Injection of international norms crucial to far South talks

May 19, 2018

By Don Pathan
SPECIAL TO THE NATION
Krong Pinang, Yala

But Thai military’s fear of scrutiny is blocking the path to peace  

Sergeant Chaiwat (not his real name) wondered out loud, with a hint of sarcasm, why violence in Thailand’s southernmost provinces hasn’t subsided in spite of the fact that the country’s leaders – who he called “the bosses” – have been engaging in talks with the rebels for as long as he could remember.

He had reason to be agitated; his operational area was put on high alert on Tuesday after insurgents carried out simultaneous pre-dawn attacks against one police station and four military outposts. “Ramadan starts tomorrow and the militants probably want to let off some steam before they observe the holy month,” Chaiwat said. “But it doesn’t mean they don’t carry out attacks during Ramadan. They’re just not as frequent and intense.”

Thai military officials examine the scene of an attack by suspected separatist militants in Yala on Tuesday.

Like many security officials on the front line in this historically contested region, where Muslim militants have taken up arms against the Thai state to carve out a separate state for the local Malays, Chaiwat is wondering if the “bosses” are talking to the right people. While peace negotiations are something way above his pay grade, Chaiwat said he feels a strong disconnect between the policy level and the actual security operations.

Chaiwat said he is confused over a number of things, including the so-called Safety Zone pilot project under the directive of Aksara Kherdphol, a retired army general who is also leading a team of negotiators – the so-called Dialogue Panel – at the table with MARA Patani, an umbrella organisation made up of several longstanding Patani Malay separatist movements.

Chaiwat said he is just as puzzled at the war of words between Aksara and the commander of the Fourth Army Area, Lt-General Piyawat Nakwanich, who is in charge of day-to-day security in the far South. The two men don’t see eye-to-eye, said security officials in Bangkok, pointing to a turf war and inter-agency rivalries.

Aksara, who sits in Bangkok, has been working hard on his Safety Zone, a pilot project in which both warring sides must observe a ceasefire in a designated district. The project comes with a “Safe House” where representatives from both sides are to sit and work together on various issues, including monitoring the Safe Zone itself. Piyawat, who lives in the conflict-affected region under heavy guard, was quick to dismiss the Dialogue Panel’s initiative, saying, “I’ve got 14 Safety Zones of my own.”

One Bangkok-based security official commented: “Instead of talking it over, they go the media to discredit one another,” adding that when they finally meet for lunch in Bangkok, the damage has already been done. Further complicating discussions, civic groups in the far South have been calling on the separatist militants and Thai forces to respect “Safe Spaces” – designated public areas such as market and school they say should be demilitarised.

Like many observers of this conflict, Chaiwat is not really sure what the fuss is about. After all, victory is still nowhere in sight. The number of insurgent attacks may have dropped sharply since 2007, but the militants have demonstrated that they still have the capability to hit government targets, Chaiwat said. On Tuesday militants with machine guns and grenade launchers attacked five military and police positions in Krong Pinang and nearby Yaha district.  An unregistered drone had been spotted just days earlier hovering over one of the targets, a Ranger outpost.

Needless to say, the ongoing violence and the “spitting contest” between the two top brasses do nothing to help the argument that Thailand is moving in the right direction. In fact, peace talks have hit a snag because MARA Patani felt insulted by Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha for “jumping the gun” by announcing the much-hyped Safety Zone.

MARA Patani was expecting a more formal launch after what they considered a “breakthrough”, in spite of the fact that the Safety Zone is not considered a game-changer in the overall scheme of things. Realising his boss had committed a blunder, Aksara went into damage-control mode and went public about the pending release of three insurgent prisoners as demanded by MARA Patani.

He was suggesting to the umbrella group that all was not lost. The three will be transferred to the so-called “safe house” in Pattani where they will be guarded by Thai soldiers until further notice. For the talks to resume, said a source from one of the MARA Patani groups, the Thai government would have to reiterate its commitment to the peace process in the same way that the Yingluck Shinawatra government had done when her administration launched this peace initiative in February 2013.

One reason why Thai leaders don’t take MARA Patani seriously is their conviction that the umbrella organisation does not have any influence on the combatants, say Thai government officials. BRN reluctance Bangkok is hoping that the group with actual control over the combatants, the Barisan Revolusi Nasional (BRN), will join MARA Patani at the table. But the only tangible thing Thailand and MARA Patani have received from the BRN is an assurance they will observe the ceasefire in the designated Safety Zone.  The BRN said they would only negotiate directly with Bangkok when they are ready and properly trained. The talks, BRN sources insisted, must be in line with international best practices, which means having members of the international community mediate the negotiations. Over recent months, Bangkok has begun to ease up on its zero-sum mentality.

A green light has been given to members of the international community to work with the BRN and local civil society organisations (CSOs), including those who are critical of the state, to help them with capacity building and familiarise them with concepts such as International Humanitarian Law and other international norms. Bangkok thinks more progressive CSOs and BRN members will be good for conflict resolution. The best-case scenario would be creation of a rift within the BRN movement, between the military hardliners and the more progressive camp. But the Thai military, especially the Fourth Army, is not keen on giving foreign organisations or governments access to affairs in the far South. Thai military officials said they don’t want the headache, but local CSOs said the Army is afraid of having to explain to outsiders their questionable tactics and conduct in this restive region.

They pointed to mounting allegations of human rights abuses and harassment of CSO leaders, including the recent raid on the home two young Patani Malay activists, Artef Sohko and Arfan Wattana, by some 60 armed security officers. The activists were not at home.

“My little brother asked them if they had a search warrant and they told him to shut up and to inform me that there’s no way I’m going to win this case because they have the power to do what they do,” said Arfan.

Officers stopped Arfan’s brother from photographing them; meanwhile a police officer took a selfie at the scene which he posted on Facebook with a complaint about the weather and long working hours. Like the Army, Aksara is not keen on the idea of outsiders working with the BRN directly. In his mind, ongoing talks between his Dialogue Panel and MARA Patani is the only legitimate process and anybody who wants to work on conflict resolution in the far South needs to come and see him.

But non-military personnel said the only way to move forward is to give in to BRN’s demand of internationalising the process. One reason why some in Bangkok policymaking circles favour the idea of permitting foreign countries to work with the BRN is that they believe the government holds the moral high ground in the eyes of the international community, which is supportive of their policy for the far South.

The BRN, on the other hand, said Thailand is only interested in reducing the violence to justify their counter-insurgency programmes but won’t talk about historical grievances and root causes of the regional conflict. The positions of the two sides, it seems, are just as wide apart as ever.

Don Pathan is a security consultant and member of the Patani Forum (www.pataniforum.com), a civil society organisation dedicated to critical discussion on the conflict in Thailand’s far South.

Thai PM’s Protocol Breach Jeopardizes Southern Peace Talks

Commentary by Don Pathan
Yala, Thailand
May 14, 2018

Peace talks between Thailand and an umbrella group representing Patani Malay separatist organizations have come to a standstill because the rebel side felt insulted by Thai Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-o-cha for “jumping the gun” with his announcement of a much-talked-about Safety Zone pilot project. 



Sources on both sides confirmed that the stalling in talks between the government in Bangkok and MARA Patani, a panel negotiating on behalf of long-standing separatist groups in the Deep South, stemmed from the perceived violation of protocol by Prayuth.



MARA Patani felt humiliated and belittled because they were expecting a more formal launch for what they considered a “breakthrough” – the announcement of a pilot Safety Zone, or geographically limited ceasefire, in Thailand’s southern border region.



A source in one of the organizations that sits on MARA Patani said they would like to see the Thai side reiterate the same kind of commitment that the then-government of Yingluck Shinawatra had announced back in February 2013, when the dialogue process was first launched.

Yingluck’s initiative marked the first time that a Bangkok government stated publicly that it was determined to resolve the southern conflict through political means. Prior to that, peace initiatives were kept out of the public spotlight.  



In spite of the fact that the Safety Zone is nothing close to a game-changer for the resolution of the decades-old conflict in the Muslim-majority Deep South, nevertheless, it appeared to be the only thing that Thailand and MARA Patani had to show for in the talks. This explains why the latter was extra sensitive on protocol.



It also explained why Gen. Aksara Kerdpol, the chief negotiator for the Thai side, had come forward about the pending release of three prisoners, as demanded by MARA Patani as pre-condition for the implementation of the ceasefire.

Realizing that his prime minister had created a blunder, Aksara, by going public with the pending release of the three, was sending a message to the MARA Patani side that all is not lost. 

The three are to be transferred to a holding center, dubbed “the apartment,” located inside the compound of the Islamic Committee of Pattani. It is the so-called “safe house” where they will be guarded by Thai soldiers until further notice.



The BRN factor

Thai security officials and militant sources on the ground, meanwhile, said that nothing would change until the Barisan Revolusi Nasional (BRN) negotiated directly with the Thais. BRN is one of the long-standing separatist movements, and it controls virtually all of the militants on the ground.



Bangkok wants BRN to come to the table under the MARA Patani umbrella, but the group insisted that they would only meet the Thais directly and would only come to the table when they feel properly trained. 

Moreover, any talks must be in line with international best practices, which means that members of the international community should be permitted to mediate the negotiations, BRN sources said.



Policy makers in Bangkok reject the idea of broadening the participation in this peace process that is being facilitated by Malaysia and up until the recent past, was not keen with the idea of permitting members of the international community engaging directly with the BRN.

Involving the international community

But other Thai officials said they had let go of their zero-sum game mentality.

A green light has been given, they said, to members of the international community to work with BRN and local civil society organizations (CSOs), including those critical of the state, to help them with capacity building and familiarize them with the various concepts, such as international humanitarian law and other international norms.



Hardliners in the military, especially the Fourth Army Region who oversees the security situation in the far south, are not too keen with the idea of permitting international NGOs or foreign governments becoming too involved with the affairs in the far South, for fear of having to explain to outsiders their questionable tactics and conducts in this restive region. 



Critics point to the mounting allegations of human rights abuses and harassment of CSO leaders and political activists in the region. The recent raid of a home a young Patani Malay activist, Artef Sohko, by some 60 security officers is a case in point.

Authorities confiscated some academic papers from Artef’s home. It was in English and it was about the peace process in the Mindanao region of the southern Philippines.

“They said they will get it translated.

I really hope they learn something from it,” Artef said.

Moreover, Kerdpol, the chief Thai negotiator, is also afraid that the participation of outsiders would undermine his role as the one with the sole mandate to negotiate with the rebels, said Thai officials overseeing the southern conflict.

Such attitudes may be challenged if and when the Thai junta steps down and a new government comes to power.

A significant number of Thai officials (non-military) favored the idea of opening up the process to permit members of the international community to participate in the peace process if it means bringing BRN to the table.



They said the self-proclaimed BRN members who sit on MARA Patani do not have the blessing of the group’s ruling council, namely the Dewan Pimpinan Parti (DPP). And until that happens, the dialogue process with MARA Patani is little more than a “talk shop.” 

BRN, on the other hand, said Thailand continued to take them for granted and only wanted to end the political violence without addressing the historical grievances and root causes of the conflict in the far South. 



They said Prayuth “jumping the gun” with the announcement about the Safety Zone was not the first time Bangkok had humiliated MARA Patani. The fact that Thai Government continues to refer to the umbrella organization as “Party B,” instead of referring to them by their organizational name, is a case in point.  



In the final analysis, the Safety Zone is a big leap of faith but it is doomed to fail because the project rests on shaky ground. 

The group that controls the militants on the ground – BRN – may have promised not to sabotage the project but one has to wonder how long that will last.



Don Pathan is a consultant and security analyst based in Thailand. The opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and not of BenarNews.

Southern Thai Peace Talks Hit Snag Over Rebel Group’s Demand

Don Pathan
BenarNews

Yala, Thailand

Thailand’s peace initiative with Malay Muslim insurgents in the Deep South has hit a snag as rebels have threatened not to go through with the Safety Zone initiative unless Bangkok releases three of their imprisoned members.

Thai officials insisted that the call to release the three prisoners was not a demand tied to the prospect of a safety zone – or geographically limited ceasefire – but a “request” from MARA Patani, the panel representing insurgent groups in the peace talks. The Justice Ministry is looking into the case, officials told me.

If granted, it would not be a pardon but an early release, according to sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

If not, it would be a setback for the Safety Zone, a much-talked about project that would become Thailand’s showpiece for the international community. The project involves the designation of a district where a ceasefire is to be observed in Thailand’s southern border region.

MARA Patani, an umbrella organization made up of six long-standing separatist movements, began talks with the Thai government three years ago.

Like all other previous peace initiatives, Thailand’s engagement with MARA Patani rests on a shaky ground because the umbrella organization does not have control over the combatants on the ground.

A military intelligence officer described Thailand’s engagement with MARA Patani as “just buying time” until the leadership of the Barisan Revolusi Nasional (BRN), the one group that controls virtually all of the militants in the field, decided to join the peace process.

So far, there is no indication BRN will change its stance – not because of a lack of trying on the part of MARA Patani or Malaysia, the designated facilitator.

Glimmer of hope

A moment of hope, albeit small, came late last year during a meeting between Malaysian mediator Ahmad Zamzamin Hashim, who is a retired spy chief, and two senior members of BRN’s ruling council.

Zamzamin received an assurance from the BRN leaders that their militants would not sabotage the safety-zone initiative, which would be implemented in a yet-to-be-named district in one of three Muslim-majority provinces in the Deep South. The idea was conjured up by MARA Patani and Thailand’s Dialogue Panel.

BRN sources said they were still committed to independence for Patani, the Malay historical homeland that today forms Thailand’s three southernmost provinces. They had no plan to enter into a negotiation with the Thais, they said.

Moreover, a planned meeting between the country’s chief negotiator, Gen. Aksara Kerdpol, and one of the BRN senior figures, Doonloh Wae-mano (alias Abdullah Wan Mat Noor), to be held in Indonesia, should not be interpreted as a breakthrough in any way.

Nevertheless, the fact that BRN agreed not to sabotage the Safety Zone project and allow the initiative to take its course was welcomed in Thailand despite the glaring irony that the participants, MARA Patani and Thai government, don’t control the armed militants.

A spitting contest

Bangkok wants to make this Safety Zone project its showpiece in order to demonstrate to the public and the world that it is making “progress” in efforts to end a separatist conflict that has killed nearly 7,000 people since January 2004.

For a moment, things appeared to be moving in the right direction.

People were looking forward to the launch of the safety zone scheduled for April 2018. And then came a demand from the MARA Patani that three of their people be released from prison, sources on both sides told me.

Beside the horse-trading and the political and legal challenges that come with it, Thailand’s peace initiative for the Deep South is also facing some major obstacles coming from the people inside the country.

The ongoing spitting contest between Aksara and the commander of the Fourth Army region, Lt. Gen. Piyawat Nakwanich, who oversees security in the Deep South, could very well have negative consequences on the government’s strategy for the area.

Government sources said the disagreement was part of a turf war between the two members of the military top brass who had been dismissive of one another through the media.

In a recent statement to the press, Piyawat said Aksara’s safety project was nothing to get excited about and added that he himself had single-handedly created 14 such zones and that he didn’t want to boast.

Piyawat also talked about his Bring People Home project, a half-baked amnesty program that supposedly helps former insurgents return to normal civilian life, calling it a success because it put a dent in BRN’s morale and military standing.

According to a Thai government source overseeing the southern conflict, the bickering stemmed from the dispute of who should oversee which programs.

Members of the Dialogue Panel, the official name of Thailand’s negotiating team, believe they should be the one administering Bring People Home because they are the ones who are dealing directly with the rebels and, therefore, they would be in a better position to run the program.

The dispute between Aksara and Piyawat forced a leading member of MARA Patani to issue a public statement, accusing the commander of the Fourth Army region commander of creating confusion.

Sukree Haree said Piyawat’s amnesty project and his version of 14 “safety zone” districts were entirely different from the programs discussed at the negotiating table between his umbrella organization and the Dialogue Panel.

BRN sources dismissed Piyawat’s claim of success, saying those who surrendered through the program were not deeply involved in the movement and may just be guilty by association. This is a common accusation employed by the Thai authorities but has no bearing in court.

Moreover, the BRN has not reached the stage of a full-fledged army and, therefore, does not need that many soldiers in its ranks.

The strategy at this point is to discredit the government’s security apparatus, making the region ungovernable as much as possible.

A roadside bombing followed by a brief gunfight that hardly ever lasts more than five minutes is the usual battle scenario in this region.

The insurgents said they are more interested in capturing the locals’ hearts, mind and imagination, not geographical space, which is something way down the road, at which time, a conventional force will be needed.

Don Pathan is a consultant and security analyst based in Thailand. The opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and not of BenarNews.

Army’s tighter grip threatens peace initiative in far South

Don Pathan
Special to The Nation
March 10, 2018

Yala

Concern is growing that the military’s eagerness to please bosses in Bangkok could lead to collapse of safety zone project

The tension between Internal Security Operation Command (Isoc) Region 4 and civic leaders working on the conflict in Thailand’s far South has reached an unprecedented height as neither side shows signs of backing down. 

A week ago, 38 civil society organisations (CSOs) and 22 individual academics and activists signed a petition calling on Isoc Region 4 Command to stop intimidating the media and human rights defenders, and to be realistic about the challenges people in the region face. Signatories pointed to alleged harassment of local human rights activist Ismail Teh, who won an eight-year legal battle when a Thai court ordered the government to compensate him financially for the beating inflicted upon him while he was in detention.

Just weeks ago, 4th Army commander Lt-General Piyawat Nakwanich filed defamation charges against Ismail for talking to the media about his case.  Late last month, Aiman Hadeng, president of Justice of Peace Network, a local CSO made up of former detainees, was held incommunicado without charges for a week.  Other similar incidents over the past few weeks include the raid of a private Islamic school in Pattani’s Nong Chik district that turned up nothing incriminating and the detention of 14 youths camping on a Yala’s hilltop popular among local tourists. The March 2 press statement was signed by both Muslims and Thai Buddhist academics and CSO leaders who are fed up with what they say amounts to a campaign of intimidation from the military.

These activists accuse the Fourth Army Area Command, the engine behind Isoc Region 4, of ignoring the reality on the ground and refusing to address the root cause of the conflict. A government source in Bangkok who monitors the conflict in the far South said concern is growing that Lt-General Piyawat’s activities could drive a bigger wedge between the state and a local Malay population which the Army is supposed to be winning over.

There is also concern that his heavy-handedness could affect the ongoing peace dialogue between the central government and MARA Patani, an umbrella organisation made up of six long-standing Patani Malay separatist movements. Thailand’s engagement with MARA Patani has reached an important juncture that includes the implementation of a Safety Zone, a pilot project in which the two sides will designate a district in the far South where a period of ceasefire will be observed. 

The Thai government and MARA Patani will also set up a “Safe House” where representatives from both sides can jointly monitor the security situation in the Safety Zone and take up issues raised by the local residents.  The designated district is set to be announced by May, once technical teams from the two sides have ironed out the details of a project that had been on the table for more than two years.

Bangkok and MARA Patani were able to push for implementation only after the Barisan Revolusi Nasional (BRN), the group that controls virtually all of the insurgent combatants but is not taking part in peace negotiations, agreed not to sabotage the initiative. In 2013, alleged extrajudicial and “target” killings by Thai forces came into focus when a BRN liaison, Hasan Taib, raised the issue at a meeting with Thai representatives in the peace talks. Negotiations at the time were also complicated when local activists marched to the Malaysian Consulate in Songkhla to raise the same case and called on Kuala Lumpur, in its capacity as talks facilitator, to intervene and end alleged torture and assassination of former detainees. Now, there is growing concern that Piyawat’s aggressive tactics in the South could see the BRN wash its hands of (or place severe limitations on) the Safety Zone project. 

Rebel sources said they were extremely upset at Piyawat’s “blind” sweep operation in Bannang Sata, Yala, in early January, during which government troops netted about 50 local residents for detention. The round-up was in response to an arson attack on a passenger bus by a local militant cell in mid-December 2017. A Thai government security official said Piyawat was out to impress his superiors in Bangkok with his heavy-handed tactics while giving no consideration to the consequences. 

But senior government officials and the top brass don’t seem to mind the aggression, while the predominantly Buddhist Thai general public outside of this restive region remains largely indifferent to the plight of the Patani Malays. For many, the very idea of sitting at the same table with Patani Malay movements as equals is unpalatable. “In the eyes of the military leaders, they [Patani Malay separatist movements] will always be criminals,” said the Thai government source, who spoke on condition of anonymity. In this line of thinking, said the source, Piaywat’s questionable tactics on the ground will generate little opposition among the top brass in Bangkok, who are running the show and will continue to do so until the mandate is eventually handed back to the Thai people.

 Don Pathan is a founding member of the Patani Forum (www.pataniforum.com), a civil society organisation dedicated to critical discussion on the conflict in Thailand’s far South. He is based in Yala, one of the three southernmost provinces in this historically contested region known as Patani.TagsArmyfar SouthpeaceinitiativeArmy’s tighterBangkok

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/opinion/30340631 

Thai Military, Southern Rebels Must Agree on Rules of Engagement

Don Pathan
BenarNews

Yala, Thailand

Separatist insurgents recently hijacked a double-decker tour bus and set it on fire in Thailand’s Deep South, after escorting the passengers off.

The incident jolted security officials in the region, where the military had boasted about winning hearts and minds of the predominantly Malay Muslim population.

The military claimed as well that hundreds, and possibly thousands of militants, were itching to put down their arms through a government amnesty program known as Bring People Home.

Motorbike bomb killed three in an open market in Yala, Thailand, on Jan 22, 2018. 

The attack in December irked policymakers in Bangkok. It also exposed questions about security along the only road linking Yala – one of the three conflict-ridden provinces in the south – to Betong, an important border town where an international airport is being built.

Initial reactions to the attack were mixed. Lt. Gen. Piyawat Nakwanich, the army’s regional commander, at first suggested a crime syndicate may have been behind the attack.

But as the investigation unfolded and as more militant sources began to speak, the attack appeared to be part of the separatists’ strategy to undermine the security apparatus. It was, indeed, a stern statement to the Thai government that this road was not safe to travel.

To demonstrate they are not a bunch of misguided fanatics bent on racking up body counts, the militants, in this case, did not harm the passengers on the bus. The rebels stopped in-coming traffic so the passengers could cross the road, and they also helped older ones with their luggage.

It was their way of showing they respect certain boundaries, even though there are no written rules of engagement for the two warring sides.

Mop-up operation

The army responded to the arson attack two weeks later by carrying out a mop-up operation in Bunnang Sata district and nearby villages. By the time the operation ended, authorities rounded up 50 suspects.

Authorities said detainees provided valuable information. Relatives of the arrested huddled in front of holding centers, where their sons and husbands were locked up under martial law that permits detention without legal representation. With no access to the detainees, it was understandable that relatives feared the worse as many of those in custody had already been released.

Local and international human rights organizations have documented allegations of torture and abuse of detainees. But the authorities often dismiss such allegations without investigation, and the army has even threatened legal action against accusers.

Not all of the military personnel in the region agreed with the January mop-up operation. Some argued it would undermine the overall counter-insurgency effort aimed at winning support from Malay Muslims who make up more than 80 percent of the two million residents in the Deep South.

They were concerned that a blind sweep could be perceived by the militants as going overboard, and could provoke retaliation.

Their fears were realized on Jan. 22. An insurgent cell in Yala set off a vicious motorbike bomb at a market in Yala, killing three civilians, including an Islamic religious student.

The message to the Thai side was loud and clear: Your action has deadly consequences. In the end, a perceived violation by the army was answered with another violation by the rebels.

For observers of the conflict, the friendly conduct of the militants behind the bus attack and angry cell members behind the motorbike bomb seems to be a world apart. If anything, it reflected diverse views among the militants on the ground.

“It seems that some militants have no qualms about pushing the boundaries of what’s acceptable, while others believe humanitarian principles have to be respected,” said Artef Sohko, a political activist from The Patani, a civil society organization that promotes the right to self-determination for the people of this historically contested region.

While collateral damage does happen in this conflict and both sides can be blamed for these violations, it is very rare for militant cells to single out soft targets.

The last time a soft target was singled out for an attack in the far south was on Oct. 24, 2016, when a bomb went off at a nighttime food hawking area in the heart of Pattani, killing one person and injuring 18 other people.

That was retaliation against the rounding up of more than 100 Patani Malay youths and students living in Bangkok, some of whom claimed to have been beaten, militant sources said.

Since there are no written rules of engagement, it’s pretty much up to the two warring sides to decide where to draw a red line. What is clear is that retaliatory attacks against perceived violations have been deadly.

Insurgents dictate pace of violence

But it hasn’t stopped the Thai security forces from pushing the line with their operations in the field, not to mention other forms of harassment that push the residents even further from reconciling with the state.

Moreover, with no pressure to explain their conduct because policymakers and security planners in Bangkok have more important issues to attend to, the regional army command is left alone to construct its own narrative.

The military paints itself as morally superior to the insurgents because government officials are not behind the violence. It believes that the more insurgents resort to violence, the more they distance themselves from the community.

Officials often pointed to a steady drop in the number of violent acts in the Deep South since 2007, but separatist sources said the decision to reduce those incidents was theirs to make. In other words, the militants have been told to make their hits count, which mean greater intensity with each and every attack.

This is not to say that the military does not deserve any credit for bringing down the number of violent incidents. The decision to post paramilitary rangers in remote areas helped expand the security grid and improve response times.

Meanwhile, the movement has shown that militants can hit any place at any time, and even against targets outside of the traditional theater of violence. In their view, as long as the movement exists, the government can never claim victory.

Until someone can bring the two sides to reach an agreement the rules of engagement and tit-and-tat violence will go on with no end in sight.

Don Pathan is independent security analyst and a founding member of Patani Forum (www.pataniforum.com), a civil society organization dedicated to critical discussion on the conflict in Thailand’s southernmost provinces. The opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and not of BenarNews.

Where Next for Peace Talks in Thailand’s Deep South?

Commentary by Don Pathan
Yala, Thailand
BenarNews

Roadside bombing that killed four troops in Pattani on Sept 22, 2917. AFP

Thailand’s snail-pace peace talks with Malay Muslim separatist movements have reached a critical juncture. The main armed group, Barisan Revolusi Nasional (BRN), is thinking of moving to the next level of dialogue by drawing international negotiators to the table, and beyond the normal tit-for-tat violence between them and Thai security forces.

It has been 14 years of ambushes, roadside bombings and targeted killings of Thai security officials and suspected collaborators. Thailand, on the other hand, continues to follow a two-pronged strategy: winning the hearts and minds of local Malay Muslim through economic development aimed at stimulating growth in the impoverished southern border region; and engaging in hot pursuits of militants on the ground.

Other than that, the security officials are sitting ducks, waiting to be hit by militants as they move from place to place.

In all, nearly 7,000 people have died from the insurgency-related violence, yet a political settlement is nowhere in sight.

Every now and then, the insurgents carry out coordinated attacks outside of this conflict-affected region known as the “Deep South” or “Patani,” the Malays’ historical homeland, to send a stern warning to the Thai security apparatus that they are capable of expanding their campaign of violence away from the historically contested region.

However, recent months saw a significant shift in Malay-Muslim separatist tactics. Key up-and-coming individuals, who will take over the movement when the elders pass, believe it’s time to move beyond the shaming and humiliation of the Thai security apparatus. They want to explore other possibilities and opportunities through engaging members of the international community.

But shifting the playing field from the battleground to the world’s stage will not be easy. Members of the international community are reluctant to engage the BRN out of concern of upsetting Bangkok.

In fact, one of the BRN’s demands for a formal negotiation with the Thais is mediation by the international community. This issue was raised during a series of meetings over the past six months between the designated facilitator, Malaysia’s Ahmad Zamzamin Hashim, and a senior member of the BRN ruling council, Doonloh Wae-mano.

Zamzamin also used his meeting with the BRN leader to arrange a meeting between Doonloh and Thailand’s chief negotiator, Gen. Aksara Kerdpol. The meeting is expected to take place in Indonesia but no date has been set.

The upcoming meeting is not a breakthrough or a game changer, BRN sources insisted. They said BRN’s position remained the same: if the Thais want to carry out formal negotiations, they will have to internationalize the process, which means the negotiations will have to be mediated and facilitated by foreign governments and the venue will have to be outside of Malaysia.

Permitting Doonloh to meet with the Thai chief negotiator was “a gesture of goodwill” toward Kuala Lumpur in its capacity as the facilitator for the peace initiative, BRN sources said.

Thai officials, however, are split on the idea of the meeting itself; some think a face-to-face meeting between Doonloh and Aksara is a positive development, a step in the right direction.

Others are concerned that dealing directly with the BRN will undermine the official process between Bangkok and the other separatist groups, most notably, MARA Patani, an umbrella organization of long-standing Patani-Malay rebel organizations. In other words, these officials would like to see BRN come under MARA Patani’s umbrella and deal with the Thais from there.

BRN sources also revealed the group is not in a hurry to get to the negotiating table. First and foremost, their representatives will have to be granted legal immunity and be properly trained, preferably by members of the international community with experience in conflict resolution and peace mediation.

Furthermore, any formal negotiation, they said, will have to be done outside Malaysia, preferably in Western countries with a strong reputation in conflict resolution and mediation.

Thai security and BRN sources said these demands have upset Zamzamin, the retired Malaysian spy chief who invested a great deal of energy going back and forth between the Thais and the rebels to keep Kuala Lumpur at the center of the process.

After all, Malaysia shares a common border with Thailand’s conflict-affected region. And in this respect, Malaysia is a stakeholder to the conflict, not exactly an honest broker.

The sources said Zamzamin met with Doonloh at least three times over the past six months. He has tried hard to convince Doonloh to permit BRN to join the Kuala Lumpur-facilitated peace talks between Thailand and MARA Patani.

The decision to join MARA Patani, or come to the negotiating table, is not up to Doonloh entirely, sources in the BRN said. The group is governed by a ruling council, the Dewan Pimpinan Parti (DPP), and such an important decision would be made collectively.

While MARA Patani claimed to have BRN members on board, BRN’s operatives on the ground and abroad, as well as the movement’s Indonesia-based Information Department, maintained that these people acted on their own and without the DPP’s consent.

Thai officials working on the conflict in the far South said MARA Patani was resting on shaky ground, because their process has not generated any meaningful traction. Moreover, the very fact that BRN, the group that controls virtually all of the militants on the ground, refuses to join them at the table also makes it difficult to move ahead with any plans, such as the implementation of a safety zone – an area where a limited ceasefire is to be observed.

Kuala Lumpur’s commitment to the talks should be clearer by the end of February when Zamzamin’s contract with the government is up for renewal. Some observers don’t think MARA Patani can survive without him at the helm.

Progress in the peace talks is moving at a snail’s pace partly because the BRN, which controls the militants, refuses to come to the table; and partly because Bangkok has never shown that it is interested in getting to the bottom of the Patani Malay cultural and historical grievances.

Thailand only wants to deal with the security aspect of this insurgency and discontent. The government believes it can win over the hearts and minds of the local Malay Muslim to deny the BRN militants the legitimacy for their armed struggle.

But such efforts are unlikely to bear fruit if Bangkok refuses to talk about the historical grievances and mistrust between the state and its Malay minority.

An earlier version of this commentary incorrectly gave the name of the governing body of BRN as the Dewan Penilian Parti. It is the Dewan Pimpinan Parti.

Don Pathan is a consultant and security analyst based in Thailand. The opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and not of BenarNews.

https://www.benarnews.org/english/commentaries/far-south-view/more-talks-01082018131535.html

ASIA TIMES : Eye on Catalonia, South Thailand yearns to vote

http://www.atimes.com/article/eye-catalonia-south-thailand-yearns-vote/

Malay Muslim activists in the insurgency-prone region have called for a referendum on 'rights to self-determination', a rally cry military authorities have curbed and silenced

By DON PATHAN YALA, OCTOBER 31, 2017 3:48 PM (UTC+8)

• 121
• 0

An artist takes part in a graffiti event as part of the Saiburi Street Xhibit in Pattani - one of Thailand's southernmost Muslim majority provinces hit by a deadly insurgency - on February 28, 2016. Photo: AFP/Madree Tohlala

Spain may be halfway around the world from Thailand, but that hasn’t stopped ethnic Malay political activists in the Southeast Asian nation’s Muslim-majority southernmost region from tuning in to developments in Catalonia, where a vote for independence has been met with a swift and firm counter-response from Madrid.

Political activists here have observed the political crisis in Spain with curiosity, wondering how the Catalan population developed their political platform, strengthened their movement’s grass roots legitimacy and ultimately through democratic means challenged the Spanish government’s notion of undivided national sovereignty

http://www.atimes.com/article/eye-catalonia-south-thailand-yearns-vote/