LOCAL
Honeymoon cut short
Like his US counterpart, the Thai head of
state is having a rocky start to his second term
Deputy Agriculture
Minister Newin Chidchob, left, and Transport Minister Suriya
Juengrungruangkij listen to an opposition MP's debate on the
row over the purchase of baggage scanners for Suvarnabhumi Airport. — Pattarachai Preechapanich |
Prime Minister
Thaksin Shinawatra and President George W Bush certainly have one thing in common.
They are both finding that their second term in office has a very
short honeymoon period indeed.
In the United
States, Mr Bush’s approval ratings among the American people have
been dropping significantly. Iraq is still a mess despite the recent election.
Mr Bush’s plans for reforming the government-supported retirement
programme (social security) have proven very unpopular and leading
members of his Republican Party have not won him any friends by
their questionable political activities.
The US economy is also struggling with the high cost of energy.
Here in Thailand,
Mr Thaksin has an Iraq-like predicament of his own with the continuing
unrest in the deep South. The situation is bad enough that few students
who won places in universities in the area appear willing to risk
accepting them.
The prime minister,
too, is facing criticism for one of his key initiatives, the attempt to negotiate a
free-trade agreement with Japan. Local industrialists are complaining
that the proposed agreement puts local automakers and steel producers
at a severe disadvantage against their Japanese competitors.
The issue that
is giving Mr Thaksin the most grief,
however, is a familiar one in Thailand politics – allegations that
government politicians and high officials have been involved in
corruption. This is particularly awkward
for the prime minister since he only recently announced the launch
of his so-called “war” on corruption.
There have been
several accusations of corruption in recent weeks, but the most
troubling concerns a contract with a US company for supplying bomb
detectors for the new Suvarnabhumi Airport. Late last month, the
local media got wind of the fact that the supplier, InVision Technologies,
had paid a fine to
the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) for violations of the law involving foreign corrupt practices.
The
judgment against the company stated that Invision had concluded
the deal despite being aware that there was “a high probability
that its foreign sales agents, or distributors, made or offered
to make improper payments to foreign government officials.”
In everyday language,
such improper payments are known as bribes
and suddenly everyone here wanted to know who was involved. Suspicions
quickly centred on Patriot Business Consultants Co Ltd, the local
distributor that brokered the deal for the airport’s main contractor.
It was suggested that the price of the bomb detectors was inflated to be able to finance the payments
to key Thai officials in order to ensure the contract would go through,
a charge the company president vigorously
denies.
Interestingly,
Mr Thaksin has focused most of his wrath
on Invision, now called GE Invision after its acquisition by the
giant multinational. He has demanded that the company provide a
clear explanation of the bribery charges or the deal might be terminated.
What is a more
than a little confusing to outsiders like myself, however, is why,
if bribery was indeed involved, the deal has been allowed to remain
in force so long. News that Invision was being invested first surfaced
last September and the first fines against the company were announced
in December. Try a Google search on “Invision SEC” and you will
find a great deal of detailed information on the case that came
out long before it became known to the public in Thailand.
Watch to see
what happens this week. And, if the deal is finally terminated,
watch to see if this results in significant delays to the airport’s
opening. Watch also for the lawsuits that would inevitably
follow
|
counterpart
a person
who has the same position in another placed or organisation
have in common
(of two people, animals,
things, etc.) to have one or more clear similarities, i.e.,
qualities, experiences, etc.
honeymoon period
a period of time with little
or no criticism
mess
a situation that is full of problems
|
questionable
likely be wrong in some way
predicament
an unpleasant situation that is difficult to get out of
initiative
a new action intended to solve a problem
grief
trouble; criticism
awkward
difficult to begin with
launch
start
|
got wind of
heard a piece of information,
especially information what was supposed to be secret
fine
a payment of money as a punishment
bribe
money improperly paid in
order to get someone to do something for you
brokered
arrange
|
inflated
made higher (more expensive) than it should be
vigorously
strongly
wrath
anger
terminated
ended
inevitably
that which is certain to happe
|
INTERNATIONAL
Embattled nominee
President Bush’s choice for UN ambassador
has run into trouble
Outgoing US Undersecretary of State for Arms Control John Bolton. Bolton is seen as a controversial
choice for the position of US Ambassador
to the United Nations. — AFP |
This Thursday,
the US Senate Foreign Relations committee is scheduled to hold a
meeting to decide whether to recommend that one of President George
Bush’s proposed appointees
be voted on by the full Senate. Normally, this would not be a big
news item, even in the US itself, but this is no ordinary nominee and the position itself
has international implications Thus, you will likely see one
or more stories on the results of the meeting right here in the
Bangkok Post.
The interest
stems from President Bush’s decision to nominate John Bolton, his
outgoing undersecretary of state for arms control, for the position
of US Ambassador to the United Nations. To put it mildly, the nomination
is a controversial one. Mr Bolton has long been one of the UN harshest
critics and he has sometimes sounded as if he would like to see
the organisation abolished.
That, say his
many supporters in President Bush’s Republican Party, is exactly
the kind of man that is needed. The UN, they say, is both inefficient
and corrupt, and it badly needs reform. Supporters of the UN around
the world, however, were dismayed
by the appointment, seeing it as one more piece of evidence that
the US is trying to diminish
the role of the UN in world affairs.
Since the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee is controlled by Republicans by a margin
of 10-8, few expected that Mr Bolton’s nomination would face serious
trouble. It has become very clear, however, that Mr Bolton has made
a lot of enemies in his time in Washington and his abrasive behaviour towards those who disagree
with him have raised serious questions about his fitness for the
job.
He has also upset
some of his superiors in the State Department by his tendency
to make his own foreign policy. Former Secretary of State has strongly
hinted
that he should not get the job.
As a result his
nomination has been held up for a month to allow the committee to
investigate the charges against him. This period ends on Thursday,
however, and Mr Bolton’s fate could be decided this week. Watch
to see what happens.
|
embattled
having a lot of problems or difficulties
nominee
a person who has been proposed for a job
appointee
someone who has been chosen official for a job (in the case,
the appointed must also be confirmed by the US Senate)
|
implications
results; effects
abolished
ended
dismayed
very unhappy or disappointed
diminish
to cause to be reduced
|
abrasive
rude and unfriendly
superiors
people who have hold higher positions or ranks
tendency
the likelihood to behave in a particular way
hinted
said in an indirect way
|
| 
