[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index ][Thread Index ]

NEWS - Managing our ethnic diversit



Subject: NEWS - Managing our ethnic diversity

Bangkok Post - November 30, 1999

Managing our ethnic diversity

OPINION: Does our relatively trouble-free ethnic history conceal the
presence of real prejudice? One academic asserts that the media has a
central role to play in leading, and opening up, discourse about
'hilltribes' in Thailand-starting with what we all agree to call them

Krisadawan Hongladarom

Compared to its neighbours, Thailand may give the impression that it is
a
tolerant country. There are many tribal minorities in Thailand: Karen,
Hmong, Lahu, Lisu, Mien, Kui, Mlabri, or Lawa, to name but a few, but
the
country has largely been free from ethnic-related confrontations or
unrest.

Without making a comparison to the well-documented cases of oppression
in
Burma, how well has Thailand fared in terms of respect for its ethnic
minorities?

One of the first things that strikes people who look into the issue of
tribal minorities in Thailand is the fact that ethnic minorities of
diverse
cultural backgrounds are referred to by Thais using one all-encompassing
term-hilltribes.

School textbooks tell us that the reason why these people are called
chaokhao_ which roughly translates as "hilltribes"-is because they live
in
the highlands, when compared with most Thais, who live in the lowlands,
suggesting that their way of life and geographical location led to the
name.
But it is this different way of life which unfortunately leads many
people
to regard them in terms of stereotypes and speak of them using racist
terminology.

With increasing news coverage of hilltribes and incidents involving them
in
the newspapers (particularly the Thai language press) during the past
few
years, the statement that there were never any ethnic conflicts in this
"land of the free" does not hold true any more.

Perhaps we are fooling ourselves that ethnic wars never existed in
Thailand.
Perhaps we are too optimistic about harmony, the very word which unites
"us"
and "them".

HMONGS-DANGEROUS CRIMINALS

One fine day in mid July 1998 three Hmong men from a village in Phop
Phra
were arrested on drug possession charges.

In the wake of the arrest, more than 200 villagers protested outside a
local
police station. They were asking for the release of the men, whom they
said
were innocent victims set up by the police because they refused to pay
protection money.

The protest was treated as a riot, and Hmongs were characterised in the
press as "defiant". They were bold and arrogant, an ethnic minority who
dared to challenge the state.

Possessing a large variety of "non-ordinary" weapons, they were reported
to
have nearly beat the police to death. They were accused of being a
criminal
gang. They were said to have stirred up a movement which alarmingly
spread
to other provinces.

Over the course of a fortnight, Hmongs became the country's most wanted
criminals.

Stories of their past association with opium growing and wars were
revealed
in the media. Hmong homes were referred to as so-called strongholds, and
as
they were assumed to be the centres of unlawful activities, were closely
monitored.

Whenever a Hmong was caught with amphetamine pills, it became a big
issue in
the media. We read stories of the Amphetamine Hmong, the Drug
Trafficking
Hmong Gang, the Phop Phra Movement, as well as the Tham Krabok Movement.

As expected, the incidents were reported mainly from the authorities'
perspective. It was therefore not surprising to see that Hmongs were
represented as "arrogant and violence-seeking" and "ungrateful people
who
create a lot of problems on Thai soil".

There is hardly any serious distinction made between the Hmong who
settled
long ago, including those at Phop Phra, and those who immigrated from
Laos
and settled at Wat Tham Krabok quite recently.

The categories of "citizens"_ if such a word can apply to this
indigenous
group-and "immigrants/refugees" merge into one, becoming the notorious
amphetamine-dealing Hmong.

HILLTRIBES ON TV

'Toong Saeng Tawan (TST) welcomes the year 1998 with stories from the
highlands, the world of children. Children learn stories and gain
knowledge
both from everyday life and from home ...."

These are the opening words of a story of a hilltribe, the Karen, or
what
TST prefers to call the "Pakakeuyor", using the name the people call
themselves.

"The children feel that if their way of life, beliefs, and various
aspects
of their culture are not passed down from generation to generation, when
they grow up they will not know who they are or which tribe they belong
to.
So they want to preserve it."

TST is a weekly TV programme by Pa Yai Creation Company. The programme
is
broadcast on Saturday mornings from 7:30 to 8:00 a.m. on Channel 3.

Its aim is to promote the interdependence of humans, nature, and
culture,
with children being young guides for their communities.

"Thoong Saeng Tawan is rooted in the idea that humans must live together
and
that they must find ways to deal with limited natural resources," said
Niramon Methisuwakul, the programme's main producer. "These ways may be
expressed by rituals of paying respect to rivers and forests or by other
forms of cultural conventions passed down from one generation to
another."

During its nearly eight years of productions, TST has produced 24
episodes
about hilltribes, featuring a wide range of stories, from why Karens are
called great conservationists to the Akha ritual, sakorway.

With the help of flowers, sand, and water, the Akha apologise to the
spirits
of nature they may have harmed during their agricultural work. This
ritual
is a clear indication of how much the Akha care for the fact that humans
must live in harmony with nature.

Being the first episode on hilltribe cultures, Naaw Paa Son or "Cold
Pine
Forests" features a Karen community in Mae Cham, Chiang Mai. It
illustrates
how pine forests are important to Karens and how they preserve them. The
theme of this specific production is conveyed mainly by a Karen girl
named
Sida.

The story is full of questions the reporter asks the children. These
questions introduce the native perspectives, their children's voices
punching holes in the stereotypical view that many people hold: that
hilltribe people are selfishly destroying the country.

"Sida, how important are pine trees?,"asked Ms Niramon.

"I have lived in the forests ever since I was born. I don't have
electricity
like people in the city. I use pine forests instead," replied Sida. "If
pine
trees are cut down, the kids who are born after us will not get to see
them
again."

"When lots of people cut trees, how do you feel?" Ms Niramon asked.

"I feel sad. I'm sad that the forests must be like this. I want the
forests
back. I don't want trees to be cut."

DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES ON HILLTRIBES

A question may arise regarding how possible it is that there are two
perspectives of hilltribes which are contradictory to each other.

One pictures hilltribe people-the Hmong in particular-as a threat to the
nation, while another presents an adorable picture of another hilltribe
group, the Karen.

In fact, coverage of Karens in the local press is not always rosy.

Karens are represented as illegal labourers and murderers. When there is
a
crime associated with this ethnic group, they are often characterised as
"ungrateful and cruel".

Murderers are cruel. But when we say Karens are cruel, it gives a
different
picture.

Presenting hilltribe stories from the insiders' perspective, TST clearly
demonstrates a different viewpoint from the general news.

Hilltribe people are no longer seen as the ones who destroy the
environment
or the ones who always commit crimes.

Several journalists may agree that the media representation of tribal
minorities is much better than before, because people have more
understanding of traditional problems associated with these minorities
such
as slash-and-burn farming and opium growing.

But it must be acknowledged that major flaws concerning news reports on
hilltribes still remain. Front-page headlines have employed violent
words
with heavy racial overtones, representing hilltribe people as ugly
outsiders
whom Thais cannot trust.

In addition, news reports are still dominated by the perspectives of
local
officials, whose voices are louder and sound more credible.

Compared to the local tabloid press, the situation on TV is quite
promising.
TST is part of a new phenomenon of Thai TV which aims to do more than
just
entertain viewers.

However, given the early broadcast hours on Saturday mornings and the
perception that it is a "show for kids", TST cannot deliver its message
to a
very wide audience.

It is sad to say that Thais' conception of hilltribes is and will be
guided
by what they read in the headlines and lurid news reports.

Whether or not hilltribe people are considered to be part of the
nation-state depends largely on how the media views them. It also
depends on
the extent to which the media is aware of its role as either a
progressive
or a reactionary force driving social change.

HILLTRIBES IN OFFICIAL DISCOURSE

'Issues concerning hilltribes such as those involving the granting of
Thai
citizenship are sensitive and need to be dealt with with great care
because
in solving these problems, we put national security at stake."

Echoing the familiar nationalistic discourse, these were the opening
words
of a speech given at a recent meeting regarding the problems of what
names
we should call highlanders and how we can prove their ethnic identities.

The meeting was an admirable attempt to bring together civil servants,
workers with non-governmental organisations, and academics from various
disciplines such as anthropology, archaeology, history, law,
linguistics,
population studies, sociology, and Thai studies.

The participants also included representatives of the Akha, Hmong,
Karen,
Lahu, and Mien tribal groups. They were asked to provide concrete
solutions
for both questions posed.

The meeting, held on November 16, was supported by the Thailand Research
Fund, and aimed to promote dialogue between academics and civil servants
and

NGO workers.

Various names for each tribal group were proposed. It was agreed that
"Hmong" is to replace "Meo", and "Akha" is to replace "Ikaw". The old
names
are unsatisfactory because they are pejorative and are not what the
groups
call themselves.

"Whether you call us 'Akha' or 'Ikaw' is not a problem. Though we don't
like
to be called Ikaw, we can bear it, as long as the term does not create a
harmful effect. The problem is not really how we should be addressed,"
said
Miju, a young but outspoken Akha representative.

The question raised in the meeting was important indeed, but the root
cause
of the problem, as Ms Miju rightly put it, does not lie in the names. An
equally important question we should ask is whether we have treated our
"ethnic siblings" fairly, and whether we have attended to their basic
needs
and wants.

Another issue addressed was whether there are reliable means to prove
whether a person belongs to a particular ethnic group. It was hoped that
such means would solve the chronic problem of resolving the claims of
highlanders who seek Thai citizenship. We all used to be immigrants. We
escaped from somewhere. One day some of us claimed a certain plot of
land
and gave it a name, a beautiful name.

We decided to mark a boundary and drew a map. We asked those who looked
different from us, who spoke strange tongues to live outside the marked
territory. This is our area, we said. You live where you are and be
content.
But our area grows larger and theirs smaller.

We want to "tame" them because we are afraid they will cause problems.
We
categorise them with the most convenient word. Order must be maintained
and
differences managed. This is what textbooks tell us. This is what we
hear
from political debates, from our respectable seniors. And it is what we
read
in newspapers.

- Dr Krisadawan Hongladarom teaches linguistics at the Faculty of Arts,
Chulalongkorn University. For over the past decade, she has also been
conducting research on the Tibetan language and culture in Nepal and
mainland China.