Back
About RSIS
Introduction
Building the Foundations
Welcome Message
Board of Governors
Staff Profiles
Executive Deputy Chairman’s Office
Dean’s Office
Management
Distinguished Fellows
Faculty and Research
Associate Research Fellows, Senior Analysts and Research Analysts
Visiting Fellows
Adjunct Fellows
Administrative Staff
Honours and Awards for RSIS Staff and Students
RSIS Endowment Fund
Endowed Professorships
Career Opportunities
Getting to RSIS
Research
Research Centres
Centre for Multilateralism Studies (CMS)
Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS Centre)
Centre of Excellence for National Security (CENS)
Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS)
International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR)
Research Programmes
National Security Studies Programme (NSSP)
Social Cohesion Research Programme (SCRP)
Studies in Inter-Religious Relations in Plural Societies (SRP) Programme
Other Research
Future Issues and Technology Cluster
Research@RSIS
Science and Technology Studies Programme (STSP) (2017-2020)
Graduate Education
Graduate Programmes Office
Exchange Partners and Programmes
How to Apply
Financial Assistance
Meet the Admissions Team: Information Sessions and other events
RSIS Alumni
Outreach
Global Networks
About Global Networks
RSIS Alumni
International Programmes
About International Programmes
Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior Military Officers (APPSMO)
Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior National Security Officers (APPSNO)
International Conference on Cohesive Societies (ICCS)
International Strategy Forum-Asia (ISF-Asia)
Executive Education
About Executive Education
SRP Executive Programme
Terrorism Analyst Training Course (TATC)
PUBLIC EDUCATION
About Public Education
Publications
RSIS Publications
Annual Reviews
Books
Bulletins and Newsletters
RSIS Commentary Series
Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
Commemorative / Event Reports
Future Issues
IDSS Papers
Interreligious Relations
Monographs
NTS Insight
Policy Reports
Working Papers
External Publications
Authored Books
Journal Articles
Edited Books
Chapters in Edited Books
Policy Reports
Working Papers
Op-Eds
Glossary of Abbreviations
Policy-relevant Articles Given RSIS Award
RSIS Publications for the Year
External Publications for the Year
Media
News Releases
Speeches
Video/Audio Channel
Events
Contact Us
S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies Think Tank and Graduate School Ponder The Improbable Since 1966
Nanyang Technological University Nanyang Technological University
  • About RSIS
      IntroductionBuilding the FoundationsWelcome MessageBoard of GovernorsHonours and Awards for RSIS Staff and StudentsRSIS Endowment FundEndowed ProfessorshipsCareer OpportunitiesGetting to RSIS
      Staff ProfilesExecutive Deputy Chairman’s OfficeDean’s OfficeManagementDistinguished FellowsFaculty and ResearchAssociate Research Fellows, Senior Analysts and Research AnalystsVisiting FellowsAdjunct FellowsAdministrative Staff
  • Research
      Research CentresCentre for Multilateralism Studies (CMS)Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS Centre)Centre of Excellence for National Security (CENS)Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS)International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR)
      Research ProgrammesNational Security Studies Programme (NSSP)Social Cohesion Research Programme (SCRP)Studies in Inter-Religious Relations in Plural Societies (SRP) Programme
      Other ResearchFuture Issues and Technology ClusterResearch@RSISScience and Technology Studies Programme (STSP) (2017-2020)
  • Graduate Education
      Graduate Programmes OfficeExchange Partners and ProgrammesHow to ApplyFinancial AssistanceMeet the Admissions Team: Information Sessions and other eventsRSIS Alumni
  • Outreach
      Global NetworksAbout Global NetworksRSIS Alumni
      International ProgrammesAbout International ProgrammesAsia-Pacific Programme for Senior Military Officers (APPSMO)Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior National Security Officers (APPSNO)International Conference on Cohesive Societies (ICCS)International Strategy Forum-Asia (ISF-Asia)
      Executive EducationAbout Executive EducationSRP Executive ProgrammeTerrorism Analyst Training Course (TATC)
      PUBLIC EDUCATIONAbout Public Education
  • Publications
      RSIS PublicationsAnnual ReviewsBooksBulletins and NewslettersRSIS Commentary SeriesCounter Terrorist Trends and AnalysesCommemorative / Event ReportsFuture IssuesIDSS PapersInterreligious RelationsMonographsNTS InsightPolicy ReportsWorking Papers
      External PublicationsAuthored BooksJournal ArticlesEdited BooksChapters in Edited BooksPolicy ReportsWorking PapersOp-Eds
      Glossary of AbbreviationsPolicy-relevant Articles Given RSIS AwardRSIS Publications for the YearExternal Publications for the Year
  • Media
      News ReleasesSpeechesVideo/Audio Channel
  • Events
  • Contact Us
    • Connect with Us

      rsis.ntu
      rsis_ntu
      rsisntu
      rsisvideocast
      school/rsis-ntu
      rsis.sg
      rsissg
      RSIS
      RSS
      Subscribe to RSIS Publications
      Subscribe to RSIS Events

      Getting to RSIS

      Nanyang Technological University
      Block S4, Level B3,
      50 Nanyang Avenue,
      Singapore 639798

      Click here for direction to RSIS
Connect
Search
  • RSIS
  • Publication
  • RSIS Publications
  • CO07086 | The Southern Insurgency: Rethinking Thailand’s Military Strategy
  • Annual Reviews
  • Books
  • Bulletins and Newsletters
  • RSIS Commentary Series
  • Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
  • Commemorative / Event Reports
  • Future Issues
  • IDSS Papers
  • Interreligious Relations
  • Monographs
  • NTS Insight
  • Policy Reports
  • Working Papers

CO07086 | The Southern Insurgency: Rethinking Thailand’s Military Strategy
Prashanth Parameswaran

08 August 2007

download pdf

Commentary

IN HIS most incisive public remarks since Thailand’s bloodless coup, Thai Army Commander- in-Chief Sonthi Boonyaratkalin in June criticized security forces for their inefficiency, unprofessionalism and uncreative mindset that helped fan the flames of Thailand’s southern insurgency. As more than 2,000 have died and the insurgency rages on into its fourth year, Bangkok’s military strategy has been an unmitigated disaster, leaving the military fending off accusations of human rights abuses and engaging in mass arrests that produce little intelligence from tight-lipped insurgents. The southern region is approaching the precipice of civil war, insurgents are gaining increasing support and violence has continued unabated. In order to turn its foundering military campaign around, Thailand must address a number of critical issues relating to resources, capacities, conceptual frameworks and policies that plague its counterinsurgency effort.

Too Few Good Men

The Thai military is overstretched and under-performing. Only one out of every three or four checkpoints are manned in the insurgency-wracked provinces of Pattani, Yala and Narathiwat. The police eschew cooperation with the military due to deep interagency rivalry, while military personnel simply lack the rigour and enthusiasm to fulfill their combat duties. In some cases, the military has recruited poorly-trained villagers to supplement its depleting ranks, which only increases the chances for costly operational errors. The security vacuum is having adverse effects. Buddhists in the South, frustrated with the government’s ineptitude, are increasingly taking up arms and organizing their own militias. It is no coincidence that this has led to a surge in revenge attacks this year between Buddhists and Muslims. These are ingredients for a full-scale civil war.

Gen. Sonthi’s concerns about the lack of professionalism within the security forces are well-founded. Until recently, forensic teams that arrived after bomb attacks used obsolete equipment and techniques that led to dismal evidence collection. Army personnel simply refuse to wear the proper protective equipment while carrying out security duties, resulting in unnecessary casualties through bomb-related accidents. The security forces’ dismissive attitude and rudimentary practice of evidence collection and law enforcement will only lead to ineffective public trials. These public prosecutions are integral counterinsurgency instruments since an increase in transparency will ameliorate the military’s reputation for brutality. Furthermore, transparent verdicts will turn the tide against the insurgents, who have stepped up their campaign of using mass village demonstrations to free detainees interned under shaky evidence.

It’s The Thought That Counts?

While capacity and resource problems can be quickly rectified, it will take much more to improve the deep-seated myopia of the security forces. They view counterinsurgency through the prism of short- term operational gains, rather than a long, complex process. Part of this thought paradigm is due to the special forces background of Thailand’s current Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont and Gen. Sonthi, which leads them to emphasize quick, light operations that privilege arrests over the more critical goal of acquiring intelligence from villagers by ‘holding’ certain areas. In the last few weeks, the armed forces have engaged in ‘sweep up operations’ and ‘manhunts’ to clear areas of insurgent presence. While this has netted insurgents and weapons, it is unlikely to work in the long run. The insurgency is waged with simple weapons which are easily replenished. And insurgents are unlikely to know much more beyond their direct cell operations. Furthermore, ‘sweeps’ are unlikely to succeed in obtaining intelligence from villagers and informants, simply because their allegiance will stick with the ever- present, lurking insurgents rather than transient security personnel.

The few intelligence-centric operations that do exist in the villages are so ill-conceived that they are playing into the insurgent narrative rather than furthering the process of government counter-ideology. When a team leader of a psychological operations village force was asked what his most successful mission was, he enthusiastically detailed how his squad worked with Muslim villagers to plant a Thai flagpole to institutionalize allegiance to the nation-state. Soldiers seem oblivious to the fact that attempts to “Thai-ze” villagers only serve to strengthen the insurgent narrative, which stresses attempts by the Thai state to ‘forcibly assimilate’ Southern Muslims. As a result, insurgents are able to tighten their grip on the villagers, subduing them into a culture of silence locally known by the motto of tidak tahu, tidak lihat, tidak dengar (I do not know, I do not see, I do not hear). While the armed forces may win some operational battles on the ground in the upcoming weeks, the insurgents have a virtual monopoly on the hearts and minds of the Southern borderland.

Actions Speak Louder Than Words

Exacerbating these key factors is the abject failure of concrete security policies in the southern villages. Proposals are often implemented and evaluated without the inputs of Muslim villagers. For example, the recruitment of ‘Rangers’ or indigenous village forces is often hailed as a successful government policy to tailor security to local needs. However, most argue that these ‘Rangers’ consist of Muslim buruk (bad Muslims) who were gamblers, drunks or petty criminals. Empowering village outcasts with vital security roles is a recipe for disaster. Even more disturbing, however, is the fact that the policy has neither been revoked nor revised. It suggests a systematic lack of engagement with the local community. Many Southern Muslims, for instance, are perplexed as to why the government has not made it compulsory for all officers serving in the south to learn the local Malay dialect. This would result in more goodwill and interaction between villagers and the military, which would in turn ameliorate the long history of distrust and suspicion between the two parties.

Policies are also dogged by unbalanced implementation. Polling conducted in the South shows that village leaders are very dissatisfied with current security policies focused on ‘hunting militants’, while neglecting important non-military dimensions like local administration. Villagers, teashop visitors and academics interviewed all agree that “social justice” is the key to the South. Yet the government has not implemented plans related to justice – like strengthening social infrastructure and enhancing community participation. Even some government and army officers in Bangkok view the lack of implementation as the primary Southern obstacle. They offer explanations such as bureaucratic inertia, red tape, ‘laziness’ and, most notably, Bangkok-centric distractions including political instability and upcoming elections.

The Way Forward

The Thai government must resolve a multi-faceted array of deficiencies in order to reverse its counterinsurgency misfortunes. First, it must increase its security presence by three or four times, because only with the creation of security will villagers shift to or keep their allegiance with the government. Security leads to intelligence, which will in turn result in more successful and discriminate military operations.

But government success is also contingent upon professionalism and possessing the right conceptual framework. The former can be accomplished by enhancing inter-agency cooperation, buying more sophisticated counterinsurgency equipment, and enforcing a strict code of conduct. The latter will probably be a trial and error process in balancing the security, social and political roles of the military that is currently too heavy-handed and operational-centric.

Policy implementation must also be consistently carried out in all dimensions of the counterinsurgency effort. If other issues do threaten to distract Bangkok, it must remember that the insurgency has festered because of decades of alternating heavy-handedness and neglect. The Thai government would do well to understand that time is not on its side. Prospects for a regional jihad always lurk just around the corner.

About the Author

Prashanth Parameswaran is a Harrison undergraduate research scholar at the University of Virginia, conducting field research on the Southern Thailand insurgency. He was also a research assistant at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University. 

Categories: RSIS Commentary Series / Conflict and Stability / Southeast Asia and ASEAN

Commentary

IN HIS most incisive public remarks since Thailand’s bloodless coup, Thai Army Commander- in-Chief Sonthi Boonyaratkalin in June criticized security forces for their inefficiency, unprofessionalism and uncreative mindset that helped fan the flames of Thailand’s southern insurgency. As more than 2,000 have died and the insurgency rages on into its fourth year, Bangkok’s military strategy has been an unmitigated disaster, leaving the military fending off accusations of human rights abuses and engaging in mass arrests that produce little intelligence from tight-lipped insurgents. The southern region is approaching the precipice of civil war, insurgents are gaining increasing support and violence has continued unabated. In order to turn its foundering military campaign around, Thailand must address a number of critical issues relating to resources, capacities, conceptual frameworks and policies that plague its counterinsurgency effort.

Too Few Good Men

The Thai military is overstretched and under-performing. Only one out of every three or four checkpoints are manned in the insurgency-wracked provinces of Pattani, Yala and Narathiwat. The police eschew cooperation with the military due to deep interagency rivalry, while military personnel simply lack the rigour and enthusiasm to fulfill their combat duties. In some cases, the military has recruited poorly-trained villagers to supplement its depleting ranks, which only increases the chances for costly operational errors. The security vacuum is having adverse effects. Buddhists in the South, frustrated with the government’s ineptitude, are increasingly taking up arms and organizing their own militias. It is no coincidence that this has led to a surge in revenge attacks this year between Buddhists and Muslims. These are ingredients for a full-scale civil war.

Gen. Sonthi’s concerns about the lack of professionalism within the security forces are well-founded. Until recently, forensic teams that arrived after bomb attacks used obsolete equipment and techniques that led to dismal evidence collection. Army personnel simply refuse to wear the proper protective equipment while carrying out security duties, resulting in unnecessary casualties through bomb-related accidents. The security forces’ dismissive attitude and rudimentary practice of evidence collection and law enforcement will only lead to ineffective public trials. These public prosecutions are integral counterinsurgency instruments since an increase in transparency will ameliorate the military’s reputation for brutality. Furthermore, transparent verdicts will turn the tide against the insurgents, who have stepped up their campaign of using mass village demonstrations to free detainees interned under shaky evidence.

It’s The Thought That Counts?

While capacity and resource problems can be quickly rectified, it will take much more to improve the deep-seated myopia of the security forces. They view counterinsurgency through the prism of short- term operational gains, rather than a long, complex process. Part of this thought paradigm is due to the special forces background of Thailand’s current Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont and Gen. Sonthi, which leads them to emphasize quick, light operations that privilege arrests over the more critical goal of acquiring intelligence from villagers by ‘holding’ certain areas. In the last few weeks, the armed forces have engaged in ‘sweep up operations’ and ‘manhunts’ to clear areas of insurgent presence. While this has netted insurgents and weapons, it is unlikely to work in the long run. The insurgency is waged with simple weapons which are easily replenished. And insurgents are unlikely to know much more beyond their direct cell operations. Furthermore, ‘sweeps’ are unlikely to succeed in obtaining intelligence from villagers and informants, simply because their allegiance will stick with the ever- present, lurking insurgents rather than transient security personnel.

The few intelligence-centric operations that do exist in the villages are so ill-conceived that they are playing into the insurgent narrative rather than furthering the process of government counter-ideology. When a team leader of a psychological operations village force was asked what his most successful mission was, he enthusiastically detailed how his squad worked with Muslim villagers to plant a Thai flagpole to institutionalize allegiance to the nation-state. Soldiers seem oblivious to the fact that attempts to “Thai-ze” villagers only serve to strengthen the insurgent narrative, which stresses attempts by the Thai state to ‘forcibly assimilate’ Southern Muslims. As a result, insurgents are able to tighten their grip on the villagers, subduing them into a culture of silence locally known by the motto of tidak tahu, tidak lihat, tidak dengar (I do not know, I do not see, I do not hear). While the armed forces may win some operational battles on the ground in the upcoming weeks, the insurgents have a virtual monopoly on the hearts and minds of the Southern borderland.

Actions Speak Louder Than Words

Exacerbating these key factors is the abject failure of concrete security policies in the southern villages. Proposals are often implemented and evaluated without the inputs of Muslim villagers. For example, the recruitment of ‘Rangers’ or indigenous village forces is often hailed as a successful government policy to tailor security to local needs. However, most argue that these ‘Rangers’ consist of Muslim buruk (bad Muslims) who were gamblers, drunks or petty criminals. Empowering village outcasts with vital security roles is a recipe for disaster. Even more disturbing, however, is the fact that the policy has neither been revoked nor revised. It suggests a systematic lack of engagement with the local community. Many Southern Muslims, for instance, are perplexed as to why the government has not made it compulsory for all officers serving in the south to learn the local Malay dialect. This would result in more goodwill and interaction between villagers and the military, which would in turn ameliorate the long history of distrust and suspicion between the two parties.

Policies are also dogged by unbalanced implementation. Polling conducted in the South shows that village leaders are very dissatisfied with current security policies focused on ‘hunting militants’, while neglecting important non-military dimensions like local administration. Villagers, teashop visitors and academics interviewed all agree that “social justice” is the key to the South. Yet the government has not implemented plans related to justice – like strengthening social infrastructure and enhancing community participation. Even some government and army officers in Bangkok view the lack of implementation as the primary Southern obstacle. They offer explanations such as bureaucratic inertia, red tape, ‘laziness’ and, most notably, Bangkok-centric distractions including political instability and upcoming elections.

The Way Forward

The Thai government must resolve a multi-faceted array of deficiencies in order to reverse its counterinsurgency misfortunes. First, it must increase its security presence by three or four times, because only with the creation of security will villagers shift to or keep their allegiance with the government. Security leads to intelligence, which will in turn result in more successful and discriminate military operations.

But government success is also contingent upon professionalism and possessing the right conceptual framework. The former can be accomplished by enhancing inter-agency cooperation, buying more sophisticated counterinsurgency equipment, and enforcing a strict code of conduct. The latter will probably be a trial and error process in balancing the security, social and political roles of the military that is currently too heavy-handed and operational-centric.

Policy implementation must also be consistently carried out in all dimensions of the counterinsurgency effort. If other issues do threaten to distract Bangkok, it must remember that the insurgency has festered because of decades of alternating heavy-handedness and neglect. The Thai government would do well to understand that time is not on its side. Prospects for a regional jihad always lurk just around the corner.

About the Author

Prashanth Parameswaran is a Harrison undergraduate research scholar at the University of Virginia, conducting field research on the Southern Thailand insurgency. He was also a research assistant at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University. 

Categories: RSIS Commentary Series / Conflict and Stability

Popular Links

About RSISResearch ProgrammesGraduate EducationPublicationsEventsAdmissionsCareersVideo/Audio ChannelRSIS Intranet

Connect with Us

rsis.ntu
rsis_ntu
rsisntu
rsisvideocast
school/rsis-ntu
rsis.sg
rsissg
RSIS
RSS
Subscribe to RSIS Publications
Subscribe to RSIS Events

Getting to RSIS

Nanyang Technological University
Block S4, Level B3,
50 Nanyang Avenue,
Singapore 639798

Click here for direction to RSIS

Get in Touch

    Copyright © S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies. All rights reserved.
    Privacy Statement / Terms of Use
    Help us improve

      Rate your experience with this website
      123456
      Not satisfiedVery satisfied
      What did you like?
      0/255 characters
      What can be improved?
      0/255 characters
      Your email
      Please enter a valid email.
      Thank you for your feedback.
      This site uses cookies to offer you a better browsing experience. By continuing, you are agreeing to the use of cookies on your device as described in our privacy policy. Learn more
      OK
      Latest Book
      more info