Please log in to reply 1 reply to this topic

[churchill]

BANGKOK (Reuters) - Five years after a violent rebellion erupted in Thailand's southern Muslim provinces, the conflict remains shrouded in mystery.

No credible group has claimed responsibility for the near-daily attacks or made their demands public.

The death toll from the unrest in Yala, Pattani and Narathiwat provinces is close to 3,500, with neither a military victory nor a political solution looking likely.


WHO IS BEHIND THE VIOLENCE?

No group has publicly come forward, but analysts, academics and the military believe the Barisan Revolusi Nasional (BRN) Coordinate is the main player.

The group is said to be a military offshoot of the Patani Malay National Revolutionary Front, a political movement established in the 1960s to seek independence, or at least autonomy, for the region's ethnic Malay Muslims.

A low-level insurgency in the 1970s and early 1980s, fought mainly in the jungle, ended with an amnesty for fighters. The violence resurfaced in 2004.  Continued...at http://in.reuters.co...ndChannel=11584
-- Reuters 03/07/09

[Nilrem]

What is behind Thailand's mysterious insurgency?

This is a key question with interesting subquestions:
Who's behind the violence?
Where does the sentiment come from?
What are the rebels' capabilities?
How is the governmetn tackling the violence?
Are outside groups involved?
Will the violence spread?
Is a political solution possible?

Notice that all the questions in this article explicitly or implicitly revolve around bias and violence. Of course an "insurgency" movement to Thai authority would be a "liberation" movement to Malay Muslim authority. The implicit "sentiment" is centered by hostility on both sides; involving "outside groups" implies the violent type; as does a "political solution" with inside groups, which would "reduce its reliance on a military approach". This means it'd keep relying on violence and militarism just less so while reaching out "to the Muslim elite and make the people feel valued, not isolated or marginalized." Clearly contradictory.

Thai authorities are quite right to believe that prominent local politicians, religious leaders and Islamic teacher of involvement in the insurgency (or liberation from in the Malay Muslim view). I will simply elaborate somewhat on this aspect as an educator.

The Thai and Moslem authorities rely heavily on a propagandizing educational system in their teachings. They instil positive feelings for the State in the former case and for Islam in the latter case. Its propaganda since each side hypes their deep seated prejudices while degrading (even demonizing opposition. In other words, Thai government schools proprogate their nationalistic feelings and associated values at the expense of Malay culture and Islam religion. Moslim schools hype feelings for Islam and associated values at the expense of Thai natioanlism and culture.

Years ago I studied the Thai school system and curriculum amongst the hill tribes, particularly among the Lisu people. The propaganda was pervasive and the programming worked. I see it has worked well among the Isaan people. They are essentially assimilated and identify as Thai, though that could change and there could be a push to re-establish their roots as they tried somewhat a generation ago.

Positively, the people of Thailand are united in their deep seated emotion for King Bhomibol. While some Thai worship the king even among the Malay Muslims there is a lot of respect for him personally for what he has done, for instance, in promoting the Koran. The king has also been instrumental in supporting indigenous culture among the hill tribes, which they've appreciated. I think this is due, in my opinion, to his sincerity and care for the multicultural aspect of Thailand. In this regard i see no propagandizing on his part. Quite the opposite.

However, with his death a void will appear and if it isn't properly filled the Thai people may easily split not only along political lines (which is recognized) but along ethnic lines as well (which may not be recognized as much). This puts a lot of fear into the hearts of authoritarian bureaucrates (who are by nature control freaks) and political leaders as well as red/yellow shirt populists.

Long live King Bhumipol!-- and, though somewhat pessimistic, i sincerely hope that the people of Thailand can come together to respect each other like they respect their king.

So in conclusion, from my point of view, the mystery behind Thailand's problems is a country permeated by propaganda, since by definition misinformation and negative emotion will keep what is truly good and good in truth unknown. It incites violence and hatred, which focuses on differences and not commonalities. I suggest Thailand should start to resolve the problem by taking the propaganda out of the school system.

Nilrem