golden triangle

we left for the golden triangle the day after we returned to chiang mai by way of a cramped minibus tour. our guide and driver, mr. hand and mr. noise respectively, we not as enjoyable as their reservoir dog-like names. it was a very long day starting at 7am.

we passed through chiang rai (180km ne of chiang mai) without stopping. from what we saw and have read it is a smaller version of chiang mai (less traffic, pollution, and a smaller night market). we went down the main north-south drag but saw nothing more.

239 km north of our starting point we stopped at the small village of chiang saen. known as the gateway of the golden triangle, the 60km of road between chiang rai and chiang saen was very pretty. the road followed the mae nam chan river and featured coconut groves and rice paddies. the city, like chiang rai and chiang mai after it, was abandoned as the capital of thailand as the burmese forced the capital city to be moved south time and time again. i would have liked to stop longer to explore the crumbling city walls and the encirling moat, but we had to move on. we did, however, have a chance to visit the area's oldest wat: wat jadeeloung. it was established in 1331 and rebuilt in 1515. some of the trees in the courtyard were over 400 years old.

at my need lydia and i then visited the infamous golden triangle (12km nw of chiang saen). the golden triangle is the area where thailand, burma (myanmar), and laos meet at the boundaries of the mekong and mae ruak rivers. while i stood on thai soil i could see to the left burma and to the right laos. note: the golden triangle has a history of being the centre of illegal drug activites. with burma, laos and thailand in such close proximity it was the perfect meeting point for the opium and heroin market. we paid to have a local take us on his motorized sanpan (longboat) across the mekong. it was cold on the water but interesting to see burma and laos from the river, and with them so close i could not pass on the chance to see them closer. we ended up crossing and entering laos on foot (you do not require a passport) - a choice that our guide seemed to champion but not follow himself. over in the democratic peoples republic of laos (d.p.r.l.) we were immediately approached by corrupt government officials (perhaps soldiers) who hit us up for an entry fee. i protested, but lydia wisely spared the confrontation and paid for both of us. note: although one was armed we were never in danger. the area we had entered was a cheap, sketchy, blackmarket so we hung by the boats until we could leave. i am sure that other people have had a more pleasurable/favourable experience while in the d.p.r.l. anyways i can now say that i have been to laos.

once back in thailand we had a buffet lunch, and then visited mae sai. this is the famous "visa run" city where people cross in burma only to re-enter thailand for another 30 day visa. we checked out the burmese/thai border and got the touristy snapshot of standing in the northern most spot in thailand. we did not, however, cross into the burmese city of tachilek. the heavy soldier presence and our first hand experience visiting thai refugee camps did not make it appealing. you would have also had to surrender your passport, and as i sleep with mine and had trouble paying even the laos entry fee we declined. the poverty near the border was even more prevalent as the human trafffic passes between the countries. it is a busy crossing, and thais, being the richer of the two nations, cross to shop for burmese goods.

lastly we visited a padung village of the famed "long neck" people. it was very interesting to see the women's rings, a process that begins at age 5 and continues until the woman has over 20 rings lengthening her neck. if they are removed she cannot survive. we took some pictures and tried to be respectful. they were very accomodating. however, it got me thinking that as tourists we want to see the traditional ways of life for these people, but through our presence, we alter the way they are living. you cannot see something here and not impact the future. all you can do is try and limit your effect. doc brown was right.

our trip, covering over 560km in more than 14 hrs, was exhausting and frustrating. it was too much to see, too rushed, too cramped, too orchestrated. we merely passed by tourist things and missed what really counts. on a postive note we did make new friends with a couple from switzerland and sweden.

on the way home our late tour travelled at night (something our travel doctor warned us never to do). lydia and i saw as we passed through some rough road a kid face down on the sandy pavement, his motorbike nearby. i think he was dead. we made our guide and driver pull over at the next police box to inform the police. it was a hard thing to see, and so much more alien and real than a huge pileup on the 401. lyds and i both have come to agree that we are done with organized tours that are not treks. they suck, and for the most part, the people do too (we had an elderly couple that i could have given the one flew over the cuckoo's nest treatment to). it is just not the backpacker way. we simply ran out of time to see things properly, and so we had to settle.