News from Today's Thai Newspapers

[nyeinchan@xxxxxxxxxxx]

Bangkok Post
June 12, 1997
Li could be sent back to face bribery investigation 

US authorities ready to facilitate inquiry 

Surath Jinakul


Li Yun Chung could be returned to Thailand to explain how he came to be 
released on bail.

The United States has promised to facilitate Thai investigations into 
bribery allegations against Li, the Narcotics Suppression Bureau chief 
said yesterday.

Pol Lt-Gen Noppadol Somboonsap was given the assurance by Katherine 
Palmer, a New York public prosecutor, who called on him to thank Thai 
police for helping extradite Li.

Ms Palmer assured him US authorities were ready to send Li back here if 
there was a need to question him.

Li, or Pongsak Rojanasaksakul, was handed over to the Drug Enforcement 
Administration this month after he jumped bail and was returned by Burma 
last month. On departure for the US, Li said: "I will not return."

He was alleged to have bribed Thai officials to secure his release on 
bail in February following his arrest in Samut Sakhon last year.

The Justice Ministry has appointed a panel to investigate Somchai 
Udomwong, former Criminal Court deputy chief justice, for granting Li 
bail in contravention of a standing policy covering narcotics cases.

The Police Department set up a separate committee to look into the 
allegation.

Pol Lt-Gen Noppadol said Ms Palmer told him Thailand could request Li be 
flown back for further questioning. The prosecutor also discussed legal 
cooperation between Thailand and the US but Pol Lt-Gen Noppadol declined 
to elaborate.

Ms Palmer said Thailand's help in extraditing Li to face charges of 
importing 486kg of heroin showed there was nowhere drug traffickers can 
hide.

BURMA GAS PIPELINE / MEETING ENDS IN CONFUSION



Conflicting stories told after talks

Govt says it's a deal, opponents disagree

Chakrit Ridmontri, Yuwadee Tunyasiri and Suebpong Unarat


The government said yes but opponents said no.

Depending on who made the statement, the meeting between supporters and 
opponents of the controversial gas pipeline project chaired by Prime 
Minister Chavalit Yongchaiyudh either arrived at a satisfactory 
conclusion or none at all.

Gen Chavalit and Industry Minister Korn Dabbaransi told reporters at 
Government House where the meeting took place that both sides had agreed 
that the 16.5-billion-baht project should go ahead.

"Conservation groups do not want the project rejected. They only want 
more information so that it will proceed without posing adverse 
effects," said the premier, adding that "the two sides understood each 
other".

But opponents told a different story.

"The prime minister has yet to solve the problems we raised and just 
passed them on to the provincial committee," said Phiphop Dhongchai, 
leader of a coalition for democracy campaign.

Gen Chavalit said the committee, which was recently set up to monitor 
the environmental impact of the project, would have to make public 
contract details made between the Petroleum Authority of Thailand, the 
Burmese gas exploration consortium and its own contractor.

He also assured opponents that the committee would be empowered to 
command various agencies involved in the project implementation and 
impose environmental mitigation measures.

Construction of the 260-km pipeline which will deliver natural gas from 
Burma's Yadana and Yetagun fields to a power plant in Ratchaburi began 
in February after the National Environment Board approved its 
environmental impact assessment study.

Opponents opposed it on the grounds that it will pass through a national 
park and an 1A watershed area, threatening ecology and endangered 
wildlife species.

Chaired by the Kanchanaburi governor, the multilateral committee 
convened its first meeting last month in an attempt to sort out 
differences between the two sides. But the two conservation groups, 
including a local one, have pulled out citing "a lack of transparency".

Mr Korn and government spokesman Warathep Rattanakorn also echoed Gen 
Chavalit's optimistic outlook, insisting that the project "will proceed 
and its plan made clear".

Mr Warathep said representatives of kamnan and village chiefs in 
Kanchanaburi had voiced support for the project because it will lead to 
greater development and prosperity in the area. They said they 
represented the majority of local people.

But opponents remain sceptical. Local conservation group leader Boonsong 
Chansongrassami said the provincial committee comprising mostly local 
officials and village chiefs could "neither conduct environmental impact 
studies nor monitor the construction".

He said it was a bureaucratic body and unreliable.

"What we need is an independent committee with neutral experts from 
various fields to conduct a study on the impact of the project, which is 
powerful enough to monitor and control the work done by the PTT."

He said construction work must stop while the study is being done.

Suraphon Duangkhae, deputy director of Wildlife Fund Thailand, said the 
conservation groups have yet to agree with Gen Chavalit's conclusion, 
saying that the provincial committee would be unable to make a decision 
contrary to the government's wishes.

Meanwhile, human right activists have claimed that the project 
encourages the use of forced labour and the relocation of ethnic groups 
living along the pipeline route in Burma.

Postbag

------------------------------------------------------------------------


A fist full of dollars? 

Am I the only person confused by US foreign policy? Both China and Burma 
have a less than glowing record with respect to human rights, yet Burma 
has sanctions applied against her while China's Most Favoured Nation 
status is extended.

Could the difference be that Burma is a small country of little 
commercial significance, whereas China presents tempting financial 
opportunities?

US attitudes towards the Middle East are also perplexing. What would be 
their policy if the Palestinians, and not the Gulf States, were sitting 
atop an oil field?

Maybe I should not be confused, but simply accept that these are just 
two examples of a US foreign policy which is riddled with hypocrisy.

Sleepless in Sukhumvit





Ambassador's Burma views are skewed 

I find it interesting that the Bangkok Post (June 11) published 
Philippine Ambassador Arcilla's apologia on Burma's impending induction 
into Asean for a variety of reasons.

Firstly, it is contrary to the outrage of the Philippine people 
themselves, who denounced Burma's admittance as an historic mistake and 
a "step backward" for democracy (Bangkok Post, June 3). Secondly, H.E. 
Arcilla's article appears to be a well-crafted propaganda piece, 
attempting to present the issue as another example of "Meddling West 
versus Proud and Independent Asia" and to skew the meaning of 
"constructive engagement" to his own ends.

Since several Asean-member governments are "special democracies" who 
view themselves as "benevolently authoritarian - with elections", it is 
understandable that they see no obstacle to admitting Slorc Burma. They 
argue that Western-style democracies are not suitable for them at the 
present time. Aside from insulting the intelligence of their citizens, 
it is nothing more than justification for these governments to continue 
doing things the way they want, irrespective of the wishes of the 
electorate. There is no such thing as Western-style democracy. A 
government is either democratic or it is not. 

The essence of widespread objections to the proposed admission of Burma 
is that Slorc is nothing more than the man with the gun. Slorc was not 
elected and has only used its guns on its own people. It has done 
nothing to better the country's economy, unless for personal gain. 

An example of constructive engagement would be the encouragement of 
Slorc to relinquish its choke-hold on the Burmese people in return for 
increased recognition in the political and economic arenas (as was done 
with apartheid). Not only does Asean not encourage Slorc to cease 
governing at the point of a gun, it gives Slorc the additional means to 
do so. This is one reason why so many people find Burma's admission to 
Asean so highly objectionable.

Jonathan Nations

The Nation
PTT agrees to bare all on Yadana deal 



BY WATCHARAPONG THONGRUNG 

THE Petroleum Authority of Thailand (PTT) has finally agreed to reveal 
all information about the Yadana gas pipeline project, including details 
of the contract it signed with the Burmese government. 

Pala Sookawesh, PTT's governor, said yesterday that his agency will 
reveal contract details to the provincial sub-committee in Kanchanaburi 
today. 

''We [the PTT] want to make things clear to Kanchanaburi residents and 
protest groups," he said at a meeting with government officials, 
Kanchanaburi residents, environmentalists and the state enterprise. 

PM's Office spokesman Warathep Rattakorn said the meeting decided that 
the provincial sub-committee would solve all the problems and conflicts 
between the PTT and those opposed to the project. The sub-committee must 
submit its resolution to Prime Minister Chavalit Yongchaiyudh within two 
weeks, he said. 

However, he said construction would go ahead since nobody has taken any 
action against the project. 

''The protesters are just concerned about the environmental impact and 
want to know all information about the project," Warathep said. 

Pipob Thongchai, a project opponent, said he was upset with the 
meeting's conclusion. 

''The PTT and the government do not answer our questions. We want the 
project developers to stop construction and make everything clear to 
us," he said. 

Pipob said he did approve of PTT's promise to reveal the contract 
details today. 

''However, they should be revealed in front of a national committee and 
not a provincial sub-committee," he said. 

Pala said the contractor was now building the pipeline in the area 
outside the forest and 20 per cent of the job had already been 
completed. He expected at least 210 kilometres of the pipeline to be 
laid by the latter part of the year. 

He added that work on the six-kilometre section that passed through the 
forest would begin in November. 

''We can't bow to all of the environmentalists' demands. However, we 
have reduced the width of the construction path through the forest from 
20 metres to 12," he said. ''Reducing the width requires higher costs, 
but the forest will only lose 40 rai." 

He added that if construction was not completed by June 1 next year, the 
day gas is due to start flowing as per the terms of the contract, the 
PTT would be fined. 

Fines total Bt125.5 million for a delay of two months, Bt487.5 million 
for three months, Bt967.5 million for four months and Bt1.57 billion if 
it is five months late.

Burma closes key post on Thai border in row over shifting frontier



posted at 20:40 hrs (Bangkok time) 



BANGKOK, June 12 -- Burma on Thursday sealed a key frontier post facing 
Thailand, in a sharp escalation of a simmering boundary dispute, 
television reports said. 

The border post in the Mae Sot district of the western Thai province of 
Tak, 426 kilometers (256 miles) west of was closed Thursday morning, 
cutting the passage of all trade people across. 

Burma shut the border after the two countries failed to reach an 
agreement over a disputed boundary along the Moei River which divides 
them, and also over a Thai ban on the export of a small onion native to 
Burma, national television said. 

Officials could not immediately be reached for comment on the issue 
which has dogged ties for several weeks. 

The closure came after heavily-armed Thai and Burmese troops in May and 
in early June were locked in a tense stand-off on a disputed island in 
the river dividing the two countries. 

In late May, rival troops armed with tanks and heavy weapons manoeuvred 
within meters (yards) of each other, attempting to gain a better 
position to claim the disputed land. 

The two sides have been holding talks over the issue, but all attempts 
at a diplomatic solution have failed. 

The standoff began in May after Burma refused to act on a Thai request 
that construction workers dredging the banks of the island in an attempt 
to divert the Moei River cease operations. 

Thai troops were stationed across from the workers in order to force the 
issue, and Burmese soldiers were sent in to protect them. 

The showdown came after the river changed course after severe flooding 
during the rainy season several years ago, and Thailand holds that under 
existing agreements the demarcation of the border must change as a 
result. 

Burma was said to be attempting to divert the river back to its original 
course in a bid to win back territory lost through the natural 
phenomenon. 

The foreign ministry has said Thailand had sent an aide-memoire to Burma 
on November 23, 1995, putting forth its claims. 

Thailand's director for Treaties and Legal Affairs has held talks with 
his counterpart but Burmese officials refused to accept the Thai 
position. (AFP)


"THERE WILL BE NO REAL DEMOCRACY IF WE CAN'T GURANTEE THE RIGHTS OF THE 
MINORITY ETHNIC PEOPLE.  ONLY UNDERSTANDING THEIR SUFFERING AND HELPING 
THEM TO EXERCISE THEIR RIGHTS WILL ASSIST PREVENTING FROM THE 
DISINTEGRATION AND THE SESESSION."  "WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING THEIR 
STRENGTH, WE CAN'T TOPPLE THE SLORC AND BURMA WILL NEVER BE IN PEACE."



---------------------------------------------------------
Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
---------------------------------------------------------