• 
• 

Published on July 12, 2007

The big commonality in their dire fates is Chinese policy. Just as many Chinese see every wild animal as potentially being a part in their panties or medicine cabinets, so too do Chinese officials see every large river as a commercial tool to be exploited.

Some of us view large rivers in awe as sources for sustenance, wildlife and for nurturing a plethora of flora and fauna. Not so for many Chinese and their Burmese and Laotian vassals. For them, a river is a large volume of gravity-driven water that should be harnessed for commercial gain. Indeed, if people upriver benefit to the detriment of those downriver, and watershed dwelling villagers must be forcefully relocated - then so be it. Progress must march on.

In North America there are provisions that allow citizens to organise, gather petitions and lobby their governments to set aside special natural places for protection. In Burma, Laos and China, such citizens' action would be laughed at - if not callously nipped in the bud.

Thailand's Egat and the private MDX Group are poised to provide significant funding for the upcoming dams. They should seriously consider the ramifications of being a party to ethnic cleansing and environmental destruction that are integral to dam building. Have they considered alternative options to generating electricity - or are their heads snugly buried in the sand of old thinking?

Ken Albertsen

CHIANG RAI

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

Road-rage killer should not have been given bail

Re: "Murder accused gets bail", News, July 10. It is very wrong that police granted bail for the young man who used his Mercedes as a murder weapon. He should have been sent to jail right off the bat, and sent to a psychiatrist to evaluate him for mental illness.

He wrote a very nice letter of apology to the person he killed, which was delivered by his mother to the relatives of the deceased. How a mentally ill person could write so well is beyond me.

Surasak Piputtana

BANGKOK

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

Decision on poll run a test of character for Sonthi

Re: "Head straight at the crossroads and don't turn", Opinion, July 11.

On the world stage, Thailand's last coup was illegitimate. As Tulsathit Taptim relates, Thaksin violated the 1997 constitution with unreported overseas money.

It has always been the contention of this observer that democracy moves creakily and with halting steps. But, in time, justice is served. Had he stayed in power with honest and democratic institutions in place, Thaksin would have tripped over his own egocentric greed. The country would have been spared a coup and General Sonthi Boonyaratglin would have stayed in the barracks.

Now, concern is raised over Sonthi's motivations. Was the coup for democratic restoration? Does Sonthi have the welfare of the country in his heart? If you are of the philosophical bent that man is basically good, you need not worry. He will do the right thing. If you believe man is basically bad, you know Sonthi will be the next prime minister of Thailand.

Tom Fin

BANGKOK

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

CNS chief should take a five-year break

Council for National Security (CNS) Chairman General Sonthi Boonyaratglin has coyly never ruled out the possibility of running for Parliament, so speculation is rife that he'll run. I suggest that he should not.

Evidently, he seeks to prevent former prime minister Thaksin or his cronies from coming back to power and taking revenge on him. But if all that General Sonthi has done was just, transparent, and in keeping with the letter and spirit of the law, what does he have to fear?

He's allegedly using Internal Security Operations Command staff, and its General Panlop Pinmanee, to build up his political support base and break up Thai Rak Thai strongholds.

If so, why is he using public employees for personal gain - rather than internal security? One of Thaksin's alleged sins was that he could not differentiate between public assets and his own; is the general committing the same sin?

If he runs, General Sonthi will oversee domestic security for an election in which he himself will be a main candidate. Does he see no conflicts of interest in this situation? Will he clamp down on pro-Thaksin and pro-Sonthi protests with equal fervour?

He engineered our first coup d'etat in 15 years, against an elected government that served its full term and was re-elected by a landslide. If Sonthi the candidate loses, will Sonthi the general "save" us with another unrequested coup?

I have no problems with General Sonthi standing for office - but only after a hiatus of, say, five years, so we can be sure he won't use his tanks or men to decide for us.

Burin Kantabutra

BANGKOK

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

Energy-saving lamps carry health risks

I am a Thai engineer working in Germany. I catch daily news from Thailand via the Internet. Everybody talks about global warming and tries to convince people to save energy. One big project in this effort is to convince people to use energy-saving compact fluorescent lamps.

I think this is the wrong advice because many Thai people do not know how to dispose of these lamps. In European countries, disposing of this highly dangerous trash is a big issue. These lamps contain mercury, which is a very poisonous chemical even in small portions.

If this type of lamp is broken, it could result in mercury poisoning for everybody in the house. And if you decide to throw the broken lamp away with the regular garbage, you will end up poisoning underground water sources since most Thai garbage just ends up being buried somewhere.

Most people do not know this important issue about energy-saving lamps. It is an issue that concerns us all.

More generally, an important issue currently being ignored is how to collect and dispose of poisonous garbage such as batteries, energy-saving lamps, mobile phones and their batteries, etc. At the very least people should be warned not to touch a broken energy-saving lamp and to contact pollution control officials, as they are highly poisonous.

Rut

BANGKOK

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

US only power capable of keeping Iran in check

Re: "The myth behind the US's defence policy", Letters, July 11.

The notion that the US "tested" nuclear weapons on Japan in 1945 is far from the truth. One has to transpose oneself into a different era to understand the truths applicable at the time. In 1945 Japan was perceived as an enemy refusing to surrender at a deadly cost to its own people and the forces then fighting Japan seeking its surrender. Even the first bomb did not get the required result.

The nuclear stand-off during the Cold War was not, mercifully, between opposing sides with suicidal tendencies. Nuclear weaponry was inevitable from the research of the early 1900s but the push came from the fear of Germany developing and using atomic bombs.

Technology will always find evil uses just as the Internet and modern gadgetry have become tools for terrorists. A nation with nuclear technology has to be feared and where possible stopped. The UN is unable to act in any sensible timeframe thanks to its flawed structure. The US has stood in where other countries have declined to make a stand. By no means can the US claim to be the role model of the world. However, there are few countries around the world who allow their citizens to live in relative peace, dignity and whose people are able to appoint and remove governments without fear from extremists to the extent that the US does. Iran does not need nuclear weapons, and with its present regime there has to be action sooner, as later could be disastrous.

Tommy Bee

BANGKOk

Send us your views in an instant E-mail your opinion, with 'Letters to the Editor' in the subject box, to: letters@nationgroup.com