Thailand Demands Telecom, Satellites Back From Singapore

[seagull]

I think governments should agree to deals struck by former administrations...even if the deal was a lemon for Thailand.

Imagine the reluctance that foreign governments would have doing business with Thailand knowing that any contract or agreement could be reversed by newly elected officials

Governments who decide to take foreign assets and "nationalize" industries in their countries suffer a big international loss in confidence.

The message they send is that rule of law and signatures on contracts are only good from one adminstration to another.

In addition All foreigner who bought condominiums in Thailand should start worrying that the new government isn't going start regarding them as national assets. Or if you are married to a Thai and own a house you might start worrying if Thailand is going to take away her right to own property. That's how it was only 10 or so years ago wjem the economy was in the toilet and the Thai government changed the law to attract foreign capital

Well said, I applaud you. Otherwise, any contract signed by any two parties, be it individuals or between governments, would have to state categorically...... "this contract can and will be declared null and void, as and when I or my future administration deems fit to do so, and no reasons shall forewith be available at your disposable". This is military rule. As much as soldier boy claims that the coup is for national unity and democratic reforms, hel_l I doubt it. Even when elections are finally held, they would still be pulling strings, elected politicians would merely be puppets! After all, they came with guns and tanks, didn't they.

[seagull]

Who do you guys think, arn't Thailand Military stronger than the small Singapore armed force?

Will the US & US really help Singapore when war broke up?

Thailand military stronger than small Singapore armed forces??? Where have you been? And I don't think singapore would need assistance from the US or UK in the event of a military confrontation, or at worst scenario, an outright war with Thailand.

Having said these, no, Thailand and Singapore is not going to war over bht 140 billion. As soldier boy Sonthi, has said, he is looking for resources and whether Thailand could buy back the so call national assets.

[pap]

If Temasek's takeover was legal and met all required sale stipulations of the law at the time, then Thailand will just have to wear it or offer a fair market price and ask for good faith.

There is enough corruption and cheating in Thailand, that if this asset was legally sold and bought, then tough 5hit.

I do not see this coup government turning out good for Thailand or being willing to let go when it really comes down to it. I fully expect the interim government will NOT be replaced by a demorcratic one that anywhere near meets a normal international definition of democracy.

I tend to agree with you but I definitely see the counter point to that. That counter point is that Thaksin had the laws set up to benefit himself and in doing so violated the public trust and subjugated the democratic institutions that would normally control an abuse of power.

This is not a simple nut to crack and is not as simple as it looks at first glance.

[pap]

Who do you guys think, arn't Thailand Military stronger than the small Singapore armed force?

Will the US & US really help Singapore when war broke up?

Thailand military stronger than small Singapore armed forces??? Where have you been? And I don't think singapore would need assistance from the US or UK in the event of a military confrontation, or at worst scenario, an outright war with Thailand.

Having said these, no, Thailand and Singapore is not going to war over bht 140 billion. As soldier boy Sonthi, has said, he is looking for resources and whether Thailand could buy back the so call national assets.

Another point is the US and UK are also friends of Thailand....not just Singapore. They have strategic interests with both countries.

Even though both countries share a dim view of the coup their lack of intervention shows their intent to continue to be friends. A war over something so minor is ludicrous. A war over soccer is more likely.

[macular]

... As soldier boy Sonthi, has said, he is looking for resources and whether Thailand could buy back the so call national assets.

WHEN did he ever mentioned about "buying" back? I thought the word expressed verbally is "take back" !

Get a correct politician to do the job ! Fast !!!

Edited February 16, 2007 by macular

[farang prince]

Tell me if I'm missing something here.

Foreign shareholding in Thai companies is limited to 49%

Shin corp is a Thai company

Shin shares are currently in the toilet

Enfoce the (pre-coup) law and buy back a controlling

interest at a bargain basement price.

????

Yes you are missing something....Do you really think Singapore is going to roll over and play dead if Thailand attempts some ridiculous end run on the Shin/Temasek deal? Singapore is not one of the region's strongest economies because they are a lap dog. Any attempt by the government in Thailand to strong arm Temasek would result in the immediate termination of satellite communications throughout the country. I guess the general's can then use couriers or smoke signals to conduct business. The naivete of some of our TV posters is equalled only by the naivete of the Thai generals. Incredible.

[macular]

...and oh yes, he wanted to take back the "national asset" which was publicly listed (and sold) and he has also thought that it was HIS belongings.

quote:

"I am thinking about whether we can take those assets back. I want our national assets back, especially the satellites."

"I want my belongings back, especially the satellites."

http://www.bangkokpost.com/topstories/tops...s.php?id=116857

Was thinking that the military should spend more effort in attending to the problems below:

http://www.bangkokpost.com/breaking_news/b...s.php?id=116856

(link about Southern unrest)

Edited February 16, 2007 by macular

[chuchok]

From not so long ago...

Singapore-Thailand inks MOU on investment promotion and protection

font size ZoomIn ZoomOut

Singapore and Thailand have forged closer economic relationship with representatives of both sides inking a memorandum of understanding (MOU) on bilateral investment promotion and protection.

Thai Foreign Minister Kantathi Suphamongkhon and Singaporean Trade and Industry Minister Lim Hng Kiang on Wednesday signed the MOU at the second forum on Singapore-Thailand Enhanced Economic Relationship (STEER), witnessed by Deputy Prime Minister and Commerce Minister Somkid Jatusripitak, who is co-chairman of the meeting, the Thai News Agency reported Thursday.

The two-day STEER meeting, hosted by Thailand during Nov. 22-23, was organized with the common intention by premiers of both countries to strengthen bilateral economic cooperation and partnership.

An informed source said the signing of the MOU took place under the framework of an agreement reached by the governments of Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand -- all the founding members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) -- in 1987 to promote and protect investment.

The MOU was prepared in response to the Thai government's policy to attract foreign investors and promote Thailand as a regional investment hub.

It stated a procedure on investment protection for individuals and corporate entities in Thailand and Singapore.

The two ministers also signed a strategic roadmap for the economic partnership between the two neighboring countries in fields of food and farm products, as well as tourism, small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), education, and capital market.

Simultaneously, around 280 leading business persons of both countries joined a seminar to match trade and investment partners in seven fields, including software, electronics, vehicle parts, transport and logistics, property and finance.

In the past five years, the Board of Investment of Thailand ( BOI) has granted investment promotion privileges to 339 Singapore- run investment projects with total value of 78.36 billion baht.

Singapore is ranked the second biggest investor in Thailand, the agency said.

Source: Xinhua

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200511/2...124_223677.html

Edited February 16, 2007 by chuchok

[lannabull]

My guess is that a little horse trading occurs and something that saves face for all sides will be worked out. They'll thump their chests for a little while yet though.

They could also give them equal value in Buffalo, I hear a few died recently.

[nick2k]

The Singapore company has some responsibility to shoulder, I mean they hold the company through a number of questionable entities to evade the 51% rule, helping Taksin to avoid taxes etc..

I mean buying such a huge company directly from the prime minister of said country. They must have known there would be questions when Taksins time ended, knew that there were rules they were circumnavigating in terms of ownership etc.. They took a risk, it looks like it won't be paying off.

For Thailand they simply need to follow through on their own rules, perhaps limit foreign ownership of telecomms/energy etc... to 25% or so.

When Thaksin came to power the foreign holdings limit on telco's was 49.5%

One of his first major self-help measures was to drop that to 25% immediately after Orange had put in the money to vreate CP Orange here.

Immediately before the sale of Shin, he reversed it back up to 49.5%

Vested interest? Abuse of position and authority?

Absolutely !

I am a reader. I would like to read some documentation supporting your claim. could you please provide some links? thank you.

[kuma]

so many years ago elements of the us gov were trying to stop the sale of global crossing to "the chinese"......... (see below)

However, the Global Crossing buyout by Hutchison Whampoa is drawing fire from inside Capitol Hill. At issue is the role of billionaire Li Ka-Shing, Hong Kong's most well-known businessman, whose companies make up 15 percent of the market capitalization of the Hong Kong stock market.

Li Ka-Shing's empire includes Hutchison Whampoa, Chinese ports, telecom, energy assets and the Panama Canal.

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, a California Republican, has sent letters to President Bush, the attorney general, the Department of Defense and the investigative arm of Congress demanding an inquiry into the plan, according to Al Santoli, national security adviser to Rohrabacher.

"The purchase of Global Crossing by Li Ka-Shing is another step as his role of a stalker for the People's Republic of China," stated Santoli.

Rep. Rohrabacher claims Li's close connections to the Chinese government should disqualify him from owning Global Crossing's network. Li Ka-Shing's ownership also raises national security issues. Global is a major bidder for U.S. Defense communications contracts.

Global Crossing recently lost a $400 million U.S. defense contract to provide secure communications for the U.S. military. The contract remains a major part of the controversy surrounding the bankrupt telecommunications giant, which also reportedly controls 20 percent of all the fiber-optic cable leaving the United States.

so how many of the people barking about thailand now were on the same horse when america did this?? global crossing was far less startegic to the us than taksins assets he sold are to thailand, but did everyone lose it about the banana republic of the usa (if they did chooose to block the sale...in the end they realized the company was of little staregic value anyway in the grand scheme of things) and the death of foreign investment blah blah blah

oh and lets not forget this other gem out of the us...Chinese investment ignited political controversy last year when a state-owned oil company, CNOOC, sought to purchase Unocal, a second-tier U.S. oil company. The bid ultimately collapsed amid furious congressional opposition.

and i do not want to pick on just the us, many european countries, asian ones, even my own have done similar things in the past, and will do them again in the furture.

it was noted in this forum that indeed s'pore pushed its luck wrt the deal they made with a sitting PM that was flouting some rules and changing others to suit his purposes solely - and if they did not know that then shame on them. given the behaviour of those in power at the time and the obvious conflicts of interest absolutely thailand should be taking another look at this - and at the same time have a chuckle over all the humpty dumpties out there saying the world as thailand knows it will collapse, hahaha give me a break.

sure their could be some more diplomatic language, but the speaker being quoted here is not a diplomat or a politician.

The Singapore company has some responsibility to shoulder, I mean they hold the company through a number of questionable entities to evade the 51% rule, helping Taksin to avoid taxes etc..

I mean buying such a huge company directly from the prime minister of said country. They must have known there would be questions when Taksins time ended, knew that there were rules they were circumnavigating in terms of ownership etc.. They took a risk, it looks like it won't be paying off.

For Thailand they simply need to follow through on their own rules, perhaps limit foreign ownership of telecomms/energy etc... to 25% or so.

When Thaksin came to power the foreign holdings limit on telco's was 49.5%

One of his first major self-help measures was to drop that to 25% immediately after Orange had put in the money to vreate CP Orange here.

Immediately before the sale of Shin, he reversed it back up to 49.5%

Vested interest? Abuse of position and authority?

Absolutely !

I am a reader. I would like to read some documentation supporting your claim. could you please provide some links? thank you.

[LPCustom69]

I don't think that you have to worry about owning A condo. However, owning more than one might turn out to be another matter. The way things are going, it wouldn't surprize me if they tried to seize condos from those that own several. In the old days, when a thai woman married a farang, she gave up the right to own property in Thailand. In the interests of "saving Thailand," they may revert back to that to keep the farangs from owning a piece of Thailand through their spouse. If they're smart they won't, but who knows anymore.

I think governments should agree to deals struck by former administrations...even if the deal was a lemon for Thailand.

Imagine the reluctance that foreign governments would have doing business with Thailand knowing that any contract or agreement could be reversed by newly elected officials

Governments who decide to take foreign assets and "nationalize" industries in their countries suffer a big international loss in confidence.

The message they send is that rule of law and signatures on contracts are only good from one adminstration to another.

In addition All foreigner who bought condominiums in Thailand should start worrying that the new government isn't going start regarding them as national assets. Or if you are married to a Thai and own a house you might start worrying if Thailand is going to take away her right to own property. That's how it was only 10 or so years ago wjem the economy was in the toilet and the Thai government changed the law to attract foreign capital

[chuchok]

so many years ago elements of the us gov were trying to stop the sale of global crossing to "the chinese"......... (see below)

However, the Global Crossing buyout by Hutchison Whampoa is drawing fire from inside Capitol Hill. At issue is the role of billionaire Li Ka-Shing, Hong Kong's most well-known businessman, whose companies make up 15 percent of the market capitalization of the Hong Kong stock market.

Li Ka-Shing's empire includes Hutchison Whampoa, Chinese ports, telecom, energy assets and the Panama Canal.

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, a California Republican, has sent letters to President Bush, the attorney general, the Department of Defense and the investigative arm of Congress demanding an inquiry into the plan, according to Al Santoli, national security adviser to Rohrabacher.

"The purchase of Global Crossing by Li Ka-Shing is another step as his role of a stalker for the People's Republic of China," stated Santoli.

Rep. Rohrabacher claims Li's close connections to the Chinese government should disqualify him from owning Global Crossing's network. Li Ka-Shing's ownership also raises national security issues. Global is a major bidder for U.S. Defense communications contracts.

Global Crossing recently lost a $400 million U.S. defense contract to provide secure communications for the U.S. military. The contract remains a major part of the controversy surrounding the bankrupt telecommunications giant, which also reportedly controls 20 percent of all the fiber-optic cable leaving the United States.

so how many of the people barking about thailand now were on the same horse when america did this?? global crossing was far less startegic to the us than taksins assets he sold are to thailand, but did everyone lose it about the banana republic of the usa (if they did chooose to block the sale...in the end they realized the company was of little staregic value anyway in the grand scheme of things) and the death of foreign investment blah blah blah

oh and lets not forget this other gem out of the us...Chinese investment ignited political controversy last year when a state-owned oil company, CNOOC, sought to purchase Unocal, a second-tier U.S. oil company. The bid ultimately collapsed amid furious congressional opposition.

and i do not want to pick on just the us, many european countries, asian ones, even my own have done similar things in the past, and will do them again in the furture.

it was noted in this forum that indeed s'pore pushed its luck wrt the deal they made with a sitting PM that was flouting some rules and changing others to suit his purposes solely - and if they did not know that then shame on them. given the behaviour of those in power at the time and the obvious conflicts of interest absolutely thailand should be taking another look at this - and at the same time have a chuckle over all the humpty dumpties out there saying the world as thailand knows it will collapse, hahaha give me a break.

sure their could be some more diplomatic language, but the speaker being quoted here is not a diplomat or a politician.

Li Ka-Shing has close to 15% (If not more) of the Worlds containers ports sewn up.They may even control/manage bangkok....

[pap]

so many years ago elements of the us gov were trying to stop the sale of global crossing to "the chinese"......... (see below)

However, the Global Crossing buyout by Hutchison Whampoa is drawing fire from inside Capitol Hill. At issue is the role of billionaire Li Ka-Shing, Hong Kong's most well-known businessman, whose companies make up 15 percent of the market capitalization of the Hong Kong stock market.

Li Ka-Shing's empire includes Hutchison Whampoa, Chinese ports, telecom, energy assets and the Panama Canal.

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, a California Republican, has sent letters to President Bush, the attorney general, the Department of Defense and the investigative arm of Congress demanding an inquiry into the plan, according to Al Santoli, national security adviser to Rohrabacher.

"The purchase of Global Crossing by Li Ka-Shing is another step as his role of a stalker for the People's Republic of China," stated Santoli.

Rep. Rohrabacher claims Li's close connections to the Chinese government should disqualify him from owning Global Crossing's network. Li Ka-Shing's ownership also raises national security issues. Global is a major bidder for U.S. Defense communications contracts.

Global Crossing recently lost a $400 million U.S. defense contract to provide secure communications for the U.S. military. The contract remains a major part of the controversy surrounding the bankrupt telecommunications giant, which also reportedly controls 20 percent of all the fiber-optic cable leaving the United States.

so how many of the people barking about thailand now were on the same horse when america did this?? global crossing was far less startegic to the us than taksins assets he sold are to thailand, but did everyone lose it about the banana republic of the usa (if they did chooose to block the sale...in the end they realized the company was of little staregic value anyway in the grand scheme of things) and the death of foreign investment blah blah blah

oh and lets not forget this other gem out of the us...Chinese investment ignited political controversy last year when a state-owned oil company, CNOOC, sought to purchase Unocal, a second-tier U.S. oil company. The bid ultimately collapsed amid furious congressional opposition.

and i do not want to pick on just the us, many european countries, asian ones, even my own have done similar things in the past, and will do them again in the furture.

it was noted in this forum that indeed s'pore pushed its luck wrt the deal they made with a sitting PM that was flouting some rules and changing others to suit his purposes solely - and if they did not know that then shame on them. given the behaviour of those in power at the time and the obvious conflicts of interest absolutely thailand should be taking another look at this - and at the same time have a chuckle over all the humpty dumpties out there saying the world as thailand knows it will collapse, hahaha give me a break.

sure their could be some more diplomatic language, but the speaker being quoted here is not a diplomat or a politician.

The difference between this and the other countries stopping sales is that the sale was stopped prior to transfer of ownership. Had this been stopped prior to sale your point would be much more spot on. In Thailands case their issue is more closely tied to national security because they can not secure communications easily via other means. "Taking" as opposed to "buying" is where the issue is.

Each nation must decide what it feels is in its national interest. That's not for us to decide. At least the Thais concern on this one is valid. Their proposed action of "taking"is the problem. If "taking" is really what they meant in their statement its a problem. I know how something being mis-translated can have a profound impact on its meaning.

To take and to want are very close in meaning in many languages other than English.

[cdnvic]

laughing out very loud @ those talking of war

You aren't the only one.

[beano2274]

This has two aspects. As a Military man he is correct to demand secure communication channels. This is a requirement for all militaries. The fact that Singapore is saying they do not listen in is probably not true unless their government did not realize they had this capability which is possible. He should try all means to have HIS GOVERNMENT find a way to get him the secure communications he needs. But it should be the Government doing this via a much more intelligent means.

The other aspect is what will it cost Thailand to further alienate the free market. They could always purchase it back. Most things are for sale if the price is right. If it truly is a national asset they should buy it back. Taking back the asset is the wrong method without a doubt. They may not be able to take it back anyway. This is not an oil well that sits under their land that they can take back. Whoever has the passwords to access telemetry and communication channels controls the satellite. I have not doubt the command set was altered when new ownership took over. Should Thailand try to take the satellite back the Singaporeans could simply disable the satellites via commands. Trying to force the company to give back the Satellites is definitely the wrong approach.

I have no doubt the general is good at running an army. But yet again this shows why generals should not run countries.

Then the Thais should think of cryptography, it is used by all the worlds Military to decipher communications, so saying that Singapore listen in is absolute rubbish, and why are the Thais using the unsecure communications.

This place is getting worse everyday.

Is this the fallout from Thaksin going to Singapore, to collect more money, or losing at football

[iosufm]

Yet another reason to increase my short position on the SET. This guy has been my ticket to print money, its easy to profit from stupidity. Lovin' it.

[Bruce1]

The govt doesn't own the satellites, it only owns the licences to operate them. The general is talking rubbish.

If the military needs secure communications it should arrange them independently.

Taking back Shin Corp would mean repudiating foreign investment. Singapore has a lot of money invested in Thailand. Many other people have lots of money invested in this country. Scare away foreign investors and this place will rapidly start to look like Burma or North Korea. That would be a very stupid thing to do. Surely these generals are not that stupid?

[wintermute]

The govt doesn't own the satellites, it only owns the licences to operate them. The general is talking rubbish.

Exactly and this is why it's such a joke. The satellites weren't launched from Thailand to begin with and i'm sure the actual array to control them are based far away from Thai borders. Even if they did "seize" the paper ownership and a few Shincorp buildings they still wouldn't have any control.

If the military needs secure communications it should arrange them independently.

Taking back Shin Corp would mean repudiating foreign investment. Singapore has a lot of money invested in Thailand. Many other people have lots of money invested in this country. Scare away foreign investors and this place will rapidly start to look like Burma or North Korea. That would be a very stupid thing to do.

Surely these generals are not that stupid?

I wouldn't be so sure of that. Their recent comments on reverting back to a largely self stylized "suffiency economy" sounds awfully like protectionism and isolationism rolled into one. Their colorful little speeches to the foreign press and foreign governments haven't convinced me of anything else. I don't think they'd take the extreme movement of completely cutting off the outside world but I have a feeling they will try to limit contact and increase their own self interested rule. It's very much a "Burma" scenario we're seeing here the only difference is there hasn't been any real bloodshed yet.

[Bruce1]

I hope you're wrong but I fear you might be right.

[pampal]

It make no sense to buy back the old satellites and their related equipment.

Commission new satellites and keep it secure if they are worried about eavesdropping.

Allow singapore to operate in the commercial market and not the military.

This wouldn't shake investor confidence while allowing secure comms.

[Gravelrash]

I've been observing the "I hate Toxin" rants for a while, many seem oblivious to the fact that we may have ended up with the greater of two evils, there are many disturbing signs, hopefully not.

[hammered]

I've been observing the "I hate Toxin" rants for a while, many seem oblivious to the fact that we may have ended up with the greater of two evils, there are many disturbing signs, hopefully not.

While the investment climate may not be what we as foreign guests in Thailand like, we should also not forget the many thousands of deaths under the last government when comparing although I would like to see more action taking on investigating the killings.

I personally think a lot of the nationalist and anti-Singapore rhetoric is aimed at the average Thai person who will like it and does not represent Thai foreign policy.

[KireB]

Just a scenario, a different perspective and not a fact or opinion:

The coup went way too smooth and convenient. Thaksin and cronies staged their downfall together with some parts of the millitary. He sold his company and now they are gonna buy it back using taxpayers money and playing the nationalistic hand.

By announcing the need and desire to buy something back, the price increases rapidly. Huge profits for all parties involved!

Follow the money trail.

[popshirt]

... As soldier boy Sonthi, has said, he is looking for resources and whether Thailand could buy back the so call national assets.

WHEN did he ever mentioned about "buying" back? I thought the word expressed verbally is "take back" !

Get a correct politician to do the job ! Fast !!!

Ummmm where is Margaret Thatcher these days?

[Sing_Sling]

An old military/xenophobic tactic is to unify against a common enemy, be it real or imagined.

korea has been doing this for decades to further their economic growth and keep Japanese goods out of their country as well as get the population into a feeding frenzy to compete.

Thailand has long had Burma as their target boy . . . this has now changed to Singapore . . . and the loss in football must have felt like a right kick in the ghoulies.

Military Action? Ridiculous.

Economic war? Bye-bye Thailand.

[LoveThai]

sonthi's comments are rather strange and confrontational - not a good sign. i hope surayud brings some rational thinking to the process - all thailand has to do is enforce existing law and it will get 51% of shin back. the only thing left to do is work out the details.

Will the details be too much of a hassle to them? i think in this situation, mai pen rai will not be use.

Edited February 17, 2007 by LoveThai

[slimdog]

A couple of snippets from the Bangkok Posts report:

ShinSat is 41% owned by Shin Corp, so it is still a Thai-owned firm. The company has signed a Build-Transfer-Operate (BTO) contract, so satellites and orbital slots are considered state-owned. The company only has the right to provide services. The management and staff are also Thai.

ShinSat's concession was amended to allow Shin Corp to reduce its stake from 51% to the minimum 40%. The original contract required Shin Corp to hold at least 50% shares for the 30-year contract.

Full story: http://www.bangkokpost.com/News/17Feb2007_news00.php

[ianc66]

Whatever made Sonthi think his communications were secure before Temasek?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECHELON

[BigC]

bring taksin back. if he was suck a bad man he would have curtianpeople assiniated long before he was kicked out. he could even have it done now.

he was the clsed thing to a decoratic leader that Thailand, Asia had.

he made a little on the side. not like asian govments to me corrup now is it.

sounds to me there is something personal behinde the scenes.

maybe he didn't pay the right people and this is what happened. well this is that of the opinum of a thai taxi driver in BBk