 |
| Section
1.1 : King Rama the 5th |
CHULALONGKORN
Thailand’s
beloved monarch reformed his ancient land and opened it to the West, without surrendering
its sovereignty
By Mr. Anand Panyarachun
Former
Prime Minister of Thailand September
21, 1853 in Bangkok, Succeeded his father, King Mongkut, to the throne. Death
of the regent who restricted his reforms. First railway line completed. Established
Chulalongkorn University to train a corps of provincial administrators. Abolished
slavery. Met with European leaders to ensure Thailand’s sovereignty October 23,
1910. Every
night, throngs of Thais of different backgrounds and ages congregate in-groups
large and small at the Royal Plaza in Bangkok. In the serene atmosphere of this
vast public space, they set up altars with candles and joss sticks to pay homage
to their beloved, long-deceased monarch, King Chulalongkorn, Rama V of the Chakri
Dynasty. They solemnly show their respect to the equestrian statue, ensconced
at the center of the plaza, that symbolizes his majestic reign. It is a moving
and impressive sight. The
King ascended the throne in 1868 and reigned for 42 years until his death in 1910.
During that time he became one of the world’s best-known monarchs, celebrated
in literature and drama. Thais remember and revere him as a paragon of learning,
accomplishment and dynamism, the man who more than any brought their ancient nation
into the modern world. When
he succeeded to the throne of Siam, as the country was then known, on the demise
of his father King Mongkut, or Rama IV, he was a mere boy of 15 in feeble health.
Even though Siam was nationally an absolute monarchy, the power he inherited was
limited. Real authority lay in the hands of a small oligarchy of noble families.
Their control of the nation’s purse, the forced labor of the peasantry, the provincial
administration, the legal system and the line of succession imposed enormous constraints
on the young monarch. In fact, it was a sign of the oligarchs’ power that they
succeeded in placing on the throne such a young and seemingly sickly king, who
was not expected to live very long. This
was not an auspicious climate for any new ruler. The only factor in the boy’s
favor was the invaluable training he had received from his father. Chulalongkorn
was the beneficiary of a superb and balanced education that combined both classical
Thai and modern Western elements. He had also enjoyed a valuable apprenticeship
at his father’s side. Otherwise, the deck was stacked against him. In the initial
period of his reign, King Chulalongkorn had to function under the guidance of
the regent - the foremost noble-man and other members of the regent’s family who
held powerful administrative positions. The King realized that the reforms he
wanted to introduce, especially to the monarchy itself, would be greeted with
hostility by the oligarchs, whose power and vested interests would inevitably
be threatened. Why
was the young monarch so intent on reform? One obvious reason was to shore up
his insecure throne. Also lurking in the King’s mind was an external threat. European
ambitions in the region were becoming overt and aggressive in the late 19th
century. The colonial expansions of Britain, France and other powers were in full
steam. A way had to be found to resist European imperialism, in both political
and commercial terms. To confront the colonial powers openly would have courted
disaster; to shut off his kingdom from the outside world and oppose foreign concepts
and thinking would also have led to catastrophe. King
Chulalongkorn decided on a third option, constructive engagement with the colonial
powers. He did this by opening up the country to the West through skillful diplomacy,
yielding concessions without giving up sovereignty. The King was also buying time
to consolidate his power through a modernization drive. He experimented with innovative
changes in his own household by up-dating the dress code, sponsoring Western-style
education for his younger brothers and associates and filling the court with open-minded
young men who shared his vision. He also studied various models of European colonial
administration during visits to Dutch and British holdings in Java, Malaya, Burma
and India in 1871 and 1872. He was slowly and quietly laying the ground-work for
the centralization of administration in Siam. The
conservative nobility did not at first grasp the significance of King Chulalongkorn’s
activities. Their complacency enabled him to embark on a series of reforms at
his second coronation on November 16, 1873. It was a sort of coming of age, as
the king was now 21. A start was made in the abolition of slavery. The practice
of prostration in public and at ceremonial events was discarded. Some major financial
and legal reforms were undertaken. The Privy Council and the Council of State,
bodies that acted like a cabinet and a panel of advisers, respectively, were set
up. Before long, though, these moves generated anger and defiance from the nobility.
Sensing an imminent confrontation with the old guard, the King temporarily retreated
and let the reform measures lie dormant. He
knew time was on his side. By the early 1880s, the ranks of the regency began
to dwindle. The end of the chapter came with the death in 1883 of the regent and
in 1886 of his designated successor. The King named his eldest son as crown prince.
Chulalongkorn’s enthusiasm for reform was revived, but he was still constrained
by a lack of competent and trusted bureaucrats to implement his program. So the
King turned to his younger brothers, whose modern education he had helped to guide
and whose minds were imbued with a spirit of innovation. He appointed them, some
still in their early 20s, to positions of authority. He also recruited a number
of foreign advisers in various fields of expertise. What
the King did next touched nearly every aspect of the lives of his people. Provincial
administration was brought under centralized direction and augmented by specialized
functional ministries. Modern law codes and other judicial reforms were decreed,
and these went a long way toward pacifying the European powers’ discontent with
the legal system. Fiscal administration was centralized and modern accounting,
budgeting and auditing procedures were adopted. Roads and bridges, railways, telegraph
lines, irrigation canals and water gates were constructed. Mining projects were
launched. Mapping was introduced. The King also vastly expanded educational and
medical services. The military forces were upgraded through conscription and the
founding of a military academy. King
Chulalongkorn never forgets that his kingdom’s economy was based on agriculture.
To benefit the rural population, he introduced land title deeds, as well as a
more equitable land tax and collection system. The King also developed unexploited
land by the intensification and extension of agriculture, forestry and mining.
Those and other economic reforms helped bring unprecedented industrial growth
and increased foreign trade. The
King championed education and the teaching of ethics and morality. Education,
in his view, was not only an instrument to serve national needs, but the means
to ensure a better quality of life for his people. He established a primary education
system by making full use of Buddhist monasteries over the entire kingdom, and
he introduced a formal curriculum for the training of teachers. Furthermore, he
established vocational and trades schools and a civil service institute, which
subsequently became Chulalongkorn University, to prepare young men and women for
public service. By increasing the knowledge and worldliness of the people, this
“popular education” policy would, ironically, lay the seeds for an anti-monarchical
movement in the 1932 revolution. The
direction, substance and comprehensiveness of King Chulalongkorn’s reforms were
startling. He almost single-handedly ushered in a new order to replace the old
one. While he succeeded in restoring absolute monarchy to the throne, he was not
in search of personal power. He was seeking power as a means to effect progressive
change and advancement for Siamese society. He was convinced that fundamental
change was right and necessary, from both a Buddhist and a Western perspective. The
miraculous preservation of Siam’s independence and sovereignty, in contrast to
the experience of other Asian countries, was due in large measure to the King’s
reforms, diplomatic skills and ability to consolidate central authority. These
were the qualities that endeared him to his subjects - to such an extent that
the Thai people donated money to erect the King Rama V equestrian statue at the
Royal Plaza to commemorate the life and deeds of a king whose legacy left a permanent
imprint in the hearts and minds of his people. King Chulalongkorn was indeed a
symbol of an enlightened age in Siamese history. Through his leadership and vision,
a traditional Southeast Asian kingdom was transformed into a modern nation.
Under the Royal
Patronage of
His Majesty King Bhumibol Adulyadej
Sixth Cycle Celebration
of His Majesty
The King of Thailand
and
AIT's 40th Anniversary
Through
the formation of
An International Academy in Engineering Development and
Scientific
and Management Technology (IAEDSMT)
And the
Civil and Environmental Engineering
Conference (C&EEC)
New Frontiers & Challenges
November 8-12, 1999
LESSONS
LEARNED IN MANAGING THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT: HOW TO ESCAPE THE ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION
SYNDROME
Anand Panyarachun
Abstract
The U.N./Stockholm/1972
Conference on the Environment was the catalyst for the growth over the following
decade of a World Environmental Movement. This included the establishment of national
environmental protection agencies in most developing countries, as well as the
founding of various International Assistance Agencies to help and guide the developing
countries in forming and managing their environmental protection programs, and
to establish appropriate protection programs that required global or regional
control. The decade of the 1970s was one of great expectations, with a high level
of hope that the new system would actually work. These expectations have
not been realized. Indeed, degradation has markedly increased to the point that
our precious resources may not be with us after another half century. It is now
very obvious that the World Environmental Movement has failed and that a drastically
new approach must be established. This paper reviews the causes for this past
failure and recommends a new approach based on integrating environmental protection
into economics. Development planning, whereby development planners will be required
to provide equal attention to both the environment and economics.
The
Challenge
There are many who mark the 1972 U.N. Stockholm Conference as
the start of the World Environmental Movement, a distinct global effort to preserve
natural environmental resources. The movement gave impetus to the establishment
of national environmental protection agencies by countries throughout the World,
including Thailand's own National Environment Board in 1975. This was a momentous
time and a movement of great expectations, when many thought that these new environmental
protection agencies, with guidance from the United Nations Environment Program,
would generate the momentum for effective environmental protection systems in
their countries. What transpired in the following decades was frustrating
disillusionment. The famed U.N. Brundtland report issued 15 years later in 1987
noted clearly (i) that the World Environmental Movement had been a gross
failure, (ii) that this failure was especially evident in the developing
countries where the bulk of the World's population and natural resources can be
found, with the total environmental degradation during the 15 years from 1972
to 1987 actually exceeded the total historical degradation in these countries
prior to 1972, (iii) that this degradation could be attributed to the combination
of accelerating population, urbanization, industrialization, and encroachment
into national resource areas, the accelerating demand of the industrialized countries
for timber and other natural resources, the availability of new technologies making
it easier to extract and sell these resources, and a political system which fostered
such extraction and sales, and most importantly, (iii) that unless major
changes were made in the approaches to environment protection, there would be
little left to be preserved within the next half-century. The report concluded
there was a critical need to overhaul the institutional systems to support the
World Environmental Movement, and that "more of the same" operations
practiced since 1972 could not meet this need. Unfortunately the Brundtland
message was not heeded. In fact the U.N. Rio De Janeiro Conference of 1992, to
mark the successes of the World Environmental Movement over the 20 years since
1972, appears to have ignored the Brundtland warnings. It provided a platform
to preach only more of the same. The Conference created the perception of progress
based on the participation of over 100 Heads of State, but it was woefully meaningless
and even counterproductive in substance. Even as the conference proceeded in Brazil,
rampant forest destruction continued and has continued unabated ever since. The
Conference generated substantial discourse on how to protect forests to preserve
biodiversity, and recommended protocols for action, but none of these International
protocols have led to the fundamental changes in the World Environmental approach
which the Brundtland report concluded were critically and urgently needed. With
the end of the 20th century and a new millennium upon us, it is timely that we
recognize the reality of accelerating environmental degradation. It is also timely
that we recognize and admit the fallacy of continuing the World Environmental
approach of the past three decades. And it is most timely for us to assess our
work honestly and seriously and to propose a new approach that is feasible and
can effectively serve to correct the World's environmental problems over the next
decades. What we need now, at the global level, is an honest recognition
of the critical need to reorient the World Environmental Movement, together with
feasible recommendations how we can accomplish this. This is my main theme today,
which I trust will be given due consideration by the World's decision-makers.
Categories for Environmental Action We can consider the overall World
Environmental Movement as consisting of three distinct yet inter-twined types
of activities: 1. First are those actions to be done by the individual affluent
industrialized countries within their own boundaries to reduce their already high
levels of resource consumption and pollution. 2. Second are actions by individual
developing countries, again within their own boundaries, to promote sustainable
levels of resource use and to limit pollution. National governments take the lead
in these activities, with assistance from the affluent industrialized countries,
often channeled through International agencies. 3. Third are the actions
on a broader macro-scale, whether global in scope, regional, or sub-regional.
While actions must be taken by all, the bulk of the funding must come from the
affluent industrialized countries, the only countries with sufficient finances
to support these activities. The actions would be carried out through International
assistance agencies, such as the multinational development banks, U.N. affiliates,
bilateral and agencies, and other International organizations such as the World
Trade Organization. My esteemed colleague, Mr. Kasem Snidvongs, former Permanent
Secretary of the Ministry of Science, Technology and Environment, is presenting
a paper at this Conference which addresses the individual country, or micro-level,
picture. My remarks are intended to complement his by focusing on the broader
global or regional level. In particular, I am concerned with the reasons for our
lack of success at the global level, and what actions we should implement now
to help break through our impasse. A Proposal for a New World Environmental
Action Program Integration of the Environment with Economics It is
encouraging that International literature and the media have begun to address
the need for a new approach for the World Environmental Movement. In a 1998 paper
published in the Environmentalist, Kasem Snidvongs and his colleagues note that
the institutional structure established in 1972 for the World Environmental Movement
has not only failed, but that it was doomed to fail from the start because it
ignored the basic adage that "Money drives all systems." Instead the
system then set up assumed that the financial decision makers, who are predominantly
economists, would continue to function on their own, and that environmental protection
would be achieved by guidance from environmentalists through the United Nations
Environmental. Program, the World Wildlife Fund, the International Union
for Conservation of Nature, and other International agencies. The "Environmental
Think Tank" was to be the United Nations Environmental Program, with assistance
from other U.N. agencies such as the UNDP. It was to have basic responsibility
for planning necessary environmental programs, and make recommendations for the
World Bank, other Multilateral Development Banks, and development funding agencies
to assure that economic programs gave due attention to environmental needs. This
did not happen. Instead, the economic oriented development banks and agencies
continued to guide and finance development in more-or-less their usual way, with
only some limited "add-on" attention to environmental issues. The primary
interest of economists in nearly all governments, whether of affluent industrialized
or developing countries, has been to realize short-term economic gains. In contrast,
long-term sustainability requires environmental protection. With severe environmental
degradation upon us, and with, as Brundtland noted, the likely destruction of
most natural resources in the next half-century, we must think more in terms of
long-term sustainability than short-term gains. The solution can only come through
a thorough integration of the environmental with the economic. Economic development
becomes economic-cum-environmental development, and economists become economic-cum-environmentalists. The
World Bank, as a leading "think tank" in development matters, is already
incorporating the environment in many of its efforts. Yet a glance at many World
Bank funded programs shows that economic considerations still predominate. It
might be more than a mere cosmetic change if the World Bank were to change the
name of its main institute from the International Bank for Reconstruction and
Development to the International Bank for Reconstruction and Environmentally Sustainable
Development. The change in name would assure that Bank programs would include
the environment in more than an "add-on" manner. In the same vein,
the WTO should change its name to the WTEO, the "World Trade and Environment
Organization," to reflect maintaining the environment as a priority concern
in International trade and commerce. The March 5, 1999 article of the International
Herald Tribune, "The NGO spector Stalks Trade Talks" describes the current
attack by NGOs on the WTO for providing only "add-on" consideration
to environmental issues in its economic operations. The article notes that the
NGOs are not going to cease their demands; they are just beginning their efforts;
and they intend to force the WTO to become a WTEO. In a new system stressing
the integration between environmental and economic issues, the mandate of the
UNEP and other International environmental agencies would be to monitor and report
on the adequacy of attention to the environment in the economic-cum-environment
programs. The change in approach cannot come simply with name changes.
It must come in the attitudes and approaches of those who work at all levels of
development planning. We can see the potential for this link in the integration
of the environmental and economic in the current role of Dr. Bindu Lohani, Deputy
Manager for one sector of ADB projects, a new post for him since January 1999.
Previously Dr. Lohani was Manager of ADB's Environment Division (he essentially
created it): his role as "Bank Environmental Chief" was to advise and
guide ADB project managers on incorporating environmental matters into economic
programs, but the response continued to be mostly "add-on". Under his
new position, Dr. Lohani (who is basically environmental-cum-economic oriented)
is in a position to require truly integrated environmental and economic planning
in the new projects prepared by the group under his supervision. We hope this
will lead to effective programs, both environmentally and economically, and that
the future of such integration will be institutionalized rather than dependent
on the capability of particular individuals. Suggested Action Program Once
the basic institutional restructuring of the World Environmental Movement is implemented,
the doors come open to numerous new possibilities for meaningful project action.
The following is but a suggestion of selected potential projects. Forestry
and Related Biodiversity The problem of forest degradation and the destruction
of related habitats for biodiversity is certainly of the highest priority to the
World. The failure to protect the World's forests and wildlife habitats is also
the No. 1 indictment of the approach taken by the International Assistance Agencies.
It is time we need to recognize that some types of forests and habitats do not
need - indeed, should not include - people in their equation. Even the IUCN and
the World Wildlife Fund, who are supposed to be the leading International NGOs
in the fight to preserve biodiversity, have not helped reduce the destruction
of critical habitats for biodiversity in their attempts to allow people to live
in harmony with forests. It is time we recognized that the only solution for some
of the critical biodiversity protection would be to identify these, key purchase
and own them, and thus prevent encroachment of people into these special wildlife
and biodiversity reserves. This is the approach taken by the Nature Conservancy,
whose mission "is to preserve plants, animals and natural communities that
represent the diversity of life on Earth by protecting the lands and waters they
need to survive" through purchases and other means of acquisition. This approach
is not just for NGOs, but can be taken effectively by government, as illustrated
by the U.S. Federal Government's purchase from private owners of a vast tract
of massive redwood forest in northern California (Reference 4). A logical
and feasible approach (Reference 2) would be first to provide substantial funds
for a careful quantified evaluation of forests in the World - those past, present,
and likely to remain under the ongoing system of environmental management - to
identify the minimum preservation needs on a global basis and identify selected
areas which can meet these needs at the least cost. These sites could then be
purchased (on favorable terms to the governments or private owners), put under
International plenipotentiary treaty control (as used to be the mechanics of the
former Mekong Committee), and provided competent management and monitory mechanics.
For such action, the first step is to allocate, for example, $0.5 million to prepare
the TOR for the required feasibility study, carry out the study to develop the
recommended action program (this study might cost approximately $50 million),
then implement the program (at a capital cost of possibly $2 trillion). These
sums may seem large, but they are minimal when compared to the seriousness of
the problem. Assuming the feasibility study makes a convincing case, it should
not be difficult to persuade the Group of Seven to finance the plan. Remember,
up to now, no such study or facts guide public policy, so no one as yet knows
what to do and how to proceed. This is the type of action that the Global Environment
Fund, established at Rio/92, should be undertaking. Biodiversity at the
Sub-Regional Level Another promising approach (Reference 2), which can supplement
and complement to the global approach noted above, could be put into immediate
use for those very precious natural resource areas already known to be under heavy
encroachment pressure, such as the coastal Sunderbunds region of India and Bangladesh
- the last remaining major habitat of the Bengal Tiger - and the mountainous "Panda
region" of China. Again, competent feasibility studies for each case must
be done to obtain the facts and to prepare convincing cases for political and
financial decision makers. The territories could be placed under conditions of
a plenipotentiary biodiversity treaty, while of course assuring the sovereignty
of each country. Another suggestion for immediate sub-regional action would be
a study of endangered species in the Mekong basin sub-region, not under separate
country programs but on a cost-effective sub-regional basis. Control over the
resources would be shared by all the countries of the region, with the assistance
of the International community. Climate Change and the Loss of the Ozone
Layer Endless talk and little action again characterize the response to
the problems of climate change and the loss of the ozone layer. Although many
argue that the trends of climate change are not yet certain, few dare claim that
the problem is not serious. It is that the International Protocol on Climate Change
supports comprehensive studies that could lead to action: yet a lack of adequate
action characterized by a lack of political will is what we have to show for the
World effort to tackle this grave crisis. Again, climate change is too important
an issue to leave to individual countries to solve. Most - whether they are advanced
industrial or developing countries - are likely to take much meaningful corrective
action because the costs of doing so are seemingly very high. An International
Climate Change R&D Program (which would probably cost $50 million) could take
the IPCC studies as a starting point to conduct a massive R&D program to: (1)
determine the causes-and-effects of climate change, whether natural or man-made,
and (2) wherever it is found that man-made actions are the significant causes,
delineate the needed action program, including costs, for such actions as massive
reforestation to help counter the CO2 the atmosphere, drastic CFC replacement
programs, and so forth. It should be clear that no country seems willing
to modify its on-going economic behavior to ameliorate climate change, so long
as they can claim the facts remain insufficient to prove the actual effects of
climate change, because the costs of such economic modification appears too large.
Yet this fundamental issue, that the economic conditions predominate, seems not
to be recognized in the current World Environmental Management on climate change,
even at the recent Buenos Aires Conferences (Reference 4) dealing directly with
this issue. The two leading "culprit" countries, the U.S. and China,
typify the World's approach: the advanced industrialized countries are not willing
to sacrifice their current advanced economic standing. A widespread International
effort is needed, under International management, with sufficient financial support
for development of green technologies and with stricter, more rapid phasing out
of those technologies recognized as contributing to climate change. Riparian
Freshwater Shortage Another critical environmental problem of global implication
is the scarcity of riparian freshwater resources. With increasing population,
burgeoning industrialization, and destruction of forest resources, the World's
river water supplies in most of the World are becoming severely overtaxed (Reference
6). This problem is especially critical where rivers are shared by more than one
country. The U.S. and Mexico already faced the problem in sharing the scarce
water of the Colorado River. With increasing U.S. demands for the water, including
demands by the growing urban areas of Southern California, the freshwater flow
to Mexico was greatly reduced, seriously affecting the production of tomatoes
and other crops mainly sold to the U.S. A "solution" was the construction
and operation of a large desalinization plant, to substitute for the lost fresh
water. The tomatoes and other produce are now grown with extremely expensive,
highly subsidized water. Other International conflicts over riparian fresh
water loom throughout the World, as up-stream countries build dams to meet their
water needs, leaving down-stream countries with greatly reduced water flow. We
find this occurring now with the Tigris, the Euphrates, the Nile, and our own
great river of Southeast Asia, the Mekong. The problem extends to conflicts over
groundwater flow, particularly in more arid regions such as the Middle East. Again,
there is need for a comprehensive International effort to evaluate the supply
and demand for all the key riparian and groundwater sources. This should lead
to a recommended cost-effective program, including an International conference
that can lead to a "Law on the Use of World Freshwater Resources". Legal
Damages One of the most effective mechanisms in the U.S. for compliance
with environmental laws is the evaluation of damages and collection of penalties
for damages at sufficient levels to assure compliance. Illegal pollution discharge,
for example, is fined at $50,000 a day, a rate that assures quick remedial action.
Yet, as my colleague Mr. Kasem Snidvongs notes in his paper at this conference,
governments of developing countries have not been in a position to impose such
penalties, in part because they lack a competent monitoring system (common in
advanced industrial countries like the U.S.) that are required to obtain the hard
data needed for enforcement. Yet such comprehensive monitoring and application
of effective penalties is needed in Thailand and the rest of the developing World. A
novel idea was recently expressed in an editorial in the International Herald
Tribune of 20-21 April, 1999 (Reference 7), concerning the environmental damage
caused by an Ecuadorian company which is a subsidiary of a U.S. company. The editorial
stated that the plaintiffs should be able to sue for damages in an American court,
in response to NGO pressures. This is what Indians affected by the Bhopal disaster
had wanted to do: sue Union Carbide in an American court for the drastic health
and environmental damage caused by the Union Carbide factory. Bizarre as this
approach may initially seem, it could become reality. Just as Spanish and British
courts are now claiming jurisdiction over human rights abuses against Spanish
citizens by General Pinochet in Chile, so too can we imagine a time when those
intentionally acting to harm the environment can be held accountable in courts
not just in the country where they have done the harm, but also in the country
where they are legal registered, and even in other countries where their victims
may reside. Conclusion In summary, the evidence seems ample that a
major overhaul is needed in the World Environmental Management system that so
far has such a dismal record in environmental protection. The timing could also
be seen as appropriate, as we start the 21st century. There is a critical and
urgent need to establish anew the World Environmental Management system that recognizes
the need to link economics with environmental programs, and that can assure environmental
issues are integrated in - not just added on to - all economic development programs.
A much needed initial step to this effort cannot be "more of the same".
U.N. planned and managed International conferences such as Rio/92 or Buenos Aries/98,
which have done little to change the economic and environmental status quo. Instead,
we need a new Global Environmental Conference, within the U.N. context, planned
and managed by representatives from the Group of Seven, or is it G-8, who need
to provide most of the economic backing for major. International efforts, along
with representatives from The Group of Seventy-Seven currently numbering well
over a hundred plus China, who represent the bulk of the developing World and
their crucial political support. These representatives should begin the effort
to map out and implement the new global environmental program that is so desperately
needed.
References: 1. International Herald Tribune, (1999). "Ecuador's
Right to Sue",
issue of 20-21 April,
2. International Herald
Tribune, (1999). "NGO Spector Stalks Trade
Talks", 5 March, 3.
Ludwig, H., Potter, J., and Snidvongs, K., (1998). "Facing Up to
Environmental
Reality in the 21st Century", Environmentalist (U.K.)
18, 131-134. 4.
National Geographic Society (USA), (1999). "Biodiversity, the Fragile
Web", issue of February, 5. Resources for Future, (1999). "At
Buenos Aires and Beyond",
pages 10-13, issue of Winger, 6. U.N.
Brundtland Committee, (1987). "Our Common Future". 7. Water Environment
Federation, (1999). "Population Growth Threatens to Spark World Water Crisis",
Asia Water Environment, February.
H.
M. The King and the Environment
by Mr. Anand Panyarachun
Foreign Correspondents Club of Thailand
In Honour of the 50th Anniversary
of
H. M. The King of Thailand's Accession to the Throne
June 5, 1996
Mr. President, Distinguished Guests, Ladies and Gentlemen,
I
am honoured by your invitation to deliver an address on His Majesty the King's
accomplishments in promoting environmental protection. In
this field, as in so many others, His Majesty has worked tirelessly on behalf
of his people. In fact, he has continuously and actively dedicated himself to
development work since 1951, and has been responsible for initiating nearly 2000
projects, spanning a range of development sectors, including land and water resources,
agriculture, livestock, fisheries and forestry. Many of these projects have broken
new ground in their respective fields. In a number of cases, His Majesty has pioneered
what are now accepted as routine techniques. At a time
when public participation and cross-sectoral integration are high on the sustainable
development agenda, we can look back at over four decades of Royal work based
on these very principles. Undoubtedly, as we attempt to reconcile our nation's
economic development with its social and environmental realities, we can do no
better than follow the example set by our King. To trace
the evolution of His Majesty's commitment to the environment and development of
Thailand we must go back 50 years, to the date of His Majesty's accession to the
throne and subsequent departure to Europe to complete his studies. The overseas
journey of Thailand's new monarch was greeted with some ambivalence, not least
of all by the King himself. The mood of this period is best described by the King
himself, in an extract from his writings dated August 19, 1946:1
"…the car passed through the crowds extremely
slowly and on approaching Wat Benjamabopitr began to speed up slightly. At that
moment I heard the sound of someone crying out loudly 'Don't desert your people!'.
I wanted to cry back that as long as the people did not 'desert' me, how could
I ever 'desert' them?" Some
twenty years later, His Majesty met with the very person who had cried out and
was able to say:2 "Your
words made me aware of my duty and brought me back" This
personal affirmation of duty and responsibility was an indication of the extraordinary
discipline and dedication of the young monarch. It also served to underline that
his coronation pledge on May 5, 1950, to: "….reign
with righteousness for the benefit and happiness of
the Siamese people". Would
indeed become the guiding principle of his life and work. His
Majesty's work began in earnest on his return to Thailand on a permanent basis
in 1951. The very first Royal Development Projects were initiated in 1952, with
infrastructural and water resource developments in the mid-south of the country.
During this early period from 1952-1962, His Majesty's efforts were directed towards
the immediate problems of what was then still an impoverished and predominantly
rural society. Many of the early Royal projects were welfare-oriented initiatives
aimed at providing basic health and education services for the very poorest members
of Thai society. After visiting the north-eastern region
of Thailand for the first time in 1955, His Majesty began to formulate his determining
thesis that integrated and systematic development, largely based on sustainable
agricultural practices, would be fundamental to the long-term livelihood of the
population. The focus of His Majesty's work, therefore, began to shift towards
the areas of agricultural and water resource development, and the role that modern
technologies could play in creating sustainable solutions. The
emphasis on technological solutions is not surprising, given His Majesty's early
academic background in science and technology. However, what singled out his Majesty
as an early leader in this field was his enduring belief in the importance of
appropriate technology, or what may be termed local solutions to local problems. Rather
than wholesale import of foreign techniques and tools, His Majesty advocated trial
and experimentation under Thai conditions as a more sustainable pathway towards
development. Indeed, His Majesty's own talent for active experimentation allowed
him to make a number of significant contributions from Chitralada Palace, his
Bangkok residence. The Royal projects at Chitralada Palace
are, by now, well known. Experiments began as early as 1951, when His Majesty
conducted breeding trials for tilapia fish (Oreochromis mossambicus) in
the swimming pool at the Royal Residence.3 From these modest beginnings,
His Majesty's research work expanded to cover almost
every sector of agricultural development. Since the 1970s, His Majesty's work
programme has included the vegetative propagation of economic plant species, cultivation
of medicinal herbs, hydroponics, livestock husbandry, and the development of biogas
technology. Although originally conceived as experimental
trials and demonstration exercises, a number of these initiatives have matured
into viable technologies. For example, water hyacinth (Eichornia crassipes)
was first grown experimentally at Chitralada Palace in 1985, to assess its potential
as a pollution control agent. This aquatic plant can act as a biological filter
to remove heavy metals from severely polluted waters. Based on the experience
gained from this trial, a successful water pollution control project was initiated
at the Makkasan Swamp in Bangkok.
Research and development at Chitralada
Palace has played an important role in the development of an integrated Royal
strategy for resource management. Indeed, His Majesty's approach to problem solving
incorporates many of the elements now considered vital to successful rural development
programmes. With respect to research, the two key elements
of this approach are application and extension. Recognising that research work
is a means to an end, rather than an end in itself, His Majesty has always sought
to relate his results to the problems faced by rural people. Accordingly, the
implementation of Royal projects in various villages and rural areas is usually
based on the conclusions and lessons drawn from His Majesty's own experimental
projects. As I mentioned earlier, His Majesty began emphasising
the importance of sustainable rural development and water resource management
at an early stage in his reign. It is now in these areas that he is perhaps best
known to his people,4 and in which His Majesty has developed and refined
his characteristic approach to development and environmental management. The
emphasis on certain sectors in particular should not be construed as a limitation
in the Royal development strategy. His Majesty has paid considerable attention
to the need to find integrated development options that are consistent with both
maintenance of environmental quality and conservation of the natural resource
base. Indeed, His Majesty has sought not only cross-sectoral integration, but
also harmonisation of spatial and institutional factors.5 His
Majesty's perspective on environmental management can be demonstrated by recourse
to two well-known initiatives: the introduction of Vetiver Grass Technology (VGT),
and the development of the Chai pattana Water Aerator. For
all practical purposes, topsoil is a non-renewable resource like petroleum. Yet,
every year, both wind and water remove enormous quantities of soil from agricultural
lands in Thailand, particularly in the steep, upland areas to the north of the
country. A number of reasons lie behind these high rates of soil erosion, including
deforestation, unsuitable farming practices, and a low awareness of effective
soil conservation techniques amongst farmers. Against this
background of soil loss and unsustainable land usage, His Majesty introduced the
use of vetiver grass (Vetiveria spp.) as a natural, or 'biological' method for
soil conservation and the control of soil erosion.6 In its most common
form, VGT is the establishment of vegetative hedges along contours to reduce the
flow of water and sediment from eroding sites. Other applications include the
stabilisation of reservoir embankments and prevention of gully erosion. Compared
to more traditional, engineered practices, the cultivation of vetiver grass is
a simple, effective and inexpensive soil management tool.7 The
use of vetiver grass has been widely adopted by Thai farmers, and is now well
established as a local soil conservation technique. This is not all. The study
and experimentation into vetiver applications promoted by His Majesty has made
Thailand one of the world's leading exponents of VGT, a fact amply demonstrated
at the recent international conference on vetiver grass organised here in Bangkok
by the Office of the Royal Development Projects Board.8 Vetiver
grass represents a multi-purpose solution to the twin problems of soil and water
resource conservation. It is an excellent example of the local approach allied
to the development of appropriate technologies that has long been advocated by
His Majesty. So too is the Chai Pattana Water Aerator, another simple, yet effective,
tool, conceived and designed by the King himself. Development
of the Chai Pattana Water Aerator (models RX-2 to RX-7), and the associated Chai
Pattana Bio-Filter (model RX-8), was initiated by His Majesty in response to the
need for simple, inexpensive technologies for tackling water pollution, for example
in the canals and waterways of Bangkok. Between 1984 and
1987, His Majesty had advocated the flushing of polluted waterways with fresh
water from the Chao Phraya River.9 He also promoted the use of water
hyacinth as a biological filter, as discussed earlier. Later on, between 1988
and 1991, His Majesty sought to introduce further techniques for wastewater treatment,
in order to build a composite and effective strategy for the control of water
pollution. One of the outcomes of this period of development was the Water Aerator,
a tool that enhances biochemical processes for treating polluted water. Biological
treatment of wastewater involves the use of aerobic bacteria to consume organic
pollutants. However, the efficiency of these bacteria is limited by the level
of dissolved oxygen, which can be very low in highly polluted waters. The Water
Aerator is designed to overcome this limiting factor by increasing the amount
of dissolved oxygen available to aerobic bacteria. The
first designs for the Chai Pattana Water Aerator were introduced by His Majesty
towards the end of 1988. Subsequent development and construction of the first
Aerators by the Department of Irrigation was made possible with funding provided
by the King's Chai Pattana Foundation. The Chai Pattana Foundation has also provided
support for distribution of the Aerator and research trials aimed at improving
its effectiveness.10 The preceding two examples
have shown something of His Majesty's approach to environmental management, including
his emphasis on the integration of development efforts and the application of
small-scale, appropriate technology. I would now like to
explore in greater detail the methods by which Royal Development Projects are
devised and implemented, including His Majesty's techniques for working in the
field and appraising local requirements. The first, and
most important, point to note is His Majesty's personal, or 'people-oriented'
approach.11 As stressed by the King himself in an address delivered
in November, 1970:12 "In
working out a programme to help people, it is necessary that you know the people
you intend to help. There is no short cut. One does not know a people by merely
memorising some research papers prepared by research centres. You must meet them
and like them." The truth
of this assertion is reflected in His Majesty's punishing work schedule. Even
to the present day, His Majesty sets aside approximately 200 days out of every
year for visiting rural areas13 and seeing for himself the challenges
and obstacles being faced by his subjects. Once on-site,
His Majesty will begin a process of consultation with local communities, the potential
beneficiaries of a Royal Project, and local government officials, the usual implementers
of a project. Only after identifying the needs of the people, and relating them
to the existing management plans and operating constraints of local government
agencies, will His Majesty make recommendations for development work. Even then,
His Majesty will only suggest principles and guidelines for further work: local
officials are free to implement what they consider feasible. By
allowing local communities to actively participate in the selection of objectives,
strategies, and approaches for development projects, His Majesty manages to achieve
five very important objectives: - Increase the awareness
of all project participants of the social and economic benefits provided by the
natural environment;
- Identify the respective needs and
aspirations of the various parties in relation to environment and development;
-
Strike a balance between the short-term with its immediate results and the long-term
with the maintenance of environmental quality and conservation of natural resources;
-
Develop a sense of 'ownership' of Royal projects and their policy, strategy and
operational components, so that decisions are made by all stakeholders;
-
Foster dialogue between government agencies working in different development sectors
to highlight cross-sectoral problems and their solutions.
Underlying
these objectives is a second, important principle in His Majesty's approach to
the development of field projects. This is the requirement for site-specific solutions
to the problems of environment and development. As has been pointed out, the Royal
Projects are notable for their fine degree of differentiation in specific provisions
according not only to the physical, but also the socio-economic environment.14 His
Majesty's appreciation of the so-called 'reality of place'15 led him,
in 1979, to introduce the concept of integrated study centres, each involved in
the study and promotion of development alternatives in specific environments. The
Royal Development Study Centres, as they are now known, serve as 'demonstration
models',16 each co-ordinating much of the existing information and
research relevant to the problems of the specific areas in which the Centres are
sited. Methods and technologies developed at the Centres are disseminated to farmers
in the surrounding rural region, allowing them to choose and adopt strategies
that are relevant to their needs and feasible in terns of implementation. His
Majesty has described the Centres as 'living museums',17 a term which
accurately reflects their role as open repositories of appropriate, locally-derived,
technology. At the same time, however, the Centres also provide an accessible
framework for development co-operation between local communities, non-governmental
organisations, government agencies and other workers concerned with sustainable
development. To date, six Royal Development Study Centres
have been established, and the network now broadly covers the range of bio-physical
and socio-economic variation in Thailand.18 To illustrate the integrated
strategies being promoted by these Centres, I would like to dwell briefly on the
work of the very first Royal Development Study Centre, situated at Khao Hin Sorn
in Chachoengsao Province. The prevailing environmental
and socio-economic conditions which prompted His Majesty to establish the Khao
Hin Sorn Centre as the first Royal Development Study Centre provide an excellent
example of the complex matrix of human and environmental factors that have influenced
development in Thailand. Logging and agricultural settlement
on the rolling uplands of east and north-east Thailand have had major impacts
on environmental quality in these regions. So too has the extensive cultivation
of cash crops such as cassava (Manihot esculenta). Low input cash-cropping
on sandy upland soils has reduced the nutrient status of these soils and increased
their susceptibility to erosion.19 Against this
background of soil erosion and fertility decline, His Majesty initiated the Khao
Hin Sorn Centre as a focus for research and development into forestry and agricultural
methods for soil and water resource conservation. Programmes at the Centre include
intensive crop cultivation, livestock breeding and agro-forest development. Occupational
development in small-scale cottage industries has also been promoted as a way
of supplementing rural incomes. As the first of the Royal
Development Study Centres, Khao Hin Sorn provided an important testing ground
for His Majesty's concepts and principles. For example, the emphasis placed by
His Majesty on integration of all efforts came as a challenge to government agencies
and officials used to operating as discrete units with little or no horizontal
communication.20 The importance of extending research developments
to the surrounding farming community, while undeniable, was also somewhat overshadowed
by problems with land and resource ownership.21 Obviously,
change can never be immediate, especially with respect to people's livelihoods.
Nevertheless, the on-going efforts of those at Khao Hin Sorn have demonstrated
the will to realise His Majesty's vision, and this is a strong foundation on which
to build the strategies so necessary for sustainable rural development. His
Majesty's unstinting efforts in the fields of environmental management and sustainable
development have long been a major factor behind the high level of environmental
awareness that exists amongst Thai citizens today. The majority of the population
were perhaps not aware of the true extent of His Majesty's concern until 1989. On
the occasion of His Majesty's birthday, a royal audience was granted to many thousands
of well-wishers at Chitralada Palace on December 4, 1989. As is usual on such
occasions, His Majesty delivered an informal address, touching on certain issues
and concerns affecting Thailand and Thai society. On this occasion, his Majesty
devoted his entire speech to the state of the environment, covering issues not
only of national, but also of global, importance. With
respect to global issues, His Majesty dwelled at some length on the threat of
global climate change, and the strategies necessary for combating it. His solution
to the problem was simple and straightforward: "….carbon
in the atmosphere increases every year by 3 billion tons. And this is what worries
the scholars. The solution is: burn less fuel and plant more trees."22 At
the national level, His Majesty concentrated on the problem of water management.
On this subject he struck a positive note, emphasising that:
"…the water cycle in this country is still adequate,
it only requires proper management. If it is well managed, water is plentiful…If
we use water with caution, as well as keeping a close control on polluted water,
we can survive."23 His
Majesty concluded by stressing the need for careful, objective analysis of environmental
problems, allied with an integrated approach towards developing solutions:
"If we study the problems calmly and reasonably,
we will be on our way to their solution….The problems I mention here concern all
branches of knowledge because they concern the very existence of humanity. These
problems are all inter-dependent."24
Such was the impact of His Majesty's speech on the cause of environmental protection
and sustainable development in Thailand that the government subsequently declared
December 4 as National Environment Day. Apart from marking an event of special
importance, this day now serves to reinforce the common concern all Thai people
have for their environment. I would like to conclude my
address by quoting from His Majesty's Birthday speech once more. In the space
of a few short words, His Majesty managed to conjure up an image of Thailand that
we are in danger of losing forever. At the same time, however, His Majesty instilled
a note of optimism and determination from which we can all draw strength and inspiration:
"Thailand is most suitable for human settlement,
but we must preserve it well, lest this country of orchards and farms becomes
a sterile desert. It can be protected; this can be done."25
We have no other option, but to see to it that it is done!
References: 1
Quoted in: Office of the Royal Projects Board, "His Majesty King Bhumibhol
Adulyadej and His Development Work". Bangkok, 1987, p. 11.
2 Ibid., p. 11. 3
United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation Regional Office for Asia and
the Pacific. "The King and Agriculture in Thailand". Bangkok, 1987,
p. 7. 4 United Nations
Environment Programme, "Sustainable Development of Natural Resources: A Study
of the Concepts and Applications of His Majesty the King of Thailand". Bangkok,
1988, p. 26. 5 Ibid.,
p. 26. 6 Office of the
Royal Development Projects Board, "His Majesty the King's Approach Towards
Sustainable Agriculture". Bangkok (undated), p. 20.
7 Richard Grimshaw, "The Role of Vetiver Grass in Sustaining Agricultural
Productivity". Asia Technical Department, The World Bank, 1994, p. 1.
8 "Vetiver: A Miracle Grass". February 4-8, 1996, Bangkok,
Thailand. 9 The Secretariat
Office of the Chai Pattana Foundation, "The Chai Pattana Aerator: A Royal
Initiative for Wastewater Treatment". Chai Pattana Foundation Newsletter,
December, 1991, p. 12. 10
Ibid., p. 13. 11 Dr.
Phaichitr Uathavikul, "Managing the Environment" (forthcoming).
12 Quoted in: United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation Regional
Office for Asia and the Pacific. "The King and Agriculture in Thailand",
op. cit., p.13. 13 Office
of the Royal Development Projects Board, "Royal Development Projects".
Bangkok, 1995, p. 7. 14
Dr. Phaichitr Uthavikul, "Managing the Environment", op. cit.
15 United Nations Environment Programme, :Sustainable Development of
Natural Resources: A Study of the Concepts and Applications of His Majesty the
King of Thailand", op. cit., p. 133.
16 Office of the Royal Development Projects Board, "His Majesty
the King's Approach Towards Sustainable Agriculture", op. cit. P. 22.
17 United Nations Environment Programme, "Sustainable Development
of Natural Resources: A Study of the Concepts and Applications of His Majesty
the King of Thailand", op. cit., p. 31.
18 The six Royal Development Study Centres are: Central Region - Khao
Hin Sorn Centre in Chachoengsao: Central Region, Western Sector - Huai Sai Centre
in Petchaburi; Central Region, Eastern Sector - Kung Krabaen Bay Centre in Chanthaburi;
North- Eastern Region - Puparn Centre in Sakhon Nakhon; Northern Region - Huai
Hong Khrai Centre in Chiang Mai; and Southern Region - Pikun thong Centre in Narathiwat
19 United Nations Environment Programme, "Sustainable Development
of Natural Resources: A Study of the Concepts and Applications of His Majesty
the King of Thailand", op. cit., p. 69.
20 Ibid., p. 75. 21
Ibid., p. 78. 22 Office
of the National Environment Board, "Royal Speech Given to the Audience of
Well-Wishers on the Occasion of the Royal Birthday Anniversary on Monday, 4th
December 1989. Bangkok 1990, p. 12.
23 Ibid., p. 15-17 24
Ibid., p. 15. 25 Ibid.,
p. 17.
Speech
by H.E. Mr. Anand Panyarachun
Former
Prime Minister of Thailand
Given at the Reception to Introduce the Book “Mahajanaka”
Authored
by His Majesty the King
at The Oriental Hotel
June 3, 1996
Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen, Today
is the beginning of a very important week in Thai history. A week, which begins
commemorative events in celebration of His Majesty’s Golden Jubilee. In the past
few weeks I have also been busy doing my own thing. A couple of weeks ago, I was
privileged to be invited to be a keynote speaker at an international conference
for historians of Asia and the Pacific. And as a humble subject of His Majesty,
I thought that the least I could do to join in the celebration of His Majesty’s
Golden Jubilee was to undertake a certain personal mission and this I did in speaking
up on His Majesty’s role in the making of Thai history. In the past few days I
have also been interviewed by CNN and BBC and also written a column to be published
towards the end of the week in an international paper. I
feel that there is a need to fill in the knowledge of the foreign communities,
wherever they are, of the love, admiration, respect and reverence we in Thailand
have for our King. It is perhaps something, which is not, or can never be, fully
comprehended by foreigners, let alone those who might have lived in this country
for the past 10 or 15 years. It is something that cannot be easily explained either.
You only have to witness it. You only have to feel it and you only have to sense
it. Because of the communication that the King has with His own people, irrespective
of religion, well-being, profession, He has been able to establish a rapport with
His subjects in a way no other monarch can. So
tonight, it is my special privilege to be asked to do another chore, one which
I feel, I must admit, embarrassed, one for which I hardly feel qualified. I might
have many ambitions in my lifetime, but being a literary critic is not one of
them. The King has reigned over the country
for nearly 50 years. Six days from now, He will have reached a milestone. He had
to learn a process. He had to do His best under whatever circumstances. The very
idea that he had to try His best without expecting any reward or any benefit to
Himself. That has been the hallmark of His life. Nineteen
years ago when He listened to a sermon by a high-ranking monk, the sermon was
about a Jataka tale. It is a tale, one of many, which depicts the life or former
life of Lord Buddha. When He heard that sermon, He was inspired to carry the message,
the moral of that story to the people in general. Because in spite of our saying
that we are Buddhists, very few of us have taken the time and trouble to read
the Tripitaka or Jataka tales, partly because it is extremely difficult to comprehend.
Even the modern versions in Thai also pose difficulties among readers, including
myself. He felt that the story had morals from which we could learn and could
draw lessons and, in effect, could apply in our own daily life. Jataka
are stories about the Lord Buddha, when he was incarnated as Bhotisatta, sometimes
in human form, non-human form, or as an angel, or as a creature. Often when Buddha
taught Dharma, he would use the Jataka, which is a story with a Dharrna message,
as a teaching tool, as the listeners were not always of the same disposition.
There are 2 types of Jataka. One is the Canon Jataka and the other is Non-Canonical
Jataka. The Canon Jatake comprises 547 Jataka and is divided into 22 groups. The
last and most important group contains 10 Jataka about Bhotisatta in the period
immediately preceeding Lord Buddha’s attaining enlightenment. The said 10 Jataka
are about the following: re-nunciation, endeavour, kindness, self-determination,
wisdom, morality, forbearance, equanimity, truthfulness and charity. Originally,
Jataka in the Tripitaka were composed solely as prayers. Around B.E. 1000 they
were adapted into prose for easy understanding. Non-Canonical Jataka do not appear
in the Tripitaka. They are 50 Jataka composed by a Buddhist monk from Chiangmai
around the period B.E. 2000 - 2200 based on village folklore. From ancient times,
Jataka tales have had an important role to play in the Buddhist society. Archeological
evidence discovered through the years and certain Buddhist customs bear witness
to this. The Mehajanaka book in Thai and
in English by His Majesty the King is a translation and retelling of the story
of King Mahajanaka in the Holy Tripitaka Buddhist scripture. Among the Canon Jataka,
the Mahajanaka Jataka has two interesting and different features. First, it is
a story about Lord Buddha Incarnated as a merchant who has to practice perseverance
in his endeavours. Secondly, it is a story about Suvarnnabhumi which His Majesty,
I am almost certain, makes very clear is Thailand. The text that has been modified
concerns the incident of the mango trees. The story had it that, at the entry
of the park, there were standing two mango trees, one bearing fruit and the other
barren. The King tasted the delicious mango fruit, then entered the park. When
he returned, he saw that the mango tree with the task fruit had been vandalised
and felled. As for the other tree, it was still proudly standing. At this juncture,
the King left the city to seek supreme tranquility. The story demonstrated that
good things of good quality will be the target of greed and will stand always
in danger. His Majesty the King was of the opinion that King Mahajanaka’s desire
to leave the city on a quest for supreme tranquility was not yet opportune, not
timely, because Mithila’s, that is the name of the city, prosperity had not yet
reached an appropriate level. The people still lacked wisdom as well as technical
knowledge. They did not see the essence of what is beneficial, not even for their
own good. Therefore, an institution of learning had to be set up. His Majesty
has a view that King Mahajanaka would have been able to achieve the supreme tranquility
more readily if he had completely fulfilled his worldly duties first. King MahaJanaka
practised ultimate perseverance without the desire for reward, which resulted
in his gaining the throne and bringing prosperity and wealth to the city of Mithila
by the strength of his personal qualities. His
Majesty the King, I assume, saw in this tale a moral lesson for the problems facing
Thailand. His literary skills are evident in the choice of appropriate, yet simple,
words both in the Thai and English texts that makes the Mahajanaka tale relevant
to the contemporary period. Some modifications, of course, were made in the text
for the sake of easy understanding. His Majesty has also woven a new scenario
where King Mahajanaka contributes to furthering the course of the people’s education
before he sets off to seek the supreme tranquility. In addition to the text, His
Majesty felt that there was the need to use art to assist in the teaching of Dharma.
As the substance of the story had already been adapted to make it contemporary,
His Majesty asked the artists to create illustrations representative of contemporary
Thai art. His Majesty further deemed it appropriate to design the book along the
lines of a Western fairy tale, but in the style of contemporary Thai art. Hence,
accompanying the text are paintings by 8 prominent Thai artists whose preliminary,
renditions and subsequent drafts were all presented for His Majesty’s approval.
In fact, all the details of the production of the book, from the artwork, choice
of type face, column separation, book size, binding and all other relevant details
were effected at the express wish of His Majesty. There are also 4 maps drawn
end illustrated by His Majesty to show the route taken by King Mahajanaka. The
Royal intention in telling or in re-telling the MahaJanaka tale is to make the
teachings of Lord Buddha readily accessible to the people for constructive contemplation
on the occasion of the Golden Jubilee of his reign. To understand the moral tale,
and fully recognise and appreciate the nuances of language, some people might
have to persevere more than the others. His Majesty felt that for the reader to
gain access to its Dharma, it was necessary to create a feeling of sacredness.
In order to make a symbolic object to which people could refer to when discouraged;
His Majesty deemed it appropriate for the Mahajanaka medallion to be commissioned
to accompany the book. This is the first and perhaps the only time that such a
medallion has been consecrated in a royal ceremony by His Majesty.
Let me conclude by recapitulating what I said earlier. - When
His Majesty was inspired to write this book some 19 years ago, and it did take
literally 19 years to complete it in all details. He would use a very old computer.
He would type it Himself. He would use it to draw graphs, to do many things. He
might write one sentence or one paragraph a day, but had laid very careful plans
as to what type of book he wanted. He saw to it that every minute detail was adhered
to and up to His full satisfaction. It took Him 19 years and He knew that He wanted
the book to be published during His Golden Jubilee Year. It is a labour of love.
It is a labour of perseverance. Throughout
His reign, He has long adhered to Lord Buddha’s teachings. I often joke to my
personal friends, that if you live in Thailand and do not have a sense of humour,
you will go insane. His Majesty must at all times retain His sense of objectivity,
and above all, His perseverance. What, does it imply? To persevere is to enjoy
what one is doing. To persevere is not to gain a personal benefit. To persevere
is not to lose heart. To persevere is to know the objective. To persevere is to
avoid greed and ignorance. To persevere is to accept the realities. I think without
His perseverance, without strict adherence to Lord Buddha’s teachings, He would
not have been able to accomplish the mission that he set out to achieve.
Bhumibol
Adulyadaj: The Making of a Great King
by Mr. Anand Panyarachun
May
27, 1996 On 9 June 1996, His Majesty
King Bhumibol Adulyadaj will reach another milestone in His Reign - the Golden
Jubilee of his accession to the throne. The
last fifty years have indeed been a remarkable reign for the Thai King, who succeeded
to the throne in 1946 by accident. He was not born to be King; the untimely demise
of his brother, King Ananda Mahidol, catapulted him to the position at the young
age of 19. To understand the present-day
Thai monarchy, one needs to go back in history to the founding of the first central
Thai State, Sukhothai, in the thirteenth century. The King, at the time, was entrusted
with the task of ruling, not out of any divine right, but by the consent of his
peers. He had an obligation to rule the country with “righteousness”, not for
his personal glory, but “for the benefit and happiness” of the people in his trust.
The royal code of conduct emphasized the major Buddhist precepts and the Tenfold
Practice of Duties of Kingship, which to this day remain the cornerstone of the
Thai Kingship: almsgiving, morality, liberality, rectitude, gentleness, self-restriction,
non-anger, non-violence, forbearance, and non-obstruction. For
more than seven centuries, the concept of a patriarchal and responsive monarch
has remained a Thai ideal. In his Oath of Accession to the Throne, His Majesty
King Bhumibol Adulyadej pledged, as his ancestors had done, to “reign with righteousness
for the benefit and happiness of the Siamese people. “The focus of his reign centers
around three main themes: the well being of his subjects, the security and stability
of his country, and the unity of his nation. His
Majesty’s dedication to the improvement of the quality of life of his people in
renowned. He has traveled extensively to every part of the country, meeting his
subjects from all walks of life. He has personally initiated nearly 2000 royally-sponsored
projects for the economic and social well being of the people. These
activities do not formally fall within the domain of a constitutional monarch.
The fact that His Majesty has persevered in these activities for the benefit of
the Thai people has greatly endeared him to his subjects - so much so that the
Thais, in general, unreservedly accord him the respect, confidence and trust that
no other monarch in our history, nor for that matter the world, has ever enjoyed. In
a constitutional monarchy, The King does have certain powers and responsibilities.
He may dissolve Parliament and appoint the Prime Minister and high-ranking officers
and civil servants. All legislation approved by the National Assembly is presented
to the King for signature. This is not just a formality. The King has discretionary
power to withhold his assent. In private consultations with the Prime Minister,
as Head of Government, the King’s views, be they be in the form of “encouragements”
or “warnings”, provide an important input for the Prime Minister’s decision-making
process. In exercising his constitutional power, the King must be ever conscious
of his responsibility and objectivity. His Majesty has, as a general rule, kept
to constitutional proprieties. There have,
however, been a number of “extraordinary” political situations which have demanded
that the King resort to his “reserve power”, outside any constitutional provision,
to defuse national crises. One occasion
was the student uprising in October 1973, when demands were made for a permanent
constitution and an end to government by martial law. The arrest of student leaders
by the military provoked a massive popular demonstration, which led to the tragic
deaths of a number of student activists and innocent bystanders. The King, responding
to the suffering of the people, intervened in a dramatic television appearance
to reassure the people that action was being taken to resolve the crisis. The
King then took the unprecedented step of appointing one of his Privy Councilors
as the new Prime Minister. Normalcy was soon restored, much to the relief of the
people. The other occasion was His Majesty’s
intervention in the May 1992 tragedy, a classic case of a government out of touch
with the times and the sentiments of the masses. The attempt by demonstrators
to topple the government had gained momentum outside parliamentary confines. The
senseless shooting of demonstrators by the military precipitated an outbreak of
mob mentality, resulting in a horrifying showdown. The
King, closely following the increasingly tragic developments and accurately assessing
the country’s mood, summoned the two antagonistic instigators to the Palace in
full view of national television. He quietly, but sternly, admonished them for
their actions and counseled them to resolve the confrontation. The whole Kingdom,
as well as international viewers of CNN and BBC around the world, witnessed with
much amazement on their television screen how a national crisis had been resolved
by His Majesty’s reserve power. The bloodshed
stopped immediately afterwards. The Prime Minister resigned from his post. Some
two weeks later, a new civilian Prime Minister was nominated and appointed by
Royal Command. The interim Prime Minister
was entrusted by Royal Command to restore peace and stability to the country and
to hand power back to the people. A general election was held on 13 September
1992, and a newly-elected government was formed. The peaceful transfer of power
was effected. Since then, another general election has been held in Thailand on
2 July 1995, reaffirming the country’s commitment to the constitutional transfer
of power. The military has retreated to the background, refraining from interference
in national politics, and succeeding in regaining its prestige as a professional
armed force. On those two occasions, the
King demonstrated clearly the extent of his influence and moral power. His sense
of justice, his over-riding concern for the well-being of the people, his wisdom
and his pragmatic approach to life, have had a profound impact on the course of
the country’s development. Without his guiding hand, Thailand would not be where
it is today - a nation, which has consistently demonstrated its inner strength,
political resilience, social harmony and economic dynamism. To
the Thai people, the present monarchy is not an abstract or irrelevant concept,
but a responsive, caring and indispensable institution that is an integral part
of their lives.
His
Majesty's Role in the Making of Thai History
by Mr. Anand Panyarachun
at the 14th Conference of the International Association
of Historians of Asia
Chulalongkorn University Auditorium
May 20, 1996 In accepting the
invitation to deliver the keynote address today at the 14th Conference of the
International Association of Historians of Asia, I feel duty-bound to warn you
all that I am not a historian by training or by inclination. The address I am
about to give cannot, by any standard, be viewed as a historical paper. It is
not based on any research work or scholastic study of the period. It is,
however, based on the personal perception of an individual who spent twenty-three
years in his country's foreign service, thirteen years in the private sector and
served twice, albeit for short and limited duration's, as Prime Minister. Hence,
I might be deemed somewhat qualified, in an unscholarly manner, to speak of our
King, the longest reigning monarch in the world, and his fifty-year reign. I
am sure that all of you here are aware of this historic event in our country.
The entire nation joins hands in the national celebrations of His Majesty's Golden
Jubilee this year. The outpouring of joy, gratification and pride sees no parallel
in the more than 700 year-history of our nation. It has indeed been a remarkable
reign of a Thai king who succeeded to the throne after the abdication of his uncle,
King Prajadhipok, Rama VII, in 1935,and the untimely demise of his elder brother,
King Ananda Mahidol, Rama VIII, in 1946. It could well be said that His
Majesty King Bhumibol Adulyadej became King Rama IX by accident. He was not born
to be King. As such, he had little time to be groomed to be one. When he, a young
man of 19 years of age, ascended to the throne in 1946, it was only fourteen years
after absolute monarchy, which existed for nearly seven hundred years, had been
brought to an end in a relatively peaceful way. The political process was then
still fragile and turbulent. The military wing of the "democratic" movement
was gaining dominance and losing sight of its initial democratic spirit and goals. His
Majesty began learning his constitutional craft in 1946 at the University of Lausanne,
Switzerland, where he changed his specialisation from science to law and political
science. This academic study was merely a primer - at best a theoretical course. To
understand the present-day Thai monarchy, one needs to go back to the founding
of the first central Thai State, Sukhothai, in the thirteenth century. The pioneers
of independence chose to elevate the wisest and most capable among them to be
King. The King, having been entrusted with the task, not out of any divine right,
but by the consent of his peers, had an inherent obligation to rule the country
"with righteousness", not for the glory of himself or his family, but
"for the benefits and happiness" of the people in his trust. The king,
being a Buddhist, was in effect a "dharma raja" - that is - a monarch
upholding the rule of Buddhist righteousness, ruling in a style of kingship some
have summarized as "patriarchal". The royal code of conduct emphasized
the major Buddhist precepts and the Tenfold Practice or Duties of Kingship, which
to this day remain the cornerstone of Thai kingship: almsgiving, morality, liberality,
rectitude, gentleness, self-restriction, non-anger, non-violence, forbearance,
and non-obstruction. During the reign of King Ramkhamhaeng the Great, the
ideal of a paternalistic ruler, sensitive to the needs of his people and aware
of his duty to guide them, was already well established. This system was memorably
reflected in a famous historical inscription found among the ruins of Sukothai.
It describes life in the first capital and contains the following passage.
"(The King) has hung a bell in the opening of the gate over there; if
any commoner in the land has a grievance….which he wants to make known to his
Lord and Ruler, it is easy; he goes and strikes the bell which the King has hung
there; King Ramkhamhaeng, ruler of the Kingdom, hears the call; he goes and questions
the man, examines the case and decides it justly for him." For
more than seven centuries, this concept of a patriarchal and accessible monarch
has remained a Thai ideal. The change of capital from Sukhothai to Ayutthaya brought
about the Khmer concept of divine Kingship and the Ayutthaya Kings incorporated
many of the divine features, with all-attendant Royal rituals and ceremonies,
into the function of the Throne. The Sukhothai style of Kingship, nonetheless,
has never entirely disappeared from the national consciousness and it was resurrected
when the rulers of the Chakri Dynasty ushered in a new era in 1782. Since
1782, when Bangkok was established as the capital, a succession of rulers of the
Royal House of Chakri have contributed to the practice of deeply--rooted Buddhist
beliefs and the benevolence of reigning as their fore-fathers. Both King Mongkut,
Rama the Fourth, and King Chulalongkorn, Rama the Fifth, - great- grand-father
and grandfather of our reigning King - travelled widely throughout the country.
They strove to cultivate personal contacts and discourse with their subjects,
however common or humble, and in the process and often incognito, learned of their
thoughts and problems. The Chakri Kings, well-aware of the changes taking place
within the kingdom and the outside world, brought about reforms and opened up
the country to external influences and ideas, paving the way for Thailand to become
a modern State under a constitutional monarchy. "Continuity and change"
is now an almost clich?'d theme of historical study. Yet the story of the Thai
monarchy demonstrates very clearly the continued general validity of such an approach.
Thailand is now a constitutional monarchy and a country aspiring to become a newly
developed society, but the traditional principles of righteous Buddhist kingship
and kingly virtues remain of paramount importance to the present monarchy. His
Majesty has displayed, and continues to display a profound understanding of constitutional
kingship as well as the traditional sources and symbols of Thai monarchical tradition. In
his Oath of Accession to the Throne, as his ancestors had done, His Majesty King
Bhumibol Adulyadej pledged to "reign with righteousness for the benefit and
happiness of the Siamese people" In his fifty-year reign, he has not deviated
from that pledge. Indeed, he has earned the love, admiration, and trust of his
people in a manner that cannot be fully comprehended by foreigners. The
significance of his reign relates to three main themes: the well being of his
subjects, the security and stability of his nation, and national unity. In
the fifties and sixties, he travelled to every nook and corner of the country,
meeting with the people, especially farmers and the poor in rural and remote areas
as well as the hill tribes. Gathering information, personally assessing the farming
and agricultural areas, experimenting his new concepts and applying appropriate
technology at his palace ground in Bangkok, he began a series of Royally initiated
projects. His nearly two thousand projects to date deal with such areas
as irrigation, water-resources management, forest and fishery conservation, soil-erosion
and improvement, crop-substitution, reafforestation, land development, rural and
community development, primary health care, eradication of leprosy, education,
flood control, urban traffic and environmental protection. His wide-ranging interests,
combined with his self-acquired technical knowledge and pragmatic approach based
on local culture and wisdom, have enabled the poor, the under-privileged and the
dis-enfranchised to lead a more hopeful and constructive life, thereby strengthening
the social fabric of our society and fortifying our national cohesion and identity. His
work in all these development areas stems from his conviction that the well being
of the people is tantamount to the well being of their sovereign. The two are
inseparable and inter-related. His concern for the security and stability
of the Thai nation is reflected in the innumerable trips and lengthy visits he,
the Queen and other members of the Royal family, have made to the sensitive areas
of the country which were, at one time, confronted with communist insurgency movements
or separatist, ethnic and religious-inspired bands of rebels and bandits. His
frequent visits were a morale booster to the populace. His royal projects to uplift
the living conditions of the people in those areas underline his own personal
commitment and dedication to the people. He has proven by his deeds that he has
an over-riding interest in his subjects. After a State visit to a foreign
country, His Majesty inspired the then government to embark on the first national
economic and social development plan, laying the foundation for the country to
move in a more systematic manner from an agrarian society to an agro-industrial
one. He also built up close personal relations with other monarchs and Chiefs
of State of major powers and neighbouring countries which, on many occasions,
helped to avert potential conflicts and reduce tensions along the border. His
personal diplomacy, exercised judiciously and unobtrusively, has contributed to
the harmonisation of national interests and consolidation of ties of friendship
and international cooperation. I have so far dwelled on the varied activities
that His Majesty initiated, developed and implemented. These activities do not
normally fall within the domain of a constitutional monarch. The fact that he
has persevered in these activities for the long-lasting benefit of the Thai people
has very much endeared him to his subjects - so much so that the Thais, in general,
willingly and unreservedly accord him the confidence and trust that no other monarch
in our history, or for that matter, any other monarch in the world, has ever enjoyed.
The King has, in the process; gained the "reserve powers" which he has
put to good use, whenever circumstances require. Now I shall deal with the
King's constitutional role and how he has discreetly and deftly influenced the
course of our political history. We must bear in mind that the young King, after
his accession to the Throne in 1946, had to tread cautiously through the shoals
of political and military bedrocks. Political intrigues and military machinations
were the order of the day and His Majesty, while widely loved and respected, was
still relatively a figurehead of a people who had yet to know their own sovereign. As
I stated previously, the King embarked early in his reign on a journey to know
his subjects and, in the process, allowed his subjects to get close to and know
him. At the same time, he used his time wisely to accumulate "constitutional"
experience. He has been through 15 constitutions, 17 coups d'etat, and twenty-one
Prime Ministers. He has an acute grasp of constitutional rule. He remains detached
from politics, playing a non-partisan role in the country's political process
and development. As a constitutional monarch, however, he possesses "the
right to be consulted, the right to encourage and the right to warn." Under
normal circumstances, he exercises these rights through private audiences he grants
to the Prime Minister of the day. What transpires during these meetings remain
private and confidential, and even after statutory silent periods, parts of the
consultations may not be made known. In a constitutional monarchy, the King
does have certain powers and responsibilities under constitutional provisions.
In exercising this power, he must be ever-conscious of his responsibility and
objectivity. All bills approved by the National Assembly are to be presented to
the King for signature. This is not just a formality, as the King retains discretionary
power to withhold his assent temporarily. In private consultations with the Prime
Minister, the King's comments, be they "encouraging" or "warning",
provide an important input for the Head of Government, if he wishes, to reevaluate
the government's position and direction. His Majesty alone possesses continuous
political experience and has always kept to constitutional proprieties. His remarks,
whether made privately or publicly, have always been listened to with great attention
and circumspection. His indirect influence on government's policies and measures
cannot, therefore, be underestimated. A constitutional monarch may dissolve
Parliament, appoint a Prime Minister, high-ranking officers and civil servants.
There have, however, been a number of "extraordinary political situations"
where the King has had to draw on his "reserve power" to defuse national
crises. It is public knowledge that there were two occasions when His Majesty
used this reserve power. The first time was the student uprising in October 1973,
when demands were made for a permanent constitution and an end to government by
martial law. Arrests of student leaders provoked a massive popular demonstration,
which unfortunately led to the killing of a number of student activists and innocent
bystanders. The situation was threatening to erupt into a destructive national
confrontation. The Government had lost control. The King, sensing the suffering
of the people, intervened in a dramatic television appearance. His Majesty was
able to reassure the people that the crisis had subsided and that the three key
military figures had decided to leave the country. The King then took the
unprecedented step of appointing one of his Privy Councilors as the next Prime
Minister of Thailand. Normalcy was soon restored, much to the relief of the people.
A new era of democracy was brought into being, but the process remained fragile
and tentative. It came to an abrupt end in October 1976. The period between
1976-1991 saw the "ups and downs" of our national efforts to develop
democratic institutions, oriented towards stability. Progress was made gradually
and steadily until a bloodless coup took place in February1991. There was, thereafter,
a period of national reconciliation and consensus building. Success eluded us
and we as a nation succumbed to one more traumatic episode. The May 1992
tragedy was a classic case of a government out of touch with the times and the
sentiments of the mass. The attempt by demonstrators to topple the government
gained momentum outside parliamentary confines. There again, senseless shooting
precipitated the outbreak of mob mentality, resulting in a horrifying showdown. The
King, closely following the increasingly tragic developments and accurately assessing
the country's mood, summoned the two antagonistic leaders to the Palace in full
view of national television. He quietly, but sternly, admonished them for the
dire consequences of their actions. The whole kingdom, and international viewers
of CNN. And BBC around the world, witnessed on their TV screen how a national
crisis had been resolved by His Majesty's reserve power. His sense of timing was
of decisive importance. A premature intervention might not have produced the desired
result and could have exacerbated the already explosive situation. Hence, it can
be said that the timing of His Majesty's actions is determined by the gravity
of the State of affairs of the country; in other words when he senses that total
breakdown is impending or that the country is on the verge of a political vacuum. The
bloodshed stopped immediately thereafter. The Prime Minister voluntarily resigned
from his post. Some two weeks later, a new civilian Prime Minister - a non-member
of the House of Representatives - was nominated in the afternoon of June 10, 1992,
by the President of the Parliament and appointed by Royal Command that evening. It
is a matter of historical footnote that during the morning Parliamentary session
of the same day, Parliament had already approved an amendment to the constitution
to the effect that the Prime Minister would have to be chosen from the elected
members of the House of Representatives. Since the adopted amendment would not
become law until it was published in the Royal Gazette the following morning,
this technical loophole enabled the President of the Parliament to submit the
name of a non-member as the new Prime Minister to the King for his approval. The
interim Prime Minister was entrusted by the Royal Command to restore peace and
stability in the country and to give power back to the people - meaning to arrange
and supervise a free and fair general election in the not too distant future.
The mandate given was carried out swiftly and peacefully by removing military
leaders who, according to the investigation of the Ministry of Defence panel,
were politically and morally responsible for the May tragedy. A general
election was held on 13th September 1992. Despite some irregularities, the election
was perceived on the whole to be free and fair. A new Prime Minister, an elected
Member of Parliament was appointed and a cabinet was formed. Peaceful transfer
of power was effected. Since September 1992, another general election was held
in Thailand on July 2, 1995, reaffirming constitutional change of power. Throughout
this period of four years, the Thai military retreated to the background and became
true servants of State - not allowing themselves to be involved in any manner
in the democratic political process. They have indeed gone back to the barracks
and remained there, thus enhancing their prestige as professional armed forces. To
what extent our arrival at this juncture has been due to His Majesty's non-partisan
guidance during his fifty-year reign needs to be fully assessed and analyzed by
historians. As a layman, I have no doubt that his sense of justice, his overriding
concern for the well-being and security of his people, his sense of history as
well as his pragmatic and gradualist approach, have made a highly significant
impact on the politics, economic and social development of Thailand. He has the
skill and integrity to influence politics without being political. Without
His Majesty's guiding hand, we would not be where we are today - a nation which
has consistently demonstrated its inner strength, political resilience, social
harmony and economic dynamism - a trait which has enabled the Thais to survive
many a threat and misfortune in their long history. The course of modern
Thai political history will run smoothly and peacefully if and when the Thai political
system pursues the middle path and a balance is achieved between freedom and stability.
His Majesty's adoption of the balanced approach during his fifty-year reign serves
as an inspiration for the governance of Thailand. To the Thai people, the
monarchy is not an abstract concept, but a real, tangible, human and caring institution. His
Majesty the King personifies positive elements of our national characteristics
and he is the very embodiment of the common character of the Thai people of all-ethnic
groups, religion and culture. He is our inspiration toward a stronger, more secure
and prosperous destiny. He has deservedly earned the respect and trust of his
people to the point that his BARAMEE (in the Thai language) would overcome all
adversities. HE IS THE SOUL OF THE THAI NATION. LONG LIVE
HIS MAJESTY.
Speech
Archives in English Section
2 : Social
Issues
|
|
| Section
2.1 : UNICEF |
Searching
for a Better Structure Bangkok Post
August
1, 1996 Anand Panyarachun: ‘Accidental Prime Minister’
committed to treating more than the symptoms of Thailand’s political malaise “If
we want to have democratic rule we have to earn it. It is something that is not
given to you by divine right…. It is something that we have to earn, and it is
something that we have to fight for: fight for with our ideas, fight for with
our own participation, fight for with our own responsibility to the public at
large”. There are those who have never
forgiven Anand Panyarachun for agreeing to become Prime Minister in 1991. For
these activists and intellectuals. Mr. Anand legitimised the “coup d’etat” in
February of that year, by the military group that called itself the National Peace-keeping
Council. Then there are those who have
never forgiven him for having stripped the coup leaders of their power, and at
the same time treated with disdain the elected politicians who were willing to
side with the coup leaders. Huge numbers
in Bangkok and the cities supported him in his efforts as “Prime Minister by accident”,
as he described himself. Toward the end of his second term - appointed almost
on the spur of the moment, to steer Thailand back to normality, after the bloody
anti-military protests of May 1992 - Mr. Anand was under such heavy criticism
that his supporters rallied around him. A special reception was organised for
him at a Bangkok hotel and “I love Anand” car stickers appeared everywhere. His
critics accuse him of having been dictatorial and intellectually arrogant. Some
are bored with the media attention given to him. Some admire him for his principles
and independence. They accept his weaknesses - such as impatience with the more
simple-minded questions of reporters, and intolerance of the tedious “nit-picking”
of Thai political debate. Among many Thais
who believe that only charismatic individuals can save the country, Mr. Anand
is the 1990s version of “the knight on a white-horse”. For them, he personally
saved the country twice; from dictatorship in his first term as Prime Minister
from March 1991 to April 1992, and then taking Thailand out of turmoil back to
electoral democracy from June to September 1992. “The
white-horse knight” is not an image he encourages. His speeches and interviews,
during those brief periods as Prime Minister, emphasised structure, rather than
personalities. He did not talk much about the need for “good people” to come to
power. He did talk about suitable laws to define the proper role of the military,
about freedom of information and the press, and about the participation of the
public in politics. In April 1991, two
months after the coup that first brought him to office, Mr. Anand spoke to the
Foreign Correspondents Club of Thailand. He urged the Thai public to “wake up
to the fact that if we want to have democratic rule we have to earn it. It is
something that is not given to you by divine right…. It is something that we have
to earn, and it is something that we have to fight for: fight for with our ideas,
fight for with our own participation, fight for with our own responsibility to
the public at large.” It was a stirring
and surprising performance, a passionate argument for participation and against
military dictatorship, by the man the military had put into office un-elected.
As if to sum up the contradictions that has characterised his life, it was in
English. Communication with the Thai masses, has never been his strong point,
even if large sections of the urban population love him. Many
of those who look back favourably on his two terms as Prime Minister, do so out
of admiration for his honesty, and for the way he resisted the military that put
him in power. Few realise that what he and his colleagues were trying to do was
more complex than that. They were trying to set up better structures, that would
make Thailand more democratic and open, reduce the power of the military, and
reduce opportunities for corruption among military and civilian officials and
politicians. It is surprising that Mr.
Anand ever became Prime Minister. His early years were promising enough. He was
born on August 9, 1932, the year of the revolution that turned Thailand into a
constitutional monarchy. He went to three schools: Amnuay Silpa, Bangkok Christian
College, and Dulwich College in London. Then came Trinity College, Cambridge University,
an honours degree, and 23 years in the diplomatic service. Within
12 years, he was Ambassador to the UN in New York and to Canada. In 1972 he became
Ambassador to the United States in Washington as well as to the UN in New York.
The two postings gave him nine un-interrupted years at Ambassador level in the
United States. In 1976 he returned to Bangkok, to become permanent secretary at
the Foreign Ministry. And then his high-flying
career stalled. Within months, he was removed from office, accused of communist
sympathies, and made Ambassador-at-large. He was grounded. In 1977, he became
Ambassador in Bonn, but by then the strain on his family had been immense, and
diplomacy was no longer attractive. A year later, Mr. Anand left the Foreign Ministry,
and joined Saha Union, at that time a business group mainly involved in textiles. Mr.
Anand was a victim of the extreme polarisation of the 1970s. In 1975, the year
the Vietnam War ended, and two years after the overthrow of the Sarit- Thanom
military dictatorship, the elected government of M.R. Kukrit Pramoj decided that
U.S. bases should leave Thailand. As Ambassador in Washington, Mr. Anand’s job
was to negotiate the withdrawal. The military and the ultra-conservative civilians
they installed after the bloody “coup d’etat” of October 6, 1976 did not forgive
Mr. Anand. His career since then shows
just how absurd the communism accusation was. For the past 18 years, except for
his two “accidents” in 1991 and 1992, he has been a businessman. His premiership
in 1991 and 1992 included an increased emphasis on privatisation and the outlawing
of state enterprise unions. Mr. Anand’s
list of past and present positions includes numerous directorships and Chairmanships
of Saha Union companies (including Chairman of Saha-Union Public Co. Ltd. Itself
since 1991), President of the Federation of Thai Industries, director of many
Thai and international companies, including IBM (Thailand) and Sime Darby Berhad
of Malaysia, President of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations Chambers
of Commerce and Industry, and member of the Board of Governors of the American
Chamber of Commerce in Thailand. Since April 1994 he has been Chairman of Post
Publishing Public co. Ltd., publisher of the Bangkok Post. He
is also Chairman of the Thailand Development Research Institute, Thailand Environment
Institute, and Thailand Business Council for Sustainable Development, as well
as Ambassador for Thailand for UNICEF (the UN children’s fund). Among the public
figures he admires are former British Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher, and international
media tycoon, Rupert Murdoch. He summed
up his ideological position, in an interview during his second term in 1992, beginning
with a joke. “Who was it who said: “Who
was the first socialist in the world?”… The answer is Christopher Columbus. Why?
Because he didn’t know where he was going. When he got there he didn’t know where
he was, but he didn’t care, because he didn’t have to pay for it!” Mr.
Anand described himself as an “enlightened liberal”, not an enlightened authoritarian.
There is a vast difference in that.” That meant distancing himself from leaders
like Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore. “I think
it’s all wrong in a way, when you listen to all these foreigners comparing the
May events in Thailand to the Tiananmen Square incident in China; or when people
try to compare my previous (first) administration with Mr. Lee Kuan Yew’s style
of management, because here we have unlimited freedom of the mass media - that
was only interrupted during that fateful week (of the May 1992 uprising).” Democracy
inevitably means a risk of instability. The former Prime Minister of Singapore
placed development and stability before democratic freedoms, Mr. Anand said. “I
do not go that far, but at the same time I would say that Mr. Lee Kuan Yew is
partially right, and perhaps in terms of Singapore society, who am I to say that
is not right for the Singaporeans?” Thailand’s
size and diversity make it quite different from Singapore. “I mean, you can discipline
two million citizens, but you cannot really discipline 56-57 million people.” This
was June 1992, one month after the May uprising. He described what he thought
had gone wrong with Thai democracy and what he thought needed to be done. The
fault, he said, lay with the political structure, and this was the ultimate cause
of the May bloodshed. “In the past 60 years
we merely dealt with the symptoms of the malady, and we either did not have the
courage, or didn’t have the vision, to try to undertake some structural adjustments.
That doesn’t mean that within the next four months I’ll be able to do many things
with regard to structural adjustment, but at least I hope that by the time I leave,
I will have begun a process of structural adjustment.” He
spoke especially about the military, and the laws or administrative measures needed
to redefine its role. “The objective is to try to lower the army’s profile, or
lower their role. It is not aimed at destroying the institution, or defaming the
institution. On the other hand, I’d rather look at the positive side of the structural
adjustment, in the sense that it will enhance the army’s professionalism, enhance
the effectiveness of their management, and make them into a more efficient fighting
force, in defence of the constitution and in defence of our territorial integrity. “I
think in the past 60 years - this is not really the fault of the army, I think
it’s the fault of the entire system in Thailand - that somehow in-advertently
we have either given or we have acquiesced in the acquisition of this very high-profile
role of the army. We need time to think, to ponder seriously whether certain roles
they have been given, or they have acquired on their own, are really the roles
that should belong to them.” Tackling the
military, only became his responsibility in his second term. In his first term,
the military kept the task of re-drafting the constitution out of his hands completely.
He still introduced innovations, to restructure Thai politics, setting up PoIIWatch,
the independent election monitoring commission, and introducing legislation requiring
more open and systematic screening of large public projects. His
form of liberalism made Mr. Anand a champion of regional free trade, beginning
when he was President of the ASEAN Chambers of Commerce and Industry in 1982-83.
A decade later as Prime Minister he signed the ASEAN free-trade Agreements at
a Singapore summit. Many assumed that the
coup group chose Mr. Anand as Prime Minister because one of its leaders, Gen Suchinda
Kraprayoon, had been military attache in Washington when Mr. Anand was Ambassador.
Mr. Anand played down the suggestion. In
any case, his government was soon at odds with the coup group. The first big quarrel
was about the three-million-line contract that the Telephone Organisation of Thailand
had signed with TelecomAsia, a member of the Charoen Pokphand group. Against the
wishes of the army officers on the TOT’s board of directors, the Anand government
split the contract, leaving TelecomAsia with the two million new lines in Bangkok. Then
came public protests in late 1991 about the coup group’s attempt to draft a new
constitution, in a way that would improve its chances of retaining power after
the March 1992 election. Mr. Anand openly criticised the draft. Almost
half a decade later, it could be argued that the impact of the Anand government
has been short-lived. Peace and democracy were restored, and foreign confidence
in Thailand was only temporarily damaged. The corruption and petty bickering among
politicians seems as bad as ever. Yet some
issues – such as ASEAN free trade, and some aspects of transparency in political
decisions – are now taken for granted. The combination of public protests and
the Anand government’s actions, have probably strengthened Press freedoms, considerably. It
is probably still too soon to judge whether the other legal and structural changes
that Mr. Anand and his colleagues introduced, during their brief terms, are having
an impact. He has always emphasised the length of time needed for changes to become
ingrained. The last long gap between attempted or successful “coups d’etat” was
five years and five months from September 1985 to February 1991. That gap is right
now being surpassed. Anand
Panyarachun’s Biography Name: Anand
Panyarachun Born: August 9, 1932, Bangkok Education:
- Amnuay Silpa School, 1943-45
- Bangkok Christian College,
1945-48
- Dulwich College, London, 1948-52
- Trinity College, Cambridge,
1952-55
Career: 1955: Joined
Foreign Ministry 1964: Posted to Thai Mission to UN, New York
1967: Ambassador, Acting Permanent Representative to UN and Ambassador
to Canada 1972: Ambassador to U.S. and UN 1976: Permanent
Secretary, Foreign Ministry 1977: Ambassador-at-Large 1977:
Ambassador to West Germany 1979: Joined Saha Union as Chairman or
Director of several Companies 1991: Chairman, Saha-Union Public
Co. Ltd. 1991: Prime Minister (March-April 1992, June-October 1992) Others:
1980-80: Vice President, Association of Thai Industries
1982-84: President, ASEAN Chambers of Commerce and Industries 1986-90:
Chairman, ASEAN Section of ASEAN-US Business Council 1990-91:
Chairman, Federation of Thai Industries 1991-95: Member, Business
Advisory Council, International Finance Corp. 1993-94: Chairman,
Business Council for Sustainable Development (Geneva) 1982: Chairman,
Star Block Group Pcl 1982: Director, Sime Darby Berhad, Malaysia
1984: Director, Siam Commercial Bank Pcl 1988-: Member, Advisory
Council of SASIN Graduate School of Business Administration 1989-:
President, Old England Students Association 1989-: Chairman,
Eastern Star Real Estate Pcl 1990-: Member, Board of Trustees, Asian
Institute of Technology 1992-: Chairman, Thailand Development Research
Institute 1993-: Chairman, Thailand Environment Institute
1993-: Chairman, Thailand Business Council for Sustainable Development
1994-: Chairman, The Post Publishing Public Co. Ltd. 1995-:
Chairman, Kenan Institute Asia 1996-: Distinguished International
ISIS Fellow, Malaysia 1996-: UNICEF Ambassador of Thailand
The
Man of the Hour
Can Anand’s Constitution Reform Thailand?
Asiaweek,
October 10, 1997 The Nations Thailand “It’s a Good Starting Point” The
charter chief on the reforms – and himself In the popular imagination,
Anand Panyarachun’s persona is that of a retired, reluctant sheriff called up
by the decent folk of some Wild West town to get rid of the bad guys terrorizing
them. The reputation as saviour was forged during Anand’s two short but highly
effective stints as caretaker prime minister. The first was in February 1991,
when a military junta asked him to head the government. The second was after the
May 1992 crackdown on democracy demonstrators. During both periods. Anand performed
like no other Thai premier – with competence, honesty and the public interest
in mind. Small wonder many Thais want the suave former diplomat and businessman
back as PM, especially during this time of political and economic uncertainty. Anand,
now 65, would decline in the unlikely event such an offer was made, but he did
agree to serve as chairman of the Constitution drafting committee, over-seeing
99 indirectly elected people from various walks of life -- politics, business,
academia. The upshot is a new charter that goes some way toward cleaning up Thai
politics and improving civil rights and liberties. As an aristocrat and
self professed Anglophile (he graduated from Cambridge in law), Anand can come
across as elitist and autocratic in style. In substance, however, he is very much
a man of the people. On the eve of the parliamentary vote over the new Constitution,
Anand discussed the changes, their implications for the country – and himself
– with Correspondent Julian Gearing, Excerpts from their 90-minute talk: The
current Constitution was actually drafted and amended when you were in office.
Did you not have any concerns about it at the time? Every now and then
there are complaints, that when I was Prime Minister, why did I not use the opportunity
to reform the political system? The fact is that when I was first asked (by the
coup leaders) to be Prime Minister, I was a bit ambivalent. On the one hand, the
military knew that all my life I had been against dictatorship, corruption and
extreme rightist policies. On the other hand, I saw that the coup did receive
fairly strong support from the public, because the public was fed up with the
government and with the corruption. I knew that if I were to accept (the job),
I would disappoint a number of my more liberal friends, those people who viewed
me as a sort of standard bearer for democratic ideas. But, I said to myself, if
I were to go in, try to sort out the confusion and chaos, it would have some redeeming
value. I did not like certain provisions in that interim Constitution, but after
I talked to the coup leaders, I said to myself, you are damned if you do, you
are damned if you don’t (laughs) – so I went in. So I had nothing to do with the
Constitution. As a result, during Anand I and Anand II, I was not able to take
any political initiatives. There is criticism that the new charter is
too much of a compromise? Compromise is the basis of democracy. Whatever
course we decide to take. It is always subject to criticism. I am aware of that,
I am used to it. It doesn’t bother me. There might be one or two sections where
there are problems, but it doesn’t mean that the whole process is bad. It can
be amended some time in the future, after the next election, after the new Constitution
has come into force and has been tested in practical terms. What will
this charter do to tackle vote buying and corrupt practices? The monitoring
process is going to be more thorough. The organisations to be set up will have
the power and responsibility of bringing wrongdoers to justice. It doesn’t mean
that just because we have a good Constitution, democracy is going to have a rosy
path in this country. People have to participate in the follow-up. People have
to be alert to see that only all good men are put in these monitoring bodies (laughs). What
about the bad men, the godfathers, the corrupt? Will this new Constitution get
rid of them? You cannot get rid of them overnight. You have to go through
a series of elections. There is a school of thought that people with unsavoury
characters, if they live under rules which allow them to show their unsavoury
side, they will do it. But if you put them in a different environment, under different
rules which make it much more difficult to show their unsavoury side, then they
may conform. I will not say they will reform, but they may conform. A
number of politicians have been quite outspoken in their opposition to the draft.
Why do you think someone like Interior Minister Sanoh Thienthong expressed sentiments
against it? Perhaps he is worried this new Constitution may spell the
end of his career. In the debate over this Constitution, many of the MPs have
shown their real characters. Deputy PM Thaksin Shinawatra suggests only
rich people, people who can support themselves, ought to be ministers? I
don’t agree with that. This is a very simplistic assessment. Rich men do not cheat.
Or educated people do not cheat. Will Thailand continue to be ruled by
the elite, people with money? I don’t think so. Look at Democrat Party
leader Chuan Leekpai. He comes from a rural area, he comes from a very humble
family, his mother is still living in the market sector of Trang in the south.
Look at Britain, at the number of Etonians, the people with money. But then they
had John Major. Times change. We are sitting in Bangkok, but the provinces
rely very much on the old system of patronage politics? It is not a
system, it is a culture, and you cannot change that culture overnight. Democracy
is not only based on the Constitution. It is based on traditions, conventions,
generations of practice which form into a culture, a democratic culture. We don’t
have that yet. And it will be a long time before we do. We have to uplift education,
we have to enable the people to earn a decent livelihood, because what is the
use of talking about democracy or the Constitution if they have no jobs? It is
no use saying because we don’t have this and we don’t have that, then dismantle
the whole process. If we look at the bigger picture, how does Thailand’s
democracy compare with others in Asia? As far as democracy is concerned,
we are much better off than many other nations in terms of freedom of assembly,
of expression, of civil rights and liberties. On the other hand, we in Thailand
have had a so-called democratic period of only 65 years, with 40 years of interruption
from military coups and what not, so it is a fledgling democracy. People are not
accustomed to the principles of democracy, to the philosophy. Many think that
if you are able to exercise your vote once every three to four years, that is
democracy. It is not only about participating in elections. It is about involvement
in the decision-making process and in the governance of the country. We tend to
look to the form rather than to the substance and essence. A few critics
have questioned whether Thailand should be borrowing political systems from the
West? They all wear suits to Parliament. To me, it is a very flimsy
charge. After all democracy was born in the West. So if we didn’t go to the source,
where could we go? The philosophy itself is something that is not indigenous.
And if you don’t learn from the mistakes of other countries, the way they reform
their political system and the way they try to reform their perennial problems,
who could we go to? There is nothing to be ashamed of, there is nothing wrong
with this approach. Will you return to politics? I
was never really in politics. I was brought into it, practically dragged into
it. I enjoyed the work that I did as Prime Minister. I think I did some good for
the country, but I never liked the life. Politics is the art of the possible.
In the process you have to engage in manoeuvering and shenanigans. My family wouldn’t
want me to take it up again. It is not my cup of tea. It is not my line. I like
simplicity. I like my privacy. Often the Thai people seek a white knight
to save them in times of crisis? That is right. That is the problem
with the Thai; people. They are always looking for a knight in shining armour.
People have given up hope. There has not been any cheery news for Thailand for
quite some time – economically or politically. The new charter is something to
which the public is looking forward. Of course you always have to be wary that
you do not raise their expectations too much. It is not a panacea to all our ills,
but it is a good starting point. Because in a way, it is the first fundamental
reform of our political system. It is a watershed.
A
Politician by Accident Prime Minister Anand Panyarachun
From
Thailand Executive Profile On March 2, Cambridge-educated
diplomat-turned-businessman, Khun Anand Panyarachun, was sworn in as the country’s
18th Prime Minister since the introduction of the constitutional monarchy
in 1932. Eight days earlier, on February 23, Thailand’s first elected Prime Minister,
Chatichai Choonhavan, had been overthrown by the Army in a blood-less coup. The
interim National Peacekeeping Council cited several reasons for staging the coup,
ranging from alleged Government corruption to choking traffic conditions in Bangkok.
Midway through his term in office, 59-year old Prime Minister Anand talks to Simon
Thurlow about his sudden emergence into the spotlight, and outlines what still
has to be done before general elections are held next year. “I
just have to face the fact that I’m not an elected representative. If I should
hurt some people’s feelings and disappoint some people, then all I can really
do is just apologise, but I did not appoint myself, that’s one thing. Secondly,
when they decided to offer me the position, I took account of the fact that I
was not involved in any manner, or way with the extra-legal means of the transfer
of power. “It’s not for me to pass a value
judgement on the actions that they took-perhaps they had good reasons, but I think
that when certain doors had been opened, they showed a certain degree of sincerity
in their actions. They had demonstrated an acceptable degree of genuine intention,
to put Thailand back on the right course.” The
Prime Minister jokes that when he finally acceded to the requests of the Army’s
National Peacekeeping Council to take the job, it was the result of a mental lapse. “It
is something for which my wife will never forgive me,” he says, laughing heartily. “I
am not a politician by profession, I’m not a politician by aspiration. I am a
politician by accident. I happen to be a man who is holding a political position
that’s all. “I’ve spent 23 years in the
Foreign Service and 13 years in the private sector and though in the past I had
the opportunity of being recruited into the Cabinet, I always turned it down. “I
have gone on record that I’m not going to stand for election, and I do not believe
that public life is something that comes naturally. Well to some people it comes
naturally, but not to me.” Why, then, did
he agree to become Prime Minister? “I had
to deal with the situation after the seizure of power and if they (NPKC) decided
to offer the job to a civilian, then I rather thought that was a step forward,
a very positive step. All I hoped for was, at least, to be able to contribute
to this early restoration of the democratic regime in Thailand. “It
is my personal belief, my conviction, that there was a need to put the country
back on the course of stable and balanced rule. That would be part-and-parcel
of the early restoration of the democratic regime. “It
provides me with ample opportunities to do things as a concerned citizen of our
country, to do things that I believe to be right, to do things that I believe
to be in the long-term interests of the country. “Obviously,
because of the absence of an elected House of Representatives ….If I could galvanise
people, provide them with certain direction, policies, within a short period of
time, be it nine or 12 months, at least give the opportunities that most people
would want, but would not be able to make come true.” One
of the main reasons cited by the military for the coup was the alleged corruption
of the Chatichai government. Prime Minister Anand explains his role in improving
the Government’s image. “It’s very important
that I introduce new elements into the government of our country. I want, by the
time I leave my job, by the time our government is no longer there, Thai people
to look back and say that at least for a short period we had a clean, honest government.
This is not something, which is unique. Too many times in the past, people have
been disillusioned, I suppose people in any democracy become disillusioned with
politicians. You often get the case, in America, in all sorts of places, but that’s
a part of life. “We know that we can at
least get the majority of the people who vote to accept our government and our
policies, our directions. I want, at least, to be a part of constructing the system,
which in future governments of Thailand will seem clean, transparent, to be accountable
for what they do.” After only a few months
in his new job, Prime Minister Anand was faced with the potentially explosive
situation of having to resolve a multi-billion baht scheme initiated by his predecessors,
to privatise and expand Thailand’s telephone system. After
protracted negotiations, a deal was struck, that broke what would have been a
monopoly, and which went against the wishes of a large army faction. The resolution
of the contract was hailed as a personal triumph for Prime Minister Anand, firstly
for being able to get things done, and secondly for being able to chart an independent
government courses. However, when pressed, he refuses to acknowledge any personal
credit. “I think it’s the best deal out
of a bad situation. I had certain constraints, the fact that the agreement was
about to be signed before I come over. There was a definite moral agreement, a
moral commitment on the part of the government. I believe in the continuity of
governments, and I believe in the continuity of commitments given by the previous
government. Those commitments should never be allowed to lapse. “If
I had started from scratch, if I had a clean slate, perhaps this is not the way
that I would choose to privatise the telephone organisation. Or perhaps it is
not the most effective way of inviting the private sector’s participation in the
telephone services. Be that as it may, the concept had already been agreed on
by the previous government, and the contract was about to be signed, so I thought
that I should at least do my best to get the best agreement out of the concept.
I thought it was a deal that was acceptable both to the government and to the
people who were getting the concession.” Prime
Minister Anand is acutely aware that his days in office are numbered. He jokes
about it often, but that does not diminish his strong belief in the continuity
of government, and the obligation to honour previous commitments, and especially
on a personal level. “I have never regretted
it (taking the job). In all my life, once I made a decision, I stood by those
decisions. I don’t do anything half-heartedly. I have said that for me this is
an interim time. I am an interim Prime Minister of an interim government, but
I am anything but interim in what I do. I hope that my decisions of the past months,
things that have happened, procedures established, the systems, I hope that they
will last and not be reversed by the future government.” The
Prime Minister’s handling of the telephone contract, illustrated these beliefs,
as do his current attempts to rationalise the shambles that has allowed as many
as five over-lapping schemes to be tabled, to help ease Bangkok’s chaotic traffic
situation. “Any agreements that have been
signed by the Thai Government would have to be honoured by the future government,
that is a cardinal rule. Agreements that have not yet been signed will, of course,
be subject to review. Of the agreements that have already been signed, the way
we handle things is not to try to sabotage, to try to make it fail, but we had
to look more deeply into the question of physical planning and of the engineering
involved. “We started with a handicap,
in the sense that we did not have a master plan for a mass transit system. We
merely responded to the projects, the proposals put up by the private sector.
Under normal circumstances, the best approach would have been to have our own
master plan and then to decide on the concept to be followed. Then, the private
sector could respond to the final concept that was chosen. That is not the case,
so, in those areas (transport) the Thai Government always had the bad habit of
reacting to specific proposals and projects. As a result, when it came down to
questions and negotiations, the Government was often in a dis-advantaged position,
because it had no way of controlling the procedure of the project itself.” Prime
Minister Anand has appointed a special committee to try and unravel the mess,
which includes a multi-billion-dollar scheme of Hopewell’s Hong Kong magnate,
Gordon Wu, to build a mass-transit railway, but it will not be easy. “The
people who got involved in the deliberation process were from one agency, with
a vested interest. We believe that gives rise to corruption charges. It gave rise
to some decisions that were made inadvertently, and decisions that were not thoroughly
discussed and assessed. So I appointed a committee which includes all of the representatives
of the agencies concerned – the finance, the engineering, and the authorities
with their different projects. I hope that they can help iron out “the wrinkles”
that are bound to happen when four or five government agencies run separately
and uncoordinatedly and in isolation. So, “the name of the game” now is coordination,
so that the physical parts of all the projects are not in conflict with each other,
and that it would be physically feasible for all the projects to get off the ground.” In
the past few years, Thailand has suffered from extremely bad press over its environmental
record, be it the deterioration of its beaches or the devastation of its natural
forests. Prime Minister Anand observes: “I
think that this government has perhaps done most in the environmental field, to
continue to generate public interest in the negative aspects of environmental
matters. We have taken quite a number of concrete measures to alleviate suffering,
our programme reducing the lead percentage in gasoline has been very successful
and of course there is more to come. We’re determined to bring in a higher degree
of private sector involvement in this national effort to protect the environment
in which we live. “We have de-controlled,
de-regulated industries, commerce, and we expect that this de-controlling, this
de-regulation and also our tax reform package (a value- added tax is to be introduced)
would enable industry in Thailand to spend more money on waste treatment plants,
not polluting canals and rivers. We will also do our best to see to it that the
natural environment of the country, the forests, the rivers, would be least impaired
by the actions of the Government. “We want
modernisation of the country, particularly Bangkok, to spread out. I have a dream,
a dream of my own, that instead of having all roads leading to Bangkok, I wish
that we could have all roads leading out of Bangkok to the provinces. That by
the time we leave, we will have set aside two or three plots of land in Bangkok
as parks.” Prime Minister Anand accepts
that there are problems with the exploitation of the country’s forests. “There
will always be problems: one, if the law is not strong enough there is nothing
one can do, and secondly, if the law is strong enough, then the people who are
trying to enforce the law are not honest. Perhaps 80 years ago, 80 per cent of
the land area was covered in forest. Now it’s down to about 35 per cent, if not
20 per cent. That is a natural phenomenon. It has happed in every country, it’s
happening now in Brazil. It’s something that we do not like to see happen but
it has happened in every country.” Anand
adds: “I think that the population of Thailand in my younger days was 23 million
people. That was only 30 to 40 years ago and now we have a population of 56 million.
As a result, we have 30 million more people, particularly in the agricultural
sector. They need land, each family needs land. Where do they get it from? We
get it from the public forests”. Thailand’s
economy over the past few years has expanded to such a rate that it has earned
the tag of “fastest-growing country in the world”. Inevitably, however, there
has been a slow-down in line with the world-wide trend and the after-math of the
Gulf War. Prime Minister Anand is not overly concerned. “If
you regard eight to nine per cent growth this year, it is not a slump, it is a
drop from twelve or thirteen per cent growth. Everything is relative. In a way,
I think it was partly designed by the Government, because I don’t think that any
country of our size and our level of development could sustain 12 per cent average
growth every year, as four or five years in the past. I think it’s very important
that we slow down the growth intentionally, and we view it as a pause. By the
time we think we could go ahead with “full steam” again, at least supporting facilities,
be they infrastructure, be they technical personnel, be they anything, these factors
will be ready. “For example, the real-estate
sector has been growing at the rate of 60 and 70 per cent in the past three to
four years and you cannot go on at that rate because it is a kind of “runaway
train”. You have to just slow it down so that it will not get “off the track”.
The money supply in the past has been slightly too large, so I think we had to
take control of the situation. Financially, we’re much better off than we were
four of five years ago, or eight, or nine when there was a sort of slump, a recession
in Thailand. “Now the foreign exchange
reserve is up to about US$17 billion. If you look back eight or nine years ago,
we only had about US$2 billion. This US$17 billion covers about five-and-a half
months of imports and the baht is quite stable. I think confidence in Thailand
is to continue judging by the in-flow of capital from abroad. Of course, the position
has changed slightly, there is now less in-flow from equity and more in-flow from
short-term loans. I am sure that picture will be corrected quite soon.” Will
Thailand becomes a financial centre in Southeast Asia? “That’s
what we hope for,” says Prime Minister Anand with a chuckle, “that’s what we hope
for, I think it’s going to come about in spite of the Thai Government. If you
look at the map, Thailand, although not geographically so, is right in the middle
of the Asean area, and with the opening up of the economies of Laos and Cambodia
and Vietnam in particular, and also Burma, I can visualise it in 10 years time.
Thailand will just be the hub of activities on a regional scale. Our banks are
fairly active now in these areas. I can see a much larger market in the future,
so I think that the economies are complementary and, of course, being more advanced
in terms of banking, in terms of trade, in terms of industry, all of these Indo-China
states will be naturally drawn into our orbit. I don’t say that within a big power
sort of attitude, but I think it is inevitable. Of course, on top of that, we’ve
developed very good relations with our neighbours, politically and economically.
The security factor is no longer a factor in the present scheme of things. Previously
it would hinder any kind of movement in that direction, but now it’s irrelevant.” This
year’s break-through in talks, hosted by Thailand, on a resolution of the fighting
in Cambodia has enhanced Thailand’s position as a regional force and power broker. “The
problem has been with us for over a decade, there was a stalemate, there was a
deadlock, each side thought, rightly or wrongly, that time was on their side.
We just pointed out that time was on nobody’s side and that, if the stalemate
were allowed to be prolonged, there was the likelihood that the Cambodian problem
would no longer figure on the international agenda, including that of Thailand.
With the trend around the world towards negotiation, compromise and pragmatic
solutions to problems, the Cambodians themselves had to make up their minds. Whether
to go with the rest of the world, whether they could afford to “dilly-dally” and
argue on procedural points, or argue on such tiny points which, in fact, had no
real practical meaning. “I give a lot
of credit to the four factions, I think also that the major interested parties
involved, like Thailand, contributed to the process, to the negotiating process,” So
what, then, is the future regional role for Thailand? “My
God, this cabinet has only six months to go, we’ll do our best in that time,”
says Prime Minister Anand, laughing strongly. “We’re
only a small country, so we’re not that ambitious, at least this Government is
not that ambitious. We have to work within the time limits, but perhaps the future
Government can take a greater role. I think that whatever we do, we have to recognize
our limitation, our own constraints. We’re not a major power – we are a sizeable
power within the region, but that’s it. Period.” Midway
through his term, the Prime Minister reflects on his time at the helm of the country. “I
enjoy the work I’m doing, I enjoy the job but I do not enjoy the position of being
Prime Minister. In a way I am a rather private man, I cherish my own private time,
I cherish my own private life. In the political arena you have to stand in front
of the public every day, every hour. All of your words, all of your deeds are
scrutinised and assessed. Sometimes there’s a lot of character assassination.
It’s not that I am not in a position to answer all of these accusations, all of
these slanders and 'what-not', but it’s not my 'cup of tea.'” So
what does Khun Anand look forward to when he retires? “A
holiday, a part-time job and not having to give interviews,” he says, grinning
broadly, “signifying, most politely, that the interview was over.”
PRIME
EXAMPLE Anand Panyarachun
By Judi Buehrer,
Thailand Tatler
December 1994 “I
consider it my luck that whatever I was or whatever I was doing, I was often involved
in some momentous event pertaining to the interests of Thailand. You can call
it fate” Among the companies and enterprises
chaired by Anand are the Saha Union Group, Star Block Group, Eastern Star Real
Estate Co. and the Post Publishing Public Co. Ltd. He also sits on the boards
of directors of IBM Thailand, Samitivej Public Co., Siam Commercial Bank, Sime
Darby Berhad of Malaysia, IBM Asia Pacific, the International Advisory Board of
General Electric Company, American International Group Icl, and International
Finance Corporation Business Advisory Council. He is honorary chairman of Chiva-Som
International Health Resorts. And that’s not all. He also chairs the Thailand
Development Research Institute Foundation, the Thailand Environment Institute
and the Cambridge Thai Foundation. He is a member of the Advisory Council of SASIN
Graduate Institute of Business Administration of Chulalongkorn University, the
Board of Trustees of the Asian Institute of Technology, and Chulalongkorn University
Council. Anand is also chairman of the Business Council for Sustainable Development
based in Geneva. For a man who zealously
guards his privacy, Anand Panyarachun is a conspicuously public figure. In fact,
Anand seems to be everywhere these days addressing business, education and environmental
seminars and conferences in Thailand and abroad. Newspaper and magazine stories
quote his witty messages, next to photographs of his familiar, smiling visage
– often sharing the spotlight with such notables as Prime Minister Chuan Leekpai
and Miss Thailand. You would think that
Anand is on a mission. And he is. You could say he’s Thailand’s self-appointed,
roving ambassador. The 62-year-old former Prime Minister-States-man-businessman
spends about half of his time these days crusading. At an age when most men plan
their retirement, Anand divides his time and energy between chairing the multi-billion-baht
Saha Union Group, stumping the speaking circuit to promote Thailand abroad, and
to fight for educational and environmental reforms on the home-front. “I
think it’s important that the Thailand story is told to the outside world in an
accurate, comprehensive and objective manner,” Anand says, “I hope that my talks
will contribute in some measure to the better understanding of Thailand, and to
the advancement of the Thai position in international diplomacy and trade.” Anand
is selective about his speaking engagements. He declines about 60 percent of invitations
he receives, premising his acceptance “upon my interest in promoting Thailand’s
political and economic interests.” A prominent
figure nearly half of his life-time, Anand has been described as a polished diplomat,
skillful technocrat, astute chief executive – even a knight in shining armour.
Admired for his numerous business, political and personal achievements, he is
perhaps most warmly regarded by Thais and expatriates for nurturing the Kingdom
through the healing, re-building process after two national crises; the February
1991 coup d’etat and the May 1992 uprising. After
the first incident, Anand headed the interim government as Prime Minister until
April 21, 1992, when he left Government House and returned to his ninth-floor
office in the Saha Union building at Sukhumvit 58. National stability was short-lived,
however, and he was appointed Prime Minister again after the bloody May 1992 student
uprising, that resulted in 50 deaths. The tragic incident triggered a period of
national despair, and Anand faced the weighty task of reassuring his fellow citizens
while encouraging them to get the country back on its feet. His faith in Thai
people led him to counsel them to “reach inside our own souls to rediscover and
tap this inner strength of ours.” Looking
back, Anand says thoughtfully, “Everyone was deeply disturbed and distressed.
I think every society, every nation, goes through some kind of a crisis, now and
then. In our case it was a crisis of such magnitude – a crisis of the mind – there
was a need to resolve it in a rather peaceful, just and objective way. In the
shortest possible time, too, although it’s not the type of thing you can lay to
rest easily.” These days, Anand maintains
his pragmatic approach, moral values and earnest demeanour. His spacious, meticulously
ordered office, projects a purely business-like ambiance, except for a stunning
collection of blue and white porcelain vases, and numerous photographs of Anand
with His Majesty the King and Heads of State from around the world. Walking briskly
across the room to a semi-formal sitting area, Anand reclines in a silk-upholstered
chair and glances at the seven-page bio-data in his hand. He relinquishes it to
the reporter, saying almost apologetically, “I don’t really like handing out this
sort of material about myself.” It seems
an odd remark from a man who has attained national and international esteem, and
chaired a host of notable enterprises. In
spite of his public and business stature, Anand is uncomfortable talking about
himself. Responding to comments about his accomplishments, he says, “I just do
a day’s work. If it turns out to be good, it might be labelled as an accomplishment.
Well, thank you, but that’s it.” Though
he answers personal questions tersely, he reveals much when asked whom he most
admires. “Normally I go for people with integrity, people who are decent human
beings. My role model would be my father.” Anand
talks almost reverently about his father, Phya Prichanusart, who played a key
role in defining Thailand’s education system. King Rama VI sent him to England
to study the British public school system. Later, as education permanent secretary,
Phya Prichanusart helped set up many schools, including Vajiravudh College, of
which he became headmaster. Anand describes
his father as “a decent man, and a very good father. He generated warmth within
our family circle. He never tried to make our decisions for us, although we would
talk, discuss matters. He was a teacher - he spent all his life teaching. He loved
to read - something I inherited from him. He listened to people, which is very
important in a man. You have to be able to listen to other people, to be interested
in their ideas and point of view. He left the Civil Service in his early 40s,
at a very young age, and started another career. He co-founded the Bangkok Chronicle,
now known as the Bangkok Post. Together with a blind American teacher, Miss Caulfield,
he set up the first school for the blind in Thailand. Although he was a devout
Buddhist, he became, I think, the first non-Christian to chair the YMCA in Thailand.
He was a well-travelled man who loved music, especially Chinese and Western opera,
and Thai classical dance. He was a man of varied interests, a kind-hearted person,
a man of principle.” Anand contemplates
his answers carefully, before delivering them in precise English, with a cultured
Cambridge accent. It is hard to imagine this poised, confident man grappling with
the English language. “I left Thailand
at a relatively old age - the age of 16 - and it was a real struggle to learn
proper English,” he says, recalling his first experience abroad at Dulwich College,
London, in 1948. “The first year was very hard, being away from home, and not
being able to catch up with my peers at school because of my inadequacy with the
language.” He persevered and went on to the University of Cambridge’s Trinity
College, where he graduated with a law degree and honours. When
Anand returned to Bangkok in 1955, he joined the Foreign Service, where he advanced
quickly. He was appointed secretary to the minister of foreign affairs in 1959,
and in 1964, first secretary to Thailand’s mission to the United Nations. In 1967,
while continuing his UN position, he was named ambassador to Canada. He served
as Thailand’s ambassador to the United States and permanent representative of
Thailand to the United Nations from 1972 to 1975, as permanent secretary for foreign
affairs in 1976 and as ambassador to Germany from 1977 to 1978. As
an envoy, Anand helped forge several significant agreements, including the first
ASEAN-European Community Cooperation Agreement, the normalisation of relations
with China, Laos and Vietnam and first ASEAN summit meeting in Indonesia. Concerning
his participation in such historic negotiations, Anand says, “I consider it my
luck that wherever I was, or whatever I was doing, I was often involved in some
momentous event pertaining to the interests of Thailand. You can call it fate.” Anand
resigned from the Foreign Ministry and joined the Saha Union Group in 1979 as
vice-chairman. His first appointment as Prime Minister in 1991, triggered his
abrupt resignation from all his business positions, a step he repeated after the
May 1993 uprising. He flashes the familiar boyish grin and States,
“I felt obliged to go back to my business activities, for the simple reason that
when I left Saha Union - twice - I was, not able to give them any advance notice.” Anand
says he is in the process of phasing out of the business world. His agenda remains
full, and includes a diverse itinerary. For example, over the past year he addressed
conferences held by the Pacific Area Travel Association in Hawaii, the School
of African and Oriental Studies in London, Merrill Lynch in New York, Thammasat
University’s Economic Association in Khao Yai, and the University of Khon Kaen
and the Federation of Thai Industries in Songkhla. Anand
prefers to focus his talks in Thailand on environmental protection and educational
reforms. In addition to advocating environmental preservation, he co-founded The
Environmental Institute, because he felt it was time that business and industry
began to address the environmental damages they had spawned. Anand’s government
made the environment a high priority and enacted “a rather comprehensive law”
on environmental protection and management. He embarked on a national programme
to build more waste treatment plants, and implemented tax incentives to encourage
people to use lead-free gasoline. In the
past eight years, he believes Thailand “has done a good job in getting down to
the basics.” Much more needs to be done, “it is important that a partnership be
established between the government, the public sector, the people and the business
world. Business and industry are slowly but steadily accepting responsibility
for environmental preservation and protection.” The Institute is aiming its workshops
and seminars at both top executives and young business leaders. “I’m rather encouraged
by their interest and attitude,” he says. Following
a path his father pioneered, Anand has initiated a “one-man campaign” to get the
country moving on education. He supports up-grading the quality of teachers, and
beefing up programmes to train Thailand’s future business leaders, scientists
and technicians. He hopes Thai people will contribute to the task. “It would be
more than a donation, rather it would be a wise investment,” he says. “My
vision is to make Thailand into a regional education centre. We can position ourselves
to do so. Education has been proven to be a vehicle for equitable distribution
of income. Unless we start now, we will be more..” Anand paused to find the right
word…”retarded,” he adds with a spontaneous, youthful grin. More seriously, he
concludes, “A beginning must be made.” Last
year, Anand added Bangkok’s traffic congestion to his priority list. By launching
Traffic Crisis 94, he created a forum, including the public and private sector,
to propose measures to solve Bangkok’s traffic woes. “His
Majesty the King did a lot of good things to focus attention on the issue and
galvanize public interest in solving the traffic crisis. Our exercise was, in
fact, a response to His Majesty’s initiative. Far too often we just left it to
the King to do magic things. I think he’s over-worked,” Anand says. Though
Anand devotes considerable time to business and public speaking, he and his wife
MR Sodsri, two married daughters and their families, see each other often and
travel together frequently. “I love travelling in Thailand – especially to the
north and northeast. One of these days, I hope to stop travelling abroad and concentrate
on Thailand. There are so many places I have not yet seen.” Anand
also enjoys watching TV sports programmes and reading Winston Churchill’s books,
good English prose, speeches by World Leaders and political and economic publications.
A music lover, he says, “I have only one regret. I would love to have learned
to play a musical instrument, but I am a good listener.” His favourite composers
are Rachmaninov, Chopin, Brahms and Puccini. Anand
continues to play squash when he has time, but has given up tennis. “It’s changed
a lot, with all the top spins and what not.” He played on Cambridge tennis and
squash teams, but then, as now “Work always took precedence.” After
a nearly two-hour interview, one feels as though there is much more to learn about
Anand. At first serious, reserved and intellectual, he has gradually relaxed,
allowing his warmth and humour to emerge. He’s come a long way since the anxious,
homesick student arrived in London. One has a sense that he will go further, prompting
the question: Is he considering returning to politics? “No,”
he responds quickly, emphatically. “I’m a private person, I cherish my privacy.
It’s not my “cup of tea” to subject myself to constant public scrutiny.” In view
of his rise to power twice, another question persists: Could he be coaxed to return
to the political arena? The youthful Anand
grin fills his face. “I could do it for a short time a year or two as I did in
the past, but not for the rest of my life. I’m not that dedicated to politics,
and my wife does not like it! I still follow politics, and I try to do a few things.
Not everyone has to jump into the political arena to have an effect.” A
fitting remark, but an under-statement from a man who continues to stimulate thought
and action at many levels.
PAVING
THE WAY by David Peters
Manager Magazine,
June 1993
The public display of support
Holds the seeds of
a political movement
that should be watched closely In
mid-March, ostensibly responding to a criminal charge against Anand Panyarachun,
for malfeasance in office, Sumet Jumsai na Ayudhya organized a small circle of
friends to offer “moral support” to the embattled former Prime Minister. As
Friends of Anand (FOA) swiftly expanded its base, from 20 or 30 people to about
20,000, (mostly white-collar workers and bureaucrats. The local and international
media painted the movement as a spontaneous eruption of popular support for a
national hero: a selfless, honest man who, despite his distaste for political
life, twice sacrificed himself, by taking on the mantle of leadership, to protect
his country’s fragile democracy, in times of crisis. How
wonderfully noble A close look at FOA’s
founding members and their political connections, however, suggests that the organization
may have been anything but spontaneous. It may represent no less than an attempt
by the social and business elite - with the express cooperation of Mr. Anand –
to hijack the country’s political system (see Appendix 1 - Anand’s Liberal Corporatism). Often,
with hindsight, it’s possible to think that there was more organization for something
like this, than there really was,” argues MR Sukhumbhand Paribatra, a political
scientist at Chulalongkorn University and FOA spokes-person. “We had no intention
whatsoever, to organize anything big.” If
that was, indeed, their intention, then they failed miserably. Someone who knew
about the group, clearly lacked discretion, because Dr. Sumet’s office was soon
flooded with phone calls and faxes from people expressing their support for Mr.
Anand. “In the first week, we had three or four thousand people; in two or three
weeks, we had ten thousand.” MR Sukhumbhand reveals. “At
that point, we felt that we couldn’t just let it go on without any organization.
A group of people met together with Sumet Jumsai as the coordinator, and advisers
to FOA were chosen.” According to FOA office
manager, Siriporn Sukosi, the group’s membership stood at 19,075 as of 29 April.
With these numbers, the obvious counter-argument to MR Sukhumbhand is that nothing
this big happens without organization – and money. Which, since few people are
willing to shell out large sums of cash with no chance of return, begs the question
of “why”? FOA insists that it simply collect
the names of people who contact it, and thus has no money. The group does, however,
have an office on Ploenchit Road across from Le Meridien President Hotel, a telephone,
a fax machine and a staff: Ms Siriporn, another full-time woman and two students. “Many
big businesses and other persons contact us and ask us how much they can contribute,
but we tell them to hold off, because we don’t know what to do with the money,”
MR Sukhumbhand explains. “We’re not set up legally. As expenses come up, they
are paid by members of the group, but no money actually passes to us; we are not
a fund-raising group.” “We have private
funding.” confirms Ms. Siriporn. “We don’t request donations from members but,
when we have expenses, we receive gift cheques.” Asked who pays the rent, she
laughs, and answers that she really does not know. Among
the founding FOA members, there is no shortage of money. A list of supporters
released to newspapers in mid-March, includes HH Princess Suthisiri Sobha, HH
Princess Vimolchatra, HSH Lt. Gen Prince (MC) Chidchanok Krisdakorn, ML Manich
Jumsai, Phairat Benjarit, MR Kasemsamosorn Kasemsri, ML Tor Krisdakorn, Witthaya
Vejjajiva, MR Sukhumbhand, Duangmanee Visetkul, MR Sarisdiguna Kittiyakara, Mechai
Viravaidya, MR Butri Viravaidya, Likit Hongladarom and MR Narisara Chakrabhongse. These
paragons of the Thai elite, comprise one important prong of FOA’s backing. The
other comes from a more unlikely source: the Palang Dharma Party. On 25 March,
about a week after the aforementioned 15 names appeared in the local dailies,
former PDP leader Chamlong Srimuang led a group of 20 party members, including
several MPS, on a courtesy call to Mr. Anand’s office at Saha-Union Corporation.
Maj Gen Chamlong remarked at the time that FOA would not have to work alone. In
analyzing the significance of this visit, it is important to remember that, just
a few months earlier, Maj Gen Chamlong openly wooed Mr. Anand to become PDP leader.
Given the Democrats’ resurgence in Bangkok in the last election, many observers
at the time reasoned that Mr. Anand was about the only person who could guide
the PDP back to supremacy in the capital. Social
critic Sulak Sivaraksa comments that “Chamlong cares very much for Anand, and
Anand may end up as head of the PDP. This would help to redeem Chamlong’s image.
His party’s reputation for being anti-monarchist and anti-Buddhist would be cleaned
up, if it had someone of Anand’s stature as leader.” Contrary
to the popular image created by the media, therefore, FOA can easily be seen as
a significant political movement. A group of 20,000 people, led and backed by
an elite group of wealthy and influential figures, endorsed by a major political
party – all in support of an enormously popular former Statesman whom the same
political party desperately wants as its leader. In
this context, it is noteworthy that Athong Jumsai na Ayudhya, the older brother
of FOA coordinator Dr. Sumet, is a PDP MP from Bangkok’s Constituency 5. Mr. Anand,
for his part, has his own connections with the PDP: for example, he is the chairman
of the honourary board of governors of a new health spa being built on land owned
by current PDP leader Boonchu Rojanasatien in Hua Hin. Of
course, FOA officially denies that it is involved in politics. MR Sukhumbhand
argues, “I think that different members (of FOA) probably have different intentions
in joining. We had an agreement from the beginning that there should be no political
activities associated with the group. However, if members want to be more politicized
then, as individuals, they can do that.” The
next morning, newspapers reported MR Sukhumbhand’s announcement of his willingness
to run for the PDP in the 11 July by-election. He later changed his mind, and
decided not to run. The by-election will
fill the seat in Bangkok’s Constituency. I vacated by hotel tycoon Akorn Hoontrakun,
who resigned in late April, to avert a possible share- manipulation scandal. Although
the party denies it, Mr. Akorn is thought by some to be one of the PDP’s biggest
fund-raisers. After the May crack-down,
Mr. Akorn and his associates at Business Management Services Company (BMS) created
a brief media stir, by announcing their intention to give financial support to
‘quality’ candidates, those with strong ethics and reputations for honesty. Mr.
Akorn ran for his seat on such a platform, which fit well with the PDP’s reputation
- a reputation that Mr. Anand also enjoys. If
it is ultimately discovered that Mr. Akorn broke the law to raise funds for the
PDP, he - and the party itself - will be shown to be no different than the ‘old-style’
politicians that he criticized so harshly for their bad characters. Although
Mr. Anand’s reputation would not be affected by such a scandal, the Opposition
has begun to raise its own questions about the former premier’s connections that
– if the media and the people could look beyond their rosy views of him – would
similarly show him to be not much different, from any other successful business-person
or politician in this country. Mr. Anand,
in an exclusive interview with Manager, claims. “I refused (the PDP’s) offer,
like I would refuse any offer to become the head of any political party. I’m not
interested in politics or, I should say instead, I’m not interested in being a
player. There may be people who would like to see me become one for their own
reasons, but I cannot help that.” All along,
in response to an almost daily stream of media questions on this subject, Mr.
Anand has denied that he is interested in returning to lead the country. “I have
no taste for public life.” He explains. “I think that, for a person to perform
effectively, he should enjoy the position he holds. “Harry
Truman said, ‘If you can’t “stand the heat”, get out of the kitchen.’ Personally,
I think I can “stand the heat”, but the point is that, even if I could “stand
the heat”, why should I place myself in the kitchen?” If
this is his deep-seeded feeling, then why did he accept the position offered to
him by the National Peacekeeping Council (NPKC)? “It must have been a lapse of
sanity”. he quips. “My liberal views are
quite well known in this country …However, when he (Gen Suchinda Kraprayoon, who
had been an assistant military attache in Washington when Mr. Anand was the ambassador)
came to me and pleaded that he wanted a civilian Cabinet, I believed in his sincerity. “I
was concerned that, for ten years, there hadn’t been an upheaval like the one
that had just happened. There had been two coup attempts, but they had failed.
I deeply regretted that the military had seized power, irrespective of the corruption
charges against the Chatichai government. I did not play a part in the planning
of the action, and I did not approve. “Nonetheless,
I thought that, if there’s anything that I could do to bring Thailand back to
a State of normalcy and stability, and to get the economy going again, I should
do it….they (the NPKC) knew that I was an independent thinker, that I was not
a stooge or a “front”. “In all my dealings
with them, they were always fair to me. I tried to explain to them and rationalize
to them some of my programmes. In return, we had a relationship of mutual trust
and mutual understanding…They understood that my decisions were not for personal
gain or personal interest.” Whatever scruples
might have stood in the way of Mr. Anand taking the premiership the first time,
they were not evident after the bloodshed last May. “The second decision was easier
than the first one,” he admits. “The first time that I accepted, the offer came
from the military, after a coup d’etat. I knew that this could be seen as betraying
my principles that I might look like I was seeking the job. “There
was also a question of legitimacy: a person of my standing and reputation, by
accepting the premiership, could be seen as conferring legitimacy to that illegal
act. Nonetheless, it was a decision that I made consciously and conscientiously,
weighing both the positive and negative factors. “The
second time, it was a technically-correct procedure. The term was also much shorter,
and the agenda had been drawn up for me.” He
was offered the premiership twice, and he accepted on both occasions. It has been
said that, the first time, both Ukrit Mongkolnavin and Arsa Sarasin refused similar
offers. If Mr. Anand felt strongly about staying out of public life, he probably
could have said “no”. However, when ‘called
on by his country,’ he has never missed an opportunity to take a larger role.
Even if his stated aversion is sincere, it has clearly not been strong enough
for him to resist the roles, that some people offer him ‘for their own reasons’. There
is no evidence that he would resist a future call by a group representing the
people – as FOA purports to do. In response to the out-pouring of support on his
behalf over the past three months, Mr. Anand has consistently portrayed himself
as a surprised and overwhelmed private citizen, who takes no part in the organization
of events in his honour, but who is nonetheless a willing participant, because
of the gratitude he feels toward his well-wishers. “I
am personally gratified by the show of support given to me,” he explains. “I think
that these are well-meaning people who have trust and faith in my integrity, and
who perhaps feel that I was given a raw deal.” From
the middle of March until the end of April, an astonishing array of events were
held to honour Mr. Anand, and he managed to fit each and every one of them into
his busy schedule. Every day, newspapers carried pictures of obscure business
groups bringing him flowers; a group of Royal Polo Club members organized a “Run
for Anand’; a relatively mysterious group called Red Flowers for Anand began posting
notices around the city. Over Songkran,
a water-pouring ceremony was held for Mr. Anand at Chatuchak Park; he was the
guest of honour at fund-raising dinners; the Australian ambassador hosted a party
for him, that was attended by the ambassadors from the U.S., the U.K., Canada,
Germany, Italy, Japan and New Zealand. Although
he repeatedly denied any involvement in organizing this carnival side-show in
his honour, he also never disguised his appreciation. His condonation of the various
activities, and his willingness to bask in the media spotlight in the process,
was clear indication that he encouraged FOA’s cause. The
‘spontaneous’ display of support for Mr. Anand came to a head on the date of his
first court appearance, 21 April. He was mobbed outside the court-house by supporters,
whom he greeted with triumphant waves, looking more like a campaigning politician,
than an arraigned defendant in a criminal case. One
of the most controversial, events that Mr. Anand attended over the past few
months, was the Australian ambassador’s dinner. There are few countries in the
world where foreign dignitaries could rally behind a former Prime Minister, indicted
in criminal court for malfeasance, without any serious diplomatic repercussions. Sources
at the American embassy report that MR Sukhumbhand was instrumental in organizing
the dinner, that he even accompanied the Australian ambassador, when he went to
distribute invitations. He denies this allegation, but acknowledges that the dinner
“undoubtedly sends a diplomatic message of some sort, although exactly what message
is, for you to figure out.” In response
to charges that the foreign ambassadors were interfering in domestic affairs or
the Thai judicial process, he argues, “The thing that you have to remember, is
that the government is not the plaintiff in this case. The public prosecutor is
actually working on Anand’s defense…Anand is not an opponent of this government,
so where is the interference?” MR Sukhumbhand
evidently forgets, as, perhaps, did Mr. Anand, that interfering with the government
and interfering with the judicial process are two different things --- assuming,
of course, that the executive allows the judiciary its independence. Western
governments undoubtedly supported the two Anand governments. Mr. Anand seemed
like the right man at the right time to liberalize the economy, in ways that helped
foreign companies’ local concerns. This support has somehow created an image of
Mr. Anand as a champion of democracy, even though his two terms -- and, indeed,
his whole career in government service -- were anything but democratic. To
serve a dictator, or not to serve a dictator: that is the question that has
confronted many gifted Thais in the 61 years since the advent of constitutional
monarchy in Thailand. Mr. Anand, like many of his educational and social background,
chose the former. Mr. Anand received his
university degree from Cambridge in 1955, after which he immediately joined the
Foreign Ministry. In 1959, he became secretary to Thanat Khoman, who served as
the Foreign Minister from 1959-1973. “He
came to the Ministry soon after Cambridge.” Dr. Thanat recalls. “He was recommended
by Pote Sarasin (Prime Minister immediately after Sarit Thanarat’s coup). When
he recommended Anand, I accepted. I found him to be a very candid and straight-forward
man…He learned fast and, in a short time, he became a good diplomat.” Pote
Sarasin, of course, is the father of Pow and Arsa Sarasin, who were both members
of Mr. Anand’s Cabinets, and also of Pandit Bunyapana, permanent secretary of
the Finance Ministry. Mr. Anand’s mother, Khunying Preuk Panyarachun, was the
aunt of Thanphuying Siri Sarasin, Mr. Pote’s wife; and Mr. Anand’s father, Phraya
Prichanusart, looked after the Sarasin boys when he was the superintendent of
Thai students in England after the Second World War. Thus the Sarasin family,
which has sometimes been tagged ‘Thailand’s Kennedys’, is very closely tied to
the Panyarachun family. Under Dr. Thanat,
Mr. Anand got on the “fast track” at the Foreign Ministry, vigorously implementing
the foreign policy of two of Thailand’s most notorious dictators: Field Marshal
Sarit and Thanom Kittikachorn. Dr. Sulak comments that, “if there’s one thing
that Anand does not seem to know, it is that it is wrong to serve dictators.” In
1972, after holding various diplomatic posts in North America for eight years,
he landed the plum job: ambassador to the U.S. He was only 40 years old. In 1975,
he was called back home to become permanent secretary of the Foreign Ministry
under the Kukrit government. Then dictatorship caught up with him. The
morning after the bloody coup of 6 October 1976, Mr. Anand was asked to calm down
the foreign representatives in Bangkok and explain the reasons for the previous
day’s events. Shortly thereafter, he was dismissed from the Ministry, charged
with harbouring communist sympathies and releasing State secrets. He chose to
fight. “The way he was treated, was absolutely
disgusting.” remarks Dr. Thanat. “The charge against him was a kind of treason
charge. It was ludicrous to think that he would do something like that.… I asked
Thanin (Kraivichien, Prime Minister after the coup) to be fair with him.” Mr.
Anand was ultimately cleared of the charges against him and re-instated, but the
course of his career had been shattered irreparably, and the post that he was
ultimately offered -- the ambassadorship to West Germany -- was a definite step
down from what he had enjoyed before. In 1978, he resigned from the Ministry and
went to the private sector. “I’m not a
person who would look back with bitterness. I always try to look forward and outward,”
Mr. Anand claims. “The events (in 1976) were traumatic, and I was saddened. Nonetheless,
however unfair, however unjustifiable, however … evil -- I was looking for a softer
word -- these events were, they don’t bother me now. They don’t govern nor have
an influence on my present thinking. I know what I was, I know what I am; I have
a clear conscience.” Perhaps Mr. Anand
would not be so generous, if he had not been able to walk out of the Ministry
and straight into the executive offices of Saha-Union as vice chairman. The chairman
at the time was Amnuay Viravan, who sympathized with Mr. Anand, as he himself
had been driven to resign from his post as permanent secretary of the Finance
Ministry by the 1976 coup and its ensuing communist “witch hunts”. Unlike Mr.
Anand, Dr. Amnuay quit, before anyone had a chance to accuse him of anything. Then,
on 23 February 1991, another coup brought Mr. Anand full circle. Once again, he
chose to serve the dictators and, once again, his public image was improved by
this association. In the absence of an elected Parliament to debate issues, the
two Anand governments managed to push through reams of legislation, most of which
had actually been “on the drawing board” since the Prem or Chatchai administrations.
For this, he is generally considered to have been a particularly effective Prime
Minister. Asked to assess his own performance,
he replies, I don’t bother. What’s done is done. What we could not do, it’s too
bad, but when the term is up, the party’s over. It’s time to leave the affairs
of State to those responsible.” Mr. Anand’s
troubles in 1976 and his straight-talking style, quite easily lead to the mistaken
notion that he represents the common people. Nothing could be further from the
truth -- it is important to remember to what extent he is a product of his background. Mr.
Anand comes from a very elite segment of society. Born to a rich Chinese family,
he was given the best education available, in the best schools in England, and
was then ushered into a prestigious job with a recommendation from the Prime Minister.
He spent 12 years circulating in the hallowed diplomatic corridors of Washington
and New York. Regardless of the strife he endured, he had a comfortable job waiting
for him in the private sector, at the end of his ordeal. The
kind of privileges that he has enjoyed -- and the sheltered existence that this
generally entails -- encourages contempt for the people, rather than empathy.
He and his peers tend to have a theoretical understanding of democracy through
their Western educations, but a poor idea of what it means on a practical level. Dr.
Sulak, a contemporary of Mr. Anand, comments, “Most of my generation have a low
opinion of the people. Anand worked under Sarit so long that democracy for him
only means the forms -- having elections, having a House of Representatives --
and not the substance. If he needs to get elected, he can do it. “The
bottom line is that he thinks that the country needs someone like him, to talk
to foreign companies, or the Japanese. He thinks that his Cabinet was the best
in the world, with the brightest minds available in the country, so how could
it have done anything stupid?” Because
of this mind-set, elitist aristocratic Chinese have tended to rally behind Thai
dictators. Since the power of the people is suspect, the only alternative is to
rely on the power that comes from the barrel of a gun. Thai generals have usually
recognized their own weaknesses in actually administering the country, and have
brought in the elite to do their patriotic duty. Despite
all of Mr. Anand’s liberal posturings, his apprenticeship with Dr. Thanat under
Sarit and Thanom involved the suppression, rather than the expression, of democracy.
He also clearly maintains a high regard for the NPKC, describing it with words
such as ‘sincerity’, ‘trust’ and ‘understanding’. As
for Thai democracy, on the other hand, he comments, “We are politically immature,
partly because of habit: Thais like to listen to rumours -- perhaps we are more
gullible than other people”. Members of
his social class have often used such generalizations, to justify a form of ‘guided
democracy’ -- with the elite in the driver’s seat -- which is not actually democracy
at all. If Mr. Anand’s life and works can be taken as a body of evidence, he undoubtedly
supports a form of benevolent dictatorship, run by people like him, which nonetheless
retain the outward trappings of democracy. Ideology
notwithstanding, would it be so bad to have Mr. Anand back as Prime Minister?
After all, he is thought to have a sterling character, and his two governments
are considered to have been particularly transparent -- so much so, in fact, that
people scoff at Opposition accusations that not everything was as above-board
as it seemed. “The Opposition leaders who
are making these charges are children whose own records are certainly not beyond
question,” snaps MR Sukhumbhand, “Even their records out of office are not beyond
question. The Opposition leaders who are more decent and grown up -- such as Dr.
Arthit Urairat and Gen Chatichai -- refuse to get involved.” Mr.
Anand himself is somewhat more circumspect (see Appendix 2 - In His Own
Defense). “Those who dislike me, I don’t know if they’re engaged in some sort
of character assassination. I have always been willing to discuss what I did as
Prime Minister but, when charges are not based on fact, there is only so much
I can do.” For some reason, people find
it inconceivable that Mr. Anand could ever allow himself to be swayed by personal
connections, or to cut deals “under the table”. When someone has moved in the
circles that he has, however, it is understood that he or she will have acquired
influence. It is not necessary for him or her to go around proclaiming the fact
-- everybody knows. Perhaps the opposite question would thus be more helpful:
given Mr. Anand’s connections, how could he have entirely avoided using them? Remember
who Mr. Anand is: he is related by blood or by marriage to some of the richest
and most influential Chinese families in Thailand. His wife was born MR Sodsee
Chakrabandh; her aunt was HSH Princess Javalit Obhas Rabibadhana, the wife of
HSH Prince Amara Samarnlaksana Kittiyakara who, in turn, is the uncle of Her Majesty
the Queen. Of the 15 founding members of FOA listed above, ten carry some sort
of royal title. Moreover, during his 13
years in the private sector, Mr. Anand held an impressive string of corporate
posts: director of five Saha-Union subsidiaries, IBM (Thailand), Sime Darby Berhad
(Malaysia) and Siam Commercial Bank; and chairman of seven other Saha-Union subsidiaries,
Sports Ace Company, Star Block Company, Thai PTA, Eastern Star Real Estate Company
and, just before the coup, Saha-Union itself. In
the line of work, he has made contacts with people like Suthep Bulakul, with whom
he sits on the board of Star Block Company, and who has shown his loyalty by becoming
a member of FOA. In fact, it is difficult to think of many people in this country
who are better connected than Mr. Anand. That
he was once mis-treated by a Thai dictator, is no reason to paint him as an outsider
in Thai society. It is true that he is considered to be some-what of a loner in
his personal life but, in business and in government, he has always worked with
people -- and worked well. When Mr. Anand
got his first job at Saha-Union, he had no track record of business management
expertise; all he had, was a personal connection with the chairman. When he was
offered the premiership for the first time, again it was because he had a personal
relationship with Gen Suchinda. He has
undoubtedly made deals with, and decisions in favour of, people with whom he has
strong connections, whether through business or family: he simply has relationships
with too many people, for him to get much done in this country, without working
with some of them. In this sense, Mr. Anand
is not essentially different from the scores of other business leaders and politicians
who, for some reason, have so much dirtier reputations. Given who his friends,
are and what corporate positions he holds, there is no doubt that he has a great
many vested interests to protect and, even if he expresses it in a subtle manner,
everyone who deals with him knows exactly what those interest are, at the outset. Contrary
to his media-enhanced image, Mr. Anand is not a self-sacrificing, ambition-less
individual, and he is certainly not a champion of democracy. Whether he wanted
to be a player or not, he is one, with financial and political backing from the
PDP and the upper class, and the support of a 20,000-strong ‘grass-roots’ organization. The
movement’s aim is un-ambiguous: to orchestrate a public demand for Mr. Anand’s
return to the political arena; to a certain extent, this has already happened.
Judging from his past, this will mean more of the same style of government served
up by his two previous administrations -- not the achievements, but the process. For
a blueprint of Mr. Anand’s tactics, think of how he pushed legislation through
an appointed legislature, or how he decisively crushed public-sector unions. These
kinds of actions achieve immediate results, but they have very little to do with
democracy. Appendix of Paving the Way
- ANAND’S LIBERAL CORPORATISM : Thailand’s Political Future?
by
Mark Wrangel The one thing
that I decidedly like about Anand Panyarachun is that he reputedly hates the game
of golf. Given his background, his profession and the social circles in which
he travels, this definitely shows a significant degree of personal independence
and immunity to peer group pressure – key unconventional leadership characteristics. The
rest of the man’s views and actions as a Foreign Ministry bureaucrat, a business
leader and political figure – before, during and after his two ‘accidental’ terms
as Prime Minister – and the reputation and political following that he enjoys,
are not so much matters of like or dislike, but subjects for analysis. The
surprisingly rapid growth of the Friends of Anand (FOA) political support group
to a size – by Thai standards – verging on a mass movement begs for an explanation. He
naturally disavows political ambition – of political party leadership, at any
rate – and turned down an offer to head Chamlong Srimuang’s Palang Dhamma Party
(PDP). If anything, that endeared him all the more to his followers; it is all
part of the image – or image-building process, if conspiratorially inclined. An
Anand does not seek political office, he is asked, implored even, to make the
sacrifice to serve. (This is actually quite
Chinese. Check Romance of the Three kingdoms to see how often aspiring
Chinese emperors had to be asked, begged and cajoled before finally accepting
the position. Suchinda Kraprayoon tried the same ploy, but rather less convincingly.
Since Mr. Anand was educated at Cambridge, Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar
may be another interesting reference for such shenanigans.) In
many analysts’ judgement, therefore, an Anand III government looms as a distinct
possibility in Thailand’s future. A large and growing number of well-connected
and influential individuals, and of apparently well-funded groups, ‘like’ Mr.
Anand, and are disaffected with ‘politics as usual’ and ‘ordinary (corrupt) politicians’.
The movement ‘s support base includes a substantial portion of PDP voters but,
characteristically, cuts across political party lines. Were
national elections to be held in the near future, the Anand movement (with PDP
complications), would certainly have a chance to emerge with the largest number
of seats in Parliament. Maj Gen Chamlong must have understood when he offered
Mr. Anand the PDP helm that, with its current leadership personnel and continuing
links to unorthodox, fundamentalist religious influence, the party probably reached
the limits of its political potential in last September’s polls. In
the event of a successful Anand movement/PDP electoral performance, Mr. Anand
could hardly remain on the sidelines, despite his stated lack of political ambition
(if did not prevent him from becoming PM twice under rather more dubious circumstances). Even
if he did, however, the train has let the station: the political movement that
he helped to create – or, at any rate, to catalyze – exists, and will become an
increasingly important element of the Thai polity in years to come. A first test
of its strength will come with the 11 July Bangkok by-election to fill the seat
vacated by ‘angelic’ suspected stock manipulator Akorn Hoontrakul. What
type of political movement has been inspires by Mr. Anand’s political views and
actions, with or without his instigation? Borrowing a term from a recent study
of the “new political economy of Thailand” by Thammasat University political scientist
Anek Laothamtas (Business Associations and the New Political Economy of Thailand,
Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado, 1992), and drawing on the policies he pursued
as Prime Minister, Mr. Anand’s political philosophy could be described as a form
of liberal corporatism’. In his study,
Dr Anek uses the term in value-neutral fashion to characterize developments in
Thai society that contrast with both the earlier Thai (military) bureaucratic
polity and pluralist models of government-interest group interaction in a liberal
constitutional democracy. Pluralism, he
writes, is marked by a minimal role of a government “in the formation of societal
groups, or in structuring the relations between itself and the groups, or among
the groups themselves. Groups work more as independent policy advocate than as
the policy instruments of the government.” Corporatism,
on the other hand, “conceives of the government as a largely autonomous actor
with issues and ideas of its own … [It] may structure its formal relations with
society as well as the intra-societal relations …Interest groups are organized
hierarchically and then linked to the government group competition is thus expected
to be limited since major conflicts will be solved by higher [authority]. Finally,
groups … work not only as policy advocates; they are often in charge of….public
duties…” Dr Anek largely neglects to mention
that corporatism, historically, has been associated mostly with authoritarian
regimes; in fact, it was a hallmark of 1920s-1940s Italian and German fascism.
Liberal corporatism, for its part, is essentially fascism with a more human face. Mr.
Anand presumably object to having his political views described as corporatist.
He has referred to himself as “a bit of a free-thinker” who “wishes for [a] democratic
Thai society.” A man’s political attitudes and actions, however, are often a more
reliable indicator of his true philosophy than his words, and the track record
of Mr. Anand’s two governments certainly hints at corporatism. Although
he insists that he has “not discerned to this day why [he] accepted the offer
of Prime Ministership two years and a half ago, “Mr. Anand clearly savored the
opportunity of “getting things done” with virtually complete impunity from and
disregard for political constituency or specific interest-group demands. What
was in the best interest of Thai people and society was sovereignly discerned
and resolutely implemented by the Prime Minister and his hand-picked Cabinet of
technocrats. The Anand administration’s overriding attitude, the Bangkok Post
commented accurately in March 1992, “seems to be that any policy reformed deemed
to be beneficial for the aggregate system should be implemented even if it might
be unpopular among some quarters of the populace.” Mr.
Anand may have picked up this attitude, typical of arrogant social engineers,
through his association with IBM, a company famous for such mannerisms in its
corporate culture. It is decidedly not the sentiment of a democrat entrusted with
the restoration of the constitutional democracy. Lacking political legitimacy
and even the semblance of a popular mandate, Mr. Anand – even at the expense of
being criticized for a lack of concrete achievements by his government other
than restoring democracy – might have done better to defer major controversial
policy measures, rather than pushing them through with undue haste. As
it turned out, however, what a committed democrat should have seen as his main
political task – laying the groundwork for a return to stable constitutional democracy
– was the one thing definitively not achieved by Mr. Anand’s first government.
For him to say, as he did in a late April 1993 interview, that “the strength and
the weaknesses of the interim constitution did not concern my government,”
(emphasis added) is a truly extraordinary excuse and evasion of responsibility
for what followed. Equally extraordinary
is his characterization of last year’s May tragedy – in a 1 July 1992 speech to
the Foreign Correspondents Club – as resulting from a “failure of management
[emphasis added], which allowed a specific political challenge to an individual
government to be transformed into a crisis of legitimacy, affecting all institutions.”
If only we have more efficient political management. In
addition to their style of governance and attitude toward the governed (sheep),
the two Anand governments implemented a variety of substantive policy measures
along corporatistlines of restructuring society (“We tried to improve the structure,
improve the social fabric,” explains Mr. Anand). The
most ambitious and relevant such undertaking was the restructuring of state enterprises,
combined with the process of increasing degrees of privatization. Some well and
some less well-considered privatization programs had, of course, already been
underway during the Chatichai administration. Two additional key elements under
Mr. Anand, in term of liberal corporatist realignment, were the dissolution of
state enterprise unions, with the desired side effect of a general weakening of
all trade union organizations, and the weeding out of military appointees on enterprise
boards and their replacement by technocrats and private sector corporate managers. The
effect of the first measure, naturally, is to undermine any independent political
and economic clout that the trade unions might develop, and transform them from
potential political and economic antagonists into docile advisory organizations
and instrumentalities in the implementation of social policies dictated from above
– just what corporatism describes. The
weeding out of military appointees from enterprise boards was surely justified
in part by their lack of professional competence and as a counter-measure to graft
and corruption. Politically, it was also eminently popular with the May 1992 anti-Suchinda,
and anti-military protestors. But to see
it only in such terms – i.e, as officially presented – is short-sighted and misses
more fundamental points: the attendant political weakening of the military institution
(“getting the military out of business and politics so they can concentrate on
their basic professional function”) not only weakens the military, but also the
political say of the lower classes in urban and rural areas. Cynics,
or people without a proper and somewhat longer-term sense of Thai historical development,
may dispute this and claim that the army’s claim to represent the interest of
‘the people’ was always merely a pretext for blatant interference in the affairs
of state. Indeed, for parts of the officer corps, it frequently was just that. Nonetheless,
both the instrumental historical role of the armed forces in ushering in Thailand’s
modern political era and broadened popular franchise and the economic patron-client
relationships that developed between military officers and the rural poor in upcountry
military districts were of great significance. Furthermore, it would be foolish
to say that no military men ever took their acclaimed social and political-representational
role seriously. Depriving the military
of its commercial role and board seats will of necessity break up traditional
patron-client relationships, without any immediate replacement in sight. It
will now be the corporatist alliance between government bureaucrats/technocrats
and private-sector business that dominates policy directions, notoriously unconcerned
with in-depth rural economic development. Asked
why his governments’ legislation seemed to be almost exclusively concerned with
and flavoring the business community, Mr. Anand responded that he “could not possibly
solve [in seventeen months] what the past eight to ten governments over period
of six decades failed to solve.” “That may be true, but it was not the question.” Corporatist
social restructuring also requires tighter government control over the judiciary:
an independent judiciary is anathema. It is thus poetic justice that Mr. Anand
is now in trouble with the law – at least over one of his attempts at social engineering. Finally,
with regard to Mr. Anand’s ‘legislative’ record, some attention should be given
to the Criminal Code amendments calling for tough new penalties on defamation
that were rushed through three readings by the rubber-stamp NLA in one sitting.
So much for the former premier’s highly touted ‘transparency’ and his respect
for freedom of expression. In style and
substance, the two Anand administrations exercised governance and left a legislative
legacy quite contrary to basic requirements of liberal constitutional and pluralist
democracy. It is a mystery why, considering his governments’ record, to Mr. Anand
should now be seen as a defender of democracy. It
is nonetheless coherent that, on the basis of this same record, he has become
the symbol and potential standard bearer for the urban middle- and upper-class
elite’s political aspirations. Whether it be Business Management Services Company
(BMS) members, well-to-do PDP supporters or other joiners of the FOA movement,
what unites them at this point in time is shared political and business interests
that they perceive would be best served by Anand-style liberal corporatism. -
IN HIS OWN DEFENSE
In an exclusive
interview with Manager, former Prime Minister Anand Panyarachun
addresses two much –publicized charges of wrongdoing brought against him by Opposition
politicians: that his government broke up the Charoen Pokphand (CP) Group’s three-million-line
telephone monopoly and awarded one million lines to Loxley because he had a vendetta
against the former and connections with the latter, and that he sold off two state-owned
oil refineries to Thai Oil at a bargain price. “It
was our government’s policy not to encourage monopolies”, Mr.Anand contends. “We
didn’t tackle other infrastructure projects because, when we came into our jobs,
the contracts were already signed; we couldn’t touch them. But the contract with
CP had not yet been signed. “The insinuations
about my problems with CP involve a PVC [polyvinyl chloride, a downstream petrochemical
product] joint venture with a Belgian firm called Solvay. Solvay initially contacted
us [Saha-Union Corporation, in 1988], and I went to Brussels and had a day-long
meeting with Baron [Daniel] Janssen. We concluded the talks by shaking hands and
agreeing that Solvay and Saha-Union would be joint-venture partners. “I
returned and, a few day later, a Solvay director was supposed to fly in and announce
the joint-venture agreement with me. I remember that I came back on a Sunday night,
the Director arrived on a Tuesday, and we were supposed to make the announcement
on Wednesday. However, the director came to me on the Tuesday and informed me
that there had been new developments, that a politician here had convinced Solvay
that it should join with a new group. “I
professed my disappointment, because I thought that there was a gentlemen’s agreement
when we shook hands in Brussels, but it is not Saha-Union’s style to chase after
a joint venture when we’re not wanted. I did, however, express my disappointment
and my bewilderment in a letter to Baron Janssen. “The
official excuse that he gave for backing out of the joint venture was that we
were already working on a PTA [purified teraphalic acid] project with an English
company, ICI. He said that the NPC2 [National Petrochemical complex II] project
were supposed to be spread among Thai companies, and that we were thus not a suitable
partner because we already had one. At the time, however, there were at least
two other groups – that were working on more than one project, so we don’t believe
that our involvement with ICI would have been a problem. “Solvay
eventually joined with CP, and I respected its decision. Khun Dhanin [Jiarawanon]
is a personal friend of mine, and this was purely a business matter. I certainly
hold no personal vendetta toward CP. Furthermore, Saha-Union’s business and CP’s
business do not compete. The innuendo that I took on CP over the telephone project
is completely groundless. “And as for the
insinuations that the contract was given to a company related to me, I never allow
relations – be the blood relations or personal relations – to interfere with my
business judgement or my political judgement. “The
Cabinet had nothing to do with the bidding process. Everything took place in full
view of the press and the public. When the bidding documents were opened, it was
there for all to see. The decision was based on the percentage of return for the
government. Loxley offered 43.1 percent, higher than other three – and much higher
than CP. “The other companies involved
– and they were major companies: Shinnawatra, B. Grimm – never
made any complaints. Those who made these charges against me just didn’t bother
to look at the documents. During my two terms, we put everything in writing, and
there was no hanky-panky. “If I had not
been done fairly and squarely, you would think that the others would file complaints,
or that they would have requested this government to review the decision, but
no such request has been made. This bidding was carried out in completely open
and transparent manner. “ As for Mr.Anand’s
alleged connections with Loxley, the telecommunications company is a subsidiary
of General Engineering (GEL), the chairperson of which is Khunying Chadchanee
Chatikavanij who is the daughter of late Thai Farmers Bank president Bancha Lamsum.
Krit Panyarachun, Mr. Anand’s nephew (through his older brother, Kusa), is married
to another of Bancha’s daughters, Suphawan. Bancha’s
brother, Banyong Lamsum, and his son, current TFB president Banthoon Lamsum, are
director and managing director, respectively, of Sukhumvit Vechakit Company, of
which Mr. Anand is also a director, as is Chinda Suwanraks, the husband of one
of Mr. Anand’s nieces. Of course, these
relationships do not necessarily mean that Mr. Anand is guilty of misuse of office.
TFB is a major shareholder of many companies listed on the bourse, and it is certainly
difficult to find two successful Sino-Thai families in Bangkok that have not married
into each other at some point. Nonetheless,
the closeness of Mr. Anand’s relationship with the Lamsum family makes it possible
to perceive an opportunity for misuse of office – and this is all that
is usually necessary to demonstrate a conflict of interest. In such a situation,
a truly transparent Prime Minister would acknowledge the possibility of conflict
and disqualify himself from the decision-making process. The
sale of old refineries to Thai Oil, Mr. Anand argues, was a different case altogether.
“It was neither I nor the government who arrived at the selling price,” he explains.
“We retained four good consulting firms – including Goldman Sachs and Chase –
which were chosen by the Finance Ministry, the Industry Ministry and one or two
other government agencies… “The median
price had to be no less than the present value: the revenue that the government
is entitled to receive from the lessee, accounting for fifteen-percent annual
revenue growth over the remainder of the ten-year lease agreement, plus the actual
value of the assets – Unit 1 and Unit 2 – at the end of the term. “We
took care that we would get a fair price. If someone were to put up a higher figure,
I don’t know what basis he or she would use. If you buy a Mercedes Benz – no matter
how good these car might be – its value will depreciate after twenty-five years.
“And there was no economic rent in this
case. If the government had said that no more refineries could be built in Thailand,
it would be a different story, but the government had a liberal policy: anybody
could come in and set a up a refinery. “We
were simply following a policy of previous governments, dating back to the beginning
of the Prem administration, of enabling Thai Oil – a Thai company – to become
competitive. Back in 1980, the Prem government bought forty-nine percent of Thai
Oil, using the Petroleum Authority of Thailand as the shareholder, and the Crown
Property Bureau bought another two percent. “It
was known, even back then, in order to mobilize funds, Thai Oil would have to
get into the Stock Exchange. The stock exchange said that, before Thai Oil could
be considered for listing, it would have to fulfill two conditions. First, it
had insufficient assets, because two of its refining units were used on a rental
basis. Secondly, that rental contract only had about nine or ten years to go.
“My government decided that the contract
should be extended for another fifteen or twenty years – I forget the exact term
– to make the land rental more permanent. We also decided that the assets on the
land should be sold to Thai Oil, so that it could qualify for listing. These refineries
have been operating for twenty-five years and, with other companies – Esso, Shell,
Caltex – putting in state-of the-art technology, Thai Oil would need to mobilize
funds to pay for modernization. “This privatization
process was initiated by Prem, and that’s why there was no open bidding for refineries.
The purpose was to enable Thai Oil – a Thai company fifty-one percent owned by
government agencies – to secure listing and to mobilize funds for future programs.
We were following an already-existing resolution of the Council of Ministers.” It
is interesting to note in all of this that Thai Oil’s managing director is Kasame
Chatikavani. If the family name sounds familiar, it is because he is married to
GEL chairperson Khunying Chadchanee. Again, family connections give rise to the
allegations that dog Mr. Anand. As with
the CP-Loxley case, Mr. Anand’s explanation of the oil refinery sale is logical
and credible. What is disturbing, however, is his implication that he should be
free to make important state decisions involving close personal friends and quasi-blood
relatives, simply because he has a good reputation. Because
he is Mr. Anand, Thai people are supposed to trust that he arrived at his ultimate
decisions on the basis of purely objective reasons, without being affected by
personal factors. It is true that he is
Mr. Anand, and Mr. Anand is extremely well-connected man (see Paving the Way,
p16). He has extensive networks of contacts in government, from his 23 years in
the Foreign Ministry; in business, from his 13 years at Saha-Union; and in society,
from his family background and his public profile over the years. If
someone without his reputation claimed total immunity to subjective considerations,
no one would believe him. - TALK
IS CHEAP
Excerpts from an interview
with Friends of Anand spokesperson MR Sukhumbhand Paribatra ( with some clarifications
by FOA office manager Siriporn Sukosi ). Manager
: How many members does FOA have now? MR Sukhumbhand
: Thirty thousand. [Ms. Siriporn : As of 29 April, nineteen
thousand and seventy-five.] Manager
: And there’s some sort of office and office manager? MR
Sukhumbhand : Yes, Khun Siriporn. Idon’t remember her phone number. Just a
second. You see, I’m spokesman, but I don’t even know the phone number of FOA.
Khun Siriporn was seconded from a big company whose director is a supporter of
FOA. [Ms. Siriporn : I just came back from the US about
six months ago, and I was in between jobs when a friend mentioned this one to
me.] MR Sukhumbhand : Manager
: You have organized fundraising dinners. How is it possible that no money
has come to you? MR Sukhumbhand : That wasn’t us.
The dinners were organized by some NGO. Manager
: Which NGO? MR Sukhumbhand : I can’t remember.
[He cannot remember the group’s phone number or which NGO organized the dinner?
Perhaps FOA should have found a spokesperson with a better memory.] Manager
: So all of the groups supporting Mr. Anand formed and became high-profile
at the same time by coincidence? MR Sukhumbhand :
People thought we were high-profile because we had a press conference but, in
fact, we had to become high-profile to explain that we are not high-profile. [Of
course, the high profile had nothing to do with the fact that they sent an open
letter, signed by several prominent and influential figures, to the daily newspapers,
and then proceeded to collect almost 20,000 names in a month and a half to support
their cause.] Manager : I understand
that you were involved in organizing the ambassadorial dinner … MR
Sukhumbhand : Me? No. That was the Australian Ambassador. Manager
: So you had no role in this? MR Sukhumbhand :
Absolutely not. [Sources at the American embassy claim that
he was instrumental in organizing the dinner.]
ASIAN FORUM STATEMENT
11th Asian Forum on Corporate Social Responsibility
Grand Ballroom, Shangri-La Hotel, Bangkok, Thailand
25 October 2012
10:10 to 10:20 a.m.
STATEMENT BY
MR.
ANAND PANYARACHUN
"The impact of global corporate social responsibility"
It is my pleasure to be here with you at the Asian Forum on Corporate
Social Responsibility.
Let
me start by congratulating the organizers for convening this year's
Forum on the theme of social innovation, which involves not only
goods and services but processes and technologies that reach out to
all stakeholders.
Recent
global events have underscored the relevance of this Forum.
The
"Occupy Wall Street" movement has dramatically increased the
importance of corporate social responsibility.
Today's
consumers are demanding that companies consider their impact on
society as much as their own business interests.
Commitment
to corporate social responsibility has become a key element of good
corporate citizenship, alongside sustainability and good governance.
And in this context, the 1997 financial crisis and the 2007 global
economic crisis provide useful lessons for all of us.
Times
have certainly changed. I recall once when CSR programs were merely
ad-hoc initiatives.
Now
CSR is increasingly institutionalized within an organization, and
even standardized across industries.
We
are living now in world that knows no borders. As we become ever
more connected, we can see that globalization is having a profound
impact on corporate social responsibility.
First,
supply chains have globalized and are increasingly a measure of
company competitiveness. In its turn, CSR is increasingly integrated
into the global supply chain via "green standards" and
monitoring health and safety among supply chain sub-contractors.
Second,
multilateral organizations and non-governmental organizations are
globalizing CSR. For example, the UN Millennium Development Goals
are referred to in the CSR strategies of many companies, including
those at the local level. As you know, the MDGs are a set of time
bound goals and targets to reduce global poverty and promote health,
education, gender equality and environmental sustainability.
Third,
demanding customers from developed countries are driving CSR.
European customers are particularly concerned about environmental
sustainability. North American customers are particularly concerned
about child labor and gender equality issues. Therefore, global and
export-oriented companies are responding by adjusting their
strategies and operating practices.
Fourth,
"going glocal" is the trend among companies doing
business in middle-income and emerging economies that represent a
growing customer base, including the population at the
bottom-of-the-pyramid. Globally-mandated Headquarters CSR policies
are increasingly adapting to local conditions. For example, some
host governments are legally requiring CSR, or encouraging
companies, to undertake CSR projects on education and health that
may not be directly related to the companies' core business, but are
of benefit to the local society.
Fifth,
the quest for global solutions to social issues, including respect
and support of the human rights of children, is accelerating even as
the solutions appear more "glocalized."
The
resolution of social issues transcends borders and presents both
threats and opportunities for instance in the rise of social media
and the democratization and globalization of information and news, as
was so evident during the Arab Spring.
Moving
to the relevance of CSR at the national or local level, let me use my
own country, Thailand, as an example.
Economically,
we can proudly call ourselves a developed middle-income developing
economy and we can arguably serve as a model for aspiring economies
in the Greater Mekong Subregion and beyond.
As
an export-oriented manufacturing hub, Thai companies are familiar
with the operating requirements of globalization.
Thailand
is a major tourist destination, a foreign investment hub, and a part
of global manufacturing platforms and supply chains. So the country
can modestly state that it has considerable experience with
globalization.
With
respect to CSR, Thailand is not immune to rising expectations and the
need to be even more socially conscious and civic minded.
Our
people as consumers are growing in sophistication. They are more
conscious of safe and green products.
The
new generation of employees expects their employers to address social
and environmental issues to be responsible corporate citizens, to
use renewable energy, and even to offer a life-style in terms of
working hours and income to meet family needs and increasing
consumption.
A
primary concern that employees look into is not only how the
organization conducts business with, but who the organization
conducts business with.
Employees
pay more attention to their company's codes of ethics and to offers
of both living standards and quality life styles.
These
issues affecting Thailand will also affect other less developed
countries as their economies grow. How Thailand responds to the
concerns of the people will also serve as a model for other countries
grappling with these social issues.
Looking
back, when Bangkok last hosted the Asian Forum on Corporate Social
Responsibility in 2003, the theme of the Forum was "Business,
Government and Civil Society Collaboration in Nation Building."
Looking
at the present, we have indeed seen how multisectoral cooperation has
led to higher growth and increased social responsibility in this
country. And we see that CSR has been and will continue to be a key
driver for engaging with all these actors.
This augurs
well for the present Forum.
I wish you
every success in your deliberations.
Thank you.
Speech
Archives in English Section
3 : Governance
& Ethics
|
|
| Section
3.1 : Philosophy & Ethics |
Keynote
Speech
by H. E. Mr. Anand Panyarachun
UNICEF Ambassador
for Thailand
at the Regional Consultation on
"Challenging the New
Millennium:
The Rights of the Child and Issues of
Displacement in Southeast
Asia"
Siam City Hotel
January 26, 2000
In my capacity
as the UNICEF Ambassador for Thailand, I would like to extend our warmest welcome
to the delegations from countries in our Southeast Asian Region, our friends from
South Asia who share some of the same problems and concerns, and others from Asia.
I am pleased to see the trend that we are increasingly thinking of us as one Asian
group. I would also like to extend our congratulations to the National Youth
Bureau, the organizer of this regional consultation, for taking the initiative
in bringing together all of us. I am aware that the National Youth Bureau, together
with UNICEF is monitoring the status of Thai children and initiates follow-up
action to take remedial measures. It is important to have opportunities
for concerned Government agencies, NGOs and particularly youth, our stakeholders,
from the two Asian regions, as well as UN agencies to have dialogues on important
issues such as the one we are focussing on today. I recall in an earlier
occasion, over two years ago, I had the opportunity to appear before some of you
who are from the Mekong Sub-Region, addressing the gathering of concerned Government
and NGOs representatives on the "Illegal Labour Movements: the Case of Trafficking
in Women and Children". It is encouraging to know that actions taken
to tackle the problem of trafficked children, who are categorized as displaced
children, are being reported here at this meeting and in a wider context of child
rights and displacement in Southeast Asia. The persistence in combating the violations
of the rights of displaced and trafficked children and sustenance of the interest
and efforts in promoting Child Rights by all of you is highly commendable. The
expanded scope of deliberations of this meeting in the agenda - seems ambitious.
I hope it will help us understand better the situation of refugee children, displaced
and cross-border trafficked children and to come up with ways and cooperation
in recommending solutions to the problems at all levels. In view of the apparent
complexity and difficulties concerning the situation of such children in the Region,
this is a very timely consultation. For example, in September last year,
UNICEF reported that as many as 500,000 people were displaced from their homes
and facing severe nutritional and health risks in Timor. Among this number, some
75,000 were estimated to be under the age of five. Thailand, on the other hand,
has been both the sending and receiving country as far as trafficking of children
is concerned in this region. Several reports have shown the rising number
of children victims of trafficking for labour and sexual exploitation from our
neighbouring countries, particularly in the Mekong Sub-region, and most notably
from Myanmar, China, Laos, and Cambodia. Also in Thailand, there are some
150,000 children from the hill tribes born in the country and categorized as children
without nationality and often even birth registration. So are a number of sea
gypsies along the Southern coast. This includes illegal foreign child workers
who are working in deep sea fishing in Pattani province. What can we do
about such children is a question that needs to be answered, taking into account
multiple dimensions such as human and child rights, humanitarian concerns, political
issues, legal and constitutional provisions, economic and social implications
etc. Efforts are being made by all of you to find long-term solutions to these
problems. One country cannot do it alone as they are inter-related and emerging
from the multiplicity of root causes. It calls for all of us to share among us
the issues of concern and to seek ways to tackle them together. This calls for
not only national, but bilateral and regional agreements, directions and concrete
plans of action to advance the progress. In these efforts, it is important
to ensure compliance to the principles enshrined in the Convention on the Rights
of the Child to provide the best protection to these children. I would like
to thank all of you who have come from various corners of our region with the
great intention to arrive at constructive and positive solutions toward the improvement
in the protection of refugee and displaced children. I would also like to thank
the UN agencies, namely, UNHCR and UNICEF and the Southeast Asia Foundation for
Institutional and Legal Development or SEAFILD for their continuing interest in
this subject and support to this regional consultation. I wish you all great success
in this very important deliberation.
Keynote
Address
by Mr. Anand Panyarachun
Former Prime Minister of Thailand
and UNICEF Ambassador for Thailand
at the Fourth Ministerial Consultation
on Progress toward the Goals for Children
In the East Asia and Pacific Region
November 12, 1998
Ms. Bellamy, Excellencies, Distinguished Delegates,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
It is both a privilege and an honour to have the opportunity
to deliver this keynote address to such an esteemed gathering of Ministers, key
government officials and experts dedicated to finding solutions to the many problems
now facing the children of our great region. Before I begin, please allow
me to give special thanks to Prime Minister Chuan Leekpai and UNICEF Executive
Director Carol Bellamy for their thought-provoking addresses. Their heart-felt
commitment to the cause of children is inspiring and it should serve us well in
the difficult work that lies ahead. I must admit that when first asked to
make this presentation, I was concerned about the prospect of addressing an audience
with so much experience in the field of child development. After all, my long
professional career has been mainly in the areas of diplomacy, politics and business.
Even though I often championed the concern of children during my political career
and term as Prime Minister, it was only relatively recently that I assumed my
duties as UNICEF Ambassador for Thailand and began to fully immerse myself in
the concerns of children. Yet, after some reflection, I realized that my
grasp of the dramatic social and economic changes that have shaped, and continue
to shape this region has given me much to share with you about how these forces
can be harnessed for the benefit of children. I also realized that there are literally
hundreds of millions of excellent reasons - one for each of the 600 million children
in the East Asia and the Pacific region - for me to speak to you today. Let
me start by noting that we can be justifiably proud of the achievements our region
has made in the past decades. Until recently, our region was known around the
world for its remarkable and mostly equitable economic growth and, as Ms. Bellamy
has pointed out, for the extraordinary progress we have made for our children.
I would like to share with you my own personal analysis of these achievements,
the reasons for this great success, and what we can learn from them as we deal
with the many difficult challenges ahead. Over the past three decades, there
have been many diverse, country specific strategies that have contributed to our
region's overall prosperity. The main elements have been a balanced approach to
good fiscal and economic policy and a strong emphasis on human resource development.
These have included: ท The building of a broad base of human capital by
focusing on basic education and the provision of basic social services, such as
access to health care; ท The adoption of an outward-looking trade strategy,
with domestic protection limited to a core group of strategically important industries; ท
The more equitable distribution of the benefits of economic growth, particularly
through land reforms and broader access to credit facilities; ท Selective
intervention to promote both increased domestic saving and the transfer of these
savings to internationally competitive domestic firms, and; ท Developing
a co-operative relationship between the public and private sectors. While
all of these elements have been key to the region's success, it is my opinion
that the generous investment in basic primary education and in other basic services
marks the most critical difference between the high level of development experienced
in our region and that of the world's other developing regions. For example,
as long ago as 1960 governments in the Republic of Korea, Malaysia and Singapore
were making massive public expenditures for education. In East Asian countries,
education was seen not as just a luxury for the privileged few, but as a right
and necessity for all. The emphasis was put on universal, high quality primary
education, while university education systems were largely self-financed. In countries
such as Thailand, Malaysia, the Republic of Korea and Hong Kong, nearly 70 per
cent of education budgets were devoted to primary education. Singapore spent 834
US dollars on every primary school student in 1985, compared to just 28 dollars
per primary school student in India, and 21 dollars per student in Pakistan. As
a result, East Asian countries achieved almost universal literacy, and were better
able to meet the demand for a skilled, educated workforce, and to handle the pressures
of competition in an expanding and open global market. The cumulative benefits
of such major and well targeted investments in human resource development become
increasingly clear with the passage of time: over the last three decades, East
Asia's real gross domestic product has grown consistently at a rate almost three
times as fast as South Asia's. So the very foundation of the phenomenal
growth this region enjoyed in recent decades has been our strong commitment to
human resource development, which, quite simply, was a wise investment that we
made in ourselves. Now, with the dark clouds of economic uncertainly hovering
over our region, all that we have achieved is under threat. Day by day the situation
seems to deteriorate in many countries, with more mass layoffs announced and ever
grimmer projections for the years ahead. More and more families can no longer
afford to pay for basic health care or afford to keep their children in school.
Once thriving middle class families have seen the dreams they hold for their children
suddenly evaporate. Laid-off factory workers can no longer afford to feed their
children. Tens of thousands of labourers, the ones who built the gleaming skyscrapers
of the "Asian Miracle," now have no choice but to sleep in our streets.
In short, there are more poor than ever, more families and children in trouble,
and more and more people who need help but cannot find it. What has happened
to our region, the region of the "Tiger" and "Tiger cub" economies,
of ever-higher GDP growth rates and an ever-expanding middle class? How did we
come to this end? What became of the "The Miracle"? Domestic institutional
shot-comings, poor fiscal management and plain, unbridled greed were among the
culprits. I will leave it to the economists, the bankers and others to conduct
the post-mortem. Instead, please allow me to discuss where we should go
from here if we are to ever regain the promise the future once held. What are
some of the things that need to be done? First, I want to underline that
we must not forget how our region became an economic powerhouse, how "The
Miracle" came to be. As noted earlier, it was sustained, long-term investment
in education that made us strong enough to compete in the global arena. No matter
what the current economic outlook, no matter how tight the money supply, no matter
what kind of economic restructuring and reform is required, without continued,
adequate investment in the development of human resources we will never recover,
never redeem the Miracle. People are the real wealth of our nations, and it is
only through investment in people, starting with children, that we can ensure
our future. Second, we must continue to strive to ensure good governance
and transparency at all levels. How power is exercised in the political, economic,
social and administrative arenas, how governments inter-act with people in the
public realm, how businesses conduct themselves, and how families treat their
children, will be key. Governments need to pursue and penalize corruption,
develop more checks and balances, and make our institutions and their personnel
more accountable for their actions. There needs to be more decentralization, and
with it the devolving of decision-making and resource allocation. This goes hand-in-hand
with the need to encourage a sense of responsibility on the part of local authorities
and to foster more open management. Governments must also promote more public
hearings, policies and inquiries so that the voices of the public are heard prior
to the adoption, review or reform of laws, policies and programmes. Good
governance is also necessary within the private sector, where there must be more
self-regulation through codes of conduct and peer pressure so that the sector
itself can promote self-regulation and issue reprimands. As the current economic
crisis has taught us, good governance and transparency is desperately needed at
the global level, where unfettered financial flows can serve to make or break
a nation's economy. We can no longer allow the interests of a privileged few to
wreak havoc on the lives of millions. In this era of globalization, where the
ripples and shock waves of economic disruption is felt far beyond one nation's
or one region's borders, the international community must establish a set of rules
to regulate those financial and speculative activities that have potential for
economic destabilization. A fundamental re-examination of the way international
payments are conducted should be made. Third, we must address the issue
of wage disparity and rising inequality between the city and the countryside,
the huge, groaning gap between the "haves and the have-nots". This has
become a growing and alarming problem in several of the region's countries over
recent years. We cannot invite only the rich and privileged to the table and then
expect that the left-over scraps will be enough for the middle class, those trying
desperately to work their way into the middle class, and the poor and disenfranchised
living on the margins of society. Equitable distribution of the benefits of growth
is one of the hallmarks of a free and fair society. We must ensure adequate infrastructure
development and public and private sector investment in less-developed areas,
and remove constraints on access to credit for all our citizens. In addition,
economic rescue packages should not be used to assist only the immaculately tailored,
Mercedes-driving financiers who are now in need of a bailout, but rather the barefoot
farmers who travel by water buffalo and the women and children of the rice paddies. Fourth,
we must also increase the use of social incentives for those working to forward
social development. All too often investment incentives such as tax relief are
given only to entrepreneurs and the rich to invest in industries that are deemed
beneficial to the economy. Few incentives are available to those working for social
development, such as NGOs. The situation needs to be redressed so that incentives,
such as tax relief, are given to those working for and in the community, especially
for children. Fifth, we must seize the opportunities that the current situation
presents us. If I may have the privilege of borrowing from a recent address of
Prime Minister Chuan, the crisis has sparked what he called a "back-to-basics
movement". Has reminded us that our tightly knit families and the community
networks inherent in our agricultural sector from the bedrock of our society.
Constitute an available reserve of "social capital", which has often
been overlooked in our rush towards industrialization. The crisis has helped us
to look again at our inner strengths and has enhanced the resilience of our society.
This should make us better able to weather the social repercussions of the crisis. Finally,
let me say the road to economic recovery and stability will not be easy. It will
be long and hard and painful. It will demand regional and international solidarity.
We now live in an inter-dependent world, and no nation or region can afford to
stand-alone or stand by when other nations or regions need assistance. If we are
to rebuild "The Miracle", and in doing so guarantee our children their
right to a world where there is opportunity to fully develop and contribute to
society, we must all work together. I can think of no better way for us to do
so than by striving to meet the World Summit Goals for Children. The achievement
of the goals would provide both our children and our nations with the foundation
they needed to cope with the challenges of the future. If we here today work together,
we can ensure this. If we stand together, there is nothing that can stop us. We
owe it our countries our citizens, and most of all, to our children. It is our
solemn and sworn duty. We dare not fail.
Closing
Statement
"Caring For Young Children:
Perspectives on Change for
the Future" by His Excellency Anand Panyarachun
Former Prime Minister and
UNICEF Ambassador for Thailand at
the International Conference on Young Children:
Priorities and Challenges
in the 21st Century
Imperial Hotel, Bangkok
August 6-9, 1996
Thank you for the opportunity to speak at this Conference which has addressed
so many issues of vital importance to young children.
It is banality to
say everything is changing. "It's a changing world…etc". Even the weather
is changing. Yet, as with the weather-as someone said, "Everybody talks
about it - but nobody does anything about it" So, often enough, it
is with change. Yet learning to deal with change is increasingly what life is
about. Learning to manage the forces, which shape our lives, in the midst of this
change, is what development is about. Individual development and national development
are intimately connected. What constitutes the nature of the change in store
for our children in the 21st century? We already have to deal with a world in
which many powerful influences on day-to-day living - the choice of consumer products,
the possibilities of work, the offerings of mass communication and entertainment
- come from far away and are devised without our participation. The future is
likely to enormously increase this sense of alienation and uncertainty. Two
courses are open to us in dealing with this. One is to decentralize power and
authority to institutions, governmental and otherwise, closer to where people
actually live. The other already is taking place. An enormous increase in
the need for information to help individuals understand and anticipate important
changes in their personal and working lives. This phenomenon - so far at least
- is threatening to open another gulf between the haves and the have-nots, dividing
us into the information-rich and the information-poor. The globalized economy
lives on information. Compared to the information access of the average schoolchild
today, in Thailand certainly, the actors in the globalized economy are already
unimaginably "information-rich", and the gap is widening! Such
a gulf makes even more pivotal the challenge of decentralizing power and, consequently,
of access to information. Taking part in decision making and taking responsibility
for action are the most important learning experiences any of us can have. They
give us the confidence to go on to other challenges. This is real development
- and the best way we can care for the children of the 21st century is to foster
and promote this development. I don't need to tell you all the physical
and psycho-social factors - which bear on that process of growth in the young
child and which require a holistic approach to allow the child to become capable
of handling complex emotions and interactions with others and with the world around
them. I stress the need for a holistic approach to solutions, especially
in public policy. Lack of this approach in public policy has led to disparities
in access to social services-formal and non - formal education, proper health
care and adequate nutrition - as well as to forms of abuse and exploitation which
make one wonder sometimes about man's claims to superiority over the animal kingdom. The
more common consequence of the failure of public policy, and therefore the more
powerful in its aggregate effect, is the separation of children from parents.
Often not having enough secure family environment, because economic pressures
have compelled fathers and mothers to migrate to cities and towns to seek work. Of
course the economic and social marginalisation of many children thus thrown upon
their own resources, to live by their wits at a frighteningly young age, their
options and choices drastically narrowed, their futures foreclosed - even should
they happen to escape outright abuse and gross exploitation by others - is tragically
wasteful and dangerous. For mainstream economics, these human costs are
"externalities", regrettable but inevitable casualties of the drive
for national competitiveness. This must be why economics is called "the dismal
science". To me such a perspective seems not only morally bankrupt
but extremely shortsighted. Human costs mean social costs and these have a way
of becoming enormously expensive. Just because we have not worked out how to count
them does not make them less costly. Indeed, the public policy challenge
of the holistic approach to child development begins with this lack of measurement.
Until we reckon the cost of all these wasted young lives, fore-shortened possibilities
and unrealized potential, the political commitment will remain uncertain and the
necessary financial investment highly unlikely to say the least. Children
deserve better! Indeed they have a legal right to something better. Thailand,
like some 180-plus countries around the world including every one in this region,
acknowledges that fact through accession to the Convention on the Rights of the
Child. I signed the articles of accession on behalf of Thailand in 1992. The
Convention is a binding international instrument setting the norms for children's
survival, development, protection and participation. Survival rights focus
on needs basic to existence, including the provision of health care and nutrition.
Development rights, are about children reaching their potential. These include
the right to education, leisure, freedom of thought and culture. Protection
rights of course refer to protection against such things as abuse, neglect and
exploitation. Participation rights, include the child's right of access
to information and to a role in decision-making appropriate to their competence
in matters which concern them. As I have already noted, access to information
and playing an adequate role in decision making is arguably one of the most important
(and effective) ways we learn. The key to development really. Children should
have as much preparation for participation as possible, through actual experience.
As you all know, learning begins at birth. Young children can, and do, participate
as much as they jolly well can. We parents try to draw the line and maybe we should
be more ready to bring children in on appropriate levels of decision making in
these early years. In any case when participation is systematically denied
and judgement is never exercised, one of two things happens - either the analytical
thinking and capacity for making judgements tends to atrophy, or resentment begins
to grow. Many problems of adolescence - and who knows what else in adulthood -
have their origins in these tensions. As with the individual, so with the
nation. A people need experience of participation to fully exploit its potential
to learn and to develop. It is the job of public policy and national leadership
to provide an environment and a stimulus for this development. Care and development
of the child is a logical place to start. The 21st century will demand new
abilities of our citizens in this part of the world-the ability to learn throughout
life, to analyse and make informed judgements, to reason and to anticipate, to
work harmoniously in groups and to collaborate through sharing knowledge, to negotiate
and to resolve conflict without recources to the fight-or-flight reaction. These
capacities, the experts tell us, represent where the world is heading. Our corporations
are already struggling to develop such capacities, to start thinking of workers
as assets rather than costs. Is it too much to expect that the "dismal"
economics which guide our public policy considerations could begin to learn the
same lessons? Start to think about the young child, and the nurturing family and
community environment that the child needs, as assets rather than "externalities". Let
us not make the same mistakes as were made by the industrialized world a century
and a half ago…and reap the same bitter harvest of alienation and anti-social
behaviour, of large scale unrest and discontent, of prisons full and neighborhoods
aflame. I believe the subject of this Conference to be crucial to avoiding
a repetition of this history. I hope our national leadership around this region
are paying attention because, to paraphrase an American saying, you can ignore
some of the people some of the time but you can't ignore most of the people most
of the time. Children are people too and the message of this Conference
is that not only are you never too old to learn but that public policy has to
recognize that you are never too young either - and that it's none too soon to
begin acting on the premise.
Human
Rights and Business Ethics
by H.E. Mr. Anand Panyarachun
International Symposium
on Human Rights and Business Ethics
United Nations
Conference Centre, Bangkok
October 24, 1998 Excellencies
Distinguished
Guests and Participants
Ladies and Gentlemen It is a privilege for me
to be here with you today as we commemorate the fiftieth Anniversary of the adoption
of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. I would like to first commend
the Thai Government for organizing this Symposium, and other related activities,
to mark the Anniversary. Today's programme provides us with an opportunity to
promote public awareness of the meaning of human rights and its relevance to our
daily lives. I have been asked to speak to you about the subject of "Human
Rights and Business Ethics." But before I do that, allow me take this opportunity
to share with you some of my thoughts on the general topic of human rights. When
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted fifty years ago by the Member
States of the United Nations, it represented a milestone in the long struggle
for human rights. The Declaration was predicated on principles of non-discrimination,
civil and political rights, and social and economic rights. It was believed
that these rights were to be enjoyed by all human beings of the global village
- men, women and children, as well as by any group of society, disadvantaged or
not. These rights were not seen to be "gifts" to be withdrawn, withheld
or granted at anyone's whim or will.
Events in Asia today underscore
the sad fact that violations of human rights continue to be tolerated in many
countries of our region. The right to due process, the right to freedom of opinion
and expression, the right to freedom from torture and degrading treatment, and
so forth, are still elusive concepts in some parts of Asia. In the past
months, I have noted with much concern the spate of incidents of ethnic hatred
and perpetuation of xenophobic attitudes in our region, which undermine the cohesive
fabric of our societies. I have also watched with dismay the systematic persecution
of individuals who have political views differing from the ruling authority. Aside
from these recent events, we also see the on-going practice of discrimination
due to race, gender and religion. We cannot and should not sit in silence
and allow these violations of our basic rights to continue to take place. As citizens
of a global and inter-dependent community, we all have a responsibility to encourage
our governments to promote and protect human rights. It is my hope that
we will seize on the opportunity of the fiftieth anniversary of the Universal
Declaration to mobilize all strata of society in a reinvigorated and broad-based
human rights movement. On the part of the Thai Government, this movement
has already begun. As Chairman of the National Commission for the Formulation
of a Policy and Action Plan on Human Rights, I can tell you that we are determined
to enhance further Thailand's commitment to the various international instruments
in the field of human rights. Let me return to the original subject of my
address, namely "human rights and business ethics." I will share with
you some of my views as a man who has served in the foreign service for 23 years,
then worked in the business sector for nearly 20 years, and in the meantime, accidentally,
became head of government twice in the early 1990s. One general consensus
in the international community nowadays is the greater influence of business over
people's day-to-day lives and over global development, particularly by trans-national
corporations. Within the global economy, corporations own immense resources,
capital and manpower. Many multi-national corporations are considered more financially
powerful than some developing countries. The world's 500 largest industrial corporations
control an astonishing 25 percent of the world's economic output. The top 300
trans-nationals, excluding financial institutions, own some 25 percent of the
world's productive assets. Such figures underscore the gigantic expansion
of International business influence. Control over our economic activities leads
inevitably to control over all aspects of our lives. Will we let today's "Darwinian
Economics" devour our energies and erode our ethical sense? I personally
do not think that our society can let only the fittest survive, without supporting
the weak. Restriction of the economic "survival of the fittest"
within the limits of humanity and honour, is what we mean by "morality."
Hence, the question of compatibility between morals and markets has unavoidably
become a matter of public discourse. What do we mean when we talk of "business
ethics"? In the West, the movement of business ethics took off in the 1970s,
a movement reinforced by many social and cultural trends. People began challenging
the traditional view that money was everything - or that economic value took precedence
over other values. "Business Ethics" took the form of a marriage
between economics and ethics. The goal was to promote corporate policies and practices
that would contribute to the long-term, sustained and responsible success of enterprises,
while at the same time, fairly balance the competing claims of key stakeholders.
These include investors, employees, customers, communities, and the environment.
Through this approach, the position of the more marginal members of our society,
who have no access to power and less voice than other citizens, would be respected. Enlightened
companies know their enterprises cannot be sustainable if they are at odds with
values, which are shared across the world, and if they grow out of impoverishment
of others. For some time now, companies have been called on to abide by
certain environmental standards. Now their human rights standards are also being
called into question. Exhaustive discussions have sought to agree how far
corporations should go to protect human rights. The subjects of labour standards;
health and safety; employment; non-discrimination; freedom of expression, association
and assembly; women's and children's rights; and transparency and accountability
have all been raised. Responding to the mounting pressure both from governments
and the public, corporations are now much more concerned with the effects their
activities having on people, communities and governments. This includes the economic
and social impact in the host country in which they do business. In 1992,
the world adopted the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, proclaiming
that human beings were the centre of sustainable development and that they were
entitled to a healthy and productive life in harmony with nature. The business
sector was then put in the spotlight as a leading actor to match the rhetoric
with action. The major test for business was to devise strategies to maximize
added value while minimizing resource and energy use, and pollution. The Geneva-based
Business Council for Sustainable Development, which I had the privilege of serving
as both a member and, subsequently, as Chairman, produced a report "Changing
Course", which mapped out a new course for an ecologically balanced environment
with proposed commitments for action. Developing effective methods for international
business to protect human rights may be a more difficult task. Several codes of
conduct have been adopted to cover the broad issues and contexts within which
businesses work. However, there is no consensus among businesses as to how much
regulation, and how much self-discipline, would be acceptable or beneficial, without
jeopardizing their primary function of growth with efficiency. It is my
view that a unified and standardized code of ethics for business practice should
be established. In this regard, various existing standards should be unified such
as: 1. Social Accountability 8000 (SA 8000);
2. The OECD Guidelines
for Multinational Enterprises;
3. The ILO Multinational Enterprises; Tripartite
Declaration of Principle;
4. The Caux Round Table Principles for Business,
and
5. The Amnesty International Human Rights Principles for Companies While
the unification of these standards will be an arduous and challenging task, it
is a necessary one. Questions may be raised as to whether it is timely to be focussing
on business ethics at this time of economic turmoil. But paradoxically, we cannot
deny that our current economic crisis is partly a result of the weakness of ethical
values in our society, which urgently need to be addressed. In addressing
the challenge of developing a standardized code of ethics for business practice,
certain questions obviously need to be asked. One: In terms of substance,
should the code be general business
responsibilities, or merely human rights
concerns? Two: In terms of application, will the code be only applied to
producer, companies, or also to other relevant sectors such as suppliers, and
contractors? Will investors be included? These must all be reflected in the code's
substance. Three: In terms of enforcement, should the code be legally binding,
or be effected on a voluntary basis? And Four: In terms of monitoring and
evaluation, how will the implementation be credibly monitored and evaluated? I
would, humbly, propose the following four guidelines for the development of such
a unified code of ethics. The first is that the code should be realistic
and practical, but unwavering in principle. Without such an approach, the code
is unlikely to be endorsed by the concerned parties. The second is to ensure
efficient administration of the Code. Relevant processes such as implementation,
monitoring or evaluation, must not unnecessarily increase bureaucracy and regulations. The
third is that the Code should be verifiable and reviewed. The whole process, particularly
monitoring and evaluation, must be verified with transparency, by a credible and
independent mechanism, and must be periodically reviewed when necessary. Lastly,
the development of the Code must be participatory to create a sense of ownership
and commitment of all stakeholders. While the business sector can play a
supporting role, the responsibility for the realization and protection of human
rights falls on the Government. Government must act responsibly, as it has the
duty to distribute fair shares and responsibilities through the rule of law. However,
no government can respond to all demands. A strong civil society is very much
required, where citizens serve as monitors to review the actions of governments. In
this regard, I am pleased to hear the Prime Minister's enthusiasm for bringing
together business and civil society as partners in human rights protection. The
NGO sector in Thailand is one of the most vibrant in Asia. It has achieved much
in promoting human rights, particularly in the areas of political reform and protection
of the rights of vulnerable groups, such as children and women. An emerging
area of work for NGOs in Thailand is influencing the decisions of corporations
on how they do business in Thailand. In the West, human rights groups, consumers,
investors and labour unions, have through various pressure points been successful
in promoting human rights in corporate codes of conduct. And companies have been
responding to such pressures. Those companies that get bad press about human rights
violations have seen consumers boycott their products. In the long run, the bottom
line suffers. I would encourage our NGOs to mount similar campaigns in the interest
of protecting human rights in Thailand. Moral codes are not new. They have
evolved as economic life has evolved - as hunting gave way to agriculture, then
to industry, and to the present market economy. Perpetual growth is the driving
force of the market economy, but its practitioners need not be scrupulous. Ethics
are not the panacea for ills, but they supply the moral foundation for a better
individual and global order. Ethics and business are not adversaries. In
the long run, they need each other. The market cannot be sustained by economic
value alone. It requires a set of ethical standards to make the market not a place
of exploitation, but of mutual gain. In the midst of change and pressure for more
corporate responsibility, and the search for an appropriate and balanced role
of business, it has been said that "the task is rather like rebuilding a
ship while it's still at sea." For those of you who may be ambivalent,
you should recall the wisdom of our ancestors. When arriving at the gates of judgement
the first question asked was "Did you deal honestly in business?"
Keynote
Address
by Mr. Anand Panyarachun
on "Child Rights
and good Governance:
Regional Cooperation against
Child Sexual Abuse and
Exploitation"
June 1, 1998 Second Asia-Pacific Intergovernmental
Meeting
On Human Resources Development for Youth
June 1-5 1998, Bangkok Organized
by the United Nations Economic and
Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific
The theme of this meeting is "Elimination of sexual abuse and exploitation
of children and youth." The continuing practice of child sexual abuse and
exploitation, which has come to the fore in recent years as a global phenomenon,
is a gross violation of the rights of the child. Child rape, incest, child
prostitution, child pornography and the trafficking in children for sexual purposes
are increasingly found in all parts of the World. The damage to the child is both
physical and psychological. It is both generational and inter-generational. The
situation is frequently cloaked in a veil of secrecy. There is regrettably a ready
market for the child victims locally, transnationally and internationally. The
customers range from local clients to sex tourists and paedophiles who cross boundaries
in search of their prey. They are facilitated by intermediaries such as pimps,
procurers and brothel owners with their seedy underworld. At times, it is the
parents themselves who sell their children in to the sex trade. The issue
is further complicated by the fact that it has become increasingly globalized.
The advent of technology may also facilitate it. For instance, with the push of
a button, it is now possible to send out thousands of child pornography images
Worldwide. There are paedophile networks which transmit their information to all
parts of the globe instantaneously through computer technology. Globalization
also means that it has become easier for the traffic in children by means of abductions,
tricks and enticements both within countries and across borders. The children
are dealt with as commodities traded and exchanged as part of an increasingly
borderless World. In this context, globalization implies that we are faced with
transnational crimes. These are compounded by diseases, which know no borders,
especially HIV/AIDs. We know all too well that the HIV/AIDs epidemic is wreaking
havoc among women and children, particularly those victimised by the sex trade.
It is aggravated by new delusions, especially the practice of those customers,
mainly male, who seek out children in the belief that children are less likely
to be HIV-infected. Children also run a greater risk than adults of becoming infected
with other sexually transmitted diseases. They are scarcely in a position to demand
that adults use condoms as preventive measures, or to seek medical care when they
fall ill. Conversely, we should not forget that while globalization is pivotal
in the march towards the next millennium, there remain key local issues to be
addressed, often with International implications. There is an environment of poverty,
which is a breeding ground for abuse and exploitation. Lack of access to education
and the wherewithal of life renders children more susceptible to the sex market.
This is a further hampered by criminality, corruption, family disintegration,
migration, discrimination, negative tradition practices and a decline in values.
Despite such dilemmas, the World has become increasingly mobilised against
child sexual abuse and exploitation. A key re-orientation of the mind-set is to
accept that children have rights not to be abused and exploited. Children are
not chattels or objects to be violated by others, but are persons, subjects of
inherent, inalienable rights. As I have mentioned, the primary International
agreement which guarantees this standpoint is the 1989 United Nations Convention
on the Rights of the Child. It has been ratified by nearly all countries of the
World. It advocates non-discrimination, the best interests of the child, the right
to life, survival and development, and respect for the views of the child as key
principles for our action for and with children. It calls for national, bilateral
and multi-lateral measures against sexual abuse and exploitation of children. The
Convention was bolstered in 1996 by the World Congress against Commercial Sexual
Exploitation of Children, held in Stockholm, which tackled primarily the issues
of child prostitution, child pornography and the trafficking in children for sexual
proposes. The Congress adopted a Declaration and Agenda for Action which call
for the establishment of national plans of action, focal points and data bases
on the phenomenon by the year 2000. It calls upon all States, in cooperation
with civil society, to take more effective measures, especially through education.
It also calls for the criminalisation of all the offenders, whether foreign or
local, while ensuring that the child victims are not penalised. The implementation
challenge facing the International and national communities appropriately leads
to the challenge of good governance and its inter-face with child rights. Good
governance is concerned with how power is exercised in the political, economic,
social and administrative fields. Although it is much related to how governments
act and interact with people in the public realm, it also applies to the private
realm of how businesses conduct themselves and how families treat their children. The
notion of good governance is concerned with a more open and participatory society
whereby all those who interact with children should be more transparent, honest
and accountable towards the children. It calls for more consultations and cooperation
between governments, law enforcement authorities, the business sector and civil
society, including NGOs' the mass media, and child and youth representatives. These
tenets greatly influenced the drafting of the new Thai Constitution, which was
promulgated in 1997. I was most honoured to be a participant in the process leading
to this constitution. An accidental midwife (or mid-husband) for a child-friendly
Constitution! Some of the orientations, which may help to promote child
rights and good governance, include the following:
1. Improved Selection
and Capacity-building of Law Enforcers:
This implies the need to screen candidates,
train them well for their tasks as law enforcers in the pursuit of "quality"
law enforcement and monitor their performance. Dissemination of child rights and
related laws and policies to law enforcers and the public is essential to promote
greater empathy towards the child. Education and training as a preventive strategy
against child rights' infringements should be maximised, and these should include
information concerning HIV / AIDS. 2. More support for Good Law Enforcers
and Effective Law Enforcement:
This entails raising the income of law enforcers
to a reasonable level so as to prevent them from corruption, coupled with recognition
and rewards for good performance. It is complemented by measures to promote more
effective law enforcement, such as an alliance between good police and community
leaders and organizations. 3. More Penalisation of Corruption:
This
is particularly important to the area of child sexual abuse and exploitation as
it is often inter-mixed with dark forces, underworld influences and officials
who use the law for their own ends, needing effective counter measures. 4.
More People's Participation in Decision-making, Monitoring and Implementation:
This calls for more participation of civil society and its members as watchdogs
against child sexual abuse and exploitation. For instance, "Neighbourhood
Watch" programmes and community volunteers for child protection can help
to safeguard against the phenomenon. In regard to laws, policies and programmes,
it is necessary to promote more public hearings and inquiries so that the voices
of the public are heard prior to their adoption, review or reform. 5. More
Checks-and-Balances:
This calls into play the possibility of rendering formal
institutions and personnel more open and accountable to the public by having members
of the public serve as monitors. For instance, the local police boards should
have members of the public serve on them as counterparts for the formal police
personnel. Some countries are also experimenting with the idea of a children's
Ombudsman or equivalent mechanism which acts as a monitor against child rights'
violations and which reports to Parliament for further action. 6. More Social
Incentives:
All too often investment incentives such as tax relief are given
to enterpreneurs wishing to invest in industries that are deemed beneficial to
the economy, even though this may create negative impact for children. Too few
incentives are accorded to those working for social development, such as NGOs.
This situation needs to be redressed so that more incentives, such as tax relief,
are given to those working for the community, especially children. 7. More
Self-Regulation:
While laws are important to help eliminate child sexual abuse
and exploitation, the private sector should be invited more concretely to self-monitor
against abuses by the sector. This can take the form of Codes of Conduct and peer
pressure, so that the sector itself can promote responsive conduct through self-regulation,
and reprimand those found to be in breach. 8. More Decentralisation with
Responsibility:
This calls into play the need to decentralise to the localities
in terms of decision-making and resource allocations. It goes hand-in-hand with
the need to encourage a sense of responsibility on the part of the localities
to promote child-related projects and to foster open management and accountability
towards the public. 9. More Multi-disciplinary Terms:
As child sexual
abuse and exploitation arise from a variety of factors and damage both the physical
and mental health of children, there is a need to promote more multi-disciplinary
terms to respond to the child's needs. There is still a shortage of social workers,
counsellors, doctors and psychologists who are essential for addressing not only
the physical but also the mental damage inflicted on the child victim. 10.
More Child-friendly and Gender-sensitive Measures:
This entails the need for
more laws, policies, programmes and practices which are responsive to the child
and sensitive to his and her gender. In several settings, the current administrative
and legal system re-traumatises the child, and this needs to be reformed. These
ten challenges are key challenges for the ESCAP region as we progress toward the
future. Some of them, I am sure, are already in your minds as policy-makers and
practitioners working for both child rights and good governance. This is exemplified
by the current human resources development project of ESCAP to train social development
and health workers on the issue of child sexual abuse and exploitation. In
addition, initiatives are underway by other United Nations agencies, such as UNICEF,
the International Labour Organization, the United Nations Development Programme,
UNAIDS, the United Nations Population Fund, the World Health Organization and
other agencies, which are working in concert for child rights. They are part and
parcel of the need for more regional cooperation and the quest for sustainable
partnerships, old and new. Such challenges are a direct test for all of
us in the call for more concrete action on behalf of children. If well implemented,
empowered by a collaborative spirit and reinforced by mutual cooperation, the
Asia-Pacific region will be able to pride itself on being a humane leader for
the new millennium.
Speech
Archives in English Section
4 : Economics
and Development
|
|
-
The Third Wave of Investment:
Opportunities with ASEAN ?
November 23, 2005
 HTML
|  PDF
- Envisioning
Asia's Future: The Role of Good Governance in Sustaining Development
June 13, 2001
PDF
(external link) - Asian
Economic and Business Outlook for the New Millennium
June 1, 2000
HTML
| PDF
- Asia: Back to
Basic?
July 29 - 30, 1999
HTML
| PDF
- The Leadership
Forum
February 25, 1999
HTML
| PDF
- Integrity in
Governance in Asia
June 29, 1998
HTML
| PDF
- Facing the Future
March 23, 1998
HTML
| PDF
- Strategy for
the New Millennium
20 February 1998
HTML
| PDF
- Constitutionalism
and Democracy in Asia
September 1, 1997
HTML
| PDF
- Forging A Partnership
with the New Asia
March 22, 1997
HTML
| PDF
- Competitiveness
of Asian Emerging Economies
November 29, 1996
HTML
| PDF
- Asian Business
Leadership: Planning for the Future
March 3, 1996
HTML
| PDF
- Quest for Investment
Liberalization
October 2, 1995
HTML
| PDF
- AIDS and Social
and Economic Progress in the Asian and Pacific Countries
September
21, 1995
HTML
| PDF
- The Future of
Asia?s Past ? Bringing Conservation Philosophy into Practice
January
11, 1995
HTML
| PDF
- Asian Prospects
Toward the 21st Century
November 8, 1994
HTML
| PDF
- Liberalization
of the Thai Economy
September 22, 1994
HTML
| PDF
- Address at the
Second Convention of the International Bottled Water Association (Asia Chapter)
August 26, 1994
HTML
| PDF
- Address at the
Asian Investment Conference
July 20, 1994
HTML
| PDF
- Pacific Regionalism
and Global Business Strategies
June 6, 1994
HTML
| PDF
- Implications
of Rapid Economic Growth for Thailand?s Political Structure
July
5, 1993
HTML
| PDF
- The Future is
Ours to See
May 13, 1993
HTML
| PDF
- Address at the
IFCT Nomura/Jafco's seminar on Venture Capital Business
April 29,
1993
HTML
| PDF
- Management &
Society in the Asia of Tomorrow
February 18, 1993
HTML
| PDF
- A Vision for
Thailand: Toward the Year 2000
August 3, 1989
HTML
| PDF
- Towards an ASEAN
Common Market ? Thailand?s Perception: The Private Sector View
October
30, 1986
HTML
| PDF
- Economic Development
Strategy of ASEAN Countries
September 12, 1986
HTML
| PDF
- ASEAN and Its
Future
January 16, 1986
HTML
| PDF
- The Outlook
of the Pacific Economic Community Concept
March 15, 1985
HTML
| PDF
- Multi-National
Corporations in Thailand an Investor's Point of View
July 7, 1984
HTML
| PDF
GOOD
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE by Mr. Anand Panyarachunn
The
Role of a Director in Thailand in the New Millennium
June 30, 1999 Ladies
& Gentlemen, First of all, allow me
to congratulate the Stock Exchange of Thailand and AIG for gathering such a distinguished
group of people to talk about this important topic. Good governance, transparency,
accountability, minority shareholders rights have become the new “buzz words”
as Thailand and indeed Asia, throws off the shackles of the economic woes that
have plagued us since 1997. Central to
the equitable balanced and sustainable development of our Nation, is the need
to counter corruption, both in the corporate sector as well as government. Corruption,
at every level, must be challenged, curtailed and in the long run, hopefully eradicated,
if we do not wish to deplete our limited budget and resources. Corruption demobilizes
the spirit of our nation and its people. If allowed to persist, we would inhibit
and dwarf the moral integrity of our society. I would venture to suggest to you
all, that at the core of Thailand’s economic problems of, hopefully the past,
lies the ugly truth that there was an absence of transparency, accountability,
and a complete disregard for accepted business ethics, and the rule of law. Traditional
Thai Values and the way business was invariably conducted, speak of loyalty first
and foremost to family and kin folk. Business dealing were based on trust and
personal relationships. More often than not families decided business strategy
over lunch on Sunday at the senior family house. Little or no thought was given
to other minority investors, be they Thai or foreign. Self-interest, protection
of personal wealth and family holdings overrode the basic business requirements
of honor and to be responsible for obligations both corporately and socially.
Many Thais have wondered aloud, that if the first signs of financial mismanagement
were taken seriously and were immediately and properly dealt with, perhaps our
economic plight might have lessened. Others ask that the fact that our economic
ills were allowed to escalate and worsen indicate suspected acts of “cover up”
and favoritism in return for a later “special favour” by the powers that be. Social-cultural
values which propagated consumerism, conspicuous consumption fertilized by the
practices of cronyism and patronage have invariable combined to badly harm the
Thai economy and society in general. Because
socio-economic and political factors are so inextricably intertwined, a holistic
all encompassing approach which focuses on their interrelationship will serve
us well in the future. Make no mistake, the captains of industry and commerce
and our nation’s business leaders have a major social role to play in shaping
society as a whole. Government should be an active partner in this process, but
a strong civil society where everyone from business leaders to average citizens
cohere to energetically pursue openness, transparency and accountability, will
prove to be the most enduring deterrence against corruption. Very
clearly as we approach the new millennium, the decisions taken by C.E.O’s, directors
and corporate officers, and the way they make them, no longer simply affect the
success of their company or their own careers. Recent regulatory changes adopted
by the government, SEC & SET, which I applaud, have strengthened, the rule
of law and more explicitly defined the legal obligation of corporate directors.
Throughout Asia, the voice of the minority shareholder and small inverter is being
heard. Gone will be the days of “rubberstamp” self-interest in decision-making. I
also contend that our business leaders have a moral obligation to society in general.
Protection of our environment that will be inherited by the next generation is
but one example. We are going to need business leaders that provide real leadership
with good moral character and high integrity – role models that have a real commitment
to foster transparency, accountability in corporate governance and a willingness
to welcome public engagement and involvement in solving both business and social
issues. In tandem, government must be the provider of a legal framework which
assures that people’s voices are not only heard but are nurtured. We will require
a set of values that are congruent with engagement and participation by all private
individuals. We can no longer accept a situation where the average citizen is
made to feel not only his/her insignificance and vulnerability vis-à-vis
government and powerful business organizations, where he/she is also conditioned
to submit with silence and to endure, however onerous, with patience and tolerance. We
must translate and expand our natural commitment to family and kin into a far
longer commitment that embraces society in general. I believe our business leaders
have an obligation to society that requires active participation and involvement
and even vigilance to fend off the corrosive effects of corruption wherever and
whenever it occurs. The ethics and integrity necessary in business should easily
translate and in fact should be examples for an integrity system that benefits
society as a whole. As our nation moves
out of recession and as we embrace the new challenges and opportunities that the
new millennium will bring, I believe it is incumbent upon us all to realize that
there is a finite amount of capital in the world. That much needed funding will
flow to countries and companies where investors believe, apart from business opportunities,
that their interests, however small, will be protected, where business practices
are conducted in an open and transparent manner and where C.E.O’s and directors
are directly accountable for their actions. I do not presume to know all the answers,
especially in the face of divergent social-cultural economic-political contexts.
I do, however, believe that our business leaders have the responsibility and ownership
for driving good corporate governance within their corporations. Overtime and
with diligence, social good governance will follow for the wider and longer-term
benefit of our nation.
The
Tao of Development:
Economic Management
and Good Governance in Asia
Asia-Europe
Foundation First Anniversary Lecture By
Mr. Anand Panyarachun
Former Prime Minister of Thailand
February
17, 1998 Introduction Distinguished
Guests, Ladies and Gentlemen, It
is a great honour to be invited to deliver the Asia-Europe Foundation’s First
Anniversary Lecture. In a year when so many terrible things have happened, it
is comforting in its own small way that the Foundation, or ASEF, has passed the
one-year mark. Asia and Europe are both home to ancient civilizations, but the
flow of ideas and knowledge between us has tended to be one-way. This forum is
a unique opportunity for us to redress that imbalance and learn from one another
in order to understand each other better. Since the topic
on everyone’s mind these days is East Asia’s economic crisis, it would be unseemly
of me not to begin with it. In only half a year, the region’s so-called economic
miracle, built up over decades, has shuddered to a halt. The likelihood of an
Asia-Pacific century, once considered inevitable, is now up in the air. The
steps we take at this point will determine whether our current travails are merely
a large speed bump or whether the "Asian miracle" goes down in history books as
a footnote. As for myself, I believe the region’s fundamentals
are sound enough to allow recovery within a reasonable period of time, provided
that we follow the right course. That right course is
already a subject of intense debate among people more learned than I. So today
I intend to address another question that is no less pertinent but usually relegated
to the sidelines of the debate: How can Asia, drawing on the painful lessons of
the crisis, lay the groundwork for long-term development that is balanced, equitable
and sustainable? I ask this question because development
is not only about growth. As we have seen, high growth can occur while other aspects
of development – social justice, equitable income distribution, sound environmental
management – lag behind. Development -- if you will allow an Asian metaphor --
is a matter of yin and yang, a matter of finding the right balance between competing
priorities, of which growth is only one. As Asia is a
region of great diversity, generalizations will run the risk of being overly broad.
Most of my observations shall therefore be drawn largely from Thailand. Some of
these observations might be applicable to other cases, but this is a judgment
I leave to the audience. An introspective retrospective Thailand’s
financial crisis, as many have observed, is a blessing in disguise. Its greatest
blessing, I believe, is that it has compelled us to become more introspective.
Now that we have learned first-hand the harsh realities of the global marketplace,
we should be in the right state of mind to correct weaknesses in our system that
were left untended during our high-growth days. This process
of self-evaluation is indispensable. The choices we make today will determine
the course of our long-term development. Looking at where
we started out and where we stand today, it is plain that new choices are needed.
When East Asia first began its modernization drive in the late 1950s, the debate
over free markets versus central planning was far from settled. Armed with cheap,
plentiful labor and abundant natural resources, we adopted outward-looking trade
and investment policies, gradually integrating our economies into the world market.
The result was that our economies grew by leaps and bounds.
The East Asian success story was dubbed a miracle by Western analysts and observers
and was generally held up as a model for less developed countries in other parts
of the world. But as we grew, our development became lopsided.
Many of us preferred extravagance over efficiency, high growth over equitable
income distribution, and quick profits over sustainability. For
countries seeking escape from poverty, these choices were not surprising. After
all, we were playing catch-up, and had to compress into the span of a few decades
what took the West hundreds of years. And as those of
you who work with computers know, compression is usually achieved through loss
of non-vital or redundant data. In our case, what we lost was neither non-vital
nor redundant. While outwardly we seemed to be doing a splendid job of catching
up economically, it was often at the expense of social and political development.
It has taken a crash to bring home the fact that many
of our institutions are ill-equipped to meet the challenges of the globalized
era. While the world has been undergoing deep transformations, our economic, political
and social institutions have not kept pace. Efficiency,
patronage, and economic management The kind of
systemic reform Asia needs to stay on top in the global era will not occur overnight,
which is all the more reason for the process to be set in motion quickly. Competition
among developing countries has become more intense, with the entry of new players
in the international economy, all hawking cheap labor, plentiful natural resources,
and friendly investment laws. In the West, political support for preferential
trading privileges or special assistance to developing countries is increasingly
hard to come by. The only way for us to survive in the
long run is to improve our efficiency. And the key to improving efficiency lies
in better economic management. This sounds like a truism.
So let us be clear about what is involved, both the factors working against us
and for us. Working against us is institutional inertia.
Asia’s economic success was called a miracle because it was built on an institutional
framework that often contradicted free-market economics – strong state intervention,
state-directed industrial policies, tight government-business networks. But
as they say, nothing succeeds like success. As long as the economy steamed ahead,
the institutions that underpinned Asia’s growth worked well enough. It was only
when the crisis hit that the flaws were exposed for the world to see. Once the
system broke down, reform became not merely fashionable but imperative. In
the case of Thailand, our integration into the world economy was far from seamless.
In fact, it created an internal contradiction that led to inefficiencies in the
system. While we adopted Western-style capitalism, we retained our traditional
system of patronage networks, a system built on personal connections to allocate
values and resources. Personal connections can be innocent,
but when they become a factor in public affairs, they can be deadly. Because patronage
is not based on merit, it tends to breed inefficiency, rent-seeking behavior and
corruption. Resource management and the Thai way Another
feature of Thai society that is ripe for reform is the way we exploit and consume
resources. If ever there was a country that could afford
to be self-sufficient, it was Thailand, where, as King Ramkhamhaeng the Great
observed in the 13th century, there was always fish in the water and rice in the
fields. Thailand was so abundant in its natural resources that the efficiency
with which they were used was never an issue. When the Royal Forestry Department
was set up over a hundred years ago, for example, its original mandate was to
oversee the exploitation, rather than the conservation, of the forests. Our
natural bounty has declined considerably since then, as the pattern of resource
exploitation shifted from subsistence or domestic consumption to supplying the
global market. The fertile rice fields around Bangkok have been converted into
industrial and housing estates; the Gulf of Thailand suffers from overfishing;
our forests have been so severely depleted that logging had to be banned. The
modern-day mismanagement of our natural resources does not imply, however, that
efficiency or sustainability is a concept unfamiliar to Thais. We do have traditional
strengths that need to be revived and drawn upon, especially in this time of crisis.
Before we opened our hearts to consumerism, recycling and economical use of resources
were very much part of the traditional Thai way of life. Sustainable use of resources
was built into the system. Each person used only as much as he needed. Material
wealth was secondary; making merit was more important. And the extended family
provided a social safety net for those unable to take care of themselves, such
as the elderly. Accumulating great wealth was possible, but there was no compelling
reason to do so. The introduction of the joys of the consumer
society changed that. The prospect of making profits to allow indulgence in life’s
luxuries replaced Buddhist piety as a motivator. I am
not bemoaning the loss of a bygone era. The world changes and there is no turning
back. My point is that in our rush to catch up with the West, the lessons we learned
-- from the West and from our past -- were incomplete. While
the West had evolved checks and balances to curb the excesses of capitalism, in
our exuberance to reap the fruits of capitalism the need for such mechanisms went
unheeded. While transparency and accountability had long been pillars of public
governance in the West, in Asia the webs of power and money remain largely hidden
from public view. We sought to emulate Western ways without
an appreciation of their underlying philosophy or how they evolved. At the same
time, we discarded our tradition of sustainable resource usage. We created a hybrid
form of capitalism where patronage was put to the service of profit-maximization,
a recipe for unbalanced and unsustainable development. Good
governance and economic management Better economic
management is clearly needed. And the key is good governance. Good
governance, I must note, is about more than good government. It is about more
than having honest and capable people in public office. We Thais have a fondness
for the comforting certainty of strong leadership. Whenever the country is in
trouble, we long for a knight in shining armor to come to our rescue. But
the days of father-knows-best decision-making are over. The state, despite its
aura of authority, is not omniscient, particularly in this day and age when markets
routinely flout state efforts to maintain economic stability. The government by
itself cannot know, for example, how a given dam project will affect the lives
of those living downstream or the ecosystem of the area. When it comes to choosing
among competing priorities, political leaders are as likely to fail us as to save
us. In developing countries, governments often make decisions
– political and economic – that run counter to the public interest. Good governance
is about putting in place the mechanisms to define what constitutes the public
interest and to see that the public interest is served despite everything else.
This is the rationale of the political reform movement underway in many Asian
countries. Requirements for good governance For
good governance to come about, reforms must take place at several levels. The
government must be responsive to the people’s needs. In order for it to be so,
it must first be accountable. A government that answers to no one, a government
whose actions go unchecked, is more likely to abuse its power and ignore the public
interest. Checks and balances are at the heart of accountability.
In a representative democracy, it is the duty of the opposition to perform this
function in the legislature. But that is not enough. Checks and balances must
be in place throughout society to counterweigh society’s most powerful institutions.
A free and responsible press, representing a broad spectrum of opinions, is vital
to make sure that all aspects of any given issue get a fair hearing. Citizen groups,
NGOs, must be encouraged to form and monitor the work of the government, as well
as educate the public and policymakers on issues of concern. When
there is a diversity of channels for the people to articulate their interests,
it is more likely that all sides of an issue will be discussed and that a solution
acceptable to all will be reached. It is when public policy decisions are made
in secret or by a small coterie that the public interest is likely to be harmed.
To avoid such occurrences, the decision process must be transparent and open to
scrutiny. The people must be given free access to all information pertaining to
public policies and projects. To be sure, good governance
will not bring about some idyllic utopia. In fact, it can be quite messy. The
cacophony of voices can be deafening, and we must always keep in mind the rationale
for good governance. We all dream of having Solomon-like leaders with the integrity
and wisdom to solve all our problems justly with a minimum of fuss. But leaders,
too, are human, susceptible to temptation and other human frailties. Good governance
makes up for their shortcomings by opening up the policy process to all the people.
On the part of Thailand, reforms are underway to bring
about good governance. Last year, we passed a new constitution that, for the first
time in Thai history, was drafted with the full participation of the public. As
someone who played a part in the drafting process, I have hopes for this constitution.
I like to think that over time, it will transform Thailand into an open, democratic
society, where transparency and accountability are the norm rather than the exception.
I like to think that the provisions of the constitution will ensure that human
rights and civil liberties are better protected and enforced. I like to think
that the changes the constitution makes in the electoral process will reduce money
politics and corruption, and that the checks and balances it provides will result
in greater accountability on the part of politicians. But of course the constitution
is not a magic bullet that will cure all of society’s ills overnight. All sectors
of society must embrace the ideals behind it before it can make a difference.
Corporate governance Good
governance does not stop at the government. Accountability and transparency must
also be demanded of companies and all actors that exert a disproportionate influence
on the public interest. Companies, in particular, are
no less prone to abuse than are governments, but are less subject to public scrutiny.
In a patronage system, they can logically be expected to make the most of connections
to externalize costs to society – especially environmental costs such as resource
depletion or environmental damage. But in many developing
countries, it is even harder to hold companies accountable. Flexible and creative
accounting practices as well as pro forma auditing can conjure up balance sheets
that have no bearing to reality. Bloated asset valuation can give a misleading
picture. Cozy ties with influential political figures can help ensure that the
companies’ skeletons remain firmly in their closets. The task of monitoring the
private sector for abuses thus cannot be left to the government. Enlightened consumers
and shareholders must do their part to keep corporate abuses at bay. This can
only be achieved if and when full disclosure of facts and figures relating to
companies’ performance is strictly observed. Conclusion The
crisis facing East Asia is at heart a crisis of adaptation. It is difficult because
in order to adapt well, we must do away with certain traditions, certain ways,
that are out of line with the global marketplace. But if we are to prosper in
this challenging era, the sooner reforms are implemented, the sooner our societies
become open, the sooner transparency and accountability are built into our system,
the surer will be our rewards. Certainly there has been
no shortage of people who choose to portray the crisis in nationalistic terms.
After all, wasn’t it our liberalization and consequent exposure to global financial
markets that landed us in this trouble? Blaming outside
forces is much too simplistic, and it reflects poorly on our critical thinking
skills. As I hope I have made clear, it wasn’t our integration into the world
economy that is to blame for the crisis, but our failure to maintain balance between
competing development priorities. Our experience teaches us that there could be
no liberalization without discipline, no investment without risk. There
are no absolutes in this world – no sure thing. In the digital age, we cannot
afford to see the world in black and white or even shades of gray; we have to
recognize that there are millions of colors available – and who is to say which
is the most beautiful? The nationalism we need is not
the unreasoning kind, but a nationalism based on ideas, on reason. There is as
much in our culture that can help guide us towards sustainable development, as
there are flaws in our character that would impede it. All the different forces
shaping our society must come out into the open to work out together a vision
of where we want to go and how we aim to get there. We must learn to engage one
another in civil dialogue, with tolerance and compassion. Good
governance allows our diversity to be reflected in our policies. It is a necessary
condition for the efficient management of our nation’s resources. It allows us
to be as self-reliant – or as interdependent – as we wish to be. Because good
governance is about making choices that reflect society’s true needs, it is the
most direct path to reconciling Asia’s traditional strengths with the demands
of the global economy. Thank you.
It’s
a Good Starting Point The Charter Chief on the Reforms
- and Himself
The Nations Thailand
Asiaweek October 10, 1997 In
the popular imagination, Anand Panyarachun’s persona is that of a retired, reluctant
sheriff called up by the decent folk of some Wild West town to get rid of the
bad guys terrorizing them. The reputation as saviour was forged during Anand’s
two short, but highly effective stints, as caretaker prime minister. The first
was in February 1991, when a military junta asked him to head the government.
The second was after the May 1992 crack-down on democracy demonstrators. During
both periods, Anand performed like no other Thai premier - with competence, honesty
and the public interest in mind. Small wonder many Thais want the suave former
diplomat and businessman back as Prime Minister, especially during this time of
political and economic uncertainty. Anand,
now 65, would decline in the unlikely event such an offer was made, but he did
agree to serve as chairman of the Constitution drafting committee, over-seeing
99 indirectly elected people from various walks of life - politics, business,
academia. The upshot is a new charter that goes some way toward cleaning up Thai
politics and improving civil rights and liberties. As
an aristocrat and self-professed Anglophile (he graduated from Cambridge in Law).
Anand can come across as elitist and autocratic in style. In substance, however,
he is very much a man of the people. On the eve of the parliamentary vote over
the new Constitution, Anand discussed the changes, their implications for the
country - and himself - with Correspondent Julian Gearing. Excerpts from their
90-minute talk: The current Constitution
was actually drafted and amended when you were in office. Did you not have any
concerns about it at the time? Every now and then there
are complaints, that when I was Prime Minister, why did I not use the opportunity
to reform the political system? The fact is that when I was first asked (by the
coup leaders) to be Prime Minister, I was a bit ambivalent. On the one hand, the
military knew that all my life I had been against dictatorship, corruption and
extreme rightist policies. On the other hand, I saw that the coup did receive
fairly strong support from the public, because the public was fed up with the
government and with the corruption. I knew that if I were to accept (the job),
I would disappoint a number of my more liberal friends, those people who viewed
me as a sort of standard bearer for democratic ideas. I said to myself, if I were
to go in, try to sort out the confusion and chaos, it would have some redeeming
value. I did not like certain provisions in that interim constitution, but after
I talked to (the coup leaders), I said to myself, you are damned if you do, you
are damned if you don’t (laughs) - so I went in. So I had nothing to do with the
Constitution. As a result, during Anand I and Anand II, I was not able to take
any political initiatives. There is
criticism that the new charter is too much of a compromise. Compromise
is the basis of democracy. Whatever course we decide to take, it is always subject
to criticism. I am aware of that; I am used to it. It doesn’t bother me. There
might be one or two sections where there are problems, but it doesn’t mean the
whole process is bad. It can be amended some time in the future, after the next
election, after the new Constitution has come into force and has been tested in
practical terms. What will this charter
do to tackle vote buying and corrupt practices? The monitoring
process is going to be more thorough. The organs to be set up will have the power
and responsibility of bringing wrong-doers to justice. It doesn’t mean that just
because we have a good Constitution, democracy is going to have a rosy path in
this country. People have to participate in the follow-up. People have to be alert
to see that only all good men are put in these monitoring bodies (laughs). What
about the bad men, the godfathers, the corrupt? Will this new Constitution get
rid of them? You cannot get rid of them over-night. You
have to go through a series of elections. There is a school of thought that people
with un-savory characters, if they live under rules which allow them to show their
un-savory side, they will do it. But if you put them in a different environment,
under different rules, which make it, much more difficult to show their un-savory
side, then they may conform. I will not say they will reform, but they may conform. A
number of politicians have been quite outspoken in their opposition to the draft.
Why do you think someone like Interior Minister Sanoh Thienthong expressed sentiments
against it? Perhaps he is worried this new Constitution
may spell the end of his career. In the debate over this Constitution, many of
the MPs have shown their real characters. Deputy
Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra suggests only rich people, people who can support
themselves, ought to be ministers. I don’t agree with that.
This is a very simplistic assessment. Rich men do not cheat. Or educated people
do not cheat. Will Thailand continues
to be ruled by the elite, people with money? I don’t think
so. Look at Democrat Party leader Chuan Leekpai. He comes from a rural area, he
comes from a very humble family, and his mother is still living in the market
sector of Trang in the South. Look at Britain, at the number of Etonians, the
people with money. Then they had John Major. Times change. We
are sitting in Bangkok, but the provinces rely very much on the old system of
patronage politics. It is not a system, it is a
culture and you cannot change that culture over-night. Democracy is not only based
on the Constitution. It is based on traditions, conventions, and generations of
practice, which form into a culture, a democratic culture. We don’t have that
yet. It will be a long time before we do. We have to uplift education, we have
to enable the people to earn a decent livelihood, because what is the use of talking
about democracy or the Constitution, if they have no jobs? It is no use saying
because we don’t have this and we don’t have that, then dismantle the whole process. If
we look at the bigger picture, how does Thailand’s democracy compare with others
in Asia? As far as democracy is concerned, we are much
better off than many other nations in terms of freedom of assembly, of expression,
of civil rights and liberties. On the other hand, we in Thailand have had a so-called
democratic period of only 65 years, with 40 years of interruption from military
coups and “what-not”, so it is a fledgling democracy. People are not accustomed
to the principles of democracy, to the philosophy. Many think that if you are
able to exercise your vote once every three to four years, that is democracy.
It is not only about participating in elections. It is about involvement in the
decision-making process and in the governance of the country. We tend to look
to the form rather than to the substance and essence. A
few critics have questioned whether Thailand should be borrowing political systems
from the West. They all wear suits to Parliament. To me,
it is a very flimsy charge. After all democracy was born in the West. So if we
didn’t go to the source, where could we go? The philosophy itself is something
that is not indigenous. If you don’t learn from the mistakes of other countries,
the way they reform their political system and the way they try to reform their
perennial problems, who could we go to? There is nothing to be ashamed of; there
is nothing wrong with this approach. Will
you return to politics? I was never really in politics.
I was brought into it, practically dragged into it. I enjoyed the work that I
did as Prime Minister. I think I did some good for the country, but I never liked
the life. Politics is the art of the possible. In the process you have to engage
in manoeuvering and shenanigans. My family wouldn’t want me to take it up again.
It is not my “cup of tea”. It is not my line. I like simplicity. I like my privacy. Often
the Thai people seek a “white knight” to save them in times of crisis. That
is right. That is the problem with the Thai people. They are always looking for
a knight in shining armour. People have given up hope. There has not been any
cheery news for Thailand for quite some time - economically or politically. The
new charter is something to which the public is looking forward to. Of course
you always have to be wary, that you do not raise their expectations too much.
It is not a panacea to all our ills, but it is a good starting point. Because
in a way, it is the first fundamental reform of our political system. It is a
water-shed.
Politics
and Sanity Address by Mr. Anand Panyarachun
The
Petroleum Institute Dinner
at the Grand Hyatt Erawan Hotel
February
18, 1997 Distinguished
Guests, Ladies and Gentlemen, My first,
off-the-cuff thought in considering the content of today’s presentation was that
politics is the most potent aphrodisiac. The quest for power has, for most politicians,
an irresistibly seductive attraction. In fact, it is the allure of that aphrodisiac
that entices so many men, and increasingly women as well, into politics as a full-time
career. Having been propelled into Thailand’s
national political arena some years ago under circumstances largely beyond my
control, I shall seek your indulgence in claiming personal exemption from the
attribution that I am a professional politician. Nevertheless, the seductive influence
of politics has not escaped me. I say this
despite the peculiar dangers attached to such an admission. Not only may my family
and friends misinterpret my message by attributing double meaning to the term,
“aphrodisiac”, but reference to that titillating term has probably already diverted
your attention to other, more delicate topics. Let
me, then, depart from this line of discussion and start over with a second thought
- that in Thailand, at least, the title of this speech, “politics and sanity,”
is an oxymoron, a pairing of words that naturally contradict one another. Perhaps,
in the Thai setting, “politics and insanity” would have been
a more natural and understandable title. Speaking
of sanity and insanity in relation to Thai politics carries my thoughts to Sigmund
Freud, the father of psychoanalysis. How would Freud have explained the malaise
of Thai politics? Let us recline for a moment on Freud’s famous couch, savour
the fragrant aroma of his favourite Monte Cristo cigar, and listen to his interpretation. First,
he would have examined the outward symptoms. Treading lightly over this sensitive
terrain, he would likely have characterized Thai politics as a network of alliances
among numerous contending factions or interest groups, constantly reforming themselves
through an ongoing process of negotiation to solidify their power base. Each of
those factions, he would have noted, is led by a personality skilled in the arts
of negotiation and compromise, a personality considered by his encourage as capable
of mobilizing resources in pursuit of the faction’s objective of maintaining and
strengthening its power base. Freud would
have perceived, in that pattern of constantly shifting political alliances, the
individual politician’s concern not so much with the means of promoting the public
interest as of gaining factional, and ultimately personal, control over the levels
of power. He would have inferred that many Thai politicians lead dual lives arising
out of their persistent advocacy of the public interest while striving for personal
and factional gain. That JekyII and Hyde personality trait would have interested
him greatly, for it is no easy matter, psychologically speaking, to transform
oneself at a moment’s notice from standing before the TV cameras with promises
of public benefit to sitting in private negotiations over division of the spoils. Freud
would also have meditated on the relations between Thailand’s politicians and
other key actors, especially big business and the bureaucracy, including the military
establishment. Here he would have noted the surprisingly intimate atmosphere of
close and cordial cooperation and accommodation among the various contending interest
groups in working to their mutual advantage. In
considering the relations between the politicians and interest groups with less
to offer in negotiation, Freud would have been struck by the differing rules applied
to keep the less powerful in check: =>
The docile willingness of the public-at-large -- especially the politically
less sophisticated rural population - to accept the broad ambiguities, sweeping
generalizations, unattainable promises, and more, voiced by most politicians in
local election campaigns, would have left him bemused. =>
He would have been equally intrigued by the blandishments offered to the less
impressionable student population, in the form of vague allusions to greater
participatory democracy, as well as more. pragmatic promises relating to enhanced
educational and post-educational opportunities, to defuse their activism, in recollection
of the political confrontations of yesteryear. =>
As for organized labour, one of the few interest groups generally unwilling
to succumb to the politicians’ blandishments, the repressive measures enacted
to curtail labour “interference” or “disruption” would have been noted as an important
clue to the social psychology of the Thai political leadership. In
short, Freud would have been struck by the emphasis in Thai politics on placating
the various major social interest groups through largely unfulfilled promises,
while harbouring a strong aversion to open debate and decisive action on basic
social issues. From a review of the symptoms,
Freud would have proceeded to a socio-psychological analysis of the Thai political
scene. In one of his most entertaining works, “Civilization and Its Discontents,”
Freud developed a theory of the irremediable antagonism between the demands
of instinct and the restrictions of civilization. In effect,
that theory argues that it is our self-control of our instinctual desires that
makes us civilized. We pay a price for that self-restraint in the form of a deep-seated
sense of frustration. Civilization requires that we suppress our instinctual desires,
but it cannot prevent feelings of desire. That inner conflict is expressed through
feelings of guilt. Thus the title of Freud’s book -- civilization is
inevitably accompanied by discontent. That
human dilemma can be dealt with in a variety of ways. We can sublimate
our guilt feelings through productive effort. That option has resulted in the
great accomplishments of art and science, which we commonly consider the hallmark
of civilization. Alternatively, we can seek to repress the conflict between our
personal urges and social convention through neurotic behaviour. Third,
we can escape the realities of the human dilemma entirely through psychotic
behaviour. Such a socially pathological course of action ignores the restrictions
imposed by civilization. We thereby regress to ego-satisfaction, ultimately
descending to selfishness and brutality. Perhaps
you may think that I have deviated a bit too far from the theme of this talk that
I have fallen into a trance under the clouds of cigar smoke drifting over Freud’s
couch. Let me disabuse you of such suspicions by returning to the subject at hand. Freud
did his research and writing in a far different environment than that of contemporary
Thailand. It has been said, in half-jest, that his theory is applicable solely
to the Freud household of early 20th-century Vienna, and to no other time or place.
As Freud himself said, after delving deeply into psychological theories of auto-eroticism:
“When all is said and done, a cigar is still a cigar.” Despite
the cross-cultural complications of travelling between 1920s Vienna and 1997 Bangkok,
I believe that Freud’s couch may be quite a suitable place from which to examine
the social pathology of present-day Thai politics. Politics,
it has often been said, is the art of the possible. If negotiation
lies at the heart of that art, compromise is its soul. Thai politics exemplifies
these metaphors, but with a Freudian twist. They centre on what Freud would call
ego-gratification, with the negotiations and compromises all too often attaching
no more than cursory consideration to the larger social concerns for which the
politicians have been delegated responsibility. Let
us lift our eyes above the latest political scandal -- whatever it may be today
-- and scan Thailand’s broader political horizon. What we see is a panorama of
self-indulgence. The traditional political expression, kin moeang (referring
to the perquisites of absolute Kingship), has been distorted to new meaning in
this age of participatory democracy. Election to political office in this modern
age conveys upon the honoured recipient public trusts to represent and serve the
people. It does not include a mandate to adopt the perquisites of traditional
Kingship. In this regard it is evident that many individuals and factions in positions
of political leadership still have much to learn about their larger duty, their
duty to the public interest. Freud stated
that “unrestricted satisfaction of personal interest means putting enjoyment before
caution, and soon brings its own punishment.” In the Thai political context that
pronouncement carries prophetic meaning. The current recession in the Thai economy,
it is widely agreed, is a direct result of the political mismanagement of recent
years. The past record of factional accommodation to personal ambitions without
due consideration of the public costs and benefits has led to the current International
perception of our country as a relatively high-risk investment haven. It is no
surprise, under those conditions, that the investment bubble has burst, with dramatic
consequences first for the stock market and, over the longer term, national income
and employment. Thailand’s business community
has only itself to blame for this passage of events. For it was negotiation and
compromise between the politicians and business - in the form of financial backing
in return for favourable treatment - that laid the foundations for the bust. As
a major player in the political sweepstakes, business placed personal and factional
interests ahead of the larger social concerns, with predictable consequences.
Freud would have considered this a reflection of man’s self-destructive instincts,
which can only be overcome by “civilization” - placing the common good ahead of
self-gratification. He stated as a basic psychoanalytic principle that “the replacement
of the power of the individual by the power of the community constitutes the decisive
step of civilization.” If civilization
represents sanity, as Freud suggests, then a sane politics can only emerge with
the public interest as its overriding motive. Aldous Huxley said that an intellectual
is a person who has discovered something more interesting than sex. A civilized
man, it may be said, is someone who has discovered something more satisfying than
personal advantage. That is the essential
political issue confronting Thailand today. It is an issue that transcends the
law. No constitution can legislate that dictum into prescribed action. It is a
responsibility that each of us must pursue with personal conviction and the common
sense that recognises us as inseparable members of the larger community. Having
spent so much time reclining on Freud’s couch, permit me to close with one of
his favourite quips, taken from the eighteenth-century philosopher, Pascal: “Had
Cleopatra’s nose been shorter, the whole face of the world would have been changed.”
He meant that, had Cleopatra not been quite so pretty, Julius Caesar and Mark
Antony might not have parted ways, and the Roman Empire might have taken another
course. The point is that small matters can make a very big difference. That
point should be pondered by each of us as we decide on our role in ensuring that
our country’s future will be even greater than it’s past. If we want to ensure
sanity in Thai politics, each of us must accept our responsibility as an active
participant working for an open society.
ETHICS
AND GOVERNANCE Keynote Address by Mr. Anand Panyarachun
Rotary
International 1996
Asia Regional Conference Closing Session
October
27, 1996 President Giay, Excellencies, Distinguished guests,
Ladies and gentlemen, Approaching the 21st
century, we stand in joyful anticipation of a new millennium of world peace and
prosperity – with Asia in the driver’s seat. I join in that celebration of the
future, and of the “New Generations” who has been the subject of your deliberations
at this Conference. But I peer into the
future with a vivid remembrance of earlier generations who had similar hopes and
aspirations – generations whose optimistic expectations of a full and happy life
for themselves and their children were in many cases left unfulfilled. Exactly
a century ago was the “Age of Innocence”, also known as the “Gay ‘90s.” Ironically,
that term has been revived, a hundred years later, with an entirely new meaning.
You will, I hope, permit this old man the luxury of the antique usage. That
era a century ago was marked by prospects as buoyant as those of today. The leading
business moguls and political pundits of that era visualized a coming age of prosperity
unrivalled in world history. The driving force of technology was considered by
them an unmixed blessing. The opportunities offered by an unstintingly bountiful
nature went unquestioned. The possibilities of a universal peace through political
ententes among the major empires, and even the vague concept of a “League of Nations”,
were being discussed the world over -- from the salons of Europe of the forums
of Asia. Among the world’s intellectual, industrial and government leaders the
innate goodness and manifest destiny of humanity went unquestioned. But
that vision had it’s dark side – and even darker consequences. The continuing
prosperity envisaged a century ago was to be founded on the backs of the colonial
peoples, and it was to be energized through the rape of their resources. We know
well today, a century later, the fallacies upon which the “Great Expectations”
of that “Age of Innocence” were based. Those fallacies, after all, spawned two
World Wars, separated by a devastating economic collapse, and followed by a Cold
War and a myriad of bloody struggles for independence and ideology. The
peoples of Asia suffered mightily through those years. But looking back, we can
state with pride that they weathered the storms of the twentieth century with
distinction. We can glory in their achievements. The region’s remarkable economic
progress of the past several decades offers striking testimony of Asia’s resilience
and potential. But we cannot afford to rest on our laurels. Today,
anticipating a splendid new millennium, do we stand at the edge of another precipice?
In seeking to “build the future with action and vision” (--the theme that President
Giay has established for Rotary International--) we bear a great responsibility
to future generations. We must build the future with foresight, based on hindsight. Will
our legacy, like that of the world’s leaders a century ago, be flawed? Will future
generations suffer the consequences of the untrammelled aspirations of Asia’s
current leaders? Will this era be known to future generations, in contrast to
the former “Age of Innocence”, as the “Age of Excess?” Asia
today presents some curious similarities to the West of a century ago: A sense
of manifest destiny in a coming “Asian century”; an absolute conviction in the
beneficence of unfettered competition; a lurking distrust of the traditional functions
of government; a general disdain for the disadvantaged groups in society; widespread
contempt for the limits of environmental depletion; a growing preference for “instant
gratification”, the “quick buck”, and consumerism. Much
has been made recently of “Asian values” as a defense again these
so-called alien intrusions. Are the moral standards of Asia somehow superior?
Are the traditional ethics of this hemisphere somehow impervious to the blandishments
of the new prosperity? The self-serving
colonial myth of the “lazy native” has been laid to rest. Racist conceits of intellectual
superiority have been out to the lie. Equally, the lure of the so-called “exotic
Orient” is fast fading as Asia modernizes to challenge the world in technology.
In fact, Asia today is a dynamo of restless energy, the envy of the world. That
reality may not sit happily in some corners of the tourist industry, which flourishes
on the quaint and picturesque, but for the people of this region they are points
of fully justifiable pride. So what of
those vaunted “Asian values?” Just as once we questioned the superiority of the
West, we can now ask: Where is the natural ethical superiority of the East? Traditionally,
Asian values centered on equanimity of spirit, loyalty to kith and kin, respect
for wisdom, and trust in enlightened leadership. But are those not universal
values? I fear, scanning the Asian
horizon, that a new system of Asian values is emerging. It may be characterized
as a transformation from devotion to duty to a search for the instant
pay-off. Self-interest is replacing concern for the common good. That
tidal shift in ethical standards is observable in many quarters, in both the business
and political arenas, and it is spreading rapidly across society. The news media
report daily on the abuses of the public trust that are rife throughout Asia today
– South Asia as well as East and Southeast Asia. The flouting of legal and regulatory
provisions; the granting of monopoly privileges to friends, family and financial
backers; the preferential use of privileged information; vote buying; resource
wastage; human exploitation – the list of abuses being committed for personal
gain is depressingly long. This erosion
in Asia’s ethical base has as its common denominator the pursuit of private benefit
at public expense. Surrounded by signs of burgeoning prosperity, individual desires
for a larger share of the cake have become a driving force in Asian society. That
is not even a zero-sum game; it leaves all participants as long-term
losers. Leaders throughout the region –
in the political arena, the industrial and financial sectors, the information
and entertainment industries – serve as role models in the setting
of ethical standards. All too frequently these days, the models being presented
to the public are grim. Military figures negotiating business deal, narcotics
traffickers serving as parliamentarians, respected business personalities consorting
with shady characters, professors offering snake-oil remedies to age-old problems,
clerics caught under the covers – laughable, were it all not so deplorable. Equally
interesting is the current wave of support for our so-called Asian values. As
if a long-hidden treasure-trove had suddenly been discovered, Asian values are
the fashion topic of the day. Without specifying what, precisely, is being referred
to, political leaders region-wide have grasped this fashionable term as useful
rhetorical device. They have used it to champion special interests, to oppose
foreign competition, to curry favour with an all-too-often gullible public. A
well-defined set of Asian values is sorely needed. At the top of the list should
stand “Good Governance.” For it is only through effective leadership
that the expected prosperity of the new millennium can be realized. I have already
referred to leadership in its guise as role model. That function of leadership
is additional to, but possibly even more important than, it’s well-known policy-making
and administrative functions. In those multiple senses, good governance is as
much a responsibility of the business community as of the political establishment. Visionary
leadership is required to devise a strategy for the sustained progress of
Asia into the new millennium. Vigorous leadership is required to translate
that strategy into action. Responsible leadership is required to ensure
the application of that action for the common good. Vision,
vigour, responsibility – those qualities constitute the essence of good governance.
The absence of any of those elements is a prescription for disaster. It was the
failure of all three that contributed to the disasters of the past century. The
current crisis of Asian values warns us to take immediate action. Let
me restate my position in a nutshell. Asian values today appear to be glorifying
personal interest. Yet the essential objective of any ethical society must
be the realization of its public aspirations. In that quest, ethics
cannot be divorced from good governance. It is your responsibility
as Asia’s leaders to recognize that connection and act on it, for the sake of
the “New Generations” of which you have spoken so eloquently at this Conference. This
Conference, in its focus on the New Generations, has highlighted the urgent need
for a return to ethical fundamentals in the conduct of public as well as private
affairs. That regeneration of values is essential if the New Generations of the
21st century are to build on the achievements of the past. Social and
political progress should be given the chance to match the scientific and technological
advances, as well as recent economic growth, that have been the outstanding achievements
of the past century. Let us make the 21st century not only the Asian
century but also the century of Asian values. In
conclusion, permit me to illustrate my argument with a vivid example. This tear,
1996, marks the golden jubilee celebration of the reign of His Majesty King Bhumibol
Adulyadej of Thailand. Over the fifty-year time span of his reign, His Majesty
has exemplified the criteria of leadership that I have sought to enunciate in
this address. Service to others, devotion to duty, moral integrity and perseverance
– these attributes have made our King the beloved leader of his people. One could
find no better example of what Asian values should be all about, and no better
role model to guide the lives of Asia’s Future Generations.
DEMOCRACY
AND FREE MARKETS at the Conference Dinner
hosted
by the Centre for Democratic Institutions
the Australian APEC Study Centre
and
the Asia Society Australasia Chapter
by Mr. Anand Panyarachun
Melbourne;
November 26, 1999 I take it that the
topic chosen for this talk arises from the need to reflect upon the very rapid
changes taking place in our part of the World, both in the political and economic
sphere, and put them in the context of the broader choices that each society has
to make at various junctures in its history. All
countries, including even Cambodia during the murderous Khmer Rouge episode, claim
to be “democratic.” Such easy claims render the word almost meaningless. Those
of us who subscribe to the liberal tradition would narrow the meaning of the term
to mean a system of government whereby there exists and functions a lawful procedure
by which a government can be peacefully removed, and presumably and preferrably
a new one, acceptable to the population, installed in its place. Elections are
but one of the many possible mechanisms, whose only virtue is that they have been
tried and tested in a vast number of countries. An
essential concept of the democratic system is the notion of choice. The collectivity
of the governed are in theory supposed to have some choice in the matter of whom
they are governed by. One of the claims to superiority of free markets is that
it enables people to have a wide latitude of choice in their economic life: where
they work, what they consume, how much they want to save, and so on. It is, therefore,
sometimes claimed that free markets must inevitably lead to a democratic form
of government – a claim much in vogue in the period since the adoption of the
market system in formerly communist countries. This claim is easy to refute, as
many authoritarian countries allow free markets to exist. The converse, however,
may well be true, once a country has, for whatever reasons, decided to have a
heavily planned economy, it is difficult to imagine such an economy surviving
in a democratic environment, let alone making a success out of it. I
believe that there is no direct relationship between free markets and a democratic
form of government. There are some of us who do not make that direct link between
the two, but link them with a third factor, namely economic growth as well as
the high standard of living that continued growth brings in its wake. It is now
widely accepted that some form of a market economy is a better approach to achieve
the high economic growth that is widely desired. Of course, the kind of market
economy that will deliver the growth need not be the bare-knuckled capitalism
that has emerged in some transitional economies. Indeed, as I shall discuss presently,
that kind of capitalism is no good for anyone. But
whether that economic growth can be delivered with a democratic form of government
is not as widely accepted. At one time, many of my less patient compatriots, and
even now, many Asian leaders would make the claim that we should go all out for
economic growth, and let democracy wait, until the fruits of growth are ploughed
into such basic services as education. THEN, when the powers that be decide that
the people are good and ready, democracy will be bestowed upon them. Needless
to say, these arguments are self-serving. On
the other side, for years, we also heard parallel opinions being voiced by Western
businessmen. They felt they could do better business with a “stable” government
than with those that are subject to the whims of the electorate. Stability of
the players is equated with stability of the rules of the game, an assumption
that does not pas the critical examination that it requires. Now that the old
players in some countries have left the scene, so have the rules of the game,
leaving the businesses and their investors in a limbo – a well-deserved limbo,
I might add. One of the unfortunate legacies
of communism, and its distant cousin, socialism, is the overly sharp dichotomy
sometimes drawn between a free market economy and a State-managed system, and
the implication that is sometimes drawn that the two are alternatives or substitutes.
The freer the market, the less the State role. This assumption may well be true
for a society and an economy that has had a lengthy evolution of both its market
and political institutions, so that the prevailing rules of the game in both areas
are more or less taken for granted. However, for a developing country like my
own, and probably even more so for a transitional economy, these rules to the
game do not exist, and the State has to take an action role. Are the States in
the region up to their task? Before they go about writing rules for others, they
must be good at devising and then conforming to the rules that govern themselves. We
in Thailand are all too well aware of the failures that have attended our political
system. The rate at which we have been tearing up and rewriting constitutions
has made us the envy of the world. Despite the frequent changes that were made,
one could not discern any improvement through an evolutionary process. Rather,
we seemed to be spiraling rapidly downward to money politics of the most blatant
kind. Western economists worry about excessive intervention of government in the
markets. We Thais have to worry about the intervention of the market mechanism
in our system of government. In the last
two years, the log-jam that had barred us from serious political reform had suddenly
been broken. A new constitution was proclaimed in 1997. Although this is the last
of the more than a dozen that we have had over the last sixty odd years, it was
the first that was passed with a wide degree of public participation and entirely
by constitutional means. The process was initiated by the Parliament, the means,
including the setting up of the National drafting assembly, its composition, its
election, its emphasis on public hearings, were all devised by the Parliament
which would eventually approve or disapprove the draft constitution in toto. The
constitution mandated many institutional reforms, ranging from the auditing of
government finances, to electoral supervision, to judicial reforms. It mandated
specific legislation to be passed by the Parliament in these and many other areas.
Although many, probably most, of the current parliamentarians (elected under the
old constitution) disliked both the Constitution and the mandated reforms, they
swallowed hard and reluctantly voted for them, and we should not begrudge them
the credit that is due. The economic crisis
that has hit us in the last two years, also indicates that our market institutions,
which we took for granted during the four decades of uninterrupted growth, had
serious flaws. Since these institutions were never “broke”, no-one thought of
fixing it before it was too late. Now we have no choice. During the last two years,
it has become necessary for us to re-fashion in a hurry some of the most fundamental
institutions of a market economy. These include new bankruptcy rules, new systems
of corporate governance, new systems of regulation of public utilities. The most
important task remains to be done, however, and that is to re-erect a financial
mechanism that will link savers and investors, so that the economy can more forward.
The mechanism that had served us before the crisis is now hopelessly beyond repair,
but no-one seems to have any clear idea as to what is to replace it. The
changes that have been made and many that remain to be done, are changes to the
fundamental institutions of the market economy, but they are not the kind of changes
that the market mechanism will naturally bring about, there must be a political
process. Inasmuch as these changes are taking place during a crisis, when there
is no economic growth to anaesthetize the pains of adjustment, it is not surprising
that there was bad temper all round. But to this day, I am glad to report that
our political system is still holding out well. It is my firm belief that the
reason the job was done, and that the reform was implemented was because the new
political atmosphere made for a much greater participation – sometimes angry participation
– by key sections of the population. And this is as it should be. We are truly
engaged in a social contract with the future. It is important that all Thais are
at least aware of what is being done in their name, and (God forbid) even to have
an influence on the outcome. The travails
of the last two years have taught us some lessons about democracy and free markets.
The first is that for an efficient, thriving market system to operate, it must
be within the framework of a set of rules of the game, and yet allow for the smooth
operation of the market mechanism. The State is necessarily involved in fashioning
these rules of the game. But these rules in themselves have to command a broad
social acceptance, the process by which they are adopted must be participatory
to the broadest extent possible. Of course,
fashioning new rules of the game is by itself insufficient. Inasmuch as it is
the State that created most of the important ones, it has to stand guard over
them and, most importantly, ensure that they are followed and applied in the right
context. In a rapidly changing world, it is inevitable that the officers of the
State that will have to apply some discretion over how the rules are interpreted
and applied. Their own personal probity, the integrity and transparency by which
they conduct their affairs, are absolutely essential. A few – very few – authoritarian
States may have officers that rise up to these standards. Many democratic States
(including my own) have signally failed to do so. But I believe that in the long
run, it is only in an open, democratic State, where freedom of speech is protected
and guaranteed, where such officers will emerge and survive to serve their country. As
business-men and women, your performance is always measured against the standards
set up by the stern task-master that is the market. The market test is unconditional.
Businesses fail, even if the circumstances that led to the failure are beyond
the control of those running them, as my colleagues in Bangkok are finding out.
The market does not provide any ready excuse. Perhaps your banker may give you
temporary help from your mistakes, but in a well-regulated system, he is still
subject to the market test. Politicians
in less democratic, and therefore, less fortunate, countries do not have any standards
by which they are judged at all. But even in democratic countries, they are measured
by less stringent standards than the market. The most common of this is electoral
performance. But the electoral test is far less stringent than the market test,
because it is hedged about by many conditions and subject to various whims and
fashions, which can be manipulated. Politicians have too many alibis, and they
always cite them! It is for this reason
that we need to steer clear of the interventionist hand of the State and the heavy
hand of socialism. Having said that, let
me quickly add (as my last point) that it would be a mistake to allow full play
to the invisible hand of the market, except with respect to business men and women.
This is because it will always be the cast that some individuals will be at the
losing end of the fast-paced economic changes that are constantly occurring. And
many of these are weakly equipped to bear the brunt. It is essential that society
(not necessarily the State) be ready to lend a helping hand to them. For Australians,
this may sound “old-hat.” This is because you have been living in a Welfare State
for close to a century, and have (I gathered) even gotten tired of it. But for
many Asian countries, the current crisis has caught their governments and their
peoples unawares. Social safety nets are almost entirely non-existent, and the
social consequences are therefore somewhat severe. One of the most important tasks
that we now face in Asia is therefore, to learn from your experience, and fashion
a hard-headed approach to the provision of a social safety, but one which stays
within the bounds of our modest means. We
in Thailand have already embarked on a road to a functioning democracy and a sustainable
free-market system. We along the way have learned to appreciate the values of
systems, and at the same time are not oblivious of the flaws. It is my personal
hope that a new political culture, to be instilled and nurtured by the present
constitution and the organic laws, will produce in due course a government which
is truly a government of the people, for the people and by the people.
Democracy
in Thailand By Anand Panyarachun
Former
Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Thailand
Parliament House, Canberra
November
24, 1999 The Honourable Alexander Downer,
Minister for Foreign Affairs, the Vice-Chancellor of the ANU, Ambassador Roland
Rich, Director of the Centre for Democratic Institutions, Ambassador Laxanachantorn
Laopahan, Honourable Members of the House of Representatives, Excellencies, ladies
and gentleman. Let me say, at the outset
that it is a great honour and privilege for me to be invited by the Centre for
Democratic Institutions to make an appearance here, before you, as the third speaker
at these annual lectures. It is a personal honour and it is one that I will cherish. At
the same time, I would like to think that the honour given to me personally today
is perhaps a reflection of the closeness and the depth of the relations between
Australia and Thailand. A reflection of the understanding and cooperation that
Australia - her government, the people - have always offered and extended to Thailand,
in recognition of our great efforts to promote democracy and human rights. Some
of you may not know the history of Thailand and I ask your indulgence in allowing
me to give you a very brief political history. The Kingdom of Thailand was founded
in the thirteenth century. Relatively speaking, it is an ancient country, the
country that has always been ruled by kings, a country that started on its course
as a true state, with defined territories, with defined powers of the king which
were initially absolute. Our kings, traditionally,
have always ruled the country with compassion and human kindness and with full
determination to see that their people, their subjects, receive fair and equal
treatment and that the benefits of the rules are evenly distributed. The
beginnings of the modern Thailand started in 1932, when there was a so-called
revolution which transformed absolute monarchy into so-called democratic rules.
But, substantively, nothing changed very much. The
rules of the game did not change, it was merely a transfer of power from the king
and the royal elite to a group of bureaucrat elites. The power was never transferred
to the people, in spite of what the military, the bureaucrats and, subsequently,
the politicians had been saying all along. So
from 1932 up to the mid-eighties, we were only a democracy in name and in form.
Most Thais would understand democracy to mean the existence of a constitution,
the electoral process, the parliament and the cabinet and they would exercise
their right to vote once every three to four years. But even with that democratic
right exercised, they were not allowed to enjoy it fully or uninterruptedly. For
the first forty years, since 1932, there have been a number of coups d’etat. Democratic
rule was distorted or subverted and was undermined by the people in power. The
people always got the short end of the stick. We
went through this forty-year period of intermittent democratic rule, interspersed
with military rule and bureaucratic rule. In the mid-eighties, we managed to entice,
peacefully and through logic, the student activists and those people who were
labeled by the central authorities as being communist, to give up their arms and
return to the fold of society. Thailand
is the only country that won the fight against communism without having to engage
in a full-scale war. The authorities knew that the only solution to that problem
would be a political one. And we, fortunately, managed to win the minds and the
hearts of the so-called ten thousand communist rebels by accepting them back,
by giving them amnesty and by taking them back into the mainstream of life in
our society. And since then they have been
given further opportunities to pursue their careers, to pursue their occupations
and professions, and many are now sitting in the National Assembly, as the elected
representatives – and quite a few are cabinet members. But
since the mid eighties, we were not yet immune from any threat from the military,
from the generals, in cahoots with businessmen who supplied money to the political
process. Initially, there was a rule by the bureaucratic elite - both military
and civilian - then, there was a rule by the bureaucrats, the military and the
politicians. And subsequently, there was a rule by the bureaucrats, the military,
the politicians and big money. In the eighties,
we saw vast injections of money into our political process. Money corrupted the
entire electoral process. So, in the mid-eighties, people started to have public
debates and serious discussion about political reform. I knew, at that time, the
economy was still going strong, we were averaging about seven to eight per cent
annual growth rate and had done so for some twenty consecutive years. If
you look at our GDP, our export growth and our per capita income and the growing
number of the so-called middle class people, one would not question the wisdom
of the economic and financial policies conducted at that time, because while the
going was good, nobody bothered to find out what flaws might exist and what errors
we might be making. And yet, during those
days, the Thai people, without the encouragement of the government, started thinking
about change. The Thai public started serious talks, dialogues and discussions
about the need for political reform, the need to enhance human rights, the need
to make more equitable distribution of income. That process took nearly ten years
- study after study. Eventually, we managed
to get our parliament, the National Assembly, to talk seriously about the matter.
And in the mid-nineties, it was parliament, for once in our lifetime, that engaged
itself in this political reform process. Since
1932, we have had fifteen constitutions. Fifteen constitutions that were thrown
away, every time, when there was a change of power, extra-constitutionally. Fifteen
constitutions which vary in degrees as to their democratic content. Fifteen constitutions
which were drafted mainly, and in many cases exclusively, by the power that be,
by those who had to protect their own vested interests, political or otherwise,
by those who did not wish to relinquish their authority or their responsibility,
by those who had no trust in their people, by those who only grudgingly called
themselves democrats. But everything was
fake. We realised that with the highest standard of education, with the increasing
wealth, with the rising middle class, with the expansion of our economy and with
relative stability of our major policies, we could afford the luxury of such philosophical
questions as the drafting of a democratic constitution, the need to build up political
institutions, the need to embark on the road to a sustainable economy, the need
to look after the environment and, above all, the need to transfer the power,
the sovereign power, to the people. We
had struggled for over fifty years, when the parliament reluctantly and only because
of the public pressure decided to embark on a process of political reform. it
was the first time that a new constitution was drafted within the context of the
parliament. It was done through parliamentary means. After
several studies and research work, conducted by a parliamentary committee, together
with people from outside the parliament, there was a firm basis to go ahead. And
it was the National Assembly that set up the procedures, setting up an indirectly
elected body known as the National Constitution Drafting Assembly, consisting
of ninety-nine members chosen from the provinces and a number of seats were reserved
for nominations by the Institute for Higher Learning, those who had special expertise
in law, in political administration and in political science. It
was a balanced assembly because a majority of the members of the drafting committee
were ordinary people - they were lawyers, there were labour leaders, there were
former student’s activists, they were from the provinces. Many of them spoke their
mind, sometimes contrary to democratic values and yet, for the first time, people
had a choice. There was wide popular participation.
We engaged in public hearing, we consulted with every sector of our society, be
it business, farmers, school-teachers, labourers and other groups in society.
We confirmed that this is a people’s constitution. Of
course, there was considerable opposition. At the beginning, it came from the
parliamentarians because they saw in this, I would say, revolutionary document,
not a gradual erosion of their power, not a gradual erosion of their vested interests,
but a very drastic reduction of their power and responsibility and the drastic
challenge to their vested interests. They
saw this therefore as a revolutionary document precisely because it was approved
through constitutional means, with public participation. They saw it as a threat,
as a threat to their well being. They engaged in a vigorous campaign to oppose
the adoption of the draft, but again, for the first time in our history, public
opinion prevailed. And I know the process
of political reform started even before the onset of the financial and economic
crisis because we in Thailand happen to believe that economy and politics are
intertwined. You cannot do one without the other. We do not think it is right
or it should be adhered to as a sacred theory, that you open up the economy first
and the opening up of politics will automatically, or inevitably, follow. I
am not rejecting that theory, but my belief is that each society’s economy has
become more complex and more complicated and more integrated into the globalise
system largely imposed by the developed countries. Whether
we like it or not, we just had to tag along. We could not resist the changes that
were taking place, particularly aided by computer technology and information technology.
If we resisted, we had no resources and power to beat it. And if we decided to
go along, however reluctantly, we would have just to see to it that we put in
place reform measures, preparatory measures that would bring our legal infrastructure,
our financial infrastructure, our credit regime and our economic regime up to
internationally competitive standards. We
focused on political reform because we happened to believe that if you start it
early and if you start it without having to rush through things, then that the
political reform process could help immensely in implementing the much more difficult
economic and financial reform measures that would have to come sooner or later. So,
now we have come to the stage where we know that democracy is not only a matter
of exercising choice, because freedom of expression and freedom of choice just
do not immediately or effectively translate into goods and services to be provided
by the government to the people. I am not
so sure whether the present so-called democratic regime in many countries could
be viewed as a functioning democracy, in the same way that it was not enough in
the past or in our history just to learn the three RS: reading, ‘riting and ‘rithmetic.
You needed a little more than that. You
needed a functional literacy. Likewise you need not only a constitution, a parliament
and a cabinet, but you need a functioning democracy. And you need to build up
an infrastructure for democracy of which; of course, a parliament, constitution
and cabinet are part and parcel. A functioning
democracy, even with a good constitution, such as the one we have now, must continually
focus on strengthening the rule of law, on the enhancement
of human rights, on transparency, on accountability, on people’s participation,
on the checks and balances of the powers vested in the individuals who hold public
office. In decentralisation, indeed, with
the devolution of power from the central authorities to the locals, that would
not be sufficient without two other legs in the infrastructure of democracy. There
is an urgent need for our societies not only to have good infrastructure on the
legal side, but there is an urgent cry also for us to help build civil society,
a civil society which represents cross- sections of opinions of society as a whole. A
civil society which includes not only NGOs, be it women’s NGOs, development NGOs,
human rights NGOs or environment NGOs, but also includes trade associations, business
associations, teachers’ unions, labour unions, farmers’ groups and other private
associations. Because only by building
up those elements in the civil society would we be able to provide checks and
balances against the powers that be, or against the authorities both central and
local. It is only by building a civil society that the government in power will
be able to define and to determine exactly, or at least more or less exactly,
where public interest lies. That is a very
difficult question because every politician, every individual whatever he does
and whatever he says always cites public interest. Just like you saying you cannot
vote against God, but such statements lack sincerity and lack real meaning. Then
what is the third leg in our infrastructure? This applies both to the public and
the private sector. We must ensure that there is good governance that is applicable
both to the government and to the public sector as well as to the corporate sector.
The features which go into good governance
are also reflected in our Constitution. The independence of the judiciary, the
rule of law, the accountability mechanisms of institutions as reflected in our
Constitution. We have ombudsmen, we have an administrative court, we have constitutional
supremacy, and we have a constitutional court for the first time. The Constitution
is the supreme law of the land and any existing law which is contrary to the provisions
of the Constitution is null and void. We
advocate also the independence of the media because in most developing countries
the State always intervenes into such matters as what their people should hear,
what they should be told. As a supplement to checks and balances mechanisms, an
independent, objective and, particularly, incorruptible mass media is an essential
feature. So we all tried to do all these
things in a limited time. It took us nearly a decade. Were we successful? Yes,
up to a certain point. Are we confident that we will be able to achieve the objectives
that we set out with? Yes up to a certain point. We
have managed to produce a constitution which for all intents and purposes is quite
adequate, and is more advanced than documents we produced in the past. We are
building up a civil society, we talk to each other a lot as a nation, and we try
to implement the good governance concepts. The
question mark is this: that in spite of what we did, in spite of what we are doing
- and we shall have to continue to do it continuously in the future years - the
most difficult and the most testing criterion is the attitude of the people themselves.
We cannot legislate a change in the political culture of the country, in the social
barriers of a society and in our basic attitudes. That
is going to take time but I am confident that once we have embarked on the correct
road to a functioning democracy and to a sustainable development the process is
irreversible the hiccups along the way there will be two steps forward and only
one step backward. With our persistence
and with our single-minded objective eventually we shall reach the goal. Thank
you very much. ROLAND RICH: Thank
you very much Khun Anand. We will now have a session for questions from the floor
and I would invite people to go to the two microphones in the aisles. Please introduce
yourselves before you ask the question, but I always reserve the chairman’s right
to ask the first question. And my question relates to reform fatigue. The
new Constitution requires a number of new institutions to be established: a constitutional
court, administrative courts, the anti-corruption agency, the ombudsman, the new
Human Rights Commission, and all this comes all at once. Will there be reform
fatigue? Will the people be able to see the thing through? ANAND
PANYARACHUN: The reform process is going to take quite
a long time and to me it is a never ending process, so I am sure that every now
and then people will feel this reform fatigue. To me that is only a temporary
thing, a transitional thing. The one long
lasting by-product that we have since the exercise started is that people’s participation
has increased. In the past few years I have been in contact with a number of civil
society elements. I keep in touch with them and they do their own thing. Those
who are interested in environmental matters would pursue their matters, those
who are interested in human rights pursue theirs. So,
there is good networking between all these elements, and I have not detected any
sense of disillusionment, any sense of despair. Yes, they were disappointed many
a time because our politicians still are doing their best to distort the intentions
of the Constitution, to undermine the reform process directly or indirectly or
even to subvert the intent of the constitution while they were in the process
of enacting organic laws. Every time somebody
was doing something underhand, elements of civil society and NGOs and the oppressed
would not let them get away with it that easily. I have had personal experiences
when some organic laws, particularly relating to the Human Rights Commission,
to legislation on the ownership of the frequency bands of the radio, to the freedom
of mass media were distorted and the draft bills were sent up with the collusion
of both the government members and opposition party members. Quietly
or sometimes publicly we managed to engage the parliamentarians in public debate
and finally we overcame their opposition. In a way we had to put them to shame.
So I think people’s participation is a
factor which has to remain constant, it is a factor which has to be present all
along, and I think that we are now acquiring a new culture within our society.
If we want the Constitution to be written to the effect that sovereign power belongs
to the people, you must act and you must behave as if you are the owner of that
power. Indifference or just pure talk without
any action to follow up your talk, these are the luxuries that we can no longer
afford. ROLAND RICH: Thank
you. Andrew Thomson, you are next. ANDREW
THOMSON – AUSTRALIAN HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES: Thank you
Your Excellency. My name is Andrew Thomson. I’m a member of the House of Representatives
in Australia. Can you give us your opinion about the effect on democratic institutions
of the new information technology, particularly the World Wide Web and E-mail?
ANAND PANYARACHUN: Well,
Thailand, you know, in spite of occasional military rule, has always been a relatively
open society. There was never any secret police, and military rule was not that
harsh. There were definitely some limitations on the freedoms of expression and
communication. So, I believe we need not
be overly concerned about the computer technology, the Internet and new forms
of communications. We need to continue to focus on the basics of democracy. We
stressed the freedom of expression, freedom of choice. Obviously
some of these freedoms would be polluted by outside forces beyond our control
but unlike some other countries that have been, relatively closed societies, perhaps
they feel the threat much more than we do. I’m not belittling the possible debilitating
effects associated with the control of the new technologies but I happen to believe
that in the end people’s good judgement will prevail if their freedoms are guaranteed.
ROLAND RICH: Thank
you. Yes. CHRISTOPHER
PYNE – AUSTRALIAN HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES: Thank
you sir. I’m Christopher Pyne. I’m also a member of the Parliament. Thailand has
always been a great hotbed for democracy in the Asian region together with the
Philippines, these are the two countries that have been keen practitioners of
democracy. In recent years we have seen countries like Taiwan and now Indonesia
also embrace democratic institutions and traditions for their future. Would
you like to give a prediction or some comments about what future countries perhaps
in the Asian region might move down a path towards democratic traditions, specifically
countries that previously had democracies like, for example, Myanmar? ANAND
PANYARACHUN: Well, each country, each society has to decide
on the fundamental question whether they want to remain a closed society, an authoritarian
society or whether they want to open up. It is not for me to predict as to which
other countries would embark on this process, but in the case of Thailand I think
you may recall that the watershed of our modern political history was on October
fourteenth 1973, when we had a spontaneous student uprising joined by hundreds
and thousands of people in the streets of Bangkok. Of
course some lives were lost, over a hundred, there was gunfire but out of that
nasty incident and with the blessing of our King the crisis came to an end, a
new Constitution was drafted and the military had to retreat. Then
again three years later there was a military backlash in 1976, also in October,
and I would label that particular period as the mini-McCarthy period in our history.
Many prominent men, many student leaders were labeled communists. I was one of
them. At that time I was permanent secretary
in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and because it was the period when the then
elected government was adjusting its foreign policies, seeking rapprochement with
China and Vietnam and also Cambodia, I was just a victim of circumstances. Because
I was the permanent Secretary and I was seen, perhaps unjustifiably, as the instrument
that promoted this rapprochement. In fact, I was merely following the government
policies even though I had agreed fully with those policies. So maybe there were
many victims of circumstances. I was accused
of being a communist. It took us about four or five months to clear my name. I
was sent to Germany, then I decided that civil service was not my cup of tea and
I left. I left the service at the relative young age of forty-six and I was given
the opportunity to join the private sector and I just did my own thing. I
continued living in Thailand and never fled the country. I had my job, I paid
my taxes but I had no interest in politics in Thailand. Then fate came along and
some leaders in the military asked me to become Prime Minister after the last
coup d’etat in 1991. It was against my
thinking because I never supported the coup d’etat, but there was an important
development in that for the first time the military knew that they could not run
the country. So having staged a successful coup d’etat against an elected government
they came to me, a civilian, and an unknown quantity to the military establishment. It
proved something. The military knew very well that they could stage a successful
coup d’etat but they also came to realise that in the modern world, the running
of a modern society and the management of the economy needed people with different
qualifications from generals or air marshals. ROLAND
RICH: Thank you. The next question is from Gareth Evans,
President of the International Crisis Group, and former member of the House of
Representatives. GARETH EVANS – INTERNATIONAL
CRISIS GROUP: Khun Anand, no southeast Asian leader ever
relishes answering questions about their neighbours, as you have just confirmed,
but you are an exception in so many ways to the norm, that I thought it might
be worth trying again, to ask you, specifically, about Indonesia. What
degree of confidence do you now have in Indonesia’s capacity to consolidate and
maintain its own process of democratisation, particularly in the light of the
emerging separatist pressures in Aceh and elsewhere? ANAND
PANYARACHUN: I am easily encouraged and now you encourage
me to make comments on my neighbours. I will comply with your request. Now, take
Myanmar. I disagree with the way that the country is being run. I do not know
any member of the SLORC/SPDC and I do not like what they are doing. Yet I have
a certain degree of respect for their internal affairs. They,
themselves, have to learn that the World has changed so much, that some matters
were traditionally and historically viewed exclusively as internal matters. That
might have been true a hundred years ago, or fifty years ago, but definitely not
in 1999. I do not think that countries like ours should adhere strictly to that
interpretation. I think we can raise our
concerns - we could talk to them about our true feelings - but, at the same time,
I do not believe that countries like Myanmar should be ostracised by the International
community. I still remember the days when I was serving as my country’s representative
at the United Nations in the ‘60s and ‘70s. We
all knew about the apartheid regime in South Africa. We all knew that there were
a series of sanctions enforced against South Africa. We knew how little effect
those sanctions had, because there were some countries who violated the sanctions,
including those in the Third World too, for business reasons. Now,
let me talk about constructive engagement. This term is not a term or a policy
invented by ASEAN. It was invented by the Brits in relation to South Africa. Britain
at that time did not want to have sanctions in force against South Africa. So,
it was the British government, then, who advocated the constructive engagement
policy with South Africa, for which it was very much criticised and perhaps justifiably,
by the Third World. Sanctions could never be fully effective. Now in 1990s, as
we are reaching the new millenium, I think it is essential - it is essential to
send strong messages and strong signals, to the people of Burma, that they’re
not going to be abandoned. That they are
not going to be deserted by the International community. And that they are not
going to be left in the hands of the SLORC. At the same time, we should send strong
signals to the SLORC. Let them have their own reasons for conducting such policies,
with which we disagree. But there is room for talk. There is room for dialogue.
There is room for adjustment. Now, of course,
the pace of change is not going to satisfy us. But I believe in the unpredictability
of certain forces. If you were to ask me whether we would have this Constitution
that we adopted two years ago in 1997 in Thailand - if you asked me ten years
ago - I would have said, forget it. People have a way of changing. Even
government leaders have a way of changing. So I am not that pessimistic about
Myanmar, but I think it is important that when we talk about constructive engagement,
it must encompass all elements of engagement. We must not be selective. We have
to engage them economically, politically and we have to see to it that they hear
the truth. Now, in regard to Indonesia,
I wish them well. It has gone through a very traumatic experience. I hope that
the new political leadership in Indonesia can overcome some of the obstacles.
I do not want to go into details, but I just want to take cognisance of one very
important historical fact. Many of the
communal problems that you see, either in Burma/Myanmar or in Indonesia, are the
results of colonisation and the divide-and-rule policies instituted by the colonial
authorities. Of course we have the benefit of hindsight and when we look at the
period when Burma was formed into a nation, or Indonesia for that matter, we might
conclude that both countries could have functioned more effectively as a nation
had the colonialists encouraged them to form a federation. A nation with federal
structure, rather than one which is a unitary state. So you asked me where did
Myanmar go wrong, or where did Indonesia go wrong, I think part of the responsibility,
a fairly major part, must be laid at the doors of the British and Dutch. But
it is no use talking about the past. The main thing is to get a cohesive-society,
to energise them and try to move them forward and move them together, then we
stand a better chance of resolving these problems. ROLAND
RICH: Well, I think the privilege of the last question
goes to Alison Broinowski who has been waiting patiently. ALISON
BROINOWSKI: Thank you, Roland. Your Excellency, you have
given us an inspiring account of constitutional change in your country, one that
we have noted, particularly in Australia, because of our recent failure in that
regard. I wonder though, in the light of what you have said about human rights
in Thailand, whether you could cast your mind back to 1993, when an International
human rights meeting was held in Bangkok, to which Australia was, it was made
clear, unwelcome If such a review were
held now, in Thailand, would Australia be a welcome participant, to talk about
ideas of human rights at such a meeting? ANAND
PANYARACHUN: That question was posed to me as somebody
who has no part in the government, in running the country. I run the risk of giving
an answer that may not be repeated by the government authorities, but I think
that, since 1993, the current government knows full well that certain matters
which were untouchable in the early ‘90s are no longer so. And
I hope very much that they will adopt a different attitude to 1993.
Speech
Archives in English Section
5: Education
|
|
Address by Mr. Anand
Panyarachun on behalf of the Honorary Degree Recipients
Honorary
Degrees Congregation
Loke Yew Hall, University of Hong Kong
March
14, 1996 Mr. Chancellor Mr.
Vice-Chancellor Distinguished Guests Ladies
and Gentlemen It is a pleasure and an honour
for me to be here with you at this Congregation. The University of Hong Kong has
decided to confer upon six individuals honorary degrees in various disciplines.
In representation of those six personalities, I have been invited to address you
today. The six recipients are men and women
who, each in his or her own right, have contributed in profound and lasting ways
to the betterment of society. Their contributions, in the fields of community
service, social development, public service, economic development, and the fine
arts, speak for themselves. Of diverse nationality and background, they share
one common trait – their commitment to the improvement of their societies and
their determination to work towards a more prosperous, just and secure world. I
am proud to have been selected for inclusion among such a distinguished group
of individuals. I share their pride and humility in accepting this distinction
– one that gives recognition to the leadership role that each of us has been privileged
to play and that we will certainly continue to exercise in our respective areas
of expertise so long as providence wills. Jean
Monet, the father of “unified” Europe, once said that there are two kinds
of people: those who want to be something and those who want to
do something. The distinction between those mind sets, those contrasting
visions of what life is all about, is fundamental. It
is self-evident that the vast majority of humanity in today’s world clings to
self-serving values in pursuit of personal interest. For those people, doing
is the means of being. On the other hand, there are those who, imbued with
a sense of idealism nurtured by vision and energy, work for the collective interest.
For those people, doing is the very essence of life, and it is their leadership
that drives development. The recipients of today’s honorary degrees exemplify
that quality of leadership. They stand before you as models of a “life-style”
that you, too, can adopt, if you simply will it so. University
graduates today are far better equipped with the knowledge and skills to effect
change than those of my generation. A university degree, however, is by no means
a guarantee of success in life. It is all too easy to fall prey to the notion
of “credentialism”, the view that social status and occupational position derives
from the academic degrees accumulated. It is not the degree, but what you do with
it, that counts. It is my hope that you,
the graduating class of the University of Hong Kong standing upon the edge of
a new millennium and a new China, will use your learning to serve the public interest.
Today, like never before, opportunities for public service beckon you with open
arms. That is because we are witnessing today a remarkable trend throughout Asia:
a rapidly expanding role for civil society in development. The
move towards more open societies has been associated with widespread disenchantment
with ineffective and inefficient governments. But government cannot be abandoned;
rather, as is being attempted in the United States and elsewhere, it must be “reinvented.”
The clarion call of the people for “good governance,” centring on efficiency,
accountability and transparency in the activities of government,
is directed to your ear. It has always
been my belief – and my practice while serving in public office – that governments
must promote transparency, predictability and an open environment that provides
opportunities for informed political and productive economic and social participation
by all. Good governance depends ultimately upon the responsiveness of all public
institutions – the legislative, administrative and judicial – to the needs and
concerns of the people. A public that is educated, well informed, politically
aware, and committed to democratic principles is the key to good governance. It
is that reality that is referred to in the aphorism: “Each people gets the government
it deserves.” All of you have a stake
– and a responsibility – for the future development of Hong Kong, China, Asia
and the world. Each of you will have an opportunity for public service, in any
of a wide variety of capacities. As responsible citizens, you must ensure that
the economic and social resources of your communities are managed with efficiency,
effectiveness and integrity. That can only be done through your active participation
in the institutions and processes that govern your lives. I
hope that the future will afford you the opportunity to do just that. On
behalf of all the honorary degree recipients, I wish you every success in your
endeavours.
“English
Language Education beyond the Year 2000: The Shape
of Things to Come”
Inaugural and Keynote Addresses delivered by
Mr.
Anand Panyarachun
at the International Conference on
“Expanding
Horizons in English Language Teaching”
organized by Chulalongkorn University
Language Institute
in honour of
His Majesty King Bhumibol
Adulyadej’s Golden Jubilee Year
November 27, 1995 Ladies
and Gentlemen, It is with great pleasure
that I accepted to take part in this important event, not only because the theme
of the conference is a challenging one, but more so because it provides me with
an opportunity to associate myself with Chulalongkorn University and the distinguished
audience in commemorating the rare occasion that happens probably only once in
one’s lifetime – the celebrations of the fiftieth anniversary of His Majesty the
King’s Accession to the Throne. The entire nation rejoices, and Chulalongkorn
University has held, and will be holding, several events as part of the celebrations. It
is only natural that a premier seat of learning such as Chulalongkorn University
would focus attention on an academic subject, and one with resounding futures
overtones. It is gratifying to know that in tune with the ever-increasing momentum
of the globalization process, the Language Institute wishes to look towards the
horizons where nations will converge, thereby making it imperative for peoples
from diverse linguistic backgrounds to be able to communicate in a World language
which is mutually understandable. In so doing, no nation will be at a disadvantage
by having to rely on translation or interpretation, that is to say, through a
third party, in an International setting. Even if translation or interpretation
is available, the rapid response time demanded in many International situations
would make the mode of translation and interpretation inadequate and inefficient. As
I understand it, the organizers of this conference are searching for “VISIONS”
– a term which nowadays is becoming the in-word. Usually one talks about political
visions, economic visions, social visions, etc., in the context of national development.
The task before us to-day, however, is more concentrated on the attainment of
knowledge by individuals. In the topic “Expanding Horizons in English Language
Teaching”, we are challenged to forecast the content, the learning and teaching,
of a single language, English, in the years beyond 2000 – which actually starts
only five years hence. I must mention at
the outset that I am not a linguist. In fact my school experience was that English
was not my forte. Although I attended a missionary secondary school, at the time
when it was generally taken that missionary schools provided better opportunities
for English or French learning in Thailand, I did not particularly enjoy English
lessons. Moreover, I found out later, when I first had to apply my theoretical
learning into practice in an academic setting in England, the citadel of the “Standard
English”, that the English I had learnt at school was quite inadequate. I
understand that the audience today consists mainly of English language instructors
and researchers from several countries. This conference, therefore, provides an
excellent opportunity to exchange country experiences and pool together expertise
in English language education. Our Thai instructors, in particular, have a good
chance to learn from fellow English language instructors from other countries
whether problems are similar, what their strategies and implementation plans are
to cope with those problems, to ensure that future generations would find English
language learning more enjoyable, and that what is learnt is truly functional
in real life today and in the years to come. Let us unite our efforts and have
a good look at this important area of learning, which is of great significance,
academically and professionally, as well as in the domains of economic, social
and even cultural developments, for our future World, a World without frontier,
a World with International understanding. I
have the pleasure to declare the International Conference open, and wish it success
in its undertakings. The conference organizers
intend to make full use of the limited time available for the conference, which
I endorse. I have therefore been asked, and I agreed, not to leave this podium
to take a deep breath, but to continue to share my personal views and concerns
on the topic entitled English Language Education Beyond the Year 2000: the
Shape of Things to Come. The reason
behind my choice of this topic is quite simple: it does not require linguistic
specialization or first-hand teaching experience, of which I have none. As a product
and user of English language education, and not the producer, I can avoid “teaching
fish how to swim”, as the Thai saying goes, which is equivalent to “carrying coals
to Newcastle”, since this is a gathering of English language instructors who are
more knowledgeable about methodology, process, content, assessment, etc., of teaching-learning
than I. But being at the receiving end, I can perhaps air my views and offer suggestions
for improvement of future products, in the light of emerging trends. English
language, whether one likes it or not, is here to stay. In order to substantiate
my personal prediction of “the shape of things to come”, it may
be useful to look back at the English language in the past, how it leads to the
present, which in turn offers directions into the future. Before proceeding further,
let me mention that predictions cannot be completely accurate; more so when such
predictions involve human activities, in this case, attitudes, commitments, interests,
of human beings, learners and instructors alike. Also these predictions are being
made at a time when change is accelerating at a rate greater than at any other
time in human history. English as a World
language is a comparatively recent phenomenon. In fact in the sixteenth century,
the language was confined to England and Southern Scotland, and not yet having
penetrated much even into Ireland or Wales, let alone into the World beyond. The
number of English speakers began to increase at the time of the Industrial Revolution,
when there was a growth of population in England itself. Concurrently, English
spread itself into the rest of the British Isles at the expense of the Celtic
languages, through the imperatives of political and economic power. It was further
encouraged by deliberate policy of a confident and aggressive government. It then
strengthened its position as a World language through its wide diffusion outside
the British Isles by trade, colonization, and conquest. The process expanded with
the English settlements in Northern America in the seventeenth century, and also
in the West Indies in competition with Spanish, French and Dutch colonizers. British
domination of the Indian sub-continent dates from the second half of the eighteenth
century, adding a further magnitude to the expansion of English. British settlement
in Australia, the British domination in South Africa, Singapore, British Guiana,
New Zealand, Hong Kong, West, East and Southern Africa pushed the geographical
and population frontiers of the use of English by vast magnitudes. In the Philippines
and Puerto Rico, the American form of English appeared at the end of the nineteenth
century, further magnifying the use of English. To this historical backdrop should
be added the population growth in the United States of America as a further contribution
to the increase in the use of English. The
aforementioned historical base of vast populations using English, in proportion
more than any other second language, was the reality in the World even during
the first decades of the twentieth century. By the 1980s, there were an estimated
400 million native speakers of English, and about the same number using it as
a second language. Some 76 percent of all secondary school students were having
English as a second language. It is not
surprising that new phenomena of the twentieth century took as its communication
foundation this vast base, and built upon it to push even further the use of English. UNESCO’s
Statistical Year Book of 1994 reports that the number of book titles published
in English in countries where English is neither the mother tongue nor the first
language, came to over 10,000. By comparison, book titles in French came to only
1,800. Internationally circulated scientific and technological publications would
show an even greater proportion in English. The
economic and political power of the United States, the need for a major lingua
franca for the scientific community, for International trade, for banking and
finance, for the electronic communications era, were but a few of the new twentieth
century phenomena that have built on the historical foundation of English usage.
These factors energized the raising of English to its present dominant position.
English has now become a near-global tongue, used by some 700 million speakers,
bulk of the World’s mail and 80 percent of electronic information. In
addition, current pressures for globalization of the market place, of communication,
of the scientific and technological spheres, have placed English permanently in
its current eminent position as the lingua franca of International business and
politics. These same factors make it imperative that the learning of English be
given high priority, and that this high priority is placed unambiguously in the
context of functionality in the multiple uses of English in the multiple
facets of mega-trends for globalization. To
emphasize that even good translation modes will become dangerously inadequate
over the next decade, may I quote an extract from the Bangkok Post Outlook Section
of 8 September 1995, titled “Greater Highways in the Sky”. It goes as follow:
“….To make sure nothing goes wrong, traffic controllers and pilots keep in constant
contact with each other throughout the flight. Since pilots come from all parts
of the World, air-to-ground communications have to be in one standard language:
English…ICAO is developing a new system, which will make use of satellites and
digital technology for aviation control. The system, which is expected to be ready
by the year 2000, will enable controllers and pilots as well as airport officers
– wherever they are in the World – to communicate, swiftly and correctly, via
computer language…” This piece of information
on technology research and advancement certainly underlines further that beyond
the year 2000, the English language will be essential for World communication. The
data presented earlier is important for our deliberations, not merely because
of the confirmation of the importance of English as a World language. The data
also stresses that many types of uses for the English language must necessarily
be a characteristic of the “shape of things to come”. The types
of uses arise from the diverse functionalities of English that are likely to be
demanded beyond the year 2000. Surely the
critical operative word functionality must have fundamental and far-reaching
implications for the development of curricula, methodologies, evaluation and other
processes in English learning and teaching. Indeed, in many countries, the antiquated
“Latin Model” of infusing huge doses of grammar, has been replaced already with
proficiency-based curricula for communicating in English. I
wish to raise the issue of overall design for your deliberations. In the context
of the vastly increased types of functionalities indicated earlier, perhaps a
new and radical view of functionality itself needs to be developed, and with it,
new implications for curriculum development and other components of English learning
and teaching. One possible approach may be to shift the emphasis of the design
from the limited “supply” side to the “demand”
side. Given the varied and changing specific demands made on the use of English
nowadays, the stress on the “supply” aspect is clearly not valid. Even
to-day, the demands may range from mere knowledge of the Roman script, say, for
punching computer keys, to being able to understand and use technical brochures
for operating household items, or comprehending food labels, etc., to following
installation or repair manuals by technicians. Then there are Commercial English,
Scientific English, and even its use in literature and culture. The English proficiencies
required for each of these are naturally different. Should the educational provisions,
which are aimed at achieving those varied proficiencies, necessarily be derived
from the characteristics of each of the requirements? Should the proficiencies
be defined case by case? Rather than presuming
what should be the foundational proficiencies that can serve all these highly
varied sets of individual proficiencies, it may be necessary to define carefully
and systematically first these varied and different sets of proficiencies,
and only then derive any common foundational proficiencies. These then could be
the common cores of proficiencies for beginners of English language learning. Later
on the design may eventually include a smorgasbord of learning sequences for learners
to select from, according to individual functional requirements. Some are likely
to be modular and additive; some of short, and others of long duration. I
venture to indicate here examples of some initial questions that may arise from
such a concept of demand-side functionality. - What are the situations in which English is to be used?
-
What are the language activities or environments in which the learners
will need to be engaged?
- What are the language functions, which
the learner will need to fulfil?
- What
are the notions or concepts, which the learner needs to be able to handle?
- What
will the learner need to be able to do with respect to each topic?
Of course such a design content
must be more complicated than ones in general use. This may well be as serious
constraint to effective implementations, if current modes of learning and
teaching are used. In addition, in many
countries, other constraints may exist. Among them are inadequate teacher proficiencies,
and lack of, or inappropriate, or even negative environmental reinforcement for
the learning of English. The former has
arisen not only from possibly ineffective teacher training curricula and methodologies,
but also from the very large number of teachers who have to be trained in a relatively
short period to meet the quantitative requirements of English learning and teaching.
The latter is an almost inevitable consequence of the social and cultural milieu,
which is devoid of suitable resources to support the reinforcement and application
of the initial learnings in English. Both aspects are likely to take a considerable
time to reach levels of adequacy. However,
the future of English language education is not too bleak. With the advancement
of information technology, one may look forward to the time, I believe, when technology
may be fully used to make up for the aforementioned and other inadequacies. We
already have language laboratories. Computers have been used widely to assist
in the learning and teaching process. It may not be too Utopian to predict that
one of these days, perhaps in a decade or so, something along the line of a Flight
Simulator may be available to learners of languages. In
the field of aviation, integral to pilot training, flight simulators are now essential
training instruments for all airlines, air forces and space programmes. A trainee
is totally immersed in simulated real-life situations – involving the techniques
as well as the atmosphere, the environment, which have psychological effects on
the learning and behavioural processes. Can
we then think ahead, in the “shape of things to come”, to the development of corresponding
English Language Simulators, which are computer-assisted, complete with
audios and visuals, and interactive, and so on? Currently shared-time and on-line
computer-assisted simulation or instruction is not merely possible but economically
feasible for language instruction. It can provide language scenarios for a vast
number of situations. It can accommodate a large variety of learning styles and
other learning attributes. It would be relatively easy to alter curriculum learning-teaching
sequences, as and when needed, in contrast to the inertia of traditional “classroom”
situations. Fortunately a substantial range
of software and hardware are already available in the market, and more will surely
appear. Some adaptations most certainly will be required. We
may have to focus first on teacher trainees, as facilitators of learning through
the new medium. This may be followed by the introduction to schools with language
laboratories that could be converted into computer assisted language-learning
simulators. Then these may become resource centres for a cluster of schools. Finally
all schools may have such facilities. We may move on to even community learning
centres to meet non-formal learning demands not only for English but for any other
foreign language as well, as needed by the general population. Indigenous
software and hardware development work must be encouraged, and it must take into
account local cultural and language-specific barriers and demand requirements,
vis-à-vis English learning and teaching, or of any other language. You
would, no doubt, recognize that all three important issues, that is, (I) multiple
proficiency; (II) inadequate teacher proficiencies; and (III) non-supportive social
and cultural milieu, may find solutions in the suggestion of the user-friendly,
computer-assisted, language learning simulators. This aspect alone, I believe,
would make this suggestion worthy of serious consideration. Since
the aforementioned would involve the creation of innovative and sustainable designs
for English language curricula, and learning sequences, may I seek your tolerance
regarding a few observations I would like to make in this respect. These observations
have been derived from being a concerned consumer, and not, as I said at the beginning,
from academic expertise. We have seen linguists
and linguistic experts designing classroom language teaching and learning materials
along lines conforming to their individual notions of linguistic structure and
theory. Sometimes one had the feeling that there is greater interest in promoting
those notions than in researching careful language learning effectiveness in pupils.
We have seen over-emphases on language as recurring structural units, with syntax
largely ignored. Such designs do not take into account the vital environment or
scenario for the language use, which the simulation situations require. The
development of learning sequences may best be done, I believe, by active practitioners
in the applied field of teaching English, and not by theoreticians alone who may
tend to adhere to one aspect of language learning with which each theoretician
has best equipped herself or himself. Language communication is a behavioural
phenomenon in a real World setting, and not necessarily dependent solely on analyses
of language structures. The excessive devotion to grammatically correct linguistic
competence demands high skills abstraction totally beyond functional operational
skills of learners, in addition to being irrelevant to the kinds of language demands
I outlined earlier. The point about a simulation
intervention is that language speakers and writers do not simply generate sentences
in the abstract, but in context. Language is for receiving and transmitting information
in context, across the wide scope spectrum, as fitting each particular
position in the spectrum. All else, including the nicety, grammaticality and elegance
of speech, can become subsidiary to this pragmatic use, and mere tools for the
purpose, not ends in themselves. None of
us can guess what the English language will be like in a hundred years’ time.
What appears quite certain, however, is that information technology and knowledge
growth is moving ahead at a phenomenal speed. It seems unlikely that any other
language will supercede the English language as a World medium of communication,
given its present head-start. If a nation is to keep up-to-date with developments
in all spheres of knowledge, particularly in scientific and technological research,
it has to be able to have an instant access to the World “knowledge bank:, through
electronic and other means. This requires proficiencies in English, which is the
dominant World language for International communication. The English language
will continue to be the major vehicle that drives us along the information superhighway.
The development of a nation, therefore, will make it imperative for the people
to learn and master the English language. Hence the education system-must seeks
ways to improve both the quantitative and qualitative aspects of this learning
area. We have also to recognize that societies
are organizing rapidly, having as focal points people who can innovate,
who can increase productivity, who can maintain sustainable development, through
knowledge. The co-ordinating and activating new economic nucleus is knowledge,
the resource with the highest value, the resource that has the highest “value
adding” potential. The traditional triad of capital, labour and materials as raw
components of progress is being replaced by knowledge in the new information era
– knowledge held and used by people, knowledge that people in countries must have
access to, acquire and expand, so that the countries themselves may progress.
Not preparing for this may even be called suicidal for our countries. The quickest
access may well be largely through the English language. Let
us pool our efforts and ideas together to make it easy, enjoyable and profitable
for our people to learn and to want to learn English and acquire sufficient proficiencies
to make it truly a tool for communication in a World without frontiers, and a
tool for the uninterrupted development of our countries beyond the year 2000. Let
us also remember that predicting the “shape of things to come” is exciting. But
shaping the shape of things to come is even more gratifying.
Keynote
address delivered by Mr. Anand Panyarachun
at
the 1995 Annual ASAIHL Seminar on
“Higher Education for All”
at
Bangkok University, Bangkok
June 22, 1995 Higher
Education and an Enterprising Society Mr. President, Ladies
and Gentlemen, It is a pleasure and an
honour for me to have been invited by the organizers of the 1995 Annual ASAIHL
Seminar to deliver an address at this distinguished gathering. The
theme of this Seminar, that is, Higher Education for All, is of particular interest
to me. Although I am not an educationalist by training or by profession, yet on
several occasions I have professed my personal interest and concern in education
in its broader connotation. Since education enters the life of everyone of us,
we should pool our ideas and efforts to ensure its quality and relevance. When
we speak about Higher Education for All, the term “for all” appears to focus on
the quantitative aspect – whether it be the rather long-term prospect of ensuring
that every person receives higher education, or whether it be the more feasible
prospect of making higher education accessible to all by providing equal opportunities
to receive high education, through various modes of delivery and over various
flexible spans of time. The factors contributing to achieving these aims are amply
covered by the topical papers to be presented and discussed in this Seminar in
the next few days. I have therefore opted to focus the attention of this audience
on two questions which have been of great concern to me, and these are: firstly,
what kind of higher education should be accessible to all who venture into higher
education? And secondly, what kind of higher education for what kind of society?
I would like to share with you my own thoughts and concerns, hoping that through
our co-operative endeavour we will arrive at some practical strategies for the
benefit of our future generations. It is never too early to debate and act on
educational reform and renewal, since in education, the future is now. There is
no end to the need for reform in education, since to-day’s future will most likely
not be tomorrow’s. The last decades have
witnessed an astonishing growth and reform in higher education. Yet higher education
is facing a crisis both in terms of quantity and quality. The current national
and international efforts to focus world attention on Basic Education for All
means that eventually there will be more students wishing to go on to secondary
education, and sooner or later the pressure will be on higher education. According
to UNESCO’s global projections, the growth
of the number of students in higher education will accelerate – from 65 million
in 1991 to 79 million in the year 2000, 97 million in 2015 and 100 million in
2025. The projected enrolment in higher education in the developing countries
also shows a strong increase – from 30 million in 1991 to 40 million in the year
2000, 50 million in 2015 and 54 million by 2025. To cope with this quantitative
aspect, let alone quality and relevance, the higher education system itself must
be innovative in its search for strategies and actions with an eye on both the
near and distant future in which the young intellectuals will live a meaningful
life. Traditionally, education has been
viewed in the context of social, economic and cultural development of a nation.
However, in recent times, with the aspiration towards a “learning society”, education
is in itself a contribution to the development of a society. Thus, independent
of the earlier definition, opportunities have to be provided to individuals to
extend their learning, if necessary, purely in terms of their own personal interests. Higher
education, whether it be confined to a selected few, or whether it be for all,
should be given and received with a definite purpose, which entails careful planning
in setting goals and objectives. Generally speaking, much educational planning
has not given adequate weightage to educational goals, or the set goals are not
taken into full account in evaluating the process that produces the products of
higher education, or in evaluating the products of higher education. The planning
also frequently appears to focus mainly on projecting the present trends into
the future time-frame, and tends to give more attention to inadequacies and shortfalls
of the past, rather than exploring the needs of the future. In other words, it
is current crisis-oriented, or focused on finishing the unfinished tasks. In recent
years, some efforts have been made to involve non-educationalists in forecasting
future requirements and future goals and aims. The translation of goals into strategies
and contents is also a most vital undertaking. Like
many countries in the region, Thailand, too, has defined its goals for the education
system, the most recent being the Royal Command Announcement of 10 June 1992.
In this Announcement, it is stated that the goals of education emphasize balanced
and harmonious development in the individual in four aspects, namely, wisdom,
spiritual development, physical development, and social development. Taking
two of these goals as examples, under “Wisdom”, the description states: “WISDOM.
An educated person should attain wisdom: the ability to understand causality;
to differentiate between virtue and vice, right and wrong, and good and malicious
deeds on the basis of truth, to intelligently solve problems; to recognize and
understand rapid and various changes; to be creative and possess an inquiring
mind to keep up with technological progress;
to appreciate Thai wisdom and culture; and to wisely choose modern knowledge and
exogenous culture for adoption by Thai society”. And under “Social Development”,
the description states: “SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT. An educated person should possess
proper social behaviours at work and in the family, organizations and society;
to extend help unselfishly; to possess communication skills and ability; to use
proper Thai as well as foreign languages for communication purposes; to preserve
the Thai national identify and culture; to recognize and observe one’s own and
others’ rights and freedom under the democratic form of government with the King
as Head of State; to be able to utilize and conserve natural resources and to
create a proper environment; and to contribute towards enhancing an appropriate
role of the nation in the world community”. Since
these are national goals, it is pertinent to ask: in what way are these being
manifested in higher education so that the young intellectuals of the nation may
be helped to develop them? In what way are the various learning areas and faculties
in higher education, the Departments of Chemistry or Mathematics, or History or
Languages, or Engineering or Medicine, and indeed every one of them, assisting
in helping the young intellectuals to develop in respect of such goals? If little
conscious effort has been focused on this issue to date, should it not become
a priority concern in designing learning strategies and sequences in all areas
of higher education? A related question
is whether higher education institutions themselves should manifest in their “way
of life” these same goals, not only because these goals are nationally important,
but also to create an atmosphere and an environment in which the goals are practised
in real life. To take one goal, social
development; the extension services of the Faculties of Agriculture in many countries
reach out, with their academic and developmental resources, to the masses of the
nation. What would corresponding extension services be for the Faculties of Law
and Humanities, or Fine Arts? Is this an important dimension in higher education? Educational
reform and renewal, at any level, must be conceived in the perspectives of multi-dimensional,
multi-variable and long-term developments in society. Education, and more so higher
education, should not merely respond to society’s needs; it should also be an
effective change agent in re-shaping the present, generating new possibilities,
and strengthening capacities to make choices as to what kind of “preferred” future
we want, out of a number of possible futures. In
order to form an idea of the kind of society that would likely to be equipped
to face the challenges of the future, I venture to predict a future global scenario,
in full realization that predictions, and more so predictions of human activities,
can never be absolutely accurate. However, a broad charting of future paths may
be useful in preparing for eventualities whenever they occur. This
century has witnessed exceptional human achievements in knowledge, as well as
amazing discoveries on how to discover knowledge. At the same time the shifting
of social, cultural and political imperatives, coupled with cumulative growing
problems as a result of contemporary technologizing civilization, has posed a
heavy burden on mankind. The knowledge explosion, the development quest, the emerging
interdependent world, the problems of population and environment, and the crisis
of human values are relentlessly increasing their demands for societies to be
active participants in the choosing and fashioning of the future. Unless and until
we equip ourselves in advance to cope with the rapid socio-economic and technological
advancements, as also the realities of different rates of advancements, for example
those of science and technology versus those of socio-cultural developments, we
may find ourselves lagging behind, marginalized, and passively letting circumstances
overwhelm us. What, then, could ensure
our survival in the future? Knowledge alone will not suffice, and this is expressed
in a Thai saying, “Steeped in knowledge, but unable to save oneself”.
Technical skills acquired to-day may become obsolete in a few years’ time, due
to the rapid scientific and technological advances. In
the vastly changing scenarios of the world, several factors seem to point at a
trend towards shifting more and more responsibility onto the shoulder of the individual.
The impact of the “mass” concept seems to be less significant. For
example, adverse conditions in many countries continue to worsen the impact of
unemployment on individuals, making it imperative for each man and woman to have
to vie for jobs by showing characteristics such as initiative, creativity, leadership
and adaptability. Likewise, increasing self-employment especially assisted by
modern electronic technology asserts great demands on the part of individuals.
In business companies, top-down management is giving way to increased involvement
of all workers, even at the decision making level, in order to make full use of
new ideas, creativity, and commitment of large numbers of individuals to meet
the exigencies of the market. Even the media is being demassified, as evidenced
by the major mass newspapers and magazines losing ground to smaller and mini-magazines
catering to special interest groups, with individual writers and reporters initiating
new approaches and communication styles to attract individual readers who can
now afford to be more selective in their choice of reading materials. Another
obvious example of this “individual trend” is the advances made in the electronic
media, which will continue unabated, making it necessary for each of us to learn
and be familiar with, say, bank electronic networks, self-service supermarkets,
computer link-up for home-based duties, computer-assisted means to cater to individual
specifications. Taking these trends into
account, it may well be that future generations of society will have to develop
proficiencies that may be called “enterprise proficiencies”, the
term “enterprise” here having the broader connotation and not merely confined
to entrepreneurship or money-making activities. Personal qualities and abilities
such as initiative, creativity, risk taking, self-confidence, team spirit, leadership,
which enable the individual to be better at thinking, analysing, solving problems,
taking action and corrective measures, are not subject areas to be taught in schools
or universities, but can be captured through the learning process. University
students, being at a mature age for divergent thinking and intellectual independence,
are in a position to develop these proficiencies which ultimately will improve
their quality of life and ensure their place in an enterprising society which
is constantly seeking new ways to improve the future of mankind. The
trends as presented so far offer challenging conditions in which higher education
has to rethink its role and mission, particularly in view of the fact that higher
education is in the very forefront of the intellectual growth of a nation. The
wards of higher education are the young intellectuals of a nation. The growing
interdependence of the world and the will to preserve national identity and heritage
require concerted action to make education assume greater responsibility towards
sustainable human development. In this context, higher education is undoubtedly
in the best position to develop a quality workforce and a cadre of future decision
makers with the needed proficiencies to survive in a complex and rapidly changing
society. An enterprising society must search
for positive ways to cope with the dichotomies in the world to-day, that is to
say, for example, international co-operation versus international competition;
economic development versus social development; industrial progress versus environmental
sustainability. These dichotomies must be recognized as realities of life, existing
side by side in this world of ours, and efforts must be made to make one complementary
to the other, instead of trying to focus attention on one at the expense of the
other. One of the roles of higher education is to help future generations to accommodate
these dichotomies constructively. Even higher education itself is faced with dichotomies
of its own, such as increasing participation while trying to avoid surpluses of
graduates; achieving high quality fundamental research while having to respond
to the current needs of industry and community. Now
that we have identified and predicted some of the trends and challenges of the
future scenario, it is for us all, and educationalists in particular, to gear
higher education towards the desired goal. Certainly higher education cannot be
considered in isolation from the entire education system. Society building must
start with the young child. But it is specially the graduate who is at the terminal
level of formal education who must be equipped with intellectual tools and characteristics
to learn how to learn that is, lifelong education must be one of the set objectives.
An enterprising individual should, after leaving the portals of a school or a
university, possess a certain mind set and be able to seek further sources of
knowledge and information to improve his or her existence, and not remain stagnant
and be a prey to obsolescence. A young intellectual must learn how to develop
penetrating mindfulness, critical thinking, discover causality; how to solve problems,
recognize patterns in the observed data; identify and define them, consider alternative
solutions, select the most feasible solution; develop proficiencies for real-life
problem solving, plan and monitor actions,
and evaluate result for future planning cycles. No doubt those who are in or exposed
to Buddhist traditions of mental development will recognize that aspects like
critical thinking, penetrating mindfulness, dependent origination, now considered
highly modern “pedagogy”, had been integral to Buddhism for over 2,500 years.
It may well be appropriate to ask whether it is the duty of higher education to
enlighten the young intellectuals of parallelisms between the ancient and the
modern such as those which exist in our cultures. In so doing, the young intellectuals
may be helped to place their modern learning in the stream of cultural consciousness.
Similar parallelisms between the ancient and the modern surely exist in other
religious and cultural frameworks as well. How
can learners in a higher education institution be facilitated to be enterprising?
The key word here is “to facilitate”, which provides opportunities for the development
of divergent thinking on the part of the learners themselves. In a formal type
of higher education institution, the academic staff should no longer be only “lecturing”
to students; rather, they should encourage in the young mind the habit of learning
to learn and learning to do, preferably using real-life situations in the learning
process. The staff is in fact the role model in acting as facilitator, so that
the young intellectuals can gain self-reliance and self-confidence to face the
vicissitudes of life on their own later on. In
the era of globalization, higher education should also give full attention to
enhanced internationalization, in its content and in its functions. A nation can
no longer afford to remain in isolation, and the young must benefit in their formative
years from an education system that enables them to come into contact, either
directly or indirectly, with the world at large. In this context, the study of
international languages and world history will be an asset in promoting inter-cultural
understanding and mutual respect among nations. The study of a second language
should start as early as possible, and should continue throughout the school and
college years. A good command of at least one international language would ensure
that a nation is not in a disadvantaged position in international dealings and
contacts. Moreover, the knowledge of an international language, and English in
particular, provides greater opportunities for acquiring first-hand and latest
information on new discoveries, new ideas and latest research findings which may
be beneficial for one’s own use and reference. It enables a person to have instant
access to an international network of information, thanks to the electronic media
and the information super-highways which ensure information flow throughout every
corner of the globe. The internationalization
of higher education can also be effected through staff and student mobility. This
should be promoted as a two-way traffic, in the sense that every country has something
to give and something to receive, as equal partners, and not merely from South
to North, as is regrettably still the case in many developing countries. Scholarships,
fellowships and exchange programmes should benefit participants on both sides.
In this regard, it may be mentioned that the dilemma of the “brain drain” is not
exclusively caused by professional mobility, but also by other factors such as
lack of opportunities for professional growth in one’s own country, or by political,
economic and social issues in one’s homeland. Having made the point about “internationalization”,
it is perhaps appropriate to recall, in this context, one of the goals of education
stated in Thailand’s National Scheme of Education of 1992, that is “wisdom”,
and I quote: “to appreciate Thai wisdom and culture, and to wisely choose modern
knowledge and exogeneous culture for adoption by Thai society”. Such goal is undoubtedly
of value to all countries in the region. The question is: Who would facilitate
the development of these proficiencies of wisdom in the young intellectuals? And
in what way? Against the rising tide of
dehumanizing forces, it is imperative that people must preserve and strengthen
personal cultural and social values. Apart from those nurtured by the home, values
are developed in the young mind by the educational environment. In the development
of a whole personality, knowledge and skills must be processed through moral and
ethical sensibility, cultural understanding, humaneness and compassion. An enterprising
society must be a caring society – a society which sets certain moral and ethical
standards for its members, giving a sense of dignity in showing respect and responsibility
for others, and working towards the common good of a nation, and of mankind. Higher
education is at the frontier of knowledge, and is the producer of young intellectuals
of a nation and its future decision makers; hence it is in the best position to
respond to the intellectual aspiration of the individuals to learn, as well as
to contribute towards the creation of an enterprising society.
Technology
Management Education
and Economic Development by
Mr. Anand Panyarachun
at Dusit Laguna Hotel, Phuket
12 March
1995 Optional Intro: Let
me first welcome all of you, particularly those who have traveled from overseas,
to Phuket. As one looks at the beautiful scenery and inhales in clean, balmy air,
I support a question about this week-long executive program must arise: Is this
work or vacation? Looking at the packed
schedule ahead, I am afraid I must be the one to inform you that it really will
be work. I am assured by the organizers that Phuket was chosen so that the clean
air would stimulate clearer thinking and the wonderful views would encourage far-sighted
vision of what lies ahead for business in the region. I
hope this is true – at least to some extent – because we do have a serious purpose;
upgrading the skills and thinking of executives who will have much to say about
how well Thailand and the region develop in the years ahead. With rapid technological
change and worldwide competition, economic development increasingly depends on
the ability to learn. The businesses that flourish are those that are best able
to acquire develop and use knowledge that global markets need. So economic development
and business progress is intimately and necessarily involved in the learning process.
This broader understanding of education and business was the major reason that
I recently accepted the chairmanship of the Kenan Institute of Asia. The
Institute is, in fact, carrying out a number of interesting and valuable tasks
in this region: - providing innovative
ideas for infrastructure development, such as the Global Transpark, which is being
planned for U Taphao
- arranging research opportunities for top Thai, Indonesian and Vietnamese academics
through the CitiBank Fellowship Program
- carrying out business research in Southeast Asia that will
help enlarge our understanding of the success of some of the best regional firms
- Building business linkages through the US-Thailand Development
Partnership that can help address serious environmental and health problems in
Thailand
- Bringing
young MBA interns to work in the region.
At
the core of each of these activities is the concern for education – improving
the knowledge and skills of our people so the mistakes of the past will not be
repeated and the knowledge that leads to success will not be forgotten. That
is very much the purpose of this week. Continuing
education is our defense against being overwhelmed by the pace or rapid and puzzling
change. Nowhere has the pace of change
been greater than in the role that technology plays in our lives and in our businesses. During
my lifetime, the development experience has moved from dependence on resource
advantages to labor-cost advantages to technology-advantages. In fact low-cost
labor was only the beginning of the “East Asian Miracle.” The major part of that
continuing movement is a miracle of technologies – their acquisition, their application
and their development. As a result, nations that were formerly on the periphery
of the world economy are today among the most interesting players shaping the
future. Technology leadership may be important to success in the world economy
of today; it will be absolutely essential to success in the 21st century. The
issues of technology acquisition are of critical importance to Southeast Asia
because we began to industrialize later than the West and Japan. We must use the
technology of others in order to begin to develop technology of our own. Of course,
we must invest more in research and development. Our companies and our economies
will not prosper in the 21st century without these investments and
they must begin now. To make these investments most effective, however, we must
buy into the knowledge that has been built up by others. Isaac
Newton said “I have only been able to see so far because I have stood on the shoulders
of giants.” So should we stand on the shoulders of the technological
giants of business? However, we must not
feel that we are a supplicant seeking aid from the owners of technology. Asian
companies have the market knowledge, the distribution channels and the business
systems in place that are required to bring a new technology to the local market. This
knowledge is a part of the intellectual capital that is needed just as much as
technological capability if an enterprise is going to succeed. The common phrase
“technology transfer” misses the mutual benefits of this process,
which should actually be called “technology partnering” or “technology
cooperation.” The technology holders must
learn to partner, with us in Southeast Asia in order to share in the growth of
our domestic markets and, ultimately, to share in the benefits of the improvements
that we can bring to the technology. We must learn how to partner with foreign
firms in order to access the right technology and move up the technology scale. This
is not a zero sum game. A technology cooperation agreement that fails for the
Asian partner, usually fails for the Western partner as well.
The program that we are inaugurating today addresses issues
that are central to world business competition. Over the next week you will work
through the issues that will characterize much of our industrial future. We will
examine how foreign technologies should enter in the repertoire of our own activities
and competencies. From those issues we will evolve general strategies and specific
skills that will enable our companies to succeed in achieving technology leadership. In
Southeast Asia, over the past decade, we have an abundance of examples of local-foreign
partnership that were built around technology; some successful and others not.
The development of Thai Airways International has been a successful melding of
foreign hardware with traditional Thai service. The establishment of Malaysia
as the world’s leading exporter of electronic components is a tribute to the effective
partnership of American and Japanese technology with local worker skills and management
efforts. The excellence of Singapore’s high-tech port facilities was born of a
far-sighted government strategy, effective management, Western technology and
a capable work force drawn from many of the countries of Southeast Asia. The launch
of Indonesia’s Pallapa satellites more than two decades ago combined an appreciation
of technology and an understanding of the peculiar needs of an expansive archipelago
nation. Those satellites have not only
helped the country achieve its current rapid rate of development, but they have
also helped assure the successful political integration of scattered islands with
differing languages and cultures. There are many other examples. All
of this attests to the power of technology in developing our nations and our people. It
is important to recognize, however, that few of these “technological” experiences
are primarily concerned with hardware. One of the defining characteristics of
late-20th century technology is that it is increasingly “soft”
in nature. It is the software that drives the hardware. It is the “bytes”
that are increasingly more important than the “bolts.” It
is the management skills, such as those you possess and those you will acquire
this week, that ultimately determine success or failure. In
the past, to speak of technology was to speak of engineering. Today, to speak
of technology is increasingly to speak of management. A giant like IBM does not
falter because of its technology, but because of mismanagement of that technology. The
management of technological change is significantly different than the management
of other, more traditional activities. The management of technology is the management
of ideas, of concepts, and the management of the people and processes capable
of developing those ideas. It is the management of intellectual rather than real
property. It is a world where the key assets of the firm are in the heads of the
workers and managers; where management by authority is supplanted by management
by knowledge. It is where knowing why something works the way it does is more
important than knowing how it works. It is a world where knowing how to learn
may be the most important knowledge of all. It
is fashionable today in management circles to talk of reinvention. The idea is
a powerful one. It claims that if you are behind a well-established market leader,
you will probably never catch-up by imitating them. You will only fall further
behind as they continue to move ahead to new agendas, while you pursue the old
ones. What you must do to leap over the leaders is to reinvent the business; change
the rules of engagement; negate the traditional advantages. The
genius of the Apple computer was not in its technology. The main frames of IBM
were far more technologically advanced. The genius was in reworking the technology
to suit the needs of people for independence, low cost and ease of operation. The
increasing need for reinvention is of vital importance to the Newly Industrializing
Economies. We are not doomed to forever follow in the tracks of
the fore-runners. The new technologies of the future and the staggering pace of
their development give us the power, if we are clever, to leap over the old, established
leaders; to reinvent the basis for competition. To do that, however, we must first
get into the technology game. We must access technologies from abroad that we
do not already have and partner with foreign firms to acquire the competitive
knowledge that we need. We must understand
the deeper workings of the technology, and perhaps more important, understand
the underlying needs of the people who will use it. Companies
around the world have large inventories of innovative devices and processes. This
technology, however, is worthless until it can be connected to human needs. So
an adhesive invented by 3M that didn’t stick very well seemed like a failure until
it was converted into the yellow “Post-it” notes that are now stuck everywhere. Clearly
two kinds of knowledge are needed – the understanding of the technology and the
understanding of how to make that technology serve human needs. Despite
the increasing recognition that both of these kinds of intellectual capital are
essential to future financial results, companies have often failed to value it
sufficiently or manage it properly. That is a problem for those companies and
an opportunity for those who need to play “catch-up.” Dow
Chemical for instance found that of its 29,000 patents, less than half were being
utilized. Dow concluded, however, that the company owned intellectual assets that
went much beyond patents – technical expertise, trade secrets, and market knowledge
and distribution systems. The failure of companies to identify and value their
intellectual assets properly will be exposed in any technology cooperation agreement. Whether
we work for Western companies with high technology or Asian companies with high
aspirations, we cannot assume that technology in and of itself will lead to success.
It is effective acquisition and proper management of all sorts of intellectual
assets that provide competitive advantage. A
recent study in Thailand examined the effects of technology acquisition on 20
different companies in a variety of energy-intensive industries. The study found
that the major impact of the technological cooperation did not result from the
main investment, but from incremental efforts to improve production procedures
and systems associated with the new technology. The study found that these associated
improvements did not take place in every company. These changes took place only
in those firms where there were organized structures of knowledge and resources
dedicated to absorbing a wide range of inputs from the technology provider. The
most successful technology cooperation had little to do with technology in and
of itself, but much to do with the managerial capabilities of the firms involved. So
technology cooperation must be far more than moving machinery or gadgets to a
new location. It requires investment of time and resources, not just in the technology
itself, but in acquiring the necessary knowledge that goes with it. It implies
a genuine partnership: combining intellectual assets, transferring managerial
techniques, re-training people and possibly re-organizing our businesses. The
goal should not be technology, but capability. In
the next week you will focus on negotiation as the core of a process that delivers
that capability by creating new combinations of intellectual assets. Negotiation
is far from all of the process, but it sets the framework and often the tone for
what must follow. If it is done poorly, it will be difficult to avert failure.
Clearly it is not an easy process. Not only are there difficulties in valuing
the assets that each side provides, there are barriers of distance, culture and
information. In areas of new technology
development and technology transfer, Asian managers often face difficulties in
working out where they should focus. They often find out later to their disadvantage
that issues they thought were insignificant turn out to be very expensive. The
process should begin with an understanding of the motivations of each side. The
technology seeker must understand why his company needs the technology. This requires
an examination of the company’s current capabilities, its aspirations, its market
and its competitors. This is essential to deciding on the scope, extent and costs
of the technology cooperation arrangement. The seeker must also find out as much
as possible about the motivations of the provider. There
is a tendency to think the technology provider has all the cards. The seeker must
count his own cards: the technology owner’s need for the marketing, production
and adaptation abilities that the seeker can provide. The
negotiation must specify all the elements of the technology to be acquired. It
is essential that those broader intellectual assets we noted earlier be specifically
included. It is usually to the advantage of both parties to have an explicit process
to transfer such assets as scientific understanding of the technology, technical
expertise in its manufacture, systems for maintenance and repair, ongoing training
and effective marketing approaches. All
of this is actually based on people. It therefore requires such people-based mechanisms
as conferences, seminars, open communication and opportunities for informal inter-action.
Typically, these are overlooked or under-estimated. Much
of negotiation concentrates on the “what” to negotiate. However, it is equally
important for Asian managers and their Western counterparts to understand the
“how” of negotiation; that is, how culture, style and strategy influence the negotiation
outcome. The Technology Leadership Program
therefore will go beyond lectures and develop a negotiation simulation that will
test skills and strategies. The beauty of the simulation is that you will get
not only expert guidance and review, but that you can’t drive your company into
bankruptcy while you learn. Having been
through some rather difficult negotiations myself, I can tell you that negotiating
talent is only a small part of the formula for success. You have to work hard
to develop the information needed to map out a clear strategy. You have to see
the process from the point of view of your partner, but you also need the determination
to stick with your own strategy and achieve your objectives. As
a senior manager you have to bring all the elements together into a cohesive strategy
and then you have to build the teams and make the decisions that make things happen.
Doing this in the cross-cultural context that is typical of technology cooperation
adds new dimensions to the challenge. I am sure you will learn a great deal from
your teachers, but you will also learn from each other. Your
tasks are genuinely important – to a great extent the future of your companies
will depend on you and your ability to move towards technology leadership. The
development of our economies, in turn, depends on corporate abilities to develop
technology and connect it to human needs. But
don’t completely forget the beauty of our surroundings. Enjoy the course – both
the executive course, and perhaps even the golf course, enjoy Phuket and return
home to enjoy great success.
Remarks by Mr. Anand
Panyarachun at the Morning Convocation, University
of Victoria
Victoria, B. C., Canada
November 27, 1993 It
is highly significant that of the three recipients of honorary degrees of the
University of Victoria in 1993, two come from a region which is now commonly referred
to as East Asia. Dr. Chen-Fu Koo from Taiwan is a much – respected figure not
only in his own country but is well – known all over the region. His name is synonymous
with the remarkable progress and development of Taiwan. His consistently wise
counsel to the government played an important role in enabling Taiwan to achieve
its present status. I myself also come
from that region. Admittedly, Thailand’s record in the past decades cannot match
that of Taiwan, but gradually she, along with other Southeast Asian countries,
is travelling towards the same destination. East
Asia stands out among developing regions for its spectacular economic growth and
impressive reduction of poverty. But is also stands out as a region marred by
degradation of air, water, land and biodiversity. If not corrected in time, this
encroachment on the environment will undo the tremendous progress in human development
that the region has achieved. It will make long – term economic growth unsustainable
in East Asia. Global Changes Much
of the economic success of East Asia has to a large extent been a result of the
region’s commitment to the role of education in development. The long-term returns
of the region’s educational investments are beginning to bear fruit. If we are
to continue to move forward, we must ensure that education in East Asia and elsewhere
always responds more readily to the changes taking place around us. There
have been many in recent years:
- the end of the cold war has altered the types of problems mankind is dealing
with to include more economic and social issues;
- improved information and transportation flows have increased
the amount of ideas and goods available to address these new questions; and
- the increasing integration of the world economy has
given us more choices and options, increasing the complexity of the environment
in which these questions are both posed and answered. Actions we take increasingly
“spill over” to affect other countries or sectors.
All
these developments have radically changed the way we look at the World, and education
must equip us with new tools with which to approach the challenges. Promoting
development means promoting responsibility. This is the more traditional, and
time-tested, role of education in development. Education plays a crucial role
in creating not only personal development, but also social progress. One
example of this increased consciousness is the ability to gain a better understanding
of politics and democracy and of events beyond one’s own locality. Another
example of increased consciousness is looking at how industrialization and the
economic development process can be pursued to truly benefit all members of our
society. With such an awareness, we will be able to address income and regional
disparities that often occur along with economic development, and which can prevent
the benefits of development from reaching those who need it most. True
education not only creates awareness of technological possibilities, but also
develops a moral consciousness to manage the development of those possibilities. Expanded
information and technology flows require that we prepare our people to be a part
of the information age; expanded training in electronic data processing and communications
technology are necessary for such countries as Thailand to maintain the economic
progress it has experienced in recent years. Education
and Regional Development A recent study
of the Asian Development Bank on regional cooperation in the education sphere
concluded that there is a strong link between “education and training on the one
hand, and productivity and income on the other”. At
a most basic level, education, especially of women who have been a neglected target
group, has a crucial effect on poverty, health and nutrition, and can drastically
improve basic standards of living. While
improvements in primary education are seen as most likely to yield the highest
returns, technical and vocational education, especially management training, is
singled out by the Bank as the most important way to help alleviate serious skills
shortages in certain parts of the region. Focused training can promote such sub-regional
sectoral efforts as development of tourism and of new technologies. Consultations
with regional governments showed they feel that coordinating at least some elements
of higher education, especially research capabilities, on a sub-regional basis
will increase the region’s knowledge base and ensure that skills crucial to economic
development are available from among the population of the region. Challenges The
following are the challenges as I see them: First,
to promote the internationalization of education by forging more International
linkages between educational institutions. Regional information networking, faculty
and student exchanges, and International cooperation on research, curriculum development
and training at both graduate and undergraduate levels are ways to further Internationalize
education. Second, to encourage educational
institutions to continuously enhance the relevance of educational curricula to
respond to evolving economic, political, and social conditions and to improve
linkages between the education sector and other sectors in the economy. All areas
of knowledge must be approached by being placed within a comprehensive international
context. Third, to use education as a tool
to promote social progress of our nations and increase mutual trust and understanding.
World leaders can make peace and war, but it takes ordinary citizens to create
world understanding. Proper education can encourage social responsibility, individually
and collectively, and an awareness of global perspectives and common global problems
that can override parochial concerns. In
all these areas, the University of Victoria has consistently taken the initiative
to pursue courses of action, which are designed to meet these challenges. I
wish you success in your commitments to the future.
Keynote
Address by Mr. Anand
Panyarachun
Chairman, Saha Union Group of Companies
on
“International Cooperation
Among Higher Education Institutions”
Kasetsart
Golden Jubilee International Convention
Kasetsart University, Bangkok
August
10, 1993 Distinguished Participants,
Ladies & Gentlemen: I am honoured to
be with you at this Golden Jubilee Convention marking Kasetsart University’s 50
years of excellence in serving our country and bringing together such an impressive
group of international and domestic educators. In
my term as Prime Minister, I would like to think that I played a role in stressing
the emphasis that must be placed on education, which should be high on the agenda
of all future governments. I am reminded of a talk I gave last August to the Foreign
Chambers of Commerce, where I stated:
“A better educated population will be the key to our nation’s efforts to tackle
the challenges of the future. Higher levels of education will lead to greater
political awareness, reduce differences in economic opportunities between urban
and rural areas, and the enhanced competitiveness of the Thai economy.” As
a private citizen, I continue to believe strongly in that statement. Education
is the key upon which the development of the Thai society rests, and, indeed,
the development of the entire Southeast Asian region. In
my talk today, I shall first present my views on the changing role of education
in the world economy. Then, closer to home, I shall put forward some thoughts
on the crucial role of education in the regional context – both for ASEAN and
for the emerging nations of Indochina, Myanmar, and southern China. Lastly, I
shall conclude with some ideas on the challenges to be considered and addressed
by this prestigious international convention.
- Role of Education in a Changing Global Economy
To
play a vital role in shaping society, education must continuously respond to the
changes taking place around us. There have
been many in recent years: - The
end of the cold war has altered the types of problems mankind is dealing with
to include more economic and social issues;
- Improved information and transportation flows have increased
the amount of ideas and goods available to answer these new questions; and
- The increasing integration of the world economy has given
us more choices and options, increasing the complexity of the environment in which
these questions are both posed and answered. Actions we take increasingly “spill
over” to affect other countries or sectors.
All
these developments have radically changed the way we look at the world, and education
must equip us with new tools with which to approach this increasingly challenging
environment. Of course, the traditional
role that education has played in helping our country develop must not be overlooked. Successful
economic development rests on the development of each person to his fullest intellectual
and moral ability. A tall order, but one I am sure you are capable of filling. Promoting
development means promoting responsibility. This is the more traditional, and
time-tested, role of education in development. Education plays a crucial role
in creating not only personal, but social maturity. One
example of this increased consciousness is the ability to gain a better understanding
of politics and democracy and of events beyond one’s village or town of birth.
This will be accompanied by increasing political development and a strengthening
of society’s institutions to achieve true social maturity. Another
example of increased consciousness is looking at how industrialization and the
economic development process can be truly useful and productive for all members
of our society. With such an awareness, we will be able to address income and
regional disparities that often occur along with economic development, and which
can prevent the benefits of development from reaching those who need it most. True
education not only creates awareness of technological possibilities, but develops
a moral consciousness to control the development of these possibilities. We
should never forget to pay attention to developing people into socially responsible
citizens with the same intensity we give to developing new technologies. This
moral component of education is one of the foundations of the Thai nation and
a most valuable asset of traditional methods of education that we must preserve
as we expand our horizons to meet the new challenges of today’s changing world.
Building upon this solid base, education
must now evolve to meet these new challenges. Expanded
information and technology flows require that we prepare our people to be a part
of the information age; expanded training in computers and communications
technology are necessary for such countries as Thailand to maintain the economic
progress it has experienced in recent years. I
am sure you are also well aware that the main client for university graduates
has substantially shifted from the civil service to the private sector. This means
that more effective inter-facing between universities and the private sector is
essential and we must develop innovative programs to ensure this is achieved.
Industry/academic cooperation can ensure that research is quickly applied to serve
the general public. Another new challenge
we must meet is the ability to support sustainable development.
Environmental awareness, energy efficiency, and conservation technology
must all be addressed to stop the depletion of our natural resources. Our development
must be built upon sustainability of these resources, or we will end up paying
more later for their rehabilitation. People are but one of our available resources,
and education should teach us that improvement of our own condition is dependent
on the improvement of our environment. Environmental
cooperation is one example of how countries can cooperate to pool talented manpower
to address common global problems. As the world gets smaller, we must educate
people to understand their neighbors and their neighbor’s concerns, to be more
tolerant. Cultural understanding and a global perspective come through awareness
of other societies, and universities must increase this awareness. Only by achieving
such an understanding can Thailand truly function in today’s global economy and
participate in the fight to solve our global problems. At
the same time, social responsibility can be promoted by increasing awareness of
those less privileged within our society. Universities must continue efforts to
extend themselves to the community to ensure that new ideas reach all levels of
the population. Kasetsart began pioneering
such an outreach approach some 40 years ago, offering short courses during holidays,
off-hours, and weekends to small entrepreneurs, farmers, and to mothers at home.
Such efforts should be expanded to ensure that those who cannot attend university
full-time can still profit from our centers of higher learning. The
evolution of education is fundamental to our societal development. While traditional
roles must always remain, evolve, and be improved, efforts to implement the newer
roles education is being called upon to fill must be given top priority.
- Education and Regional Development
In
Southeast Asia, and the areas around Thailand in particular, there exists significant
scope for education to play a key role in promoting economic development in the
emerging nations of Indochina, Myanmar, and southern China. Thailand’s recent
economic prosperity has caused us to transform our role in some cases to that
of a donor, instead of a recipient, country. A
recent study of the Asian Development Bank on regional cooperation in the education
sphere concluded that there is a strong link between “education and training on
the one hand, and productivity and income on the others.” At
a most basic level, education, especially of women, has a crucial effect on poverty,
health and nutrition, and can drastically improve basic standards of living. While
improvement in primary education is seen as most likely to yield the highest returns,
technical and vocational education, especially management training, is singled
out by the Bank as the most important way to help alleviate serious skills shortages
in parts of the region. Focused training can promote such sub-regional sectoral
efforts as development of tourism and of new technologies. Interviews
with area governments showed they feel that coordinating at least some elements
of higher education, especially research capabilities, on a sub-regional basis
will increase the region’s knowledge base and ensure that skills crucial to economic
development are available from among the population of the region. As
an example of such regional research and training, I may cite Kasetsart’s Regional
Community Forestry Training Center (RECOFTC), which is being sponsored by the
Asian Development Bank, along with Swiss and Thai agencies. This community forestry
training program utilizes knowledge from several different countries by employing
resource persons “on-loan” from various public and private groups.
The global community helps preserve a dwindling global resource – the forests
– through a cooperative university program. Further collaboration of this kind
between countries will help reach the goals on our global and regional agenda,
of which resource preservation ranks high on the list. Universities are the natural
catalyst for sharing the knowledge needed to reach these goals. At
another level, there still exists considerable scope for enhanced cooperation
between the ASEAN nations in the human resource development arena. Development
of additional area-oriented specialized regional research/ education
centers, such as SEARCA in the Philippines, BIOTROP in Indonesia,
and AIT in Thailand should be promoted. Cooperating universities can channel themselves
into technology generation and transfer as an inter-disciplinary project. Encouraging
the academic and private sector to work together, while at the same time encouraging
academic cooperation, is especially important in newly emerging areas of technology.
Development and successful transfer of these technologies is key to strengthening
regional economic competitiveness and improving the welfare of each of the ASEAN
national economies. An increased
number of regional cooperative science parks and research centers can be facilitated
by seeking multilateral and bilateral funding to support these initiatives. Such
an area-oriented view for university research agendas greatly assists regional
economic development by expanding our existing body of knowledge while simultaneously
integrating that knowledge with the regional economy. In
these ways, better regional cooperation can be supported through better academic
cooperation. - The Challenges Posed
for this International Convention
Although
I am far from being an educational expert, I shall take the liberty of concluding
with four main challenges that I urge the educationalists present here to address
during this ambitious Inter-national convention. First,
to promote the internationalization of education by forging more international
linkages between educational institutions. Teacher exchanges, student exchanges,
and international cooperation on study and training at both graduate and undergraduate
levels are all ways to further internationalize education. To this can be added
specific networking opportunities between academics in different countries through
information exchange and research. Second,
to encourage educational institutions to continously develop their curricula and
course offerings in response to evolving economic, political, and social conditions
and to improve linkages between the education sector and other sectors in the
economy. All areas of knowledge must be approached by being placed within a comprehensive
international context. Third, to use education
as a tool to promote social maturity in our nations and increase
mutual trust and understanding. World leaders can make peace and war, but it takes
ordinary citizens to create world understanding. Proper education can encourage
social responsibility and an awareness of global perspectives and common global
problems which override parochial concerns, whether personal, local, or national. Last,
to combine increased international linkages with international understanding to
initiate concrete educational initiatives to assist the newly emerging nations
of the region in their economic and social development. By also forging links
with other ASEAN economies for mutual assistance in these areas, we can further
the development of the entire region. I
am aware that these are not small challenges, and that your deliberations will
not end with this convention. But I am equally sure this conference is a perfect
example of the critical long-range thinking the education sector needs to face
these challenges. I look forward to observing
your successes in these areas, and to the resulting continued social and economic
development in the Southeast Asian region amid improved trust and understanding
among our peoples. I wish you all good
luck as you tackle these critical challenges.
|
 |
|
| | | | | | | |
