Involve southerners in solutions to the insurgency

The Democrats know far more about the South than I do. PM Abhisit should ask the southerners where it itches most, so to speak, and act in accordance with their wishes to solve the causes of their itches.

While economic development will be vital, it will be far from sufficient. A Narathiwat court just indicted our authorities for the death by torture of an imam in a military camp, and Amnesty International reported that "Thai security forces have systematically relied on torture". Even now, authorities are granted immunity in advance of their violations of human rights. Treating southerners like a conquered people and simply throwing money at them is likely to bring the same response that President Bush got from an Iraqi journalist: two hurled shoes.

PM Abhisit has declared that justice and the rule of law will be a keystone for his administration, especially in bringing reconciliation down south, and I fully agree. Our military and police must be scrupulously law-abiding, or be subject to court martial.

Let the Southerners guide us in bringing reconciliation, using justice and the rule of law.

BURIN KANTABUTRA

BANGKOK

Handouts will not save the economy

Re: "Rate Cut is Welcome to Stimulate Growth", Editorial, January 15.

While there may not be any quicker way to stimulate the economy than to give poor people the bulk of the Bt116 billion to spend, this strategy is totally ineffective. No way this will "stop and reverse the downturn of the economy", as you put it.

First of all, the recipients of this handout have always been poor, even before the economic downturn. With an additional Bt2,000 a month for less than six months, what will they buy that will have a marked, positive, sustainable impact on our economy? What will it reverse? Nothing will have changed. Nothing will have improved. We are just delaying the inevitable slide into a deeper recession.

We need to start creating jobs, now. If we pour money into any effort, it should be aimed at bolstering the foundation that will drive future Thai GDP. For example, I can think of at least a dozen specific infrastructure projects in Bangkok that can benefit the city and increase employment not only of construction workers but of all businesses that supply building materials. And how about reducing taxes on imports and business taxes, and creating bigger incentives for foreigners to invest in Thailand?

Our politicians have spent far too much time on trivial issues that do nothing to benefit people in Thailand. If they spend just 1 per cent of that time trying to come up with creative, big-impact projects to stimulate the economy, then Thailand can manage its way through the global recession.

OUTRAGED TAXPAYER

BANGKOK

Bush deserves credit for making tough decisions

Re: "What Exactly Is George W Bush's Legacy?" Editorial, January 14.

This is a shallow piece of analysis. Through omissions and exaggerations, it seeks to present as poor a picture of George Bush as possible.

Iraq is now a success story. Of course mistakes were made, yet it was Bush's rejection of political expediency and the advice of the Iraq Study Group that has led to the current success in Iraq. Bush took the risk of the surge. This has left Iraq today a relatively safe, free, non-aggressive regional power, free from the tyranny of Saddam Hussein. Bush deserves credit for ultimately getting it right.

Secondly, The Nation makes exaggerated claims about torture in the Bush administration. The crimes of Abu Ghraib were punished. The careless statement about a "widespread" use of torture fails to acknowledge that there were only three cases of "waterboarding".

The editorial implies that the war in Iraq is an unsustainable expense - and therefore a chief cause of the recession. Unfortunately, the facts don't add up. Military spending in the US is only 4.4 per cent of GDP, compared to nearly 9 per cent for entitlement programmes like Social Security.

The editorial fails to note the tremendously difficult choices Bush had to make. What was he to do about Iraq when there were no good options? If a catastrophic attack is believed imminent, does one sit back and let it happen? This lack of context makes it easy to blame Bush for things that went wrong. Again, where is the credit for preventing another attack on US soil?

If the Bush record on the war is so awful, why does Barack Obama see it necessary to keep Secretary of Defence Robert Gates on the job? Obama has already learned a lesson that The Nation apparently has not: ruling is tough and involves hard choices that may turn out to be unpopular; that doesn't mean those choices are wrong.

 I want to thank President Bush for his service to the US. Though I surely don't agree with everything he has done, his willingness to make difficult decisions is admirable. History will judge him more kindly than The Nation has.

JEFFREY S GEPNER

BANGKOK