Instinctively, the government, the military and police sought to downplay the incidents, pointing out that small home-made explosive devices were used, which suggested the perpetrators of what looked like very well coordinated attacks - by whoever they may be - did not intend to cause heavy casualties. Or they said that they had got wind of the imminent plots but somehow failed to intercept them correctly and prevent them occurring.

Security experts have discussed in great detail their theories about the types of improvised bombs and tactics used in the latest attacks and how they differ or conform to the pattern of behaviour of militants engaged in the armed struggle against the Thai state. Accounts of what happened made by various security agencies sometimes conflict but all are diligently and widely reported by the mass media.

The question to ask is are members of the public supposed to feel reassured by such inane excuses or hastily arranged face-saving exercises?

Why can't the heads of the country's security agencies just tell the hapless public the truth? For example, why can't they explain how they did not know that such attacks were in the offing, that the quality of intelligence gathering was not good enough and that there is no foolproof way to prevent attacks by determined terrorists. The public must be told that security agencies have the impossible responsibility of having to be successful and doing everything right 100 per cent of the time. This includes raids on places where insurgents hide out, arresting would-be terrorists before they strike and flagging down their vehicles in randomly set up roadblocks.

Terrorists, who may look exactly like any law-aiding citizen, however, get to pick the place and time that suits them to pull off their heinous crimes - killing and maiming innocent people. They can make a virtually limitless number of attempts before they actually do it. In other words, they need only to be successful once to pull off a big or small terrorist attack with the potential to have a disproportionately huge impact on the country's perceived political and economic stability.

Only when people responsible for national security come clean as to what they can and cannot do, will they be successful in mobilising public support in the fight against terrorism and insurgency in the strife-torn deep South, as well as in other parts of the country where the terrorists might choose to bring their fight.

Being honest with the public would be a much better policy than giving them a false sense of security. Even now the great majority of people, including those in Bangkok which was subjected to coordinated bomb attacks on New Year's Eve, appear to have snugly settled into the same sense of complacency.

What is needed is greater participation and awareness by the public of the clear and present danger of terrorism. There has to be a concerted effort to make all of us - government officials and the general public - feel that we are in it together to oppose terrorists and their hateful agenda aimed at undermining everything that we as a society hold dear, including freedom from fear, political stability, economic development, social cohesion, tolerance and the peaceful coexistence between people of different faiths and ethnicity.

Thailand needs to get organised and improve its capabilities to deal with terrorism - from intelligence gathering to emergency response services. Even at this late stage of the struggle against terrorism, our political leaders and security agencies are still reticent about tightening security, including stationing visibly armed and well-trained troopers at public places, apparently for fear of causing public panic and scaring away foreign tourists.

This is wrong. In the face of a constant threat from terrorism, it is better to err on the side of being too cautious than to be too carefree and ending up sorry.