It is nice to read and learn about some words of comfort as "David" Thailand squares off with "Goliath" the United States on the HIV drug deal, especially when those words came from a former United States president, Bill Clinton.

 He has sided with Thailand (and Brazil) on the controversial compulsory licensing of the anti HIV/Aids drugs Efavirenz and Kaletra and the heart-disease drug Plavix.  Since leaving the presidency Clinton has championed the cause of the anti-HIV movement and become a darling for the poor around the world, who have to depend on the expensive drugs to prolong their lives.

But Clinton's words can be taken only with a grain of salt.  After all, he is no longer president of the United States, and therefore has no power whatsoever to make those words stick. 

One also remembers that at one time he could help a lot but would not.  I refer to the one page in his book "My Life" when he expresses his regret that he, along with his treasury secretary James Rubin, refused to bail out Thailand when the Asian economic meltdown was sweeping this part of the world, and when Thailand hit rock bottom.

We also do not forget the fact that America has already entered into its election year earlier than expected.  Already there are about a dozen candidates or more vying for leadership of the Democratic and Republican Parties.  It is a well-known fact that the American pharmaceutical industries generally support the Republican Party, and it would not help his party if Clinton were to be seen supporting them.

Personally for me, if those words of comfort had come from his wife, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, who is now the Democrats' front-runner with 36 per cent support, I think they would be more credible and carry much more weight than they do coming from Bill.  It remains to be seen whether, if Hillary should win the Democratic nomination, she would listen to her husband's words and add a provision to her party's platform.  Even a small footnote in this regard, in my opinion, would suffice.

Prachyadavi Tavedikul

Bangkok

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

Media not helping public understand charter debate

Re: "Charter drafters beholden to public", Editorial, May 10.

I wonder how many Thais really understand the ins and outs or the problems with our proposed new constitution. I know I don't.  The news media concentrate on the problem they want to emphasise and I get the feeling that the reporting is therefore biased in that direction. 

I suggest that all news media outlets contain a regular section on the constitution, on the same day, so that any Thais reading the different newspapers will get the same info. These points should also be broadcast by all television stations during the evening news, with a short unbiased discussion listing the pros and cons of each proposed point. 

All newspapers and television stations should take part in this so that nobody can be misled by the newspaper they read or the television station they tune in to. They could then issue questionnaires to test the public's understanding of the constitution points being discussed, which could also serve as feedback for those in power.

If the news media could put such a plan into action, with the government's assistance if needed, I am sure that in a short time we would be capable of voting more intelligently and not just on hearsay. You will get the meaningful feedback that you need.

Am I being naive? 

Can the Thai news media get together? Don't disappoint us.

Concerned but mixed up

Bangkok

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

London anti-coup protesters genuinely concerned, not paid

An article in The Nation on May 8 stated that protesters on May 4 were mainly non-Thai illegal immigrants and the organisers paid these people to join the protest ("UK protesters paid to rally"). Furthermore, the article implied that the money probably came from the illegally-ousted former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra. We would like to clarify the following facts:

1) No money was paid to any of the protesters; all protesters were Thai except a few British sympathisers. The majority were students, not 'uneducated women who married farangs', as claimed by General Sonthi Boonyaratglin. And if they were uneducated people, aren't they to be counted?

2) Furthermore, none of the organisers have ever met or accepted money from former prime minister Thaksin.

3) The protesters are a sincere group of people who cannot and will not stand by and watch this bunch of military men destroy democratic institutions. Thais in the UK ask the junta to remember the daily oath they recited when they were cadets to protect His Majesty the King and our country. With their misguided thoughts they are destroying our country's development before our eyes.

Watana Ebbage

Leader, Kon Thai Group in UK

London

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

Global warming deniers put future generations at risk

Re: "Alternative-energy interests push global warming agenda", Letters, May 10.

Several correspondents have expressed views that climate change assertions are not scientifically based but are really about making money.

A recent flight by British royalty from London to Washington and back excreted 1.5 tonnes of carbon - yes, just one flight.

Imagine how much carbon goes up into the atmosphere every day? Just what do these readers imagine the recent climate conference in Bangkok was about then?

If climate change is just a rip-off - and it is not - why has US President George W Bush stood so firmly against the Kyoto Accord on climate change while corporate America increasingly urges its government to take stern action to prevent disaster? After all, the Americans are so often accused of making money wherever and whenever the opportunity arises, be it in Iraq or with the World Bank.

Yes, mitigation of the effects of climate change will be costly and painful and every one of us in every country has a part to play - but being in denial in the end may prove to be a criminal act and commit our successors to a life not worth living.

Irrespective of what new technologies bring, we shall need to change, travel less, work close to our homes, and turn off the lights when they are not essential. Then, just perhaps, there will be a future for those who come after us.

David Harrison

Bangkok

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

Rohingya refugees need Thailand's diplomatic support

Thank you for all Thailand is doing to help refugees from Burma. Please help to lobby to ensure that no Rohingyas are forcibly returned.

A Ramsay

UK

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

Burmese junta understands force, not negotiation tactics

Re: "Road links untapped region", Business World, May 9.

This article highlights the problem posed by Burma. To make the dream come true, much depends on the Burmese State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) because more than 1,000 kilometres of the 1,700 kilometre Stillwell Road connecting India and China lies in Burma. But unfortunately, experience over the last 19 years has shown that the SPDC is unlikely to deliver, blocking the development of India as well as China.

While both India and China are developing very rapidly, the development is not balanced. Both India's Northeast and China's Southwest regions are both underdeveloped. If this imbalance continues, these regions could destabilise both India and China. The key lies in providing access to China and Southeast Asia for India's Northeast and access to the Indian sub-continent and the Indian Ocean for China's Southwest.

Although India is trying very hard to please the Burmese generals in order to get them to cooperate, it is not likely to happen any time soon. India needs to learn from the Chinese experience. In 1990, China sold arms and poured in millions of dollars in aid money to upgrade Burma's highways, railways and waterways so that the Indian Ocean was accessible. The SPDC took the money, however despite this, no highways, railways, waterways, or access to the Indian Ocean have yet to materialise. India's campaign to woo the Burmese generals, by selling them arms and cooperating in military operations will likely yield similar results.

The generals do not understand friendship except as a target for exploitation. They understand force and power.  China began getting more favours from the SPDC, such as the sale of cheap gas, when the Chinese government started pushing the SPDC last year for reforms. The Chinese, despite their veto on a motion to place restrictions on Burma at the UN Security Council, are still continuing to call for the SPDC to reconcile with its people and move towards an "inclusive democracy". This will give China better results than India's campaign.

It is time both India and China, as well as Burma's other neighbours, realise that their competition for the SPDC's favours will have an adverse impact on their national interests. Their hands of friendship will only be exploited, and the SPDC will favour those they fear. Instead of competing for the SPDC's favours, India and China need to cooperate in order to achieve a common goal - access to new markets. A consensus by Burma's neighbours will enable both Asean and the United Nations to better persuade the Burmese generals that they need to open up the country and provide for the needs of the people of Burma, as well as the needs of its neighbours. Such cooperative efforts would benefit everybody. Without a consensus and cooperation, the SPDC will continue to exploit differences and play one country off against another.

Harn Yawnghwe

Brussels