EU supports Asean approach to sea row
Leila B. Salaverria, Philippine Daily Inquirer, November 6th, 2012
VIENTIANE, Laos—In meetings on Monday with President Benigno Aquino III, leaders of the European Union (EU), Switzerland and Norway declared support for an Asean approach to the territorial disputes in the West Philippine Sea (South China Sea).
Secretary Herminio Coloma of the Presidential Communications Operations Office told reporters that the European leaders indicated their support for a peaceful resolution of the territorial conflicts based on international law, which is the same as the Philippine position.
But any meeting with China, which is claiming nearly all of the West Philippine Sea, is not on Mr. Aquino’s schedule, Coloma said.
Aside from the Philippines and China, Vietnam, Taiwan, Malaysia and Brunei also have claims to parts of the sea.
Mr. Aquino is also expected to mention the matter when he addresses the Asia-Europe summit and is likely to discuss the territorial dispute during bilateral talks with the leader of Japan on Tuesday, Coloma said. Japan also has simmering tensions with China due to conflicting claims to East China Sea islets.
“There was an agreement that it is a matter of international interest considering that a significant amount of world trade passes through that body of water. And in particular, Switzerland and the EU, and to some extent also Norway, indicated their firm support for the Philippines in terms of our position that conflicts or disputes in that area are to be resolved peacefully and follow international law,” Coloma said.
“And in particular, there is firm support for an Asean-centric approach, which has always been the position of President Aquino considering that four out of the 10-member states of Asean have specific stakes in the West Philippine Sea,” he added.
China has taken the position that territorial disputes should be settled bilaterally.
President Aquino had trilateral meetings with Herman Van Rompuy, the president of the European Council, and Jose Manuel Barroso, president of the European Commission.
He also held bilateral talks with Norway Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg and Swiss Confederation President Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf.
Coloma said the EU officials told Mr. Aquino that concerns about the Philippine aviation industry were technical and not political.
Philippine carriers have been banned from the European Union following the poor assessment by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) of the country’s aviation safety measures.
“It was emphasized by the President of the European Commission… that these are technical issues—technical issues involving safety standards and these are not political issues. And we acknowledge that we are addressing the technical concerns and that we are moving positively in the direction of addressing and resolving all of those concerns,” Coloma said.
The Philippines was assured that it would get “every measure of support” in meeting international safety standards, he said.
“Definitely, the present restrictions on our Philippine carriers would not promote the idea of increased tourist traffic between Europe and the Philippines. And so we would like to see an early resolution of the concerns of the ICAO and similar bodies like the US Federal Aviation Administration,” Coloma said.
Originally posted: 9:02 pm | Monday, November 5th, 2012
Tuesday, November 6, 2012
Monday, November 5, 2012
'The Time to Choose Sides on Climate Change Is Now' | Common Dreams
'The Time to Choose Sides on Climate Change Is Now' | Common Dreams
Common Dreams staff
(photo: Adam Welz/350.org)
As the devastation from "superstorm" Sandy continues for millions, Up host Chris Hayes urged viewers on Saturday that the time to choose sides on climate change is now.
While "we want our government first and foremost to keep us safe," it has neglected to heed warnings from climate scientists and the manifestations of climate change we have seen in extreme weather events.
"The first thing a competent government must do is protect its citizens." "Yet," says Hayes, and as the climate silence during presidential campaign has highlighted, "here we sit with a political system that can barely bring itself to acknowledge or discuss the tangible danger climate change poses to us, never mind undertake the massive, sustained effort necessary to combat and adapt to it."
What is needed, Hayes says, is immediate action to confront the events like Hurricane Sandy that human caused climate change have ensured will be upon us. A "crash program" is in order to bring about the transformation in infrastructure and energy the new climate necessitates.
"We absolutely have it within us, collectively, to beat back the forces of chaos once again. But we must choose to do so," urges Hayes. "And the time for choosing is now. You are either on the side of your fellow citizens and residents of this planet, or you are on the side of the storms as yet unnamed."
Common Dreams staff
(photo: Adam Welz/350.org)
As the devastation from "superstorm" Sandy continues for millions, Up host Chris Hayes urged viewers on Saturday that the time to choose sides on climate change is now.
While "we want our government first and foremost to keep us safe," it has neglected to heed warnings from climate scientists and the manifestations of climate change we have seen in extreme weather events.
"The first thing a competent government must do is protect its citizens." "Yet," says Hayes, and as the climate silence during presidential campaign has highlighted, "here we sit with a political system that can barely bring itself to acknowledge or discuss the tangible danger climate change poses to us, never mind undertake the massive, sustained effort necessary to combat and adapt to it."
What is needed, Hayes says, is immediate action to confront the events like Hurricane Sandy that human caused climate change have ensured will be upon us. A "crash program" is in order to bring about the transformation in infrastructure and energy the new climate necessitates.
"We absolutely have it within us, collectively, to beat back the forces of chaos once again. But we must choose to do so," urges Hayes. "And the time for choosing is now. You are either on the side of your fellow citizens and residents of this planet, or you are on the side of the storms as yet unnamed."
* * *
Friday, November 2, 2012
Burma: No solution to end ‘Kachin War’ under unfair charter | Asia News – Politics, Media, Education | Asian Correspondent
Burma: No solution to end ‘Kachin War’ under unfair charter | Asia News – Politics, Media, Education | Asian Correspondent
Zin Linn, Nov 02, 2012
“We have agreed to continue political negotiations,” KIO spokesman told Mizzima News.
Zin Linn, Nov 02, 2012
Subsequent to President Thein Sein took office, the quasi-civilian government looks as if ignoring its own promises – good governance, national reconciliation, poverty alleviation etc. – made during the presidential inaugural ceremony. The president needs to stop civil war against ethnic rebels to implement good governance, national reconciliation and poverty alleviation. His government also requires honoring ethnic people’s equal rights and self-determination so as to stop the war.
Burmese government armed forces continued offensive on KIA and Kachin civilians although there was a peace talk between the government and KIO’s representatives in Sino-Burma border city Ruili on 30 October 2012.
According to Kachinland News, a severe battle took place between Kachin people’s militia under KIA’s mobile battalion and Burma Army’s 321st L.I.B at Mali-yang on Friday. The two armed units encountered once more at Ja Pu village and fought another battle on the same day, reported a front line source.
Moreover, another mêlée occurred in northern Shan State between KIA’s 34th Battalion under 4th Brigade and Burma Army’s Meiktila-based 99th L.I.D at Mung Lung village located between Mo-gok and Kyawk-me on 30 October.
As said by KIA’s 4th Brigade commander Colonel Zau Raw, Burma Army had fired 105 mm mortar shells targeting towards Kachin administrative capital Laiza for at least 14 times while KIO had been preparing for approaching Ruili talk. There were more than 90 battles between the two sides in October alone, referring Colonel Zau Raw Kachinland News reported.
On 30 October, government peace-mission led by President’s Office Minister Aung Min met with KIO representatives headed by Kachin politician Sumlut Gam in Ruili of Sino-Burma border town.
The nine-member KIO peacemaking team was formed with Sara Kaba Sumlut Gam, Tara Kasa Lahpai La, Lt. Col. Ji Nawng, Colonel Hkun Nawng, Colonel Lahpai Zau Raw, Colonel Zau Tawng, Colonel Marip Naw Htoi and Maj. Sing Hkaw. And government peace-making body was made with 11 delegates, includes Minister U Aung Min, Minister U Win Tun, Minister U Ohn Myint, Brigadier General Tun Tun Naung, Brigadier General Aung Soe, General Zaw Win, Colonel Than Aung, Colonel Aung Thu, Colonel Kyaw Swa Win, Minister U Lajun Ngan Seng, Minister U Aung Myat, and U Tun Tun Oo, Kachinland News said.
President Thein Sein addressed members of government peacemaking team on 3 July 2012. (Photo: http://www.president-office.gov.mm)
According to KIO spokesman La Mai Gum Ja, government and theKIO have already agreed to begin political dialogue in November.
“Assuming our central committee agrees to the proposal, we will meet in November at a venue inside Burma,” he said. He said the two sides have agreed that the next meeting will be held in either Myitkyina or Bhamo in Kachin State or Muse in Shan State.
It is a puzzle for people of Burma because the peace-process between KIO and the government is easier said than done to reach its goal. The civil war has broken out together with the country’s independence since 1948. The cost of the civil war pulls Burma down into an abysmal canyon of poverty. Besides, the war caused the nation least developed country. Burma’s admittance to Least Developed Country status by the UN-OHRLLS in 1987 brought to light its economic bankruptcy.
Under British administration, Burma was the second-wealthiest country in South-East Asia. It had been the world’s largest exporter of rice. Burma also had a wealth of natural and labour resources. It produced 75% of the world’s teak and had a highly literate population. The country was believed to be on the fast track to development, David Steinberg, a distinguished Professor of Asian Studies at Georgetown University, said in one of his research papers.
Under the military dictatorship for decades, Burma becomes known as a natural gas and teak seller and its socioeconomic conditions have gone downhill under the soldiers’ unprofessional management. The military monopolized economy makes most of the public in poverty, while military leaders and their cronies exploiting the country’s abundant natural resources.
In 2010-11, the state properties, especially real estate, were transferred to relatives of military authorities under the guise of a privatization policy. It became wider gap between the military-backed privileged first-class and the ordinary population.
Although the President expressed his compassion for war-victims in Kachin state during the 24-October press conference with the local press, he never said to address the Kachin issue through political means. The biggest gap is that the President dogmatically accepts only one army in Burma under the 2008 constitution. He also turns a deaf ear to KIO’s proposal for political dialogue to end the armed conflicts.
President Thein Sein’s government used to say that it has been trying to build a peaceful and developed country; on the other hand the momentum of civil war is increasing. So the words of the government are not in harmony with the acts of its activities on the ground.
Even though government and the KIO said that they have agreed to continue the peace negotiations in the near future, it looks impracticable since the talks have been framed by the undemocratic constitution.
Wednesday, October 31, 2012
Vietnam Jails Two Songwriters for Anti-state Lyrics | The Irrawaddy Magazine
Vietnam Jails Two Songwriters for Anti-state Lyrics | The Irrawaddy Magazine
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS, October 31, 2012
HANOI, Vietnam—Two musicians in Vietnam whose topical songs are popular among overseas Vietnamese were sentenced to prison on Tuesday, prompting criticism from the United States and international rights groups.
Vo Minh Tri and Tran Vu Anh Binh were jailed for four and six years respectively on charges of spreading propaganda against the state, said Tri’s lawyer, Tran Vu Hai. They faced possible sentences of up to 20 years.
In a half-day trial, a court in Ho Chi Minh City accused the musicians of posting songs on a website operated by an overseas Vietnamese opposition group, Patriotic Youth, according to Hai. Communist Vietnam does not tolerate challenges to its one-party rule.
Tri, 34, known as Viet Khang, has composed songs criticizing the government for not taking a more aggressive position against China in the potentially resource-rich South China Sea, where Vietnam, China and other Asian nations have competing territorial claims. A video of his song “Where is My Vietnam?” (Viet Nam Toi Dau) has been viewed more than 700,000 times on YouTube.
Binh, 37, is credited with writing the music for “Courage in the Dark Prison” (Nguc Toi Hien Ngang), a song that encourages nonviolent protest and expresses support for imprisoned blogger Nguyen Van Hai.
The convictions come a month after Hai, known as Dieu Cay, and two other Vietnamese bloggers were sentenced to four to 12 years behind bars on the same charges.
Human Rights Watch condemned Tuesday’s trial and called for the songwriters’ immediate release.
“First critics, then bloggers, then poets, and now musicians!” Phil Robertson, deputy director at the New York-based group’s Asia division, said in a statement. “The international community can no longer stand by quietly as these free speech activists are picked off one by one by Vietnam’s security apparatus.”
Truc Ho, one of Tri’s US-based supporters, told The Associated Press in April that Patriotic Youth is a group of students, artists and young professionals who promote awareness of social justice and human rights issues in Vietnam.
After Tri was arrested in December, Truc Ho said he and some friends launched a campaign in the United States to press for the songwriter’s release. Their online petition to the White House gathered more than 150,000 signatures within a month, he said.
The US Embassy said it was deeply troubled by Tri’s sentencing.
“This conviction is the latest in a series of moves by Vietnamese authorities to restrict freedom of expression. The Vietnamese government should release this musician, all prisoners of conscience and adhere to its international obligations immediately,” embassy spokesman Christopher Hodges said in a statement.
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS, October 31, 2012
HANOI, Vietnam—Two musicians in Vietnam whose topical songs are popular among overseas Vietnamese were sentenced to prison on Tuesday, prompting criticism from the United States and international rights groups.
Vo Minh Tri and Tran Vu Anh Binh were jailed for four and six years respectively on charges of spreading propaganda against the state, said Tri’s lawyer, Tran Vu Hai. They faced possible sentences of up to 20 years.
In a half-day trial, a court in Ho Chi Minh City accused the musicians of posting songs on a website operated by an overseas Vietnamese opposition group, Patriotic Youth, according to Hai. Communist Vietnam does not tolerate challenges to its one-party rule.
Tri, 34, known as Viet Khang, has composed songs criticizing the government for not taking a more aggressive position against China in the potentially resource-rich South China Sea, where Vietnam, China and other Asian nations have competing territorial claims. A video of his song “Where is My Vietnam?” (Viet Nam Toi Dau) has been viewed more than 700,000 times on YouTube.
Binh, 37, is credited with writing the music for “Courage in the Dark Prison” (Nguc Toi Hien Ngang), a song that encourages nonviolent protest and expresses support for imprisoned blogger Nguyen Van Hai.
The convictions come a month after Hai, known as Dieu Cay, and two other Vietnamese bloggers were sentenced to four to 12 years behind bars on the same charges.
Human Rights Watch condemned Tuesday’s trial and called for the songwriters’ immediate release.
“First critics, then bloggers, then poets, and now musicians!” Phil Robertson, deputy director at the New York-based group’s Asia division, said in a statement. “The international community can no longer stand by quietly as these free speech activists are picked off one by one by Vietnam’s security apparatus.”
Truc Ho, one of Tri’s US-based supporters, told The Associated Press in April that Patriotic Youth is a group of students, artists and young professionals who promote awareness of social justice and human rights issues in Vietnam.
After Tri was arrested in December, Truc Ho said he and some friends launched a campaign in the United States to press for the songwriter’s release. Their online petition to the White House gathered more than 150,000 signatures within a month, he said.
The US Embassy said it was deeply troubled by Tri’s sentencing.
“This conviction is the latest in a series of moves by Vietnamese authorities to restrict freedom of expression. The Vietnamese government should release this musician, all prisoners of conscience and adhere to its international obligations immediately,” embassy spokesman Christopher Hodges said in a statement.
Monday, October 29, 2012
Marcoses lose US appeal | Philippine Daily Inquirer
Marcoses lose US appeal
Philippine Daily Inquirer, October 29th, 2012
Victims of human rights violations during the Marcos dictatorship have scored a victory in their long quest to get compensation from the Marcos estate.
A US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld on Oct. 24 a contempt judgment against Sen. Ferdinand “Bongbong” R. Marcos Jr., his mother Imelda and the estate of Ferdinand E. Marcos for violating an injunction that barred them from dissipating assets of the estate.
The judgment amounting to $353.6 million is believed to be the largest contempt award ever affirmed by an appellate court.
The judgment may be implemented against any US property owned by Imelda and Bongbong. However, the human rights victims need to ask the Philippine government for implementation of the judgment against the Marcoses’ personal property in the Philippines.
A Philippine law requires that all ill-gotten wealth recovered from the Marcoses should be spent on the government’s land reform program.
Robert Swift, lead counsel for the 10,000 Filipino human rights victims who obtained a judgment against the late dictator and his estate in 1995, said he was satisfied with the new judgment.
“The Marcoses have thumbed their noses at the United States court and Filipino human rights victims ever since the $2-billion judgment was entered in 1995,” Swift said in a statement.
Dynasty
The American lawyer said the Marcoses were caught trying to dissipate the estate’s assets to recapitalize the family’s political dynasty in the Philippines.
Bongbong began serving his six-year term as senator in 2010. Imelda is a representative of Ilocos Norte in Congress, while daughter Imee is the governor of the province. Both mother and daughter are running for reelection in midterm elections in May 2013.
Swift said the new judgment was against Imelda and her son personally for their misconduct.
“It broadens the possibilities for collection of money to the human rights victims. The victims can be assured they we will vigorously and aggressively seek to collect this sum,” the lawyer said.
Commission on Human Rights (CHR) Chairperson Loretta Ann P. Rosales said Sunday night that the US court victory against the Marcoses was “payback” for the “shameless arrogance” of Bongbong and his mother, who have not apologized for the looting and the killings during the Marcos regime.
“If we can’t get their apology, at least we will force them to pay more and refresh the minds of a new generation of Filipinos on the atrocities committed by the family for close to two decades,” Rosales said in a phone interview.
“They (Bongbong and Imelda) are the face of their families and the Filipinos should continue to demand payment for the sins of their family.”
She said the $353.6 million awarded by the US court would be on top of the close to $2 billion awarded to martial law victims in 1995.
Barred in US
Rosales said she was told by lawyers that the contempt award meant that the Marcoses would not be allowed to set foot on any US territory.
“The contempt ruling means that the US courts are taking seriously the disrespect shown by the Marcoses. More than the heavy fines, this is a big embarrassment to the family who has shown no remorse for the deeds they made,” the CHR said.
Rosales said that the contempt charge was a “long shot” and that the US courts sided with the victims was a “pleasant surprise.”
“The senator’s refusal to apologize and own up to the sins of his father only shows the continuing arrogance of his family,” said Rosales, herself a victim of human rights violations during the Marcos regime.
The litigation against Marcos began in 1986 shortly after the dictator and his family fled to Hawaii following the people power revolution.
After Marcos died, Imelda fought the litigation. Following a historic trial, a Hawaiian jury awarded 9,539 Filipino human rights victims almost $2 billion.
The judgment was affirmed on appeal. While the jury was deliberating, the Marcoses entered into a secret deal with the Philippine government to make the Marcos estate judgment-proof.
When Swift learned of this, the human rights victims sought a contempt award against Imelda and her son, and the Marcos estate’s legal representatives, for violating the injunction that barred them from dissipating the estate’s assets.
Imelda and Bongbong were found to have agreed to the transfer from the United States to the Philippines artworks considered part of the estate, and to split the estate with the Philippine government, retaining 25 percent tax-free as their share.
After five hearings during which documents showing the Marcoses’ efforts to dissipate the assets were introduced, the court found the Marcoses in contempt and ordered them to pay the victims until they purged their contempt.
The Hawaii Court of First Instance imposed a daily fine of $100,000 from Feb. 3, 1995, to Feb. 3, 2005, when the contempt order expired, leaving a total fine of $353,600,000.
The appellate court last week wrote that the “$100,000 per day amount was necessary and appropriate because the Marcoses’ contumacious conduct” caused direct harm to the victims, by preventing them from collecting on their $2-billion judgment. With a report from Gil Cabacungan
Philippine Daily Inquirer, October 29th, 2012
Victims of human rights violations during the Marcos dictatorship have scored a victory in their long quest to get compensation from the Marcos estate.
A US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld on Oct. 24 a contempt judgment against Sen. Ferdinand “Bongbong” R. Marcos Jr., his mother Imelda and the estate of Ferdinand E. Marcos for violating an injunction that barred them from dissipating assets of the estate.
The judgment amounting to $353.6 million is believed to be the largest contempt award ever affirmed by an appellate court.
The judgment may be implemented against any US property owned by Imelda and Bongbong. However, the human rights victims need to ask the Philippine government for implementation of the judgment against the Marcoses’ personal property in the Philippines.
A Philippine law requires that all ill-gotten wealth recovered from the Marcoses should be spent on the government’s land reform program.
Robert Swift, lead counsel for the 10,000 Filipino human rights victims who obtained a judgment against the late dictator and his estate in 1995, said he was satisfied with the new judgment.
“The Marcoses have thumbed their noses at the United States court and Filipino human rights victims ever since the $2-billion judgment was entered in 1995,” Swift said in a statement.
Dynasty
The American lawyer said the Marcoses were caught trying to dissipate the estate’s assets to recapitalize the family’s political dynasty in the Philippines.
Bongbong began serving his six-year term as senator in 2010. Imelda is a representative of Ilocos Norte in Congress, while daughter Imee is the governor of the province. Both mother and daughter are running for reelection in midterm elections in May 2013.
Swift said the new judgment was against Imelda and her son personally for their misconduct.
“It broadens the possibilities for collection of money to the human rights victims. The victims can be assured they we will vigorously and aggressively seek to collect this sum,” the lawyer said.
Commission on Human Rights (CHR) Chairperson Loretta Ann P. Rosales said Sunday night that the US court victory against the Marcoses was “payback” for the “shameless arrogance” of Bongbong and his mother, who have not apologized for the looting and the killings during the Marcos regime.
“If we can’t get their apology, at least we will force them to pay more and refresh the minds of a new generation of Filipinos on the atrocities committed by the family for close to two decades,” Rosales said in a phone interview.
“They (Bongbong and Imelda) are the face of their families and the Filipinos should continue to demand payment for the sins of their family.”
She said the $353.6 million awarded by the US court would be on top of the close to $2 billion awarded to martial law victims in 1995.
Barred in US
Rosales said she was told by lawyers that the contempt award meant that the Marcoses would not be allowed to set foot on any US territory.
“The contempt ruling means that the US courts are taking seriously the disrespect shown by the Marcoses. More than the heavy fines, this is a big embarrassment to the family who has shown no remorse for the deeds they made,” the CHR said.
Rosales said that the contempt charge was a “long shot” and that the US courts sided with the victims was a “pleasant surprise.”
“The senator’s refusal to apologize and own up to the sins of his father only shows the continuing arrogance of his family,” said Rosales, herself a victim of human rights violations during the Marcos regime.
The litigation against Marcos began in 1986 shortly after the dictator and his family fled to Hawaii following the people power revolution.
After Marcos died, Imelda fought the litigation. Following a historic trial, a Hawaiian jury awarded 9,539 Filipino human rights victims almost $2 billion.
The judgment was affirmed on appeal. While the jury was deliberating, the Marcoses entered into a secret deal with the Philippine government to make the Marcos estate judgment-proof.
When Swift learned of this, the human rights victims sought a contempt award against Imelda and her son, and the Marcos estate’s legal representatives, for violating the injunction that barred them from dissipating the estate’s assets.
Imelda and Bongbong were found to have agreed to the transfer from the United States to the Philippines artworks considered part of the estate, and to split the estate with the Philippine government, retaining 25 percent tax-free as their share.
After five hearings during which documents showing the Marcoses’ efforts to dissipate the assets were introduced, the court found the Marcoses in contempt and ordered them to pay the victims until they purged their contempt.
The Hawaii Court of First Instance imposed a daily fine of $100,000 from Feb. 3, 1995, to Feb. 3, 2005, when the contempt order expired, leaving a total fine of $353,600,000.
The appellate court last week wrote that the “$100,000 per day amount was necessary and appropriate because the Marcoses’ contumacious conduct” caused direct harm to the victims, by preventing them from collecting on their $2-billion judgment. With a report from Gil Cabacungan
Sunday, October 28, 2012
Opinion: Vietnam's Difficult Road to Reform | asia sentinel
Opinion: Vietnam's Difficult Road to Reform | asia sentinel
Khanh Vu Du, 26 October 2012
If the recent intraparty dispute has proven anything, it is that the Communist Party, not its individual leaders, ultimately bears responsibility for Vietnam's failures
Reform, or what passes for reform in Vietnam, is not implausible. Democracy and individual rights are not foreign concepts to the Vietnamese. The arrest and detention of pro-democratic and human rights activists prove as much. The public outrage against the government’s economic mismanagement and corruption proves as much.
More often than not, reform is used as a catch-all solution for the failures of government. The problem is not the act of reform but the extent to which the government and political system is reformed. What is perhaps certain is that corruption, economic mismanagement and human rights abuses would have continued if the president and his faction had assumed power in the recent struggle between Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung and President Truong Tan Sang.
In a country where power comes not from the people but the ruling (and only) party, merely replacing the individual at the top will do little, if nothing. What is required for real reform is a serious and concerted effort by the people and from those within the government to change the system. Of course, this is easier said than done, and the obstacles are many.
A Revolt of the Ruling Elite
The intraparty dispute between the Vietnamese prime minister and president was driven in part by Prime Minister Dung’s handling of the economy. While some blame can be assigned to the global recession, the corruption and mismanagement surrounding the prime minister could not be overlooked. The scandals at Asia Commercial Bank, Vinashin, Vinalines, in addition to a poorly performing economy had made Prime Minister Dung toxic.
Although President Sang and his supporters had a case for removing the prime minister, one should not mistake their desire to do so for the good of Vietnam. The struggle between the two factions was not one of protecting the people, but a struggle to protect and preserve their place in the party. This was not a revolt of the masses but of the ruling elite, And although Prime Minister Dung has retained his job, the “revolutionaries” are still in power, perhaps waiting, biding their time until the next opportune moment.
But another revolt by party members will achieve little. True, there exist the old communist hardliners, who view the liberalization of Vietnam’s economy as a betrayal of Ho Chi Minh’s principles. There are also those party members who have prospered in the new, open market Vietnam (oftentimes through patronage and perhaps even shady business dealings), and who are just as likely to invoke the spirit of Ho Chi Minh to defend the status quo.
Communism has failed in Vietnam, but the new, more economically liberalized country has also begun to show signs of stress. Vietnam, by its very political nature, has made it possible for the government to hide its failures and shield its party members from charges of corruption—that is until the situation becomes untenable, as was the case with Prime Minister Dung.
The Vietnamese people are not unaware of their government’s deficiencies, but for a long stretch of time it was easy for them to look the other way. Vietnam was once a booming economy with great promise in Southeast Asia. The people could see and experience the positive changes that had come about, and the government could take credit for the success. For a time, it was easy for the people to say, “Well, at least today is better than yesterday.”
Today, this sense of optimism has diminished.
The Party is the System
The public apology by Party Secretary Nguyen Phu Trong over the failures of the Communist Party in serving the people was in part a response to actual failures but also in part to shield and distance the party from Prime Minister Dung. As if the party secretary’s apology was surprising enough, even the prime minister was forced to issue an apology of his own in front of the National Assembly, pledging to reform state-owned corporations.
And here lies the greatest obstacle towards reform. It is not about purging the Communist Party of corrupt officials. The individuals themselves are not the problem but a side effect. The problem is not superficial but deeply rooted and structural in nature. Corruption, economic mismanagement, and human rights violations are merely symptoms of the problem: the political system.
Presently, the Vietnamese political system is the Communist Party. An independent oversight committee on governmental affairs does not exist. Had Prime Minister Dung been ousted and President Sang or someone else had taken his place, change would have only occurred at the leadership level. Of course, there might have been some movement in the rank and file, but none of these changes would have had any lasting effect on the average Vietnamese citizen.
Appointments and elections are held within the Communist Party. Investigations into corruption are initiated by the Communist Party. All of this is to repeat the obvious: the Communist Party is not simply the sole, ruling party but the government. It is the system. None of this is particularly revealing, but it is worth mentioning.
A Need for Structural Reform
The obvious and only solution for Vietnam is to reform and democratize. Of course, the nature of the Vietnamese government means change on this level must be initiated from within. Or, in a worst case scenario, the government somehow falls apart and a new one takes its place. Either way, the path to democracy will not prove to be easy.
Whatever the journey, the goal for the Vietnamese people is to reform the political infrastructure. The government and the institutions of government should be geared towards carrying Vietnam into the future. An obvious change is an increase in transparency. The present system merely provides the opportunity to propose band-aid solutions. Much like the party secretary’s apology, blame will be cast, action will be taken, and it will be business as usual.
Power must ultimately be transferred away from those who create laws and into the hands of the people. Reform is not simply replacing the party leaders. It is not simply replacing members of the Politburo. Reform is not lip service paid to constitutional changes.
Reform in the case of Vietnam is the complete and thorough renovation of its political system. It is the democratization of Vietnam, because anything less than that will simply be incomplete and ineffective. Anything less than the distribution of power and improvement in government transparency is to invite the same old thing.
When the communist policies of old failed, the Vietnamese government changed: it modified its economic policies. The result of these changes was an increase in living standard and invitation for foreign investment. But now there is a new problem, and that problem is not its economic policies but the political system. If the Vietnamese government serves the people, as it purports to do so, then it must accept the need for real change.
While none of this can occur without support from within the existing government, none of this will occur without pressure from the public.
Change is not easy. Change in an authoritarian government, in particular, is not bloodless. As we have witnessed throughout the Middle East and Northern Africa, beginning in Tunisia and now being fought in Syria, change is often violent. But the Middle East and Northern Africa is not Vietnam. However, it is guaranteed that reform will be hard fought.
This is not to say that the Vietnamese people should take to the streets and risk their safety and future, but at some point the people must ask themselves, “Is this the country I deserve?”
(Khanh Vu Duc is a Canadian lawyer who researches on Vietnamese politics, international relations and international law. He is a frequent contributor to Asia Sentinel)
Khanh Vu Du, 26 October 2012
If the recent intraparty dispute has proven anything, it is that the Communist Party, not its individual leaders, ultimately bears responsibility for Vietnam's failures
Reform, or what passes for reform in Vietnam, is not implausible. Democracy and individual rights are not foreign concepts to the Vietnamese. The arrest and detention of pro-democratic and human rights activists prove as much. The public outrage against the government’s economic mismanagement and corruption proves as much.
More often than not, reform is used as a catch-all solution for the failures of government. The problem is not the act of reform but the extent to which the government and political system is reformed. What is perhaps certain is that corruption, economic mismanagement and human rights abuses would have continued if the president and his faction had assumed power in the recent struggle between Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung and President Truong Tan Sang.
In a country where power comes not from the people but the ruling (and only) party, merely replacing the individual at the top will do little, if nothing. What is required for real reform is a serious and concerted effort by the people and from those within the government to change the system. Of course, this is easier said than done, and the obstacles are many.
A Revolt of the Ruling Elite
The intraparty dispute between the Vietnamese prime minister and president was driven in part by Prime Minister Dung’s handling of the economy. While some blame can be assigned to the global recession, the corruption and mismanagement surrounding the prime minister could not be overlooked. The scandals at Asia Commercial Bank, Vinashin, Vinalines, in addition to a poorly performing economy had made Prime Minister Dung toxic.
Although President Sang and his supporters had a case for removing the prime minister, one should not mistake their desire to do so for the good of Vietnam. The struggle between the two factions was not one of protecting the people, but a struggle to protect and preserve their place in the party. This was not a revolt of the masses but of the ruling elite, And although Prime Minister Dung has retained his job, the “revolutionaries” are still in power, perhaps waiting, biding their time until the next opportune moment.
But another revolt by party members will achieve little. True, there exist the old communist hardliners, who view the liberalization of Vietnam’s economy as a betrayal of Ho Chi Minh’s principles. There are also those party members who have prospered in the new, open market Vietnam (oftentimes through patronage and perhaps even shady business dealings), and who are just as likely to invoke the spirit of Ho Chi Minh to defend the status quo.
Communism has failed in Vietnam, but the new, more economically liberalized country has also begun to show signs of stress. Vietnam, by its very political nature, has made it possible for the government to hide its failures and shield its party members from charges of corruption—that is until the situation becomes untenable, as was the case with Prime Minister Dung.
The Vietnamese people are not unaware of their government’s deficiencies, but for a long stretch of time it was easy for them to look the other way. Vietnam was once a booming economy with great promise in Southeast Asia. The people could see and experience the positive changes that had come about, and the government could take credit for the success. For a time, it was easy for the people to say, “Well, at least today is better than yesterday.”
Today, this sense of optimism has diminished.
The Party is the System
The public apology by Party Secretary Nguyen Phu Trong over the failures of the Communist Party in serving the people was in part a response to actual failures but also in part to shield and distance the party from Prime Minister Dung. As if the party secretary’s apology was surprising enough, even the prime minister was forced to issue an apology of his own in front of the National Assembly, pledging to reform state-owned corporations.
And here lies the greatest obstacle towards reform. It is not about purging the Communist Party of corrupt officials. The individuals themselves are not the problem but a side effect. The problem is not superficial but deeply rooted and structural in nature. Corruption, economic mismanagement, and human rights violations are merely symptoms of the problem: the political system.
Presently, the Vietnamese political system is the Communist Party. An independent oversight committee on governmental affairs does not exist. Had Prime Minister Dung been ousted and President Sang or someone else had taken his place, change would have only occurred at the leadership level. Of course, there might have been some movement in the rank and file, but none of these changes would have had any lasting effect on the average Vietnamese citizen.
Appointments and elections are held within the Communist Party. Investigations into corruption are initiated by the Communist Party. All of this is to repeat the obvious: the Communist Party is not simply the sole, ruling party but the government. It is the system. None of this is particularly revealing, but it is worth mentioning.
A Need for Structural Reform
The obvious and only solution for Vietnam is to reform and democratize. Of course, the nature of the Vietnamese government means change on this level must be initiated from within. Or, in a worst case scenario, the government somehow falls apart and a new one takes its place. Either way, the path to democracy will not prove to be easy.
Whatever the journey, the goal for the Vietnamese people is to reform the political infrastructure. The government and the institutions of government should be geared towards carrying Vietnam into the future. An obvious change is an increase in transparency. The present system merely provides the opportunity to propose band-aid solutions. Much like the party secretary’s apology, blame will be cast, action will be taken, and it will be business as usual.
Power must ultimately be transferred away from those who create laws and into the hands of the people. Reform is not simply replacing the party leaders. It is not simply replacing members of the Politburo. Reform is not lip service paid to constitutional changes.
Reform in the case of Vietnam is the complete and thorough renovation of its political system. It is the democratization of Vietnam, because anything less than that will simply be incomplete and ineffective. Anything less than the distribution of power and improvement in government transparency is to invite the same old thing.
When the communist policies of old failed, the Vietnamese government changed: it modified its economic policies. The result of these changes was an increase in living standard and invitation for foreign investment. But now there is a new problem, and that problem is not its economic policies but the political system. If the Vietnamese government serves the people, as it purports to do so, then it must accept the need for real change.
While none of this can occur without support from within the existing government, none of this will occur without pressure from the public.
Change is not easy. Change in an authoritarian government, in particular, is not bloodless. As we have witnessed throughout the Middle East and Northern Africa, beginning in Tunisia and now being fought in Syria, change is often violent. But the Middle East and Northern Africa is not Vietnam. However, it is guaranteed that reform will be hard fought.
This is not to say that the Vietnamese people should take to the streets and risk their safety and future, but at some point the people must ask themselves, “Is this the country I deserve?”
(Khanh Vu Duc is a Canadian lawyer who researches on Vietnamese politics, international relations and international law. He is a frequent contributor to Asia Sentinel)
Saturday, October 27, 2012
Ethnic violence Escalates in Burma's Arakan State | asia sentinel
Ethnic violence Escalates in Burma's Arakan State | asia sentinel
26 October 2012
Rohingya, Rakhine minorities clash
Violence against ethnic Rohingya villagers in Burma’s Arakan province is increasingly out of control, according to the National Democratic Party for Human Rights, a Rohingya defender organization which has sent numerous pleas for outside help over the past week.
On Wednesday, a spokesman said the fishing village of Kyaukpyu Town had been attacked by thousands of Buddhist-majority ethnic Rakhine, also known as Arakanese, armed with guns, knives and machetes, alleging the attackers had the backing of the Burmese government.
As many as 50,000 Muslim villagers are now without shelter, the spokesman said, although the region is largely cut off from outside communication, and the figures and the violence cannot be verified independently. Later reports said the mobs had moved to other villages, burning and looting. Rohongyas apparently fought back in the Taungbwe village of Kyauktaw town, killing 15 ethnic Rakhine. Two Rohingya said, the spokesman said.
The organization pleaded for United Nations help to stop the violence, saying marauding gangs attacked villages this week, burning Rohingya houses and killing at least two people. Villagers have gone into hiding from the violence. Native Rakhine have blamed the Rohingyas, with some alleging the violence is being fomented from Islamic militants in Bangladesh. That also cannot be verified.
In Washington, DC, the US government reacted by urging all parties including the Burmese government to take immediate steps to halt the violence. At the same time, the UN secretary-general, Ban Ki-moon in New York described the latest outbreak of communal violence in Northern Arakan as deeply troubling.
“The widening mistrust between the communities is being exploited by militant and criminal elements to cause large-scale loss of human lives, material destruction, displaced families as well as fear, humiliation and hatred affecting the people from all walks of life,” a spokesman for Ban said.
“The United States is deeply concerned about reports this week of increasing ethnic and sectarian violence in Burma’s Rakhine [Arakan] State, and urges parties to exercise restraint and immediately halt all attacks,” the US State Department spokesperson, Victoria Nuland, told reporters at her daily news conference. “We join the international community and call on authorities within the country, including the government, civil and religious leaders, to take immediate action to halt the ongoing violence, to grant full humanitarian access to the affected areas, and to begin a dialogue towards a peaceful resolution, ensuring expeditious and transparent investigations into these and previous incidents,” she said.
The predominantly Muslim Rohingya have lived for decades in the Rakhine corner on the western coast of Burma, a long, relatively narrow region on the Andaman Sea that is blocked off from the rest of the country by the 3,000-meter Arakan Mountains. Population pressures have moved them east from Bangladesh, with tensions rising. However, the campaign against them began to intensify in November 2011 with escalating violence that impelled many of them to attempt to escape, taking boats down the long coast to Thailand where the Thais attempted to push many of them back into the sea.
As Asia Sentinel reported in July, Burmans have temporarily faded into a common “Buddhist Burmese” identity vis-à-vis the Rohingya, with senior opposition leaders from Aung San Suu Kyi’s party including Tin Oo, Nyan Win and Win Tin speaking out against the Rohingya. Well-known celebrities, scholars and well-respected writers agreed. Even Aung San Suu Kyi has remained largely silent on the issue.
Responding to questions, Nuland said the violence has been on the agenda in all of the conversations that the US has had with the Burmese, including last week’s Human Rights dialogue. US officials have made five visits down to northern Arakan State since the outbreak of the violence in June, she noted.
“That, in and of itself, is remarkable if you consider where Burma was a year ago, that they are allowing not only us, but they are allowing other international observers and UN organizations to try to assist them in getting a handle on this. It’s obviously a very difficult problem, and we are working with them on various ways to address it,” she said.
The US in October announced an additional contribution of US$2.73 million for displaced people in Rakhine, of which US$2 million was to be routed through the United Nations High Commission for Refugees with another US$730,000 to go through UNICEF for water, sanitation, hygiene, and nutritional support.
Nuland said the root of the problem can be traced to the extreme poverty and lack of opportunity that plagues both communities in Rakhine state. She refrained from responding to questions about whether the events play a role in the further lifting of sanctions on Burma. “I’m not going to get ahead of where we are, which is to try to work with Burmese authorities on ways to address both the short-term issues and the longer-term issues. As we have said, there are communal issues on both sides; there are issues of poverty on both sides. So these have to be worked out over time. But I’m not going to make any predictions about where this is going to go,” Nuland said.
26 October 2012
Rohingya, Rakhine minorities clash
Violence against ethnic Rohingya villagers in Burma’s Arakan province is increasingly out of control, according to the National Democratic Party for Human Rights, a Rohingya defender organization which has sent numerous pleas for outside help over the past week.
On Wednesday, a spokesman said the fishing village of Kyaukpyu Town had been attacked by thousands of Buddhist-majority ethnic Rakhine, also known as Arakanese, armed with guns, knives and machetes, alleging the attackers had the backing of the Burmese government.
As many as 50,000 Muslim villagers are now without shelter, the spokesman said, although the region is largely cut off from outside communication, and the figures and the violence cannot be verified independently. Later reports said the mobs had moved to other villages, burning and looting. Rohongyas apparently fought back in the Taungbwe village of Kyauktaw town, killing 15 ethnic Rakhine. Two Rohingya said, the spokesman said.
The organization pleaded for United Nations help to stop the violence, saying marauding gangs attacked villages this week, burning Rohingya houses and killing at least two people. Villagers have gone into hiding from the violence. Native Rakhine have blamed the Rohingyas, with some alleging the violence is being fomented from Islamic militants in Bangladesh. That also cannot be verified.
In Washington, DC, the US government reacted by urging all parties including the Burmese government to take immediate steps to halt the violence. At the same time, the UN secretary-general, Ban Ki-moon in New York described the latest outbreak of communal violence in Northern Arakan as deeply troubling.
“The widening mistrust between the communities is being exploited by militant and criminal elements to cause large-scale loss of human lives, material destruction, displaced families as well as fear, humiliation and hatred affecting the people from all walks of life,” a spokesman for Ban said.
“The United States is deeply concerned about reports this week of increasing ethnic and sectarian violence in Burma’s Rakhine [Arakan] State, and urges parties to exercise restraint and immediately halt all attacks,” the US State Department spokesperson, Victoria Nuland, told reporters at her daily news conference. “We join the international community and call on authorities within the country, including the government, civil and religious leaders, to take immediate action to halt the ongoing violence, to grant full humanitarian access to the affected areas, and to begin a dialogue towards a peaceful resolution, ensuring expeditious and transparent investigations into these and previous incidents,” she said.
The predominantly Muslim Rohingya have lived for decades in the Rakhine corner on the western coast of Burma, a long, relatively narrow region on the Andaman Sea that is blocked off from the rest of the country by the 3,000-meter Arakan Mountains. Population pressures have moved them east from Bangladesh, with tensions rising. However, the campaign against them began to intensify in November 2011 with escalating violence that impelled many of them to attempt to escape, taking boats down the long coast to Thailand where the Thais attempted to push many of them back into the sea.
As Asia Sentinel reported in July, Burmans have temporarily faded into a common “Buddhist Burmese” identity vis-à-vis the Rohingya, with senior opposition leaders from Aung San Suu Kyi’s party including Tin Oo, Nyan Win and Win Tin speaking out against the Rohingya. Well-known celebrities, scholars and well-respected writers agreed. Even Aung San Suu Kyi has remained largely silent on the issue.
Responding to questions, Nuland said the violence has been on the agenda in all of the conversations that the US has had with the Burmese, including last week’s Human Rights dialogue. US officials have made five visits down to northern Arakan State since the outbreak of the violence in June, she noted.
“That, in and of itself, is remarkable if you consider where Burma was a year ago, that they are allowing not only us, but they are allowing other international observers and UN organizations to try to assist them in getting a handle on this. It’s obviously a very difficult problem, and we are working with them on various ways to address it,” she said.
The US in October announced an additional contribution of US$2.73 million for displaced people in Rakhine, of which US$2 million was to be routed through the United Nations High Commission for Refugees with another US$730,000 to go through UNICEF for water, sanitation, hygiene, and nutritional support.
Nuland said the root of the problem can be traced to the extreme poverty and lack of opportunity that plagues both communities in Rakhine state. She refrained from responding to questions about whether the events play a role in the further lifting of sanctions on Burma. “I’m not going to get ahead of where we are, which is to try to work with Burmese authorities on ways to address both the short-term issues and the longer-term issues. As we have said, there are communal issues on both sides; there are issues of poverty on both sides. So these have to be worked out over time. But I’m not going to make any predictions about where this is going to go,” Nuland said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
