|
Non-Violence
and the State
Satha-Anand
answers questions from a student
about it with reference to the situation in Thailand
By
Chaiwat
Satha-Anand, TFF Associate
Q
- Why
do you think the non-violent action training should be
introduced to the National Security Council
policy?
A -
Let me respond to your
questions in two ways: theoretical and practical. At the
theoretical level, for the past two decades I have argued
that if conflict is paired between the state and the
peoples, it has been on the side of the state that
initiates violence, not the peoples' side. (See for
example: Robin Williams, The Wars Within: Peoples and
States in Conflict (Cornell University Press, 2003)
As a result, to try to stop violence by "preaching
nonviolence" only to the peoples will not put an end to
what I called "situation of violence". Understood in
military term, between offensive and defensive violence,
changing those who use defensive violence alone will not
end violence. If offensive violence disappears, then
there will no longer be "defensive violence".
My objective has always been to
transform the state into using nonviolent methods. ( I am
working on a book tentatively titled: State and
Nonviolence.) (For this line of argument see Chaiwat
Satha-Anand, "Teaching Nonviolence to the States,"
in Majid Tehranian (ed.) Asian Peace (I.B.Tauris,
1999))
Now to understand the workings on
the side of the state, one needs to look at it from at
least three levels: Actor(s), Structure(s) and
Culture(s). (For this method of analysis, see
Johan
Galtung, Peace by
Peaceful Means (Sage, 1996)).
Policy exists at the structural
level which could be a source of violence. (For example:
the Thaksin government's policy in the drug war).
Government officials who are trigger happy could
contribute much to the violence suffered by the people.
(For example: when the government chose a police officer
who was highly decorated for ending the lives of so many
criminals in the past to handle the problem of violence
in the South.) A government's policy is a political
direction formulated as a guide to mobilize resources to
make things happen as determined by the government.
The National Security Council, on
the other hand, formulates policies that last longer than
the life of a particular government (e.g. Southern Border
Security Policy 1999-2003). To have a nonviolence-based
policy, then serves the transformative process both from
the structural as well as the cultural dimensions, those
who don't want to fall back on the use of state terror
could work with some levels of legitimacy within the
complex state apparatus.
Given my thinking, it should come
as no surprise to you why the police and "security
officers" (not "authority officers") would qualify as the
target groups.
Q -
What are
the other alternative methods have you suggested to The
National Security Council?
A -
What do you mean by
"alternative methods"? You have to look at what has
transpired from within the state-security sector. In
terms of policies, there have been the "Southern Border
Security Policy 1999-2003", as well as the "Prime
Ministerial Order 187/2546" which posits that nonviolent
method is the only way the state considers legitimate in
dealing with conflicts between the state and the peoples.
In addition, the PM Order 187/2546
also indicates that government agencies which are likely
to get into conflicts with the peoples need to have their
officials trained in nonviolence so that they will be
aware of both the peoples' methods in conducting
conflicts and able to come up with nonviolent
alternatives themselves.
The Thai state had tried nonviolent
methods in the past, especially in the form of the Prime
Ministerial Order 66/23. (See an analysis of this
particular order from a nonviolence perspective in
Chaiwat Satha-Anand, "Forgiveness as a Nonviolent
Security Policy: An Analysis of Thai Prime Ministerial
Order 66/23," in Social Alternatives Vol.21 No.2
(Autumn 2002)).
Q
- Are
they any improvements that could make from the training
programme?
A -
Depend on what you mean by
"improvements". For me, the fact that these policies and
training programs exist are already "improvements" in
terms of furthering the cause of nonviolence.
Q
- Is
increased training likely to have amy impact on the
overall conflict?
A -
It would be unrealistic to
believe that there will be no impact at all on impending
conflicts involving these government officials because,
to believe in the "no-impact thesis" would be to assume
that change is not possible and that human beings won't
be touched by anything they experience. If on the other
hand, one believes that we are "touched" by things we
experience in life, then certainly the "no-impact thesis"
won't hold.
In addition, the idea of training
these officials is based on the two assumptions, both
realistic and not idealistic. They are: first, the Thai
bureaucracy, or any bureaucracy anywhere, is not a
monolith. There are officials with differences in this
bureaucracy. To assume that they are all alike is quite
unrealistic. Second, government officials are normal
human beings, not completely evil nor saintly. In
general, they would try to function without using
violence on people.
Q -
In your
opinion, it is possible for both sides (government
+company) and ( NGOs+community) to form a consensus to
solve the problem together?
A -
I am not sure I am
interested in "forming a consensus". As a matter of fact,
I am quite terrified by some "consensuses" when they
condemn others to atrocities in the past. (See for
example, Jean-Joseph Coux and Philip R. Wood, Terror
and Consensus: Vicissitudes of French Thought
(Stanford University Press, 1998)).
What I am interested in is to come
up with alternatives for both the peoples and the state
in their engagements with each other that are nonviolent
and try to solve problems through nonviolent fights, if
necessary. Conflicts will continue as long as humans
exist but violence needs to stop.
Q
- In
your opinion, do you think that would it be possible that
initiatives in non-violence, grounded in spiritual values
(Buddhist and Muslim) offer an alternative way
forward?
A -
Of course, it would be
possible that nonviolent initiatives could be grounded in
spiritual values. But I prefer to work for nonviolent
alternatives from a non-spiritual position because of my
doubt about my own spiritual qualities as well as my
experiences in working for nonviolence where it could
easily be relegated to the spiritual realm and as a
result marginalized.
I could talk about nonviolent
security policies based on the state's past experiences
or international pool of knowledge on the subject. But it
would be much more difficult to put forward such policies
to the security communities, both in Thailand and
elsewhere in the world, based primarily on spiritual
values.
In fact, it could be argued that
most success stories of nonviolent actions in the
twentieth century have not been spiritually-based, nor
"made for moral reasons". (See for example, Peter
Ackerman and Jack Duvall, A Force More Powerful: A
Century of Violent Conflict (St. Martin's Press,
2000: p.5))But to say this does not mean that nonviolent
actions are not and could not be inspired by
spiritual/religious values.
Q -
Are
Buddhist and Muslim NGOs able to work together in non
violence? Are values about peace and non violence
shared?
A -
Naree, Phra Paisal and
myself work together for nonviolent changes. The
villagers in Chana are Muslims who use nonviolent
methods. The Ban Krua protesters are Cham Muslims who use
nonviolent methods to fight for their rights and
consequently strengthen the Thai civil society. (See
Chaiwat Satha-Anand, The Life of This World:
Negotiating Muslim Lives in Thai Society (Marshall
Cavendish, 2004-forthcoming)). In so doing, they couldn't
have done it alone but in collaboration with others,
especially non-Muslims. But whether values about peace
and nonviolence are "shared", I am not sure. All I could
tell you is that I don't think my understanding of "peace
and nonviolence" is really shared by all my friends and
vice versa, partially shared? Well, perhaps...
Q
- I
have read your paper that came from one of the hand out
document from non violent action training in Songkla in
draft version about "Non Violent Action from the State's
perspective". Would it be possible for you to give me
some advice on how could I get the complete
version?
A -
Yes, the complete version
is published in the National Defense College's journal:
Rattapirak (June 2004?). I will have to find the
correct citation for you.
May I ask you a favor? Would it be
possible to send this question-answer to some of my
friends abroad? I believe it would be interesting to hear
what they have to say about it.
Wish you all the best,
Chaiwat Satha-Anand
Get
free articles &
updates
©
TFF & the author 2005
Tell a friend about this article
Send to:
From:
Message and your name
|