Bangkok Post
June 14, 2000

The national committee set up by the government to resolve the protracted Pak Moon dam protest has come up with a proposal that it hopes will put an end to the months-long standoff. It calls for the Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand to open all dam spillways until the end of August to allow fish from the Mekong River to spawn in the Moon River. lhpEgat has also been asked to withdraw all lawsuits filed against protest leaders. In the meantime, the protesters must lift the siege at a parking lot near the dam to enable Egat staff to return to work.

The proposal represents a compromise solution that should be acceptable to the two conflicting parties, namely Egat and the dam protesters, because it is reasonable and practical, with both sides gaining something and losing something. To spurn the proposal outright would only prolong the stalemate and could aggravate the conflict which, in the end, will inflict more damages on the public. After all, for a diverse and complicated society such as the one we are living in to achieve peaceful co-existence and social harmony, the middle path approach seems to be the most pragmatic means of problem-solving.

There is no question that laying siege to the parking lot of the dam, which is state property, is against the law. Also, many of the protesters have already been compensated by Egat for losing their land and property as a result of the dam’s construction. But just to be fair, one has to look deeper into the root cause of the villagers’ frustration and desperation. To be uprooted from their ancestral land is already cruel enough, but to be deprived of a means to make a living because the dam has failed to deliver what it promised, is indeed a double tragedy.

What the protesters have been demanding from the start is not compensation, but a return of their livelihood which was robbed by the dam. They hope the opening of all the spillways until August will facilitate the return of fish from the Mekong River into their natural spawning grounds in the Moon River. Then in years to come, they hope they will be able to make a humble living by fishing, which they used to do before the Pak Moon dam was built.

It might be too embarrassing for a giant organisation like Egat to accept the truth, which amounts to admission of its own failure. The truth is that the fish ladder highly touted by Egat as facilitating the flow of fish to its natural spawning grounds, has been a total fiasco. Another truth is that Egat’s projection that the dam will produce up to 136 megawatts of electricity has never been achieved since it started operation five years ago. About 44 megawatts of electricity are generated annually, which is an insignificant amount compared to thousands of megawatts of surplus electricity available these days.

A temporary shutdown of the power plants at Pak Moon will not cause a blackout in Ubon Ratchathani because of surplus electricity unless, of course, Egat wants. And with more power coming into the grid from Laos under the IPP programme in the foreseeable future, the production units at Pak Moon will be rendered even less significant.

Since Egat is already opening some of the spillways, opening them all will not make much difference. Also, it is unlikely to cause damage to fish farming in the Moon River. Besides, the measure is temporary. A detailed study is needed to evaluate the long-term consequences of the measure on natural feed stocks in the river. And who knows, the protesters can be wrong in their judgement.

The dam standoff has dragged on far too long and should be resolved. It is about time that the two protagonists come to their senses and accept the compromise solution drawn up by the national committee.

Last but not least, the Pak Moon protest should serve a valuable lesson to future governments, if not to Egat, that they must think harder and, more importantly, allow public participation, the next time they plan to build another dam.