Rice crisis back to haunt junta

The government has launched a plan to help out rice farmers with Bt35.9 billion in “soft” loans at a lowly 3 per cent interest.
The market price for Hom Mali (Jasmine) paddy has now dropped to Bt9,700 per tonne, from Bt12,000 previously.
Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha has sought to alleviate pressure on his government by accusing local politicians and rice millers of collaborating to suppress the price.
He went as far as to suggest that collaboration was motivated by a political desire to damage ties between the government and farmers, and proposed that a law be enacted to punish the “evil” middlemen.
In the immediate term, the government plans to waive retail tax on rice to get consumers to buy and store more of the stuff, and also encourage oil firms to buy rice and distribute it to customers at filling stations in the same way they give away free water.
Thailand has been selling rice to the world since the days of the Ayutthaya Period. Cultivation of the crop is embedded deep in our national myths and nation-state narrative. Old songs extol the virtues of an idyllic kingdom where fish and rice are plentiful.
But the realities of our modern era have taken a heavy toll on this romantic notion. Sadly, successive governments have unabashedly exploited the issue of rice for political gain, instead of taking constructive and comprehensive action to help farmers.
The junta can’t claim they didn’t see this current crisis coming. After all, wasn’t catastrophic management of the Yingluck administration’s rice subsidy project one of the reasons why the military seized power?
Yet instead of living up to their promises to improve the plight of rice growers, the junta procrastinated until the problem hit them in the face. And following the line taken by previous governments, they continue to politicise the issue.
For too long, farmers have been held hostage by politicians’ desire to prosper financially or in terms of electability. The price for rice and other agricultural commodities was falling during the Yingluck government. The details of how she exploited that situation, politicised it and got herself in hot water have been well chronicled. 
Under the administration of her brother, Thaksin, the rice price was high and so allegations of price-fixing drew little attention. Does the junta now expect us to believe that the conspiracies between “evil” middlemen and rice millers only emerged after they took power?
We require a change in our attitude towards rice production, but we also need to broaden our view and consider supply and demand at the global level. The schemes announced by the junta are merely short-term measures. We are not out of the loop.
Too often our leaders have barked up the wrong tree, warning for example that Vietnam and India are about to overtake us in the rice-growing rankings. The end result, needless to say, has been Thai overproduction that leads to depressed prices.
The situation is not helped by an attitude widely held among low-income workers – that if a job can’t be found in the city, one can always go back to the countryside and grow rice.
Rice, like any other agricultural product, has to be understood in the context of the global market. And while we think globally, we must act locally.
We need to consider the whole chain of production – from the water supply for paddies to the consequences of oversupply, not to mention the fact that politicising the issue does nothing to relieve the plight of the farmers.
Last but not least, our nation’s food security blueprint must also ensure that farmers get their fair share of the pie, including income from exports.