Do the right thing


FRANK CHING

Nov 28, 2007           
     
  |   

  



The November 15 white paper on the mainland's political party system, which emphasises the role of the eight so-called "democratic parties", comes at a historically appropriate time. This year marks the 50th anniversary of the anti-rightist movement, during which the leaders of these minor parties were denounced, persecuted and purged.

In 1956, Mao Zedong launched the "Hundred Flowers Campaign" in which intellectuals were encouraged to speak up and criticise the Communist Party. They were assured that there would be no reprisals.

However, the next year, Mao reneged on his promise and cracked down on those who had spoken out, saying that all he was doing was "luring snakes from their holes".

There then followed a nationwide campaign to seek out and denounce so-called "rightists", who had vented their dissatisfaction at the communists. Hundreds of thousands of people were purged.

Among the prominent victims was Zhang Bojun, then minister of communications and chairman of the Chinese Peasants and Workers Democratic Party, one of the eight "democratic parties". He was classified as the "No.1 rightist" by Mao and stripped of his ministerial post.

Another major victim of the purge was Luo Longji, a founder of the China Democratic League - another of the "democratic parties" - who had been minister of the timber industry.

In 1981, five years after Mao's death, the party issued a "resolution on certain questions" in the party's history that held Mao responsible for the Cultural Revolution. However, it skipped lightly over the anti-rightist movement, saying simply that there were "serious faults and errors in the guidelines of the party's work". No doubt the party was more concerned about the victims of the Cultural Revolution - who were Communist Party members, after all - than victims who were members of the "democratic parties".

Now that 50 years have gone by, it is time for the Communist Party to openly apologise to these eight political parties and compensate the victims or their descendants.

It is good that, this year, Wan Gang of the political party China Zhi Gong Dang has been named minister of science and technology, and Chen Zhu , who is not a party member, is now minister of health. But the Communist Party should explain why it took 50 years to appoint such people to high office and why it purged their predecessors.

In 1978, after his return to power, Deng Xiaoping convinced party members at a key meeting that they should make economic development, rather than class struggle, their main focus. And he put forward the guiding principle to "emancipate the mind, seek truth from facts, and unite as one in looking to the future".

At a talk to the Central Party School in July, the current party leader, Hu Jintao , again gave top priority to emancipation of the mind.

Next year is the 30th anniversary of Deng's crucial guideline, and the party should demonstrate that it is truly adhering to this principle by conducting a thorough reappraisal of the anti-rightist movement.

Clearly, however, it is not ready to do this. It still preserves Mao's image and legacy, and does not allow public discussion of his mistakes. This is, no doubt, because too many other people would be implicated. Mao, after all, did not act alone. Deng was his hatchet man in the anti-rightist movement, although he did try to make amends later in life by posthumously rehabilitating some of the victims.

But, as long as the Communist Party is reluctant to face its own past truthfully, others will have difficulty believing that it is different from the party of 50 years ago, and that the views of the leaders of the "democratic parties" will be given credence.

To begin with, the Communist Party must abandon the requirement that all other political parties have to support its leadership. As long as this remains the case, there is no chance that other parties will feel comfortable about expressing their views truthfully.

Frank Ching is a Hong Kong-based writer and commentator


http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/ ... lumns&s=Opinion

The impossible American dream


Robert Samuelson
Nov 29, 2007           
     
  |   

  



Few phrases are more abused than the "American Dream". The standards for achieving it have become so open ended and expansive that, inevitably, we must fail. Does it mean becoming a homeowner? Enjoying increased living standards? Having "opportunity"? Rising above your parents' class? Achieving economic security? Or all the above - and more?

It's a mushy concept that inspires endless debates. What's lost is the bedrock reality that we Americans are more prosperous than at any time in our history. But the selective and highly critical reading of economic and social trends distorts our vision. Consider, as a case in point, a report from the Economic Mobility Project, a group established by the Pew Charitable Trusts.

"The dream that one can rise up from humble beginnings and achieve a comfortable middle-class living ... transcends racial lines," the report begins. "But is this a reality for black and white families alike?" Well, no, it concludes. The study compared the adult incomes of whites and blacks whose parents were middle-aged in the late 1960s. As adults, only 31 per cent of the black children born into middle-income families had inflation-adjusted incomes exceeding their parents' at a similar stage. Yet, 68 per cent of the comparable white children had higher incomes than their parents. Somehow, the report said, middle-class black parents couldn't protect their children from downwards mobility.

The message was that the already small black middle class is in eclipse. The reality, however, is different: since the 1960s, the black middle class has steadily expanded.

Although blacks' economic status lags behind that of whites, the advances are still sizeable. In 1972, only 6.2 per cent of black households had incomes exceeding US$75,000 in inflation-adjusted "2006 dollars"; in 2006, that figure was 16.8 per cent. Over the same years, the share of non-Hispanic white households with incomes above US$75,000 went from 18.4 per cent to 33.8 per cent. Yet, in 1972, the ratio of whites to blacks in this income bracket was three to one; now it's two to one.

Reconciling these apparent contradictions is easy. In the late 1960s, the black middle class was tiny. The group cited represented only 8 per cent of black children. Whatever happened to them has been overwhelmed by the gains of other blacks.

The high degree of intergenerational economic mobility is Pew's most interesting finding. What happens at the bottom of the income scale also happens at the top. About 60 per cent of children born to the richest fifth of parents do not end up among the richest fifth; parents influence their children's destiny but do not determine it.

Everyone knows that economic inequality has increased in the US. But the people at the top are not all the same people - or even the children of the same people. This vindicates one version of the American Dream: there is opportunity.

But there's a rub. The possibility that their children will move down the economic ladder is one of the great anxieties that assaults the vast middle class.

Mobility is a great thing, but it often comes at someone else's expense. To some extent, the American Dream is inherently an impossible dream because it cannot fulfil people's expectations of both opportunity and peace of mind.

Robert Samuelson is a Washington Post columnist


http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/ ... sight&s=Opinion

Do the Singapore rap


PETER KAMMERER

Nov 30, 2007           
     
  |   

  



Civil servants are generally staid, conservative and rock-solid people. As a result, they are perceived as being dull, humourless and lacking innovation. Attempts to break the mould, in the interests of making Hong Kong's civil service more approachable and in touch with the needs of the people it serves, have mostly failed. There is hope, though, and it comes from an unlikely source: Singapore.

I recommend that our colourless officials, Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen foremost among them, check out a video posted on the internet homepage of the city state's Media Development Authority, the government branch responsible for censorship and promoting the growth of media. In its four minutes and 34 seconds, they will find a valuable lesson.

The offering, that has also found its way to the video-sharing website YouTube, shows the suit-wearing authority's senior management rapping words of wisdom to a hip-hop beat while swinging their hips in time. Their performances are gob-smackingly terrible and the lyrics unimaginative.

Despite this, the video has, in a week, become one of the most watched on YouTube, with more than 100,000 views. Traffic to the authority's website, www.mda.gov.sg, has doubled.

Reactions from viewers have been mixed. Many found it cringe-inducing, while a distinct minority have praised it. Recent YouTube postings include: "What a waste of money"; "I like it - you need a lot of courage and a young heart to do it"; and "Amateurish in concept, poorly written and performed."

Singaporean gay rights advocate Alex Au told me he was "flabbergasted" when he set eyes on the video. Not being a fan of the authority - it prevented him from putting on public display a collection of his photographs showing same-sex couples kissing - he might be expected to be less than enthusiastic about the statutory body. The authority, he determined, was Orwellian in its outlook and language, and he detailed a list of other decisions to back up his claim, including: banning a video game because of a scene in which a woman and an alien female kiss; the pre-screening of offerings for a poetry reading; and the editing of movies.

Mr Au may be right about the authority being out of step with global practices, but he is not so accurate when it comes to how it uses language, if the video is any guide. From the opening chorus of "Yes, yes y'all / We don't stop / Get creative, can do, rock on", the conservatively dressed officials show that, although middle-aged, they do have a sense of humour.

You see, what the critics do not understand is that this is not a serious attempt by the authority's senior management to show that they are hip and cool. Rather, it is self-parody.

The authority's communications director, Cassandra Tay, explained that the video had originally been shown at a staff conference in April "as an informal and light-hearted way to communicate our future directions for the media industry, with the production quality pegged accordingly". It was so well received that it was screened in the office reception area, and to new staff, and bundled with an interactive annual report.

"We are amazed at the response and pleased that much discussion has been generated, and we hope this will raise greater awareness of Singapore's media industry," Ms Tay told me.

I venture that the idea has generated far more discussion and achieved its aims much better than the silly effort by InvestHK with its 2005 offering of businessmen dancing on the roof of the HSBC (SEHK: 0005, announcements, news) headquarters to the band Queen's hit We Will Rock You. This is one instance where Singapore has got one up on Hong Kong.

The reason has nothing to do with the merits of the Singaporean video. What stands out is the underlying concept of trying a daring and innovative approach.

Rhyming a few words, well or poorly, and then speaking them to a foot-tappable backbeat, is not difficult. Shaking your hips while doing so is a natural instinct.

Singapore has already come up with the idea, so copying it would not be innovative. Nonetheless, our officials have to do something about sprucing up their image and that of our city.

Dare I suggest a break-dancing competition?

Peter Kammerer is the Post's foreign editor

peter.kamm@scmp.com


http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/ ... lumns&s=Opinion

Good fuel economy
Beijing can learn from America's failures, particularly with regard to oil pricing policies

David Donadio
Dec 03, 2007           
     
  |   

  



Any country pursuing economic liberalisation could learn much from America's successes. But, these days, China might learn more from America's failures. In booming Guangdong, energy price controls have forced lorry drivers to wait in long lines for diesel fuel. Because Beijing forces oil refiners to sell their products at prices well below what it costs to produce them, the refiners have cut back production capacity, resulting in long queues at the pumps. "Oil futures are near US$100 [a barrel], but the price we sell at is only US$60. We are still losing money," a Sinopec (SEHK: 0386) executive told The Wall Street Journal last month.

For 17 months, planners kept Chinese oil prices fixed, while the true market cost skyrocketed. Now, thankfully, the government seems to have got the message. At the beginning of last month, Beijing raised fuel prices by roughly 10 per cent, in the hope of ending the shortages. It helped - but only allowing prices to return to market levels will restore a healthy equilibrium of supply and demand.

China's policies have precedents in America, and they're not pretty. In 1973, the oil crisis induced the US government to pass oil price controls, which most Americans knew better as long queues at petrol stations. Then, in 1979, the Iranian revolution disrupted world oil supply for the second time in a decade, creating another big spike in prices. US president Jimmy Carter instituted price controls again, resulting, as before, in long queues.

Drivers waited hours to fill up their cars, often in lines hundreds of vehicles long. In the state of Maryland, governor Harry Hughes proposed an "odd-even" system of rationing, under which cars with odd-numbered licence plates could fill up on odd days, and cars with even-numbered plates did so on even days. It was bizarre, and it certainly wasn't popular.

And, of course, once a government begins to control prices and ration scarce goods, it's hard to stop. It didn't take Beijing planners long to recognise that the price controls were hurting their own oil companies but, instead of allowing them to charge what the market would bear for the products, they tried to compensate the companies for the losses. And, so, the lunacy of the controls compounded itself.

"The government forces state-owned or state-controlled firms to absorb losses that analysts say are now running at up to US$10 a barrel on imported crude," John Ruwitch wrote recently in the International Herald Tribune, so "for the past two years, [Beijing] also doled out hefty year-end compensation to Sinopec, the worst hit".

Sinopec controls about 80 per cent of the Chinese market for refined petroleum products, and the China Daily reports that, last year, the bailouts cost the government more than US$1.2 billion. So, Beijing essentially forced consumers to pay for the inconvenience of queueing. The Chinese government knows how much it paid out to aid ailing firms, but it will never really know how much harm it dealt the overall economy. In May last year, Beijing allowed petrol prices to rise 10.6 per cent, and diesel prices to go up 12.3 per cent. No doubt, governing bodies made those decisions on the basis of some economic analysis but, as anyone familiar with the laws of economics has to wonder, what did these economists know about demand that the consumers themselves didn't?

Often, spiking prices aren't pleasant, but they're not the end of the world, either. As my colleagues at the Cato Institute, Jerry Taylor and Peter Van Doren, point out, in the last week of September 2003, oil was selling in US spot markets for US$23.86 a barrel. Five years later, prices are four times higher, but the inflation, unemployment and recession that supposedly follow oil price shocks are nowhere to be seen.

The Communist Party has staked its legitimacy on the ability to continue delivering economic growth at what, by historical standards, is a blistering pace. Party officials seeking to ameliorate popular discontent no doubt want to shield ordinary people from spiking prices but, like them or not, market prices are a reality.

Allowing prices to rise and fall, as they will in the market, can actually relieve pressure on governments. Scarce goods are scarce goods, and even an all-powerful party can't control everything. By recognising certain adversities as facts of life, a government can absolve itself of the onus of having to put an end to them. After all, putting an end to them sometimes creates bigger adversities elsewhere.

David Donadio is a writer and editor at the Cato Institute in Washington


http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/ ... sight&s=Opinion

Green growth
The fight against global warming could herald an eco-friendly transformation of the world's economy

Ban Ki-moon
Dec 04, 2007           
     
  |   

  



We have read the science. Global warming is real, and we are a prime cause. We have heard the warnings. Unless we act, now, we face serious consequences. Polar ice may melt. Sea levels will rise. A third of our plant and animal species could vanish. There will be famine around the world, particularly in Africa and Central Asia.

Largely lost in the debate is the good news. We can do something about this - more easily, and at far less cost, than most of us imagine.

These are the conclusions of the latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

This week, world leaders gather for a summit in Bali. We need a breakthrough: a comprehensive climate change agreement that all nations can embrace. We must set an agenda - a road map to a better future, coupled with a tight timeline that produces a deal by 2009.

We do not yet know what such an accord might look like. Should it tax greenhouse gas emissions, or create an international carbon trading system? Should it provide mechanisms for preventing deforestation, accounting for 20 per cent of carbon dioxide emissions, or help less-developed nations adapt to the inevitable effects of global warming - effects weighing disproportionately on them? Should it emphasise conservation and renewable fuels, like biomass or nuclear power, and make provisions for transferring new "green" technologies around the world?

The answer, of course, is some variation on all the above - and much, much more. If the negotiations get bogged down in the sheer breadth and complexity of the issues, we lose our most precious resource: time. In this, it helps to have a vision of how the future might look, if we succeed.

That is not merely a cleaner, healthier, more secure world for all. Handled correctly, our fight against global warming could set the stage for an eco-friendly transformation of the global economy - one that spurs growth and development rather than crimps it.

We have witnessed three economic transformations in the past century. First came the industrial revolution, then the technology revolution, followed by our modern era of globalisation.

We stand, now, at the threshold of another great change: the age of green economics. The evidence is all around us, often in unexpected places.

Visiting South America recently, I saw how Brazil has become one of the biggest players in green economics, drawing 44 per cent of its energy needs from renewable fuels. The world average is 13 per cent; in Europe, it is 6.1 per cent.

Much is made of the fact that China is poised to surpass the US as the world's biggest emitter of greenhouse gases. Less well-known, however, are its more recent efforts to confront grave environmental problems. China will invest US$10 billion in renewable energy this year, second only to Germany. It has become a world leader in solar and wind power.

At a recent summit of East Asian leaders in Singapore, Premier Wen Jiabao pledged to reduce energy consumption (per unit of gross domestic product) by 20 per cent over five years - not so far removed, in spirit, from Europe's commitment to a 20 per cent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020. This is the way of the future. According to some estimates, growth in global energy demand could be cut in half over the next 15 years simply by deploying existing technologies, yielding a return on investment of 10 per cent or more.

The new IPCC report lays out the very practical ways, from tougher standards for air conditioners and refrigerators to improved efficiency in industry, building and transport. It estimates that overcoming climate change may cost as little as 0.1 per cent of global GDP a year over the next three decades.

Growth need not suffer and, in fact, may accelerate. Research by the University of California at Berkeley indicates that the US could create 300,000 jobs if 20 per cent of electricity needs were met by renewables. The UN Environment Programme estimates that global investment in zero-greenhouse-gas energy will reach US$1.9 trillion by 2020 - seed money for a wholesale reconfiguration of global industry.

Already, businesses in many parts of the world are demanding clear public policies on climate change, regardless of what form they might take - regulation, emissions caps, efficiency guidelines. The reason is obvious. Business needs ground rules.

Our job, in Bali and beyond, is to shape this nascent global transformation - to open the door to the age of green economics and green development.

What's missing is a global framework within which we, the world's people, can co-ordinate our efforts to fight climate change. The scientists have done their job. Now it's up to the politicians. Bali is a test of their leadership. What are we waiting for?

Ban Ki-moon is UN secretary general


http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/ ... sight&s=Opinion

Trade trouble


FRANK CHING

Dec 05, 2007           
     
  |   

  



The message was delivered in European tones, but it had a distinctly American flavour: Beijing must lower its import barriers, raise the value of its currency, protect intellectual property rights and create a level playing field. "The EU exports less to China than to Switzerland, a country of 7 million people," said the European Commission president, Jose Manuel Barroso, last Wednesday in Beijing after their annual summit meeting.

The European Union is growing increasingly impatient. The EU's trade deficit with mainland China has tripled in the past six years, reaching US$190 billion last year, and is expected to increase more than 30 per cent this year, to US$253 billion.

For many years, Brussels handled Beijing with kid gloves, depicting Europeans as more sophisticated than crude Americans who knew no better than how to twist arms and impose sanctions. Now, however, the Europeans have decided that the soft approach simply does not work, and have opted for confrontation.

And, it seems, this American-style approach gets results. Washington's call for an increase in the value of the yuan has seen the currency rise almost 12 per cent since July 2005.

However, during that period, it has actually fallen 8 per cent against the euro, making Chinese exports to Europe cheaper and fuelling Beijing's trade surplus.

Moreover, while Europe until recently was reluctant to bring action against China in the World Trade Organisation, the US has not been similarly deterred. And, last week, Washington triumphantly announced that Beijing had agreed to terminate prohibited subsidies that gave an unfair advantage to Chinese products while denying US manufacturers the chance to compete fairly. The agreement came nine months after the US, together with Mexico, took action in the WTO.

The new European approach was demonstrated by trade commissioner Peter Mandelson who, on the eve of the summit, delivered no-holds-barred speeches denouncing the safety of mainland exports, its "tidal wave" of counterfeits, its "theft" of European technology and its controlled currency.

Little was achieved in the summit meeting. In the end, the two sides agreed to set up two panels to study trade and currency issues.

Relations have been strained by political issues, as well. European leaders who were more sympathetic, such as Germany's Gerhard Schroeder, Jacques Chirac of France and Britain's Tony Blair, have been replaced by others less inclined to tiptoe around Beijing. Opinion polls show European perceptions of China are plummeting, with protectionist sentiments rising. Its standing has dropped 15 per cent to 20 per cent in surveys in France, Germany, Italy, Spain and Britain.

Up to last year, both China and the EU trumpeted their special relationship, which was described as rising to a comprehensive strategic partnership. Even now, Brussels is by no means antagonistic. In fact, the EU last week openly opposed Taiwan's plan to hold a referendum on joining the UN.

But, on the trade front, Europeans are adamant that Beijing must act. "China has understood our messages and our concerns - no question about that," said a senior European official. "At the highest level, this has been taken on board."

This means it is up to mainland leaders to take action. But economic growth is still Beijing's top priority, and it is unlikely to be willing to slow that growth by respecting intellectual property rights or allowing its currency to appreciate substantially.

If it does not act quickly and decisively, protectionism will certainly rise in Europe. Then, Beijing may well be confronted by a united western front, with the US and Europe sharing common concerns and increasingly co-ordinating their actions.

The mainland is now between a rock and a hard place. Its honeymoon with Europe is over. It has to decide whether it will play by the rules or continue to plead that it is a developing country to which ordinary rules should not apply.

Frank Ching is a Hong Kong-based writer and commentator

frank.ching@scmp.com


http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/ ... lumns&s=Opinion

When the drive for peace only heightens tensions


Donald Kirk
Dec 06, 2007           
     
  |   

  



In the search for peace, the Middle East rivals Korea as a global flashpoint where a lasting solution seems elusive if not impossible. Fighting in the Middle East has probably cost as many lives as wars for control of the Korean peninsula, beginning with the Sino-Japanese war in the early 1890s, the Russian-Japanese war in the early 1900s and on to the Korean war of 1950-1953 and its aftermath.

That litany of suffering does not begin to count the second world war. The slaughter in Europe and the deaths of millions in Nazi concentration camps had much to do with the birth of Israel as the Jewish state, while the slaughter in Asia drove the Japanese from Korea, leading to the division of the peninsula in 1945.

It may be pointless to try to compare the numbers killed in wars, mass executions and political reprisals in both regions. Still, the eagerness of US President George W. Bush to leave a legacy of achievement between Israelis and Palestinians seems to parallel his hopes for reconciliation on the Korean peninsula. If six-party talks to get North Korea to abandon its entire nuclear weapons programme appear difficult, the process of getting Arab states to ever endorse an Israeli-Palestinian settlement seems infinitely more complicated.

One common bond between the Middle East peace process and that on the Korean peninsula may be the lack of realism on the part of America. It's not likely that Israel and the Palestinian state will come to terms any time soon and, even if they were to find some basis for agreement, what about Gaza, the strip of land that  has fallen into the hands of Hamas? What, exactly, do Middle East talks have to do with the discussions on North Korea's nuclear weapons or North-South reconciliation?

A common denominator is Iran. As a Shiite Muslim state, Iran exerts tremendous militant influence among Shiites in Iraq and elsewhere, including southern Lebanon. Tehran poses a threat not only to Israel but also to the Korean peninsula. Its refusal to talk about giving up its nuclear programme betrays its long-term interest in emerging as a nuclear military power.

Towards this end, Iran has collaborated with North Korea on technology. Iran's nuclear programme relies on highly enriched uranium, an area in which Pyongyang steadfastly denies having dabbled, while building warheads with plutonium at their core. North Korea may shut down the ageing facilities at its Yongbyon complex, but it's hard to subscribe to US envoy Christopher Hill's claim that the regime will acknowledge all it has done to develop a warhead with highly enriched uranium.

Nor is the Iran-North Korean link the only one between the Middle East and Korean talks. Nobody has come up with a definitive explanation for the Israeli raid on a mysterious Syrian base in September. The assumption is the target was "nuclear related" and that North Koreans were killed. Since North Korea is a nuclear state and Syria is not, we may assume that Pyongyang was providing expertise, and possibly equipment, for a Syrian nuclear facility. It seems highly unlikely, however, that details will emerge.

What is most frustrating is that all these talks raise false hopes without resolving underlying problems. True, the Middle East peace conference in Annapolis was the first in seven years. And, the six-party talks on North Korea - when they resumed in 2005 - broke an impasse that had existed since the breakdown in 2002 of the 1994 nuclear agreement over the North's highly enriched uranium programme. In a shrinking world, peace processes are intertwined.

They may, however, only deepen confrontations. What if Iran escalates threats against Israel? And what if North Korea, gorged on aid, goes on developing nuclear warheads in secret after acknowledging its "entire" inventory? These are dangers that Mr Bush, pursuing his "legacy", prefers to ignore.

Donald Kirk is the author of two books and numerous articles on Korea for newspapers, magazines and journals


http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/ ... sight&s=Opinion

Can we really justify burning food for fuel?


Hans-Werner Sinn
Dec 07, 2007           
     
  |   

  



When UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon recently visited Brazil, he was impressed by the country's use of biofuel to power a quarter of its vehicles. The UN and many countries share the view that biofuel is one option in fighting climate change.

The United States subsidises production of ethanol from maize, with output there growing 12 per cent annually, and almost 10 per cent worldwide. European Union countries subsidised biofuel production with £á3.7 billion (HK$42.5 billion) last year, and intend to cover 8 per cent of their motor fuels from biological sources by 2015 and 20 per cent by 2020.

But is it really wise and ethically acceptable to burn food rather than eat it? If we allow food to be used to produce biofuels, food prices will be linked to the oil price, as the head of the German farmers' association happily announced. Indeed, food prices are increasing in Europe, because more and more farmland is being used for biofuels instead of for food production.

This is not sustainable. The so-called tortilla crisis, which led to protests in Mexico City in January, foreshadows what we can expect. The price of maize, half of which is imported from the US, more than doubled in a year, primarily because of production of bioethanol.

The problem is that advocates of biofuel production have not made it clear where the land will come from. In principle, there are only three ways to procure it: by withdrawing it from food or fodder production, from the production of natural materials - particularly wood - or from nature. The perversity of the first alternative is obvious: there is no surplus food production in the world. Whoever wishes to grow biofuels on land previously used for food production must recognise that this would increase food prices, harming the poorest of the poor.

Similarly, to cultivate biofuels on land otherwise used to produce sustainable construction materials would drive up the prices of these materials and encourage their substitution by non-sustainable materials, like concrete and steel. This may be all right on ethical and social-policy grounds, but it certainly would not help the environment.

Because of photosynthesis, wood stores carbon. The larger the stocks of trees, the less carbon dioxide there is in the atmosphere and the cooler the Earth remains.

It makes no sense to use land in whatever form to produce biofuels. Only producing them without the use of additional land is justifiable in terms of environmental and social policy.

This would mean using agricultural and other waste, which would otherwise rot and produce nearly equal amounts of carbon dioxide and methane - an even more dangerous greenhouse gas.

That option should be supported. However, official encouragement of the production of biofuels on land that would have been used for other purposes must be brought to a halt.

Hans-Werner Sinn is professor of economics and finance at the University of Munich, and president of the Ifo Institute. Copyright: Project Syndicate


http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/ ... sight&s=Opinion

Back to school for rabble-rousing fans
243 days to go

OLYMPIC COUNTDOWN
Peter Simpson
Dec 09, 2007           
     
  |   

  



They're considered the extra man and can make or destroy sportsmen and women on the field of play by their bizarre, humorous, eccentric and, sadly, occasionally violent acts of passion and loyalty. From Liverpool to Lisbon, Beijing to Brisbane, Manchester to Melbourne, Soweto to Seoul and Rio to Rotterdam, fans are at the heart of the sporting matter, if not the final score.
The anatomy of the fan has kept postgraduate students burning the midnight oil, pontificating on what makes the terraces tick in theses a thousand pages thick.



Sports fans on the mainland are no different from their counterparts the world over, when given the chance to show their colours.

But government officials are concerned the overly patriotic spectating masses might let the country down when the Olympic flame is lit next year.

Chinese sports fans have a tradition of committing a net-full of spectating faux pas. If they're not spitting obscenities to make grandmothers from Harbin to Kunming choke on their rice, or waving inciting banners to freeze international relations, they're loudly answering a blaring mobile phone, or taking flash camera shots during breath-stealing sporting moments - exposing not only their rudeness but their sporting ignorance.

As any international golfer, snooker or tennis player who has competed on the mainland will testify, the Chinese often behave as if they are enduring a long-distance bus ride sat on an open box of irate scorpions; fidgeting away, oblivious to events and easily distracted by a call inquiring if they're heading to the karaoke bar.

So worried is the Beijing government, that in fine communist tradition it has started to conduct spectating lessons at factories, on the farm, in offices and at other work units. It hopes the teachings by the "The Beijing Civilised Workers Cheering Squad" - which includes 20 government-approved chants - will prevent a huge embarrassment in the Bird's Nest stadium.

There will be a collective slap to the forehead among the dark suits if the public education programme fails, and Old Wang's mobile goes off with The East Is Red ringtone just as Liu Xiang prepares to spring from the blocks in the Bird's Nest, or if a bandana-wearing revengeful fan proclaims justice for Nanjing when Japan's divers take to the high board in the Water Cube.

"Zhongguo, Zhongguo - ha, ha, ha. Zhongguo, Zhongguo bi sheng. Jia you! Jia you!" shouted one group of office clerks during their sportsmanship class - like a reconstructed struggle lesson reminiscent of regimented mass education and participation favoured by Chairman Mao during the Cultural Revolution.

The clerks' chants of "China, China - ha, ha, ha. China, China must win", and "Fill her up! Fill her up [Let's go China]", are preferable to those heard during the recent, nail-biting Super League soccer end-of-season matches.

Last month, Beijing Guo'an failed to clinch the championship during their last game of the season. The fans' vitriol was akin to an annual Tourette's sufferers' convention. It was only thanks to a huge security presence that the mouthfuls of bilious threats were prevented from being carried out.

Anyone who attended the Asian Cup soccer final in 2004 between China and bitter rivals Japan can attest to what appeared to be a careful orchestration of the home fans' reaction to the 3-1 loss on the hallowed turf of the Worker's Stadium in Beijing.

While most fans were ushered from the stadium, a few thousand were allowed to remain behind to shout the worst expletives and insults known in the Chinese language.

The 3,000-odd Japanese fans - surrounded by hundreds of plain-clothed and uniformed PLA - watched their heroes lift the cup in a stunned, worried silence.

The Japanese women's soccer team suffered similar torment just three months ago - booed and jeered by 40,000 Chinese fans during their match against Germany at September's World Cup clash in Hangzhou.

Bitter rivalries are to be expected in sport and can add a priceless edginess to performances. However, xenophobia bordering on racism is a worry at international and domestic sporting events held in China. Black soccer players are often booed - a throwback to the terraces of 1970s and early '80s Britain.

More worrying, perhaps, is the average Chinese fan has his or her emotions continuously juggled by a government that uses sport to either promote and actively encourage patriotism bordering on nationalism, or to order respect, restraint and politeness in front of "foreigners".

Recall, if you will, the riots outside the Japanese embassy in Beijing in 2005. Seething over Tokyo's wartime past and its bid for a permanent UN Security Council seat, it was reported the Chinese government authorised coaches to pick up students and other approved activists and drive them for a banner-waving, stone-throwing protest.

After the riot, which saw embassy windows smashed and drew condemnation from around the world, the protesters were ordered by shadowy figures in the mob to stop with the stones.

"We were told on the first day that throwing stones was okay, and the next that it was not," said one of the protesters, a Chinese university student who plays for an expat soccer team in Beijing.

Beijing Guo'an's stadium is, like much of the capital, decorated with government sloganeering banners such as "Be civilised when you watch the match. Don't get angry about the results" - all part of the mass campaign to whip Beijingers into shape.

And it's working.

"We are not going to shout profanities in front of foreigners because the Olympics is a show for foreigners," Lui Wei, a 21-year-old spectator attending a recent Guo'an game, told an Associated Press reporter.

"The government has told us it's not polite. The government wants to show a good image of the country," Lui said.

How parliaments and police forces managing hooligan-plagued football matches across Europe must be turning green with envy.


http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/ ... lumns&s=Opinion

A dangerous pattern of US presidential fraud


Laurence Brahm
Dec 11, 2007           
     
  |   

  



"China measures national success by GNP [gross national product] while Bhutan measures it by GNH [gross national happiness]; America measures it based on GNF [gross national fear]," a Tibetan lama said at a Buddhist forum in Bangkok recently.

His thoughts seemed to be underscored by a US intelligence services report last week vindicating Iran's nuclear programme as peaceful. According to the National Intelligence Estimate, Iran stopped its nuclear weapons programme in 2003, and has no apparent intention to renew it.

Suddenly, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad seems both reasonable and credible, certainly compared with US President George W. Bush. All along, Mr Ahmadinejad has insisted on Iran's right to diversify its energy sources away from polluting oil - the nation's main export and revenue earner - to non-polluting, uranium-fuelled sources.

On the falsified assumption that Iran's programme is defence related, Mr Bush's brinkmanship has brought the world to the edge of what the president himself proclaimed as "world war three".

But Mr Bush seems unshaken in his convictions. He continues to justify escalating sanctions and possibly turning the Middle East into another apocalypse through false or contrived intelligence - as was the case with Iraq. Facts have been suppressed, to make way for opinion.

As Mr Bush said: "Look, Iran was dangerous, Iran is dangerous and Iran will be dangerous." Such rhetoric is echoed by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who said: "I continue to see Iran as a dangerous power in international politics." The question that the media should be asking is: which power is really the dangerous one today?

As Senator Barack Obama explained lucidly, Mr Bush "continues to not let facts get in the way of his ideology". So, have we traded one form of fundamentalist-driven brinkmanship for another? Is there any difference between blinkered thinking in Tehran and in Washington? The irony of this latest intelligence revelation is that it brings tremendous credibility to Mr Ahmadinejad.

"Any security problem that could happen in one country will have a negative effect on the security of all countries," he said. "These situations cannot endure more pressure, otherwise they will be out of control. We wish, at the same time, that all those concerned with regional and international affairs [would] reconsider their positions before it is too late."

Now, it seems that Mr Ahmadinejad was telling the truth all along, and Mr Bush was lying. These lies continue the dangerous pattern of presidential fraud proved by the false evidence that coerced the American public into supporting an invasion of Iraq. Mr Bush has something in common with al-Qaeda - mainly the persistence of single-minded fanaticism.

Almost immediately after the release of the intelligence report, US Defence Secretary Robert Gates rushed off to Kabul, claiming there were rumours of rising al-Qaeda influence and Taleban popularity. The Taleban is popular, due to skewed and unrealistic US policies which have failed in Afghanistan, like in Iraq, making the situation for local residents even worse than before.

Nevertheless, Dr Gates blamed it all on Iran. But al-Qaeda is essentially the militant wing of a Wahabi fundamentalist movement which, like the Taleban, is Sunni. Iran is Shiite. So, a connection seems tenuous.

The only conclusion is that Dr Gates needs a crash course in Islam, and the western media needs to ask more independent-minded questions instead of just repeating White House press announcements.

Washington has now been seen to be falsifying intelligence about Iraq and Iran (repeating the pattern of lies seen with Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam). With countless lives lost - meaninglessly - isn't it time to say "enough"?

Laurence Brahm is a political economist, author, filmmaker and founder of Shambhala Foundation


http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/ ... sight&s=Opinion

Size is everything in Swede's business-led battle with poverty


BEHIND THE NEWS
Sarah Monks
Dec 12, 2007           
     
  |   

  



Mention a scale model and most people think of a miniature train, car or an iconic building in perfect replica. But for Swedish industrialist Percy Barnevik, scale - huge scale - is the right model for raising the world's "bottom billion" out of poverty, including hundreds of millions in China.

Since stepping down in 2001 as chairman of one of the world's leading engineering companies, ABB, formerly known as Asea Brown Boveri, he has been on a mission to mobilise the world's poorest into entrepreneurship and job creation.

Unlike many people his age, Mr Barnevik, 66, is unwilling to "retire to Spain to drink gin and tonic". He is the founding donor and international chairman of Hand in Hand, an Indian charitable trust run by 4,000 local Indian employees and 9,000 volunteers to deliver large-scale results rapidly - and which is growing fast.

"Where we differ from other charities is that we build scale. I don't want to help a thousand downtrodden women. I want to help 1 million. I don't want to get just 100 children into school in India but 300,000," he said during a visit to Hong Kong last week.

In little over three years, the organisation has given entrepreneurial training and business coaching to 262,000 impoverished women in the southern Indian state of Tamil Nadu and facilitated their access to cheap credit. As a result, the women have started 95,000 family businesses and 500 medium-sized enterprises. The target is 1.3 million new jobs by 2010.

The new enterprises cover a wide range of products and services, from looms to laundries to foodstuffs. In addition, Hand in Hand has set up medical camps and health awareness campaigns that reach 250,000 people annually. More than 12,500 children have passed through Hand in Hand's residential schools.

The programme is being replicated in South Africa and Afghanistan, where its self-help model for the poor is being adopted by governments and NGOs with the aim of creating 1.3 and 2.2 million jobs, respectively, within five years.

Now, Mr Barnevik is turning his attention to the mainland and applying his model to help lift the 500 million poorest Chinese out of poverty. He visited Hong Kong last week and sees a possible role for the city in supporting a job creation initiative in one of the mainland's poorest areas.

Mr Barnevik is no stranger to China, having first visited Beijing on business in 1970. Some years later, he signed "the biggest order of my life" with then premier Li Peng for ABB to supply generators and transmission systems for the Three Gorges hydroelectric scheme.

"China is ahead of India because it started reform 30 years ago. But the need for creative, productive employment for poor people left behind is identical," he said. "In western China tens of millions live in very poor conditions. It is necessary to raise employment levels, create jobs where people earn better money and to limit the migration to the big cities.

"China works hard to stimulate companies to move west, but bringing companies there can't do it all. A hundred million jobs won't easily come out of big business. You also need cottage industries."

London-based Mr Barnevik recently spent a week in northern Yunnan visiting poor villages close to the border with Sichuan to find out what the situation is like on the ground and to meet officials and NGOs.

"Some of these villages without roads are comparable to the worst in India," he said. "The poorest are used to receiving grants. The idea is to help them start enterprises and move higher than the absolute bottom. I focused on the opportunities to start enterprises, the available market and possible products to develop."

Mr Barnevik is adamantly opposed to what he calls "the feeding tap" which can quickly run dry when aid or donations stop flowing. "The idea of help to self-help with loans instead of grants is at times difficult to carry out, but it is the only sustainable way out of poverty," he said, citing the success of Nobel Prize-winning Bangladeshi banker Muhammad Yunus and his Grameen Bank in championing microcredit loans to entrepreneurs too poor to qualify for traditional bank loans.

"The basic idea is to stimulate poor people to stick out their necks, start enterprises, employ other people and grow from there. You need strong local partners. We train them and then they train those who become the entrepreneurs."

Hand in Hand invests heavily in education and capacity building - and allows little scope for any "sitting on hands". Family-based businesses must be up and running on their own almost immediately. Medium-sized companies must survive on their own after an initial period of hand holding. Hand in Hand "citizens' centres", which provide village-level internet connections and other business support facilities, must be owned and run by entrepreneurs as service companies after six to 12 months.

The tough approach replicates the management style that made Mr Barnevik a corporate titan in Europe and a key player in global business. He demands high efficiency, strict targets, tight quality control, low costs (hence no "expensive" western staff), maximum leveraging and, above all, scale.

"The potential for China is, of course, huge. We want to see the beginning of something that can be scaled up to 1 million people and jobs over a certain period of time," he said, adding that the Tamil Nadu experience showed the self-help model could work on a large scale.

"The Chinese have the people and they have money to expand it themselves throughout the province into other provinces."

He said the mainland already had a good system for lending to small enterprises through community co-operatives and agricultural banks, but that donor money from inside the country and elsewhere would be needed to invest in training.

Mr Barnevik donated about US$17 million of his own cash to get Hand in Hand off the ground. In Hong Kong, he met with heads of potential NGO partners from whose experiences Hand in Hand could learn. He also began meeting potential donors interested in financing a job creation programme on the mainland.

"We have all the reason in the world to believe the successful job creation model can be implemented there with proper co-operation and local partners," he said.

"That's what makes it attractive to me, that you can participate as a catalyst, as a pilot and it can have a big impact since you have well-organised government in China with their own funding to carry on. Like rings on the water."

For more information go to www.hihseed.org


http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/ ... sight&s=Opinion

A slow start out of the Olympic blocks


OBSERVER
James Tien
Dec 13, 2007           
     
  |   

  



"A lifetime of training for just 10 seconds." That was how the great African-American athlete Jesse Owens described his mixed emotions after winning a gold medal - and sporting immortality - in the 100-metres final at the 1936 Berlin Olympics.

No one could accuse Owens of being poorly prepared. His whole adult life to that point had focused on his quest for gold. We in Hong Kong, by contrast, have only nine months before our own Olympic challenge - and right now, we're simply not in shape.

In August next year, Hong Kong will have the honour of being an Olympic city, hosting the equestrian events of the 2008 Games. It is the opportunity of a lifetime - and an opportunity we are currently in danger of allowing to pass us by.

Cross the border to the mainland, and the billboards, the posters, the paraphernalia and the excitement are there for everyone to see. Here in Hong Kong, by contrast, there isn't so much as an Olympic murmur, let alone an Olympic fervour. I have every confidence that, as the time draws near, Hong Kong will focus on the challenge that the Olympics presents. My concern, however, is that we will leave it too late, and fail to make the most of this golden opportunity.

It isn't only athletes who benefit from the Olympics. With the eyes of the world upon us, the 2008 Games will benefit every person who lives, works and does business in Hong Kong and mainland China. We must be ready to welcome the Olympic tourists on their way to and from the Games on the mainland, and those watching the Hong Kong events.

We must be ready to take advantage of the opportunity to burnish Hong Kong's appeal around the world and showcase our huge variety of attractions. We must entice and attract as many visitors as we can and ensure that they take away with them memories not just of the greatest Games yet, but of a diverse and vibrant city that they will want to return to again and again.

To prepare ourselves properly, we must promote ourselves properly. That is why the Hong Kong Tourism Board, which I chair, has already begun taking our message around the world. We are selling Hong Kong as a destination in New Zealand, Britain, France and the United States. In the months ahead, we will intensify those promotion efforts in target cities across the continents.

We plan to implement a series of initiatives to improve the Olympic atmosphere and enrich visitors' experiences. These include special decorations and meet-and-greet events at ports of entry. But the true fervour needs to come from within the hearts of Hongkongers - and that is lacking.

Time is a precious commodity, as Owens appreciated when he reflected ruefully on the years of effort he invested for his 10 seconds of glory. But the legacy of his deeds in that golden summer more than 70 years ago lives on today.

We cannot afford to stand on the sidelines and watch the Olympics pass us by, like observers watching the finalists in the 100-metres race flash before their eyes. We must get involved, engaged and engrossed. The prize that the 2008 Games offer is more than just a moment in the sun. It is a legacy that will last for years. Every schoolchild should be chattering excitedly about it; every business planning promotions around it.

Our legacy will be a strengthened sporting interest among our young people. It will be a hugely enhanced international reputation for Hong Kong. Our legacy will be the knowledge that, in the summer of 2008, we were a successful and celebrated Olympic city. But that legacy has yet to be earned.

Let's get on the starting blocks now. Let's not waste another day. Let's get a proper Olympic countdown under way in this co-host city and remind everyone just how close it is, just how much there is still to do, and just how much we have to win or lose.

James Tien Pei-chun is chairman of the Hong Kong Tourism Board and the Liberal Party


http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/ ... lumns&s=Opinion

Blinkered Macau


PETER KAMMERER

Dec 14, 2007           
     
  |   

  



Few places on Earth have undergone as much change in the past decade as Macau. Even beside the growth of mainland China, the city's evolution from a sleepy Portuguese backwater to the world's gambling capital, in terms of revenue, is stunning. Bulging coffers from gambling taxes, and phenomenal growth and development, would ordinarily earn leaders the equivalent of a Nobel Prize for public service.

The serious problems the city faces say quite the opposite, though: those in charge should be replaced by people who know what they are doing. This is the view of the author of the definitive reference book on the city, Nagasaki University professor Geoffrey Gunn. After visiting Macau last Friday for the first time in two years, I can only agree.

An information technology training manager I met at the ferry pier in Hong Kong answered my question about how much had changed by using an analogy he was familiar with: hardware and software. He said the city had undergone a facelift that was akin to putting the latest computer in place, but the mindset of the people using it - the operating system - was still Windows 95. This proved to be remarkably accurate.

Macau is often compared with its US gambling city sister, Las Vegas - although the only similarity is that there are Las Vegas casino operators who have set up shop in Macau. The driving force of Macau's income is overwhelmingly from casino taxes. Las Vegas knows that this is not, in itself, a viable income stream and has diversified through conventions and entertainment.

A terrorist attack, bird flu outbreak, powerful typhoon: any disaster could send gamblers running. And they might not come in such numbers if the mainland, Hong Kong or other regional cities opened their doors to casinos - as Singapore is doing.

Dr Gunn put the lack of diversification down to the government not having a firm development plan. Worse, it had given little thought to the implications of letting so many casino operators in at once with the opening of the gambling concession in 2002, leading to a flood of mainland gamblers and severe strain on essential resources like electricity, water and transport.

There is ample proof of this one-eyed approach which, in two cases, even tramples on another income-earner - the city's history and roots. The A-Ma temple, dedicated to the goddess of the sea and believed by some to be the origin of Macau's name, has been cut off from the reason for which it was built: a road now separates it from the South China Sea. And Beijing has stepped into a controversy over a Unesco-designated world heritage site, the Guia lighthouse, because the Macau government's approval of erecting tall buildings nearby threatens to obscure it.

The trial on fraud and money-laundering charges of former transport and public works secretary Ao Man-long is revealing much about the drivers of the construction boom. It comes amid increasing anti-government sentiment from a chunk of the population left out of the development loop because they lack the skills to work in the new casino and retail operations.

Authorities recognise the brewing crisis and have promised an improved education system and better social services. But skills on a par with imported foreign workers will take time to develop, as will building capacity on the electricity grid and homes for the elderly, among much else that needs urgent attention.

Above all, though, Macau's people need to shake off their small-town mentality.

My return to Hong Kong summed up the so-called new Macau. At the ferry terminal, I was told that although it was 8pm, the earliest sailing for which tickets were available was 12.45am. Startled, I turned round, and was greeted by a throng of ticket touts who had snapped up the available seats and were offering them at inflated prices - all within earshot of the counter.

This is the thinking of the Macau of old - and the reason why there needs to be a shake-up in the top-most echelons of the administration, to set an example for all.

Peter Kammerer is the Post's foreign editor

http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/ ... lumns&s=Opinion

Catch of the day: a fix for our fisheries crisis


Markus Shaw
Dec 17, 2007           
     
  |   

  



For the past few years, along with other environmentalists, I have been invited by the chief executive to discuss areas of concern prior to his policy address. Every year, I have told him that our marine environment and collapsing fisheries are the most pressing conservation issues in Hong Kong. As usual, marine conservation merited not a single mention in this year's policy address.
The dire state of our marine environment is an easy problem to fix. It requires a little intelligence, some commitment, and not a great deal of money. In addition, a recent socio-economic study by the University of British Columbia shows that investing in a solution to our fisheries crisis results in a very significant return on investment in terms of payback to other parts of the economy.



One of WWF's proposals is the creation of sizeable no-take marine reserves. Our initial aim is 10 per cent of local waters. Bill Ballantine, the famous marine conservationist from New Zealand and pioneer campaigner for no-take reserves, said on a recent visit here that we should be more ambitious. "Go for 50 per cent," he said. "Hong Kong will be an overnight sensation. The whole world will speak of you with admiration - you'll be on the front pages and at the forefront of conservation."

It was a dramatic call. Not as dramatic, however, as the "top priority" 1999 recommendation of the Environmental Policy Working Group, set up by Tung Chee-hwa, that all of our waters should be turned into a marine park. Here's a message for Donald Tsang Yam-kuen: this would be a legacy on a scale of former governor Murray MacLehose's country park system - a lasting legacy for the ages.

In the meantime, the government still operates a free-for-all fishing policy. Mr Tsang says the problem is difficult because fishermen's livelihoods are at stake. It only takes a moment's reflection to realise that their livelihoods are at stake because there are no fish to catch. It is not an excuse for inaction. Even the fishermen feel anything is better than the status quo. The Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department is asleep at the wheel. Ten years after a government-commissioned report concluded that our fisheries were in a state of crisis and in need of urgent action, almost nothing has been done.

The Committee for Sustainable Fisheries was set up last year. It will talk until 2009 and then make recommendations. Its membership does not include anyone from the WWF, the most actively involved NGO on this issue in Hong Kong. Nor does it include any scientist with fisheries expertise, despite there being in Hong Kong world-renowned experts in this field.

The fishing community is also asleep at the wheel. The key prerequisite of any compensation scheme is a licensing regime for commercial fishermen in Hong Kong. All our neighbouring countries operate such a scheme. It is inexcusable that there should be any delay in its introduction here. Yet the fishermen themselves are opposed. This is akin to the government saying to fishermen: "Here is a monopoly," and the fishermen replying: "No thank you."

The fishermen's instinctual reflex to oppose any change, even one which will benefit them, is one of the obstacles to progress. It also contradicts the opinion that many of them have expressed that any change is better than the status quo.

The average weight of fish caught in Hong Kong is less than 10 grams. Last week I interviewed one of them: "There are very few adults left now," it said. "Most of us are kids - we get taken at a very young age." A Chinese Bahaba (a two-metre specimen) said: "I'm really surprised you were able to find me! We used to be some of the most numerous fish in the Pearl River Delta. Now even I find it difficult to find another Bahaba. I think I must be one of the last ones left."

I asked what message I could bring back, and they all replied: "Alas, fish don't vote. Tell them that we love the waters of Hong Kong. Make it safe for us, and we will come back."

Markus Shaw is chairman of WWF Hong Kong


http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/ ... sight&s=Opinion

Cracks in the system
It's a pity the strategic economic dialogue is so ineffective, as Sino-US ties will only get trickier

Andy Xie
Dec 18, 2007           
     
  |   

  



Despite the hoopla around agreements on food safety and some other issues, the fortunes of the Sino-US strategic economic dialogue continue to decline. Last week's third session of the meetings did not reverse their trend towards becoming another expensive talk shop. With so many top-level people together for several days, it is a pity that the dialogue didn't achieve more.

It can, and it should. The rise of China is bringing benefits to many and also significant tension to the world order. The process must be managed carefully by China and the US together, to avoid big shocks to the global economic system in the next 20 years.

The dialogue came about as the tension over China's currency policy threatened to boil over. From America's perspective, the forum was meant to be a pressure cooker for hammering Beijing into capitulation on its currency policy. China saw it as a place to educate foreign devils on mainland realities, so they would stop making demands and complicating the life of the Communist Party.

But it was a case of "same bed, different dreams" from the outset. The lame duck presidency in the US robbed the American delegation of its "scarecrow" effect. Indeed, the next US administration may abandon the dialogue completely. That would be a pity.

The rise of China will be the most important force in the global economy for the next two decades. China's economy will grow to over half the size of the American one in the next 10 years, and may exceed it before 2030, triggering more tensions between the two nations. A platform like the strategic economic dialogue will be badly needed to solve disputes and head off new tensions.

The key to a stable global equilibrium is to make China's rise a win-win for most players, especially the US. It has been so in the past. As factories moved to China, the west benefited from higher corporate profitability, lower consumer prices and low interest rates. Cheap debt covered up the income problem for blue-collar workers who lost out to Chinese workers. Western companies also benefited from China's income growth by owning a big chunk of the Chinese economy. Over one-tenth of Chinese domestic demand is met by foreign enterprises that produce in China. No large economy in the world is as open.

But that virtuous cycle has run into rough ground lately. Debt has played a big role in US prosperity over the past 10 years. But now it turns out that much of the debt accumulation was due to fraudulent financial products that understated their true costs. Hence, the trend to go into debt became artificially inflated. As the debt bubble bursts, the US is trying to prop up its living standard through income instead of debt. Its cheap-currency policy has fostered an obsession with China's exchange rate.

But a stronger yuan would have little direct impact on the performance of US exports. China's labour cost is one-tenth of America's. No conceivable amount of yuan appreciation would make America's manufactured goods cheap enough for Chinese consumers to buy.

An indirect effect of yuan appreciation - the further strengthening of other currencies against the US dollar - is difficult to assess. Inflationary pressure from a cheap dollar appears to be taking hold, which may limit how far it can fall. So it seems the US must solve its problem through less consumer spending rather than exports. But that will be painful, so the US may lash out at China regardless of its actual level of culpability in the US downturn.

It is not in China's interest to see the US decline. America's economy needs to make some adjustments, but the downturn could spiral out of control. The US Federal Reserve is trying to inject liquidity to revive the credit market, but that is the wrong medicine. Two issues stopped the credit expansion. First, some major financial institutions may be technically bankrupt; regardless of how much money they get from the Fed, they cannot lend because of a lack of capital.

Second, Wall Street misled the world and marketed fraudulent papers in the name of financial innovation. It could take time for foreigners to recover their confidence in Wall Street, and lend to America again. Other people cannot help the US on the second point; it must undertake serious reforms and weed out the bad apples in its financial system.

But Beijing could help with the first point. China is running a current-account surplus of over US$300 billion per year. The surplus capital could be used to pursue equity stakes in US financial institutions, to replenish their capital. More important, Beijing could link those institutions to China's booming economy, enormously strengthening their franchise value. This win-win solution, however, is resisted by the US establishment, who can't imagine Chinese as major shareholders - that is, potential bosses. They just want to keep Chinese in the dark and feed them US Treasury debt.

Americans may come to their senses next year. When the credit crunch becomes much worse, Chinese money may not look so bad after all. They might even knock on China's door, begging for money. The best way for China to help the US is to recapitalise its own financial system, not revalue the yuan. Let the next strategic economic dialogue focus on solutions like this rather than on fancy rhetoric.

Andy Xie is an independent economist


http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/ ... sight&s=Opinion

Nobel calling for Chinese stem cell scientist who beat the odds


BEHIND THE NEWS
Stephen Chen
Dec 19, 2007           
     
  |   

  



When she started out two years ago at the University of Wisconsin-Madison searching for gene combinations that could reverse an ordinary skin cell into a stem cell, a primitive type that could potentially be turned into any kind of human cell, Yu Junying's chances were one in about nine followed by 157 zeros.

"I did not have much hope of getting anywhere when we started," said Dr Yu, 34.

But the Peking University graduate, who grew up on a rice farm in Tanxi village, Zhejiang province , and went to the US a decade ago, was undaunted and came up with a solution that could put her in the running for a Nobel Prize. "I am just a stubborn person who got lucky," she said of her breakthrough research.

Stem cells became the source of intense scientific interest after researchers discovered they had the potential to produce any kind of human cell. The first human stem cells were successfully harvested in 1998 and since then many scientists have believed the only viable source of the type is an early-stage embryo. But the process involves destruction of the embryo and is ethically controversial.

A number of alternative sources have since been proposed, including ova and sperm, but little progress has been made.

Fresh from her PhD programme at the University of Pennsylvania, Dr Yu, started her research in 2003 as an assistant scientist in the laboratory of James Thomson, a renowned stem cell specialist who led the production of the first human embryonic stem cell lines.

Dr Yu spent the next two years trying to prove that "fusing" stem cells with other cells causes some of these cells to revert to a stem-cell-like undifferentiated state.

"It was an exciting finding, but practically useless unless we could figure out what were the driving genes behind the changes," said Dr Yu.

She calculated there were about 100 possible trigger genes in the pool and, in 2005, with the continued support of Dr Thomson, started sorting them out to determine which ones activated the process. She focused her efforts on setting off the reversal in skin cells.

"Few had thought about skin cells maybe because they are too marginal and too common," said Dr Yu. "But they are the type of cells we understand most."

About the same time, she had heard of a team of Japanese scientists who were on the same trail, but said she felt no pressure.

"They must have felt the same. In the beginning you feel as though only God knows how long it will take. It could be forever," she said.

Dr Yu worked at least 10 hours each day in the lab doing the labour-intensive cloning, injecting and testing of one gene after another, over and over again with only two technicians to help her. A year passed with no positive results.

"Besides the Japanese, I didn't think anyone else was willing to do the job because it was heavy duty and labour intensive," she said. "I was prepared for decades [of research]."

But then she got lucky. On July 4 last year, Dr Yu hit on a combination of 14 genes that actually worked. To celebrate, she went home and had a sound sleep.

The initial excitement was followed by fear and stress. For more than three years she had worked with little hope and, thus, little pressure. But at that moment she realised she could not "afford to lose the race to the Japanese".

That realisation was shared by the university laboratory and more resources were put at her disposal, with Dr Thomson participating in the final testing phase.

Dr Yu redoubled her efforts and successfully narrowed the number of genes down to four - two functional drivers and two efficiency boosters - and submitted her paper to Science magazine.

The Japanese team, led by Kyoto University's Shinya Yamanaka, also submitted their findings - with two pairs of genes similar to Dr Yu's - to Cell magazine at more or less the same time.

In a rare moment of co-operation between two rival scientific journals, the magazines decided to publish their papers simultaneously on November 20. "It was a deal to share the Nobel prize," a leading mainland biologist said.

When asked recently if the paper would win her the Nobel Prize, Dr Yu simply said with a smile: "Who knows?"

Unlike the discovery of the molecular structure of DNA, which went unnoticed for years, Dr Yu's and Professor Yamanaka's findings made headlines around the world.

"Everyone was waiting for this day to come," Tadeusz Pacholczyk, director of education at the National Catholic Bioethics Centre, told The New York Times.

Pei Duanqing, deputy director general of the Chinese Academy of Sciences' Guangzhou Institute of Biomedicine and Health, said he vividly remembered a visit to meet Dr Yu at her lab last year.

"The woman has a very pure mindset ... with persistence and fresh ideas," Professor Pei said. "We are profoundly happy not only because it opens a door that leads to an entirely new world [of stem cell research] for all of us, but also because a Chinese has played a decisive role in making it happen."

Meanwhile, Dr Yu has two issues to address. First, she is eager to find out how and why the genes can effectively reverse a cell's development.

"We still know terribly little about the reversing mechanism. Further investigation may revolutionise our understanding of life," she said.

The second objective is to perfect the technology so that one day it can be safely applied to people and this involves finding ways to remove the four alien genes.

"The reversed stem cells are not exactly the same as those we obtain from an embryo ... [The alien genes] could induce mutations or cancer, so I am looking for methods to take them out after they complete their functions at the final stage," she said.

"Before their removal, we will not use them to produce any tissues or organs for humans ... We may use [the stem cells] to study some diseases such as Parkinson's by creating some neurons for drug testing, but we are not ready to apply the cells on humans directly."


http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/ ... sight&s=Opinion

America's tortured soul stands on trial


TOM PLATE

Dec 20, 2007           
     
  |   

  



There are times when, from a moral standpoint, men and women simply should not remain silent. In such times, seemingly fine lines need to be turned into unequivocal hard lines. This is when the men and women of conscience stand out.

Consider the controversy about torture that is bedevilling America. It may be hard to believe, but only one serious presidential candidate has so far been outspoken about the need for the US never to use torture.

At a time when potential leaders ought to be standing up, by and large they are falling all over themselves in an attempt to avoid taking firm policy lines that might alienate potential primary voters.

But moral waffling is not the style, on the vital question of torture, for Senator John McCain. And he should know: he spent time in a Vietnamese prison, where he was severely mistreated and other American soldiers were tortured.

He recently said: "These tools are not American tools, and the easy way is not the American way."

It is the difficult moral dilemmas in life that give definition to our character and soul. All the candidates favour a high-quality health care system. No one is happy about the rich-poor divide. No candidate, as far as I know, offers anything other than a contemptuous view of Islamic terrorism. Those are the easy questions. But should the US way of interrogation permit the torture of a suspect who may have valuable, even explosive, information?

Two major ways of approaching this question are perhaps most incisive. One approach uses cost-benefit analysis: would the quality and quantity of information obtained by torture justify the barbarity of the technique? The problem with this philosophical approach is that sometimes, if not often, the information is not useful or may be erroneous.

The second classic approach is more principled. It does not try to add up the gains and losses of using torture, but would absolutely ban certain classic torture techniques as unambiguous no-go areas for US interrogators.

But don't desperate times call for desperate measures? The answer is that desperate times test true moral fibre in ways that ordinary times can't even approach.

In 1981, I wrote a book with Andrea Darvi, now my wife, titled Secret Police: The Inside Story of a Network of Terror. Its conclusion was that America is different from bad nations only when it stays on the morally right side. "A secret police force is a horribly blunt and effective instrument of suffering," we wrote. "This book is intended as a warning."

Today, more than a quarter of a century later, at least one candidate for the White House takes a similar view. It is no wonder that both the Des Moines Register and The Boston Globe - major newspapers stalking the Des Moines and New Hampshire primary tests - recently endorsed Senator McCain. No one needs to agree with him on every issue. But at least he stands for something - and it is something very important: America's national soul.

Tom Plate is a veteran journalist and author, most recently, of Confessions of an American Media Man


http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/ ... lumns&s=Opinion

Grains of hope


PETER KAMMERER

Dec 21, 2007           
     
  |   

  



As a child growing up in Australia in the 1960s, the topic of global hunger came up every other night at the dinner table. A reluctant vegetable eater, I was constantly being reminded by my mother about the world's starving children so that I would not waste food.

World leaders have spoken a lot about global hunger. There have been numerous top-level summits held, agreements signed and countless billions of dollars pledged and given.

Swathes of the world have benefited, but there are still substantial parts where hunger is rampant. The UN estimates that, each day, 25,000 people die from a lack of food or related causes.

The problem is not so much that there is not enough food, but that people living in poverty cannot afford it. They become malnourished, and prone to illnesses and disease.

If governments gave 0.7 per cent of their annual budgets to fight poverty, as experts contend they should, hunger would quickly disappear. As it is, only Scandinavian nations meet or approach this target, and the consequence of the shortfall is apparent in the grim statistics.

Through rapid industrial development, China and India are showing what can be achieved. But not all nations can offer the same workforce skills and advantages, so a solution, for now, remains in the world banding together to help feed hungry people.

Innovation is the key, and I stumbled across it on the internet this week at www.freerice.com. Millions of other people have also found what is surely one of the most useful of all websites.

US computer programmer John Breen, a long-time advocate for poverty alleviation, came up with the idea by chance. His eldest son was studying for exams and a word game was devised to help him with his English.

Mr Breen had developed a site for the UN's World Food Programme and has since set up his own site - poverty.com - to educate people about the problem. By combining his word game with his desire to see global hunger vanquished, the new website was born on October 7. Tens of thousands of people have since received food that they would not otherwise have.

At this seasonal time of giving and sharing, there is no better gift than the address of this website. By playing the game, you will be improving your English language skills while feeding the needy.

The concept is simple: You are given a word and have to choose the one with the same meaning from a list of four. Each correct answer earns 20 grains of rice, which the advertiser on each page pays for and forwards to the World Food Programme.

For those learning English or who simply love words, this game is addictive. The more correct answers, the harder the level. While you are learning and having fun, money for food is being raised.

World Food Programme spokesman Caroline Hurford said that more than US$200,000 had already gone to her organisation and that at least half had been used to buy rice for the victims of the recent floods in Bangladesh. With millions of people visiting the site each day, and the number increasing rapidly, she had high hopes for its fund-raising powers.

Mr Breen is surprised about how much interest his idea has generated, mostly through word of mouth. While he does not see it as the solution to global hunger, he does believe it is a valuable tool to educate people about the problem. He is also more optimistic now than ever before that he will live to see the day - perhaps in as little as 20 years - when everyone in the world is properly fed.

There are many worthy charities asking for donations to help the needy in Hong Kong and elsewhere in China. After giving them our largesse, and in between celebrating the festive season, we should find time to visit freerice.com.

Those few hundred grains of rice we earn while playing a game may not on their own feed a starving person but, through a combined effort, we can make a modest dent in global hunger. The chances are also good that we will have improved our vocabulary. These are surely gifts we cannot let pass by.

Peter Kammerer is the Post's foreign editor

peter.kamm@scmp.com


http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/ ... lumns&s=Opinion

Engage with Iran to isolate its president


Volker Perthes
Dec 24, 2007           
     
  |   

  



The recent US National Intelligence Estimate about Iran's nuclear programme and ambitions has opened the door to fresh strategic discussions among the five permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany. Such a strategic reconsideration is probably most necessary for those in the Bush administration who, until recently, have been prophets of imminent danger.

For Europeans, the report has not removed, but rather confirmed, the 2003 concerns of Britain, France and Germany that Iran's nuclear programme could eventually give it a military nuclear capability, and that even before that point, it might spark regional nuclear proliferation.

The report also confirmed two assumptions that have since guided Europe's diplomatic approach: Iran reacts to external incentives and disincentives, and taking legitimate Iranian interests into consideration is the best way to influence Iran's leaders. Most Europeans who have been dealing with the issue also assume that Iran is aiming at capacities that would eventually make all options available, including quick development of a nuclear weapon, rather than actually acquiring a weapon.

So concern about Iran's nuclear programme is still justified. The robust diplomatic approach needed to confront the problem must include three components. First, it should be based on a broad international consensus. Second, it should clearly communicate that the issue is proliferation, not the nature of the Iranian regime. Third, any further sanctions should be accompanied by an earnest offer of dialogue and engagement.

By contrast, some US policymakers continue to believe Iran would abandon its enrichment programme if the European Union imposed unilateral sanctions. But a clear-headed analysis indicates that EU sanctions would lead to more trade diversion, with China, Russia, Turkey or Dubai benefiting.

Thus, Europeans favour a new Security Council resolution, even if its measures are weaker than what the US or the EU could impose unilaterally. This would send an effective signal that Iran is in conflict with the entire world community.

Iranians do not like to be isolated. Making it obvious that it is President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's policies that are isolating Iran would strengthen the still-fragile anti-Ahmadinejad alliance of pragmatic conservatives and reformers.

Europeans should call for a common policy with the US that focuses on domestic developments in Iran. Both the EU and the US should be prepared to enter direct, comprehensive and unconditional negotiations with Iran.

The best method of strengthening Mr Ahmadinejad, however, appears to be to threaten the country and the regime as a whole. An honest offer of engagement would allow Mr Ahmadinejad's pragmatic opponents to show that it is Iran's president and his policies, not the west, that are at fault.

Volker Perthes is chairman and director of Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik of the German Institute for International and Security Affairs. Copyright: Project Syndicate


http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/ ... sight&s=Opinion

Prize and prejudice
The Nobels fascinate us, although they may not be the best measure of merit

Robert Marc Friedman
Dec 27, 2007           
     
  |   

  



The dance around the golden Nobel medallion began over 100 years ago, and is still going strong. As icon, myth and ritual, the Nobel Prize is well secured. But what do we actually know about the Nobel Prize? Shrouded in secrecy and legend, the prize first became an object for serious scholarly study after 1976, when the Nobel Foundation opened its archives.

Subsequent research by historians of science leaves little doubt: the Nobel medallion is etched with human frailties.

Although many observers accept a degree of subjectivity in the prizes for literature and peace, the science prizes have long been assumed to be an objective measure of excellence. But, from the start, the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, which awards the physics and chemistry prizes, and the Caroline Institute, which awards those for medicine/physiology, have based their decisions on the recommendations of their respective committees. And the committee members' own understanding of science has been critical in determining outcomes.

From the beginning, the inner world of those entrusted to make recommendations was marked by personal and principled discord over how to interpret Alfred Nobel's cryptic will and to whom prizes should be awarded. While committee members tried to be dispassionate, their own judgments, predilections and interests necessarily entered their work.

Winning a prize has never been an automatic process, a reward for attaining a magical level of achievement. Nominators rarely provided the committees with a clear consensus, and the committees often ignored the rare mandates when a single strongly nominated candidate did appear, such as Albert Einstein for his work on relativity theory. Academy physicists had no intention of recognising this theoretical achievement, "even if the whole world demands it".

Moreover, a simple change in the composition of the committee could decide a candidate's fate. Not until committee strongman C.W. Oseen died in 1944 could the theoretical physicist Wolfgang Pauli - one of the giants of quantum mechanics - receive a prize. Conversely, the Academy of Sciences sometimes rebelled against its committees. Harbouring a grudge, one chemist rallied the academy to block the committee's recommendation for the Russian Dmitry Mendeleyev, who created the periodic table.

Even when all involved tried to rise above pettiness and partiality, selecting winners was always difficult - and remains so. Committee members occasionally confessed privately that, often, several candidates could be found who equally deserved a prize. Unambiguous, impartial criteria for selecting a winner were not at hand - and never will be.

The image of science advancing through the efforts of individual genius is, of course, appealing. Yet, to a greater extent than the prizes allow, research progresses through the work of many.

Brilliant minds do matter, but it is often inappropriate and unjust to limit recognition to so few. The Nobel bylaws do not allow splitting a prize into more than three parts, thereby excluding discoveries that entailed work by more than three researchers, or omitting key people who equally deserved to share in the honour.

Moreover, it has become clear that many important branches of science are not addressed by Alfred Nobel's testament (limited to physics, chemistry, physiology/medicine). Some of the past century's greatest intellectual triumphs, such as those related to the expanding universe and continental drift, have not been celebrated. Environmental sciences - surely of fundamental importance - also come up empty. There is nothing wrong with wanting heroes in science, but we should understand the criteria used to select those who we are asked to revere.

Why do people venerate the Nobel Prize? There is no easy answer. The cult of the prize began even before the first winners were announced. Media fascination whipped up speculation and interest. The creed of the prize did not depend so much on the merit of the winners, as much as the understanding that the prize was a powerful means to gain prestige, publicity and advantage.

Even scientists who frowned on the Swedish committees' limitations and sometimes odd choices nevertheless still nominated and lobbied for candidates, knowing that a winner can draw attention and money to a research speciality, institution or national scientific community.

Is science or society well served by a fixation on prizes and competition? Perhaps once the mystery of the Nobel Prize is reduced, we might reflect on what is truly significant in science.

The soul and heritage of science going back several centuries is far richer than the quest for prizes.

Robert Marc Friedman, professor of the history of science at the University of Oslo, is the author of The Politics of Excellence: Behind the Nobel Prize in Science. Copyright: Project Syndicate


http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/ ... sight&s=Opinion

Promising new start for South Korea


Ralph Cossa
Dec 28, 2007           
     
  |   

  



The landslide presidential victory of conservative Lee Myung-bak is good news for South Korea, for the United States, for their alliance and - if responded to appropriately and wisely - for North Korea as well.

Mr Lee has made it clear that he is committed to improving North-South relations, but that progress along this front first requires Pyongyang to live up to its denuclearisation promises. This is a positive message that reinforces both the flexibility and firmness contained in Washington's current approach towards Pyongyang. It will bring Washington and Seoul closer than they have been for several years, both in terms of dealing with the North and in terms of the alliance itself.

While Mr Lee and his Grand National Party (GNP) are more conservative than incumbent President Roh Moo-hyun's "progressive" administration, they are not your father's conservatives. The more hardline position, represented in the election by former GNP leader Lee Hoi-chang, scored poorly. It finished a distant third behind Lee Myung-bak and the United New Democratic Party's Chung Dong-young - Mr Roh's former minister of reunification who was, in the eyes of many, overly conciliatory towards the North.

It is hard to imagine Mr Chung or Mr Roh really playing hardball with the North, regardless of its transgressions. By contrast, president-elect Lee has said "full-fledged economic exchanges can start after North Korea dismantles its nuclear weapons". While Mr Roh paid lip service to the concept of reciprocity, Lee Myung-bak seems more serious about expecting it, while remaining clearly committed to the positive aspects of North-South engagement that South Koreans have come to expect and demand.

Lee Hoi-chang, at the other extreme, seemed more comfortable with the school of international diplomacy favoured by America's former UN ambassador, John Bolton, which sees confrontational politics and ultimate regime change in the North as the only viable option.

No doubt, some in Washington will see a conservative victory as an opportunity to revert to the more confrontational - and largely ineffective - policies of the past; this would be a huge mistake. Of course, Pyongyang may leave Washington and Seoul with no other option, if it continues to drag its feet on making a complete declaration of its nuclear programmes and holdings.

The new administration takes the reins in Seoul on February 25, and Pyongyang will be presented with several options. It could revert to form and drag its feet on the denuclearisation process, thus forcing the new president (and the Bush administration) into a more hardline position. Or it could produce a comprehensive list of its nuclear programmes and holdings - locking in the denuclearisation process and the firm, yet flexible and fair, approach that Mr Lee and the Bush administration currently seem to prefer. One hopes Pyongyang makes the right choice.

Ralph A. Cossa is president of Pacific Forum CSIS. Distributed by Pacific Forum CSIS


http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/ ... sight&s=Opinion

Blogging boom sets up stars for bonanza
222 days to go

OLYMPIC COUNTDOWN
Martin Zhou
Dec 30, 2007           
     
  |   

  



If you're waiting for gossip and the daily thoughts of your favourite athletes about life at the Olympics, chances are you're in for a treat next summer.

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) earlier this month softened its stance towards blogs by Olympians during the games.

A recent IOC meeting pledged to lift the restriction on athletes and coaches who are keen to share their first-hand experience at the "Greatest Show on Earth".

The permission is a U-turn on the rules that saw a cyber blackout during the 2004 Athens Games.

An IOC spokeswoman this week declined to comment on the issue, saying the IOC was still mulling over just how it should police the blogs. But she did reveal the IOC was very attracted to the idea of the heaps of free publicity nice blogs would bring, those which would help "communicate" the Olympic message to the world.

The pending approval of blogging among athletes and coaches will be welcomed by many - especially the mainland's sport fraternity, some of whom are rubbing their hands at the opportunity to market their blogs to advertisers.

However, topping the agenda of concern among Chinese leaders is the threat of freedom of expression such freewheeling examples of blogging pose to the authorities.

The Chinese government is keen to project Beijing 2008 as being held in a modern, stable nation full of happy, prosperous, forward-thinking people.

To counter bad publicity, however - grievances issued from all quarters of Chinese society and overseas - China has been strengthening its censorship of domestic and international media over the past two years.

So you can imagine the horror felt by all in the Zhongnanhai government compound at the thought of foreign athletes and coaches - and some nationals - articulating their complaints and insight through first-hand accounts of what really lies behind the glittering Olympic cosmetics, especially those moaning at or criticising the authoritarian regime.

So to what extent have Chinese officials sought to influence the IOC's ongoing discussions about blogs, as it has done on many issues including pollution? The IOC ideally wants a quiet life and has been seen to appease China on many issues.

But not in this case, some observers believe.

"Human rights groups will object to the games being held in China, where free speech is famously nonexistent," Jason Lee Miller, an editor with WebPro News, a website devoted to coverage of online business, wrote in a recent commentary. "Hence, regulating the free speech of athletes probably wouldn't look good. That could add to the IOC's motivation to champion new-found openness."

More threatening than angry Communist leaders, according to Miller, are the complaints from media conglomerates who have shelled out hundreds of millions of dollars to secure broadcasting rights to the games.

Allowing the athletes to blog freely and turn the Olympic village into a reality show of sorts could be seen as undermining the official coverage paid for by media outlets.

Indeed, the 2004 blog embargo was issued days before the games opened in Athens and was believed to have resulted from persistent defiance and complaints from the IOC's media partners.

An IOC press "subgroup" commission recently decided that blogging by athletes would not violate Olympic rules as long as they received no payment, posted their entries as a "diary or journal", and did not use photos, video, or audio obtained at the games.

Yet the rules will also most certainly be ignored on the mainland.

Olympic blogging is set to be big business, several Chinese language portal editors told this column.

Highly popular sites like Sina.com and Sohu.com have already begun to offer tantalising cash prizes for those Chinese athletes who are willing to share their experience as an Olympian.

Most Chinese sports heroes have already developed blogging as a source of income. Major websites rely on celebrity blogs to boost their brand's popularity among netizens.

"The hosting rights of a blog by a national team member in such a popular sport as football usually costs 300,000 yuan a year," said an editor at Sohu.com.

"In 2008, the price will certainly shoot up."

But will those Chinese athletes, known for living in secrecy with intense daily training, be able to set aside time for writing a proper blog entry either before or during the games so as to lay a nest egg once their athleticism gives up?

Moreover, without normal education from an early age, can mainland athletes actually write a sellable blog?

There are ways, said the Sohu editor.

"It has almost become a trend for celebrity athletes to hire a ghost blog writer," he said. "The writer will emulate the athletes' verses and style and sometimes it works very well."

As for censorship, the government may not have to concern itself too much with their type-happy sports stars. Self-censorship, like self-preservation and a few extra yuan, is the name of the game for blogging mainland athletes.


http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/ ... lumns&s=Opinion

Roads apart
China's plans for its own satellite navigation system have stunned its partners at Europe's Galileo project

BEHIND THE NEWS
Yojana Sharma
Jan 02, 2008           
     
  |   

  



When China announced early last month that its home-grown Beidou-2 satellite navigation system would be used to guide traffic and monitor sports venues during the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games, there was astonishment in European capitals.

China has been the most important non-European partner in the European Union's £á3.4 billion (HK$38.9 billion) Galileo satellite navigation project. Beijing was to invest a substantial £á230 million in Galileo and, as a spin-off of the partnership, European companies hoped to have access to the lucrative mainland transport and communications market.

But with Chinese officials implying signals from the Beidou-2 system would be freely available to its citizens and to countries in Asia who sign up to use the Chinese system for their navigation devices, Beidou-2 would compete with Galileo for lucrative mass-market applications in Asia.

"If China were to push ahead on a global civilian system we would review our relationship because we do not have an interest in helping them into the mass market," said Paul Verhoef, head of the Galileo programme at the EU Commission's headquarters in Brussels. "In a sense, it is a competition and it will have an impact on some of the things we do with them."

China's participation in Galileo was originally to build ground stations on the mainland to receive Galileo signals and extend the European system's global reach. China also hoped to launch Galileo satellites, although it has been beaten to that by Russia.

Satellite navigation is already ubiquitous in Europe and the US. Cheap hand-held and dashboard devices provide drivers with accurate directions to any destination. The technology, rapidly replacing maps, is now being incorporated into mobile phones - a lucrative mass-market application.

Satellite navigation has also become a valuable tool in identifying and dispersing traffic jams, for port and air traffic control, for tracking forest fires and giving advance warning of tsunamis. The technology can even be used to track giant panda movements.

For now the world uses the freely available GPS (global positioning system) developed and owned by the US military. European politicians have always worried it could be switched off whenever the US military wished, with dire consequences for industries that have begun to rely on it. These fears led to the launch in 2000 of the ambitious civilian Galileo project which envisages 40 to 50 ground stations around the world.

EU Transport Commissioner Jacques Barrot said in November that Galileo would "ensure the economic and strategic independence" of the EU. But it seemed Galileo would collapse amid bickering over the spoils between private companies in Europe. Late last month, the EU rode to the rescue, taking the project out of private hands, providing a cash injection from the EU Commission's budget to ensure its survival. It is far from clear what will happen to the collaboration agreements with non-EU countries.

The mainland first joined Galileo in 2003 when EU ministers regarded China as an important emerging economic power. "We signed up with China when it was not clear what the implications would be," Mr Verhoef said. "We soon realised that if you allow such co-financing you get into complicated discussions on co-ownership.

Now that it is clear that the only ownership can be in Europe, we need a different kind of agreement."

EU officials admitted that China was unhappy with being treated as a junior partner and had downgraded its involvement. But at the same time China made it clear it wanted to be part of the newly resurrected Galileo. The first Chinese delegation arrived in Brussels on December 19, less than three weeks after the EU took over the financing of Galileo.

"The political co-operation with Galileo was always a really big thing in China," Mr Verhoef said. "It was part of China's strategic relationship with Europe - part of a strategic partnership against the US."

Steven Tsang Yui-sang, a lecturer in Chinese politics at Oxford University, said: "Galileo is a very powerful back-up system for China's military. The US may destroy Chinese satellites but they will not destroy Galileo."

There is another reason why China needs Galileo: its space scientists still can't match the quality of European engineering. "Technology transfer is an important consideration," Mr Verhoef said.

The EU's main aim is to ensure the EU and Chinese civilian systems are compatible. An accord was signed with the US last year to change the signal of GPS-3 and alter Galileo to make them interoperable. "By doing this we are trying to make Galileo more interesting for the end user. They don't want disruption or interruption. Even with China's civilian system we need to make sure it is interoperable," Mr Verhoef said.

EU officials downplay the military applications of satellite navigation, preferring to focus on Galileo's economic benefits. But defence experts say it is clear satellite navigation is the cornerstone of the next generation of smart missiles and will also pinpoint troop and armaments movements.

"I believe this project will have to have military implications at some point," said Ana Gomes, the Portuguese member of the European Parliament who led a recent debate on the funding of Galileo.

Galileo is intended to be accurate in positioning to within one metre, compared with five metres for GPS and 10 metres for Beidou-2 - as recently revealed by Xinhua.

Galileo has already spurred the US to upgrade GPS and Russia to modernise its own Glonass system. "Galileo's accuracy is more useful for military or intelligence purposes than for commercial uses," said Richard North, an adviser on Galileo to the British parliament.

"Part of the very great attraction for China to be associated with the Galileo project is the transfer to Beidou of military technology. It is hard to see how it can be stopped," Dr North said.

Both Taiwan, which has been lobbying the European Parliament on Galileo and EU-China relations this year, and the US have been putting pressure on the EU to reduce collaboration with China for that reason.

Ironically, the change to a publicly funded Galileo has pushed the economic benefits to the background in favour of its military use. "In the beginning it was true Galileo was a civilian, commercial undertaking, but after all the delays and with the public funding the security and military rationale has become stronger," said Jose Carlos Matias, a Macau-based expert on China's involvement in Galileo.

EU officials argue that Galileo's public regulated service (PRS), which involves the greatest accuracy, is encrypted and available only to organisations such as the European Police Agency (Europol), the European Anti-Fraud office, emergency response organisations such as the Maritime Safety Agency and EU peacekeeping forces.

"The Europeans have always said the high-level PRS signal would not be available to China. Frankly, no one believes them," Dr North said. "If Chinese scientists have the architecture of the system, which they must do, they can work it out to crack the code."

Jonathan Holslag, of the Brussels Institute of Contemporary Chinese Studies and an adviser to the EU on China affairs, said: "It is obvious China's [Beidou-2] project is based on European technology. The Chinese know the European technical codes and standards. They take it as a point of departure for their own project."

During the December 5-6 EU-China summit in Beijing the EU stopped short of accusing China of stealing Galileo technology. Dr Holslag said EU delegates instead linked China's continued participation in Galileo to general improvements on intellectual property protection.

"Chinese collaboration on Galileo subverts the whole notion of an [EU arms] embargo," Dr North said. "It's obvious that satellite navigation technology will add to China's military capability."

However, Mr Verhoef said adequate safeguards had always been in place. "We knew when we started with China that they wanted to build their own military system. We don't want to provide technology for it. There is a very strict technology transfer regime."

This is not simply to comply with the EU embargo on arms sales since 1989 but because the EU does not want to jeopardise relations with the US.

"We have sound political and economic reasons - we don't want Washington to stop the sale of US components for Galileo," Mr Verhoef said.

There is every indication that the EU wants to avoid wrangles over technology transfer and make up for time lost. Mr Barrot said the November funding agreement would allow the EU system to be operational by 2013 - five years later than planned.

Beijing now says Beidou-2 will not be fully operational before the Shanghai World Fair in 2010. The use of the system at the Olympics will be very limited.

"The announcement about the use of [Beidou-2] at the Olympics may simply be symbolic," Mr Matias said. "It takes time to deploy a constellation of satellites."

China has five satellites in geostationary orbit. Galileo, like GPS, envisages a global system involving 30 satellites. China might be sending a signal to the EU that it wanted to be treated as an equal on satellite navigation rather than a junior partner, he said.

"Special navigation is an indication of power" on the world stage, Mr Barrot said when the EU took over Galileo's funding last month.

Certainly, that is not lost on the Chinese authorities.


http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/ ... sight&s=Opinion

Only time will loosen the tycoons' grip


OBSERVER
Alex Lo
Jan 03, 2008           
     
  |   

  



Democratic critics have blasted Beijing and its rubber-stamp parliament's decision to delay full democracy for the city for at least another decade. But Hong Kong may well need that much time to gradually undermine the political influence and economic stranglehold that its most powerful but reactionary indigenous group has wielded over the city's life: its ageing tycoons and their offspring, who are being groomed to take over their business empires.

As a group, these people have consistently resisted meaningful constitutional changes. Even those who have not openly opposed universal suffrage have shown no enthusiasm for it. PCCW (SEHK: 0008) chief Richard Li Tzar-kai is just about the only second-generation businessman who has come out in support of full democracy. Yet the way he has treated minority shareholders over the years - since taking over Hongkong Telecom during the height of the dotcom bubble - raises questions about his democratic credentials.

Even a child knows that "one person, one vote" is not compatible with functional constituencies, which allow some local residents to have more than one vote. But Beijing and the National People's Congress Standing Committee have a tough balancing act to play. By leaving Hong Kong to sort out the details of its electoral arrangements, they left open the possibility of retaining functional constituencies in some form even after 2020. This was a nod to assure entrenched business groups that their vested interests were not being ignored.

In 10 to 13 years, the current leaders in Beijing who have given the green light to universal suffrage in the city, and possibly even a few of their successors, will have left the scene. The mainland can only become more open politically if its current economic trajectory continues.

Hong Kong's democrats and their allies will, hopefully, be replaced with younger, fresher, more charismatic and imaginative democratic leaders.

Meanwhile, our most famous tycoons will probably not be around when Hong Kong holds its first fully democratic election, but their children and grandchildren will. They are being groomed to take over the family firms, most of which are publicly listed. These companies dominate most of the key sectors of the local economy - ports, supermarkets and other retailers, power utilities, transport, medium-sized and smaller banks and, of course, the all-important property development.

This business succession process on the basis of family ties has been going on for years. The fact that it is seen as a matter of course in Hong Kong, with few eyebrows raised, says a lot about the backwardness of our supposed status as a global financial hub. If anecdotal evidence serves, the children have none of the business acumen and people skills of their fathers. But there is no doubt that they have the same arrogance, and feel the same sense of superiority and an even stronger sense of entitlement. Their politics, which is rarely ever aired in public, is likely to be just as reactionary.

Fortunately, the princes and princesses are unlikely to wield the same power and influence behind the scenes in any way that will remotely resemble their fathers or grandfathers. They will, hopefully, have neither the connections nor networks to do so. Either their businesses will go into decline or they will become more professional, to meet international standards, with senior managers hired from outside the families.

Either way, the elitism characteristic of Hong Kong for decades, which has fused political and economic powers, is likely to be further eroded with each generation. The local business royalties should go the way of the families of the so-called robber barons of the United States in the past century - retaining their wealth and exercising great philanthropy, but with diminishing political clout. This could only be for the good of Hong Kong.

Alex Lo is a senior writer at the Post


http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/ ... lumns&s=Opinion