Re: "Down with the death penalty?", (BP, Aug 9).
Whenever a heinous and shocking crime happens, the call for the death penalty comes up. But I would emphasise that life imprisonment provides a safer alternative while protecting society. The death penalty risks executing innocent people, is influenced by race, location, and the quality of legal representation, and is therefore too often applied inconsistently.
Studies have failed to show that executions effectively deter crime. Countries like the US, China, Iran or Saudi Arabia still implement the death penalty while their crime rate is not lower than in countries without capital punishment.
Furthermore, executions do not necessarily help victims' families heal and may prolong their suffering, while the funds could instead support counselling and other services. The death penalty can also result in the execution of people with serious mental illnesses and places psychological burdens on correctional workers involved in executions. Finally, capital punishment is inconsistent with the practices of most democratic countries and raises serious moral and human-rights concerns because it requires the state to deliberately take a human life.
Ali Al-Nasani
Cut Cold War ties
Re: "Air force clarifies US military flights at Krabi airport", (BP, Apr 8).
The Thai public was stunned to learn that the US military could utilise Krabi International Airport for combat operations against Iran without fanfare or government consent. This easy access was made possible by legacy bilateral frameworks dating back to 1950. Over the decades, these arrangements evolved to include pre-authorised transit provisions, leaving today's Thai government with virtually no say when our civilian infrastructure is co-opted for US power projection. The post-World War II landscape was vastly different: Thailand wanted economic development, while Washington sought a Southeast Asian foothold to "counter communism". Acting in its national interest, Thailand signed an Economic and Technical Cooperation Agreement with the US Department of State in 1950, followed by a Military Assistance Agreement in the same year, closely linking the two.
Thailand graduated from requiring US economic assistance in 1995. Yet the military agreement endures, presenting a clear and present danger to our national security, as the report of military use of Krabi airport demonstrated.
Under this legacy arrangement, Thailand continues to host the annual Cobra Gold joint exercises on its territory, most recently in February 2026. These exercises no longer offer a meaningful security shield for Thailand, and granting unhindered access to domestic facilities severely compromises our national sovereignty. In today's volatile geopolitical environment, these post-WWII and Cold War-era military ties with the US directly contradict Thailand's professed policy of neutrality.
No economic arrangement or military alliance is meant -- or should be expected -- to last indefinitely, and the 1950 PACOM agreement contains explicit provisions allowing Thailand to terminate the arrangement with one year's notice.
The Thai government must once again act strictly in our national interest. If Thailand is serious about showing the world that we are committed to true non-alignment, the time to issue formal notification to end the PACOM agreement has arrived. Remaining locked in Washington's strategic orbit under an obsolete military agreement guarantees only one outcome: risking our national survival by being dragged into US-imposed China containment actions and impending military conflict in our region.
ML Saksiri Kridakorn
