Crisis in the South, but at least no Isis

A senior Thai security official has finally spoken up to set the record straight about an alleged link between Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (Isis) and the Malay Muslim insurgency in the southernmost provinces.

There is no link, Royal Thai Police spokesman Pol General Detnarong Suthichanbancha said this week.

Zero Isis activities have been detected in Thailand, he said. The ideology of the Malay separatists in the Patani region is different to that of Isis. The two groups are unlikely to ever join forces.

While Isis does recruit radical Muslims from around the world to join in its ground war in the Middle East, it also wants some of them to remain in their home countries to carry out attacks on “soft targets”.

Detnarong went on to claim that the government’s policy is to end the southern unrest by building trust among citizens there. It was the standard government line, but at least he understands the need to say “the right thing” – even as the government fails to live up to that commitment.

The same cannot be said for Thailand’s overall chief of security, Deputy Prime Minister General Prawit Wongsuwan. Prawit has a tendency to make eyebrow-raising statements without offering proper context, the result frequently being damage that could have been avoided.

“There are Islamic State members in that zone,” Prawit has been quoted as saying of the Thai-Malay frontier. Without specifically identifying Malaysia, he suggested that Isis members have penetrated the Muslim-majority southernmost provinces from across the border. Lacking a proper explanation, a statement like that can be interpreted in several ways, some harmful.

The police are quite correct to point out the ideological difference between the Patani Malay separatists and Isis. While the former acts on ethno-nationalist grounds, the latter is motivated purely by “jihadist” aims. Of course the term “jihadist” is itself problematic for the vast majority of Muslims around the world who have a starkly different interpretation of the word “jihad”. This word means “struggle” and can connote something as harmless as the struggle for self-realisation, rather than simply a brutal “holy war” waged against non-Muslims.

The word “takfiri” has been used in reference to groups like Isis that read the Koran in the starkest terms, inferring instruction to kill all non-believers.

The Thai insurgency remains very much ethno-nationalist in nature and, as such, unable to garner the support or sympathy of those who live outside the three southernmost provinces, who identify themselves as “Thai Muslims”.

This does not mean though that Thailand and the Malay-speaking provinces can rest comfortably in the absence of groups like Isis. Western Muslims have often travelled to Bangkok for connecting flights to Turkey, where they cross the border into Syria to join Isis. 

Jemaah Islamiah operatives from Indonesia nestled in Thailand to plan the 2002 Bali bombings and hide afterward. Intelligence sources determined that the masterminds entered Thailand via the Malaysian border following the attacks. The head of the operation, Hambali, was finally arrested hiding out in Ayutthaya. Members of Hezbollah, the Middle Eastern militant organisation, were discovered with a warehouse of explosives in Thailand. (It is thus wrong to single out the South as a bulwark of extremism.)

Isis and its barbaric methodology need to be understood in context. Thai leaders and policymakers should refrain from using such tragedies like that experienced in Paris to advance their own agenda – like attempting to silence critics. It serves no useful or even meaningful purpose.