The Nation
The Royal Thai Air Force has defended its decision to buy 12 Swedish-made Gripen fighter jets worth about Bt34 billion, following criticism that the price tag was inflated and the timing inappropriate.
Group Captain Monthon Satnukorn, the Air Force's deputy spokesman, declined to comment on the timing after an article in a US publication suggested there should not be an arms transaction while Thailand still has an unelected government.
I think The Nation is starting to make shit up, because I have searched for hours for this mysterious US publication. Why doesn't The Nation name this publication and quote it?
However, Monthon said the multibillion-baht deal, approved by the interim Cabinet on October 16, was transparent and there was no inflated price tag as speculated.
"It's untrue that the price [for all 12 jets] was only about Bt20 billion. We've seconded senior officials to visit the manufacturer in Sweden and have had a thorough price comparison on various models," he said.
Other than me, who speculated that the price was inflated? I would love to read this US publication that came to the same conclusion as me.
I have not read one article that says all 12 jets were contracted for 20 billion baht. Did Captain Monthon misspeak or did The Nation misprint his words? Why didn't the reporter ask for a clarification? What is the actual price? 34 or 20 billion baht?
An Air Force source also said US-based Lockheed Martin, a major defence contractor and arms-maker, had recently asked in a letter to the Foreign Ministry why the Air Force had decided to buy Swedish jets.
"The letter, a copy of which was forwarded to the Air Force, noted that Thailand and the US had long been close military allies. At present, Thailand is also designated as the US's non-Nato ally," said the source.
"As a result, the US firm was wondering why the Air Force had not considered buying US-made jets, even though it previously acquired F-16A/B and F-5E aircraft from the US."
This last part would actually make sense if there hadn't been coup. However, the US is outlawed from selling arms to a junta that removed a democratically elected government by force.
The source said the Air Force had earlier approached the United States, Russia and Sweden to purchase the new squadron to replace its ageing F-16E jets, which will be retired over the next two years.
However, Lockheed Martin appeared to be uninterested and inflexible on the pricing of its F16C/D jets. Later on, the Air Force decided to buy the Swedish JAS-39 Gripen jets, which are considered sophisticated and good value for money.
"I guess the US private sector has asked for the reasons because we are a long-time buyer of US-made jets," said the source
Again, the US can't sell military equipment to Thailand because of the coup. Notice that there is no quote from Lockheed Martin concerning this story. Why didn't The Nation call them up and ask if they were "uninterested" and "inflexible?"
"However, we're not worried, even though the US government might step up pressure on the Swedish government not to sell the jets to Thailand during this juncture due to last year's coup.
Sweden has its own laws against selling arms to military dictatorships also.
"At this stage, we plan to sign only a memorandum of understanding with the Swedish maker, while a contract will be signed later after the country has a new elected government.
The first initial bribes have been paid. When the contract is signed, the next round of bribes will be paid.
"On the allegedly inflated price tag, I guess it's a misunderstanding because there is the basic price plus a wide range of sophisticated options, such as weapon or radar systems. It's like buying a car such as a Fortuner, which has so many options."
The thing about this story that really bothers me is that The Nation takes a falsehood, like a made up article of a fictitious US publication that it refuses to name or quote, then basically allows the military spokesman to refute a story that doesn't even exist. Yes, The Nation is that corrupt.
The Nation didn't bother to do any price comparisons on its own. The Nation didn't bother to investigate the fact that BAE Systems, the British arms dealer brokering this deal, has been accused of serious corruption charges all over the world regarding the Gripen fighters. The Nation didn't bother to ask for the invoices or ask to know what the details to this package deal are. The Nation didn't bother to ask the names of the military officials who brokered the deal. The Nation didn't even bother to fact check this story. It probably made up the story because it certainly contains no facts.
Like I have pointed out countless times, The Nation will lie, obfuscate and cover up for its patrons in the Thai military.
It will never do an investigation into the military procurement process. And it certainly will never do an investigation into the pre and post-coup assets of the generals.
Here is an interesting story concerning the BAE Systems . I suggest my readers do a Google search on BAE Systems, Al Yamamah, Gripen and corruption.
BAE Systems owns about 20% of Saab, the maker of Gripen, and is responsible for marketing Gripen to foreign countries. From wikipedia, "BAE is involved in production of the export version of the Saab Gripen and owns 50% of Gripen International KB, the company responsible for marketing of the aircraft. BAE owns a 20.5% share of Saab AB."
Money quote:
As far as Saudi Arabia was concerned, the jets were something of a white elephant for which it had little use and few capable pilots. The chief threat it faces comes from domestic not external opposition against which Tornados provide no protection. But the jets did provide a convenient cover for recycling the country’s oil revenues outside its official budget. One person involved in the deal told the Financial Times, “It was a way of Saudis paying money to Saudis”.
Over the years, there were constant rumours of corruption, with allegations that BAe had operated a £60 million slush fund to sweeten the deal and pay for extravagant hospitality for key middlemen. Successive governments maintained that no bribery was involved, although numerous officials and politicians in a position to know have admitted that bribery is endemic in the arms trade.
Denis Healey, a former Labour Defence Secretary in the 1964 Labour government, told the Guardian, “Bribery has always played a role in the sale of weapons. In the Middle East, people wouldn’t buy weapons unless you bribed them to do so—and that was particularly true in Saudi Arabia.”
Replace the words Saudi and Saudi Arabia with the words Thai and Thailand. This culture also exists in Thailand.
You have to remember that since the Suchinda coup in the 90's, the military's influence has been on the decline and its budget had shrunken significantly--until the last coup, that is. And the way generals make their money for their Mercedes, their mia nois, their golf clubs, their mansions is through a corrupt procurement process.
What happens is that a middleman introduces the deal to a general. An upfront gift is made to the general making the decision in order to grease the wheels. The deal doesn't necessarily have to get through for the general to make some money. If the deal does go through, the invoice is beefed up to cover up for the cost of the bribes, and the Thai tax payer ends up footing the bill.
As has been pointed out by Bangkok Pundit, the size of the military budget has increased significantly since the coup.
I have no doubt that the coup has more to do with the generals recycling the tax payer's money into their own pockets than national security or Thaksin's corruption.
