OFFICIAL INTRANSIGENCE LEADS TO STALEMATE IN DEEP SOUTH

DON PATHAN
THE NATION

SOLDIERS and police inspect the scence of a roadside bomb attack on a passing police vehicle in Pattani's Yarang district.

BESIDES the criminalisation of the MalayMuslim insurgent movement in Thailand’s deep South, there is also the problem of ongoing brutality by both sides that undermines mediation efforts by the old guard of Malay separatists. It’s not easy claiming to have command and control of the new generation of militants and then have to face up to the kind of violence that takes place on the ground, exiled leaders say.
With regard to the lack of unity among the long-standing separatist groups, the same can be said of the Thai side. No official agency can really claim a sole mandate to carry out a peace process, not even the Army, because a significant number of hardliners in the military do not like the idea of talking to the enemy.
During the Surayud administration, Kuala Lumpur, Jakarta, as well as European countries were asked to help. They were seen as credible partners and were asked to take a direct role in facilitating meetings with the separatists. Surayud thought it made sense to work with the international community, especially countries where many of the old guard were exiled.
The Abhisit government retreated from Surayud’s hands-on approach and told the rest of the world that the deep South was an internal matter. The idea of negotiating peace was just too controversial and the government needed what one officer at the PM’s Office called “deniability”.
That doesn’t mean that Abhisit Vejjajiva wasn’t aware that various security and intelligence agencies were talking to the separatist groups. The PM just couldn’t be seen as sanctioning these initiatives because it was too sensitive politically.
Surayud, on the other hand, headed a military-appointed government that didn’t have opposition in Parliament to contend with. Unfortunately, the vision Surayud put forth never materialised as mediators and the exiled groups became territorial. Then the following administrations – from Samak Sundaravej to Abhisit – pushed foreign governments and international bodies away.
Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya may have publicly thanked Kuala Lumpur for supposedly informing Thailand about the Organisation of Islamic Conference’s (OIC) initiatives on Thailand’s deep South, after news about their meeting with the old guard went public late last year. But no one who followed the issue closely believed what he said. They saw his statement as a face-saving measure. This is because the Thai government does not want outsiders to get involved in the deep South.
Like others, Kuala Lumpur is concerned that the violence could either spill over to its side of the border or lure Malaysian citizens into the conflict. After all, the Thai-Malaysian border is as artificial as any other. Today, what concerns the international community is the idea that the political context of the conflict will change – from a Patani Malay nationalist cause to a global jihadist cause where the fight becomes one for Islam.
There is nothing to suggest that the conflict is moving in that direction, however. One of the reasons is that the new militants, locally referred to as juwae, or “fighters” in the local Malay dialect, see themselves as winning, as they are able to attack anyone, any place, at any time. The juwae share the same resentment toward the Thai state as local Malay villagers. This explains why so few people help Thai security officials with their investigations.
Thailand will be hard pressed by the OIC members to explain the culture of impunity among its officials in the deep South. Thailand’s unwillingness to crack down on pro-government death squads or its own people accused of torturing suspects continues to drive a deeper wedge between the Malays in the deep South and the state. The June 2009 Ai Bayae massacre in Narathiwat and a May 2011 shooting spree in Bannang Sata in Yala are just two incidents that come to mind. Both incidents were carried out by former paramilitary rangers with an axe to grind with local insurgents but decided to take it out on ordinary villagers. And the fact that the Bannang Sata shooting took place just 200 metres from an Army outpost, and that none of the soldiers bothered to come to check the five locations that gunmen hit, reinforced the perception that the Army turns a blind eye or that soldiers had colluded with Buddhist gunmen. Warrants were issued and the suspects sent home after turning themselves in. If the Ai Bayae massacre is any indication, the suspects are likely to walk free.
Still, the Army is convinced it is the most suitable negotiator and determined to be at the head of any negotiations with the insurgents. The Army believes that with help from Indonesia and Malaysia, the old guard will come to the table – assuming they can get over their grudges – and that will serve as an entry point to the new militants. It is not clear what kind of concession the Army could make to the old guard to gain the attention of the insurgents who, seeing themselves as winning, don’t seem to be interested in talking.
Another thing that is unclear is why the Army is assured that it has the right to engineer any peace process given the fact that it talked to the old guard in the 1970s and 80s but failed to achieve any breakthrough. A retired senior officer in the Malaysian government who helped facilitate some of the meetings in the 1980s said the Thai Army was never serious about moving talks beyond an informal setting.
In the coming months, it is likely that Thai soldiers and the Patani Malay old guard will come face to face again for a round of talks. Meanwhile violence continues and there doesn’t seem to be much anybody can do to stop it. Some people believe that sooner or later the militants will get tired of fighting and look for a way out. But this end game the old guard hope for might not materialise.
The problem with the new generation of militants is that there will always be a new crop of young fighters to replace them. Judging from the recent past, especially the conduct of the post-Tak Bai generation, the replacements will be just as vicious and brutal, if not more so.

Confusion over confession by suspect

While Suthep says ex-ranger had admitted to his crime, Army official at crime scene denies development

By Don Pathan
The Nation

Confusion over whether a man suspected of a killing spree in Yala on Tuesday had confessed continued yesterday as Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban told reporters in Bangkok that a former paramilitary ranger had admitted to the crime. Authorities on the ground said interrogation of the suspect had yet to reach any conclusion.

Suthep was quoting Panu Uthairat, the director of the Southern Border Provinces Administrative Centre.

Fourth Army chief LtGeneral Udomchai Thammasarotrat, meanwhile, said that the suspect was still being interrogated and that the authorities had yet to obtain a confession.

Udomchai said the use of martial law had been approved against the suspect, Bannang Sata resident Pirapan Pandam, 27, because the area where the killing spree had been carried out was an extremely restive one.

"It doesn't matter if the suspect is a Buddhist or a Muslim. I am here to uphold the law," Udomchai told The Nation in a telephone interview.

In Bangkok, Suthep was quick to distance the government from the case. He told reporters that the incident that caused the deaths of four people and injuries to 21 was not the work of government security officials. Neither was it the work of Malay Muslim separatists, whom authorities accuse of being behind most of the violence in the deep South, he said.

A senior government official in the region said Pirapan, along with three other alleged culprits, may have been motivated by the fact that his older brother, Sombat, 32, was shot and killed while on a hunting trip in the outback of Bannang Sata district on April 27.

According to the government official, Pirapan is being held at a ranger unit in Raman district in Yala.

Authorities had to act quickly for fear that the incident would prompt serious retaliation from insurgents, the source said.

Efforts are being carried out to convince militant cells in Bannang Sata not to retaliate against what was billed as an isolated incident, he added.

Sombat was killed along with his dog while reportedly on a hunting trip. A village elder living near where the killing took place said the victim was out to hunt for pangolin, an endangered anteater that is trafficked for illegal meat and medicine markets.

Sombat had been warned repeatedly that there were insurgents in the area but insisted on carrying on with his hunting trip, the elder said.

Local and international human rights organisations said progovernment death squads had been employed in the past to settle scores, but officials insisted that target killings of suspects were not government policy.

Martial law permits detention of a suspect for 10 days without formal charges.

Pirapan and three others on a pickup truck were accused of carrying out the killing spree. The suspects, all in hoods, used AK47 and M16 automatic rifles to attack a teashop, their first target, less than 200 metres from an army outpost.

The four gunmen hit five more targets, including a village grocery store, two young men sitting on a motorbike in front of a local Islamic school, and other passers by on the street.

Eyewitnesses who survived the teashop attack said the four culprits were all hooded and did not say a word to each other.

They also added that the fact that it took about an hour before the authorities showed up at the scene raised questions over their seriousness about tracking down the gunmen.

No consensus for peace dialogue in the deep South

Talking to the enemy is nothing new in Thailand's dealing with the insurgency in the Malay-speaking South - as long as it is done outside of the public sphere and does not enhance the legitimacy of the militants.

Don Pathan
The Nation

For the past three decades or so, the Thai Army has dispatched mid-ranking to senior officers to meet with the separatists. The meetings were carried out secretly in Middle-Eastern capitals at times when a number of Arab governments were providing the Malay-Muslim separatists from the deep South with money and training.

These encounters were treated mainly as intelligence-gathering exercises and didn't have much impact on policy. The missions came to a pause during much the 1990s after the militants halted military activities and returned to their villages. Thailand attributed the success to the "Tai Rom Yen" amnesty programme. Meanwhile, the Communist Party of Thailand (CPT) was on its way out. The movement was already in disarray when then prime minister Prem Tinsulanonda signed the famous Executive Order 66/2523 paving the way for non-military means to end the ideological conflict. Integration wasn't difficult because CPT members didn't have any identity problem.

They just didn't embrace the state-constructed identity of what Thai-ness and Thailand should be. The Malay separatists, on the other hand, are part of an ethno-nationlaist movement. Unlike the CPT, which wanted to take over the state, the Malays just want their homeland back.And while Thai security planners were busy patting themselves on the back, a new generation of Malay-Muslim separatists was already in the making. Unfortunately for Thaksin Shinawatra, this new generation took up arms just as he entered the premiership. He didn't want to recognise them and called them "sparrow bandits". But when separatists raided an Army camp in Narathiwat on January 4, 2004 and made off with 400 weapons, Thailand could no longer deny the political underpinning of the attacks. Since then, violence has become an everyday reality.

More than 4,600 people, mostly Malay-Muslims, have died in insurgency-related violence. While the government responds with massive troop mobilisation, the idea of talking to the enemy is back on the drawing board. Unable to find an identifiable enemy to talk to on the ground, security officials have turned to the leaders of the long-standing separatist groups who they met in previous decades. In 2005, former Malaysian prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohammed was asked to help facilitate meetings with the old guard in the hope they could talk sense to the new generation of militants, known as juwae, or fighters, in the Malay dialect. The then Armed Forces' Security Centre chief Lt-General Vaipot Srinuan and General Winai Pathiyakul of the National Security Council represented the Thai side in the Langkawi meetings. Former prime minister Anand Panyarachun received the set of recommendations. But Thaksin, the next prime minister, was in no mood to listen to any of it.

In September 2006, the Army ousted Thaksin. The junta appointed a member of the Privy Council, General Surayud Chulanont, as the country's interim prime minister. Besides restoring Thailand's tarnished image, reconciling with the Malays in the deep South was also on his agenda. Besides issuing a formal apology for the Tak Bai massacre and for other atrocities committed against the Malays by the Thai state, Surayud also reached out to neighbouring countries and foreign experts to help jump start a peace process with the separatists. Executive Order 206/2523 permits Thai officials to explore ways to carry out dialogue with the separatists. During a visit to Yala in May 2007, and two months later in an address to the nation, Surayud thanked the international community, including the UN and Malaysian government, for their assistance in facilitating dialogue with the separatists. But the foundation he laid was never carried forward by subsequent administrations, at least not in a meaningful way.In September 2008, more than two years after the Langkawi Process, then vice-president of Indonesia, Jusuf Kalla, had a crack at organising a similar forum.

Kwanchart Klaharn, a former Fourth Army commander, represented the Thai side in Bogor, Indonesia. The process immediately hit a snag when news of the event became public. Bangkok quickly distanced itself from the meeting for fear of political backlash. Former Thai Army chiefs, including Chavalit Yongchaiyud and General Chettha Thanajaro also tried their luck, but neither had much political capital to give their initiative any meaning. Last but not least, the Organisation for Islamic Conference (OIC) has also come into the picture, and since late last year has held meetings with leaders of the long-standing separatist groups. The same old guard that has been meeting with Thai representatives over the past three decades was called up to take part in meetings with OIC secretary-general Dr Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, who chaired a gathering in Jeddah, while Talal A Daous, the organisation's director for minority affairs, chaired one in Kuala Lumpur.

The simultaneous meetings were held on September 30-October 1, 2011. A source in the separatist BRN-Coordinate was blunt about the OIC's credibility gap: "The OIC granted Thailand the permanent observer status knowing that such status should have gone to the Malays," he said. "How do you expect the OIC or any other so-called mediator to understand the needs of a non-state actor like us?"At a gathering last week at Thammasat University, academics dug up Surayud's Executive Order 206/2523 and called on the authorities to explore the concept of "peace dialogue". They went to length to explain that "peace dialogue" is not in any way a formal negotiation, possibly out of concern that a more formal process would be dismissed outright by the government or security planners, many of whom don't like the idea of talking to the enemy for fear that it would legitimise their movement. Citing foreign examples, academic Mark Tamthai said a "peace dialogue" could help build momentum that could attract more hardline groups if and when they see benefits generated by the process itself.

Fearing that they would be kept out of the loop as the idea of a "peace dialogue" gains momentum in some quarters, the Army has gone back to the drawing board."The Army must be in the driver's seat, not the passenger seat, if a peace process is to have any chance of success. We can deliver on the separatists' request and guarantee continuity, but civilians can't," said one officer.For three decades, the so-called Thai representatives have been meeting with the same leaders from various separatist groups. This time, there is a new generation of militants and they don't always take orders from the old guard, said a senior Army officer working on the conflict in the deep South.

The most important thing, said the officer, is to be able to deliver on whatever request the separatists toss out in order to generate confidence."And if you cannot deliver on their request, you can forget about the militants coming on board any peace process, or dialogue, or whatever you want to call it."


Part II

Can the old guard get peace talks going in the South?

Like the interim Surayud Chulanont administration, the Thai Army plans to consult with Malaysia and Indonesia on the insurgency in the deep South of Thailand because many of the old guard Malay-Muslim separatisits now live there.

Like former Malaysian prime minister Dr Mahathir's Langkawi Process, the idea is to get the old guard to convince the juwae, the new generation of separatists, that there is an end game to the violence that has rages since 2004."It's embarrassing to go the Malaysians and the Indonesians right now to ask for help knowing that we don't have unity among ourselves or a real commitment to this idea of talking to the enemy, much less a guarantee of continuity, especially when we go from one administration to another," said one unnamed Army officer. "Moreover, there is no political stability in our country," he added.

The way things stand, the juwae don't seem to be eager to talk peace either. The past four months have been extremely bloody and brutal, forcing intelligence agencies to come up with all sorts of conclusions, including one that said the juwae wants to attract the attention of the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC) to legitimise themselves. But then again, they have been saying that for decades.Such an argument coincides with the concern of Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva, who has been urging the international community not to "legitimise" the militants on the ground.Officials say Abhisit should worry less about what the foreigners think and more about the support and sympathy that local Malay-Mulsims have for the juwae.

But admitting that the government is not winning the battle for hearts and minds, especially after billions of baht have been spent on development projects, is tantamount to committing political suicide.A source in the BRN-Coordinate - one of long-standing separatist groups with the strongest working relationship with the militants on the ground - said the juwae are extremely sceptical about any peace or dialogue process because they think it's part of a ploy to get them to surface so they can be killed.Indeed, target killings carried out by pro-government death squads have been extensively documented in the deep South.

There is no indiction that such a tactic has improved the situation or created the kind of atmosphere that could lead to peaceful dialogue.Beside the lack of unity among the old guard, said the BRN-Coordinate source, their dialogue with the juwae has taken on a sour note. "We are concerned with the collateral damage and the deaths of civilians. Many of the cells appear to be indifferent to the fact that their activities on the ground undermine what we are trying to do abroad. We talk to them but we still lack shared command to truly influence them," the BRN-Coordinate cadre said.

Thai intelligence agencies sometimes paint a neat-and-clean organisational chart of the shadowy movement, but security and civilian officials in the deep South, as well as sources in the separatist movements, say there is a considerable gap between the current generation and the old guard."I have interrogated hundreds of juwae and recall only a couple identifying themselves with the long -standing separatist groups," said a police officer working in the deep South since 2004.

Given the organic nature of today's movement, as well as the alarming trend of younger juwae selling their skills to crime syndicates, getting anybody on board a meaningful peace process will be extremely difficult, said another civilian officer. Nevertheless, all parties on both sides of the fence pretty much agree that the only exit strategy is through the old guard, simply because the new generation of juwae will not surface to talk.Nobody understands this more than the old guard.

That's why since 2004 many have been trying to reinvent themselves, reaching out to foreign mediators to raise their profile and present themselves as the representatives of Malays in the deep South.A senior government officer at Government House joked about the proliferation of foreign and local NGOs wanting to do mediation work, saying, "We need a mediator for the mediators."

According to one government source, the authorities have been permitted to explore ways to carry out dialogue with people who are "one-step removed from the insurgency" as a way to establish a channel of communication with the militants. The ambiguous language is necessary here, according to the source, because there is no executive order or legislation to support direct talks with anybody who identifies themselves as separatist.Academics and members of the civil society, especially those advocating peaceful means, have been consulted by Thai security planners and officials as well. Some of their concepts have been debated publicly but it is not very clear as to how much influence these ideas will have on government policy."

In spite of what these peace-loving academics and NGO people say or try to do, there is a danger in bringing any of the so-called dialogue into the public spotlight. You unnecessarily up the ante by doing it," said a former member of the now-defunct Communist Party of Thailand (CPT), which used to run with the BRN-Coordinate decades ago."For one thing, how will the government explain to victims' family members, both Muslim and Buddhist, when they ask about justice," he added."

Moreover, it was [former premier] Prem's 'non-military approach', not 'peace dialogue', that helped paved the end for the communists and permit us to reintegrate into society," said the former CPT member.In his executive order, Surayud Chulanont pointed to the ethno-nationalist nature of the conflict between the Malays and the Thai state. But policy -makers didn't really know how to follow up on the order or his public apology for past atroccities, and so they turn to development projects, hoping that this will win hearts and minds.

No one wants to admit that the problem is rooted in Thailand's nation-state construct that leaves virtually no room for the Malay narrative."We will never see peace if Thailand is more concerned about state consolidation, as opposed to national unity. There has to be an arrangement that permits Malay identity, ethnicity, culture, narrative and way of life to flourish and co-exist peacefully with the rest of the country," said the former CPT cadre. "Can the state do this for the Malays?""It won't be easy," said the Army officer, "but there is a growing number of people in the military who are willing to explore other non-military ideas, such as greater cultural space for the Malays. It's about their dignity. Essentially, all these killings are political in nature. And somewhere in there is an end game to it all."

Daring attack on South army post

Militants charge through front gate, killing at least 6 soldiers, wounding 6

By Don Pathan
The Nation

Suspected separatist militants attacked an Army task-force unit in Narathiwat's Rangae district last night, killing six soldiers and wounding six others just days after Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva talked about lifting the state of emergency in more districts of the troubled deep South.

This attack was considered one of the boldest moves by the separatists in a long time.

The militants charged through the front gate - the only entry into the Task Force 38 camp - and started firing, catching the troops off guard, a senior officer recounted. Lt-Colonel Thanit Saengchan estimated that at least 20 armed men were behind the attack.

Task Force 38 comes under the 15th Infantry Division of the Fourth Army Area, though the Narathiwat province comes under the command of the Second Army Area, which also has the Northeast region under its jurisdiction.

Details about the gunfight, the extent of the damage and if anything was stolen remained sketchy as of press time. Task Force 38 is about a kilometre from an Army battalion that was raided on January 4, 2004, by scores of Malay-Muslim separatists who made off with about 350 pieces of weapons.

The highest-ranking officer who died in the shootout was identified as Captain Krit Kampirayan, who was the company's commander.

The wounded were rushed to the Yala Central Hospital, a regional medical centre with better facilities. The attack came as Army commander-in-chief General Prayuth Chan-ocha and Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban, who is in charge of security affairs, were visiting the region to provide moral support to the troops and officials.

Abhisit returned from the region two days ago after discussing ways of strengthening the Southern Border Provinces Administrative Centre with civilian officials.

Insurgent attacks have become almost an every day occurrence in the three Malay-speaking southernmost provinces of Pattani, Yala and Narathiwat, as well as in the four Malay-speaking districts of Songkhla.

The attack in Rangae was a "slap in the face" and "a tremendous setback" for the policy-makers, said a senior officer, who spoke on condition of anonymity, as the Royal Thai Army in Bangkok plans to hand the entire deep South region back to the Fourth Army. The idea is to pull out the units from the Second Army Area and Third Army Area and send them back to the Northeast and the North, respectively. It is not immediately clear if this latest incident will affect this plan, which is supposed to kick off in October.

Last night's attack also came as the authorities in Bangkok boasted about improved security in the restive region where more than 4,300 people have been killed since 2004. Almost 500 of the victims were soldiers and police.

Claiming success in the curbing of violence, the government recently lifted the emergency decree in Pattani's Mae Lan district. Observers said this claim was far too premature because the movements of the militants were far too fluid. Some said the idea of marking areas as "green" or "red" zones was misleading because this generation of insurgents did not care about controlling geographical space, but were more interested in controlling the mindset of the local population.

Sympathy for the insurgents among the Malay-Muslim populace remains high and the number of people coming out to name suspected insurgents remains low, despite the government's claim that it was succeeding in winning the hearts and minds of the local residents.

More than 64,000 security officers are working in the deep South and the government has spent billions on trying to maintain order in the restive region, where the violence is nowhere in sight.

Massive refugee influx a worry in all-out conflict

By Don Pathan
The Nation

November 15, 2010

The writing was already on the wall, and so when armed clashes erupted on the Thai-Burmese border, just everybody was saying, “I told you so”.

But few thought the first crack of gunfire would have erupted in Myawaddi, a Burmese border town adjacent to Mae Sot district in Tak province.

Myawaddi fell temporarily under the hand of the Democratic Karen Buddhist Army (DKBA), itself a splinter group that broke away from the Karen National Union (KNU) in 1995. But all sides knew that such occupation was symbolic as the rag-tag Karen outfit could not hold onto the seized area.

Fighting between government troops and rebel soldiers also erupted elsewhere. Militia from the Shan State Army-North engaged in sporadic gunfights with government troops in northern Shan state. A similar engagement between the junta and the rebel KNU also took place in areas adjacent to Kanchanaburi.

For months all eyes were on the Sino-Burmese border, where the 30,000-strong United Wa State Army (UWSA) were doing everything it could to avoid going to war with the Burmese junta. An all out fight between the Wa and the junta would devastate the entire border arrangement, but it appeared that the Burmese would have liked to “save the best for last”, said a Thai intelligence officer. He added that the junta may have preferred to take out smaller outfits before moving up to challenge the bigger fish.

The Burmese have yet to make their first move and for the time being there is no sign of mobilisation of troops against the Wa stronghold in Panghsang, said a UWSA official on condition of anonymity. He was speaking from the Wa stronghold on the Sino-Burmese border.

Ever since the ouster of former security tsar General Khin Nyunt in October 2004, the relationship between the Burmese government and groups with which it had a ceasefire has taken a turn for the worse.

None of these groups had worked with any other Burmese leader except Khin Nyunt. And with the security tsar removed from the top military line-up six years ago, the ethnic armies had no choice but to deal directly with the junta. But such a task would prove to be virtually impossible as General Muang Aye and Burmese supreme leader General Than Shwe weren’t interested in making any concessions, much less giving the groups an exit strategy.

The ruling State Peace and Development Council’s demand was that these ethnic armies lay down their weapons and transform themselves into the country’s border guards under the direct command of the Tatmadaw.

Some of the small groups had no choice but to swallow their pride, surrender their weapons and take up the border-guards position. But major groups such as the Wa and other major outfits decided they were not going to be a walkover.

These leaders were determined to protect their investments, business interests and their armed outfits all of which they had spent decades putting together. Some of these so-called investments stemmed from, among other things, heroin and opium cultivation, smuggling, logging, gems and fisheries.

Last year’s attack against the Kokang did not only catch Beijing off guard but it was also wake-up call for China. In the past Beijing pretty much allowed the Yunnan government a free hand to deal with the ethnic armies along the Sino-Burmese border. Many of these groups have historical and personal ties with the Chinese authorities dating back to the days of the communist insurgency. UWSA troops, for example, were once foot soldiers of the now defunct Communist Party of Burma.

But that strategic leverage was pretty much shattered when the Burmese junta turned their guns on the Kokang Chinese in August 2009, forcing more than 30,000 refugees to flee across the border. Besides sending a stern message to other ethnic armies, the attack was also a way of telling the Chinese leadership that their friendship with their so-called proxies would not come at Burma’s expense.

China responded by dispatching intelligence officers from Beijing, as well as beefing up border security. Yunnan’s border management and economic interests would have to take a backseat to Beijing’s overall concern, which is centered on Burma’s increasingly important role in its energy security.

China has also tried to mediate between the ethnic armies and the Burmese junta, but all Beijing’s mediation efforts have failed to produce any concrete results. The junta has never seen the Chinese as honest brokers because of the latter’s historical ties with the ethnic armies, which could feel abandoned if Beijing is unable to strike a balance between its needs and the security concern of the rebel outfits.

Besides expanding rapidly into Burma’s hydropower sector, China also has major oil and gas pipelines tapping into the country’s rich gas reserves. Beijing is certainly looking to shorten the transport time of its crude imports from the Middle East and Africa.

Today, a more immediate concern is the possible influx of hundreds of thousands of refugees from Burma into the Thailand and China if the sporadic gunfights between Burmese soldiers and the ethnic armies turn into an all-out conflict.

Surrendering their command to the junta would mean an end to whatever dream of autonomy they may have, not to mention the lucrative business deals these outfits have along the border. But from where things stand at this point in time, it appeares that these groups are not going down without a fight.

Beijing, meanwhile, is forced to sit back and watch its strategic leverage being shredded to pieces as its proxies dig deeper into the trenches to prepare for a big Burmese offensive.

“The Wa soldiers are doing push-ups every day,” said a Chinese security official monitoring the rugged Burmese sector of the Golden Triangle, where opium warlords and ethnic militias play for keeps. “They want to be ready when the fighting breaks out,” he added.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2010/11/15/opinion/Massive-refugee-influx-a-worry-in-all-out-conflict-30142242.html

OIC to take up issue of militancy in South

56-country organisation has meetings with Patani Malay separatist groups 

Don Pathan
The Nation

The Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC) is poised to delve into the issue of insurgency in Thailand's Muslim-majority South to look for a political solution to the ongoing conflict that has claimed more than 4,200 lives since January 2004.

According to diplomatic sources and leaders of the long-standing Patani Malay separatist groups, the OIC had organised simultaneous meetings with these exiled leaders in Kuala Lumpur and Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, on September 30-October 1.

OIC secretary-general Prof Dr Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu chaired the meeting in Jeddah, while Talal A Daous, the organisation's director for the Muslim Minorities and Communities group, chaired the gathering in Kuala Lumpur.

GROUPS THAT HAD TALKS

Participants of the recent gathering at the two cities included two factions of the Patani United Liberation Organisations (PULO), Barisan Revolusi Nasional (BRN), Barisan Islam Pembangunan Pattani (BIPP) and others senior leaders from the exiled community.

The leaders were urged to combine their efforts to form a political front, while the OIC vowed to help facilitate a dialogue process with the Thai government. The Malaysian government helped facilitate the meeting in Kuala Lumpur and it was understood that Malaysia would work closely with the OIC on this initiative.

According to one diplomat, the OIC urged these longstanding separatist groups to combine efforts and form the United Patani People Council (UPPC). Once the front was created, the Patani People Congress (PCC) would be in the pipeline. The idea behind the PCC is to obtain some sort of mandate from the Muslims of Patani, a Malay historical homeland that came under Bangkok's direct rule just over a century ago when the vassal state was annexed by Siam.

A participant at the meetings quoted OIC officials as having said their organisation was the "most suitable" to take up the initiative, citing religious affiliation and a long history of interest in the conflict in Thailand's deep South.

CAUTION

The move by the 56-member OIC was welcomed by the exiled Patani Malay leaders and it was the most concrete action yet. However, almost all interviewed by The Nation cautioned against any great expectation, saying similar initiatives by the OIC as well as other so-called peace processes in the recent past have failed to take off or translate into formal peace.

"The OIC has expressed interest in seeing peace in Patani but the most they have done was issue statements criticising the treatment of Malay Muslims by the Thai state," said one exiled leader, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

One Pulo source said his faction was taking a "wait and see" approach, saying it was "too early to make any conclusion as to how this initiative will evolve".

Another Pulo leader from a different faction said for any initiative to gain real traction, it would be up to "the Thais themselves as to whom they thought suitable to be a mediator or facilitator".

Never mind religion, separatism is the issue in the deep South

Don Pathan
The Nation

Pattani

Yacob Raimanee has been the imam of the provincial mosque for more than a decade. Being the spiritual leader of the Pattani Central Mosque is a prestigious position and anyone who occupies it can expect to find himself rubbing shoulders with local and national leaders.

Just a week ago there was an attempt on Yacob's life. Several shots were fired at him from a few metres away but the bullets nipped his cap as he bent down to unlock his front door. As with other violent incidents, security officials were quick to blame the attack on a new generation of Muslim insurgents bent on carving out a separate homeland for Malays in the southernmost provinces.

To date the insurgency has left more than 4,200 dead, mostly ordinary people and government officials.When a senior figure such as Imam Yacob is targeted, it is no surprise that more eyebrows are raised than usual. Security officials and the political elite in Bangkok are concerned for the well-being of their man in the deep South but are also wondering if the conflict in this highly contested region has reached a new threshold.

But Yacob is much more than a senior public figure. He is seen as a man of substance, a person who the Thai social and political elite can turn to in times of trouble. And the relations between the Malays of Patani and the Thai state have never been anything but troubled. For as long as anyone can remember, Yacob has been the go-to man for the Thai state. Be it foreign dignitaries or Muslim journalists from Arab countries, Imam Yacob will defend the legitimacy of the Thai state in the Malay historical homeland known as Patani.

He often points out to foreign visitors that Muslims in Thailand have more freedom to practice Islam than the Muslims in their respective countries. There is nothing wrong or incorrect in his claim of religious freedom in Thailand. But this is beside the point when one takes into consideration the historical tension between the Thai state and Patani. The dispute has more to do with Thailand's nation-state construct, which leaves little room for the Malays in the deep South.

Originating from Bangkok, Yacob is very much a Thai Muslim. Like many others he is living proof that Thai Muslims can climb to great heights on the Thai social ladder. And it is true, there could be no limit for a Muslim in Thailand, just as long as he/she doesn't question the legitimacy of the Thai state and the three pillars - nation, religion and monarchy - on which it was built.

That Yacob has also obtained a certain social standing among the Malay-majority community is also testimony that riding on the coattails of the Thai state has its rewards. It reflects, too, the dynamics and complexity within the Malay-speaking South, where historical memories are long. Locals, for instance, still refer to certain families that sided with the invading Siamese during annexation a century ago as "traitors" and often point to how the state continues to reward these families with top bureaucratic positions.

The Thai state, on the other hand, tends to see things in black and white. Individuals or institutions with strong Patani Malay nationalist views are seen as a threat to Thai nationhood, like the separatists.

Such a narrow mindset discourages frank and open debate on sensitive issues such as identity - in this case Patani Malay - historical and cultural narratives, and how to reconcile these differences. But it would be misleading to assume that the Malays of Patani are united and all singing from the same song sheet. Globalisation has taken its toll on Patani and the end result is a number of fault lines within the Malay-speaking community.

Divisions exist along the lines of religious affiliation (traditional Shafi'i jurisprudence, orthodox Wahabi, Tablighi Jamaat, or even Shi'ism). They also occur according to the extent of one's loyalty to the state - whether one embraces the Patani historical narrative or opts for the official state version.Today, one can't really go anywhere without hearing about the tension between the orthodox and the traditionalists, who accounted for about 90 per cent of the local Muslim residents in the deep South.

The orthodox tend to shun the Malay-ness of Patani and opt for a more puritanical interpretation of Islam, while traditionalists see their Malay identity as being inseparable from Islam. Both camps often complain about more or less the same things - students' low test scores, lack of social mobility, lack of commitment from the state in formal education, inadequate representation in the bureaucracy, and so on. But beneath the usual criticism of the state, there is a sense of bitterness as the two sides compete over resources, scholarships and funding for their students, their schools and their associates.

One advantage the orthodox community has over the traditionalist Shafi'i is that the insurgents behind the ongoing violent separatist campaign are from the latter camp. However, this doesn't mean that all traditionalists are armed militants on a mission to secure a separate homeland for the Malays of Patani.

But as donor agencies and countries sit down and look at the proposals from Muslim organisations and foundations of this highly contested region, it is very likely that they will go for a safer bet.