Blasting the Mekong: Environmental concern just tip of iceberg  

Another is China’s strategy is to use the river as a backdoor for transportation of its goods to Southeast Asia. Beijing’s political, military and economic influence means the plan is being implemented with minimal resistance from its Mekong neighbours.  
Envisaging an economic quadrangle reaching from its borders with Laos and Myanmar into northern Thailand, Beijing has been pushing to turn the river into a major trade route since 1992, with Simao port in Yunnan province at its head.
Legal instruments and an international mechanism were created to expedite the plan. In April 2001, China, Myanmar, Laos and Thailand signed the Agreement on Commercial Navigation on the Lancang-Mekong River. Just months later, the four countries formed the Joint Committee on Coordination of Commercial Navigation on the Lancang-Mekong River (JCCCN), as a mechanism to regulate channel clearance and navigation.
 At China’s initiative, the JCCCN began the first phase of clearance more than a decade ago, then launched the second phase at its meeting in Myanmar last year, ordering the navigation channel to be cut to Luang Prabang in Laos and beyond. The key obstacle here is the rapids at Khon Pi Luang on the Thai-Laos border, where plans to blast have met with fierce opposition from local residents and environmentalists.
Chinese company CCCC Second Harbor Consultant is currently surveying the river here in preparation for the second phase. Thailand announced in December that it would help out with company’s environmental and social impact assessment, due for completion in November.
A second concern relates to physical connectivity. Given existing alternatives, the Mekong is not a shortcut for cargo transport between China, Laos and Thailand. 
The river stretches 590 kilometres from Yunnan’s Simao port through Huay Xay in Laos to Thailand’s Chiang Kong. The equivalent road route is far shorter, at just 450km. 
Likewise the distance by river from Simao to Luang Prabang is 890km while by road it is just 510km.
A third transport corridor from Simao to Vientiane is 1,380km along the Mekong – or a mere 890km by road.
Yet the longer distances by river are offset by the lower cost of transport, according to a study by the Mekong River Commission. Transporting cargo by road from Simao to Chiang Kong costs $39.47 per tonne, compared to $23.22 per tonne by river, the study indicated.
Roads between key Chinese cities and Laos and Thailand have already been improved. However China and other Mekong countries remain insistent that the river be developed as an alternative or supplement to existing routes.
A third issue concerns the economics of river development, with Thailand’s Mekong-borne trade with China, Laos and Myanmar  worth an estimated Bt15.9 billion last year.
However the Mekong remains a side-route among the more convenient road options. Thai trade with China and Laos via the R3A highway was worth an estimated Bt19 billion last year.
The fourth thing to consider is Mekong developments impact on national borderlines. Thai officials have raised their concerns at JCCCN meetings that channel clearance would alter the boundary between Thailand and Laos.
Thai officials have insisted that the clearance cannot be conducted until demarcation of the 1,000-km boundary set by the Mekong’s current course is completed. That work is still in its early stages, but China has sent a clear signal it is prepared to wait in its determination to see the Mekong project through.