Actually this was a smart public relations move for Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont. With the reputation of his government and Thailand floundering overseas in the wake of the coup, appointing Somkid Jatusripitak as a "political marketer" was a sheer stroke of genius.

Who cares what he stands for in Thailand? He is not currently setting policy for the Surayud government. On the international front, he represents trusted modern capitalism. The United States and Europe love him. So what if Somkid spoke about free-market economics under Thaksin. That will give him even more credibility when he weaves his story linking free-market economics with the sufficiency economy model.

Contrary to the column, it is necessary for Surayud's government to care about what foreigners think about the sufficiency economy model. They represent a huge engine of growth with their investments into our country. Thailand must convince international businesses that the sufficiency economy model is a viable variant of the free-market economics espoused by Thaksin, without the corruption and unbridled spending on silly projects with no return.

Let Somkid figure out how to explain why he has switched sides. A credible figure who tries to explain sufficiency economics to an international audience is exactly what the doctor ordered. Somkid is a terrific mouthpiece at this point. If he wants to sell himself out like a hired gun and risk his own reputation and integrity, let him do so. It is his life and he has to live with himself.

Outraged Taxpayer

Bangkok

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

Former Thaksin crony will have to prove himself in post

Re: "More flak over role for Somkid", News, February 18.

Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont's political acrobatics in appointing Somkid Jatusripitak as Thailand's economic envoy notwithstanding, Somkid must prove himself worth the premier's trust by displaying his protean talent in his new job.

Somkid's assertion that he has been a dutiful supporter of the sufficiency concept of economic development is not convincing, he must prove it with his achievements in his newly-appointed capacity.

Somkid should know that this is a once-in-a lifetime opportunity to show his hardiness and himself as a possible choice for Thailand's future leadership. He must convince the Thai people and the world that Thaksinomics was not as successful as it was propagated to be, and that it should never return to haunt us again.

Anything less than that would simply be considered a vain attempt and a no-confidence admission on the part of Somkid himself.

Chavalit Van

Chiang Mai

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

Buying back satellites best bet for Thai-S'pore relations

Re: "Govt mulls satellite buy-back", News, February 18.

The reaction was predictable enough: Singapore does not like what General Sonthi Boonyaratglin said about buying back the ThaiCom satellites from Temasek.

It appears the foreign ministries of Thailand and Singapore will once again have their hands full in mending their countries' relations, which are further strained. Singapore's foreign ministry reportedly was puzzled by Sonthi's remarks on Friday and demanded clarification from the Thai side.

I do not believe that Thailand has to do anything on this matter. On the contrary, I think General Sonthi has done Singapore a great favour by offering or attempting to buy back the troubled enterprise. As everyone knows, the Shin Corp deal of January of last year has been a thorn in the side in the relations of the two countries for quite some time. Would it not be better if this thorn is removed so that business between Thailand and Singapore can be back on the ground that it was before?

To sell now would be a wise decision for Singapore. And for Thailand, to buy now is also what the people want the government to do. With the baht strengthening the way it is, coupled with the fact that there is an excess in the foreign-exchange reserve, one can see the advantage of this buy-back if it happens at this time, the sooner the better.

It will be like killing four birds with one stone. First, we make use of the strength of the baht that might contribute to its weakening. Second, we get rid of the dollars that we do not need. Third, we will get our property back. And last, but not least, Thailand-Singapore relations will be out of the twilight zone and back to normal.

Prachyadavi Tavedikul

Bangkok

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

School's 'shaming' of Chotiros an attack on individuality

Re: University should worry about standards of dress on campus" Letters, February 18.

Puzzled in Bangkok's splendid letter points out the distressing, bizarre handling of Chotiros Suriyawong's apparel choice by the media and Thammasat University.

Indeed it was shameful and totally uncalled for. Chotiros should have been well aware of what the media's response might be when she appeared at the awards ceremony, because arguably that is their "job". However, the university, supposedly under grave pressure to act, in my opinion deserves the lowest of marks for its "using a hammer to kill a mosquito" solution.

While saving face for the university and its administration with a criminal court like "sentencing", they also, in typical authoritarian manner, saw an opportunity to squash in Chotiros the spirit for any future discord by shaming her in public.

Educators and parents alike can affirm that the inner spirit of dissent in our youth cannot be so easily extinguished by external solutions. Do you think that the young women in school uniforms are "pushing" the dress-code envelope for merely reasons of glamour?

I find it astonishing that a somewhat controversial item of apparel, in what should have been a routine celebrity event, resulted in such an overblown media frenzy with unwarranted consequences for a spunky young woman. Chotiros, perhaps some may recall your name with regard to a particular evening dress you wore; but there are countless others who admire your daring and conviction in exercising your right to choose.

Mr Bill

Bangkok

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

Writer not denying Thai role in Suvarnabhumi debacle

Re: "Foreigners should not be made scapegoats in debacle", Letters, February 18.

I feel sorry that I got the above letter's writer excited with my comments on foreign experts (" 'Foreign experts' responsible for much of the problems currently plaguing airport", Letters, February 16). I agree that it is ludicrous for anyone to blame foreigners "for everything from traffic jams to the bungled airport", to quote the writer. I certainly never claimed that.

When I came back to this country in the 1960s to join the Town and Country Planning Department, the Litchfield master plan for Bangkok was just finished and it became the official "bible". As with any project undertaken by foreign consultants, there were Thai counterparts who in this case never told the American planners that the site they had chosen for the new airport is a swamp. If anyone is to blame, it must be the Thais themselves. The Litchfield Plan is interesting in that it was drawn up by people from a land-based culture for a water-based society, hence the emphasis on motorisation and other land-based programmes. It led, rightly or wrongly, to the filling in of the city's canals and the end of Bangkok as the "Venice of the East".

Which brings to mind, when I was still a student in Europe in the late 1950s, there was a proposal to build a motorway right into Venice on the Grand Canal. The whole of Europe rose up in arms to protest against it and it was preserved as part of Europe's heritage. I can't see the Thais protesting against cultural destruction with any vehemence. Thirteen years ago the government nearly built elevated expressways in Bangkok right on both banks of the Chao Phya River. Of course I had to protest.

Sumet Jumsai

Bangkok

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

Support needed for aid agencies on Burma's borders

Re: "Burma could be next humanitarian folly", Opinion, February 16.

Dr Thung Tun's response to the International Crisis Group that labelled the Burmese democracy movement an "anti-aid-lobby" opens new space to debate whether humanitarian assistance to Burma is beneficial to its neediest citizens. The author's ending, in which he said that international aid agencies and his exile government (the National Coalition Government of Union of Burma [NCGUB]) share the same goal for the betterment of all people in Burma is encouraging.

An open debate concerning from where and to whom aid should be delivered is long overdue. Cross-border humanitarian aid will definitely meet the needs of the neediest people in the ethnic nationalities' states.

Due to the heavy militarisation and escalation of civil wars, people in these states, especially in Arakan, Chin, Karen, Karenni, and Shan, are facing starvation and a major increase in infectious diseases. They need immediate assistance for food, clothing, shelter, medicines, and sanitised water in order to live.

In Karen State alone, there are 150,000 refugees and 89,000 internally-displaced persons. Likewise, there are hundreds of thousands of internationally-displaced persons in Arakan State, Chin State, Karenni State, and Shan State.

My recent fact-finding trips to the Bangladesh-Burma and India-Burma borders where hundreds of thousands of Arakanese, Chin, and Rohingya displaced people have limited access to food, water and medicine proved to me that we need cross-border humanitarian aid immediately. There are people left dying, starving and vulnerable due to a lack of basic assistance.

Transparency and accountability must be the rule in technical and methodology-related issues concerning how the aid should be delivered directly to the people and the local aid agencies from Kachin, Karen, Karenni, Mon and Shan.

The agencies have been delivering food, medicine and clothing to their displaced people with limited resources by crossing the Thai-Burma border. These local aid agencies should be supported and expend more aid to Arakan State and Chin State.

Nyi Nyi Lwin

Team Leader

Economic and Development Planning Committee on Ethnic Nationalities Council

Washington DC