First of all I would like to congratulate Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont on his appointment and wish him and his soon-to-be-appointed Cabinet every success in the challenging task that lies ahead over the next 12 months.

One area that the interim government will be paying particular attention to will be foreign direct investment (FDI). Thailand has already become a sideshow to China in the Asian FDI stakes and the political turbulence during the course of this year has done nothing to enhance Thailand's appeal as an FDI destination. Nevertheless, FDI is vital to Thailand and all other developing economies since, over and above the actual capital inflows it generates, it is the main window through which innovation, competitiveness and productivity gains flow into the economy.

A by-product of the recent political turbulence has been the acute uncertainties raised about ownership structures permissible for foreign direct investors. In today's global economy it is no longer acceptable to force foreign direct investors to have local joint-venture partners, who may add no value in terms of business expertise or capital. Even worse, making a direct investment overseas without being allowed management control of their own business is utter anathema to most companies, including Thai corporations investing overseas. Even China and Vietnam recognise these facts and permit 100-per-cent foreign-owned enterprises.

A brief survey of household-name multinationals operating in Thailand will reveal that most are using some sort of nominee structure to avoid the use of non-value-added local partners and retain management control.

A very effective way to reassure foreign direct investors they are welcome in the Thai economy would be for the interim government to reform the Alien Business Law as a matter of urgent priority. Protecting strategic sectors from foreign domination is an accepted principle internationally and happens in most developed economies, including the US. Clear rules prohibiting use of nominee structures in strategic sectors should be incorporated, while foreign ownership restrictions on companies operating in the rest of the economy should lifted entirely. Americans have been allowed 100-per-cent ownership of companies in Thailand for decades under the Treaty of Amity and Economic Relations. This appears to have caused no obvious damage to the economy and the right should be extended to all nationalities.

Singapore has a very successful track record in attracting foreign direct investors. It allows total foreign ownership of companies in non-strategic sectors but has very strict laws restricting foreign ownership in strategic sectors, including harsh penalties for nominees and their users. Dare I suggest that the island republic's foreign investment laws could be used as a model?

George Morgan

Bangkok

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

Pre-coup situation was beyond people's power

 Re: "Thais are seeing the results of failure to act on our political responsibility", Letters, October 6.

Letter writer Pruittiporn Kerdchoochuen said the people should be the ones fixing the imperfections of the system, not the military. Let's not forget that soldiers are people too, as well as also being citizens. We must try to move away every now and then from our Western-inculcated mindset.

Elections constitute only one element of a democratic society. When free and fair elections could not be held as scheduled, when corruption was rampant, when the nation was a whisker away from violent clashes, when deep divisions were being sown between South and North, rural and urban, rich and poor, and when the one revered institution that has held the country together was being systematically marginalised, it was probably time for the ultimate check and balance to come into play.

In the midst of World War II, German generals tried to depose the "democratically elected" German leader Adolph Hitler by planting a bomb in his conference room. They failed. But had they succeeded, the judgement of history would still be that they were heroes. Everything is relative.

As time goes by, and as more and more information comes out about not only the corruption, but the lies, deceit, abuses and extrajudicial killings of the past six years, and how close we came to civil war, history's judgement most probably will be that on September 19, 2006, the generals of the Thai Armed Forces without bloodshed did the right and honourable thing - and just in the nick of time.

Natika Chairat

Songkhla

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

Electorate holds the key to a healthy democracy

 Not long a go, a large majority of Thai voters made their voices heard by voting for Thaksin and the multitude of Thai Rak Thai "yes men" who grabbed on to his cloak and purse-strings. Now many of those voters realise they were hoodwinked into believing empty promises. Have they learned any lessons? Let's hope so. Can it happen again? Yes.

A big step towards a functioning democracy is for people from all walks to educate themselves about candidates and issues, and not so readily follow a quick fix to fatten their wallets. Rewriting the constitution may help to some degree, but much more important is individual leaders' morals.

There needs to be a countrywide character cleansing. A populace that tolerates cheating and corruption - in school exams on up to the highest levels of government - will get what it begets. Thus far, Thais have been given the example (from Thaksin and Thai Rak Thai) that morality is for wimps, and the way to get ahead is to be deceptive and walk over others on the road to riches. When voters develop a high personal code of morals, they become less likely to put up with such antics.

Ken Albertsen

Chiang Rai

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

US being a true friend by voicing its concerns

 Re: "US, China differ on coup", News October 5.

Not doubt your headline will bring out the anti-American crowd condemning the US for promoting elections as the preferred method for transferring political power. In fact, the concerns raised by the American government should be addressed.

As anyone knows who has studied the history of coups and military rule, both in Thailand and elsewhere, nearly all coup leaders promise a return to democracy but these promises are rarely kept. Empirical evidence of military takeovers of democratically elected governments does not lead one to be overly optimistic about the near term future of freedom, democracy and economic development in the country. So it is prudent for the US to exert whatever political pressure it can to ensure the coup leaders keep their promises.

The US is demonstrating friendship to the Thai people more by pushing for a quick return to democratic principles than it would by unquestioningly accepting a system of government that has a terrible track record. In a book I am completing, I used the Thai political system as an example of how an Asian democracy can differ significantly from the American or European models and still adhere to democratic principles. I will have to delete that part before sending the book off to the publishers. Obviously, I was proven wrong.

The coup happened, it cannot be undone, but hopefully everyone with a legitimate interest in this beautiful country will work together to take it back to being a free, democratic and prosperous country where differences of opinions are debated and settled through the ballot box, and not through the use of tanks and threat of force.

Scott A Hipsher

Bangkok

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

Heed lesson of Afghanistan, Iraq before lecturing others

 According to news reports, the US State Department says "Thailand's image in the eyes of the world and US-Thai relations will suffer until Thailand returns to its place as a democratic leader in Asia".

Let me posit that just the opposite is true. The unmitigated arrogance of the US State Department and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is disgusting and distasteful. The Thais are very kind, but if they were not, Thai-US relations would suffer until the US stops interfering. Rice needs to take a lesson from Iraq and Afghanistan and the disaster the US has wrought in these countries.

Richard Stampfle

Nong Khai

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

Surakiart's UN stance hurt Thailand's good image

 Re: "Some lessons from the failed UN bid", Editorial, October 5, and "Surakiart drops out of race for UN top post", News, October 6.

Finally, the sorry saga of the past two years has come to an end. The ill-conceived and poorly executed idea turned into a wild-goose chase and damaged the credibility of both Thailand and Asean. Many well-intentioned words of caution from both within and outside the country went unheeded. But at least the Foreign Ministry should now be able to devote its time and resources to more solid and substantive work.

At the very last minute, some dignity could have been salvaged if Surakiart had issued a statement congratulating Ban Ki-Moon and wishing him well, as other candidates have done. It would have been the graceful thing to do. Instead, he chose to rush back to get a meeting with Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont to offer excuses, with the press speculating that he was also lobbying to return as foreign minister. One of his campaign staff has even been quoted as saying Thailand lost because "unlike some other countries" we did not have the financial resources to "buy" the support of Security Council members. This is extremely bad form.

The Foreign Ministry needs to quickly put the whole episode behind it and resolve never again to let the whims of transient political office-holders override good judgement.

Friendly countries please note: it was not the real face of Thailand that you were seeing these past few years.

Prapa Tepchat

Bangkok