Does Nsc Chief's ' Gaffe' Reveal Secret Intent Of The Government?

[Lite Beer]

ANALYSIS
Does NSC chief's 'gaffe' reveal secret intent of the government?
The Nation on Sunday

Paradorn

PATTANI: -- Are they prepared to give autonomy to Pattani local administration?

The public statement by National Security Council secretary-general Paradorn Pattahathabutr about the controversial idea of an autonomous Pattani metropolitan administration as a possible ultimate solution to the violence in the deep South has been met with consternation in many quarters, not least because it was made prior to the talks with insurgents' representatives on March 28.

However, it could simply reflect the possibility that the intention was always to give the insurgents what is said to be one of their key demands, while the peace dialogue had merely been established to prevent the public from criticising the government.

Whatever the reason, given his role as a key negotiator representing the authorities, the statement has put the government side immediately at a disadvantage, as the insurgents' representatives - members of Barasi Revolusi Nasional Coordinate (BRN) - expected to attend the meeting in Langkawi, had not yet tabled the issue, although it is believed to have been the key goal inspiring their armed struggle.

No agendas have been drawn up for the talks by either side, as the March 28 session is just the first round of discussion after an agreement to constitute efforts to end the violent insurgency was signed on February 28 at a meeting in Malaysia, which has offered to

broker the dialogue.

The idea of establishing a Pattani metropolitan administration - whether it is granted full autonomy, as the insurgents are believed to want, a degree of self-government akin to the administration governing Pattaya City or the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration, or semi-autonomy as proposed as a compromise by academics - has been long disputed among the authorities and the public, without ever winning acceptance.

Senior members of House of Representatives and senatorial panels have reportedly complained about Paradorn's statement, saying that if the ultimate goal of establishing a Pattanai metropolitan administration was effectively conceded to the insurgency by Thai authorities from the outset, there was no need to discuss the issue further.

"A 15-member team comprising officials from the Thai authorities and members of the public would not really be required at all, because the objective would have been declared for them," said one of parliamentarians, speaking on condition of anonymity.

Shortly after Paradorn made his statement on Monday, Army commander General Prayuth Chan-ocha said the process had not yet reached any conclusion. "Paradorn could well be jumping the gun," he said.

Warnings have since been secretly given to Paradorn, reportedly either by the government or King Prajadhipok's Institute, which has been monitoring the situation and studying possible solutions for ending the violent insurgency.

He has been urged to speak less about the peace dialogue, and indeed also about other issues regarding political and tactical solutions now being implemented to deal with the violence.

A senior King Prajadhipok's Institute official, General Ekkachai Sriwilas, said an eight-point master plan for dealing with the violence had stressed the need for a united approach.

"Teamwork is stated in the plan, with all parties involved focused as a core group. No one should act as a solitary hero in implementing the measures," he said.

Former National Security Council chief Prasong Soonsiri expressed surprise over Paradorn's statement, and questioned his role as a key negotiator in the process.

"This will fully benefit the insurgency and the BRN," he was quoted as saying.

But this is not the first example of a verbal blunder related to the notion of a Pattani metropolitan administration causing major embarrassment to the speaker.

Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yoobamrung, who on Wednesday toned down Paradorn's statement by blaming the media for misquoting him, once backtracked from his own public remarks mentioning the idea when he was interior minister during the Samak Sundaravej government in 2008.

-- The Nation 2013-03-17

[chainarong]

One would hope that for peace, this idea is shot down in flames , its any easy cop out but !!! in five years time lets see who is governing what , , nothing the Muslim community would like more than to be able to rule in their own right , what then,

[nuananddon]

Today Pattani , tomorrow Bangkok, etc ect ect.

[Robby nz]

Should they be given some sort of self governance who would be doing the governing?

The BRN leaders of course, werent they the heroes who set the whole thing up?

But how would that sit with the other groups who are still doing the shooting and bombing, that is the ones not under any sort of control of the BRN?

Would the south then be under sharia law and education and if so what would happen to non Muslims?

[Locationthailand]

An accident looking for a place to happen and the BRN are going to provide the scene, endorsed by Thailand political misfits.

[diddums]

Hope they move up to Phuket and take it over also.

[GentlemanJim]

It is about time that Thai politicians learned to draw the line between the irresistible urge to hear their own voices on Thai media and the fact that certain things, particularly negotiations should be absolutely confidential until a deal is struck. How can anyone possibly negotiate anything, in particular peace, when you declare that the Government is even considering giving such a huge concession. Where are the bargaining/leverage mechanisms now?

Non of this is any surprise. I believe the long term agenda of the Shiniwatra clan is to divide the country North and South. They will keep the wealthy industrial and rice producing North and get rid of the troublesome child in the South.

Autonomy was given in Bangkok and Pattaya to assist in the complexity of the administrative issues of local Government, it was not given on religious grounds or on the claim to a territory, If autonomy is given in Pattani, they will have sharia law within a year.

[FarangTalk]

Returning some degree of self-governance to the Muslim majority is the only way forward.

Non of this is any surprise. I believe the long term agenda of the Shiniwatra clan is to divide the country North and South. They will keep the wealthy industrial and rice producing North and get rid of the troublesome child in the South.

What about the oil and gas in the South?

[simple1]

Should they be given some sort of self governance who would be doing the governing?

The BRN leaders of course, werent they the heroes who set the whole thing up?

But how would that sit with the other groups who are still doing the shooting and bombing, that is the ones not under any sort of control of the BRN?

Would the south then be under sharia law and education and if so what would happen to non Muslims?

If autonomy were to be granted to the three southern provinces then there would be elections for the governors, mayors etc. I do not believe central government would permit a parallel judicial system under Sharia Law. If events prove me wrong then I would assume that it would be similar to Malaysia where non Muslims are not subject to Sharia law. In any case a large majority of Muslims are moderates & the moderates do not support the implementation of sharia law.

As you say the challenge for the cessation of violence is getting the younger, more radicalised, generation (Juwae) to engage in the peace process. A good timeline analysis, overview of the challenges for constructive dialogue for peace is at:

http://www.chathamhouse.org/media/comment/view/189745

Edited March 17, 2013 by simple1

[animatic]

Returning some degree of self-governance to the Muslim majority is the only way forward.

Non of this is any surprise. I believe the long term agenda of the Shiniwatra clan is to divide the country North and South. They will keep the wealthy industrial and rice producing North and get rid of the troublesome child in the South.

What about the oil and gas in the South?

Not to mention that the vast majority of the south is NOT trouble,

except they vote Democrat and not Team Thaksin.

[GentlemanJim]

Returning some degree of self-governance to the Muslim majority is the only way forward.

Non of this is any surprise. I believe the long term agenda of the Shiniwatra clan is to divide the country North and South. They will keep the wealthy industrial and rice producing North and get rid of the troublesome child in the South.

What about the oil and gas in the South?

Not to mention that the vast majority of the south is NOT trouble,

except they vote Democrat and not Team Thaksin.

Correct, so get rid of them. Those in the South hate the reds and PTP and Thaksin, the divide is already created.

I am well aware the majority of the South is not trouble, I live there, so if the majority of the South is not trouble, why are the Government considering autonomy in Pattani?

Farangtalk, you said

Returning some degree of self-governance to the Muslim majority is the only way forward

is it? So you are saying grant self Governance due to religious belief? What a tricky road you would walk. Good job Bangkok doesn't have a majority of Muslims. I assume you are for granting autonomy to Birmingham and Leeds/Bradford in the UK then! How about the only way forward being a corruption free determined, well led military and intelligence campaign to identify and remove from circulation those who are leading the insurgence. It is also about time the Thai Government called in some true independent specialist assistance in terms of HOW to negotiate with insurgents. Thaksin cares not one Iota for the deep South, and little more for the rest of the South, he has made that clear on many occasions, so don't kid yourself, and no need for roll eye smileys.

[waza]

Should they be given some sort of self governance who would be doing the governing?

The BRN leaders of course, werent they the heroes who set the whole thing up?

But how would that sit with the other groups who are still doing the shooting and bombing, that is the ones not under any sort of control of the BRN?

Would the south then be under sharia law and education and if so what would happen to non Muslims?

Shades of Afghanistan I feel, still why would the PTP care they always vote Dem down south.

[simple1]

Should they be given some sort of self governance who would be doing the governing?

The BRN leaders of course, werent they the heroes who set the whole thing up?

But how would that sit with the other groups who are still doing the shooting and bombing, that is the ones not under any sort of control of the BRN?

Would the south then be under sharia law and education and if so what would happen to non Muslims?

Shades of Afghanistan I feel, still why would the PTP care they always vote Dem down south.

The Democrats have a very slim margin in voter preference. Interestingly only 23% of a 2010 survey of 1500 Thais in the Deep South view separatism as a solution to the ongoing conflict (doesn't define what Separatism actually means in practice) refer:

http://asiafoundation.org/in-asia/2011/07/13/thailands-deep-south-a-political-labyrinth/

Edited March 18, 2013 by simple1

[animatic]

Should they be given some sort of self governance who would be doing the governing?

The BRN leaders of course, werent they the heroes who set the whole thing up?

But how would that sit with the other groups who are still doing the shooting and bombing, that is the ones not under any sort of control of the BRN?

Would the south then be under sharia law and education and if so what would happen to non Muslims?

Shades of Afghanistan I feel, still why would the PTP care they always vote Dem down south.

The Democrats have a very slim margin in voter preference. Interestingly only 23% of a 2010 survey of 1500 Thais in the Deep South view separatism as a solution to the ongoing conflict (doesn't define what Separatism actually means in practice) refer:

http://asiafoundation.org/in-asia/2011/07/13/thailands-deep-south-a-political-labyrinth/

There is a difference between separatism, leaving and becoming 'north Malaysia',

and not being controlled by clueless autocrats in Bangkok who have no idea

what matters in their lives, why it matters and how to govern them for the best of all involved.

Right now it is northern pols not wanting to lose face that directs all moves in dealing with the south,

and that is the primary reason that is a dismal failure. They can't imagine that any cultures but their own narrow nationalist view point matters at all. Plus there isn't enough money coming their way on the issue to be worth making a significant change. ie, swapping face for money which builds bigger face another way.

Edited March 18, 2013 by animatic