Thailand mulls ceding power to end deadly rebellion

[webfact]

FOCUS

Thailand mulls ceding power to end deadly rebellion

by Amélie BOTTOLLIER DEPOIS

BANGKOK, June 12, 2013 (AFP) - After nearly a decade of conflict that has left thousands dead, Thailand is considering handing over limited powers to its Muslim-majority south in an effort to persuade rebels to lay down their arms.

Thai officials will meet with the two main insurgent groups on Thursday in Kuala Lumpur for a third round of talks that have so far failed to end near-daily violence in the region bordering Malaysia.

In an effort to find a breakthrough in a war largely forgotten by the outside world, despite more than 5,500 deaths since 2004, Thai authorities have floated the idea of handing some local decision-making to three southern provinces dominated by Malay-Muslims.

"We're not talking about autonomy but about local administration," Bangkok's lead negotiator Paradorn Pattanatabut, head of the National Security Council, told AFP last week.

"They have their own identity (in the south) so local administration might be suitable to recognise that identity, culture and religion," he said, but added that the idea would not be on the table at this week's talks.

His comments revived an idea previously raised by the government but later shelved.

Bangkok and the tourist hotspot of Pattaya already have a form of locally-elected administration able to make bylaws, levy taxes and manage their budget.

Paradorn said elected governors there could provide a template for the culturally distinct southern provinces of Yala, Narathiwat and Pattani, whose top political rulers are appointed by Bangkok.

"It's possible that there would be some kind of elections," he said. "There could be governors for each province or a single governor for the three provinces."

Paradorn raised the idea after meeting Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra, suggesting government backing and recognition at the highest levels of a political dimension to the violence.

Hopes of progress in the bitter standoff received a boost after rebel group PULO (Patani United Liberation Organisation) joined the second round alongside the BRN (Barisan Revolusi Nasional)-- held responsible for most of the violence.

Full autonomy for the south remains taboo as the constitution insists the Buddhist-majority kingdom must not be divided.

While that over-arching principle is in place, some experts doubt whether the insurgents will end their violent campaign.

"The rebels are fighting for independence, so exploration of alternative administrative models, along the lines of the Bangkok or Pattaya metropolitan areas, is not going to mollify them," said Matthew Wheeler of the International Crisis Group (ICG).

Moreover, concerns among the Thai elite -- both political and military -- mean it is far from certain that Yingluck will press ahead with a potentially divisive policy.

"Many senior military officers and civilian bureaucrats are antagonistic to the idea of a special administrative zone, as is the opposition Democrat Party," Wheeler said, adding it "seems unlikely" Yingluck would exhaust political capital on the issue.

Some in the south, where both Buddhist and Muslim civilians have borne the brunt of the conflict, see Paradorn's proposal as a distraction from the wider issues of alleged abuses by Thai security forces and the perceived denigration of Malay Muslim culture.

"It would be useful for the people to have an (elected) representative who would understand them and know their thoughts and feelings," said Adilan Ali-Ishak, head of the Muslim Attorney Centre in Yala province.

"But I don't think it's the priority of the people. They want safety... and an end to discrimination -- detainees are still assaulted, still not allowed to speak the Malay language."

At the same time there is a growing realism among some of the south's wider population that limited local power would represent progress of sorts.

"It is very important to give power to the local people," said Srisompob Jitpiromsri, director of conflict monitor Deep South Watch.

"Decentralisation is a kind of justice... it is a political justice that gives opportunities and rights for the people to administer themselves."

Some experts warn that the fragile peace process could collapse altogether in the absence of an impartial mediator empowered to help draw up a roadmap out of the conflict.

"This whole process is on life-support, and it's unclear whether either side is able to generate enough goodwill to get it off life-support," said Anthony Davis, a security analyst with IHS-Jane's.

-- (c) Copyright AFP 2013-06-12

[thaikahuna]

That would be a very stupid move and would lead to sharia law implementation almost immediately.

[Thai at Heart]

A "mull" is normally followed by an "urge" in Thai politics.

[jaidam]

Much as I loathe the idea of giving in to terrorists demands, it does seem like an appropriate response to allow some degree of autonomy in the 3 southern provinces. This has worked to an extent in Basque region of northern Spain.

Perhaps some sort of deal whereby they get some autonomy under the conditions that random beheadings of rubber workers and teachers, and school arson attacks are stopped immediately.

[FarangTalk]

That would be a very stupid move and would lead to sharia law implementation almost immediately.

It may be used to some degree in civil litigation as it is in Malaysia or even the UK nowadays.

However, the area is majority Muslim, shouldn't they be deciding what laws they want to implement?

[OzMick]

That would be a very stupid move and would lead to sharia law implementation almost immediately.

It may be used to some degree in civil litigation as it is in Malaysia or even the UK nowadays.

However, the area is majority Muslim, shouldn't they be deciding what laws they want to implement?

Well I for one will never set foot in an area where I could be executed for what is written on my t-shirt.

[GentlemanJim]

To cede power to rebels! Mmmm Why not save time and money and just annex the deep south now and call it Malaysia. Perhaps someone could translate for the Thai's, 'you give someone an inch and they take a yard', you give rebels an inch and they will take everything. Islam demands world domination so do the Government think it stops in Yala? And IF this is nothing to do with religion then what do the rebels want? The rebels are happy with the money and power and position they have, do the Government think they want to give that away for some offer of peace? This is full time employment to these guys and the hours are easier than 7/11 or the local building site. This is a business, they don't want peace.

Perhaps the Government should remember how their own redshirt representatives (now ministers and politicians) negotiated with Abhisit. They demanded early elections and a date, and Abhisit, conceded to all their demands. Clearly not expecting this to happen the reds then walked out of the negotiations despite all their demands being met and continued their act of anarchy. Why do the Government think the rebels in the South are more honourable than they are themselves?

[whybother]

That would be a very stupid move and would lead to sharia law implementation almost immediately.

It may be used to some degree in civil litigation as it is in Malaysia or even the UK nowadays.

However, the area is majority Muslim, shouldn't they be deciding what laws they want to implement?

No.

Should the people of Pattaya be deciding what laws they want to implement?

[tomross46]

Over 50 years ago Malaysia had the same problem, called the Malay Rebellion. They solved the problem, and it was not through negotiation. They had a unit trained by the SAS and the SBS, it was called VAT 69. There way of solving the problem worked, but the left wing liberals would be screaming.

[Robby nz]

Wondering about the "Thailand" in the heading.

How much of Thailand really wants what Paradorn Pattanatabut is proposing?

There are also those down there who are not Muslim, how would they fare?

Seems to me that any form of Government whether local or national which is run on religious principals is not desirable.

And where is Chalerm in all of this?

I thought he had been ordered by the PM to lead the delegation in the talks.

[canman]

That would be a very stupid move and would lead to sharia law implementation almost immediately.

It may be used to some degree in civil litigation as it is in Malaysia or even the UK nowadays.

However, the area is majority Muslim, shouldn't they be deciding what laws they want to implement?

If there was a majority Christian area in Thailand would you advocate they should have the right to their own laws?

[FarangTalk]

That would be a very stupid move and would lead to sharia law implementation almost immediately.

It may be used to some degree in civil litigation as it is in Malaysia or even the UK nowadays.

However, the area is majority Muslim, shouldn't they be deciding what laws they want to implement?

Well I for one will never set foot in an area where I could be executed for what is written on my t-shirt.

You do understand the difference between civil and criminal law?

[FarangTalk]

That would be a very stupid move and would lead to sharia law implementation almost immediately.

It may be used to some degree in civil litigation as it is in Malaysia or even the UK nowadays.

However, the area is majority Muslim, shouldn't they be deciding what laws they want to implement?

If there was a majority Christian area in Thailand would you advocate they should have the right to their own laws?

Certainly, if that area used to be an autonomous region which the Thais merely claim sovereignty over and the majority of people from that region supported a claim to independence or self-governance then it would be up to them what laws they implement; civil or criminal.

< Off topic baiting comment removed >

Edited June 12, 2013 by metisdead

[gemini81]

That would be a very stupid move and would lead to sharia law implementation almost immediately.

It may be used to some degree in civil litigation as it is in Malaysia or even the UK nowadays.

However, the area is majority Muslim, shouldn't they be deciding what laws they want to implement?

No.

Should the people of Pattaya be deciding what laws they want to implement?

Its lawless in Pattaya, so hard to know where to begin!

[canman]

That would be a very stupid move and would lead to sharia law implementation almost immediately.

It may be used to some degree in civil litigation as it is in Malaysia or even the UK nowadays.

However, the area is majority Muslim, shouldn't they be deciding what laws they want to implement?

If there was a majority Christian area in Thailand would you advocate they should have the right to their own laws?

Certainly, if that area used to be an autonomous region which the Thais merely claim sovereignty over and the majority of people from that region supported a claim to independence or self-governance then it would be up to them what laws they implement; civil or criminal.

As a fellow Scotsman, do you support an independent Scotland?

Actually Nova Scotia, I am not totally across all the issues with respect to an independent Scotland but based on the little I do know I would give it qualified support. On the issue of a seperate french state in Canada my answer would be a resounding no.

Edited June 12, 2013 by canman

[darrendsd]

That would be a very stupid move and would lead to sharia law implementation almost immediately.

It may be used to some degree in civil litigation as it is in Malaysia or even the UK nowadays.

However, the area is majority Muslim, shouldn't they be deciding what laws they want to implement?

That's like saying the IRA should have been able to implement what laws they wanted to during the troubles

The Thai government should never give in to terrorism

[OzMick]

Well I for one will never set foot in an area where I could be executed for what is written on my t-shirt.

You do understand the difference between civil and criminal law?

You ask if I know the difference and in the next post claim they have the right to change both? Do you understand why there is a separation of church and state in civilised countries?

[OzMick]

That would be a very stupid move and would lead to sharia law implementation almost immediately.

It may be used to some degree in civil litigation as it is in Malaysia or even the UK nowadays.

However, the area is majority Muslim, shouldn't they be deciding what laws they want to implement?

If there was a majority Christian area in Thailand would you advocate they should have the right to their own laws?

Certainly, if that area used to be an autonomous region which the Thais merely claim sovereignty over and the majority of people from that region supported a claim to independence or self-governance then it would be up to them what laws they implement; civil or criminal.

As a fellow Scotsman, do you support an independent Scotland?

AFAIK there are no plans in an independent Scotland to execute unbelievers who badmouth the Selkies.

[Thai at Heart]

That would be a very stupid move and would lead to sharia law implementation almost immediately.

It may be used to some degree in civil litigation as it is in Malaysia or even the UK nowadays.

However, the area is majority Muslim, shouldn't they be deciding what laws they want to implement?

Last time I looked I thought the area was 100% Thailand. Actually, Isaan is majority red politically, I reckon they should be able to enact anti-yellow laws. No yellow lines on the road, no yellow t-shirts, no yellow flowers because they find the colour unappropriate. Likewise, the majority yellow areas, can ban Man U shirts, Liverpool shirts, repaint fire hydrants. '

Hey it's only religion after all. What bad could come of allowing religion into lawmaking? I look forward to compulsory burkaas and public stonings. It's all in the name of religion after all.

Buggar it, split all the country up into little pockets of land owners.

Don't worry, the Chinese will have a quiet word about this idea. They don't want the Uighurs getting any bright ideas.

Edited June 12, 2013 by Thai at Heart

[canopus1969]

That would be a very stupid move and would lead to sharia law implementation almost immediately.

It may be used to some degree in civil litigation as it is in Malaysia or even the UK nowadays.

However, the area is majority Muslim, shouldn't they be deciding what laws they want to implement?

Last time I looked I thought the area was 100% Thailand. Actually, Isaan is majority red politically, I reckon they should be able to enact anti-yellow laws. No yellow lines on the road, no yellow t-shirts, no yellow flowers because they find the colour unappropriate. Likewise, the majority yellow areas, can ban Man U shirts, Liverpool shirts, repaint fire hydrants. '

Hey it's only religion after all. What bad could come of allowing religion into lawmaking? I look forward to compulsory burkaas and public stonings. It's all in the name of religion after all.

Buggar it, split all the country up into little pockets of land owners.

Don't worry, the Chinese will have a quiet word about this idea. They don't want the Uighurs getting any bright ideas.

It is - because of an historic cock-up

[BeforeTigers]

Allowing for a local governor and allowing for full sharia law with powers of capital punishment are not even close to being the things.

To think they are is ignorant.
To say so in a public forum is stupid.

Edited June 12, 2013 by BeforeTigers

[Mosha]

Over 50 years ago Malaysia had the same problem, called the Malay Rebellion. They solved the problem, and it was not through negotiation. They had a unit trained by the SAS and the SBS, it was called VAT 69. There way of solving the problem worked, but the left wing liberals would be screaming.

The rebels called them "hòk sìp gâo"

[reiltin]

If a place like pattaya can decide to a degree how its governed and enact bylaws why not pattani?nations are built on rebellion,let those living there decide how they should live rather than fear how they may die.

[unanimosity]

That would be a very stupid move and would lead to sharia law implementation almost immediately.

Does Malaysia function under Sharia law?

[unanimosity]

If they do this and you own property in Phuket it would be time to sell because what is happening now in Yala and Narathiwat will shift north to Phuket.

[simple1]

Over 50 years ago Malaysia had the same problem, called the Malay Rebellion. They solved the problem, and it was not through negotiation. They had a unit trained by the SAS and the SBS, it was called VAT 69. There way of solving the problem worked, but the left wing liberals would be screaming.

There was an effective local population strategy, together with a hearts & mind operation that ran in parallel to the Malay commando, UK & Australian special forces operations. Originally developed by General Briggs and further expanded under Templers guidance. The rebels were provided amnesty through negotiations. During the second rebellion there were not any UK forces present, it fell apart due to factional disagreements and some factions surrendered to the Thai Government

[chooka]

Then what happens when they want to expand further north?

[simple1]

That would be a very stupid move and would lead to sharia law implementation almost immediately.

Does Malaysia function under Sharia law?

Yes & No. Llimited to civil matters & does not apply to non Muslims. I understand their has only been one or two exceptions regards inter religious marriage. In some states there are Sharia criminal laws, for example there is the Kelantan Syariah Criminal Code Enactment 1993. Their jurisdiction is however limited to imposing fines for an amount not more than 5000 Ringit, and imprisonment to not more than 3 years. Their was an attempt to implement Sharia criminal law across Malaysia to replace common law, but was rejected by the Malaysian Bar Council

Edited June 12, 2013 by simple1

[Markaew]

To cede power to rebels! Mmmm Why not save time and money and just annex the deep south now and call it Malaysia. Perhaps someone could translate for the Thai's, 'you give someone an inch and they take a yard', you give rebels an inch and they will take everything. Islam demands world domination so do the Government think it stops in Yala? And IF this is nothing to do with religion then what do the rebels want? The rebels are happy with the money and power and position they have, do the Government think they want to give that away for some offer of peace? This is full time employment to these guys and the hours are easier than 7/11 or the local building site. This is a business, they don't want peace.

Perhaps the Government should remember how their own redshirt representatives (now ministers and politicians) negotiated with Abhisit. They demanded early elections and a date, and Abhisit, conceded to all their demands. Clearly not expecting this to happen the reds then walked out of the negotiations despite all their demands being met and continued their act of anarchy. Why do the Government think the rebels in the South are more honourable than they are themselves?

Good point.

They have done it before, why not again? This is what Thailand does best; when there is a dispute then give away land. This is reflected throughout Thai history. Maybe in 50 years Thailand will be as big as Rhode Island.

[55Jay]

Mmmm so US is not a civilized country as they still use Bible in courts and swear to God or things like that...

Might want to fact check that one.