ELL: Akha Crisis: Akha Visit 1999, analysis and village eviction

[Matthew McDaniel]

For village eviction Photos go to  http://akha.tripod.com/eviction.htm


AKHA VISIT 1999
By Ali Ben Kahn

During July/August 1999 I was able to visit northern Thailand and meet
Matthew McDaniel of the Akha Foundation.  I was very impressed by the
various activities being undertaken by the Foundation, and also very
alarmed by the situation of the Akha in Thailand at the present time.

I initially contacted Matthew in early/mid 1999 after several months of
reading his Akha newsletter which is posted on various internet bulletin

boards.  I am presently undertaking a Ph.D. in the area of the
recognition
of indigenous knowledge systems, (or the lack thereof), in promoting
plant
biodiversity conservation within the very problemmatic context of
'development'.  Matthew's internet newsletter caught my eye as he seemed
to
be grappling with many of the same problems that concern me and was
obviously trying to come up with some alternatives to conventional
western
style development.

Matthew gave me a good introductory talk about the situation of the
Akha.
Much of this information can be found on the Akha Foundation homepage,
though not in such detail.  Matthew then took me to several villages so
that I could see for myself what was happening.

I have ocassionally seen reponses to Matthew's newsletters and comments
questioning his view that the current situation is one of crisis.
Unfortunately, I have to confirm his belief that, basically,  the Hill
Tribe cultures are under siege and I can assure everyone that Matthew's
reports do not exaggerate in any way the urgency of the situation.

However, I want to make clear that the following is based on my own
interpretation of what I saw and learned, based on my own background as
someone who has very deep reservations about the whole concept of
'development' as defined and created by western culture.  I don't
pretend
to have an easy answer or a new whizz-bang alternative.  However, I
believe
that we need to question the whole concept of 'development', as indeed
many
are already doing, and try to evolve some new ways of sharing wealth,
constructive technology, knowledge systems and so on.

Having said that, back to northern Thailand.  Under the guise of
'development' and 'modernisation' there appears to be a policy on the
part
of the Thai government to systematically dismantle Hill Tribe cultures.
My
ongoing research suggests that there are a number of reasons for this.

Thailand operates a very old-fashioned, assimilationist policy aimed at
bringing the Hill Tribes into the 'mainstream' Thai culture.  As a white

Australian, the very idea of assimilationism makes my hair curl!  Maybe
some people mean well by wanting others to assimilate.  A lot of the
time
however, assimilationism is just another way of saying 'your culture is
crap, ours is better so take it up or else, because we're not going to
allow any space for you to be different'.  In other words, it leads
inexorably to cultural genocide and the Australian Aboriginals have
educated us about the extreme injustice and arrogance of this!

The land that should belong to the Hill Tribes (but which doesn't
legally
as they have no 'land rights' or citizenship status) could be 'better'
used
by the Thai government and/or Thai farmers.  Without going into the
various
rights and wrongs of this, or the situation of impoverished Thai
farmers,
suffice to say that some very lucrative plantation deals, tourism
ventures
etc are in the offing if only those Hill Tribes weren't cluttering up
the
place!  The situation regarding tourism is interesting though: the Thai
government is faced with some very awkward dilemmas here, given the big
boom in Hill Tribe Treks-more later.

The need to be active (or at least appear to be active) in the field of
biodiversity conservation and agricultural reform.  This has become a
major
interest of various heavy duty aid and development agencies (World Bank,

IMF, Asian Development Bank etc).  Thailand is faced with some very
embarassing past history in this area, e.g. systemmatic destruction of
their once widespread forest resources facilitated by official
corruption
and lack of good governance to mention only one.

Unfortunately, it has now proved convenient to scapegoat the Hill Tribes

and to claim that deforestation, soil erosion, stream siltation and
numerous other environmental ills are caused by their agricultural
practices, one of which is shifting cultivation.  The possibility that
these people may have valuable indigenous knowledge about their
surrounding
ecosystems and to have developed production systems suited to their
environment is never mentioned or acknowledged.

This scapegoating the hill tribes for the problem of deforestation is
very
widespread.  I visited the Hill Tribe Museums in both Chaing Mai and
Chaing
Rai.  Both feature display information panels that put the blame for
deforestation squarely on the shoulders of the Hill Tribes.  No mention
is
made of government sponsored logging, illegal logging and the corrupt
practices of the past and present which persist even though logging was
banned in the early 90's, and which in any case simply shifted the rape
of
the forests into Laos, Burma and Cambodia.

While it is undoubtedly true that shifting cultivation becomes less
sustainable as population increases, there have been no recent
demographic
studies to clearly demonstrate that the hill tribe populations have
increased or by how much.  This is another claim of the government: that

the Hill Tribe populations are increasing at a rapid rate.  Whether or
not
this is actually true needs to be properly researched.

In relation to the putative effects of land clearing, in the course of
my
research I have found evidence that a major contributor to stream
siltation
in northern Thailand is, in fact, roadbuilding.  While travelling to and

from the villages I saw many examples of road building practices that
were
nothing short of environmental vandalism on a monumental scale: these
really have to be seen to be believed! No environmental impact studies
had
been undertaken, no proper/best practice guidelines exist in any
meaningful
context and road building proceeds with complete and absolute disregard
of
the surrounding environment.  The government is undertaking a massive
roadbuilding programme to facilitate both trade and tourism, especially
tourist access into ever remoter areas as part of the 'Hill Tribe Trek'
phenomenon.

In this way, the government is faced with a dilemma: one the one hand,
it
wants the land the Hill Tribes are living on to create lucrative
plantations. The plantations are usually pines and eucalypts and
clearing
of indigenous forest to plant them is common.  This is usually justified
by
the claim that the areas were already degraded (by, you guessed it, Hill

Tribes).  Indeed, the Forestry Dept's definition of
re-aforestation/revegetation seems to consist entirely of planting with
exotic plantation species.  Deals with Chinese interests for enormous
joint
plantation projects were being announced in the Thai media while I was
there.

I am presently seeking information on development funding for
're-afforestation'and revegetation in Thailand.  Do the donors know, for

example, what is really happening?

On the other hand, tourism is a mainstay of the Thai economy, especially

during hard times such as the recent Asian economic crisis.  Hill Tribe
Treks are the most recent BIG thing and so there is a need to maintain
some
villages.  However, many of the selling points of the treks are that the

villages visited are 'unspoilt, remote, intact indigenous cultures etc'
and
so there is a need to keep pushing into ever more remote areas, to build

more and more roads (bigger to accommodate bigger coaches) and so on.
It
isn't hard to see that this is completely unsustainable.

However, tourism aside, the overall policy is undoubtedly to move the
Hill
Tribes off the mountains.  Once moved, the people are provided with
little
or nothing in the way of services and facilities.  The situation
concerning
water is particularly critical and underscores the apparent reluctance
of
the Thai government to provide even the most basis infrastructure. This
is
in contradiction to the stated policy of the government, which partly
justifies the moving of people in order to better provide for their
basic
needs in the areas of education, utilities and health care.

The real situation however, is very different.  I saw several villages
that
Akha had been moved to which were not even provided with a source of
water.
Health care is an unobtainable dream and there are many well documented
cases of Hill Tribe people being mistreated or ignored by health workers

who view them as undeserving ignorant savages.

One of the things that the Akha Heritage Foundation does is to build
wells.
I saw several excellent wells, constantly in use, that Matthew had
helped
to build.  However, it seemed absurd to me (and very revealing) that
Matthew is undertaking such basic infrastructure works which by any
standards should be provided by the government.

Moving villages has numerous consequences for the people involved.  They

are always moved downwards, sometimes even to flat land which Akha are
not
used to, and the change in altitude can affect the health of both the
people and their livestock.  Loss of livestock means less protein.

The forced removals seriously disrupt the traditional agricultural
production cycles which also leads to dietary problems and malnutrition.

Common ailments among Akha babies, eg congenital heart problems, are
often
blamed on dietary deficiency on the part of the mothers.  This is
usually
blamed on the eating of white rice but there can be no doubt that
overall
protein deficiency is a major contributor.  This in turn has increased
pressure on the wildlife of the forests, notably barking deer and birds
(which are noticeably absent due to heavy hunting).  Added to this is
the
aggressive marketing of MSG (monosodium glutamate) in Thailand,
particularly among the Hill Tribes.  All this adds up to very serious
dietary problems.

In short, and to be very blunt, it was hard to come to any other
conclusion
except that the Thai government is undertaking a deliberate policy of
cultural genocide, dressed up in old-fashioned assimilationist language,
or
under the guise of environmental protection or development.

The Thai Forestry Department bears no resemblance to what most other
forestry workers would recognise as comprising best practice forestry
management.  It would be more appropriate to call it the Department of
Logging and Plantations, and indeed you sometimes hear this said
jokingly
when referring to the Forestry Dept.

The use of the environmental protection motive to attack Hill Tribes is
particularly invidious and hypocritical given the otherwise complete
lack
of commitment on the part of the Thai government to undertake proper
natural resource management in the forests of the north.  There are no
inventories of natural resources and no programmes to manage the forests
in
a sustainable manner and no scientific (western or otherwise) standards
applied.  The rich store of Akha and other Hill Tribe lore concerning
the
forests is completely ignored in the face of logging and plantation
pressures.

In reaction to this very negative government approach, the Hill Tribes
are
in the very embryonic phase of organising themselves to protect their
culture and knowledge.  This is made additionally difficult due to the
influence of the Christian missionaries, who always seem to initiate
their
entry into a village by telling the people that their own culture and
religious beliefs are wrong (often described as 'devil worship') and
must
be given up.  In Christian invaded villages it is unusual to see women
wearing headdresses (which are enormously significant components of
women's
cultural lives) and in some villages there are only older women present,
as
the missionaries encourage the younger women and girls to leave the
village.

The reason given for this is to save them from 'devil worship', abuse by

the males of the village, and for purposes of education.  The fact that
many of these removed women and girls end up as prostitutes is an
interesting phenomenon that requires further investigation. This removal
of
younger women has a devastating effect on the age structure of villages,

the production cycles, social interactions, marriage prospects and so
on.

The Thai government maintains a hands-off approach to these Christian
activities but it isn't hard to see that this cultural disruption aids
and
abets the government's covert aim of gradually dismantling Hill Tribe
culture and removing them altogether from the mountains of northern
Thailand.  Cultural demoralisation will simply make it that much easier.

In relation to this missionary activity, I will be honest and say that I

personally have never been able to understand the zeal that lies behind
thinking that you have the right to go to someone's else's culture and
carry out this kind of activity.  I can understand compassion and
generosity but not the colonial mentality that says that you should give
up
your 'devil-worshipping' ways (as defined by me) and take up my system
of
beliefs.  I found it very interesting that Matthew views this as a human

rights issue and my conclusion is that he is right.  I think that this
will
become a big issue in the near future as increasing numbers of
indigenous
peoples gain the confidence to challenge what is, after all, a direct
attack on their basic human right to adhere to their own system of
beliefs.
In addition, I think that extreme fundamentalist evangelicism and
missionary zeal will be recognised as the mental illness it undoubtedly
is.

In relation to the missionaries in northern Thailand, I tried hard to
find
examples of good works but failed.  I wanted to give them the benefit of

the doubt, but found only a weird kind of ignorant fundamentalist empire

building whereby the missionaries are happy to build a big church on the

highest point of a village that doesn't even have a well!  The role of
these missionaries in the destruction of Hill Tribe culture should not
be
underestimated.

In relation to tourism, I would urge everyone reading this to keep in
mind
the following if you ever visit northern Thailand and consider going on
a
'Hill Tribe Trek'.  These treks are the latest fad and often dressed up
as
'ecotourism'.  Inquiries quickly reveal, however, that local
tribespeople
gain little benefit from these treks and suffer considerable disruption
to
their village life and privacy.  In addition, remember that the
popularity
of treks has encouraged the government to increase road building and
other
means of access into ever more previously remote villages.

Conclusion
So, sorry to be talking doom and gloom but this IS a crisis situation.
It's only by knowing the truth and challenging what is happening that we

can help the Hill Tribes who are starting to get organised to challenge
these attacks on their culture and to have the right to make decisions
about their future for themselves.

My experience helped me realise that Hill Tribe cultures (and other
cultures in general) are incalculable treasures.  We may not all agree
on
everything and there's always room for dialogue, discussion and even
argument and disagreement.  After all, no-one's culture remains the same

forever (if it does you're in trouble).  The important thing is who gets
to
decide, how much respect you're given and how much space is available
for
difference to exist.  In Thailand at the present time, that space is
apparently almost non-existent.


Ali Ben Kahn
B.A.; M.Env.Stud.; Grad. Dip. Outdoor Ed. & Outdoor L'dship.
Dept of Social Inquiry
University of Adelaide
South Australia
(ali.benkahn at student.adelaide.edu.au)

I am a plant ecologist and conservation biologist presently doing a PhD
Degree at the University of Adelaide in South Australia.  My research
field
is the acknowledgment and application of indigenous knowledge in plant
conservation as part of the development process.  This reflects my
interests in several areas, mainly plant conservation and natural
resource
management, cultural diversity and the alternative development movement
which is critical of the importation of western values, economics and
knowledge systems into other cultures.

I have worked for many years as an environmental activist and am
presently
Vice President of the Nature Conservation Society of South Australia,
the
state's pre-eminent science based community biodiversity and nature
conservation organisation.  I also sit on several state statutory bodies

dealing with issues pertaining to conservation and/or natural resource
management.  I am a practicing Mahayana Buddhist and have traveled
extensively, especially in Africa, where I lived in Zimbabwe in the late

80's.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------
(Ms) Ali Ben Kahn
Department of Social Inquiry
University of Adelaide, SA, 5005
Ph: (08) 8303 3351 (wk); (08) 8449 9379 (hm)

--



Matthew McDaniel
The Akha Heritage Foundation
386/3 Sailom Joi Rd
Maesai, Chiangrai, 57130
Thailand
Mobile Phone Number:  Sometimes hard to reach while in Mountains.
66-01-881-9288

US Address:

Donations by check or money order may be sent to:

The Akha Heritage Foundation
PO BOX 6073
Salem OR 97304
USA

By Visa Card Secure Site:

https://www.givetocharity.com/cgi-bin/give.pl?CODE=10956

Donations by direct banking can be transferred to:
(Preferred)

Wells Fargo Bank
Akha Heritage Foundation
Acc. # 0081-889693
Keizer Branch # 1842  04
4990 N. River Road.
Keizer, Oregon,  97303 USA
ABA # 121000248

Or In Thailand:

Matthew  Duncan McDaniel
Acc. # 3980240778
Bangkok Bank Ltd.
Maesai Branch
Thailand

Web Site:

http://www.akha.com
mailto:akha at loxinfo.co.th

Discussion Groups:
akha at onelist.com
indigenousworld at onelist.com





----
Endangered-Languages-L Forum: endangered-languages-l at carmen.murdoch.edu.au
Web pages http://carmen.murdoch.edu.au/lists/endangered-languages-l/
Subscribe/unsubscribe and other commands: majordomo at carmen.murdoch.edu.au
----