OPINION

Save Dutch embassy

Re: "City's green spaces losing ground", (Opinion, March 30).

Thunpicha Greigran reports gently about a "quiet battle" being lost: the intended commercial sale of the historic Dutch embassy, located on a 9.3-rai plot on Witthayu Road, the heart of the city. Most probably adding to more suffocating high-rise buildings. Instead of handling the situation in the spirit of gratitude for Thai hospitality since Ban Hollanda was kindly allocated to the Dutch near Ayutthaya -- more than 420 years ago -- the Dutch government tries to extract unilaterally the profit from speculative value accumulation, and leaves Bangkok citizens powerless. This hard-nosed commercial approach, while we talk about friendship relations, could be challenged in multiple ways. Can foreigners own land in Thailand and do with it what they want? Or is Thai sovereignty of a higher order, and can it, for example, introduce overarching zoning, as Ms Thunpicha suggests? If the embassy moves to a new office in August this year, it abandons its special diplomatic status over the land. Legal exceptions that allow foreign ownership for diplomatic posts recede. Enough material for time-consuming legal battles. But there is also another path. With the help of a loan provided by Dutch banks, with the real estate as collateral and so without risk, an independent Thai-Dutch tripartite (governments, private sector, civil society) foundation could assume stewardship. Imagine: an international, semi-public "Peace Institute" for Asia-Pacific strategic peacebuilding could be constituted. This would keep the city open and green and contribute to the reputation of Bangkok as "the Geneva of the East".

War on smog, please

Re: "Tackle smog in North", (Editorial, April 2).

As a long-term Chiang Mai resident, I have had to migrate to the South in March and April each year for health reasons. This year, I have observed, with horror, perhaps the worst PM2.5 pollution in the past 20 years. It is a widespread man-made disaster that cannot be mitigated without enormous resources and resolve.

This is a plea to the government to declare an environmental emergency and mobilise the troops of the 3rd Army to put out the fires and enforce the law. There is precedent for this kind of manpower intervention during major flooding. Why can't we do this now to rescue the people in the North?

Fuel policy hurts poor

Re: "Fuel reform now", (PostBag, April 1).

Mr Burin Kantabutra -- a regular contributor to PostBag -- must be a rich person, as he recommends a) slashing all fossil-fuel subsidies, b) introducing carbon pricing, c) accelerating the usage of solar and wind for power production, and d) strengthening building codes to use less energy.

These measures will make the middle class and the poor poorer; they will not affect the rich at all.

Carbon pricing increases the cost for everything; countries with plenty of renewables, such as Germany, have the highest per kWh cost, and building standards like those in the EU already take their toll, as young families cannot afford to buy a home anymore due to the increase in cost.

By the way, is the US shifting away from fossil fuels but constructing numerous gas-fired power plants? Mr Burin, in which world do you live?