OPINION

Curb open burning

Re: "Taking stock of nation's climate finance", (Opinion, July 17).

While I commend the government's commitment to addressing climate change and its substantial investment in various initiatives, I urge policymakers to remain attentive to the full scope of contributing factors.

Scientific research consistently shows that a significant portion -- potentially more than half -- of Thailand's air pollution is actually attributable to open biomass burning.

For comparison, emissions from vehicles and industrial activities are secondary contributors.

Satellite data on hotspots from the past three years reveal little to no decline in the open burning activity.

Alarmingly, some of these fires have taken place within our national parks, highlighting both environmental and regulatory challenges.

In my view, directing more resources and strategic focus towards mitigating biomass burning -- through stringent enforcement, public awareness and sustainable alternatives -- could lead to more measurable improvements in both air quality and climate outcomes.

Mideast history lesson

Re: "Stick to the facts", (PostBag, July 19).

I would like to correct EL Wout's assertion that "Hamas started the war", referring to the Israel-Palestine conflict.

In fact, the Nakba of 1948 is what really started the war.

Recent events are merely battles in this historical conflict, as Israel seeks to expand its territory to take over existing Palestinian territory and Arabs try to drive them out.

The only hope for peace is that one of them succeeds or a two state solution is imposed on both parties.

Even then, they would no doubt continue their wicked ways.

As Martin Luther King Jr famously said: "Violence begets violence."

Religion and politics

Re: "Clergy in need of control, not reform", (Editorial, July 20).

The Post's editorial is critical of the proposed legal remedies to Thai Buddhism's enduring ethical failures, but does it go far enough?

The underlying problem corrupting Thai Buddhism is that it has traditionally been a tool of political players.

Hardly what the Buddha taught, those players give out gilded temples and other goodies in return for a version of Buddhism that serves the interests of its sufficiently rich endowing masters.

In weightier matters, monks should not be treated differently from any other person under the law.

If two people, for example, engage in consensual sex, that is not a matter for the state to concern itself with.

Whether one or more of the parties in the consensual sex is a monk or not is irrelevant.

If the religion wants to disrobe monks for engaging in consensual sex, that's fine, but it's not a criminal matter for the state.

When monks commit crimes, such as fraud or worse, they should be imprisoned as monks. The law should not wait for them to be disrobed.

It is not for the state to say who can or cannot be a monk or to treat some criminals differently merely because they hold a religious position.

There is no good reason why monks should not be imprisoned while they are monks.

Temples handling money should be treated exactly as any other institution soliciting funds from the public.

Thai Buddhism deserves to be liberated from the legalised state feudalism binding it.