Vague Treaty Rules Sank Nasa Project: Thailand

[webfact]

Vague treaty rules sank Nasa project

Supalak Ganjanakhundee

The Nation

BANGKOK: -- Thai politics has shot down the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration (Nasa)'s weather-research project, exposing the country's lack of consistent legal procedures for handling cooperation and agreements with foreign governments.

Nasa asked for permission to use Utapao airbase for its three weather surveillance aircraft to conduct the Southeast Asia Composition, Cloud, Climate Coupling Regional Study (SEAC4RS) project in August and September.

This deployment will address key questions regarding the influence of Asian emissions on clouds, climate and air quality, as well as the fundamental satellite observability of the system. Scientific observations will focus on the role of the Asian monsoon circulation and convective redistribution in governing upper atmospheric composition and chemistry, according to Nasa's website.

The opposition Democrat Party and some senators demanded that the Cabinet bring the proposal before Parliament for its approval in accordance with Article 190 of the Constitution, as they suspected Nasa might have an ulterior motive to conduct the research for military purposes aimed at containing China in Asia-Pacific.

The project could drag Thailand into the strategic conflict between China and the US, they said.

In fact, there were no grounds to doubt the scientific merits of the project. The opposition party has been familiar with it since Nasa signed a joint statement of intent with the Science Ministry's Geo-Informatics and Space Technology Development Agency (Gistda) in September 2010, during the Abhisit Vejjajiva administration.

If there were any concerns over the project's implications for national security, the then Democrat-led government had an obligation to clear them up and bring them before Parliament for approval, as it is now demanding the current Cabinet do. In fact, Abhisit's administration paid no attention to the Nasa deal.

The project matters to politicians now because some saw an opportunity, on constitutional grounds, to impeach the government if the Cabinet failed to seek parliamentary approval.

Strictly speaking, the scientific cooperation project does not require parliamentary approval under the Constitution. The government's legal advisers at the Council of State, as well as the Foreign Ministry's Treaties and Legal Affairs departments, are in agreement on this.

Article 190 of the Constitution says that agreements with foreign countries or international organisations need Parliament's approval if they result in a change in territory or sovereignty over territory; have significant implications for the budget or for social or economic security; or would require the issuance of domestic law to be enforced.

Unfortunately, the Constitution Court set a precedent of loosely interpreting the charter when it ruled on a joint statement signed with Cambodia that simply supported the World Heritage inscription of Cambodia's Preah Vihear temple in 2008. In its verdict, it said that any document signed with a representative of a foreign government could be regarded as a treaty that "may" make changes in territory or sovereignty or have significant implications for economic and social security. In so ruling, it declared the Preah Vihear joint statement unconstitutional, forcing then foreign minister Noppadon Pattama to step down.

If the term "may" applies to any context, it was not unreasonable for politicians to expect that the court would decide that the Nasa project "may" have a significant impact on the security of the country.

Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra's government apparently feared the consequences of a ruling under Article 190, not conflict between China and the US. It decided to bring the Nasa proposal into Parliament in accordance with Article 179, not 190 as demanded by the opposition.

Article 179 stipulates a consultative process, and does not call for a resolution to be passed. The move provided an excuse for the Cabinet to delay its final decision on the project until the next session of Parliament in August.

In the end, Nasa made the decision to cancel the project due to time constraints on preparing its equipment. This project will not be the last to fall victim to the political struggle in Thailand.

-- The Nation 2012-07-04

[theblether]

No, no, no...........The masters in Beijing sunk the Nasa project. I wish these guys would remember what they said from one day to the next.

Edited July 3, 2012 by theblether

[Thai at Heart]

So once again a court"interpretation" ends up being used for political ends.

[Moruya]

The man has Ganja in his surname

[chotthee]

The masters in Beijing sunk the Nasa project?

More like The masters in Dubai sunk the Nasa project because USA refuse the visa application.

[noitom]

US people are lucky that the Thais rejected the offer and the US will not waste any US taxpayer money helping Thais with a preposterous learning project.

[Unkomoncents]

In fact, there were no grounds to doubt the scientific merits of the project. The opposition party has been familiar with it since Nasa signed a joint statement of intent with the Science Ministry's Geo-Informatics and Space Technology Development Agency (Gistda) in September 2010, during the Abhisit Vejjajiva administration.

All part of Thailand's march towards global insignificance. This fiasco stretches way back to the last government. This is not a Thaksin, Yingluck, PTP, Democrat, Yellow-Shirt, or Red-Shirt issue; this is simply the result of the incompetent machinations of a developing country that is determined to become famous for political instability, corruption, and just plain stupidity.

[rotary]

US people are lucky that the Thais rejected the offer and the US will not waste any US taxpayer money helping Thais with a preposterous learning project.

You are right on that. US folks and Thai folks both lucked out on this. Thats all the US needs,,,,,,,another boondoggle project.

[phiphidon]

As per my post from 29th June. If the democratic party and abhisit put as much effort into winning hearts and minds and winning votes as they do into trying to get the "opposition" impeached or dissolved they might actually win an election one day.

Surely they realise that actions such as these do them no good in the long run - the public (well those who aren't full on dems) realise the lengths these guys go to on legal grounds and particularly remember that when it comes to the elections. They are fed up to the back teeth with politicians interfering with their elected choice.

The project matters to politicians now because some saw an opportunity, on constitutional grounds, to impeach the government if the Cabinet failed to seek parliamentary approval.

PhiPhiDon Posted 2012-06-29 13:58:52

Some information for those of you who genuinely are interested into why this didn't go ahead as opposed to those who have already made their one state minds up:

Article 190 of the constitution states that before any international agreements are made by State agencies with foreign powers the agreement/s have to be discussed in parliament first. Well actually, not all agreements, it depends on how the judiciary sees fit at the time - there is a fluid interpretation of Article 190.

Discretion being the better part of valour and bearing in mind the CCs recent actions (and determination of the dems to get back into power by any means possible other than the ballot box) the government thought it best to discuss the deal in parliament rather than risk being dissolved by the CC for not having done the right thing.

As simple as that

Edited July 4, 2012 by phiphidon

[zydeco]

Yes, it is best the US taxpayer avoid being entangled in the political insanity rampant in the country right now. No doubt bribes, waste, and inefficiencies would have played out. The problem is that I live, here, in Thailand. The study would have done me and those close to me a great deal of good. I spent two months evacuated from my house during the flood last year, because the nitwits in charge had no idea how to manage what should have been a minor crisis. Instead, they flooded half the country, destroyed homes, reduced industrial productivity, and likely killed scores of people through their ineptitude. This country needs the NASA study. In particular I need it, if it would help avoid another catastrophe like last year.

[Dap]

Vague treaty rules had nothing to do with sinking the NASA project, idiots did.

[americaninbangkok]

As per my post from 29th June. If the democratic party and abhisit put as much effort into winning hearts and minds and winning votes as they do into trying to get the "opposition" impeached or dissolved they might actually win an election one day.

Speaking of great PTP projects... How are those tablet PCs coming along? Are we up to a thousand yet?

[Moruya]

As per my post from 29th June. If the democratic party and abhisit put as much effort into winning hearts and minds and winning votes as they do into trying to get the "opposition" impeached or dissolved they might actually win an election one day.

Surely they realise that actions such as these do them no good in the long run - the public (well those who aren't full on dems) realise the lengths these guys go to on legal grounds and particularly remember that when it comes to the elections. They are fed up to the back teeth with politicians interfering with their elected choice.

The project matters to politicians now because some saw an opportunity, on constitutional grounds, to impeach the government if the Cabinet failed to seek parliamentary approval.

PhiPhiDon Posted 2012-06-29 13:58:52

Some information for those of you who genuinely are interested into why this didn't go ahead as opposed to those who have already made their one state minds up:

Article 190 of the constitution states that before any international agreements are made by State agencies with foreign powers the agreement/s have to be discussed in parliament first. Well actually, not all agreements, it depends on how the judiciary sees fit at the time - there is a fluid interpretation of Article 190.

Discretion being the better part of valour and bearing in mind the CCs recent actions (and determination of the dems to get back into power by any means possible other than the ballot box) the government thought it best to discuss the deal in parliament rather than risk being dissolved by the CC for not having done the right thing.

As simple as that

Whilst I am aware that I'd have more chance of making you see if I poked both your eyes out with a poker I shall persist.

Do you truly believe that Thaksin did no wrong?

Do you truly believe that his sister's administration is acting impartially for the good of the people?

Do you truly believe that Abhisit and Suthep asked the armed forces to open fire with live rounds on the red shirts?

[seminomadic]

The man has Ganja in his surname

Excellent observation.

Of course I can't be sure of the tones, but the complete last name appears to translate as "Pot, eh? You're good."

[Moruya]

The man has Ganja in his surname

Excellent observation.

Of course I can't be sure of the tones, but the complete last name appears to translate as "Pot, eh? You're good."

Indeed. And the government seemed to be entertaining a Chinese gentleman called vegetable piss this week

[phiphidon]

As per my post from 29th June. If the democratic party and abhisit put as much effort into winning hearts and minds and winning votes as they do into trying to get the "opposition" impeached or dissolved they might actually win an election one day.

Speaking of great PTP projects... How are those tablet PCs coming along? Are we up to a thousand yet?

Why are you asking me? What do tablet PC's have to do with democratic party interference causing delays that resulted in the cancellation of a NASA project that they had previously agreed on when in office. I'll give you a clue, nothing, next.

[phiphidon]

Vague treaty rules had nothing to do with sinking the NASA project, idiots did.

Yes if the democrats hadn't insisted on the project being discussed in parliament, the alternative being an charge of anti constitutionalism and possible dissolving of the PTP, this project could have gone ahead.

The dem.party is responsible for this debacle and yes, they are the idiots.

[culicine]

As per my post from 29th June. If the democratic party and abhisit put as much effort into winning hearts and minds and winning votes as they do into trying to get the "opposition" impeached or dissolved they might actually win an election one day.

Speaking of great PTP projects... How are those tablet PCs coming along? Are we up to a thousand yet?

Why are you asking me? What do tablet PC's have to do with democratic party interference causing delays that resulted in the cancellation of a NASA project that they had previously agreed on when in office. I'll give you a clue, nothing, next.

Nice to see you recognise the Democrat party as being the democratic party in LoS..cheers Yinkluck needs no interference from the democrats. She and her clan are quite capable of screwing things up by themselves:)

[who]

Vague Treaty Rules Sank Nasa Project

Rubbish. What sank it was the babys is parliment prancing around throwing mud at each other. This really shows the world what a 4th rate country Thailand is. Thank heaven that it has the worlds most charming people.

[Moruya]

As per my post from 29th June. If the democratic party and abhisit put as much effort into winning hearts and minds and winning votes as they do into trying to get the "opposition" impeached or dissolved they might actually win an election one day.

Speaking of great PTP projects... How are those tablet PCs coming along? Are we up to a thousand yet?

Why are you asking me? What do tablet PC's have to do with democratic party interference causing delays that resulted in the cancellation of a NASA project that they had previously agreed on when in office. I'll give you a clue, nothing, next.

Surely they were a democratic bribe

[billd766]

Vague treaty rules had nothing to do with sinking the NASA project, idiots did.

Yes if the democrats hadn't insisted on the project being discussed in parliament, the alternative being an charge of anti constitutionalism and possible dissolving of the PTP, this project could have gone ahead.

The dem.party is responsible for this debacle and yes, they are the idiots.

That is quite possibly correct, however if the PTP had discussed in Parliament back in September while it was in session and they were reminded about it could all have been discussed and sealed properly with no problems.

Because they didn't do ANYTHING about it until the last two weeks the blame lies squarely on their own doorstep.

Don't blame the Democrats just because PTP screwed up themselves.

[LomSak27]

Because they didn't do ANYTHING about it until the last two weeks the blame lies squarely on their own doorstep.

Don't blame the Democrats just because PTP screwed up themselves

Not at all, the dems sidetracked it for purely political reasons. I assume thats good fo you so fine. You serve up some baloney and expect people to think its not Baloney?! Time for a reality check.