Thai Government Criticised For Using "Brute Force" in Muslim South

Producer: Sunai Phasuk
First broadcast: 29 April 04, Radio Singapore International

Thailand's government is facing growing criticism and calls for an inquiry over its use of "brute violence" in the southern Muslim region.

More than a hundred Muslim militants were killed yesterday in clashes with security forces.

According to authorities, police and soldiers battled armed groups which launched coordinated attacks at 10 police stations and security checkpoints in provinces of Yala, Pattani and Songkhla.

However, human rights groups have expressed concern about the government's overwhelming response against young and poorly armed rebels.

Senior security officials have defended their actions saying that it was necessary for security forces to defend themselves against militants who have been responsible for the resurgence in violence since January this year.

For more on this Bharati Jagdish (BJ) spoke to Dr Sunai Phasuk (SP) from Forum Asia, a Bangkok-based human rights organisation.

SP: "The government should have been in a position to prevent the incident to begin with or even if it had been unavoidable, the government should have made an effort to minimise the casualties and arrest the attackers alive instead of killing most of them."

BJ: But don't you think that, to some extent, the heavy-handed approach of the security forces was warranted considering that the violence has been going on for four months now and although the militants were reportedly armed only with machetes, the security forces felt that they were in danger?

SP: "Well, the security forces have not violated any laws by doing this, but whether or not such serious action is warranted has to be considered on a case-by-case basis. In this case, the government cannot justify their actions by saying that they had to use lethal force because the violence has been going since January this year. The fact that the attackers were only armed with machetes is a key factor. The government forces were armed with M-16 rifles, rocket-launchers, armoured tanks and even helicopter gun-ships. I still maintain that it was too heavy-handed."

BJ: I understand that the government has had a closed-door parliamentary session to discuss, specifically, the bloodshed in the South. Why was there a need to keep the proceedings secret?

SP: "Well, I think this is a miscalculation on the government's part because the population of Thailand, not only the Muslim community, but all Thais are very much interested in knowing the government's explanation of the situation. They would like to know about yesterday's incident - why and how it happened, what were the motives of the attackers, why the government decided to react in such a violent manner, where the attackers are now, are they being detained - these are things people want to know and the government should be transparent about this."

BJ: Some government officials were saying that the session had to be kept secret because in their discussions, they might end up implicating other countries - countries in which these militants are believed to have undergone training. What do you know about this?

SP: "The Thai government officials are just trying to point the finger at Malaysia and Indonesia - implying that these countries are safe havens for the armed groups operating in Southern Thailand. I don't think the government's justification for having a closed session is constructive at all."

BJ: I understand that there are a lot disagreements among senior officials about the source of the conflict. Is this creating further problems in terms of resolving the problems in the South?

SP: "Yes, there have been conflicting views among the top leaders about the motives behind the violence in the region and this has led to conflicting approaches to solving the situation. What happened yesterday might have opened a window of opportunity for the more hardline and hawkish elements in the government to continue to resort to the use of violence and to send more troops to the South. However, this will not engender any confidence among the people of Thailand, but instead it will create a climate of fear, especially for the people in the South."

BJ: Now, neighbouring Malaysia has called on Thailand to be more cautious and has expressed concern that people fleeing the Thai security forces may try to enter Malaysia. What can Thailand do to prevent this?

SP: "Well, the Thai government needs to assure the population in the South, especially the Muslim community, that the crackdown on militants will not be done indiscriminately and investigations will be based on human rights and with the due process of the law. The government has to assure the people there that there will not be indiscriminate arrests and extra-judicial killings, abduction or torture by the law and order agencies or by the military. This has been a thorny issue in Thailand because the military and the police have allegedly committed extra-judicial acts in the past. If this continues, it will create more fear among the population and it will cause them to flee to Malaysia. So, the Thai government has to assure them that these things will not happen."

BJ: The situation in Southern Thailand has attracted global attention. The United States has expressed great concern and has even offered assistance to the Thai authorities in dealing with the situation. What sort of assistance would the Thai government accept from the US?

SP: "The Thai government needs to be extremely careful in reacting to the US's offer of assistance. If accepting assistance would mean the presence of US personnel - intelligence, military or technical personnel - in Thailand, it would be seen even more clearly that Thailand is leaning even more closely to the US and its global war against terrorism which, in some parts, is seen as the US's war against Islam. Thailand needs to be careful about this, given the sensitivities in the Southern provinces."