Politically Inconvenient, Legally Correct: A Non-international Armed Conflict in Southern Thailand

This article argues that the insurgency in southern Thailand, currently into its ninth consecutive year, is a non-international armed conflict (NIAC). The title implies the contentiousness of the argument, which is responsive to the government of Thailand's express claim that the situation in the South is rather one of banditry, organized crime, and/or ill-defined insurgency. The article begins with brief sections on the nature and applicability of international humanitarian law (IHL) and the factual background of Thailand's conflict. The conflict began in January 2004 and has pitted variously armed and organized ethnic Malays-nearly all Muslims-against the predominantly Buddhist Thai state and its security forces. Over 5000 people have been killed and thousands more injured. Reference is made to a recent report by Amnesty International (for which the author works), which characterized insurgency attacks as war crimes under IHL. The article then applies the relevant IHL to these facts by addressing, through their various constituency sub-elements, the two main legal elements of Common Article 3 NIACs, organization and intensity. Each sub-element is at least partially satisfied, such that the requisite 'minimum levels' of both organization and intensity are plainly established, and the situation's character as a NIAC becomes clear. The article draws upon both primary and secondary source material, and for the first time marshals the facts in southern Thailand relevant to Common Article 3 NIACs in a coherent and purposeful manner. Finally, the article dispenses with the specific claim that Thailand's southern violence is primarily of a non-ideological, criminal nature and that such militates against its constituting a NIAC.