EDITORIAL: Take away the licence to kill

TRIGGER-HAPPY SECURITY OFFICIALS IN THE SOUTH NEED TO REASSESS PROCEDURES THAT FUEL THE ANGER ON WHICH INSURGENCY FEEDS

Thai security forces are in hot water again over their actions in the deep South. This time the controversy is over the shooting to death of four young men in Pattani’s Yarang district.

According to the official version, a group of paramilitary rangers were tracking suspected insurgents who had gathered in Pattani’s Tung Yang Daeng District to plan attacks against government security agencies. The scene of the gathering was a construction site at a village in the district.

The rangers’ actions in storming the gathering and shooting dead four young men has drawn fierce criticism from the rector of Fatoni University, where two of the victims had been studying.
Dr Ismail Lutfi Japakiya has every right to voice his concern, especially now that his students are at the centre of the debate.

Dr Lutfi is proud of his university’s reputation as “cleaner than clean” and not involved in the region’s ongoing separatist conflict.

Academics and researchers who work in this contested region see the insurgency as part of a nationalist movement.

Meanwhile, Lutfi’s brand of Islam places religion above all else, which is why those very same academics and researchers do not talk about his institution in the light of separatism.
Thai authorities, of course, disagree with his claim that none of the students at Fatoni University has embraced separatism as an ideology or has joined the separatist militants.

They claim that just because the university as an institution does not embrace or promote Patani Malay separatism, that doesn’t mean its students – including the two shot dead in Tung Yang Daeng – hadn’t embraced the ideology.

Lutfi and his university staff have in the past been helpful to the state, often making themselves available to receive foreign dignitaries and reporters invited to the South by the government. To show its appreciation, the Yingluck Shinawatra administration added
 another academic building to the Fatoni campus.
That appreciation must now be extended by ensuring justice for the two dead students and their families.
The problem of trigger-happy Thai security officials is nothing new in the deep South, but this latest incident adds weight to arguments that their approach and tactics are in urgent need of an overhaul.
In January 2012, soldiers attached to a ranger unit in Pattani’s Nong Chik district, who were reportedly “itching for a fight” after their base had been attacked by militants, gunned down a group of Muslim funeral-goers who happened to be passing, killing four and injuring five.
 Expectations that the military would reassess their rules of engagement in response to that debacle came to nothing.

The decade-old emergency decree, coupled with a culture of impunity for security officials, has helped foster a “shoot-to-kill” attitude among security officials. They know that the law – which many locals have dubbed a licence to kill – will protect them. Public indifference in the rest of Thailand towards the plight of Malay Muslims in the southernmost provinces also ensures that whatever controversial measures the government takes in the region will be met with little or no criticism elsewhere.

Dr Lutfi has maintained a good working relationship with the Thai state and, thus, the authorities owe it to him to conduct their investigation into the Tung Yang Daeng shootings honestly and accurately.
If the two students were part of the insurgency, the burden is on the state to convince the public of that fact. Meanwhile, Thai security officials’ standard operating procedures in the South must be closely scrutinised and reassessed.

We should not lose sight of the fact that more than 6,000 people – most of them Malay Muslim residents – have been killed in insurgency-related violence in the three southernmost provinces.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/news/opinion/today_editorial/30257529

Lost in FOG of conflict, peace talks must go back to basics

Don Pathan
Special to the Nation

To make progress in deep south, negotiations must first focus on verifying separatist groups' credentials

The so-called peace process launched just two years ago by the government of Yingluck Shinawatra is having problems getting back on its feet after languishing for more than a year without progress.

The initiative, launched on February 28, 2013, struggled almost from the very beginning. It hit a snag in late 2013 when the designated liaison with the separatists, Hasan Taib, called it quits. And then came the infamous Bangkok Shutdown that sent the Yingluck government into survival mode, until the May 2014 coup put the final nail in her political coffin.

Our latest junta leadership pledged to continue the peace talks, but on condition that the separatists established a common platform and brought about a "period of peace". For some, this means a ceasefire. For decision-makers in Bangkok, it means assurance that whoever comes to the negotiating table has a significant degree of command-and-control over the separatist combatants.

Observers, stakeholders and separatist leaders themselves agree that the one longstanding group that controls the vast majority of combatants is the Barisan Revolusi Nasional (BRN).

So far, unlike other groups, the BRN has been camera shy. It frowns on members who have surfaced to take part in any discussion or forum, closed-door or not. Senior BRN members, both in exile and at home, have been kicked out of the movement for violating this ground rule.

Even individual BRN members who have jumped on the bandwagon of the Majlis Amanah Rakyat Patani (MARA Patani), an initiative to create a regional assembly in Thailand's Malay-speaking South to rubber stamp the ongoing peace initiative, have been asked to leave the movement.

Combatants on the ground and leaders living in exile, as well as Thai intelligence officers, see MARA Patani as a desperate attempt to give the process some credibility after more than a year of stalling. But the plan is not generating any traction, which means key actors in the peace process must now go back to the drawing board and rethink the entire thing.

Latest 'short cut' has failed

The BRN has given MARA Patani the cold shoulder on grounds that it is "artificial and instant", when there is in fact no short cut to peace. The group said they want to talk peace with Thailand but will come to the negotiating table only after a number issues are resolved. These include proper training for their negotiators, official recognition and immunity for members of their political wing.

The BRN said they would like to work with the international community on capacity building but Bangkok is still contemplating the idea of giving the green light to international NGOs or foreign governments to work with the group.

One of the problems, said a Thai political insider, is that the Thai side has never been sure which group is capable of what, or who are the real BRN.

For the past decade or so, just about every potential facilitator and mediator, local and foreign, has claimed to speak for the BRN or to have the group's endorsement. But none has succeeded in generating any traction that leads to meaningful progress towards peace.

No go-between with separatists

Even the credentials of Hasan Taib, the designated BRN liaison for the peace initiative under the Yingluck administration, were misrepresented to the public. Hasan, who did not have the endorsement of the BRN leadership when he surfaced on February 28, 2013, didn't have the audacity to call himself BRN leader. And so the label "liaison" was applied.

The debate over whether Hasan had any influence with the combatants on the ground or support from the BRN leadership nagged the Thai government throughout the process, until November 2013 when he quit in a YouTube video statement. He later went incommunicado for a few weeks.

Now, the participants in the current process are unable to find a replacement to come to the table. Ideally, Bangkok wants a person who is a known figure among the Malays of Patani. Without BRN endorsement, the negotiations will be nothing more than a talking shop. Others believe that a bad process is better than no process at all.

With virtually no leg to stand on, it appears that MARA Patani is about to crumble even before the first meeting begins.

Without calling it "Plan B", Thai officials are saying there has to be a contingency plan or something to keep the talks going if MARA Patan is ditched.

Some officials suggest peace efforts should go back to basics, with confidence-building measures between the two warring sides to repair decades of confusion.

In sub-national conflicts elsewhere, insurgents either give prior warning of an attack through a go-between, such as the media, or leave some sort of signature at the scene as a way of claiming responsibility. This is not the case in southern Thailand, at least not yet anyway, said officials.

Official sources in Bangkok said Thailand might be willing to go down the confidence-building route, as it would help the government obtain a better understanding of the capability of the various Patani movements and factions.

Since recognition is what the movements are after, some sort of a "clearing house" where both sides could get together - directly or through an interlocutor - and compare notes to verify responsibility for attacks could well be the place to begin the much-needed confidence building activities.

DON PATHAN is a freelance security analyst and a consultant based in Yala. He is also a founding member of the Patani Forum (www.pataniforum.com).