Wang Shuda's article made interesting reading, but I have to question his enthusiasm for teaching the Chinese writing system to foreigners.

The total number of Chinese ideograms has been estimated at 50,000, with 5000 to 8000 in common use and 3000 required for everyday purposes. Each ideogram represents a particular syllable, and you have to learn how to read and write at least 1500 of them to become even semiliterate. This should suffice to daunt all but the most ardent Sinophile.

Far more useful to the average foreign student would be an accurate transliteration system. A good transliteration system would enable a foreigner with no knowledge of the spoken language to pronounce words with reasonable accuracy.

The Pinyin system of transliteration promoted by the Chinese government since 1958 has largely replaced the traditional Wade-Giles system, beloved by generations of classical-Chinese scholars. Pinyin is based on Russian, though, and has shortcomings that are bound to baffle the student.

Take for example the Pinyin spelling of the Chinese word for "thank you": xiexie. This is pronounced, approximately, "shye-shyeh", but you'd never know it from the way it's spelled. When the Rolling Stones went on stage in China for their debut appearance, they greeted the audience by calling out: "Shee-a shee-a!" The audience must have wondered what they were trying to say.

Or take my own humble surname, which is traditionally spelled Ts'ao and which I spell Tsow. Pinyin spells it Cao. Most people would pronounce that "cow." As a non-cow, I object. Moooo!

The Pinyin system needs to be thoroughly revised and subsequently promoted as a learning tool for foreign students. I strongly recommend this course of action to the Chinese government and Chinese educators.

S Tsow (not Cao)

Bangkok

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

Opposition must not relent in effort to expose TRT's faults

Re: "Soul-searching or reconciliation?" Editorial, July 31.

The future of sustained democracy in Thailand still hangs in the balance. To this reader, continued pressure to expose the nature of this dangerous "wannabe dictator" is a no-brainer - it must not abate. Concerted efforts to expose past Thai Rak Thai errors and remove Thaksin from the political scene trumps what I believe are insincere attempts at reconciliation. No one really believes him except rural folk, and it would serve the opposition well to focus most of their efforts between now and election day on educating the masses about why the country is in the mess it's in and whom to blame. My modest advice to the opposition: just be honest in word and deed, but for goodness' sake, give voters alternatives to more of the same.

An Old Friend of Thailand

Bangkok

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

Probe needed into awarding of ground-services contract

Re: "Inquiry into TAGS books urged by top Democrat", News, July 31.

There appears to be substantial grounds for the Democrats' suspicions that the awarding of Suvarnabhumi Airport's management contract - worth a whopping Bt 10 billion - smells fishy. Why was the public tendering process sidestepped? Thai Airport Ground Services (TAGS) is majority-owned by Frobisher, a company with registered capital of only Bt2 million-plus, with a mere Bt100 million to Bt200 million in annual income. It's co-owned by a Singaporean lawyer who audits its books and a Thai lady whose registered address was an abandoned house. This hardly sounds like someone whom we would want to trust with managing our nation's showpiece.

Caretaker Transport Minister Pongsak Ruktapongpisal's explanations sound lame to me. He says TAGS has long experience at Don Muang and that picking a new contractor would require staff to be freshly trained. None of his "reasons" address the issue of why the deal wasn't subjected to a public tendering process in the first place. If choosing someone else would disrupt operations, the new firms could have been required to hire existing staff for, say, six months - this is a minor matter when considering the B10 billion at stake.

As the Democrats look into the matter, the auditor-general should also be put on the case. Something's rotten at Suvarnabhumi, and - as in the CTX case - the minister in charge can't satisfactorily answer the questions put to him.

Burin Kantabutra

Bangkok

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

Six commitments Thailand needs from its next premier

The question should not be who is the more decisive or innovative leader - caretaker Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra or Abhisit Vejjajiva - but rather which one could provide the sort of leadership we need in the present situation. We need someone who encourages public participation, weighs different opinions and then makes sure every programme is implemented with complete transparency.

To locate this sort of person, we must listen to all the candidates very attentively. Above all, let's hear what they have to say about their commitment to the following:

1. Transparent political reforms and specifically a commitment to remove politicians altogether from the Constitution's rewriting process.

2. A reinvigoration of and commitment to specific economic and social policies. Specifics, please. Let's talk about corporate business and mega-projects, yes, but always in the same breath with debt relief, village hand-outs, local consumer incentives etc. And let's not forget hospitals, schools and the future!

3. Protecting Thai rights in any free-trade agreement and a promise that none will be signed unless a public hearing is held first, and adequate time is left to ensure public input.

4. Speeding up all corruption cases without fear or favour, including those related to the CTX scanners and the fire trucks, as well as the iTV concession etc.

5. Speeding up the investigations into all murders, disappearances and human-rights cases that have given Thailand such a bad reputation in recent years.

6. A promise that no politician, person in uniform or bureaucrat who has been implicated in a corruption or conflict-of-interest scandal will be promoted or appointed to any position in which he or she might possibly fiddle some more!

So who could live up to these commitments? If a Thai Rak Thai Party member can do it, that's great, because it would certainly make the next government a more stable one, but I strongly doubt that Thai Rak Thai would elect such a leader. Is Abhisit the candidate? Almost certainly yes, but only if he stated these policies frequently, clearly and forcibly and if every Democrat candidate explained them in depth, too.

Lung Kip

Chiang Mai

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

Letter writer mistaken in call to punish fourth EC member

Re: "Student wants fourth commissioner taught a lesson", Letters, July 30.

Vexed Student in Boston, Massachusetts, asked why the fourth election commissioner, Charupat Ruangsuwan, was not punished for violating election law like the other three commissioners were. The answer is because his name was not in the lawsuit filed by the Democrat Party. They withdrew his name after he resigned. A judge can only rule on a case based on the defendants named by prosecutors or plaintiffs, in this case the Democrats.

SP

Samut Prakan

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

Lebanese leaders' bad choices endangering their citizens

While the current war between Hezbollah and Israel is disturbing for many reasons (including tragic civilian deaths on both sides of the border), it is sad to see that Arab leaders are once again failing their people. When France and the US helped free Lebanon of Syrian occupation, there was hope that democracy would bloom in Lebanon. While elections were held, Lebanon's leaders are failing their people by refusing to acknowledge their responsibility for the current situation that is proving disastrous for Lebanon.

Lebanon's political leaders were well aware Iran and Syria were arming Hezbollah with thousands of missiles, and Lebanese leaders were also aware Hezbollah had turned entire villages into military bases by building bunkers inside homes and hiding weaponry in Shi'ite homes. Lebanese politicians knew Hezbollah would attack Israel, as Hezbollah has sporadically shelled Israeli towns and launched cross-border attacks over the last six years. While Israel always responded to these unjustified provocations with restraint, Lebanon's leaders had to know there would come a time when Israel would say enough was enough. If Lebanon's army was too weak to disarm Hezbollah and comply with UN resolutions, then the country should have demanded that the UN, Nato or the Arab League send in a force that would disarm Hezbollah and block Syrian and Iranian weapons from coming into South Lebanon.

The failure of Lebanon's leaders to act responsibly has continued throughout the crisis. When Hezbollah attacked Israel, the Lebanese and Israeli PMs should have sat down together and come up with a way to handle this crisis. Israel was willing to talk to Lebanon's head of state and would have loved the opportunity to establish relations with its neighbour. But Lebanon's leader relied on the old tactic of refusing to recognise or negotiate with Israel. Now, Lebanon has cancelled a visit by the US secretary of state and stated it would not negotiate with anyone on a way to end the war. How will this help Lebanon's people, and what type of leadership is this?

Lebanon's prime minister has demonstrated there has only been one responsible Arab leader in recent history who was truly interested in peace. That leader was Anwar Sadat of Egypt, who bravely tried to move his country forward by making peace with Israel. Unfortunately, his people did not support peace, and he was murdered by Egyptians for recognising the "Zionist enemy".

Josh Baker

Thailand