Competitive Colonialisms: Siam and the Malay Muslim South

The development of political science in Thailand

“…Scholars from various fields such as Nidhi Eoseewong (1996), Kasian Tejapira (2001), Thongchai Winichakul (1994, 2000a, 2000b, and Tamara Loos (2010) illustrate that the characteristic trait of semi-colonialism has left its imprints; the strategic ruling elites in Bangkok have modified elements of colonial practice to impose domination over the rest of the country for decades. The projection of power endures both in terms of political supremacy which tolerates the prolonged state of limited democracy and of economic exploitation which provides wealth for the elites through the control of natural resources.…”

Fashioning the Gentlemanly State

“…Given the contested nature over the Malay areas and the fear of British colonial intervention by Siamese monarchs, they strove to demonstrate their ability to administer properly and modernize the Malay-Muslim provinces (Loos 2010). This competitive colonialism also manifested itself in military matters: the newly created Ministry of Interior held that the local Malay population was not to be trusted, and refused to arm and train the local population when universal conscription was introduced.…”

“…It was here where rulers' awareness of the competitive colonial power of the British in neighbouring Kelantan substantiated their quest for territorial control over the area, and acted as a catalyst for a number of imperial-style policies (Loos 2010). The area, now roughly comprising Thailand's 'three southern provinces', used to be an independent Islamic sultanate named 'Patani' 7 before it formally became part of the Kingdom of Siam with the Anglo-Siamese treaty of 1909.…”

Research as a military mascot: Political ethnography and counterinsurgency in southern Thailand

“…The imperial complicity produced in this interaction, moreover, has to be put into the historical context of southern Thailand. As Tamara Loos has argued, the catalyst for Siam’s strengthening of rule over Patani at the end of the 19th century was the competition with the neighbouring British imperial rulers in Malaya about the ‘ability to peacefully and prosperously run the local colonial administration’ (Loos, 2010: 84). Borrowing typically British imperial means of governance such as the establishment of Islamic family courts, Siam’s royal rulers developed Patani into a ‘showcase’ to demonstrate their skills in ruling a ‘foreign’ population ‘justly’ and ‘efficiently’ (Loos, 2010: 85).…”

“…As Tamara Loos has argued, the catalyst for Siam’s strengthening of rule over Patani at the end of the 19th century was the competition with the neighbouring British imperial rulers in Malaya about the ‘ability to peacefully and prosperously run the local colonial administration’ (Loos, 2010: 84). Borrowing typically British imperial means of governance such as the establishment of Islamic family courts, Siam’s royal rulers developed Patani into a ‘showcase’ to demonstrate their skills in ruling a ‘foreign’ population ‘justly’ and ‘efficiently’ (Loos, 2010: 85). In this historical light of an imperial competition, my presence also stood for a Western imperial gaze inspecting whether the governance techniques deployed by the Thai military were up to the standard of the ‘civilized’ world.…”