ABOUT Politics

Previous experience with the military is keeping one top Democrat quiet Thailand’s version of the ‘Suez Canal’ has unexpectedly re-emerged A fishing activist and the government have a common aim, and they’re not winning many friends

Staying out of the limelight

Deputy Democrat Party leader Chamni Sakdiset has managed to avoid the eagle eye of the military regime and has been spared that “invitation for talks or attitude adjustment sessions” experienced by other politicians.

Since the military takeover in May last year, Mr Chamni has maintained a low profile and avoided speaking out openly against the military, even though he makes it clear he disagreed with the putsch.

His memories of the days when the country was in the throes of political tensions which centred around left-right ideologies are still vivid.

At the time, Mr Chamni was a leading student activist during the Oct 14, 1973 student uprising.

With his left political leanings, he was forced to flee into the jungle to escape political persecution soon after the Oct 6, 1976 student massacre at Thammasat University.

Apart from himself, several activists who championed leftist ideals at the time have now become key members of current major political parties.

When the Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva and other party key members were called in for talks with the military, Mr Chamni knew if he spoke out publicly against the government and the military, he would face the same treatment.

He needed to be sure that this would not happen to him. He never offers his opinions on the post-coup state of politics.

“I don’t receive a single call from anyone. I don’t want to talk [publicly about politics],” Mr Chamni said.

He also noted that when the military summons someone for talks, they actually do not care to listen to his or her views.

“It is only the military’s style of stopping politicians from commenting on the current situation,” Mr Chamni said of the sessions.

He said he disagreed with the military coup, adding he had had unpleasant experiences with the military in the past.

When he was 28 in 1976, Mr Chamni became secretary-general of the Socialist Party of Thailand after his predecessor Boonsanong Boonyothayan, who was also the party founder, was assassinated in Bangkok’s Phaya Thai district on Feb 28 of that year. The killing took place prior to the Oct 6, 1976 student massacre.

At the time, several labour and farm leaders, and student activists who leaned to the left of the political spectrum, were targeted for political persecution.

But for Mr Chamni, the killing of his father after the Oct 6, 1976 clash is impossible to forget.

His father, who was a teacher at a local school in Nakhon Si Thammarat, was shot dead shortly after Mr Chamni fled into the jungle in the northern province of Nan and joined the Communist Party of Thailand following the Oct 6 clash.

Mr Chamni insisted his father was never involved in the left-right conflict.

“My father was killed despite having nothing to do with anything. That’s why I have bad memories of the military,’’ he said.

Commenting on the current political situation, Mr Chamni said the Pheu Thai Party and former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra may be down, but not out.

He added anti-coup elements are still active here and abroad and gain sympathy from the international community, while the military does not have an international stage on which to defend itself.

A big ditch in the South

It seems the contentious Kra canal project that keeps re-emerging will never get off the ground.

The plan to create a passageway through southern Thailand as an alternate international shipping route to the Strait of Malacca has been around for decades with more than 25 studies commissioned. So far it remains on paper.

The Kra canal project, which requires the digging of an international sea lane through southern Thailand linking the Indian and Pacific oceans, was last mentioned about 10 years ago, in 2005, during the Thaksin Shinawatra government.

At that time a Senate panel studying the scheme had completed a preparatory feasibility report with recommendations, but the September 2006 coup that ousted the administration seemed to have thwarted any follow-up.

The project disappeared from public view until May this year when news, published on the China Daily Mail website, surfaced, saying a memorandum of cooperation for a feasibility study for the construction of the canal had been signed in Guangzhou by various parties.

The Thai and Chinese governments promptly denied any agreement was signed.

However, the Kra canal project will be given a push by Sayant Chanwipaswong, a member of the National Reform Council (NRC) and chairman of a sub-committee on infrastructure and logistics, who plans to ask the NRC to dust off the Senate committee’s report when the council meets to deliberate logistics reform plans on Aug 11.

If the NRC agrees with him, the issue will be forwarded to the Prayut government.

According to Mr Sayant, the Senate subcommittee spent more than two years and a lot of resources to prepare the Kra canal report, so their findings should not go to waste. The NRC member himself is a supporter of the canal project which is estimated to cost about a trillion baht.

The report in question is said to have recommended a route known as A9, one of several routes under review. The 120-kilometre A9 route is known as the most feasible, cutting through the provinces from Trang on the Andaman to Songkhla on the eastern side.

Meanwhile, the private sector is also abuzz over the Kra canal project.

According to Paisal Puechmongkol, secretary-general of the Thai Chinese Culture and Economy Association, the Communist Party of China has invited its representatives to attend a meeting on China’s 21st century Maritime Silk Road.

China’s vision for the Maritime Silk Road connecting China’s coast line with the Indian Ocean is said to include the proposed canal, which will allow shipping to bypass the Strait of Malacca, shorten the distance by 1,200 km, save about 72 hours of sailing time and reduce fuel costs by billions of baht.

In a recent press interview, Mr Paisal described the Kra canal project as “inevitable”, pointing out that the Strait of Malacca, one of the world’s busiest and most congested waterways, will be too crowded in less than 10 years.

However, while economic implications of the canal project for Thailand are hardly doubted, security concerns, both internal and regional, are likely to be a major, or even a deciding, factor if the project is given the go-ahead. Environmental questions are also likely to play a significant role, particularly at the coastal ends.

It should come as no surprise if the Kra canal project never comes to fruition.

Reeling in the trawlers

Friends can be made by having a common enemy. But when that enemy is a financial titan of immense influence, it can be a double-edged sword. Banjong Nasae is finding this out the hard way as he fights for marine resources preservation.

Access to the marine environment activist’s Facebook page is on and off, frustrating his followers who like to keep up with his battles against the giant conglomerates which, he insists, are responsible for polluting and plundering the sea.

Mr Bangjong has engineered a campaign against unregistered vessels and large trawlers with illegal fishing nets. In the midst of this war, it seems he has found a common ally in the government which has imposed strict controls on unregistered fishing vessels to avoid European Union sanctions.

After the government began to show it meant business in wiping out the unauthorised fishing trawlers, Mr Banjong found that its stand mirrored his efforts.

The government’s tough stand on commercial fishing boats complying with registration requirements stems from the rules governing illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing practices. The government feels it must eradicate IUU or the EU will cripple the country’s trade in fishery products.

However, Mr Banjong’s campaign, which is in sync with the government’s policy, may have created the impression among some fellow activists that he is on the side of the state which is accused by environmentalists of favouring policies that show little interest in protecting the rights of the “little people”.

Mr Banjong, as president of Rak Thalay Thai (Love Thai Seas) Association, has been vocal in his drive to expose actual and potential environment destruction from large-scale projects, including deep-sea port constructions and oil rigs in the Gulf of Thailand.

After he went public with his campaign to keep potentially damaging projects away from local communities, he won the admiration of many, evident in the jump in his fan page followers.

He has zeroed his criticism in on a major company which makes animal feed and which buys fish supplies from vessels that use trawl nets. The nets are powerfully destructive and sweep up everything including baby fish from the sea floor.

The rapid depletion of fish stocks is all too evident.

With many large fishing boats staying inshore, fearing the clampdown on them for not being registered, fisher folk with smaller boats are enjoying a big break. One smallscale fisherman in the South reportedly hauled in two million baht worth of prized fish stock in a day.

But Mr Banjong believes registration of boats will not tackle the crisis in the country’s fishing industry.

He feels the government is too preoccupied with the priority of resolving the IUU fiasco out of fear of harm to the exporters.

Scant attention is being paid to solving fishing problems in a sustainable way. Mr Banjoing said if managed effectively, smallscale fishermen, who work close to shore, can catch enough fish to feed the entire country.

In the meantime, Mr Banjong is trying to figure out why his Facebook page is open one moment, closed the next. It could be a technical glitch, although his followers reckon if he pretends to stop attacking a certain big company, the problem might just go away.