FOCUS ON ASIA
http://www.gmwatch.org/asia.asp

Note that in item 3 the Thai PM is said to have dismissed suggestions that his earlier backing for open-field GM trials was linked to US pressure. Curious then that his own Environment Minister should have complained back in June that the US was insisting Thailand grow GM crops as a condition of a much desired bilateral free trade agreement (FTA).
http://www.gmwatch.org/asia.asp

Another country which has signed a framework agreement on trade and investment paving the way for an FTA with the United States is Malaysia. By another curious coincidence Malaysia's Prime Minister has also been talking about a change of direction to embrace GM of late. He's even been telling poor Malay farmers that GM will turn them into millionaires!
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4277

1.GMOs may not be manna from heaven
2.Europeans shun Thai papaya
3.Debate over GMO crops spreads to Asia
---

1.GMOs may not be manna from heaven
Wasant Techawongtham, Deputy News Editor Bangkok Post, 3 Sep 2004
http://www.biothai.org/cgi-bin/content/news/show.pl?0301

Thaksin Shinawatra's back down on his decision to give the green light to open field trials and the eventual commercialisation of transgenic crops is a good sign. It's not easy for a leader with high self-confidence and a big ego such as Mr Thaksin to accept that his decisions might not be absolutely right.

My only fear is that this may be just a tactical retreat to allow time to formulate a more convincing marketing campaign rather than genuine open-mindedness to hear out different opinions as a basis for policy-making.

The pros and cons of genetically modified organisms are still being heatedly debated among scientists, so it is prudent to go slow, especially when so much is at stake.

Thailand is recognised worldwide as a major producer of quality organic foods. Any move that creates doubt about this hard-earned reputation would shake international confidence and lead to market losses. Farmers would be the ones who suffer.

GMO proponents argue that any decision on the issue should be science-based. They say there has been no scientific evidence that GMOs are harmful to health or the environment. But any evidence there might be is by no means conclusive. Not enough time has elapsed to prove things one way or the other.

Underlining the argument about scientific proof, however, is the economic motive. GMO supporters assert that the technology will be key to eradicating world hunger and farmers' poverty.

Analysis of the first Green Revolution, which made the same claim, has shown that, after 40 years, farmers remain just as poor and world hunger just as rampant. The only ones who have reaped actual benefits are big agrobusinesses.

The second Green Revolution that GMOs promise to usher in will be no different. The only difference is that the true beneficiaries will be a few mega-transnational corporations which control this high technology and want to make it the dominant means of production for the world's farmers.

Poor, underdeveloped countries will be the ultimate losers because they have no means to develop their own technology, which requires a huge investment and an army of top-notch scientists. They will be condemned to wait for handouts from the rich countries or international aid agencies.

Mid-level countries like Thailand may have the means to access the technology, but they will not be able to catch up on the technological development even with a so-called leapfrog approach.

But Thailand has advantages that many countries do not. It still has rich bio-diversity that will be increasingly invaluable as natural resources worldwide are exploited. Biodiversity will be where the future of the world lies in terms of food, medicine and other basic necessities.

This richness has served us well throughout history. Effort and investment should be spent to preserve and further develop this bottomless well of wealth. This, however, requires a long-term view of the state of our nation rather than a short-term goal of economic gain at all costs.

Mr Thaksin has the option of either staking our future on a few transnational corporations and powerful countries which have a near monopoly on high technology or on developing indigenous knowledge based on our natural richness for sustainable future.

Mr Thaksin is famous for his ingenuity in projecting his vision with a few simple words. New Thinking, New Action is the slogan that launched his Thai Rak Thai party into a dominating political power.

Before that, he launched his political career with the slogan Ta Doo Dao,

Thao Tid Din, or Eye on the Star, Feet on the Ground. It was intended to inspire the nation to strive for excellence while remaining connected to its roots.

One hopes that the star he has his eye on is the country's future, not some satellites, and the ground he stands on is Thai soil imbued with a rich cultural heritage, not some dust overlaid with GM technology owned by transnational corporations who answer to no one.
---

2.Europeans shun Thai papaya
Kamol Sukin, Sirinart Sirisunthorn
The Nation, 3 Sep 2004
http://www.biothai.org/cgi-bin/content/news/show.pl?0297

GMO CONCERNS

Importers cancel orders fearing contamination

Several European Union importers this week stopped importing canned fruit products containing papaya from Thailand fearing possible contamination from genetically modified (GM) papaya, a Thai exporter said.

The "stop" order was received on Wednesday by a major Thai manufacturer, from one of its main customers in a European country, Germany according to one source. The company has been importing canned fruit salad and fruit cocktail products from the Thai company for years, said Wanlop Phichphongsa, managing director of Top Organic Products and Supplies Co and a member of Thai Organic Trader.

Another Thai company received a similar notice from a customer in France, said another source. But this case has yet to be officially confirmed.

"The reason is clear: It is the fear of GM papaya contamination," he said about the first case. "The reaction has been a lot faster than we would have imagined, faster than the bird flu impact."

He spoke on the condition the exporter would not be identified - to avoid further damage to its business, Wanlop said.

The EU importer had asked for a GM-free certificate for the papaya the company uses, Wanlop said.

"The policy's impact was felt immediately, leaving no time to prepare," he said.

"The Thai manufacturer tried to explain to its customer that Thailand has no policy to grow and trade GM papaya and sent them copies of English-language news report about this week's Cabinet resolution to support the explanation. But it failed. The importer still insisted on sticking to its stop order."

Wanlop said it is clear the order was due to two factors; the recent resolution of the National Biotechnology Policy Commission that gave the green light for GM crops and the lack of credibility of Thai authorities. They have denied leakage from some GM papaya experiments despite results of testing at farmers' fields indicating otherwise.

He called on the government to order an investigation into the leakage of GM contaminated papaya into farmers' orchards in Khon Kaen and nearby provinces.

"There should be some independent committee that could gain trust from foreign importers to conduct the investigation," he said.

Thai ambassadors and commerce offices abroad need to communicate Thailand's GM-free crop policy to importers in order to prevent further damage to Thai exports, he said.

Annually, canned fruit-salad products gen