Thailand should forget its love affair with submarines

[webfact]

EDITORIAL
Thailand should forget its love affair with submarines
The Nation

Approval imminent for purchase of three Chinese-built subs - and we still haven't been told truthfully what they're for

BANGKOK: -- The only thing standing in the way of the Royal Thai Navy's purchase of three Chinese-made submarines is the military-led government's Cabinet. In other words, approval for the purchase is just a formality. There has been no indication that the Cabinet will object to the deal or even raise any tough questions about the actual need for such sophisticated weaponry.

Unlike the Cabinet, however, there is no reason for citizens to remain silent on this crucial instance of the spendthrift military capitalising on the myth of mutual deterrence among nations. This is public money being spent, after all - a massive Bt36 billion, with tremendous maintenance and operational costs to follow. The Navy came close to getting its submarines during the Yingluck Shinawatra government, which nurtured friendly ties with the top brass for politics' sake and made good use of the foundation laid down by her brother Thaksin, the now-fugitive former premier.

But when the big bill for the subs was tabled amid dire financial circumstances, Yingluck balked at the final hurdle, and now the tab has been handed to the current administration. It's difficult to imagine the brass-heavy Cabinet hesitating, but history will not be kind to its members, simply because of the military nature of the incumbent regime. It is self-serving in the extreme.

We would have before us at this moment a fundamentally different scenario if the Navy or the government had ever made an earnest effort to convince taxpayers that the submarines are needed. For them to point out that other countries in the region have acquired submarines is hardly a sound rationale for Thailand following suit. Nor does it make sense that undersea craft are essential to protecting our territorial waters and natural marine resources.

One might justify Filipino submarines, given that country's direct confrontations with China in the South China Sea. But what modern enemies does Thailand face? Are Cambodia and Myanmar threatening incursions? Do the might of Malaysia and Indonesia need countering? Has piracy become such a problem that we need torpedoes? Could subs help in the remotest way to end human trafficking across the Andaman Sea?

And how would submarines safeguard our fish stocks, particularly when Thai fishing boats must routinely trespass into other countries' waters to find adequate catches?

Casting shadows over the discussion are the HTMS Chakri Naruebet, a helicopter carrier so little used that it's now widely dismissed as a white elephant, and the high-priced blimp that was supposed to help our soldiers in the deep South spot insurgents - in dense woodland.

Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha likely lacks the political confidence to say no to the Navy's request for subs. Can he and his Cabinet be brought to their senses? With protest barred in this benighted Kingdom, a public uprising is out of the question.

We are left only with the dim hope that the Cabinet might finally demand better answers from the Navy to justify such expenditure. Modernising the military for the sake of "national security" - given an acceptable definition of that term - is not necessarily a bad move. But we need to hear more than the usual rhetoric about keeping up with the neighbours. Their needs are significantly different than ours, especially those with vastly greater water surface to monitor.

Thailand, with its relatively limited sea area and depleted marine resources, ought to be more than able to mind its territory with coastline frigates and patrol boats. Such talk certainly rubs the brass the wrong way, with their dreams of hi-tech warfare, but the rest of us would feel much more comfortable.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/opinion/Thailand-should-forget-its-love-affair-with-submar-30263609.html


-- The Nation 2015-07-03

[ezzra]

But why? they're so cute, and China is offering 3 for the price of one, and running and maintaining

subs is so easy and cheap, just like the aircraft carrier they have, and beside, how are the glorious

navy of Thailand going to fight the Cambodian and those pesky insurgents in the south without

the use of submarines?.....

Edited July 3, 2015 by ezzra

[ratcatcher]

A spot-on editorial, but my money is on the navy getting their new toys come hell or shallow water. It's enough to make Thais seasick.

[NongKhaiKid]

Should maybe but unlikely to happen and as for the truth as to what they're needed for, is a firm reason needed, try face.

[bangkokheat]

thailand wants to show the world they also can have big guns, would not at all be surprised if someone at the top is getting a nice kick back from china,,shhhh

[LomSak27]

That's what happens when you were raised on Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea reruns and have umpteen DVD' and video clips floating around of The Naval Department fun room of .... Crimson Tide, The Hunt for Red October, U 571, Das Boat and of course

Yellow Submarine

[Ricardo]

Unusual to see such a sensible article in the Thai media, the RTN has yet to make any case to the taxpayers, for these proposed new toys.

The only time they previously bought/operated submarines, just prior to the Japanese invasion, the subs were totally useless, and one fears that these will prove to be the same.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matchanu-class_submarine

If there's a need for fisheries-surveillance, or patrolling shallow coastal waters, then patrol-boats or frigates would surely be more effective and better value-for-money than these submarines, or is it time to introduce surveillance-drones for coastal-use ?

If it's about corruption or backhanders to the military, which I hope-against-hope that it isn't, then at least get the brown-envelopes from buying something which you need !

Edited July 3, 2015 by Ricardo

[toybits]

Hmmm, Regarding the Headline... The RTN is not Thailand.

[Toknarok]

They have to have submarines otherwise the newly built submarine base will be wasted.

[WitawatWatawit]

If I could ask the cabinet one question, it would be this: Does the navy have any intelligence on the ANTI-submarine capabilities of its neighbours?

[spiritrace]

The only problem with getting the subs are the screen doors to keep out the mosquitoes.

[Halion]

It had been reported that the Thai Navy did indeed have a submariner division actively staffed for several decades based in Chonburi.

Now that they have had time to adequately train these folk they need these submarines to take the egg of their faces.

Thai territorial water to the most part and significantly shallower than the operational depths required for submarines but lets not let logic get in the way of another white elephant or the chance for some kickback cash.

[jadee]

Although the stated reason for the subs is 'deterrent', there may be political pressure from China to see Thailand equipped with such weapons. Subs offer a strategic advantage that few nations can match. Thai subs may be part of China's 'string of pearls' strategy, who knows.

[Franky Bear]

They will hardly leave the wall. As someone who's had to deal with Chinese "engineering" for many years. All I can say is they are awful

Engineers and I'd hate to be the mechanic on one of these lumps of junk

[monkey4u]

It had been reported that the Thai Navy did indeed have a submariner division actively staffed for several decades based in Chonburi.

Now that they have had time to adequately train these folk they need these submarines to take the egg of their faces.

Thai territorial water to the most part and significantly shallower than the operational depths required for submarines but lets not let logic get in the way of another white elephant or the chance for some kickback cash.

Don't forget the navy celebrates submarine day also

[bheard]

The news article makes sense.

Thailand has no need for submarines

[petermik]

These are ideal for carrying fare paying passengers from Pattaya to Kho Lan diving deep below the surface thus avoiding the garbage floating on the top AND it will pay for itself in a couple of years

[rametindallas]

Should maybe but unlikely to happen and as for the truth as to what they're needed for, is a firm reason needed, try face.

try face

Try 'kick-back' to an offshore bank account. That's why they don't buy quality used or from Germany of Sweden. Those countries won't build crap to satisfy a price that allows for 'padding'.

Problems in China's submarine program? http://www.lowyinterpreter.org/post/2013/04/24/Problems-in-Chinas-submarine-program.aspx

.

[Denim]

I'd like to be there at the launch and naming :

' I name this sub ' backhander 1 '

followed by similarly named sister ships.

Probably be stationed off the coast of Dubai in the slim hope of torpedoing Thaksin out waterskiing.

[rametindallas]

I guess having an aircraft carrier that never leaves port and only has one broken aircraft on it wasn't embarrassing enough.

.

[baboon]

Should maybe but unlikely to happen and as for the truth as to what they're needed for, is a firm reason needed, try face.

try face

Try 'kick-back' to an offshore bank account. That's why they don't buy quality used or from Germany of Sweden. Those countries won't build crap to satisfy a price that allows for 'padding'.

Problems in China's submarine program? http://www.lowyinterpreter.org/post/2013/04/24/Problems-in-Chinas-submarine-program.aspx

.

Unfortunately some poor bugger is probably going to end up drowning because of this...

[jaywalker]

They will hardly leave the wall. As someone who's had to deal with Chinese "engineering" for many years. All I can say is they are awful

Engineers and I'd hate to be the mechanic on one of these lumps of junk

I thought they already had a fleet of submarines in Pattaya that they call "ferries".

They get zero maintenance and often even submerge!

Edited July 3, 2015 by jaywalker

[sabaii69]

I was in subs in the Sixties. I like to go down, what were we talking about?

[DLang]

Are they not needed to quickly and efficiently transport Rohingya slaves to their new masters?

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

Couldn't they just skip the subs, and take 1 or 2 billion off the top, and spread it around to the various VIPs' bank accounts, then everyone could go home happy...and Thailand would save 30+ billion???

[GarryP]

With the depth of the Gulf of Siam, they may be better of buying a pair of waders for each sailor. It would certainly save a lot of money and at least the waders would see some use.

[Bpuumike]

Tickets needed for the gravy train.

[sammygood]

nobody asks what they are going to do with them ?

help the poor fishermen to locate shrimp ?

[ratcatcher]

If I could ask the cabinet one question, it would be this: Does the navy have any intelligence on the ANTI-submarine capabilities of its neighbours?

WW, permit me to suggest that you simplify your question to the empty cabinet.

"Does the navy have any intelligence?"

No need for further comments.

[soalbundy]

Someone in the navy top brass has been watching 'Das Boot'' or ''The boat'' and had a 'brain wave' we could use some of that.