http://www.huffingtonpost.com/pj-burns/burmese-focus-on-survival_b_127659.html
Posted September 19, 2008 | 08:26 AM (EST) BIO Become a Fan Get Email Alerts Bloggers' Index
Burmese Focus On Survival, Many No Longer Look To U.S. For Help
Show your support.
Buzz this article up.
If you want to discuss politics in Myanmar (also known as Burma), even far-away American politics, you don't meet in a popular restaurant for a chat over lunch. You wouldn't pick up a phone and call a friend for an engaging discussion. If you did, you would probably find yourself being followed, monitored and, if you kept it up, arrested and thrown in prison for four to seven years. To discuss politics in Myanmar is risky business. It is mostly done outdoors, at night, sitting at low tables, on tiny stools at street corner tea shops. This is where people gather to talk about politics and any other issue that you might not want overheard by the wrong person - namely a government informer. Tea shop proprietors set up large speakers that blare heavy metal and hip hop tunes - the perfect din to conceal any questionable conversations. This is the reality of living in Myanmar, where it is believed one in five "citizens" is informing for military intelligence or M.I. as it is ubiquitously known.
Usually these closely-guarded conversations focus around local, national and personal questions. Who is M.I. and who is not? What sort of power structure shifts might be stirring among the countries ruling generals? Which underground market has the cheapest gas this week? A trio huddled around a tea shop table might be trying to distinguish rumor from fact. Are rebels in Shan State really beating back Burmese forces? Are the monks really organizing for another round of protests next month? Is Aung San Suu Kyi really on a hunger strike? Is your brother really still in prison? Was General Than Shwe really secreted out to Singapore for another emergency surgery? Is electricity really going to be out the rest of the week? These are the sort of issues that are most often discussed at the tea shops - after they've finished, discussing the international soccer leagues, of course. American politics doesn't much raise an eyebrow here as it once had. However, if there is a little extra time and another pot of tea to finish or a couple extra cheroots to smoke, a few people might make time to discuss America's latest presidential election circus that has permeated even this oft-forgotten corner of the world.
Myanmar has been so closed off from the outside world for so long that international news reports on television often seem more like a Hollywood movie than actual events occurring "outside", somewhere in the world. The local street-side tea shops receive nightly reports from government-scripted MRTV, but few people listen. A traditionally dressed young woman literally reads the news from the state run newspaper. Perhaps this is to demonstrate that any errors in the reporting are not her fault. Maybe she does not want to inadvertently let slip any subtle suggestions that the news is anything but factual. She reports each night that the country is enjoying record-breaking rice yields thanks to the oversight of such-and-such a general and his flawless ministry. The news of the bumper crop doesn't seem to jibe with the high cost of rice and the hungry kids on the streets. But this is all the news on MRTV that is fit to report. They would superficially cover the American election, highlighting the candidates, their wives and the media circus. They might be quick to report any glaring scandals of corruption, but more often than not they merely gloss over the real political issues. The people don't seem to mind. They have far more important things to worry about than the American presidential election.
Most people are aware of the two candidates' names. Most know that McCain was in a Vietnam prison and that Obama is the black one. They are impressed with the former and too-quick to dismiss the latter. In Myanmar society, the dark-skinned are still disadvantaged. Darker-skinned Indians mostly comprise the labor force and are often discriminated against by Myanmar's elite and middle classes. For Myanmar people, it is difficult to take Obama seriously as a candidate. One man asks "why would you want a black man for your leader". I try to explain that we don't care about race anymore. We look to the substance of the candidate. I believe this, but I can tell he knows there is more to it than that. After a moment, I admit to him what he's already heard, that we have places in America where people would never vote for a black man. But I add quickly, they are becoming fewer and fewer. I remind him that Obama went to Harvard. This he knows and he admits he is very impressed as "Harvard is a very good school."
As for McCain, his Vietnam legacy is less known than Obama's race, but those who do know McCain's story are very impressed by it. Myanmar people have a long torturous history that would compel them to be impressed by the story of a man held in a cage by enemies, only to survive and become a "big man" himself, even more powerful than his captors. This is the story they hope will come to be for their own national hero, Aung San Suu Kyi. They can appreciate McCain's story far better than any American voter. Yet in reality they don't have a vote of any kind, so they don't bother speculating much. No one I spoke with realized that McCain had been to Myanmar in 1995. This is probably because he was there to visit with democratic icon Aung San Suu Kyi and the government wouldn't likely broadcast that information on MRTV.
McCain in fact has been by far the most outspoken for Myanmar. In 2003, he called for then Secretary of State Colin Powell to boycott a trip to the region and encourage Myanmar's neighbors to increase pressure on the regime to hand over power to the democratically elected party that won elections in 1990. He has since called for increased international sanctions.
His wife Cindy is an even more out-spoken critic of the regime. In June she vowed to make human rights in Myanmar an issue if she were to become first lady. She then went on to call the ruling junta "a terrible group of people" who rape and starve their own people. She may be right, but this sort of name-calling is exactly what has forced the paranoid junta to dig in and cling to empirical, iron-fisted control of the country. This sort of threatening language is what has made them ignore outside pressures and violently maintain their hold on power. They have positioned themselves, uniquely protected by both China and India. They also maintain a valuable economic lifeline with their ASEAN neighbors. The threat of further sanctions by John McCain and the acerbic, albeit accurate, name-calling by Cindy is easily dismissed by the ruling junta. Until China, India or ASEAN starts making threats, they are sitting pretty.
Here might be Obama's opportunity to try a new tack. Throughout the presidential race he has been the candidate who has said that he will engage rogue states, not just shut them out of the game. He has said that he will "not only work with countries we like but also with those we don't". Engagement with the Myanmar junta might be the first step toward real change. After all it is worth a whole-hearted try, nothing else has worked for the last forty years.
The citizens have given up on the idea that the US or the UN will come to liberate them like they did for Iraq. Even with their sparse news, they eventually came to see that the US never went there to liberate. This is a popular topic because Myanmar people love to make analogies. In 2003, when the US invaded Iraq, many Myanmar people were elated. They heard George Bush say that we were invading to rid the peace loving people of Iraq of a terrible dictator. The Myanmar people took note, saying, "that's us, too!" When it was decided that Saddam had to go because he killed his own people, they nodded their heads in approval, knowing their leader had done the same. If Iraq was due for regime change, Myanmar clearly had to be very close to next-on-the-list. Then lots and lots of time went by and they saw what was happening in Iraq, or rather what was not happening. There was no blossoming of democracy. The tea shop scuttlebutt spun around rumors of "Americans getting richer and Iraqis not getting any freer". Slowly they began to realize that no one was coming to liberate them. There would be no regime change. Unless they made a public, international demand for it.
In September of 2007, Buddhist monks and university students took to the streets en masse. The people joined them until the streets were filled with hundreds of thousands of citizens screaming Doyay! Screaming for democracy. Then the troops came. Just like in 1988, a bloody stamp down on these protesters put a brutal end to their uprising almost as quickly as it had emerged. On day three of the riots, a man approached me and asked where was the UN? Where was the USA? Didn't they see all this on the news? I didn't know how to answer him. I held his desperate eyes and all I could think to say was, "You already know." His shoulders fell and I saw the hunger and hope fade from his eyes. He said, "They won't come will they?" I shook my head. "They don't care do they?" I shook my head again. Finally he looked up the street at the crowd of his people facing the soldiers and then back to me and he said, "We are all alone, aren't we?" I nodded my head. He already knew the answers to all these questions, he just hadn't admitted it until that moment.
For others the realization came later - in May after Cyclone Nargis devastated Yangon and eviscerated most of the Aywerwaddy Delta in the south killing 100,000 or more. As international aid agencies clashed with the government, French and American war ships closed in with humanitarian aid. The desperately paranoid junta government feared it might be a prelude to an invasion and warned them away. The people watched intently wondering if this might be the beginning of the end of their oppressive rulers. In a tea shop, of course, a man asked me if the ships had medical supplies or bullets? His question was hopeful for either. I admitted that I didn't know. Either way, he said, they would do some good. As it turned out the ships were filled with both, but they dropped off their medical supplies and turned and headed away. Everyone knew at that point, if they didn't already know, that there would be no invasion, no liberation, no Doyay!
So now that the US election cycle has come once again, they are understandably tuned out. For most of them, they have only a romanticized idea of what democracy is anyway. When they talk about democracy, they speak with almost a religious zeal. As if with Democracy (always capitalized) the skies will part and salvation will rain down over all. When asked about specific policies or programs, they shrug and dismiss it. "Democracy" will handle all that.
A friend of mine, "Mying Htun," told me that most Myanmar people didn't have any idea what real democracy was. They didn't understand what it really entails. He was well traveled and spent years in Australia. He knew what an active, living democracy looked like. We sat at his restaurant before opening, countless wait staff bustling about. Mying Htun gestured at them, "If they were given a vote tomorrow, you know who they would vote for?" I didn't know. "Neither do they. They would come and ask me who I wanted them to vote for."
He went on to explain that they have never known anything but a strong leader telling them what to do. To all of a sudden ask them what they wanted, was expecting too much. He told me that if McCain and Obama were running for "leader" in Myanmar, McCain would win easily. I asked why and he said, "You name it!" He's been in a military prison. He's angry and mean. He a tough soldier. He's not black. I let the last one go, but noted that many of those qualities sounded a great deal like their current leader.
Myint Htun laughed at that notion and nodded his head. He supposed that was true. "Give us a choice and we will choose a strong, iron-fist leader again." I pushed a little further, "A leader like Obama might offer something new. A new way to unify all the different groups. Move together and then move beyond," I delicately suggested. "Yeah, but he's black. We'd never vote for him." Simple as that. End of discussion. I was left wondering if Myint Htun was talking about his country or mine.
This week OffTheBus is publishing a variety of stories that cover the presidential election from an international perspective.
Friday, September 19, 2008
Burmese Focus On Survival, Many No Longer Look To U.S. For Help
A Living Legend
(Photo courtesy: AFP)
http://www.mysinchew.com/node/15946?tid=10
Aung San Suu Kyii is a democracy icon in the non-violent mould of Mahatma Gandhi.
Nyo Ohn Myint still remembers the moment, 20 years ago, when the legend of Aung San Suu Kyi began. He was there when she gave a stirring speech and became the symbol of hope for a country under the oppressive grip of military rule since 1962.
The then history teacher at Rangoon University was in a convoy of five vehicles that had taken Suu Kyi, on the morning of Aug 26, 1988, from her colonial-era home in the Burmese city to a public meeting in front of the great, gold-topped Shwedagon pagoda.
It was slow going, Nyo Ohn Myint, then 25, recalls. They had taken an hour to cover the three-mile distance. And that first major public appearance for Suu Kyi gained significance in the wake of the brutal crackdown over two weeks before when Burmese troops had shot to death some 3,000 unarmed people protesting against the military dictatorship. That August 8 protest drew hundreds of thousands of people, the largest crowds since anti-government demonstrations had begun earlier that year.
The crowds had swelled to nearly 500,000 to hear Suu Kyi, then 43, who was only known as the daughter of Burma’s independence hero, general Aung San, and an occasional visitor to the country from Oxford where she was living with her British academic husband and raising a family. Nyo Ohn Myint stood on a side stage and watched Suu Kyi establish her political credentials in Burmese.
"It is also true of the Burmese democracy movement: it is likely to lose its momentum if she is not in the scene."
That day she emerged “as the person who could lead our country,”’ the former confidant of Suu Kyi said during a telephone interview from the northern Thai city of Chiang Mai. “She impressed the crowds and was totally committed to take on the political challenge of dealing with the military regime.”
Other student activists who were in the vanguard of the 1988 anti-government protests feel likewise about Suu Kyi’s debut on Burma’s political landscape. “She gave people hope with her speech,” says Myint Myint San, then a 22-year-old final year botany student at Rangoon University. “She did a tremendous job to help people understand what democracy means. And she dared to speak to the army and confront (then dictator) general Ne Win.”
In the days that followed, the tapes of her speech were in high demand. “People kept playing it again and again,” Myint Myint San told IPS. “People began to talk of Burma getting its second independence after we got our first when the British (colonisers) left (in 1948).”
It was a dramatic turn of events for a woman who had come home in March 1988 to care of her sick mother and with no thought of political activism on her mind. “When I returned home to Burma in 1988 to nurse my sick mother, I was planning on starting a chain of libraries in my father’s name. A life of politics held no attraction to me,” she said in a 1995 interview with Vanity Fair. “But the people of my country were demanding for democracy, and as my father’s daughter, I felt I had a duty to get involved.”
Yet, two decades later, the hope for a new Burmese independence — free of military oppression — appears remote. The junta remains firmly in control, with a tighter grip on the political landscape than in 1988. And Suu Kyi’s democratic mission has been forced to the margins.
But that has not diminished Suu Kyi’s stature as a democracy icon in the non-violent mould of Mahatma Gandhi. It has come at great personal sacrifice, though, given the over 13 of the past 19 years she has spent under house arrest, and the harsh limits the junta placed on her meetings with supporters and family members.
She was vindicated in 1990 when a new party she led, the National League for Democracy (NLD), won with a huge majority at a parliamentary election that the junta refused to recognise. In 1991, she was awarded the Nobel Peace prize, the first among 40-odd international awards she has won. And in the years since, international attempts to nudge Burma towards political reform have had to turn to the charismatic Suu Kyi — detained or free— to ensure credibility and public support.
“She has become the rallying point for the democracy movement in Burma. She has contributed tremendously to the growth of democratic culture in the past 20 years,” says Aung Naing Oo, a Burmese political analyst living in exile in Thailand. “Her struggle has put Burma’s political problems and its suffering on the world map.”
Take her out of the picture and the NLD will be nothing, he explains in an interview. “It is also true of the Burmese democracy movement: it is likely to lose its momentum if she is not in the scene.”
Her two decades in Rangoon have also helped build bridges between the majority Burmese community and the Southeast Asian country’s many ethnic communities, 17 of which had rebel movements fighting separatist campaigns against the Burmese troops. Leaders of these ethnic communities have confirmed that reconciliation between the majority Burmese and non-Burmese minorities is possible through dialogue with Suu Kyi.
They relate to her views of a democratic Burma that she has articulated over the years in her speeches and writings. “When we ask for democracy, all we are asking is that our people should be allowed to live in tranquility, under the rule of law, protected by institutions which will guarantee our rights, the rights that will enable us to maintain our human dignity, to heal the long festering wounds and to allow love and courage to flourish,” she is once reported to have said. “Is that such a very unreasonable demand?” (By MARWAAN MACAN-MARKAR In Bangkok/ IPS Asia-Pacific/ AsiaNews)
MySinchew 2008.09.20
Credentials Committee of the UN to decide on Burma
http://www.mizzima.com/news/world/1066-credentials-committee-of-the-un-to-decide-on-burma.html
Solomon
Friday, 19 September 2008 23:24
New Delhi - Burmese opposition groups in exile said the first step towards challenging the ruling military junta's membership of the United Nations has proceeded smoothly, as the World Body chief has admitted their petition to the General Assembly.
"The UN General Secretary has conveyed the message and admitted our petition to the General Assembly. There has been no rejection. So the first step is successful," said Myo Win, Joint General Secretary (2) of the National Council of the Union of Burma, an umbrella Burmese group that led the campaign.
"The General Assembly has accepted the petition and it will be discussed by the Credentials Committee," he added.
Burmese opposition groups in exile, including the NCUB, Members of Parliamentary Union (MPU), and International Burmese Monks Organisation or Sasana Moli on September 9, submitted a petition challenging the credentials of the Burmese junta at the world body.
The 63rd UN General Assembly, which began its session on September 16, has appointed a nine-member Credentials Committee which includes Botswana, China, Cyprus, United States, Russia, Luxembourg, Mexico, Mozambique and Saint Kitts, and Nevis on the opening day of the session.
The credential challenge will be first reviewed and discussed by the committee before taking a decision on it. Only if the committee decides to put it forward, will it be submitted to the General Assembly for a final decision.
Myo Win said, "Most of the members from the Credential Committee are in solidarity with us, except a few countries, so we are optimistic."
"But we know China and Russia will oppose the petition in the committee but there is no provision for the use of veto power," said Myo Win.
Burma became a UN member state in 1948 and from 1961 to 1971, U Thant, a Burmese diplomat served as the third General Secretary.
Burma enjoyed a brief period of parliamentary democracy following its independence from British rule in the period 1948 to 1962. But in March 1962, the military led by former General Newin grabbed power in a coup and transformed the country into a socialist state.
But in 1988, Burmese people rejected the socialist form of governance and ousted Newin and his one party system in a mass protest. But the legacy of the military went on when the current batch of generals assumed power in a coup in September 1988.
The junta in 1990 held general elections, where detained opposition leader Daw Aung San Suu Kyi led National League for Democracy party won a landslide victory. However, the junta refused to hand over power and continued to rule the country with an iron grip.
The Burmese opposition groups in exile, which have launched the credential challenge to oust the junta at the UN, argue that as the generals have been forcibly retaining power and have ruled the country illegally, therefore the UN should review its credential.
"We also hope that this campaign will highlight the sufferings of the people of Burma," Myo Win said.
Burma opposition offered guns by IslamistsDaniel Pedersen in Mae Sot, Thailand
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,24374934-401,00.html
September 20, 2008 03:18am
ISLAMIC fundamentalists have offered weapons to Burma's opposition groups with which to fight the ruling military junta.
And the resistance groups - which feel they have been left high and dry by the international community - are seriously considering the offer.
Former students, who were forced to flee Rangoon after pro-democracy protests in 1988 were violently put down, are said to be discussing the offer in the Thai border town of Mae Sot.
They know accepting arms from a group linked to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq could polarise the West against them and damage their revolution.
But there are no other offers of weapons to fight the military regime, which is officially known as the State Peace Development Council.
Members of the resistance inside Burma want guns and don't care where they come from.
They have decided fighting is the only way to freedom and are compiling an arms shopping list.
The prospect of a holy war developing in Burma is likely to be greeted with trepidation by neighbouring states including China, which is one of the military junta's prime supporters.
Thailand already has a grinding Muslim insurgency in its deep south, fed by militant Islamists operating out of northern Malaysia.
Meanwhile, the Karen National Liberation Army, which has waged a war of independence in Burma since 1949, has expressed dismay at the offer of guns from religious zealots.
"We are fighting an honourable war to free our people from oppression and want absolutely nothing to do with terrorists," says the KNLA's Colonel Nerdah Mya. "We don't do deals with the devil."
Concerns for Burma as milk formula scandal widens
Updated Fri Sep 19, 2008 8:13pm AEST
In China, there's growing anger at new reports that the company at the centre of the tainted milk formula scandal knew of the contamination three years ago. More than six thousand babies have fallen sick after drinking the formula, four have died and more than 150 are ill with kidney failure. Local officials have confirmed there are 22-other producers of the tainted formula and two of those have been exporting it to countries including Burma.
Presenter: Sonia Randhawa
Speakers: Monique Skidmore, medical anthropologist; Shantha Bloemen UNICEF.
The Generals Go Cyber?
By AUNG ZAWArticle
Burma's military junta has so successfully suppressed the media that Internet sites based outside the country are one of the few remaining sources of reliable news for Burmese people. Now it appears not even those sites are safe. Shortly before yesterday's anniversary of the 1988 pro-democracy uprising and last year's Buddhist-monk-led Saffron Revolution, the Web sites of my newspaper, The Irrawaddy, and other Burmese news portals came under cyber attack. I am not alone in believing that the junta is behind the attack, just as it was behind the shutdown of Internet access in Burma during last year's uprising.
On Tuesday, we received reports from our stringers and regular readers that Internet connections in Burma were running slowly. The number of these reports suggested a concerted effort to prevent information from going in or out of the country in the run-up to yesterday's important anniversary. The next day, our colleagues and subscribers in the United States, Japan and Malaysia notified our Thailand-based office that they were unable to access our Web site, www.irrawaddy.org.
A few hours later, inet, the largest Internet host server in Thailand and the primary host of our site, confirmed our site had been under a "distributed denial of service" attack since 5 p.m. that day. Someone had managed to freeze our site by bombarding us with so much traffic that our server couldn't cope. Inet finally decided to shut down our server.
The attackers also targeted our "mirror site," which handles overflow traffic whenever our primary host is unavailable. Singlehop, the server for our mirror site, told us the attack was forcing it to shut down our site, too. The company told us the attack had been "very sophisticated." The attacks on both our primary and our mirror sites are continuing.
Nor are we alone. Fellow exile news agencies Democratic Voice of Burma and New Era were also disabled in similar attacks. We have been forced to publish our daily news via a temporary blog we've created, theirrawaddy.blogspot.com.
The attack on our Web sites is persistent and believed to be manually launched from various locations, which according to our Web hosts means it's the work of a large group of hackers. Cyber criminals, widely dispersed around the globe, can be bought for as little as $500 a day. We've been able to trace one source of the current attack to a computer connecting to the Internet in the Netherlands. Burma may have local cyber criminals too. In recent years the regime has sent students -- mostly from the army -- to Russia for study that many believe includes training in cyber warfare.
As for the motive, that's not a mystery either. Exiled media groups like the journalists at The Irrawaddy, bloggers, reporters inside Burma and citizen journalists played major roles last September in highlighting the brutal suppression of the monks and their supporters in the streets of Rangoon. Live images, eyewitness reports, updates and photographs landed on our desks every few seconds.
Through us and others like us, the outside world was able to witness the terror of the Burmese regime on television and on the Internet. And so the military regime struck back. On Sept. 27 last year, all connections to the Internet inside Burma were closed down for four days as the authorities tried to conceal their crimes.
This latest act of apparent sabotage comes in a broader climate of Internet and media repression. In Burma, some Internet cafes require users to provide identification before logging on so the government can track Internet usage. In other cafes, informers observe students playing video games and Buddhist monks complain they are treated like criminals if they ask to use the Internet.
Meantime, reporters, editors and publishers based in Rangoon are under increasing pressure. Earlier this month, police apprehended a group of reporters and charged them with working for The Irrawaddy, though they were not. Our stringers say they are nervous, though fortunately they remain undetected. My friend, a foreign journalist who recently left Burma, said that the mood was very tense. "It is hard for our Burmese colleagues to report," she said. "But they are very brave."
In this increasing climate of fear where Internet users are frequently suspected of working for exiled media, people in Burma are naturally afraid to communicate. The Internet is one of the few remaining opportunities they have to do so, especially with the outside world.
Over the past 20 years, the battle between Burma's regime and pro-democratic forces has shifted from the streets to the jungle and now to the computer. The generals will not give in; rather, they will equip themselves and become more sophisticated. The attack on our site appears to be a sign of this trend.
However, the junta is mistaken if it thinks we will give up. We at The Irrawaddy have to build stronger firewalls and more effective systems to prevent future attacks. Ultimately, the flow of information is unstoppable. The Burmese regime's cyber criminals cannot penetrate the strongest firewall of all -- the spirit of desire for change.
Mr. Aung Zaw is founder and editor of The Irrawaddy magazine.
Copyright 2008 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Global Economic Collapse and the Original Vision of Adam Smith (Part 3 of 3)
POSTED September 18, 1:13 PM
Judah Freed - Political Issues Examiner
Adam Smith.Few people today realize that Adam Smith actually was a social progressive. “Civil government,” he wrote, “so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defense of the rich against the poor.”
Adam Smith envisioned wealth and power distributed throughout society, benefiting everyone. Yet he did not imagine "a nation of shopkeepers," as some say dismissively, for he actively promoted manufacturing.
Adam Smith favored small business and small government. He saw monopolies as enemies of free enterprise and fair markets. He labeled trade associations as conspiracies to raise prices.
Unfair and fraudulent market practices deserve regulation, Smith said. This point is especially telling today, for those touting deregulation in Smith's name actually are betraying the vision of their idol.
In fact, Smith heartily endorsed clear laws governing commerce along with sanctions against outlaw enterprises and nations. He favored both spontaneous market sanctions by consumers as well as government-backed law enforcement with corrective actions ending in force as a last resort.
Any modern corporation lacking sympathy for its customers and the general public violates the morality of Adam Smith. He’d decry the inhumane techno-capitalism now being malpracticed in his name. At the dawn of the Industrial Age, he wrote, “The robot is going to lose. Not by much. But when the final score is tallied, flesh and blood is going to beat the damn monster.”
If Adam Smith’s ideas and ideals had been heeded since his time, capitalist economies today may not suffer from the ruinous boom-and-bust “business cycle” that Marx criticized so effectively. If Adam Smith had been heeded for carefully, I contend, we might not be facing global economic collapse today.
Why is Adam Smith so misunderstood?
Unlike other utopian thinkers who first mapped out a vision for an ideal world and then presented a compass to navigate their imagined terrain, Adam Smith published his moral compass first, and only 20 years later did he offer a map for his utopia. We have misread his map because we have forgotten his compass. This is how we’ve lost our way.
You are free to disagree with me on this, of course, but I blame free-market economist Milton Friedman and his followers for misleading us away from the ideals and principles of regulated capitalism as Adam Smith intended.
Unlike ethical self-reliance libertarians (my term) who balance personal and social responsibility, most free-market capitalists today share the exploitive utilitarian values of libertine libertarians (also my term) who want to enjoy all the pleasures of economic freedom without any social responsibility or personal accountability.
In my judgement, the rampant greed of libertine libertarians is what got us into the mess we're in today. Unlike Gordon Gekko in the film, Wall Street, I contends that greed is not good. Heeding the grounded wisdom of self-reliance libertarians like Karl Hess may have spared us from our current woes.
In reaction to the abuses of free-market capitalism, some favor socialism to close the unjust and widening gap between rich and poor. They want the state to control the economy and redistribute all wealth “equally.” We're seeing a step in that direction with the nationalization of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
I agree we need a safety net for those unable to care for themselves. However, I challenge the tendency of codependent welfare states to rob people of incentives to achieve their highest potential and practice mindful self rule. I'm against any form of Big Government, no matter what political party or economic philosophy is behind it. This is why I urge us to beware of any and all messianic leaders promising to save us in trade for the power to make decisions on our behalf.
As we face a global economic collapse inthe coming years, as we look for sane solutions, we might need to create an entirely new economic model. If this becomes a necessity, Adam Smith himself would remind us that democracy and capitalism are not the same thing and that commerce is older than capitalism.
If we use common sense to develop a stable international economic system that fairly empowers people to sustain themselves and their families, so they can prosper in ways that benefit everyone, that system will make global sense.
NOTE: Portions of this column were adapted from my book, Global Sense.
Global Economic Collapse and the Original Vision of Adam Smith (Part 1 of 3)
Adam Smith
POSTED September 18, 12:03 PM
Judah Freed - Political Issues Examiner
Adam SmithAs the world catapults into what could be the worse financial crisis since the Great Depression, we're seeing the results of free-market capitalism run amuck. Please observe the irony here. Today's crisis is a direct result of unreasonably deregulating financial markets in the holy name Adam Smith. Yet such policies are contrary to what Adam Smith himself envisioned.
Before we look at Smith in the 18th century, but let's first turn our attention to more recent history.
In response to the Great Depression, President Franklin D. Roosevelt and the U.S. Congress established the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) along with related regulatory agencies. Their job was to prevent the kind of wild financial speculation and greedy fraud that led to the Wall Street crash of 1929. The crash wiped out fortunes among the upper class while plunging the middle and lower classes into desperation.
Secured by this regulatory regime, the U.S. economy boomed after World War II. As prosperity grew, a parallel desire for deregulation grew under both Republican and Democratic administrations. This drive peaked in the administration of George W. Bush, who effectively gutted the SEC, the Commerce Department and other watchdog agencies while sinking the nation to debt by borrowing hundreds of billions to fund foreign wars. In a nutshell, the regulators were deprived of the funding and manpower to do their jobs effectively.
The lack of any real government regulation and oversight, consequently, allowed massive lending to millions of unqualified home buyers, which led to the sub-prime U.S. mortgage market collapse.
The reckless lending was based on the false belief that real estate prices would rise forever, that homeowner equity would keep increasing without limit. People with low or erratic incomes were unduly reassured by lenders that they could expect to refinance or sell their homes at a profit before their huge balloon payments were due.
Mounting foreclosures since last year have provided a harsh reality check. The fantasy bubble has popped.
Let's look at basic economics. A foreclosed mortgage is worth only a fraction of its original market value. In communities with numerous foreclosures, the resulting drop in property values means homeowners find themselves owing more than their house is worth on the open market. They are "upside down" in their houses, which induces them to try selling their homes, which further reduces property values. This directly and indirectly leads to more foreclosures.
Companies holding foreclosed mortgages suddenly find themselves holding worthless scraps of paper. Well, actually, we're talking about digital entries in electronic ledgers, but you get the idea. Organizations that invested in securities based on sub-prime loans to high-risk borrowers, naturally, are the hardest hit. The resulting chain-reaction is what led to today economic crisis.
The failure of the sub-prime mortgage market has now spread to all major financial houses in the U.S. and overseas that had any substantial stake in sub-prime investment instruments. The financial failures of overextended lenders, such as Countrywide, have recently led to the government takeover or nationalization of the two largest U.S. lenders and mortgage investors, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The takeover largely was necessary due to lax government supervision of these semi-private institutions.
Despite the U.S. government subsidizing the sale of Bear Stearns to JP Morgan last March and the government bailout this week of American International Group (AIG), we're now seeing the failure or threatened failure of such Wall Street giants as Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, Washington Mutual, Morgan Stanley, and Goldman Sachs. These are merely the top names on a long list.
Because of increasing global interdependence, U.S. banking failures are the catalyst for a wider financial crisis internationally. The uncertainty inherent in this crisis is inducing precipitous stock market drops from a lack of investors confidence, causing otherwise healthy companies to lose their capitalization overnight.
A five percent drop in overall stock values on Wall Street means billions in funding evaporating into thin air. These are funds that could have gone for such things as creating jobs or converting to alternative energy sources. Instead of wealth spreading from the top tier throughout society (the trickled down economic theory), fear and privation now is spreading from top to bottom.
Don't be deceived into thinking these abstract ideas will have no concrete effect on you. Within the next few months and years, what seems like only scary or confusing headlines today will adversely effect you and everyone else on the planet.
And this brings us back to Adam Smith. (Go to Part 2.)
Global Economic Collapse and the Original Vision of Adam Smith (Part 2 of 3)
POSTED September 18, 12:25 PM
Judah Freed - Political Issues Examiner
Adam SmithTo place today's financial crisis into context, we need to look afresh at the ideas of Adam Smith, a leader of the 18th century Scottish Enlightenment movement. Adam Smith is credited with conceiving modern capitalism.
In 1759, Adam Smith published The Theory of Moral Sentiments. Morality, he wrote, requires an act of imagination. Put yourself in the shoes of another person to act as they would act. Promoting empathy, the Golden Rule, Smith called it “sympathy.” He said morality must be guided by sympathy, yet emotions must be ruled by reason.
In 1776, three months after Paine published Common Sense, Adam Smith published the first of his five volumes in The Wealth of Nations. Like a one-two punch, after Paine’s essay had turned politics on its head, Adam Smith’s essay turned economics on its head.
Since the 1500s, European mercantilism had defined national wealth as gold bullion in state treasuries. Mercantile states earned gold by manufacturing and exporting merchandise, taxing imports, and selling off the natural resources or agricultural products of their colonies. This is why Europeans invaded and plundered the Americas, Africa and Asia.
Adam Smith instead said national wealth lay in the commerce of its people. He figured national wealth as the total value of all the goods the people consume daily. The wealth of nations relies on buying and selling goods.
Therefore, Smith said, the consumption of goods and services is an economic necessity. Capitalism is consumerism. Indeed, consumer spending comprises two-thirds of the U.S. economy today and about the same in the European Union and Japan.
Smith also favored ending hereditary occupations, where a son did the same job as his father. To accelerate the shift, he proposed the division of labor in factories, a clever idea that gave rise to mass production and the assembly line. Sadly, Adam Smith unduly discounted the value of labor, which later would upset Karl Marx and other critics, helping them draw ardent followers.
If we have the freedom to earn our daily bread as we wish, as Adam Smith proposed, if no king or dictator commands the economy, how does the grain get to market?
In Smith’s laissez faire utopia, the “invisible hand” of enlightened self interest, guided by moral sympathy, directs all commercial affairs, so all prosper. “Every man [or woman], as long as he does not violate the laws of justice, is left perfectly free to pursue his own interest his own way, and to bring both his industry and capital into competition with those of any other man or order of men... It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest.”
Now you know the basic theory. What is the practical reality? (Go to Part 3.)
NOTE: Portions of this column are from my book, Global Sense.
Japan injects an extra $24B into its financial system
TOKYO (AP) — Japan's central bank infused money markets for the third day in a row, pumping another $23.8 billion to sustain domestic liquidity amid the deepening U.S. financial crisis.
With its sixth injection this week, the Bank of Japan has added a total of $76.1 billion since the bankruptcy filing and sale, respectively, of Lehman Bros. and Merrill Lynch, two Wall Street giants.
The central bank has worked closely with U.S. and European counterparts, who have also flooded money markets with cash to ensure smooth lending among banks.
While the Bank of Japan has been quick to provide extra liquidity, it decided Wednesday to stay put on monetary policy and kept its key interest rate unchanged at 0.5%.
In a statement, the bank stuck with its description of economic growth as "sluggish against the backdrop of high energy and materials prices and weaker growth in exports."
Bank of Japan Gov. Masaaki Shirakawa reiterated that the lethargy will persist for the time being but the economy is likely to "return onto a sustainable growth path with price stability."
He also downplayed the impact of the recent turmoil on Japan's financial system and praised the Federal Reserve's $85 billion bailout of troubled insurer American International Group.
The Fed's rescue of AIG was the "right decision" and would help restore investor confidence after recent shake-ups on Wall Street.
Shirakawa acknowledged that Lehman's collapse would hurt Japanese banks, among the U.S. investment firm's biggest creditors. He added, however, that affected institutions should have ample funds to cover losses.
"I am not concerned that the recent events will destabilize the financial system in Japan," he said.
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Japan PM front-runner says no date for general election Fri Sep 19, 12:45 AM ET
Taro Aso, a candidate of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) leader race and former foreign minister speaks before the press with other four candidates in Tokyo while former defence minister Shigeru Ishiba (L) looks on. Aso, the front-runner to become Japan's next prime minister, said unabashedly Friday he was a hawk.
(AFP/Yoshikazu Tsuno)
TOKYO (AFP) - Taro Aso, the front-runner to be Japan's next prime minister, said Friday that no date had been set for a general election amid reports it could come as soon as next month.
The ruling Liberal Democratic Party votes Monday for a replacement for unpopular Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda.
The Asahi Shimbun and other newspapers said the ruling party hoped to call a general election on October 26 to seize on the initial popularity of the new prime minister.
"It almost sounds like the Asahi newspaper has the right to dismiss the parliament" for an election, Aso, an outspoken former foreign minister, told a debate with his rivals at the Foreign Correspondents' Club of Japan.
"I don't think anyone has talked about October 26 so ... if you report this to your head office, I feel you would be making a mistake," Aso said.
Japan's opposition has been hoping for a landmark election victory against the Liberal Democrats, who have been in power for all but 10 months since 1955.
North Korea Pledges to Restart Nuclear Reactor
By Kurt Achin
Seoul
19 September 2008
A senior North Korean official says his country is beginning to restore a disabled nuclear facility capable of producing weapons material. Pyongyang says the United States has not fulfilled obligations under a multinational agreement to get rid of the North's nuclear weapons. VOA's Kurt Achin reports from Seoul.
North Korean diplomat Hyun Hak Bong announced his country's intentions Friday following a meeting with a South Korean counterpart in North-South border village of Panmunjeom.
Hyun says the process of disabling North Korea's main nuclear facility has been stopped, and the process of restoring it is now ongoing.
In this 27 Jun 2008 file photo provided by China's Xinhua News Agency, ruins of Yongbyon nuclear complex's cooling tower are seen
North Korea agreed last year to fully disable its nuclear facility at Yongbyon as part of a broader multinational deal aimed at ending its nuclear programs altogether. In a separate phase of the deal, North Korea provided a nuclear declaration to its negotiating partners - South Korea, China, Russia, Japan, and the United States.
The six-nation process hit a wall in August, when the United States decided not to remove North Korea from a State Department list it accuses of sponsoring terrorism. Washington says its promise to do that was contingent on North Korea committing to steps for proving that its nuclear declaration is accurate.
Hyun, the North's envoy, disagrees.
Hyun says the verification issue is a separate issue from Pyongyang's removal from the terrorism list. He accuses the United States of imposing a one-sided condition that is not part of the agreement.
South Korean Foreign Minister Yu Myung-hwan, speaking Friday to journalists in Seoul, agreed with U.S. officials that verifying North Korea's declaration was always part of the deal.
Yu says all parties in the six nation talks understood that the North Korean declaration and its verification were intertwined. He says removing Pyongyang from terrorism list does not necessarily require the verification process to be completed - just that North Korea agree on the principles for carrying it out. North Korea, says Yu, fully understands that.
Yu suggested the North may be threatening the restoration of its Yongbyon facility as a means of gaining diplomatic leverage.
North Korea demolished the facility's cooling tower earlier this year in a carefully choreographed public demonstration it was disabling Yongbyon. Analysts say it would take months - possibly years - to fully resume the reactor's operations.
Asia Stocks Roar Back
By Michael Schuman Friday, Sep. 19, 2008
Asian stock markets posted sharp gains Sept. 19 as investors grew more confident that stepped-up government efforts to contain the damage caused by the U.S. credit crunch would be effective. Japan's benchmark Nikkei index was up 3.8%, Hong Kong's Hang Seng 9.6% and the Shanghai stock index shot up 9.5%, recovering some of the steep losses suffered earlier in the week.
Sentiment was boosted by a 3.9% jump in the Dow Jones Industrial Average and by reports that the U.S. Treasury Department and Federal Reserve are discussing a massive plan to purchase soured mortgages from American financial institutions. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said after a late-night meeting in Washington that the plan, the details of which are still being worked out, is "aimed right at the heart of this problem." Markets also got a boost from the Sept. 18 announcement that the world's major central banks would inject $180 billion into global financial markets.
At the same time, Asian governments are beginning to independently take direct action to stabilize their reeling stock markets. China on Sept. 18 said it would waive government taxes on some share transactions to stimulate trading. Chinese government agencies are also trying to put a floor under the market by purchasing shares in publicly listed Chinese companies. Meanwhile, Taiwan's government indicated that a state-controlled fund would be willing to shore up Taiwan company stocks via share purchases.
The moves will boost confidence in the short term, but investors remain jittery, says Tai Hui, regional head of economic research for Standard Chartered Bank in Singapore. "It's not that the financial turmoil is getting any better," he says.
The big Sept. 19 gains were driven to some extent by bargain hunting. After tumbling about 45% from highs reached late last year, Asian stocks now trade at roughly 10 times 2008 earnings — which means they're relatively cheap. Although Asia's economic growth is expected to slow over the next 12 months, the region's financial systems and economies are still fundamentally sound, analysts say. Banks in Asia haven't experienced the dangerous losses on property and mortgages that are devastating their U.S. counterparts. To some, like Hugh Young, managing director at Aberdeen Asset Management Asia in Singapore, the sell-off is providing a buying opportunity. Young's been trolling the markets for solid blue chips and conservative banks with strong balance sheets. "Now's the time to be buying — slowly," he says. "If people are selling because they need the cash, that's what we like."
However, analysts warn that the markets aren't immune from further bad news and the uncertainty level is still high. Goldman Sachs in a note to investors this week said that Asian stocks are "getting interestingly cheap" but analysts "certainly do not pretend to have any real clarity on the near-term market outlook." The investment bank said "for now, most investors in Asia will continue to focus more on cutting risk and hedging positions rather than putting on substantial new risk." The wild ride in Asian markets isn't over.
Timeline: UN Secretary-Generals
Author: Christopher W. Tatlock
Updated: September 18, 2008
Ban Ki-moon, Korea
Kofi Annan, Ghana
Boutros Boutros-Ghali, Egypt
Javier Perez de Cuellar, Peru
Kurt Waldheim, Austria
U Thant, Myanmar (formerly known as Burma)
Dag Hammarskjöld, Sweden
Trygve Lie, Norway
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ban Ki-moon, Korea
(2007 – Present) Ban Ki-moon's tenure has featured a new emphasis on climate change policy, efforts to mitigate the surging prices of both energy and food in the developing world, and an inherited portfolio of issues including nuclear nonproliferation negotiations with Iran and continued efforts to solidify the United Nations' role in Sudan's Darfur conflict. Prior to serving as secretary-general, Ban was Korea's Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade. He joined the Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs in 1970, and served in a variety of diplomatic roles inside and outside of Korea during the next twenty-five years, including posts at embassies in the United States, Austria, and India. In 2001, Ban started work at the United Nations as chief of staff to Han Seung-soo, the president of the General Assembly. Ban returned to Korea after his term and served as Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade from 2004 until 2006. He has been actively involved in issues relating to inter-Korean relations. In September of 2005, he helped bring about a landmark agreement aimed at promoting peace and stability between North and South Korea through Six-Party Talks. Since becoming Secretary-General, Ban has spoken out on several issues including the North Korean and Iranian nuclear threats, the humanitarian crisis in the Darfur region, and administrative reform of UN operations.
Kofi Annan, Ghana
(1997-2006) Kofi Annan began his career as a budget officer with the World Health Organization (WHO) and rose through the ranks to become UN under-secretary-general at a time of record increases in peacekeeping operations. In 1995 he was appointed the secretary-general's special representative to the former Yugoslavia. Since his election in 1997, Annan's goals as secretary-general have included implementing management and budget reforms, addressing ever-growing costs and demands for UN peacekeeping operations, and better meeting the needs of poorer nations. Under his leadership, the United Nations executed contemporary platforms aimed at sustainable development in Africa and the utilization of global capitalism to benefit socioeconomic needs. His "Millennium Report" advocates initiatives to eradicate poverty, combat HIV/AIDS, and protect the environment.
Boutros Boutros-Ghali, Egypt
(1992-1996) Boutros-Ghali served one term as secretary-general, suspending his candidacy for a second term after conflicts with U.S. foreign-policy leaders. He has an extensive international relations background as a scholar, diplomat, and jurist. Boutros-Ghali's term in office was marked by increased operating costs and ineffective peacekeeping efforts that proved burdensome to the UN. Unsuccessful U.S. participation in Somali peacekeeping operations, inability to curb fighting in Bosnia and Croatia, and subsequent reluctance from the international community to act against genocide in Rwanda, all precipitated U.S. support to transition the leadership position of secretary-general.
Javier Perez de Cuellar, Peru
(1982-1991) Before assuming office, Perez de Cuellar was Peru's ambassador to Switzerland, the Soviet Union, Poland, and Venezuela; served as his nation's permanent representative to the United Nations; and represented Peru on the Security Council, even serving as the Council's president. In 1979, he was appointed under-secretary-general for special political affairs. While in office, the UN leader oversaw negotiations for the release of American hostages in Lebanon, facilitated the withdrawal of Soviet troops from Afghanistan, negotiated the ceasefire ending the Iran-Iraq War, and developed the 1991 UN-backed peace pact in Cambodia.
Kurt Waldheim, Austria
(1971-1982) Before he was elected secretary-general, Waldheim was the permanent representative of Austria to the United Nations. During his two-term leadership of the UN, Waldheim participated in the Paris International Conference on Vietnam and presided over the first phase of the Geneva Peace Conference on the Middle East. Five years after his second term ended, Waldheim was elected President of Austria, a post he held until 1992; however, during the campaign his service in the German Army came to light. Though he declared no personal involvement, Waldheim was implicated in Nazi atrocities in the Balkans during World War II and was subsequently barred from entering the United States by the Justice Department.
U Thant, Myanmar (formerly known as Burma)
(1961-1971) U Thant served as acting secretary-general after Dag Hammarskjöld's death. Just over a year later, the General Assembly voted unanimously to make him secretary-general. At the time of his appointment, U Thant was the permanent representative of Burma to the United Nations, and had previously chaired the UN Congo Conciliation Commission and the Committee on a UN Capital Development Fund. Under his leadership, the United Nations facilitated the end of the Cuban missile crisis and allayed civil war in the Congo.
Dag Hammarskjöld, Sweden
(1953-1961) Dag Hammarskjöld was unanimously elected to two terms as secretary-general and served until September 18, 1961, when he died in a plane crash en route to a peace mission in the Congo. Mr. Hammarskjöld's most significant contributions to the United Nations' mission include promotion of Armistice Agreements between Israel and the Arab States; the 1956 establishment of the UN Emergency Force (UNEF); and multiple visits to countries in Africa, Asia, Europe, the Americas, and the Middle East to acquaint himself with officials of member governments and problems in specific areas.
Trygve Lie, Norway
(1946-1952) Prior to his election as the first secretary-general of the United Nations, Lie led the Norwegian delegation to the UN Conference on International Organization in San Francisco, April 1945; chaired Commission III, which drafted the Security Council provisions of the UN charter; and in 1946 he led the Norwegian delegation to the UN General Assembly in London. While in office, Lie supported UN intervention in the Korean War and the foundation of Israel and Indonesia. He also advocated UN recognition of People's Republic of China upon the exile of the Nationalist government.
Weigh in on this issue by emailing CFR.org.
India's bitter brew
18 Sep 2008
Tea workers in India
While India flaunts its benevolence overseas, little charity is being shown to native tea laborers struggling with poverty, hunger and disease.
By Charles Bara for ISN Security Watch
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
India has successfully positioned itself as a benevolent neighbor to countries in need. Not only was it one of the first countries to provide relief to disaster-struck China and Burma, it also offered US$450 million infrastructure development aid to Afghanistan in August.
But India has failed to help the most vulnerable members of its own society, among them the tea laborers of Assam and North Bengal. Since 1998 up to 4,000 tea laborers and their families have starved to death, losing their only source of income after the closure of the tea gardens. Little is being done to alleviate this problem.
The closure of the tea gardens can be attributed to a fall in tea prices, the declining productivity of the land, and hence a decline in the quality of the tea. There is also tough competition from growers Sri Lanka and Kenya. High loans and minimal investment from the landowners have also contributed to the closures.
Nevertheless, India remains the largest tea producer in the world, accounting for 31 percent of global production. According to a recent Reuters report, tea production in 2008 is expected to rise 4.79 percent to 985 million kgs.
However, according to a report on the website iGoverment, the West Bengal Trade Union Minister Aloke Chokraborty said, "The tea garden owners do not invest the profit they earn from the tea gardens into the same business or ancillary business. They take the profit and invest it in some other business at some other places."
The misery of the tea garden workers, meanwhile, is a known phenomenon. However, the majority of these laborers are easily ignored due to their Central Indian tribal affiliations. A marginal group in every respect, these workers are not a priority for anyone, including their union, which refuses to support their call for the reopening of the gardens.
These laborers were aggressively recruited to the tea gardens in the 1840s when the British sought to break China's market domination by growing tea in Assam and the Himalayan foothills in the Darjeeling area. Lured by the promise of a better life in the tea estates, the workers were forced to clear the jungles, succumbing en masse to epidemics such as malaria and kala-ajar (or "black fever"). Some were victims of tiger attacks. Between 1863 and 1966 alone, some 32,000 tea workers died.
The migration has proved devastating to the tribes as their identity is strongly tied to the ancestral lands they can no longer return to. The culture they have sought to preserve in the tea gardens is being eroded as their numbers dwindle.
Until a few years ago, there were approximately 340 tea estates in North Bengal employing some 300,000 workers. Of these, some 55 percent were women with an average of five to six people dependent on the wages of a single tea worker. The situation started to worsen in 2002. Today, the number of unemployed tea workers ranges from a very conservative 10,000 to as high as 21,000 according to a recent survey by the farm workers union, Paschim Banga Khet Mazdoor Samiti.
The union found that workers are trying to sustain themselves on surrounding forest products and insects. In some areas, the entire population of rats and snakes has been eaten by desperate workers.
The government refuses to admit that the tally of dead tea laborers is due to starvation. Father Cherian Padiyara, who campaigns on behalf of the tea laborers said in a Businessworld article recently: "In early June the government admitted that 571 people had died in the past 15 months. It was a stunning disclosure, the first time that West Bengal had admitted there had indeed been tea garden deaths without, of course, admitting that these were due to starvation.
"It cited coronary disease, TB, high fever, septicemia, meningitis, cancer, malaria, hepatitis and cirrhosis of the liver as causes of death. It is, of course, common sense that a lack of food and malnutrition lowers the body's immunity and leaves people vulnerable to a host of infections and diseases."
The same article quoted Anuradha Talwar, the West Bengal adviser to the Supreme Court, as saying that, although the state may choose to portray the deaths as disease-related, "the fact remains the workers have starved to death and many are waiting to die."
When the Chandmuni Tea Estate in West Bengal closed in 2002 to make way for urban expansion, more than 2,000 workers lost their livelihoods. Half traded their existence for token compensation. The other (noncompliant) half joined the equally miserable pavement dwellers in the city.
As they have few skills except those required to grow tea, even the best intentions are proving inadequate in helping them find an alternative source of income. In the gardens, they lived a secluded life away from towns and other villages. This remoteness made them dependent on tea estate management for everything from food and water to medicine, electricity and education.
The tribes in North Bengal have never been a high priority for the West Bengal governments. It is not that government officials ignore the issue, but funds for the victims are often siphoned off.
The percentage of aid that reaches the people affected by the closure of the tea gardens remains unknown. The lot of the tea laborers gets worse every day. As Suman Talukdar, a manager at the Child Rights and Youth (CRY) group puts it: "There is many a slip between cup and lip in the lives of those people."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Bara is a master's student at the Center for Comparative and International Studies, Zurich.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The views and opinions expressed herein are those of the author only, not the International Relations and Security Network (ISN).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Publisher
International Relations and Security Network (ISN)
Haul Generals before the ICC: rights groups
Mizzima News
Thursday, 18 September 2008 20:48
The first anniversary of the commencement of monk-led mass protests in Burma sees the launch of the latest campaign direct at rallying international support and awareness around the continued rights violations in Burma perpetrated by the ruling junta against its own people.
An initiative co-sponsored by Christian Solidarity Worldwide and Partners Relief and Development UK, Change for Burma! seeks to bring the Burmese regime's leaders before the International Criminal Court (ICC) on a wide range of charges related to crimes against humanity.
Urging those in the UK, Europe and throughout the world in support of the mission's goals to contact their local parliamentary representative, Change for Burma! also calls for a universal arms embargo against the Burmese armed forces.
Speaking in support of this most recent attempt to further bring pressure upon Naypyitaw, British MP John Bercow, Co-Chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group for Democracy in Burma, said, "We've got to have a mass popular demonstration of discontent. We've got a personal and collective responsibility to do something".
Though chronicling and raising awareness of rights abuses throughout Burma and its varied communities, the project gives considerable attention to the plight of Chin State in Northwestern Burma, where an estimated 90 percent of the population is Christian – the highest figure in Burma.
Chin State is currently facing a famine which is said to affect 100,000 people.
"Virtually unseen by the world, thousands of farmers have been reduced to starvation in Chin State, the poorest part of Burma," laments the movements founders.
"The regime won't permit food aid or aid workers into the devastated areas. Villagers are too weak Burma is one of the poorest countries in the world," continues the organization's onslaught against the junta. "It is ruled by one of the world's most brutal regimes, guilty of every possible human rights violation."
Change for Burma! further accuses the Burmese regime of systematic religious persecution, including the desecration of crosses and churches, the forceful display of Buddhist propaganda during Christian services and the denial of promotion within the government and armed forces to members of the Christian community.
In contrast to Chin State, in the whole of Burma the Christian population is estimated to be less than five percent, with nearly 90 percent of Burmese being Buddhist.
Reasons To Be Gloomy
Four things to worry about.
By Ian Bremmer
Posted Thursday, Sept. 18, 2008, at 12:31 PM ET
An oil platform off the coast of Nigeria
In July, I spoke at a London conference with the gloomy title "Darkest Before the Dawn." That darkness hung over the meeting, as economists and strategists, both behind the podium and in the audience, detailed the growing international anxiety over America's financial crisis and its potential impact on global markets. Nevertheless, most of them seemed convinced that better days are coming.
As a political scientist, I fear the dawn may be farther behind the horizon than some expect, as four emerging trends pose broader and deeper challenges to the international order than we've seen in several decades.
The first of these drivers of long-term change involves energy. In 1990, the world consumed about 66 million barrels of crude oil per day. By 2007, that number had climbed to 86 million. The U.S. Energy Information Administration projects that by 2030, daily demand will soar to 118 million barrels. As energy consumption soars in developing countries like China and India, supply is struggling to keep pace.
The problem is not that the world is running out of oil. It's that future supplies will come increasingly from politically less stable parts of the world—the broader Middle East, the Caspian Sea basin, and West Africa. These regions are especially vulnerable to political turmoil, terrorist and insurgent attacks, war, government collapse, and other serious threats.
And, of course, the sixfold increase in oil prices since 2002 has empowered the governments of some oil- and gas-exporting states to use their newfound market leverage as a political weapon. Political leaders in Russia, Iran, Venezuela, and others already use their hydrocarbon wealth to pick political fights. High prices allow even marginal energy exporters like Sudan and Burma to resist international pressure for political reform.
Finally, as energy becomes an ever more precious commodity, the governments of developing states are micromanaging their energy policies by investing in national energy champions, state-owned companies that give government officials near-complete control of the country's most valuable natural resources.
The largest energy companies in the world today are state-owned firms like Saudi Aramco, Gazprom (Russia), CNPC (China), NIOC (Iran), PDVSA (Venezuela), Petrobras (Brazil), and Petronas (Malaysia). The leading multinationals—Exxon Mobil, Chevron, BP, and Royal Dutch Shell—produce about 10 percent of the world's oil and gas and hold just 3 percent of its reserves.
Collectively, national oil companies now own more than three-quarters of all crude oil reserves. The men who run them answer to political bureaucrats, not shareholders. That's a big problem for supply growth, because some of these state officials divert profits toward political projects (or line their own pockets) instead of reinvesting them in efforts to find new reserves and to build the pipelines needed to bring them to market.
The effects of all these risks can increase the prices that consumers pay for energy, weighing on growth in America, Europe, and Japan. They can embolden governments like Iran's to pursue high-risk political strategies—like aggressive development of a nuclear program—secure in the knowledge that energy exports will generate plenty of cash and help the country resist international pressure for change. Few governments around the world want a nuclear Iran. But the country's energy customers won't support sanctions that might cost them access to badly needed oil and gas supplies.
The second shift in the international balance of power is a related one. The growth of state capitalism, particularly in China and the Middle East, gives authoritarian governments with opaque political systems and large amounts of cash unprecedented levels of political and economic influence.
With the end of the Cold War, the dynamism and market power of the United States, Western Europe, and Japan—fueled by private wealth, private investment, and private enterprise—seemed to have established the dominance of the liberal economic model. But public wealth, public investment, and public enterprise have returned with a vengeance. An era of state capitalism has dawned, one in which governments are again directing huge flows of capital—even across the borders of capitalist democracies. The trend has important implications for free markets and international politics. Best recent estimates are that sovereign wealth funds, state-controlled pools of capital fueled by large reserves of foreign currencies, already account for about 12 percent of international investment—double their share of five years ago. Some credible forecasts suggest their assets could grow 500 percent by 2015. Twelve new funds have been established since 2005. More than 20 countries now have sovereign wealth funds, and several more have indicated an interest in creating them.
Yet despite the fast-growing market power of these sovereign wealth funds, we still don't know much about them. "Very few of them publish information about their assets, liabilities, or investment strategies," warns the International Monetary Fund. Some fear the states that control them will use these funds to gain political leverage inside other states.
This shift in the international balance of market power is generating considerable anxiety among U.S. and European policymakers, who fear that emerging-market-based national oil companies, state-owned enterprises, and sovereign wealth funds threaten the economic stability and national security of other countries. Whatever the political motivations for creating them, state-run companies and investment funds are burdened with the same bureaucracy, waste, and political cronyism that plague the (often authoritarian) governments that control them.
The third important geopolitical shift flows from technological advances that arm ambitious and aggressive governments, organizations, and even individuals with powerful new weapons. The tools of the information age help citizens connect and collaborate with one another and with the world outside. In recent years, we've witnessed the birth of a truly global talent pool—and have seen what it can do to generate prosperity in several countries at once. At the same time, weapons technologies—missile-guidance systems, chemical and biological agents, and nuclear know-how—are also cheaper and more widely available than at any time in history. In the past 10 years, India, Pakistan, and North Korea have officially joined the nuclear club, and the trend toward proliferation will likely intensify over the next decade.
The fourth and broadest shift in the international order flows from the transition from a U.S.-dominated system toward a nonpolar world, one in which the leading political and economic institutions no longer reflect the true balance of global power.
As U.S. hegemony gradually fades, the international leadership vacuum will grow. Other states, profiting from America's troubles or at least not wanting to share in them, will resist taking on new international responsibilities that come with costs and risks. All this comes at a historical moment in which the usefulness and legitimacy of the United Nations, World Bank, and International Monetary Fund are already open to question. On a variety of transnational issues—nuclear nonproliferation, counterterrorism, and public health and environmental worries—this trend means that problems can easily become crises.
So much for the darkness; where's the dawn? As rising energy prices create political problems for the governments of countries that depend on oil-supply growth, we'll see a surge in investment in new energy technologies and infrastructure. That process, still in its infancy, is already moving forward.
State capitalism will threaten the performance of global markets until the demands of the marketplace push a range of authoritarian states toward the fundamental political reforms that bring greater transparency. Addressing the diffusion of dangerous technologies will require, among other things, a new and more effective nonproliferation regime. But as more countries develop an interest in preserving a profitable status quo, we're likely to see more movement in that direction.
None of these transformations is right around the corner. Lifting the darkness will take more than a new business cycle, a new oil find, or a new American president. Without fundamental changes in the global system, none of these challenges can be met. The good news is that necessity remains the mother of invention, and that almost everyone appreciates a beautiful sunrise. As a greater number of governments and citizens own a stake in global economic growth, more people than ever will be looking for ways to coax the sun from behind the horizon.
Can he last?
Web www.bangkokpost.com
A former judge and a former permanent secretary, new Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat is a first-time MP with only seven months under his belt. He may run into a fog in terms of priorities and how to deal with the slew of problems for the ruling party.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Nattaya Chetchotiros
President of the Thai Journalists Association and Assistant News Editor, Bangkok Post
The days of uncertainty are finally over, with Somchai Wongsawat, the People Power party's (PPP) deputy leader, emerging from political obscurity to succeed Samak Sundaravej, who exited the premiership in disgrace. But the ship of state with Mr Somchai at the helm could be headed for a violent vortex, whipped up by growing sentiment against another "nominee" prime minister.
It's no secret that one reason why Mr Samak did not last very long in the prime minister's seat was in part due to his openness about his alignment with the coup-ousted prime minister, Thaksin Shinawatra. Mr Samak went on record as Mr Thaksin's proxy and with such a label his opponents kept hounding him with criticism, which chiselled awayat his credibility.
The force of the "proxy" criticism will hit Mr Somchai a lot harder, as he is Mr Thaksin's brother-in-law. The husband of Mr Thaksin's younger sister, Yaowapa, has put himself on a collision course with the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD), which has staged a marathon protest against what it calls a puppet government controlled by remote from London, where Mr Thaksin is now in exile after jumping bail in a corruption trial.
The PAD will be on Mr Somchai's back and will have a field day digging into his past, his every track record, and exposing any and every piece of dirty linen there might be.
Mr Somchai has been on the receiving end from party factions since Mr Samak's departure. He has reportedly been forced to bow to conditions from the camp in the PPP controlled by the influential former Thai Rak Thai party executive, Newin Chidchob, in return for the faction's support for him to secure the premiership.
Seventy-three MPs answer to the Newin-linked faction, which explains why Mr Somchai could not afford to let the group switch its backing to another candidate when it came to voting for prime minister in parliament.
Mr Somchai has agreed to allocate two ministerial posts to the faction, in addition to four deputy minister portfolios promised earlier.
Once Mr Somchai is sworn in as the country's 26th prime minister and the celebrations are over, the faction will come forth with its demand that he honour his word by handing them the cabinet seats.
Mr Samak and Mr Somchai appear to share a goal. Near the end of Mr Samak's days in office, he organised continuous commemorative events to be held between Her Majesty the Queen's birthday on Aug 12, and His Majesty the King's birthday on Dec 5. It would seem Mr Samak had envisioned his stint at least stretching past Dec 5, when a prime minister leads a delegation of officials in celebrating His Majesty's birthday, a duty of the highest esteem. But his hopes have been dashed.
By comparison, Mr Samak possessed far more political clout than Mr Somchai does, and many have begun to wonder whether the latter will even survive the next few months as prime minister.
Mr Somchai is not an abrasive character, nor is he adept at mobilising crowds, such as the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD), whose members clashed with the PAD at the height of the recent political tensions.
Mr Somchai displayed his concern for the PAD and, in doing so, has shown he is a non-confrontational figure who would never adopt a violent approach in solving problems. However, his efforts to express a compromising disposition may not be enough to win over the PAD, which has vowed a protracted rally against any prime minister picked from the PPP basket.
A former judge and a former permanent secretary, Mr Somchai has only been an MP for the last seven months, after his first election. Despite advice and coaching from many of the 111 former Thai Rak Thai executives now deprived of election rights as a result of that party having committed electoral fraud, Mr Somchai may well be running into a fog in terms of priorities and how he can deal with the slew of problems for the party.
It is not clear whether he intends to stay in office long enough for Her Royal Highness Princess Galyani Vadhana's funeral in November, or whether he plans to keep his government intact till Dec 5.
Then, there is the nagging question as to when - not if - he thinks he should dissolve parliament: before or after the Constitution Court passes its judgement on the PPP, which is accused of poll fraud in the Dec 23 general election. The case is being investigated by the prosecution and it may not be too long before it is forwarded to the court.
The Somchai government's lifeline may hinge on the length of the court's deliberation, which could take up to four months, although many experts feel it would be a lot shorter. The court may not dwell much on the case since the Election Commission has, with a unanimous vote, ruled that the PPP should be disbanded. A dissolution of the party could come sooner rather than later.
Mr Somchai's first test of leadership will be selecting the people to be in his cabinet. Some critics are dismissive of his ability to cherry-pick capable individuals for the new line-up, which they remarked could be far less presentable than those under the Samak administration. With his limited bargaining power with the various factions, Mr Somchai has even less choice and freedom than Mr Samak did in shopping around for potential ministers.
Mr Somchai also has to convince parliament on the day he divulges his government's policies, about his plan to reconcile differences in this bitterly-divided society. Unless he can make the pro-government movement listen to him, he cannot guarantee to keep civil unrest under the lid.
On the economic front, Mr Somchai needs to soothe investors' nerves and assure them of the strength of the Thai economy in the face of the massive financial crunch in the United States.
Mr Somchai has been compared to the other two S's - Finance Minister Surapong Suebwonglee and Justice Minister Sompong Amornwiwat - who were also favourites to replace Mr Samak. While some regard him as the best fit for the top job, there is no one better to comment on his confidence in the new role than Mr Somchai himself.
Thaksin 'still boss'
Web www.bangkokpost.com
A People Power party envoy is believed to be on his way to London to submit the potential line-up of the Somchai Wongsawat cabinet for the perusal of former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra.
Yongyuth Tiyapairat, a former deputy leader of the People Power party, has been ordered to Britain by new prime minister Somchai Wongsawat to update Mr Thaksin on the political situation and seek his advice on allotment of cabinet seats, a source in the PPP said.
Some changes could be made to the proposed line-up based on his advice.
The report of the list being delivered to London came after His Majesty the King on Thursday endorsed the nomination of deputy PPP leader Somchai Wongsawat as the new prime minister.
The royal command appointing Mr Somchai was accepted by Parliament President Chai Chidchob who was granted an audience with the King to nominate Mr Somchai at Klai Kangwon Palace in Hua Hin.
The source said the line-up has yet to be finalised. It is being prepared by core party members, including Mr Yongyuth and deputy PPP leader Sompong Amornwiwat and is expected to be finalised on Sunday, before being readied for royal endorsement.
The source said attempts are under way to weaken the political clout of former Thai Rak Thai executive Newin Chidchob who commands the rebellious Friends of Newin faction in the PPP.
The faction, which has 73 MPs under its wing, opposed Mr Somchai's nomination but then had a change of heart.
The source said Mr Sompong is likely to be moved from the Justice Ministry to the Interior Ministry, where he is expected to challenge Mr Newin's clout.
It is also reported that the Friends of Newin faction will lose the seat being held by Supol Fongngam, deputy interior minister.
The post is not in the quota held by the Friends of Newin group as claimed, said the source.
Rifts over the allocation of cabinet seats in the faction are also emerging.
Chaiya Promma, a member of the Friends of Newin group, said the four ministers in the group's quota should be changed. The group should meet to discuss candidates for the cabinet posts.
"If the four ministers retain the seats, there will be problems. I call for changes so that we can compare their performance," he said, adding some MPs have been lobbying others to support them for cabinet portfolios.
A group of 40 PPP MPs, meanwhile, signed a petition to block Puea Pandin leader Suvit Khunkitti from joining the cabinet. Their move follows speculation he will be named industry minister.
PPP MP for Lop Buri Suchart Lainamngern, said the party MPs question Mr Suvit's loyalty, citing the Puea Pandin leader's pullout from the Samak Sundaravej government in late July.
Chaiyos Jiramethakarn, spokesman for the Puea Pandin party, shrugged off the campaign, saying the move did not create conflict, although it might have spoiled the atmosphere.
He also criticised the PPP for meddling in Puea Pandin's affairs.
PAD core leader Chamlong Srimuang said Thursday that the PAD would continue its protest and would not negotiate with Mr Somchai.
Sondhi Limthongkul, another PAD core leader, said he would unveil the PAD's proposal for a new political order on Monday, and clear any questions over the issue.
PAD coordinator Suriyasai Katasila said the group has agreed on three points — the protest will continue without any negotiations with the government, it will oppose constitution amendments and it will push for a new political order.
Following royal endorsement, Mr Somchai promised to work to achieve national reconciliation and unity.
Quoting Mr Chai, he said the King urged the quick formation of a new cabinet to tackle the country's problems.
He said the government expects to deliver its policy statement on Sept 25.
WALL STREET FALLOUT
Supachai: The worst is yet to come
Strong Asian growth slowed by US crash
``If regulators allow banks like Lehman Brothers to leverage debt 35 to 40 times, then there must be something wrong,'' says Dr Supachai.
Asian economies should brace for more impact from the global credit crisis and also prepare for a prolonged global economic recession, warns Supachai Panitchpakdi, secretary-general of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (Unctad). The insolvency of Lehman Brothers and the bailout of the insurer AIG have shed new light on the depth of the meltdown of financial institutions in the United States, the former Thai deputy prime minister said yesterday.
The breakdown of the US financial system could result in a decline in world economic growth this year and next, and complicate efforts to forge a new global trade agreement under the World Trade Organisation, which Dr Supachai headed from 2002-05.
''We had predicted a global economic slowdown by 1% this year. But watching the situation in the financial market as it has unfolded over the last few days, my fear was that it would be higher than that,'' he said at the Thailand Focus investors' conference yesterday in Bangkok.
''People mostly think of the word recession in a technical aspect, which means two quarters of economic contraction. It is a recession nevertheless. We must prepare for a longer period of recession.''
The anticipated decline in US financial market asset prices, recognition of losses, deleveraging of the private sector and the need to recapitalise the financial system would be a prolonged process, Dr Supachai said.
Asia economies are expected to post strong 6% growth this year due to growing incomes in China and India which will be buoyed by agricultural product prices.
But Asian economic policymakers should avoid repeating stagflation which occurred in the 1970s when global economies were hit with high inflation pushed by fuel prices against a backdrop of weaker international trade than today.
Asian countries should continue to improve labour productivity and strengthen trade liberalisation to cushion the impact of the world slowdown, he said.
Meanwhile, central banks must avoid adopting overly restrictive monetary policy that could depress economic growth, he added.
With the threat of stagflation, the trend in policy is to keep interest rate increases on hold.
Dr Supachai said financial institutions' unwinding of futures contracts in the wake of the credit crisis could contribute to a further decline in oil prices. But Asian economies should avoid subsidies which increase dependence on fossil fuel and thus pressure their current accounts.
He said the global credit crisis highlighted loopholes in regulations of world financial systems.
''The combination of the financial system awash with liquidity and the unfettered market mechanism is the cause of the problem. When there is an upturn in the economy, people become more complacent and are willing to take more risks,'' he said.
''If regulators allow banks like Lehman Brothers to leverage debt 35 to 40 times, then there must be something wrong.''
THAILAND IN TURMOIL
On the brink of becoming a failed state
PAVIN CHACHAVALPONGPUN
Is Thailand at risk of turning into a ''failed state''? The current political crisis suggests the existence of certain indicators of the state's vulnerability to collapse amid unending conflict. The People's Alliance for Democracy has pledged to oppose any members of the ruling People Power party from leading a new government, including new Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat, the brother-in-law of Thaksin Shinawatra; the latter was ousted in a military coup two years ago today, and is at present a fugitive from Thai law residing in London.
The PAD accuses the PPP executives of working as agents of Mr Thaksin and is continuing its crusade to uproot his political legacy. But getting rid of Mr Thaksin's political influence seems to be a ''mission impossible'', considering his strong support at the grassroots level.
This political zero-sum game led to a serious confrontation between the PAD and the pro-government camp, the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD), which is believed to be backed by some factions of the PPP.
The military, despite possessing absolute control under the state of emergency decree (which was announced on Sept 2 and lifted on Sept 14), has declined to use force against the protesters.
But a fresh coup d'etat should not be discounted if the crisis deteriorates and the country slips into a political coma.
The Democrat party's proposal of a ''national unity'' government failed to make itself attractive. The PPP has no reason to hand over its majority rule to the opposition.
Meanwhile, the Thai economy has been badly affected by the political unrest, with the tourism industry being hit hardest. Some foreign investors have cast doubts over the country's long-term political stability and threatened to curb manufacturing orders, which could have a devastating impact on the export sector.
These are the symptoms that insinuate Thailand is experiencing conditions of a state collapse.
What is a failed state? Noam Chomsky defines it as a state whose central government is so weak or ineffective that it has little practical control over much of its territory. According to Max Weber, a state could be said to succeed if it maintains a monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force within its borders. When this is broken, such as through the domination of warlords and terrorists, the very existence of the state becomes dubious; and the state could become a failure.
A failed state also implies the conditions in which a state has been rendered ineffective and is unable to enforce its laws uniformly because of many reasons, including extreme political corruption, military interference in politics and grave political situations in which non-state actors wield more power than the state.
Since 2005, the US-based Fund for Peace and the magazine Foreign Affairs have jointly published an annual ''Failed State Index'' based on a number of social, economic and political indicators of state vulnerability. The indicators are not designed to forecast when states may experience violence or collapse. They are instead meant to measure a state's vulnerability to collapse and conflict.
In the Thai case, certain conditions indicate that the country may be on the brink of collapse. The current political struggle appears to have derived from a legacy of vengeance-seeking group grievances. The PAD, while presenting itself as a defender of democracy, accused the Thaksin regime of committing power abuse, corruption and leaning towards authoritarianism. But the PAD is also acting on behalf of the Bangkok elite, who have embarked upon a vengeance mission against Mr Thaksin, simply because he was considered a threat to their power.
Although Thailand is not experiencing sharp or severe economic decline, the ongoing political wrangle has already badly impacted the economy.
The Thai Tourism Services Association revealed that the number of international arrivals in recent weeks has fallen by 70%. Hotel room occupancy has dropped by 30-40%, evidently in the aftermath of the closure of airports in Phuket, Krabi and Hat Yai late last month. Tourism accounts for 6.5% of the country's gross domestic product. The estimated loss to tourism and related service industries has been more than 42 billion baht.
Other symptoms of a failed state are also seen in the Thai case. The country has suffered endemic corruption by the ruling elite and their resistance to transparency and accountability. Court cases against the Shinawatra family reaffirm the deep-rooted corrupt practices, leading to a widespread loss of public confidence in state institutions and due process.
The governments under the Thai Rak Thai party and the PPP, despite winning landslide elections, adopted certain authoritarian characteristics in which constitutional and democratic institutions and processes were manipulated. There were attempts to use nationalistic political rhetoric by the ruling elite, often in terms of forcing communal solidarity, to serve its own legitimacy. On top of this, the media was often silenced for its critical comments on the governments.
Meanwhile, the emergence of the PAD which has operated with impunity also contributes to the possibility of Thailand becoming a failed state. A large portion of civilians is seen to be sympathetic to the PAD, even endorsing its ''New Politics'' that could take Thai democracy back a few decades to the time when despots thrived.
The PAD supported the unions' strike to disrupt essential services, such as public transportation, electricity and water supplies. The aim was to put the blame on the government for being unable to maintain basic state functions that serve the people.
Certain Asian countries are listed as failed states in this year's index, including Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Burma, North Korea and Sri Lanka.
Although Thailand has not yet got itself onto the list even when there seems to be no solution in sight to the crisis, the country is likely to be put under a ''warning'' status that suggests a likelihood of it turning into a failed state.
It is really up to the ruling leaders and the opposition to work their way out of this political deadlock. The final destination is indeed not so much about getting away from the Failed State Index, but about getting our lives back on track and living like civilised citizens of the world.
Dr Pavin Chachavalpongpun is a Visiting Research Fellow at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore.
Posts
