NxaiPan

All major powers be they China, USA or USSR/Russia, have their agendas and can and have been ruthless in their defense throughout history. Your view of China being innocent of military aggression and merely benevolent in it's allocation of aid is simply devoid of any evidence or credibility.

Difference being , China doesn't get involved militarily way beyond its region, something the other major powers you quoted have found irresistible and you have failed to produce "evidence" that China was an "aggressor" by having patrols on the Mekong, something that stretches "credibility"

Looks like the Seychelles will be the Chinese navy's first stopping-off spot (cannot call it a base as the Chinese don't do overseas bases), for resupply and recreation, and what a great spot for R&R. See attached piece:

http://www.washingto...5lqO_story.html

From the Mekong to the Seychelles force projection will be a growing activity for China as it takes up the mantle of a great power.

Yes "considering an invitation" something that a North Atlantic Power never bothers about before venturing out of its territory.

Here's China's latest "we don't do no intervention" toy, doing work-up trials in the Yellow Sea. At least they won't be able to sail it up the Mekong.

i would second that Eva provides a very decent service, but not a patch on Cathay.

The Korean flight avoiding BKK is also a great option, especially if you get a leg on their new A380.

My only original input would be based on the fact that I always like to see more places en route somewhere if I have the time and the prices are reasonable.

If I was retiring out here my logic would be driven by the fact that I had no time constraints and as March can be (not this year, thank goodness) a pretty grim time of the year in CM. Hot, humid and potentially smog that makes LA look clean.

If I was beginning a trip here from CA I would consider cherry blossom in Japan, Hawaii, the Phillipines, or go totally wild and head down to the S.Pacific and/or Australia. Obviously depends what you are in to, and how leisurely you want to travel.

Just a few off the wall ideas!

All major powers be they China, USA or USSR/Russia, have their agendas and can and have been ruthless in their defense throughout history. Your view of China being innocent of military aggression and merely benevolent in it's allocation of aid is simply devoid of any evidence or credibility.

Difference being , China doesn't get involved militarily way beyond its region, something the other major powers you quoted have found irresistible and you have failed to produce "evidence" that China was an "aggressor" by having patrols on the Mekong, something that stretches "credibility"

Looks like the Seychelles will be the Chinese navy's first stopping-off spot (cannot call it a base as the Chinese don't do overseas bases), for resupply and recreation, and what a great spot for R&R. See attached piece:

http://www.washingto...5lqO_story.html

From the Mekong to the Seychelles force projection will be a growing activity for China as it takes up the mantle of a great power.

Yes "considering an invitation" something that a North Atlantic Power never bothers about before venturing out of its territory.

So China is extending its military reach beyond SE/E Asia as predicted by Global Times?

BTW did China wait for an invite before wading into into Tibet, Russia, Vietnam, India, the Paracel or Spratly islands, or even the Mekong beyond the Lancang?

Notice your focus on N.Atlantic powers, is Russia another innocent party who only waits for invites to foreign adventures?

Absolute nonsense. How can a major travel hub such as BKK operate with just one airport..!!

London has 6 airports, New York has 3 and they are not enough.

This guy is an idiot..!!

I am biased as I have made my living for the last 18 years at DMK and continue to do so today. Am I an expert, no way but might know a little bit more about the day to day operations than some of the opinion slingers around here. With no LCC terminal at Swampy and the costs for operators quite high, this leads me to believe that DMK is an option. Why close the oldest still operating airport in Asia? Here are a few little things that go on out there that may be hard to mimic at Swampy:

1. Royal Thai Airforce Base including all the back shops, military housing, training facilities etc. 2. The Royal Flight Department & Royal Terminal (as in the Royal Family). 3. Royal Skyways flight training and maintenance hangar. 4. BAC Flight Training Academy. 5. Thai Airways 7 widebody maintenance facility with all the supporting back shops which is booked 5 years in advance. 6. Mjets Business Aviation Terminal and ground handling. 7. Bangkok Airways heavy maintenance hangar. 8. Police Aviation Department and Hangars. 9. Dept. of Agriculture Aviation Department and Hangars. 10. US Embassy Flight Department. 11. Si Chang Flying Service (Helicopter Operation). 12. SGA Aviation (Cessna Caravan Operation). 13. Nok Air. 14. Orient Thai Airlines. 15. Royal Aviation Museum 16. Thai Aviation Industries Hangar and Avionics Repair Station (performs heavy maintenance checks on Air Asia A320 aircraft). 17. Thai Flying Service. And there are more.

Yea, maybe we should just close the whole farm and move it all to Swampy. Think about it and then Get real.

Great post and nice to see some sense amongst all the inanities.

You know DMK and what's there. With its Vietnam era legacy it seems perfectly set up for the RTAF as a logistics, training and high profile flight centre, also must be a plum posting for RTAF folk (DMK or Korat, hmm tough choice).

Would Nok & Thai Orient be missed? Could DMK be scaled up on the cargo side?

BKK for commercial passengers, AOB at DMK.

All major powers be they China, USA or USSR/Russia, have their agendas and can and have been ruthless in their defense throughout history. Your view of China being innocent of military aggression and merely benevolent in it's allocation of aid is simply devoid of any evidence or credibility.

Difference being , China doesn't get involved militarily way beyond its region, something the other major powers you quoted have found irresistible and you have failed to produce "evidence" that China was an "aggressor" by having patrols on the Mekong, something that stretches "credibility"

Looks like the Seychelles will be the Chinese navy's first stopping-off spot (cannot call it a base as the Chinese don't do overseas bases), for resupply and recreation, and what a great spot for R&R. See attached piece:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia-pacific/china-says-mulling-offer-from-seychelles-to-act-as-naval-resupply-and-recreation-base/2011/12/12/gIQA5e5lqO_story.html

From the Mekong to the Seychelles force projection will be a growing activity for China as it takes up the mantle of a great power.

Thank you IATA for your insight, are you suggesting the same applies to London, New York, Paris, Los Angeles, Madrid, Brussels, Moscow, Chicago and what about all the hype behind IATA endorsing Haneda ? If Heathrow was the only London airport would Ryanair or Easyjet exist ????? Airlines and airports meet at a price point that works and if there is passenger demand then what is wrong with more options ?

Not quite the same thing, William! But why listen to IATA? What do they know about international air travel? I'm sure you know so much more!

Also Madrid-Barajas is the sole airport for Madrid.

Or if we switch Heathrow for KUL, we get a different point of view: "If KUL was the only Kuala Lumpur airport would Air Asia exist?"

Sole airports do not exclude the possibility of LCCs if there are differentiated/cheaper facilities available as in KUL's LCCT.

Hopefully this is what BKK will provide next for Air Asia, Nok, Orient Thai, Lion, Jetstar etc

Absolute nonsense. How can a major travel hub such as BKK operate with just one airport..!!

London has 6 airports, New York has 3 and they are not enough.

This guy is an idiot..!!

Yes indeed, fellow git; amazing how idiots thrive & rise, is it not?

Dear old Don Muang was a lovely airport. Rail travel neatly integrated & e/thing within easy reach; nip across the overpass for street chicken & rice for 100B, plus a beer for 40B. The real trouble was, it was not a glorified market for over-priced tourist junk, operated by spivs, with an airport attached - like Heathrow - hence Swampy.

Before they put pen to paper, I suggest the planners take a trip to Heathrow to discover how NOT to do it. What a ruddy mess. It's so vast, it has a weird, circular train service round the far-flung terminals. Lost passengers get on it & keep going round till they lose the will to live. At least staff remove their skeletons. H/row is stiff with 'security'. Pity the bruisers can't protect the passengers from the cab pirates - it was $100 for the cab to London, just 15 miles away (last time I was unlucky enuf to be there).

What a joy it was to get back to sunny, smiling, relaxed Thailand. I wanted to do a Pope & kiss the tarmac. Gatwick?! Don't get me started on that! Old Git Tom

LHR and its disastrous, piecemeal development (what other major airport has its terminal buildings inside the runways and its main access route being a narrow tunnel under said runways?), explains why London needs LHR plus LGW/LCY/STN/LTN. Now that an extra runway has been ruled out the physical constraints mean that London cannot have a single, decent airport.

Such a shame that the UK did not do a Schipol or Frankfurt as instead you now need multiple airports with all the interconnection problems, taking up more land and blighting more people's lives.

Don Muang is also a RTAF base,

Should they shift to Swampy as well?

So Don Mueang reverts to being a cargo hub, RTAF station and an emergency alternative for BKK. Not such a bad option.

Those naughty Middle-eastern airlines, offering fleets of new aircraft at half the price, simply not sporting ! Unfortunately competition is here to stay, including from Asian Low-Cost-Carriers, also with fleets of new aircraft, Thai Airways simply must slim-down if it hopes to continue to survive ! One can only wish them well.

Guess it would be deeply appreciated if there would be more destinations from airports in Thailand direct to places in Thailand like Ubon Ratchathani to Chiang Mai without flying to Bangkok first....

Ubon to CNX? Try Air Asia on Mon, Wed, Fri for a fraction of tired THAI's prices.

You forgot London City and Luton- If London can support LHR/STN/LCY/LGW/LTN business is business more is better in my opinion

There's also Saaaafend and Biggin Hill which also handles London flights.

No major city in the world can operate on one airport, impossible. The idea of Don Muang should be to house the likes of Air Asia, Nok Air etc. similar to Stansted in London.

It's not rocket surgery..!!!

While it may not be rocket surgery, take a look at things from the Asian perspective.

10 largest cities in Asia: Tokyo, Shanghai, Delhi, Mumbai, Dhaka, Guangzhou, Beijing, Jakarta, Karachi, Kolkata, and throw in KL as a regional similarity for BKK. How many have more than 1 commercial passenger airport?

Answer is 2, Tokyo & Shanghai (KL has Subang but now only flying Berjaya and the remnants of Firefly, both very small turbo prop operators, and hated by the local residents)

In many western countries there are multiple airports serving major cities, London, Paris, New York, but even in the west purpose built major airport complexes become sole providers eg Schipol, Frankfurt (excluding the misnamed Frankfurt-Hahn, 120 kms away and beloved by Ryanair), Denver, and Madrid Barajas. Places like London and NY have multiple airports due to their historical legacy and the planning restrictions they now face. Examples such as Atlanta and Detroit also undermine the big city/multiple airports answer.

It makes huge sense to have airlines in a single location. Hubs need feeder routes and a LCC terminal at BKK similar to KUL would be the best of all world's for both airlines and passengers.

Don Mueang pre-floods was only significant for Thai Orient and Nok Air. With the latter being brought tighter under Thai's wing, this might be the perfect opportunity for Thai to bring all its brands under 1 roof, especially once Thai Smile launches.

So Don Mueang reverts to being a cargo hub, RTAF station and an emergency alternative for BKK. Not such a bad option.

All major powers be they China, USA or USSR/Russia, have their agendas and can and have been ruthless in their defense throughout history. Your view of China being innocent of military aggression and merely benevolent in it's allocation of aid is simply devoid of any evidence or credibility.

Difference being , China doesn't get involved militarily way beyond its region, something the other major powers you quoted have found irresistible and you have failed to produce "evidence" that China was an "aggressor" by having patrols on the Mekong, something that stretches "credibility"

Glad to see that at least you have now given up claiming that China has never intervened militarily across its borders, that its aid programme only has humanitarian objectives and that China was responsible for the recent reforms in Myanmar and the release of Aung San Suu Xyi for good measure.

But now you have moved the goalposts and while you excuse any regional interventions (why should invading India, Vietnam, Tibet or Russia really matter, or illegally occupying parts of the Paracel & Spratly islands be of any concern?), now you claim that military involvement by China is unheard of outside SE/E Asia.

Earlier this year to much fanfare the ex-Soviet aircraft carrier, Varyag, was relaunched and with a further 2 carriers under construction it looks like they will be somewhat more employed than Thailand's rather sad carrier, Chakri Naurubet, which seldom leaves port. China has made no bones about its intention to develop a blue water capability (naval force projection beyond a nation's immediate region) and carriers have no other genuine strategic function. Preparation for this role is a handy by-product of China's on-going participation in anti-piracy naval operations off Somalia.

While this naval activity is largely yet to come, more recently China has nudged into 4th in the world of arms exporters (and possibly higher as much of its arms trade is via 3rd parties or client governments such as Pakistan & N.Korea), and this has increased materially in the last 3 years. While the arms trade undertaken by the USA, Russia, France etc equips many of the world's grim governments China's clients are little to boast about, Myanmar, Iran, Sudan, Zimbabwe amongst others. China even backed the wrong horse in Libya supplying weaponry to Qaddafi during the recent conflict. This needed some rapid backtracking and blustering once it became clear that Qaddafi was doomed and the significant Chinese investments in Libya's oil & gas industry were in jeopardy for making the wrong call.

China's nuclear policy is obviously somewhat opaque but there is credible evidence linking them to Iran, Algeria, Pakistan, N.Korea, Syria and even possibly S. Africa.

In a nutshell China is little different and becoming ever more like the other world powers in terms of its desired force projection, arms sales, willingness to intervene militarily and nuclear transfers. The era of China as the colonial victim is well and truly over and economic clout now marches in step with military/political objectives on a widening regional/world scale.

Global Times (the Chinese Communist Party's tabloid for international coverage) backs this up in the article below which underlines the importance of overseas bases for China's military. The CCPs own newspaper can hardly be dismissed as China haters.

http://opinion.globa...-05/658995.html

Isn't this a JOINT operation?? http://english.peopl...83/7672222.html

aka 3rd Opium War, but nowadays more meth than poppy.

[

calling murder "war" is interesting.

In reality, what's the difference?

Normally 25 years to life for the first, and a medal for a job well done with the second.

I used this crossing about a month ago in my truck and went to LP via an overnight at Oudom Xai as the Hongsa/LP route is currently unpaved.

Which crossing? You mention Oudom Xai but I don't think you can get there from the Nan crossing. So assuming you just mean the regular one at Chiang Khong, then up to Oudom Xai, then down to Luang Prabang?

When you say 'unpaved' (between Hongsa and Luang Prabang) does that mean 'impassible' (perhaps in the rainy season)? It looks like the most direct route. (Though of course it's a long drive from Chiang Mai to Nan, too.)

As the lignite mine/power plant construction gears up you will find the LP-Hongsa route improves rapidly and with the transmission line planned to run from Hongsa via Nan to Lampang there should also be some marked improvements on the Thai side also. So some good will come of Hongsa's destruction.

Well I think we have to say congratulations to whoever is responsible for these wonderful figures. In spite of a massive global downturn which has seen a severe reduction in European and American holidaymakers to winter destinations such as Thailand and with the more competitive markets in Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos sweeping up a lot of the low budget travellers and Malaysia's continued untroubled excellence it is truly incredible they have achieved this record.

While floods, economic wobbles etc are the latest short-term headwinds that Thailand faces, there is a more material long term threat that the LOS faces.

30 years ago Thailand had a virtual monopoly on tourism in SE Asia. It was the only viable option for mainstream tourism (albeit that fighting with the CPT was still in full swing in N. & NE Thailand, and the Golden Triangle section in Thailand meant a lot more than a tourist label).

Since then Thailand has basically jogged on the spot in tourist appeal terms and in some senses has gone backwards (the overdevelopment of Pattaya, Phuket, Samui etc). The attractions and destinations of Thailand have basically been matched and bettered as the rest of SE Asia has come online as a tourist destination.

The shortsightedness is epitomised in the example of the Andaman Sea dive sites. Sure, the widespread bleaching in 2010 was due to a rise in sea temperatures but the management of this area has been woeful. The latest wizard wheeze is to boost the existing 200 tuna fishing boats based out of Phuket by an additional 300 Taiwanese fishing boats. So dead coral and no fish, no wonder many of the dive operators are relocating to Komodo in Indonesia, where not only is there world class diving but the navy shoots (or at least shoots at) fishermen encroaching on the Marine park, rather than busying themselves towing Rohingya refugees out to sea in boats without engines as the RTN allegedly likes to do.

The situation here is similar to the demise of tourist destinations in the UK such as Blackpool, Brighton and Margate in the UK. Once Brit tourists could get cheap flights and holiday packages to Spain, Greece etc these places went into long term decline (though Brighton has reinvented itself as the San Francisco of England). Here the combination of LCCs such as Air Asia and Lion Air coupled with better options throughout the region present a massive challenge to tourism in Thailand.

Mass tourism from Russia and China will probably fill the gap in the short term but even they will probably wise up and seek out alternative destinations in years to come. but this type of tourism will do little but undermine Thailand's appeal in the long run as it becomes Asia's version of the Spanish Costas and Benidorm, Torremolinos and Loret del Mar are recreated in a Thai setting.

The likelihood that Burma/Myanmar fully opens for tourist business is on the verge of becoming reality and this will eat another chunk of Thailand's tourist lunch. Phuket or Ngapali; Ayutthaya or Bagan; "trekking" in Chiang Rai area or trekking in Northern Shan state; Doi Inthanon with a RTAF/NSA station on top or Putao's mountains with snow on top; and so on.

it's not too late for Thailand to get it's tourist act together but it seems that TAT (never has an acronym been more appropriate, as in English vernacuar "tat" means rubbish or trash) revels in complacency and ineptitude fully supported by bucket loads of spending money and highly dubious statistics. Spain has pulled its tourist industry back from the brink, and I would love to see Thailand pull off the same trick, but I'm not going to hold my breath....

See the attached and make your own mind up where on this graph Thailand currently is and which of the Options A through E is the most likely outcome over the next 10 years.

reminds me of Florida 2000

Reminds me of China in ..........oh wait, China, good at military intervention across its borders, not so keen on any form of genuine participation by its 1.1 billion people..

Authoritarian regimes whether they be Putin's Russia, Hu's China, Ahmadinejad's Iran, Mugabe's Zimbabwe etc really don't like their people having a real say as they have more than a sneaking suspicion what they might actually say if they were allowed to do so.

Perhaps the wise folks at TAT (which we now know means trash) might study the attached graph and ponder over which direction Thailand is heading from the range of Option A to Option E.

My gut instinct tells me that LOS is rapidly coming to that classic fork in the road and what it does in the next few years will determine which option becomes reality.

So according to you, China only gave "humanitarian aid" to Myanmar and you are also suggesting that thanks to the Chinese, not only were elections held in Myanmar but also that the Chinese enabled the release of Aung San Suu Kyi ?

That's almost as believable as your claim that the Chinese have never intervened militarily overseas which a previous post shot down in spectacular fashion. Care to address that claim? Looks like you are long on support for China and short on evidence.

Maybe they did, maybe they didnt have influence on Myanmar. Fact is the Chinese have no military ambitions overseas and the Chinese "knockers" usually from Western countries are caught out when their own foreign military escapades have proved so disastrous in foreign policy terms , their own economies and humanitarian reasons. You need evidence for that? I wont waste my time adding hundreds of reliable links.

So apart from

their intervention in Korea in 1950

their "intervention" in Tibet in 1950

their war with India in 1962 over Aksai Chin & South Tibet

their border clashes with the Soviet Union in 1969

their illegal seizure of the Paracel islands and naval battle with S. Vietnam in 1974

their invasion of Vietnam in 1979

their naval battle and seizure of various Spratly islands from Vietnam & the Philippines in 1988

their continuing claims to Arunachal Pradesh and more recently the entire South China Sea

what has China ever done in terms of military intervention?

Please answer the question rather than bringing up other nations' chequered history. You claimed that China followed a different path and has never indulged in military adventures beyond its borders (apart from gunboats on the Mekong but that's different of course). If China is innocent of all of the above, what evidence do you have to support your claim?

I agree. China has an agenda when it gives " aid ", and that agenda is the well being of China. It is a bit like borrowing money from a mafia chieftain. In the end you will be paying back a hell of a lot more than you borrowed. I am amazed that any country would accept aid from China, when in the end it is nothing more than a Trojan horse. So this current strategy of running gun boats on the Mekong is simply to throw a bit more fear into Thailand and Laos. China may seem far away to Thais, but it will seem a lot closer when they see armed boats flying a red flag running up and down the Mekong.......

China has behaved with restraint since their sailors were killed. Lets remember Thailand accepted it was their soldiers who were the perpetrators, but acting alone and not under any orders (see news link).A bit different to how Thailand and Cambodia behaved over a temple on their borders.

As far as accusing China of acting as a "Mafia Chieftain", China doesn't interfere in foreign countries unless asked to, certainly not militarily, as many world powers do, and it gives aid when requested. Leave the Mafia style interference to other so called world powers.

http://twocircles.ne...se_sailors.html

Quite who was doing what in that interesting little junction of China, Myanmar and Thailand will probably remain as murky as any of the activities there in the last 60 odd years. All sorts of very unpleasant players playing a brutal, high stakes game with little quarter expected or given.

"China does not interfere in foreign countries...." almost made me choke on my bottle of Tsingtao, and then the somewhat weasly "unless asked to". Many foreign interventions use the fig leaf of "being asked". The US went to Vietnam as "advisors" requested by S.Vietnam, the Soviets were "asked" to intervene in Afghanistan and so on.

China is little different.

It sent almost a million troops into N. Korea in late 1950, of course having been asked (begged) by the Great Leader.

Earlier that year 40,000 troops of the PLA invaded and crushed the Tibetans (not sure if they found someone to ask them in that time).

In October1962, taking advantage of the world's attention on the Cuban Missile Crisis, 80,000 PLA troops invaded 2 areas of India in the Aksai Chin and South Tibet, and they were certainly not invited by anyone that time.

China continues to claim ownership of the Indian province of Arunachal Pradesh and there were further border clashes in 1967 and 1987. In continuation of this and due to the fact that India gave sanctuary to the Dalai Lama, the "non-interventionist" PRC has been supporting the Maoist Naxalite insurgent movement in NE India for the last 50 years.

More recently and closer to home the PLA had another "school trip" into Vietnam in Feb 1979 with 200,000 troops and the subsequent fighting killed approximately 50,0000 on both sides (ie almost equal to total US deaths in Vietnam), in a month of hard fighting.

The unasked for aggression with Vietnam continued with more border skirmishes and culminating in a full blown naval battle off the Spratly islands in 1988 sinking 2 Vietnamese naval craft, killing 60 and capturing a further 40 (including a CIA agent). The PLA subsequently occupied (and still do) a chunk of the islands, and for good measure seized a Philippine island in the same chain (this time without any fighting as the Philippine military backed off).

From Mar-Nov 1969 the Communist brothers, China & the Soviet Union, fought a series of skirmishes with some 700 deaths on both sides over ownership of a river island.

Whoops almost forgot; the Chinese navy won their first battle in 300 years when they swatted the fading S.Vietnamese navy in Feb 1974, and occupied the Paracel islands (an illegal occupation which continues to this day).

So life isn't so simple and China is hardly a saint when it comes to flexing its military muscles. Its aggressive military build-up in recent years and its extraordinary claims to most of the South China Sea has helped make the US very popular in many capital cities of countries fearing a confrontation with a resurgent China.

Full of inacurracies and fantasy too many to mention.,And I suggest you research the history of Tibet, part of China

Inaccuracies and fantasy? I'm intrigued, please enlighten me.

I agree. China has an agenda when it gives " aid ", and that agenda is the well being of China. It is a bit like borrowing money from a mafia chieftain. In the end you will be paying back a hell of a lot more than you borrowed. I am amazed that any country would accept aid from China, when in the end it is nothing more than a Trojan horse. So this current strategy of running gun boats on the Mekong is simply to throw a bit more fear into Thailand and Laos. China may seem far away to Thais, but it will seem a lot closer when they see armed boats flying a red flag running up and down the Mekong.......

China has behaved with restraint since their sailors were killed. Lets remember Thailand accepted it was their soldiers who were the perpetrators, but acting alone and not under any orders (see news link).A bit different to how Thailand and Cambodia behaved over a temple on their borders.

As far as accusing China of acting as a "Mafia Chieftain", China doesn't interfere in foreign countries unless asked to, certainly not militarily, as many world powers do, and it gives aid when requested. Leave the Mafia style interference to other so called world powers.

http://twocircles.ne...se_sailors.html

Quite who was doing what in that interesting little junction of China, Myanmar and Thailand will probably remain as murky as any of the activities there in the last 60 odd years. All sorts of very unpleasant players playing a brutal, high stakes game with little quarter expected or given.

"China does not interfere in foreign countries...." almost made me choke on my bottle of Tsingtao, and then the somewhat weasly "unless asked to". Many foreign interventions use the fig leaf of "being asked". The US went to Vietnam as "advisors" requested by S.Vietnam, the Soviets were "asked" to intervene in Afghanistan and so on.

China is little different.

It sent almost a million troops into N. Korea in late 1950, of course having been asked (begged) by the Great Leader.

Earlier that year 40,000 troops of the PLA invaded and crushed the Tibetans (not sure if they found someone to ask them in that time).

In October1962, taking advantage of the world's attention on the Cuban Missile Crisis, 80,000 PLA troops invaded 2 areas of India in the Aksai Chin and South Tibet, and they were certainly not invited by anyone that time.

China continues to claim ownership of the Indian province of Arunachal Pradesh and there were further border clashes in 1967 and 1987. In continuation of this and due to the fact that India gave sanctuary to the Dalai Lama, the "non-interventionist" PRC has been supporting the Maoist Naxalite insurgent movement in NE India for the last 50 years.

More recently and closer to home the PLA had another "school trip" into Vietnam in Feb 1979 with 200,000 troops and the subsequent fighting killed approximately 50,0000 on both sides (ie almost equal to total US deaths in Vietnam), in a month of hard fighting.

The unasked for aggression with Vietnam continued with more border skirmishes and culminating in a full blown naval battle off the Spratly islands in 1988 sinking 2 Vietnamese naval craft, killing 60 and capturing a further 40 (including a CIA agent). The PLA subsequently occupied (and still do) a chunk of the islands, and for good measure seized a Philippine island in the same chain (this time without any fighting as the Philippine military backed off).

From Mar-Nov 1969 the Communist brothers, China & the Soviet Union, fought a series of skirmishes with some 700 deaths on both sides over ownership of a river island.

Whoops almost forgot; the Chinese navy won their first battle in 300 years when they swatted the fading S.Vietnamese navy in Feb 1974, and occupied the Paracel islands (an illegal occupation which continues to this day).

So life isn't so simple and China is hardly a saint when it comes to flexing its military muscles. Its aggressive military build-up in recent years and its extraordinary claims to most of the South China Sea has helped make the US very popular in many capital cities of countries fearing a confrontation with a resurgent China.

Looks like Thailand really screwed the pooch by the " rogue" Thai soldiers killing those Chinese boat crewmen. Now welcome to Chinese gun boats patrolling on the Mekong , with guns pointed towards the Thai border. Som nam na......

I fail to see where it reads they were Thai soldiers. In that area its all mixed up, no one really knows who who up around there. KMT, Wa, Shan, etc...if they were related to a drug kingpin, more than likely its someone that grew up on both sides of the border.

If you read any reliable report (see below) on this incident you will see the connection to the RTA's "elite" anti-narcotics squad. Quite what they were doing and who for, is a whole different question.

http://www.economist.com/node/21538789

Looks like Thailand really screwed the pooch by the " rogue" Thai soldiers killing those Chinese boat crewmen. Now welcome to Chinese gun boats patrolling on the Mekong , with guns pointed towards the Thai border. Som nam na......

And people wonder why SE Asian countries are becoming more receptive to and even seeking a US presence/influence in the region.

As is happening in many African countries, people in this part of the world are beginning to see that with China's economic muscle comes an increasing appetite to project political/military influence. Rather than playing off the Soviets & Americans we could well be heading towards a scenario where nations play off the Chinese & Americans.

We have already seen this in Myanmar with the government's apparent suspension of the Myitsone dam on the Irrawaddy, which is Chinese financed, due to be built by the Chinese, and the electricity generated was to be transmitted to China. This suspension was an apparent attempt to gain US and general western favour.

Looks like the Mekong, one way or another (Chinese patrols, drug trafficking, dams, resource exploitation), is going to be in the news for a long time yet, but that's hardly surprising when one of the major rivers of the region is shared by 6 nations, all with very different agendas.

floods,floods , floods,is that the only reason they can come up with?

You don't think the floods are the problem? Please enlighten us.

Simple answer.

30 years ago Thailand had a virtual monopoly on tourism in SE Asia. It was the only viable option for mainstream tourism (albeit that fighting with the CPT was still in full swing in N. & NE Thailand, and the Golden Triangle section in Thailand meant a lot more than a tourist label).

Since then Thailand has basically jogged on the spot in tourist appeal terms and in some senses has gone backwards (the overdevelopment of Pattaya, Phuket, Samui etc). The attractions and destinations of Thailand have basically been matched and bettered as the rest of SE Asia has come online as a tourist destination.

The shortsightedness is epitomised in the example of the Andaman Sea dive sites. Sure, the widespread bleaching in 2010 was due to a rise in sea temperatures but the management of this area has been woeful. The latest wizard wheeze is to boost the existing 200 tuna fishing boats based out of Phuket by an additional 300 Taiwanese fishing boats. So dead coral and no fish, no wonder many of the dive operators are relocating to Komodo in Indonesia, where not only is there world class diving but the navy shoots (or at least shoots at) fishermen encroaching on the Marine park, rather than busying themselves towing Rohingya refugees out to sea in boats without engines as the RTN allegedly likes to do.

The situation here is similar to the demise of tourist destinations in the UK such as Blackpool, Brighton and Margate in the UK. Once Brit tourists could get cheap flights and holiday packages to Spain, Greece etc these places went into long term decline (though Brighton has reinvented itself as the San Francisco of England). Here the combination of LCCs such as Air Asia and Lion Air coupled with better options throughout the region present a massive challenge to tourism in Thailand.

Mass tourism from Russia and China will probably fill the gap in the short term but even they will probably wise up and seek out alternative destinations in years to come. but this type of tourism will do little but undermine Thailand's appeal in the long run as it becomes Asia's version of the Spanish Costas and Benidorm, Torremolinos and Loret del Mar are recreated in a Thai setting.

The likelihood that Burma/Myanmar fully opens for tourist business is on the verge of becoming reality and this will eat another chunk of Thailand's tourist lunch. Phuket or Ngapali; Ayutthaya or Bagan; "trekking" in Chiang Rai area or trekking in Northern Shan state; Doi Inthanon with a RTAF/NSA station on top or Putao's mountains with snow on top; and so on.

it's not too late for Thailand to get it's tourist act together but it seems that TAT (never has an acronym been more appropriate, as in English vernacuar "tat" means rubbish or trash) revels in complacency and ineptitude fully supported by bucket loads of spending money and highly dubious statistics. Spain has pulled its tourist industry back from the brink, and I would love to see Thailand pull off the same trick, but I'm not going to hold my breath....

Thank Heavens ... the UN's Emergency-Relief Supply-Convoy must have made it to Chiang Mai at last, just as we were giving up all hope !

Or was it perhaps an air-drop ?

Must have been a direct air-drop on Macro for all those who seem incapable of shopping anywhere else. As there never were any shortages in the bottle shops... well except Singh, as Singh factory was actually flooded. But all the other beers were in plentiful supply everywhere except Macro and Tesco... in any case thank God that horrific shortage of Macro/Tesco sourced beer has finally subsided.

If you know a bottle shop that stocked Leo small or Beer Lao light or dark during the flooding, you were abrogating your patriotic duty not to tell us.

This tip from Betico1 posted 2 weeks ago saw me through the beer Lao drought at Makro. They had 2 pallet loads out front of Lao Dark & Lao regular and more in the back, at least they did 2 weeks ago. Not as cheap as Makro but any harbour in a storm...

"Beer Lao by the case Huay Kaew - Canal Road intersection. Off licence is on right side just before Canal Road heading Zoo direction. 920 a case of 24. Not sure for Lao Dark but I drink it regularly at the off licence with the tables outside along Nimmanheimen Road. They seem well-stocked for everything. Just a shame more bars don't sell Lao, light or dark. Beats the tasteless Thai beers by a mile and no thumping hangover"

Always happy to do my patriotic duty and keep Beer Lao flowing to places other beers don't reach!

Did this route on a dirt bike last week; from the border to Hongsa (Laos), a huge new road is under construction. It's all dust now but it's the size of a 4 lane highway. I was wondering why as on the Thai side, the same old very small road leads to the border and no signs of construction so there's a bit of a disconnect.

I have heard there's a "normal" road now from Hongsa to LP but we didn't take it so don't know details.

We met an American couple at the border who were working for Hongsa Power - they told us the Hongsa coal Power plant is built by the Thai electric company and will be the by far biggest plant of its kind in the region. Renderings at the immigration in Laos showed an absolutely massive construction with three very large cooling towers. Supposed to be operational 4 years from now. Just a guess but once they turn this monster on it's probably going to be over with the rural idyll in Hongsa valley.

Hongsa will be a lignite strip mining and power plant site generating some 1800 MW by 2015 at a cost of some $3.7billion. Majority owned by Thai companies Banpu & RATC (having eased out the original Thai company, see New York based law suits), 95% of the electricity will be sent to Thailand. Funding is via Thai/Chinese banks and the construction will be done by Chinese contractor CNEEC. This explains all the road building.

Hongsa has been developing as an ecotourist spot based around the Sayaburi elephant festival and the large local elephant population (sadly only around 500 now due to the destructive logging of the area), but these are likely to be early casualties of strip mining and power generation. Lignite is one of the dirtiest and least efficient fossil fuels. Banpu's similar lignite operation at Mae Moh, near Lampang, has been highly contoversial due to the degree of pollutants generated, and the subsequent cost of retrofitting some pollution control has meant Banpu has been very interested in developing similar projects in more "amenable" locations such as Hongsa.

Sayaburi or Xayaburi province in Laos is likely to be in the press again this week as the Mekong River Commission meets in Siem Reap Dec 7-9 to discuss the Xayaburi dam on the main course of the Mekong river (downstream from Hongsa). The same nexus of Thai/Chinese construction/banking interests, insatiable Thai electricity demands, tame environmental assessments and huge scope for financial gain means that consensus may be achieved opening the way to Laos building 11 such dams on the main course of the river with significant impacts on the environment, wildlife and 60 million people downstream whose livelihoods and nutrition depend on the river, but seem to carry little weight against the gravy train of vested interests.

Shortsightedness seems to know no bounds. Enjoy the Mekong valley while you can.

While the Hongsa area of Laos looks doomed due to the development of lignite strip mining at least there was some good news today about the Mekong valley.

Looks like the MRC has backed down from a full blown confrontation over the Sayaburi dam, see attached.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203501304577086012500372618.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Hopefully this is just a face-saving exercise and the new environmental report will drag on a while. Strange though because the MRC rejected the environmental impact assessment report it commissioned last year as it was too straightforward about the likely problems involved with damming the main stream of the Mekong. We then had the joke of a report by the notoriously "open-minded" and generous in its views Swiss company Poyry, all done in less than a month which raised endless issues with the dam and then promptly ignored them to enable the Laos government to continue construction as they had "done" an environmental report.

So humble pie time for Laos, an undignified silence from the Thai side (apart from the cancelling of some expensive Christmas shopping), and while Cambodia has been ambivalent, Vietnam had everything to lose and nothing to gain so must be jubilant.

Some kudos should be given to Clinton (and I have been no fan of her's in the past) and the US State Dept who at the very least gave the issue a major public airing which is likely to have contributed to today's decision.