Minutes of the 266th meeting - Tuesday 6 September 2005
"Reconciliation in Southern Thailand:
Lessons from past attempts and present directions"
A talk by Dr. Mark Tamthai,
Institute for the Study of Religion and Culture, Payap University, Chiang Mai
Present: Bodil Blokker, Hagen Dirksen, Klaus Bettenhausen, Adrian Pieper,
Guy Cardinal, Mohamad Jesr, Thomas Ohlson, Annelie Hendriks, Manus
Brinkman, Richard Nelson-Jones, Peter Hoare, Ken Kampe, David Steane,
Annette Kanstrup-Jensen, John Butt, Bill Yoder, Hans B�nziger, Sophie Le
Coeur, Marc Lallemant, Intira Collins, Fregonese Federica, Carool Kersten,
Mungoi Suantak, Kong Janoi, Kate Gunn, Gonzague Jourdain, Ammarin Thanolap,
Oliver Hargreave, Christy Tovar, Colin Hinshelwood, Sharreh, Phu Murng,
April Paw, Ester, Tabithar, Sunday Htoo, Karen Williams, Sandar Moon, Khwa
Nyo, Jessica M. Hill, Oliver Benjamin, Edward van Tuyll, Mark Bleadon,
Martin Luiz, Yan Naing, Alexander, Nay Tawin, Mi Monkyae, Boorng Di, Aung
Min, Dacia Gauer, Adam Dedman, Brad Teeters, Reinhard Hohler, Chris Barr,
Wan-Lee Yin, Maria and Guy Scandlen, Sasitor Tamthai. An audience of 60 +
perhaps at least another 8 people who didn't sign the attendance sheet.
Mark Tamthai was a professor at Chulalongkorn University for 30 years and
is now the director of the Institute for the Study of Religion and Culture
at Payap University. For the past 10 years he has been advisor to the
National Security Council on matters of peace-building and reconciliation.
He was one of the architects of the National Security Policy for the
Southern Border Provinces (1999-2003). He is a member of the National
Reconciliation Commission (NRC) and chairs the NRC's working group on the
development of nonviolent methods in the struggle for justice and dignity
in the southern border provinces.
Mark's minutes of his talk
Past Attempts. From the point of view of Bangkok the southern region was
always a security concern and the policy used to deal with this situation
through the years was that of assimilating the population in the region to
'Thai' ways, along with an emphasis on economic development during
particular difficult times. Since the security situation never showed a
sustained marked improvement, a completely different way of thinking about
the region was embarked upon about 8 years ago. It was time to draft the
new National Security Policy for the Southern Border Provinces (1999-2003)
and this time the people who live in the region were invited to participate
along with the security officials in trying to write a better policy which
would take their lives and their personal security concerns as a starting
point. The policy that resulted from this participatory process was a
complete 180-degree turn from all the previous policies based on the
assimilation paradigm of security. The policy begins with the following
'Vision for Resolution of Security Problems in the Southern Border
Provinces':
For all people in the southern border provinces to be able to live happily
and peacefully on the basis of their religious and cultural identity,
especially for Thai Muslims, the majority group of people in the area, to
be able to "live as Muslims in Thai society" just as other groups are doing
as members of Thai society.
For all people to realize the value of cultural diversity, as a source of
power and wisdom which helps create security, peace, and sustained
development.
For the people in the region to have the opportunity to participate in
problem solving and development processes as well as in tasks jointly
carried out by all parties in society, so as to protect the way of life of
the people in the society from the impact of changes and external pressures.
The first three years (1999-2001) of this policy saw a marked improvement
of the situation in the region. But things began breaking down the final
two years (2002-2003), and January 2004 was the starting point of the
present spiral of violence. This called for an urgent evaluation of this policy.
Lessons learnt from evaluating the implementation of this policy:
1. This kind of approach to the south was so very new and different from
all previous approaches that the re-training of government officials to
understand this type of policy will need much better planning and must go
beyond merely holding workshops.
2. Those who oppose such policies will not openly argue against them since
they are designated as "official" policies but will attempt to undermine
them with covert activities. If those wayward officials are not disciplined
by their superiors then this will likely raise questions as to the
sincerity of the new approach.
3. For such a turnaround in vision to take hold it is necessary to bring
the entire Thai public on board. This will necessitate a large number of
public education programs throughout the country.
Present Directions.
The present directions being taken by the National Reconciliation
Commission (NRC) fall under 5 sub-committees, which oversee about 15
working groups. The 5 sub-committees (and examples of the problems they
work on) are:
- Sub-committee on rebuilding trust, human rights justice system reform. An
example of a working group here is one that deals with allegations of
abductions by state officials.
- Sub-committee on conflict resolution and the promotion of nonviolent
forms of struggle. An example of a working group here is one that works
with the community leaders in the south to explore the possibility of
developing a nonviolent movement aiming at the struggle for justice.
- Sub-committee on education and development. One of the working groups
here is studying existing text books which seem to be promoting
assimilation and leaving little room for maintaining one's identity. This
is then followed by suggestions on how to rectify the matter.
- Sub-committee on cultural diversity.
- Sub-committee on Reconciliation in the local areas. This Sub-committee
deals with immediate short term measures to head off approaching violence,
such as might arise from misunderstanding mosque activities during Ramadan
or from a lack of go-betweens trusted by all during confrontations.
Are we doing enough?
Are the present directions explained above enough? Are the directions
complete enough to be a foundation for sustainable reconciliation? One
glaring omission from the various matters the NRC is dealing with is that
they do not cover the political aspirations of all the stakeholders. The
NRC is basing its work on the assumption that a revamp of the justice
system (through judicial reform) and the promotion of Thai society as a
culturally diverse society (through public education projects) is the
foundation for reconciliation in the area. Political solutions, such as
special autonomous zones, have not been discussed or debated in any depth.
The key question is, "Should they?". This question itself can not be
answered without discussion of this matter, and so it would seem that the
NRC still has much self-evaluating to do.
Mark's talk was followed by an extended and extensive question and answer
session. As part of an answer to one question from the audience, Mark
talked about the Thai flag as an example of cultural differences/diversity
as an obstacle to assimillation. The white colour in the Thai flag
represents religion - specifically Buddhism. The Muslims in the South do
not feel inclined to acknowledge a symbol which does not include their
religious faith. According to the Thai flag, to be Thai means to be
Buddhist.
<< Back to Metting Diary |
