~Meaw & More~

Icon

Reactive blogger (~and more~)

Recognition Not Permitted

The TUSU unitary ceasefire hoax, the position of the government, the army and the opposition party leader and their responses are predictable.

Almost everybody disassociate from Gen. Chetta (understandable, nobody wanted to look dumb.)

The army has distanced itself from any involvement in the TV appearance of the three engineered by former army chief Gen Chettha Thanajaro.

Army deputy spokeswoman Col Sirichan Ngathong quoted Gen Anupong as saying the TV appearance was solely the work of Gen Chettha, now leader of the Ruamjaithai Chart Pattana party, as he was hoping this would help restore peace to the deep South.

Gen Anupong said the army-run Channel 5’s decision to air the pre-recorded ceasefire announcement was part of its journalistic duty, insisting he had not seen the footage of the announcement before it was aired on TV.

Former army chief Gen Sonthi Boonyaratkalin said yesterday he was not even aware of the TUSU’s existence.

Intelligence units in the deep South have been told to step up operations to prevent more separatist attacks.

The source said authorities are concerned the BRN Coordinate may launch attacks to challenge the TUSU’s ceasefire announcement.

The opposition Democrat party was unconvinced the announcement would bring a ceasefire to the restive region.

Thepthai Senpong, an assistant to the party secretary-general, questioned why the government, especially Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej, was not told about the airing of the ceasefire announcement in advance and refused to comment on the matter.

Then some advise that the government should not talk with the insurgent groups
Next, came the leader of the opposition party:

Abhisit says govt should not talk with insurgents(BangkokPost.com) – The government should not negotiate with southern insurgency as it would lead to the raise in their status to international level, Democrat party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva said Saturday.

Mr Abhisit’s advice came after a group of Muslim men claiming to be leaders of southern insurgency announced a ceasefire on Thursday.

He also said former army chief Chetta Thanacharo, the man who initiated the talk with the group, had a good intention, but this is not the work of the government. (Emphasis mine)

It will take a while before they realised that the insurgents want recognition, one way,through generating disruption and violence. They have been recognize somewhere outside Thailand even though not “internationally”already. Love it or hate it, it is certain. If they do not have certain recognition from Thai state they can kill until someone capable granting recognition decided that it is a time to talk. Every state is an armed entity, yet it is important to talk to a state.
This is a way of “this” way. People do not listen a call for intervention, unless a group of people finally pool in money to buy some bomb and arms and use them regularly. When casualties reached certain level, decision makers agree to talk. Legitimate time for interventions. Ceasefire agreement. Broken accords. Peace or not.

To me, it is a conflict negotiation dilemma. Yet, we are too far to pull back or alter it. I personally detest killing as a part of the bargain. My ideal and impossible to attain condition would be: if you want a recognition, don’t kill. Ironically casualties are currencies and a language to operate. Casualties came with gravity, seriousness and hopefully recognition, earned at the expenses of human suffering.

I do not support killing for recognition of a non-state entity to show off their control or how capable they are to general chaos and fear. Systematic massacre is not a proof of state building capacity.

But would it be possible to recognise that some people already think different, the major point a ‘peaceful Thais’ should really consider.

On the other hand, Pulo, BRN shrug off ceasefire declaration. Will a recognition quest of PULO and BRN coordinate as entities from TUSU will cause more lives?

Warning: even talking to the right reps will not end violence. Talk about this later. Mobilization is addictive.When violence can earn a profitable living — that takes time to get rid of it. Yes, I am referring to The Political Economy of Armed Conflict: Beyond Greed and Grievance. and I like this paper from years ago.

Advertisements

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: