EDITORIAL : THE EL MOUDJAHID, ALGERIA

Le piège de la provocation évité

L´Algérie n´est pas tombée dans le piège de la provocation que voulaient lui tendre les partisans d´une régionalisation de la guerre en Libye. Elle a su, dès le départ, adopter une position de non-implication dans un camp contre un autre appelant à un dialogue entre frères d´un même pays en vue d´une solution pacifique, loin de toute intervention militaire extérieure. Après plus de trois mois de bombardements intensifs qui ont fait déjà des milliers de victimes, des centaines de milliers de réfugiés et des centaines de disparus en haute mer qui tentaient de fuir le terrain des affrontements, rien n’indique que cette guerre, dont l´objectif était, à l´origine, de sauver les populations civiles, va un jour s´arrêter. Les Alliés sont passés depuis la fin de la semaine dernière à la vitesse supérieure avec l´engagement  d’hélicoptères de combat, exactement comme l´ont fait les Américains pour prolonger la déjà longue guerre du Vietnam.
Pendant ce temps, les partisans de la paix multiplient les initiatives dans l´espoir d´éviter l´enlisement durable du conflit libyen. L´Union africaine et l´Algérie proposent un dialogue inter-libyen comme unique voie pour mettre fin à ce conflit et son lot de morts, de ruines et de réfugiés. Apparemment, la position de l´Algérie contrecarrait les plans des partisans d´une instabilité durable de ce pays frère dont certaines puissances convoitent les  richesses pétrolières  et la position géostratégique. C´est sur cette base qu´a été montée une insidieuse campagne visant à calomnier l´Algérie pour son refus de voir les Libyens s´entretuer et leur pays s´engager dans la voie de l´irréparable. La diplomatie algérienne a su garder son sang froid et beaucoup de recul par rapport à cette provocation, sans modifier sa position qui s´est avérée la meilleure pour la sécurité, la paix et l´unité de ce pays voisin, ainsi que celles de toute la région du Maghreb et du Sahel. Les accusations de transport et de financement des activités des «mercenaires» africains se sont avérées une naïve propagande qui n´a pas résisté à l´épreuve des faits sur le terrain.
 Tour à tour, Américains et Britanniques ont rejeté ces accusations sans preuves mais aux desseins évidents de nuire á la crédibilité internationale de l´Algérie. Ces accusations étaient tout simplement trop grossières pour être prises au sérieux y compris par les puissances militaires occidentales qui sont engagées aux côtés des insurgés. C´est cette partie au conflit qui continue de rejeter toutes les propositions de solution  émanant de l´Union africaine et que l´Algérie soutient sans réserve. Si trafic d´armes il y a, c´est celui que les groupes d’Al-Qaeda pour le Maghreb islamique assurent à partir de Benghazi, avec certaines complicités là-bas, pour financer les foyers du terrorisme au Sahel et dans le Nord de l´Algérie. C´est dans ce but que la diplomatie algérienne multiplie ses efforts, selon ce qu´a laissé entendre Abdelkader Messahel, la semaine dernière, sur la base de ce double objectif : faire accepter par les Libyens des deux camps opposés un plan invitant au dialogue, et réussir la conférence sur la lutte contre le terrorisme d’ Aqmi, en septembre prochain à Alger, avec la participation des puissances militaires siégeant au Conseil de sécurité  (Etats-Unis, Russie, France, Royaume-Uni et Chine) aux côtés des pays de la ligne de front, à leur tête l´Algérie qui a donc su adroitement éviter le piège de la provocation visant à l´impliquer dans le conflit libyen et à rompre le prestigieux capital de confiance dont elle jouit au plan international grâce à son expérience en matière de lutte contre le terrorisme.

 

EDITORIAL : THE JERUSALEM POST, ISRAEL

 

Defending the border

THE IDF’S response to Sunday's "Naksa" border protests could not have been much more seriously planned or more cool-headedly implemented.
Talkbacks (1)   News reports – even unconfirmed and dubious ones – that IDF soldiers had opened fire on unarmed Syrian- Palestinian and killed more than 20 of them would normally be likely to arouse the ire of innumerable countries across the globe.

Yet international reactions to the violent “Naksa Day” incidents Sunday near the towns of Majdal Shams on the Golan Heights and Kuneitra in Syria have been relatively subdued. In response to Israel’s determined effort to rebuff attempts by hundreds of Palestinian “refugees” – most of whom were actually born in Syria to families resident in Syria for generations – to overrun the Israeli border in the North, the US State Department issued a statement emphasizing that “Israel, like any sovereign nation, has a right to defend itself” and went on to say that “provocative actions like this should be avoided.”

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon condemned “all actions intended to provoke violence.”

And yet, both the UN secretary-general and the State Department also included in their statements thinly veiled criticism of Israel. The State Department called on “all sides to exercise restraint,” seemingly implying that Israel had not. And Ban referred to Israel’s border with Syria on the Golan Heights as the “area of separation on the occupied Syrian Golan” – not only questioning Israeli sovereignty there but asserting Syrian rights to territories it lost after initiating military offensives on Israel first in 1967 and again in 1973. (Syria rejected outright an Israeli offer to return the Golan Heights in exchange for peace immediately after the Six Day War.)

The US and UN reactions reflected a certain understanding of Israel’s difficult predicament, but also seemed to contain in them the seeds of future tension should incidents like Sunday’s repeat themselves. In the US State Department and, less surprisingly, in the UN, there appears to be a lack of appreciation for the fact that there is precious little Israel can do to prevent a toll of fatalities should its borders come under relentless mass onslaught – short of giving up its right to sovereignty and the right to defend itself.

THE IDF’S response Sunday could not have been much more seriously planned or more cool-headedly implemented. Unlike May 15’s “Nakba Day” incidents, when a small contingent of soldiers lacking proper crowd control devices were taken by surprise and overrun, resulting in over 100 Palestinian breaching the border, this time the IDF was ready. Ample forces were concentrated near Majdal Shams and Kuneitra and supplied with tear gas, stun grenades and rubber bullets. The border fence had been reinforced, trenches dug, minefields checked and remarked. Numerous high-ranking officers were at the scene to provide soldiers with a sense of security and to react quickly to changes on the ground.

Soldiers followed clear rules of engagement: In the first stage of confrontation, potential infiltrators were warned in Arabic with megaphones not to approach the border; if they were not deterred, nonlethal riot dispersal means like tear gas were used; if they continued to approach, warning shots were fired in the air. Soldiers were permitted to aim fire directly at the infiltrators, and only then below the waist, when they actually reached the fence, but not before.

Syrian television, broadcasting with rare openness from the front, claimed over 20 of its citizens were killed by the IDF. This, of course, is the same news outlet, controlled by Bashar Ashad’s ruthlessly violent regime, that entirely failed to report that, on the very same day that Palestinians violently commemorated Israel’s successful defense of its borders against the attack of the combined armies of four Arab countries in the June 1967 Six Day War, over 30 peaceful Syrian demonstrators calling for Assad’s ouster had been gunned down by military forces in the north of the country. Previous Assad atrocities have been just as diligently unreported.

More reliable are IDF reports, issued after an investigation, which found that relatively few live rounds had been fired, that the death toll was likely far lower, and that a number of rioters had been killed when Molotov cocktails that they, the protesters, had been throwing set off an antitank minefield near Kuneitra.

The US State Department’s readiness to uphold Israel’s “right to defend itself” and the UN secretary-general’s condemnation of “action intended to provoke violence” are encouraging. But their criticism of Israeli “violence,” based on highly unreliable information, raises familiar concerns. Do they expect Israel to allow its northern border to be overrun by hordes of “refugees” seeking to annul Israel as a Jewish state?

Referring to Israel’s justified defense of its sovereign borders, in the face of Syrian-motivated provocations, as “violence” will only encourage additional such provocations in the future – in part, as a means of diverting international attention away from atrocities being perpetrated daily in Syria. Unequivocal denunciation of such provocations, on the other hand, accompanied by unequivocal support for Israel’s right to protect its borders with appropriate measures, would help prevent future such incidents by taking away their prime incentive – the delegitimization of Israel.

EDITORIAL : THE DIARIO FINANCIERO, CHILE

 

La oportunidad de Humala

Tal como se esperaba, los mercados financieros reaccionaron con elocuente pánico al triunfo de Ollanta Humala en la segunda vuelta electoral peruana. La caída histórica que mostraron los principales indicadores de la Bolsa de Lima dejan en evidencia que ni la moderación del discurso de campaña del líder de Gana Perú ni su apertura a integrar a figuras moderadas en el gabinete, han sido suficientes como para convencer a los inversionistas de que estamos más cerca de un futuro Lula que de un temido Chávez.


El currículo y la personalidad del presidente electo de poco contribuyen cuando se trata de despejar estas dudas y temores que hoy remecen a los mercados. Sin embargo, son esta misma experiencia e imagen las que otorgan a Humala la oportunidad histórica de contribuir al actual proceso de desarrollo peruano, mediante la aplicación de medidas que aporten a la conformación del sustento social necesario para la consolidación del modelo. En otras palabras, reformas sociales que -dentro de un marco de acción que está rindiendo frutos y atrayendo inversión- aporten a la solución de problemas tan relevantes como la educación, salud, infraestructura y pobreza.

Para ello, no sólo es necesario que el presidente electo conforme un gobierno de concertación, como anunciaron representantes de Gana Perú al término de la jornada electoral. También resulta clave que Humala se aleje de cualquier pretensión personalista y, por el contrario, busque reestablecer el debilitado sistema político y sus instituciones más básicas: los partidos políticos. Que en reemplazo de los rumores que ya mencionan a la futura primera dama como eventual sucesora en la presidencia o del repetido recurso de modificar la constitución para prolongar en el poder a los gobiernos personalistas, se hable del objetivo de convertir a Gana Perú en una fuerza permanente y que también los otros partidos vayan ocupando los espacios de representación.

Después de todo, la propia lógica de la elección dejó en evidencia el efecto que se produce cuando el centro político se atomiza, los partidos políticos dejan paso a los líderazgos personalistas y, como consecuencia, la segunda vuelta termina siendo disputada por los candidatos más radicales, pero obligados a moderar su discurso para captar a ese disgregado voto moderado. Así ocurrió en Perú y en otros países de la región, como Argentina en la primera elección que llevó a Néstor Kirchner a la Casa Rosada.

En definitiva, la institucionalidad económica no es suficiente para conseguir la confianza de los mercados. También se requiere una institucionalidad política, con una estructura lo suficientemente sólida como para posibilitar ese gobierno de concertación que promete Gana Perú. Es lo que Chile ostentó a partir de los años 90 y que hoy aparece amenazado por esa notable pérdida en la calidad de la política y buena parte de sus protagonistas.

EDITORIAL : THE TAIPEI TIMES, TAIWAN

Liang’s ‘olive branch’ is a threat

Addressing the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore on Sunday, Chinese Minister of National Defense General Liang Guanglie (梁光烈) struck all the right notes when he said that China would not become a military threat and would never seek hegemony or military expansion.

While undoubtedly reassuring, that “solemn pledge” by Beijing to the international community was, as is often the case with such proclamations by Chinese officials, more revealing for what it didn’t say.

It is true that China does not have expansionist or imperial designs on its neighbors in the Western understanding of the term. It does not seek to occupy other countries or overthrow governments whose policies it finds disagreeable, nor does it want to impose its own political system on others. In that regard, Beijing has been consistent in its adherence to the principle of non-interference in the domestic affairs of other countries and Liang’s comments were a reflection of that policy from the military.

What he did not say, however, is that Beijing’s concept of expansionism differs from the way it is normally understood and therein lie the seeds of potential future conflict.

Whereas in the West hegemony uses the state as its reference point, Beijing thinks in terms of civilizational rights. In other words, attempts to recreate an unexpurgated historical China cannot, by definition, constitute expansionism, because that sphere already falls — in Beijing’s view — under its jurisdiction.

It is no secret that the “China” to which Beijing lays claim includes Taiwan, Tibet, parts of the Himalayas, the South China Sea and other areas, all of which are contested by other countries. Just as Liang was soothing the diplomats and security experts gathered in Singapore, the Philippines and Vietnam were accusing China of undermining peace and stability over the Spratly Islands (南沙群島).

Despite Liang’s claim that China is 20 years behind the US in military modernization, the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has become a force to be reckoned with in the past decade or so, and one that is perfectly capable of deterring, if not defeating, intruders in its backyard.

Once we factor in the PLA’s asymmetrical approach to warfare, as well as the advantage of fighting on its own turf, the idea that China would represent a formidable challenge to the far more advanced US military is no longer so far-fetched.

While it is technically true that China does not threaten military expansion, it nevertheless has the proven capability — and willingness — to strike distant enemies should its “core” interests be threatened by external forces. In other words, while Beijing does not regard its claims on Taiwan as expansionistic, it has all the means to wage war beyond its shores should war break out in the Taiwan Strait, with targets in Japan or in international waters, for example, well within range of a rising number of ballistic missiles.

In Beijing’s eyes, its rise does not constitute expansionism because contested territories all fall under China’s historical jurisdiction, and as long as its neighbors respect those claims, the region will, indeed, be one of “peace and prosperity.” However, given that most countries do not agree with those claims, China will continue to be seen as a rising hegemon and the risk of conflict will remain undiminished.

EDITORIAL : NINE O'CLOCK, ROMANIA

                  

Improvisation as a system

“The head coach probably hopes that this new deadline will give him the peace of mind he needs, but it is difficult to understand first of all why he fails to take into account, albeit theoretically, the chances that the team still has, and secondly how he can imagine that people will leave him be all that time.”

Head coach Razvan Lucescu’s resignation from the football national team after the first game in recent years in which the team played coherently, showing balance, a well-organized defence and a good offence, a game that reminded us for a few moments of the games that the golden generation played at the World Cup in 1994, should not come as a surprise for those that carefully watch the Romanian world of football and even the Romanian political life.

Although more than 20 years have passed since the collapse of communism, it is easy to see that personal ego trumps general interest even today. From unification of all ideas and actions in the name of “the national interest,” we have fallen to the other extreme in which ego and the visible disdain for others is considered a standard of power, of personality, of “charisma.” Not even well-intended personalities that start off in good faith, such as Razvan Lucescu, son of the great Romanian player and head coach Mircea Lucescu, are immune from this scourge. In the two years that passed since he took over the team, public opinion and the mass-media in particular did not give him a single moment of peace.

From ironic statements such as “daddy’s boy,” to direct insults coming from where he least expected and to indirect attacks coming from the very leadership of the Romanian Football Federation (FRF), the former (and current) Rapid head coach worked in a permanent state of tension, having at his disposal an extended line-up of players whose value was incomparably lower than the value of the “golden generation” whose performances he was asked to emulate immediately. Without having a long and brilliant career behind him, the head coach did not give in and, after two years of work, the results were visible on the pitch. However, instead of being a reason for joy and hope, the game against Bosnia turned out to be nothing but a good opportunity for him to take revenge for all the frustrations and insults accumulated during this time and a new moment of disappointment for us, the fans.

What is the outlook? Not too bad… if we weren’t in Romania. With the professionalism that characterizes it and with which it has astonished us throughout the last 20 years, FRF announced the miracle solution: Gheorghe Hagi. Because we Romanians know how to respect our national values and symbols! Does it matter that the same FRF sacked the same Hagi in 2001 for failure to qualify for the World Cup and Galatasaray had to do the same following the weakest results the team had in recent times?

While Hagi was not a surprise for anyone, the novelty was FRF’s idea to propose Anghel Iordanescu as a “technical director” that would take care of all national teams, including the U21 and U18 teams. FRF once again managed to astonish us, this time with its explanation for the appointment of the two: they were in Bucharest at the time.

It is difficult to say at this moment the role the “technical director” will play at the national team and what his relations with the head coach will be, especially since the two are yet to sign a firm commitment. The certain thing is that the Romanian principle according to which what was done by our predecessors is bad and has to be torn down in order for us to do “the right thing” applies in this case too.

Iordanescu, otherwise the head coach that had the best results in the history of Romanian football (reaching the World Cup quarterfinals in the US in 1994), announced that in case he is appointed technical director the previous goal of qualifying for the EURO 2012 tournament will disappear (!), the new objective: qualifying for the EURO 2016. The head coach probably hopes that this new deadline will give him the peace of mind he needs, but it is difficult to understand first of all why he fails to take into account, albeit theoretically, the chances that the team still has, and secondly how he can imagine that people will leave him be all that time. Like a funny guy stated these days, maybe it would have been better for the qualification objective to be set for the year in which the final episode of the “The Young and the Restless” series will be aired.

EDITORIAL : THE CITIZEN, TANZANIA

We must not take peace for granted

The call by the minister for Information, Culture and Sports, Dr Emmanuel Nchimbi, that Tanzanians should nurture the country’s peace and shun mistrust could not come at a more appropriate time.

He made that call in a statement read on his behalf by the minister for Home Affairs, Mr Shamsi Vuai Nahodha, at a function to mark the peaceful co-existence of people in  the world, organised by the  Ishik Medical and Education Foundation in Dar es Salaam.

He said since the world was now a “global village”, thanks to science and technology, people must learn to live together as one. It is a pity that we have countries neighbouring ours, that are in turmoil, a situation which could overspill to Tanzania.

Ours has, for a long time, been home to refugees fleeing from Congo, Burungi, Rwanda, Uganda and even Kenya, a few years ago. The main cause was animosity in those countries based on differences in tribal and political affiliations.     Happenings in Tanzania since the last General Election have been giving the indication that peace and tranquility that we have enjoyed since independence is being threatened.

We are referring to protest marches in which participants end up being beaten up by the police, in which political leaders are arrested and incarcerated.

The police in Dar es Salaam distanced itself from the action, saying it was simply carrying out a court order. But,  surely, more restrain should have ben exercised, given that Mr Mbowe, chairman of Chama cha Demokrasia na Maendeleo (Chadema), was attending parliamentary committee meetings and preparing for the Budget session.

It is such things, small as they seem, that could mothball into a serious mess that could end up spoiling the reputation of Tanzania as an island of peace in a turbulent continent.We all need to nurture a culture of understanding, love and tolerance if we are to retain the country’s heritage of peace and tranquility.

RAISE RESEARCH BUDGET 

To realise development in an entity or indeed, a country, ample funds should be spent on research. That way, solutions to various problems and insights to the way forward are found.

There is a dearth in research in most African countries, mainly because of limited funds set aside for this key undertaking.In the 2010/11 fiscal year, Tanzania’s 44 public research institutions had a total budget of Sh30 billion, which was too little to undertake such activities accordingly.

The Africa Technology Policy Studies has hinted that despite efforts to establish a number of research and development institutions, research benefits are yet to be fully realised because the policy is hazy.

The East African Legislative Assembly has resolved that the EAC member states should spend at least one per cent of their gross domestic product on developing science, technology and innovations.

That is in tandem with the African Union resolution passed in 2007 to the effect that each member state allocates at least the same percentage to the same course.It is crucial for African countries to put aside more funds for research if they are to attain meaningful development.

It is pointless to claim that resources for research are scarce while a lot of money is embezzled or misused on sideshow activities such allowances and endless seminars.

 

EDITORIAL : THE BUSINESS DAY, SOUTH AFRICA

               

 

Stop moaning about the rand

LIKE star-crossed lovers in a failed relationship, the government and the rand need to get over one another. Ever since the Zuma administration took office, various government representatives in economic posts have complained about the currency exchange rate. This week, once again, Trade and Industry Minister Rob Devies said SA’s manufacturing sector was being undermined by an "overvalued" rand.

Yet everything we have learnt about the rand in the modern era teaches us two iron rules: First, that generally speaking over the longer term, the rand finds a value that is more or less appropriate. And second, that SA is not in a position to set the value of the exchange rate, rendering the debate about its "true" value moot.

In fairness to Davies, it seems as if he was going through the motions, and he did acknowledge, at the very least, the second iron rule. However, the crux of the debate actually lies within the first rule because this is where the disagreement resides. Is the rand in fact more or less fairly valued at the moment? Davies is not alone in making this assertion: importers would probably agree. Exporters probably wouldn’t. Such is the way of the world.

Yet examine the recent data a little more closely. There was a fairly common notion that the rand was "overvalued" because of the carry trade, the cross-border transaction whereby money is borrowed in a country with low interest rates and invested in a country with high interest rates, yielding the differential. Yet, since the beginning of this year, the carry trade has gone quiet, and there has, in fact, been a net outflow of investment from SA’s markets. The rand, however, has generally strengthened even more against the two big trading currencies, the dollar and the euro, during this period. The carry trade is clearly important at certain points in time, but not always.

The other justification for the rand being considered "overvalued" is the notion that SA belongs within a group of countries with "commodity currencies". The rand does tend to track currencies such as the Australian dollar, although it’s currently a bit weaker than the Aussie dollar. Yet this argument is circular. About 40% of SA’s exports are commodities, so if commodity prices are high, then it’s likely the economy will be doing well.

If that’s the case, the rand strength is justified. This is not market perversion; it’s market sense.

The core complaint about the supposedly "overvalued" character of the rand is that it handicaps SA’s manufacturing sector. Generally this is true, but it may be overstated. For example, the sector that outperformed in the most recent gross domestic product tally was the manufacturing sector, which grew 14,5% quarter on quarter, contributing about half of the strong growth rate in the first quarter of this year.

Neither is this unique: the sector grew in three quarters last year, albeit off a low base.

The essential problem is that exporters and the government are seeking a quick fix, and they feel the route to that is through a structurally weaker currency. But it’s more or less impossible, unless you have the great economic heft of a China or a US, to run simultaneously a strong economy and a weak currency.

The easy way to weaken the currency is to weaken the country, and no one wants that.

Instead of moaning about the strong currency, we should be celebrating it. If this is a reflection of the ba lance of good and bad in the economy, it’s a good one. This doesn’t mean there won’t be periods when the currency is totally out of whack. But this is not one of them.

Manufacturing might be hurting a bit at the moment but judging by the state of the global economy, this problem is not going away soon. It would be better to focus on underlying manufacturing prowess, which demands the hard task of skills development, innovation and hard work. That is the sustainable route. Laying blame on someone or something else is the conniving politicians’ way out.

 

Brics looking a little limp

IT LOOKS certain that the five Brics countries will be unable to agree on a single candidate from a developing economy to take over as MD of the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

The five countries in the bloc — Brazil, Russia, India, China and S A — have all said they want an end to the historic tradition of choosing a European to head the world’s biggest lender.

But their failure to coalesce behind a single candidate shows that the Brics are pretty useless in fighting a corner that matters in the global scheme of things.

Some have grandstanded behind a contender in their midst, but with only three days to go to the nomination deadline, not a single Bric name has been formally endorsed.

Even worse, the Brics have been unable to support the only emerging market candidate formally nominated — Mexico’s central bank governor, Agustin Carstens.

A Russian official has said the front runner for the post, French Finance Minister Christine Lagarde, faces "no real competition". And Brazil has said it will support Ms Lagarde on condition that Brazil gets a "strategic position" on the IMF’s board, and that she commits to reforms that increase the weight of emerging market countries at the institution.

The lack of consensus shows that, despite all the fanfare, the Brics bloc is largely a conceptual entity.

It may provide a useful forum to network and make bilateral agreements, but it is evidently not yet a force in the global arena. The one thing it has managed to do is to begin talking about trading with each other in their own currencies rather than dollars.

It may be useful to remember that the bloc was initially just an idea in the head of an executive at investment Bank Goldman Sachs.

The term Bric — which excluded SA — was coined for the four biggest emerging economies with bright prospects for global investors.

Since then, Goldman Sachs has come up with another brand for countries with promising investment prospects — the Next 11.

It groups Bangladesh, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, South Korea, Turkey and Vietnam. Will they too take up the imaginary baton and informally unite. And, we wonder, to what effect?

EDITORIAL : EL UNIVERSAL, COLOMBIA

         

 

Espacio público marino

Cristian Valencia, columnista de un periódico de Bogotá, escribió el pasado fin de semana un artículo advirtiendo sobre la necesidad de defender el paisaje público de la bahía en Santa Marta que, a su juicio, ha sido tomado por la Marina Internacional, con la autorización de la Dimar.

Se queja Valencia de los letreros de “No Pase” que fueron instalados en la mitad de la playa y de la extensión de los tajamares sobre el espacio público de la bahía, asumiendo que era propiedad privada.

Este caso es de interés e incumbencia de los cartageneros porque eventualmente se instalarán aquí marinas como la de Santa Marta, teniendo en cuenta el potencial enorme que este tipo de proyectos tiene para generarle recursos a la ciudad.

El punto central de la discusión que empieza a darse en Santa Marta es el alcance de las autorizaciones que concede la Dimar para el aprovechamiento de las zonas de playa y los terrenos a orillas del mar.

En el artículo 15 de la Ley 768 de 2002, llamada Ley de los Distritos –que establece el régimen político, administrativo y fiscal de Cartagena, Santa Marta y Barranquilla–, se deja en manos del alcalde mayor la atribución para otorgar permisos en relación con la ocupación de playas, previo concepto técnico favorable de la Dimar.

También fija esa Ley las condiciones para declarar áreas del territorio distrital como recurso turístico, con el fin de regular su aprovechamiento y uso en proyectos de explotación turística, entre ellos las marinas.

Es importante que tanto la Administración distrital de Cartagena, como sus autoridades turísticas y portuarias conozcan el proceso seguido en Santa Marta, para que no se repitan aquí los problemas que pudieron dar lugar a la polémica que empieza a generarse en torno a los límites de la concesión otorgada para el funcionamiento de la Marina Internacional.

Al parecer, tal concesión se otorgó sobre una construcción que en los planos tenía bajo impacto visual y ambiental, pero finalmente -según sus críticos- se hizo una obra protuberante y que obstaculiza la visual paisajística de la bahía.

Tanto la Marina Internacional de Santa Marta como las que se proyecten construir en Cartagena traerán beneficios indudables a las dos ciudades, empezando por la creación de empleo, pero es necesario que se clarifique hasta dónde pueden los concesionarios limitar el acceso de la gente a sitios que son tajantemente definidos como imprescriptibles y no sujetos a privatización, y hasta dónde podrían responder las marinas a los dueños de embarcaciones si cualquiera pudiera entrar en ellas.

En Cartagena estaba ocurriendo un caso similar, con un establecimiento autorizado para funcionar en las murallas que intentó restringir el libre paso de las personas a través de ellas.

Las marinas son una inversión que debe dar utilidades, pero también deben ser proyectos integrados a la ciudad donde se construyan, sin impedir el disfrute colectivo del paisaje público, y a es a las administraciones distritales a las que corresponde que así sea, porque tienen facultades para ello, concedidas por la Ley de los Distritos.

EDITORIAL : ASHARQ ALAWSAT, SAUDI ARABIA, published in LONDON

Vigilant minds 2011

 

Although Russia had previously taken a tough stance against the intervention of NATO forces in Libya to support the rebels, the special envoy for the Russian President is expected to arrive today in Benghazi, the headquarters of the Libyan rebels. What is the meaning of this?

The answer simply is that Moscow, as history testifies, will take hard-line positions whenever there is a crisis in our region, however it will soon return to play politics, as they say. In the end, the Russians are acting out of their interests, just as they did with Jamal Abdul Nasser, Saddam Hussein, and others in the region. Moscow has not protected one of its Arab allies, nor has it prolonged the life of their regimes. All Moscow usually does is abstain from voting in the Security Council, which is what it did with regards to Libya recently. However, we are now witnessing the arrival of the presidential envoy in Benghazi, the stronghold of the Libyan rebels, in order to meet with members of the Libyan Transitional National Assembly, whilst the Russian envoy has announced that he will not visit Tripoli, Gaddafi's headquarters!

This should draw attention to the fact that Moscow will always act out of self interest, it will not rush to save a drowning man who refuses to help himself. This matter is significant today, particularly with regards to the debate revolving around Moscow's position, and of course that of China too, and whether they will prevent the passing of a resolution in the Security Council against the Syrian regime. All the facts suggest that they will not use their veto if the Syrian file is referred to the Security Council, especially as the crisis in Syria is continuing without any real solutions offered by the Syrian regime, at least solutions that will appease the masses, or even surprise them, as the Turkish Foreign Minister has said before. The most that Moscow will do, as well as China, is abstain from voting in the Security Council against Syria, then afterwards they will deal with the reality on the ground, as happened in Libya, where the Russian President, following his country's initial hard-line position, has returned to call for Gaddafi to step down from power!

It is suffice here to reflect on two contradictory news items that appeared over the past two days. The Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov announced on Saturday that NATO was unfortunately "sliding towards ground operations" in Libya, following the deployment of British and French combat helicopters for the first time. However, a statement issued by NATO yesterday revealed that fighter pilots from the Russian, Polish and Turkish air forces will participate in a NATO training exercise, lasting five days, carried out over Poland and the Black Sea, under the name "Vigilant Skies 2011". This is the first time that Russian air forces have participated with NATO, the two being former Cold War foes, in a joint training operation to combat "terrorism". These two news items tell the whole story of course!

Therefore, what is greatly needed today in the Arab world is to exercise "Vigilant minds 2011", not "Vigilant Skies", with reference to the Russian military exercises with NATO. We must consider what is going on around us, and recognize that Russia and China are only protecting their interests.

EDITORIAL : THE NIGERIAN TRIBUNE, NIGERIA

CITIZEN AREMU AND THE POLICE

HE was hale and hearty. Took his wife to school as usual on his motorbike. Just a few hours later, the man died — with his hand severely burnt and his back with visible and nauseating wound, which is suspected to have been caused by acid bath — all in daylight with the haggling market din and within the precincts of a police checkpoint. Yet, nobody could provide any information to unearth the cause of this hideous death.

THE graphic synopsis of the last hours of Mr Ayinla Olabamiji Aremu, a retiree of the Nigerian Agriculture and Cooperative Bank (NACB) captures the lurid tale of the unfortunate end of a man described by peers as divinely blessed with ecclesiastic virtues and stoical disposition.

THE deceased, according to reports, dropped his wife at the school where she teaches, around 7.30 a.m., oblivious of the lurking and consuming incubus, but a few hours later, he transited to the great beyond in controversial and horrific circumstances that have remained a real mystery.

THE late Aremu’s body, according to reports, was brought to Adeoyo Hospital, Ibadan, Oyo State by the police, after it was rejected at the University College Hospital (UCH), Ibadan, because they (police) were clueless as to how the man died. At Adeoyo Hospital, however, a doctor insisted that the deceased be undressed as a prelude to accepting the corpse. This request, according to an eyewitness, resulted in open altercation between the hospital authorities and the police, with the medical staff standing their ground. The removal of the shirt on the deceased revealed a gory and unsightly bleached body of the late Aremu. Unfortunately, the police, according to a source, explained that Mr Aremu slumped, thereby dodging the issue of the burns.

THIS extensive burns on the deceased’s body vis-a-vis the explanation of the police, was no doubt a catalyst for the intense suspicion displayed by the family and the public, as to the honest intention of the police in the whole episode.

FOR instance, Mr Aremu’s corpse, according to the police, was found around 9.00 a.m. by the roadside near a police checkpoint at Mapo Hall, Ibadan. A handset including the sum of  N1,000 only, were found on him after a search, and five missed calls were recorded on the phone. This admission, no doubt, appears eloquent and straightforward.

BUT the questions being asked are: Why did the police in their ‘wise’ judgment choose to delay contacting the family till 12.00 noon when the corpse was already taken to the University College Hospital, even when they had in their possession. the telephone numbers of the relatives as enunciated in their own report? Even if it is admitted that the man collapsed, it is pertinent to ask if the fall was through a motorbike accident or did he park his bike before he collapsed, as evidence shows that the motorbike was not damaged? Again, the incident occurred at a police checkpoint, and the bike was taken to the police station for what the police will call a “protective custody,” why did the police deny the seizure of the bike in the first instance, until the deceased’s cousin brought evidence to challenge the police denial?

WITH the brutal burns all over the body of the deceased, why have the police remained passive in questioning one or two persons at the point of incident? These and other issues are poignantly agitating the minds of the public. We now call on the police to expeditiously swing into action and unravel the mystery behind the death of Mr Ayinla Olabanji Aremu. It is an open secret and we hope that the police themselves are not unaware, that the public perception of them is at the lowest ebb. This newspaper, some months ago, devoted an editorial to eulogise a hardworking police officer, whom we even recommended for a national honour for his passionate and positive contributions to the skill acquisition and therefore better life for orphans. This, we say, to show that we are not in the least, trying to be judgmental on an issue that is already in the public court.

WE need to say that the current self-exculpatory tactics of the police can only inflame the widespread scepticism about the police intentions. Justice should not only be done, it must also be seen to be done as justice delayed is justice denied.

EDITORIAL : THE OUTLOOK, AFGANISTAN

                 

 

More Rapid Pullout Than Expected

In a new report on the US Afghan mission, the New York Times on Monday June 06, 2011 said that "President Barack Obama's national security team is contem plating troop reductions in Afghanistan that would be steeper than those discussed even a few weeks ago, with some officials arguing that such a change is justified by the rising cost of the war and the death of Osama bin Laden".

The report clearly demonstrated the fear that the exhausting war against terrorism in Afghanistan has left the contributing countries no more patience to see their money spent and their soldiers dying on the ground for a gloomy perspective. This is high time for the Afghan government to get a move on to find the necessary political determination to end militancy and build the capacity to aptly handle the duty once the international allies are gone. As the clock is ticking to announce the withdrawal deadline, these last moments are too vital for winning or losing the war and getting the mission accomplished. However, as ever, violence continues harassing people's lives and downplaying achievements in the country. The perspective of peace, development and stability remains erratic here. Fighting a fatiguing war, the government is yet too weak to stand on its own.

Following hard days in the recent decades, Afghans have got a clear outlook of how the country will handle the problems once the international forces make a complete withdrawal. They have stayed here since a decade and have managed the overall process. Only a month before the withdrawal process will kick off, the government of president Karzai is hesitant on its capability to accurately manage things after the pullout. A number of NATO officials share the same concern and have frequently given warnings on a premature withdrawal. But the intolerant calls for a complete pullout suggests that western nations are putting even more pressures on their governments to take troops home as Al-Qaeda's mastermind has been killed.

Reports said that as of this week, at least 1,493 members of the U.S. military had died in Afghanistan as a result of the US-led operation in Afghanistan in 2001. The human loss comes in addition to the huge amount of money spent on troops fighting here. US official accounts say the annual cost for each single soldier serving on the ground has hit a million dollars. This, amidst the hard times for US economy, can serve as the biggest pressure on Obama's administration to start bigger withdrawal as soon as military officials confirm the timing. So, there would be the need for a thorough review of the Afghan government's preparedness to take over the mission. Nonetheless, indications say that President Karzai doesn't seem agreeing that his government can fulfill the job as expected.

Real Source of Information

ISAF says, the local Afghans are now turning against Taliban and Al-Qaida. They cooperate more than before by providing information about insurgents. That is good news as it means the public outreach programs launched by ISAF and Afghan government have started giving results. Success in Afghanistan seems to be improbable to achieve without winning the trust of the people. The factor that has been widening the gap between people and government and its western backers, is civilian killing. Despite that, if the number of people cooperating with security forces is increasing, it can be deemed a positive progress.

The reporting by local Afghans about suspicious people would result in prevention of terror attacks and would save lives of many Afghans. In an Afghan society, it is very difficult for security forces to recognize the insurgent who hide among civilian population wearing clothing similar to that of local people. It is the common Afghans who have better knowledge about people's activities in their districts. Therefore, they are important source of gathering useful information of insurgent's hideouts.

Public awareness programs must continue. Still the Taliban have many people on their side. Taliban preaches against foreign presence in Afghanistan, tries to motivate common Afghans towards fight against westerners and do whatsoever it can to recruit more people into its ranks. This process will continue for many other years. It is necessary to open the minds of people and make them clearly distinguish between a democratic system and Taliban's imposed so called sharia government.

The increasing trend among people to cooperate with government also indicates that Afghans are tired of long term conflicts and fights. Now they want peace and harmony to prevail in their lives. Also, majority of Afghans are in favor of long term international presence in their country. That is because withdrawal of international community without having fixed major issues here, would result in further destruction of Afghanistan which is neither in benefit of Afghans nor the world.

Govt. Fails to Spend or Not Willing to Spend?

According to reports, in the previous fiscal year, the government of Afghanistan has been able to disburse $937 million or 40 percent of the total $2.3 billion developments funds it had on hand and in control. Therefore, in the current FY budget, the development budget has been cut by 40 percent. With this low budget execution rate, the government of Afghanistan complains of having control over lesser portion (20 percent) of the total funds donated, albeit this concern was addressed in the London Conference on Afghanistan in January 2010. Based on the commitments made in the conference, 50 percent of donor funds would be channeled through the system of Afghan government by early 2012, provided implementation rate is increased and corruption is controlled.

The government maintains that the biggest hurdle to bettering execution rate is the deteriorated security situation. But most of the development funds go to the most insecure provinces of Afghanistan where, at current, numerous development projects are underway. In the last decade, the concentration of government and its national backers have been on these provinces. Unlike that, the secure provinces, such as those in the center of Afghanistan, have been kept deprived and very little or no development is observable.

In Bamyan, for instances, no development work has taken place throughout the last decade. Although it deserves the right of being on the priority list of government, the highways connecting Bamyan to center and other provinces have remained rough and tough. The popular, Band-e-Amir in Bamyan which has given the status of first national park of Afghanistan has not gained any attention. A month ago the people of Bamyan protesting the lack of attention from government acclaimed a donkey for its service. They also put a big lantern at a city roundabout for being deprived of electricity in this modern age.

Like Bamyan, there are so many other provinces that have remained out of government and international attention, despite being the most peaceful regions. If insecurity is the major cause of low execution rates of development projects, why does not the government shift them to secure provinces of Afghanistan?

EDITORIAL : THE KHALEEJ TIMES, UAE

Syria in scope

Syria’s troubled political front is already mired in violence and bloodshed with the situation escalating rapidly beyond control.

At this juncture it may now face additional pressure from the nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, IAEA.  A meeting of the IAEA is currently underway to determine Syria’s alleged illicit nuclear activity. The conclusion being drawn now is that the suspected nuclear site at Deir Alzour destroyed by Israel in 2007 may have been a nuclear reactor, a fact denied 
by Damascus.

The question is why is this being brought up now, especially when Syria’s relations with United States, prior to the eruption of protests across the MENA region were on the mend. Syria is a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, (NPT) and thus has a right to enrich its fuel for civilian nuclear energy — non-military use.  Considering the long-standing trust deficit with  the western states and animosity with Israel, Syria has been in the eye of the storm for long. The special relations the Syrian government of President Bashar Al Assad enjoys with Iran has further alienated it from the rest of the 
world community.

There are contending opinions among the IAEA members regarding Syria’s nuclear posture, with some defending its greater openness and cooperation and others blaming it for not allowing access to certain cites in recent years.  But the issue of whether Syria is pursuing a covert military nuclear programme at this point may well be lost given the bigger stakes at play.

Assad’s regime is under a serious threat from opposition groups who have despite use of all-out state force have stuck to their guns, demanding the ouster of the ruling setup. The growing number of deaths, arrests and use of brutal tactics against the protesters has set in force a vicious cycle.  Ironically, any reforms and concessions by the government in order to appease the masses has only backfired. The people have outright rejected the proposed changes, saying they have come too late. The inability of the government to toe a single policy and implement the promised reforms has rendered the whole process to be a mock exercise.

It is feared that further instability in Syria may well start a bigger regional conflagration, one involving neighbouring Israel and even Iran. Particularly disturbing is the rising number of civilian casualties of the Syrian protests. Something must be done on an immediate basis to start talks with the opposition groups in order to end the instability and work out a negotiated settlement for the future of 
Syrian politics.

Going over the Golan

Fissures in the Middle East are exploding. The clashes on the Golan Heights border town, in which Israel used force to disperse Syrian protesters, were not an isolated incident.

This could become an order of the day as the Arab population in the conflict zones is in a state of flux. Syrians who are facing the barrel of the gun have been trying to sneak into the bordering countries, and the recent clashes on the Lebanese border are a case in point. However, this clash in the Golan Valley is different from the perspective that people here chose to stage a rally to defy the artificial lines of demarcation, and to vent their anger against Israeli occupation of their territory. The event coincided with the 44th anniversary of the 1967 Middle East war and henceforth Tel Aviv’s encroachment of the strategic heights. Though it is untenable to believe that unarmed protesters could pose even an iota of challenge to the Israeli might, it goes on to prove the simmering unrest that has not been addressed for decades, and how serious this could turn out to be.

The 300 or so odd Syrian agitators are just a stark reminder of geopolitical upheavals in the making, and which are getting compounded this time around with unrest at home and on the international front. With volatility in the region on the rise, it seems to be a perfect time for addressing the inevitable. US President Barack Obama has made a strong point by advising Israel to go back to the borders of 1967, and make permanent peace with its Arab neighbours. The fact that none of the Middle East nations who have a territorial dispute with the Jewish state have objected to the new roadmap should be read as an encouraging and feasible route to peace and security. Israel neither has any moral locus standi nor any more rabbits to pull from its hat in confronting this new equation. Trading land for peace is sine qua non and cannot be dispensed with. The sooner it is done, the better. At the same time, it would be futile for Damascus to play to the gallery, especially at times when a serious uprising for fundamental rights is raging right under its nose. Sympathising with the Palestinians is justified but not before putting to rest the concerns that Syrians nurse on their own turf. Going over the Golan shouldn’t merely be a stunt. Israel can best be confronted when Arab countries are on the same wavelength and without any skeletons in the cupboard.

 

EDITORIAL : THE TODAY'S ZAMAN, TURKEY

               

 

Why are diplomats free to abuse in America?

WASHINGTON —- Watching Dominique Strauss- Kahn plummet from managing director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to criminal defendant, one could be forgiven for believing that diplomats do not get away with crimes committed in the United States. But one would be wrong.

Strauss-Kahn had functional immunity as head of the IMF, so only acts that fell within his official duties were covered. But if Strauss-Kahn had been a diplomat, even a low-ranking attaché, this story might have been quite different. Envoys posted to the United States, like their American counterparts posted abroad, enjoy full diplomatic immunity under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. But in almost all cases, this immunity translates into impunity when those diplomats commit crimes. Nowhere is that impunity more apparent than in abuse of foreign nationals brought to the United States to work as servants in diplomatic households. Diplomats serving in the United States can bring domestic servants into the country on visas available only to diplomatic personnel. And while the diplomats sign contracts with the workers promising compliance with all US labor laws, gross violations are not uncommon. The Freedom Network, a coalition of anti-trafficking organizations, reports that dozens of domestic workers employed by diplomats in the United States have made allegations of rape, sexual assault, forced labor, involuntary servitude, labor law violations and human trafficking against their employers. The Government Accountability Office cited 42 abuse cases in a 2008 report while acknowledging that the cases were probably underreported. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a petition in 2007 to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights on behalf of six domestic workers who alleged their diplomat employers abused them in the United States. None of these cases can be found on a criminal docket. In each instance, the diplomat has walked. Take the case of Badar al-Awadi, formerly the third secretary at the Kuwaiti Mission to the United Nations. He and his wife brought an Indian domestic worker to the United States in 1996 to care for their children and serve as a housekeeper. In a civil complaint filed in federal court in New York, the domestic worker alleged that she ran away after enduring four years of forced labor, rape and mistreatment by her employers. The plaintiff first filed in 2002, and the court dismissed her case without prejudice in 2005 because of diplomatic immunity. She refiled in 2006, and the case is still pending. Al-Awadi did not face prosecution in the United States; nor was he punished by his employer. Rather, the Kuwaiti government hired a prominent law firm to defend him in the civil case -- in court filings, he has denied the allegations -- and then promoted him. He is currently Kuwait’s ambassador to Cuba. Or consider the case of Alan Mzengi, the former minister plenipotentiary for consular and social affairs at the Tanzanian Embassy in Washington. In a lawsuit filed in federal court, a young woman alleged that Mzengi trafficked her into the United States for forced labor. Upon arrival, her complaint stated, she was stripped of her passport, forbidden to leave the house and subjected to 16-hour days as a nanny/housekeeper without any payment. The Justice Department did not pursue the case, but even if it had, Mzengi’s immunity protected him from prosecution. I serve as pro bono counsel to the victim in the Mzengi case. She obtained a $1 million default civil judgment against Mzengi and his wife, after both defendants failed to respond to the lawsuit. A federal judge, after hearing the victim testify, called the Mzengis’ conduct “heinous” and found that the victim was “a prisoner” in the defendants’ home. Mzengi -- who tried to reopen the judgment and denied the allegations -- simply left the United States. According to Time Magazine, Mzengi now serves as an adviser to the president of Tanzania. While the US government can request that the diplomat’s home government waive immunity, such requests almost never occur. On the rare occasions they do, the other state declines. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton raised the issue of diplomatic trafficking in a Cabinet-level meeting Feb. 1. She declared, “Whether they’re diplomats or national emissaries of whatever kind, we all must be accountable for the treatment of the people that we employ.” As a start, the State Department should suspend certain governments from the privilege of bringing domestic workers into the United States. The Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 requires the secretary of state to suspend countries from the special visa program if there is credible evidence of abuse of domestic workers and where the mission is found to have tolerated abuse. Tolerance is left undefined in the statute, but multiple allegations in one mission speak volumes. Kuwait faces three federal civil lawsuits alleging trafficking, forced labor, physical abuse and exploitation of domestic workers by diplomats. Two of those cases involve allegations of rape. The judgment against Mzengi, the Tanzanian diplomat, remains unpaid. Earlier this year, the Tanzanians made a settlement offer designed more to mollify the State Department than to compensate the victim. In short, tolerance of abuse remains the norm, and Tanzania and Kuwait fall squarely under the 2008 law. Both should be suspended without delay. Like the victim alleging sexual assault in the Strauss-Kahn case, women abused and exploited by diplomats serving in the United States deserve justice. While a wrist slap to their embassies through visa suspension is hardly an end to impunity, it is a good place to start.

EDITORIAL : THE NEW ZELAND HERALD, NEW ZELAND

National needs to put the economy first

The Prime Minster says National will put work requirements for social welfare at the centre of its election campaign this year. What a pity. The National Party worries about work-shy beneficiaries every year. This election could be about more constructive subjects.

When John Key won the party's leadership he had high hopes of taking the economy to a higher level of wealth. By the time he won the last election the country was in a recession aggravated by the global financial crisis.

The past three years have been dominated by the need to assist the recovery as well as deal with a level of state spending that left him facing deficits for a decade.

Inevitably, the economic "step change", as he used to call it, has been on the backburner. But not entirely forgotten. Contracts have been awarded for a fibre-optic cable network to 75 per cent of the population and a rural broadband service.

Personal and company income taxes have been reduced by an increase in the GST rate. Efforts have been made to assess more of the country's mineral potential, though the Government has backed down on mining any part of the conservation estate and it faces Maori resistance to seabed oil drilling.

But the state of the economy remains favourable for the direction the Government wants to set. Commodity prices are high, domestic property is not attracting new investment. Households, farmers and business are reducing debt. Developing countries are enriching their diet. The stage could not be better set for investment in countries that produce food.

This should be the centrepiece of National's case for re-election. It can turn foreign investment interest to advantage, encouraging New Zealanders to invest in themselves as keenly as the Chinese and others may do. If it is re-elected it will offer citizens shares in state-owned electricity and gas production, and Air New Zealand.

It will go into the election with a considerable store of credibility and good will, which it could build on with positive and practical proposals to improve national productivity and give the voters a vision of progress.

Why, then, would it want to run a campaign that would suggest its primary mission in a second term will be to make sure beneficiaries are not bludging? It is not as though it is going to be as harsh as its Welfare Working Group, which recommended solo mothers who have a baby when already on the benefit should have to look for work once the baby is 14 weeks old.

The working group's report was made public hours before the February earthquake in Christchurch. The report has been overshadowed by that event and may deserve the closer attention National's election campaign could give it.

The welfare system is clearly permitting a certain amount of work evasion, as evidenced by the numbers that migrated to the sickness benefit once dole recipients had to accept reasonable offers of work.

But it is hard to see that much would be gained from the working group's basic proposal to replace all benefits with a single Jobseeker Support payment, paid at the rate of the dole, with supplements for sick and disabled beneficiaries and sole parents. It is not the beneficiaries who need to be tested so much as the doctors who are certifying them.

But whatever work tests National adopts for the election, the policy will merely enable Labour to highlight unemployment. The time to tackle the large numbers on the sickness benefit is when the economy is running close to capacity and labour shortages are appearing. The Government would do much better in November to put the economy first.

EDITORIAL : THE NATIONAL POST, CANADA

            

 

The last big-spending budget

When Finance Minister Jim Flaherty introduced the Conservative government's original 2011 budget on March 22, the Tories were leading a minority House rife with rumbling about a possible election. While Prime Minister Stephen Harper denied wanting to go to the polls, Mr. Flaherty's offering suggested otherwise. Modest in its deficit-cutting ambitions, it clearly targeted key Tory voting groups: families, seniors, homeowners and rural Canadians. The Finance Minister refused all possible compromise, a gesture that, coupled with the opposition's appetite for a vote, set the stage for the dropping of the writ four days later.

That budget is back, with a few changes. The first amendment is welcome, and long overdue: phasing out public per-vote subsidies to political parties. This will not only save taxpayers $27million per year, but will end a perverse situation whereby Canadian taxpayers have provided financial support for the separatist Bloc Québécois, which would have otherwise still continue to collect $1.8-million per year despite having only four MPs in the House of Commons. As we have written in this space before, political parties are not government agencies; since they purport to reflect the will of the voters with their platforms, they should be required to get their money from those same voters.

Another change is less justifiable: $2.2-billion for harmonization of the Quebec sales tax in 1991. While other provinces, including B.C., Ontario and New Brunswick, also struck deals with Ottawa, unlike Quebec they gave up control over their sales tax programs to the federal government. Meanwhile, Quebec continued to benefit from generous federal equalization payments. As Niels Veldhuis, senior economist at the Fraser Institute, puts it: "We're ... providing compensation for something they did in their own interests. A transfer doesn't act as an incentive if it's done 20 years later."

To the extent this $2.2-billion was forked over to dampen Quebec nationalism (the usual reason cited to justify such "asymmetric" treatment), it was entirely unnecessary. As the election result showed, separatism is unpopular these days; even the PQ have descended into bickering this week. To the extent there is still a Quebec nationalist spirit worth channeling in Ottawa, the NDP has gone to embarrassing lengths to channel it. The Tories should leave them to it.

The new version of the 2011 budget also adjusts the federal government's deficit projections. In fiscal 2010-11, Ottawa now is expected to run a deficit of $36.2billion, $4.3-billion less than previously estimated. But its deficit in 2011-12 will clock in at $32.3billion, $2.7-billion more than predicted. One of the main contributors to that increase is, of course, the aforementioned HST deal with Quebec.

Finally, while the budget forecasts do not incorporate the government's election promise to balance the books in 2014-2015, as opposed to 2015-2016, Mr. Flaherty has promised the government will do so through a Strategic and Operating Review by which it proposes to find $11-billion in savings over three years. According to Mr. Flaherty, this will require cutting 5% in program spending, a fairly modest reduction. The budget does not provide any details of where the cuts will be made, and we are skeptical such cuts will ever come. Every incoming government makes vague promises about trimming waste -and few are those that actually do any trimming.

Considering this government's record, scaling back spending will not come naturally. When Mr. Harper took office in 2006, the government enjoyed a $13.8-billion surplus. Two years later, the red ink started to flow, with federal debt as a percentage of GDP rising from 29% in 2008 to 35% in 2010. Some of this was due to revenue shortfalls caused by the 2008 financial crisis and its aftermath. But most of it was the result of massive, politically motivated spending increases.

The election is over, and the largesse now has to end. While the Tories must respect their promises to voters, which include home-renovation credits, bigger benefits for seniors and tax credits for some caregivers and parents, they should no longer think of creative ways to spend taxpayers' money. They should now focus on austerity, taking a page from the Liberals' playbook during the 1990s. Budget 2011, originally crafted within the confines of minority governance, won't be the test of this government's resolve, but Budget 2012 will be.

EDITORIAL : THE KOREA HERALD, SOUTH KOREA

Naval buildup

With the operational deployment of its second Aegis-class destroyer, the 7,600-ton Yulgok YiYi, in the East Sea last week, the Republic of Korea Navy has significantly increased its defense capabilities. The addition of the Yulgok YiYi means that the Navy now has 11 destroyers of 3,000 tons or larger defending the seas off the three coasts against enemy intrusion. In early 2013, they will be joined by a third Aegis-class destroyer, the 7,600-ton Seoae Ryu Sung-ryong, now under construction.

An Aegis-class destroyer has a powerful integrated naval weapons system that uses state-of-the-art computers and radars to track multiple enemy targets, numbering up to 1,000, and destroy them. Currently, the naval forces of the United States, Japan, Spain and Norway in addition to South Korea operate Aegis-class warships.

Linked up with the Navy’s first Aegis-class destroyer, the Sejong the Great, the three large, high-performance warships will establish a foolproof air defense network over the Korean waters from 2013, according to Navy officers. They compare the advancing capabilities of the ROK Navy with North Korea’s more numerous but largely dilapidated vessels, which include only three warships of 1,000- to 2,000-ton class.

Since the tragic sinking of the patrol craft Cheonan that left 46 sailors dead and the North’s shelling of Yeonpyeong Island exposed flaws in the combined defense system in the volatile northwestern seas, the Navy has made utmost efforts to improve equipment and cut redundancies in the command system through massive exercises in the West and East seas. The deployment of additional Aegis-class destroyers with high anti-submarine capabilities not only increases defense preparedness but raises morale in the Navy.

Yet, caution seems to be in order against the Navy’s ambition of making an “oceangoing naval force.” That plan still looks premature, considering the pressing need for bolstering defense off the Korean coasts.

There is growing justification for the global role of the Navy from the need to protect the sea lane plied by Korean merchant ships, particularly against the threat of pirates. However, we have to focus our vision on the security of the three seas around the divided peninsula as we steadily build up our naval power.

 

 

Summit obsession

 

The two Koreas have so far had two summits, first in 2000 and second in 2007. Those reading the “declarations” from what were hailed as historic meetings would be dismayed at the little effect they have had on the relations between the two parts of the Korean Peninsula.

In the two documents, the South and the North agreed to build mutual trust through economic cooperation and exchanges in all fields, put an end to military hostilities and pursue peaceful reunification. The Oct. 4, 2007 Declaration provided the creation of a “special peace and cooperation zone” in the West Sea. Only three years later, we witnessed the sinking of the patrol craft Cheonan and the artillery shelling of Yeonpyeong Island in the projected peace zone.

Still, the leaderships of Seoul and Pyongyang share a penchant for inter-Korean summits as a shortcut to resolving problems between them. Even at this time when the bilateral relations are at their lowest ebb, emissaries met in a third country to discuss conditions for a summit. If there is any difference now, it is that the other side does not hesitate to divulge the secret contact on purpose.

The disclosure came as part of the North’s angry reactions to South Korean news reports late last month that some Army units were using pictures of Kim Il-sung, Kim Jong-il and Kim Jong-un as targets for firing practice. North Korea picked up this seeming act of sacrilege in the South to unleash extremely harsh verbal attacks on Seoul’s government and military leaderships.

A spokesman for the North’s powerful National Defense Commission, chaired by Kim Jong-il, alleged that Seoul’s emissaries “begged” the Northerners to arrange three rounds of inter-Korean summit by March next year. The Southern delegates produced a “cash envelope” to entice the Northerners, he claimed.

For North Korean loyalists, shooting at pictures of the Kim trinity may be comparable to the burning of Koran in the Islamic world ― or be even more unbearable. But, we can conjecture that Pyongyag’s sudden shift to an offensive mode from a defensive one brought upon them by the South’s resolute responses to the Cheonan and Yeonpyeong attacks could be a gesture of independence by Kim Jong-il after an unproductive visit to China last month.

Kim promised efforts to reduce tension on the Korean Peninsula and reopen the six-party denuclearization talks during his meetings with Chinese leaders, but he might have chosen to act conversely back home. On his week-long tour stretching 5,000 kilometers, Kim was preached at by his hosts on the need for economic reform and openness and given scant commitment on providing the food and energy assistance he requested.

The crucial year of 2012 is approaching and Kim Jong-il is increasingly anxious to show his 20 million people some evidence of the promised “powerful, prosperous nation” on the centennial of his father. His all out campaign since the beginning of this year for direct dialogue with the South met Seoul’s unrelenting demand for Pyongyang’s apology for the Cheonan and Yeonpyeong attacks, which he could not accept.

By now, Pyongyang’s leaders must have given up holding any form of dialogue with the conservative government in Seoul until elections next year. If we give any credence to the North’s allegation of a “cash envelope” and the claim by an opposition lawmaker of the delivery of $10,000 during the Beijing secret contact, the Pyongyang emissaries might have been disappointed by the stinginess of President Lee Myung-bak compared to the generosity of the previous Kim Dae-jung and Roh Moo-hyun administrations.

Lee said Monday his government would carry on its North Korea policies with patience and consistency, whatever surprises Pyongyang has in store for the future. He did not clarifying whether or not he would pursue a summit with Kim Jong-il.

The North’s disclosure, despite Blue House explanations ex post facto, did cause some doubts about Lee’s avowed patience and consistency, even among his conservative supporters. We would like to emphasize here that the president needs to keep himself from the temptation of an inter-Korean summit at a time when he is about to wrap up his administration.