OPINION

Clear as a bell

Re: "The Battle for Hilll 350", (BP, Dec 19).

Thank you for including the map that clearly shows sovereign territory and the disputed area. This information should be included with every article about the border war!

Now everything is clear. Neither side is "defending its sovereignty". Both sides are "invading the disputed area". Thus both sides are wrong.

This land and the Khmer temples on the tops of mountains no doubt have value, but the ownership of same is not worth even one soldier's life. Just let Cambodia have it. Or let the International Court of Justice (ICJ) split it up, then forget it.

Repression writ large

Re: "Conditions 'beyond horrific' in captured Sudanese city", (World, Dec 19).

Sudan's nightmare is a timely reminder of the horrors of war over peace. It is hard to say which is the worse for civilians who just want to get on with their lives: theocracy or military rule. Both are brutally repressive.

Both fear free speech. Both serve those intent on holding onto or expanding their own power over others. Both love the excuse, whether from nationalism or doctrine, of indulging cruelty to fellow humans.

Sadly, military rulers have a habit of wrapping themselves in the trappings of religion, usually whilst betraying the principles of that religion.

More sadly still, religious leaders too often mirror that habit, embracing the martially robed with open arms as a means to more richly gilded churches, temples, and mosques.

A tad confused

I can see the hatred and disgust burning in Michael Setter's eyes as he attempts to count the number of space stations supposedly floated by the CCP in the airspace above him.

His confusion is such that he fails to distinguish between the totalitarianism of China's Communist Party (CCP) and Thailand's People's Party (PP). The CCP has seven members on its Politburo Standing Committee; by contrast, the PP's core decisions are effectively shaped by its de facto billionaire leader, Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit, heir to a major business empire and a staunch critic of the Thai monarchy.

The problem is that since the 2019 general election, the Move Forward Party (MFP) and its reincarnated successor, the PP, have failed to play any meaningful role as leaders of the opposition in scrutinising and monitoring the Pheu Thai government.

It was reported that Mr Thanathorn visited Thaksin Shinawatra -- then still a fugitive -- in Hong Kong, an allegation he has yet to deny.

More recently, attention has focused on the role of MP Rangsiman Rome, chair of the House Committee on National Security, who invited Pol Gen Surachate "Big Joke" Hakparn -- dismissed from the Royal Thai Police over alleged links to online gambling fraud -- to testify and attack his former superior, Pol Gen Torsak Sukvimol, with similar allegations.

Nor are MFP and PP members themselves beyond reproach.

Two MPs were expelled over sexual misconduct, while another was sentenced last week to jail for forging military conscription exemption documents -- yet they continue to portray the military as the sole obstacle to "liberating" the country.

The party's political flagship policy is the amendment -- or, more bluntly, the removal -- of Article 112.

Without it, PP supporters believe they would be free to flash their three-finger salute to insult the monarchy without fear of prosecution.

The party's latest manoeuvre, backing Anutin Charnvirakul as prime minister in exchange for the possibility of a referendum to amend the constitution, is clearly designed to pave the way for revisiting Article 112.

Democracy was not denied when Pita Limjaroenrat was prevented from forming a government or becoming PM. In fact, political manoeuvring and common sense prevailed.