EDITORIAL : THE OUTLOOK, AFGANISTAN

                   

 

Terrorists Usually Deny Mass Casualties

It is clear that Taliban militants, as a branch of wider terrorist network in the region and world, have been actively engaged in act of violence to cause fear for the purpose of changing behavior in the society. Their common acts of atrocities continue to be suicide attacks, roadside bombings and kidnappings, which often lead to mass casualties in Afghan society and to which ordinary Afghans usually fall victims.

The terrorist attacks carried out by the Taliban militants and other insurgent outfits continue to have three major consequences, which are: mass destruction, mass casualty and mass disruption. Their insurgent activities continue to cause damages to roads, bridges and other government installations and buildings, which have mainly been constructed with the aid money from international community and donors. It becomes clear when one travels the highways that have been built after the fall of Taliban in late 2001.

Almost every five minutes, more or less, one comes across the ruined parts of the road caused by Taliban militants through roadside bombings. The Taliban militants remain the major cause of civilian casualties, which often take place in huge numbers as on Saturday, June 25, 2011, more than 60 people were killed in a suicide bombing at a hospital in Logar province. According to reports, another 120 people were wounded in the blast in the remote Azra district.

Deen Mohammad Darwish, spokesman for the provincial governor was reported to have said, "The information we have is that a suicide bomber blew himself up inside a hospital, killing 35 civilians and wounding 45 more." Although the Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid denied responsibility and said insurgents never attack hospitals, it is to be mentioned that since they do not want to turn the local people against themselves, they usually deny the responsibility for the attacks that lead to mass casualties and the Logar suicide bombing on Saturday is one of those attacks. That is why it is rightly said that "the nature of modern terrorism is that anyone can be a victim." The Taliban militants linked with broader network of terrorists continue to cause mass disruption in the society.

The insurgent activities have hampered economic restoration and reconstruction efforts across the country. The disruption of daily lives of Afghan people by the Taliban suicide attackers is the disruption of social, economic and political life in the country. It is hoped that there will be a day when Afghans can get rid of these terrorists.

Unreported Incidents of Rape

There are many cases of rape, torture and all kinds of violence against women in areas outside the capital, provincial and district centers that go unreported. A recent incident had been resolved by local elders in the traditional conflict resolution process in Balkh Province. A teenage girl was kidnapped and raped. Her parents wanted to kill her, but local human right activists intervened through the conflict resolving councils and saved the life of a victim of rape while the boy who had committed this heinous crime was fined some amount of money and let go without any legal punishment.

There are dozens of such cases that go unreported. People do not want to report such incidents as they are considered the matter to honor to be resolved mutually, without any third-party, the government, court or media knowing about it. In most of the cases we come to know that the rapists have fled the scene or could not be arrested.

Why do such cases occur increasingly? Regardless of the brutality committed, one of the major reasons behind such cases is that yet none of the rapists have been punished and it has encouraged perpetuators of such crimes.

Corruption and lawlessness are other major reasons in this regard. In most cases police have been failed to arrest the criminal while in some other cases rapists have been released after paying "cash". It is feared dozens of child rape cases occur across the country most of which are not reported due to certain reasons including the corruption and honor. While another factor in this regard is that according to Sharia law for rape case to be validated, victims must provide four witnesses to prove the crime other than that the raped or victims are to face adultery charges. In such cases no one is ready to go in front of Court as witness as most are feared of the influence of rapists while many are beaten by the above mentioned law; therefore, people avoid reporting such cases for legal procedure and rely on the methods of local conflict resolution by passing the proper judicial process.

The Government is needed to take stern action making some cases as paradigm for the criminals in order to reduce such cases. Corruption should be eradicated. Raped family members should be encouraged to come before Court and penalize the criminals and anti-social elements. The cases of locally resolved issues should also be investigated.

Heading Towards Democracy

The outstanding democratic moves and public demonstrations in the Middle East is mainly based on certain modern values such as democratic elections, freedom of expression, transparency in governance and basic civil rights of the citizens. The angry mobs who easily sacrificed hundreds of pro-democracy protestors have demonstrated their will to develop democratic processes and institutionalize modern human values. They have made a consensus on forming the next regimes in a manner that they become enough committed to respect rights of the citizens and put into practice the general will of democratic reforms.

It is because, depending on essence of political principles and ethical values, Politics vary from one regime to another. There are certain variables by using which the governments try to justify their practices and criticize that of their opponents. Concepts such as justice, freedom, equity, etc are frequently put forward to validate governments' approaches and practices. At the global level, complicated political and social phenomena may sometimes perplex systems that are not ready to face them.

The recent freedom-seeking movements in Middle East hold serious threats in spite of their favorable democratic achievements. The protest-rocked countries were afraid of the possible return of some despotic or extremist systems following hard days of revolution and sacrifices. However, promising indications say that nations have got enough awareness on whether to support a democracy-based ruling or provide backing for the extremist Islamic movements. They have selected democracy.

In the well-known hotbed of Islamic movements Egypt, people seem to have chosen democracy over fanaticism and radicalism. Reports said that Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood has joined forces with 17 other parties, including liberals and leftists, to form a common platform for parliamentary elections in September, as it seeks to allay fears among secular groups and the country's Christian minority. In a meeting on Tuesday, several Islamist, liberal and leftist parties said they would "channel their efforts... into building a state of law based on citizenship, equality and sovereignty of the people." In a statement, the parties outlined their common principles including "freedom of belief and worship", freedom of expression and a free media, the independence of the judiciary and "an economic system based on social justice."

Besides democratic reforms and political achievements in the region, rejuvenation of extremist movements remained a matter of concern. Acknowledging vulnerability of the democratic achievements made so far, none can downplay the significance of accomplishments made on the way to search for reform and democracy. Great democracies will emerge out of those newly born systems. This needs to be built on. To prevent any possible detriment to the nascent democracies, there should be some proper plans in place to take care of stability and prevention of extremist groups spreading their area of operation.

EDITORIAL : THE KHALEEJ TIMES, UAE

The Syrian implications

The United States is immensely concerned over the Syrian army’s reported movements on the border with Turkey. The US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, while commenting on the deployment of tanks and forces on the border — in a bid to deter refugees from crossing over into Turkey — has warned against any steps that could escalate tensions and possibly lead to border clashes.

Turkey’s palpable concern about the developments reflects the seriousness of the situation. Apparently, the Syrian ambassador in Ankara was called by the Foreign Ministry and apprised of the concerns the 
situation merits.

At the same time, fresh protests on Friday have been called for thus raising the possibility of further violence and bloodshed. This is disturbing. Three months down the lane when the protests first started, the violence and instability continues unabated. Already more than 1,300 people have been killed and thousands displaced. Refusing to cow down, the protesters have vehemently rejected what they call President Bashar Al Assad’s “cosmetic” reforms and amnesty measures. They continue to demand the ouster of the regime. A long shot from how the protests first started. Because of the mismanagement by the government and the reliance on brute force and violence to quell the uprising, things have now rapidly deteriorated. As part of the growing international condemnation for the Syrian regime’s use of force against civilians, the European Union has upped the ante by imposing new sanctions and extending earlier ones. The new sanctions also include some members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard that are allegedly supporting Damascus’ suppression movement. How Damascus and Teheran react to this development is 
anybody’s guess.

Thanks to the government’s loss of credibility, Assad’s recent proposal to hold a National Dialogue has been met with derision. More unfortunate is the complete lack of confidence in a regime even when it proposes change and wants to initiate a dialogue to address people’s grievances.

Even if Assad manages to cling to power, the fact remains that his rule has suffered a lasting blow, one whose repercussions cannot be  simply forced away. More worrisome is the prospect of a bigger conflict erupting on the scene. Regional tensions remain high with Lebanon and Israel and now even Turkey facing a grim scenario. The situation in Syria warrants immediate redressing without losing anymore time. Maybe the EU, the US and other regional states should offer mediation and a peaceful end to the crisis.

GOP’s Libya stunt

The Republicans are honing on President Obama. Their considerate move to deny the president enough leverage space to exercise his foreign policy options is symbolic, though. Nonetheless, they do carry a political message — intended more for the forthcoming presidential duel than being bothered in essence for Libya. This is why the two votes that refused authority to continue in the NATO-led operation and, subsequently, rejected a bid to cut off money for the conflict are contradictory.

The GOP, perhaps, wants to make it a point that this pacific-ideologue president is more into war-making business than making peace with itself, and in doing so he hasn’t bothered to go by the book for taking the Congress on board. But the White House still finds itself in a comfortable territory, as it has volumes to argue that what the president has done is well within in the limits of his executive powers, especially the ‘twilight zone’, wherein in he doesn’t need the stamp of approval of the legislatures on issues of world peace and security.

Had the Republicans been alone in castigating the president, the point would have been well-taken, but what spoiled the show was the nod of several Democrats who wanted to vent their anger on Obama for taking a solo flight when it comes to foreign expeditions. This issue, however, won’t die down with the resolution, as it has squarely failed to address the realities that Washington would be made to face while dealing with an adamant leadership in Tripoli. And, secondly, the GOP that for ages had been in favour of a stronger foreign policy that drew its strength from overseas adventures is treading an illogical argument. Libya is neither Iraq nor Afghanistan where the predecessor president had launched himself on a personalised agenda.

The intervention in the North of Africa is one for principles for which the Americans had struggled vehemently. The Libyans who had risen against the corrupt dictator are in need of diplomatic and materialistic support, and that can’t be ignored by the United States as the rest of its allies and the world at large are out there in action.

Washington has already stalemated for long, and its backseat status has come as a maneuvering point for the Col Muammar Gaddafi, who has survived the European blitz for more than 100 days. The Congress should help Obama in, at least, ending this impasse.

EDITORIAL : THE NEW ZELAND HERALD, NEW ZELAND

A time for making new starts

To their credit, most Cantabrians have accepted with a mixture of resignation and grace the Government's proposal to buy them out of their homes, ravaged by nine months of earthquake and aftershock.

Earthquake Recovery Minister Gerry Brownlee announced this week that homeowners in the so-called red zone can either sell their homes - or just the land they sit on - to the Government for its current rating value.

The announcement was received with relief by many, but others felt the rating value (the last rating valuation was carried out in 2007) was too low, even though Christchurch property prices were at a peak in that year.

Such reactions, doubtless born of quick calculations in a state of stress, are understandable and it bears saying that the dissenters will have attracted media attention out of proportion to their numbers.

But it is to be hoped that, after more sober reflection, any disgruntlement would fade. For by any reasonable standard, the people of Christchurch have been well-served by the Government and the taxpayers who will have to fund their decisions.

The nation's sympathies have consistently been with the shaken people of the south since September last year. As news emerged of each aftershock, never mind the killer quake in February and big jolts as late as this week, everyone has been appalled at the strain to which Cantabrians have been subjected.

Equally, no one can fail to have been profoundly impressed by the stoicism with which they have borne their trials or by the repeated demonstrations of community and can-do spirit that the catastrophes have elicited.

Now, though, even as the earth continues to shudder, the time has come to plan for the future, to accept that some of the damage wrought will never be repaired. It is time to speak of making new starts.

Inevitably, few people will emerge from the process without sustaining a cut in their quality of life. That is how cataclysm works. But the final cost to the Government of the buyout will be between $485 million and $635 million, and will be another call on the $5.5 billion earthquake recovery fund, which represents 8 per cent of GDP.

These are not small amounts of money, and the costs of the earthquake are hitting us all hard at one of the tightest times in the country's economic history: the effects of the global financial crisis are far from behind us; the South Canterbury Finance bailout is a present drain on the Government's coffers; the Pike River tragedy has taken a financial toll which does not match the human toll but still has to be paid for; the earthquake seems likely to swallow an insurance company, a risk the Government is underwriting.

The Rugby World Cup in the spring will come with a price tag, although it seems likely that it, like the earthquake recovery itself, will provide a short-term fillip to economic growth.

In such circumstances, it behoves the people of Christchurch to count their blessings. Taxpayers do not seek - nor do Cantabrians owe - a debt of gratitude. They are being looked after as they should be, as we all would expect to be in their situation.

But they know better than any of us that nothing can make it completely right again. What is offered is fair and reasonable, a solid basis for making a new go of things. They will put the silted past behind them with the blessing of all of us.

Lenders need a legal wake-up call

Perhaps Richard Yoon, the director of loan company Ferratum, was hampered by the fact that English is his second language when he answered questions this week about his practice of offering unsecured short-term loans via text message.

Why else would he speak of his business conduct - which includes charging interest at up to 60 per cent per annum - in such guileless terms.

"It's clever ... I'm so happy," he said, before adding more revealingly that "legally, what we are doing is fine, but ethically - I don't know."

On that last matter, we are happy to lay Mr Yoon's doubts to rest. Ethically, most of us would find his predatory usury is indefensible and deeply offensive.

Lamentably, it is not illegal. But not a moment before time, the Government is investigating what might be done about it.

Justice Minister Simon Power has announced a financial summit in August, which will examine ways of controlling what he calls "the preying-on of vulnerable people by loan sharks".

Predictably in an election year, Labour leader Phil Goff has been agitating for action, conveniently forgetting that Labour failed to act on a 2007 report on fringe lending practices in South Auckland that recommended significant reform.

The Consumer Affairs Ministry had advised that a cap on interest rates was problematic because it could become the ruling rate and charged by ethical lenders.

Unquestionably it is a complex area, particularly when credit-card companies charge almost 20 per cent. It may be difficult simply to limit interest rates.

But there is certainly room for rigorous mandatory disclosure regimes, with heavy penalties for non-compliance, so that low-income people may easily see how high-interest credit can quickly balloon into impossible financial burden.

At the same time, stars such as actor Jay Laga'aia and league legend Stacey Jones might like to consider the human cost of spruiking such expensive credit to communities in which they are held in high esteem.

It is certainly legal, but it is no more ethical than what Mr Yoon and other lenders do.

EDITORIAL : THE JAKARTA POST, INDONESIA

Life without protection

The Constitution stipulates the state’s responsibility for protecting its people and their rights, but for many, the supreme law has appeared simply as a historical document that is not workable.

For the whole week, the government was made busy defending itself from constant media attacks over last week’s beheading of an Indonesian domestic worker in Saudi Arabia for murdering her employer. In the more liberal social media, the government has become easy prey for critics who accuse it of doing little, if anything, to save Ruyati binti Satubi.

Indeed, the media hype surrounding Ruyati overlooks the statistics of the government’s successful attempts since 1999 to spare more than 100 citizens from the death penalty overseas, not to mention ongoing negotiations to secure clemency for dozens of citizens facing capital punishment.

But do not blame the media, which has never lost faith in its long-held credo, “bad news is good news”, for the nation-wide outcry. Blowing out the bad news about Ruyati and millions of other Indonesian citizens who are employed in working conditions vulnerable to abuse across the world should instead push the government to fight for improvement.

President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono finally announced a temporary suspension of Indonesian migrant workers’ placement in Saudi Arabia starting on Aug. 1, pending the kingdom’s signing of an accord on the protection of Indonesian workers.

Compared to the President’s previous but much-criticized suggestion that each migrant worker be given a cellular phone to call for help in cases of abuse, the latest policy shows the government’s firm will to stop the plight facing Indonesian overseas workers.

It will require herculean efforts to convince Saudi Arabia to sign such a bilateral agreement that may be incompatible with its legal system, let alone to make sure the accord will come into effect.

The path to the negotiating table looks difficult, as both Indonesia and Saudi Arabia will have to settle diplomatic rancor stemming from Indonesia’s protest of a lack of transparency on the part of the Saudi government concerning the execution. Riyadh later accused Indonesia of lying after Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa said the Saudi Arabian government had apologized for the beheading.

With no quick fix expected in the Ruyati saga, Yudhoyono and whoever succeeds him in 2014 will have to brace for the complicated state mandate to protect the foreign exchange heroes and heroines as well as other citizens who are embroiled in legal cases abroad.

There are fears, however, about the government’s reactionary, fire-brigade attitude in dealing with the Ruyati case. The government’s focus on the case may distract its attention from the approximately 2.6 million domestic workers at home who have been left unprotected and therefore prone to injustice.

It is ironic, as a matter of fact, that while proclaiming success in protecting migrant workers, the government has yet to prove its commitment to protecting domestic workers at home, evident in the absence of a law that promotes the rights of people employed as housemaids.

While putting pressure on recipient countries of Indonesian migrant workers to provide decent protection to the unskilled workforce, the government and the House of Representatives continue delaying deliberation of a bill on domestic workers. This is despite the House’s decision to include the bill among priority draft laws under the national legislation program last year.

The bill was proposed to the House during the 2004-2009 period, but it has so far failed to win political support from both the legislative and executive powers, probably because  it concerns the poor or because millions of employers —  including the politicians and government officials — are reluctant to recognize the rights of their maids.

International human rights group Amnesty International warned last February of protection that remained elusive for Indonesian domestic workers and only preserved the old practice of slavery. Many of the workers have experienced slavery since an early age, although employers would refuse to call it child labor.

Housemaids, according to Amnesty International, do not benefit from the labor law, as they are not covered by the legislation and therefore vulnerable to exploitation. Their well-being is dependant solely on the generosity of their employers.

There are many employers who provide decent wages, holiday allowances during Idul Fitri, leave and days off and perhaps a health allowance, but we cannot turn a blind eye to physical and mental exploitation of defenseless domestic workers.

Indonesia has frequently lashed out at other countries for abusing its citizens, but left the practice unabated at home.

When it comes to the war on corruption, protection is also elusive for whistle-blowers, as in the case of Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDIP) politician Agus Condro. He confessed to the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) last year of accepting Rp 500 million (US$58,000) in bribes to help Miranda S. Goeltom win the Bank Indonesia senior deputy governor post in 2004.

A total of 30 politicians from various parties, including Agus, were convicted in the bribery case this week. The judges, however, displayed no mercy for Agus and refused to give him leniency despite his key role in revealing the vote-buying scandal.

In the past, a number of whistle blowers were brought to court and convicted of defamation, while the people they named in graft cases were left untouched.

No doubt, the absence of protection for Agus and other whistle-blowers has dealt the country’s anticorruption drive a big blow.

— Dwi Atmanta

EDITORIAL : THE INDENDENT, IRELAND

         

 

Let's avoid fear -- and delusion

In the wake of the revelation that we are now to foot the bill for the numbskulls who bought a Bulgarian bank for €216m and sold it back to the fortuitous girlfriend of the Bulgarian prime minister for €100,000, the Irish taxpayer is entitled to ask is there any limit to the indignities we must suffer?

Circumstances such as this mean it is difficult to respond positively to the equally surreal spectacle of Michael Noonan urging us to reacquaint ourselves with the old Celtic Tiger ethos of 'shop until you drop'.

Yet there is merit in Mr Noonan's position, for Ireland, having embraced every other economic fallacy, is in danger of falling victim to 'the paradox of thrift' where the desire of a frightened people to save more than they spend does more harm than good. Today we need only look at our deserted villages to see just how much damage can be done to the living economy of the main street by the dead economy of the safety deposit box.

But whilst fear and cynicism will only hasten the downhill road to default, we must not embrace the delusional politics of mindless optimism either. Mr Noonan was, however, guilty of that vice when he claimed that ending the preferred creditor status of the ECB in any future bailout represented some form of diplomatic triumph. The minister's position may have brought Michael Collins' famous 'stepping stone' speech to mind but only in the sense that this latest EU 'concession' is only a stepping stone to nowhere.

Changing the methodology by which our reparations to Germany are paid may secure a stay of execution, but only at the cost of an extension of the torture.

Even if we do finally get back to the bond markets all that will happen is that our appalling overhang of debt will be privatised. We will merely be exchanging 'Frankfurt's way' for the diktat of Goldman Sachs.

The reason Irish people are not spending is that Europe's Alice in Wonderland-style attempts to persuade us to believe half a dozen impossible things every day is not working. Until a final solution to Europe's existential crisis is reached it is delusional to believe that Ireland's fiscal crisis, or that of Greece, Italy, Spain and Belgium, can be resolved by the cowardly politics of kicking the can (and the future of the misfortunate Pigs) down the road. Either some form of managed default, or a trillion or two of fiscal liquidity to help the austerity medicine go down, will have to be negotiated as part of an EU-wide banking settlement before the frightened Irish public will open their purse strings.

Many will believe Mr Kenny's apparent status in the polls is another example of how we appear to be experiencing a summer of delusion. We should, however, not be too cynical. Mr Kenny is not a 21st century 'Liberator', but whilst his political caution can be as agonising as it is self-interested, the care with which the new Cosgrave picks his steps may actually suit the need of this country to steer a careful course between excesses of delusion and cynicism.

The Government's record has been equally speckled. But for every Shatter, and his embarrassing desire to crack down on crime correspondents rather than white-collar crime, there is a Howlin. Optimists will hope that the bustling ambition of the latter means this could yet turn into the summer of reform where the State will be cast in a better mould.

EDITORIAL : THE KOREA HERALD, SOUTH KOREA

 

 

Lee-Sohn talks

 

President Lee Myung-bak is meeting Rep. Sohn Hak-kyu, leader of the main opposition Democratic Party, on Monday morning. They are set to discuss six agenda items at the breakfast talks, which their aides expect to last for about two hours.

The agenda items are: a cut in university tuition fees, a corruption scandal involving savings banks, an early ratification of the Korean-U.S. free trade agreement, job creation, and a proposal for a supplementary budget and putting household debt under control. With each being an issue of great magnitude, it is doubtful that all of them will be appropriately addressed in two hours.

Moreover, Lee and Sohn are so wide apart on key issues ― tuition fees, the free trade agreement and a supplementary budget ― that it will demand a Herculean task to strike an accord on any of them. The dim prospects are a cause for concern that the talks may end up with nothing but a photo op, as their earlier meeting, held in May 2008, did.

Sohn’s demand for a 6 trillion won supplementary budget is related to his proposal to cut tuition fees by half at an early date, if not in September, and his call for a job-creating program. But Lee is said to be firm in his belief that the budget surplus should be spent on defraying the national debt, which has ballooned in the wake of the global financial crisis.

On the issue of half-priced tuition, Lee believes a reform in higher education must come before any action is taken to cut tuition fees. Lee is apparently irked by the ruling Grand National Party’s latest proposal to secure 1.5 trillion won from the 2012 budget plan, spend it on scholarships and double the government’s subsidies to 3 trillion won by 2014 to cut tuition fees up to 30 percent. His office has made it clear that it is opposed to the proposal.

Another issue that sets Lee and Sohn wide apart is the scandal involving several savings banks. Lee believes their near insolvency can be traced back to the previous administrations’ lapse in policy ― permitting mutual savings and credit unions to turn into savings banks and raising the maximum coverage of deposit insurance from 20 million won to 50 million won. But Sohn claims that the Lee administration’s inadequate supervision is responsible for their problems and the lobbying and corruption scandal involving them.

Nonetheless, Lee and Sohn are likely to agree on an inquiry by independent counsel into the case. They are under mounting pressure in this regard, given the public opinion that the investigation by prosecutors has been inadequate.

Another area in which they can be easily pull off an agreement is the snowballing household debt, which has surpassed the 800 trillion won mark. Lee’s administration is already working on a package designed to put it under control.

But one of the thorniest problems is posed by Lee’s proposal to ratify the Korean-U.S. trade agreement no later than in August. Sohn demands it be renegotiated again, claiming that the agreement, which had been concluded by the previous Korean and American administrations, was rewritten in favor of the United States in recent renegotiations.

Sohn’s allegations cannot be brushed aside as groundless. He has a point, given that American demands with regard to auto trade were accommodated during the renegotiations. Nevertheless, Sohn will have to determine whether Korea will be better off with the allegedly flawed accord or without it.

But remarks by Kim Hyun-jong, the former trade minister who negotiated the original agreement, should help Sohn make a final decision. At a forum hosted by Washington-based Brookings Institution earlier this month, Kim said it should be ratified in a “macro framework,” given Korea’s fierce competition with China and Japan in the U.S. market.

For his part, Lee will do well to go the extra mile to persuade Sohn to come around and endorse the free trade agreement. If necessary, he should offer concessions in other areas in exchange for Sohn’s commitment to ratifying the accord by the August deadline. Lee, in the fourth year of his five-year presidency, should be reminded that he needs the opposition’s help more now than three years ago.

 

 

 

 

Rift in ruling camp

 

The presidential office is at odds with the ruling Grand National Party, which is abandoning much of its conservative tenet ahead of next year’s elections. But it has few tools to use against the move.

Fatigue is settling among presidential aides, who find it virtually impossible to force the party to toe the line, unlike at the outset of President Lee Myung-bak’s administration. They apparently feel helpless as the ruling party is attempting to co-opt the opposition by embracing many of its liberal policies.

A case in point is the party’s recent decision to push for cutting university tuition fees up to 30 percent by 2014. It apparently wanted to steal the show when it announced the decision on Thursday, four days ahead of Lee’s talks with the leader of the opposition Democratic Party, who has long championed half-priced tuition.

Lee repeatedly expressed his opposition to the DP’s proposal, but he acquiesced to include the issue among the agenda items at the demand of DP leader Sohn Hak-kyu.

The presidential office acknowledged it had called on the ruling party’s leadership to delay the announcement until after the Lee-Sohn talks on Monday morning. A presidential spokesman said on the record, however, that it was only natural for the ruling party to be eager to present an alternative to the opposition’s demand.

Another case of dissent involves the ruling party’s decision to roll back tax cuts for wealthy people and businesses in accommodation of a demand from the liberal opposition party. The ruling party promises to submit a bill to abolish tax cuts scheduled for next year ― which would reduce the highest income tax rate from 35 percent to 33 percent fand the top rate of corporation tax from 22 percent to 20 percent ― when the National Assembly opens its regular session this fall.

The rift in the ruling camp is being pronounced as the Grand National Party’s national congress, scheduled for July 4, is approaching. One of the leading candidates for the post of party chairman says that, if elected, he would keep his distance from Lee’s conservative administration.

He is not alone in moving toward the center, if not the left, though it is a matter of degree. But GNP politicians need to be reminded that, by doing so, the party is losing its conservative base of support.

EDITORIAL : THE BANGKOK POST, THAILAND

 

 

BTS' growing pains need attention

In commemoration of Her Majesty the Queen's birthday on Aug 12, the long-awaited extension of the BTS Sukhumvit line from On Nut to Baring will be open to the public, with free rides until Jan 1 of next year. The extension opens up a large swathe of the city to mass rail transit including much of Phra Khanong and Bang Na, and will provide great benefits to businesses and the general public. The Bangkok International Trade and Exhibition Centre has invested 750 million baht to improve and renovate facilities in anticipation of growth driven by accessibility to the skytrain.

This is, of course, good news. The BTS and the MRT underground rail line have given much to inner city residents in terms of convenience, and made the city much more attractive to tourists. It seems that early fears that rank-and-file Bangkokians would avoid the trains because they are too expensive were unfounded. With a BTS pass a trip the entire length of the line is only 20 baht, not much less than an air-con bus and a lot faster.
But with the success of the trains has come crowding, especially on the BTS. This is inevitable and expected by passengers at certain times of the day, but sometimes it is excessive. Commuters waiting at the Siam interchange station frequently have to let several trains go by before they can squeeze in, and the platform at the interchange is often packed to capacity. This is potentially hazardous since there are no barriers in front of the tracks.
Obviously when the On Nut to Baring extension opens in just a little over a month, the overcrowding at peak periods will only get worse, as it is expected to serve around 120,000 commuters day. So far there is no word from the Bangkok Mass Transit System about any plans to lessen crowding on the Sukhumvit line.
More trains may not be the answer, since at times trains must wait between stations for forward trains to load. Instead, more cars on each train is probably the right approach. The Silom line has for many months had trains with four cars, but so far all trains on the Sukhumvit line are still set at three. The system's designers reserved space to accommodate five cars at all stations. It seems obvious that at some time in the near future this will be needed, especially as another long extension of the Silom line, from Taksin station to Phetkasem, is projected to open on Dec 5, 2012.
WORLD HERITAGE ROW A STRATEGIC BLUNDER
The announcement on Friday from Natural Resources and Environment Minister Suwit Khunkitti that Thailand might quit its membership of the Unesco World Heritage Convention over a draft agreement on issues regarding the management plan for Preah Vihear temple seems ill-considered to say the least. Aside from the fact that the threat seems childish at a glance, withdrawing from the world heritage body would be harmful to Thailand's national interests. The world heritage stamp brings visitors to the country and it also assures that the sites will be well maintained and guarded against neglect and possible exploitation. There are five official world heritage sites in Thailand and a dozen or more proposed sites.
The timing of the threat and the reasoning behind it are curious. The draft report was prepared by the World Heritage Centre because Thailand and Cambodia could not agree to the wording of reports drawn up separately. Mr Suwit, who is leading the Thai delegation at a meeting of the World Heritage Committee (WHC) in Paris, said Thailand would quit the convention merely if the report is forwarded for consideration to the WHC. That amounts to acknowledging defeat very early in the game. In explaining his actions Mr Suwit mystifyingly said that words in the draft like ''restoration'' and ''repair''may be used in the future to refer to repairs of damages in attacks by Thai troops. He wants these words replaced with ''protection'' and ''conservation''.
Thailand does seem to be at a definite disadvantage in the negotiations which centre around disputing claims to territory around the ancient Preah Vihear temple.
This is largely due to a series of tactical errors from Thai negotiators, such as the one by Mr Suwit on Friday, which must be seen as overly defensive by the WHC and international observers. This in turn may be because Cambodia probably has the stronger case.
Even if Thailand does ultimately lose out in the battle over the Preah Vihear buffer zone, it would be a mistake to quit the WHC. It would be an even bigger mistake to quit before the issue has been decided.

EDITORIAL : THE TEHRAN TIMES, IRAN

Persian Press Review

Tehran Times Political Desk

This column features excerpts from news articles, editorials, commentaries, and interviews of the leading Iranian newspapers and websites.

Thursday’s headlines

HEMAYAT: Leader says the aim for manufacturing military equipment in Islamic Republic is to defend country

JAVAN: Six presidents to participate in counter-terrorism conference in Tehran

TAFAHOM: Plane and train ticket prices will increase

JAME JAM: Wait for dollar at price of 10,000 rials, Bahmani (central banker) promises

KHORASAN: Salary of 1,100,000 retirees will increase by end of Tir (21 June- 21 July), official at Civil Servants Pension Fund announces

TEHRAN-E EMROOZ: We have not kept silence about rise in prices, commerce minister says

HAMSHAHRI: Majlis set deadline for Education Ministry to implement plan to close schools on Thursdays

KAYHAN: Over 300 pieces of military equipment unveiled

FARHIKHTEGAN: We are not worried about UN Special Rapporteur on Iran, says FM Salehi

QODS: New Scientist say Iran has turned into a space power

MELLATEMA: People wander around ATMs to get subsidy cash payment

JOMHORI ESLAMI: Be cautious about deviant current, reformists says Mahdavi Kani

Leading articles

MELLATEMA in a news report says 25 lawmakers have signed a motion to impeach Interior Minister Mostafa Mohammad-Najjar. The report quotes MP Mohammad Javad Abtahi as saying Majlis Speaker Ali Larijani plans to meet lawmakers in an effort to convince them to give up the impeachment motion against the minister. Abtahi stated that impeaching interior minister is not in the best interests of the country at this juncture, and the issue can be resolved through dialogue. MP Jafar Qaderi also explained the reasons behind the lawmakers’ decision to impeach Mohammad-Najjar. According to Qaderi, authorizing irresponsible officials to appoint governors general, poor performance of governors general, lack of coordination between governorates and security institutions are among the reasons that lawmakers have cited to impeach the interior minister.

TEHRAN-E EMROOZ in a news report quotes Asadollah Badamchian, the deputy director of the Islamic Coalition Party, as saying that the plot to create sedition in the upcoming parliamentary and next presidential elections is much more complex than the previous seditions, and the Islamic Coalition Party should remain vigilant. The enemy, which could not bring seditionists to power in the country (in 2009), is using a different method to win seats in the next parliament, and thus “we should be aware of enemy’s intrigues,” he added

EDITORIAL : THE NEW YORK TIMES, USA

The Phony Tough-on-Terror Crowd

Republicans and Democrats are championing bills to further militarize the prosecution of terrorists, beyond anything even President George W. Bush proposed.

They want Americans to believe the legislation will keep the country safer. In fact, these bills could end up tying the hands of F.B.I. agents and other law enforcement officials trying to disrupt terrorist plots. They are likely to deprive prosecutors of their most powerful weapons in bringing terrorists to justice. And they come perilously close to upending the prohibition, which dates back to Reconstruction, against the military’s operating as a police force within the United States.

There is no sign that the White House tried to stop the House from passing a particularly awful version of these bills, which would move most, if not all, terrorism cases from civilian courts to military tribunals. And there is no sign the White House tried to stop the Senate Armed Services Committee from approving only a slightly better one.

Democrats on that committee insist they defeated far worse proposals. There are, however, some issues that require an unwavering stand. Preserving the role of law enforcement agencies in stopping and punishing terrorists is one of them. This country is not and should never be a place where the military dispenses justice, other than to its own.

President Obama must push the Democratic leadership to amend the Senate bill — and make it clear that he will veto any bill that turns over proper law enforcement functions to the military.

For decades, terrorism has been prosecuted — with great success — in civilian courts. The Bush team insisted, falsely, that these courts were not tough enough for the war on terrorism and pushed the use of military courts for some “unlawful combatants.”

Both the Senate and the House versions of the bills now remove the possibility of civilian trial and mandate military detention and military trial for anyone deemed to be a member of Al Qaeda “or an affiliated entity.” Under current political thinking, that means pretty much anyone arrested for carrying out or plotting a terrorist act anywhere. The bills exclude American citizens, and the Senate bill appears to exclude lawful residents of this country, but government lawyers fear that is not clear enough.

The Senate bill allows the secretary of defense to transfer a prisoner to law enforcement custody in consultation with the secretary of state and the director of national intelligence. The likelihood of that happening given current politics is infinitesimal, but more important, it is the statutory job of the attorney general to decide when and how to prosecute federal prisoners. Cutting him out of the process is an effort to turn all terrorism cases into matters of war, not law.

Attorney General Eric Holder Jr. and the Obama team are to blame in part for feeding the political paranoia that led to this pass. Mr. Holder properly decided to try Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and other 9/11 plotters in a federal court in New York, but failed to consult with New York politicians, who scurried for cover and scuttled the prosecution.

The most basic truth — which almost no politician will dare to admit — is that federal court trials work. The military tribunals (which started with Mr. Bush’s kangaroo courts and now involve a system that is somewhat more refined but still flawed) have managed to extract a few minor plea deals. They have yet to render a verdict or impose a stiff sentence on a single high-profile terrorist.

Since 9/11, hundreds of prisoners have been convicted of terrorism or related crimes in civilian courts. Federal prosecutors have many more charges they can file against prisoners than military prosecutors do. Sentencing in federal court is by a judge using tough guidelines. Military commissions have no experience handling capital-punishment cases. And many countries will not send a prisoner to the United States if he will face military prosecution.

Government lawyers say some countries will not even provide evidence if it will be used in a military trial. In short, it seems unlikely that a military tribunal could ever hold a trial or impose a sentence that would stand up to American or global democratic values.

The Senate and House bills also could cripple F.B.I. investigations of terrorists and terrorist plots. Lawyers in the Obama administration say that if an agent interrogating a prisoner decided the suspect was a member of Al Qaeda or any “affiliated” group, he would have to stop the questioning, no matter how well it was going, and have the prisoner flown to Guantánamo or a military brig in this country.

The peddlers of fear and the phony tough-on-terrorism crowd have dominated the national security debate for too long. The president must step in and stop this march toward endless war and the perpetual undermining of American constitutional values.

Whose Stimulus?

Big businesses are telling Washington that they are willing to do their bit for the economy — if the price is right. Multinational companies say they could repatriate hundreds of billions in foreign profits and pump them into domestic investment and hiring, but only if Congress and the White House agree to cut the tax rate on those profits to 5.25 percent from 35 percent. They call their plan “the next stimulus.” Sounds more like extortion.

In the last five years American businesses have kept abroad more than $1 trillion worth of foreign earnings, according to government data. An article by David Kocieniewski in The Times last week noted that Microsoft has $29 billion offshore, Google has $17 billion and Apple has $12 billion.

The Obama administration should not give in to such corporate coercion. The last time big businesses got such a “tax holiday,” in 2005, companies spent most of the money rewarding their shareholders with stock buybacks and dividends, not in hiring.

Truth is, businesses’ decisions to invest or increase employment depend on the state of the economy. If consumer demand is depressed, as it continues to be, corporate chieftains see no business logic in raising production. In the second quarter of 2010, when expectations of recovery were rosier, nonresidential investment jumped 17.2 percent. In the first quarter of this year it grew only 2 percent.

Bringing more money home at lower tax rates isn’t going to change that thinking. What these businesses don’t say is that they are already awash in cash. According to Federal Reserve data, companies in the United States have $2 trillion stashed in bank accounts, Treasury securities and other investment-ready assets. And this excludes cash held abroad by their foreign subsidiaries to avoid taxes.

Businesses will always want a tax cut. And they will always justify it as good for hiring and investing, whether or not it is. We remain perplexed by the Obama administration’s decision to consider businesses’ contention that cutting employers’ contributions to payroll taxes will lead to more jobs. It probably won’t — especially if the break is not specifically tied to new hiring.

The faltering economy needs real stimulus, like extending the payroll tax cut for workers until the end of next year. That would put money directly in the pockets of American workers and stimulate consumption. Investing in infrastructure would also help.

Beyond pleasing shareholders, there is one other guaranteed result of giving employers a big tax break on their foreign profits: less cash to finance government programs or pay down the deficit. According to Congress’s Joint Committee on Taxation, the proposed cut would cost $79 billion over 10 years.

A version of this editorial appeared in print on June 26, 2011, on page SR11 of the New York edition with the headline: Whose Stimulus? Giving multinationals a big tax break on foreign profits won’t create more jobs.

Tapping the Oil Reserve

We have never been enthusiastic about quick fixes. But the Obama administration’s decision to release 30 million barrels of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve — the nation’s emergency stockpiles — makes sense.

It should provide a modest boost to the American economy. It will help consumers at the pump as they head into the summer vacation season. And it sends an important message to the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries that the United States is capable of protecting its domestic market, at least in the short term, even when those countries refuse to increase production.

The initiative is part of a joint effort with the International Energy Agency, whose other members will release an additional 30 million barrels. The total amount, 60 million barrels over 30 days, is aimed at making up the loss of nearly two million barrels a day in exports caused by unrest in Libya and, to a lesser extent, Yemen.

The two million barrels is a tiny fraction of the 89 million barrels consumed daily around the globe. Even so, there should be some relief for consumers. According to the Center for American Progress, a research and advocacy group, past oil sales from the reserve — most recently President George W. Bush’s release of 21 million barrels after Hurricane Katrina — reduced prices by 10 to 15 percent within a month. That would translate today into savings of 25 to 35 cents per gallon of gas at the pump.

The predictable critics weighed in after the announcement. The American Petroleum Institute, the lobby for oil companies profiting from high prices, called the release “ill-timed.” House Speaker John Boehner accused President Obama of “using a national security instrument to address his domestic political problems.” Fred Upton, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, who is always eager to drill in environmentally fragile areas, said 30 million barrels could be found on Alaska’s outer continental shelf if the administration “would stop blocking permits.”

The strategic reserve, established after the 1973-74 Arab oil embargo, contains 727 million barrels — just over two months’ worth of imports. When it is tapped, the oil usually has to be replaced at higher prices. So this is not something the country should do very often. Given the turmoil in the Middle East and the weak economy, it is justified now.

An important question is what happens next. After OPEC failed this month to agree to increase production, Saudi Arabia said it would pump as much as 1.5 million more barrels a day until the end of the year. The administration and the International Energy Agency now need to hold the Saudis to that promise.

Marvel Superheroes and the Fathers of Invention

Rosalind Kirby Estate

Jack Kirby in 1965. His heirs are fighting for the rights to his work.

The comic book industry began life in the early 20th century as the province of con men who stripped artists of their creations, then moved on to the next mark. The artists who were paid virtually nothing for work on characters that are now worth billions at the movies are nearly all dead. But their heirs are beginning to speak for them through a federal copyright law that practically invites descendants to sue for ownership interests in characters whose current value could never have been imagined at the moment of creation.

Courts have already granted a share of the copyright for Superman to the heirs of a co-creator, and sided with Captain America’s creator in another copyright fight. These cases are small fry compared with the battle now being waged between Marvel and the heirs of the legendary comic artist Jack Kirby, who breathed life into such pop culture icons as the X-Men, the Incredible Hulk, Iron Man, the Fantastic Four, Spider-Man, Thor and the Silver Surfer.

Of course these court battles are about money. They also force the modern entertainment industry to reckon with the often amoral practices of the old comics workshops. And they raise deeper questions about how to credit creative works produced at a time when even the most talented artists were treated as serfs.

Marvel pioneered a new method of comic book production. It broke with the industry’s tradition of requiring artists to draw almost by rote from a pre-existing script. Instead, it gave its best creative minds wide artistic latitude.

The Marvel editor Stan Lee sometimes offered general ideas for characters, allowing the artists to run with them. Mr. Kirby plotted stories, fleshing out characters that he had dreamed up or that he had fashioned from Mr. Lee’s sometimes vague enunciations. Mr. Lee shaped the stories and supplied his wisecrack-laden dialogue. And in the end, both men could honestly think of themselves as “creators.”

But Mr. Kirby, who was known as the King of Comics, was the defining talent and the driving force at the Marvel shop. Mr. Lee’s biographers have noted that the company’s most important creations started out in Mr. Kirby’s hands before being passed on to others, who were then expected to emulate his artistic style.

Mr. Kirby’s life experiences informed the look and feel of the genre. The cinematic movement in his narratives came out of his experience as an animator. The crowded fight scenes in comics like the Fantastic Four and the X-Men are reminiscent of his boyhood days as a street fighter on the Lower East Side during the Depression.

In 2009, shortly after Disney agreed to buy Marvel for $4 billion, the Kirby heirs filed notices of copyright termination. They argue that most of Marvel’s film earnings involve Mr. Kirby’s creations — and that therefore they have a right to a share of the copyrights.

Marvel counters that Mr. Kirby’s work falls under the rubric of “work for hire” — meaning it was done under the direction, supervision and control of the company — which, if true, would invalidate the family’s claim. But that could be difficult to demonstrate at trial, given the poor record-keeping of the era and what is known about how Mr. Kirby worked.

According to court documents, Marvel’s predecessor company fired nearly all of the art staff in 1957 to save money, making Mr. Kirby an independent operator who sold his work to the publisher. If this case comes to trial, Marvel’s star witness would likely be Mr. Lee, former chairman of Marvel Comics. In his 2010 deposition, Mr. Lee seemed to suggest that Mr. Kirby was little more than a talented foot soldier who followed the whims of his boss.

Mr. Lee sang a different tune during the Marvel glory years of the 1960s, when he sometimes described Mr. Kirby as an equal in the creative process. In a 1968 interview later quoted in The Comics Journal, Mr. Lee talked about brainstorming with Mr. Kirby, who, he noted, needed “no plot at all” to produce stories: “He just about makes up the plots for these stories. All I do is a little editing. ... He’s so good at plots, I’m sure he’s a thousand times better than I.” Analyzing published articles from that period, the writer Earl Wells, in his famous 1995 essay “Once and for All, Who Was the Author of Marvel?,” said the record “yields as much evidence that Kirby was the author as it does that Lee was — much of it in Lee’s own words!”

In the years since Mr. Kirby’s death in 1994, the once lawless comics business has been transformed into an industry where creators are more fairly paid, credit is clearly apportioned and rights are meticulously spelled out in contracts. The kinds of legal confusions that have recently flared up in the comic book realm are unlikely to ever be seen, say, in the burgeoning world of online games, where corporate authorship is firmly locked down.

It is up to the courts to decide the legal questions at the heart of the Kirby copyright case. There is no doubt that the King of Comics contributed far more to Marvel — and pop culture — than he has received credit for.

EDITORIAL : THE DAILY TRIBUNE, THE PHILIPPINES

 

 

Noy’s lips have slipped

EDITORIAL

Click to enlarge

06/26/2011
The string of ratings upgrade that the country received the past few days appears to be teasers for Noynoy to persuade him to push forward the breaking of his pledge of no new taxes or tax increases.
Already, Noynoy had stated that taxes will be increased in 2013, saying that the pledge for new taxes was only for a year.
Plagiarizing the elder and the better George H.W. Bush during his 1988 US presidential campaign, Noynoy boasted “Read my lips, no new taxes” during his own campaign in the elections last year to stress his politician’s vow.
After being elected, he was already singing a different tune saying that the new taxes or tax increases pledge was only effective for his first year in office and which means it will effectively expire this month.
His Palace apologists, as standard practice, blamed the past administration for Noynoy’s failure to hold up to his pledge, citing several supposed anomalies in government agencies that drained the public treasury. Until now, however, nothing concrete had come out from such allegations.
Noynoy’s economic officials said his administration is staring at a P298 billion deficit this year after a record P314 billion budget shortfall last year.
His officials are now brimming with confidence that the gap in the budget won’t be as big as P298 billion after reporting surpluses in the first few months of the year but these were achieved by heavily cutting off spendings for basic services.
To raise revenues, Noynoy said during the campaign sorties that his government instead would run after tax cheats and smugglers, which is turning to be another empty promise as smugglers and their agents are lording it over at the Bureau of Customs while the Bureau of Internal Revenue is running after small fry and ordinary individuals to squeeze them dry for taxes.
The Philippines received one-notch upgrades from both Fitch Ratings and Moody’s while Standard and Poors issued conditions for a further improvement in the country’s credit ratings.
As it stands, Fitch rates the Philippines one rung below investment grade while both Moody’s and Standard and Poors have the country at two notches below investment grade.
Getting an investment grade would mean lower credit costs and an improved investors view for the country.
Among the bigger economies in the region, the Philippines is at the tail-end in the credit ratings game. Indonesia’s worst rating among the three agencies is already a notch below investment grade.
The upgrades that the country received had attached caveats about the urgent need to expand the tax base to improve revenue collections which in layman’s language, is simply to tax more Filipinos.
The more likely and fastest way to do this is to raise the value added tax that is 12 percent which is about the right rate for a developing country but which is not raising the right revenues for the Philippines mainly as a result of tax evasion and corruption that exists among the collecting agencies.
The tax should be imposed on nearly all consumer commodities and services but the efficiency rate or actual collections represent only a small fraction of what the government should be collecting.
In effect, targets are regularly missed and the deficit remains gargantuan compared to past administrations.
The upgrades are invitations for Noynoy to advance the government’s tax increases forward and break his pledge earlier than planned.
Reneging on his campaign vow would be easier now for Noynoy since he is not keeping his promise anyway, saying that new taxes would have to be imposed in 2013.
With the ratings firm baiting a new upgrade, the likelihood is that the date would be moved forward to next year.
The question among many is whether Noynoy can hold up to the pressure.
Read his lips, Noynoy is speaking in a forked tongue.

EDITORIAL : THE NEW STRAITS TIMES, MALAYSIA

 

 

Before self

IN the last two months, we've celebrated Mothers Day and Fathers Day. And though the days have been about honouring mothers and fathers and the role they play in building the family, essentially, both these days have been about the family and family togetherness.
For those lucky enough to have the experience of a happy, united family, the concept of the family might seem simple enough -- certainly something to be thankful for, but on the whole, something that could almost be taken for granted. Until compared with families who aren't happy, and aren't united. For these unfortunate families, the formula could seem illusive, and quite possibly, impossible to achieve.

What is a family? And why is a happy family something to be celebrated? And how is "family" different from "friends"? It is said that friends are "the family you choose for yourself" -- the family that one would choose if one had the benefit of choice, where everyone would be quite a perfect fit for the life and world of one's choosing.

The blood-family on the other hand, is the family into which one is born, and from which there is no escape; everyone is here to stay, and no one is going to go away. Love them or loathe them, they will always be your family. Ignore them, deny them, quarrel with them -- and they are still your family. So the only thing one can play with is whether it will be a happy one or an unhappy one.
Make no mistake: The happy family is not one in which everyone gets along all the time, nor the one that has no problems. The happy family is the one in which, no matter what happens, everyone is still committed to being family; where unhappiness or disagreement doesn't drive members to move next door to live with someone else's family permanently, or to tell other members to leave the family home. But does such a family just happen as a matter of luck? If children grow up to be close siblings for the rest of their lives, is this because of luck?

All siblings quarrel at some point; that's natural, because no one person is the same, so disagreements do occur. At the childhood stage, quarrels might centre on the sharing (or not) of toys; in the adult stage, the stakes get higher, and the quarrels get more serious. What determines how the quarrel turns out -- whether punches are thrown or threats are made, or whether mutual compromises are made -- depends on whether or not they understand that the family is important, and whether or not they are committed to keeping the family together. The secret to a strong, happy, united family is putting the family before self.

EDITORIAL : THE GUARDIAN - THE OBSERVER, ENGLAND

                  

 

Learning languages: To speak only English is to narrow your horizon

As the candidates on The Apprentice proved, faced with speaking a foreign language the British are losers

It was hardly music to the ears. Susan, Tom, Melody and colleagues from BBC 1's The Apprentice, described as "an entrepreneurial elite", ventured in last week's episode into Paris and briefly tried to engage the natives in their mother tongue. "Porcelaine?" said one of the team trying to coax the sale of a tea pot, starting out quite strongly before collapsing into: "Ah oui, fine bone china." "Un mobile phone shop?" asked another.

For many in the UK, English is their first and only language. On grounds of functionality, why would they want to get their heads around the grammar, vocabulary and literature of foreigners?

They comfort themselves with the belief that "everyone speaks English" – when that's not true of 75% of the world's population.

Andy Burnham, Labour MP and shadow secretary of state for education, said in a recent interview: "In parts of my constituency they struggle to see the relevance of learning French or Spanish. They are not going to go on holiday there, they don't want to work there… they are being very rational when they argue that a language wouldn't necessarily place them in the strongest position when entering the workforce."

This is at once the utilitarian view of learning – discard what isn't going to impact on your wage packet – and depressingly patronising of young people. It narrows their horizons to the life they are living now rather than encouraging them to expect that they will explore the wider world.

In 2004, learning a foreign language was removed from the core curriculum in secondary schools. Last year, French dropped out of the top 10 table of favourite GCSEs subjects. German and Spanish are also losing favour. Now 60% of state schools and three quarters of 14-year-olds do not study a modern language.

The new English baccalaureate requires a modern language as one of its key subjects but it's too soon to tell whether this reverses the trend of the last several years. In universities, too, the study of languages, except perhaps Mandarin, is gradually becoming extinct.

Learning a foreign language is obviously about communication, but as one academic has written, it also provides "a new mental landscape".

Books, films, poetry in a different tongue open the door to cultures, values and ways of seeing that would otherwise be barred. Translations provide only a peek through a crack in the door. Italian, French, Spanish, Portuguese and the less common languages each add to the understanding of joy, affection, happiness and the love of words.

We live in a digital age with Android phones and Google that can convert conversations into a different language instantly but in the process they also risk bleaching it of all colour.

So, to be good with languages may or may not help in the labour market or prove useful on a fortnight's holiday but arguably it is a passport to a more rounded life.

And that has to have a value.

Libya: Nato must up its game to finish what it started

100 days after the air strikes began, Gaddafi is still in power

In March, Benghazi, Libya's second city, seemed close to annihilation at the hands of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi. He had promised to exact retribution from his citizens for their temerity in seeking freedom from his 40-year dictatorship. Influenced by the memory of Kosovo and backed by the Arab League, the United Nations security council passed resolution 1973. It authorised the imposition of a no-fly zone in Libya. It also instructed that "all necessary measures" should be taken to protect civilians under threat of attack. The wide support the measures received was bolstered by compelling images of terrified civilians in Benghazi awaiting what would undoubtedly have been a brutal and deadly onslaught by Gadaffi's forces, bolstered by mercenary forces and determined to crush a nascent democratic revolution. Three months ago it seemed possible that it would be only a matter of weeks before what US defence secretary Robert Gates called "the mightiest military alliance in history" would achieve its aim. And the warmth of the "Arab spring" would spread a little further into Africa.

Today, however, is the 100th day of the Nato air strikes and Gaddafi is still in power. Joint Nato operational support has come from 18 countries, including the UK and France, with 15 enforcing the no-fly zone and launching air-to-ground missiles. Yet not only is Gaddafi still in power; rebel progress around Misrata in the west of Libya has stalled, and the transitional national council in Benghazi says it is desperately short of funds because the $1 billion promised by Nato has yet to materialise. In addition, fissures have appeared in the Nato alliance, criticised for being "a confused coalition of the unwilling and unable".

At the same time, a million refugees have fled Libya, mainly into Tunisia and Egypt. Italy has called for a suspension of the air campaign to permit the delivery of humanitarian aid . Ironically, there is now a danger that the Nato mission is contributing to the very humanitarian crisis resolution 1973 was intended to avert. Meanwhile, in the UK, the cost of the Libyan intervention has escalated from the original estimates of "tens of millions of pounds" to over £260m, now that the mission has been extended by another three months to September. The heads of the Royal Air Force and the Navy have warned that continuing operations in Libya beyond the autumn could mean redeployment from other tasks and asking more of forces already "fragile " and overworked stretched by the additional demands, for instance, of Afghanistan.

So, what can be done? How can the original UN mandate to protect the lives of Libyan citizens be honoured quickly and the current stalemate broken without Nato drifting into the illegal waters of pursuing regime change for which it has no mandate? Is it possible to act within resolution 1973 to encourage a chain reaction that may lead to Libyans effecting their own regime change?

The success of the Nato mission is that a no-fly zone and the creation of a protective cordon around Benghazi were accomplished in the first few weeks following the UN vote – undoubtedly saving lives. Nato spokesmen also say that Gaddafi's fighting ability has been degraded by 50%, and many of his entourage have defected.

However, the rebels in the west in the Nafusa mountains and in the port of Misrata insist that without more intensive support from Nato it is difficult to make further advances. They lack the firepower and military discipline to take command on the ground. On the contrary, the rebels appear stranded in a no man's land, served by social networking and mobile phones, but not the aerial support and arms they require.

It is vital that Nato is more proactive both in the air and on the ground to break this current impasse. Critics of the Nato mission point out that during the 78 days of of the short, sharp Kosovo campaign, four times as many aircraft were used to conduct three times as many sorties in a country very much smaller.

In Libya, in contrast, Nato appears to be stuck in second gear while Obama's decision not to have the US participate in ground attacks has also had a negative impact. Last week, the House of Representatives prohibited the use of money for military operations in Libya, requiring an end to direct US combat, but it did allow finance for support operations such as surveillance and intelligence.

Nato is hampered and split. It is hampered because the terms of resolution 1973 do not permit it to arm Gaddafi's rebels. However, given the political will, it could provide more support on the ground and much more than the current few air sorties a day. It is split because while some Nato members have repeatedly said that enforcement action will end if "violence is stopped", others have also insisted that Gaddafi must go, not in the context of regime change, but as part of the remit to protect vulnerable Libyan citizens.

Russia now shares that view, in spite of its initial scepticism about the Nato action. David Cameron and Nicolas Sarkozy have the most to lose among Nato leaders if intervention in Libya is protracted – or collapses. Both say they refuse to consider a ceasefire that allows Gaddafi to remain.

He, as yet, appears disinclined to consider his own removal as "brother leader of the revolution". He still considers himself to be the only revolutionary force in town. He may calculate that if Nato fails to increase the pressure via aerial attacks and more "boot power" on the ground, and if the numbers of civilian deaths as a result of Nato bombing begin to rise, the alliance will fragment. The evidence that he has a point is already visible. Last Monday a Nato strike on a compound west of Tripoli killed 19 civilians, including women and children. Amr Moussa, the outgoing head of the Arab League, has added his voice to those calling for a ceasefire and a negotiated settlement with Gaddafi. "When I see children being killed," Moussa said, " I must have misgivings."'

Misgivings must also arise, however, if realpolitik results in a settlement that sees Libya divided, Gaddafi still in power with the power to destabilise the region and the lives of citizens who defied him once more at risk. David Cameron's response is that time is on the alliance's side: perhaps. That still requires Nato to abandon its limited, cautious, low-risk approach and flex far more of its muscle. If the Libyans are not to lose the opportunity to develop and establish a democratic government, one that has legitimacy and widespread support, then Nato must finish what it set out to do 100 days ago — and soon.

Olympic tickets: Got any spares?

The disappointments of the ballot have cast a shadow over what is already a major achievement

Your perception of whether the Olympic ticket ballot was fair will probably depend on whether you ended up with front row seats or whether, like the mum of double Olympic champion Bradley Wiggins, you got nothing at all. There have been PR embarrassments but was the ticketing system essentially unjust? The insistence that buyers could pay only using a Visa card was an unnecessary stipulation, a gift of exclusivity for a sponsor. One might also wonder if it were beyond the wit of the system's designers to ensure that tickets were more evenly spread. Some ended up with plenty; others none at all.

The ticket chaos has brought an air of disappointment to an otherwise impressive process. The site itself has been all but completed on time and on budget: Lord Coe and his team have managed to attract all their required sponsorship. And, as those of us fighting on Friday morning in our pyjamas to get ringside for the Greco-Roman can attest, the Games are pretty much sold out. Even if you are now set to watch it on TV, that looks a lot like an unlikely victory.