If, as Ken Albertsen argues, native-speaking English teachers are preferable to non-native speakers, then a bilingual teacher should be best. However, that's a specious argument, because different horses are suited to different courses, pun intended.

We all know it takes more than a native-speaking accent and fluency to be a good teacher; it takes proficiency, commitment, empathy and even a knowledge of the local language and culture.

If you can afford native speakers, by all means have them. We need all the help we can get to bootstrap up our English. But even if we'd wanted to, there wouldn't be enough to fill all our schools, so let's not weed out the home-grown, common-or-garden variety just yet.

But as many have pointed out, a native speaker raises the question of native to where? Singaporeans are obviously native speakers of Singaporean English, and their accent is just as easy (or hard) to understand as many other regional dialects of English are.

If you need proof a native speaker's accent isn't top priority when the goal is a quantum leap in English proficiency at the national level, two vignettes come to mind: Singaporean taxi drivers reading The Straits Times and shop assistants engrossed in English novels.

I can almost guarantee that neither member of these two occupations would have had the benefit of native-speaking teachers, but as far as English goes, they could serve as models for our own taxi drivers and shop-girls, and even office-workers, any day.

Of course, one could argue that Singapore began with a larger databank of proficient local English teachers and that theirs is a much smaller population, plus they spend 25 per cent of their budget on education, so I'm comparing apples and oranges.

But now the technology to overcome this handicap is available, in the form of CDs, DVDs and MP3 players. I have suggested handing out CDs with songs and poems to teach English to high-school kids ("Suggestions on improving the teaching of English at the high-school level", Letters, November 20, 2003). Since then, having actually been in the trenches (or so it seems) teaching at a boys' school, I'd like to tweak the original proposal just a little: first, go for the teachers.

Produce English courses that are geared to local needs on CDs and distribute them practically free of charge to teachers in all primary and secondary schools; and of course, conduct workshops on their use.

The Education Ministry should be able to carry out this policy, but why not a non-profit organisation funded by someone with a vested interest in English literacy, such as The Nation newspaper?

Let's stop talking about poor English and put our money where our mouth is.

Trirat Petchsingh

Bangkok

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

A most curious system of government indeed

Thailand's caretaker Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra was voted into office - twice - on a landslide vote, creating the first single-party Cabinet in the country's history (ignoring the fact that a number of smaller parties and factions merged with Thai Rak Thai prior to the poll, making it arguably merely another coalition government in all but name).

After a time, many Thais voiced a growing concern that Thaksin's actions as premier weren't fulfilling his expansive promises. (Indeed, I am reminded that some years ago, as a deputy prime minister under Chavalit Yongchaiyudh, Thaksin vowed to solve Bangkok's chronic traffic congestion within six months! I'm sure we all remember what happened to the economy of Thailand and subsequently to the region when these men were at the helm, and Bangkok's smoggy streets still seem to be gridlocked.)

The public eventually demanded that Thaksin step down, amid accusations of abuse of office, demagoguery, corruption, conflicts of interest, human-rights offences and exploitation of legal loopholes. Thaksin refused. As the political stalemate approached the boiling point, there were fears of bloodshed, and the chilling spectre of another coup loomed on the rocky landscape of Thai politics. And here's where things get a little hazy.

An emergency general election was held under questionable circumstances and subsequently annulled. After an audience with His Majesty the King, Thaksin apparently stepped down and disappeared abroad. A caretaker Cabinet was installed and headed by Chidchai Vanasatidya, to pick up the pieces. Thaksin abruptly reappeared on the scene after his "break" and returned himself to power, pending a fresh national poll at some point in the curiously distant future.

So what of Chidchai? Just who - legally speaking - is Thailand's legitimate caretaker prime minister? Is Thaksin really free to step in and out of the premiership as he pleases? Does anyone really care?

A most curious system of government.

Lewis Gibson

Singapore

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

China's approval is required to invade nations over here

Re: "Many reasons why the US will never invade Burma", Letters, June 19.

Why the speculation about why the US will or will not invade Burma to remove its junta?

Quite definitely, the answer is no to an invasion of Burma, or for that matter to an invasion of Iran or North Korea.

The reason these days is uncomplicated. Burma and North Korea are part of China's sphere of influence, and Iran is China's largest energy supplier. While China, with a permanent seat on the UN Security Council, will listen carefully to other members' views, there is no doubt of its resolve to veto any proposals that run counter to domestic interests.

Asean likewise lacks the potency to do any more than just continue talking about possible sanctions against Burma. Quietly, of course, its members like Thailand would rather just carry on doing business as usual.

David Prescott

Bangkok

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

Media should maintain focus on unsolved murders

Re: "DSI 'in dire need of major overhaul'", News, June 18.

Thanks for keeping us posted on the non-progress of the investigations into the murder cases of environmental activist Charoen Wat-aksorn and monk Phra Supoj Suwajo and the disappearance of Muslim lawyer Somchai Neelaphaijit. Please report weekly on the non-progress of these investigations until the non-progress becomes progress and your unrelenting pressure finally results in the real murderers being unmasked, tried and convicted.

John Francis Lee

Chiang Rai

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

Ally status was why Japan didn't wage war on Thailand

Re: "Banzai to Thai, Japanese royals", Editorial, June 18.

I was delightfully reading your editorial when I reached these sentences: "Thailand was fortunate that Japan did not wage war on its territory during World War II. This explains why Thailand does not harbour any kind of animosity towards Japan in the way some countries still do."

Amazing memory!

Indeed, Japan did not wage war on Thailand, as the two countries were allied during the war!

At the time, Thailand was ruled by Field Marshal Plaek Phibunsongkhram, a military dictator with nationalist leanings. In 1941, the Japanese invaded the country; Phibunsongkhram, while reluctant, believed that Japan's superior military power gave Thailand no choice but to order an armistice and allow the Japanese to pass through. The premier became more enthusiastic about cooperation with Japan when the Japanese performed well in Malaysia, and on December 21 a formal alliance was concluded.

At noon on January 25, 1942, Thailand declared war on the United States and Great Britain, but the Thai ambassador in Washington, Seni Pramoj, refused to deliver it to the State Department. By 1944, it was evident the Japanese were going to lose the war, and their behaviour in Thailand had become increasingly arrogant. Bangkok also suffered heavily from the Allied bombing raids. This, plus the economic hardship caused by the loss of Thailand's rice export markets, made both the war and Phibunsongkhram's regime very unpopular, and in July Phibunsongkhram was ousted by the Seri Thai-infiltrated government.

The new government hastily evacuated the British territories that Phibunsongkhram had occupied and aided the Seri Thai movement and at the same time maintained friendly relations with the Japanese. On August 16, 1945, Thailand rescinded its declarations of war. The British were in favour of treating Thailand as a defeated enemy, but the Americans had no great sympathy for British or French colonialism and decided to support the new government. Thailand thus received little punishment for its wartime role.

Nothing or nobody is perfect, but at least accepting and assuming the past prevents from falling into what I prefer to call a regrettable amnesia.

Clio

Bangkok

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

Farangs like low cost of living but want it to be like home

Re: Beer boycott over lack of English Cup commentary", Letters, June 20.

When I was living in the US, I never complained about ESPN not having Thai commentary. I never complained about not having Thai subtitles on the movie screen. I watched "Three Days of the Condor" three times and to this day still don't know who killed whom or why.

There is a lot of grumbling about not having English commentary during the World Cup, making me feel foreigners are whining too much. They enjoy the low cost of living here, yet at the same time they want the same high living standard and convenience of the West.

Meechai Burapa

Chiang Mai

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