I propose a truce. Suspend all protests temporarily. Postpone elections. In return, PM Thaksin will demand a trial in open court to clear his name - like media critic Supinya Klangnarong did, only for the PM, it'll be about the Shin sale's legality, including whether or not official secrets were sold to a foreign government, as the Law Council of Thailand believes. If PM Thaksin really believes in his innocence, he shouldn't object to this, and knowing the truth will educate we the people so that when we do have elections, we'll do so based on facts, not emotions - and if he won't ask for a trial, his silence will speak louder than words.

During the truce, the association of university rectors and P-Net should arrange debates between Thai Rak Thai and the opposition on various issues of the day - eg, political reform - to educate voters further, with topics to be decided on by the neutral organisers. If any side declines to show at a debate, they'll be represented by an empty seat, and the show will go on.

The truce will last until PM Thaksin's trial or the coronation ceremonies are over, whichever ends last, with elections to follow shortly thereafter.

This way, our beloved King can celebrate in peace, we'll get facts on which to vote, and we'll stay within our democratic institutions.

Burin Kantabutra

Bangkok

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

TRT could stand some background checks itself

Re: "Checking opposition figures' backgrounds may be worth it", Letters, March 25.

May I ask Curious to relax and stop his or her insinuations about Suriyasai Katasila? When I met him about a year and a half ago via the support network for Supinya Klangnarong, he appeared to be a very intelligent, focused and determined person, even though just 33 years old. He is just a regular guy doing the hard work that allows people like Curious to have the freedom to express their opinions in the press.

As for the Campaign for Popular Democracy (CPD), again Curious should take it easy. All the communists are dead, so no need to worry that Suriyasai or the CPD have any evil up their sleeves. Instead, maybe Curious should worry a lot more about Suriya Jungrungreangkit of Thai Rak Thai. Rewind to 1997-98 on Bang Na-Trat Road, and you will learn some interesting things about this servant of the public.

PH Retlaw

Bangkok

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

PM might as well resign, since his end is near anyway

Re: "Anti-Thaksin camps are wasting precious time pushing for PM's resignation", Letters, March 27.

Prachyadavi Tavedikul has misread public sentiment against Thaksin Shinawatra. Even if he does not resign voluntarily or by force, and even if his party has the most votes after the boycotted election, he will be up against all kinds of protest. Ever-increasing numbers of people will learn about the corruption and abuse of power in his administration. He will lose the ability and legitimacy to govern. By dissolving Parliament and rapidly scheduling an election, Thaksin hoped to buy his "next life". He and his brain trust did not foresee the possibility of a boycott by three major opposition parties. The electoral results will be incomplete and shallow, if not altogether tainted.

Prachyadavi takes the position that it is appropriate for people to petition His Majesty the King for a royally sponsored government. In his 60-year reign, people have petitioned His Majesty for everything under the sun. His Majesty has exercised discretion and prerogative throughout his reign. It is presumptuous to prejudge the people - including learned scholars - or royal discretionary power.

Netirat Intira

Bangkok

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

Our leader, not our system, is what's broke and needs repair

Self-interest has led Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra to one controversy after another. Now, it has brought him to the point where he risks being driven out of office for good.

Take, for example, the Shin shares deal from which his family received B73.3 billion tax-free. If the deal had been done in a way that the state got paid (approximately B20 billion) in taxes, and the Shinawatras received the remaining B53.3 billion baht or so, everybody would have been happy. The resulting situation would be the stark opposite to the one we have now.

Thaksin would be praised instead of condemned. He would be regarded as a national leader who set a precedent for Thailand's future business people to serve their country any possible way they could, not to be so self-serving as to waste their time looking for any loophole or leeway to avoid contributing to their country.

Now, it seems, the B20 billion his family saved as a tax privilege is just a token sum compared to Thaksin's political future, which is at stake at the moment. To regain people's confidence in him, in money terms, it would take much, much more than that. Penny wise, pound foolish?

True democracy is good for the country and the general public as a whole, but it turns out we have a self-seeking businessman-cum-politician abusing the situation here. The system may be good, but the human factor is a wrong choice.

Chavalit Van

Chiang Mai

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

Past actions cannot preclude present criticism of China

Re: "China softer on Taiwan than the US was on the South", Letters, March 26.

It was said that the US had no right to criticise China for its treatment of Taiwan when the US had its own problems with secessionism in the past. But the difference between southern secession in the US 145 years ago and the situation with China and Taiwan now is that Taiwan is not taking anyone hostage. Taiwan does not practise chattel slavery. What is more, Taiwan has a better civil-liberties record than does China.

Second, it's a red herring. If we take the argument that one cannot criticise the actions of anyone from any country if his or her own country has done something wrong or had a similar policy, then no criticism would be possible. Germans could not criticise Pol Pot's genocide of the Cambodians, because of the Holocaust in Germany 70 years ago. Cambodians couldn't criticise US aggression, because of Pol Pot's aggression, and so forth.

A much saner and morally sounder approach is to say the actions of any government, be it the US, China or Sudan, should be criticised by all people of good conscience everywhere.

As someone once said, "The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for all good men to do nothing."

Linus G

Chiang Mai

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

Bangkok buses need better lighting, not loudspeakers

Is another scam being perpetrated while people are not looking? A few weeks ago, I noticed rows of new plastic discs fitted to the roofs of buses. In my ignorance, I thought smoke detectors had been installed, presumably with some hidden means of combating any fire thus detected.

To my horror, I have discovered I was mistaken. The discs form a noise-distribution system. Who in the Bangkok Mass Transit Authority (BMTA) was conned into agreeing to this expenditure? What was in it for them? There is enough noise on the streets of Bangkok without adding to it for bus passengers.

In the good old days, if a bus driver was trying to drown out the traffic noise for himself, the passengers could take evasive action by moving towards the back of the bus. Now the noise permeates the whole vehicle.

If viable alternatives to the buses existed, I would certainly be changing to those other modes of transport.

If the BMTA really did have money to spare, why did it not upgrade the lighting in the buses? Various levels of government at the local and national levels have launched short-lived campaigns to encourage people to read more.

Travelling time on buses is otherwise dead time, which people could be encouraged to make use of by reading. However, in the evening hours this is difficult, because the level of lighting on most buses, particularly BMTA buses and including the "new" orange air-cons, is not adequate.

Ironically, my experience over the years is that the much-maligned small green "tin can" vehicles score higher on both these criteria than do the red and orange BMTA fleets.

Gareth Clayton

Bangkok

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

Uneven foreign ownership is a problem in Thailand, too

Re: "Foreign ownership in the US a burden to future generations", Letters, March 25.

The letter by Dr Charles Frederickson on the foreign-investment imbalance in the United States raises fundamental questions about the strength of many democracies around the world. The fact is that high levels of stockholding by foreign institutions can be used to influence government economic and social policy.

The collapse of the Thai economy in 1997 was largely brought about because foreign investors were able to cash in their chips. From the investors' point of view, capital withdrawals were justified, given the fundamental structural flaws in the economy.

But Thailand, perhaps at the behest of the United States or the G-7, was unwilling (unlike Malaysia) to impose emergency exchange controls.

Although it does not go down too well with society, in reality Thailand has the same investment-imbalance problem and takes similar risks that Dr Frederickson describes in his letter.

Evidently, there is a certain degree of weakness in a democracy: the people vote in the government, and big business strongly influences policy. Could this be why the US is so keen to shout democracy from the highest hills?

David Prescott

UK

Send us your views in an instant E-mail your opinion, with 'Letters to the Editor' in the subject box, to: letters@nationgroup.com