How the Disturbing Presentation of "Coconut-Picking Monkeys" Targeted at Thailand Relates to Trade Agreement Preparations

The author believes that the movement to remove coconut milk and coconut products from shelves in the UK has unusual underlying motives. The following presentation focuses on assumptions and opinions for the purpose of investigation and precaution.

The irregularity in the presentation of the story about 'coconut-picking monkeys' by international organizations raises suspicions about the specific reports of monkey labor akin to slavery in Thailand, despite Thailand being a mid-level exporter of coconuts and coconut products. There are several major coconut-exporting countries with traditional practices of training monkeys to pick coconuts similar to those in rural Thailand. A simple search on YouTube or Google reveals many examples from countries near the equator, such as India, Sri Lanka, Indonesia, Malaysia, and the Philippines, all of which use monkeys as working animals. So why is the spotlight solely on Thailand, which has a very low coconut export volume?

Shortly after, another wave of bad news followed: UK's Tesco plans to ban chicken imports from Thailand due to claims that chicken feed contains environmentally damaging soybean meal. Although this news is not yet clear, it reflects the 'issues' that the Thai export industry will face moving forward. This is because, after the UK withdrew from the EU, it has been negotiating bilateral trade agreements with several key trading partners. Thailand, as we understand, is currently in the process of negotiating an upgrade to its trade agreement.

Is this the cause of the strange news?

Last year, trade between Thailand and the UK was valued at approximately $6.26 billion, a slight decrease from the previous year. It appears that Thailand has consistently enjoyed a trade surplus. Do you know what one of the main products Thailand imports from the UK is? The answer is agricultural chemicals! which has been consistently among the top imports. Thailand is a major importer of chemicals from countries like China, the UK, and the USA, and recently there has been a policy to ban three significant chemicals.

Many may think it has ended since the government has decided to announce the ban on chemicals, but those involved in the industry say it won't end easily. The market value of hundreds of billions cannot be easily dismissed. Our neighboring countries have also reversed their bans after previously announcing them. This raises the question: Is the ban on coconut milk and coconut products (minor) followed by the news of the chicken ban (which is becoming serious) related to Thai-UK trade negotiations? Or at the very least, does it result in the Thai government delaying the ban on prohibited substances?

Oh! Major chemical companies like Syngenta have production bases in Huddersfield, England, exporting significant amounts to Thailand each year. The losses incurred by the UK due to the chemical ban policy are also considerable. Donald Trump once laid out the trade deficit account by country; I wonder how much it affects the UK in the BREXIT era. But one thing is certain: the case of macaques and coconut milk is not normal.

Recently, the Thai giant CP announced through the media that the company is tightening its inspection of corn purchases from farms that do not encroach on forests and destroy the environment. This issue is not new; it has been announced for the past 2-3 years. But why suddenly does the PR department of this giant chicken-exporting company reiterate this? It seems to relate to the news that the UK will ban imports of chicken products from Thailand due to environmentally damaging raw materials.

This is an out-of-season corn news, reiterating old news... this is also unusual!

The author interprets this as the reaction of Thai exporters to warning signals like 'cutting a chicken to show the monkey', indicating that the next target will not be the minor coconut products but rather chicken, which is a champion in generating GDP.

Currently, domestic animal feed corn is insufficient and must be imported from neighboring countries. Not only that, but other raw materials like soybean meal or wheat also need to be imported periodically to produce animal feed and meat for export. Therefore, animal feed corn is expanding into high mountains even though there are no land rights documents because, in reality, every kernel of animal feed corn has a buyer. If not this giant, then another giant. Is this why CP has to announce loudly that their company has measures unlike others?

But still, if trade negotiations do not go smoothly, anything can happen. Take the example of Indonesian palm oil, which is currently in limbo because the EU has canceled imports due to deforestation and environmental destruction. Even if our animal feed exporters firmly prove that corn does not encroach on forests, the destination country can still use environmental destruction as an excuse to take action. This is because almost all corn fields in the north use fire to prepare the land, as it is the cheapest management method.

Importantly, the problem of using fire in corn fields is not limited to Thailand. The northern states of India also face the same issue, where both rice and corn are burned. The skies of India in October, which is the harvest season, become dark with the highest pollution levels in the world. Our neighbor Myanmar also burns in March. Do not underestimate the complaints about corn that resonate around the world.

Modern trade barriers use issues of environmental and human rights, and even animal rights ethics have been weaponized. Farmers and stakeholders should not be indifferent to these strange phenomena because, ultimately, macaques – coconut milk – soybean meal – chicken exports – corn – paraquat and trade negotiation preparations may all be interconnected.

However, in practice, the corn on the mountains, which should have been phased out since the giants announced they would not buy corn not grown on legally documented land, still exists in the northern highlands in hundreds of thousands of rai. Moreover, the government policy still guarantees corn prices as it has promoted in the past.

I cannot imagine what would happen if there were a halt to chicken and animal feed exports due to environmental/carbon dioxide/global warming issues, similar to how palm oil was banned. How would farmers on the mountains survive? The government should zone and announce goals to reduce corn and single-crop (fire-using) areas in high mountains from now on to allow time for gradual change.

Better than waiting until it’s too late!

SOURCE: www.bangkokbiznews.com