[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index ][Thread Index ]

Bangkok Post Editorial (Fait accomp



Fait accompli in the forests

Editorial

Feb 12 1998
Bangkok Post

The pronouncement this week by the prime minister to the effect
that protests against the Yadana natural gas pipeline have come
too late is probably correct. Had Chuan Leekpai made the same
utterance four years ago after the contract was signed, the
protests then would have been too late as well. 

When governments and industrial giants such as oil corporations
get together to develop large-scale projects, they take on the
characteristics of a juggernaut and only the brave stand in the
way. 

Given that Thailand has a pressing need for energy, despite the
present economic lethargy, and that gas from the Andaman Sea
appears to be the answer, the project was a winner from the day
it left the drawing board. 

Which is a pity, because the government, the Petroleum
Authority of Thailand, Unocal of the United States and Total of
France have gone about their joint project in a cavalier manner
that has demonstrated clearly their conviction that nothing must
be allowed to obstruct their sure thing. 

The issues here are simple enough: we need energy and we need
to conserve what is left of our forest cover. The two need not be
competing demands because the pipeline could and should have
been routed to avoid forest, particularly the prime watershed of
Huay Khakaeng wildlife sanctuary in Kanchanaburi. 

At the time the contract was signed, there were options that
remain open today. For example, roads have been upgraded and
built in the expectation that the military dictators in Rangoon will,
one day, free Burma from its isolationist shackles. The pipeline
could have followed established routes, in this way sparing the
forest and avoiding international criticism from conservation
groups. 

In the annals of public relations disasters, the government, in the
form of the Petroleum Authority and the Kanchanaburi provincial
authority, have distinguished themselves. They have behaved like
children when confronted by demands that they make public the
clause in the contract which, they say, leaves Thailand liable to a
daily fine of 40 million baht if the project is not finished by July. 

At public meetings, opponents have been allowed to see the
contract - but from a distance. The provincial authority continued
in this vein by staging a concert at its headquarters at which luk
thung singers and dancing girls entertained a crowd of
30-40,000 people who were described by officials as
pro-pipeline protesters. 

The tactics brought into play by the authorities have been crude,
and rather embarrassing given that ecological issues tend to
assume international proportions. The governmentÕs decision to
deploy 200 soldiers along the route to protect the site from
protesters who have kept their cool while struggling to be heard
is another over-reaction and another mistake. With a little
foresight, matters could have been so different. It would have
cost more to have built the pipeline along a different route and
that would have been a price worth paying if our natural
resources were to be saved. It would also have been a price the
oil companies could pay with ease. Such action might have gone
some way towards showing Thailand is paying more than lip
service to the environment. 

Despite the promotional spiel about eco-tourism being pumped
out to attract visitors and their money to Amazing Thailand, the
Yadana project is becoming an international cause. Perhaps it is
just as well that Amazing Thailand is concentrating on beach
resorts, department stores and other totems of the international
tourist monoculture.