¼ÐÃD: English Articles Everyday [¥´¦L¥»­¶]

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-8-14 08:19     ¼ÐÃD: English Articles Everyday

Let's continue in the new forum...!!

   

[ ¥»©«³Ì«á¥Ñ ¤j¥Ð­^©ú ©ó 2006-8-16 08:15 AM ½s¿è ]

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-8-14 08:38

Monday, August 14, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
World powers must not let Lebanese ceasefire fail



   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

   Guns should fall silent across Lebanon today as a UN Security Council-negotiated ceasefire to bring almost five weeks of fighting between Israeli troops and Hezbollah guerillas takes effect. There is no guarantee that this will happen, of course - rebels are by nature disrespectful of authority and Israel has vowed to answer threats against its civilians with brute force if the truce is not immediately respected.
That stepped-up battles greeted UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan's announcement of the resolution on Saturday could be interpreted as boding ill for peace; he had, after all, coupled the speech with a suggestion that the sides lay down their arms immediately to respect the spirit and intent of the decision.


Such pessimism should be put aside, however, because although the ceasefire has been called to stop the killing of Israeli and Lebanese civilians - more than 1,000 of whom have died already - the ramifications are of a far wider nature. At issue is the credibility of the security council.

For this reason, none of the council's permanent members - Britain, China, France, Russia and the US - can afford to have the truce fail. For the sake of their desire to ensure global stability, they must see the resolution carried out to the letter.

That means bringing the ceasefire into effect as quickly as possible and putting 15,000 foreign peacekeepers and an equal number of Lebanese troops into place in southern Lebanon. Israel must pull back its forces to Israeli territory and the Lebanese government must ensure that Hezbollah militias are disarmed and neutralised. Then, a process to bring permanent peace to the region must begin.

In the weeks leading to Saturday's resolution, such resolve was mostly lacking. Vested interests, disagreement and an absence of will marked the council's initial inaction. Only when international outrage at the loss of civilian life and destruction of Lebanon became overbearing did council members move towards the agreement that they should have swiftly come to at the outset.

Such behaviour is shameful for an organisation claiming to promote the peace and stability of the world's people. While under the UN's watch, hundreds of thousands of lives in Israel and Lebanon have been destroyed or disrupted. Lebanon, a nation that has experienced too much hardship through civil war and conflict with Israel, must again be rebuilt.

With its resolution, the security council has shown that it is not entirely toothless. Now, for the sake of its worth in international eyes, it must do its utmost to ensure the Israeli and Lebanese governments and Hezbollah comply and move towards a lasting peace.

The world's most powerful nations have no choice other than to make their pledge become reality: they owe it to the innocent people in Israel and Lebanon caught up by procrastination and inaction.

http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZZM34LQQE.html

---

§@ªÌ: ¤ë©]    ®É¶¡: 2006-8-14 21:12

i really appreciate your tireless effort... Well Done

---

§@ªÌ: happycamel    ®É¶¡: 2006-8-14 21:59

¤Þ¥Î:

­ì©«¥Ñ ¤j¥Ð­^©ú ©ó 2006-8-14 08:38 µoªí
Monday, August 14, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
World powers must not let Lebanese ceasefire fail



   
Prev. Story | Next Story



----------------------------------------------------- ...

Good.  Keep it up!

---

§@ªÌ: ¬¶¸¥¤u§L    ®É¶¡: 2006-8-14 22:38

´£¥Ü: §@ªÌ³Q¸T¤î©Î§R°£ ¤º®e¦Û°Ê«Ì½ª

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-8-15 08:08

¤Þ¥Î:

­ì©«¥Ñ ¤ë©] ©ó 2006-8-14 09:12 PM µoªí
i really appreciate your tireless effort... Well Done

Thanks for your support...

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-8-15 08:15

Tuesday, August 15, 2006

CRISIS MANAGEMENT
How to avoid a public backlash


ANTHONY CHEUNG
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

     


The Hong Kong Observatory was criticised for not issuing the No8 signal when Typhoon Prapiroon battered the city this month. Critics said the weather office put public safety at risk: the winds reached over 200km/h in some parts of the city, piles of shipping containers were knocked down at terminals and more than 600 trees were flattened.

Director Lam Chiu-ying defended the observatory's decision not to issue the top level of public warning on scientific and rational grounds.

However, public sentiment was hostile; some even called for his resignation. This is not the first time that the decisions of professionals in government departments have been challenged by the public. During the outbreak of bird flu in 1997 and the severe acute respiratory syndrome epidemic in 2003, both the Department of Health and the Hospital Authority were blasted for their perceived slow reaction. Despite local misgivings, however, Hong Kong was praised by the world health community for performing well in combating bird flu.

Following the Sars crisis, the Hospital Authority was blamed by its own review panel for relying too much on the traditional, evidence-based epidemiological approach, which required full, "hard" data before confirming the state of the outbreak. The panel called for greater weight to be given to "soft" intelligence in order to overcome mental hurdles created by established practice within the medical profession.

Professionals' reliance on hard data may sometimes prevent them from taking a more flexible approach to a situation.

Two lessons can be drawn from this. First, there is no doubt that professional authority is no longer treated as sacrosanct. With the popularisation of knowledge, ordinary people with good educations are prepared to challenge the decisions of experts. The media, too, is keen to expose flaws in professional views and actions.

Second, professionals in government have to recognise that handling public affairs is both a science and an art. Policy decisions must be evidence-based and rationally reached. However, public perceptions and expectations should also be part of the equation. Crisis management often fails simply because of poor communication and different ways of thinking between officials and citizens. But there is no reason why professional excellence must necessarily imply inadequate political good sense.

In Hong Kong, a typhoon signal is not just a scientific indicator. Decades of typhoon signals have conditioned people and businesses alike to use them as the sole guide to behaviour. Thus it's crucial to think about how the signalling system can do a better job of putting people on the alert. The Observatory should constantly review the criteria for issuing typhoon signals; alerts are necessary for specific weather conditions in different parts of the city.

The Observatory should continue to issue typhoon information based on scientific grounds - such as wind force and direction. But it's also necessary to supplement that information with related precautionary advice. Such advice should take account of the changing sprawl of the population, economic activities, local weather and traffic conditions,  as well as special community needs.

Releasing emergency information should be better co-ordinated by the government centre, and not left entirely to scientists.

Anthony Cheung Bing-leung is an executive councillor and founder of SynergyNet, a policy think-tank.



http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZU43E1VQE.html

---

§@ªÌ: poolseelover    ®É¶¡: 2006-8-15 15:20

pls keep it up.. your effort is appreciated!!

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-8-16 08:18

Wednesday, August 16, 2006

OBSERVER
No laughing matter


ALEX LO
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

   Doh! The ever-subversive Simpsons, along with other foreign cartoons such as Pokemon, Doraemon, Mickey Mouse and the Teletubbies, are to be banned from the mainland's prime-time television - between 5pm and 8pm - from next month.
Media regulators are concerned that homegrown animation programmes have been losing market shares for years, to the extent that they are becoming dinosaurs - but without the extinct creatures' enduring cartoon appeal. By some estimates, foreign cartoons now command 90 per cent of the market. In other words, mainland cartoon productions "suck big time", as Bart Simpson might say.


Instead of encouraging competition by opening markets - as the mainland has done in so many key industries under World Trade Organisation rules - state media regulators are hinting darkly at the undesirable influence of foreign cartoons on mainland children. Homemade cartoons, they say, such as the Monkey King, should be promoted in their place - they have greater educational value.

This does not bode well for the mainland industry. Thru the Moebius Strip, billed as the mainland's most expensive animated feature to date - at a cost of 130 million yuan - has bombed at the box office this month.


The prime-time ban, issued by the State Administration of Radio, Film and Television, will affect all TV stations. Mainland media pundits, appropriately, are already heaping scorn on the latest example of communist bureaucratic ineptitude. Guangzhou's Southern Metropolis News thundered: "This is a worrying, short-sighted policy and will not solve the fundamental problems in China's cartoon industry."

The irony is that the mainland has an army of talented animators. Most of them, however, are employed by foreign giants such as Disney, Warner Bros. and big-time Japanese studios.

But, like all things on the mainland, there may be a hidden political dimension. Some may think that mainland censors are using the blanket ban as an excuse to get rid of the Simpsons, undoubtedly the most subversive of the lot.

You may remember the controversial Goo Goo Gai Pan, episode 347 of the Simpsons, which was first broadcast in March last year in the United States. I am pretty sure the mainland distributor dropped that one, though I have not been able to confirm this. The episode sees Selma, Homer's older, chain-smoking sister-in-law, going through the menopause and deciding to adopt a baby from China. She is unmarried, but under state laws, only married foreign couples can adopt. So Homer pretends to be Selma's husband when they fly to China.

On his state adoption form, Homer puts down his profession as an acrobat, as an in-joke, until he is asked to substitute for a performer who has recently suffered a "bullet-related death" for questioning the Communist Party. He is told the performance is necessary to forestall a riot brought on by the audience's realisation that the party is not infallible.

Homer is hurt badly in the performance, but they manage to adopt baby Ling from an orphanage. Unfortunately, Madame Wu - the Beijing functionary whose voice is provided by Chinese-American actress Lucy Liu - learns the truth and rolls a tank into Tiananmen Square to stop the family leaving. With her body, Selma blocks the tank from advancing, and reasons with Madame Wu.

The episode also contains some controversial dialogue:

Madame Wu: "Lisa [Homer's young and super-smart daughter], soon you will have a Chinese sister who will surpass you academically."

Lisa: "I don't know. I'm considered pretty smart."

Madame Wu: "Well, Tibet was considered pretty independent. How'd that work out?"

In another scene, the American family visits the embalmed Mao Zedong . Homer: "Ohhoh, look at him, he's like a little angel ... who killed 50 million people, goochee goochee goo! Yes you are!"

Such foreign cartoons simply insult the feelings of the Chinese people.

Alex Lo is a columnist and senior reporter at the Post.

http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZSFVE1VQE.html

---

§@ªÌ: Killing me Soft    ®É¶¡: 2006-8-16 15:36



§V¤O.....

---

§@ªÌ: tbb    ®É¶¡: 2006-8-16 15:52

thank you very much.

---

§@ªÌ: busman    ®É¶¡: 2006-8-16 22:05

thank you

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-8-17 08:15

Thursday, August 17, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
Bloomberg's welcome initiative on smoking



   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

   As new problems emerge, old ones often get forgotten without being solved. It is thus refreshing to see New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg donating US$125 million of his own money to campaign against a health problem that is considered very much passˆm - smoking.
It is interesting to note that Mr Bloomberg's announcement came as Aids is very much in the limelight. A week-long conference being held in Vancouver has - once again - turned the spotlight on what is still regarded as one of the world's most threatening epidemics. HIV, responsible for causing Aids, was discovered a little over two decades ago, and funding for research to find a cure is ballooning. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, for example, has contributed US$1.9 billion to the fight.



Sars and bird flu are two other newly discovered health issues that are also attracting increasing attention. Amid the frenzy to unravel their mysteries, however, it is all too easy to forget that there are other less captivating, but no less threatening, health problems that remain unsolved. Smoking is one of them. According to the World Health Organisation, tobacco consumption is the single leading preventable cause of death. Every year, it results in the premature deaths of nearly 5 million people. And if current smoking patterns continue, the number of deaths will double to 10 million a year by 2020.

Regrettably, smoking remains widely popular, even though its harmful effects, including second-hand smoke, are already well documented. Nor is its prevention a tardy business. One only needs to summon up the determination to quit. But perhaps so much is known about smoking that it has lost the attention it deserves or the funding required to combat it. Money is needed not so much to find a cure, but to protect children and young people from tobacco, to prevent them from taking up smoking, to support smokers to quit and to protect non-smokers from second-hand tobacco smoke. These preventive measures require dedicated efforts to lobby governments and fight established interests, to pass laws and introduce rules to ban or discourage smoking. Hong Kong's uphill battle to ban smoking in public places is a case in point.

By donating a large sum of money to tackle a problem such as smoking, which has gone off the radar screen of many philanthropists, Mr Bloomberg is doing the world a great service. In 2003, the WHO spearheaded the passage of an international treaty on tobacco control, but its implementation has been slow.

The campaign against smoking is not the only health issue that would benefit from similar donations. For example, malaria remains an endemic problem, particularly in Africa where it kills more than 1 million people a year. The world would be a healthier place if more philanthropists followed Mr Bloomberg's example.


http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZ8R9PWXQE.html

---

§@ªÌ: monomonk    ®É¶¡: 2006-8-18 03:11

thx

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-8-18 08:20

Friday, August 18, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
Population policy must strike right balance



  
Next Story



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

   The mainland's population problem is not just one of size, but also of structure. In a worrying development, the structural problems are getting worse even though efforts to control growth are largely a success. The population is still set to increase, from 1.3 billion now to a projected peak of 1.45 billion by 2030, and the structural issues make the task of managing this growth that much more difficult.
Topping the list is the serious imbalance between the sexes, with many more boys born than girls. While the problem is not new, the fact that it is getting more serious despite measures to tackle it is unsettling. To prevent the abortion of female fetuses, the improper use of ultrasound equipment for sex selection has been banned in many parts of the country. Other measures include the Girl Care Project that encourages rural families to value daughters as much as sons and the offer of financial incentives to parents of girls. The last measure is particularly noteworthy, as it strikes at the heart of the problem - the underprovision of social services and lack of retirement protection for the country's mainly rural population.


Although traditional values favouring boys who can carry on the family lineage remain strong, they are fading as modern values of sexual equality permeate the younger generation. But until the countryside is covered by a proper social security system, rural people will continue to hang on to the idea that having a son is the most dependable way of providing for old age.

One encouraging sign is that attitudes towards child-bearing and parenting among the educated and urbanised Chinese are no different from those of their counterparts in the developed world. They are less likely to discriminate against girls and more inclined to have fewer or no children. In Shanghai, for example, declining birth rates have even prompted the city government to encourage the birth of a second child. Much as Hong Kong is fretting about a greying population, Shanghai is worried that its shrinking workforce will put a heavy burden on the young to take care of the elderly.

Currently, only about 42 per cent of the mainland's population is urbanised, and the rate is considered low relative to its level of industrialisation. Perhaps the most effective way of addressing the population's gender imbalance and bulging growth lies in quickening the pace of urbanisation.

To be sure, policymakers have already identified urbanisation as a solution to many ills, notably rural poverty. They regard managing the process of urban growth as a critical challenge. The household registration system that used to bind peasants to their land and bar them from coming to the cities has largely been scrapped. But peasants still face tremendous difficulties being accepted as city dwellers. City governments' means of funding and providing social services have yet to adapt to the reality that migrants from the countryside are a permanent feature that must be provided for.

From a macro perspective, the huge size of the mainland population remains the biggest concern. But the problem manifests itself in various forms in different parts of the country. Some of the structural issues are localised. Presumably, they could be eased by a freer flow of people between the countryside and cities and a significant boost to social services in rural areas. Shanghai may find declining birth rates less of a problem if young blood continues to flow in from other parts of the country and its retirees find relocation to the countryside a realistic alternative.

As Hong Kong tries to map out its own population strategy, the mainland's population trends are instructive. For cultural reasons, our rising number of unmarried women may not desire to pair up with bachelors from the mainland. Our borders with the mainland will, for a long time to come, impede mainlanders from flooding in. But the scenario of those borders coming down sooner than we expect - either by design or pushed by events - is one that we should not ignore.


http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZE3DPWXQE.html

---

§@ªÌ: wailingwylie    ®É¶¡: 2006-8-18 20:21

let's learn real English everyday

---

§@ªÌ: ¨D¨ä    ®É¶¡: 2006-8-20 02:50

¤Þ¥Î:

­ì©«¥Ñ ¤j¥Ð­^©ú ©ó 2006-8-14 12:38 AM µoªí
Monday, August 14, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
World powers must not let Lebanese ceasefire fail



   
Prev. Story | Next Story



----------------------------------------------------- ...

Thank you!

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-8-21 08:06

Monday, August 21, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
Determination needed to solve rubbish crisis



  
Next Story



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

   Garbage is not something we like to think about: after dumping it outside our door, we would like that to be the end of the matter. Given that a garbage crisis looms, with our three landfills nearing capacity, that attitude must quickly change.
Waste disposal is a problem for cities the world over. Hong Kong has the added difficulty of not enough space on which to dump refuse and a government that took up the matter later than it should have.


Even though various measures are now in place, or are being introduced, to deal with waste reduction and recycling, there is no sense of urgency about their implementation. Nor does Hong Kong have the big incinerators other cities use to reduce the amount of material going into landfills; due to a slow legislative process, the high likelihood of legal challenges and lengthy construction time, none is likely to be off the drawing board and in use before our rubbish dumps reach capacity, between the next four and eight years.

Hong Kong people's concern about the air pollution all too frequently blotting out blue skies would seem to indicate a keen environmental awareness. The amount of unnecessary garbage being tossed into tips clearly states the opposite.

The government claims that reversing such a practice is a matter of education. It believes educational campaigns will go a long way to ensuring that 80 per cent of residents will be sorting household rubbish for recycling by the end of the decade. As proof, Environmental Protection Department officials point to the household rubbish recycling rate rising from 8 per cent in 1998 to 16 per cent last year; they expect it to be 20 per cent next year. Projects to increase the convenience of recycling are also seen as the way forward in cutting down waste.

Compared with other big developed cities such as London, New York and Tokyo, we are no better or worse at recycling. Our circumstances are somewhat different, however.

Hong Kong's environmental officials have toured the world and inspected how other cities deal with rubbish. They well know that the solution lies not in a voluntary system or convenience, but in making recycling compulsory, as happens in Taipei and Munich. Even implementing a scheme, as in Vancouver or Sydney, where rubbish will not be collected if it has not been sorted into bags or bins containing recyclable material and other waste substantially boosts rates. Under such systems, residents quickly learn the value of recycling and develop a sense of social responsibility that they would not ordinarily have attained.

Companies in such cities also have to act responsibly by ensuring the goods they produce and sell can be reused as much as possible. They are held responsible for the disposal of hazardous materials and equipment that contains material harmful to the environment.

Our government is just now tackling the latter approach and has a timetable for implementation of laws for the proper disposal of plastics, electrical equipment, batteries, tyres and the like. Given its reluctance to legislate on new restrictions involving business, however, there is a danger that laws will be weakened.

While Hong Kong's household recycling rate is poor considering the urgency of our waste disposal problem, a model system has long been in place when it comes to construction firms: they have to pay for the waste they dispose of in landfills. This encourages them to dump as little as possible by selling reusable material to recyclers and has helped push the city's overall recycling rate to 43 per cent.

As impressive as this figure sounds, it is well below the 70 per cent achieved by many cities in northern Europe and Scandinavia. There, a culture has evolved where caring for the environment goes well beyond what gets put in the garbage.

Other cities have shown that where there is will, a solution to waste problems can be found. That determination is what Hong Kong needs and with the government taking the lead, we can find a way out of our impending mess.


http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZ97R7XZQE.html

---

§@ªÌ: ¸¯¸­¹p°ó    ®É¶¡: 2006-8-21 12:03

thank ~ keep going

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-8-22 08:16

Tuesday, August 22, 2006

YANTIAN PORT DEVELOPMENT
The threat to Hong Kong's ecotourism


MARKUS SHAW
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

     


The more Hong Kong merges with the economy of the Pearl River Delta, the more clearly we see the need for regional planning - and the sustainability it would bring.
One example is the continued development of the Yantian container port in Shenzhen, which is growing enormous. With increasing shipping traffic and port development at Yantian, water-borne rubbish and bilge-oil discharge have become major problems in the waters of Mirs Bay.

On a recent visit to the beautiful beaches of Tai Long Wan (which faces Mirs Bay), I was stunned by the amount of rubbish both on the beach and in the water. Only 10 years ago, these waters were fairly pristine.

The beaches of Tai Long Wan feature in many tourism adverts for Hong Kong: they would do well not to zoom in too closely. The same problems are facing the marine parks of Yan Chau Tong and Tung Ping Chau, which are even closer to Yantian.

These developments put at risk the government's and community's aspirations to turn our northeastern waters and countryside into a conservation and ecotourism zone. Those familiar with the area will know that it is one of the most beautiful and scenic in the world, combining green hills and turquoise waters to stunning effect.

As the Pearl River Delta region becomes increasingly blanketed by concrete and development, so the value of such beautiful countryside increases. Quite simply, it provides a unique opportunity to combine conservation and commercial exploitation in the form of ecotourism. The communities in that area are sitting on a priceless asset, if only they knew it. Now I fear that our own efforts to conserve the northeast and develop a thriving ecotourism industry may be rendered futile in the face of increased pollution - caused by untrammelled development on the mainland side of Mirs Bay.

At the same time, there are longstanding fears of competition to our port from the ports in Yantian, Shekou and Chiwan. Yet Hong Kong's major advantage is that it has the only deep-water port in the area (all the others must be continuously dredged to maintain a shipping channel).

The main difficulty for Hong Kong's port seems to be its distance from mainland factories and the inefficiencies of cross-border traffic. For some time, I have asked whether it would be possible to build a dedicated railway line linking the Hong Kong port with a distribution centre in China. Containers arriving on ships would be placed directly on trains and taken to the mainland distribution centre, and vice versa.

This would increase the speed and efficiency of distribution from the Hong Kong port to mainland destinations. It would eliminate the problem of the huge volume of road and river transport of containers between Hong Kong and the mainland, which contributes significantly to air pollution.

For those in government and the community who are still wedded to the idea of large-scale infrastructure projects, here's a solid proposal that would actually bring some major, sustainable benefits.

Markus Shaw is chairman of WWF Hong Kong.

http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZ65GL74RE.html

---

§@ªÌ: johntamtam    ®É¶¡: 2006-8-22 16:03

Thanks!  It is very nice of you!  

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-8-23 08:31

Wednesday, August 23, 2006

IRANIAN NUCLEAR CRISIS
The chance for China to shine


KEVIN RAFFERTY
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

     


The world has been brought to a dangerous precipice by the Iranian nuclear issue. But Tehran's hostility towards the trade and other concessions offered by the UN Security Council - in return for giving up its nuclear enrichment programme - is also a golden opportunity for China.

Indeed, this could be the defining moment of Beijing's international maturity. Is China prepared to be part of the global government system and to play a leading role in creating much-needed new rules of international behaviour? Or will it continue to play short-sighted, selfish games?

Iran's supporters say possessing a nuclear bomb is the most powerful symbol of a country's modernity, and a guarantee that it cannot be pushed around. The particular problem that Iran poses is that the world should not only worry about proliferation of nuclear weapons to Iran, but also nuclear proliferation from Iran.

The Iranian government is behaving as the natural heir to the Persian imperial tradition, ironically following in the footsteps of the late, unloved shah. When he helped trigger the quadrupling of oil prices in the 1970s, the shah declared that he wanted to use the income to build up his navy so it could patrol the seas between Iran and Australia.

The current Iran of the mullahs sees itself as the messianic sword arm of a crusading Islamic revival. Its support for Hezbollah reinforces the worries that Iran with a nuclear weapon would threaten stability, and not merely in its own backyard.



The five security council members - the United States, France, Britain, Russia and China - plus Germany, must offer carrots as well as sticks to Tehran. An Iran that can be engaged and modernised could become a force for stability in the Middle East. Unfortunately, Iran appears set to press ahead with its controversial nuclear work. This means that the six nations have to consider diplomatic sticks, including the threat of sanctions, as US President George W. Bush has urged.

Unfortunately, sanctions often fail: there is always someone with an interest in doing business with a rogue regime. Beijing has been propping up many oppressive governments, from Myanmar to Sudan and Zimbabwe. Beijing is playing an important role on the Iranian issue, too, as the leading supplier of arms to Tehran. This includes not just tanks and guns, but surface-to-air and surface-to-surface missiles of the kind that Iran has passed on to Hezbollah.

Although no one has firm proof - and it would be forbidden under China's commitments to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty - Beijing has been suspected of passing on nuclear know-how to Tehran.

China has good, selfish, short-term and short-sighted reasons for its support of regimes in Myanmar, Iran and Sudan: notably, its anxiety to secure energy and other natural resources, to underpin its rapid economic growth. And if, at the same time, it pokes the US in the eye, that isn't likely to worry it.

Deng Xiaoping gave the advice that China should "hide brightness and nourish obscurity ... to bide our time and build up our capabilities". It was good advice at the time, but Beijing has since experienced decades of rapid economic growth.

China is now a world economic power - whether its own rulers or Washington like it. And because of that, it is creating a large political footprint, too. It can no longer hide its brightness in obscurity. Nor can Washington - in spite of Mr Bush's best efforts - hope to get its own way, unchallenged, on large international issues.

But this means that China now has responsibilities, too. It is not in Beijing's interests to see the spread of nuclear weapons. It is odd that a government anxious to suppress domestic dissent, and one that looks askance at Hong Kong's wishes for democracy, would welcome nuclear weapons in the hands of an Islamic, revolutionary Iran. The prospect that such weapons might spread to terrorists should be a major worry to a government that has its own discontented Muslims and other suppressed dissidents.

Beijing could play a key, constructive role in pointing out to Tehran the advantages of co-operation rather than confrontation with the rest of the world. If it comes to the need for sanctions, China's support will be essential both in convincing Iran that the rest of the world is serious, and in making sanctions work as never before.

Being a key player on this pressing issue for global co-operation would strengthen China's image immensely. It would also demonstrate to Mr Bush, in a practical way, that there are limits to an imperial US presidency.

Whether China's leaders can respond to the challenge remains an open question. They may head the biggest nation on Earth, with the fastest economic growth the world has seen. But politically, President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao have so far shown themselves to be short-term and short-sighted players - with little understanding of the historic opportunity awaiting them and China.

Kevin Rafferty is editor-in-chief of PlainWords Media, a consortium of journalists interested in development issues.



http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZW2QHH6RE.html

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-8-24 08:06

Thursday, August 24, 2006

US CREDIT BOOM
Spend, spend, spend: the end


ROBERT SAMUELSON
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

   America is at the end of the credit boom - certainly the six-yearboom, and maybe even the 60-year boom. Has any society ever created so many ways for people to go into hock? In 2003, Americans had 1.46 billion credit cards, or five per person on average. Home mortgages now total US$9 trillion.
In 1946, households had 22 cents of debt for each dollar of disposable income. Now they have US$1.26. Behind these figures lies a profound social upheaval: the "democratisation" of debt. Everyone gets to borrow. But this process may have reached its limits.


Although Americans are routinely stigmatised as credit junkies, that's unfair. Of course, some people do borrow too much, and some financial institutions do lend abusively. Still, the democratisation of debt has generally been a good thing: millions of families can now borrow for university educations, cars and clothes. The biggest boon has been the expansion of home ownership, up from 44 per cent of households in 1940 to 69 per cent today. Three-quarters of household debt consists of mortgages.

At heart, Americans' appetite for credit reflects national optimism. We presume that today's debts can be repaid because tomorrow's incomes will be higher.

The origins of today's credit culture date to the 1920s, with the advent of instalment payments for cars and appliances, says economist Martha Olney of the University of California. In the 19th century, "it was thought that only irresponsible families bought on credit", she says. "By the 1920s, it was only foolish families that didn't buy on credit, and use it while they were paying for it."

After the second world war, credit became part of the mass market. The combination of aggressive merchandising, and laws prohibiting racial and ethnic discrimination in lending, led to a huge expansion of borrowers.


The trouble is that no society can forever raise its borrowing faster than its income - which is what America has been doing. Sooner or later, debt burdens become oppressive. One reason for thinking America has passed that point is that the last spasm of credit expansion was partially artificial. To soften the 2001 recession, the US Federal Reserve embarked on an audacious policy of easy credit. From December 2001 to November 2004, it held its key, short-term interest rate under 2 per cent.

A property bonanza ensued. The frenzy depended heavily on low-interest-rate mortgages. But what the Fed giveth, the Fed taketh away. Since June 2004, it has raised short-term interest rates from 1 per cent to 5.25 per cent. Whether the Fed achieves the vaunted "soft landing" - an economic slowdown that reduces inflation without causing a recession - hinges heavily on how the credit boom of the last few years unwinds. If it ends violently, with a crash in home prices and housing construction, a recession could follow.

This turn of the credit cycle could signal the end of the decades-long rise of personal debt as a proportion of income. It is not just that debt service - interest and principal - is at a historic high, or almost 19 per cent of disposable income. Since 1989, the share of households with debt has risen from two-thirds to three-quarters.

For years, the democratisation of debt stimulated the economy. What happens without that prop? For better or worse, we may soon learn.

Robert Samuelson is a Washington Post columnist.


http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZ4677H6RE.html

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-8-25 07:09

Friday, August 25, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
A lesson in the changing nature of universal truths



   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

   The International Astronomical Union has spoken and set in stone - until the next debate, at least - the composition of Earth's neighbourhood. But while this may have seemed to have been an argument about whether Pluto is or is not a planet, in reality it has been one of far greater gravitas - the questioning of science itself.
In our fast-changing world, there can be no better lesson for those among us who are reluctant to review and amend our beliefs and practices.


For the majority of us, the thought that Pluto is not what schools have been teaching since its discovery 86 years ago seems quaint. Astrologers and others in the business of star gazing and fortune telling see it much more seriously. To some others, so much fuss about a small rock so far away is absurd. A small number among us, disinterested in what lies beyond the atmosphere or perhaps just poor students or too young to understand, may wonder why a harmless Disney dog is making headlines.

Whatever our feelings, though, in the back of most minds is the sense that familiarity has been tampered with. Like a badly food-stained favourite shirt or well-worn, but comfortable, slippers, Pluto was not something to be so willingly discarded. This was a case of an old friend being in hospital and potentially at death's door.

Scientists are not so emotional. They are forever making discoveries that make previous findings obsolete. No scientific branch is as ever-changing as astronomy, where each new glance at a telescope or gathering of satellite data alters charts. What was in the heavens last night will be added tomorrow. Such change is exciting rather than distressing for astronomers. They know that with each new finding, they are a step - albeit a miniscule one in all but a few rare cases - closer to understanding the universe.

More broadly, though, Pluto has proven a paradigm shift for science. This is a phrase much used but little understood by the general populace - although for the scientific community, it has great meaning. First used by American science philosopher Thomas Kuhn 44 years ago, the term describes a dramatic shift in basic assumptions within scientific theory. In science there are frequently anomalies against a paradigm and when enough accrue, a crisis occurs in the discipline affected. New ideas are floated, debate flourishes and truth is reassessed and if necessary, changed.

That is what happened over Pluto and the scientific community has made its reassessment, which we all will live by until evidence indicates it is time to think otherwise. Upheavals can be destabilising, but sometimes they are necessary - particularly when it comes to banishing complacency. Often, taking stock of what we have can also be refreshing. For those of us in need of change, Pluto should become our new symbol.


http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZOCCM79RE.html

---

§@ªÌ: veinitha    ®É¶¡: 2006-8-25 11:37

too long to see

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-8-28 08:03

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

---

§@ªÌ: happycamel    ®É¶¡: 2006-8-28 09:19

Read!

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-8-29 08:13

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

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-8-30 08:16

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

---

§@ªÌ: happycamel    ®É¶¡: 2006-8-30 09:36

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-8-31 07:15

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

---

§@ªÌ: jamesliu    ®É¶¡: 2006-8-31 22:27

thanks

---

§@ªÌ: happycamel    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-1 01:38


Thx

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-1 08:08

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

---

§@ªÌ: yauhokiu    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-1 15:49

gooooooooood

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-4 08:55

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

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-5 08:07

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

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-6 08:07

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

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-7 07:12

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

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-8 08:12

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

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-8 08:12

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

---

§@ªÌ: hello.eric    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-9 23:25

thank you

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-11 08:09

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

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-12 08:15

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

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-13 08:11

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

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-14 08:24

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

---

§@ªÌ: fwu19    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-14 15:26

´£¥Ü: §@ªÌ³Q¸T¤î©Î§R°£ ¤º®e¦Û°Ê«Ì½ª

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-15 08:02

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

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-18 08:09

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

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-19 08:06

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

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-20 08:01

Wednesday, September 20, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
Street markets a valuable part of our cultural heritage



   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

   One test of a great city is how well it preserves what is worth keeping. This is especially so in Hong Kong, where the issue of development versus preservation is complicated by lack of space. As a result there is often little room for sentiment such as preservation of important strands of our cultural heritage.
The buzz concepts are improved traffic flow, high-rise makeovers of old neighbourhoods such as Lee Tung Street in Wan Chai, fondly known to many as Wedding Card Street, and modern tourist attractions such as the Ngong Ping 360 cable car and Disneyland.


Traditional tourist attractions such as street markets do not loom large in the vision of government planners. Dai pai dongs are dying out because licences for the food stalls can only be passed on to spouses. The 70-year-old Wan Chai street market, the largest and oldest on Hong Kong Island, is the latest example of cultural heritage under threat. Since hawkers were driven out of Wan Chai Road 30 years ago to improve traffic flow, the market has thrived in the back streets, a way of life to locals and a magnet for tourists.

Now it is under pressure again, this time from urban renewal. Earlier this year, the government backed down from a plan to move all the 150-odd stalls indoors beneath a new residential development by China Estates Holdings. The move was aimed at improving traffic flow after the new development opens. But it was opposed by the hawkers because it would have robbed the market of its traditional open-air colour and character.

The government still insists that roughly half the market must go, and is trying to find alternative outdoor sites for 86 stallholders. Local residents and shopkeepers have opposed the building of new stalls within the remainder of the market.

It is ironic that one reason for the forced move is to improve traffic flow - as it was 30 years ago - and that another is to improve the area's "environmental hygiene". Some may wonder which detracts more from environmental hygiene - increased traffic polluting the air or local residents' perception of the market as visual "pollution" of the neighbourhood.

The emasculation of the Wan Chai market amounts to sanitisation of the streetscape at the expense of an important example of the city's cultural heritage. Visitors to the city will not be the only losers. Hawkers in densely populated urban areas supply a service to low- income groups for which there is no comparable alternative.

We have a more serious environmental hygiene problem than street markets - air pollution, which poses serious public health issues and casts a shadow over economic development. Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen will earn the gratitude of all if he uses his policy address to outline a more comprehensive plan for improving air quality. That would be more meaningful than cracking down on popular street markets.


http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZRVRO9CRE.html

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-21 08:08

Thursday, September 21, 2006

US TREASURY SECRETARY
Mr Paulson goes to China


DON EVANS
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

     


This week, Henry Paulson is making his first trip to China as US treasury secretary. But this is hardly his first visit to the mainland. Mr Paulson has made more than 70 visits  to the country over the past three decades.
When US President George W. Bush nominated him as treasury secretary, he gained not only one of Wall Street's most respected leaders, but one of the world's foremost experts on China.

Over the years, Mr Paulson has cultivated relationships with Chinese leaders that are second to none. They know him as someone they can do business with, and someone they trust to speak with them frankly. China has emerged as the world's fastest-growing economy and one of America's most important trading partners: Mr Paulson's expertise could not have come on the scene at a better time.

During his trip, he will emphasise the critical importance of continued reform and modernisation of the mainland's financial sector. Such reform would promote the country's sustainable growth over the long term, expanding its economic output by as much as 17 per cent - according to a McKinsey and Company survey. It is also a prerequisite to progress on the big issues that define America's economic relationship with China.

The first of these is currency reform. As Mr Paulson made clear in his confirmation hearing, in order to remove capital controls and move to a more freely floating exchange rate determined by market forces, China must have a modern, fully functioning, market-based financial system.

The second key issue is the trade deficit. Among the reasons that our trade deficit with China exists and continues to grow is because Chinese consumers save too much. A better consumer-credit system would unleash unmobilised savings by allowing mainland consumers to use loans to buy many of the big-ticket items for which they now must save.

A stronger consumer market in the mainland would lead to a greater demand for imports from the United States, and a lower trade deficit.

The third concern is a level playing field for American companies operating in the mainland. Too much of China's capital continues to flow to inefficient, nonproductive state enterprises rather than to the most productive borrowers. Further opening of the country's financial system to foreign institutions would inject world-class expertise and know-how regarding credit analysis, risk management and internal controls into China's financial markets. This would transform its economy, putting foreign companies on a fairer, market-oriented, competitive footing with local enterprises.

I recently travelled to Beijing to meet top business and government leaders. We discussed many of the same issues that will be on Mr Paulson's agenda: the critical importance of open commercial banking, capital, and insurance markets to promoting the consumption-led economic growth that China's leaders seek; the need for China to continue to meet its obligations under the World Trade Organisation; and the importance of further steps towards currency reform.

I know, from my own experience, that Chinese financial leaders understand that allowing greater reliance on market principles is in the best interest of the country's long-term growth, job creation and general well-being of its citizens.

Mr Paulson's task will be to continue to urge them to transform that insight into action.

The US and China together accounted for half of the world's economic growth over the past four years. Further, China is the fastest-growing market for US exports and the second largest source for American imports.

The fortunes of the two countries are undeniably linked.

Don Evans is former US commerce secretary and chief executive officer of the Financial Services Forum.



http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZUPZO9CRE.html

---

§@ªÌ: happycamel    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-21 11:38

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-22 08:04

Friday, September 22, 2006

UNITED NATIONS MANDATES
Big talk, little commitment


ANNE-MARIE SLAUGHTER
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

   The United Nations peacekeeping operations under way in Lebanon offer a big opportunity for the UN to demonstrate its relevance and impact on the world stage. If only those member states who claim to be the UN's biggest supporters would put their money where their mouths are.
Many world leaders, particularly those in Europe, decry the Bush administration's undermining of the UN, especially since 2003. Leaders in France expressed outrage when the US sidestepped the UN and invaded Iraq without the international community's blessing. Yet they stunned the world in August when they backed down from their promise to send 2,000 peacekeepers to intervene in southern Lebanon, and instead committed only 200.


Fortunately, France is reconsidering, while Germany will provide limited naval assistance and Italy has stepped up to contribute 3,000 peacekeepers. But Europe's response, like the US response in other cases, highlights a critical issue for all supporters of the UN and international institutions more generally. If we cannot do what it takes to make them more effective, we will increasingly find that nations will bypass them altogether.

UN Security Council Resolution 1701 calls for Israel and Lebanon to support a permanent ceasefire. It thus set the stage for UN officials to set out the rules of engagement for its peacekeepers. The rules dictate when, and under what circumstances, UN troops can fire their weapons to defend themselves. But, as the current UN mission in Lebanon well knows, defending yourself is not the same as preventing hostile fire in the first place.

But the need for rules of engagement is only the symptom of a deeper problem. The real issue is a yawning gap between paper and practice. In the heat of an international crisis, the security council passes resolutions to great public fanfare, establishing an official UN "mandate". But then the secretary-general is left, resolution in hand, to ask member states for the actual, tangible resources necessary to implement the action that has been commanded. In the overwhelming majority of cases, those resources fall far short of what is required to successfully intervene in a crisis.

A UN mandate review this year found that member states adopt hundreds of mandates each year - conferring "additional responsibilities with neither corresponding funds nor guidance" on how resources should be used. In American domestic politics, such commands from the US Congress to states are known as "unfunded mandates" - ordering results without providing the resources necessary to achieve them. It's political theatre: big headlines, small results. The mandate gap reflects the way the world has done business with the UN for decades: big promises, small pay-outs, and much scapegoating if the UN then fails.

The UN provides the mechanism for a global response, but it does not exist separately from its member states. It is up to those members to provide both the necessary will and the required resources. Otherwise, the UN is nothing more than a handy mechanism for outsourcing political blame.

Our commitment to bring peace to the Middle East, or Darfur, or Kosovo or Haiti, is not measured by our words, but by our wallets. The world gets what it pays for.

The author is dean of the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University. Copyright: Project Syndicate



http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZX8LM9CRE.html

---

§@ªÌ: happycamel    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-22 10:27

---

§@ªÌ: taurus    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-25 11:00

¤Þ¥Î:

­ì©«¥Ñ ¤j¥Ð­^©ú ©ó 2006-9-22 08:04 µoªí
Friday, September 22, 2006

UNITED NATIONS MANDATES
Big talk, little commitment

ANNE-MARIE SLAUGHTER
   
Prev. Story | Next Story

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

... The real issue is a yawning gap between paper and practice. In the heat of an international crisis, the security council passes resolutions to great public fanfare, establishing an official UN "mandate". But then the secretary-general is left, resolution in hand, to ask member states for the actual, tangible resources necessary to implement the action that has been commanded. In the overwhelming majority of cases, those resources fall far short of what is required to successfully intervene in a crisis ...

[¥i¼¦®a·AÉNª¤ !]

Thanks a lot, Brother ¤j¥Ð­^©ú ...  

I've been asked who writes for Mr. Bush's speeches. Do you have any information on this matter. ?  

Looking forward to viewing your article for this week ...

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-25 13:41

Monday, September 25, 2006

OUT OF THE BOX
Off to a miserable start


KITTY POON
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

   September is the month of stress. Surveys indicated that nearly 78 per cent of Hong Kong teachers feel stressed by their overwhelming workloads at the start of the school year. This month is also a time of immense anxiety for parents - especially those whose children must make the transition from kindergarten to primary school one year from now.
A friend of mine is a mother of two, and her older daughter will be eligible to study in a primary school next year. But the admission process begins this month, and the whole family has been mobilised to achieve one single goal - to send their lovely girl to a reputable primary school.


At the core of this daunting task is the application letter. To impress the prospective school, the parents have decided to write it in English, although that means hiring a professional editor.

Also central to the application is the emphasis on the personality of the young lady. Hence, a great number of relatives are being enlisted to describe her amiable characteristics in their reference letters.

Knowing that extracurricular activities are one of the criteria in the selection process, some parents enrol their children in various private lessons, such as drawing, singing, kung fu, and ballet, to build an impressive record.

The application exercise also involves an interview at the prospective school. It's widely known that schools are likely to ask about the patterns of family life. In order to demonstrate to the school that they take a keen interest in expanding their children's cultural and other experiences, parents have to ingeniously "engineer" family outings. This often involves taking their children on guided tours around Hong Kong, or joining tours to the mainland and Taiwan.

Some parents, especially those with demanding jobs, can't take all these measures. For them, the remedy may lie in tutorials to train their youngsters in giving model answers during school interviews.

It wouldn't be an exaggeration to say that enrolling your child in a reputable primary school in Hong Kong is equivalent to getting a top job with a Wall Street firm.

For many families, this admission exercise can take a heavy toll on finances - especially for those with modest incomes. It also places undue pressure on working parents, who have to invest a lot of time and energy. Further, it makes a mockery of the city's education system, which gives little thought to the value of personal growth.

It would be difficult to fully understand the true feelings of the children being put through this ludicrous enrolment process. But it was reported that more than 300 calls from disturbed students have been received by the Federation of Youth Group so far this month.

It's hard to imagine that children could go on to enjoy - and feel motivated in - their years in school, after such a terrifying experience at the beginning of their school life.

This corrosion of the genuine interest in learning will have significant implications for the personal development of our young children.

It will also eventually undermine their creativity, thus weakening the overall vibrancy of Hong Kong in the long run.

Kitty Poon, a research fellow at the Polytechnic University of Hong Kong, is a part-time member of the government's Central Policy Unit.



http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZ0X9P9CRE.html

---

§@ªÌ: taurus    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-25 17:13

Thank you Brother ¤j¥Ð­^©ú,

It is indeed a serious problem to many families in HK. I just hope that there will be a solution to it in the near future ....

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-26 08:05

Tuesday, September 26, 2006

MISGUIDED ENERGY POLICY
An escape from Bush's future


JEFFREY SACHS
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

     


It always comes back to oil. The continuing misguided interventions in the Middle East by the United States and Britain have their roots deep in the Arabian sand. Ever since Winston Churchill led the conversion of Britain's navy from coal to oil at the start of the last century, the western powers have meddled incessantly in the affairs of Middle Eastern countries to keep the oil flowing - toppling governments and taking sides in wars in the supposed "great game" of energy resources. But the game is almost over, because the old approaches are obviously failing.
Just when one is lulled into thinking that something other than oil is at the root of current US and British action in Iraq, reality pulls us back. Indeed, US President George W. Bush recently invited journalists to imagine the world 50 years from now. He did not have in mind the future of science and technology, a global population of 9 billion, or the challenges of climate change and biodiversity. Instead, he wanted to know whether Islamic radicals would control the world's oil.

Whatever we are worrying about in 50 years, this will surely be near the bottom of the list. Even if it were closer to the top, overthrowing Saddam Hussein to ensure oil supplies in 50 years ranks as the least plausible of strategies. Yet we know, from a range of evidence, that this is what was on Mr Bush's mind when his government shifted its focus from the search for Osama bin Laden to fighting a war in Iraq.


In any event, the war in Iraq will not protect the world's energy supplies in 50 years. If anything, it will threaten them by stoking the very radicalism it claims to be fighting. Genuine energy security will come not by invading and occupying the Middle East, or by attempting to impose pliant governments, but by recognising certain deeper truths about global energy.

First, energy strategy must satisfy three objectives: low cost, diverse supply and drastically reduced carbon-dioxide emissions. This will require massive investments in new technologies and resources, not a "fight to the finish" over Middle East oil. Important energy technology will include the conversion of coal to liquids (such as petrol and diesel), the use of tar sands and oil shale, and growth in non-fossil-fuel energy sources.

Indeed, there is excellent potential for low-cost solar power, zero-emitting coal-based technologies, and safe and reliable nuclear power. Solar radiation equals roughly 10,000 times our current energy use. We tap that solar power in many fundamental ways, but the possibilities are huge for a greatly increased use of inexpensive, widely available and environmentally friendly solar power.

Coal, like solar energy, is widely available. It is already inexpensive, but it is a major pollutant and a source of greenhouse-gas emissions. Yet these problems can be solved. Gasification of coal allows for the removal of dangerous pollutants, and coal can already be converted to liquid oil products at low cost; a South African company is beginning to bring that technology to China on a large scale. Nuclear power is yet another possibility for reliable and environmentally safe energy.

It is ironic that an administration fixated on the risks of Middle East oil has chosen to spend hundreds of billions of dollars to pursue unsuccessful military approaches to problems that should be solved at vastly lower cost, through research and development, regulation and market incentives. The biggest energy crisis of all, it seems, involves the misdirected energy of a US foreign policy built on war rather than scientific discovery and technological progress.

Jeffrey Sachs is a professor of economics and director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University. Copyright: Project Syndicate



http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZQZUM9CRE.html

---

§@ªÌ: tuuuu    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-26 15:37     ¼ÐÃD: love you

live

---

§@ªÌ: maxwellxzy    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-26 20:21

very good!

---

§@ªÌ: simonyuenok    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-26 20:51

thank you for sharing

---

§@ªÌ: happycamel    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-27 01:25

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-27 08:06

Wednesday, September 27, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
The big question: how small should government be?



   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

   Economist Milton Friedman hit the nail on the head when he said the four words "big market, small government" were fine but "it all depends on what you fill them with". As the debate continues on whether the catchy phrase adopted by the government is the same as "positive non-interventionism", there is a better question the community should be asking: what should the role of government be? We need to reach a consensus on the answer as it determines how "small" we want our government to be.
These days, even the most ardent free-market economists agree that unfettered capitalism is untenable, as the government needs to intervene in the markets to establish the ground rules and safeguard the public interest. What they differ on is the form and extent of such intervention.


Dr Friedman and his followers probably feel that our heavily subsidised, sizeable public housing and health-care programmes are blatant interventions in the market. But others, who feel the government should play a role in redistributing wealth, are of the view that Hong Kong is not doing nearly enough to narrow the wide gaps between the rich and the poor.

In fact, when and how extensively governments should intervene in business affairs has been an enduring theme in economic history. It is one over which wars have been fought, revolutions waged and, in the case of Hong Kong, rowdy demonstrations and spirited debates held.

Hong Kong has a low-tax regime and a policy of capping public spending at no more than 20 per cent of gross domestic product, compared with more than 40 per cent in many developed economies. The bulk of our budget is devoted to social spending on heavily subsidised education and welfare services, public housing for 30 per cent of the population and welfare for about 16 per cent.

Opinions are split on whether the government should do more or less. Some argue the size of our public sector is already too large as Hong Kong is a city that does not have to fund an army. Besides, unlike sovereign countries that have to maintain extensive diplomatic representations overseas, we run only a small number of economic and trade offices in key cities abroad and on the mainland. Others say Hong Kong should spend more on public services, although it is not always clear if they want the government to tax more and spend more, or cut existing services and use the savings on new ones.

Should the size of the public sector remain at less than 20 per cent of GDP? Or should it be expanded or reduced? Rather than dwelling on the semantic differences between "positive non-interventionism" and "big market, small government", these are the questions our officials and politicians should lead the public to debate. These are fundamental issues about what kind of a society we want Hong Kong to be and they are crucial to the making of tough decisions, such as whether to introduce a goods and services tax.


http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZ1ITM9CRE.html

---

§@ªÌ: happycamel    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-27 08:53

Thx

---

§@ªÌ: oldfella    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-27 18:53

You certainly deserve a round of applause for all the effort !

---

§@ªÌ: taurus    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-27 19:19

¤Þ¥Î:

­ì©«¥Ñ oldfella ©ó 2006-9-27 18:53 µoªí
You certainly deserve a round of applause for all the effort !

Agree  ......

Bravo, Brother ¤j¥Ð­^©ú !!!!!!!  

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-28 08:06

Thursday, September 28, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
A chance for Japan to change with the times



   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

   Japan's newly-elected Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is his country's first leader born since the end of the second world war, and the cabinet he has appointed is generally of the same generation. That such a government has come about says much of present-day Japan and the urgent challenges its politicians face.
Those matters, ranging from stabilising the economy, through rehabilitating state finances to dealing with a rapidly ageing population and improving relations with neighbouring countries, have long been the bane of successive Japanese governments. Resolving them will be important in moving the nation forward, but the solution will be no easier for a cabinet without war memories than it has been for those faced with the same problems and, as a rule, a decade or two older.


Nonetheless, perceptions are important in this juncture of Japan's history, just as in 2001 when Mr Abe's flamboyant predecessor, Junichiro Koizumi, took office.

Mr Koizumi, then 59, was seen as a breath of fresh air capable of rejuvenating the image of the factious ruling Liberal Democratic Party and taking on Japan's ills. In five years, he accomplished what previous prime ministers had thought impossible: confronting the party's old guard to push through economic reforms, most notably the privatisation of the savings and insurance giant Japan Post. Single-handedly, he also turned back the clock of progress on relations with China and South Korea, insisting on yearly visits to the Yasukuni shrine to remember Japan's war dead.

The new prime minister, 52, has made implementing a broad Asian diplomacy one of his cabinet's key tasks. How it will go about that given that Foreign Minister Taro Aso, also a conservative who challenged for the premiership, has retained his job is unclear. While Mr Abe has said he wants better ties with Beijing and Seoul, he has side-stepped whether he intends to go to Yasukuni while in office. Foreign policy under him will, for now, have to be a wait-and-see matter, although if he truly wishes what he claims, he can readily make that happen.

Foreign ties may yet be governed by domestic issues. Keeping the economy from slipping back into deflation while taking into account a declining population, the need for a sustainable social security system, dealing with the outstanding 770 trillion yen (HK$51.41 trillion) debt of the central and local governments and the urgency of education and immigration reform will keep the cabinet busy.

Mr Abe has also made replacing the pacifist constitution his goal. He envisages the document will lead the country away from what he terms a "post-war regime" and guide the nation's future.

Mr Koizumi broke the mould of Japanese leaders. With Mr Abe and his team representing a younger, more energetic breed of politician, an opportunity exists for Japan to change with the times.


http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZGTJP9CRE.html

---

§@ªÌ: taurus    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-28 08:55     ¼ÐÃD: A chance for Japan to change with the times

¤Þ¥Î:

­ì©«¥Ñ ¤j¥Ð­^©ú ©ó 2006-9-28 08:06 µoªí
Thursday, September 28, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
A chance for Japan to change with the times
   
Prev. Story | Next Story

. . . . . . . . . .

Mr Abe has also made replacing the pacifist constitution his goal. He envisages the document will lead the country away from what he terms a "post-war regime" and guide the nation's future.

Mr Koizumi broke the mould of Japanese leaders. With Mr Abe and his team representing a younger, more energetic breed of politician, an opportunity exists for Japan to change with the times
------------------------------------------------------ ...

History always repeats itself. What happened to Mr Koizumi will highly probable to guide Mr. Abe's path soon. Those pulling the string remain the same group of old men behind the scene .....

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-29 08:10

Friday, September 29, 2006

US INTELLIGENCE REPORT
Face the grim truth about Iraq


DAVID IGNATIUS
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

   No matter how you slice it, the US National Intelligence Estimate warning that the Iraq war has spawned more terrorism is big trouble for US President George W. Bush and his party in this election year. It goes to the heart of Mr Bush's argument for invading Iraq, which was that it would make America safer.
Many Democrats act as if that's the end of the discussion: a mismanaged occupation has created a breeding ground for terrorists, so we should withdraw and let the Iraqis sort out the mess. Some extreme war critics are so angry at Mr Bush that they seem almost eager for America to lose, to prove a political point. Even among mainstream Democrats, the focus is "gotcha!" rather than "what next?" That is understandable, but it isn't right.


The issue raised by the intelligence report is much grimmer than the domestic political game. Iraq has fostered a new generation of terrorists. The question is what to do about that threat. How can America prevent Iraq from becoming a new safe haven? How does America restabilise a Middle East that today is dangerously unbalanced because of Washington's blunders in Iraq?

This should be the Democrats' moment, if they can translate the national anger over Iraq into a coherent strategy for the future. But with a few notable exceptions, they are mostly ducking the hard question of what to do next.


Here's a reality check for the Democrats: there is not a single country in the Middle East, with the possible exception of Iran, that favours a rapid American pullout from Iraq. Why? The consensus in the region is that a retreat now would have disastrous consequences for America and its allies. Yet withdrawal is the Iraq strategy you hear from most congressional Democrats, whether they call it "strategic redeployment" or something else.

I wish Democrats - and Republicans, for that matter - were asking this question: how do we prevent Iraq from becoming a failed state? Many critics of the war would argue that the worst has already happened - Iraq has already unravelled. Unfortunately, as bad as things are, they could get considerably worse. Following a rapid American pullout, Iraq could descend into a full-blown civil war, with the Sunni-Shi'ite violence spreading outward throughout the region.

In this chaos, oil supplies could be threatened, sending the price of oil well above US$100 a barrel. Turkey, Iran and Jordan would intervene to protect their interests.

The Democrat who has tried hardest to think through these problems is Senator Joseph Biden. He argues that the current government of national unity isn't succeeding in holding Iraq together, and that America should instead embrace a policy of "federalism plus" that will devolve power to the Shi'ite, Sunni and Kurdish regions. Iraqis are already voting for sectarian solutions, Senator Biden argues, and America won't stabilise Iraq unless it aligns its policy with this reality.

Iraq has compounded Muslim rage and created a dangerous crisis for the United States. The damage of Iraq can be mitigated only if it again becomes the nation's war - with the whole country invested in finding a way out of the morass that doesn't leave us permanently in greater peril. If the Democrats could lead that kind of debate about security, they would become the nation's governing party.

David Ignatius is a Washington Post columnist.



http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZXH0N9CRE.html

---

§@ªÌ: taurus    ®É¶¡: 2006-9-29 10:24     ¼ÐÃD: US INTELLIGENCE REPORT

It¡¦s hard to think of a president and an administration ever in the American history more devoted to secrecy than President Bush and his team. If not when it suits Mr. Bush and the Republican camp politically, it is difficult to believe that the public will ever be given a glimpse of those secrets.

But the three declassified pages from what is certainly a voluminous report did not tell us anything more than what any American with a newspaper, television or Internet connection should have already known. The invasion of Iraq was a catastrophic disaster. The current situation will get worse if American forces leave. However, the crucial issue of a suggestion about how to avoid that inevitable disaster was neither provided in the report nor by the president.

But one of the key findings of the National Intelligence Estimate, which represents the consensus of the 16 intelligence agencies, was quite clear that the war in Iraq has greatly increased the threat from terrorism by ¡§shaping a new generation of terrorist leaders and operatives.¡¨

It listed the war in Iraq as the second most important factor in the spread of terrorism ¡X after ¡§entrenched grievances such as corruption, injustice and fear of Western domination.¡¨ And that was before April, when the report was completed. Since then, things have got much worse.

But then why the Bush Administration decided to share this piece of information with his U.S. citizens ?

The New York Times claimed as follows : Mr. Bush decided to release this small, selected chunk of the report in reaction to an article on the intelligence assessment that appeared in The Times over the weekend. As a defense of his policies, it serves only to highlight the maddening circular logic that passes for a White House rationale. It goes like this: The invasion of Iraq has created an entire new army of terrorists who will be emboldened by an American withdrawal. Therefore, the United States has to stay indefinitely and keep fighting those terrorists.

By that logic, the more the United States fights, the longer the war stretches on.

Disclosure of the classified report, and Bush's subsequent move to make public portions of it, has had broad political ramifications. The escalating debate over national security reflects the belief among strategists in both parties that the terrorism issue works to their benefit. The question is how voters will interpret each side's arguments.

For Republicans, the report provides more evidence that Iraq is central to the war on terrorism and can't be abandoned without giving jihadists a crucial victory. Republicans have also sought to portray Democrats as inadequate to the job of protecting the nation, pursuing an election-year strategy of trying to mobilize conservative voters in key districts by arguing that Democrats would "cut and run" from Iraq and thus embolden terrorists.

And for Democrats, it furthers their argument that the 2003 Iraq invasion has inflamed anti-U.S. sentiments in the Muslim world and left the U.S. less safe. Democrats, citing shrinking public support for Bush and the Iraq war in some recent polls, have tried to portray the administration as incompetent.   

On the other hand, this incidence also brought out the wisdom of Mr. Rumsfield and his art of debating over this issue in his following remarks :

(Rumsfeld did not specifically criticize or address the controversial intelligence report, but instead commented more broadly about the terrorist question that has gripped the political world since the report was disclosed last week.

"Are more terrorists being created in the world? We don't know. The world doesn't know," said Rumsfeld, adding that there are no good ways to measure "The world doesn't know. There aren't good ways to measure how many terrorists are being trained at camps around the world.") ¡K¡K.

(Rumsfeld said any specific comments on the report should come from Bush. But he added that while it's hard to know how many terrorist are being created, officials have a better idea how many have been killed or captured.) ¡K¡K

There was offered a split-screen debate between each party's most influential leader this week with Clinton's appearance Sunday and Bush's news conference Tuesday.

Clinton accused Bush of spending billions of dollars in Iraq while losing focus on capturing Bin Laden in or near Afghanistan. "If I were still president, we'd have more than 20,000 troops there trying to kill him."

Clinton also criticised Bush's broader agenda of promoting democracy overseas, in particular, in Middle East, subtly contesting the president's frequent argument that free elections in Iraq and Afghanistan were signs of progress.  "Democracy is about way more than majority rule," "Democracy is about minority rights, individual rights, restraints on power."

Bush on Tuesday declined to respond directly to Clinton's comments even though "I've watched all this finger-pointing and naming of names, and all that stuff," Bush said. "Our objective is to secure the country¡K. So I'm not going to comment on other comments."

If we look at what happened in Taiwan and Thailand recently, we must admit that Bush-style of democracy has proved to be successful on the voting day of presidential election in these two S.E. Asian countries but unfortunately short-lived. It has failed in Thailand. What will happen in Taiwan remains to be seen. But from what happened in Iraq, we can foretell that the current Taiwan political turmoil will simply drag on and on and on ..............

[ ¥»©«³Ì«á¥Ñ taurus ©ó 2006-9-29 06:26 PM ½s¿è ]

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-10-3 08:09

Tuesday, October 3, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
Building design has key role to play in recycling



   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

   The Environmental Protection Department's proposal to amend building regulations in a bid to encourage the separation and recycling of domestic waste deserves support. It aims to make it easier for people to participate in recycling and, in this way, help develop a more sustainable lifestyle.
Officials want to change the building code to ensure that every residential building has a purpose-built room on every floor for the collection of rubbish, providing residents easier access to segregated recycling bins.



Generating as little waste as possible is an essential component of the sustainable society that Hong Kong must try to achieve. But doing it is not as easy as it sounds in this space-challenged city.

This has been illustrated by a pilot scheme that aimed to encourage housing estates to sort and recycle their waste. After expanding at a rapid rate to cover 420 housing estates accommodating about 26 per cent of the population, the scheme has failed to expand further. Those that have failed to join up are not averse to the scheme, but are barred from participating by the physical constraints of the buildings in which they live.

The amazing fact that has so far escaped attention, so far as policy-making is concerned, is that most residential buildings in Hong Kong do not have built-in facilities for handling waste. Garbage bins are typically placed at staircase platforms as an afterthought, sometimes at the risk of breaching fire safety rules. There is simply no space for putting several bins on each floor for separately collecting recyclable waste such as plastic, aluminium cans and paper, as well as waste that cannot be recycled.

At many buildings, the rubbish collection process is also very unhygienic. As they are not fitted with service lifts or disposal shafts, waste collectors with their trolleys use residents' lifts for carrying rubbish. The only exceptions are public housing blocks, which have purpose-built collection rooms on every floor, connected by shafts.

The lack of attention to rubbish disposal facilities at housing estates would likely change if the government were to impose a garbage fee to encourage people to embrace recycling. Reducing waste and fostering recycling by imposing a green tax is sound. But the idea would be socially and politically more acceptable if buildings were designed to facilitate waste separation and recycling.

The Buildings Department has made efforts to make buildings more environmentally friendly by reviewing its requirements and encouraging the inclusion of so-called green features.


For the sake of both cleaner living and waste reduction, the Environmental Protection Department's advice should be heeded. Purpose-built rooms for rubbish collection should become standard features in new buildings, and help provided to make such space in old buildings.


http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZZODN9CRE.html

---

§@ªÌ: funseeker    ®É¶¡: 2006-10-3 10:13


Thanks for sharing.

---

§@ªÌ: oldfella    ®É¶¡: 2006-10-3 18:14

"Democracy is about way more than majority rule," "Democracy is about minority rights, individual rights, restraints on power."

Certainly some food for thought !

---

§@ªÌ: taurus    ®É¶¡: 2006-10-3 18:37

¤Þ¥Î:

­ì©«¥Ñ oldfella ©ó 2006-10-3 18:14 µoªí
"Democracy is about way more than majority rule," "Democracy is about minority rights, individual rights, restraints on power."

Certainly some food for thought !

Certainly some food for thought and our stomach as well !  

Presently reading Larry Diamond's past papers, try to extact one of these which will be applicable to HK .....

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-10-4 08:08

Wednesday, October 4, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
The UN: a test of strength if ever there was one



   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

   The United Nations has, sadly, suffered collateral damage in a world changed forever by terrorism. Its authority was diminished by the US-led invasion of Iraq without UN support, and its credibility damaged by indecision in the face of challenges thrown up by the new threat. In the midst of a crisis of relevance, its reputation was shredded by the exposure of internal corruption and mismanagement that led to the disappearance of billions of dollars from the oil-for-food programme meant to help poor Iraqis before the war.
The priority of the next secretary-general of the UN must therefore be to preside over the restoration of the world body's moral authority and credibility. That is a lot to ask of one person whose position carries plenty of prestige but who, rather than exercising real power, is dependent on forging consensus. However, a number were prepared to take it on - mainly Asians, because it was Asia's turn at the top job for the first time since  U Thant, who held it between 1961 and 1971. As the only one to command the support of all five permanent members of the Security Council, South Korea's foreign minister, Ban Ki-moon, is assured of formal approval by the council and the General Assembly.

  
The big five rarely remain in agreement for long, but Mr Ban will clearly need all the support he can get from them - and particularly from the US - if the standing of the UN is to be restored. He strongly supports reform of the world body, which did his candidature no harm in Washington.

Outgoing secretary-general Kofi Annan tried to make a start on ridding the organisation of corruption and overly bureaucratic operations, but some of his more important initiatives have been stalled in the General Assembly.

There is no time to lose in restoring the standing of the UN, given what is almost a daily roster of security or humanitarian threats, such as those in the Middle East, Iraq and Afghanistan, the Iranian and North Korean nuclear disputes and the Darfur crisis in Sudan.

Mr Ban says, rightly, that the most urgent issues confronting the UN remain internal management reform and regaining the trust and confidence of member states and major stakeholders. It needs to promise less, deliver more and reduce the overlap between its agencies in delivery of services. Perhaps when it has tidied up its own backyard it can address difficult issues shelved in the past, like a broad agreement on the definition of terrorism and the use of pre-emptive force.

Despite the inevitable flaws of a co-operative body and its recent troubles, the UN still offers the best hope of resolution of conflict and alleviation of human suffering through international co-operation. The mild-mannered diplomat who will be its next chief says he may look soft but that he has inner strength when he needs it. He will need it, and often.


http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZ7JCN9CRE.html

---

§@ªÌ: funseeker    ®É¶¡: 2006-10-4 09:57

  thank you
BTW, I want to ask if you type the whoe passage, or cut&paste/scan.

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-10-5 08:19

Thursday, October 5, 2006

WELFARE
A reason to get off the safety net


C.K. LAU
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

   Social workers have complained about a government scheme aimed at helping people get off the dole: they say it's virtually forcing them to pressure welfare recipients to accept low-pay jobs. The scheme puts the social workers in a difficult situation, they say, as they stand to receive a bonus for finding work for a target number of recipients.
The social workers' complaint raises a few questions: how should they be paid and their performance assessed? As for encouraging welfare recipients to find work, would it help to introduce a minimum wage?

  
Social workers have the unenviable job of counselling and organising suitable activities for people who are emotionally or materially deprived. As professionals, they are supposed to try their best to help the needy, and their personal interests should not affect the level of service they provide.

The bonus arrangement could be seen as an affront to their professionalism, as it tempts them to persuade welfare recipients to accept poorly paid jobs.

To be sure, social workers who take part in the scheme to help welfare recipients find work should not be likened to employment agents. The latter get paid only for finding the right recruits for employers, and finding work for job seekers.

Social workers have the rather specialised task of encouraging those who have been on the dole for a long time to muster the willpower to work for a living again. Many of their clients may not have a strong incentive to work, as Hong Kong does not have a time limit on welfare.

Yet, many people would probably object to paying social workers a fixed salary without regard for the number of welfare recipients they helped return to the working world. If that were the arrangement, would they all be equally enthusiastic about encouraging their clients to wean themselves off welfare?

How would social workers who have found work for many of their clients feel if they were paid no more than colleagues who have achieved zero placements? Even if we accept that every social worker is driven by a strong sense of professionalism, it shouldn't mean suitable incentives cannot be provided to reward those who are more effective.

Even so, the social workers' complaint about having to persuade welfare recipients to accept low-pay jobs does deserve a sympathetic hearing. At a press conference on Tuesday, several welfare recipients talked about being persuaded to accept jobs that pay as little as HK$14 an hour. A single mother with a 13-year-old son, who had been receiving HK$4,300 a month in welfare payments, said she now worked five days a month as a domestic worker for just HK$300 a month.

As the business and labour sectors continue to debate the case for introducing a minimum wage, a relevant consideration is how we can wean people off welfare when Hong Kong does not have a wage floor.

Employment and welfare are two sides of the same coin. Hong Kong does not have an official poverty line. But the income and asset limits for receiving welfare under the Comprehensive Social Security Assistance scheme are de facto poverty lines that affect the motivation to work.

Everyone who falls below those lines is entitled to welfare. Those who opt not to go on the dole have trouble making enough money to afford them a decent standard of living. So the incentive is just not there to encourage people to leave the welfare net.

Until a minimum wage is introduced, it will be impossible for the government to impose a time limit on welfare - the most effective weapon in reducing the number of welfare recipients.

C.K. Lau is the Post's executive editor, policy. ck.lau@scmp.com



http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZCIKN9CRE.html

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-10-6 08:03

Friday, October 6, 2006

WAN CHAI'S BLUE HOUSE
Tourism shell or living history?


ADA WONG
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

     


The Urban Renewal Authority and Housing Society announced their plan for a complete facelift of the 80-year-old Blue House in Wan Chai this year. The society has promised to foot a bill estimated at around HK$100 million.
The Blue House is a pre-war tenement-style historic building nestled in a quiet corner of Stone Nullah Lane off Queen's Road East. It was affectionately called the Blue House after its greyish walls were accidently painted marine blue by a Lands Department maintenance team.

Together with the nearby Bauhaus-style Wan Chai market, Blue House is one of the rare gems in the heart of old Wan Chai that has been left unscathed by the fervent pace of urban renewal. Civil society is heartened that the Blue House will not be bulldozed. The next question is: how should this heritage be conserved?

The plan of the two statutory bodies is to change the predominantly residential nature of this pre-war tong lau (low-rise walk-up) into yet another Covent Garden-like cultural tourism spot. Residents will leave. The space will be filled by a Chinese-style tea house, Chinese herbal medicine shops and other commercial activities. The open space at the back will be turned into a piazza suitable for the occasional Chinese traditional arts performance. Even a spa was mentioned.

While the initiative of the authority and society is laudable, their conservation plan is fundamentally flawed. First, the transformed Blue House will lose its cultural significance and become a "mummified" building with no connections to its past. Its colourful history will, ironically, be wiped out in the course of its "conservation". An artificial outer shell will remain for the sake of cultural tourism, while the more valuable but intangible social network will be destroyed.

People - thousands of them - have shaped the Blue House for almost a century. It exemplifies those sweet but difficult days of a bygone era. It tells us many stories of the struggles and perseverance of Hong Kong's first generation of immigrants. The Blue House welcomed many of them, and a small hospital and two schools were once housed on its upper floors.

Former residents are eager to tell their stories. One person who grew up there recalls vividly how, with three families squeezed into a small apartment, the children still managed to find a place to play badminton amid the bunk beds.

The Blue House is home to a tightly knit community. Tenants rely on an organic neighbourhood support system to survive and make ends meet.

The widely respected Burra Charter of 1999 - Australia's principles and procedures for conserving heritage places - defines conservation as "all the processes of looking after a place so as to retain its cultural significance".

I believe the cultural significance of the Blue House is found not only in its architectural style but in its rich history, as well. The proper documentation and conservation of that history will strengthen our appreciation of a way of life that we no longer know.

If the Urban Renewal Authority and Housing Society abide by the Burra Charter, then the residential nature of the Blue House should be retained. Long-time residents must have a choice of continuing to stay after the renovation. The grand plans of the authority and society are also flawed because local people did not participate in planning its conservation and adaptation.

The community is a stakeholder when it comes to decisions on "adaptation" which - according to the Burra Charter - is only permitted when the changes will have a minimal impact on the cultural significance of a place. The rule of thumb is: if the building is not in a dangerous state, minimum intervention is the best strategy.

Heritage is not renewable. Mistakes cannot be reversed. Hong Kong has already made so many irreversible mistakes in heritage conservation. Let's be sure we make the right decisions for the Blue House.

Ada Wong is chairwoman of Wan Chai District Council.

http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZJ35Q9CRE.html

---

§@ªÌ: wallen881000    ®É¶¡: 2006-10-6 08:42

thnaks

---

§@ªÌ: funseeker    ®É¶¡: 2006-10-7 02:24

  THX

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-10-9 08:04

Monday, October 9, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
Well-balanced children need work and play



   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

   Parents want the best for their children and it is therefore understandable that many in Hong Kong feel the need to instil in their offspring a passion for learning. Education is widely seen, after all, as a pathway to prosperity and happiness.
Whether wealth and happiness are one and the same is a hotly debated point; there is no doubt, though, that students with the best school marks get first choice when it comes to universities and courses. If they maintain their academic form they supposedly in line for the pick of jobs when they graduate.


It is hardly surprising therefore that a survey shows that more than 70 per cent of parents questioned believed their children's main activity out of school hours should be academically inclined. Revising home work was seen by six of every 10 parents as the best pastime, while 10 per cent preferred their children to read books. Only 11 per cent thought taking time out for a one-on-one chat was the most important activity, while hobbies and sports ranked low on the list.

This is a worrying revelation and the consequences are clearly borne out by the lack of laughter and smiles among the children on our streets. Generally, they have intense looks on their faces as they rush from school, presumably to the tutorials lined up by their parents.

There is nothing wrong with raising children to be successful by having them embrace learning. Limiting the time they spend watching television or playing computer games and rewarding them for reading books is to be encouraged. Sitting down as a family to go through a report card and to set goals for improvement shows a sense of caring and provides valuable input.

But children need more than study to develop into well-rounded adults. They must have time with their friends beyond an on-line chat room; physical activities such as sports or hiking are essential to ward off obesity; hobbies keep minds active and engender interest in matters non-academic; and for the sake of family relationships, parents must find time for a chat to get to know their offspring.

Hong Kong is not an easy environment in which to allow this to happen. Parks and playgrounds are limited in number, size and facilities; the high population density makes pastimes taken for granted in other affluent societies, such as bicycle riding, out of the question in many places; costs often make activities a once-in-a-while treat; long working hours and cramped living conditions can make family interaction less than perfect.

But the government has recognised the need for change and, since last year, has been phasing out the rote learning method of teaching. Improving lifestyles by providing more and better public and living spaces is now seen as an essential part of our city's development.

Similarly, parents need to recognise that their children need a balance between school work and time to themselves and with their family and friends. Education alone is not a guarantee of professional success or happiness.


http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZVZSN9CRE.html

---

§@ªÌ: oldfella    ®É¶¡: 2006-10-9 22:20

Just want you to know that your quiet service is much appreicated

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-10-10 08:00

Tuesday, October 10, 2006

WORLD BANK
Corruption isn't the only issue


JOSEPH STIGLITZ
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

   At the recent annual meeting of the World Bank, officials spokeextensively about corruption. It is an understandable concern: money the bank lends to developing countries that ends up in secret accounts - or finances some contractors' luxurious lifestyle - leaves a country more indebted, not more prosperous.
James Wolfensohn, the bank's previous president, and I are widely credited with putting corruption on the bank's agenda. We prevailed against opponents who regarded it as a political rather than an economic issue, and thus outside the bank's mandate.


But the World Bank would do well to keep four things in mind as it takes up the fight. First, corruption takes many forms, so a war on corruption has to be fought on many fronts. In some countries, overt corruption occurs primarily through campaign contributions that oblige politicians to repay major donors with favours. Smaller-scale corruption is bad, but systemic corruption of political processes can have even greater costs.

Second, it's fine for the World Bank to deliver anti-corruption sermons. But policies, procedures and institutions are what matter. In fact, the bank's procurement procedures are generally viewed around the world as a model to be admired.

But success in fighting corruption entails more than just good procurement procedures - avoiding, for instance, single-source, non-competitive bidding. Many other policies and procedures can be enacted that reduce incentives for corruption. For example, some tax systems are more corruption-resistant than others, because they curtail the discretionary authority of tax officials.

Third, the World Bank's primary responsibility is to fight poverty. This means that when it confronts a poor country plagued with corruption, its challenge is to figure out how to ensure that its own money is not tainted - and that it reaches the projects and people that need it.

Finally, while developing countries must take responsibility for rooting out corruption, there is much that the west can do to help. At a minimum, western governments and corporations should not be complicit. Every bribe that is taken has a payer, and too often the bribe payer is a corporation from an advanced industrial country.

Making all payments to governments transparent would bring further progress. Western governments could encourage this simply by tying this requirement to tax deductibility. It is equally important to address bank secrecy, which makes corruption easier by providing corrupt dictators with a safe haven for their funds.

Some of those who criticise the bank's stance on corruption worry that the campaign will be used as a "cover" for cutting aid to countries that displease the US administration.

The most strident criticism, however, comes from those who worry that the World Bank is straying from its mandate. Naturally, it must do everything it can to ensure that its money is well spent - which means fighting both corruption and incompetence.

But money itself will not solve all problems, and a single-minded focus on fighting corruption will not bring development. On the contrary, it might merely divert attention from other issues of no less importance for those struggling to lift themselves out of poverty.

Joseph Stiglitz is a Nobel laureate in economics. Copyright: Project Syndicate. www.project-syndicate.org



http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZYXWN9CRE.html

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-10-11 08:07

Wednesday, October 11, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
China must reassess its position on Myanmar



   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

   Myanmar's military leaders do not threaten Asia like their North Korean counterparts; they are not known to have ambitions to acquire nuclear weapons, nor do they have soldiers lining the border of a neighbouring country as the North does with South Korea. But this is no benign regime that should be ignored, as the poor state of the nation and the atrocities committed against its people attest.
Just as with North Korea, the world needs to pressure the regime to change and ensure China, India and Russia, the nations propping up the junta through economic and military help, see the error of their ways. The three have not joined western and Southeast Asian nations in expressing concern about the junta. They have shunned imposing sanctions and used engagement for strategic benefit - a process which, given Myanmar's stagnation, is having no effect.


The generals who run Myanmar would like to have us think that they have the welfare of the 50 million people they rule at heart. Their reconvening of a constitutional convention yesterday was aimed at discussing the role of political parties and elections under a seven-stage plan to restore the democracy lost when the military seized power in 1962. They have agreed to let UN deputy secretary-general Ibrahim Gambari return next month.

These would seem to be moves in the right direction, but there is good reason to be sceptical about them. The junta has no wish to give up power, and experience has shown that it cannot be trusted.

The opposition National League for Democracy knows this only too well, which is why it has refused to take part in the 13-year-old constitution-drafting process. Denied the right to form a government despite winning elections in 1990, its leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, remains under house arrest. As the UN Security Council took up the issue of Myanmar for the first time last month, a fresh crackdown was launched on critics, more than 1,000 of whom are already jailed.

Myanmar has rich natural resources, yet is Southeast Asia's second-poorest nation. Bad nutrition levels, high disease rates and inadequate health facilities mean average life expectancy is just over 60 years. A quarter of the population lives in poverty. China's bid to have a higher international profile and to play more of a role in world affairs will be undermined if it continues to be protective of such a regime.

Beijing claims the generals pose no threat, and therefore objected to discussion of Myanmar at the Security Council. Yet it is precisely such governments that need to be talked about at the highest possible level because while they may not bother other nations, their own people are unnecessarily suffering.

For Myanmar's sake, China and its allies must set aside narrow economic and strategic interests and work with the rest of the world.


http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZDDIQ9CRE.html

---

§@ªÌ: hango    ®É¶¡: 2006-10-11 15:32

谢谢¡I·P谢§Aªº发¨¥¡I

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-10-12 08:05

Thursday, October 12, 2006

EDUCATION
A+ for kindergarten vouchers


C.K. LAU
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

   The government has taken a significant step by extending the public subsidy to pre-primary education, opening a new route to funding kindergartens.


Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen announced yesterday that education vouchers would be issued to parents to help them pay kindergarten fees.

The new policy will make Hong Kong one of a few jurisdictions in the world to embrace, albeit partially, an education voucher scheme. The idea was first championed by renowned economist Milton Friedman more than 50 years ago.

The scheme is a major departure from the established mode of funding education. The government now funds designated public schools and universities directly.

Under the scheme, public money will go to parents - who will decide which kindergarten to spend it on.

Given our local circumstances, vouchers are an ideal way to subsidise kindergartens. Hong Kong has long had a thriving pre-primary sector, and there is almost universal enrolment of children between the ages of three and six in kindergartens.

At present, in terms of their curriculums, about 680 kindergartens are classified as local and more than 50 as international. The total student population stands at about 130,000. Most of them are non-profit-making.

With no direct government funding, kindergartens have long been used to living with market forces.

The survival of individual schools depends wholly on their appeal to parents and the demographic trends of their respective neighbourhoods.

Had the government opted to fund kindergartens directly, it would have had to embark on the difficult task of choosing which of them should receive public funding. It would also have had to decide which ones to close, as the student population continues to shrink. The whole exercise would have been a controversial one that could never please everyone.

But there's a major flaw in the voucher scheme as announced by Mr Tsang yesterday: it will apply only to non-profit-making kindergartens charging not more than HK$24,000 per student per year.

For those who feel that public funding should not be used to line the pockets of operators of profit-making kindergartens, the decision makes sense.

Yet, if the purpose of the voucher scheme is, in the words of Mr Tsang, "to support the family by easing the financial burden of parents", then the exclusion cannot be justified.

Arguably, every child should have the right to receive a subsidised education irrespective of the type of school his or her parents choose. Those who opt for private schools should not be penalised by being denied public funding.

Even if we accept that only non-profit-making kindergartens should be eligible for public subsidies, the decision to limit such funding to schools charging less than HK$24,000 is also questionable.

The cap is apparently aimed at barring kindergartens from raising their fees as a result of public funding. Even so, the limit is arguably too low, and may lead to the unintended effect of penalising kindergartens that charge fees beyond that level.

Despite these drawbacks, the adoption of the voucher scheme for kindergartens is a major breakthrough for Hong Kong. Let's hope it can be extended to other education sectors, in time.

This makes associate degree programmes the only area that receives no public funding. When resources are available, associate degree students should be issued vouchers to help them pay their fees.

C.K. Lau is the Post's executive editor, policy.ck.lau@scmp.com



http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZ8VLQ9CRE.html

---

§@ªÌ: happycamel    ®É¶¡: 2006-10-12 11:56

Thank you.

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-10-13 08:05

Friday, October 13, 2006

IRAN AND NORTH KOREA
The grip of US 'soft' power


JIM HOAGLAND
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

   North Korea has, in its own inimitable fashion, paid tribute to a little-noticed US push to get the world's bankers to isolate regimes that promote nuclear proliferation and terrorism. Who else would claim to have conducted a nuclear weapons test - and then threaten more blasts to get their way in a US$24 million banking dispute? Don't they have any good lawyers in Pyongyang?
North Korea's efforts to blame its crossing of the nuclear-testing threshold on US "economic hostility" would be laughable - if the regime were not led by world-class paranoids and fantasists capable of believing their own odious propaganda. Americans do not have to believe it, however.


Such a regime may be beyond reasoning with or, even worse, deterring in a conventional sense, as the Bush administration seems to believe.

But Pyongyang's threats - if not its excuses - must be taken seriously, and met with new forms of containment and pressure. The same is true of Iran, the other major target of the US Treasury Department's efforts "to isolate bad actors from the global financial system" - by calling attention to their use of banks for rogue operations.

That description comes from Stuart Levey, the Treasury's undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence. "If the objective was to put pressure on North Korea, well, we succeeded," said Mr Levey. He has joined Deputy Treasury Secretary Robert Kimmitt in travelling the globe to persuade other governments to examine and, where appropriate, cut financial links to Pyongyang and Tehran.

But the purpose of this effective new effort to exert pressure with "soft power" is much broader. According to Mr Levey, the Treasury Department is targeting people who are eminently deterrable: "People who are in business are very concerned about their reputations and do not want to get involved in illicit activity that is under scrutiny. They will make the decisions about whether they continue doing business or not. We don't make the decision for them." Mr Levey disputes North Korea's characterisation of US policy as being one of politically driven "sanctions".

"The United States effectively lifted sanctions against North Korea in 2000, and the Bush administration has not reimposed them," Mr Levey asserted. "What we are doing is calling attention to the risks in being involved in these transactions."

The first use of the heavy US financial hammer was against the Macau-based Banco Delta Asia, which the Treasury identified last year as a "primary money-laundering concern" for Pyongyang. The bank, which operates under the control of the Chinese government, froze an estimated US$24 million in North Korean assets rather than risk losing US and other business.


North Korea clearly takes these financial pressures seriously. So must Iran. Squeezing the regime financially is probably the only hope of keeping Tehran from going nuclear. Iran was forced to announce three months ago that its oil production is declining - in large part, experts say, because of a long-term lack of new investment in the oil industry and the difficulty of getting new technology from abroad for its faltering fields.

Access to capital and advanced equipment will not have been helped by the US decision last month to exclude Bank Saderat, Iran's largest state-owned bank, from buying or selling dollars and other financial instruments from US banks. This is in response to the bank's role in transferring millions of dollars to terrorist groups.

In the early days of the Soviet Union, Lenin predicted that capitalists would eagerly sell him the rope he would use to hang them. He lost the bet when Moscow proved unable to pay for ruling an empire. The Treasury's sophisticated efforts to deny gangsters in North Korea and Iran access to global capital should not be abandoned because of the nuclear bluster from Pyongyang and Tehran.

Jim Hoagland is a Washington Post columnist.


http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZ6P6O9CRE.html

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-10-16 08:09

Monday, October 16, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
China must make sanctions work



   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

   The divergent response of China and other UN Security Council nations to the sanctions imposed on North Korea for apparently testing its first nuclear device would seem to foreshadow difficulties in enforcing the resolution. Whatever the statements of Chinese officials, however, now that the deal has been approved, Beijing must do its utmost to prevent Pyongyang from spreading or acquiring more nuclear materials and technology.
China has, after all, a firm position on this matter, as strongly expressed by the Foreign Ministry last week: "To bring about denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula and oppose nuclear proliferation." For the sake of regional stability and its own security, ridding North Korea of nuclear weapons and ambitions should be Beijing's foreign policy priority.


Nonetheless, the contentious issue of inspecting cargo leaving and arriving in North Korea's ports, as stipulated by the resolution, is difficult for China, given its status as Pyongyang's foremost ally.

China is the nation most able to get the secretive country to scrap its nuclear ambitions. Provoking confrontation with a newly declared nuclear neighbour is the last thing Beijing wants - hence its reticence, along with fellow North Korean ally and neighbour Russia, to back the original wording of the resolution. This was done under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter, which leaves open a military option. The compromise was to preclude that threat. But the mainland has no choice, now that it has backed the finalised agreement, than to enforce its provisions.

How stringently mainland border and maritime officials do this is, on a case by case basis, up to the officers concerned. The US and European nations did not face the same sensitivities as China when drafting the resolution.

Beijing does not have the luxury of long-distance lambasting. While it has joined the rest of the world in condemning North Korea for threatening global security, it has to deal far more diplomatically with the problem on its doorstep.

Regardless of the difficulties, though, the Security Council's authority must also be preserved at all costs; resolutions approved must be abided by and enforced as closely as possible.

Whether China's ambassador to the UN, Wang Guangya , meant to undermine that authority by saying after the vote that the mainland would not conduct any inspections is unclear in the absence of official reaction from Beijing. Having just voted for the resolution, he can hardly reject its provisions.

Whatever the difficulties, China must do its utmost to make the sanctions work. Only with strict enforcement will North Korea be persuaded to return to the dialogue that it broke away from in preference to proliferation.


http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZPXSQ9CRE.html

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-10-17 08:07

Tuesday, October 17, 2006

SINO-AUSTRALIAN RELATIONS
When ignorance is bliss


GREG BARNS
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

   Australians like China. That's according to a public opinion survey released this month by the Lowy Institute, a foreign-policy focused think-tank based in Sydney. It appears that Australians are much more willing to ignore China's human rights violations and lack of democracy than is the case with Indonesia. Despite the latter's strides towards democracy within the past decade, Australians see their near northern neighbour in essentially negative terms.
But when it comes to assessing Australians' warmth of feeling towards other countries, China scores well. Sixty-one per cent of respondents felt positive about China. This places it only one percentage point behind Australia's traditional ally, the US, and only three points behind Japan - one of its largest trade partners. By contrast, only 50 per cent of Australians said they felt warmly about Indonesia. And China's rating could go higher, as 59 per cent of those surveyed believe relations are improving. By contrast, 47 per cent believe ties with Indonesia are worsening.


China seems to be trusted by Australians to act more responsibly than the US around the world. The survey records that while 38 per cent of respondents believe Beijing cannot be trusted to act responsibly in global affairs, 39 per cent think the same about Washington. And while there's global nervousness about China's rise as a global power, Australians seem relatively relaxed, ranking it last on a list of 13 threats to Australia's interests over the next decade.

But while the survey reveals a relatively positive disposition towards China, there is some ambivalence in these results. Eighty per cent trust China only "somewhat or not at all". No doubt, however, China's tough stance on North Korea in the past week will enhance its standing.

So why are Australians relatively optimistic and positive about China? The answer may lie in the contrasting attitude towards Indonesia.

Over the past decade, Indonesia has featured prominently in the Australian media and politics. Indonesian resistance to independence for East Timor contrasted with the efforts of the Australian leadership to ensure the birth of that nation seven years ago.

Then there have been high-profile cases of Australians being charged and punished for allegedly trafficking in drugs on the Indonesian island of Bali.

The Indonesian justice system is viewed by many Australians as corrupt, and particularly unfair to Australians. When a young Australian, Schapelle Corby, was jailed for 20 years for trafficking in cannabis, anti-Indonesian sentiment reached alarming levels in Australia.

The perceived leniency towards the perpetrators of the 2002 Bali bombings, in which 88 Australians were killed, has not helped, either.

In contrast, while there is some focus here on what an Australian-Chinese free-trade agreement might mean in terms of job losses and investment - and on whether Australia should sell uranium to China - it is a bit remote from the average Australian. China, it seems, can get away with being a dictatorship, while Indonesia's efforts to become a transparent democracy are not being recognised by Australians, if the survey is any guide.

Australian political commentator Paul Kelly says the local media is partly responsible for this view of the world.

Its "denigration of Indonesian democracy in contrast to its tolerance of China's dictatorship is entrenched and has passed into popular Australian sentiment", he wrote.


But if the media gives prominence to cases of Australians having their human rights abused by the Chinese authorities, or it begins to showcase examples of Chinese actions taking away Australian jobs, then China might find itself in Indonesia's shoes. For the moment, however, Australians are giving China a big tick.

Greg Barns is a political commentator in Australia and a former Australian government adviser.



http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZAKZQ9CRE.html

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-10-18 08:06

Wednesday, October 18, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
Ignorance the biggest hurdle in fighting HIV



   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

   It is one thing for China's rulers in Beijing to make decisions that affect people's lives, but another thing entirely for the message to reach 1.3 billion people through layers of authority and officialdom at provincial, city and local levels.
How much harder it must be then for Beijing to change social attitudes. President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao have tried, going to some lengths to remove the social stigma of HIV/Aids and raise the profile of the disease on the national health agenda.


Both have made televised personal visits to patients to help break down prejudice. The number of new cases has continued to rise, however, and local mainland officials have been blamed for disregarding national policy on prevention and treatment.

An example has come to light in Harbin , Heilongjiang , where residents and the police were upset by a public lecture for sex workers on prevention and treatment of HIV/Aids. The lecture was held by the Harbin Disease Prevention and Control Centre's Aids Prevention and Control Institute. Many critics said the health authorities should work with police to get prostitutes arrested; the police said the lecture was unacceptable and made them "feel uncomfortable".

However, an online poll conducted by Sina.com showed overwhelming support for the lecture among a more broadly representative group of nearly 5,000. This is encouraging, because education to overcome ignorance about HIV/Aids and promote safe-sex practices remains the most effective means of combating the disease.

Today's report in which a senior central government health official says China is becoming like Africa in the way the virus is transmitted shows that Beijing should leave no stone unturned in its efforts to see that the message does get through.

Figures given by Hao Yang , deputy director general of the bureau of diseases prevention and control at the Ministry of Health, are disturbing: HIV/Aids has spread beyond high-risk groups such as drug users, prostitutes and homosexuals to become a "generalised epidemic"; 48 per cent of new cases last year arose from sexual relations; 1 per cent of all pregnant women are infected.

Regional health officials have long warned against a false sense of security that Asia is shielded from the devastating effects of Aids in some African countries. The possibility that the virus could easily spread into the general population increases as Asians embrace less conservative values, with more young people having casual sex.

In Hong Kong, HIV infections are increasing three times faster than 20 years ago. The Department of Health puts this down mainly to unsafe gay sex. However, given that Hong Kong may be vulnerable to the spread of HIV/Aids originating from the mainland or the rest of Asia, education in disease prevention and easy access to testing remain important.


http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZ5KGO9CRE.html

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-10-19 08:05

Thursday, October 19, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
Working smarter, not harder, the way forward



   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

   Three months after the government took the lead to introduce a five-day work week, a survey has found that more than 60 per cent of employers have no plans to follow suit. The finding should not come as a surprise, as it takes time for the effect of the initiative to permeate the community. But it does mean the government has to do more to address the unhealthy work-life balance that is still afflicting the bulk of the workforce.
It is encouraging that the survey by Community Business has revealed that almost 30 per cent of respondents already enjoy a five-day week, and the employers of a further 10 per cent are considering adopting the practice. The findings suggest that Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen's decision to introduce a five-day week for most civil servants is achieving the intended effect of encouraging other employers to do the same.


However, the positive response has come mainly from public bodies and big private companies. As the survey has confirmed, many workplaces - particularly small and medium-sized companies - still have a six-day work week. It is also common for workers to do unpaid overtime on a daily basis. Many suffer from various symptoms of fatigue and stress that are attributed to long working hours. So much of their day is consumed by work that they have little time left to savour other aspects of life.

In his policy address last week, Mr Tsang reiterated his commitment to improving the quality of family life. He said the government would work with non-governmental organisations to promote various family-friendly work practices, including flexitime, job-sharing and working from home. This is certainly the right way forward.

Most employers do care about the welfare of their workers. Many are likely to be willing to adopt such practices so long as they do not affect their bottom line. But they baulk at doing so because they do not know how. Perhaps some NGOs could take up the task of collecting and sharing information on how companies can introduce a five-day work week and other family-friendly work practices through creative work arrangements. Annual awards could also be introduced to recognise innovative ways of reducing working hours and enhancing productivity.

Hong Kong can raise its productivity only by working smarter, not harder. Employers need to appreciate that their workers can only upgrade or refresh their skills if they have more spare time for relaxation and self-improvement.

Compared with other economies at a similar level of economic development, such as Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan, Hong Kong has been slow in embracing a five-day week.

When even the mainland and Nepal have adopted the practice years ago, it is a shame that workers in what the government touts as Asia's world city are still toiling six days a week.


http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZ3TOO9CRE.html

---

§@ªÌ: taurus    ®É¶¡: 2006-10-19 11:12     ¼ÐÃD: Re : Working smarter, not harder, the way forward

As far as I remember, five work-day week started in China in 2000. Good for our fellow comrades ...

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-10-20 08:27

Friday, October 20, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
The course China must take to combat graft



  
Next Story



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

   It is not so long ago that a crisis of capitalism in the US dragged attention away from corruption in China. Investor losses caused by fraud, corruption and insider trading stretched public confidence in the integrity of corporate America to breaking point.
The scandals triggered nationwide probes by investigators and market regulators that have uncovered widespread malpractice. Companies have agreed to large settlements that go some way to compensating victims.

  
Wall Street was compelled to address conflict-of-interest issues in the use of analysts' reports to promote share sales, and Congress tightened corporate law to increase transparency and restore confidence. The criminal law has followed its own course. Wrongdoers have been severely punished and in some cases ill-gotten gains have been recovered.

If that could happen in the home of capitalism, which stands or falls on trust and confidence, it surely would have been a sharp reminder to China's leaders about the danger posed by corruption and greed to the mainland's emerging market economy. It came too late, however, for the kind of reforms needed to expose and cut out the cancer of official corruption on the mainland, even if the Communist Party was ready to adopt them.

The leadership has given priority to rooting out corruption. Most people were still taken by surprise by the sacking last month of Shanghai party secretary Chen Liangyu and other top city officials. They have been accused of using the city's 10 billion yuan pension fund for illegal loans to connected parties. Now investigators from Beijing are looking into the activities of top Shanghai property developers.

There is considerable interest in how the Shanghai probe into pension-fund dealings led to the sacking of outspoken National Bureau of Statistics director Qiu Xiaohua , and the detention of the man credited with bringing Formula One grand prix racing to Shanghai, Yu Zhifei .

These events have been overtaken, however, by the arrest of five judges of the Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court in a bribery scandal said to highlight systemic corruption in the mainland's legal system and public contempt for it and resentment of it.

A vice-president of the court and four other senior judges are accused of accepting bribes and indulging in decadent lifestyles. The five were allegedly prepared to hand down favourable verdicts for those prepared to pay. More worrying, they have been described as only "the tip of an iceberg" of judicial corruption. Indeed, Supreme People's Court president Xiao Yang describes judicial corruption as rampant and says senior court officials need to be kept under "close supervision".

This deplorable state of affairs goes to the heart of the Communist Party's professed goal of developing a legal system based on the rule of law. This newspaper has argued that senior party cadres still wield too much discretionary power - over all manner of things from land zoning to bank lending - and that they are therefore prone to corruption. So long as they remain above the law, rather than subject to the rule of law, official corruption will continue to undermine the party's moral authority.

A first step towards promoting the rule of law would be to tighten the rules governing exercise of administrative power, reduce the scope for discretion, and make it subject to clear lines of accountability and transparency.

The party cannot put off forever a choice between a free media which exposes corruption and a controlled media which covers it up. That will be a test of its faith in its right to rule.

The party leadership has pledged to fight corruption and strive for social harmony. But success will depend on the taking of concrete steps to free up the media, limit the discretionary power of officials, and build a system under which everyone is subject to the rule of law - including the party.



http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZ8N9R9CRE.html

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-10-23 08:10

Monday, October 23, 2006

GLOBAL INFLUENCE
China's great African gambit


SANOU MBAYE
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

   Ever since the Berlin conference of 1883, which Belgium's King Leopold II called "the sharing of Africa's cake", the west has assumed exclusive rights over sub-Saharan Africa. While centuries of struggle to end colonial rule and apartheid have not changed this much, now western influence is being challenged by China, which likewise covets the region's minerals and resources.
China is winning goodwill across the continent by tapping into shared anti-colonial resentments - and by treating Africa seriously. Next month's meeting of the China-Africa Co-operation Forum, established to promote trade and investment, will include 46 African heads of state, along with China's leaders. In any case, President Hu Jintao , Vice-President Zeng Qinghong and Premier Wen Jiabao visit the continent regularly.


Mainland China's moves to strengthen ties have three objectives: to consolidate secure energy and mineral supplies; to curtail Taiwan's influence on the continent (which harbours six of the 26 countries with which it maintains full diplomatic relations); and to augment Beijing's burgeoning global authority.

China has invested billions of dollars in African oil production, mining, transport, electricity production and transmission, telecommunications, and other infrastructure. In 2004 alone, its foreign direct investment in Africa represented US$900 million of the continent's US$15 billion total.

Trade figures tell a similar story. Sino-African trade grew by 700 per cent during the 1990s, doubled from 2000 to 2003 - to US$18.5 billion - then jumped to US$32.2 billion in the first 10 months of last year. While trade and investment ties with China helped boost the continent's overall economic growth to a record high of 5.2 per cent last year, China also cancelled US$10 billion in debts from African countries.

Yet closer relations have brought controversy. African countries have become large buyers of Chinese weapons and military equipment. In so unstable a continent, one saturated with weaponry, pouring in more guns is hardly welcome. As Deputy Foreign Minister Zhou Wenzhong put it: "Business is business, and China separates business from politics."

Of perhaps greater long-term worry is the support Beijing provides for Africa's authoritarian rulers. Economic growth without social justice merely prolongs the denial of decent living conditions to the majority of Africa's people for the benefit of a minority.

The fact China, within a decade, has overhauled Africa's balance of power - relegating the US and Britain to third and fourth, respectively - and is challenging France for first place as the continent's main economic and commercial partner, has irked competitors.

France has stepped up its monitoring of China's African activities. To tie Europe closer to Africa, British Prime Minister Tony Blair even proposed eliminating the European Union's agricultural subsidies under the Common Agricultural Policy.

Africa is the world's only remaining "soft target", where outside powers can battle it out for access to mineral resources. But the last thing Africa needs is to be an economic and political battleground. Africans know from past experience that countries have no friends, only interests.

The ongoing Darfur conflict illustrates the problem. Despite its declared commitment to non-interference, China's interests in Sudanese oil imply otherwise. Thus, Beijing threatens to veto any resolution in the UN Security Council that might impose sanctions against the Arab ruling class.

Until Beijing sees its economic interests as tied to political development, Africa's economy may grow but Africans will continue to suffer.

Sanou Mbaye is a Senegalese economist and a former member of the African Development Bank senior management. Copyright: Project Syndicate



http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZHHZO9CRE.html

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-10-24 08:26

Tuesday, October 24, 2006

SHANGHAI
Year of the baby


BILL SAVADOVE
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

   An unusual combination of factors has Shanghai heading for a baby boom. Thecurrent year in the lunar calendar is auspicious for weddings, while next year is auspicious for having babies. The surge in new families is also being fuelled by growing wealth, a relaxation of strict family planning policies and an influx of migrants.
There's some debate about next year in the lunar calendar. The media and wedding companies say it will be a Year of the "Golden Pig" - or a Year of the Pig under the influence of gold - which comes around only once in 60 years. It's seen as a good time to have offspring. Some fortune-tellers disagree, saying it's actually a Year of the Pig under the influence of fire.

  
But such doubts haven't stopped women like Jessie Yang, who got married this month. "I want to have a baby next year because many people said it will be the Golden-Pig year, which is auspicious for new babies. A `Golden Pig baby' sounds lovely, doesn't it?" she said.

Whatever the element, such as fire or gold, babies born in the Year of the Pig are supposed to lead lucky and comfortable lives. That is because the namesake animal never worries about anything beyond food and sleep, an elderly Shanghai resident explained. She said simple people can enjoy a simple kind of happiness. The newly married Ms Yang does have one concern, however: the expense of raising a child. "I'm just afraid prices for baby products will rise. Wedding charges are much higher this year, since too many people are marrying," she said.

Shanghai allows couples to have two babies, if both parents were only-children. Now the biggest deterrent is usually the perceived cost of raising two youngsters. Other couples can have a second child if they pay a fine of around 56,000 yuan. But that sum pales in comparison to the cost of raising an extra youngster. Shanghai people are different from much of the country when it comes to children. For example, they are more accepting of having daughters, in contrast to the traditional preference for sons. This is partly because of the perception that daughters do a better job of taking care of elderly parents.


The newest sign of status in Shanghai isn't driving a foreign car or owning a luxury property. The best way to flaunt your wealth these days is to appear in public with two children, showing the world that you can afford to raise them.

The Shanghai Population and Family Planning Commission is forecasting 137,000 births next year, up from an estimated 131,000 this year. The commission had originally predicted 127,000 births this year, but increased its estimate because migrant workers were having more babies than expected.

Shanghai's birth rate is expected to peak at 160,000 in 2015. But let's not be hasty: when, exactly, is that next Year of the Golden Pig?


http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZFSY9QLTE.html

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-10-25 08:05

Wednesday, October 25, 2006

CUTTING INDUSTRIAL EMISSIONS
A Marshall Plan for global warming


MARGO THORNING
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

   The heat-trapping gases that are a necessary byproduct of economic activity pose difficult policy challenges for the world's leading economies. Government finance and environment ministers are increasingly concerned with what seems an intractable problem: how to reduce greenhouse gases without sacrificing economic growth. But closer inspection reveals that challenge to be an opportunity.
Consider China and India. The governments of both countries are keen to set their economies on the path to robust growth. Doing so would alleviate poverty and provide opportunities for their citizens. But that growth necessarily means increased energy use and rapidly rising emissions levels.


Meanwhile, some major developed countries have had mixed results in their efforts to cut emissions of heat-trapping gases. As the Associated Press reported this month, "the world's big industrialised nations are struggling to meet the greenhouse-gas reductions they committed to in the embattled Kyoto pact on climate change". They are finding it difficult to make severe cuts in the face of concerns over lost jobs and lowered productivity.

"Europe is veering off course", the news report concluded, "Japan is still far from its target and Canada has given up". The European Environmental Agency predicts that 12 of the 15 original EU member states will fail to meet their Kyoto targets for 2010. Understanding that failure would help officials in both the developed and developing worlds take the necessary steps to slow the growth of emissions.

One sensible, and politically achievable, way forward is the Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate (AP6). This initiative of six partners - the United States, China, India, Japan, South Korea and Australia - accounts for almost 50 per cent of the global population and more than 50 per cent of the planet's man-made greenhouse-gas emissions. The partners are aware that developing nations will account for the greatest growth in emissions over the next two generations. So, sensible efforts to reduce future emissions will focus on market mechanisms that transfer clean technology to the developing world.

China and India have relatively high emissions intensities: that means their greenhouse-gas emissions per dollar of economic output are much higher than in the US, Europe, Australia, Japan or South Korea. This is true for other developing countries as well.

The technology used by Chinese industry, for example, emits four times more greenhouse gases than a comparable amount of economic output in the US, on average. China is gradually getting cleaner, but even the new technology it introduces has twice the emissions intensity of new processes in the US. Meanwhile, India is lagging behind in emissions intensity, and new Indian investments are frequently as inefficient as their legacy industrial stock.

Lowering the emissions intensity of developing countries to levels found in new investments in the US would nearly achieve the goals of the Kyoto Protocol, according to analysis conducted for the International Council for Capital Formation think-tank.

Getting developing nations to adopt the newest technologies will require initiative and vision from government officials. Promoting a favourable investment climate, for example, is a key requirement. Beijing and New Delhi have already taken farsighted steps to do that. But more could be done to minimise corruption and regulatory burdens, establish the rule of law and recognise intellectual property rights.

But AP6 and other efforts like it cannot succeed without sustained efforts from the business sector. Governments will only act when they are confident that foreign direct investment is likely to take place in the wake of politically risky reforms. This is why there is such a significant role to be played by firms from developed nations that are already present in China and India, and are familiar with the legal, political and economic terrain.


It's helpful to recall the success of the Marshall Plan. After the second world war, European governments pledged various actions - with money provided by the US government, working in concert with business interests. When Europeans made good on those pledges, the plan was extended and broadened.

AP6 could operate similarly. China and India want certain actions from Australia, Japan, South Korea and the US. Those could be made contingent on Beijing and New Delhi's success on implementing certain near-term reforms.


This is a win-win situation rarely possible in public diplomacy. The beneficiaries will be the economies and environments of all involved.

Margo Thorning is managing director of the International Council for Capital Formation.



http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZD5K8QLTE.html

---

§@ªÌ: potatogundam    ®É¶¡: 2006-10-25 17:22     ¼ÐÃD: ¦^´_ #98 ¤j¥Ð­^©ú ªº©«¤l

THANK YOU VERY MUCH

---

§@ªÌ: ¤j¥Ð­^©ú    ®É¶¡: 2006-10-26 08:03

Thursday, October 26, 2006

CHIEF EXECUTIVE ELECTION
The pro-democrats' dilemma


JOSEPH CHENG
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



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

   There are different views within the pro-democracy movement on taking part in the coming chief executive election. There are essentially three lines of thinking.
The first is strong opposition to involvement in what critics call "small-circle" elections. The second position is a pragmatic view that not participating next year would probably be the most advantageous approach for the pro- democracy movement. The third line favours wholehearted participation, because it would offer people a choice and pressure the chief executive to present a detailed platform - strengthening accountability.



Those who oppose participation want to uphold principles and reject compromise. Their stand has to be respected.

However, the pro-democracy movement makes compromises every day because of the structure of Hong Kong's politics. For example, of its 25 seats in the Legislative Council, seven come from functional constituencies. The democrats oppose the functional system. Yet, without those seven seats, they would not have one-third of the seats in Legco, and could not have vetoed the Tsang administration's political reform proposal in December.

Competing for functional constituency seats has always been a controversial, contradictory issue in the pro- democracy movement. A majority seems to support participation. Naturally, they want to win these seats. But at the same time, they continue to fight for the abolition of the functional system - while seeking to broaden the electorates of functional constituencies.

Everyone agrees that the pursuit of democracy in Hong Kong has to proceed through legal and peaceful means. This means the pro-democracy movement has to compete within an undemocratic constitutional and electoral framework. But it is meaningless to argue that taking part in the less-than-democratic system will strengthen its legitimacy - or that of the government.

The pragmatic view holds that the present situation is highly unfavourable for the pro-democracy movement. These people think that the re-election of Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen is already a fait accompli. The economy is enjoying an upturn and the government avoids all controversial issues, so it is difficult to challenge Mr Tsang.

They also point out that the movement is divided on the election issue, and that it lacks the resources and organisation to conduct an effective campaign. Some even think that, in the absence of a candidate from the pro-democracy movement, voices opposing Mr Tsang will emerge from within the establishment.

Those who support participation hope it will challenge the limitations of the small-circle election. Competition offers an opportunity for popular participation, and for voicing the people's views, they say.

If the pro-democracy challenger can secure an official nomination by winning the support of 100 Election Committee members, that would create a chance for formal debates with Mr Tsang. But gaining that support remains a formidable challenge. A pro-Beijing united front has apparently been fully mobilised to prevent the nomination of pro-democracy candidates.

Winning votes in the Election Committee, however, is not a significant indicator of how well candidates perform or the appeal of their election campaign. The real test is whether a candidate can do a good job of mobilising the community. If a majority of Hongkongers think there should be competition in the election - and that they should have a chance to indicate which candidate they prefer - then participation by pro-democracy groups will be meaningful.

A lack of resources is a serious challenge for the pro-democracy camp. And attracting media coverage is difficult, given the level of self-censorship. But fighting for democracy in Hong Kong has never been easy.

Joseph Cheng Yu-shek is a professor of political science at City University of Hong Kong.



http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZPXGW3PTE.html

---

Åwªï¥úÁ{ ­»´ä Xocat Forum °Q½×°Ï (http://p.xocat.com/p/)

Powered by Discuz! 6.0.0