Peace Processes as Joint Learning Processes of Stakeholders

and Insider Peacebuilders: A Case Study on Southern

Thailand

Norbert Ropers – Berghof Foundation/ Center for Conflict Studies and Cultural Diversity (CSCD)

Mathus Anuvatudom – King Prajadhipok’s Institute (KPI)

November 2013

Points to Share

1. Why is the Insider Peacebuilders Platform (IPP) needed?

2. How did we do during nine months (September 2011 –

June 2012)?

3. What are the outcomes?

4. What are the challenges?

5. What are the lessons learnt from the process?

“a critical mass of committed

and experienced insider

peacebuilders

who represent together all key

stakeholders from across the

conflict spectrum of different

motives, positions, and

interests

that loosely forms an effective

joint platform for conflict

analysis and development of

roadmaps for peace”

Basic Assumptions on IPP (phase 1-2)

1. A network for active engagement to transform the

conflict by stakeholders across the divide was needed.

• In the past 7 years, few efforts on peacebuilding involved inclusive

collaboration of stakeholders. Most networks are like-minded.

• Public discourse on peace process in the south was very limited.

2. Conflict transformation based on collective action is

unlikely to achieve without common understanding on

the conflict.

• Any approach regarding on political solution (i.e. research papers, 50

forums on decentralization) was not seriously considered due to

different understandings on the cause of violence.

3. Joint conflict analysis could be a learning process where

trust can be gradually built and pave the way for future

collaboration.

• A starting point to engage fundamentally different groups of people

together is to provide a safe space for learning.

• Sound solutions can only come from proper analysis. Practical

solutions can only then come from joint analysis.

• There is no analysis of the conflict done by insider stakeholders

released to the public realm.

Basic Assumptions on IPP (phase 1-2)

Look Backward

LookForwa

rd

The Formation and Activities of IPP

1. Forming up of core working team comprised of Bangkok-

Pat(t)ani based organizations supported financially and

academically by international organizations/ communities

The Formation and Activities of IPP

2. Venue – Prince Songkla University, Pattani Campus

3. 5 workshops – 3 days each/ plenary and break out group

sessions from September 2011 – June 2012

4. Selection of participants

• Multipliers

• Representation of different opinions

• Approximately 50 persons ranging from military officers, civil

servants, local politicians, monks, imams, Thai Buddhist and Malay

Muslim teachers, youth and women leaders, journalists, academics,

community leaders, and local intellectuals

A Series of Joint Conflict Analysis

• Promote systemic

understanding

• Step-by-step trust

and confidence

building

• Visualizations

Onion Tool

Operational

Youth

Patani

Liberation

Movement

Senior

GroupsCurrent

Leaders

Sym-

pathizers

Military

Thai State

Govern-

ment

State

Agencies

Pursuing the goals by means

that triggered violence

Summary of the Analysis on Conflict in Southern ThailandInsider Peacebuilders Platform (IPP)

Positions and Needs

• Independent

State

• Self government

in accordance

with Malay-

Patani identity

• Protection of

culture, identity,

and dignity of

Malay Patani

community

• Justice and

equality on

political,

economic,

socio-cultural

matters

Retaliation

Civil Society

Sector

Organization

/Network

Communities

Implementation of

Emergency Decree

Illegal

business/

Criminals

Positions and Needs

• Justice and social stability

• Peaceful coexistence within pluralistic

society

• Political participation

Mainstream Thai Society

International Community

Narratives of Malay Muslims –

““We were conquered and treated unfairly

for decades.”

Narratives of Thai Buddhists - “We had lived

together peacefully until a group of people was trying

to mobilize locals for their own causes.”

Narratives of Thai

Chineses –

“We are just settlers.”

Positions and Needs

• Territorial

Integrity and

Sovereignty

• Social stability

and safety of

lives and

properties

• Protection of

culture, identity,

and dignity of

Thai State

Outcomes from IPP Process

1. Common analysis of and understanding on the conflict done by

various stakeholders

• Joint comprehensive conflict analysis

• Thai Buddhists realized strong sentiments for liberation/independence

• BRN – Liberation movement emerged as a main party (before the

official peace dialogue)

2. A physical and psychological space/network where fundamentally

differences can be safely discussed, tolerated, and co-exist.

• Participants are enthusiastic to meet, discuss, and update situation

• Participants were more cautious not to over-generalize the others

• Participants acknowledged different perspectives and their rationales

and realized that they can actually “work” together (i.e. military officer)

Outcomes from IPP Process

3. Cultivating interest and understanding on peace process at

Track 2 level which can later be a safety net for Track 1 level

4. Environment conducive to peace dialogue and public discourse

on peace process (some participants believe in its contribution to 28/2)

TRACK I

TRACK III

Consolidating and

Building Capacity for IPP

• 12 workshops

• 3 training sessions

• 24 team meetings

2

Mobilizing Track III

• Voices of Pat(t)ani

• Peace campaign designed by

Multiplatform Media experts

4

Supporting Track I

• Consultation/ Lobbying1

Setting up Insider

Peacebuilders Resource

Center (IPRC)

3

TRACK II

Mainstream Thai Society Deep South of Thailand Society

IPPJoint Learning

Process

Challenges of IPP Process

1. Turning joint learning into joint action

2. Difficulty of inviting more military officers and politically-

driven Thai Buddhists on board

3. Open question on whether multiplying this type of work as

several IPPs or strengthening the original group

4. Limitation on measuring impact at macro level

Some Lessons Learnt from IPP Process

1. An inclusive platform/network where all key actors are adequately

present is critical to a meaningful transformation – Internal

dialogue within groups of stakeholders is necessary to prepare for

engagement

2. Joint learning based on sound tools, knowledge and experiences

from elsewhere with good facilitation and safe environment can

disseminate expertise and skills, build trust and confidence, and

lay a foundation for public peace process

3. Although track 2 and 3 are critical, linkage of IPP with track 1

will make the work of IPP and the peace process in general more

holistic and create more immediate impacts.