Saturday, October 18, 2008
Thailand's spats with 'friendly' neighbors
Thai anti-government protesters gather in front of the Lady Mo monument in downtown Nakhonratchasima city, northeast Thailand. Even the protesters follow the tradtion of showing loyalty to the crown; the group carries portraits of Thailand's king and queen. They also wear yellow, the king's color. (Photo/Frank G. Anderson)
http://www.upiasia.com/Politics/2008/10/17/thailands_spats_with_friendly_neighbors/2482/
By Frank G. Anderson
Column: Thai TraditionsPublished: October 17, 2008
Nakhonratchasima, Thailand — Once again, Thailand finds itself in an embarrassing spat with a “friendly neighboring country.” This time it is Cambodia, regarding Khao Preah Viharn, the 1,000-year-old temple ruin located on the Thai-Khmer border. Soldiers from the two countries fired at each other across the border on Wednesday, leaving two Cambodian soldiers dead and 10 Thais captured.
Conflicting claims have rankled since even before UNESCO granted the site World Heritage status, at the request of Cambodia, earlier this year.
The latest clash follows earlier, repeated, border spats with Laos, and with Burma. It leaves one wondering about the Thai Way of foreign policy.
Over the centuries, in fact, Thailand’s longstanding approach to foreign relations has been to get entangled as much as needed to serve private interests, and to deny entanglement and blame the other side whenever consequences come home to roost.
Also, authorities are quick to cite nationalism when innocents, like villagers living near the borders, are forced to suffer consequences of unwise foreign relations.
Thailand’s foreign policy approach has been painted by the diplomatic corps and the media as a traditionally wise one that shrewdly played off one powerful foreign interest against another – in the Thai Way – to preserve the status quo, or to refrain from rocking Thailand’s socio-political boat. This worked well, on the surface, with older powers like France and England, but broke down in dealing with the United States and much more importantly, with Thailand’s oft-referenced “friendly neighboring countries” – Cambodia, Laos, Burma and Malaysia.
Its failure has also extended to China, but the Thais refuse to recognize this. With the Chinese dominance in business, government, society and economy, it is hard to deny that Thailand has now been colonized. The fact has made itself known time and time again. Even when the Dalai Lama attempted to visit this predominantly Buddhist kingdom, he was not permitted to do so because of Chinese government objections. China has interfered in other Thai domestic issues by forcing the Thai government to stop anti-China demonstrations, most notably by the Falun Gong group, which should be permitted to practice its creed in Thailand, but is not.
With much more powerful countries such as the United States thoroughly undermining their own international strategies and goodwill in the foreign arena, it perhaps seems unfair to cite Thailand’s failures in this regard. Yet it is important to recognize that there is a problem, and a long-term one, in the Thai Way of dealing with others. For Thailand, the costs are much more significant than for powerful countries, particularly in the human rights arena.
When the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush told former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra that Thailand’s reputation in the human rights area was being damaged by his war on drugs, Thaksin shot back, “The United States is a useless friend.” He flippantly continued extrajudicial killings of suspected drug dealers.
When Thaksin secretly made deals with Cambodia, Burma and Laos for his own interests, the Thai public and media remained obedient in not asking penetrating questions. When the entire world has pointed to Thailand’s repeated historical state-sponsored anti-democratic violence – particularly during Octobers – complaints and appeals have been unanswered, rejected, countered with Chinese-style propaganda, or otherwise construed as interference in Thailand’s domestic affairs.
Both its internal and foreign policies seem to be having short-term and long-term detrimental effects on Thailand’s people, its economy – save for tourism – and its value system. Thailand’s current altercation with Cambodia therefore bears review.
Differences between Thailand and Cambodia are real, longstanding and important. Yet they have often been swept under the carpet, particularly with regard to human rights issues and any semblance of democratic reform, because powerful political personal interests stand in the way of ironing out issues that would benefit the general public. This tends to undermine the images of the nations that the rulers claim to serve. Is there any hope for the millions in this part of the world who are daily subject to powerful whims and wantonness?
It is important for both Thailand and Cambodia that the bureaucracy, police and military be under the control of the civilian government, not subject to the political whims of powerful people. Even with quasi-civilian control, the deep-reaching influence of powerful military and royalist figures forestalls any real change toward international standards of freedom, transparency and good governance.
Nationalist images, the sporting of royalist colors and clothing, citations of loyalty to the kingdom, crown and religion, all proceed on a blind progression into the future. Unless Thailand’s reform process subordinates the military to civilian rule; unless Thailand’s domestic policies change to allow provincial governors to be elected rather than appointed; unless Thailand’s voting process is reformed so that local politicians owe their loyalty to the electorate rather than to their party; Thailand’s future is dark and hardly beneficial to the majority of its people – all of whom deserve better.
--
(Frank G. Anderson is the Thailand representative of American Citizens Abroad. He was a U.S. Peace Corps volunteer to Thailand from 1965-67, working in community development. A freelance writer and founder of northeast Thailand's first local English language newspaper, the Korat Post – www.thekoratpost.com – he has spent over eight years in Thailand "embedded" with the local media. He has an MBA in information management and an associate degree in construction technology. ©Copyright Frank G. Anderson.)
Why low oil will not last long
ROBERT EBEL INTERVIEW: full transcript
http://www.di-ve.com/Default.aspx?ID=72&Action=1&NewsID=55122&newscategory=36
by Paul Cachia - pcachia@di-ve.com
Local News -- 17 October 2008 -- 14:40CEST
In the midst of the financial markets’ turmoil, there was one piece of good news. Oil prices, which neared the $150 mark just few weeks ago, fell back below $70, mainly due to fears of slower global growth as the financial crisis deepens.
Is $90 per barrel acceptable to the American people? Of course it is compared to the $147 dollars in July. That is very acceptable.
Robert Ebel, a senior advisor to the US government on oil and energy issues, is holding firm to his prediction that oil could go back to $90 by the next few weeks.
He believes that $90 a barrel is a ‘fair and acceptable’ oil price for consumers. “Is $90 per barrel acceptable to the American people? Of course it is compared to the $147 dollars in July. That is very acceptable,” he argues.
“OPEC [the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries] will be meeting soon. The easiest thing is to cut down production, which means that the supply will go down and the price will go up,” he noted but the fundamentals of the oil market remain the same.
“OPEC understands how the market price works. If they raise the price too much, alternative forms of energy come into play , people will grab their car less and as demand for oil decreases, the price comes down,” he explained.
Mr Ebel is convinced that the problems of the oil industry are not below the ground.
“The world’s oil is not running out fast. The oil age will remain with us for decades to come,” he asserted. Ebel’s recommendation? Buy large stocks of fuels now.
Contrary to popular belief, the world still needs to achieve a technical breakthrough that might make oil independence more than a political wish.
If we were sitting here 22 years from now, we will be talking about basically the same kind of fuels that we consume today.
“If we were sitting here 22 years from now, we will be talking about basically the same kind of fuels that we consume today - coal, oil, natural gas - and in the roughly same percentages. Not much will have changed,” he is predicting.
There’s no magic solution. The only way to solve these problems is to encourage people to consume less.
“The consumption of gasoline has come down in the US because of the high price. People were forced to use their cars less than they were accustomed to. So, we have probably reduced our oil consumption by a million barrels a day this year. That’s a lot of oil. We consume about 20 million barrels a day.
"One out of four barrels of oil consumed worldwide is consumed in the US. So, if we save the whole world benefits,” he claimed.
Pressure is mounting in the US to reduce dependence on Middle East oil. But will the change in president and administration after the November elections make a real difference to US energy policy?
“Whoever wins next month’s presidential election, whether it is Barack Obama or John McCain, is bound to want to shape a new national policy,” Mr Ebel added.
“I do not like it when we see our senior executives travelling to Saudi Arabia saying please Mr Saudi Arabia sell us more oil.
"They are the producers; we are the consumers. We need each other. If they do not have us as their market what would they do with the oil? From where would they get the income to develop their economy?” he said.
Mr Ebel has travelled widely, offering his views on world oil and energy issues to the US government with particular emphasis on the former Soviet Union and the Persian Gulf. He led various US oil expeditions to the former Soviet Union, Siberia, Turkmenistan, Sudan and Uzbekistan. So, he knows the market well.
www.di-ve.com caught up with Mr. Ebel in Malta where he was a guest of the US Embassy.
ROBERT EBEL INTERVIEW: full transcript
Q. In the midst of last week’s market turmoil, at least there was one piece of good news – oil price which had neared $150 per barrel just few weeks ago fell back below $80 per barrel [at the time of the interview]. But some analysts are saying that low oil will not last with predictions that oil could go back to $140 per barrel by next year. What’s your opinion?
A. I am not sure that it will go back to $140 per barrel. OPEC will be meeting soon to decide what should they do? The easiest thing that they can do is to cut production, which means that supply will go down and the price goes up. Well, we can only guess as to what they will do but I guess that what will they do.
Q. It was reported that the OPEC countries are meeting to discuss cutting production if prices continue to fall...I think countries like Saudi Arabia has learnt their lesson from the 1990s when they pumped more for cash but the Asia economic crisis struck and oil prices fell below $10 dollars a barrel...
A. That is a lesson that they still remember. They do not want to get caught like that again when oil fell under $11 per barrel. So, they do not want it to fall below $80 so let see what kind of approach they will take. It will go slightly into a worldwide recession that will bring the price of oil down because the demand for oil will go down, so let see how they read not only the oil price but how they read the financial crisis.
Q. I know that you are not a supporter of the ‘peak oil theory’. You were quoted as saying in 2005 that ‘the oil age will remain with us for decades to come’ but given this gloom and doom scenario, are you still sure?
A. I am still convinced that the problems that the oil industry has worldwide is not below ground. The problems are above ground. That means that there is plenty of oil below ground. That’s the issues of getting to that oil and getting it market.
Q. The Oil crisis was often used by in the run-up of the upcoming US electoral with both contenders promising short-term solutions to fire up the crowds. John McCain is using his three-word solution to the gasoline prices – drill baby drill, insisting on the opening of more offshore waters to oil development whereas Obama wants to tax away oil companies’ profits. Do you see these policies as doable?
A. Well you know politicians say things that they believe will help them get re-elected or get elected. Now I am not sure which one will eventually be elected president. But whoever it is, when he gets in office he will surround himself by experts and people will coming knocking on their door telling him what he should be doing, so what they are saying today and the program that may put in force in the next March or April are two different things. Obama takes this soft approach that is let us develop alternative forms of energy. McCain would take a harder approach which is let us build 40 nuclear power stations, that is the difference between the two gentlemen.
Q. The largest hydrocarbon reserves at least in terms of conventional fuels sources are found in the Middle East, Russia and Venezuela all led by colourful leaders to put it mildly. Very often, critics charged on the US government that US foreign policy is shaped on the need for affordable oil rather than peace-keeping missions. During her tenure Condoleezza Rice visited 65 countries, including seven trips to Russia, not to mention the US war in Iraq...
A. I do not like it when we see our government representatives; senior government representatives travelling to Saudi Arabia and say please Mr. Saudi Arabia sell us more oil. You know I do not like to see that at all. They are the producers we are the consumers, we need each other. If they do not have us as their market what would they do with the oil? From where they would have their income to develop their economy?
I do not like Venezuela, I do not like the president of Venezuela but I tell my audiences do not pay attention to what he says, watch what he does. He may say we are going to cut off oil to the United States but that is not doing to happen. We are too valuable as a market to him to walk away from the US. Russia got lots of oil, Iran has lots of oil, Canada has lots of oil but it’s mostly unconventionally oil...plenty of oil but it takes much the incentives to produce unconventionally oil around the world, that’s the price because these are expensive forms of oil to produce...price degrading incentives.
Q. In Europe for example, the Norwegians who get their electricity from a wide range of sources, pay some of the most expensive electricity bills in Europe. In fact the only source of electricity which is cheaper than fossil fuel is nuclear energy. In fact, France produces their electricity in nuclear power and it is cheaper compared to the rest of Europe. So, alternative energy will not come cheap? Does this mean that we still need to achieve a technical breakthrough that might make oil independence more than political wish?
A. That is a good point...Let’s take the issue of ethanol which is the alternative form of energy made from corn. It is protected, protected against imports of ethanol by 51 cent import charge. It means that the producers can really pocket that 51 cents and he also gets a subsidiary of 54 cents, together it’s a dollar per gallon for ethanol. But what’s happening in the ethanol markets? It is plateau.
New plants are being built in part because of current financial situation. So the bloom has sort of gone off the ethanol market and now we are waiting for the technology to develop which allow us to make ethanol from cellulosic materials and forget corn because we think corn is a food for animals and humans and we think it we should be kept that way.
Q. A Californian company is claiming that it has developed a new technique for recycling carbon dioxide, or CO2, and turning it back into fuel. Is this just a pie in the sky?
A. You know I have to see it to believe it. You get so many of these when you have a problem in a particular source of fuel. Somebody said I can take water and burn it in this car. Let’s see it work. Let’s see how it works before we buy into it.
Q. In Malta, we have the idea of building these huge offshore wind turbines but can we harness enough of its strength to solve our power crisis and light very home?
A. Two questions with regards to offshore wind. One is these wind mills be acceptable to the local people? Or will they spoil their view? Two, how about the water depths? You cannot them in areas where water depths are too great. If you cannot those two questions then you have it you have the possibilities...
Q. Or is hedging fuel prices using politics or using markets the only possible solution in the current circumstances?
A. You have got to look at the various forms of alternative forms of energy, where it is bio-fuel, ethanol or wind or solar. But are they going to make a major contribution to the supply of energy? No, there are not going to, there are just limits to it, so we get some, may be 10 per cent, at the most but I am not convinced it is going to be greater than that.
Q. So, we still have to depend on the same kind of fuels?
A. Yes, I think if we were sitting here 22 years from now and we were going about the consumption of energy worldwide we would be talking about basically about the same kinds of fuels that we consume today coal, oil, natural gas and roughly in the same percentages. Not much will be changed.
Q. The situation is very serious there’s no question about that...The sharply higher prices for oil have changed the landscape of the countries and global corporations as they are launching more green initiatives. Environment concerns have suddenly emerged as a dominant driver of global corporations. Are they being driven by an old impulse to be good stewards of the planets or are they being directed from an equally ancient desire to make money?
A. Depends on who you’re talking to? I take for the average citizen who understands there is a problem and we need to do something about it. And there are people who think that here is an opportunity for me to make some money. And what the free market is all about for the entrepreneur who sees an opportunity and responds for it. I cannot say that is wrong to do that.
Q. So, we still have to depend on the same kind of fuels...
A. Yes, I think if we were sitting here 22 years from now and we were going about the consumption of energy worldwide we would be talking about basically about the same kinds of fuels that we consume today coal, oil, natural gas and roughly in the same percentages. Not much will be changed.
Q. A year ago, you said that “that high prices are acceptable to the American consumer since people want the house with a yard and they are moving further and further out of the cities. They were willing to get up early and drive further. But now the trend is changing, it is beginning to hurt with the US changing lifestyle. In fact, according to Reuters 10 per cent of Americans are considering moving closer to work while roughly the same percentage said they were thinking about getting a job closer to home...
A. Well that was when the price of gas got up to $4 per gallon and you saw more people grab a bus to go to work, use the subway to go to work, the train if it is possible rather than spend the money to fill up their cars because if you commute an hour and a half from your home to your job, an hour and a half coming in and a hour and half coming...that is three hours, your car would consume a lot of gasoline and if you do that five days a week it is going to be very very expensive..I tell what has happened the consumption of gasoline has come down in the US because of the high price because people were forced to make this change and to use their cars less than what they were accustomed to.
So we probably reduced our oil consumption by a million barrels a day this year. That’s a lot of oil. We consume about 20 million barrels a day. One out of four barrels of oil consumed worldwide is consumed in the US. So, if we save the whole world benefits.
Q. So are you envisaging a scenario where people will be more aware of their consumption but at the same time still having these oil prices?
A. Well, the price is $80 per barrel is that acceptable for the American people? Of course it is compared to the $147 dollars in July. That is very acceptable. Is it acceptable to the people who sell us the oil? I am not so sure and we will find out when OPEC meets next month to see what they are going to do. They might think that since the oil price has dropped they are going to cut back on the supply and therefore the price will rise again. We have to see.
Q. So more people will fall under the poverty line...
A. Poverty line begins when oil price hits $100 a barrel. I think OPEC understands how the market price works. They raise the price too much, alternative forms of energy come into play, the people grab their cars less, and demand for oil is less, price comes down. So they understand that. What they have to understand is now who far will they want to raise the price above the $80 per barrel. If that’s their base price for a barrel of crude so let’s see what else gone work.
Q. Will the price of oil stabilise at around $85-$90 dollars?
A. That’s right...yeah...That’s what I would like to see. If they agree with me I do not know but that’s what I would like to see...The producing governments cannot be seen as bowing to the wishes of the consumer of the importing countries. They cannot do that. That’s not politically acceptable in their county. They have to find a way how to keep the importer happy and keep the people in their country happy. That’s an issue and that is the problem.
Global prosperity reliant on women
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/opinions/articles/2008/10/18/20081018liggett18.html
by Jodi Beckley Liggett - Oct. 18, 2008 12:00 AM
My Turn
The current global economic crisis is a chance to reflect on what will be needed to launch a worldwide recovery. Something to consider: when women and girls are afforded equal opportunity, the results in terms of economic advancement are striking.
The Women's Funding Network reports that 7 of 10 of the world's hungry are women and girls. Two-thirds of the world's children denied a primary education are girls, and 75 percent of the world's 876 million illiterate adults are women, according to the Millennium Campaign 2007.
In some regions, especially sub-Saharan Africa, women provide 70 percent of agricultural labor, produce over 90 percent of food, and yet are nowhere represented in budget deliberations, as noted by the World Economic Forum 2005.
Even in the United States, we find that women earn 23 percent less than men and are far more likely to be poor.
The Economist called women "the most powerful engine" of global economic growth, estimating that over the past decade, they have contributed more to such growth than China. The East Asian "economic miracle" of unprecedented growth from 1965 to 1990 offers an example of how all elements of the poverty puzzle must fit together: Gender gaps in education were closed, women were able to delay childbearing and marriage while more work opportunities increased their participation in the labor force. The economic contribution of women helped reduce poverty and spur growth. So it seems that those who are most affected by economic downturns, women, also hold the greatest potential to end it.
Worldwide, the Women's Learning Partnership estimates that for every year beyond fourth grade that girls attend school, wages rise 20 percent, child deaths drop 10 percent and family size drops 20 percent. In analyzing the companies that make up the Fortune 500, a Catalyst study found that companies with the highest representation of women in management positions delivered 35.1 percent more return on equity and 34 percent more total return to shareholders than companies with the lowest representation. A recent study by the American Institute on Domestic Violence found intimate partner violence costs the U.S. almost $1.8 billion each year, and victims lose nearly 8 million days of paid work per year, the equivalent of more than 32,000 full-time jobs. Addressing women's safety and equality in the workplace, at school and at home yields serious economic benefits for everyone.
Like women round the world, Arizona women still earn less and are more likely to be poor than men. Why? Arizona has the second-highest female dropout rate, and the fourth-highest number of repeat births to teen mothers.
We know that these factors are a prescription for economic hardship. But Arizona has the tools and the will to turn this situation around. Savvy school districts are helping teenage mothers struggling to do the smart thing and get their high-school diploma.
Our state has invested in child care to help poor mothers earn jobs that will support their family. Arizona has made great strides in ensuring shelter for women fleeing domestic violence, helping them to rebuild their lives and become self-sufficient.
Yet, in tough economic times, belts are tightened and programs are cut. As our policymakers ready themselves to take drastic measures, we'd like to remind them that it just doesn't make sense to shred what little safety net we have in Arizona supporting girls, working women and their families. Women's equality is the key to economic prosperity. If we help them, we help ourselves.
Jodi Beckley Liggett is director of Research and Public Policy for the Arizona Foundation for Women (www.azfoundationfor women.org)
Chevron/Thai unaffected by the US financial crisis
http://nationmultimedia.com/2008/10/18/business/business_30086317.php
By Watcharapong Thongrung
Published on October 18, 2008
The Nation, Agencies
Chevron Thailand Exploration and Production, a unit of the second-biggest US energy firm Chevron Corp, says it has not been affected by the US financial crisis.
President Tara Tiradnakorn said there was no sign the outbreak would force the company here to adjust its exploration and development investment plan in Asia-Pacific.
He said parent Chevron Corp was pressing for development in Thailand, Cambodia, Burma, Vietnam, Indonesia, the Philippines, China, Bangladesh and Australia, as could be seen from its annual investment budget for the region of Bt4 billion, 20 per cent of its global investment, on a forecast that demand for oil and natural gas in the region will overtake the US and the EU.
In 2030 demand growth for oil and natural gas in Asia-Pacific will be 27 per cent, compared to 23 per cent in 2005, Tara said.
From the forecast, he said, Chevron will have to invest more in petroleum development in Thailand. Currently it operates about 20 projects in the Gulf of Thailand, with 12 production platforms and 305 fields that produce 138,000 barrels of crude oil and 1,700 million cubic feet of natural gas a day.
Chevron Corp has given Chevron Thailand an investment budget of US$3.1 billion (Bt106 billion) to develop the Platong 2 field in the gulf from 2008-2022. This covers a central production platform, a residential platform and five well-head platforms to meet higher demand for natural gas by 2011.
Platong 2 will be near an existing Chevron field that now produces 30,000 barrels of crude a day. That field has a full capacity of 420 million cubic feet of natural gas a day. The company will start constructing a central production platform for Platong 2 and the existing field in mid-2010 to come on line by the second quarter of 2011 and supply 14 per cent of total domestic power demand.
Tara said Chevron Thailand was also studying exploration and production of petroleum in its new G4/50, G6/50, G7/50 and G8/50 Gulf of Thailand fields, for which it was awarded government concessions last year.
Chevron Corp said it would spend almost $6 billion on Asian projects this year and the global financial crisis would not derail expansion plans, according to Bloomberg.
In Asia, Chevron has oil-exploration ventures in Thailand, Indonesia and China and refineries in Singapore and Thailand, plus one refinery in Australia.
It will spend a quarter of the $23 billion allocated for global expansion in Asia this year, Kurt Glaubitz, head of media relations for exploration and development, said in Hong Kong Thursday.
"We have a $5-billion credit facility that we expect will be fully available to us, and our cash position is strong," said Glaubitz, who is based at the company's headquarters in San Ramon, California.
Under the University Partnership Programme (UPP) agreement signed on Thursday, Chevron Thailand Exploration and Production along with PTT Exploration and Production will jointly provide support of $10 million.
Chevron initiated the UPP with 18 universities from 10 countries, including Thailand.
Chevron Thailand Exploration and Production has around 100 employees in petroleum geology, most expatriates.
Powerplay behind newest Cold War
http://arirusila.cafebabel.com/en/post/2008/10/18/Powerplay-behind-newest-Cold-War
Georgia 08/08/08 is the date when headlines in Western mainstream media started to tell how big, bad aggressive Russia attacked to tiny, democratic, good Georgia. After that the West continued accusations about occupation a free sovereign state started rethink enforcing its frontlines around Russian border in new cold war era. Al this despite the fact, that day earlier 7th August 2008 Georgia had started the moths before planned war against its separatist province (look my article “OSCE report fault Georgia - one trivial statement more from EU summit” 4th Sept.2008 from my [BlogArchive|). All this despite he fact, that USA had already showed the way how to break international law e.g. by bombing Kosovo and orchestrating the quasi-independence of that separatist province.
While speaking about new confrontation between East and West the (mostly western) political commentators have used first nice, warm words like freedom, democracy, sovereignty, humanitarian catastrophe to justify their planned harder actions to response Russia’s aggression. However if we scrub the soft spoke for dummies – sorry for public – we can find the hard reality and bigger game behind recent headlines of Caucasus or Balkan events. I try next to highlight few aspects with this power play.
By AriRusila on Saturday, October 18 2008, 05:11 - Caucasus - Permalink
Pipes
First element I would like to mention is energy. Georgia is part of a NATO military alliance (GUAM) signed in April 1999 at the very outset of the war on Yugoslavia. It also has a bilateral military cooperation agreement with the US. These underlying military agreements have served to protect Anglo-American oil interests in the Caspian Sea basin as well as pipeline routes. (The alliance was initially entitled GUUAM, Uzbekistan subsequently withdrew and the name was changed to GUAM: Georgia, Azerbaijan, Ukraine, and Moldova). More you may find from my article 9th Sep.2008 "War on Pipes: Transport corridors as core of US-Russia confrontation" where is write about GUUAM and SRS (Silk Road Strategy Act). Article one may find from my BlogArchive.
To reduce reliance on Persian Gulf oil, the Bush Administration has sought to strengthen relations with other non-OPEC, oil-rich countries. For example when (then) Defense Secretary Rumsfeld visited Kazakhstan, his main agenda was to promise security assistance for Kazakhstan's oil pipelines and facilities on the Caspian Sea, where an estimated 7-9 billion barrels of oil were recently discovered (the largest oil discovery anywhere in 30 years). Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Turkey recently signed a U.S.-backed deal to build an oil pipeline to bring that oil to ports on the Mediterranean. The U.S. has military ties with each.
U.S. oil demand is huge and increasing. Today, the U.S. has less than 5 percent of the world's population, yet it consumes more than 25 percent of global oil production-about 20 million barrels per day (mbd). Oil is the dominant fuel in the U.S. energy market, meeting almost 40 percent of total U.S. energy needs. Most of this is consumed by the transportation sector. If current U.S. oil demand trends continue, by 2025, the US. will be consuming over 29 mbd. More larger and heavier cars and trucks- with bigger engines, driven more miles each year- will account for most of this growth. All tolled, today, the world is consuming a little over 80 mbd (30 billion barrels per year). By 2030, global demand is expected to grow by 50 percent to 120 mbd (45 billion barrels per year).
After August events in Georgia everything did not happen according US plan. Russia could warm its relationship with Azerbaijan which was clearly to seen when Dick Cheney made his travel around Caucasia and came back empty hands. Also the situation in Ukraine developed away from US hopes. Paul Goble concludes in his “Window on Eurasia” Sep. 5th 2008 following: “With Iran’s declaration that it opposes the construction of any undersea pipelines in the Caspian on "ecological grounds" and thus will block any delimitation of the seabed that allows for them and Baku’s decision not to back the West’s push NABUCCO project, Moscow can claim its first major political victory from its invasion of Georgia.”(Source).
These actions mean that the Russian government will now have full and uncontested control over pipelines between the Caspian basin and the West which pass through Russian territory and will be able either directly or through its clients like the PKK to disrupt the only routes such as Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan that bypass the Russian Federation.
Military-industrial complex
Second let me mention "military-industrial complex". When Russia’s invading forces choked roads into Georgia with columns of armoured vehicles and struck targets from the air, it instantly bolstered the case being made by some that the Defence Department isn’t taking the threat from Russia and China seriously enough. It was said that "Christmas Comes Early For the Military Industrial Complex”.
The Military-industrial Complex has been one of the biggest players in US foreign policy since President Eisenhower. Details about Iraq killing Iranians with US-supplied chemical and biological weapons significantly deepens our understanding of the current hypocrisy. It began with "Iraq-gate" when US policy makers, financiers, arms-suppliers and makers, made massive profits from sales to Iraq of myriad chemical, biological, conventional weapons, and the equipment to make nuclear weapons. Reporter Russ Baker noted, for example, that, "on July 3, 1991, the Financial Times reported that a Florida company run by an Iraqi national had produced cyanide some of which went to Iraq for use in chemical weapons and had shipped it via a CIA contractor." This was just the tip of a mountain of scandals.
A PBS Frontline episode, "The Arming of Iraq" (1990) detailed much of the conventional and so-called "dual-use" weapons sold to Iraq. The public learned from other sources that at least since mid-1980s the US was selling chemical and biological material for weapons to Iraq and orchestrating private sales. These sales began soon after current Secretary of State, Donald Rumsfeld traveled to Baghdad in 1985 and met with Saddam Hussein as a private businessman on behalf of the Reagan administration. In the last major battle of the Iran-Iraq war, some 65,000 Iranians were killed, many by gas.
Coming back to present days one could easily find out how the US government borrows heavily to cover its off-the-charts defence spending—$587 billion this year. Spending in Iraq and Afghanistan is from 2.9 - 5.0 bn$ per week or 280.000 - 500.000 $ per minute.
The five largest American Defence contractors are Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and General Dynamics. They are being followed by Honeywell, Halliburton, BAE Systems and thousands of smaller defence companies and subcontractors. Some, like Lockheed Martin in Bethesda (Maryland) and Raytheon in Waltham (Massachusetts) draw close to 100 percent of their business from defence contracts. Some others, like Honeywell in Morristown (New Jersey), have important consumer goods divisions. All, however, stand to profit when expenditures on weapons procurements increase. In fact, U.S. defence contractors have been enjoying big Pentagon budgets since March 2003, i.e. since the onset of the Iraq war. As a result, they have posted sizable increases in total shareholder returns, ranging from 68 percent (Northrop Grumman) to 164 percent (General Dynamics), from March '03 to September '06.
For war profiteers, soldiers returning maimed or in caskets, and an over $500 billion Pentagon budget paid for by the taxes of ordinary citizens, are externalities -- costs and consequences borne by others.
NATO became even more threatening to Russia because, at the same time, the alliance shifted its mission from defending the soil of member countries to offensive missions outside the treaty area - for example, bombing Bosnia, Kosovo, and Serbia.
The trend toward autocracy in Russia is maybe horrible for some Russian interest groups, but it is little threat to the United States. Even autocracies have legitimate security concerns, and Russia has been invaded several times through Eastern Europe, which is why the Russians are worried about a hostile alliance on its borders. Empirical evidence shows that authoritarian regimes aren't necessarily externally aggressive - for example, the dictators in Burma - and that democracies are no less belligerent than autocracies in their foreign policies. In fact, data show that the most aggressive nation on the planet after World War II has been the United States - not the Soviet Union - with more than 100 military or covert interventions in other countries.
If we make contrast to today’s’ financial turmoil one should remember following. Wall Street analysts concur that "war is good for business" particularly during a period of "economic slowdown". The top five U.S. defence contractors generated almost $129 billion in revenues and $8 billion in profits in 2006, double the revenue and profits in 2000 when George Bush became President. I bet that they want this to continue.
Lobbyists
Third there are lobbyists. Their business turnover is minimal compared two above mentioned elements but they are important glue between business and public affairs. Lobbyists can channel business money as donations or bribes to political figures or parties who then can facilitate the needs of donors.
In Georgia case most famous is Randy Scheuneman. Top McCain foreign policy advisor, Randy Scheuneman, was paid $200,000 recently by Georgia for consulting services, about one day before McCain issued a policy statement backing and emboldening the Republic of Georgia in its grab for disputed regions. And it now appears that McCain may have signalled that the US would essentially have Georgia's back if it tried to assert possession of the territories. Since 2004 Scheuneman got $900.000 from Georgia. Recently US promised over 1 bn$ taxpayers money to Georgia - god investment I must say, for Georgians.
In the mid-1990s at the stint of the Clinton administration the United States launched the process of involving “former Soviet satellite nations” into both the European Union and NATO with an eye at securing a more efficient control over their political activities. The rapid expansion of the North Atlantic alliance was a part of the strategy of a “new American age” worked out by R.Cheney and his team. In 1996, Bruce Jackson, one of Cheney’s close friends and a top manager of the military-industrial corporation “Lockheed–Martin” took the reins of the influential lobbyist organisation “American Committee on NATO Expansion”. Bruce Jackson was appointed as head of the US Committee on NATO by President Clinton and put in charge of integrating the Eastern European countries into NATO in spite of assurances that had been given to Soviet leader Mikhael Gorbachev that this would not be done. This integration involved selling US weapons systems to these countries so that they would be compatible with ours.
Lobbying can have also win-win effect to players. E.g. Bruce Jackson founded the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq in 2002, a few months after retiring from Lockheed Martin. One can image, as the war in Iraq grinds on at a cost of some $250-400 million per day, and another contractor-heavy organization, the Iran Policy Committee, calls for a pre-emptive strike against Iran, how US Foreign politics is guided.
The New Defence Agenda (NDA) is part of Brussels growing military-industrial complex. Set up in 2003, it is funded by arms producers Lockheed Martin and BAE Systems in order to promote higher European military spending. Others arms industry lobby groups include the European Association of Aerospace Industries (AECMA) and the European Defence Industries Group (EDIG). The arms industry is also using the Lisbon Agenda and competitiveness to argue their case for increasing the EU?s current defence spending of about 3 percent of GDP to the US level of 6 percent.
New and Old Europe
Discussing about transatlantic relationship with Russia I can see a triangle drama with "western" camp. US has found stalwart allies from "New Europe" Polish-Lithuanian tandem as its spearhead, who are serving as America's watchmen on Europe's periphery as well cannon fodder in demanding theatres. The tandem with some wingmen (Estonia, Latvia) have their role in expanding Western military ties to East Europe and checking Russia's energy grip on Europe.
We have "Old Europe" like Germany, Italy some cases Spain and France also, who are more interesting about strategic political and business partnership with Russia. Old Europe countries are also developing bilateral cooperation with Russia when they see its advantages.
While some "New Europe" countries still have some post-Soviet trauma, US is tied to her self-caused conflicts and "Old Europe" is wondering how the Union will look in future, it is demanding task to find a common approach to relationship with Russia. While Russia also considers its options I can only hope that some neutral forum for dialogue could be found.
Yes I hope that one or more forums can accommodate different dialogs. Europe schizophrenia will be cured either in some common forum or with two rail development where new and old Europe maybe are going with different speeds and maybe also different directions - the trauma symptoms maybe are similar in new and old Europe countries but the cause/motivations differ. Post-Soviet new ones maybe have more emotional cause for their actions, US maybe have more economical priorities as well some old EU states.
More my articles one may find from my [BalkanBlog]
Myanmar: Children of the cyclone
Saw Kay Htoo at the children protection center. Htoo lost his parents and ten siblings when Cyclone Nargis ravaged the Ayeyarwaddy Delta that fateful night in May. International Federation. 
Pont Pont is 15 years old. The wind blew away her family’s home and her parents were swept away by the floodwater. Pont Pont was rescued by a group of people who managed to take refuge on higher ground. International Federation.
http://www.redcross.org/article/0,1072,0_312_8317,00.html
Cyclone Nargis left hundreds of children orphaned and vulnerable. These are the stories of Htoo and Pont Pont.
By Lasse Norgaard, Information Delegate, Bangkok, Thailand
Friday, October 17, 2008 —
Saw Kay Htoo
You could be forgiven for thinking that Saw Kay Htoo is just like any other 11-year-old boy. Walking home from school with a beaming smile and chatting with his classmates, there are no obvious signs of the tragedy he has lived through.
Saw Kay Htoo at the children protection center. Htoo lost his parents and ten siblings when Cyclone Nargis ravaged the Ayeyarwaddy Delta that fateful night in May. International Federation.
Home, however, is the child protection centre in Labutta, where seven orphans live together. They all lost their parents during the cyclone almost five months ago. Three of the smaller children are from the same family, but Saw Kay Htoo is alone.
Htoo lost his parents and ten siblings when Cyclone Nargis ravaged the Ayeyarwaddy Delta that fateful night in May. His family tried to escape the cyclone in their boat, but the boat was dashed to pieces by the waves. He saw his parents and siblings disappear one by one during the night. Htoo managed to survive by holding on to some wreckage until he landed on higher ground.
Sitting on a chair in the child protection centre, you can sense the sadness in Htoo's eyes, but it will take a psychologist to treat the underlying trauma. Fortunately, Htoo has been surrounded by committed and caring volunteers from the Myanmar Red Cross Society, who run the center.
Volunteers
Since the cyclone struck, the volunteers have taken turns looking after the children, preparing their meals, helping them with homework and organizing plays when possible. Now a more systematic psychosocial support program is being implemented as the whole operation gradually moves from relief to recovery.
So far, 25 volunteers from the Myanmar Red Cross Society have been trained in psychosocial counseling, and they in turn will train their peers. The training will target community leaders, teachers, monks and other groups, and it is designed to help the healing process as the children deal with their trauma and loss. Htoo and the other children from the center, together with 443 orphans from the area around Labutta, are all in need of this psychosocial support.
Pont Pont
Pont Pont is 15 years old. The wind blew away her family’s home and her parents were swept away by the floodwater. Pont Pont was rescued by a group of people who managed to take refuge on higher ground. International Federation.
Children like Pont Pont are simply happy to be alive. Pont Pont is 15 years old and she wears purple grips in her hair, and her face is decorated and protected with thanaka (a traditional cosmetic paste). The wind blew away her family's home and her parents were swept away by the floodwater. Pont Pont was rescued by a group of people who managed to take refuge on higher ground. Using a map pinned to the wall of the Red Cross office in Labutta, Pont Pont was able to point out the location of her parents' house.
Eleven days later, Red Cross volunteers were able to locate her parents, who amazingly were alive, and they arranged a family reunion. Pont Pont's family survived the disaster. Her gratitude for the help she received from the Red Cross led her to enroll as a volunteer, so that she too can help other vulnerable people.
The American Red Cross has contributed more than $3.6 million, deployed an international disaster worker, and sent more than 204,000 relief items-such as blankets, tarpaulins, hygiene kits and insecticide-treated mosquito nets-to help families affected by the cyclone. This contribution includes a $1 million grant from the US Agency for International Development's Office of US Foreign Disaster Assistance (USAID/OFDA).
Pressure sought on Myanmar over aid
http://www.burmabloggers.net/?p=913
18 October 2008 No Comment
The UN and ASEAN must put more pressure on Myanmar’s military junta over the proper distribution of international assistance to the victims of Cyclone Nargis, a Myanmar activist says.
“A lot of international aid was misused by SPDC (State Peace and Development Council). The military sold many donated items in the markets. There should be an independent system to monitor and evaluate aid distribution to ensure that it reaches the right people,” Khin Ohmar of the Burma Partnership said to The Jakarta Post on Friday.
Ohmar also blasted the “Post-Nargis Joint Assessment (PONJA)” prepared by the UN, ASEAN and the SPDC.
“It (PONJA) cannot be considered truly comprehensive nor objective as it omits references to certain aspects, including intimidation and human rights abuses and of the real situation in the cyclone hit areas. It was prepared in collusion with the SPDC,” Ohmar said.
Ohmar with Yuki Akimoto of Japan’s Burma Information Network and National Democratic Institute’s director Stephanie J. Lynn discussed the newly launched alternative to PONJA, “Post-Nargis Analysis: The Other Side of the Story”, with the Post.
“We felt the need to tell the other side of the post-Nargis story. Our analysis is based mainly on documentation by civil society organizations and true stories from the cyclone victims,” Ohmar said.
Produced collectively by 19 NGOs and authored by Akimoto, “Post Nargis Analysis” was launched in Jakarta on Thursday.
“Indonesia is the biggest country in Southeast Asia and the ASEAN Secretariat is located in Jakarta. That’s why we chose to release the report in Jakarta,” Ohmar said.
In early May 2008, Cyclone Nargis devastated Myanmar. Around 2.5 million people lost their houses and livelihoods, and around 140,000 lost their lives.
The junta, which has a notorious record for suppressing human rights, blocked international aid for several days after the disaster struck. After strong pressure from ASEAN and the international community, the regime finally allowed foreign aid workers to help cyclone victims.
During the distribution of aid, there were reports of aid being confiscated and sold on the market, and also of aid being withheld to those who refused to vote in a referendum to prolong the junta’s power.
RUSSIA-BURMA NUCLEAR INTELLIGENCE REPORT #2
http://kaytu.burmabloggers.net/?p=785
10.18.2008 | Author: admin | Posted in Daily New
We have received additional intelligence that expands our last report, and which also provides confirmation for earlier reports. This intelligence comes from new sources. In summary, as we continue to receive information, the details of the SPDC’s nuclear program are becoming more and more concrete.
Nuclear program objective
In May 2001, at the National Defence College (Rangoon), SPDC Science and Technology Minister U Thaung said that Burma would make an effort to possess nuclear weapons by 2020. Once achieved, this would make the regime the strongest military power in Southeast Asia; the country would be transformed into the “Fourth Burman Empire”; and, it would be able to threaten Thailand militarily.
This statement reveals the SPDC to be a grave threat to international security and peace. The regime’s announcement that its new 10 MW reactor is intended for peaceful research purposes is a lie.
Program background
The SPDC’s program to acquire nuclear weapons began in 1990. (At this time the junta was known as SLORC.) Rangoon University Physics Professor U Po Saw was consulted about developing the technology, and also the selection of candidates to become state scholars. The process of honing cadet officers for training in nuclear technology was begun in 1997 with Defense Services Academy Class 42.
Prior to 2000, Russian nuclear experts were invited and discussions on building a reactor, its location, and the training of state scholars, were held.
Our sources also tell us that the junta first contacted India to obtain nuclear technology. The country agreed to accept state scholars. However, since India also stipulated that it had to supervise and control the operation of the reactor, this approach was halted.
With the help of China, the SPDC succeeded in reaching its agreement with Russia. In addition, the Chinese government has advised the junta that it should try, by various means, to make nuclear weapons and, if it cannot produce them by its target date of 2020, that it should buy them.
In 2003, the regime sent thirty military officers to North Korea to study reactor technology. In 2006, it started buying from the North the machinery necessary for reactor construction. The SPDC established its connection with North Korea so it would not have to stop the program if its relations with Russia turned sour.
The SPDC sells natural resources to obtain nuclear technology, including for the costs of educating the state scholars (a new source confirms that there are over 4,600 in Russia alone). We have also learned that the resource sales included 20,000 tons of iron ore mined in Ka-thaing Taung, a range in the Hpakan area in Kachin State (near the famous jade mines). But, and as has been reported by others, the junta did experience financial problems in 2005 and its program with Russia was suspended. These difficulties were overcome, the program was restarted, and the SPDC is now financially secure. (The reason for this change of fortune is obvious. According to the new U.S. Burma law: “The Congressional Research Service estimates that the Yadana pipeline provides at least $500,000,000 in annual revenue for the Burmese Government.”)
Our new sources further tell us that the SPDC has secretly tried to gain assistance from Iran. This confirms a relationship that we have previously heard about from other sources.
Further, in 2000, Japan started taking scholars for doctoral level studies, to operate a reactor. With the help of Japan, new departments of nuclear science have been set up at Rangoon University, Mandalay University, and the Defense Services Academy.
Training in Russia
In 2001, the first batch of scholars, 150 military officers, was sent to Russia from Tada U Airport on chartered Aeroflot flights.
In Russia, the scholars attend a variety of institutes in Moscow and also St.Petersburg, depending on their subjects of study. The schools include:
MEPHI – Moscow Engineering Physics Institute
MIET – Moscow Institute of Electronic Technology
MATI – Moscow Institute of Aviation Technology
MAI – Moscow Aviation Institute
BMSTU – Bauman Moscow State Technical University
MITT – Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology
MISI – Moscow Civil Engineering Institute
MSMU – Moscow State Mining University
MEPHI teaches nuclear science, MIET rocket guidance, MAI aircraft and space subjects, and MATI the technology for building rockets to carry satellites. There are also course programs in tunneling, uranium mining, and uranium ore refining.
Our new sources confirm that many of the scholars are unhappy. They were forced to go to Russia; their pay is too low; the harsh weather has caused them problems; and the medical care they receive is inadequate. They complained to the Burma Embassy in Moscow, and asked to be sent home. In response, the Directorate of Intelligence sent weekly instructions urging them to complete their work and to fulfill the national aim (to produce nuclear weapons). At one point former Foreign Minister U Win Aung came in person and told the students to finish their studies. He relayed a message from Vice Chief of Staff Maung Aye that anyone who married a Russian woman scientist and then returned to Burma would be rewarded.
Also, in 2002, Quartermaster General Win Myint as well as the Navy Chief, Air Chief and Transport Minister went to Russia and arranged for the training of twenty Air Force pilots, who would then take ten purchased MIG 29s back to Burma. They additionally discussed whether Burma should acquire aircraft carriers and submarines. In July 2002, Science and Technology Minister U Thaung went to Russia and signed the agreement for the acquisition and construction of the nuclear reactor.
Reactor Location
In our previous report we stated that the site of the reactor is Kyauk Pa Toe (aka Kyauk Pha Htoe), near Tha Beik Kyin. While we do not yet have a confirmation of this, we have received additional information about the SPDC’s efforts to keep its location secret.
Even the technicians who were trained to build the reactor were not allowed to know its site. In June 2006, there was an information leak, and the officers for the program were called to Naypyidaw and interrogated. This is apparently a reference to the information that was published by Bertil Lintner in a July 2006 Asia Times article, which said that North Korean technicians had been seen at Natmauk, a town to the east of Magwe.
We have now learned that a 10-megawatt reactor was being built (or was intended to be built) in Myaing Township, Magwe Division, and further that it was to use heavy water and, for that reason, that it would be able to produce plutonium.
This leaves us with two plausible reactor sites, Myaing Township and Kyauk Pa Toe. One scenario that could explain this discrepancy is that the SPDC’s original plan was to locate the reactor in Magwe, but that this subsequently changed, perhaps because, as The Irrawaddy reported, it is an earthquake zone. In any case, while Magwe remains a possibility, there is also a strong source identification for Tha Beik Kyin.
Uranium activities
We have received additional information about Burma’s uranium deposits, which helps confirm our prior reports. Uranium ore that is commercially exploitable exists in the Kyauk Pyon, Paungpyin and Kyauk Sin areas. In addition, uranium prospecting has occurred or is underway in southern Tenasserim, Karenni State (the Loikaw area), Moehnyin in Kachin State, and in areas west of Taunggyi.
Uranium milling is in progress at Tha Beik Kyin. Further, and as we speculated in our last report, we have received information that a program to enrich milled uranium (yellowcake) to U-235 has also begun at Tha Beik Kyin. The entire operation at this location is now referred to as Nuclear Battalion-1.
We have also had confirmed that in early 2006, yellowcake was sold to North Korea. In July 2006, the regime purchased from North Korea nuclear activation equipment for use in uranium enrichment and also for the production of plutonium. While we do not know the precise nature of this equipment, there is a good probability, given the other information, that it includes centrifuges. At least one North Korean nuclear expert is now working in Tha Beik Kyin.
We further have confirmation that a related Military Research Center was built in the Setkhya range (aka Sa Kyin) near Lun Kyaw, which area is also reportedly a Nuclear Battalion, and that there is a Civilian Research Center in Kyaukse Township. There are also Russian nuclear experts in Pyin U Lwin, who give refresher courses to the state scholars after they return home.
Military modernization and Napyidaw defense
The SPDC has made a great effort to purchase major weapons systems and to modernize its armed forces. We can now report the following significant acquisitions.
In 2002, the junta bought 122 mm howitzers from North Korea. From China Northern Industries Corporation, it bought fifteen large radars for air force use. These radars were installed at Mingaladon Air Force base; Namsan Air Force base; the radar base at the top of Nat-ye-gan Mountain in Ann Township; Hainggyi Island radar base; and Koko Island radar base. Moreover, for sea and coastal security the regime installed naval-use radars, on Pyin Wain, Take Soon and Ta-pin-hmaw islands in the Irrawaddy Division; on Kyun Thaya, Mayu, Man-aung and Nantha islands in Arakan State; and on eight islands in Tenasserim Division. In 2002, it also bought, from Russia, ten MIG-29s; as well as, in February 2005, missile launchers and trucks; and, in November 2006, 122 mm and 240 mm missiles.
Naval officers are enrolled in training courses in India and Russia. In India, they attend a Ship Simulator Course, and in Russia Anti-Ship Firing and Missile courses. From September 2007, the SPDC started to buy twenty-eight anti-ship missile carriers, in batches, and the related missiles. India together with China are also both selling and giving weapons to Burma. In 2007, India gave 76 mm and 75 mm mountain batteries and 120 mm anti-aircraft batteries, for ten anti-aircraft battalions.
Before 2000, there were only two artillery divisions in Burma. By 2004, the heavy weapons force had been expanded to ten artillery divisions and one rocket division.
Since the move of the military headquarters to Pyinmana, fiber optic cables have been used to communicate with the regional commands. A Wide Area Network (WAN) is used to connect strategic locations including the defense perimeter of Naypyidaw, the radar bases in Rangoon Division, the air force bases, the naval bases, etc. In addition, for the defense of Pyinmana, the ten battalions of MOC 6 are posted in the area. An anti-aircraft battalion is stationed at Taung Nyo in the Pegu Yoma range, another anti-aircraft battalion is to the east of Wegyi and Thawutti, and a number of anti-aircraft missiles are based in Pyinmana itself. For additional security for Naypyidaw, two armored battalions are stationed between Pyawbwe and Pyinmana towns, and three artillery battalions and the No. 901 Artillery Operation Command are in the Bawnetgyi-Payagyi area, in Pegu Division.
For signal communications security, the SPCD is developing its own wireless systems. Prior to 2006, XD-D6M machines were used. They could generate wavelengths of from .01 to 99 meters, and the signal could be intercepted easily. For that reason, the SPDC instructed the Armed Forces Main Communications Factory to produce new devices. In 2006, the factory created a new wireless device, with Chinese technical assistance, and it was tentatively named 2006M1. The new machines produce wavelengths of from .00001 to .00009 meters. It is reportedly quite difficult to intercept messages sent over the new machines.
The SPDC is also developing computer software to replace the manual firing programs for the 76 mm and 120 mm artillery, mortars, 25 Pounder and 105 mm howitzers, etc. There has also been software research for forward observation systems both from the ground and the air.
The defense industry factories No. 16 and 19 have been extensively modified so that they may produce spare parts. (Chinese and Russian weapons are notorious for regularly needing replacement parts, and the weapons also wear out more quickly in the tropics.) The SPDC had Chinese and North Korean experts modify factory No. 14 so that it is able to produce medium-range rockets. Construction of factory No. 14 was started in 2000 in Ngapeh Township of Magwe Division and it is believed to be in operation. Approximately 3,000 military engineers are working in the factory. (Note: Our last report estimated that it would be five years before the SPDC could produce medium-range rockets, but it referred to Russian-made guided rockets, so this could be a separate project.)
Conclusion
The fact that the SPDC is aggressively seeking nuclear weapons (not to mention all of its other programs) should make the leaders of Thailand, and the world, extremely concerned. The appeasement policy of the Thai government and the International Community towards the junta must be reversed. The SPDC is a threat of the greatest severity. It must be stopped. Since the Security Council, with Russian and Chinese vetoes, is unable to act, there must be an alternative solution. The only real options are for the U.S., either alone or with other concerned nations (Thailand?), to assist the people of the country to free themselves, using whatever means are required.
At the moment, though, there is a conspiracy of silence even to acknowledge this threat. Thailand, the U.S. and other nations are preoccupied with other problems. There is no desire to recognize publicly another new crisis. We therefore must force the issue.
We at Dictator Watch recognize the need for the media to confirm its sources and to only publish news after it has been verified. But, we also understand that there is such a thing as investigative journalism. For situations as serious as this, we are surprised that there are apparently not major investigations underway, by leading media outlets. After all, there are innumerable dissatisfied people inside the SPDC, including many who should have knowledge of the intelligence that we have revealed. It should not be that difficult to secure independent confirmation.
Our reports to date have served to alert the Burmese, NGO and intelligence communities, but because there has been no major media coverage the world at large is as yet uninformed. Most importantly, this lack of coverage means that political leaders, in Thailand, the U.S., at the U.N., etc., can continue to act as if there is not a problem.
The fact that the new U.S. Burma law requires the Secretary of State to prepare a report on the SPDC’s programs for weapons of mass destruction is a good start, and something to which we would be pleased to contribute. However, a threat of this severity requires more than a report.
Copyright © 2008 Kay Tu Ma Ti
Powered by WordPress · Theme by Dimox
Consumer Safety Ranks Low among Regime’s Concerns
http://www.irrawaddy.org/opinion_story.php?art_id=14466
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By YENI Friday, October 17, 2008
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In a reversal of its reliance on consumer goods from China, the military government in Burma has now advised its citizens to avoid buying Chinese dairy products.
The advice comes after Burma’s official newspapers initially ignored the tainted milk crisis in neighboring China, where several infants have died and thousands have fallen ill after consuming dairy products contaminated with the toxic industrial chemical melamine.
Despite the belated recognition of the threat and the subsequent government warning,
no task force has been formed to remove suspected melamine-contaminated dairy products from local stores.
The only action taken so far has been the destruction by the Burmese Food and Drug Board of Authority of 16 tons of tainted baby food imported from Inner Mongolia’s Yili Industrial Group.
There’s little protection for consumers who save money by buying repackaged milk powder sold in small plastic bags or which has passed its expiry date.
Because of a lack of regulations protecting consumer interests enacted by a government more interested in business connections that place profits over safety, it is unclear how many children in Burma have fallen ill after drinking milk products tainted with melamine, a chemical that mimics protein in testing.
This is not the only area lacking consumer protection. In the past few weeks, explosions occurred on three passenger-carrying vehicles apparently driven by compressed natural gas (CNG)—leading to general fear among the public about traveling on buses and taxis using this fuel.
In the latest incident, seven people died and one person was critically injured when the pickup truck in which they were travelling from Taikkyi Township to Rangoon’s main vegetable market, Thiri Mingalar, exploded. The driver, his assistant and five passengers were killed in the blast.
On October 10, a bus exploded in downtown Rangoon, although there were no casualties. Two people were injured in early September when a passenger bus exploded in Insein Township.
The Burmese authorities have said only that the cause of the latest blast is “under investigation.” Observers suspect that the regime wants to forget the incident because one business involved in converting vehicles to CNG and in the construction of CNG filling stations, the junta-friendly IGE Co Ltd, is run by sons of powerful Minister of Industry-1 Aung Thaung, who also is a protégé of Burma's supreme leader Snr-Gen Than Shwe.
So it’s hardly surprising that Rangoon people are worried about the safety of the city’s public transport. As one Rangoon resident put it—“It’s like sitting on a time bomb.”
Japan elected as nonpermanent member of UNSC for 2009-2010 term
Japan elected as nonpermanent member of UNSC for 2009-2010 term
Saturday 18th October, 06:20 AM JST
NEW YORK —
The U.N. General Assembly on Friday elected Japan and four other countries as nonpermanent members of the Security Council for two-year terms beginning in January 2009. Austria, Turkey, Uganda and Mexico were the other countries that received at least the two-thirds majority vote of 128 required for election from the 192 members of the assembly. The five countries will fill an identical number of UNSC seats which will be vacated at the end of December. Japan defeated Iran 158 to 32, winning one seat allocated to Asian members of the United Nations. Indonesia currently holds the seat. ‘‘We believe that this is the manifestation of trust and confidence member states have in Japan’s role in the Security Council’’ in peace and security, development, the U.N. Millennium Development Goals, food crisis and climate change, Japanese Ambassador to the United Nations Yukio Takasu told reporters. Turkey and Austria won two seats earmarked for the ‘‘Western Europe and Others’’ region, defeating Iceland by garnering 151 votes and 133 votes, respectively. Existing nonpermanent members for the category are Italy and Belgium. Japan defeated Iran overwhelmingly in view of the confrontation between Iran and other U.N. members, especially the United States and European countries, over its nuclear program. Japan is also believed to have received support from other U.N. members in light of the second largest financial contributor to the world body after the United States. Japan sees Security Council membership as vital for it to intensify its bid for permanent council membership as intergovernmental talks on the proposed expansion of the U.N. membership structure are to begin soon. ‘‘In the course of next year, I am convinced that the momentum of Security Council reform after all so many years will be high,’’ Takasu said. ‘‘We hope that Japan’s active participation as a nonperamanent member over the next two years will be conducive to the reform that will include expansion of permanent members and nonpermanent members,’’ he said. U.S. Deputy Ambassador Alejandro Wolff pledged to support Japan’s bid for permanent membership in the council. ‘‘Of course Japan is a country that we support for permanent membership and the fact that it was elected by such a resounding number of votes also brings us great satisfaction,’’ said Wolff. ‘‘We expect them to be an outstanding contributor to the work of the council.’’
The General Assembly elects five countries each year to fill an identical number of vacated seats. The Security Council consists of five permanent veto-wielding members and 10 nonpermanent members who serve two-year terms. In Tokyo, Foreign Minister Hirofumi Nakasone said in a statement that ‘‘Japan will play an active and constructive role at the Security Council which is tasked with maintaining peace and security of the international community.’’ ‘‘Japan will strive to realize Security Council reform and Japan’s permanent membership at an early time,’’ Nakasone said. While U.N. members generally agree that Security Council reform is necessary to help the United Nations effectively cope with new challenges in the 21st century, there are widely divergent views on how to reform it. Past negotiations failed over the number of new seats and whether veto should be granted to new permanent members.
© 2008 Kyodo News. All rights reserved. No reproduction or republication without written permission.
Jade and gem sale earns Myanmar $175 million
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/world/20081017-0750-as-myanmar-gems.html
ASSOCIATED PRESS
7:50 a.m. October 17, 2008
YANGON, Myanmar – Myanmar has earned more than $175 million (130 million euros) from its latest government-sponsored sale of gems, despite a U.S. ban on their import, an official said Friday.
Most of the revenue from the 13-day auction that ended Thursday was earned from the sales of jade, which fetched more than $172 million (128 million euros).
Gemstones and pearls were the other items offered.
An organizer of the gems emporium, speaking on condition of anonymity because he is not authorized to release information, said 2,648 gem merchants participated from nearly a dozen countries, including China, Thailand, Japan and Canada.
In July, President Bush signed legislation banning the import of gems from Myanmar, which already was the voluntary policy of retailers like Tiffany's and Bulgari.
It is one of several economic sanctions Washington has applied to Myanmar's military government because of its poor human rights record and failure to hand over power to a democratically elected government.
U.S. officials said at that time that Myanmar has been evading earlier gem-targeting sanctions by laundering stones in other countries before they are shipped to the United States.
Myanmar gem sellers say the sanctions have very little impact on their business because they rely on Chinese and Thai gem merchants, who are the major buyers.
The largest contingent at this latest sale was the more than 2,200 gem merchants from China, which is the main market for Myanmar jade. The second largest contingent of more than 70 gem merchants were Thais, who usually dominate the gems and jewelry bidding.
Due to U.S. economic sanctions imposed on Myanmar in July 2003, which froze all U.S. dollar remittances to the country, international business transactions including the gem sales are done in euros.
Organized by the Mines Ministry, the events are major revenue earners for Myanmar – one of the biggest jade and gem producing countries in the world. Myanmar has held gem emporiums since 1964, and organizers launched a midyear sale in 1992.
Teak plantations are on the rise in Myanmar
http://lemn.fordaq.com/fordaq/news/teak_18073.html
18/10/2008 - 08:47
Recent news reports from Myanmar have indicated that plantation areas have been growing in recent years, particularly in the Pyinmana and Taungdwingyi districts where conditions are highly suitable for growing world class teak. The Forestry Department of the Ministry of Forestry has planted teak on the Bago Yoma mountain range in the Pyinmana District as part of the Ministry’s greening project of 2004-2005. Further actions under this greening plan are being undertaken during 2008-2009 (see TTMR 13:16).
Other reports have indicated that two privately owned teak plantations have been established: a 5,000 acre teak plantation in Kyangin Forest Reserve in the Ayeyarwady area and a 1,700 acre teak plantation in Taungnawin Forest Reserve of Paukkhaung Township. Both private entities planted teak in deforested areas after 2006. One owner of the forest plantations noted that he would wait about six to seven years before harvesting the trees, instead of maintaining the stands for about 40 years. The government has also been conducting work to assist others in managing and establishing plantations. The Ministry of Forestry and the Myanmar Timber Entrepreneurs Association (MTEA) jointly held a seminar on 4 October in Yangon to discuss these themes. Participants at the seminar examined the specific subjects of timber certification and wood industry development and identified opportunities to establish teak plantations.
Myanmar Log Prices (natural forests)
Teak Logs, FOB € Avg per Hoppus Ton
(traded volume)
Veneer Quality Aug Sep
2nd Quality 5,428
(6 tons) 5,428
(6 tons)
3rd Quality 3,964
(13 tons) 4,587
(9 tons)
4th Quality 3,294
(43 tons) 3,428
(44 tons)
Sawing Quality Aug Sep
Grade 1 (SG-1) 2,514
(253 tons) 2,574
(191 tons)
Grade 2 (SG-2) 2,074
(465 tons) 1,950
(531 tons)
Grade 3 (SG-3) 1,462
(58 tons) 1,671
(31 tons)
Grade 4 (SG-4) 1,858
(470 tons) 1,817
(487 tons)
Grade 5 (SG-5) Assorted 1,537
(592 tons) 1,651
(661 tons)
Grade 6 (SG-6) Domestic 1,215
(382 tons) 1,273
(365 tons)
Grade 7 (ER-1) 1,055
(156 tons) 1,108
(190 tons)
Grade 8 (ER-2) 790
(69 tons)
Hoppus ton=1.8m³; All grades, except SG-3/5/6, are length 8' x girth 5' &up. SG-3/4/6 are girth 4' &up. SG-3 grade is higher than SG-4 but with lower girth and price.
Logs, FOB € Avg per Hoppus Ton (traded volume)
Pyinkado (export)
417 (319 tons)
Gurjan (keruing-exp) 232 (469 tons)
Tamalan 364 (76 tons)
Taungthayet --
(ITTO's Tropical Timber Market Report)
Trimite acest articol unui prieten
Alte titluri
Myanmar - Teak market unchanged since May 2008
12/09/2008 - 15:06
Myanmar: Replanting mangroves viewed as long-term effort
02/07/2008 - 13:41
Myanmar struggles to recover from Cyclone Nargis
15/05/2008 - 15:27
Myanmar: Trends show less than predictable tender prices
31/03/2008 - 17:42
Myanmar log prices
22/10/2007 - 18:05
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
