Dec 22, 2007
The Big Clean-up
A recent food poisoning outbreak hit over 200 people who ate PrimaDeli's cakes. The company was given the green light to resume operations yesterday, after an 11-day clean-up and inspection process. DIANA OTHMAN and SUMATHI V. SELVARETNAM look at the process.
CLEAN SWEEP: Samples were taken from various surfaces at the factory. -- PHOTO: PRIMADELI
Step 1: All-out efforts to disinfect factory over 11 days
OPERATIONS at PrimaDeli's factory in Keppel Road come to a halt on Dec 4 for a complete disinfection of the premises.
Prima hired cleaning specialists to conduct the massive round-the-clock clean-up from Dec 5 to 16.
All surface materials were stripped off.
Ceilings, floors, walls and production equipment were washed with a high-pressure jet and wiped clean with a sanitiser concentrate to remove all possible sources of microbial infection.
Airborne disinfectants were used throughout the factory.
Dressed in protective gear to stop them from 'shedding' their own germs or contaminants onto the site, six officers from the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority of Singapore (AVA) descended upon PrimaDeli's 1,080 sq m food production facility at Keppel Road on Monday.
In two hours, a total of 75 swab samples were taken at the buns, pastry and cakes section of the factory.
Samples were collected from any area where there was any possible contact with food.
This included preparation table tops, kitchen utensils and equipment such as ovens and trays.
The handles of toilet doors and doors to preparation rooms were also swabbed.
The samples collected were sent to AVA's Veterinary Public Health Centre in Lim Chu Kang for testing.
Step 2: Tests on samples to ensure tip-top hygiene
STRINGENT TESTING: Scientists at AVA's Veterinary Public Health Centre checking swab samples for the presence of bacteria. -- ST PHOTO: ALPHONSUS CHERN
View more photos
IN A microbiology laboratory at AVA's Veterinary Public Health Centre, swab samples go through two main tests:
a hygiene indicator - to check how clean they are;
and salmonella detection - to search for any of the germs responsble for outbreak of food poisoning.
The hygiene indicator test reveals the amount of bacteria in the samples.
It also indicates if there are any suspicious germs present.
To carry it out, swab samples are diluted and spread on agar dishes containing nutrients for bacteria growth.
The dishes are placed in different incubators with temperatures ranging between 35 and 44.5 deg C, for two to three days.
In the salmonella detection test, swab samples are screened in an automated machine.
The machine does DNA fingerprinting to identify the unique salmonella strain.
The AVA will allow PrimaDeli and its 39 franchise outlets to open only if laboratory investigations reveal a complete absence of salmonella.
The hygiene indicator levels must also pass muster, that is, the bacteria count should be low and free of any harmful pathogens.
Step 3: Factory can reopen after checks for safety lapses
THE results on Thursday showed that the samples collected were satisfactory in terms of hygiene and that salmonella was no longer present.
The PrimaDeli factory also has to comply with international food safety requirements.
The Agri-Food & Veterinary Authority (AVA) was engaged in helping the factory review the processes that it uses to check for errors and safety lapses.
The factory passed this second hurdle yesterday.
The AVA gave PrimaDeli the go-ahead to produce items made under high heat, such as cakes without cream, crusty breads, tarts and cookies.
It also allowed PrimaDeli to produce frozen dough that can then be baked at the latter's outlets.
Full factory operations will resume when the AVA is satisfied that hygiene standards are maintained.
PrimaDeli will then be able to bake cakes with cream toppings and other un-baked ingredients.
The company has decided to take things slowly and produce just frozen dough until it is granted permission to resume full factory operations.
Step 3: Factory can reopen after checks for safety lapses
THE results on Thursday showed that the samples collected were satisfactory in terms of hygiene and that salmonella was no longer present.
The PrimaDeli factory also has to comply with international food safety requirements.
The Agri-Food & Veterinary Authority (AVA) was engaged in helping the factory review the processes that it uses to check for errors and safety lapses.
The factory passed this second hurdle yesterday.
The AVA gave PrimaDeli the go-ahead to produce items made under high heat, such as cakes without cream, crusty breads, tarts and cookies.
It also allowed PrimaDeli to produce frozen dough that can then be baked at the latter's outlets.
Full factory operations will resume when the AVA is satisfied that hygiene standards are maintained.
PrimaDeli will then be able to bake cakes with cream toppings and other un-baked ingredients.
The company has decided to take things slowly and produce just frozen dough until it is granted permission to resume full factory operations.
Step 3: Factory can reopen after checks for safety lapses
THE results on Thursday showed that the samples collected were satisfactory in terms of hygiene and that salmonella was no longer present.
The PrimaDeli factory also has to comply with international food safety requirements.
The Agri-Food & Veterinary Authority (AVA) was engaged in helping the factory review the processes that it uses to check for errors and safety lapses.
The factory passed this second hurdle yesterday.
The AVA gave PrimaDeli the go-ahead to produce items made under high heat, such as cakes without cream, crusty breads, tarts and cookies.
It also allowed PrimaDeli to produce frozen dough that can then be baked at the latter's outlets.
Full factory operations will resume when the AVA is satisfied that hygiene standards are maintained.
PrimaDeli will then be able to bake cakes with cream toppings and other un-baked ingredients.
The company has decided to take things slowly and produce just frozen dough until it is granted permission to resume full factory operations.
Saturday, December 22, 2007
Dec 22, 2007 - Thailand needs stability
Dec 22, 2007
Thailand needs stability
THAILAND will hold its parliamentary election tomorrow, its first following last year's military coup against the government of Thaksin Shinawatra. It is not likely to produce a conclusive result. As our Thailand correspondent Nirmal Ghosh quoted a Thai politician explaining: 'The election is just the qualifying round. The real battle will be in Parliament when MPs have to vote for a prime minister.' There are a number of reasons why this would be so.
To begin with, twice the number of candidates and parties are contesting this election compared with the last. Opinion polls indicate the People Power Party (PPP) - a reincarnation of the disbanded Thai Rak Thai party of Thaksin - is likely to gain the most number of seats but not an outright majority, though that possibility cannot be ruled out. Since the military would not want it to be part of any government, the PPP will probably not lead a coalition. The next government will probably be led by the likely runner-up in the election, the Democrat Party (DP), an outcome the military would favour. If the PPP wins an outright majority, it would set the stage for further confrontation between Thaksin and the Thai elite down the line. If a DP-led coalition excludes the PPP, that would leave the largest party in the country out of power, a constant threat to the elite. Either way, the election is likely to set the stage for more politicking - or business as usual.
That is something Thailand cannot afford. It needs stable government to deal both with security issues in its southern provinces, where a Muslim-led insurgency continues to simmer, as well as with economic issues. Once one of Asean's most promising economies, Thailand may soon be surpassed by Vietnam. It needs effective government to further develop its infrastructure, reform its education system, improve rural services and implement policies to attract investors. Thaksin, despite his faults, did address pressing social and economic problems. That is why he remains popular in large parts of the country, including Bangkok (if the opinion polls are to be believed). The military government that succeeded him has had a spotty record.
The best outcome would be an all-party coalition, including the PPP. In the interest of stability, Thaksin might continue to be excluded from power, but Thailand needs a rest from politics. Whatever result the election produces, Thai politicians need to come together to form an effective government. They will jeopardise their country's future if they treat the election as a mere prologue to post-election politicking.
Thailand needs stability
THAILAND will hold its parliamentary election tomorrow, its first following last year's military coup against the government of Thaksin Shinawatra. It is not likely to produce a conclusive result. As our Thailand correspondent Nirmal Ghosh quoted a Thai politician explaining: 'The election is just the qualifying round. The real battle will be in Parliament when MPs have to vote for a prime minister.' There are a number of reasons why this would be so.
To begin with, twice the number of candidates and parties are contesting this election compared with the last. Opinion polls indicate the People Power Party (PPP) - a reincarnation of the disbanded Thai Rak Thai party of Thaksin - is likely to gain the most number of seats but not an outright majority, though that possibility cannot be ruled out. Since the military would not want it to be part of any government, the PPP will probably not lead a coalition. The next government will probably be led by the likely runner-up in the election, the Democrat Party (DP), an outcome the military would favour. If the PPP wins an outright majority, it would set the stage for further confrontation between Thaksin and the Thai elite down the line. If a DP-led coalition excludes the PPP, that would leave the largest party in the country out of power, a constant threat to the elite. Either way, the election is likely to set the stage for more politicking - or business as usual.
That is something Thailand cannot afford. It needs stable government to deal both with security issues in its southern provinces, where a Muslim-led insurgency continues to simmer, as well as with economic issues. Once one of Asean's most promising economies, Thailand may soon be surpassed by Vietnam. It needs effective government to further develop its infrastructure, reform its education system, improve rural services and implement policies to attract investors. Thaksin, despite his faults, did address pressing social and economic problems. That is why he remains popular in large parts of the country, including Bangkok (if the opinion polls are to be believed). The military government that succeeded him has had a spotty record.
The best outcome would be an all-party coalition, including the PPP. In the interest of stability, Thaksin might continue to be excluded from power, but Thailand needs a rest from politics. Whatever result the election produces, Thai politicians need to come together to form an effective government. They will jeopardise their country's future if they treat the election as a mere prologue to post-election politicking.
Dec 21, 2007 - Religious minorities in Indonesia
Dec 21, 2007
MATA JELI: A PERSPECTIVE ON INDONESIAN AFFAIRS
Protecting religious minorities
By Bruce Gale
ABU Dujana, the self-proclaimed military commander of the Jemaah Islamiah (JI) terrorist group, went on trial in a South Jakarta District Court on Dec 12.
But Dujana was not charged with any specific bombing incident. Instead, public prosecutor Bayu Adinugroho argued that the terrorist leader was guilty of stockpiling weapons and conspiring to attack Christians in conflict-torn Poso in the eastern Indonesian province of Central Sulawesi.
The focus on the minority Christian community as the victim of extremist violence may have been coincidental. After all, most observers believe there is insufficient evidence to link Dujana to the JI's bombing campaigns in other parts of the country.
But the charge did seem to go some way towards addressing renewed criticism that the authorities are either unable or unwilling to protect religious minorities from extremist violence.
'The state, whose job it is to protect religious freedom and the right to practise one's faith,' said an editorial in the Jakarta Post last month, 'has failed us on so many occasions that it raises questions about the commitment of those in the government to uphold the Constitution.'
But not all the news has been bad. As often happens in Indonesia, progress on one front is frequently accompanied by a deterioration somewhere else.
On Christmas Eve 2000, a coordinated series of bombings of churches in Jakarta and eight other cities killed 18 people and injured many others. Since then, the approach of the Christmas season also brings forth speculation about another spate of bombings.
But Christmas has been a peaceful affair for some years, and Christian leaders are not expecting any trouble this time around.
'The government is more alert now,' noted retired general Herman Mantiri last week, when I asked him about the security situation during Christmas.
General Mantiri, a devout Christian, was formerly chief of staff of Indonesia's Armed Forces. Last year, thousands of police and army personnel guarded churches across the country during the Christmas and New Year period. Media reports suggest a similar move will be mounted this year.
Official statistics show that while Indonesia's estimated 234.6 million population (as of July this year) is overwhelmingly Muslim, about 10 per cent are Christian.
What really worries Christian leaders is not so much the possibility of bombings during the Christmas season as the increase in extremist attacks during the year.
Mr Theophilus Bela, secretary-general of the Committee for Religious Peace, told me last week that more than 70 churches have either been closed down or have come under attack by extremist groups in the past 12 months. Most were Protestant churches with small congregations located in West Java, but Catholic churches were also hit.
Radical Muslim groups involved in forcibly closing down churches include the Front Pembela Islam (Islam Defenders Front) and the Aliansi Gerakan Ant Pemurtadan (Anti-Apostasy Alliance). Their defence is that the buildings hit are not authorised for use as churches.
By law, Indonesian church groups must have a worship permit. But Christian leaders say a joint regulation issued by the Religious Affairs Ministry and the Home Affairs Minister last year makes it almost impossible to obtain one.
The rule stipulates that a house of worship can be built only if it is approved by at least 60 local residents and the congregation has at least 90 members. A separate building permit is also needed. But Christian leaders argue that, even when these rules are met, subdistrict heads are reluctant to grant the permit.
For this reason, many Christians worship in private homes or rented facilities, some of which have also come under attack.
Apart from general references to the growing influence of fundamentalist Islam, few observers can explain the recent surge in religiously motivated violence.
Ms Sidney Jones of the International Crisis Group in Jakarta says the concentration of militant activity in West Java is consistent with the area's radical tradition, which dates back to the formation of the Darul Islam (Islamic State) movement in the 1950s.
Yet another factor, she argues, is the apparent willingness of the authorities to turn a blind eye to the violence.
One puzzle is the fact that most attacks have taken place in regencies such as Kuningan, Tasikmalaya and Indramayu. Industrial areas such as Bekasi and Tangerang, where an influx of workers from poor Christian areas in the outer islands over the past 10 to 15 years might have been expected to produce religious tensions, have been quiet by comparison.
And while radicals often cite alleged Christian proselytising as the source of their ire, many non-evangelical churches have also been targeted.
Also, Christians are not the only victims. Last month, al-Qiyadah al-Islamiyah sect leader Ahmad Moshaddeq declared his own teachings false after a mob flattened his mosque in the same regency.
And on Tuesday, a mob attacked a complex in a village in Kuningan occupied by the Ahmadiyah sect. A small mosque and dozens of houses were reportedly damaged.
A report last year by the US Department of State on democracy, human rights and labour noted that, although often present, police almost never try to prevent violence by radical groups. This reluctance to act puzzles local and international observers, especially since the Muhammadiyah and the Nahdatul Ulama, both influential Islamic organisations known for their moderate views, are on record as condemning violence.
'One of the biggest failures of the Yudhoyono government has been its inability to protect minority groups,' notes Ms Jones.
Official indecision is one explanation, with critics accusing President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono of being slow to make up his mind, especially on controversial issues.
Another possibility is that Dr Yudhoyono, whose secular nationalist Democrat Party won a mere 7.5 per cent of the votes in the 2004 legislative election, is worried about alienating the Muslim vote ahead of the 2009 presidential and parliamentary polls.
This theory gains strength from the way in which his administration has given greater power to the Majelis Ulama Indonesia (Council of Muslim Religious Scholars, or MUI) to decide which Muslim groups are 'officially deviant'. Until recently, MUI was hardly taken seriously by anyone.
But one thing is for sure: the issue of church closures is unlikely to fade just yet.
Last week, Protestant and Catholic leaders took their complaints about church closures directly to the Indonesian Commission of Human Rights, prompting officials to say they intend to examine both the violence and the restrictive regulations.
bruceg@sph.com.sg
MATA JELI: A PERSPECTIVE ON INDONESIAN AFFAIRS
Protecting religious minorities
By Bruce Gale
ABU Dujana, the self-proclaimed military commander of the Jemaah Islamiah (JI) terrorist group, went on trial in a South Jakarta District Court on Dec 12.
But Dujana was not charged with any specific bombing incident. Instead, public prosecutor Bayu Adinugroho argued that the terrorist leader was guilty of stockpiling weapons and conspiring to attack Christians in conflict-torn Poso in the eastern Indonesian province of Central Sulawesi.
The focus on the minority Christian community as the victim of extremist violence may have been coincidental. After all, most observers believe there is insufficient evidence to link Dujana to the JI's bombing campaigns in other parts of the country.
But the charge did seem to go some way towards addressing renewed criticism that the authorities are either unable or unwilling to protect religious minorities from extremist violence.
'The state, whose job it is to protect religious freedom and the right to practise one's faith,' said an editorial in the Jakarta Post last month, 'has failed us on so many occasions that it raises questions about the commitment of those in the government to uphold the Constitution.'
But not all the news has been bad. As often happens in Indonesia, progress on one front is frequently accompanied by a deterioration somewhere else.
On Christmas Eve 2000, a coordinated series of bombings of churches in Jakarta and eight other cities killed 18 people and injured many others. Since then, the approach of the Christmas season also brings forth speculation about another spate of bombings.
But Christmas has been a peaceful affair for some years, and Christian leaders are not expecting any trouble this time around.
'The government is more alert now,' noted retired general Herman Mantiri last week, when I asked him about the security situation during Christmas.
General Mantiri, a devout Christian, was formerly chief of staff of Indonesia's Armed Forces. Last year, thousands of police and army personnel guarded churches across the country during the Christmas and New Year period. Media reports suggest a similar move will be mounted this year.
Official statistics show that while Indonesia's estimated 234.6 million population (as of July this year) is overwhelmingly Muslim, about 10 per cent are Christian.
What really worries Christian leaders is not so much the possibility of bombings during the Christmas season as the increase in extremist attacks during the year.
Mr Theophilus Bela, secretary-general of the Committee for Religious Peace, told me last week that more than 70 churches have either been closed down or have come under attack by extremist groups in the past 12 months. Most were Protestant churches with small congregations located in West Java, but Catholic churches were also hit.
Radical Muslim groups involved in forcibly closing down churches include the Front Pembela Islam (Islam Defenders Front) and the Aliansi Gerakan Ant Pemurtadan (Anti-Apostasy Alliance). Their defence is that the buildings hit are not authorised for use as churches.
By law, Indonesian church groups must have a worship permit. But Christian leaders say a joint regulation issued by the Religious Affairs Ministry and the Home Affairs Minister last year makes it almost impossible to obtain one.
The rule stipulates that a house of worship can be built only if it is approved by at least 60 local residents and the congregation has at least 90 members. A separate building permit is also needed. But Christian leaders argue that, even when these rules are met, subdistrict heads are reluctant to grant the permit.
For this reason, many Christians worship in private homes or rented facilities, some of which have also come under attack.
Apart from general references to the growing influence of fundamentalist Islam, few observers can explain the recent surge in religiously motivated violence.
Ms Sidney Jones of the International Crisis Group in Jakarta says the concentration of militant activity in West Java is consistent with the area's radical tradition, which dates back to the formation of the Darul Islam (Islamic State) movement in the 1950s.
Yet another factor, she argues, is the apparent willingness of the authorities to turn a blind eye to the violence.
One puzzle is the fact that most attacks have taken place in regencies such as Kuningan, Tasikmalaya and Indramayu. Industrial areas such as Bekasi and Tangerang, where an influx of workers from poor Christian areas in the outer islands over the past 10 to 15 years might have been expected to produce religious tensions, have been quiet by comparison.
And while radicals often cite alleged Christian proselytising as the source of their ire, many non-evangelical churches have also been targeted.
Also, Christians are not the only victims. Last month, al-Qiyadah al-Islamiyah sect leader Ahmad Moshaddeq declared his own teachings false after a mob flattened his mosque in the same regency.
And on Tuesday, a mob attacked a complex in a village in Kuningan occupied by the Ahmadiyah sect. A small mosque and dozens of houses were reportedly damaged.
A report last year by the US Department of State on democracy, human rights and labour noted that, although often present, police almost never try to prevent violence by radical groups. This reluctance to act puzzles local and international observers, especially since the Muhammadiyah and the Nahdatul Ulama, both influential Islamic organisations known for their moderate views, are on record as condemning violence.
'One of the biggest failures of the Yudhoyono government has been its inability to protect minority groups,' notes Ms Jones.
Official indecision is one explanation, with critics accusing President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono of being slow to make up his mind, especially on controversial issues.
Another possibility is that Dr Yudhoyono, whose secular nationalist Democrat Party won a mere 7.5 per cent of the votes in the 2004 legislative election, is worried about alienating the Muslim vote ahead of the 2009 presidential and parliamentary polls.
This theory gains strength from the way in which his administration has given greater power to the Majelis Ulama Indonesia (Council of Muslim Religious Scholars, or MUI) to decide which Muslim groups are 'officially deviant'. Until recently, MUI was hardly taken seriously by anyone.
But one thing is for sure: the issue of church closures is unlikely to fade just yet.
Last week, Protestant and Catholic leaders took their complaints about church closures directly to the Indonesian Commission of Human Rights, prompting officials to say they intend to examine both the violence and the restrictive regulations.
bruceg@sph.com.sg
Dec 20, 2007 Putin Man of Year
Dec 20, 2007
Putin named Time's Person of the Year
Russian President led country back to table of world power, says magazine
FIRM LINE: Mr Putin, seen here fishing in the Yenisei River of Russia's Tuva region, has fostered a tough-guy image. -- PHOTO: AFP
NEW YORK - RUSSIAN President Vladimir Putin was named Time magazine's 'Person of the Year' for 2007 yesterday for bringing his country 'roaring back to the table of world power'.
Mr Putin, a 55-year-old former KGB official, will appear on the cover of Time as the person the editors believe had the greatest impact on events this year, for better or worse.
'He's not a good guy, but he's done extraordinary things,' said Time managing editor Richard Stengel, who announced Mr Putin's selection on NBC's Today Show.
'He's a new czar of Russia and he's dangerous in the sense that he doesn't care about civil liberties; he doesn't care about free speech; he cares about stability. But stability is what Russia needed and that's why Russians adore him.'
The Russian President beat several rivals for the Time distinction. Former US vice-president Al Gore, British author J.K. Rowling, Chinese President Hu Jintao and US commander in Iraq David Petraeus were named runners-up in that order.
The choice came days after Mr Putin announced a plan to hold on to power after his term ends.
On Monday, he said that he would serve as prime minister if his close ally Dmitry Medvedev wins next year's presidential vote.
Born in October 1952 in St Petersburg, then called Leningrad, Mr Putin served as a KGB spy in East Germany.
He rose to head the KGB's successor organisation FSB before being chosen as prime minister by late president Boris Yeltsin in August 1999. Mr Putin took over as acting president when Mr Yeltsin stepped down in December 1999.
He was elected president in March 2000 after a huge public relations campaign to build a profile for the relative unknown.
Since then, Mr Putin has overseen a steady concentration of power within the Kremlin walls, sidelining the political opposition and imposing tight control on the media. This has caused his Western critics to question his democratic credentials.
Two of his outspoken critics, journalist Anna Politkovskaya and former spy Alexander Litvinenko, were murdered last year. That raised concerns in Russia about the stability Mr Putin has been credited with enforcing after the chaos of the 1990s.
But Mr Putin has played to his power base in the security forces and military by fostering a tough-guy image. He has bluntly told Western governments to keep their 'snotty noses' out of Russia's affairs.
Delivering on a vow he made when first elected president in 2000, he crushed the Chechen rebellion, though sporadic attacks continue on Russian forces.
His years in power have been marked by a significant rise in living standards, helped by soaring oil prices, but large sections of the population still live in poverty.
Mr Putin has prided himself on bringing stability and predictability to Russia after the zig-zags of the Yeltsin years. He described the demise of the Soviet Union as 'the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century'.
Polls have shown that talking tough about Russia standing up to foreigners strikes a chord with millions of Russians who yearn for the Soviet Union's once mighty superpower status.
REUTERS, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Putin named Time's Person of the Year
Russian President led country back to table of world power, says magazine
FIRM LINE: Mr Putin, seen here fishing in the Yenisei River of Russia's Tuva region, has fostered a tough-guy image. -- PHOTO: AFP
NEW YORK - RUSSIAN President Vladimir Putin was named Time magazine's 'Person of the Year' for 2007 yesterday for bringing his country 'roaring back to the table of world power'.
Mr Putin, a 55-year-old former KGB official, will appear on the cover of Time as the person the editors believe had the greatest impact on events this year, for better or worse.
'He's not a good guy, but he's done extraordinary things,' said Time managing editor Richard Stengel, who announced Mr Putin's selection on NBC's Today Show.
'He's a new czar of Russia and he's dangerous in the sense that he doesn't care about civil liberties; he doesn't care about free speech; he cares about stability. But stability is what Russia needed and that's why Russians adore him.'
The Russian President beat several rivals for the Time distinction. Former US vice-president Al Gore, British author J.K. Rowling, Chinese President Hu Jintao and US commander in Iraq David Petraeus were named runners-up in that order.
The choice came days after Mr Putin announced a plan to hold on to power after his term ends.
On Monday, he said that he would serve as prime minister if his close ally Dmitry Medvedev wins next year's presidential vote.
Born in October 1952 in St Petersburg, then called Leningrad, Mr Putin served as a KGB spy in East Germany.
He rose to head the KGB's successor organisation FSB before being chosen as prime minister by late president Boris Yeltsin in August 1999. Mr Putin took over as acting president when Mr Yeltsin stepped down in December 1999.
He was elected president in March 2000 after a huge public relations campaign to build a profile for the relative unknown.
Since then, Mr Putin has overseen a steady concentration of power within the Kremlin walls, sidelining the political opposition and imposing tight control on the media. This has caused his Western critics to question his democratic credentials.
Two of his outspoken critics, journalist Anna Politkovskaya and former spy Alexander Litvinenko, were murdered last year. That raised concerns in Russia about the stability Mr Putin has been credited with enforcing after the chaos of the 1990s.
But Mr Putin has played to his power base in the security forces and military by fostering a tough-guy image. He has bluntly told Western governments to keep their 'snotty noses' out of Russia's affairs.
Delivering on a vow he made when first elected president in 2000, he crushed the Chechen rebellion, though sporadic attacks continue on Russian forces.
His years in power have been marked by a significant rise in living standards, helped by soaring oil prices, but large sections of the population still live in poverty.
Mr Putin has prided himself on bringing stability and predictability to Russia after the zig-zags of the Yeltsin years. He described the demise of the Soviet Union as 'the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century'.
Polls have shown that talking tough about Russia standing up to foreigners strikes a chord with millions of Russians who yearn for the Soviet Union's once mighty superpower status.
REUTERS, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Dec 20, 2007 Food Supply Crunch in Sg
Dec 20, 2007
Beware food supply crunch
THE extent of reduced food inventories in Singapore and the link to rising prices of groceries and meals out are becoming more apparent. This is not yet a crisis situation, and a straight comparison with the worldwide food supply shortage is not completely relevant. The diversion of a good portion of the American corn crop to ethanol production is feeding through in circuitous ways in higher grain and meat prices across parts of the global supply chain. Costlier animal feed is being compounded by higher meat consumption in new middle-class markets, like China. All that is having a peripheral effect on prices in Singapore, as shoppers in supermarkets and food court patrons have noticed. But Singaporeans' staples of rice, fish, poultry, fruit and vegetables - much of these imported from within the region - have not so far been buffeted by excessive price spikes. There is reasonable confidence there will be no supply disruptions either. Floods and the occasional animal disease outbreak in the supply sources of Thailand, China and Malaysia have brought seasonal supply fluctuations. Singaporeans have grown accustomed to these.
But the margin of market protection is getting thinner as worldwide consumer demand, reduced arable land, bad weather and costlier energy are coming together to constrict supply worldwide. The question consumers and the Government should mull over is how long it will be before the full force of dwindling world food stocks strikes this region, in the form of supply disruptions and sky-high prices. The Food and Agriculture Organisation has given ominous warning of its food price index having risen by 40 per cent this year, against only 9 per cent last year. Wheat stocks are at their lowest since 1980. Corn stocks are also low, thanks to a push towards renewable-energy use in the United States. Incidentally, this is a part answer to the problem of global warming.
Food price hikes here can be tackled with administrative measures, like government aid to low-income families. The NTUC FairPrice supermarket chain is helping customers with discounts on house brands of food and household products, on top of the GST hike it absorbed for six months. But if world supply trends look like heading towards a prolonged crunch, Singapore may find it strategically necessary to increase what food production it can manage. It has had success with space-saving vegetable growing, the hydroponic way. Crops are clean, a premium in these times of questionable production methods. An incentive to increase 'clean' fish farming could also arise, considering the polluted waters of supply regions and the use of banned growth hormones in fish culture.
Beware food supply crunch
THE extent of reduced food inventories in Singapore and the link to rising prices of groceries and meals out are becoming more apparent. This is not yet a crisis situation, and a straight comparison with the worldwide food supply shortage is not completely relevant. The diversion of a good portion of the American corn crop to ethanol production is feeding through in circuitous ways in higher grain and meat prices across parts of the global supply chain. Costlier animal feed is being compounded by higher meat consumption in new middle-class markets, like China. All that is having a peripheral effect on prices in Singapore, as shoppers in supermarkets and food court patrons have noticed. But Singaporeans' staples of rice, fish, poultry, fruit and vegetables - much of these imported from within the region - have not so far been buffeted by excessive price spikes. There is reasonable confidence there will be no supply disruptions either. Floods and the occasional animal disease outbreak in the supply sources of Thailand, China and Malaysia have brought seasonal supply fluctuations. Singaporeans have grown accustomed to these.
But the margin of market protection is getting thinner as worldwide consumer demand, reduced arable land, bad weather and costlier energy are coming together to constrict supply worldwide. The question consumers and the Government should mull over is how long it will be before the full force of dwindling world food stocks strikes this region, in the form of supply disruptions and sky-high prices. The Food and Agriculture Organisation has given ominous warning of its food price index having risen by 40 per cent this year, against only 9 per cent last year. Wheat stocks are at their lowest since 1980. Corn stocks are also low, thanks to a push towards renewable-energy use in the United States. Incidentally, this is a part answer to the problem of global warming.
Food price hikes here can be tackled with administrative measures, like government aid to low-income families. The NTUC FairPrice supermarket chain is helping customers with discounts on house brands of food and household products, on top of the GST hike it absorbed for six months. But if world supply trends look like heading towards a prolonged crunch, Singapore may find it strategically necessary to increase what food production it can manage. It has had success with space-saving vegetable growing, the hydroponic way. Crops are clean, a premium in these times of questionable production methods. An incentive to increase 'clean' fish farming could also arise, considering the polluted waters of supply regions and the use of banned growth hormones in fish culture.
Dec 19, 2007 Rise of India and China
Dec 19, 2007
RISE OF INDIA AND CHINA
A tale of two aspiring nations
By Lee Kuan Yew
NOT ON A PAR YET: Until India gets its social infrastructure up to First World standards and further liberalises its economy, it is unlikely to pose the challenge that China's economic ambitions does to the US, the EU and Japan. -- PHOTO: BLOOMBERG
EVEN though the Indian economy's annual growth rate has been 8 per cent to 9 per cent for the last five years, the country's peaceful rise hasn't led to unease over its future.
Instead, Americans, Japanese and western Europeans are keen to invest in India, ride on its growth and help develop another heavyweight country.
I recently had the opportunity to visit New Delhi twice. Last month, JPMorgan Chase brought its international advisory board, its European board and its principal officers from many parts of the world to the Indian capital for a two-day meeting. And earlier this month, Citigroup invited me to speak along with the bank's top leaders at an Asia-Pacific Business Leaders' Summit there.
Two of the largest US banks consider India to be a growth story and are eager to service American and Indian companies. I did not detect any anxiety over India becoming a problem to the present world order.
But why has China's peaceful rise raised apprehensions? Is it because India is a democracy in which numerous political forces are constantly at work, making for an internal system of checks and balances? Most probably, yes - especially as India's governments have tended to be made up of large coalitions of 10 to 20 parties.
One example of India's 'checks and balances' at work was the suspension of its talks on a US nuclear power deal. Although this deal is manifestly in India's interests, 60 communist Members of Parliament - part of the Congress Party-led coalition government - opposed the deal. Subsequently, the Communists allowed negotiations to resume, reserving their position on the outcome. India's development will, from time to time, run into domestic obstruction.
SCALE OF THINGS
The US, the EU and Japan root for India because they want a better-balanced world, in which India approximates China's weight.
Contrast this with the singleness of purpose in policy and its execution displayed by China's Communist government.
India's navy has an aircraft carrier force; its air force has the latest Sukhoi and MiG aircraft; its army is among the best trained and equipped in Asia. India can project power across its borders farther and better than China can, yet there is no fear that India has aggressive intentions.
Could this be because India is surrounded by states in turmoil? Pakistan is in crisis; a bad outcome there will increase the terrorist threat to India. As Mr Pervez Musharraf is now an elected civilian President, he won't have the same command over the army he has had as army chief. And any other elected president will have even less sway over the military.
Nepal is a deeply divided and troubled country. Sri Lanka is embroiled in an unending civil war, with the Tamil Tigers carrying out endless suicide bombings. India obviously has preoccupations enough to keep its focus fixed on its border regions.
Suppose China were also a democracy with multiple parties and political power bases? Would a multiparty China with a yearly economic growth rate of 9 per cent to 12 per cent be viewed with the same equanimity as India is? Such a China would probably continue to make big strides on the economic, social and military fronts, with more sophisticated capabilities on the ground and sea and in the air and space, and would eventually become a peer competitor, if not an adversary, of the US.
The speed of China's change and the thoroughness, energy and drive with which the Chinese have built up their infrastructure and pursued their goals spring from their culture, one that is shared by the Koreans, Japanese and Vietnamese, who adopted the Chinese written script and absorbed Confucian culture.
The Chinese are determined to catch up with the United States, the European Union and Japan. Fast-forward 20 to 30 years and the world will have to accommodate a more technologically advanced and economically more sophisticated China, whether under a single- or multiparty system.
India does not pose such a challenge - and won't until it gets its social infrastructure up to First World standards and further liberalises its economy. Indeed, the US, the EU and Japan root for India because they want a better-balanced world, in which India approximates China's weight.
The Indian elite also speak, write and publish in English. They hold a wide range of diverse views - and to the degree that Mr Amartya Sen, a Nobel winner in economics, entitled one of his books The Argumentative Indian. Few Chinese, on the other hand, speak - let alone write in - English, and what they publish in Chinese doesn't always disclose their innermost thoughts.
What if India were well ahead of China? Would the Americans and Europeans be rooting for China? I doubt it. They still have a phobia of the 'yellow peril', one reinforced by memories of the outrages of the Cultural Revolution and the massacres in Tiananmen Square, not to mention their strong feelings against Chinese government censorship.
China will have to live with these hang-ups. To reinforce the idea that theirs will be a peaceful path going forward, the Chinese have rephrased the term 'peaceful rise' to 'peaceful development'. Greater openness and transparency in Chinese society would also help.
Singapore and South-east Asia (Asean), sandwiched between these two behemoths, need China and India to achieve a balanced relationship, one that allows both to grow and prosper, pulling up the rest of Asia - East, South-east and South - with them.
The writer is Minister Mentor of Singapore. This article appears in the Dec 24 issue of Forbes Asia magazine.
RISE OF INDIA AND CHINA
A tale of two aspiring nations
By Lee Kuan Yew
NOT ON A PAR YET: Until India gets its social infrastructure up to First World standards and further liberalises its economy, it is unlikely to pose the challenge that China's economic ambitions does to the US, the EU and Japan. -- PHOTO: BLOOMBERG
EVEN though the Indian economy's annual growth rate has been 8 per cent to 9 per cent for the last five years, the country's peaceful rise hasn't led to unease over its future.
Instead, Americans, Japanese and western Europeans are keen to invest in India, ride on its growth and help develop another heavyweight country.
I recently had the opportunity to visit New Delhi twice. Last month, JPMorgan Chase brought its international advisory board, its European board and its principal officers from many parts of the world to the Indian capital for a two-day meeting. And earlier this month, Citigroup invited me to speak along with the bank's top leaders at an Asia-Pacific Business Leaders' Summit there.
Two of the largest US banks consider India to be a growth story and are eager to service American and Indian companies. I did not detect any anxiety over India becoming a problem to the present world order.
But why has China's peaceful rise raised apprehensions? Is it because India is a democracy in which numerous political forces are constantly at work, making for an internal system of checks and balances? Most probably, yes - especially as India's governments have tended to be made up of large coalitions of 10 to 20 parties.
One example of India's 'checks and balances' at work was the suspension of its talks on a US nuclear power deal. Although this deal is manifestly in India's interests, 60 communist Members of Parliament - part of the Congress Party-led coalition government - opposed the deal. Subsequently, the Communists allowed negotiations to resume, reserving their position on the outcome. India's development will, from time to time, run into domestic obstruction.
SCALE OF THINGS
The US, the EU and Japan root for India because they want a better-balanced world, in which India approximates China's weight.
Contrast this with the singleness of purpose in policy and its execution displayed by China's Communist government.
India's navy has an aircraft carrier force; its air force has the latest Sukhoi and MiG aircraft; its army is among the best trained and equipped in Asia. India can project power across its borders farther and better than China can, yet there is no fear that India has aggressive intentions.
Could this be because India is surrounded by states in turmoil? Pakistan is in crisis; a bad outcome there will increase the terrorist threat to India. As Mr Pervez Musharraf is now an elected civilian President, he won't have the same command over the army he has had as army chief. And any other elected president will have even less sway over the military.
Nepal is a deeply divided and troubled country. Sri Lanka is embroiled in an unending civil war, with the Tamil Tigers carrying out endless suicide bombings. India obviously has preoccupations enough to keep its focus fixed on its border regions.
Suppose China were also a democracy with multiple parties and political power bases? Would a multiparty China with a yearly economic growth rate of 9 per cent to 12 per cent be viewed with the same equanimity as India is? Such a China would probably continue to make big strides on the economic, social and military fronts, with more sophisticated capabilities on the ground and sea and in the air and space, and would eventually become a peer competitor, if not an adversary, of the US.
The speed of China's change and the thoroughness, energy and drive with which the Chinese have built up their infrastructure and pursued their goals spring from their culture, one that is shared by the Koreans, Japanese and Vietnamese, who adopted the Chinese written script and absorbed Confucian culture.
The Chinese are determined to catch up with the United States, the European Union and Japan. Fast-forward 20 to 30 years and the world will have to accommodate a more technologically advanced and economically more sophisticated China, whether under a single- or multiparty system.
India does not pose such a challenge - and won't until it gets its social infrastructure up to First World standards and further liberalises its economy. Indeed, the US, the EU and Japan root for India because they want a better-balanced world, in which India approximates China's weight.
The Indian elite also speak, write and publish in English. They hold a wide range of diverse views - and to the degree that Mr Amartya Sen, a Nobel winner in economics, entitled one of his books The Argumentative Indian. Few Chinese, on the other hand, speak - let alone write in - English, and what they publish in Chinese doesn't always disclose their innermost thoughts.
What if India were well ahead of China? Would the Americans and Europeans be rooting for China? I doubt it. They still have a phobia of the 'yellow peril', one reinforced by memories of the outrages of the Cultural Revolution and the massacres in Tiananmen Square, not to mention their strong feelings against Chinese government censorship.
China will have to live with these hang-ups. To reinforce the idea that theirs will be a peaceful path going forward, the Chinese have rephrased the term 'peaceful rise' to 'peaceful development'. Greater openness and transparency in Chinese society would also help.
Singapore and South-east Asia (Asean), sandwiched between these two behemoths, need China and India to achieve a balanced relationship, one that allows both to grow and prosper, pulling up the rest of Asia - East, South-east and South - with them.
The writer is Minister Mentor of Singapore. This article appears in the Dec 24 issue of Forbes Asia magazine.
SOCIAL COHESION IN SINGAPORE - 19 Dec 2007
SOCIAL COHESION IN SINGAPORE
Challenges confronting the Malay community
By Zainudin Nordin, For The Straits Times
NO NATION can claim to be ethnically homogenous.
Even traditionally monolithic countries such as Japan and South Korea have become more multiracial, through the movement of people seeking economic opportunities. Others, like Singapore, have long been multiracial, though during colonial times the way our multiracialism was managed was to keep the communities separate, with little common space and no shared destiny.
Recent global incidents have once again shown that multiracial societies face different and complex challenges. These cannot be taken lightly. Multiracial societies need to work harder to achieve harmonious relations.
A scathing commentary in The Wall Street Journal on Dec 5 noted that ethnically motivated riots in France were now happening 'once or twice a year', and that the French government tended to give the same ineffective response. Nearer home, in Malaysia, some ethnic Indians have been demonstrating because they claim to be discriminated against.
In my view, news coverage of these incidents is one-dimensional because the position always seems to be that ensuring community cohesion is the sole responsibility of governments. This is a fallacy.
Just like in other aspects of governance, my view is that the state can play the role of the enabler, or the facilitator. But it must be incumbent on the populace to step forward to do its part.
Let's take the example of Singapore, and in particular, of the Malay community.
For many years, the Malay community faced challenges to upgrade and improve itself in education, employment and wealth. This is despite the Government providing a level playing field, with equal educational and employment opportunities for all.
Then, over the years, the Malay community and its leaders began to realise they needed to band together, to draw on its own strengths and make an effort to push itself forward. There is a significant realisation that these challenges can be overcome through collective action. This is so because moving the community forward required not only administrative structures that the Government provided, but also a debate within the community about its goals and values, and gentle persuasion to take action.
I am therefore very proud that the Malay community in Singapore has seen marked improvement, especially in education and employment.
Education
IN EDUCATION, school enrolment is almost 100 per cent. The number of dropouts has steadily fallen and educational performance has improved. In 1980, only 15 per cent of Malays attained five O-level passes. Today, that percentage has quadrupled to 60 per cent.
According to the Trends In International Mathematics And Science Study, a measurement of students' progress in these subjects, on a regular four-year cycle, Malay students surpass the international average.
More than 80 per cent of Malay students have successfully pursued post-secondary education at ITE, polytechnic and pre-university levels. In fact, the community is well poised to achieve its target of 90 per cent entering post-secondary institutions by 2010.
The number of Malays entering tertiary institutions, such as universities and polytechnics, has also gone up. Only 1.3 per cent gained entry in 1980, but in 2005, the figure increased to 34 per cent. More students are in professional and technical courses such as accounting, engineering and the life sciences.
We are witnessing a sustained level of progress and development in the education arena and this bodes well for the Malay community. The outstanding performance of Natasha Nabila Muhamad Nasir at the 2007 PSLE is but one of the many excellent examples of this progress.
Consumption
A BURGEONING middle- class among the Malays has increased the purchasing power of the community. This is made possible through the efforts of the community to raise the education level. As a result, more Malays are holding better-paying jobs because they have attained higher qualifications and skills.
An increasing number of Malays have bought larger homes. In fact, 93 per cent of Malays are home-owners, and those living in HDB four-room or larger flats and private properties have risen by 60 per cent.
The community is also witnessing a growing number of successful, young professionals. These progressive, outward-looking and confident Singaporeans are making their mark in their fields.
Not only are they able to succeed locally, this new generation of Malay-Singaporeans has global mindsets that make them socially and economically mobile. They are able to arrive at this level of success by competing and working with the best in the industry. This further illustrates the evolution that is taking shape in the community and the new resolve that has emerged over the years.
Family life
HOWEVER, the fight is not yet over. While the Malay community has caught up with other communities in education and employment, other issues have surfaced. I am particularly concerned about Malay family life.
Divorce rates are rising. The number of children being raised by single parents is also growing. And most worrisome, the number of teenage girls giving birth is growing.
Clearly, these three issues are inter-related, and form a vicious cycle. Poor parental guidance at home means there is no one to tell teenagers to abstain from irresponsible pre-marital sex. The inevitable pregnancies and the subsequent pressure to marry make for unhappy marriages where neither the father nor mother has the ability, emotional or financial, to look after the children. The strain leads eventually to divorce, and again, single parenting, and insufficient support and guidance.
Without a strong family environment, children do poorly in school. Older children are often asked to forsake education in order to work and supplement the family income. Children, without family or school supervision face becoming delinquents.
This vicious cycle, if left unchecked, will chip away at the advancements that the Malay community has made. But history has shown that the Singapore Malay community has the ability to face up to and overcome these challenges.
Community effort
SO, WHAT should the community and its leaders do? How do we reach into the family which, for many of us, is a private realm?
Take, for example, the drug problem that plagued the community in the 1980s. Between 2002 and 2004, the number of Malay drug abusers plunged to about a tenth of what it was. Explaining the sharp drop, the Central Narcotics Bureau said the community had gone all out to educate youths against drugs.
Yayasan Mendaki, for instance, worked closely with Malay and Muslim organisations to spread the anti-drug message. The main focus was and is on education to make sure youths attend classes and stay out of trouble.
Similarly, we all need to jointly tackle the issue of dysfunctional families. I feel it has replaced drugs as the social problem of the day. Just as community action solved the drugs problem, community action must once again be the solution to the problem of dysfunctional Malay families.
The first significant step is for the community to recognise that dysfunctional families are a problem, and accept this as a challenge to be dealt with.
Second, these families need the community's help to stand on their own two feet. They require not just financial help but also proper attention and care, such as counselling and empowerment plans. They need to build self-esteem and confidence, and be imbibed with the right values that can help them change and improve their situation.
So, Malay organisations, self-help and community groups must ask some tough questions: Are we allocating our resources to deal with this adequately? Are we making available enough channels to those who are reaching out for help? For those who do not realise they have a family problem, how do we make them see differently?
More directly, do we need in-school counselling for all teenage girls and perhaps have them sign an abstinence pledge to curb teenage pregnancies? Can we get our young, cool Malay men to talk about being sexually responsible, that getting a girl pregnant out of wedlock is the worst thing you can do? Do we need Malay parents to pledge to spend more quality time with their children and share important lessons on morality and family values?
We also need a set of ideas to celebrate, and to set up as role models successful Malays. How can the Malay community show other communities the contributions they are making to Singapore's continued growth and success? In other words, what is the Singapore Malay community's claim to fame?
Tough love
CLEARLY, there are more questions than answers. This is because this problem is even more complex and challenging than drugs. Dysfunction in the family is not criminal. Nobody goes to jail when their teenage daughters get pregnant. The police do not get involved when children don't do well in school.
It is not about legal sanctions. It is about persuading, hand-holding and taking hard decisions when necessary. It is about changing mindsets, instilling confidence and developing personal capabilities. Let there be no mistake - it is a tall order.
But when a community is faced with undisputed evidence that brings into question its ethics, its value system - its entire way of life - then the one true test of the community's strength is how it responds.
Let us approach this as a community that has no choice. The success story must continue, because the success of the Malay community is inexorably linked with Singapore's success, and it is our responsibility to make sure we do our utmost to contribute to Singapore's growth, its success, and its continued social cohesion.
The writer is the mayor of Central Singapore District and Member of Parliament for the Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC.
Challenges confronting the Malay community
By Zainudin Nordin, For The Straits Times
NO NATION can claim to be ethnically homogenous.
Even traditionally monolithic countries such as Japan and South Korea have become more multiracial, through the movement of people seeking economic opportunities. Others, like Singapore, have long been multiracial, though during colonial times the way our multiracialism was managed was to keep the communities separate, with little common space and no shared destiny.
Recent global incidents have once again shown that multiracial societies face different and complex challenges. These cannot be taken lightly. Multiracial societies need to work harder to achieve harmonious relations.
A scathing commentary in The Wall Street Journal on Dec 5 noted that ethnically motivated riots in France were now happening 'once or twice a year', and that the French government tended to give the same ineffective response. Nearer home, in Malaysia, some ethnic Indians have been demonstrating because they claim to be discriminated against.
In my view, news coverage of these incidents is one-dimensional because the position always seems to be that ensuring community cohesion is the sole responsibility of governments. This is a fallacy.
Just like in other aspects of governance, my view is that the state can play the role of the enabler, or the facilitator. But it must be incumbent on the populace to step forward to do its part.
Let's take the example of Singapore, and in particular, of the Malay community.
For many years, the Malay community faced challenges to upgrade and improve itself in education, employment and wealth. This is despite the Government providing a level playing field, with equal educational and employment opportunities for all.
Then, over the years, the Malay community and its leaders began to realise they needed to band together, to draw on its own strengths and make an effort to push itself forward. There is a significant realisation that these challenges can be overcome through collective action. This is so because moving the community forward required not only administrative structures that the Government provided, but also a debate within the community about its goals and values, and gentle persuasion to take action.
I am therefore very proud that the Malay community in Singapore has seen marked improvement, especially in education and employment.
Education
IN EDUCATION, school enrolment is almost 100 per cent. The number of dropouts has steadily fallen and educational performance has improved. In 1980, only 15 per cent of Malays attained five O-level passes. Today, that percentage has quadrupled to 60 per cent.
According to the Trends In International Mathematics And Science Study, a measurement of students' progress in these subjects, on a regular four-year cycle, Malay students surpass the international average.
More than 80 per cent of Malay students have successfully pursued post-secondary education at ITE, polytechnic and pre-university levels. In fact, the community is well poised to achieve its target of 90 per cent entering post-secondary institutions by 2010.
The number of Malays entering tertiary institutions, such as universities and polytechnics, has also gone up. Only 1.3 per cent gained entry in 1980, but in 2005, the figure increased to 34 per cent. More students are in professional and technical courses such as accounting, engineering and the life sciences.
We are witnessing a sustained level of progress and development in the education arena and this bodes well for the Malay community. The outstanding performance of Natasha Nabila Muhamad Nasir at the 2007 PSLE is but one of the many excellent examples of this progress.
Consumption
A BURGEONING middle- class among the Malays has increased the purchasing power of the community. This is made possible through the efforts of the community to raise the education level. As a result, more Malays are holding better-paying jobs because they have attained higher qualifications and skills.
An increasing number of Malays have bought larger homes. In fact, 93 per cent of Malays are home-owners, and those living in HDB four-room or larger flats and private properties have risen by 60 per cent.
The community is also witnessing a growing number of successful, young professionals. These progressive, outward-looking and confident Singaporeans are making their mark in their fields.
Not only are they able to succeed locally, this new generation of Malay-Singaporeans has global mindsets that make them socially and economically mobile. They are able to arrive at this level of success by competing and working with the best in the industry. This further illustrates the evolution that is taking shape in the community and the new resolve that has emerged over the years.
Family life
HOWEVER, the fight is not yet over. While the Malay community has caught up with other communities in education and employment, other issues have surfaced. I am particularly concerned about Malay family life.
Divorce rates are rising. The number of children being raised by single parents is also growing. And most worrisome, the number of teenage girls giving birth is growing.
Clearly, these three issues are inter-related, and form a vicious cycle. Poor parental guidance at home means there is no one to tell teenagers to abstain from irresponsible pre-marital sex. The inevitable pregnancies and the subsequent pressure to marry make for unhappy marriages where neither the father nor mother has the ability, emotional or financial, to look after the children. The strain leads eventually to divorce, and again, single parenting, and insufficient support and guidance.
Without a strong family environment, children do poorly in school. Older children are often asked to forsake education in order to work and supplement the family income. Children, without family or school supervision face becoming delinquents.
This vicious cycle, if left unchecked, will chip away at the advancements that the Malay community has made. But history has shown that the Singapore Malay community has the ability to face up to and overcome these challenges.
Community effort
SO, WHAT should the community and its leaders do? How do we reach into the family which, for many of us, is a private realm?
Take, for example, the drug problem that plagued the community in the 1980s. Between 2002 and 2004, the number of Malay drug abusers plunged to about a tenth of what it was. Explaining the sharp drop, the Central Narcotics Bureau said the community had gone all out to educate youths against drugs.
Yayasan Mendaki, for instance, worked closely with Malay and Muslim organisations to spread the anti-drug message. The main focus was and is on education to make sure youths attend classes and stay out of trouble.
Similarly, we all need to jointly tackle the issue of dysfunctional families. I feel it has replaced drugs as the social problem of the day. Just as community action solved the drugs problem, community action must once again be the solution to the problem of dysfunctional Malay families.
The first significant step is for the community to recognise that dysfunctional families are a problem, and accept this as a challenge to be dealt with.
Second, these families need the community's help to stand on their own two feet. They require not just financial help but also proper attention and care, such as counselling and empowerment plans. They need to build self-esteem and confidence, and be imbibed with the right values that can help them change and improve their situation.
So, Malay organisations, self-help and community groups must ask some tough questions: Are we allocating our resources to deal with this adequately? Are we making available enough channels to those who are reaching out for help? For those who do not realise they have a family problem, how do we make them see differently?
More directly, do we need in-school counselling for all teenage girls and perhaps have them sign an abstinence pledge to curb teenage pregnancies? Can we get our young, cool Malay men to talk about being sexually responsible, that getting a girl pregnant out of wedlock is the worst thing you can do? Do we need Malay parents to pledge to spend more quality time with their children and share important lessons on morality and family values?
We also need a set of ideas to celebrate, and to set up as role models successful Malays. How can the Malay community show other communities the contributions they are making to Singapore's continued growth and success? In other words, what is the Singapore Malay community's claim to fame?
Tough love
CLEARLY, there are more questions than answers. This is because this problem is even more complex and challenging than drugs. Dysfunction in the family is not criminal. Nobody goes to jail when their teenage daughters get pregnant. The police do not get involved when children don't do well in school.
It is not about legal sanctions. It is about persuading, hand-holding and taking hard decisions when necessary. It is about changing mindsets, instilling confidence and developing personal capabilities. Let there be no mistake - it is a tall order.
But when a community is faced with undisputed evidence that brings into question its ethics, its value system - its entire way of life - then the one true test of the community's strength is how it responds.
Let us approach this as a community that has no choice. The success story must continue, because the success of the Malay community is inexorably linked with Singapore's success, and it is our responsibility to make sure we do our utmost to contribute to Singapore's growth, its success, and its continued social cohesion.
The writer is the mayor of Central Singapore District and Member of Parliament for the Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC.
Spratley disputes - 19 Dec 2007
Dec 19, 2007
Protests in Hanoi: Beijing 'concerned'
BEIJING - CHINA said yesterday it was 'highly concerned' over anti-Chinese protests in Vietnam, after the second rally in a month there over rival claims in the South China Sea.
'We hope the Vietnamese government will take a responsible attitude and effective measures to stop this and prevent bilateral ties from being hurt,' Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang told journalists.
Several hundred people marched in Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City on Sunday in support of their government's position in the long-simmering dispute over the Spratly and Paracel archipelagos in the South China Sea.
Similar rallies on Dec 9 were tolerated by police for about an hour, but triggered a diplomatic protest from Beijing two days later.
The Spratlys are claimed in full or in part by China, Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan. The Paracels, which Chinese troops took from South Vietnamese forces in 1974, are also claimed by Vietnam and Taiwan.
Mr Qin insisted yesterday that China had 'indisputable sovereignty' over the South China Sea and its adjacent waters.
AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE
Protests in Hanoi: Beijing 'concerned'
BEIJING - CHINA said yesterday it was 'highly concerned' over anti-Chinese protests in Vietnam, after the second rally in a month there over rival claims in the South China Sea.
'We hope the Vietnamese government will take a responsible attitude and effective measures to stop this and prevent bilateral ties from being hurt,' Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang told journalists.
Several hundred people marched in Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City on Sunday in support of their government's position in the long-simmering dispute over the Spratly and Paracel archipelagos in the South China Sea.
Similar rallies on Dec 9 were tolerated by police for about an hour, but triggered a diplomatic protest from Beijing two days later.
The Spratlys are claimed in full or in part by China, Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan. The Paracels, which Chinese troops took from South Vietnamese forces in 1974, are also claimed by Vietnam and Taiwan.
Mr Qin insisted yesterday that China had 'indisputable sovereignty' over the South China Sea and its adjacent waters.
AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE
Bali Decisions
Key decisions in Bali
Two-year dialogue
Negotiators agreed to start two years of talks on a new deal to succeed the Kyoto Protocol, the main pact till 2012 to fight climate change, to bind outsiders led by the US, China and India. The talks will start next April and end with the adoption of a new treaty in Copenhagen in late 2009.
Emission cuts
No firm targets, but the pact set an aim for 'deep cuts in global emissions' to avoid dangerous climate change. The final text distinguished between rich and poor countries, calling on the former to consider 'quantified' emission cuts and the latter to consider 'mitigation actions'.
UN Adaptation Fund
The meeting agreed to launch a UN fund to help poor countries cope with damage from climate change such as droughts or rising seas. The fund now comprises only about US$36 million (S$52 million), but might rise up to billions if investments in green technology surge.
Preserving tropical forests
A pay-and-preserve scheme known as the Redd, or 'Reducing emissions from deforestation in developing countries', aims to allow poorer nations from 2013 to sell carbon offsets to rich countries in return for not burning their tropical forests.
Carbon capture and storage
The meeting postponed until next year any consideration of a plan to fund an untested technology which captures and buries the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide, emitted from power plants that burn fossil fuels.
REUTERS
Two-year dialogue
Negotiators agreed to start two years of talks on a new deal to succeed the Kyoto Protocol, the main pact till 2012 to fight climate change, to bind outsiders led by the US, China and India. The talks will start next April and end with the adoption of a new treaty in Copenhagen in late 2009.
Emission cuts
No firm targets, but the pact set an aim for 'deep cuts in global emissions' to avoid dangerous climate change. The final text distinguished between rich and poor countries, calling on the former to consider 'quantified' emission cuts and the latter to consider 'mitigation actions'.
UN Adaptation Fund
The meeting agreed to launch a UN fund to help poor countries cope with damage from climate change such as droughts or rising seas. The fund now comprises only about US$36 million (S$52 million), but might rise up to billions if investments in green technology surge.
Preserving tropical forests
A pay-and-preserve scheme known as the Redd, or 'Reducing emissions from deforestation in developing countries', aims to allow poorer nations from 2013 to sell carbon offsets to rich countries in return for not burning their tropical forests.
Carbon capture and storage
The meeting postponed until next year any consideration of a plan to fund an untested technology which captures and buries the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide, emitted from power plants that burn fossil fuels.
REUTERS
Dec 17, 2007 Indonesian Haze
Dec 17, 2007
INDONESIA'S HAZE
Some doubts linger
THERE was a different atmosphere when President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono and Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong met in Bali during the just-concluded conference on climate change. This year, Indonesia did not export haze to neighbouring countries.
Both are surely happy.
There had been no reports of Indonesia, Singapore or Malaysia being hit by the haze, which can affect daily activities and aviation.
Some said this is a result of Indonesia overcoming forest burning and the new land clearings. But others cynically feel it is due to the rainy season coming earlier than usual. Indeed, razing of farmlands is usually done at the end of the dry season so that the fires can be doused by rainfall.
But is it true that there has been no haze at all? Not really. At the end of the dry spell, many fire points had been discovered. Not as many as usual and not as big as during the past years, so the haze did not get to reach other countries. Meanwhile, local residents in a number of areas in Kalimantan and Sumatra did experience some haze problems.
We hope the reduction in the movement of the haze is due more to the government's action and awareness of (farm) operators. But it must be admitted that, until today, there hasn't been any detailed explanation about the fact that we have not been overcome by haze as usual.
Isn't there confirmation that the absence of the haze is due to the rainy season coming earlier? We await the government's explanation.
Actually, it is easy for the government to stop the haze invasion. Even though it has never been admitted, we are more convinced that the burning of land is done by operators who want to develop plantations, such as oil palm.
But we are always made to believe that burning of lands is done by transient farmers. The question is: why didn't this take place in the past? Why only now, during the time of much deforestation and opening of big farmlands?
Herein lies the importance of honesty on all sides. In the issue of forest fires, the parties concerned are the district government, the police and the Forestry Department. In their hands lie the responsibility of monitoring as well as deterring and acting against those who are fond of burning forests.
Through their honesty, if there are forests on fire, they only need to look at the papers stating ownership and authority on the land, the permits for farming, and groups that can mobilise manpower for forest burning.
Yet, a moderate solution becomes complicated if we are corrupt. A host of reasons will be conjured, when the Indonesian police is proven to be more sophisticated than the US police. The proof: the ability of the Indonesian police to nab criminals is much better than US police.
And most spectacular is when the Indonesian police, better than any police force in the world, is able to uncover the terrorism network to its roots. So uncovering perpetrators of forest fires should just be at the tips of their hands.
We are grateful that we have been able to go through 2007 without any significant invasion of the haze. Hopefully in 2008 and the years to come, there will no longer be forest burning. This is the nicest gift for the climate change conference in Bali.
This editorial appeared in Indonesia's Republika last Friday.
INDONESIA'S HAZE
Some doubts linger
THERE was a different atmosphere when President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono and Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong met in Bali during the just-concluded conference on climate change. This year, Indonesia did not export haze to neighbouring countries.
Both are surely happy.
There had been no reports of Indonesia, Singapore or Malaysia being hit by the haze, which can affect daily activities and aviation.
Some said this is a result of Indonesia overcoming forest burning and the new land clearings. But others cynically feel it is due to the rainy season coming earlier than usual. Indeed, razing of farmlands is usually done at the end of the dry season so that the fires can be doused by rainfall.
But is it true that there has been no haze at all? Not really. At the end of the dry spell, many fire points had been discovered. Not as many as usual and not as big as during the past years, so the haze did not get to reach other countries. Meanwhile, local residents in a number of areas in Kalimantan and Sumatra did experience some haze problems.
We hope the reduction in the movement of the haze is due more to the government's action and awareness of (farm) operators. But it must be admitted that, until today, there hasn't been any detailed explanation about the fact that we have not been overcome by haze as usual.
Isn't there confirmation that the absence of the haze is due to the rainy season coming earlier? We await the government's explanation.
Actually, it is easy for the government to stop the haze invasion. Even though it has never been admitted, we are more convinced that the burning of land is done by operators who want to develop plantations, such as oil palm.
But we are always made to believe that burning of lands is done by transient farmers. The question is: why didn't this take place in the past? Why only now, during the time of much deforestation and opening of big farmlands?
Herein lies the importance of honesty on all sides. In the issue of forest fires, the parties concerned are the district government, the police and the Forestry Department. In their hands lie the responsibility of monitoring as well as deterring and acting against those who are fond of burning forests.
Through their honesty, if there are forests on fire, they only need to look at the papers stating ownership and authority on the land, the permits for farming, and groups that can mobilise manpower for forest burning.
Yet, a moderate solution becomes complicated if we are corrupt. A host of reasons will be conjured, when the Indonesian police is proven to be more sophisticated than the US police. The proof: the ability of the Indonesian police to nab criminals is much better than US police.
And most spectacular is when the Indonesian police, better than any police force in the world, is able to uncover the terrorism network to its roots. So uncovering perpetrators of forest fires should just be at the tips of their hands.
We are grateful that we have been able to go through 2007 without any significant invasion of the haze. Hopefully in 2008 and the years to come, there will no longer be forest burning. This is the nicest gift for the climate change conference in Bali.
This editorial appeared in Indonesia's Republika last Friday.
Dec 17, 2007 Bali Climate Talks
Dec 17, 2007
THE BALI CLIMATE TALKS
Think big, start small, act now
By Thomas L. Friedman
BALI - THE negotiators at the UN climate conference here came from almost 200 countries and spoke almost as many languages, but driving them all to find a better way to address climate change was one widely shared, if unspoken, sentiment: that 'later' is over for our generation.
'Later' was a luxury for previous generations and civilisations. It meant that you could paint the same landscape, see the same animals, eat the same fruit, climb the same trees, fish the same rivers, enjoy the same weather or rescue the same endangered species that you did when you were a kid - but just do it later, whenever you got around to it.
If there is one change in global consciousness that seems to have settled in over just the past couple of years, it is the notion that later is over. Later is no longer when you get to do all those same things - just on your time-table.
Later is now when they're gone - when you won't get to do any of them ever again, unless there is radical collective action to mitigate climate change, and maybe even if there is.
There are many reasons that later is over. The fact that global warming is now having such an observable effect on pillars of our ecosystem - like the frozen sea ice within the Arctic Circle, which a new study says could disappear entirely during summers by 2040 - is certainly one big factor. But the other is the voracious power of today's global economy.
Throughout human history there had always been some new part of the ocean to plunder, some new forest to devour, some new farmlands to exploit, noted Mr Carl Pope, executive director of the Sierra Club, an observer at the Bali conference.
RUNNING LOW
Many countries are now chasing too few fish, trees and water resources, and are either devouring their own or plundering those of neighbours at alarming rates.
But 'now that economic development has become the prerogative of every country', he said, we've run out of virgin oceans and lands 'for new rising economic powers to exploit'.
So, too many countries are now chasing too few fish, trees and water resources, and are either devouring their own or plundering those of neighbours at alarming rates.
Indeed, today's global economy has become like a monster truck with the accelerator stuck, so no one can stop it from wiping out more and more of the natural world, no matter what the global plan.
There was a chilling essay in the Jakarta Post last week by Mr Andrio Adiwibowo, a lecturer in environmental management at the University of Indonesia, about how a plan to protect the mangrove forests around coastal Jakarta was never carried out, leading to widespread tidal flooding last month.
This line jumped out at me: 'The plan was not implemented. Instead of providing a buffer zone, development encroached into the core zone, which was covered over by concrete.'
You could read that story in a hundred different developing countries today. But the fact that you read it here is one of the most important reasons that 'later' has become extinct.
Indonesia is second only to Brazil in terrestrial biodiversity and is No. 1 in the world in marine biodiversity. Just half a hectare in Borneo contains more different tree species than all of North America - not to mention animals that don't exist anywhere else on earth. If we lose them, there will be no later for some of the rarest plants and animals on the planet.
And we are losing them. Market- driven forces emanating primarily from China, Europe and the US have become so powerful that Indonesia recently made the Guinness Book of World Records for having the fastest rate of deforestation in the world.
Indonesia is losing tropical forests the size of the state of Maryland in the US every year, and the carbon released by the cutting and clearing - much of it from illegal logging - has made Indonesia the third-largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the world, after the US and China.
Deforestation actually accounts for more greenhouse gas emissions than all the vehicles in the world, an issue the Bali conference finally addressed.
I interviewed Mr Barnabas Suebu, the governor of the Indonesian province of Papua, home to some of its richest forests. He waxed eloquent about how difficult it is to create jobs that will give his villagers anything close to the income they can get from chopping down a tree and selling it to smugglers, who will ship it out to other parts of Asia to be made into furniture for Americans or Europeans.
He said his motto was: 'Think big, start small, act now - before everything becomes too late.'
Ditto for all of us. If you want to help preserve the Indonesian forests, think fast, start quick, act now. Just don't say later.
NEW YORK TIMES
THE BALI CLIMATE TALKS
Think big, start small, act now
By Thomas L. Friedman
BALI - THE negotiators at the UN climate conference here came from almost 200 countries and spoke almost as many languages, but driving them all to find a better way to address climate change was one widely shared, if unspoken, sentiment: that 'later' is over for our generation.
'Later' was a luxury for previous generations and civilisations. It meant that you could paint the same landscape, see the same animals, eat the same fruit, climb the same trees, fish the same rivers, enjoy the same weather or rescue the same endangered species that you did when you were a kid - but just do it later, whenever you got around to it.
If there is one change in global consciousness that seems to have settled in over just the past couple of years, it is the notion that later is over. Later is no longer when you get to do all those same things - just on your time-table.
Later is now when they're gone - when you won't get to do any of them ever again, unless there is radical collective action to mitigate climate change, and maybe even if there is.
There are many reasons that later is over. The fact that global warming is now having such an observable effect on pillars of our ecosystem - like the frozen sea ice within the Arctic Circle, which a new study says could disappear entirely during summers by 2040 - is certainly one big factor. But the other is the voracious power of today's global economy.
Throughout human history there had always been some new part of the ocean to plunder, some new forest to devour, some new farmlands to exploit, noted Mr Carl Pope, executive director of the Sierra Club, an observer at the Bali conference.
RUNNING LOW
Many countries are now chasing too few fish, trees and water resources, and are either devouring their own or plundering those of neighbours at alarming rates.
But 'now that economic development has become the prerogative of every country', he said, we've run out of virgin oceans and lands 'for new rising economic powers to exploit'.
So, too many countries are now chasing too few fish, trees and water resources, and are either devouring their own or plundering those of neighbours at alarming rates.
Indeed, today's global economy has become like a monster truck with the accelerator stuck, so no one can stop it from wiping out more and more of the natural world, no matter what the global plan.
There was a chilling essay in the Jakarta Post last week by Mr Andrio Adiwibowo, a lecturer in environmental management at the University of Indonesia, about how a plan to protect the mangrove forests around coastal Jakarta was never carried out, leading to widespread tidal flooding last month.
This line jumped out at me: 'The plan was not implemented. Instead of providing a buffer zone, development encroached into the core zone, which was covered over by concrete.'
You could read that story in a hundred different developing countries today. But the fact that you read it here is one of the most important reasons that 'later' has become extinct.
Indonesia is second only to Brazil in terrestrial biodiversity and is No. 1 in the world in marine biodiversity. Just half a hectare in Borneo contains more different tree species than all of North America - not to mention animals that don't exist anywhere else on earth. If we lose them, there will be no later for some of the rarest plants and animals on the planet.
And we are losing them. Market- driven forces emanating primarily from China, Europe and the US have become so powerful that Indonesia recently made the Guinness Book of World Records for having the fastest rate of deforestation in the world.
Indonesia is losing tropical forests the size of the state of Maryland in the US every year, and the carbon released by the cutting and clearing - much of it from illegal logging - has made Indonesia the third-largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the world, after the US and China.
Deforestation actually accounts for more greenhouse gas emissions than all the vehicles in the world, an issue the Bali conference finally addressed.
I interviewed Mr Barnabas Suebu, the governor of the Indonesian province of Papua, home to some of its richest forests. He waxed eloquent about how difficult it is to create jobs that will give his villagers anything close to the income they can get from chopping down a tree and selling it to smugglers, who will ship it out to other parts of Asia to be made into furniture for Americans or Europeans.
He said his motto was: 'Think big, start small, act now - before everything becomes too late.'
Ditto for all of us. If you want to help preserve the Indonesian forests, think fast, start quick, act now. Just don't say later.
NEW YORK TIMES
A clueless nation led astray by an imperialistic elite?
U.S. FOREIGN POLICY
A clueless nation led astray by an imperialistic elite?
By Doug Bandow, For The Straits Times
I'VE OFTEN been asked by people outside of America to explain US foreign policy. It's a daunting or, perhaps more accurately, embarrassing task.
Americans know very little about the world. Their ignorance is almost charming.
In one sense, it's good that most people in America are more interested in spending time with family and friends and in earning a living than in plotting a coup in some faraway land, waging a war against an emerging power or issuing foreign ultimatums over random economic and political demands.
Unfortunately, however, as a result, Americans have essentially delegated the power to do all of those things to a Washington-centred elite. When things go wrong, Americans get angry and policies sometimes change. But Washington's interventionist enthusiasm always quickly returns.
It's not a pretty spectacle. Most Americans are not ideologically committed to turning the United States into an imperial power.
Few of them would like to spend months or years patrolling failed foreign states, such as Iraq. Most of them turn against needless conflicts when it becomes evident that they aren't going to be short and sweet.
BURDEN OF PROOF
American elites rather like the idea of the US attempting to run the world. But the vast majority of Americans, who have to pay the bill, probably would be much less enthused if they thought about it.
Indeed, when wars go bad - like in Iraq - the public eventually says 'Enough!'. Anger over the Bush administration's Iraq war - among other things, incompetently waged - led voters to transfer control of Congress to the Democrats. The failure of Congress to override the policies of President George W. Bush may lead voters to give the White House to the Democrats as well in next year's election.
Yet, in a perverse sense, the biggest US foreign policy problem is when the costs seem low. Then the public simply ignores the issue, giving policymakers wide discretion to continue advancing interventionist policies contrary to America's national interests.
How else to explain continuing American membership in Nato, especially one that keeps expanding? Europe once needed defending from the Soviet Union. From whom is America defending Europe today, a continent with a population and GDP larger than America's?
Moreover, what sense does it make to continue expanding the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation up to the borders of Russia, absorbing countries with multiple disputes with Russia, an authoritarian, nuclear-armed power?
Yet the American people remain blissfully unaware of and uninterested in their nation's foreign policy. If America ends up at war with Russia over a recent addition to Nato, voters might take notice. Otherwise they just don't care.
Similarly misguided is America's continuing defence of South Korea, which has upwards of 40 times the GDP and twice the population of North Korea. Most South Koreans no longer fear the North; in fact, they have been subsidising it for years.
Then there's Japan. The world's second-ranking economic power, Japan could do far more to protect itself and its region. Its neighbours prefer that the US does the job, but so what?
American elites rather like the idea of the US attempting to run the world. But the vast majority of Americans, who have to pay the bill, probably would be much less enthused if they thought about it.
Beyond such major commitments, Washington has dribbled bases and forces around the world. Unfortunately, foreign alliances can act as transmission belts of war at a time when America should be building firebreaks to war.
Although serious armed conflict is unlikely in either Asia or Europe, Washington's explicit promise to defend the Baltic states and Eastern Europe necessarily makes all of those nations' squabbles with Russia America's squabbles as well. Washington's implicit guarantee to Taiwan does the same thing with China next door.
Advocates of scattering security guarantees around the globe argue that such commitments deter aggression, which is true to some degree. But US deployments also ensure American involvement in conflicts that would be of little relevance to it.
Moreover, guaranteeing the security of other nations creates an incentive for irresponsible behaviour. That is, so long as some countries believe the US will rush to their defence in a conflict with a bigger power - China and Russia most obviously today - they are likely to act more aggressively.
This phenomenon is evident in Taiwan, which has adopted a confrontational stance with China. Taipei asks: With Washington behind us, why not assert our interest?
The challenge for advocates of a new US world approach is to break through the public's ignorance to build popular support for overturning elite opinion. It won't be easy.
But without a real opposition to today's aggressive interventionism, America is doomed to following a flawed imperial policy. Only by supporting presidential candidates who challenge the interventionist status quo will voters recover the American republic.
The writer is the Robert A. Taft Fellow at the American Conservative Defence Alliance. A former special assistant to president Ronald Reagan, he is the author of Foreign Follies: America's New Global Empire.
A clueless nation led astray by an imperialistic elite?
By Doug Bandow, For The Straits Times
I'VE OFTEN been asked by people outside of America to explain US foreign policy. It's a daunting or, perhaps more accurately, embarrassing task.
Americans know very little about the world. Their ignorance is almost charming.
In one sense, it's good that most people in America are more interested in spending time with family and friends and in earning a living than in plotting a coup in some faraway land, waging a war against an emerging power or issuing foreign ultimatums over random economic and political demands.
Unfortunately, however, as a result, Americans have essentially delegated the power to do all of those things to a Washington-centred elite. When things go wrong, Americans get angry and policies sometimes change. But Washington's interventionist enthusiasm always quickly returns.
It's not a pretty spectacle. Most Americans are not ideologically committed to turning the United States into an imperial power.
Few of them would like to spend months or years patrolling failed foreign states, such as Iraq. Most of them turn against needless conflicts when it becomes evident that they aren't going to be short and sweet.
BURDEN OF PROOF
American elites rather like the idea of the US attempting to run the world. But the vast majority of Americans, who have to pay the bill, probably would be much less enthused if they thought about it.
Indeed, when wars go bad - like in Iraq - the public eventually says 'Enough!'. Anger over the Bush administration's Iraq war - among other things, incompetently waged - led voters to transfer control of Congress to the Democrats. The failure of Congress to override the policies of President George W. Bush may lead voters to give the White House to the Democrats as well in next year's election.
Yet, in a perverse sense, the biggest US foreign policy problem is when the costs seem low. Then the public simply ignores the issue, giving policymakers wide discretion to continue advancing interventionist policies contrary to America's national interests.
How else to explain continuing American membership in Nato, especially one that keeps expanding? Europe once needed defending from the Soviet Union. From whom is America defending Europe today, a continent with a population and GDP larger than America's?
Moreover, what sense does it make to continue expanding the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation up to the borders of Russia, absorbing countries with multiple disputes with Russia, an authoritarian, nuclear-armed power?
Yet the American people remain blissfully unaware of and uninterested in their nation's foreign policy. If America ends up at war with Russia over a recent addition to Nato, voters might take notice. Otherwise they just don't care.
Similarly misguided is America's continuing defence of South Korea, which has upwards of 40 times the GDP and twice the population of North Korea. Most South Koreans no longer fear the North; in fact, they have been subsidising it for years.
Then there's Japan. The world's second-ranking economic power, Japan could do far more to protect itself and its region. Its neighbours prefer that the US does the job, but so what?
American elites rather like the idea of the US attempting to run the world. But the vast majority of Americans, who have to pay the bill, probably would be much less enthused if they thought about it.
Beyond such major commitments, Washington has dribbled bases and forces around the world. Unfortunately, foreign alliances can act as transmission belts of war at a time when America should be building firebreaks to war.
Although serious armed conflict is unlikely in either Asia or Europe, Washington's explicit promise to defend the Baltic states and Eastern Europe necessarily makes all of those nations' squabbles with Russia America's squabbles as well. Washington's implicit guarantee to Taiwan does the same thing with China next door.
Advocates of scattering security guarantees around the globe argue that such commitments deter aggression, which is true to some degree. But US deployments also ensure American involvement in conflicts that would be of little relevance to it.
Moreover, guaranteeing the security of other nations creates an incentive for irresponsible behaviour. That is, so long as some countries believe the US will rush to their defence in a conflict with a bigger power - China and Russia most obviously today - they are likely to act more aggressively.
This phenomenon is evident in Taiwan, which has adopted a confrontational stance with China. Taipei asks: With Washington behind us, why not assert our interest?
The challenge for advocates of a new US world approach is to break through the public's ignorance to build popular support for overturning elite opinion. It won't be easy.
But without a real opposition to today's aggressive interventionism, America is doomed to following a flawed imperial policy. Only by supporting presidential candidates who challenge the interventionist status quo will voters recover the American republic.
The writer is the Robert A. Taft Fellow at the American Conservative Defence Alliance. A former special assistant to president Ronald Reagan, he is the author of Foreign Follies: America's New Global Empire.
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Global terror: Extremists, big powers both at fault
Dec 8, 2007
Global terror: Extremists, big powers both at fault, says scholar
But no faith will tolerate an act of terror, says Syrian university rector
By Jeremy Au Yong
MUSLIM terrorists and global powers must both take responsibility for the tense global political climate, a leading Syrian academic said yesterday.
Sheikh Hussam Eddin Farfour made the point in an interview, where he denounced - in equal measure - terrorists who carry out attacks in the name of Islam, the United States-led war in Iraq, and the actions of the West in the Israel-Palestine conflict.
'We should be equal in judging. As much as we denounce terrorism, we should also be aware of the destruction caused by the world powers,' the rector of the Al-Fath University in Syria said through an interpreter.
Speaking in Arabic, he criticised terrorists for perverting the faith: 'There is a big difference between a Muslim practising Islam as faith, as a neutral religion, and the terrorists. They are not people practising the faith the correct way.'
But he then posed his own questions, asking reporters: 'How do we describe the destruction that has been caused by world powers to countries such as Iraq and Palestine? How do we term what has been done there? Isn't that a form of terrorism, attacking other people's rights and taking from them?'
His bottom line, though, was that an act of terror could never be justified: 'It will never be tolerated in any faith.'
'However, anybody who is attacked upon on his wealth, his land, his rights, the international law permits him to seek what is right. Every community will defend itself - of course, in a proper way.'
Sheikh Farfour, a regular commentator on Muslim issues in the Middle East, has been here since Tuesday at the invitation of the Islamic Religious Council of Singapore.
He has met politicians, community and religious leaders, as well as the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, who was here.
At yesterday's interview, Sheikh Farfour lauded Singapore for being a country where people of different faiths could live together in harmony.
'From my short visit, I notice that Singapore is an open country, which gives respect to all the various religious groups. And I am able to see the cooperation, bonding and rapport between the different groups. This is a good example of a plural community.'
He also urged Muslims to be good 'ambassadors of the religion'.
'You should practise openness. You should help each other, be it Muslims or non-Muslims. You should defend the country, be contributing citizens, and preserve the social harmony in Singapore. This is what Islam is all about and what Islam asks of its followers,' he said.
Sheikh Farfour will today deliver a keynote address at the Asatizah Seminar 2007, an annual gathering of Islamic religious teachers. He leaves Singapore on Monday.
jeremyau@sph.com.sg
Global terror: Extremists, big powers both at fault, says scholar
But no faith will tolerate an act of terror, says Syrian university rector
By Jeremy Au Yong
MUSLIM terrorists and global powers must both take responsibility for the tense global political climate, a leading Syrian academic said yesterday.
Sheikh Hussam Eddin Farfour made the point in an interview, where he denounced - in equal measure - terrorists who carry out attacks in the name of Islam, the United States-led war in Iraq, and the actions of the West in the Israel-Palestine conflict.
'We should be equal in judging. As much as we denounce terrorism, we should also be aware of the destruction caused by the world powers,' the rector of the Al-Fath University in Syria said through an interpreter.
Speaking in Arabic, he criticised terrorists for perverting the faith: 'There is a big difference between a Muslim practising Islam as faith, as a neutral religion, and the terrorists. They are not people practising the faith the correct way.'
But he then posed his own questions, asking reporters: 'How do we describe the destruction that has been caused by world powers to countries such as Iraq and Palestine? How do we term what has been done there? Isn't that a form of terrorism, attacking other people's rights and taking from them?'
His bottom line, though, was that an act of terror could never be justified: 'It will never be tolerated in any faith.'
'However, anybody who is attacked upon on his wealth, his land, his rights, the international law permits him to seek what is right. Every community will defend itself - of course, in a proper way.'
Sheikh Farfour, a regular commentator on Muslim issues in the Middle East, has been here since Tuesday at the invitation of the Islamic Religious Council of Singapore.
He has met politicians, community and religious leaders, as well as the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, who was here.
At yesterday's interview, Sheikh Farfour lauded Singapore for being a country where people of different faiths could live together in harmony.
'From my short visit, I notice that Singapore is an open country, which gives respect to all the various religious groups. And I am able to see the cooperation, bonding and rapport between the different groups. This is a good example of a plural community.'
He also urged Muslims to be good 'ambassadors of the religion'.
'You should practise openness. You should help each other, be it Muslims or non-Muslims. You should defend the country, be contributing citizens, and preserve the social harmony in Singapore. This is what Islam is all about and what Islam asks of its followers,' he said.
Sheikh Farfour will today deliver a keynote address at the Asatizah Seminar 2007, an annual gathering of Islamic religious teachers. He leaves Singapore on Monday.
jeremyau@sph.com.sg
How S'pore stays at the top of the game
Dec 9, 2007
How S'pore stays at the top of the game
With its 7.9 per cent growth last year, it has been called a developed country growing at developing-nation rates. Bryan Lee explains this anomaly.
IT IS almost a given that in the global rankings for economic growth, poor countries typically fill the top spots while rich nations bring up the rear.
Last year's top three - Azerbaijan, the Maldives and Angola - clocked in impressive expansion of between 18 and 31 per cent.
But they were anything but wealthy: Their citizens took home an average income of less than US$3,000 (S$4,300) that year.
In contrast, the United States, the world's biggest economy, grew a paltry 2.9 per cent.
Against this long-standing trend, Singapore stands out as an anomaly.
At 7.9 per cent, Singapore's economic performance puts it more in the league of emerging growth stars such as China and India than in the comparatively tired ranks of the US, Europe and Japan.
RELATED LINKS
GDP Growth
Yet the Republic is one of the most affluent countries in the world, coming in at No. 25 in per capita GDP terms. In Asia, it is beaten only by Japan and Brunei, and may well leapfrog both to the No. 1 position this year.
In fact, out of the 180 nations ranked by the International Monetary Fund, only two rich countries grew faster than Singapore - oil-rich Qatar and the United
Arab Emirates.
Indeed, this phenomenon was picked up in a recent report in The Economist magazine, which described Singapore as 'a developed country that grows at developing-country rates'.
The report was quoted by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong at an NTUC conference in October, when he said economic growth this year will hit the upper end of the official forecast of 7 per cent to 8 per cent.
So, how has this tiny country with no natural resources managed such a feat? Is it just sheer survival instinct gone into overdrive?
The rise - and fall - of productivity
THEORIES about long-term economic growth come in several flavours but virtually all the major ones stem from a common foundation.
An economy's capacity to produce goods and services is essentially constrained by two ingredients - capital and labour.
Growth therefore is determined in a big way by the rates at which a country is expanding its stock of machinery, infrastructure and workers.
It is also largely dependent on the productivity of these two production factors which tends to decline as capital and labour are accumulated.
A baker, for instance, would be more efficient if he were given a whisk. But hand him another whisk and it would probably do little to get the cake out of the oven faster.
Little surprise then that developing countries, with their explosive population growth rates, can expand their economies quickly simply on the back of a fast-growing workforce.
Also, as their factories are relatively poorer equipped, and other supporting infrastructure such as roads less developed, the output boost from additional capital investments will be bigger than in developed countries.
This in turn translates into a higher rate of capital accumulation, since investment spending equals the portion of a country's output or income that is not consumed by households and the government.
In this simple model, Singapore's economic prospects look bleak.
With a population that is struggling to replace itself and factories, roads and ports that are top-flight, the Republic would seem to be doomed to slow growth rates.
But the Singapore Government estimates that the country's long-term potential growth rate lies between 4 per cent and 6 per cent, well ahead of those in the developed world.
And in the past three years, helped in no small part by a buoyant global economy, its economic growth would appear to be no less than miraculous, reaching an annual average of about 7.8 per cent.
A nimble labour force, thanks to foreigners
THE magic, say economists, lies in Singapore's flexible labour markets.
'Most of the growth comes from our elastic labour supply, where we can rely on bringing in more foreign workers,' said Citigroup economist Chua Hak Bin.
Step into a shop or restaurant these days and there's a good chance you will be served by a Filipino or a migrant from China.
Shipyards, construction sites and factories are also well staffed by workers from the region.
Government statistics show that Singapore's non-resident population has swelled 34 per cent in the past four years to one million.
In contrast, the resident population expanded just 7 per cent, a figure likely to have been helped by a fair number of expatriates who have taken up permanent residency here.
While some may wonder if this absorption of foreigners is at the expense of local workers, recent employment figures point to a labour force that is maxed out, so labour imports are necessary to keep the economy growing.
Marching up the technological ladder
OF COURSE, the Singapore growth phenomenon is not just a simple recipe of adding more workers.
The country has undergone major economic restructuring to upgrade itself to take on higher value-added activities.
In economic growth theory, technology and human capital - that is, education and training investments - are two key factors that can help mitigate the diminishing productivity of labour and capital.
And unlike labour and capital, these two factors have a certain self-sustaining, self-propagating element. Returning to the baker, he would prefer to be given a Kitchen Aid rather than 100 whisks of the same value. Not only is the mixer much more efficient, it may even enable him to come up with different and better cakes.
And if he is sent to the finest pastry school in France, he could make a lot more money selling souffles than pandan chiffon cakes. He could even pass on his new skills to his friends, spreading the benefits of his training beyond himself.
In a similar way, Singapore has moved from making calculators to semiconductors, and embraced high-value service industries such as financial services.
Much of this has been achieved through targeted government policies that create a suitable business environment for foreign investors, promoting in particular several key sectors.
These measures, which may take the form of tax breaks, are costly. But they have helped attract investments from overseas that inject not just capital into the economy but new technologies as well.
Efforts, including direct public funding, have also been made to build up research and development activities here. These would go some way towards helping the economy sustain a continuous rise up the technological ladder.
The same is being done in the human capital side of the equation, with constant improvements to the education system.
'With the resources accumulated over the past four decades, the Government has a large enough war chest to prepare the economy for the next stage of development,' says CIMB-GK economist Song Seng Wun.
Reality of a supply crunch
SO HAS Singapore achieved economic nirvana, where wealth creation fears little abatement?
DBS Bank economist Irvin Seah reckons Singapore's small size has made it especially nimble to respond to threats and opportunities in the global cycles of boom and bust.
'The economic structure is well diversified. Singapore has a unique collection of strengths that is hard to emulate and that has allowed us to enjoy a mid- to long-term growth higher than many countries.'
But all that nimbleness ultimately requires acute judgment and some degree of clairvoyance on the part of the Government, whose policies have played no small part in Singapore's success.
As it stands, trouble is brewing, and ironically, it is partly a consequence of the 'developing economy' growth rates of the past few years.
Inflation, while low by world standards, hit a 16-year high of 3.6 per cent in October and is set to rise even more next year.
While due in part to high global oil and food prices, this has come about because the surprisingly rapid expansion of the economy is using up spare capacity in the system. In the property and labour markets, in particular, demand is far outstripping supply, and this imbalance is pushing up prices.
The Government is releasing more land for developing homes and offices, but it will take some years before these are built.
There is also the tried-and- tested foreign labour solution. Certainly, the large populations of Singapore's Asian neighbours would ensure a ready supply. But simply allowing more immigrant workers into the country, as the Government is doing next month, may not be enough.
High rentals, coupled with rising living costs, mean employers will need to pay foreign workers higher wages to bring them in.
Indeed, this has prompted the Government to hold back $2 billion worth of public construction projects to ease the supply crunch.
'The economy is currently facing a serious supply-side constraint. Shortage of land and labour has driven up rentals and wages,' says Mr Seah.
All this goes to show that even the most efficient of governments can do only so much to bend economic realities.
For sure, many of the current issues will subside in time.
But in the meantime, the pain of higher electricity and restaurant bills will, for the man on the street, take off some of the shine from the trend-breaking achievement of the Singapore economy.
bryanlee@sph.com.sg
How S'pore stays at the top of the game
With its 7.9 per cent growth last year, it has been called a developed country growing at developing-nation rates. Bryan Lee explains this anomaly.
IT IS almost a given that in the global rankings for economic growth, poor countries typically fill the top spots while rich nations bring up the rear.
Last year's top three - Azerbaijan, the Maldives and Angola - clocked in impressive expansion of between 18 and 31 per cent.
But they were anything but wealthy: Their citizens took home an average income of less than US$3,000 (S$4,300) that year.
In contrast, the United States, the world's biggest economy, grew a paltry 2.9 per cent.
Against this long-standing trend, Singapore stands out as an anomaly.
At 7.9 per cent, Singapore's economic performance puts it more in the league of emerging growth stars such as China and India than in the comparatively tired ranks of the US, Europe and Japan.
RELATED LINKS
GDP Growth
Yet the Republic is one of the most affluent countries in the world, coming in at No. 25 in per capita GDP terms. In Asia, it is beaten only by Japan and Brunei, and may well leapfrog both to the No. 1 position this year.
In fact, out of the 180 nations ranked by the International Monetary Fund, only two rich countries grew faster than Singapore - oil-rich Qatar and the United
Arab Emirates.
Indeed, this phenomenon was picked up in a recent report in The Economist magazine, which described Singapore as 'a developed country that grows at developing-country rates'.
The report was quoted by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong at an NTUC conference in October, when he said economic growth this year will hit the upper end of the official forecast of 7 per cent to 8 per cent.
So, how has this tiny country with no natural resources managed such a feat? Is it just sheer survival instinct gone into overdrive?
The rise - and fall - of productivity
THEORIES about long-term economic growth come in several flavours but virtually all the major ones stem from a common foundation.
An economy's capacity to produce goods and services is essentially constrained by two ingredients - capital and labour.
Growth therefore is determined in a big way by the rates at which a country is expanding its stock of machinery, infrastructure and workers.
It is also largely dependent on the productivity of these two production factors which tends to decline as capital and labour are accumulated.
A baker, for instance, would be more efficient if he were given a whisk. But hand him another whisk and it would probably do little to get the cake out of the oven faster.
Little surprise then that developing countries, with their explosive population growth rates, can expand their economies quickly simply on the back of a fast-growing workforce.
Also, as their factories are relatively poorer equipped, and other supporting infrastructure such as roads less developed, the output boost from additional capital investments will be bigger than in developed countries.
This in turn translates into a higher rate of capital accumulation, since investment spending equals the portion of a country's output or income that is not consumed by households and the government.
In this simple model, Singapore's economic prospects look bleak.
With a population that is struggling to replace itself and factories, roads and ports that are top-flight, the Republic would seem to be doomed to slow growth rates.
But the Singapore Government estimates that the country's long-term potential growth rate lies between 4 per cent and 6 per cent, well ahead of those in the developed world.
And in the past three years, helped in no small part by a buoyant global economy, its economic growth would appear to be no less than miraculous, reaching an annual average of about 7.8 per cent.
A nimble labour force, thanks to foreigners
THE magic, say economists, lies in Singapore's flexible labour markets.
'Most of the growth comes from our elastic labour supply, where we can rely on bringing in more foreign workers,' said Citigroup economist Chua Hak Bin.
Step into a shop or restaurant these days and there's a good chance you will be served by a Filipino or a migrant from China.
Shipyards, construction sites and factories are also well staffed by workers from the region.
Government statistics show that Singapore's non-resident population has swelled 34 per cent in the past four years to one million.
In contrast, the resident population expanded just 7 per cent, a figure likely to have been helped by a fair number of expatriates who have taken up permanent residency here.
While some may wonder if this absorption of foreigners is at the expense of local workers, recent employment figures point to a labour force that is maxed out, so labour imports are necessary to keep the economy growing.
Marching up the technological ladder
OF COURSE, the Singapore growth phenomenon is not just a simple recipe of adding more workers.
The country has undergone major economic restructuring to upgrade itself to take on higher value-added activities.
In economic growth theory, technology and human capital - that is, education and training investments - are two key factors that can help mitigate the diminishing productivity of labour and capital.
And unlike labour and capital, these two factors have a certain self-sustaining, self-propagating element. Returning to the baker, he would prefer to be given a Kitchen Aid rather than 100 whisks of the same value. Not only is the mixer much more efficient, it may even enable him to come up with different and better cakes.
And if he is sent to the finest pastry school in France, he could make a lot more money selling souffles than pandan chiffon cakes. He could even pass on his new skills to his friends, spreading the benefits of his training beyond himself.
In a similar way, Singapore has moved from making calculators to semiconductors, and embraced high-value service industries such as financial services.
Much of this has been achieved through targeted government policies that create a suitable business environment for foreign investors, promoting in particular several key sectors.
These measures, which may take the form of tax breaks, are costly. But they have helped attract investments from overseas that inject not just capital into the economy but new technologies as well.
Efforts, including direct public funding, have also been made to build up research and development activities here. These would go some way towards helping the economy sustain a continuous rise up the technological ladder.
The same is being done in the human capital side of the equation, with constant improvements to the education system.
'With the resources accumulated over the past four decades, the Government has a large enough war chest to prepare the economy for the next stage of development,' says CIMB-GK economist Song Seng Wun.
Reality of a supply crunch
SO HAS Singapore achieved economic nirvana, where wealth creation fears little abatement?
DBS Bank economist Irvin Seah reckons Singapore's small size has made it especially nimble to respond to threats and opportunities in the global cycles of boom and bust.
'The economic structure is well diversified. Singapore has a unique collection of strengths that is hard to emulate and that has allowed us to enjoy a mid- to long-term growth higher than many countries.'
But all that nimbleness ultimately requires acute judgment and some degree of clairvoyance on the part of the Government, whose policies have played no small part in Singapore's success.
As it stands, trouble is brewing, and ironically, it is partly a consequence of the 'developing economy' growth rates of the past few years.
Inflation, while low by world standards, hit a 16-year high of 3.6 per cent in October and is set to rise even more next year.
While due in part to high global oil and food prices, this has come about because the surprisingly rapid expansion of the economy is using up spare capacity in the system. In the property and labour markets, in particular, demand is far outstripping supply, and this imbalance is pushing up prices.
The Government is releasing more land for developing homes and offices, but it will take some years before these are built.
There is also the tried-and- tested foreign labour solution. Certainly, the large populations of Singapore's Asian neighbours would ensure a ready supply. But simply allowing more immigrant workers into the country, as the Government is doing next month, may not be enough.
High rentals, coupled with rising living costs, mean employers will need to pay foreign workers higher wages to bring them in.
Indeed, this has prompted the Government to hold back $2 billion worth of public construction projects to ease the supply crunch.
'The economy is currently facing a serious supply-side constraint. Shortage of land and labour has driven up rentals and wages,' says Mr Seah.
All this goes to show that even the most efficient of governments can do only so much to bend economic realities.
For sure, many of the current issues will subside in time.
But in the meantime, the pain of higher electricity and restaurant bills will, for the man on the street, take off some of the shine from the trend-breaking achievement of the Singapore economy.
bryanlee@sph.com.sg
Chinese Migrant workers in Singapore
Dec 9, 2007
How much is this? And please speak in English
China workers may be cheaper to hire, but their lack of English is putting off some customers
By Mavis Toh & Shuli Sudderuddin
STEP into the toy department of Isetan Scotts and chances are you will be served by Zhang Jia Le from north-eastern China.
The cheerful 20-year-old quit his studies, borrowed $7,000 from relatives and came to Singapore to work three months ago.
The Ji Lin native who said he lost interest in studying, remarked: 'The environment here is better and we learn how to handle and sell many different kinds of products.'
He is among a growing number of front-line China workers in the service industry.
Mainland Chinese are making their presence felt not only in foodcourts and hawker centres but also in shopping malls, supermarkets and petrol stations.
Employers like these workers because they are hard-working and are willing to take jobs shunned by Singaporeans.
But the reception from others has been less than warm. In the past two weeks, four people have written to the Forum page of The Straits Times commenting on the ubiquitous China worker.
The letter writers said these workers are taking jobs away from Singaporeans and questioned their suitability, saying that many do not speak English.
One exasperated reader, Mr Murali Sharma, described how he could not get a glass of warm water from a waitress from China at a wedding banquet.
The 71-year-old retiree said: 'I can't speak Mandarin and she couldn't speak English. It was so frustrating.'
The Sunday Times visited 23 coffee shops and foodcourts in the past week and found China workers serving in at least eight eateries. At a coffee shop in Braddell, up to 10 of the 25 employees were China nationals.
Their vocabulary is typically restricted to job-related terms but sometimes it is not even sufficient for work.
Ms Sharidah Zaitun, 47, a part-time editor, has had frustrating encounters with service staff from China at food centres and shops who cannot understand her.
She said: 'Singapore has an international community and speaking English is a must.'
Even some Chinese Singaporeans have problems. Not all can speak Mandarin and they get by using dialects such as Hokkien or pasar Malay in hawker centres.
Mrs Maggie Goh, 61, a retiree who speaks only Hokkien and English, said she has resorted to pointing to items on the menus in restaurants.
Just on Friday, she was served by a waiter from China at a restaurant in Parkway Parade who could not understand English. 'He kept speaking in Mandarin even though I spoke to him in English. I ended up pointing to items on the menu. It was a struggle,' she said.
Expats in particular are having difficulty with the language barrier.
A Filipina accounts manager, Denise Iroy, 31, recounted how she once spent 15 minutes trying to explain to a salesman from China that she wanted to buy an adaptor.
'I tried to speak slowly but he still could not understand me. In the end, the manager had to come and assist me.'
Employers and labour agents said the influx of China workers came after rules were relaxed to allow them to work in the service industry.
They said service-sector companies can now hire work permit holders for up to 45 per cent of their total workforce with China workers making up 5 per cent of that.
The Manpower Ministry could not say how many China workers are in the service industry but interviews with labour agents suggest that demand is hotting up.
Agent Zen Tan said that from July to December, his agency supplied about 3,600 China workers to companies in the service sector. This month alone, demand has gone up by 20 per cent.
He said: 'A lot of these jobs require long hours and Singaporeans do not want to take them.'
Mr K.H. Hong, who owns a chain of 10 coffee shops islandwide, said he hires China workers because they are 'hard-working, willing to work overtime and eager to learn'.
It also does not hurt that a China worker's pay is $1,000, about 10 per cent lower than what a Singaporean or Malaysian earns - because he is usually inexperienced. Mr Hong has about 40 China workers in all.
Ms Shereen Leong, senior human resource executive of foodcourt operator Koufu, which has 21 outlets, said local workers are scarce in the tight labour market. The company has 29 China workers out of its pool of 503 workers.
One such person is Wu Ye Li, who has been manning the dessert stall at Koufu's Toa Payoh outlet for two years.
The 34-year-old started out serving customers but has since learnt to prepare all 15 items on the menu.
She works 12 hours a day, gets two days off a month and earns $1,000 monthly.
She admitted that the first months at work were frustrating because she could not understand her customers' orders.
'Language was a problem, the Singapore slang is different and I knew little English,' she said. But now, she can speak simple English to her customers.
Ms Julia Tay, deputy human resource manager of Isetan, hired four China workers in the past four months after interviewing them via webcam.
She thinks that they would be more committed to their jobs because of the large sums they've paid labour agents to hook them up with jobs in Singapore. The amount can be as high as $8,000.
She said: 'Though having a basic command of English is important, the willingness to learn is more important.'
The China workers are paid the same amount as the other workers - $1,100 a month. The company does not give them English language lessons.
The store, which has 600 retail assistants, plans to place up to three China workers in each of its four branches.
Bata Singapore, which employs 11 China nationals as sales staff, tackles the language problem by enrolling them in a week-long basic English course.
Ms Corrine Goh, manager of the Peninsula Plaza branch, which has two China workers, said the company preferred to hire China nationals over English-speaking Filipinos because they are cheaper.
China nationals get $1,000 a month compared to $1,500 to $1,800 for Filipinos.
She said: 'Of course language can be a problem, but the workers try their best. We hire them based on how much they are willing to learn and how far we think they can go.' She said that there have been no customer complaints.
While some customers may be unhappy with the China workers' weak grasp of English, employers said the situation is not likely to change given the tight labour market and Singaporeans' reluctance to work in the service industry.
Mr Hong Poh Heng, chairman of the Foochow Coffee Restaurant and Bar Merchants Association, said: 'They are cheap to hire and unlike Singaporeans, are willing to work long hours and on public holidays to pay back their loans.'
But 24-year-old undergraduate Rebecca Norfor has this piece of advice for employers who seem to downplay the importance of language in good service.
'If I have to tear my hair out to communicate, I will take my business elsewhere.'
mavistoh@sph.com.sg
shulis@sph.com.sg
How much is this? And please speak in English
China workers may be cheaper to hire, but their lack of English is putting off some customers
By Mavis Toh & Shuli Sudderuddin
STEP into the toy department of Isetan Scotts and chances are you will be served by Zhang Jia Le from north-eastern China.
The cheerful 20-year-old quit his studies, borrowed $7,000 from relatives and came to Singapore to work three months ago.
The Ji Lin native who said he lost interest in studying, remarked: 'The environment here is better and we learn how to handle and sell many different kinds of products.'
He is among a growing number of front-line China workers in the service industry.
Mainland Chinese are making their presence felt not only in foodcourts and hawker centres but also in shopping malls, supermarkets and petrol stations.
Employers like these workers because they are hard-working and are willing to take jobs shunned by Singaporeans.
But the reception from others has been less than warm. In the past two weeks, four people have written to the Forum page of The Straits Times commenting on the ubiquitous China worker.
The letter writers said these workers are taking jobs away from Singaporeans and questioned their suitability, saying that many do not speak English.
One exasperated reader, Mr Murali Sharma, described how he could not get a glass of warm water from a waitress from China at a wedding banquet.
The 71-year-old retiree said: 'I can't speak Mandarin and she couldn't speak English. It was so frustrating.'
The Sunday Times visited 23 coffee shops and foodcourts in the past week and found China workers serving in at least eight eateries. At a coffee shop in Braddell, up to 10 of the 25 employees were China nationals.
Their vocabulary is typically restricted to job-related terms but sometimes it is not even sufficient for work.
Ms Sharidah Zaitun, 47, a part-time editor, has had frustrating encounters with service staff from China at food centres and shops who cannot understand her.
She said: 'Singapore has an international community and speaking English is a must.'
Even some Chinese Singaporeans have problems. Not all can speak Mandarin and they get by using dialects such as Hokkien or pasar Malay in hawker centres.
Mrs Maggie Goh, 61, a retiree who speaks only Hokkien and English, said she has resorted to pointing to items on the menus in restaurants.
Just on Friday, she was served by a waiter from China at a restaurant in Parkway Parade who could not understand English. 'He kept speaking in Mandarin even though I spoke to him in English. I ended up pointing to items on the menu. It was a struggle,' she said.
Expats in particular are having difficulty with the language barrier.
A Filipina accounts manager, Denise Iroy, 31, recounted how she once spent 15 minutes trying to explain to a salesman from China that she wanted to buy an adaptor.
'I tried to speak slowly but he still could not understand me. In the end, the manager had to come and assist me.'
Employers and labour agents said the influx of China workers came after rules were relaxed to allow them to work in the service industry.
They said service-sector companies can now hire work permit holders for up to 45 per cent of their total workforce with China workers making up 5 per cent of that.
The Manpower Ministry could not say how many China workers are in the service industry but interviews with labour agents suggest that demand is hotting up.
Agent Zen Tan said that from July to December, his agency supplied about 3,600 China workers to companies in the service sector. This month alone, demand has gone up by 20 per cent.
He said: 'A lot of these jobs require long hours and Singaporeans do not want to take them.'
Mr K.H. Hong, who owns a chain of 10 coffee shops islandwide, said he hires China workers because they are 'hard-working, willing to work overtime and eager to learn'.
It also does not hurt that a China worker's pay is $1,000, about 10 per cent lower than what a Singaporean or Malaysian earns - because he is usually inexperienced. Mr Hong has about 40 China workers in all.
Ms Shereen Leong, senior human resource executive of foodcourt operator Koufu, which has 21 outlets, said local workers are scarce in the tight labour market. The company has 29 China workers out of its pool of 503 workers.
One such person is Wu Ye Li, who has been manning the dessert stall at Koufu's Toa Payoh outlet for two years.
The 34-year-old started out serving customers but has since learnt to prepare all 15 items on the menu.
She works 12 hours a day, gets two days off a month and earns $1,000 monthly.
She admitted that the first months at work were frustrating because she could not understand her customers' orders.
'Language was a problem, the Singapore slang is different and I knew little English,' she said. But now, she can speak simple English to her customers.
Ms Julia Tay, deputy human resource manager of Isetan, hired four China workers in the past four months after interviewing them via webcam.
She thinks that they would be more committed to their jobs because of the large sums they've paid labour agents to hook them up with jobs in Singapore. The amount can be as high as $8,000.
She said: 'Though having a basic command of English is important, the willingness to learn is more important.'
The China workers are paid the same amount as the other workers - $1,100 a month. The company does not give them English language lessons.
The store, which has 600 retail assistants, plans to place up to three China workers in each of its four branches.
Bata Singapore, which employs 11 China nationals as sales staff, tackles the language problem by enrolling them in a week-long basic English course.
Ms Corrine Goh, manager of the Peninsula Plaza branch, which has two China workers, said the company preferred to hire China nationals over English-speaking Filipinos because they are cheaper.
China nationals get $1,000 a month compared to $1,500 to $1,800 for Filipinos.
She said: 'Of course language can be a problem, but the workers try their best. We hire them based on how much they are willing to learn and how far we think they can go.' She said that there have been no customer complaints.
While some customers may be unhappy with the China workers' weak grasp of English, employers said the situation is not likely to change given the tight labour market and Singaporeans' reluctance to work in the service industry.
Mr Hong Poh Heng, chairman of the Foochow Coffee Restaurant and Bar Merchants Association, said: 'They are cheap to hire and unlike Singaporeans, are willing to work long hours and on public holidays to pay back their loans.'
But 24-year-old undergraduate Rebecca Norfor has this piece of advice for employers who seem to downplay the importance of language in good service.
'If I have to tear my hair out to communicate, I will take my business elsewhere.'
mavistoh@sph.com.sg
shulis@sph.com.sg
Ensuring Asia's taps flow safely and steadily - Dec 10 2007
Dec 10, 2007
WATER SUMMIT
Ensuring Asia's taps flow safely and steadily
By Tommy Koh, For The Straits Times
IN 2000, the UN convened a summit that adopted a set of ambitious Millennium Development Goals (MDG) and Millennium Development Targets (MDT). One of those targets was to reduce by half the number of people in the world without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation by 2015.
To help advance this aim, the Asia-Pacific Water Forum (APWF) was launched in September last year. It has two aims: to provide regional countries and organisations with a common platform to articulate strategies and promote achievements in solving water problems; and to showcase the best practices in governance and innovation, and success stories that have had an impact on the lives of people, especially the poor.
The APWF convened the region's first Water Summit, in Beppu, Japan, last week. It focused on three priority themes and five result areas.
The three priority themes are: water financing and capacity development, water-related disaster management, and water for development and ecosystems.
The key result areas include developing knowledge and lessons learnt. Singapore's Public Utilities Board, the Asian Development Bank and Unesco have set up such a knowledge hub in Singapore, which has already trained more than 500 individuals.
Another area is to develop local capacity. A third is to increase outreach by the APWF to the public. The fourth area is to monitor investments and results. The fifth is to support the work of the APWF and the Water Summit.
Real impact
WHEN I was invited to join the steering committee of the Water Summit, I accepted with the hope that it would not be another photo opportunity or festival of speech-making. I exhorted the committee to be ambitious and to make this an action-oriented meeting with a real impact on the lives of the 700 million people in this region who do not have access to safe drinking water and the 1.9 billion people who do not have access to basic sanitation.
The summit was not well covered by the international media because of the attention focused on the Bali conference on climate change. This is a pity because the summit produced some very important deliverables. Let me highlight some of them.
We agreed that people's right to safe drinking water and basic sanitation is a human right and a fundamental aspect of human security. I think such a statement has never been made before.
We agreed to meet the Millennium Development Target on water and sanitation by 2015 and to aim to achieve by 2025 a situation in which every Asian has access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation. I would note here that Asean leaders at their recent summit in Singapore said they would aspire to meet the MDT on water by 2010.
We agreed to accord the highest priority to water and sanitation in our economic and development plans. We also agreed to increase substantially our allocation of resources to the water and sanitation sectors. The sad reality today is that most governments in Asia do not accord a high priority to these sectors or fund them adequately.
We agreed to improve governance, efficiency, transparency and equity in all aspects related to the management of water, particularly as it impacts on poor communities. We recognised that while women are particularly vulnerable, they are also resilient and entrepreneurial, hence, should be empowered in all water-related activities. The biggest problem facing Asia today is not technology or hardware, but these soft issues.
We agreed to take urgent action to prevent and reduce the risks of flood, drought and other water-related disasters and to bring timely relief and assistance to their victims. More people in Asia lose their lives and homes to floods and other water-related disasters than those in the rest of the world.
We agreed to support the region's vulnerable small island states in their efforts to protect lives and livelihoods from the impact of climate change. We were moved by the poignant statements of leaders of South Pacific island states that some of their low-lying isles are already submerged.
We exhorted the Bali conference to take into account the relationship between water and climate change, such as the melting of snow caps and glaciers in the Himalayas and rising sea levels, which some countries in the region are already suffering from. It should be remembered that nine of Asia's great rivers begin in the Himalayas and that nearly one billion people could be adversely affected.
We requested that the next Group of Eight Summit commit to supporting developing countries achieve their MDG and MDT on water and sanitation, and to take immediate action to support 'adoption to climate change' by developing countries.
We agreed to empower a high-level coordinating mechanism in our respective Cabinets and, where possible, to appoint a minister in charge of water to ensure that all related issues are dealt with in a holistic manner. At the moment, only two countries, Australia and Singapore, have ministers in charge of water.
We agreed to put in place a system for monitoring investments, as well as policies and projects, to ensure accountability and to make adjustments to policies and projects, if necessary.
Basic sanitation
THE United Nations has designated 2008 the International Year of Sanitation. At the summit, we held a regional launch of this international year. All participants agreed that if the water situation is deplorable, then the sanitation situation is a disaster. Nearly two billion people in this region do not have access to basic sanitation.
The lack of basic sanitation is a threat to human health, a driver of poverty and an assault on human dignity and safety. We agreed that solving the sanitation problem is not only important in itself, but also to the achievement of the other MDGs.
Singapore's own Mr Jack Sim, the founder of the World Toilet Organisation, made an impressive presentation at the meeting. He spoke of his work in Indonesia's Aceh province, rural China, India and other parts of Asia, using low-tech, non-water reliant methods of sanitation.
He also showed photos of two six-year-old boys defecating in public. One was of a boy in present-day Bangalore. The other was of himself, taken 40 years ago. The moral of the story is that with economic growth, political will, good governance and social equity, Asia can solve its sanitation problem.
Thought leader
THERE is difficult work ahead. But the success of the Water Summit shows the way forward. Singapore has been asked to consider hosting the next summit in 2009.
I hope the Singapore Government will agree to do so because, like Japan, Singapore is recognised by the region and the international community as a thought leader in water and sanitation. But much work remains to be done.
The writer is the chairman of the APWF's governing council and a member of the Water Summit's steering committee.
WATER SUMMIT
Ensuring Asia's taps flow safely and steadily
By Tommy Koh, For The Straits Times
IN 2000, the UN convened a summit that adopted a set of ambitious Millennium Development Goals (MDG) and Millennium Development Targets (MDT). One of those targets was to reduce by half the number of people in the world without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation by 2015.
To help advance this aim, the Asia-Pacific Water Forum (APWF) was launched in September last year. It has two aims: to provide regional countries and organisations with a common platform to articulate strategies and promote achievements in solving water problems; and to showcase the best practices in governance and innovation, and success stories that have had an impact on the lives of people, especially the poor.
The APWF convened the region's first Water Summit, in Beppu, Japan, last week. It focused on three priority themes and five result areas.
The three priority themes are: water financing and capacity development, water-related disaster management, and water for development and ecosystems.
The key result areas include developing knowledge and lessons learnt. Singapore's Public Utilities Board, the Asian Development Bank and Unesco have set up such a knowledge hub in Singapore, which has already trained more than 500 individuals.
Another area is to develop local capacity. A third is to increase outreach by the APWF to the public. The fourth area is to monitor investments and results. The fifth is to support the work of the APWF and the Water Summit.
Real impact
WHEN I was invited to join the steering committee of the Water Summit, I accepted with the hope that it would not be another photo opportunity or festival of speech-making. I exhorted the committee to be ambitious and to make this an action-oriented meeting with a real impact on the lives of the 700 million people in this region who do not have access to safe drinking water and the 1.9 billion people who do not have access to basic sanitation.
The summit was not well covered by the international media because of the attention focused on the Bali conference on climate change. This is a pity because the summit produced some very important deliverables. Let me highlight some of them.
We agreed that people's right to safe drinking water and basic sanitation is a human right and a fundamental aspect of human security. I think such a statement has never been made before.
We agreed to meet the Millennium Development Target on water and sanitation by 2015 and to aim to achieve by 2025 a situation in which every Asian has access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation. I would note here that Asean leaders at their recent summit in Singapore said they would aspire to meet the MDT on water by 2010.
We agreed to accord the highest priority to water and sanitation in our economic and development plans. We also agreed to increase substantially our allocation of resources to the water and sanitation sectors. The sad reality today is that most governments in Asia do not accord a high priority to these sectors or fund them adequately.
We agreed to improve governance, efficiency, transparency and equity in all aspects related to the management of water, particularly as it impacts on poor communities. We recognised that while women are particularly vulnerable, they are also resilient and entrepreneurial, hence, should be empowered in all water-related activities. The biggest problem facing Asia today is not technology or hardware, but these soft issues.
We agreed to take urgent action to prevent and reduce the risks of flood, drought and other water-related disasters and to bring timely relief and assistance to their victims. More people in Asia lose their lives and homes to floods and other water-related disasters than those in the rest of the world.
We agreed to support the region's vulnerable small island states in their efforts to protect lives and livelihoods from the impact of climate change. We were moved by the poignant statements of leaders of South Pacific island states that some of their low-lying isles are already submerged.
We exhorted the Bali conference to take into account the relationship between water and climate change, such as the melting of snow caps and glaciers in the Himalayas and rising sea levels, which some countries in the region are already suffering from. It should be remembered that nine of Asia's great rivers begin in the Himalayas and that nearly one billion people could be adversely affected.
We requested that the next Group of Eight Summit commit to supporting developing countries achieve their MDG and MDT on water and sanitation, and to take immediate action to support 'adoption to climate change' by developing countries.
We agreed to empower a high-level coordinating mechanism in our respective Cabinets and, where possible, to appoint a minister in charge of water to ensure that all related issues are dealt with in a holistic manner. At the moment, only two countries, Australia and Singapore, have ministers in charge of water.
We agreed to put in place a system for monitoring investments, as well as policies and projects, to ensure accountability and to make adjustments to policies and projects, if necessary.
Basic sanitation
THE United Nations has designated 2008 the International Year of Sanitation. At the summit, we held a regional launch of this international year. All participants agreed that if the water situation is deplorable, then the sanitation situation is a disaster. Nearly two billion people in this region do not have access to basic sanitation.
The lack of basic sanitation is a threat to human health, a driver of poverty and an assault on human dignity and safety. We agreed that solving the sanitation problem is not only important in itself, but also to the achievement of the other MDGs.
Singapore's own Mr Jack Sim, the founder of the World Toilet Organisation, made an impressive presentation at the meeting. He spoke of his work in Indonesia's Aceh province, rural China, India and other parts of Asia, using low-tech, non-water reliant methods of sanitation.
He also showed photos of two six-year-old boys defecating in public. One was of a boy in present-day Bangalore. The other was of himself, taken 40 years ago. The moral of the story is that with economic growth, political will, good governance and social equity, Asia can solve its sanitation problem.
Thought leader
THERE is difficult work ahead. But the success of the Water Summit shows the way forward. Singapore has been asked to consider hosting the next summit in 2009.
I hope the Singapore Government will agree to do so because, like Japan, Singapore is recognised by the region and the international community as a thought leader in water and sanitation. But much work remains to be done.
The writer is the chairman of the APWF's governing council and a member of the Water Summit's steering committee.
Friday, December 7, 2007
ASEAN Charter
Dec 4, 2007
THE ASEAN CHARTER
Assertive steps on the path of progress
By K. Kesavapany
ASEAN has long adhered to certain norms and principles guiding relations among its member states and inter- state ties in general. These were first codified in the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in South-east Asia, which Asean's leaders signed in 1976.
These norms and principles are: renunciation of the use or threat of force in global relations, peaceful settlement of inter-state disputes and non-interference in one another's internal affairs.
The Asean Charter reaffirms these norms and principles for inter-state relations and also sets norms that have to do with the relationship between the state and its citizens. Specifically, it includes among Asean's objectives democracy, good governance, the rule of law, human rights and fundamental freedoms as well as equitable access to opportunities for human development, social welfare and justice.
This is something of a breakthrough, although not of the magnitude some of us would have wished for. For the first time, Asean enshrines in a basic document principles that deal with the domestic affairs of its members. The Charter defines the bloc's values, draws up standards of behaviour and provides leaders with something to invoke and act upon in case of serious violations.
Human rights
THE Charter expresses Asean's intention to set up a human rights body. But with its terms of reference still to be drawn up, we do not yet know the mandate, composition or authority of this body.
No judicial arm or enforcement mechanism is envisioned. Asean is not about mutual accusation or the legal enforcement of commitments. As of now, the human rights body could promote the exchange of best practices and help to build capacity in Asean countries for the promotion and protection of human rights.
It could expand and make more specific the regional definition of human rights. It could do so perhaps on the basis of the statement on human rights in the Joint Communique of the 1993 Asean Ministerial Meeting.
Asean's approach to human rights has been step by step, sector by sector. For example, it has taken, at different times, collective positions on the worst forms of child labour, violence against women and the rights of migrant workers. The human rights body could monitor compliance with these commitments and initiate similar consensus on others.
These might not be the stuff of contention and confrontation that is grist for the media. NGOs, too, might not be satisfied with the pace. But in a regional group as diverse as Asean, it is the most efficacious way of proceeding on this issue at the moment.
Single market
THE Charter also reaffirms Asean's determination to integrate the regional economy into a 'single market and production base'. It reiterates the steps the bloc has agreed on to achieve this goal. For this purpose, leaders have adopted a 'blueprint' for the Asean Economic Community embodying these and additional measures, most of them with specific timelines.
They did so on the recognition that the integration of the regional economy would be the most effective way of attracting investments.
If combined with policies to ensure that people have equitable access to their nation's wealth, all this would greatly improve people's lives. It is often pointed out that South-east Asia has a population of more than 550 million people and a combined gross domestic product of US$1 trillion (S$1.4 trillion). But these figures will mean something to investors only if the regional economy was truly integrated.
According to the Charter, the blueprint and other commitments would be carried out by strengthening regional institutions and by reinforcing Asean's procedures.
Hands-on leadership
HERE, the Charter does several things. One of them is to call for Asean summits to be held twice a year instead of the current once a year. One of these meetings is to be devoted entirely to intra-Asean matters, which will enable the heads of state or government to take hands-on and focused leadership of regional affairs. The summit is also explicitly charged with making decisions on important matters, particularly in cases where consensus cannot be reached.
Another step is to create a committee of permanent representatives to take over supervision and decision- making from the Asean Standing Committee. The committee of permanent representatives would be based in Jakarta, where the Asean Secretariat is located, while the Asean Standing Committee is made up of home-based officials. With this change, supervision should be closer, management easier and decision-making faster. At least, that is the Charter's intention.
The Charter also makes explicit the secretary-general's responsibility to 'facilitate and monitor progress in the implementation of Asean agreements and decisions'. It calls for the establishment of dispute-settlement mechanisms in cases where the agreement concerned does not provide for one. The secretary-general would 'monitor' compliance with the decisions of the dispute-settlement mechanisms.
This is what we mean when we say the Charter is intended to make Asean more rules-based - strengthening the mechanisms for compliance and improving the likelihood of compliance.
The Charter, of course, provides for no coercive mechanism for enforcement. It sets up no body like the United Nations Security Council.
What the Charter banks on is the further cultivation of a culture of compliance with Asean agreements and decisions. The development of such a culture would, in turn, depend on two things. One would be the sharper consciousness of the identity of the national interest with those agreements and decisions. The other would be the domestic reforms required for the implementation of Asean agreements.
Dispute settlement
PERSONALLY, I would have liked to have seen the dispute-settlement mechanism in the Charter strengthened. Although such a mechanism exists, it has never been used. Given the acute sense of nationalism in our respective countries and the element of 'face-saving' interest in our cultures, an independent body to make pronouncements is an absolute necessity.
Let me illustrate this by the example offered by the World Trade Organisation (WTO). Before its inception, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (Gatt) was a toothless organisation. Lots of agreements were signed and commitments made. But none of them was binding on all the members. As a result, Gatt lacked clout.
Those of us engaged in the Uruguay Round of trade negotiations in the mid-1990s felt this shortcoming should be remedied.
A dispute-settlement body, with panels drawn from a list of trade experts and lawyers, was established to adjudicate on trade issues purely on the basis of trade law.
While there was some uneasiness initially, the findings of the Dispute Settlement Panel have been accepted by all. In fact, it has become 'the crown in the jewel' of the WTO. It is the only world body where all countries have equal access to the law.
While it might be premature to wish for such a mechanism in Asean, it is a goal we should aspire to if we want to see it become a rules-based organisation and equipped to face the challenges of the decades ahead.
Charter ratification
OUR governments have brought forth as good a Charter as possible under present circumstances. It is now our task to bring the process forward. By 'us', I mean the respective national legislatures of Asean countries and non-governmental institutions such as think-tanks and advocacy groups.
Here, parliaments have the specific and urgent responsibility of having the Charter ratified. Any delay in ratification would cause a loss in dynamism and all the old doubts of whether Asean is anything more than a talk shop will re-emerge.
I suggest a fast-track process be used. This is a mechanism that trade negotiators use to advance their work. Simply, it means everything in a particular agreement is either endorsed or rejected. There is no scope for picking and choosing those parts which are to one's liking and calling for other parts to be rejected or re-negotiated.
Think-tanks, research institutions and advocacy groups in member countries should rise to the challenge of explaining the Charter to the people.
In the past, the tendency was to leave such matters to governments. But in this era of globalisation, when decisions taken by governments have a direct and immediate impact on the people, there is a need for the latter to be kept fully informed.
Ratification of the Asean Charter and its subsequent implementations call for collective effort on the part of governments, parliaments and the citizens of Asean. We need to move with a steadfastness of purpose if the goal of achieving an Asean community by 2020 is to be achieved.
Ambassador Kesavapany is director of the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. This article is excerpted from a speech yesterday in Kuala Lumpur at a conference jointly organised by the Asean Inter-Parliamentary Caucus for Good Governance and the Working Group for an Asean Human Rights Mechanism.
THE ASEAN CHARTER
Assertive steps on the path of progress
By K. Kesavapany
ASEAN has long adhered to certain norms and principles guiding relations among its member states and inter- state ties in general. These were first codified in the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in South-east Asia, which Asean's leaders signed in 1976.
These norms and principles are: renunciation of the use or threat of force in global relations, peaceful settlement of inter-state disputes and non-interference in one another's internal affairs.
The Asean Charter reaffirms these norms and principles for inter-state relations and also sets norms that have to do with the relationship between the state and its citizens. Specifically, it includes among Asean's objectives democracy, good governance, the rule of law, human rights and fundamental freedoms as well as equitable access to opportunities for human development, social welfare and justice.
This is something of a breakthrough, although not of the magnitude some of us would have wished for. For the first time, Asean enshrines in a basic document principles that deal with the domestic affairs of its members. The Charter defines the bloc's values, draws up standards of behaviour and provides leaders with something to invoke and act upon in case of serious violations.
Human rights
THE Charter expresses Asean's intention to set up a human rights body. But with its terms of reference still to be drawn up, we do not yet know the mandate, composition or authority of this body.
No judicial arm or enforcement mechanism is envisioned. Asean is not about mutual accusation or the legal enforcement of commitments. As of now, the human rights body could promote the exchange of best practices and help to build capacity in Asean countries for the promotion and protection of human rights.
It could expand and make more specific the regional definition of human rights. It could do so perhaps on the basis of the statement on human rights in the Joint Communique of the 1993 Asean Ministerial Meeting.
Asean's approach to human rights has been step by step, sector by sector. For example, it has taken, at different times, collective positions on the worst forms of child labour, violence against women and the rights of migrant workers. The human rights body could monitor compliance with these commitments and initiate similar consensus on others.
These might not be the stuff of contention and confrontation that is grist for the media. NGOs, too, might not be satisfied with the pace. But in a regional group as diverse as Asean, it is the most efficacious way of proceeding on this issue at the moment.
Single market
THE Charter also reaffirms Asean's determination to integrate the regional economy into a 'single market and production base'. It reiterates the steps the bloc has agreed on to achieve this goal. For this purpose, leaders have adopted a 'blueprint' for the Asean Economic Community embodying these and additional measures, most of them with specific timelines.
They did so on the recognition that the integration of the regional economy would be the most effective way of attracting investments.
If combined with policies to ensure that people have equitable access to their nation's wealth, all this would greatly improve people's lives. It is often pointed out that South-east Asia has a population of more than 550 million people and a combined gross domestic product of US$1 trillion (S$1.4 trillion). But these figures will mean something to investors only if the regional economy was truly integrated.
According to the Charter, the blueprint and other commitments would be carried out by strengthening regional institutions and by reinforcing Asean's procedures.
Hands-on leadership
HERE, the Charter does several things. One of them is to call for Asean summits to be held twice a year instead of the current once a year. One of these meetings is to be devoted entirely to intra-Asean matters, which will enable the heads of state or government to take hands-on and focused leadership of regional affairs. The summit is also explicitly charged with making decisions on important matters, particularly in cases where consensus cannot be reached.
Another step is to create a committee of permanent representatives to take over supervision and decision- making from the Asean Standing Committee. The committee of permanent representatives would be based in Jakarta, where the Asean Secretariat is located, while the Asean Standing Committee is made up of home-based officials. With this change, supervision should be closer, management easier and decision-making faster. At least, that is the Charter's intention.
The Charter also makes explicit the secretary-general's responsibility to 'facilitate and monitor progress in the implementation of Asean agreements and decisions'. It calls for the establishment of dispute-settlement mechanisms in cases where the agreement concerned does not provide for one. The secretary-general would 'monitor' compliance with the decisions of the dispute-settlement mechanisms.
This is what we mean when we say the Charter is intended to make Asean more rules-based - strengthening the mechanisms for compliance and improving the likelihood of compliance.
The Charter, of course, provides for no coercive mechanism for enforcement. It sets up no body like the United Nations Security Council.
What the Charter banks on is the further cultivation of a culture of compliance with Asean agreements and decisions. The development of such a culture would, in turn, depend on two things. One would be the sharper consciousness of the identity of the national interest with those agreements and decisions. The other would be the domestic reforms required for the implementation of Asean agreements.
Dispute settlement
PERSONALLY, I would have liked to have seen the dispute-settlement mechanism in the Charter strengthened. Although such a mechanism exists, it has never been used. Given the acute sense of nationalism in our respective countries and the element of 'face-saving' interest in our cultures, an independent body to make pronouncements is an absolute necessity.
Let me illustrate this by the example offered by the World Trade Organisation (WTO). Before its inception, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (Gatt) was a toothless organisation. Lots of agreements were signed and commitments made. But none of them was binding on all the members. As a result, Gatt lacked clout.
Those of us engaged in the Uruguay Round of trade negotiations in the mid-1990s felt this shortcoming should be remedied.
A dispute-settlement body, with panels drawn from a list of trade experts and lawyers, was established to adjudicate on trade issues purely on the basis of trade law.
While there was some uneasiness initially, the findings of the Dispute Settlement Panel have been accepted by all. In fact, it has become 'the crown in the jewel' of the WTO. It is the only world body where all countries have equal access to the law.
While it might be premature to wish for such a mechanism in Asean, it is a goal we should aspire to if we want to see it become a rules-based organisation and equipped to face the challenges of the decades ahead.
Charter ratification
OUR governments have brought forth as good a Charter as possible under present circumstances. It is now our task to bring the process forward. By 'us', I mean the respective national legislatures of Asean countries and non-governmental institutions such as think-tanks and advocacy groups.
Here, parliaments have the specific and urgent responsibility of having the Charter ratified. Any delay in ratification would cause a loss in dynamism and all the old doubts of whether Asean is anything more than a talk shop will re-emerge.
I suggest a fast-track process be used. This is a mechanism that trade negotiators use to advance their work. Simply, it means everything in a particular agreement is either endorsed or rejected. There is no scope for picking and choosing those parts which are to one's liking and calling for other parts to be rejected or re-negotiated.
Think-tanks, research institutions and advocacy groups in member countries should rise to the challenge of explaining the Charter to the people.
In the past, the tendency was to leave such matters to governments. But in this era of globalisation, when decisions taken by governments have a direct and immediate impact on the people, there is a need for the latter to be kept fully informed.
Ratification of the Asean Charter and its subsequent implementations call for collective effort on the part of governments, parliaments and the citizens of Asean. We need to move with a steadfastness of purpose if the goal of achieving an Asean community by 2020 is to be achieved.
Ambassador Kesavapany is director of the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. This article is excerpted from a speech yesterday in Kuala Lumpur at a conference jointly organised by the Asean Inter-Parliamentary Caucus for Good Governance and the Working Group for an Asean Human Rights Mechanism.
Russian Elections
Dec 4, 2007
Russia does itself a favour
RUSSIA was the big winner in the weekend's parliamentary election for the Duma. In voting strongly for President Vladimir Putin's party, the Russian people endorsed foremost the healing effects that the regional stability and the economic gains of the past few years are having on the national spirit. The nation that was parodied prematurely in some Western capitals as a spent force, after the reversals of the Gorbachev-Yeltsin years, will come out the stronger. Its influence as a balancing force in international affairs will grow with its new-found prestige. Incomplete results gave Mr Putin's party, United Russia, and its allies some 85 per cent of the Duma's 450 seats. The ballot was billed as a referendum on Mr Putin's policies, which it was, and more. Mr Putin has through no-nonsense rule disciplined polarising tendencies and made good use of the prosperity brought by high energy prices to revive living standards. Russia has recorded average growth rates of 7 per cent during his presidency. The stock market is buoyant, consumerism has returned. The health and longevity of Russians laid low by rampant alcoholism in the post-Soviet adjustment era have improved.
The United States and pockets of ex-Warsaw Pact resentments in the European Union are unhappy that a man they regard as an autocrat, the destroyer of nascent democratic institutions begun by Mr Mikhail Gorbachev, has been retained by the voters to be the country's eminence grise after his presidential term ends in March. These critics, especially in America, have fanciful ideas of what they think Russians should want. The voters are smarter, all glory to them. Mr Gorbachev himself said in interviews that, outside Russia, Western rose-tinted opinion saw 1990s Russia as a beacon of democratic renewal whereas, for Russians, this was a time of political turmoil and personal hardship. He thinks the US capitalised on Russia's frailities of that period and is now demonising the new Russia, and Mr Putin personally, because they challenge America's notion of supremacy.
An important outcome of the Duma vote is that Russia regains its old status as one pillar in a world grown multipolar. This will be welcomed, not least in East Asia and Latin America. A revealing postcript to the election is that the United Russia party scored big majorities in the Muslim republics of Ingushetia and Chechnya. Mr Putin does not waffle and he carries a big stick. He has proved that his prescriptions have brought results for all of Russia, across its 22 time zones. What position he will hold after he completes the maximum two terms matters little, in the circumstances.
Russia does itself a favour
RUSSIA was the big winner in the weekend's parliamentary election for the Duma. In voting strongly for President Vladimir Putin's party, the Russian people endorsed foremost the healing effects that the regional stability and the economic gains of the past few years are having on the national spirit. The nation that was parodied prematurely in some Western capitals as a spent force, after the reversals of the Gorbachev-Yeltsin years, will come out the stronger. Its influence as a balancing force in international affairs will grow with its new-found prestige. Incomplete results gave Mr Putin's party, United Russia, and its allies some 85 per cent of the Duma's 450 seats. The ballot was billed as a referendum on Mr Putin's policies, which it was, and more. Mr Putin has through no-nonsense rule disciplined polarising tendencies and made good use of the prosperity brought by high energy prices to revive living standards. Russia has recorded average growth rates of 7 per cent during his presidency. The stock market is buoyant, consumerism has returned. The health and longevity of Russians laid low by rampant alcoholism in the post-Soviet adjustment era have improved.
The United States and pockets of ex-Warsaw Pact resentments in the European Union are unhappy that a man they regard as an autocrat, the destroyer of nascent democratic institutions begun by Mr Mikhail Gorbachev, has been retained by the voters to be the country's eminence grise after his presidential term ends in March. These critics, especially in America, have fanciful ideas of what they think Russians should want. The voters are smarter, all glory to them. Mr Gorbachev himself said in interviews that, outside Russia, Western rose-tinted opinion saw 1990s Russia as a beacon of democratic renewal whereas, for Russians, this was a time of political turmoil and personal hardship. He thinks the US capitalised on Russia's frailities of that period and is now demonising the new Russia, and Mr Putin personally, because they challenge America's notion of supremacy.
An important outcome of the Duma vote is that Russia regains its old status as one pillar in a world grown multipolar. This will be welcomed, not least in East Asia and Latin America. A revealing postcript to the election is that the United Russia party scored big majorities in the Muslim republics of Ingushetia and Chechnya. Mr Putin does not waffle and he carries a big stick. He has proved that his prescriptions have brought results for all of Russia, across its 22 time zones. What position he will hold after he completes the maximum two terms matters little, in the circumstances.
Water politics and nature
Dec 5, 2007
Water politics and nature
WATER scarcity is not a mental picture people have of climate change. Rising waters are. National Geographic in an advance report drawn from a scientific journal has added an expanding tropical zone, by as much as 500km on either side of the Equator, as a new nature-warping phenomenon of global warming. It is scientists' misfortune that governments everywhere have a low attention threshold for esoterica such as this. But governments should be all ears when scientists present the issue of water shortage and consequent resource wars in graphic terms. This makes the matter of melting glaciers in the Tibetan plateau of the Himalayas, raised this week at the inaugural Asia-Pacific water conference in Japan, one more reason climate change should not be treated as the scientific equivalent of doodling. Governments need to get serious about it.
The Himalayan glaciers which feed river systems in China, South Asia and South-east Asia have been retreating at a faster rate in the last two decades, as ambient temperatures rose by 2.2 deg C, according to one study. The small print says this rate was more rapid than in the last 100 years. So what, so far? Try this for comprehension: The Himalayan glaciers hold the most plentiful supply of frozen water on Earth, aside from the polar ice caps. In summer months snow melt replenishes Asian rivers which otherwise would run low. More than two billion people in this swathe of the continent depend on the snow melt. What scientists are saying is that, at the accelerated rate of planetary warming, the seasonal rhythm of ebb and flow will sooner or later be disrupted beyond repair, with frightful results. A deluge, with disastrous flooding in China, the subcontinent and mainland South-east Asia, will be followed by a dryout of the river systems over a few decades. Droughts will follow, which will decimate crop cultivation. Almost all the Himalayan glaciers shrank in the last two decades, a doubling in quantity from the mid-20th century on. The World Wide Fund for Nature has said a quarter of the world's glaciers would be gone by 2050.
There is added danger in the sub-Himalayan region from the bursting of glacial lakes. A Japanese mountaineer, Mr Ken Noguchi, told the water conference of how Nepal and Bhutan lived in fear of burst lakes. Asian countries which have damming projects on the upper reaches of rivers, to conserve water stocks and to prevent flooding, invariably cause unhappiness to riparian states downstream. The political dimension of the water resource issue gets all the attention. Should not nations be looking at first principles?
WATER scarcity is not a mental picture people have of climate change. Rising waters are. National Geographic in an advance report drawn from a scientific journal has added an expanding tropical zone, by as much as 500km on either side of the Equator, as a new nature-warping phenomenon of global warming. It is scientists' misfortune that governments everywhere have a low attention threshold for esoterica such as this. But governments should be all ears when scientists present the issue of water shortage and consequent resource wars in graphic terms. This makes the matter of melting glaciers in the Tibetan plateau of the Himalayas, raised this week at the inaugural Asia-Pacific water conference in Japan, one more reason climate change should not be treated as the scientific equivalent of doodling. Governments need to get serious about it.
The Himalayan glaciers which feed river systems in China, South Asia and South-east Asia have been retreating at a faster rate in the last two decades, as ambient temperatures rose by 2.2 deg C, according to one study. The small print says this rate was more rapid than in the last 100 years. So what, so far? Try this for comprehension: The Himalayan glaciers hold the most plentiful supply of frozen water on Earth, aside from the polar ice caps. In summer months snow melt replenishes Asian rivers which otherwise would run low. More than two billion people in this swathe of the continent depend on the snow melt. What scientists are saying is that, at the accelerated rate of planetary warming, the seasonal rhythm of ebb and flow will sooner or later be disrupted beyond repair, with frightful results. A deluge, with disastrous flooding in China, the subcontinent and mainland South-east Asia, will be followed by a dryout of the river systems over a few decades. Droughts will follow, which will decimate crop cultivation. Almost all the Himalayan glaciers shrank in the last two decades, a doubling in quantity from the mid-20th century on. The World Wide Fund for Nature has said a quarter of the world's glaciers would be gone by 2050.
There is added danger in the sub-Himalayan region from the bursting of glacial lakes. A Japanese mountaineer, Mr Ken Noguchi, told the water conference of how Nepal and Bhutan lived in fear of burst lakes. Asian countries which have damming projects on the upper reaches of rivers, to conserve water stocks and to prevent flooding, invariably cause unhappiness to riparian states downstream. The political dimension of the water resource issue gets all the attention. Should not nations be looking at first principles?
Water politics and nature
WATER scarcity is not a mental picture people have of climate change. Rising waters are. National Geographic in an advance report drawn from a scientific journal has added an expanding tropical zone, by as much as 500km on either side of the Equator, as a new nature-warping phenomenon of global warming. It is scientists' misfortune that governments everywhere have a low attention threshold for esoterica such as this. But governments should be all ears when scientists present the issue of water shortage and consequent resource wars in graphic terms. This makes the matter of melting glaciers in the Tibetan plateau of the Himalayas, raised this week at the inaugural Asia-Pacific water conference in Japan, one more reason climate change should not be treated as the scientific equivalent of doodling. Governments need to get serious about it.
The Himalayan glaciers which feed river systems in China, South Asia and South-east Asia have been retreating at a faster rate in the last two decades, as ambient temperatures rose by 2.2 deg C, according to one study. The small print says this rate was more rapid than in the last 100 years. So what, so far? Try this for comprehension: The Himalayan glaciers hold the most plentiful supply of frozen water on Earth, aside from the polar ice caps. In summer months snow melt replenishes Asian rivers which otherwise would run low. More than two billion people in this swathe of the continent depend on the snow melt. What scientists are saying is that, at the accelerated rate of planetary warming, the seasonal rhythm of ebb and flow will sooner or later be disrupted beyond repair, with frightful results. A deluge, with disastrous flooding in China, the subcontinent and mainland South-east Asia, will be followed by a dryout of the river systems over a few decades. Droughts will follow, which will decimate crop cultivation. Almost all the Himalayan glaciers shrank in the last two decades, a doubling in quantity from the mid-20th century on. The World Wide Fund for Nature has said a quarter of the world's glaciers would be gone by 2050.
There is added danger in the sub-Himalayan region from the bursting of glacial lakes. A Japanese mountaineer, Mr Ken Noguchi, told the water conference of how Nepal and Bhutan lived in fear of burst lakes. Asian countries which have damming projects on the upper reaches of rivers, to conserve water stocks and to prevent flooding, invariably cause unhappiness to riparian states downstream. The political dimension of the water resource issue gets all the attention. Should not nations be looking at first principles?
WATER scarcity is not a mental picture people have of climate change. Rising waters are. National Geographic in an advance report drawn from a scientific journal has added an expanding tropical zone, by as much as 500km on either side of the Equator, as a new nature-warping phenomenon of global warming. It is scientists' misfortune that governments everywhere have a low attention threshold for esoterica such as this. But governments should be all ears when scientists present the issue of water shortage and consequent resource wars in graphic terms. This makes the matter of melting glaciers in the Tibetan plateau of the Himalayas, raised this week at the inaugural Asia-Pacific water conference in Japan, one more reason climate change should not be treated as the scientific equivalent of doodling. Governments need to get serious about it.
The Himalayan glaciers which feed river systems in China, South Asia and South-east Asia have been retreating at a faster rate in the last two decades, as ambient temperatures rose by 2.2 deg C, according to one study. The small print says this rate was more rapid than in the last 100 years. So what, so far? Try this for comprehension: The Himalayan glaciers hold the most plentiful supply of frozen water on Earth, aside from the polar ice caps. In summer months snow melt replenishes Asian rivers which otherwise would run low. More than two billion people in this swathe of the continent depend on the snow melt. What scientists are saying is that, at the accelerated rate of planetary warming, the seasonal rhythm of ebb and flow will sooner or later be disrupted beyond repair, with frightful results. A deluge, with disastrous flooding in China, the subcontinent and mainland South-east Asia, will be followed by a dryout of the river systems over a few decades. Droughts will follow, which will decimate crop cultivation. Almost all the Himalayan glaciers shrank in the last two decades, a doubling in quantity from the mid-20th century on. The World Wide Fund for Nature has said a quarter of the world's glaciers would be gone by 2050.
There is added danger in the sub-Himalayan region from the bursting of glacial lakes. A Japanese mountaineer, Mr Ken Noguchi, told the water conference of how Nepal and Bhutan lived in fear of burst lakes. Asian countries which have damming projects on the upper reaches of rivers, to conserve water stocks and to prevent flooding, invariably cause unhappiness to riparian states downstream. The political dimension of the water resource issue gets all the attention. Should not nations be looking at first principles?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)