[lbo-talk] Roy on Indian election

kjkhoo at softhome.net kjkhoo at softhome.net
Sat May 22 11:04:20 PDT 2004


At 9:15 pm +0500 21/5/04, uvj at vsnl.com wrote:
>kjkhoo at softhome.net wrote:
>
>In Malaysia
>> Essentially a reversion to the pattern established in 1995, and a
>> personal triumph for the new man, Abdullah Badawi. Voters, relieved
>> at Mahathir's departure, liked the noises Badawi was making.
>> But hardly the exemplary seeing-off of the so-called fundamentalist
>> Islamists touted in the world media. The Islamic party, although
>> trounced in terms of seats -- an effect of the first-past-the-post
>> system -- retained its support in the (poorer) northern states. It
>> was in the rich central states that there was almost wilful
>> abandonment of Anwar Ibrahim's party.
>
>Is there a strong or influential Leftwing group or trade union in Malaysia?

No. Neither has actually ever recovered from the Emergency, followed by the continued repressive legislation and policies, and the complications of hugely ethnicised politics.


>Btw, what is your take on the events in Southern Thailand?

In brief, a continuing effect, in multiple guises, of the Siamese-British agreement a century ago which separated the Malay kingdoms/states into Siamese and British (which became British Malaya, Malaya and then Malaysia). The last upsurge -- in the mould of national liberation movements of the time -- was some thirty years back. Subsequently handled with some gentleness by Bangkok, as also the abatement of the national liberation wave, it receded. It now is apparently re-appearing in Islamic guises (there are several 'movements'), but as yet without that much popular support. But that could change depending on how Bangkok chooses to deal with it. There are conflicting tendencies in Bangkok, the soft approach being advanced by Deputy Prime Minister Chaturon, himself a returnee from that wave of student enlistment in the Thai CP's insurgency following the crackdown of 1976, and using that experience as a justification for his approach. The security services are for a more hardline approach which will almost certainly lead to increased popular support for the separatist movements. The US-led "war on terror" has been of no help; a different administration would probably have reacted negatively to the massacre, providing more room for the soft approach.

That said, events in S Thailand are also confused by corruption and drug smuggling. Over the past year, Bangkok has been conducting a "war on drugs", with extra-judicial killings numbering around 2,000 -- a regression from Thailand's generally improving human rights record, an improvement which made Thailand one of the best in SE Asia. The regression allowed the security services to partially revert to their bad old ways.

There are more than a few hints that the arms heist of January this year was an inside job, then covered up when an audit was due -- the officers killed during that alleged heist were officers of a rank one would hardly expect to be on guard duty. Some local persons were arrested, then tortured into confessing; the use of torture was confirmed by a forensic scientist. Their lawyer made a public accusation, naming names, and he disappeared a couple of days later -- still not found, although there were some arrests (all security men) at the end of April. Thaksin, the Prime Minister, brushed it aside when the lawyer disappeared, saying it was due to a domestic dispute.

In the recent massacre, a Deputy Prime Minister had ordered that there be no assault on the mosque, but was disobeyed by the commanding officer who was immediately transferred out. There was really little justification for the scale of the massacre: the security services had been tipped off and were ready for the attackers; the attackers were mainly armed with machetes, most of them were teenagers possibly believing they were "kebal", i.e., immune to bullets. The popular response was one of shock, anger, and bewilderment -- they had no sense that their children were involved in any such activities and couldn't believe it. So they responded by giving them all a martyr's burial, i.e., no cleansing of the body prior to interment -- a move I take not so much as support for their acts, but as a way of providing some meaning to their deaths. In one village, the whole village's soccer team was killed; one family lost virtually all its breadwinners. There are reports that some were wounded, and then killed.

For obvious reasons -- largely tourism-related -- Bangkok makes contradictory noises about the meaning of those events. Thaksin, the Prime Minister, said it was all criminal elements. But others in his government acknowledge that it was linked to separatist movements. However all have resisted labelling it as the work of "al Qaeda", and have chosen to point to local circumstances -- correctly so, in my opinion. Still, it is such heavy-handedness that provides "jihadis" an entry point.

If you're interested in these events, check up on The Nation (Bangkok) as well as commentaries in Asia Times. The Nation (Bangkok) initially lost its footing in the immediate aftermath, but it subsequently recovered and provided really rather good coverage. Their archives are freely accessible via the "search" option.

kj khoo



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list