~Meaw & More~


Reactive blogger (~and more~)

Why I don’t Believe in ‘this’ Unitary “Ceasefire” Declaration

There is no demand for the government or Thai people to do anything in return for reparation, redress, etc. Even if the ceasefire could have been possible, as a representative of a collective groups, they should have had demanded for, at least amnesty for groups members within a certain period to prevent further personal retaliation from group members whose families and relative were killed by state operation. What about release of detainees? Even this was a real ceasefire, without addressing personal grievance, it would be hard to see successful future.

They speak as if the ‘underground’ group is a collective entity, which is not.

The background did not look like Sweden or Norway.

They don’t talk about removing military and other paramilitary forces from the areas, and not even mention demilitarization by state security officers which is a strong demand by some malay ethnic “local people.”

And they did not even mention any future of Patani political future, whether it would be self government, semi-autonomy, etc. It even skipped to presume re-intergration back to Thai state, which is contrary to previous statement hinted more independent self-government or an aspiration to be islamic state.

They merely asked “people associated to the movement” to stop killing people and officers and that if they violate the unitary ceasefire agreement, they could be disassociate and even exterminate. Have you heard anything like this?

It is, to me, a propaganda to confused people not to kill or murder on the ”organization’s behalf,” but for which organization, I really do not know.

The statement did not address authority over any specific groups. The “spokesperson and leader'” could not even say what groups he represented. BRN? Pulo? others?

To make me convince you have to ask Dr. Wan or his ‘foreign minister’ to participate in the ceasefire statement. To make it more convincing, the stage setting should have had representative from each individual group, covering their faces, if they want to, of course.

There is no potential information or even a hint of practical issues for and ‘immediate ceasefire,’ effective today. Where to give up your bomb making equipments? Should members reported to any entities? If someone has spikes making material what should they do with? To Thai state, it did not set any condition how a unitary ceasefire could be terminated.

My serious concern is that the human rights conditions after this ‘fake’ ceasefire agreement (it sounded unreasonable to me) will get worse.

Even if the ceasefire does not work, any extra-judicial killing would be toned down as intra organization ‘disciplining’ disobedience members. Perfect excuses to wipe out insurgents casualties to be included as human rights violation the Thai state has to be accountable.

As of tomorrow, if there is increasing “insurgent” casualties, they could be labeled as those wanted by the collective underground organization for violating ceasefire agreement. Insurgents killing each other. Insurgents silencing one another. If it sound too familiar, the excuse had been overused in wars on drugs before. The south will be a free-fire zone. I am convinced that it is a minimum effect from this ‘”ceasefire declaration.”

UPDATE: Army Chief, Anupong Paochinda, said the reps are leaders of inactive groups which do not participate in current incidents. Scholars questioned flag and finally identified the key speakers. (Matichon)


Filed under: Security, , , ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: