3,380 Killed In Nine Years Of Violence: Thai South

[webfact]

SOUTH INSURGENCY

3,380 killed in nine years of violence

PAKORN PUENGNETR

THE NATION

On anniversary of 2004 Narathiwat raid, injury count stands at 8,388

NARATHIWAT: -- A total of 3,380 people have been killed and 8,388 wounded in terror attacks since the resumption of insurgent violence in the deep South nine years ago today, according to figures released yesterday by the Southern Border Provinces Administrative Centre.

The attacks included 2,480 roadside and vehicular bombings, the centre said.

Of the 1,629 assault rifles and handguns seized by insurgents during their attacks - including 413 M16 rifles taken in the January 4, 2004, raid on a Narathiwat Army depot that re-ignited the insurgency - only 508 have been retrieved.

Of the 501 security-related criminal cases brought to court, 304 - or 60.6 per cent - ended in acquittals, resulting in 780 suspected insurgents walking free.

The budget for operations to contain the violence and carry out development projects next year will reach a record Bt21.124 billion, compared with Bt16.277 billion last year and Bt13.45 billion in 2004.

In all, 8,778 security-related legal cases were reported, along with 109,043 general criminal cases or cases not yet classified as either common crimes or insurgency-related. Of the security-related cases, 2,079 were committed by known insurgents while the remaining 6,699, or 76.32 per cent, were committed by insurgents not known to authorities.

In the 2,079 cases, 1,472 suspects have been arrested or are in custody, while 607 are on the run.

Identified insurgents number 9,822, comprising 310 religious leaders and clerics; 207 at the command level; 1,113 core leaders; and 2,262 specially trained RKK commandos, with the remainder being sympathisers or supporters.

Cases of violence broke down as follows: 7,014 shootings; 2,480 bombings; 1,513 cases of arson; 92 other types of murders; 171 raids to steal guns; 65 protests; 301 assaults; 2,197 acts of disturbance; 219 gunfights; and seven others.

-- The Nation 2013-01-04

[upena]

BP and Nation have been reporting "over 5,000" deaths for the past few years. How did the numbers drop?

[NoshowJones]

BP and Nation have been reporting "over 5,000" deaths for the past few years. How did the numbers drop?

Is it mainly the Muslims who are responsible for these deaths? If so, shut down their Mosques, then they will move to some other country. I'm sure there are many other countries that would accept them. Maybe I should watch what I'm saying, I have friends and family back in the UK.

[Travelman868]

What are these people looking for. All over the world muslims are killing other muslims and anyone else who gets in the way.

They cost the world economy hundreds of billion $ each year. Every airport in the world has security that but for muslims would be limited.

If they hope to convert the world to Islam they should show suuni's and Shia's can live together.

But of course that's not going to happen.

[simple1]

BP and Nation have been reporting "over 5,000" deaths for the past few years. How did the numbers drop?

Good question. Purely speculative, but this report is talking to deaths by insurgent activity. Maybe the gap in numbers is because the report excludes killings due to crime, such as drug gangs, robberies, personal disputes etc

[Thai at Heart]

Of the 501 security-related criminal cases brought to court, 304 - or 60.6 per cent - ended in acquittals, resulting in 780 suspected insurgents walking free.

So they nabbed 300 people for who they couldn't even make a proper case against. And you wonder why the locals are pi***d off

[Ian Curtis]

BP and Nation have been reporting "over 5,000" deaths for the past few years. How did the numbers drop?

Is it mainly the Muslims who are responsible for these deaths? If so, shut down their Mosques, then they will move to some other country. I'm sure there are many other countries that would accept them. Maybe I should watch what I'm saying, I have friends and family back in the UK.

Has anyone ever asked the question, "Why is the violence happening?". I suspect that it goes back in history and I suspect too that we British could well have contributed to the conflict. I quote a small extract from http://www.thaimalayconflict.org (not quite sure actually, but something like this!)

In 1909, the southern states of Songkla, Patani, Narathiwat, Yala, and parts of Kelantan, Perlis and Kedah were under the Sultan of Patani in Malaya but subject to the influence of Thais. The Patani Sultanate was strong for a short time but at a later stage it become weak and was forced to pay homage to the Thai King in the form of Bunga Emas, a plant made of real gold. By the time of the Anglo-Thai agreement in 1909, Songkla, Patani, Narathiwat and Yala were given to Thailand by British colonists who ceded the land without consultation with the people. Perhaps, the British believed they could obtain enough raw materials, such as tin and rubber, from the remaining Malaysian states, which produced sufficient amounts for export of raw materials to Great Britain. Moreover, the Malay states of Kelantan, Kedah, and Perlis provinces on the Malay Peninsula accepted the British, but the people of Yala, Narathiwat and Patani held to their ethnic identity and customs as Malays and Muslims.

I believe us British must carry a share of the blame in the conflict!

The ceding of Songkla, Patani, Narathiwat and Yala was followed by the imposition of Siamese rule, which was accompanied by a range of measures aimed at strengthening Thai culture in the southern provinces. These were important causes of local discontent in the early and mid-twentieth century, resulting in a number of rebellions. The use of education to promote Thai language and Buddhism and the key role of Buddhist monks in the new Thai rule emerged as particular causes of dissatisfaction. The effort to promote assimilation of Malay Muslim communities in the south was particularly focused on displacing the Pondoks (Muslim religious schools), which traditionally performed a central function in the reproduction of Malay Muslim culture and identity. One of the most controversial elements of the assimilation campaign was the 1921 Compulsory Primary Education Act, which required all children to attend state primary schools for four years and to learn the Thai language. All Malay Muslims had to have Thai names as well. Naturally, this was not to the liking of Malay Muslims in the southern part of Thailand.

Somebody ought to tell the two governments to begin discussions from a historical position.

[FarangTalk]

BP and Nation have been reporting "over 5,000" deaths for the past few years. How did the numbers drop?

Is it mainly the Muslims who are responsible for these deaths? If so, shut down their Mosques, then they will move to some other country. I'm sure there are many other countries that would accept them. Maybe I should watch what I'm saying, I have friends and family back in the UK.

Has anyone ever asked the question, "Why is the violence happening?". I suspect that it goes back in history and I suspect too that we British could well have contributed to the conflict. I quote a small extract from http://www.thaimalayconflict.org (not quite sure actually, but something like this!)

In 1909, the southern states of Songkla, Patani, Narathiwat, Yala, and parts of Kelantan, Perlis and Kedah were under the Sultan of Patani in Malaya but subject to the influence of Thais. The Patani Sultanate was strong for a short time but at a later stage it become weak and was forced to pay homage to the Thai King in the form of Bunga Emas, a plant made of real gold. By the time of the Anglo-Thai agreement in 1909, Songkla, Patani, Narathiwat and Yala were given to Thailand by British colonists who ceded the land without consultation with the people. Perhaps, the British believed they could obtain enough raw materials, such as tin and rubber, from the remaining Malaysian states, which produced sufficient amounts for export of raw materials to Great Britain. Moreover, the Malay states of Kelantan, Kedah, and Perlis provinces on the Malay Peninsula accepted the British, but the people of Yala, Narathiwat and Patani held to their ethnic identity and customs as Malays and Muslims.

I believe us British must carry a share of the blame in the conflict!

The ceding of Songkla, Patani, Narathiwat and Yala was followed by the imposition of Siamese rule, which was accompanied by a range of measures aimed at strengthening Thai culture in the southern provinces. These were important causes of local discontent in the early and mid-twentieth century, resulting in a number of rebellions. The use of education to promote Thai language and Buddhism and the key role of Buddhist monks in the new Thai rule emerged as particular causes of dissatisfaction. The effort to promote assimilation of Malay Muslim communities in the south was particularly focused on displacing the Pondoks (Muslim religious schools), which traditionally performed a central function in the reproduction of Malay Muslim culture and identity. One of the most controversial elements of the assimilation campaign was the 1921 Compulsory Primary Education Act, which required all children to attend state primary schools for four years and to learn the Thai language. All Malay Muslims had to have Thai names as well. Naturally, this was not to the liking of Malay Muslims in the southern part of Thailand.

Somebody ought to tell the two governments to begin discussions from a historical position.

Actually the Brits saved several other provinces from being annexed by Siam with the compromise of letting Siam claim sovereignty over four. Siam wanted 11 provinces on the Malay peninsula.

Sent from my GT-I9100T using Thaivisa Connect App

[hellodolly]

BP and Nation have been reporting "over 5,000" deaths for the past few years. How did the numbers drop?

The numbers are just the ones in the last 8 years and do not include the ones in the previous 98 years.

[hellodolly]

BP and Nation have been reporting "over 5,000" deaths for the past few years. How did the numbers drop?

Is it mainly the Muslims who are responsible for these deaths? If so, shut down their Mosques, then they will move to some other country. I'm sure there are many other countries that would accept them. Maybe I should watch what I'm saying, I have friends and family back in the UK.

Has anyone ever asked the question, "Why is the violence happening?". I suspect that it goes back in history and I suspect too that we British could well have contributed to the conflict. I quote a small extract from http://www.thaimalayconflict.org (not quite sure actually, but something like this!)

In 1909, the southern states of Songkla, Patani, Narathiwat, Yala, and parts of Kelantan, Perlis and Kedah were under the Sultan of Patani in Malaya but subject to the influence of Thais. The Patani Sultanate was strong for a short time but at a later stage it become weak and was forced to pay homage to the Thai King in the form of Bunga Emas, a plant made of real gold. By the time of the Anglo-Thai agreement in 1909, Songkla, Patani, Narathiwat and Yala were given to Thailand by British colonists who ceded the land without consultation with the people. Perhaps, the British believed they could obtain enough raw materials, such as tin and rubber, from the remaining Malaysian states, which produced sufficient amounts for export of raw materials to Great Britain. Moreover, the Malay states of Kelantan, Kedah, and Perlis provinces on the Malay Peninsula accepted the British, but the people of Yala, Narathiwat and Patani held to their ethnic identity and customs as Malays and Muslims.

I believe us British must carry a share of the blame in the conflict!

The ceding of Songkla, Patani, Narathiwat and Yala was followed by the imposition of Siamese rule, which was accompanied by a range of measures aimed at strengthening Thai culture in the southern provinces. These were important causes of local discontent in the early and mid-twentieth century, resulting in a number of rebellions. The use of education to promote Thai language and Buddhism and the key role of Buddhist monks in the new Thai rule emerged as particular causes of dissatisfaction. The effort to promote assimilation of Malay Muslim communities in the south was particularly focused on displacing the Pondoks (Muslim religious schools), which traditionally performed a central function in the reproduction of Malay Muslim culture and identity. One of the most controversial elements of the assimilation campaign was the 1921 Compulsory Primary Education Act, which required all children to attend state primary schools for four years and to learn the Thai language. All Malay Muslims had to have Thai names as well. Naturally, this was not to the liking of Malay Muslims in the southern part of Thailand.

Somebody ought to tell the two governments to begin discussions from a historical position.

What two governments the Sultan of Pataniis no longer exists. Malaysia has made it perfectly clear they do not want them. What Government are the Thai government expected to consult with? The terroists have not come out and declared them selves as a government.

Yes look at the historical record these three provinces have never had a government they have always been a part of a government that included more than them.

"In 1909, the southern states of Songkla, Patani, Narathiwat, Yala, and parts of Kelantan, Perlis and Kedah were under the Sultan of Patani"

[Mosha]

BP and Nation have been reporting "over 5,000" deaths for the past few years. How did the numbers drop?

Perhaps they didn't die at the scene but enroute to hospital. Much like traffic fatalities.

[Thait Spot]

How many of these deaths occurred since Thaksin's days?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect App

[FarangTalk]

How many of these deaths occurred since Thaksin's days?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect App

The new wave of violence started under Thaksin's first administration but notably worsened under the military Junta and the Democrats.

[Nickymaster]

Meanwhile.....on a more important note......the Minister of defense is occupied chasing down his political opponent, who seems to be more of a threat than the insurgents…(to him and Thaksin).

How many lives could be saved if Sukampol would do his job??

Edited January 5, 2013 by Nickymaster

[Thait Spot]

How many of these deaths occurred since Thaksin's days?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect App

The new wave of violence started under Thaksin's first administration but notably worsened under the military Junta and the Democrats.

Not my understanding. The junta attempted to deal with the insurgents and the dems took a softer line. Violence picked again after Yingluck

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect App