Published on June 24, 2005

This is the second part of a two-part interview conducted by the Berlin-based academic Dr Farish A Noor with Dr Wan Kadir Che Man, the head of the Patani Bersatu movement, who is currently living in exile in Europe.

So for you what is happening in southern Thailand is an entirely local matter, without foreign connections? I ask this for the simple reason that in the media today there have been many unproven allegations that the trouble in southern Thailand is caused by foreign influences.

Some have even suggested a connection with Arab militant groups like al-Qaeda.

That is an exaggeration. You have to remember one very important factor: for the Patani Malay-Muslims, their sense of pride and integrity is based on the idea that they (the Kingdom of Patani) was a centre of Islamic learning itself.

The Patani Muslims consider themselves among the earliest Muslims in Southeast Asia and among the most pious, with an Islamic heritage and tradition of their own. They do not want this Islamic heritage to be compromised by the Thai government, nor by foreign Arab influences.

This is why the Patani Malays tend to reject Arab or Indian Muslim missionary groups that have tried to come to teach us Islam, and why Patanis are not receptive to Arab-Wahhabi influences or even other schools of thought like the Shias, etc.

Patani Muslims have a strong cultural reaction to outsiders, and we do not like being treated like second-class Muslims by foreign Muslims, especially from the Arabs. Based on this, it is not that easy for outsiders to come and try to influence us on matters of Islam, our beliefs or struggle.

There have been some attempts in the past, like the Wahhabis trying to build mosques and fund missionary work, but they all failed.

No, I state clearly that the situation in Patani has always been determined and shaped by local factors and this includes the local political situation.

During the 1970s and 80s when the Patani liberation groups were fighting for autonomy or even independence, there was some political support from Muslim states overseas, but this was largely token and inconsequential as far as the ground-level realities were concerned in Patani.

Then can I ask you a follow-up question about alleged regional connections? Of late some so-called security experts have claimed that the situation in Patani has been made worse by the interference of neighbouring states.

Thaksin has also claimed that Patani rebels have been helped by neighbouring states. As the head of Bersatu since 1998, can you comment on this?

As long as I have been the leader of Bersatu we have never received any support from any neighbouring countries such as Malaysia or Indonesia.

I state this categorically now: we have never received any kind of support whatsoever, be it in terms of arms, logistics, planning, training or finance from any other country in the region.

The claim that neighbouring countries have been helping the groups in southern Thailand is totally false – I can say this with certainty as I am the leader of the alliance, and I know for a fact that we were never helped by anyone.

If there has been any help or support, then I would be the first to know as I am the leader of Bersatu, but I am telling you clearly and firmly: no such support was ever given to us.

Our struggle was always a local affair, and not some concerted international effort.

And what about the claim that Patani groups were training in neighbouring countries?

This is also false, even ridiculous. For a start it would be very hard to carry arms and do training in a country like Malaysia, as it is almost impossible to smuggle weapons across the border. Neither was Indonesia ever an option for it.

There was simply no need for any of this, because there is more than enough space and secret areas all over the southern provinces where the militants could go and train for fighting.

It is much easier to train in Patani itself because there are many Malay-only enclaves in Patani, Narathiwat and Jala were there are places for them to train. All the young militants you see today are trained in Thailand, in the pondok school system.

Most of them are locally trained. Many of them have not even been to neighbouring countries like Malaysia before, such as the wanted militant Ma’ Sae Nu Seng, who openly stated that he had never been in Malaysia before in his entire life.

So if this has always been a domestic issue limited to the southern provinces of Thailand, what hopes do you have for the future and what path do you wish to take?

I personally believe that violence does not and will no longer work; which is why I am appealing to all the groups to come together and for us to strategise and find other legal means to carry on our struggle.

The basis of this struggle is the demand for respect and recognition of our past history, our identity and our specific cultural, political and economic needs. Violence as we see it today is proof that the Thai government has not been able to deal with the situation or pacify the people in Patani.

This is because of their own short-sighted tactics and the brutal methods they have used, as well as their continued reluctance to recognise that the people of the South have been there for centuries and we are not an inferior, second-class people with no rights.

I worry about the violence we see today because it is unprecedented in scale and ferocity. Worse of all, the victims are ordinary civilians: men and women, children, school teachers, imams and monks.

This is counter-productive and eventually will harm all of us, and the Thai nation.

So what I want is this: we are calling on the government to truly and effectively implement articles 282 to 290 of the 1997 Thai Constitution, which makes allowances for local government and limited self-control.

This was the Constitution that came into effect during the term of [former] prime minister Chavalit, and it is still in operation now.

Articles 282 to 290 deal with local government, the power and authorities of local municipalities, local elections etc. The aim of these articles was to secure some form of local political representation at the regional, provincial and district levels and it added to the decentralisation of power.

This is needed if the people of provinces like Patani are ever going to regain their self-respect and dignity. It is also the only way for leaders like me to persuade the more violent and militant groups to give up the armed struggle and to return to the democratic political process.

Most of all this means that our struggle will be a legal, constitutional one.

Dr Farish A Noor
Dr Farish A Noor is a researcher at the Zentrum Moderner Orient, Berlin, and was formerly Chair of Asian Studies at Sciences-Po, Paris, and a lecturer at the Islamwissenschaft Institute of Freie University, Berlin.

Post your comment to this story here