Critics have warned that the military-led approach to handling the conflict in Thailand’s southern border provinces may be prolonging unrest rather than resolving it.
Since violence resumed in 2004, the conflict in Pattani, Yala and Narathiwat remains entrenched, rooted in historical, identity and religious differences involving separatist groups.
According to Deep South Watch, a local think tank, more than 7,000 people have been killed in the decades-long unrest in the region, which is home to a majority of the country’s Malay Muslim population. The violence has led to the imposition of a prolonged security framework, with martial law and emergency decrees remaining in place for over 20 years.
Critics say these measures, while aimed at maintaining order, have also contributed to mistrust and weakened confidence in the state.
Ekkarin Tuansiri, a political scientist at Prince of Songkla University’s Pattani campus, told Thai PBS World that, despite civilian governments being in power, responsibility for the region has largely been left to security agencies.
His remarks came as a top-ranking army officer, General Somsak Rungsita, was appointed to head the delegation for peace talks with the Barisan Revolusi Nasional (BRN), an umbrella organisation representing several insurgent groups.
Ekkarin said the military-led approach reinforces a view that the state approaches the South primarily through a security lens.
“The approach is still security-first,” he said, adding that political leaders have been reluctant to shift away from this framework.
Seen as threat
Saharee Chelong, a prominent activist from the region, said many people feel they are not being treated as citizens, but as potential threats.
“When policies are designed around security, people start to feel like they are the enemy,” said Saharee, who previously served as an assistant to former Fair party MP Kannavee Suebsang.
This perception, he explained, has shaped how communities view the state. Institutions, such as the military, police and courts, are often seen as a single force, rather than separate bodies with checks and balances, he said.
“As a result, trust in the system remains low,” he added.
Under emergency powers, authorities can detain suspects for extended periods without charge.
Several incidents have been linked to heavy-handed crackdowns by officials, including the 2004 clashes at the Krue Se Mosque and the Tak Bai incident, in which 80 detainees suffocated to death while in military custody.
Saharee said investigations into violent incidents often fail to reach those believed to be behind them, particularly when they involve officials or former security personnel, deepening what many describe as a culture of impunity.
Beyond security
Without addressing underlying issues, many believe that a security-driven approach alone is unlikely to bring lasting peace.
According to a research paper called ‘Counter Violent Extremism (CVE) Concept in Thailand’s Southern Border Provinces: Origins, Problems and Prospects’, a mix of historical grievances, identity issues and governance challenges are key drivers of the unrest.
The southern border provinces, with their distinct Malay Muslim identity, have long experienced tensions linked to centralised rule and cultural integration policies, the research noted.
“The conflict is rooted in deeper issues beyond day-to-day violence,” Saharee added.
Calls for change
Both Saharee and Ekkarin said the government needs to rethink its strategy.
Saharee called for greater decentralisation and more local control, including mechanisms that genuinely involve local communities.
Ekkarin, meanwhile, proposes moving away from emergency laws, towards a peace-focused framework that allows broader participation beyond the security sector. He also calls for greater transparency in peace talks to rebuild public trust.
“We can change from ‘emergency’ rules to ‘peace’ rules,” he said, urging a shift in the government’s perspective.
Despite ongoing efforts, both said meaningful change will depend on whether the government is willing to move beyond a military-led approach.
