EDITORIAL : THE DAILY STAR, BANGLADESH

UP polls conducted well

EC should build up on the trend

Even though the Union Parishad (UP) elections have been held after two years' delay, the Election Commission (EC) deserves thanks for its success in conducting those more or less peacefully. The local administration, too, have a share in the credit for ensuring successful conduct of this first phase of the six days long polls for the UPs.

There is no denying the fact that the UPs' are the most intensely contested polls. Small wonder in the past, both before and after the UP polls, one would hear of instances of severe violence. Murder or hijacking of candidates by rivals, snatching of ballot boxes, occasional brawls between supporters of contending parties and suchlike occurrences often marred the polls. That is not to say that the ongoing UP polls have been totally free from any kind of untoward happenings. Reports have it that among the 190 UPs spread over 24 upazilas under Khulna Barisal and Chittagong divisions where the elections were conducted Tuesday, sporadic cases of violence did take place only at a few centres. But considering their number compared to those in the past years, they were few and far between. If the same trend continues through to the end over the next five days, that would be something to rejoice at. One has to wait until the first phase of the UP polls in progress is concluded before giving the final judgement about it.

While the peaceful conduct of the UP polls is an occasion to be acclaimed, one cannot say that just holding of an election is an end in itself. Once all the hullabaloo is over will come the real test of the administration in ensuring that this basic tier of the local government is able to play its desired role and deliver the goods. To that end, the government will have to be sincere about effecting devolution of powers on to the local government bodies.

In view of the manner in which the UP polls are being conducted, it would be a real achievement on the part of the EC, if it is able to retain this trend even in the next general election. Every well-conducted series of elections strengthens our belief in the electoral process.

Doctors' truancy

We share PM's indignation 

Prime Minister's warnings to the doctors who are negligent of their duties in rural areas have been well taken by all. This is not, however, the first time that she spoke her mind on the issue.

The PM, while handing over vehicles and ambulances to the authorities of the upazila and district level hospitals in Dhaka, has said that the doctors will have to comply with rural postings lest the government enforce replacement. She pointed out that such absenteeism deprives the mass people of better health facilities. We welcome the PMs tough words and want these implemented in kind when necessary.

While agreeing with the PM we would like to point out that proper living and working facilities for the doctors, especially lady doctors, have to be ensured in the rural areas. According to a BMA version, lady doctors posted to remote UP health centres find it difficult to do their job without proper accommodation facilities. Transport, accommodation and other related necessities should be provided to meet minimum requirement of the doctors. But where adequate facilities are available no excuse should be tolerated.

The practice of not attending place of postings in the countryside is nothing new. It has been happening for a long time. Doctors tend to skip their duties and attend to private practice in cities. However they draw salaries basing on their appointment at rural places. The dismal picture of neglected hospitals, clinics or community health centers and reports of absence of doctors are all too glaring.

The government should take measures to improve facilities for the doctors in rural areas and also sack the habitual absentee doctors who resort to wicked practices while enjoying the perks that their jobs carry.

 

 

EDITORIAL : THE DAILY MIRROR, SRILANKA

The threat of attack

Civilian casualties mounted in NATO (US) led air war in Libya, as the war over resources progressed in its second week.

The US, British and French bombs and missiles left hundreds of Libyans dead and injured. The number of civilians killed in the air war touched 100 early this week.

It looks like after its failed attempts to encroach into South Asian oil deposits, the fossil fuel hungry West had decided to take the Chinese juggernaut head on.

It’s surprising that since ancient times the wars fought over resources had not changed much.

According to a report on the web British Petroleum Survey, Africa had proven oil reserves of 117,481 billion barrels at the end of 2007, or 9.49 percent of the world’s reserves. Five countries dominate Africas oil production, accounting for 85 percent of the total—Nigeria, Libya, Algeria, Egypt and Angola. But Gabon, Congo, Cameroon, Tunisia, Equatorial Guinea, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Ivory Coast also produce oil, and exploration is ongoing in Chad, Sudan, Namibia, South Africa and Madagascar.

Africas oil is of a high quality and easy to mine, often from offshore rigs, and is distributed through existing sea lanes. The continent is the location of more than a third of the world’s new discoveries since 2000 and could be the site of far greater reserves than now thought. It is also the site of 8.22 percent of global natural gas reserves, ranks first or second in quantity of world reserves of bauxite, cobalt, industrial diamond, phosphate and what not and holds substantial gold deposits.

One observer pointed out that Washington was particularly anxious to “offset the challenge to its influence in Africa coming from China.”

Trade between Africa and China was estimated at $115 billion a year ago with a 43.5 percent increase.

For the European powers, particularly France and the UK, the shaking of the political kaleidoscope in North Africa and the Middle East is viewed as a golden opportunity to at least partially overcome the subordinate position into which they have been long cast in their former colonial preserves by Washington and, latterly, Beijing.

The British Foreign Secretary William Hague last week said “these momentous events do not necessarily stop at the borders of the Arab world,” he identified the Ivory Coast as well as Sudan and Zimbabwe as countries where others like Gaddafi stand in the way of a brighter future for their countries.

Most alarming is that he has said that Britain had an ambitious foreign policy which seeks to build up our standing and influence in the world, and to support our economy,” he said “the nations of Africa” as a strategic area of UK interest.

This looks more like the beginning of the World War 1. Berlin now fears losing out to Paris and London in a post-Gaddafi Libya. Another country that is wary of the implications of the war is Italy-the colonial ruler of Libya and has the biggest investment in the country’s oil. Turkey, which initially opposed the war but has since shelved its opposition, is also maneuvering to benefit from the carnage, one commentator said.

Meanwhile Turkey has recognized the Interim Transitional National Council (TNC) (Ring any bells?) and guess who is the Prime Minister is? It’s Mahmoud Jibril, who taught for many years in the US after receiving a PhD at the University of Pittsburgh-it would be too naïve to remind Dr. Rudrakumaran here.

EDITORIAL : THE DAWN, PAKISTAN

Mohali ‘summit’

THAT the two prime ministers met at Mohali on Wednesday in an environment enlivened by what by any standards was a carnival is itself an achievement. Their second meeting since February in Thimphu, this get-together should serve to help revive the ‘composite dialogue’ so rudely shattered by the Mumbai episode. A breakthrough was never expected, and nobody seemed to share the misplaced optimism generated by some TV channels on both sides. Nevertheless, we can detect a modest diplomatic gain: an invitation was sent by India, and Pakistan accepted it, the grace being mutual. This should be a matter of satisfaction seen against the background of the mistrust that has characterised India-Pakistan ties for six decades. More significantly, the Mohali meeting is a clear indication of the two prime ministers’ resolve to pursue the peace process despite the hurdles in the way, not the least of which is the opposition from the hawks in Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s cabinet to a soft line towards Pakistan, and his weakened position because of the corruption scandals now rocking Indian politics. The interior secretaries’ accord in New Delhi must have gladdened the two chief executives, because they agreed to set up a ‘terror hotline’, coupled with the declaration in the joint statement that they will “remain engaged on outstanding issues”.
Last July’s talks in Islamabad were an unmitigated disaster, for the two foreign ministers achieved nothing, with the then foreign minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi blaming the Indians for coming unprepared. But, as irony would have it, the same G.K. Pillai whose haste in blaming Pakistan for the Mumbai crime while the talks were going on was criticised by his foreign minister acted with greater wisdom and clinched on Tuesday with Qamar Zaman Chaudhry, his Pakistani counterpart, a deal on many thorny issues, including a pledge to share information on Mumbai and the Samjhota Express. Both sides also agreed on visits by Pakistani and Indian delegations in connection with the Mumbai probe, and there was a marked understanding on what is a perennial problem — fishermen’s arrest and ‘inadvertent crossers’. It has not yet been decided when the interior ministers will meet. This obviously means that a meeting between the foreign ministers and a visit by the Indian prime minister belong to a distant and — given their accident-prone relationship — hazy future.
Nevertheless, Prime Minister Gilani’s visit to Mohali and the interior secretaries’ work constitute a step forward, especially because the joint statement makes it clear that both Islamabad and New Delhi regard terrorism as a common enemy. There is still a long way to go, however. The deep mistrust remains, and may not go away unless the two sides also agree on the definition of terrorism.

Balochistan killings

IN another tragic loss that forms part of a disturbing trend, the bulletriddled body of a student believed to be a Baloch activist was found in Balochistan’s Khuzdar district on Sunday. He had reportedly been missing for some time. The news came a day after the discovery of eight bodies in Balochistan. These recent examples represent only a handful of extrajudicial killings out of the scores that have been reported over the last few months. While people have been going missing in Balochistan for years, their dead bodies are now being found, opening up a new chapter in the long running, low-intensity conflict between Baloch activists and security agencies. Separatists do contribute to violence in the province as well; they have attacked
security forces, government officials, non-Baloch residents of the province and public infrastructure. But the party affiliations of those whose bodies have been found indicate that the killings are unlikely to have been carried out by insurgents. This, and the fact that many of those found dead were among the province’s missing persons, has created the suspicion that security agencies are involved. As a result, the insurgency has intensified, leading to incidents such as the gunning down of at least 10 men at a Frontier Works Organisation camp in Gwadar last week.
The government’s Aghaz-i-Huqooq-i-Balochistan package is meant to address some of the grievances of the Baloch, although nationalists argue its implementation has been slow. Pakistan’s military has also made conciliatory gestures by hiring Baloch youth and establishing educational institutions. The 18th Amendment promises more provincial autonomy, and the seventh National Finance Commission Award has increased the province’s share of federal revenue and acknowledges Balochistan’s right to profit from its natural resources. But these efforts will not be enough as long as security agencies and law-enforcement personnel continue to exert as much influence in Balochistan as they do; the chief minister has himself admitted that he has limited control over the province. Until the issue of the missing persons is resolved and the civilian administration allowed to truly govern the province, no concessions will be enough to bring these retaliatory attacks and killings to an end.

Waste of funds

A RECENT report, Education Emergency, told us that the situation in education is critical. Now we learn, as reported by this newspaper, that every fourth college in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa has been established in an area that is unfeasible for its operation. Of the functional colleges, 40 out of 153 do not manage to enrol the numbers of students required to avail of their capacities, which means that they are functioning to great cost and little gain. According to government policy, to make it viable a college for boys should be established in an area where 350 students qualify for the Secondary School Certificate examination, while for a girls’ college 250 students should be available. These 40 colleges have been established in areas where the number of students is less 200. This means the provincial government spends around Rs10,000 per month on every student in the colleges in unfeasible areas, versus Rs1,500 per student on colleges with a sufficient number of students.
It is shocking that resources are going to waste in a country where the state of education is critical. Reportedly, public representatives have pushed through the establishment of colleges in unfeasible areas in order to oblige voters. The construction of each such college can cost up to Rs200m. Meanwhile, there is an insufficient number of colleges in cities and towns. Peshawar alone needs 10 more institutions to cater to the needs of a growing student body that comes from across the province. This is devoid of sense. There is no denying that remote areas need educational institutions. However, colleges that do not have enough students to function viably yield no benefit either. The government and elected representatives need to come up with an effective solution to ensure that funds from the public exchequer are not wasted.

 

 

 

EDITORIAL : THE HINDU, INDIA

Problems of abundance

Even as a season of bountiful harvest of the rabi season crops, wheat followed by rice, gets under way, India's food management policy has come under a great deal of stress. The main objectives of food management are unexceptionable: procurement of food grains from farmers at remunerative prices; distributing them to consumers, particularly deprived and vulnerable sections of the people at affordable prices, and maintaining buffers for food security and price stability. It is the instruments used — the minimum support price (MSP) and the central issue price (CIP), and the nodal agency, the Food Corporation of India (FCI) — that have come under scrutiny at a time India is facing problems of plenty. An immediate problem has been one of storage. As of March 1, the FCI was reportedly holding 45.8 million tonnes of rice and wheat — more than twice the prescribed buffer stock norm, which includes a food security reserve of five million tonnes. A sizable part of this is stored in the open, with minimal protection. The FCI has also used private warehouses for stocking grain for which it incurs a heavy carrying cost. The problem of storage will become acute if, as expected, the FCI procures another 15-20 million tonnes of wheat during this season.

There are no easy ways out. Export of grains to reduce the surplus may not be an optimal solution. Like many countries, India has been very selective in permitting exports of food grains. The interests of domestic consumers have been paramount. There have been occasions when Indian exporters were priced out. Sales in the domestic markets to reduce the stocks are possible but even here a coherent strategy is needed. In many places, open market prices of wheat are reportedly ruling below the MSP. Solutions to the storage crisis will have to be found in a larger context of reordering the food management and procurement policies. The old fixes will not work at this juncture. Procurement of wheat and rice is open ended and the MSP, which has been raised by successive governments, sets the floor price, thereby contributing to higher prices. There is, at this point, very little chance of restricting each year's procurement to actual production. Nor can the mechanism of MSP be revisited in its entirety, given the political sensitivity involved. According to the Economic Survey 2010-11, the economic cost of food grains to the FCI has increased substantially over the last few years but the issue price has not gone up, so the food subsidy bill will go up. The continuing tragedy is that the Indian system is not able to deliver the ‘surplus' food grain to the hungry.

EDITORIAL : THE ASHARQ ALAWSAT, published in LONDON

Syria and the opportunity of reform

The Syrian President's speech, delivered before the parliament in Damascus, suggests that the Syrian government has decided to confront its internal crisis with severe security measures, instead of a package of reforms, particularly since the Syrian President considers what is happening to be a plot.
The Syrian President says that what is happening in his country comes against the backdrop of the "fashion" trend of revolutions taking place in the region. It is important to note Damascus previously considered what happened in Egypt, and elsewhere, to be the voice of the people expressing their dissatisfaction with their rulers' conduct…It is true that President al-Assad said in his speech that reform is a necessity, but yesterday he provided no reformative declarations, which indicates, based on reports a few days ago, that there is a dispute in Damascus, behind closed doors, about how to deal with the unprecedented demonstrations that have erupted in several Syrian cities. It has been said that there are those calling for greater reform, and others calling for more force to deal with the demonstrators. Of course, there is evidence to suggest that this is true, and this does not come from the media or satellite television, which was criticized at length by the Syrian President during his speech, but the issue is far simpler than that.
Three days ago, Vice President Farouk al-Sharaa, through the official news agency (SANA), announced that President al-Assad would deliver an important speech during the next two days, to reassure everyone. This caused expectations to rise dramatically, amongst the Syrian people first and foremost, but also amongst observers abroad, for what is happening in Syria will certainly have implications for many issues in the region, whether positive or negative. However, the President's speech did not include any indications of reform, but only mere promises to study the "reformative" decisions which were announced last week.
As expected, immediately after the President's speech, demonstrations took place in Latakia, yet these were dispersed with bullets, and there was news of serious injuries. Damascus today has now entered something of a grey area. The failure to adopt genuine reforms has made solutions even more difficult, in light of the continuing protests, and confrontations in Syrian cities. Delaying reformative decisions will be costly, as it only wastes time. Similarly, the security confrontations will have serious repercussions on Syria as a whole, both internally and externally, and this is a dangerous matter. Accordingly, the coming days will tell us a lot: will the Syrian masses cease their demonstrations, after it has become clear that they will be confronted by force? Or will they intensify their efforts there, and raise the ceiling of demands? Certainly, it is difficult to say anything for sure at the moment; however it is clear that Damascus missed the opportunity to announce the radical reforms the Syrians are waiting for, and this was a grave error. Reform, first and foremost, is a genuine need for Syria, and even if it was enacted now, under pressure, it would not make the state look opportunistic, as the Syrian President claimed. 

EDITORIAL : THE NEW YORK TIMES, USA

They’ve Got to Fix Their Priorities

The banks may have weathered the financial crisis, but the rest of the country hasn’t. Taxpayers are still on the hook for federally guaranteed bank debt. Homeowners’ equity continues to erode. Small businesses still have trouble getting loans, and savers are still getting hammered by near zero interest rates. Joblessness remains high. State budgets are ravaged.

So whom have Washington policy makers singled out for help? Bank shareholders, including bank executives who are invariably big holders of stock in their banks.
The Federal Reserve recently gave the all-clear for several banks to increase dividends and expand share buybacks, among them JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Citigroup and Goldman Sachs. That’s good news, at least in the short run for bank investors, but it is a dubious development for everyone else.
The dividend-boosting banks that were too big to fail before the crisis are even bigger now, while reforms to rein them in are under political attack even before they have been implemented. Sheer size and inadequate regulation — the combination that led to the crisis — argue for banks to use their earnings to build bigger capital cushions, not to pay dividends and repurchase shares.
Yet Fed officials have concluded that many banks are safe and sound enough to pay out cash and still withstand a severe shock should one occur again. It’s hard to share their confidence. Before it approved new dividends, the Fed required banks to test their crisis-readiness against several criteria, like elevated unemployment, but it did not release detailed results of the tests. Public data do not inspire confidence either. There is much debate over whether banks are valuing their mortgage assets correctly, and, by extension, whether they are adequately capitalized.
What is known is that recent bank profits have been boosted not by increasing revenues, but by downward revisions to expected future losses. With house prices falling anew, further reducing the value of mortgage assets, how reasonable is that?
Even if banks were ready for anything, more dividends and buybacks still would be premature. Big banks that plan to increase payouts still hold nearly $120 billion in government-backed debt under a crisis-era program from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. The subsidized bonds come due between now and the end of 2012. Paying shareholders before the bonds are retired puts bank investors before taxpayers — talk about skewed priorities. Banks also face potentially huge fines in court cases and in settlement talks with government officials over mortgage and foreclosure practices that have harmed both homeowners and mortgage investors. It is irresponsible for the Fed to allow bolstered dividends before the penalties are known and paid. It is also a disturbing omen. Regulators are part of the settlement talks over the banks’ wrongful practices. Are they assuming that banks can afford both stiff penalties and bolstered dividends? Or are they assuming that the penalties will be weak?
When it comes to redress and reward, bank shareholders should be at the back of the line, behind taxpayers who stand behind too-big-to-fail banks and behind homeowners who are bearing the brunt of a housing debacle for which banks bear considerable responsibility. For the Fed to allow new dividends and bigger buybacks before these issues are settled is a display of the same type of “banks first” favoritism that got us into this mess to start.

Google’s Book Deal

Google’s ambitious proposal to scan, index and make available every book ever written promised a cultural revolution. Yet for all its promise, Judge Denny Chin of the United States District Court in Manhattan was right to strike down the plan last week, ruling that a settlement with the Authors Guild and publishers that would allow Google to put millions of books online without the explicit consent of their authors “would simply go too far.”

Google, like anybody else, is entitled to scan and post books that are in the public domain. As for new books, most publishers cut deals for Google to provide access to portions of their new titles and give readers an option to buy a digital copy. The settlement, signed in 2005 and revised in 2008, covered books in the middle, those out of print but still protected by copyright.

The agreement would have given new life to millions of half-forgotten titles collecting dust in out-of-the-way libraries. Readers could browse through portions and buy digital copies. And authors could opt out of the deal.

But Judge Chin rightly pointed out that the Authors Guild — which has 8,000 members — hardly represents the entire class of authors. It had no right to enter into an agreement that automatically put their works in Google’s system unless they opted out. This was particularly problematic for so-called orphan books — those for which the owner of the copyright is not known or can’t be found. Only Google would be allowed to digitize these books.

Altogether, Judge Chin argued that the agreement would grant Google a virtual legal monopoly over the online book search. That is too high a price to pay. Google’s loss means that, for now, its search results will show only snippets of text from books that are under copyright but out of print. But Judge Chin suggested Google’s deal still might work if authors had to opt in rather than opt out. Google’s lawyers have rejected this option, arguing that it is too slow and that many books would probably be left out. But Google and its partners should give it a try.

Congress, meanwhile, can resolve the problem of orphan books. In 2008, it almost passed a bill that would allow anybody to digitize orphan works without fear of being sued for copyright infringement as long as they proved that they had tried to find the rights’ holder. This would give all comers similar legal protection to that which Google got in its agreement.

Congress should approve this legislation. While it’s at it, it should consider promoting a nonprofit digital library, perhaps seeded with public dollars. The idea of a universal library available to all is too good to let go.

An Extraordinary Intrusion on Women’s Rights

Far too many states are putting new obstacles in the way of women seeking legal abortions. But South Dakota’s new law stands out for its intrusiveness and its abuse of women’s rights.

About half the states, including South Dakota, require women to wait 24 hours after an initial doctor’s visit before terminating a pregnancy. The South Dakota law, which takes effect on July 1, now extends that waiting period to three days, making it the nation’s longest.

As a practical matter, the 72-hour wait is likely to stretch to a week or more. With no local doctors willing to perform abortions, the sole provider of nonemergency abortions in the state, a Planned Parenthood clinic in Sioux Falls, flies in doctors from Minnesota once a week. The new law will further compound the hardship for low-income women who must travel long distances to reach the clinic and who will be forced to make several trips or arrange to stay away from home between appointments.

The new law’s intrusions don’t stop there. All women seeking abortions, including victims of rape and incest, will be forced first to attend a counseling session at one of the state’s crisis pregnancy centers. These are unregulated facilities run by private groups with the aim of discouraging abortions, typically by displaying graphic photos or with ideological or religious messages or medical misinformation about psychological or physical risks.

We trust the courts hearing the inevitable legal challenge will agree that this is Big Brother gone wild. Women considering an abortion need facts and medical expertise, not a mandatory visit with anti-abortion activists, the compromising of their privacy or a prolonged waiting period that pushes the procedure later into pregnancy.

Without the Campaign Donors, This Wouldn’t Be Possible

Even by Washington’s low standards, the House’s Republican freshmen are turning pandering into a high art. At a recent transportation hearing in his home district, Representative James Lankford of Oklahoma heaped praise on a panel of private sector witnesses. Three of the four executives so publicly favored were later discovered to be donors to Mr. Lankford’s campaign.

Nothing illegal in that, nor in the enthusiasms of another freshman, Mike Pompeo of Kansas, dubbed the Congressman from Koch for championing the conservative agenda of the billionaire Koch brothers, Charles and David. They contributed handsomely — $80,000 worth — to Mr. Pompeo’s campaign kitty. Once elected, Mr. Pompeo hired a former Koch Industries lawyer as his chief of staff.

Mr. Pompeo said he ran for Congress because as a businessman (whose business included some Koch investment money) he saw “how government can crush entrepreneurism.” His contributions to the House Republicans’ budget-slashing legislation included two top priorities of Koch Industries: killing off funds for the Obama administration’s new database for consumer complaints about unsafe products and for a registry of greenhouse gas polluters at the Environmental Protection Agency.

The congressman said he was concerned that the database would encourage false accusations about good products and that the registry would increase the E.P.A.’s power and cost jobs. Those arguments are nonsense, but Mr. Pompeo represents an early warning of the shape of things to come when the Supreme Court’s misguided decision to legalize unfettered corporate campaign donations fully kicks in next year.

The Koch brothers are planning to spend tens of millions in the 2012 campaign, as are Democratic power brokers and unions. Ordinary voters may be making a show of demanding real political change, but they are being increasingly outbid at the big money table where American politics happens.

 

 

 

 

EDITORIAL : THE GUARDIAN, UK

Arts funding: creative tensions

These are wrong cuts to one of the most successful, vibrant and cost-effective sectors in British life

Just before the 2010 election, the head of one of Britain's most admired arts organisations was asked how his sector should respond in the event of a Conservative government cutting spending on the arts. "More than anything," he replied, "I hope we won't be too childish about it." Yesterday that hope – that the arts would not overindulge in some of the too easily caricatured anti-Tory scorn of the past – was put to the ultimate stress test. And it passed.
That moment came as Arts Council England, which administers most of the public funding for the arts in Britain, parcelled out what was left after its funding was cut by 30% in the autumn spending review. Judging by its generally more sorrowful than angry tone yesterday, the art world's mood is healthily self-aware these days. Arts cuts are rightly seen in the wider context. Yet there is no disguising that these are large, destructive and wrong cuts to one of the most successful, vibrant and cost-effective sectors in British life. Coming on the day when the taxpayer-owned Lloyds banking group revealed it is paying its new boss a signing-on fee of £4.6m, on top of an annual salary of £1.06m, the arts cuts are a reminder that we are certainly not all in this together.
The autumn spending review handed the Arts Council – which is headed by Dame Liz Forgan, who also chairs the Scott Trust that owns the Guardian – an incredibly difficult hand to play. But the council has played the hand as well as could reasonably have been expected. Having been forced to cut 15% off its funding programme, the council was right not to salami-slice 15% off its existing funding to all of its 849 previous clients. Instead, it took the opportunity to reapportion the diminished funds from scratch, to conduct a proper review which seems to have been fair and open, and has ended up supporting 695 organisations over the forthcoming spending period, of which 110 are newly funded. This is a brutal outcome for the 206 arts organisations which will not now receive Arts Council funding at all, and it faces most of the council's remaining clients with grim choices in balancing their books in the light of their reduced grants. Overall, however, it is surely the least worst way.
The council's approach combines good administration with smart politics. As well as bravely making hard artistic judgments (as it is supposed to do) about the organisations to be supported and not, the review and rejuvenation of the client list means that the process contains some excitements rather than universal gloom. It is good that events like the Manchester Festival or the Kendal Arts International, along with organisations like Suffolk's HighTide theatre, have won funding for the first time. It is also right that the biggest previous recipients have taken their share of hits – though on purely artistic grounds it is hard to see why English National Opera has been relatively lightly treated. Some of the tougher decisions are harder to understand, however, and it looks as though the regional breakdown has penalised the south-west, where both the Northcott in Exeter and St George's concert hall in Bristol got nothing. Dance, too, has been badly treated, especially given its immense potential for expansion. And while London's theatre does relatively well, it is hard to understand how the Almeida, described by the council yesterday as "an exemplary organisation", thereby deserves a 39% cut for its efforts.
Yesterday was a black day for the arts. Yet paradoxically the arts are not entering a new dark age. The old argument about whether the arts should be publicly funded has been won, not lost. There is far wider recognition today, including among politicians of all parties, of the creative dynamism and economic vibrancy of the arts sector than a generation ago. The arts have taken a hit. But they are still standing. It is time to start preparing the case for better public arts funding when conditions allow.

Syria: A lost opportunity

The president's address consisted almost entirely of generalities, offered no new measures and made no specific promises.

Has President Bashar al-Assad missed his moment? He has certainly succeeded in disappointing the expectations raised by predictions, some of them apparently leaked by his own government, that he would make a historic speech this week charting a new path of reform for his country. Instead, after nearly two weeks of protests and violence in Syrian cities, he appeared yesterday before parliament to deliver an address which consisted almost entirely of generalities, offered no new measures and made no specific promises. Historic it was not.
His main purpose seemed to be to demonstrate that he would not allow himself to be pushed into panicky action by street protests, an impression reinforced by the orchestration of excessive displays of support by members of parliament and by the crowds waiting outside. The approach was to claim for his regime kinship with the popular movements that have brought political change across the Arab world, and to point to a long-standing reform programme in Syria as evidence that his government welcomed the new importance of the Arab street.
Reform in Syria had been under way for years, he said, but had been delayed by the urgent need to respond to threats from abroad, and to strengthen the Syrian economy. The troubles in Deraa and Latakia had been fomented by foreigners, even if meddling by outsiders was not their only cause. The security forces had been told to avoid bloodshed, the deaths were regrettable, and there would be investigations. This vague commitment aside, Syrians are left contemplating proposals they already knew about, some of which have indeed been in the legislative pipeline for years, and which were dusted off once again late last week.
These plans, which include the possible lifting of emergency rule, a political parties law, a media law, and measures against corruption, are hardly to be rejected in principle. But Syrians have long experience of political and constitutional rearrangements that leave the substance of power in the hands of one party and one family and its associates, of anti-corruption campaigns which inexplicably fail to target the main offenders, and of media relaxations which at best move the line of control a few millimetres.
Assad has some advantages. He is closer to the protesters in age, his foreign policies bring him some support, and the regime does offer some protection to minorities, Kurds excepted. But, if he wants to be seen as part of the solution and not as part of the problem, he will soon have to offer the detailed, convincing measures he signally failed to produce yesterday.

EDITORIAL : THE GLOBAL TIMES, CHINA

UN resolution legality needs a gatekeeper

On March 29, Gaddafi's army recaptured two cities. This new twist to the Libyan military situation has heaped political embarrassment on the West. It is now time to prevent the West from further abusing Security Council Resolution No. 1973.

The Western powers have acted beyond the resolution. Although the leaders of the US, Britain and France have said their military actions are only aimed at establishing a no-fly zone, the Western air strikes have directly attacked Libyan government forces and provided air support for the opposition. They have jointly demanded Gaddafi to step down immediately, which has nothing to do with Security Council resolutions.

In the absence of China, Russia, the African Union and most members of the Arab League, the London conference centered around the political landscape of the "post-Gaddafi era." This countermands the authority of the United Nations and goes against the Western declaration of "letting Libyan people determine by themselves."

The intensification of Western direct military intervention could force Gaddafi to step down soon. But the West has two obstacles: the Security Council resolution does not grant them such authority and they have to consider public opinion. The greater the opposition of global opinion, the more hesitant the West will be.

China should unite with Russia in requiring the US, Britain and France to respect Security Council resolutions. As the Security Council president this month, China should hold an emergency meeting at the ambassadorial level, and demand announcements about air strikes and plans for future intervention. The Council should ask the West to guarantee no expansion of military operations.

China should let French President Sarkozy know that the air strikes he defends are widely opposed in China. If he is a president with political honor, he should face the questions posed by Chinese media and guarantee that he will abide by Resolution 1973.

The world must not allow the West to act unchecked, especially when using the name of the UN. They should hear the voices of opposition and face the problems they cause.

Maintenance of the Security Council resolution can achieve a moral high ground. China and Russia abstained, which does not mean the US, Britain and France gained carte blanche. China, Russia, Brazil and other emerging countries should take actions to let these three countries understand this.

China should enter into contact with the Libyan opposition and various other forces in the Middle East. Libya's future can only be decided by the Libyan people themselves. Since Obama, Cameron and Sarkozy also agree with this, they should accept supervision. Even if the supervision would encounter some opposition in the Arab world, it is still worth doing.

 

EDITORIAL : THE DAILY YOMIURI, JAPAN

Find the funds for quake reconstruction

The Yomiuri Shimbun

The budget for fiscal 2011, which starts Friday, passed the Diet on Tuesday in line with a constitutional provision that gives the House of Representatives legislative precedence over the House of Councillors.
The nation faces a time of emergency in the aftermath of the triple whammy of this month's massive earthquake and tsunami and a series of problems at a crippled nuclear power plant. It was unavoidable that the budget was approved without any revisions even though there are some problems with it.
Charging ahead with handout policies such as child-rearing allowances, at a time when recovering from the disaster and rebuilding are paramount priorities, is nothing but a waste of fiscal resources. We urge the government to promptly compile a supplementary budget so fiscal spending can be channeled toward reconstructing the disaster-hit areas.
According to a government estimate, the earthquake and tsunami caused 16 trillion yen to 25 trillion yen in damage to buildings and roads. Secondary damage, such as cuts in production resulting from the catastrophe, also will be huge.
After the 1995 Great Hanshin Earthquake, three supplementary budgets totaling about 3 trillion yen were compiled, bringing government spending to 5 trillion yen, including reserve funds. The fiscal outlay required this time is expected to be far bigger because the extent and scope of the damage is larger.
===
Priority in fiscal spending
The reserve fund of 1 trillion yen currently outlaid for fiscal 2011 will not be sufficient for this rebuilding work. An additional budget was formulated one month after the Great Hanshin Earthquake. A similarly speedy response is needed this time, too.
Priority should be given to urgent work such as restoring transportation networks and other lifelines, removing debris and constructing temporary housing units. Livelihood support to disaster victims should also be extended as quickly as possible.
The problem is how to raise funds for these projects. Deficit-covering government bonds account for about 44 trillion yen of the 92.4 trillion yen budget for fiscal 2011. Therefore, we think the government must, before doing anything else, abandon projects that are not necessary or urgent.
Nearly 2 trillion yen could be saved if the government reinstates the previous child allowance system that costs less than the current system. The 400 billion yen earmarked for making public high school tuition free and for subsidies for private school tuition, and 900 billion yen set aside as income compensation for farming households also are obvious targets for shelving or slashing.
It is also necessary to overhaul the plan to make all expressways toll-free or to adopt a uniform 1,000 yen toll for all passenger cars on weekends regardless of distance traveled.
===
Explanations needed
Once disaster reconstruction moves into high gear, additional funds will be needed to build disaster-resistant towns and rebuild industrial infrastructure. Considering the huge sums that will be involved, rehashing spending plans alone will be unlikely to get the job done. One idea would be to issue special government bonds to raise funds that would be exclusively used for reconstruction projects.
However, the nation is in dire fiscal straits and saddled with the biggest fiscal deficit among industrialized countries. To secure reconstruction funds and reliable fiscal resources for social welfare, there is no alternative but to carry out some sort of tax increase.
The government, along with the ruling and opposition parties, must carefully explain the severe state the nation faces to the public to convince them of the need to share the burden.