• 
• 

Published on October 16, 2007

Yawi is commonly spoken throughout the South, and its usage should be maintained to protect the people's unique cultural identity but as an optional language.

The Ministry of Education's goal of improving southern education is highly laudable, but the pilot bilingual project in the South, where 14 primary schools were asked to teach most of their lessons in Yawi, is short-sighted and should be dropped immediately. Assume the best-case hypothesis, and each school succeeds in developing its pupils to the fullest of their ability: what then? Develop secondary schools, universities, and grad schools for them and their successors, all taught mostly in Yawi? Where will we get the teachers and texts in Yawi for them? And, the academic journals and other reference materials for them to do university-level research with? When they graduate, not knowing Thai as well as their competitors in the national job market, they'll be doomed to be working not only in the South, but with firms that deal mainly in Yawi and this in an age of globalisation.

MOE's planners should have vision that extends beyond their nose, but this project doesn't show it.

Burin Kantabutra

Bangkok

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

Arrogance at the AEC is contempt of court

Re: "Pinthongta's silence infuriates AEC", News, October 10.

I read with mounting anger the report of the latest episode in the pathetic pantomime that is the investigation into the sale of Shin Corp, in which Pinthongta [Shinawatra] sweeps in to the meeting grinning like a Cheshire cat, says nothing of value, and then sweeps out again.

Then, to add a further obscene Alice in Wonderland twist, her lawyer, who is deputy leader of the People's Power Party, threatens to sue the AEC if it files criminal charges against her on Monday and announces that she now feels she should no longer lend her cooperation to the ASC.

However, the reasons for not giving evidence are interesting: she would not give any statement deemed detrimental to her parents, as it would be ungrateful of her as a daughter to do so. I wonder what that tells us about what she knows?

It is time that those in authority sent a clear message that the Shinawatras are not above the law. If she is in contempt, then send her to jail. To do nothing simply shows ordinary law-abiding Thais that money and position will always protect you in Thailand and the coup was a waste of everybody's time.

Andrew Hamilton

Bangkok

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

Stronger persuasion needed with China

On October 10 the UN Security Council decided to omit a paragraph from its statement on Burma. The paragraph that was omitted demanded a full account of those jailed, missing or killed by the military junta. Is that an unreasonable request? Can you imagine, your son has been missing since the day the protests began? You do not know if he is alive or dead. You do not know where he is. The government will tell you nothing. You lay in bed at night wondering if he has been cremated by the soldiers. Should we accept that? The UN also watered down its Security Council statement to say "strongly deplored" instead of "condemning" the junta's brutal action against peaceful protestors. Why was it watered down? China is why. If you don't turn it into powdered milk, they will veto it. Let's veto them. Let's boycott the 2008 Olympics.

William Babcock

North Carolina

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

Diplomacy the most effective way to change

It seems the recently proposed solution of pressurising the Chinese government through a boycott of the Beijing Olympics is a sign of desperation rather than critical thinking.

China is a world economic and military power, with a permanent seat on the UN Security Council. Do these people really believe that it is going to change its foreign policy in response to a threatened boycott of its Olympics by a few nations or groups of individuals? Would the USA similarly comply if the games were being staged in Los Angeles and China threatened to withdraw its athletes unless the USA stopped supporting Taiwan?

If you are genuinely interested in influencing China, then quiet diplomacy is far more effective than overt threats.

Conversely, supporters of Burma should fully support the games, not try to prevent or disrupt them, so that they can be used as a legitimate forum for political expression. The glare of the world's media would ensure any banner-waving spectator or street protesters had the instant attention of billions of people. Judging by the clampdown on the Internet by the Burmese junta, that would be a much more effective way of providing support to the Burmese people. Of course it would not topple the brutal military regime but at least at the end of the games we would have generated new world-wide interest in the plight of the Burmese people, a Chinese government still open to persuasion and an Olympic movement relatively untainted by government interference.

Peter Moseley

Bangkok

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

History shows a record of Burmese intransigence

Re: "Burma junta stages pro-government rally in Rangoon", News, October 13.

After reading the said headline, one couldn't help thinking that the Burmese junta is hopelessly trapped in its own make-believe role of self-appointed saviour of the nation.

It might have started with the intention of keeping the country from falling apart due to restless non-Burman ethnic groups, which make up more than 40 per cent of the population and occupy some 60 per cent of the landmass known as Burma.

The political reality has changed with time and now the non-Burman ethnic groups are not demanding total independence anymore, but are instead driving for a genuine federalism, where equality, human rights and democracy prevail. They also have a common cause with the Burman democratic opposition camp, notably with Aung San Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy (NLD), which won the 1990 election by a landslide.

The junta has rejected the UN's call for dialogue among the military, NLD and non-Burman ethnic groups. Instead, it is stubbornly pushing its own version of so-called "disciplined democracy", without the consent of the people.

The heart of the problem is the junta's wish to protect its interest and cling on to power at all cost. The merciless crushing of mass uprisings in 1962, 1974, 1988 and this month were aimed at nothing less than enslaving the populace and denying any meaningful democratisation process. As such, the junta is capable of doing anything that will ensure its hold on power.

What the world needs to know is that the military's mindset has no room for compromise. It sees everything as a win-lose, zero sum outcome.

Given these circumstances, and if it sincerely wants to save the people of Burma from their ongoing agony and misery, a coalition of the willing should embark on a new game-plan, other than the junta's dictated one.

SMW

Washington

Send us your views in an instant

E-mail your opinion, with 'Letters to

the Editor' in the subject box, to: letters@nationgroup.com

The Nation