Your Dec 3 report on the Aetas building is well put and you make the important point that this should be a warning for future developers. However, you fail to make another point which is whether or not this should lead to action against other offending buildings. I can think of several within a short distance of where I stay in Sukhumvit Soi 39 including one that is currently under construction. The sois around here are certainly less than 10m wide in places and there are several huge condos and apartment buildings. There is a very valid reason for the 10m rule. Small streets cannot cater for the large volumes of traffic created by these big residences. As an urban planner it annoys me to see the apparent disregard for the normal rules of development control.
Richard Mabbitt
Clearing muddy waters
Khun Kraisak Choonhavan raised some important points in his two Nov 26 and 27 articles pertaining to the Xayaburi dam, the first impoundment constructed across the Lower Mekong River. I wish to make a few observations which would hopefully put things in context.
While he noted that the contentious issue of Mekong mainstream hydropower projects was not mentioned in the recent Asean Summit, in fact the Asean leaders already made an indirect reference to it in their meeting over a year ago. In the chairman’s statement issued at the conclusion of that summit, it included the following: “We recognise the importance of preserving, managing and sustaining use of water resources, and call on Asean member states to continue effectively implementing the Asean Strategic Action Plan on Water Resources Management, including assessing impacts that economic development has on the environment and people’s livelihoods in major river basins including the Lower Mekong Basin.”
The Asean leaders have stated their intentions quite clearly, albeit in broad terms. The key challenge now is how to interpret this and apply it in practice and what is needed is further follow-up actions. Even under the Asean-China Plan of Action for cooperative activities to be undertaken during 2011-2015, there are similar references to sustainable development matters pertaining to the Mekong or Lancang, the latter being the Chinese name for the same river.
Again, the missing element is follow-up actions to implementing the stated intentions expressed by the leaders of both Asean and China.
As far as possible, channels to raise such complex issues for further discussion, besides the various bilateral avenues, there are several mechanisms at the inter-governmental level which could come into play at least up to the end of this year.
The Mekong River Commission (MRC) has been mentioned by Khun Kraisak but he is probably looking at it from a half-empty glass perspective.
While that might be true, one could also work from a glass half-full position since the MRC is an already existing institution but requires further beefing up to make it more effective.
Thailand will be hosting the 5th Greater Mekong Sub-region (GMS) Summit in mid-December.
Although the six-member GMS countries (that includes China) and the Asian Development Bank, which serves as the secretariat of the two-decade old GMS economic cooperation programme, have avoided dealing with mainstream Mekong water-related issues, things could change if there is a push for it.
Another potential opportunity is the Mekong-Japan cooperation forum comprising five of the six GMS countries plus Japan where a 3rd Green Mekong Forum to be hosted also by Thailand will be held towards the end of this year.
One of the proposed activities under its action plan is “Japan and Mekong region countries will cooperate for a study on sustainable management and development of the Mekong river, including on the impact of mainstream hydropower projects”.
Several key points have emerged which would require more deliberation among the concerned stakeholders. As Khun Kraisak mentioned in his article, besides the Xayaburi dam which is practically a Thai investment, another impoundment called the Don Sahong dam is slated for construction in another section of the Lower Mekong River and in this case by Malaysian investors.
As Asean and the GMS integrates and becomes more closely-knit in the years ahead, such cross-border investments among Asean countries will only likely increase. There are always pros and cons to any developmental activity and the challenge is to find an acceptable balance or trade-off in such situations.
From a policy point of view though, it is important to know who wins and who loses, where and when across the Asean or GMS landscape as we engage in cooperative activities of any kind and most significantly how to redress the concerns of the losers.
This then leads to the critical need to have platforms where constructive cross-sectoral dialogue conducted in an inclusive and participatory manner can take place on matters such as Mekong hydropower generation where economic interests intersect environmental/social considerations and are coupled with geopolitical/strategic ramifications.
Dams can serve a useful purpose if planned, constructed and implemented properly taking due cognisance of the potential benefits and opportunities as well as the possible downside risks and therefore the need to have adequate safeguards. One essential aspect of any such kind of decision-making process is to be open to consideration of alternative solutions and the other points of view besides one’s own.
That is reconciliation in the true sense of the word and the statement by the Asean leaders at last year’s summit pertaining to the issue does provide an opportunity to do this, if appropriately pursued.
Apichai Sunchindah
Don't judge me
Somsak Pola (Postbag, Dec 5) assumes that I’d be angry at Mr Holt’s letter which claimed Michael Brown, the young black man killed by a white policeman, got what he deserved.
But seven African-Americans gave testimony before a grand jury which backed up the testimony of the policeman who said he acted in self-defence.
This reminds me of the Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman case last year when Zimmerman, a white man, was accused of murdering Martin an “innocent” black teenager. Yet the prosecution’s own witness said he saw Martin bashing Zimmerman’s head into the street pavement shortly before Zimmerman killed him.
But the America-bashers who are only interested in spitting on America and calling it an evil racist country, are not going to let anything like the facts or the evidence get in the way of their judgements.
Eric Bahrt
Let's look at the facts
Re: “Light on the facts”, Guy Baker, and “Brown saw no justice”, Colin Carr. Both of these gentlemen, as well as the gentleman who stoked their responses are all claiming a different set of facts. The reason for this is because the newspapers are reporting different sets of facts, depending on whom they choose to believe.
The fact is that no one truly knows exactly what happened. The only thing we know is that the cop involved faced a grand jury and they found him innocent.
Why some people have chosen to believe a stepfather who was not there, who has been convicted of a drug charge and who was yelling "burn the b***h down" over a cop that has a good record is a mystery to me.
People talk about all of the incidences between black men and policemen and claim racial profiling, yet no one considers that there may be so many incidences because blacks have a tendency to bait the cops.
I don’t know this for a fact, but I have a tendency to believe it because I lived in Los Angeles for 57 years and never had a problem with a cop.
The reason I never had a problem is because I stayed out of their way and let them do their jobs and if I was stopped and questioned, which happened a few times, I simply answered their questions truthfully.
But all of this aside, the incident created no excuse to burn and loot the city as has happened so many times in America. I think some of the people commenting on this affair should gain a little experience living in America before they start placing judgements on policemen.
John Arnone
Jurors cleared cop
Re: "Brown got US justice", (PostBag, Nov 4). Before people rush to disagree with Mr Holt, they should also bear in mind something not mentioned in his letter, namely that a grand jury comprising predominantly of black jurors cleared the police officer, who fatally shot the young thug, of any criminal wrongdoing after hearing all the evidence referred to by Mr Holt which, of course, opposing counsel reportedly tried to suppress.
Martin R
Democracy is a tool
Re: "Idea Man", (Asia Focus, Dec 1). Kishore Mahbubani’s books are seminal for those interested in Asian geopolitics; they augment information in current affairs media.
He rightly points out that democracy is a tool, not an ideology. Some western powers have promulgated it as a religion so enabling, as a US congressman proclaimed, their countries to destabilise other governments, presumably to put into power, their own puppets whom they can manipulate to do their will, in order to retain global supremacy and/or vested interests.
Victoria Beck
Prayut an unsung hero
I am getting bored of all the whining by Western media writers, foreign leaders, out-of-country academics and clueless journalists who criticise Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha for taking over in a coup.
By doing so, he stopped a potential civil war and what would have turned out to be a bloodbath (does anyone remember the caches of arms and ammunition discovered stashed around the country?)
Gen Prayut’s stated goal is to ultimately allow for democratic elections to take place at an appropriate time in the future.
Meanwhile, he and his cabinet are trying to clean up Thailand. Did the critics somehow also miss the Dec 4 report about Thailand moving up 17 places over last year in the 2014 Corruption Perceptions Index rankings?
I come from a “democratic” country (at least up until now). In the US, which is really a republic and not a democracy, I am used to the rule of law and being able to live free of fear from roaming gangs blocking traffic, throwing grenades, or looting and burning innocent places of business (again, up until now).
Thank you, Prime Minister Prayut and your team, for trying to restore the real Thai spirit of graciousness and kindness.
Leon Sexton
Not lost in translation
My name is Frank O’Neal and I volunteer at the Thai Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Everyone at the TSPCA is working tirelessly to promote and educate Thai people on the new Animal Welfare law. Our short- and medium-term strategies are now being implemented and drafted, which we will soon make public in Thai and English on our website.
Eric Bahrt is under the impression that the TSPCA’s website (www.ThaiSPCA.org) does not have an English version. TSPCA website content is primarily published in Thai, because it is the language of the Thai people and it is the Thai Society – not English Society – for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. We understand the importance of having an English version, so one is available by simply clicking on the English version link at the top right corner of the home page.
We are thrilled to have supporters of animal welfare and rights like Eric Bahrt and glad to know they are excited about reading new content regarding our ongoing and future activities. We are very meticulous when translating Thai to English, which sometimes causes the process to take longer than we would like. Please be assured, the new content published first in Thai will be available for your viewership in English as soon as possible.
Frank O’Neal
CONTACT: BANGKOK POST BUILDING
136 Na Ranong Road Klong Toey, Bangkok 10110
Fax: +02 6164000 email: postbag@bangkokpost.co.th
All letter writers must provide full name and address.
All published correspondence is subject to editing at our discretion.