Monday, August 28, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
The only viable approach to Iran's nuclear intent



   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   If the world's powers want Iran to stop heading down the path of North Korea in making nuclear weapons, they have to ensure a united approach rather than the disjointed one presently being adopted. For inspiration, they - and Tehran - need only look to Libya, which has gone from pariah nation status to that of equal partner in less than three years.
The best opportunity comes on Thursday, when the UN Security Council's deadline demanding Iran suspend uranium enrichment or face economic and political sanctions expires. Details of Iran's response are not known, but already the US has expressed typical scepticism - and kept up warnings that hint of an Iraq-style military reaction should there be obstinacy.



Tehran's leaders gave no suggestion at the weekend that they would give in, speaking of their determination to enrich uranium, the fuel the US and European nations fear is being produced to make nuclear bombs. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, inaugurating a heavy- water nuclear plant, maintained the programme was for peaceful purposes.

There is no reason to believe Iran's leaders, given their anti-Israel rhetoric and financial and military backing of extremists like Hezbollah. They see in Israel justification for whatever their objectives - a nation that developed a nuclear energy programme and atomic weapons while not being a party to international safeguards and without intervention.

The blinkered international pressure on Iran while ignoring Israel sends the wrong signal. If the security council truly wants to lay proliferation concerns to rest, it must correct such anomalies and strive for the objective that the world's five declared atomic powers - its permanent members - have promised for more than three decades, but shunned: full disarmament.

That those same nations, plus Germany, are now heading negotiations with Iran is, at best, hypocritical. Alliances - the US with Israel, China and Russia with Iran - would seem to ensure that whatever the response, it will be imperfect.

Best to look to what drove Libya to give up its weapons of mass destruction programmes on December 19, 2003, and make amends for terrorism and support of anti-western extremists. While no two situations are alike and therefore cannot be easily replicated, the foundations, built on containment and sanctions, but most importantly, diplomacy, can be.

In Libya's case, that involved a unified American and European policy driven by the US markedly softening hostility. Such a forthcoming approach towards Iran would similarly signal that it, too, can garner the benefits of engagement.

The process will not be quick, nor without concessions by all sides. But it is the only viable approach and one that the US and its partners must adopt to set an example to other nations that may have an eye on weapons proliferation.


http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZT9FK9CRE.html

Read!

Tuesday, August 29, 2006

NATIONAL SECURITY LAW
A chance to expose the west's hypocrisy


MICHAEL CHUGANI
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   If the government is looking for an opportune time to revive its deeply unpopular proposal for a national security law, it is now. That is not so much because Hongkongers have become less fearful of far-reaching laws to protect the nation, but because the government can now expose the hypocrisy of its foreign critics.
These detractors, primarily Britain and the United States, but also western Europe, helped undermine Hong Kong's earlier attempt at national security laws by taking the high ground. They insisted the government did not need intrusive measures that crossed moral, civil and human rights boundaries. Few observers noticed at the time that legislatures in those countries were passing national security laws in the name of fighting terrorism.


Now, three years after those emotionally charged days, a national security law is no longer on Hong Kong's radar screen, but the recognition remains that our constitution demands such a law. Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen knows it would be political suicide to breathe life back into the corpse just months before his bid for re-election. But Hong Kong is duty-bound to revisit the issue sooner or later, and fresh proposals could well be back on the agenda after the spring elections. That will, without doubt, again trigger overseas criticism designed to ensure that, in protecting national security, the government also protects civil and privacy rights.

By that time, US President George W. Bush is likely to have manipulated the current mood of hyped-up fear over fresh terror attacks to further tighten America's security laws. He has already authorised the secret monitoring of suspects without a judge's warrant. That practice has been ruled unconstitutional by the courts, but he is determined to have his way.

The US Patriot Act, passed after the September 11 attacks, is far more intrusive than the law the Hong Kong government tried to pass three years ago. Britain, France and others have tightened their laws in the wake of the London train attack last summer.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair says the rules of the game of civil rights have changed. Europe now wants to change them even further, with proposals to racially profile all Arab and Muslim air passengers as possible terrorists, following Britain's foiling this month of an alleged plot to blow up planes.

The very proposal is sickening, but at least it exposes the hypocrisy of the west. In effect, it says that while others must respect human-rights norms in protecting their nations, the west can ignore such standards to protect its own security.

Critics of this reading of western behaviour will argue that the west faces a very real threat of terror attacks while others do not - and Hong Kong, in particular, is quite safe. That is an arrogant argument, suggesting others are not qualified to assess - and act accordingly - to counter the threats facing them. India and Indonesia have suffered horrific terrorist attacks, and China has its own problems in the Muslim region of Xinjiang - but its crackdown continues to draw western condemnation as human rights abuse.

Beijing has its own reasons for wanting a national security law in Hong Kong, and has the sovereign right to guard against perceived threats. What Hong Kong can and should do is exert pressure to make sure the law strictly respects international standards of human rights, while safeguarding the nation.

Then it would be in a position to shame those who have pointed fingers at it. Hong Kong's government officials and politicians are wimps when it comes to pointing fingers back at their foreign critics. The national security law, if properly done, will give them the moral high ground to act like men - and women.

Michael Chugani is editor-in-chief of ATV English News and Current Affairs.

http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZAX2N9CRE.html

Wednesday, August 30, 2006

BEHIND THE NEWS
A wicked Web


MARK O'NEILL
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     


As the World Cup gripped the mainland, so too did online gambling websites, sparking a huge unchecked loss of capital that is said to have reached up to 100 billion yuan. Photo: EPA

In the early hours of July 24, a team of Shanghai police broke up the mainland's biggest gambling operation of the World Cup, which had handled 1 billion yuan worth of bets during the tournament.
They broke into the head office of the syndicate, seizing 17 million yuan and HK$1 million in cash, 10 computers used to place the bets and three passenger cars used to collect money and deliver winnings, and arrested 17 people, including its chief, Ren Shen.

Ren and his team were only the tip of the iceberg - foreign media estimates put the amount bet by Chinese on the World Cup at between 50 and 100 billion yuan, putting China among the biggest gamblers on the tournament, on which about US$70 billion was bet, up from US$60 billion on the World Cup in Japan and South Korea in 2002. It is several times the 30 billion yuan bet each year on the country's official soccer lottery. It was gambling as much as the love of soccer that had mainlanders addicted to their televisions throughout the month of the World Cup, making it almost the sole conversation topic for some.


According to a survey by a research institute at Beijing University, more than 600 billion yuan leaves China each year in betting losses.

What makes this extraordinary is that all these bets are illegal - the communist government outlawed gambling when it took power in 1949 and the only legal betting is in Hong Kong and Macau.

For the government, gambling is a three-fold danger - the uncontrolled outflow of capital, the flouting of law and nurturing of organised crime despite repeated police campaigns, and the damage to individual families who run up debts they cannot pay.

Everyone has heard anecdotes of the evils of gambling - losing the children's school fees and the family home, wives who divorce their husbands and people who in despair take their own lives.

The government is especially sensitive because the gambling boom has coincided with an increase in the wealth gap. Millions of Chinese see their neighbours buying fancy cars and expensive homes but will never be able to afford these luxuries through their normal jobs. For them, gambling represents the only hope of making a fortune.

It is the internet that has made a nonsense of the government regulations, by enabling global companies to reach the mainland gambler.

Globally, there are about 330 Chinese-language gambling websites, based in the US, Britain, Southeast Asia, Hong Kong and Macau. The companies set up finance companies in Hong Kong and Macau to handle the flow of money.

It started in earnest after October 2001 when China launched a soccer lottery, allowing punters to predict wins, losses and draws in nine matches in Italy's Serie A and four in the English Premier League. This fuelled interest in European soccer. The watching of domestic soccer has waned because of low standards and widespread corruption.


National and regional television channels broadcast several live games from Europe every week, with replays and analysis, while newspapers and magazines provide detailed information on the teams and players. The foreign sites offer more choice and flexibility than the domestic lottery and are out of the control of the authorities.

"Most serious is internet soccer gambling, with collusion between foreign and domestic syndicates," said Zhu Entao, assistant to the minister of public security. "Nearly all the profits go offshore. The sums involved are millions, tens of millions and even more than 100 million yuan. The outflow of money is enormous.

"If we do not take measures and this continues for a long time, it will harm the national economy and the exchequer. The laws against gambling are out of date. We must consider administrative measures."

On the mainland, the syndicates operate like businesses, with agents and representatives who deal with the clients. Ren operated as the representative of a foreign company. He told police that he was the principal agent of a foreign gambling syndicate which paid him a commission as well as a percentage of the losses which the clients made. He said that there were two tiers of agents, with the second tier dealing directly with clients and assessing their creditworthiness.

Clients place money on deposit with the syndicate and are given a codeword or number to identify themselves. They make bets via mobile telephone, computer or short messages. Underground banks process the transactions, moving the money in and out of China.

To avoid detection, the websites often change names and addresses and use servers outside China. Those who work in the syndicates keep as little information as possible, making it hard for police to collect evidence.

"Many of our clients think that they are very smart and can make a fortune in a single day," Ren said.

"They are fantasising. Gambling companies never lose money. The staff who work for them have much more specialist knowledge than you. According to the rules, if you bet 100 yuan, you can only win 80. If you lose, you lose all the 100."

During the World Cup, punters could bet on anything - the result after 90 or 120 minutes, who would score and when, who would receive a yellow or red card, with betting before and during the game.

The best-known gambling chief is a Taiwanese named Yu Kuo-ju, a minor triad boss who moved to the mainland in 2002 and became the agent for a syndicate based in Costa Rica. He used door-to-door salesmen and women to get customers, with operations in Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou, to bet on football in Europe, Latin America and Asia.

The Taiwan press estimate that he has since 2002 earned more than NT$10 billion (HK$2.36 billion) and call him the most successful Taiwanese businessman on the mainland.


http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZJN6N9CRE.html

Thursday, August 31, 2006

FREE PRESS
The dilemma of shielding privacy


C. K. LAU
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Over the past two decades, a central theme of the debate over press freedom has focused on fears that the government might tighten the reins on the media after Hong Kong returned to mainland rule in 1997.
Such worries materialised in 2003, when the government sought to legislate on national security by introducing a bill to implement Article 23 of the Basic Law. It included provisions that could have impinged on a free press, and was eventually shelved after a groundswell of opposition.


But there has never been any doubt that the Hong Kong media also face a no-less serious threat from within. It springs from the questionable reporting practices of errant members of the press, which might provoke the public to demand the imposition of limits on what they can publish.

The moral outrage sparked by Easy Finder's publication of photographs of actress Gillian Chung Yan-tung, taken while she was changing her costume, has confirmed that the threat is real. The unrepentant attitude of the magazine, whose senior editors and proprietor have remained silent, is keeping the controversy alive. Even Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen has been obliged to weigh in by expressing his empathy with public sentiments.

Responsible members of the press could do without this row, especially since it might lead to the passage of laws regulating the media's intrusion into privacy. It's not that they endorse Easy Finder's unethical ways. But one more law governing the media would be one more latent threat to the operation of a free press.

Few would object to the notion that a changing room should be off-limits to prying eyes. But if an investigative reporter has reasonable suspicions that a politician is about to engage in dirty dealings - which may reflect on his integrity as a public servant - should a hidden camera be installed to find out the truth? It would be difficult to answer either "yes" or "no" without attaching various caveats.

The question illustrates the difficulty of finding a legally clear-cut answer to questions that are essentially about morality and ethics, where the lines of decency are not always very well defined.

Imagine that a hidden camera caught a politician taking drugs inside a changing room. The outrage over his illegal conduct would likely overshadow concerns about the impropriety of spying on him in a place where people should have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Does the end justify the means? Should the footage be ignored since it was obtained through questionable means?

Essentially, every crime is a moral wrongdoing - but not everything that is morally outrageous should be criminalised. As the community outcry over Easy Finder's excesses escalates, some lawmakers are pushing the government to introduce legislation on invasions of privacy. It may be possible to draw up a law that strikes a proper balance between respecting privacy while not infringing on the operation of a free press. But if no satisfactory solution can be found, then the community will have to decide which they value more: privacy or a free press.

Ideally, if every journalist abided by the industry's code of ethics, there would be no need to make the choice. The code provides that journalists should respect the reputation and privacy of individuals. And if there is a need to report on the private life of individuals because of the public interest, they should do it in ways that don't hurt people unnecessarily.

Members of the media would strengthen the cause of a free press - and do themselves and the community a great service - by voluntarily abiding by their own code of ethics.

C.K. Lau is the Post's executive editor, policy.


http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZPVOK9CRE.html

thanks

Thx

Friday, September 1, 2006

COMPETITION ON THE MAINLAND
The great electronics wars


INGO BEYER VON MORGENSTERN and CHRIS SHU
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     


Competing in mainland China's consumer electronics market has never been easy: rampant price wars caused by overcapacity have squeezed profit margins to some of the lowest levels in the world. And, as if things weren't bad enough for manufacturers, a new wave of consolidation among electronics retailers is turning up the heat.
We recently saw the acquisition of China Paradise Electronics Retail by Gome Electrical Appliances Holding, China's leading electronics speciality chain. That came fresh on the heels of an alliance struck - then put on hold - between China Paradise and Dazhong Electrical Appliance. In April, US-based Best Buy acquired Jiangsu Five Star. All this has happened within the space of a few months.

Retail chains dominate the consumer electronics landscape: a handful of these players control as much as 40 per cent of sales in first-tier cities like Shanghai and Beijing.

They dominate even more in some product categories: the new giant forged from the imminent merger of Gome and China Paradise will control 60 to 70 per cent of TV sales in Shanghai.

Unless consumer electronics players - whether Chinese or foreign - rethink their strategy, they risk losing the battle for the wallets of millions of mainland consumers.

A lot is at stake: the mainland's consumer electronics market has been growing at a compound rate of 12 per cent a year, and is expected to reach about 1 trillion yuan by 2010, up from 590 billion yuan this year.

This market will account for 25 per cent of the global market by 2010. Carving out a share of it has ranked high on the agendas of many of the world's consumer electronics companies for some time. Many of the world's best-known brands already have a sizeable presence in China.

But price wars - triggered in part by the rise of the electronics retail chains and overcapacity - have pushed profit margins on TVs and other white goods to below 3 per cent - among the lowest in the world.

Amid the proliferation of brands, many manufacturers are having a harder time competing for shelf space in the major electronics retail chains. A growing number of second-tier brands, both foreign and domestic, are being pushed off the shelves in favour of better-known and faster-selling ones.

Moreover, the US and European trend to sell products under retailers' own labels will catch on in mainland China. Gome already has its own brand, Idell, while China Paradise recently introduced a line under the brand name Yole. These private-label brands will compete head-on with established brands.

So how should consumer electronics players compete on the mainland? First, manufacturers need to form win-win partnerships with the large retail chains, helping them build capabilities in marketing strategy, in-store promotions, and supply chain and inventory management. These are critical capabilities that retailers in more developed markets may take for granted, but which many mainland retailers still lack. Firms that help retailers build these skills will secure their position as "strategic vendors" to the major retail chains.

Surprisingly, not all consumer electronics companies on the mainland are equipped to serve the needs of the large retail chains. Many lack dedicated teams to focus on serving the major retail chains that comprise the bulk of their sales.

Others have individual sales teams for each of their product categories: in one case we observed, a manufacturer had five different sales teams calling on the same retail-chain account.

For most consumer electronics players, working more closely with these new retail giants will be an essential part of staying in the game.

Some, however, may want to fight fire with fire, and consider opening their own branded stores. Sony and Zhuhai-based Gree have already opened hundreds of branded stores throughout the mainland, selling directly to the consumer and playing an important role in shaping the buyers' experience with their brand.

The trick, however, will lie in co-investing with dealers at the city level - to share the investment risk - while exercising direct management control over these stores, to maximise sales and manage their brand properly.

For example, Sony co-invests with local dealers to build Sony shops. But it directly manages the in-store sales teams, to ensure that sales targets are met, inventory is tracked, and valuable information on customer buying behaviour is collected.

Finally, two trends may play to the advantage of foreign players in the consumer electronics sector. They are the opening of mainland China's distribution sector in line with its World Trade Organisation commitments, and the growing presence of large, sophisticated foreign electronics distributors like Ingram Micro and Trend Micro.

Through their existing global relationships with these large distributors, foreign manufacturers can gain access to hard-to-reach geographic markets and distribution channels. These include regional department stores and small, independent speciality stores.

Competing in the mainland's consumer electronics market may be tougher these days due to the wave of consolidation reshaping the landscape. But the players that figure out a strategy for collaborating with these new electronics retail giants - without becoming too dependent on them - will have a better chance at succeeding in this dynamic marketplace.

Ingo Beyer von Morgenstern is a director who leads McKinsey and Company's hi-tech practice in Asia. Chris Shu is an associate principal in Shanghai.



http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZVP9N9CRE.html

gooooooooood

Monday, September 4, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
Hong Kong needs more than a healthy economy



  
Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   As Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen prepares for his policy address next month, he can take heart from a generally positive environment.
The political climate is calm, he enjoys relatively high levels of popularity and, crucially, the economy is doing well. But there is no room for complacency.





This newspaper's survey of 726 opinion leaders, published today, shows that while respondents are generally happy with the chief executive's economic policies, especially with regard to integration with the mainland, there are many other areas in which they expect the government to improve. It reveals that, within this influential sector of the community, there is underlying dissatisfaction with key aspects of the government's performance.



Policies seen as being the most urgent are those related to making Hong Kong a better place in which to work and live. Improving the environment, easing poverty, and furthering health-care reform were among those seen as urgent matters by an overwhelming majority of respondents. The survey also suggests there is room for improvement with regard to governance issues, including greater transparency and better public participation. This is an area in which Mr Tsang should be doing more.

Interestingly, more than half thought Mr Tsang's first policy address had failed to identify our city's most pressing issues; 66 per cent did not believe his policy blueprint found solutions to those problems. He will be expected to better articulate his plans this time. Only 10 months of Mr Tsang's two-year term remain. It may be tempting for the chief executive to argue that this policy address is, therefore, not one in which he can outline his strategy for the future.

But he should not back away from initiatives, even those which are long-term. There is a need for concrete policy proposals to meet the many challenges Hong Kong faces.

Mr Tsang should also bear in mind that this will be his last policy address before the chief executive election next year, when he is expected to be the frontrunner. The community will therefore expect him to outline the thinking that is likely to form the basis of his election campaign.

He has enjoyed high levels of popularity since his appointment. But polls show these have been slipping in recent months. In our survey, only 52 per cent of respondents backed Mr Tsang for a second term. While this is far above the 35 per cent approval rating of Mr Tung's low point, the figure suggests that Mr Tsang should not rest on his laurels.

Before drafting his speech, Mr Tsang is involved in a wide-ranging consultative process. He has declared the environment to be a priority, but more concrete measures are necessary, especially on air pollution. Consultation has started on health reform, although the important second stage on funding has been postponed. There is a need to get this back on track quickly. The poverty commission, meanwhile, has been widely criticised for its failure to get to grips with the problem.

It is notable that while only 20 per cent of respondents thought the government's progress on universal suffrage was either good or excellent, the issue was relatively low down the list of policies respondents regarded as urgent.

This is, no doubt, partly because little can be achieved on the constitutional reform front in the near future. Indeed, no electoral reforms can take effect until 2012. But this is, nonetheless, a matter which Hong Kong people care deeply about. Mr Tsang should use the policy address to provide an update on constitutional reform and to provide more details of his plan for the way ahead.

Action is needed on a wide range of issues including education, health, welfare, planning, the environment and political reform. The chief executive should listen carefully to the views expressed before his policy address but be prepared to take tough decisions. A clear vision for Hong Kong's future is needed. A buoyant economy alone is not enough.


http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZ3OZK9CRE.html

Tuesday, September 5, 2006

LAURENCE BRAHM
No room at the banquet



   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   During the Tang dynasty, poet Du Fu commented on the social inequities and debauchery of his day among corrupt officials and the wealthy, writing: Zhumen jiu rou chou, Lu you dong si gu. ("Within vermillion gates wine and meat rot, While on the street outside people starve to death.")
Written over 1,200 years ago, such lines spring to mind today amid the luxury of a typical banquet for government officials and their capitalist Chinese entrepreneur cronies. They are feted with the world's finest seafood and the most expensive, imported wines, while their luxury cars are parked outside.


Meanwhile, at the end of last year, there were 23.65 million impoverished people in rural China who simply did not have enough to eat, according to official statistics. Another 40.67 million people with low incomes were searching for a way out of their desperate situation. Many were turning to crime, drugs and prostitution - which have now become pillar industries of the Chinese economy.

If you ask Beijing officials - as they feasted in five-star hotels - about the problem of poverty, they would most likely shrug and dismiss those waidi ren, or "rural outsiders". They give definition to China's new class system, which appears more like a caste system.

Many outside economists point with concern to the widening income gap, warning about the sustainability of China's economic model. China's Gini coefficient - a measure of unequal income distribution - has reached the internationally acknowledged warning limit of 0.4, which should set alarm bells ringing in the elite Zhongnanhai compound.

This is precisely what occurred last month, when the Communist Party's Central Committee called a symposium of various interest groups. They included the All-China Federation of Industry and Commerce, so-called democratic parties and hosts of non-communist social representatives.

This broad spectrum of groups was summoned to discuss how to cope with the issue of "reforming and standardising income". Some observers might have seen it as a massive lobbying effort to maintain a social pact between the Communist Party and the rest of society.

That's because those spending lavishly on five-star lifestyles are mostly government officials and state-owned enterprise leaders, while rural China struggles with poverty. The meeting was held in Zhongnanhai, underscoring the importance and sensitivity of the party's concerns over this ticking time bomb.

As expected at such meetings, a five-point programme was issued - presumably to be studied at more symposiums at luxury resorts. The five points are: "Pay more attention to social equity; increase the incomes of low earners; expand the proportion of medium-income earners; regulate high earners effectively; and forbid illegal incomes."

As for paying attention to social inequity, anyone can do that by stepping a few metres outside their luxury hotel. But other requirements, such as forbidding illegal incomes, may be difficult to implement: illegal incomes are propping up the prosperity of many at the top.

The income disparity heralds an era of problems that have already been experienced by other developing countries, such as Indonesia. Namely, that society remains stable as long as income gaps don't widen. As those gaps expand, however, social contradictions intensify, and there is a sharp increase in the probability of sudden, turbulent economic situations.

It was concern about just such income inequity that allowed Marxist ideals to filter into Peking University, in the first half of the last century, inspiring people like Mao Zedong to overthrow the existing system with all its inequities.

China's government at the time lacked principles and catered to foreign economic interests - so obviously the things that occurred then couldn't be repeated. That must be reassuring for everyone. Then again, if Mao's ghost was listening in to the meeting last month in Zhongnanhai, what might he suggest doing?

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



http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZZDON9CRE.html

Wednesday, September 6, 2006

TERRORIST CELLS
Identifying the 'virtual' enemy


H. T. GORANSON
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     


Five years have passed since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, yet it seems that policymakers have learned little about how terrorist cells operate and what their weaknesses are. The Bush administration still uses the phrase "war on terror" and behaves as though it really is a war - the ordinary kind, where one government fights another.
Yet, after five years of military exertions, strategies based on targeting a united aggressor have only made the situation worse. It is time to understand the new, emerging model of conflict.

In order to make the "war" model fit, the Bush administration alludes to al-Qaeda as a centrally directed enemy. In fact, there is no master planner or funder of terrorist activities now. The Madrid, London and Bali attacks - as well as several thwarted operations in the United States and Britain - were all characterised by their dispersed organisation. Independently generated plots emerged and used ad-hoc resources, often within the target country.

Those small operations also lacked a common internal design. Terrorist motivations differ from cell to cell. People can be involved for profit or power, for political or religious reasons, out of hatred or for thrills. Conventional military models are geared to decapitate something that, in this case, has no head.

The characteristics of this new structure have already been studied in a very different context. Terrorism is a violent version of an agile "virtual enterprise". A virtual enterprise is any small group that assembles itself into an organisation that is just large enough to accomplish the collective intention.

Virtual enterprises are unusually innovative and, in the business sector, they are possibly the only system that can build a one-off product well. In fact, they are probably the commercial model of the future.

At present, most of the price of any product supports the huge, inefficient organisation that assembled it. Nearly all the creativity and problem-solving occurs in small companies that are later "integrated" by mega corporations - which have expensive and vulnerable infrastructures and keep most of the profit. This model is the current basis of the business world, just as centralisation has also been the favoured defence strategy.

Extensive research into alternative models was funded through the US Defence Department, which wanted better, cheaper and more tailored-to-order equipment. The research noted the conditions and triggers needed to facilitate the self-assembly of small, opportunistic groups, and to enable them to act like large companies. Unfortunately, the research programme was cancelled before its findings could be applied in the business world, almost certainly because it threatened large companies.

It is often forgotten that US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld emerged from retirement to reorganise the American military into a smaller, more agile force, using some of these same insights.

But the planning for the Iraq invasion - in which Mr Rumsfeld advocated the use of fewer troops than advised - suggests a poor understanding of distributed systems. While the forces were deployed for a flexible entry and withdrawal, the Bush administration ended up using them for an old-fashioned occupation. Terrorists, however, have been better at capitalising on models of distributed operation. Scores of texts are appearing in the Muslim world on holy warrior strategic studies.

These books - and the trends they indicate - are becoming less dogmatic and increasingly sophisticated in the adoption of modern management techniques. Their research surely includes the young science of virtual-enterprise management: how to nurture and support self-organising cells.

Perhaps the first lesson for western policymakers is that virtual enterprises run on a culture of trust. Some kinds of trust can be based on an artificial notion of opponents who are "not us" - rather than on real values and direct experience.

That is why the Bush administration's actions actually strengthen the virtual-terrorist-enterprise dynamic. US President George W. Bush's "us and them" rhetoric clearly defines an "other" and positions it as a cohesive enemy. His "war" approach is making it easier for Islamist terrorists to view the west as a united and malevolent force.

In future, the virtual-enterprise model will shape how business is conducted, wars are fought and probably how government services are administered. It promises to decouple the management of finance from that of production, implying faster innovation and growth. However, if western governments do not develop a deep understanding of how these structures operate, they stand no chance of combating the agile terrorist enterprise.

H.T. Goranson is the lead scientist of Sirius-Beta Corp. Copyright: Project Syndicate/Institute for Human Sciences



http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZR48L9CRE.html

Thursday, September 7, 2006

FREEDOMS IN PERIL
The authoritarian legacy of 9/11


RALF DAHRENDORF
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Five years after the attacks on the United States, 9/11 is no longer a mere date. It has entered the history books as the beginning of something new; a time of change. The terrorist bombings in Madrid, London and elsewhere will also be remembered, but the catchphrase is "9/11".
But was it really a war that started on September 11, 2001? Not all are happy about this American notion. During the heyday of Irish terrorism in Britain, successive British governments went out of their way not to concede to the Irish Republican Army the notion that a war was being waged. "War" would have meant acceptance of the terrorists as legitimate enemies - as equals, in a sense - in a bloody contest for which there are accepted rules of engagement.


This is neither a correct description nor a useful terminology for terrorist acts, which are more correctly described as criminal. By calling them "war" - and naming an opponent, usually al-Qaeda and its leader, Osama bin Laden - Washington has justified domestic changes that, before the 9/11 attacks, would have been unacceptable in any free country.

Most of these changes were embodied in the Patriot Act. Though some simply involved administrative regulations, the act's overall effect was to erode the great pillars of liberty, such as habeas corpus - the right of recourse to an independent court whenever the state deprives an individual of his freedom. From an early date, the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba became the symbol of something unheard of: the arrest without trial of "illegal combatants" who are deprived of all human rights.

For everyone else, a kind of state of emergency was proclaimed that has allowed state interference in essential civil rights. Controls at borders have become an ordeal for many, and police persecution now burdens quite a few. A climate of fear has made life hard for anyone who looks suspicious or acts suspiciously, notably Muslims.

Such restrictions on freedom did not meet with much public opposition when they were adopted. On the contrary, by and large it was the critics, not the supporters, of these measures who found themselves in trouble. In Britain, where Prime Minister Tony Blair supported the US attitude entirely, the government introduced similar measures and even offered a new theory.

Mr Blair was the first to argue that security is the first freedom. In other words, liberty is not the right of individuals to define their own lives, but the right of the state to restrict individual freedom in the name of a security that only the state can define. This is the beginning of a new authoritarianism.

The problem exists in all countries affected by the threat of terrorism. There is even a debate - and some evidence - concerning the question of whether involvement in the "war against terrorism" has actually increased the threat of terrorist acts.

A diffuse sense of anxiety is gaining ground. People feel uneasy and worried, especially when travelling. Any train accident or airplane crash is now at first suspected of being an act of terrorism.

Thus, 9/11 has meant, directly or indirectly, a great shock, both psychologically and to our political systems. While terrorism is fought in the name of democracy, the fight has in fact led to a distinct weakening of democracy, owing to official legislation and popular angst. One of the worrying features of the 9/11 attacks is that it is hard to see their purpose - beyond the perpetrators' resentment of the west and its ways. But the west's key features - democracy and the rule of law - have taken a far more severe battering at the hands of their defenders than their attackers.

Two steps, above all, are needed to restore confidence in liberty within the democracies affected by the legacy of 9/11. First, we must make certain that the relevant legislation to meet the challenge of terrorism is strictly temporary. Some of today's restrictions on habeas corpus and civil liberties have sunset clauses restricting their validity; all such rules should be re-examined by parliaments regularly.

Second, and more importantly, our leaders must seek to calm, rather than exploit, public anxiety. The terrorists with whom we are currently at "war" cannot win, because their dark vision will never gain broad popular legitimacy. That is all the more reason for democrats to stand tall in defending our values - first and foremost by acting in accordance with them.

Ralf Dahrendorf is a member of the British House of Lords. Copyright: Project Syndicate/Institute for Human Sciences



http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZH89L9CRE.html

Friday, September 8, 2006

THE MUSLIM WORLD
Betrayed by the 'war on terror'


MAI YAMANI
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     


"We are all Americans," wrote Le Monde on September 12, 2001. And so it was with most people in the Muslim world, who were as appalled as anyone else at the carnage of the terrorist attacks. When America responded, almost no one mourned the fall of the Taleban, who were universally condemned for their fanaticism.
This unanimity of opinion no longer exists. In the five years since the attacks, two audiences for the so-called "war on terror" have emerged. As the "war" progressed, the audience closest to the action began to see the emerging combat in a way that was diametrically opposed to that of the United States and the west.

To the US administration, every act in the drama of the "war on terror" was seen as discrete and self-contained: Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine and Hezbollah in Lebanon. The Bush administration invaded and occupied countries, and yet failed to see that these events were being linked in the eyes of people in the region. As they sat glued to Al-Jazeera and other Arab satellite channels, they came to view the various battles of the "war on terror" as a chain of events in a grand plot against Islam.

Worse yet, America waved the banner of democracy as it prosecuted its wars. But hopes for democracy have been buried in the rubble and carnage of Baghdad, Beirut and Kandahar.

Many Muslims understand the underlying causes of the alienation that animates Islamic radicalism and violence. They know that the rigid dictatorships of the region have paralysed their populations. Only those consumed by the fires of their rage seem able to melt the shackles of these authoritarian societies.

But the price of escape is a kind of deformation. Embittered, fanatical, vengeful: those who rebel against the status quo enter the wider world seeking retaliation, not just against the regimes that deformed them, but against the west, which propped up the region's authoritarians in the interest of "stability".

Many Muslims also understand that the problem of Palestine goes beyond the suffering of the Palestinian people. They know the region's dictators have used Palestine to justify their misrule and to avoid political and economic liberalisation. So when America called for democracy, the hearts of many in the region soared. But America let them down. As people at last began to hope for more liberal and decent societies, the US continued to endorse the regimes that were repressing them.

After the ousting of the Taleban in Afghanistan, the US turned its sights on the secular dictatorship of Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Instead of encouraging reform of Saudi Arabia's Wahhabi regime - the system that spawned 15 of the 19 hijackers in the 9/11 attacks - it waged war on a regime that had nothing to do with that crime.

The deeper America sank into the Iraqi quagmire, the more it began to turn a blind eye to the region's surviving dictators, particularly those in Saudi Arabia, Syria, Egypt and Pakistan.


So the effort to democratise Iraq - indeed, the entire American project to democratise the region - has fallen under deep suspicion among even the most moderate Muslims. America, they believe, only wants a democracy that suits its interests.

With democracy in most of the region still a long way off, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice repeats her mantra that the dead civilians of Beirut, Sidon, Tyre and Gaza represent the "birth pangs" of a new Middle East. But until the west stops regarding dead babies as political props, we cannot understand how the Muslim world perceives all that has happened since 9/11. Only then will we understand why the unified view of five years ago has fractured so violently.

Mai Yamani is the author of Cradle of Islam. Copyright: Project Syndicate. www.project-syndicate.org



http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZ9LFL9CRE.html

Friday, September 8, 2006

THE MUSLIM WORLD
Betrayed by the 'war on terror'


MAI YAMANI
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     


"We are all Americans," wrote Le Monde on September 12, 2001. And so it was with most people in the Muslim world, who were as appalled as anyone else at the carnage of the terrorist attacks. When America responded, almost no one mourned the fall of the Taleban, who were universally condemned for their fanaticism.
This unanimity of opinion no longer exists. In the five years since the attacks, two audiences for the so-called "war on terror" have emerged. As the "war" progressed, the audience closest to the action began to see the emerging combat in a way that was diametrically opposed to that of the United States and the west.

To the US administration, every act in the drama of the "war on terror" was seen as discrete and self-contained: Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine and Hezbollah in Lebanon. The Bush administration invaded and occupied countries, and yet failed to see that these events were being linked in the eyes of people in the region. As they sat glued to Al-Jazeera and other Arab satellite channels, they came to view the various battles of the "war on terror" as a chain of events in a grand plot against Islam.

Worse yet, America waved the banner of democracy as it prosecuted its wars. But hopes for democracy have been buried in the rubble and carnage of Baghdad, Beirut and Kandahar.

Many Muslims understand the underlying causes of the alienation that animates Islamic radicalism and violence. They know that the rigid dictatorships of the region have paralysed their populations. Only those consumed by the fires of their rage seem able to melt the shackles of these authoritarian societies.

But the price of escape is a kind of deformation. Embittered, fanatical, vengeful: those who rebel against the status quo enter the wider world seeking retaliation, not just against the regimes that deformed them, but against the west, which propped up the region's authoritarians in the interest of "stability".

Many Muslims also understand that the problem of Palestine goes beyond the suffering of the Palestinian people. They know the region's dictators have used Palestine to justify their misrule and to avoid political and economic liberalisation. So when America called for democracy, the hearts of many in the region soared. But America let them down. As people at last began to hope for more liberal and decent societies, the US continued to endorse the regimes that were repressing them.

After the ousting of the Taleban in Afghanistan, the US turned its sights on the secular dictatorship of Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Instead of encouraging reform of Saudi Arabia's Wahhabi regime - the system that spawned 15 of the 19 hijackers in the 9/11 attacks - it waged war on a regime that had nothing to do with that crime.

The deeper America sank into the Iraqi quagmire, the more it began to turn a blind eye to the region's surviving dictators, particularly those in Saudi Arabia, Syria, Egypt and Pakistan.


So the effort to democratise Iraq - indeed, the entire American project to democratise the region - has fallen under deep suspicion among even the most moderate Muslims. America, they believe, only wants a democracy that suits its interests.

With democracy in most of the region still a long way off, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice repeats her mantra that the dead civilians of Beirut, Sidon, Tyre and Gaza represent the "birth pangs" of a new Middle East. But until the west stops regarding dead babies as political props, we cannot understand how the Muslim world perceives all that has happened since 9/11. Only then will we understand why the unified view of five years ago has fractured so violently.

Mai Yamani is the author of Cradle of Islam. Copyright: Project Syndicate. www.project-syndicate.org



http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZ9LFL9CRE.html

thank you

Monday, September 11, 2006

OVERSELLING CLIMATE CHANGE
Inconvenient truths for Al Gore


BJORN LOMBORG
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Cinemas everywhere will soon be showing former US vice-president Al Gore's film on global warming. An Inconvenient Truth has received rave reviews in America and Europe. But, while the film is full of emotion and provocative images, it is short on rational arguments.
It makes three points: global warming is real; it will be catastrophic; and addressing it should be our top priority. Inconveniently for the film's producers, only the first statement is correct. Indeed, many of Mr Gore's apocalyptic claims are highly misleading. But his biggest error lies in suggesting that humanity has a moral imperative to act on climate change because we realise there is a problem. This seems naive, even disingenuous.


We know of many vast global challenges that we could easily solve. Preventable diseases like HIV, diarrhoea and malaria take 15 million lives each year. Malnutrition afflicts more than half the world's population. Eight hundred million people lack basic education. A billion don't have clean drinking water.

In the face of these challenges, why should stopping climate change be our top priority? Mr Gore's attempt at an answer doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

He shows that glaciers have receded for 50 years. But he doesn't acknowledge that they have been shrinking since the Napoleonic wars in the early 1800s. Likewise, he considers Antarctica the canary in the coal mine, but again doesn't tell the full story. He presents pictures from the 2 per cent of Antarctica that is dramatically warming, while ignoring the 98 per cent that has largely cooled over the past 35 years. The UN climate panel estimates that Antarctica's snow mass will actually increase during this century. The movie shows scary pictures of the consequences of the sea level rising seven metres, flooding large parts of Florida, San Francisco, New York, Holland, Calcutta, Beijing and Shanghai. Yet the UN panel on climate change suggests a rise of only 30cm to 60cm during this century.


Financial losses from weather events have increased dramatically over the past 45 years, which Mr Gore attributes to global warming. But all, or almost all, of this increase comes from more people with more possessions living closer to harm's way.


After presenting the case for the potentially catastrophic effects of climate change, Mr Gore unveils his solution: the world should embrace the Kyoto Protocol, which aims to cut carbon emissions in developed countries by 30 per cent by 2010. But even if every nation signed up, it would merely postpone warming by six years in 2100, at an annual cost of US$150 billion. The real issue is using resources wisely. According to UN estimates, for US$75 billion a year we could provide clean drinking water, sanitation, basic health care and education to every human. Shouldn't that be a higher priority?


At the climax of his movie, Mr Gore argues that future generations will chastise us for not having committed ourselves to the Kyoto Protocol. More likely, they will wonder why, in a world overflowing with "inconvenient truths", Mr Gore focused on the one where we could achieve the least good for the highest cost.

Bjorn Lomborg is author of The  Skeptical Environmentalist. Copyright: Project Syndicate. www.project-syndicate.org



http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZ5JJL9CRE.html

Tuesday, September 12, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
Control of news not the way to foster harmony



   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Given Beijing's warnings of late to dissidents, journalists and lawyers through arrests and tough sentences, its announcement of tighter controls on the inflow of foreign news is unsurprising. The impact is clear: the move will allow the government to control and, when deemed necessary, restrict what people read, hear and see.
It is not clear, however, whether the decision to put Xinhua in charge of distributing and releasing all news from foreign sources is driven by a desire to boost the agency's income, strengthen control over the use of foreign media reports, or both. While from the authorities' viewpoint the move may make sense, seen from outside, it is a bad decision that will further dent the reputation of a government that needs to confront its challenges with well-conceived policies, not by trying to suppress inconvenient reports or pretend that difficulties do not exist.


With the Communist Party's 17th national congress little more than a year away, Xinhua now has a significant role: controlling information. In the lead-up to the event, which will involve important leadership changes, there is an utmost desire by the government to ensure political stability by keeping a lid on speculation. Social stability has become a priority amid protests by people who have fallen victim to inequities created by the shift to market capitalism.

The latest rules are part of a tightening of the government's grip on the media. It was revealed in July that a law was being drafted to punish media outlets, including foreign media, for publishing unauthorised reports on emergencies. By controlling reports of disturbances and corruption, Beijing believes that a greater sense of harmony can be imbued.

Such issues are also covered by the latest regulations, which list what news cannot be distributed on the mainland, including content determined to undermine national unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity, or endanger China's security, reputation and interests. These are matters that can be broadly interpreted and implemented without explanation; even discussion of the value of the yuan could fall into the category of "being in the national interest".

The government perceives it has lost much income from businesses such as investment firms buying information directly from news agencies, which have been aggressively marketing services. As the intermediary, Xinhua can recoup a share of those fees. How far Xinhua will go in implementing the rules is uncertain; it has the power to ensure that only positive news is disseminated.

The latest moves to restrict information are dangerous for a nation seeking to improve the lives of its citizens. Instead of stability, such decisions are more likely to ferment discord through increased speculation and hearsay. Only with a free and fair media can the wrongs of society be righted.


http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZ49QL9CRE.html

Wednesday, September 13, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
On the road, finally, to carefree travel



   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Thanks to PCs and the internet, we have access to more information than we know what to do with. It is also true, thanks to the conflicting demands of career, home and personal life, that we are more time poor than ever.
In terms of quality of life, this can be a zero-sum game. We do not have the time to research all the information available, let alone put it to good effect to arrange an important purchase, or travel, entertainment, recreation or education. Therefore, anything that puts more time at our disposal without loss of work efficiency is to be welcomed. An example is the lead being given by the government and banks in moves towards a five-day working week.


It is arguable that the most irritating waste of our time is the amount taken up getting from one place to another, including travelling to work and back. This will not come as news to anyone who has sat in heavy traffic while their time ticks away, or who has been caught up without warning in a traffic jam caused by an accident, bad weather or roadworks.

The government tried to address the problem years ago by exploiting the modern abundance of information to save scarce time. The project, known as the Transport Information System (TIS), aims to provide a road map containing all information that could affect traffic conditions. But the project was frustrated by a dispute with the successful tenderer.

As we report today, the government has finally found a new partner for the HK$103 million contract.

When it is fully up and running, the TIS will enable travellers by public or private transport to access information on road conditions, weather and accident sites and the quickest route to their destination by computer, PDA and 3G mobile phones. A public transport information system giving the quickest route anywhere at any given time could be operating within 18 months.

The TIS will be hailed as a small move in the right direction by critics of the government's plan to reclaim a long stretch of harbour from Central to Causeway Bay for a road tunnel to relieve congestion on existing roads along the waterfront. They claim that every new road will eventually become saturated with traffic, and argue that congestion can only be alleviated by a comprehensive traffic management scheme that includes road pricing, levelling of the tolls of the three harbour crossings and more use of public transport.

That is a debate that is far from over. But the need for something like the TIS was demonstrated in May last year, when weather warnings from the Observatory failed to predict the strength of local storm winds in Kowloon. They toppled container stacks, felled trees and threw scaffolding onto the road, causing traffic chaos. It was hours before official warnings went out advising people to avoid the hot spots and take the MTR. The TIS might have made a difference.


http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZHP7O9CRE.html

Thursday, September 14, 2006

OBSERVER
A cop-out on maids' rights


FRANK CHING
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Once again, Hong Kong has been chastised by a United Nations human rights body about the way it treats foreign domestic helpers. And once again, the government has indicated that it intends to do nothing about it.
Late last month, the committee responsible for monitoring the way Hong Kong implements the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women voiced concern over the situation of female migrant domestic workers here.

  
It specifically mentioned the Immigration Department's "two-week rule", which requires these workers to leave Hong Kong within two weeks of their employment being terminated.

"The committee recommends that the [Hong Kong government] ensure that female foreign domestic workers are not discriminated against by their employers or subject to abuse and violence," it said. "It urges the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region to repeal the `two-week rule' and to implement a more flexible policy regarding foreign domestic workers."

There is little doubt that some workers - especially Indonesians, most of whom do not speak English but who make up 43 per cent of all migrant domestic workers - are being abused by their employers, by employment agencies and by finance companies.

A recent study by the Centre for Comparative and Public Law of the University of Hong Kong concluded that such people "often work in situations of debt bondage" akin to slavery.

In those cases, a worker arrives and is met by a representative of a Hong Kong employment agency. The agency confiscates the worker's passport and employment contract, and takes her to a finance company, where she is forced to sign a sham loan document.

The agency then delivers the worker to the employer and asks him or her to deduct money from the maid's salary every month until the "loan" is repaid, sending the money directly to the finance company.

The Hong Kong government reacted self-righteously to the university study. The Labour Department said that foreign domestic helpers in Hong Kong "are well protected when compared with [those] in other jurisdictions".

Moreover, it termed the 22 cases of debt bondage cited "a relatively small sample".

The government also says that it does not have jurisdiction, because the workers incur the debt obligations in their home country. But clearly, organisations in Hong Kong are complicit in the exploitation of these workers.

Hong Kong employment agencies are the ones that confiscate passports and force the workers to sign over very large sums, to be deducted from their salary, to a Hong Kong finance company.

If the Hong Kong government had the political will, it could easily uncover exactly what is going on and which employment agencies and finance companies are involved.

It could prohibit the confiscation of passports. This is one tactic that abusive employment agencies use to make the worker totally helpless: without her passport and employment contract, she is unable even to verify her identity, and cannot make any complaints to the police or other official body.

Forbidding the confiscation of identity documents is a recommendation that has been made by the UN Working Group on Contemporary Forms of Slavery. Saying it doesn't have jurisdiction is a cop-out by the government.

It could also get rid of the "two-week rule", which has been in effect since 1987. As the Hong Kong University study points out, the rule "gives the employer the power to terminate the work visa". It also "discourages" the helper from filing complaints.

For over a decade, human rights committees have called on Hong Kong to abolish this rule.

The UN committee that monitors the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has been calling on the government to do so since at least 1994.

The Hong Kong government was unmoved then, and it remains unmoved now.

Frank Ching is a Hong Kong-based writer and commentator. frank.ching@scmp.com



http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZC9FO9CRE.html

Friday, September 15, 2006

PRIVATE HEALTH INSURANCE
False promise for the medical system


GEORGE CAUTHERLEY
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Is private health insurance a promising remedy for dealing with the difficulties faced by public health-care systems? Many governments, including Hong Kong's, think so. But, like other policy tools, private insurance has its risks as well as opportunities.
Private insurance, its advocates believe, promises an "all-win" situation: it gives both the well-off and the less well-off better access to health care, and eases the cost pressure on the public health-care system. Shifting demand to the private sector frees up resources. This means the people who rely on the public system get better access to health care, while costs in the public system are eased.


Expanding the health-insurance market, it is reasoned, will also strengthen competition among insurers - leading to lower insurance premiums and health-care costs.

But sceptics wonder if an "all-win" situation is really attainable. They note, first, that commercial insurers have strong incentives to limit the amount of claims they pay - in order to earn profits and stay in business. To ensure profits, one strategy is to sell policies only to healthy people. That would burden the public system with a larger proportion of less healthy, and more costly, patients.

So increased private insurance may not necessarily free up resources or help ease cost pressures in the public system. Nor is there any certainty that it will improve health-care access for those remaining in the public system.

Second, expanding private insurance may draw doctors and nurses from the public to the private sector, where the pay is often better. That could force the public-health system to raise wage levels, either cutting into its budget for other services or forcing overall costs and spending to increase. In short, the growth of private insurance is not guaranteed to improve access - and may force up costs - in the public system.


Insurers must undertake a host of administrative tasks that do not exist in a medical system funded by taxes. These include assessing the risk status of the insured, determining premiums, underwriting policies, and administering billing and claims. None of these activities improve anybody's health. Private insurance also imposes significant amounts of administrative work on health-care providers, such as negotiating contracts with insurers and handling fee reimbursements. So, given the same amount of funding - other things being equal - more health care will be provided by a public system.

Medical systems financed by private insurance are generally more expensive. In 2004, the United States and Switzerland relied the most on private insurance, among member states of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. They also had the two most expensive medical systems - absorbing 15.3 per cent and 11.6 per cent, respectively, of their gross domestic product. The OECD average was 8.9 per cent.


Other research compared the tax-financed Canadian system with that in the US. It concluded that the excess administrative costs in the US were US$209 billion - or 17.1 per cent of all health-care spending. That's enough, it was estimated, to provide medical coverage for all uninsured Americans.

Advocates of private insurance must show why it is a worthy and effective policy tool for advancing healthcare objectives.

George Cautherley is convenor of the Healthcare Policy Forum.



http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZ8XZL9CRE.html

Monday, September 18, 2006

EDUCATING OUR YOUNGSTERS
Beware the media's influence


VICTOR KEUNG FUNG
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     


We must start educating our children about the media. Young people's values can be influenced by what they learn in the media, and we are seeing disturbing signs of what's happening.
Some computer companies, for example, give students discounts to buy computers. It's not uncommon, at the beginning of the school year, to see students selling their discount rights through internet chat rooms. The young people know full well that they are breaking the rules, but they do it anyway, to make a quick buck.

Such behaviour should not be condoned. We should pay attention to students' moral and social values because they are the future leaders of our society. In a recent public-opinion survey, 18 per cent of adult respondents said they were concerned about young people's honesty and conduct - a sharp increase from 8.8 per cent in a similar survey done one year ago.

Youngsters' values are shaped by what they learn at home, at school, from their peers and through the media. By the time they enter university, it is too late to change them - their value systems are already formed. We should educate youngsters between Primary Five and Form Five.

I believe most parents are doing a good job of telling their children what is right and what is wrong, although more could be done.

No doubt, teachers have also done well in educating our children. And we can always advise youngsters to distance themselves from undesirable friends.

But it's the media's impact that makes us feel so helpless. It's everywhere. And the media's role in shaping young people's values is enormous.

Asking the media not to spread evil, undesirable or improper values is an uphill battle, if not a losing one. Some media companies never regard the protection of moral or social values as their concern. Their sole objective is to maximise profit.

The government is reluctant to act because it could easily be accused of trampling press freedom and freedom of speech. Further, it could be politically sensitive to integrate media education into school curriculums. Once the government touches on moral values, people will start asking questions about political values - such as the virtues of communism and capitalism.

So, media education can only be done at home and through after-school programmes. Parents should talk more with their children about issues reported in the media, to help them determine the sort of behaviour that's acceptable.

In some other cultures, media education means more than just discussing issues covered in the media. Parents and teachers explain to young people what the background of a TV station or newspaper is, and what the organisation stands for. Knowing such things would help our children understand the messages they're getting. For instance, the anti-communist stance of The Wall Street Journal is known to all of us.

The government and charity organisations should fund after-school programmes to educate students about the media and what they report. This would help young people tell the difference between good and evil. I believe such programmes would be highly popular among students, because most young people are fascinated by the media.

When the new, six-year high school education system is implemented in the next few years, perhaps the government will consider including media education elements in one of the general-education courses. I will keep my fingers crossed.

It will be a long, hard battle to win the hearts and minds of our young, but it's a battle worth fighting: it will help shape not only their personal values, but also the future of Hong Kong.

Victor Keung Fung is a Hong Kong-based commentator on political and education issues.



http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZGV3M9CRE.html

Tuesday, September 19, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
China widens its role on the world stage



  
Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   China has sent the clearest signal yet of its intention to play a bigger role in world affairs by deciding to boost the size of its peacekeeping force in the troubled nation of Lebanon.
The larger commitment is welcome news. An expanded role in peacekeeping operations is one that the international community has long wanted China, the only Asian nation with a United Nations Security Council veto, to assume. Now that the nation has agreed to raise its peacekeeping force to 1,000, however, its decision is likely to draw both applause and alarm from the west.

  
Applause, because China's decision to put the lives of its soldiers at risk in a high-profile mission signals an expanded commitment to multilateral organisations. The move to dramatically increase the number of soldiers on the ground shortly after a Chinese peacekeeper was killed in Lebanon speaks to a high-level decision to up China's ante in the global diplomatic game. While we support China's move, those who worry about its rise likely will react with alarm. This is a powerful sign that China intends to take on a political and military role to match its growing economic might. In this regard it is likely to prove very different from Japan. As an emerging power with no serious conflicts with most countries, China is well suited to playing the role of peacekeeper. This is particularly so in places where conflicts have a religious dimension or where there is a colonial history. There, Chinese troops with no record of foreign conquests and no vested interests are more likely to be accepted as buffers between contending forces.

To be sure, there are reservations about China's policy of not interfering in the domestic affairs of other countries. The policy is rooted in the country's humiliation at the hands of western imperial powers a century ago. But Beijing has been using this policy of non-interference to justify turning a blind eye to human rights abuses by many governments. That is especially true in Africa, as it tries to secure raw materials from rogue states such as Sudan. China's attempt to prevent UN action in Darfur is shameful and deserves to be condemned. Closer to home, its support of Myanmar's generals has been vital for one of Asia's most repressive states.

However, whatever the weaknesses of this opportunistic non-interference policy, China's growing role as a peacekeeper is a sign that the country is becoming more integrated into the web of international agreements and institutions. As the nation's standing grows, we hope it will increasingly abide by global norms. China's largely successful first five years as a member of the World Trade Organisation has silenced many of the doubters on the economic front.

There is little reason why China cannot work for similar progress in the diplomatic sphere.


Committing troops to a war zone is a painful decision for any country and its leaders. Squeezed between belligerent forces, the job of peacekeepers is a largely thankless one. Although they carry arms, they are expected to fire only in self- defence. In practice, the political and military consequences of them firing to protect themselves can be so complex and devastating that they are essentially barred from doing what soldiers are supposed to do - fight.

In deciding to send troops overseas, one thing that works in Beijing's favour - at least for the time being - is that the leadership enjoys much greater freedom than its counterparts elsewhere. The Chinese political system is such that the leadership does not have to contend with a pacifist constitution, as is the case in Japan, or strong anti-war movements, which have great followings in many developed democracies.

In July, a Chinese military observer was killed in an Israeli attack on what it wrongly thought was a Hezbollah position. Over time, the presence of more Chinese troops overseas will lead to rising casualties among them. But that is the price China has to pay as a responsible member of the international community.


http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZ127M9CRE.html