The Dark Side of Development and Foreign Aid

by Piyaporn Hawiset

31 May 2000

So-called development aid actually does more to hurt the people it purports to help while at the same time providing benefits to the economic and political elite. The case of villagers displaced by Thailand's Pak Mun Dam demonstrates that poverty is often imposed by unequal development strategies that rob rural people of the resources they once depended on for their livelihood. It also demonstrates that the true intent of so-called development is to use the activity as a pretext to develop mechanisms for the economic and political elite and development aid organizations such as the Asian Development Bank, the World Bank and foreign governments to in effect steal the wealth of the ordinary people.

True Lies The Pak Mun Dam seems to evoke different images to different people, depending on where they stand. On one side of the concrete structure is plenty of water, but very scant sign of aquatic life. On the other side, the level of water is drastically low, but from time to time one can spot people trying to fish even though the catch often turns out to be barely enough for a simple meal. The stark differences also apply to debate between the two camps. The Thai authorities and the World Bank, the main source of funding for the project, have hailed the Pak Mun dam as a big success. Despite all its claims at a paradigm shift towards poverty reduction, the ADB actually has a main objective. In the end it is economic colonization for the economic and political elite. The ordinary people pay for this folly. Thailand's northeastern villagers, however, have long held grudges against the project, which has destroyed the ecology of the Mun River as well as the locals' age-old way of life. The World Commission on Dams, an independent international organisation set up to address controversial issues surrounding large dams, recently released a summary of its evaluation of the Pak Mun Dam project. The following are the commission's main findings. COST OF THE PROJECT From the original $135 million (5.13 billion baht) plus $11 million (418 million baht) for environmental and social mitigation, the budget eventually ballooned to $233 million (8.85 billion baht) and $32 million (1.22 billion baht) for mitigation programs. POWER BENEFITS The 136 Megawatt target has not been realised. The WCD found the actual output to be about 40 MW for April and May, during which both demand and capacity for power are at their highest. The WCD estimated the dam's economic return, called its Economic Internal Rate of Return (EIRR), to be about 4 to 5 percent, well below the original estimate of 12 percent. The project therefore has ended up being uneconomic and should never have been built. But in Thailand, those who are commissioned to carry out economic and financial feasibility studies understand their bread and butter comes from Thai authorities and/or the World Bank or ADB, hence they ensure that the analyses always provide acceptable results. FISHERIES The WCD estimates the dam has caused the loss of 60 to 80 percent of the fish in the reservoir and the river upstream of the dam. Of 265 species found in the Mun River before 1994, the WCD counted only 96 species upstream of the dam. The dam advocates originally predicted its reservoir area would produce 100 kilograms per hectare per year of fish without stocking, or 220 kg/ha/year in conjunction with a stocking program. In contrast, the actual fish yield is about 10 kg/ha/year. In the reservoir itself, yields are slightly better, ranging from 19 to 38 kg/ha/year. DISPLACEMENT The original plan claimed that only 241 households in 11 villages would be affected. Altogether, however, 1,700 families lost their house, land, or both. These households also claimed compensation for lost fishing income due to the dam's unexpected impact on local fisheries. Some money eventually was made available for compensation, but the elite created also sorts of legal excuses and much of it was siphoned into the pockets of local officials, petty tyrants and local members of the economic and political elite. IRRIGATION BENEFITS EGAT projected the Pak Mun dam would provide irrigation services to a total area of 25,900 hectares, but the WCD found that so far, these claims have not been fulfilled. NATURAL RAPIDS More than 50 natural rapids, in which fish spawn, were permanently submerged as a result of the construction of the dam. VEGETATION The commission found that the dam led to the loss of river bank vegetation as well as natural and community forests. At least 40 edible plants, 10 bamboo species, and 45 species of mushroom were wiped out.

A mass of dark clouds hung low over the spot where the Mun River flows into the Mekong. At this confluence of the two rivers, the decade-old suffering of people whose livelihood has been ruined by the nearby towering Pak Mun Dam condensed and poured out like a torrential rain. "We became poor because of oppression by the rich. They squeezed the best from our resources, leaving waste in their wake for us to tend to," said Prasit Bua-ngam, a villager from Tarn Sum district, Ubon Ratchathani province. The man's bitterness echoed that of the few thousand villagers displaced by dams in the Northeast who were gathered at the Mae Mun Man Yuen [Long-lasting Mun River] protest camp/village near the dam in Khong Chiam district, Ubon Ratchathani. They had been there for more than one year. Conceived in the 1980s, the Pak Mun hydroelectric dam faced strong resistance from the very start. Villagers complained that having the dam sprawled across the mouth of the Mun River would block the migration route of fish, preventing them from swimming from the Mekong to the Moon to breed. Studies by agencies outside of the givernment came to the same conclusion, but Thailand's economic and political elite, as well as greedy and venal government officials only lent deaf ears to the reports. The greedy and venal forced the project to go ahead so that they could siphon what they could of the budget and also make money on associated goods and services rackets and land compensation rackets. The dam's construction also required dynamiting around rapids to expedite the outflow of water released from the dam. The rocks were once shelters and breeding grounds for fish. Without them, the villagers cautioned, the fish stock would decline. All the villagers' predictions became frighteningly true. The completion of the dam in 1994 brought an end to the once-flourishing life of fishermen along the banks of the river. With their farmlands flooded and no fish to catch, dam-displaced villagers simply lost their livelihood, becoming not only poor but helpless. Fed up by years of protests and negotiations that in reality were nothing more than stalling tactics on the part of politicians and government officials, the villagers made it clear they did not want any compensation in terms of money. What they want and still need is for authorities to return their livelihood-the ability to tap into their natural resources and to lead the life they did before the river was dammed. Consequently, the villagers demanded that the Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (EGAT) open the dam's gates and let the river run free once more. he Pak Mun Dam was an example of how the state's development strategies and strategies of financing agencies such as the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and the World Bank that favour the affluence of Thailand's economic and political elite over self-sufficiency impose poverty on rural people. "People used to be happy here. The Mun River was the source of their life, providing them with water and fish. Pak Mun Dam was built to generate electricity so that city people could lead a more luxurious life and the wealthy factory owners had electricity to run their factories. No one cared that it destroyed the river and the livelihood of people who lived there," he said, adding that some villagers who were uprooted to make way for the Sirindhorn Dam, also in Ubon Ratchathani, ended up becoming street sweepers in Bangkok, many of their daughters subsequently kidnapped and forced to become sex slaves in brothels owned by the same economic and political elite. Mr Sulak was speaking as a panellist at a discussion, which was part of a two-day seminar to deliberate possible solutions for the poor in Thai society, held at the beginning of May 2000 at the Mae Mun Man Yuen village. Respected scholar Prof Saneh Chamarik added that there were poor people in every period of time. The difference was, in the past, people became poor due to individual traits. At present, poverty was brought on by unjust structures in society. What are these "structures"? The respected scholar Prof Prawase Wasi explained that, fundamentally, Thai society despises the poor. Thai society is discriminatory and racists. It looks down on those who are not as rich as the filthy rich and it looks down on people who are of darker skin because dark skin is associated with poverty. This means people of other races or who naturally are of dark skin are looked down upon and put down by Thai society. "The social perception (of poverty) is one elementary structure. Thai people have been ingrained with the false belief that poverty is a result of bad karma in previous lives, which they can redeem by doing good things and sacrificing for other people. The social fibre has been used by the elite to justify their taking advantage of the poor," Prof Prawase said. "The poor have been made to believe through generations of nonsensical superstition that they be slaves for the rich just to end up in a better station in life in the next life, if one actually exists." The academics agreed that in order to liberate themselves from the iron grip of the urban-biased structures set up by the economic and political elite, the poor have to organise and build an alliance not only with those who share similar problems but also with people from other social strata such as members of the middle class. Ajarn Naruemol Thapjumphol, from Chulalongkorn University, noted that since poverty was a politically constructed problem, particularly in cultures like Thai culture, brought on by public policies, it must be solved by political means. "We can't tackle just state-level mechanisms, but also transnational institutions which exert a lot of influence over national policies," he said. A vertical alliance between villagers, academics and members of the media must be forged. Together, they can create a new set of knowledge based on people's real lives, which can be used to counter the often distorted information that the state resorts to in order to uphold its policies--policies purposely enacted to benefit the political and economic elite. "The fight to better the plight of the poor is not just one against the state, but a struggle to win over the sympathy of a majority of people," Prof Prawase said. He also urged the government to stage a dialogue with the villagers. "The government must send people who have the power to make decisions. Also, the dialogue must be held with both sides on an equal footing. Academics must assist villagers in terms of information, too. And the people who are sent must genuinely want to bring about a compromise and reforms--not just create obfuscation and stalling for the sake of maintaining the status quo as they typically do." Prof Nithi Eawsiwong, a founding member of Midnight University, an attempt by a group of intelligentsia to initiate alternative education, added that the poor may have to resort to alternative media to focus awareness on their plight.

"It is increasingly difficult for the poor to access mainstream media outlets, which have to survive under the rules of capitalism and which generally are owned by members of the same economic and political elite. Villagers may have to maximise the use of alternative media, both folk ones such as Mor Lam (folk music) and international ones such as the Internet.

"Since our leaders tend to pay more attention to international voices, the Net would be a great means to influence local policy," Prof Nithi said.

Prof Saneh called for land reform as a more concrete method of solving problems for the poor. To work, the reform must constitute not only a comprehensive and fair redistribution of land, but also a return of vernacular space for the poor to lead a community-based, self-sufficient life. "We can't wait for a Sor Por Kor 401-type land reform to be imposed on us by the Ministry of Agriculture," Prof Saneh said, referring to the scandal and corruption-rife attempt at land redistribution in the past.

"What the poor need to do is push for redistribution of land so that it can be a basis to rebuild local economies and cultures, not to steal it from them and then resold at exorbitant prices by the rich. We have to participate in the process of redistribution and have a clear plan of what we want to do with the land." Prof Saneh added that the reform would be meaningless if villagers only used it to continue chemical-intensive monoculture, or to merely sell the land for money. Mr Sulak noted that the villagers affected by the dam now gathered at Mae Mun Man Yuen were a symbol of a strong civil society taking shape.

A shift towards strengthening the people's power is already evident on the grassroots level, he said.

"It is not only here at Pak Mun that people are calling for their rights and a return of their livelihood, but also in Kud Chum, where people agreed to use their own local currency. Even members of the middle class in Kanchanaburi came out to protest the Yadana Gas Pipeline Project, which they believe would have an adverse impact on their environment." It is the ruling elite that fails to realise the failure of mainstream development direction, he said.

Ajarn Kasian Techapira from Thammasat University shares Mr Sulak's view. Fishermen at Pak Mun, he noted, knew more than 100 types of fish by heart. That knowledge-their intellectual and social capital- was destroyed together with their natural resource base when the Pak Mun Dam blocked the flow of their river.

"Their knowledge about fish is useless now because there are no fish left to catch," Acharn Kasian said. "The dam robbed them of resources, not only those of the villagers but also those of the country. It brought poverty on villagers who were once independent in a self-sufficient lifestyle."Ironically, he added, rural Thai people became poor because of the government's misguided attempt to develop them.

Villagers lay symbolic siege to dam

Moving under the cover of early morning darkness, more than 1,000 protesting villagers on May 15 occupied a parking lot next to the power generation plant at Pak Mun dam in Khong Chiam district. One group of 100 villagers staged a symbolic siege of the dam on its crest. Another group took to the river below the dam in 50 boats. It was the culmination of a threat to seize the dam and "let the Mun river run free" by the villagers who have demanded that their traditional way of life be restored.

Authorities had anticipated the siege but the protesting villagers took advantage of the darkness at 2am to move into the parking lot. Protest leaders and activists made speeches aboard a truck equipped with a loudspeaker system and blasted the authorities for neglecting the plight of the rural people and of the poor. Hundreds of policemen and defence volunteers were on hand to respond to any untoward incident but remained at a distance to avoid any appearance of provocation.

Led by the Assembly of the Poor, the villagers occupied an empty lot on the river bank at the dam site and set up a makeshift village called Mae Mun Man Yuen where they have stayed since February 1999. The villagers and rural people have been affected by various state projects, including Pak Mun and Sirindhorn dams, and a development project at Chong Mek pass on the Thai-Lao border. Activists and villagers condemned the construction of Pak Mun dam, which began operating in 1994, for decimating the fish population in the Moon river.

The World Commission on Dams released a report in March 2000 showing the loss of up to 80% of fish in the river. The WCD was created and funded by the World Bank, the main financier of Pak Mun dam, to study the impact of dams. The findings confirmed the accusations of environmentalists and protesters that the "fish ladder", which dam authorities built to allow fish to travel up the river, was a total failure.

The May 15 action was designed to force the dam authorities to open all eight spillways to restore the river to its original level and allow fish from the Mekong river to travel up and spawn in the Mun river once again. Protest leaders said the activity was not meant as a demand for compensation as officials had alleged, but was a genuine demand that the river's ecology be restored so that villagers could go back to their original occupations of fishing and farming by the river. The protesters stressed that their intent was non-violent and they would not resort to destroying property, blocking roads or taking any action which might be construed as causing violence.

They said that the Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand, the dam developer, would try to take advantage of the situation to instigate violence in a bid to dislodge them from their make-shift village. Pol Lt-Gen Laemthong Yan-ubon, regional police commander, said the villagers would be able to continue their protest as long as they remained non-violent. Senior provincial officials accused the protesters as being belligerent and insincere. Praphat Bunyindee, the deputy governor, said provincial authorities had earlier requested the protesters to send representatives to meet officials to discuss their demand, but the protesters had spurned the request. Most Thais, instead, felt that it was the senior provincial officials who were beliigerent and arrogant in their misplaced and pompous sense of authority and importance.

Giant catfish in protest against dam

Fishermen on May 15 released a young Mekong giant catfish into the Mun River to demand the river’s rehabilitation. Before the release of the 25-kg catfish, more than 500 villagers staged an earlymorning protest at the dam site. They wanted the government to order EGAT to open all of the dam’s gates to restore fisheries.

“We would like to call the government’s attention to the loss of our livelihood,” said community leader Thongcharoen Sihatham. “We have long attempted to discuss our problem with EGAT, but it just does not listen.”

The villagers said opening the gates was a peaceful way to decommission the Pak Mun dam because it did not involve removing the concrete structure itself. Meanwhile EGAT took a group of 10 journalists to the dam site and arrograntly denounced the protest. EGAT officials said the villagers were trespassing as the site was state property. The villagers’ demand to have the gates opened could not be met because it would result in power shortages or even blackouts in a number of Northeastern provinces, the officials said.

EGAT assistant governor Supin Panyamak denied the fishermen’s claim that construction of the Pak Mun dam had affected fisheries in the river even though international studies by renowned ecologists and icthyologists, commissioned by the World Bank have shown the situation to be otherwise. By saying this, Suphin either demonstrated incredible ignorance or arrogance and recalcitrance.

“They will have to prove their claim. From the information we have received from the Royal Fisheries Department, local income from fisheries has increased [from stocking the reservoir],” he said. The migration of fish from the Mekong into the Mun is a myth, said Theeraphat Thongkham, EGAT’s aquatic biologist, even though many studies, even before the dam was built, showed otherwise. He said there was no evidence of fish from the Mekong migrating to feed and spawn in the Mun.

However, trying to save face after he had obviously lied in the face over overwhelming evidence to the contrary, he could not explain why EGAT had built a fish ladder at the dam site in the first place. The ladder was installed at the Pak Mun dam after fishermen and ichthyologists reported the dam would affect fisheries and the genetic diversity of the Mun River basin.

“Probably the only change since the dam’s construction has been in the structure of the fish population in the Mun River,” he said. “This is because the dam created a reservoir, which changed the river’s condition from flowing to still.” That is, he unwittingly and simply contradicted himself.

Stand-off as dam protesters stay put

About 1,000 protesters remained at Pak Mool Dam the night of May 19 after practising dodging water cannons and breathing through wet cloth during the day. Meanwhile, 300 police officers stood assembled six kilometres away, ready to move in should the order be given. Governor Siwa Saengmanee vowed to remove the protesters by the end of the night. Earlier that week, he had set May 19 as the deadline for them to leave peacefully or face arrest.

The protesters vowed to remain until the government met their demand to open the dam's water gates to allow fish to migrate into the area. Earlier in the day Siwa met with the protesters and proposed that the dispute be settled by an arbitration committee. The protesters rejected the proposal and Siwa's request that they leave. Siwa was later taken to a hospital and treated for fatigue and high blood pressure. At dusk, police officers, defence volunteers and EGAT officials took turns driving past the site. Meanwhile, 200 policemen from a special task force and 100 border patrol officers stood by at Sirinthorn Dam six kilometres away.

Wanida Tantiwitthayapitak, an adviser to the Assembly of the Poor, one of the groups advising the protesters, May 19 said she feared that authorities would rally a group of rival villagers to confront the protesters before sending police to disperse them. The decision by a group of senators to visit the site to investigate firsthand caused speculation that the protesters might be removed by force. The protesters claimed the government wants to break up their demonstration before the senators, including Sopon Supapong and Damrong Puttan, visited the site on May 21.

Damrong said on May 19 that the senators wanted to find a solution acceptable to all sides. He said information gathered at the site would be presented to the full Senate for discussion. At the protest site, Suriyasai Katasila, secretary-general of the Campaign for Popular Democracy, claimed the Chuan government was using the media to smear the protesters by claiming they had destroyed state property.

Prime Minister Chuan Leekpai on May 19 urged EGAT to explain the issue to the public.

"EGAT needs to tell the people about the truth," Chuan said. "It may use newspapers, radio or TV to explain. Without any explanation, people will not understand what it is all about and why the government does not try to solve the problem." Chuan said the villagers had a right to protest as long as they do not destroy state property.

"If they do, the authorities have the duty to protect the state property," he said.

Meanwhile, in Bangkok student activists from 16 universities and activists for the poor rallied briefly in front of Government House to demand that the government stop using the media to distort the issue. EGAT officials lied when they claimed the protesters had destroyed state property. Student activist Naruemol Paiboonsutthikhun called on the government to order EGAT to open the water gates.

Protesters seize dam in Si Sa Ket

Meanwhile, thousands of local villagers on May 19 seized Rasi Salai Dam in Si Sa Ket Province, demanding the government release water to neutralise soil previously polluted by salt, the pollution resulting from the construction of the dam. Paichit Silarak, a leader of the Assembly of the Poor, led 1,500 villagers to take control of the dam. The protesters threatened to destroy the dam if their demands were not met. About 50 government officials from the Science Ministry’s Energy Promotion and Development Department were locked inside offices near the dam. Protesters stopped other authorities and police from entering the area.

Si Sa Ket Governor Kosin Ketthong despatched 30 special taskforce police to keep law and order at the scene. Deputy Science Minister Pornthep Techapaiboon said the government would not resort to force to end the protest, fearing the political implications. Paichit reported the water had flooded more than 150 salt mines after it was dammed, because it was unable to take its normal course. When the water was released, it contaminated soil and other water sources in the area because it had become saline from the mines. Poor farmers were further impoverished now that they could not longer grow crops on their now salt-contaminated land.

Dam base attacked

Si Sa Ket-Protesters on May 30 started removing stones at the base of Rasi Salai dam in an attempt to open up a water channel to allow the Moon river to flow again. About 500 protesters removed stones from an area at the southern end of the dam, which they said was the river's course before the two-billion-baht dam was built.

Protest leaders Paijit Silalak and Paithoon Thothong said the dam severely affected ecology and the water channel would restore it. They also chained up the front entrance gate to the dam on hearing that police may attempt to disperse the protesters. Their move prompted local authorities to send police to the area. The protesters occupied the dam since May 19. They wanted all spillways opened, because the dam had caused a salinity problem in the area.