http://washingtonindependent.com/36807/when-burma-policy-is-really-china-policy
By Mike Lillis 4/1/09 12:20 PM
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton made headlines in February when, during a spin through Asia, she revealed that the Obama administration is reviewing its Burma policy, in search of more effective ways to sway the tyrannical military regime.
“Clearly, the path we have taken in imposing sanctions hasn’t influenced the Burmese junta,” she told students at Tokyo University.
Today, Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) weighs in with a message for the White House: “Stay the course” on Burma policy, particularly as it pertains to support for Aung San Suu Kyi, the Nobel-Prize winning head of the National League for Democracy who’s been under house arrest on and off (mostly on) since 1990. From an op-ed in The Boston Globe today:
While it may be expedient for some diplomats and aid workers to marginalize the National League for Democracy, Clinton must recognize that no political reconciliation in Burma is possible without that party’s full participation along with ethnic representatives who remain imprisoned.
Further down, Gregg reveals what this issue, in his mind, is really about: Stemming the spread of Chinese influence in Southeast Asia.
Burma is more than just a human-rights problem. Illicit drugs, diseases, and refugees migrate to neighboring countries, creating major social — and financial — burdens on local and national governments. Geostrategic interests, including natural resources and access to deep water ports for a growing Chinese navy, should be of increasing concern to the region, as well as the United States and Europe. [...]
It is far from certain that engagement with the military junta will produce any significant reward (tigers don’t change their stripes), and the United States is not in a position to effectively counter China’s growing presence in Burma, whether through high-risk investments or security assistance. The best antidote to a growing Chinese footprint is transparent and accountable governance, long championed by the NLD and one of America’s best exports to the region.
Can’t wait for the next Cold War.
–
TWI is on Twitter. Please follow us here.
Thursday, April 2, 2009
When Burma Policy is Really China Policy
U.S. Plans to Join U.N. Human Rights Council
http://www.christianpost.com/Intl/Human_rights/2009/04/u-s-plans-to-join-u-n-human-rights-council-01/
By Ethan Cole
Christian Post Reporter
Wed, Apr. 01 2009 03:46 PM EDT
The United States will run for an elected seat on the U.N. Human Rights Council this year, the State Department announced Tuesday, reversing the Bush administration's approach to the often discredited Council.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who has recently been criticized for downplaying China’s human rights problem, said human rights is “an essential element of American global foreign policy,” according to The Associated Press.
“With others, we will engage in the work of improving the U.N. human rights system to advance the vision of the U.N. Declaration on Human Rights.”
Clinton, along with U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice, said the United States wants to join the Council to help advance President Barack Obama’s vision for a “new era of engagement” with the global community.
Rice said the administration desires to make the Council more effective by “working from within.”
Under former President George W. Bush, the United States had boycotted the Council for repeated criticism of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians while hardly mentioning or investigating the human rights violations of flagrant abusers such as Sudan, Zimbabwe, China, and Burma.
U.S. House Human Rights Commission co-chairman Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) applauded the Obama administration for the “bold decision” to seek a seat on the U.N. Human rights Council. He promises to work for congressional support for the decision.
“I am very pleased that President Obama has made the bold decision for the U.S. to run for a seat on the United Nations Human Rights Council,” McGovern said in a statement. “I am committed to working closely with other human rights leaders in the Congress to provide the Administration with any support it may need to successfully implement this important decision.”
The State Department’s announcement comes less than a week after the U.N. Human Rights Council adopted a highly-criticized “defamation of religions” resolution. The resolution, spearheaded by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), could be manipulated to legitimize anti-blasphemy laws and repress religious and speech freedom, critics warn.
“It is high time the United States rejoins the rest of the family of nations in making the Council the strongest international human rights entity yet,” McGovern said. “I am certain that under Secretary Clinton's and Ambassador Rice's leadership, the United States will not only mount a successful bid for the seat, but will once again be a leader in the defense of human rights, and will work successfully for the structural changes needed to improve the Council.”
The next election for the Council will take place on May 15 at the U.N. General Assembly in New York.
Dying, and Alone, in Myanmar
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/01/world/asia/01iht-myanmar.html
BANGKOK — The most heartbreaking moment for doctors and nurses treating people with H.I.V./AIDS in Myanmar is the arrival of a new patient. Running short of funds and medications, clinics have started turning dying people away.
“They continue to knock on our doors, even though we can’t take in most of them,” said Joe Belliveau, operations manager of the international aid group Médecins Sans Frontières.
The 23 clinics run by the group, also known as Doctors Without Borders, are the primary dispensers in Myanmar of the antiretroviral drugs that can prolong the lives of those infected with H.I.V., the virus that leads to AIDS. So most of the people it cannot treat are likely to die.
The people of Myanmar, a country that seems to have been marked for suffering, receive little foreign assistance — the country ranks among the lowest per capita for such aid in the world. The same is true for assistance for people with H.I.V./AIDS.
Médecins Sans Frontières estimates that 240,000 people are currently infected with H.I.V. in Myanmar and that 76,000 are in urgent need of antiretroviral drugs. Every year, about 25,000 people with the virus die.
The group’s clinics have been providing 11,000 people with the antiretroviral drugs that keep them alive. The longer they live, the more treatment they need. The group says it is unable to increase its budget there without taking money away from people in need elsewhere.
Last year it made the difficult decision to stop accepting any new patients in order to continue treating the old ones. It has opened its doors a little bit this year, accepting 3,000 new patients, still a fraction of those in need.
“When we stopped last July it was devastating for the staff,“ Belliveau said. “They couldn’t even treat the ones dying on their doorsteps.”
This year, the United Nations-backed Global Fund To Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria has applied for government permits to bring antiretroviral drugs into Myanmar, and the number of people receiving treatment is likely to rise.
But that will only be one step. Fewer than 20 percent of those who need the drugs receive them, either from international groups or, in very small amounts, from the government, Médecins Sans Frontières said in a report released in November.
When a photographer visited a clinic a few months ago, he found anguish and fatalism among the people who had not received the drugs.
“I can only live longer if I have ART,” said one 28-year-old woman, referring to the antiretroviral treatment she needs. “Most of the money and possessions I had are already gone. My family sends me food from the village, but they cannot support my treatment. If I get ART I will be able to live, if not, I will die.”
In one room the photographer found a 49-year-old man, gaunt and weak, sitting on the side of a bed. He had no family, and because of the stigma of the disease he was ashamed to tell his friends or co-workers about it.
“The worst thing for me is the loneliness,” he said.
Two weeks after his picture was taken, he was dead.
US wants common Myanmar strategy with Asia
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hNFsFTOzY4WNkOA3rcRkDIHJVN3Q
WASHINGTON (AFP) — The United States wants to forge a common strategy with Asia to coax military-run Myanmar out of isolation, a senior official said Wednesday, suggesting six-way talks with North Korea could be a model.
President Barack Obama's administration has launched a review of policy on Myanmar, also known as Burma, where a US official last week paid the first visit by a senior envoy in more than seven years.
Deputy Secretary of State Jim Steinberg said the United States wanted a "collaborative and constructive" approach on Myanmar, saying nations with sway over the junta should avoid "recreating a mini version of the Great Game."
"Viewing relations with a notorious authoritarian regime like Burma as a zero-sum game is in no nation's interest," Steinberg told the National Bureau of Asian Research, a think-tank.
"We want to discuss a common approach with ASEAN, with China, with India and with Japan to find a policy that will improve the lives of the people of Burma and promote stability in this key region," he said.
Asian nations including those in ASEAN, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, have mostly tried to engage with Myanmar. China is the key trade and military partner of the junta, which crushed 2007 protests led by Buddhist monks.
The Asian approach contrasts with that of the United States and the European Union, which have slapped sanctions on the regime to pressure it to improve human rights and free pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi.
Steinberg said the US "core objectives" would remain the same after the review -- to seek a "more open" Myanmar that respects the rights of its people and integrates into the global economy.
"We all have a common interest in working together to get a constructive solution that convinces the junta that the path they are pursuing is not in their interest," he said.
He said Myanmar was an issue on which the United States was open to setting up new "flexible" frameworks similar to the six-nation talks on ending North Korea's nuclear program.
"The solution to many global problems will not always be in creating new formal institutions or new bureaucracies," he said.
Copyright © 2009 AFP. All rights reserved. More »
Banking on Beijing
http://www.amconmag.com/article/2009/apr/06/00006/
There are two ways to interpret the fact that China is America’s largest creditor at a moment of stupendous American borrowing. The first is as an economist. And we’ll get to that. But the second is as a thriller writer—or paranoid economic and political nationalist—and it is much, much juicier.
The thriller scenario begins in the blood-red corridors of the Zhongnanhai leadership compound in Beijing, next door to the Forbidden City. Here China’s political elite has been plotting their usurpation of American power for decades. Bent over their Lenovo Thinkpads, the brilliant sons of Communism have engineered nothing less than a global revolution.
Dissolute, wasteful, crass America has been rotting, borrowing and spending, licking lead toys and watching “The Girls Next Door.” Meanwhile, diligent, thrifty, clever China has been preparing to take its place, squirreling away money and buying American debt.
Poor America thinks only in four-year election cycles, cackle the Beijing bureaucrats, whereas China thinks in hundred- and thousand-year spans, in vast historical revolutions that must inevitably turn in their favor.
Does any issue sum it up better than patent infringement? “We can’t do business with a country which pirates ‘The Dark Knight’ and Microsoft Office,” screams America. “Fine,” say the Chinese, “But did we ever see a penny from our invention of paper?”
And so, in the spring of 2009, the time came for China to spring its trap.
As with the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand in 1914, no one believed so trivial an incident as the hassling of a U.S. naval ship in the waters of the South China Sea could precipitate the events that followed.
Sunday, March 8, 75 miles south of Hainan Island. The USNS Impeccable was cruising in international waters, dragging behind it a Surveillance Towed Array Sensor System (SURTASS), a listening device used to pick up underwater acoustical data, notably submarine movements.
Suddenly, five Chinese boats appeared and surrounded it, one coming within 25 feet. A Chinese sailor produced a grappling hook and tried to snag the Impeccable’s SURTASS. The Impeccable’s crew sprayed him and his ship with a fire hose. The Chinese sailors undressed down to their underwear and kept coming. One boat tossed wood into the water ahead of the Impeccable, forcing it to stop. Two hours later, Chinese fighter planes flew low over the American ship.
The Impeccable’s captain said Chinese harassment had increased markedly during the previous week, but he had no idea why. The Pentagon maintained that the Chinese have vastly under-reported their military spending and cloaked their intentions for years. Was the truth now starting to emerge? Was China’s pesky aggression a sign of worse to come?
The following Friday, March 13, China’s premier, Wen Jiabao, followed the military attack with an assault on America’s credit-worthiness. “We have lent a huge amount of money to the U.S.,” he said. “Of course we are concerned about the safety of our assets. To be honest, I am definitely a little worried.”
With the U.S. Treasury rolling out ever more plans to borrow and spend, this was no time for one of the biggest acquirers of its debt to be making violent choking sounds.
Or was it the perfect time? With America on its knees, was this not the ideal moment to trigger the shift of power from Washington to Beijing? Would China now dump its U.S. assets, render the dollar worthless, and emerge triumphant from the wreckage of the global economy?
Get me Harrison Ford.
The truth may be more mundane—unless, of course, you are a keen follower of the patterns of global credit, in which case these are riveting times.
China’s massive acquisition of American assets in recent years, from Treasury bills to corporate bonds and equities, seems to have many people spooked. The way they talk about it, you would think some tattooed goon, seconded from a Macao casino, had cornered Lady Liberty and was demanding she pay the vigorish.
China, according to this thinking, is not someone to whom you want to owe money, especially if like America you are already in a deep financial hole and asking to dig further. China’s motives are not aligned with America’s interests. Owe them too much and one day you’ll pay a far heavier price than you imagined.
In fact, Chinese lending and U.S. borrowing have become so fundamental to the success of their respective social and economic models, and the stability of the global economy, that a quick unraveling would be a form of mutually assured destruction. There is no easy way out of the relationship for either country unless they wish to tumble like Holmes and Moriarty into the roaring Reichenbach Falls.
China’s huge dollar reserves are merely a symptom of an economic fix of its own making. Ever since Deng Xiaoping introduced his economic reforms to China 30 years ago, the country’s growth has been driven by exports—mostly to the United States and Europe.
The export focus led to the creation of millions of manufacturing jobs, which in turn served the primary goal of China’s leaders, to ensure social stability through employment and prosperity. China’s factories duly became the last stop on the global assembly line, taking in imports from more advanced Asian economies such as South Korea, Taiwan, and Japan, repackaging them, and sending them off by container ship.
Crucial to this strategy was a weak currency. If the renminbi climbed, as it should have given China’s growing economic power, the value of Chinese exports would rise and their competitiveness fall. So Beijing acted aggressively to keep the renminbi at a consistent level against the dollar. Until 2005, there was a fixed peg. Since then, the renminbi has been allowed to float and has drifted up by around 20 percent, though it still trades well below where most economists believe it should.
How the Chinese achieved this explains much of the present situation. First, the Chinese central bank simply printed renminbi to dilute the existing pool and buy foreign currencies. Then, fearing inflation, they bought back their own currency by issuing bonds and raising capital requirements on Chinese banks, which must now turn over some 20 percent of their cash deposits to the government.
In addition, China lent to its biggest export market by investing in dollar-denominated securities, notably those issued by the United States Treasury and government agencies like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. This kept the dollar healthy and Chinese exports relatively cheap.
For years, this policy of keeping the renminbi low against the dollar and using the dollar trade surplus to lend back to the United States to buy more Chinese goods worked. But it was a policy, like a Ponzi scheme, that became all but impossible to reverse and was merely putting off the cost China would one day have to pay for its explosive growth.
As Brad Setser, a global economic analyst at the Council on Foreign Relations, has written, “The benefits—rapid export growth, lots of investment in the export sector—associated with China’s exchange rate policy were front-loaded while the costs—export dependence, losses on China’s reserves—were back-loaded. The bill for subsidizing China’s exports during the boom is just now coming due.”
One consequence of this is that China’s leaders now view America’s economic challenges from two different, often conflicting, perspectives. On the one hand, China is America’s largest foreign creditor. U.S. Treasury and government agency securities are now estimated to comprise $1.25 trillion of China’s American portfolio. Another $250 billion or so is believed to be split between U.S. corporate bonds, money-market funds, and equities. American assets are believed to comprise 70 percent of China’s foreign reserves, with most of the rest held in euros. The numbers are murky as China’s foreign investments are handled by a number of entities, some in Hong Kong, whose holdings are not disclosed.
If America runs up more debt than it can reasonably repay, the value of China’s U.S. holdings will fall. Thinking as a lender, China would rather America tightened its belt, cut its expenses, and focused on paying back its existing debts. It wants America to keep the dollar strong and interest rates low to preserve the value of its bonds.
But if the U.S. economy does not recover quickly, whether through government stimulus or other means, China’s entire growth and export-driven economy risks unwinding. If one accepts that the size of China’s reserves is a sign of its devotion to the goal of social stability, of which the export economy is simply the means, then Beijing must be willing President Obama’s borrowing plans to succeed. Dollar be damned, China needs the American consumer to buy Chinese goods and sustain Chinese jobs.
In this context, Wen Jiabao’s fretting over a fall in the value of China’s foreign reserves, its rainy day fund, is like complaining about a dripping tap when water is pouring in from the ceiling. Even if the value of China’s U.S. portfolio were to fall by 30 percent, it would cost the Chinese around the same as their recent $586 billion stimulus plan. If the whole lot, a sum equivalent to one seventh of America’s GDP, were to go up in smoke, China would remain solvent. Except that would also mean that the United States’ economy had ceased to exist, which would be a considerably larger problem.
From America’s perspective, China’s fussing is a mild concern. If China were to stop lending money to the United States, there are other sources of capital in the world. There are plenty of investors, including American investors, who still see the full faith and credit of the United States government as a decent bet.
And realistically, where else is China going to go? It has already tried to use its economic muscle to patch together a network of oil suppliers around the world to immunize itself from price movements and supply disruptions by cutting deals with Iran, Sudan, and Angola. But it still depends on global supply for 95 percent of its energy needs. This policy of going where squeamish rivals fear to tread has also led it to become the largest trading partner of Iran, North Korea, and Sudan and the second largest of Burma and Zimbabwe. You scarcely need to be the UN High Commissioner of Human Rights to understand this is not the Peoria Chamber of Commerce.
The China Investment Corporation, a sovereign wealth fund, and the State Administration of Foreign Exchange (SAFE), a shadowy body with responsibility for managing China’s foreign reserves, have made a number of investments in Western financial firms in recent years. Two years ago, the Chinese paid $3 billion for a stake in the Blackstone Private Equity Group. The value of that has fallen by around 75 percent. In December 2007, the CIC paid $5 billion for a 10 percent stake in Morgan Stanley. That has since fallen by more than half.
The Chinese were reportedly stunned by their losses in Lehman Brothers and by the lack of support they received from the U.S. government. When Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were close to collapse, only intervention by the Bush administration saved the Chinese from dramatic losses on hundreds of billions of dollars in mortgage-backed securities. Since then, the Chinese have sold their government agency securities and bought short-term Treasury bills, which carry less risk.
In fact, when you decompose the risks and returns on China’s portfolio, U.S. Treasuries may well be its soundest investment. Singapore’s vaunted Temasek sovereign wealth fund, for example, lost 31 percent of its value last year. Had China followed Temasek’s investment strategy, or indeed Blackstone’s, instead of buying boring old Treasuries, Wen Jiabao would have thrown himself into the Yangtze.
Over the next few months, the extent of China’s buying of U.S. assets will be closely watched. The World Bank forecasts that China ran up a $425 billion current account surplus in 2008. It has to put the money somewhere, and there is already a surfeit of domestic credit. That cash, perhaps the last of the great savings glut piled up in emerging markets over the past decade, has to go overseas.
The appetite of foreign central banks for U.S. Treasury securities is already falling as the global economy contracts. But for the next few months at least, long enough for President Obama to get his stimulus funding in place, the money, with China’s help, should be there.
And then what? Then the really hard work begins for China. Wen Jiabao has conceded that the government target of 8 percent growth this year, necessary to contain unemployment, is unrealistic. He has called on China’s businesses to “focus on adjusting product structure, improving quality and upgrading technologies in the face of economic woes.” It is high time, he was saying, for China to move up the economic value chain, to go from sweatshop to design shop, to develop its domestic markets and create investment opportunities for its own citizens.
The reason the Chinese save so much is not because they are better than us or because they all read Suze Orman. They save because they have nothing to buy or to invest in and because they are terrified that when they get sick or grow old or have to educate their children, the state will not help them.
China’s priorities are territorial integrity and economic growth, not bankrupting the United States. Growth can only continue with greater economic liberalization and a move away from the government’s mercantilist policies, notably its insistence on using an artificially low currency as its main competitive weapon. For all of its success, China’s GDP per capita still ranks only 100th in the world. It is a woefully inefficient consumer of energy, a rank polluter, and a poor provider of educational and health services to its people. If you think the United States has problems, try living in Guangzhou Province, the heart of China’s manufacturing industry, where millions of migrant workers are struggling to find work.
The stark facts of China’s relative position to the United States are these: China has four times the people and one quarter the GDP.
Wen Jiabao is within his rights to express concern about his investment in the United States. But he must also acknowledge that China’s ability to convert its surplus into loans to Americans has been crucial to China’s economic growth.
Had China pursued a different strategy over the years, letting its currency float, liberalizing its markets, and stimulating domestic consumption, its progress may have been more uneven and less predictable. It would have had a different set of problems to face today—problems that might have looked more like America’s.
__________________________________________
Philip Delves Broughton is the author of Ahead of the Curve: Two Years at Harvard Business School and a former New York and Paris correspondent for The Daily Telegraph.
The American Conservative welcomes letters to the editor.
Send letters to: letters@amconmag.com
Huge Population of Rare Dolphins Discovered
http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/550615/
Newswise — The Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) announced today the discovery of a huge population of rare dolphins in South Asia—but warns that the population is threatened by climate change and fishing nets.
Using rigorous scientific techniques, WCS researchers estimate that nearly 6,000 Irrawaddy dolphins, which are related to orcas or killer whales, were found living in freshwater regions of Bangladesh’s Sundarbans mangrove forest and adjacent waters of the Bay of Bengal—an area where little marine mammal research has taken place up to this point. Prior to this study, the largest known populations of Irrawaddy dolphins numbered in the low hundreds or less.
Each discovery of Irrawaddy dolphins is important because scientists do not know how many remain on the planet. In 2008, they were listed as vulnerable in the IUCN Red List based on population declines in known populations.
The results of the study were announced today at the First International Conference on Marine Mammal Protected Areas in Maui, Hawaii and published in the Winter issue of the Journal of Cetacean Research and Management. Authors of the study include Brian D. Smith, Rubaiyat Mansur Mowgli, and Samantha Strindberg of the Wildlife Conservation Society, along with Benazir Ahmed of Chittagong University in Bangladesh.
“With all the news about freshwater environments and state of the Oceans, WCS’s discovery that a thriving population of Irrawaddy dolphins exists in Bangladesh gives us hope for protecting this and other endangered species and their important habitats,” said Dr. Steven E. Sanderson, President and CEO of the Wildlife Conservation Society. “WCS is committed to conservation of these iconic marine species from dolphins, sea turtles, sharks to the largest whales.”
“This discovery gives us great hope that there is a future for Irrawaddy dolphins,” said Brian D. Smith, the study’s lead author. “Bangladesh clearly serves as an important sanctuary for Irrawaddy dolphins, and conservation in this region should be a top priority.”
Despite finding this extraordinarily large population, the study’s authors warn that the dolphins are becoming increasingly threatened by accidental entanglement in fishing nets. During the study, researchers encountered two dolphins that had become entangled and subsequently drowned in fishing nets—a common occurrence according to local fishermen.
In a second paper, published in the March/April issue of Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystem, Smith and his coauthors report the additional long-term threat to the dolphin population of declining freshwater supplies, caused by upstream water diversion in India, coupled with sea-level rise due to climate change. These circumstances also threaten Ganges River dolphins, an endangered species with a range that overlaps with that of the Irrawaddy dolphins’ in the Sundarbans mangrove forest. The recent likely extinction of the Yangtze River dolphin, or baiji, is a potent reminder of how vulnerable freshwater dolphins are to extinction via the impacts of humans.
The Irrawaddy dolphin grows to some 2 to 2.5 meters in length (6.5 to 8 feet) and frequents large rivers, estuaries, and freshwater lagoons in South and Southeast Asia. In Myanmar’s Ayeyarwady River, these dolphins are known for “cooperative fishing” with humans, where the animals voluntarily herd schools of fish toward fishing boats and awaiting nets. With the aid of dolphins, fishermen can increase the size of their catches up to threefold. The dolphins appear to benefit from this relationship by easily preying on the cornered fish and those that fall out of the net as the fishermen pull it from the water. In 2006, WCS helped establish a protected area along the Ayeyarwady River to conserve this critically endangered mammal population.
WCS is currently working closely with the Ministry of Environment and Forests in Bangladesh on plans for establishing a protected area network for both Irrawaddy and Ganges River dolphins in the Sundarbans mangrove forest. Funding is critical to sustaining these activities along with WCS’s long-term efforts to study the effects of climate change on this habitat, support sustainable fishing practices, and develop local ecotourism projects.
Support for this study has been provided in part by the Kerzner Marine Foundation and Ocean Park Conservation Foundation, Hong Kong (OPCFHK). This study was also funded in part by the U.S. Marine Mammal Commission. The Convention on Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) has also supported WCS efforts as part of a regional program for cetacean conservation in the Bay of Bengal.
The Wildlife Conservation Society saves wildlife and wild places worldwide. We do so through science, global conservation, education and the management of the world's largest system of urban wildlife parks, led by the flagship Bronx Zoo.
Together these activities change attitudes towards nature and help people imagine wildlife and humans living in harmony. WCS is committed to this mission because it is essential to the integrity of life on Earth. Visit: www.wcs.org
Special Note to the Media: If you would like to guide your readers or viewers to a web link where they can make donations in support of helping to save wildlife and wild places, please direct them to: www.wcs.org/donation
Standing firm on Burma
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2009/04/01/standing_firm_on_burma/
By Judd Gregg | April 1, 2009
SECRETARY OF STATE Hillary Clinton recently announced that the administration will undertake a Burma policy review.
Over the years, Congress and various administrations have imposed economic sanctions and aid restrictions against the State Peace and Development Council, as the misfit military junta in Burma calls itself. Some question whether US actions have had any result in lessening the junta's death grip over that country.
Clinton should seek to answer that question by soliciting the opinions of those who matter most: the people of Burma and their elected representatives from the National League for Democracy. In 1990, the League won parliamentary elections that were ignored by the junta, and its key leaders, including Aung San Suu Kyi, were jailed - or worse. Despite the military junta's campaign of brutality, democrats in Burma have refused to give up.
Clinton will hear predictable answers from diplomats who will insist that a policy shift toward greater economic engagement with the SPDC is in order, regardless of the fact that Transparency International lists Burma as the second-most corrupt country in the world.
She will hear some aid workers insist that America causes the Burmese people's suffering through its sanctions, never mind the SPDC's well-documented record of economic mismanagement, failed governance, and gross human-rights abuses.
And the secretary will hear a repeated refrain in foreign capitals that "China and India won't" or "the Association of Southeast Asian Nations can't" when it comes to holding the junta accountable for its contemptible misrule, at a time when President Obama has much of the world eager to reinvigorate diplomacy with America.
However, the voice Clinton must listen hardest to is the one she is likely to hear least. Suu Kyi remains under house arrest in Rangoon. While it may be expedient for some diplomats and aid workers to marginalize the National League for Democracy, Clinton must recognize that no political reconciliation in Burma is possible without that party's full participation along with ethnic representatives who remain imprisoned.
Burma is more than just a human-rights problem. Illicit drugs, diseases, and refugees migrate to neighboring countries, creating major social - and financial - burdens on local and national governments. Geostrategic interests, including natural resources and access to deep water ports for a growing Chinese navy, should be of increasing concern to the region, as well as the United States and Europe.
During the review, the administration should stay the course on current US policy toward Burma. Assistance provided in the wake of Cyclone Nargis should be monitored closely to ensure that none is siphoned off by the regime, and ongoing programs that seek to address the most basic of needs to the people of Burma - inside and along the border with Thailand - should continue at increased funding levels to address currency and commodity price fluctuations. Finally, no one should believe that elections scheduled for next year will be transformational so long as Suu Kyi, the National League for Democracy, and ethnic nationalities remain shackled, and barred from political participation by the junta's Draconian constitution. The call for the immediate and unconditional release of Suu Kyi and all prisoners of conscience must continue.
America has stood by Suu Kyi and the National League for Democracy for over two decades. Any policy change that calls for a deviation from this support must be weighed carefully. It is far from certain that engagement with the military junta will produce any significant reward (tigers don't change their stripes), and the United States is not in a position to effectively counter China's growing presence in Burma, whether through high-risk investments or security assistance. The best antidote to a growing Chinese footprint is transparent and accountable governance, long championed by the NLD and one of America's best exports to the region. Further, history demonstrates that the people of Burma have no misguided affections for their northern neighbor.
To paraphrase former British prime minister Winston Churchill, the price of America's greatness is a responsibility to stand by courageous democrats in Burma. Congress has done so in the past, and should continue to do so as long as they struggle for justice and freedom in their country.
Republican Senator Judd Gregg of New Hampshire is a ranking member of the State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Subcommittee.
© Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company
The G-20's Funny Money
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123854148528775677.html
The IMF has a plan to create cash and pass it all over the world.Article
more in Opinion »Email Printer Friendly Share:
Yahoo Buzz facebook MySpace LinkedIn Digg del.icio.us NewsVine StumbleUpon Mixx Text Size
If the G-20 leaders meeting in London this week have one goal, it is to find a way to reflate the global economy with the least political cost. As bad luck would have it, the International Monetary Fund is standing by to help.
A hint of what's in store came from Japanese Prime Minister Taro Aso earlier this week when he said that he will propose an increase in "special drawing rights," or SDRs, at the IMF. If the term "SDR" sounds vaguely familiar, perhaps that's because it was the subject of a short-lived proposal last week from the head of the People's Bank of China to create a new global reserve currency that could replace the U.S. dollar. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner may have been caught off guard when he said that he would entertain the idea. When his comment sent the dollar plummeting, Mr. Geithner quickly backtracked.
But Mr. Aso's reference to SDRs is something altogether different. He is proposing a massive expansion in foreign aid, which we will explain below. What is important to understand is that the plan means hundreds of billions of dollars in handouts going to emerging market countries with no strings attached: All governments qualify, including those that lock political dissidents in dungeons and steal from their own people. Treasury is widely believed to support the SDR expansion, despite the fact that it will increase, yet again, costs for American taxpayers and the debt burden of future generations and will reward dictators the world over.
SDRs are nothing more than a fancy term for allocated credits divvied out by the IMF to member countries. The SDR pool at the fund traces its roots back to the gold standard when it was used as a liquidity tool for balance-of-payments shortfalls. These "international reserves" would continually circulate from deficit to surplus countries.
Today, under fiat currencies, SDRs are like bits of paper printed by IMF officials in the basement. They have no value but can be exchanged for subsidized loans to nonreserve currency countries. As the fund explains, "The SDR is neither a currency, nor a claim on the IMF. Rather, it is a potential claim on the freely usable currencies of IMF members." The current exchange rate per SDR is about $1.50.
When a country decides it wants to spend an SDR, it alerts the fund, which then takes the bits of paper it created to the country that has the real money and exchanges them. For example, if Bananalandia wants dollars, its SDR account is debited, and America's SDR account is credited. The U.S. then issues debt to raise the dollars to give to Bananalandia. The rate at which countries borrow is a weighted average of the lowest rates in the dollar, euro, yen and pound sterling. In practice, the "loans" are almost never retired.
Since 1970, the Fund has allocated 21.4 billion SDRs (almost $32 billion at the current dollar rate). But in 1997 the IMF board passed a resolution to double the number of SDRs. In 12 years it has failed to get the 85% of total votes at the Fund to approve that resolution.
The reason was easy to understand: The U.S. has 16.8% of the votes and the cost to U.S. taxpayers of SDRs is already substantial. In a 2004 paper for Congress's Joint Economic Committee, Carnegie Mellon economist Adam Lerrick explained that SDRs cost U.S. taxpayers $330 million per year. With the U.S. "contribution" to the 1997 resolution total U.S. exposure would be about $12 billion. Mr. Lerrick estimated that the total cost of this proposed expansion to U.S. taxpayers could reach $750 million annually. With this in mind and given the lack of conditionality for what amounts to foreign aid, Congress refused to approve the IMF proposal.
Mr. Aso of Japan didn't specify amounts he will endorse in London. But Ted Truman, a former assistant secretary of the Treasury under Bill Clinton who is now advising Mr. Geithner, is calling for "an immediate, one-time allocation of $250 billion" in SDRs. He says his goal is to put into action the "many well-intentioned pledges to adopt expansionary policies, avoid protectionism, stabilize and reform the financial system, mobilize the IMF and multilateral development banks to help the weakest countries, and combat poverty" that will come out of the London meeting. Wow, free money can certainly do magical things.
As for getting this through Congress, Mr. Truman adds that the Treasury Secretary "can vote for an SDR allocation of up to $250 billion, or somewhat larger, as long as he consults with key members of the U.S. Congress 90 days before he casts his vote. Thus, the actual allocation could occur by mid-summer, much sooner than most other crisis-mitigation measures would begin to take effect." We're told by others that this is, at best, an "unusual interpretation" of U.S. law.
Since IMF financing is "off-budget," meaning that it doesn't show up as an annual U.S. expenditure, all this is an off-the-books future liability. But no one should mistake this as charity for the deserving poor. As we wrote in an editorial in 2004, a doubling of SDR credits would make Iran eligible for a total of $465 million, Syria $90 million, Robert Mugabe's Zimbabwe $115 million, Sudan $100 million, Venezuela $840 million and Burma $80 million.
If Americans decide they want to give more to the neediest, there are honest ways to do it. But to simply blanket the world with conjured dollars and ask already-stretched American taxpayers to pay for it is bad economic policy and even worse governance.
Please add your comments to the Opinion Journal forum.
Lead, Arsenic in Burmese Medicines
http://www.rfa.org/english/news/burma/poisoning-03312009112749.html
2009-03-31
U.S. health officials have found lead and arsenic in traditional Burmese medications used by refugee families. Are children back in Burma also affected?
AFP
Four-year-old Yah Min, a victim of lead poisoning, sits with her father in their apartment in Fort Wayne, Indiana, Feb. 13, 2009.
BANGKOK—Burmese children in the United States who took two commonly used household medications from Burma were found to have high levels of lead and arsenic in their blood, a U.S.-based health organization said.
The poisoning was discovered in 32 Burmese refugee children who were resettled in Fort Wayne, Indiana, in the United States from refugee camps in Thailand.
“All refugees are tested when they come into the country for several things," said Loraine Hagerty, special projects manager of the St. Joseph Community Health Foundation, which has been helping the Fort Wayne refugees.
I don’t think these medicines are what we have on the market today."
U Tin Nyunt, director general of Burma's department of indigenous medicines
"It was found that there were a number of Burmese refugee children who had tested positive for lead poisoning," said Hagerty, whose organization works closely with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to run the tests.
"And when additional tests were conducted on their arrival in Indiana, we found more instances of lead poisoning amongst the Burmese refugee children," she added.
Indiana-based Burmese doctor Khin Mar Oo said follow-up tests were currently under way on the affected children.
Homes surveyed
"When tests were conducted by the schools, they found that the lead levels in the Burmese refugee children were quite high," Khin Mar Oo, who runs an organization helping Burmese refugees in Fort Wayne, said.
"At first it was thought that these lead levels were brought about during their stay on the Thai-Burma border," she said.
"But then they found that ... not only were the lead levels high in the Burmese refugee children who had come from Thailand, but also in some of the refugee children born in the U.S."
People living in rural areas, especially the parents of children, are still using these medicines."
Rangoon housewife
Health-care workers and medical experts from the CDC visited the homes of the affected children in early February to look for clues in their environment, diet, and medications.
Tests on building materials and drinking water yielded no evidence of lead or arsenic, so experts began questioning the children about their daily routines, Hagerty said.
"We actually went from door to door and asked them a lot of questions about the products that they use in their homes, habits that their children have, what they drink and eat and what kinds of medication they took, taking samples of their medication and testing them at the laboratories," she said.
Children's medicine pinpointed
The source of the lead and arsenic was finally narrowed down to two types of Burmese medicine called “Daw Tway" and "Daw Kyin” medicines, specifically aimed at children. The two medicines are commonly used in rural households all over Burma.
An official who answered the phone in the national food and drug administration of Burma's health ministry said he was unaware of the problem.
"[We] did not pass those medicines," he said. "Maybe it went through the department of indigenous medicines."
U Tin Nyunt, director general of Burma's department of indigenous medicines, said the remedies could have come out before 2007.
“I don’t think these medicines are what we have on the market today," he said.
"They are most likely to be medicines from earlier times ... We have machines that can test heavy metals in medicines, and if they are found in medicines we will revoke the production license of the producer," he said.
'No announcements' heard
But he said he had been unable to crack down on substandard medications produced before he took office.
"Since I took over responsibility here we have absolutely not permitted this at all," he said. "We are doing all of this within the policies and regulations."
The packaging on the two medicines found among the Burmese refugees in Indiana was marked September 2007.
A housewife based in the former capital, Rangoon, said she had seen no media reports concerning these medicines.
"People living in rural areas, especially the parents of children, are still using these medicines," she said. "They are still selling these medicines."
Cheap alternative
"There have been no announcements with regard to these medicines. When I heard this, I was quite alarmed because the children depend on these medicines," she said.
These traditional remedies, at about 50 kyat (a few U.S. cents), were far cheaper than a visit to a clinic or hospital, which could run into thousands of kyat, she said.
A total of 12,000 children have been diagnosed with lead poisoning among refugee communities in the U.S. states of Indiana, Illinois, Kentucky, Ohio, Michigan, and Missouri, according to health sources.
The CDC is expected to release a detailed report next month on the reasons for the lead poisoning among U.S. refugee families.
Common problem
Issues such as this are not uncommon among refugees, said Steve Weil, co-founder of the Virginia-based nonprofit Coalition for Environmentally Safe Communities.
"There are any number of these products," said Weil, whose organization is working with Denver-based Mercy Housing to conduct workshops, funded by the U.S. Health and Human Services department, aimed at educating U.S. health and refugee workers about lead poisoning.
The last of three workshops is scheduled for April 2 in Indianapolis, he said.
Remedies originating abroad are often inconsistent in their lead content, with one batch containing toxic lead levels and another with little or none, Weil said.
Original reporting by Nyi Nyi and Kyaw Min Htun for RFA's Burmese service. Translated by Soe Thinn. Burmese service director: Nancy Shwe. Executive producer: Susan Lavery. Written and produced in English by Luisetta Mudie and Sarah Jackson-Han.
Myanmar gets China's help for hydropower project
http://news.alibaba.com/article/detail/energy/100077635-1-myanmar-gets-china%2527s-help-hydropower.html
YANGON, March 30 - China is to help Myanmar build a big hydropower plant on the River Irawaddy in the north of the country, adding to a string of joint hydropower projects, and a huge gas pipeline to China is also planned, officials in Myanmar said.
The latest hydropower project, under a deal reached with a Chinese delegation last week, involves a plant in northern Kachin State, at the confluence of the Malikha and Maykha rivers on the upper reaches of the Irawaddy.
Located about 20 miles (32 km) north of Myitkyina, Kachin's state capital, and about 50 miles (80 km) from the Chinese border, officials say the plant will generate electricity to be used domestically and for export.
Sources in the region have said that feasibility studies for the project were carried out last year around the confluence, raising concern about the possible relocation of nearby villages and the ecological impact.
To cope with growing demand, Myanmar has pushed ahead with dozens of hydropower projects across the country, mostly with the assistance of China, one of the few allies of the army-ruled Southeast Asian country.
At present 15 major hydropower projects are still being implemented.
On completion of these projects, total installed electricity generation capacity will be 10,400 megawatts. According to official data, total capacity in the whole country has been 1,690 megawatts since fiscal 2005-2006 (April/March).
PIPELINE
China said last week it had signed a contract with Myanmar to build cross-border oil and gas pipelines. [ID:nPEK68191]
A senior Chinese energy official said one project involved a gas and oil pipeline running more than 2,000 km (1,240 miles) through Ruili and Kunming in Yunnan province to Chongqing municipality in southwestern China.
It would help China cut out a long detour through the congested Strait of Malacca and strengthen China's access to rich energy reserves in Myanmar itself.
Officials in Myanmar said the pipeline would start from its western deep-sea port in Kyaukphyu Township in Rakhine State.
A senior Energy Ministry official told Reuters last year the consortium that had developed two major offshore gas blocks off Rakhine had already agreed to sell gas from the block to China through a pipeline.
Construction of the pipeline is scheduled to start in the first half of 2009, they said.
Located in the A-1 block off Rakhine, the Shwe gas field has proven reserves of 4 to 6 trillion cubic feet (TCF).
Myanmar has at least 90 TCF of gas reserves and 3.2 billion barrels of recoverable crude oil reserves in 19 onshore and three major offshore fields.
According to official data, Myanmar exported gas worth $2.53 billion, mainly to neighbouring Thailand, in fiscal 2007/2008 (April/March), up from $2.03 billion in 2006-2007.
Myanmar's gas exports in the first nine months of the current fiscal year totalled $1.78 billion.
Dear Mr President, I want to buy a foreign policy-SOUTH AFRICA
http://www.politicsweb.co.za/politicsweb/view/politicsweb/en/page71639?oid=123510&sn=Detail
Howard Sackstein
31 March 2009
Howard Sackstein writes to Kgalema Motlanthe asking what's on offer, and how much it will be
Dear Mr President,
Please forgive me. I was both inexcusably wrong and hopelessly naive. I mistakenly used to believe that South African foreign policy should somehow reflect the moral lessons that we, as a nation, learned during the lengthy period of our dark ages. But Mr President, I now realise that I was utterly puerile and hopelessly callow.
Why should our facade to the world reflect those lofty and wishy-washy ideals contained in our constitution? I have now belatedly realised that, like so many other state assets, we have merely privatised our country's foreign policy - and why not, I ask?
So what, if we have sold our foreign policy on the occupation of Tibet and the oppression of the people of Burma to China. I am sure we have received good value for this - and those trendy knock-off shoes sown by those industrious little 6 year olds and the thousands of prisoners on death row will no doubt be shipped to us even cheaper. And let's face it, during these tough economic times who can afford a pair of real Prada shoes when fake ones come at one hundredth of the price.
I now understand that Deputy Minister Hajaig's racist anti-semitic outburst was probably sponsored by Iran, as was out refusal to co-sponsor the General Assembly resolution on Holocaust denial and our mysterious absence to vote in its favour. I hope we got proper money from those Iranians, I hear they have a glut of Persian carpets, also handily made by entrepreneurial tweens, and they are good hagglers so, I hope we bargained well for the best deal.
I presume our entire Middle East policy has been purchased by Arab petro dollars - I hope they didn't pay us in oil - you know what's happened to the price of crude these days. Don't do anything for Hamas or Hizbollah without pre-payment - I hear from other countries that they are not good payers.
Rumour has it that we bartered our Zimbabwe foreign policy to Bob for some farms. I hope the rumour's not true that the farms went to politicians rather than to the treasury - foreign policy is a state asset and we all need to benefit from its sale. Did we give him back Captain Morgan because he didn't pay us in full?
I can't for the life of me understand what President Lt-Gen Omar el-Bashir of Sudan gave us in return for the protection we have afforded him for his genocide in Darfur - I don't think those Sudanese have much? But then again I hear that the Chinese are generally willing to underwrite el-Bashir's debts, maybe we gave his protection as part of a bigger package deal, like one of those Fifa 2010 packages you can buy on the internet. Make sure you get a guarantee from a Chinese Bank. Let's face it, when its time to collect, the last place you want a guarantee from is Citi Bank or Barclays.
It's quite evident to me that our participation in the much maligned UN Human Rights Council must be a very lucrative enterprise for us. It's almost like a spot on the International Olympic Committee. I bet Pakistan and the Organisation of Islamic Congress coughed up lots of cash for our vote against freedom of expression on religion and to not support the General Assembly declaration on gay rights - how did those things get into our Constitution anyway?
Trevor Manual must be loving it! Who needs taxes when your entire Budget can be funded by foreign countries and organizations buying your foreign policy. No wonder he came out in support of our decision to deny a visa to the Dalai Lama. From what I understand His Holiness, the saffron clad monk, earns very little salary and could probably not even have afforded the Visa fees even if we had granted it to him. The Pope, on the other hand, has an entire empire and art works worth billions - when he wants a Visa let's put the price up - he can afford it. It's a similar system that the British seem to be using against us when we want to go watch their Queen in concert at Buckingham Palace.
You may have to share a little of the bounty with Minister Hogan - those random outburst of rational principle are enough to frighten away any purchaser.
So now Mr President, this brings me to the real point of my letter. It's my mother's birthday in April and I was really not sure what to buy her as a gift - and then I thought, why not buy her one of our country's foreign policies.
I don't have that much money, so I doubt I could afford a really important foreign policy like condemning Russia for its invasion of Georgia or its gross human rights violations in Chechnya or for that matter condemning the abuse of women in Arab countries or their lack of democracy and I am convinced I couldn't afford a policy to criticise Hamas for firing nearly 10 000 rockets at Israel over the last few years. I am sure that would cost a lot because I would have to pay the government, ANC and Cosatu.
I was thinking more on the lines of doing something to an obscure un-important nation. So, how much would it cost to impose sanctions on Micronesia? Or what is the price to lobby to elect the King of Bhutan as Secretary General of the United Nations?
I was also thinking of an international campaign against the banking secrecy or tax evasion status of Belize or the Cayman Islands, but if any of our politicians have stashed their cash there, it may be a little too rich for my budget to buy that particular foreign policy.
I am sure I have not exhausted all the options on the menu so, I kindly ask you or your foreign minister to e-mail me a price list for all of our foreign policy options and I am sure I will be able to find one that will make my mother really happy on her special day, and that I can afford.
I live in hope that one day, the people of this great tapestry which is our nation, will be able to once again look upon our government with respect and pride.
Warm Regards,
Howard
Bangladesh to Develop Nuclear Power
http://democracyforburma.wordpress.com/2009/03/31/bangladesh-to-develop-nuclear-power/
2009 March 31
tags: Human Rights, world focus on Burma, Junta, Burmaby peacerunningDhaka: Bangladesh is keen to set up a nuclear power plant in the next decade with a 1,000 MW capacity with potential help from Russia, in order fulfill the demand for power in the country.
According to official sources, the power plant will be set up at Rooppur, which was previously set up by the then East Pakistan government for the same purposes.
Bangladesh recently received three initial proposals to set up the nuclear power plant from three countries - China, Russia, and South Korea - but Russia is at the top of the list and is eager to move ahead with the project under a bilateral agreement.
A Russian technical expert team arrived on Sunday in Bangladesh on a three-day visit to discuss the proposed power plant project with Bangladesh authorities.
Prior to the team’s visit, the Russian ambassador met with Bangladesh’s state minister for science and ICT, Mr. Yeafesh Osman, to discuss issues related to the project.
However, Bangladesh may face big challenges in mobilizing funds for the project due to the current global financial crisis. The project is likely to cost US $1.2 to $1.5 billion and take up to ten years to complete.
The nuclear power plant project was initiated in Bangladesh during the previous BNP government and the caretaker government that followed expedited the process to obtain a clearance certificate from the International Atomic Energy Agency.
According to sources, the Bangladesh caretaker government received technical and financial support from the IAEA to develop a site suitable for the plant, with the IAEA providing $366,000 for the site in Rooppur.
Bangladesh has also requested the IAEA to provide technical support to create a trained and skilled workforce for the project, the government source said.
Narinjara news
Fishermen find killed Briton's body
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5jY_D37owGdGzacsiLjTxllExwNiA
The body of a British yachtsman allegedly murdered by three pirates has been found, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) said.
Three Burmese migrants have been accused of slitting the throat of 64-year-old Malcolm Robertson and throwing his body overboard when they raided his yacht as he sailed with wife Linda off the Andaman sea coast off Thailand last week.
A spokeswoman for the FCO confirmed a body found on Monday has been confirmed as that of businessman Mr Robertson, from Hastings, East Sussex.
Reports in Thailand said his body was recovered by fishermen about 10 nautical miles north of Satun's Lipeh Island.
A Foreign Office spokeswoman said: "A body recovered by the Thai authorities on Monday has been identified as Mr Robertson. Our thoughts are with Mrs Robertson and her family at this difficult time. The embassy team with them is providing consular support."
The discovery ends a week of anxiety for Mr Robertson's family, who had to endure several false reports of his body being found.
Three migrant workers from neighbouring Burma who were arrested on a raft about half a mile from the couple's 44ft yacht were charged with kidnap, assault and theft.
But Thai authorities said they could not bring a murder charge until they found Mr Robertson's body.
He owned a chain of coffee shops in and around his home town of Hastings and St Leonards but passed the running of the business to his children in recent years and was semi-retired.
He was fulfilling a lifelong dream by spending the winter months sailing around warmer climes in his yacht, named Mr Bean, with his wife. They were both qualified yacht masters who had sailed round the world.
How the G-20 Can Pay for a Global Climate Deal
http://laborstrategies.blogs.com/global_labor_strategies/2009/03/how-the-g20-can-pay-for-a-global-climate-deal.html
The G-20 summit convening in London on April 2 is preparing to create a quarter trillion dollars of brand new stimulus money to help poor countries battle the global recession.
World leaders plan to use a little-known form of global currency to pay the freight, a currency known technically as "Special Drawing Rights" (SDRs) but often referred to as "paper gold." It’s a currency that can be issued by the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the Telegraph has reported that the U.S. government is keen on the idea.
Senior figures in the U.S. Treasury have been encouraging the Fund to issue hundreds of billions of dollars worth [of SDRs] to prevent the recession from turning into a global depression.
If leaders at the G-20 summit can create "paper gold" to jump-start the global economy, they can also turn it in a green direction to jump-start protection of the global climate.
They should put much of paper gold stimulus under discussion into an international fund, to help developing countries pay for climate protection. Such an action would remove the greatest stumbling block in the way of international climate action -- the lack of financing to pay for energy conservation, technology transfer, adaptation, forest conservation, clean energy, and research and development. It would allow negotiators to arrive in Copenhagen for climate talks at the end of the year with the finances in place to negotiate and sign a global deal.
Without the financing, the chances of success in Copenhagen are slim. Yves De Boer, the UN's climate chief, left no doubt about that in comments he made this week criticizing EU finance ministers for putting conditions on financial help for developing countries, contrary to promises made in Bali in 2007:
I think without clarity on finance from industrialized countries there will be no commitment from developing countries.
"Paper gold" offers a way out of this stalemate -- a way to mobilize resources without either taxing or borrowing. That’s why G-20 leaders are proposing to issue a quarter trillion dollars worth of new SDRs – and why paper gold can play a crucial role in protecting the climate, too.
Measures that would fight both global warming and global economic meltdown simultaneously are being called a "Green New Deal." At the climate talks in Poznan last December, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon called a "Global Green New Deal" the best chance for securing a climate agreement in Copenhagen in late 2009. And in a February op-ed in the Financial Times, Ban together with Al Gore wrote,
What we need is both stimulus and long-term investments that accomplish two objectives simultaneously with one global economic policy response -- a policy that addresses our urgent and immediate economic and social needs and that launches a new green global economy.
World leaders convening at the G-20 have the opportunity to do just that.
The SDR Backstory
Countries normally set aside reserves, most often in gold and U.S. Treasury bills, as insurance to protect their currencies against speculation, runs, and other forms of economic adversity. If a country’s currency starts to plummet in value, the government can use the reserves to buy back its own currency and stabilize it.
The mountains of U.S. Treasury bills hoarded by China and Japan, for example, were purchased in order to protect their currencies against the kind of runs that devastated national currencies during the so-called Asian financial crisis of the late 1990s. Global currency reserves amount to trillions of dollars, and they currently sit idle in national treasuries.
In 1969, after a string of liquidity crises, the world’s major governments agreed to create SDRs to increase global liquidity. Nobel laureate and former World Bank chief economist Joseph Stiglitz explains that SDRs as "a kind of global money ... which countries agree to accept and exchange for dollars or other hard currencies." If countries are provided SDRs to add to the gold and foreign currency in their national reserves, money can be put to use for other purposes instead of sitting idle -- for things like combating global warming.
Several years ago, Stiglitz proposed that SDRs or a new "global greenback" along similar lines be used to supplement other reserve currencies. They would be issued for investment in developing countries and for "global public goods" like environmental projects, health initiatives, and humanitarian assistance. They would have the added benefit of checking global deflation and would help countries with trade deficits avoid ruinous devaluations and runs on their currencies.
Until the current economic crisis, such ideas received little public attention -- indeed, few except international economists even knew SDRs existed. But since the beginning of 2009, discussion of paper gold has exploded. George Soros has called for "trillions of dollars" in SDRs to be issued. And now British Prime Minister Gordon Brown has campaigned for countries to agree to a new allocation of SDRs at the G-20 meeting that starts on April 2, and the U.S. seems to be warming to the idea.
These world leaders are well aware of the threat of global warming and the cost of fighting it -- roughly half a trillion dollars a year, according to the British government’s Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change. That amounts to about 1 percent of global GDP for the next three to four decades. So far, however, none of these leaders has publicly discussed using paper gold to help pay for climate protection.
Green Paper Gold Can Finance Climate Protection
In the same way that economic stimulus measures around the world have pumped new funds into the green measures, global leaders can deploy "paper gold" to finance climate protection. It would surely qualify as a "global public good," as Stiglitz put it, and at the same time provide a needed economic stimulus.
The creation of paper gold is the international equivalent of increasing a nation’s money supply. It is what economists call "quantitative easing," and paper gold does it on an international scale. Former IMF chief economist Simon Johnson explains the current G-20 proposal:
The principle behind it is that everyone would get bonus dollars. The objective is to create a windfall of cash.
As in a stimulus measure applied to a national economy (for example, America’s Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009), if the windfall of cash is used to generate economic activity, then the value created by the new activity is what pays for the initial spending over time. The global recession has put millions of people and productive resources out of service. If they could be mobilized effectively, these vast unused productive capacities might well be sufficient by themselves to rebuild the global economy on a low-carbon basis before it is too late.
Some experts warn that paper gold will cause inflation, but we are in the midst of a historic crisis of deflation, in which the IMF, the U.S., and the great majority of economists are calling for economic stimulus to counter deflation. Issuing paper gold is precisely such an economic stimulus, providing at the global level what national stimulus plans provide at the level of an individual country.
The IMF is calling for a global stimulus of 2 percent of the world’s total product to sustain global demand in the current economic downturn -- about $1.2 trillion. Less than half of that would cover the projected annual cost of protecting the world’s climate and also provide a stimulus at the same time.
Further, if paper gold is used to stimulate work and production through green public works using material and human resources that would otherwise lie idle, they will create new value at least a great as their own value, forestalling any inflationary effect. Even if there were an inflationary effect, it would affect all countries approximately equally, so that one of the main downsides of inflation – exchange rate volatility -- would not occur.
It is easy to agree in theory that all countries should coordinate their economies to provide their fair share of the needed global economic stimulus, but in practice, they often pursue their own national interests -- or those of their most politically powerful constituencies. That's why national stimulus spending carries a risk. The stimulus will create new spending at home -- but it may primarily benefit the economies of other nations that supply cheap exports and do not stimulate their own economies -- something called a "free rider" problem. Paper gold, however, overcomes this because it stimulates the global economy as a whole, and therefore benefits the global economy as a whole.
As Tom Vosa, head of economic research at nabCapital in London explains, "If one or two countries do fiscal packages, that’s simply going to boost the export market for countries which haven’t." There’s widespread agreement among the world’s biggest countries that the current global financial and economic crises require global solutions, and that's why paper gold is being looked at as a powerful new tool for concerted international action.
How It Can Work
There is one serious problem with using SDRs for climate protection: many believe the IMF has a poor record of environmental stewardship and concern for the poor, and environmental and social justice advocates cringe at the notion of expanding the IMF’s reach into climate territory.
There are two possible solutions. Countries can agree to create an entirely new form of paper gold, such as the "global greenback" proposed by Stiglitz, that does not involve the IMF, but such a reinvention of the wheel is likely to be slow, contentious and impractical. That is why in our current economic and climate emergency, an alternative built on existing mechanisms is necessary, one that would require the IMF to issue SDRs to a global climate protection trust fund overseen by another institution -- such as the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP).
The UNEP’s authoritative scientific committee, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), could play a major role in setting criteria and evaluating the results. Countries would apply to the trust fund for green paper gold and be allowed to use it solely to implement their national plans to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and honor international climate commitments.
Complete transparency in allocating and contracting would be an ironclad condition for receiving green paper gold. The funds would be allocated based on countries’ need in paying for their own climate protection costs and the importance of their efforts to global climate protection targets. The funds could also be allocated, as Stiglitz has suggested, by competition among countries for the most worthwhile projects.
International climate protection efforts have been stymied by conflict between developed and developing countries over who should bear the cost of mitigation and adaptation, but green paper gold can provide the basis for a "grand bargain" in which climate protection would be an environmental and economic win-win, with poor countries least able to pay at the front of the queue.
If the Copenhagen climate negotiations are to succeed, they must find a way to finance climate protection efforts. If world leaders are serious about protecting the global economy and global climate, they should commit to a green paper gold bargain at the April 2 conference in London and consummate the deal at Copenhagen.
[Originally published at SolveClimate.com]
The sky is not blue in Burma
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=8731&page=0
The recent decision by the Burmese military to release 6,313 prisoners indicates that the rulers are well-versed in undertaking public relations exercises ahead of proposed multi-party elections in 2010.
Some parties see this as a positive first step in the seven-stage roadmap to democracy; a sign that the junta may be ready to enter the international community after years of isolation. But Burma has been at war for more than six decades. The military uses armed conflict, rape, torture and displacement of civilians. Of the inmates that have been released, 24 are deemed political prisoners.
According to the Burma Campaign UK, there are more than 2,100 political prisoners still behind bars. As for a people’s power movement, an anonymous Burmese blogger on the BBC website remarked that the junta’s way of dealing with such a concept is to “simply shoot everybody”.
The military authorities are grinning because they have tossed a bone to the outside world with the promise of an election next year, and in doing so, have driven a wedge in the international community who are divided over what to make of this announcement.
The United Nations and the Japanese government adopt a policy of dialogue and diplomacy with the junta, and see this as a breakthrough. However, history has shown us that military authorities in power are unlikely to give up authority so easily. The Burmese army’s condition is the insistence that will play a powerful role in the parliamentary make-up and retain 25 per cent of seats in parliament.
Naturally, the most famous political prisoner in Burma and around the world, leader of the National League for Democracy, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, continues to remain under house arrest. Her party’s deputy leader, 82-year-old Tin Oo, also remains confined to his home in detention. The United Nations Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, has repeatedly called for the unconditional and immediate release of Aung San Suu Kyi. Yet the UN’s Special Envoy for Burma, Ibrahim Gambari, has failed to win any concessions. It is little wonder that Aung San Suu Kyi is tired of appearing for the media when it is clear that the Burmese leadership will not change their hardline stance.
The Burmese military are the only party interested in seeing Gambari on a regular basis because they know it serves as a distraction from their failure to assist the victims of Cyclone Nargis and for the endless and well-documented abuses against its own people, especially ethnic minorities.
In a response to the Asian edition of the Wall Street Journal’s editorial criticising the value of Gambari’s visits published on August 28, 2008, the Consulate-General of Burma (Myanmar) to Hong Kong defended Gambari by praising the mutual respect shown between the junta and the Special Envoy for Burma. At the same time, the unnamed official has accused critics of failing to listen to the Burmese government’s side of the story, saying that if “such people wear dark glasses, you cannot see the truth”.
When the 2007 Saffron Revolution commenced, the junta stopped the flow of information to the outside world by blocking 85 per cent of e-mails and blocked foreign news agencies from reporting within Burma's borders, thus restricting live streaming of events.
One courageous individual, Nay Phone Latt, who streamed a rare glimpse into the actions of the armed forces was arrested and tried without legal representation. He was found guilty of breaching both the Electronics Act and the Video Act and sentenced to 20 years in jail. One year later, Burmese publications in exile such as The Irrawaddy and Democratic Voice for Burma were shut down by the junta.
Too many nations have forgotten that the Burmese military brutally crushed unarmed monks and civilians showing their support, resulting in the death of hundreds of protestors and detention of thousands more.
The events of 2007 must now seem distant with international media attention shifting to cover the global financial crisis. Each country is implementing measures to protect their economies. United States President Barack Obama will obviously review policy towards Burma, but his priorities are stopping the war in Afghanistan, and improving diplomatic relations with Iran, North Korea, and Russia. Now is the time for the rest of the world to go beyond the stages of talking tough.
The United Kingdom, the European Union, Canada, the members of ASEAN and Australia need to take a more proactive role. Burma's allies, notably China and India, need to stop insisting that private diplomacy will work in convincing the regime to step down and change their ways. The proposed elections in Burma will allow the military to commit more crimes against its own population and give General Than Shwe a chance to make an honourable exit.
Under the present climate, no polls will be free or fair. The National League for Democracy will be barred from fielding candidates, and restrictions on voting will be implemented to prevent an overwhelming protest vote against the junta’s candidates by the rural population who have suffered the most.
The Burmese government also has the option of cancelling the election if they suspect a perceived or genuine threat to their power is possible by citing security concerns in the country’s best interests. This ploy will be undoubtedly described as “despicable” and “unacceptable”, but for all of the colourful adjectives that world leaders and the United Nations are capable of using, the military junta will not listen nor care.
The Burmese government’s ignorance for the plight of its own people is best demonstrated in the closing line of a letter defending Ibrahim Gambari’s visits: “The sky is always blue in the Union of Myanmar.”
Their version of reality cannot be any further from the truth. For far too long now, the military dictatorship of Burma has held a gun to the heads of their own people and left bloodstains and bullets as calling cards. The innocent people of Burma cannot afford to be left vulnerable in the dark anymore.
Asian pharmaceutical products dominate Myanmar market
http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/006200903301021.htm
YANGON (Xinhua): Pharmaceutical products from Asian countries are dominating Myanmar's consumers market with India standing as the country's largest pharmaceutical products importing country, the local weekly Flower News reported Monday.
Accounting for 40 percent of Myanmar's pharmaceuticals import, India is followed by Bangladesh, China, Thailand, Indonesia, Pakistan and Vietnam.
According to the statistics of the Ministry of Commerce, Myanmar imported over 5,000 categories of pharmaceutical products annually.
In the fiscal year 2007-08, Myanmar imported pharmaceutical products worth of 115.56 million U.S. dollars, an increase of 15.5 percent from 2006-07, earlier statistics shows.
Meanwhile, Myanmar's largest and most modern pharmaceutical factory in the northern city of Pyin Oo Lwin was established in December 2007 producing 162 kinds of medicines.
With the aim of reducing import-substitute medicines, the Pyin Oo Lwin Pharmaceutical Factory under the Ministry of Industry-1, produce high-quality modern medicines such as tablet, capsule, intramuscular, intravenous, lotion and powder.
There has been some five other pharmaceutical factories in Myanmar, including two special ones, respectively located in Yangon, Sagaing and Inyaung.
These factories are producing medicines that supply 40 percent of the domestic market.
Moreover, a famous Myanmar private pharmaceutical company, FAME, will produce seasonal medicines for Japan and South Korea as proposed by the two countries.
FAME is known as the first private pharmaceutical factory in Myanmar whose products meet the stringent Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP) standards set by the World Health Organization ( WHO).
The company produces 45 different kinds of Myanmar traditional herbal medicines and its products were exported to countries or regions such as Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, Taiwan, South Korea , Germany and Japan.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Business
Tea leaves from Myanmar recalled
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/southeastasia/view/418752/1/.html
Posted: 30 March 2009 1112 hrs
Singapore: A range of pickled tea leaves imported from Myanmar has been found to be unsafe for consumption.
The Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA) - which has issued a product recall - said it has detected the presence of Auramine O, which is a yellow dye used as an industrial colouring agent for coloring silk, cotton, paper and leather.
The dye is not permitted for use in food, and all products containing the dye have been recalled and will be destroyed.
The move follows a ban by the Myanmar Health Ministry on 43 brands of pickled tea leaves which were found to contain the chemical dye instead of edible dye, which is said to cost 20 times higher than Auramine O.
Pickled tea leaves, mixed with edible oil and nuts often called "tea salad" or "la phet thote" is a popular traditional side dish.
The pickled tea leaves found to contain the chemical dye include several popular brands sold in Myanmar and abroad.
In Singapore, 20 types of pickled tea leaves imported from Myanmar have so far been found to contain Auramine O dye, including those under the brands of Ah Yee Taung, M&N, Shwe Toak, Soe Win, U Ka Kar, Yuzana and Zayan.
The AVA said in a statement that all consignments of tea leaves from Myanmar will be held for testing and will be released for sale only if test results show that they are free from Auramine O.
Consumers who have bought such products are advised not to consume them but to discard the products. Those with queries can call AVA's hotline at 6325-7625.
Details of the recalled products:
1: Ah Yee Taung Pickled Tea Leaves
2: Ah Yee Taung Pickled Tea Leaves (Normal)
3: Ah Yee Taung Pickled Tea Leaves (Red)
4: Ah Yee Taung Pickled Tea Leaves (Sour & Spicy)
5: M&N Pickled Tea Leaves (Extra Spicy)
6: M&N Pickled Tea Leaves (Spicy)
7: M&N Than Lwin Fwn Food Products Lon May Pickled Tea Leaves
8: M&N Than Lwin Fwn Food Products Pickled Tea Leaves
9: Shwe Toak Pickled Tea Leaves with Mixed Nut
10: Soe Win Gold Label Tea Leaves, 70 g (Best before date Jul-09)
11: U Ka Kar Green Tea Leaves
12: Yuzana Pickled Tea Leaves (Blue) - "Girl"
13: Yuzana Pickled Tea Leaves (Red) - "Boy"
14: Yuzana Pickled Tea Leaves (White) - "Girl"
15: Yuzana Pickled Tea Leaves with Mixed Peas
16: Yuzana Pickled Tea Leaves
17: Yuzana Pickled Tea Leaves (Sour & Spicy)
18: Yuzana Pickled Tea Leaves with Peas
19: Yuzana Plantation Pickled Tea Leaves
20: Zayan Pickled Tea Leaves (Hot & Spicy)
Posts
