How Thaksin and Thai Rak Thai party re-ignited the violence in the Thai South

Abstract

Southern Thailand has longed resisted the rule of central Siamese Kings and then governments. The Kingdom of Pattani, established as a Malay-Muslim kingdom in the late 14th century was both prosperous and known to the western world as a trading post of some repute. For centuries, the Malay-Muslims prospered and evolved a culture and traditions which were separate from those of their Siamese neighbours to the north. Various Kings of Siam attempted to subjugate the Kingdom but to no avail. It took the treachery of Nai Chanthong one of the Chiefs of the Sultan to bring the kingdom to the Siamese King Rama I and it lost both its independence and its monarchy. In 1909, after the British portioning of Kedah and the sultanate of Patani was granted to Bangkok to rule. As a part of the post-colonial wave of nationalism that swept Southeast Asia in the middle part of the twentieth century, the Malay-Muslim community suffered the indignity of having many of its symbols of its culture and way of life–such as dress, language and names–relegated to a minority status, banned as they were in government institutions. As a result of this state led this perceived internal colonialism many Malay-Muslims took up arms against the central Thai governments, aided by the Communist movement of the time. This armed separatist struggle, however, was waged only by a minority of the Malay-Muslims, the majority continuing to live peacefully with their Chinese and Thai Buddhist neighbours. From the 1980’s onwards, the spread of democracy and civil society rather took away the radical elements of the south and the separatist movement became quiet until 2004 When a raid on an army camp and a pitch battle at the symbolic Kru Ze temple which ended with the deaths of many Muslims. The attacks signaled the resurgence of the separatist movement. This paper explores the reasons why, including the roots of ethnic conflicts and the spread of radical Islam. However, its main premise is to argue that the policies and management style of Thaksin Shinawatra and the Thai Rak Thai party were the real reason why this peaceful but potentially explosive region decided once more to take up arms. Thaksin’s aggressive stance, his desire to control all regions and all levels of politics, his lack of understanding of the culture and political landscape of the South all led to the violence which the South is presently witnessing.