EDITORIAL : THE GLOBE AND MAIL, CANADA

A sobering defence of the HIV-afflicted

A United Nations-sponsored report on HIV and the law, released this week, is at once a thorough and sobering survey of the international landscape and, for the most part, a sensible, sensitive and humane set of recommendations for preserving and enhancing the legal and human rights of the 34 million persons currently living with HIV and the roughly 7,500 who join their ranks each day.

Two years in the making, the 146-page report by the Global Commission on HIV and the Law – former Canadian ambassador to the UN Stephen Lewis was one of the 14 commissioners – draws its 80-plus recommendations largely from the experiences of individuals and organizations in 140 countries.

Staunchly against “punitive laws, discriminatory and brutal policing and the denial of access to justice,” HIV and the Law: Risks, Rights and Health correctly calls for the worldwide decriminalization of voluntary sex work and consensual same-sex sexual practices. It further urges the repeal of “punitive conditions” such as the federal ban in the United States on funding needle and syringe exchanges.

Some recommendations raise as many questions as they answer, such as one that calls for decrimilalization of the possession of small amounts of all drugs for personal use – a very radical step.

And where the report seems to go astray in its laudable concern for the rights of persons living with HIV is in the realm of disclosure. It labels as “counterproductive” laws that “criminalize HIV transmission, exposure or non-disclosure of HIV status.” Like other advocates for the HIV-positive, the report describes the infection as “preventable” and “remediable,” even as it acknowledges that in 2010 alone almost 2 million persons worldwide died of HIV-related causes. To many, especially in the affluent West, HIV is now considered “a manageable chronic condition.” Yet more than three decades after its onset, it remains incurable and continues to pose a “significant risk of serious bodily harm,” as Canada’s Supreme Court observed in 1998.

It’s the responsibility of those who knowingly have the condition to inform potential sexual partners of their status, regardless of how many condoms are at hand or the potency of the antiretrovirals they’re taking. Nevertheless, even if it goes too far in places, the report is for the most part a needed statement in defence of those whose rights and protections are often lacking.

Ontario’s doctors should be at the negotiating table, not in the courtroom

Last week, the union representing Ontario’s Catholic teachers demonstrated the merits of engaging with that province’s government as it seeks to bring its finances under control – negotiating a deal that replaced one cost-cutting proposal with another that its membership might find more palatable. That should serve as a lesson for the association representing the province’s doctors.

When negotiations with the Ontario Medical Association broke down this spring, Premier Dalton McGuinty’s deficit-plagued government imposed through regulation a round of fee cuts aimed at meeting immediate fiscal targets. Now, the OMA has launched a constitutional challenge aimed at overturning them, mostly on the basis that the government did not negotiate in good faith. That’s likely to be an uphill legal battle, given that the OMA is not a certified union. But the OMA’s president, Doug Weir, argues that the association has nothing to lose, since the government couldn’t treat it any more harshly than it already has.

In fact, doctors stand to lose a great deal more. Ontario is expected to be in the red until at least 2017, and doctors’ fees account for roughly 10 per cent of the province’s total program spending. So this spring’s cost-cutting measures, targeted heavily at a few specialist groups, were only the first round. If the OMA were to adopt a more constructive approach and return to the table, it could at least help shape future funding decisions. If not, the government will unilaterally impose further measures.

This involves more than just haggling over numbers. The province has little choice in the years ahead but to make structural reforms to the way health care is delivered. To get those reforms right, Ontario will need the engagement of doctors, who after all know the system better than anyone else.

To some extent, it’s incumbent on Mr. McGuinty – who allowed wages to skyrocket during better times, and is now abruptly trying to make up for it – to extend olive branches as he tries to sort through the country’s biggest fiscal challenge. But those who benefited from generous settlements in the past need to accept new realities, and make the best of them. Lawyering up is not the answer.

EDITORIAL : THE AUSTRALIAN, AUSTRALIA

Productivity agenda must be the ALP's core purpose

WHILE we have applauded the belated realisation by some in the ALP that the Greens are their enemy, not their friends, Labor needs to address the core of its identity crisis.

There is a reason Labor has been so susceptible to the siren song from the Greens. It is the same reason the party has been gripped by leadership contortions and finds itself flatlining in the death zone in opinion polls. The government has failed to outline a plausible policy agenda.

Labor either does not comprehend its mission, can't explain it, or both. In order to differentiate itself from the Greens it needs to offer more than rhetorical flourishes about loopy extremism. Labor needs to offer a policy prescription that shows voters it has a plan to generate prosperity.

The ALP's uncertainty about itself has been highlighted by its national secretariat launching an online survey of members to find out what policies they like and want. This is neither here nor there because the policy agenda has been staring them in the face for years.

As prime minister in January 2010, Kevin Rudd identified the productivity challenge and we encouraged the initiative. But along with Mr Rudd, the productivity agenda seems to have been discarded. Which is why the independent intercessions by former BHP chairman Don Argus and Treasury economist David Gruen are so welcome.

Mr Argus laments a lack of "political leadership and courage" as serious economic and social challenges are confronted by "sloganeering politics" that is doing taxpayers a disservice. His main arguments will be familiar to readers of The Australian.

This eminent businessman explains Australia's good fortune in experiencing record terms of trade when the GFC hit, and he warns about our lack of preparedness for the repercussions when those terms of trade fall. He is concerned about high levels of household debt and rising levels of government debt.

"Instead of looking at what extra taxes can be levied, we need more debate about how we can get the cost side of our public finances down," Mr Argus says. He explains the debate must include discussion about an entrenched welfare mentality.

Importantly, Mr Argus argues that productivity is the key to our economic future and he criticises the impact of government policies: "The carbon tax and workplace relations system are productivity hindering, not productivity enhancing."

This productivity focus has been supported in a separate speech by Dr Gruen, who also warns about the impact of waning terms of trade and the need to boost efficiency to maintain our prosperity. He prods the private sector to take up the challenge, saying it is companies themselves who need to be innovative to boost output.

And, saliently, he warns that in periods of adjustment some firms will fail. So there is an unspoken lesson in this for the government to resist endless subsidies to protect inefficient industries. We need to accept that over time the least efficient companies could close, and ideally their staff and resources will migrate to more productive opportunities.

Nothing should be more important to the government than confronting these challenges. And nothing could be more relevant to Labor's core purpose or its mainstream constituents. Yet on these issues, it seems to be silent.

Throwing money to the wind

THE support of both major political parties for the current renewable energy target of 20 per cent by 2020 is a sign that economically rational energy policy is not the forte of either the Gillard government or the opposition.

The Productivity Commission, the Institute of Public Affairs and others have warned that the economics of the RET wilt under cost-benefit analysis, with the price of wind and solar power vastly outstripping that of coal-generated electricity. Such reports might have escaped the attention of consumers.

But they will take notice of the news that the NSW Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal expects that green schemes will add $316 a year to the average power bill, with the carbon tax to contribute $168 and the RET and other schemes to contribute $148.

As Origin Energy chief Grant King has warned, renewable energy could add more to power bills than the carbon tax by 2020 as solar roof-top panels boom and demand for grid-based power from coal- and gas-fired electricity falls.

Poorer families would bear the brunt of the investment in transmission networks as wealthier households reaped generous subsidies for investing in solar panels.

As well as driving up power prices, the flaw of the mandatory RET is that in "picking winners" among high-cost technologies it distorts the market and diverts investment from other lower-emission energy sources. In advising government, the Climate Change Authority must take a hard, unbiased look at such anomalies in its review of the RET.

The fact that the so-called sustainable RET policy is unsustainable economically is beyond the grasp of the Greens, who want an even higher target than 20 per cent by 2020. For the government, the program means ongoing anger from voters as power bills continue to soar. But scaling back the RET would involve a major showdown with the Greens.

Tony Abbott, who is opposed to pricing carbon, has an even greater problem with the RET. His "direct action" policy advocates spending $100 million a year for an additional one million solar energy homes by 2020 and promoting larger-scale renewable energy generation with incentives through the RET. On the evidence, governments "picking winners" results in taxpayers losing.

EDITORIAL : THE NEW STRAIT TIMES, MALAYSIA

Tariffs on tobacco will cut its consumption further

HABITS, no matter how debilitating, can be hard to shed. One such habit is smoking. Despite universal recognition of the weed's health risks, the tobacco industry has shown an untiring resilience in fighting its own corner. In fact, it is aggressively campaigning against any further restrictions on its marketing strategies, as is happening in Australia. Higher taxes and health warnings on cigarette packaging are not having a sufficiently deterrent effect on old or new smokers. Concerns have been expressed on the number of young adults lighting up in the face of endless public campaigns against smoking because the damage is not just on smokers themselves, but also on those around them -- the passive smokers, whether second or third hand. Medical scare stories abound, including one claiming that constant smoking indoors can leave a long-lasting residue that sickens infants.

That Asean has decided, as a group, to take a stronger public health stand against smoking is, therefore, to be warmly welcomed. The proposed delisting of tobacco from the Asean Free Trade Area (Afta) list, as declared by the minister of health, should help put the habit out of reach of many. Granted that more than any other group, the economically less able will be first hit by further price increases, nevertheless, the end game is to reduce the number of smokers to zero and guarantee public health. As it stands, tobacco, as part of the Afta list, enjoys a tariff rate as low as five per cent. Delisting makes for the possibility of imposing a higher duty on tobacco products. Not that the industry will take these measures lying down, but governments cannot shy away from their duties to fulfil the greater good.

Of course, the reason why it was in the list in the first place is because the tobacco plant was a cash crop encouraged in many Asean member countries, including Malaysia. Naturally then, it merited a special position in the trading arrangements of the organisation. Responsive as always to ethical concerns, the crop is now not a major earner for the country. And, as concerns grow regarding the adverse impact of smoking on health, policy priorities must be changed accordingly. Indeed, it is easier to persuade people that infant deformities in the Indochinese countries are due to Agent Orange dropped on the region during the Vietnam War. Why is it not as easily believable that smoking by pregnant mothers is likely to harm the unborn child? Certainly, people should be free to decide for themselves, but there should equally be clear and costly disincentives to making the wrong choices.

EDITORIAL : THE JAKARTA POST, INDONESIA

Let’s vote

The phrase “Vox populi, Vox Dei” (the voice of the people is the voice of God), was an old saw when Alcuin wrote the words to Charlemagne almost 12 centuries ago. 

The words were an undisputed recognition of the public’s role in government, and certainly ring true today. The gubernatorial election held today in Jakarta is further proof of the truth of another phrase — every vote counts — as people go to the polls in hopes of making the metropolis a better place to live.

Nearly seven million voters will make a collective decision that will shape the fate of the capital city for the next five years — if they exercise their right to choose one of six candidates in the race.

For better or worse, the voice of the electorate will affect the rest of Jakarta’s denizens: the commuters and those who make a living and do business in the capital, where about 60 percent of nation’s money supply circulates. Millions of people who have no right to vote are pinning their hopes on those who can exercise the franchise.

Unlike the two-horse race during the city’s last (and first) direct gubernatorial election five years ago, this time around, voters have no good reason to skip election day and squander their chance for change. 

This year’s election season has been more feisty, with six tickets contesting for the city’s top jobs. Those who may have lost faith with candidates from political parties also have no excuse: there are two independent candidates in the running.

Hopefully, voters will have made up their minds before arriving at polling stations, as all the candidates have tried their best to show they deserve the people’s mandate. During 2-week campaign season that ended on Sunday, the candidates made promises and discussed their platforms, programs, initiatives and promises in the media and on the street. 

The candidates all claim to have the skills needed to manage the city, solve its myriad problems and to promote the general welfare. It will require wisdom and caution from the electorate to decide. At stake are the interests of the city. 

Voters may have been enticed by smoothly delivered campaign rhetoric on a host of problems to solve Jakarta’s myriad woes, from horrendous traffic to poor public services and from the floods that inundate the city every year to the poverty that afflicts all too many residents.

However, a free media and easy access to the Internet have meant that voters can easily investigate the track records of each candidate on their own, evaluating a candidate’s leadership ability, personality, integrity, credibility and his (for the candidates are all men) achievements in tackling the day-to-day issues that comprise work of a governor. Information is available everywhere, in abundance, so voters can scrutinize and gauge those who would lead Jakarta.

Of course, money is another way that people can be motivated to vote. In every election in Indonesia, officials have had to contend with the illegal practice of vote buying — often called serangan fajar or a dawn attack, as it occurs just hours before voting begins. 

Only a few cases of vote buying were brought to court in the past. Allowing continued violations of election law to happen paves the way for corruption, as elected leaders leave no stone unturned to recover the money they spent to gain high office.

Today is the right time to select a leader who will respond and solve grievances and complaints you have endured for the last five years. So let us vote.

EDITORIAL : ESTADAO.COM.BR., BRAZIL

O sinal de alarme para a indústria: aviso ao governo

O Estado de S.Paulo

O Relatório de Mercado (Focus), na sua última edição, reduz mais ainda sua projeção de avanço da produção industrial, que cai de 0,39%, na semana anterior, para 0,10%. Até agora, só os setores que têm redução do IPI mantêm alguma atividade que, na perspectiva de retorno do IPI à taxa normal, não vai além do objetivo de substituir estoques que continuam baixos.

A Pesquisa Industrial Mensal de Emprego e Salário do mês de maio, que o IBGE acaba de divulgar, já dava um alerta sobre o desempenho do setor manufatureiro. Em relação ao mês anterior, registrou recuo de 0,3% do pessoal ocupado, de 0,6% do número de horas trabalhadas e de 2,5% da folha de pagamentos real. Esses dados já mostravam que a situação se agravava no setor que até agora se apresentava como instrumento de distribuição de renda por meio da folha de pagamentos e, até então, exibia uma produtividade capaz de justificar a elevação dos salários.

A manutenção do número de trabalhadores empregados parecia se explicar pela vontade das empresas em preservar pelo menos os operários mais especializados, numa economia em que se faziam muito escassos. Agora o quadro mudou totalmente e se pode temer uma volta do desemprego no setor industrial, e apesar dos incentivos oferecidos a alguns setores da indústria, não se verifica nenhum investimento para aumentar a produção, o consumo parece ser atendido pela importação e não se observam, no setor manufatureiro, ações decisivas no sentido de reduzir o custo da produção para oferecer preços mais atrativos.

O setor, levando em conta o nível de endividamento da população, prefere, ao contrário, reduzir a produção. Nessa situação, caberia ao governo se convencer de que um aumento da demanda só pode ter origem em investimentos que representem suplemento de distribuição de salários e demanda nova de bens e serviços que poderão dar um impulso e convencer o setor industrial a sair da sua atual letargia.

A falta de ação do governo - que tem verbas para isso - parece explicável pelo receio de iniciar projetos que se acha incapaz de administrar e de manter no orçamento o prazo inicialmente previsto. Receio também de enfrentar uma burocracia que parece trabalhar para impedir que os projetos de investimentos prosperem. Enquanto continuarem de pé todos esses obstáculos, a economia funcionará apenas esporadicamente, nos momentos em que o governo ofereça incentivos fiscais que reduzem suas receitas.

EDITORIAL : THE GUARDIAN, UK

House of Lords reform: another can kicked down another road

The coalition has been weakened. Cameron-Clegg relations have been strained. The loss of shared purpose is palpable

Forced to make a choice about its priorities, the coalition government placed the importance of its own survival above the importance of its bill to reform the House of Lords. By withdrawing the timetabling or programme motion which would have secured the Lords reform bill's passage through the Commons but which faced certain defeat, the government buckled. The original bill passed by 460-124. But the government lost face – especially on the Tory side where 91 voted against the bill – and may have lost Lords reform too.

For ministers, however, the alternative was simply too dangerous to contemplate. If the programme motion had been put to the vote and lost, as seemed certain, the coalition might have unravelled with unexpected speed. A rapid outbreak of hostilities between the coalition parties was the talk of the Commons.

In the end, that was a price neither the Conservatives nor the Liberal Democrats were prepared to pay. The coalition therefore lives to fight another day. Another can has been kicked down another road. Politically, that was the only pragmatic outcome on offer.

Yet no one who regards reform of the House of Lords as historic unfinished business can be comfortable with this outcome. Labour claimed a victory for parliament, but that was only true in the sense that something had to give. In all other respects there was no cause for parliamentary pride. The withdrawal of the programme motion greatly increases the likelihood that Nick Clegg's bill will run into the sands . It is not dead yet. But the events of the past 48 hours have hugely reduced its chances of making it onto the statute book. To put it as neutrally as possible, that is another lost opportunity, after a century and more of waiting. True, the passing of the reform bill's passing on second reading on Tuesday night means that Lords reform is still theoretically in play. That perhaps offers something to build on if Labour is serious. Yet any building depends on a flexibility of approach and a willingness to compromise that have been conspicuously absent from this week's manoeuvrings. The conservatives on both sides of the Commons tasted blood. It is hard to see much sign of a change there.

An autumn timetabling motion is promised. Maybe it will meet the objections of those who opposed the motion that was withdrawn. It might in theory succeed where the old one failed. But the Conservative rebels are not interested in making Lords reform easier for Mr Clegg; on the contrary, the rebellion will embolden them. Meanwhile Labour, while still professing commitment to reform, finds it far easier to unite behind opposition towards anything proposed by the coalition than behind reform of an upper house of whose influence many Labour MPs are afraid, even while many of them hope eventually to see out their days there at the taxpayers' expense. The truth is that Labour talks the talk about Lords reform but cannot deliver.

This week's events are likely to have large consequences. Politically, the coalition has been weakened. Relationships between David Cameron and Mr Clegg have been strained. The loss of shared purpose across the coalition is palpable. The Tory revolt will only strengthen the belief on the Labour benches that their oppositionism is bearing fruit.

But the faltering on Lords reform has a wider effect too. "We both want a Britain in which our political system is looked at with admiration, not anger," wrote Mr Cameron and Mr Clegg in their coalition agreement in 2010. Two years later, there is not much sign of progress. A Hansard Society survey showed increased levels of disengagement and even outright rejection of party politics. Last weekend, a YouGov poll found 64% of the public believe that British politicians have neither ethics nor principles. A grand total of 1% think politicians behave in a very principled and ethical way. Nothing that has happened this week is likely to turn that tide. On the contrary, these events suggest it is running stronger than ever.

City lobbying: their pay, their say, their way

Our stories on the finance industry's lobbying machine must serve to toughen up the coalition's proposals

For the ramifications of our stories on the City's lobbying machine, you need simply browse through the rest of the website. Here is an item about how George Osborne is fighting Brussels for the right of bankers to pay themselves untenably large bonuses. There is the report on the admission by the Barclays chairman, Marcus Agius, about how watchdogs had only belatedly taken on the bank about its years of antisocial behaviour: the tax-dodging, the loophole-seeking, the contempt for the normal rules – after years of letting its millionaire executives go wild.

The Collins dictionary defines lobbying as attempting "to influence (legislators, etc) in the formulation of policy". Whether it is pay or taxes or market supervision, the City has had its say and got its way. Over and over again. The results are all around us and will have to be paid for in taxes, debt and damaged economic prospects for years to come.

The response from the lobbying industry to all this was the same on Tuesday as it has been for ages. "Lobbying is an absolutely integral part of the democratic process," wrote the Public Relations Consultants Association. Members of all industries and none must be entitled to make their views known to policymakers. The trouble with the City's influence is that it is so large and pervasive: there are 26 industry bodies and 38 public affairs organisations, and nearly one in every five lords has a direct interest in finance. If anything, the £93m lobbying budget quoted by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism is an understatement: it leaves off conferences, thinktank funding and much of the quotidian entertainment and lunching that goes into buttering up powerbrokers.

Just before becoming prime minister, David Cameron vowed to lessen the grip on the policymaking process exerted by lobbyists and their paymasters. "We don't know who is meeting whom," he declared in 2010. "We don't know whether any favours are being exchanged. We don't know which outside interests are wielding unhealthy influence." The truth of that statement has only been amplified through all the stories about Frédéric Michel and Jeremy Hunt, Adam Werrity and Liam Fox, and former Conservative treasurer Peter Cruddas and his demands for £250,000 donations in return for dinners with the prime minister.

Yet in office Mr Cameron has shown less resolve in tackling lobbyists' power. The lobby register that his coalition is currently consulting on would ignore whom lobbyists are meeting and why, and how much they are being bankrolled. It would leave off the vast majority of professionals engaged in lobbying work. The results of the consultation will be announced this month. Our stories this week must serve to toughen up the proposals.

In praise of … Frances O'Grady

The election of the new TUC general secretary gives the unions an appropriate and modern public face

Normally there is little to cheer in an election with only one candidate. But the election of Frances O'Grady as general secretary of the Trades Union Congress is an exception. Ms O'Grady will be the first woman to head what in the past has been a very male movement. Yet with women now significantly more likely to be union members than men, this makes Ms O'Grady an appropriate modern public face of the unions. It also puts the British unions very much in the mainstream – the European TUC is now headed by France's Bernadette Ségol, Australia's Sharan Burrow is general secretary of the International TUC, while 15 unions here have female leaders (though none of the big ones). Ms O'Grady is a union moderniser. Merely by getting the job, she makes it harder to dismiss the unions as a blokey movement. But she will be even more influential if she helps to turn around the decline in union membership, now only 23% of the workforce.

EDITORIAL : THE USA TODAY, USA

Bush tax cuts fight solves nothing

President Obama and Mitt Romney spent Tuesday arguing over whether the Bush tax cuts should be extended for virtually everybody, or everybody. In so doing they made a pretty good case for why neither major party cares much about the government's trillion dollar budget deficits — or about anything, for that matter, if it gets in the way of winning the election.

OTHER VIEWS: 'A massive tax increase'

Truth is, the Bush tax cuts were unaffordable when they were enacted, and they are even more so today. But you won't hear that on the campaign trail.

During a radio show appearance, Romney argued for extending all of the tax cuts, including those that affect the top income brackets. Never mind that tax revenue, as a percentage of the economy, has fallen to levels not seen since the Truman administration. Making the Bush tax cuts permanent would raise deficits by $2.8 trillion over 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

Obama's argument is not much better. After agreeing in 2010 to a two-year extension of all the tax cuts, the president is back to making the case he made during the 2008 campaign. He wants to retain the cuts for families making less than $250,000 per year.

At an appearance Tuesday in Iowa, Obama argued that allowing the tax cuts above that income level to expire would raise almost $1 trillion over the next decade. But that is only as compared with Romney's approach. Obama's plan would add nearly $2 trillion in deficits when compared with doing nothing and allowing all the tax cuts to expire.

At the risk of stating the obvious, these are big numbers: $2.8 trillion is three-and-a-half times the size of Obama's 2009 stimulus measure and would cover nearly half of the national defense budget for the decade. Obama's $2 trillion would cover about a third of the defense budget.

Rate the debate

But what's a few trillion among friends when there are election narratives to develop?

The Republican one involves branding itself as the no-tax-increases-ever party while heaping blame on Obama for deficits. Never mind that the deficits are largely the result of the Bush tax cuts, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the Great Recession. Before those events, there was a budget surplus.

Obama's narrative is all about class resentment. He wants to paint a picture of wealthy individuals — including a certain former Massachusetts governor with a $100 million trust fund for his children — not paying their fair share. Never mind that there aren't enough rich people to balance the budget if everyone else's taxes stay low and major entitlement programs remain on their unsustainable trajectories.

That both sides are still bickering about whether to extend the Bush tax cuts from 2001 and 2003, and for whom, shows how stuck they are in the partisan trenches they dug years ago.

One way out of the hole is to phase out the Bush tax cuts for everyone, returning tax rates to where they were during the prosperous Clinton years.

An even better way is to rewrite the hopelessly complex tax code.

When the president's deficit-reduction commission, the Simpson-Bowles panel, devised a plan to eliminate at least $4 trillion of red ink over 10 years, it did not frame its case in terms of the Bush tax cuts. Simpson-Bowles proposed raising revenue (while actually lowering rates) by eliminating or reducing loopholes. It combined these modest revenue hikes with entitlement reforms and cuts in discretionary spending to produce an attractive and sensible plan.

That is the direction both parties should be taking, with a balanced yet bold deficit deal. Every dollar of tax increases should be matched with $3 in spending cuts. The parties were close to such a "grand bargain" last summer. Obama and a bipartisan cast of senators were ready to sign on. But House Republicans pulled the plug, charging that Obama had tried to change the terms of the agreement after a deal had been struck.

Those talks should resume, with an eye toward reducing short-term economic uncertainty and long-term deficits. Fighting over the Bush legacy, or everything that is purportedly wrong with the Obama administration, or how a wealthy elite is allegedly causing the nation's problems, solves nothing. It only drives deficits higher and people's opinions of government to new depths.

EDITORIAL : THE GLOBAL TIMES, CHINA

Hanoi will feel pain for helping US return

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in Hanoi Tuesday that the US supports Vietnam's work in resolving the South China Sea issue, but also told Vietnam it needs to do more to protect human rights. She expressed her concerns over "the jailing of journalists, bloggers, lawyers and dissidents for peaceful expression."

Clinton's remarks have clearly outlined the direction of Vietnam developing a strategic partnership with the US. The bilateral relationship between Hanoi and Washington is more like a marriage of convenience. Vietnam has to give up its current path of development if it wants to be able to count on US support.

Politically, Vietnam is following the path of China, realizing rapid development by taking the road of gradual reform. Western values haven't deeply encroached into Vietnam. The influence of political opposition is much less active than it is in China. 

An elite class politically allied with the West hasn't been formed in Vietnam. But such a trend is already being started before it deeply affects Hanoi's domestic political landscape. 

Strong anti-government protests are rare in Vietnam now. A few sporadic incidents are seemingly all against the Chinese government. However, they may change their targets in the future.  

Vietnamese mainstream society has acknowledged China's development model. Many feel powerless over territorial disputes between the two countries. Nationalist sentiment, on the one hand, is uniting Vietnamese society, but is also poisoning Hanoi's political connection with China. Vietnam is being pushed by the growing nationalist mood toward the US, which likes to reprimand Vietnam politically at the same time as lending its support.

Hanoi is counting on China to vindicate its political choices, but also wants to counter China by leveraging US power. However, the strategy needs to strike a good balance between China, the US and its domestic political forces. It will be difficult to sustain this for long.

The only viable path for Vietnam is to coordinate with China to limit the US pivot to Asia. The territorial disputes should not turn into hostility against each other. Instead of being a link in the US chain containing China, Vietnam can be a post against deep US involvement in Asia. 

Hanoi has been keen on facilitating the US return to Asia in the last few years. It should be clear that the pressure Washington has placed on China will be felt in Vietnam. It will very likely be among the first victims if East Asia is overwhelmed by political disturbances. 

During her speech in Mongolia Monday, Clinton attacked China's political system without naming the country. It shows the US pivot to Asia also has a value subtext besides military and economic concerns. 

Both China and Vietnam are progressing in terms of creating prosperity and freedom for its people. Clinton and her colleagues should save their slogans and instead prove to the world that they are able to lift the US and the West out of financial chaos.

EDITORIAL : THE YOMIURI, JAPAN

3-party cooperation key to successful Diet business

The Yomiuri Shimbun

To make indecisive politics decisive, it is vital for the Democratic Party of Japan, the Liberal Democratic Party and New Komeito to uphold their agreement on the integrated reform of social security and tax systems and extend their relationship of trust.

Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda and LDP President Sadakazu Tanigaki faced off at the House of Representatives Budget Committee Monday. Referring to many DPJ lawmakers voting against the reform bills in a recent lower house plenary session in defiance of the party leadership, Tanigaki criticized the DPJ by saying the rebellious action "undermines the relationship of trust among the three parties."

Noda said, "I deeply apologize over the matter as DPJ president."

The prime minister also stressed, "I'd like to fulfill my responsibility by making utmost efforts in House of Councillors deliberations to pass the bills in line with the three-party agreement."

Despite the mass defection by former DPJ President Ichiro Ozawa and his followers, the party avoided becoming a minority ruling party in the lower house. But there are potential defectors within the party who indicated they may join hands with a new party to be led by Ozawa. This makes it more difficult for Noda to steer his government.

===

Build relationship of trust

Passage of the integrated reform bills and other important bills will not be possible without the cooperation of the DPJ, the LDP and Komeito. Noda and the DPJ leadership must work toward building and maintaining the relationship of confidence with the two opposition parties.

Tanigaki lambasted the government over the consumption tax hike and its shelving of a promised system to guarantee minimum pension benefits, saying it "runs counter to the [DPJ's own] manifesto." The LDP leader also called for the lower house to be dissolved for a general election after the reform bills clear the Diet.

Noda countered that none of the parties had withdrawn their specific policies--including the DPJ's aim to introduce a minimum pension system--in hammering out the three-party accord.

He rejected the idea of early dissolution of the lower house, saying, "I'd like to seek the people's confidence in the administration after accomplishing what should be done, including the integrated reform."

Because dissolving the lower house was not a condition of the three-party accord, which was worked out while shelving difficult issues such as the minimum pension plan, Tanigaki's demands lack persuasive power.

If Tanigaki sticks to criticizing the government over violation of the manifesto, he will fall into his own trap by appearing to make adherence to manifestos a top priority.

===

Passage of bond bill crucial

As an example of "what should be done" before dissolving the lower house, Noda cited legislation of a special bill on the issuance of deficit-covering government bonds.

Finance Minister Jun Azumi said unless the special bill is passed in the current session of the Diet, the government will run short of fiscal resources for the national budget before the end of October.

Even if the LDP returns to power, the party will also find it difficult to deal with the special bill on issuance of deficit-financing government bonds because a divided Diet, with different parties controlling the two houses, is almost certain to persist.

The LDP must cooperate in the passage of the special bill without taking fiscal resources "hostage."

Other urgent tasks facing the extended Diet session are the correction of the disparity of the value of votes in lower house elections and passage of bills related to the introduction of a common ID number system for social security and tax programs. We hope the current Diet session will bring about fruitful results.

(From The Yomiuri Shimbun, July 10, 2012)

(Jul. 11, 2012)

Central, Tokyo govts should get in tune over Senkaku Islands

The Yomiuri Shimbun

The inability of the central and Tokyo metropolitan governments to get on the same page will be only to China's advantage. They need to closely cooperate on the Senkaku Islands issue.

The central government has finally made a concrete move to put the Senkaku Islands under state control.

Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda has admitted that the government is holding talks with the metropolitan government and the owner of three islands in the five-islet chain. "From the viewpoint of peacefully and stably maintaining and managing [the islands], we've been in contact [with the metropolitan government and others] at various levels," Noda said to the House of Representatives Budget Committee on Monday.

The central government's aspirations of putting the Senkaku Islands under state control will advance efforts to better maintain the territorial integrity and effective control of the islands.

The government currently leases the three islands, including Uotsurijima, from the owner and bans people other than government officials from landing on them. However, under individual ownership, through which the islands could be sold to or inherited by a third person, the future of the islands could be unstable.

===

China's claim unwarranted

Tokyo Gov. Shintaro Ishihara has built up a relationship of trust with the islands' owner. Donations to the Tokyo government to purchase the three islands have topped 1.3 billion yen.

Given the recent developments, various options are on the table, including having the metropolitan government buy the three islands and then immediately transfer them to the central government.

Ishihara has expressed distrust of the government's plan to purchase the islands, saying the Noda administration is trying "to gain popularity" and deriding it as "abrupt." However, now is not the time for the central and metropolitan governments to be out of step.

It is essential that the islands be surely placed under state control, regardless of how this is done. The central and metropolitan governments must speed up necessary arrangements to make this happen.

The Japanese government's plan to place the islands under state control prompted Beijing to issue a statement saying, "No one will ever be permitted to buy and sell China's sacred territory."

However, it was only in 1971--after the existence of oil reserves was confirmed near the Senkaku Islands--that China started to claim sovereignty over them.

Japan has been in effective control of the islands since it incorporated them into its territory based on international law in 1895. It is unreasonable of China, which effectively gave tacit approval to Japan's control of the Senkakus, to belatedly claim sovereignty over them.

===

Strengthen JCG

Chinese fishery patrol boats approach waters around the Senkaku Islands almost monthly and repeatedly make their presence felt.

Earlier this month, Taiwan patrol vessels and a leisure fishing boat briefly intruded into Japanese territorial waters.

These provocations will only undermine Japan-China and Japan-Taiwan relations. We strongly urge Beijing and Taipei to exercise self-restraint.

Even if the government puts the Senkaku Islands under state control in the future, this in itself will not be able to prevent intrusions and other illegal acts.

It will be necessary to enable Japan Coast Guard officers to apprehend foreign nationals who illegally land on the Senkaku Islands. To do so, the Diet should quickly deliberate a bill to revise the Japan Coast Guard Law.

Also, the JCG must be strengthened in terms of manpower and the quality of its equipment, through such measures as deploying a large patrol vessel that will enable long-term monitoring of waters around the Senkaku Islands and increasing the number of JCG officers.

(From The Yomiuri Shimbun, July 10, 2012)

(Jul. 11, 2012)

EDITORIAL : THE TIMES OF INDIA, INDIA

Asian doubles

China's slowing economic miracle offers India the opportunity to catch up

The OECD has observed that China's economic growth is slowing down. There is reason to believe that this could be a long-term structural trend, and the double-digit growth that has characterised the Chinese economic juggernaut is becoming a thing of the past. If that's the case, it has momentous implications for China, the world and India.

Wages are rising rapidly in China, which indicates that its vast army of surplus rural labour, waiting to man its expanding factories, is no longer a resource that China can rely on. This trend is exacerbated by China's one-child policy, which has led wags to opine that China might grow old before it grows rich. The relative underdevelopment of China's financial sector means there are not too many instruments for the Chinese to keep their money, with the result that enormous funds are washing around in the real estate sector. This is going to lead to a property bubble that will burst sooner or later, slowing down growth. China's very economic success may have landed it in a middle-income trap, whereby it becomes much harder to grow quickly on a high base than on a low one.

In India, China evokes fear, inspired by China's rapid modernisation, memories of the 1962 war, Chinese territorial claims on Arunachal Pradesh and aid to Pakistan's nuclear forces. But fear is compounded by envy and admiration as well. India's political class has ideological inhibitions about drawing on western models, as exemplified in JD(U) chief Sharad Yadav's latest warnings about the now-defunct East India Company. In that context China stands out like a beacon. If China can have its economic miracle, surely India can too.

Unfortunately the same OECD report says that Indian growth is slowing too. And that is even before India has had its economic miracle. With reforms given short shrift the economy has generally been subject to left-hand drive, despite both Indians and Chinese being enterprising people (why does the political class not realise that left-wing thought, too, is of western origin?). Before we can speak of transcending the need for growth, India needs to emulate China's spectacular successes in reducing poverty. Opponents of growth should note that since India is growing from a lower base - its per capita income is one-fourth China's - it ought to have an easier job of it but is still floundering. China inspired us (hopefully) to overcome India's inferiority complex vis-a-vis the West. But thanks to policymakers who do everything but make policy, are we now doomed to a permanent inferiority complex with respect to China?

Cry me a river

Sobbing storms the world of tennis

PDAs, give way to the new vogue. It's PDW - or public display of weeping - as evidenced at the Wimbledon men's final. The stakes were clearly high for Britain's Andy Murray, as he faced up to Swiss tennis maestro Roger Federer. As the first Briton in 74 years to make it to the grand stage, alas the fairytale wasn't meant to be for him as Fedex prevailed in the end.

The famed British stiff upper lip more than quivered as Murray wept and walked off the court. In an increasingly androgynous world sport was supposed to be the last bastion of machismo, where real men gird their loins to do battle. Not anymore. Murray's water-works bear testimony to the fact that athletes are no longer shy of getting in touch with their tender side - even if it made some fans cringe with embarrassment.

Gone are the days when champions like Bjorn Borg wore an ice-cold expression in both misery and elation. For today, a stiff upper lip is bound to result in a dip in an athlete's popularity. No stranger to crying on court, Federer himself is believed to be an avid advocate of PDW. In fact, the Swiss avers that crying actually helps a player connect with his fans and shows that he really cares about winning and losing.

Where does that leave our own desi tennis aces, we wonder. Having actively taken part in an ugly Olympics selection controversy, we are yet to see a few snivels. But whatever be your grown-men-crying threshold, one thing's for sure - bawling is in. Move aside ladies, let the real men do all the crying.




Slippery road ahead



The government must buffer us against the likelihood of a poor monsoon this year

The monsoon is catching up, says the Indian Meteorological Department (IMD), and the July-August rains will cover up June's deficit. IMD still hopes for normal rainfall this year. One hopes IMD is proved right, but several international weather stations - the Japanese, the Australians and now even the Americans - are cautioning about El Nino sometime in August, and its probability is increasing by the week.

This is cause for concern, more so when we look at IMD's past record of forecasting weather. In 2002, IMD had forecast normal weather (101% of Long Period Average (LPA)), but the reality turned out to be only 81%, leading to a severe drought. And in 2009, against a forecast of 93% of LPA, the actual rainfall was only 78% of LPA, the worst in decades. This only shows that weather forecasting can be a very humbling exercise for scientists, even with their best efforts and intentions.

While we hope for the best, wisdom lies in preparing for the worst. In that preparation, one needs to know whether it is likely to be a repeat of 2002 or 2009, and what the damage to agriculture and thereby the impact on food prices is likely to be. In a country where almost half the expenditure of an average household is on food, this is critical for any contingency planning.

The impact of a freakish monsoon on agriculture depends upon the monthly and spatial spread of rains during the critical four months of June to September. In 2002, June rains were above normal by 9%, while July was deficient by 54%, August by 2% and September by 13%. But in 2009, June rains had a deficit of 47% while July was down only by 4%, August by 26% and September by 20%.

Spatially, in 2002 the maximum deficit in those four months was in the southern peninsula (-32%) followed by northwest India (-26%), while in 2009, the maximum deficit was in northwest India (-35%) followed by the northeast (-23%) and central India (-20%). As a result of this varied pattern of rains, foodgrain production in 2002-03 was down by 38 million tonnes, while in 2009-10 it was down only by 16 million tonnes des-pite the overall deficit of rains being higher than in 2002.

The million-dollar question is: What will 2012-13 look like agriculturally? It is a gamble to forecast at this stage with July and August rains yet to come, but given the information so far, it wouldn't be a surprise if Indian agriculture lands up in a situation like that of 2009-10. Foodgrain production may take a hit of 10-15 million tonnes, if not more. But given that the country has ample grain stocks (more than 82 million tonnes in June), it should be easy to rein in cereal prices despite hardening of international prices of wheat and corn since June 15 (up by 20-25%).

The real fear is about pulses, especially tur and moong. Both have less than 5% irrigation cover. Maharashtra produces almost 35% of the country's tur and Rajasthan about 45% of the country's moong - and both have seen scanty rains during June. Other important states growing pulses are Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat and Uttar Pradesh, all facing rain deficit ranging from 30% to 70%. If things don't improve significantly, their production can suffer, and given the very thin global market for these pulses, their prices can shoot up. Remem-ber 2009 when tur prices shot through the roof and brought tears to households and policymakers alike? We need to learn from our past mistakes and do some advance planning through imports or encouraging production on irrigated tracts.

Oilseeds can also get affected adversely, especially soyabean and groundnuts. But given that the global market for edible oils is large, one can tide over this, albeit with a higher import bill of palm and soya oils. The rupee's falling value can put some pressure on the prices of imported oils. Our edible oil bill is already touching Rs 40,000 crore (almost half of our consumption) and may go up further.

Given that rains in Maharashtra, Gujarat, Rajasthan and western Madhya Pradesh have remained deficient, cotton could also be a casualty. And given that cotton stocks at home are not very comforting, cotton prices too can come under pressure.

What are the takeaway points for policymakers? Contingency planning in Karnataka, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh needs to focus on pulses, oilseeds and cotton. Cereal production is likely to see a drop, but we have ample stocks to rein in prices of staples. On edible oils, we need a long-term vision and strategy to promote oil palm aggressively in Andhra Pradesh and the northeas-tern states. An investment of Rs 10,000 crore (over a five-year period) can help trim more than Rs 6 lakh crore over the next 27 years from the edible oil import bill, according to a Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices report. But above all, we need to give a much higher priority to investment in irrigation and better use of water.

EDITORIAL : THE DAILY MIRROR, SRILANKA

Make the world a better place

It was President John F. Kennedy who said, “Children are the world’s most valuable resource and the best hope for the future.” Indeed, they are the ones most capable of dealing effectively with problems of today’s world and also take it to greater heights. Every age and generation brings out children best equipped for that period. For children of a bygone era surely wouldn’t be able to fit into today’s world. The technology and other sciences are so advanced to what it was earlier. The responsibility on our path is to protect, guide and nurture children.  Only then would they be able to be what they ought to be.

Unfortunately, we are not nurturing them. Every child is called to fulfil a destiny, but it’s in our hands to help its discovery or hinder it. Needless to mention its hindrance affects the future. The world then struggles in its purpose to be made into a better place, for all people. The spiritual health and vitality of a nation can be gauged by how the women and children are treated. The diagnosis for our country is quite dismal, to say the least. More than 900 rape and child abuse cases in just six months; Police Department statistics claim that nearly 700 of them involve children. These appalling figures are just the tip of the iceberg, considering the number of incidents that remain unreported, owing to fear of social stigma and lack of awareness.

Society is privy to much violence and explicit sexual feeding through the internet, movies and publications. We need to realise that what we take in takes root in our minds. We unknowingly programme ourselves and what we have seen, becomes part of us. It bears bad fruit the moment an opportunity presents itself. In a way violence and unlawful sex then become second nature. Once we go over the deep end, we could become a danger not only to society we live in, but even to our spouse and children.

 The view that it’s alright for adults to watch violence, sex and wrong values in visual form, is a misnomer. Taking the principle of advertising, they say constant viewing and audio suggestion could make us believe even in a lie. Therefore, constant openness to vulgarity, wrong morals and sexual perversion could make us come to the conclusion there is nothing wrong in them.

There is no point in going to our places of religious worship if we are not willing to want our lives transformed. The practice of self-control over our base human nature is imperative. Then Higher Powers would suspend one's karmic repercussions; making it safe and rewarding not only for our children, but our neighbours as well.

EDITORIAL : THE DAWN, PAKISTAN

New CEC

THE nomination of Fakhruddin G. Ebrahim, a retired justice of the Supreme Court, has ended the months-long wrangling between the PPP and the PML-N over the appointment of the next chief election commissioner. This is welcome news at a time when the democratic project could certainly do with a boost. For a while it had appeared that egos were going to keep the two sides deadlocked on the appointment of a new CEC. Leader of the Opposition in the National Assembly Chaudhry Nisar in particular appeared determined to get his way, wanting one of his three nominees to get the nod from the parliamentary committee even if other qualified and non-controversial candidates were brought into the mix as a compromise. In the end, with a new prime minister in the saddle and the PPP facing uncertainty over his fate, the party acquiesced.

What remained was to convince a reluctant Mr Ebrahim to accept the CEC slot ahead of a general election. While health concerns will remain, the octogenarian Mr Ebrahim is certainly a man of integrity and forthrightness and under his watch the Election Commission of Pakistan could come closer to playing its rightful constitutional role in the holding of an election. While the challenges will be immense — free and fair elections, or at least freer and more fair than have been held to date, are rarely in the interests of the political class and the other powers that shape elections here — this is perhaps the right moment in Pakistan’s history to work towards making the electoral process more transparent and fair.

But the deal between the opposition and the government to elect a new CEC goes beyond the matter of elections. It is yet another sign that if given the time and space to work out their differences, politicians can and do deliver. That basic argument for the continuity of the system is often ignored in Pakistan and drowned out by the protests against governmental incompetence and parliamentary toothlessness. While criticism of the present government is all too real and meaningful, there have been notable achievements, particularly from the structural point of view. The 18th Amendment to give more power to the provinces and disempower the president’s office; the NFC that has given more resources to the provinces to deliver on an expanded range of responsibilities; the 20th Amendment that built on the 18th Amendment to give more autonomy to the ECP are some well-known examples. Now the biggest challenge is ahead: a legitimate general election conducted under the auspices of the civilians. They may just deliver, if given the time and space.

Gujrat attack

 MONDAY’S attack on soldiers in Gujrat was a stark reminder that home-grown militants still have the intention, and the means, to target security forces outside the tribal areas.The pace of such attacks has slowed down, and there have been no recent incidents on the scale of PNS Mehran or GHQ, so some progress against this threat has been made over the last couple of years. But the ease with which this most recent assault took place indicates that the danger persists and that the quality of preventive intelligence-gathering, and even of routine surveillance around a military presence, is still not where it needs to be.

Second, the incident was a reminder of the militant nexus connecting settled areas to Fata-based militancy. It is not entirely clear whether the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan, which has claimed responsibility, was involved directly, or if the attack was carried out by Punjab-based militants affiliated with it. But it is plain that Punjab is still vulnerable to violent extremism and anti-state activity that is made possible by links that stretch from Fata to the province.

What remains missing is official messaging that can inform Pakistanis about the real nature of this threat — that it is home-grown and focused on the destruction of the Pakistani state as it exists today. The view that such attacks are carried out by foreign hands, for example, or that they are justified because of Pakistan’s alliance with the United States, are alarmingly common. But each incident can also be used as an opportunity to fight these misperceptions. The concept of the so-called Punjabi Taliban still remains a murky one in terms of who is involved, who they are linked to, and what their aims are. And not all sensitive information about these groups can be shared publicly. But this is not a war that can be fought without citizens’ support, and some amount of disclosure about how these groups are weakening Pakistan could help build a national consensus against militancy and improve intelligence-gathering by making citizens responsive to suspicious activity in their communities.

Fizzling out?

CONTRARY to previous reports that the ‘long march’ of the Defence of Pakistan Council would not be allowed to enter Islamabad, the rally that included an outlawed organisation and some ‘banned’ leaders did manage to enter the capital on Monday and disperse peacefully. There was no violence along the rally’s 275-kilometre journey from Lahore to Islamabad, and the federal authorities allowed the convoy to D-Chowk opposite parliament because the two sides had come to an understanding. This peaceful conclusion of the rally on the basis of the ‘understanding’ was a pleasant surprise. Suddenly things begin to make sense, especially when Hafiz Saeed counsels peace. Since the Salala incident and the blocking of the Nato supply line, the DPC leadership had vowed never to allow supplies for the US-led Isaf forces in Afghanistan to be resumed. Often, DPC leaders had threatened to set the country on fire from Karachi to Khyber if trucks started rolling again along highways vulnerable to sabotage.

The blocking of Nato supplies and the subsequent resumption had parliamentary approval — both decisions having the backing of a military bruised as much by May 2 as by Nov 26. While the DPC’s enthusiastic support for the supply cut-off was in keeping with its militant opposition to America and to Islamabad’s perceived ‘slavery’ to Washington, its low-profile opposition to the resumption decision and the ‘understanding’ with the federal administration sound baffling, if not secretive. Evidently, those who inflated the balloon decided to prick it. The DPC’s anti-government rhetoric may still find a place in the media, but the zing is gone. The powers that be may revive the DPC under a new garb for the general election, and there may be new entrants, but for the present the DPC’s tacit approval of supply resumption has deprived it of its raison d’être.