Explaining Thailand to the world

[kamui]

Explaining Thailand to the world

 

Published on March 28, 2005 The Nation

 

Thailand?s new foreign minister says his priority is to ?explain? incidents like Krue Se and Tak Bai to the international community and thus overcome the country?s bad image on human rights.

 

Around the New Year, Chang Noi watched one of the video CDs of the Tak Bai incident. The showing took place outside Thailand, with an audience of teachers and students mostly from Asian countries ranging from India to Japan. This video compilation began with footage taken inside the Tak Bai police station at the point when the security forces believed they were coming under fire. It had long sequences showing the arrested demonstrators being tied up, dragged along the ground, kicked and beaten, made to crawl, struggling to avoid drowning in the river and being thrown on trucks. It ended with a group of senators visiting a detention centre. The footage clearly came from several different cameramen and had been spliced together without much editing. The picture quality was often poor, but the overall story was very clear.

 

At the end of the one-hour showing, there was first a stunned silence, and then a lively discussion. Thais and non-Thais, Muslims and non-Muslims, all had something to say.

 

One historian who studies Malaysia told the group that the incident was very similar to others that had taken place in the past. He knew of documents recording such incidents going back to the 1840s, when Siam faced one of the many revolts in response to its attempt to control the Malay states in the mid-peninsula. People were arrested, maltreated and died in custody in large numbers. Such incidents happened again around 1900 and perhaps later also. He asked whether the Thai state had some sort of long-term policy to treat people from the area this way. If not, why did such incidents recur?

 

Another Asian member of the audience asked about the treatment of those arrested. Being forced to crawl along the ground with one?s hands tied behind one?s back, or being put in the river and having to struggle to avoid drowning probably qualified as torture. This obviously did not happen casually but was organised and must have been ordered by somebody. Who gave the orders? How high up? Would anyone be held responsible?

 

One of the few non-Asians in the audience then made a comment. He had expected to see pictures of the security forces trying to disperse a demonstration. Instead the operation was much more like an attack, a military charge. The demonstrators were completely surrounded. They could not ?disperse? because there was no place for them to go. Were the security personnel intent on capturing as many of the demonstrators as possible? Are demonstrators always presumed to be criminals?

 

This prompted a comment from an Asian political scientist who had studied security forces throughout the region. He said he was dumbfounded over the crude tactics of the security forces, who did not seem to have any riot-control equipment. They were all carrying weapons loaded with live ammunition, leading to the inevitable results.

 

In countries like the Philippines and Indonesia, where security forces are often called upon to deal with insurgents or demonstrators in remote areas, they equip themselves appropriately and practice riot-control tactics that do not provoke violence. In places like Korea, where students and workers regularly demonstrate in urban locations, security forces know how to deal with people appropriately. There is plenty of information on riot control out there, particularly from the British army, which has a long history of combating the troubles in Northern Ireland.

 

The political scientist noted that the clumsiness demonstrated by the officers in the video reminded him of what happened on the streets of Bangkok in May 1992. He asked why Thai security forces seemed to treat political demonstrators like wartime enemies. A member of the audience who had inside knowledge replied that the police and soldiers seen in the video seemed to be following standard Thai procedures. If so, the political scientist asked, why did the security forces retain such procedures rather than adopt new ones?

 

The discussion then turned to the video?s final sequence, which features scenes at the detention centre a couple of days after the incident. Around a hundred detainees were pictured sitting on the floor in rows and being instructed by a security officer. What was going on? Thai members of the audience had to explain. The instructor was organising them to sing a kindergarten song about elephants. ?Elephant, elephant, elephant; have you ever seen an elephant?? There was another stunned silence. An East Asian member of the audience then began to think aloud: So first we saw the security forces treating people like animals, then treating those who were lucky enough to survive like infants. Do the Thai security forces think that people in their country?s far South are infants and animals? If so, does that explain why the situation has become so bad?

 

The final comment came from someone from one of Thailand?s neighbouring countries. She said she understood that the southern problem was complex. The violence perpetrated by the rebels is awful and unacceptable. But the state and its security forces have a special responsibility. Because they claim a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence, they must use that violence within the bounds of certain rules. Given the growth of tensions on a regional and worldwide scale, incidents like Tak Bai have consequences that are not confined within one country?s borders. As a neighbour of Thailand, she could not accept the government?s argument that Tak Bai was a ?domestic? affair in which others should not interfere. What, she asked, can the rest of us do to prevent such incidents happening? After all, their consequences are widespread and far-reaching.

 

When Thailand?s new foreign minister starts ?explaining? Tak Bai and other incidents to the international community, he has to answer the sort of questions raised by this audience. But maybe he has started off with the wrong verb. ?Explaining? is not what is needed.

 

Chang Noi

 

The Nation

[chilli13]

Good article. Spot on I'd say

[Guest]

.

Passive voice, euphemism and mis-direction are clever, but not that clever.

arrested demonstrators

 

1840s, when Siam faced one of the many revolts

 

put in the river and having to struggle to avoid drowning probably qualified as torture.

 

The demonstrators were completely surrounded.

 

Are demonstrators always presumed to be criminals?

 

Thai security forces seemed to treat political demonstrators like wartime enemies.

 

Around a hundred detainees were pictured

 

The violence perpetrated by the rebels is awful and nacceptable.

The one fact nobody dares write about is that those "demonstrators", "detainees", and "rebels" are all good Muslims. That's never mentioned by the politically correct "The Nation", nor almost anywhere else.

 

No matter how much The Nation tries to focus our attention only on Tak-Bai, it ultimately fails. Since January 2004, more than 600 Thai-Thais have been murdered/killed in South Thailand. Yet South Thailand has a very large Muslim majority. It is not Muslims who are being killed by those demonstrators-detainees-rebels.

 

Anyone who is interested can find many web sites with translations of the Muslim holy book - the Qu'ran - in virtually any language. There the reader will find hundreds - literally hundreds - of suras (chapters) admonishing good Muslims:

Qur?an 8:12 ?...terrorize the unbelievers ...smite them on their necks and every joint and incapacitate them. Strike off their heads and cut off each of their fingers and toes.?

Good Muslims in South Thailand - as elsewhere - are merely abiding by the words of their prophet and their holy book. And against those odds, can one prime minister in any one country expect to secure a lasting peace?

Qur?an 4:91 ?You will find others who [wish] to live in peace and being safe from you ... seize them and kill them wherever you find them; and against these We have given you a clear sanction and authority.?

The Muslim War (Jihad) in South Thailand can not stop until the Muslims win. Then they will move their attacks to their next target, and then the next and the next. The Muslim Jihad (war against all non-Muslims) can never stop until Islam covers the world ... or until there are no more Muslims who can fight.

 

As long as there have been many Muslims living in South Thailand, there has never been peace there, and never can be. Don't bother getting angry at me for writing this ... don't take my word for it ... have a look at the Qu'ran for yourself. The Qu'ran is very clear: The Muslim holy book demands total domination of all non-Muslims. There is no leeway for any peace with un-believers.

.

What I don't understand is why The Nation is working so hard to avoid that.

.

[Flashermac]

So you are recommending genocide? Or maybe just expelling all of the Muslims from the former sultanate of Pattani, where they have lived since before there ever was a Thailand?

 

Doesn't it strike you as odd that there are several Muslim areas of Bangkok, but no one is murdering Buddhists or Christians in them. One of them is quite close to KSR, where the Israeli backpackers hangout and there are three Israeli restauants. Why no suicide bombers?

 

p.s. A few comments sent me by an American friend, from passages in the Judeo-Christian Holy Book:

 

"I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as it suggests in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?"

 

"Lev. 25:44 states that I may buy slaves from the nations that are around us. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans but not Canadians. Can you clarify?"

 

"I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?"

 

"I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev. 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense."

 

"Lev. 20:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear prescription glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?"

[khunsanuk]

Hi,

 

Flashermac, thanks for the words of reason in reply to the racist crap in the previous post.

 

Sanuk!

[Flashermac]

I have a Muslim friend who is very embarrassed by what the extremists are doing to his religion. Most Muslims I have met have been quite decent people. But there are enough loonies around, unfortunately.

 

Still, the trouble in southern Thailand is much more ethnic than religious. There are many Muslims in Phuket, Songkla and other provinces -- but they are Thais who happen to be Muslim. The people in the three southernmost provinces are mostly ethnic Malaysians. They have to learn Thai in school, since to them it is a foreign language.