EDITORIAL : THE DAWN, PAKISTAN

The way forward

HAVING failed to capture America’s prime enemy on Pakistani territory while the US launched a unilateral ground and air operation to do so, where do we go from this point? At stake is the future of American and Pakistani cooperation on counter-terrorism. The incident raises several difficult questions about the future of the US-Pakistan relationship as a whole, but it is in this area that the parameters will be most deeply questioned. Will America conduct more unilateral strikes in Pakistan if it has information about high-value targets? Will Pakistan hold back intelligence it might have about targets in the future? Some statements from both sides already indicate that collaboration on counter-terrorism could be threatened. The Foreign Office statement released on Tuesday mentioned “deep concerns and reservations” about the US operation. CIA chief Leon Panetta told the press that Pakistan was kept in the dark about the strike because “they might alert the targets”. The idea that even Bin Laden might have been protected speaks volumes for the level of American mistrust and the negative perception that the Pakistani state has managed to create about its intentions.

In the midst of all this back-and-forth, both sides must remember one thing: we have a common enemy. This was once America’s war, but for several years now it has been waged on Pakistani soil and at the cost of a huge number of Pakistani lives. The Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan and some other militant groups say they attack the Pakistani state — and kill civilians in the process — because it cooperates with America. It was this very ideology that Bin Laden promoted, seeking retaliation for American interference in the Muslim world through attacks against the US and the Muslim governments who work with it. His second-in-command, Ayman al Zawahiri — who had given calls for jihad against the Pakistani state and the ‘un-Islamic’ politics practised in the country — and other senior members of the group remain at large.

The events of this week cannot be allowed to derail what is a shared goal: to secure both nations from a common threat. The post-Osama world requires a new chapter in counter-terrorism cooperation between the two countries. Fortunately, there is plenty of precedent to build on; on several occasions they have shared intelligence or conducted joint operations that have resulted in the arrests of high-profile terrorists in Pakistan, including Umar Patek as recently as March this year. One hopes that the recent operation was an exception resulting from Bin Laden’s status as Al Qaeda’s leader. Going
forward, cooperation is the only way the two countries will be able to fight the terrorist threat.

Inflation woes

PRICES are surging again. Food became more expensive last month. Energy prices shot up. Healthcare and transportation costs rose. House rents spiked. The common man is worried because his wages are not keeping pace with the swift change in prices. Industry is baffled as its input costs are soaring while its profits are eroding. The central bank is in a bind, not least because it is finding it more difficult to strike a balance between growth and inflation. The government, as always, is confused and doesn`t know where to look for a solu-tion to its plethora of economic troubles. Apart from a short interval, prices have shown a sustained growth in the last three years. The consequences of price inflation are already having an impact on the people and the economy. Poverty levels are rising and low- to middle-income people are forced to cut their spending on food, healthcare and education. Unemployment is spreading.

In a recent report, the Asian Development Bank has warned that the continued rise in prices (in countries like Pakistan) is bound to pull many below the poverty line. Economic uncertainty has increased, dampening investment confidence and slowing growth. Industry is curtailing production and cutting jobs. Experts agree that the price inflation will continue in the months to come owing to both domestic and international factors. Internationally, oil and food prices are escalating. Domestically, the resource-constrained government is forced to raise energy prices to contain its deficit. Also, provincial governments have been unable to check hoarding of various food items, making it difficult for consumers. The situation demands that policymakers formulate an effective strategy to push growth and contain inflation simultaneously. Also, the government must follow the economic and financial reforms agenda to improve its fiscal position and put in place a mechanism to prevent the artificial increase in food prices. The common people are least bothered about the internal and external causes of rising prices or CPI numbers. What they want is price stability and availability of food, energy and transportation at affordable prices. The government must work towards ensuring this.

Welcome assurances

THE interior minister has done well to assuage the Supreme Court`s concerns that the government is thinking of setting up military courts for trying terrorism cases. Appearing before the apex court on Monday in connection with the case of the missing persons, Rehman Malik said the government had no plans to amend the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, because it feared the law-enforcement agencies could misuse their powers under the amended act, though the detention period for suspects could be extended to 90 days. Even though the Supreme Court had summoned the interior minister and other officials to explain the delay in the recovery of missing persons, the idea of military courts for suspected militants had been in the air for quite some time, causing Supreme Court Bar Association chief Asma Jahangir to express her concerns over the reports.

The existence of parallel systems of prosecution and justice has served to confound and delay the judicial process in Pakistan. Already there are three sets of laws on the statute book — the traditional `British law` as amended from time to time in Pakistan, the Islamic laws imposed through decree by the Zia regime and a mix of these laws with those martial law regulations given constitutional protection by parliaments under military control. The end-result of this legal potpourri has been the slowing down rather than quickening of the judicial process. As we have pointed out several times in this space, the rate of conviction is low because the work of the prosecuting agencies leaves much to be desired, suspects on bail disappear and witnesses are won over or threatened — sometimes even murdered. Against this background we do not need more or harsher laws; what we need is an efficient prosecution process that helps courts in their quest to ensure that terrorists get their just deserts.

EDITORIAL : THE KHALEEJ TIMES, UAE

Gaddafi’s defiance is for what?

Libya and its entrenched leader are far from done. Even days after one of his son’s death in a NATO airstrike, Col Muammar Gaddafi is defiant.

The mass burial ceremony in Tripoli, which was reportedly attended by his other sons along with hundreds of people, is an indication of how politicised and polarised the Libyan society has turned, inevitably lending credence to the dictator to rule the roost. This would not have evolved had Britain and France allowed the uprising to take its due course, and led the people demanding change to triumph. A repeat of Egypt and Tunisia was stalled as extra-territorial forces intervened in a purely domestic issue, blowing it out of proportion to be dubbed as an aggression or sorts for neo-colonising Libya. At the same time, the European allies have failed to honour the mandate bestowed upon them by the United Nations to protect the civilians against government troops, and have rather compounded their miseries by waywardly flying sorties and sending down missiles.

With the passage of time, Libya is slipping into a perpetual warfare, and reflects no different from Afghanistan. This is more so because it is no more an issue of saving the civilians, who rose against Gaddafi, but has become a real-politick agenda for the West and the rebels who are more than eager to slice a part of Libya for their vested objectives. Though the uprising enjoys support worldwide and a broader base at home, it should not come at the expense of the country’s territorial integrity. The reported instance of some rebel chieftains grabbing a section of oil wells and selling the crude to foreign markets speaks highly of the collapsing writ of the state, which is quite unfortunate. This scrambling of territory and political influence, coupled with migration of its citizens, is costing this oil-and-mineral rich country too dearly.

Gaddafi has no recourse but to quit. The personal tragedy that he has seen last week should be more than enough for him to find a rationale in conceding power. Though as a statesman, he should have humbly bowed out when the nation rose against him — sparing the death of hundreds of innocent people and destruction of property to the tune of billions of dollars. As they say, it’s late but never too late, the embattled leader still holds the last say. It’s time to bid adieu to the false power ceiling.

Cityports the next step

The Arab Travel Mart currently under way is a clear indication that people are very much on the go and the spectre of recession has not been able to frighten people into shutting the doors on the outside world.

Have business will travel still works. The new slogan for the second decade of this century could well be that the world meets in airports. This is not an overestimated statement of the growing importance of airports worldwide. A focal point for diverse industries such as entertainment, tourism and Meetings, Incentive, Conferences and Exhibition (MICE), airports today have grown much beyond just passengers and cargo. The development of airports in cities, such as London and Amsterdam, has earned them the title of Airport Cities. Metropolises worldwide are now trying to emulate the Airport City concept by adding more features to their airport master plan, by going much beyond just building arrival and departure terminals and airside facilities. Abu Dhabi and Dubai spearhead such enterprises.

An Airport City is a self-contained unit in which the airport serves not just as a landing field or point of departure for aircraft but 
creates its infrastructure and its own ambience. The Cityport as it will soon be known is rather like a grounded cruise ship in which everything is available by way of facilities and it has both the acumen and expertise as well to ensure a smooth running of the system while offering passengers in-terminal facilities.

So, you have hotels. Hospitals and clinics. Medical attention. Playing areas. Entertainment options. Food outlets. Shopping arcades. Communication facilities. Intermodal transportation. Even options for health clubs and spa treatments and salons. Tomorrow, who knows, a golf course, tennis courts and indoor squash courts for a quick game between flights.

On the technical side, spare part options on the premises, swifter procedures and turnaround times, in-house maintenance, airport staff housing colonies and more elaborate apron movements. The emphasis on Airport Cities is due to many reasons. The foremost being airports are under pressure to create additional revenue streams. The complete package of amenities available at the airport is a strong attraction for major air carriers, cargo integrators and manufacturing and distribution centres to specific airports, hence increasing their competitive edge in the global economy.

There is no other way to go. Dependency has to be taken out of the book on good airports and warehousing and instant access to materials made mandatory. 

The emerging Airport Cities has resulted in different airports demonstrating stronger elements of one or the other type of facilities. And good, healthy tourism will be at the core of this next phase.

EDITORIAL : THE DAILY NATIONAL POST, CANADA

Let's win over the NDP's accidental MPs

So, which is it going to be? Will our shiny, new two-party system give us refreshingly ideological left-right politics, with the right, such as it is, holding the upper hand for the moment? Or, as Tom Flanagan has argued, will the inevitable grinding of the Median Voter Theorem produce Tweedledum/ Tweedledee choices and a political game played between the 50yard lines? (With only two parties, the theorem says, both target the median voter for fear of being squeezed out of the centre and reduced to their base support.)
Centrist politics or ideological politics, which is it to be?
Not to dodge the issue, but the most likely answer is "Both." At election time, median-voter politics dominates. With the goalposts given, if the right veers too far right, the left takes all left voters and also makes inroads among centre-right voters, thus winning a majority. Just the opposite happens if the left moves too far left: the right wins centre-left votes. Plus: open up too much room at midfield and both left and right have to worry about the resurgence of a centrist Liberal Party of Canada.
Does that mean conservatism -and for that matter, socialism -are dead, victims of the slogging match at the 55-yard-line, replaced by uninspiring three-yard plunges up the middle? Not at all. Though it makes sense in the short run to take the field as given and stake out your position in the middle, in the longer run you try to move the goalposts.
We now have the prospect of four years without an election. Before electoral considerations become overpowering again, there's plenty of time for both sides to try to budge the country's ideological tectonic plates. If you're the government, you have the advantage in such a struggle being able to put little bits of your ideological druthers into budgets and let the country try them out and learn with experience they're nothing to be afraid of.
Since 1993, when Kim Campbell didn't quite say an election isn't the right time to discuss policy details, that has been the conventional wisdom. But the campaign just finished put the lie to that. We had one party back a 15% corporate tax, a second favour 18% and a third propose 19.5%. You can't get more precise than that. Let's insist our politicians keep arguing this way, with details on the table.
Another lesson from that election is that there's ample room for ideological differences even on a relatively narrow question such as exactly what rate of corporate tax we should charge. If we could focus the debate on a relatively narrow range of similar issues, we could have plenty of disagreement yet keep the economy's most important underpinnings out of play.
Much to their surprise, much to the surprise of the people who voted them in, the NDP's Quebec caucus now includes five students from McGill University (though none from my classes, unfortunately). William F. Buckley used to say he'd rather be governed by the first 100 names in the Boston telephone book than by the Harvard faculty. He never said anything about the Harvard student body.
"I never dared to be radical when young," Robert Frost wrote "for fear it would make me conservative when old." These accidental MPs have taken the road Frost didn't, so there's hope for them: being radical now they may grow conservative with age. (Maybe even sooner: I'd love to see their reaction when they notice all the deductions on their first pay stub.) Having been reminded of their lack of experience by every commentator in the country, they may already be open to suggestions.
Here's an idea for them: The best policy for the left is "hard heads, soft hearts." A competitive capitalist economy is not an NGO. It may not be the most caring institution ever visited on humankind. But it is a wonderful institution -the best ever -for producing goods and services people want. Production-wise, the chance government can improve on capitalism is remote. Government therefore shouldn't even try.
Bureaucrats and regulators whose job is to try to devise national strategies for this or that industry should be bought out and retired off. That's the "hard heads" part. Hard-headed socialists and social democrats understand how foolish it is to try to supplant the market or second-guess how it works. (That means you, marketing boards, and other such egregious restraints on competition.)
The "soft hearts" part involves the realization that, like nature, the market is indifferent to the damage it does. Not everybody succeeds. Some do quite badly. Conservatives doubt the government's ability or even desire to repair such damage and have greater confidence in private efforts to help those who would otherwise be left behind. Liberals and others are much more trusting, or at least are willing to accept the evident inefficiencies of government in exchange for what they believe are net gains. But that's the kind of thing we should debate, not which industries the country needs or how to make Canadians more entrepreneurial.
There's more than enough room for disagreement about what our tax rates should be and how much income we should redistribute to the market's victims. The actual running of the economy let's leave to the invisible hand.

A lesson for American conservatives

The following editorial appeared in Wednesday's edition of The Wall Street Journal.

Canadian Conservative Party leader Stephen Harper's landslide victory in Monday's election, capturing the first centre-right majority since 1988, is a tutorial in economics as much as politics. Aspiring Presidential candidates south of the 49th parallel, please take note.

Mr. Harper has been running a minority government since 2006 and this time he won big. Conservatives captured 167 seats of 308. Second place went to the hard-left New Democratic Party, which won 102 seats and is now the official opposition, replacing the more moderate centre-left Liberal Party. Liberals won a scant 34 seats, while the separatist party, Bloc Québécois, took the worst drubbing, winning only four seats against 47 in the last parliament.

Mr. Harper was conciliatory on Monday night but also took appropriate credit. "We got that mandate because of the way we have governed, because of our record," he said in Calgary. That record is worth reviewing, especially as it relates to government spending and taxes.

Despite its reputation for leaning left, Canada has been economically opening and liberalizing since the mid-1990s. Progressive Conservative prime minister Brian Mulroney negotiated the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1993 and later that decade, as the Canadian dollar swooned, the Liberals were forced to begin cutting federal spending.

Yet Liberals were only willing to go so far in shrinking Ottawa's bureaucracy. Enter the Harper government in 2006. It made tax cuts, a strong national defense and rationalizing government its priorities. And it made good on those promises. On Jan. 1, 2008, Canada's general sales tax fell to 5% from 7%. Mr. Harper has also cut the federal corporate tax rate, which is now 16.5% and is scheduled to fall to 15% in 2012. (Add in provincial corporate rates of about 10%.) The U.S. federal rate alone is 35%.

Canada avoided America's housing mania and meltdown, but as our biggest trading partner it shared some of our economic pain. Conservative policy -low taxes and a willingness to allow the exploitation of rich oil and mineral deposits -has been a life saver for a small economy heavily integrated with the U.S. Its GDP grew by 3.3% last year, compared to America's 2.9%, and it now takes $1.05 to buy a Canadian dollar.

Mr. Harper did engage in stimulus spending, but he was also mindful of the risks. Canada's stimulus did not add to the country's entitlement rolls, and he has avoided the debt explosion afflicting the U.S. and much of Europe. He has also promised to balance the budget by fiscal 2014-2015 without raising taxes, which was a clear dividing line in the recent campaign.

All of this has made Mr. Harper's Tories the party of Canada's working and middle classes, including the immigrant communities around Toronto, which has long been a Liberal stronghold. As the Canadian polling company Compas explained on Sunday before the vote: "The historic middle class or bourgeois bastion of the Liberal-Conservative establishment, university-educated voters, have become the fortress of the antiestablishment NDP, while less educated and hence lower status Canadians are set to become the stronghold -the impregnable fortress -of the Conservatives."

The bad news here is that Canada's extreme left is now the opposition party, suggesting a sharper ideological polarization more typical of America. New Democratic leader Jack Layton moderated his populist tone during the campaign but the party's official "constitution," as reported on in the Canadian press, is anything but moderate. It includes references to "the extension of the principle of social ownership" and promises to increase government control of the economy in the interest of social justice and the environment. If the Tories mess up, the NDP would be poised to take the country sharply to the left.

For now the Conservatives will get to showcase their agenda with far more freedom than before. The NDP's constitution isn't well known and its victories, particularly in Quebec, seem largely attributed to a protest vote against the failures of the separatists and Liberals.

On the other hand, a too-cautious Mr. Harper could have trouble with his own party. Tory voters have been waiting for this majority for a long time and their victory means a lease of four years in power. Canadians will expect Mr. Harper to reshape economic policy to make the country more internationally competitive. That would seem to include reform of the national health-care model, which is draining government budgets but which Mr. Harper has been reluctant to talk about. Cuts in personal income tax rates are also on the conservatives' list.

The lesson of Mr. Harper's victory is that well-implemented conservative economic policies can attract and keep a political majority. America's Republicans might want to send a visiting delegation and study up.

Giving Ignatieff his due

Michael Ignatieff told reporters on Tuesday morning that he is stepping down as Liberal leader and would like to return to "teaching young Canadians."

He will have a lot to teach them. Perhaps one of his first topics should be: Mud wrestling or politics, which is the more honourable career?

Even in the context of an otherwise gracious departure from Canadian politics, which followed a tasteful concession speech on Monday night, Mr. Ignatieff couldn't quite bring himself to accept that the Liberals had brought their current state of devastation on themselves. He still feels the Conservatives are abusive and anti-democratic. He still points out that the government was found in contempt of Parliament, ignoring the partisan nature of a campaign by angry opposition parties to gang up on a government lacking the votes to defend itself. He still thinks he was largely ruined by attack ads that defined him as a carpetbagging academic before Canadians got to know him for themselves.

It painted a pretty bleak picture, which makes you wonder why Mr. Ignatieff then went on to express, quite eloquently, his hope that others will follow in his footsteps -preferably young people, and in particular young women -to revivify the party and return it to the heights he failed to achieve. Why would you want to wish that on someone, after portraying politics as a profession peopled by the bad and the worse?

Perhaps because Mr. Ignatieff is still, at heart, an optimist; the guy who, as he says, believes that "public service" (which is what politicians claim they perform) is a worthy career worth pursuing despite its deep crevices of muck and maliciousness. This quality helps explain why Mr. Ignatieff has been a success in his career till now: He can be eloquent, committed, passionate, intelligent and engaging. He must be great in a classroom.

Why was he not able to get that across in his two years as Liberal leader, or before, as an opposition MP? Too often, he appeared to be striving to shape himself into the persona he felt he should be -to act like a "politician," according to some image he had of what a politician should be. Too much of the tough-guy posturing -"Mr. Harper, your time is up," "Any time, any place."

Mr. Ignatieff came on his job at a bad time: The Liberal party was down and close to out, but unwilling to admit it, or to take the time needed to rebuild. It was intent on finding a saviour, the magic candidate who could slay the Tories and return the party to its deserved glory, all without any serious changes to an organization that had been coasting for years on memories of its past. Even Mr. Ignatieff himself, in his concession speech, could not resist revisiting gauzy memories of Laurier and other long-dead Liberal leaders -a party-wide reflex toward nostalgia that goes some way to explain why Liberal elders are so persistently out of touch.

Jack Layton spent a decade reconstructing the NDP; Stephen Harper rebuilt the Conservatives methodically from the ruins of a fractured right. But the Liberals wanted none of that; a couple of years in opposition was plenty for them; all they needed was a bright new face.

They were wrong, and Mr. Ignatieff is paying the price. He wasn't given the time or opportunity to rebuild. Maybe he didn't want to, or see the need himself. He still seems a bit fixated on the fact the Conservatives haven't played by the rules (as if the Liberals ever did). He still seems a bit too academic in outlook, trying to apply reason to an unreasonable business. Pierre Trudeau could do that because he had regular majorities to impose his personal agenda, whether the country liked it or not. It's harder to do when you're in opposition, facing a tougher leader than Mr. Trudeau faced.

It's likely Mr. Ignatieff will get another teaching job soon enough -or perhaps a leadership role in a blue-chip NGO or UN agency. He would make a fine ambassador, certainly. And no doubt a book will follow with his thoughts on his experience in partisan politics. It will undoubtedly be worth reading -especially by the next generation of politicians seeking to lead the party he is leaving.

EDITORIAL : RFI english, FRANCE

 

 

French press review 5 May 2011

 

 

There's plenty of variety on this morning's front pages, but not an awful lot of good news. Border controls may return to Europe, France's social security lost millions on a dodgy drug, fighting continues in Côte d'Ivoire and are France's Socialist just going through the motions in choosing their presidential candidate?

Business daily Les Echos informs us that we're likely to see the return of border controls here in Europe, this backward step the result of French pressure to stem the flood of Tunisians streaming through Lampedusa.
Le Figaro returns to the scandal surrounding the anti-diabetes drug, Mediator, recently much in the news
because it turned out to be killing some of the people it was supposed to cure.
The French social security system people paid out 1.2 billion euros for the dubious drug between 1983 and 2005, when Mediator was finally taken off the pharmacy shelves.

Dossier: AfPak news and analysis

They have yet to calculate how much the state then paid in sick leave for people who were being killed by Mediator, or how much they shelled out to pay people who had to stop working permanently as a result of taking the pills.
Catholic La Croix's main story looks to Côte d'Ivoire, with the bad news that, despite the establishment of a president in Abidjan, inter-ethnic fighting continues in Duékoué, in the west.
There are at least 30,000 refugees living inside the walls of Duékoué's Catholic mission.
Communist l'Humanité warns that Nicolas Sarkozy is planning to make life even more difficult for the struggling average Frenchperson.
The papers accuses the president of forcing the parliament to accept a finance law which will effectively hand control of the national budget and social security spending to the Eurocrats in Brussels.
Popular Le Parisien wonders if the Socialist Party is pulling the wool over voters' eyes. The very democratic socialists organise primary elections, to allow the party faithful chose who will represent them in next year's presidential bunfight.
There are dozens of contenders at the moment, from the sublime to the ridiculous. But everybody knows that Dominique Staruss-Kahn is going to be the main left-wing hope in 2012, so why are they bothering to go through the motions?
The ranks of the right are chortling with delight: "a bloody mess," "a massacre," "devastating," are some of the expressions of right-wing pleasure.
Says another UMP figure, "primary elections are like civil wars. They leave a lot of dead bodies and unhappy survivors in their wake. It's great!"
And speaking of presidential elections, the current main man, Nicolas Sarkozy, is given a 23 per cent popularity rating in an opinion poll published by Le Monde, down from 65 per cent back in 2007.
Libération looks at Barack Obama's attempts to get himself re-elected, an effort which the weekend killing of terrorist leader Osama Bin Laden has certainly helped. Barack is back to 50 per cent popularity, from a low of 43 per cent last month.
Not everyone is entirely happy about Obama's weekend coup against Osama. Libé reports that a joke
currently going the rounds from Peshawar to Karachi says something like "Pakistan is a very dangerous place. Not even Osama Bin Laden was safe there!"
The more serious question is how the world's most wanted man could live just down the road from Islamabad for four years without anyone in high places knowing he was on Pakistani soil.
And, by the way, in case you are still wondering about the legality of Sunday night's commando action by the US special forces, Eric Holder, the American justice minister, said yesterday that the murder of bin Laden was "completely legal and in line with our values".
"It was an act of legitimate national defence,"  he claims. Democracy is clearly in safe hands.

EDITORIAL : THE KOREA HERALD, SOUTH KOREA

New regulatory culture

Last Saturday, we called for drastic reform of the Financial Supervisory Services as the powerful regulatory agency exuded the stench of corruption. We were not alone in smelling the odor. President Lee Myung-bak did as well.

On Wednesday, Lee made a surprise visit to the FSS to express his fury and disappointment over the regulator’s failure to prevent irregularities at financial companies and FSS inspectors’ connivance with corrupt financiers.

Lee’s visit to the FSS was prompted by the prosecution’s announcement on Monday of the outcome of its investigation into Busan Savings Bank, one of the eight insolvent savings banks whose operations were suspended in February.

Prosecutors found that the savings bank’s largest shareholder and executives took out 4.6 trillion won in illegal loans from the troubled bank and its five affiliates over several years. The unscrupulous officials were also charged with falsifying financial statements and engaging in other wrongdoing.

The prosecutors said they were also zeroing in on FSS officials for their possible collusion with the savings bank officials, given that they had inspected the savings bank numerous times during the period but failed to detect any illicit activities.

Referring to the Busan Savings Bank case, Lee publicly chastised FSS officials for their failure to preempt the problems. He attributed the regulatory failure to chronic corruption at the FSS that has been handed down from its predecessors.

Lee said it might not be fair to tar all FSS officials with the same brush. But he stressed none of them could avoid responsibility for the present crisis facing the FSS. To reform it, Lee said, it was necessary to use a sledgehammer.

Lee’s intervention in FSS reform was timely and his decision to have the Prime Minister’s Office oversee a planned task force was a step in the right direction. Since what needs to be reformed is not just the FSS but the governance of financial regulation, the task cannot be left to the FSS alone.

Regarding the overhaul of the FSS itself, the agency’s besieged chairman, Kwon Hyuk-se, has come up with a set of bold measures. They included an outright ban on FSS inspectors from working for private financial companies after retirement.

Thus far, the FSS has recommended its retiring officials for the post of auditor at financial firms on the grounds that FSS experts are better qualified than anyone else for the job.

But this controversial practice can no longer be justified, as former FSS officials who work as auditors at the troubled savings banks were found to have done nothing to prevent them from running into trouble. If anything, they only worsened the problems by delaying the day of reckoning.

The planned ban is welcome as it will help FSS officials stay away from developing incestuous relationships with financial companies. This in turn may push financial companies toward reforming their business practices.

Another measure called for regular corruption tests on all FSS staff to ensure that poorly rated officials are excluded from positions prone to bribery. The package also included a plan to oblige a wider range of FSS officials to disclose their personal wealth, a requirement currently imposed only on high-ranking officials. These steps will help curb a tradition of graft at the FSS.

As for governance reform, it is necessary to give the Bank of Korea and Korea Deposit Insurance Corp. the right to inspect financial companies. Thus far, the FSS has adamantly refused to give up its monopoly on this power. But it can no longer stick to its stance.

As every cloud has a silver lining, the ongoing crisis of the savings bank industry provides a rare opportunity to reform the regulatory culture of the financial industry. The task force should grab it and usher in a new culture to spur the growth of the financial market.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EDITORIAL : THE AZZAMAN, IRAQ

Iraq working to preempt Qaeda attacks to avenge killing of leader

Iraq has tightened security measures, particularly in restive areas, to foil attacks by Qaeda following the assassination of its leader Osama Bin Laden by U.S. troops in Pakistan, a senior police source said.

The source, refusing to be named on security grounds, said the measures were the toughest in the provinces where al-Qaeda is still active.

“We should not give them (al-Qaeda) any chance to carry out revenge attacks for the killing of their leader Osama Bin Laden,” he said.

“We must close all doors in their face,” he added.

He said more security and military forces were deployed in the Provinces of Anbar and Diyala, still believed to be the group’s strongholds.

Al-Qaeda is reported to be active in the Province of Nineveh, of which Mosul is the capital, and the Province of Salahudeen, of which Tikreet is the capital.

In another development, U.S. and Iraqi troops, in a joint operation, have arrested three senior Qaeda operatives in Diyala, the same source said.

“A special airborne Iraqi-U.S. joint force arrested three al-Qaeda elements in Baaquba,” the source said. Baaquba is the capital of Diyala Province.

EDITORIAL : THE BANGKOK POST, THAILAND

Questionable spending spree

Cabinet's final spending spree on Tuesday was typical of Thai politics. The Abhisit Vejjajiva government was not the first to carry out this ugly practice and it will not be the last. Several previous governments unabashedly did so. Hence such Thai phrases as thing thuan (dropping of lances), ploy phi (setting free the ghosts) or tay krajard (emptying the baskets) have been coined and used to describe this final act of splurging.

In a marathon meeting which began at 8am on Tuesday and lasted till 2am the following day (allowing for an afternoon break from 1pm to 7pm), the cabinet endorsed more than 200 on- and off-agenda proposals and issues worth almost 100 billion baht in budget.

Indeed, it was an extraordinary feat by the government as far as the number of issues, proposals and projects was concerned.

Setting aside the quantitative achievement, one may justifiably wonder whether the hard-working Cabinet had exercised discretion or proper consideration before giving their approval, especially for multi-billion-baht projects. Or did they merely give the ministries concerned the benefit of the doubt and simply glanced through most of their proposals or projects? Considering the number of projects approved and the time it took to approve them, the latter seems to have been the case.

Some of the projects approved by Cabinet are populist in nature and do not need to be implemented in a rush. These include the 25-billion-baht housing loan scheme for first-time home-buyers, to be implemented by the Government Housing Bank; and the 20% pay rise for officials of tambon and provincial administration organisations, provincial councillors and Bangkok councillors.

The opposition Pheu Thai Party has cried foul over these projects and will ask both the Election Commission and the National Counter Corruption Commission to take a closer look, to see whether these approvals amount to vote-buying.

One particular project appears suspicious and should be scrapped. That is the 200-million-baht public relations budget sought by the Labour Ministry, supposedly to inform the public about the benefits of the social security scheme. The amount is comparatively small but the question is why is it needed. Why can't the Labour Ministry let the Public Relations Department and the state-run television stations do the publicity for free, with the Labour Ministry simply supplying the information?

There certainly are projects worthy of the expense and a quick cabinet decision on these projects was necessary. A case in point is the substantial increase in special compensation for provincial waterworks staff in the strife-torn deep South, from 2,500 baht to 5,000 baht a month. Because of the dangers posed by Islamic extremists and the high risk involved in their job, these workers deserve the pay rise, which will also serve as an incentive for them not to leave the region for safer places.

The most important point about this traditional practice of a cabinet's final spending spree is that it is completely wrong _ morally, financially and economically. Taxpayers' money is supposed to be used wisely and productively on projects which have been carefully thought out, and are for the public's benefit. Cabinet ministers, the prime minister in particular, are duty-bound to see that the projects are worth the expenditure. Rushing them through, especially those projects which would be binding on the next government, is an act of sheer irresponsibility.

EDITORIAL : THE INDEPENDENT, IRELAND

Glimmer of hope in Exchequer figures

NEVER prophesy, especially about the future. No sooner had the Department of Finance reduced its forecast for growth in the economy this year than the tax revenues for April suggest it might have spoken too soon.

The mandarins of Merrion Street would be delighted to be proved wrong on this one. Nobody is going to make too much of one month's figures, but officials were pleasantly surprised by the underlying strength of tax revenues last month, especially the critical one of income tax.

It is critical, not only because it is the major source of government revenue, but because it is an early, if rough, guide to employment and incomes.

Last month's figures were boosted by bank payments of DIRT tax on savings, but even allowing for this, income taxes seem to be more than €60m better than expected.

There are always two figures in the Exchequer returns -- what actually happened, and what was expected. The penal nature of last year's Budget is seen in the fact that we are paying 20pc more income tax than last year, thanks to cuts in credits and the arrival of the new social charge. The fact that this is more than expected creates at least the hope that the Budget has not had as depressing an effect as it might have done.

There was a good showing by VAT as well. It is still 3pc lower than expected at Budget time last December, but that is a sharp improvement on the 5pc shortfall in VAT and income tax at the end of March. That shortfall will have been one reason behind the downgrade to the economic forecast.

The irony is that the revenue target which was beaten in April was based on the original 1.7pc growth forecast. Had it been the revised 0.7pc growth, revenues would be significantly ahead of target. It is early days, but any continuation of the trend could see the Government coming close to the original Budget target for borrowing of €17.7bn.

That would be a saving of €500m on the revised estimate, which is still real money, but the effects could go far beyond that.

Finance Minister Michael Noonan had an unmistakably jaunty air commending these figures to the Dail. He knows that any growth beyond one per cent this year would lend weight to the official forecasts of a noticeable recovery from next year, and could begin the slow process of restoring confidence in the country's prospects.

We shall have to wait and see, but at least there is something to wait for.

Probe called to account

THREE cheers for Mr Justice Peter Kelly in his complaints about the length of time it it is taking to investigate allegations of wrongdoing at Anglo Irish Bank. The way things are going, some of those convicted of misbehaviour in other countries will have paid their debt to society before any Irish ones are even held to account.

Matters have been complicated by the fact that there are two investigations: one by the Garda and one by Paul Appleby, the Director of Corporate Enforcement. This may not have been a good idea in the first place. The Garda investigation into possible criminal actions must take precedence and it complicates matters to have the two taking place together.

Nor is it likely that the law would let Mr Appleby take action against anyone facing criminal prosecution. Having said all that, it is still a shock that some 50 people have yet to be interviewed in this investigation.

It certainly seems to have shocked Mr Justice Kelly. He is right to be alarmed at the apparent inaccuracies in what he has already been told. Last year, the ODCE version was that one part of the investigation would be completed by the end of the year. This week's version is that it is "90pc complete" but a number of important interviews have yet to be conducted.

There will be another kind of shock at the revelation that a number of those involved in these affairs are refusing to cooperate. If that is not a breach of the law, it ought to be. In the meantime, there seems no reason why they should not be named so that all can see who refuses to talk about matters which so damaged the country's reputation, after its finances had been destroyed; in many cases by the same people.  

EDITORIAL : THE AUSTRALIAN, AUSTRALIA

Don't cry for Osama bin Laden

 

An illustration by Jon Kudelka. Source: The Australian

JUSTICE and the law are not always congruent and in the haze of war the law of self-preservation is likely to prevail

The Australian understands those who would have preferred for Osama bin Laden to be captured and forced to account for his crimes. It is true that we must demonstrate a strong commitment to standards of justice rather than descend towards the barbarity of those who attack our values. Yet much of the legalistic condemnation of bin Laden's death smacks of pointless moral posturing.

Only those in the Abbottabad compound, amid the darkness, gunfire and fear, can know exactly how it unfolded. But it is hardly surprising that, without an immediate and obvious surrender, bin Laden was shot. Who among us would take the time, delay the trigger, and thereby risk their own life or jeopardise this vital mission? The discussion of alternative responses from the comfort of our lounge rooms is absurd. The frankness of US authorities in revealing bin Laden was not armed underscores the accountability of their system and should silence all but the loopiest conspiracy theorists.

Besides, there are pragmatic reasons why we are all better off without bin Laden surviving to create an international propaganda circus that would have endangered even more lives. We could have expected howls of protest over incarceration at Guantanamo Bay as the human rights lawyers demanded nothing less than an American civil trial. But bin Laden's imprisonment would also have provided an ongoing rallying cry for terrorists in Afghanistan and further afield, possibly leading to the loss of more soldiers' lives. And fears would have been raised around the world about his fanatical supporters attacking or taking hostage Americans, Australians or any westerners, to keep the terror alive. In the pragmatic ways of the world, not the abstract realm of attention-seeking human rights lawyers, it is a good and just thing that bin Laden is dead.

As for the spontaneous American celebrations, denounced on the ABC as bloodlust, many of us would shy away from such spectacles. But who would begrudge a people who lost almost 3000 innocents, targeted in their homeland for the "crime" of being free, throwing off their blanket of fear and launching a victory dance at vengeance realised and a tyranny ended?

Sovereign wealth fund or bust

GETTING slightly ahead of his Treasurer, Financial Services Minister Bill Shorten has declared that questions about a sovereign wealth fund and what shape it should take are worthy of debate.

Strangely, he then goes on to say such a conversation is premature. On the contrary, The Australian believes the sooner we analyse this initiative the better because, as Mr Shorten recognises, it would require "complex regulatory" discussions.

Repairing the budget and retiring debt are certainly the primary fiscal tasks confronting the Gillard government but the long-term challenge of managing the resources boom looms large. Wayne Swan has been all too eager to talk up the challenges of the two-speed economy and provide a jaundiced post-mortem on how the previous government failed to squirrel away enough of the previous resources boom. His duty then must be to present a plan to ensure the current mining boom is properly managed for the benefit of later generations.

Mr Swan's only answer until now, supported by Mr Shorten, is to focus on channelling future revenue windfalls into compulsory superannuation, so that more individuals are self-sufficient in retirement and the national savings pool is increased. This is a commendable plan, but only up to a point. The boom will generate at least an extra $30 billion in revenue for the coming financial year and private investment to expand our mining output will top $100bn next year. In other words, the rivers of gold are set to build into something of a flood. There could be no better time to devise a sensible plan to manage the economic consequences.

One of the key purposes of a new sovereign wealth fund, as outlined by opposition frontbencher Malcolm Turnbull, would be to act as a fiscal stabiliser against our increasing reliance on commodity prices. Rather than banking the extra revenues for distant generations, we would be creating reserves to draw on when resources demand or prices fall, dragging down revenue. There would be an element of intergenerational saving but the primary purpose would be the fiscal stabilisation. Private superannuation cannot fulfil this role through a resources boom-and-bust cycle. Such a wealth fund stands out as a crucial economic reform worthy of examination by both sides of politics, lest we ever regret squandering the opportunities of mining boom Mark II. 

Tackling the other deficit: carbon policy credibility

FORGET Tony Abbott's alleged four-letter assessment of climate change for a moment, Prime Minister.

It is the 48-point paradox in yesterday's Newspoll findings that should really trouble you. It found that 78 per cent of voters believe in climate change and most attribute it to human activity. But Ms Gillard's policy response, a carbon tax, is supported by just 30 per cent. The 48 per cent discrepancy is a measure of the credibility gap Ms Gillard has to bridge between now and the next election. Make no mistake; voters have a sound understanding of what is at stake. They do not want the government to jeopardise their prosperity by going out on a limb. But the fact that the science of climate change is so well accepted indicates most would not support climate action.

Voters are clearly angry with the government for its plan to introduce the tax on July 1 next year after Julia Gillard pledged not to do so during last year's election campaign. Voters appear to appreciate what the government's adviser on climate change, Ross Garnaut, said in 2008 -- that Australia, which produces 1.5 per cent of the world's greenhouse emissions, must not get too far ahead of the rest of the world.

The Australian favours a market mechanism as an efficient strategy to alter energy consumption patterns and cut emissions, but there is no compunction for Australia to launch such a strategy before the world's biggest economies and our major trading partners commit to similar action. The Gillard government would be prudent to review the timing of its scheme following the warnings of mining giants BHP and Rio Tinto. Both companies point out that acting before China and the US, the world's largest polluters, would damage Australia's international competitiveness by saddling heavy trade-exposed industries with a "dead weight", which industry groups and trade unions agree will cost jobs and limit prosperity.

The degree of concern about climate change reflected in the Newspoll, coupled with voters' reluctance to support a carbon tax from next year, opens the way for politicians on both sides to explore other viable options, such as the capture and long-term storage of carbon in soil and forests. Sequestration is part of Mr Abbott's "direct action" climate change policy and could also work well with the government's emissions trading scheme, because it is well suited to Australia's vast land mass.

Professor Garnaut sensibly favours land sequestration being linked to carbon pricing. Such a link was absent from the Rudd government's ETS model, but in private senior Labor figures have acknowledged the potential of such an approach. Encouragingly, Professor Garnaut has also pointed out that up to 14 per cent of the carbon permits scheme could be used for agricultural offsets, creating the equivalent of a new wool industry for Australia's agricultural sector.

Ms Gillard purports not to be interested in the political cycle, but she erred in announcing the tax without any detail, leaving the public wondering how much it would cost and giving the opposition a political gift. Much as they oppose the government's carbon tax, the electorate would welcome more effective climate change policies. 

EDITORIAL : THE JAKARTA POST, INDONESIA

Wanted: Pro-people parties

With the general election now three years off, the political climate is heating up every day as politicians begin jockeying for positions, heightening the rivalry. At least three new political parties have registered with the Law and Human Rights Ministry to try their luck in the 2014 elections.

These three are the National Republican Party, the Nasdem Party and the Indonesian Sovereignty Party (PKB Indonesia). Many more are expected to register for screening in the coming year, making the best of Indonesia’s burgeoning democracy.

The question is how serious are they about their participation in the 2014 elections? And how big are their chances at winning, or at least securing seats at the House of Representatives?

The National Republican Party, founded by Hutomo “Tommy” Mandala Putra, the youngest son of the late dictator Soeharto, has taken the public by storm because most people never realized he was planning to form a political party. Tommy was a onetime Golkar functionary, but Golkar moved away from the Soeharto shadow to shed its image of being a legacy of the New Order regime, and to win support from reform-minded voters.

Nasdem is meant to be a political wing of National Democrats, a “social movement” organization led by media tycoon-cum-politician Surya Paloh and the revered Sultan Hemengkubuwono X of Yogyakarta. Nasdem has got dirty looks from such major political parties as Golkar and the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P), which lost their seasoned politicians to the new organization.

PKB Indonesia is a splinter from the National Awakening Party (PKB) founded by the late charismatic Muslim cleric and former president Abdurrahman “Gus Dur” Wahid. Led by his daughter, Yenny Wahid, PKB Indonesia is tipped to steal the show in the 2014 elections thanks to Gus Dur’s charisma, which charmed millions supportive of his unwavering defense of pluralism at the heels of the growing Islamic extremism.

But the struggle to win coveted seats at the House will be extremely tough for any newcomers because the existing political parties have raised the bar so high that it will take formidable resources to attract would-be voters.

Complicating the situation further is the falling public trust in political parties, widely perceived as among the most corrupt institutions along with the House of Representatives, police and the judiciary. The new parties will have to offer more and better programs than those offered by their established rivals.

In notoriously corrupt Indonesia, money reigns supreme in everyday life, and politics is no exception. There is nothing secret about the ways the (politically and financially) powerful use their money to buy everything from votes to loyalty and “justice”. Lately, Indonesia has been witnessing politicians exploiting religious issues such as Ahmadiyah and secessionist Islamic State of Indonesia (NII) movement for personal and political gain.

Keeping in mind that the increasingly well-informed public will only vote for parties that truly defend their interests, we hope that political parties, be they old or brand new, only strive for the interests of the people through democratic means.

Singapore ‘democratic’ sling

When Singapore holds general elections this Saturday, it is not so much an exercise of democracy in the way it is understood by many in the West (or in Indonesia for that matter), but more an exercise of renewing the people’s mandate for the People’s Action Party (PAP).

Even with seven opposition parties, Singapore is a one-party state. PAP has not only won every single election held since 1965, it always did so with an unshakable large majority. In 2006, it came away with 82 of 84 seats.

This year, there are 87 seats at stake, but unlike the last time, there are no more walkover constituencies as the opposition parties have now combined to contest every single district. Watch how the 200,000 young people voting for the first time (about 8.7 percent of the total) cast their ballot papers. There may still be surprises, though do not hold your breath. Although the government is tolerating criticism from the opposition at their rallies or from the disgruntled public through online media, people still do go to jail in Singapore on charges of defamation against government officials.

So, the question to outsiders is why do you bother with the polls at all?

Those who follow Singapore politics agree that the elections provide Singaporeans with a greater degree of freedom in expressing their sentiments. The social media in one of the world’s most wired nations is filled with people griping about PAP shortcomings although expressed in restrained tones.

Elections are still useful for the PAP leadership to feel the pulse of the people. In Singapore’s style of democracy, two-way political communication takes place quite effectively, not only during the elections, but at regular town-hall meetings.

Even with the restrictions in place on free speech, the aspirations of the people still do go through the political channels to the top. Contrast this with new democracies, such as Indonesia, where political communication often breaks down in spite of free speech. Then again, managing a nation of 5 million people is not the same as one with 240 million.

In the end, most Singaporean voters will go with PAP, which is seen as being responsible for turning their country into one of the wealthiest in Asia. A nation that came up with the Singapore Sling cocktail drink is entitled to come up with its own version of democracy.

EDITORIAL : THE DAILY TRIBUNE, THE PHILIPPINES

 

 

Big dip

 

It’s getting worse for Noynoy Aquino, by way of public dissatisfaction rating over his administration’s performance.

The latest survey — actually two months old, as the survey was conducted between March 4 and 7 — showed that the Aquino administration’s net satisfaction rating suffered another dramatic fall, dropping by 18 points from last November’s survey, now getting a net rating of +46, so said Social Weather Stations (SWS) that still rated this, according to its terminology, as “good.”

Reacting to the survey dip, his mouthpieces did a Gloria mouthpiece, dismissing the falling numbers, saying that they are not alarmed at all, stressing that the numbers remain relatively high compared to Noynoy’s predecessors during similar periods of their respective administrations.

What is not being said by Noynoy’s mouthpieces is that drops in previous administrations that occurred during their terms were not that big a drop in a space of a quarter. And not quite dropping in their less than 9 months in office.

But leave the Palace to its denials.

Despite putting up a brave front over the dropping ratings of Noynoy however, it is fairly evident that Malacañang and its principal, are pretty worried over the falling numbers, especially as they know that Noynoy is a creation of the Yellow media and that he and his government survive on propaganda rather than achievements and performance.

The fact alone that over the past few weeks, Noynoy has been trying to project himself — albeit unsuccessfully — as a “hard at work” president, by even coming out and saying that he would have a very busy work week during the Lenten break, visiting airports, seaports and bus terminals yet it was clear that he was just doing it for less than a day and simply for photo ops.

Then too, with news that the US Navy SEALS killed Osama bin Laden, there he went, announcing that he would be convening the security cluster and check on security precautions and even going on an overkill in attempting to portray himself as a quick response leader which was a silly move, given the fact that, as president, he should already have been apprised of the security situation by his intelligence teams. Besides which, in a global terror war, security should be a 24/7 issue, not just when bin Laden and terrorists are killed. Certainly, a security cluster meeting is hardly going to produce anything. Just what is his government supposed to do, especially when the target of the jihadists who may want to avenge the death of bin Laden would be the USA, not the Philippines.

Besides, it is always being claimed by the military and the police that the Abu Sayyaf, which is said to have links to bin Laden, is already a spent force.

Obviously, all this is being done in Noynoy’s bid to erase the already cemented image of his very laidback presidency, and attempting to earn pogi points in the media, is evidence that Noynoy and his Palace boys are worried about their dipping ratings.

Word is even out that Noynoy has hired a big time crisis PR man who has landed a contract for a makeover of Noynoy and the fee he charged is reportedly fantabulous.

Not surprisingly, presidential spokesman Edwin Lacierda expressed confidence that the Aquino government’s performance ratings will improve, saying that the general public has already recognized the efforts made by the administration along key governance issues. That’s bravura.

This is not propped up by the ratings, but Noynoy and his boys can certainly go on dreaming and remain in a denial state, as all this will eventually come back to him in a nightmare.

The fact is, Noynoy’s ratings are expected to fall some more, mainly because he has done nothing by way of resolving the problems the nation faces; he has not done anything by way of bringing down the oil prices — which have risen dramatically due also to the 12 percent expanded value-added tax government imposes. The poor certainly have gotten poorer, and even the middle class is going the way of the poorhouse.

And worse of all, Noynoy, along with his administrators, are utterly devoid of direction and policies.

Instead of focusing on alleviating the plight of the citizenry and its multi-faceted problems, he prefers to spend his time politicking, in between being focused on his computer games.

It won’t be easy to erase Noynoy’s image as a non-achiever, non-performer and non-president.

Lazy is as lazy does.

EDITORIAL : THE NEW STRAITS TIMES, MALAYSIA

Challenging disability

THOUGH the Health Ministry conducts early detection and diagnosis of children with physical, intellectual or developmental disabilities, and the Education Ministry carries out an outreach programme which includes screening children for visual, hearing, speech and other impediments, there is no question that the early intervention campaign by the Association for Wives of Cabinet Ministers and Deputy Ministers (Bakti) would be an added boost. What is clear is that the health, education and welfare agencies would be in a better position to address the needs of the disabled with Bakti's active participation. For one thing, as many of the disabled have not been diagnosed at an early age, any initiative that seeks to identify children with potential disabilities, and make them eligible for treatment, therapy, counselling and other support services, would be beneficial. At the same time, as parental understanding and knowledge of the congenital causes, such as rubella, childhood afflictions, such as poliomyelitis, and other tell-tale signs of disabilities is vital for prevention and early treatment, the more widespread the channels of dissemination, the better it would be.

But as important as it is to make parents more knowledgeable about the physical and psychological symptoms, and more familiar with the range of programmes and financial coverage available for the disabled, what is also vital is to address attitudes. With autism, cerebral palsy, Down's syndrome and other disabilities, there is, unfortunately, a long history of stigma that has caused untold grief and hardship for the families coping with the never-ending task of caring for a disabled child. Though the negative references have now been shorn from formal discourse, having a disabled child is still associated with shame, as Prime Minister Datuk Sri Najib Razak pointed out at the launch of the Bakti campaign in Ipoh on Tuesday. In fact, it would not be at all surprising if the estimated 300,000 disabled who have yet to register with the Welfare Department have chosen not to do so because carrying the disabled identity card carries a stigma that many want to avoid. Indeed, the disabled commonly experience stigmatising reactions. Even when people do not feel uncomfortable around them, they are viewed with pity.

What has to change is this crippling notion that people with disabilities are defective and an affliction. The fact is that the disabled are more than capable of learning, working and contributing to society. Indeed, if we remove the psychological, physical and social barriers that limit their access and mobility, many would cease to be less than able. What they need is empathy and to be empowered.

 

EDITORIAL : THE GUARDIAN, UK

            

 

The Manchester Guardian, born 5 May 1821: 190 years – work in progress

The paper has essentially changed neither its ownership nor its character during its long life

The Manchester Guardian first appeared 190 years ago today. It was a weekly comprising just four pages and priced at a steep 7d (seven old pence), of which 4d went to the government in stamp duty. This was the severest of paywalls, and the initial circulation was just 1,000, soaring to 3,000 by the mid-1820s. Its appearance coincided with the death of Napoleon on Saint Helena, but his passing wasn't mentioned in the paper for several weeks, so slowly did news then travel.

The Guardian was founded by a young cotton merchant called John Edward Taylor in the wake of the Peterloo massacre of 1819, in which soldiers had killed 11 people at a public meeting in Manchester. Taylor was a reformer and religious nonconformist, and he wanted a paper committed to political change but even more wedded to truthful reporting. His prospectus for the paper promised to "zealously enforce the principles of civil and religious liberty, warmly advocate the cause of reform, endeavour to assist in the diffusion of just principles of political economy, and support, without reference to the party from which they emanate, all serviceable measures".

A newspaper, wrote CP Scott on the Guardian's centenary, has a "moral as well as a material existence". The paper has essentially changed neither its ownership nor its character during its long life. Taylor's eager embrace of political reform in 1832; Scott's early advocacy of Irish home rule and opposition to the Boer war; the attempt to warn the world of the threat posed by Hitler; the immediate realisation in 1956 that Suez was a catastrophe; the pursuit of sleazy politicians in the 1990s; the partnership with WikiLeaks to draw back the curtain from the murky world of international diplomacy; and the commitment to opening up journalism in the digital age; they are all much of a piece. The Taylors and Scotts who dominated the first century of the Guardian's life would surely recognise the same ends now being pursued, even if they might be a little surprised by the means.

In March the Guardian was read by the largest audience in its history – more than 49 million unique users, as Scott didn't call his readers. He thought of his paper as a pulpit. Readers today are less taken with sermons. Technology has revolutionised the way news is distributed – but also the ability to amplify, celebrate and harness other voices. The next 10 years – between now and our bicentenary – will see even more rapid and radical changes in the media. It is good to pause and reflect that the things that matter most – truthfulness, free thought, honest reporting, a plurality of opinion, a belief in fairness, justice and, most crucially, independence – do not change.

Fatah-Hamas accord: All eyes on Cairo

It is easy to miss the one event with the capacity to change the scenery in a way more profound than Osama bin Laden's death

Mayhem has become a daily ritual. Rocket launchers pound one town in Libya as a rescue ship relieves the wounded from another; the international criminal court is preparing to issue three warrants for war crimes to Colonel Gaddafi's regime; tanks are deploying in Syria; a president refuses to stand down in Yemen; a clampdown is in full swing in Bahrain; and dissent is welling just below the surface in Saudi Arabia and Jordan. All this now passes for another day in the life of the Middle East. And it is easy in this 24/7 drama to miss the one event with the capacity to change the scenery in a way more profound than Bin Laden's death.

Such an event took place in Cairo yesterday. Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, and Khaled Meshaal, the leader of Hamas, two men who dedicated much of their time in the last four years to undermining each other, met in Cairo to sign an agreement to form a national unity government. The Palestinian president announced the two were turning forever the black page of division. We shall see. The ceremony was delayed over whether the two leaders would appear on the podium together. (In the end they agreed to speak consecutively.) And as for the promise to release each other's prisoners, four more Hamas activists had been arrested in the West Bank only the day before.

The potential of such an accord should not be minimised. It does not lie in what it would do or not do to the peace process. This was killed in inaction long ago – and not by one Israeli government, but by several. Binyamin Netanyahu, the Israeli premier, may plead the collapse of the talks was not his fault, and he was presented with a free gift from Hamas, when its leader in Gaza, Ismail Haniyeh, mourned the death of Bin Laden as an Arab holy warrior. But even if you argue, as Mr Netanyahu does, that recognition of Israel's existence as a Jewish state is the core of the conflict, and not territory or settlements, what sunk the peace process has become an argument for historians, not politicians. There is no plan B, no realistic path of getting such talks back on track. Israel had the most moderate Palestinian leader in Mahmoud Abbas it was ever likely to meet over a negotiating table in several generations and blew it. He left empty handed. Had Mahmoud Abbas been given a serious and imminent possibility of signing an agreement that established a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, with its capital in Jerusalem, and one in which the Palestinian right of return had not been erased unilaterally from the reckoning, Mr Netanyahu might have had a case when he accused his counterpart of walking away from peace. In the end, there was no peace to walk away from. There was the status quo or as Mahmoud Abbas himself put it, the cheapest occupation in Israel's history. Israel's reaction to the Cairo agreement, the holding up of a $89m cash transfer to the Palestinian Authority only rubbed the point home that this status quo is unacceptable. This is, after all, their cash, not Israel's. The degree of dependency may vary, but every Palestinian ultimately lives as hostage to Israel's fiat. This is untenable and has been the daily reality of the so-called peace process. The only path left for Palestinians of all affiliations is to unite, reform and strengthen their leadership. This is what started to happen yesterday.

The Cairo accord could well turn out to be as fragile as the one signed in Mecca four years ago. It can still be undermined in a myriad of ways. But the clock itself cannot be so easily put back. The new factor which will not be changed is Egypt's re-emergence as a major player in the Middle East. No one expected a foreign policy to emerge before a domestic one, least of all before the government itself had been formed. But if Egypt succeeds in projecting its will as Turkey has done, it has the numbers to change the balance of power. It is wholly in the interests of the US and the EU to have a government in Cairo that will keep a peace accord with Israel but not be servile to its interests.

In praise of … the essay

Michel de Montaigne crafted a personal and conversational genre which has been the preferred literary mode of free spirits

With their exams looming, Britain's school and university students are probably more likely to curse the essay than to celebrate it. And with academic tomes getting ever longer while tweets gets ever pithier, the essay may seem like a bit of a relic to many others too – a bit like county cricket squeezed between tests and Twenty 20. Yet it is hard to think of a more modern mentality than that of the man who practically invented the essay nearly half a millennium ago and whose popularity today has rarely been greater, thanks not least to the recent bestseller by Sarah Bakewell. Michel de Montaigne established the essay as a form into which the provisional and the questioning were written from the start. He wrote about the momentary and the accidental, even the banal, rather than the all-encompassing. In doing so he crafted an intensely personal and conversational genre which has been the preferred literary mode of free spirits from Addison to Žižek and Hazlitt to Hitchens. The best essays, like George Orwell's, are tough but not fanatical, delight in the commonplace and ambiguous and can see the world as easily in a ham sandwich as a morning rose. The imminent launch of a new publishing imprint, Notting Hill Editions, specifically devoted to reviving the essay, may be a sign of unmet demand for wise and witty individual voices amid the modern Babel. Exam candidates may long to see the end of the essay. Many others of us, less immediately pressured, would be happy for more of them.