OPINION

Jakarta junket

Re: "Govt ducks Myanmar Asean challenge," (Opinion, April 23).

Needless to say that countries surrounding Myanmar have a common history. The region has been ruled by coup makers and authoritarian regimes. Two countries on its western border, Bangladesh and India, are not interested in wasting their resources and efforts. Only China on its northern border can influence the coup makers. Sadly, China has very little interest in supporting democracy anywhere or bringing back the elected government in Myanmar.

Asean's motto of "non-interference" is a sign of its collective impotency and will not lead to any action. Inviting the Tatmadaw to Jakarta and ignoring the elected leaders is a big mistake. Resolution of any conflicts requires all factions around the table. Hence, this hastily organised Asean poker game by Mr Joko Widodo will not yield any results. However, Mr Widodo must be given credit for trying!

I called three local area hospitals yesterday and not one of them could give me any information about when Covid vaccines would be available. So much for Prime Minister Prayut's promise of citizens having the option to buy the vaccines privately. Prayut seems hell-bent on buying the vaccines as cheaply as possible, thus the Chinese Sinovac and Russian Sputnik purchases.

Who in their right mind thinks this is saving money ? No one will want these drugs that have a low efficacy rating.

In the meantime, the hamsters are loose on the merry-go-round trying to figure out a way to open the borders ASAP. As usual, when in doubt, run another cable line to fix the problem.

It seems like everyone is talking about Seaspiracy, the controversial documentary released by Netflix. Some hate it, others love it, no one feels indifferent about it. Its message is radical, the imagery so visceral, it stays with you for a long time.

The debate has reached us, too.

First of all, we are grateful about this film and the heated debate. Because more people are starting to think about their individual impact on the ocean and realise how important the health of it is. It's true that the ocean is the biggest carbon sink, helps to cool down the atmosphere and plays a crucial role in the stability of our climate. It's also true that some corporations seem to exploit what most of us want to protect.

But while the film concludes that not eating fish is likely the only solution to save the oceans and its eco-systems, we at #tide strongly believe that it's a bit more complicated. Even if we all stopped eating fish today, millions of tons of plastic waste would still end up in the ocean tomorrow and sea creatures would be killed in vast numbers by different types of plastics.

Pitting equally important problems against each other does not get us anywhere. We think it's about time to change our behaviour on multiple levels. That's why we are collaborating with fishermen from small islands in the Andaman Sea, whose lives are threatened by overfishing and plastic pollution. Many of them are part of an ethnic minority called the Moken.

The Moken are semi-nomadic. They spend their days out on the sea in traditional long-tail boats. These are not large-scale fishing companies but small, family-run, artisanal operations. Their methods are in no way comparable to the destructive and sometimes illegal fishing practices pictured in Seaspiracy.

We don't need to tell them how to fish sustainably, they have been doing this for centuries. We are convinced that it needs many approaches to save the oceans. One is to preserve life. One is to fight plastic pollution, by creating a circular economy.

Co-founders of #tide tide ocean SA

Pattaya-Hua Hin ferries have now been at rest for over a year.

Why can't they open a new direct line? It could be something between Koh Larn and some pier in the Chao Phraya River, for example Taksin pier. There are thousands of Bangkok residents who go to Pattaya every weekend, resulting in huge traffic on Highway 7, while parking near the pier has reached its limits. Taking the sea route to Koh Larn directly would surely be a success. Prospective customers are just waiting.

Re: "Duterte to deply navy over South China Sea claim," (BP, April 21).

Under the United Nations Convention on Law of the Seas -- of which China is a legal party -- the Permanent Court of Arbitration in the Hague issued its "final decision" in 2016, declaring that China has "no legal basis" for claiming historic rights to maritime boundaries and resources in the areas falling within its self-invented "Nine-Dash Line", in the South China Sea. Despite this clear ruling, China continues to threaten and intimidate the Philippines and other neighbours, acting as a schoolyard bully.

It is long past time for Philippines President Duterte to send navy ships to protect his country's legitimate claims. Of course, the anaemic Philippines navy alone would be no match for the power of the Chinese fleet should push come to shove. The international community should therefore stand together with the Philippines against China's hegemonic tactics and illegal claims.

It is an intriguing idea that up to 2,000 US soldiers could visit Pattaya for R and R in August. (BP, April 22). I wonder what their expectations will be.

The USA has a strong tradition of "service" families, so many of the likely visitors will know of their fathers' or grandfathers' memories of Thailand in the late 60s and early 70s. Best-case scenario, with all of the projections of Covid immunity being in place, these soldiers/sailors will presumably hit Pattaya for 24-hour shore leave, will have dollars in their pockets and looking for "rest and recreation". August is only three months away. Can Pattaya gear up to satisfy this very limited influx of "tourists", with no guarantee of more to come?

My own, totally non-PC view, is that the most sought-after tourist venues around the world offer a side of sleaze that gets even the most conservative tourists in. Sure, the high-end resorts make big money for the economy, but even the best-heeled tourists don't leave without a visit to Walking Street in Pattaya or Bangla Road in Patong. A "disappointed" review from 2,000 young American soldiers could seal Thailand's tourist fate for the near future.

April 22's Editorial, "Don't silence deep thinkers," directly addresses a major stumbling block to progress for Thais in many aspects of the nation's life: political, social, and certainly moral. However, the identified assault on academic freedom is but one of the major problems with the existing lese majeste law, section 112 of the Criminal Code.

The very real harm done by them is not merely that the feudal lese majeste laws rejects the principle that Thais have basic human rights to hold and express opinions.

This is indeed a serious moral failure in the lese majeste law: Thai people, and others, do have a moral right to discuss matters that interest them, especially matters of national significance. Presumably those intent on enforcing ignorance of the topic do not also hold that the topics covered by the repressive lese majeste law are of no significance: if they did think any such thing, their eagerness to press lese majeste charges to silence the voices that might speak truth to Thainess would be inexplicable. All agree that the matters being suppressed really do matter.

But the harm from the lese majeste law that is at least as great as the violation of a basic moral right to free speech is that the lese majeste law makes it logically impossible for any law-abiding Thai citizen to have a well-informed opinion about the censored topic.

This guaranteed ignorance is a logical consequence of all such censorship. Consider an example: it is illegal to say anything critical of the officially sanctioned view that Kim Jong-un, the supremely admired leader of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, is the world's wisest, most benevolent, most perfectly righteous elected ruler, the world's greatest pianist, a superb horseman, a man of great athletic prowess, and a noble leader who sets the perfect example of a simple, selfless life. The world outside the jurisdiction of that law might hold very different opinions about North Korea's leader, but within the coconut shell bounded by the censoring law, law-abiding citizens will have had none of those false beliefs corrected by contact with reality. They will sincerely believe every false opinion pushed by the system that viciously punishes any hint of dissent.

Basic critical thinking will take us a little further: we do not need to actually have evidence to the contrary to be deeply suspicious of any belief propped up by censorship. The fact that critical, dissenting opinion is criminalised is already a sufficient reason to suspect that the popular opinion that accords with what the law permits is likely false in significant articles of the dogmatic faith legally dictated.

The consequence of Thailand's lese majeste law is that whatever beliefs and attitudes law-abiding Thais sincerely hold regarding the institution that is so protected from reality must lack solid foundation. Those who truly value Thai institutions must oppose the lese majeste law precisely because they are both confident of the genuine worth of those institutions and because they desire that Thais have the freedom to hold informed, solidly founded opinions about such important Thai matters.