You set out very clearly in your editorial the varied and significant challenges before the new prime minister and his Cabinet. You rightly assert that the new administration will be tested by a sceptical populace if it does not work to restore the country and punish any crimes that were committed.

It would seem dangerous to choose a military man to head an administration that seeks to heal the deep divisions and resentment inflicted on Thailand over the past five years by the Thaksin regime. The mindset of "military management" is poles apart from what is needed in consensus and reconciliation. Military management is essentially based on well-trained individuals doing exactly what they are told, when they are told to do it. There is no need for discussion, inclusion or consensus.

To employ that style of thinking in the short period before the "floodgates" of the popular vote will be opened again would be a grave error. Thailand is no longer willing to accept the dictates of the dominant "elite". The people want to be listened to and have a role in the development of the country. To deny the people that input would only continue the divisions, perceived or otherwise, between the rural poor, the political classes, the middle classes, the military, the Bangkok elite and the South.

Surayud needs now to be a man of the people, not a textbook military commander. He must be open and inclusive, but most importantly he must communicate not just orders, but information, and lots of it, and ask for information back. The road map must be therefore clear, certain and comprehensive or only failure awaits.

Dr Daniel W Delaware

Boston, Massachusetts, United States

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

Let's all do our best to support the AEC

Re: "No honeymoon for Surayud govt", Editorial, October 10.

All I can say is that most of our hopes and prayers are now riding on the Assets Examination Committee (AEC).

Names like Khunying Jaruvan Maintaka, Nam Yimyaem, Klanarong Chantik, Kaewsan Atibhodi, and Sak Korsaengreung at least inspire confidence and convey a sense of activism and determination.

They certainly are not seat warmers. Their courage over the past five years against overwhelming odds and frightening intimidation make them worthy of our trust and admiration. They have earned the right to be in positions of authority in the post-Thaksin era.

Let us give the AEC our time and attention. Let's accord the AEC members due recognition and all the powers necessary for them to accomplish their tasks. Let us all constantly encourage and fortify them to remain true to their principles and beliefs. As things now stand, the future of our nation depends on their success.

Natika Chairat

Songkhla

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

Continuity is not the best guideline for foreign policy

Re: "Retired diplomat Nitya to retain foreign policies", News, October 10.

Please tell me it ain't so.

Surely one of the justifications for the coup that the international community can readily understand is that the foreign policy conducted by the former regime was not based on the national interest, but propelled mainly by the commercial and personal interests of those in power. Continuity is surely not what we should be aiming for. We need to make a clean break with the recent past in order to have any hope of justifying the overthrow of the previous government.

Surely we need someone unconnected to the former regime to outline forcefully and credibly to the world the abuses, and indeed the sins, of the former regime.

Surely we need to weed out the sycophants and loyalists of the former regime so they don't continue with past practices or come back to wreak havoc.

One year is not a long time, but it can quickly become a time of lost opportunity.

Prapa Tepchat

Bangkok

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

Those 'old men' have a lot of valuable experience to share

Re: "'Cabinet of Old Men' to take it slow and steady", News, October 10.

Isn't it about time to put an end to the rampant ageism that permeates Thailand? In the Surayud Cabinet, the median age of 63 years is hardly a cause for concern. In much of the world, many political and business leaders, as well as those in academia, remain vibrant and productive well into their 70s and even 80s. Yet in Thailand, the government, media, and public at large seem to treat every citizen who is over the age of 60 like they are farmers who need to give their bodies a well-deserved rest.

Academics, who feed not only a country's intellectual life but also its overall prosperity, are forced into retirement, while those in politics and business often are looked upon as unwelcome hangers-on, who would be better off tending their gardens. Considering the rapidly ageing general population of Thailand, it would be wise for the country to begin seeing people of this age bracket not as "old", but as highly experienced and capable.

David Tapila

Sakon Nakhon

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

Thaksin's political fate was written in the stars

Re: "Hard Talk: An institution? The facts suggest otherwise", Opinion, October 10.

I think Thaksin Shinawatra's meteoric rise to political power in 2001 was bad luck both for him and for Thailand.

Lacking in political experience, Thaksin resorted to personal whims and astrology in solving our national problems - a sign of obtuseness and lack of direction. On several occasions, he showed utter ignorance and offered clumsy decisions in tackling important issues such as the southern Muslim insurgency and the prevalence of drugs.

Here was a prime minister with a tough job to do but no ideas in his head: he knew how to manipulate his way into political power and nothing else. An early end to his once-in-a lifetime political fortune was expected.

Chavalit Van

Chiang Mai

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

Declaration of Independence holds lessons for us all

The last time I voted in the USA was in Broward County, Florida, with an absentee ballot. Of course I'm still not confident that my vote was counted.

In Bangkok, we have just experienced a political upheaval, to return power to the people from those who had consolidated it. The Thai Rak Thai party under Thaksin accomplished this by subverting the Constitution and manipulating it to serve its own corrupt ends.

Some say the coup was undemocratic, but let me quote from the US Declaration of Independence:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness - That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organising its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness."

I'm trying to draw an analogy. The exact details of presidential/prime ministerial malfeasance differ between the two countries. The Thaksin government was overtly corrupt, and instead of stealing his election by trickery and manipulation of the system, he was able to buy the electoral process.

This ability to control the government through a culture of corruption, and the inability of the opposition to regain power via the democratic process, led directly to the coup. It was the only means left to effect change and re-direct the government back to a truly democratic system.

The Declaration of Independence may provide the justification required for a democratically inspired military coup in Thailand, but it also provides for the revamping of our US system, to put in place a redesigned one that could address the imbalances currently corrupting the existing one. Do you agree?

Cosmic Surfer

Bangkok

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

Suvarnabhumi was not as grand as expected

I just arrived back in Bangkok from South Korea at the new Suvarnabhumi Airport. I was looking forward to seeing this new wonder of Asian air destinations, but compared to Incheon International, which truly is amazing, the new airport here seems like the world's largest hobbit hole. It has relatively low ceilings and interminably long corridors to get from the aeroplane boarding site to passport control. Thank god for the rapid moving footpaths or I might still be there.

After what I've seen of traditional Thai architecture and even Siam Paragon I think the designers could have done a lot better from the architectural standpoint. The feeling is not as spacious as advertised. It's almost claustrophobic. But to give it credit, processing through customs was unusually quick.

My taxi driver complained about farang objecting to the fare into town, which is about double that from Don Muang Airport. He said he is losing business as a result. Likewise, many businesses around the old airport are losing out due to the shift to Suvarnabhumi. One wonders why the money wasn't spent on expanding the old airport rather than building a completely new one. But this may be part of the legacy of the late, great Thaksin.

I'm sure his cronies made and are making a bundle on this change of airport venue.

I know what scary mask I'm going to wear for Halloween this year.

Brian Elkey

Bangkok