• 
• 

Published on July 28, 2007

Out of the nine trouble-makers, only Jaran is seeking to bail himself out of jail, citing a ridiculous argument that he has to continue performing his duties as a member of the National Human Rights Commission!

Why did he not have this sense of duty before taking a microphone to instigate a rampage that led to his arrest?

Now that it has just been announced that the court has granted him bail, I hereby call on the chairman of the National Human Rights Commission to dismiss him.

Chamnong Watanagase

Bangkok

Stifling bureaucracy set Jakrapob on wrong path

I was saddened to my soul when I learned of the events on Sunday, and of the subsequent admission by core members of the so-called Democratic Alliance Against Dictatorship to investigating authorities on their role in the mayhem that tarnished Thailand's image in the eyes of the world.

I do not care about the eight others who have been implicated because I do not know them. But one who deviated from the righteous path on which he should have been gives me a sick feeling. Jakrapob Penkair was one of the officials I recruited during my time at the Foreign Ministry. Though he did not work directly under me, I knew then and there that he had the potential for a great future and career at the ministry.

At the time when I was deputy permanent secretary, he was a junior official who was climbing the ladder. Jakrapob's flair in public relations was noticeable even then. He was still wearing thick glasses but he was impeccably dressed - just like someone who has to be in front of a television camera all the time. He emceed many events for the ministry - and with great success.

I remember supporting him, though he might not know it, in the competition for a scholarship that enabled him to study at Johns Hopkins University for a master's degree in international relations. Jakrapob was more than a good student. Not only did he get the degree, he was already well on his way towards a PhD at Johns Hopkins. It would be a waste not to give him the opportunity to finish what he started, which would have been good for the ministry where he worked in the long run. I even vouched for his assignment to our embassy in Washington. The decision was initially positive.

What happened afterwards was something beyond my control. I was abruptly sent to the Netherlands after the Banharn government took over. Jakrapob did not go to Washington; he was shifted to Brussels instead. I did not know if this was what caused him to resign from the ministry. After that I heard a lot about him speaking about his opposition against the "feudal (sakdina) system" in general, but even then, not so much against the Foreign Ministry in particular.

But what surprises me the most is that after he left the Foreign Ministry he was not on good terms with the ruling regime of the time. When he was a guest speaker at a Rotary Club event while my wife was president there in 2003, Jakrapob spoke about the dim prospects of Thaksin Shinawatra becoming a regional leader, let alone a world leader. All that changed after he became government spokesman following the Apec meeting the following year.

And when he changed, he changed completely. I find it hard to believe that he is now on the opposite side of the fence all the way.

There are many people like Jakrapob in the overall Thai bureaucracy, and if only that bureaucracy was more kind towards him, recognised his talents, rewarded and admired him for what he could do, Jakrapob would have been a lot more useful to our society than he has been now to Thaksin Shinawatra.

Prachyadavi Tavedikul

Bangkok

Love of nation best shown in one's private actions

Your editorial, "Surayud should have known better", on July 26 made my day. I urge all readers of The Nation who have not yet read it, particularly those who live outside the country and know nothing of what is truly going on, to go back and do so.

Last June, we were a nation of very proud people, celebrating the 60th anniversary of His Majesty the King, with the greatest of love, respect and joy. How quickly all that has faded and the country is returned to self-serving egotists.

How thankful I am that you specifically mentioned the October 6 tragedy. Three decades is a long time for people's memories and October 6 is often confused with October 14 three years before.

The best that people and international media seem to be able to do is confuse all three including "black May", which, to my mind, ended in the best interests of the people and the country.

I would like to suggest that those who claim patriotism born out of reverence for the monarchy, as your editorial has put it so well, would do best to stay at home and keep away from the riff-raff of politics. "High-born ladies" should remain at home, as "Housewives Against Socialist Activists" and other similar groups should have done prior to the October 6 incident.

One who remembers

Bangkok

UN correct to dismiss Taiwan membership bid

Re: "Taiwan short-changed by exclusion from UN", Letters, July 24, and "United Nations ignores Taiwan's achievements as a state in its own right", Letters, July 26.

Not long ago, Chen Shui-bian submitted to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon an application letter for UN membership under the name of Taiwan. Obviously, this is an outright wrong action. Now the whole world has learned that the letter was immediately rejected by the UN Secretariat.

It is common knowledge that Article 4 of the UN Charter, Article 58 of the Provisional Rules of Procedure of the Security Council and Article 134 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Assembly clearly stipulate that only sovereign states are eligible to apply for UN membership.

The Government of the People's Republic of China is the sole legitimate government representing China as well as the sole legitimate representative of China to the UN. This position is widely upheld by the international community and confirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758. Taiwan, as an inalienable part of the Chinese territory, is naturally not entitled to join the UN, which is comprised of sovereign states, under any name or in any way. The return of the letter by the UN Secretariat guarantees the solemnity of the UN Charter as well as the authority of the UN.

As a matter of fact, as local elections in Taiwan are soon to start, Chen Shui-bian has intensified his dangerous push for "Taiwan independence" in pursuit of the selfish gains for himself and the Democratic Progressive Party. These reckless movements have met strong opposition from all peace-loving people including Taiwan compatriots and the international community.

The US State Department issued a statement that the US, committed to the one-China policy, does not support Taiwan's bid for membership to any international organisation that accepts only sovereign states as members, including the UN.

Besides, countries and regional organisations including Russia, Japan, Egypt, Singapore and the European Union, have issued statements against Taiwan's bid for UN membership.

Any attempt by Chen Shui-bian to separate China and push for "Taiwan independence" by joining the UN under the name of Taiwan or holding a referendum on UN membership under the name of Taiwan is doomed to failure.

Tiger Ho

Bangkok

Correction: In the Opinion article "Asean at 40: What could have been?", published on July 23, Cambodia was mentioned as having joined Asean in 2000. Cambodia joined Asean in 1999. The Nation apologises for this error.