Resource grabs

Re: "Maduro caught by 'elite troops'", (BP, Jan 4).

If it wasn't clear before, the United States has just demonstrated it possesses the capacity to strike down any country that isn't a peer military adversary, all while sustaining minimal losses.

Like Saddam Hussein, Manuel Noriega, Moammar Gadhafi, Fidel Castro, and Patrice Lumumba -- among other sovereign country leaders -- Maduro believed he was adequately protected at home. He could not be more wrong.

This armed invasion of a sovereign nation reveals the United States' true objective -- Venezuela's oil. The DEA's 2025 National Drug Threat Assessment, easily found on the agency's site, does not even name Venezuela as a credible threat.

Claims stated by President Trump about oil beneath the ground in Venezuela being "stolen" from the United States further undermine any remaining doubt that the drug cartel danger was a pretext. Such rhetoric marks a stark imperial intent not seen publicly since the old "civilising mission" language of the Europeans in the 1840s.

Over the past few decades, the United States has twisted agreements and used pretences to extract the wealth of several oil-producing nations, such as Iraq and Syria, wielding its immense military power. It has sent bombers to Iran while in discussion about a peace plan.

Although not legally binding under international law, what would prevent the United States from arguing that Thailand has made a moral commitment and that the United States has rights to Thailand's rare earths in the recent, frankly unthinkable MoU signed by the prime minister, and then blockading the Gulf of Thailand?

ML Saksiri Kridakorn

Ideological tilt

Re: "'Free our president', Maduro supporters demand at rally", (World, Jan 5).

It is not difficult to discover exactly why the Bangkok Post has become almost exclusively leftist in content and tone. Sadly, the balance between differing views is long gone, and the news is now narrative-driven. It cleaves to an objective best described as designed to create the general acceptance of Marxist/socialist values among Thailand's English-speaking society.

Michael Setter

Sham democracy

Re: "Poll is a test of courage", (Editorial, Jan 5).

The Post's editorial trots out that old deceit, "Thai-style democracy". There are, of course, many styles or flavours of democracy.

Each of these successful nations varies in the form of their own democracy, as is their sovereign right, but they all have one thing in common: a sine qua non (an essential condition) to qualify as a democracy. To qualify as democratic, a nation's government must adhere to non-negotiable elements of democracy.

If some ideas or opinions, whether written, acted, painted, printed, spoken, shouted, uploaded to a computer system, or whatever, are banned for no reason other than the usual criminal laws of slander, defamation, libel, treason, or other genuine defence against an enemy, that country fails to be a democracy. In that sense, Thailand fails. When a country can lawfully imprison internationally honoured human rights advocates precisely for speaking up for human rights, it is not a democracy.

Felix Qui
06 Jan 2026 06 Jan 2026
08 Jan 2026 08 Jan 2026

SUBMIT YOUR POSTBAG

All letter writers must provide a full name and address. All published correspondence is subject to editing and sharing at our discretion

SEND