The issue of the three southern border provinces (Pattani, Narathiwat, and Yala) is a complex issue and involves deeply challenging core issues.
In light of the recent deadly attacks on civilians, predominantly non-Malay and non-Muslim, the public’s attention was drawn to the protracted conflict in the deep south anew.
First, what is the truth?
Earlier this week, the BRN (Barisan Revolusi Nasional Melayu Patani) has denied responsibility for the killing of civilians, including a disabled person and a Buddhist novice. If their is true, the question then becomes: who did it?
The answer may depend on individual beliefs – was it a splinter separatist group (fighting for Pattani homeland independence)? Was it a a secret element within the Thai armed forces seeking increased budget allocation for the conflict in the deep south? Or is it a third party (e.g., those taking the opportunity to seek personal revenge)? Or a foreign agent provocateur?
The reality is that most people do not know the truth about who is responsible.
Second, the matter of trust.
The situation is characterized by little to no trust between the conflicting parties (and there may be more than two parties). A number of non-Malay-Muslim Thais doubt if the government of Malaysia is genuinely an impartial broker in the negotiations, believing the Malaysian government would naturally side with those of the same ethnicity, language, religion, and roots. Furthermore, if the violence against the population stops (albeit temporarily), what does that imply? Does it mean that the party that desires or benefits from the negotiations was actually behind the attacks in recent weeks?
What’s more, some conservative Thais even believe that the main opposition People’s Party is secretly supporting the separatist movement. Their conspiracy theory is that the party seeks to uproot Thai society to its core.
No matter what you may think, the issue of trust, or the lack there of, is undeniably problematic. It’s very difficult to foster trust given the decades of conflicts, deaths and casualties.
Third, the path towards the solution.
Deputy Prime Minister Phumtham Wechayachai clearly announced earlier this week his readiness for peace talks, but under two conditions: an immediate end to the attacks on civilians, and excluding the issue of territorial integrity, which is non-negotiable. This suggests that what the Thai state can offer most is decentralization of power, but it remains unclear whether this will reach the level of electing a governor, declaring the provinces a special administrative zone, or making Pattani semi-autonomous.
Nevertheless, as long as there are still dissatisfied groups or individuals given the parameter on what’s negotiable, violence against civilians will likely persist, at least until one side achieves a decisive victory. However, even that does not guarantee a permanent end to the century-old conflict, as future generations of Thai-Malay Muslims may still aspire to an independent homeland of Pattani, or Patani as they refer to it.
Given such difficult situations, it’s best that the Thai general public consider the matter carefully, use reasoning more than emotions, and try to play whatever positive role they can to lessen the pain of this protracted conflict.
___
