Military Itching For Bt 6 Billion Secured Satellite

[wintermute]

I look out my window to the CBD in Singapore and think about the time I worked in Thailand. I love Thailand but rivals - Thailand is a puppy.

Yeah I don't understand this condescending tone coming from Thai officials either. It's almost like they have a permanent case of penis envy when they look at Singapore. Singapore is probably one of the most productive countries in the world per capita. They are a nation of only 4 million people but financially and economically they are pretty ###### significant. Most Singaporeans have that annoying Singlish crap going on but most are pretty well educated. They are also one of the finance hubs in the world along with the likes of Tokyo, Hong Kong, London, and New York.

[wintermute]

It really depends on how long "eventually" is. For many years to come, the Singaporean government has no fear about Thailand becoming the hub of choice by MNC's, at least as it relates to their regional finance centers, despite operating costs in Thailand being significantly lower. The driving factor is stability. Coups aside, MNC's have never been impressed with the constant changes each new government in Thailand brings, including reassessments of contracts signed by the previous government. There are just so many war stories, that it is a non starter and will be for a long time.

It will be even more difficult for Thailand in the future because of the convoluted policymaking by the current flavor of the year military junta. Singapore is authoritarian but behind it all it's backed by extremely savvy businessmen who deal with the world's biggest economies on a daily basis. They took Singapore from a backwater port to a pretty significant hub in about 30 years. A couple things that ensure Singapore will always have a leg up on Thai competition...education and a willingness to adapt. Not to mention that Singapore has cultivated some very close ties to the world's big economic powers. Thailand is insular, backward, and xenophobic in comparison. If the school system in Thailand were comparable to Singapore's i'd say that Singapore's days are numbered but it's not even close. Thailand would need a complete cultural/intellectual overhaul to even begin to deal seriously with anyone outside of the developing SE asian nations.

[thedude]

"Singapore is Thailand's rival in the region, not a big daddy like the US."

Now this is funny!!!

I look out my window to the CBD in Singapore and think about the time I worked in Thailand. I love Thailand but rivals - Thailand is a puppy.

Name one Thai Nobel Prize winner - Name one engineering, scientific or medical breakthrough achieved by a Thai.

Singapore and Thailand the rivals in the region - please get real. Thailand as much asI love it is the only country in the region going backwards and is fast becoming the laughing stock of Asia (I will still visit every month though as I love the place)

There are several areas where Thailand is looking to challenge Singapore in the region, for example air travel. The new airport was designed with that purpose in mind. What if it succeded and hordes of tourists and travellers would make stopover in Bangkok instead? How would Singapore like losing a couple of million of tourists and business travellers?

Thailand is already ahead in terms of tourist numbers and will continue to trump singapore, however singapore handles more total passengers because its an aviation hub with a lot of transit passengers. singapore also focuses on tourist dollars instead of number of arrivals. while suvarnabhumi is struggling to be fully operational, singapore's terminal 3 is about to be completed, which will match suvarnabhumi's total load capacity. it will be several years (optimistically) before thailand's aviation standards can catch up. dont hold your breath.

Thai economy is bigger, and they want to dominate their less fortunate neighbours like Cambodia and Laos and they are competing with Singaporean investors there.

Actually singapore investors have been avoiding Laos and Cambodia and Myanmar, i think they'd gladly let thailand take the lead. however its a different story with Vietnam, where singapore has been amongst the biggest investors for many years now, thailand's investment footprint in vietnam is almost invisible. to put things in a better perspective, singapore's direct competitors are more like hong kong and dubai, while thailand's direct competitors are like vietnam, philippines, indonesia.

Thais also want MNCs to set headquarters here and not in Singapore. Thailand is a natural choice for companies planning on expansion in the region.

I don't think so. singapore is regional headquarters to over 200 global banks, most big pharma players, tech players like IBM, HP, Acer, AMD, media companies like MTV, ESPN, Discovery, BBC, CNBC, all the major IBs like Goldman Sachs and Merryl Lynch, think tank consultants like Mckenzie, Bain, BCG, oil majors like Exxon Mobil and Shell, Japanese majors like Mitsui and Sumitomo, Koren majors like Samsung and LG....the only industry that thailand has more MNCs in comparison is the auto industry due to the manufacturing base, otherwise thailand doesn't even come close as a destination for MNCs. the race in the region is really between hong kong and singapore.

In the long run Singapore has nothing to offer that cannot be developed locally, eventually.

If introducing 3G would markedly increase Thailand's competitiveness but require some serious initial investment - would Singapore pay for it?

If Thailand decides to build only ONE national 3G network so that all other operators simply lease it - will Singapore chip in? The situation is that now Singapore controls 60% of Thai telecom market, they can block anything they disagree with.

you have just identified the real reason why foreign ownership limits for telcos were increased from 25% to 49%, because no foreigner is going to pump so much investment into 3G with only 25% stake and let the thai company cream all the profit, furthermore, you only raise the equivalent amount of capital to your shareholding. so while the whole world is liberalising their telco sectors to bring in much needed foreign capital and technology, thailand is doing the reverse. telenor (norway) and hutch (hong kong) are already looking to exit with all these problems and low margins, while the military govt wants singapore out of AIS, so i guess we will never get 3G in this country. this nationalistic backlash coupled with paranoia is really doing the nation a disservice.

Edited January 23, 2007 by thedude

[Plus]

Just over a year ago Telenor effectively took total control of Dtac and now it's considering a pullout? First time I hear something like this. Could you provide some sources, please.

Thai ports are never going to compete with Singapore due to geographic location but transit tourists can easily pass through Suvarnabhumi instead of Singapore. The airport hasn't turned out to be a threat yet but the potential is still there.

MNCs have been in Singapore for many many years and they are not going to switch to Bangkok overnight, if ever. BUT, for companies looking to do business in the region, Thailand is a better choice. Take autos, or retail, for example - what's the advantage of running a superstore chain from Singapore when neither customers nor suppliers live there?

Singapore long term problem is that it's becoming disconnected from the region, and as local economies grow and protect their domestic market, largely irrelevant. Same story with Hong Kong - it's not a gateway to the region anymore, just a middleman.

What I mean to say is that Thailand does have regional aspirations and has every right to protect them. Why should it just bend over and hand its satellites and telecoms to Singapore?

[wintermute]

MNCs have been in Singapore for many many years and they are not going to switch to Bangkok overnight, if ever. BUT, for companies looking to do business in the region, Thailand is a better choice.

Actually Vietnam is an even better choice. It's at about where Thailand was 20 years ago and the Vietnamese are much more savvy at business with a work ethic to boot. They are closely following China's opening of their markets to foreign investment. Thailand's future competition is really Vietnam, Indonesia, and the steamroller.. China. You see a lot of "sino-thai" joint projects because they are really trying hard to cast their cards in with the Chinese. However, more than likely China will end up overwhelming much of the region in the future with countries like Vietnam and Thailand having to find their competitive advantage quickly. Thailand will probably rely on tourism to prop itself up but it's not going to take them out of "developing world" status.

Singapore has a better future because it's a small compact city-state that has already secured itself with foreign enterprise. Its population is also educated and hard working without the serious social/institutional flaws that marr Thailand.

Take autos, or retail, for example - what's the advantage of running a superstore chain from Singapore when neither customers nor suppliers live there?

The Japanese built their base up in Thailand mainly to sell to its domestic market in which they have a 90% stake in. If Thailand become a net exporter in its own branded vehicles then it would be a different story. Right now it's just a cheap industrial manufacturing hub with Japan funding its development. If Thailand kills the golden goose then Japan will just move on to the next cheap industrial hub.

Singapore long term problem is that it's becoming disconnected from the region, and as local economies grow and protect their domestic market, largely irrelevant. Same story with Hong Kong - it's not a gateway to the region anymore, just a middleman.

Wrong. Singapore's financial status is extremely important to most of Asia. It has set itself up as a very necessary middleman. Hong Kong may become irrelevant but only because over time it will be reabsorbed into the mainland. Shanghai is already prepping itself to take over Hong Kong's place. Singapore really has no competition in the finance sector in SE Asia. Thailand can't even plan out its own domestic policies competently much less run a global financial hub.

What I mean to say is that Thailand does have regional aspirations and has every right to protect them. Why should it just bend over and hand its satellites and telecoms to Singapore?

It shouldn't but it also shouldn't engage in rather opaque policy flip-flops that looks like they are engaging in corporate looting.

[Plus]

Little correction - Japanese have invested in making Thailand a world wide production base for small pickups, and regional production base for Hondas and Toyotas.

Still, the main point is not how fat is Thailand's chance of becoming a region leader in this or that industry - the point is that there's competition for leadership and Thailand wants to be in the race.

They probably don't need to launch an extra satellite but their concerns are legitimate.

Did someone post this interesting article from the Nation?

NATIONAL SECURITY

ShinSat sale 'tragic blow for defence'

Expert says takeover should be blocked or Thailand would have to spend billions to ensure signals are not intercepted

Singapore's takeover of the Thaicom satellite and AIS mobile phone company is a "tragedy" for Thailand's defence communications network and should be blocked if possible, a top Australian defence analyst said yesterday.

Deal of the Century

Professor Des Ball said the sale of the ShinSat satellite and AIS to Temasek would end up costing Thailand billions of baht - which would be the price of having to launch a new satellite to ensure the Thai military's signals could not be intercepted.

"It's not in Thailand's interests to allow Singapore control of such a critically important communications system, through the satellite and mobile phone company," Prof Ball said in an interview in Bangkok yesterday.

"That's why they [the Thai Army] are now talking about their own satellite and using [two-way] radios - their system has been compromised."

Professor Ball, from the Australian National University in Canberra, is a world authority on signals intelligence. A regular visitor to Thailand and Southeast Asia, he has strong links with the Thai military.

Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont said yesterday the government would solve the problem in the long run - by either buying the [shinSat] stake back or launching a new satellite. "We have to think about this in various aspects, not only security, but also commercial," Surayud told reporters.

"Further, we don't know whether the current stakeholder wants to sell to us."

The government had no plan to launch a new satellite in the short term, but the Information Communications and Technology Ministry was likely to launch its own satellite late this year, he said.

Prof Ball said Australia went through a similar debate five years ago when Singtel purchased the Optus mobile phone company. He was one of a series of analysts who publicly opposed the takeover. The Australian government eventually allowed the sale to go through, partly to ensure continued close cooperation with the island state, but Australia had to spend a huge sum on fibre-optic cables to avoid use of the Optus satellite and ensure its defence communications were secure.

Part of the problem, Ball said, was "Singapore have a track record of taking advantage of information for commercial and political purposes" - as did the US, and former Soviet Union.

Singapore had "listened to and photographed Australian military facilities", which had created diplomatic rifts, he said.

"They have a history of abusing their access to training in other facilities abroad.

"That is not what friends are supposed to do - they abused their friendship," Ball said.

But remarks made recently by Army chief General Sonthi showed it was very clear Thailand was aware of the problem posed by the Shin takeover, he said.

The sale of ShinSat to Temasek had "given Singapore direct access to the Royal Thai Army's satellite communications", Ball said.

"They are going to have to have their own independent system, otherwise they hand their military and very sensitive [data] traffic to Singapore on a plate.

"It's a tragedy they've handed that away with the Shin deal and will now have to redesign their own system.

"If they could get out of this [shin] there are national security reasons why they should. If not, they'll have to spend billions [of baht] - or hundreds of millions of dollars - to redesign another satellite system. Launching a new satellite could cost US$250 million.

"If I was in [Thai] Army HQ [headquarters] I'd be trying to get out of this [shin] deal as quick as I could."

Singapore already had an extensive array of satellite listening facilities, from a major base on Sentosa Island to listening equipment at the Thai Army base in Sai Yok - which Prof Ball said appeared to be "primarily focused on Thailand" - judging by the types of antennae he had seen there in recent years.

There were both HF (High Frequency) and VHF (Very High Frequency) antennae at the Singaporean compound at RTA base in Sai Yok, but he believed "the VHF is predominantly listening to Thailand" within a radius of 100-150km. A priority target might be a military base such as the Ninth Division and its associated units at Kanchanaburi.

Ball presumed that Thai military data sent via the Thaicom-3 would be encrypted - "so that's not easy [to decode ] ... it depends on the level of encryption and the Singaporeans' ability to access this stuff.

"The Thaicom-3 satellite system carries a considerable amount of military and non-military [data] traffic. And in a sense, AIS and the mobile phone system is the same issue - it's the ability [of Singapore] to monitor the mobile phone traffic devices from that satellite."

Thailand's communications experts were "very switched on" and among the leaders in Southeast Asia, Ball said. "And Thaicom-3 is one of the most advanced in Asia.

"These guys know how your circuits flow better - probably better than anyone, other than the Singaporeans. They would have been aware of this [problem] from the start."

Jim Pollard

The Nation