Thai Press on Burma Relationship

[dohrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

Subject: Summary of the Thai Press, Tues, Oct 12 (fwd)
BANGKOK
SUMMARY OF THE THAI PRESS
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 1999

(NOTE:  The following is an unedited summary of selected news, columns and
editorials from the Thai press.  It should be read in conjunction with the
Bangkok English language newspapers.  Items are selected for summary based
upon their interest and usefulness to US officials.  This press summary
should not be considered a balanced reflection of what appears in the Thai
press on any given day.  This is not an official document and the
producers assume no responsibility for accuracy of translations.) I.  

II. 	EDITORIALS & COMMENTARY:

		1.	The dictatorial Burmese junta has clearly reacted
against Thai handling of the Burmese Embassy seizure by a group of   
Burmese
students without any bloodshed to excess, as opposed to its appreciation
initially extended to the Thai Government.  It has unduly reacted with
arbitrary closure of the Thai-Burmese border measuring over 2,000   
kilometers
long, lifting of fishing concessions to Thai trawlers without any prior
notice, and issuance of a statement by its Embassy in Washington DC,   
calling
for drastic action against alleged terrorists while its mouth pieces   
under
the cloak of local mass media attacked Thai authorities for allegedly
collaborating with the Burmese students.  Prime Minister CHUAN LIKPHAI   
could
not help expressing surprise at such a two-faced stance of the Burmese   
junta
who was greatly displeased with the Thai Interior Minister's saying that   
the
Burmese students were merely students fighting for democracy, not
terrorists.  What does the Burmese Government's call for drastic action
against the Burmese students really mean?  Does it mean a bloody   
crackdown
on them by an armed force with no regard for the lives of the 89   
hostages,
including tens of Burmese diplomats and family members?  The Thai   
Government
could in no way do so because of its obligation to save the lives of all
hostages.  This makes the difference between dictatorial and democratic
wills.  The Burmese Government should ask itself what have caused   
hundreds
of thousands of Burmese people to flee to Thailand for refuge.  Isn't it
caused by its brutal suppression and massacre of its people and its   
faulty
policies both in political and economic aspects that have made Burma a
dictatorial and poorest country in Asia being isolated by the world
community.  The Burmese junta itself has failed in suppressing the   
various
minority groups of separatists with drastic action for almost 40 years.   
 In
mid 1988, it started to crack down even on the Burmese students and   
people
themselves, compelling them to struggle for democracy.  In fact, the   
Burmese
Government should have thanked the Thai Government and fellow ASEAN   
members
for helping to bring Burma into the world society by making it part of   
ASEAN
while it was being isolated by most Western countries.  Its different
political and economic systems should make no obstacles to its friendly
relations with neighboring countries, which must rely on one another for
mutual gains.  - Thai Rath editorial and similar comments by Siam Rath   
and
Naeo Na editorials

		2.	The seizure of the Burmese Embassy here this early
October has caused Thai-Burmese relations to deteriorate gradually,   
starting
with border closure, followed by fishing concession revocation and latest
release of a statement by the Burmese Embassy in Washington DC attacking   
the
Thai Government.  Although the Burmese Government had thanked Thailand in
the beginning, it is just a matter of insincere diplomatic formality.  We
believe Thai-Burmese relations will decline further as long as Thailand
remains a sanctuary for the Burmese students rebelling against the   
Burmese
junta.  We are now standing at a junction where we must choose between
compromising with the Burmese junta to avoid affecting its interests   
along
the border and fishing in Burmese waters, and tackling our internal   
problems
in our own way without heed to the Burmese Government's feeling.   
 Regardless
of whether our past contributions are right or wrong, Interior Minister   
Maj
Gen SANAN KHACHONPRASAT deserves commendation for calling the Burmese
Embassy seizure by the Burmese students a struggle for democracy, not a   
act
of terrorism.  The Burmese Government must admit that all its domestic
problems have compelled the Burmese students to flee to Thailand for   
refuge
and that Thailand does not mean to side with them in allowing them refuge
but merely takes into account humanitarian reasons.  In spite of Thai
backing for any group's struggle for democracy, it does not mean that
Thailand must necessarily be its rival's enemy.  What the Burmese   
Government
should do instead is to express gratitude to Thailand for helping to   
settle
the Burmese Embassy seizure amicably as it initially did.  The Burmese
Government is tacitly exploiting prevailing economic problems to force
Thailand to admit that its amicable resort is wrong with no respect for   
Thai
sovereign rights to find a way out with least damage on its own.   
 Bilateral
negotiation as proposed by several parties might be a way out but it   
could
in no way come true without cooperation from the Burmese Government.   
 After
all, the Burmese retaliatory measures could be damaging to Burma itself   
in
the long run, in which case Thailand might find a better way out in the
interim period.  Certainly, we do not wish to sever relationship with   
Burma
as an ASEAN member but it would be totally meaningless should Burma   
pursue
its two-faced policy.  We are fully for the Thai Government to stand firm
against the dictatorial rule in Burma despite any loss of tremendous   
gains
from its previous constructive engagement policy.  - Krungthep Thurakit
editorial

		3.	LOM PLIANTHIT wonders what kind of foreign policy
employed by Foreign Minister SURIN PHITSUWAN that has estranged Thailand
from neighboring Burma so badly.  The author deems it wrong for SURIN to
foster friendship with a remote country like the US while cultivating
enemies nearby.  He is apparently referring to recent Burmese border   
closure
and lifting of fishing concessions to Thai trawlers in retaliation for
dissatisfied Thai handling of the Burmese Embassy seizure by a group of
Burmese students.  The author means to fault SURIN for allegedly turning
Burma into Thailand's foe in spite of long-standing Thai-Burmese   
friendship.
He dissents from observation by people in general that the Burmese   
Embassy
seizure by the Burmese students led by JOHNY is the root cause of Burma's
hostility towards Thailand.  Rather, he regards it as a mere last straw   
of
Burmese dissatisfaction with the Thai Government assumably stemming from
SURIN's alleged pro-American gesture and excessive backing for the   
struggle
for democracy in Burma.  Thailand has allegedly been taking extremely   
good
care of Burmese students hostile to the Burmese regime so as to become a
"good boy" of the US.  The writer believes Thailand is being isolated by
neighboring countries including even a former close friend like Laos,   
which
is presumably fostering better friendship with Malaysia and using   
Thailand
as their land bridge.  The author concludes that SURIN is no match for   
late
former Foreign Minister Gen CHATCHAI CHUNHAWAN in terms of diplomatic
proficiency as he feels Thai dignity has greatly declined in the eyes of
neighboring countries throughout the CHUAN Government's rule.  - Thai   
Rath
column
		4.	The recent Burmese Embassy seizure has brought many
suspicions that it was orchestrated either by the Government itself to
distract public attention from the recent oil price row or by rival
political parties to undermine the Government.  Whether it is true or   
not,
it reflects a decline in Thai politics which has virtually failed to   
serve
public interests.  In public eyes, both the Government and government
parties have been evading problems and doing everything to serve their   
own
purposes and remain in power as long as possible.  The Government has
apparently been orchestrating circumstances to distract public attention
from prevailing problems one after another.  How can people call this   
type
of government the people's government or one working for the people?  It
would be even worse if the happening was truly orchestrated.  What the
people have actually seen are unimpressive things like repeated electoral
frauds in Paknam, vested interest earning from government projects, and
endless intra-coalition rifts.  The Government has never thought of   
meeting
public needs.  It should have thought of clients rather than bankers,
farmers rather than rice mill proprietors and exporters, service users
rather than telecommunications firms.  The Government can never expect to
live in peace as long as it fails to bring about the public well being.   
 -
Matichon editorial



******************