Illusionary myth about violence on the southern border: a case study of amphoe Sangob, Yala province

Abstract

The objectives of the research, “Illusionary Myth about Violence on the Southern Border: A Case Study of Amphoe SaNgob, Yala Province” are to 1) study the construction of myth about and the intention of violence in Yala Province by means of power interactions between social institutions and the local people; 2) analyse and compare the perspectives on violence on the Southern border of the people within the area of violence and those outside; and 3) study the crisis concerning rhetorical representations which are related to conflict on the Southern border created by clashes and collisions, using the concept of power/discourse, political economy of socio-cultural conflict, and symbolical violence to analyse and explain the existing phenomena. The research has chosen to study Yala Province, which is located in the middle of the four Southern border provinces, together with studying secondary information obtained in Bangkok. The field research took four months through participant observation, semi-structured interviews and group conversations with thirty-one information providers who were from different groups, for example, direct and indirect victims of violence, local authorities, religious leaders, journalists, representatives of non-profit organization who worked in the area, representatives of the Central administration and people outside the area. The research has found that though the main rhetoric which has dominated the intention of and understanding about the violence on the Southern border of people in and outside the area is concerned with attempts to separate the land by an ethnic and religious group; the people in the area have understood and have been aware of the complexity and different shades of violence. These include religious and political differences, inequality, suppression of Muslim Malays by the Thai State and criminal activities which have taken place along the border between Thailand and Malaysia (for example, drug trafficking, smuggling of illegal merchandise and human trafficking). Meanwhile, outsiders have thought and acknowledged that violence is mainly caused by attempts of the ethnic and religious group to separate the land. Their understanding has resulted from the domination of the main rhetoric presented by the media in the form of “a single causal representation” of the violence which has been caused by attempts to separate the land. This rhetoric has been constructed and driven by the State’s institutions so that it has become the main rhetorical current in society. The Thai State has tried to create a set of rhetoric/knowledge about conflict on the Southern border, which is based on the notion of indivisible sovereignty, in order to justify its exercise of power to control and its use of violence against things which are considered to be rebellious or harmful to State security. At the same time, the rhetorical set on violence created by the State has been accepted by people outside the area because they have acknowledged that the State consists of knowledgeable authorities who have direct responsibility for solving the problems caused by violence through the exercise of the duality of power and knowledge. This has made the intervention and use of violence of the State justified and unquestioned. The results of the clashes and collisions of the diverse representations of conflict of the people in the area and the conflict representations created by the Thai State has contributed to the existence of the crisis in the representations of violence on the Southern border, which are unclear and thus make the crisis difficult to solve.