OPINION

Horse first, then cart

All the hype about the implementation of the SRT is missing a lot of details that are troubling. All the stops pictured in the chart in Monday's Business Section are not destinations that have a developed infrastructure that can handle increased traffic of both people and goods.

If the strategy lauds distributing an extra 15 million people within five years, how are these people expected to traverse the locales without public transportation? How will this benefit tourists and citizens if the destination is not prepared to handle a major influx of passengers? The elite groups backing the project seem concerned with the rail system and potential profits, yet there is no mention of investing and improving local infrastructure.

It seems that the "cart is placed before the horse". The areas in question should be prepared well before the delivery of the rail. The devil is in the details.

This can't be right

Did I read Veera Prateepchaikul right in "Treading a fine line over China" (Opinion, Oct 14)? When he wrote in a sneering tone of Future Forward Party's (FFP) Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit's "obsession with democracy and freedom" did Veera seriously mean to suggest that a society might value too highly democracy and freedom? And in his eagerness to appease both the Chinese communists and Thailand's forces equally opposed to such good values, does Veera really mean that good people should not take a unwavering stand in defence of democracy and freedom?

Compromise is one thing, and FFP's reasonable leaders have in practice and principle always sought compromise. They have publicly committed to and have in their acts sought only reform that is done openly, transparently and in accordance with the law.

Appeasement is a totally different thing and, as history shows, craven pusillanimity in the face of brutes only encourages bullies, communist and otherwise, to greater suppression of freedom and democracy, both of which demand unrelenting vigilance if they are to flourish.

Perhaps Veera should review Section 2 of the Thai constitution, which, with neither compromise not appeasement, explicitly defines the Thai nation as having a democratic form of government.

Lacking foresight

Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit should realise that his actions in Hong Kong have put the current Thai government in an awkward situation. He should bear in mind that if in the future his party becomes part of the government -- his less-than-honest stance towards some of Thailand's long-standing friends and trading partners will come back to haunt him.

As for now, the least Mr Thanathorn can do is approach the Chinese embassy and solve the problem in a truthful manner like a grown-up man should, in order to save the country from a difficult situation.

Midlife madness

As recently as July this year, General Apirak Kongsompong was reported in the Bangkok Post as saying that, once the new cabinet is sworn in, he would wash his hands of politics. "From then on, I won't make political comments, nor will I get involved in politics in any way," he said.

So why is he now making impassioned claims about Thailand being threatened by a non-existent communist network? Let us hope his recent speech was merely an embarrassing symptom of some sort of a mid-life crisis which will soon pass.