by Richard Welford rwelford@csr-asia.com
China’s dam industry has become the global leader in the dam construction industry, funded by Chinese financial institutions that have taken the place of the traditional funders such as the World Bank. A new guide from International Rivers, an NGO interested in protecting rivers and the communities around them, is critical of many of the Chinese funded developments. It says that there are huge negative impacts on communities and the environment associated with the dam building. The report focuses on overseas dams that have been built and financed by Chinese companies and encouraged by the Chinese government.
The guide says that as of May this year Chinese companies and financiers had 97 large dam projects in 39 different countries. Many of the projects are located in Asia, but they can be found on every other continent as well. The majority of dams are for hydropower generation.
The Chinese government is keen to support investment in dams in South East Asia, in particular, because it aims to secure regional stability and to facilitate cross-border trade. Such dam projects also lead to employment for Chinese workers.
The Chinese government’s official export credit agency funds most of China’s overseas dams. In Asia its main hydropower projects cover Cambodia, Myanmar, Laos, Malaysia and Nepal. But other investors include the Bank of China and the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China in Nepal and the Goldwater Investment Group and CITIC in Myanmar.
China’s dam industry has a poor social and environmental track record, as shown by projects such as the Three Gorges Dam, according to the guide. A key strategy of Chinese investors is to make previously inaccessible resources accessible. This includes remote areas, politically unstable regions, and parks and other protected areas. Few Chinese dam builders and financiers have adopted environmental policies in line with international standards. And Chinese financiers have provided funding for projects previously rejected by other financing institutions due to non-compliance with social and environmental standards. The Chinese government’s promises of “noninterference in domestic affairs” means that it has been willing to support governments with records of corruption and human rights abuses.
The guide argues that the Chinese government wants to be a responsible and respected international actor. It is interested in international experiences implementing environmental and social standards. But it is not always receptive to direct criticisms raised by western institutions. Concerns raised by southern NGOs, on the other hand, may be better received. Thus, it is important for China’s government, industry, and financial leaders to hear from dam-affected communities and civil society organizations about the problems associated with large dams.
The guide by International Rivers lists all the dams being built and funded from China. But is also goes on to outline various policies and regulation surrounding dam building including those relating to environmental impact assessment, displacement of people and disclosure of information.
China’s environmental laws have been significantly strengthened in recent years, it argues. In September 2003, China’s People’s Congress approved a new Environmental Impact Assessment Law. The law requires that enterprises proposing projects within China with significant environmental impacts must conduct an environmental impact assessment (EIA) prior to project construction. The assessment must be approved by the Ministry of Environmental
Protection (MEP). China’s EIA law requires public participation. This requirement was clarified in February 2006 when MEP (then SEPA) issued “Provisional Measures for Public Participation in Environmental Impact Assessment.” The public participation measures provide basic instructions on: Procedures for disclosing EIAs to the public; When to engage the public in the EIA process; Who should be included in public participation; Methods that can be used to facilitate public participation (hearings, soliciting comments, public forums, expert forums).
China also has laws on the displacement of people for dam projects. The most important of these is the 2006 “Rules of land compensation and people resettlement in medium and large hydraulic and hydroelectricity projects.” This law states: Displaced people must be provided with a level of livelihood similar to or greater than that which they enjoyed prior to dam displacement; Resettlement plans must include economic development plans, not just cash payments for land and resources lost; Resettlement plans should create jobs for displaced people; If rural communities are to be displaced, resettlement plans must include a plan for reclaiming new farmland (to avoid over-crowding in resettlement areas).
While the compensation law applies only to people displaced by dam projects in China, it can serve as a model for the standards Chinese companies should use overseas, says the guide. It is important to note, however, that in practice, few communities displaced by dams in China have received new jobs or training. But they usually do receive some kind of payment for their land.
The guide outlines new regulations on the disclosure of government information came into effect in China in 2008. One new regulation requires that Chinese government offices release information on a timely, regular basis. It also creates a mechanism through which Chinese citizens can demand government information. This regulation may make it easier for citizens and NGOs to access information on the initiation, approval and regulation of overseas dam projects. While China’s laws and regulations are promising, they have been difficult to implement in practice. MEP, many Chinese environmental NGOs, and concerned citizens in China are working hard to strengthen China’s legal safeguards. They are doing so through education and awareness campaigns, legal measures, and by working directly with Chinese companies.
Although these regulations and related initiatives now exist, the guide argues that in many cases there is a failure to adhere to these fully overseas and that they are not always well developed. Whilst some Chinese companies are adhering to other international social and environmental guidelines, it is clear that others are not.
The International Rivers guide points out that there are no laws or regulations that specifically address social and environmental impacts of dams Chinese enterprises build overseas. But in response to mounting criticisms of Chinese companies working overseas, the State Council in October 2006 issued nine Principles Governing the Activities of Foreign Investment Firms. These principles include: Mutual respect, equality and mutual benefit, complementarity, and “win-win” cooperation; Ensuring protection of environmental resources; Caring for and supporting local communities and local people’s livelihoods; Complying with local laws and regulations; Cultivating and protecting the interests of local employees; Strengthening project safety; Creating a friendly environment for public opinion.
SASAC, which supervises China’s state-owned enterprises (SOEs) has taken steps to ensure SOEs set the standard for corporate social responsibility. In January 2008, SASAC issued Corporate Social Responsibility Guidelines for State-owned Enterprises. These standards can be applied to SOEs such as Sinohydro and China Southern Power Grid. The guidelines state that SOEs should “set an example of honesty and trustworthiness, resource conservation, environmental protection, and people centeredness.”
In addition, China Exim Bank and China Development Bank have their own environmental and social responsibility policies. China Development Bank has a brief summary of its environmental policy publicly available on its web site. The policy states, “In recent years, environmental compliance has become an aspect of our loan evaluation process. We will not consider a loan application complete until the applicant has obtained approval from the relevant environmental agencies and we are otherwise satisfied with its environmental compliance.”
The guide also examines some of the campaigns by communities affected by the construction of dams. In particular it looks at the international campaign to save the Salween River in Mynamar and China where a series of 17 dams have forced the resettlement of numerous ethnic minority communities. The dams are also accused of harming downstream fisheries and biodiversity, in general.
The guide encourages campaigns to stop dams or to decrease the human and environmental impacts of dams by using a number of different tactics. These tactics include research, media work, legal approaches, corporate campaigns, legislative tools and peaceful protest. It lays out, in some considerable detail, the types of approaches to take and places considerable emphasis on engagement with funders.
In the past, the World Bank has said that “dams are essential for growth and poverty reduction”. The promotion of poverty-reduction benefits in what it now calls a “high risk, high reward hydraulic infrastructure” has become one of the key drivers of dam construction in developing countries.
Critics, on the other hand, have argued that dam builders have provided little evidence to support the poverty reduction hypothesis and that the 24 countries in the world dependent on hydropower for more than 90% of their electricity are still to be found amongst the world’s least developed nations.
Not surprisingly, it is the large dams that come in for most criticism. Some 40,000 large dams have been built in the last 50 years with reservoirs that cover 400,000 square kilometres. The environmental effects of dams have been the target of many groups that have opposed dam construction. Dams reduce the flow of water downstream and this changes the landscape that the river flows through and, in turn, the flora and fauna along the river. They also impact on seasonal water variations changing the growing pattern of local crops dependent on the river.
A dam also holds back sediments and a river deprived of its sediment load will tend to increase erosion of the downstream channel and banks. Riverbeds are typically eroded by several metres within the first decade following dam construction. This can lower the groundwater table, threatening vegetation, local wells and the floodplain, often requiring irrigation where none was needed in the past.
A river’s estuary, where fresh water meets the sea, is a particularly important ecosystem. It is at the point where 80% of the world’s fish catch comes from and the health of the ecosystem is very much tied up with the volume and timing of the nutrients found in the fresh water.
In addition, the storage of water in dams delays and reduces floods downstream and this affects those ecosystems linked to the river’s flooding cycle. Plants and animals depend on this cycle for reproduction, hatching and migration. The floods also deposit nutrients on the land, flush out stagnant channels and replenish wetlands. Again, the IRN argues that dams currently threaten 20% of the world’s recognised freshwater species with extinction.
The fact is that most rivers in the world are no longer controlled by nature, but by humans. However, those making the decisions about the fate of rivers often have a narrow agenda linked to short run financial considerations rather than one linked to long term costs and benefits. This whole picture of river manipulation is further complicated by the impact that climate change will have on our efforts to create a water-secure future.
But people, as well as local ecosystems, are affected by dam building. Large dams have forced as many as 80 million people from their lands. Indigenous, tribal and peasant communities have been particularly badly hit and in many cases have been economically, culturally and psychologically devastated. Local cultures linked to land rights, burial grounds and local knowledge have often disappeared.
Those people displaced by the building of dams are perhaps the most visible. But other people are affected downstream because of lost land, lost canals and damaged irrigation opportunities. They have also been impacted by roads, power lines and other infrastructure associated with servicing the dam and power generation.
We are now seeing, therefore, a growth of protests against dams. The human rights problems and potential environmental devastation caused by dam projects have encouraged affected people’s groups, environmental and social activists and even some development agencies to campaign against ongoing and proposed projects. Any investment surrounded in controversy and with prospects of protests and media attention looks much more risky and this has got the investment community thinking hard.
So, what of corporate social responsibility? Critics of large dams have often called for water and energy planning to be made transparent, comprehensive, participatory and accountable. There is no suggestion, here at least, that there should necessarily be a blanket ban on dam building but that assessments relating to the construction of dams should be much more thorough and consultative. Even the much criticised World Bank says that “concepts of stakeholder involvement and options assessment imply a change in investment patterns for water and energy development. More resources and time will be spent at the upstream end of planning. Benefits such as the early elimination of unacceptable projects, improved project portfolios, greater public acceptance, improved access to external funding, and lower overall costs outweigh the incremental time and costs spent prior to decision-making”.
Clearly, there needs to be a better consideration of other options before building a dam. Those affected by a dam should be involved in considering those options and encouraged to participate in the decision-making. A number of smaller dams along a river may do less damage then one large dam for example. Others, however, point to decentralised alternatives to damming such as the promotion of geothermal power, biogas development, solar systems for local energy provision and even smaller scale water projects such as water wheels and water driven turbines.
Corporate social responsibility has always been about active engagement, two-way dialogue and a full assessment of all options involved in an investment project. Sadly, to date that has often been lacking in the building of dams, especially Chinese overseas dams. ■
http://csr-asia.com/weekly_detail.php?id=11477
Thursday, September 11, 2008
China's overseas dams: development or destruction?
Japanese distiller recalls liquor in tainted rice scare
Photo: AFP
Thursday September 11, 7:16 PM
TOKYO (AFP) - A major Japanese beverage company said Thursday it was recalling some 650,000 bottles of distilled spirits it had made with pesticide-tainted rice which was illegally marketed as edible.
Asahi Breweries Ltd. said it was voluntarily recalling four brands of "imo shochu", a popular liquor produced mostly from sweet potatoes, at a cost of about 1.5 billion yen (14 million dollars).
The rice was used since June in the process of fermenting sweet potatoes for the spirits.
"We have not detected any traces of agrochemical residues in end products," a company spokesman said, adding that the recall was aimed at dispelling consumer worries.
Asahi was the first major beverage company to be hit by a scandal involving a rice processing company, Mikasa Foods, which has resold non-edible rice it had purchased from the government for industrial use.
The products were part of rice imported by the Japanese government from China, Vietnam and other countries under its international commitment to open its rice market.
ADVERTISEMENT
The rice had been set aside as a problem product after it was found to be contaminated with excessive levels of toxins, or deteriorated with fungi, or affected by other factors in storage.
The government sold the products to private dealers on condition that they be resold for industrial use, such as making glue, but not for human consumption.
But the farm ministry said this week that Mikasa had sold the tainted rice to distillers as well as makers of snacks, such as Japanese rice crackers, in hopes of making more profits.
Russia's recognition of Georgian areas raises hopes of its own separatists
By Ellen Barry
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
MOSCOW: Tatarstan is a long way from South Ossetia. While South Ossetia is a poor border region of Georgia battered by war, Tatarstan is an economic powerhouse in the heart of Russia, boasting both oil reserves and the political stability that is catnip to investors.
But the two places have one thing in common: Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, both have given rise to separatist movements. And when President Dmitri Medvedev of Russia formally recognized the breakaway areas of South Ossetia and Abkhazia as independent nations two weeks ago, activists in Kazan, the Tatar capital, took notice.
An association of nationalist groups, the All-Tatar Civic Center, swiftly published an appeal that "for the first time in recent history, Russia has recognized the state independence of its own citizens" and expressed the devout wish that Tatarstan would be next. The declaration was far-fetched, its authors knew: One of Vladimir Putin's signal achievements as Medvedev's predecessor was to suppress separatism. The Tatar movement was at its lowest ebb in 20 years.
But Moscow's decision to recognize South Ossetia and Abkhazia made Tatarstan's cause seem, as Rashit Akhmetov put it, "not hopeless."
Akhmetov, editor in chief of Zvezda Povolzhya, an opposition newspaper in Kazan, said, "Russia has lost the moral right not to recognize us."
Medvedev's decision to formally recognize the two disputed areas in Georgia — an option long debated in Moscow's foreign policy circles — has had far-reaching consequences.
Most immediately, it has deepened the rift between Russia and its erstwhile negotiating partners in the West. But some also see Moscow departing from its longstanding insistence on territorial integrity, leaving an opening for ethnic groups within its borders to demand autonomy or independence.
"In the long term, they could have signed their own death warrant," said Lawrence Scott Sheets, the Caucasus program director for the International Crisis Group, an independent organization that tries to prevent and resolve global conflicts. "It's an abstraction now, but 20 years down the road, it won't be such an abstraction."
Moscow's position is that South Ossetia and Abkhazia were extreme situations, in which decisions were driven by the threat to the lives of its citizens. Russian troops poured across the border early in August, after Georgian forces attacked civilian areas in the city of Tskhinvali, the South Ossetian capital, with rocket and artillery fire.
The attack made it "completely impossible" to conceive of South Ossetia returning to Georgian control, said Dmitri Peskov, a spokesman for Putin, now Russia's prime minister.
Peskov said Russia stood firmly behind the principle of territorial integrity and saw no major separatist movements within its borders.
"We do have some separatist movements, some extremist elements, especially in the northern Caucasus, but they are very minor," he said. "These are very fragmented and very small groups." He added that the circumstances of South Ossetia and Abkhazia belonged in a "totally different category."
The picture looked very different before Putin took office. In the 1990s, President Boris Yeltsin urged regional leaders to "take as much sovereignty as you can swallow." Movements toward self-rule were taking hold in some of Russia's most valuable territory: in Tatarstan, home not only to an oil industry but also to a major truck factory and an aircraft plant; in Bashkiria, a major source of natural gas; in Komi, a northern province that produces coal.
All this came to a halt in Chechnya, an oil-rich patch of land in the north Caucasus. Chechnya was the only region to declare independence outright. In 1994, Russia sent troops into Chechnya, and two years of fighting left tens of thousands dead. In 1999, amid a crescendo of violence throughout the north Caucasus, Putin, then the prime minister, oversaw a second war that obliterated the Chechen rebel movement
The message from Moscow — empowered and newly rich with petrodollars — was clear. "Russia has shown the inhuman price it will pay to preserve its territorial integrity," said Sergei Karaganov, a political scientist who leads the Council for Foreign and Defense Policy. "The fighting in Chechnya was not just against the Chechen rebels, it was against movements all around." In fact, the threat of separatism has largely faded from the Russian landscape, and Putin has granted enough freedom to quiet internal opposition in many of Russia's trouble spots. Even in the north Caucasus, one of Russia's most volatile regions, the government now helps Muslims with visas and airfare to go on the pilgrimage to Mecca, the hajj. At the same time, Putin greatly strengthened his executive power, abolishing the direct election of governors in 2004. Handpicked bosses improved local economies and clamped down harshly on opposition groups.
Tatarstan was a case in point. Tatars still commemorate the day in 1552 when Kazan fell to Ivan the Terrible, absorbing their country into Holy Russia.
When Yeltsin encouraged regions to assume sovereignty, Tatarstan complied with gusto, adopting its own taxes and license plates. Gleaming new mosques competed with Kazan's onion domes, and ethnic Tatars, who made up 48 percent of the population to the Russians' 43 percent, opened their own schools. The Tatar Parliament declared that local conscripts could not fight outside the Volga region.
When Putin eliminated regional elections, the Tatar president, Mintimer Shaimiyev, protested vociferously, calling the plan a "forced and painful measure." But in the years that followed, Akhmetov, the editor of the opposition newspaper in Kazan, saw prospects for autonomy drop to a new low.
"We understood that our president could be removed at any time, within 24 hours," Akhmetov said. But Medvedev's decision to recognize South Ossetia and Abkhazia, he said, "created a precedent, kind of a guideline" for gaining independence. Moscow is confident that it wields strict control over politics in the outlying regions, he said, but that could change in 10 or 20 years.
"The seeds of self-destruction are built into the authoritarian system," Akhmetov said. "It's Moscow's mistake."
A similar stirring came out of Bashkortostan, a major petrochemical center where ethnic Bashkirs make up about 30 percent of the population. A small organization called Kuk Bure, which has pushed for the Bashkir language to be required in public schools, issued a manifesto accusing Moscow of "double standards" for championing ethnic groups like the Abkhaz and Ossetians while ignoring their platform.
"The time has come to ask each federal official — and they have multiplied by the thousands in Bashkortostan in recent years — 'What are you doing for the Bashkir people?' " said the statement, which was posted on the group's Web site.
Timur Mukhtarov, a lawyer and one of the movement's co-founders, said the group's mission stopped far short of independence. Though some may discuss that notion in private, laws against extremism have made it dangerous to espouse publicly.
At 31, he feels some nostalgia for the Yeltsin years, a time of "more chaos, but less fear."
The Russian stand for self-determination in Georgia may not change Moscow's attitude toward Bashkortostan, he said, "but at least it gives us something to discuss."
Russia's act could also stir movements in the northwest Caucasus, where a number of groups called for autonomy or separation in the early 1990s, said Charles King, a professor of international affairs and government at Georgetown University. Those calls had gone quiet since Putin took power.
But few people have watched events in Abkhazia more closely than their ethnic kin, the Circassians. Many Circassians still live in Russia, in the republics of Kabardino-Balkariya, Karachayevo-Cherkesiya and Adygeya; the vast majority live outside Russia yet look back at the Caucasus as their homeland.
"They're ecstatic," said Professor King, author of "The Ghost of Freedom: A History of the Caucasus." "Their cousins have gotten independence. They see this as something quite big, that could have real implications for Russia."
South Africa's Human Rights Reputation Tarnished
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
By Carroll Bogert
Published in The Sunday Independent
September 7, 2008
Supporters of human rights around the world watched in joy 14 years ago as apartheid ended and a new era of democratic governance began in South Africa. But many of us are now watching in dismay as the country's foreign policy often aligns with global enemies of human rights.
The South African government's unwillingness to confront President Robert Mugabe on his extremely abusive governance of Zimbabwe is well known to South Africans, and justly controversial.
Less well known are the many other important international issues on which the South African government has sided with reactionary rather than progressive forces.
As a member of the United Nations security council for two years, South Africa has had many opportunities to speak out forcefully for human rights - or to join those speaking out against them. Again and again, it has chosen the latter course.
Burma is the best-known case. With Russia and China, South Africa has blocked efforts to condemn the military government's lethal crackdown on peaceful protesters last year.
Perhaps the department of foreign affairs has forgotten that, when Burma was still democratic, it demanded that the evils of apartheid, including the Sharpeville massacre of 1960, should be brought before the security council.
The international solidarity movement against apartheid constantly confronted the argument that what happened inside a country's borders was none of the rest of the world's business. That is precisely the argument that the South African government now makes frequently at the security council. It narrowly defines what constitutes a "threat to international peace and security", and insists that all other matters be taken up at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.
Meanwhile, in Geneva, outside the limelight, South Africa has demonstrated a similar pattern - failing to support key resolutions condemning human rights abuses in countries from Iran to Uzbekistan, and aligning itself with countries whose human rights records are, by anyone's standard, abysmal.
At the UN this month, a diplomatic struggle is shaping up to be South Africa's lowest moment yet. The issue is Darfur, and more specifically the request by the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) for an arrest warrant for Omar al-Bashir, the Sudanese president. The accusation: genocide and crimes against humanity, the world's most serious crimes.
News of the warrant request was greeted with joy among the millions of Darfuris who have been driven from their homes by government forces acting in concert with janjaweed militias. Tens of thousands of Africans have died in this civil war, most of them civilians, and most of them as a result of Sudanese government actions.
The Sudanese government has begun a concerted campaign to evade justice for these crimes and the South African government has become its accomplice. Together with Libya, also on the security council, South Africa has been leading an effort to suspend the International Criminal Court's request for the next 12 months.
Suspending the request for an arrest warrant would send a clear signal, not only to the Sudanese government, but also to tyrants everywhere that they can continue to cheat justice through international political machination.
I was present at the negotiations on the treaty for the International Criminal Court 10 years ago in Rome, and listened with admiration to the speech of Dullah Omar, the South African justice minister, in ringing support of this important new human rights institution. Achieving a strong treaty at those talks was an uphill battle, but we won. Only the steadfast leadership of South Africa, along with a handful of others, overcame the opposition of major powers such as the United States, China and Israel.
The International Criminal Court is not an anti-African institution, as some have alleged. It is a pro-African institution: pro-civilians in Darfur whose villages have been burned to the ground, pro-women in the Democratic Republic of Congo who have been raped in wartime, pro-children in northern Uganda who have been abducted as child soldiers. It is opposed to government and rebel leaders responsible for such crimes, no matter where they live.
The prosecutor has also been looking into situations in Colombia and Afghanistan, as well as crimes committed in the Russian-Georgian armed conflict.
It is truly heartbreaking to see South Africa preparing to abandon the court at a critical juncture in its history. Sadly, it appears to be part of a trend that is putting Pretoria's foreign policy on the wrong side of history.
Perhaps only a fervent and sustained outcry from South African society can restore the country to its rightful path and begin to repair the damage that has already been done to its reputation.
Carroll Bogert is Associate Director of Human Rights Watch
Posted by Umar Ahmed at 08:11
Labels: Human Rights Watch, South Africa, Zimbabwe
http://www.themodernintelligencer.com/2008/09/south-africas-human-rights-reputation.html
This Week In Petroleum
10 September 2008 @ 02:12 pm EST
Feeling the Pinch: Gasoline Prices Vary (a lot) from Country to Country
Whether Americans decided against vacations this summeror at least made them more efficient or closer to home ("staycations")or are carpooling or using more public transportation, the message is clear: sustained high retail prices for motor gasoline are having an impact on the American driver. U.S. gasoline demand, according to the Energy Information Administration (EIA), declined by 2.3 percent in May and 4.4 percent in June, compared with the same time periods a year ago. This reflected the largest decline in year-ago gasoline demand in May since 1980 and the fifth-largest year-ago decline in any May since at least 1945. For June the comparisons are even more dramatic, with the year-ago decline this June the largest since 1980 and the third-largest since 1945.
Americans have also been consuming less oil overall. Total oil consumption data from the first half of 2008 compared with the first half of 2007 show that Americans consumed, on average, 925,000 barrels per day (or 4.5 percent) less. Over the same period, the United Kingdom, France, and Italy also posted continued declines in oil consumption, while consumption in the rest of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries was relatively flat. According to EIAs latest Short-Term Energy Outlook OECD countries consumed about 1 million barrels per day less in the first half of 2008 than in the first half of 2007.
Over the same period, non-OECD countries accounted for about 1.3 million barrels per day of increased consumption, with significant growth taking place in China, the Middle East, and Latin America. The reasons for this increase include the faster-growing economies of the developing world and their energy-intensive industrial sectors. A key reason for the sharp contrast in oil consumption trends in the OECD and non-OECD countries is differences in retail prices, as shown in the figure below.
Many governments intentionally keep retail fuel prices low through subsidies or price caps. However, with the price of crude oil increasing two-fold over the year between June 2007 and June 2008, the cost of maintaining such arrangements may have begun to outweigh the benefits, especially for net oil importers. In Bangladesh, Brazil, Brunei, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Malaysia, Burma (Myanmar), Pakistan, South Africa, Sri Lanka, and Thailand, governments were forced to relax price controls despite serious inflation concerns due to strong economic growth. In June 2008, China announced plans to increase the price of motor gasoline and diesel by roughly 17 percent (42 cents per gallon) each, bringing Chinese prices closer to global prices.
The net oil exporters can avoid implementing price reforms longer than the net importers, but the increasing disparity in world retail prices creates a strong incentive to supply the export market over the domestic market. Iran, for example, is a country where the low retail price for gasoline and diesel has increased demand to the extent it is now a net importer of both products, despite being the worlds fourth largest oil producer. This has not only led to a high subsidy cost, but also to shortages and the implementation of a gasoline-rationing program. Similarly, Nigeria also relies on product imports to meet its growing demand for transportation fuels. In addition, price policy differentials between neighboring countries have further increased demand by encouraging cross-border smuggling, especially in Nigeria and Venezuela.
The product price subsidies result in lower domestic retail prices than the market would indicate. This makes oil consumption, particularly for transportation fuels, much less sensitive to price changes than it would be otherwise, keeping consumption in those countries artificially high. As a result, countries without subsidies find their prices driven up and their demand driven lower than would otherwise have been the case in order to balance world oil supply and demand.
U.S. Gasoline and Diesel Price Drops Persist
The U.S. average retail price for regular gasoline fell for the ninth consecutive week, dropping another 3.2 cents to 364.8 cents per gallon. Unlike last week when prices increased slightly in the Gulf Coast and the Lower Atlantic portion of the East Coast, this week prices declined in all regions of the country. The price on the East Coast fell 2.2 cents to 360.9 cents per gallon. The average price in the Midwest slid 3.7 cents to 363.6 cents per gallon. Reversing a portion of last weeks increase, the price in the Gulf Coast dipped by 2.7 cents to 355.1 cents per gallon, and remained the lowest average price of any region. The price in the Rocky Mountains fell for the seventh consecutive week, dropping 4.6 cents to 376.7 cents per gallon. On the West Coast, the average price has now fallen for eleven straight weeks, sliding another 4.6 cents to hit 381.3 cents per gallon. That price has plunged 64.7 cents since its record high set on June 23. Although the West Coast price remains the highest average regional price in the Nation, the differential between the national average and the average price on the West Coast has narrowed by more than 21 cents since that June 23 all-time regional high. The price in California dropped 4.6 cents to 385.9 cents per gallon.
For the eighth week in a row, diesel prices dropped in all regions of the U.S. The average U.S. retail diesel price slumped 6.2 cents to 405.9 cents per gallon, a cumulative plummet of more than 70 cents from the all-time high set on July 14. Nonetheless, the price remained 113.5 cents higher than a year ago. The average price on the East Coast dropped 6.9 cents to 410 cents per gallon. The price in the Midwest slipped 5.1 cents, hitting 401.5 cents per gallon. The price in the Gulf Coast dropped 5.3 cents to tie with the Midwest for the lowest price in the Nation at 401.5 cents per gallon. The price in the Rocky Mountains tumbled 7.9 cents, to 410.5 cents per gallon. Plunging 9.2 cents, the average price on the West Coast reached 415.6 cents per gallon. In California, the price fell to 418.5 cents per gallon, a drop of 9.7 cents.
Propane Inventories Push Higher Despite Hurricane Disruption
Primary supplies of propane managed to push higher by over 1.5 million barrels despite the disruption by Hurricane Gustav last week. With last weeks build, total propane inventories stood at an estimated 54.5 million barrels as of September 5, 2008, a level that continued to track below the average range for this time of year. Despite a small drop in the East Coast measuring 0.1 million barrels, inventory gains were reported in all other major regions last week. The largest gain was in the Midwest with a 1.2 million-barrel increase, followed by a 0.3 million-barrel increase in Gulf Coast inventories. During this same time, the combined Rocky Mountain/West Coast region showed a modest 0.1 million-barrel gain. Propylene non-fuel use inventories remained relatively flat last week but accounted for a smaller 5.9 percent share of total propane/propylene inventories from the prior weeks 6.1 percent share.
UN to consider request for Myanmar junta's seat
The Associated PressPublished:
September 10, 2008 UNITED NATIONS:
Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon will ask a committee to consider a request from the winners of Myanmar's 1990 elections to replace the country's current military junta representatives at the United Nations, the U.N. said Wednesday.
The letter from pro-democracy candidates elected to parliament 18 years ago challenged the legitimacy of the military government that refused to cede power after a landslide victory by opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy. The junta has ruled Myanmar, also known as Burma, ever since.
U.N. spokeswoman Michele Montas said any decision on who should represent a country at the United Nations is up to the General Assembly's Credentials Committee, which will meet soon after the 63rd session of the assembly opens on Sept. 16. World leaders will arrive the following week for their annual ministerial meeting.
"The secretary-general can only convey this letter ... (and) it will be conveyed," she said.
Daw San San, vice president of the Members of Parliament Union (Burma), said in the letter obtained by The Associated Press that the organization has set up a permanent mission to the United Nations and has appointed U Thein Oo as its permanent representative to the U.N.
"His excellency U Thein Oo is instructed to represent the people of Burma and the legitimate, democratically elected members of parliament in all organs of the United Nations," San said.
Oo was identified as an elected representative from Mandalay.
Myanmar's U.N. Mission said Ambassador Kyaw Tint Swe was not in his office Wednesday afternoon to comment.
The military has ruled Myanmar since 1962 and has been widely criticized for suppressing basic freedoms. The current junta, which took power in 1988 after crushing pro-democracy demonstrations, held general elections in 1990 but refused to cede power to Suu Kyi's NLD. Since then, the country has been in political deadlock.
Suu Kyi has been in prison or under house arrest for more than 12 of the past 18 years. For about the last three weeks, the 63-year-old Nobel Peace Prize winner has refused daily food deliveries to her home to protest her ongoing detention, according to her political party.
http://www.iht. com/articles/ ap/2008/09/ 10/news/UN- UN-Myanmar- Credentials. php
Dictatorial rule continues in Burma
Media Credit: Jim Moldenhauer / Daily Vidette Photo Editor
Professor Tun Myint of the Department of Political Science at Carleton College presented "Explaining Doggedness of Dictatorial Rules in Burma/Myanmar?" at International Seminar Series Wednesday afternoon.
Tun Myint, assistant professor of political science at Carleton College in Northfield, Minn., spoke about the prolonged history of struggles between the Burmese government and its citizens in the Bone Student Center Wednesday afternoon.
The presentation, "Explaining Doggedness of Dictatorial Rules in Burma/Myanmar," focused on the history of military rule in Burma and how the legitimacy of the government has come under constant question.
"Burma will continue to struggle for legitimacy until its government is replaced by a more democratic one," Myint said.
"Legitimacy will come when there is a strong sense of religious and cultural foundation effectively built into the government's soul."
Burma, the largest country by geographical area in southeast Asia, has been controlled by its military since 1962. There have been many protests against the government, but few have had any success.
According to Dr. Te-Yu Wang, professor of politics and government, Myint spent two years in Burma as a student activist.
"It's rare to find an expert who was actually there opposing the government," Wang said. "We were just lucky to get him for this presentation."
In order to legitimize the Burmese government, the social foundation of Burma needs to be better defined, according to Myint.
"Without social foundations, no roots of democracy can exist," Myint said. "So far, government has failed to establish a law system based on social foundations."
There are four main social foundations to consider, according to Myint.
"The most important one is defining religious views," Myint said. "Eighty-nine percent of the Burmese population is Buddhist, so teaching of Buddha is essential."
Another important social foundation essential to Burmese life is teaching karma.
"No single creator exists in Buddhism," Myint said. "You are your own creator."
"For example, if you look at a piece of wood, it is just wood, but if you put pieces of wood together, you call it a table. You created it."
The final two social foundations are creating a specific language and naming system.
In addition to successfully building social foundations into the government, Burma faces other challenges in its quest for legitimacy.
"The government needs to think outside the box," Myint said. "They need to institute a framework that will meet the needs of the self-governing nature of the citizens. A lot of citizens do not even have the basic needs necessary for survival."
Myint's presentation was part of the International Seminar Series, available to the public every Wednesday at noon on the third floor of the Bone Student Center.
http://media.www.dailyvidette.com/media/storage/paper420/news/2008/09/11/News/Dictatorial.Rule.Continues.In.Burma-3424596.shtml
Thai Ruling Party Re-nominates Samak for Prime Minister
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By SUTIN WANNABOVORN / AP WRITER Thursday, September 11, 2008
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BANGKOK — Thailand's ruling party endorsed ousted leader Samak Sundaravej to return as prime minister Thursday despite misgivings by some of its coalition partners, intensifying the country's political deadlock
A two-hour meeting of Samak's People's Power Party ended with him being chosen as its prime ministerial candidate, said party spokesman Kuthep Saikrajang.
Thailand's ousted Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej tours a fresh market before holding his cabinet meeting on Tuesday in Udon Thani province, about 580 km (360 miles) east of Bangkok. (Photo: Reuters)
"A majority of the party members voted to reappoint (Samak) to be the prime minister as he is the leader of our party. So he is the best choice," Kuthep told reporters.
Samak was forced out of office Tuesday by a Constitutional Court ruling that found he had violated the constitution by being paid to host television cooking shows while in office. Since then the People's Power Party and its five coalition partners have been running a caretaker government.
"I thank the party for nominating me," Samak told reporters Thursday. "I am accepting the nomination in order to protect democracy in the country."
Samak's ouster was the latest political embarrassment for Thailand, where anti-government protesters have occupied the prime minister's office compound since Aug. 26. Protesters initially demanded Samak's resignation and now say they'll stay put until a suitable replacement is appointed.
Samak's re-nomination, however, was not endorsed wholeheartedly by the other five parties, leaving the country mired in a political deadlock that has raised fears of instability, economic chaos and even a military coup.
Some of the coalition partners said they accepted the People's Power Party's right to nominate Samak, but didn't necessarily agree with the choice.
"We honor the core party's nomination, but we think the new prime minister should be someone who can help resolve the political crisis," Somsak Prisana-anantakul of Chart Thai Party, the second-largest party in the coalition, told a joint news conference by representatives of all six parties in the coalition.
The ruling party's vote does not automatically make Samak the prime minister. The nomination will be tested by a vote Friday in the 480-seat Parliament, where the People's Power Party has 223 seats, 17 short of a majority.
The other five parties in the coalition control 83 seats while the opposition Democrat Party has 165 seats. The remaining seats are vacant.
"You will see in Parliament tomorrow whether people vote for me or not," Samak said.
The coalition partners refused to say if they will vote for Samak. There also were signs that the coalition would try to persuade the People's Power Party to nominate someone else by Friday.
The joint news conference came hours after Thailand's army chief urged all political parties to form a government of national unity.
He also urged the caretaker government to lift a state of emergency that Samak had imposed Sept. 2.
"It is time to lift the state of emergency," army commander Gen. Anupong Paochinda told reporters, saying he had conveyed that view to the interim leaders. "Keeping it in place will damage the country's economy."
Anupong's comments were likely to fuel speculation of a possible coup to end the crisis, despite his repeated denials of any military intervention.
"A national unity government is the best way to end the ongoing political crisis," Anupong said. "Politicians should sacrifice personal interests ... for the sake of peace and national interests."
Democracy in Thailand has been interrupted by 18 military coups since the country became a constitutional monarchy in 1932.
The most recent was in 2006, when the army ousted then Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, who recently fled to Britain to escape corruption charges.
The anti-Samak protesters, known as the People's Alliance for Democracy, call Samak a puppet of Thaksin and accuse him of running the government as a proxy for Thaksin while he is in exile. Thaksin's ouster came after months of street protests by the same alliance.
In the end, it was not the protesters that brought down the 73-year-old Samak.
http://www.irrawaddy.org/article.php?art_id=14228
Nilar Thein Arrested, Sources Say
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By MIN LWIN Thursday, September 11, 2008
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Burmese security forces have reportedly hunted down and arrested the prominent woman activist Nilar Thein, who went into hiding one year ago.
Aung Tun, brother of jailed activist Ko Ko Gyi, told The Irrawaddy on Thursday that Nilar Thein was arrested on Wednesday, but he could provide no further details. Another, unnamed activist said she was seized as she moved hiding places.
In happier times—Kyaw Min Yu, his wife Nilar Thein and their baby daughter Phyu Nay Kyi Min Yu
Nilar Thein went into hiding, leaving her young baby with family members, as police and troops rounded up participants in the mass demonstrations in Rangoon and other cities last August and September.
Nilar Thein’s husband, Kyaw Min Yu, also known as Jimmy, was arrested on August 21, 2007, along with 12 other leaders of the 88 Generation Students group, including Ko Ko Gyi, Min Ko Naing, Htay Win Aung, Min Zeya and Mya Aye. They had led a demonstration on August 19 against sharp increases in the price of fuel and other commodities.
Nilar Thein had already served two terms of imprisonment in Insein and Tharrawaddy prisons for her involvement in political activities.
In March, she and two of her colleagues—Su Su Nway and Phyu Phyu Thin—received the Czech Republic’s Homo Homini award for their promotion of democracy, human rights and nonviolent solutions to political conflicts.
http://www.irrawaddy.org/article.php?art_id=14229
Suu Kyi Meets Her Lawyer Again
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By WAI MOE Thursday, September 11, 2008
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Burma’s detained democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi had a one-hour meeting on Thursday at her home with her lawyer, Kyi Win, according to her party, the National League for Democracy (NLD).
NLD spokesman Win Naing confirmed the meeting but was unable to give any further details. It’s feared that Suu Kyi is on a hunger strike after refusing deliveries of food and other household supplies for more than three weeks.
NLD sources said Kyi Win was routinely questioned by the police special branch after his meeting with Suu Kyi.
Kyi Win last visited Suu Kyi on September 1, and afterwards reported that she had made no mention of a hunger strike. He quoted her as saying: “I am well, but I have lost some weight. I am a little tired and I need to rest.”
In a statement on September 5, the NLD expressed concern about Suu Kyi’s welfare and said she was refusing food supplies “in protest against ... her unlawful detention under the security law."
NLD spokesman Nyan Win said Suu Kyi and her lawyer had discussed at the September 1 meeting a lawsuit she is bringing against her continuing detention, which was extended in May. She has been under house arrest since May 2003.
Kyi Win had two meetings with Suu Kyi last month, on August 8 and August 17.
Posts
