However, some activists and the general public may wonder whether such an outcome can be observed in practice since it is a technical term used for negotiation strategy.

The pact's opponents failed to delay the signing as the government sees it as giving a needed kick to the listless economy.

The two prime ministers announced that the pact would promote high economic growth in their nations.

Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont described it is the greatest pact ever, since not only would exports to Japan surge, but also investment and other benefits such as technology transfer and closer cooperation would increase between the two countries.

However, he has mentioned nothing about the possible harmful social and environmental impacts claimed by NGOs. The negotiation team only said that if any flaws appeared after implementation, each side could amend the pact every other year or cancel it at one year's notice.

Yet how can we ensure that the country actually enjoys the advantages guaranteed by the government or that the major benefits are widely distributed among the population and not restricted to some businessmen as with the other free-trade pacts that Thailand has entered into?

And if negative effects appear, can Thailand solve the problems easily or call for changes to the pact before they inflict irreversible damage?

The public may immediately ask questions about whether Thailand is prepared for any damage from the pact. Has the government studied the impact of the JTEPA in every area, and if so for how long?

As it is a bilateral agreement, it can be amended later if found to inflict hardship on most people in the country.

Japan seems to have conducted a study on the bilateral pact two to three years in advance to make sure the positive impacts outweighed the negative and it would boost its economy.

Aat Pisanwanich, director of the International Trade Studies Centre of the University of the Thai Chamber of Commerce, said the government should balance the advantages and disadvantages of the agreement for the sake of both the economy and society.

Although the pact may fuel economic growth in each country by 1-2 percentage points, the government cannot be sure that it will not have side-effects that will erode the living standards of the masses, he said.

"As long as there are issues of concern, the government should not rush to make a commitment. Once a commitment is made, it will be hard to retract," Aat said.

Even though many businessmen say the deal will shore up Japanese confidence to invest more in the Kingdom, is it worthwhile for the country to exchange security of living standards for a temporary kick to economic growth?

Pongvipa Palapleevalya, senior director of the Thailand Environment Institute, said the pact might worsen pollution here as Thailand's capacity to manage industrial waste and garbage dropped.

Although the government says trade in toxic waste is covered by the Basel Convention, Thailand is inefficient in managing such waste. The environmental threats will accumulate and eventually ruin the country's environment, she said.

The beneficial effects on the economy may be obvious in the short term, but who knows when the adverse effects will be noticed? Once problems surface, it may be too late to solve them.

How can we ensure that Japanese investors really transfer all their technical knowledge to Thailand? Under the agreement, Thailand cannot file a complaint against a Japanese company if it refuses to transfer high technology to local industries. Japan may well limit its technology transfers to Japanese-Thai joint ventures.

For instance, although more than 30 per cent of local automobile companies have long had joint-venture arrangements with Japan, Japan has not transferred any advanced technology here yet. The country still has limited efficiency in automobile production as Japan reserves its latest technology, such as hybrid-car production, for itself.

Under the agreement, Japan will eliminate 92 per cent of duties on imports, while Thailand will over time cut taxes on 97 per cent of goods from Japan.

However, Thailand may not get to enjoy the lower tariff rates as much as its expects. The stiff sanitary standards imposed on imports by Japan will obstruct exports from Thailand, which are mostly agricultural commodities. Thailand mainly buys from Japan expensive industrial goods.

Has Thailand really gained much from the free-trade pacts already in force with Australia, New Zealand, China and India? The country expected that the Australian pact would remove trade obstacles to Thai exports, but Thai shrimp have run into biosecurity barriers in Australia.

Thailand cannot buck the global trend that favours trade liberalisation. Many countries have concentrated on forging bilateral trade pacts in order to preserve their competitive edge.

The decision of the interim government to ink the JTEPA does not break any law as it has full authority to make international commitments just like an elected government. However, it would be better if the government listened to warnings from the public and NGOs before making a commitment.

Pacts can last for generations. The government should not weigh only the short-term benefits of international agreements when they may have harmful side-effects on the country's society and environment in the future.

Surely it is better to prevent trouble than to wait until problems arise before seeking a solution. Buddhism teaches us that.