mortor of l3btlo~opb!'ir.amu.ac.in/11806/1/t10175.pdf · department of islamic studies augarh...

A STUDY OF MUSLIM CULTURE INSOUTHERN THAILAND

ABSTRACTOF

THESISSUBMITTED FOR THE AWARD OF THE DEGREE OF

mortor of l3btlo~opb!'IN

ISLAMIC STUDIES

BY

ZULKIFLEE MASAE

Under the Supervision of

DR. ABDUL HAMID FAZILI

DEPARTMENT OF ISLAMIC STUDIESAliGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY

AliGARH (INDIA)

2016

DEPARTMENT OF ISLAMIC STUDIESAUGARH MUSUM UNIVERSI1Y

AUGARH-202002. U.P.• INDIA Phones: Ext. 0571·2701131InL 1365. 1366

Fax: 0571·2700528Email: [email protected]

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the thesis entitled "A Study of

Muslim Culture in Southern Thailand" is in an original

work done by Mr. Zulkiflee Masae under my supervision.

The thesis is fit for submission for the award of the degree

of Ph.D. in lslamic Studies.

u~ct1tli(Dr.~J~amid ~ZiiI 7

Supervisor

i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First of all, I would like to thank Almighty Allah, the most merciful, the most

benevolent, and without His blessing, the completion of this thesis was not possible.

This thesis has been an exciting and challenging experience for me and I have

been accompanied by a great number of people whose contributions are worth to mention.

This thesis would not have been completed without the support, encouragement, and

valuable and timely help of many individuals and institutions.

I would like to express my heartiest thanks and sincere gratitude to my

supervisor Dr. Abdul Hamid Fazili, Department of Islamic Studies, Aligarh Muslim

University, (AMU) Aligarh, for his benevolent guidance, inspiring attitude,

sympathetic behavior, keen interest and devotion throughout the tenure of this work.

Without his whole hearted cooperation, it would have been rather impossible to

complete the present work. I am also indebted to Prof. Sayyid Ahsan, Chairman,

Department of Islamic Studies, AMU, for his moral and academic encouragements

and for providing the necessary facilities. Prof. Zafarul Islam, former Chairman,

Department of Islamic Studies, AMU, must also be thanked for his invaluable

suggestions and encouragements. I am also thankful to all teachers of the Department

of Islamic studies AMU, especially Prof. Mohammad Ismail, Prof. Obaidullah Fahad,

Dr. Ahsanul Haq, Dr. Adam Malik Khan, Dr. Abdul Majid Khan, Dr. Aijaz Ahmad,

Dr. Bilal Ahmad Kutty, and Dr. Imtiyaz al-Huda.

I would also like to extend my gratitude to my colleagues in Thailand, for their

continuous support and assistance they extended to this research. Especially, I would like

to thank Dr. Anas Amatayakul, Mahidol University Thailand, Dr. Muhammadtolan

Kaemah, Yala Rajabhat University Thailand; for their kind cooperation and all the help

they extended to me when I was in need of it. I am also thankful to my friends and fellow

scholars, viz. Dr. Pervez Ahmad Khandey, Dr. Cheruhaya Luebaeluwong, Dr. Rahmatullah

Khan, Dr. Arifeen Yama, Dr. Hafeez Patla, Mr. Muhammad Yaseen Gada, Mr. Waleed

Easor, Mrs. Nasra Mulor, Mr. Chakrapob Sasukul, and Mr. Natatapol Madnuraks.

Behind every success, there lies always the unending support of family members;

the cooperation of my mother Rorkiyoh Puteh, father Mr. Dorloh Haleng Masae, my wife,

Saniyah Adae, my sons, Ashraf Masae and Ilham Masae, and my wife’s friends –Miss.

Rureena Chema, Miss. Subaika Alee and Miss. Salwa Bangpu cannot be overlooked as

they all made it possible for me to devote to my work with full time and concentration.

ii

The more pain-taking part of this research-work has been greatly facilitated by

the help and cooperation of the library staff of the Department of Islamic Studies, AMU,

library of Prince Songkhla University campus Pattani, Thailand; Library Mahidol

University Thailand, and Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi. My special thanks are due to

Mr. Kabir Ahmad Khan, Librarian, Department of Islamic Studies, AMU, who whole-

heartedly supplied to me the necessary materials whenever needed. It is difficult to find

the right words with which I can express my indebtedness to the Office-Staff, Department

of Islamic Studies, AMU, for their continuous cooperation. Dr. Mahamud Khan, a Post

Doctoral Fellow, Department of Education, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, also

specially provided me invaluable insights and suggestions regarding my research work.

Apart from the department, I am also very thankful to my dear friends for being

with me in my long stay at AMU, during all the good and bad times of my life. I feel

really blessed when I count the names of those friends who were with me and still

remember me in their busy life. I am also thankful to my step-parents step-father Haji

Hama Saraseh, step-mother Mrs. Ropee–ah Sasu, and their family, for their support.

Last but not least, I want to thank all those who helped and supported me in one

way or the other throughout my research work. I do not have words to express my

gratitude towards all of them. Today I have a feeling of both joy and sorrow at a time

that I have completed the long cherished dream of my father in the form of this thesis

but he is no more in this world. I pray to Almighty Allah to bless him with eternal bliss.

(Zulkiflee Masae)

Abstract

1

ABSTRACT

Thailand has a total area of approximately 198,000 square miles, and its population is

around 70 million. The Thai Muslim population is about 5 million, making up roughly

7.5-8 % of the total population, out of them 44% of Muslim population reside in the

south and the rest in the different provinces of Thailand.

Thailand, one of the developing countries in South East Asia, has unique

ethnic groups, government, religion, language, and customs. Its capital the land of

tourism and its comprised geography has given certain amazing alleviation to its

community and support for the peoples’ activities.

The Southern Thailand region, previously was a semi independent Malay

kingdoms, which was a part of the empire of Bangkok (Thailand), Sukhothai and

Ayutthaya. After the Ayutthaya kingdoms collapsed in 1767, Pattani obtained its full

independence, but under king Rama I (Chakri dynasty) administration it once again

became a part of Thailand. In 1909, the Patani king integrated with the Siamese

kingdoms as part of the agreement with England. Yala and Narathaiwat were initially

part of Pattani but as they failed to integrate they became separate provinces. After

that period, the rebellions and anti Siam (Bangkok) movement started and on several

occasions resulted in conflict.

The southern Thailand, which comprised three border provinces of Thailand

include Yala, Narathiwat, and Pattani, are predominantly inhabited by Malay Muslim,

also known as Melayu Pattani due to their Malay dialect. Historically, the southern

Thailand region under King Malay and during the 16th century represented the height

of Muslim civilization in South East Asia. The southeast Muslim Malay Sultanates.

A loose relationship of vassalage was established by king Rama I and maintained with

few changes until the ascent to the throne of Thailand by Chalalongkorn King V, in

the late 19th century. It is consisting of near about 5-7 million of the total population

out of which 80% are Muslims. In 1909, the Southern region of Thailand integrated

with the Thai kingdom after an agreement with England. The Muslims of Southern

Thailand of Pattani province have a significant position in the country and with the

passage of time their culture, literature, tradition, and politics got moulded to a greater

extent.

Abstract

2

Southern Thailand is also probably one of the earliest Malay states to convert

to Islam, certainly well before Melaka. One the scholars of Hikayat of Patani has said

the story of its King Raja Phya Tu Nakpa who falls seriously sick, with apparently no

cure to his ailment in sight. Then a holy man by the name of Syeikh Sa’ed came to

him and said that he can cure the king, if he promises to convert to Islam. The ruler

promised to do so and in a few days he was wonderfully healthy, however after

getting fit he forgets his promise and fell ill, and again approached that holy man.

This happened thrice and at last he accepted Islam and was called himself Sultan

Ismail Shah.

The kingdom of Thailand’s southern provinces like Pattani, Yala, Narathaiwat

and part of Songkhla which were originally formed the center of the tribute; paying

Malay Sultanate of Patani Kingdom but later on Thailand annexed those provinces in

1902 sparking a primarily ethnic Malay insurgency against the government Thailand.

Moreover, Muslim population in Thailand is mainly divided into two groups--

The Thai -Muslim and the Malay-Muslim. Being the larger group and the main group

the Thai Muslim have a group hold on the society while the Malay Muslim have

concentration in south of Thailand and is also a largest ethnic group of that area. The

majority of the Muslims are in the province of Pattani, Yala and Narathiwat, which

are all very close to Malaysian. There is a difference between rural life and urban life.

The main towns an district are mainly Buddhist. The southern Thailand’s however an

exception. There the Muslim culture dominates everywhere.

The separatist movement in Southern Thailand had emerged and struggled

against the authority of Thailand Kingdom over Sempadan region in Southern

Thailand. The Sempadan regions in Southern Thailand known as Changwad Chaiden

Pak Thai has inhabited by Malay Muslim communities. They have their own behavior

and customarily different from the rest of Thai communities. Based on historical

overview, most of the Muslim communities had strong historical ties to Malay rather

than to Thai.

Therefore, as Muslim minority in Thailand, they exhibit distinct

characteristics as compared to the homogeneous majority. Given such distinctions,

minority groups tend to preserve their original identities in the face of new inventions

that endanger their ethnicity.

Abstract

3

Modern Pattani is an outlying province of Thailand and its population

comprising with Malay and Muslims. However, there are very few studies dealing with

these aspects of Muslim culture in Southern Thailand even though several studies have

been appeared up to date information on their historical and Muslims cultural part of

Thailand. The case studies will help to understand the Muslims culture in Southern

Thailand. It will comprise of four chapters excluding Introduction and conclusion.

The first chapter of the thesis “The Malay world and the influence of Malay

culture in Southern Thailand (before and after Islam)” focused on the study of Muslim

culture in southern Thailand which comprised of the provinces like Pattani, Yala, and

Narathiwat. The diversity of people, religions, customs, and historical background not

only gave colour to its people, activities, and cultures, but also provided valuable

resources for the country which sometimes need a specific solution.

This chapter will provide the reader a general description about Thailand’s

geography and Muslim Culture by specifically concentrating on Southern Thailand.

The chapter will also focus on the previous as well as current or contemporary

conditions, which are particular to Southern region.

The second Chapter titled “The advent and Spread of Islam in southern

Thailand (Pattani)” will provide the historical background about the advent and

spread of Islam in the region. It will also focus on the development of Islamic culture.

However, this chapter mainly focuses on the study of Pattani regions and it will be

helpful to understand the settlement with the peace resolution in southern Thailand. In

this chapter, further light is shed on the Policy of Government administration in

southern Thailand (Sri Maha Wangsa Dynasty, and Kelantan Dynasty, which was

ruler of Patani kingdom). This chapter has also provided the knowledge about the role

and influence of Chularajmontari on the people of southern Thailand.

The third Chapter of the thesis “Social-Cultural Conflict in Southern

Thailand” covers the socio-cultural conflict, because the southernmost provinces of

Thailand such as Pattani, Yala, Narathiwat, and part Songkhla can be seen ethnically

and culturally as a part of the Malay world, but this region belongs to Buddhist

Thailand. This conflict can be summarized as the efforts of Thai government to take

hold over the Malay region and to dominate Malay society and the resistance of the

Malay Muslims against these efforts. In this chapter, the purpose is to investigate

about the roots of this conflict.

Abstract

4

The fourth chapter “Melayu-Muslim Movements in Southern Thailand”

provided the information regarding the Melayu-Muslim movements. In my analysis

there are three waves of Melayu-Muslim separatism in southern Thailand.

In the beginning of eighteenth century to present-day, southern Thailand

appears continues to be a problem because in 2004 a group of gunmen attacked an

army camp in the southern Thai province. Thus, southern Thailand has seen a return

of the Melayu –Muslim separatist disagreement with the central government.

In this new round of resistance, the insurgents’ activities are well planned and

well organized and have brought about heavy damage to property and life as well as

created much confusion, making investigation and counter operations difficult. This

chapter mainly focused on the root cause of insurgency, movement in southern

Thailand

In case of unrest and resistance of Muslims in southern part of Thailand,

several commentators and analysts have talked about the ongoing unrest in southern

Thailand. Dr. Chaiwat Satha-anand said in his study that political history, economic

conditions and injustice in society were factors attributing to conflicts in the Deep

South. Dr. Surin Pitsuwan saw ethic differences and differences in the ways of life,

cultures and historical and religion backgrounds as causing the problems. Others such

as Dr. Imron Maluleem found in his analysis that the three southern border provinces

have been plagued with seven point of problem in south. (1) the problem concerning

religious, ideal, language and cultural identities.(2) psychological problem (3)

economic problem (4) educational problem (5) ethnic problem (6) political problem

and (7) administrative problem.

Islamic education among the Muslim community of Southern Thailand and the

nearby areas preserves has played an important role in preserving hitherto certain

characteristics, therefore, keeping intact the link with the intellectual traditions of the

past.

The pondok, the madrasah, the traditional school of the Muslims of Southern

Thailand, has provided Islamic education to the Muslim, not only in southern

Thailand but also in Thailand as a whole, furthermore, this institution served in the

past as a center of Islamic traditional leaning for the Muslim of South East Asia.

Abstract

5

Among these were well- known Pondok and their respective Tok guru.

Through them, Pattani was able to attract student from all over the area. And the

graduates of these Pondok were numerous; some of them become religious teachers

themselves and role models in the Muslims community, providing Islamic education

for the Muslim people as their ancestors used to do. In the Greater Pattani Region in

particular, the Pondok institutions have grown to symbolize the Malay- Muslims,

pride in their ideals.

A significant policy change came under Yingluck Administration. On 28

February 2013, the government agreed to launch a formal Malaysia facilitated peace

dialogue with the BRN, (Barisan Revolusi Nasional) a clandestine movement

believed to be the most significant force behind the southern insurgency.

The (BRN) official was identified as Hassan Taib, “chief of the BRN liaison

office in Malaysia.” Barisan Revolusi Nasional in Bahasa Malaysia means “National

Revolutionary Front”. It refers to the separatists' concept that the three southernmost

provinces and part of Songkhla represent a distinct nation. And the text of the

agreement was not revealed, but Mr. Hassan spoke briefly with reporters called in to

cover the event. and Lt Gen Paradorn, speaking on Wednesday evening ahead of the

formal agreement, said, “While I can't guarantee the agreement will succeed, it must

be better than letting the South burn on like this.” He said the agreement was a result

of the Thai-Malaysian Peace Dialogue signed after Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm

Yubarung met Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak in the Malaysian capital

recently.

Mara Patani (Majlis Amanah Rakyat Patani-The Amanah Council for Patani

People) was originally an initiative from the pro-dialogue BRN, members as a

proactive step towards the dialogue table. It was formed on 25/10/2014 by a coalition

of young and elderly members of the BRN, including the Pemuda (youth), the Ulama

(clerics) and the armed wings. It was believed that they represent the “BRN Action

Group” who are inclined to seek political solution through negotiation with the Thai

government. After a long and exhaustive discussion they finally agreed to form an

umbrella organization with some structural adjustments and a new name: MAJLIS

SYURA PATANI, as a newly formed umbrella organization, the Mara Patani, has its

own limitations and shortcomings. With hard work and determination from all those

Abstract

6

who give them full support to come to an agreements through consensus. It is

expected that Mara Patani, will be strengthen and consolidated from time to time.

Thai Muslim population has a tremendous impact on the overall prosperity of

the South East Asian Muslims. Therefore, to strengthen their activities, programs, and

cultural values, it is incumbent on Muslim organizations and individuals to adopt a

middle path away from both the extremes because Muslims, especially after the 9/11

attacks, are being attacked through the Western political environment in one way or

the other in order to subjugate and malign the true face of the Islamic culture and

values. Equally important for Thai Muslim population is to excel in their intellectual

horizon only then Muslims would be able to stand and to keep pace with the world

leadership locally as well as globally.

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page No.

Acknowledgement i

List of Maps iii

List of Table iii

Appendices iv

Figures iv

Abbreviation v

Introduction 1 -7

CHAPTER: I

The Malay world and the influence of Malay culture in Southern

Thailand (Before and after Islam) 8-43

Introduction 8

1.1. Geographical Background of Southern Thailand 8

(a) Pattani 11

(b) Narathiwat 12

(c) Yala 12

(d) Muang Saiburi 13

1.2. Background: the Peoples of Thailand 13

(a) capital 14

(b) North-East 15

(c) North of Thailand 15

(d) South of Thailand 16

(e) Upper South of Thailand 16

(f) Deep South 16

viii

1.3. Cultural Background of Muslim in Southern Thailand 17

1.4. Historical background of Malay culture in Southern Thailand 18

1.5. Langkasuka Empire. 20

1.6. Srivijaya Empire 22

1.7. Establishment of the Kingdoms of Srivijaya 23

(a)-Cultural Influences 25

(b)- The golden age 25

(c) -Influence of Islam 25

1.8. Decline of the Srivijaya Empire 25

(a)-Relations with Regional Powers 27

1.9. The Early Establishment of Melaka 27

1.10. Spread of Melaka Culture and Its Development 30

1.11. The Portuguese conquest of Melaka 31

1.12. Decline of Melaka 32

1.13. Kingdom of Patani Empire 32

Note and reference 37-39

Appendix 40-43

CHAPTER : II

The Advent and Spread of Islam in Southern Thailand (Pattani) 44-85

Introduction 44

2.1. Muslims in Southern Thailand 44

(a)-History of Muslims-Patani state 46

2.2. The Patani under Non-Muslim Ruler 47

2.3. Patani under Muslim Rule 48

2.3.1. Sri Maha Waangsa Dynasty 48

ix

(a)The First Sultan Isamail Shah Silullah Fil Alam (ac 1500-1530) 48

(b) The Portuguese in the Patani era 50

(c) The Second Sultan Muzafar Shah (R.II) (1530-1564) 50

(d) Sultan Mansoor Shah (R.III),(1564-1572) 53

(e) Sultan PatikSyam (1572-1573) 54

(f) Sultan Bahadur Shah (1573-1584) 55

(g) Raja Hijau (1584-1616) 55

(h) Raja Biru (R. 1616-1624) 57

(i) Raja Ungu (1624-1635) 58

(j) Raja kuning (1635-1686) 62

2.3.2. Kelantan Dynasty 64

(a) Raja Bakal (1688-1690) 64

(b) Raja Mas Kelantan (1690-1707) 64

(c) Raja Mas Jayam (1707-1710) 65

(d) Raja Aishah Devi (1710-1719) 66

(e) Raja Bendang Badan (1719-1723) 66

(g) Raja Laksamana Dajang (1723-1724) 67

(h) Raja Mas Jayam (1724-1726) 67

(i) Raja Alaung Yunus (1726-1729) 67

2.4. Decline the Kingdome of Patani 69

2.5. The Establishment of the Chularajmontri in Thailand 70

2.6. The Influence of Chularajmontri and the Situation in Southern Thailand 70

2.7. Role of Ulama 71


Appendix 76-85

x

CHAPTER : III

Social-Cultural Conflict in Southern Thailand 86-128

Introduction 86

3.1. Sukhothai Period (1238-1483) 86

3.2. Ayutthaya Period (1351-1767) 87

3.3. Thonburi Period (1767–1782) 88

3.4. Early Chakri Period (1782–1868) 88

3.5. Inclusion into Thailand 89

3.6. Modern Thai Rule 92

3.7. Southern Thailand (Pattani) Vassal State 94

3.8. World War II 95

3.9. The conflict in southern Thailand 97

3.10. Conflicting Identity 99

3.11. Cultural Identity in Southern Thailand 101

(a)The tradition of Muslim and other nation in Thailand 103

1. Dialogue of Life 104

2. Thai Buddhist-Muslims Culture or Traditions in Dialogue 107

3. Funeral Function participated by the Thai Buddhists and

the Thai Muslims in brief 110

(b)Tolerance as the Basis for Dialogue of Life or Culture 111

1. Islamic Tolerance 111

2. Buddhist Tolerance 112

3.12. Political and Integration Policies in Southern Thailand 113


Appendix 128

xi

CHAPTER : IV

Melayu- Muslim Movements in Southern Thailand 129-178

Introduction 129

4.1. Historical Memory 130

4.2. The Emergence of Separatist Movements 131

4.3. The first wave of Malay Kingdoms (1900-1950) 131

(a) Gabungan Melayu Patani Raja 136

(b) Patani People’s Movement and Hajji Sulong 137

4.4. The second wave of Separatist Movement: Islamic Identity (late 1950-2000) 142

(a) Barisan National Pembebasan Pattani (BNPP) 144

(b) Barisan Revolusi National (BRN) 146

(c) Patani United Liberation Organization (PULO) 147

(d) Gerakan Mujahideen Patani (GMP) 149

(e) BERSATU 149

(f) Gerakan Mujahideen Islam Patani (GMIP) 150

(g) Other Resistance Groups 150

1. Permuda 150

2. PANYOM 151

3. Persatuan Mahasiswa Islam Patani (Selatan Thailand) di Patani 151

4.5. The Third Wave of Separatism: Appealing to

a Wider Audience (2000–presently) 151

4.6. Mara Patani (Majlis Amanah Rakyat Patani-

The Amanah Council for Patani People) 156

4.7. The Islamic Private School in Southern Thailand 158

4.8. The Government Policy for Education in southern provinces of Thailand 160

4.9. The state of education present- day 163

4.10. The Foundation of Pondok in Southern Thailand 164

4.11. Higher Educational Institutions: Colleges and University 165


Appendix 171-178

INTRODUCTION

Introduction

1

INTRODUCTION

Thailand, one of the developing countries in South East Asia, has unique ethnic

groups, government, religion, language, and customs. It is the land of tourism and its

geographical location has increased the importance of the region, thus, providing the

support for the peoples’ activities.1

The term “Thailand” in Thai language is defined as a country of free. Thai are

proud in the fact that Thailand is the only country in South East Asia which never

came to be ruled by any foreign power in colonized era2. Thailand, or as well-known

as Siam3 in ancient time, is also called Suwannaphumi or the “Golden Land” due to its

prosperity in food and natural resources.

The Southern Thailand region, previously was a semi independent Malay


Ayutthaya. After the Ayutthaya kingdoms collapsed in 1767, Pattani4 obtained its full

independence, but under King Rama I (Chakri dynasty) administration it once again





occasions resulted in conflict.

The southern Thailand, which comprised three border provinces of Thailand

include Yala, Narathiwat, and Pattani, are predominantly inhabited by Malay -

Muslim, also known as Malay Pattani due to their Malay dialect. Historically, the

southern Thailand region under King Malay and during the 16th century represented

the height of Muslim civilization in Southeast Asia. The southeast Muslim Malay

Sultanates. A loose relationship of vassalage was established by King Rama I and

maintained with few changes until the ascent to the throne of Thailand by

Chalalongkorn King V, in the late 19th century. It is consisting of near about 5-7

million of the total population out of which 80% are Muslims. In 1909, the Southern

region of Thailand integrated with the Thai kingdom after an agreement with

England. The Muslims of Southern Thailand of Pattani province have a significant

position in the country and with the passage of time their culture, literature, tradition,

and politics got moulded to a greater extent.

Introduction

2

The Kingdom of Thailand’s southern provinces like Pattani, Yala, Narathaiwat

and part of Songkhla which were originally formed the center of the tribute; paying

Malay Sultanate of Patani5 Kingdom but later on Thailand annexed those provinces in

1902 sparking a primarily ethnic Malay insurgency against the government Thailand.

Moreover, Muslim population in Thailand is mainly divided into two groups--

The Thai -Muslim and the Malay- Muslim. Being the larger group and the main group

the Thai Muslim have a group hold on the society while the Malay Muslim have

concentration in south of Thailand and is also a largest ethnic group of that area. The

majority of the Muslims are in the province of Pattani, Yala and Narathiwat, which

are all very close to Malaysian. There is a difference between rural life and urban life.

The main towns an district are mainly Buddhist. The southern Thailand’s however an

exception. There the Muslim culture dominates everywhere.

The separatist movement in Southern Thailand had emerged and struggled

against the authority of Thailand Kingdom over Sempadan region in Southern

Thailand. The Sempadan regions in Southern Thailand know as Changwad Chaiden

Pak Thai has inhabited by Malay-Muslim communities. They have their own behavior

and customarily different from the rest of Thai communities. Based on historical


than to Thai.

Therefore, as Muslim minority in Thailand, they exhibit distinct characteristics

as compared to the homogeneous majority. Given such distinctions, minority groups

tend to preserve their original identities in the face of new inventions that endanger

their ethnicity.

The Muslims southern Thailand of Pattani province has a significant position

and they are comprised on a unique and historical society whose culture, literature,

tradition, and politics have been moulded through the passage of time. But a very few

studies dealt with these aspects of Muslim culture of Southern Thailand even though

several studies have been appeared up to date information on their historical and

Muslims cultural part of Thailand.

Modern Pattani is an outlying province of Thailand and its population

comprising with Melayu and Muslims. Pattani province is rich in Muslims cultural in

southern part of Thailand. The case studies will help to understand the Muslims

culture in Southern Thailand.6

Introduction

3

A part from the previous research, the case studying of Thailand are different

in many way first the southern Thailand (Pattani) has a different historical background

from the southern Philippines. And second it is theoretical frame work not only said

about Muslim Culture in southern Thailand but also about the conflict and their

resolutions. Third the one way the data was collected not only from Bangkok but also

in southern Thailand.

SIGNIFICANCE AND OBJECTIVE OF STUDY

1. To present the historical background of the Malay-Muslims and the ethnic

groups in Southern Thailand.

2. To investigate the position of the Muslims in the political milieu in Southern

Thailand.

3. To study the impact of social-cultural conflict in Southern Thailand.

4. The study also involves the development of Malay-Muslims and interfaith

dialogue in Southern Thailand.

METHODOLOGY

The sources used in this research work are mostly primary and original which

included published and unpublished works, though the numbers of original source

materials in Melayu and Thai languages to small. The study is based on the

contemporary and historical and will concentrate on the literature still extant mainly

in Melayu and Thai languages.

I would also like to make a comment regarding the use of material in this

thesis. It has been difficult to find material about the history of the Muslims in

Thailand. My main sources are “The Muslims of southern Thailand” by Michel

Gilquin, “A history of Patani” by Tengku Ismail Tengku Chik and Tengku Arifin

Tengku Chik, “A Short History of Thailand” by David K. Wyatt and “The Malay

Kingdom of Patani” by Ibrahim Syukri. The last book was published in Melayu after

the Second World War, in Jawi language. The author is Thai national who uses a

pseudonym and the book is coloured by the author’s passion for the great glory days

of the Kingdom of Patani as well as for the suppression he feels the area has suffered

from Thai governments during the twentieth century. Why I decided to use the book, I

used this book because the book is translated and edited by Conner Bailey, Historian

and Rural Sociologist, and John N. Miksic, Anthropologist who are well acquainted

Introduction

4

with the south of Thailand. Authors have frequently commented and used the data of

the book whenever anything was in question. They have appropriately suggested

possible reasons for misunderstandings or misspellings and also suggested solutions

or supplementary facts.7

This dissertation focuses on the Study of Muslim Culture in Southern

Thailand, which show the role of Islam in the movement for cultural and religious

freedom among the Malay-Muslims of southern Thailand. Since 1909, the final

incorporation of the Greater Patani Region into the Thai Kingdom, there has been

many rebellions and protests against Thai rule. At various historical periods,

responding to changes in Thai national politics, the movement for freedom took

various forms, but the central theme and binding force has always been Islam and its

rich symbolism. How the Malay- Muslims of southern Thailand have expressed their

grievances against Thai rule and their aspirations for freedom through their religious

rituals, culture, traditional places, language, political and ideals has been another

important of this study.8

The thesis focused on the study of Malay Muslims in southern Thailand. It is

the largest group of Muslims in Thailand. In relation to the feelings of national

sentiments for Thailand, that I believe the Malay Muslims in the south of Thailand

lack to a certain degree, I will take a look at ethnic- and cultural belonging as well as

at how nation building and construction of nationalism, and the research group of

Malay–Muslims in southern Thailand.

Apart from the Introduction and conclusion, the whole work is divided into

five chapters which are as follows.

The first chapter of the thesis “The Malay world and the influence of Malay

culture in Southern Thailand (before and after Islam)” focused on the study of Muslim

culture in southern Thailand which comprised of the provinces like Pattani, Yala, and

Narathiwat. The diversity of people, religions, customs, and historical background not

only gave colour to its people, activities, and cultures, but also provided valuable

resources for the country which sometimes need a specific solution.

This chapter will provide the reader a general description about Thailand’s

geography and Muslim Culture by specifically concentrating on Southern Thailand.

The chapter will also focus on the previous as well as current or contemporary

conditions, which are particular to Southern region.

Introduction

5

The second Chapter titled “The advent and Spread of Islam in southern

Thailand (Pattani)” will provide the historical background about the advent and

spread of Islam in the region. It will also focus on the development of Islamic culture.

However, this chapter mainly focuses on the study of Pattani regions and it will be

helpful to understand the settlement with the peace resolution in southern Thailand. In

this chapter, further light is shed on the Policy of Government administration in

southern Thailand (Sri Maha Wangsa Dynasty and Kelantan Dynasty, which was ruler

of Patani kingdom). This chapter has also provided the knowledge about the role and

influence of Chularajmontari on the people of southern Thailand.

The third Chapter of the thesis “Social-Cultural Conflict in Southern

Thailand” covers the socio-cultural conflict, because the southernmost provinces of

Thailand such as Pattani, Yala, Narathiwat, and part Songkhla can be seen ethnically

and culturally as a part of the Malay world, but this region belongs to Buddhist

Thailand. This conflict can be summarized as the efforts of Thai government to take

hold over the Malay region and to dominate Malay society and the resistance of the

Malay Muslims against these efforts. In this chapter, the purpose is to investigate

about the roots of this conflict.

The fourth chapter “Melayu-Muslim Movements in Southern Thailand”

provided the information regarding the Melayu-Muslim movements. In my analysis

there are three waves of Melayu-Muslim separatism in southern Thailand.

In the beginning of eighteenth century to present-day, southern Thailand

appears continues to be a problem because in 2004 a group of gunmen attacked an

army camp in the southern Thai province. Thus, southern Thailand has seen a return

of the Melayu–Muslim separatist disagreement with the central government.

In this new round of resistance, the insurgents’ activities are well planned and

well organized and have brought about heavy damage to property and life as well as

created much confusion, making investigation and counter operations difficult. This

chapter mainly focused on the root cause of insurgency, movement in southern

Thailand. Finally a conclusion of all the chapters has been given in the last of the

thesis

Introduction

6

Pattani Province areas insurgency andterritorial losses of King Thailand1909 to present -day

Appendix: 1: the Map Southern Thailand insurgency of Thailand kingdom9.

Bangkok Capital

Introduction

7

NOTE AND REFERNCES

1 Maunati Yekti, “Multiculturalism separation and Nation State Building in

Thailand” Research Center for Regional Resources Indonesian Institute of science

Jakarta, 2004, p.11.2 Singh Nagendra Kr, Islam in Thailand: Resurgence or Consolidation:

International Islamic Dynasties, v. 39, (New Delhi India 2005), p. 200.3 Siam is the name by which the country was known to the world until 1993 and

again between 1945 and 1949. On May 11, 1949, an official proclamation

changed the name of the country to “Prathet Thai” or “Thailand”, by which it has

since known. The word “Thai” means “free”, and therefore “Thailand” means

“Land of the free”.4 The modern Thai province and city is spelled Pattani. The conventional Malay

spelling of the traditional Sultanate and its capital city is Patani. This difference

in usage is followed in this study.5 Patani (with single “t”) refers to the Malay kingdom of Patani, while Pattani (with

double “t”) refers to the Pattani provinces of Thailand.

6 ราฮมมลา พรยศ, (2543) .ศ..1350-1909 และการเขามาของศาสนาอสลามในภมภาคปตตาน,

published by Department of Social Sciences, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences,

Prince of Songkla University , pp. 2-3.

7 Syukri, Ibramin , the Malay Kingdom of Patani. Chiang Mai, Silkworn Books.

Translated in to English by Conner Bailey and John N. Miksic. 2005, pp. vii-xi.

8 Pissuwan Surin, “Islam and Malay Nationalism: A case study of the Malay-

Muslim of southern Thailand” Bangkok: Thammasat University, 1989,p. 1.

9 Pissuwan Surin, op.cit., p. 3.

CHAPTER: I

THE MALAY WORLD AND THE INFLUENCE OFMALAY CULTURE IN SOUTHERN THAILAND

(BEFORE AND AFTER ISLAM)

Geographical Background of Southern Thailand

Background: the Peoples of Thailand

Cultural Background of Muslim in Southern Thailand

Historical background of Malay culture in Southern Thailand

Langkasuka Empire.

Srivijaya Empire

Establishment of the Kingdoms of Srivijaya

Decline of the Srivijaya Empire

The Early Establishment of Melaka

Spread of Melaka Culture and Its Development

The Portuguese conquest of Melaka

Decline of Melaka

Kingdom of Pattani Empire

Chapter I: The Malay world and the influence…

8

CHAPTER: I

THE MALAY WORLD AND THE INFLUENCE OF MALAY

CULTURE IN SOUTHERN THAILAND (BEFORE AND AFTER

ISLAM)

Introduction

Thailand is one of the developing countries in South East Asia, which has unique

ethnic groups, government, religion, language, and customs. It has a particular

nickname: ‘the land of smiles’ coined for the sake of tourism. It is unique geography

has given a certain colour to it is community and support for the people’ activities.1

The diversity of people, religions, customs, and their historical backgrounds

contribute to the picture of Thailand. The area extends from the northern to the

southern part of Thailand and needs special attention, especially Southern Thailand,

comprised to the province like Pattani, Yala, and Narathiwat of Thailand. The

diversity done not only give colour to its people, activities, and cultures, but also

provides valuable resources for the country itself as well as impacting on problems,

which sometimes need a specific solution2.

This chapter will give a general description of Thailand’s geography, peoples,

and Muslims Culture by specifically concentrating on Southern Thailand. I will look

at the previous and current or contemporary conditions, which are particular to

Southern that will be assessed especially by the geography, peoples, and Muslims

cultural conditions of Thailand and Southern particular. 3

1.1. Geographical Background of Southern Thailand

The Kingdom of Thailand, located in Southeast Asia on the Gulf of Thailand and the

Andaman Sea. Thailand covered an area of 510,000 kilometers square, has a

population of 60 million growing at a rate of 1.5% each year. Thailand shares its

border with Las to the Northeast Myanmar in the west and north, Laos in the

northeast, Cambodia in the east and Malaysia in the south. The Myanmar border

begins from the west to the south along the Malay Peninsula. The East of Thailand is

next to Laos where it meanders along the Mekong River as far as Cambodia.

Thailand, although rich in rubber and in mineral resources, was never colonized by


9

Europeans and has existed as a unified monarchy since 1350. The capital, Bangkok,

an attractive blend of Western and Thai architecture, was established in 172. Thailand

extends about 2,500 kilometers from the North to the South and 1,250 kilometers

from the East to the West, with a coastline of approximately 1,840 kilometers on the

Gulf of Thailand and 865 kilometers along the Indian Ocean.

In general, a Thailand administrative region is divided into eight regions: First,

The Capital Bangkok Second, the vicinity of Bangkok that consists of five provinces.

Third, the central region, that consists of six provinces. Fourth, the eastern region, that

consists of eight provinces .Fifth, the western region, that consists of six provinces.

Sixth, the northeastern region, that consists of nineteen provinces. Seventh, the

northern region, that consists of seventeen provinces. And the last, the southern

region, that consists of fourteen provinces4

Thailand’s climate in general is tropical. The difference of climate is more

obvious in the North where the temperature increases to quite high in the summer and

lower in the spring and winter, especially in the mountainous area, which is much

cooler than others. Rain can create weather that is cool and fresh in the rainy season.

The difference between the rainy and dry seasons is quite obvious. The country has

three seasons, winter from November to February, summer from March to May, and

the rainy season from June to October. Most areas have more than 70% of the rainfall

in the rainy season that comes with the southwest wind. But the rainfall differs

according to the air in every area and its distance from the ocean. Temperatures

average 75 to 92 degrees Fahrenheit, with the highest temperatures from March to

May and the lowest in December and January.

The most conspicuous features of Thailand's terrain are high mountains, a

central plain, and an upland plateau. Mountains cover much of Northern Thailand and

extend along the Burmese border down through the Malay Peninsula. The central

plain is a lowland area drained by the Chao Phraya and its tributaries, the country's

principal river system, which feeds into the delta at the head of the Bight of Bangkok.

The Chao Phraya system drains about one-third of the nation's territory. In the

northeastern part of the country the Khorat Plateau, a region of gently rolling low hills

and shallow lakes, drains into the Mekong River through the Mae Nam Mun. The

Mekong system empties into the South China Sea and includes a series of canals and

dams.


10

Together, the Chao Phraya and Mekong systems sustain Thailand's

agricultural economy by supporting wet-rice cultivation and providing waterways for

the transport of goods and people. In contrast, the distinguishing natural features of

peninsular Thailand are long coastlines, offshore islands, and diminishing mangrove

swamps.

The southern region of Thailand really has only two seasons, the wet and the

dry. These seasons do not run at the same time on both the east and west side of the

peninsular. On the west coast the southwest monsoon brings rain and often heavy

storms from April through to October, whilst on the east coast the most rain falls

between September and December. Overall the southern parts of Thailand get by far

the most rain with around 2,400 millimeters every year, compared with the central

and northern regions of Thailand, both of which get around 1,400 millimeters.

The Southern area is a narrow Peninsula that has its particular climate, terrain,

and resources. Its economy is based on rice cultivation for subsistence and rubber

production for industry. Other sources of income include coconut plantations, tin

mining, and tourism, which is particularly lucrative on Phuket Island. Rolling and

mountainous terrain and the absence of large rivers are conspicuous features of the

South. North-south mountain barriers and impenetrable tropical forest caused the

early isolation and separate political development of this region. International access

through the Andaman Sea and the Gulf of Thailand made the South a crossroads both

Theravada Buddhism, centered at, and Islam, especially in the former Sultanate of

Pattani on the border with Malaysia.5

The Pattani area is about 19,404 kilometers square, with the distance of 655.3

miles and 1,055 kilometers from Bangkok city. Pattani province borders Songkhla

province in the north, Narathiwat in the south, the Gulf of Thailand in the east, and

Yala in the west. In general, the geography of Pattani area is will water, so that it is

suitable for cultivation or agriculture. Most of Pattani inhabitants are Muslim. Thai

could be the result of Pattani’s geography that extends it into the Nusantara

Archipelago and Malaysia. Administratively, Pattani is divided into12districts

including Muang , Kaphoe, khok Pho, Mai Kaen, Mayo, NongChik, Panare, SaiBuri,

Thung Yang Dang, Mae Lan, Yarang and Yaring.


11

According to Pitsuwan (1989:3), the southern region, especially the Pattani

Provinces has been indicated as the area that is called the area of separatist

movements, which are against the Thai governmental law. This is one of the

consequences of Pattani geography with the area far from the centre of Thailand’s

governance and receiving little attention. Due to this, the Pattani people have a sense

of alienation. Though the number of Malay Muslims is small and insignificant, their

resistance has become more complex, as the result of its geographic condition that is

the same as that of the other four provinces in the deep southern part of Thailand-

Pattani, Yala, Songkhla, Narathiwat, and Satun, which border the Malay Muslim

state, Malaysia .Though for a very long times Pattani has been integrated into the Thai

state by Buddhist values, provinces that are dominated by Muslims can be deemed as

still isolated from the state bureaucracy which has a Thai Buddhist orientation which

limited the Muslim in fulfilling their obligations.

The fact of Pattani’s geography which comprised Yala, Sutan, Songkhla, and

Narathiwat Provinces which are close to the Malaysian border, because these three

provinces to communicate more easily, and language like those of Malaysian. Also

the transference of workers from Pattani to Malaysian strengthens the Pattani

identification with Malaysian 6

The southern Thailand provinces like Pattani, Yala, and Narathiwat situated

along the northeastern coast on the narrow Kra Isthmus, were in effect the physical

boundary separating the Thailand and the Peninsular Malay territories. These

provinces were endowed with either deltas suitable for agriculture or hills and

mountain ranges rich in mineral resources. The principal rivers in all three provinces

encouraged coastal commerce, and trade activities were focused on the ports along

these rivers. The following provides a brief overview of the geography and economic

significance of the provinces of Pattani including the district of Saiburi, Yala

including the districts of BannangSata and Raman and Narathiwat in the late 19th and

early 20th centuries.7

Pattani

The province of Pattani included both deltaic regions and mountainous ranges. The

main mountain range, called the Central Range or the Kerbau or Korbu Range,

extends in an arc from Pattani (Siam) to Melaka Malay Peninsula of Malaysia. The

Pattani River flows through the northeastern mountain range of the Peninsula into the


12

Gulf of Thailand. The Pattani River, beginning at its source in the Upper Perak

watershed, is the principal river in the Pattani region. It runs through Raman, Yala,

Nongchik and Pattani. From Pattani, the river extends into the Bay of Pattani, a

narrow strip of land, about 7-8 miles in length projecting westwards to the Gulf of

Thailand. This projection is the Cape of Pattani and it is protected from the ravishing

monsoon winds, enabling the safe passage of vessels throughout the year, irrespective

of the wind changes. Thus Pattani, endowed with a natural harbour, and therefore

ideal for stopovers throughout the year, was the main reason for the many traders

calling at the port in the past. According to W. Bougas, this favorable geographical

position promoted the growth of commerce and enhanced the coastal or pasisir

characteristic of Pattani. The numerous tributaries of the Pattani River, on the other

hand, created a deltaic region appropriate for farming. These rivers supported a river

in trade and allowed for communication and transport between market centers along

the main river and the inland areas. The Kuala Tujong (at Nongchik), a bifurcation

from the main Pattani, for example, was navigable for small tongkang (boats) and

allowed for regular contacts with the town of Pattani which was the upstream hub of

the commerce of this region. It is located about two miles from the kuala (estuary) of

the Pattani River.8

Narathiwat

The principal river of the province of Narathiwat is the Tanjung Mas River. This

province is the most easterly province in the Pattani region, bordering Kelantan to the

south. In the past, Tanjung Mas, as its name suggests, was rich in minerals especially

gold and also tin. Its port, at the mouth of the river Tanjung Mas, is used to be an

important port of call for boats from Kelantan, Terengganu and Singapore. This river

port was also a collection and distributing centre for goods from the inland areas of

the Malay provinces to export to places such as Singapore.9

Yala

The province of Yala is located amidst a series of limestone ranges that lie further

down to the south of Pattani. The principal river running through Yala is the Biserah

(Biserat) and dotting the plains are mountain peaks of more than 4000 feet. The Bukit

Besar (also called Indragiri) is the highest peak in the province and in former times

used to be a prominent landmark for ships approaching Pattani. This peak is formed

of granite and extends into similar granite hills such as Bukit Bilau. South of Yala is


13

located the district of BannangSata, a predominantly inland territory rich in tin fields.

Granite ranges alternating with limestone surround the area around BannangSata.

Foreign mining companies and individuals were attracted to invest in the

BannangSata tin fields in the early part of the twentieth century, following the

movement away from the depleted mining areas on the west coast (i.e. Phuket) to the

east coast areas (i.e. Nakhon Si Thammarat and Pattani)

Further south, down the Pattani River, in a southeasterly direction is Muang

(later district) of Raman, a largely mountainous area comprising limestone caves.

Raman is located closest to the source of the Pattani River and borders the Upper

Perak territory. Raman was rich in tin, and during the 1880s, its tin fields became a

source of contention between the Raja of Raman and the British authorities in the

Malay Peninsula prompting border rectification between the two.

Muang Saiburi

Although Saiburi is a district of Pattani today, in the past Muang of Saiburi formed

one of the seven muang khaek under Siamese patronage. The river Saiburi waters a

large section of the muang bearing the same name–Saiburi (at times the older name

Teluban was used). This muang was also known as Selindung Bayu- a Malay term

meaning “protected from the winds”. The gold mines in Sai were the most important

in the Pattani region and formed the principal export from the Malay muang in the

early nineteenth century late nineteenth century writers referred to the mines in Sai as

the Tomoh/Temoh Mines or the Telubin mines (the valley in which the Tomoh mines

were located). Gold in the Tomoh Mines in Saiburi used to be worked by Chinese

laborers’ until the late nineteenth century. Thereafter little mention has been made of

the gold produced in this area.10

1.2. Background: the Peoples of Thailand

The Thai people, or formerly Thailand, are the main ethnic group of Thailand and are

part of the larger Tai ethno-linguistic peoples found in Thailand and adjacent

countries in Southeast Asia as well as southern China. Their language is the Thai

language, which is classified as part of the Tai–Kadai family of languages, and the

majority of Thai are followers of Theravada Buddhism. The term Thai people may

also refer to the population of Thailand in general, and not only to ethnic Thais.

Today, “Thai people” usually includes central and Southern Thai (Thailand proper),

Northern Thai (Lanna) and Isan people (strictly speaking Western Lao).11


14

The Thais can be broken down into various regional groups with their own

regional varieties of Thai. These groups include Central Thai (also the standard

variety of the language), the Isan (more closely related to the Standard Lao of Laos

than to Standard Thai), Lanna Thai and Southern Thai. Modern Central Thai has

become more dominant due to official government policy, which was designed to

assimilate and unify the disparate Thai in spite of ethno linguistic and cultural ties

between the northeastern Thai people and the people from Laos for example.

Ethnically and religiously, Thailand is a diverse country. It is evident from the

fact that Thailand has a vast diversity in language and religion. On this account, the

whole country is divided into four zones a groups, the central, the south, the northeast,

and the north.12

Capital

As for the Central Thailand is concerned, it’s consists of Mon and Khmer speaking

people. Bordered these people of Central Thailand also consisted of Thai tribes

among whom Siamese Thai are predominant. The Khmer came to Thailand and

Cambodia in the 13th century while Thai tribes came from China in the 6th century.

After 6th century the whole of Thailand was dominated by Khmers and their language,

beliefs and political dominates became the basis of whole country. Last they were

replaced by the Siamese, who are now called Thai.

Through intermarriage with elite Mon communities that Thai dynasties

emerged as a strong political power. Through these cultural connections, the Thailand

emerged as a kinship political farce in the west of Khmer Empire and as far as south

as Nakhon Si Thammarat on Malay Peninsula.

The Tai established dynasties through intermarriage with the indigenous elite

Mon communities. The Thailand emerged from a web of political and kinship

relations with the Mon to form new power connections in the west of the Khmer

Empire and as far south as Nakhon Si Thammarat on Malay Peninsula. These

communities were further mixed by the introduction of captives of war, slaves and

forced migration of people or whole communities.

Over hundred years of Khmer rule, the Thai communities were having with

them the Brahmanist traditions and political and administrative concepts, due to these

influences the Thai developed distinctive characteristics. The contemporary Cham,


15

Khmer, Pagan and Chinese referred to them as ‘Siam’. With features of all dynasties,

and they borrowed a lot of Brahmanical beliefs which were passed on by the Khmer.

So, Thai Buddhism is intermixed with Brahmanical rituals especially in the royal

court.

Chinese is another significant migrated group, who also mixed with local

communities and has live in the mountain region along the Burmese border.

Another significant migrated group here is the Chinese, many of whom mixed

into the local communities while the Karen, the largest minority ethnic group, live in

the mountain region along the Burmese border.

In central Thailand after the Vietnamese invasion, the Muslim fled from here

and the Champa Empire was devastated. The Champa were originally Hindus, but

later they accepted Islam and followed the Shafai School of fiqh. However some

Champ combined Islamic religion beliefs and rituals with the Hindu- Buddhist

religion. Traditionally, the Cham followed a matrilineal descent system which is now

replaced by a patrilineal system following orthodox Islamic influences.13

North-East

As far the North East Thailand is concerned it was inhabited by many Thai speaking

tribes. They were known as Issan or Lao Issan peoples. Their culture and language

was same as that of other tribes, but the only difference was that they lived as deal

tired. The Issan language is closely related to that of Thai Yai and Thai Yuan of North

Thailand and the Shan state of Myanmar. There are also some words borrowed from

Pali, Sanskrit and Khmer.

North East Thailand is dominated by Issan who are Buddhists, this religion

mixed with animistic beliefs in spirits or Kwans. Here the Muslims are in minority.

And the whole populations of Thai Muslims here are immigrant Pathans from

Pakistan-Afghanistan and migrants from other regions of Thailand.14

North of Thailand

The cultural and linguistic history of North Thailand is much internship. The whole

population is made up of 16 different ethnic groups, who have different occupations,

languages, religions and cultures. The main occupation is farming as well as rice produces.


16

The dominant ethnic group is that of Thai speakers or The Thai Yuan, whom

are also known as Khon Muang; the others are Thai Yai (Shan), Thai lue, Thai khun

and Thai Yong. As most all the Thai tribes came from south-west china, however

there are also the Karen speakers who came from Burma or Myanmar. The Tibeto-

Burman speakers originated in Tibet, which comprise Lisu, the Akha and the Lahu.

There areHaw from Yunna who speaks a Divitic language which is different from

Mandarin. Lastly, there are the Hmong and the Yao tribes who came from China, and

speak Meo-Yao. The Thai Yuan dominate the upper north and also reside in the

provinces of Sukhothai, Tak and Uttaradit. The Karen, Akha. Lahu, Yao, Lisu and

Hmong reside in the lower and upper north provinces, while the Siamese Tai

dominate the lower north.

The religion is almost Buddhist. They are politically conscious, live in

lowlands with sedentary lifestyles and language. The non Thai groups are non-

sedentary and are not having any central political system. Among the Haw from

Yunnan these are the Hanafi Muslim as well as followers of Buddhist religion.

South of Thailand

It is divided into two past upper Deep South.

Upper South of Thailand

Here we find a large gap between the groups who live here; religious and cultural

differences are prominent. This part of Thailand comprises Chumphon, Suratthani,

Patthalung, Nakorn Si Thammarath, Songkla, Phuket, Krabi, Phangnga, Ranong,

Trang and Satun. All most all are Buddhist, except some Thai speaking Muslim of

Malay ethnic background. The language of the region is pale and Thai.

Deep South

This is Muslim dominant area of Thailand. The people of this religion are considered

as stanch Muslim, having links with other Muslims of The world. The Deep South

comprises the provinces of Pattani , Yala , Narathiwat and part of Songkhla, areas

comprised Chana, Depha, Nathavi, and Sabayoi ( known as Deep south). The whole

populations follow the Shafi School and Malays peaking people from the large group.

There are some Buddhists also but in minority. The Malay Muslim call themselves

‘orang nayu’ (Malay Muslim) whom speak ‘cakapnayu’ (speak local Malay) and are

different from ‘orang siyae,’ the ethnic Thais who are Buddhists. They feel offended


17

when referred to as ‘Thai Muslim,’ a term which they interpret ethnically for,

according to them, Malays cannot be anything other than Muslims just as Thais are

always Buddhist. Malay Muslims also see the term as an indication of forced

assimilation by the Thai state while Muslims in other regions of Thailand do not take

it as an offense when referred to as ‘Thai Muslim.15

1.3. Cultural background of Muslim in Southern Thailand

The southern Thailand, which comprised three border provinces of Thailand include

Yala, Narathiwat, and Pattani, are predominantly inhabited by Malay Muslim, also

known as Melayu Pattani due to their Malay dialect. Historically, the southern

Thailand region under King Malay and during the 16th century represented the height

of Muslim civilization in Southeast Asia.16 The southeast Muslim Malay Sultanates.

A loose relationship of vassalage was established by king Rama I and maintained with

few changes until the ascent to the throne of Thailand by Chalalongkorn King V, in

the late 19th century. Chalalongkorn’s drastic modernization program included the

centralization of the administration of the kingdom and led to the fist attempts at the

direct administration of the Malay Sultanates of Patani, Kelantan, Terengganu, and

Perlis.17 The center administration was resisted by Malay Muslim in the Southern

Thailand and their tradition al leaders were tolerated by the central Government until

the early 20th century when direct administration by Thailand bureaucrats was

imposed by Thai and traditional leaders were left with only a ceremonial position.18

The southern Thailand provinces of Thailand like Pattani, Yala, Narathiwat,

part Songhkla, and Satun, can be seen, ethnically and culturally, as a part of the Malay

world and now belong to Buddhist Thailand is above all the consequence of a long

conflict between the Thais and the Malays19. According to the Anglo-Thai Treaty of

1909 the boundary was fixed between Thailand and the United Kingdom in the Malay

Peninsula.20 The relation between Malay society in the southern part of Thailand and

Thai governments underwent considerable conflict in the past. After the Second

World War, the conflict eventually took the form of a separatist movement, which has

until very recently continued. Against this background we can understand that Muslim

Malay calls the southernmost part of Thailand area of Islam, and the remaining parts

of Thailand area of war.21


18

As mentioned earlier the Muslims of southern Thailand view their identity in

ethnic group and in religious terms, which in their view, they are first Malays who are

Muslim by religion. Actually, such ethno-religious references to identity is found not

only among the Malays of Thailand but is also present in the case of other ethnic groups

in the region such as the Thai, Burmese, Acehnese, Javanese, Balinese, Filipinos and

the immigrant Chinese, where each group stresses first the ethnic dimension of its

ideality which is then tied to a religion, be it Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity etc.22

The Malays Muslim in the three southern provinces view the present Political

culture as a demand for recognition of the ethnic groups, religion, tradition, customs

language and culture Malay of the Southern Thailand Malay Muslim community.23

The southern Thailand is stated of Buddhist-Muslim relations in the Deep

South is presently at a very low level of trust. The diversity of people, religion,

customs and their historic backgrounds contribute to the picture of Thailand. The area

extends from the northern to the southern parts of the heart of Southeast Asia is needs

special attention, especially Pattani, a province in one of the regions in Southern

Thailand. The diversity does not only give color to its people, activities, and cultures,

but also provides valuable resources for the country itself as well as impacting on

problems, which sometimes need a specific solution.

The general or original of Southern geography of Thailand by specifically

concentrating on three provinces comprised Pattani, Yala, and Narathiwat. I will

look at the previous and current or contemporary conditions, which are particular to

Deep South that will be especially assessed by the geographical conditions of

Thailand and Pattani particular.

1.4. Historical Background of Muslim culture in Southern Thailand

The peninsular of Malay has always been inhabited by the majority of the Malay

people. It occupies the land between the two major oceans of India and South China

in the west-east island of Singapore at the south. Since the medieval period the

peninsula was governed by the Administrations of the fragmented Malay kingdoms

throughout peninsula. The peninsula is not just a barrier between the Indian Ocean

and the China Sea. It has also been for centuries the meeting region of culture and

civilization providing the mercantile sea passage between East and West since ancient

times. Consequently it has been the stage upon which the rise and fall of civilizations


19

and nation-state has played. More specifically the Malay peninsula has been the

meeting point of Islamic with Hindu and Buddhist civilization where northern and

southern culture have met and where two groups have evolved. Before 1900 AD, the

Malay Peninsula had been dominated for centuries by ethnic Malay kingdoms

stretching from the kingdom of Ligor, (today Nakorn Si Thammarat) in the north to

Johor Bharu in the south.24

With regard to the remainder of the northern Malay Peninsula, three of Malay

kingdoms, namely Pattani, Ligor (Nakorn Si Thammarat) and Singgora (Songkhla)

became the victims of the aftermath, and have been annexed by the new Thai nation

state established in 1782 at Bangkok.25

During the period of colonization in southeast Asian whereas many of the

Melayu kingdoms have under the British but Pattani was left as a buffer state between

British territory and Bangkok rules territories in the north. In the 1930 the original

state of Siam was reconstructed to become the present nation of Thailand. The

kingdom of Patani has been divided and become just a part of Thailand territories and

as a province. Since annexation of the Malay kingdom by the Bangkok Siamese state

the situation in the southern regions has been in the stage of more or less perpetual

war. Resistance to Thai rule both politically and militarily has been almost

continuous. No one knows how the story will end; possibly final destinations include

partition, autonomy or independence. What really turned the difference between

Muslim Pattani Malay and Thai Buddhist into a more systematic conflict was the

Political and power expansion in the beginning of the 1900’s which occurred during

the growth of power proliferation of the Thai Buddhist state in the north at Bangkok.26

The history of Pattani is one of the significant issues resulting in insurgents

wanting to separate Pattani from Thailand. The three provinces of Pattani, Yala,

Narathiwat and the western part of Songhkla, once were part of an independent

Sultanate of Patani during the 15th -18th century. In 1786, there was a war between

the Sultanate of Patani and the Kingdoms of Siam (the former name of

Thailand).Pattani was defeated during the following two hundred years under Thai

rule. Many problems occurred which, for the most part, came from a lack of

understanding by Thai rulers toward a people dissimilar in culture, linguistics, race,

and religion.27


20

In Southern Thailand region previously was a semi independent Malay


Ayutthaya. After the Ayutthaya kingdoms collapsed in 1767, Pattani obtained its full

independence, but under king Rama I (Chakri dynasty) administration it once again





occasions resulted in conflict. 28

In turn, after Southern Thailand of Pattani fall under the rule of Thailand and

the establishment of the new reorganization system have caused the emergence of

movement. This could be simply understood because the Siam kingdoms have pushed

the implementation of political policy in its region. This is in fact strengthening to

against Thai government.

Since early in January 2004.more then 3,300 people, both Buddhist and

Muslims, have died, 7000 have been injured, and schools, government building,

nightclubs, Buddhist temples railway station, the airport in the major southern city of

Hatyai police station and houses of private citizens have been torched or bombed.

Because, southern Thai Malay-Muslims who fought an insurgency in Thailand in the

1970, with the aim to separate and bring the Malay-Muslims rule, continue to be

viewed as separatists threatening the physical borders of the nation state.

1.5. The Langkasuka Empire

This is another large Kingdom of the last 2nd century which spanned from Pattani on

the east coast, to northern Kedah on the west. Wu-pei-chih, certainly firmly places a

Lang-hsi-chia to the south of Songkla (Singora), up to the Patani River and the fabled

spirit land of Lakawnsuka still features in the mythology of Pattani Malays. Pattani

was probably one of the Srivijaya Empire’s conquests.

Southern Thailand is also probably one of the earliest Malay states to convert

to Islam, certainly well before Melaka. One the scholars of Hikayat of Patani has said

the story of its king Raja Phya Tu Nakpa who falls seriously sick, with apparently no

cure to his ailment in sight. Then a holy man by the name of Syeikh Sa’ed came to

him and said that he can cure the king, if he promises to convert to Islam. The ruler


21

promised to do so and in a few days he was wonderfully healthy, however after

getting fit he forgets his promise and fell ill, and again approached that holy man.

This happened thrice and at last he accepted Islam and was called himself Sultan

Ismail Shah.

It was under Ismail Shah that the state got its name as Patani’s “PantaiIni!” But one

account says that he finds a farmer's hut at this spot and calls his capital 'Pak Tani' (farmer).

This capital is thought to be in modern day Kampong Kresik (Kru Se) in modern time.

In 1516, the Portuguese first visited Pattani under Godinho de Eredia and

described Pattani as the first seat of the Malay Empire. In 1511, Malaka fell to the

Portuguese and Pattani became popular among Indian Muslim traders. Its location on

the east coast of the Peninsula gave it the added advantage of being the ideal

emporium of the Chinese goods. The military strength was also strengthened by the

economic growth. Taking advantage of a massive invasion of Ayutthaya by the

Burmese in 1563, Sultan Ismail's successor, Sultan Muzafar Shah, launched an attack

on the Siamese, with 200 ships and thousands of men, but he died in the way.

In 1584, Patani entered its golden age29 with the rule of four successive

Queens, Ratu Hijau (The Green Queen), Ratu Biru (The Blue Queen), Ratu Ungu

(The Violet Queen) and Ratu Kuning (The Yellow Queen).And the borders of Pattani

were expanded which include Kelantan and Terengganu and became the most

powerful Malay state after Johor. During this period Patani became famous for the

production especially new cities “Mahalela”, “Seri Negara” and “Seri Petani” were

known as the cities of production. They acted as the important sea post.

Patani contributed much to technology and it was due to their technology that

they caught hold of all the important cities. However during the last Queens Patani

fell into gradual decline. This decline probably prompted her to submit to Siam as a

vassal state and send the “Bunga Mas” (silver and gold flower) to Sukhothai and,

subsequently, to Ayutthaya. She died without an heir and the country descended into

decades of political chaos and conflict. Fortunately for Patani, Siam was too weak to

take advantage of the situation, being too busy driving off crippling Burmese

invasions into her territory, culminating in the pillaging and complete destruction of

Ayutthaya in 1767.


22

The Siamese general Phraya Taksin led a war of independence that drove the

Burmese out of Siam and his successor Rama I established the Chakri dynasty, which

was to rule Siam to this day. A resurgent and much stronger Siam demanded troops

and supplies from Pattani to face yet another Burmese raid.

When Patani’s Sultan Muhammad was reluctant to send troops, Rama I's son,

Prince Surasi, attacked Patani in 1786. Sultan Muhammad was slain in battle and his

capital was burned to the ground. 4,000 Patani Malays were brought in chains and

marched barefoot the 1,300 km to Bangkok. It was said that the captives had to have

their ear lobes and legs sewn together with strong rattan to prevent escape. In Bangkok,

they became slaves and were made to dig the city's system of canals or “klongs”. As the

ultimate humiliation, the symbols of Pattani’s strength and power the 'Seri Negara' and

“Seri Patani” cannons were brought in triumph to Bangkok. Both can still be seen today

gracing the entrance to Thailand's Ministry of Defense building.

Further rebellions erupted in Patani in 1791 and 1808, following which Patani

was partitioned into seven states, Patani, Teluban (Sai), Nongcik, Jalor (Yala), Jambu

(Jering), Legeh (Rangae) and Reman and administered directly by the Raja of Ligor.

There were few months of independence when four of the states joined the Kedah

Malays in driving the Siamese out of the peninsula - but their success was short-lived

and they were recon queried easily. In 1906, the seven states were reconstituted into a

single province. From the mythical Langkasuka to the seat of Malay empire, the

province of Pattani was now formally annexed as an administrative division of the

Kingdom of Thailand.30

1.6. Srivijaya Empire

The early history of Java with in an Indonesian context Srivijaya is also interesting

because with it island and mainland southern Asian are closely linked,. In other

words, it is nonsensical to think only in terms of the modern nation state of

Indonesian, Malaysian, or Thailand. Further, a subject that touches upon the history

of the Malay kingdoms in southern Thailand. It is clear that Srivijaya began as Malay

kingdoms in southern Sumatra in the second half of the 7th century after that, the name

reappears one, in AD.775 indifferent region namely southern Thailand, at a time when

this region had evident contacts with Java and northeast Indian, .The significance of

this is still unclear, but for a certain time part of southern Thailand any have been

central to Srivijaya,. However, by the late 10thand early 11th century, Surarnadvipa

(Sumatra) and Srivijaya are again associated.31


23

The some name Srivijaya can to be linked with history Malay-Muslims in

southern Thai, in a limited sense, the obscene of other convenient labels. In the

mention it is better to focus on description and interpretation of the objects and

monuments, themselves. In the field of history Srivijaya should be viewed in its wider

southern Asian context. 32

1.7. Establishment of the kingdom of Srivijaya

Among the most powerful early state was Srivijaya a Hindu- influence Buddhist

kingdoms that ruled the Malay Peninsula from the 7th to 14th century from the island

of Sumatra across the Melaka straits, now part Indonesian. The state was a

“thalassoracy” meaning that it derived its legitimacy ability to control maritime

traffic. 33It is probable that is authority did hat extended inland very far. At the zenith

of its power, it dominated the trade of most of Sumatra, the Malay Peninsula, western

Java and western Borno although is authority never extended much beyond the

coast.34 It had also established preferential trading partner state with imperial China a

tributary state.35

The peculiar climate of the region augmented its power Monsoonal wind

patterns required ships to dock at part for several months, depending on the season36

and Srivijaya benefited from its location on the treading route to China.37 It powerful

naval fleet forced all ships to stop in any season and pay high docking made the fees

worthwhile to the ship’s owner38 Palembang the coastal capital became thriving hub.

But by the 14th century, after losing Chinese support Srivijaya’s dominance had

eroded and its authority over sea trade routes was continually challenged by rival

kingdoms and the one sea mighty kingdom was reduced to putting a China across the

harbor to keep pirates at bay lifting it only to enable merchant ships to dock.39

The Kingdoms of Srivijaya did not lose to the enemy and not so long

afterword both kingdoms lay down their army for the peaceful conciliation and after

all Patani fell under both kingdoms. It was said that after the war the differences

among them were settled deacon and both Srivijaya and Suleandra established centers

of government and built a new city in Pattani to keep the welfare on the eastern Malay

territories, and Ligor had not been paid much attention by the Selandra kingdoms

(VI). At that time Patani became more famous to all over the world.40


24

Therefore, during that period Patani was well known in the Arabs world

along with China Java and India. The title Raja’s were written in Sanskrit and Pali but

the spoken language used Patani was Malay. It had been Malay since the kingdoms of

Srivijaya and after the Sulendra became involved the Malay was mixed with India

language and with Langkawi language as for cloths the Malay of that time wore no

shirts and the jungle people were naked like animals. It was said that in the beginning

Raja Srivijaya come and built Ligor Jaya. It was a great blessing for the Malay

countries in the year seven hundred and seventy five. At that time Pattani was called

Langkasuka and it’s was religion Hinduism.41

During this period that Raja Srivijaya had great power. It was very famous and

finally reached the government of Langkasuka. At this time the territories of

Langkasuka were also called Chayahate by the Chinese. When Raja Srivijaya came he

married with a princess of Langkasuka and had children one of which was named

Bangsa and at the age of twenty eight was installed as Raja of Langkasuka and his

elder sister was established Kedah part of Langkasuka at the time. The kingdoms

Bamdsa had two daughters and two sons. His first son was named Intira Bangsa

(Antira) and the second Chantra Bangsa. Chantra Bangsa became the ruler of Ligor

territories and Intira Bangsa ruled in the name of Langkasuka. It was said that later on

the country’s name of Langkasuka had been changed to Jaya Negeri by Kingdoms

Srivijaya whose capital city was Palembang.42

After that a son Antira Bangsa was established as kingdoms of Patani, in the

beginning of the 9th Century. While his majesty was on the throne, a power struggle

broke out in the area Teluk. It was told that in the war between Raja Srivijaya and

Raja Khmer, Raja Khmer was defeated. Hence, Raja Srivijaya, the great, conquered

Teluk and as far as the country of the Khmers. And the country of Khmer was called

by the Malayu people “Champaka Pura” and a princess of Champaka Pura was then

married to Raja Antira Bangsa, whose name was Intira Bangsa ruling Patani had sent

troops to assist Raja Srivijaya and because of this Kingdoms Khmer was defeated by

Raja Jaya. It was said that Raja Khmer was defeated by famous, a place for padi

planting. At time Patani was fertile, green and full of corps Arabs.43


25

(a) Cultural Influences

Srivijaya kingdom got influenced with Indian culture, first by Hindu culture and then

followed by Buddhism which was introduced in Srivijaya in the year 425 AD.

Srivijaya is the most important center of Mahayana Buddhism. Srivijaya kings

controlled the archipelago through trade and conquest from the period of the 7th

century until the 9th century. Thus directly participate in developing Nusantara

Melayu culture.44

(b) Golden Age

In the year 902, Srivijaya sent tribute to China. Two years later, the last king of the

Tang Dynasty conferred the title of the messenger of Srivijaya. China envoy from the

literature that has this Arabic name given the information that in those days was

related to Srivijaya Arab allow Srivijaya had entered the Islamic influence in the

kingdom.45

In the first half of the 10th century, between the fall of the Tang dynasty and

the rise of the Song dynasty, foreign trade is rampant, especially Fujian, Min royal

and the rich countries of Guangdong, the kingdom of Nan Han. Srivijaya undoubtedly

benefited from this trade. In the year 903, the Muslim traveler Ibn Battuta was

impressed with the prosperity of Srivijaya. Urban areas include the kingdom of

Palembang (especially Hill Seguntang), Muara Jambi and Kedah.46

(c) Influence of Islam

Because of the influence of Arab Muslims are much visited in the Srivijaya and

Srivijaya king named Sri Indrawarman converted to Islam in the year 718. So it is

possible the social life of Srivijaya is social communities within the community are

Buddhist and Muslim communities alike Srivijaya King was recorded several time

sent a letter to the caliph of Islam in Syria. Even in a letter addressed to the Caliph

Umar bin Abdul Aziz (717-720M) with a request to send preachers to the palace of

Srivijaya but caliph refused to send use preachers to the palace of Srivijaya.47

1.8. Decline of the Srivijaya Empire

Srivijaya Empire was weakened by a series of raids which were unsuccessful in parts

of Sumatra and the Malay Peninsula. In 1025, Rajendra Chola, the Chola king from

Coromandel in South India, wrested Kedah from the Srivijaya Empire. For the next

20 years, the Cholas continued a series of raids and conquests; which weakened

empire and the people were forced to do agriculture work rather than coastal and

long-distance trade.


26

In Chinese history, it is said that Srivijaya Empire sends his ambassador for

Jambi and Palemnang. Between 1079 and 1088, number of ambassador visited China.

In 1079 particular the ambassadors from Jambi and Palembang visited China. Thus it

is clear that the power of Srivijaya Empire frequently shifted between these two cities

Jambi and Palembang. From 11th century onwards, however Jambi became the main

center of all trade thus Palembang was of bit neglected

In the book of Chu-fan-chi written around 1178, Chou-Ju-Kua described the

existence of two most powerful and rich kingdoms ruling over the Indonesian

archipelago: Srivijaya, a Buddhist kingdom holding power in the west and Java

(Kediri), which dominated the east. About Srivijaya, Chou-Ju-Kua, reported that

Srivijaya had 15 colonies and was still the mightiest and wealthiest state in the

western part of archipelago. Srivijaya's colonies were: Tioman, Pong-fong (Pahang),

Tong-ya-nong (Terengganu), Ling-ya-si-kia (Langkasuka), Kilan-tan (Kelantan), Fo-

lo-an (Dungun, eastern part of Malay Peninsula, a town within state of Terengganu),

Ji-lo-t'ing (Cherating), Ts'ien-mai (Semawe, Malay Peninsula), Pa-t'a (Sungai Paka,

northern part of Malay Peninsula), Tan-ma-ling (Tambralinga, Ligor or Nakhon Si

Thammarat, South Thailand), Kia-lo-hi (Grahi, northern part of Malay peninsula), Pa-

lin-fong (Palembang), Sin-t'o (Sunda), Lan-wu-li (Lamuri at Aceh), Kien-pi (Jambi)

and Si-lan (Cambodia).48

Thus the power of Srivijaya Empire was dealing in the 11th century. And the

frequent conflict untimely led to it subjugated by Javanese kingdom. In 1288,

Singghasari, the successor of Kediri in Java, conquered several Melayu states includes

two by state of Jambi and Palambang. As much of Srivijaya Empire was lost during

Pamalayu expedition, it was finally in 13th century that Majapahit Kingdom of

Javanese expanded in Sumatra and Srivijaya Empire was graduated. In 1347, Prince

Adityawarman was given responsibility over Sumatra by Tribhuwana

Wijayatunggadewi, the third monarch of Majapahit. The following years were very

crucial for the kingdom as the sedimentation on the Musi River and the kingdom

capital off from direct sea access. This crippled the trade in the capitals kingdom, as

the decline continued the Ottomans who advantage of the Siham him and penetrated

to this area from Aceh and the Pasai regions. By the late 13thcentury, the kingdom of

Pasai in north Sumatra converted to Islam.49


27

(a)-Relations with Regional Powers

From historical records and archaeological evidence, stated that in the 9th century

Srivijaya had made colonization of almost all the kingdoms of Southeast Asia, among

others: Sumatra, Java, Malaya Peninsula, Cambodia and South Vietnam. Domination

of the Straits of Malacca and Sunda straits, Srivijaya as a controller to make the trade

routes of spices and local commerce charge for every ship that passed. Srivijaya

accumulate wealth as a trading port and warehouse market serving China, and India.

Minanga is the first power of Srivijaya competitors can finally conquered in

the 7th century. Melayu Kingdom has gold mining as an economic resource and the

word Swarnnadwipa (island of gold) may refer to this case. And then Kedah is also

subject and subordinate to the region.

In the early days, the Khmer empire was also a colony of Srivijaya. Many

historians claim that Chaiya, SuratThani province, southern Thailand, as the last

capital of the kingdom, Srivijaya influence apparent on building the pagoda-style

Borom That Kingdom. After the fall of Srivijaya, Chaiya is divided into three cities

namely (Mueang) Chaiya, Thatong (Kanchanadit), and Khirirat Nikhom.

Srivijaya also closely related to the Pala kingdom in Bengal, and a numbered

plaque notes that 860 kings Balaputra a monastery dedicated to the University Nalada,

Pala. Relations with the Chola dynasty of southern India quite well and then become

worse after Rajendra Coladewa ascended the throne and an attack on the 11th century.50

1.9. The Early Establishment of Melaka

The Melaka origins of present-day Muslim Malaysia are treading to the 15th century

establishment of the Melaka (Malacca) Sultanate on Peninsula west coast. Melaka

was founded by Srivijaya Prince Paramesvasa who had come there to avoid

domination by rulers of on encroaching kingdoms based in Java.51 Melaka had

already become an important enterpot (trading center) and cultural influence along the

straits by the late 14th century, Malay became the dominant language of commerce in

the region.52 Social contact with Muslim Indian traders from Gujarat played a role

disseminating the Islamic faith. 53Paramesvasa became a Muslim around 1414, taking

the title Sultan Iskandar Shah, and married the daughter of the Sultan of Pasai a

trading partner.54 Under Sultan Muzafar Shah, (Patani Sultan) who became the

monarch, Melaka in 1414, the Sultan growing commercial military and political

stature promoted Islam throughout the region.55


28

Islam first entered South East Asia, the region of present-day Thailand,

Malaysia, and Indonesia, among Asian continent, through Muslim merchants who

controlled Indian Ocean trade route. Geographically, South East Asia, particularly the

Malay Peninsula, was an important spot for ships sailing south from China or east

from India. The port city of Malacca in Malaysia had become an important world

trading centre by the 15th century. Islam arrived in South East Asia near the end of the

13th century with traders from India, who introduced the religion first to northern

Sumatra, an island of Indonesia. Although at the time only a few regions in India had

converted to Islam, it was traders from these regions, particularly Gujarat in northwest

India, who brought their faith to Sumatra. It is generally accepted that it was Indian

Muslims, not Arab Muslims, who introduced Islam to Southeast Asia, before arrival

of Islam South East Asia already was heavily influenced by Indian culture and

religion including Hinduism. When Indian merchants and missionaries later

introduced Islam to the region, they were careful to retain whatever previous Hindu or

animist customs were necessary to gain the widespread adoption of Islam. It has been

suggested that had the more orthodox Arabs been the first to bring Islam to Southeast

Asia, their insistence that the locals entirely abandon their old customs might have

dissuaded them from converting. Thus, Islam in Southeast Asia has a different

character than orthodox Islam in Arabia, but had it not been for the tolerance of the

Indian missionaries, Islam may not have even taken root in Southeast Asia at all.56

There was a stamp conflict between Ayutthaya and Malacca and the season was

clear, that the religious motive was behind this conflict and there were earlier other

seasons. However it was clear that Sultanate of Malacca played an important role in

propagating Islam not only on the Malay Peninsula, but in Java and Sumatra, opposed

the expansion of Buddhist Thailand down the Malay Peninsula. And other reason of the

conflict was that Malacca was the international seaports between the Indian Ocean and

the South of China and Ayutthaya always wanted to supersede then.57

The interest of the Thai in the Malay region became apparent from the end of

the 14thcentury. the Ayutthaya chronicle states that king Ramesuan in his second reign

(1388-1395) conquered Chiang Mai and Angkor and took many prisoners, and that

those from Chiang Mai were settled in Chanthaburi, Nakhon Si Thammarat (Ligor),

Phatthalung and Songkhla Administratively lay under the of Ayutthaya at that time.58


29

It is written in an Ayutthaya chronicle that Tenaseri, Nakhon Si Thammarat,

Songkhla, and even Malacca were include among the places which accepted Thai

suzerainty in the of the Ayutthaya Dynasty (1351-1767) King Ramathibodi

(I)(R,1351-1369). The vassal relationship of Malacca is, however, doubtful, because,

above all the foundation of his kingdom does not go back before 1400.the record of

the above-mentioned chronicle indicates, however, that the kingdom of Ayutthaya

was interested in Malay Peninsula from its beginning.59

The conflict between Malacca and Ayutthaya reached it is height in 15th

century and they were quit hostile to the Thai, until the beginning of the 16th century,

other areas Malaya were also included in this conflict. Tome Pires, a historian, has

said that between 15th and 16th century, the people of Pahang also turned back on

Ayutthaya.60

For the first time Pattani under region up areas came under the influence of the

Thai during the King of Ramkamhaeng this is clear from Varian inscription of king

Sukhotthai and according to the one of the places them submitted to the kingdom of

Sukhothai was Nokhon Si Thmmarat, which is supposed to have brought Kedan,

Pahang was already under him around 13th century. Further Nokhon Si Thmmarat

remained in a vassal- suzerain of the area and in relationship to the Thai from 13th to

16th century.

It is generally that the Malay areas around Pattani for the first time came under

the influence of the Thai during the region King Ramkhamhaeng (R, 1279-1298) this

assumption is based upon the famous inscription of this king of Sukhothai, according

to the latter, one of the places then submitted to the kingdom of Sukhothai was

Nokhon Si Thmmarat, which is supposed to have brought Kedan, Pahang was the area

around Pattani under its leadership already in the first half of the 13th century.

Furthermore Nakhon Si Thammarat together with these areas supposedly remained in

a vassal- suzerain relationship to the Thai of the basin of the Menam Chao Phraya

from the end of the 13thto the early 16th century.61

But it did take root the mid-15th century and Islam had spread from Sumatra to

Malacca and its major trading partner as well as its surrounding areas such as Brunei.

The third ruler of Malacca, Sri Maharaja Muhammad Shah (1424-1445), is said to be

the first Malaccan ruler who accepted to Islam. His son, Muzafar Shah (1446-1459)

proclaimed Islam as the state religion of Malacca. By 1470, Malacca had annexed


30

several territories from the neighboring Siamese empire and become the most

powerful state in Southeast Asia. This territorial expansion also fuelled the expansion

of Islam. Not only the religion was spread through the conquest of new lands but also

by the recruitment of soldiers from non-Muslim regions particularly the island of

Java, who converted while in service and then spread their new faith when they

returned home.

1.10. Spread of Melaka Culture and its Development

During the reign of Sultan Iskandar, and establishment of Islam in Malacca, the

spread of Islam to other parts like Pattani and other Archipelago. The upper south

Thai province of Songkhla is a language border between Malay and Thai specking

Muslims. The spread beyond Songkhla was very little. The reason for this stow spread

was due to concentration of Buddhists, which was spread into indo-china by the Mons

of Burma and the Hindu domination of the area. There were remarked ethino-

linguistic distinctions between Thai Muslim and Buddhists. However, the Melaka

Malay culture was responsible for the speedy spread of Islam in the Archipelago.62

The transmission of Melaka Malay culture throughout the Malay-Indonesian

archipelago largely involved in spreading of Islam.

During 15th century the Islamic influence came from china with the help of

traders. Trade was the main sourer of introducing Islam to this archipelago. Traders

settled their and made relations with the locals which is evidenced by the graveyard

of that period Indian Muslim trades in 13th century onwards also played an important

role in spreading the leaching of Islam throughout the century. Malacca being the

growing trade centre, where the spices from east were imported, thus the Indian

traders especially Gufralis played an important role in developing the trade and

commerce of the country and in gaining the local encouragement. The Indian traders

from south India are considered the main force in spreading Islamic learning

throughout the century.

Some scholars are of the opinion, that the rulers of Malaka first accepted Islam

and later they professed their people to enter the new faith, which they wholeheartedly

accepted. Thus whole population came to the fold of Islam and worked for the spread

of Islamic teaching them throughout the Archipelago.


31

Importantly, although it is evident that these traders were responsible for

introducing local societies to Islam, the actual process by which ordinary people

became Muslim is unclear.

Although contradictions in the sources allow for debate, modern scholars

generally ascribe Melaka’s adoption of Islam to the third reign. Its rulers in turn

persuaded or compelled their vassals to adopt Islam, while its prestige and

commercial success ensure that the process of self-Islamization continued in the

archipelago. Local traders in the marketplace, observing the heightened status of the

royalty and nobility accruing from new titles and pretensions, would have reported

back to their respective rulers. Because of these appealing advantages or a genuine

attraction to the doctrine, more and more kingdoms were converted to the new faith.

Significantly, the Malay heritage was built upon much earlier traditions. It did

not originate solely from Melaka, but rather from its predecessor Srivijaya in the

earlier centuries. Srivijaya’s commanding position in the archipelago at the time

would have ensured the dissemination of its culture throughout its loosely governed

empire. Nevertheless, Melaka did contribute to the evolution of Malay culture by

incorporating Islamic ideas. The new religion became closely identified with Malay

society, so much so that one ruler even boasted that Melaka could become an

alternative to Mecca as a place of pilgrimage.63

1.11. The Portuguese conquest of Melaka

During the mid of 15th century, the Portugal’s started showing their interest in the Melaka

traded. It was the encouraged of Vasco Da Gama’s discovery of Calicut’s commercial

activities in 1498. Thus the Portugal king announced to establish a new trade rout around

the Cape of Good Hope. Alfonso de Albuquerqe was the main architect of the expansion

in Asia and during his tenure the spices of Asia reached Europe and the established his

own trade centers at Goa, Hormuz (Peria) and Malaka in 1511.64

After establishing themselves the Portugal’s usurped the power of Malaka

king and reached with a contingent of ships at the Malaka Port in 1509; The Indian

traders warned the Malaka traders not to be so friendly with Portugal’s, because they

have already capture Goa. Thus the Malaka people became to be sensitive and the

Portugal would not usurp the power, but Brunei the neighboring state fall to the

Portugal’s.65


32

1.12. Decline of Melaka

The thriving Southeast Asian trade had not gone unnoticed by European powers.

Moreover the Portuguese, in particular, were eager to convert Muslims to

Christianity.In1511 Portugal conquered Malacca but Portuguese efforts to establish a

trade monopoly were thwarted by military raids conducted by Malacca’s Sultan

Mahmud and his sons’ kingdoms, particularly the one based in present-day Johor.

Over the next century, Portugal colluded with the Sultanates of Johor and Aceh (in

present-day Indonesia) in short-lived and shifting alliances, while fighting each other

for a regional trade monopoly. By 1641 the Dutch had appeared on the scene. An

alliance with Johor helped the Dutch defeat the Portuguese allowing the Dutch to

assume control of Malacca. Shortly thereafter Malacca fell into decline, partly owing

to a plethora of Dutch-imposed taxes, levies, and fines on traders who challenged

their monopoly.

1.13. Kingdoms Patani Empire

The Patani66 region was the location of a Kingdom most likely founded in the second

century A.D. The early of this area and its population remains unclear but

archaeological evidence suggests that the area was the seat of Langkasuka, otherwise

known as lang-Ya-Hsiu in Chinese recodes.67

It was located on the east of the Malay Peninsula between Senggrora

(Songkhla) and Kelantan with a capital city in the Yarang area.(district of provinces

Pattani).In those notes that region was said to be an important commercial port for all

Asian semen especially for the Chinese navy that tried to cross the Gulf of Thailand to

Vietnam and the Malay Peninsula. Arab accounts dating from 1511-1544A.D. place

Langkasuka. More recently archaeologists have discovered the location of the former

Langkasuka in the Patani River Basin. The present-day location of the complex is

district Yarang of Pattani about 12 to16 kilometers inland from Patani Bay. Religions

relics discovered at the Yarang site and inferences based on Chinse record suggest

that the inhabitants were influenced Hinduism- Buddhism and beliefs both Hinduism

and Buddhism constituted major components of the culture of settlement.68

The settlement arises from the commercial relation that involved the Srivijaya

Kingdom. Most experts are of the opinion that one of the Malay ancestors in Malacca

area after the conquest of the region in the 8th and 9th centuries developed to become


33

the Malay of now. With the fading of the Srivijaya Kingdom’s monarchic influence in

the 11th century, this region got its independence and became a separate region. The

Langkasuka area itself became of interest to several neighboring kingdoms in

Southeast Asian in the 13th and 14th centuries, the Angkor Empire in Cambodia, the

Burmese Empire in Pagan, the King Chola’s in India the King of Ceylon’s Empire the

Majaphat and Srivijaya Empires. Almost all of that empire were able to intervene and

tried to make an independent area in their region.69

How Langkasuka changed into Pattani cannot be ascertained because there is

no clear historic evidence of it. Thai historians, A. teeuw and Wyatt write that the

Patani region existed in the 14th and 15th centuries. At that time, Pattani began to be

recognized as an area of commerce and spread of Islam. The story Hikayat Patani

mentions that the Patani Malay Kingdom originated from the Malay kingdom enter in

Kota Mahlegai ruled by the Phya Tu kerub Mahayana. The narrative tells how the

kingdom was formed. At that time the location of Pattani was far in the hinterland and

difficult to be accessed by any merchants. Phya Tu Antara, a child of Phya Tu Kerud

Mahayana, moved the kingdom to fishing settlement that was found by chance. This

region was called Patani now believed to have been centered at Kampong Grisek in

the present Patani region.70

The King Tu kerub Mahajana he some name, is religion Buddhist, ordered the

city to be moved from the inland site of Kota Mahlegai to sea shore. He had his palace

rebuilt near the bay at kresik. At the time the main trading port was at Rhu Sembilam

about ten kilometers from his palace. In the beginning Pattani was just a city name while

the whole territory was still called Langkasuka the new city of Pattani grew up in the tact

with the growth of the maritime trade in Southeast Asian during the period.71

History of Patani wrote about Tu Antira or Indira Wangsa , a son of Tu kerub

Mahajana succeeded his father in the late 1400s.He was crowned with the title of

Paraja Tu Nakpa. The title of Paraja is probably derived eastern Malay dialect which

usually the second syllable to Paraja). Increasing maritime trade led to Tuk Antara’s

totally abandoning the old city Kota Mahligai and building up the new city of Pattani

as the capital of his kingdom. During period Pattani was well know to sea farers. It

also became the most frequently used name for the kingdom by both local inhabitants

and foreign visitors. As time passed, the name Langkasuka gradually disappeared,

becoming eventually just a legacy for the people of Pattani. Pattani transformed itself


34

from the name of a small village to the country’s name with harbor as one of the most

important maritime trading sites in Southeast Asian. It was frequented not only by far

eastern Asian traders Chinese and Japanese, but also by Indian, Arabs, and later

Europeans as well came to trade at Pattani in that time.72

During the period of Sang Jaya Wangsa, in which Srivijaya ruled the territory

of Langkasuka, maritime trade had been increased. This was due to the fragmentation

of the Malay kingdoms, which became closer connected became of kinship relations

between peoples of the Indian Ocean and those of South China Sea. The main export

goods from Pattani were gold, silver, copper, ivory, honey, and frame cradles. The

import goods south China were clothes and ceramics. During the 14th century

maritime trade greatly increased. This was became the Pattani bay was convenient for

larger ships to take shelter during the northeast monsoon. In order to compete in the

international maritime traded.73

The famous trading Centre of Pattani attracted Christian and European colonists

who in the 15th and 16th centuries began colonial expansion into the Asian region. The

Portuguese and Dutch partook in trade in this region. Especially to get land products like

spices, black peppercorns and gold which had become the most important Pattani

products. It is noted that the Portuguese had already arrived in Pattani in 1517 to conduct

commercial transactions. In 1602 the Dutch also began to trade and established a base in

Pattani harbor. Next, the British also took part in commercial activity here. This led to

conflict between the Dutch and the British and resulted in war in 1623 which the Dutch

won. The commercial relations with the Dutch increased, supporting the hope for the

Dutch to get needed rice and food provisions.74

Apart from being known as a trade area, the Pattani region had an important

role in Islamization of the Malay people. From the geographic aspect, Pattani was the

channel for spreading Islam along the Peninsula area to the South China Sea and

reached the harbor areas in the Cantonese and Yunan region in China. Pattani was

actually similar to other areas in South China Sea like Champaku and Tonkin. Islam

spread in Pattani though direct interaction between the merchants and the Pattani

community. Islam in Pattani was more influenced by Chinese Muslim whose

commercial relations were of long standing. D’ Eredia, a Portuguese visitor in 1613,

that Islam had developed earlier in Pattani than in Melaka. A similar a statement was

made by Teeuw and Wyatt who are convinced that Islam developed in the kuala


35

Berang area and Terengganu between 1386 and 1387. For this reason it can be said

that Pattani was a culture and dissemination center of Islam in the Malay world. Trade

with Arabs, Indians and Chinese Muslim merchants, introduced Islam to Pattani

where it became a religion embraced by the local residents.75

Hikayat of Patani wrote about how Pattani accepted Islam. Explain that Phya

Tu Antara, the son of Phaya Tu kerub Mahajana of Kota Mahligai, accepted Islam

through a Pasai Muslim scholar, named Sheikh Said. The King’s illness with a

grievous of skin infection which no doctor or shaman was able to cure. The King

promised that whosoever that could cure his illness would be suitably rewarded,

including the hand of his daughter in marriage. A Muslim religious scholar Sheikh

Said from Pasai, Sumatra, (Indonesian) was living in Biara village just five kilometer

from the place. Hearing the King’s proclamation he refused the offer of marriage with

the princess, instead asking the King to make a vow to convert to Islam after the

illness had been cured. The King promised, but repeatedly reneged, not until the third

time did the King keep his promise, converting to the faith by confessing the

Shadadar. There is only God and Muhammad is God Messenger.76 As a result of

being cured the Patani King accepted Islam and after Islam was accepted by the King,

a lot of Pattani people also entered Islam.77

In 1457, the King Tu Nakpa Mahajana declared the Kingdoms an Islamic

state, the fist on the Malay Peninsula. The was renamed Patani Darulsalam78 (Patani,

the land peace).Despite the kingdom’s name change the old culture of calling the

realm Langkasuka persisted among subjects and foreigners alike throughout the 15th

century, only dying out in the sixteenth. The King’s family, ministers, and most of his

subjects then converted to Islam. The King himself was crowned again. This time by

Sheikh said of Pasai, with Muslim title of Sultan Ismail Shah Sillulah fil Alam, Sultan

the first Muslim in of Patani ruling over this Malay kingdom.79

The existing commercial contacts and spread of Islam propel led Pattani into

even greater prosperity, along local tradition of trade activity formed Pattani into a

strong economic and political area. Under Sultan Muzafar Shah’s administration

which replaced that of Sultan Ismail Shah. Pattani interacted with and joined their

neighbors like Johor, Pahang and Kelantan kingdoms to become one force from 1530

to 1540 important position of Pattani from the geographical and political aspects

placed Pattani to be acknowledged as an area to be reckoned with.80


36

Raja Kuning (R.X)(1635-1688)

PhyanTu Kerub Mahajana

Phaya Tu AntiraPhaya Tu Nakpa

Sultan Ismail Shah of Patani(Raja Pattani, I)(Ac1500-1530)

Siti Aisyah (Tengku Mahachai)Pemangku Bagi

x.-Raja Jalal of Sai regent for (IV)Sultan Muzafar Shah

(Raja Patani II,)(K.1530-64)

Sultan Mansoor ShahRaja Patani (III,)(K.1564-1572)

Sultan Patik Siam(K.Raja Patani,IV)

(1572-1573)

Sultan Banbang(Raja Patani)

(I.1573-m.1584)

Raja BimaRegicide

Raja Babdur (R.VI).(1573-1584)

Raja Biru(R.VIII) (1616-

1624)

Raja Hijau(R.VII) (1584-

1616)

Raja Ungu(R.IX) 1624-

1635)

F.Raja Emaskerenchang

Table: 1: The Sri Maha Wangsa Dynasty of PataniThe Sri Maha Wangsa Dynasty of Patani

K: Ruler: X, Married, I, birth; M, expiry

The geographically strategic position of Pattani on the Malay Peninsula was a

reason for the town being expected by foreign merchants from east or west to be a

halting-place for rest or trade within a short time, Pattani became an important

kingdom, progressive both economically and politically and stable with good

governance. Besides that the international communications base prevented Pattani

from falling into the hands of colonizers like the kingdom of Siam, Britain and

France.


37

NOTES AND RFERENCES

1 Maunati Yekti, “Multiculturalism Separation and Nation State Building inThailand”, Research Center for Regional Resources Indonesian Institute ofScience Jakarta, 2004, p. 11.

2 Ibid.,3 Ibid.,4 Ibid., p.12.5 Thailand’s Provinces, http/countrystudies.us/Thailand (accessed on 20 June 2013).6 Che Man W.K., Muslim Separatism: The Moros of Southern Philippines and the

Malays of Southern Thailand, Oxford University Press, Singapore, 1999, p.17.7 Sathian R.M., Economic change in the Pattani region.1880-1930: tin and cattle in

the Era of Siam’s Administrative reforms, (Ph.D.) thesis Submitted in Departmentof History, National University of Singapore, 2004, P. 24.

8 Ibid., pp. 24-25.9 Ibid., p. 27.10 Ibid.,11 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thai_people, (accessed on 15 July 2013).12 Yusuf Imtiyaz, “Southern Thailand Crisis: Ethno-Religion and Political

Dimensions”, department and lecturer in religion at the Graduate School ofPhilosophy and religion, Assumption University, Thailand, p.50.

13 Ibid., p. 51.14 Ibid., p. 52.15 Ibid.,16 Feigenblattott von, “The Importance of Culture in Emic interpretations of the

History of Thailand’s Southern Separatist Movement: “The Gentlemen’sAgreement “of 1943 and the Malaysian Relationship with the Separatist”, theJournal of Alternative Perspectives in the Social Sciences, 2 (1): 46-56, 2010.p. 46.

17 Ibid., pp. 46-47.18 Ibid., 47.19 Cho Hung-Guk, “Thai–Malay Conflicts in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries”,

in International Area Review, Sogang University, 2 (2): 47-68, 1999, p.47.20 Ibid., p. 48.21 Ibid., p.48.22 Yusuf Imtiyaz, op.cit, pp. 63-64.23 Ibid., p.68.24 Tengku Ismail Chilk & Tengku Arifin Chilk, Patani Cradle of The East: A History of

Patani, ed by Emir. Prof. Meson Hoadley, Muslim news Thailand, 2011, p.1.


38

25 Ibid., p.2.26 Ibid., pp.2-3.27 Klaimanee Wiphusana, The need to improve population and resource control in

Thailand’s counterinsurgency, (M.A.) thesis submitted in Department of DefenseAnalysis, Naval postgraduate school, Monterey, California, 2008 p.3.

28 Maunati Yekti, op. cit., p. 35.29 Paul Wheatley, “The Golden Khersonese”, University, Kualalumpur of Malaya

Press1961,p.14.30 http://www.sabrizain.demon.co.uk/malaya/early1.htm (accessed on 6 July 2013).31 Robson Sturat, “Srivijaya and southern Thailand” the journal Songklanakaria J. of

social Sciences and Humanities 4 (2) May-Aug,.1998, p.226.32 Ibid., p. 226.33 http/www.friesian.com.thalasso.htm, (accessed on 6 July 2013).34 http://www.aseanfocus.com/publications/history_malaysia.html (accessed on 20 June

2013).35 http://www.seasite.niu.edu/crossroads/russell/seageog.htm (accessed on 20 June 2013).36 OoiKeat Gin, Southeast Asia: A Historical Encyclopedia from Angkor Wat to East

Timor, ISBN 1-57607-770-5 Library of Congress, California, United States ofAmerica vol. 1. 2004, p. 1250.

37 Andaya. leonard Y. and Andaya, Barbara Watson, A History of Malaysia,Palgrave Macmillan the University of Hawai'I, 1984,p. 28.

38 Kea Gin, op. cit., p 869.39 leonard. And Watson, op. cit., p. 28.40 Tengku Ismail Chilk &Tengku Arifin Chilk, op.cit. pp. 24-25.41 Ibid., p. 25.42 Ibid., p.26.43 Ibid., p.27.44 http://seeaboutindonesia.blogspot.in/2010/03/srivijaya.html (accessed on 28 May 2014).45 Ibid.,46 Ibid.,47 Ibid.,48 Ibid.,49 Ibid.,50 Ibid., op.cit.http://seeaboutindonesia.blogspot.in/2010/03/srivijaya.html (accessed

on 28 may 2014).51 Keat Gin, op.cit., p.1250.52 Ibid., p. 869.


39

53 Ibid.,54 Ibid.,55 Encyclopedia Britannica. “Sultanate of Malacca.” http://search.eb.com/eb/article-

9050254 (accessed on 6 July 2013).56 The Islamic world 1600, www.ile:///E:/SEAsia.html (accessed on 30 June 2013).57 Cho Hung-Guk, op. cit., p.50.58 Ibid., p.49.59 Ibid.,60 Ibid.,61 Ibid., pp- 48-49.62 http://www.imamreza.net/eng/imamreza.php?id=2022(accessed on 30 June 2013).63 http:// malaysiahistory. net/? option= com_ content& view= article& id= 155&

Itemid= 91&fontstyle=f-larger ( accessed on 28 May 2014).64 Ibid.,65 The Malacca empire, http://www.colonialvoyage.com/malacca.html. (accessed on

6 July 2013).66 Patani (with one ‘t’)refers to the Malay kingdom of Patani, while Pattani (with

two “t”) refers to the Pattani provinces of Thailand.67 Sathian, op.cit., p,31.68 Ibid, p.31.69 Maunati Yekti, op.cit., p. 37.70 Ibid, pp.37-38.71 Tengku Ismail Chilk &Tengku Arifin Chilk, op.cit., p.37.72 Ibid., p. 37.73 Ibid., p. 36.74 Maunati Yekti, op.cit., p. 39.75 Ibid, p. 39.76 Tengku Ismail Chilk & Tengku Arifin Chilk, op.cit., p.38.77 Ibid, p. 38.78 Klaimanee Wiphusana, op.cit., p.5.79 Tengku Ismail Chilk & Tengku Arifin Chilk, op.cit., pp. 39-40.80 Maunati Yekti, op.cit., p,40.


40

Appendix: II Map of Southeast Asia Country

Courtesy:https://www.google.co.in/search?q=south+east+asia+to+the+14th+century+ma


41

Appendix: III the Map of Srivijaya Empire.

https://www.google.co.in/search?newwindow=1&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=map+of+southeast+asia+country


42

Appendix: IV The state symbol of Thailand and the flag kingdom of

Thailand

Courtesy: htt://uppic.happymass.com/upload/c8ea30cd55a07b44f5a8f7171617.jpg


43

Appendix: V Map provinces of southern Thailand

CHAPTER: II

THE ADVENT AND SPREAD OF ISLAM IN

SOUTHERN THAILAND (PATTANI)

Muslims in Southern Thailand

The Patani under Non-Muslim Ruler

Patani under Muslim Rule

Sri Maha Wangsa Dynasty

Kelantan Dynasty

Decline the Kingdome of Patani

The Establishment of the Chularajmontri in Thailand

The Influence of Chularajmontri and the Situation in Southern

Thailand

Role of Ulama

Chapter II: The Advent and Spread of Islam…

44

CHAPTER: II

THE ADVENT AND SPREAD OF ISLAM IN

SOUTHERN THAILAND (PATTANI)

Introduction

Now a today’s, South East Asia is located between the two giants- India and China.

This region comprises 11 countries, which are as known Asian continent which

comprised to the country like Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, East Timor, Indonesia,

Laos, Myanmar, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam. During

the World War II the term of South East Asia became popular.1

South East Asia can be seen as two geographical regions: mainland South East

Asia, which includes the countries of Myanmar, Thailand, Laos, Cambodia and

Vietnam; and the other, is insular South East Asia, Comprising Malaysia, Singapore,

Brunei Darussalam, Indonesia and the Philippines. The inclusion of Malaysia in the

latter group is justified by the Malay Peninsula’s greater exposure to the sea and it’s

ethnic. Cultural, religious, and geographical affinities with Sumatra and Java of

Indonesia and the Philippines are groups of islands, large and small, fertile and

barren: 17 thousand islands in Indonesia and 7 thousands in the Philippines. Along

with Malaysia and Philippines, the Indonesian islands constitute the Malay world.2

Today, Islands of Southeast Asia, that is, the Malay world, has one of the

heaviest concentrations of Muslim peoples on earth. This “Muslim Archipelago”

encompasses Malaysia (around 55% of 22 million people are Muslim), Indonesia

(87% of 200 million), Brunei (68% of 330700), and the Philippines, where Muslim

are concentrated in the western and central parts of the Mindanao island and the Sulu

archipelago (4-7% of 74 million), Muslims in Thailand of minority Pattani80% of

about 5-7 million).3

2.1. Muslims in Southern Thailand

Muslim population in Thailand is mainly divided into two groups-- The Thai -Muslim

and the Malay- Muslim. Being the larger group and the main group the Thai Muslim

have a group hold on the society while the Malay Muslim have concentration in

south of Thailand and is also a largest ethnic group of that area. The majority of the


45

Muslims are in the province of Pattani, Yala and Narathiwat, which are all very close

to Malaysian. There is a difference between rural life and urban life. The main towns

an district are mainly Buddhist. The southern Thailand’s however an exception. There

the Muslim culture dominates everywhere 4

In the Southern region of Thailand, Pattani, Islam had been introduced by the

trader of India in 13th century. Over the next four centuries, Islam consolidated its

presence in that region. During this pried this position of Islam was strengthened

through the work of Sufi missionaries and the conversion of key parts of the region’s

elite. The complex pattern of these conversions is believed to be one of the main

reasons for the region. Thai diversity has been further reinforced by the patch work of

languages and ethic identities found among South East Asia Muslims5.

Pattani appears to have been a successor to an earlier kingdom. Langkasuka,

Srivijaya, is generally in the straits of Malacca region. It had extended It’s over

lordship to Langkasuka in the 8th and 9th centuries A.D. to bringing it within the realm

of the Malay world. With the decline of Srivijaya, particularly after the 11th century,

the isthmian principalities were able to reassert their independence, which was,

however, to be challenged again later, particularly in the 14th century, by Majapahit

and Sukhothai. The regional revival of trade and the spread of Islam in the region

were also beginning to effect the traditional regional alignments and rivalry. Pattani,

which was generally believed to have been founded before the mid-14th and

15thcenturies, grew within this political and commercial milieu. In Syukeri written

suggests that Pattani evolved from an earlier Thai inland kingdom of Koto Mahaligai.

Claims that Pattani was an offshoot of the Kedah Dynasty, However, it would seem

that it was not so much the founding of the Dynasty as that of its Islamization that was

to have a profound impact on that brought to a significant extent its continuing

membership in Malay world. The very basis of the identity of the kingdom, with the

acceptance of Islam by its rulers, was transformed into something that becomes more

computable and increasingly indistinguishable from the rest of the Malay world.6

The majority of Muslim population in southern Thailand is Sunni. The Muslim

of Southern Thailand has very good connection with the Muslim of other countries.

They also participate in the global events and the Muslim a pain worldwide.


46

Muslim of South Thailand is of Malay decent and speaks the Pattani Malay

dialect, which is close to the Kelantan of Malaysian. The Malay quality binds them

closely to the Malay culture world, which is the culture of north area from north

Malay Peninsula to Indonesian island of Sumatra and the southern Philippines.7

History of Muslims-Patani state

The history of Malay-Muslims in the areas of southernmost state, Thailand knows as

Greater Patani. The Malay-Muslims are Sunni and engaged mainly in agricultures.

They were the majority population of three southernmost provinces of Thailand. The

other originated outside of Thailand and migrated at one time or another into the Thai

kingdom. Among these groups were west Asian groups from Persia and Arabia. The

others were those from South East Asia. The Shiite Muslim from Arab and Persia

were the most prominent and were successfully assimilated into the noble class of

Siamese by marriage and by serving the Siamese monarchs from the Ayutthaya in the

Seventeenth century. This Persia Muslim was able trades and unlike the Malay-

Muslim in the south, engaged mainly in trade and commerce in unban settlements. By

the middle of the seventeenth century, the Persian Muslim married local Thai women

and set up families in Ayutthaya. Later King Soung Tham of Ayutthaya period

(r.1610-1628) appointed the leader of the Muslim community to be Chularajmontri

(Sheikhul Islam) overseeing the activities of Thai Muslims in the Kingdom.

The relations between the Malay-Muslims and the Thai state had been mediated

through state relations between Patani kingdom and Thai kingdom, while relations

between migrant Muslims and the Thai state had been mediated mostly through

individuals and personal relations. During the tributary system of rule, Bangkok rulers

rarely had any direct contact with the Malay-Muslim of Pattani. They were first subject

of and government by the local Muslim rajas who had pledged allegiance to Thai

overland. The autonomous state of Patani kingdom had been curbed gradually in the

eighteenth century relation with Bangkok dynasty rule and finally was relinquished in

1902 by becoming a province under direct rule from Bangkok government.

Thai Muslim Thais of central Thailand engaged mainly in trading, especially

long-diarist tread and in local commerce. They occupied key positions in the Siamese

court as official interpreters and were appointed as nobility in the King’s foreign

office. Apart from the Chinese, non-Malay Muslims, in the central were gradually

integrated into Thai society and government and found their place in the country’s


47

economy and cultivated their own customs and religion beliefs alongside the Thai and

other ethnic groups. There was no racial or religion conflict with the government until

the rise and formation of the modern Thai nation state, at this point the Muslim and

other ethnic groups were labeled as minorities and Buddhist was proclaimed the

national religion.8

2.2. The Patani under Non-Muslim Ruler:

The Kingdom of Patani, which was founded in 1370, was a prosperous state. It

acquired two dynasties and the rulers succeeded each other until 1688. In 1729 a new

dynasty came into power, the dynasty from Kelantan. Pattani had its greatest power

in16th and17th century and in the nineteenth century Pattani got crunched between

Siam and Britain in the Anglo- Siamese treaty 1909. Pattani declared independence in

1457 and in 1630 Pattani rebelled against the kingdom of Siam and allied with the

Protoguses and attacked Phatthalung and Nakhon Si Thammarat. The Dutch aided

Pattani by sending a small army to Pattani in 1634. A civil was in Pattani weakened

the kingdom, but when Ayutthaya fell to the Burmese in 1767, the Malay vassals

remained away. The Chakri dynasty was another strong dynasty which established

power at the end of the 18th century it wished to re-establish its relations with the

former vassal states, but in 1776 Siam defeated Pattani and Sultan succeed were

directly appointed by Siam. Pattani accept to Siamese control in 1786, then two

Sultanates were divided into seven point.9

The Hikayat Patani states that the ruler of an inland Kingdom called Kota

Mahligai founded Patani. This could well have been the move from the inland-based

Langkasuka, to the coastal village of Patani. Another Malay source, the Sejarah

Kerajaan Melayu Patani (SKMP) also tells of a ruler of an inland town (i.e. Kota

Mahligai) who moved his capital or palace to a coastal site that was known as

Kampung Pak Tani (Village of Pak Tani).According to the Hikayat Patani, Patani

derived its name from an old man called Pak Tani, who lived on the spot where the

new capital was established. The Hikayat Patani explains that the King and his men

who were out on a hunting trip spotted Pak Tani and his wife on the beach where a

white deer chased by the King’s hounds disappeared. The Kedah Annals (or the

Hikayat Merong Mahawangsa), on the other hand, claims that a Kedah princess, sent

on a journey eastwards, founded the settlement and named it after her magical keris

(sword). The founding of Patani by a princess appears in a Thai version as well.


48

According to this source, the settlement was named Patani because a deer that the

princess had been pursuing disappeared along the beach, and her followers reported

the incident as “ma hai sia thi trong pata ning” (meaning “it came and disappeared

directly at this spot on the beach”). All the words in this phrase are Thai except for

“pata ning” The Sejarah Melayu (Malay Annals) provides a similar story to explain

the founding of Malacca by a Prince from Palembang. According to the HMM,

(Hikayat Merong Mahawangsa) the princess rode on an elephant named Gemala

Johari, and her magical keris which the author explains is the east coast Malay

rendering of pantai (meaning beach) and ning (meaning this, these or here).

This explanation indicates that the story of the founding of Pattani in Thai was

based on a combination of sources, which included stories from the Malay Peninsula

such as the HMM. More importantly, it indicates Kedah’s role in the founding of

Pattani and the fact that it was not geographically distant from Pattani (the princess rode

on the back of an elephant over land). The use of the Thai language underscores the

influence of Siam on Kedah and, by extension, Pattani. The link between Siam- Kedah

and Patani opens up a whole range of significant questions: (1) was the Kingdom of

Patani founded by Thai-speaking people? (2) Can the kingdom of Patani or the

Pattani/southern Thailand region be considered a Malay-speaking area? These

questions are open to debate but. linguistic and political associations aside, the Thai-

Kedah- Patani link is important for this study for two reasons: (i) it proves that an

overland route was in common use and linked Kedah on the west coast with Pattani on

the east; and (ii) this link established a traditional relationship between the two which

was far older and perhaps historically more important than Pattani’s (political) relations

with Kelantan.10

2.3. Patani under Muslim Rule

2.3.1. Sri Maha Wangsa Dynasty

The Patani Kingdom was ruled by the Sri Maha Wangsa dynasty for more than two

centuries under some ninth rulers.

The first Sultan Isamail Shah Silullah Fil Alam (ac 1500-1530)

Kasian Ahmad,11 Saied, in the Hikayat Hang Tuah, The new King, Sultan Isamail

Shah (the Tu Nakpa) raised Sheikh Sa’ed, the religious scholar from Pasai who had

cured the Sultan’s Father, to the position of personal adviser. To strengthen


49

relationship with Malay kingdom of Malacca, the sent an envoy led by Ambassador

Ukun Pola to pay homage before Sultan Mahmood. Malacca had sent the fabled hero

Hang Tuah’s to Pattani in return. Evidence of Hang Tuah’s presence at Pattani in the

well at Kresik, where he used to bath, named after him, a tradition that lives on. In

1509, According to the Historian colonial de Portugal e Holanda: the first attempt by

the Portuguese to seize Malacca. The attempt failed and many Portuguese were

captured by the combined Malay troop12.In June of 1511, the viceroy of India,

Alfonzo de Albuquerque, decided to organize an expedition to conquer Malacca. At

the head of 1,100-1,200 men and 14 ships, Alfonso de Albuquerque arrived in vim of

Malacca, and immediately demanded the rescue of the Portuguese that were taken

prisoners in the 1509 expedition. The Sultan tried to gain time to strengthen the town

defenses. He was well aware of the small number of 20,000 men and 2,000 guns.

Albuquerque wasted no time. At dawn of 25 July 1511, the Portuguese attacked the

town concentrating the assault on the bridge on the river dividing the town. After a

battle the bridge was conquered by the Portuguese, but at nightfall they were forced to

retreat. After some days of preparations, on 10 August in 1511, the Portuguese

renewed the attack. Albuquerque had the assistance of some Chinese junks that were

anchored in the port. The use of a junk offered by Chinese was decisive, as this junk

was used as a bridgehead. This time the attack was successful and the Portuguese

finally succeeded in establishing a bridgehead in the town. There were then several

days of siege in which the Portuguese bombarded the city. On 24 August 1511, the

Portuguese again attacked only to discover that the Sultan had escaped. With Malacca

was now in Portuguese hands, they sacked the town, but following Albuquerque’s

order, they respected the property of those who sided with them.13In 1517, a present

purposes a more important consequence is the stream of refugees and merchants from

Malacca who fled to Pattani’s port where security was much greater. As it is an evil

wind that blows no good the fall of Malacca turned Pattani into a center for eastern

traders. These were the Golden age of the Patani kingdom as the center of maritime

trade on the Malay Peninsula a Portuguese envoy led by Qurate Coelho arrived in

Pattani and to paid homage before Sultan Ismail. The two countries opened the trade

with one another. 14


50

During 1511-1641, more than hundred years, Malacca remained under

Portuguese control despite repeated attempts by the combined Malay troops from

Johor, Aceh, Kedah, Pahang, Kelantan, Pattani and occasionally Java, to being

Portuguese domination to an end. Yet this was only accomplished by new comers to

the region, namely the Dutch. On 14 January 1641, the Portuguese under the

command of Manuel De Sousa Coutinho surrendered to Dutch commander

Willemzoon Kartekore. What is important here is that here in Pattani was one of the

more important players in the Malay worlds; this is despite the fact that, unlike its

allies cum rivals to the continental South, Pattani bordered on the more powerful

states of continental Southeast Asian and was in the long run at severe disadvantage in

keeping its independence.15

The Portuguese in the Patani era

In 1538, the people Portuguese his named Fernao Mendes Pinto16 visited Pattani.

More impotent, he described his adventures in the travels of Mendes Pinto, on in the

way from Pattani to Ayutthaya his ships were attacked with robbed by pirates, leaving

them penniless. Thirsting for vengeance, the Portuguese set out in search of the

pirates and in the process become pirates themselves. Thus in order to protect his

kingdom from all sorts of pirate, Sultan Ismail Shah ordered his subjects to build

canons. With Skeikh Abdul Somad from Rum (Turkey) as engineer, three cannons

were cast at Pattani and called Sri Negeri, Sri Patani and Maha Lela. This was one of

the lasting contributions of Sultan Ismail Shah, the new Muslim King of Pattani, who

ruled his kingdom for 30 years. He was buried according to Islamic faith at Braholm

Penarek, Patani leaving two sons and daughter namely Muzafar Shah, Mansoor Shah,

and Siti Devi Aishah all three became rulers and regent of Patani kingdoms.17

The Second Sultan Muzafar Shah.( R.II)(1530-1564)

The first son of Sultan Ismail Shah, he came ruler of Patani Kingdom, In 1530 in

period maritime commerce was prosperous. Pattani had become an important centre

of maritime trade on the east coast of the Malay Peninsula. Sultan Muzafar Shah led

in person a mission to King Chakrapad of Ayutthaya. A history of Patani written, the

original embassy visit by the King of Pattani to Ayutthaya18 was followed by official

trade agreements between the two kingdoms, although in point of fact de trade had

long been establish between their subjects. A number of his retinue was left behind in

Ayutthaya to facilitate the formal trade agreement. On his came back, King


51

Chakrapad granted his majesty sixty Burmese and hundred Loti an slaves which

accompanied him to Pattani. The Burmese were settled at kampong Kedee as

elephant’s keepers and Laotians sent to Kampong Parek as rice planters. Their

descendants still live there to this day19.After that the King of Ayutthaya had sent a

message to his allies, including King Patani, asking assistance against Burmese

invasion. Sultan Muzafar Shah with his brother King Mansoor, along with hundreds

of ships and armed fully equipped for war together with hundreds women, set sail for

Ayutthaya. When they reached the city, the Burmese had already left Ayutthaya after

an unsuccessful attempt to conquer the city. Led by King Muzafar Shah himself

Patani’s armada decided to enter the city and paid homage before the King of

Ayutthaya. But as fate would have it, a convoluted dispute arose between soldiers of

Ayutthaya and Pattani, which brought both sides into an armed conflict. During the

conflict, Sultan Muzafar was hit by a bullet in the right arm. The forced him to order

to keep control over his kingdom in care of this death. That was the last heard from

the second Muslim King of Pattani. A reliable source claims that Sultan Muzafar Shah

was killed in the city and his body buried by his men at the mouth of Chno Praya

River, (Present-day River of Bangkok). The descendants of the soldiers who were

with him and survived the conflict are today the Malay people living in Ayutthaya.

They are mainly centered at Ban Lump alee and Klong Takean but are spread over

many places in central Thailand.20The Annexation of upper Burma’ written, in 1559,

the King Bayinnaung (พระเจาบเรงนอง) of Burma, in an unprecedented conquest of upper

Burma, made himself lord of the Shan states, Manipur Chiengmai, and Vien Tien in

1559. This he followed up by launching a number of attacks on his rival Ayutthaya.

He succeeded and in 1563 where his father Tabingshweti had failed and raised

Burmese glory by taking of Ayutthaya captive.21An interesting account of the cause

of the conflict between Pattani and Ayutthaya is given by written in the history of the

Malay kingdom of Pattani, the Sultan Patani, Muzafar Shah, went to Ayutthaya in

order to make acquaintances and to create a closer friendship with King of Thailand.

He was, however, not well received by the King of Thailand who looked down upon

him became and dissatisfaction aroused by the proud nature of the Thailand in that

time name Siam. In 1563, after this incident, the Sultan of Pattani found out that

Thailand (Siam) was attacked by the Burmese and decided to attack Siam in order to

revenge the earlier humiliation in Ayutthaya. When Sultan Muzafar Shah arrived with

his army at Thailand, he discovered that the citadel of Ayutthaya was surrounded by


52

Burmese soldiers, quickly he Majesty landed his army and immediately invaded the

Royal citadel of Siam (Thailand). Who were guarding the front of the citadel, were

killed by the Pattani Malay soldiers. Finally all the defense of the Siam were

weakened, and one by one they war cries of the Malay soldiers, who had successfully

seized the citadel’s gate, he fled through a door in the back of the citadel and ran to

hide in a place named Maha Phram Island there the Siam registered their strength to

counter attack the army of Pattani Malays. As soon as they were sated with running

amuck and killing the Siam, the Malay army left the citadel, returned to their ships,

and immediately weighed their anchors to sail back to Pattani. But when their army

had gone as far as the mouth the Chao Phraya River, by the will of God who is all

powerful, his Majesty Sultan Muzafar Shah suddenly died, and they were forced to

bury at the estuary of the country of Thailand.22

Dispute claims by some writers that Pattani and other Malay kingdoms were

vassal states to Ayutthaya, no unambiguous evidence has been found. The powerful

states on the eve of twentieth century were of those situated along the coasts with

control over major maritime trade routes. It was not possible to move troops of

thousands soldiers easily by land in contemporaneous Southeast Asian became it was

covered by deep jungles. Buffalo carts, cattle cats, and elephants were the only

vehicles for overland transportation. The only support of the claim of Ayutthaya

vassalage was the sending of the “Golden or Silver Flower” yet it is easy to

misinterpret the gesture. Most kingdoms in Asian sent these tokens of alliance to

those considered as their theoretical lords. In return they received an abundance of gift

whose value was many times that given. in any event, these ‘Golden Flowers’ were

sent to centers of power so distant as to make any claim of vassalage an academic

question. For example, almost all the states of Southeast Asian sent embassies to

China which returned laden with gifts’ from the ‘Son of Heaven’ as a gesture

honoring loyal ‘vassals’ which no one expected to be demanding much less dangerous

Pattani’s misfortune was to have entered into a ‘Golden flower’ arrangement with a

power which was both physically close and demanding of the bonds of alliance cum

vassage.23 Sultan Muzafar Shah, his had two sons. Patik Syam, a son with Queen, was

born during his absence to King Ayutthaya. Another son by his second wife was

named King Bambang, who at that time was thirty years of age. Both would be killed

in dispute for the throne.24


53

Sultan Mansoor Shah (R.III),(1564-1572)

The second son of Sultan Ismail Shah, he and younger brother of Sultan Muzafar

Shah him died at Ayutthaya. He was crowned King on his return to Pattani. During

the absence of the late Sultan Muzafar Shah and Mansoor, the country had been under

the guidance of the ruler of Sai named King JalaI, a brother in law of the Sultan and

husband of their younger sister , Devi Aishah.25The Hikayat Patani’ describers in

some detail the events of military expeditions launched by Palembang against Pattani.

They began almost as soon as Sultan Mansoor returned from Ayutthaya and new of

Sultan Muzafar’ death in Ayutthaya had spread. Twice Palembang laid siege to the

city of Pattani. Both were unsuccessful, forcing the troops to retreat to Palembang.

The people of yore attributed the victory to the three large canons cast to guard Patani,

namely Sri Negeri, Sri Patani, and Mahalela. They were effective in stopping the

invasion from Palembang and ultimately drove the enemy back to the sea26

Acceding to Hikayat Patani, Mansoor Shah, not long before his death in 1572,

decided to sand a mission of homage to Ayutthaya in order to restore relations

between Patani with Siam. Behind such a change of policy towards Ayutthaya we can

suggest firstly a negative development of Pattani’s relation with its neighboring

Malay Sultanates, and Secondly a political and military recovery of Siam which may

have been felt by the government of Pattani. Regarding the second point, it is to be

noted that the Thai government of King Maha Thammaraha (R, 1569-1590), soon

after its disastrous defeat by Burma in 1569, began to put the administration of the

state in order Sultan Mansoor had four daughters with his Queen and two sons by a

concubine. The first three daughters were King Hijau, youngest daughter died in

childhood of the boys by the concubine; the elder was named King Bima and the

younger King Bahader. Among the guardians of Sultan Mansoor’s children was along

chin, a son of Burmese war captive from Ayuthya and Wan Jahallullah a grandson of

Sheikh Shafiuddin. The latter would seem to be a brother of Sheik Faqih Ali, who

wrote Tawarikh Patani (A history of Patani) upon which this narrative is based. The

Sultan’s third daughter was married to Sultan of Pahang Sultan Addul Ghafur

Muhyiddin Shah who reigned from 1590 to 1614.27 Now the position was reversed,

realizing the threat from Palembang and acknowledging Ayutthaya’s increasing

military power in the north, Sultan Mansoor without hesitation decided to send a


54

diplomatic mission to Ayutthaya with the specific aim of bringing about

reconciliation between the two countries. Wan Muhamad Bin Sheikh Shafiudin was

installed as admiral and head of the mission under the of Orang Kaya Seri Agar di

Raja It fell to his responsibility to lead the mission from Patani to pay homage to

Somdej Phra Thammaraja, the King of Ayutthaya.28‘A history Patani’ wrote, after a

stay of some twenty days in Ayutthaya, the mission returned to Pattani with the

reconciliation letter from King Somdej Phra Thammaraja. For Sultan Mansoor it had

been a grievous loss both to hear of the circumstances of those he left behind and

especially of his deceased brother. Otherwise he was pleased to receive the comradely

responds from Ayutthaya. Falling ill 1572 the last words of the Sultan were: when

this flower has fallen, the next Sultan of this kingdom shall be without further

discussion Raja Patek Siam (a son of Sultan Muzafar Shah).Subsequently his majesty

Sultan Mansoor Shah. Left all his of earthy wealth and prestige and returned to the

kingdom of God after years of ruler Patani Darussalam peacefully.29

Sultan Patik Syam (1572-1573)

The new Sultan whose name was Palik Syam son of Muzafar Shah and nephew of

Monsoor Shah come is the throne. His aunt King Devi Aisha the younger sister of the

two former Sultan, Mazufar Shah and Masoor Shah, and nephew of the late Masoor

Shah, became his guardian and hence the regent of the realm. Due to the new Sultan’s

young age exacerbated by those who favored the heirs of Masoor, there was a split

among the minister as to his suitability for the throne. Of particular interests was Sri

Emra, one of the minister, who persuaded King Bambang, a half- brother of the young

King, to stage a coup d’etat at the morning- prayer when the palace door was opened

for the audience king Banbang slipped in entered his half–brother’s of the young

king, to stage a coup d’etat. At the morning-prayer when the palace door was opened

for the audience Raja Bambang slipped in, entered his brother’s room with a kris in

his hand, and killed him in the presence of King Devi Asiha. Both king and his

guardian, Aunt Aisha, died because of King Banbang’ eagerness for the throne. While

running out of the palace, himself then was killed by Dato Wangkabuda in 1537.

After due investigation, the court found that Sri Emara was the instigator of the

murder of the royal family and was himself sentenced to be executed in public30


55

Sultan Bahadur Shah (1573-1584)

The younger son of Sultan Masoor Shah succeeded after his cousin’s assassination at

the age of ten. This was the second period when Patani kingdom had a minor as ruler,

a circumstance which brought no good. A similar fate befell the royal family once

again. A power- hungry minister, Sri Amar Palawan, persuaded the young king’s

elder half- brother king Bima to rise against his younger brother. The denouement was

sparked by a dispute between the two half -brother over the fact that the elder had

ridden an elephant beside the Sultan without the younger’s permission. The king

shouted, who gave you right to ride on that elephant’ and ordered him to dismount. It

was told that the incident made Raja Bima very angry. Using a well- tried method;

one early morning while most of the people were attending the Morning Prayer in the

Mosque, Raja Bima entered the palace and got near the young king, who had been left

briefly unattended by his guards. Raja Bima then stabbed his half-brother with his

kris, killing the Sultan, after which Raja Bima himself was killed while escaping on

his elephant by the wicked Sri Amar Pahlawan. The evil minister could only for a

short time keep his nefariousness dealings secret. The remaining male children of Sri

Wangsa dynasty were all minors and hence deemed inappropriate to succeed for fear

of the melancholy incidents repeating themselves. To avoid a repetition of the

previous tragedies, the ministers proclaimed that the next ruler must be an adult, male

or female. According to tradition a successor to the throne was recommended by the

reigning King, but was ultimately determined by a majority vote of ministers as the

final judge. In the event of reigning ruler’s absence the court of ministers had absolute

authority. As attested to by all contemporary accounts, the previous tragedies

combined with a shortage of adult male heirs to usher in a remarkable period of a

series of highly competent female regents at Pattani. It started by the high minister

electing Tengku Hijau (Green Princess) the eldest daughter of Sultan Mansoor Shah,

to be the heir apparent the title of Raja Hijiau.

Raja Hijau (1584-1616)

In 1584, the Raja Hijau (Green Queen) was established the sixth ruler of Sri Wangsa

Dynasty, she showed genius in her business dealings. With her own fleet of merchant

ships, she was one of the foremost Pattani entrepreneurs of the period, trading directly

with foreigners, including the newly arrived Europeans. She not only lived on her

own income and encouraged her subjects to trade but also developed the country’s


56

agriculture and transportation infrastructure by ordering the digging of canals for

irrigation and waterways transportation purposes. One of her canals is still runs

through across the city of Pattani to this day. Malek, written after things had settled

down, King Hijau ordered khatid Abdul Jabar, her defense minister, to make an

investigation into the death of her half-brother Sultan Bahadur Shah. The

investigation found that Sri Amar had masterminded the assassination. Khatib Abdul

Jabar was then ordered to seize him. The story relates that Sri Amar did not give up

easily, but fought for his life. He was finally killed, but Khatib Abdul Jabar was also

wounded and later died on a Friday just before noon prayer too secure the

administration the Queen filled the important official positions with those she trusted.

for example, Wan Jaharullah became her right-hand adviser, Along-In a Burmese

slave from Ayutthaya, became her left-hand adviser, and Wan Muhammad Bin

Sheikh Shafiudin became her treasurer. A British travelers John Smith was said to be

the first European appointed as her trade adviser in 1600.Patani is much more

important as a foreign mart than either Johor or Pahang. It is also more popular than

the other Malay states and is able to put 180,000 armed men in to the field Malay,

Siamese, “Patne” and Chinese are the languages used in Patani (lachand van Kley

1993, 1119-20 based on Niefhoff’s account Churchill).

There were Buddhist people claiming to be subjects of the King of Ayutthaya

living in Pattani, they had their own temple with gilded statures. The Dutch, who had

established commercial relations in 1602 with Pattani, were meanwhile becoming

increasingly active in the gulf of Siam. Always anxious to obtain China goods, the

Dutch sent an embassy in 1604 to establish relations with Siam the most important of

China’s vassals in the region.31 In 1604 Jacob van Neck a Dutch explorer in the

service of the newly-created Dutch East India Company visited Pattani and noted that:

Reid32 written the major mosque of Pattani was built by Chinese labor at end of the

sixteenth century and it was exceptional, a stately edifice of brickwork, gilt very

richly within and a domed with pillars, curiously wrought with figures. Pattani had

become a center of artillery industry in Southern Asian, producing and purchasing of

cannons. As early as 1592 the Emperor of Japan, Shogun Tokukawa Eiyasu, had sent

his diplomatic mission to Pattani and in return Pattani’s envoys had been sent to Japan

in 1599 on behalf of King Hijau. In June 1611, the English East India Company ship

the Globe entered Pattani’s harbor33. An English factory was established in Pattani


57

before the Globe continued its journey to Ayutthaya to deliver a letter from King

James I to King Song Tham. The following year, 4 October 1613, saw a revolt by

Javanese living in the city against their Pattani overloads, Dutch Besar and Dutck

Laksamana. A great deal of change was caused by the fires, but with Dutch and

English assistance the rebellions was suppressed. This was the third uprising caused

were carried out by Japanese whom later were also suppressed by Patani’s

authorities34The King Hijau, rule her kingdom for 32 years, dying at the age of sixty

three. Although remaining single throughout her life, she was a most prestigious

woman and was well known Throughout the Malay world, she remains so to this day

due to her commercial power and perceptiveness in piloting the kingdom through of

the crisis precipitated by her (male) predecessors.

Raja Biru (R. 1616-1624)

The founded a ruler Raja Biru, the seventh King of Sri Wangsa dynasty, her olden

fifty. She further expanded the irrigation system so that more fertile land could be

brought into use. The production of sea salt, one of the kingdom’s important exports,

had been improved, attracting even more traders to the port. In 1614, Sultan Ghafur of

Pahang, Raja Biru’s brother-in- law died. Her younger sister, Raja Ungu, Queen of

Pahang returned to Patani bringing her only child with Sultan Ghafar, a daughter

named Raja Kuning, to Patani. At the age of twelve, Raja Kuning had been engaged

to Raja Decho, son of Raja Mustafa the ruler of Badalung and a descendant of Sultan

Sulaiman of Songkhla (Singgora). Badalung was a territory within Singgora

kingdom’s sphere. However, the engagement was later cancelled. The arrival of the

Spanish at Patani can be traced from John Browne’s letter from Patani to Benjamin

faired in Ayutthaya dated 30 May 1616, here is certain news that the Spaniards will be

in Pattanya( Patani) within this 5 day at the longest. The Queen in gone a great way

up the country. And for the Ambassador from Jorre (Johor) he is stayed with all his

men here in Pattanya every day expecting their coming. In 1618 the on-going dispute

between the English and the Dutch over the economic spheres of interest in Makassar

and Moluccas had spilled over to Patani, resulting in considerable violence. In

December a Dutch ship named ‘Zwart leeuw’ was captured on the way to Bantam by

the English under the command of Sir Thomas Dale. In June the following year two

English ship ‘The Hound and The Sampson’ commanded by John Jourdain anchored

at the port of Pattani. At the same time, the Dutch forces, led by Hendrik Jansen, were


58

reinforced by some 8,000 men sent to Pattani from Java and Sumatra, on 17 July 1619

the Dutch fired on both ships, sinking them. Many Englishmen were killed, including

Jourdain himself.35The two ships were seized by the Dutch, and a great many English

were taken prisoners. They were treated with great barbarity, number of them being

sent to Japan in chains. The English on shore were only saved from massacre by the

intervention of the Queen of Patani.36The incident was calmed down later via a treaty

of cooperation in 1620. Due to shortage of spices, Pattani could not supply Dutch

demand. Thus in May 1622, Jan Peterzoon Coen ordered the Dutch Indies Company

factory in Patani to be closed. The English closed their trending station at Pattani the

following month. Thus, the Dutch and English relation and left a legacy of friendship

on Pattani soil to this day.

Raja Ungu (1624-1635)

A former Queen of Pahang and third daughter of Sultan Mansoor Shah became third

Queen and the eighth ruler of the Sri Wangsa dynasty. Raja Ungu (Purple Queen) had

returned to Patani with her young daughter Raja Kuning after death of her husband

Sultan Ghafur. On August 1612 a welcome ceremony had been organized by Queen

Hijau to welcome home her younger sister after 28 years away from Patani. The

festivities lasted for seven day and seven nights. The King Ungu was entitled Paduka

Shah Alam’ (Her Majesty the Queen of the Universe). In this period Ayutthaya began

to extend its influences into the sphere of the northern Malay kingdoms with

Badalung and liquor as allies, which were drawn closer to Ayutthaya than the other

Malay kingdoms. This development was vigorously opposed by Raja Ungu, who

subsequently cancelled her daughter engagement to Raja Decho of Badalung

engaging her instead to Raja Bijau, the crown prince (yang di pertuan muda) of Johor

and a brother to Sultan Abdul Jalil Shah. The engagement’s festive ceremony was

carried on in Pattani according to the Royal custom to seven day and seven nights.

Almost three thousand people from Johor accompanied their prince to Patani. This

marriage tie helped to consolidate relationships between the Malay kingdoms in case

of reckless scenario coming from the North. This precaution seemed necessary. The

death of Ayutthaya’s King Indgra Raja Songthan in 1628 ushered in a period of

confusion and internecine struggles for the throne. First, a young son of King

Soungthan came to the throne, but was assassinated. Then Prince Athitwong was

installed as the next ruler. It was likewise ended by another coup in 1630. Led by


59

Prince Worawong, supported by the Dutch and Japanese Yamada in Ayutthya, he

emerged victorious and proclaimed himself King with the title of Phra Chao Prasath’

(Lord of the Golden Palace). His accession was regarded with intense hostility in

Pattani, as well as by the Portuguese, who had sided with the previous King. More

important, it would bring about many changes in the region’s political and economic

stability. The Queen of Patani strongly opposed the incident, going so far as not to

recognize Phra Cao Prasath Thong as the legitimate ruler of the kingdom. There by

breaking off all political and economic relations. This created a background of

hostility between the two kingdoms. It also resulted in the Portuguese loosing many

commercial privileges to the Dutch in Ayutthaya. The result was entering into a pact

with Pattani directed against Ayutthaya and the Dutch. Consequently the Portuguese

and Patina’s were banned from trading in Ayutthaya, while the Dutch who supported

Prasath Thong received many privileges and goodwill.

Rigor, another Northern Malay kingdom, decided to follow Patina’s lead by

severing relationships with the new ruler of Ayutthaya. Hostility between Patani and

Badalung due to the cancellation of the previous engagement between the Queen’s

daughter and Badalung’s prince had brought them into confrontation which became

even more intense in the aftermath of Patani-Ayutthaya break. It, in fact, result the

Queen of Patani sending her troops to invade Badalung in 1631. This only increased

Ayuthya’s mistrust of Patani, especially in night of the fact that Badalung had entered

into an alliance with Ayuthya. King Prasat Thong’s campaign in the Malay Peninsula

was initiated by an invasion of ligor, carried out by Ayutthaya’s armada under the

command of Japanese admiral, Yamada Naga Masa. Ligor thus became the first

Malay kingdom to be attacked by Ayuthya under the new policy. After Ligor’s fall

the Japanese commander was appointed as governor, becoming the first Malay

kingdom to fall under Ayutthaya occupation. The fall of Ligor left no doubt in Pattani

as to the acute danger coming from the north. To shield the kingdom, Raja Ungu

sought closer relations with Johor, Khmer, Jambi, and Indragiri, as well as with the

Dutch. At the same time it made Ayutthaya even more eager to go further south. The

invasion of Badalung by Pattani forces in 1631 was, in fact, a ruse set in nation by the

Dutch. Ayutthaya had at first let a Dutch Captain, Anthoni Caen, pay home age before

the Queen of Patani in order to persuade her Majesty the Queen to break all

relationships and trade with the Portuguese and to submit to Ayutthaya. The plotters


60

calculated righty that the Queen would consider the proposals as humiliating and

insulting her honor and sovereignty and take rash action this she did by invading

Badalung, an ally of Ayutthaya, thus, Making first Great War on Patani with

Ayuthyainevitably.On the Pattani side the kingdom could count on the assistance of

fifty warships from Johor and Pahang and four warships form Portuguese Malacca led

by Captain Antonio Vaz Pinto. In alliances with some the Malay kingdoms of Captain

Class Bruijin had promised to contribute two warships with their troops.

After some days of preparation in Ligor, Ayutthaya’s forces under the

commands of four leaders namely Phraya Phraklang Phraya Klaholm, Admiral of the

Ramsith warships, and the Governor of Ligor with approximately sixty thousand men

and forty warships sailed towards Pattani. Ayutthaya’s forces wasted no time and on

11 May 1634. They attacked the town with fierce battles erupting both by sea and on

land. The three famous cannons, Sri Patani, Sri Negeri., and Mahalela provided

effective artillery fire for defending the city. The Patani chronicle describes the battle

as the fiercest Patani ever had, The Siamese launched the attack, attempted to climb

over the city walls, which were not yet completely built. Some were on the way down

into the ditches and some were already in the ditches. Thus they were short by Pattani

people; caused so many deaths to the Siamese people unaccountable numbers of

death, and many had been chased by warriors. Therefore, the Siamese people were

then unable to cross over. Hence, the Siamese people were forced retreat to the field

and gathered at the front of Malim Ajilane. Patani’s forces then made counter attack

outside the city walls. The battle was awesome. Blood spilled over the battle fields

and dead bodies lay on the streets and at every corner. there followed several days of

fierce fighting but without any sign of Dutch support to the Ayutthaya forces, which

were experiencing shortage of foodstuff to feed their men. Finally’ on 21 may 1634,

after ten days of fierce battle, the intruders were forced to retreat, driven back with

tremendous casualties on both sides. The Dutch arrived in Pattani ten days after

Ayutthaya’s armada and its allies beat a hasty retreat. King Prasath Thong put the

blame from failing to defeat Pattani on the Dutch and punished them by closing the

city to them and banning all trade with the Dutch. Not until an abject apology had

been received from Dutch East India Company representation would trade and

political relationships between the two kingdoms be resumed. On the Patani side great

loss of life and destruction of parts of the city was exacerbated by the death a great


61

commander, namely Faqih Ali al- Malbari, Temenggung Seri Paduka, who fell in the

battle. What prompted the King of Ayutthaya’s decision to order an expedition aimed

at conquering Pattani just at time? It was most likely due to contemporaneous polities.

The death of the Burmese King Anaukpetlun opened up period of political instability

and great swings in governmental the situation, all of which favored. Ayutthaya. D.P.

Singhal describes the situation in Burma at the period which coincided with

Ayutthaya’s attack on Patani;

Anaukpetlun’s death was followed by a short period of confusion

and internecine struggle for the Burmese throne. Finally Thalum, a

brother of the deceased King emerged victorious in 1629. Thalun’s

reign of nineteen years was a departure from the usual pattern of

the Burmese history. He refrained from leading unnecessary

military expeditions and gave his people much needed rest and

peace. Conditions of peace inevitably led to the restoration of order

and social reorganization. Old village and district administrations

were revived. The Revenue Inquest of 1638 was compiled during

Thalun’s reign. In1635 the capital was moved from Pegu to Ava

where it remained until 1885 when Upper Burma fell into the hands

of the British.

Through the mediation of Kedah’s Sultan Rijaluddin Shah, Patani and

Ayutthaya finally reached the conciliation in February of 1636. In Mach that year

Ayutthaya’s diplomatic mission led by Pharaya Phra Khlang paid homage before the

Queen of Patani and on 6 August Pattani sent its town envoy to Ayutthaya to confirm

the peace treaty. An unexpected result of the war with Ayutthaya was the return of

many Pattani men of note from various places, including Arabia and Mecca. Among

them were the honorable t historical writer Sheik Faqih Ali Al Fathani who during

that time was practicing Dak Wah in the Bugis and South Celebes, where he was

appointed honorable Panglima in the Bugis forces struggling against Dutch

occupation After the death of Sheik Faqih Ali al Malbari and victory against

Ayutthaya the Queen and minister of Pattani unanimously appointed Sheik Faqih Ali

Al Fathani bin Mohammad bin Shafiudin al Abasi Panglima with the title of Maha

Raja lela. More important for present, context he compiled the history of Pattani from

variety of sources, arranging them into one called the Tawarikh Patani, which is the


62

most significant historical literature to this day. To consolidate reconciliation with

Ayutthaya and gain a foothold in the northern market, the Queen made a visit to that

kingdom in 1641. The kingdoms restored their relationships and maintained the status

quo for a period of time. Raja Ungu died in 1635 and was called Marhum Pahang.

Raja Kuning (1635-1686)

The ninth Raja Kuning became the successor next ruler Raja Ungu was her daughter

Raja Kuning (Yellow Queen), whose father had been Sultan Ghafar of Pahang. She

was ninth ruler and fourth queen in the Sri Maha Wangsa dynasty. At time relations

with Ayutthaya had reached conditions of normality. Raja Kuning renovated and

improved the affairs of state in such fields as managing revenues taxing

systematically, distributing the palace’s properties to the state, restoring law and order

and reorganizing the state administrative. Like her grandmother, she managed her

living expenses from her own farms and business without state funding. She built up a

marine trading company called Sharikat Perkapalam di Raja Patani (Patani Royal

Shipping Company).Only the best captains were employed, as for instance, Nakuda

Sandang or Saudaga Raja among them. Despite the treaty with Ayutthaya ratified

previously, Ligor as a vassal of Ayutthaya raided Pattani under the governor Aukya

Sena Phimuk in 1638, but was repelled.

In 1641, a mission was sent to Ayutthaya for peaceful reconciliation and

normal relations were again resumed. Raja Kuning ruled the kingdom on her own.

Not until 1641 did her husband, Raja Bijau Yang di Pertuan Madu, and a delegation

from Johor, including King Sultan Abdul Jalil III, his Queen and royal retainers, visits

Pattani. After some time the Johor delegation returned but her husband Raja Bijau

seconded by his mother, the Queen of Johor, remained behind to help his wife govern

the country. Raja Kuning was an artist herself and became a patron of the arts,

gathering artists and actors, revising traditional plays from the Hindu period, and

keeping them alive. The repertoire included such works as Mayong, Asik, the

Ramayana in the wayang kulil shadow play, and others. Yet her private life was as not

smooth and peaceful as it should have been due to turbulence within her family,

mainly from her husband. Many woman artists came and went and ultimately

unfaithfulness prevailed. Her husband began an illicit affair with a female singer

named Dang Sirat. He went so far as to leave the royal palace and build a new one for

his lover, abandoning almost totally his queen. It is told that as time passed Dang Sirat


63

was called ‘ChePuan’ and demanded a city of her own to rule. Finally, when he

regained his conscience and subjects began to turn away from him Raja Bijau decided

to kill Dang Sirat and flee to Sai, there to aboard a ship bound for Johor. In June 1645

he departed for good leaving his wife alone to given the county. In August 1645 Raja

kuning’s mother in- law, the queen of Pahang was escorted by Raja Lela Chief officer

of Pattani with forty men to return to Johor.

The extraordinary lives of Pattani women at this period are attested to by

Nieuhoff, a Dutch mariner who visited Pattani in 1662.Nothing is more common than

if any foreign merchant come to Patani, to ask them whether they don’t want some

women for their convenience and there is no want of young handsome women who

offer their service, out of whom each may take his choice and agree with her at best

he can, as to what he is to allow her per month; which done she immediately repairs

to his lodging, where in the day she serves as chambermaid, and in the night for a bed

fellow and during this agreement, the man must be as careful to avoid the commerce

of other woman as she is on her side unless he will expose himself to manifest danger.

At parting the man pays her wages and so they are both free one, it being as customs

among the nobles here to entertain many female slaves, whom they let out for such a

life and gain great profit for them. Those who by a time appointed do not pay what

they owe the King or private persons are beaten twice or thrice a month on the shin

bones, which is done till they can find means to discharge the debt…After they have

trampled upon the criminals, they poured the vinegar on the putrefied carcass, which

they then pour down the offender’s throat through a funnel, and when he is full they

beat his belly with cudgels till it bursts. Thieves are trampled to death. If a single man

is found in bed with married women he is stripped naked to a little pair of drawers,

then daubing his face with lime, they ram an arrow through’ each ear and fasten a

little drum on his back, which they beat at all the cross street, to expose him to his

shame. This punishment ends in 40 or 50 strokes of a cudgel on the man’s bare

buttocks, but the women receive ‘em with drawers on. A Kelantan chronicle described

the journey to Johor of Raja Kuning in old age in order to visit her husband. When her

ship arrived at the Kelantan river mouth, she suddenly took ill and passed away. This

was in 1686. She is buried at kampong Panji district of kemuming Kota Bharu

Kelantan, today Malaysian and the place was called Markam Marhum Besar or

Markam Raja Kuning. She was the last ruler of the Maha Wangsa Dynasty ruling over

Pattani and the adjacent territory of Kelantan territory in that period was under Raja


64

SaktiI,WijayaIndera (long Betong), which was a part of Pattani before British rule and

Anglo-Siam Treaty in the early twentieth century. Since there was no direct heir of

the Sri Maha Wangsa dynasty to ruler the kingdom, Raja Sakti (aka Sultan

Muhammad I) of Kelantan was asked to rule Patani for the time being. He mobilized

the armed forces from the Malay kingdoms on the east coast and invaded Singgora,

Badalung and the southern parts of Ligor which were in Ayutthaya’s hands. They

recaptured a number of towns and once again the northern Malay kingdoms were

under the Malay rule. Raja Sakti establish a new political network by uniting

Kelantan, Patani, Singgora, Badalung and parts of Ligor and Terengganu to found

Patani Besar (Greater Besar).He elevated his son Raja Bakal to the throne of Patani

Besar, although Kelantan was the administrative center and he himself the absolute

ruler of the new Empire. For a period, Kelantan’s royal lineage was crowed as the

next Patani’s rulers because according to royal custom, the country’s ruler must be

descended from a royal lineage.37

2.3.2. The Kelantan Dynasty

After the fall of The Sri Maha Wangsa dynasty, the Kelantan Dynasty became the

ruler of Patani Kingdom and Patani ruled by its eight rulers. But now Kelantan is a

province of Malaysia.

Raja Bakal (1688-1690)

Raja Bakal had served Patani’s administration and moreover was a confidant to the

late queen, Raja Kuning. He was nominated by his father Sultan Muhammad of

Kelantan and approved by the council of ministers. Upon his father’s death he also

succeeded to the throne of Kelantan and later moved the administration of Greater

Patani to Patani city. He ruled only two years. After his death in 1690 his wife became

the ruler because he has no liar, son or daughters.

Raja Mas Kelantan (1690-1707)

The next ruler of Kelantan dynasty, according to the Kelantan chronicle Raja Mas

Kelantan was Raja Bakal’s wife. She divided Kelantan’s ruling administration into

two parts. The western region was administrated via Kota kubang Labu, where Tuan

Sulong, a son of Jambu’s ruler in Patani territory, was nominated as ruler. Tuan

Sulong’s descendants have been ruling Kelantan to this day. The eastern region was

centered at Jembul Pengkalan Datu under Raja Sakti II.


65

During Raja Kelantan’s region, Ayutthaya under Pha Pethraja raided Patani

twice, one in 1691 and again in 1692. Both were repelled by Patani forces.

Reconciliation was reached via a treaty of 1694 and Ayutthaya began trading in

Patani again the city population in this period increased due to people moving from

Kelantan to Patani to staff in the expanded administration and to participate in trade

with foreign merchants. The queen died after seventeen years on the throne and her

daughter Raja Mas Jayam was crowned as ruler of the kingdom.

Raja Mas Jayam (1707-1710)

Raja Mas Jayam (The Queen of Golden Victory) adopted the Tamil name of Jayam

(victory).The Kelantan chronicle records merely that a daughter of Raja Mas Kelantan

was elevated to the throne of Patani with full support from ministers of Patani and

Kelantan. Despite repeated reconciliation and treaties, Ayutthaya never really

respected the spirit of the agreements. Not this time either. After the coronation, again

their armada of ca four hundred ships and five thousand men besieged the city of

Pattani. At the time Malays were united with moral and fighting spirit high. This was

due to the ties of kinships both between the royal families and among the subjects

themselves. From all over the east coast Malay kingdoms, as well as from Johor,

came an armada of smaller and larger warships numbering some four hundred twelve

which had been mustered and sent to the war zone. Ayutthaya was unaware of the

strength of the allies in the south and after twelve days of attacking they were still

unable to get closer to the city. The intense fighting had taken place only at the sea.

Shortage of food was the major problem since they could not receive supplies from

the land. But the underlying reason for the sudden withdrawal of their forces was that

the King of Ayutthaya, Somdej Phra Saraphet VIII (Phra ChaoSua) unexpectedly

died. As result, it proved impossible to make an agreement with Ayutthaya nobles and

the story of unreliability from the north continues to this day. Despite victory over the

enemy, Raja Mas Jayam could not win at home. She could not get along with her

ministers. This was possibly due to the uneven distribution of rewards after the war.

Another important reason was that she favored Kelantanists over local Pattani

ministers, all of which resulted in actions against her position. Consequently, she was

force to abdicate in 1710.her successor was said to be a princess and a descendant of

Kedah’s lineage named Raja Devi.


66

Raja Aishah Devi (1710-1719)

According to Patani’s chronicle (Hikayat Patani)Raja Devi (Angel Queen)was a

descendant of a prince of Kedah who had taken refuge in Patani when Aceh launched

an attack on that state in 1620.the prince , if such he was , was married to a women

living in the city. The Patani chronicle says this resulted in a daughter. Yet in

consideration of the dates, she must have been a granddaughter or even great grand-

daughter. One result of Ayutthaya’s raids was to make the port insecure, especially for

the property of foreigners, who accordingly began relocating to other ports, such as

Batavia (now Jakarta capital in Indonesia) where the Dutch had built their Asian wide

trade center. It is likely that Ayutthaya’s hostility was a cover for their desire to

eliminate Patani as a rival to its trade expansionism. Whatever the reason, the port of

Patani began a slow decline. Europeans has also had built up their own city ports the

area in order to have direct communicate with their trading partners. Other reason for

Pattani’s economic decline were that the Japanese in demand for the products of the

Malay Peninsula, which contributed to departure of the foreign traders. Be that as it

may, the most significant reason for the decline remains the assault from the north. A

supplementary reason lies in the queen’s weakness and obviously incapability to deal

with economics and commercial. Raja Devi had been picked as an outsider without

previous experience of ruling or administrating. Fortunately during her region there

were no major attacks or raids, merely traditional plundering on the outskirts of the

kingdom from time to time, Raja Devi reigned for some nine years, during in 1719 AD.

She was the last of a remarkable line of female rulers in a region and within a religion

not usually conductive to advancement of women. At this time, Haitian an English

trader who visited the country, notes that

Patani had forty-three provinces including Kelantan and

Terengganu, but when a Johor Prince married a Terengganu

Princess, then Terengganu became part of Johor, made (sic) forty-

two provinces remained under Patani. Population of Patani is about

150,000 between 16-60 years old.38

Raja Bendang Badan (1719-1723)

After, Raja Devi Bendang Badan was crowned as new ruler of the kingdom, after

consultation with the council of ministers. Usually called Alaung Betong, he was

entitled Paduka Shah Alam (King of the Universe).His term as ruler was short. Not


67

long after his installation, he came into conflict with the kingdom’s administration

and finally was forced to abdicate. In his reign not much changed or improved to

bring up the economy. He was easily forgotten and we are unable to trace either his

legacy or his existence afterwards. A source claims that via a non- violent coup

against him Raja Laksamana Dajang claimed the throne.

Raja Laksamana Dajang (1723-1724)

Raja Laksamana Dajang’s rule was not long successful, or smooth. A conflict arose

between the Raja of Sai and Datuk Pengkalan Pauh, a minister of state. Since Raja

Laksamana proved unable to mediate in the conflict, he decided to abdicate and went

into exile at Singgora after only eleven months on the throne. He was brought back

after his death in Singgora (Singapore) and buried according with kingdom’s minister.

It was decided to ask the former queen, Raja Mas Jayam, to become ruler again.

Raja Mas Jayam (1724-1726)

Her Majesty’s second term proved to be even shorter than the first. She was

honorably installed as the kingdom’s ruler for second time in 1724.Her younger sister,

Puan Rogaayah, had married Tum Zainal Abidin who was subsequently elevated to

the ruler of Terengganu from Patani accompanied by around eighty Pattani families.

On the day of her brother-in law’s coronation, Raja Mas Jayam rewarded a kris and a

sword as presents. The Kris has been used by royalty in Terengganu and as a

ceremonial accoutrement to this day. Tun Zainal and Puan Rogayah had four children,

one of them succeeding to the throne after their father. Their descendants have

succeeded to the Terengganu throne down to the present. Raja Mas Jayarn ruled the

Patani kingdom for two years, dying in 1726. She was buried according to royal

tradition at kampong Teluk Tanjong, Jumbu district of Jering. After her death once

again a Kelantan prince was elected ruler of the Kingdom.

Raja Alaung Yunus (1726-1729)

Raja Alang Yunus, from a Kelantan noble family, was crowned as ruler of Patani in

1726 with the title Yang Di Pertuan. He was said to be a son of Raja Tuan Besar, a

Patani nobleman by his second wife, Raja Sharifah, herself a daughter of Raja Sakti II

of Kelantan. In Raja Alaung’s reign Islam dominated. Many mosques were built and

consecrated as theological institutions where all Islamic studies could take place.

With the establishment of Pondok there came many scholars from various Palace


68

invited to participate in the study of Islam. An abandoned palace of Laksamana

Dayang was disassembled and brought to the city to build a mosque at Kelantan

Bandar. Raja Alaung transformed the Cradle of the East (Serambi Mekah) to become

a centre of Islamic study and Kresik mosque became once again South East Asia’s

most respected Islamic institution. Dakwah from Pattani were sent out to many places

in South East Asia. This missionary zeal included many well-known Islamic scholars

from the kingdom recognized in the Muslim world as far away as Turkey, Arabia and

the far reaches of the Indonesian archipelago Pattani was brought back to life one

more time not as a commercial centre, but as the centre of Islamic education. Alaung

Yunus came into conflicts with his half- brother, Datuk Pengkalan Pauh, the minister

Datuk Pujut, the ruler of Sai, and Alaung Terab. The conflict became more and more

volatile and serious, ultimately leading to his assassination on 12 August 1729 while

riding an elephant. He was buried at pujut mausoleum. The death of Raja Alaung

Yunus caused the split between Pattani and Kelantan. The kingdom fell riskily into a

condition of king –lessness with no proper control over the administration fortunately,

the regrettable condition did not override common sense, but faith to the rule of Allah

prevailed. An important reason for the situation remaining peaceful despite its lack of

leadership was due to Burmese military expansion eastward. The threat posed by the

Burmese effectively halted any disposition of Siam-Ayutthaya to aggressive activity

against Malay states in the southern part of the peninsula.

At the end of 1759, King Alaungpaya of Burma personally led the siege of

Ayutthaya, calling on the besieged city to submit to him and honor him as the new

Chakravartin (World Conqueror). During the siege, according to Burmese sources, his

army was forced to retreat. Hsinbyushin (r. 1763-1776) his successor proceeded with

what was an unfinished war against Ayutthaya. Under the command of Naymyo and

Thihapati, in 1763 Chingmai was captured. The Laos King of Vientiane submitted

and became a vassal of the Ava kingdom and lung Prabang was crushed in March

1765. A long siege of Ayutthaya ended on 7 April 1767 when the Burmese troops

finally broached the city’s defense and sacked the town. King Suriyamarin escaped in

a small boat, but was found dead some days later. Ten of thousands of Ayutthaya had

been devastated captured and led away to Burma. Ayutthaya, either placing a leave

King Myedu, Alaungpaya’s Second son had planned to leave behind a substantial

garrison at Ayutthaya, either placing a trusted Siamese prince on the throne or


69

appointing senior Burmese officials to rule the country directly. But an unexpected

threat was now looming on Burma’s northern border in the form of a huge Manchu

invasion. Strange as it may seem, the Patani kingdoms remained without a king for

some forty years. During that time it was governed by ministers, as well as honorable

scholars and noble men and women not until 1769 was a new Raja was elevated to the

throne.

2.4. Decline the Kingdome of Patani

There has been always, dissention of southern Thailand and the main government.

The Thai’s of south being Muslim majority always have a reservation to participate

in the political affairs free Buddhist state in turn the government t also have a biased

all trade towards this area. The process of national integration is synonymous with

cultural disintegration from the perspective of the many Malay-Muslim Pattani, which

situated in southern Thailand, was established in mid- 15th century, soon after the

foundation of the Sultanate of Malacca. The Sultanate was situated on the east coast

of the Malay Peninsula and coincided with the present-day Thai provinces of Pattani,

Yala, and Narathiwat, the Pattani was also a great trade center and was south between

china and other far east–west. It geographical position isolated if from the advance of

the Portuguese, Spanish, Dutch, and finally British trading settlements finally

succumbed to Siamese power in 1785, the same year the Sultan of Kedah leased the

island of Penang to the English East India Company and was forced to pay annual

tribute to the King of Ayutthaya.39Conflict between the noblemen of Pattani and Siam

occurred frequently, especially over regulation and practices of the Royal Malay

culture which were quite different form Siam’s culture. Pattani maintained resentment

for another twenty years until 1808 when Datoe Paangarun rebelled. Bangkok had to

suppress the uprising. This turmoil made king Rama II decides to divide Pattani into

seven small cities with the objective of separating and ruling Pattani more easily.

Siam assigned city governors form local people and each city had its own autonomy.

However, Siam kept sanding more Buddhist officials who had little knowledge about

Islam. The culture and local language this caused more discontent among the people

in Pattani.40 Siam’s goal was to undermine Pattani’s strength by dividing it into

seven cities. This not only lessened the armed forces but also decreased unity and

economic stability. Pattani and the other six cities needed time to organize to carry out

another resistance. At that point repeated war between Siam and Patani caused more

intervention by Siam in Patani’s Politics military, economy and society.41


70

2.5. The Establishment of the Chularajmontri in Thailand

The Chularajmontri (Sheikhul al-Islam) office was established during the medieval

period of Islam. Its purpose was to streamline Islamic religious hierarchy or the

Ulama within the state by appointing one of them who is often the learned in Islamic

religious sciences. The Shaikhulal-Islam would function as the chief mufti - chief

jurisconsult, an expert on Islamic law and an advisor on matters of religious import to

the state. The Shaikhulal-Islam would give legal opinions on the matter of religion

both private and public. But his advice was not legally binding upon the political

authorities; they only carried moral authority. The intention here was to give a

bureaucratic status to the religious leadership within the political structure of the

evolving and expanding state.42The firth institution of the Shaikhul al-Islam in the

Islamic world was established in Khurasan in the 10th century, and it was soon

adopted in the other part of Islamic world: Anatolia (Turkey), Egypt, Syria, Safavid

Iran, Central Asia, the Delhi Sultanate and China.43 Between the 14th-16th centuries

the office of Shaikhul al-Islam served different functions in different countries. The

Shaikhul al-Islam was the chief jurisconsult in Ottoman Turkey, a judicial official of

some sort in Safavid Iran, one who distributed gifts to the Sufis in India and as an

examiner of Islamic teacher’s credentials in Central Asia and China. Turkey Mustafa

Kemal abolished the office of the Shaikhul al-Islam in 1922. Today, the office of

Shaikhul al-Islam continues to exist in different formats in different countries, either

in the form of a ministry, a council, or a person both in the contemporary Muslim

majority countries such as Indonesia, Malaysia, Pakistan, Bosnia and Tanzania and

also in Muslim minority country such as Thailand. In former Thailand known as

Siam, the Muslim community was made of two different components. First, there

were the native Malay Muslim in the neighboring southern part of the country made

up of independent Malay kingdoms who managed their own political and social

affairs. Second, there were the immigrant Muslims who had come to settle in Siam

since the ancient kingdom of Sukhothai (1228-1438) and the subsequent Ayudhya

(1351-1767) kingdom.44

2.6. The Influence of Chularajmontri and the Situation in Southern Thailand

Since late 2004- 2007, near about 2088 peoples had died in the ongoing conflict in

southern Thailand. The second on 2004 violent events of the Kresik mosque in the

month of April and the Takbai incident in the month of 25, Octobers or Ramadan


71

have become part of the southern Malay Muslim memory. They have further

aggravated the situation. On 19 September 2007, there was a military coup against the

Thaksin Shinawatra government led by a Thai Muslim general viz., Gen. Sonthi

Boonyaratkalin. The coup and the change in policy towards dealing with the southern

unrest may help in contributing towards the resolution of the southern Thai conflict.

The coup leaders cited the following reasons for staging the coup viz., corruption,

national disunity in relation to the unrest in the South, nepotism and abuse of power as

well as insults made to the monarchy. The present interim government is led by prime

minister general Sarayud Chulanont, he was installed by the Council for National

Security (CNS) headed by General Sonthi Boonyaratkalin. Prime Minister Sarayud

Chulanont has offered an apology to the southerners for the past events of Krue Se

mosque and the Takbai Situation.45

2.7. Role of Ulama

The role of Ulama started in the early fifteenth century, and it might even have been

mentioned in the Hikayat Patani ( The history of Patani) chronicle is that the first Raja

Patani Paya Tu Nakpa embraced Islam by the witness of Pasia Ulama Shaykh sa’ed.

His name was then changed into Sultan Ismail Shah. From here the Pattani Ulama

began their function. In 1457, after Pattani had officially become the Malay

government, it started to connect its own identity as a Malay kingdom, spreading

Islamic concepts throughout the Malay Archipelago. Hasan Madmarn, Assistant

Professor, said in the first half of the sixteenth century, one of the Ulama named Faqih

wan Musa bin wan Muhammad Salih al-faqih, was believed to be a pioneer in

operating the first pondok in Pattani, and in a village called Seno. This traditional

account continues to be early part of seventeenth century, as we know the pondok as a

traditional Islamic institution, has remained an Islamic heritage in the southern

Thailand today, representing the Islamic center of learning of several decades. It will

not cease to perform its roles as long as the Muslim so city is in need of it. It role in

providing Islamic heritage should not be disturbed. The effort of any party or any

authority to destroy this center will meet with failure.

Muslim communities in the world seek to follow the same Islamic concept of

educating their children. However, differences occur in the way and each community

implements is education concepts. Several different types of Islamic education

instruction such as pondok, pesantren, langgar, and madrasah, exist in Indonesia,


72

Philippines, Malaysia, and southern Thailand. The kitab Jawi written by either

Indonesia or the Pattani Ulama are being taught in such institutions. In addition to

these instructions, Masjid and balisah (musalla) are also utilized as learning centers

providing basic Islamic heritage to the Muslims in their everyday life.

Table 2: Hierarchical structure of Islamic institutions in Thailand

Source: Ramizah Wan Muhammad the Dato’ Yuthitham and the Administration of Islamic

Law in Southern Thailand (2011), Omar Farouk, “The Muslims of Thailand: A

Survey” (1988).

Mosque

Religious Affairs

Ministry of InteriorMinistry of Justice

Dept. of Local and judicialAdministration

Provincial Courts ofFirst Instance

Dato YuthitbamChularajmontri

National Muslim council

Provincial Muslim Council

Private Religion School

Mosque

Imam of the Mosque

National Assembly

yMinistry of Education

King of Thailand

y


73

Table 3 the number and percentage of Muslims in Thailand (Population and

Housing census: 2000)

Part Number Percent

Bangkok 262,023 9.4

Central 220,434 7.9

North 30,637 1.1

North East 18,069 6.7

South 2,246,399 80.9

Total 2777,542 100.0

From: National Statistical Office of Thailand: 2002.


74

NOTE AND REFERENCES

1 D.R. Sardesai, Southeast Asia, Past and Present, Harper Collins Publisher, NewDelhi, 1997, p.3.

2 Ibid., 4-5.3 Imtiyaz Yusuf, “Southeast Asia: Aspects of Islam in Thailand today” ISIM

Newsletter, no.3/9 1999, p.19.4 Gilquin Michel, The Muslims of Thailand. Translated Islamism, Michael

Silkworm book, 2005, pp.33-34.5 Neil J. Melvin, “Conflict in southern Thailand Islamism, Violence and the State in

the Patani Insurgency“, Stockholm International Peace Research Institute No. 20,2007, p. 19.

6 Chidchonok Rahimmula “Peace Resolution: A case study of separatist andterrorist Movement in southern border provinces of Thailand”, Department ofsocial sciences, faulty of Humanities sciences of Prince of Songkla University,Vol.10.No.1. 2004, p. 99.

7 The National Reconciliation Commissions (NRC) composed of 50 members localand national civil society and government leaders. It was convened under the formerPrime Minister Anand Panyarachun on March 2005, tasked with overseeing thatpeace is brought back to the south. Chapter 3, “Diagnosis: Understanding Violencein the Southern Border Provinces”, submitted 2006, pp. 30.

8 Thanet Aphornsuvan, ” History and Politics of the Muslim in Thailand“Thammasat University, 2003, p. 9.

9 Gilquin Michel, op.cit., pp. 64-65.10 Sathian R.M., Economic change in the Pattani region.1880-1930: tin and cattle in

the Era of Siam’s Administrative reforms (Ph.D.) thesis Submitted in Departmentof History, National University of Singapore 2011, pp. 32-33.

11 Kasian Ahmad, Hikayat Hang Tuah Dewan Bahasa kualalumpur Malaysian.1973,p.144-116.

12 Tengku Ismail Chilk & Tengku Arifin Chilk, Patani Cradle of the East: A Historyof Patani, ed by Emir. Meson Hoadley, Muslim news Thailand, 2011, p.41.

13 The Malacca empire, www.colonialvoyage.com/malacca.html (accessed July 6, 2013).14 Tengku Ismail Chilk &Tengku Arifin Chilk, op.cit. p.43.15 Ibid., p.43.16 Ibid.,p.43.seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fern%C3%A3o_Mendes_Pinto

(accessed July 15,2013).17 Tengku Ismail Chik & Tengku Arifin Chik, op.cit., p. 43.18 Arifin Binci, Alaoman, Ahmad Somboon Bualuang, Patani Darussalam, the

Center of southern Thai Islamic culture, Muslim News (in Thai) 1st/2000. p 74,see Afifin Binci, Political and social history of Pattani, Southern Thailand,University of Michigan. (in Thai) 2007, p.63-64 see Tengku Ismail Chik&Tengku Arifin Chik , op.cit., p.45.


75

19 Tengku Ismail Chik & Tengku Arifin Chik,op.cit., p.45.20 Ibid., p.46.21 Ibid., p. 47.22 Hung –Guk Cho, “Thai- Malay Conflicts in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth

Centuries”, International Area Review, Department of South East Asian StudiesSogang University, Vol.2. No. 2. 1999, pp. 53-54.

23 Tengku Ismail Chik &Tengku Arifin Chik, op.cit., p.47.24 Ibid., p.46.25 Ibid., p.48.26 Ibid., p. 48.27 Afifin Binci, op.cit., p.77.28 Tengku Ismail Chik &Tengku Arifin Chik , op.cit, p. 48.29 Ibid., p.49.30 Ibid.,p. 49.31 Donald F. lach and Edwin J. Van Kley: Asian in the Making of Europe. Vol. (3)

A century of Advance, the University of Chicago. 1993, p.1172.32 Reid Anthony (ed) .. Southeast Asian in the Age of commerce 1450-1680: Vol. (1)

The londs below the winds new haven: Yale University Press 1988, p.68.33 Tengku Ismail Chik & Tengku Arifrin Chik, op.cit. p.53.34 Ibid., p.53.35 Ibid., p.5436 Wood, W.A.R. (1926) “A history of Siam” 1926, p.167., see Tengku Ismail Chik

& Tengku Arifin Chik, op.cit., p.55.37 Tengku Ismail Chik &Tengku Arifin Chik, op.cit., p.64.38 Ibid., pp. 67-68.39 Max L. Gross, A Muslim Archipelago; Islam and Politics in Southeast Asia.

National Defense Intelligence College. Washington, DC, 2007, pp. 59-60.40 Klaimanee Wiphusana, “The need to improve population and resource control in

Thailand’s counterinsurgency” (M.A.) thesis submitted in Department of DefenseAnalysis, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, California,2008,p.7.

41 Ibid.,p.7.42 Imtiyaz Yusuf “The Role of Chularatjmotri/Shaikh al- Islam in Resolving Ethno-

religious Conflict in Southern Thailand” The American Journal of Islamic SocialSciences Vol.27 No.1.: 31-53, 2010, p. 36., see Andrew D.W. Forbers, TheMuslim of Thailand, Center for South East Asian Studies (Bihar) IndiaDepartment Islamic Studies, Muslim Aligarh University, vol.1. 1988, p. 22.

43 Richard W. Bulliet, “The Shaikh al-Islam and the Evolution of Islamic Society”Studies Islamic No.35 1972, pp. 53-67.

44 Imtiyaz Yusuf op.cit., p.36.45 International Crisis Group “Southern Thailand: Insurgency Not, Jihad. 5. p. 23.

(accessed on 6 June 2013).


76

STRUCTURE OF GENEALOGY OF THE INLAND DYNASTY OFPATANI KINGDOM IN SOUTHERN THAILAND

Figure:1: : Structure of Genealogy of the Inland Dynasty of Patani


77

Figure: 2: Structure of Genealogy of Patani’s Rajas ( Inland Dynasty of Patani)


78

Figure: 3: Structure of Kelantan Dynasty (1)


79

Figure: 4: Structure of Kelantan Dynasty (2)


80

Figure: 5: Structure of the political evolutionary chart of Patani state


81

Appendix: VI Map of the Islamic world, 1500

Courtesy: http://www.ucalgary.ca/applied_history/tutor/islam/fractured/summary.html


82

Appendix: VII The Map of Islam's Journey into Southeast Asia

Courtesy:https://www.google.co.in/search?q=south+east+asia+to+the+14th+century+map


83

Appendix 1: The graveyard of King Tu Nakpa Islamil Shah. It islocated at the Brahome, Yaring, Pattani Province in Thailand

Courtesy: http://www.muslimthai.com


84

Appendix: 2 The graveyard of King Patani Dynasty, KelantanDynasty and Inland Dynasty of Patani. It is located at the Kelantanin Malaysian

Source: Arifin Binci, A. Laoman, Ahmad Somboon Bualang., “PataniDarussalam”, the center of Southern Thai Islamic culture 1st 2000 .p 21.


85

Appendix: 3 The last Raja of Patani (Ruler 1899-1902) Tengku Abdul KadirQamarruddin in Kelantan Dynasty

Source: Bangnara, A. Patani: Past-Persant, Bankok: Chomrom Saengtian (inThai). 1976, 9,24(a) , Arifin Binci, A. Laoman, Ahmad Somboon Bualang.,

“Patani Darussalam”, the center of Southern Thai Islamic culture 1st 2000 .

CHAPTER: III

SOCIAL-CULTURAL CONFLICT IN SOUTHERNTHAILAND

Sukhothai Period

Ayutthaya Period

Thonburi Period

Early Chakri Period

Inclusion into Thailand

Modern Thai Rule

Southern Thailand (Pattani) Vassal State

World War II

The conflict in southern Thailand

Conflicting Identity

Cultural Identity in Southern Thailand

Political and Integration Policies in Southern Thailand

Chapter III: Social-Cultural Conflict…

86

CHAPTER: III

SOCIAL-CULTURAL CONFLICT IN SOUTHERN THAILAND

Introduction

Present-day, the relation between Malay society in the Southern part of Thailand and

Thai government underwent considerable conflict. During the Second World War this

conflict eventually took place in the form of a separatist movement, which is recently

continued against this background. In this chapter i will try to explain that the

Muslims call the southernmost part of Thailand is an area of Islamic culture and the

remaining part of Thailand is the area of conflict in Thailand.

From the seventeenth century to the eighteenth century, the root cause of the

conflict between Malay Muslims and Thai government can be summarized as the

efforts of the latter to take hold Sultan of Malay and dominate on the Malay society

and the resistance of the former against their efforts. The purpose of the chapter is to

investigate the root cause of this conflict between southern Thailand and Thai

government. This work will focus attentions in this period

3.1. Sukhothai Period (1238-1438)

In 1238 a Tai chieftain, Sri Intraditya, declared his independence from Khmer

overlords and established an independent kingdom at Sukhothai in the Chao Phraya

Valley in central Thailand. After that the people of the central plain took the name

Thai, which means “free,” to distinguish themselves from other Tai people still underforeign rule. The Kingdom of Sukhothai conquered the Isthmus of Kra in the

thirteenth century and financed itself with war booty and tribute from vassal states in

Burma (today Myanmar), Laos, and the Malay Peninsula. During the reign of

Ramkhamhaeng (Rama the Great, r. 1279–98), Sukhothai established diplomatic

relations with the Yuan Dynasty (1279–1368) in China and acknowledged China’semperor as its nominal overlord. After Ramkhamhaeng’s death, the vassal statesgradually broke away; a politically weakened Sukhothai was forced to submit in 1378

to the rising new Thai Kingdom of Ayutthaya and was completely absorbed by 1438.

During the Sukhothai period, the Thai-speaking Kingdom of Lan Na

flourished in the north near the border of Burma with its capital at Chiang Mai, the

name also sometimes given to this kingdom, Lan Na emerged as an independent city-

state in 1296. Later, from the sixteenth to eighteenth centuries, Lan Na came under

the control of Burma.1


87

3.2. Ayutthaya Period (1351-1767)

The city-state of Ayutthaya was founded in 1350 and was established capital in 1351

on the Chao Phraya River in central Thailand; It was named after “Ayodhaya”, the

Indian city of the hero Rama in the Hindu epic Ramayana. In 1360 Ramathibodi

(r. 1351–69) declared Theravada Buddhism as the official religion of Ayutthaya and

compiled a legal code based on Hindu legal texts. Thai custom remained in effect

until the late nineteenth century. Ayutthaya became the region’s most powerful

kingdom, eventually capturing Angkor and forcing the Khmer to submit to Thai

suzerainty. Rather than a unified kingdom, Ayutthaya was a patchwork of self-

governing principalities and tributary provinces ruled by members of the royal family

who owed allegiance to the King. The King, however, was an absolute monarch who

took on god-like aspects. This belief in a divine kingship continued until the

eighteenth century. The kingdom became increasingly sophisticated as new social,

political, and economic developments took place.

In 1511 Ayutthaya received the first diplomatic mission from the Portuguese,

who earlier that year had conquered the state of Malacca in the south Thailand.

Ayutthaya signed trade treaties with Portugal in 1516 and with the Netherlands in

1592 and established commercial relation with Japan and England in the seventeenth

century also Thai diplomatic missions also went to Paris and The Hague, when the

Dutch used force to extract extraterritorial rights and free trade access in 1664,

Ayutthaya turned to France for assistance in building fortifications. In this regard

French engineers, missionaries and the first printing press soon arrived. Fear of the

threat of foreign religion to Buddhism and the arrival of English warships provoked

anti- European reactions in the late seventeenth century.

After a bloody dynastic struggle in the 1690s, Ayutthaya entered what some

historians have called its golden age—a relatively peaceful period in the second

quarter of the eighteenth century when art, literature, and learning flourished. The

rising power of Burma led to a Burmese invasion of Ayutthaya and the destruction of

its capital and culture in 1767. Only a Chinese attack on Burma kept the chaotic Thai

polity from Burmese subjugation.2


88

3.3. Thonburi Period (1767–1782)

The Thai made a quick recovery under the leadership of a half- Chinese military

commander, Phraya Taksin. Taksin had escaped from the besieged Ayutthaya and

organized resistance to the Burmese invaders, eventually driving them out. Taksin

declared himself, King and established a new capital at Thon Buri, a fortress town

across the river from modern Bangkok. By 1774 Taksin had annexed Lan Na and

reunited Ayutthaya in 1776. He was deposed and executed in 1782, however, by his

ministers, who invoked interests of the state over Taksin’s claim to divinity.3

3.4. Early Chakri Period (1782–1868)

Another general, Chakri, assumed the throne and took the name YotFa (Rama I, r.

1782–1809). YotFa established the ruling house that continues to the present. The

court moved across the river to the village of Bangkok, the kingdom’s economy

revived, and what remained of the artistic heritage of Ayutthaya was restored. The

Kingdom of Bangkok consolidated claims to territory in Cambodia and the Malayan

state of Kedah while Britain annexed territory in an area that had been contested by

the Thai and the Burmese for centuries. Subsequent treaties—in 1826 with Britain and

in 1833 with the United States— granted foreign trade concessions in Bangkok. The

kingdom’s expansion was halted in all directions by 1851.

The reign of King Mongkut (Rama IV, r. 1851–68) marked a new opening to

the Western nations. To avoid the humiliations suffered by China and Burma in their

wars with Britain and the resulting unequal treaties, Bangkok negotiated and signed

treaties with Britain, the United States, France, and other European countries between

1855 and 1870. As a result, commerce with the West increased and, in turn,

revolutionized the Thai economy and connected it to the world monetary system.

Foreign demands for extraterritoriality convinced Mongkut that legal and

administrative reforms were needed if Siam4were to be treated as an equal by the

Western powers. Monkut’s death in 1868 postponed further reforms, however.

Reign of Chulalongkorn, Reforms, and War (1868–1932) Real reform

occurred during the reign of Chulalongkorn (Rama V, r. 1868–1910). After his formal

enthronement in 1873, he announced reforms in the field of judiciary, state finance,

and the political structure. An antireform revolt was broke out and was strictly

suppressed in 1874. After which Chulalongkorn embarked on less radical approaches.

In time, he ordered the gradual elimination of slavery and corves labor. He introduced


89

currency- based taxes and a conscription-based regular army. In 1893 a centralized

state administration replaced the semi feudal provincial administration. The regime

established European-style schools for children of the royal family and sent

government officials, promising civil servants, and military officers to Europe for

further education. The first railroad line was opened between Bangkok and Ayutthaya

in 1897 and extended farther north in 1901 and 1909. To the south, rail connections

were made in 1903, linking with British rail lines in Malaya.

During this time, British and French colonial advances in Southeast Asia

posed serious threats to Siam’s independence and forced Siam to relinquish its claims

in Cambodia, Laos, and the northern Malay states. Although much diminished in

territory by the 1910s, Siam preserved its independence, and the kingdom served as a

buffer state between the British and French colonies. During this time, anti-Chinese

sentiments came to the fore. About 10 percent of the population was Chinese, and

ethnic Chinese largely controlled many government positions, the rice trade, and other

enterprises, much to the resentment of the native Thai.

Siam joined the Allies in declaring war against Germany during World War I

(1914–18) and sent a small expeditionary force to the European western front. These

actions won Siam favorable amendments to its treaties with France and Britain at the

end of the war. Siam also gained, as spoils of war, impounded German ships for use

in its merchant marine. Siam took part in the Versailles peace conference in 1919 and

was a founding member of the League of Nations.5

3.5. Inclusion into Thailand

In 1785, King Rama I, the founder of the current Thai Dynasty, enacted a campaign

to incorporate Pattani as well as the Malay Sultanates of Kedan, Kelantan and

Terengganu into the Siamese Empire. Rama sidelined the ruling elites and elevated

leaders loyal to Bangkok in their place. further uprisings against Bangkok occurred in

1789-1791, after which Siam deposed the Patani Raja6, and the power sharing

arrangement by splitting the former kingdom of Pattani in to territories can be seen as

the beginning of a ‘divide and rule ‘policy designed to weaken the forms fitting Thai

in order to be able claim legitimate sovereignty over the region. This, of course, went

against Malay conviction that the kingdom was not divided. The seven territories had

always constituted part of the united realm. In any event, the heads of the territories

were not independent rulers, but were nominated by the supreme King at Pattani and

expected to rule in accordance with the tradition of subordinate chiefs of the realm.


90

By unilateral decree Patani became ‘Pattani’, Tuk Jong ‘NongChik’, Reman‘

Raman’,Jalor‘Yala; Sai (Teluban)‘Saiburi’, Jering (Jambu) ‘Yaring’, and legeh Ra-

Ngek’. Acceding to the Siamese, Pattani was only a city among the other six

territories. Each had its own head governing the territory independently, but under the

surveillance and supervision of NaiPhai, the Sino-Siamese viceroy. After ligor,

Singgora was a second level administrative center of Bangkok’s colonial outpost.

Residing at Jaring (Jambu), now called ‘Yaring’, the Siamese viceroy was to oversee

Malay rulers. All political and economical issues of the former kingdom of Patani

were sent first to the Siamese colonial office in Singgora and then on to Ligor before

being forwarded to Bangkok for ultimate determination. The Malays, however,

considered the Siamese in Jering/yaring as mere representatives, a sort of a foreign

ambassador. For them Pattani remained an independent state with the Sultan as the

supreme head. The realities were somewhat different. Every ruler had to be approved

in advance by Bangkok before any official position could be announced. Rulers in

name only, the Malay chiefs had only minimal powers to government their territories.

Basically they served as revenue collectors for the King of Bangkok. Malay- Muslim

titles as raja and shah gradually disappeared, being replaced by the Bangkok second

class titles for chiefs as phraya or luang. 7

In 1816 a new organization was proposed by the governor of Singgora, Phraya

Apai Sonkhram (a Chinese), and officially approved by King Rama II. The ruling

organization can be summarized as follows.

Table: 4 the political evolutionary chart of Patani state

Territory Ruler,s Residence

Pattani

NongCik

Raman

Jalor

Rangeh

SAiBuri

Jering

Tuan Sulong

Tuan Nik

Tuan Mansoor

Tuan Jalor

Tuan Nik Dah

Tuan NikDeh

Tuan Phai

Kresik

NongCik

Kota Baru

Jalor

Legeh

Jeri Nga

Jamb


91

Here only a few notes concerning each of the seven territories and their rulers

can be given. Pattani was ruled by Tuan Sulong, a grandson of Datauk Pengkalam (R.

1791-1810). For the Malays as a whole only the ruler of the Pattani territory was

considered the legitimate head of the entire Kingdom, who was consistently called raja

or Sultan. While the Siamese- Bangkok considered the seven territories as their vassal

state, for the Malays they were a force of occupation. Despite country’s name change to

Pattani, it was still considered by the local population as an independent state. The

mosque in kresik repaired and re-establish as an important Islamic institution. Tuan

Sulong attempted to rebuild kresik on the style of its glorious past, but his project was

opposed by Siamese authorities. At present, Kresik is just an abandoned small village

only a ruined skeleton. As the place where many of serious incidents in the present

conflict occurred, it has always been a symbol of the struggle with and resistance to the

Bangkok regime. Most of the Pattani historical legacy also lies here.8

Further uprisings against Bangkok occurred in1789-1791, after which Siam

deposed the Pattani Raja, and 1808 after which Pattani was carved into seven smaller

Muang or provinces in a repeat of the „divide and rule‟ tactic. This did not stop the

seven provinces from rebelling against Siamese rule, but the rebellions resulted only

in Kedah being subdivided into two parts. The rebellions during the Ayutthaya and

early Bangkok periods were mainly conflicts among elites over the control of

manpower and wealth in Malay provinces of Siam9. In 1891, during a visit to the

Malay provinces, King Rama V said

“We do not have any special interests in these provinces...If we were to

lose them to the British, we would lose only tributes of silver and gold

flowers. Other than that, there would be no other material loss. However,

to lose these territories would be a blow to the dignity of the country. That

is why we must reassert our possession of these territories...”

Between the Siamese and Malay elites focused the conflict in the area to an

aristocratic struggle Matrimonial bond for power, not a nationalist or religious

struggle. A united opposition to RamaI’s incorporation in the early 19th century

showed signs of a Malay identity, but there was no popular solidarity or resistance

against Siamese rule.10


92

3.6. Modern Thai Rule

At the end of the nineteenth century King Chulalongkorn, Rama V, accelerated his

hold on Southern Thailand in the face of British expansion in Malaya. He converted

the traditionally semi-autonomous principalities into provinces under direct rule from

Bangkok. in the case of Pattani and her sister states, this occurred under the creation

of the “Area of Seven Provinces” administrative body in 1901consolidation through

1906.followed by the official annexation of Pattani in 1902 and consolidation through

1906. This move alienated the Malay rajas and nobility, but, aside from the then-Raja

of Pattani, this was easily smoothed over by reparations from Bangkok. The British

opposed the Siamese rearrangement of sovereignty requiring the Siamese to sign the

Anglo-Thai treaty of 1909 whereby the government in Siam ceded the provinces of

Kedah, Kelantan, Terengganu, and Perlis to Great Britain in exchange for recognition

of Thai control of Pattani and Satun.11

In 1902, King Chulalongkorn’s decreed, in an effort to unify the code of law

in Thailand, that “no law shall be established” without specific royal consent. Up until

then the local rajas enforced Sharia law and the backlash from the religious

community forced Chulalongkorn to strike the compromise that the state would

refrain from intruding into the sensitive areas of inheritance and family relations,

following the common British colonial practice. This allowed the locals to create a

court system, “the Qadi’s court,” but the government got to pick the Ulama who

presided over the court. Where the centers of Malay Muslim life had been the Masjid

or mosque, where rule and law were administered as well as religion, and the pondok

or religious school. Under the new order central governance and secular law replaced

local customs and religious laws. The Masjid was no longer the center of the village.

To further exacerbate the changes, while family and inheritance laws were

administered in accordance with Sharia law, these decisions could be overturned by a

secular Thai judge on appeal. In the southern areas there was little formal education

amongst the Malay children. In most of the country, government education officials

and Buddhist monks implemented the reforms. In the southern areas where, if there

was any opportunity for education, it was limited to memorization of the Qur’an, the

reforms were implemented by the government without local or religious assistance.12

As school reform spread through Thailand in the early twentieth century, the

government implemented four years of compulsory education in public schools. The

1921 Education Act enacted compulsory attendance and required schools that wished


93

to receive public assistance to meet minimum requirements including administering

education in the Thai language. King Rama VI campaigned intensely to consolidate a

Thai national identity. School reform and a common national curriculum was one of

his best tools. In 1922 a serious rebellion occurred. Whereas most rebellions had been

the province of the elites or some of the hajjis, religious leaders, protesting the new

law structure, the 1922 rebellion had a much wider base including many Malay

nobility and hajjis, as well as the former Patani raja. In 1923 reforms issued for the

south included the repeal of compulsory education, alteration of the tax code to ensure

Thai Malays were not taxed more than British Malays, and the assignment of more

agreeable Thai administrators.13

In 1932, a coup ended the absolute power of the Thai monarchy and ushered

in an era of liberal democracy. Greater Pattani, consisting of the modern provinces of

Pattani, Yala, and Narathiwat, elected Muslims to both the National Assembly and the

Senate in 1932 and again in 1937. The province of Satun, never a part of the Kingdom

of Pattani itself, was the only majority Muslim province not to send a fully Muslim

slate to Bangkok. Unfortunately, the democratically elected bodies exercised little

control over the Thai bureaucracy. Little progress toward integration occurred prior to

the reemergence of nationalism under Marshal Phibul Songkam in 1938. The ultra-

nationalist pan-Thai agenda of Phibul Songkam was off-putting enough for the Malay

Muslims, but he also undertook a series of modernity initiatives that, while aimed at

Thai society as a whole, especially offended Malay Muslims. These initiatives

included the requirement to take a Thai surname which Thais did not traditionally use.

Also Phibul Songkam encouraged men to kiss their wives in public and required

western dress, including westernized women’s hats, in public. These regulations

forced the Malay Muslim population to forego traditional Muslim dress and

deportment. They overturned the special status of Islamic law over inheritance and

family matters. They even required the use of forks and spoons as the “national

cutlery.”To many Buddhist Thais these were an affront to their traditions, but to

Malay Muslims in Pattani it was an affront to their religion as well.14

Against the backdrop of the rule of nationalist Phibul Songkam in the newly

renamed Kingdom of Thailand in 1939, was the run up to war in Southeast Asia. The

elites of Thailand backed the Japanese while the elites in Pattani backed the British

and petitioned the British to liberate Pattani from Thai rule. Thailand capitulated to


94

the Japanese and did nothing to hinder their run toward Singapore. In return the

Japanese restored the provinces of Kedah, Kelantan, Terengganu, and Perlis to

Thailand. Northern Malay resistance to the Japanese was largely organized by Tengku

Mahmud Mahyuddin, the son of the former raja of Pattani who had moved to

Kelantan in British Malaya after his ouster in Pattani.15Tengku Mahmud Mahyuddin

hoped that the British would assist in liberating Pattani in exchange for his efforts

against the Japanese.16Unfortunately British reversals in Malaya left them unable to

project power or extensively affect the post war order on the Johor Peninsula. The

British needed the help of Thailand to counter the post-war armed Malayan nationalist

and communist movements, so there was no real question of liberating Pattani from

the Thais. Phibul Songkam left power in 1944 with the slumping fortunes of the

Japanese and a more moderate leader arose.17

3.7. Southern Thailand (Pattani) Vassal State

This ethnic Malay Sultanate was founded in 1309, in the pre-Islamic period the Malay

Peninsula. About the same time that the Pattani elites converted to Islam, the

Kingdom of Siam began to assert its influence. This early suzerainty allowed the

native Malay rajas to remain in power in Pattani as long as they continued to pay

tribute. This early association was not without its tension. The Pattani rajas were

focused toward Malacca more than toward Siam. Unfortunately the Portuguese

defeated the Malaccan Sultanate in 1511 so Malacca was unable to assist Pattani in

throwing off its obligations to Siam. Throughout the Ayutthaya period in Siam and

into the Bangkok period, Pattani proved a troublesome vassal. Whenever Siam

seemed weak, Pattani would, at the very least stop paying tribute and at the most

revolt. Revolts occurred in 1564 when a Pattani unit, called to assist Siam against the

Burmese, instead seized the King’s palace. Other uprisings occurred in 1630, 1633

and 1767 after the Burmese ransacked Ayutthaya. Throughout this period the Siamese

government took an indirect “divide and rule‟ approach to the governing of Pattani,

splitting the territory up and cultivated rival elites to administer the separate pieces

under the observance of the administration of a southern Thai city. This approach

succeeded in keeping Pattani mostly divided and a vassal of Siam for five centuries.18

The importance of the Malay identity in the struggle of the southern Thai

Muslims can be clearly seen when we run through the Bangkok policies that cause

opposition from the Thai Malay Muslims and the claims and objectives of various


95

separatist groups and organizations. The more organized struggle of the Thai Malay

Muslims begins in early 1900s. 1901 King Chulalongkorn decided to speed up the

process of assimilation and centralize the administration of the southern provinces.

This led to opposition from the Malay Raja of Pattani, Tengku Abdul Kadir, among a

few others. However, this struggle was short lived and ended after Tengku Abdul

Kadir was arrested and jailed, but released a few years later after he signed a guarantee to

renounce politics.19 More periodic protests began after 1910 when the Bangkok

government decided to emphasize more on Thai language, and the Thai Malay was

forced to receive Thai language education. When the Primary School Act 1921 was

passed, major rebellion was orchestrated by Tengku Abdul Kadir from Kelantan.20

Monarchy in Thailand came to an end in 1932 and was followed by a short-

lived democracy, which saw Malays obtaining seats in the National Assembly and

Senate. In 1938 Thailand fell under military rule, which again tried to assimilate the

Malay, but did not try to convert them to Buddhism.21

During the Second World War, Bangkok government supported the Japanese,

while the Malay under the leadership of the son of Tengku Abdul Kadir, Tengku

Mahmud Mahyuddin supported the British in Malaya.22

The issues of History and identity were clearly shown in Tengku Abdul Jalal,

another Malay leader's plea to the British to liberate the southern Thai provinces from

Thai rule:

Pattani is really a Malay country, formerly ruled by Malay Rajas for

generations, but has been Siam’s dependency only since about fifty years ago. Now

the Allied Nations ought to help the return of this country to the Malays, so that they

can have it united with other Malay countries in the peninsula.23

More structured organization was formed in the 1940s with increasing Malay

nationalism and dissatisfaction with the Thai authorities. The objectives and activities

of these organizations clearly showed the Malay identity.24

3.8. World War II

On August 8, 1941, the same day that Pearl Harbor was attacked, Japanese troops also

invaded Thailand at SamutPrakarn province (near Bangkok) and in the south at

Prachuabkirikhan, Chumpon, Songkhla and Patani. At that time, the Thai Armed

Forces were small and unable to wage war with Japan. Even though Thailand had


96

decided to join Britain and the United States, both countries were busy and help

would have been too late; Thailand would have been crushed by the Japanese

invasion before help arrived. Ultimately, Prime Minister Phibun Songkhram yielded

to pressure to ally with Japan. However, many Thai people did not agree with his

decision and formed an underground resistance known as “Free Thai” to fight against

the Japanese, led by Pridi Phanomyong. Free Thai cooperated with the United States

Office of Strategic Services (OSS) and British Forces 136. Free Thai’s members

conducted training of guerrilla forces, intelligence gathering, and made secret contact

with the allied forces.25

In Malaya, Tengku Mahmud Mahyuddin son of the last Sultan of Pattani,

Tengku Abdul Kadir, who had been sent into exile by the Thai government, played a

big role in countering the Japanese occupation. He recruited Malay volunteers for

British Force 136to fight the Japanese. Most of his activity took place in the Pattani

Region. Tengku Mahmud Mahyuddin also received support from Pridi Phanomyong,

the leader of Free Thai, in his fight. Pridi Phanomyong also hinted that “an Allied

victory would bring independence to Patani.” However, Tengku Mahmud

Mahyuddin’s hope seem to be unfounded when the Japan successfully occupied

Malaya in February 1942, and restored the territories of Kelantan, Terengganu,

Kedah, and Perlis to Thailand.26

In Pattani, during the war, many Muslim people felt deep regret when the Pattani

provincial governor announced to Muslim leaders and clerics that he wanted Muslim

people to pay respect to Buddha’s images in schools. He stated that Buddhism was the

national religion of Thailand. Every Thai person was to pay respect to Buddha’s images

even if they were not Buddhist. Abdul Yhalal Nasare, alias Adun Na Saiburi,

representative of Pattani, objected to the Thai government, mentioning that the Pattani

provincial governor was overdoing the cultural mandates and hurting Muslims, and

attempting to erase Islam from Thailand. Yet, in April, 1944, the government replied that

“the Ministry of Interior has investigated this issue and found that the act of the Pattani

provincial governor was correct and didn’t bring any trouble or complication to the

people.” Abdul Yhalal Nasare was very upset with the government’s reply. He finally

immigrated to Malaya. During that time, confidence in the government greatly decreased.

In July 1944, Prime Minister Phibun Songkhram resigned. The conflict between the

Pattani people and the Thai government was temporarily reduced because the new

government took a more conciliatory approach to governing the southern provinces.27


97

On August 15, 1945, Japan surrendered unconditionally subsequent to the

attacks by atomic bombs at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. After the war, Thailand, this had

changed to the allies’ side during the war, returned Kelantan, Terengganu, Kedah, and

Perlis to British Malaya. At this point, Tengku Mahmud Mahyuddin saw a political

opportunity for independence of Pattani. He sent a request to Britain, asking for help

to liberate Pattani from Thai rule, or else for an affiliation with the Malay Federation.

However, this was a difficult and critical issue for Britain when considering the status

of Pattani as a reward to Tengku Mahmud Mahyuddin and the Muslim people who

helped the British during the war and also as a means of “punishing” Thailand for its

stance in the war. In this case, Britain had the power to grant Tengku Mahmud

Mahyuddin’s request, but Britain had many things to consider: Thailand’s secret

assistance to the allies against the Japanese was substantial for Britain; there were

friendly acts and favorable support from the U.S. to Thailand, and also the Anglo-

Siamese treaty of 1909. Ultimately, when Britain gave no answer to Tengku Mahmud

Mahyuddins, his hopes fell.28

3.9. The conflict in southern Thailand

Historical Background of the Conflict: As we have already known that Thailand has

been experiencing unprecedented escalation of political unrest in its three Malay-

Muslim-dominated provinces, namely Pattani, Yala and Narathiwat, where 80 percent

of the total Thai Muslim population today about 8-10 million29 are dwelling amidst

the differences of ethnic, lingual, cultural and political factors among them. The

incidents of unrest in the Deep South from January 2004 to January 2010 had

happened for six full years.

From the database of Deep South Watch, it was found that over the past 6

years, there were a total of 9,446 incidents of unrest, resulting in approximately 4100

deaths and 6,509 injuries. The total casualty of the unrest over the past six years, with

the dead and the injured figures combined, was more than 10,609 individuals. If the

family of the deceased and the injured were included as those affected by the

mentioned loss, then it is estimated that the number of people who were directly

affected by the loss would be approximately 53,045 persons. It is interesting to note

that the victims - those who lost their lives as well as those who were injured from the

violence in the southern border provinces - consisted of various backgrounds. There

were Muslims as well as Buddhists. Among the dead, the Muslims outnumbered the


98

Buddhist, while among the injured, the majority was Buddhists. Statistics showed that

58.95 percents (2,417 individuals) of the deceased were Muslims, while 38.02 percent

(1,559 persons) were Buddhists. Among the injured, 59.82 percent (3,894 persons)

were Buddhists, while 32.17 percent (2,094 persons) were Muslims.30

Prof. Imtiyaz Yusuf in right in written, in 1906, Siam annexed the Malay

Muslim provinces of NongChik, Ra-ngae, Raman, Saiburi, Yala, and Yaring, which

were parts of the independent Malay Muslim vassal state of Patani. Next, Siam

dissolved and united the provinces into what came to be known as “monthon Pattani”

or a subdivision of Pattani.

The annexation was further strengthened in 1909 by an Anglo-Siamese treaty

that drew a border between Pattani and the Malay states of Kedah, Kelantan, Perak,

and Perlis. According to this treaty, the British recognized Siam sovereignty over

Pattani. In return, Siam gave up its territorial claim over Kelantan and recognized

British control over the other Malay states of Kedah, Perak, and Perlis.

After 1909, Siam embarked on a centralization policy, which led to the

imposition of Thai administrative officials in the three deep southern Malay

provinces. Most of these officials were Thai Buddhists and unfamiliar with the local

language and Muslim culture, which led to social antagonism.

According to the centralization policy, the former Negara or Country Patani

state was divided into three provinces division Narathiwat, Pattani, and Yala, which

now make up the three Malay Muslim majority provinces of the South. This period

also saw the beginning of the Pattani separatist movement, which was initially a

royalist movement led by Tengku Mahmud Mahyuddin, a prominent Pattani leader

and the son of the last raja of Pattani.31

Vanchai Vatanasapt in his research entitled “Citizens Dialogue: Out Of”, also

agreed with Imtiyaz Yusuf, concluded all aspects of origin and development of the

conflict clearly as his writing read thus:

1) The issue of conflict in southernmost provinces, Thailand is a chronic problem

that several governments have attempted to resolve, but day after day acts of

violence still occur.


99

2) According is the research done by the King Pradjadhipok Institute, the conflict

in Southern Thailand stems from the desire of the ethnic Malay-Pattani people

to preserve their unique language, religion and culture.

3) There is evidence of an expressed desire for separatism, but it is probably not

the view of the vast majority of those in the region.

4) The state must understand that Game Theory will probably have a part in

creating a united front and trust building measures.

5) The life of every citizen whether Buddhist or Muslim which become the

capital cost of the Game Theory needs to be reduced effectively.”

Conflict Analysis: My observation drawn from the data received from the

Deep South Watch agency can be put into the following points, viz.

Firstly, the numbers of incidents are decreased interestingly due to the new

measure rendered by the government. Instead of using military as before, but now the

government using peace dialogue of life and action, which have been resorted to the

use in the past from the time of Former Prime Minister Prem Tinsulanonda. Thus,

says the deep-south-watcher: “Thailand attributed the success to the “Tai Rom Yen”

amnesty programme.”32 And this peace dialogue has been kept practicing by the

former Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva up until the former Prime Minister Yingluck

Chinavat.33

Secondly, among the dead and injured people, the numbers of ordinary

Muslims people outnumbered those of Buddhist monks, Islamic leaders, teachers,

policemen and soldiers, that leads to a conclusion that the separatists are trying to kill

those Muslims villagers who do not cooperate with them.34 So, majority of Thai

Muslims do not want separation from Thailand.

3.10. Conflicting Identity

The notion of Southern Thailand as foreigner or visiting was derogatory. Southern

Thailand Muslims view themselves as indigenous people. They had been living in

their region since 1668 when the Pattani and Kelantan Sultanes rein this region. The

annexation of their land by the King Chulalongkron had made them became an

integral part of Thailand. The fact that they were different in terms of religion,

language, custom from the majority of the Thai Buddhists, made the Thai identified

them as khaek35 (or Malay). Based on their distinct language, religion, and culture, the


100

majority of the Thai Buddhist treated them as an alien cultural group. After the

incorporation, they were also identified as Thai Muslims. Such a call, in Pattani’s

understanding, was intended to erase the Identity as Malay. The identity of Malay was

considered no longer relevant after being integrated to Thai, the newly recognized

identity as the Thai Muslims which was now more important and relevant to the

present situation of Pattani. Such identity by and large, was established by the

government through the annexation of Pattani territory and joined it into the

sovereignty of Thailand.

The way Thai -Buddhist saw the Pattani Muslims, and on the other way round,

was highly imbued with stereotyping, prejudices, and stigmatization. The Thai-

Buddhist often identified the Pattani as the Khaek, generally meant the visitor, or

foreigner. Khaek, referred to people with brown skin, coming from, South Asian, such

as from India, Pakistan and Bangladesh khaek, denoted to a derogatory meaning.

Those who were lazy, untrustworthy, poor, stupid, mischievous, thieves were often

identified as Khaek.

The Southern Thailand Muslims Identified the Thai- Buddhists as status

worshipers. It was the image of Buda that they worshiped. Waging war against them

was compulsory, not because they were atheist, but mainly since they were

colonizers, depriving the Pattani from their ancestral land. The Pattani Muslims were

uneasy to obey the infidel rulers. The Muslim Jihad (war on the path of Allah)

directed against the Thai ruler was more on the cause of maintaining justice. Through

separatism movement, the South Muslims wanted to get back their freedom as well as

their land sovereignty from the Thai government. The relationship between deep

South and the Thai state representing the Thai-Buddhist majority was strongly marked

by ideological as well as political conflicts. The South Muslim identified their

relationship with the Thai government as the relationship between the colonized and

the colonizer. The historical fact supported such identification. Since 16th century

Pattani was an autonomous body of royal government reigned under Malay Muslim

Sultanates. Officially, the Pattani was forced to be integrated in 1902, and in the early

of 20th century Pattani was completely separated from other Malays in the Malay

Peninsula. Based on their kinship, ethnicity, and religion, the Pattani are parts of the

Malays in Malay Peninsula by blood, territory, culture, religion, and affinity they

were parts of their Malay brothers in the Peninsular. Incorporating Pattani into the


101

identification as Thai was mainly because they had their own history, religion,

custom, and kinship different from the Thai. Forced integration had led the Thai

government (Siamese) not only to destroy the Pattani’s regional autonomy, but also

their identity as Malay Muslims. The Thai government set education and other

cultural programmers to make the Pattani to make the Southern became Thai. In

reality these programs even strengthened their resistance against the Thai

government.36

3.11. Cultural Identity in Southern Thailand

Muslim of South Thailand is of Malay decent and speaks the Pattani Malay dialect,

which is close to the Kelantan of Malaysian. The Malay quality binds them closely to

the Malay culture world, which is the culture of north area from north Malay

Peninsula to Indonesian island of Sumatra and the southern Philippines. This being

part of the “Malay cultural world” is made more pronounced due to geographical

factors. When villagers in the area are asked who they are, the answer they give is

“Muslim Malay, which means ethnic Malay of Islamic faith. Some identify

themselves as ‘Islamic person,’ in a tone of voice that shows their pride and indicates

a high degree of religious devoutness.” Some reply that they are “aukhaenayu” (a

Malay), not “aukhaesiyae” or “aukhaesiyam” (a Siamese). It is possible that they are

afraid of saying “a Thai” because in the understanding of some people, “Thais or

Siamese are Buddhists.” Answering “aukhaesiyae” might make that person guilty of

“murtad”, or apostasy. In this sense, language and religion have long and intensively

shaped the identity of Malay Muslims in the area.30 Moreover, the allegiance of the

Malay villagers in the southern border provinces to the Malay language stems from

the fact that they are rural people who have used the language since childhood with

their parents and in their religious studies. In this sense, the Malay language, which

has come to define whether or not a person is Malay, is a link between the present-day

population and the glorious past of the Pattani Sultanate. When the Malay Peninsula

came under the influence of Islam, the local people adopted the Arabic script for use

in the Malay linguistic system. For this reason, the Malay language written in Arabic

characters is not only valuable in terms of communication, but also of religious

significance, as it is used in the study and dissemination of Islam and its sacred

rituals. For these people, the Malay language is a treasure trove of great cultural value

and a source of pride for Muslims of Malay descent. In a way, this being “Malay”


102

differs from being a Malaysian in Malaysia. While Malaysia is a new country born in

the 20th century, for over 700 years Pattani was one of the two centers of Islamic

studies in Southeast Asia(the other being Aceh, which was considered a gateway to

the holy city of Mecca). In fact, 300 years ago, Pattani was considered the best center

for Islamic studies on the Malay Peninsula. All Islamic texts written by Pattani

scholars were either in Arabic or Arabic-scripted Malay, called Jawi.37The majority of

Muslim population in southern Thailand is Sunni. The Muslim of Southern Thailand

has very good connection with the Muslim of other countries. They also participate in

the global events and the Muslim appears worldwide.38

The provinces of Pattani, Yala, Narathiwat and Satun once constituted ‘Patani

Raya’ or ‘Greater Patani, wedged between the Siamese Empire to its north and the

Malacca Sultanate to its south. Although it was the target of influence of both

neighbors, their domains of authority diverged. Culturally, the people of Pattani were

aligned with Malacca but politically, they found themselves under Siamese

suzerainty. The southward expansion of Siam, especially after the defeat of Malacca

by the Portuguese in 1511, forced the Malay Sultanate of Pattani to enter into a

tributary relationship with Siam. They were obligated to pay an accolade of gold

flowers called Bunga Mas. Although the Malay Sultans viewed this gift as a sign of

friendship with Siam, the latter regarded it as a symbol of allegiance.

The Malay rajas of Pattani detested their vassal association with Siam and

whenever the latter was perceived to be weak, they stopped paying tribute. The initial

revolts by Pattani occurred between 1630 and 1633. Conflict once again erupted after

the Burmese ransacked the Siamese capital of Ayutthaya in 1767. Frustrated with

these frequent rebellions by Pattani, King Rama I decided to abolish its tributary

status and in 1785, undertook a campaign to absorb it into the Siamese Empire along

with the Malay Sultanates of Kedah, Kelantan and Terengganu. In the process, the

existing rulers of Pattani were sidelined and leaders loyal to Siam were appointed.

This led to revolts by Raja Tengku Lamidin during 1789-91 and later by his successor

Dato Pengkalan in 1808. Bangkok managed to stave off these challenges and decided

to divide the region into seven smaller provinces. Despite these measures, trouble in

Kedah led to fresh bids for independence in 1832 and 1838 but these came to a

naught. This further caused the split of Kedah and the creation of the present-day

Satun province. The nature of the resistance against Siam until the early 20th century


103

was aristocratic. Matrimonial bonds were formed between the Siamese and Malays

and their dealings were directed by concerns over power rather than notions of ethnic

or religious solidarity. A united opposition was forged largely in the 19th century after

King Rama I’s decision to incorporate the Malay kingdoms directly under the

Siamese that led to the isolation of existing elites. The joint confrontation was

showing fledgling signs of ethnic Malay identity but the revolts against Siam were

still primarily a quest for political independence, or at the very least, autonomy.39

(a) The tradition of Muslim and other nation in Thailand

The Malay traditional system of education, the pondok system, has gradually

been transformed into a system of government–sponsored private religion schools

with a secular curriculum and Thai language as the medium of instruction (for an

account of the pondok and its transformation,.40Such transformation is regarded by the

Muslims as a frontal attack on their Islamic institution, which has caused its religious

quality to decline. To some Muslims, this is a serious threat to the Muslim

community. While a growing number of Malay- Muslim are accepting Thai

education, other feel obliged to send their children abroad for religious education.

The transformation pondok has not only reduced the quality of religious

education; it also has a secular curriculum inferior to that of the purely secular school.

Not surprisingly, many Muslim villagers who have graduated from the converted

pondok have failed to qualify for higher education. Consequently, in 1970 the

government decided to send a quota for Malay-Muslim student admissions to the

nation’s institutes of higher learning, without having to go through the normal

entrance examinations. Through this quota programme, hundreds of young Malays

have gradually been integrated into the Thai nation and are referred to by the Thais as

‘Thai-Muslim’. They become the counterbalance to the foreign educated Muslims

who have been leading the community in other directions.

However, Thai- Buddhists and other minority groups are not happy with the

special privilege accorded to the Malay. They consider that higher education, which is

a ‘passport’ to a better life, should not favor any specific groups, and view the quota

programme as revise discrimination’. The strongest criticism of the programme has

come from former Prime Minister Kukrit Pramoj himself. During his administration

(1975-1976), Kukrit proposed to abolish the whole scheme. He argued that the special

privilege granted to the Muslims would regard them as being unqualified student


104

admitted to the intuitions without the rigorous entrance examinations. Some would

turn out to be weak students and be forced to drop out; psychologically, they would

suffer ever more, and in the end would join the opposition (Suthasana 1976:164).

Kukrit also opposed government interference in pondok education. He preferred

improved secular education for Malay-Muslims student .Kukrit, however, lasted only

ten months as Prime Minister and was unable to implement his education policy; so

the programme continues.41

Closely related to educational measures was a decision of the central

government to recruit Malay- Muslims into the bureaucracy. By doing so, the

government sought to achieve the closer co-operation between Muslim villagers and

government officials deemed necessary for the success of its integration efforts.

However, the Muslim officials are caught between two contradictory demands: the

demand of the bureaucracy for their assimilation and total loyalty to the Buddhist –

oriented state, and that of their own people who expect better treatment from them.

Once they change their Malay names and adjust themselves to fit Thai officialdom,

they are viewed as having rejected their own culture and lose the trust of their own

people. 42On the other hand, if Muslim officials develop close relationships with the

people of their constituencies and refuse to bow to Thai bureaucratic pressure, they

are labeled disloyal and their future in the bureaucracy is at stake. Thus, while

increasing numbers of Malay-Muslims have been recruited into the bureaucracy, they

have done very little to bridge the gap between the Muslim villagers and the state.43

1. Dialogue of Life: To spend life in daily routine activities of the followers of all

religions is to live in the dialogue of life. Actually, in working together we as

followers should not attach too much to the names of ours religions. Caring for the

names of one’s one religion is to hold the dogma of his/her religion. Living together

without mentioning religious nomination is to hold the commonsense.44The Buddha

says: “Acquaintance is the best relatives.”

Consider the following philosophical story entitled “Dogmatism Impossible”:

Three men are engaged in building houses, a carpenter, a roofer, and a bricklayer.

They work together happily and with good humor, solve disagreements by

commonsense procedures, share their food as well as their profits. Their business is

successful. Now one day the subject of religion surfaces. It turns out that the carpenter

is a Thai Buddhist, the roofer a Thai Muslim, and the bricklayer a Thai non-


105

religionist. They soon begin quarrelling about the idea of God and what is true

religion. The Buddhist says that no Creator God, we, human beings, create our own

lives. The Muslims assert the opposite. They agree only on one thing, the bricklayer,

non-religionist, is damned and un-virtuous. The bricklayer, non-religionist, argued

that both of them are fools and are wasting their energy with superstitious myth of the

past. The argument continues, and soon they come to blows. The next days are

difficult. They find that they cannot work together in harmony for they no longer see

each other as co-worker in a common cause, but as enemies, holding incompatible

world views. The joy has gone out of the partnership. It is doomed.

Buddhadasa Bhikkhu, the modern thinker of Thai Buddhism, cautions us to

not cling too much to mere names of our religions for fear of being an obstacle for

mutual understanding, as he puts it thus:

“The ordinary, ignorant worldly person is under the impression that there are

many religions and that they are all different to the extent of being hostile and

opposed. Thus one considers Christianity, Islam, and Buddhism as incompatible and

even bitter enemies. Such is the conception of the common person who speaks

according to the impressions held by common people. If, however, a person has

penetrated to the fundamental nature (dhamma) of religion, he will regard all religions

as essentially similar. Although he may say there is Buddhism, Christianity, Islam,

and so on, he will also say that essentially they are all the same. If he should go to a

deeper understanding of dhamma until finally he realizes the absolute truth, he would

discover that there is no such thing called religion, that there is no Buddhism,

Christianity, or Islam.” 45Clinging to only names of one’s own religion without

understanding the truth inside finally and unavoidably leads to religious conflict.

According to Buddhadasa, one can be a good Buddhist and a good follower of

other religions, such as Islam and Christianity, at the same time. Why did he say so?

Donald Swearer in the admiration of Buddhadasa’ pioneering mission of dialogue

wrote: “The thought-provoking nature of Buddhadasa’s point of view is suggested by

the titles of his talks “No Religion” ไมมศาสนา = Mai MiSasana, “A Good Buddhist

Should be a Good Christian” = Chaw PhutThi Di Yom Pen

KhritThi Di to name only two. Buddhadasa’s purpose was to encourage both Buddhist

and Christians to recover the deepest principles of their religions, to delve beyond the


106

other, superficial coverings that hide the true core, and in doing so to discover a

common ground. For Buddhadasa this enterprise was nothing less than discovering

the truth about the nature of things (saccadhamma).46 I further Buddhadasa’s idea

thus: A good Buddhist should be a good Muslim.

Certain questions might be asked: Why is the dialogue of life is necessary for

the case of conflict in the southern Thailand in spite of the differences in religious

belief of the people? Thai Buddhism is known as “Political Buddhism”, so, there exist

ideas of Buddhist nationalism and military monks. The Buddha came from the King’s

caste in India. Thai Sangha has close relation with royal institution.47 Dialogue of life

is not too much formal practice. Religious Pluralism always starts with commonsense

through the simple idea that “to be man is to live and associate with man”. All experts

in peace dialogues say thus: “There is a need to foster strong ties that would bind

peoples of differences together” (Yusuf and Schmidt, (ed) 2006, p. 71). Phra Paisan

Visalo, in his article on “the Bridge for Bridging Brotherhood in the Deep South” said

that “the difference in religious belief of people is not the problem, but the problem is

mutual understanding between two groups of religious followers. So, the interaction

between Thai-Buddhists and Thai-Muslims should be organized to reduce the gap

between them. The government and people concerned should arrange activities that

both Buddhists and Muslims can meet to exchange their cultures, arts, music, and

these should be done from the level of district to the province up to the country. Phra

Paisan48 appreciated the former Prime minister, Surayuth Culananda’s Thai-Buddhist

and Muslim -youth project by bringing them to live their lives together in Bangkok

from time to time. Phra Paisan’s opinion corresponds to Vanchai Vatanasapt’s on the

point that the majority of Thai-Malay Muslims in the South do not want to separate

from Thailand, but they just wanted to have freedom and liberty in protecting and

believing their religion. Phra Paisan quoted a researcher who set up 3 questions to

survey opinions of both Thai Buddhist and Thai Muslims in the South: (1) Thailand is

one nation that can never be separated, (2) Everyone is equal in the law of nation, and

(3) One has the right and liberty to believe in any religion. The result came out that

the second choice for both Thai Buddhists and Thai Muslims is on the question:

“Everyone is equal in law”. The first choice for Thai Buddhists is on: “Thailand can

never be separated”. But the first choice for Muslims is on: “One has full right to

follow one own religion”. So, they wanted to stay together in Thailand under the law

of nation with one own religion.


107

Vanchai Vatanasaptin write agreement with Phra Paisan Visalo introduces the

solution to the conflict through the method of “Citizens Dialogue” by saying thus:

“The process of deliberative discussion or citizens dialogue in the region creates true

participation, gives people an opportunity to look after their own lives and property,

and gives the people a chance to have a role in building peace. Most importantly, the

state must listen attentively with empathy not sympathy to create trust and repair

relationships between the state and the people by revealing the truth. The state must

create justice with compassion through both legal means and social justice. There will

never be peace unless that peace is founded on justice.”49

It is said that the “Citizens Dialogue”, in other words, called “Dialogue of

Social Life” will automatically conjoin with other types of dialogue. When Thai

Buddhists and Muslims live together, they then will do activities, learn religious

doctrine and exchange religious experiences together.

2. Thai Buddhist-Muslims Culture or Traditions in Dialogue: Dialogue of life

preoccupied the rest three kinds of dialogue, namely, that of action, doctrine and

religious experiences as mentioned earlier. Recently, the District Governor in the

Southern provinces organized a well-known custom relationship between Thai

Buddhist-Muslims known as “Ashura”, “Azura”, pronounced in Thai as “อาซรอ”. The

Ashure50 became the peace dialogue of life in the form of custom participation known

as ‘Ashure Dialogue of Life for Thai Buddhist-Muslim.’51According to Islam, sharing

Ashure is a symbolic representation of the unity and essential relationship of humans

to one another and to their Creator. The making of Ashure is a common practice

among Muslim and Christian people in the Middle East. Chaveewan Vannaprasert

explains the objectives of the Azura ceremony in Thailand with 4 points, viz., (1) to

commemorate an important day in Islamic history, (2) to encourage the people to

cooperate and share with each other in making the zura desert and in distributing it to

their neighbors, (3) to promote unity in the society, and (4) to allow people to get

together and enjoy themselves (pp. 120-121). The activities participated in by the Thai

Buddhists and the Thai Muslims are narrated that when the moth of Maraham arrives,

the Azura ceremony is announced among the Thai Muslims. The Thai Buddhists may

offer some ingredients or help in the preparation of the Azura desert (Thai: khanom) if

they wish or they may simply be invited to share the khanom with their Thai Muslim

neighbors once it has been prepared. This shared activity creates better social

integration between the two religious groups.


108

Another question might be asked: Why could both Thai Buddhist-Muslims

people in the South participate in the customs of each other quite naturally and

voluntarily with no any hesitation and religious discrimination at all? Omar Farouk, in

his paper entitled “The Muslims of Thailand: A Survey”, says that Muslims are

inevitably exposed to the pervasive cultural influence of the dominant Thai-Buddhist

society.52 Raymond Scupin, in his paper on “Popular Islam in Thailand”, opined that

“Muslims in rural Thailand living in a Buddhist surrounding sustain similar

supernatural conceptions in common with rural Thai Buddhists. The Muslims in Bang

Chan believed in a variety of phi and the conception of khwan53. Ruth-Inge Heinze, in

his article “Socio-Psychological Aspects of the Work of Thai-Muslim Bomohs in

Pattani”, wrote thus: “Thai-Buddhists, in general, tolerate a wide range of different

religious behavior. Thai-Muslims, though, do not overtly treat Thai Buddhists as

infidels. Thai-Muslims perform merit making activities similar to those of Thai-

Buddhists. Similar religious activities ease tension in a multi-religious setting. Thai-

Muslims may go to Thai-Buddhist folk healers and spirit doctors (mokhwan) and vice

versa. The level on which Thai-Muslims and Thai-Buddhists meet appears to be in

deed the level which is based on the persistent belief in spirits. Thai-Muslims also

believe in the various Thai spirits or phi. These included (1) spirits of the dead, (2)

spirits who exist of their own account, e.g., nature spirits, and (3) other-worldly spirits

who are not seen or heard but whose influence is felt,.” 54It is said that the Pattani

region was a center of diversity and cultural riches termed ‘the plural peninsula’, and

was also a cradle of strong Buddhist traditions, known by the legendary of Long Po

Thuad, Wat Chang Hai. Buddhist and Muslim cultures have been enriched by

extensive interactions and borrowing.55

Chaveewan Vannaprasert and her researcher group did a research on the topic

“The Traditions Influencing the Social Integration between the Thai Buddhists and

the Thai Muslims” (1986) found that there is the close relation between customs and

social integration between the two socio-religious groups in the three southernmost

provinces of Thailand56. Chaveewan further found that the more social activities

involved in a custom, the better the custom will facilitate social integration. As she

summarized:


109

(1) Customs which require more social rituals offer more opportunities for

people of different religions to participate in them;(2) The more opportunities people

are given to participate the greater their social integration will be;(3) The greater the

frequency of a custom, the better it will facilitate social integration; (4) Adequate

knowledge and understanding of one another’s traditional ceremonies and rites by

Thai Buddhists and Thai Muslims will encourage appropriate participation in

accordance with religious principles; and (5) appropriate participation in traditions

ceremonies and rites will facilitate better social integration.” 57

The Chaveewan’s research findings mentioned many traditions that both Thai-

Muslim and Thai-Buddhist could participate, to mention a few, such as (1) House-

Warming Ceremony, (2) Wedding Ceremony, (3) Thai Buddhist Ordination Rite, (4)

Songkran Festival, (5) The Hari Raja Festival, (6) La-Sang Festival and Puyor Bu-

nae, (7) The Maolid Day, (8) Funeral Rite, and so on. Some customs are deserved to

be mentioned, as for examples of birth (marriage), death and season customs, as

follows:

1. The Wedding Ceremony: Joint-participation in such wedding celebrations results

in the creation of a better understanding and sense of social obligation between the

people of the two faiths.

1.1 The Tradition of the Thai-Buddhist Wedding Ceremony: Thai-Muslims,

who are good friends of the newly-weds, often help provide the newly-

weds with betel leaves, flowers, milled rice, fruits, and some other items of

farm products, etc. used in the wedding ceremony. They’ll help build a

new house for the newly-weds. Sometimes, Thai-Muslims will lend the

wedding couple their household utensils, appliances, and furnishings to be

used in the wedding cerebration.

1.2 The Tradition of Thai-Muslim Wedding Ceremony: Thai Buddhists invited

to attend a wedding celebration by participating in the wedding reception.

They congratulate the newly-weds and present them with a wedding gift

either in kind, in cash or both. Thai Buddhists guests are served a meal

provided by the newly-weds. Sometimes, some Thai Buddhists can help

serve as bridesmaids or groomsmen or help greet guests on behalf of the

bridal couple.


110

2. Funeral Function participated by the Thai Buddhists and the Thai Muslims in

brief: This type of social interaction in times of bereavement strengthens both

individual and collective bonds between the two socio-religious groups. It is narrated

that as soon as relatives and friends, Thai Buddhists and Thai Muslims, hear the news

that there has been a death in a family they will pay a visit of condolence to the family

without being invited. Some may offer money as a contribution to help with the

funeral expenses. The family will serve meals and beverages to all the guests. Thai

Buddhists will attend the body bathing ceremony as well as the other religious

ceremonies mentioned earlier including the cremation. However, the Thai Muslims

cannot attend any of the religious ceremonies but they may pay a visit to express their

sympathy to the family and may offer some money to the family members to help

offset the funeral expenses. Chaveewan Vannaprasert’s further observations are useful

to be mentioned here thus:

1. Voluntary Participation: The empirical evidence from her research suggests

that participation in all the celebrations by the two socio-religious groups is

obviously carried out on a voluntary basis.

2. Friendship: There is friendship at two different levels: the friendship between

the village community leaders of the two socio-religious groups and that

between the common villagers of these groups.

3. Social obligations and reciprocity existing between the two socio-religious

groups: the so called social obligations have developed on the basis of the

groups’ proximity to one another, their members’ mutual offers of assistance

and the daily transactions and transportation services which they share.

4. The medium of language used to facilitate mutual understanding: They used

two languages, namely, mother-tongue in the southern Thai dialect and the

Pattani-Malay dialect-Yawi.

5. Common public services: They both share the following public services: rest

shelters, public wells, a health center including an obstetrical center, a village

newspaper reading room a commune office and village coffee-shops.


111

6. The degree of social integration achieved in the customs as studied could be

summarized as follows:

6.1. The traditions that facilitate the highest degree of social integration

include the wedding ceremony, the circumcision rite, the celebration of the

Prophet Mohammed’s birthday, and the Buddhist ordination rite.

6.2. The traditions which facilitate a moderate degree of social integration

include the Songkran festival, the celebration of Hari Raja, the celebration

of Lord Buddha’s return from heaven and the tradition of Forest-Robe

Presentation.

6.3. The traditions that facilitate the lowest degree of social integration include

the Post-Lent Robe Presentation (kathin), the Azura tradition, the tradition

for making merit dedicated to the deceased (ching prêt), the house-

warming celebration, the month of Ramadan celebration. These functions

are more or less religious oriented matter and are rarely held, so they have

been placed in the third category. And in the future, these functions should

be given more attention.

7. Chaveewan Vannaprasert finally recommended that the government should

encourage the preservation of local arts and cultures of the two religious

groups: Thai Buddhist and Thai Muslims, so that each may maintain its own

identity of its subculture.

(b) Tolerance as the Basis for Dialogue of Life or Culture

1. Islamic Tolerance: Muslims preserve ‘tolerance’ through the belief in God, who

gives glory and honor to all human beings. One verse of the Qur’an explicitly says:

“Verily we have honored the children of Adam” (QS. 17: 70).So, everyone has the

same gift of honor and glory from God; they are equal to each other in terms of being

servant of God. The Buddhists understood this idea through the concept of death that

they are subject to birth, old age and death. The Qur’an further approves the

dissimilarity and diversity within the society as God says: “O mankind! We have

created you male and female, and have made you nations and tribes that ye may know

one another” (QS. 49:13).The Qur’an accepts specific views about religious pluralism.

In one verse, it says: “For each we have appointed a divine law and a traced out way”

(QS. 5: 48). The Islamic tolerance is based on justice as says the Qur’an: “Let not your


112

dislike for a people causes you to deal unjustly. Deal justly, for that is closer to

taqwa”(5:8). “When you speak, speak justly, even if a near relative is concerned (4:58),

the text further says. So, Abu Sulayman remarks: “The Islamic society stands on the

foundations of unity and the concept of brotherhood. As such, it focuses on answering

the basic needs of the individual and the interests he/she shares with others in terms of

the family, the neighborhood, the nation, and humankind in general.”58

2. Buddhist Tolerance: The Tipitaka (M.III.268-9) tells us how to cultivate inner

peace through tolerance (khanti) in order to pacify the outer conflict. The story of

Punna Bhikkhu deserves mentioning here as a process for cultivating peace through

tolerance. The Buddha questions the monk that if a man harms you by several forms

of violence, then what you will do. The monk replies that if he/she scolds me, that is

better than he/she beats me, and his/her beating better than killing, his/her killing me

better than I kill myself. The text narrated thus:“One upon a time, Punna Bhikkhu

approached the Buddha to say

Farewell with his intention to go and stay with people of Sunaparanta country.

1) The Buddha: “Punna, if you will be threaten by the Sunaparanta people, who are

fierce and rough, what then will you think of that? Punna Bhikkhu: “Venerable

sir, they are still excellent in that they did not attack me with the first.”

2) The Buddha: “Punna, suppose they attack you with the stick, what will you

think of that?” Punna Bhikkhu: “Venerable sir, they are still excellent in that

they did not attack me with the knife.”

3) The Buddha: “Punna, suppose that they do attack you with the knife, what will

you do about that?” Punna Bhikkhu: “Venerable sir, they are still excellent in

that they did not take my life with a sharp knife.’”

4) The Buddha: “Punna, suppose they do attack you with sharp knife, what will

you do about that?”

Punna Bhikkhu: “Venerable sir, if they did so, I shall think in the same line that I have

been obtaining this weapon, and have been killed even without myself laboring any effort.”

The Buddha: “Very Good, Punna, Possessing such self-control and

peacefulness, you will be able to live in the Sunaparantapa country.”


113

The above quotation of Buddhist doctrine can be compared to that of tolerance

and peaceful co-existence in Islam, especially when the Qur’an is read thus, “And let

not your hatred of a folk who (once) stopped you’re going to the Inviolable Place of

Worship seduce you to transgress; but help ye one another unto righteousness and

pious duty. Help not one another unto sin and transgression, but keep your duty to

Allah” (QS. 5:2), which signifies the doctrine of tolerance. To understand certain

virtues is to use the method of dialogue. Dialogue is fruitful not only for intra-

religious dialogue, but also the inter-religious one.

3.12. Political and Integration Policies in Southern Thailand

The Political integration of Southern Thailand should be seen comprehensively from

their backgrounds, i’e establishment of the Thai nationalism concept and Thai

modernization in the early 20th century. David J. Steinbeng (1971:313) says that the

history of Thailand between 1919 and 1941 basically is a political work resulting

from reform policies undertaken by King Chulalongkorn 1868-1910. The policy was

implemented when the Siamese Kingdom border at the end of the 19th. And in the 20th

centuries went backwards to fulfill the French demand for Siam to release some Indo-

Chinese territory. As a result, Siam had to acknowledge Laos and Cambodia as

French territory. The western colonial powers finally determined the border of the

Siamese kingdom i.e. France through the 1907 agreement and Britain through the

Anglo- Siam agreement of 1909.59

Furthermore, King Chulalongkorn Rama V ruled (1868-1910), implemented

reform in his kingdom by changes in the authority and power of local government

which became independent on the central government. Before this policy, the

kingdom allowed local government and kings to be autonomous. The King and his

ministers fundamentally and radically changed the structure of the kingdom by

erasing the power of local governments and Kings. King Chulalongkorn (1868-1910)

returned Siam(Thailand) to its past by reviving royal authority to fight against the old

nobility through depersonalization and the establishment of an administrative system,

and also created a civil servant class the position of which was legitimized by

education and giving them a function in the hierarchy of the administration. In

relation to that Keyes (2003) explains: 60


114

In response to the threat of colonial expansion, the Siamese government of

King Chulalongkorn Rama V 1868-1910 instituted beginning in the last decade of the

19th century: radical reforms which transformed the empire that allowed many people

a significant degree of local autonomy into a state in which the authority of all

officials depended on their appointment by the court. Associated with the reform of

provincial administration was establishment of a permanent military whose officers

were trained-often in western military academies for their positions.

One of the impacts of this policy on local nobility including that of the Pattani

kingdom (the southern border provinces of Thailand) was the decrease of their

authority and power.

They were predominant in the tributary state of Bangkok (Siam) and in the

provinces where noble families had significant roles. As we know the policy meant to

unite all tributary states and provinces under the kingdom of Bangkok both in

administration and social-politics. The stages were basically policies to prevent

political expansion of Britain in Myanmar and the Malay Peninsula, and France in

Indo-China.

The Thai nationalism defined by King Chulalongkorn (1868-1910) and his

successor King Vajiravudh (1910-1925) was that the national spirit was based on

loyalty to the Siameae Kingdom, the Thai nation, and Buddhism. King Vajiravudh

assumed that what was called the national heritage of the people was one language

(the Thai language), one religion (Buddhism), and a relation with the Kingdoms

(Chakri monarchy).The concept of Thai nationalism was proposed to unite all nations

under the Siamese Kingdom including non-Thai minority groups such as Hmong,

Chinese and Malay Moslems. The policy impacted positively in the internal context

i.e promoting of national consciousness among ruler group and developing the spirit

of professionalism in administration to accomplish a modern nation state that was

acknowledged by the international world, and establish a modern legal system.61

The integration policy at the superstructure level was followed up by the

political administrative policy which was pioneered by King Chulalongkorn (1868-

1910). On one side, the policy impacted considerably on disturbances of the social

order of minority groups the Malay Moslems. The administrative and political

integration of the Malay-Moslem areas (Pattani) to Siam as southern border provinces

was implemented in 1902 and strengthened by the Anglo-Siam treaty of 1909. Based


115

on the agreement, Siam delivered their tributary state Kedah, Kelantan, and

Terengganu to British in Malaya, and maintained their control over the southern

border provinces: Pattani, Narathiwat, Yala, Songhkla, and Satun.

Since 1902, all the kingdoms of Pattani: Pattani, legeh, Rahman, and Saiburi

were united into one administrative unit called month on Pattani .The policy was

followed by the implementation of the local Government Act of 1889 put into effect

by King Chulalongkorn Rama V. the Malay Muslim kingdom such as Pattani were

tributary state which had a local autonomy before the kingdom changed into an

administrative unit that was controlled by the central government. Since the reform

movement in 1902, the King of Pattani’s position was replaced by that of a Governor

appointed from Bangkok.62

Before the reform, in 1901, the King of Pattani, Sultan Abdul Kadir Qamarruddin

had sent a letter to Sir Frank Swetenham, the British Governor of the Strait

Settlements.63The letter claimed that the Thai administration was oppressing the people of

Pattani, intervening in their peaceful lives, and also encouraging misery and poverty

among the Malay Muslims. Although the British in Malaya had a strong desire for

expansion, they still wished for Bangkok to be a buffer between British Malaya and

French Indo-China. In that period, the role of Thailand (Siam) was needed to blockade the

Germans who wished to set up a refueling base on Lengkawi Island and France that

wished for a canal in Gentingkra. Besides that the British in Malaya had other plans for

the four kingdoms south of Deep South to consolidate their power in the Malay

Penisula.64

Nevertheless, the Thai kingdom (Siamese kingdom) also set up a policy to

accommodate a number of demands from the nobility in 1905 as follows. First, the

central government only would regard the nobility and their descendents as appointed

civil servants. Second, reward of the nobility was addressed to the full political integration

into Thailand. Third, the government released the nobility of royal descent from

compulsory military service. After that, the government undertook improvement in roads

postal service and security, and building residences for governors and their assistants.

Besides implementing infra structural development, the government also put

into effect political integration in law and culture. The central government proposed

that all legal problems should be resolved under Thai laws except for family and


116

heritage laws. The appointing of Islamic judges (qadi) became prerogative rights from

Thai judges. In October 1902, the Minister of Internal Affairs of the Thai kingdoms,

Prince Damrong decided that every Malay kingdom should get six qadi.65In conflicts

people had a right to choose a qadi as an arbitrator, but the Thai judges had the

authority to give a final decision on every affair that had been decided by a qadi. If

Thai judges agreed with qadi decisions there was no further dispute. But if the Thai

judges disagreed with the qadi decision, the people who lost in the conflict could

appeal to a higher court that was closed to the qadi66

The culture assimilation program was addressed to activities that could

support and obliged the Malay Muslim to take part in secular education systems

undertaken by the government. The Thai education system was supposed to be

implemented for all people of Thailand based on the Education Act of 1921

determined by King Vajiravudh or Rama VI (1910-1925) (Rahimulla, 2003)67. As a

consequence, all of the madrasah (Islamic schools) under mosques were compelled to

change their curricula to include the Thai language and Thai citizenship doctrines.

Furthermore, the government controlled all sectors of the social lives of The Malay

Muslims. The Malay language, Islam, and the tradition that they had followed for

hundreds of years were replaced under an authoritarian Buddhist Kingdom.68

The policy gave birth to great disappointment from the nobility which lost its

authority and Islamic leaders Ulama groups with Thai laws replacing Islamic laws.

The change had invited great resistance from the Malay Muslim people because they

had been united under an Islamic kingdom which had become the centre of

civilization in Southeast Asia. The Thai Kingdom tried to implement a lot of the

cultural assimilation programs by force by intervening in the laws and social

institutions of the Malay Muslim in order to adapt to Buddhist thoughts and to

strengthen Thai nationalism. Alexander Horseman (2000) state as follows:

with the transformation of Pattani from being a Malay principality to an

ordinary Thai province, local Malay, remember the old times, when the Pattani

Sultans was known as a cradle of Islam, attracting Muslims from the Malay Peninsula

to its famous Islamic schools. The nostalgia for a lost state characterizes the

psychological of the Malays. Cut off from the Islamic heartland, and bound up with

the religion cosmology of the Buddhist nation –state of Thailand.


117

The political integration policy of 1902 through law and administration

encouraged two armed rebellions of the Malay Muslim in 1903 and 1922. The armed

rebellion of 1903 was led by the King of Pattani, Sultan Abdul Kadir Qamarruddin and

resulted in the Malay Muslim people becoming more oppressed and asking for military

aid from the British in Melayu. The resistance was fail ire since the British still had

their policy of support for the Siamese kingdoms. Furthermore, the Sultan Abdul Kadir

Qamarruddin was arrested and jailed in Phisanulok until 1916.After his release from

prison, the Sultan moved to live in Kelantan. Meanwhile his struggle continued to give

a great inspiration for the Pattani independence struggle. The second rebellion took

place in 1922 by the Malay Muslim in Namsai village, so it is known as the Namsai

rebellion that caused thousands of Muslim deaths by Thailand (Siamese) armed forces.

Meanwhile, in practice the policy could not be implemented by the Thailand

(Siamese) officials (Wilson 1960:112). The interest to maintain Thai nationalism

based on Theravada Buddhism contradicted with the interest to maintain minority

cultures. Thailand officials could not undertake the policy since they placed Thai

nationalism as the first priority. The King’s statements were always suspected by the

Malay Muslim as insincere; merely addressed to resolve the fury of Malay Muslim in

a short time. King Vajiravudh or Rama VI 1910-192569 intended to not repeat the

failures of pioneers to deliver their territory to western colonialists.

Rahimmula (2003) right written: to resolve that rebellion of the Malay

Muslim, the administration of the Siamese kingdoms started to implement the

accommodation policy to obtain their sympathy King Vajiravudh Rama VI 1910-1925

ordered the Minister of Internal Affairs, Prince Dewaaongse to impose political

polices as follows: First, those regulations and practices contradictory to Islam should

be stopped immediately. Second, the level of taxes imposed on the Malay Muslim

could not be higher than those imposed on other Malay Kingdoms. Third, high

officials assigned to the deep south of Thailand should be honest, fair, and firm.70

After the death of King Rama VI in 1925, his position was taken by King

Prajahipok or Rama VII (1925-1935), when the treatment and policies of Thailand

towards Deep South can be divided into two categorizes i.e limited political

participation and a broad cultural assimilation policy. The Political participation was

made possible since there was a significant political change in Thailand; a coup by the

People’s Party of the King’s power. As an impact of the world crisis, the


118

administration of Thailand underwent a shortage in the national budget of II million

Tikal (Hall op, cit: 967). At that time, when the King was still receiving medical

treatment in the US, there was conflict among the highest council members of the

kingdoms, mainly between the Minister of Defence, Prince Bovaradej, and the

Minister of trade, Prince Purachatra. It resulted in political crisis in Bangkok.

Coinciding with this, scholar groups under Mr. Prid Banomyong71 established a

political institution to take power. By support from military groups, the party

occupied Bangkok and undertook a non violent revolution on 24 January 1932.72

The main concept of the Constitution of 1932 was to implement a decision

that the status of the King was Head of the Armed Forces and the Protector of

Buddhist and other religion. The King was a sacred and inviolable figure all over

Siam. His power came from the people of Thailand. As the King, he carried out

legislative authority through the parliament and executed power through a ministerial

council headed by the prime Minister and undertook judicative power through the

Court. The King was also strengthened by the right to be consulted the right to

encourage and the right to remind the government of his function to serve the state.

King Prajadhipok came back from the US two days later and accepted the

People Party as s political institution. On 10 December 1932 he signed the first

Constitution in Thailand and ended 800 years of absolute monarchy.73Based on the

Constitution, the King lost all of his power except the one to grant amnesty. The

nobility also was discharged from all political positions in the ministerial council and

the armed forces. Furthermore, a Senate consisting of 70 people was transformed and

the name changed to the Consultative Council consisting of 156 people half of whom

were appointed (Hall op cit:968).The King resigned in 1935 and was replaced by

Ananda Mahidol (1935-1945) who was 10 years old.74

Surin Pitsuwan written: the political liberalization impacted on the Siamese

policy regarding the Malay Muslims thought participation in the General Election to

choose their representative in the Consultative Council. The Malay Muslim also

exploited the political opining. The candidates chosen by the election came from

intellectual groups supported by Islamic intellectuals. State that the level of Malay

Muslim political participation depended on their perception on the Thailand

administrative policy regarding the Malay Muslim. If the collective interest of Malay

Muslims was protected and promoted by the government, the Malay Muslim would

participate greatly in the political process and vice versa. However, the role and


119

influence of parliament were very limited in the fight for the Malay Muslim interests

and aspirations in order to reduce the central government intervention in the Malay

Muslim affairs. The roles of parliament or the Consultative Council were limited to

only accept the Malay Muslim complaints, with the institution having no authority or

power to control or execute a set of government policies in all the countries. The

policies were under the supervision and control of the armed forces and bureaucracy.

Riggs (1966) explains that the Malay Muslim aspirations for an independent

institution outside the government to control the government had lost an independent

institution outside the government to control the government had lost in the structure

of the parliamentary constitution itself. This was made worse by the implementation

of ultra nationalist policies under Prime Minister Phibun Songkhram (1938-1945).75

The politics of ultra nationalism meant to implant Thai nationalism in all sectors

of social life. It was basically related to the acknowledgement that Thai culture was the

only culture in Thailand and the Thai kingdoms had to develop and implant Thai

nationalism in all sectors of social life. It was basically related to the acknowledgement

that Thai culture was the only culture in Siam and Siamese Kingdoms had to develop

and implant the Thai culture in the minds of the people of Siam. Even, the minority

groups such as Malay Muslim in and Chinese must be subjugated to all forms of Thai

culture.76 The name of the country, Siam was changed to Thailand; Phibun Songkhram

thought that the kingdom belonged to the Thais not to the Chinese people that were

predominant in the economic sector at that time. The policies were inspired by fascist

regimes such as those of Adolph Hitler in Germany, Benito Mussolini in Italy and the

Japanese Kingdom before World War II. In the nine month period of ultra nationalist

administration, a set of policies that were anti-China and anti-Malay-Muslims were put

into effect in Thailand. The policies of assimilation resulted in a great fury of the Malay

–Muslims. In World War II, the Malay-Muslims refused to join Thailand because of the

politics of ultra nationalism implement by Phibun Songkhran. Coinciding with that, the

Malay nationalism movements appeared in the Malay Peninsula along the Malay-

Muslims borders. This grew into the pen-Malay movement which gave rise to Malay

nationalism in colonial lands. The disappointment and fury against the policies of

assimilation or Thai Rathaniyom encouraged young Malay-Muslims to revive the

Malay identity and raised an Islamic awareness. Traditional Islamic institutions or

pomdok had significant roles in campaigning for Pan- Malayanism and Islamic

resurgence. As are stated by Naimah Thalib (1999).


120

In the 1930 and 1940s, attempts by the Phibun government to

assailment ethnic minorities into national life had a direct impact

on the Muslim community in the South. Malay-Muslim protested

at the assimilation measures and there emerged growing

dissatisfaction, especially among the young. This resulted in a

determined attempt to revive Malay identity and raise the level of

Islamic consciousness. Religious institutions such as the pondok

were used to disseminate ideas of pan-Malay nationalism and

Islamic revive

Entering World War II, on 25 January 1942, Prime Minister Phibun

Songhkram declared a war against the British and the USA. The invasion of Japan

was welcomed warmly as Japan delivered Indo-China, northern Malaya, and

Myanmar to Thailand. In return, the Thai administration supported the Japanese

Kingdom in its War after the War ended; the southern border provinces still were

placed under the kingdom of Siam although there were endeavors from the Malay-

Muslim elites to found an independent state. The failure of the Malay-Muslims was

the result of factors as follows. First, the British needed great quantities of rise from

Thailand for their colonies. Second, US pressure on the British not to take over

southern Thailand to keep stability and peace in World War II, not as a buffer state but to

blockade the influences of communist ideology from china to South East Asia.77

In response to the rise in Malay nationalism in the Deep South of Thailand, the

administration of Thailand enacted the Patranage of Islam Act on 3 May 1945

proposed by pro democracy scholars and architect of the Revolution of 1932, Mr.

Pridi Banomyong, and a Muslim senator from Bangkok, Cham Promyong. Based on

this, Islamic intellectuals (Ulama) Majid councils, Islamic schools (Madrasah), and

Chularajamuntri (National Ulama Councils), were integrated into the Thai

administration. Surin Pitsuwan, written (1989:78) that the policy was addressed to

weaken elite members such as Tengku Mahyidin (a son of Sultan Abdul Kadir

Qamarruddin) and Tengku Abdul Jalai.78


121

Astri Suhrke (1989:5) explains that the Chularajjamotri was a council establish

at the national level to manage the problems of Muslims people in Thailand. At the

provincial level, the Majelis Ugama Islam or Islamic Religion Assembly was set up

by local government to give advice to the local government about problems regarding

Islam and the problems of Muslim people. Besides that, the government also

acknowledged the Mosque Council or Dewan Masjid to manage any mosque

problems. The Islamic law relating to the family and heritage law was put into effect

in regions where three were Muslim people. The Islamic judges were civil servants of

the Ministry of Justice and were appointed by the Ministry of Internal Affairs.

According to an informant, the MUI (Majelis Ugama Islam) Pattani, of the 77

provinces in Thailand, 33, in southern, central and northern Thailand, were inhabited

by Muslims. 79


122

Table: 5: List of state policies of the Thai administration in the Southern bonder provinces

No Background Policies Administration Results

1

To blockade British Malay

And French Indo-China

political expansion

Territorial integration of 1902, Aristocrat

integration, Administration reform based

on Thesaphiban

King Chulalogkon

(1868-1910)

The rebellions of

1902and 1922

2The Thai nationalism of King

Vajiravudh

Integration of education based on the Act

1921

King Vajiravudh

(1910-1925)

Introduction of Thai language into Islamic

traditional institutions (pondok)

3

Cop d’ etat and ConstitutionalChange of

1932

Political Liberalization Mr. Pridi Banomyong Limited Participation

4

Development of fascism in

Europe and West Asia

approach of world war II

Thai-rathniyom

1938

Prime Minister

Phibun Songkhram 1938-1944and

1949-1957

The Patani defended ally states, Malay

nationalism

5The defeat of Thailand in

world war II

Patronage of Islam Act 1946; Integration of

Ulam

Pridi Banomyong

1946

Chularajmontri Haji Sulong Polittion rebellion

1947

6 Vetnam warIntegration of Islamic traditions ( pondok)

in 1960s

PM Sarit Thanarat (1957-19630 and

later

State control of pondok separatism under

PULO, etc,

7Development and cold war

between USA and USSR.

Prime Ministerial order no. 65/66, Tai Rum

YenPM Prem TinSulanoda

The decrease of separatist movements and

sympathy for the government

8International campaign

against terrorismMartial Law 2004 PM Thaksin Sinawatra

Increase in violence Pattani, Narathiwat and

Yala

9 International Peace talkThe government agreed facilitated peace

dialogue with the BRN, (2013)PM Yingluck Sinawatra

The dialogue areca of Southern Thailand

Pattani, Narathiwat and Yala

Source: Date processing


123

NOTE AND REFERNCCES

1 http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/History/Thailand-history.htm (accessed28June 2013).

2 Ibid.,3 Ibid.,4 As the Thai kingdom was officially known from 1855 to 1939 and from 1946 to

1949; prior to then, the Thai traditionally named their country after the capital city.5 http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/History/Thailand-history.htm

(accessed28 June 2013).6 Lieutenant Commander Timothy P. Reidy, Jr., US Navy, Patani and Chechnya

lessons from a History of insurgency, U.S. Army Commander and General StaffCollege, 2008.p, 23.

7 Tengku Ismail Chilk & Tengku Arifin Chilk Patani Cradle of The East: A Historyof Patani, ed by Emir. Meson Hoadley, Muslim news Thailand, 2011,pp. 85-86.

8 Ibid., p 86.9 Lieutenant Commander Timothy P. Reidy, Jr., US Navy, op.cit., p.24.10 Lieutenant Commander Timothy P. Reidy, Jr., US Navy, op.cit., pp.23-24.11 Ibid., p.24.12 Ibid., pp. 24-25.13 Ibid., p.25.14 Ibid., pp.25-26.15 International Crises Group, Southern Thailand: Insurgency; Not Jihad. Asia

Report, (Jakarta/Brussels: International Crises Group,2005) p.4.16 Southern Thailand: Insurgency, Not Jihad p. 4.17 Lieutenant Commander Timothy P. Reidy, Jr., US Navy, op. cit., p. 27.18 Ibid., p. 22-23.19 S P Harrish, op. cit., p. 5., see Hoon Peow, “Politics of Religious, Southern Thailand,

Southern Philippines,” Uluslararası Sosyal Aratırmalar Dergisi The Journal ofInternational Social Research Volume 2 / 9Fall2009, p.341-342.

20 Ibid., p.6.21 Ibid., p.6.22 Ibid., p. 7.23 S P Harrish, op. city., p.7.See Hoon Peow, op. cit., pp. 341-342.23 Hoon Peow, op. cit., pp 341-342.24 Hoon Peow, op. cit., pp 341-342.25 Klaimanee Wiphusana, “The need to improve population and resource control in

Thailand’s counterinsurgency”, (M.A.) thesis submitted in Department of DefenseAnalysis, Naval postgraduate school, Monterey, California, 2008 p.13., see JamesF. Dunnigan and Albert A. Nofi, Victory at Sea: World War II in the Pacific NewYork: William Morrow and Company, Inc. 1995, p.419.


124

26 Klaimanee Wiphusana. Op. cit., p. 13., see Max L. Gross, A Muslim Archipelago:Islam and Politics in Southeast Asia, National Defense Intelligence CollegeWashington, DC 2007.p.64.

27 Klaimanee Wiphusana. op. cit., pp. 13-14.,see International Crisis Group, “SouthernThailand: Insurgency, Not Jihad,” Asia Report No.98, (18 May 2012), 4.

28 Klaimanee Wiphusana, op. cit., pp 13-14.

29 Oknation.(2552). The Numbers of Muslim Population in Thailand(จานวนประชากรมสลมในประเทศไทย). retrieved December 29, 2011, from

http://www.oknation.net/blog/photo-sigree/2009/10/10/entry-2.

30 Jitpiromsri Srisompob. Deep South Watch. Center for the Study of Conflict andCultural Diversity, Prince of Songkla University (2011).

http://www.oknation.net/blog/Patani-time/2010/06/19/entry-2.31 Prof. Imtiyaz Yusuf, op. cit., pp. 45-46.32 Deep South Watch. (2010a). Sixth Year of the Southern Fire: Dynamics of

Insurgency and Formation of the New Imagined Violence. Retrieved December28, 2011, from http://www.oknation.net/blog/Patani-time/2010/06/19/entry-2.

33. Deep SouthWatch. (2011b). The 2012 Three Provinces in the Southern ThailandGo-ahead for Reformation (2555 สามจงหวดชายแดนภาคใต”เดนหนาปฏรป ).RetrievedDecember29,2011,retrievedfromhttp://www.deepsouthwatch.Org/node/2644.

34 Deep South Watch. (2010a).op. cit.,35 Khaek: The Thai Muslim visiting in Thailand namely Malay Muslim , Pakistan,

South Indian, Chine seetc, :Nagen draKr Singh, Abdul Mabud Khan: Encyclopedia ofthe World Muslims: Tribes, Castes and Communities, Volume 1,2001: p. 702.

36 Maunati Yetti, “Multiculturalism, Separation and Nation State Building in Thailand” ResearchCenter For Regional Resources Indonesia Institute of Science Jakarta 2004., p. 114.

37 The National Reconciliation Commissions (NRC)., op.cit, p. 30-31.38 Ibid., p.31.39 Hoon Peow, op.cit., p. 341-342.40 Pissuwan Surin “Islam and Malay Nationalism: A Case study of the Malay- Muslim

of southern Thailand” Bangkok: Thammasat University, 1989, pp.175-204.41 Che Man W.K. “Muslim Separatism: The Moros of Southern Philippines and the

Malays of Southern Thailand” New York: Oxford University Press, 1990, p. 164.42 Pissuwan Surin, op.cit. pp 210-211.43 Che Man W.K. op.cit. pp.164-165.44 Louis P. Pojman. (2001). What Can We Know? An Introduction to Theory of Knowledge

(second edition.). United States: Wadsworth. p. 34.45 Buddhadasa, 1989, p.146.


125

46 Donald Swearer. (2004). The Ecumenical Vision of Buddhadasa Bhikkhu and HisDialogue with Christianity ( ) Retrieved December 30,2011, from http://www.lanna.mbu.ac.th/panya/no_61/vision.asp.

47 Jerryson, Michael K., Buddhist Fury: Religion and Violence in Southern Thailand.New York: Oxford University Press. 2011. p.57.

48 Phra Paisan Visalo.(2011). The Bridge for Bridging the Brotherhood of DifferentReligions.( ).Retrieved December 28, 2011, fromhttp://www.visalo.org/article/PosttoDay254902.htm.

49 Vanchai Vatanasapt. Citizens Dialogue: the way out of the Southern Thailandviolence. Songklanakarin Journal of Social Science and Humanities 14(1) Jan. -Mar. 2008. p. I.

50 Ashure (in Turkish: Aşure or Noah's Pudding is a Turkish dessert that is made of amixture consisting of grains, fruits and nuts. It is served during the first month of theIslamic calendar, Muharrem, on the Tenth of Muharrem, or the Day of Ashure.“Ashura” means “tenth” in Arabic. Ashure is a part of the culinary tradition of Turkeyas well as many of the surrounding countries, and Christian and Jewish cultures aswell as Muslim share similar versions under a variety of names(Wikipedia, 2011).

51 Muslims News Agency. (2011). The Organization of Azura Celebration forRelationship between Thai Buddhists and Thai Muslims in Yala Province(ยะลาจดกจกรรมกวนอาซรอสรางสมพนธพทธ- ). Retrieved December 29, 2011, fromhttp://www.thaimuslim.com/view.php?c=1&id=17208.

52 Andrew D.W. Forbes, The Muslims of Thailand: A survey in Thailand: Historyand Culture Studies,” by edited by Bihar Center for South East Asian Studies,Aligarh Muslim University Department Islamic studies Vol. I. 1988, p. 25.

53 Andrew D.W. Forbes, op.cit., p.35.54 Andrew D.W. Forbes. op.cit., p. 137,140.55 McCargo, Duncan. Tearing apart the land: Islam and legitimacy in Southern

Thailand. New York: Cornell University Press. 2008, p. 3.56 Chaveewan Vannaprasert. The Traditions Influencing the Social Integration between

the Thai Buddhists and the Thai Muslims. Pattani Thailand:: Prince of SongklaUniversity 1986, p. 199.

57 Ibid., p. 199.58 Vanchai Vatanasapt, op. cit., p.8.59 Maunati Yekti, op.cit., p 65.60 Ibid., p.65.61 Maunati, Yekti, op.cit., p.65.62 Ibid., p. 68.63 Pissuwan Surin “Islam and Malay Nationalism: A Case study of the Malay- Muslim

of southern Thailand” Bangkok: Thammasat University, 1989, p, 22., Sultan AbdulKadir Qamarruddin: He was the last Sultan of Patani from the Kelantan dynasty.The king refused political and administrative integration into the Siamese kingdomand instructed his officials to fight against the rulers from Bangkok in 1902. Thispolicy encouraged the rebellion against Siam and the king was arrested in Pitsanulokand held until 1916.


126

64 Pissuwan Surin, op. cit., p. 23., Gentingkra: The Strait Sentiments between upperSothern and Bangkok , now provinces of Thailand.

65 Pissuwan Surin op. cit., p. 33.66 Maunati Yekti, op. cit., p. 70.67 Chidchanok Rahimmula, “Peace Resolution :A Case Study of Separatist and

Terrorist Movement in Southern Border Provinces of Thailand”, Department of socialsciences, faulty of Humanities sciences of Prince of Songkla University, Vol. 10 No.1 Jan - Apr 2004, pp. 103-104.

68 Maunati Yekti, op. cit., p. 70.69 King Vajiravudh or Rama VI was the son of King Chulalongkorn Rama V and

ruled between 1910 and 1925. The king is well known because of his policyresulting in the National Education Act of 1921 that forced every educationinstitution in Thailand to use the Thai language. The King was educated at Oxfordand introduced what was called Thai nationalism. In World War I between 1914and 1918, the king sent his troops to Europe to help the allies.

70 Maunati Yekti, op.cit., p. 70., see Pissuwan Surin, op.cit., p.71.71 Pridi Banomyong was the father of democracy in Thailand. He was born on II may

1900 in Ayuthaya of common people. At the age 20 he got a scholarship to studylaw in France, from the Ministry of Justice of Thailand, from 1920 to 1927.Although he studied abroad, he never lost his ideals or awareness of the need tocope with the social and economic problems facing his nation. His ideals were tochange absolute government into a democratic government as a basis to developSiam in the future. He believed that the democratic political system was a way todevelop the civilized society of Thailand. For this, he established the Peoples’ Partyand launched a non-violent revolution on 24 June 1932 in Bangkok. Its principleswere to: maintain assure all of citizen liberation both in polities and the economy.

72 Maunati Yekti, op.cit., p. 72.73 After the non-violent revolution of 1932, King Prajadhipok or Rama VII

(1925-1935) went to Britain he resigned from his position and was replaced by hisnephew, Ananda Mahidol who was 10 years old.

74 King Ananda Mahidol or Rama VIII was killed in 1946, after his return fromEurope in December, 1945, after World War II ended the state of politics andeconomics were made worse in Thailand when the Japanese government arrestedmany politicians. In the midst of the turbulence, the king was found short in June1946. His sudden death is still a mystery. The present king, his younger brother:Bhumibol Adulyadej (Rama IX) replaced him.

75 Maunati Yekti, op.cit., p. 74.The Phiun Songkhram, was an utra– nationalist figure from a militarybackground. He was appointed Prime Minister in 1939. Before becoming PrimeMinister, he had contributed his services to defeat the military pro-monarchy thatwished to mount a coup of the parliamentary government. Their policies wereknown as Thai Rathaniyom or Thailand for the Thais. In the period of World WarII Phibun Songkhram declared war against the allies and joined the Japanese.After the war ended, on 7 September 1945, Phibun Songkhram came back toBangkok where the Administration of Prime Minister Pridi Bhanomyongestablished a democratic government with the cultural policies addressed tostrengthen and establish Thai nationalism: Chat Satsana, Phramahakasat –NationReligion and Monarchy.


127

76 The Phibun Soungkhram policies were known to be very racist. Called ThaiRathaniyom, it can be translated as Thailand for the Thais.

77 Maunati Yekti, op.cit. pp. 75-76.78 Pitsuwan Surin, op.cit, p. 78., see Manati Yekti, op.cit., p. 77.79 Manati Yekti, op.cit., p.77.


128

Appendix 3: Chronology of the Chakri Dynasty

1. Phra Phutthayotfa (Rama I) 1782 – 1809

2. Phra Phutthaloetla (Rama II) 1809 – 1824

3. Phra Nangklao (Rama III) 1824 – 1851

4. Mongkut (Rama IV) 1851 – 1868

5. Chulalongkorn (Rama V) 1868 – 1910

6. Vajiravudh (Rama VI) 1910 – 1925

7. Prajadhipok (Rama VII) 1925 – 1935 (abdicated)

8. Ananda Mahidol (Rama VIII) 1935 – 1946

9. Bhumibol Adulyadej (Rama IX) 1946 – present

CHAPTER: IV

MELAYU-MUSLIM MOVEMENT IN SOUTHERN

THAILAND

Historical Memory

The Emergence of Separatist Movements

The first wave of Malay Kingdoms

The second wave of Separatist Movement: Islamic Identity

The Third Wave of Separatism: Appealing to a Wider Audience

(2000–presently)

Mara Patani (Majlis Amanah Rakyat Patani- The Amanah Council for

Patani People)

The Islamic Private School in Southern Thailand

The Government Policy for Education in southern provinces of

Thailand

The state of education present- day

The Foundation of Pondok in Southern Thailand

Higher Educational Institutions: Colleges and University

Chapter IV: Melayu-Muslim Movements…

129

CHAPTER: IV

MELAYU-MUSLIM MOVEMENTS IN SOUTHERN THAILAND

Introduction

The four provinces of the southern Thailand, known as Sempadan region consists of

Pattani, Yala, Narathiwat, and part of Songkhla, areas comprised Chana, Depha,

Nathavi, and Sabayoi ( known as Deep South), has become conflicting region. In the

seareas of southern Thailand and the rest of Thailand, these differences have grown

due to the extreme different between social structures of society that corned into

potential source of conflict that has triggered the emergence of separatist movement.

Society of Thailand reflect the undeniable fact of diversity that supposedly

been preserved by Thai constitution. Thai constitution that guarantees an equal

treatment to all Thai national regardless the existing, however, is powerless to prevent

discrimination over Muslim group especially, in the four Southern provinces of

Thailand. Some may point that discriminations are still obviously occur in the four

Southern provinces. This discrimination is in various form and sometimes come along

with government policy that seen by people in the south very difficult to be

implemented. The existence of differences between people in the south and the rest of

Thailand namely on language, religion, historical memory and cultural affinity affects

the dynamics of society in the four provinces. In turn it’s bringing different direction

of the discourse of Thailand as a multi-culture country. This study will analyze the

root cause of the emergence of separatist movement, the dynamic of separatist

movement, and its relations with the dynamic of Thailand as a multi-culture country.1

The present day Thai, provinces like Pattani, Yala, and Narathiwat, were once

known as Pattani Raya or the Greater Pattani, now within Thailand, has been an

independent Kingdom until 1786. The ancient Kingdom of Langkasuka changed its

name at some point of the fourteenth century to the Kingdom of Pattani. It was

important commercial center for Asian as well as European traders. Hinduism and

Buddhism seem to have been practiced until Islam was adopted in the fifteenth

century. From the twelfth to fifteenth century, the Arab merchants carried out

missionary activities by spreading Islam alongside their trade. In the process, a large

number of people were converted to Islam. Many of the early Arabs married local


130

women and settled in Asia. Islam was spread in the region only in the mid- fifteenth

century when the King of Pattani himself embraced Islam and the kingdom of Pattani

was declared an Islamic State in 1457. The Islamization of Pattani replaced many of

the Hindu-Buddhist culture and institutions. The Ulamas, the religious elites, became

predominant in the socio-political system of the kingdom. However, the Muslim

dynasty was abolished in 1786 when the Kingdom of Pattani was conquered by the

King of Siam.2

4.1. Historical Memory

Pattani remained as a well known and prosperous Kingdom in the past. The seaport

has grown to be the biggest trading port in Southern Asia. The border of Pattani

region has expanded up to Songkhla region. As Pattani have many biggest trading

areas so it maintained good relation with the different nations and Kingdom like

Ayatthaya. Along with the fall of Malaka, during the region of Rama I (Chakri

dynasty), Pattani was invaded by Siam, a Thai kingdom which centered in Ayatthaya

in 1786. Pattani began to struggle for regaining their independence under Saim

Kingdom.3

To organize the local governmental system a new policy of Administrative

order was introduced by King Chulalongakorn this was known as thesaphiban system

of provincial administration. Through this Chulalongakorn wanted to ensure loyalty

of the provinces to the national capital because during that time France and Britain

were expanding their empires and busy in establishing their colonies in the

neighboring areas of Thailand. The Resistance movement came into existence when

Malaya Raja of Pattani and Ra-ngae were deposed and exiled. But after sometime

Rajas were allowed with the condition that they complied with the Thesaphiban

system and refrained from further political activity. 4

The Malay nobility were replaced from the power and Thai Buddhist civil

servant were became the in Change of Southern provinces in 1902. Those assigned to

the southern provinces were unfamiliar to the customs of Islamic law and Malay

Language of the general population that creating the rift between governor and

governed. The rift shill persist today despite of various changes have been

implemented by the central Thai government.5


131

In 1901 Abdul Kadir Qamarruddin, the Raja of Pattani wrote to Sir Frank

Swettenham, the British governor of the Straits Sentiment in Singapore, petitioning

for British intervention on behalf of the Malay population living under the

suppression of the Thai monarchy. But British government did not intervene and

insisted that Thailand exert greater authority over southern region. British keep

remained distant from the problem and this diplomatic maneuver proved successful

because in 1909 Pattani has formally become part of Thai region according to treaty

of the Anglo-Siamese. According to the treaty the Pattani has become part of

Thailand, while Terengganu, Kedah, and Kelantan remain as a part of Malay region.6

After signing the treaty Pattani fall under the rule of Thailand and established of

new reorganization system simply understood because the Thai/Siam kingdom has

pushed the implementation of political policy in its region. This gave the birth of

separatist movement. This is in fact strengthening the reason to against Thai government.7

4.2. The Emergence of Separatist Movements:

The separatist movement in Southern Thailand had emerged and struggled against the

authority of Thailand Kingdom over Sempadan region in Southern Thailand. The

Sempadan regions in Southern Thailand known as Changwad Chaiden Pak Thai has

inhabited by Malay Muslim communities. They have their own behavior and

customarily different from the rest of Thai communities. Based on historical


than to Thai. Beside most of them are Malay descendants and devoted to Islam, they

closed linked to Malay behavior and customary, Malay spoken language with strong

Kelantan dialect. Nevertheless, most of these communities have no sense of belonging

to the Thai-ness of the Thai nation that have religion, customary, language, and

behavior differ from them. Therefore, as Muslim minority in Thailand, they exhibit

distinct characteristics as compared to the homogeneous majority. Given such

distinctions, minority groups tend to preserve their original identities in the face of

new inventions that endanger their ethnicity.8

4.3. The first wave of Malay Kingdoms (1900-1950)

The historical analysis of Pattani separatist movement could be traced back especially

when Pattani, was ruling under the Raja Abdul Kadir Qamarruddin. From 1901 as the

King of Pattani, Raja Abdul Kadir Qamarruddin had to struggle against Thai

government. This struggle is as to respond to the failure of negotiation of the Singapore

Governor General, Sir Frank Swettenhan to change the Siam toward Pattani.9


132

Tengku Suleiman, Sultan of Pattani died in 1899, his son Tengku Abdul Kadir

Qamarruddin ascended to the Raja also with the title of Sultan Abdul Kadir. After his

coronation he received a letter from the Siamese authorities stating that he was not the

legitimate King of Pattani since he had not yet been approved by Bangkok’s King.

Consequently, his privileges were confiscated. He had no right to claim the title of

King or became involved in the country’s administration. Despite the fact that he

came to pay homage to Rama V, he was not welcomed as royalty by the Bangkok

court. On his return he made a detour to Singapore in order to meet with the British to

intervene by including Pattani in the British governor, Sir Frank Swettenhan. He

hoped to persuade the British to intervene by including Pattani in the British sphere of

protected Malay states. This trued out to be in vain. Sir Frank Swettenhan held to the

Burney treaty and refused to intervene in Pattani issue. Two years later when Rama V

visited Pattani on 25 May 1900, he acknowledged that Tengku Andul Kadir was the

legitimate King of Pattani and entitled him the Siamese title of Phraya Vishitpakdee

Sri Surivangsa Ratanketh Prateth-Raja10

Abdul Kadir Qamarruddin was only twenty-seven when he took the charge as a

Raja of Pattani. He was fluent by his British friends who regularly visited to him

especially in Singapore. R.W. Duff, a Brit employed by the British Mining Company in

Pattani, pointed out that Abdul Kadir Qamarruddin need to negotiate with Bangkok.

But this was rejected as his Majesty considered a plea to the Siamese/Thai King

degrading to himself and for his country as independent state. On 13 August 1901,

Sultan Abdul Kadir wrote a letter to Sir Frank Swettenhan in Singapore officially

asking the British to intervene in Pattani.

I trust that the trouble and grievance which are being imposed on my

people will be seen by Your Excellency to be so harassing and

unendurable that the peace and well-being of the state are endangered….and also that it will be seen that my application for the intervention and

good offices of Great British has good ground on which it is founded,

and on which such application can be made to Great British or some

other of the Great power either Europeans or other.11

The position taken by Sir Frank Swettenham regarding the Pattani problems

forced Raja Abdul Kadir to look for an alternative to free Pattani from the shackles of

Siam. With the support of the other Malay Kings, Raja Abdul Kadir formulated a

policy of resistance and launched a rebellion against the Siamese kingdom not to

continuously interfere against the French in Indo-china so in turn the French would


133

attack Siam in the east and force Siam to more their soldiers there. If three scenarios

applied, Malay Kings thought that they would be freed from the shackles of Siamese

colonization.

R.W. Duff advised Raja Abdul Kadir to try to resolve the problem in Pattani

through negotiation rather than violently. He proposed that Raja Abdul Kadir contact

group in Singapore and draw up a petition to the United Kingdom. In his petition,

Raja Abdul Kadir explained his dissatisfaction and tried to explain Siam’s rule over

Pattani, Raja Abdul Kadir hoped that the United Kingdom would submit his

complaints to the Kingdom of Thai.

The former Raja of Pattani, Tengku Abdul Kadir Qamarruddin, on 13 October

1901 delivered the petition to Sri Frank Swenttenham to send to the United Kingdom

in London. King Saiburi, King Reman and King legeh also joined in the petition in

overcoming the problem of the Patani Kingdom and people as a consequence of

interference from Siam those feeling of dissatisfaction revolved business, especially

in the case of taxation and second, in the interpretation of the Islamic religion. Raja

Abdul Kadir Qamarruddin emphasized that measures of Siamese/Thai officials were

in contradiction Tengku with the principle of communication between countries as

outlined by Rama V in the same manner as contained in the letter of inauguration of

King Pattani.

R.W. Duff, one of British businessman who wants to have economic accesses

over legeh region, mole to the decision of the King of Pattani to against Thai

government. He informed the plan to the Siam Kingdom. Therefore, to response to the

information, Phraya Sri Sahadhep has met Raja Andul Kadir Qamarruddin in October

23rd, 1901.12In his palace at Chabangtiga with a document in Thai, which he was

asked to sign? This was refused because the contents were in Thai, which he was

unable to understand. After convincing arguments and oaths from the Siamese envoy

that the document concerned complaints over abuses by Siamese authorities in Pattani

territory which would be presented to the King, trustingly Raja Abdul Kadir agreed to

sign.13The Siamese envoy then sailed for Singapore. But before leaving he ordered the

Siamese representative in Pattani, Phraya Sakseni, to arrest the Tuan lebeh, the

Raman ruler, who was accused of leading a rebellion against the Siamese/Thai King.14


134

In 1903, Tengku Abdul Kadir Qamarruddin, the former Raja of Pattani, was

arrested and sent to prison in Phitsanulok province in Northern Thailand. He was

sentenced to ten years in prison but was released after spending served two years and

nice months and pledging to refrain from politics. Tuan Tengah was permitted to

return to Re-ngae after having promised to comply with the government

‘Regulations’. Despite their pledges, Tengku Abdul Kadir Qamarruddin and his

associates managed to organize a series of resistance movements and uprisings in the

region.

During the region of King Vajiravudh (Rama VI, r. 1910-1925), the resistance

movement intensified as the effect of Thai control over Malay society increased. Most

of the unrest was essentially motivated by the desire to region self-rule as a Muslim

community. Indeed, from the very beginning of the incorporation of Pattani into the

Thai Kingdom in 1902, Muslim resistance took both political and religious forms. The

involvement of religious leader in the struggles to region the political power of the

nobility was a case in point. Rebellions led by charismatic religious leader to Tae in

1910 and Hajji Bula in following year were further instances of religious hostilities.15

In 1915, Tenku Abdul Kadir Qamarruddin retreated to Kelantan then, which

by was under British rule. From there he continued to provide leadership for

resistance movement with the resistance of the Sultan of Kelantan, Sultan Muhammad

IV. The most serious uprising inspired by Tengku Abdul Kadir Qamaruddin’s efforts

to resist Thai rule occurred in 1922 after the Thai government had taken another

major step towards Muslim integration by promulgating the Compulsory Primary

Education Act in 1921. The Act required all Malay-Muslim children to attend Thai

primary schools. It was introduced to promote the use of the Thai Language among

the Muslims.16

The Malay- Muslim regarded the Act as part of programme of ‘Siamifying’

the Pattani people and stamping out their religion and culture. To them, it was crucial

that their young children should not expose to education that would divert their

attention from the teachings of Islam. As a reaction to the government’s enforcement

of compulsory Thai education and to the alleged funneling out of the area of a large

share of revenues collected from the Malay, the former King of Pattani continued to

inspire rebellions against Thai rule even from other side of the border. His influences

among the some religious leader order the Muslim villagers of Ban Namsai, in Mayo


135

District, not to pay taxes and rent on land to Thai government. In 1922 the villagers of

Ban Namsai clashed with the military and police forces. The rebellion resulted in

many casualties and the execution of several Muslim leaders.17In the following year,

Thai authorities were accused of closing the Muslim vernacular and Quranic schools,

resulting in another outbreak of protests. These resistance movement required

substantial Thai forces for their suppression.18

The outbreaks in 1922 and 1923 forced Bangkok to reassess its integration

policy. King Vajiravudh issued new guide-lines for dealing with the Muslims in an

attempt to lessen conflict in the provinces. These were aimed mainly at redressing

some of the government regulations and practices that appeared inconsistent with the

teaching of Islam. Taxation of the Muslim villagers was also minimized. Bangkok

became aware of the emerging sense of Malay nationalism among the people in the

northern states of Malaya and of their willingness to extend support to their brethren

across the border. More importantly, it was perceived that there was a real threat of

losing Pattani to Britain if polities for the political and cultural integration of the

Muslims went carried out indiscriminately.19

After the 1932 revolution ended Thailand’s absolute monarchy, it suddenly

seemed possible to reach an understanding with the new democratic government.

When the former Raja of Patani died in 1933, his son Tengku Mahmud Mahyuddin

returned to Thailand; however, he chose to settle in Bangkok instead of Pattani.

Between 1933, and 1938, an increasing number of Malay-Muslim candidates were

elected to parliamentary seats, thanks to the active lobbying on their behalf by the

Ulama leadership, who were now moving to the forefront of the campaign for

autonomy.

In 1932 a new constitutional monarchy was implemented that led to greater

willingness within the Malay-Muslim population to become a part of the Thai nation-

state. Three Malay-Muslims were elected to Parliament in 1937. Regional elites of the

southern provinces began to see their prominent roles and influence restored. This

improvement was somewhat short lived; the Thai Rathaniyom (Thai Custom Decree)

was issued in 1939 under Phibul Songkram’s ultra-nationalist military regime (1938-

1944) and Phibul Songkhram’s confrontational policies provided the stimuli for a

strong Malay nationalist reaction. Frustrated by the setbacks it had suffered and

profiting from Thailand’s momentary weakness in the final years of the Second World


136

War, the leadership of Thailand’s Malay-Muslims turned south. After the Japanese

invasion of British Malaya, Thailand was rewarded for its pro-Japanese stance and

given possession of the Malay states that it had been forced to cede to Britain in 1909.

One unintended –and certainly undesired–effect of this was that it brought Malays

from both sides of the border closer together again. In addition, Tengku Mahmud

Mahyuddin’s overtures toward the embattled British gained him access to allied

policymaking circles and, for a brief moment, it appeared as if there was a real chance

that, after the war, Thailand’s southern provinces would rejoin their compatriots in

British Malaya. Optimism was further stimulated by growing pan-Malayan nationalist

sentiments at the end of the war. Following World War II, Phibul’s regime was ousted

from office and the Rathaniyom decree was repealed, however much damage had

been done in the span of a few years. Malay-Muslim leaders reacted strongly to the

Rathaniyom decree, thus marking the beginning of the creation of separatist groups.

Gabungan Melayu Patani Raja

GAMPAR stands for “Gabungam Melayu Patani Raya” meaning the “Greater Pattani

Malayu Association,” the first Pattani Malay organization which was set up at

Kotabaru, Kelantan State on March 14, 1948 means the attainment of independence

by some subject people of South East Asia after the Second World War had aroused

nationalistic aspirations among the Muslims in the region. The Pattani Malay

nationalists who resented Thai control over the four provinces organized GAMPAR in

British Malaya with its principal offices in Kelantan, Kedan, Penang, and Singapore.

Although GAMPAR was headed by former princes, with Tengku Mahmud

Mahyuddin as its President and Tengku Adul Jalal as its Deputy President, its aim

was no longer to fight for the restoration of power to former indigenous rulers.

GAMPAR’s main objective was to strive for irradiation of Pattani with the Malay

states on the peninsula. Hundreds of Malay refugees from the southern provinces had

held a meeting in Kotabharu, Kelantan, and had unanimously decided to demand the

separation of the four southern Thailand from Siam and then linking them up with

Malayan Federation.20The organization came into existence after Haji Sulong was

arrested and imprisoned by the Thai government. The organization is said to have

been structured on the basis of PKMM-Parti Kebangsaan Melayu Malaya. This

organization was officially opened on March 3, 1948, at Madrasah Muhammadiyyah,

Kotabaru, attended by about 200 concerned members, especially Malay Muslims who


137

were Pattani and by birth. Tengku Ismail bin Tengku Nik was elected as the chairman

of the GAMPAR. Tengku Mahmud Mahyuddin did not attend the opening ceremony;

nor was he given any post of the GAMPAR. However, there was a strong belief that

he was certainly behind the movement. The GAMPAR set up its three objectives as

clearly stated in its manifesto as follows.

1. The four provinces of Pattani, Yala, Narathiwat and Satun be united under Malay

Islamic state and its residents be liberated from disdain, oppression, and exploitation.

2. The state under the appropriate governance in line with Islamic tradition and

practices is established as to meet the demands of the Malay-Muslims.

3. The status and quality of life of the Malay-Muslims in the area be upgraded from

standpoints of humanity, justice, freedom and education at the earliest possible

moment (Nik Anuar Nik Mahmud, 1999).After Tengku Mahmud Mahyuddin

died in1953 and Haji Sulong bin Abdul Kadir died, the GAMPAR came under

new leaders and developed into various independent groups and organizations

with their strong determination to liberate the so-called Pattani State.21

Patani People’s Movement and Hajji Sulong

The Patani People’s Movement (PPM) was organized by Hajji Sulong bin Abdul

Kadir bin Muhammad Al-Fatani, a religious teacher and President of the Provincial

Council for Islamic Affairs (Majlis Agama Islam), and other Muslim leaders in the

Pattani region. In Pattani Haji Sulong, Haji Wae Semae Muhammad ( President of a

Muslim association of Pattni called ‘Semanget’ (‘Zeal’), and 100 other Muslim leader

mobilized to the Pattani Muslim under the banner of the (PPM).22 The PPM was

linked with GAMPAR and Semangat and was supported by different groups of

Muslims. This was the first time that the leadership of a resistance government of

such magnitude was dominated by the religious elite. It marked an important change

from the earlier struggle, which was led largely by former aristocrats.

On 3 April 1947 the PPM, under the leadership of Haji Sulong, presented a set

of demands to the government of Thawan Thamrongnawasawat. Its objective was to

laythe foundation for an autonomous Pattani State consisting of the four Muslim

provinces. On 9 September of the same year, incidents flared up in Kampung Belukar

Samok, Bacho District, Narathiwat. Police units burnt the village, causing forty

families to loss their homes.23


138

On 16 January 1984, Haji Sulong and his associates, including Haji Wae

Semae Muhammad, arrested and charged with treason. Their arrest produced a strong

reaction among the Malay-Muslims and, in February, uprising erupted in several

places; in one of these, eight policemen were killed in a clash with Muslim villages

near Kampung Resab, Pattani.

The situation in Pattani continued to deteriorate when Phibun returned to

power on 8 April 1984. On 26 April 1988, a revolt occurred in Kumpung Dusun Nyor

in Re-ngae District, Narathitwat. The revolt was believed to have been instigated and

organized by a religious teacher, Haji Adul Rahman (To’ Paerak), and some

nationalist leaders who had fled from the destroyed Kampung Beluker Samok. These

instigators included Haji Mat karang, Che Senik Wan Mat Seng, and Zakaria Lalo.

The fight against Thai police forces, which lasted two days, cost many lives. It was

estimated that 400 Malays and 30 policemen were killed in the battle.24

It resulted, moreover, in the flight of some 2,000-6,000 Muslims to Malaya25.

The Dusun Nyor Revolt, as it was known to the Malays, was the most serious uprising

since the arrest of Haji Sulong .Although situation in the provinces remained critical.

An estimated 250.000 Pattani Muslims signed a petition requesting the United

Nations to preside over the separation of the four Muslim southern and its subsequent

irredentism with the newly formed Federation of Malaya. Faced with his situation,

Phibun government declared a state emergency in Malay- Muslim area and sent three

regiment of special police to Narathiwat , ostensibly for the purpose of combating the

Communists.26

The Muslim leader who fled to Malaya had rallied behind Tengku Mahmud

Mahyuddin, the leader GAMPAR. For his part, Tengku Mahmud Mahyuddin made a

series of appeals to the United Nations, urging the Security Council to investigate

Thai administration in Pattani and to organize a plebiscite. Strong protests were sent

to various international organizations such as the Asia Relations Organization and the

Arab league. Call for support was addressed to Muslim countries, such as the state of

the Arab league, Indonesia, and Pakistan.27

In spite of the steps taken by the moderate government of Thailand from 1945

to 1947, violence in the southern provinces intensified. Rioting in Narathiwat in 1946

was followed by the formation of the PPM, in 1947 by the leader of the Pattani


139

Provincial Islamic Council, Haji Sulong. Southern Muslims looked on Haji Sulong as

their de facto Shaikhul al-Islam, religious leader, as opposed to the Chularajmontri

whom the Thai government installed to take that role. Educated in Mecca, Haji

Sulong aspired to political autonomy within a federal system in order to preserve the

unique Malay Muslim culture. Haji Sulong summed this up saying;

We Malays are conscious that we have been brought under Siamese rule by

defeat. The term “Thai Islam” with which we are known by the Siamese government

reminds us of this defeat and is therefore no appreciated by us. We therefore beg of

the government to honor us with the title of Malay Muslims so that we may be

recognized as distinct from Thai by the outside world.28

Some scholars may not agree with my placement of Hajji Sulong in the first

wave of separatism because his leadership marks the first time a religious leader took

on the separatist fight. However, I tend to categorize him at the tail-end of the first

wave because of his elite position in society. Hajji Sulong was born to a wealthy

family and was sent to study in Mecca at the age of 12 where he remained for 20

years as the head of an Islamic school. Also, Hajji Sulong did not rely primarily on

religious imagery in creating a cohesive movement against the Thai government but

was still pulling from the ethno-political imagery of an autonomous Malay state. The

presence of Hajji Sulong in the irredentist movement taken with the aftermath of the

Dusun Nyor Rebellion set the stage for the second wave and the groups that were

created therein.29

Although Gabungan Melaya Patani Raya had been formed abroad in Kelantan,

it had been able to organize the PPM. After 1948, more clashes took place between

the liberation movements and Thai Military forces. Muslims in Thailand, especially in

Bangkok, suggested that autonomy would be the best solution, but the savories were

ignored by the government. It claimed the conflict in Pattani was only bandit activity

designed to discredit Thailand. A further attempt to solve the conflict peacefully had

been made by Tengku Mahmud Mahyuddin. On 25 January 1984, thus before the

clash at Duson Nyor, he submitted a letter of grievances to British Prime Minister

complaining that:

According to the Laws of human right and justice, I hope the British

Government not going to support the Dictatorship in Thailand which discriminating

and humiliating the Malay people in Pattani. The Government of Thailand is


140

conducting policy against international laws. Therefore, I as a representative of all

Pattani people hereby make a request to the British Government to interfere in Pattani

issue according to U.N.O.’s ‘The United Nation Organization’ declaration

For a while Pattani hoped for support from the newly independent Indonesian

government. After sovereignty was formally transferred on 27 December 1949 to the

Indonesian government, Pattani’s confidence in their cause greatly increased. This

was due to the promise of cooperation via inspiration of Greater Indonesian more

radical member from Pattani joined military training militarily, as well as academic

studies in the newly-Indonesian.

In the beginning of 1950s the liberation movement had been again reconstructed

following the deaths of the leader of GAMPAR, Tengku Mahmud Mahyuddin, and

religious leader Haji Sulong Abdul Kadir. The movements were consolidated under one

leader, namely Tengku Jalal Bin Tengku Abdul Mutaleb, a prince of Sai and an exiled

member of the Thai Parliament. The new organization was Barisan Nasional

Pembebasan Patani (BNPP) or The National Front for Patani Independence’. In the

1960s, Indonesian-education Pattani students formed an independence movement

operating within the country and along the border called Barisan Revoluci Natinal

(BRN) or The National Revolution front Patani Independence, under the leadership of

Ustaz Karin Hassan. Its aim was the establishment of Pattani republic emphasizing

political organization rather than guerrilla warfare. The organization’s aim was to

introduce nationalism into Malay educational institutions as pondok as a means of

creating national identity and Islamic consciousness as fundamental principles. The

organization later had even tuned to military warfare as well.

Since Haji Sulong or Abdul Kadir Tukmina had established Syariatnamed

Haiah Nafaz Al Ahkam al Syariat or Council of Syariah. During the meeting in

October 28th 1943, the council has elected Haji Sulong as the Judge or Qadi for

Pattani. This decision has not been legitimatized by the Thai kingdom even if people

in Pattani have recognized the authority of Haji Sulong. Based on the high respect to

Haji Sulong, people in Pattani accept the rule and leadership of Haji Sulong. As a

consequence, Pattani become more alienated from the power of Thai Kingdom.

The request from Pattani for autonomy did not get enough support from the

world community, and Britain was unable to push forward any amendment to the

territorial boundaries because of disagreement by the US.30However, the problems

were sufficient for the Thai government to change its policy. In 1946, Perdi


141

Phanomyong, the Prime Minister, enacted the “Patronage of Islam Act” whichintegrated Muslim leaders into the state structure, headed by a Chularajmontri (chief

cleric) who was to give advice to the King on matters related to Islam. With the Act, a

Provincial Council for Islamic Affairs was established. Two Islamic judges were

appointed by the Ministry of Justice to advise the state courts on Islamic marriage and

inheritance laws. Yet Thai Buddhist judges retained the ultimate authority. This

retention of authority was unacceptable to the Muslim people.

In the mid-twentieth century, there was a wave of nationalism in Southeast

Asia, especially in Indonesia and Malaya. This resulted in fighting for independence

from western colonization. Since the situation in Pattani had still not improved, Haji

Sulong Toh meena, chairman of the Pattani Provincial Islamic Council and chairman

of the “Pattani Ideology Association” petitioned seven demands to the government

in April 1947. Haji Sulong's seven demands were:31

1. A democratically elected governor of Malay origin must be installed in Malay

dominated provinces.

2. Personal in the local government of four Malay provinces must be 80 %

Malay Muslim following the makeup of the population

3. Malay must be recognized as an official language parallel to Thai.

4. Malay must be the official language of educational institutions in the four

Malay provinces.

5. An independent Islamic Court must be established for the Muslim population.

6. All taxes and revenues collected in the Malay dominated provinces must be

spent there.

7. Islamic Councils in the Malay provinces have authority over Islamic

jurisprudence and rights over Malay culture and traditions.

Luang Thamrong Nawaswat, the Prime Minister of Thailand, brought the

seven demands to the cabinet meeting in mid-July. The seven demands did not

mention seceding, but emphasized “local autonomy.” Still, the petition was more thanthe government at that time would accept, and the seven demands were rejected. With

his unsuccessful demands, Haji Sulong made another move. He announced his

support of Tengku Mahmud Mahyuddin, at that time still in exile in Pattani Malaya,

to come back and rule Pattani. In November 1947, there was military coup in

Thailand led by Field Marshal Phibul Songkhram.32


142

As Prime Minister, Phibul Songkhran has come to power for the second times in

April 8th 1948, afterward, the Muslim people in Southern regions begun to start. During his

second term, Phibul Songkhran has tried to revaluate his assimilations policy in the past that

has caused the movement. However, Phibul Songkhran’s effort was not succeed.33

In January 1948, Haji Sulong and his party members were arrested. Muslim

people were very displeased. Villagers protested in the Saiburi district of Pattani

where Haji Sulong was detained. Subsequently, Haji Sulong was moved out of the

southern provinces for trial, but the protest did not end. Tension was increasing in the

three southern province of Pattani, Yala, and Narathiwat. The group’s objective was

to incorporate Pattani, Yala, Narathiwat and Satun into Malaya. The GAMPAR

mobilized the Muslim people in southern Thailand to protest against the government.

Finally, on April 28, 1948, there was a clash between the authorities and villagers at

Dusun Nyor village, Cha Nae district, of Narathiwat. Around four hundred Muslims

died and thousands more fled to Pattani Malaya. The government declared martial law

and deployed troops to control the situation.34

The biggest struggle of Muslim people happened in Dusun Nyor of Narathiwat

provinces, in 1948 Thousands people have struggled against Thai Polices and has

caused more than one hundred people were killed. Even Haji Sulong has been put in

jail for three a half years, this is not decreasing factor of Muslim separatist movement

in the southern Thailand. Haji Sulong has been honored as the father of Pattani

Independence Movement. In February 1949, Haji Sulong was sentenced to prison for

seven years, but. In 1952, he was released, returned to Pattani and worked as a teacher

in a pondok (religious school). But, Haji Sulong has been killed secretly in August

1954, he and his son, Ahmad Toh meena, were called to meet the police in Songkhla

and disappeared.35

4.4. The Second wave of Separatist Movement: Islamic Identity (Late 1950-2000)

Separatist movement in Southern Thailand has many seasons. Firstly, it began as an

ethnic movement but soon it changed to an Islamic movement due to the good paying.

The economic and religion factor were responsible for the unrest a many the Muslim

and the situation worsened day by day. Under martial law Of Sarit Thanarat (1957-

1963), Thai Buddhists were encouraged to settle in the trouble areas of Southern

Thailand and each family was allowed these areas of land. The policy was to

minimize the concentration of Muslim movement and to put this area strictly under


143

government centers. By this migration the Muslim became a minority and

concentration of Buddhist increased. During the 1960s and early 1970s,

approximately 160,000 Buddhist migrated to the southern Thailand. This separation

also very much opposed by the Muslim.

Also at this time many Malay-Muslim students were returning from receiving

education overseas due to government mandates that Thai be the language of

instruction and that the curriculum in all schools, including pondoks (Islamic school),

teach aspects of Thai-Buddhist culture. The majority of these students studied in

neighboring Malaysia or Middle Eastern Muslim countries. Upon returning to

Thailand, these students found that the Thai government would not employ them

causing more animosity; it was these disenfranchised, foreign educated young men

who would eventually take jobs as teachers in local pondok.

The traditional system of education in the pondok, is as most suitable for

teaching Muslim values. The new education system (the kingdom system of

education) supposedly distorts the delivery of Muslim values. Therefore, sine the law

of National Education has declared, there are problem in education system in the

southern provinces. Some pondoks refused to implement new education system will

later on destroy their culture affinity to their Malay ancestor and more important is it

will later on destroy the teaching Islamic. Some podokos, which adopt the kingdom

education system, has changed from traditional Pondoks into Madrasah or registered

Islamic School. Meanwhile, by using the new education system and then Thai

kingdom has opportunity to launch many public schools in the Muslim

communities.36

Another important factor for the developed of separatist ideas among the

Youth was their interaction with the Youth of other countries , whom they travelled

abroad and came in to contact with different persons having ideology of pure Islamic

knowledge and who were famous in their countries for their contribution in the field

of politics. These Youth while having education in foreign countries introduced with

deferent Islamic groups like was PLO (Palestinian Liberation Organization) and other

groups and there for a very good control.


144

The encroachment of traditional Malay-Muslim territory by Northern and

Northeastern farmers at the insistence of the central government coupled with

disenfranchised, well-educated youth helped to spawn the second wave. The Islamic

identity of the second wave was not initiated in the southern provinces but introduced

and encouraged by the external actors and events that I have described above.

Education abroad allowed Malay-Muslim students to network with other students in

these pre-dominantly Muslim countries to which they traveled. Through these

networks links were formed with Islamist groups such as the Arab League, the

Palestinian Liberation Organization, Islamic Secretariat, and Partai Islam.

Barisan National Pembebasan Patani (BNPP)

Barisan National Pembebasan Patani (BNPP) was known in English as the National

Liberation Front of Patani (NLFP). This organization was established by the Pattani

the Malay-Muslim radicals or fundamentalists who were motivated to rise up in arms

against the Thai government to establish the independent state of Pattani, separate

from Thailand. It was the one of the earliest separatist movements in this regard. This

organization was established by Tengku Mahmud Mahyuddin in 1948. It was

developed from the GAMPAR. After the death of Tengku Mahmud Mahyuddin in

195337, after than Founded in 1959, by Tengku Jalal Nasir Adul Na Saiburi or Adul

Jalal Nasare, BNPP (Barisan Nasional Pemberbasan Patani or Patani National

Liberation Front) was the first armed group that rose against Thai authority. The

group’s objective was the independence of Pattani and not integration with Malaya.

Militants were divided into small groups (about 10-20 men for each group) and

operated throughout Pattani, Yala, and Narathiwat under the command of Deureh

Madiyoh, alias PohYeh. As the strength of the group was definitely weaker than that

of the authorities, the groups used guerrilla warfare. Recruitment was conducted

through religious teachers. New members received basic military training in local

areas and some of them were later sent to Libya, Syria, and Afghanistan for advanced

training. The BNPP also informed Muslim countries in the Middle East about

Pattani’s story and sent many Muslim youth from southern Thailand to study in Egypt

and Saudi Arabia. The group received significant political and financial support from

Malaysia’s Parti Islam in Kelantan.38


145

As it is, the BNPP, has been in operation for a long time and has played a

significant part in the struggle for separation with special emphasis on the public

relations by means of which adequate information about the Pattani State was well

publicized, so much so that the people both inside Thailand and beyond have been

kept well informed. The focus was stated on the people in the Arabic world. Under

the possible support by the BNPP, the young Malay-Muslims were sent to study at

universities in the Middle East, such Egypt and Saudi Arabia. After completing their

studies the young graduates returned to their home place, working under the direction

and supervision of the BNPP. This organization was initiated by the former rulers of

the former Pattani State, who lost their political power. This is why the BNPP was in

full support of the monarchical system and in good relationship with the conservative

Muslims, as well as the religious leaders, including the Pondok school leaders in the

southern border provinces of Thailand. The Islamic teachings are the guidelines on

the basis of which the followers and supporters are motivated to take part in the

movement. In addition, the Tentera Natinal Pembesasan Rakyat Patani (TNPP)

participants established a good relationship with the members of Parti Islam,

especially those in the northern states of Malaysia bordering on Thailand. At present

the role of the BNPP is on the decrease on account of its political defeat to the UMNO

(United Malays National Organization).However, the relationship between the BNPP

and the Parti Islam is still in a positive and satisfactory.39Apart from that, the BNPP is

found doing its best to help the Malay-Muslims in the southern border provinces of

Thailand obtain Malaysian nationality in return for their support to the organization.

The TNPP, members have been organized and reorganized into guerrilla and, hid ding

along the mountainous chains such Boodo Mount in Narathiwat Province.

The BNPP began to lose its strength in 1972 due to heavy suppression by the

Thai military. Five years later, the leader of the group, Abdul Yhalal Nasare, died. In

1978, Parti Islam ceased its financial support. Many members left the BNPP, but the

rest gathered again under a Central Committee of fifteen, led by Badri Hamdan in Ban

Panare, Pattani. Under Hamdan’s leadership, more religiously-educated leaders came

to dominate the BNPP. In 1984, PohYeh, the military leader died. The strength of the

militants also decreased from the peak of around 300 men to about 50.40 The group

began to shift from armed fighting to political efforts. Ultimately, in 1986, the BNPP

changed its name to Barisan Islam Pembebasan Patani (BIPP), in order to emphasize


146

its own commitment to Islamism. In the 1990s, BNPP ceased its movement for a

while, but returned again in 2002, after core members met in northern Malaysia. It

was believed that the BIPP participated in attacking Thai security officials in 2002,

but there was no compelling evidence of their participation in the 2004 attacks.41

Barisan Revolusi National (BRN)

This organization was established on March 3, 1963 with Ustaz Abdul Karim as its

leader. Karim was a teacher at Pondok School, Rusoh District, of Narathiwat

Province. He started his movement as an illegal organization based on nationalism,

socialism and Islam. His movement is quite different from the other organizations in

this regard. It was organized in favor of leftism and violence in spite of the fact that it

was considered weaker than other because its field operations were limited in its

scope, at least in terms of space. Later on Karim reorganized his movement and

expanded its field operations with a strong intention to establish the Pattani State. He

placed more emphasis on political organizing than on political activities in line with a

guerrilla band. The BRN used the Pondok Schools as its operational bases and the

former Pondok school teachers as its active leaders. Therefore, their activities within

the pondok schools were easily carried out by the BRN. Within a short period of time

(1966-1972, 5 years) the BRN was successful in exerting its influence over a number

of Pondok schools in the provinces of Yala and Narathiwat and later in Pattani

Province.

In October 1968, the party set up a military wing called Angkatan Bersenjata

Revolusi Patani (Patani Revolutionary Armed Forces or ABREP) led by Jehku Baku

(alias Mapiyoh Sadalah). Its strength was around 150 men and it was based in the

Budo mountain range in Narathiwat. The BRN also had close a relationship with the

insurgent Communist Party of Malaya (CPM), which since 1960 had retreated into

southern Thai territory. 49 In 1974, the BRN launched a successful attack against a

Kabu police station or Raman district, of Yala. The militants robbed the officials’ of

their weapons and released many prisoners. However, the BRN focused more on

political organization, especially in religious schools, than on guerrilla activities.50

But in 1977, there was a major split in the organization caused by internal dissent.

Ustaz Karim set up the Council for the Domestic Revolutionary Movement (Majlis

Gerakan Revolusi Dalam Negeri) which became known as the BRN-Congress (armed

efforts). “Haji M” set up a coordinating committee (Majlis Koordinasi) known as


147

BRN-Coordinate (political and religious efforts). In the 1980s, the BRN-Congress’

military wing began to decline. Ustaz Karim ultimately lost his leadership by vote to

Jehku Peng (alias PohTua, alias Rosa Buraso, and alias Abdul Razak Rahman) in

1984. However, Ustaz Karim and his followers later established a group known as the

BRN-Ulama in Malaysia, which focus on religious activities until his death in 1996.

The BRN was having socialist and radical revolutionary ideas, which led to

some religion groups not to join the party. Later when there was dissention of ideas,

the party broke into three groups. The first BRN coordinate, it ceased activities in

Thailand and concentrates more a Malaysia. The second, the BRN Congress headed

by Rosa Burako, was a military group and were having all sorts of weapons. Third

group headed by Abdul Karin Hassan headed the third, and was called BRN Uram, it

focused on political and religion work. Out of three BRN congress was most active in

southern border provinces It had also hindquarters at Malaysia.

Patani United Liberation Organization (PULO)

This is one of the most powerful and influential separatist movement in the century.

This founded of January 22, 1968 in Mecca, Saudi Arabia. It is founding president

was Tengku Bira Kotanila, alias Kabir Abdul Rahman, known as Adun Na Wang

kram, who graduated from Aligarh Muslim University, India42. In 1969, the

organizational platform was formulated with a group of Pattani students in Mecca,

who were also the old student of Aligarh Muslim University. The difference between

PULO and other organizational was that, all others were farmed on the bonds of

aristocracy and religious leadership, while PULO attempted to unite all parts of the

community. The ideology of PULO is based on religion, Nationalism, homeland, and

humanitarianism. This party was very much concerned with liberating the Malay

Muslim provinces of Thailand and establishing an Islamic State; they also were aware

of the need for a long-term strategy to prepare for the goals of secession. For

achieving these goals, they devoted their concern towards education as making people

politically conscious. This organization had it members throughout the Arab world.

The objective of organization was to establish an independent Muslim Malay state,

which worlds comprise Pattani. Yala, Narathiwat, and Satun.

The PULO occupied the middle ground between the traditionalist BNPP with

a leadership rooted in the former Pattani aristocracy, and the Islamic socialist BRN,

which later suffered from severe internal factionalism. Recruitment was conducted in


148

southern Thailand and northern Malaysia and focused on Pattani Muslims studying in

Malaysia and the Middle East, and on religious teachers. Tengku Bira Kotanila was

an expert publicist and fund-raiser. He received large amounts of financial support

from the Middle East. During 1975-1984, many Muslim youth were sent to Libya,

Syria and Palestine for guerrilla warfare training. The PULO enjoyed rapid growth in

its membership in the 1970s and several hundred guerrilla fighters were based mostly

in the Narathiwat – Budo mountain range. The Military wing was led by Haji Yuso

Pakistan and Haji Sama-aeTha-nam. Their peak of operations was during 1976 to

1982. The PULO began to decline due to broad amnesty and the political inclusion

policies of the Thai government.43

In the mid-1980s, PULO had been weakened by financial constraints. There

were also differences among the leadership over rank, privilege and personality.

Subsequently, in 1992, Arong Mooreng and Haji Rohman Bazo established a New

PULO but did not formally break away until 1995. The New PULO was active in the

Betong district of Yala and some districts of Narathiwat. Their tactics were to launch

constant low-level attacks and minimize loss of life44.However, in late 1998, the Thai

government with the cooperation of Malaysian authorities arrested four senior PULO

leaders including Haji Rohman Bazo, chief of New PULO, his deputy Abdul Rahman

Haji Yala, and the group’s military chief, Haji Da’oud Tha-nam. Picked up separately

was Haji Sama-ae Tha-nam, the military chief of “Old PULO.” The loss of these

leaders effectively disrupted the PULO network in both Thailand and Malaysia.45

In 1992, a new PULO emerged as a dissident faction of the original PULO.

Ar-rong Moo-reng and Hajji Abdul Rohman Bazo established New PULO with the

intention of pursuing Pattani’s self-autonomy with more consistent actions that its

parent organization. New PULO was a sort of guerrilla group, which carried out

miner attacks often and on, to harass the local authorities. However, the New PULO

and PULO were not having compromise on any issue and Old PULO had a very

different ideology.

In 1989, all parts include new PULO, PULO and other groups formed a

coalition known as Bersatu.


149

Gerakan Mujahideen Patani (GMP)

In the 1980s, the insurgency groups had been heavily suppressed by Thai authorities

and began to lose their momentum. On 16 September 1985, lead members of

BNPP/BIPP, BRN-Coordinate, BRN-Ulama, and PULO met together and discussed

problems such as their operations, logistical support, and group disunity. Ultimately,

the BBMP (Barisan Bersatu Mujahidin Patani) was formed as a coordinate operation

center and symbol of their unity. However, it did not work out well. Then, in 1986,

the GMP (Gerakan Mujahideen Patani), a splinter group from BBMP was founded.

The GMP conducted its activities in northern Malaysia with emphasis on political

efforts. Their significant efforts led to the consolidation of various insurgency groups

working together again under the name “BERSATU” a couple of years later.

BERSATU

Bersatu (The United Front for the Independence of Patani), an alliance between

PULO, New PULO, the BRN Congress, the BNP, and the BIPP, was formed in 1989

when leaders of these groups “held a joint meeting called ‘the gathering of the fightersfor Pattani.” At this meeting an agreement was made to unify and “carry out thestruggle in the same direction to avoid creating confusion in accepting financial

donations from foreign countries.” In the late 1990s, Bersatu organized “OperationFalling Leaves,” “a series of coordinated attacks aimed at killing off state workers,law enforcement personnel, local government officials, schoolteachers and other

perceived symbols of Thai Buddhist repression.”Between August 1997 and January

1998, at least 33 separate attacks were carried out under this operation, which has

been labeled the “most serious upsurge of Muslim separatist activity since the early

1980s.”Campaign of violence increased international attention on the area and caused

Thailand and Malaysia to tighten their shared border. At this time Malaysia made a

series of high-level arrests of secessionist leaders in the northern region. “OperationFalling Leaves” forced Malaysia to reconsider their previous stance, that these

separatist movements were just a domestic Thai problem. The BERSATU’s aims andobjectives were to fight for independence and liberate of Patani, while resisting Thai

rules and policies. The group called for jihad with armed fighting, and requested

support from Muslim countries. The BERSATU was based in Malaysia; its leader was

Dr.Wan Kadir CheMan (Dr.Fadeh). However, BERSATU could not command the

various groups in conducting their operations, but defined policy and provide

appropriate direction. The groups’ member still carried out their activities freely, butwith increased coordination.


150

Gerakan Mujahideen Islam Patani (GMIP)

The GMIP was founded in 1995 by Cheku Mae Abdul Rahman (alias Cheku Mae

Kuteh, alias Abbas bin Ahmad) and Nasoreee Saesang (alias AwaeKaelae, PohWae,

or Haji Wae). The group broke away from the older GMP (Gerakan Mujahideen

Patani) and shared the aspirations of other Muslim Malay separatist groups for an

independent Islamic state in southern Thailand, while seeking to draw inspiration

from the wider currents of international jihad. The appearance of GMIP was almost

simultaneous with the formation of the KMM (Kampulan Mujahideen Malaysia)

which was set up by Afghan veteran, Zainol Ismael.

Nasoree had also trained and fought with Afghan Mujahideen in the late

1980s, where he met Nik Adili Nik Aziz – son of Parti Islam se Malaysia (PAS)

leader Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat, from the Kelantan state of Malaysia. Nik Adili Nik

Aziz joined the KMM in 1996. It is possible that these two groups were allied and

enjoy mutual support. GMIP representative was present at meetings of the Southeast

Asian pan-Islamic jihadist co-ordinating group Rabitatul Mujahideen (RM) convened

by JemmahI slamihya (JI) in Malaysia in 1999-2000. In the late 1990s, New PULO,

BRN, and GMIP claimed responsibility for 33 separate attacks from August 1997 to

January 1998 resulting in nine deaths. The GMIP specialized in urban bombing using

improvised explosive devices (IEDs) and raids by small groups of gunmen. Their

movements were concealed within the crowded population, and they waited for a

proper opportunity to launch their attacks.

Other Resistance Groups

Although the BRN, PULO, BERSATU, and GMIP were the principal resistance

movements against continuing Thai rule in southern Thailand, a weakness of the

resistance movement in general caused the emergence of other movements, either as

break-away movements or as new initiatives in other sectors of Malay-Muslim

Thailand. Among these were:

1. Permuda

Permuda (the youth wing of Patani liberation–Permuda Merdeka Patani / PMP),

formed by the BRN-Coordinate in 1992.Recruitment was conducted through ponoh,

private schools teaching Islam (PSTI), some secular state schools, and also local

mosques. The youth were provoked to perform jihad and trained in guerrilla warfare.

Permuda has conducted some significant operations such as armed robbery and

assassinations of government officials since 2001.


151

2. PANYOM

PANYOM (Patani National Youth Movement or Gerakan Permuda Kebangsaan

Patani), began their first activity in 1997 by extortion of money in Pattani. In 1998,

propaganda and provocation to fight for independence of Pattani circulated through

the internet. They also publicized the struggle of many separatist groups which aimed

to receive international recognition.

3. Persatuan Mahasiswa Islam Patani (Selatan Thailand) di Patani

(PMIPTI) The Association of Thai Students in Indonesia (Persatuan Mahasiswa Islam

Patani (Selatan Thailand) di Patani / PMIPTI), PMIPTI was founded in 1968 by Thais

in the three southernmost provinces who graduated from religious schools in Indonesia.

At the beginning, the group had normal functions such as educational coordination and

student activities, but later it was infiltrated by BRN-Coordinate which distorted its

objectives. The PMIPTI has been active in recruiting and fundraising.

The Islamic separatist groups of southern Thailand had in 1990, established

links with Muslim sympathizers overseas. This enabled them to get monetary as well

as political support. They got training also from the overseas country. This oven a sort

of third wave, but the then prime minister did not acknowledge this third wave, which

exacerbated in a great chaos.

By the late 1990s the Islamic separatist groups in southern Thailand had

established links with Muslim sympathizers overseas capable of supplying monetary

support as well as tactical and political training. This leads me to suggest that a third

wave of separatism was emerging. I argue that the actions and policies of Prime

Minister Thaksin Shinawatra do not acknowledge the emergence of this third wave

and thereby have exacerbated the conflict. The motives of this new wave of violence

are still somewhat unclear.

4.5. The Third Wave of Separatism: Appealing to a Wider Audience (2000 –presently)

In May 2002, the then Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra dismantled the Ministry of

Interior’s Southern Border Provinces and the Civilian Police Military Task Force 43

(CPM 43), became he thought the insurgency has come to an end. Thai led to a great

de buckle because the SBPAC (Southern Border Provinces Administrative Center),

which was established in 1981 was the main link between southern people and

Bangkok, that’s why the insurgency once again rose in those areas.46


152

In the 1960s and 1970s, guerrilla activity in rural Narathiwat, Patani, and Yala

increased, primarily in the form of attacks on police posts and government buildings,

including government schools. Then, in 1980, General Prem Tinsulanonda, a native of

Songkhla province, took office as prime minister after almost two decades of

intensive campaigns against separatist and communist insurgencies in the south. His

government realized that its strategy had to be political as well as military, and in

1981 the new government overhauled security and governance structures to promote

the new goal of political accommodation. Among the innovations under Prem’s

leadership was the introduction of a new administrative system in the south intended

to promote a shift from confrontation to negotiation. A joint taskforce of civil police

and the military (CPM 43) was created to coordinate security operations; it reportedly

instructed officers and personnel to cease extrajudicial killings and disappearances of

detained suspects. The government also launched the so-called Policy of Attraction,

aimed at drawing sympathy away from separatist groups by increasing political

participation and promoting development projects intended to strengthen the regional

economy. Political matters were handled by the new Southern Border Provinces

Administrative Centre (SBPAC) established in 1981. Broad amnesty offers were

eventually taken up by hundreds of communist and separatist fighters.47

On 12 March 2004, Somchai Neelahphaijit, a high profile Muslim lawyer

from the southern provinces was reported missing. The (mis) handling of this case by

Thai authorities and comments made by Thaksin caused more tension in the south.

Somchai was defending several individuals accused of the 4 January terrorist

activities and was also campaigning for the lifting of martial law in the region. On 11

March, Somchai submitted letters to five independent bodies calling for investigations

regarding police torture of his clients; he was reported missing the next day. Omar

Tayib of Narathiwat, a member of the Senate sub-committee on Islamic affairs,

petitioned the government to set up an independent investigation because “any

indications of mishandling would further divide the Muslim community and the

state.” Thaksin refused an independent investigating committee on the grounds that

“Somchai is merely a lawyer . . . and not representative of the Muslim community.”

In June 2004, an indictment was submitted naming five suspects in the disappearance

of Somchai. All five were members of police forces. They were charged with

coercion and conspiracy to commit robbery. To date, no other information is available

regarding Somchai’s whereabouts or the outcome of the indictment.48


153

28the April 2004 is considered as the bloodiest day in the southern provinces

of Thailand because 11 security outposts and police satiation in Yala, Songkhla, and

Pataani were attacked and more than 100 people dead. The suspected Islamic

militants with full arm were mostly teenagers ranging from 15 to 20 years old. This

was followed by center attacks on a Kresik Mosque where it was suspected that same

militants have taken refuge. This siege lasted for 6 hours until the armed forces

entered the Mosque land killed all the 32 militants; the former Prime mister Thaksin

praised the achier of Thai military and stewarded the military men who were

responsible far such as big victory. No group took the responsibility, but it is

hypothesized that there was a link between 1956 attacked and attacked 2004.

The most import thing about the attack was that all the attackers were young,

religious, less armed and willing to die for the cause of Islam. The attacks appear to

have been organized by the Hikmat Allah Abadan (Brotherhood of the Eternal

Judgment of God) headed by Ismael Yusof Rayalong, an Indonesia religion leader for

Yala, but there is no proof.

In April 28th 2004 has been related to the previous events, such as the stolen

300 guns from the military post in Narathiwat in January 4th 2004, this stolen case has

been followed by the riot and ended up with 4 people dead, and 21 public schools

were burned down. In the previous time, in December 2001 until January 2004, it can

be said that were many cases includes riots happened in the Southern region.

However, many people have said that that the government only sees those (almost 500

case) as the common criminal case, without trying to see it’s political connotation, if

the government carefully looking at the political dimension of any significant

incident, maybe the security condition in the South can be properly handled.

In one of those incidents, April 28, 2004, more than 100 militants carried out

terrorist attacks against ten police outposts across Pattani, Yala and Songkhla

provinces in southern Thailand. Gunmen retreated to the 425-year-old Kresik

Mosque, regarded by Muslims as the holiest mosque in Pattani. General Pallop

Pinmanee, commander of the Southern Peace Enhancement Center and deputy

director of the Internal Security Operations Command, was the senior Army officer

on the scene. After a tense seven-hour standoff, General Pallop Pinmanee ordered an

all out assault on the mosque. All the gunmen were killed. He later claimed, “I had no

choice. I was afraid that as time passed the crowd would be sympathetic to the

insurgents, to the point of trying to rescue them.49”


154

In October 2004, six young men were arrested in TakBai, Narathiwat

province, suspected of supplying weapons to Islamic militants. On 25 October in

protest of these arrests, around 1,500 people gathered outside the police station.

Security forces opened fire and detained more than 1,300 people. Six demonstrators

were shot dead and seventy-eight of those arrested died from suffocation or

convulsions due to being haphazardly herded into the back of military trucks. Thaksin

blamed the 78 deaths on the protestors’ weakened condition due to religious fasting,

and not because they were sardined into the back of trucks with poor ventilation.

Following this incident and the reaction by the state, there was another increase in

violent acts against police, schools, Thai teachers, and Buddhist monks.

On September, 19, 2006, the head of the armed forces, General Sonthi

Boonyarataklin, ousted the Thaksin government in a bloodless coup. The armed

forces established the Council for National Security (CNS) and appointed a former

general, Surayud Chulanont, as interim Prime Minister. The Council for National

Security (CNS) promised fresh elections within the year. A major change of policy

was expected, as General Sonthi Boonyarataklin is a practicing Muslim and had

differed with Thaksin over the need to hold talks with the insurgents moreover, both

Sonthi and Surayud were Special Forces operatives, and had participated in counter-

insurgency operations against the Communist Party of Thailand (CPT) during the

Cold war. As such, both men understand how the Thai armed forces had framed a

successful counter –insurgency strategy in the 1970and 1980s

The Surayud government made resolving the problem in the south a priority,

and took a number of important steps toward that end in the wake of the coup.

Surayud adopted a more conciliatory tone than his predecessor, and promised to

establish a constructive dialogue with “all concerned parties” The Prime Minister Said

he would use the recommendations made by the National Reconciliation Commission

(NRC) as “guidepost” patch up relations with Malaysia, and even consider the partial

implementation of Islamic law in the Southern Thailand.50Since the coup the new

government has made significant progress in mending ties with neighboring countries,

especially Malaysia Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi has praised Surayud “More

diplomatic” approach to the restive Southern Thailand. 51On the sidelines of the

ASEAN Summit in January 2007 the two leaders agreed to reconvene annual talks

and to push forward with the Joint Development Strategy, which is designed to foster


155

economic integration between Thailand’s southern provinces and Malaysia’s northern

States. When Surayud visited Jakarta in November 2006 he praised the peace the

peace processes in Aceh as a model Thailand Should emulate, and the Surayud re-

establishing the SBPAC and CMP-43. However, when the SBPAC was formally

stood up Jan, 3, 2007, bureaucratic inertia and budgetary issues left understaffed and

not fully operational.52

In 28 February, 2013, on Thursday just ahead of an official visit to Malaysia

by Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra of Thailand, agreement with rebel group

ready to talk peace. The national security chief signed a peace agreement with the

insurgent group Barisan Revolusi Nasional (BRN). It is the first formal engagement

between the government and insurgents. National Security Council (NSC) Secretary-

general Paradorn Pattanatabutr said the BRN is a group that Malaysia believes

operates in the Deep South."It's another attempt by the government to tackle the

unrest. It does not mean the peace agreement will end the ongoing violence."

The (BRN) official was identified as Hassan Taib, "chief of the BRN liaison

office in Malaysia". Barisan Revolusi Nasional in Bahasa Malaysia means "National

Revolutionary Front". It refers to the separatists' concept that the three southernmost

provinces and part of Songkhla represent a distinct nation. And the text of the

agreement was not revealed, but Mr. Hassan spoke briefly with reporters called in to

cover the event.53and Lt Gen Paradorn, speaking on Wednesday evening ahead of the

formal agreement, said, "While I can't guarantee the agreement will succeed, it must

be better than letting the South burn on like this." He said the agreement was a result

of the Thai-Malaysian Peace Dialogue signed after Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm

Yubarung met Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak in the Malaysian capital

recently. Before the signing, a military source in Bangkok cautioned that while the

BRN operates in the Deep South, it does not control all militant cells, especially those

at the operating level who still do not want to negotiate. The national security chief

also said the government is expected to hold talks with other southern insurgent

leaders after Ms Yingluck comes back from Malaysia. Lt Gen Paradorn was in

Malaysia Wednesday to prepare the ground for Prime Minister Yingluck's visit

Thursday. Ms Yingluck is scheduled to attend the Thailand-Malaysia annual

consultation in Putrajaya and hold talks with Mr. Najib on Thailand's request for

Malaysia to help arrange for discussions with insurgents in the Deep South. Lt Gen


156

Paradorn said before leaving Bangkok Wednesday that several rebel leaders had

approached him for talks."I am verifying whether they are indeed based in Malaysia

and whether talks are possible before I proceed and ask Kuala Lumpur for

cooperation. We estimate there are fewer than 1,000 insurgency sympathizers in

Malaysia," Lt Gen Paradorn said. The army has estimated that about 9,000 militants

are active in the Deep South. Lt Gen Paradorn said Mr.Najib wanted to establish anti-

insurgency cooperation not only with Thailand but with other countries in Asia as

well. The National Security Council (NSC) chief is expected to sign an accord with

his Malaysian counterpart that says the security chiefs will cooperate to tackle the

insurgency. He said the formal collaboration will allow authorities to monitor new

areas and give the insurgents nowhere to turn but the negotiating table."The condition

for the talks is that seceding is off the agenda. It's against our constitution," Lt Gen

Paradorn said. If the issue of allowing a special administrative zone comes up, the

NSC will look into details and see if it contravenes the charter, he said."The talks will

let us know what they think and want so that we can design some solutions.

"Everything will be based on the rule of law and the constitution," Lt Gen Paradorn

said. Security officials earlier voiced concern over Ms.Yingluck's attempt to forge

such a formalised "peace talk". They said the government would be boosting the

status of the insurgents if they enter into formal negotiations while weakening its own

position. Lt Gen Paradorn said asking for help from Malaysia does not mean Thailand

is upgrading its domestic problem to the international level. Prime Minister Yingluck

Wednesday denied reports that her government planned to appoint former Prime

Minister Chavalit Yongchaiyudh as a security adviser.54

4.6. Mara Patani (Majlis Amanah Rakyat Patani- The Amanah Council for Patani

People) was originally an initiative from the pro-dialogue BRN members as a proactive

step towards the dialogue table. It was formed on 25/10/2014 by a coalition of young and

elderly members of the BRN, including the Pemuda (youth), the Ulama( clerics) and the

armed wings. It was believed that they represent the “BRN Action Group” who is

inclined to seek political solution through negotiation with the Thai government.

It is not clear how much support this group has from the mainstream BRN or

from the military wing. They are, however, optimistic that they will eventually gain

support and endorsement from both, including the mass if their action bears favorable

outcome. Upon their shoulders rests the responsibility to secure support and consent

from the BRN leadership for their initiative.


157

In the middle of March 2015 the BRN Action Group proposed the idea to

other Patani liberation movements and invited them to unite together under one

umbrella organization, to determine the direction of their struggle and to discuss

unified proposals for the peace negotiation with Thailand.

After a long and exhaustive discussion they finally agreed to form an umbrella

organization with some structural adjustments and a new name: MAJLIS SYURA

PATANI, still maintaining the abbreviation: MARA Patani (as an acknowledgement

of BRN's initiative). In English it is PATANI CONSULTATIVE COUNCIL (PCC).

The Patani movements are:

1. BarisanRevolusiNasional - BRN Action Group

2. Barisan Islam Pembebasan Patani (BIPP)

3. Pertubuhan Persatuan Pembebasan Patani (PULO-P4)

4. Pertubuhan Pembebasan Patani Bersatu (PULO-dspp)

5. Pertubuhan Pembebasan Patani Bersatu (PULO-mkp), and

6. Gerakan Mujahidin Islam Patani (GMIP).

The involvement of the above six movements in MARA Patani makes the

MAJLIS SYURA PATANI (MARA Patani) the most effective organization for all the

currently active movements up to date, even though it was an initiative of BRN at the

start. According to internal sources, the formation of the new Mara Patani is based on the

consensus of all movements far from pressure or influence from the Malaysian facilitator.

As for the moment, the MARA Patani comprises of representatives of the six

above-mentioned movements. In future it will open its door to representatives of other

stakeholders in Pattani. This is to ensure that the future direction and political

demands can be mutually discussed and decided according to the true needs of the

people.

Even though the formation of Mara Patani is seen as a top-down process ot

from the grassroots and it is acceptable as far as the struggle for freedom and

independence is concerned. Because it was initiated and championed by the liberation

movements who have been striving for more than a half century.


158

The purpose of Mara Patani is not only to participate in peace talk with

Thailand but also for its struggle to gain recognition and international support for

the Right to Self-determination for the people of Pattani. It has to be emphasized that

even though all the liberation movements agree to come to the dialogue table, not

even one has dropped the claim for independence.

As a newly formed umbrella organization, the Mara Patani, has its own

limitations and shortcomings. With hard work and determination from all those who

give them full support to come to an agreements through consensus. It is expected that

Mara Patani will be strengthen and consolidated from time to time.

Perhaps Mara Patani may not be the best instrument to fulfill the in aspirations

the Pattani Malays, but currently it is the sole unified voice to attain support from

people of various groups with or without a peace process.

Some observers are concerned that the Mara Patani could fail if the BRN

Action Group members are not given mandate by their organization. It is premature to

make that assumption objectively. Whether or not Mara Patani could effectively

perform in the dialogue process and make considerable progress, only tide and time

will tell.

The secretariat of Mara Patani will soon hold a convention for MAJLIS

SYURA PATANI to discuss and debate the proposals, endorse its formation and

determine the direction of its struggle followed by its inauguration.

Last but not least, an insider of Mara Patani hopes that the CSOs and the

NGOs, the activists and all people of Pattani who seek changes, justice and freedom,

will strongly support Mara Patani, as the SOLE VOICE and CHANNEL to fight for

the desires and inspirations of the Patani Malays. Mara Patani also calls upon other

Pattani stakeholders to respond to its invitation to join its ranks and files and

to shoulder this heavy responsibility together.

Let us wait for the details and see the response from all parties after the Mara

Patani is officially proclaimed in the near future.55

4.7. The Islamic Private School in Southern Thailand

Southern Thailand (Pattani), in the early ninetieth century, became the center of

traditional Islamic education to which the Muslim get their early education in Islam

before transferring them to Muddle Eastern institutions, especially to study under the


159

tutelage of the teachers at the Holy Mosque in Mecca. Pattani had preserved a unique

religious and culture character and institutions which could not be found elsewhere in

the region. Among these were well- known Pondok and their respective Tok guru.

Though them, Pattani was able to attract student from all over the area56. And the

graduates of these Pondok were numerous. Some of them become religious teachers

themselves and role models in the Muslims community, providing Islamic education

for the Muslim people as their ancestors used to do.57In the Greater Pattani Region in

particular, the Pondok institutions have grown to symbolize the Malay- Muslims,

pride in their ideals. The religious leaders who guide and instruct in the Pondok also

serve as the role model of all Islamic vestures and ethical ideas for the student and

other Muslims outside the walls.58 Because the Pondok is considered both a religion

and education institution, it has become a “microcosm” for the idealized Islam in a

Malay society that is marginal both in relation to the Thai state and Malay- Muslim

world in general. To the bureau crate of the Thai state, the Pondok are considered the

hotbeds of radicalism and political activism .Since the King Rama V, in 1908 the

educational policy to infuse Thai nationalism had been started. The committee

conducted the educational program comprised of the Buddhist monks, Village heads,

and traditional healers. The government embarked on the teaching of Thai language in

every school. Though the Thai government was very anxious in conducting the

education program especially to the non-Thais and non–Buddhist. The teaching of

Thai language by Thai-Buddhist monks had aroused strong protest from the Pattani

Muslim. In Muslim believe, it was a sinful deed to teach their children with other

religion. The Malay- Muslims of Pattani accused that secular education program in

posed by the Thai government was aimed at eliminating the Jawi language and

religion (Islam), as well as to convert the natural status of the Malay- Pattani

generation in to Thai .Briefly; the Pattani perceived that the government educational

program was a strategy to control them politically and culturally59. Consequently

many of the Pattani parents did not send their children in state School. They were

anxious with the subjects taught by the Buddhist monks. And the Thai government set

up culture policy dealing with the use of language and custom to promote further Thai

nationalism. The culture policy, intended to assimilate the Pattani into Thai culture

was called the ratthainiyom. Ratthainiyom Number 1 issued on 24 June 1930,

announced that Siam was replaced by Thailand as of the State. It also stipulated that

all ethnic groups should change their names into Thai. The Pattani accepted this


160

regulation with suspicion of the government plan to replace Islam and Malay identity

with the Thai customary values. Most of the Pattani combined Islamic (Arabic) and

Malay names together. By bearing a Thai name, the culture and ethnic boundaries

were blurred. Those Muslim migrants coming from the Middle East, India, Pakistan,

Bangladesh, Saudi Arabia, were all included as Thai Muslims despite their varied

backgrounds or place of origin.60

Ratthainiyom Number 3 issued on August 1939 stipulated that the use of Thai

to replace Siam did not mean to divide Thai citizens based on locality (Northern Thai

and Southern Thai) or religion (Thai Muslims, Thai Christians, Thai Buddhists). The

Muslim Pattani strongly rejected the identification as Thai Muslim for the reason that

it was not their natural identity. They had their own history, religion, and culture of

origin, separated from the Thai.61

4.8. The Government Policy for Education in southern provinces of Thailand.

The Ministry of Education has improved the Pondok of education process in the four

southern provinces in accord with Educational Development Program used throughout

the country. In the year 1970/2513 B.E. the Ministry of Education carried out the policy

of improving the Islamic Private School, under the improvement Project of the Ministry

of Education, 1970. The primary objectives of this policy were to bring the education of

the Pondok into line with the levels of the national standard of education and to build a

better understanding between the government and the people. In the 1973, the prime

minister’s Cabinet made this decision by forming the Improvement Committee for the

Islamic Private School to give advice to the Ministry of Education to help it to reach

stated national education objectives62. And it is policy of the Government to promote

higher standard of Education in the southern provinces and to encourage the Muslims to

take course at vocational school as well as universities. This will earn them suitable

qualification and opportunities to enter government service or to have a more secure

career. Following are some of the measures that the government has undertaken to

improve the educational standard of the Thai Muslims. Thus, upgrading the Pondok to

the level of public school in which Islamic Study is offered. (The Pondok in various

localities used to offer only instructions in religious matters. Thus, when the students

complete their studies, they are insufficiently equipped with the knowledge to earn their

livings. In 1964, the Government decided and undertook to upgrade the Pondok to the

level of educational instructions where the regular school system is used that is,


161

curriculum is clearly set out, period of study is well–defined, and lessons are given on

general and vocational subjects in addition to the teaching of Islam. The student who

completes their studies at the improved Pondok would then have the essential

qualifications to further their education at the higher level or could immediately enter

into any profession of their choice.63

The policy of the government is to bring the Malay Muslims of the four

southern provinces into the full consciousness of having a Thai identity. This is

approached through the education proposed by the Ministry of Education. Through

introducing Thai education into the Islamic Private School, the government hopes that

Thai language will take over from the Arabic as well from the Malay language, which

is the mother tongue of the Malay language of the Malay Muslims in these areas, has

not faded away as the government might have hoped. Rather, it adapted itself to the

situation under the new techniques of modern education which is guided in practice

by the young Malay Muslims graduates. In fact, in both Pondok and Madrasah

system, side- by-side with the Arabic language, the Malay language grows in the

extent of its use as result of the influence of young graduates from neighboring

Islamic countries,64 and Astri Suhrke say: “Ethnic boundaries as symbolized by the

centrality of the Pondok and the Malay language have not been markedly weakened,

despite the government’s very considerable investment in Thai public education.”65

The common targets of the separatist movements throughout the period of

armed resistance were police posts, army units, and government schools. The

inclusion of the latter shown that the central government’s education policies

continued to be considered a highly controversial intrusion into Malay-Muslim

affairs.66

The post-war military regimes that controlled Thailand from 1947 until 1973

again took up the cause of national secular education, and new integrative plans were

promulgated in 1960 and 1963. These initiatives targeted the Pondoks, system more

directly, because Bangkok insisted on registering all Pondok‘s with the Ministry of

Education as “private schools teaching Islam” if they wanted official recognition.

Between 1965 and 1971, the government increased its efforts to introduce a modern-

secular curriculum with overt Buddhist dimensions into these schools. In 1971,

registration became mandatory and registered Pondoks, were no longer permitted to

teach in Malay67. These measures effectively deprived the Malay-Muslims of an


162

education system that prepared individuals for social and cultural functions in the

Malay-Muslim communities and stimulated a drive to pursue an Islamic education

abroad68. Another effect was that schools that failed to reform and seek registration

faced devaluation, which, in turn, had real socioeconomic implications for their

graduates.69

In his continuous analysis of Thailand’s “southern question,” Surin Pitsuwan

consistently argues that education is probably the most central issue not only for the

Malay-Muslims’ emancipation, but also for their sense of recognition of their distinct

ethnic identity.70 His 1982 thesis drew attention to the mistaken assumptions

informing the Bangkok’s ill-conceived education policies toward the south since the

1960s. Politicians thought that introducing a secular curriculum would somehow

miraculously turn Malay-Muslims into Thais. In this respect, Surin Pitsuwan

approvingly quoted the dissenting view of former Prime Minister Kukrit Pramoj, who

thought that people’s religious institutions, including the Pondoks, should be left

alone and that the government should limit itself to improving economic conditions

and making sufficient education opportunities available on an optional basis.71But not

only had the politicians had it wrong. The security establishment, responsible for the

uphill task of maintaining law and order in the south, insisted that ethnicity needed to

be deemphasized in order to alleviate ten-sions between the center and the periphery.

In the case of the Malay-Muslims, this meant that religion should be separated from

other cultural traits; in the eyes of the security officials, Malay-Muslims were just

“Thais professing Islam.” The above account, however, convincingly demon-strates

that Malay-Muslim ethnicity is a complex mélange from which it is impossible to

arbitrarily subtract religion. As far as those directly responsible for the conversion

process taking place in the Pondoks were concerned, the regional education officials

were of the opinion that much of the com-munal opposition was due to the perception

that Bangkok was only interested in pushing through a secular curriculum. Instead, it

would have been wiser to take a more comprehensive approach and acknowledge

support for a distinct Islamic component in the curriculum.72

Unfortunately, the general conclusion must be that patronage and support

usually give way to supervision and control. Probably the first real step toward

empowering Malay-Muslims was given in 1988. As part of the less repressive

approach introduced by Prem Tinsulanonda’s government, that year saw the


163

establishment of a College of Islamic Studies on the Pattani campus of Prince of

Songkhla University. However, it cannot be denied that security concerns must also

have been a motivation for this initiative: namely, an effort to discourage the earlier

mentioned trend of seeking an Islamic education overseas, which could expose

Thailand’s Muslims to the unwanted influences of Muslim radicals abroad.73

4.9. The state of education present- day

From their historical status as the independent kingdom of Pattani to being annexed as

Thailand’s peripheral provinces, the three southernmost provinces’ Islamic religious

education system revolved around one major institution: the traditional Pondok. After

succumbing to government assimilations policies, the traditional Pondok underwent a

forced transformation into private Islamic schools in the latter 20th century, and have

since competed with government schools for the hearts and minds of the Malay

Muslim populace.

The current structure of education in Southern Thailand is made up of four

types of institutions: Tadikas, traditional Pondoks (Pusat Pendidikan Pondok),

government or state schools, and private Islamic schools (Sekolah Agama Rakyat). A

traditional Pondok is an institute where students of all ages and abilities gather

informally to study a mix of religious and secular education, choosing their

specialisms and supervisors. 74 Of the 500 traditional Pondoks that exist, only about

half are registered and officially recognized by the government. A Tadika is a pre-

school attached to the local mosque where children can learn religious education at

the elementary level.

Private Islamic schools, which are mostly (and oddly) financed by the

government, are the result of an earlier government campaign to modernise traditional

Pondoks. These “modern Pondoks” number more than 300, and are forced to offer a

balanced religious and secular education that complies with government standards in

order to continue receiving full federal funding.

Unlike traditional Pondoks, the private Islamic schools have a stronger secular

education and operate within a more formal and government-controlled framework.

Although they were mostly confined to secondary education initially, many are now

extending down to primary school to get more students – creating “extended” Islamic

private schools.75The government schools previously taught entirely with a Thai

ethnocentric curriculum, but have recently made allowances for Malay Muslims.


164

Government law requires every Thai citizen to complete nine years of

compulsory education – six years in elementary (P1-P6), and three years in upper

secondary (M1-M3).76The average Malay Muslim youth, from age 5-12, can attend a

government school or an extended private Islamic school (a private Islamic school

that has both elementary and secondary education), while spending his or her first few

years at a Tadika to enhance religious education.

Subsequently, from age 12-17, he or she can continue at a government school

at the secondary level or choose a normal private Islamic school. Generally speaking,

three quarters of Malay Muslims in the south attend private Islamic schools, while

only a quarter attend government schools. 77The reason has as much to do with the

lack of focus on religious education in state schools as it does on the mentality of

Malay Muslims which tends to view government institutions with suspicion and as an

assault on their language and culture.78

From 18 years on, students have the option of going to university. However, a

2001 survey found that only 3pc of Buddhists and Muslims in the Deep South had a

university education.79While Pondok education can be taken at any point of a

student’s life, interest in the Pondok system is declining with time. One 1999 study in

the South showed that only 25pc of parents wanted to send their children to a Pondok,

because of its weak secular curriculum that lowered their children’s job prospects. 80

4.10. The Foundation of Pondok in Southern Thailand

The typical Muslim community in any part of the world will generally seek to follow

the same Islamic concept as to how to teach Islam to the children. The differences

occur in the way each community implements these educational concepts. The names

of Islamic institutions such as langgar, madrasah, pondok pesantren and pondok can

be found easily in Indonesia. Some of these names can be found also in the Muslim

Philippines. Similarly, in Malaysia, terms such as pondok and madrasah are well-

known to the broad spectrum community. Among these institutions the pondok has

been a well-repented one in the Malay world perhaps from as far back as the 11th

century until today. In Thailand , especially in the five southern border provinces such

as Pattani, Yala, Narathiwat, Satun, part of Songkla provinces, the Pondok has been

known as such to the community for a long time. However, the Islamic education

available in the institution of southern Thailand may have difference approach from

that of Indonesia, the Philippines and Malaysia.81The Islamic education in the Muslim


165

community in Thailand stars at the homes of religious teaches, at the balaisah or the

masjid. Then for more intensive training at a higher level, the children have to go

elsewhere. The parents usually send them to study at certain pondok and hope that

they will become the leaders of their own community or at least know how to take

responsibility as good Muslims towards their families.82

In medieval Islam, the madrasah was the highest educational institution of

Islam and the development of the madrasah of medieval, somewhat paralleling in

function of the college of modern times, occurred in three stages: from the masjid to

the masjid khan complex, to the madrassah.

Carefully observing the learning process in the Pondok of Southern Thailand ,

with special attention to how it relates to the masrash of medieval Islam and yet

without comparing or contrasting the two institutions in any great detail, we find that

the intellectual processes in both is most the same. The Pondok of Southern Thailand,

However, preserves its function today and continues to bring education to Muslim

communities, though not in as broad a way as did the medieval from of the learning

institution. The differing intellectual maturity of the student is the most important

factor that makes the learning process different in the two. The different become

clearer when we look at the learning system in the masjid of medieval Islam and that

of southern Thailand (Pattani). This is become the system of the former concentrated

deeply on law and its component subjects.83

4.11. Higher Educational Institutions: Colleges and University

The Institution Islamic education in Thailand currently revolves around two

institutions: The collage of Islamic Studies at prince of Songkla University in

Pattani,84 and Fatoni University (which was upgraded from a collage in July 2007) In

Yala and Pattani. A third University, Princes of Narathiwas University, has just been

opened. This University is governed by an advisory committee consisting of

prominent Muslim academics and schools from Thailand, and external divisions from

Al- Azhar University.85 The Institution Islamic education in Thailand owes its genesis

to the Department of Philosophy and Religion at the prince of Songkla University

which introduced an Islamic studies component to its programme in 1982 in the wake

of the global resurgence of Islamic consciousness that significantly impacted

Thailand’s Muslim minority communities. The rationale of this programme, however,

which subsequently evolved into full-fledged colleges of Islamic studies in


166

accordance with the 5th National economic and social Development plan 1982-1986,

was decidedly political. Rather than being tellingly of the education ministry, as one

might expect, the change was tellingly mooted by the Nation Security Council.

Consequently, it is not surprising that the initiative has been characterized as an

outgrowth of “efforts to solve the problem of the southern border provinces.” Beyond

that it can also be surmised by the timing of the move that there was a concern to

manage the impact of the Islamic resurgence among Thailand Muslim by stemming

the outflow of Studies to the Middle East. By this time, the Middle East was in the

throes of Islamist activism (which at times verged on radicalism) as a result the

Iranian Revolution, the Afghan Mujahideen struggle in Afghanistan and widespread

disenchantment over Israel’s occupation of Lebanon. The college was envisaged to

fulfill this role in two ways firstly, by providing schools graduates and founding of the

College served as gesture to the Muslim community of the government’s

consideration for their interests and aspirations. Secondly through its short- term

programs catering to non-Muslim government officials posted to the south, it was also

an attempt to facilitate interaction and mutual understanding between Muslims and

non-Muslim in southern Thailand. Instruction at the college is in three languages –

English, Arabic and Thai. The Islamic Studies program me consists of two streams,

one in Arabic and the other in Thai.

Fatoni University was found as a College in 1998 in Tambun Budi Yala

Province, with a faculty of religious studies housing department in Shari’a (Islamic

law) and Usul- addin (Theology). A second campus was established at Bukit Datu in

kanpung Serong, Pattani, in 2003. According to its administrators, the rationale

behind the formation of Yala Islamic Collage (the Old names of Fatoni Univesity)

flowed from the observation that while the Islamic private school system had seen

many Muslim Student attain secondary education, very few entered public

universities and even fewer had the opportunity to pursue tertiary studies abroad if

financial support was not readily available. The initiative that gave birth to Yala

Islamic College essential arose from within the community, with Malay –Muslim

academics being the primary drivers of the processes. Yala Islamic College was

established under the Southern Higher Education Foundation and continues to be

supervised by the Committee of Higher Education institution at the Ministry of

Education.86


167

NOTE AND REFERNCES

1 Maunati Yekti, “Multiculturalism, Separation and Nation State Building in Thailand,”Research Center for Regional Resources Indonesian Institute of Science Jakarta,2004, p. 127.

2 Syed Serajul Islam, The Politics of Islamic Identity in South East Asia. InternationalIslamic University in Malaysia.2005 p.88.

3 Maunati Yekti, op .cit., p.138.4 A Jones Sara, op.cit., p.37.5 Ibid., p. 37.6 Ibid,.p. 37.7 Maunti Yekti, op.cit., p.139.8 Ibid., pp.130-131.9 Ibid., p.145.10 Tengku Ismail Chilk & Tengku Arifin Chilk Patani Cradle of The East: A History

of Patani,(ed) by Emir. Meson Hoadley, Muslim news Thailand, 2011, pp.97-98.11 Ibid., pp.98-99.12 Maunati Yekti, op.cit., P.145.13 Tengku Ismail Chilk & Tengku Arifin Chilk, op.cit.,p.100.14 Ibid., p.100.15 Che Man W.K., Muslim Separatism The Moros of Southern Philippines And The

Malays Of Southern Thailand. Oxford University Press, New York, Singapore1990.p. 63.

16 Che Man W.K., op.cit., p. 64.17 Che Man W.K., op.cit., p. 64.,see Pisuwan, Surin, op. cit., pp. 57-58.18 Che Man W.K., op.cit., p. 64.19 Ibid., p.64.20 Ibid., p. 66.21 Chidchanok Rahimmula, “Peace Resolution: A Case Study of Separatist and Terrorist

Movement in Southern Border Provinces of Thailand”, Department of social sciences,faulty of Humanities sciences of Prince of Songkla University, Vol. 10.No. 1 Jan - Apr2004, pp. 105-106.

22 Bangnara, A. Patani: Past-Persant, Bankok: Chomrom Saengtian (in Thai). 1976. p.106.23 Bangnasa , A. op.cit., pp. 100-101.24 Ibid., p.67.25 Straits Times, 29and 30 April 1984.26 Singapore Free Press, 28 July 1984.


168

27 Che Man W.K., op.cit., p. 67.28 Aphornsuvan Thnet, "History and Politics of the Muslims in Thailand," Thammarat

University 2003., p. 22.29 A. Jones Sara, op.cit., p.45.30 Anglo-Siamese treaty signed between Siam (Thailand) and Britain; Siam was

forced to yield Kelantan, Terengganu, Kedah, and Perlis to British Malaya. Sincethen, Siam was considered as a rigid territorial nation-state.

31 International Crisis Group, “Southern Thailand: Insurgency, Not Jihad,” 5.32 Klaimanee Wiphusana, “The need to improve population and resource control in

Thailand’s counterinsurgency” M.A. thesis submitted in Department of DefenseAnalysis, Naval Postgraduate School Monterey, California, 2008, p.16.

33 Maunati Yekti, op.cit,. p. 148.34 Klaimanee Wiphusana, op.cit., p. 17.35 Ibid., op.cit. p.148.36 Che Man W.K, op.cit., p.97.37 Chidchanok Rahimmula, op.cit., p.106.38 International Crisis Group “Southern Thailand; Insurgency, Not jihad” 7: see

Chidchanok Rahimmula, op.cit.p106., see Klaimanee Winphusana, op. cit. p 18.,see Maunati Yekti ,op.cit. p.151.

39 McBeth, 1980, 20., see Chidchanok Rahimmula, op .cit., p. 106.40 International Crisis Group “ Southern Thailand; Insurgency, Not jihad” 7.41 Surachart Bamrungsuk, “Insurgency in Southern Thailand,”

http://www.isranews.org/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2103&Itemid=56/ (accessed July 12, 2012).

42 International Crisis Group “ Southern Thailand; Insurgency, Not jihad” 8.43 Klaimanee Winphusana, op. cit., p. 22.44 International Crisis Group “ Southern Thailand; Insurgency, Not jihad” 13.45 Klaimanee Winphusana, op. cit., p. 22.46 A Jones Sara, op.cit., pp. 54-55.47 Lieutenant Commander Timothy P. Reidy, Jr., US Navy, Patani and Chechnya

lessons from a History of insurgency, U.S. Army Commander and General StaffCollege, 2008. pp. 32-33.

48 Johan Saravanamuttu, Islam and Politics in Southeast Asia Routledge Taylor &Francis Group London and New York 2010, pp. 108-109.

49 Neil J. Melvin, Conflict in Southern Thailand Islamism, Violence and the State inthe Patani Insurgency SIPRI Policy Paper No. 20. 2007, p. 2.

50 Thai PM open to syariah law in restive south,” Straits Times November 9, 2006.51 Malaysia PM Says Surayud on right track in south” Bangkok Post, December 12, 2006.


169

52 Lan Storey, ethnic Separatism in Southern Thailand Kingdom Fraying at theEdge? Asia- Pacific Center for Security Studies March (2007), p.7.

53 Thai Prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra rebel group ready to talk peace”Bangkok Post, February 28, 2013.

54 Ibid, Thai Prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra rebel group ready to “talk peace”Bangkok Post, February 28, 2013.

55 News Bangkok post (12 Nov 2015).56 Hasan Madmarn, The Pondok & Madrasah in Patani College of Islamic Studies,

Prince of Soungkla University, Patani, Thailand 1999, p. 12.57 Hasan Madmarn, op.cit., p. 12.58 Pisuwan Surin, Islam and Malay Nationalism: A case study of the Malay-Muslims

of Southern Thailand, Thamasant University. 1985 p. 178-179.59 Maunati Yekti, op.cit. p. 115.60 Ibid., p. 117-118.61 Ibid., p. 118.62 Madman Hasan, op.cit., p.72.63 Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Thai Muslims, Faculty of Science Mahidol University

Bangkok , Thailand 1979, pp. 14-15.64 Madmarn Hasan, op.cit., p. 73.65 Suhrke A. Loyalist and Separatists: “The Muslims in Southern Thailand”, Asian Survey,

17 (3) March 1977, p. 237-306.66 Carool Kersten. “The Predicament of Thailand’s Southern Muslims” The

American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences pp.19-20.67 Uthai Dulyakasem, Emergence and Escalation, 1977, pp. 217-19, 225-27; see

Pisuwan Surin, op.cit., pp. 188-196.68 Pisuwan, Surin, op. cit., p. 196.69 Uthai Dulyakasem, op. cit., p. 277.70 On of his most recent contributions is: “Developing Thailand’s South” In: Far Eastern

Economic Review, February 12, 2004.71 Ibid., p.197.72 Ibid., p.197-203.73 Carool Kersten. “The Predicament of Thailand’s Southern Muslims” The American

Journal of Islamic Social Sciences, 2004., pp.19-20.74 For a more detailed description of the pondoks, see: Madmarn, Hasan. College of

Islamic Studies, Prince of Soungkla University, 1999.75 Interview with Ibrahim Naringraksakat, Assistant Professor and director of the

College of Islamic Studies, Prince of Songkla University, Pattani. (June 2007).


170

76 Interview with Ahmad Somboon Bualuang, former member of the NationalReconciliation Commission (NRC), a Muslim academic and director of the Centerfor Muslim and Democratic Development in Southern Thailand. (July 2007).

77 Interview, Srisompob Jitpiromsri, political science Professor at Prince of SongklaUniversity, Pattani. (June 2007).

78 Gunaratna, Rohan, Arabinda Acharya and Sabrina Chua.Conflict and Terrorism inSouthern Thailand. Marshall Cavendish Academic. 2005, pp. 46-53.

79 Interview, Ahmad Somboon Bualuang, (July 2007).80 Janchitfah, Supara. Violence in the Mist: Reporting on the Presence of Pain in

Southern Thailand. Kobfai Publishing Project, 2004, p. 56.81 Madmarn Hasan, op.cit. p.55.82 Ibid., pp.55-56.83 Ibid., pp.55-56.84 Tengku Ismail Chilk &Tengku Arifin Chilk., op.cit., pp.198-199.85 Liow, Joseph Chinyong, Islam, Education and Reform in Southern Thailand.

Singapore 2009. p. 62.86 Ibid., p. 63.

Chapter IV: Melayu-Muslim Movement…

171

STRUCTURE OF THE MALAY ORGANIZATIONS INTHAILAND

Figure 6: Structure of the BNPP Organization (A) Central Working CommitteeCongress

(MajliskerjaTertinggi) (MajlisSyura)

Chairman

Vice-Chairman

Secretariat

Office of the Chairman Foreign Section

Treasury Section Interior Section

Political Section Information Section

Economic Section

Military Section

Education Section

Islamic Call Section

Youth and Welfare Section


172

Figure 7: Structure of the BNPP Organization (B)

,

Military Section Interior Section

Secretariat

Foreign Section

Foreign BranchMilitary Committee Provincial Committee

Armed Fighters of BNPP(NLAPP)

District Committee

Guerrilla Unit Commune Committee


173

Figure 8: Structure of the BBMP Organization Congress and Supreme Tribunal

(MajlisShura)

Presidium(MajlisMujahideen)

Chairman


174

Figure:9Structure of the POLU Organization Central Committee SupremeTribunal

Source: Syed Serajul Islam, The Politics of Islamic Identity in South East Asia, pp,

196-199 see Che Man, Muslim Separatism,pp209-212

(MajilisTertinggi)


175

Appendix 4: Image Comparisons

TakBai protest, 25 October 2004.

MuslimThai Newspaper, 15 November – 14 December 2004, 25. (The author was

unable to contact or obtain written permission from the apparent copyright

owner of the image produced above. The author will remove this image upon

request of the copyright owner if necessary)


176

Appendix 5“Barbara Whittingham – Jones “Patani – Malay State OutsideMalaya”. 30 October 1947

The Straits Times (October 30,1947) : 8.

Haji Sulong was petitioned seven demands to the government in April 1947.refersp.141.


177

Appendix 6: Chronology of Prime Ministers

1. Phraya Manopakorn Nititada (28 June 1932 – 20 June 1933)

2. General Phraya Phahol Pholphayuhasena (21 June 1933 – 11 September 1938)

3. Field Marshall P. Phibulsongkhram (16 December 1938 – 24 July 1944)

4. Major Khuang Apivongse (1 August 1944 – 17 August 1945)

5. ThaweeBoonyaket (31August 1945–17 September 1945)

6. M.R.W. Seni Pramoj (17 September 1945-31 January 1946)

7. Major Khuang Apivongse (31 January 1946 – 24 March 1946)

8. Pridi Phanomyong (24 March – 21 August 1946)

9. Rear Admiral Thavan Thamrongnavasawat (23 August 1946 – 8 November 1947)

10. Major Khuang Apivongse (10 November 1947 – 8 April 1948)

11. Field Marshal P. Phibul Songkram (8 April 1948 – 16 September 1957)

12. Phot Sarasin (21 September 1957-26 December 1957)

13. Thanom Kittikachorn (1 January 1958 – 20 October 1958)

14. Sarit Thanarat (9 February 1959 – 8 December 1963)

15. Thanom Kittikachorn (9 December 1963 – 14 October 1973)

16. Sanya Dharmasakti (14 October 1973 – 15 February 1975)

17. M.R.W. Seni Pramoj (15 February – 6 March 1975)

18. M.R.W. Kukrit Pramoj (14 March 1975 – 12 January 1976)

19. M.R.W. Seni Pramoj (20 April 1976 – 6 October 1976)

20. Thanin Kraivichien (22 October 1976 – 20 October 1977)

21. Kriangsak Chomanand (12 November 1977–28 February 1980)

22. PremTinsulanonda (3 March 1980 -29 April 1988)

23. General Chatichai Choonhavan (4 August 1988 – 23 February 1991)

24. Ananda Panyarachun (2 March 1991 – 7 April 1992)

25. General Suchinda Kraprayoon (7 April – 24 May 1992)


178

26. Meechai Ruchuphan (24 May 1992 – 10 June 1992, acting)

27. Ananda Panyarachun (10 June – 23 September 1992)

28. Chuan Leekpai (23 September 1992 – 13 July 1995)

29. Banharn Silpa-Archa (13 July 1995 – 1 December 1996)

30. General Chavalit Yongchaiyudh (1 December 1996 – 9 November 1997)

31. Chuan Leekpai (9 November 1997 – 9 February 2001)

32. Thaksin Shinawatra (9 February 2001 – 19 September 2006)

33. Chitchai Wannasathit (5 April – 23 May 2006, acting for Thaksin)

34. General Surayud Chulanont (1 October 2006 –19 September 2006)

35. Samak Sudaravaj (29 January 2008- 8 September 2008)

36. Somchai Wongsawt (18 September2008- 2 December 2008)

37. ChaovaratChanweerakul (2December-15 December2008,acting forAbhisit)

38. Abhisit Vejjajiva (17 December2008- 5 August 2011)

39. Yingluck Shinawatra (5 August 2011-7 May 2014)

40. NiwatthamrongBoonsongpaisan (7 May-22 May 2014, acting for Prayut Chan-o-cha)

41. General Prayut Chan-o-cha (24 August 2014- present)

CONCLUSION

Chapter V: Conclusion

179

CONCLUSION

Thailand has a total area of about 198,000 square miles, and its population is around

70 million. The Thai Muslim population is about 5 million, making up roughly 7.5-8 % of

the total population. Out of them 44% reside in the South and the rest in the different

provinces of Thailand.

Of the estimated 1.6 billion population of the world, about 60 % live in Asia.

Some 250 million Muslims live in South East Asia making 40% of the entire

population, and living mostly in Brunei, Indonesia and Malaysia. Significant

minorities are also located in the other South East Asian states. The majority of

Muslims in South East Asia are Sunni, following mostly the Shafi School of fiqh or

jurisprudence (Islamic law). It is the official religion in Malaysia and Brunei and one

of the six official faiths in Indonesia.

The problem of insurgency (aiming to separate independent state from

Thailand) is one of the significant issues in the contemporary history of Thailand. The

present-day provinces consist of Pattani, Yala, Narathiwat and the western part of

Songkhla. Earlier these provinces were the parts of an independent Sultanate of Patani

during 15th until 18th century. In 1786, there was a war between the Sultanate of Patani

and the Kingdom of Siam (the former name of Thailand), in which Patani was defeated.

In the following 200 years under the Thai rule, many problems have emerged which, for

the most part, were the outcome of a lack of genuine understanding by Thai rulers

toward the population dissimilar in culture, language, race, and religion.

The settlement arises from the commercial relation that involved the Srivijaya

Kingdom. Most of the experts and scholars are of the opinion that one of the Malay

ancestors in the Malacca area after the conquest of the region in the 8th and 9th

centuries developed to become the Malay world. With the fading of the Srivijaya

Kingdom’s monarchic influence in the 11th century, this region got its independence

and became a separate region. The Langkasuka area itself became the interest to

several neighboring Kingdoms in South East Asia in the 13th and 14th centuries. The

Angkor Empire in Cambodia; the Burmese Empire in Pagan; the King Chola’s in

India; the King of Ceylon’s empire, the Majapahit and the Srivijaya Empire; and the

King Ismail Shah in Patani Darussalam Empires not only intervened but also tried to

make their independent empires in the region.


180

The establishment of Islamic state in Malacca during the reign of Sultan

Iskandar, a Muslim convert and the former ruler of Srivijaya, led to the spread of the

early syncretic Islam in South East Asian Archipelago.

In Thailand, Islam came from three directions: 1.Islam first arrived in southern

Thailand in the mid- 13th and 14th centuries C.E. through the Arab traders. 2. Islam

reached Central Thailand during 15th century through Shia Persians and Sunni Indian

traders stationed in Ayudhya.3. Indian, Bengali and Chinese Muslims arrived in the

North of Thailand between 1870s and 1890s respectively. That too resulted in the

spread of Islam.

Islamic Kingdom in southern Thailand was founded during the second half of

14th century by Sultan Ismail Shah; moreover, Patani became the center of Islam in

Thailand due tothe influence and reformative activities of Sheikh Sa’ed Muslim from

Pasai Sumatra. Currently, the majority of Thai Muslims are residing in the four

southern provinces of the country.

The emergence of Islam in Central Thailand is distinctly different and separate

from the spread of Islam in the southern Thailand. Historical evidence shows that

Thailand established close ties with Muslim Nations as early as the beginning of

Sokhothai period, whereby the first stone inscription of King Ramkamhaeng depicted

the word “pasarn”- meaning a dry market. It was believed that this word originated

from the Persian vocabulary as “Ba-zar”. The appearance of Persian vocabulary

shows a connection with the Muslim world. In the Ayudhya period, trade between

merchants from Thailand and Muslim countries such as Persia, Arabia, Turkey, Malay

and Java flourished greatly by the contribution from the Muslim community. Their

trading skills and advanced knowledge proved highly beneficial for the Muslims in

the country. As a result of their influence, Muslims were appointed to important

positions in the Siamese Government.

The Thai Muslim community is made up of two groups: the native Muslims

and immigrant Muslims. However, there is ethnic, cultural and political variety within

the Thai Muslim community.

The majority of Thai Muslims belong to the Sunni sect. However, there is also

the presence of a small Shia community, consisting of members who belong to the

Imami and Bohra sub-groups within the Shia sect.


181

Islam came to South East Asia, first through the Muslim traders along the

main trade-route between Asia and Far East, and then it was further spread by

Missionary Ulama and finally consolidated by the expansion of the territories of

converted rulers and their communities. The first communities arose in northern

Sumatra Aceh (Indonesia) and the Malacca. These regions remained a stronghold of

Islam and it is from these regions that the massage of Islam was propagated to other

regions using the trade routes. However, there is no clear indication of when Islam

first came to the region; the Muslim gravestone marks date of 1082. When Marco

Polo visited the area in 1292, he noted that the people in urban port State of Perlak

were already Muslims. A Chinese source records the presence of a Muslim delegation

to the emperor from the Kingdom of Samudra (Pasai) in 1282. Other accounts

provided instances of Muslim communities present in the Malay Kingdom during the

same time period. The development of Islam generally followed the east trade routes

primarily through the Buddhist region. After a half century the first dynasty in

Malacca emerged arise in the form of the Sultanate. At the far end of the Archipelago,

Parameswara Dewa Shah after his marriage to a daughter of the ruler of Pasai,

converted to Islam and adopted the new name of Muhammad Islandar Shah in 1380.

From these regions Muslim missionaries speared the message of Islam to Mindanno

and Java as well as to the other parts of South East Asia. As commerce grew in the

region of South East Asia with the rest of the Muslim world, Islamic influence

extended to the court as well.

Southern Thailand is a small state, which consists of near about 5-7 million

Muslims. This region comprises the provinces Pattani, Yala, and Narathiwat which were

under the administration of Bangkok. In 1909, the Southern region of Thailand

integrated with the Thai Kingdom according to the agreement with England. Pattani,

which initially comprised Yala and Narathiwat, was the part of Southern Thailand but

Pattani failed to integrate Yala and Narathiwat, thus became separate provinces.

However, the research works on the study of Muslim Culture in southern Thailand and

the history of Malay- Muslims of southern Thailand view national integration as their

own Muslim cultural disintegration because Thai Buddhism and Malay Islam belong to

two different cosmological orientations.

Southern Thailand (Pattani) was commercial center which directly or

indirectly become a center of Islam in the Malay Peninsula area. Islam entered in

these region in the Middle Ages through trade and through the endeavors of Muslim


182

scholars from Arab, Persia and India; because the tradition of sailing and commerce to

East Asia and South East Asia as well as Nusantara or Asean country, prevailed long

before the birth of Islam; Moreover, Islam also spread to the region or through

Chinese or Champa merchants.

In 1457, the King Tu Nakpa Mahajana declared the Kingdom as an Islamic

state, the first in the Malay Peninsula. It was renamed as Patani Durulsalam (Patani,

the land peace).Despite the Kingdom’s name change the old culture of calling the

realm Langkasuka persisted among subjects and foreigners alike throughout the

15thcentury that showed signs of decay in the sixteenth. The King’s family, ministers,

and most of his subjects then converted to Islam. The King himself was crowned

again. This time by Sheikh Sa’ed of Pasai, with Muslim title of Sultan Ismail Shah

Sillulah fil Alam. He became the first Muslim King Sultan of Patani who ruled over

this Malay Kingdom.

The Pattani Kingdom’s golden age was recorded during the reign of his four

successive Queens known as Raja Hijau (the Green Queen), Raja Biru (The Blue

Queen), Raja Ungu (The Purple Queen) and Raja Kuning (The Yellow Queen). From

1584, the kingdom’s economic and military strength was greatly increased and it was

able to seacoast successfully four major Siamese invasions, especially with the help of

the eastern Malay kingdom of Pahang and the Southern Thailand of Malay Sultanate

of Johor.

Later on, Pattani was forcefully incorporated into the nation state of Thai. Not

identifying the problem of Malay Muslims of Pattani identity the government,

however, had undertaken forced assimilation policy by sacrificing the Pattani identity.

The Thai elites did not give an opportunity for natural assimilation through political

and cultural education. The forced integration had taken away the position of Malay

leader’s: the nobles, and religious. They were the groups that lost their power and

authority after being subjugated and controlled by the Thai government. Not

surprisingly, those who vigorously attempted to regain the autonomy and

independence of Pattani were among these elites. The movements were strongly

supported by commoners who had suffered from assimilation programme conducted

under the military and police supervision, especially during the Phibul Songkhran

government.


183

The on-going conflict in Southern Thailand does not show any signs of

ending. In fact, its intensity has increased, in spite of the interim government’s

apology and change of policy from that of using force to peaceful strategy and

seeking of dialogue.

The interim Prime Minister has offered a public apology to the southerners for

the mistakes committed by the previous government and has opted for the method of

dialogue with the local Muslims. But in spite of all this, violence is on the increase

and there are now more Inter-Malay-Muslims who are government officials such as

headmen of villages or teachers. And the employed people if suspected of being

government informants are either attacked or killed by the insurgents.

Furthermore, as the numbers of victims rose amid daily killings, bombing and

attacks on the public and security personnel by the insurgents, the conciliatory and

pro-dialogue policy of the interim government had come under severe criticism both

from public and the press.

Thailand has been experiencing unprecedented escalation of political unrest in

its three Malay-Muslim-dominated provinces, namely Pattani, Yala and Narathiwat.

About 80 percent of the total Thai Muslim population today, accounting about 8-10

million are dwelling in the region amidst the differences of ethnic, lingual, cultural

and political factors among them. The incidents of unrest in the Deep South from

January 2004 to January 2015 had happened for 11 full years.

In Pattani, owing to the unrest, a series of resistance movements and uprising

broke out but still they were incorporated into the Thai Kingdom at the beginning of

the century. The leadership of these early rebellions comprised mainly the former

royal families and religious leaders who were motivated primarily by the desire to

recapture the authority of the deposed Malay Sultans. From 1900 to 1947, the

resistance struggle of the Malay Muslim was largely a response to the events

connected with the Thai assimilation policy. Bangkok was accused of “Siamifying”

the Malay community and of stamping out their religion and customs. Resistance and

resentment against Thai efforts of assimilation were further aggravated by

nationalistic aspirations among the Muslims which were stimulated by the success of

independence movements elsewhere in South East Asia. As a result, the period

between 1947 and 1959 witnessed the Pattani struggle for autonomy or irredentism

with Melayu. GAMPAR and PPM were organized to carry out such struggle. This


184

period also witnessed the transfer of leadership from former aristocrats to religious

leaders. From the late 1950, the Thai government moved aggressively to consolidate

its control over socio-economic and religious affairs of the Malay–Muslims.

Especially, sensitive was government interference in religious institution such as the

Pondok at a time when Islamic awareness among the Malay- Muslims was increasing

with the general resurgence of Islam. In the 1970, the three major liberations

movements flourished.

In 1948, after the Dusun Nyor of Narathiwat provinces rebellion, Voramai

Kabisingh suggested that roads in three provinces be repaired. He suggested that Thai

and Muslim officials who abused their power must be investigated and also the

corruption be eliminated. It can be seen, however, that corruption is still rampant in

the region.

In 2004, therefore, Prawase Wasi gave his suggestions, in order to reform the

society, as under:

1. Change the way history is taught and learned to make learners realize that the

war is not always necessary and how peace can be achieved.

2. Promote understanding of local cultures and speed up power decentralization

to reduce conflicts between Muslim and authorities.

3. If the two above ideas are materialized, separatism will not be given support as

people can stay together happily when they are treated equally and with

respect to their human dignity.

Although separatist movements really exist in the three regions of southern

Thailand, we should deal with them in peaceful manner and stop being aggressive and

insulting those who are not like us. This will help in bringing violence in southern area to

an end. If we can treat fellow human beings with understanding, compassion and equality,

then and only then peace can return to the southern Thailand.

The idea of peace process was unthinkable in the Thai context when the

violent insurgency erupted, predominantly in the Malay- Muslim southernmost region

in 2004. The prevailing discourse mainly propagated by the military was that the Thai

state was risked by taking such approach. That helped in elevating the insurgents’

political status. Military solution dominated the Thai state’s strategies for handling the

deadly conflict. A significant policy change came under Yingluck Administration on


185

28 February 2013 and the government agreed to launch a formal Malaysia facilitated

peace dialogue with the BRN, (Barisan Revolusi National) a clandestine movement

believed to be the most significant force behind the southern insurgency.

All media reported of a mutual agreement reached by the technical committee

meetings (Parties A and B with the facilitator) of the peace dialogue on 11-12

November 2015.The committee agreed to establish safety zones in two districts of

Bacho and Cho-Ai-Rong in Narathiwat. However, MARA Patani stressed that the

reports are false and baseless and that the matter was never discussed at all on or off the

dialogue table during those two days. They rejected it as it was deliberately planned by

certain parties with a hidden agenda to jeopardize the newly resumed peace dialogue

process.

MARA Patani also clarified that up to this moment the dialogue process is

still at the confidence building stage and informal. Thus, any important issues

including the establishment of safety zones will not be discussed until the process is

formal.

Furthermore, on the other hand, several commentators and analyst have talked

about the ongoing unrest in southern Thailand, for example; Dr. Chaiwat Satha-anand

said in his study that political history, economic conditions and injustice in society

were factors attributing to conflicts in the Deep South. Dr. Surin Pitsuwan saw ethnic

differences, differences in the ways of life, cultures and historical and religion

backgrounds as the reasons responsible for the regions unrest. Dr. Imron Maluleem

found in his analysis that the three southern border provinces have been plagued with

seven point of problem. (1) the problem concerning religious, ideal, language and

cultural identities.(2) psychological problem (3) economic problem (4) education

problem (5) ethnic problem (6) political problem and (7) administration problem.

In addition, the thesis discussed the structure of Islamic education; the Islamic

education in Thailand can generally be divided into three level; at elementary (Arabic

language called Ibtidai, Thai Language called Prathom 1-6); at middle (Arabic:

Thanawi, Thai: Matayom 4-6) levels; and the last higher institution university. From

18 years on, students have the option of going to university. However, a 2001 survey

found that only 3% of Buddhists and Muslims in the Deep South had a university

education. The move to increase the number of years of compulsory education from

six to nine years was welcomed in some circles but also met with reservation by


186

others. Thai Muslim community; in particular harbored concerns that increase in the

number of years of compulsory education meant that their children would have

Islamic education institutions. Since 2006, the ministry of Education has worked to

align the standard of Islamic Studies bringing its various levels at par with those of

government schools. Correspondingly, ibtidai has been standardized with primary

schools (six years), mutawassit with secondary schools (three year).

Islamic education in the Muslim community of Southern Thailand and the

nearby areas preserves, up to the present time, certain characteristics, thus, in keeping

up with the intellectual traditions of the past. The pondok, the madrasah, the

traditional school of the Muslims of Southern Thailand, has provided Islamic

education to the Muslim, not only in southern Thailand but also in Thailand as a

whole. Furthermore, this institution served in the past as a center of Islamic traditional

leaning for the Muslim of South East Asia.

Injustice in the civil administration in southern Thailand gave rise to a lot of

questions on various phenomena such as citizenship in the southern most provinces

with an annual income per person are under poverty line of the country. The lowest

educational achievement in the country is evident from the fact less than 3 percent of

the populations in 3 provinces hold a bachelor's degree. From 2004 to 2010, the

people have been affected by the unrest in the area. Near about have died, 4,000,

people have been affected by the reason; over 10,000 children orphaned, more than

3,000 school were burned and more than 200 schools and 137 teachers were killed.

The Muslims of southern Thailand of Pattani province have a significant

position of being a unique historical society whose culture, literature, tradition, and

politics have been moulded through the passage of time. But a very few studies have

dealt with these aspects of Muslim culture of Southern Thailand, even though several

studies have appeared in this connection which give up to date information on the

historical and Muslim cultural part of Thailand.

The current case study of Thailand is different in many ways; first, the

southern Thailand (Pattani) has a different historical background from the southern

Philippines; second, its theoretical frame work not only discusses the Muslim Culture

in southern Thailand but addresses the conflict and their resolutions. Third, the

relevant data was collected not only from Bangkok but also the southern Thailand.


187

In this analysis, there are various challenges and problems—internal as well as

external—for the Muslims of Southern Thailand, because the Malay-Muslims are

struggling at social, political, economic, education, and religious fronts. As the people

in the adjoining areas follow the religion of Buddhism that means the Buddhists

would make every possible effort to stop any spread or the existence of Muslim

identity in the region. More important for the Malay-Muslims in order to preserve

their Muslim identity, is to excel intellectually as well as economically. Another

impartment issue the Malay-Muslims have to keep in their minds is that while

allowing any policy or reformative program, no place to the extremism of any sort

from entering their social and religious fabric should be given. Otherwise, the culture

and Malay-Muslim identity would be in danger because the contemporary political

atmosphere is quite bristle, that needs a peaceful and intellectual way in order to

progress. Therefore, it is incumbent to progress through education, both religious and

modern, as it widens your horizon, enriches your culture, secures your future, and

gives you strength that does not let you fall until you reach your destiny. Summing

up, Malay-Muslims have a tough time ahead to develop and preserve their culture,

and the time will decide how far they would be successful in their endeavor.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bibliography

188

BIBLIOGRAPHY

The Holy Qur’an

English Language

Abdullah, Taufik and Sharon Siddique, eds. “Islam and society in Southeast Asia”.

Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 1986.

Acharya, Amitav., “Constructing a security Community in Southeast: ASEAN and the

Problem of Regional order”. Londom: Routldge, 2001.

Andrew D.W. Forbers, The Muslim of Thailand Center for south East Asian Studies

(Bihar) India Department Islamic Studies, Aligarh Muslim University, Vol.1. 1988.

Andaya. leonard Y. and Andaya, Barbara Watson, A History of Malaysia, Palgrave

Macmillan the University of Hawai'I, 1984.

Amporm Marddent, “Buddhist Perception of Muslims in the Thai South”, Association

for Asian Studies Annual Meeting at Boston in (March) 22-25, 2007.

Aurel Croissant, “Muslim Insurgency, Political Violence, and Democracy in

Thailand”, Viol. 19:1–18, Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 2007.

Azra, A. The Origins of Islamic Reformism in Southeast Asia: Networks of Middle

Eastern ‘Ulama' in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries. Honolulu: University

of Hawai'i Press. 2004.

Bailey, Conner and Miskic, John N., “The Country of Patani in the Period of

Reawakening” in the Muslim of Thailand Vol. 2. “Polities of the Malay-Speaking South”.

Andrew D.W. Forbes ed., Bihar: India, Center for South East Asian Studies, 1989.

Bougas, W. A., The Kingdom of Patani. Between Thai and Malay Mandalas. Bangi:

Institute of the Malay World and Civilization, University Kebangsaan Malaysia.1994.

Bradley, F. R. The Social Dynamics of Islamic Revivalism in Southeast Asia: The

Rise of the Patani School, 1785-1909. (Ph.D.) University of Wisconsin-Madison,

Madison. 2010.

Chaiwat Satha- Anand, “Islam and Violence: A Case study of Violent Event in the

four Southern Provinces, Thailand”, 1976-1981. Tampa, Florida: USF Monographs

in Religion and Public Policy, 1987.

Bibliography

189

Chaveewan Vannaprasert, “The Traditions Influencing the Social Integration between

the Thai Buddhists and the Thai Muslims”. Pattani Thailand: Prince of Songkla

University, 1986.

Che Man W.K., Muslim Separatism: The Moros of Southern Philippines and the

Malays of Southern Thailand, Oxford University Press, Singapore, 1999.

Cheruhaya Luebaluwong, Advent and Spread of Islam in Thailand, unpublished (Ph.D.)

thesis submitted in Department of Islamic studies Aligarh Muslim University 2014.

Chidchonok Rahimmula, “Peace Resolution: A case study of separatist and terrorist

Movement in southern border provinces of Thailand”, vol. 10 No.1 Department of

social sciences, faulty of Humanities sciences of Prince of Songkla University, 2004.

Cho Hung-Guk, “Thai–Malay Conflicts in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries”,

in International Area Review, Sogang University, 2 (2): 47-68, 1999.

Clark D. Neher, Southeast Asia in the New International Era, 2nd ed. Politics in Asia

and the Pacific interdisciplinary perspectives, Northern Illinois University, Westview

Press, Oxford, 1994.

Dennis P. Walker, “Conflict between the Thai and Islamic Cultures in Southern

Thailand (Patani)’” 1948-2005Islamiyyat, 27 (1): 81-111. 2005.

D.R. Sardesai, “Southeast Asia, Past and Present”, Harper Collins Publisher, New

Delhi, 1997.

E.W. Hutchinson, Adventurers in Siam in the Seventeenth Century, the Royal Asiatic

society, Thailand, 1985.

Farouk Bajunid, O. “The Origins and Evolution of Malay-Muslim Ethnic Nationalism

in Southern Thailand”. In A. Taufik & S. Siddique (Eds.), Islam and Society in South

East Asia (pp. 250-281). Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.1987.

“———————” “The Muslims of Thailand”. South East Asian Review (13), 1-

30.1989.

“———————” “The Muslim in Thailand”: A review, Southern Asian Vol. 37.

No.2. 210-234, 1999.

“———————” Islam, Nationalism and the Thai State. In W. Sungannasil (Ed.),

Dynamic Diversity in South Thailand (pp. 1-20). Chiangmai: Silkworm Books.2005.

Bibliography

190

“———————” “The historical and transnational dimensions of Malay Muslim

separatism in Southern Thailand,” in Arm end Separatism in Southeast Asia, Lin Joo-

Jock and Vani S., eds., Singapore: Regional Strategic Studies Programme, institute of

Southeast Asian Studies, 1984.

John F. Cady, Southeast Asia: Its Historical Development, McGraw-hall, Inc. New Delhi, 1964.

Gilquin Michel, The Muslims of Thailand. Translated Islamism, Michael Silkworm

book, 2005.

Gordon P. Means, Political Islam in Southeast Asia, 2009.

Gunaratna, Rohan, Arabinda Acharya and Sabrina Chua. “Conflict and Terrorism in

Southern Thailand”. Marshall Cavendish Academic. 2005,

Hasan Madmarn, Tradition Muslim Institutions in Southern Thailand: a critical Study

of Islamic Education and Arabic Influence in The Pandok and Madrasah of Patani,

(Ph.D.) Thesis in the Department of Language and Literature, University of Utah in 1990.

“——————” The Pondok & Madrasah in Patani College of Islamic Studies,

Prince of Soungkla University, 1999.

“——————” “Secular Education, Values and Development in the Context of

Islam”. Singapore: centre for Research on Islam and Malay Affairs (RIMA), 2003.

Ibrahim Syukri, History of the Malay kingdom of Patani. Translated by Coner Bailey and

John N. Miksic. Athens: Ohio: University, 1985.

Imtiyaz Yusuf, “Southern Thailand Crisis: Ethno-Religion and Political Dimensions”,

Department and lecturer in religion at the Graduate School of Philosophy and

religion, Assumption University, Thailand.

Imtiyaz Yusuf, Southern Thailand Conflict and the Muslim world, the Graduate

School of Philosophy and religion, Assumption University, Thailand. 2006.

Janchitfah, Supara. “Violence in the Mist: Reporting on the Presence of Pain in

Southern Thailand”. Kobfai Publishing Project, 2004.

Jitpiromsri Srisompob. Deep South Watch. Center for the Study of Conflict and

Cultural Diversity, Prince of Songkla University, 2011.

Bibliography

191

John L. Esposito, The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Modern Islamic World, Oxford

University Press New York Vol. 4. 1995.

Joseph Chinyong, Muslim Resistance in Southern Thailand and Southern Philippines:

Religion, Ideology, and Polities, Policy Studies 24. East –West Center Washington 2006.

Johan Saravanamuttu, “Islam and Politics in Southeast Asia” Routledge Taylor&

Francis Group London, and New York 2010.

Jerryson, Michael K., Buddhist Fury: Religion and Violence in Southern Thailand.

New York: Oxford University Press. 2011.

Kasian Ahmad, Hikayat Hang Tuah Dewan Bahasa kualalumpur Malaysian.1973.

Lieutenant Commander Timothy P. Reidy, Jr., US Navy, Patani and Chechnya

lessons from a History of insurgency, U.S. Army Commander and General Staff

College, 2008.

Liow, Joseph Chinyong, Islam, Education and Reform in Southern Thailand.

Singapore 2009.

Max L. Gross, A Muslim Archipelago; Islam and Politics in Southeast Asia. National

Defense Intelligence College. Washington, DC, March 2007.

M.B. Hooker, Islam in South-East Asia. A grant from the British institute in South–

East Asia. Department Islamic Studies, Aligarh Muslim University, 1984.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Thai Muslims, Faculty of Science Mahidol University

Bangkok, Thailand 1979.

McCargo, Duncan. Tearing apart the land: Islam and legitimacy in Southern

Thailand. New York: Cornell University Press. 2008.

Muhammadtolan Kaemah, A Critical Study of Islamic Religio-Politacal Movements

in Malaysia, unpublished (Ph.D.) thesis submitted in the Department of Islamic

A.M.U. Aligarh in 2009.

Osman Abdullah Chuah, Conflicts and Peace Initiatives between Minority Muslims

and Thai Buddhists in the Southern Thailand. Vol. 3. No. 2010.

OoiKeat Gin, “Southeast Asia: A Historical Encyclopedia from Angkor Wat to East

Timor”’, ISBN 1-57607-770-5 Library of Congress, California, United States of

America Vol. 1. 2004.

Bibliography

192

Paul Wheatley, “The Golden Khersonese”, University, Kualalumpur of Malaya Press 1961.

Peter Chalk, “The Malay-Muslim Insurgency in Southern Thailand: Understanding

the Conflict’s Evolving Dynamic”, RAND National Defense Research Institute 2008.

Peter Hourdequin, “Muslim Influences in Seventeenth Century Ayutthaya,”

A Review Essay, Vol. 7 No.2, (Special Edition: Islam in Southeast Asia) University

of Hawai’i at Manoa 2007.

Pridi Phanomyong, “National Unity and the Problems of the Three Southern

Provinces”. Bangkok: National Federation of Southern Students 1974.

Reid Anthony (ed).. Southeast Asian in the Age of commerce 1450-1680: vol.(1) The

londs below the winds new haven: Yale University Press 1988.

Richard w. Bulliet, “The Shaikh al-Islam and the Evolution of Islamic Society”

Studia Islamica No.35. 1972.

Sathian R.M., Economic change in the Pattani region.1880-1930: tin and cattle in the

Era of Siam’s Administrative reforms, (Ph.D.) Thesis Submitted in epartment of

History, National University of Singapore, 2004.

Srisompob Jitpiromsri, “Sixth Year of the southern fire: Dynamic of Insurgency and

ormation of the New Imagined Violence”, Deep South Watch (DSW) Price of Songkla

University 2011.

Singh Nagendra Kr, “Islam in Thailand: Resurgence or Consolidation: International

Islamic Dynasties”, v.39, (New Delhi India 2005), p.200.

Suara Siswa. “Document on Pattani movement”, (University of Malaya, Malaysia. No. 2. 1970.

Suhrke A. Loyalist and Separatists: “The Muslims in Southern Thailand”, Asian

Survey, 17 (3) March 1977.

Surin Pissuwan, Islam and Malay Nationalism: A Case study of the Malay- Muslim of

southern Thailand, Bangkok: Thammasat University, 1989.

Syed Serajul Islam, The Politics of Islamic Identity in South East Asia. International

Islamic University in Malaysia. 2005.

Tengku Ismail Chilk &Tengku Arifin Chilk Patani Cradle of the East: A History of

Patani, ed by Emir. Meson Hoadley. Muslim news Thailand, 2011.

Bibliography

193

Teeuw, A., & Wyatt, D.K. Hikayat Patani and the Story of Patani. The Hague:

Martinus Nijhoff 1970.

Thanet Aphornsuvan, “History and Politics of the Muslim in Thailand” Thammasat

University. 2003.

“———————” “Origins of Malay Muslim “Separatism” in Southern Thailand”,

Asian Research Institute National University of Singapore No.32, 2004.

The New Encyclopedia Britannica, Chicago, V.27, 1994.

The National Reconciliation Commissions (NRC) composed of 50 members’ local

and national civil society and government leaders. It was concerned under the former

Prime Minister Anand Panyarachun on March 2005, tasked with overseeing that

peace is brought back to the south. Chapter 3, “Diagnosis: Understanding Violence in

the Southern Border Provinces”, submitted 2006.

Uthai Dulyakasem, “Muslim-Malay separatism in Southern Thailand: factors

underlying the political revolt.” In Armend Separalism in southeast Asia, Lin Joo-

Jock and Vani S., eds., “Singapore: Regional Strategic Studies Programme”, institute

of Southeast Asian Studies, 1984.

Uthai Dulyakasem, Emergence and Escalation, 1977.

Wiphusana Klaimanee, “The need to improve population and resource control in

Thailand’s counterinsurgency”,(M.A.) thesis submitted in Department of DefenseAnalysis, Naval postgraduate school, Monterey, California, 2008.

Wood, W.A.R. “A history of Siam” 1926.

Wyatt, David k. Thailand: A Short History. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1984.

Maunati Yekti, “Multiculturalism Separation and Nation State Building in Thailand”,Research Center for Regional Resources Indonesian Institute of Science Jakarta, 2004.

Interviews

Interview with Ibrahim Naringraksakat, Assistant Professor and director of the College of

Islamic Studies, Prince of Songkla University, Pattani. (June 2007).

Interview with Ahmad Somboon Bualuang, former member of the National

Reconciliation Commission (NRC), a Muslim academic and director of the Center for

Muslim and Democratic Development in Southern Thailand. (July 2007).

Interview, Srisompob Jitpiromsri, political science Professor at Prince of Songkla

University, Pattani. (June 2007).

Bibliography

194

Journals, Magazines and Periodicals

Albritton, Robert B., “Electoral participation by southern Thai Buddhists and

Muslim” South East Asia Research 4, No. 2. (September) 1996.

Carool Kersten, “ The Predicament of Thailand’s Southern Muslims” The American

Journal of Islamic Social Sciences, 2004.

Scupin Raymon, “Islam in Thailand before the Bang kok Period”. In Journal of the

Siam Society, Vol. 7 (2), 1976.

Feigen blattott von, “The Importance of Culture in Emic interpretations of the History

of Thailand’s Southern Separatist Movement: “The Gentlemen’s Agreement” of 1943

and the Malaysian Relationship with the Separatist”, the Journal of Alternative

Perspectives in the Social Sciences, 2(1): 46-56, 2010.

Hasan Madmarn, “The Strategy of Islamic education in southern Thailand” The Kitab

Jawi and Islamic Heritage. The Journal of Sophia Asian studies No.27.2009.

Hoon Peow, “Politics of Religious, Southern Thailand, Southern Philippines”

Uluslararası Sosyal Aratırmalar Dergisi. The Journal of International Social Research

Volume 2 / 9 fall 2009.

Imtiyaz Yusuf, Southeast Asia: “Aspects of Islam in Thailand today” ISIM

Newsletter, no.3/9 1999.

“———————” “The Role of Chularatjmotri/Shaikh al- Islam in Resolving

Ethno-religious Conflict in Southern Thailand” The American Journal of Islamic

Social Sciences Vol.27 No.1.: 31-53, 2010.

“———————” “Ethno-religious and Political Dimensions of the Southern

Thailand Conflict”, Journal the Henry L. Stimson Center 43-55, 2009.

“———————” ‘Religion diversity in a Buddhist Majority Contrary: the case of

Islam in Thailand”. International Journal of Buddhist Thought & Culture Vol. 3, pp.

131~143. 2003.

International Crises Group, Southern Thailand: Insurgency; Not Jihad. Asia Report,

(Jakarta/Brussels: International Crises Group,2005)

International Crisis Group “Southern Thailand: Insurgency Not, Jihad. 5.

International Crisis Group “Southern Thailand; Insurgency, Not jihad” 7.

Bibliography

195



International Crisis Group, “Southern Thailand: Insurgency, Not Jihad,” Asia Report No.98.

Neil J. Melvin, “Conflict in southern Thailand Islamism, Violence and the State in the

Patani Insurgency”, Stockhom International Peace Research Institute No. 20, 2007.

Robson Sturat, “Srivijaya and southern Thailand” the Journal Songklanakaria J. of

social Sciences and Humanities 4 (2) May-Aug. 1998.

Saroja Dorairajoo, ‘Peaceful Thai, Violent Malay (Muslim): A case Study of

‘Problematice’ Muslim Citizes of Southern Thailand’, Journal of Asian Studies

27(2)2009.

S P Harrish, “Changing Conflict Identities: The care of the southern Thailand”

Discord, Institute of defaces and strategic studies Singapore No.107, February 2006.

Syed Serajul Islam, “The Liberation Movement of the Muslims in Thailand” Asian

Profile Vol.28, No.5: pp.400-411., (October 2000).

“———————” “The Islamic Independence Movements in Patani of Thailand and

Mindanao of the Philippines” in Asian Survey, Vol. 38, No. 5, pp. 441-456. May, 1998.

Vanchai Vatanasapt. “Citizens Dialogue: the way out of the Southern Thailand violence.”

Songklanakarin Journal of Social Science and Humanities 14(1) Jan. - Mar. 2008.

Veerachart Nimanong, “Thai Buddhists- Muslim Customs in Dialogue for Peaceful

Co-existence in the Southern Thailand”, Journal Asian Culture in Dialogue 1-10 (11-

13) at ABAC, Suwnnabhum Campus Hand of Philosophy, 2012.

Thai Language

ครองชย หตถา. ลงกาสกะอาณาจกรยดตนของชายแดนใต. ปตตานโรงพมพมตรภาพ, 2552.

ครองชย หตถา. ประวตสตรปตตานสมยอาณาจกรโบราณถงการปกครอง 7 หวเมอง. กรงเทพฯ สานกพมพ แหง

จฬาลงกรณ มหาวทยาลย, 2552.

ครองชย หตถา. มสยดกรอเซะมรดกอารยธรรมปตตาน. ปตตานมหาลยสงขลานครนทร.2549.

ชยวฒน สถาอานนท. ความรนแรงกบการจดการ “ความจรง”: . กรงเทพฯ : สานกพมพ

มหาวทยาลยธรรมศาสตร , 2551.

Bibliography

196

เฉลมเกยรต ขนทองเพชร. หะยสหลงอบดลกาเดรกบฏ... . กรงเทพฯ : มตชน, 2548.

ดเรก กลสรสวส . ความสมพนธของมสลมทางประวตสาสตรและวรรณคดไทยและสาเภาสสยมาน (ฉบบ) กรงเทพฯ

สมาคม ภาษาและหนงสอแหงประเทศไทยในพระบรมราชปถมภ ม, .

ปยนาถ บนนาค. นโยบาย การ ปกครองของ รฐบาลไทย ตอชาว ไทยมสลม ในจงหวด ชายแดนภาคใต (พ.ศ.2475-

2516). โครงการเผยแพรผลงานวชาการคณะอกษรศาสตรจฬาฯ, 2547.

นนทวรรณ ภสวาง. ปญหา ชาว ไทย มสลม ใน จงหวด ภาค ใต. สมาคม สงคมศาสตร แหง ประเทศ ไทย, 2531.

ปยนาถ บนนาค. มสลมในแผนดน ไทยบทบาท ชาว ไทย ใน การ สรางสรรค สงคม ไทย. กรงเทพฯ จฬาลงกรณ

มหาวทยาลย. 2553.

พรยศรา ฮมลา. พฒนาการประวตสตรราชอาณาจกรมลาย ค.ศ. 1350-1909 และ เขา มา ของ อสลาม ใน

ภมภาค ปตตาน: ปตตานมหาลยสงขลานครนทร, 2543.

อ. บางนารา (นามแฝง) ปตตานในอดต- ปจจบนกรงเทพฯ:ศนยการพมพ, 2523

เสาวนย จตหมวด. กลมชาตพนธชาวไทยมสลม กรงเทพฯ: กองทนสงาจระอมพร, 2531.

อนนตวฒ นานกร.ประวตศาสตรเมองลงกาสกะ-ปตตาน.กรงเทพฯ: โรงการพมพมตรสยาม, .

อลรอน มะลลม. วเคราะหความขดแยงระหวางรฐบาลไทยกบมสลมในประเทศไทย: กรณศกษา กลม มสลม ใน

เขต จงหวดชายแดนชายภาคใต กรงเทพฯ อสลามดเคเดม, 2538.

อบดลลอฮลออแมน. มสยดกรอเชะ? .วารสารอลญอาด210-211

(พฤษภาคม-มถนายน), 13-23., 2533.

ธเนศ อาภรณสวรรณ. ความเปนมาของทฤษฎแบงแยกดนแดนในภาคใตไทย. กรงเทพฯ : โครงการ เอเชย ตะวนออก

เฉยงใตศกษามหาวทยาลยธรรมศาสตรและคณะทางานวาระทางสงคมจฬาลงกรณมหาวทยาลย, 2549.

รตตยา สาและ. การ ปฏสมพนธ ระหวางศา สนก ปรากฏ ใน จงหวด ปตตาน ยะลา และ นราธวาส. กรงเทพฯ:

สานกงาน กองทน สนบสนน การวจย, 2544.

พทธพล มงคลวรวรรณ. “ “ขอเรยกรอง 7 ขอ ของ หะย สหลง” มหาวทยาลยสงขลานครนทร

ฉบบ 3 กนยายน - ธนวาคม 2552

อารฟน บนจม อ. ลออแมน อฮหมด สมบรณ บวหลวง ปาตาน ดารสสลาม: ศนย วฒนธรรม ชาย ภาคใต: สานกพมพ

มสลมนวส 1/2534.

อารฟน บนจ, ล. ลออแมนและซฮยมย อสมาแอล. ปาตาน ... ประวตศาสตร และ การเมอง ใน โลก มลาย. หาดใหญ:

มลนธวฒนธรรมอสลามภาคใต, 2550.

Bibliography

197

อาหหมด ฟาฑอล-ฟาฏอน. ประวตศาสตรปตตาน. สถาบน สมทร รฐ เอเชย ตะวนออก เฉยง ใต ศกษา, 2543.

อบรอฮม ชกร. ประวตศาสตรราชอาณาจกรมลายปะตาน. กรงเทพฯ: สถาบน สมทร รฐ เอเชย ตะวนออก เฉยง

ใตศกษาและซลคเวอรมบคส, 2549.

Websites

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thai_people,

http/country studies.us/Thailand

http://www.sabrizain.demon.co.uk/malaya/early1.htm

http/www.friesian.com.thalasso.htm ,

http://www.seasite.niu.edu/crossroads/russell/seageog.htm

http://seeaboutindonesia.blogspot.in/2010/03/srivijaya.html

http://search.eb.com/eb/article-9050254

http://www.imamreza.net/eng/imamreza.php?id=2022

http://malaysiahistory.net/?option=com_content&view=article&id=155&Itemi

d=91&fontstyle=f-larger

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fern%C3%A3o_Mendes_Pinto

http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/History/Thailand-history.htm

http://www.oknation.net/blog/Patani-time/2010/06/19/entry-2.

http://www.deepsouthwatch.org/node/2644.

http://www.isranews.org/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id

=2103&Itemid=56

Newspapers

Bangkok Post, English Newspaper

Bangkok Times Weekly Mail

Malay Mail

Manager online, Thai Language newspaper

Matichon news Thai language Newspaper

Muslim Thai Newspaper

Singapore Free Press, 28 July 1984.

The Nation Thailand’s English NewspaperThe Straits Times Newspaper

mortor of l3btlo~opb!'ir.amu.ac.in/11806/1/t10175.pdf · department of islamic studies augarh...

Documents