The National Energy Policy Council has just announced that it is forming a committee to conduct a feasibility study for the construction of a nuclear power plant in Thailand. With this announcement, probably everyone from the television repairman to every government crony capable of operating a microwave oven will initiate their own feasibility studies on how to profit from the project.

In my opinion Thailand's systemic graft and corruption will guarantee the facility will be of poor design, poor construction and made of substandard materials while the Thai people will be paying for a first-class project. Everyone expects business as usual in any mega-project, only this project has the potential to kill and injure millions once the nuclear reactor is brought online. If you don't think it could happen I have one word for you: Suvarnabhumi.

Once hailed as the crown jewel of mega-projects in Thailand, the new airport is mired in faults that may eventually lead to hanging up a sign, "closed for repairs". King Power allegedly took over the terminal for a shopping mall while disregarding the safety of passengers and employees by blocking some of the fire exits. The runways and the terminal suffer from substandard design and construction that will cost billions of baht to fix. Suvarnabhumi Airport still does not possess national or international certification for airline flights after almost six months of operation. This brings us back to the nuclear power plant issue.

Thailand's woeful experience managing mega-projects coupled with rampant graft and corruption at all levels can double the price of the project while disregarding public safety at the same time. The crumbling support for the Suvarnabhumi-to-Bangkok rail project is really no surprise but can the Thai people allow this business-as-usual mind-set to apply to a nuclear reactor? This is a perfect recipe for an unspeakable disaster that has the potential to cause death and sickness in Southeast Asia for decades. Please say no to a nuclear power plant and opt for clean energy alternatives.

David Barkdull

Bangkok

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

Government bail-out for iTV would set wrong precedent

Re: "PM's Office ready to seize debt-hit iTV", News, March 2.

If the government goes ahead with the planned rescue of iTV by hiring thousands of their employees, it would be creating a dangerous precedent.

At any given point in time there are many companies in financial trouble. If iTV still owes the government big money, we cannot allow it to get off with billions of baht still in its coffers. On behalf of taxpayers everywhere, the government as the No-1 creditor must petition the court for involuntary bankruptcy against iTV. On this path we are moving speedily past "Amazing Thailand" and becoming "Irrational Thailand".

Netirat Intira

Bangkok

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

Junta's foreign business policy sending investors elsewhere

The events of the last few months have shaken my confidence in Thailand, to a dramatic degree. As many of the recent letters have suggested, there is much uncertainty in the minds of foreign investors about the Thai government's intentions. Though I was no supporter of Thaksin, and had issues with his integrity, the new government, and General Sonthi Boonyaratglin, former finance minister Pridiyathorn and especially premier Surayud Chulanont have recently been appearing to be neophytes, very naive and thoroughly incompetent, by comparison.

Part of the reason for Thailand's current level of prosperity is the global economy. Another large part is the intelligent and well-planned policies that were put into place by former administrations with the foresight and knowledge that Thailand is dependent on international capital and investment in order to grow and prosper. This has resulted in a very dynamic economy. By contrast, the current group now leading Thailand, is either showing an alarming degree of indifference towards economic and legal factors that are necessary to maintain investor confidence or a shocking degree of ignorance of the dynamics required to maintain a sound economy. For a potential investor, such as myself, either one of these scenarios is frightening.

There are simply too many emerging markets in the world right now and too many choices for investors and multinational companies. This country is not the only show in town, so to speak, which is the attitude the international community has been seeing in these brash new leaders.

With the world economy on the verge of slowing down, the international community needs to be encouraged to invest in Thailand, and the recent proposals do nothing to accomplish that. The damage that could be done to Thailand's economy could be substantial, and sustained. None of us who love and support this exceptional country want to see that happen. I believe Thailand needs to be rescued from this current group, and it needs to be done quickly.

Mike Snyder

Bangkok

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

More police in Pattaya would be a waste of taxpayer's money

Re: "Man 'confesses' to shooting Russians", News, March 2.

After the murder of two Russian ladies in Pattaya the usual claims have come up again, that we need more police. Please, not again!

The problem with the police in Pattaya is not that they are too few in number but that they are busy - busy looking the other way. How else could the increasing drug peddling and shooting incidents happen? At the same time, in Pattaya there are a lot of "police volunteers" hanging out, as they sit around on their small bikes on the beach with walkie-talkies and the black T-shirts claiming "volunteer". If they really are volunteers, then they have no authority at all. The whole excuse is to show that "the police" are "doing something", even if it is useless.

Just today I was standing at a major intersection of Sukhumvit Road when a taxi crashed with a rickshaw. The three or four policemen in their box didn't even realise it until pedestrians alerted them. See nothing, hear nothing, do nothing - that would about sum it up. Do we really need more of that and have to pay for it via taxes?

Sam Munich

Chon Buri

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

Justice system must do more to keep criminals off the street

I see the murder suspect who is accused of killing two Russian tourists was out on bail for a prior robbery. I thought it was only the liberal Western countries that allowed criminals so much freedom to commit further crimes by making bail so low and easy.

I often wonder why the system is so easy on the criminal elements in society. I came to the conclusion that it keeps the system going by keeping the courts and police busy catching the same criminals over and over again, and the victims keep becoming victims. Who will the next victim be?

Bill Cymbalsky

Bangkok

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

Rich making the poor suffer for the sake of their greed

Re: "'Free market' in real estate would only benefit the wealthy", Letters, March 3.

I agree with John Arnone. But the richest 20 per cent are just those who run political economies for their own benefit everywhere, not only in Thailand. The rest of us survive on what "trickles down".

If that were the worst of it we could get along. But the greed of the richest 20 per cent is such that their schemes to get more involve monetising and destroying the natural world we all share, the environment and a way of life more or less in harmony with it. The greed of the "haves" and "have mores" blinds them to the desolate lives we all must live as a result of their actions.

We will all discover together that "You can't escape the hell on earth your greed has created", no matter how "rich" you are, is as true as the time-worn saw: "You can't take it with you when you go".

John Francis Lee

Chiang Rai

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

Writer mistaken about World Court's Srebrenica ruling

Re: "Court's muddled ruling does little for survivors of Srebrenica massacre", Opinion, February 28.

In his commentary on the International Court of Justice's February 26 judgement in Bosnia and Herzegovina versus Serbia and Montenegro, Antonio Cassese repeated a falsehood that had already entered into the myth surrounding the break-up of Yugoslavia within the first hour after the judgement was published: namely, that the "court ruled that genocide had taken place". This is false - and it is critical to understand the exact sense in which this former president of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia got the World Court's judgement wrong.

Not once in any of the nine items about which the World Court itself made a determination did it find that "genocide" was committed against the male population of the Srebrenica "safe area" following its evacuation in July 1995. Instead, the World Court imported from the tribunal's rulings in previous cases an already-existing determination to this effect.

An accurate description of the World Court's judgement, therefore, would state that the World Court quoted or reiterated or mentioned the fact that Cassese's old court has on occasion ruled that genocide took place - and that as far as the World Court is concerned, on the basis of this evidence, this most critical of all questions is closed.

Of course, the two questions begged by all of this are whether the Yugoslavia tribunal serves not juridical but political ends, and whether, ultimately, it is a credible source upon which to base anything.

About these two questions the case is far from closed.

David Peterson

Chicago, Illinois