EDITORIAL
Change in approach needed in South, not an admin shake-up
The Nation

BANGKOK: -- Mistakes of the past may just be repeated if root causes of the conflict are not addressed

The Thai military has spoken of a blueprint on a new structure of agencies to handle the ongoing insurgency in the southernmost provinces.

They said it would boost efficiency and strengthen cooperation among various security and development agencies assigned to quell the insurgency in this restive region.

But then, haven't we heard this before? Remember the so-called Pentagon 2 or other promises made by our national leaders about how everything is on the right track?

The junta, who seized power from a civilian government just a month back sounded very much like a broken record, sadly.

But let's look at the bright side of things, although there isn't much to draw on. The fact that the junta will not have to contend with political opposition, and that all agencies, supposedly, are singing from the same sheet of music, offers a good opportunity for the military to put in motion some meaningful initiatives.

Under this new arrangement, the National Security Council (NSC) will become a secretariat that formulates strategy while the Fourth Army will be the implementing agency.

The Southern Border Provinces Administrative Centre (SBPAC) will continue its traditional role in development but the centre will come under the directive of the Fourth Army Area. It will not shine as bright as the time it was headed by Pol Colonel Thawee Sodsong, the de facto head of the Malaysia-backed peace process that was launched in February 2012 in Kuala Lumpur.

Theoretically, Thailand's position and strategy would be more unified and the various agencies will not be able to stray away on a tangent, as the military is calling the shots. It remains to be seen whether this is a good thing. But if we look at the aftermath of the previous coup and past experience, there are things the current junta could learn from.

In the aftermath of the 2006 coup, for example, the military-appointed government of General Surayud Chulanont apologised for the Tak Bai massacre and reached out to neighbouring countries, namely Malaysia, for advice, and supported a professional mediator to work with the NSC, one of the factions from the Patani United Liberation Organisation.

Another thing that Surayud did was he put an end to the use of "black-lists", and also clamped down on targeted killings of suspected insurgents. The culture of impunity and the use of extra-judicial killings on the ground had hampered the peace process from establishing meaningful traction.

All these positive developments provided a glimpse of hope for the region. But it was short-lived as the military that had appointed him had a different idea - a major troop surge and a vicious shakedown that sent thousands of young men to "education" camps outside the region. And when the court intervened and ordered these young men to be released, the military declared them persona non grata in the deep South.

This time around, the junta is likely to appoint a prime minister who will toe their line. In fact, there is talk that junta supremo General Prayuth Chan-ocha could himself become the prime minister. Definitely, it will make the chain of command much more efficient.

But all this restructuring is like clapping with one hand. The military has never talked about a peaceful coexistence between the Malays of Patani and the Thai state. The junta should know that they don't have to reinvent the wheel and that they could draw from past experience, like the recommendations of the National Reconciliation Commission that touched on the root causes of the conflict and prescribed ways to achieve reconciliation.

-- The Nation 2014-06-22

How does it go?

If you keep doing the same thing over and over again don't be surprised if you keep getting the same result?

Thais haven't got a clue to addressing the Thai south issues rationally let alone solving the issues. A Thai military dictatorship and military led initiative of any kind will always be perceived to be a force initiative. Thais don't seem to understand that. The Thais perceive the insurgents to be fools and not see that there is no accountability in the Thai system. Until Thais recognize that civilian government leadership is the only possible way to solve the Thai south, there will be unrest and killing.

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Thais haven't got a clue to addressing the Thai south issues rationally let alone solving the issues. A Thai military dictatorship and military led initiative of any kind will always be perceived to be a force initiative. Thais don't seem to understand that. The Thais perceive the insurgents to be fools and not see that there is no accountability in the Thai system. Until Thais recognize that civilian government leadership is the only possible way to solve the Thai south, there will be unrest and killing.

I agree, but don't forget they had civilian governments and no results , mainly because they have no idea how to adjust to a problem, this is way above their heads and they should ask for international help.

It is a blunt truth that the insurgents in the south want their own country (something that secessionist idiot reds said before the coup). No country is going to allow this.

The Thais are not going to give them the land. The Muslims will not relent unless thae have a province that obeys Shariah Law (and which means all others must obey that Idiot Law).

Stalemate. Forever.

Fang, I'm not sure I agree with you mate. In almost any other insurgency i would, however this one seems a bit different! You have to look at the history of those involved. It really is simplifying a complex matter to call this a Muslim insurgency. There are way too many factions down there. Some want Patani back, some want to become Malay. However (at least in the early days) it seemed that they would all settle for some sort of autonomy in local governance. Recognition of their religion and not being targeted simply because they are ethnically Malay and not really Thai. They want to speak their own language. Obviously there are some complete nutters down there, and they are all about Shariah. However Shariah will never happen here (much like the rest of the western world will not allow it). I honestly think it will take a brave Government to finally solve this issue. They will have to tackle a culture of complete mistrust, and extra-judicial killing. They will have to make apologies and quite likely open some investigations that have been closed for years. They would need to act transparently and with integrity; following through on promises made! It won't be popular, but I think they need an outside group (maybe an NGO) that is acceptable to all parties, to mediate and drive the process forward (NOT the bloody USA). The way things have gone here, historically, I just can't see any of this happening in the near future. Maybe you were right after all Fang- STALEMATE

The Nation seems to be getting quite critical of the Junta recently.

Islam is protected by the Thai monarchy; indeed the King funded the translation of the Qur’an into Thai. Sharia Law has been permitted for civil matters in Thailand since 1948.

In case you haven't seen it before a quote from a Thai military officer.

"There are three ways of understanding the underlying causes of the conflict in southern Thailand. The first is to see it as an ethno‐nationalist conflict; the second to see it as a religious conflict; and the third is to see it as having its roots in the region’s poverty and unemployment. This section argues that religion and poverty have roles to play, they are not the main causes of the conflict. It is instead the strong sense of Malay ethnic identity that is the strongest driver behind the conflict."

For the full report go to http://www.defence.g...d_Nurakkate.pdf

It looks as though a stalemate is currently a possibility, but a brief quote of the thoughts of a TV member on the issue of the deep South, that just maybe will be a part of future policy.

"I suggest that the approach that Templer took during the Malaysian troubles in the 50's would be a better option. Until the Thai forces are seen as friends, or at least not oppressive enemies, nothing will change. Accommodation to local desires and aspirations has to be satisfied before peace breaks out. Then the fanatics may be isolated and picked off - often with local support"

"The Thais are not going to give them the land. The Muslims will not relent unless thae have a province that obeys Shariah Law (and which means all others must obey that Idiot Law)."

I wonder how long this worldwide resurgence in Islamist extremism is going to last. It's going on in the ME, Africa, India, even China now. Methinks some kind of internal shake-up in the Muslim world (maybe oil drying up, or some kind of "awakening") will loosen it up. I don't see how you can negotiate with the sort of brutal people behind this, they suffer from extreme arrogance for one.

Thais haven't got a clue to addressing the Thai south issues rationally let alone solving the issues. A Thai military dictatorship and military led initiative of any kind will always be perceived to be a force initiative. Thais don't seem to understand that. The Thais perceive the insurgents to be fools and not see that there is no accountability in the Thai system. Until Thais recognize that civilian government leadership is the only possible way to solve the Thai south, there will be unrest and killing.

I agree, but don't forget they had civilian governments and no results , mainly because they have no idea how to adjust to a problem, this is way above their heads and they should ask for international help.

I think both of you should consider the possibility that the consortium of authorities who run things in the South no matter who is the central government have solved the issues, adjusted to the problems and are generally getting the results they desire.

Even if you reject this - after careful consideration and consultations with some people who live(d) in the deep South who will tell you things you obviously don't know - the chances of asking for "international help" are zero or less. And why would they? Did the British in Ireland, who couldn't solve that problem for one heck of a lot longer and bloodier than the conflict in the South? Did the Canadians with separatists? Did the Ukraine with the Russians? Did Mexico with the drug cartels? Why should Thailand even consider such an outlandish thing?

The Thai authorities can bring the insurgency in the South to a peaceful and successful end pretty well any time they want. Which certainly raises the question of whether they want to. The deep South is VERY lucrative to people involved at the top in major black market operations and international crime. "Solving the problem" would hurt those people very, very badly. The central government of any civilian persuasion has NO authority there. If Prayuth were to concentrate his efforts, he might be able to turn things around, but he would use up 100% of his political capital in doing it and would be powerless everywhere else.

You can safely bet he won't concentrate any effort there. Like every government he'll make cosmetic changes, and all gangs on all sides will continue operations as usual.

.

Edited June 22, 201411 yr by wandasloan

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

It is a blunt truth that the insurgents in the south want their own country (something that secessionist idiot reds said before the coup). No country is going to allow this.

The Thais are not going to give them the land. The Muslims will not relent unless thae have a province that obeys Shariah Law (and which means all others must obey that Idiot Law).

Stalemate. Forever.

And yet the Pilippines was able to find a solution that settled 40 years of violence with muslim insurgents. So maybe never say never.

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

"The Thais are not going to give them the land. The Muslims will not relent unless thae have a province that obeys Shariah Law (and which means all others must obey that Idiot Law)."

I wonder how long this worldwide resurgence in Islamist extremism is going to last. It's going on in the ME, Africa, India, even China now. Methinks some kind of internal shake-up in the Muslim world (maybe oil drying up, or some kind of "awakening") will loosen it up. I don't see how you can negotiate with the sort of brutal people behind this, they suffer from extreme arrogance for one.

Good question and it is a worry of course because we are constantly being told that Islam is actually a peaceful religion.

This is of course supported by the constant stream of news reports we read and see about the prevalence of non Islamic suicide bombers.

This rash of CoE, Roman Catholic, Anglican , Buddhist, Taoist, Hindu, Zarathustrian, Mormon, Hamish, Shintoist and Christian Scientist Suicide bombers is of course proof that Islam is a religion of peace and that the whole of the rest of the world that does not subscribe to the ideology of Islam is wrong. Let us not even mention the Agnostic and Atheist car bombers to any great degree - they are really bad news.

The beheading, maiming , stoning, using civilians as human shields, bombing schools full of children ,wife beating , refusal to allow women to be educated or educate themselves, walking around in bed sheets, flying to foreign countries to consume alcohol and fornicate - these are all useful lifestyle pointers that we should all adopt as they will surely lead us to a harmonious and peaceful global society......yeah !

It is a blunt truth that the insurgents in the south want their own country (something that secessionist idiot reds said before the coup). No country is going to allow this.

The Thais are not going to give them the land. The Muslims will not relent unless thae have a province that obeys Shariah Law (and which means all others must obey that Idiot Law).

Stalemate. Forever.

Exactly. Muslims participate in "talks", or "compromise" only as a stepping stone toward eventual satisfaction of their total agenda, which more often than not is both separatism and Shariah. The moment progress towards those ends stops, or begins to flag, violence & insurgency start. There are two choices in dealing with them. Give in to their demands, or fight them to the point of suppression. There is no steady-state middle ground. There are some polyannas who will foolishly mistake one of the "stepping stones" for a lasting peace, which is never really anything more than a prelude to the next set of demands.

Islamic extremists / conservatives 'demand' implementation of full Sharia Law, but where full Sharia law has not already been implemented e.g. Eygpt, Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand the large majority of Muslims reject such proposals.

Edited June 22, 201411 yr by simple1