• 
• 

Published on December 23, 2007

He also pointed out that since then the price of fuel has been increased twice and significant inflation has driven up the prices of basic food items and commodities. He also concluded that recent demonstrations were for the most part the expression of deep and widespread discontent about socio-economic conditions in the country.

But the military regime ignores its own peoples' hardships. Every year, the regime spends US$1.10 (Bt37) per citizen on education and $0.40 on healthcare, compared to $400 for each soldier. On the other hand, it spends generously on grandiose programmes for itself. It bought MiG-29 fighters, military hardware and even a nuclear reactor, all costing billions of dollars. It also built a new administrative capital costing billions. In March 2006, salaries of civil servants, especially army personnel, were increased up to 10 times, in a bid to increase loyalty.

According to figures issued by the regime's Central Statistics Organisation, in 2006, out of total foreign trade worth $8 billion, Thailand led with $2.7 billion, followed by China with $1.5 billion. The regime's main exports were gas sales to Thailand, timber to India and China, followed by gems and garments. In terms of projected investment - $14 billion up until the end of 2006, mostly in the energy sector - Thailand led with $7.5 billion, including $6 billion for the Salween dam, followed by Singapore, the UK and Malaysia with $1.6 billion, $1.5 billion and $700 million respectively. In both trade and investment, Thailand is the main financier of the military regime in Burma.

Even after the brutal crackdown on peaceful demonstrations, India, China, Malaysia and Thailand made agreements or announcements to invest more in Burma.

The people of Burma have suffered much due to these investments. They provide income to the regime to buy arms to kill its own people. The regime usually makes the areas for concessions and projects safe from the armed rebels through military offensives in which they target not only rebels but also civilians, accompanied by severe abuses including forced labour, relocation, land confiscation, rapes, torture and execution. The military usually orders people to move away from designated areas without providing any assistance. This creates a massive influx of refugees and migrants to Thailand, while many seek refuge in the jungles.

The heartfelt request from the Burmese people is that there be no more trade and investment in contract farming, timber, gas, gems, mines and dams - which all contribute to further suffering. It is time for the international community and Thailand to stop funding the military regime.

Sann Aung

Member of Parliament, Burma

Bangkok

Young ears permanently harmed by noise pollution

Re: "Improving life in Bangkok can start with help from BTS", Letters, December 22.

Oraya's letter was timely in warning of the effects of noise pollution on our lives, but it didn't go far enough. It is a great irony that the government takes great steps to protect our lungs by banning smoking in public places. By issuing masks, it takes strenuous steps to ensure those working on our streets protect their mouths and noses and we all spend a great deal of money protecting our eyes and even more protecting our skins.

However, protecting the most delicate of our sensory organs, the ears, is forgotten or ignored completely by both government and individuals alike. These very complex systems of diaphragms, nerve-endings, fluid-filled tubes and cavities are far more susceptible to damage than almost any of our other organs. But because we can't see the inner workings and the damage done, because the deterioration is gradual, we abuse them daily. The state even seems to promote that abuse by holding rallies that wouldn't be considered a success unless huge banks of speakers were placed within a few metres of the audience.

Study after study has shown that high levels of noise permanently damages the developing ears of children. Most children raised in high-noise level environments are, in fact, slightly deaf by the time they reach adulthood. And by "high noise levels" these studies do not mean a Boeing 747 hurtling over your rooftop every few minutes. That is about 135 decibels. A safe level is somewhere between 50 and 65 decibels. The maximum allowed in countries, which take this seriously, is 85 decibels intermittently. Any shopping mall in Bangkok with music, and girls promoting their wares through banks of loudspeakers, is excessively above that level. Other research shows that constant, but unwanted noise at levels as low as 60 decibels is stressful. If only mall managers would realise they are actually driving people away by their excessive deployment of noise!

The medical profession remains curiously silent. The damage is already done for the present young generation. When I lectured at one of the premier music faculties in a Bangkok university, I noticed how poor the hearing was amongst my students. Their habits of using headphones, going to shopping malls and discos, using the BTS Skytrain, and just the general noise level of their daily lives in Bangkok, had seriously impeded their ability to hear. It is already too late for them, but perhaps something can be done for the next generation.

Robert Walker

Bangkok

Two sides to every side of human-rights struggles

Human-rights issues throughout the world are incessantly breaking out and will, like war, be always with us. The desire for power and to maintain it ensures that both individual and collective human rights will always be at risk.

The Nation has, in recent editorials and the letters column, highlighted rights abuses in some countries such as Burma and Sudan, in the Middle East and, of course, right here in the Kingdom as regards the insurgency in the South. While some nations are worse than others as far as rights abuses is concerned, no nation in this imperfect world will ever be abuse free. When I read that a former president of a country and a member of the present opposition party in that country openly criticised the current policy of the administration and its president, I "see" democracy in action. When I read a certain country is "the last executioner of children"; that the horrors of Middle Eastern prisons like Egypt, Syria, or Uzbekistan are worse than US prisons in Iraq and Cuba while failing to mention that those prisons are where the CIA transfers kidnapped terrorist suspects, or that the president of Iran stated he wanted to "wipe Israel off the map" - when there is easily verifiable proof to the contrary - I see exaggeration, caricaturing and misrepresenting of statements without regard for fact.

These statements were made by someone who does not speak Persian, has not set foot in Iran; thinks Iran has the same geography as Iraq, and of course maintains that the county is not only a threat to Israel and the Middle East but ultimately to the people of the United States. These are hardly qualifications to "bob and weave" with the likes of Muhammad Atif Ali.

Mr Bill

Bangkok