact on the military's ability to gather intelligence and thus understanding.

GWR

06-06-06, 01:28 AM

For all the intrigues involved in the south (like just who is killing who to what purpose) I think it is well worth thinking about what it is like to be a southern muslim. To be successful in a modern sense, you could do one (or two) of the following. Most Thai Buddhists will be only too glad if you go and work elsewhere, as long as you don't bring any nasty doctrines home with you:-

1) Renounce the faith or just put it on a backburner.
2) Move out of the region to an urban center elsewhere in Thailand.
3) Go and work in Malaysia and be treated like shit (as are many foreign nationals who work there). But at least you might make some money.

Of course, all of these contribute even further to the malaise of the region. You are also faced with the problem that Thailand is unlikely to ever allow independence or even give you more autonomy. (Can't open that can of worms can we? Every region of the country would want it!) And Malaysians may wish to cause instability in your region, but its central government hates the idea of another fundamentalist state next to Kelantan.

On top of that it is worth considering the following. Has any part of Thailand really improved since you first knew it? Sure it's more developed, but it's poorest (many of whom live in the deep south) have precious little to show. And in a political sense, nothing ever really gets better. Thailand is still racked with the same lack of political freedom it knew pre-1932. Sure, there is a constitution; but since when has it provided any form of security to the less well-heeled anywhere in Thailand. All most Thais have achieved over the years is more shopping opportunities. If your aspirations lie beyond 'shop till you drop' you are usually pissing into the wind.

All of the above pretty much guarantees that the southern problem is unsolvable. All the nice words about peace have been said before. What these usually amount to is that some national politician wants to share the profit from local initiatives with a small group of local politicians (let's say Chaowalit and the Wada Faction here for example). The benefits of such projects never really filter down. And the Muslim establishment in Bangkok doesn't really have much in common with its southern brethren.

We could talk about the history of the unrest, and the outside intrigues and ideologies here for ever. It's obvious this conflict cannot be resolved with the current mindset of Thai politicians, as they have failed to generate any tangible political progress in the country as a whole since 1932. Under these circumstances, it's a wonder the south isn't even more receptive to outside radical agendas.

GWR

06-06-06, 12:56 PM

Featured Frontpage:-

http://www.2bangkok.com/06/southjune2006-john.jpg

Village safety volunteer shot dead - June 4, 2006
Mr. John reports: On June 4, Mr. Abdullah Homprasert, a 40-year-old village safety volunteer, was shot twice while he was driving his motorcycle back from sending his son to Tadika School one kilometer from his home. He always carried his gun. After investigation, it was found that two bad guys followed and shot him. When he fell, they took his gun. The police assumed they planned the shooting because the deceased had spoken out forcefully against terrorists.
(Photo: Mr. John for 2Bangkok.com)

Time to spend less money on the glut of golf-playing generals and more on protection for guys like this.

These guys are apparently 100% expendable.

ncr

13-06-06, 04:31 PM

Well, we didn't expect anything else, did we? Still, what a lame excuse. :eek:

From The Nation (7 June 2006):

Govt shrugs off NRC final report (http://nationmultimedia.com/2006/06/07/regional/regional_30005908.php)

The caretaker government yesterday gave the cold shoulder to the final report submitted on Monday by the National Reconciliation Commission (NRC) on ways to end the violence in the South, with senior officials saying they have no time to read it. Deputy Prime Minister Chidchai Vanasatidya, who oversees issues relating to the South, said he had not yet read the report, which proposed the government employ peaceful means to contain violence in the region, rather than relying heavily on military operations. "I have sore eyes. No, I have not yet read the report. I have not had time to consider it," said Chidchai, who is also a member of the NRC. [!]

The 15-month-old commission was disbanded yesterday after submitting the report to the government. The report, dubbed "Overcoming Violence through the Power of Reconciliation", cited economic abandonment, a misreading of local history, ignorance of local feelings concerning identity and injustice as the root causes of the violence over the past two and a half years.

Another deputy prime minister, Wissanu Krea-ngam, said the Cabinet had received the report and assigned the government-sponsored Independent Commission on Justice and Civil Liberties of the Southern Border Provinces (ICJC) to study the findings. The ICJC, chaired by former Senate president Ukrit Mongkolnavin, will digest the report and return to the government with its recommendations - if there are any urgent tasks in the report that the government badly needs to respond to, Wissanu said.

Religious leaders in the deep South, however, urged the government to quickly implement measures suggested by the NRC to end the conflict in the predominantly Muslim region. Yala provincial Islamic committee chairman Abdullahmae Jehsae said the government should adopt the NRC's idea of passing the Peaceful Reconciliation in the Southern Border Provinces Act, to establish a number of "peace championing" bodies to solve the problems in the South. The report was compiled with input from local residents and concerned people, he said. The government does not need to do anything other than implement it, he said.

A spate of violence has rocked the deep South since the beginning of 2004. The violence takes place on an almost daily basis and has claimed more than 1,300 lives so far. There was fresh violence yesterday in Yala as an ex-ranger was shot dead in the heart of the city while packing his belongings at a market to return home. Two gunmen on a motorbike fired three shot at Command Sgt-Major Anmart Chuliwan, 50, who worked as a vendor of second-hand clothes. He died instantly at the market at about 1.30pm.

GWR

13-06-06, 08:46 PM

The vast majority of Thailand's politicians really seem to believe that 'Mai Pen Rai' is a valid political standpoint. Another corker from a PM used to be 'Mai Mee Bunha'. A slightly more urbane (and just as corrupt) PM liked to show off his international sophistication by saying it in something approximating English - "No Problem!".

Actually the thought that they don't have time to read it is not necessarily a false claim. Maybe, it just indicates that they rarely read anything in any depth. I doubt that they read the small print of the Hopewell Project, for example. Note for example that yer man's own reading list rarely strays beyond the sort of Reader's Digest genre of dangerously oversimplified economic thinking.

The real tragedy is that there is no one out there with either the bollocks or the intellect to begin to tackle this problem. When things die down a bit, it will get swept under the carpet again for the umpteenth time.

Anand poured his heart and soul into the constitution, only to see Thaksin use it as a door mat. It must have been a real pisser to embark on the NRC project knowing full well that it would end up being as good as useless.

GWR

14-06-06, 03:08 PM

That Chang Noi Column featured frontpage yesterday deserves a more permanent link :-

http://www.geocities.com/changnoi2/reconciliation.htm

Naphat

15-06-06, 02:36 AM

The English translation of the executive summary of the report is out; you can download it at the NRC site.

http://www.nrc.or.th/th/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_details&gid=30&Itemid=47

Chang Noi has already made a good summary of the report, but one thing stood out for me -- one of the immediate reconciliation measures:

2. The NRC proposes that the state clearly demonstrate that it chooses to engage in dialogue with the militants, and ensures the coherence of security policy on this matter.

Which leads me to wonder how the report will be received by the public at large. It's already in a sense watered-down without any recommendation for any form of autonomy (the full report quotes section 1 of the constitution "Thailand is one and indivisible Kingdom."), so hopefully it will be more acceptable to the wider majority. We need more public debate on this.

admin

15-06-06, 09:36 AM

Does anyone know when the full report will be available in English?

ncr

16-06-06, 04:27 PM

As per today's frontpage:

Lull ends in savage wave of 44 blasts (http://nationmultimedia.com/2006/06/16/headlines/headlines_30006582.php) - The Nation, June 16, 2006

2 dead, 25 injured; Thaksin 'lost for words' as to why authorities could not prevent attacks...

PM: Government must boost counter-insurgency measures (http://etna.mcot.net/query.php?nid=22613) - TNA, June 15, 2006

New Militants evolve as military wilts (http://nationmultimedia.com/2006/06/16/opinion/opinion_30006576.php) - The Nation, June 16, 2006

...Without a doubt, yesterday's attack was another slap in the face of the country's security apparatus. Like previous incidents, our esteemed political leaders were left with virtually nothing to say - merely mumbling their way from one interview to the next, unabashedly saying how government policy has been on the right track and how things are going to improve...

This only shows that choosing to ignore the recommendations of the NRC report would be a big mistake. A very big mistake.

ncr

16-06-06, 05:46 PM

More from TNA, 16 June 2006:

Songkhla responds to southern bombings (http://etna.mcot.net/query.php?nid=22615)

SONGKHLA, June 15 (TNA) - Police are stepping up security measures throughout the business district of Hat Yai, the Southern region's key commercial centre, following Thursday's bombings in southernmost provinces.

Until now, Songkhla has been considered to be outside the insurgency-affected area.

Police launched more frequent patrols at Hat Yai railway station, asking passengers to watch out for hidden explosives or suspicious-looking objects or persons and to immediately alert the authorities if they find one.

Security measures are also intensified at and around Hat Yai bus terminal, hotels, trading centres and community areas.

Additionally, Songkhla police have gone on alert in other districts, Chana, Thepha, Saba Yoi and Nathawi, which border on the southernmost provinces. (TNA)-E008

Scuba22

17-06-06, 07:28 PM

It doesn't surprise me in the least that this crew would ignore an objective non-partisan recommendation about solving problems. That's not what this government is about, similar to the Bush admin in the US.

The electoral system is supposed to put into power people who can govern, but both in Thailand and in the US, I think the system has been comprehensively gamed, so that now the winners are the ones who figured out how to win in the system, regardless of whether they can actually govern or not. We've seen how a combination of ruthless personal enrichment, media savvy and electoral process control can put people into power who have absolutely no idea of how to govern.

Our only hope is that more people wake up to this reality and refuse to be continually manipulated.

Cheers.

Scuba22

GWR

19-06-06, 12:02 PM

I believe this article may have showcased by one of our posters before, but it seems to me worth remembering:-

March 2005
Understanding the Situation in the South as a “Millenarian Revolt”
Nidhi Aeusrivongse

Editor’s Note: Nidhi Aeusrivongse has been the dominant figure in Thai historical scholarship for the past two decades. Long on the faculty of Chiang Mai University, he earned a doctorate in history at the University of Michigan in 1976 with a dissertation on literature and nationalism in Indonesia.

http://kyotoreview.cseas.kyoto-u.ac.jp/issue/issue5/

PAC

20-06-06, 12:51 AM

Does anybody have the English summary? The link on the NRC site seems dead. If anybody downloaded a copy could they post it?

Thanks

admin

20-06-06, 01:01 AM

i just put a copy here: http://www.2bangkok.com/06/nrcreport.pdf

PAC

20-06-06, 01:36 AM

Thanks so much.

Tettyan

27-06-06, 11:16 AM

So the most bold and substantive NRC proposal, that for making Pattani Malayu a second "working" language in the 3 provinces, has been rejected before it even had a chance to be considered. Following Prem's lead, Thaksin has completely sealed the coffin on this matter. Of course, The Nation and ThaiDay were completely silent when Prem spoke out on the matter - their righteous indignation only being triggered when it came time for Thaksin to opine. So I will go out on a limb here and offer some comments on Prem's words. Mods, please let me know if I'm crossing the line here.

Second language proposal rejected
By Martin Petty 26 June 2006

Privy Council President Gen Prem Tinsulanonda yesterday dismissed as “unacceptable” a proposal to use Pattani Malayu as a second language in the mainly ethnic Malay South.

Gen Prem, a former prime minister, said a recommendation by an independent fact-finding commission to introduce Pattani Malayu as a working language was impractical and would not help bring peace to the southernmost provinces.

“This proposal is unacceptable,” he said. “We won’t solve this problem through language. What is needed is love and understanding throughout the country.”

Gen Prem said other countries had ethnically diverse populations speaking a variety of languages but stuck to one official language, citing the United States as an example.

Well, I think the United States is the wrong example to cite here. The diversity in the US is a result of immigration. Nobody forced the immigrants to settle in the US - it was their choice, and in making that choice, they also choose to accept the society and culture of their new country.

On the other hand, Muslims in the deep south didn't choose to settle where they are now - they have always been there. They didn't choose to be part of Thailand - nobody asked them when the borders were demarcated. So the situation does not correspond to the US, but more closely resembles the problem of Quebec in Canada. From the latter case, bilingualism has been absolutely essential to maintaining the unity of a country with well-settled minority-language populations.

Incidentally, support for seperatism in Quebec is very fluid, with probably no more than 1/3 of the population consistently for independence. The key to keeping the country together is maintaining the support of the "soft seperatists". Many Québécois just want to be recongized as distinct from the rest of the country. Support for leaving Canada rises depending on whether the "soft seperatists" feel the federal government is sensitive to their concerns or not. The defeat of the 1980 referendum on Quebec sovereignty by a wide margin seemed to put the seperation question to rest, but support for the cause was reignited when PM Pierre Trudeau amended the Canadian constitution without Quebec's consent in 1982. I personally think that the Meech Lake Accord (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meech_Lake_Accord) (recognizing Quebec as a "distinct society") would have put the issue to rest, but the agreement failed to be ratified before the constitutionally-imposed deadline.

I'm not an expert on the southern issue, but it seems as if hardcore supporters of seperatism are a small minority. The key always seems to be the silent majority, which can be easily swayed by the stupid actions of an out-of-touch central government. Just like the British reaction to the Easter Rebellion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easter_Rebellion#Reactions_to_the_Rising), which unnecessarily increased public support for the cause of Irish independence. The Thai government should take a close look at this bit of history at its peril.

The rebels had little public support at the time, and were largely blamed for hundreds of people being killed and wounded, (mostly civilians caught in the crossfire). At the time the executions were demanded in motions passed in some Irish local authorities and by many newspapers, including the Irish Independent and The Irish Times[2]. Prisoners being transported to Frongoch internment camp in Wales were jeered and spat upon by angry Dubliners -many of whom had relatives serving with British forces in the First World War.
... [but] Irish nationalist opinion was appalled by the executions and wholesale arrests of political activists (most of whom had no connection with the rebellion) that took place after the Rising. This indignation led to a radical shift in public perception of the Rising and within three years of its failure, the seperatist Sinn Fein party won an overwhelming majority in a general election, supporting the creation of an Irish Republic and endorsing the actions of the 1916 rebels.

GWR

27-06-06, 12:38 PM

Wholeheartedly agree with much in the previous post. If you have crossed the line, I doubt it will even register. I don't think the average reactionary here is erudite enough to understand the consequences of what you are saying anyway. And if they are reading it, it may do them good to feel that someone else is driving yet another nail in their eventual coffin.

Yes, it seems as if no one here (apart from Khun Anand and some of his merry man) has taken any account of late colonial history elsewhere in the world. Thaksin is either a very stubborn pro-colonialist or someone who never reads social history. I suspect elements of both, as his perception of his own country is probably shaped by the sort of fantasy literature that passes off for objective history here; e.g. Bang Rachan, Suriyothai. Like other countries, politicians and elite are continually making noises here about the necessity of respecting the nobility of the common man, but only if aforesaid plebian continually demonstrates his unswerving obeisance at every whipstitch. Which automatically relegates all Pattani Malays to vassal status.

It isn't hard to believe that the elite here is having the same problems readjusting to global realities that the English upper crust had at the outset of the twentieth century. Truth be known, it took two world wars to convince them that if they wanted to survive they were going to have to acquire some bankable skills like the rest of us; instead of living off their ancient priviledges. And even now that mentality still exists in some quarters.

Yet again, Thaksin has shown that he is only a radical when it comes down to things that directly and immediately affect his own pocket book. He has created a propaganda machine that tells us to automatically repeat the fact that he is a groundbreaker, but he still has the instincts of a medieval warlord. Thaksin has shown us that he is still living in the fantasy world of General Plaek. I suppose General Prem's statement will just have to be written off as another parting shot of a tired and worn-out generation.

GWR

27-06-06, 12:54 PM

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/breakingnews/read.php?newsid=30007423

http://www.bangkokbiznews.com/2006/06/02/images/picweb_copy82.jpg

One truly wonders what it is that Kantathi hopes to achieve here. One could argue that OIC is an organization that represents the status quo in Islamic nations: the same folks who helped to bring us to the current crisis by continually sweeping their problems under the carpet. Someone to commiserate with, perhaps?

OIC offers help regarding Thailand's restive South: Kantathi

Foreign Affairs Minister Kantathi Suphamongkhon said Tuesday that the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) expressed concern over the situation in the deep South and was ready to help if asked to.

Kantathi said the concern was raised during the meeting of OIC ministers in Azerbaijan on June 19 to 21.

But, he said, the OIC realised that the issue was an internal affair of Thailand and the OIC was pleased in the progress of the Thai government's attempts to create reconciliation between people with different faiths in the deep South.

Kantathi said the OIC stated that if the Thai government needed any help, it would be willing to help.

The Nation

GWR

27-06-06, 01:12 PM

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/breakingnews/read.php?newsid=30007424

Bombs kill five security officers in Yala

At least five security officers were killed early Tuesday in two bomb blasts in Yala province.

The victims included a soldier and four volunteer security officers who were protecting a convoy of teachers on their way to a school in Yala, police said.

The two bombs went off almost simultaneously. All five were killed in the first blast, as the second bomb

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/06/27/headlines/headlines_30007425.php

Seven killed as violence continues in the south

Yala - At least seven people have been killed in separate attacks by suspected insurgents in southern Thailand, including a bomb attack that left five security officers dead.

In the deadliest incident, insurgents ambushed a military convoy that was protecting teachers on their way to school early Tuesday in Yala. A 20-kg bomb exploded under a military truck, immediately killing a soldier.

Four civilians working as security officers survived the blast, but were shot in the head at point blank range at the head by at least 20 militants waiting nearby.

A second bomb exploded nearby just moments later. It is believed that that explosion was meant to prevent security forces from rescuing the men.

A third bomb meanwhile exploded outside the home of a local government official in neighboring Narathiwat province, but injured no one.

Students in Narathiwat found a fourth bomb outside a school as they were arriving for their classes, but police managed to defuse it.

Meanwhile, two Muslim men were killed in separate drive-by shootings also blamed on the militants, police said.

The Nation

ncr

27-06-06, 03:20 PM

So I will go out on a limb here and offer some comments on Prem's words. Mods, please let me know if I'm crossing the line here.Remember, in this country, if you criticize Prem, your radio show will be axed...! :D

Scuba22

27-06-06, 03:45 PM

I think the United States is the wrong example to cite here. The diversity in the US is a result of immigration.

Yes, it's the wrong example, but not just because of immigration; it's also the wrong example because Prem's assertion that the US has an official languange is incorrect. There is a movement in the US that's trying to extablish English as the "official language" specifically because it isn't. If it were, then there would be legal grounds for NOT allowing multilingual versions of school enrolments, welfare applications, voter registration forms, etc.; as well as getting rid of bilingual education. The need for inclusion is precisely why there is no official language.

This argument is even stronger in the case of annexing a separate culture, as is the case with Pattani.

GWR's comments regarding historical understanding are most appropriate. My Thai staff tells me that they learn virtually nothing about what happened in Thailand since WWII. Nobody knows the history of Pattani and how the Deep South came to be part of Thailand. I've spread around the ICG article and people were completely amazed - they had just assumed the southern provinces had always been part of Thailand, there's just no consciousness of a different kingdom that was annexed by Thailand.

I am, however, surprised by Prem's reaction. I had thought that he was one of the more conciliatory figures in regards to the South and central authority. It seems a bit odd that he would take such a reactionary tone. Or am I missing something?

Scuba22

Wisarut

27-06-06, 05:08 PM

Even though Papa Prem is very reconcile figure, he is just like top brasses graduage from CRMA (then Bangkok Military Academy) .... Nationalism is the most important thing to uphold at all cost! This nationalism has been in place since the day of Prince Jirapraprawat (the founder of Modern Siamese Army - son of King Chulalongkorn) and Prince Chakkrabongse (the founder of Military Staffs - the Brain and Nerve of Modern Army) ....

Therefore, the Internationalsim or the left leaning has NO place in the Army! Only Nationalism (either subtle form or radical form) is accepted! I can testify for that since I've been through Army by myself!

Tettyan

28-06-06, 10:13 AM

Yes, it's the wrong example, but not just because of immigration; it's also the wrong example because Prem's assertion that the US has an official languange is incorrect. There is a movement in the US that's trying to extablish English as the "official language" specifically because it isn't. If it were, then there would be legal grounds for NOT allowing multilingual versions of school enrolments, welfare applications, voter registration forms, etc.; as well as getting rid of bilingual education. The need for inclusion is precisely why there is no official language.

Yes, you're right to point out that there's no official language in the US, at least at the federal level. But a majority of states have adopted laws or resolutions declaring English to be the official language within their borders. Nevertheless, this does not preclude them from providing government services in areas with a substantial concentration of ethnic minorities who don't speak English.

To get an idea of how backward the Thai government's attitudes really are, let me compare Thailand's policy with that of Communist China. China officially recognizes 55 ethnic minority "nationalities" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_minorities_in_China) as a matter of policy. Of course, how the policy is implemented in practice is another matter, but at least they recongize the principle. On the other hand, many Thais can't even bring themselves to even accept just the principle of this concept.

Finally I'll credit the Nation for finally putting Prem's words in their proper place (after much hesitation, it seems):

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/06/28/opinion/opinion_30007446.php

EDITORIAL
Raze linguistic, cultural barriers
June 28, 2006

Using Yawi as a working language in the deep South could foster mutual trust and better understanding

The final report to the government by the National Reconciliation Commission (NRC) contains recommendations designed to help restore peace and promote economic and social development in the strife-torn deep South. Most of the proposals merit serious attention by the general Thai public and could serve as a basis for rational public debate on how best to build mutual trust and better understanding between residents of Yala, Pattani and Narathiwat provinces and the rest of Thai society.

Ideas like the proposed promotion of the locally predominant dialect of Malay - commonly known as Yawi - as a "working" language within the region apparently has not gone down well with those who stubbornly cling to old mind-sets. They believe that making Malay Thais learn the Thai language as part of state-enforced assimilation is the best approach.

But that is overly simplistic.

It may be true that a lack of Thai-language proficiency has prevented Malay Thais from fully exploiting opportunities to advance economically and socially in mainstream Thai society. To those who subscribe to this line of thinking, poor Thai language skills have held them back, leading to resentment and frustration and in turn making them vulnerable to manipulation by Islamic militants and Malay separatists.

But such conventional thinking is flawed, because it fails to take into account the uniqueness of Malay Thais as a community with a distinct language, religion, culture and way of life. Malay Thais do desire to get ahead in this society, just like everyone else, but many also attach great importance to preserving their Malay identity.

Past mistakes by the Thai government to force Malay Thais to conform to narrowly defined "Thainess" by promoting the Thai language while trying to suppress local language usage continues to be a source of resentment to many in the deep South even today. So much so that Malay Thais tend to see the Thai language as a tool of oppression or a conspiracy to destroy Malay identity.

But today, such widely held notions are a bit far-fetched and coloured by a lingering distrust.

And this distrust is mutual. State officials continue to regard Malay Thais' reluctance fully to embrace the Thai language as a sign of disloyalty bordering on treason and thus a potential national-security threat.

Both sides must overcome such mutual distrust and fear based on painful historical memories and meet halfway. Clearly, the first step towards reconciliation is for both sides to build confidence based on mutual respect.

The Malay Thai community should realise that learning the Thai language does not mean abandoning Malay identity. On the contrary, Thai-language proficiency should enable fuller participation in the democratic process and a better ability to protect personal interests.

As for the proposed use of Yawi as a working language in government offices, there is absolutely no reason why this should have provoked an overreaction from Privy Council President Prem Tinsulanonda and government leaders. They are reportedly opposed to the idea of Yawi becoming a "second official language" in the deep South, even though the NRC proposal's exact wording is "working language".

The government ought to learn from the private sector, from operators of big department stores to non-Malay small-business owners, who already make sure any public announcements or interpersonal communications are made in both Thai and Yawi. Why? Because it's good for business.

And the last time we checked, the main business of government officials was still to provide the best public service they can to the public. Surely for these civil servants to be able to greet the public with a few phrases of a simple Yawi greeting would not hurt anyone. Having Yawi speakers on hand to assist locals who cannot communicate in Thai would be a nice gesture, even though the official language at all government offices must remain Thai.

There would be no better way to show sincerity and goodwill towards Malay Thais and reassure them of our respect for their identity within our multicultural society. And it would cost nothing to say, "Saya boleh jakap bahasa Melayu" ("I can speak Malay").