OPINION

Give Pita a chance

Re: "Senators slow to warm to Pita's PM bid", (BP, May 17).

While this letter is hardly Shakespeare, the results of the May 14 Thai election are just as overwhelming as they are undeniable. The simple fact of the matter is that "the old guard" did not only unexpectedly lose Thailand's recent election in a result which shocked even many seasoned Thai political experts, but lost an election in what was arguably an outright shellacking delivered by the hands of very angry Thai voters who clearly all but chucked Thailand's past political norms straight out the window.

That all said, it is no secret to regular Post readers that I am a die-hard Trump supporter and, as such, I think I might have some advice for any Thai senator who might be "slow to warm" about the notion of putting Khun Pita Limjaroenrat into the prime minister's chair at only 42 years of age.

My message basically is to learn from my country's recent election mistakes: Specifically, back in 2016 or so, nobody took Trump supporters like me seriously. Indeed, so much of Washington's established Senate and Congress had become so disconnected from the will of increasingly poor blue-collar workers, a rapidly declining middle class and rural voters (like me) that the establishment simply assumed Hillary Clinton would crush us stupid "deplorables" (as she called us) at the polls.

My message to any Thai politician who might read this is that an unwillingness to accept change led my country to nothing but heartbreak, violence, unnecessary political polarisation, as well as the looming possibility of an authoritarian government being democratically elected, perhaps as early as 2024.

So, for any Thai senator or politician who might read my letter, I would say that Mr Pita Limjaroenrat/the MFP/Pheu Thai seems to have clearly won this election fair and square. While I would prefer a more conservative prime minister, and while I really prefer monarchy and tend to dislike democracy, America's "Trump years" strongly suggest that the most constructive thing the Thai Senate can do is respect the overwhelming will recently expressed by Thailand's voters.

I would suggest the "powers that be" give Mr Pita a chance as prime minister and support the formation of a revised government which respects the minority rights of political parties who lost but is otherwise generally on par with these overwhelming election results. I also suggest that whatever new administration emerges, deeply thank Gen Prayut Chan-o-cha for several decades of patriotic military and political service to a nation which he clearly loves.

Great expectations

Re: "Historic win faces hurdles", (BP, May 16 ).

Every supporter of democratic values should be in awe at the determination of Thai voters in last Sunday's election. Rarely has one witnessed an election deliver an overwhelming mandate for such radical change in the way a country decides to organise itself.

However, given that Move Forward's policy platform represents the first existential challenge to the ruling elites' successful dominance of this country over the last 90 years, it is unlikely these so-called elites will walk quietly into the night.

And what constitutes this existential challenge?

Move Forward is committed to dismantling all the tools of control deployed by the powers-that-be to extract enormous wealth from this country while simultaneously creating one of the world's most unequal societies.

This means demilitarising Thailand by ending conscription, downsizing the armed forces, and placing them under civilian control.

This means decentralising Thailand by deconstructing the massively over-centralised elephantine bureaucracy that is the Ministry of Interior by, among many other initiatives, introducing elections for provincial governors and re-energising the decentralisation commitment enshrined in the 1997 People's Constitution.

This means dismantling long-held monopolies, licences to print money, to unleash smaller-scale entrepreneurship for the benefit of our economy as a whole.

And yes, it means improving the relationship between the monarchy and the people to make it more harmonious and mutually beneficial, more fit for purpose in these rapidly changing times. This process would start with amending, not revoking, Section 112 in two specific respects, namely limiting the right to file a complaint to the aggrieved party, in this case the Bureau of the Royal Household, and significantly reducing the severity of any penalty.

So now we await the joint sitting of the appointed Senate and the House of Representatives to elect our next prime minister. The principles of parliamentary democracy dictate that if Move Forward can lead a coalition commanding a majority in the House of Representatives, then Khun Pita should be elected as prime minister. This will be the people's expectation.

Those who seek an alternative result should ask themselves at what cost this might be achieved.

It's not set in stone

Re: "New generation tires of old guard", (BP, May 18).

The climax of the Thai election has just begun after the result reviews that the Move Forward Party has earned around 150 seats, 10 ahead of the once-popular Pheu Thai Party. Although neither party has commanded a landslide, the outcome, especially the overwhelming number of Bangkokians siding with the Move Forward Party, is sending a clear verdict to Gen Prayut that he is no longer wanted as prime minister.

In his eight-year reign as head of the government, Gen Prayut did not fulfil his promises of reform, especially reform of the Police Department. His government has turned into a big bureaucratic clubhouse with unprecedented corruption, nothing less than that in the Yingluck government that he had accused of when staging the coup in 2014.

With the generals defeated and the mission to form a new government in sight, the Move Forward Party's main hurdle is convincing a big portion of the Thai population that their reform agenda for the royal institution is necessary. Most of the senior Thais are still in reminiscence of His late Majesty King Rama IX, remembering the many good deeds that he did for this country.

It appears that Mr Pita was a little too carried away when he announced quickly that he would become the next Thai prime minister. He has to stay calm and accept and control his young followers when it turns out his party could remain the opposition party in the new parliament.

Try telling the truth

Re: "Senators slow to warm to Pita's PM bid", (BP, May 17).

If Thai senators want to be respected as protectors of good governance, surely it is time they started telling the truth rather than making statements they surely know are plain wrong.

Senator Jadet Insawang reportedly said he would not vote for Mr Pita because he "has been attempting to scrap Section 112 [the lese majeste law], and that is unacceptable". Surely Jadet knows that the Move Forward Party policy is to amend Section 112. It has never been their policy to abolish the law.

Senators have a duty to do their research and to uphold ethical standards by telling the truth. If they believe in democracy, the unelected senators also have a duty to respect the clear mandate of the people.

Atrocities ignored

Re: "Biden won't issue apology to Japan over atomic bomb", (BP, May 19).

US President Biden is quite right when he says he will not issue an apology to the Japanese for the dropping of atomic bombs on Japan during World War II.

Has Japan apologised for its invasion of Manchuria in 1931, or the "Rape of Nanking" in 1937, during which it cold-bloodedly killed about 200,000 male prisoners and civilians and raped more than 20,000 women and girls?

Has Japan apologised for its inhuman treatment of allied prisoners of war and Asian forced labourers in constructing the Burma-Thailand Railway during World War II? Some 90,000 Asia civilians, including thousands of Thais, and 12,000 POWs died in its construction. It is estimated that 250 people died for every kilometre of railway line.

Has Japan apologised for using Korean "comfort women" during World War II?

Has it shown any remorse for the bombing of Pearl Harbor?

The answer to all of the above is "no", and Japan continues to write history books that conveniently fail to mention any of them.

Intersecting ideas

Re: "When 1 almond gulps down 8.7 litres of water", (Opinion, May 18).

It is a pity that the opinion section did not print the commentary about almond/alfalfa production on the same day, opposite Eric Bahrt's statement about beef: water ratios and Chufflebottom's implication that grass uses rain and not irrigation. A three-way tie, indeed.

Methane dischargers

Re: "Abundance forecast for 2023", (BP, May 18).

Actually, as far as I can remember, the results of this annual ceremony are always upbeat. I suppose the sacred oxen are enticed to be positive for national morale. However, things were not very fortuitous in 2004 (Indian Ocean tsunami) or 2011 (national flood disaster in Bangkok and elsewhere).

To be blunt, the rest of this year does not portend well with the ongoing sweltering heatwave, among many other things. Flatulence must be a considerable issue judging by their size, induced by diets that encourage obesity and resultant copious methane discharge that wreaks havoc on the gasping atmosphere already choked by other human-induced GHG emissions.

As an expert in this domain, what are Eric Bahrt's views in the gas context?