Erdogan not a model

This refers to Aijaz Zaka Syed’s article projecting Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan as a model for other Muslim leaders to follow (Oct. 30)

Turkey has long been held up as an example of a model Islamic state — secular, moderate, democratic, and collegial. However, Ankara has started to backslide since the election of Erdogan, head of the formerly outlawed Islamist AKP. Since coming to power in 2002, Turkey has given Hamas a reception usually reserved for heads of state, eliminated the visa requirements for Syrian travelers to Turkey, and begun joint military maneuvers with Syria. All of this may virtually eliminate any possibility of Turkey’s membership in the European Union. In other words, Turkey on a larger scale is similar to Algeria; Islamists will use elections to come to power, but their objective is not pluralism or any notion of democracy, as we know it. So do you still believe that we need more Erdogans?

Shiv, By e-mail, published 5 November 2009

Thai monarchy

With reference to Gwynne Dyer’s article, “Thailand crisis is the result of democracy” (Oct. 25), I wish to inform you that some paragraphs and the opinions expressed therein are absolutely untrue and could lead to public misunderstanding.

In this regard, I wish to make the following clarifications:

1. As a constitutional monarchy, King Bhumibol Adulyadej of Thailand is above politics. Throughout his reign, he has very strictly maintained his political status. Even with growing public calls for him to “royally confer” a prime minister to break the political impasse during the first half of 2006, he abstained, explaining that the constitution did not confer such power; to do so would mean overstepping his role and would hence be undemocratic. Given the king’s well-known steadfast integrity, those knowledgable about Thailand should have dismissed outright any “suspicions” about the king’s role in the 2006 coup. In fact, only after the military leaders had acted and taken control, did they request an audience with the king to report on the situation and the actions they had taken. It was only then that the king learned of the coup.

2. As for the issue of royal succession which is governed by both the Palace Law on Succession B.E. 2467 (1924) and the constitution, there are clearly stipulated rules and procedures. The Palace Law on Succession states that it is the king’s prerogative to appoint his heir to the throne. Once the king makes such proclamation, the line of succession is clear. In this connection, Crown Prince Maha Vajiralongkorn was proclaimed crown prince, or in the other words heir to the throne. There is thus no cause for uncertainty and no warranted basis for speculation. However, Section 23 of the constitution also addresses the issue of royal succession in the event that the king has not appointed his heir. In this case, it states that the Privy Council is to submit the name of the successor to the throne to the Council of Ministers who will further submit this to the National Assembly for approval. Upon the approval of the National Assembly, the president of the National Assembly will invite such successor to ascend the throne and proclaim such successor king. It is only in this latter case where the king has not appointed his heir that the name of a princess may be submitted to the National Assembly.

3. Finally, Thai lese-majeste law is there to protect the monarchy, which, as a national institution, is integral to the country’s national identity and security. It is also necessary because Thai law and convention does not provide for the monarchy to take legal action against the people or allow the monarchy to act in its own defense. The law itself does not prohibit discussion about the monarchy. Nevertheless, if comments or opinions expressed amount to false accusations, then the person concerned must be ready to be held accountable for his/her actions in the courts of law.

Charn Jullamon, Thai charge d’affaires, Riyadh, published 5 November 2009

Oil policy

It is likely that Saudi Arabia will continue its policy of a stable oil market, with a market-driven price, and intervention only if necessary. It is important that crude oil remains a stabilizing factor for economic recovery, and supply must be plentiful and the price reasonable. Crude prices in the $70 range are realistic, but output may have to be increased to help keep prices reasonable in case of stalled economic recovery.

An increase in output may be justified, considering the economic recovery conditions and current inventory levels.

Emil J. Kovach Jr., By e-mail, published 5 November 2009

Time to unite

This refers to your editorial, “It’s time to unite” (Nov. 4). After centuries of killing one another, Europeans have come to realize that they should unite their energies and build a strong region rather than falling prey to others. They sacrificed their nationalistic pride to achieve this objective and their rulers agreed to be small fish in a larger pond. It is time the Arabs did the same thing.

Rahmatoola Rujeedawa, By e-mail, published 5 November 2009

Israel and Arabs

This is regarding Ramzy Baroud’s article, “Who cares for human development crisis?” (Nov. 4). The author refers to the Arab Human Development Report published in 2002. This is an important document that should lead to some introspection. Does anyone in the Arab world care? Of course the Arab world would rather hate Israel than do anything about fellow Arabs who live in poverty and illiteracy. Ironically if the Arabs stopped hating Israel, there are many Jews who are from Arab countries who would be ready to help the countries of their birth. Keep in mind that Israel has more companies on the Nasdaq than Europe, China, Japan and India combined. You do everything to oppose Israel and yet it prospers. Cisco has purchased 9 start-up Israeli companies and is looking for more. Can you make the dramatic changes that would enable the Arab world to prosper?

Sheldon Winston, By e-mail, published 5 November 2009

No double standards

Iqbal Paul seems to know my mind better than I do my own! In his letter (Nov.3), he thinks that I would find it anathema that non-Caucasians should be permitted to join the BNP. In fact I have always argued that the BNP should be open for anyone of whatever religion, race or color provided that they are loyal to Britain and to British culture. So Paul should proceed carefully in his writings and examine the evidence before he shovels words into my mouth. However, I would point out that there are black and Asian associations in Britain that operate color bars. A white policeman would be denied membership of the Black and Asian Police Association on the basis of color. The Black Trade Union Association will bar a white trade unionist again on the basis of color. So let’s have a bit less of the hypocrisy and double standards.

Francis A. Andrew, By e-mail, published 5 November 2009