Thaksin is a troublemaker. Regardless of his intentions in meeting with Singapore deputy premier S Jayakumar, he knew it would create suspicion, yet he did it anyway.

Reading about how he wants to leave politics and become a normal citizen is worse than reading about Britney Spears or Paris Hilton's latest exploits. If he wants to leave the limelight, why is he prancing around the region meeting with political leaders and granting interviews with CNN and the Asian Wall Street Journal?

It is easy to criticise Thailand's military Junta for its recent missteps - currency controls for example - but I wonder why Thaksin doesn't also brag about how he so cleverly avoided paying even a single baht in tax for his billion dollar sale of Shin Corp?

He represents everything that is wrong with Thai politics - corruption, scheming, lying and putting personal self interests ahead of national interests.

It sickens me to read about his behaviour. He embarrasses me as a Thai citizen.

Outraged Taxpayer

Bangkok

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

Thailand should take its share of the blame in Singapore spat

Re: "CNS chief sends mixed signals to Singapore", News, January 18

Yes, Singapore was wrong for their deputy premier meeting ex-PM Thaksin and allowing CNN to attack us from their soil - but, are we overreacting?

We are not entirely blameless in this affair. The Singaporean ambassador to Thailand informed our Foreign Ministry of the planned meeting several days before the event but we did nothing about it. Even though it's been four months since the coup, we haven't clarified Thaksin's legal status: is he a fugitive from the law? Should his ordinary passport be cancelled - and, if so, on what grounds? We forbid his return, yet we don't want him travelling around; precisely what do we want, so others can consider our wishes? Singapore and Thailand are both Asean members, yet apparently we haven't used its mechanisms to solve our problems through dialogue - instead using highly visible means of retaliation from which it's difficult to back down.

Now, there's talk of cancelling our agreement with Singapore for them to use a military training site in Kanchanaburi which they've been using for over two decades - which would cause geographically small Singapore grave concern and, to me, escalate the matter.

Also, from a Singaporean investor's point of view, first we hit them with capital controls, then we tightened the Foreign Business Act, and now we have a diplomatic row. Why would they think that they're welcome here? Do we think that we're the most attractive show in town?

Where will this all end? Are we taking care to follow Stephen Covey's "Seven Habits of Highly Effective People", which says, "Seek first to understand [the other side] before seeking to be understood"? We should heed veteran diplomat and former foreign affairs minister Surin Pitsuwan, who warns that this diplomatic friction could easily get out of hand.

Burin Kantabutra

Bangkok

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

Other countries should reconsider welcoming ex-PM

Re: "Is this a new version of bilateral 'constructive engagement'?", Opinion, January 18. Thaksin Shinawatra revealed his true self when he seized the opportunity to verbally attack the Surayud government in his interviews with CNN and the Asian Wall Street Journal during his visit to Singapore - a visit described by the host country as purely social and private.

The result: the Thai government angrily reacted by protesting against Singapore for providing a venue for Thaksin to subvert Thailand's internal security. Singapore was caught in a most embarrassing situation by Thaksin's tirade against Bangkok - effectively making his otherwise low-key visit a noisy and controversial one.

Most likely, Thaksin alone was proud of his success in acquiring publicity - unmindful that he had caused the ruckus and uneasiness both in Thailand and Singapore.

Always an egocentric person, Thaksin never hesitates to say anything off the cuff for his own good, regardless of appropriateness and the consequences that will follow. Potential hosts should take note.

Chavalit Van

Chiang Mai

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

Money spent on movie could have been put to better use

Re: "The greatest Thai hero comes to life", News, January 18.

As reported in the January 5 issue of the Asian Wall Street Journal, the Thaksin government approved funding of US$22 million (Bt771 million) for this film. Thaksin probably approved the funding to buy some quick-fix national pride to deflect the real damage his government's policies have wreaked upon this nation. As for the movie's content, I refer to a comment in the AWSJ article from a Thai movie critic: "Patriotism in Thai films is too simplistic. It's all about killing your enemies or saving the nation. They never show other types of patriotism - such as being critical of your country, or being hard working, or choosing moral leaders. Why are we still doing this? We don't have enemies anymore."

If the moviemakers can sucker in educated people, I'm sure the movie will be a huge financial success and sell a lot of popcorn and pride.

Paul Bradley

Bangkok

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

Hoping that delayed film festival is country's best yet

Re: "The greatest Thai hero comes to life", News, January 18.

Now that the much-touted movie "King Naresuan" is being shown to the public, one hopes the theatres will be free in July, to hold the postponed Bangkok International Film Festival (BIFF).

The film festival is said to have Thai programmers for the first time, which is a very good thing for the country.

One hears that the Tourism Authority of Thailand and The Nation will hold a combined BIFF this year, with the same director as The Nation festival.

It looks like the choice of directors is limited in this country.

The BIFF has brought a great choice of films from around the world and one hopes the Thai programmers will keep up the standard of the festival.

Film Buff

Bangkok

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

Skytrain's advertisements an assault on passengers' senses

The BTS Skytrain continues to bombard passages with loud, intrusive promotional rubbish in their cars, when silence would be most welcome. The passengers who have paid for the service should not have to suffer, because of someone's insatiable greed. Moreover, any advertisers should know they are damaging their images and ensuring consumers will reject their products and services - to punish them for such a tasteless intrusion on their peace of mind.

Which government department should a person contact to protest this aural abuse?

I would also criticise the BTS for not running trains with more than three cars. Frequency does not solve the problem. The crowding from 4pm to 7pm is appalling.

A Rider From Day One

Bangkok

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

Two airports would put nation in league with other big cities

Re: "Don Muang plans will make mid-trip transfers difficult", Letters, January 18.

All these boring complaints about two airports. London, Seoul and New York have two airports. Would you like me to continue with the list? Two airports for Bangkok makes sense and any logistical issues related to distance between the two airports can be managed just fine. I have never had any issue with the two airports in the cities I mentioned and I am sure that eventually Bangkok will smooth out your worries.

Philip Cook

Bangkok

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

Humanitarian crisis in Burma requires international action

Whether the ruling Burmese military regime, that goes by the name of State Peace and Development Council (SPDC), accepts it or not, the general population in Burma, including ethnic people, have had no peace. And their living standards have not improved in keeping with the government's slogans.

The people are desperate for peace because they have never seen it in their lives. Civil war, political conflict and human rights violations have been protracted and these have heaped constant suffering on them.

There is neither peace nor development, only a series of humanitarian crises in Burma and along its borders. Hundreds of thousands of refugees are in neighbouring countries. There are a million displaced persons due to the conflict; education and healthcare standards have bottomed out completely; there is massive unemployment in cities and rural communities; people are suffering from human rights violations, including sexual violence against women.

This is a real humanitarian crisis. The United Nations and government agencies in Burma have approached and talked to the SPDC about the ongoing crisis. But they say the SPDC does not want to listen to them and are bent on ignoring the plight of the people.

Lack of economic development and lack of trust (for the SPDC) in regard to foreign investment in Burma creates unemployment for the people who live in SPDC-controlled areas. With limited incomes many families, almost over 80 per cent of Burma's population, are steeped in poverty. The Burmese military regime has applied more and more restrictions on international NGOs and UN agencies in their travels and implementation of their programmes. People in Burma desperately need humanitarian assistance from international organisations as much as possible to reduce their suffering and allow them to survive.

Independent Mon News Agency

Bangkok